*Come out and die* never happened.

[Ygrain]

1 minute ago, The Doctor's Consort said:

If you had read the op or the post above your post you had seen that no one claims that Jaime was lying. Jaime just repeats the gossips that he had learned which however were no true but he couldn't knew it.

"Why is Jaime told a lie" is a passive construction, i.e. somebody else told Jaime a lie.

Gossip like that doesn't appear from nowhere, wanting to kill the crown prince is a big thing. 

1 minute ago, The Doctor's Consort said:

It would seem that someone wanted to create chaos and a war between the Crown and the majority of the High Lords. However I have no idea about who would had something to gain by this war.

Well, there have been several wars trying to depose the Tagaryens, and currently we have two scheming characters whose motivation may be of the same origin.

[Jon's Queen Consort]

Just now, Ygrain said:

"Why is Jaime told a lie" is a passive construction, i.e. somebody else told Jaime a lie.

I hadn't noticed it, but I hadn't understood the difference.

1 minute ago, Ygrain said:

Gossip like that doesn't appear from nowhere, wanting to kill the crown prince is a big thing. 

Gossips can also appear out of the blue especially if someone can pay for it. For example Brandon arrives in KL furious asking for Lyanna and someone pay the people to spread the rumors that Brandon had asked Rhaegar to face him. Aerys learns those rumors and arrests Brandon. Or maybe someone who the King trusts tells the King what he has learnt.\

5 minutes ago, Ygrain said:

Well, there have been several wars trying to depose the Tagaryens, and currently we have two scheming characters whose motivation may be of the same origin.

I agree but it is very weird how the whole war started when there was a new Blackfyre heir.

[sweetsunray]

2 hours ago, The Doctor's Consort said:

I agree but it is very weird how the whole war started when there was a new Blackfyre heir.

It is speculated that Aegon is a Blackfyre heir. But I'm far from convinced that fAegon is a Blackfyre heir at all.

[Jon's Queen Consort]

1 minute ago, sweetsunray said:

It is speculated that Aegon is a Blackfyre heir. But I'm far from convinced that fAegon is a Blackfyre heir at all.

Still, the fact that the deaths of the Targs were crucial for Varys' plan makes me to doubt something that was told by someone who was not from all we know so far, present when it happened.

[sweetsunray]

13 minutes ago, The Doctor's Consort said:

Still, the fact that the deaths of the Targs were crucial for Varys' plan makes me to doubt something that was told by someone who was not from all we know so far, present when it happened.

Actually, Varys advizes Aerys not to open the city gates for Tywin, while Pycelle advizes Aerys to do this. He certainly appears angry over the death of Rhaenys. The assassination plan for Dany and Viserys and Vaes Dothrak was nothing but a mummer's show to push Drogo over the edge into speeding up the possibility to come to Westeros with the Dothraki, without actually killing either Viserys or Dany. Illyrio wept when he learned of Viserys's death. The Golden Company expected to join the Dothrakia and Viserys to help the Targaryens back on the throne, and even Illyrio refers to the dragon having three heads.

[Jon's Queen Consort]

13 minutes ago, sweetsunray said:

The assassination plan for Dany and Viserys and Vaes Dothrak was nothing but a mummer's show to push Drogo over the edge into speeding up the possibility to come to Westeros with the Dothraki, without actually killing either Viserys or Dany. Illyrio wept when he learned of Viserys's death. The Golden Company expected to join the Dothrakia and Viserys to help the Targaryens back on the throne, and even Illyrio refers to the dragon having three heads.

He needed Dany in order to be Aegon's wife and cement his place as the rightful heir. 

13 minutes ago, sweetsunray said:

He certainly appears angry over the death of Rhaenys.

If he cared about Rhaenys he would had saved her too.

13 minutes ago, sweetsunray said:

Actually, Varys advizes Aerys not to open the city gates for Tywin, while Pycelle advizes Aerys to do this.

If he cared about the Targs he wouldn't had turned Aerys against Rhaegar. He needed Rhaegar's children to be killed in order to replace Aegon with his Aegon and with at least Elia alive he couldn't do it.

[sweetsunray]

1 hour ago, The Doctor's Consort said:

If he cared about the Targs he wouldn't had turned Aerys against Rhaegar. He needed Rhaegar's children to be killed in order to replace Aegon with his Aegon and with at least Elia alive he couldn't do it.

