*Come out and die* never happened.

[The Fattest Leech]

10 minutes ago, Damsel in Distress said:

Yes.  Have you?

 

If you have read it then you would know about the play, the punches, the tooth, princes fighting and dying. 

[Damsel in Distress]

2 minutes ago, WSmith84 said:

Well, it kinda disproves your point, doesn't it? Dunk beats a Targaryen Prince in full view of an audience and his guilt is not in doubt, yet he was still allowed a trial.

Dunk was a knight.  We don't know if Brandon was a "ser" or not.  Aerion was not the heir to the throne and not in the same level of importance as Rhaegar.  Unlike Brandon, Dunk never made any threats in front of the king in his home.  Dunk made his threats under a very different environment.  It was during a tournament where knights were present for the fighting.  Brandon rode in with his armed men and they threatened to kill the heir to the throne.  An act of terrorism committed in the king's home.  Aerys was the king and he passed his own judgment on Brandon.

 

[kissdbyfire]

1 hour ago, Damsel in Distress said:

To threaten the life of a Targaryen is treason since they are the rightful rulers and they are the government.  Brandon deserved what he got from Aerys.

 

1 minute ago, Damsel in Distress said:

Dunk was a knight.  We don't know if Brandon was a "ser" or not.  Aerion was not the heir to the throne and not in the same level of importance as Rhaegar.  Unlike Brandon, Dunk never made any threats in front of the king in his home.  Dunk made his threats under a very different environment.  It was during a tournament where knights were present for the fighting.  Brandon rode in with his armed men and they threatened to kill the heir to the throne.  An act of terrorism committed in the king's home.  Aerys was the king and he passed his own judgment on Brandon.

 

LOL

That's not what you said in your previous post. But by all means, twist and turn your own words to make them fit. It's quite entertaining to watch.

[The Fattest Leech]

3 minutes ago, Damsel in Distress said:

Dunk was a knight.  We don't know if Brandon was a "ser" or not.  Aerion was not the heir to the throne and not in the same level of importance as Rhaegar.  Unlike Brandon, Dunk never made any threats in front of the king in his home.  Dunk made his threats under a very different environment.  It was during a tournament where knights were present for the fighting.  Brandon rode in with his armed men and they threatened to kill the heir to the throne.  An act of terrorism committed in the king's home.  Aerys was the king and he passed his own judgment on Brandon.

 

No, the books make it clear that the whole knighthood thing is an Andal tradition. There are no Ser's in the north by title, but by "profession" yes. Words are Wind, remember. 

And isn't royal family royal no matter where they are in Westeros?

[The Fattest Leech]

Ugh. Lost a post. Damn phone. 

6 minutes ago, Damsel in Distress said:

Dunk was a knight.  We don't know if Brandon was a "ser" or not.  Aerion was not the heir to the throne and not in the same level of importance as Rhaegar.  Unlike Brandon, Dunk never made any threats in front of the king in his home.  Dunk made his threats under a very different environment.  It was during a tournament where knights were present for the fighting.  Brandon rode in with his armed men and they threatened to kill the heir to the throne.  An act of terrorism committed in the king's home.  Aerys was the king and he passed his own judgment on Brandon.

 

This not what you claimed in your first post. 

Also, you seemed to have forgotten that Dunk did not just threaten a Targ prince, he physically laid a fist to his face and defanged the creep. 

[Philokles]

I love the idea a Hedge Knight nobody has heard of before has more privileges than a Lord Paramount's son just because he claims to have been knighted by another nobody.

[Moiraine Sedai]

20 hours ago, The Doctor's Consort said:

I always doubted that Brandon went to KL and demanded Rhaegar to face him. Does anyone else believes that the Come out and die is utter bs?

There are two ways for Jaime to know what Brandon did. One, Brandon was allowed to ender Red Keep armed along with his entourage or he went to KL and screamed outside of the Walls and Jaime happened to be there to hear him. If Jaime wasn’t present when Brandon said it he couldn’t know what happened and it could had been created from someone who had something to gain from a civil war that brings chaos and death. Maybe someone like Varys.

So you're rewriting the story now.   Trying to kill his prince fits with what we know of Brandon's hot temper.  The idiot should have sent a polite written message to the king and humbly ask for an audience.  

