R+L=J v.138

[BearQueen87]

RumHum,

it really seems to be the same with incest as well as with polygamy. Laena-Daemon and Rhaenyra-Daemon weren't incest matches in the strict sense (uncle-daughter matches were common among the Starks, too), and those are the only Targaryen matches I can think about right now that were done without the king's persmission. All the other matches from Aegon-Rhaena onwards were brokered by the king.

What about Jaehaerys II and Sheara?

[Lord Varys]

Yeah, I thought about that, too. That was another Maegor-Alys only with incest involved. Aenys wasn't all that nice, Aegon V was neither and let them get away with it. Just as he later did not forbid Jaehaerys to marry Aerys to Rhaella.

[BearQueen87]

Yeah, I thought about that, too. That was another Maegor-Alys only with incest involved. Aenys wasn't all that nice, Aegon V was neither and let them get away with it. Just as he later did not forbid Jaehaerys to marry Aerys to Rhaella.

But Aegon V also did not dissolve the union because it was consummated, even though it angered the realm. A lot.

[IceFire125]

A Rhaegar-style version of the main title... directly from the city of doomed lovers ;) Beautiful!

“Yes. And yet Summerhall was the place the prince loved best. He would go there from time to time, with only his harp for company. Even the knights of the Kingsguard did not attend him there. He liked to sleep in the ruined hall, beneath the moon and stars, and whenever he came back he would bring a song. When you heard him play his high harp with the silver strings and sing of twilights and tears and the death of kings, you could not but feel that he was singing of himself and those he loved.”

[Kingmonkey]

Polygamy most certainly was legal. The 'legitimacy' of the entire Targaryen dynasty is predicated on polygamy being legal since the founder of said dynasty was involved in a polygamous union and thus the legitimacy of all his descendants are subject to this precedent being legal.

I don't think anyone's trying to claim that polygamy has been illegal since time immemorial. I doubt anyone's trying to suggest that any putative law against polygamy was intended to be retroactive, because that would certainly be dumb.

Also, we can actually dismiss that polygamy was made illegal for the following reasons: 1) We have examples of polygamy in the main series and it is not the polygmay that concerns people but rather the incest. Incest is considered an 'abomination' but we hear nothing of the sort when it comes to polygamy, and 2) We have two SSM's where the author states that there "was and is precedent" and that he considers it an option to create a polygamous marriage post Maegor. This strongly implies that in-universe polygamy has never been oficially outlawed. Frowned upon, yes. Illegal, no.

There is precedent -- yes, for Targs. Per GRRM: "If you have a dragon, you can have as many wives as you want". Given that it is not unreasonable to assume that this suggests that if you don't have a dragon you can't necessarily have as many wives as you want, and the lack of attested polygamous marriages after Jaehaerys' conciliation with the Faith, there is scope for there to be such a law. This isn't contra-indicated by the possibility of Targs going ahead and doing what they like, because:

a. Kings.

b. Dragons.

The SSMs and the precedents demonstrate that even if there is a law it's not relevant to the behaviour of Targs. They don't prove that there cannot be such a law, because the counter-evidence is equally applicable in either case due to it not being relevant to the behaviour of Targs. We can't be sure there is no such law, but we can be sure it doesn't matter.

There's one simple answer to this debate: "Like their dragons the Targaryens answered to neither gods nor men." Trying to argue that there is no such law is misguided IMO, because it can't be proven and isn't necessary to prove to win the debate.

[magic713]

Since this theory has been refined so well, will Martin change the outcome of the story to surprise his fans?

He has stated that he won't change the outcome of the story just because some people have put together all the clues and solved the puzzle.

This point is what worries me most in the future canon books. I am so deep in belief in the theory of R+L=J and I have seen it is a highly popular theory on the web. But since it is so popular, I worry that GRRM might not have it in canon since it is what is highly expected. I know what the article says but it still worries me.

