Jump to content

What's the point of Bonifer Hasty?


James Steller

Recommended Posts

12 hours ago, Mister Smikes said:

Well, we don't know his exact motivation.  There may have been a mix of motives, and he was certainly a cruel man.  But even a peasant tend to want a male heir, and a family consisting of children that are actually their own.  That is perfectly normal and not "weird speculation". 

It is kind of weird when we talk about the son of a landless prince wanting an heir for his non-existing lands and his non-existing titles.

We can assume that Aegon may have wanted more sons ... but not more heirs. But in the conversation we get Aegon doesn't talk about wanting children, he tells Naerys and us that she is his wife, his property, and he will continue to fuck her.

And that is rather crucial. If you think that your wife is a slut who cheated on you with your brother and passes the child of your brother as your own ... would you then insist to keep that woman as your wife?

12 hours ago, Mister Smikes said:

Doing things for for the sheer hell of being evil, however, is not normal, and GRRM is pretty much on record that he does not like to write that kind of villain because he does not consider them realistic.  And Aegon's interest in Daeron's parentage did seem to increase after he became king, which makes sense, since the kingship was something he could not simply dispose of by will without causing problems.

Aegon the Unworthy didn't give shit about 'the kingship'. He was the worst Targaryen king and practiced the worst kind of deliberate misrule.

Aegon had issues with his son Daeron, but those were apparently of a political nature, the heir threatening the position/rule of the father.

12 hours ago, Mister Smikes said:

There is no death penalty for pre-marital fornication.  Neither Baelor I nor Viserys II would have stood by and permitted the murders of Aemon and Naerys.   King Baelor was protective of Naerys; and King Viserys would not have been happy about his firstborn murdering his other 2 children.

Naerys and Aemon (and Daeron, too, perhaps) would still be put to death if Naerys insidiously pretended a bastard child was the king's heir. That would have been the treason they committed.

That said, we are not necessarily talking about pre-marital fornication. If you go with Aemon as Daeron's father then, yes, one possibility is that Aemon rather than Aegon deflowered Naerys ... but that's not the only possibility. And I daresay that this entire thing would have unraveled if delicate Naerys hadn't bled in her wedding night. She was only fifteen years old, after all, and small and very frail.

As for King Baelor - yes, he was protective of Naerys while he viewed her as Aegon's victim ... but that would have changed if he had reached the conclusion his cousin was a vile and scheming temptress who had corrupted the noble Dragonknight. Baelor the Blessed was a zealot.

Viserys II would have likely not wanted to execute any of his children, but he turned into a stern and unforgiving man. He would have punished them severely if this scandal had unraveled. Naerys would have shamed her brother-husband and House Targaryen and Aemon, in addition, the Kingsguard.

12 hours ago, Mister Smikes said:

Or maybe you are forgetting that I am not suggesting Naerys is guilty of adultery or treason.  Aegon himself never seems to have believed this.  His suspicions were only about Daeron his firstborn, never about Daenerys.  And I would guess that one reason he was happy to keep Naerys as his wife is that he was reasonably sure that any children born to Naerys (after Daeron) would be his.

Aegon's rumors and lies regarding Daeron seems to be based on the idea that Aemon and Naerys had an affair. It is rather plausible for Aegon to claim the child he loathes isn't his if rumors claim that Naerys and Aemon have an affair. If they have an affair in the 170s and 180s they also could have had an affair back in 153 AC, no?

Sort of like the idea that Jaime and Cersei (may) have an affair leads people to the conclusion that Jaime must also be the father of Cersei's children ... never mind that their affair could have started years after the birth of Tommen.

12 hours ago, Mister Smikes said:

Even after his accession to the throne, Aegon is believed to have been held back by his fear of the Dragonknight.   But, in the end, neither Aemon nor Naerys survived his reign.  But he has nothing in particular to avenge here.   The problem, in this case, is not that Aemon and Naerys betrayed him after the marriage.  It is merely his suspicion that Daeron is not his. 

That isn't the case. Morgil Hastwyck as the king's mouthpiece claims that Naerys and Aemon have an affair. He doesn't claim that Aemon and Naerys may have had a pre-marital, pre-Kingsguard affair over twenty years ago.

12 hours ago, Mister Smikes said:

You are arguing against the text her.  We are told Aegon did not want Daeron as his heir, but feared the consequences of disinheriting him.  Of course, it is conceivable that Daeron really was Aegon's son, and Aegon's real problem (whatever he may have said) was simply that he did not like Daeron.  But you are presenting this as an argument against the suggestion that Daeron was not his son.  In fact, Aegon suspecting that Daeron was not his son is perfectly consistent with what we know.

Daeron was only Heir Apparent and Prince of Dragonstone because King Aegon IV named him Heir Apparent and Prince of Dragonstone.

At the beginning of his reign Aegon IV had no problems with Daeron - or not enough problems to refuse to name him Heir Apparent and grant him the title Prince of Dragonstone.

It should have been remarkably easy for Aegon IV to get Daeron out of the way. Just insist that he move to Dorne with his Dornish wife and be the Prince Consort of Dorne at Myriah's side. Or live at Sunspear at the court of his brother-in-law. King Baelor married Daeron to a foreign princess. Aegon IV could have forced Daeron to give up his claim to the Iron Throne simply because of that marriage.

Later, when father and son clashed over politics Aegon felt he lacked the power to disinherit Daeron without facing severe opposition and possibly another war with Dorne.

If Aegon IV had had reason to believe or suspect that Daeron wasn't his son he would have never named Daeron his heir and there would have been an investigation and the subsequent execution of the parties involved. Sort of like Aegon dealt with the Brackens and Terrence Toyne.

Also - and this is a really crucial issue here - if Aegon ever thought Daeron wasn't his son and felt this was problematic for his own reign/succession then he would have either killed or set aside Naerys as his queen or he would have taken a second or third or fourth wife to ensure that he had a trueborn son. But he never did that. He fucked women left and right and had an army of bastard children but he never took steps to ensure that he had at least one trueborn son.

He would have done that definitely when he became king in 172 AC but he would also earlier have insisted that the other kings give him permission to do this. But he didn't do that. Instead, his commentary when Naerys had delivered Daeron was that he basically was his son and that Naerys was his wife and would continue to sleep with him despite the fact that she didn't want that nor was he particularly interested in her.

12 hours ago, Mister Smikes said:

Witnesses to prove what accusations?  Pre-marital sex?  What would the witnesses say?  That Aemon and Naerys were inseparable companions before the marriage?  Would a maester need to tell him that Targaryen siblings who are very close have a distressing tendency to get the hots for each other?   I'm sure some witnesses at the tournament noticed that Aemon named Naerys queen of love and beauty.  There may be other clues than this, but they would be subtle ones.

Well, there were concrete enough 'clues' for a trial-by-combat.

If Aegon ever honestly believed Daeron was Aemon's son he would have to have sufficient evidence for this - either firsthand knowledge that they had an affair, that they had sex around the time of Daeron's conception, etc.

12 hours ago, Mister Smikes said:

Irrelevant.  The question is one of pre-marital sex.  Which can be explained by a moment of weakness and passion between two horny teenagers.

We actually have no indication that pre-marital sex could have led to the conception of Daeron. Yes, Daeron was born in the same year his parents married, but there is no indication that Daeron was conceived before Naerys and Aegon married. It is a weak possibility, but nothing one can reasonably make the basis of a theory without any textual evidence.

12 hours ago, Mister Smikes said:

He joined the kingsguard after Naerys married Aegon.  This parallels Bonifer, who swore off other women after Rhaella's marriage to Aerys.

The difference here is that nobody in the books even entertains the notion that Bonifer could be Rhaegar's father.

And, again, the accusations Aemon has to defend Naerys and himself against are not about them having pre-marital sex a long time ago but they are cuckolding their king and brother.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 7/28/2021 at 7:35 PM, Lord Varys said:

It is kind of weird when we talk about the son of a landless prince wanting an heir for his non-existing lands and his non-existing titles.

Nothing weird about it at all.  It is not as though he had no expectations.

Quote

And that is rather crucial. If you think that your wife is a slut who cheated on you with your brother and passes the child of your brother as your own ... would you then insist to keep that woman as your wife?

Wow!  You just keep insisting on this straw man.  Dude, I don't think she committed adultery.

And I don't think she ever lied to him either, since that appears to be your backup argument.

Quote

Aegon the Unworthy didn't give shit about 'the kingship'. 

He still cared about his comfort and survival.  "When you play the game of thrones ...".  But no, he did not care much what became of the kingship after he was dead.  He did legitimize his bastards though

Quote

Naerys and Aemon (and Daeron, too, perhaps) would still be put to death if Naerys insidiously pretended a bastard child was the king's heir. That would have been the treason they committed.

LOL, do you think they insidiously hid from him the results of the DNA testing?    What lies do you think they told him?

Quote

That said, we are not necessarily talking about pre-marital fornication.

