What do you feel about the romanticization of Rhaegar/Elia/Lyanna's story?

[ShadowCat Rivers]

Jaime is a guy who despises religious people while fucking his sister, the King's wife, because of "love". He values "romance" (of a sort), but not faith.

I don't think that he held Rhaegar in esteem because "romance". More likely, he didn't include him in the list of mad Targs IMO. This was to point out that there were people, contemporary to Rhaegar, that did not think of him as mad, and that the Baelor the blessed analogy does not explain why they thought highly of him and Jaime is an examble of those people.

Elia was generally polite but Oberyn described her as being particularly fierce when it came to her children. Elia is also described as being smart so she would understand the political implications of such a situation.

I'm not saying that this would be Littlefinger level treachery, but she would be smart and motivated enough to think along the lines of a Lady Olenna Redwyne; doing what's necessary to protect her kids.

In this sense, Catelyn was truly a SAINT for not killing Jon Snow, fiercely protective of her children and politically smart that she was...

No, I don't agree that your speculation has any basis.

Elia really does not have to be the mastermind. Unless dealing with a medicis type of woman, it's rarely the wife who would be pressing her sons claim, it's other powerful men who would prefer a different kings for various reasons.

I was replying to Rorey Targaryen who suggested that Elia would have murdered Rhaegar and Lyanna...

[Rorey Targaryen]

ShadowCat

1. Inaccurate comparison. Jon posed no real threat to Catlyn's children compared to the threat that he would pose Elia's kids once you consider each separate circumstance. As far as Catlyn believed, Jon was the illegitimate product of a moment of weakness that Ned had with a woman of no real standing or power. Jon was merely a reminder of Ned's supposed infidelity and he wasn't a threat to Ned's legitimate children and their claim to Winterfell.

2. I'm saying Oberyn would do the deed.

[lakin1013]

It's definitely romanticized because it's supposed to be. George makes the point in the book - All smiles dying, the crown of Love and Beauty, the Tower of Joy, "Promise me, Ned.", "rubies flews from the chest of a dying prince", "he died whispering a woman's name (Lyanna's)". As much as I love Elia, GRRM makes the point that the great love story is Rhaegar and Lyanna. ...

I read the question from the OP and thought of this response immediately. Then I read page after page of process responses regarding polygamy and madness and infidelity and so on and assumed that I had read the question wrong. GRRM presents it to us as a romance ...the story (willful beautiful teenage girl runs away with handsome emo prince who has a barren wife), the crown, the unknown knight, the blue roses...how on earth are we to think about it any other way? It is classic just as it is.

As readers we are cautioned to not believe flawed memories or retellings of old tales and the story of Jon's parents could become something entirely with more information, but as it is, Lyanna and Rhaegar is a romance. - until the author tells us otherwise.

[ShadowCat Rivers]

ShadowCat

.

1. Jon posed no real threat to Catlyn's children compared to the threat that he would pose Elia's kids once you consider each separate circumstance. As far as Catlyn believed, Jon was the illegitimate product of a moment of weakness that Ned had with a woman of no real standing or power. Jon was a reminder of Ned's supposed infidelity and he wasn't a threat to Ned's legitimate children. Inaccurate comparison.

2. I'm saying Oberyn would do the deed.

1. One could argue that bastard children, bearing the stain of bastardy and being treated differently, would be more motivated in stealing their trueborn siblings' rights, if they can find support of course. We don't see too many second/third sons doing that... I acknowledge that a legitimate child of R+L would have more political support, but in both cases it would eventually be a matter of circumstances. You never know how things will turn up, so, if Elia had reasons to act "proactively" based on possibilities, so had Catelyn. After all, an event of 80% probability might never occure, while another event of only 1% might do. Not inaccurate comparison IMO.

2. On Elia's request though... How many people has Cersei killed with her own hands? Does it matter who does the deed?

[UnmaskedLurker]

Aerys demanding Ned and Rob's head was the immediate cause of rebelling, not the sole reason. In fact, why do you think Aerys demanded Robert's head at all? Robert was a threat simply because he was the Lord of one of the kingdoms and was betrothed to the girl his son foolishly kidnapped. I cannot take you seriously if you are suggesting Robert would have done nothing. He would have gone to war (going by his nature) and would have likely had other supporters, maybe even Jon Arryn for all we know.

