What's the point of Bonifer Hasty?

[Mister Smikes]

17 hours ago, Lord Varys said:

There is no indication/confirmation that those stories are true.

You could say that about anything

Quote

We couldn't talk about the thing if the author hadn't put it into the novels.

So GRRM wrote about the thing merely so that you could argue that it wasn't true?  Seems a bit pointless to me.  There's such a thing as red herrings to be sure, but you don't even seem to be arguing that.  

Quote

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.

I don't agree with this assumption -- and it IS and assumption --  and I think that this is you projecting your own nihilism onto the text.   The stories of the White Walkers have not exactly proven to be nonsense; and as for Sansa and her ideals of the True Knight, it remains to be seen that they are entirely bunk.  GRRM, in his external remarks and in the Dunk and Egg stories, actually seems to have some respect for the ideals of knighthood.  Poor Sansa and her ideals seem to have been thrown for a loop as things stand now, but the story is not over yet, and perhaps the other foot has yet to drop.

Quote

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.

That some rumors are false does not prove that all rumors are false.  Authors can, and often do, use rumors to convey to the reader what the author wishes the reader to know.

Quote

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.

What you are doing is making an "argument from silence" from Yandel's text.  You are pretending there cannot have been any prior rumors because Yandel does not mention them.  So yes, you are indeed relying on Yandel.  Even worse, you are relying on him for something he never even says.

And why on earth would there be "investigations and trials".  Viserys was King before Aegon, and he is the architect of this whole forced marriage situation.

Quote

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

And how would they "knowingly" do that?  Almost every argument you make is some variant of "Aemon cannot be Daeron's father, because everyone would magically know.".  HOW!!!??? HOW WOULD THEY MAGICALLY KNOW!!!???  Where did Aemon get his foolproof magical DNA test?  Where did Naerys get her foolproof magical DNA test?  Where did Aegon get his magical DNA test?  Where did Viserys get his magical DNA test?  Where did the Dornish, deciding whether their daughter should marry Daeron, get their magical DNA tests?

When did Naerys ever pass Daeron as Aegon's son?   She told Aegon she had given him an heir.  She never claimed she had given him a son.  She might not have been sure one way or the other.

Quote

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.

Rhaenyra's situation was that she lost a war.  Another key difference is that Naerys, unlike Rhaenyra, does not need to be a liar or an adulteress in order for the stories to be true.

Quote

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.

LOL, are you accusing Viserys I of treason?   Because GRRM clearly means us readers to understand that those children are in fact Harwin's.  Maybe Viserys I just thought that Rhaenyra's reputation among the common folk and religious folk would suffer if she were known to be an adulteress.

So when Viserys I heard rumors he told people to shut up about it in the strongest terms.  And somehow this proves that that if Viserys II heard rumors (about a situation he himself had a hand in creating by way of his forced marriage) he would have conducted "investigations and trials".  

Quote

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.

When did Naerys lie to anyone about anything?   She did not have a magical DNA test, so what do you speculate she was lying about?

Quote

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.

No.  My scenario does not assume they "knew".  There are no magical DNA tests in my scenario.  My scenario assumes they suspected.

Quote

That isn't the case. Aegon couldn't legitimize Daeron if he was a bastard because he wasn't king in 153 AC.

There is a far simpler way of legitimizing a bastard.  One can just marry a pregnant woman and make an honest woman of her before the child is born.   This time-honored method of legitimizing bastards has been employed for centuries.  For instant, a certain ancient text claims a guy named Joseph used it to make an honest woman of a girl named Mary before a boy named Jesus was born.

Quote

Also, Aegon could only legitimize Daeron as Aemon's bastard not his own.

No.  See above.  

Quote

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.

Not according to the ancient and time-honored method of legitimizing bastards I described above.  

Quote

And we do not assume that it was publicly known that Daeron wasn't Aegon's biological son, right?

Are you asking if the results of the magical DNA test were ever published?  No.  The results of the magical DNA test were never published under my theory.  There are no magical DNA tests in my theory.  I keep telling you that, but you don't listen.

Quote

Aegon certainly had the right to look the other way in the Daeron thing if he knew the truth.

He also would have felt incentives for complying with the wishes of his father, the same guy who forced them to marry in the first place.

Quote

But his character, everything we know about this man implies that he wouldn't have done that.

I disagree.  I see no such indications.    

Quote

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.

There was no magical DNA test for him to publish.  But even if there were one, it is by no means 100% clear that he would have published it.

If he loathed them so much that he would have denounced and disinherited Daeron, and murdered Aemon and Naerys, why did he not do it?  There was, after all, no magical DNA test to prove him wrong?  Your argument negates itself, and is based on magical certainties that are unlikely to exist in the scenario proposed.

Quote

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.

Well, by those standards you can't possibly lose.  The text merely says Aegon suspected.   Nobody ever says anything about knowing.  There was no magical DNA test.  

Quote

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

He's a double-nephew -- a nephew on both sides.  He shares as much of his genetic heritage as a bastard son by an unrelated person.  But yes, Daemon Blackfyre, supposedly sired with his close relative Daena Targaryen, would have contained more of his genetic heritage.

Quote

You don't seem to get that the royal blood is irrelevant here.

It matters to some.

Quote

We are discussing legitimate birth, whether Daeron II was a trueborn child or a bastard.

If he was born into the marriage, that is sufficient to make him a legitimized child.  That is especially true if the father never rejects him, and sometimes even if the father does reject him.  Such tried and true methods have been legally legitimizing bastards for centuries if not millennia.

I don't say the Blackfyres can't try to make propaganda hay out of Daeron being "falseborn".  But that might fly better if Aegon had been more popular, and Aemon, Naerys and Daeron less popular.  As it stand, everyone knows that Aegon was the real villain.

Quote

Daemon Blackfyre was also Targaryen on both sides but that didn't make him a royal prince - his father's legitimization decree did.

Daeron Targaryen was also a Targaryen on both sides, but that didn't make him a royal prince.  Aegon marrying Naerys before Daeron was born did that.  No "legitimization decree" is required under such circumstances.  This made him a legitimized child, and it also made him Aegon's child.  If Aemon had ever told Aegon, "no that's my son", Aegon would have had every right to tell him to buzz off.

Quote

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

If Daeron wasn't Aegon's son then his right to the Iron Throne will probably come down to who is more popular and who has the bigger army.  Daeron was more popular and would probably end up with the bigger army.  And he was in fact Aegon's legal and legitimate heir according to ancient and time-honored standards of legitimacy.  Sure, Daeron's opponents can TRY to make propaganda out of the suspicion that he was conceived before the marriage by another person.   The problem is that Daeron and Aemon and Naerys did not do anything wrong according to the standards of most people, except maybe a little pre-marital fornication between 2 lovers who would have married if they could (we are apparently supposed to ignore the incest issue, but that's GRRM for you).  To most common people, the forced marriage of Aegon and Naerys would have been the real crime.

Quote

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.

You think he raised Daeron himself?  If he did not care who his heir was, there goes your entire argument.

He kept Naerys as his wife, and kept Aemon on his kingsguard.  The latter at least was a pretty good move, considering Aemon died saving Aegon's life.  He did not loathe them THAT much.

Quote

I don't really care much about how it could make sense because I don't really like your theory very much.

It is obvious you don't like the theory.  It is also obvious that you are unwilling to consider, in a fair way, how it could make sense.

Quote

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.

If he just wanted to send Falena away he would have just sent Falena away.

Quote

Aegon apparently used it in that way, but that wasn't his father's intention.

Obviously Viserys could not anticipate with any degree of confidence that the affair would continue for years, with a child would be born years later.  But he certainly knew they had been boinking very recently, and he knew how babies are made.  

Quote

The idea that Viserys would marry Naerys to Aegon because she was pregnant by Aemon is, quite frankly, laughable.

My idea, as paraleled by the Falena situation, was that he forced her to marry because he knew or suspected she had been having sex.

Quote

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.

Gosh.  If only someone had explained this to Naerys!  She could have gotten out of the horrible forced Aegon marriage easily.

Quote

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

Yes, if only you had been there to explain this to everyone, much misery could have been avoided.

Quote

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.

You are arguing against the current text, not some earlier version that has been superceded.  You are setting your ego above the word of the author.

Look, if you want Daeron to be Aegon's son, that is a perfectly defensible theory.   We can both imagine all sorts of ways this could be true.  We don't even need to argue against the text.  Your problem is you want to rule out alternatives as complete impossibilities.  And you are doing so by arguing against GRRM himself. 

Quote

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.

Are "more tragic" stories automatically better?  Why should there by no silver lining in the tragic lives of Aemon and Naerys?  Why cannot the child of their love live on, become a good king, and become the grandfather of Dunk's friend Egg.   If you prefer it the other way, then fine.  Just accept that GRRM has deliberately made it ambiguous, and has left it open for other readers to consider other possibilities.  Why is that so hard for you?

[LynnS]

9 hours ago, Lord Varys said:

There is no indication/confirmation that those stories are true.

I have no comment about the current discussion but I'm curious about what constitutes an indication/confirmation from your perspective.  Thanks.

