R+L=J v.160

[W1NT3RF3LL]

3 hours ago, John Courage said:

I don't think the WHY of Rhaegar's abduction of Lyanna really has anything to do with R+L=J unless the discussion is leading to a conclusion that Jon is or is not the child of Rhaegar and Lyanna.

ahhhh I can't agree with you there.  I mean personally, after years of sitting through the multiple versions of this thread I think this has been brought up several times on the reasons why he did it, however I think it has just been implied that it was a combination of romantic/attraction and the prophecy he meant to fulfill. 

[UnViserion]

8 hours ago, John Courage said:

I don't think the WHY of Rhaegar's abduction of Lyanna really has anything to do with R+L=J unless the discussion is leading to a conclusion that Jon is or is not the child of Rhaegar and Lyanna.

It actually has almost everything to do with R+L=J. And I don't think anybody was suggesting Jon isn't Lyanna and Rhaegars son so I don't know what the issue is.

and seriously-- what in the Sam-hell are we discussing here then? In what universe do we need 160 volumes on a tired old conclusion for if not to delve into the mechanisms that drove RLJ in the first place? MtnLion says we're getting off topic because he's getting boxed. He knows this thread wouldn't have even achieved "pinned status" if all we discussed was what he is suggesting.

Get a couple hundred more posts under your belt and then come talk to me, k?

[John Courage]

6 minutes ago, Rhaegar the Unworthy said:

It actually has almost everything to do with R+L=J. And I don't think anybody was suggesting Jon isn't Lyanna and Rhaegars son so I don't know what the issue is.

and seriously-- what in the Sam-hell are we discussing here then? In what universe do we need 160 volumes on a tired old conclusion for if not to delve into the mechanisms that drove RLJ in the first place? MtnLion says we're getting off topic because he's getting boxed. He knows this thread wouldn't have even achieved "pinned status" if all we discussed was what he is suggesting.

Get a couple hundred more posts under your belt and then come talk to me, k?

I don't need a couple hundred of posts to discuss any topic with anyone, I've been reading the novels since 1997, so my decades worth of rereads constitutes a pretty well rounded understanding of the series and an opinion as valid as anyone elses. I was suggesting that if the discussion doesn't have to do with whether or not R+L=J is true, then maybe it should have its own thread. A thread called "Why did Rhaegar abduct Lyanna", K? 

[evita mgfs]

2 minutes ago, John Courage said:

I don't need a couple hundred of posts to discuss any topic with anyone, I've been reading the novels since 1997, so my decades worth of rereads constitutes a pretty well rounded understanding of the series and an opinion as valid as anyone elses. I was suggesting that if the discussion doesn't have to do with whether or not R+L=J is true, then maybe it should have its own thread. A thread called "Why did Rhaegar abduct Lyanna", K? 

You go, John Courage!

[John Courage]

9 hours ago, J. Stargaryen said:

Really?

• Rhaegar kidnapped Lyanna. In the text.
• Southron ambitions. In the text.
• Varys whispering to Aerys that HH was a plot by Rhaegar. In the text
• Rhaegar telling Jaime that he means to call a council when he returns from the Trident, and meant to long ago. In the text.

It's almost like you're completely mistaken when you say my conclusion is not based on the text. And for the record, that's the second time you've attacked my argument without actually addressing any points I have made.

1. Rhaegar kidnapped Lyanna. Ok, I agree. He kidnapped her. Where is it suggested in the text that he does it for political reasons?

2. Southron ambitions. Ok, kind of vague, where does anyone in the text connect southron ambitions with the abduction of Lyanna?

3 & 4. Varys whispering to Aerys that HH was a plot by Rhaegar. That Rhaegar had planned on a secret meeting at HH, yet didn't act on it, was the road not taken he's referring to when talking to Jaime.

No council at HH, so no political conspiracy. Unless you can point to somewhere in the text where it says Rhaegar actually met with and conspired with these people at any other point concerning Aerys or abducting Lyanna to touch of some crazy convoluted scheme, I think you're putting more into the text than you're taking away from it. The mystery surrounding the abduction of Lyanna by Rhaegar is provided context through visions, dreams, and old memories, that all seem to hint at romance or prophecy. No one remembers the events as if Rhaegar was acting out some half cooked political conspiracy.

