Poisons that Cause Insanity

[Shaggydog Stark]

I couldn't sleep well last night and I got to thinking about the Targs again :)

Some of the earlier Targs did not marry their siblings, for instance Rhaenyra had an Arryn mother, so her descendants were only 50% Targaryen, following from that...

I thought about the genetics of the line starting with Daeron II, he had a Dornish wife so their children were "half-targs" or much less, but I will make it easier by pretending they were 50% Targ, so to speak. That includes Maekar.

Maekar had an unknown wife, and since she is unknown and not a sister to Maekar it's a good guess she is not Targaryen. So Maekars children are only at maximum ~1/4 Targs... His four sons were among the most crazy of the Targaryens, but not all of them.

Moving on to Aegon V's son Jaehaerys II, who's wife is also not mentioned but he married for love so I'm guessing he married a non-Targ. So if this is correct his children Aerys and Rhaella who married eachother were only ~1/8 Targaryen at the most!

Wich makes Rhaegar, Viserys and Dany ~1/4 Targaryen genetically speaking. IF I have guessed correctly about the unknown queens not being Targaryen.

Keeping in mind that the first seriously mad Targ from Aegon and Rhaenys line was Baelor, and he was possibly mad from snake venom...

They were not so inbred we are led to believe, or GRRM just made a mistake along the lines...

Any thoughts?

I have been thinking about this too. And I agree with your line of thought. I have researched if incest can cause insanity but have been unable to find anything conclusive as yet. Perhaps I am using the wrong "key" words in my google search, I will keep looking, but I too have looked at the Targs and don't find them as insane as we are led to believe. Insanity can be hereditary, but if that were the case here we would have found more insane Targs than we do. Funny that most of the insanity is concentrated in the last two generations and the one insanity that we know of from previous generations (Baelor the Blessed) was caused by snake venom which is basically poison.

I have a hunch that we are right about this and foul play may be the reason for all the "sudden" insanity in the last generations. I am very suspicious of the Citadel, because of the role they played in destroying the last living dragons. I can't help but think it's all related somehow and they did use poison on the dragons to make them deformed and stunted before they gradually died out.

[voodooqueen126]

If Viserys were poisoned to become mad then it would ruin the story for me. I like to believe that he was driven into madness by a traumatic childhood, moving around in constant fear of being killed and being laughed and mocked by all but his sister. It's tragic and enough to make a lot of people crazy. Removing that aspect of his backstory with - oh he was poisoned into madness - just doesn't seem right.

Quite a lot of the Targs were mad. Wasn't it one of them who said something along the lines of "Every time a new Targ is born, a coin is flipped with one side greatness and the other madness"? Baelor the Blessed comes to mind as being a man who is batshit crazy.

I think basilisk blood produces madness that makes people mad quickly/suddenly/mice attack lions etc perhaps most similar to crystal meth in the real world.

Where as the kind of madness that Viserys exhibits is the natural hereditary kind, compounded by childhood trauma.

Barristan says that Viserys was eccentric even as a child.

[Shaggydog Stark]

I think basilisk blood produces madness that makes people mad quickly/suddenly/mice attack lions etc perhaps most similar to crystal meth in the real world.

Where as the kind of madness that Viserys exhibits is the natural hereditary kind, compounded by childhood trauma.

Barristan says that Viserys was eccentric even as a child.

Like Baelor the Blessed? Except Baelor the Blessed went mad from the poisons of serpents. I really think there may be variations of poisons that cause madness, so you have the basilisk blood type and then you have other types which are not so blatant in their results. It is something worth considering.

Barristan does say that and I really think that either Varys or Pycelle might have had something to do with both father and son being so eccentric. Call it a hunch, I may be totally wrong. ;)

[Ser Lepus]

"This paste is spiced with basilisk blood. It will give cooked flesh a savory smell, but if eaten it produces violent madness, in beasts as well as men. A mouse will attack a lion after a taste of basilisk blood."

Jaqen used the poison to make a dog mad in Harrenhal and make it kill its master, on Arya request..

[1234567]

Like Baelor the Blessed? Except Baelor the Blessed went mad from the poisons of serpents. I really think there may be variations of poisons that cause madness, so you have the basilisk blood type and then you have other types which are not so blatant in their results. It is something worth considering.

