So if popular theories are true... there were technically 7 Targaryns still alive at the start of book 1!

[King Viserys Targaryen IV]

10 minutes ago, RumHam said:

You don't even have to guess, Martin has said this at least twice:

 

http://www.westeros.org/Citadel/SSM/Entry/2769

 

http://www.westeros.org/Citadel/SSM/Entry/Asshai.com_Forum_Chat

That does not say that it could not happen, just less likely.

And it also does not consider the very popular Rhaegar over the Mad King.

The Faith was very weak under Aerys and Robert till Cersei let them strengthen.

[RumHam]

Just now, King Viserys Targaryen IV said:

That does not say that it could not happen, just less likely.

And it also does not consider the very popular Rhaegar over the Mad King.

The Faith was very weak under Aerys and Robert till Cersei let them strengthen.

Well yeah, I mean we're very seldom dealing in absolutes. Just about anything can technically happen. Also it's not just the Faith as an institution that's the issue, it's the opinions of the lords and smallfolk who follow the Faith. 

[UnmaskedLurker]

24 minutes ago, Jak Scaletongue said:

 

My guess - Maegor had actual, living, fire-breathing dragons.  Rhaegar didn't.  THAT'S how Maegor forced the Faith to accept incest and polygamy.  Rhaegar does not have that option.

This is true.  But I'm having a brain fart now and can't remember the example I was going to use.  It was historical...dammit!  But it's still true - if no one knows it happened and/or refuses to acknowledge it, then it may as well not have happened in the first place. But that goes for most things (ie: Pluto's still a planet, dammit!)

We don't actually know if they were married or not - so calling it a "real" marriage is getting a little ahead of ourselves.  At this point it is purely speculation that they were ever married in the first place.  At this point it's not impossible, but it's not absolute either.  It's pure speculation one way or another.

Overall, my impression is that the Faith decided to choose it's battles, so to speak, after this whole dust-up with Maegor.  Purely speculating here, but I would guess that the incest taboo was already so ingrained in Westerosi culture (the North included, where the Faith isn't as influential) that the Faith focused on wiping out the polygamy.  The incest would be easier to contain to *just* Targaryens, whereas polygamy would show it's (few) advantages to the Lords when they wanted/needed a different wife than the one their father stuck them with (for whatever reason - "barren," "harridan," Selyse...).  But that's my two cents - easier to contain the incest to *just* the Targs, polygamy would be harder to contain to *just* the Targs so the Faith made a deliberate decision to stem the polygamy.

 

Of course, initially getting away with incest and polygamy had to do with having dragons. But as you know, the incest continued long after the dragons disappeared. So dragons were not necessary to continue incest, so I am not sure why polygamy would be any different -- especially given that the Faith considered incest to be the bigger sin.

You put forth the suggestion that maybe there was a compromise for the Targs to keep incest but give up polygamy -- and you posit why they might agree to that exchange. But there is no evidence to support it and evidence to the contrary. There is evidence that no one thought that incest -- outside of the Targs -- would be permitted or legal. So giving up on incest for the Targs did not mean that others thought they could engage in incest -- Cersei and Jaime know that they cannot because they are not Targs. Allowing Targs to engage in polygamy would work the same way.

Moreover, we have various Targs after the end of the Faith uprising who suggested that they wanted a polygamous marriage (I think both Daemons -- Daemon, brother of Viserys I who eventually married his niece, Rhaenyra, and Daemon Blackfyre, bastard son of Aegon IV). In these cases the King said no and would not allow it. But the King did not indicate that some agreement with the Faith made it impossible -- just that the King did not want it to happen for various reasons. If some agreement with the Faith made it clearly impermissible, then they would not have bothered to ask in the first place, knowing it would not be recognized in any event.

Bottom line is that if Rhaegar and Lyanna had a wedding, I admit that the legality might be a matter of dispute. Some would call it legit based on the prior Targ precedents of Aegon I and Maegor -- as well as the incest exception -- and others might argue not legit for various reasons based on the Faith. As a side note, there is a strong argument that even under the Faith -- a polygamous marriage is still a real marriage -- it is just that the parties engaging in the marriage are subject to sanction (which might include death or exile). But at the time of the wedding (if it occurred), Rhaegar would have believed he had the political influence to ensure full recognition of the marriage.

As to evidence of the marriage to prove Jon is legit -- that might be an issue. But again, if GRRM wants to bolster such a marriage as legit and Jon as a true-born son of Rhaegar -- he can come up with a witness (like the Septon performing or a witness, like JonCon).

16 minutes ago, King Viserys Targaryen IV said:

[snip]

Thank you for summarizing that evidence. I was too worn out to do it myself. Nice job. 

