Jump to content
Sign in to follow this  
aeverett

Targaryen Madness: What If We Have It All Wrong

Recommended Posts

I've been thinking about the insanity displayed by many of the Targs and have come to a conclusion that runs counter to what most would expect. 

We know that the Valyrians (Targs included) started out as ordinary goat herders until they discovered dragon eggs.  They tended the eggs, and slowly, over time noticed physical changes to themselves (Silver hair, oddly colored eyes, better stamina in hot weather, etc)  as well as gained the ability to bond with dragons.  This goes on for over five millennia, until Daenys has her dreams (or the Targs get into trouble at court) and the Targ family moves to Dragonstone.  The doom happens nearly a century later, and a few years after that Aegon begins his conquest.   

However, Aegon's sons married outside the Valyrian bloodlines.  Several generations of Targs did so, even if most kept the incest tradition.  Dany and Jon have the blood of House Hightower, House Blackwood, House Martell, etc. in them, and we readers and viewers tend to see that as a good thing.  Non-magical humans suffer horribly when they engage in multiple generations of sibling to sibling inbreeding, but what if it's really the outbreeding, not the inbreeding, that drives Targs like Aerion Brightflame and Aerys II insane?   Think about it this way; when they produced offspring with non-Valyrians, their physiology began to revert back to that of normal human beings, but retained enough magic to drive them mad.  What's more, it wouldn't strike every Targ as the balance of Valyrian to Westerosi genes would be luck of the draw at conception, like a coin flip.  From what we've seen with Robert, Stannis, and Renly, and little Shireen, enough out breeding removes the insanity problem, but takes with it the special magic that gives those with 'the blood of Old Valyria' the ability to control dragons.  

This would put Dany, Jon, and their descendants in a rough spot.  Healthy children with no magic and no dragons, or half their family going mad, but the sane ones taking to the skies and ensuring a permanent dynasty built on fire and blood.  

Edited by aeverett

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, aeverett said:

Non-magical humans suffer horribly when they engage in multiple generations of sibling to sibling inbreeding,

That a usually believed myth, but not really true. Sexual relationships within the family are so taboo in most cultures the risks of genetic defects have been overly exaggerated. But if a standard children has a 1% chance of being born with genetic defects, a children of two siblings would have something like a 4%. Significantly higher, but still very unlikely.

In fact, in history we see many real families with much more inbreeding that the Targaryens. One of the more reputedly beautiful and intelligent women of antiquity, Cleopatra, was born of a LOT of incest: there were 3 brother-sister marriages and 3 uncle-niece marriages within 4 (patrilineal) generations, such that her family tree collapses to a single couple.

So I don't think that Targaryen inbreeding (or lack of it) can be used to explain much, tbh.

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Ehh, if you have enough kids in today's society, chances are at least one will be a dick. Obviously, the dragon blood was the reason for the mutant still births and miscarriages etc. I don't think it's outbreeding or inbreeding that causes the mean Targs. I think it's the power/entitlement.

If we look at Joeffrey, we are to believe that he was a bad egg due to inbreeding, and Marcella and Tommen by luck turned out ok. But, from day 1 Joeff knew he would be king some day. The power is what got to him, I believe. I feel like this was a major problem with a lot of the Targs, definitely Viserys...the entitlement. The iron throne is basically the ring from Lord of The Rings. Hell, even Stannis started going crazy when he thought it was his turn to be king.

The "good" people in this story, either started with no entitlement; Ned, Jon, somewhat Sam and Dany....or lost it along the way ; Sansa, Jorah.

So someone like Rhaegar Targaryian who is entitled and still good is GOT version of Aragon. The power didnt consume him afaik.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
7 hours ago, The hairy bear said:

That a usually believed myth, but not really true. Sexual relationships within the family are so taboo in most cultures the risks of genetic defects have been overly exaggerated. But if a standard children has a 1% chance of being born with genetic defects, a children of two siblings would have something like a 4%. Significantly higher, but still very unlikely.

In fact, in history we see many real families with much more inbreeding that the Targaryens. One of the more reputedly beautiful and intelligent women of antiquity, Cleopatra, was born of a LOT of incest: there were 3 brother-sister marriages and 3 uncle-niece marriages within 4 (patrilineal) generations, such that her family tree collapses to a single couple.

So I don't think that Targaryen inbreeding (or lack of it) can be used to explain much, tbh.

 

Then how is someone like Gilly, who is descended from a rather long line of incest compounded for interest, not look like Sloth from The Goonies?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
9 hours ago, The hairy bear said:

That a usually believed myth, but not really true. Sexual relationships within the family are so taboo in most cultures the risks of genetic defects have been overly exaggerated. But if a standard children has a 1% chance of being born with genetic defects, a children of two siblings would have something like a 4%. Significantly higher, but still very unlikely.