It's what I'm talking about.  If you disagree with me, please focus on what we disagree about.

Quote

If you go with Aemon as Daeron's father then, yes, one possibility is that Aemon rather than Aegon deflowered Naerys ... but that's not the only possibility.

It's the only possibility as far as I'm concerned.  The alternative is ruled out for reasons we already agree on.   So now you're going to change your tune and argue it is possible after all?  

Quote

And I daresay that this entire thing would have unraveled if delicate Naerys hadn't bled in her wedding night.

Unraveled how?  Their father ordered them to marry.  And there is no indication that Naerys ever lied to her father, to Aegon, or to anyone else, about being  a virgin on her wedding night.  Traditionally, not being a virgin on your wedding night is not even grounds for an annulment, much less grounds for an execution.  

Quote

As for King Baelor - yes, he was protective of Naerys while he viewed her as Aegon's victim ... but that would have changed if he had reached the conclusion his cousin was a vile and scheming temptress who had corrupted the noble Dragonknight. Baelor the Blessed was a zealot.

That's absolutely wacko.  You have absolutely no idea how religious people think.  Baelor had a few screws loose, but that does not mean you can invent any wacko idea you want, ascribe it to Baelor, and assume he believed it.

There is no indication that Aemon ever violated his kingsguard vows, or that Naerys ever violated her marriage vows.  There is no basis for your assumption that Baelor would have been shocked shocked shocked to find out that neither of them were sinless Virgin Maries before they took their respective vows.  Baelor believed in forgiveness.

What punishment did he inflict on Daena the Defiant?  

And Aegon would have alot of balls to come before King Baelor, and say "Oh holy King, please execute my sister-wife.  I have found out she was once a sinner, before we married."  Aegon's own sinful, sensual life was infamous.

Quote

Viserys II would have likely not wanted to execute any of his children, but he turned into a stern and unforgiving man. He would have punished them severely if this scandal had unraveled.

Viserys DID punish Naerys severely.  He forced her to marry Aegon, thereby separating her from Aemon forever.

No-one was betrayed or wronged here, as far as we know.  There were no secrets and no lies, as far as we know.  Naerys never claimed to love Aegon.  She cried at the bedding; so her feelings were pretty clear.  She never claimed to anyone, as far as we know, that she did not love Aemon.  Aemon never claimed he did not love Naerys.  Aegon, on his side, never claimed to love Naerys.  Aegon and Aemon quarreled at the wedding and Aemon may have made no secret about how he felt, as far as we know.  .  

Quote

Naerys would have shamed her brother-husband and House Targaryen and Aemon, in addition, the Kingsguard.

Naerys was not married yet, and Aemon was not on the Kingsguard yet.  You don't need to be a virgin to get married, and you don't need to be a virgin to join the kingsguard.

Quote

Aegon's rumors and lies regarding Daeron seems to be based on the idea that Aemon and Naerys had an affair.

My position is that it is false that they had an affair after the marriage, but it may well be true that they had an affair before the marriage.

Quote

If they have an affair in the 170s and 180s they also could have had an affair back in 153 AC, no?

You argued that an affair in the 170s and 180s marriage was impossible, and I already agreed with you.   What, you want to backtrack now?  Just so you can argue with a straw man?  Stay focused.  If you disagree with me, focus on what we disagree about -- the affair in 153, 

Quote

Morgil Hastwyck as the king's mouthpiece claims that Naerys and Aemon have an affair.

Morgil's charges are false.  And of course it is only speculation that he is the king's mouthpiece, though that speculation is plausible enough.

Quote

He doesn't claim that Aemon and Naerys may have had a pre-marital, pre-Kingsguard affair over twenty years ago.

Aegon hints that he believes Daeron is not his own son, and that pretty much amounts to the same thing.  This of course depends on precisely when the wedding was.   But if the wedding was on March 12 or later in the year and/or if Daeron was overdue, then there are only 2 options:  Either Daeron was conceived on the honeymoon or was conceived before the wedding.

Quote

Daeron was only Heir Apparent and Prince of Dragonstone because King Aegon IV named him Heir Apparent and Prince of Dragonstone.

He is the Heir Apparent because of where he stands in the line of succession.

Quote

It should have been remarkably easy for Aegon IV to get Daeron out of the way.

So why didn't he?  Whatever his reasons, he obviously did not like him.  These are stupid arguments.  And you yourself just argued that Aegon did not care a damn about the kingship after he was gone.

Quote

Later, when father and son clashed over politics Aegon felt he lacked the power to disinherit Daeron without facing severe opposition and possibly another war with Dorne.

And earlier, he was too irresponsible and selfish to give much thought to whatever would happen after he died.

Quote

If Aegon IV had had reason to believe or suspect that Daeron wasn't his son he would have never named Daeron his heir and there would have been an investigation and the subsequent execution of the parties involved.

LOL, no.  You don't get to execute your wife for not being a virgin on your wedding night.

Quote

Also - and this is a really crucial issue here - if Aegon ever thought Daeron wasn't his son and felt this was problematic for his own reign/succession then he would have either killed or set aside Naerys as his queen or he would have taken a second or third or fourth wife to ensure that he had a trueborn son.

He did kill Naerys ... in childbirth.   He killed her by insisting on more children.    And it is not clear he survived her very long, and he may have been very ill by that time.  Selfish, irresponsible people tend to assume they have more time to put their affairs in order than they actually do.

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

17 hours ago, Lord Varys said:

We actually have no indication that pre-marital sex could have led to the conception of Daeron.

We have no indication either way.  If the marriage was in January or mid February, then the conception was probably after the marriage.   If the Marriage was mid-March or later, then the conception was probably before the marriage.   But we don't know the date of the marriage.

Quote

Yes, Daeron was born in the same year his parents married, but there is no indication that Daeron was conceived before Naerys and Aegon married.

There is no indication he was conceived afterwards either.  You are making a fallacious argument from ignorance.

Quote

It is a weak possibility, but nothing one can reasonably make the basis of a theory without any textual evidence.

The textual evidence directly suggests that various people, including Aegon IV and Egg, believe or suspect that Daeron is Aemon's son and not Aegon's son.  Nobody in a position to know is ever said explicitly to believe otherwise.  Naerys has never been known to express an opinion on the topic.  The only contrary evidence is that Daeron is accepted as Aegon's legal son by law and custom by virtue of being born after the marriage and into the marriage.   But that is merely how the world works.

Quote

And, again, the accusations Aemon has to defend Naerys and himself against are not about them having pre-marital sex a long time ago but they are cuckolding their king and brother.

As far as I can tell, not even the singers, who celebrate the love of Aemon and Naerys, seem to believe that Morgil's charges are true.   But they still believed that Aemon and Naerys were lovers in some sense.   The position of the singers on Daeron's parentage is unclear.

And you never answered my questions.  Why did Aemon call himself the "Knight of Tears"?  What loss was he mourning, if not the loss of his love, Naerys?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 7/29/2021 at 6:03 AM, Mister Smikes said:

Nothing weird about it at all.  It is not as though he had no expectations.

The idea that he had reason to expect to own something back in 153 AC is very low. Not to mention that a man of his character would have never cared what happened after his death, so the guy would have not cared much about an heir even after it became clear he might be king one day.

On 7/29/2021 at 6:03 AM, Mister Smikes said:

Wow!  You just keep insisting on this straw man.  Dude, I don't think she committed adultery.

What you think doesn't really matter all that much since the topic we are discussing isn't limited to your far-fetched idea that Daeron was conceived before Naerys' wedding. You have no positive evidence for this, so why should I or anyone think this is a very likely scenario or the only one to be considered when we discuss the likelihood of the Daeron Falseborn story to be true?

The positive evidence we do have implies is that Aegon IV believed or at least spread the tale that Naerys and Aemon had an extra-marital affair after the wedding of Aegon and Naerys. This is the basis for the story of Daeron Falseborn, not the idea that Aemon and Naerys may have had a pre-marital affair which may have led to the conception of Daeron.

On 7/29/2021 at 6:03 AM, Mister Smikes said:

And I don't think she ever lied to him either, since that appears to be your backup argument.

Oh, but if she never lied to him then we are back to my original point:

The problem that Aegon IV would have accepted a child as his seed which may have also been the child of his brother. If Aegon had had reason to believe Aemon had fucked Naerys prior to their wedding - or during the wedding night before Aegon got his chance - then he could have declared the child a bastard. Either back in 153 AC when the child was born or later when he became king. But he didn't do that, he accepted Daeron as his son and made him his heir and Prince of Dragonstone when he became king.

He only started to entertain the idea that Daeron may be a bastard when relations between him and his son deteriorated.

Also, we actually have textual evidence for Naerys lying to Aegon in the quote where she begs him that they end their marriage. She claims she did her duty and gave Aegon a son - if she knew or suspeced the child was Aemon's seed she did lie there. She would have given Aemon a son then, not Aegon.

