R+L=J v.60

[Pero the first of His name]

Remember Ned?

How he made us all sad...

At King's Landing he could only end up dead.

Evenings he could have enjoyed with Cat in their bed.

Gods, why was someone else not chosen in his stead?

And to the king whose armies in rebellion he once lead,

Robert, he promised that to the prince his daughter would be wed.

Lots of dangerous people around him he had

Yet he did not listen to what about trust LF said.

After about black hair he had read

Never was a there better time for the words of incest to be spread.

Not doing so made him prisoner of the crimson red.

Although for mercy, Sansa had plead,

Joffrey commanded to have his head.

Oh, the horror would beat the humour even out of Edd.

Nevertheless, at least GRRM did not make him undead...

I hope you will like this song and understand how it belongs in this thread.

[The stallion]

Regarding the warging ... it's an extremely rare talent. Only one person in a thousand is a warg (and it may be even more specific, if you have to have First Men heritage), and only one warg in a thousand can be a greenseer. But here we have six kids in the same family, same generation, who are all wargs. That suggests to me that there's a prophetic, religious and/or supernatural "reason" for this, someone pulling the puppet strings. I'm actually not convinced that Ned, Brandon or Lyanna would have been wargs even if they'd had direwolves.

Rather than assuming that all Starks have warging abilities (I tend to think it was much more prevalent in their early history but has since subsided) or trying to use the warging to pinpoint parentage ("Jon must be Ned's son because he's a warg"), I think the smarter tack might be to view warging as something supernatural and not try to bring genetics into it too much, beyond the aforementioned point that it seems like First Men heritage and/or old gods worship is necessary. Trying to boil it down to family genetics seems like missing the forest for the trees. The better question might be why these kids are all wargs at this particular time in the story, and what implications it's going to have.

ETA: And Varamyr's situation, when he's a warg but neither of his parents are and his father views it as kind of an abomination, should show that it's probably not something as simple as straight-down genetics.

What of House Farwynd of the Lonely Light. They're out on the Iron Isles so I'm pretty sure they don't worship the old gods, nor communed with the CofF... Yet they too are warg/skin changers. Do the iron isles have roots with the First Men?

[FrozenFire3]

What of House Farwynd of the Lonely Light. They're out on the Iron Isles so I'm pretty sure they don't worship the old gods, nor communed with the CofF... Yet they too are warg/skin changers. Do the iron isles have roots with the First Men?

Yep, First Men roots.

[Zaphodess]

... so by the time R+L came around, it was an excuse for rebellion, not the cause, and I think the backdrop for those political dynamics are just as fascinating as R+L.

That. The practices of incest and polygamy are associated with the Targs. These practices set them apart from the rest of the nobles and reminded them that the Targaryens were foreign invaders. They are symbols of the bad aspects of their reign and it would probably be very unwise for someone who intends to claim the IT now - whether Targ or no - to show their contempt for Westerosi morality by ignoring these taboos.

And I think that even a claim from a Bastard might get more support than a claim from someone born in a hard to prove polygamous marriage. Especially not when the parents getting together was the final insult that got the bloodshed started. Don't forget that even if Lyanna was not abducted and raped, she was a Lord's daughter and her family had not even been asked, much less consented to the union. It's not at all unlikely that the affair legally was a rape anyway. Or at least seen as a crime on the same level.

Imo, it doesn't matter whether R married J, the (hypothetical) marriage is unlikely to be accepted as legal and Jon would be regarded as a bastard anyway. If Jon really is R+L (which is a good possibility but by no means certain), the impact of such a parentage now is vastly overrated in many theories around here.

[Greymoon]

Awesome analysis.

Thank you!

[MtnLion]

Corbon, lets walk through the age again, shall we?

If on the younger end of the spectrum, Ashara is sixteen when she dies, fifteen years later, she is 31.

If she is on the genersously older end of the spectrum, and is twenty, fifteen years later, she is 35.

Tyrion thinks he sees a woman who is in her mid forties, which would be 43-45.

Sorry to butt-in, but I was straining to follow this argument, and I want us to be somewhat correct. If I recall, it is like year 300, now (don't think we have seen 301,yet). The Tourney at Harrenhal was held in the year of the false spring, 281. That sure as hell looks like 19 years or a bit more, instead of the 15 years you use above, to me.

ETA: Let's use the base date of the Tourney at Harrenhal for calculations. We have a pretty good handle on the timeline from there.

[Twinslayer]

This quote is up against the backdrop of many people making the arguement that because the Westerosi people have not been vocal in stating their disapproval of these practices that is somehow a default arguement of acceptance of these practices when if the Targaryens have dragons, they would be crazy to voice their disapproval.

