What if Rhaegar didn't take Lyanna?

[stateofdissipation]

21 minutes ago, the trees have eyes said:

Nope.  The marriage alliance between the Starks and Tullys (Brandon and Catelyn which became Ned and Catelyn) is just your normal run of the mill marriage between two noble families planned in peacetime.

The marriage alliance between the Tullys and Arryns (Lysa and Jon) is specifically beacuase Jon Arryn needs Hoster's military support in the Robellion.  Without Rhaegar kidnapping / eloping with Lyanna ,Jon Arryn would have had no need to lower himself to marry Lysa.  GRRM has this confirmed to us us by both Lysa and Catelyn.  You can assume they are both wrong if you want to I suppose but it's there all the same as the reason for Lysa's unhappy marriage and estrangement from her family.

Nope.  The marriage alliance between the Starks and Tullys (Brandon and Catelyn which became Ned and Catelyn) is just your normal run of the mill marriage between two noble families planned in peacetime.

There are extensive marriage records... Can you find another example of one great house marrying into another?  If it is run of the mill it should be easy.  

Tully-Stark-Baratheon marriage... is not run of the mill nor peaceful.

 

It is not an assumption that Lysa and Cat are wrong.  Both completely ignore the Tully-Stark aspect of the double wedding.  It is a fact that ignoring the consequences of Hoster marrying one daughter into a house in open rebellion against Aerys is wrong.  They are both wrong by omission.

 

If a Arryn-Tully marriage bound Hoster to the cause then so did a Stark-Tully...  If Stark-Tully made Hoster a rebel then Arryn-Tully was not a necessity of war--- not a result of Rhaegar kidnapping Lyanna.

 

 

[WSmith84]

Except Jon and Ned married at the same time. So presumably Hoster wouldn't have married Cat to Ned either if Jon had refused. That's what all the textual evidence suggests.

[The Wolves]

1 hour ago, WSmith84 said:

Except Jon and Ned married at the same time. So presumably Hoster wouldn't have married Cat to Ned either if Jon had refused. That's what all the textual evidence suggests.

So Hoster would just throw away the possibility of his daughter marrying a heir to a great house, his grandchild being Lord of the North, and an alliance with one of the greatest and oldest houses in the country because Arryn refused a marriage? 

Tully was not a stupid man. 

[WSmith84]

7 hours ago, The Wolves said:

So Hoster would just throw away the possibility of his daughter marrying a heir to a great house, his grandchild being Lord of the North, and an alliance with one of the greatest and oldest houses in the country because Arryn refused a marriage? 

Tully was not a stupid man. 

No, he wasn't. He was a clever and quite ruthless man from what we know. Perhaps he would have sided with Aerys and angled for some marriages from the loyalists. Or perhaps he was bluffing and, had Jon Arryn said no, he would have caved. Point is, he can't marry Cat to Ned and then refuse them swords. He's already committed to the rebels at that point. Refusing them swords just puts himself and his daughter at risk. So I think the threat must have been made, even if it was a bluff.

[Jon's Queen Consort]

11 hours ago, stateofdissipation said:

Ned married Cat... do we need a text quote for that?

You have Catelyn's musings and Lysa's words... 

you do not have a basis in fact for their beliefs... It is a fact that is what they thought and said but not necessarily what happened.

Hoster and Jon believed that a marriage between Ned and Catelyn would not subject house Tully to the wrath of Aerys should the rebellion fail.

---a textual basis for that?

 

You need both for Hoster to be able to impose conditions on his support of the rebellion and to have those conditions met.

In short you don't have text to support what you think. When from the other hand we have both text and previous examples about it. 

[WSmith84]

I should also point out that, prior to the rebellion, Hoster was trying to marry Lysa to Jaime. And Jon Arryn seemed content to not marry again, naming his nephew as heir. So, all in all, without the rebellion it's pretty unlikely that a Lysa-Jon match would have happened.

[devilish]

How I think things would shape up

Aerys will rule for a couple of more years (5-6 years).  As he descends into madness he will keep on pissing off Tywin and Rhaegar until they will finally crack. A deal  will be made between Tywin and Rhaegar which I believe to be similar to these line. Tywin will commit his troops to Rhaegar’s cause as long as Jamie is released from KG and Aegon would marry a Lannister offspring.  Rhaegar will use his dazzling charm to convince the Martells to participate. Considering how Aerys treated Rhaenys I doubt that they would need a lot of persuasion on the matter.

A number of marriages will be made. Cersei will marry Willas, which will bring the Tyrells in Rhaegar’s side.  The Martells will propose a marriage between Arrianne and Eddard/Benjen. Hoster will sense something is happening and will propose to have Rhaenys promised to Edmure Tully. It all depends on whether Rhaegar have promised his daughter to Tywin (ie to marry Jamie) or no. Considering that Cat has married Brandon and that Lyanna had married Robert, Hoster will have a big say in what is g

At one point Tywin would use his contacts within KL (Pycelle and Jamie) to have Rhaegar’s family + Jamie rescued. Their escape will trigger Aerys madness who would declare them (+ Rhaegar) as enemy of the kingdom. At that point ravens will be sent from both sides to all big houses demanding support.  

This is how I think they would fight

Rebels

Lannisters
Tyrells
Martells
Tullys

Loyalists

Arryn
Baratheon
Crownlands

Neutrals (or apparent neutrals ie spend ages to regroup all the army)

Starks

[stateofdissipation]

6 minutes ago, WSmith84 said:

I should also point out that, prior to the rebellion, Hoster was trying to marry Lysa to Jaime. And Jon Arryn seemed content to not marry again, naming his nephew as heir. So, all in all, without the rebellion it's pretty unlikely that a Lysa-Jon match would have happened.

Hoster tried to marry Lysa to Jamie pre rebellion but refused a Tyrion-Lysa pairing.

Jon had married twice and failed to produce an heir.  Jon had named his nephew his heir.

 

Take a look at aSoS SS pages 38 -39.

Quote

 

Lysa had gushed happily of the sons she was certain they carried...      She was so happy...

 

Catelyn had always thought that Lysa had simply been late, but what if she had been with child...

 

If she (Lysa) had lost a child before that might explain her Father's words and much more besides...

 

 

The abortion was of Petyr's child conceived after Brandon wounded Petyr and apparently aborted after her marriage to Jon.

Quote

Lord Hoster groaned. "Dead."  His hand groped for hers.  "you'll have others... sweet babes, and trueborn."-- aSoS SS 35

Why would Hoster wait so long...

 

Quote

He (Jon) needed a young wife if House Arryn was to continue...  A young wife known to be fertile.

 

pregnant made Lysa known to be fertile.

 

Hoster allowed Lysa to nurse Petyr.  The resulting pregnancy may have made Lsya soiled but it also made her a suitable candidate for Jon's third wife. 

