R+L=J v.155

[corbon]

 

 

What's the source for this statement? The king is above the law, and of course nobody is likely to prosecute one of his children provided they are on good terms with the king. But unequal application of the laws aside (which happens for non-royal nobles too.) I don't think it's been established that sovereign immunity applies to the royal family as well.

 

 

Its not the royal family that is above the law, its the Targaryen House.

 

Jaime:

That would show the realm that the Lannisters are above their laws, like gods and Targaryens.

Catelyn:

The dragon kings had wed brother to sister, but they were the blood of old Valyria where such practices had been common, and like their dragons the Targaryens answered to neither gods nor men.

 

Did text state that father/daughter and mother/son marriage were outlawed in westeros?

 

Those particular forms of incest, no, but they are incest. And incest is a monstrous sin against the gods, both old and new.

She had seen enough of Robert Baratheon at Winterfell to know that the king did not regard Joffrey with any great warmth. If the boy was truly Jaime's seed, Robert would have put him to death along with his mother, and few would have condemned him. Bastards were common enough, but incest was a monstrous sin to both old gods and new, and the children of such wickedness were named abominations in sept and godswood alike. The dragon kings had wed brother to sister, but they were the blood of old Valyria where such practices had been common, and like their dragons the Targaryens answered to neither gods nor men.

 

Its also against the law of the realm:

That (Jaime marrying Cersei publicly) would show the realm that the Lannisters are above their laws, like gods and Targaryens.

 

No, it didn't. And because it didn't, there's absolutely no reason to believe the affirmative unless otherwise stated. And clearly, incest was looked down upon, but not illegal in any sense in this story...but 'outlawed' and 'frowned upon' aren't the same thing whatsoever.

 

While Catelyn's quote really only goes to the religious sentiments, Jaime's speaks to the laws of the realm, not religions. So yes, it does say in the text that incest is literally against the law.

[Ygrain]

The truth behind the claims about Daemon and Aegon is irrelevant, the fact is that the possibility of multiple wives on the part of a Targ prince (a bastard at that) was brought up a little over a century ago. Whether this or that house, or the Faith, or the small folk would or wouldn't have liked it, or accepted it without a fight we can only speculate. There is absolutely a foundation for the possibility of Rhaegar taking another wife, whatever fallout that would have entailed, however stupid or whatever the intention.

There is also a SSM stating that there "was and is precedent". IS. If there is precedent, it is still valid.

[sj4iy]

While Catelyn's quote really only goes to the religious sentiments, Jaime's speaks to the laws of the realm, not religions. So yes, it does say in the text that incest is literally against the law.

Okay, it is. That wasn't really my point, though. My point is that people are somehow gleaning information out of the text that is never once stated simply because they 'think' that's the way it should be. Until the text states that there was a law against it, then it's nothing more than an unsupported assumption. And just because no one after Aegon married polygamously, it doesn't mean that it wasn't 'possible' according to the laws of Westeros.

[sj4iy]

Sj4iy, I would like to buy your rock.

It's a lovely rock. Very shiny.

[IceFire125]

There is also a SSM stating that there "was and is precedent". IS. If there is precedent, it is still valid.

 

First off all I want to thank you for the one of the best fantasy novels I ever read. Then I would like to ask one question: In the SOS Jora Mormont told to Dany that Aegon The Dragon had two wives and she could take two husbands. The question is if there were any other precedents of polygamy among Targaryens besides Aegon the First.

 

Yes, there were.

 

Maegor the Cruel had eight or nine wives, I seem to recall, though not all of them were simultaneous. He beheaded a few of them who failed to give him heirs, a test that all of them ultimately failed.

 

There might have been a few later instances as well. I'd need to look that up... (or make that up, as the case might be).

 

http://www.westeros.org/Citadel/ssm/category/heraldry/Heraldry/P600

[Lord Varys]

Well, that SSM is outdated. Maegor only beheaded one of his wives, and he never had 'eight or nine'.

 

The polygamy issue is actually very simple. There are two layers to it. First, whether Rhaegar would have done it and actually did it. I agree with that completely. Then there is the separate issue whether this would have been a 'valid' or an 'accepted' marriage. This I very much doubt because was neither king nor would he had sufficient strength as king to enforce such a special rule for himself. Not if he wanted to become as 'popular' as good old Maegor. Rhaegar faced five strong power blocs against the marriage, of faced them at least potentially prior to the outbreak of the Rebellion:

 

1. His own father, Aerys II, who considered the coronation of Lyanna at Harrenhal as a prelude to a treasonous conspiracy against him.