The Westerosi lords don’t speak out against incest either, but from what can be gleaned, they also didn’t practice it, (that we know of), until Jamie and Cersie. In fact, we see Joanna take actions to try and stop it when she first finds it.

Martin has been as straightforward as he has ever been in addressing a topic with that particular quote. They accept it by coercion and threat of death because of the presence of the dragons, so his implications are clear.

The Targaryens do as they please so long as they have the back-up of their dragons.

And I think it’s not a matter of what the Targaryens consider “taboo,” as they consider themselves omnipotent, but what the Westerosi people think, which is not clear, so calling other posters “liars” as was done recently, (whether you agree with the poster or not), over such ambiguities takes the debate to a whole different level.

If I had to guess, I think the Westerosi consider it an exclusive "Targaryen thing,” it’s what they do.

I would also add that if indeed Rhaegar was willing to break a betrothal, run off with a highlords daughter, he might well consider putting Elia aside as Cersei is afraid Robert is going to do, “for some new Lyanna.”

And where did Cersei get the notion that she might be, or could be set aside?

I’m ninety-nine percent sure Rhaegar married Lyanna, (I’m never one hundred percent with Martin), but the hypothetical of what his overall intentions were, and how they would really be received is up for speculation. But what Martins quote does do is shine a light on how the Targaryens might have been privately regarded as reflected in the practices that set them apart from the people they ruled.

Also, this quote doesn't just address the sexual practices of the Targaryens, but the overall political landscape they are trying to navigate which I find fascinating . While Rhaegar and Lyanna are an interesting story, there are actually other themes in the book that are just as interesting.

I don't believe Roberts Rebellion happened overnight, but has been quietly fermenting, with resentments churning probably since the last dragon died. Martins quote is essential to this fact as beyond incest and polygamy, (and nobody is going to die, or go to war over Targaryen sex practices), that perhaps other unmentioned abuses, or offences to the Nobles were committed.

I think most Targaryens were politically savvy enough, that even with dragons they understood the necessity of their Nobles "saving face," and keeping their diginity, as there are quite a few families that were and are, truly Targaryen loyalists and thought they were a good thing for the realm.

But, I also think there have been some Targaryens much like Viserys, running round, screaming about the "blood of the dragon," offending their Nobles, so by the time R+L came around, it was an excuse for rebellion, not the cause, and I think the backdrop for those political dynamics are just as fascinating as R+L.

This is a very good analysis.

I also want to make sure what I have said about this is clear. I have never said that it is impossible that Rhaegar went through some kind of marriage ceremony with Lyanna. What I have said is that polygamy was taboo in Westeros and that has some implications for how we consider the Rhaegar/Lyanna relationship and its possible impact on Jon.

People break taboos all the time. Walder Frey breaking guest right is one example. The issue is whether you get away with it.

So to me there are three questions surrounding the possible Rhaegar/Lyanna marriage. First, would Rhaegar and Lyanna both believe that was okay? Rhaegar's family history suggests he probably would be open to it. Lyanna's suggests that she would not. (GRRM says that polygamy is an act of defiance against the lords, and Lyanna's father was one of the most important ones). I don't think the fact that she may (or may not) have willingly run off with a married man means she would be willing to break this taboo. For example, in real life, there are members of the Catholic Church who practice birth control but do not condone the death penalty. Thus, I think it is possible that Lyanna would think having an affair was okay but getting into a polygamous marriage was not.

Second, would Jon accept the validity of a polygamous marriage? He has grown up with Ned's moral code and Ned is one of the most straight-laced people in the books. There is a very real possibility that Jon will think that any polygamous marriage, if it did happen, was invalid. He might find this news more horrifying than finding out his mother was a prostitute.

Third, would the other lords and the Faith in Westeros accept the validity of a polygamous marriage between Rhaegar and Lyanna? We don't know what would have happened if Rhaegar had openly declared that he was married to Lyanna. Would the lords and the Faith have accepted it? Would they say it was invalid and Jon was a bastard? Would they say it was valid but it invalidated the marriage to Elia, making Aegon and Rhaenys bastards? Would they say that all three were legitimate but the marriage to Elia was dissolved, freeing her up to remarry? All this would be debated if Rhaegar had announced this openly at the time.

Rhaegar did not, however, announce this. So if R+L=J is revealed now along with the claim that there was a marriage, the living lords and High Septon will have to decide. If Jon is sitting on a dragon when this is announced, people are likely to accept whatever he says. If Dany is the only one on a dragon and she says there was no valid marriage between Rhaegar and Lyanna, Jon will continue to be a bastard.

