Still a bastard (spoilers)

[Rhymes with Sneak]

1 hour ago, elbucho3 said:

So the show took us from the Tower of Joy scene directly to Winterfell where someone yells "He has the blood of Ned Stark in him". I think the fact that he's not Ned Stark's son will be more important than the fact that he's a Targaryan (unless/until he crosses paths with Dany). 

Agreed.  Even if Howland Reed can testify to Jon's parentage, we do not presently know of any living character that can testify to any marriage between R&L that would legitimize Jon.  Without some contrived plot devise (a document in the Citadel attests the marriage! It was suppressed, but luckily not destroyed, by Pycelle!), Jon will be a bastard practically even if his parents did marry (and the fact that Rhaegar was already married can be overcome).  So I think his Targaryen blood mainly will matter as far as allowing him to ride a dragon and to removing him from the argument about inheriting Winterfell since he is not Ned's son.  I think he ends up married to Danerys and Sansa ends up lady of Winterfell.  

[Rippounet]

15 minutes ago, Mourneblade said:

However there will be consequences based on his legitimacy.  R and L were married plain and simple. The King's Guard would not have been there otherwise. Their duty, once the King died, was the next in succession. If Jon was a bastard, those King's Guard are at Dragonstone protecting Vicerian. There is no ifs, ands, or buts about this.

Unfortunately, this is all wrong. You have two huge problems with this interpretation:
i) Chronology: Jon Snow could only be heir after the death of Aegon, yet the KG had been staying with Lyanna for some time before the sack of KL. Plus, until the birth, no one knew whether Lyanna would have a son or a daughter anyway...
ii) Legitimacy: Viserys was named heir after Rhaegar's death, and Viserys's heir is Dany. And there is a big question mark about polygamy that you can't just dismiss.

So contrary to what -too many- people believe:
i) The KG's presence at the ToJ proves absolutely nothing, and Martin made it quite clear that they stayed there because Rhaegar ordered them to.
ii) Jon isn't the "legal" Targ heir even if he is legitimate, Dany is.

Now all this being said, it's all moot because:
i) The KG's presence at the ToJ may still be a clue to Jon's parentage. In other words, even though in-story they could not initially be guarding the heir, it can still be a clue that he is half-Targ and will be king. Plus, it's possible by the time Ned arrived at the ToJ, the KG did think of Jon as the heir (in which case, they either didn't know about or ignored Aerys choosing Viserys).
ii) Jon and Dany may end up marrying each other anyway.
iii) It's quite clear now that parentage isn't all that important.

To sum up (about Mourneblade's point): what could prove that Rhaegar and Lyanna married is not the fact that the KG were there, but the fact they fought Ned. Perhaps it's nitpicking... But I think it's a big difference.

[LadyAlisande]

Perhaps Sam will find a secret and totally authentic record of the marriage between Lyanna and Rhaegar, in the Citadel. All those books, right?

Or maybe they weren't married. Who has a better claim to the throne, then: the bastard of the legitimate king, or the legitimate king's sister (a woman)? This would be the more interesting scenario; having Jon be legitimate makes his claim the obviously correct one, and that's not as much fun as if they both have equally strong claims. 

Of course, they could just get married and solve the problem. So what if he's her nephew. Her parents (his grandparents) were siblings, afterall.

 

[Mourneblade]

2 minutes ago, Rippounet said:

Unfortunately, this is all wrong. You have two huge problems with this interpretation:
i) Chronology: Jon Snow could only be heir after the death of Aegon, yet the KG had been staying with Lyanna and Jon for some time before the sack of KL. Plus, until the birth, no one knew whether Lyanna would have a son or a daughter anyway...
ii) Legitimacy: Viserys was named heir after Rhaegar's death, and Viserys's heir is Dany. And there is a big question mark about polygamy that you can't just dismiss.

So contrary to what -too many- people believe:
i) The KG's presence at the ToJ proves absolutely nothing, and Martin made it quite clear that they stayed there because Rhaegar ordered them to.
ii) Jon isn't the "legal" Targ heir even if he is legitimate, Dany is.

Now all this being said, it's all moot because:
i) The KG's presence at the ToJ may still be a clue to Jon's parentage. In other words, even though in-story they could not initially be guarding the heir, it can still be a clue that he is half-Targ and will be king. Plus, it's possible by the time Ned arrived at the ToJ, the KG did think of Jon as the heir (in which case, they either didn't know about or ignored Aerys choosing Viserys).
ii) Jon and Dany may end up marrying each other anyway.
iii) It's quite clear now that parentage isn't all that important.