[The Fattest Leech]

18 minutes ago, Horse of Kent said:

I love the idea a Hedge Knight nobody has heard of before has more privileges than a Lord Paramount's son just because he claims to have been knighted by another nobody.

I know, right? 

[sweetsunray]

1 hour ago, Ygrain said:

That's an interesting interpretation but still doesn't explain why Brandon expected Rhaegar to be in KL. Plus, I am not sure if one is allowed to duel a crown prince even if his father is sane. Does the World Book offer any historical parallel?

I'd say a trial by combat is a specific type of duel, and there you have several princes and the crown pince voluntarily combatting, with the crown prince even dueling his brothers. That's a Dunk and Egg novel - the Hedge Knight, and mentioned in the world book.

[Lady Blizzardborn]

1 hour ago, Moiraine Sedai said:

So you're rewriting the story now.   Trying to kill his prince fits with what we know of Brandon's hot temper.  The idiot should have sent a polite written message to the king and humbly ask for an audience.  

Actually the idiot should have sent a message to his father, or gone straight to his father, and let Rickard handle it. As Lyanna was not yet married, her father was the person in the best position to demand her return. Robert would be the only other person with a particular right to protest, but since they weren't married yet his was not as strong a position as Rickard had. Brandon jumped the chain of command, which was stupid. Rickard would have stood a better chance of knowing how to handle the situation, and possibly getting Lyanna back unharmed. 

Brandon also could have appealed to his betrothed's father for assistance and counsel. Between Rickard and Hoster they might have gotten Tywin to come in and tell Aerys to ignore both families, and Aerys being Aerys he would likely do the opposite of what Tywin suggested and send the girl back north.

@sweetsunray you make good points, but you also need to factor in Ned's inferiority complex when it came to Brandon the Great, and the tendency people have to turn their dead loved ones into better/abler people than they were. Sure when Ned's doubting himself he's going to say Brandon should be Hand, Brandon should be Lord, Brandon should have Cat. He's having a Jan Brady moment there (just replace Marcia with Brandon). In his mind he never measured up to his big brother, who was made in the mold of the old Kings in the North. And he's not the only one who thinks along those lines; Tyrion says that Jon has more of the north in him than his siblings do (wolf blood). Ned is a great guy, but he's not the prototypical Stark of old, which oddly might end up being the whole reason the world has a chance. We'd have a very different story if Brandon had lived. Now I feel like giving Ned a pep talk (you're good enough, you're smart enough, and doggone-it, people like you!).

[Ygrain]

1 hour ago, sweetsunray said:

I'd say a trial by combat is a specific type of duel, and there you have several princes and the crown pince voluntarily combatting, with the crown prince even dueling his brothers. That's a Dunk and Egg novel - the Hedge Knight, and mentioned in the world book.

I don't think the trial of the seven qualifies as a valid comparison. It is fought to prove a man guilty or innocent, whereas Brandon challenged Rhaegar over something else, most likely his family's, or his sister's, honour. I'm not sure if Brandon would get  to walk away after killing Rhaegar under such circumstances.

[Ferocious Veldt Roarer]

To the general point of the thread: I, myself, follow the policy of "reasonable doubt". That is: doubt when there are direct signs in the text with "Hey, something fishy here!" written on them. Contradictions, like. But nothing in the books makes me think that Jaime got it wrong, it seems in perfect harmony with other relations we have.

I don't subscribe to the Cartesian principle of doubting everything. There's no end to that.

4 hours ago, Ygrain said:

That's an interesting interpretation but still doesn't explain why Brandon expected Rhaegar to be in KL. Plus, I am not sure if one is allowed to duel a crown prince even if his father is sane. Does the World Book offer any historical parallel?

Duel? Certainly. If one can duel the king, then why not the crown prince? Maegor the Cruel and the captain of the Warrior's Sons fought a trial of seven - but the king was the challenger.

Challenge? I don't know.

3 hours ago, Damsel in Distress said:

Dunk was a knight.  We don't know if Brandon was a "ser" or not.

We know for a fact that Tyrion Lannister was not a knight. Nor a lord. His right to a trial was never questioned by anybody (and he stood trial twice, both among very unwelcoming crowd), so I see no reason to question Brandon's.