[Frey family reunion]

On 7/27/2021 at 10:17 AM, Mister Smikes said:

Hence, Rhaegar may believe that his union with Elia unites the lines of Aerys and Rhaella, which means that his son can be TPTWP, and his children the 3 heads of the dragon.

I've considered this possibility as well.  Rhaella accuses Aerys of turning her "ladies" into his whores.  Most readers seemed mainly focused on Joanna, but it can't be forgotten that the Princess of Dorne was also one of Rhaella's "ladies".  

Quote

(Joanna was not the first lady to be dismissed abruptly from Her Grace's service, nor was she the last).

ETA: the one caveat, is that Rhaella seemed very instrumental in arranging Rhaegar's marriage to Elia.  If she suspected Elia's mother of an affair with Aerys that seems an odd match.  

[Lord Varys]

On 8/9/2021 at 1:14 PM, LynnS said:

I have no comment about the current discussion but I'm curious about what constitutes an indication/confirmation from your perspective.  Thanks.

I'd say that an indication is something that's indicated by the text, i.e. there are (more or less) clear and repeated hints that something is or might be the case. A confirmation is when something is actually confirmed by the text. For instance, I'd say that it is indicated that Jon Snow is Rhaegar's son by Lyanna while it is confirmed by the text that Cersei's children were fathered by Jaime.

21 hours ago, Frey family reunion said:

I've considered this possibility as well.  Rhaella accuses Aerys of turning her "ladies" into his whores.  Most readers seemed mainly focused on Joanna, but it can't be forgotten that the Princess of Dorne was also one of Rhaella's "ladies".  

I don't think that can be a plausible scenario. Elia Martell was born at Sunspear while King Aegon V still sat the Iron Throne and Aerys II was still a youth. It is a pretty big mystery how exactly it makes sense that the nameless Princess of Dorne ended up as a lady-in-waiting to Rhaella. She was already married for ten+ years when that happened, possibly indicating that her husband died shortly after Elia's death and she decided, for whatever reason, to spend an extended time at court following the coronation of Jaehaerys II. Since she met and befriended Joanna Lannister during her time at court, the Princess would have been there sometime between 259-263 AC. It might also make sense to assume that the nameless Princess was a younger child and not the anointed heir of Dorne (an elder brother of hers could have fought and died on the Stepstones in 260 AC, say).

In any case, her reign as Princess of Dorne can only have started after she her ended her time as lady-in-waiting since it makes little sense that the Princess of Dorne would be serving as lady-in-waiting to a queen. Her place would have been at Sunspear.

21 hours ago, Frey family reunion said:

ETA: the one caveat, is that Rhaella seemed very instrumental in arranging Rhaegar's marriage to Elia.  If she suspected Elia's mother of an affair with Aerys that seems an odd match.  

I'm not sure Rhaella was instrumental in this. She could have been involved, but Aerys II himself also would have ties to the Princess, both from her time at court in his youth as well as due to his own visit to Sunspear and Dorne in 270 AC. I guess the Princess could have first reached out to Rhaella in her attempts to make a match between Elia and Rhaegar, but she could also have written directly to Aerys II. Or simply shown up at court with Elia to arrange the match without there being written negotiation.

It is also possible that Aerys II himself approached the Princess considering Elia was the highest born distant Targaryen cousin and as such the best possible match for if you follow the incestuous marriage policy.

[Mister Smikes]

21 hours ago, Frey family reunion said:

ETA: the one caveat, is that Rhaella seemed very instrumental in arranging Rhaegar's marriage to Elia.  If she suspected Elia's mother of an affair with Aerys that seems an odd match.  

I don't see a problem here.  At that age, Rhaella would not even be dismissing her companions on her own authority.  Hostility to Aerys turning her ladies into his whores is more likely to reflect a protective attitude toward the ladies than hostility toward them.  And even if there were some hostility, it would not necessarily translate to the resulting child.  Also, I do not recall Rhaella being instrumental in arranging Rhaegar's marriage to Elia.

A bigger objection would be Aerys' youth.  If we accept the numbers given us in various sources, I cannot see any way to make Aerys any older than 13 and a half at the time of Elia's conception.  But of course Aegon the Unworthy was caught bonking an older woman at 14, and Viserys II sired a son at 12.

[Lord Varys]

On 8/9/2021 at 6:25 AM, Mister Smikes said:

I don't agree with this assumption -- and it IS and assumption --  and I think that this is you projecting your own nihilism onto the text.   The stories of the White Walkers have not exactly proven to be nonsense; and as for Sansa and her ideals of the True Knight, it remains to be seen that they are entirely bunk.  GRRM, in his external remarks and in the Dunk and Egg stories, actually seems to have some respect for the ideals of knighthood.  Poor Sansa and her ideals seem to have been thrown for a loop as things stand now, but the story is not over yet, and perhaps the other foot has yet to drop.

That isn't an assumption, it is a tendency that's rather obvious in the text. There is chivalry in the text, of course, but stories and songs about noble knights are generally suspect because they are usually propaganda and fairy-tales invented by singers who basically lie for a living.

True knights and such are depicted in the novels and novellas as such, not through the eyes of the singers.

And Old Nan's stories seem to be a living oral tradition, not stuff invented by singers to entertain a highborn audience. Still, though, Nan's stories contain falsehoods and inaccuracies - for instance, the idea that the Others breed with human women don't seem to be accurate. That seems to be a corrupted version of the fact that folks hand over the newborn male children to the Others for some reason.

On 8/9/2021 at 6:25 AM, Mister Smikes said:

That some rumors are false does not prove that all rumors are false.  Authors can, and often do, use rumors to convey to the reader what the author wishes the reader to know.

If you want to make the case that George does this in ASoIaF then point us to rumors which are used by him to establish facts. George's take on rumors usually is to establish they are not true. For instance, you can take Lysa's letter or Robert's ramblings about Rhaegar as rumors which are later put into perspective.

The rumors people like to believe in on the streets are almost all utter nonsense, as are most rumors in real life.

On 8/9/2021 at 6:25 AM, Mister Smikes said:

What you are doing is making an "argument from silence" from Yandel's text.  You are pretending there cannot have been any prior rumors because Yandel does not mention them.  So yes, you are indeed relying on Yandel.  Even worse, you are relying on him for something he never even says.

An argument from silence makes sense when you discuss a historical event which, if it happened, can be expected to have had certain consequences. I just can buy the idea that Aegon IV knowing or suspecting that Daeron wasn't his son would have led him to do certain things to Daeron or his siblings in the nineteen years prior to his coronation. Nor does it make sense he wouldn't have used his powers as king in a different manner in such a scenario.

We are talking here about a very smart man who seems to have been the worst of the Targaryens.

On 8/9/2021 at 6:25 AM, Mister Smikes said:

And why on earth would there be "investigations and trials".  Viserys was King before Aegon, and he is the architect of this whole forced marriage situation.

Viserys II was only king for a year. Aegon could have tried to destroy his siblings during the reign of Aegon III, Daeron I, and Baelor the Blessed.

On 8/9/2021 at 6:25 AM, Mister Smikes said:

And how would they "knowingly" do that?  Almost every argument you make is some variant of "Aemon cannot be Daeron's father, because everyone would magically know.".  HOW!!!??? HOW WOULD THEY MAGICALLY KNOW!!!???  Where did Aemon get his foolproof magical DNA test?  Where did Naerys get her foolproof magical DNA test?  Where did Aegon get his magical DNA test?  Where did Viserys get his magical DNA test?  Where did the Dornish, deciding whether their daughter should marry Daeron, get their magical DNA tests?

If a rumor gets more popular that's enough to destroy something like a betrothal. I mean, the Tyrells don't believe Cersei's children are Robert's ... but so far it is politically convenient to buy into that lie. But for the Prince of Dorne who had every reason to hate the Targaryens after Daeron's war it wouldn't be that easy to overlook the fact that King Baelor wanted to marry his daughter to a guy who seems to be no prince but a royal bastard.

We even see how Jaime expects that the Martells might not be happy with him publicly revealing Myrcella's true parentage. He thinks that this might mark the end of the betrothal.

Also, as king Aegon IV decides what's the truth. If he believed or suspected that Daeron wasn't his son then he could just make this the truth. He could declare his son a bastard and he could also command his sister-wife - who was supposed to obey him as her lord husband, head of house, and king - to publicly declare that Daeron was Aemon's son. Just as he could command the Dragonknight who was equally obliged to obey Aegon - and who, in addition, had also taken the vows of a Kingsguard meaning he was part of an order of knights who had taken special vows to obey the king.

If Aegon had commanded Aemon to publicly declare that he was the father of Daeron then he would have been forced to obey.

The entire thing makes on sense, in my opinion, if Aegon himself never actually believed Daeron wasn't his son.

On 8/9/2021 at 6:25 AM, Mister Smikes said:

When did Naerys ever pass Daeron as Aegon's son?   She told Aegon she had given him an heir.  She never claimed she had given him a son.  She might not have been sure one way or the other.

If she wasn't sure she shouldn't have told Aegon she had done her duty and given him an heir. Because if she wasn't sure the child was Aegon's then the child wasn't really Aegon's heir but a bastard. And bastards do not inherit anything.