[J. Stargaryen]

3 hours ago, John Courage said:

1. Rhaegar kidnapped Lyanna. Ok, I agree. He kidnapped her. Where is it suggested in the text that he does it for political reasons?

2. Southron ambitions. Ok, kind of vague, where does anyone in the text connect southron ambitions with the abduction of Lyanna?

3 & 4. Varys whispering to Aerys that HH was a plot by Rhaegar. That Rhaegar had planned on a secret meeting at HH, yet didn't act on it, was the road not taken he's referring to when talking to Jaime.

1. It's not directly suggested. Otherwise I might have led with that.

2. Lady Dustin, who tells us about the southron ambitions, doesn't connect it to Lyanna's kidnapping. But why would she know Rhaegar's motive for kidnapping Lyanna? It doesn't even seem like Robert does.

Though, interestingly, Lady Dustin does discuss the southron ambitions while in the Winterfell crypts, right in front of the statues of Rickard, Brandon and Lyanna. Thanks for reminding me. Because it is a curious thing to introduce into the text. Why in Dance, and why in the Winterfell crypts, in front of those statues? Maybe the southron ambitions played a part in their deaths.

3 & 4. I know.

Quote

No council at HH, so no political conspiracy. Unless you can point to somewhere in the text where it says Rhaegar actually met with and conspired with these people at any other point concerning Aerys or abducting Lyanna to touch of some crazy convoluted scheme, I think you're putting more into the text than you're taking away from it. The mystery surrounding the abduction of Lyanna by Rhaegar is provided context through visions, dreams, and old memories, that all seem to hint at romance or prophecy. No one remembers the events as if Rhaegar was acting out some half cooked political conspiracy.

You can absolutely conspire to do something that you don't end up doing.

Where is it suggested in the text that Rhaegar kidnapped Lyanna for the sake of prophecy? There's talk of Rhaegar loving Lyanna, and there is prophecy stuff that is connected to Aegon. Does anyone in the text connect the prophecy stuff to the kidnapping? If not, then people who make the connection on their own must be putting more into the text than they're taking away from it, right? Or, are those people just connecting the dots and theorizing in a pretty standard way?

---

Thanks for attempting to address my points with this post. But all you've done is point out that I'm connecting dots, and that I might be mistaken in doing so, which we already knew. That's part of what makes it a theory instead of a fact.

[John Courage]

3 hours ago, J. Stargaryen said:

1. It's not directly suggested. Otherwise I might have led with that.

2. Lady Dustin, who tells us about the southron ambitions, doesn't connect it to Lyanna's kidnapping. But why would she know Rhaegar's motive for kidnapping Lyanna? It doesn't even seem like Robert does. Thanks for reminding me. Because it is a curious thing to introduce into the text. Why in Dance, and why in the Winterfell crypts, in front of those statues? Maybe the southron ambitions played a part in their deaths.

3 & 4. I know.

You can absolutely conspire to do something that you don't end up doing.

Where is it suggested in the text that Rhaegar kidnapped Lyanna for the sake of prophecy? There's talk of Rhaegar loving Lyanna, and there is prophecy stuff that is connected to Aegon. Does anyone in the text connect the prophecy stuff to the kidnapping? If not, then people who make the connection on their own must be putting more into the text than they're taking away from it, right? Or, are those people just connecting the dots and theorizing in a pretty standard way?

---

Thanks for attempting to address my points with this post. But all you've done is point out that I'm connecting dots, and that I might be mistaken in doing so, which we already know. That's why it's a theory and not a fact.

Let me first say that I apologize for being confrontational. I did not intend to be, but it was Rhaegar the Unworthy's comment that I should get a few hundred posts under my belt that got me a little miffed.

