What Keeping the Blood Pure, Actually Looks Like

[CAllDSmith]

So there is a theory I've seen in multiple places, and partially subscribe to, that the dragonlords of Valyria genetically modified themselves as they possible did their dragons and other things in order to make themselves more compatible with their dragons. This is why the pale hair and purple eyes genes don't die out like they should, and why they aren't prone to the same genetic disorders that other people would be. They essentially magicked out those disorders, and the incest is actually necessary for them to do their dragon thing. This would also work as GRRM's equivalent of the "divine right" and the belief that King's had "better blood" that let them do things that normal people couldn't, like healing hands. It's similar to how GRRM plays other medieval myths and tropes as if they were true (First Night, rule of thumb, everyone being covered in shit etc.) So after a different thread had me calculating exactly how much Stark and Targaryen Jon Snow would be if R+L=J I wanted to do it for the whole line to see what keeping the blood pure actually looked like. As a warning math was not my strongest subject, but I think my fractions are right in this account. 

So let's start with Aegon the Conqueror, for simplicity's sake we're going to assume that Aerion Targaryen's mother was also a Targaryen. Making Aegon and Rhaenys both 

3/4 Targaryen 1/4 Velaryon 

Aenys is then also :                While Alyssa Velaryon is (For simplicity's sake)

3/4 Targaryen 1/4 Velaryon  + 2/4 Velaryon 2/4 Massey 

Which makes Jaehaerys I and Queen Alysanne 

3/8 Targ, 3/8 Vel 2/8 Massey  

Baelon is also 3/8 Targ 3/8 Vel 2/8 Massey as is his sister-wife Alyssa 

So Viserys I is                   while his wife Aemma Arryn was (rounding to an Arryn) 

3/8 Targ 3/8 Vel 2/8 Massey + 3/16 Targ, 3/16 Vel 2/16 Massey, 8/16 Arryn 

= 

Rhaenyra                                             +         Daemon Targaryen's 

9/32 Targ, 9/32 Vel 6/32 Massey 8/32 Arryn + 12/32 Targ 12/32 Vel 8/32 Massey 

= Visery's II (only doing genetic here.)                          Larra Rogare (as far as we know 64/64 Rogare, though I have seen some fun theories about her mom.) 

21/64 Targ, 21/64 Vel, 14/64 Massey, 8/64 Arryn  + 64/64 Rogare 

Making Aegon the Unworthy, Naerys and Daeron II 

21/128 Targ, 21/128 Vel, 14/128 Massey, 8/128 Arryn 64/128 Rogare 

Mariah Martell might have had an amount of Rogare in her, but we know literally nothing about the spouses of the Dornish Princes(ses) So 256/256 Dornish it is! ( If I could round these down I would I swear.) 

So Maekar Targaryen is actually:                                                                                                       + Dyanna Dayne's 

21/256 Targaryen, 21/256 Vel, 14/256 Massey, 8/256 Arryn, 64/256 Rogare and 128/256 Martell.     512/512 Dayne 

= 

Egg the Unlikely                                                                                                                        

21/512 Targaryen, 21/512 Vel, 14/512 Massey, 8/512 Arryn, 64/512 Rogare, 128/512 Martell, and 256/512 Dayne 

Now I'm going to use a personal theory here, just to make this math slightly more interesting. otherwise just turn the denominator to 1024 and add 512/1024 Blackwood to the end and you've got all the Targaryens In Dany's line. (Isn't incest fun.) The theory is that Betha Blackwood's mother was Gwenys or Mya Rivers who would be: 

21/512 Targaryen, 21/512 Vel, 14/512 Massey, 8/512 Arryn, 64/512 Rogare, 384/512 Blackwood 

Which would make Jaehaerys II, Queen Shaera, Aerys II, Rhaella, Rhaegar, Viserys III, and Daenaerys Stormborn all: 

42/1024 Targ, 42/1024 Vel, 28/1024 Massey, 16/1024 Arryn, 128/1024 Rogare, 128/1024 Martell, 256/1024 Dayne, and 384/1024 Blackwood or: 

37.5% Blackwood, 25% Dayne, 12.5% Martell, 12.5% Rogare, 4.1% Targ, 4.1% Vel, 2.7% Massey, and 1.5% Arryn.  With everything but Targaryen, Massey, and Velaryon able to be cut in half and then another name added. 

Now if R+L=J the real fun begins. Using the family tree in the back of World, with the theory that Melantha Blackwood is a sister or cousin to Betha Blackwood through the other Rivers I came up with a count for Lyanna that was accurate before going back to Aegon the Conqueror parents messed it up. 

66/256 Locke, 64/256 Flint, 48/256 Royce, 27/256 Karstark, 16/256 Blackwood, 12/256 Stark, 8/256 Targ 8/256 Rogare 6/256 Glover. I'll be back to edit it after making dinner, unless one of you wants to be nice and do the math for me. 

 

So what do you guys think or this incredibly time consuming project that yielded no more benefit than to show just how weird genetics and thinking of keeping the blood "pure" can be? 

[kissdbyfire]

I confess to skipping some of the maths above... I had my fill w/ genetics in uni, and while I find it a very interesting topic, I don’t think rw genetics apply here. I do think the whole “blood of the dragon” mantra has something to it, but I haven’t subscribed to any specific theory yet. It’s only been 20 yrs, and I’m still pondering. I also confess to not being super duper motivated to dissect that aspect of the story...

