R+L=J v.160

[Rippounet]

34 minutes ago, MtnLion said:

I don't recall Rhaegar ever confirming that he wanted to depose his father. 

Yes, I'm sure he "meant to call a council" to discuss the weather, or perhaps snarks and grumkins... The fact that he was talking about Aerys with Jaime is just a crazy coincidence, right?

As crazy as how these quotes complement each other:

Quote

Prince Rhaegar shook his head. "My royal sire fears your father more than he does our cousin Robert. He wants you close, so Lord Tywin cannot harm him. I dare not take that crutch away from him at such an hour."

Jaime's anger had risen up in his throat. "I am not a crutch. I am a knight of the Kingsguard."

Rhaegar had put his hand on Jaime's shoulder. "When this battle's done I mean to call a council. Changes will be made. I meant to do it long ago, but... well, it does no good to speak of roads not taken. We shall talk when I return."

Quote

The memory was still bitter. Old Lord Whent had announced the tourney shortly after a visit from his brother, Ser Oswell Whent of the Kingsguard. With Varys whispering in his ear, King Aerys became convinced that his son was conspiring to depose him, that Whent's tourney was but a ploy to give Rhaegar a pretext for meeting with as many great lords as could be brought together. Aerys had not set foot outside the Red Keep since Duskendale, yet suddenly he announced that he would accompany Prince Rhaegar to Harrenhal, and everything had gone awry from there.

Quote

Jon was not entirely innocent of the history of the realm; his own maester had seen to that. "That was the year of the Great Council," he said. "The lords passed over Prince Aerion's infant son and Prince Daeron's daughter and gave the crown to Aegon."

"Yes and no. First they offered it, quietly, to Aemon. And quietly he refused. The gods meant for him to serve, not to rule, he told them. He had sworn a vow and would not break it, though the High Septon himself offered to absolve him. Well, no sane man wanted any blood of Aerion's on the throne, and Daeron's girl was a lackwit besides being female, so they had no choice but to turn to Aemon's younger brother-Aegon, the Fifth of His Name.

And of course, the "Rhaegar likely just forgot about politics" arguments hinges on completely dismissing this passage from TWOAIF:

Quote

Chief amongst the Mad King's supporters were three lords of his small council: Qarlton Chelsted, master of coin, Lucerys Velaryon, master of ships, and Symond Staunton, master of laws. The eunuch Varys, master of whisperers, and Wisdom Rossart, grand master of the Guild of Alchemists, also enjoyed the king's trust. Prince Rhaegar's support came from the younger men at court, including Lord Jon Connington, Ser Myles Mooton of Maidenpool, and Ser Richard Lonmouth. The Dornishmen who had come to court with the Princess Elia were in the prince's confidence as well, particularly Prince Lewyn Martell, Elia's uncle and a Sworn Brother of the Kingsguard. But the most formidable of all Rhaegar's friends and allies in King's Landing was surely Ser Arthur Dayne, the Sword of the Morning.

To Grand Maester Pycelle and Lord Owen Merryweather, the King's Hand, fell the unenviable task of keeping peace between these factions, even as their rivalry grew ever more venomous. In a letter to the Citadel, Pycelle wrote that the divisions within the Red Keep reminded him uncomfortably of the situation before the Dance of the Dragons a century before, when the enmity between Queen Alicent and Princess Rhaenyra had split the realm in two, to grievous cost. A similarly bloody conflict might await the Seven Kingdoms once again, he warned, unless some accord could be reached that would satisfy both Prince Rhaegar's supporters and the king's.
Had any whiff of proof come into their hands to show that Prince Rhaegar was conspiring against his father, King Aerys's loyalists would most certainly have used it to bring about the prince's downfall. Indeed, certain of the king's men had even gone so far as to suggest that Aerys should disinherit his "disloyal" son, and name his younger brother heir to the Iron Throne in his stead. Prince Viserys was but seven years of age, and his eventual ascension would certainly mean a regency, wherein they themselves would rule as regents.
In such a climate, it was scarce surprising that Lord Whent's great tournament excited much suspicion. Lord Chelsted urged His Grace to forbid it, and Lord Staunton went even further, suggesting a prohibition against all tourneys.

Such events were widely popular with the commons, however, and when Lord Merryweather warned Aerys that forbidding the tournament would only serve to make him even more unpopular, the king chose another course and announced his intention to attend. It would mark the first time that Aerys II had left the safety of the Red Keep since the Defiance of Duskendale. No doubt His Grace reasoned that his enemies would not dare conspire against him under his very nose. Grand Maester Pycelle tells us that Aerys hoped that his presence at such a grand event would help him win back the love of his people.