Secondly, I only made one response to you that didn't address the contents of your STAB theory, which was a comment about you using too much imagination in response to a comment that you had made to someone else that they used too little. I have a couple of responses on the thread that did actually address your theory.

Now, I'll address your points:

3 hours ago, J. Stargaryen said:

Lady Dustin, who tells us about the southron ambitions, doesn't connect it to Lyanna's kidnapping. But why would she know Rhaegar's motive for kidnapping Lyanna? It doesn't even seem like Robert does.

If Rhaegar abducted Lyanna out of political machinations, I suspect that those political rivals who were meant to be most affected by the abduction would be able to connect the dots of the political ramifications of the abduction, which no one does nor does anyone ever think of it as a political maneuver.

 

3 hours ago, J. Stargaryen said:

Though, interestingly, Lady Dustin does discuss the southron ambitions while in the Winterfell crypts, right in front of the statues of Rickard, Brandon and Lyanna. Thanks for reminding me. Because it is a curious thing to introduce into the text. Why in Dance, and why in the Winterfell crypts, in front of those statues? Maybe the southron ambitions played a part in their deaths.

She's telling Theon why she hates the Starks. She mentions Rickard's southron ambitions as the reason she doesn't wed Brandon, but she doesn't really discuss it in any detail, and it seems to me to be just a derogatory comment about Rickard's political ambitions for his family, as in its something a southron would do, not a proud and honorable northerner. I do not subscribe to the theory that suggests the Starks, Tullys, Arryns, Lannisters, and Baratheons were in the process of forming an alliance to depose Aerys. I believe they were only doing what noble houses normally do. They intermarry to try and preserve peace, and increase their families status, especially as house paramounts. There is nothing to suggest they were planning on deposing Aerys. Ned never thinks of this supposed conspiracy, Robert never thinks of this supposed conspiracy, Tywin never thinks of this supposed conspiracy, and there is no one in the text that suggests this conspiracy ever existed.

 

3 hours ago, J. Stargaryen said:

You can absolutely conspire to do something that you don't end up doing.

I agree. But you don't address this point:

4 hours ago, John Courage said:

No council at HH, so no political conspiracy. Unless you can point to somewhere in the text where it says Rhaegar actually met with and conspired with these people at any other point

 

The final point you made:

3 hours ago, J. Stargaryen said:

Where is it suggested in the text that Rhaegar kidnapped Lyanna for the sake of prophecy? There's talk of Rhaegar loving Lyanna, and there is prophecy stuff that is connected to Aegon. Does anyone in the text connect the prophecy stuff to the kidnapping? If not, then people who make the connection on their own must be putting more into the text than they're taking away from it, right? Or, are those people just connecting the dots and theorizing in a pretty standard way?

 

No one in the text suggests that Rhaegar kidnapped Lyanna for the sake of prophecy, but that's not what I said. I said, "The mystery surrounding the abduction of Lyanna by Rhaegar is provided context through visions, dreams, and old memories, that all seem to hint at romance or prophecy."

Dany's experiences in the house of the undying for example, where she has multiple visions. The first vision she has concerning Rhaegar is when she sees him with Elia and Aegon, and he tells Elia that Aegon's is the song of ice and fire, but there are three heads of the dragon so there must be one more. The second vision concerning Rhaegar is a few lines later where Dany sees a dying prince, rubies scattering in a river, and the prince murmuring a woman's name with his dying breath. Then we have the vision where Dany sees a blue flower growing from a chink in a wall of ice, that fills the air with sweetness.

We have the story of TKotLT, where Aerys dispatches Rhaegar to find out who the mystery knight is, only to return empty handed. But the next day he crowns Lyanna as the QoLaB with a garland of blue winter roses.

We have Ned's memories and dreams where he recalls Lyanna dying in a bed of blood surrounded by blue winter roses.

We have Barristan Selmy telling Dany that Rhaegar was "fond" of Elia, and later he tells Dany that Rhaegar "loved" his Lady Lyanna and thousands died for it.

