Was Eddard a hostage in the vale?

[thranta flyer]

“A thoughtful look at the intent behind wardship's. There are many variables as you point out. What I think is interesting is that you group Myrcella and Eddard together. We know that Myrcella is sent to Dorne by Tryion to keep her safe and to allow Dorne some power/control of the Iron Throne, but she is called a ward. She is however, very easily a hostage of the Martell's, and a pawn against her own house, as we see with Arienne's plot to crown her. Maybe Ned was all of those things, too? Complicated.”

The thing about Myrcella is that Tyrion wanted her out of KL for a few reasons.  First, she would be a lot safer in Dorne which is fairly isolated, and we know from Doran’s musings over the kids in the water gardens that they hold kids in fairly high respect.  Both Doran and Tyrion know that this is a highly political move, but Tryion also loves his nieces and nephews.  Myrcella is sent there to get to know Trystane as well as assurance that a political deal is kept.  She’s a pawn that could become a hostage should the need arise because the Lannisters break faith.  In those regards, she’s sent there with good intentions, but the circumstances have not yet arisen where is an outright hostage.  Eddard was also sent with the best intentions, but at any point he could have been used as a hostage.  Both were sent as pawns/wards with the best intentions, but there is always the potential for that to change.  That’s the parallel I was trying to draw there.  Arienne’s plot, um, complicates things…

“Yes, Theon was also a pawn in the game and could easily be set up as a loyal vassal of Roberts if his father and uncles were removed. That would have been the smartest thing to do, but it depends on being able to defeat the iron born first.”

I totally agree, but I think they could have been defeated again fairly easily.  If any of the kingdoms was despised/had few friends, it’s the Iron Born.  They are pretty much on their own, especially when they start reaving and terrorizing all the other lords.  I’d bet big money that Tywin wouldn’t let the port at Lannisport be burnt to a crisp again.

“There is lot's of speculation of why Elbert Arryn was with Brandon Stark and what there connection might have been. We do know that Brandon was a ward of house Dustin at Barrowton, so he was not at Winterfell. If Jon Arryn sent his heir to be a ward of the north, one would think that heir would be a ward at Winterfell, and not Barrowton. But maybe Elbert was fostered at Winterfell. Until we are told, everything we come up with is speculation.”

I don’t think I was clear here.  At this point, all the “boys” were past the age of fostering.  I was trying to make the case that because Ned was fostered in The Vale, he would have known Elbert quite well, even if Elbert was fostered elsewhere.  It’s also probably safe to say that Robert/Elbert/Ned/Brandon who were all close in age are considered family because of the fostering.  I suspect that after their age of fostering, all four of them, especially the lords paramount would have been included in their fathers/uncles councils, so I think that it’s possible Elbert was visiting Winterfell for some reason and simply decided to ride to KL with Brandon for whatever reason.

“There is something we are missing from this story. I suppose GRRM is withholding it, or he has very subtly hinted at it and we have missed it. Either Aerys has good reason to expect that Jon Arryn would execute his wards (who were to hold to still be wards, so why does the text refer to them that way), or Aerys didn't demand Ned's head or Robert's, or only one or the other, but not both. I think Jon Arryn could have been playing a big manipulation game and I am not all that sure that Aerys made that demand. But if he did, why was in "Defiance" for Jon Arryn to refuse?”

I was thinking about this.  Everyone assumes that Rhaegar ran off with Lyanna, but it could have been the other way around.  Perhaps Aerys was upset at Lyanna for seducing Rhaegar OR Aerys thought that Lyanna (and therefore the North, the Vale, etc…) were conspiring against him to take the throne and Rhaegar/Lyanna running off was the evidence needed to confirm that in his paranoid mind.  He may have summoned Brandon and Rickard to answer for the crimes of the North turning against the crown.  If Elbert and the other remainder of the party supported whatever Brandon/Rickard said, then Aerys might consider them accomplices.  It’s all super interesting to think about, but I just don’t think we have enough information.

[devilish]

12 hours ago, St Daga said:

Do we know that RIckard Stark had any ambition outside of the north except for what Barbrey Dustin tells us? Her intent is very questionable, and it is not clear what game she is playing, with Theon, or with Roose. The only think I am certain of with her, is that she hates Ramsay.

So, to speculate that Rickard Stark was "hurt" because of his lack of inclusion in plotting of southron houses is flat speculation. Not any different that what I am doing with my theory, honestly.

This is pretty much the same idea that many of the "southron ambitions" theories are built on, but they are just theories at this point, just like RLJ or that Joffrey sent the catspaw to kill Bran. Theories not proved in the text!

Well, timeline wise, Ned was in the vale long before Lyanna was betrothed to Robert, so that seems like something that might have happened much later. I doubt very much that is why Ned was sent to the vale.

Brandon seems like a grey eyed version of Robert Baratheon. I think they would have gotten along famously! However, Rickard didn't sent his  heir to the vale, he sent his second son. Still, I think the intent behind the move is vague, and you are guessing as much as anybody. The fact is, there is nothing in the text either way, so it's easy to speculate.

I don't believe the Southern ambitions theory at all. If there was, then Rickard would have used Lyanna’s kidnap as an excuse, dragging the North, the Riverlands and the Stormlands into war. However, I do agree that there was a sort of ganging up going on, not only between the North, Stormlands, Vale and Riverlands but among the rest of Westeros as well (The Martells and the Lannisters discussed a possible marriage between them too). The reason to that can be attributed to King Egg whose reforms caused quite a stir in the kingdom. If you ask me, there seem to be an effort to build a union front that could stand against any king who dared micromanaging his kingdom again.