W/ all that said, I firmly believe Martin is not promoting/endorsing the “purity of bloodlines”. In fact, I’m pretty certain it’s just the opposite. So the real question imo is, what then? What happens if striving to keep your bloodline “pure” is indeed a lot of hooey? 

[CAllDSmith]

44 minutes ago, kissdbyfire said:

W/ all that said, I firmly believe Martin is not promoting/endorsing the “purity of bloodlines”. In fact, I’m pretty certain it’s just the opposite. So the real question imo is, what then? What happens if striving to keep your bloodline “pure” is indeed a lot of hooey? 

See I'm not saying he's supporting/endorsing it any more than that he supports/endorses the right of the First Night (which never existed.) and the rule of thumb (which that's not how we get the expression.) I think he's playing with a fantasy trope and what it actually would mean if it were true in some way in his fantasy setting. I think Tommen and Myrcella are proof enough that he isn't making an actual point about it since they're still decent people. Maybe it's a point about nurture over nature since it seems as if the determinant factor for Targaryen coin flips isn't how they're born but how they're raised? Ex. We saw how many of Jaehaerys and Alysanne's kids growing up, and none of them really showed any "madness". 

[kissdbyfire]

17 minutes ago, CAllDSmith said:

See I'm not saying he's supporting/endorsing it any more than that he supports/endorses the right of the First Night (which never existed.) and the rule of thumb (which that's not how we get the expression.) I think he's playing with a fantasy trope and what it actually would mean if it were true in some way in his fantasy setting. I think Tommen and Myrcella are proof enough that he isn't making an actual point about it since they're still decent people. Maybe it's a point about nurture over nature since it seems as if the determinant factor for Targaryen coin flips isn't how they're born but how they're raised? Ex. We saw how many of Jaehaerys and Alysanne's kids growing up, and none of them really showed any "madness". 

Sure. And I didn’t claim you said he was endorsing anything etc etc etc. I was merely giving my opinion. And yes, I think he is playing w/ some common fantasy tropes, but still... the books don’t exist in a vacuum. We have an author behind the story, and one that is pretty outspoken and doesn’t shy away from a wide range of topics, from history to current events and politics. 

The Targs and their obsession w/ the purity of their bloodline come across as... erhm... some sort of “super race”. And our author likes to say he is a “proper mongrel” (or words to that effect). So, I don’t think what the Targs believe about their “specialness” will turn out to be correct. 

We even have some clues pointing to this already... the dragonseeds are “mongrels”, not the “purest of pure Targ awesomeness”, and quite a few have bonded w/ and rode dragons. Just my 2p worth. 

[Lord Varys]

There are merely more and less inbred noble freaks in this world. These noble families have married amongst themselves - i.e. the same gene pool of a couple of dozens eligible families for centuries and millennia. They are all far, far, far beyond the degree of inbreeding any real world royal or noble families - because they did that kind of thing only for a millennium, give or take.

George's old families have done it for 8,000 or 6,000 years.

One really doesn't want to know the coefficient of relationship among the, say, Starks or Lannisters. Both did marry cousins out of the main male line, but we don't know how many first, second or third cousins there are among their female line ancestors. All those daughters must make some great matches, too, and their children will have to marry someone of equal or similar station, too.

If the author had wanted to sent the message that 'keeping the bloodlines pure' was bad in principle he should have not had the heroes of the story be the offspring of cousin marriages - nor should he have given the world 8,000-6,000 years of royal and noble inbreeding - on a cousin level, to be sure, but still. He has gone on record saying that he doesn't champion or support sibling incest, but even there he doesn't give his characters actual proper arguments against that kind of thing - which one would expect him to do if he wanted to tell us that this kind of thing is unforgivable or will always lead to problems.

The nobility are not going to change their marriage policies, and those books won't suddenly introduce love marriages as the new gold standard of marriages.

Insofar as the purity of the Targaryen bloodline is concerned - we have to keep in mind that the Targaryens do have millennia of (predominantly) sibling incest on Dragonstone and in Valyria behind them. They get some foreign blood in the bloodline in Westeros, but it is not that much compared to the amount of inbreeding they had lived through until the Conquest.

It seems that the blood of the dragon is not easily bred out if incest and cousin marriages remain the default setting. 

And while it seems at this point that Myriah Martell, Dyanna Dayne, and Betha Blackwood do have no Targaryen/Valyrian blood of their own, that's not confirmed. We have Rhaena Targaryen's six Hightower daughters who may all end up marrying into various families who then, in turn, would marry into other houses.

This kind of thing is already confirmed for Aelinor Penrose - a cousin of King Aerys I. Perhaps Dyanna is a similar case - not to mention that those three daughters of Elaena Targaryen by her Penrose husband may have also had children of their own that pop up later in the family tree.

[Clegane'sPup]

1 hour ago, CAllDSmith said:

So there is a theory I've seen in multiple places, and partially subscribe to, that the dragonlords of Valyria genetically modified themselves as they possible did their dragons and other things in order to make themselves more compatible with their dragons. This is why the pale hair and purple eyes genes don't die out like they should, and why they aren't prone to the same genetic disorders that other people would be. They essentially magicked out those disorders, and the incest is actually necessary for them to do their dragon thing.

Without the extra material martin wrote --- in ASOIAF Dany is the last Targ standing. Yeah, LC Snow, Eddard's bastard may be the get of Lyanna and Rheagar.

In order for martin to be the american toliken his ASoIAF novels/books/saga need to make sense. Two more books until martin completes spinning his tale.