We have multiple accounts where Rhaegar is described as being motivated by prophecy. He is described as being a bookish child who only learns the sword and lance when he becomes convinced by something that he reads in a scroll that it is necessary for him to do so in order to fulfill TPTWP prophecy. Later, he communicates with his uncle Aemon via Raven, discussing Aegon when he decides that it's actually his son who is TPTWP. This, in addition to Dany's visions of him, suggests Rhaegar pursued TPTWP prophecy his entire life.

This is all the context provided to flesh out the mystery of the relationship between Rhaegar and Lyanna. Is there any textual evidence that provides even a slight hint that Rhaegar kidnapped Lyanna out of some political conspiracy? Is there any textual evidence that suggests that Rhaegar was ever motivated by politics at all? I don't think so.

I would contend that a person would have to read far more of their own bias or presupposition into the text to arrive at the conclusion that the abduction was politically motivated (since there is little to no textual evidence to support this), than it would take to believe that the abduction was motivated by love (as I believe) or the pursuit of prophecy.

[dreem24]

1 hour ago, John Courage said:

snip

 

100% agree.  Even crowning L shows that R wasn't the best diplomat...

 

And the whole thing if motivated by politics asumes everyone does what R thinks/wants em to do and that no one will plan/do anything for their own gain.

 

Also kidnapping her would create problems from most lords.  How would it be received if the prince could take anyone's dougther highborn or otherwise and get away with no repercussions...  The king is mad and burns people the prince a rapist even if only by rumor once those start go prove you are not...  And the other major and not so major players will not react?  Everyone will do as R wants because???

[J. Stargaryen]

2 hours ago, dreem24 said:

 

100% agree.  Even crowning L shows that R wasn't the best diplomat...

 

And the whole thing if motivated by politics asumes everyone does what R thinks/wants em to do and that no one will plan/do anything for their own gain.

 

Also kidnapping her would create problems from most lords.  How would it be received if the prince could take anyone's dougther highborn or otherwise and get away with no repercussions...  The king is mad and burns people the prince a rapist even if only by rumor once those start go prove you are not...  And the other major and not so major players will not react?  Everyone will do as R wants because???

I believe you're misreading somewhere along the way if you think that everyone did as Rhaegar wanted.

@John Courage I can't quite get to your post at the moment as I am traveling today. It's possible I will be able to later, though I'm not 100% sure I'll have access to a computer for the next ~10 days. But the short version is: I don't see anything in your post that I consider persuasive. For example, you describe the crypt scene between Lady Dustin and Theon. Right, I get what you're saying, but in literature an author will often use subtext to communicate with the audience. That's what I'm suggesting here, so your argument describing the scene doesn't really move me.

No worries about being confrontational earlier. We're cool. Anyway, gotta run. Hopefully I'll be able to get back to you tonight or tomorrow.

[UnmaskedLurker]

A few follow-up comments regarding recent posts by John Courage, Rhaegar the Unworthy and J. Star--

1) I believe it was JC and not ML who suggested we were getting off-topic. IMHO, nothing that touches on RLJ should be considered off-topic on this thread. Similarly, however, if someone wants to start a new thread to focus expressly on a sub-issue (like Rhaegar's motivation), that approach should be acceptable as well. In the years I have been reading this board, from time to time, people have taken one view or the other -- i.e., some arguing that all issues touching on RLJ in any way should only be in the pinned thread and others arguing that the pinned thread should be reserved only for arguments relating to the likelihood of RLJ being true. In practice, the mods seems to have allowed either approach, so I think it can be accepted that either approach is valid.

2) J. Star's comment about lack of imagination was directed toward me. Just to be clear, J Star and I have been exchanging views for long enough that he has earned the right to make such a comment to me -- I was not bothered in the least. I appreciate JC coming to my defense on the issue -- but don't feel like I was put off by JS.

3) I really get annoyed when people suggest that new posters need to post more before their opinions become valid. I think there are respectful ways of explaining the "ways of the board" (as I tried to do in item 1) above) -- and there are dismissive ways. I hope that long-time posters on the board would want to encourage new people joining. Treating them dismissively (unless they are trolls -- trolls don't deserve respect) does not make the board better. JC has been trying to add to the conversation constructively and deserves to be treated with respect.

