Game of Thrones begins....

[The Larch]

He was alrady married. I don't think you can make much of an argument based on "honor" for a guy who was already married with kids running off with someone else t begin with, and throwing polygamy into it (which I don't even think would be recognized as a legitimate marriage in the Seven Kingdons anyway) doesn't improve his standing.

There had been polygamous Targ kings in the past, the Targs always had a "we're above human laws" air to them, that's why they also married brothers and sisters, unthinkable for any other.

[grumbler]

I do have a hard time imagining the honorable Rhaegar making the bastard with his true love. He always tried to live up to the ideals in his books.

The Targaryens engaged in both incestuous marriage and multiple marriages in the past, so it is possible that BA and you are correct that R and L were married.

[Berkut]

Learn something new every day - I was not aware of the multiple marriages bit. That would make things rather interesting, now wouldn't it?

Although....

Jon would not have been born when Rhaegar was killed. Would he be in line, since presumably a child in the womb is not an heir (seeing as you would not even know the sex, much less that it even exists potentially).

[viper37]

Jon Starkgaryen has no interest in the throne, and nor should he.  His fight is against the real enemy.  His only goal going forward will be bringing as many people together as possible to face off against the White Walkers.

True, but Dany is barren and it would appear that Jon (or Jon's progeny) would be her only heir.

So we have the long anticipated reveal that Jon is the son of Rhaegar and Lyanna. So that is good....but...

How is it going to be revealed to anyone other than Bran? Assuming Bran even gets to Winterfell, why would anyone believe him?

The only person who was there who is still alive is Howland Reed, and even he doesn't seem like a very convincing eyewitness to anyone not inclined to backing Jon anyway...

Curious to see how this comes out...

From a claim standpoint, he is still a bastard though, right? If a bastard has a claim, one would think Gendry would be a viable heir at this point....what in the hell every happened to him anyway?

Pretty much the definition of bastard is the inability to inherit.  A bastard can be legitimized, but has no claim if not legitimized.

I suspect that the proof of Jon's heritage will come from something to do with a flaming sword.

William the Conqueror inherited Normandy despite being a bastard.

[viper37]

I do have a hard time imagining the honorable Rhaegar making the bastard with his true love. He always tried to live up to the ideals in his books.

Viserys states that Rhaegar took Lyanna out of love, they fled together, he did not kidnap her.
And Barristan Selmy did say Rhaegar was the most honorable man he met, and he did not like the fighting.

Also, I had to go back to be sure, to read Cersei's prohecy.

Cersei asks if she will wed the prince she has been promised to. Maggie replies she will "marry the king." Cersei's second question is quickly taken up by her asking if she will be queen. Maggy insists she will be, but only "for a time." She elaborates on this, "Then comes another, younger, more beautiful, to cast you down and take all you hold dear." Finally, young Cersei asks if she and the king will have children. "The king will have twenty children, and you will have three... Gold shall be their crowns and gold their shrouds," replies Maggy.

I think I've said it before, the younger more beautiful queen is Daenerys, while she always thought it would be Margeary.  As others have said, if next season is only 7-8 episodes, it's not impossible that Cersei could be dead by the 4th.

"to cast you down and take all you hold dear" could mean not only the Kingdom, but maybe Jaimie will abandon Cersei for Daenerys.

[Valmy]

William the Conqueror inherited Normandy despite being a bastard.

Yet none of William's son's 20 bastards could inherit the throne of England or Normandy which led to the Anarchy. Huh. Consistency may not be Medieval world's strong suit. But in Westeros the rules seem pretty clear. A bastard is not even considered a member of your family.

[Valmy]

Also, I had to go back to be sure, to read Cersei's prohecy.