On 8/9/2021 at 6:25 AM, Mister Smikes said:

LOL, are you accusing Viserys I of treason?   Because GRRM clearly means us readers to understand that those children are in fact Harwin's.  Maybe Viserys I just thought that Rhaenyra's reputation among the common folk and religious folk would suffer if she were known to be an adulteress.

So when Viserys I heard rumors he told people to shut up about it in the strongest terms.  And somehow this proves that that if Viserys II heard rumors (about a situation he himself had a hand in creating by way of his forced marriage) he would have conducted "investigations and trials".

We are talking about this quote here:

Quote

To so name them was tantamount to saying they were bastards, with no rights of succession…and that she herself [Rhaenyra] was guilty of high treason.

Now, adultery as such is not high treason, especially not if the person who suffers from it isn't a monarch. But apparently it was high treason to pass a bastard for a royal child if you knew this wasn't the case. Which may have been the case for Rhaenyra and Naerys both.

Also, if you look at it then Jacaerys Velaryon at least - if he is the son of Harwin which isn't confirmed - could have been fathered prior to Rhaenyra's marriage like you like to believe for Daeron, too. After all, Mushroom claims he found Rhaenyra and Harwin abed together the night after she had her falling-out with Criston Cole.

The Rhaenyra example also shows us the power the husbands in such a scenario have. Laenor Velaryon is mocked to his face by Queen Alicent when she comments on the looks of his children after birth ... yet the man still accepts them as his seed, making them his own. He could have destroyed Rhaenyra easily enough by accusing her of adultery and declaring that those children weren't his.

Aegon the Unworthy could have done the same. And unlike Laenor Velaryon - who profited from his marriage to Rhaenyra by expecting to one day becoming prince/king consort of Westeros - Aegon had no advantages at all from his marriage to his nearly infertile sister-wife. And his character doesn't indicate he wouldn't have done something like that.

On 8/9/2021 at 6:25 AM, Mister Smikes said:

There is a far simpler way of legitimizing a bastard.  One can just marry a pregnant woman and make an honest woman of her before the child is born.   This time-honored method of legitimizing bastards has been employed for centuries.  For instant, a certain ancient text claims a guy named Joseph used it to make an honest woman of a girl named Mary before a boy named Jesus was born.

Well, that implies you are a decent guy - and also that the child you are legitimizing this way is yours. Neither would be the case for Aegon. And if there was a rushed marriage for a possibly pregnant Naerys then her chosen husband should have been Aemon not Aegon.

On 8/9/2021 at 6:25 AM, Mister Smikes said:

He also would have felt incentives for complying with the wishes of his father, the same guy who forced them to marry in the first place.

Oh, we don't know if Aegon was forced. Naerys seems to have been forced, but Aegon may not have been.

On 8/9/2021 at 6:25 AM, Mister Smikes said:

If he loathed them so much that he would have denounced and disinherited Daeron, and murdered Aemon and Naerys, why did he not do it?  There was, after all, no magical DNA test to prove him wrong?  Your argument negates itself, and is based on magical certainties that are unlikely to exist in the scenario proposed.

LOL, come on, if you think a king like Aegon IV needed proof to destroy a person then you are not making sense. If he wanted to believe something it would be so. Period. And the people around him would fall over themselves to provide him with pretexts to get what he wanted.

Daeron could only have gained prominence and influence at Aegon's court if his father had originally supported and sponsored him - by naming him his heir and making him Prince of Dragonstone.

On 8/9/2021 at 6:25 AM, Mister Smikes said:

Well, by those standards you can't possibly lose.  The text merely says Aegon suspected.   Nobody ever says anything about knowing.  There was no magical DNA test.

A historian cannot really know what Aegon believed or suspected. It can only say what Aegon appeared to - or pretended to - believe.

On 8/9/2021 at 6:25 AM, Mister Smikes said:

He's a double-nephew -- a nephew on both sides.  He shares as much of his genetic heritage as a bastard son by an unrelated person.  But yes, Daemon Blackfyre, supposedly sired with his close relative Daena Targaryen, would have contained more of his genetic heritage.

I'm not sure why you think Aegon IV would give a fig about how closely he was related to his inbred relatives? The man may have murdered his own father, after all. Or do you view him as some kind of biological robot, unable to harm to turn against a guy he is closely related to?

The crucial thing here is that Daeron as Aemon's son is simply a monstrous betrayal in this context. And if you are shitty person like Aegon - whose attempts to create chaos after his death are well attested - then it makes no sense to pretend he would care about things like that.

On 8/9/2021 at 6:25 AM, Mister Smikes said:

If he was born into the marriage, that is sufficient to make him a legitimized child.  That is especially true if the father never rejects him, and sometimes even if the father does reject him.  Such tried and true methods have been legally legitimizing bastards for centuries if not millennia.

If King Aegon IV had declared his son wasn't his seed this would have been so. If you can legitimize bastards you can also declare trueborn children bastards.

On 8/9/2021 at 6:25 AM, Mister Smikes said:

I don't say the Blackfyres can't try to make propaganda hay out of Daeron being "falseborn".  But that might fly better if Aegon had been more popular, and Aemon, Naerys and Daeron less popular.  As it stand, everyone knows that Aegon was the real villain.

Well, no. In the eyes of the Blackfyre partisans 'the old king' - Aegon IV - was obviously not viewed as a villain. They view it as significant and important that this guy gave Blackfyre to Daemon.

On 8/9/2021 at 6:25 AM, Mister Smikes said:

Daeron Targaryen was also a Targaryen on both sides, but that didn't make him a royal prince.  Aegon marrying Naerys before Daeron was born did that.  No "legitimization decree" is required under such circumstances.  This made him a legitimized child, and it also made him Aegon's child.  If Aemon had ever told Aegon, "no that's my son", Aegon would have had every right to tell him to buzz off.

That would be Aegon's privilege and call, though. He was Naerys' husband and eventually the king. He wasn't obliged to do anything of that sort. And his character doesn't indicate he could be persuaded or forced to this against his will. I mean, I like the idea that Tyrion is actually Aerys' son - but in that context it can make sense that Tywin would raise him as his son. After all, Tywin was very much in love with Joanna and Tyrion was her child, too. Also, Aerys himself was his king and childhood friend even if they had trouble.

But Aegon never got along with Aemon (as we can see from his behavior as a toddler in FaB) nor is there any indication that he was capable of genuine decency.

On 8/9/2021 at 6:25 AM, Mister Smikes said:

If Daeron wasn't Aegon's son then his right to the Iron Throne will probably come down to who is more popular and who has the bigger army.  Daeron was more popular and would probably end up with the bigger army.  And he was in fact Aegon's legal and legitimate heir according to ancient and time-honored standards of legitimacy.  Sure, Daeron's opponents can TRY to make propaganda out of the suspicion that he was conceived before the marriage by another person.   The problem is that Daeron and Aemon and Naerys did not do anything wrong according to the standards of most people, except maybe a little pre-marital fornication between 2 lovers who would have married if they could (we are apparently supposed to ignore the incest issue, but that's GRRM for you).  To most common people, the forced marriage of Aegon and Naerys would have been the real crime.

You completely confuse the timeline here. Daeron II had no rivals when he ascended the throne. Daemon Blackfyre was fourteen-year-old at that time who had only been legitimized on Aegon's deathbed - and he had only been acknowledged as Aegon's son two years earlier. And, by the way, we only have Aegon's word that Daemon is Aegon's son. How much worth is that, actually? To our knowledge, Princess Daena never confirmed Aegon's story.

If Aegon IV had decided to legitimize Daemon Blackfyre earlier and named him his heir, if he had never named Daeron his heir or if he had disinherited him, if he had imprisoned or banished him on this or that pretext ... then Daeron II wouldn't have risen to the throne.

And it should have been rather easy to that. Daeron wasn't a martial man and the idea that a Dornish princess could become the queen at his side could have been enough reason to cut him out of the succession.

On 8/9/2021 at 6:25 AM, Mister Smikes said:

He kept Naerys as his wife, and kept Aemon on his kingsguard.  The latter at least was a pretty good move, considering Aemon died saving Aegon's life.  He did not loathe them THAT much.

That makes sense if he didn't know or suspect that Aemon was Daeron's father, right?

On 8/9/2021 at 6:25 AM, Mister Smikes said:

It is obvious you don't like the theory.  It is also obvious that you are unwilling to consider, in a fair way, how it could make sense.

But why should I do that?

On 8/9/2021 at 6:25 AM, Mister Smikes said:

If he just wanted to send Falena away he would have just sent Falena away.

Falena was a Stokeworth - where exactly could he send her without arranging a marriage for her? If her lordly father or brother liked to have her around she would be close enough to KL for Aegon to continue their affair. Also, there is no indication Falena was pregnant at the time of her marriage.

On 8/9/2021 at 6:25 AM, Mister Smikes said:

My idea, as paraleled by the Falena situation, was that he forced her to marry because he knew or suspected she had been having sex.