3 hours ago, Damsel in Distress said:

  Aerion was not the heir to the throne and not in the same level of importance as Rhaegar.  Unlike Brandon, Dunk never made any threats in front of the king in his home.  Dunk made his threats under a very different environment.  It was during a tournament where knights were present for the fighting.  Brandon rode in with his armed men and they threatened to kill the heir to the throne.  An act of terrorism committed in the king's home.

"Terrorism"? ZOMG. Call it, I don't know, "The Terrible Awful". The word you're using fits really bad.

[Quoth the raven,]

2 hours ago, Lady Blizzardborn said:

Actually the idiot should have sent a message to his father, or gone straight to his father, and let Rickard handle it. As Lyanna was not yet married, her father was the person in the best position to demand her return. Robert would be the only other person with a particular right to protest, but since they weren't married yet his was not as strong a position as Rickard had. Brandon jumped the chain of command, which was stupid. Rickard would have stood a better chance of knowing how to handle the situation, and possibly getting Lyanna back unharmed. 

Brandon also could have appealed to his betrothed's father for assistance and counsel. Between Rickard and Hoster they might have gotten Tywin to come in and tell Aerys to ignore both families, and Aerys being Aerys he would likely do the opposite of what Tywin suggested and send the girl back north.

@sweetsunray you make good points, but you also need to factor in Ned's inferiority complex when it came to Brandon the Great, and the tendency people have to turn their dead loved ones into better/abler people than they were. Sure when Ned's doubting himself he's going to say Brandon should be Hand, Brandon should be Lord, Brandon should have Cat. He's having a Jan Brady moment there (just replace Marcia with Brandon). In his mind he never measured up to his big brother, who was made in the mold of the old Kings in the North. And he's not the only one who thinks along those lines; Tyrion says that Jon has more of the north in him than his siblings do (wolf blood). Ned is a great guy, but he's not the prototypical Stark of old, which oddly might end up being the whole reason the world has a chance. We'd have a very different story if Brandon had lived. Now I feel like giving Ned a pep talk (you're good enough, you're smart enough, and doggone-it, people like you!).

Brandon's personality is that of a rash, hotheaded young man.  Waiting and thinking things through is not his way.  Although I would think the long ride to the city would have cooled off most men.  And the dumb asses who accompanied should have talked sense and stopped him. 

Whether somebody deserved their fate is highly subjective.  What is not subjective is the fact that King Aerys had the right to do what he did to Brandon.  Fools die young.  Brandon, Robb, Jon, and Lyanna.  Very well, put Rhaegar on that list too.  The point remains, you do not make threats to kill the royal family.  In America, we consider the threat credible if the criminal has the means and the ability to carry it out.  Brandon and his gang were armed and ready to kill.  I would have had them all executed after they have served their usefulness to bring their fathers out of their castles.

[WSmith84]

6 minutes ago, Quoth the raven, said:

In America, we consider the threat credible if the criminal has the means and the ability to carry it out.  Brandon and his gang were armed and ready to kill.  I would have had them all executed after they have served their usefulness to bring their fathers out of their castles.

Westeros is not America. Pretty much anybody in Westeros can carry a sword, so pretty much everyone is 'armed and ready to kill.' And, once again, even if you judge Brandon and his friends all guilty, it doesn't make their fathers guilty of anything.

[Ferocious Veldt Roarer]

6 minutes ago, Quoth the raven, said:

Brandon's personality is that of a rash, hotheaded young man.  Waiting and thinking things through is not his way.  Although I would think the long ride to the city would have cooled off most men.  And the dumb asses who accompanied should have talked sense and stopped him. 

Whether somebody deserved their fate is highly subjective.  What is not subjective is the fact that King Aerys had the right to do what he did to Brandon.

Actually, he did not. Brandon Starks of that world get trials. Kings who disregard that see their kingdoms pulled out from under them.

6 minutes ago, Quoth the raven, said:

  Fools die young.  Brandon, Robb, Jon, and Lyanna.  Very well, put Rhaegar on that list too.  The point remains, you do not make threats to kill the royal family.  In America, we consider

First, hardly relevant. Second...