4) As to the substance of the debate, I think that J. Star is correct that all of us are trying to fill in the missing pieces and none of us has "proof" regarding which theory is correct. Unlike the basic RLJ hypothesis (i.e., that R&L are parents to J), where no other alternative really makes sense and the evidence is quite overwhelming, evidence regarding Rhaegar's motivations does not come close to any level of substantiation that anyone can be certain. All we can do is look at all the surrounding circumstances and use our best judgment regarding what seems to fit the clues best. While I have sympathy for the notion that Rhaegar would have kidnapped Lyanna to get some political advantage, I keep getting stuck on seeing how Rhaegar could have reasonably thought he could turn the situation to his advantage. As alluded to above, J Star thinks it is my lack of imagination that keeps me from seeing the possibility. I have not really relied on my imagination -- I have asked others (specifically Rip and J Star) to use their imagination -- and their imagination results in scenarios that I find too convoluted to persuade me that Rhaegar could have thought such a scheme could have worked. But I do not discount the possibility as it makes some sense from a thematic point of view. Right now, of the theories that have been put forth over the years, I tend to order their likelihood as follows: (1) Rhaegar learned that Aerys was about to arrest Lyanna as KotLT and "kidnapped" her in the "nick of time" to save her from arrest and execution (while hiding out and deciding what to do next, they fell in love and got married, etc. etc.); (2) Rhaegar and Lyanna arranged a fake "kidnapping" due to a combination of romance/prophecy/engagement-breaking motives; (3) Rhaegar had political motives (Rip and J.Star proposed theory), which then led to them falling in love, getting married, etc. etc.; and (4) Rhaegar took Lyanna without her consent due to "prophecy" (or romantic obsession), and then she later came around and fell in love with him, they get married, etc. etc. Of course, knowing GRRM, the real answer is probably (5) something else.

[Starstorm]

I believe there's huge importance in the political ramifications of Rhaegar's kidnapping of Lyanna. Not only does it intertwine R+L=J with the Southron Ambitions, but it also carries parallelism, something Martin is fond using, into the War of the Five Kings. As @MindBomb states here:

Quote

I'm pretty convinced that the Inn at the Crossroads was a part of the abduction story. So, the Tyrion abduction provides some mirroring clues.

The reason Rhaegar didn't travel North with Lyanna, up to Winterfell or even Riverrun, is because he knew Aerys's men would be coming after him. So, he juked them by going the opposite direction. He has allies in the South, the Martells and less importantly, the Daynes. He has the support he needs in order to keep Lyanna safe and, in my humble opinion, send a raven as soon as possible to Winterfell explaining the situation with the KotLT and why he had to keep her safe.

I don't believe the romance came until later, Rhaegar was doing a solid for what he believed were his future allies in claiming his throne. He couldn't predict Brandon Stark was going to be an idiot and ride up to the Red Keep screaming bloody murder, things happened too quickly. It was after they reached the Tower of Joy, I believe, where Rhaegar comforted Lyanna after news of Brandon and Rickard being burned alive reached them.

This leaves direct parallelism to Robb Stark and Jeyne Westerling's relationship.

Where, as we know, Robb took Jeyne's maidenhood and married her to save her honor. I believe Rhaegar did the same, marrying Lyanna to preserve her honor after deflowering her. I think only after that, and his realization of the prophecy, is when he truly fell in love with her, and vice versa. As far as we know, she still carries that child regardless of her mother's meddling, an heir to the North, in her womb.

As for what message the blue roses displayed to the Starks, it was clearly one of alliance, and not one of opposition. In the Southron Ambitions theory, Rhaegar used the Harrenhal tournament as a way to unite his cause with STAB, and use their united forces to coerce his senile, insane father to step down. There's no reason to believe his crowning of Lyanna was anything threatening.

I think if his plan came into fruition, and Rickard got the letter in time, the Targaryen Dynasty would still live on.

Brandon, you messed up, bud. You messed it all up.