But that makes no sense. Naerys married her elder brother as was custom amongst the Targaryens. And if she had had sex with Aemon then she would have been married to him rather than Aegon to prevent the silly scenario we are talking about.

On 8/9/2021 at 6:25 AM, Mister Smikes said:

Yes, if only you had been there to explain this to everyone, much misery could have been avoided.

Exactly. Frankly, the Naerys-Aegon match doesn't make much sense as it is. But it makes even less sense as a punishment for Naerys having sex with Aemon. If I think about it, if Naerys had had sex prior to her wedding - or was already confirmed to be pregnant at that time - then the chances are higher that Aegon raped and impregnated her and Viserys decided to marry them to each other to spare his daughter the humiliation of giving birth to a bastard.

The idea he would force her to marry the brother she didn't have sex with yet would just be utter stupidity.

On 8/9/2021 at 6:25 AM, Mister Smikes said:

Look, if you want Daeron to be Aegon's son, that is a perfectly defensible theory.   We can both imagine all sorts of ways this could be true.  We don't even need to argue against the text.  Your problem is you want to rule out alternatives as complete impossibilities.  And you are doing so by arguing against GRRM himself. 

I'm not saying this is impossible, I'm merely giving reasons why I think your idea on the matter as well as your arguments do not convince me. I never said it was impossible for Daeron to be Aemon's son. I just find it very unlikely.

[Lord Varys]

1 hour ago, Mister Smikes said:

A bigger objection would be Aerys' youth.  If we accept the numbers given us in various sources, I cannot see any way to make Aerys any older than 13 and a half at the time of Elia's conception.  But of course Aegon the Unworthy was caught bonking an older woman at 14, and Viserys II sired a son at 12.

Elia and Oberyn were both born at Sunspear and the Princess of Dorne resided there during that time. She wasn't at court, nor would have have been a lady-in-waiting to a granddaughter of the king. She wouldn't have had her own household but rather been part of the household of her mother, Princess Shaera.

Also, with Summerhall still around and Jaehaerys being Prince of Dragonstone we cannot pretend to know where Aerys and Rhaella grew up. Prior to his coronation Jaehaerys II and his family may have lived on Dragonstone or Aerys could have spend time with his uncle at Summerhall (assuming Duncan got that castle after he gave up his claim to the Iron Throne).

[Frey family reunion]

1 hour ago, Mister Smikes said:

I don't see a problem here.  At that age, Rhaella would not even be dismissing her companions on her own authority.  Hostility to Aerys turning her ladies into his whores is more likely to reflect a protective attitude toward the ladies than hostility toward them.  And even if there were some hostility, it would not necessarily translate to the resulting child.  Also, I do not recall Rhaella being instrumental in arranging Rhaegar's marriage to Elia.

A bigger objection would be Aerys' youth.  If we accept the numbers given us in various sources, I cannot see any way to make Aerys any older than 13 and a half at the time of Elia's conception.  But of course Aegon the Unworthy was caught bonking an older woman at 14, and Viserys II sired a son at 12.

Ah yes, I always forget about the ages when I talk about this theory.  So this would have occurred in their swinging teens with a dornish “cougar” perhaps a good Dunk and Egg story.

[Firefae]

I wonder how he was like in his youth and how he and Rhaella fell in love. There is so little we know about her except her suffering. I feel Ser Bonifer Hasty could've be a potential window into Rhaella and maybe the Aerys II reign in general. Unfortunately GRRM is propably just gonna kill him off before he could reveal anything interesting.

[Mister Smikes]

6 hours ago, Lord Varys said:

Elia and Oberyn were both born at Sunspear and the Princess of Dorne resided there during that time.

The question is not where she was when Elia was born.  The question is where she was 9 months earlier (before, hypothetically, rushing home to Sunspear where a child would eventually be born a "month early").

Quote

She wasn't at court, nor would have have been a lady-in-waiting to a granddaughter of the king.

GRRM says she was at court, and a companion of Rhaella, alongside Joanna, at some point.  Exactly when is unclear, and it is a bit of a puzzle.

Edit:  See quotes provided in the next post.

Quote

Also, with Summerhall still around and Jaehaerys being Prince of Dragonstone we cannot pretend to know where Aerys and Rhaella grew up. Prior to his coronation Jaehaerys II and his family may have lived on Dragonstone or Aerys could have spend time with his uncle at Summerhall (assuming Duncan got that castle after he gave up his claim to the Iron Throne).

This, if true, might reconcile Joanna's arrival at KL in 159 with her being a companion of Rhaella since an earlier period.

[Mister Smikes]

@Lord Varys

From ASOS:  

 

OBERYN:  Were you aware that our mothers knew each other of old?

TYRION:  They had been at court together as girls, I seem to recall. Companions to Princess Rhaella?

OBERYN:  Just so.

 

About which GRRM later clarifies in a Nov. 2000 SSM:

 

GRRM:  The queen's companions weren't necessarily all of an age. Take a look at the group of ladies who attend Margaery Tyrell, for instance -- a mixture of girls her own age and some who are notably older and younger.

 

Which seems to confirm that they were indeed at court together, even if the Princess of Dorne was a significantly older "girl" at the time.  I don't know if "at court" necessarily means "at King's Landing".  It would depend on where Egg#5 was holding court in the years preceding Summerhall.

[Lord Varys]

5 hours ago, Firefae said:

I wonder how he was like in his youth and how he and Rhaella fell in love. There is so little we know about her except her suffering. I feel Ser Bonifer Hasty could've be a potential window into Rhaella and maybe the Aerys II reign in general. Unfortunately GRRM is propably just gonna kill him off before he could reveal anything interesting.

I don't think so. Hasty is going to play a crucial role in the coming books, and it is quite telling that George has yet to make it explicit that Hasty was Rhaella's tourney knight. He clearly wants it to come as a surprise that Hasty is going to raise the Targaryen banner and support their restoration in TWoW.

4 hours ago, Mister Smikes said:

The question is not where she was when Elia was born.  The question is where she was 9 months earlier (before, hypothetically, rushing home to Sunspear where a child would eventually be born a "month early").

Of course, but it is exceedingly unlikely that she was at court at that time, or that she spend any time with Aerys II. Keep in mind that the Princess was actually married at that time and that she clearly wasn't the ruler of Dorne yet, or else she would have never served a princess as a companion. If there were visits and such her husband should have accompanied her. In fact, he would have, or else a child of hers conceived at KL would have been born of adultery.

4 hours ago, Mister Smikes said:

GRRM says she was at court, and a companion of Rhaella, alongside Joanna, at some point.  Exactly when is unclear, and it is a bit of a puzzle.

We can pin it down to 259-263 AC when Joanna left. The Princess could have remained after Joanna left, but she would have definitely left once she became Princess of Dorne.

The Princess being a companion at court and then leaving for Sunspear for her two pregnancies and to continue in that role afterwards - which she would have to do because Joanna only came to court after Jaehaerys II became king - is quite a stretch. In fact, it is also kind of weird that the Princess would leave for court so quickly after the birth of Elia and Oberyn. Which actually makes it more likely that she might have only gone there in 260 or 261 AC.

4 hours ago, Mister Smikes said:

Edit:  See quotes provided in the next post.

This, if true, might reconcile Joanna's arrival at KL in 159 with her being a companion of Rhaella since an earlier period.

Joanna served Rhaella as a lady-in-waiting. That is something for a royal woman who has her own household, i.e. Rhaella as the daughter of king (not the granddaughter of a king which she was until 259 AC) and about Rhaella as a married woman. A married woman and her lord husband do have their own household and thus companions in a meanigful way.

Margaery as a daughter of a great lord and dowager queen (she is the widow of Renly, after all) also had her own household, but back at Highgarden Margaery's ladies would have been the ladies of her mother or grandmother, not her own, at least not while she was a woman grown. Which Rhaella never was during the reign of her grandfather.

You can take a look at the other royal children and grandchildren we see in FaB. Aerea has no companions. Rhaena has companions, but she is the Conqueror's eldest grandchild, a very important person in her own right ... and she is part of the household of her parents up until her marriage to her brother.

A woman like the Princess of Dorne would only become part of Rhaella's household when she and Aerys were the royal couple which would, one day, succeed King Jaehaerys II and Queen Shaera. She is too highborn for that kind of thing. Especially if she was already the heiress of Dorne in 259 AC and earlier.

If I had to guess that Rhaella and Joanna and the Princess of Dorne bonded on Dragonstone during/after the War of the Ninepenny Kings while Tywin and Aerys were off to war and Rhaella lived at her brother's seat.

[Mister Smikes]

1 hour ago, Lord Varys said:

Of course, but it is exceedingly unlikely that she was at court at that time, or that she spend any time with Aerys II.

The text says she was at court with Joanna as a Companion of Princess Rhaella.  It must have been some time.

Quote

Keep in mind that the Princess was actually married at that time and that she clearly wasn't the ruler of Dorne yet, or else she would have never served a princess as a companion.

That does not help narrow things down at all.  

Quote

If there were visits and such her husband should have accompanied her.

Interesting opinion.

Quote

In fact, he would have, or else a child of hers conceived at KL would have been born of adultery.