6 minutes ago, Quoth the raven, said:

the threat credible if the criminal has the means and the ability to carry it out.  Brandon and his gang were armed and ready to kill.  I would have had them all executed

If you did it without due process, then the word isn't "executed", it's "murdered". Which, even in your America, is a crime.

[sweetsunray]

1 hour ago, Lady Blizzardborn said:

@sweetsunray you make good points, but you also need to factor in Ned's inferiority complex when it came to Brandon the Great, and the tendency people have to turn their dead loved ones into better/abler people than they were. Sure when Ned's doubting himself he's going to say Brandon should be Hand, Brandon should be Lord, Brandon should have Cat. He's having a Jan Brady moment there (just replace Marcia with Brandon). In his mind he never measured up to his big brother, who was made in the mold of the old Kings in the North. And he's not the only one who thinks along those lines; Tyrion says that Jon has more of the north in him than his siblings do (wolf blood). Ned is a great guy, but he's not the prototypical Stark of old, which oddly might end up being the whole reason the world has a chance. We'd have a very different story if Brandon had lived. Now I feel like giving Ned a pep talk (you're good enough, you're smart enough, and doggone-it, people like you!).

Well, that's my issue. That wel all too easily dismiss the first opinion of Ned about Brandon, in a private setting, as Ned's "inferiority complex". But the "inferiority" complex" only works imo if we didn't have the story the OP's about. I think the discrepancy between Ned saying on the one hand to Cat that Brandon's the one who should be Hand, then telling Arya about the early grave and wolf's blood, and the statue he gives Brandon, should not be swept off as "oh, then it's his inferiority complex talking" and in the other moment "Ned's saying Brandon was a rash fool in a polite way". Ned's a ruler for 15 years, fought and won a war, father of 5. He's got a lord's face. Cat thinks of him as a shy young man one nistance, and cold and icy another. Jaime thinks of him as cold as ice 15 years ago already. He's not Brandon, but I wouldn't call him "not Northern" either. As for the Stark children - initially Robb looks more southern (from the outside), but Cat already sees more Northern Ned in him the night of the catspaw attacking Bran.  He's the guy who can look at his dying best friend and king and tell him "he wasn't as bad as Aerys II". I don't think "an inferiority complex" is really the issue here. That's what Cat makes of it, because like her father, she thinks Brandon was a gallant fool.

2 hours ago, Lady Blizzardborn said:

Actually the idiot should have sent a message to his father, or gone straight to his father, and let Rickard handle it.

We don't know whether messages were sent or not. But they could have been sent. Take my proposal: Brandon totally could have sent Rickard a message to his father, to inform him not to respond himself, but laying out his intentions. It would explain why Rickard's political response remained low key. 

Letting Rickard handle it is not that easy imo at all. You'd have Boltons, Umbers and Karstarks and other lords of houses butting in, and watching Rickard. How quickly weren't they testing and watching when things went wrong in aGoT?  How many would have pushed for a harsh reaction from the warden himself and calling the banner, do you think? If Brandon leaves it to his father, then his father gets into this impossibel situation over an abducted daughter. If Rickard is too soft on it, his lords will think him weak, and Robert gets rightfully upset. If Rickard talks tough, then you easily have an army flocking.

But Rickard's son and heir can talk tough without getting armies and bannermen into it. Then it's just a family matter, right? More than a giant political powder keg. And if he dies - Rickard still has two other sons as heir. Rickard's lords can't call for blood and war, if Rickard's heir died in a duel. A duel was arguably the least harmful situation to save everyone's face and avoid war, preserve the status quo. Heck, if Brandon had died in a duel with Rhaegar, nobody would even make issue anymore if the victor kept his stolen prize. 

2 hours ago, Ygrain said:

I don't think the trial of the seven qualifies as a valid comparison. It is fought to prove a man guilty or innocent, whereas Brandon challenged Rhaegar over something else, most likely his family's, or his sister's, honour. I'm not sure if Brandon would get  to walk away after killing Rhaegar under such circumstances.

And given my above reasoning, Brandon may very well have been prepared to die. His actions that did get him killed, throttling himself to reach for the sword and save his father strongly suggests that Brandon was a self-sacrificing type.