 

Regarding your last comment I doubt Brandon and Robert would have gone well together. The former might be a womaniser like Robert was but unlike the stag he was fiercely protective towards his family. He’s the one who encouraged Ned to dance with Dayne girl and went ballistic when Rhaegar crowned his sister as Lady of Beauty. He even went to KL to challenge the crown prince himself, which, in my opinion, is suicide.

Robert-Ned relationship worked magnificently because one was an alpha male and the other was a beta. I cant see Brandon bending the knee to someone to some Lord Paramount who brought far less troops to the war then he did. Even if he did, he'll certainly won't call Lyanna's son a bastard just to avoid upsetting Robert. If the stag wanted to kill Lyanna's boy then he will have to march to Winterfell for him.

[devilish]

In real life wards (including marriages) served a complex role. It sealed a bond of trust between the two houses with the one sending the ward committing itself to back the other house in time of need. However, things can go south very quickly. Isabella of France who was crucial in keeping Edward II Plantagenet in rule was stripped off her children and her lands in England when the King of France (ie her brother) declared war on her husband.

[St Daga]

21 hours ago, Ralphis Baratheon said:

If Jon Arryn welcomed Robert and Eddard into the Vale/Eyrie and fed them then they are technically protected by Guest Right. Bread and Salt seems more like a symbolic gesture done when the guest and/or host are on uneasy terms with each other. For instance when King Robert and his family visit Winterfell there is no offer of bread and salt that I can remember because no one felt it was needed.

Theon was sent to the North and Winterfell as a hostage. He wasn't welcomed as a guest like foster children and wards are. It just so happens the Stark's are kind people and treated him more like a ward then a hostage.

If your idea that simply feeding someone is a gesture of guest right, then Theon has had thousands of meals at Winterfell, and therefore was offered guest right by the act of eating.  Now, Mance does tell Jon that he was safe as soon as he ate his first meal at Winterfell, the "meat and mead" offered during the welcoming feast. So, was there some small ceremony that welcomed Robert's whole party, that included a pledge of guest right, or is the act of offering and accepting food enough? It's a bit vague if you ask me.

21 hours ago, Ralphis Baratheon said:

So we know Targaryen madness is not propaganda. Barristan believes it himself and was told this by a Targaryen way before a rebellion was ever fought. 

But what defines "madness" in 50% of Targaryen's? Was Baelor mad because he was a religious nut job who didn't want to have children with his sister, or his days of fasting? Is that enough to make a Targaryen viewed as mad. Because that is a far different thing than roasting people alive. I think Aerys was definitely cruel, but cruelty isn't exactly equal with madness. Certainly, Aerys was reported to have gotten sexual arousal from his acts of cruelty, which makes him a creep, but does it make him truely insane? Now, Maegor is considered cruel, but was he mad? He had all the builders of the Red Keep murdered, but does that make him crazy? I don't think it as clear cut as we would like it to be. If roughly every other Targaryen is born "mad" then which of the three original dragon riders was mad? Aegon, Visenya or Rhaenys? I think that Baristan is saying what he was told, but that doesn't make it true.

 

[St Daga]

20 hours ago, Consigliere said:

How weird that you put stock in the author's words only when it suits you. For there to be a mystery, an author first needs to establish said mystery (i.e. Jon's parentage, TPtwP etc). Five books in and there is not a single shred of textual evidence that supports Ned being a hostage of Jon Arryn. The 'mystery' doesn't exist.

Of course there is a mystery in regards to Jon's parentage, and it has been layered throughout the books. I don't deny that. There are many mysteries hinted at in the books. I also don't know that there is anything to the idea of Ned possibly being a hostage in the vale at some point, but I think some of the wording is curious and I am merely asking questions. I don't know why you seem to be so upset about questions. If you don't think it's possible, that is fine. I am exploring a possibility, you certainly don't need to.

As to GRRM, he tells us his novels are canon, and that unless it is in the novels, it should not be thought of as canon. As far as I know, his SSM's are not in the novel's. He also considers TWOIAF as semi-canon, whatever the heck that means, so I look at it and the information in it, with a very shady eye.

[St Daga]

11 hours ago, thranta flyer said:

Eddard was also sent with the best intentions, but at any point he could have been used as a hostage. 

No where in the text does it ever say why Eddard was sent to the vale. We have lot's of internal monologue and verbal discussion about Myrcella, but none about Ned.

11 hours ago, thranta flyer said:

Everyone assumes that Rhaegar ran off with Lyanna, but it could have been the other way around. 

Yes, I have speculated at one time that it was Lyanna who took Rhaegar, much like Catelyn "takes" Tyrion. But I also wonder at the entire narrative of Lyanna and Rhaegar together and if that is a false lead? Maybe they never had any contact after Harrenhal and the rest is just gossip and stories to explain a rebellion. I think almost anything is possible with GRRM and he is excellent with misdirection. He gives us very little in the way of true fact, but the internet is "full" of stories that connect very few dot's of fact. He allows us to lead ourselves down a merry little path. It's brilliant, really!

11 hours ago, thranta flyer said:

It’s also probably safe to say that Robert/Elbert/Ned/Brandon who were all close in age are considered family because of the fostering.  I suspect that after their age of fostering, all four of them, especially the lords paramount would have been included in their fathers/uncles councils, so I think that it’s possible Elbert was visiting Winterfell for some reason and simply decided to ride to KL with Brandon for whatever reason.