What I am curious about is in the books, how would the subject of Jon's parentage even be brought up? It seems that there is almost no way for a character to absolutely confirm it (with the exception of Howland Reed, who hasn't appeared yet), and there doesn't seem to be a real reason for anyone to bring the subject up (especially should the worst come to pass after ADWD).

[BearQueen87]

This point is what worries me most in the future canon books. I am so deep in belief in the theory of R+L=J and I have seen it is a highly popular theory on the web. But since it is so popular, I worry that GRRM might not have it in canon since it is what is highly expected. I know what the article says but it still worries me.

What I am curious about is in the books, how would the subject of Jon's parentage even be brought up? It seems that there is almost no way for a character to absolutely confirm it (with the exception of Howland Reed, who hasn't appeared yet), and there doesn't seem to be a real reason for anyone to bring the subject up (especially should the worst come to pass after ADWD).

Bran-in-tree-who-can-see-the-past seems likely.

And yes, Mr. Reed who will be appearing any day now.

And GRRM isn't going to change his plan based on how popular it has become, no worries. You don't change your mind after 20 years simply because obsessive readers put the clues together. He's a mystery writer. He *wanted* us to solve this one.

[FrozenFire3]

Okay well now I need that to happen in a show flashback. Say, at a certain tourney when the dragon prince played a song so beautiful that the wolf maid wept?

“Yes. And yet Summerhall was the place the prince loved best. He would go there from time to time, with only his harp for company. Even the knights of the Kingsguard did not attend him there. He liked to sleep in the ruined hall, beneath the moon and stars, and whenever he came back he would bring a song. When you heard him play his high harp with the silver strings and sing of twilights and tears and the death of kings, you could not but feel that he was singing of himself and those he loved.”

You two, mind readers :grouphug:

The performer is a good friend of my best mate, btw. Her talent literally gave me... visions, as in episode 10 final scene visions lol

Jon gets stabbed

FADE TO BLACK: heartbeat sound

FADE IN: a lonely tower

FADE TO BLACK: heartbeat slowing

FADE IN: the blurred shape of a silver haired man

FADE TO BLACK: heartbeat slowing

FADE IN: pale, delicate hands clatch a crown of blue roses

FADE TO BLACK: End Credits - Harp version of the main title

[UnmaskedLurker]

Ok, I can appreciate your frustration. However, let's keep in mind that we are trying to untangle hints and clues to something that has not been made explicit. We should always retain a little humility about our conclusions, because we might be wrong.

There are good reasons to think that Rhaegar and Lyanna may have married polygamously. There is zero evidence that polygamy is not possible and that therefore those hints should be ignored. There's also zero actual evidence that polygamy had NOT been made illegal -- only that even if it had, it wouldn't make any difference to the Targs.

When someone comes up with the theory that polygamy had been made illegal, and can show that this theory is consistent with the facts, that theory should not just be waved away because you (and indeed I) don't like it. It should be answered. We cannot dismiss the possibility that polygamy was made illegal, but we can dismiss the relevance of that possibility, by addressing that far more important question of whether Rhaegar would be bound by such a law. Unless we can show that polygamy was legal, arguments that it wasn't legal won't go away. Thus if we want to answer those arguments, we should do so with reference to what we can show -- and what is covered quite nicely in the FAQ, I believe -- that GRRM has made it pretty clear that it was still an option for the Targs, whether it was technically legal or not.

I pretty much agree with what you say, so I probably was not clear in my original explanation of what frustrated me. It is often the case that that something that I think appears to be true -- but cannot be 100% proven to be true -- others believe is not true. And of course, they might be right -- I am sure many of my predictions will be wrong, and I highly enjoy exploring evidence that suggests I might be wrong. So disagreeing with my theory, in and of itself, is not what bothers me at all.

But then the opponents start inventing all the different ways in which it might not be true -- based on no real evidence. It is the invention of these different ways that frustrates me. Of course there are ways GRRM can invent to make something not true that otherwise appears to be true. I really don't need examples, and examples don't make the argument stronger. So to be more specific, it is the suggestion these people seem to make that coming up with additional hypothetical ways in which it could be made not true increases the likelihood of it not being true that frustrates me. We all acknowledge that GRRM might have something else in mind and can do what he wants. But unsubstantiated speculation is not an argument and does not add to the dialogue or strengthen the case the person is trying to make. Give me evidence from the books. Don't make stuff up and act that made up stuff replaces evidence as an argument.

