Lady_Qohor Posted April 21, 2023 Share Posted April 21, 2023 I don't know if this has been pointed out before, but in an age of high infant mortality, it could be argued that it's coldly pragmatic rather than strange for kings to give their favourite name to more than one child, for example: - James III of Scotland had two sons named James - His son, James IV had two sons named Alexander - Charles II had four sons called Charles and two daughters called Charlotte (these were all with different women but even so.. .) - Empress Matilda (aka the real life Rhaenrya) seems to have had three half sisters also called Matilda. Let's just be grateful that it's unlikely the next season of Hot D will introduce Rhaenyra's three bastard half sisters who are also called Rhaenyra Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The hairy bear Posted April 21, 2023 Share Posted April 21, 2023 As far as I know, the practice of repeating names among your children was a Scottish-only thing. It's a practice that is still practiced today. Your other non-Scottish examples are referring to illegitimate half-sibling from different mothers, so it wouldn't really be an issue. As per the show having Rhaegar named his second son Aegon while his firstborn Aegon is still alive... I would say that it's just another careless slip by D&D. It's probably not worth it to put too much thought into it when the writers clearly didn't. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mormont Posted April 21, 2023 Share Posted April 21, 2023 14 minutes ago, The hairy bear said: As far as I know, the practice of repeating names among your children was a Scottish-only thing. It's a practice that is still practiced today. The Pastons, a Norfolk family of gentry, had two sons named John, both named after their father, John. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
csuszka1948 Posted April 21, 2023 Share Posted April 21, 2023 It's without example in Westeros. Besides, GRRM clarified that it was Ned who named Jon. He doesn't have a 'Targaryen' name. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Lady_Qohor Posted April 21, 2023 Author Share Posted April 21, 2023 1 hour ago, csuszka1948 said: Besides, GRRM clarified that it was Ned who named Jon. He doesn't have a 'Targaryen' name. Oh I know that, but I was making a point about the TV show where the writers named Aegon. You're right, from what I can see it doesn't have precedence in Westeros. I just wanted to point out that as this happened with real life medieval royals, the decision to name Jon Aegon wasn't as ridiculous as I previously thought (although it still is pretty ridiculous) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Lady_Qohor Posted April 21, 2023 Author Share Posted April 21, 2023 3 hours ago, The hairy bear said: Your other non-Scottish examples are referring to illegitimate half-sibling from different mothers, so it wouldn't really be an issue. As per the show having Rhaegar named his second son Aegon while his firstborn Aegon is still alive... I would say that it's just another careless slip by D&D. It's probably not worth it to put too much thought into it when the writers clearly didn't. You're right that it's not usual among living legitimate siblings. However, my point was that it does have some precedence, among the Scots, illegitimate siblings and what appear to be at least a couple of cases in France. - Louis Viii had two living legitimate sons called Philip at one point - Philip VI appears to have had two living legitimate sons called John at one point. 3 hours ago, The hairy bear said: I would say that it's just another careless slip by D&D. It's probably not worth it to put too much thought into it when the writers clearly didn't. Totally agree, there's no way the writers thought about this in as much detail, this was just something interesting to think about on a Friday afternoon. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
csuszka1948 Posted April 21, 2023 Share Posted April 21, 2023 Honestly, I think the writers messed it up. Instead of the Targaryen name they should have focused Ned's promise to Lyanna, because 1) I doubt it was just 'keep him safe', otherwise Ned wouldn't have felt guilty after allowing Jon to go to the Wall, 2) I suspect the promise involved something like 'let him choose how he wants to live and who he wants to love' (just like the life Lyanna wanted for herself but could never have), and this will influence Jon's final decision to support Bran as King&go with the wildlings instead of nominating himself King. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ColdBenDaario NaStarkHands Posted April 26, 2023 Share Posted April 26, 2023 On 4/21/2023 at 7:19 PM, mormont said: The Pastons, a Norfolk family of gentry, had two sons named John, both named after their father, John. Thomas Howard, 2nd Duke of Norfolk, had two sons (who both reached adulthood, alive at the same time etc) by successive wives named Thomas. John Dudley, Duke of Northumberland, had two sons (both reached adulthood, alive at the same time etc) by the same wife named Henry. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.