 

[Syl of Syl]

From what I understand, this is not really how genetics work. Leaving aside some of the assumptions, I don't think your math accurately represents how genetics work.

I think it is accurate to say that each child does indeed inherit half his/her genes from each parent, but the half that each child inherits is random. For example, if we say that Aenys inherited half his genes from Aegon and half from Rhaenys, that is fine. But if we go to the next generation, we cannot say with a certainty how much of Jaehaerys's genes he inherits from Aegon and how many from Rhaenys. Since he inherits half his genes from Aenys, he can inherit the entire half that Aenys inherited from Aegon with nothing from Rhaenys, or the entire half that he inherited from Rhaenys and nothing from Aegon and any of the myriad of outcomes in between these two extremes. And in fact, all outcomes are equally likely, so for Jaehaerys to inherit exactly half of each half that Aenys inherited from Aegon and Rhaenys is extremely unlikely.

[Rose of Red Lake]

I certainly hope that there is a Targaryen point-of-view trap going on where their blood purity magic is all hype, that they aren't actually "all that." Mainly because a breed of superior humans that is literally superior and also happens to think they're superior is really gross even for fantasy fiction. It smacks of the racist "one-drop" laws in the U.S.

It would be ironic if they thought they had to incest to control the dragons, but they actually did not, because they misunderstood genetics. "Blood" can never really be "pure." If I were writing it I'd make sure this house gets trapped by their own distorted thinking by having them get all the negative consequences of incest while the "positives" aren't actually present.

[Karneol]

I thought by this post about the Westerosi noble families. 

It's ironic to see how diffrent they think they are but probably most of them have the same genpool. Take the Brackens and Blackwoods for example: 

Quote

"Someone did, my lord. Many someones. We've had a hundred peaces with the Brackens, many sealed with marriages. There's Blackwood blood in every Bracken, and Bracken blood in every Blackwood. The Old King's Peace lasted half a century.

Probably every Westerosi house is somehow a descendant of Garth Greenhand, Brandon the Builder and Nymeria Martell. Kind of every European is a descendant of Charlmagne:

https://youtu.be/15Uce4fG4R0

[Megorova]

14 hours ago, Lord Varys said:

And while it seems at this point that Myriah Martell, Dyanna Dayne, and Betha Blackwood do have no Targaryen/Valyrian blood of their own, that's not confirmed. We have Rhaena Targaryen's six Hightower daughters who may all end up marrying into various families who then, in turn, would marry into other houses.

This kind of thing is already confirmed for Aelinor Penrose - a cousin of King Aerys I. Perhaps Dyanna is a similar case - not to mention that those three daughters of Elaena Targaryen by her Penrose husband may have also had children of their own that pop up later in the family tree.

It's fairly likely, that one of Hightower-Targaryen girls married with one of Daynes (because both Daynes and Hightowers are fairly great Houses, thus, good matches for each other, and their castles are also close to each other), which makes Dyanna Dayne partially Targaryen.

It's also likely, that Dyanna's daughters, Rhae and Daella, married with their cousins from Dayne family, which makes current Daynes partially Targaryen (including Gerold Dayne, who has interesting hair-coloring (silver hair, divided by a streak of midnight black), similar to Valarr (brown hair, with a streak of silver-gold running through it) and Elaena Targaryen (platinum white with a bright golden streak down the middle)).

Valarr's mother was Jena Dondarrion. "The Dondarrions gave refuge to King Baelor I Targaryen and Prince Aemon the Dragonknight when they returned from Dorne via the Boneway." Maybe Dondarrions helped King Baelor, and later Baelor Breakspear married with a Dondarrion, because Dondarrions were bloodrelated to Targaryens. Maybe some time after the Conquest, Dondarrions intermarried with Baratheons, or something like that. Borros Baratheon married with Elanda Caron, and Duncan the Tall together with Arlan of Pennytree were serving to "Lords Caron and Dondarrion when they fought a Vulture King in the Red Mountains three years before the tourney at Ashford Meadow." Maybe Carons and Dondarrions were supporting each other, because they were bloodrelated. Thus, thru marriage of Borros Baratheon and Elanda Caron, and then thru marriages of their descendants with Dondarrions, Jena Dondarrion was partially Targaryen, and that's why Baelor married with her (to keep the blood of the dragon in the fold).

So bicolored hair of Gerold Dayne could be a hint about his dragon-blood.

Also, it's likely, that paternal grandmother of Rickard Stark, Melantha Blackwood, was partially dragonseed. That's if Mya or Gwenys Rivers, that were half-Blackwoods and half-Targaryens, later married with their cousins from House Blackwood. It seems, that Melantha was from the same generation as Betha Blackwood, so it's likely, that they were either sisters or cousins. So Aegon V married with Betha not only because he loved her, but also because she was a dragonseed (thru descendants of Melissa Blackwood).

So it's fairly possible, that Dyanna and Betha, and maybe even Myriah (thru her mother, who could have been a Valyrian member of the Triarchy. Or maybe Myriah's father was son of Aliandra Martell and Drazenko Rogare, thus he himself was half-Valyrian. That's why he wasn't against marrying both of his children to Targaryens.), did had Targaryen genes. Even though we don't know about it, yet.

[Syl of Syl]

By the way, I don't think it's totally fair to demonize the Targaryen incest without thinking about context. I am not saying we should celebrate brother-sister incest, but by modern standards, every house in Westeros is practicing incest. The Targaryens were obviously more extreme, but we have to remember that this is a society where marrying your first cousin is totally acceptable.