Aerys already distrusted Rhaegar because of Tywin's declarations at Duskendale. He already distrusted his wife and son when he hired Varys.

That Varys wasn't fond of Rhaegar though can also be explained by the fact that Rhaegar was into prophecies and likely magic. He might still not have wanted his children dead.

1 hour ago, The Doctor's Consort said:

If he cared about Rhaenys he would had saved her too.

Well, the pisswater prince story is probably not true. I do think that Aegon is not the actual Aegon, but he may have been born later, and a plot to put him on the throne may have been hatched after both Rhaenys and Aegon were killed already. I don't think Varys saved either two, nor even thought to save them. He made the save-story up afterwards. But him not saving them, does not necessarily prove he wanted them dead, or expected them to die.

I don't think Varys went to KL with a plan. I think it was hatched later, long after Illyrio's son was born and Serra had died. And the best way to get him on the throne is to pretend he's a Targ. And I'm not convinced of the necessity of Varys, Serra, Illyrio or Aegon being a Blackfyre. Especially, since a Blackfyre isn't a fake dragon.

And my issue with plenty of Blackfyre arguments and such as the ones I quoted from you here, is that they argue from "should" and "would" based on premisses and assumptions about Varys, while completely ignoring independent verifications of his actions from independent witnesses. A theory that says "ignore everything you know Varys to have done, and believe what I'll replace it with" just doesn't work for me. The theory must fit his actions, not the other way around. Jaime was present and kept close by Aerys at all times when Tywin came to KL with his army. Varys argued to keep the city gates closed, Pycelle argued to let Tywin in.

[Greymoon]

2 hours ago, The Doctor's Consort said:

Still, the fact that the deaths of the Targs were crucial for Varys' plan makes me to doubt something that was told by someone who was not from all we know so far, present when it happened.

I dismissed my own earlier post as a fancy fanfiction, but there is one thing in there I mentioned that I do believe could factor in and that we rarely aknowledge when speaking about the kidnapping of Lyanna Stark: the rumours that Rhaegar planned something against his father.

If there is truth to Rhaegar wanting to act against his father and if Aerys got wind of it, the King and his council would probably have tried to undermine Rhaegar's efforts.

By killing eventual, potential allies (the heir and lord of the north + the heir of the vale and other highborn) and doing it in the name of Rhaegar, Aerys takes the upper hand here. Whether he expected his actions to lead directly to war is not the question (in fact, I don't believe he did), but when looking at it from the angle of a father/son conflict, Aerys managed to make house Targaryen look united and made it difficult, if not impossible, for Rhaegar to find allies of his own.

If not Aerys himself, his councillors would certainly have thought about how the King's actions would be perceived from the outside, right? And what this would mean in terms of Rhaegar's popularity?

So...As far as Brandon yelling "come out and die" goes, this could truly have been fabricated, indeed. Aerys's councillors might have changed wording/events around a bit, to appeal to the King's madness.

I guess what I'm trying to say is that whoever started the rumour might have thought it beneficial for Aery's reign: they might have wanted to both undermine Rhaegar and keep the insane King on the throne.

This could also lead back to Varys in fact. As another poster mentioned above, Varys did tell Aerys not to open the gates to Tywin Lannister and that is not the action of someone who wants Aerys dead. But what if these are the actions of someone who wants a terrible king on the throne so that some time later, a great council can be called and another claimant put forward? (=> fAegon)

Could it be that Varys didn't plan on the murder of Elia and her children, but that he did plan on disposing of House Targaryen through legitimate means?

(If that was the case Varys might not have tried to prevent the war, but he would have tried to prevent Robert's victory...or Rhaegar from taking the crown)

[Ygrain]

8 hours ago, sweetsunray said:

Actually, Varys advizes Aerys not to open the city gates for Tywin, while Pycelle advizes Aerys to do this.

An Illyrio advises Viserys not to go to Vaes Dothrak, yet he does. Sometimes, telling people not to do something is the surest way to make them do just that.

- Not necessarily meaning that Varys did resort to this sort of psychological play, but him saying something doesn't actually mean that his intentions are beneficial to the receiver. Varys was definitely not acting in the best interest of the realm or the Targaryen dynasty when he was fuelling Aerys's paranoia.

