Jon's female ancestors

[Lady Blizzardborn]

35 minutes ago, dmc515 said:

Forgot about Lady Rhaena - good call.  But Penrose was kinda what I was alluding to - the houses most people agree either do or have a strong possibility entail Plumm, Penrose, Tarth, Dondarrion, and obviously Velaryon (and obviously Baratheon and Martell).  Other than the Brienne thing, I DAF about any of those houses, at least as it concerns the current events of ASOIAF.  Obviously, the daughters and daughters of daughters etc. present myriad possibilities, but I say boo to the current lineup of Targ blood houses.  Boo I say!

Boo is entirely fair.

There's no evidence that the Dondarrions had any Targ blood. I understand that people want a nice political or incestual justification for Baelor's marrying a lady from that house, but we really don't have one. That would make a fun game actually: guess why Baelor married into a minor Stormlands house.

I will say one thing for House Penrose, the spirit of Elaena Targaryen lived on in Ser Cortnay. He was a badass.

Really it's the ones we don't know about at all that have the most promise. Aerion's son Maegor, for example. We know he was born, and didn't become king. That's it. Lots of potential there. 

[DMC]

2 hours ago, Lady Blizzardborn said:

There's no evidence that the Dondarrions had any Targ blood. I understand that people want a nice political or incestual justification for Baelor's marrying a lady from that house, but we really don't have one. That would make a fun game actually: guess why Baelor married into a minor Stormlands house.

Yeah, I think I was channeling @Lord Varys' theory that the Dondarrions have Targ blood and thus this is why Beric is able to be resurrected there.  But, if we're going off of wives of Targaryen princes/kings, we should also include the Daynes with Maekar.  And the Daynes' coolness is beyond reproach.  

Forgive me, I have no amusing answers for your fun game.  I suppose it would make sense for Baelor to marry a SL house to quell the anti-Dornish sentiment.  Problem is, one would think he'd marry a marcher house and the Penroses have not been mentioned as such (not sure Parchments' location has ever been canonized).  BUT - I guess since they already had Targ blood that was the compromise.

ETA:  Wow, this is what happens when you're half paying attention during a reply.  Obviously, Baelor did marry a marcher lord - the Dondarrion your were talking about.  Don't know why I got that confused with Aerys marrying a Penrose considering you just said that and I was responding to it.  I really suck.

2 hours ago, Lady Blizzardborn said:

Really it's the ones we don't know about at all that have the most promise. Aerion's son Maegor, for example. We know he was born, and didn't become king. That's it. Lots of potential there. 

You remember the theory that Aerion's Maegor was the Tattered Prince?  Timing may not quite work out, but I always thought that was cool.

[Lord Varys]

We have it confirmed that the Penroses actually do have Targaryen blood before Elaena married Ronnel Penrose since Aelinor Penrose - who isn't a daughter of Ronnel and Elaena - is Aerys I's unspecified cousin on the Targaryen side.

Now, that makes it rather likely that the Penroses are descended from one of the daughters of Rhaena and Garmund. In fact, to make sense of the thing we know about the Penroses it is quite likely that Ronnel Penrose is Rhaena's grandson and also the father of Aelinor Penrose by his first wife. He would also have had another son by that one to explain how there could have been a Lady Penrose who was not Elaena whose youngest son was spared by Fireball during the Blackfyre Rebellion. Ronnel was already dead by then and Parchments would have passed to Aelinor's full brother, a man who had already grown up sons by in 196 AC.

The chances that Daeron II married his cousin Elaena to a Penrose who wasn't a lord and who didn't have any royal blood makes little sense. And he would have never made such a man his Master of Coin - especially not if he was a incompetent as he supposedly was.

Jena Dondarrion likely has a similar ancestry since it makes no sense at all to assume a Prince of Dragonstone could marry a 'normal' Dondarrion. Egg's Blackwood marriage apparently would have caused a scandal had he been not at the very end of the succession. Baelor was at the top, and the Dondarrions are, by and far, even less prestigious than the Blackwoods. The Blackwoods at least once wore crowns and are descended from the First Men. But the Dondarrions are descended from some messenger.

There wouldn't have been any need for a Blackfyre Rebellion to get rid of Daeron II - the Baelor-Jena match should have been enough. It should have stirred up as much trouble or even more than the Duncan-Jenny thing later did. And that led to Prince Duncan losing his claim to the Iron Throne.