It is possible. But it could also be very different, or much more or much less. GRRM is tricky!

Thank you for the interesting and polite discussion!

[St Daga]

11 hours ago, devilish said:

I don't believe the Southern ambitions theory at all. If there was, then Rickard would have used Lyanna’s kidnap as an excuse, dragging the North, the Riverlands and the Stormlands into war. However, I do agree that there was a sort of ganging up going on, not only between the North, Stormlands, Vale and Riverlands but among the rest of Westeros as well (The Martells and the Lannisters discussed a possible marriage between them too). The reason to that can be attributed to King Egg whose reforms caused quite a stir in the kingdom. If you ask me, there seem to be an effort to build a union front that could stand against any king who dared micromanaging his kingdom again.

This is well thought out!  I have questioned Rickard's "southron ambitions" myself, and find that I don't trust Barbrey Dustin's words at all, and she is who plants this idea in our heads. I agree that if Rickard did really want a war, then the idea of Rhaegar kidnapping his daughter would be enough for him to do that. But instead, he goes to Kings Landing to seek justice from his King in regards to the accusation that his heir Brandon threatened to murder the crown prince. Rickard didn't enter KL like a man ready to incite rebellion!

11 hours ago, devilish said:

Regarding your last comment I doubt Brandon and Robert would have gone well together. The former might be a womaniser like Robert was but unlike the stag he was fiercely protective towards his family. He’s the one who encouraged Ned to dance with Dayne girl and went ballistic when Rhaegar crowned his sister as Lady of Beauty. He even went to KL to challenge the crown prince himself, which, in my opinion, is suicide.

I really have begun to question the idea of what is commonly thought about Brandon's womanizing and hot temper. Yes, according to Ned, Brandon had the "wolf blood", but what does that really mean. Now, I already doubt Barbrey Dustin's words, and it is she who tells us that Brandon liked to bloody his sword. In Ned's thoughts, he thinks Brandon would know what to do, he always did, which doesn't really fit the idea of rash decisions and fly away tempers. I agree that Brandon loved and wanted to protect his family. I also don't know if we really understand the reason for Brandon's reaction when Rhaegar "crowned" Lyanna at Harrenhal, or what he was thinking when he raced off to Kings' Landing. I think that is part of the mystery that GRRM still needs to reveal to us.

As to whether Brandon and Robert would have become "besties", I agree with you that they probably would not have. But I think they would have managed okay together. Certainly, we know that Ned the quiet wolf and Brandon the wild wolf were not carbon copies of one another, in looks or in actions, but how different they might have been is hard to say.

11 hours ago, devilish said:

Even if he did, he'll certainly won't call Lyanna's son a bastard just to avoid upsetting Robert. If the stag wanted to kill Lyanna's boy then he will have to march to Winterfell for him.

We don't really know that is what was going on with Ned, or if he truly claimed Lyanna's child as his own. It's a well accepted idea and it might be true, but I don't know that it is. There is a chance that Jon is exactly what Ned claims him to be, his own bastard. Time will tell if we ever get another book. Certainly I agree that the north would be formidable to attack, and Robert would have to work to get to Winterfell to get to Jon, in this scenario. But isn't a lie, in this case, better than having the rest of the 7K attaching the people and livelihood of the north. If Robert got the Iron Born on his side, they could attack the west coast, his own fleet with Stannis the Mannis could attack the east coast, while people attempted to push up the neck. It would take a large force, but it could be done. And all of that to protect one boy, when a lie served to avoid all of that. Ned had honor but he wasn't blind to protecting his people or his lands. Do we think that Brandon would have been? I think there is a lot more to Brandon Stark than being a hot tempered ladies man. I hope someday we get to learn more about Brandon and Rickard.

11 hours ago, devilish said:

In real life wards (including marriages) served a complex role. It sealed a bond of trust between the two houses with the one sending the ward committing itself to back the other house in time of need. However, things can go south very quickly. Isabella of France who was crucial in keeping Edward II Plantagenet in rule was stripped off her children and her lands in England when the King of France (ie her brother) declared war on her husband.

You are correct. This is all very complicated, both in real life, in history and in this story. Politics can change as quickly as the wind, and what was an alliance is now an enemy and rival.

Nice discussion. Thank you.

 

[SFDanny]

1 hour ago, St Daga said:

Of course there is a mystery in regards to Jon's parentage, and it has been layered throughout the books. I don't deny that. There are many mysteries hinted at in the books. I also don't know that there is anything to the idea of Ned possibly being a hostage in the vale at some point, but I think some of the wording is curious and I am merely asking questions. I don't know why you seem to be so upset about questions. If you don't think it's possible, that is fine. I am exploring a possibility, you certainly don't need to.

As to GRRM, he tells us his novels are canon, and that unless it is in the novels, it should not be thought of as canon. As far as I know, his SSM's are not in the novel's. He also considers TWOIAF as semi-canon, whatever the heck that means, so I look at it and the information in it, with a very shady eye.

Nothing wrong with asking questions. I think the quote by Martin which @Consigliere posted makes the theory that Ned was held as a hostage in the Vale extremely, extremely unlikely. One has to suppose George lied or has changed his mind about some very important details of his backstory. If you have specific evidence that either is true, I'd love to see it. Dismissing his remarks as not in the canon - while strictly true - is meaningless other than to note Martin could still possibly change what he said in later published works. While true, that goes for things within the canon of the books as well.