Tywin and Joanna Lannister share a pair of grandparents. Paxter Redwyne and Mina Tyrell do as well. Nobody says boo about this. 

It's only two examples, but like the royal families of medieval Europe, I am sure that this kind of cousin-marrying has been a common theme throughout Westerosi history. So while the noble families of Westeros are not quite as inbred as the Targaryen family was, the difference is a matter of degrees.

[Lord Varys]

20 hours ago, Rose of Red Lake said:

I certainly hope that there is a Targaryen point-of-view trap going on where their blood purity magic is all hype, that they aren't actually "all that." Mainly because a breed of superior humans that is literally superior and also happens to think they're superior is really gross even for fantasy fiction. It smacks of the racist "one-drop" laws in the U.S.

It would be ironic if they thought they had to incest to control the dragons, but they actually did not, because they misunderstood genetics. "Blood" can never really be "pure." If I were writing it I'd make sure this house gets trapped by their own distorted thinking by having them get all the negative consequences of incest while the "positives" aren't actually present.

If there is a symbolic meaning to the incest thing - and there certainly seems to be - then this is most likely part of the overall '(magical) power comes with a price attached' theme. We learn that Melisandre had to pay a high price for her magic, we know that only death can pay for life which is another high price, we also know that skinchangers pay with a part of their humanity for their ability to control animals, we know that greenseers are apparently marked as special/short-lived by the gods (Bloodraven is an albino, Brandon a cripple), Beric and Catelyn defeat death but are changed on a fundamental level, and so on.

It seems rather obvious to me that the incest and what the incest led to was the price the Targaryens (and the other dragonlords, too) paid for the ability and privilege to ride dragons - or rather: to keep that ability a dominant trait in the bloodline of a family after it had been originally acquired. Because it is quite clear that you don't need an immediate dragonlord ancestor - much less pure-blooded incestuous dragonlord parents - to become a dragonrider. You can have a non-dragonlord parent to claim a dragon, and you can only have dragonlord ancestors much farther down your family tree (although we should not play up those bastard dragonriders during the Dance to much - they could all be descended from multiple dragonseeds giving them as much - or nearly as much - dragonlord blood as, say, Dany has after the Martell, Dayne, and Blackwood marriages of her immediate ancestors.

In that sense, there is no reason to believe that George will use the moral sledgehammer and have people tell each other and the Targaryens that incest is very, very wrong - especially not by making it so that the children of incestuous unions sort of have to pay their price for the behavior of their parents. George doesn't condemn Cersei and Jaime for their love, and he most definitely won't condemn Dany and Jon for their love - which is going to be the closest thing to a proper incestuous marriage we are going to get. Arianne and Aegon would be first cousins if they married (and Aegon is Elia's son) but nobody in Westeros cares about that.

Insofar as that the author is going to question or condemn the political mechanics of the world he has created - that's not going to happen, either. There are subtle clues that he doesn't like the things in his world much, but he wanted it to be realistic. We hear George's voice, I think, when the triarchs of Volantis are compared to the monarchy of Westeros, for instance, but nobody is going to abolish monarchy in Westeros - or crush the feudalistic hold the nobility has over the smallfolk. And as long as this remains and aristocracy power and wealth will marry power and wealth. Like they always did.

29 minutes ago, Syl of Syl said:

By the way, I don't think it's totally fair to demonize the Targaryen incest without thinking about context. I am not saying we should celebrate brother-sister incest, but by modern standards, every house in Westeros is practicing incest. The Targaryens were obviously more extreme, but we have to remember that this is a society where marrying your first cousin is totally acceptable.

Tywin and Joanna Lannister share a pair of grandparents. Paxter Redwyne and Mina Tyrell do as well. Nobody says boo about this. 

It's only two examples, but like the royal families of medieval Europe, I am sure that this kind of cousin-marrying has been a common theme throughout Westerosi history. So while the noble families of Westeros are not quite as inbred as the Targaryen family was, the difference is a matter of degrees.

Exactly. I laid that out above, too.

If you care about the effects of inbreeding then all the nobility are inbred freaks, not just those who get there faster by banging their sisters.

And it actually seems to be the case that the Targaryens are beyond the point in an inbred population where half the offspring or more dies. Those gene combinations that don't really work can be bred out of the gene pool if they don't live to procreate. As problematic traits they do have cruelty and sadism, autism, and schizophrenia left that pop up occasionally in the family tree, but it actually seems there are much more good apples than foul ones - and those good apples tend to be really, really good. Very healthy, smart, capable physically strong, and stunningly beautiful people.

First cousin marriages don't qualify as incest in most countries in the world, by the way. That's just a recently developed prudery in the US. Up until the late 19th century it was very common that the people in the US married their cousins, especially in the rural areas. Demonizing this kind of thing as a crime - or something that will cause create health risk for potential offspring - is completely irrational. As is, in a truly enlightened society, consensual incestuous love and sex among consenting adults. We do have methods of birth control in our day and age - and even if we did not, it seems very wrong to criminalize people who just love each other. And since it is not obligatory to do genetic test when you have sex with people you are not closely related to - despite the fact that you can produce handicapped offspring this way, too - I really see no reason why incest couples should go into jail for what they do. This doesn't really happen all that often, and nobody would be stupid enough to start some sort of 'incestuous dynasty' these days.