The difference between the trial of seven and a regular duel between sons of lords is the goal of the duel. One is to prove innocense. The other is solving a matter one-on-one instead of armies. We often see people try to avoid battles and wars like that, no? At Storm's End, Jaime at the siege of Riverrun. And if Rhaegar had been there and had in fact accepted the challenge, with that many witnesses around, one can hardly charge Brandon of manslaughter if he had been victor of such a duel.

[kissdbyfire]

43 minutes ago, Quoth the raven, said:

Brandon's personality is that of a rash, hotheaded young man.  Waiting and thinking things through is not his way.  Although I would think the long ride to the city would have cooled off most men.  And the dumb asses who accompanied should have talked sense and stopped him. 

Whether somebody deserved their fate is highly subjective.  What is not subjective is the fact that King Aerys had the right to do what he did to Brandon.  Fools die young.  Brandon, Robb, Jon, and Lyanna.  Very well, put Rhaegar on that list too.  The point remains, you do not make threats to kill the royal family.  In America, we consider the threat credible if the criminal has the means and the ability to carry it out.  Brandon and his gang were armed and ready to kill.  I would have had them all executed after they have served their usefulness to bring their fathers out of their castles.

LMAO

"this is not America... la la la la la"

And the threat wasn't credible. Or wouldn't be for a normal person, which Aerys obviously wasn't. We're talking a handful of men w/ swords in a castle with thousands of guards + KG etc etc etc.

[The Fattest Leech]

56 minutes ago, Quoth the raven, said:

Brandon's personality is that of a rash, hotheaded young man.  Waiting and thinking things through is not his way.  Although I would think the long ride to the city would have cooled off most men.  And the dumb asses who accompanied should have talked sense and stopped him. 

Whether somebody deserved their fate is highly subjective.  What is not subjective is the fact that King Aerys had the right to do what he did to Brandon.  Fools die young.  Brandon, Robb, Jon, and Lyanna.  Very well, put Rhaegar on that list too.  The point remains, you do not make threats to kill the royal family.  In America, we consider the threat credible if the criminal has the means and the ability to carry it out.  Brandon and his gang were armed and ready to kill.  I would have had them all executed after they have served their usefulness to bring their fathers out of their castles.

Um, no. Some people in the minority may feel this way, but this is not the common American response. Check each state laws. 

 

And Raven, you are either from Maryland or Pa. This isn't the same between the two states. 

[Ygrain]

1 hour ago, Ferocious Veldt Roarer said:

Duel? Certainly. If one can duel the king, then why not the crown prince? Maegor the Cruel and the captain of the Warrior's Sons fought a trial of seven - but the king was the challenger.

Challenge? I don't know.

And again - it's the trial of seven, not a one-on-one duel. Plus, the problem of challenge - can a subject challenge a royal? And on what grounds? Brandon accepted Petyr's challenge for Cat's hand, even though there was a vast difference in their rank, but on the other hand, Brandon was not Petyr's liege.

38 minutes ago, sweetsunray said:

And given my above reasoning, Brandon may very well have been prepared to die. His actions that did get him killed, throttling himself to reach for the sword and save his father strongly suggests that Brandon was a self-sacrificing type.

I think you are right that Brandon was definitely the type to try and save his family no matter the risk to himself, but the way I see him (wild wolf), more like a spur of the moment action - shield someone with his own body, sacrificing himself in battle to give the others chance to escape, something like that. Not plan an action that would only eventually lead to his demise.

38 minutes ago, sweetsunray said:

The difference between the trial of seven and a regular duel between sons of lords is the goal of the duel. One is to prove innocense. The other is solving a matter one-on-one instead of armies. We often see people try to avoid battles and wars like that, no? At Storm's End, Jaime at the siege of Riverrun. And if Rhaegar had been there and had in fact accepted the challenge, with that many witnesses around, one can hardly charge Brandon of manslaughter if he had been victor of such a duel.

But those are still different matters than what Brandon's cause would be, and it basically ties in with my response to Ferocious Veldt Roarer: is one entitled to challenge royalty, for, say, dishonouring their sister? Or for any personal reason? And is it alright for anyone to kill royalty in a duel?

[kissdbyfire]

Wasn't there a duel when one of Aegon V Söns backed out of a marriage contract? A Baratheon against Dunk as Aegon's champion?