Yes I think we do know that Robert would have not have had Jon Arryn's support--nor do I think Jon Arryn (or Robert for that matter) would have gone to war. Jon Arryn was given an order by the king he could not carry out--so war was necessary because he was committing treason. Robert had plenty of time after Lyanna was abducted to cry for war and he did not do so. There is no indication whatsoever that Robert would have even thought it remotely possible to go to war over Rhaegar running off with Lyanna. Rhaegar and Lyanna are gone for some time before the events leading to war occur--and at no point during that time does Robert suggest that he would go to war over Lyanna being "kidnapped." You are making that up and it is basically contradicted by the text.

[Ser Eric]

Yes I think we do know that Robert would have not have had Jon Arryn's support--nor do I think Jon Arryn (or Robert for that matter) would have gone to war. Jon Arryn was given an order by the king he could not carry out--so war was necessary because he was committing treason. Robert had plenty of time after Lyanna was abducted to cry for war and he did not do so. There is no indication whatsoever that Robert would have even thought it remotely possible to go to war over Rhaegar running off with Lyanna. Rhaegar and Lyanna are gone for some time before the events leading to war occur--and at no point during that time does Robert suggest that he would go to war over Lyanna being "kidnapped." You are making that up and it is basically contradicted by the text.

We don't know what Robert was doing at the Eyrie. We don't know what Jon, Ned and Robert were doing up there. Do you really think Ned and Robert were just sitting around and doing nothing? At that point Ned thought it was kidnap as well. They may very well have been planning something. When Aerys demanded their heads Jon had no choice but to openly rebel. I asked you this before, why do you think Aerys demanded Robert's head if he was no threat at all? Robert was quite blatantly a threat, just because he immediately did not shout at the top of his voice does not mean he wasn't.

And really it doesn't matter how much time passed by. The immediate cause of the Blackfyre rebellion was Dany marrying but that was far from the only cause.

[UnmaskedLurker]

1. On the same merit, there's nothing in the text to support the notion that Elia was buying into Rhaegar's prophetic ramblings. All we know for a fact is that he told her. We don't know her reaction. It could go either way. However, any mother who cares about her children as Elia does would be cautious of such a threat posed to them.

I would only say to this point that while we know very little about Elia, we have the one vision in which she asks Rhaegar if he will make a song for Aegon, and Rhaegar replies that Aegon is TPTWP and has a song, ASOIAF. This exchange is not the exchange of someone that Rhaegar would think was not receptive to his prophesy beliefs. So while the evidence is thin--it is not non-existent. And yes, she might be cautious, but what exactly could she do? She really could not stop the second marriage, so why would she not try to make the best of it?

[Lord Damian]

From what we know of Lyanna, she seems to have been nobody's fool nor was she some pushover. We are told she is like Arya at least at some point in her life. Now, it does not mean that she was uncapable of love and in the end, she probably had a strong attachement for him if not outright love.

I just feel that Lyanna, like most any Stark we know except Sansa, would have been fiercely loyal to her family and would not do anything that would necessarily dishonor them nor potentially harm them (I think if she took off her helm as the knight of the laughing tree, her father would have been proud). I am still unsure if Rheagar kept her ignorant of her brother and father's murder so as not to upset her against him and his family but It seems that in the beginning, she was taken at swordpoint by Rheagar, Ser Arthur Dayne and Ser Oswell Whent and had no choice. Later, whether it was free will or some kind of Stockhom Syndrom, Westeros style.

[Bright Blue Eyes]

I don't think that he held Rhaegar in esteem because "romance". More likely, he didn't include him in the list of mad Targs IMO. This was to point out that there were people, contemporary to Rhaegar, that did not think of him as mad, and that the Baelor the blessed analogy does not explain why they thought highly of him and Jaime is an examble of those people.

Baelor is praised by some and considered mad by others. Rhaegar is praised by some and considered mad by those few who know enough.

In this sense, Catelyn was truly a SAINT for not killing Jon Snow, fiercely protective of her children and politically smart that she was...

No, I don't agree that your speculation has any basis.

No support and a bastard to boot. Not comparable.

I was replying to Rorey Targaryen who suggested that Elia would have murdered Rhaegar and Lyanna...

Would be a smart way to go about it - if she could get away with it, which is quite unlikely.

Yes I think we do know that Robert would have not have had Jon Arryn's support--nor do I think Jon Arryn (or Robert for that matter) would have gone to war. Jon Arryn was given an order by the king he could not carry out--so war was necessary because he was committing treason. Robert had plenty of time after Lyanna was abducted to cry for war and he did not do so. There is no indication whatsoever that Robert would have even thought it remotely possible to go to war over Rhaegar running off with Lyanna. Rhaegar and Lyanna are gone for some time before the events leading to war occur--and at no point during that time does Robert suggest that he would go to war over Lyanna being "kidnapped." You are making that up and it is basically contradicted by the text.