14 minutes ago, RumHam said:

[snip]

Yes, I know about all of that evidence, and it really does not affect my analysis. First, it supports my position that there is no formal understanding that the Faith would accept incest but not polygamy. Second, I have acknowledged that some people might object to the marriage of Rhaegar and Lyanna. I believe it happened. I believe that Targ loyalists would have accepted it and that the 3 KG at ToJ did accept it. I believe that Rhaegar likely thought he had the political influence and popularity to get it accepted by enough people to avoid any "cloud" on the marriage. None of that analysis is inconsistent with anything that GRRM said in any of those interviews. But you know that as we have had this discussion before.

[King Viserys Targaryen IV]

Just now, RumHam said:

Well yeah, I mean we're very seldom dealing in absolutes. Just about anything can technically happen. Also it's not just the Faith as an institution that's the issue, it's the opinions of the lords and smallfolk who follow the Faith. 

Well, I have always had the opinion that I cant say whether ot not Rhaegar would have gotten away with two marriages. But that has no bearing on whether he married Lyanna or not.

Things happen all the time that are not legal or accepted, but that does not mean they did not happen.

 

Even in the example of Maegor, he married two wives and then was banished for it.. but he did marry two women.

[Jak Scaletongue]

12 minutes ago, King Viserys Targaryen IV said:

It does not matter if "and the world does not recognize a marriage between them...". The point is that they were married and the 3 King's Guard recognized it.

It does not matter if Westeros WOULD have recognized it, only that Jon's supporters recognize it when he gathers his forces.

But everyone who may have witnessed a marriage between them is dead.  Rhaegar, Lyanna and all 3 KG are no longer alive to vouch for the authenticity of their marriage.  If no one knows it happened how does anyone know it happened? Yes, Bran *might* see it thru a tree, but he might not - we don't know IF they were married, we don't know WHERE, and we don't know WHEN.  If no one knows a marriage happened, how does anyone know a marriage happened?  Everyone who was likely present at a (theoretical) marriage between Lyanna and Rhaegar is dead.

And if Jon gathers his supporters under any name, it's more likely to be Stark than Targaryen.  He's fighting the Others, he's in the North, he's needed in the North to fight Others - he'd be better off taking Robb's legitimization and gathering his forces as a Stark.  Whether it's factual is irrelevant - he *looks* like a Stark, everyone already *thinks* he's Ned's bastard and he's already got a legitimization right there for him.  Though, personally, I think he'll stick to Snow either way.  Being a bastard is a huge part of his identity - his struggles with it aren't just going to magically disappear just because someone hands him a piece of paper and says "oh look, you're legitimate" ( I don't think it matters if he's a legitimate Targ or legitimate Stark, he's not going to be comfortable with the idea.)

[King Viserys Targaryen IV]

1 minute ago, Jak Scaletongue said:

But everyone who may have witnessed a marriage between them is dead.  Rhaegar, Lyanna and all 3 KG are no longer alive to vouch for the authenticity of their marriage.  If no one knows it happened how does anyone know it happened? Yes, Bran *might* see it thru a tree, but he might not - we don't know IF they were married, we don't know WHERE, and we don't know WHEN.  If no one knows a marriage happened, how does anyone know a marriage happened?  Everyone who was likely present at a (theoretical) marriage between Lyanna and Rhaegar is dead.

And if Jon gathers his supporters under any name, it's more likely to be Stark than Targaryen.  He's fighting the Others, he's in the North, he's needed in the North to fight Others - he'd be better off taking Robb's legitimization and gathering his forces as a Stark.  Whether it's factual is irrelevant - he *looks* like a Stark, everyone already *thinks* he's Ned's bastard and he's already got a legitimization right there for him.  Though, personally, I think he'll stick to Snow either way.  Being a bastard is a huge part of his identity - his struggles with it aren't just going to magically disappear just because someone hands him a piece of paper and says "oh look, you're legitimate" ( I don't think it matters if he's a legitimate Targ or legitimate Stark, he's not going to be comfortable with the idea.)

I think between what Jon finds in the Crypts (I am guessing a Targaryen wedding cloak) and the ability to ride a Dragon, will satisfy any doubters.

While yes, I believe he will take the Legitimization from Robb to be King in the North and King of the Trident, that will not be the final destination.

 

Being a bastard WAS a big part of his identity. Now his identity is a leader of men. His identity will continue to grow and change.

The important part is what he learned while he was a bastard.