That is my point. It isn't that it would be impossible for Rhaegar to try to break the taboo against polygamy. It's that I don't know that Lyanna would go along with it, that Jon would accept it, or that other Lords and the Faith would recognize it.

[W1NT3RF3LL]

This is a very good analysis.

I also want to make sure what I have said about this is clear. I have never said that it is impossible that Rhaegar went through some kind of marriage ceremony with Lyanna. What I have said is that polygamy was taboo in Westeros and that has some implications for how we consider the Rhaegar/Lyanna relationship and its possible impact on Jon.

People break taboos all the time. Walder Frey breaking guest right is one example. The issue is whether you get away with it.

So to me there are three questions surrounding the possible Rhaegar/Lyanna marriage. First, would Rhaegar and Lyanna both believe that was okay? Rhaegar's family history suggests he probably would be open to it. Lyanna's suggests that she would not. (GRRM says that polygamy is an act of defiance against the lords, and Lyanna's father was one of the most important ones). I don't think the fact that she may (or may not) have willingly run off with a married man means she would be willing to break this taboo. For example, in real life, there are members of the Catholic Church who practice birth control but do not condone the death penalty. Thus, I think it is possible that Lyanna would think having an affair was okay but getting into a polygamous marriage was not.

Second, would Jon accept the validity of a polygamous marriage? He has grown up with Ned's moral code and Ned is one of the most straight-laced people in the books. There is a very real possibility that Jon will think that any polygamous marriage, if it did happen, was invalid. He might find this news more horrifying than finding out his mother was a prostitute.

Third, would the other lords and the Faith in Westeros accept the validity of a polygamous marriage between Rhaegar and Lyanna? We don't know what would have happened if Rhaegar had openly declared that he was married to Lyanna. Would the lords and the Faith have accepted it? Would they say it was invalid and Jon was a bastard? Would they say it was valid but it invalidated the marriage to Elia, making Aegon and Rhaenys bastards? Would they say that all three were legitimate but the marriage to Elia was dissolved, freeing her up to remarry? All this would be debated if Rhaegar had announced this openly at the time.

Rhaegar did not, however, announce this. So if R+L=J is revealed now along with the claim that there was a marriage, the living lords and High Septon will have to decide. If Jon is sitting on a dragon when this is announced, people are likely to accept whatever he says. If Dany is the only one on a dragon and she says there was no valid marriage between Rhaegar and Lyanna, Jon will continue to be a bastard.

That is my point. It isn't that it would be impossible for Rhaegar to try to break the taboo against polygamy. It's that I don't know that Lyanna would go along with it, that Jon would accept it, or that other Lords and the Faith would recognize it.

What if they married after Elia was killed?

[Dr. Pepper]

What if they married after Elia was killed?

So, like, Lyanna wed Rhaegar posthumously? lol

[W1NT3RF3LL]

So, like, Lyanna wed Rhaegar posthumously? lol

Ya I just realized that the timing is off and it wouldn't work. lol

[Rhaegar's Love]

As far as Westeros accepting the marriage as valid or not is impossible to say right now.

For instance, lets say Jon is indeed AA/TPtwP and saves the pathetic backsides of everyone in Westeros. Are you really going to put up a stink and say the guy who just saved your life and the lives of all your loved ones isn't trueborn and shouldn't be recognized as such? Especially after being put through civil war by a bunch of selfish, bratty nobles? People would look back on what Rhaegar did and say "hey I guess he was right after all!" Of course, everyone won't be saying this but I think the vast majority would.

Even if he isn't AA, if he just manages to successfully lead the defense against the Others, people are probably going to feel the same as above.

And ultimately, maybe it'll only matter to Jon, who has lived with the bastard label all his life. As long as he knows the truth, maybe that's all he'll care about and bugger what everybody else thinks.

So, just because it would be a polygamous marriage, I wouldn't be so quick to say it automatically works against him.

[Zaphodess]

No, this is my pet theory. I firmly believe Rhaegar and Lyanna intended to get married as a way to restore order and blow the wind out of the rebellions sails. But for it to work, Elia had to die. A legit, non-polygamous marriage was the only thing that could sweep the accusations of rape (not-unfounded in terms of feudal society) from the table.

[Joe Pine]

What if they married after Elia was killed?

Nah. He's a Targaryen heir. It's bigamy, polygamy. Whatever. Medieval values. I can accept the theory that there was a northern or old gods style hand fasting at a heart tree near Harrenhal, but not a last minute grab a septon wholly legitimate wedding.