This disagreement over the impact of canon vs. semi-canon sources has a history on this site and elsewhere. Let me just state once again my own take on it. I think this is a separation Martin has used for a specific purpose. He doesn't want readers coming back at him after a book is published and saying "but you said!" and being told he lied to readers. Changes happen and our author wants readers to know that up front.

That doesn't mean semi-canon sources are useless to the reader. They are extremely useful. Martin often clarifies things we have spent years debating in his interviews and in his correspondence. The real point is that everything in Martin's canon and semi-canon sources needs to be evaluated by the reader. Canon sources can lie and change just as semi-canon ones might. It is the whole point of the format Martin uses that we see reality from so many different points of view that we, as readers who go beyond a surface level of understanding of the materials, have to take the bias of each point of view into account. 

Which is a long way of saying, showing where you think Martin's remarks about Robert and Ned's stay in the Vale is possibly not valid any longer and what evidence you think supports this idea is a interesting discussion. Just dismissing Martin's remarks as "semi-canon" without any evidence to back it up, is much, much less so. Then we are in the realm of pure speculation, which has its place, but it is a different kind of discussion.

Lastly, let me just say, my understanding is that Martin considers The World of Ice and Fire  - the book, not the app - a canon source. If you have something that says differently I'd like to see it. Like other canon sources, one has to sort through the bias of the "authors" of the history and weigh what looks to be true with what looks to be false or distorted, but that's not new to any of us, I think.

 

[SFDanny]

29 minutes ago, St Daga said:

This is well thought out!  I have questioned Rickard's "southron ambitions" myself, and find that I don't trust Barbrey Dustin's words at all, and she is who plants this idea in our heads. I agree that if Rickard did really want a war, then the idea of Rhaegar kidnapping his daughter would be enough for him to do that. But instead, he goes to Kings Landing to seek justice from his King in regards to the accusation that his heir Brandon threatened to murder the crown prince. Rickard didn't enter KL like a man ready to incite rebellion!

Lady Dustin is the source of the phrase "southron ambitions" but the idea that Lord Rickard was engaged in plots with those he help build alliances with goes back to sources from much earlier in the story. This is a debate for another thread, but let me just state I believe Rickard, Jon Arryn, and Hoster Tully are engaged in a plot to build a bloc of alliances between Great Houses of Westeros as a alternate power base to the Targaryens with the aim of getting rid of Targaryen rule. The formation of which is laid well before Aerys or Rhaegar take any action against this new alliance. The participation of Tywin Lannister in this appears to take place much later, and Steffon Baratheon's participation is questionable as it may be Maester Cressen who orchestrates the fostering of Robert. There is plenty of evidence that suggests this other than Lady Dustin's conservation with Theon.

If you want to discuss it elsewhere, I'd be happy to do so. Although I don't have a lot of time today, so my ability to post may be limited.

[Consigliere]

56 minutes ago, St Daga said:

Of course there is a mystery in regards to Jon's parentage, and it has been layered throughout the books. I don't deny that. There are many mysteries hinted at in the books. I also don't know that there is anything to the idea of Ned possibly being a hostage in the vale at some point, but I think some of the wording is curious and I am merely asking questions. I don't know why you seem to be so upset about questions. If you don't think it's possible, that is fine. I am exploring a possibility, you certainly don't need to.

Excuse me, but I am in no way "getting upset". If you want to question some of the wording then that is fine but you have done so on a public forum so you should have expected some disagreements.

 

Quote

As to GRRM, he tells us his novels are canon, and that unless it is in the novels, it should not be thought of as canon. As far as I know, his SSM's are not in the novel's. He also considers TWOIAF as semi-canon, whatever the heck that means, so I look at it and the information in it, with a very shady eye.

I don't know what "canon" has to do with this anyway. You present a theory with zero textual evidence to support it and your main argument seems to be "well, the books don't explicitly rule it out therefore it must be possible even though I have no textual support to back up my claims". That is a really poor way to go about things. And while an SSM is not canon, surely the author's word concerning the backstory of a character in his own story should carry significant weight, right?

Also, I think you've gotten the book and the app mixed up. TWoIaF is most definitely canon. AWoIaF (the app) is semi-canon.

[St Daga]

2 hours ago, SFDanny said:

Lastly, let me just say, my understanding is that Martin considers The World of Ice and Fire  - the book, not the app - a canon source. If you have something that says differently I'd like to see it. Like other canon sources, one has to sort through the bias of the "authors" of the history and weigh what looks to be true with what looks to be false or distorted, but that's not new to any of us, I think.

It seems I have been mistaken about the World Book (The World of Ice and Fire), and confused it with the app (A World of Ice and Fire). According to a post by Ran, who should know, GRRM considers the published ASOIAF novels, the Dunk and Egg stories and the World Book as canon, not the SSM's or the app (which according to Ran, he considers semi-canon). However, the idea of the unreliable narrator, which GRRM uses as a tool as sharp as Valyrian steel, cannot be denied. That leaves much open to interpretation. But I thank you for helping me clarify in my head, the canonicity of the World Book. It is still very shaded by the unreliable narrator, however, but is canon, as you stated.

However, I think what is revealed in the SSM's is open to question, more so than the published materials, which are also open to question. One of GRRM's more famous SSM statements is the age relation of Jon and Dany and how many moons apart they were born, and the time relation to the sack of KL. It's both colorful and vague.  He is the King of Misdirection, our GRRM, and I very much admire him!

2 hours ago, SFDanny said:

I think the quote by Martin which @Consigliere posted makes the theory that Ned was held as a hostage in the Vale extremely, extremely unlikely.