[RumHam]

31 minutes ago, UnmaskedLurker said:

Yes, I know about all of that evidence, and it really does not affect my analysis. First, it supports my position that there is no formal understanding that the Faith would accept incest but not polygamy. Second, I have acknowledged that some people might object to the marriage of Rhaegar and Lyanna. I believe it happened. I believe that Targ loyalists would have accepted it and that the 3 KG at ToJ did accept it. I believe that Rhaegar likely thought he had the political influence and popularity to get it accepted by enough people to avoid any "cloud" on the marriage. None of that analysis is inconsistent with anything that GRRM said in any of those interviews. But you know that as we have had this discussion before.

Respectfully, I wasn't really trying to have this conversation with you again. I think we've been down that road enough.  I was just trying to inform Mr. Scaletongue that his guess is backed up by two quotes from Martin. 

29 minutes ago, King Viserys Targaryen IV said:

Well, I have always had the opinion that I cant say whether ot not Rhaegar would have gotten away with two marriages. But that has no bearing on whether he married Lyanna or not.

Things happen all the time that are not legal or accepted, but that does not mean they did not happen.

 

Even in the example of Maegor, he married two wives and then was banished for it.. but he did marry two women.

I'm not adamant that Rhaegar and Lyanna didn't have a marriage ceremony or consider themselves wed. (though I do think that knowing that the marriage would be challenged and probably declared void would have probably been a factor dissuading them from attempting it in the first place. Some people think Rhaegar felt he had to do it so his "third head" would be a proper prince, but that doesn't make sense to me.) So I'm not saying it didn't happen, as much as I'm suggesting it wouldn't count. Is it concievable that it could have been upheld as a valid marriage? sure. But I don't take it as a foregone conclusion like many of you seem to.

Anyway we're quite a bit off track here, and again just retreading debates we've already had. 

[Jak Scaletongue]

7 minutes ago, UnmaskedLurker said:

Of course, initially getting away with incest and polygamy had to do with having dragons. But as you know, the incest continued long after the dragons disappeared. So dragons were not necessary to continue incest, so I am not sure why polygamy would be any different -- especially given that the Faith considered incest to be the bigger sin.

You put forth the suggestion that maybe there was a compromise for the Targs to keep incest but give up polygamy -- and you posit why they might agree to that exchange. But there is no evidence to support it and evidence to the contrary. There is evidence that no one thought that incest -- outside of the Targs -- would be permitted or legal. So giving up on incest for the Targs did not mean that others thought they could engage in incest -- Cersei and Jaime know that they cannot because they are not Targs. Allowing Targs to engage in polygamy would work the same way.

Moreover, we have various Targs after the end of the Faith uprising who suggested that they wanted a polygamous marriage (I think both Daemons -- Daemon, brother of Viserys I who eventually married his niece, Rhaenyra, and Daemon Blackfyre, bastard son of Aegon IV). In these cases the King said no and would not allow it. But the King did not indicate that some agreement with the Faith made it impossible -- just that the King did not want it to happen for various reasons. If some agreement with the Faith made it clearly impermissible, then they would not have bothered to ask in the first place, knowing it would not be recognized in any event.

Bottom line is that if Rhaegar and Lyanna had a wedding, I admit that the legality might be a matter of dispute. Some would call it legit based on the prior Targ precedents of Aegon I and Maegor -- as well as the incest exception -- and others might argue not legit for various reasons based on the Faith. As a side note, there is a strong argument that even under the Faith -- a polygamous marriage is still a real marriage -- it is just that the parties engaging in the marriage are subject to sanction (which might include death or exile). But at the time of the wedding (if it occurred), Rhaegar would have believed he had the political influence to ensure full recognition of the marriage.

As to evidence of the marriage to prove Jon is legit -- that might be an issue. But again, if GRRM wants to bolster such a marriage as legit and Jon as a true-born son of Rhaegar -- he can come up with a witness (like the Septon performing or a witness, like JonCon).

Thank you for summarizing that evidence. I was too worn out to do it myself. Nice job. 

Yes, I know about all of that evidence, and it really does not affect my analysis. First, it supports my position that there is no formal understanding that the Faith would accept incest but not polygamy. Second, I have acknowledged that some people might object to the marriage of Rhaegar and Lyanna. I believe it happened. I believe that Targ loyalists would have accepted it and that the 3 KG at ToJ did accept it. I believe that Rhaegar likely thought he had the political influence and popularity to get it accepted by enough people to avoid any "cloud" on the marriage. None of that analysis is inconsistent with anything that GRRM said in any of those interviews. But you know that as we have had this discussion before.