To sum up (about Mourneblade's point): what could prove that Rhaegar and Lyanna married is not the fact that the KG were there, but the fact they fought Ned. Perhaps it's nitpicking... But I think it's a big difference.

Uhm no Dany is not the legal Heir, Sons before Aunts. Rhaegar's line before Visery's, and before Dany's.

The Kings Guard stayed because of Rhaegar's Orders, initially, for sure, but once The King, and Rhaegar's other children were dead, their duty was to the next in line "Heir". These are not men who took their duty lightly as confirmed by the fight between them and Ned. Thye were also aware of what happened at the Trident and KL, as confirmed in conversing with Ned.

This WILL be important in the future of the series and the books, not necessarily for siting on the Iron Throne, but it will be important none the less. 

[Charles Stuart]

Never know what can turn up as evidence in the next two books, for all we know Aegon the Conqueror's crown or Blackfyre is waiting in the crypts of winterfell

At the end of the day, Daeny is saving herself for marriage to a suitable bachelor of standing in westeros and there isn't many male rulers/lords left besides Jon. Dorne, The Reach are already on her side and have no male members left (show wise anyway) and daeny doesn't need to marry any of them since it looks like varys has them committed to Daeny's cause so it really only leaves jon as an eligible husband which would unify the realm against the lannisters and lead to Jon being king anyway. Plus, the targs love keeping it in the family so a bit of nephew and niece action wouldn't be out of character for them

[Rippounet]

18 minutes ago, Mourneblade said:

Uhm no Dany is not the legal Heir, Sons before Aunts. Rhaegar's line before Visery's, and before Dany's.

Aerys put Viserys's line before Rhaegar's, so it's a sister before a nephew now.

18 minutes ago, Mourneblade said:

The Kings Guard stayed because of Rhaegar's Orders, initially, for sure, but once The King, and Rhaegar's other children were dead, their duty was to the next in line "Heir".

Which was clearly Viserys.
(even if Rhaegar married Lyanna, the question of polygamy remains a very sticky point, from a stricly legal perspective)

Either the KG didn't know about Viserys being Aerys's heir, either they ignored his proclamation.
If they ignored Aerys's decision, then whether Rhaegar actually married Lyanna is a moot point, because either way they betrayed their vow by choosing who they protected (i.e. they were playing kingmaker).

18 minutes ago, Mourneblade said:

This WILL be important in the future of the series and the books, not necessarily for siting on the Iron Throne, but it will be important none the less. 

 

You may be right, but it's absolutely not certain (using capital letters doesn't change that ). At this point, it's only a theory.

In fact, this is a huge difference between the books (all books, including the WOAIF) and the show. In the books, Dany is "legally" Aerys's heir. In the show, it could be Jon, because Aerys's proclamation was not mentioned, and the polygamy issue wasn't really as far as I know.
This is quite ironic, because the show is clearly putting women in power. Of course, in both show and books, Dany's identity as a dragonlord (dragonlady?) is unquestionable: she has the dragons and the Targ looks.

Which is why I tend to think they might marry after all, since a marriage would solve these problems.
[which means, of course, that any lengthy discussion on this point is just pointless internet buzzing ]

[Charles Stuart]

Pretty much, like who else is Daeny going to end up marrying? The marriage clearly has to be strategic after all and nearly all the houses/lands now have females in charge or unsuitable males. Euron is a no go and robert of the vale likewise.

[Prince Jon]

Did seem pretty interesting that Dany dumps boyfriend and mentions marriage in the same episode as Jon becomes the most eligible bachelor in Westeros.

[Mourneblade]

2 hours ago, Rippounet said:

Aerys put Viserys's line before Rhaegar's, so it's a sister before a nephew now.

Actually no he did not, just because he sent his wife, son, and unborn daughter to Dragonstone /= him declaring them Heirs. That is why the King's Guard stayed, otherwise they would have left the ToJ to join V on Dragonstone. They did not even though they were duty bound to protect the next King. These men showed that they were in fact duty bound, to the point of giving up their lives, which is why they were AT the ToJ when Ned got there. There is no getting around this, and why I have been saying for years that R+L=J to begin with.