They learned of Brandon going to KL the same moment they learned of Lyanna being kidnapped. Of course they waited how that worked out first.

From what we know of Lyanna, she seems to have been nobody's fool nor was she some pushover. We are told she is like Arya at least at some point in her life. Now, it does not mean that she was uncapable of love and in the end, she probably had a strong attachement for him if not outright love.

I just feel that Lyanna, like most any Stark we know except Sansa, would have been fiercely loyal to her family and would not do anything that would necessarily dishonor them nor potentially harm them (I think if she took off her helm as the knight of the laughing tree, her father would have been proud). I am still unsure if Rheagar kept her ignorant of her brother and father's murder so as not to upset her against him and his family but It seems that in the beginning, she was taken at swordpoint by Rheagar, Ser Arthur Dayne and Ser Oswell Whent and had no choice. Later, whether it was free will or some kind of Stockhom Syndrom, Westeros style.

If she knew/understood it!

[UnmaskedLurker]

From what we know of Lyanna, she seems to have been nobody's fool nor was she some pushover. We are told she is like Arya at least at some point in her life. Now, it does not mean that she was uncapable of love and in the end, she probably had a strong attachement for him if not outright love.

I just feel that Lyanna, like most any Stark we know except Sansa, would have been fiercely loyal to her family and would not do anything that would necessarily dishonor them nor potentially harm them (I think if she took off her helm as the knight of the laughing tree, her father would have been proud). I am still unsure if Rheagar kept her ignorant of her brother and father's murder so as not to upset her against him and his family but It seems that in the beginning, she was taken at swordpoint by Rheagar, Ser Arthur Dayne and Ser Oswell Whent and had no choice. Later, whether it was free will or some kind of Stockhom Syndrom, Westeros style.

Your reading of the "subtext" and mine are very different. If Lyanna was really abducted as you suggest, there is no way Ned would think as highly of Rhaegar as Ned obviously did. This is not a case of Stockholm Syndrome. This is case of a girl who is engaged to a man she cannot imagine being married to and falls in love with a prince. Her strong will is why she does not go through with marrying Robert. No one other than Robert thinks bad thoughts or has negative comments about Rhaegar. If he was really capable of kidnapping Lyanna against her will, people would view Rhaegar's character very differently. Don't just read the direct meaning of words, you need to look behind the words to figure out what is really going on. You might be correct, however, in terms of whether Rhaegar told Lyanna of the deaths or her family members--not sure about that issue.

[butterbumps!]

In what way does this mean that Rhaegar could not have divorced or polygamously married?

Do you understand what I was even arguing?

I've been pointing out that Rhaegar might have had a different reason to kidnap Lyanna initially, being as how he's the crown prince, so that if he truly wanted Lyanna as wife/ have a baby with her he could have done so officially. I think the fact that this was allegedly an "abduction" might imply that Rhaegar wasn't initially trying to fulfill prophesies, since a crown prince has other options if the need to create more heirs arose.

Polygamy is convenient if tolerated and accepted by the host culture as well as integrated in law. Marriage means alliance, more marriage means more alliance. But if the host culture do not approve of it, it's more trouble than it's worth.

The Targaryen adopted the more of Westeros one after the other.

The converted to the Seven

They did not practice slavery

They stopped polygamy

Incest became less common (Still, their blood IS special so it's a harder practice to stamp out)

They promptly integrated into the tourney sub-culture popular amongst noble (as early as Maegor the Cruel, the Targaryen became noted jouster even though that's not part of their native culture).

They learned the Westeros common tongue and while they still teach their children Valyrian, they never imposed it at court.

Pretty soon, as early as 50 years after Landing, the Targaryen were basically like any Westerosi noble family beside the freaky hair and occasional bout of incest.

They integrated promptly and thoroughly because their power depended on it. It was important even when they had still dragons and can only have been more important afterwards.

Polygamy was never outlawed for them or anything, and as far as we know, no one seems to have had a problem with the fact that they did it. The idea that they stopped practicing polygamy due to some kind of social pressure is a fabrication on your part. As is the idea that the people at large would rebel against them in the event a Targ performed a polygamous marriage in recent history.

Again, what exactly are you even arguing? That the Targ Crown Prince's power is limited by the people?