 

2. The family of his rightful wife, Princess Elia of Dorne, who would most likely not sit idly by while she is replaced by this new wife Rhaegar has chosen for 'love and lust' rather than reasons of state.

 

3. The family of Lyanna Stark, whose members - Rickard possibly aside - weren't supportive of a relationship or marriage between Lyanna and Rhaegar

 

4. Robert Baratheon, who was long betrothed to Lyanna Stark, and heavily in love with her, who would suffer this insult to his honor and his ego.

 

5. The Faith of the Andals whose scriptures forbid or condemn polygamy as Maegor the Cruel himself admitted.

 

If there had been no Rebellion, Rhaegar would have faced a strong opposition from all or at least some of those people and institutions listed above, and the chances that he (or the marriage) would have survived all that aren't particularly high. Of course, with a lot of luck and the best scenario imaginable in his favor he could have won, of course, but the odds aren't really in his favor. The chances of all/most of those powers uniting against him are pretty high, actually.

 

A third question is whether a child from that union - born the way it was, in obscurity - would ever have a claim to the Iron Throne after it was disguised as Ned Stark's bastard and never recognized as a Targaryen by a member of the royal family.

 

This is exceedingly unlikely, as is the notion that the Kingsguard at the tower proclaimed this child their king. We don't even know for a certainty the boy was born prior to Ned's arrival. Lyanna may have fallen sick prior to the birth, and only given birth to her son around the time Ned had arrived, or afterwards. This isn't clear.

 

Even the fever dream dialogue doesn't support the idea that the knights had proclaimed the child their king. You have to have your preconceived narrative and insert it as 'hidden meaning' behind the dialogue.

[UnmaskedLurker]

LV--

 

While I agree with your analysis regarding the numerous obstacles that Rhaegar would have faced on the marriage, I disagree in one important respect. And we have had this debate many times, so I am mainly making these points for anyone else who has not considered these arguments before. Rhaegar risked punishment for engaging in a polygamous marriage -- and getting married without permission of the King. Just as Jaehaerys and Shaera risked punishment for getting married without permission of the King -- and engaging in a incestuous marriage. But the marriage is still a marriage -- especially if done in an "official" Old God way (for example on the Isle of Faces, which was near by and has the right trees). But Rhaegar did not really risk the marriage being a non-marriage. He risked punishment of some kind -- most likely exile (as happened to Maegor).

 

My personal theory is that this risk of punishment or sanction is the main reason that Rhaegar and Lyanna stayed hidden so long. I strongly suspect that Rhaegar calculated that coming back to KL with both a new bride AND a new baby would make it more likely that Aerys would allow the marriage to be approved. And as long as that happened, the other objectors could be handled.

 

I also strongly disagree that the ToJ dialogue does not strongly imply that Jon is viewed as the rightful King by the KG. Now there are different theories on why they believed Jon was the rightful King (like some people thinking these KG chose Rhaegar over Aerys -- which I tend to think is not the case based on other things stated in the conversation about Aerys remaining on the throne, but it would be a way for them to consider Jon to be the next King). I believe only a strained reading of that text can explain why they indicate no obligation or interest to go to Viserys if the KG considered Viserys to be a potential claimant to the throne. I did not come to that conclusion based on any preconceived narrative. In fact, for a long time, I was on the fence but after re-reading the conversation over again many times, I found that I could not come up with any other plausible explanation for why they show no interest in going to Viserys and why they state not only that they swore a vow "then" but also swore a vow "now." The only vow "now" that makes sense is the vow to protect the King -- which means the King must be in the tower (or near by, maybe, as Ran has suggested).

[IceFire125]

My personal theory is that this risk of punishment or sanction is the main reason that Rhaegar and Lyanna stayed hidden so long. 

 

Was that where Rhaegar stand? lets read what his son thought....

 

And where do I stand? Jon did not know. To stay with Ygritte, he would need to become a wildling heart and soul. If he abandoned her to return to his duty, the Magnar might cut her heart out. And if he took her with him … assuming she would go, which was far from certain … well, he could scarcely bring her back to Castle Black to live among the brothers. A deserter and a wildling could expect no welcome anywhere in the Seven Kingdoms.

 

Lyanna desert her family (to runaway from a planned marriage--Alys Karstark); Rhaegar stole Lyanna the wildling way (for prophecy--for desire--for love?)