2 hours ago, Rippounet said:

Which was clearly Viserys.
(even if Rhaegar married Lyanna, the question of polygamy remains a very sticky point, from a stricly legal perspective)

Not really. Targaryans had their weird ways and that aspect was not questioned.

2 hours ago, Rippounet said:

Either the KG didn't know about Viserys being Aerys's heir, either they ignored his proclamation.
If they ignored Aerys's decision, then whether Rhaegar actually married Lyanna is a moot point, because either way they betrayed their vow by choosing who they protected (i.e. they were playing kingmaker). 

You may be right, but it's absolutely not certain (using capital letters doesn't change that ). At this point, it's only a theory.

In fact, this is a huge difference between the books (all books, including the WOAIF) and the show. In the books, Dany is "legally" Aerys's heir. In the show, it could be Jon, because Aerys's proclamation was not mentioned, and the polygamy issue wasn't really as far as I know.
This is quite ironic, because the show is clearly putting women in power. Of course, in both show and books, Dany's identity as a dragonlord (dragonlady?) is unquestionable: she has the dragons and the Targ looks.

Which is why I tend to think they might marry after all, since a marriage would solve these problems.
[which means, of course, that any lengthy discussion on this point is just pointless internet buzzing ]

Ignored the order? yeah were taking about Men who took their duty and their oaths very serious, Kinda like the Movie a Few Good Men. As I was a Marine IRL, I completely understand that level of dedication. Those 3 KG would never Ignore the Order, and They would know that Jon was next in line, by LAW.

In the books Dany is only legally Aerys's Heir, because no one knows about Jon. Also at the time Viserys was declared that, after the mad king died, and not by the mad king, was before the birth of the rightful heir. Son always trumps Uncle and Aunt. Had there been no war but Areys and Rhaegar died, Viserys would have been king for a month.

[Jon's Queen Consort]

Polygamy was always an option for the Targs and they don't even need to be married by a septon but they could be married according to the Old Gods.

Aerys put Viserys's line before Rhaegar's, so it's a sister before a nephew now.

No one seems to know that so how it would happen?

[TheOtherRedWoman]

10 hours ago, rodrigobraganca said:

Now that we can say that Jon (despite his real name not being Jon) is in fact the son of  Lyanna and Rhaegar, that still doesn't make him the heir of the throne. Lyanna wasn't married to Raeghar so any children that she bore, even though she was high-born, is still out of wedlock which means that she couldn't have give birth to a legitimate son. Legally he doesn't have the right to anything, maybe the North if he is legitimized as a Stark or take it by force.

So, maybe not Jon Snow but Jon Sands because he was born at Dorne?

They could have, and probably were, married long before he was born.

I have been pushing this point for too long to give up now...

Why in the world would Rhaegar have 3 Kingsguard there to protect his mistress and bastard son? No, he had them there to protect his wife and trueborn heir. Elia was weak, but the dragon must have 3 heads. She would not have survived another childbirth, and the child would not have either. He would not wasted time siring a bastard son. He would not have whisked away the only daughter of one of the greatest houses in Westeros to father a bastard. It makes no sense. 

So Elia was still alive and well at that point, why would he marry another woman? Besides the points made above, it was not uncommon for previous Targaryen men to have more than one wife. 

[JGP]

11 hours ago, rodrigobraganca said:

Now that we can say that Jon (despite his real name not being Jon) is in fact the son of  Lyanna and Rhaegar, that still doesn't make him the heir of the throne. Lyanna wasn't married to Raeghar so any children that she bore, even though she was high-born, is still out of wedlock which means that she couldn't have give birth to a legitimate son. Legally he doesn't have the right to anything, maybe the North if he is legitimized as a Stark or take it by force.

So, maybe not Jon Snow but Jon Sands because he was born at Dorne?

It depends as much on whose bastard you are, if it's known, as it does to the where. Say that the name Lyanna said was Aegon [because she somehow knew that Elia and her children were already dead] If that were the case, if would make Aegon [Jon] a great bastard due to his Targaryen lineage and he'd be Aegon Waters [which would be perfect as ice and fire make what]

Now, here's where it get kind of amusing. Jon is now the King in the North due to the proclamation of its lords. As King [as Robb, and Stannis could] he could legitimize himself. He really could. Draft some letters, sanction them with his seal, a la: 'I'm Jon Stark now.' Once he finds out about his Targaryen lineage, could he do the same? Yes, though not without a lot of controversy. Will probably be easier if Dany did once she's Queen.