 

Quote

His (Jon's) first two wives had left him childless, his brother's son had been murdered with Brandon stark in KIng's Landing, his gallant cousin had died in the battle of the bells. -- aSoS SS page 39

Later

Quote

 

Your Father's father had no sibling, but his father had a sister who married a younger son of Lord Wymar Royce, of the junior branch.  They had three daughters all of whom married Vale Lordlings.  A Wyanwood and a Corbray for certain.  The youngest... it might have been a Templeton, but...

"Mother." There was a sternness in Robb's tone. "You forget.  My father had four sons."

...

"Jon's more a Stark than some lordlings from the Vale that have never so much as set eyes on Winterfell."

aSoS BG page 58.

 

Though Catelyn does know all about the legal lines of succession she does not seem to understand the personal and emotional aspects of the process.  

There is a major difference between an heir produced directly and secondary heirs with the former being immeasurably superior to the minds of most.  Catelyn seems to believe that so long as a blood claim can be made then all is well. 

The desire of Jon to produce an heir and Robb to have his father's son rule the North are parallels.  Catelyn glosses over both points in favor of the technical claims.

[WSmith84]

40 minutes ago, stateofdissipation said:

Hoster tried to marry Lysa to Jamie pre rebellion but refused a Tyrion-Lysa pairing.

Jon had married twice and failed to produce an heir.  Jon had named his nephew his heir.

 

Take a look at aSoS SS pages 38 -39.

 

The abortion was of Petyr's child conceived after Brandon wounded Petyr and apparently aborted after her marriage to Jon.

Why would Hoster wait so long...

 

 

pregnant made Lysa known to be fertile.

 

Hoster allowed Lysa to nurse Petyr.  The resulting pregnancy may have made Lsya soiled but it also made her a suitable candidate for Jon's third wife. 

 

Later

Though Catelyn does know all about the legal lines of succession she does not seem to understand the personal and emotional aspects of the process.  

There is a major difference between an heir produced directly and secondary heirs with the former being immeasurably superior to the minds of most.  Catelyn seems to believe that so long as a blood claim can be made then all is well. 

The desire of Jon to produce an heir and Robb to have his father's son rule the North are parallels.  Catelyn glosses over both points in favor of the technical claims.

Well, presumably Hoster refused Tyrion because he didn't want a dwarf for a son-in-law and didn't want to risk a dwarf grandson. Not to mention that Tyrion's chances of inheriting the Rock were always slim. And Hoster was hardly the last person to refuse Tyrion. Plus, he probably didn't want to wait for over a decade for Tyrion to mature enough to wed. 

Jon Arryn had plenty of time to wed again after his second wife died, but he didn't. Why? He'd have no lack of offers. So why not marry? There must be a fair few widows knocking around with children that were young enough to have more.

Sorry, the idea of Hoster betting that Lysa would definitely sleep with Petyr whilst he was wounded (and betting that Petyr was even capable after such a grievous wound) in the hope that she would definitely get pregnant to demonstrate her fertility is laughable. Lysa nearly died from her abortion. That's an enormous risk for such a small gain. 

[the trees have eyes]

14 hours ago, stateofdissipation said:

Nope.  The marriage alliance between the Starks and Tullys (Brandon and Catelyn which became Ned and Catelyn) is just your normal run of the mill marriage between two noble families planned in peacetime.

There are extensive marriage records... Can you find another example of one great house marrying into another?  If it is run of the mill it should be easy.  

Tully-Stark-Baratheon marriage... is not run of the mill nor peaceful.

 

It is not an assumption that Lysa and Cat are wrong.  Both completely ignore the Tully-Stark aspect of the double wedding.  It is a fact that ignoring the consequences of Hoster marrying one daughter into a house in open rebellion against Aerys is wrong.  They are both wrong by omission.

 

If a Arryn-Tully marriage bound Hoster to the cause then so did a Stark-Tully...  If Stark-Tully made Hoster a rebel then Arryn-Tully was not a necessity of war--- not a result of Rhaegar kidnapping Lyanna.

 

 

The Stark - Tully marriage plan was entirely peaceful.  If you mean to suggest these Houses planned a rebellion to unseat the Targaryens prior to the events of Brandon and Rickard's deaths and Aerys calling for both Ned and Robert to be killed then come out and say so.  Ditto for the Stark - Barratheon marriage plans.

When the Stark - Tully marriage was planned there was absolutely no hint that an Arryn - Tully alliance was ever contemplated.  That only came about much later after Jon raised the flag of rebellion and Hoster extorted Jon's consent to marry Lysa as the price of the Tullys joining the rebellion.

So, no, if Rhaegar had not stolen / eloped with Lyanna Jon would not have married Lysa.  You can conjecture that he would have but that is all it is.

Houses often have many sons and daughters married into many different families.  Look at how many families are married into the Freys.  This doesn't automatically mean that in a civil war they would join in a rebellion or, given how many Houses they were married into, they could avoid conflicting loyalties.  The Frey are tied to House Lannister after all by Genna's marriage to Emmon Frey.  So just because Hoster Tully had betrothed his daughter to Brandon Stark when the Starks were dutiful subjects doesn't make him automatically a rebel supporter. Nor would a marriage as he could have sat things out initially to see who got the upper hand.  But a formal alliance where he pledged his troops to Jon Arryn in return for Jon marrying his daughter does.  There was of course no equivalent pledge of troops in the Brandon - Catelyn betrothal as no warfare was in mind.  If Ned had demanded it later as part of the marriage pact Hoster could easily have refused the match but as he was inclined to marry Lysa to Jon and back the rebellion it didn't become a factor so it's a moot point.

If Jon had refused Hoster (a very unwise decision given the expediency of accepting) Hoster might easily have decided to remain loyal to Aerys and broken the betrothal between Ned-as-replacement-for-Brandon  and Catelyn.  The king had demanded Ned's head so he would be amply justified in doing so.

[stateofdissipation]

2 hours ago, WSmith84 said:

Well, presumably Hoster refused Tyrion because he didn't want a dwarf for a son-in-law and didn't want to risk a dwarf grandson. Not to mention that Tyrion's chances of inheriting the Rock were always slim. And Hoster was hardly the last person to refuse Tyrion. Plus, he probably didn't want to wait for over a decade for Tyrion to mature enough to wed. 

Jon Arryn had plenty of time to wed again after his second wife died, but he didn't. Why? He'd have no lack of offers. So why not marry? There must be a fair few widows knocking around with children that were young enough to have more.

Sorry, the idea of Hoster betting that Lysa would definitely sleep with Petyr whilst he was wounded (and betting that Petyr was even capable after such a grievous wound) in the hope that she would definitely get pregnant to demonstrate her fertility is laughable. Lysa nearly died from her abortion. That's an enormous risk for such a small gain. 