If that was indeed the king's intent, it was a grievous miscalculation. Whilst his attendance made the Harrenhal tourney even grander and more prestigious than it already was, drawing lords and knights from every corner of the realm, many of those who came were shocked and appalled when they saw what had become of their monarch. His long yellow fingernails, tangled beard, and ropes of unwashed, matted hair made the extent of the king's madness plain to all. Nor was his behavior that of a sane man, for Aerys could go from mirth to melancholy in the blink of an eye, and many of the accounts written of Harrenhal speak of his hysterical laughter, long silences, bouts of weeping, and sudden rages.

 

 

The first bolded sentences are about the two sides at court. I see no reason why Yandel's biases would be reason enough to dismiss them.

 

The last paragraph I copy-pasted is even more interesting though... It suggests that Aerys coming to Harrenhal, while perhaps preventing a council, was not that good for his cause... If Rhaegar wanted to make a move before Harrenhal, it seems he might have found it even easier to find support after the tournament...

 

[UnViserion]

6 hours ago, MtnLion said:

I will make it official, though and report the deviation from theme.  This is a side topic, that should be discussed elsewhere, and has nothing to do with R+L=J.  (Perhaps the Heresy folks are stumped on finding good participants to play with on their thread?) 

You can't. make. this. stuff. up.

[UnViserion]

1 hour ago, MtnLion said:

I don't recall Rhaegar ever confirming that he wanted to depose his father.  

I don't recall Rhaegar ever confirming that he and Lyanna were in love and/or married. 

[Ser Leftwich]

11 minutes ago, Rippounet said:

 

The last paragraph I copy-pasted is even more interesting though... It suggests that Aerys coming to Harrenhal, while perhaps preventing a council, was not that good for his cause... If Rhaegar wanted to make a move before Harrenhal, it seems he might have found it even easier to find support after the tournament...

 

What if it was a double bluff from Rhaegar. That he was trying to draw Aerys out, to show the realm just how far gone he has gotten.

[UnViserion]

10 minutes ago, Ser Leftwich said:

What if it was a double bluff from Rhaegar. That he was trying to draw Aerys out, to show the realm just how far gone he has gotten.

I like this! Would've been clever.

From the World book we are told the people were appalled at what their monarch had become. 

[John Courage]

1 hour ago, Rippounet said:

2 hours ago, John Courage said:

If Rhaegar was actively conspiring with STAB to depose his father, why would he throw a monkey wrench into the whole thing by abducting Lyanna?

Ah, but Rhaegar abducting Lyanna did not "throw a monkey wrench" in any plan... What went awry was Brandon Stark rushing to King's Landing to challenge Rhaegar, after obviously having received incomplete -or false- information. And then, after Brandon being detained by Aerys, both Rickard Stark and his heir being killed by Aerys, making all negotiation with House Stark now impossible...

In fact, Aerys's actions are so extreme that they suggest that he did believe the Starks were scheming against hm...

Why did Rhaegar abduct Lyanna though? Why not just allow her to marry Robert? It makes no sense. Robert was the Lord Paramount of the Stormlands at this point. Why would Rhaegar jeopardize the alliance by abducting Robert's bride to be? What sense does that make politically?

[Ygrain]

13 hours ago, Bael's Bastard said:

Regarding polygamy, it is my opinion that the lack of polygamy after Maegor shouldn't be taken to mean much of anything, except that most kings wouldn't have seen any benefit to it. It wasn't common when Aegon did it, and it didn't suddenly become common when Maegor did it. I see no indication that any Targaryen king after Maegor actually wanted multiple wives at one time. The only people I can think of who wanted to take another wife while they were already married or betrothed were Prince Daemon (brother of Viserys I) and Prince Daemon Blackfyre. Both could be argued to have been denied for reasons which had nothing to do with anything to do with an issue with polygamy. The brother of Viserys was childless and wanted to marry the heir to the Iron Throne. Daemon Blackfyre wanted to marry the only legitimate daughter of Aegon IV, who was a key piece in Daeron II's plans for Dorne. Just because Aegon had a ton of mistresses doesn't mean he wanted multiple wives. Maybe he did, maybe he didn't, but I don't think we have any indication he actually did. I think things like refraining from polygamy and remarrying after your first wife died were probably no-brainers after what happened between the descendants of Rhaenys and Visenya and the Dance.

Thanks for saving me the time :-)

[Rippounet]

12 hours ago, John Courage said:

Why did Rhaegar abduct Lyanna though? Why not just allow her to marry Robert? It makes no sense. Robert was the Lord Paramount of the Stormlands at this point. Why would Rhaegar jeopardize the alliance by abducting Robert's bride to be? What sense does that make politically?