[Rose of Red Lake]

39 minutes ago, Lord Varys said:

In that sense, there is no reason to believe that George will use the moral sledgehammer and have people tell each other and the Targaryens that incest is very, very wrong - especially not by making it so that the children of incestuous unions sort of have to pay their price for the behavior of their parents. George doesn't condemn Cersei and Jaime for their love, and he most definitely won't condemn Dany and Jon for their love - which is going to be the closest thing to a proper incestuous marriage we are going to get. Arianne and Aegon would be first cousins if they married (and Aegon is Elia's son) but nobody in Westeros cares about that.

I've said this before to you but I guess I'll just repeat it. Its blood purity that should have a moral sledgehammer because it is racially coded. It doesn't matter how they tried to achieve it. The Targaryens could only fuck people with purple eyes or brown eyes. Instead they choose their family members--but that's not the issue. The bigger problem is their belief in blood dilution which reinforces ideas of superiority through magic. The skinchangers dont breed with each other just to create more skinchangers. They also dont want to rule over the masses, as a family, and create edicts that set themselves up as ideal humans above the law. With a House name so close to ARYAN you'd think more fans would cringe at all references to blood purity here.

[kissdbyfire]

1 hour ago, Syl of Syl said:

By the way, I don't think it's totally fair to demonize the Targaryen incest without thinking about context. I am not saying we should celebrate brother-sister incest, but by modern standards, every house in Westeros is practicing incest.

The population of the 7K is in the millions, even at the time of the Conquest, and there are several rw countries w/ less than, say, 10m people. See where I’m going? 

[Lord Varys]

32 minutes ago, Rose of Red Lake said:

I've said this before to you but I guess I'll just repeat it. Its blood purity that should have a moral sledgehammer because it is racially coded. It doesn't matter how they tried to achieve it. The Targaryens could only fuck people with purple eyes or brown eyes, whatever. They choose their family members. That's not the issue. The bigger problem is their belief in blood dilution which reinforces ideas of superiority through magic. The skinchangers dont breed with each other just to create more skinchangers. They also dont want to rule over the masses, as a family, and create edicts that set themselves up as ideal humans above the law. With a House name so close to ARYAN you'd think more fans would cringe at all references to blood purity here.

Actually, it would be pretty good if the nobility and royalty of Westeros were just racist in their marriage practices - that way millions of people would actually be eligible to marry into the main branches of the great families (i.e. all First Men, Andals, and Rhoynar in Westeros, basically). Instead those people - all those people not just the ruling dynasty - only marry among their own class. They are elitist to the highest degree, marrying only among their own circles.

I mean, outside the their incestuous unions the Targaryens seem to have been rather open if you think about Tyanna of the Tower (a bastard), Jenny of Oldstones (a commoner), and on the noble level we see obscure houses like Martells, Farmans, Penroses, Plumms, Westerlings, Costaynes, Manwoodys, etc.

That is a more diverse gene pool - and more diverse insofar as class is concerned - than any of the great houses can claim (at least those we got familiy trees and other genealogical information. The Lannisters marry basically only Westermen - and themselves. The Starks do marry only Northmen, themselves, and outside houses with prominent First Men ancestry.

As for racism:

As George unfortunately established in FaB Westeros is just rife with bigoted racism - not just the nobility, but the smallfolk as well. Do you remember how they treated the Rogares in FaB - with Lord Manderly effectively celebrating that he could cruelly punish that Lyseni who, in the end, was guilty of no crime whatsoever? How Rego Draz was cruelly killed by those savage Kingslanders? How the Kinglanders spread lies and filth about Lady Larra Rogare for the sole reason that she wasn't capering to their whim, refusing to abandon her religion and learn their language?

Skinchinging is not a talent that is inherited by blood, by the way, unlike dragonriding. There is only one dragonriding family in Westeros (counting the Velaryons as Targaryens), skinchangers, while rare, are all over the place, and Varamyr's story and experiences make it perfectly clear that there are no skinchanger families beyond the Wall. They are all ostracized people who are forced to live 'among their own', and even that did not enable them to band together and start a clan of their own.

35 minutes ago, kissdbyfire said:

The population of the 7K is in the millions, even at the time of the Conquest, and there are several rw countries w/ less than, say, 10m people. See where I’m going? 

The great noble houses don't marry their millions of subjects and peasants - they intermarry with eligible members of the neighboring nobility, apparently greatly focusing on marrying houses from their corner of Westeros instead of at least trying to bring in fresh noble blood - there are no examples of Umbers marrying, say, Ullers, or the Starks Martells, is there?

And they have done this for thousands of years.

In fact, it is quite obvious that the distinct looks of the Lannisters, Durrandon-Baratheons, Starks, Arryns, Tullys, etc. are due to inbreeding - this is the proper explanation for the development of quite specific and distinct family looks. Those traits seem to be strongest in the Stormlands - where the Durrandons of old seem to have constantly married the cousins in the Stormlands - and the West, where the Lannisters first seeded their lands with those fair-haired people to then reabsorb them back into their line, explaining why they are still all blond thousands of years after Lann. They couldn't have preserved such looks if they had often intermarried with non-fair-haired people of any kind.

[Syl of Syl]

2 hours ago, kissdbyfire said:

The population of the 7K is in the millions, even at the time of the Conquest, and there are several rw countries w/ less than, say, 10m people. See where I’m going? 

Not really. Where are you going?

