Jump to content

At which point did Robert become leader of the Rebellion


That guy Alistair

Recommended Posts

^I keep seeing that. Where did it say, that Robert proposed the match? And no. Robert and Ned were just visiting the Vale. They were living at Storms End and Winterfell respectively.

It is mentioned in a Game of Thrones... Ned had brought Roberts suit to Winterfell, ad Rickard accepted.

By the time the Tourney took pace in 281, they had been "long betrothed", as the World of Ice and Fire states.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

haha nice, yeah not too many people with this exact spelling (damn those Alisters and Alistars >.>)

Some go really off the beaten path with "Alester", apparently it was a unlucky combination judging by what happened to the Florent with that spelling.

On the up-side of our spelling, it made playing Dragon Age: Origins even more interesting

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Do you have the quote, because I honestly don't remember that.

Certainly..

The quotes for both, as I can't make out which of the two you meant :)

From the app (I had the quote correctly in my head, but the source wrong, the book only stated that the betrothal was agreed upon in Winterfell) :

she was betrothed to Robert Baratheon after her brother Eddard brought Robert's suit to Winterfell.

And indeed, Robert arrived in the North for the first time in A Game of Thrones, it would seem..

From the World Book (page 127):

"...for Lyanna had long been betrothed to Robert Baratheon, Lord of Storm's End."

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Robert was the Storm Lord ruling the Vale after his fathers death. GRRM himself said that after Ned and Robert left, they visited the Vale because it was a second home to them. Read it for yourself.

www.westeros.org/Citadel/SSM/Entry/Some_Questions

You proved my point, instead of taking care of business he's galvanting around for Tourney and extended stays in the Vale after his father died.

Yeah he might have officially pressed his claim at the Trident, puppet master Jon Arryn and rickard Stark intended to use his claim.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Frist, I did not "go out of my way".. I asked why you thought that Tywin had killed all he kids, and instead of actual argumentation,I received an answer of "yeah right, like he didn't do that".. that's not textual evidence, and when you fail to provide, I can only assume it is because you don't have any.. had you actually posted your argumentation instead of what you did post in your first post, my reaction would have been completely different.

But I can't look through my screen and look inside your head to see the thinking process behind thoughts. So all I can do is ask, and base my opinion on the answer I receive.

You want evidence?

Let's start what we know, TL wanted his daughter to be made queen. Its so well known that its mentioned in the world book, feast from Cersei herself.

We know beyond a shadow of a doubt he had something to do with Rhaeyns and Aegons death most likely he gave the order. Tyrion and Tywin from Swords talk about the death.

Mercy spoiler chapter Arya listening to men in the service of MoC while in Braavos mention he had been to Lys while in the service of TL during his handship under Aerys.

Lys the place of several Targ and Blackfyre residence.

Aerys in the absence of having a daughter to wed Rhaegar sends Steffron B to Old V to find a bride of Valyarian blood, and fails, but Aerys thinks TL had something to do with SB ship going down and states he can't rid himself ofTL because he would kill him.

After SB death Aerys wouldnt even be seen in TL presence unless he had all of his sworn swords.

Duskendale happens 6 months after Aerys denied TL, RT for marriage.Now I'm of the mind TL set Duskendale up so that RT could ascend the throne, his comment right before allowing Selmy to go rescue the king points to him having something to do with the plot.RT was still unwed and could have taken Cersei for a bride to help seal the breach between TL and the crown.

There's textual evidence to back everything im saying correct, or am I making this up based upon my own personal version of the books.

The queen has something like 7 misscariages and stillborns, and crib deaths.

With the death of one of his sons Aerys is certain someone is killing his children he even believes that his wife might have been unfaithful.

But Tywin and Pycelle had the means and access(as we don't know if Pycelle was or wasn't in attendance of the Queen) and Pycelle being Tywins toady and having ppl to answer to in the Citadel removing babies potential dragonriders and mates for Rhaegar 2 birds one stone.

No we don't know when Tywin went to Lys but we don't know either if the timing is right. But the fact he went at least lends credence to him being involved with Varys and that lends credence to why Varys has gone out of his way to orchestrate the downfall of house Lannister,I mean not just remove them, but make sure their very names will be riddled with mockery and shame for yrs to come.