While I agree that it is unlikely, I don't think it is impossible. I question some of the wording in the text, and I think we can all agree that GRRM doesn't have many words in the text that don't have a deeper meaning than what they appear to be on the surface. While unlikely, I think those things, which I stated in my original post, are curious. Why does Aerys' specifically demand Ned's (and Roberts) head, why is Ned still referred to as a ward at the age of 19, why doesn't he have some holdfast of his own at this age that is considered well past manhood in Westeros, why is he still in the vale? Yes, maybe he is living a footloose and fancy free life scattered between Winterfell and areas in the vale, but maybe he is not. Ned doesn't seem like a very footloose and fancy free kind of guy.

No where in the text is it ever stated why Ned was sent to the vale. I just question Aerys' demand of Jon Arryn and why it was "defiance" when Jon Arryn refused and called his banners. Maybe it was simply the ridiculous arrogance of Aerys that made him think that Jon Arryn would send him the heads of two grown men who were guests of his. But maybe there was something more? If I had proof, there would be no debate at all. There is very little proof in this series, just a whole lot of theories linked together by a few facts, which might not even be accurate based on the whole idea of "the unreliable narrator". GRRM is very, very smart, I think, and trickier than the majority of us.

2 hours ago, SFDanny said:

That doesn't mean semi-canon sources are useless to the reader.

No where did I state that semi-canon sources were useless to the reader. 

2 hours ago, SFDanny said:

Dismissing his remarks as not in the canon - while strictly true - is meaningless other than to note Martin could still possibly change what he said in later published works. While true, that goes for things within the canon of the books as well.

Exactly!

2 hours ago, SFDanny said:

The real point is that everything in Martin's canon and semi-canon sources needs to be evaluated by the reader.

Yes, that is what I was trying to do.

2 hours ago, SFDanny said:

Just dismissing Martin's remarks as "semi-canon" without any evidence to back it up, is much, much less so.

If you viewed me as being dismissive of GRRM's words, then I didn't express myself well. I don't dismiss anything he says, or any of his works outside of the world of ASOIAF. However, the SSM's are considered semi-canon, and my OP laid out what I felt was worth questioning in the text. I don't expect to get any people on board with believing me, but I think I raised a few valid thoughts. I also understand that many people won't see things that way.

I even referenced that very SSM in my own OP as an argument against my theory. A theory should question itself! But I still think that GRRM is smarter and trickier than the majority of his readers, and I think that leaves his style of writing open to many questions. Some of those questions might stumble upon some grand truth, most of them won't, and my theory probably falls into the later category, but I still thought it might be worth exploring.

2 hours ago, SFDanny said:

Let me just state once again my own take on it. I think this is a separation Martin has used for a specific purpose. He doesn't want readers coming back at him after a book is published and saying "but you said!" and being told he lied to readers.

This might be true in regards to the questions that he answers to the public, and I think that is why he answers them very, very carefully. I think he is much more careful now, than he was 10 or 15 years ago, because people are keeping logs of his statements, some in effort to help with clarification but some people are actively trying to trip him into reveals. I think it's a wonder he answers any questions at all at this point. As to the published books, I think he has this pretty much covered with the "unreliable narrator" idea as far as the text goes. He can pretty much get away with anything, as even people's direct memories are fallible. Personally, Catelyn's POV is the one that I find I trust the least, because I think she is delusional about several things. That doesn't mean I discount the information offered in her POV, but I am cautious of it.

Thank your for the thoughtful discussion on canonicity and for clarifying to me that the World Book is indeed considered canon.

[Ralphis Baratheon]

2 hours ago, St Daga said:

If your idea that simply feeding someone is a gesture of guest right, then Theon has had thousands of meals at Winterfell, and therefore was offered guest right by the act of eating.  Now, Mance does tell Jon that he was safe as soon as he ate his first meal at Winterfell, the "meat and mead" offered during the welcoming feast. So, was there some small ceremony that welcomed Robert's whole party, that included a pledge of guest right, or is the act of offering and accepting food enough? It's a bit vague if you ask me.

I never said it was simply food. It's not just the food it's also the fact they were welcomed to their home as Guests. If it was simply food then all prisoners would be protected by Guest Right when they are giving food in their dungeons. Prisoners that are often executed. Theon was not welcomed as a Guest but as a hostage to keep his father in line. With the evidence we have there really isn't any text to support that Eddard and Robert were ever taken as hostages by Jon Arryn.  They were his foster sons and they respected and loved him. I don't recall Ned ever referring to Theon as his foster son. The whole realm knew the reason Theon was at Winterfell.

2 hours ago, St Daga said:

But what defines "madness" in 50% of Targaryen's? Was Baelor mad because he was a religious nut job who didn't want to have children with his sister, or his days of fasting? Is that enough to make a Targaryen viewed as mad. Because that is a far different thing than roasting people alive. I think Aerys was definitely cruel, but cruelty isn't exactly equal with madness. Certainly, Aerys was reported to have gotten sexual arousal from his acts of cruelty, which makes him a creep, but does it make him truely insane? Now, Maegor is considered cruel, but was he mad? He had all the builders of the Red Keep murdered, but does that make him crazy? I don't think it as clear cut as we would like it to be. If roughly every other Targaryen is born "mad" then which of the three original dragon riders was mad? Aegon, Visenya or Rhaenys? I think that Baristan is saying what he was told, but that doesn't make it true.

Well I guess it's what the characters would define as "Mad" since they are the ones who saw Aerys as such. Barristan believed it because he was around Aerys a lot as a Kingsguard. Who else would have a better first hand account of Aerys in the story that claims he wasn't Mad towards the end of his reign?