In fact, in history we see many real families with much more inbreeding that the Targaryens. One of the more reputedly beautiful and intelligent women of antiquity, Cleopatra, was born of a LOT of incest: there were 3 brother-sister marriages and 3 uncle-niece marriages within 4 (patrilineal) generations, such that her family tree collapses to a single couple.

As a forum moderator, I'd like some clarification please because I don't know how to read this statement.

 

Are you speaking personally here or are you in some way representing GRRM in that one of the major themes of the books is:

"As its dangers are "a usually believed myth", not only is incest in real life pretty much ok, it's what the cool kids do"?

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
13 hours ago, The hairy bear said:

That a usually believed myth, but not really true. Sexual relationships within the family are so taboo in most cultures the risks of genetic defects have been overly exaggerated. But if a standard children has a 1% chance of being born with genetic defects, a children of two siblings would have something like a 4%. Significantly higher, but still very unlikely.

This is the thing a lot of people forget; the actual mechanics of how inbreeding increases genetic defects. There needs to be a genetic defect in the system already, inbreeding just increases the chances of pre-existing defects being expressed.

Of course, one could argue Targ madness was in the line since Daenys the Dreamer, so their inbreeding likely did exacerbate this nature. Not to mention Cleopatra's lineage also contained the stunted, cleft-palated Tutankhamen. And most inbred royal lineages have some recurring genetic defect; haemophilia, porphyria, mental illness like dementia (likely alzheimer's), etc.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 hours ago, Lollygag said:

"As its dangers are "a usually believed myth", not only is incest in real life pretty much ok, it's what the cool kids do"?

I didn't think this was GRRM's theme as much as D&D's, given they obviously ship Cersei and Jaime, as opposed to depicting it as an unhealthy relationship, and they depict Daenerys as a Mary Sue, as opposed to a possibly mad, possibly incompetent imposer into others' cultures, not to mention they really seemed to get off on boatsex, probably because aunt and nephew were both of age and hot.

D&D put the 'in' in incest!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
8 hours ago, Angel Eyes said:

Then how is someone like Gilly, who is descended from a rather long line of incest compounded for interest, not look like Sloth from The Goonies?

Were you replying to me? Cause what i was saying is that inbreeding is not that likely to cause genetic defects, and thus it was perfectly normal that Gilly was born sane and healthy.

6 hours ago, Lollygag said:

As a forum moderator, I'd like some clarification please because I don't know how to read this statement.

Unless explicitly stated, none of the moderator's opinions in these forums are any other thing that their own personal opinions. Their role is not relevant to the point.

6 hours ago, Lollygag said:

Are you speaking personally here or are you in some way representing GRRM in that one of the major themes of the books is:

"As its dangers are "a usually believed myth", not only is incest in real life pretty much ok, it's what the cool kids do"?

I don't think that incest is OK at all. I think it is not an advisable behavior, because it can potentially lead to vicious or submissive relationships, and prevents the creation of endogamous groups without external influences.

I'm only saying that the risk of genetic complications is grossly overstated, as real life evidence demonstrates.

2 hours ago, Beardy the Wildling said:

 Not to mention Cleopatra's lineage also contained the stunted, cleft-palated Tutankhamen.

Nooo! Big lapsus here. Tutankhamen was from the 18th dynasty, and lived more than a millennia before Cleopatra (who belonged from the Greek dynasty of the Ptolomeans). As far as I'm aware, Cleopatra had no familiars with health problems.

But I agree with everything else you say in your post.

Edited by The hairy bear

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 02/03/2018 at 3:27 PM, Bombadil @Sinsudar said:

Sorry I'm only up to the whole series to date and Book 1. Is there any vampires included or suggested in Westeros,Essos,grrm's mind or in any specific passage of the current released books?

 

On 03/03/2018 at 4:58 PM, Bombadil @Sinsudar said:

No Vampires at all in gRRm's WestEros World?   surprised...    thought the Intention was cover Them All.

Maybe a Face-Changer is close enough.

 

On 03/03/2018 at 5:05 PM, Bombadil @Sinsudar said:


Maybe simpler beings are more appropiate for Gaia at this Time.

Who really believes Arthur C. Clarke was having Real sex with little Children?   but it could make sense if He was a Time Traveller setting up a Cover, like "Nobody wants to go to North Korea" can be a cover for many stuff happening at once.

 

On 03/03/2018 at 9:35 PM, Bombadil @Sinsudar said:

In any case, it will be Order out of a controlled Chaos.

 

God would not allow otherWise.

Oh God, who is this guy, and why is he spouting this weird stream of consciousness?

Some advice for you, Mister Bombadil; even if you're just having a joke, keep it relevant to the topic at hand. This feels really out of left field. And what's this shit about Gaia and 'Order out of a controlled Chaos' and God's freaking will?

I mean, this is truly bizarre, the kind of impromptu craziness that only comes around every now and then. It's genuine, though, and it's a delight to see a genuine crazy person amongst all the attention-seeking tryhards.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
Sign in to follow this  

×