[Alia of the knife]

Love this depiction of the Starks by the same artist who did Alayne Stone for the sample chapter.

Its Ned, Lyanna, Brandon and Benjen.

"The Lords of Winter."

http://www.deviantart.com/morelikethis/476197721

[Lord Varys]

Polygamy is usually brought up by me and others because it is an interesting topic in itself especially in light to any claims to the Iron Throne Jon Snow might have or decide to press later on. The discussion about Rhaegar and Lyanna's possibly marriage is separate from the question whether that marriage will be considered valid by anyone but the bride and groom and whoever was with them.

Expecting that just because they were married in their own heart or in their own mind does not mean that anyone will consider a son from that marriage legitimate. Bringing that up and discussing the implications of this can actually shed light on some story lines regarding Jon's claim in future books. Although I'm reluctant to believe that this will matter at all as it is very unlikely that Jon Snow will ever try to ascend the Iron Throne.

Considering the secret and problematic nature of the (alleged) Rhaegar-Lyanna marriage I'd say a royal legtimation and recognition as the Heir Presumptive of another monarch (Daenerys, Aegon, Tyrion) should be necessary to enable Jon to ascend the Iron Throne. I don't see a Great Council in the end as whatever wars are still coming should actually take out all/most of the rival claimants should George intend to seat Jon on the throne in the end.

And if we face the possibility that Jon's Targaryen status would still be shaky even with Howland Reed and visionary Bran coming forth then it would also not be completely impossible that it turns out that their parents weren't married. Perhaps Lyanna resented the idea to be a second wife? Or Rhaegar wasn't stupid enough to think he could get away with that?

If we write the dream conversation off as problematic evidence it could be that the KG protected a bastard and his mother because Rhaegar told them to. Barristan Selmy told us that KG had done that in the past.

Jon Snow most likely does not have to be born in wedlock to fulfill his destiny in the coming War for the Dawn. Prophecy should not concern itself with mortal concepts like marriage. And it would be a fitting mirror image - the promised princess, surrounded by two bastard-born dragonseeds. Ned Stark wouldn't even be that much an ass/liar if he presented a bastard as his bastard and allowed him to join the NW (as he could not inherit anything anyway).

[IceFire125]

http://image.redbull.com/rbx00656/0001/1/1480/475/461688907.jpg

^_^ ^_^ :P :P

[Ygrain]

Give me evidence from the books. Don't make stuff up and act that made up stuff replaces evidence as an argument.

Amen.

[BearQueen87]

http://image.redbull.com/rbx00656/0001/1/1480/475/461688907.jpg

^_^ ^_^ :P :P

Love Masie's dress

[RumHam]

I pretty much agree with what you say, so I probably was not clear in my original explanation of what frustrated me. It is often the case that that something that I think appears to be true -- but cannot be 100% proven to be true -- others believe is not true. And of course, they might be right -- I am sure many of my predictions will be wrong, and I highly enjoy exploring evidence that suggests I might be wrong. So disagreeing with my theory, in and of itself, is not what bothers me at all.

But then the opponents start inventing all the different ways in which it might not be true -- based on no real evidence. It is the invention of these different ways that frustrates me. Of course there are ways GRRM can invent to make something not true that otherwise appears to be true. I really don't need examples, and examples don't make the argument stronger. So to be more specific, it is the suggestion these people seem to make that coming up with additional hypothetical ways in which it could be made not true increases the likelihood of it not being true that frustrates me. We all acknowledge that GRRM might have something else in mind and can do what he wants. But unsubstantiated speculation is not an argument and does not add to the dialogue or strengthen the case the person is trying to make. Give me evidence from the books. Don't make stuff up and act that made up stuff replaces evidence as an argument.