Jon Arryn had plenty of time to wed again after his second wife died,but he didn't. Why?

Game of Thrones appendix has his second wife dying of a winter chill... that is vague at best.  "plenty of time" is a fabrication.

He (Jon) needed a young wife if House Arryn was to continue...  A young wife known to be fertile. --Catelyn

There must be a fair few widows knocking around with children that were young enough to have more.

Interesting suggestion but also a fabrication.

 

Sorry, the idea of Hoster betting that Lysa would definitely sleep with Petyr whilst he was wounded (and betting that Petyr was even capable after such a grievous wound) in the hope that she would definitely get pregnant to demonstrate her fertility is laughable.

(On a side note if Hoster was "betting" there would be no "definite" outcome.   That would be planning.)

The seriousness of Petyrs wound is provided by Catelyn's testimony and Petyr telling of a large scar.

However the physical limitations from the injury did not prevent him from fathering a child with Lysa.

 

Lysa nearly died from her abortion. That's an enormous risk for such a small gain. 

The risk of near death from an abortion would have to be established before the abortion in order for there to be a risk taken.  

Administering moon tea does not directly and predictably lead to nearly dying.

[WSmith84]

2 hours ago, stateofdissipation said:

Game of Thrones appendix has his second wife dying of a winter chill... that is vague at best.  "plenty of time" is a fabrication.

He (Jon) needed a young wife if House Arryn was to continue...  A young wife known to be fertile. --Catelyn

And so Jon Arryn decided his best bet was to hope that Hoster Tully's marriage attempts with the Lannisters fell though, that Hoster's daughter would get pregnant and then abort the child thus proving her fertility? Rather than just marrying someone else and try again?

Neither Robert nor Eddard mention any wife of Jon's when speaking or thinking of their time fostered there, and Ned was fostered around eight years. That would indicate to me that Jon Arryn's wife was no longer alive. That's plenty of time to find a new bride.

Interesting suggestion but also a fabrication.

Actually, it's pretty much a certainty. Men die. Men with children die. Just find a widow under thirty with at least one child and you're good to go. Not many are going to refuse being the Lady of the Vale.

(On a side note if Hoster was "betting" there would be no "definite" outcome.   That would be planning.)

The seriousness of Petyrs wound is provided by Catelyn's testimony and Petyr telling of a large scar.

However the physical limitations from the injury did not prevent him from fathering a child with Lysa.

Well, Cat says that the final blow was so brutal that she was certain it was fatal. Regardless, hoping that a man who received such a wound could perform sexually is a fool's game.

The risk of near death from an abortion would have to be established before the abortion in order for there to be a risk taken.  

Administering moon tea does not directly and predictably lead to nearly dying.

Aborting a child is never going to be risk-free in a medieval setting. Moon tea is safe when used to terminate a pregnancy early, but we've little data to judge its safety in a late-stage pregnancy. Besides, it's not even proof that Lysa can carry a child to full-term. It's proof she can get pregnant, but that doesn't mean she won't suffer from miscarriages or still-births. Jon Arryn might as well just marry her unsoiled, or marry someone else.

 

[stateofdissipation]

1 hour ago, the trees have eyes said:

The Stark - Tully marriage plan was entirely peaceful.  If you mean to suggest these Houses planned a rebellion to unseat the Targaryens prior to the events of Brandon and Rickard's deaths and Aerys calling for both Ned and Robert to be killed then come out and say so.  Ditto for the Stark - Barratheon marriage plans.

When the Stark - Tully marriage was planned there was absolutely no hint that an Arryn - Tully alliance was ever contemplated.  That only came about much later after Jon raised the flag of rebellion and Hoster extorted Jon's consent to marry Lysa as the price of the Tullys joining the rebellion.

So, no, if Rhaegar had not stolen / eloped with Lyanna Jon would not have married Lysa.  You can conjecture that he would have but that is all it is.

Houses often have many sons and daughters married into many different families.  Look at how many families are married into the Freys.  This doesn't automatically mean that in a civil war they would join in a rebellion or, given how many Houses they were married into, they could avoid conflicting loyalties.  The Frey are tied to House Lannister after all by Genna's marriage to Emmon Frey.  So just because Hoster Tully had betrothed his daughter to Brandon Stark when the Starks were dutiful subjects doesn't make him automatically a rebel supporter. Nor would a marriage as he could have sat things out initially to see who got the upper hand.  But a formal alliance where he pledged his troops to Jon Arryn in return for Jon marrying his daughter does.  There was of course no equivalent pledge of troops in the Brandon - Catelyn betrothal as no warfare was in mind.  If Ned had demanded it later as part of the marriage pact Hoster could easily have refused the match but as he was inclined to marry Lysa to Jon and back the rebellion it didn't become a factor so it's a moot point.

If Jon had refused Hoster (a very unwise decision given the expediency of accepting) Hoster might easily have decided to remain loyal to Aerys and broken the betrothal between Ned-as-replacement-for-Brandon  and Catelyn.  The king had demanded Ned's head so he would be amply justified in doing so.

When the Stark - Tully marriage was planned there was absolutely no hint that an Arryn - Tully alliance was ever contemplated.  That only came about much later after Jon raised the flag of rebellion and Hoster extorted Jon's consent to marry Lysa as the price of the Tullys joining the rebellion.

It is safe to say that neither Lysa nor Cat knew of an Arryn-Tully marriage until shortly before it happened.

It is also safe to say that Lysa and Catelyn were under the impression that Hoster offered the support of house Tully in exchange for Jon marrying Lysa... and that neither Cat nor Lysa considered that marrying a Stark in open rebellion would have bound house Tully to the rebellion.   The latter being short sighted at best and blatantly stupid at worst.  

 

Support for the Arryn-Tully alliance pre-dating open rebellion comes from aSoS SS pages 38 and 39.

That text places Lysa's abortion after her marriage to Jon Arryn.  We know that Petyr was the father and the abortion was then "much later."

 

You can conjecture that he would have but that is all it is.

the assertion that Jon married Lysa for Tully swords and spears is conjecture.   It is conjecture and heresay from Cat and Lysa...  Catelyn thinks she figured out the truth over fifteen years after the event.   The source of Lysa's statements is not given.  

The post was what if Rhaegar had not kidnapped Lyanna.

..Robert Baratheon marries Lyanna Stark-- not questioned

..Catelyn Tully marries Brandon Stark-- not questioned

..Jon Arryn marries Lysa Tully--  

countered by Cat and Lysa believe Jon married Lysa for Tully swords post rebellion--countered by Cat's marriage to Ned already bound the Tullys to the rebellion.