Just to be clear - I don't think they sat down and negotiated or planned or formalized or anything near as organized as that.  I feel like it was more of a default/de facto decision.  The Faith wouldn't need to convince the newly demoted Kings that incest was bad - incest was already taboo in Westeros.  But if polygamy became a popular thing with the new Kings, it would trickle down to the new Great Lords and gain widespread acceptability.  Maintaining the incest taboo even with the rulers partaking in it would be easier than convincing everyone that polygamy was bad news.  Polygamy, while not practiced in Westeros before or after, wasn't precisely taboo just "not done" - incest was taboo, forbidden; only marrying one woman at a time was just custom.  Taboos are harder to break than customs - in RL incest is *still* taboo while we've been breaking customs consistently over the last 100 years.  Customs are easier to change than taboos.  Not allowing same-sex marriage is a custom, not a taboo - and allowing same-sex marriage is also a custom.  Not allowing same-sex marriage is not a taboo - it's just really, really rude (and other mean, nasty things - but it does not meet the definition of a taboo).  That's why I think the Faith took the de facto route by "allowing" (or possibly ignoring) the Targ custom of incest while trying to break the Targ custom of polygamy.  Incest wouldn't catch on the same way polygamy would.

 

 

[Dragonsmurf]

52 minutes ago, Jak Scaletongue said:

Neither Stannis nor Robb ignored ANY marriage "rules" or customs that the Faith holds.  While the Faith is VERY vocal about sex outside of marriage FOR WOMEN, they don't seem to concerned about condemning the men for mistresses and commoners daughters, etc.  They don't like brothels, but that strikes me more as a strike against the women working in the brothels than the men visiting them...though they don't like it when the men visit brothels (apparently they'd rather a man go find a farmers daughter and have his way with her for free than pay a woman for sex).  So Stannis isn't doing anything wrong by having a mistress (besides the fact his mistress isn't of the Faith), and Robb wasn't doing anything wrong by sleeping with Jeyne (though Jeyne WAS doing something wrong by sleeping with Robb, according to the Faith).  Backing out of a marriage contract is between Robb and Walder Frey, not the Faith.  The Faith performs marriages, it doesn't deal with betrothals.

The faith condemns all sex outside of marriage and sees is as a grave sin no matter the genders of the people involved. But society generally sees is as more scandalous when a woman is having sex outside of marriage.

[Jak Scaletongue]

13 minutes ago, King Viserys Targaryen IV said:

I think between what Jon finds in the Crypts (I am guessing a Targaryen wedding cloak) and the ability to ride a Dragon, will satisfy any doubters.

While yes, I believe he will take the Legitimization from Robb to be King in the North and King of the Trident, that will not be the final destination.

 

Being a bastard WAS a big part of his identity. Now his identity is a leader of men. His identity will continue to grow and change.

The important part is what he learned while he was a bastard.

I think I kind of agree with what RumHam said:

11 minutes ago, RumHam said:

I'm not saying it didn't happen, as much as I'm suggesting it wouldn't count.

And really, what I'm trying to get across is that ALL of this marriage talk is Pure Speculation.  Giving his dreams, I DO think Jon will find *something* in the crypts - but at this point, it could be ANYTHING!  It could be a super long cave structure that leads him under the Wall and all the way to Bran, as some people have speculated.  And even bastards can ride dragons, that was proven during the first Dance.  So Jon riding a dragon will NOT convince this doubter.  Something in the crypts, maybe - but not dragon riding.  But the idea that Rhaegar and Lyanna were married is, at this point, wishful thinking.  There may be hints, but there are a lot of hints for a lot things - some of which are bound to be red herrings.  Maybe the marriage hints *won't* be red herrings, but until we have some *proof* we don't know what hints are pointing the right way and which hints are trying to get us off track.

Basically, too many maybes for me to be convinced that a marriage happened.  It's not that I don't think it's possible, it's just that I'm one who WILL need it spelled out for me to be absolutely convinced. Sorry.

[King Viserys Targaryen IV]

25 minutes ago, Jak Scaletongue said:

I think I kind of agree with what RumHam said:

And really, what I'm trying to get across is that ALL of this marriage talk is Pure Speculation.  Giving his dreams, I DO think Jon will find *something* in the crypts - but at this point, it could be ANYTHING!  It could be a super long cave structure that leads him under the Wall and all the way to Bran, as some people have speculated.  And even bastards can ride dragons, that was proven during the first Dance.  So Jon riding a dragon will NOT convince this doubter.  Something in the crypts, maybe - but not dragon riding.  But the idea that Rhaegar and Lyanna were married is, at this point, wishful thinking.  There may be hints, but there are a lot of hints for a lot things - some of which are bound to be red herrings.  Maybe the marriage hints *won't* be red herrings, but until we have some *proof* we don't know what hints are pointing the right way and which hints are trying to get us off track.