I'd prefer it if he just became a legitimate great bastard, his name being Aegon/Aemon Blackfyre or something, but that's me. 

[El Guapo]

Whenever the talk about succession laws comes up I always refer to what martin has to say on the subject:

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

Well, the short answer is that the laws of inheritance in the Seven Kingdoms are modelled on those in real medieval history... which is to say, they were vague, uncodified, subject to varying interpertations, and often contradictory.

 

In other words the true heir is dependent on who you ask.

[sj4iy]

6 hours ago, SixFeetUnder said:

I doubt Jon ever finds out who his parents are. 

Martin already said he would.

[Sand Snakes]

I think the key point of him being a targ is related to dragon control. Can he control a dragon? Can he warg into one?

So in this sense it doesn't really make any difference if he is a bastard or not.

[TheOtherRedWoman]

1 hour ago, Sand Snakes said:

I think the key point of him being a targ is related to dragon control. Can he control a dragon? Can he warg into one?

So in this sense it doesn't really make any difference if he is a bastard or not.

I doubt the warging really matters in the show.... the only one who had those abilities showcased for the show version was Bran. Riding one however, I can totally see happening. 

[Erudain]

Sure according to the world book Aerys wanted to make Viserys his heir over Rhaegars sons.
The questions would be:
 - Did he formally do it?
 - If he did, who knew about it, is he alive or some sort of way to prove it other than the maester words in the world book? (which shows a clear bias)
 - If he did and can be proved, why do we assume that the line of succesion would extend beyond Viserys? Viserys being made the heir doesn't automatically makes the next sibling his heir unless specifically stated. Viserys and his sons can be now heirs, but in the abscense of any of them, both Rhaegar sons and Dany could claim it with equal strength.

[tugela]

8 hours ago, youshallnotpass said:

You can say aswell that Jon won the crown through the right of conquest. He took Winterfell and defeated Ramsey.

 

 

No. If it was by conquest he would have given the nobles the choice of bending the knee or dieing by the sword. That did not happen. Instead the nobles chose him. It was more like a kingsmoot in the Iron Islands. No inheritance and no conquest, it was an election of sorts. He was nominated by Mormont, the nomination was seconded by Manderly, and the nomination accepted by acclamation of the assembled lords.

[tugela]

6 hours ago, Rhymes with Sneak said:

Agreed.  Even if Howland Reed can testify to Jon's parentage, we do not presently know of any living character that can testify to any marriage between R&L that would legitimize Jon.  Without some contrived plot devise (a document in the Citadel attests the marriage! It was suppressed, but luckily not destroyed, by Pycelle!), Jon will be a bastard practically even if his parents did marry (and the fact that Rhaegar was already married can be overcome).  So I think his Targaryen blood mainly will matter as far as allowing him to ride a dragon and to removing him from the argument about inheriting Winterfell since he is not Ned's son.  I think he ends up married to Danerys and Sansa ends up lady of Winterfell.  

It really doesn't matter who his parents are. He will not inherit anything. Any power he attains would be obtained through deeds, not who his parents are. Everyone seems to be forgetting that the Targaryens were deposed, so there is nothing to inherit.

Daenerys sure as hell is not going to step aside just because he is Rhaegar's son, nor are the Lannisters or any of the houses that rebelled against Aerys. If he wants to be king he is going to have to earn it the hard way.

People here seem to think that there is going to be some "proof" that he is the rightful heir, and that all the other claimants that have popped up since are simply going to shrug their shoulders and leave when they see it. That is not going to happen. For a start, most people are not going to believe whatever "proof" Jon comes up with. They will assume it has been faked. Plus, there is no law in Westeros, the only law is the law of the sword, and the person who wields the biggest sword gets to decide what happens. The position of monarch is contested, and that means that anyone who wants to hold it is going to have to win it in battle. Waving a piece of paper around is not going to win that battle. A sword on the other hand will.

[Zoo_Dane]

Don't really think it matters whether R+L were secretly married or not. The realm doesn't know if they were or not. The ruling King/Queen (which could be him) at the end (if he's still even alive) could legitimize him if they so choose. 

I think being a bastard in GoT is overblown. There's just a stigma of them being dishonorable which makes it harder for them to rise. Yes, obviously they cannot inherit but in cases such as Jon where he's the last surviving male heir (no one knows about Bran) and a good person someone will legitimize him and allow him to continue the family line. Whether that's as a Targaryen or as a Stark remains to be seen.