It makes a lot of sense... From the Crown's perspective, the STAB alliance, without any renewed ties to House Targaryan, could only be a threat. From Rhaegar's perspective, it was totally worth antagonising Robert by taking Lyanna, if it meant getting the support of the other three houses (Stark, Tully, and Arryn).

And let's bear in mind, this is assuming that Rhaegar's plan was about marrying Lyanna from the start.

The political angle can have many variations, for example i) Rhaegar wanted to marry Lyanna to get the favor of STA or ii) Rhaegar abducted Lyanna to put pressure on STAB to side with him, or iii) he abducted her to create a crisis between STAB and Aerys (knowing Aerys was uncapable of handling matters diplomatically), or iv) he was using Lyanna as a messenger, and of course the great v) he only abducted her to rescue her  -from a greater threat.
The basic idea is that the abduction was politically motivated, though this does not (as I've kept repeating) exclude that he was attracted to her, or even that he had prophecy in mind. I think they only fell in love once they got stuck together after Rickard's death, but this is only my pet version.
Textual support aside, this angle has an edge over the love/prophecy ones, because it is the only one that does not make Rhaegar look really bad.
 

[Bael's Bastard]

15 hours ago, RumHam said:

But it is interesting that the worldbook says Daeron refused to permit him more than one wife, rather than something like "refused to grant him Daenery's hand." It strongly implies a Targaryen prince can't just take a second wife without the king's permission. Something also suggested by the other Daemon asking Viserys to dissolve his marriage so that he could marry Rhaenyra. Regardless of whether Viserys was going to let him marry his daughter, Daemon clearly saw his existing marriage as an obstacle that he would need the king's help eliminating.

I have no doubt that a prince's or princess' marriage traditionally goes through the king, and I imagine most Targaryen princes and princesses went along with the king's wishes regardless of their own feelings about the matter. But we have examples where princes or princesses married without the king's permission, and whatever the different risks and consequences in each case, they all remained valid marriages.

Regarding Daemon's first marriage, I think the implication is that he either legally required Viserys' approval to dissolve the existing marriage, or he concluded that the risks of pursuing it without Viserys' approval or against his will outweighed the possible rewards. He was, after all, pitching the dissolving of his existing marriage and the marriage to Rhaenyra as a package deal.

He wanted to be rid of Rhea regardless, but in requesting to be wed to Rhaenyra, he was asking Viserys to essentially make Daemon his male successor as future king consort, and put Daemon's hypothetical descendants on the throne. If Daemon had been less ambitious, who knows whether he would have been as worried about Viserys' permission. We simply don't know whether he truly legally required his permission to end his marriage.

We know he didn't require Viserys' permission to wed Laena or Rhaenyra, and at those times was willing to face whatever consequences Viserys threw at him as a result of doing it without his permission. I don't think we have as clear a picture about all that is required for a marriage to be dissolved or set aside as we do the validity of marriages once they've been consummated, whether with permission or not.

15 hours ago, RumHam said:

I think the mock wedding with Merry Meg suggests that he did, at least in his youth with her. It's possible that by the time he was king he didn't see the point anymore. 

My opinion is, if Aegon was responsible for or knew about the mummer in place of the septon, I would probably interpret it as meaning that he wasn't actually interested in marrying Meg. If he wasn't responsible for or didn't know about the mummer in place of the septon, I would probably interpret it as meaning that he actually did want to marry Meg, and perhaps even considered himself to be married to both Naerys and Meg for a time.

[John Courage]

3 hours ago, Rippounet said:

It makes a lot of sense... From the Crown's perspective, the STAB alliance, without any renewed ties to House Targaryan, could only be a threat. From Rhaegar's perspective, it was totally worth antagonising Robert by taking Lyanna, if it meant getting the support of the other three houses (Stark, Tully, and Arryn).

And let's bear in mind, this is assuming that Rhaegar's plan was about marrying Lyanna from the start.

The political angle can have many variations, for example i) Rhaegar wanted to marry Lyanna to get the favor of STA or ii) Rhaegar abducted Lyanna to put pressure on STAB to side with him, or iii) he abducted her to create a crisis between STAB and Aerys (knowing Aerys was uncapable of handling matters diplomatically), or iv) he was using Lyanna as a messenger, and of course the great v) he only abducted her to rescue her  -from a greater threat.
The basic idea is that the abduction was politically motivated, though this does not (as I've kept repeating) exclude that he was attracted to her, or even that he had prophecy in mind. I think they only fell in love once they got stuck together after Rickard's death, but this is only my pet version.
Textual support aside, this angle has an edge over the love/prophecy ones, because it is the only one that does not make Rhaegar look really bad.
 