On 7/29/2021 at 6:03 AM, Mister Smikes said:

He still cared about his comfort and survival.  "When you play the game of thrones ...".  But no, he did not care much what became of the kingship after he was dead.  He did legitimize his bastards though

The interpretation of that is that the whole bastard legitimization thing was just a big 'FUCK YOU!' to Daeron II and the Realm as a whole. It was a recipe for future succession/civil war. Aegon may have even hoped that his legitimized children might end ripping Westeros apart for good.

On 7/29/2021 at 6:03 AM, Mister Smikes said:

LOL, do you think they insidiously hid from him the results of the DNA testing?    What lies do you think they told him?

Well, if Naerys didn't know who the father was her lie may have been to not tell that. But in such a scenario the entire question becomes moot because if it forever unclear then there is no reason to discuss the question further.

On 7/29/2021 at 6:03 AM, Mister Smikes said:

It's the only possibility as far as I'm concerned.  The alternative is ruled out for reasons we already agree on.   So now you're going to change your tune and argue it is possible after all?  

It is a possibility not supported or suggested by the text.

On 7/29/2021 at 6:03 AM, Mister Smikes said:

That's absolutely wacko.  You have absolutely no idea how religious people think.  Baelor had a few screws loose, but that does not mean you can invent any wacko idea you want, ascribe it to Baelor, and assume he believed it.

Baelor imprisoned his sisters, burned books, and may have considered forcing the Northmen and the Ironborn to convert to the Faith.

On 7/29/2021 at 6:03 AM, Mister Smikes said:

There is no indication that Aemon ever violated his kingsguard vows, or that Naerys ever violated her marriage vows.  There is no basis for your assumption that Baelor would have been shocked shocked shocked to find out that neither of them were sinless Virgin Maries before they took their respective vows.  Baelor believed in forgiveness.

But that's the story people spread and believed in. The story of Daeron Falseborn isn't based on the idea that Aemon and Naerys may have had sex once before Naerys married Aegon and Aemon joined the KG.

We can expect that Baelor would have been very wroth if it turned out that his cousin Daeron wasn't a royal prince but a bastard. He promised the boy to Dorne, meaning such a revelation could have had far-flung political consequences. It could have destroyed his peace treaty.

On 7/29/2021 at 6:03 AM, Mister Smikes said:

What punishment did he inflict on Daena the Defiant?

She was already imprisoned. Naerys may have joined her cousins in the Maidenvault.

On 7/29/2021 at 6:03 AM, Mister Smikes said:

And Aegon would have alot of balls to come before King Baelor, and say "Oh holy King, please execute my sister-wife.  I have found out she was once a sinner, before we married."  Aegon's own sinful, sensual life was infamous.

It is not so much about the sin, it is about the hidden bastard in the royal family. Once Baelor annulled his marriage and became a septon Aegon and his son Daeron were rather likely to inherit the throne one day, unless Baelor decided he wanted his sisters and their children to succeed him (which he apparently never did).

On 7/29/2021 at 6:03 AM, Mister Smikes said:

Viserys DID punish Naerys severely.  He forced her to marry Aegon, thereby separating her from Aemon forever.

What? What's the basis for this? Why would Viserys want to punish Naerys in this fashion? Why shouldn't Naerys marry Aemon if he was the brother she loved? We don't know why the Aegon-Naerys match was arranged, but chances are very low it was to punish Naerys. Rather it seems it was a traditional Targaryen marriage which was supposed to ensure that Viserys' eldest son had proper Targaryen children.

On 7/29/2021 at 6:03 AM, Mister Smikes said:

No-one was betrayed or wronged here, as far as we know.  There were no secrets and no lies, as far as we know.  Naerys never claimed to love Aegon.  She cried at the bedding; so her feelings were pretty clear.  She never claimed to anyone, as far as we know, that she did not love Aemon.  Aemon never claimed he did not love Naerys.  Aegon, on his side, never claimed to love Naerys.  Aegon and Aemon quarreled at the wedding and Aemon may have made no secret about how he felt, as far as we know.  .  

Well, we are talking about siblings here. Siblings occasionally do love each other, but this doesn't mean they sexually desire each other.

On 7/29/2021 at 6:03 AM, Mister Smikes said:

He is the Heir Apparent because of where he stands in the line of succession.

Nope, he is the Heir Apparent and the Prince of Dragonstone because his royal father decided that this was so. Even if I were to agree that the line of succession decided that Aegon had to view Daeron as his Heir Apparent we do know that the king creates the Prince of Dragonstone. Aegon IV gave that title to Daeron, and that is something he would have likely not done if he had truly believed Daeron wasn't his son.

On 7/29/2021 at 1:48 PM, Mister Smikes said:

We have no indication either way.  If the marriage was in January or mid February, then the conception was probably after the marriage.   If the Marriage was mid-March or later, then the conception was probably before the marriage.   But we don't know the date of the marriage.

It is not just the numbers - it is that nobody in-universe ever contemplates the idea that Daeron II may have conceived before the wedding. This whole thing is a theoretical possibility nobody in the books ever entertained. Mind you, the author could still introduce that possibility when he writes a detailed history of the reign of Aegon III, but I don't see a reason why we should go with this possibility as a serious option when nothing points in that direction.

On 7/29/2021 at 1:48 PM, Mister Smikes said:

There is no indication he was conceived afterwards either.  You are making a fallacious argument from ignorance.

Well, since I assume that Daeron II is indeed his father's son - Aegon IV's son - I expect that he was conceived either in the wedding night or afterwards since nothing indicates Naerys had sex prior to her wedding. But, of course, if we are fantasizing we could also assume that Aegon had sex with Naerys prior to the wedding so perhaps Daeron was conceived before the wedding took place.

But I'm only starting to think in that direction if George gives him good cause to do so.

On 7/29/2021 at 1:48 PM, Mister Smikes said:

The textual evidence directly suggests that various people, including Aegon IV and Egg, believe or suspect that Daeron is Aemon's son and not Aegon's son.  Nobody in a position to know is ever said explicitly to believe otherwise.  Naerys has never been known to express an opinion on the topic.  The only contrary evidence is that Daeron is accepted as Aegon's legal son by law and custom by virtue of being born after the marriage and into the marriage.   But that is merely how the world works.

LOL, Aegon IV spread this tale, and Egg lived in a world where the tale of Daeron Falseborn had caused a pretty big civil war. Of course this whole thing muddied the water to a considerable degree.

On 7/29/2021 at 1:48 PM, Mister Smikes said:

As far as I can tell, not even the singers, who celebrate the love of Aemon and Naerys, seem to believe that Morgil's charges are true.   But they still believed that Aemon and Naerys were lovers in some sense.   The position of the singers on Daeron's parentage is unclear.

And you never answered my questions.  Why did Aemon call himself the "Knight of Tears"?  What loss was he mourning, if not the loss of his love, Naerys?

He could have been devastated that his sister had been forced to marry Aegon.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

5 hours ago, Lord Varys said:

The idea that he had reason to expect to own something back in 153 AC is very low.

I'm sure he already "owned something"  He probably owned a high quality sword and horse and suit of armor and a few other valuable items.  He was nobility, even royalty.  And, as his father's first-born, he would expect to someday inherit whatever property his father owned as well.

Quote

Not to mention that a man of his character would have never cared what happened after his death, so the guy would have not cared much about an heir even after it became clear he might be king one day.

All you are doing here is explaining why Aegon never took affirmative steps to disinherit Daeron, even if he did suspect that Daeron was not his son. 

At the worst, even if Daeron was "only" his nephew, Daeron was closely related to Aegon, sharing even more of his genetic heritage than nephews usually do.  Daeron would have been Aegon's nephew on both sides - a child of his brother and his sister.   The only way for Aegon to get an heir who shared more of his genetic heritage than Daeron would be to have Naerys, his sister, actually give him a son, 

But of course, he did care a little ... at least after realizing he was dying.  Hence, he legitimized his bastards, placing them in the line of succession and causing no end of trouble.

Quote

What you think doesn't really matter all that much

Fine.  Be that way.  I can't stop you.  But if you don't acknowledge my actual position, we can't have a real conversation.  I also feel it is kinda rude.

Quote

.... since the topic we are discussing isn't limited to your far-fetched idea that Daeron was conceived before Naerys' wedding.....

Right, but how many times do we both have to say that neither of us believes that Daeron was conceived by Aemon after the wedding?  I already said this was unlikely.  You presented some excellent reasons why it was unlikely (while pretending to argue against my position, which was frankly annoying).  And I agreed with your excellent reasons.  Can we move on?  Or must we repeat ourselves ad nauseam, because one refuses to acknowledge the other's position (which you seem to declare to be your policy).

Quote

You have no positive evidence for this, so why should I or anyone think this is a very likely scenario or the only one to be considered when we discuss the likelihood of the Daeron Falseborn story to be true?