8 hours ago, sweetsunray said:

He certainly appears angry over the death of Rhaenys.

He does? He certainly depicts her death that is bound to move the listener but again, that does not mean that his emotions over it are true. He did possess the means to save Rhaegar's family, after all, but didn't use them.

8 hours ago, sweetsunray said:

The assassination plan for Dany and Viserys and Vaes Dothrak was nothing but a mummer's show to push Drogo over the edge into speeding up the possibility to come to Westeros with the Dothraki, without actually killing either Viserys or Dany.

Yet Dany was not supposed to survive on the Dothraki sea, and Illyrio's reaction after Viserys decides not to stay in Pentos doesn't exactly scream concern about Viserys' wellbeing.

8 hours ago, sweetsunray said:

Illyrio wept when he learned of Viserys's death.

He did?

8 hours ago, sweetsunray said:

The Golden Company expected to join the Dothrakia and Viserys to help the Targaryens back on the throne,

Well, and what else were they to be told? Viserys is an unstable psycho but never mind, we have another heir in stash?

8 hours ago, sweetsunray said:

and even Illyrio refers to the dragon having three heads.

In what context?

Plus, which one would be king, Aegon or Viserys? As a female, Dany didn't really matter, but Viserys was redundant, and due to his mental condition, a liability instead of an asset. He was always only a pawn to be sacrificed.

 

[sweetsunray]

15 minutes ago, Ygrain said:

An Illyrio advises Viserys not to go to Vaes Dothrak, yet he does. Sometimes, telling people not to do something is the surest way to make them do just that.

- Not necessarily meaning that Varys did resort to this sort of psychological play, but him saying something doesn't actually mean that his intentions are beneficial to the receiver. Varys was definitely not acting in the best interest of the realm or the Targaryen dynasty when he was fuelling Aerys's paranoia.

Belwas reported that Illyrio wept when he learned Viserys died. JonCon knew of plans of Viserys invading Westeros with Dothraki, and how Illyrio didn't plan for him to die youn. And the captains of the Golden Company expected to join Viserys and the Dothraki, and curse Illyrio his plans going awry all the time. That are 3 independent sources, including 2 that know of (f)Aegon's existence, that sound like confirming that Illyrio was not using reverse psychology on Viserys. 

Well, I'm not claiming that at the time Varys was acting in the best interest of the realm. He might actually have been just doing his duty and job to Aerys. He was only hired by Aerys for a few years. RR, the sack and especially the murder of those children may have influenced him.

Now, I'm not saying that Viserys wouldn't be sacrificed eventually, nor deny that he was always a pawn. We can think of the Prince of Pentos here: the prince who gets to sleep around and eat his fill, but come a failed crop or a battle lost and "chop, chop" and then another man is made Prince of Pentos. I suspect they were thinking of a scenario such as Viserys II and Aegon III after the Dance, except that Viserys was to take Aegon III's role, while fAegon would take the role of the miraculous surviving lost kin Viserys II.

[Ygrain]

8 minutes ago, sweetsunray said:

Belwas reported that Illyrio wept when he learned Viserys died. JonCon knew of plans of Viserys invading Westeros with Dothraki, and how Illyrio didn't plan for him to die youn. And the captains of the Golden Company expected to join Viserys and the Dothraki, and curse Illyrio his plans going awry all the time. That are 3 independent sources, including 2 that know of (f)Aegon's existence, that sound like confirming that Illyrio was not using reverse psychology on Viserys. 

"Magister Illyrio had urged him to wait in Pentos, had offered him the hospitality of his manse, but Viserys would have none of it. He would stay with Drogo until the debt had been paid, until he had the crown he had been promised. “And if he tries to cheat me, he will learn to his sorrow what it means to wake the dragon,” Viserys had vowed, laying a hand on his borrowed sword. Illyrio had blinked at that and wished him good fortune."

Does that sound to you as Illyrio concerned about not losing a precious piece in his game? Even if Illyrio didn't plan on Viserys getting himself killed with the Dothraki, he still needed to be removed at some point not to stand in Aegon's way. 