Basically, too many maybes for me to be convinced that a marriage happened.  It's not that I don't think it's possible, it's just that I'm one who WILL need it spelled out for me to be absolutely convinced. Sorry.

A Red Herring buried in a secret that GRRM has been trying to weave into the story since the beginning? Why would he do that?

It doesn't make any sense. A Red Herring is an OBVIOUS clue that is meant to throw someone off the real info. Like Jon maybe being milk brothers with Edric Dayne, or that Cat is not allowed to talk about Ashra Dayne. Those are Red Herrings.

Rhaegar and Lyanna being married is a subtle clue buried in a secret that GRRM has slowly been alluding to for 20 years.

[Jak Scaletongue]

2 minutes ago, Dragonsmurf said:

The faith condemns all sex outside of marriage and sees is as a grave sin no matter the genders of the people involved. But society generally sees is as more scandalous when a woman is having sex outside of marriage.

Both the Faith AND society are a hell of a lot more vocal about women and sex than they are about men and sex.  Didn't see Robert ever doing a "walk of shame" for all of his extra-marital affairs.  But Cersei admits to having sex AFTER HER HUSBAND IS DEAD and she's forced to walk through King's Landing buck ass naked.

That's called a double standard, and the Faith is rife with them.  If the Faith wasn't so freaking worried about it, society wouldn't be so freaking worried about it (see: the real world and Catholicism/Christianity, Islam and Judaism - don't know enough about Eastern religions...).  Why do you think people are so hung-up about same-sex marriage? Because their respective churches are so hung-up on it.  That's why it was such a big freaking deal that Ireland approved it - and part of the reason why Ireland decided to do a referendum to answer the question.

[Jak Scaletongue]

2 minutes ago, King Viserys Targaryen IV said:

A Red Herring buried in a secret that GRRM has been trying to weave into the story since the beginning? Why would he do that?

It doesn't make any sense. A Red Herring is an OBVIOUS clue that is meant to throw someone of the real info. Like Jon maybe being milk brothers with Edric Dayne, or that Cat is not allowed to talk about Ashra Dayne. Those are Red Herrings.

Rhaegar and Lyanna being married is a subtle clue buried in a secret that GRRM has slowly been alluding to for 20 years.

No, Rhaegar and Lyanna being Jon's parents is the clue buried in a secret.  They don't have to be married to be parents.

The status of Jon as bastard or trueborn is what hasn't been made clear AT ALL, yet.

I acknowledge it is very likely something that will be addressed in the remaining books - but there is absolutely no definitive proof for their marriage EITHER WAY.  There's no proof they were married and there's no proof they weren't.   

[King Viserys Targaryen IV]

13 minutes ago, Jak Scaletongue said:

No, Rhaegar and Lyanna being Jon's parents is the clue buried in a secret.  They don't have to be married to be parents.

The status of Jon as bastard or trueborn is what hasn't been made clear AT ALL, yet.

I acknowledge it is very likely something that will be addressed in the remaining books - but there is absolutely no definitive proof for their marriage EITHER WAY.  There's no proof they were married and there's no proof they weren't.   

No, there are also clues in there about them being married as well. Like the fact that the King's Guard stayed at the Tower. Or how Ned held the King's Guard as Shining examples despite having to kill them to "save" his sister. Or how Rhaegar would not visit a Brothel, yet he would kidnap and/ or bang his sister (out of wedlock).

I didn't say there was proof.. I said there was a subtle clue buried in a secret.

[Dragonsmurf]

28 minutes ago, Jak Scaletongue said:

Both the Faith AND society are a hell of a lot more vocal about women and sex than they are about men and sex.  Didn't see Robert ever doing a "walk of shame" for all of his extra-marital affairs.  But Cersei admits to having sex AFTER HER HUSBAND IS DEAD and she's forced to walk through King's Landing buck ass naked.

That's called a double standard, and the Faith is rife with them.  If the Faith wasn't so freaking worried about it, society wouldn't be so freaking worried about it (see: the real world and Catholicism/Christianity, Islam and Judaism - don't know enough about Eastern religions...).  Why do you think people are so hung-up about same-sex marriage? Because their respective churches are so hung-up on it.  That's why it was such a big freaking deal that Ireland approved it - and part of the reason why Ireland decided to do a referendum to answer the question.