You have no "positive evidence" that Daeron was conceived after the wedding either.   Either he was conceived before the wedding or conceived afterwards, and we have no "positive evidence" either way.  This is a classic argument from ignorance, you demand positive proof of x, otherwise the alternative, y, must be true.  It would be just as logical (that is, just as illogical) for me to retort that you cannot prove y, therefore x must be true.

Quote

The positive evidence we do have implies is that Aegon IV believed or at least spread the tale that Naerys and Aemon had an extra-marital affair after the wedding of Aegon and Naerys.

We have no such "positive evidence".  We know that Morgil and others spread the lie.  It is rumored (a rumor is not positive evidence) that Aegon was encouraged this lie for cynical and dishonest reasons.  There is absolutely no suggestion that Aegon believed these rumors himself.

Aegon is, however, known to have expressed doubts that Daeron was his own.  These remarks, for all I can tell, seem to have been private remarks not especially intended for public consumption.  It is ambiguous at best whether Aegon thought he had anything to gain by saying such things.  It seems, therefore, that the simple explanation for these doubts (which were not beliefs, only doubts) was that he actually held them.

Quote

This is the basis for the story of Daeron Falseborn, not the idea that Aemon and Naerys may have had a pre-marital affair which may have led to the conception of Daeron.

"Daeron Falseborn" is, as far as I can tell, an epithet given to Daeron by the Blackfyre pretenders.   But the fact that the Blackfyres found this, in some sense, useful, does not mean it is not true.   And of course the Blackfyres are going to emphasize the adultery angle, since the alternative rather weakens their case.

It also puts the mainline Targs in a funny position.  On the one hand, they are more proud of being descended from the Dragonknight than from the Unworthy.  But they cannot openly acknowledge this for fear of giving aid and comfort to their enemies.

As a legal matter, the stance of the mainline Targs is defensible either way.  Daeron IS the (legal) son and heir of Aegon, by virtue of the fact that Aegon married Naerys before the birth, acknowledged (for whatever reason) Daeron as his son, and (whatever doubts he held) never took any steps to disown and disinherit him during his life.   These circumstances give Aegon all the rights and duties of fatherhood; and hence give Daeron all the rights and duties of a son.  The blessings of marriage, preceding the birth, confer "legitimacy".  The "conception father" has no rights here, even if he were to openly make a claim.  For those concerned about bloodline, Daeron is in fact a very very close relative of Aegon.

Quote

Oh, but if she never lied to him then we are back to my original point:

The problem that Aegon IV would have accepted a child as his seed which may have also been the child of his brother. If Aegon had had reason to believe Aemon had fucked Naerys prior to their wedding - or during the wedding night before Aegon got his chance - then he could have declared the child a bastard. Either back in 153 AC when the child was born or later when he became king. But he didn't do that, he accepted Daeron as his son and made him his heir and Prince of Dragonstone when he became king.

You are inconsistent.  You are here pretending Aegon cared what happened to his property after he died.  Yet you previously argued he did not care.

Personally, I think he cared a bit, but not enough to defy the wishes of his father, or to outweigh other considerations.  His father forced the two to marry.  And you yourself argued that the father did not want any scandals.   Accepting a possible "double-nephew" as a son may not have been something Aegon cared deeply about at the time, even if he cared (a little) about it later.  After all, he did not, at that time, have any legitimate relative who was more closely related to him than Daeron was (except Aemon, who renounced land and titles).

Quote

He only started to entertain the idea that Daeron may be a bastard when relations between him and his son deteriorated.

That's one possible way of looking at it.  But there are other factors:  (1) until Daeron grew, it would be less apparent that he took more after Aemon than after Aegon; (2) until he had a more-closely-related legitimate son, there was no particular reason to challenge his possible double-nephew, who has more of his "blood" than any viable alternatives; (3) Aegon had no particular motive to privately express doubts that he never really acted upon.

Quote

Also, we actually have textual evidence for Naerys lying to Aegon in the quote where she begs him that they end their marriage. She claims she did her duty and gave Aegon a son - if she knew or suspeced the child was Aemon's seed she did lie there. She would have given Aemon a son then, not Aegon.

She said she gave him an "heir", not a "son".  Curious choice of words, no?  "Heir" is reasonably accurate either way, as long as Aegon does not object to a possible double-nephew, legitimized as a legal son (and for all anyone can tell for sure, maybe an actual genetic son), as an heir.  Aegon after all had no closer relative to serve as an heir at the time.  And of course, it would be a stretch to call Naerys a liar, since she is unlikely to have certain knowledge either.

Quote

The interpretation of that is that the whole bastard legitimization thing was just a big 'FUCK YOU!' to Daeron II and the Realm as a whole. It was a recipe for future succession/civil war. Aegon may have even hoped that his legitimized children might end ripping Westeros apart for good.

That's one possibility, sure, but I don't see how it particularly helps your argument.

Quote

Well, if Naerys didn't know who the father was her lie may have been to not tell that.

Now you're just speculating a "deception by silence" for which you have no evidence.  If Naerys knew she was not a virgin on her wedding night, Aegon probably knew that too.  If Naerys knew the date of the wedding and the date of the birth, Aegon probably knew that too.  If maesters or other experts observed symptoms consistent with an overdue birth, then, for all we know, Aegon may have known more about that than Naerys ever did.  

Quote

But in such a scenario the entire question becomes moot because if it forever unclear then there is no reason to discuss the question further.

Well, we could eventually find out the date of the wedding.  And even if this was not certain proof, it might certainly affect the odds one way or the other.

But it may well be GRRM's intent that this question remain unresolved forever.  That, however, does not give you a license for an argument from ignorance.   Just because I can't provide positive proof of x, does not make the alternative, "y" an impossibility.

Quote

It is a possibility not supported or suggested by the text.

Baelor imprisoned his sisters, burned books, and may have considered forcing the Northmen and the Ironborn to convert to the Faith.

None of which supports your bizarre speculation that he would have put Naerys to death for premarital fornication.  Baelor's imprisonment of his sisters was a precaution, not a punishment.  After Daena got pregnant in spite of his precautions, he punished himself by starving himself to death, but did nothing, as far as we know, to Daena.  

Quote

But that's the story people spread and believed in. The story of Daeron Falseborn isn't based on the idea that Aemon and Naerys may have had sex once before Naerys married Aegon and Aemon joined the KG.

While we don't know all the details of each story, there seem to be two stories.  One is the "Daeron Falseborn" story told by Blackfyre loyalists; the other are the songs of the smallfolk, who celebrate the star-crossed love of Aemon and Naerys (and who I presume are more likely to be Targ loyalists, as I would imagine that in their songs Aegon is a villain, as are his legitimized bastard descendants).

And of course, it is not just the Blackfyre supporters.  Egg, who is not a Blackfyre supporter, addresses Bloodraven as "cousin" and not as "uncle".

Quote

We can expect that Baelor would have been very wroth if it turned out that his cousin Daeron wasn't a royal prince but a bastard. He promised the boy to Dorne, meaning such a revelation could have had far-flung political consequences. It could have destroyed his peace treaty.

To the extent that he was wordly enough to care, then sure.   For all we know, he might have ordered that no-one talk openly about such doubts.  And he may have believed in the right and power of the Church to legitimize bastard children born under such circumstances as these.

Quote

It is not so much about the sin, it is about the hidden bastard in the royal family.

Which did not really become an issue until Aegon legitimized his bastards on his deathbed.  Until then (and even then) Daeron was his acknowledged heir, legitimized by the blessings of matrimony.  Rumors regarding his actual birth if anything only increased his popularity, since everyone hated Aegon, and everyone loved Aemon and Naerys.

Quote

What? What's the basis for this? Why would Viserys want to punish Naerys in this fashion? Why shouldn't Naerys marry Aemon if he was the brother she loved?

You tell me.  Are you saying Aemon was NOT the brother she lived?  Aemon called himself the "Knight of Tears" when he appeared as a mystery knight to name Naerys the queen of love and beauty.   What loss was he mourning if not the loss of his love Naerys?

Quote

We don't know why the Aegon-Naerys match was arranged, but chances are very low it was to punish Naerys. Rather it seems it was a traditional Targaryen marriage which was supposed to ensure that Viserys' eldest son had proper Targaryen children.

Sure.  But if Naerys was no longer a virgin, that might explain why their father was in a bit of a hurry.  Even if it was not known that Naerys was already pregnant (which I think the odds would be against), he might have want to forestall any such possibility or eventuality.

Quote

Well, we are talking about siblings here. Siblings occasionally do love each other, but this doesn't mean they sexually desire each other.

Sure.  But we are talking about Targaryens here, and the author is GRRM.   And again, Aemon called himself the "Knight of Tears" when he appeared as a mystery knight to name Naerys the queen of love and beauty.   What loss was he mourning if not the loss of his love Naerys?

Quote

Nope, he is the Heir Apparent and the Prince of Dragonstone because his royal father decided that this was so.

