Jump to content

[Spoilers] Episode 106 Discussion


Ran
 Share

Recommended Posts

23 minutes ago, Lord Varys said:

It is. People seem to forget what the concept of bastardy is - it is a slur for children born out of wedlock, or more specifically, for the child of a woman who is unmarried. That is also the case in Westeros since the mock names bestowed on noble bastards are *never* given to children born in wedlock, never mind how they look or how exceedingly unlikely it is that they were fathered by their legal father (e.g. the Footly boy born post-Tumbleton, Elaena's Viserys 'Plumm').

Children born in wedlock may in fact be the mailman's or the milkman's child ... but that doesn't make them bastards, it makes them merely not the biological child of their legal father. Marriage is the legal contract ensuring that a wife's children are the children of their husband.

Now, it is imaginable that a royal or noble father gets doubt about the parentage of his son or daughter, accuses his wife of adultery, and subsequently get a ruling (or rules himself if he were the king) that his children were, in fact, illegtimate. But we never actually see that happening, although it may have happened if Ned had told Robert what Cersei told him about the parentage of his children.

The only thing resembling something like that is Lucamore's children being declared bastards after he is sent to the Wall. But that's because the king and queen ruled that the marriages were never valid, not because another man fathered those children on Lucamore's wife.

This does not follow with what we hear about the concept of first night. The progeny of those such nights are called bastards and are issued from married women. Alysanne only banned the practice a few decades before these events and not entirely successfully.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 minutes ago, Denam_Pavel said:

This does not follow with what we hear about the concept of first night. The progeny of those such nights are called bastards and are issued from married women. Alysanne only banned the practice a few decades before these events and not entirely successfully.

No, they were not. They were often treated as bastards by their legal fathers, just as their mothers were called whores by their husbands ... but unless a lord who may have fathered a child in a long night actually acknowledged it, it wouldn't be viewed as a bastard with a noble bastard name. The smallfolk vilify bastards, too, of course, but they don't give them special names.

The First Night thing actually underlines the issue here - there it is publicly known that another man but the husband had sex with a given woman ... yet this doesn't mean the parentage of a child born about nine months after a First Night took place were viewed as born out of wedlock. It couldn't be said, legally, since husband and wife were married, and looks alone wouldn't have been proof enough.

But as we said with the Strong issue there - if the legal father accepts the children as his there is neither a problem nor a way to prove the opposite. If the father does not accept the children the wife and the children do suffer due to the power the father has over his family.

Orys Baratheon may have been fathered in a First Night ... but Aerion Targaryen never acknowledged him as his son and thus he apparently went by the name of his legal father. If his mother had been unwed the fact that he was a bastard wouldn't have been in doubt - which it is.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, Stenkarazine said:

This discussion about the Velaryon princes' bastardy being obvious or not leads me to another question:

In the show, how is treated the fact that Lord Corlys and his children are, well, black ? It is something that is supposed to be invisible to everyone in-universe, or is it acknowledged (Summer Isles' blood or such) ?

They're black Valyrians.

Which you can argue means there were Summer Island immigrants who intermarried with the Valyrian nobility thousands of years ago if you need an origin.

But the point is that they're Valyrian and excessively proud of such fact. This isn't that strange of a concept either unless you find it an odd idea that a country might have multiple ethnic but related branches in its nobility.

The Starks are First Men, the Lannisters Andals, and the Martells are Rhoynar.

Edited by C.T. Phipps
Link to comment
Share on other sites

7 minutes ago, C.T. Phipps said:

Because they look nothing like her and yet somehow she's not accused of their mother being someone else.

Because there were witnesses for the birth. Also, she's not claiming they are her immaculate conception. Human generally have two parents and get their genes from those two parents, some more apparant then others. When it's neither of them, nor their grandparents, three times in a row, and those boys are heirs to Driftmark, the richest seat in the realm, Dragonstone the only place where dragons are found beside KL and the Iron Throne of the Seven Kingdoms in King's Landing then there's a pretty tough pill to swallow for those further down the succession, let's be real.

Edited by Denam_Pavel
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Just now, Denam_Pavel said:

Because there were witnesses for the birth. Also, she's not claiming they are her immaculate conception. Human generally have two parents and get their genes from those two parents, some more apparant then others. When it's neither of them, nor their grandparents, three times in a row, and those boys are heirs to Driftmark, the richest seat in the realm, Dragonstone the only place where dragons are found beside KL and the Iron Throne of the Seven Kingdom's in King's Landing then there's a pretty tough pill to swallow, let's be real.

Which relates to the larger point that there's no concept of genetics so what exactly is the argument here? A culture that has no knowledge of genetics is going to point at the fact the children don't look like Laenor and take that as evidence? Viserys story is actually accurate to RL genetics and recessive genes.

And for 99.99 of all nobles, they're never going to see Laenor or Harwin (even less now) let alone their ancestors.

So it's a exceptionally weak argument.

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

8 minutes ago, C.T. Phipps said:

Which relates to the larger point that there's no concept of genetics so what exactly is the argument here? A culture that has no knowledge of genetics is going to point at the fact the children don't look like Laenor and take that as evidence? Viserys story is actually accurate to RL genetics and recessive genes.