 

[St Daga]

38 minutes ago, Consigliere said:

If you want to question some of the wording then that is fine but you have done so on a public forum so you should have expected some disagreements.

I do expect disagreement and that is fine. I actually expected more (though I don't look forward to it), because the idea I have presented is so far from what is commonly accepted. 

As I stated in my OP, there is some wording that I question, and in my experience, GRRM is very careful about his word choices. It is certainly possible that I am looking too deeply into the wording, and what I might find odd, isn't odd at all. 

43 minutes ago, Consigliere said:

You present a theory with zero textual evidence to support it and your main argument seems to be "well, the books don't explicitly rule it out therefore it must be possible even though I have no textual support to back up my claims".

I used wording from the text to make my point, a lot of it, actually. So much, that I considered that I was using too much. Whether you agree with the information I supplied or not, I outlined the things from the text that I thought might be valid. It's a theory or hypotheisis, therefore does not require absolute proof. If it was proven, it would be called a proof. Not many things have actually been proven yet in this story that GRRM is telling us.

49 minutes ago, Consigliere said:

That is a really poor way to go about things.

I highlight text that I thought was questionable or unusual, and used that text to help support my theory. 

51 minutes ago, Consigliere said:

Also, I think you've gotten the book and the app mixed up. TWoIaF is most definitely canon. AWoIaF (the app) is semi-canon.

Yes, @SFDanny helped clarify that for me, and I appreciate it.

 

[St Daga]

1 hour ago, SFDanny said:

Lady Dustin is the source of the phrase "southron ambitions" but the idea that Lord Rickard was engaged in plots with those he help build alliances with goes back to sources from much earlier in the story. This is a debate for another thread, but let me just state I believe Rickard, Jon Arryn, and Hoster Tully are engaged in a plot to build a bloc of alliances between Great Houses of Westeros as a alternate power base to the Targaryens with the aim of getting rid of Targaryen rule. The formation of which is laid well before Aerys or Rhaegar take any action against this new alliance. The participation of Tywin Lannister in this appears to take place much later, and Steffon Baratheon's participation is questionable as it may be Maester Cressen who orchestrates the fostering of Robert. There is plenty of evidence that suggests this other than Lady Dustin's conservation with Theon.

If you want to discuss it elsewhere, I'd be happy to do so. Although I don't have a lot of time today, so my ability to post may be limited.

Thanks, I don't actually post a lot on this forum but I read quite a bit and have for years. I have seen some of your posts and I think that many of the "southron ambitions" theories are interesting, I am not sure how far I see them going but I have looked into many of them, and some of the ideas are very eye opening! Maybe I will catch you sometime on one of those threads and we can discuss! 

[St Daga]

14 minutes ago, Ralphis Baratheon said:

I never said it was simply food. It's not just the food it's also the fact they were welcomed to their home as Guests.

I would agree with this. Food must be offered and words spoken. However, if Mance felt like he was protected by guest right after eating at Winterfell, then the pledge could be viewed as very broad, if it encompasses the kings entire party. As we see, Mance weaseled his way into that protection, when it wasn't intentionally offered to him specifically. If the catspaw assassin was part of the kings party, then he probably was offered guest right in a vague, all encompassing way, too. 

I do question the rules that Theon lived under, however. We know he was a "hostage" of the crown, kept at Winterfell, but that doesn't mean he wasn't offered guest right as a ward of the Stark in Winterfell.  It is possible Theon was never offered any sort of guest right safety at Winterfell. There is not much in this story that is very black and white, but maybe  guest right is one of the exceptions. However, we can agree that what happened at the Red Wedding was a bold repudiation of guest right, which was offered and then spit on by Walder Frey.

Guest right is very interesting and very important, but there are ways around it. So it's not completely black and white, but a little bit grey.  We also see that crafty Lord Manderly found a way around the guest right he offered his Frey guests with the parting gift of horses, which then led said Frey's into a trap that ended in pie. 

I appreciate the discussion on guest right and maybe I will come across the thread that you were discussing it in. It sounds like an interesting thread.

30 minutes ago, Ralphis Baratheon said:

With the evidence we have there really isn't any text to support that Eddard and Robert were ever taken as hostages by Jon Arryn

I agree that with the information we are given, it is never directly stated that Eddard or Robert were ever hostages in the vale, but some of the text implies to me that there was something off. Theon at 19 is still called Ned's ward, and Ned at 19 was still referred to as Jon Arryn's ward. The age of manhood is 16 in Westeros, so Ned should not still be thought of as a ward, and neither should Theon. Except we know that Theon is a hostage. I am just trying to look at parallel's in the story. It's possible that no parallel exists and I am seeing things that are not there. 

 

[devilish]

16 hours ago, St Daga said:

 

 

 

@St Daga

 

This is well thought out!  I have questioned Rickard's "southron ambitions" myself, and find that I don't trust Barbrey Dustin's words at all, and she is who plants this idea in our heads. I agree that if Rickard did really want a war, then the idea of Rhaegar kidnapping his daughter would be enough for him to do that. But instead, he goes to Kings Landing to seek justice from his King in regards to the accusation that his heir Brandon threatened to murder the crown prince. Rickard didn't enter KL like a man ready to incite rebellion!

In the medieval world, were absolute power was the norm and the king had to bend the knee only to to the church, sex was a luxurious but somehow rare commodity. Kings were raised in a conflicting world were on one hand they had a god given right to everything and on the other hand they had to live a pious life which was imposed on them by the church.