In the real world, christianity condemns all sex out of marriage(at least catholicism)

[UnmaskedLurker]

50 minutes ago, Jak Scaletongue said:

Just to be clear - I don't think they sat down and negotiated or planned or formalized or anything near as organized as that.  I feel like it was more of a default/de facto decision.  The Faith wouldn't need to convince the newly demoted Kings that incest was bad - incest was already taboo in Westeros.  But if polygamy became a popular thing with the new Kings, it would trickle down to the new Great Lords and gain widespread acceptability.  Maintaining the incest taboo even with the rulers partaking in it would be easier than convincing everyone that polygamy was bad news.  Polygamy, while not practiced in Westeros before or after, wasn't precisely taboo just "not done" - incest was taboo, forbidden; only marrying one woman at a time was just custom.  Taboos are harder to break than customs - in RL incest is *still* taboo while we've been breaking customs consistently over the last 100 years.  Customs are easier to change than taboos.  Not allowing same-sex marriage is a custom, not a taboo - and allowing same-sex marriage is also a custom.  Not allowing same-sex marriage is not a taboo - it's just really, really rude (and other mean, nasty things - but it does not meet the definition of a taboo).  That's why I think the Faith took the de facto route by "allowing" (or possibly ignoring) the Targ custom of incest while trying to break the Targ custom of polygamy.  Incest wouldn't catch on the same way polygamy would.

The main issue I have with your hypothesis is that we have the basic history of the Targs in WOIAF, and in no instance after Maegor did the issue of polygamy ever become addressed by the Faith -- because the Targs never attempted it again. As I noted, a couple of Targs wanted to engage in polygamy -- and the King at the time said no. But WOIAF made no suggestion that if the King had said yes that the Faith would have been an impediment. And there is no suggestion that the Faith heard about these proposals and spoke out against them. If the Faith had come to some sort of accommodation along the lines you are suggesting, there would have been a hint in WOIAF to that effect -- and no such hint exists.

As a very minor aside, I think that for a long time, the condemnation against gay relationships (not just in marriage -- but in any form) was more than just a custom but was a full-blown taboo. That is why so many people were "in the closet" for so many years. Over time (thankfully) that view has largely changed. Among certain communities, I believe it still would be considered taboo. But I don't want to quibble over semantics. My main point is in the paragraph above.

46 minutes ago, Jak Scaletongue said:

I think I kind of agree with what RumHam said:

And really, what I'm trying to get across is that ALL of this marriage talk is Pure Speculation.  Giving his dreams, I DO think Jon will find *something* in the crypts - but at this point, it could be ANYTHING!  It could be a super long cave structure that leads him under the Wall and all the way to Bran, as some people have speculated.  And even bastards can ride dragons, that was proven during the first Dance.  So Jon riding a dragon will NOT convince this doubter.  Something in the crypts, maybe - but not dragon riding.  But the idea that Rhaegar and Lyanna were married is, at this point, wishful thinking.  There may be hints, but there are a lot of hints for a lot things - some of which are bound to be red herrings.  Maybe the marriage hints *won't* be red herrings, but until we have some *proof* we don't know what hints are pointing the right way and which hints are trying to get us off track.

Basically, too many maybes for me to be convinced that a marriage happened.  It's not that I don't think it's possible, it's just that I'm one who WILL need it spelled out for me to be absolutely convinced. Sorry.

 

34 minutes ago, Jak Scaletongue said:

No, Rhaegar and Lyanna being Jon's parents is the clue buried in a secret.  They don't have to be married to be parents.

The status of Jon as bastard or trueborn is what hasn't been made clear AT ALL, yet.

I acknowledge it is very likely something that will be addressed in the remaining books - but there is absolutely no definitive proof for their marriage EITHER WAY.  There's no proof they were married and there's no proof they weren't.   

I disagree that the marriage is "pure" speculation. Almost everything on this board is speculation -- of course. What many of us are doing is combing through the text for clues and coming to opinions on the likelihood of certain events occurring (or having occurred) in the series. The marriage of Rhaegar and Lyanna is no different than any other theory put forth on the boards in that sense. But this theory has more evidence than many of them. KVT IV has set forth much of the evidence, so I won't repeat it. But pointing out that it is not "proven" is beside the point -- of course it is not proven. The question is whether the evidence is persuasive enough to conclude that it seems likely such a marriage occurred (not whether it will be recognized widely in the series -- just that it happened and Rhaegar and Lyanna considered themselves married).

I believe that the clues in favor of such a ceremony are strong. And they cannot be a red herring. A red herring for what? The readers were led to believe by GRRM that Rhaegar and Lyanna were married but SURPRISE, those clues were just red herrings and the real truth is that they are Jon's parents but they were NOT married. Wow -- what a great twist -- NOT. I admit I might be misreading the clues -- but the clues cannot qualify as a red herring. That is just not what a red herring is -- and it is not what GRRM does. 