[MtnLion]

21 hours ago, J. Stargaryen said:

No. Do you have a quote where someone says that R+L=J? Guess it must not be true, right?

Yes, actually I do have a quote that shows that Jon is a legitimate heir, thus from a married Rhaegar and Lyanna.  I even dissected the text, to make it easier for people to understand.  There is a link to it in my signature, at the tower of joy. 

[Ygrain]

4 hours ago, UnmaskedLurker said:

Right now, of the theories that have been put forth over the years, I tend to order their likelihood as follows: (1) Rhaegar learned that Aerys was about to arrest Lyanna as KotLT and "kidnapped" her in the "nick of time" to save her from arrest and execution (while hiding out and deciding what to do next, they fell in love and got married, etc. etc.); (2) Rhaegar and Lyanna arranged a fake "kidnapping" due to a combination of romance/prophecy/engagement-breaking motives; (3) Rhaegar had political motives (Rip and J.Star proposed theory), which then led to them falling in love, getting married, etc. etc.; and (4) Rhaegar took Lyanna without her consent due to "prophecy" (or romantic obsession), and then she later came around and fell in love with him, they get married, etc. etc. Of course, knowing GRRM, the real answer is probably (5) something else.

(5a) Rhaegar had secret dealings with Rickard to gain support against Aerys, and played on his southron ambition by the polygamy card and Lyanna as his second queen-to-be. Lyanna's "abduction" is just a staged pretext to get her out of the betrothal to Robert without the Starks losing face by breaking their word, and to pull wool over Aerys' eyes so as not to suspect Rhaegar's coalition with the Starks (and by extension, Tullys and Arryns). Unfortunately, the plan backfires, either because Brandon is not told, or he is told but refuses to play along.

...a girl can dream, no?

[Clash]

4 hours ago, UnmaskedLurker said:

Right now, of the theories that have been put forth over the years, I tend to order their likelihood as follows: (1) Rhaegar learned that Aerys was about to arrest Lyanna as KotLT and "kidnapped" her in the "nick of time" to save her from arrest and execution (while hiding out and deciding what to do next, they fell in love and got married, etc. etc.); (2) Rhaegar and Lyanna arranged a fake "kidnapping" due to a combination of romance/prophecy/engagement-breaking motives; (3) Rhaegar had political motives (Rip and J.Star proposed theory), which then led to them falling in love, getting married, etc. etc.; and (4) Rhaegar took Lyanna without her consent due to "prophecy" (or romantic obsession), and then she later came around and fell in love with him, they get married, etc. etc. Of course, knowing GRRM, the real answer is probably (5) something else.

I always believed that referring to a 'kidnapping' was done for reasons of preserving Lyanna's honour after her death and became the accepted narrative since there was no-one from the other side to gainsay it. The reality being that she eloped with Rhaegar willingly and they hid out in Dorne together. I would never have thought Rhaegar to be a political animal. Certainly presenting Lianna with a crown of blue roses at the tourney of Harrenhal wouldn't be a very political move.

 

[dreem24]

7 minutes ago, Clash said:

I always believed that referring to a 'kidnapping' was done for reasons of preserving Lyanna's honour after her death and became the accepted narrative since there was no-one from the other side to gainsay it. The reality being that she eloped with Rhaegar willingly and they hid out in Dorne together. I would never have thought Rhaegar to be a political animal. Certainly presenting Lianna with a crown of blue roses at the tourney of Harrenhal wouldn't be a very political move.

 

I agree and i always thought had Rickard beaten(disciplined) her more as a child instead of giving in to her behaviour she would have known her place and not ran away.. I'm honestly surprised she had no guards with her or anything and can run away/get kidnapped just like this...

[UnmaskedLurker]

3 minutes ago, Ygrain said:

(5a) Rhaegar had secret dealings with Rickard to gain support against Aerys, and played on his southron ambition by the polygamy card and Lyanna as his second queen-to-be. Lyanna's "abduction" is just a staged pretext to get her out of the betrothal to Robert without the Starks losing face by breaking their word, and to pull wool over Aerys' eyes so as not to suspect Rhaegar's coalition with the Starks (and by extension, Tullys and Arryns). Unfortunately, the plan backfires, either because Brandon is not told, or he is told but refuses to play along.