No offense, but this is completely insane. You think his has more textual support than the love/prophecy motivation? The difference here is, you don't have to insert so many moving parts into the text to assume the love/prophecy motivation as you do the political one, you only have to accept the context that's given. You haven't given any textual support for a political motivation for the abduction. You have only said that Rhaegar was a political player, therefore he could have abducted Lyanna for political reasons. Yet the reasons you have given for the political abduction don't stand up to any scrutiny. These reasons are to garner the support of the Starks? Why would the Tullys or Arryns support the abduction of Lyanna, especially if it was just accommodate Rickard's ambition? Why wouldn't Rickard just set aside Robert's betrothal? Why would they hatch a scheme for Rhaegar to "abduct" Lyanna, you think they thought that would be politically safer? You think Rhaegar would be willing to jeopardize the integrity of the alliance to depose his father by stealing the fiance of the Lord Paramount of the Stormlands? You think Robert would just let that slide? You think this doesn't make Rhaegar look bad, you think this makes political sense? We are never going to see eye to eye on this. All the context for the relationship between Rhaegar and Lyanna, as I've said multiple times, is provided for by visions, dreams, and old memories that suggest prophecy and romance. This is the explanation for why Rhaegar would do something so rash and politically dangerous, if he thought he was pursuing a cause higher than Westeros politics, a cause that had influenced his whole life. You're worried about Rhaegar looking bad, I'm not. Jon Snow did the right thing by letting the wildlings south of the wall, but it was politically stupid. Rhaegar may have had his own supporters at court, and he may have conspired to call a meeting at HH, but none of that ever happened, and there is no textual evidence that suggests he ever actively conspired to depose his father (more than calling a secret council at HH), meaning he never told "S" to do "b" and "c", or "T" to do "e" and "f", "A" to do "g" and "h", or "B" to do "y" and "z". None of this theory makes any political sense.

[Rippounet]

3 minutes ago, John Courage said:

No offense, but this is completely insane. You think his has more textual support than the love/prophecy motivation?

From a technical standpoint, the political angle has significantly more textual support than the prophecy angle, but both have far less than the romantic one (because this is the one taken by most characters, in-story).

3 minutes ago, John Courage said:

The difference here is, you don't have to insert so many moving parts into the text to assume the love/prophecy motivation as you do the political one, you only have to accept the context that's given.

Funny, because I would say the context of Lyanna's abduction was very well described in TWOAIF and strongly suggests a political motive for the abduction... I have no idea what you mean by "moving part" ...

3 minutes ago, John Courage said:

All the context for the relationship between Rhaegar and Lyanna, as I've said multiple times, is provided for by visions, dreams, and old memories that suggest prophecy and romance. This is the explanation for why Rhaegar would do something so rash and politically dangerous, if he thought he was pursuing a cause higher than Westeros politics, a cause that had influenced his whole life. You're worried about Rhaegar looking bad, I'm not.

Quite honestly, I'm worried about Rhaegar looking like a total moron.

I think you're confusing cause and consequence. That Rhaegar and Lyanna fell in love and had a child that will end up being very important is a given here. But I believe this is a well-known consequence.
If you can find textual support to say this was Rhaegar's plan from the moment he abducted Lyanna, , i.e., that "love and prophecy" were the cause of everything, I'd be very very glad to see it. And this is why we're not off-topic btw: because the question here is to know whether Rhaegar always intended to have Jon or not.

Our real problem of course is that you'll never come close to meeting the level of proof that you're asking me to provide...
Basically this conversation is going nowhere. And I'm not closer to understanding why people are so intent on dismissing the political angle...

 

[The Snowfyre Chorus]

2 hours ago, Rippounet said:

I'm not closer to understanding why people are so intent on dismissing the political angle...

I'd say... for the sake of consistency. After all, your participation in the conversation here is kind of like House Targaryen's claim to royalty. Memorable mainly because it's so recent and new. In the larger context of history, it fades to insignificance.  After all, this conversation and its conclusions are now (approximately) 12,000 years old.  Or however old the internet turns out to be.

[Ygrain]

On 28. 4. 2016 at 9:16 PM, Kal-L said:

The queen was about to die and everyone knew the King didn't love her, at the time there was no particular offense towards her. With the hindsight, I don't even need to specify that the idea of polygamous marriage would make a scandale and would be perceived as outrageously disgraceful towards the queen, despite the fact she is a Targaryen.