Barristan does say that and I really think that either Varys or Pycelle might have had something to do with both father and son being so eccentric. Call it a hunch, I may be totally wrong. ;)

The Balor bit reminded me that that happened in Dorne. Given that the Red Viper was able to change Manticore venom from a quick to slow poison I wonder if there are variations that could cause a genetic condition. Just as the theory that Moon Tea might effect women, could a poison be passed on genetically (like some diseases)? Hence Aerys is poisoned and his son has the same symptoms because the poison has actually effected Aerys at a genetic level?

Edit: I'm also thinking of radiation poisoning having effects on subsequent generations, so could a poison do the same thing?

[Shaggydog Stark]

Jaqen used the poison to make a dog mad in Harrenhal and make it kill its master, on Arya request..

That is true. He used it on Weese's dog.

The Balor bit reminded me that that happened in Dorne. Given that the Red Viper was able to change Manticore venom from a quick to slow poison I wonder if there are variations that could cause a genetic condition. Just as the theory that Moon Tea might effect women, could a poison be passed on genetically (like some diseases)? Hence Aerys is poisoned and his son has the same symptoms because the poison has actually effected Aerys at a genetic level?

Edit: I'm also thinking of radiation poisoning having effects on subsequent generations, so could a poison do the same thing?

Rapsie, these are such great points! With regard to the Manticore venom, perhaps there is a way to slow the insanity poison as well so it seems gradual and that the insanity seems to becoming worse with time, so it looks natural.

I love the idea that it might be passed genetically. This is such an interesting take. Perhaps it could miss some generations. I really like this theory. :thumbsup:

[Floredaï]

There's really no reason to look for poison as a source of insanity in the Targaryen's bloodline. I don't remember which character says that greatness and insanity are two faces of the same coin in Targaryens. Aegon the Conqueror probably had a greatness bordering on insanity, that pushed him to conquer the Seven Kingdoms, but was sufficiently in check that he kept and ruled them.

Their inbreeding has allowed that character trait to remain mostly undiluted (but for some Hightower, Arryn and Martell blood), explaining that most of the Targaryen have been ranging from fairly normal to great (Jahaerys?), and from great to slightly (Maegor, Baelor the Blessed, Aegon the Unworthy) or completely mad (Aerys II)

And of course, wielding a great power (dragons, a throne) is probably incompatible with keeping a completely sane mind.

[Eyron]

There's really no reason to look for poison as a source of insanity in the Targaryen's bloodline. I don't remember which character says that greatness and insanity are two faces of the same coin in Targaryens. Aegon the Conqueror probably had a greatness bordering on insanity, that pushed him to conquer the Seven Kingdoms, but was sufficiently in check that he kept and ruled them.

Their inbreeding has allowed that character trait to remain mostly undiluted (but for some Hightower, Arryn and Martell blood), explaining that most of the Targaryen have been ranging from fairly normal to great (Jahaerys?), and from great to slightly (Maegor, Baelor the Blessed, Aegon the Unworthy) or completely mad (Aerys II)

And of course, wielding a great power (dragons, a throne) is probably incompatible with keeping a completely sane mind.

I guess it depends on how you read the information we have been given by the author. I don't take the characters words at face-value, especially since GRRM has pointed out the "unreliable narrator" issue.

The Targ that said the words about whenever a Targaryen is born the gods toss a coin, (meaning it could become great or insane) is also a product of their environment, it was a person in the story who said it, not the author. And we did not even hear is first hand from that character, but from a POV who heard it from someone else, years and years ago.

Like you say Aerys was the completely mad one, and he is the least (approximately 1/8 part) Targaryen genetically of all the Targaryens (same as his sister). Is that not a strange fact?

Aerys is not inbred at all, not more than any of us. Genes does not work that way.

To be inbred means that both parents share many of the traits and genes and therefore the recessive genes as well as the dominant ones are likely to manifest. The actual problem with inbreeding is that it let's recessive traits, like genetic diseases and mutations pass on to the next generation.

If a person who can be considered to be inbred have a child with someone not related, the inbreeding has stopped. Whatever recessive genes that have manifested in the inbred parent is going to be suppressed in one more generation.

Let's say the inbred person have a recessive gene from both parent (who also both had it from both parents) gives us gene n,n.

The other parent (not related) does not have the recessive gene (this would be the normal case since the recessive genes are phased out of the gene-pool). That parent would have the dominant gene N,N instead.

