Jump to content

Rhaegar wasn't polygamous, he was dumping Elia for Lyanna


Recommended Posts

7 hours ago, Tralalala said:

Staying neutral is not stupid,had that scenario happen and Tywin remained neutral we could've had a hour of the lion scenario.. And how stupid it would be to march in force only for the ironborn to sack lannisport while the army is away? In almost all battle in the books(including all books,even the dunk and egg and rogue prince) remaining neutral would've been the best for most of those who joined whichever side..

If Tywin was the "swing" army, that is he could effectively pick the winning side, it would be stupid to stay neutral as there would be much more reward in being on the winning side. For example, look at what happened to House Frey when they failed to show up at the Trident. They were scorned by their liege lord and by other houses for the next 2 decades because they failed to fight for the winning side.

But for the record, I think staying neutral is not necessarily a bad plan in most scenarios. Doran kept his forces out of the Wot5K, and that was a smart move.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

14 hours ago, Traverys said:

Rape's classical definition used to refer to the act of abducting a woman, though GRRM is pretty explicit about his use of the modern definition.

That is true, and Robert certainly uses it that way, too. However, it might be that Ned does not contradict him there because Rhaegar certainly raped Lyanna in the 'he stole my sister from her future husband' way. The idea that Rhaegar actually raped Lyanna in the sense that he repeatedly had sex with her against her will is not very likely if you ask me.

Their relationship might have deteriorated eventually, and it is even possible that Rhaegar raped Lyanna once and had her imprisoned in the tower but I don't think this was a relationship 'based on rape' as Robert thinks (or wants to believe) it was.

14 hours ago, Traverys said:

It's a little disappointing that Jon hasn't mentioned more about Rhaegar than he has... Of all people he actually had an interpersonal relationship with him and has spent over a decade raising the man's son. And his POV goes out of its way to mention how he felt Elia didn't deserve him but doesn't mention anything about Lyanna.  Gah!  One of those moments you know GRRM is chuckling to himself while he writes.

I think Jon Connington definitely will become our window into Rhaegar's personality and actions in the next book. Elia Sand - basically another Lyanna bearing Elia's name - should also give more than enough motivation for him to think about Lyanna, too.

George clearly decided to postpone quite a few revelations until TWoW (or perhaps even for a later book).

Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 21/4/2017 at 2:58 PM, Lord Varys said:

Those are not complete pictures, though. Cersei and Selmy were never close to Rhaegar and they just remember certain interactions they had with him (or images of him they had created in their mind). No one ever really gives a complete picture of Rhaegar after Harrenhal. Not even Jon Connington. He reminiscences about Rhaegar the youth and is obsessed with his alleged failure at the Battle of the Bells. But just as Doran Martell rediscovered his Targaryen allegiance after the death of Elia and her children Connington might have changed his view on Rhaegar and Aerys after they were killed. I doubt Connington approved of the Lyanna affair or rejoiced when Aerys stripped him of his titles and exiled him. But once the Targaryens were gone he would have felt very bad (just as we all tend to feel bad when people we love die before we can reconcile with them), jumping on the chance to redeem himself by supporting Rhaegar's son.

 

There is a saying here, "no dead is bad".

Jon isn't completely blind about Rhaegar, though. "[E]ven Rhaegar saw that plain enough". I think this kinda implies Rhaegar was taking too time in realizing Aerys was mad, and I doubt Jon was the only one impatient about it. They couldn't just tell him to his face. I'm sure that, given the time, Jon will tell us what we don't know about Rhaegar as he, unlike Cersei or Barristan, knew him more personally than they did (but not as close as Arthur) and he will even tell us the bad things. He just, as you say, has no reason to say anything negative now as many of his friends died and he blames himself.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

6 hours ago, Lord Varys said:

I think Jon Connington definitely will become our window into Rhaegar's personality and actions in the next book. Elia Sand - basically another Lyanna bearing Elia's name - should also give more than enough motivation for him to think about Lyanna, too.

George clearly decided to postpone quite a few revelations until TWoW (or perhaps even for a later book).

 

I'm sure Jon was present during the times Rhaegar was planning whatever he planned. AWOIAF seem to imply he left KL with Rhaegar when he went to the Riverlands. Some people say that Rhaegar not being romantically interested in Jon meant he didn't like him, but I disagree. Rhaegar summoned him to court and AWOIAF also implies that Jon, as well as his other two friends, were spies in court for him. I think he trusted him enough.

The question isn't whether Jon will tell people about Rhaegar. He will likely do. The question is to who.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • 3 months later...

Archived

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

×
×
  • Create New...