Speaking about replacing someone who is about to die - boasting about replacing her, in fact - is indeed outrageously disgraceful and it has zero to do with polygamy. Note that it was not "the realm" but Naerys' brothers who intervened and punished the outrage.

Not to mention that had Aegon IV intend a second marriage, his motivation would be precisely that - to hurt and disgrace Naerys, not because that this is what polygamy means, but because he would mean it that way. 

[John Courage]

11 hours ago, Rippounet said:

Funny, because I would say the context of Lyanna's abduction was very well described in TWOAIF and strongly suggests a political motive for the abduction... I have no idea what you mean by "moving part" ...

What is the political motive for the abduction according to TWOIAF? By the way, I went back and read my last post to you, and I realized I used "you" alot, and it sounded kind of accusatory and judgemental to me, so I want to apologize. I'm not trying to be an asshole, but I do a very poor job of communicating my real emotions, which was incredulity to be sure, but I'm not trying to attack you personally. 

 

11 hours ago, Rippounet said:

From a technical standpoint, the political angle has significantly more textual support than the prophecy angle, but both have far less than the romantic one (because this is the one taken by most characters, in-story).

I disagree with the prophecy part, agree with the romance part, but to me the prophecy/love angle is kind of tied up together.

 

11 hours ago, Rippounet said:

I think you're confusing cause and consequence. That Rhaegar and Lyanna fell in love and had a child that will end up being very important is a given here. But I believe this is a well-known consequence.

You see, I think you're confusing cause and consequence. I think the reason for the abduction is love/prophecy, and its the political implication that is the consequence.

 

11 hours ago, Rippounet said:

If you can find textual support to say this was Rhaegar's plan from the moment he abducted Lyanna, , i.e., that "love and prophecy" were the cause of everything, I'd be very very glad to see it.

The same can be said for the any textual support for the abduction being political. But like I said earlier, the only textual support we have for Rhaegar acting conspiratorially in any regard is by calling for secret meeting at HH, a meeting that never actually took place. However, the textual support for the abduction being romantic/prophetic litters the text with all hints through dreams, visions, and old memories from several different POV chapters.

 

13 hours ago, John Courage said:

Yet the reasons you have given for the political abduction don't stand up to any scrutiny. These reasons are to garner the support of the Starks? Why would the Tullys or Arryns support the abduction of Lyanna, especially if it was just accommodate Rickard's ambition? Why wouldn't Rickard just set aside Robert's betrothal? Why would they hatch a scheme for Rhaegar to "abduct" Lyanna, you think they thought that would be politically safer? You think Rhaegar would be willing to jeopardize the integrity of the alliance to depose his father by stealing the fiance of the Lord Paramount of the Stormlands? You think Robert would just let that slide? You think this doesn't make Rhaegar look bad, you think this makes political sense?

Here is where I came off sounding a bit like an asshole, and I apologize again, but you never did address these concerns in your post.

[John Courage]

1 minute ago, John Courage said:

from several different POV chapters.

Well that's stupid, all the chapters are someone's POV , but I think you know what I'm getting at, POV characters that are having the visions, dreams, and old memories.

[Rippounet]

5 hours ago, John Courage said:

What is the political motive for the abduction according to TWOIAF? By the way, I went back and read my last post to you, and I realized I used "you" alot, and it sounded kind of accusatory and judgemental to me, so I want to apologize. I'm not trying to be an asshole, but I do a very poor job of communicating my real emotions, which was incredulity to be sure, but I'm not trying to attack you personally.

Here is where I came off sounding a bit like an asshole, and I apologize again, but you never did address these concerns in your post.

Well, I did find your last post a bit aggressive, but didn't take any particular offense. And this is the internet, so don't worry too much about it.
At any rate, I appreciate the apology.

Anyway, the reason I didn't address any specific concerns is because that would be starting to defend one or several specific theories, which I don't really want to do... For starters, this would be truly off-topic. And then, I'm not committed to any specific theory myself. I think I like the idea that Rhaegar was forced to abduct Lyanna to protect her, and was then framed by a shadow player that wanted a serious conflict between STAB and House Targaryen. But I have zero textual support to defend such a theory ; it's just circumstancial evidence.

I've come to think that the importance of politics is something you see or you don't see. There are quotes to defend it, but in the end, each reader is free to develop their own perspective on things. Point is, as far as R+L=J is concerned, I don't think Jon was planned from the start.