 

I believe they married in secret.

 

You were wrong to love her, a voice whispered. You were wrong to leave her, a different voice insisted. He wondered if his father had been torn the same way, when he’d left Jon’s mother to return to Lady Catelyn. He was pledged to Lady Stark, and I am pledged to the Night’s Watch.

[purple-eyes]

LV--
 
While I agree with your analysis regarding the numerous obstacles that Rhaegar would have faced on the marriage, I disagree in one important respect. And we have had this debate many times, so I am mainly making these points for anyone else who has not considered these arguments before. Rhaegar risked punishment for engaging in a polygamous marriage -- and getting married without permission of the King. Just as Jaehaerys and Shaera risked punishment for getting married without permission of the King -- and engaging in a incestuous marriage. But the marriage is still a marriage -- especially if done in an "official" Old God way (for example on the Isle of Faces, which was near by and has the right trees). But Rhaegar did not really risk the marriage being a non-marriage. He risked punishment of some kind -- most likely exile (as happened to Maegor).
 
My personal theory is that this risk of punishment or sanction is the main reason that Rhaegar and Lyanna stayed hidden so long. I strongly suspect that Rhaegar calculated that coming back to KL with both a new bride AND a new baby would make it more likely that Aerys would allow the marriage to be approved. And as long as that happened, the other objectors could be handled.
 
I also strongly disagree that the ToJ dialogue does not strongly imply that Jon is viewed as the rightful King by the KG. Now there are different theories on why they believed Jon was the rightful King (like some people thinking these KG chose Rhaegar over Aerys -- which I tend to think is not the case based on other things stated in the conversation about Aerys remaining on the throne, but it would be a way for them to consider Jon to be the next King). I believe only a strained reading of that text can explain why they indicate no obligation or interest to go to Viserys if the KG considered Viserys to be a potential claimant to the throne. I did not come to that conclusion based on any preconceived narrative. In fact, for a long time, I was on the fence but after re-reading the conversation over again many times, I found that I could not come up with any other plausible explanation for why they show no interest in going to Viserys and why they state not only that they swore a vow "then" but also swore a vow "now." The only vow "now" that makes sense is the vow to protect the King -- which means the King must be in the tower (or near by, maybe, as Ran has suggested).

You are using a worst example to support yourself.
Let us look at jaehaerys and shaera, this one in fact supported that rhaegar and lyanna did not get married.
Case of j and a proved that a wedding oath (with sex of course) is unbreakable. Even king and faith could not break it although they really wanted to. When it happened, it was blessed by the gods.
They needed to prove the oath is fake to break it, like a mummer as a septon.
Rhaegar swore his oath with elia in front of high septon and their children proved that they had sex.
This marriage oath is unbreakable.
J and a are like rhaegar and Elia in this case.
If rhaegar married with lyanna then he was a oath breaker and this second marriage would not be recognized by the god. Faith would treat it like this did not even happen if there was one.
Only way rhaegar can make it work was that to set aside elia firstly and break this oath legally.
Otherwise this second marriage is a joke.

[UnmaskedLurker]

You are using a worst example to support yourself.
Let us look at jaehaerys and shaera, this one in fact supported that rhaegar and lyanna did not get married.
Case of j and a proved that a wedding oath (with sex of course) is unbreakable. Even king and faith could not break it although they really wanted to. When it happened, it was blessed by the gods.
They needed to prove the oath is fake to break it, like a mummer as a septon.
Rhaegar swore his oath with elia in front of high septon and their children proved that they had sex.
This marriage oath is unbreakable.
J and a are like rhaegar and Elia in this case.
If rhaegar married with lyanna then he was a oath breaker and this second marriage would not be recognized by the god. Faith would treat it like this did not even happen if there was one.
Only way rhaegar can make it work was that to set aside elia firstly and break this oath legally.
Otherwise this second marriage is a joke.

I don't follow your analysis as all. What oath is Rhaegar breaking? An oath to Elia-- so what? I am not sure what you are getting at. Even if somehow it is a breach of an oath -- and I am not sure it is -- so what?

 

My point is that I agree that there were formal rules against polygamy -- just as there were formal rules against incest. But the point is -- what it is the consequence. For a Targ, the consequence is that either the King approves of the rule breaking -- and then the rule is treated as if not broken -- or the King punishes the rule breaker. That is my point. Even if you are correct that some oath to Elia was broken -- if Aerys states that no sanction will apply to the second marriage, then there is no consequence to breaking the oath. But an oath to one person cannot affect whether actions taken with another person amounts to a marriage. That would put Lyanna in a position where she is not breaking an oath, so she is bound by the marriage, but Rhaegar is not. That makes no sense.