A child of those two parents (child A) is at risk (less than 50%) of suffering from the recessive gene but will still pass the recessive gene on. The gene this child A would pass on to their own child would be N,n. No matter if the child A suffered from the recessive gene or not.

If child A marries a non related person B who do not have the recessive gene n, they will pass on N,n and N,N (A and B respectively) to child C. There is a very small risk child C gets the n recessive trait.

So to stop the effect of inbreeding it takes two generations.

[Shaggydog Stark]

I guess it depends on how you read the information we have been given by the author. I don't take the characters words at face-value, especially since GRRM has pointed out the "unreliable narrator" issue.

The Targ that said the words about whenever a Targaryen is born the gods toss a coin, (meaning it could become great or insane) is also a product of their environment, it was a person in the story who said it, not the author. And we did not even hear is first hand from that character, but from a POV who heard it from someone else, years and years ago.

Like you say Aerys was the completely mad one, and he is the least (approximately 1/8 part) Targaryen genetically of all the Targaryens (same as his sister). Is that not a strange fact?

Aerys is not inbred at all, not more than any of us. Genes does not work that way.

To be inbred means that both parents share many of the traits and genes and therefore the recessive genes as well as the dominant ones are likely to manifest. The actual problem with inbreeding is that it let's recessive traits, like genetic diseases and mutations pass on to the next generation.

If a person who can be considered to be inbred have a child with someone not related, the inbreeding has stopped. Whatever recessive genes that have manifested in the inbred parent is going to be suppressed in one more generation.

Let's say the inbred person have a recessive gene from both parent (who also both had it from both parents) gives us gene n,n.

The other parent (not related) does not have the recessive gene (this would be the normal case since the recessive genes are phased out of the gene-pool). That parent would have the dominant gene N,N instead.

A child of those two parents (child A) is at risk (less than 50%) of suffering from the recessive gene but will still pass the recessive gene on. The gene this child A would pass on to their own child would be N,n. No matter if the child A suffered from the recessive gene or not.

If child A marries a non related person B who do not have the recessive gene n, they will pass on N,n and N,N (A and B respectively) to child C. There is a very small risk child C gets the n recessive trait.

So to stop the effect of inbreeding it takes two generations.

I didn't know all this genetic stuff, thanks for sharing. As usual excellent observations!

[1234567]

@Eira

That's fascinating and also helps explain Joff as his Grandparents were cousins and his parents were siblings. Bad genetics there!

[Eyron]

Thank you Rapsie and Shaggydog :D

I was thinking about Joffrey when I wrote it actually!

I can add also that the child C in the example above will almost certainly not even pass on the gene n, if the other parent is unrelated, to it's own child, the risk of that is very small. Every time the n gene is up against a N gene it is likely to loose so to speak ;)

BTW I'm not using proper terms perhaps for genetics, I am not a biologist or a doctor.

The Game of Genes is a game of dice, but with a cheating dice, so the dominant genes mostly win :)

When I was in school and we learned about it, our teacher actually made it into a game with trait-pieces and dice, we were paired girl-boy and

threw dices to see how our imaginary child could look. My child with my classmate would turn out "Baratheon", brown-black curly hair with blue eyes :) It was very exciting because I had a big crush on my friend...

[Shaggydog Stark]

Thank you Rapsie and Shaggydog :D

I was thinking about Joffrey when I wrote it actually!

I can add also that the child C in the example above will almost certainly not even pass on the gene n, if the other parent is unrelated, to it's own child, the risk of that is very small. Every time the n gene is up against a N gene it is likely to loose so to speak ;)

BTW I'm not using proper terms perhaps for genetics, I am not a biologist or a doctor.

The Game of Genes is a game of dice, but with a cheating dice, so the dominant genes mostly win :)

So in the case of the Targs it would be extremely unlikely for Aerys to have inherited insanity because both his mother and grandmother were not Targs? Okay so Aerys married his sister, therefore their children should have been at a greater risk at inheriting the gene correct? Except out of their three children, only one seems to have been unstable.

When I was in school and we learned about it, our teacher actually made it into a game with trait-pieces and dice, we were paired girl-boy and

threw dices to see how our imaginary child could look. My child with my classmate would turn out "Baratheon", brown-black curly hair with blue eyes It was very exciting because I had a big crush on my friend...