Now, if I were to try to answer your bolded question though... Since TWOAIF states that someone was trying to convince Aerys that Rhaegar crowning Lyanna as QoLaB meant that Rhaegar was trying to curry favor with the Starks (and perhaps STAB)... And since we know that the political context was very tense and Aerys extremely paranoid... Then it's easy to imagine that Aerys eventually believed that and ordered Lyanna assassinated -or abducted (an extreme move by someone known to be extreme). So Rhaegar would have abducted her to protect her because he felt responsible for putting her in danger in the first place... I think this is the best political angle we can find with the text we have at present.

5 hours ago, John Courage said:

You see, I think you're confusing cause and consequence. I think the reason for the abduction is love/prophecy, and its the political implication that is the consequence.

Ah well, we can agree to disagree I think, and leave it at that.
At least, we're kind of back on-topic, since the question we are debating is really whether Rhaegar wanted a child with Lyanna from the start or not.  

5 hours ago, John Courage said:

The same can be said for the any textual support for the abduction being political.

I'm aware of that.
I think what boggles my mind is the fact that the political angle does not exclude the others... So from my point of view, it should be easy to say that yes, politics likely had a role somewhere. In other words, politics takes nothing away from romance or prophecy, so I don't see a need to defend them.

5 hours ago, John Courage said:

However, the textual support for the abduction being romantic/prophetic litters the text with all hints through dreams, visions, and old memories from several different POV chapters.

That the relationship is romanticized is undeniable ; but it doesn't tell us that much about how romantic the relationship itself was. A distinction can -and should- be made between the way the relationship is presented after the facts by the people at large, and the way the relationship actually developed for the people involved in it. Just as a distinction can be made between the literary devices used to introduce the relationship, and the actual events of the relationship.
I think a very strong case can be made that in ASOAIF, events are seldom remembered as they happened, and are often simplified and romanticized. Just as it is possible to argue that literary devices are sometimes misleading. This is part of ASOAIF's specific brand of  "realism."
Throughout the books we have numerous stories and songs, and yet we are at the same time forced to see that the reality is always far different from what is commonly believed or expected ; I would argue that there is a constant deconstruction of the romanticisation of stories throughout the books. The best example is of course Sansa's stories contrasted to the reality she experiences. Quentyn's character and demise make a mockery of fairy tale tropes. Jorah Mormont boldly wins Lynesse's heart but they really don't live happily ever after. Robb loses his crown for love, but the reader knows that Tywin was actually pulling the strings. Tyrion is believed to be an evil twisted monster by the people of KL, but we know he actually saved the city. And a running theme is that nothing is as it is in songs, that the ballads don't tell about the fear, the pain, the shit, the smells... Or the politics.
Yes, Rhaegar and Lyanna's love story is constantly romanticized, generally by the characters, but also, to a lesser extent, through the use of some literary devices, by the author. Which is precisely why I think there's more to it than that. I'm not saying that R+L is not romantic in nature... What I'm saying is that it is so romanticized that, within the the world of ice and fire as we know it, this is a sign that reality was likely far more complex...
What you're assuming is that Rhaegar is a rather archetypal "romantic hero" and I can't blame you for that: the brooding and isolation, the melancholy, the bloody harp (mentioned all the time), the prophecy, the tragic love interest, the rebellion against his father (and his status, and his society...), the passionate and elegant nature, the physical beauty and strength, even the tragic death... Rhaegar has in fact been portrayed as just that by Martin. Take the wikipedia page, and you pretty much have Rhaegar's characterisation...
Problem... Is... This seems slightly out of place to me. So is there a romantic strand hidden in ASOAIF, or is this a trap for the reader to fall into? Is Rhaegar really a romantic/tragic (emo ) hero? Does the text not allow for a return to realism? The fact that Rhaegar is also described as a political player does just that, and I think you only dismiss this at your own peril...
I'm sure you'll still vote for the typical tragic love story, and I can't blame you for that with the text we have at present. But I find it hard to believe that Martin spent thousands of pages playing with archetypes and not have done just that for Rhaegar.
Let's see this as a bet. I've just bet -too much- time writing this that Rhaegar is not a romantic hero, that his characterisation is only meant to mislead the reader into thinking that he did it all for love, and that you're the one who fell into Martin's trap, not me...
 

[UnViserion]

The prophecy angle, while somewhat supported in the text, is incredibly weak. There were so many other routes Rhaegar could have taken that were were better. And this is supposedly an intelligent, dutiful, honorable character. "I think I'm gonna play to the possible fantasies of a very young northern girl so I can have a third child/dragon head forged from the meeting of ice and fire to save the world." Gimme a break 

On it's own, the love angle is completely contrived. Rhaegar's the heir to the Iron Throne, with an implicit responsibility to keep the real m INTACT, not to fracture it by running off with a pretty young northern girl he's met once. 