Under such circumstances the king would need concubines, from a high nobility standing (ie that will not raise suspicions if they find themselves in court) who know better not to divulge their ‘little secret’.  Usually noblemen would bend over backwards to make sure that their daughter ends up in that role. The Boleyns for example saw their wealth increase in a ridiculous manner after they won the favour of the king.

GOT is somehow different. Sex is far more sacred in GOT and ruining one’s reputation can lead to an untimely death (Red Wedding).  I believe that good old Brandon fed little Barbrey a lot of lies to justify why he got into her skirts without the need of paying his toil.

I really have begun to question the idea of what is commonly thought about Brandon's womanizing and hot temper. Yes, according to Ned, Brandon had the "wolf blood", but what does that really mean. Now, I already doubt Barbrey Dustin's words, and it is she who tells us that Brandon liked to bloody his sword. In Ned's thoughts, he thinks Brandon would know what to do, he always did, which doesn't really fit the idea of rash decisions and fly away tempers. I agree that Brandon loved and wanted to protect his family. I also don't know if we really understand the reason for Brandon's reaction when Rhaegar "crowned" Lyanna at Harrenhal, or what he was thinking when he raced off to Kings' Landing. I think that is part of the mystery that GRRM still needs to reveal to us.

Every piece of information we have about Brandon indicate that he had a fiery temper, possibly worse than Robert’s. Think about it. Robert didn’t go ballistic when Lyanna was crowned Lady of Beauty. Brandon did. Robert didn’t go straight to KL to confront the Crown Prince. Brandon did. Robert didn’t join the rebellion up until Aerys gave him no choice but to do so (ie you can’t pretend Robert to willingly remove his head from his neck to make Uncle happy). Brandon went on kickstarting all of it.

One common mistake we tend to do is to put Brandon at par with Robert. Unfortunately its not the case. Robert is LP, Brandon is not yet warden of the North.  Robert has royal blood. Brandon is not linked to the royal family whatsoever. So Brandon went head long into something which Robert (whose got more standing and is related to the Targ) wouldn’t even dream of doing. That suggest a guy with a fiery temper that is way beyond Robert’s

 

 

As to whether Brandon and Robert would have become "besties", I agree with you that they probably would not have. But I think they would have managed okay together. Certainly, we know that Ned the quiet wolf and Brandon the wild wolf were not carbon copies of one another, in looks or in actions, but how different they might have been is hard to say.

We all know how the rebellion started. Brandon went to KL to confront Rhaegar. Aerys arrests him and he summoned Rickard whom, in turn, went to KL to answer for his son’s crimes. Both were stupidly executed and Aerys went on ordering Arryn to break guest rights and execute both Lord Baratheon and Lord Stark in cold blood. At that point, these three Lords had no choice but to rebel.

Brandon is what made Aerys flip but Aerys actions after is what caused the rebellion.  If Brandon never went to KL then we can safely assume than there would have been any rebellion at all. Rickard and Aerys would probably trash a deal (its within both their interest and that of the Martells to punish Rhaegar) which would probably see Rhaegar being disowned, Aegon becoming Aerys heir (popular with the Martells), Viserys marrying Lyanna, Rhaenys marrying Robert and Jon ending up legitimatized as a Targ.  In few words, if Brandon wasn’t so rash then this so called confrontation between him and the Stag would never happen. Rickard wouldn’t allow it and by the time this problem is sorted Lyanna wouldn’t be Robert’s problem anymore.

Having said that, if Rickard somehow dies before a deal is made and the rebellion still occur with Brandon in command, then expect the North to be more aggressive both in terms of warfare and in terms of demands. Brandon would end up with his own share of glory which will pave the way to the same ‘King in the North’ whispers Robb was subject to. I simply can’t see Brandon being the first to bend the knee to the first Baratheon king, especially one who could barely convince his entire region to join him into the fight.

If that had to happen then Robert would be forced to give his blessing to this ‘king in the North’ status. After all, Hoster joined the war because his daughter is married to him. Not to forget that his friend and mentor Jon Arryn had joined houses with the Tullys and will probably refuse to turn against his new father in law just to appease the young stag.

Which lead us to Lyanna and Jon. Assuming that Brandon does survive the tower of joy then Jon would more certainly, given refuge to the North. Robert would have neither the jurisdiction nor the casus belli needed to assassinate the boy. Which means, Jon will be raised in Winterfell, as Rhaegar’s bastard as a constant reminder that if either Robert or his sons trip then the North already have a ready-made replacement for him.

[Ralphis Baratheon]

15 hours ago, St Daga said:

I do question the rules that Theon lived under, however. We know he was a "hostage" of the crown, kept at Winterfell, but that doesn't mean he wasn't offered guest right as a ward of the Stark in Winterfell.  It is possible Theon was never offered any sort of guest right safety at Winterfell. There is not much in this story that is very black and white, but maybe  guest right is one of the exceptions. However, we can agree that what happened at the Red Wedding was a bold repudiation of guest right, which was offered and then spit on by Walder Frey.

I agree, Guest Right like most other things in the story can at times be grey. I'd be interested to see if GRRM has answered any questions regarding it.

15 hours ago, St Daga said:

Theon at 19 is still called Ned's ward, and Ned at 19 was still referred to as Jon Arryn's ward. The age of manhood is 16 in Westeros, so Ned should not still be thought of as a ward, and neither should Theon. Except we know that Theon is a hostage. I am just trying to look at parallel's in the story. It's possible that no parallel exists and I am seeing things that are not there. 