Alternatively, she might have returned to her husband in Sunspear a month after conception, and the child would have been born in Sunspear "a month early".  It is hard to tell the difference without magical DNA tests.

Quote

We can pin it down to 259-263 AC when Joanna left.

259 was when Joanna arrived in KL.  Where was she before that time?   By heavy implication, she was not at KL, but then again, neither was Rhaella.

Quote

The Princess could have remained after Joanna left, but she would have definitely left once she became Princess of Dorne.

Assuming that is true it is of no help, since we have no idea when she became ruling Princess of Dorne.  I'm not sure we can even guess how many people were ahead of her in the line of succession at this stage.

Quote

The Princess being a companion at court and then leaving for Sunspear for her two pregnancies and to continue in that role afterwards - which she would have to do because Joanna only came to court after Jaehaerys II became king - is quite a stretch.

259 is when Joanna came to KL for Jahaerys' coronation.  If Joanna was serving as a Companion to Rhaella prior to Jahaerys' coronation, she would not yet have been at KL, but at Summerhall, the site of Egg's favorite palace, and the place where Rhaella gave birth to Rhaegar.  Her arrival in KL in 259 does not prove her association with Rhaella began on that date.  Presumably, Rhaella did not arrive in KL until 259 either.  For all we know, they may have arrived together.

Quote

In fact, it is also kind of weird that the Princess would leave for court so quickly after the birth of Elia and Oberyn. Which actually makes it more likely that she might have only gone there in 260 or 261 AC.

If Joanna and the Princess of Dorne and Rhaella were together at Summerhall, there is no reason at all to suppose the Princess of Dorne returned after the births of Elia and Oberyn.  Thus can weirdness be avoided.

Quote

A woman like the Princess of Dorne would only become part of Rhaella's household when she and Aerys were the royal couple which would, one day, succeed King Jaehaerys II and Queen Shaera. She is too highborn for that kind of thing. Especially if she was already the heiress of Dorne in 259 AC and earlier.

The text says they were "Companions to Princess Rhaella" and not "Companions to Queen Rhaella".

That Summerhall is much, much closer to Dorne sounds to me like a far more significant consideration.

[Lord Varys]

10 minutes ago, Mister Smikes said:

At what time?  The text says she was at court with Joanna.

The time for her to be impregnated by Aerys and give birth to Elia.

10 minutes ago, Mister Smikes said:

That does not help narrow things down at all.

It implies the Princess had to be at court after 259 AC, and not before.

10 minutes ago, Mister Smikes said:

Alternatively, she might have returned to her husband in Sunspear a month after conception, and the child would have been born in Sunspear "a month early".  It is hard to tell the difference without those magical DNA tests you love so much.

Oh, well, that would imply she and her husband also have sex in that time. This is a rather crucial thing in all that. If the husband knew he had no opportunity to father a child the wife becomes a slut by default if she gets pregnant.#

That said - with the Dornish we don't know how the entire paramour thing fit into all that. Were there Princesses of Dorne who kept a paramour at the same time as they also had a consort? If so, then it wouldn't have mattered that much who fathered the child. But we don't know anything about that.

10 minutes ago, Mister Smikes said:

259 was when Joanna arrived in KL.  Where was she before that time?   By heavy implication, she was not at KL, but then again, neither was Rhaella.

We have no reason to believe Joanna was anywhere but at Casterly Rock prior to 259 AC. She grew up with Tywin.

10 minutes ago, Mister Smikes said:

Assuming that is true it is of no help, since we have no idea when she became ruling Princess of Dorne.  I'm not sure we can even guess how many people were ahead of her in the line of succession at this stage.

As I said, I'd feel more comfortable if it turned out that she wasn't the anointed heir of Dorne while she was going through all that serving thing - because serving princesses is unbecoming to a future Princess of Dorne - but we just have no idea. What we can assume that she wasn't already the Princess of Dorne when she was serving Rhaella at court.

10 minutes ago, Mister Smikes said:

259 is when Joanna came to KL for Jahaerys' coronation.  If Joanna was serving as a Companion to Rhaella prior to Jahaerys' coronation, she would not yet have been at KL, but at Summerhall, the site of Egg's favorite palace, and the place where Rhaella gave birth to Rhaegar.  Her arrival in KL in 259 does not prove her association with Rhaella began on that date.  Presumably, Rhaella did not arrive in KL until 259 either.  For all we know, they may have arrived together.

Rhaella wouldn't have lived at Summerhall, though, since that was either her grandfather's castle or the castle of her uncle Duncan. Rhaella was the daughter of the Prince of Dragonstone who was forced by the Prince of Dragonstone to marry her elder brother, so she would have lived with him.

That the Targaryens went to Summerhall for Egg's big ceremony thing doesn't tell us anything about where they lived normally ... nor would anyone say that Joanna went to court for Jaehaerys' coronation if she was already there.

10 minutes ago, Mister Smikes said:

If Joanna and the Princess of Dorne and Rhaella were together at Summerhall, there is no reason at all to suppose the Princess of Dorne returned after the births of Elia and Oberyn.  Thus can weirdness be avoided.

Again, Rhaella wouldn't have had her own household as daughter of the Prince of Dragonstone. She wouldn't have a big group of ladies to attend her. At best she would have had companions of her own age like the younger daughters of Jaehaerys I had. Once she was the wife of her brother and Aerys became the Prince of Dragonstone in 259 AC - a man with his own title and castle - they would have had a proper household and thus Rhaella would have also had a coterie of ladies.

They all being at Summerhall doesn't help with the weirdo Elia idea here - Elia wasn't conceived in 259 AC but rather in 255 or 256 AC. Aerys II would have been eleven or twelve at that time, which makes this entire thing completely ridiculous. Even Aegon IV started having sex only at fourteen.

To entertain something as disgusting as this we would have to know more about the Princess and her taste in little boys, not to mention the chance for her to have access to little Aerys. Keep in mind that we have no reason to believe Aerys and Rhaella spend much together as children and youth. They didn't like each other very much, apparently, so it might be that while Aerys squired with this or that important person or played with Tywin and Steffon, Rhaella and her companions were far away.

[Mister Smikes]

11 hours ago, Lord Varys said:

We have no reason to believe Joanna was anywhere but at Casterly Rock prior to 259 AC. She grew up with Tywin.

Tywin was 17 in 259 and 15 in 257.  One or both of them can be elsewhere in 257, and still leave plenty of room for them to grow up together in Casterly Rock.

We don't know when Princess Rhaella, Joanna, and the Princess of Dorne were companions together.  257 cannot be ruled out, as far as I can see.

Quote

What we can assume that she wasn't already the Princess of Dorne when she was serving Rhaella at court.

Sure.  But it does not help narrow things down .  It is also true in 257.

Quote

Rhaella wouldn't have lived at Summerhall, though, since that was either her grandfather's castle or the castle of her uncle Duncan. Rhaella was the daughter of the Prince of Dragonstone who was forced by the Prince of Dragonstone to marry her elder brother, so she would have lived with him.

I agree Aerys and Rhaella were probably living together.   I don't know where they were living, and I don't think you do either.  

If they were staying at her grandfather's favorite castle, well, the text tells us that was Summerhall.  Which is also where they were when Rhaegar was born.  

Quote

That the Targaryens went to Summerhall for Egg's big ceremony thing doesn't tell us anything about where they lived normally ... nor would anyone say that Joanna went to court for Jaehaerys' coronation if she was already there.

The text does not say Joanna went to court for Jahaerys's coronation.  It says she went to King's Landing for Jahaerys' coronation.

Court is where the King is, and prior to 259, when Egg died, the King's favorite palace was Summerhall.

Quote

Again, Rhaella wouldn't have had her own household as daughter of the Prince of Dragonstone. 

You have no authority to say this because you are not GRRM.  Also the text we are debating says nothing about Rhaella having her "own household".    It says they knew each other as girls when they both were Companions of Princess Rhaella.

Quote

They all being at Summerhall doesn't help with the weirdo Elia idea here - Elia wasn't conceived in 259 AC but rather in 255 or 256 AC.  

Elia could have been conceived as late as mid 257 and born in 258.  For instance, the following timeline is reasonably consistent with all the clues we have from the text:

15 Feb 243:  Birth of Aerys II

7 Mar 248: Birth of Doran

7 Jun 257:  Conception of Elia (if she was NOT actually born "a month early")

7 July 257:  Conception of Elia (if she WAS actually born "a month early").

28 Feb 258:  Birth of Elia.  Doran is still 9 years old (still shy of his 10th birthday).

7 Feb 262:  Coronation of Aerys (still 18, for one more week).

1 Jan 300:  Death of Joffrey

28 Feb 300:  Escape of Tyrion.

14 Mar 300.  Doran, aged 52, argues with the Sand Snakes in AFFC.  He has heard of the death of Oberyn, but has perhaps not yet heard of the death of Tywin.

I could maybe stretch these numbers further, but have not given it much thought.  But yes.  It could have been earlier too.  I am simply trying to accurately assess the range of possibilities.

Quote

Even Aegon IV started having sex only at fourteen.

Well ... that's when he was caught.  And his father sired a child at 12.