...a girl can dream, no?

I think we might have a winner here. I really don't think this should be labeled as (5a) -- it really is a variation of (3) -- Rhaegar was motivated principally for political reasons under this scenario. You have put all the elements together to show how a political motive (getting STAB on Rhaegar's side or at least STA, as B is going to be really pissed) could have played out -- by having Rickard in favor of Rhaegar and Lyanna getting married but needing a "cover story" so that Robert would not know that Rickard agreed to the engagement being broken.

You have finally come up with the "imagination" to explain how the political motive of Rhaegar might work. I now give this theory much more credence.

I think I will just have to settle for concluding that there are too many possibilities that could work and I think I probably will have to wait until GRRM tells us what really happened (assuming he ever will -- as Rhaegar's motives do not necessarily ever have to be revealed -- but I strongly suspect they will be).

[Rhaenys_Targaryen]

1 hour ago, Ygrain said:

(5a) Rhaegar had secret dealings with Rickard to gain support against Aerys, and played on his southron ambition by the polygamy card and Lyanna as his second queen-to-be. Lyanna's "abduction" is just a staged pretext to get her out of the betrothal to Robert without the Starks losing face by breaking their word, and to pull wool over Aerys' eyes so as not to suspect Rhaegar's coalition with the Starks (and by extension, Tullys and Arryns). Unfortunately, the plan backfires, either because Brandon is not told, or he is told but refuses to play along.

...a girl can dream, no?

But why would Rickard agree to support the Prince over the King, angering the Stormlands in the process?

[Kal-L]

2 hours ago, Ygrain said:

(5a) Rhaegar had secret dealings with Rickard to gain support against Aerys, and played on his southron ambition by the polygamy card and Lyanna as his second queen-to-be. Lyanna's "abduction" is just a staged pretext to get her out of the betrothal to Robert without the Starks losing face by breaking their word, and to pull wool over Aerys' eyes so as not to suspect Rhaegar's coalition with the Starks (and by extension, Tullys and Arryns). Unfortunately, the plan backfires, either because Brandon is not told, or he is told but refuses to play along.

...a girl can dream, no?

Interesting theory that I've seen several times that portrays Rickard as a character perhaps as greedy as Tywin (if not more) which in that case makes me wonder why he didn't broker a more interesting deal, a lot simpler and even better for House Stark. Promising Aegon son to a future daughter of his heir Brandon, that would make his grandson through Brandon and Cat ruler of the North, his granddaughter through B&C queen of the 7K, his grandson through Robert and Lyanna ruler of the Stormlands. Here all he manages to do is to make his family the main protagonist in the comeback of a former taboo with Lyanna being hardly more than a glorified mistress in the eyes of the realm.

1 hour ago, dreem24 said:

I agree and i always thought had Rickard beaten(disciplined) her more as a child instead of giving in to her behaviour she would have known her place and not ran away.. I'm honestly surprised she had no guards with her or anything and can run away/get kidnapped just like this...

I agree with you about Rickard's overall parenting, he should have also taught Brandon the Starks were no Kings since Aegon made King Torrhen bend the knee with his dragons three centuries ago.

[John Courage]

3 hours ago, Ygrain said:

(5a) Rhaegar had secret dealings with Rickard to gain support against Aerys, and played on his southron ambition by the polygamy card and Lyanna as his second queen-to-be. Lyanna's "abduction" is just a staged pretext to get her out of the betrothal to Robert without the Starks losing face by breaking their word, and to pull wool over Aerys' eyes so as not to suspect Rhaegar's coalition with the Starks (and by extension, Tullys and Arryns). Unfortunately, the plan backfires, either because Brandon is not told, or he is told but refuses to play along.

...a girl can dream, no?

