the silent speaker Posted June 9, 2009 Share Posted June 9, 2009 Correction: Robb may have legitimized Jon. We don't actually know that he did so. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Edward the Great Posted June 9, 2009 Share Posted June 9, 2009 The people do not want a bastard on the Iron Throne.It's not up to the people. That's the whole idea behind monarchy. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jon Targaryen Posted June 9, 2009 Share Posted June 9, 2009 The only way Dany would even consider legitimizing Jon would be if she saw irrefutable proof that Rhaegar and Lyanna were married and she saw Jon as a long lost good brother whom she always wanted.Why would Dany legitimize Jon if he were already legitimate? I guess the better question is, how? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Ontology Interface Layer Posted June 10, 2009 Share Posted June 10, 2009 The only way Dany would even consider legitimizing Jon would be if she saw irrefutable proof that Rhaegar and Lyanna were married and she saw Jon as a long lost good brother whom she always wanted.Jon Targaryen has already put this better than I did the first time, but just to drive the point home further, what you are claiming is equivalent to:"The only way Dany would even consider gluing a broken vase back together would be if she saw irrefutable proof that it had never actually been broken in the first place." Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
A wilding Posted June 10, 2009 Share Posted June 10, 2009 Legitimizing Jon would cost Dany her rightful throne.I imagine any legitimisation would be accompanied by a marriage, making the issue of the precedence between them a little less crucial. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Ontology Interface Layer Posted June 10, 2009 Share Posted June 10, 2009 I imagine any legitimisation would be accompanied by a marriage, making the issue of the precedence between them a little less crucial.Jon and Dany reigning together sounds way too "happily ever after" to me. I envision some sort of union based on the House of the Undying vision, but with either one or the other not surviving the War for the Dawn. Either Jon dying in the fighting after miraculously impregnating her or Dany dying in childbirth (though that doesn't sound bittersweet at all). Or even both, and the new child is truly the last Targaryen, and an infant monarch to usher in the Summer that never ends. Or no child at all, with both dying. Or lots of other possibilities, just not that co-reign. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mezeh Posted June 11, 2009 Share Posted June 11, 2009 Dany could not legitimize Jon if he is bastard but she could proclaim him legitimate from the beginning if she will get any proof or rather witness that Rhaegar and Lyanna were married.Now who may provide such a witness? First of all if Rhaegar married Lyanna while he had clear political reasons to keep it in secret until the end of the war (Dorne and his own father) some persons close to either Rhaegar or Lyanna should have been present on the marriage.Prince Rhaegar had a few friends and Selmy names then in ASOS:“Myles Mooton was Prince Rhaegar's squire, and Richard Lonmouth after him. When they won their spurs, he knighted them himself, and they remained his close companions. Young Lord Connington was dear to the prince as well, but his oldest friend was Arthur Dayne."Now Lonmouth and Mooton both died in the war while Dayne was killed at TOJ. This leaves us with only Connington who was exiled to Free Cities and supposedly drunk himself to death within a year. Yet this was only a rumor that reached Westeros and believed since Lord Jon was never heard after this again – but no one seen him dead and he is the only Rhaegar close friend who is not surely dead. Take into account two more things. One – Connington witness would be very strong for Dany since he was her brother close friend and for all others since Connington was well known and well respected person. The second – Connington was present at tourney at Harenhall and was mentioned in Mira Reed’s story that may be a clue that he was a part of “another story†as well.Then we have another “dead†person from the same story of Mira Reed that no one seen dead – lady Ashara Dayne. Her brother surely knew about the marriage if it took place and while he was supposed to keep it in secret he could have involved his sister in with Rhaegar’s permission. Besides it is possible that princess Elia knew about the affair and lady Ashara was her attendant. Next possible witness is Howland Reed. His daughter hinted that she knew a lot about Rhaegar/Lyanna story – clearly from her father. It is unlikely that Rhaegar really kidnapped Lyanna – much more likely that she went with him by her own will. And after Harenhall Reed definitely was deeply loyal personally to Lyanna so she may have asked him to help her to escape and then to be present on her marriage. And the last possible witness is Barristan Selmy. He never was particularly close to Rhaegar yet he was Kingsgurd who are obliged to keep royal family secrets by wows. Selmy claimed to Daenerys to know some of Rhaegar’s secrets and this may be well one of them Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Prince Rhaegar Targaryen Posted June 11, 2009 Share Posted June 11, 2009 Dany could not legitimize Jon if he is bastard but she could proclaim him legitimate from the beginning if she will get any proof or rather witness that Rhaegar and Lyanna were married.Could you please read again what Ontology Interface Layer and Jon Targaryen wrote?If Rhaegar and Lyanna were married, Jon is legitimate.There is absolutely no reason for Dany to legitimate him in this case, because via the marriage he already is.If Rhaegar and Lyanna were not married, Jon is a bastard.In this case only, Dany could legitimate him, via her rights as queen (as Stannis tried to do, too, and Robb proposed to Catelyn, both in their function as "king"). Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