As Lord Varys said, we're speculating because it's fun and we've recently learned a lot of new information. It's not some effort to find excuses to deprive Jon Snow of his birthright. The only case I'm personally trying to make is "Well, I'm not so sure they were married anymore." (and at other times in this thread: "hey, we shouldn't just ignore the fact that Viserys was Aerys' heir because it complicates this theory." ) I've repeatedly acknowledged that they could have gotten married anyway.

[UnmaskedLurker]

As Lord Varys said, we're speculating because it's fun and we've recently learned a lot of new information. It's not some effort to find excuses to deprive Jon Snow of his birthright. The only case I'm personally trying to make is "Well, I'm not so sure they were married anymore." (and at other times in this thread: "hey, we shouldn't just ignore the fact that Viserys was Aerys' heir because it complicates this theory." ) I've repeatedly acknowledged that they could have gotten married anyway.

I have no issue with any of that -- and speculation can be fun (I engage in it sometimes) -- but should be acknowledged as speculation and not really as evidence. The specific "speculation" that led to my "rant" was the notion that because we know that Jaehaerys I "unified" the laws, this fact serves as evidence that laws regarding polygamy had been altered after Maegor I. While one can "speculate" that Jaehaerys I changed the laws regarding polygamy as part of this revision, we have no evidence of such happening, and I have seen people assert it almost as if it is a proved fact that Jaehaerys I made this change. I admit it is a possible explanation for a difference in the treatment of Maegor I over anyone post-Jaehaerys I, if it happened, but we simply have no real evidence that it happened.

Rather, we have evidence that incest continued even though incest is against the rules of the Faith (and apparently more of a sin in the eyes of the Faith and the rest of Westeros than polygamy). We have evidence of at least one set of children of Aegon V running off to get married to each other in an incestuous marriage without permission. We have no evidence that Aegon V could have dissolved the marriage -- only that he could have punished them for it. We know he chose to accept it, in part, because it had already been consummated. To me, these pieces of evidence from the books suggest strongly that Rhaegar was trying to use these examples to justify marrying Lyanna -- and bringing back a baby seemed to be part of how Rhaegar thought he would get Aerys (and Rickard) to accept the marriage. I also find certain aspects of the ToJ conversation incredibly difficult to make sense of unless Hightower believes he is guarding the rightful King.

Now if someone points out that it is possible that GRRM has other plans, and will resolve these apparent conflicts through new information, I will concede it is possible. Again, going back to the wildfire plot as a useful example, if someone speculated that Jaime had a really good reason to kill Aerys prior to the reveal of the wildfire plot, someone else would have been able to accurate state that there is no evidence of any such rationale on behalf of Jaime. But one could speculate that GRRM has a rationale waiting to be revealed -- and such a person would have been right. So as the saying goes, absence of evidence is not evidence of absence.

My only frustration is when someone becomes so enamored with certain speculation (like Jaehaerys I changing the laws regarding polygamy) that the person starts treating the speculation as evidence or fact itself. Constructing different ways in which GRRM might alter the results of a mystery from the conclusion that the available evidence currently suggests simply does not substitute for actual evidence. But speculation is sometime correct, and so I have no issue with anyone speculating -- just be clear that it is speculation and not evidence.

[Lord Varys]

UL,

due to our debating this whole thing my take on both incest and polygamy is that it was never legal, and Jaehaerys I never made it illegal but merely confirmed that it was illegal. We can reasonably assume that both was illegal in all the Andal kingdoms as the Faith was both actively preaching against it as well as conducting marriages - which means that they had the authority to decide what type of marriage was legal and what type was not.

And incest is confirmed to be forbidden in the North as well. Polygamy may have been practiced by powerful people in the past but is no longer practiced as well - may be formally forbidden or not (if it wasn't then it is strange that no Stark ever had multiple wives).