...at best it is possible that the Arryn-Tully Alliance was a result of the kidnapping.

 

Houses often have many sons and daughters married into many different families.  Look at how many families are married into the Freys.  This doesn't automatically mean that in a civil war they would join in a rebellion or, given how many Houses they were married into, they could avoid conflicting loyalties. 

The Frey are tied to House Lannister after all by Genna's marriage to Emmon Frey. 

really?

The Frey's overthrew their overlord and are currently occupying Riverrun... as a result of their connection to the Lannisters.

 

So just because Hoster Tully had betrothed his daughter to Brandon Stark

Just because Hoster Tully Lord of the Riverlands betrothed his daughter to the heir to the North--

Meaning that a son of Catelyn and Brandon could have inherited the North and the Riverlands...

 

when the Starks were dutiful subjects

Dutiful as in riding to King's Landing and calling on the prince to come out to die or demanding trial by combat....  not very dutiful or subject...

 

doesn't make him (Hoster) automatically a rebel supporter.

there were not rebels for the Brandon-Catelyn marriage.... The Ned-Catelyn marriage made Hoster a rebel supported--- Ned was a rebel-

But a formal alliance where he pledged his troops to Jon Arryn in return for Jon marrying his daughter does. 

do you mean formal as in they filed  it at the court house---  Cat figured it out 15 plus years later... and she could have just gone down to the department of formal alliances and pledges---  (Note to rebels.. if the cause looks lost burn the department of formal alliances and pledges first.  Or burn it because such a department can never do any good for anybody.)

There was of course no equivalent pledge of troops in the Brandon - Catelyn betrothal as no warfare was in mind. 

There did not need to be a pledge of troops.. the kingdom was pledged and that includes its troops.  

If Ned had demanded it later as part of the marriage pact Hoster could easily have refused the match

you just switched from Brandon to Ned... and invented a different marriage pact--- and go on to ignore that Ned was in rebellion-

but as he was inclined to marry Lysa to Jon and back the rebellion it didn't become a factor so it's a moot point.

Now we left out the marriage of Cat to Ned (a rebel) in favor of the later marriage of Lysa to Jon (a rebel)

Moot--subject to debate, dispute, or uncertainty

there is no uncertainty, dispute, or debate... Hoster was bound to the rebellion with Cat's marriage to Ned the arrangement for which pre-dated the Lysa-Jon marriage. (at least in Cat's head) 

[stateofdissipation]

Quote

 

Game of Thrones appendix has his second wife dying of a winter chill... that is vague at best.  "plenty of time" is a fabrication.

He (Jon) needed a young wife if House Arryn was to continue...  A young wife known to be fertile. --Catelyn

 

And so Jon Arryn decided his best bet was to hope that Hoster Tully's marriage attempts with the Lannisters fell though, that Hoster's daughter would get pregnant and then abort the child thus proving her fertility? Rather than just marrying someone else and try again?

Hoster married a pregnant Lysa... if Cat's conclusion about Lysa losing a child at Riverrun are correct.  It was not even   

Neither Robert nor Eddard mention any wife of Jon's when speaking or thinking of their time fostered there, and Ned was fostered around eight years. That would indicate to me that Jon Arryn's wife was no longer alive. That's plenty of time to find a new bride.

Neither Bob nor Ned mention --blank-- absence of evidence is not evidence of absence...

Quote

Interesting suggestion but also a fabrication.

Actually, it's pretty much a certainty. Men die. Men with children die. Just find a widow under thirty with at least one child and you're good to go. Not many are going to refuse being the Lady of the Vale.

The practice of Lords of great houses marrying widows with children.... not the existence of widows... but a highborn widow under the age of 30 with at least one child... is kind of a pretty specific request.  Luckily there is an extensive timeline... which one were you referring to.

Quote

 

(On a side note if Hoster was "betting" there would be no "definite" outcome.   That would be planning.)

The seriousness of Petyrs wound is provided by Catelyn's testimony and Petyr telling of a large scar.

However the physical limitations from the injury did not prevent him from fathering a child with Lysa.

 

Well, Cat says that the final blow was so brutal that she was certain it was fatal. Regardless, hoping that a man who received such a wound could perform sexually is a fool's game.

Relying on a teen girl's description of a certainly fatal blow (though it was not) as the basis for determining if a teen boy is capable of an erection and ejaculation--- is what kind of game?   Spoiler... if you determined the boy was incapable you were wrong.

Quote

 

The risk of near death from an abortion would have to be established before the abortion in order for there to be a risk taken.  

Administering moon tea does not directly and predictably lead to nearly dying.

 

Aborting a child is never going to be risk-free in a medieval setting.

A child... and a child it was--- Hoster called it dead --- the description does sound like a pretty late term abortion

Moon tea is safe when used to terminate a pregnancy early, but we've little data to judge its safety in a late-stage pregnancy.

well  it apparently works late term too

Besides, it's not even proof that Lysa can carry a child to full-term. It's proof she can get pregnant, but that doesn't mean she won't suffer from miscarriages or still-births. Jon Arryn might as well just marry her unsoiled, or marry someone else.

Jon Arryn did not just marry Lysa soiled... he married her pregnant and pregnant enough to be verified without a medical professional.  Later the pregnancy was terminated without mention of a medical professional but with Lysa reciting the recipe.

these people practice trial by combat... and half a hundred other superstitions..  the reasonable thing?  

[the trees have eyes]

On 25/07/2016 at 10:39 PM, stateofdissipation said:

When the Stark - Tully marriage was planned there was absolutely no hint that an Arryn - Tully alliance was ever contemplated.  That only came about much later after Jon raised the flag of rebellion and Hoster extorted Jon's consent to marry Lysa as the price of the Tullys joining the rebellion.

It is safe to say that neither Lysa nor Cat knew of an Arryn-Tully marriage until shortly before it happened.

It is also safe to say that Lysa and Catelyn were under the impression that Hoster offered the support of house Tully in exchange for Jon marrying Lysa... and that neither Cat nor Lysa considered that marrying a Stark in open rebellion would have bound house Tully to the rebellion.   The latter being short sighted at best and blatantly stupid at worst.  

 

Support for the Arryn-Tully alliance pre-dating open rebellion comes from aSoS SS pages 38 and 39.

That text places Lysa's abortion after her marriage to Jon Arryn.  We know that Petyr was the father and the abortion was then "much later."

 

You can conjecture that he would have but that is all it is.

the assertion that Jon married Lysa for Tully swords and spears is conjecture.   It is conjecture and heresay from Cat and Lysa...  Catelyn thinks she figured out the truth over fifteen years after the event.   The source of Lysa's statements is not given.  

The post was what if Rhaegar had not kidnapped Lyanna.