A political motive all on it's own is the strongest in my opinion, but I personally believe the best catalyst to RLJ is all three playing a part. Of course Rhaegar wanted to have a third child. Of course it's possible he loved Lyanna (though I believe it's more likely he fell in love with her during their time together). And OF COURSE the STAB  marriages posed a threat to the Targaryen dynasty. To say otherwise is to be willfully ignorant of the political climate in Westeros at the time. The Targs were as weak as they'd ever been.

again, a combination of the three provides the most coherent explanation. 

Lastly, I see ppl questioning how Rhaegar abductin Lyanna benefits him politically. Who's to say he participated willingly, or that the plan was hatched to benefit him in the first place? *edit* in fact, no one on the Targaryen side stands to lose more by having their name stamped on Lyanna's disappearance than Rhaegar *edit* After all, dutiful, honorable Rhaegar had a royal family to protect. He had 7 Kingdoms to inherit, and a long night to prepare for. He also had a paranoid, crazy father who was already distrustful of him, and who certainly wouldn't have been above the low road tactic of using his own sons family as leverage to achieve whatever means he had in mind. 

I know, I know-- it makes no sense...

[Kal-L]

10 hours ago, Ygrain said:

Speaking about replacing someone who is about to die - boasting about replacing her, in fact - is indeed outrageously disgraceful and it has zero to do with polygamy. Note that it was not "the realm" but Naerys' brothers who intervened and punished the outrage.

Certainly not as disgraceful as leaving your bedridden wife who almost died to give you a heir in order to elope with a teenage girl to whom you publicly express your lust few months ago.

Lord Bracken was a social climber who wanted his daughter queen and most of all his bastard grandson legitimised, his action was definitely tactless still, he wouldn't have allowed himself to do so had it been another King, more respectful and concerned about his wife. Why would the realm react to that 'offense', he isn't talking about putting his daughter as a second wife, he is proposing her as his new queen after the first one pass away. No one cares about the greedy social climbers of King's Landing, today it's him yesterday it was Otto Hightower and tomorrow it will be Tywin Lannister. However you did well to note that it is Daeron and Aemon and not the King Aegon who thought it as an outrage and forced him to put her away when they were sure the queen survived.

10 hours ago, Ygrain said:

Not to mention that had Aegon IV intend a second marriage, his motivation would be precisely that - to hurt and disgrace Naerys, not because that this is what polygamy means, but because he would mean it that way. 

You highlighted some interesting side of Aegon's personality notably his main motivation which is to hurt and shame his wife Naerys. Had he felt he could pull a polygamous marriage I'm fairly sure he would have had multiple wives if nothing, just to spite Naerys, Aemon and Daeron because yes disagrace towards the first wife is what means polygamy. Taking a second wife means to question the status of the queen who loses her privileged place as she now shares the position and especially if the other is a favourite of the King, it means having new heirs with another woman who can be a danger in the succession, it also emphasizes the fact she is not enough, not good enough to assume the role of Queen consort.

[Sly Wren]

5 hours ago, Rhaegar the Unworthy said:

Lastly, I see ppl questioning how Rhaegar abductin Lyanna benefits him politically. Who's to say he participated willingly, or that the plan was hatched to benefit him in the first place? *edit* in fact, no one on the Targaryen side stands to lose more by having their name stamped on Lyanna's disappearance than Rhaegar *edit* After all, dutiful, honorable Rhaegar had a royal family to protect. He had 7 Kingdoms to inherit, and a long night to prepare for. He also had a paranoid, crazy father who was already distrustful of him, and who certainly wouldn't have been above the low road tactic of using his own sons family as leverage to achieve whatever means he had in mind. 

YUP!!! 

The idea that Rhaegar might have been stuck dealing with his father WHILE trying to make changes makes a lot of sense. He got stymied at Harrenhal and had to deal with the mess. Given Aerys' propensity to harbor grudges, seems like Rhaegar could have been under his father's suspicion for a while after the tournament. And thus Rhaegar had to be extra careful. 

Fits with some of the echoes in the novels between what we know about Rhaegar and what we see both Jaime and Theon do--both trying to please the ambitions of fathers whose ideas may not have been in the best interest of the realm. Or fitting with the sons' ideals. 

I think there's a good chance Rhaegar took Lyanna first to appease his Mad Dad. Or possibly under the influence of Tywin. Then Rhaegar got Lyanna away from Aerys when he realized how bad it really was going to get (perhaps after Brandon and Rickard). 