1 hour ago, Lord Varys said:

In fact, it is quite obvious that the distinct looks of the Lannisters, Durrandon-Baratheons, Starks, Arryns, Tullys, etc. are due to inbreeding - this is the proper explanation for the development of quite specific and distinct family looks. Those traits seem to be strongest in the Stormlands - where the Durrandons of old seem to have constantly married the cousins in the Stormlands - and the West, where the Lannisters first seeded their lands with those fair-haired people to then reabsorb them back into their line, explaining why they are still all blond thousands of years after Lann. They couldn't have preserved such looks if they had often intermarried with non-fair-haired people of any kind.

And we have to remember that before Aegon conquered Westeros, these were in fact distinct kingdoms. The Kings of each region would have knitted their own kingdoms together through marriages, but I doubt they reached outside their region. The Starks in particular seem to have been restricted in the marriage partners they chose being averse to intermingling with the Andal lords that the southern houses accepted. It's probably only since the time of Good Queen Alysanne that the nobles of the great houses would have been marrying daughters of houses outside their kingdom.

2 hours ago, Lord Varys said:

Skinchinging is not a talent that is inherited by blood, by the way, unlike dragonriding. There is only one dragonriding family in Westeros (counting the Velaryons as Targaryens)

To get a little bit off topic - are we sure either of these statements are true? Yes, we have the example of Varamyr, none of whose children were skinchangers. On the other hand, we have seen that Bran, Jon and Arya at the very least of Ned's children have some ability as wargs, and I think George has hinted that all six children have some ability. If it's not an inherited trait, it does seem quite the coincidence that it crops up so strongly in a single family all of a sudden. We also have the story of the Warg King which I think could be interpreted as a hint that it is indeed an inherited trait. I'm not saying it definitely is, just that there is some contradictory evidence.

Similarly I don't think it's clearcut with dragonriding. While it is certainly true that the Targaryens believed dragonriding to be an inherited ability, I don't think the evidence is conclusive. The fact is that nobody outside the Targaryen family had access to dragons, so opportunity and access could have been the reason that all dragonriders were apparently Targaryens. The sowing of the dragonseeds during the Dance however might contradict this theory. There were far more failures than successes and we assume that the successful dragonriders were accepted by their mounts because of some existence of Targaryen blood and the failures because of a lack. However, we don't know for sure that this is true and it is quite possible that there is another explanation.

I think the story of Nettles provides a possible explanation. She certainly doesn't have the look in any way shape or form, and her story in fact seems to hint that dragonriding has nothing to do with Targaryen blood. She supposedly won Sheepstealer by wooing it with gifts of food until it became comfortable with her. You can see an analogy to this with how some people are more comfortable around dogs or other animals than others. People who grow up around animals often are more comfortable and confident in their interactions with them. Likewise, Targaryen kids who grow up around dragons would have had a certain comfort level and understanding of how to interact with dragons simply by being around them more than any other person.

[CAllDSmith]

2 hours ago, Lord Varys said:

I mean, outside the their incestuous unions the Targaryens seem to have been rather open if you think about Tyanna of the Tower (a bastard), Jenny of Oldstones (a commoner), and on the noble level we see obscure houses like Martells, Farmans, Penroses, Plumms, Westerlings, Costaynes, Manwoodys, etc.

That is a more diverse gene pool - and more diverse insofar as class is concerned - than any of the great houses can claim (at least those we got familiy trees and other genealogical information. The Lannisters marry basically only Westermen - and themselves. The Starks do marry only Northmen, themselves, and outside houses with prominent First Men ancestry.

I believe you may find it hilarious that through my family research I turned the entire second half of my Church History I class, and parts of my Church History II into "Stuff my ancestors did." because of the mix of all humans being third cousins and all the interbreeding in medieval Europe (one branch of tradition takes me through Uther Pendragon to Marcus Aurelius and actual documents have me back at Charlemagne six or seven different ways.). I also find the Targaryen out breeding as being a possible accidental comment on London/England vs. Queen Victoria's House of Windsor on down where the average person on the streets of London was more inbred then the English Royal family after Victoria. 

[Corvo the Crow]

On 4/13/2019 at 2:03 AM, kissdbyfire said:

W/ all that said, I firmly believe Martin is not promoting/endorsing the “purity of bloodlines”. In fact, I’m pretty certain it’s just the opposite. So the real question imo is, what then? What happens if striving to keep your bloodline “pure” is indeed a lot of hooey? 

Opposite? Fairest people of the known world are breeding like that. 

I think he is giving it exactly as it is. Targaryens have two sides two their coin after all and as we see with the last generation, they have too many stillborn.

 

Inbreeding isn’t necessarily a bad thing, if you have perfectly healthy genes, your child with your sibling will be perfectly healthy and if you have better genes, congratulations, what you are doing is eugenics! But if by some chance mutation that couldn’t be repaired papa’s got himself a nice copy of a bad gene, there’s %50 chance of it to be passed down to the future couple, son and daugter. If both got that, there’s now a %75 chance of the offspring having the gene in one or two of the chromosomes.

Inbreeding is also always there, to a degree that is.

 

It is how new breeds come out and it’s why some genetic disorders are more prevalent in some regions. Even now it’s not feasible for an entire people to go the few hundred kilometers to find spouses that are PERHAPS not related to them through a great aunt or great great grandfather, let alone going half the world so they most definitely will find such a mate. Think how it was a hundred years ago or a thousand.

[CAllDSmith]

10 hours ago, Corvo the Crow said:

Opposite? Fairest people of the known world are breeding like that. 

I think he is giving it exactly as it is. Targaryens have two sides two their coin after all and as we see with the last generation, they have too many stillborn.