..Robert Baratheon marries Lyanna Stark-- not questioned

..Catelyn Tully marries Brandon Stark-- not questioned

..Jon Arryn marries Lysa Tully--  

countered by Cat and Lysa believe Jon married Lysa for Tully swords post rebellion--countered by Cat's marriage to Ned already bound the Tullys to the rebellion.

...at best it is possible that the Arryn-Tully Alliance was a result of the kidnapping.

 

Houses often have many sons and daughters married into many different families.  Look at how many families are married into the Freys.  This doesn't automatically mean that in a civil war they would join in a rebellion or, given how many Houses they were married into, they could avoid conflicting loyalties. 

The Frey are tied to House Lannister after all by Genna's marriage to Emmon Frey. 

really?

The Frey's overthrew their overlord and are currently occupying Riverrun... as a result of their connection to the Lannisters.

 

So just because Hoster Tully had betrothed his daughter to Brandon Stark

Just because Hoster Tully Lord of the Riverlands betrothed his daughter to the heir to the North--

Meaning that a son of Catelyn and Brandon could have inherited the North and the Riverlands...

 

when the Starks were dutiful subjects

Dutiful as in riding to King's Landing and calling on the prince to come out to die or demanding trial by combat....  not very dutiful or subject...

 

doesn't make him (Hoster) automatically a rebel supporter.

there were not rebels for the Brandon-Catelyn marriage.... The Ned-Catelyn marriage made Hoster a rebel supported--- Ned was a rebel-

But a formal alliance where he pledged his troops to Jon Arryn in return for Jon marrying his daughter does. 

do you mean formal as in they filed  it at the court house---  Cat figured it out 15 plus years later... and she could have just gone down to the department of formal alliances and pledges---  (Note to rebels.. if the cause looks lost burn the department of formal alliances and pledges first.  Or burn it because such a department can never do any good for anybody.)

There was of course no equivalent pledge of troops in the Brandon - Catelyn betrothal as no warfare was in mind. 

There did not need to be a pledge of troops.. the kingdom was pledged and that includes its troops.  

If Ned had demanded it later as part of the marriage pact Hoster could easily have refused the match

you just switched from Brandon to Ned... and invented a different marriage pact--- and go on to ignore that Ned was in rebellion-

but as he was inclined to marry Lysa to Jon and back the rebellion it didn't become a factor so it's a moot point.

Now we left out the marriage of Cat to Ned (a rebel) in favor of the later marriage of Lysa to Jon (a rebel)

Moot--subject to debate, dispute, or uncertainty

there is no uncertainty, dispute, or debate... Hoster was bound to the rebellion with Cat's marriage to Ned the arrangement for which pre-dated the Lysa-Jon marriage. (at least in Cat's head) 

So you still maintain that there was a Tully-Arryn marriage alliance planned that we have no word of in the books and you assert - out of thin air - that If Rhaegar had not kidnapped / eloped with Lyanna Jon would still have married Lysa?

Ok, if that's your thing, it's your thing but you aren't soing much to explain why you think this way.

You also seem to have deliberately misinterpreted some of what I said to argue against a strawman - never a good sign so just in case you really didn't understand:

when the Starks were dutiful subjects

Dutiful as in riding to King's Landing and calling on the prince to come out to die or demanding trial by combat....  not very dutiful or subject...

Yes, mate, dutiful subjects.  When Rickard and Hoster arranged Brandon and Catelyn's betrothal the Starks and Tullys both were dutiful subjects, and the Arryns and Barratheons too because the events that led to the rebellion were all far in the future and no one was plotting rebellion or warfare.  That all came later.

But a formal alliance where he pledged his troops to Jon Arryn in return for Jon marrying his daughter does. 

do you mean formal as in they filed  it at the court house---  Cat figured it out 15 plus years later... and she could have just gone down to the department of formal alliances and pledges---  (Note to rebels.. if the cause looks lost burn the department of formal alliances and pledges first.  Or burn it because such a department can never do any good for anybody.)

Much as Cat likes to think Hoster raised her a bit like a son prior to Edmund's birth she was not privy to strategic or military councils so you can be a mocking dick as much as you want but Cat and Lysa both independently give us this information for a reason.  Hoster Tully made it a condition of joining the rebellion that Jon marry Lysa.  It's not in the court house of your imagination but it is in the books.

There was of course no equivalent pledge of troops in the Brandon - Catelyn betrothal as no warfare was in mind. 

There did not need to be a pledge of troops.. the kingdom was pledged and that includes its troops.  

Not at all.  A dynastic marraige alliance may be useful and it may have a strong foundatoin borne out of mutual interests.  Or like the Lannister - Frey union, or, cough, cough, the Frey - Tully union it may be entirely discarded if it looks to be more of a curse than a blessing.  So the betrothal of Brandon and Catelyn did not pledge the Tullys to expend their entire "kingdom's" resources in support of the Starks at all, Hoster was not all in, he could be as circumspect or as bold as he wished.  Hence his demand that Jon marry Lysa in return for his armed support in the rebellion despite the pre-existing betrothal of his daughter to Brandon and then Ned.  This is fairly obvious but you ignore it for some reason.

If Ned had demanded it later as part of the marriage pact Hoster could easily have refused the match

you just switched from Brandon to Ned... and invented a different marriage pact--- and go on to ignore that Ned was in rebellion-

Brandon died.  So did Rickard.  I'm sure you are aware of this.  It's kind of necessary to switch to Ned.  Ned offered himself as replacement for Brandon in fulfilment of the pact but as you so rightly say Ned was by this time labelled a rebel so you might suppose he would press Hoster to call his banners to support him.  But Hoster didn't either allow Catelyn to marry Ned or call his banners until Jon Arryn agreed to marry Lysa.  Pretty simple really.

but as he was inclined to marry Lysa to Jon and back the rebellion it didn't become a factor so it's a moot point.

Now we left out the marriage of Cat to Ned (a rebel) in favor of the later marriage of Lysa to Jon (a rebel)

What don't you understand if you read the two bolded parts of the same sentence together rather than apart?  If Ned had turned up at Riverrun as an attainted rebel and told Hoster he was there to marry Catelyn in place of Brandon and wanted Hoster to call his banners Hoster could have told him to bugger off, renounced the betrothal and barred the doors.  But as he was an ambitious man and saw a way to get married into the Arryn family as well as the Starks and come out of the rebellion with his house in a stronger position that before he was inclinded to play ball and joint the rebellion.  But the betrothal made with Rickard while there were no clouds on the horizon did not bind him to do any such thing.

there is no uncertainty, dispute, or debate... Hoster was bound to the rebellion with Cat's marriage to Ned the arrangement for which pre-dated the Lysa-Jon marriage. (at least in Cat's head) 

What you are not considering is how drastically the situation changed between Rickard aranging for Brandon to be betrothed to Catelyn and Aerys murdering Rickard and Brandon and calling for Robert and Ned's heads.  You are approaching this with a dogmatic mindset that is similar to saying that Sansa's betrothal to Joffrey at Winterfell in AGOT bound the Starks and Barratheons together and that's that.  Well, newsflash for you: events occur and loyalties and strategies change because of them.