If Jena wasn't a Targaryen cousin then the decision to marry her to the Prince of Dragonstone would have been motivated by nothing of relevance. Any great lord and any lord with more prestige and power would have felt slighted by this marriage. After all, their daughters were all better born than a Dondarrion. Why did the king choose a Dondarrion and not a girl from one of the great houses? But if Daeron II was following the Targaryen marriage policy which dictates that you marry your children to cousins if there aren't any siblings or other close relatives around then the Realm most likely would have accepted that - just as they accepted all those Velaryon marriages.

[DMC]

1 hour ago, Lord Varys said:

Egg's Blackwood marriage apparently would have caused a scandal had he been not at the very end of the succession.

See, I never really got this.  *Warning, a litany of somewhat philosophical questions are forthcoming*.  The Blackwoods may not be a great house, but they're pretty much the closest thing to it - in other words they're as close to a "#2" in their respective kingdom as a house can get.  So this raises the question what houses were deemed acceptable for Targ males* by both the royal family and court?  Just the great houses?  Is it a southern thing - as in a Hightower, Dayne, or Redwyne would be acceptable but not someone from the riverlands on up?  What about the Royces?

*And while there are obviously going to be different standards for marrying off Targ females, why does it seem they're slumming it in some cases like Penrose, Plumm, and whomever the hell the Manwoodys are?  If you value your own bloodlines enough to target future wives based on the house's Targ ancestry, why not look to stronger houses?  I understand the rationale of not targeting the great houses, but doesn't it behoove you to have your potential future wives emanating from a strong house?  Or is it that Parchments and the Plumms once commanded much more power and prestige than they do at the time of ASOIAF?

[Lord Varys]

44 minutes ago, dmc515 said:

See, I never really got this.  *Warning, a litany of somewhat philosophical questions are forthcoming*.  The Blackwoods may not be a great house, but they're pretty much the closest thing to it - in other words they're as close to a "#2" in their respective kingdom as a house can get.

The Blackwoods are old and were kings once, very far back in the day, but we don't know how wealthy and powerful they still are. In the Riverlands the most prestigious house are the Tullys since the Conquest, followed by whatever house holds Harrenhal. It could very well be that the Mallisters or Freys were much more prestigious than the Blackwoods in 220 AC.

44 minutes ago, dmc515 said:

So this raises the question what houses were deemed acceptable for Targ males* by both the royal family and court?  Just the great houses?  Is it a southern thing - as in a Hightower, Dayne, or Redwyne would be acceptable but not someone from the riverlands on up?  What about the Royces?

That is an interesting question. Younger sons can marry beneath their station, of course, but even there we see that this is done to secure them a lordship - like when the Old King married Prince Daemon to Rhea Royce. She was a rich heiress chosen so that Daemon's sons could one day rule a prominent lordship of their own.

For heirs apparent the only possible marriage option were siblings and other close Targaryen kin or members of the most prestigious blood lines of Westeros. In the first century that was the Hightowers. They secured Maegor for Ceryse and later Alicent is universally accepted as Viserys I's second wife because of her impeccable bloodline. She was the only real alternative to Laena Velaryon. Just as the Prince of Dorne seems to have been the only real alternative to Laenor in Rhaenyra's case - all the other young nobles (the Lannister twins, Tullys, Freys, etc. -vying for Rhaenyra's hand were never seriously considered - and that, of course, because there was a political desire to bring Dorne into the Realm.

This indicates that an Arryn, Lannister, or Stark without Targaryen blood could also have married a king or heir apparent but not many other houses would. A king or Prince of Dragonstone marrying a Reyne, Royce, Manderly, etc. would have caused controversy and perhaps even violent opposition. I guess there are scenarios imaginable where this would have worked - after all, the king usually gets what he wants - but it would have been rather difficult.

Assuming the dragonless Targaryens could marry Dondarrions and Penroses without being related to them and keep their standing with their great lords doesn't make a lot of sense.

44 minutes ago, dmc515 said:

*And while there are obviously going to be different standards for marrying off Targ females, why does it seem they're slumming it in some cases like Penrose, Plumm, and whomever the hell the Manwoodys are?

That is the special case of Elaena Targaryen. She was a fallen girl, remember, giving birth to Alyn Velaryon's bastards followed by the scandal of her wedding to Ossifer Plumm and the birth of another bastard - most likely - in Lord Viserys Plumm. Her Penrose marriage was a political thing - Ronnel seems to have been a staunch friend of Daeron's as well as a Targaryen cousin - whereas her final marriage to Ser Michael Manwoody was the king finally giving her permission to marry the man she truly loved.

It is hardly surprising that Elaena's children were never reabsorbed back into the Targaryen line.