And I know it's been a while since we all read AGOT, but was not Tyrion only 13 when he was getting it on with Tysha?

 

[Mister Smikes]

On 8/12/2021 at 6:58 AM, Lord Varys said:

True knights and such are depicted in the novels and novellas as such, not through the eyes of the singers.

Sure.  If we ever hear more about Aemon and Naerys it will probably be in the Dunk and Egg stories, or Fire and Blood part II, or maybe in a future ASOIAF volume.  But within the world of ASOIAF, the smallfolk don't read Dunk & Egg stories.  They listen to the songs.

Quote

And Old Nan's stories seem to be a living oral tradition, not stuff invented by singers to entertain a highborn audience.

Songs are a living oral tradition.  The rhyme and metre are a mnemonic aid that allow oral traditions to survive across multiple generations.   And 150 years ago is relatively recent compared to tales of the White Walkers.

Going by the text, the tales of Aemon the Dragonknight are beloved by the smallfolk, and every child in Westeros knows the tale of how Aemon defended Naerys against the slanders of Morgil.  I don't know why you are trying to turn this into a class issue.

Quote

Still, though, Nan's stories contain falsehoods and inaccuracies - for instance, the idea that the Others breed with human women don't seem to be accurate. That seems to be a corrupted version of the fact that folks hand over the newborn male children to the Others for some reason.

Sure.  I never said that rumors were necessarily accurate.  I don't even think the rumor that Aegon is Daeron's father is necessarily 100% accurate.

Quote

If you want to make the case that George does this in ASoIaF then point us to rumors which are used by him to establish facts.

Well I suppose you have completely discounted that ludicrous rumor that Harwin Strong is the father of Rhaenyra's children.  So I'll just cite the rumor that Oberyn Martell has learned the art of poison, and the rumor that the Mountain killed Elia. 

Quote

Viserys II was only king for a year. Aegon could have tried to destroy his siblings during the reign of Aegon III, Daeron I, and Baelor the Blessed.

During this time. Viserys II, who, even if he was not king, was nonetheless the Patriarch of those family members underneath him, could have disowned and disinherited him at any time.  Or maybe he could have just killed him, since you think that powerful folks can do anything they like without fear of consequences.

Quote

Also, as king Aegon IV decides what's the truth. If he believed or suspected that Daeron wasn't his son then he could just make this the truth.

All you are saying is that the truth is irrelevant to Aegon.  That being the case, it has no bearing on our dispute.

Quote

He could declare his son a bastard and he could also command his sister-wife - who was supposed to obey him as her lord husband, head of house, and king - to publicly declare that Daeron was Aemon's son. Just as he could command the Dragonknight who was equally obliged to obey Aegon - and who, in addition, had also taken the vows of a Kingsguard meaning he was part of an order of knights who had taken special vows to obey the king.

If Aegon had commanded Aemon to publicly declare that he was the father of Daeron then he would have been forced to obey.

The entire thing makes on sense, in my opinion, if Aegon himself never actually believed Daeron wasn't his son.

That's not the argument you just made.  The argument you just made is that the truth has no bearing whatsoever on Aegon's behavior.

Quote

Now, adultery as such is not high treason, especially not if the person who suffers from it isn't a monarch. But apparently it was high treason to pass a bastard for a royal child if you knew this wasn't the case. Which may have been the case for Rhaenyra and Naerys both.

Also, if you look at it then Jacaerys Velaryon at least - if he is the son of Harwin which isn't confirmed - could have been fathered prior to Rhaenyra's marriage like you like to believe for Daeron, too. After all, Mushroom claims he found Rhaenyra and Harwin abed together the night after she had her falling-out with Criston Cole.

Okay.  So Rhaenyra, at 17, is fooling around with Harwin.  King Viserys gets word of this, and orders her to marry gay Laenor.  Rhaenyra does not want to marry gay Laenor, but Viserys tells her if the does not obey he will remove her from the line of succession.  So Rhaenyra marries Laenor in 114 and her first son, Jacaerys, is born in the same year (!).  And Jacaerys looks like Harwin and not like gay Laenor.  And no-one is allowed to voice any suspicions, because if they do, Viserys says he will have their tongues cut out.

Somehow I don't think this story proves your point.   How does this story prove that Viserys II would have acted in a manner diametrically opposed to Viserys I?

As for the Viserys quote you provide, I think that by focusing on that you are ignoring what is actually happening.   The rumor-mongers are not actually accusing Rhaenyra of treason.  Viserys is not accusing Rhaenyra of treason either.  What is happending is that Viserys is accusing the rumormongers of accusing Rhaenyra of treason, as a bit of rhetoric to support his efforts to shut them up.  Viserys is not on the side of truth here.

If there is any treason involved in the Rhaenyra/Jacaerys situtation, Viserys is the one committing it.  And as for the next two boys, there is no need to debate whether that would be treason or not, as there is no relevance to the Naerys/Aegon/Aemon/Daeron situation (unless you credit Morgil's charges, which neither of us do).

Quote

The Rhaenyra example also shows us the power the husbands in such a scenario have. Laenor Velaryon is mocked to his face by Queen Alicent when she comments on the looks of his children after birth ... yet the man still accepts them as his seed, making them his own.

Right.  And of course, this is clearly what his king wanted.  Any husband has this power to make such children "his own".  All he need do is say nothing, and which is also more or less what Aegon did.

Quote

He could have destroyed Rhaenyra easily enough by accusing her of adultery and declaring that those children weren't his.

Maybe Aegon could have done this too.   But he didn't.   (And according to you, he could have done this whether Rhaenyra was guilty of adultery or not, so the truth of the matter is irrelevant).

Quote

Well, that implies you are a decent guy - and also that the child you are legitimizing this way is yours.

No.  Laenor did the same with the Strong Boys, as we just discussed.

Quote

LOL, come on, if you think a king like Aegon IV needed proof to destroy a person then you are not making sense. If he wanted to believe something it would be so. Period. 

If the truth is irrelevant to his behavior then it is also irrelevant to our dispute.

Quote

I'm not sure why you think Aegon IV would give a fig about how closely he was related to his inbred relatives?

I'm not saying he gave a fig.  I'm pointing out that he had no particularly strong motive to give a fig, since Daeron was related to him one way or the other.

Quote

The crucial thing here is that Daeron as Aemon's son is simply a monstrous betrayal in this context.

Maybe if she cheated on him during the marriage he might have felt betrayed.  But that's not what we are discussing.  We are only discussing her not being a virgin on her wedding night.  And it is not as though she ever pretended to love him prior to this point.

Quote

If King Aegon IV had declared his son wasn't his seed this would have been so.

So why didn't he?  

Quote

If you can legitimize bastards you can also declare trueborn children bastards.

So why didn't he?  

Quote

Well, no. In the eyes of the Blackfyre partisans 'the old king' - Aegon IV - was obviously not viewed as a villain. They view it as significant and important that this guy gave Blackfyre to Daemon.

Sure.  But that's why it is inconvenient to the Blackfyres that Aegon IV is not popular among the smallfolk.

Quote

You completely confuse the timeline here.

No.  I was referring to the various Blackfyre rebellions.  Which the Blackfyres kept losing.

Quote

Daeron II had no rivals when he ascended the throne. Daemon Blackfyre was fourteen-year-old at that time who had only been legitimized on Aegon's deathbed - and he had only been acknowledged as Aegon's son two years earlier. And, by the way, we only have Aegon's word that Daemon is Aegon's son. How much worth is that, actually? To our knowledge, Princess Daena never confirmed Aegon's story.

If Aegon IV had decided to legitimize Daemon Blackfyre earlier and named him his heir, if he had never named Daeron his heir or if he had disinherited him, if he had imprisoned or banished him on this or that pretext ... then Daeron II wouldn't have risen to the throne.

Right, but so what?  The fact is, Aegon never disinherited Daeron.  Whether he would have done, had he lived another two years, is neither here nor there.  Aegon never disinherited Daeron; just as Laenor never disinherited the Strong Boys.

Quote

But why should I do that?

I don't know.  Are you trying to have an honest discussion with me, or are you just trying to push your weight around?

Quote

Exactly. Frankly, the Naerys-Aegon match doesn't make much sense as it is.

Now you're arguing against the text again.  But sure.  I don't like forced marriages either.

Quote

But it makes even less sense as a punishment for Naerys having sex with Aemon.

You're the one fixating on the word "punishment".  Was Viserys I "punishing" Rhaenyra when he forced her to marry Laenor?

Quote

If I think about it, if Naerys had had sex prior to her wedding - or was already confirmed to be pregnant at that time - then the chances are higher that Aegon raped and impregnated her and Viserys decided to marry them to each other to spare his daughter the humiliation of giving birth to a bastard.

That's an interesting idea.  But hints are that Naerys was crying, and Aemon and Aegon fighting, on the day of the marriage, and not at some earlier period.

And if you want Aegon to be Daemon's father, it seems to me the simplest theory (pending further revelations about the date of the marriage) was that he was conceived on the honeymoon. 

Quote

The idea he would force her to marry the brother she didn't have sex with yet would just be utter stupidity.