Moot--subject to debate, dispute, or uncertainty

Well, while we're talking: "A moot point can be either an issue open for debate, or a matter of no practical value or importance because it's hypothetical".  Hoster dealt with Jon Arryn principally so there was no need for Ned to bargain hard for miltary support.

[stateofdissipation]

9 hours ago, the trees have eyes said:

So you still maintain that there was a Tully-Arryn marriage alliance planned that we have no word of in the books and you assert - out of thin air - that If Rhaegar had not kidnapped / eloped with Lyanna Jon would still have married Lysa?

Ok, if that's your thing, it's your thing but you aren't soing much to explain why you think this way.

You also seem to have deliberately misinterpreted some of what I said to argue against a strawman - never a good sign so just in case you really didn't understand:

when the Starks were dutiful subjects

Dutiful as in riding to King's Landing and calling on the prince to come out to die or demanding trial by combat....  not very dutiful or subject...

Yes, mate, dutiful subjects.  When Rickard and Hoster arranged Brandon and Catelyn's betrothal the Starks and Tullys both were dutiful subjects, and the Arryns and Barratheons too because the events that led to the rebellion were all far in the future and no one was plotting rebellion or warfare.  That all came later.

But a formal alliance where he pledged his troops to Jon Arryn in return for Jon marrying his daughter does. 

do you mean formal as in they filed  it at the court house---  Cat figured it out 15 plus years later... and she could have just gone down to the department of formal alliances and pledges---  (Note to rebels.. if the cause looks lost burn the department of formal alliances and pledges first.  Or burn it because such a department can never do any good for anybody.)

Much as Cat likes to think Hoster raised her a bit like a son prior to Edmund's birth she was not privy to strategic or military councils so you can be a mocking dick as much as you want but Cat and Lysa both independently give us this information for a reason.  Hoster Tully made it a condition of joining the rebellion that Jon marry Lysa.  It's not in the court house of your imagination but it is in the books.

There was of course no equivalent pledge of troops in the Brandon - Catelyn betrothal as no warfare was in mind. 

There did not need to be a pledge of troops.. the kingdom was pledged and that includes its troops.  

Not at all.  A dynastic marraige alliance may be useful and it may have a strong foundatoin borne out of mutual interests.  Or like the Lannister - Frey union, or, cough, cough, the Frey - Tully union it may be entirely discarded if it looks to be more of a curse than a blessing.  So the betrothal of Brandon and Catelyn did not pledge the Tullys to expend their entire "kingdom's" resources in support of the Starks at all, Hoster was not all in, he could be as circumspect or as bold as he wished.  Hence his demand that Jon marry Lysa in return for his armed support in the rebellion despite the pre-existing betrothal of his daughter to Brandon and then Ned.  This is fairly obvious but you ignore it for some reason.

If Ned had demanded it later as part of the marriage pact Hoster could easily have refused the match

you just switched from Brandon to Ned... and invented a different marriage pact--- and go on to ignore that Ned was in rebellion-

Brandon died.  So did Rickard.  I'm sure you are aware of this.  It's kind of necessary to switch to Ned.  Ned offered himself as replacement for Brandon in fulfilment of the pact but as you so rightly say Ned was by this time labelled a rebel so you might suppose he would press Hoster to call his banners to support him.  But Hoster didn't either allow Catelyn to marry Ned or call his banners until Jon Arryn agreed to marry Lysa.  Pretty simple really.

but as he was inclined to marry Lysa to Jon and back the rebellion it didn't become a factor so it's a moot point.

Now we left out the marriage of Cat to Ned (a rebel) in favor of the later marriage of Lysa to Jon (a rebel)

What don't you understand if you read the two bolded parts of the same sentence together rather than apart?  If Ned had turned up at Riverrun as an attainted rebel and told Hoster he was there to marry Catelyn in place of Brandon and wanted Hoster to call his banners Hoster could have told him to bugger off, renounced the betrothal and barred the doors.  But as he was an ambitious man and saw a way to get married into the Arryn family as well as the Starks and come out of the rebellion with his house in a stronger position that before he was inclinded to play ball and joint the rebellion.  But the betrothal made with Rickard while there were no clouds on the horizon did not bind him to do any such thing.

there is no uncertainty, dispute, or debate... Hoster was bound to the rebellion with Cat's marriage to Ned the arrangement for which pre-dated the Lysa-Jon marriage. (at least in Cat's head) 

What you are not considering is how drastically the situation changed between Rickard aranging for Brandon to be betrothed to Catelyn and Aerys murdering Rickard and Brandon and calling for Robert and Ned's heads.  You are approaching this with a dogmatic mindset that is similar to saying that Sansa's betrothal to Joffrey at Winterfell in AGOT bound the Starks and Barratheons together and that's that.  Well, newsflash for you: events occur and loyalties and strategies change because of them.

Moot--subject to debate, dispute, or uncertainty

Well, while we're talking: "A moot point can be either an issue open for debate, or a matter of no practical value or importance because it's hypothetical".  Hoster dealt with Jon Arryn principally so there was no need for Ned to bargain hard for miltary support.

So you still maintain that there was a Tully-Arryn marriage alliance planned that we have no word of in the books and you assert - out of thin air - that If Rhaegar had not kidnapped / eloped with Lyanna Jon would still have married Lysa?

I maintain:

Lysa married Jon while she was pregnant.

Jon needed a young wife known to be fertile.

as per aSoS BG pages 38 and 39

Post rebellion

 

Lysa was pregnant with Petyr's child

Petyr was sent away for getting Lysa pregnant.

as per aSoS BG 537

Pre-rebellion

 

Hoster fulfilled Jon's requirements for a new wife before there was a rebellion. 

 

Yes, mate, dutiful subjects.  When Rickard and Hoster arranged Brandon and Catelyn's betrothal the Starks and Tullys both were dutiful subjects, and the Arryns and Barratheons too because the events that led to the rebellion were all far in the future and no one was plotting rebellion or warfare.  That all came later.

The marriage Tully-Stark betrothal was unprecedented.  The Stark-Baratheon betrothal was unprecedented.-- since the conquest there was not a marriage between Stark-Tully-Baratheon-Tyrell-Arryn-Martell-Lannister

Long term consequences of Stark-tully and Stark-Baratheon

Brandon and Catelyn produce an heir... Edmure does not.  Their son is the lord of the Riverlands and North.

