Mithras Posted August 28, 2015 Share Posted August 28, 2015 *I did not read any of this None of those matter if Rhaegar won at the Trident. George said that the laws follow the might in that SSM above. If Rhaegar won, everyone would have to shut up about his polygamous marriage. If a similar authority like a Great Council recognizes the R-L marriage as legal, Jon is hailed as a trueborn son of Rhaegar. The rest is empty talk. I have no doubt that George will not give any shit to 99 % of the polygamy arguments in these threads. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RumHam Posted August 28, 2015 Share Posted August 28, 2015 Polygamy was not illegal before Jaehaerys nor do we have any reason to believe that Jaehaerys made it illegal. If people hardly practice it, why should anyone make a law to ban it, especially considering that the powerful men avoid making restrictive laws as much as possible per the famous SSM of George? It may have been illegal in some of the seven kingdoms, we don't know. I wouldn't be surprised if it was illegal in the Reach due to the influence of the High Septon. We know that one king of the Reach put aside all his other wives when he welcomed Oldtown into the fold. The motivation for passing the law would probably be religious, and to prevent succession issues and stuff. Why should the king worry about making restrictive laws when he and his successors are not bound by them? Of course this is all speculative, but so is half the stuff that gets posted around here. I'm not really trying to rehash the debate about the legality of polygamy, just point out that you were kinda being a dick. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
purple-eyes Posted August 28, 2015 Share Posted August 28, 2015 None of those matter if Rhaegar won at the Trident. George said that the laws follow the might in that SSM above. If Rhaegar won, everyone would have to shut up about his polygamous marriage. If a similar authority like a Great Council recognizes the R-L marriage as legal, Jon is hailed as a trueborn son of Rhaegar. The rest is empty talk. I have no doubt that George will not give any shit to 99 % of the polygamy arguments in these threads. Exactly, if he won, he can definitely persuade or force people to recognize his polygamous marriage. Unfortunately he lost and he was gone, so there was no such validation process at all. A petition which was not discussed or approved was not a valid decree, this is very clear. Maybe in the heart of rhaegar, Lyanna is his only wife and Elia was never his wife, but his heart was smashed by the war-hammer so it did not count. So Lyanna is still a mistress and Jon is still a bastard at the birth (not necessarily in the future). Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mithras Posted August 28, 2015 Share Posted August 28, 2015 It may have been illegal in some of the seven kingdoms, we don't know. I wouldn't be surprised if it was illegal in the Reach due to the influence of the High Septon. We know that one king of the Reach put aside all his other wives when he welcomed Oldtown into the fold. The motivation for passing the law would probably be religious, and to prevent succession issues and stuff. Why should the king worry about making restrictive laws when he and his successors are not bound by them? Of course this is all speculative, but so is half the stuff that gets posted around here. I'm not really trying to rehash the debate about the legality of polygamy, just point out that you were kinda being a dick. We know both from real world history and ASOIAF history that the laws for succession do not mean much in times of crises, which in fact is the reason why many of those crises break out. Where laws fail, swords decide the matter. Do people really think that half of ADoS will be spared to polygamy discussions and similar stuff in order to decide whether Jon is trueborn or not? Will Jon and Sam search thousands of history books to look for a precedent that can make him a trueborn son of Rhaegar? That is what I understand from this endless discussion about polygamy. Every three or more RLJ threads when I return, I see same people saying the same things about polygamy over and over again. Every now and then, some new people arrive and bring up things that were discussed indefinitely 10 threads ago. So, this whole process starts over again. So, let me simplify the things for everyone. If Jon saves the world and if he ends up as the only surviving leader, all hail King Jon Targaryen, trueborn son of Prince Rhaegar Targaryen and Princess Lyanna Stark. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
purple-eyes Posted August 28, 2015 Share Posted August 28, 2015 So, let me simplify the things for everyone. If Jon saves the world and if he ends up as the only surviving leader, all hail King Jon Targaryen, trueborn son of Prince Rhaegar Targaryen and Princess Lyanna Stark. Big if here, unless you are GRRM himself. If you are GRRM, then I absolutely agree "all hail King Jon Targaryen, trueborn son of Prince Rhaegar Targaryen and Princess Lyanna Stark" Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The Twinslayer Posted August 28, 2015 Share Posted August 28, 2015 None of those matter if Rhaegar won at the Trident. George said that the laws follow the might in that SSM above. If Rhaegar won, everyone would have to shut up about his polygamous marriage. If a similar authority like a Great Council recognizes the R-L marriage as legal, Jon is hailed as a trueborn son of Rhaegar. The