 

[SFDanny]

11 minutes ago, Ygrain said:

"Magister Illyrio had urged him to wait in Pentos, had offered him the hospitality of his manse, but Viserys would have none of it. He would stay with Drogo until the debt had been paid, until he had the crown he had been promised. “And if he tries to cheat me, he will learn to his sorrow what it means to wake the dragon,” Viserys had vowed, laying a hand on his borrowed sword. Illyrio had blinked at that and wished him good fortune."

Does that sound to you as Illyrio concerned about not losing a precious piece in his game? Even if Illyrio didn't plan on Viserys getting himself killed with the Dothraki, he still needed to be removed at some point not to stand in Aegon's way. 

 

Exactly. If your central goal for over a decade is to put Viserys on the Iron Throne, one does not allow him to put himself in such danger. Illyrio and Varys sold Daenerys in an effort to get a Dothraki army into Westeros, and they let Viserys go into the Dothraki Sea with only one very disloyal retainer to accompany him. While Illyrio gave them refuge for months, he also planned for over a decade to put Young Griff on the Iron Throne. If that doesn't convince readers that Varys and Illyrio never had real interest in restoring Viserys to power of his father, then I think one has lost the forest for the trees.

[Lord Asher Forrester]

On 25/06/2017 at 7:09 PM, WSmith84 said:

Problem is we don't know who proposed the duel: was it the Laughing Storm or Egg himself? I can believe Lyonel did, but we haven't got proof either way.

I think though we can definitely say that both Brandon and Rickard had the right to a trial by combat: Dunk (whose guilt was not in doubt) and Tyrion (who is not a knight or lord) were both entitled to it (and Tyrion was accused of regicide!).

Surely Dunk proposed it ha!

[Lord Asher Forrester]

Now I am not saying that Brandon said the thing or not, it is questionable, not an absolutely truth. But i think probbably true, giving Brandon previous acts, like the tourney at Harenhall where he had to be restrained so not to confront Prince Rhaegar for giving the crown of beauty to Lyanna wich seems a shitty thing, compared to the moment when he is sure that she was kidnapped by the same prince.

But to compare any possible law of threat/agression against royal blooded when apllied by the Mad King to the same (or even another) law, when being apllied by Baelor Breakspear (wich was a decent guy and not a totally paranoid) wich should be able to see that Dunk was not a bad person, deserving to be maimed. It is quite unfair to compare one happening to another.

 

 

[Jon's Queen Consort]

3 hours ago, Lord Asher Forrester said:

wich seems a shitty thing

Why protecting his sister honor, in a society that one of the greatest merits is honor is a shitty thing? Rhaegar by giving the crown to Lyanna was insulting her and her honor, especially since he was married, his wife was present and Lyanna was betrothed.

[sweetsunray]

12 hours ago, Ygrain said:

"Magister Illyrio had urged him to wait in Pentos, had offered him the hospitality of his manse, but Viserys would have none of it. He would stay with Drogo until the debt had been paid, until he had the crown he had been promised. “And if he tries to cheat me, he will learn to his sorrow what it means to wake the dragon,” Viserys had vowed, laying a hand on his borrowed sword. Illyrio had blinked at that and wished him good fortune."

Does that sound to you as Illyrio concerned about not losing a precious piece in his game? Even if Illyrio didn't plan on Viserys getting himself killed with the Dothraki, he still needed to be removed at some point not to stand in Aegon's way.

I bolded the stuff that is relevant to Illyrio, to reflect on within a far bigger context. Dany and Jorah and others often urge Viserys genuinely to see sense in something. Viserys never ever does. And what do Jorah and Dany do at some point to Viserys's foolhardiness - they blink and give up. Nobody manages to convince Viserys of not doing what he set his mind on. If Illyrio was genuinely trying to sway Viserys to stay, then you'd still have the above scene, because Viserys never listens. What would you have Illyrio do? Tie him up and keep him imprisoned? 

Later on, Jorah tells Dany that Viserys should have remained in Pentos as Illyrio urged. Now, Jorah is not in on everything of Illyrio's plans, but he does follow Illyrio's instructions until Qarth, when Jorah covets Dany for himself.