By that logic, why not let her marry the brother she loved rather than the brother she did not love?  Seems to me you are arguing against the idea of forced marriage, while pretending to argue the parentage of Daeron.  Why would it be "utter stupidity" to force a marriage to another person?  Are you worrying again about those magical DNA tests spoiling the plan?

Quote

I'm not saying this is impossible, 

Well then, let's stop arguing.  I'm not trying to prove anything absolutely.  I'm just saying is that GRRM made the situation ambiguous, and we as readers are allowed to consider both possibilities.

[Lord Varys]

20 hours ago, Mister Smikes said:

Tywin was 17 in 259 and 15 in 257.  One or both of them can be elsewhere in 257, and still leave plenty of room for them to grow up together in Casterly Rock.

We don't know when Princess Rhaella, Joanna, and the Princess of Dorne were companions together.  257 cannot be ruled out, as far as I can see.

Sure.  But it does not help narrow things down .  It is also true in 257.

I agree Aerys and Rhaella were probably living together.   I don't know where they were living, and I don't think you do either.  

If they were staying at her grandfather's favorite castle, well, the text tells us that was Summerhall.  Which is also where they were when Rhaegar was born.  

The text does not say Joanna went to court for Jahaerys's coronation.  It says she went to King's Landing for Jahaerys' coronation.

Court is where the King is, and prior to 259, when Egg died, the King's favorite palace was Summerhall.

You have no authority to say this because you are not GRRM.  Also the text we are debating says nothing about Rhaella having her "own household".    It says they knew each other as girls when they both were Companions of Princess Rhaella.

Elia could have been conceived as late as mid 257 and born in 258.  For instance, the following timeline is reasonably consistent with all the clues we have from the text:

15 Feb 243:  Birth of Aerys II

7 Mar 248: Birth of Doran

7 Jun 257:  Conception of Elia (if she was NOT actually born "a month early")

7 July 257:  Conception of Elia (if she WAS actually born "a month early").

28 Feb 258:  Birth of Elia.  Doran is still 9 years old (still shy of his 10th birthday).

7 Feb 262:  Coronation of Aerys (still 18, for one more week).

1 Jan 300:  Death of Joffrey

28 Feb 300:  Escape of Tyrion.

14 Mar 300.  Doran, aged 52, argues with the Sand Snakes in AFFC.  He has heard of the death of Oberyn, but has perhaps not yet heard of the death of Tywin.

I could maybe stretch these numbers further, but have not given it much thought.  But yes.  It could have been earlier too.  I am simply trying to accurately assess the range of possibilities.

Well ... that's when he was caught.  And his father sired a child at 12.

And I know it's been a while since we all read AGOT, but was not Tyrion only 13 when he was getting it on with Tysha?

I'd say we can bury that whole thing considering Aerys thought his granddaughter smelled Dornish and he ended up using Elia and the children as hostages against Dorne. If Elia had been his child he wouldn't have done that, one assumes.

Not to mention that Elia was never his first choice as bride for Rhaegar.

17 hours ago, Mister Smikes said:

Sure.  If we ever hear more about Aemon and Naerys it will probably be in the Dunk and Egg stories, or Fire and Blood part II, or maybe in a future ASOIAF volume.  But within the world of ASOIAF, the smallfolk don't read Dunk & Egg stories.  They listen to the songs.

Dunk & Egg are too late for real insider knowledge about Naerys and Aemon. They are dead for about thirty years at that time.

17 hours ago, Mister Smikes said:

Songs are a living oral tradition.  The rhyme and metre are a mnemonic aid that allow oral traditions to survive across multiple generations.   And 150 years ago is relatively recent compared to tales of the White Walkers.

The difference is that Nan's stories apparently are supposed to hand down historical knowledge and lore whereas songs as sung by professional singers are just funny stories and fairy-tales for the wealthy. Maesters try to figure out what actually happened, singers distort things by inventing stuff.

17 hours ago, Mister Smikes said:

Going by the text, the tales of Aemon the Dragonknight are beloved by the smallfolk, and every child in Westeros knows the tale of how Aemon defended Naerys against the slanders of Morgil.  I don't know why you are trying to turn this into a class issue.

Every noble child might know about that. Not necessarily every common child considering many of them would never so much as meet a proper singer. Especially not on the North or other remote areas.

17 hours ago, Mister Smikes said:

Well I suppose you have completely discounted that ludicrous rumor that Harwin Strong is the father of Rhaenyra's children.  So I'll just cite the rumor that Oberyn Martell has learned the art of poison, and the rumor that the Mountain killed Elia. 

They are not bad, but those are rare occasions.

17 hours ago, Mister Smikes said:

During this time. Viserys II, who, even if he was not king, was nonetheless the Patriarch of those family members underneath him, could have disowned and disinherited him at any time.  Or maybe he could have just killed him, since you think that powerful folks can do anything they like without fear of consequences.

Viserys was serving as Hand as the king's pleasure, and the king was the head of House Targaryen, not Viserys. If Aegon had convinced his uncle or one of his royal cousins to see things his view then the old man couldn't have done anything about this.

17 hours ago, Mister Smikes said:

All you are saying is that the truth is irrelevant to Aegon.  That being the case, it has no bearing on our dispute.

No, I'm saying that King Aegon IV could do what he wanted. If he wanted his son to be his brother's bastard he could have done that ... which is why I'm saying he never believed this to be the case. Because if he had believed it, he would have acted quite differently.

I mean, if Robert had believed Cersei had an affair with Jaime and her children weren't his he would have also dealt with that issue, possibly without giving the a trial or other such nonsense.

As king, Aegon IV actually had no need to go through Ser Morgil or another pawn/mouthpiece. He could have just forced his siblings to confess - either be commanding them as their king or by arresting and torturing them into compliance.

We see this kind of Henry VIII scenario rather often in ASoIaF. Maegor did it with Alys Harroway and Tyanna, Cersei tried to do it with Margaery via the Blue Bard, etc.

17 hours ago, Mister Smikes said:

That's not the argument you just made.  The argument you just made is that the truth has no bearing whatsoever on Aegon's behavior.

No, I think if Aegon knew or suspected that Daeron wasn't his son he would have publicly revealed that truth. It is as simple as that. A king doesn't need proof to make something true. He can just say it, and the people around him will ape him and do everything in their power to make it so.

17 hours ago, Mister Smikes said:

Okay.  So Rhaenyra, at 17, is fooling around with Harwin.  King Viserys gets word of this, and orders her to marry gay Laenor.  Rhaenyra does not want to marry gay Laenor, but Viserys tells her if the does not obey he will remove her from the line of succession.  So Rhaenyra marries Laenor in 114 and her first son, Jacaerys, is born in the same year (!).  And Jacaerys looks like Harwin and not like gay Laenor.  And no-one is allowed to voice any suspicions, because if they do, Viserys says he will have their tongues cut out.

Well, no things are in reverse. Rhaenyra was forced to marry Laenor before she had her alleged affair with Harwin. She had agreed to marry Laenor, then she had her falling-out with Criston Cole and later that some night she may have had sex with Harwin.

The reason why the whole thing isn't confirmed is that we don't know how either Harwin or Larys or Lyonel Strong looked like. Rhaenyra's sons didn't look like Laenor or Rhaenyra but they are not confirmed to have looked like Harwin.

17 hours ago, Mister Smikes said:

Somehow I don't think this story proves your point.   How does this story prove that Viserys II would have acted in a manner diametrically opposed to Viserys I?

Viserys I and Viserys II may actually had had the same motivation in forcing their daughter to marry - dynastic reasons. Laenor had been Viserys I's big rival at the Great Council, so it was prudent to reunite the two branches of House Targaryen again so the Velaryons wouldn't try to steal the throne in the future. Viserys II wanted grandchildren to continue House Targaryen, so he made his daughter marry his eldest son as was family tradition.

The Targaryens had been down to two boys and two girls at the end of the Dance, basically, and if anything happened to Aegon III's young boys then the continuation of the dynasty would be in jeopardy.

17 hours ago, Mister Smikes said:

As for the Viserys quote you provide, I think that by focusing on that you are ignoring what is actually happening.   The rumor-mongers are not actually accusing Rhaenyra of treason.  Viserys is not accusing Rhaenyra of treason either.  What is happending is that Viserys is accusing the rumormongers of accusing Rhaenyra of treason, as a bit of rhetoric to support his efforts to shut them up.  Viserys is not on the side of truth here.

After Viserys' decree to shut about the issue it became treason, yes, but prior to that claiming that Rhaenyra's children were 'Strongs' meant accusing her of treason because it was apparently not okay for her to pass children who were not sired by her husband as trueborn children - and that she did.

17 hours ago, Mister Smikes said:

Right.  And of course, this is clearly what his king wanted.  Any husband has this power to make such children "his own".  All he need do is say nothing, and which is also more or less what Aegon did.

Well, you certainly also have to treat the children as your own. If you never interact with them, don't treat them as your heirs but rather like Cindarella is treated in the story, then nobody is going to believe their are yours, either, even if you don't say anything of that sort explicitly.