Cersei asks if she will wed the prince she has been promised to. Maggie replies she will "marry the king." Cersei's second question is quickly taken up by her asking if she will be queen. Maggy insists she will be, but only "for a time." She elaborates on this, "Then comes another, younger, more beautiful, to cast you down and take all you hold dear." Finally, young Cersei asks if she and the king will have children. "The king will have twenty children, and you will have three... Gold shall be their crowns and gold their shrouds," replies Maggy.

I have to say if I got the prophecy I would not have married any kings.

[viper37]

William the Conqueror inherited Normandy despite being a bastard.

Yet none of William's son's 20 bastards could inherit the throne of England or Normandy which led to the Anarchy. Huh. Consistency may not be Medieval world's strong suit. But in Westeros the rules seem pretty clear. A bastard is not even considered a member of your family.

The bastards of England or Normandy could not inherit because there were legitimate heirs, no?

In Westeros, a bastard can be legitimized (Ramsey Bolton) or be recognized as legitimate (Jon Snow).  Cersei had most of Robert's bastards executed because she thought they could represent a threat to her children.  She was the biggest threat to them all along, but hey, she never realized it.

So, it's not an automatism that a bastard can become heir (far from it), but if he proves lineage and gets support, it can happen. I guess there are multiple examples of that in medieval history too.  Of course, to get support, there is likely the need for absence of a "stronger" heir.  If the Northmen knew Bran was still alive, they might not have elected Jon King in the North.  But there is a Sansa, a girl who does not seem so inclined to rule (because it paints a target in her back, and renders her vulnerable to Littlefinger's scheming, now, she is of no interests, really, because she does not bring the North with her), so they picked Jon Snow.  Possibly with some behind the scenes encouragement from Sansa.

[viper37]

Also, I had to go back to be sure, to read Cersei's prohecy.

Cersei asks if she will wed the prince she has been promised to. Maggie replies she will "marry the king." Cersei's second question is quickly taken up by her asking if she will be queen. Maggy insists she will be, but only "for a time." She elaborates on this, "Then comes another, younger, more beautiful, to cast you down and take all you hold dear." Finally, young Cersei asks if she and the king will have children. "The king will have twenty children, and you will have three... Gold shall be their crowns and gold their shrouds," replies Maggy.

I have to say if I got the prophecy I would not have married any kings.

Did women really had a choice whom to marry in medieval times?  In Westeros, outside of Dorne, maybe, I don't think they really do.  Unless they command a pirate fleet, or an army with 3 dragons.

Besides, I think Cersei hoped to marry Rhaegar, not Robert.

[HVC]

Learn something new every day - I was not aware of the multiple marriages bit. That would make things rather interesting, now wouldn't it?

Although....

Jon would not have been born when Rhaegar was killed. Would he be in line, since presumably a child in the womb is not an heir (seeing as you would not even know the sex, much less that it even exists potentially).

posthumous heirs were a thing weren't they?

[Valmy]

Did women really had a choice whom to marry in medieval times?

In real life? Theoretically it was against Church law to force anybody to marry against their will. So the woman had to consent to the marriage. Of course your family had several carrots and sticks they could deploy whether you were a man or woman.

[Valmy]

posthumous heirs were a thing weren't they?

Yes. Yes they were. In fact one King of Persia was crowned in utero.

And players of EU2 will remember this dude: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ladislaus_the_Posthumous

[Berkut]

A bastard cannot inherit, but as in all things when it comes to inheritance, the ability to make even a spurious argument when there are other reasons to support a claim is really all that is needed, which is why even a bsatard child of a prostitute is a "threat".

Jon Snow is not just some bastard, he is the child of the ruling house and their most prestigious member and the daughter of one of the most powerful lords in the realm. He is not just *any* bastard.

Hell, look at Renly. He had zero legitimate claim, and yet he would have been king had he simply won.

[Valmy]

Well he was supposedly second in line. Hardly zero legitimate claim.

[Berkut]

Zero legitimate claim when their is a clear first in line.

It's not like there was any lack of certainty that anyone could play off of - the only possible way Renly could be legit is through Stannis.