Aww, sweet :)

[Eyron]

So in the case of the Targs it would be extremely unlikely for Aerys to have inherited insanity because both his mother and grandmother were not Targs? Okay so Aerys married his sister, therefore their children should have been at a greater risk at inheriting the gene correct? Except out of their three children, only one seems to have been unstable.

Rhaegar, Viserys and Dany would have the same risk of receiving the madness gene as their father and mother (both a child C in the example above). They would be child C's again. So the risk is very small for them too. But one child in three is very possible.

All it really comes down to is the fact that the earlier more inbred Targs should have shown craziness much more often if it was hereditary. It seems the gene manifested itself too randomly, and most often in those individuals that had much smaller risk than those who would be at great risk for it.

[Shaggydog Stark]

So it fits in neatly with our theory here :). Thanks for taking the time to explain, it is very interesting, i should have paid more attention in class. :lol:

[Eyron]

I just wonder if GRRM knows this stuff well or if the Targaryen ancestral line was just made on a whim... I would like to think he knows since he seems very knowledgeable of all possible things but otherwise we are definitely barking up the wrong tree here :)

And it is a big chance that we probably never will have any proof! Unless the citadel POV will reveal something. I hope so.

[Shaggydog Stark]

I just wonder if GRRM knows this stuff well or if the Targaryen ancestral line was just made on a whim... I would like to think he knows since he seems very knowledgeable of all possible things but otherwise we are definitely barking up the wrong tree here :)

And it is a big chance that we probably never will have any proof! Unless the citadel POV will reveal something. I hope so.

Oh I hope he has researched it, otherwise, it's all worthless information. But there are too many crazy people in the series, Eira, I can't get past that. Maybe one or two were poisoned? And Baelor the Blessed, it's like he is telling us look, this guy became insane because of poison. I am sure something is up with the posions and the citadel poisoned the dragons, i can't get that out of my mind either.

[Eyron]

I know, it is hard to look the other way now!

And I realised that the more we looked into the Targaryens and their history the more evidence we found to lead us away from the inbred-crazy theory. It really is like a puzzle, we just had to put the pieces in the right order to see the theme. And it was very different from what I had thought before looking into it, I didn't even know about the missing queens before, I had just assumed they were still marrying brother and sister most of the time. I mean we had all the information but had just looked at it wrong. I like this theory very much now!

[Shaggydog Stark]

I know, it is hard to look the other way now!

And I realised that the more we looked into the Targaryens and their history the more evidence we found to lead us away from the inbred-crazy theory. It really is like a puzzle, we just had to put the pieces in the right order to see the theme. And it was very different from what I had thought before looking into it, I didn't even know about the missing queens before, I had just assumed they were still marrying brother and sister most of the time. I mean we had all the information but had just looked at it wrong. I like this theory very much now!

Yeah I just assumed it was an established fact that they were a crazy family because of the incest but once you look at the family tree, it doesn't make sense. I also like the moontea theory with the wormwood, i know you don't agree but I find it so compelling especially where Lysa Arryn is concerned.

I am also quite certain they are poisoning Sweetrobin, I reread that chapter in AFFC with Sansa and he said the maester has put something foul in his milk.

It is very interesting and I will keep my eyes open on my reread of ADWD, just in case we missed something there too.

[1234567]

Yeah I just assumed it was an established fact that they were a crazy family because of the incest but once you look at the family tree, it doesn't make sense.

What is interesting is that Westerosi wouldn't know any of this (heck I didn't until just now), so because the Targs have a history of madness, it is perfectly possible that Aerys was poisoned by a drug (possibly one that increased paranoia or anger) and no one would suspect anything because Targs have been known to go mad before.

@Eira

Your school system sounds fantastic!

[Shaggydog Stark]

What is interesting is that Westerosi wouldn't know any of this (heck I didn't until just now), so because the Targs have a history of madness, it is perfectly possible that Aerys was poisoned by a drug (possibly one that increased paranoia or anger) and no one would suspect anything because Targs have been known to go mad before.

@Eira

Your school system sounds fantastic!

Yeah I didn't know it either until we started this thread. Eira did most of the leg work and put it together a few pages back. Once you piece together all these little scraps of information is how you get to see the bigger picture and things start to become clear. It's all very interesting.