[Shrug] Then his precise heritage does not matter at all, and (for instance) is none of King Baelor's business.  But this does not stop you from arguing that the matter is of critical importance whenever it suits you.

Quote

Even if I were to agree that the line of succession decided that Aegon had to view Daeron as his Heir Apparent we do know that the king creates the Prince of Dragonstone. Aegon IV gave that title to Daeron, and that is something he would have likely not done if he had truly believed Daeron wasn't his son.

Who else did he have that was more closely related than a legitimized double-nephew?  And you keep saying he did not care what happened after his death.

Quote

It is not just the numbers - it is that nobody in-universe ever contemplates the idea that Daeron II may have conceived before the wedding.

Well, the Blackfyres would rather Daeron be the product of adultery and treason, because otherwise their case does not sound so good.  Aegon accepeted Daeron as his heir, and you are the one who keeps arguing that he had the absolute right to do that.  And the Targaryen supporters who believe this might not want to say it too loudly for fear of giving aid and comfort to the rhetoric of the Blackfyres.

5 hours ago, Lord Varys said:

It is not just the numbers - it is that nobody in-universe ever contemplates the idea that Daeron II may have conceived before the wedding. This whole thing is a theoretical possibility nobody in the books ever entertained.

Nobody forced GRRM to tell us that Daeron was born the same year as the marriage.  Nobody forced him to say that the birth was difficult (and hence possibly overdue).  Both these details (and others) raise certain possibilities.  You cannot rule out these possibilities by demanding absolute proof.   That's just an argument from ignorance, which seems to be your favorite argument.

And the text DOES directly suggest, at least as a possibility, that Daeron might be Aemon's son and not Aegon's son.   Well that raises two possibilities.  Either Aemon had sex with Naerys before the marriage, or he had sex with Naerys during the honeymoon.  To me, the former seems far more likely than the latter.  But if you want to argue that we cannot absolutely rule out the latter either, then fine.

Quote

Mind you, the author could still introduce that possibility when he writes a detailed history of the reign of Aegon III, ... 

He could.  Or he could let it remain ambiguous forever.

Quote

but I don't see a reason why we should go with this possibility as a serious option when nothing points in that direction.

You just admitted it is a possibility.  If it does not interest you, fine.  It is a possibility that interests me.  Go discuss with someone else those possibilities that interest you. 

Quote

LOL, Aegon IV spread this tale, and Egg lived in a world where the tale of Daeron Falseborn had caused a pretty big civil war.

The Blackfyres had a motive to twist the story to their advantage.  That does not mean there was no truth to it.  And you offer no explanation why Egg calls Bloodraven "cousin" and not "uncle".  And the singers who celebrate the love of Aemon and Naerys do not appear to be Blackfyre supporters.   Aegon is the villain of these songs, and so, by implication, are the Blackfyres, who are his direct descendants, and who are more the progeny of sin than Daeron ever was.

Quote

He could have been devastated that his sister had been forced to marry Aegon.

A weak answer, IMHO.  Righteous anger would be a better emotion for a protective brother.  "Knight of Tears" does not suggest merely that he is mad at Naerys' misfortune.  It suggests Aemon has suffered misfortune as well.    And his mission was to proclaim her queen of love and beauty.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, Mister Smikes said:

Aemon called himself the "Knight of Tears" when he appeared as a mystery knight to name Naerys the queen of love and beauty.   What loss was he mourning if not the loss of his love Naerys?

This is a specious argument. We have no idea that the name meant anything at all and was merely a randomly chosen guise. Or the "tears" could have been the tears of a Kingsguard knight serving an unworthy king, and so on. 

2 hours ago, Mister Smikes said:

A weak answer, IMHO.  Righteous anger would be a better emotion for a protective brother.  "Knight of Tears" does not suggest merely that he is mad at Naerys' misfortune.  It suggests Aemon has suffered misfortune as well.    And his mission was to proclaim her queen of love and beauty.

The fact that Aemon would name himself the "Knight of Tears" suggests its meaning is sufficiently ambiguous that you can't draw any conclusions from it regarding its meaning, and that's that.

If he had named himself "The Queen's Mournful Lover", you'd be on to something.

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

To give another angle on my take on this entire story:

The problem with the Daeron Falseborn story is that it was circulated only very late. Only during the Unworthy's reign to our knowledge at this time.

And for the hundredth time: If Aegon IV believed Daeron wasn't his son then he wouldn't have named him his heir. He wouldn't have had the problems he had with Daeron later in his reign if he had had the ammunition to disinherit or remove him as early as 172 AC.

Also, it stands to reason - as I pointed out already - that if the royal family and the court at large had known or suspected that Daeron wasn't Aegon's son then this would have had consequences of some kind. Even if the kings and Viserys had shut down the thing we should have heard something. The rumors would have started earlier and they should have destroyed Baelor's precious treaty with Dorne because the Prince of Dorne wouldn't have married his daughter to a bastard pretending to be a prince - especially not if the king in question tried to hide who the child actually was.

But more importantly, it seems that the close relationship of Naerys and Aemon only really got traction during the reign of the Unworthy. When Naerys was a queen and Aemon, presumably, the Kingsguard protecting her (during the reigns of Aegon III, Daeron I, Baelor the Blessed, and Viserys II Aemon is not very likely to have spent much time with Naerys who may not even have received KG protection at that time; for instance, we do know that the Dragonknight accompanied Daeron I to Dorne and ended up in that cage).

After all, this whole story is modelled on the story of Arthur, Guinevere, and Lancelot - meaning it involves a king, a queen, and the greatest knight of the age.

With our current knowledge the best reconstruction of events is that the idea that the Dragonknight and Queen Naerys may have an affair developed and gained traction when Aemon spend a lot of time with his sister the queen, conforting her, while King Aegon IV hung out with his mistresses and visited his whores. When the king surrounds himself with mistresses then people also start to take a closer look at the men surrounding the queen.

This take is somewhat corroborated by TWoIaF since we learn there that there was an opposition party at court, involving the people loyal to Queen Naerys, namely the Dragonknight and Prince Daeron. For instance, at the very beginning of Aegon's reign they successfully forced the king to cut ties with Barba Bracken and her family because her father had openly talked about making Barba queen after Naerys died. Brynden Rivers also gained prominence later in life by being attached to this party from the start via his mother Melissa, who was able to befriend Queen Naerys and Prince Daeron during her time at court.

The idea would then be that, at first, people started to wonder whether Naerys and Aemon were only brother and sister and not, you know, brother and sister in the Targaryen way. For Aegon this would have been an ideal way to tarnish the reputation of his siblings, turning an innocent sibling love into something vile and forbidden while at the same time also throwing dirt at his son.

The idea that Daeron could have been the Dragonknight's son seems to be something that grew out of the rumors that Aemon and Naerys may have had an affair during the Unworthy's reign. It is not presented as something anyone considered a possibility in 153-172 AC. In that sense, so far the most plausible scenario is that whatever rumors circulated during the Unworthy's reign were projected back into the past with people speculating whether - assuming Aemon and Naerys had an affair - this whole thing went back to the days of Daeron's conception.

That would be my preliminary verdict on the matter while we don't have further information. If it turned out, say, that Ser Morgil Hastwyck was present during the wedding of Aegon and Naerys in 153 AC and may have had the opportunity to observe or witnessed something behind closed doors then things could change considerably.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, Ran said:

This is a specious argument. We have no idea that the name meant anything at all and was merely a randomly chosen guise. Or the "tears" could have been the tears of a Kingsguard knight serving an unworthy king, and so on. 

The fact that Aemon would name himself the "Knight of Tears" suggests its meaning is sufficiently ambiguous that you can't draw any conclusions from it regarding its meaning, and that's that.

If he had named himself "The Queen's Mournful Lover", you'd be on to something.

My argument would only be "specious" only if I claimed absolute proof that they were romantic lovers.   Anyhow, since you have undertaken to answer my question, let me say in my humble opinion that I find my "mourning the loss of a lover" interpretation vastly more plausible than your "mourning that the king is unworthy" interpretation. 

Of course, this clue does not exist on its own.  It exists in conjunction with the fact that Aemon won the tournament, and named Naerys the "queen of love and beauty".   Naming someone "queen of love and beauty" has had romantic implications every single other time it has happened in the series.   To which you will no doubt answer, "that does not necessarily mean it had romantic implications here," and go on to explain how it might be otherwise.  Which, again, is fine if you are merely arguing for the lack of absolute proof.  But if you are arguing this idea and possibility are not suggested in the text at all and therefore that I should not be allowed to talk about it, then I think you are all wet.

Anyhow, since you are (apparently) arguing against the idea that they were romantic lovers, let me remind you of the first time we ever heard of Naerys and Aemon, in AGOT:

SANSA:  I love him, Father, I truly truly do, I love him as much as Queen Naerys loved Prince Aemon the Dragonknight, as much as Jonquil loved Ser Florian. I want to be his queen and have his babies.