44 minutes ago, dmc515 said:

If you value your own bloodlines enough to target future wives based on the house's Targ ancestry, why not look to stronger houses? I understand the rationale of not targeting the great houses, but doesn't it behoove you to have your potential future wives emanating from a strong house?  Or is it that Parchments and the Plumms once commanded much more power and prestige than they do at the time of ASOIAF?

Aegon V later tried to do that, but keep in mind that no Targaryen princess ever married into House Dondarrion or Penrose directly - at least not while they didn't yet have Targaryen blood.

Rhaena's daughters by Garmund are Hightowers, not Targaryens. They have Targaryen blood, sure, but only through the female line and they are descended from the Daemon-Laena cadet branch. They are not all that close to the main line. That also explains why Rhaena originally married Ser Corwyn Corbray - never mind that this could even have been arranged at a point in time while Jacaerys or Joffrey were still Rhaenyra's immediate heirs. Daemon's girls by Laena only become really important in their own right when they are suddenly the half-sisters of King Aegon III.

Daeron II had four sons he needed to find brides for, and they had no sister, only an aunt he wanted to use as a political pawn. The only Targaryen cousins around at that time were cousins through the female line - and I think both Jena and Aelinor were two such (confirmed for the latter). Alys Arryn and Dyanna Dayne may also have been such cousins - or not. Alys Arryn was of the highest nobility and could thus certainly marry a third Targaryen son without any opposition. It could also have worked with Dyanna and Maekar but they could also have been cousins. There were six Targaryen-Hightower daughters and one of them surely could have wed a Dayne of Starfall during or after the Young Dragon's wars with Dorne - and any Targaryen cousin born from such a union would, in turn, very likely have accompanied Princess Mariah to King's Landing or eventually have joined her there.

Ossifer Plumm was apparently rich as hell - and his wealth were apparently taken by Aegon IV in the wake of his death. Creating a pretext for that money grab seems to have been the entire point of this marriage.

The Penroses are much more mysterious. It is very odd that they got two Targaryen marriages even in light of the fact that they were ultimate descended from Daemon-Laena through one of Rhaena's daughters. The best explanation for that is the idea that Ronnel Penrose was really a very close friend of Daeron's, perhaps growing up with him at court.

[DMC]

@Lord Varys - Thanks much for that.  It was infinitely easier than reacquainting myself via the wiki or source material - knew I could rely on ya!  Be back later with comments.

[Lord Varys]

Thinking a little bit more about the issue - with Yandel telling us it was Aegon V who - due to spending so much time with the smallfolk - concluded that incestuous marriages were more trouble than they were worth - we have no reason to believe Daeron II would have married any of his sons to women who didn't have Targaryen blood.

His own marriage already defied custom considering that he had married a Martell, and he planned to marry his own sister to his brother-in-law. The idea that Daeron II could afford to marry his heirs to Dondarrions and Daynes who were not related to the royal family at all sounds very odd. For one, it would have caused opposition and we don't hear anything about that. But more importantly we do know that Baelor's Martell looks did not exactly help Daeron II's cause nor Baelor's own. Compared to Daemon Blackfyre - who was born in the same year as Daeron's eldest son - Baelor didn't exactly look as impressive or regal.

And it makes no sense that Daeron II wouldn't have tried to arrange a marriage for his eldest son where the chances were not that bad that the Valyrian features would eventually resurface - which they then did, in part, in Prince Valarr. Choosing an unrelated bride would have made it even more likely that the royal line would permanently lose its special royal looks, and that could become a problem further down the road - not just with Daemon Blackfyre but simply because then nothing would set apart 'the dragon' from 'the sheep'. And that could undermine Targaryen authority.

I'm pretty sure a man like Daeron II would have understood that. Not to mention that the incest continued as before - Egg is betrothed to his sister Daella, Rhaegel's son Aelora married his twin sister, Aerion marries his first cousin Daenora.

As to the OT:

The Starks certainly could have Targaryen blood in a similar way the Penroses and Dondarrions do. In fact, there is a very good chances that Cat's children all have Targaryen blood since there is a very good chance that Cat's grandfather or great-grandfather might have married a Lothston - and the Lothstons seem to be an unofficial Targaryen cadet branch, too, just as the Plumms are.

But aside from that there is also the chance that the Starks are also directly descended from Rhaea-Garmund or one of Elaena's children. Not to mention the possibility of the true father of this or that Stark being somebody else. Aegon the Unworthy certainly could be the true father of some of Cregan Stark's sons by Lynara Stark. They would still be Starks then, thanks to their mother.

[SerJeremiahLouistark]

On 8/29/2017 at 7:33 AM, RhaenysB said:

Nobody cares about female ancestors, Jon is Rhaegar's legitimate and only surviving child that's enough to make him the heir to the Iron Throne. His mother's side female ancestors are completely irrelevant and uninteresting in both books and show. It doesn't matter. At all. 