My assumption is that every incest marriage the Targaryens made was only possible because the king - being above the law - arranged them. Polygamy was only done by Valyrian dragonlords/sorcerer princes on Dragonstone (back in Valyria, Aenar, Aegon I) and by Maegor I in Westeros - and those seem to have been continuously challenged by the Faith and Maegor's enemies throughout his reign. Maegor is thus hardly a positive precedent for polygamy or a king in general.

Considering that no one during the reign of Viserys I and during the Dance or afterwards ever seemed to ask for or consider the possibility of polygamy I find it not unlikely that Jaehaerys I - or possibly even Alyssa Velaryon as Jaehaerys' regent - decreed that no member of House Targaryen would henceforth ever take more than one wife at the same time.

But as RumHum and I have said - this does not mean that Rhaegar felt bound by that. It does not mean that he did not decide to say 'Fuck you, ancestors, I'm as great as the Conqueror I can do whatever I want' - although I think we can make a case that the disappearance of the couple could also be a hint that they did not want to come back to court/run away from their lives/responsibilities. In such a scenario a marriage may not have been exactly the top priority. Had Rhaegar wanted to make Lyanna his wife and future queen we should assume that he would have taken her to KL and married her in the Great Sept in front of the whole Realm rather than somewhere in the wild.

As to polygamy in general:

I doubt that it is not getting a rennaissance. If Daenerys wants to style herself as a female version of the Conqueror she most likely will take multiple husbands - and not necessarily the other dragon heards. Khal Jhaqo springs to mind if she has to make an alliance and is not able to subdue the Dothraki by mere dragonriding badassery. Daario may also promoted from paramour to husband by the new Daenerys who accepts her destiny and feels no longer bound customs etc. If Tyrion becomes a dragonrider and turns out to be her half-brother he could get a chance, too - and he may be crossed in love in relation to Dany rather than Arya as the original outline suggested.

And Dany having multiple husbands at the same time should become a major incident why the High Septon is going to oppose her ascension.

[UnmaskedLurker]

LV--

One aspect of this debate that often gets muddled is what it means for a certain type of marriage to be "illegal." Under the laws of the United States (and many other countries), if a marriage is not legal, generally that means that the marriage will be dissolved and treated as never having happened. So if someone in the U.S. enters into a polygamous marriage, upon discovery of this fact, not only is the person subject to criminal charges, but all marriages other than the first marriage is not respected as a legal marriage.

The same does not appear to be the case in Westeros. We have no examples that I am aware of in which a marriage was declared not to be a marriage based on polygamy -- or incest. So while Rhaegar might have been risking punishment for a polygamous marriage if he could not get Aerys to accept the marriage (or if Rhaegar did not become King and declare the marriage permissible himself), nothing in any of the books suggests that anyone could have declared Rhaegar's marriage to Lyanna not to be a marriage.

So I will concede that before and after Jaehaerys I, both incest and polygamy likely were not legal under the Faith and any part of Westeros following the Faith. But just as the Targs continued to practice incest, polygamy would be in the same category. And just as Jaehaerys II risked punishment for marrying his sister, it was a marriage either way. But Aegon V had the power, and exercised the power, to accept the marriage and call off any potential punishment.

Rhaegar obviously had reasons to go off in secret. My theory (and it is only a theory -- based on quite a bit of speculation) is that Rhaegar thought he had a better chance to have the marriage accepted by Aerys and Rickard if Rhaegar and Lyanna brought back a baby with them to KL when they announced their marriage. But the main reason that I believe that the laws of Westeros do not have a method to declare the marriage not to be a marriage is that I believe that Hightower considered it to be a marriage -- and Hightower is a by-the-book kind of guy.

[MtnLion]

I find it more than passing odd that someone would think that polygamy had been outlawed while we have two contemporary characters suggesting it without mentioning that it had been outlawed.

[RumHam]

I find it more than passing odd that someone would think that polygamy had been outlawed while we have two contemporary characters suggesting it without mentioning that it had been outlawed.

But both times they were suggesting that a ruling monarch could do this, which Lord Varys and I have never contested. Also said monarch isn't even in Westeros.