Well, that does not sound like the normal love of a brother and sister.  The text at this point does not even tell us that Aemon and Naerys are brother and sister, so persons of normal instincts have no occasion to even say "ewww" to the idea.  And apparently, one does not need to be a Blackfyre supporter to think of Aemon and Naerys as famous romantic lovers of history, tale or legend.

The next we hear of Aemon and Naerys is in ACOK, when Sansa defends Tommen by arguing against the idea that Princes don't cry:

SANSA:  Prince Aemon the Dragonknight cried the day Princess Naerys wed his brother Aegon, [...].

So, we hear in one spot, of one famous occasion when Prince Aemon cried, and of another famous occasion when Aemon called himself "The Knight of Tears".  Are we not allowed to draw a connection between these two hints?   I will certainly agree with you that there is no absolute proof.  But you will note that Sansa does not say "Prince Aemon the Dragonknight cried the day his unworthy brother succeeded to the Iron Throne."  So, if we set aside the question of absolute certainty, you can hardly claim that your hypothesis is supported by quite the same level of evidence as mine.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

56 minutes ago, Lord Varys said:

And for the hundredth time: If Aegon IV believed Daeron wasn't his son then he wouldn't have named him his heir.

You could say it 1000 times.  Maybe then I will find this convincing.   As it stands, you have not bullied me sufficiently to break my spirit.  Or, you know, we could just agree to disagree.

Quote

After all, this whole story is modelled on the story of Arthur, Guinevere, and Lancelot - meaning it involves a king, a queen, and the greatest knight of the age.

Right.  The story isn't true.  GRRM invented it.  There still might be parallels between the Naerys/Aemon story and the Rhaella/Bonifer story.   BTW, I have heard rumors that maybe the Arthur/Guinevere/Lancelot story might not be true either.

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

@Lord Varys @Ran

Here's 2 more quotes from aGoT on the Aemon/Naerys issue we were discussing:

SANSA:  thinks of "Prince Aemon the Dragonknight championing Queen Naerys's honor against evil Ser Morgil's slanders."

The word "slander" implies Ser Morgil's charges were false or lies.  We know from the quote from Sansa I gave 2 posts above that Sansa thinks of Naerys and Aemon as romantic lovers.  But she still believes that Ser Morgil's charges (treason) are false.   

Note that Ser Morgil's charges seemingly have to do with "treason", which means, based on what we now know of timelines, that they cannot directly or logically relate to doubts about the parentage of Daeron.   Of course, this would not  prevent the 2 issues from being confused in people's minds, either accidentally, or intentionally for Blackfyre propaganda.

MAESTER AEMON:  "My grandfather named me for Prince Aemon the Dragonknight who was his uncle, or his father, depending on which tale you believe."

Aemon, who can hardly be called a Blackfyre supporter, is agnostic about his heritage.  And he calls attention to the fact that Daeron named a grandson after Aemon (his supposed uncle) before he got around to naming one after Aegon (his supposed father).  It starts to look here as though his brother Egg addressing Bloodraven as "cousin" rather than "uncle" was no accident.

GRRM and Aemon both present us with two possibilities - the official story and the unofficial story --  and invite us to consider both.  Neither have any motive to do this, if we are not allowed to consider that the unofficial story might be true.

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 8/6/2021 at 5:42 PM, Mister Smikes said:

@Lord Varys @Ran

Here's 2 more quotes from aGoT on the Aemon/Naerys issue we were discussing:

SANSA:  thinks of "Prince Aemon the Dragonknight championing Queen Naerys's honor against evil Ser Morgil's slanders."

The word "slander" implies Ser Morgil's charges were false or lies.  We know from the quote from Sansa I gave 2 posts above that Sansa thinks of Naerys and Aemon as romantic lovers.  But she still believes that Ser Morgil's charges (treason) are false.   

Note that Ser Morgil's charges seemingly have to do with "treason", which means, based on what we now know of timelines, that they cannot directly or logically relate to doubts about the parentage of Daeron.   Of course, this would not  prevent the 2 issues from being confused in people's minds, either accidentally, or intentionally for Blackfyre propaganda.

Sansa's opinions and sources on the matter don't matter much - her head is full of songs and stories, not historical facts. If I had to speculate about those things my take would be that the song version of the story Sansa knows is a kind of courtly love romance where Naerys and Aemon actually love each other romantically but never actually consummate their relationship - they might kiss and caress each other, but never take the step they are not supposed to. Morgil would be right about them being in love, but wrong in his specific accusation about them actually having a sexual affair.

But in the end history's verdict would be that Morgil's accusations were false - Aemon the Dragonknight slew the man in a trial-by-combat, after all, so the Seven themselves proved the queen's innocence. This is a society in which cynics are quite aware what nonsense trials-by-combat are ... but that's not the majority opinion at this point, or else they would have abolished such trials.

And as I stated - if Daeron was Aemon's son and Naerys and/or Aemon were aware of that but Aegon wasn't then pretending Daeron was Aegon's son was treason. Especially after Aegon IV had become king but also before when it had become clear/most likely that Viserys' branch would eventually inherit the Iron Throne (i.e. during Baelor's reign) because it would mean that a clandestine bastard might end up on the throne.

But in any case - my take on the matter remains the same. The best interpretation of this entire episode is that the alleged Naerys-Aemon affair during the reign of the Unworthy cast doubt on the parentage of Daeron II.

If things had been different - if people at court had believed or suspected that Daeron wasn't Aegon's son then there would have been rumors and an eventual trial in the 150s and not only in the 170s or 180s.

Daeron II may have never been married to Myriah Martell, and he wouldn't have been made Heir Apparent and Prince of Dragonstone by a royal father who doubted that his guy was his son - a royal father who also didn't like this son all that much in 172 AC.

Even more importantly, a scenario which you seem to entertain - that Daeron was conceived before the wedding of his parents and that Aegon knew about Naerys and Aemon's affair leading to the conception of Daeron - faces another severe problem. If Aegon knew or suspected that his sister-wife wasn't a maiden in her wedding night, if he knew or suspected she may have been already pregnant at that time, he could have refused to acknowledge Naerys' son as his own. He could have declared him a bastard.

And everything we know about the character of Aegon the Unworthy implies that he would have done that. This guy wasn't the kind of man who would look the other way to keep the peace in the family or avoid a scandal.

The only way Aemon as father of Daeron II can make sense if there was a completely secret affair in 153 AC when Daeron was conceived and no one ever suspected anything at that time or later until the entire Morgil episode which happened decades later. But that's not the scenario you are suggesting.

In part, the problem I have with the Aemon version may arise from the fact that thanks to George botching the numbers in THK by making Baelor Breakspear too old. Originally, when George first gave us the lines about evil Ser Morgil in AGoT he may have thought that Daeron II was born during the reign of Aegon IV meaning the alleged affair at that time could have well led to Daeron's conception (originally, Dorne also came into the Realm via the marriage between Daeron II and Myriah during Daeron II's reign, not the Daenerys-Maron marriage).

Quote

MAESTER AEMON:  "My grandfather named me for Prince Aemon the Dragonknight who was his uncle, or his father, depending on which tale you believe."

Aemon, who can hardly be called a Blackfyre supporter, is agnostic about his heritage.  And he calls attention to the fact that Daeron named a grandson after Aemon (his supposed uncle) before he got around to naming one after Aegon (his supposed father).  It starts to look here as though his brother Egg addressing Bloodraven as "cousin" rather than "uncle" was no accident.

GRRM and Aemon both present us with two possibilities - the official story and the unofficial story --  and invite us to consider both.  Neither have any motive to do this, if we are not allowed to consider that the unofficial story might be true.

This entire thing means literally nothing. Maester Aemon wasn't exactly his grandfather's closest confidant - he had no insider knowledge on his grandfather's parentage, nor is there any indication that Daeron II himself would have *known* who his true father was. Pretending Aemon knew the truth about this matter is like saying Tommen must know who Shireen's true father is - Stannis or Patches. Like Aemon, he would have heard both stories but he isn't in a position to actually decide the question. And since Aemon is a maester - a scholar - he sees no reason to pretend this controversy doesn't exist.

Also, while Daeron II apparently named Maekar's third son after the Dragonknight, this is hardly a surprise or weird. Daeron II was closer to his uncle and mother than his father. In fact, the reason why there are no Aegons among Daeron II's own sons nor among his older grandsons is hardly a coincidence. Egg was likely named after the Conqueror or the Dragonbane, not the Unworthy.

More importantly, the Dragonknight was the greatest knight of his generation, making him an ideal namesake, whereas Aegon IV was the worst king Westeros ever had. That they continued to use the name Aegon means they really valued the Conqueror, but nobody would have named his son after Aegon IV.

Aside from, perhaps, Daemon Blackfyre who may have named his twins after Aegon IV and the Dragonknight. But if Daemon didn't want to imply his true father was the Dragonknight by naming a son after him, we cannot really pretend Daeron II naming a grandson after his uncle reveals anything about Daeron's parentage.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

8 hours ago, Lord Varys said:

Sansa's opinions and sources on the matter don't matter much - her head is full of songs and stories, not historical facts.