And for 99.99 of all nobles, they're never going to see Laenor or Harwin (even less now) let alone their ancestors.

So it's a exceptionally weak argument.

 

I should stress, the Valyrians, both houses that these kids allegedly stem from, have been inbreeding for centuries exactly because the world they live in values the visual traits the Strong boys lack. And they've had plenty success accomplishing in doing so. They at least think they have some idea of how it works. 

And that is not true. Jaehaerys went on tons of processions throughout the realm, so did Viserys and Rhaenyra, the lords of the realm have been called to Harrenhal for great councils in their lifetimes and to KL to swear fealty to Rhaenyra. The nobles know what Valyrian royals looks like, what Rhaenyra the heir looks like, what Laenor, Laena and Rhaenys, Viserys' past rivals for the throne look like and Corlys looks what the Strongs, their hosts at Harrenhal look like. They've met them anyway. When Aegon shrugs and says "Everyone knows, just look at them." there's no indication he is lying.

Edited by Denam_Pavel
Link to comment
Share on other sites

This debate about hair color and genetics in Martin’s world is pointless. As several posts have stated before, Rhaenyra’s kids paternity should not matter because her husband, her father, her in laws… people it directly affects or are of significance will stand by her and her kids. As long as they do not question or dispute the kids legitimacy, the point is moot. 

The point people should be taking umbrage with is why Martin (or rather the show) allows Alicent to make such accusations with no consequence or repercussions. Viserys is weak but Lyonel or others can advice the King that his queen is bordering on treason by spreading such rumors about his daughter and heir, and it endangers the safety of the realm.

In Ned’s case, he is not acting out of self-interest (Alicent is a hypocrite and is doing all this not out of some higher purpose but to place her son on the throne). Even so, we don’t know how Robert would have reacted if he was given this information. For all we know, he would have shrugged it off and Ned would have had to drop the accusation. It’s Ned’s assumption that Robert would have hurt Cersei and kids. Stannis, otoh, is afraid to bring this to Robert on his own. 

I see the two situations as very different. One where we have a king who loves his daughter and will not entertain the rumors about her and her kids; whereas another case where we have a king who dislikes his wife and may be entertaining thoughts of getting rid of her. Moreover in the first instance, the husband of the princess does not dispute his paternity. So Alicent’s accusations as I said before borders on treason. I do hope Viserys in the next episode loudly threatens anyone with their tongues being removed if they question the kids paternity/ legitimacy. 

The issue I have is why was Harwin dismissed. He and his father could have told the king that he attacked Cole because the douchebag made derogatory comments questioning the princess virtue. And Lyonel has the king’s trust and ear. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

17 minutes ago, teej6 said:

Even so, we don’t know how Robert would have reacted if he was given this information. For all we know, he would have shrugged it off and Ned would have had to drop the accusation. It’s Ned’s assumption that Robert would have hurt Cersei and kids. Stannis, otoh, is afraid to bring this to Robert on his own. 

We do btw, Martin has stated several times that the Lannisters were  as good as dead if he ever found out.

 

38 minutes ago, El Guapo said:

With the show now being an undeniable hit... Does that mean they're going to go with more calm in S2?

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

30 minutes ago, Takiedevushkikakzvezdy said:

Season 2 is when the war is supposed to start, so I don't think it's going to be calm. ;)

But they aren't going to be doing much, if any, time jumping. The narrative will become more conventional in that sense.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Weirdly enough, I don’t really have a favorite character on this show. It might end up being Jace, like in the books, and Rhaenys could benefit from extra screen time, but none of them have personalities that really snatch me in like Sansa and Jaime and Margaery did. Adult Rhaenyra could, but it’s only been one episode.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

6 minutes ago, The Bard of Banefort said:

Weirdly enough, I don’t really have a favorite character on this show. It might end up being Jace, like in the books, and Rhaenys could benefit from extra screen time, but none of them have personalities that really snatch me in like Sansa and Jaime and Margaery did. Adult Rhaenyra could, but it’s only been one episode.

I'm on the opposite side of the spectrum, in that the acting has been so good overall, that I "like" all of them although the time jumps don't allow you to get properly invested in them.

Edited by Takiedevushkikakzvezdy
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, C.T. Phipps said:

They're black Valyrians.

Which you can argue means there were Summer Island immigrants who intermarried with the Valyrian nobility thousands of years ago if you need an origin.

But the point is that they're Valyrian and excessively proud of such fact. This isn't that strange of a concept either unless you find it an odd idea that a country might have multiple ethnic but related branches in its nobility.

The Starks are First Men, the Lannisters Andals, and the Martells are Rhoynar.

We're obviously meant not to think too deeply about it, because if you did, it drastically changes the dynamics between House Targaryen and House Velaryon.  Because apparently, in the show House Velaryon and House Targaryen never intermarried until Rhaenys and Corlys.  It also seems to imply that black Valyrians couldn't ride dragons like their white counterparts until they intermarried.  

I personally wish they had just given us an explanation that House Velaryon had very recently married into nobility from the Summer Isles, which is both a logical extension of House Velaryon's international ties and gives another reason that the Lords of the Realm might consider Corlys an outsider.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

 Share

×
×
  • Create New...