Robert and Lyanna produce an heir... Brandon does not.   Their son is the lord of Stormlands and the North.

That is a significant reshaping of the kingdom.  If that was not directed by the king or at least approved by the king it is nor dutiful or loyal.

 

So the betrothal of Brandon and Catelyn did not pledge the Tullys to expend their entire "kingdom's" resources in support of the Starks at all,

The Brandon-Catelyn pledge included that a single heir produced from the union would result in a Stark Lord of the North and Riverlands.  

Hoster was not all in, he could be as circumspect or as bold as he wished. Hence his demand that Jon marry Lysa in return for his armed support in the rebellion despite the pre-existing betrothal of his daughter to Brandon and then Ned.  This is fairly obvious but you ignore it for some reason.

Hoster may not have been all in with Brandon-Catelyn pre-rebellion.  He certainly was with Ned-Catelyn post rebellion.  

 

Hoster's demand that Jon marry Lysa in return for support come from Lysa's statement and Catelyns deduction. 

both ignore Ned-Catelyn

both fail to make the connection between Jon needing a young wife known to be fertile and Lysa's pregnancy.

Both operate from the assumption that the marriage between Jon and Lysa was hastily arranged.

but

Lysa was permitted to nurse Petyr

Hoster sent Petyr away when Lysa revealed she was pregnant.

A pregnant Lysa marries Jon (prickly about his honor and needing a young wife known to be fertile)

Hoster terminates the pregnancy.

 

An agreement between Hoster and Jon to marry Lysa conditional on her being proven to be fertile explains the delay between the discovery of the pregnancy and the termination.  It also makes a marriage arrangement between Arryn and Tully pre-date the rebellion.

 

It was kind of necessary to switch to Ned.

 

Necessary?   for who to what?

Did the Starks need to be bound to the Tullys?

Did the Tullys need to be bound to the Starks and the rebellion.

Remember Joff setting aside his betrothal to Sansa when her father proved to be a traitor...  

There was a major change in the consideration offered in the marriage pact if the initial betrothal was peaceful and dutiful.  The Tullys had every right and every reason to back out of the arrangement and remain loyal to Aerys.

If it was simply a switch to Ned then the opposition to Aerys existed in the Brandon-Catelyn betrothal.

 

Ned offered himself as a replacement for Brandon...

That whole thing is very very fuzzy.  We are given that it happened but not how.  

Did Hoster send word to Ned in the Vale that the betrothal had switched to him?

Did Ned send word to Hoster that he intended to take his brother's place?

Were the arrangements made by Jon and Hoster?

We are also not given the time Hoster called his banners.

 

Ned took Brandon's place... why and how are left out.

 

What you are not considering is how drastically the situation changed between Rickard aranging for Brandon to be betrothed to Catelyn and Aerys murdering Rickard and Brandon and calling for Robert and Ned's heads. 

I think that was you that maintained that Ned-Catelyn was simply fulfilling Brandon-Catelyn.  

You are approaching this with a dogmatic mindset that is similar to saying that Sansa's betrothal to Joffrey at Winterfell in AGOT bound the Starks and Barratheons together and that's that. 

The Lannister-Tyrell pact Joff  then Tommen to is a closer match.  Both involve an alliance and substitute a younger brother for a deceased older brother without a change in loyalty.   But that was that.

 

Well, newsflash for you: events occur and loyalties and strategies change because of them.

The event would be the execution of Brandon and Rickard and Jon Arryn calling his banners and rebelling.   

What would the change in strategy or loyalty be?

 

Hoster dealt with Jon Arryn principally so there was no need for Ned to bargain hard for miltary support.

We are not given who did what bargaining or when...  

We are given no details in the case of Ned taking Brandon's place.

We are given Lysa and Cat's belief that Hoster forced Jon to marry Lysa in exchange for support in negotiations that neither claimed to be part of nor showed a grasp of the over all situation at the time.

 

Hoster fought with Ned at the Battle of the Bells based on Ned's betrothal to Cat.  Before the announcement that Jon was to marry Lysa. 

...Hosters banners were called though not all houses answered the call and some remained loyal to Aerys...

Hoster was a rebel before the Jon-Lysa marriage secured the swords and spears of the Tullys for the rebellion.   

 

 

 

[the trees have eyes]

On 27/07/2016 at 0:43 PM, stateofdissipation said:

So you still maintain that there was a Tully-Arryn marriage alliance planned that we have no word of in the books and you assert - out of thin air - that If Rhaegar had not kidnapped / eloped with Lyanna Jon would still have married Lysa?

I maintain:

Lysa married Jon while she was pregnant.

Jon needed a young wife known to be fertile.

as per aSoS BG pages 38 and 39

Post rebellion

 

Lysa was pregnant with Petyr's child

Petyr was sent away for getting Lysa pregnant.

as per aSoS BG 537

Pre-rebellion

 

Hoster fulfilled Jon's requirements for a new wife before there was a rebellion. 

 

Yes, mate, dutiful subjects.  When Rickard and Hoster arranged Brandon and Catelyn's betrothal the Starks and Tullys both were dutiful subjects, and the Arryns and Barratheons too because the events that led to the rebellion were all far in the future and no one was plotting rebellion or warfare.  That all came later.

The marriage Tully-Stark betrothal was unprecedented.  The Stark-Baratheon betrothal was unprecedented.-- since the conquest there was not a marriage between Stark-Tully-Baratheon-Tyrell-Arryn-Martell-Lannister

Long term consequences of Stark-tully and Stark-Baratheon

Brandon and Catelyn produce an heir... Edmure does not.  Their son is the lord of the Riverlands and North.

Robert and Lyanna produce an heir... Brandon does not.   Their son is the lord of Stormlands and the North.

That is a significant reshaping of the kingdom.  If that was not directed by the king or at least approved by the king it is nor dutiful or loyal.

 

So the betrothal of Brandon and Catelyn did not pledge the Tullys to expend their entire "kingdom's" resources in support of the Starks at all,

The Brandon-Catelyn pledge included that a single heir produced from the union would result in a Stark Lord of the North and Riverlands.  

Hoster was not all in, he could be as circumspect or as bold as he wished. Hence his demand that Jon marry Lysa in return for his armed support in the rebellion despite the pre-existing betrothal of his daughter to Brandon and then Ned.  This is fairly obvious but you ignore it for some reason.

Hoster may not have been all in with Brandon-Catelyn pre-rebellion.  He certainly was with Ned-Catelyn post rebellion.  

 

Hoster's demand that Jon marry Lysa in return for support come from Lysa's statement and Catelyns deduction. 

both ignore Ned-Catelyn

both fail to make the connection between Jon needing a young wife known to be fertile and Lysa's pregnancy.