In a work of fantasy, songs and stories are often used by the author to convey information to the reader.

And again, I'm not arguing for absolute proof.  I am saying GRRM took the trouble of conveying certain information to the reader.  You said there were no indications of the text.  When I point out that the text has such indications, you say "Yes, but I can ignore that and pretend it isn't true."  Yes I know.  Of course you can.

And how exactly is GRRM supposed to convey "historical facts" to us.  He has offered us no guarantee that the accounts of stuffy maesters loyal to kings and are necessarily accurate either.  Who are you to say that the stuffy histories are more accurate than the songs and stories that GRRM used to tell us stuff about the past, in the earliest volumes of the series, before he even planned to write FIRE AND BLOOD?

Quote

If I had to speculate about those things my take would be that the song version of the story Sansa knows is a kind of courtly love romance where Naerys and Aemon actually love each other romantically but never actually consummate their relationship - they might kiss and caress each other, but never take the step they are not supposed to. Morgil would be right about them being in love, but wrong in his specific accusation about them actually having a sexual affair.

Sure.  You can speculate all you want.  But you were arguing there were no indications in the text contrary to your speculations.  And there are.

For Morgil's charges to be false, it is only necessary for these 2 lovers not to have sex while Aegon is king.  And it they don't have sex during the marriage, they are not even guilty of adultery, much less treason.

Quote

But in the end history's verdict would be that Morgil's accusations were false

That's also the verdict of Sansa and the verdict of the songs.  And it has very little if anything to do with the question of whether Aemon is the father of Daeron.

Quote

And as I stated - if Daeron was Aemon's son and Naerys and/or Aemon were aware of that but Aegon wasn't then pretending Daeron was Aegon's son was treason.

???  In what way ???   Stupidly repeating this does not make it true.  I asked for evidence that they lied about this issue, and you came up with NOTHING.

You are the one who keeps saying that Kings have the right to name any heir they want.  They also have the right to legitimize bastards.  By accepting Daeron as his son, the King, in effect adopted him as a son, legitimized him, and chose him as his heir.  There is no evidence anyone deceived him in any way.  It is unlikely anyone else in the World knows much more than Aegon does.  He has the absolute right, as Naerys's lawful husband, and Daeron's legal father, to accept Daeron as his son.  And Daeron really was his closest living relative, except maybe until he fathered Daemon Blackfyre.

Quote

But in any case - my take on the matter remains the same. The best interpretation of this entire episode is that the alleged Naerys-Aemon affair during the reign of the Unworthy cast doubt on the parentage of Daeron II.

This does not explain why Maester Aemon is willing to consider the alternative.

Quote

If things had been different - if people at court had believed or suspected that Daeron wasn't Aegon's son then there would have been rumors and an eventual trial in the 150s and not only in the 170s or 180s.

That makes no sense.  You can't make grand statements like that.  

Quote

Daeron II may have never been married to Myriah Martell, and he wouldn't have been made Heir Apparent and Prince of Dragonstone by a royal father who doubted that his guy was his son - a royal father who also didn't like this son all that much in 172 AC.

Daeron did succeed in becoming king, and by all accounts was not only a good king but a good husband.  And his blood was every bit as Royal either way.  In the end, I doubt the Dornish cared that Daeron was merely the adopted son of the Unworthy One, but actually descended from the Greatest Knight that Ever Lived.  If they suspected the truth, they no doubt thought it a bonus.

Quote

Even more importantly, a scenario which you seem to entertain - that Daeron was conceived before the wedding of his parents and that Aegon knew about Naerys and Aemon's affair leading to the conception of Daeron - faces another severe problem. If Aegon knew or suspected that his sister-wife wasn't a maiden in her wedding night, if he knew or suspected she may have been already pregnant at that time, he could have refused to acknowledge Naerys' son as his own. He could have declared him a bastard.

He could have but he didn't.  For all sorts of possible reasons.  Including but not necessarily limited to the wishes of his father.  Problem solved. 

Quote

And everything we know about the character of Aegon the Unworthy implies that he would have done that.

We don't know that at all.   You just like pulling grand statements out of your backside.  You say that Aegon did not care what became of anybody after he died, but ignore that grand claim whenever it suits you, and pretend he cared deeply who was his heir after his unworthy life reached its unworthy end.

Quote

The only way Aemon as father of Daeron II can make sense if there was a completely secret affair in 153 AC when Daeron was conceived and no one ever suspected anything at that time or later until the entire Morgil episode which happened decades later. But that's not the scenario you are suggesting.

The scenario I'm suggesting is directly suggested by the text.  And there are all kinds of possible ways it could make sense.

And it is not even the first forced marriage in daddy Viserys' career.  When he found his son Aegon messing around with Lady Stokeworth, he forced Lady Stokeworth to marry Lord Lothston.  By doing so, he ensured that any "bastard" born of the union would be legitimate, and officially the child of Lord Lothston.  

Maybe he took similar approach when he found Aemon and Naerys messing around.

Quote

In part, the problem I have with the Aemon version may arise from the fact that thanks to George botching the numbers in THK by making Baelor Breakspear too old.  Originally, when George first gave us the lines about evil Ser Morgil in AGoT he may have thought that Daeron II was born during the reign of Aegon IV meaning the alleged affair at that time could have well led to Daeron's conception (originally, Dorne also came into the Realm via the marriage between Daeron II and Myriah during Daeron II's reign, not the Daenerys-Maron marriage).

That the numbers are inconvenient to your assumptions and arguments is not evidence that GRRM botched the numbers.  

Quote

This entire thing means literally nothing.

Is this the "words are wind" theory of literary interpretation?  Dude.  It is in the text.  That Aemon is Daeron's real father is a possibility directly suggested in the text.  More than once.  I'm not saying there is absolute proof.  I'm merely saying that GRRM invites the readers to consider the question.

Quote

Maester Aemon wasn't exactly his grandfather's closest confidant - he had no insider knowledge on his grandfather's parentage, nor is there any indication that Daeron II himself would have *known* who his true father was.

GRRM is using Aemon to convey information about the past to the reader.  Maester Aemon is over 100 years old, and a member of the family in question.  He may have knowledge of private family traditions.  Who else is more likely to know than him?  Maester Yandell?? The Ghost of High Heart???  You????

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I don't quite get the argument we're having here. I agree that GRRM's intention is that there is a belief in some quarters that Aemon could have been lover to Naerys and Daeron could have been their son.  That is obvious, it's in the text. The fact that is the case does not actually make it true, however, and GRRM's intention is that it is ambiguous.

One can personally choose to believe one or the other of the options -- I am pretty convinced that Daeron is indeed Aegon the Unworthy's son -- but it doesn't change the fact that GRRM has left it up in the air. He may not even have resolved in his own mind the actual situation -- he likes the existence of enigmas and mysteries, after all, and if he doesn't actually have to resolve an enigma, why not leave it an enigma to himself?

So, again, we seem to all agree that GRRM has presented two alternative versions of Daeron's parentage. That's all we can say about it until such time as GRRM actually decides to resolve the mystery in some fashion -- Dunk and Egg coming across a confessional letter from Naerys, or he gets around to writing his Flashmanesque Aegon the Unworthy novel. We can certainly argue about why we think it's one thing or the other, but again, the fact that there are two options cannot be taken as evidence of the truth or falsehood of either of them.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

8 hours ago, Ran said:

I don't quite get the argument we're having here. I agree that GRRM's intention is that there is a belief in some quarters that Aemon could have been lover to Naerys and Daeron could have been their son.  That is obvious, it's in the text. The fact that is the case does not actually make it true, however, and GRRM's intention is that it is ambiguous.

One can personally choose to believe one or the other of the options -- I am pretty convinced that Daeron is indeed Aegon the Unworthy's son -- but it doesn't change the fact that GRRM has left it up in the air. He may not even have resolved in his own mind the actual situation -- he likes the existence of enigmas and mysteries, after all, and if he doesn't actually have to resolve an enigma, why not leave it an enigma to himself?

So, again, we seem to all agree that GRRM has presented two alternative versions of Daeron's parentage. That's all we can say about it until such time as GRRM actually decides to resolve the mystery in some fashion -- Dunk and Egg coming across a confessional letter from Naerys, or he gets around to writing his Flashmanesque Aegon the Unworthy novel. We can certainly argue about why we think it's one thing or the other, but again, the fact that there are two options cannot be taken as evidence of the truth or falsehood of either of them.

If @Lord Varys is okay with that, then so am I.  '

I see no reason to be "convinced" in the direction you seem to prefer.  Seems to me he has given just a few hints too many the other way, when he could have just left things alone.   But that's fine.  I am happy saying that he has deliberately made the situation ambiguous.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

18 hours ago, Mister Smikes said:

In a work of fantasy, songs and stories are often used by the author to convey information to the reader.