So fine if you want to wait until GRRM spells it out explicitly. There are a number of issues for which I am maintaining that position. But if we are correct that Rhaegar and Lyanna were married -- don't say we did not give you plenty of advance warning of its likelihood based on the clues in the text as already released.

As to what will convince the doubters in Westeros -- I suspect it will be a witness. I don't think the 3 KG were the only witnesses -- I think there likely will be witnesses who are (or at least one who is) still alive and can testify to that effect. But that -- admittedly -- is more speculative than the idea of the marriage itself. I see it possible that only Jon and the readers learn of the marriage. The clues as to the existence of witnesses is less strong. But if GRRM wants there to be witnesses, they are easy to create (the Septon and Rhaegar's other companions during his travels).

[Jak Scaletongue]

52 minutes ago, Dragonsmurf said:

In the real world, christianity condemns all sex out of marriage(at least catholicism)

And, in the real world, their focus tends more towards the women than the men.  As a girl who went to Catholic school, you will NOT convince me otherwise.  I've listened to enough sermons and lessons and I've read enough history to know that the clergy didn't give a rat's ass about the men sleeping around behind their wives back, but would pounce on even the rumour that a woman was doing the same.

27 minutes ago, UnmaskedLurker said:

The main issue I have with your hypothesis is that we have the basic history of the Targs in WOIAF, and in no instance after Maegor did the issue of polygamy ever become addressed by the Faith -- because the Targs never attempted it again. As I noted, a couple of Targs wanted to engage in polygamy -- and the King at the time said no. But WOIAF made no suggestion that if the King had said yes that the Faith would have been an impediment. And there is no suggestion that the Faith heard about these proposals and spoke out against them. If the Faith had come to some sort of accommodation along the lines you are suggesting, there would have been a hint in WOIAF to that effect -- and no such hint exists.

As a very minor aside, I think that for a long time, the condemnation against gay relationships (not just in marriage -- but in any form) was more than just a custom but was a full-blown taboo. That is why so many people were "in the closet" for so many years. Over time (thankfully) that view has largely changed. Among certain communities, I believe it still would be considered taboo. But I don't want to quibble over semantics. My main point is in the paragraph above.

 

I disagree that the marriage is "pure" speculation. Almost everything on this board is speculation -- of course. What many of us are doing is combing through the text for clues and coming to opinions on the likelihood of certain events occurring (or having occurred) in the series. The marriage of Rhaegar and Lyanna is no different than any other theory put forth on the boards in that sense. But this theory has more evidence than many of them. KVT IV has set forth much of the evidence, so I won't repeat it. But pointing out that it is not "proven" is beside the point -- of course it is not proven. The question is whether the evidence is persuasive enough to conclude that it seems likely such a marriage occurred (not whether it will be recognized widely in the series -- just that it happened and Rhaegar and Lyanna considered themselves married).

I believe that the clues in favor of such a ceremony are strong. And they cannot be a red herring. A red herring for what? The readers were led to believe by GRRM that Rhaegar and Lyanna were married but SURPRISE, those clues were just red herrings and the real truth is that they are Jon's parents but they were NOT married. Wow -- what a great twist -- NOT. I admit I might be misreading the clues -- but the clues cannot qualify as a red herring. That is just not what a red herring is -- and it is not what GRRM does. 

So fine if you want to wait until GRRM spells it out explicitly. There are a number of issues for which I am maintaining that position. But if we are correct that Rhaegar and Lyanna were married -- don't say we did not give you plenty of advance warning of its likelihood based on the clues in the text as already released.

As to what will convince the doubters in Westeros -- I suspect it will be a witness. I don't think the 3 KG were the only witnesses -- I think there likely will be witnesses who are (or at least one who is) still alive and can testify to that effect. But that -- admittedly -- is more speculative than the idea of the marriage itself. I see it possible that only Jon and the readers learn of the marriage. The clues as to the existence of witnesses is less strong. But if GRRM wants there to be witnesses, they are easy to create (the Septon and Rhaegar's other companions during his travels).

Which is essentially why I don't think it was an active decision on anyone's part.  It was a de facto compromise - the Targs stopped the polygamy and the Faith stopped bitchin about the incest between Targs.  It was a stalemate, a stand-off.  But whatever...

 

My biggest issue isn't the speculation - it's the acting like it IS proven and stating it as such.  The odd "possible" or "maybe" would not be amiss.  But again, whatever....I don't buy it.  End of story.  You do, fine.  I just get itchy when things are stated as fact when they are not fact.  Even when I'm bouncing on the bandwagon myself, I STILL don't like it.  It's a pet peeve.