If R+L makes J, then we take the jump that they're married enough.

[Stann]

As far as Westeros accepting the marriage as valid or not is impossible to say right now.

For instance, lets say Jon is indeed AA/TPtwP and saves the pathetic backsides of everyone in Westeros. Are you really going to put up a stink and say the guy who just saved your life and the lives of all your loved ones isn't trueborn and shouldn't be recognized as such? Especially after being put through civil war by a bunch of selfish, bratty nobles? People would look back on what Rhaegar did and say "hey I guess he was right after all!" Of course, everyone won't be saying this but I think the vast majority would.

Even if he isn't AA, if he just manages to successfully lead the defense against the Others, people are probably going to feel the same as above.

And ultimately, maybe it'll only matter to Jon, who has lived with the bastard label all his life. As long as he knows the truth, maybe that's all he'll care about and bugger what everybody else thinks.

So, just because it would be a polygamous marriage, I wouldn't be so quick to say it automatically works against him.

I think this is pretty close to how it's likely to work. So much focus and emphasis in this thread about the polygamy aspect and how it would relate to Jon's legitimacy or not and, in the end, it doesn't make a lick of difference. He'll either learn of his true parentage or he won't. One little crannogman from the bogs isn't going to change the mind of an entire realm. Jon is, to anyone in the realm who knows him, the bastard son of Eddard Stark and, stab wounds notwithstanding, LC of the NW. Finding out that he's the son of the deposed royal dynasty wouldn't change his destiny, whether he's legit or not. Assuming he lives, he's going to war against the Others, possibly with help. If they want to hand him the kingdom after that, I doubt anyone is going to give any kind of a crap about who his mommy and daddy were.

My guess is that even if he lives through the fight (and he seems awfully ripe for a heroic death, my friends), they won't offer it to him and, even if they did, he wouldn't take it.

[lareine]

This quote is up against the backdrop of many people making the arguement that because the Westerosi people have not been vocal in stating their disapproval of these practices that is somehow a default arguement of acceptance of these practices when if the Targaryens have dragons, they would be crazy to voice their disapproval.

The Westerosi lords don’t speak out against incest either, but from what can be gleaned, they also didn’t practice it, (that we know of), until Jamie and Cersie. In fact, we see Joanna take actions to try and stop it when she first finds it.

Martin has been as straightforward as he has ever been in addressing a topic with that particular quote. They accept it by coercion and threat of death because of the presence of the dragons, so his implications are clear.

The Targaryens do as they please so long as they have the back-up of their dragons.

And I think it’s not a matter of what the Targaryens consider “taboo,” as they consider themselves omnipotent, but what the Westerosi people think, which is not clear, so calling other posters “liars” as was done recently, (whether you agree with the poster or not), over such ambiguities takes the debate to a whole different level.

If I had to guess, I think the Westerosi consider it an exclusive "Targaryen thing,” it’s what they do.

I would also add that if indeed Rhaegar was willing to break a betrothal, run off with a highlords daughter, he might well consider putting Elia aside as Cersei is afraid Robert is going to do, “for some new Lyanna.”

And where did Cersei get the notion that she might be, or could be set aside?

I’m ninety-nine percent sure Rhaegar married Lyanna, (I’m never one hundred percent with Martin), but the hypothetical of what his overall intentions were, and how they would really be received is up for speculation. But what Martins quote does do is shine a light on how the Targaryens might have been privately regarded as reflected in the practices that set them apart from the people they ruled.

Also, this quote doesn't just address the sexual practices of the Targaryens, but the overall political landscape they are trying to navigate which I find fascinating . While Rhaegar and Lyanna are an interesting story, there are actually other themes in the book that are just as interesting.

I don't believe Roberts Rebellion happened overnight, but has been quietly fermenting, with resentments churning probably since the last dragon died. Martins quote is essential to this fact as beyond incest and polygamy, (and nobody is going to die, or go to war over Targaryen sex practices), that perhaps other unmentioned abuses, or offences to the Nobles were committed.

I think most Targaryens were politically savvy enough, that even with dragons they understood the necessity of their Nobles "saving face," and keeping their diginity, as there are quite a few families that were and are, truly Targaryen loyalists and thought they were a good thing for the realm.

But, I also think there have been some Targaryens much like Viserys, running round, screaming about the "blood of the dragon," offending their Nobles, so by the time R+L came around, it was an excuse for rebellion, not the cause, and I think the backdrop for those political dynamics are just as fascinating as R+L.

Very good points, well done :)