Do you understand what I've been arguing? The whole reason I brought this up is to comment that if Rhaegar had wanted to marry Lyanna or have a child with her at the outset, then either official divorce or polygamy would have been more sensible options than kidnapping her and holding her hostage. That he doesn't seem to invoke his authority to that end, makes me think that perhaps this wasn't his initial motivation.

You said no revolt accorded pre Robert, that is false.

There are plenty of others, DWD this is a war started because a king wanted to change statue quo. FMU was another.

Why wouldn't 't? Elia has been a good wife and done her duty. Rhaegar has no form of real cause here.

Because got himself captured. I see no issue in polygamy, that has standing, but not divorce.

You were trying to claim that a Targ king must answer to his subjects, and that Rhaegar's choosing a polygamous marriage or divorce would result in a rebellion like we see unfold when Jon Arryn defy Aerys. I pointed out that the contained, tiny events of Duskendale and the others were case studies in not rebelling-- they weren't "rebellions" and they didn't truly breakdown the king's authority to the vast, vast majority of Westeros.

I'm arguing that either would be more sensible if Rhaegar had initially intended to have a child with Lyanna. This whole argument is about how Rhaegar had options in terms of havig a child with Lyanna, and that his lack of having taken those options might imply that this wasn't his original motivation in taking her.

[Mal Malenkirk]

Do you understand what I've been arguing? The whole reason I brought this up is to comment that if Rhaegar had wanted to marry Lyanna or have a child with her at the outset, then either official divorce or polygamy would have been more sensible options than kidnapping her and holding her hostage. That he doesn't seem to invoke his authority to that end, makes me think that perhaps this wasn't his initial motivation

.

He's not the king. He doesn't have the authority for a divorce or to force a marriage. What do you think is the authority of a Prince? Only what his father allows.

So on top of pissing off the Storm Land, Dorne, The North and apparently the East, good bet are Aerys would have felt threatened by his son politicking.

So no, it was bound to end very badly. He did not think this through, of was not very smart, or, back to my mental illness theory. He thought the real world did not apply to him in some way. It was Destiny!

[butterbumps!]

.

He's not the king. He doesn't have the authority for a divorce or to force a marriage. What do you think is the authority of a Prince? Only what his father allows.

So on top of pissing off the Storm Land, Dorne, The North and apparently the East, good bet are Aerys would have felt threatened by his son politicking.

So no, it was bound to end very badly. He did not think this through, of was not very smart, or, back to my mental illness theory. He thought the real world did not apply to him in some way. It was Destiny!

Thank you for finally agreeing that this doesn't come down to getting the people's support for this. It comes down to the king. If Aerys had any shred of sense left, he'd see Rhaegar's choice to wed Lyanna as advantageous. If not, well, it's not like we don't know that Rhaegar was considering making changes to the management of his father.

And no, this option expressly doesn't piss off the North or the Vale. This option raises Lyanna to queen, and "Jon" to second in line for the throne. It serves to piss off Robert, but would serve to prevent this massive bloc from becoming complete, because it takes away the Stark-Baratheon piece and anchors the Targs to the Starks. Who'd hardly openly complain that Lyanna and any of her heirs were raised to a higher position than could have been achieved by marrying Robert.

Again, to reiterate, I'm arguing that if this was all about Rhaegar's apparent need to have more heirs, taking an official channel makes considerably more sense than kidnapping her with the intention of having secret sex and secret heirs with her in the boondocks of Dorne.

[UnmaskedLurker]

Thank you for finally agreeing that this doesn't come down to getting the people's support for this. It comes down to the king. If Aerys had any shred of sense left, he'd see Rhaegar's choice to wed Lyanna as advantageous. If not, well, it's not like we don't know that Rhaegar was considering making changes to the management of his father.

Even if Aerys is not happy about the situation after the fact and even if Rhaegar does not remove Aerys as king, what can Aerys do? Rhaegar would already be married to Lyanna with a child. Just as Viserys was not happy but had to accept the marriage between Daemon and Rhaenyra, Aerys would be faced with the same situation. That is why Rhaegar stays away until the baby is born. Basically, it gives Aerys no real choice but to accept the marriage (not that he really had a choice in any event once the marriage occurred).

[Lord Damian]

Your reading of the "subtext" and mine are very different. If Lyanna was really abducted as you suggest, there is no way Ned would think as highly of Rhaegar as Ned obviously did. This is not a case of Stockholm Syndrome. This is case of a girl who is engaged to a man she cannot imagine being married to and falls in love with a prince. Her strong will is why she does not go through with marrying Robert. No one other than Robert thinks bad thoughts or has negative comments about Rhaegar. If he was really capable of kidnapping Lyanna against her will, people would view Rhaegar's character very differently. Don't just read the direct meaning of words, you need to look behind the words to figure out what is really going on. You might be correct, however, in terms of whether Rhaegar told Lyanna of the deaths or her family members--not sure about that issue.