 

They are married if they engaged in a formal marriage ceremony. That is what all the available precedent tells the readers. The issue remains one of sanction.

[Lord Varys]

Jaehaerys and Shaera's marriage could have been annulled as easily as Tyrion's marriage to Tysha. It would have greatly hurt his children, but Aegon V could have done it just as Tywin did it.

 

The same goes for Duncan as well. Royal children aren't free people, especially not while they are married. They do as they are told, or they are out. Aegon V could have unmade the marriages, or he could have cut them out of the succession. Just as Aerys II could have done. And then Lyanna's child would have been nothing - again.

 

By the way: All Aerys most likely would have done if Rhaegar had brought him another child from another woman is to complain that she smell 'wolfish' and burned her together with the rest of this ill-begotten brood. I mean, the idea to buy the love or forgiveness of your mad and paranoid father by running away and hiding during a dynasty-threatening war and then coming bad with a child, saying something like 'Hi dad, wanna look? Your third grandchild.'

 

Yes, some parents miss their children and worry for them if they are away, but Aerys was an irrational nut case. Not to mention that Rhaegar must have been completely stupid himself to contemplate that this might work. Nor would he have any intention doing it. He wanted to depose his father, not win his love or forgiveness. We know that this is the case because he says as much to Jaime after his return.

 

Come to think of it, I don't see why Rhaegar would trust into the magical ability of an infant to befuddle Aerys but not the prospect of the soon birth of such a child - which means he would have told Aerys that he was married to Lyanna (if he didn't know already) and that she was pregnant.

[UnViserion]

All the smiles died when Rhaegar crowned Lyanna Queen of Love and Beauty. Why? Because he already has a wife and Lyanna is betrothed to another. That much is obvious.

 

Now, what do you think the realms reaction would be if he produced Lyanna as his second wife and Jon as his second son? It's just ridiculous to believe that the Targaryens, at arguably the weakest the dynasty has ever been, could pull this off.

"Just because their Targaryens" feels like a cop out answer. At this point, they need Westeros far more than Westeros needs them.

[purple-eyes]

Jaehaerys and Shaera's marriage could have been annulled as easily as Tyrion's marriage to Tysha. It would have greatly hurt his children, but Aegon V could have done it just as Tywin did it.
 
The same goes for Duncan as well. Royal children aren't free people, especially not while they are married. They do as they are told, or they are out. Aegon V could have unmade the marriages, or he could have cut them out of the succession. Just as Aerys II could have done. And then Lyanna's child would have been nothing - again.
 
By the way: All Aerys most likely would have done if Rhaegar had brought him another child from another woman is to complain that she smell 'wolfish' and burned her together with the rest of this ill-begotten brood. I mean, the idea to buy the love or forgiveness of your mad and paranoid father by running away and hiding during a dynasty-threatening war and then coming bad with a child, saying something like 'Hi dad, wanna look? Your third grandchild.'
 
Yes, some parents miss their children and worry for them if they are away, but Aerys was an irrational nut case. Not to mention that Rhaegar must have been completely stupid himself to contemplate that this might work. Nor would he have any intention doing it. He wanted to depose his father, not win his love or forgiveness. We know that this is the case because he says as much to Jaime after his return.
 
Come to think of it, I don't see why Rhaegar would trust into the magical ability of an infant to befuddle Aerys but not the prospect of the soon birth of such a child - which means he would have told Aerys that he was married to Lyanna (if he didn't know already) and that she was pregnant.

Exactly. Under some scenarios, king or high septon can unmake it, a fake septon, without permission of father and house, by the sword point, etc. under these cases, the oath they had was an invalid oath, a fake one.
Rhaegar may swear an oath with lyanna, but it is a fake one. You swear to be an us citizen with cheating materials, your oath is fake.
rhaegar had very low chance to make his second marriage work. Best he can get was to be disinherited and exiled with his mistress to Essos.

[Ygrain]

"Just because their Targaryens" feels like a cop out answer. At this point, they need Westeros far more than Westeros needs them.

Sort it out with GRRM then - that's exactly the reason why he lets the Targs get away with incest. No-one else is allowed to do it. 

[UnViserion]

Sort it out with GRRM then - that's exactly the reason why he lets the Targs get away with incest. No-one else is allowed to do it. 