Now consider the much later debate with the GC. It becomes evident that they fear that Aegon's identity will be doubted by all in Westeros, without Dany. That is one of the main reasons they plan to unite with Dany. If Dany accepts Aegon as her nephew then the rest in Westeros will accept he is indeed Rhaear's son. But at the time of aGoT, she was the spare Targ, and the main Targ would be Viserys. And thus I suspect that Illyrio planned a "reunion" between Viserys and Aegon, where Viserys would be the Targ who accepts Aegon as his nephew.

Consider the timing - Dany marries Drogo around the turn of the year from 297 AC to 298 AC. That's the time when Rhaegar's son would turn 16, and thus an adult. And around that time, Illyrio shelters Viserys and Dany, giving them gifts, pampering them, getting Viserys a brother-in-law with a huge army, etc...

Furthermore it doesn't make sense at all to have Viserys killed by the Dothraki, if Illyrio wants the Dothraki for an army. And clearly his convo with Varys that Aerya overhears beneath the Red Keep, shows Illyrio being distressed that because of Dany's pregnancy, Drogo will linger in Vaes Dothrak for a while and everything will be delayed. Now Drogo promised Viserys to help him get a crown, as a "gift" in return for Viserys "gifting" his sister to Drogo. Drogo does not owe Illyrio nor Varys a "gift", he owes Viserys a "gift". So, if Viserys dies with the Dothraki, then Illyrio and Varys can forget about the Dothraki army. What happens? Drogo crowns Viserys with molten gold and that's when he tells Dany he'll never cross the narrow sea for a chair.     

So, back to Illyrio weeping over the news of Viserys's death: now, Jorah poses the correct issue - was he actually weeping for Viserys, or for the plans he needed Viserys for? It is the latter - because Viserys's death means no Dothraki army, and no Targ to lend credibility to Aegon.

[SFDanny]

1 hour ago, The Doctor's Consort said:

Why protecting his sister honor, in a society that one of the greatest merits is honor is a shitty thing? Rhaegar by giving the crown to Lyanna was insulting her and her honor, especially since he was married, his wife was present and Lyanna was betrothed.

Just some late night thoughts on this.

There seems to me to be multiple layers to this action. On the surface it is unquestionable a honor to be named the Queen of Love and Beauty, especially from a man as prestigious as the Crown Prince of the Realm. This is the response Robert chooses to respond with when he says Rhaegar is just giving Lyanna "her due." Although he likely sees a deeper level that disturbs him greatly.

Brandon sees the insult as you point out below the surface and reacts to it. Indeed, he has to be held back from reacting to it further. Although he may be responding also to other insults to the Stark's honor as well as the personal one you point to.

I have suggested that Rhaegar sees this primarily as a political message to the Starks by which he tells them symbolically that he stands with his father against the marriage alliances the Starks, Tullys, and Baratheons have been building in opposition to the Targaryen monarchy. Although, I think there is likely a honest appreciation of Lyanna's beauty and her character that Rhaegar feels as well.

Multiple layers of messages being conveyed in one act that shook the crowd and the political world of Westeros.

However, what always seems to be left out from this discussion is Lyanna's response. Nowhere do we hear what she said or felt towards Rhaegar's action. Not that one would expect our author to do so because to reveal too much might spoil the mystery too early. But Lyanna is left voiceless in all the accounts of this event. Was she just passive throughout? Did she only see one surface level and was dazzled like Sansa by stories and songs through which she sees a gallant prince showing love for her? Or did she understand the insult you speak of, and the possible political message and sit and say nothing?

After all this is the young woman of too much wolf's blood flowing through her veins who stood up the insults hurled at and  blows inflicted on a stranger, and fought with naught but a tourney sword against three bullies? Is not this the young woman who would wear a sword if her father did not forbid it? This is the same young woman who goes behind her father's back and learns to use that sword anyway, is it not? And this is the same young women who sees through Robert's charisma and good looks to see him as a man who will never change his wandering ways.

Yet she says nothing?

Not a word to Rhaegar about how he must surely mean this "honor" for his wife? Or throw the garland back at him? Or even just runaway?

The only clue we have of Lyanna's response is possibly that she dies holding what sounds suspiciously like the dried and dead remains of Rhaegar's garland of flowers he gives to her that day.