I'm not sold on Rhaegar as the father of Lyanna's child. But if he got her away from the king who burned her father and strangled her brother, it could make a lot more sense for her to fall for him. 

[SFDanny]

Leave for a few weeks and all kinds of interesting posts appear!

Let me weigh in on Rhaegar and his political motives at Harrenhal. I think what we have in his crowning of Lyanna is primarily a political act. It is a statement to the realm that the Crown Prince claims an interest in Lyanna. Not a statement he wants her romantically, though that may be developing too. It is a statement to the STAB alliance that he disapproves of their proposed alliances and that he stands with his father against attempts to remove the Targaryen dynasty from power. Why does he do this?

Because he called the Harrenhal tourney as a way to circumvent the STAB alliance grab for power and to offer himself as a peaceful candidate to resolve their concerns around his father's madness. The road not taken is indeed a council to replace Aerys. The STAB alliance spits in his face. They have no interest in replacing the father with the son, but want to do away with Targaryen rule. This comes to a head with the dishonoring of the Lady Ashara, lady-in-waiting to the Prince's wife and sister to his best friend. The best candidate for this act is the heir to the North himself. It looks like Brandon sleeps with Ashara with no intention of ending his impending marriage to Catelyn. He treats her, along with her close relationship to Rhaegar and Elia, as unworthy of respect. If I'm right, I'm pretty sure Brandon had every understanding of what were the political consequences of his actions.

Rhaegar's response is to say I will support my father rather than allow this web of alliances to come into being and this new power replace the Targaryen's rule. He is not being stupid in rejecting the people he needs for a successful council replacing Aerys. He is recognizing the political reality that the STAB alliance has gone too far in its ambitions and can never be part of his proposal. He has very little choice other than to stand with Aerys. But how he does it is perhaps the most interesting part. He does it by "honoring" Lyanna. Just as Aerys did on the first day of the tourney by "honoring" Jaime with his selection to the Kingsguard. Both of these acts are pointed not only at sending a lesson to High Lords the Targaryens see as disloyal, but also at the alliance in particular. Rhaegar proclaims his interest in Lyanna who is to be married to Robert, and Aerys takes away Jaime's ability to marry Lysa and thereby expand the STAB alliance to include the Lannisters. So, we see in the course of the tourney, the swing of the political fortunes of Westeros. Rhaegar offers a hand of peace and unity in replacing his father, and it is slapped away.

Anyway, my thoughts on the subject in a nutshell. One of these days I will finish an essay on the subject, but life keeps getting in the way.

edit:While I'm at it let me address the "kidnapping." 

After Harrenhal Aegon is born, and Rhaegar learns of Elia's inability to have any more children, or her inability to have more children without risking her death. He departs on a journey into the Riverlands with a handful of friends seeking answers. I'm convinced that this is largely to seek counsel from either the Ghost of High Heart and/or the Greenseers on the Isle of Faces regarding matters of prophecy and the need for one more head of the dragon. I don't think this starts with a search for Lyanna.

I believe the meeting with Lyanna is a chance meeting, and during it Lyanna asks him for help in stopping her impending marriage to Robert. I think the Stark response to Harrenhal is to move the marriages of the alliances forward and that includes Lyanna's marriage to Robert. They "double down" on moving the STAB alliance forward. His "kidnapping" is instead a "rescue" that Daenerys wishes for from her own wedding all those years later. The swords are pointed at Lyanna's escort and they run off together.

Is it for love? Perhaps the Crown Prince has been obsessed with Lyanna since their encounter at Harrenhal. I think it likely. Perhaps the need for another mother to give birth to his "third head of the dragon" is revealed to him as the answer for his problems. Or perhaps he simply wants to stop the marriage he objected to at Harrenhal from taking place. I think all three play a role in his decision to help Lyanna. But I think there is another motive at play here. I think he "owes" Lyanna for what he sees as using her to make his political point at Harrenhal. She may think his crowning a act of love, or understand other motives behind it, but there can be no doubt by crowning her he has placed her at the center of the struggle between Targaryens and the alliance.

What happens next though, is instructive of Rhaegar's thinking. He not only takes Lyanna away from her family, he takes her away from Aerys's power as well. If this was a purely political act against the alliance he would bring Lyanna to King's Landing and hold her hostage with all of the power of the crown behind him. He does not. He hides away with her with only the power of a handful of friends to help him and her ride out the anger they know will be coming from both sides.It is a desperate move, but likely the only narrow path that rescues Lyanna and does not give her over to an even worse fate.

In any case, that is my two cents on the subject.