 

Inbreeding isn’t necessarily a bad thing, if you have perfectly healthy genes, your child with your sibling will be perfectly healthy and if you have better genes, congratulations, what you are doing is eugenics! But if by some chance mutation that couldn’t be repaired papa’s got himself a nice copy of a bad gene, there’s %50 chance of it to be passed down to the future couple, son and daugter. If both got that, there’s now a %75 chance of the offspring having the gene in one or two of the chromosomes.

Inbreeding is also always there, to a degree that is.

 

It is how new breeds come out and it’s why some genetic disorders are more prevalent in some regions. Even now it’s not feasible for an entire people to go the few hundred kilometers to find spouses that are PERHAPS not related to them through a great aunt or great great grandfather, let alone going half the world so they most definitely will find such a mate. Think how it was a hundred years ago or a thousand.

Especially in some parts of America now that families are actually doing the research. My ancestors lived in the same county (female line of a female line of a female line.) since 1750's So now I know whenever I throw a stone in my hometown's graveyards I've got a half decent chance to hit a distant cousin. 

 

I wanna focus a bit on the Targ "coin flip" though because I think there is a point being made accidentally or not throughout the books about all characters but especially the Targs. Genius and madness being two sides of the same coin, but who determines which it is? Joffrey Doggett said that Jaehaerys looked the spitting image of Maegor when he was taking revenge for Rego Draz. Jaehaerys also had it in him to threaten some pretty harsh fates on some people. But he's seen as a genius and none of his kids are actually shown to be mad. Saera is a slut, Viserra needed love, Daella was scared of her own shadow, Gael was apparently simple but Helicent Uffering shows that that title (and what exactly it means when applied to a woman in Westeros) varies greatly. 

Of the "mad" Targaryens what we have are: 

Maegor-Extremely cruel, but was raised in a situation where he probably did receive that much paternal support and the maternal support he received was twisted. If we went with the idea that "might makes right" he actually looks pretty sane. 

Baelor the Blessed- An overly devout septon does not make a good king, we don't know how great of parents Daenora and Aegon were, but if Daeron hadn't died I strongly doubt anyone would have thought him particularly mad. 

Prince Rhaegel- The only real evidence we have of him being mad is a story about him dancing naked in the Red Keep, which can have plenty of explanations. Jury is out so far. 

Aerion Brightflame- Pretty clearly a jerk jock who is definitely poorly parented and immature. The dragon thing is a bit out there, but comparing it to how America treats bald eagles (Which as an American I'm perfectly fine with.) and it doesn't seem so outlandish. Also of note is that Aerion is from the second least inbred generation of the Targaryens. His mom was a Dayne, his grandmother was a Martell, his great-great-grandmother was a Rogare. 

Aerys the Mad King- Okay he was definitely mad, but we're not really getting a good picture as to when and why. Being forced to marry his sister (when he didn't want to.), being mocked and considered a puppet to his best friend, being kidnapped and tortured, and we know next to nothing of his youth and how Summerhall effected him. Sure, there's some issues with his fire obsession and paranoia, but there's plenty of "not-in-the-blood" explanations. 

Viserys the Beggar King- Dude had Aerys as a dad, was isolated from other children, watched everyone he loved die, and had the pressure of reclaiming the Iron Throne and keeping Dany alive placed on his shoulders by thirteen. And we know his "how to be a king" education was not stellar. He's the clearest example of the Targ madness not being nature but nurture. 

There is one other that I think exemplifies the Targ genius/madness 

Daeron the Drunkard 

Tvtropes put it pretty well: He decided to settle for the much more normal drunken failure instead of the mad oracle niche. He actively put his mind to being what he was and he excelled at it. The Targ genius/madness seems very much dependent on what they're aiming for and how that goal is judged by society. 

As a side note for how some may see this as supporting "Aryan-ism" and eugenics. There's a vast difference between describing something and supporting it. Superman, Aragorn, the Old Blood of Manetheren, there are plenty of stories throughout fiction that depict people who , due in no small part to their ancestors, have abilities that others do not have. Tolkien blatantly has Aragorn having magic powers due to being descended from Numenoreans and the elves, yet Tolkien probably gave the best screw you to the Nazis of any literary figure of the time. It's similar to the "Mhysa" issue in the show where due to filming location and the description of Slaver's Bay, (and the fact that Emilia Clarke doesn't tan like Dany did.) there's a scene with a large amount of people of color lifting up and praising a very white person for saving them. Does that have particular and unfortunate connotations that the film crew should have considered? Yes. Was the film crew attempting to suggest that Dany was in some way superior to them for her whiteness? No. @Lord Varys makes a great point about the elitism and racism within Westeros. Unfortunately as part of building a believable medieval fantasy certain stereotypes are injected to avoid an uncanny valley and a destruction of a suspension of disbelief. That doesn't mean they're depicted as being right. It's the Huck Finn issue, where just because people keep dropping the n-word people nowadays think the book is racist when actually it's very much anti-racist.  

[Megorova]

9 hours ago, Syl of Syl said:

On the other hand, we have seen that Bran, Jon and Arya at the very least of Ned's children have some ability as wargs, and I think George has hinted that all six children have some ability. If it's not an inherited trait, it does seem quite the coincidence that it crops up so strongly in a single family all of a sudden.

I think, that all of them have abilities, because their blood is a mix of Blackwoods (power of Old Gods, greenseers, wargs) and Targaryens (power of R'hllor, dragondreams/gift of foresign).