Lyanna is mute. Uncharacteristically mute. Yet the muteness of her response may well speak loudly to the reader who listens. It looks to be, when combined with what we would expect from her nature that is described to us by Ned and others, an acceptance both of the surface honor and, perhaps, and an agreement with the political message. If we accept her objections to the arranged married to Robert, then it is not so far to she this young woman's rejection of her father's plans to use her, against her wishes, in his political plans. Her muteness may be her way of standing up and saying to Westeros that she too objects to this marriage. Her mute acceptance of Rhaegar's honor should not be ignored for the shout of rebellion that I think it is.

[Jon's Queen Consort]

7 minutes ago, SFDanny said:

snip

If I understood correctly you mean that Lyanna had no problem with what Rhaegar did. But I don’t mind what Lyanna thought, I am talking about what the rest of her family thought. Sure she might like it and had fallen in love with Rhaegar and he loved her too, but their actions were what it really mattered. The fact that they might love each other doesn’t mean that their elopement was not a terrible deed that was the pretext that caused a war. Of course the elopement was an excuse but without that Brandon would had gone to KL, Aerys wouldn’t had murdered him along with his father. He wouldn’t had ordered the death of Ned and Robert and JonA wouldn’t had called the banners. Without the elopement there would be Rhaegar’s coup d'état which would had way less victims.

[Maia]

On 26.6.2017 at 0:13 AM, kissdbyfire said:

Yeah, I know what you're saying. And yes, we can most definitely agree on the Starks right to a proper trial which they didn't get b/c Aerys was batshit crazy.

 

I always thought that Ned's sentencing of Gregor Clegane was very sketchy in this context - in absentia, on the word of some peasants who just saw a huge guy, without an option of trial by combat or anything like that. And it isn't like Ned summoned Gregor and he refused to show - he just condemned Clegane summarily.

And it is odd with trial by combat - some people, even nobles, clearly weren't offered the option - like Bloodraven or Rickard Karstark and many others in tWoIaF. I guess, it is there to determine a person's guilt? And if guilt is established beyond the shadow of doubt, or if crime itself was committed openly, they are no longer entitled to it? 

 

On 26.6.2017 at 5:25 PM, Adam Yozza said:

 As to whether he would be expected to as a Prince; I think he would. Aerion and Maegor fought their own trials/duels themselves, so there's equal precedent either way.

 

Yes, but they were the challengers, not the challenged. And Aerion did try to get out of it with his "trial of Seven" ploy, where he clearly expected Dunk to be unable to assemble his side.  It was also Ser  Duncan the Tall, who duelled Lyonel Baratheon, not  Prince Duncan or Aegon V. Generally, challenges to higher ups, or among higher nobility seem to be quite rare, exactly because they are seldom accepted. Of course, Brandon himself accepted LF's challenge, so he was the type of person to expect that others would do the same.

Also, shouting for somebody to come out and die was hardly a proper challenge and it was idiotic not to check whether your target was even there before screaming your head off. Particularly since tensions between Aerys and Rhaegar were well-known, so why would you even expect the prince to be in the Red Keep? Misinformation here or there, why not check first?  Why go about it in this way at all when there were reasons to think that Aerys would be sympathetic to your position, if approached properly?

 

On 25.6.2017 at 9:57 PM, sweetsunray said:

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?

 

Completely different situations - new lords are always tested, all the more so if they are teenagers. Incumbent adult lords rarely are, unless they have a  history of incompetence and/or some disasters happen. Roose Bolton was properly wary of Lord Rickard finding out about his misdeeds and coming down on him like a ton of bricks - this tells me that nobody considered him weak.

 

On 25.6.2017 at 9:57 PM, sweetsunray said:

  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.

 

Blackwoods and Brackens survived their daughters becoming royal mistresses, Jaehaerys I's rule  and prestige of Targaryens survived his wayward daughter becoming a whore/brothel madame. Lord Rickard's situation was hardly impossible, particularly since he was a rather politically savvy sort. Didn't he even have amicable personal interactions with Aerys in the past? It seems to me that he was eminently qualified to deal with the situation and even profit from it - if his eldest son hadn't blown it all sky-high.

 

On 25.6.2017 at 9:57 PM, sweetsunray said:

 Heck, if Brandon had died in a duel with Rhaegar, nobody would even make issue anymore if the victor kept his stolen prize. 