They might if they realized that Jon also has a little bit of Dayne blood in him also on his father's side.  Currently there is no sword of the morning and dawn is unclaimed.  

Also I thought there was a chance somewhere down the line that the Blackwoods may connect the Starks and Targs.  

[Lurid Jester]

On 8/30/2017 at 9:58 AM, Free Northman Reborn said:

Jon is unique in that his father's parents were both Targaryens, and his mother's parents were both Starks. I suspect there may some mystical significance to that, which contributed to him being Azor Ahai and the Prince who was Promised.

I think you're probably reading too much into it.  

[falcotron]

4 hours ago, SerJeremiahLouistark said:

Also I thought there was a chance somewhere down the line that the Blackwoods may connect the Starks and Targs.  

Through Black Aly, or Melantha? I think we know nothing about what branch of the Blackwood family either of them comes from, but I could be wrong.

I suppose there are probably lots of Starks in the Blackwood family tree, especially if you go back to before they were exiled from the North, so Black Betha probably had some Stark blood to pass on to Jaehaerys and his successors, but I'm not sure how exciting that is.*

---

* I'm not sure how magic that depends on Stark blood (or Targ blood, or king's blood) decides whether someone qualifies. Is it based on public perception of someone as a Stark descendant, or on being X% descended from some particular Brandon Stark, or on some specific dominant gene that has a 50% chance of being lost with each outside marriage, or by fairies pulling out the charts and applying the same rules used for succession, or…?

[Lady Blizzardborn]

On 8/30/2017 at 10:05 PM, dmc515 said:

You remember the theory that Aerion's Maegor was the Tattered Prince?  Timing may not quite work out, but I always thought that was cool.

Yes. I like that one too. I think I might have done some research for it, but don't remember what I learned.

[rivers snow]

Never knew that Ned's parents were cousins! Maybe that will make Jonerys less taboo than expected in North?

i always wondered where the Stark warging and connection to Direwolves came from and if there was some intermarriage with the children of the forest by ancient first men ancestors.

[RhaenysBee]

10 hours ago, SerJeremiahLouistark said:

They might if they realized that Jon also has a little bit of Dayne blood in him also on his father's side.  Currently there is no sword of the morning and dawn is unclaimed.  

Also I thought there was a chance somewhere down the line that the Blackwoods may connect the Starks and Targs.  

Oh god and then what? Jon would whip it out of the stone it's stuck in and have another magical, ancestral sword so he can double wield too? 

[falcotron]

4 hours ago, rivers snow said:

i always wondered where the Stark warging and connection to Direwolves came from and if there was some intermarriage with the children of the forest by ancient first men ancestors.

I doubt there's any intermarriage.

From the novels/WoIaF, it's pretty clear that humans can't even interbreed with the brindled men of Sothoryos or the hairy men of Ib without producing half-breeds that are usually grotesque and almost always sterile. The chance they can interbreed with Children—who are far more different than the Ibbish—seems very unlikely. (Of course that could be different between books and show, but I don't see any good reason it should. Does Leaf look like someone likely to bear a human baby?)

I think it's more like this: When First Men started dealing with the Children, they offered to teach some humans their magic. Most people didn't even try, and most people who tried failed, but one guy—probably named Brandon—succeeded wildly. And his descendants are the Stark family.

[SerJeremiahLouistark]

4 hours ago, RhaenysB said:

Oh god and then what? Jon would whip it out of the stone it's stuck in and have another magical, ancestral sword so he can double wield too? 

While on the back of a dragon 

[RhaenysBee]

52 minutes ago, SerJeremiahLouistark said:

While on the back of a dragon 

Yeah. And while farting morals. Oh god...........  

[The Commentator]

On 8/29/2017 at 8:33 AM, RhaenysB said:

Nobody cares about female ancestors, Jon is Rhaegar's legitimate and only surviving child that's enough to make him the heir to the Iron Throne. His mother's side female ancestors are completely irrelevant and uninteresting in both books and show. It doesn't matter. At all. 

False.  Rhaegar's line was disinherited.  The crown passed to Prince Viserys, which made him King Viserys III.  Rhaegar's children lost their claim.  

[Kytheros]

5 hours ago, Widowmaker 811 said:

False.  Rhaegar's line was disinherited.  The crown passed to Prince Viserys, which made him King Viserys III.  Rhaegar's children lost their claim.  

No. Rhaegar was never disinherited. It's thought that Aerys was considering disinheriting him, or passing him over to name Viserys as heir, but it isn't said that Aerys actually got around to making it official.