And again, I'm not arguing for absolute proof.  I am saying GRRM took the trouble of conveying certain information to the reader.  You said there were no indications of the text.  When I point out that the text has such indications, you say "Yes, but I can ignore that and pretend it isn't true."  Yes I know.  Of course you can.

There is no indication/confirmation that those stories are true. That there are stories and rumors and songs about Daeron Falseborn nobody ever denied. We couldn't talk about the thing if the author hadn't put it into the novels.

Insofar as ASoIaF is concerned, George R. R. Martin almost exclusively uses singers and songs as a means to deconstruct concepts such as chivalry, courtly love, etc. Most singers in the novels are vain and vapid creatures who distort historical facts, invent stories to caper to the whims of the powerful, and so on.

Off the top of my head I don't recall a single singer who actually tries to depict events as they happened. Do you remember one?

In light of that, I'd say that in ASoIaF songs and stories are not used by the author to convey accurate information to the reader.

And if we talk rumors then this is even more true - George has fun inventing the most absurd rumors about Sansa's involvement in Joffrey's murder, say.

18 hours ago, Mister Smikes said:

And how exactly is GRRM supposed to convey "historical facts" to us.  He has offered us no guarantee that the accounts of stuffy maesters loyal to kings and are necessarily accurate either.  Who are you to say that the stuffy histories are more accurate than the songs and stories that GRRM used to tell us stuff about the past, in the earliest volumes of the series, before he even planned to write FIRE AND BLOOD?

I do not base my arguments on the actual claims of the history books (they do not make any, by the way, Yandel doesn't really touch upon the parentage of Daeron II one way or another), I base them on the apparent lack of rumors, investigations, and trials concerning the parentage of Daeron II before the accusations of Morgil Hastwyck.

This causes me to conclude that in the present material it is less likely that Aemon is Daeron's father. But that can change when or if new material is published.

18 hours ago, Mister Smikes said:

For Morgil's charges to be false, it is only necessary for these 2 lovers not to have sex while Aegon is king.  And it they don't have sex during the marriage, they are not even guilty of adultery, much less treason.

Again, they would both be guilty of treason if they were knowingly passing Aemon's child for Aegon's.

In fact, go read up on Rhaenyra's sons in FaB. She would have been guilty of treason, too, if she had indeed passed Harwin's children for Laenor's despite the fact that she wasn't a queen at that point and would have had the power as queen to legitimize any bastards she may have born.

Viserys I decrees that folks have to shut up about that or lose their tongues because he wanted to keep Rhaenyra as his heir ... and apparently felt he couldn't do that if she were found guilty of passing bastards as trueborn children.

Your idea that premarital fornication isn't treason may be correct ... but passing a bastard conceived in a premarital affair for a royal prince is treason.

18 hours ago, Mister Smikes said:

???  In what way ???   Stupidly repeating this does not make it true.  I asked for evidence that they lied about this issue, and you came up with NOTHING.

You suggested that scenario, did you not? You gave us a scenario where Naerys, Aemon, and Aegon all knew who the true father of Daeron was.

18 hours ago, Mister Smikes said:

You are the one who keeps saying that Kings have the right to name any heir they want.  They also have the right to legitimize bastards.  By accepting Daeron as his son, the King, in effect adopted him as a son, legitimized him, and chose him as his heir.  There is no evidence anyone deceived him in any way.  It is unlikely anyone else in the World knows much more than Aegon does.  He has the absolute right, as Naerys's lawful husband, and Daeron's legal father, to accept Daeron as his son.  And Daeron really was his closest living relative, except maybe until he fathered Daemon Blackfyre.

That isn't the case. Aegon couldn't legitimize Daeron if he was a bastard because he wasn't king in 153 AC. Also, Aegon could only legitimize Daeron as Aemon's bastard not his own. Adoption is apparently a known concept in Westeros as per FaB, but it is clearly rarely used (never mentioned in the novels so far) and certainly not something that played a role in this context. To adopt a child it has to be clear before that you aren't the father. And we do not assume that it was publicly known that Daeron wasn't Aegon's biological son, right?

Aegon certainly had the right to look the other way in the Daeron thing if he knew the truth. But his character, everything we know about this man implies that he wouldn't have done that. He wouldn't have raised his brother's bastard as his trueborn son. Instead he would have used his knowledge to destroy them all ... long before Aemon could become the famous Dragonknight and paragon of chivalric virtue.

I won't consider this a likely or reasonable theory until George himself tells us that Aegon the Unworthy actually did pretend Daeron was his son despite the fact that he believed or knew this was a lie.

And, no, Daeron wasn't as close a relative to Aegon as any of his bastard children if he was Aemon's son.

18 hours ago, Mister Smikes said:

Daeron did succeed in becoming king, and by all accounts was not only a good king but a good husband.  And his blood was every bit as Royal either way.  In the end, I doubt the Dornish cared that Daeron was merely the adopted son of the Unworthy One, but actually descended from the Greatest Knight that Ever Lived.  If they suspected the truth, they no doubt thought it a bonus.

You don't seem to get that the royal blood is irrelevant here. We are discussing legitimate birth, whether Daeron II was a trueborn child or a bastard. Daemon Blackfyre was also Targaryen on both sides but that didn't make him a royal prince - his father's legitimization decree did.

If Daeron wasn't Aegon's son then he had no right to the Iron Throne regardless who his father was.

The Dornish definitely wouldn't have cared whether they were marrying their daughter to a prince or a bastard, just as King Baelor would have cared. That this kind of thing is an issue is even addressed in the main series when Jaime contemplates the effects the public revelation of Myrcella's true parentage will have on her betrothal to Trystane. He doesn't believe the Martells are going to like that.

If the Prince of Dorne had realized after the betrothal of Myriah and Daeron that his daughter wasn't marrying a prince but a bastard then this would have had the potential for massive political repercussions.

18 hours ago, Mister Smikes said:

We don't know that at all.   You just like pulling grand statements out of your backside.  You say that Aegon did not care what became of anybody after he died, but ignore that grand claim whenever it suits you, and pretend he cared deeply who was his heir after his unworthy life reached its unworthy end.

I never said that Aegon cared about who his heir was ... I say he wasn't the kind of guy who would raise the bastard of a brother and sister he loathed as his own trueborn son. This isn't a dynastic argument but a common sense argument based on Aegon's character and what we know about the family dynamics between him and his siblings.

18 hours ago, Mister Smikes said:

The scenario I'm suggesting is directly suggested by the text.  And there are all kinds of possible ways it could make sense.

I don't really care much about how it could make sense because I don't really like your theory very much. I just point out that it doesn't make much sense in the books we have so far.

18 hours ago, Mister Smikes said:

And it is not even the first forced marriage in daddy Viserys' career.  When he found his son Aegon messing around with Lady Stokeworth, he forced Lady Stokeworth to marry Lord Lothston.  By doing so, he ensured that any "bastard" born of the union would be legitimate, and officially the child of Lord Lothston.  

To me it seems that the Lothston match here more seems to have been Viserys' way to get rid of Falena rather than provide his son with a smokescreen to continue his affair. Aegon apparently used it in that way, but that wasn't his father's intention.

The idea that Viserys would marry Naerys to Aegon because she was pregnant by Aemon is, quite frankly, laughable. This makes sense a dynastic marriage, but if push had come to shove and Aemon and Naerys had already had sex (and folks knew about that) before the Naerys-Aegon marriage was even arranged then the logical match would have been Aemon-Naerys not Aegon-Naerys.

Aegon could be married to one of his cousins - one of the daughters of Aegon III or one of Rhaena's Hightower girls or a Velaryon girl (assuming Baela and Alyn had unmarried daughters at the time).

18 hours ago, Mister Smikes said:

That the numbers are inconvenient to your assumptions and arguments is not evidence that GRRM botched the numbers.  

No, we know that George botched the numbers and changed the entire Targaryen family after THK came out, turning Viserys II from Aegon III's fourth son to his younger brother.

Also, the entire Blackfyre plot wasn't part of the series until after THK was completed - meaning originally, in AGoT, the Naerys story was just a play/reference to the Guinevere story. George clearly got back to that story and used the claim that Daeron wasn't Aegon's as a starting point for the Blackfyre Rebellion he conceived later.

This whole thing changed the focus of the story. The rather academic question whether this or that Targaryen brother fathered Daeron II on their Targaryen sister suddenly became the background for series of rebellions and invasions. And that now clearly colors the entire issue. Now it isn't so much a story about a great knight who may have been in love with his married sister ... but rather it is part of a bigger story about an evil king who used slanders and rumors about his brother and sister to set up a succession war.

And as such the best story here is that Daeron II is indeed his father's son ... even if Naerys and Aemon may have actually been in love. Because that would make the entire thing more tragic and Aegon IV even a bigger douchebag.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.

×
×
  • Create New...