I could see Rhaegar communicating with Rickard in secret after the events at HH, maybe to rehash the pact of ice and fire, because I DO believe he fell for her at the Tourney. However, if there was secret communication between them I don't think it had anything to do with Aerys, with the road not traveled and all, but I think if it did happen Rhaegar would definitely be playing off of Rickard's ambition, and it makes sense that they would hatch a plan to "abduct" Lyanna so that her honor remains intact. BUT, I don't think there is any evidence in the text for this, or if there is, where is it?

[Ygrain]

2 hours ago, UnmaskedLurker said:

I think we might have a winner here. I really don't think this should be labeled as (5a) -- it really is a variation of (3) -- Rhaegar was motivated principally for political reasons under this scenario. You have put all the elements together to show how a political motive (getting STAB on Rhaegar's side or at least STA, as B is going to be really pissed) could have played out -- by having Rickard in favor of Rhaegar and Lyanna getting married but needing a "cover story" so that Robert would not know that Rickard agreed to the engagement being broken.

You have finally come up with the "imagination" to explain how the political motive of Rhaegar might work. I now give this theory much more credence.

I think I will just have to settle for concluding that there are too many possibilities that could work and I think I probably will have to wait until GRRM tells us what really happened (assuming he ever will -- as Rhaegar's motives do not necessarily ever have to be revealed -- but I strongly suspect they will be).

Oh, I just picked a random number :-)

I do not claim the theory for solely mine, though, 

1 hour ago, Rhaenys_Targaryen said:

But why would Rickard agree to support the Prince over the King, angering the Stormlands in the process?

Because the king is batshit crazy, will be removed as soon as possible and the Prince becomes the King and his son-in-law. As for the Stormlands, Rickard is completely blameless here - it was all Rhaegar's doing, he took Lyanna, and now that they are married and Lyanna pregnant, there isn't really anything that Rickard can do... and nor can Robert. Even if he or the Faith or all of the Seven Kingdoms refused to accept her marriage, she is no longer eligible to become his wife. He cannot rebel because no-one would support him, and given time, Jon Arryn would talk him out of it.

22 minutes ago, Kal-L said:

Interesting theory that I've seen several times that portrays Rickard as a character perhaps as greedy as Tywin (if not more) which in that case makes me wonder why he didn't broker a more interesting deal, a lot simpler and even better for House Stark. Promising Aegon son to a future daughter of his heir Brandon, that would make his grandson through Brandon and Cat ruler of the North, his granddaughter through B&C queen of the 7K, his grandson through Robert and Lyanna ruler of the Stormlands.

Huh? You mean Rhaegar's son Aegon?

I don't see how this is supposed to be simpler or more convenient:

1) You cannot broker a deal for nonexistent children; what if Brandon had no daughters?

2) Why would Aerys or Rhaegar ever agree to such a match?

3) What if Aegon dies in childhood?

 

22 minutes ago, Kal-L said:

Here all he manages to do is to make his family the main protagonist in the comeback of a former taboo with Lyanna being hardly more than a glorified mistress in the eyes of the realm.

Vastly exaggerating here as the realm is already used to turning a blind eye towards Targaryen marriage excesses. Besides, which one was a glorified mistress, Visenya or Rhaenys?

3 minutes ago, John Courage said:

I could see Rhaegar communicating with Rickard in secret after the events at HH, maybe to rehash the pact of ice and fire, because I DO believe he fell for her at the Tourney. However, if there was secret communication between them I don't think it had anything to do with Aerys, with the road not traveled and all, but I think IF it did happen Rhaegar would definitely be playing off of Rickard's ambition, and it makes sense that they would hatch a plan to "abduct" Lyanna so that her honor remains intact. BUT, I don't think there is any evidence in the text for this, or if there is, where is it?

If Rhaegar indeed had planned to make some moves at HH, that plan was only postponed, not abandoned, and a secret pact with Rickard would inevitably make the Starks Rhaegar's allies. However, I think that Lyanna was his primary motivation and politics sort of tagged along.

Alas, no textual support for this, no, unless you count that peculiar lack of mention of any action on Rickard's part after the supposed abduction.