rest is empty talk. I have no doubt that George will not give any shit to 99 % of the polygamy arguments in these threads. This assumes that if Rhaegar won at the Trident, he could do whatever he pleased. But that is not the case. After the Blackwater, Joffrey was king, Cersei was Regent and Tywin was Hand, but the Tyrells were able to force first Joffrey then Tommen to marry Margaery. So, after the Trident, if Rhaegar had just defeated the Starks in battle with the help of the Martells, what is to say that Dorne wouldn't force Rhaegar to publicly proclaim that Lyanna was his mistress. Or if Dorne was a spent force, but Tywin had come to Rhaegar's rescue at the Trident, what is to say Tywin couldn't force Rhaegar to get rid of both Elia and Lyanna and marry Cersei instead? Whatever happened, he would not be rewarding one of the losing families with a marriage, he would be rewarding one of his allies in victory. Just like the actual winner, Robert, was forced to do. We know both from real world history and ASOIAF history that the laws for succession do not mean much in times of crises, which in fact is the reason why many of those crises break out. Where laws fail, swords decide the matter. Do people really think that half of ADoS will be spared to polygamy discussions and similar stuff in order to decide whether Jon is trueborn or not? Will Jon and Sam search thousands of history books to look for a precedent that can make him a trueborn son of Rhaegar? That is what I understand from this endless discussion about polygamy. Every three or more RLJ threads when I return, I see same people saying the same things about polygamy over and over again. Every now and then, some new people arrive and bring up things that were discussed indefinitely 10 threads ago. So, this whole process starts over again. So, let me simplify the things for everyone. If Jon saves the world and if he ends up as the only surviving leader, all hail King Jon Targaryen, trueborn son of Prince Rhaegar Targaryen and Princess Lyanna Stark. If Jon saves the world and ends up as the only surviving leader, and he wants to be king, he can call himself King Jon Snow or King Jon Stark for all anyone will care. Why would he take the name (Targaryen) of a man he never met over the name of his adoptive father, which was given to him by his adopted brother? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mithras Posted August 28, 2015 Share Posted August 28, 2015 This assumes that if Rhaegar won at the Trident, he could do whatever he pleased. But that is not the case. After the Blackwater, Joffrey was king, Cersei was Regent and Tywin was Hand, but the Tyrells were able to force first Joffrey then Tommen to marry Margaery. So, after the Trident, if Rhaegar had just defeated the Starks in battle with the help of the Martells, what is to say that Dorne wouldn't force Rhaegar to publicly proclaim that Lyanna was his mistress. Or if Dorne was a spent force, but Tywin had come to Rhaegar's rescue at the Trident, what is to say Tywin couldn't force Rhaegar to get rid of both Elia and Lyanna and marry Cersei instead? Whatever happened, he would not be rewarding one of the losing families with a marriage, he would be rewarding one of his allies in victory. Just like the actual winner, Robert, was forced to do. Yes, Rhaegar could have done whatever he wanted to do. He even told Jaime that he wanted to make the changes he meant for a long time and we know that that was about removing Aerys. With the victory at the Trident and the command of the royal armies, Rhaegar, who already had a large public support, would remove Aerys from power without any significant resistance. In fact, he might have pardoned the rebel leaders and add their army to his own if they all hailed him as the king and he gave them his word to remove Aerys from power. He could have won the Starks instantly by saying that he and Lyanna wed lawfully and willingly. If Jon saves the world and ends up as the only surviving leader, and he wants to be king, he can call himself King Jon Snow or King Jon Stark for all anyone will care. Why would he take the name (Targaryen) of a man he never met over the name of his adoptive father, which was given to him by his adopted brother? That might work but then what is the point of making Jon the son of Rhaegar and Lyanna? Besides, the Great Council might have argued that the dynasty of Jon would stand a better chance to survive if they take the Targaryen surname, which has been the associated with the Kings of Westeros for a long time. If Jon takes the Stark name, then what about the Starks of Winterfell? Why should the king of the Realm share the same surname with one of his vassals? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RumHam Posted August 28, 2015 Share Posted August 28, 2015 We know both from real world history and ASOIAF history that the laws for succession do not mean much in times of crises, which in fact is the reason why many of those crises break out. Where laws fail, swords decide the matter. Do people really think that half of ADoS will be spared to polygamy discussions and similar stuff in order to decide whether Jon is trueborn or not? Will Jon and Sam search thousands of history books to look for a precedent that can make him a trueborn son of Rhaegar? That is what I understand from this endless discussion about polygamy. Every three or more RLJ threads when I return, I see same people saying the same things about polygamy over and over again. Every now and then, some new