As I wrote in this thread earlier, it's fairly possible, that Eddard's great-grandmother, Melantha Blackwood (wife of Willam Stark), is a descendant of Melissa Blackwood's daughters from Aegon IV - Mya and Gwenys. If those girls, or even one of them, married back into Blackwood family, then next generations of Blackwoods were carriers of dragon-genes, and later passed them to Starks.

Willam Stark was great-grandson of Cregan Stark, who, same as Willam, was married with a Blackwood (Alysanne Blackwood), and had with her four daughters. It's likely, that those daughters could have married back into Blackwood family. So their descendants were bloodrelated to Starks. And that could be the reason, why several generations later, Willam Stark married with a Blackwood-girl - because they were cousins of some sort.

Just look at Starks' family tree - they nearly always married with Northerners, and there are only a few rare exceptions. And first of those exceptions in the Stark family tree was Alysanne Blackwood. Her marriage with Cregan Stark was result of a special circumstances (agreement made in the end of the Dance of the Dragons). Next exception (marriage outside of The North) was marriage between Cregan's grandson Beron and Lorra Royce (from The Vale). Beron's son, Willam Stark married with Alysanne Blackwood, and later Beron's granddaughter, Jocelyn, married with Benedict Royce. And Willam's great-grandson, Eddard Stark, married with Catelyn Tully.

So in 300 years of Starks' history they have married with someone from outside of The North only 5 times - 2 of them with Blackwoods, 2 with Royces, and 1 with Tully (which was also caused by special circumstances, same as marriage with Alysanne Blackwood).

It's highly likely, that Melantha Blackwood actually was Cregan Stark's great-grandchild, same as her husband, Willam Stark. So they were second cousins.

Also it's possible, that Benedict Royce, husband of Jocelyn Stark, was actually her first cousin. His parents were Raymar Royce and an Unknown wife. Jocelyn's grandmother, Lorra Royce, had two daughters, Berena and Alysanne, and it isn't known with whom those two were married. I think, that one of them was that Unknown wife of Raymar Royce, and mother of Benedict Royce.

Also it's possible, that Lorra Royce was Cregan Stark's granddaughter. With his second wife, Lynara Stark, Cregan had five children. One of them died, three married with other Northerners, but it isn't known, with whom married their only daughter, Lyanna Stark. If Cregan Stark, during the Dance of the Dragons, forged any sort of alliance or friendship with someone from House Royce, then it's likely, that later he married his daughter Lyanna with a member of House Royce, and thus Lorra Royce, that became wife of Cregan's grandchild, Beron Stark, also was Cregan's grandchild, same as her husband.

If my guesses are correct, then it means, that Starks not only always married with people, that were Northerners by blood (like Melantha Blackwood, Lorra and Benedict Royce), but were also closely blood-related to Starks. And, thus, the only real exceptions in Starks' family tree, is marriages of Starks with Alysanne Blackwood and Catelyn Tully - both were made to either end the war, or to gain military support in a span of war.

Now about possibility of Starks having dragon-genes.

It's possible, that Melantha Blackwood not only was 1/8 Stark, but also 1/4 Targaryen. My calculations could be totally off, but it seems, that Melantha Blackwood could be daughter of either Mya or Gwenys Rivers, and one of Blackwood-boys. Mya and Gwenys were bastards of Aegon IV, so their children were 1/4 Targs. If Melantha Blackwood really was who I think she was, then Eddard, Brandon and Lyanna were 1/32 Targaryens. Though it doesn't mean, that Bran, Arya, etc. are 1/64 Targaryens, that's because they have more Targaryen genes thru their mother

Catelyn Tully is daughter of Hoster Tully and Minisa Whent. There's only one known Whent still alive - Lady Shella Whent. Based on what is known about Harrenhal, it seems, that Shella's grandfather was first Lord Whent of Harrenhal, and founder of their House. It seems, that Shella's grandfather was also Minisa's grandfather. It doesn't even matter whether Shella and Minisa were sisters or first cousins, in both cases they had the same grandfather. This man was Catelyn's great-grandfather. I think, that he was the Bastard of Harrenhal.

https://awoiaf.westeros.org/index.php/Bastard_of_Harrenhal

Also I think, that he was secret son of Aegon IV Targaryen, and Aegon's own daughter, Jeyne Lothston. If that is correct, then Jeyne was 1/2 Targaryen, and her son was 3/4 Targaryen. This Bastard of Harrenhal was founder of House Whent, and Catelyn's great-grandfather. By the way, he is also Littlefingers' ancestor, which makes Cat and Petyr something like third cousins.

So the Bastard of Harrenhal and first Lord Whent was 3/4 Targaryen and 1/4 Stokeworth. He married with an uncknown woman, and their children were 4/8 Uncknown 1/8 Stokeworth 3/8 Targaryen. Then Shella, Minisa, and Shella's husband, who was her cousin, were something like 8/16 Unknown2 4/16 Uncknown 1/16 Stokeworth and 3/16 Targaryen.

Minisa Whent + Hoster Tully = 8/32 Unknown2 4/32 Uncknown 1/32 Stokeworth 3/32 Targaryen + 8/32 Tully + 8/32 Unknown3 (Hoster's mother, who, probably was not a Tully) <- Catelyn, Lysa, Edmure - 3/64 Targaryen.

Which makes Cat's children = Eddard 1/32 Targaryen + Catelyn 3/64 Targaryen - 5/64 Targaryens. Approximately 7,8% of Targaryen blood, and even higher percentage of Blackwood blood. That's if I calculated correctly.