I find it difficult to believe that Lyanna would have gone willingly without so much as a peep to her own family as to where she was going. Now, was there not whitnesses that broke the word that Lyanna Stark was seized by Prince Rheagar and taken away? As far as Rheagar goes, there were a lot of Targ lickspittles then who did not seem to mind what Rheagar did so long as it was not someone from their house but then again how many people would defy the crown prince if he stole their daughter, highborn or not? As far as Ned not thinking too badly against Rheagar, he does not say either way, only he reflects that Rheagar probably did not visit brothels. In the end, Rheagar did fight for his father instead of deposing him before heading to the Trident and offering an "olive branch" to Robert and Ned and the allies as they were the side with the "moral right". Instead he tried to beat them and no doubt kill them. Rheagar took from Lyanna and her family and gave nothing except an child that could not properly be defended unless claimed bastard by another man, a man more honorable than he.

[Wmarshal]

You were trying to claim that a Targ king must answer to his subjects, and that Rhaegar's choosing a polygamous marriage or divorce would result in a rebellion like we see unfold when Jon Arryn defy Aerys. I pointed out that the contained, tiny events of Duskendale and the others were case studies in not rebelling-- they weren't "rebellions" and they didn't truly breakdown the king's authority to the vast, vast majority of Westeros.

I'm arguing that either would be more sensible if Rhaegar had initially intended to have a child with Lyanna. This whole argument is about how Rhaegar had options in terms of havig a child with Lyanna, and that his lack of having taken those options might imply that this wasn't his original motivation in taking her.

which they do, in the form of war. I said nothing of polygamy, just creating a law that involves leaving a noble woman for no reason. Dorne would rise, and anyone they can rally, II, and reach depending how fast they promise Aegon to Marg. Yeah it is, people fighting main government. Niether did any of the other terrible wars, still did not stop them from happening.

Polygamy maybe, divorce no, that just piss people of more.

[Bright Blue Eyes]

In what way does this mean that Rhaegar could not have divorced or polygamously married?

Do you understand what I was even arguing?

I've been pointing out that Rhaegar might have had a different reason to kidnap Lyanna initially, being as how he's the crown prince, so that if he truly wanted Lyanna as wife/ have a baby with her he could have done so officially. I think the fact that this was allegedly an "abduction" might imply that Rhaegar wasn't initially trying to fulfill prophesies, since a crown prince has other options if the need to create more heirs arose.

Apparently we don't understand each other. I argue that the fact that Rhaegar abducted Lyanna and had sex with her is proof for his idiocy/madness/prophecy-obsession because in real-politik terms, it's suicide.

And no, this option expressly doesn't piss off the North or the Vale. This option raises Lyanna to queen, and "Jon" to second in line for the throne. It serves to piss off Robert, but would serve to prevent this massive bloc from becoming complete, because it takes away the Stark-Baratheon piece and anchors the Targs to the Starks. Who'd hardly openly complain that Lyanna and any of her heirs were raised to a higher position than could have been achieved by marrying Robert.

Spare to the IT is not higher than heir to the Stormlands. The crown would need to offer more, the STAB(L) alliance has the power to demand that.

Even if Aerys is not happy about the situation after the fact and even if Rhaegar does not remove Aerys as king, what can Aerys do? Rhaegar would already be married to Lyanna with a child. Just as Viserys was not happy but had to accept the marriage between Daemon and Rhaenyra, Aerys would be faced with the same situation. That is why Rhaegar stays away until the baby is born. Basically, it gives Aerys no real choice but to accept the marriage (not that he really had a choice in any event once the marriage occurred).

He could have Rhaegar, Lyanna or her children killed, sent to the Wall or the Faith or any combination thereoff.

Or, if he's smart, he'd get rid of Elia and her children instead, with a short war against Dorne to drive the point home. At least that way he'd attack somebody weaker than him.

[Wmarshal]

Which only cost the kingdom of Dorne, seriously, Yronwood would not the crown, he would out his whole house.

[Bright Blue Eyes]

Which only cost the kingdom of Dorne, seriously, Yronwood would not the crown, he would out his whole house.

Better than four/five regions!

At least Dorne can be beaten.

[Wmarshal]

Then continue to kill new lords and so on and so on.