So "red herring" might have been a mistype, but I'm at work and doing this quickly.  And since everyone finds so many "clues" in everything some of us a bound to be misreading a LOT of them.  Maybe you are, maybe I am, who knows.  But it still bothers me when "clues" and "foreshadowing" are used as proofs in a discussion.  There may be clues, there may not, either way don't tell me they are married beyond a reasonable doubt.  There's plenty of reasonable doubt. 

 

But, I've got other stuff to do, so maybe I'll come back tomorrow (or maybe I'll find something new and shiny on the main page tomorrow )

[UnmaskedLurker]

1 minute ago, Jak Scaletongue said:

And, in the real world, their focus tends more towards the women than the men.  As a girl who went to Catholic school, you will NOT convince me otherwise.  I've listened to enough sermons and lessons and I've read enough history to know that the clergy didn't give a rat's ass about the men sleeping around behind their wives back, but would pounce on even the rumour that a woman was doing the same.

Which is essentially why I don't think it was an active decision on anyone's part.  It was a de facto compromise - the Targs stopped the polygamy and the Faith stopped bitchin about the incest between Targs.  It was a stalemate, a stand-off.  But whatever...

 

My biggest issue isn't the speculation - it's the acting like it IS proven and stating it as such.  The odd "possible" or "maybe" would not be amiss.  But again, whatever....I don't buy it.  End of story.  You do, fine.  I just get itchy when things are stated as fact when they are not fact.  Even when I'm bouncing on the bandwagon myself, I STILL don't like it.  It's a pet peeve.

So "red herring" might have been a mistype, but I'm at work and doing this quickly.  And since everyone finds so many "clues" in everything some of us a bound to be misreading a LOT of them.  Maybe you are, maybe I am, who knows.  But it still bothers me when "clues" and "foreshadowing" are used as proofs in a discussion.  There may be clues, there may not, either way don't tell me they are married beyond a reasonable doubt.  There's plenty of reasonable doubt. 

 

But, I've got other stuff to do, so maybe I'll come back tomorrow (or maybe I'll find something new and shiny on the main page tomorrow )

I basically agree with what you have written here. I think we all tend to fall into the trap of getting sloppy regarding making it clear when we are stating something that is "canon" in the story and what is merely a conclusion based on reading of the clues. I generally try to be clear when I am stating my opinion and not fact -- but I agree that I probably slip more often than I should. I never intended to assert that there is certainty regarding Rhaegar and Lyanna being married. I agree that until the text of the series confirms it -- it is only a theory. I simply believe the clues to be sufficient that I am willing to predict it will happen -- but it is only a prediction.

When you have more time and if you are interested, my first post on the board about 1-1/2 years ago was on this topic -- link here. While I might write the OP a bit differently if I were to write it today (my thinking has evolved a bit on the last year and a half -- in particular regarding some of the nuances in terms of the legality of polygamy in Westeros, as the OP was written before release of WOIAF), I think the OP holds up pretty well over time. The OP will give you a more thorough outline of why I have been convinced for some time that Rhaegar and Lyanna were married.

[Jak Scaletongue]

20 minutes ago, UnmaskedLurker said:

I basically agree with what you have written here. I think we all tend to fall into the trap of getting sloppy regarding making it clear when we are stating something that is "canon" in the story and what is merely a conclusion based on reading of the clues. I generally try to be clear when I am stating my opinion and not fact -- but I agree that I probably slip more often than I should. I never intended to assert that there is certainty regarding Rhaegar and Lyanna being married. I agree that until the text of the series confirms it -- it is only a theory. I simply believe the clues to be sufficient that I am willing to predict it will happen -- but it is only a prediction.

When you have more time and if you are interested, my first post on the board about 1-1/2 years ago was on this topic -- link here. While I might write the OP a bit differently if I were to write it today (my thinking has evolved a bit on the last year and a half -- in particular regarding some of the nuances in terms of the legality of polygamy in Westeros, as the OP was written before release of WOIAF), I think the OP holds up pretty well over time. The OP will give you a more thorough outline of why I have been convinced for some time that Rhaegar and Lyanna were married.

I have no doubt I've slipped up, too.  It's clearly not an exact science !  But like I said, it is a bit of a pet peeve, and I can't quite bring myself to keep my mouth shut!

I'll definitely give it a read!  Thanks!  I always like reading well-written theories - plausible or crack pot!  (Not to say yours is crack pot - but I do enjoy a well-written crack pot! I am assuming it's well-written based on your comment writing!) Thanks!

[Victarion Chainbreaker]

7 hours ago, Jak Scaletongue said:

But everyone who may have witnessed a marriage between them is dead.

Rhaegar married Lyanna in the tradition of the Free Folk. Quite a few living people remember when he abducted her.