people arrive and bring up things that were discussed indefinitely 10 threads ago. So, this whole process starts over again. So, let me simplify the things for everyone. If Jon saves the world and if he ends up as the only surviving leader, all hail King Jon Targaryen, trueborn son of Prince Rhaegar Targaryen and Princess Lyanna Stark. I know we're in the R+L=J thread, but I wasn't really trying to make this about Jon's status or his fate. You suggested that the idea of polygamy being illegal was so ridiculous that discussing that possibility was a "waste of space." That's what I took issue with. I agree that even if it is illegal it would be possible for Rhaegar to get away with it or have the marriage accepted. I also agree it's possible that if Jon takes power he could somehow decree himself not a bastard. But that's not what you and I were discussing. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
purple-eyes Posted August 28, 2015 Share Posted August 28, 2015 That might work but then what is the point of making Jon the son of Rhaegar and Lyanna? There are a lot of points to make Jon the son of Rhaegar and Lyanna (have the blood of dragon and ability to ride a dragon for example), not much points to make him the trueborn son of Rhaegar and Lyanna. Based on what you have addressed here so far, I have to say you really really wish Rhaegar and Lyanna married lawfully and happily and whole country gladly accepted it. But unfortunately, until the future book writes that, we do not know. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mithras Posted August 28, 2015 Share Posted August 28, 2015 There are a lot of points to make Jon the son of Rhaegar and Lyanna (have the blood of dragon and ability to ride a dragon), not much points to make him the trueborn son of Rhaegar and Lyanna. Based on what you have addressed here so far, I have to say you really really wish Rhaegar and Lyanna married lawfully and happily and whole country gladly accepted it. But unfortunately, until the future book writes that, we do not know. Making Jon the son of Rhaegar only for him to ride a dragon is totally against George’s mindset. Jon made his accomplishments in the story not because of his birth or station or blood but by merit. He worked his ass off. He literally bled for the NW. He is doing his best and his best might not be enough in every occasion. All of a sudden, learning that he has Targaryen blood and taking a dragon to solve his problems would be betrayal to the buildup of Jon’s progression. And for the record, claiming that Targaryen blood is required to ride a dragon is circular logic. It is nowhere proven conclusively that Targaryen blood is needed to ride a dragon. For the time being, if Jon ought to ride a dragon, he can do that without being a Targaryen. In fact, as a skinchanger, he might stand a higher chance than a random dude. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
purple-eyes Posted August 28, 2015 Share Posted August 28, 2015 Making Jon the son of Rhaegar only for him to ride a dragon is totally against Georges mindset. Jon made his accomplishments in the story not because of his birth or station or blood but by merit. He worked his ass off. He literally bled for the NW. He is doing his best and his best might not be enough in every occasion. All of a sudden, learning that he has Targaryen blood and taking a dragon to solve his problems would be betrayal to the buildup of Jons progression. And for the record, claiming that Targaryen blood is required to ride a dragon is circular logic. It is nowhere proven conclusively that Targaryen blood is needed to ride a dragon. For the time being, if Jon ought to ride a dragon, he can do that without being a Targaryen. In fact, as a skinchanger, he might stand a higher chance than a random dude.So what? This is just one example. For example, As a targ bastard he can be legitimized and then had the same benefits as true born. It will be interesting to see how he will be legitimized later and also interesting to see the interaction with Dany on these things. Will she accept him and agree he had a better claim? Will she call him a bastard but still love him eventually? Will she fight with him for the throne? And even we can see how people welcome him because he is who he is, not because his legal status. A bastard proved himself and was welcomed for being himself. Why do you think so lowly on bastard? They had to be true born to win something? You want to see reed jumped out to say his parents married secretly! His is the heir to the throne! Then suddenly whole world agrees and everything is peachy? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mithras Posted August 28, 2015 Share Posted August 28, 2015 So what? This is just one example. For example, As a targ bastard he can be legitimized and then had the same benefits as true born. It will be interesting to see how he will be legitimized later and also interesting to see the interaction with Dany on these things. Will she accept him and agree he had a better claim? Will she call him a bastard but still love him eventually? Will she fight with him for the throne? And even we can see how people welcome him because he is who he is, not because his legal status. A bastard proved himself and was welcomed for being himself. Why do you think so lowly on bastard? They had to be true born to win something? You want to see reed jumped out to say his parents married secretly! His is the heir to the throne! Then suddenly whole world agrees and everything is peachy? :bang: :bang: :bang: :bang: :bang: I don’t think lowly on bastards, neither does Jon. Jon solved his issues with bastardy early in AGoT. There is no reason to go back and repeat the same things. Jon is a sworn brother of the NW. Trueborn or a legitimized bastard; it does not matter to him. He foreswore any claim to thrones or crowns. There is no reason for him to leave the Night’s Watch unless he sees no other way to protect the Realm. And for fucks sake; Jon is a major character of the story, not some character test to Dany. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