Rhaegar died as the Prince of Dragonstone, Crown Prince and Heir of the Iron Throne. Rhaegar's trueborn male children would come before Viserys in the line of succession.

[RhaenysBee]

14 hours ago, Widowmaker 811 said:

False.  Rhaegar's line was disinherited.  The crown passed to Prince Viserys, which made him King Viserys III.  Rhaegar's children lost their claim.  

No. 

8 hours ago, Kytheros said:

No. Rhaegar was never disinherited. It's thought that Aerys was considering disinheriting him, or passing him over to name Viserys as heir, but it isn't said that Aerys actually got around to making it official.

Rhaegar died as the Prince of Dragonstone, Crown Prince and Heir of the Iron Throne. Rhaegar's trueborn male children would come before Viserys in the line of succession.

This.

plus, the show wouldn't care anyway. 

[DMC]

Sorry for the delay...

On 8/31/2017 at 10:15 AM, Lord Varys said:

The Blackwoods are old and were kings once, very far back in the day, but we don't know how wealthy and powerful they still are. In the Riverlands the most prestigious house are the Tullys since the Conquest, followed by whatever house holds Harrenhal. It could very well be that the Mallisters or Freys were much more prestigious than the Blackwoods in 220 AC.

I'll give you Harrenhal, forgot about that.  After whomever holds it though, I think it's fair to assume the Blackwoods are clearly on the "next tier" with the Mallisters and Freys (at least in prestige if not in power) as evidenced by Cregan taking Black Aly in lieu of a Targ and Lord Tytos' role in ASOIAF.  Granted, I suppose it's fair to assume they were not during the 220 AC period for whatever reason because we don't really know, but that's just absence of evidence.

On 8/31/2017 at 10:15 AM, Lord Varys said:

For heirs apparent the only possible marriage option were siblings and other close Targaryen kin or members of the most prestigious blood lines of Westeros. 

...

This indicates that an Arryn, Lannister, or Stark without Targaryen blood could also have married a king or heir apparent but not many other houses would. A king or Prince of Dragonstone marrying a Reyne, Royce, Manderly, etc. would have caused controversy and perhaps even violent opposition.

I agree with this and it makes sense.  Out of curiosity, what do you think of the possibility of a crown prince marrying a Tyrell or Tully - especially if, say, the Targs were in a similar position as the Lannisters after Blackwater?

On 8/31/2017 at 10:15 AM, Lord Varys said:

Younger sons can marry beneath their station, of course, but even there we see that this is done to secure them a lordship - like when the Old King married Prince Daemon to Rhea Royce. She was a rich heiress chosen so that Daemon's sons could one day rule a prominent lordship of their own.

I guess my argument is that even without a potential lordship, it would behoove the Targs to marry second or third sons etc. to a powerful secondary house rather than, for example, marrying second son Aerys I to Aelinor Penrose because of the blood relation.  This could be a far greater strategic match not only to ensure a stronger ally but also apply soft pressure to ensure a potentially recalcitrant Great House to stay in line.  Such a strategy would be even more beneficial in marrying off daughters.  This is a normative argument of what the Targs should have done, not of what they did.

On 8/31/2017 at 10:15 AM, Lord Varys said:

It is hardly surprising that Elaena's children were never reabsorbed back into the Targaryen line.

Granted, Elaena is a special case, but do we know for sure Aelinor was not a descendent of Ronnel?

On 8/31/2017 at 10:15 AM, Lord Varys said:

There were six Targaryen-Hightower daughters and one of them surely could have wed a Dayne of Starfall during or after the Young Dragon's wars with Dorne - and any Targaryen cousin born from such a union would, in turn, very likely have accompanied Princess Mariah to King's Landing or eventually have joined her there.

Ossifer Plumm was apparently rich as hell - and his wealth were apparently taken by Aegon IV in the wake of his death. Creating a pretext for that money grab seems to have been the entire point of this marriage.

Interesting speculation on the Daynes, and thanks for the reminder on Plumm.

On 8/31/2017 at 10:15 AM, Lord Varys said:

It is very odd that they got two Targaryen marriages even in light of the fact that they were ultimate descended from Daemon-Laena through one of Rhaena's daughters.

Again, how do we know this?

On 8/31/2017 at 4:51 PM, Lord Varys said:

And it makes no sense that Daeron II wouldn't have tried to arrange a marriage for his eldest son where the chances were not that bad that the Valyrian features would eventually resurface - which they then did, in part, in Prince Valarr.

This is an excellent point based on the circumstances at the time, and IMO the strongest support that Jena (and subsequently the Dondarrions) had Targ blood.