Skip to main content

game of thrones - Would this character still be a bastard?


In the last episode of season 6 we see what is clearly..



The truth about Jon's parentage, being the son of Lyanna Stark and Rhaegar Targaryen.




Without getting into the "why" and "if" about this, (It is already covered in many other questions on this site)



Would Jon Snow still be a bastard if people knew who his parents are?



Just to be clear, i am not asking if he has a claim to the Iron Throne or not.



Answer



People knowing who Jon's parents are does not mean anything for his bastard status. One is born a bastard if he is born out of wedlock, regardless to who the parents were.


Him being son of Lyanna and Rhaegar does not prove that they had married as well because Rhaegar was already married to Elia Martell and traditionally Westeros is a strictly monogamous region by faith and culture. Being a bastard of a Prince does not mean that someone becomes legitimate child. There are plenty of examples of Bastards sired by Targaryen Princes and Monarchs e.g. Daemon Blackfyre, Aegor Bittersteel, Brynden Bloodraven etc.


It is however entirely possible that Rhaegar may have married Lyanna following the precedent of Aegon the Conqeuror who had two wives. King Maegor also had multiple wives. Quoting GRRM:




[Questions concerning Targaryen polygamy.]


Maegor the Cruel has multiple wives, from lines outside his own, so there was and is precedent. However, the extent to which the Targaryen kings could defy convention, the Faith, and the opinions of the other lords decreased markedly after they no longer had dragons. If you have a dragon, you can have as many wives as you want, and people are less likely to object.



Simple answer is, from Season Finale, we do not know if they had married or not. Thus we cannot say if Jon would remain a bastard or not.




UPDATE: In Season 7, it is revealed that Rhaegar had his marriage to Elia annulled and married someone else. That someone else can only be Lyanna, making Jon a legitimate Child. So it is all but confirmed in the show that Jon is now a trueborn Targaryen.


From S07E05:



Gilly: What does "annulment" mean?



Sam: It's when a man sets aside his lawful wife.


Gilly: Maynard says here that he issued an annulment for a Prince "Ragger" and remarried him to someone else at the same time in a secret ceremony in Dorne. Is that a common thing in the south or--?



Comments

Popular posts from this blog

futurama - How much time is lost in 'Time Keeps on Slippin''

In time Keeps on Slippin' , Farnsworth creates a basketball team which he matures by abusing Chronitons. This leads to time skipping forward by random, but ever increasing amounts. How much time was skipped in this way? Answer Unfortunately, I don't think a good estimate can be made for this, for two reasons: Many of the time skips move forward by an indeterminate amount of time. At one point, the Professor mentions localized regions of space skipping forward much more than others. We then see two young boys on the street below complaining about having to pay social security, only to suddenly become senior citizens and start complaining about wanting their money. Thus, each individual could have experienced a different amount of time skippage.

aliens - Interstellar Zoo story

I vaguely remember this story from my childhood: it was about an interstellar zoo that came to Earth with lots of bizarre and unusual species, and humans would file through and gape at all the crazy looking creatures from other planets. The twist came at the end when the perspective shifted to the other side of the bars and we discovered that the "creatures" were traveling through space on a kind of safari. They thought they were the visitors and we were the animals. Neither side knew that the other side thought they were the zoo creatures. Answer Got it. Zoo, by Edward D. Hoch. Published in 1958. Link to Publication History Link to PDF

harry potter - Did Dolores Umbridge Have Any Association with Voldemort (or Death Eaters) before His Return?

I noticed that Dolores Umbridge was born during the first Wizarding War, so it's very likely she wasn't a Death Eater then (but she is pretty evil -- who knows?). After that Voldemort was not around in a way that could affect many people, and most wouldn't know he was planning to rise again. During that time, and up through Voldemort's return (in Goblet of Fire ), did Umbridge have any connection with the Death Eaters or with Voldemort? Was she doing what she did on her own, or was it because of an association with Voldemort or his allies? Answer Dolores Umbridge was definitely not a good person. However, as Sirius points out, "the world isn't split into good people and Death Eaters". Remember that he also says that he doesn't believe Umbridge to be a Death Eater, but that she's evil enough (or something like that). I think there are two strong reasons to believe that: Umbridge was proud to do everything according to the law, except when she trie...

harry potter - What is the difference between Diffindo and Sectumsempra?

In the Harry Potter books, Diffindo is called the 'Severing Charm' and it’s most commonly used to cut ropes and the like. However, in the last book Hermione uses it on Ron but misses, creating a 'slash in his jeans' and his knee gets cut, causing him to 'roar in pain'. We've only seen Sectumsempra used once on screen when Harry directly uses it on Malfoy in the sixth book, but there it's mentioned that he is 'waving his wand wildly'. Wouldn't Diffindo, if used in such a fashion also cause a similar effect? Similarly, if it was able to cut Ron, it would also be able to, say, chop off an ear (George's)? In that case, how are these two spells different, except for Sectumsempra seemingly used exclusively to hurt humans? Answer While Diffindo and Sectumsempra both can be countered by other spells, Diffindo is far more easily countered. Reparo, a relatively common spell, can completely reverse its effect when used once. “He pulled the old cop...