King of the Narrow Sea Posted August 28, 2015 Share Posted August 28, 2015 Making Jon the son of Rhaegar only for him to ride a dragon is totally against George’s mindset. Jon made his accomplishments in the story not because of his birth or station or blood but by merit. He worked his ass off. He literally bled for the NW. He is doing his best and his best might not be enough in every occasion. All of a sudden, learning that he has Targaryen blood and taking a dragon to solve his problems would be betrayal to the buildup of Jon’s progression. And for the record, claiming that Targaryen blood is required to ride a dragon is circular logic. It is nowhere proven conclusively that Targaryen blood is needed to ride a dragon. For the time being, if Jon ought to ride a dragon, he can do that without being a Targaryen. In fact, as a skinchanger, he might stand a higher chance than a random dude. You must be joking. - He was chosen to be Mormont's steward to train him to be the next Lord Commander because he was a Stark - He was chosen to go ranging with Qhorin because he was a Stark - Stannis offered to make him Lord of Winterfell because he was a Stark - He was chosen as Lord Commander because he was a Stark - Robb made him his heir and King in the North because he was a Stark - Alys Karstark chose to go to him for justice when her uncle tried to usurp her rights because he was a Stark etc. Who he was, Eddard's "son", played a key role in pretty much all of Jon's story. He didn't work his ass off, he continually benefited from who he was by blood - a Stark. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Alia of the knife Posted August 28, 2015 Share Posted August 28, 2015 Actually I am wondering why Barri did not say straightforwardly that Rhaegar married her for duty. It is certainly not a shame or insult to marry somebody for duty. Everybody does that without a issue. Why did he bother to speak a lot of vague stuff about it in stead of saying : Yes, they married for duty and they respected each other? He DID tell her R married for duty, he was trying to be delicate. That is what I mean by obfuscate. He said Dany was not ready for the truth about her family yet. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Alia of the knife Posted August 28, 2015 Share Posted August 28, 2015 Okay when the eloquent Mithras gets all "Goodfellas" on us, it's time for lunch. :) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
purple-eyes Posted August 28, 2015 Share Posted August 28, 2015 He DID tell her R married for duty, he was trying to be delicate. That is what I mean by obfuscate. He said Dany was not ready for the truth about her family yet. I know what you mean. But seems not necessary. Marriage of duty is not ugly truth like her dad is mad. Dany had no problem for that. In fact if he said clearly for duty, this is better for dany because now she know her romantic brother ran off for love from a political cold loveless marriage. What is the point to tell her your brother ran off from a good nice woman and a marriage he was very fond of? Seems more jerkish. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mithras Posted August 28, 2015 Share Posted August 28, 2015 You must be joking. - He was chosen to be Mormont's steward to train him to be the next Lord Commander because he was a Stark - He was chosen to go ranging with Qhorin because he was a Stark - Stannis offered to make him Lord of Winterfell because he was a Stark - He was chosen as Lord Commander because he was a Stark - Robb made him his heir and King in the North because he was a Stark - Alys Karstark chose to go to him for justice when her uncle tried to usurp her rights because he was a Stark etc. Who he was, Eddard's "son", played a key role in pretty much all of Jon's story. He didn't work his ass off, he continually benefited from who he was by blood - a Stark. Except none of that happened that way. You are twisting the text. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Alia of the knife Posted August 28, 2015 Share Posted August 28, 2015 I know what you mean. But seems not necessary. Marriage of duty is not ugly truth like her dad is mad. Dany had no problem for that. In fact if he said clearly for duty, this is better for dany because now she know her romantic brother ran off for love from a political cold loveless marriage. What is the point to tell her your brother ran off from a good nice woman and a marriage he was very fond of? Seems more jerkish. Okay, okay. You are right. Selmy kept the painful secret of Rhaegars marriage for duty a secret because of the shock and disillusionment that it would cause Dany to know her brother did what every other aristocrat did, and you know what that is? Marry for duty. I don't know how the old troll sleeps at night. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