A wilding Posted June 11, 2009 Share Posted June 11, 2009 Jon and Dany reigning together sounds way too "happily ever after" to me.Oh, I agree. I am just discussing hypotheticals. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mezeh Posted June 11, 2009 Share Posted June 11, 2009 If Rhaegar and Lyanna were not married, Jon is a bastard.In this case only, Dany could legitimate him, via her rights as queen (as Stannis tried to do, too, and Robb proposed to Catelyn, both in their function as "king").The trouble is that legitimization is Westeros means proclaiming bastard a trueborn child of his father. This places legitimized bastards ahead in the line of succession of other trueborn children who are younger then bastards. This was a reason for Robb to legitimize Jon since by this he placed him ahead of Sansa and her Lannister husband. Any trueborn child of Rhaegar would be ahead of Daenerys in the line of succession but this would create a paradox. If Jon is ahead of Daenerys - she is not a queen and could not legitimize him. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Errant Bard Posted June 11, 2009 Share Posted June 11, 2009 Dany could not legitimize Jon if he is bastardWrong! She could, just like Robb could, or Stannis could, for Jon. Or alternatively, like Joffrey could for Ramsey Bolton. Or are we arguing that Robb and Stannis got, like, irrefutable proof that Jon was not a bastard but a trueborn Stark, or married him somehow? And the same for Ramsey Bolton? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mezeh Posted June 11, 2009 Share Posted June 11, 2009 Robb was Jon’s elder, Stannis wanted to legitimize Jon as Ned’s son – there is no problem in any case. But if Dany legitimizes Jon then he is a King – not her and then she could not legitimize him! The trouble is that legitimization is Westeros does not change the present – it changes the past. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Errant Bard Posted June 11, 2009 Share Posted June 11, 2009 Robb was Jon’s elder, Stannis wanted to legitimize Jon as Ned’s son – there is no problem in any case. But if Dany legitimizes Jon then he is a King – not her and then she could not legitimize him!There is a problem, you clearly wrote that she could not legitimize a bastard, when it's not the bastard part that poses a problem, it's just that you posit that a king has no right to abdicate, except forced by some hypothetical objective truth. I don't see why, and I also don't see how one can recognize the "TRUTH" Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Prince Rhaegar Targaryen Posted June 12, 2009 Share Posted June 12, 2009 The trouble is that legitimization is Westeros means proclaiming bastard a trueborn child of his father. This places legitimized bastards ahead in the line of succession of other trueborn children who are younger then bastards. This was a reason for Robb to legitimize Jon since by this he placed him ahead of Sansa and her Lannister husband. Any trueborn child of Rhaegar would be ahead of Daenerys in the line of succession but this would create a paradox. If Jon is ahead of Daenerys - she is not a queen and could not legitimize him.Think it over.Point x in time is the point where Dany legitimates Jon.Up to point x, Jon is a bastard, agreed? Therefore, up to point x, Dany is queen and is in her rights to legitimate him. Logical conclusion.She does just that, at point x. Now, and only from now on, is Jon legitimate.We will have a paradoxon as soon as Dany discovers time travel and legitimates Jon at his birth... well, although at this point probably Aerys is king anyway :smoking: Well, and if you're too lazy to think it over, it works fine in either case, because Jon joined the Night's Watch and therefore is absolutely not in the line of succession anyway. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mezeh Posted June 12, 2009 Share Posted June 12, 2009 The trouble is that after legitimization Jon will be trueborn from his bith not from the moment of legitimization. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Winterfail Posted June 12, 2009 Share Posted June 12, 2009 The trouble is that after legitimization Jon will be trueborn from his bith not from the moment of legitimization. Is that supported in the text? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Prince Bran Posted June 12, 2009 Share Posted June 12, 2009 I'm not sure I see the confusion here...if it turns out the R+L=J and R & L were actually married (as has been posited here) & furthermore that Baby Aegon is, in fact, dead, then Jon would be a trueborn Targaryen, and the throne would rightfully be his. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Errant Bard Posted June 12, 2009 Share Posted June 12, 2009 "Would", yes. Now, I ask: how would revealing "the truth" work in reality? (you cannot invoke DNA sampling machines and mass hypnosis devices) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Prince Bran Posted June 12, 2009 Share Posted June 12, 2009 "Would", yes. Now, I ask: how would revealing "the truth" work in reality? (you cannot invoke DNA sampling machines and mass hypnosis devices)No doubt. I suppose you would need some trusted source to reveal this, so you'd probably have to get a bit crackpot....like a still-alive Arthur Dayne, or something. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
dragomort Posted June 12, 2009 Share Posted June 12, 2009 I'm not sure I see the confusion here...if it turns out the R+L=J and R & L were actually married (as has been posited here) & furthermore that Baby Aegon is, in fact, dead, then Jon would be a trueborn Targaryen, and the throne would rightfully be his.**provided he somehow finds a way out of those pesky oaths Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.