17 hours ago, Mister Smikes said:

Maybe Aegon could have done this too.   But he didn't.   (And according to you, he could have done this whether Rhaenyra was guilty of adultery or not, so the truth of the matter is irrelevant).

No.  Laenor did the same with the Strong Boys, as we just discussed.

Laenor and Laenor's family actively acknowledged his children as his - Corlys even gave the elder two traditional Velaryon names while Laenor honored his thirdborn with the name of his late favorite, Joffrey Lonmouth.

But, no, Laenor couldn't have done that the same way King Aegon IV. Laenor was Rhaenyra's husband but she was the Heir Apparent to the Iron Throne and the Princess of Dragonstone. She was the liege lord of both Laenor and his father. Laenor could have tried to accuse Rhaenyra of adultery on the basis that the children didn't look like him, but the king would have to deal with the issue.

In Aegon's case Aegon himself was the king and thus had the authority to just declare that Daeron wasn't his child. He could even go as far as to declare that he never had sex with Naerys around the time Daeron was conceived. Who could contradict him on that?

17 hours ago, Mister Smikes said:

I'm not saying he gave a fig.  I'm pointing out that he had no particularly strong motive to give a fig, since Daeron was related to him one way or the other.

But that isn't the issue in a world where bastards are basically viewed as freaks with no rights. For one, there is the issue of raising another man's child, and then there is the issue of raising another man's bastard as your own trueborn son.

As I said, we can see people doing that who really love their spouses and children - and also people with other problems.

If we assume Laenor's sons are Harwin's then it is rather odd - at first glance - why Laenor and his family treated Rhaenyra's sons as their own. But the best answer to this mystery is that Laenor may have made it clear from the start that while he would marry Rhaenyra to sit as her side as prince/king consort one day, he wouldn't have sex with his wife or change his own lifestyle. His parents allowed to remain at High Tide and never forced him to cohabit with Rhaenyra at Dragonstone.

This means that the entire Targaryen-Velaryon clan here had no problems if Rhaenyra continued her bloodline with the help of another man. But that is due to Laenor's own romantic and sexual preferences.

Aegon, Naerys, and Aemon weren't part of a similar family dynamic, nor was Aegon a decent human being.

17 hours ago, Mister Smikes said:

Maybe if she cheated on him during the marriage he might have felt betrayed.  But that's not what we are discussing.  We are only discussing her not being a virgin on her wedding night.  And it is not as though she ever pretended to love him prior to this point.

No, we are discussing more than that. Naerys not being a virgin doesn't mean Naerys was impregnated by another man. If she had had sex half a year before her wedding then Aegon would never believe or know that he wasn't the father of Daeron.

17 hours ago, Mister Smikes said:

Sure.  But that's why it is inconvenient to the Blackfyres that Aegon IV is not popular among the smallfolk.

Not sure if Aegon IV was loathed by the smallfolk. His misrule seemed to affect mostly people at his court and, presumably, the Kingslanders and whoever he interacted with when he went on a progress. Aegon's many exploits may actually have entertained the commoners who never ever met him or faced his displeasure.

17 hours ago, Mister Smikes said:

I don't know.  Are you trying to have an honest discussion with me, or are you just trying to push your weight around?

We are having an honest discussion when I'm telling you what doesn't make sense in my opinion, right?

17 hours ago, Mister Smikes said:

Now you're arguing against the text again.  But sure.  I don't like forced marriages either.

That was a reference to my taste and the plausibility of that wedding at that particular time.

17 hours ago, Mister Smikes said:

You're the one fixating on the word "punishment".  Was Viserys I "punishing" Rhaenyra when he forced her to marry Laenor?

Again, you confuse the time line - Rhaenyra was forced into her marriage before (possibly) started to sleep around with other men.

17 hours ago, Mister Smikes said:

That's an interesting idea.  But hints are that Naerys was crying, and Aemon and Aegon fighting, on the day of the marriage, and not at some earlier period.

Well, it could (and likely would) have been a hastily arranged marriage if that little bit of fan fiction were true.

By the way, we have many instances were kings try to force folks into marriages if there had previously been sex - that's the case with Saera's companion Alys Turnberry who was supposed to marry Roy Connington after she got pregnant but he refused, while Jonah Mooton married Perianne Moore.

We also have Aegon V allowing Jaehaerys and Shaera to remain married after they already consummated their marriage. He could have done away with that, marrying them to Celia Tully and Luthor Tyrell, respectively, forcing Luthor to raise Shaera's bastard if she had been impregnated by Jaehaerys in their wedding night (which she apparently wasn't).

But that's not what is done in such circumstances.

17 hours ago, Mister Smikes said:

And if you want Aegon to be Daemon's father, it seems to me the simplest theory (pending further revelations about the date of the marriage) was that he was conceived on the honeymoon. 

Not sure they ever had a honeymoon. Although in light of Aegon's virility my guess would be that Daeron was conceived in the wedding night.

17 hours ago, Mister Smikes said:

By that logic, why not let her marry the brother she loved rather than the brother she did not love?  Seems to me you are arguing against the idea of forced marriage, while pretending to argue the parentage of Daeron.  Why would it be "utter stupidity" to force a marriage to another person?  Are you worrying again about those magical DNA tests spoiling the plan?

Because if folks know or suspect that the other brother is the father of the child then this poisons everything. It is a recipe for disaster further down the road.

My own explanation for Viserys' shitty behavior there would be twofold - one he wanted grandchildren by his eldest son and he wanted to continue the Targaryen incest custom which meant that Naerys would have to marry Aegon (assuming there were no other closely related royal girls around). The second reason would have to do with his own outlook on life after his beloved abondoned him, their children, and died an early death in Lys. We know that left deep marks on him, and he may have decided that if could no longer be happy but had to continue his duty to his royal brother and the Realm, that his children would also have to do their duty and marry each other even if they didn't love each other.

Frankly, I cannot think of another explanation, considering this kind of shitty incest is something smarter Targaryens of the past avoided. Viserys I didn't force Rhaenyra to marry Aegon the Elder because they didn't get along. Jaehaerys and Alysanne arranged a match between Baelon and Alyssa because they loved each other and did not force Vaegon and Daella to marry who didn't get along. After Aegon-Naerys you have to go all the way to Aerys-Rhaella to find another royal couple who were forced into a marriage by their father (although we have no details on the marriages of the children of Daeron II and his sons, so perhaps there were some forced marriages there, too).

[Mister Smikes]

7 minutes ago, Lord Varys said:

I'd say we can bury that whole thing considering Aerys thought his granddaughter smelled Dornish and he ended up using Elia and the children as hostages against Dorne.

I see no contradiction here whatsoever.  

7 minutes ago, Lord Varys said:

If Elia had been his child he wouldn't have done that, one assumes.

Assume what you like.  

7 minutes ago, Lord Varys said:

Not to mention that Elia was never his first choice as bride for Rhaegar.

As far as I can tell, it was not his choice at all.  Looks more like Rhaegar's choice.

[Lord Varys]

22 hours ago, Mister Smikes said:

As far as I can tell, it was not his choice at all.  Looks more like Rhaegar's choice.

Nothing indicates Rhaegar had any say in the matter of his marriage. Tywin asked King Aerys II to marry Rhaegar to Cersei, not the Prince of Dragonstone. Tywin also didn't dare approach Rhaegar with the marriage idea again later when Aerys II was imprisoned in Duskendale and Tywin was ruling the Realm as Hand of the King, indicating that Rhaegar couldn't choose a bride without his father's permission. Aerys II later sent Steffon Baratheon to Volantis to find a proper Valyrian bride for Rhaegar, and nothing indicates that Steffon or the king included Rhaegar in any of that.

One can, perhaps, speculate that Queen Rhaella played a minor role in arranging the Elia-Rhaegar match considering she may have acted as a go-between to establish contact between Aerys II and the Princess of Dorne. But that's it. Nothing indicates that anyone asked Rhaegar whether he wanted to marry Elia Martell. Our sources tell us that the betrothal of Elia and Rhaegar was announced - which means both Elia and Rhaegar could have learned from the royal herald that they were betrothed now. Their parents could have talked to them about that ... or not. We don't know. Catelyn makes matches for Robb and Arya when treating with Lord Walder ... and neither of her children have a right to be included in such deliberations.

If Aerys II had known Elia was his child she would have either been his first choice for Rhaegar's bride due to the Targaryen blood she would have had - and that she wasn't, since he originally sent Steffon to Volantis because there were apparently no suitable brides to be found in Westeros - or it would have been unthinkable that the Heir Apparent to the Iron Throne marry Elia because she would have been just a bastard. The Targaryens marry trueborn siblings and other close relations to each other, they do not pair trueborn children with bastards.

[Firefae]

On 8/12/2021 at 11:37 PM, Lord Varys said:

I don't think so. Hasty is going to play a crucial role in the coming books, and it is quite telling that George has yet to make it explicit that Hasty was Rhaella's tourney knight. He clearly wants it to come as a surprise that Hasty is going to raise the Targaryen banner and support their restoration in TWoW.

And who will he support then? YG or Dany? The latter might remind him of Rhaella. But he strikes me as a religious conservative man who wants a man on the throne.