Both operate from the assumption that the marriage between Jon and Lysa was hastily arranged.

but

Lysa was permitted to nurse Petyr

Hoster sent Petyr away when Lysa revealed she was pregnant.

A pregnant Lysa marries Jon (prickly about his honor and needing a young wife known to be fertile)

Hoster terminates the pregnancy.

 

An agreement between Hoster and Jon to marry Lysa conditional on her being proven to be fertile explains the delay between the discovery of the pregnancy and the termination.  It also makes a marriage arrangement between Arryn and Tully pre-date the rebellion.

 

It was kind of necessary to switch to Ned.

 

Necessary?   for who to what?

Did the Starks need to be bound to the Tullys?

Did the Tullys need to be bound to the Starks and the rebellion.

Remember Joff setting aside his betrothal to Sansa when her father proved to be a traitor...  

There was a major change in the consideration offered in the marriage pact if the initial betrothal was peaceful and dutiful.  The Tullys had every right and every reason to back out of the arrangement and remain loyal to Aerys.

If it was simply a switch to Ned then the opposition to Aerys existed in the Brandon-Catelyn betrothal.

 

Ned offered himself as a replacement for Brandon...

That whole thing is very very fuzzy.  We are given that it happened but not how.  

Did Hoster send word to Ned in the Vale that the betrothal had switched to him?

Did Ned send word to Hoster that he intended to take his brother's place?

Were the arrangements made by Jon and Hoster?

We are also not given the time Hoster called his banners.

 

Ned took Brandon's place... why and how are left out.

 

What you are not considering is how drastically the situation changed between Rickard aranging for Brandon to be betrothed to Catelyn and Aerys murdering Rickard and Brandon and calling for Robert and Ned's heads. 

I think that was you that maintained that Ned-Catelyn was simply fulfilling Brandon-Catelyn.  

You are approaching this with a dogmatic mindset that is similar to saying that Sansa's betrothal to Joffrey at Winterfell in AGOT bound the Starks and Barratheons together and that's that. 

The Lannister-Tyrell pact Joff  then Tommen to is a closer match.  Both involve an alliance and substitute a younger brother for a deceased older brother without a change in loyalty.   But that was that.

 

Well, newsflash for you: events occur and loyalties and strategies change because of them.

The event would be the execution of Brandon and Rickard and Jon Arryn calling his banners and rebelling.   

What would the change in strategy or loyalty be?

 

Hoster dealt with Jon Arryn principally so there was no need for Ned to bargain hard for miltary support.

We are not given who did what bargaining or when...  

We are given no details in the case of Ned taking Brandon's place.

We are given Lysa and Cat's belief that Hoster forced Jon to marry Lysa in exchange for support in negotiations that neither claimed to be part of nor showed a grasp of the over all situation at the time.

 

Hoster fought with Ned at the Battle of the Bells based on Ned's betrothal to Cat.  Before the announcement that Jon was to marry Lysa. 

...Hosters banners were called though not all houses answered the call and some remained loyal to Aerys...

Hoster was a rebel before the Jon-Lysa marriage secured the swords and spears of the Tullys for the rebellion.   

 

 

 

So, although you don't explicitly state that you consider the Stark-Tully marraige alliance to be aimed at Aerys rather than just increasing the status and influence of both families you pretty much imply that and it underpins your whole approach: that neither Hoster Tully nor Rickard Stark were ever dutiful subjects and were plotting treason from the get-go.  If that's what you think then fair enough but we'll agree to disagree here as the betrothal doesn't mean that at all. 

As to the families of LPs marrying into eachother I don't know why you place such significance on this.  It seems more the case that the absence of evidence should not be taken as the evidence of absence.  How do we know they didn't marry from time to time if the match was suitable?  Unless we have exhaustive records we're not in a position to portray this as a plot in motion.

Take this from AGOT when Ned reads the book of linneages:

"The seed is strong, Jon Arryn had cried on his deathbed, and so it was. All those bastards, all with hair as black as night. Grand Maester Malleon recorded the last mating between stag and lion, some ninety years ago, when Tya Lannister wed Gowen Baratheon, third son of the reigning lord. Their only issue, an unnamed boy described in Malleon’s tome as a large and lusty lad born with a full head of black hair, died in infancy. Thirty years before that a male Lannister had taken a Baratheon maid to wife. She had given him three daughters and a son, each black-haired. No matter how far back Ned searched in the brittle yellowed pages, always he found the gold yielding before the coal."

This makes it clear that marriages between LP families is nothing out of the ordinary so what's the big deal about the Stark-Tully betrothal other than the cryptic comment about Rickard's "Southern ambitions".  Maybe he just wanted some sort of presence or influence at court.  Doesn't imply rebellion at all.  Not until Aerys kills Brandon and Rickard and calls for the heads of Robert and Ned.  At which point Hoster might reasonably think that a paranoid and murderous madman might interpret his betrothal of his daughter to Rickard's son as indication of Hoster's guilt by association and mean he and his family are next in the chopping line.  But it's Aerys-like paranoia to assume that Hoster was a rebel from the get-go rather than made a rebel by events and later decisions.  And Edmure is Hoster's heir so Catelyn marrying Ned does not combine the Riverlands and North under one family which might give your suspicion some merit had Catelyn been his only child.

As to Jon marrying Lysa.  Yes the fact that Jon was desparate for an heir is part of what makes Lysa acceptable to him despite her "soiling" (btw are you actually implying that Hoster had Petyr knock her up so he could prove her fertility to Jon?) but the larger part is that Jon is in rebellion and needed Tully military support or his House would be extinguished whether he had a fertile bride or not.  This gives Hoster leverage over Jon: take her or I'll pledge allegiance to the King.  Hoster fought at the Battle of the Bells prior to either wedding, I'll give you that, so whether he was all-in or not he was definitely in rebellion and you might argue reasonably Aerys was not the forgiving sort but could Jon risk calling Hoster's bluff? 

But we'll have to agree to disagree that the main/real resaon that Jon wed Lysa was for an heir rather than for miltary success and that the information presented to us independently by both Lysa and Catelyn is wrong (to what purpose?  why would GRRM include this when it achieves nothing except to help us to understand the tragic/traumatic events of the past for for Lysa and Petyr only for both of them to be wrong?).  We see Catelyn questioning the Frey's maester about the fertiity of Roslin Frey's female relations on the maternal side and Roslin's suitability for childbirth herself.  There's no reason to think Jon Arryn could not have taken the same care in selecting a bride or that there were no noble houses ready to marry a daughter to an old man.  Walder Frey's recent marriage history shows how easy this would be for a richer and more powerful man like Jon Arryn should he have so chosen.  But Hoster Tully had far more military power at his call than any lesser Lord and this seems the key to it to me.