 

Letting the Targs marry eachother is one thing, letting the crown prince steal a LP's daughter (who is betrothed to another LP) and enter into a polygamous marriage with her is another.

 

The faith had a huge issue with the incest and polygamy. The politics involved with letting the crown unilaterally shit all over a valid marriage pact when they are at a very vulnerable position dynasty-wise is what's going to lead to war.. and what will lead to said union being unrecognized by the realm IMO.

 

edit- I think it was a very tragic overstep by Rhaegar if he thought he could pull this off.

[Lord Varys]

Ygrain,

 

incest marriages were always arranged by the king or with the king's permission. Your name may be 'Targaryen' all day long if the king doesn't allow you to marry your sister you can't. If you go along with it anyway the king could easily throw you out of the family and allow you to go through all those dreadful incest penalties.

 

I really wonder how Jaehaerys and Shaera pulled it off. The septons would have known that the king was against that match, and they would also have known that they were betrothed to other people. I smell plots there, the royal children being approached by plotters who used their love for each other as a means to destroy the alliances Aegon V wanted to make.

 

Either that, or Jaehaerys and Shaera went to great lengths to disguise themselves. Knowing the stories of 'Dunk and Egg' they would have known how to do it. But still, Jaehaerys has a misshaped left hand, and possibly other deformities as well. Unless those were all more or less hushed up, he could not have easily played the 'Egg card' there. We don't know whether Shaera had Valyrian features but considering the features of Aerys' children I'd assume this is the case. Aerys and Rhaella seem to have gotten a very strong dose of Valyrian blood through their parents - unlike Duncan, who looked like Betha.

[Ygrain]

You keep mixing apples and pears when it suits you, and rejecting pineapples for zero reason.

 

Do the Targs ever get a special treatment in some area just due to being Targs? Yes, they do.

Have they ever received special treatment in another area just due to being Targs? Yes, they have.

Has the precedent ever been declared invalid? No, it hasn't, neither in-book nor by the author; it has actually been confirmed as an existing precedent.

 

So, no, the polygamy "because Targs" is not a cop out, it's the way GRRM set the Targs to be: elitist and entitled, not answering to gods or men. LP daughter or not, because the war was not eventually fought for her.

[SFDanny]

But still, Jaehaerys has a misshaped left hand, and possibly other deformities as well.

 

Really? I missed that. Do you have a reference? TWoI&F? When you get time.

[RumHam]

 

Its not the royal family that is above the law, its the Targaryen House.

 

Jaime:

That would show the realm that the Lannisters are above their laws, like gods and Targaryens.

Catelyn:

The dragon kings had wed brother to sister, but they were the blood of old Valyria where such practices had been common, and like their dragons the Targaryens answered to neither gods nor men.

 

I still don't think the entire family is above the law. Again the prosecutions of three separate queens seem to confirm this. If Jaime had said "That would show the realm the Lannisters are fit to sit the iron throne, like Targaryens" you wouldn't take that to mean he was saying every member of house Targaryen sat the iron throne. You know what I mean? 

 

And yes in practice members of the Targaryen family didn't usually have to worry about answering to lesser men. Just as Ned's kids probably didn't have to worry about legal challenges from the people of the north. It doesn't mean they had sovereign immunity. 

[UnViserion]

You keep mixing apples and pears when it suits you, and rejecting pineapples for zero reason.

 

Do the Targs ever get a special treatment in some area just due to being Targs? Yes, they do.

Have they ever received special treatment in another area just due to being Targs? Yes, they have.

Has the precedent ever been declared invalid? No, it hasn't, neither in-book nor by the author; it has actually been confirmed as an existing precedent.

 

So, no, the polygamy "because Targs" is not a cop out, it's the way GRRM set the Targs to be: elitist and entitled, not answering to gods or men. LP daughter or not, because the war was not eventually fought for her.

 

So the current state of the Targaryen dynasty is not a factor at all? The rest of the realm is just gonna say "there go 'dem Targs again!" ?

 

I don't buy it. It's either an insanely short-sighted, poorly calculated overstep on Rhaegar's part or there's something we're missing here.

 

We don't know precisely what Robert and Ned were doing immediately following Lyanna's disappearance, because it's overshadowed by Brandon's actions. I doubt very much so that, had Brandon not rushed into KL, he, Rickard, Ned, and Robert would suddenly be ok with everything because "Rhaegar married her." What a swell guy. No way!