Yes its circumstantial, but add it up with other piece of info about Rickard and coconspirators and the picture it forms is not of this peaceful land that TL had built, war was in the air and TL wanted to be on the right side.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

You proved my point, instead of taking care of business he's galvanting around for Tourney and extended stays in the Vale after his father died.

Yeah he might have officially pressed his claim at the Trident, puppet master Jon Arryn and rickard Stark intended to use his claim.

You said they were still wards and you were wrong.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

They were still in the vale or does spliting their time between the two not count? RB the Vale and SE while Ned Winterfell and the Vale, which makes sense given quote:it was the year of the false spring and he was the eighteen again down from the Eryie to the Tourney at HH.

And given Aerys sent to the Vale not Wf or SE they must have spent a considerable amount of time there, and Ned had to go from the Vale to get to Wf and RB from the vale to SE to call his banners.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

How am I disagreeing? The quote was from AGot pg630 Neds POV.

SSM said RB split his time between Storms End, Tourney and the Vale.

Did I miss something? He also said Ned during his time as a ward would go to WF for visits and when he was of age he was free to go where he pleased, so how am I disagreeing

Don't get huffy because I pulled an actual quote that you domt like and backs up my theory.

I didn't say they were still wards, I said they still spent their time in the Vale amd given RB could rule in his own right at the time of his father's death and he was galavanting around westeros and not taking care of business at home but instead still partying in the Vale. I said mya stones birthday proves he was still in the Vale, I never said they were still wards please pull that quote.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Would some please point out where I said or wrote ward? I said they still spent time in the vale after they reach majority of age, never said anything about them still being wards, the words not even in any of my posts until the last two because somehow someone can't read or misinterpreted what I said. I said RB made the choice after his father died to stay in the Vale, I said that he made the marriage pact withLS never said they were still wards.

I definitely said and meamt RB wasn't handling business but rather acting like a perpetual frat boy with Ned in tow.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

The post I made said nothing about them being wards after they were grown. Pull the post. Winterfell is burning states in response to me and said something about wards. Up until I asked where did I say anything about them still being wards after being grown did i even type, write, or post the word ward in this thread.

I make mention that Robert was 16 when his father died and he spends the next 3 years in the Vale but the word nor the intent to imply him still being a ward after this time in now where in attendance in my statement. If anything I implied that he was being irresponsible by still spending time in the vale after his fathers deaths as he's old enough to rule in his own right.

Like I said pull the post where I said they were wards before post #55 because you won't find it.

Can't find that post were I said they were still wards after they were of age? Instead of me saying that they were living and went back to the Vale after they reached majority of age. What about me mentioning that RB was 16 in 78 as he was when his pops was dead and should have been at SE not all over the kingdom or staying in the Vale, he was a lord and he should have been at home. I even mentioned that maybe if he had spent more time at home and not in the vale or chasing tourney he wouldnt have had to fight 3 battles in a day because he was an absent ruler.

Still waiting for that post before 55 where I said grown Ned or Robert were still Jon's wards, instead of them still being in the Vale after they reached being of age?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

You want evidence?

I was no longer asking for evidence. I was explaining to you why I responded the way I did. You said

No this isnt the first time your felt the need to go out of your way to correct me and call my theories crackpot. No I don't pull quotes but I did give enough background to support my claim.

To which I explained why I responded the way I had.

I have corrected you in the past before, when you posted something that seemed to be incorrect (at times, because a reading had provided additional information, or an explanation, about an event in the series). That is true. I do that when I'm in a conversation with someone and I'm being told something that is incorrect. That's what happens on a forum.

But have I ever felt "the need to go out of my way"? No, I haven't. As to the theories you are mentioning. That was only this one. I've never described any of your theories that I encountered like that before.

The thing about "No I don't pull quotes but I did give enough background to support my claim" is, that you, in your original response, did not provide any background.. And again, that is why I responded the way I did.

I suggest we end this conversation now.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.

×
×
  • Create New...