purple-eyes Posted August 28, 2015 Share Posted August 28, 2015 Okay, okay. You are right. Selmy kept the painful secret of Rhaegars marriage for duty a secret because of the shock and disillusionment that it would cause Dany to know her brother did what every other aristocrat did, and you know what that is? Marry for duty. I don't know how the old troll sleeps at night. Actually I think this is just the way grrm gave us more information on these dead people. You know, just to confuse us. You guys wonder if elia did something wrong (like cheating with arthur) so rhaegar left her? Here you go, she is good. You guys wonder if elia was dumb or silly to let rhaegar did all this? Here you go, she has wisdom. Then we got even more confused and start to wonder if there were more game of thrones and this is what grrm wanted to see. :) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
King of the Narrow Sea Posted August 28, 2015 Share Posted August 28, 2015 Except none of that happened that way. You are twisting the text. - He was chosen to be Mormont's steward to train him to be the next Lord Commander because he was a Stark I'll give you this one as the text actually never says anything that I can find as to why Mormont chose him, but he chose Jon after Jon had done nothing noteworthy at the Wall so hardly a stretch that Mormont chose him because he was a Stark as that's his defining feature at that point. - He was chosen to go ranging with Qhorin because he was a Stark "May the gods forgive me. Choose your men." Qhorin Halfhand turned his head. His eyes met Jon's, and held them for a long moment. "Very well. I choose Jon Snow." Mormont blinked. "He is hardly more than a boy. And my steward besides. Not even a ranger." "Tollett can care for you as well, my lord." Qhorin lifted his maimed, two-fingered hand. "The old gods are still strong beyond the Wall. The gods of the First Men . . . and the Starks." - Stannis offered to make him Lord of Winterfell because he was a Stark "Your brother was the rightful Lord of Winterfell. If he had stayed home and done his duty, instead of crowning himself and riding off to conquer the riverlands, he might be alive today. Be that as it may. You are not Robb, no more than I am Robert." The harsh words had blown away whatever sympathy Jon might have had for Stannis. "I loved my brother," he said. "And I mine. Yet they were what they were, and so are we. I am the only true king in Westeros, north or south. And you are Ned Stark's bastard." Stannis studied him with those dark blue eyes. "Tywin Lannister has named Roose Bolton his Warden of the North, to reward him for betraying your brother. The ironmen are fighting amongst themselves since Balon Greyjoy's death, yet they still hold Moat Cailin, Deepwood Motte, Torrhen's Square, and most of the Stony Shore. Your father's lands are bleeding, and I have neither the strength nor the time to stanch the wounds. What is needed is a Lord of Winterfell. A loyal Lord of Winterfell." He is looking at me, Jon thought, stunned. "Winterfell is no more. Theon Greyjoy put it to the torch." "Granite does not burn easily," Stannis said. "The castle can be rebuilt, in time. It's not the walls that make a lord, it's the man. Your northmen do not know me, have no reason to love me, yet I will need their strength in the battles yet to come. I need a son of Eddard Stark to win them to my banner." - He was chosen as Lord Commander because he was a Stark "There's another man," Sam blurted out. "Lord Commander Mormont trusted him. So did Donal Noye and Qhorin Halfhand. Though he's not as highly born as you, he comes from old blood. He was castle-born and castle-raised, and he learned sword and lance from a knight and letters from a maester of the Citadel. His father was a lord, and his brother a king." Ser Denys stroked his long white beard. "Mayhaps," he said, after a long moment. "He is very young, but . . . mayhaps. He might serve, I grant you, though I would be more suitable. I have no doubt of that. I would be the wiser choice." - Robb made him his heir and King in the North because he was a Stark "Young, and a king," he said. "A king must have an heir. If I should die in my next battle, the kingdom must not die with me. By law Sansa is next in line of succession, so Winterfell and the north would pass to her." His mouth tightened. "To her, and her lord husband. Tyrion Lannister. I cannot allow that. I will not allow that. That dwarf must never have the north." "No," Catelyn agreed. "You must name another heir, until such time as Jeyne gives you a son." She considered a moment. "Your father's father had no siblings, but his father had a sister who married a younger son of Lord Raymar Royce, of the junior branch. They had three daughters, all of whom wed Vale lordlings. A Waynwood and a Corbray, for certain. The youngest . . . it might have been a Templeton, but . . ." "Mother." There was a sharpness in Robb's tone. "You forget. My father had four sons." - Alys Karstark chose to go to him for justice when her uncle tried to usurp her rights because he was a Stark "When a man takes the black he puts his feuds behind him. The Night's Watch has no quarrel with Karhold, nor with you." "Good. I was afraid … I begged my father to leave one of my brothers as castellan, but none of them wished to miss the glory and ransoms to be won in the south. Now Torr and Edd are dead. Harry was a prisoner at Maidenpool when last we heard, but that was almost a year ago. He may be dead as well. I did not know where else to turn but to the last son of Eddard Stark." Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.