<snip>

 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.

 

Absolutely not. Deaths in a duel can very much lead to blood feuds. That's why Doran had to go to such lengths to appease the Yronwoods.

 

On 1.7.2017 at 1:46 PM, sweetsunray said:

Actually, Varys advizes Aerys not to open the city gates for Tywin, while Pycelle advizes Aerys to do this.

 

Well, Varys certainly knew about Aerys's wildfire plan. Also, he didn't want either Tywin or Robert on the throne.

As to Illyrio, he had to know that Viserys going with the Dothraki  would end badly, yet he didn't try particularly hard to stop him. His protests were quite perfunctonary and very short-lived. How it squares with what the GC has been told isn't clear, but thereit is. Generally, both Varys and Illyrio emoting for the audience or telling them  stuff has to be taken with a ton of salt - those 2 have their own agenda and are very practiced at manipulation.

[devilish]

Robert is portrayed by Eddard as a powerful warrior whose quick to anger. However, how much of that is true? Robert stood aside when Lyanna was crowned Lady of Beauty. After Lyanna’s kidnap he didn’t even seek the king’s audience even though, he had every right to do so as Aerys’ LP and first cousin.  Don’t forget that it was Jon Arryn who started the rebellion and Robert joined it only after the mad king demanded his head. 
Robert had very good reasons to be so hesitant. As a Baratheon, Robert can trace his origins to Orys Baratheon, a bastard whom Aegon made LP. In few words all his powers and riches are dependent on the Targs. Unlike the North and the Vale who are impregnable regions loyal to their Lords, the Stormlands is small, its fiercely loyal towards the Targs and its surrounded by Targ loyalists. His ancestor Argella was the last Durrandon queen and yet she was dragged naked and then married off to a bastard simply because the Stormlanders refused to go toe to toe against the Targs. 

 Not to forget, that if by some miracle, Robert did win the war. He would have ended up face to face to Aerys. With Rhaegar things were simple (ie a duel in the middle of a battle) but Aerys was a different cup of tea. Aerys wasn’t the kind to get himself involved into war. He was also Robert’s anointed king and first cousin. Would Robert execute him knowing fully well that he would become kinslayer, kingslayer and usurper in one single stroke?

Such hesitation and refusal to take the most violent option was synonymous to Robert throughout his realm. He forgave most of the Targ loyalists and allowed them to keep their lands and titles. He also forgave Balon and he took the easy way out when he killed Lady to avoid further confrontation with either Ned or Cersei.  His hatred towards the Targs is legendary but he waited until Danny/Viserys became a real danger to Westeros and even then he took the least violent option (ie send assassins to kill 2-3 people as opposed to wait for a Dothraki invasion).

There’s nothing that suggest that Robert would join a rebellion just because Rhaegar took Lyanna. I doubt he would even entertain a duel by combat with the crown prince on that regard. So we can safely remove Robert from this equation. Same as we can remove Jon Arryn, whom as said, only started a rebellion when the king ordered him to break guest rights. This incident was strictly Stark and Targeryan (Rhaegar and Aerys) business.

Lets focus on the Targeryans first. Everything points at the direction that Aerys knew that his son was planning a rebellion. He first tried to weaken him by marry him to a nobody from Essos and then when Steffon failed in that quest, he settled to Elia Martell a physically weak lady whose land was great in guerrilla warfare but was hardly a superpower in offense.  We also know that Varys had warned the king about the tourney of Harrenhal being a possible breeding ground for a rebellion. The king took it seriously enough to attend the tournament himself ruining Rhaegar’s plan to find new support.
Which leads us to the next question, ie why did Aerys took Brandon’s provocation so much at heart? Common sense would say that Aerys would direct the Starks anger towards Rhaegar’s action to pit the wolf (and possibly the Baratheons + Dorne) against the treacherous crown prince in ‘a kill 2 birds with one stone’ kind of thing. That doesn’t happen. Instead, Brandon is arrested, Rickard is summoned and both are then killed. Aerys goes in full bloodbath mode ordering Arryn to both execute Ned and Robert forcing them to rebel. So what went wrong? In my opinion, everything points to Brandon. The wild wolf was so reckless and arrogant that gave Aerys no option but to go in full paranoia.