My guess would be since Theon was kept in Winterfell to be used as a hostage to keep Balon in check I suspect he would have remained with the Starks until Balon died. Then as Balon's heir Theon would presumably become the Lord of the Iron Islands. I think Ned and or Robert naively thought the Iron Born would except Theon as their new Lord when Balon died. Then the Iron Born and the North would have a much better relationship with each other as Robb and Theon were raised together. I think that might have been the plan.

15 hours ago, St Daga said:

I appreciate the discussion on guest right and maybe I will come across the thread that you were discussing it in. It sounds like an interesting thread.

Truly if the thread I was referring to discussed Guest Right even a little bit I would try to find it for you. It literally went like this, a poster said "Jon Arryn should have killed Ned and Robert when Aerys demanded" then I argued it would be a violation of Guest Right. Then the other poster said something about how the Vale wouldn't care about Guest Right and I disagreed. It ended there with regards to Guest Right. I forget what the rest of the thread was about it.

 

[St Daga]

6 hours ago, devilish said:

Under such circumstances the king would need concubines, from a high nobility standing (ie that will not raise suspicions if they find themselves in court) who know better not to divulge their ‘little secret’.  Usually noblemen would bend over backwards to make sure that their daughter ends up in that role.

Um, nobody needs a concubine, not even a king. They might want concubines, for pleasure, for prestige, for affection, but they don't need them, and they don't have the right to them either. Some noblemen did allow this role for their children, but some did not.

To assume that Rickard Stark would be happy that his only daughter, who was betrothed to a Lord Protector, was becoming the mistress of the crown prince, is a bit hard for me to believe. If other people believe that, then great, but I don't think so. Time and more information might change my mind, but as you stated, the world of ASOIAF is a bit different than the real world feudal or medieval times.

6 hours ago, devilish said:

The Boleyns for example saw their wealth increase in a ridiculous manner after they won the favour of the king.

The Boleyn family is certainly an interesting case. The family had already started it's rise to power long before Henry VIII (H8) had become a lover of either daughter. Mary actually spent time in France, and was the mistress to several men, when her father was the ambassador to France. But her marriage prospects certainly changed when she went freely to many beds. This was long before she and H8 hooked up. And while she was H8's mistress, and probably bore him one, and possible two children, he found a husband for her and claimed neither child and kicked her to the curb quickly. Anne, it seems was much smarter than her sister, and was playing the long game. If she had other lovers, she was very quiet about it, and she withheld herself from H8 for years. Ultimately she too became H8's lover, but he was well on the way to setting Catherine of Aragon aside and pissing on the Roman Catholic Church and marrying Anne. With Mary as a mistress, or concubine, the family fortune was still very unsteady, but with Anne as a wife, the family was settled. The real power of the Boleyn's came with Anne's marriage to H8, a much more prestigious position than being the mistress of a king. It seems in this case, marriage is the ideal goal in the power game as compared to being a mistress. If Anne and H8's marriage had produced a male heir, the family would have remained in favor.

6 hours ago, devilish said:

I believe that good old Brandon fed little Barbrey a lot of lies to justify why he got into her skirts without the need of paying his toil.

Well, if Barbrey's story is accurate, then it would not surprise me to find that Brandon made "sweet words" part of his seduction. Many people do that, men and woman. But we only have that account of Brandon from one person, and her intent is very questionable. Although, it would not surprise me to find that Brandon also spent some time with Bethany Ryswell before her marriage to Roose and might be the father of Domeric Bolton.

Ned claimed that Brandon had the "wolf blood" that lead him to an early grave but also felt his brother always knew what do do in a given situation. This does not sound like a rash person, prone just to fits of temper. I think that Brandon was probably a bit like Robb, who did have bouts of temper and made a very poor choice based on sex, but he also was a thoughtful and successful military commander and he cared about his people and family. I think there is more to Brandon's story than we know and it might shed a different light on him when it's revealed.

We know he got upset at the crowning at Harrenhal but we don't know what he was upset about (Ned was upset, too, but in a more quiet manner). Every thought out there is a guess, based on what we know of the story, but we certainly don't know the whole story yet. We know he was reported to have rode into KL screaming for Rhaegar to "come out and die" but did he really? I question Jaime's story a bit here. I am from a small town and I know how stories can quickly become more powerful and spread faster than truth. He certainly might have rode to KL demanding redress, but we don't even know if this is about Lyanna or not. Everyone assumes it is, but we don't know that is what was going on. We all make assumptions based on what the text gives us, but the text is given to us by the King of Misdirection and he want's us to be misled, I think.

7 hours ago, devilish said:

Robert didn’t go ballistic when Lyanna was crowned Lady of Beauty. Brandon did.

No, the Stark's felt the insult, not Robert. I don't think that Crown was laid in Lyanna's lap as an honor, but a warning, and one that the Stark's understood but Robert did not. Robert also isn't the smartest cookie in the jar. One can assume (although I hate to do that) that Robert's reign would have quickly fallen apart if not for Jon Arryn and probably Stannis.

7 hours ago, devilish said:

Robert didn’t go straight to KL to confront the Crown Prince. Brandon did.

No, as my OP stated, Robert was sitting around in the vale, drinking ale or getting into food fights, or something. Isn't it odd that if Rhaegar truly kidnapped his fiance, that Robert just decided to sit around chillin'? Something is missing from what we know.

7 hours ago, devilish said:

Robert didn’t join the rebellion up until Aerys gave him no choice but to do so (ie you can’t pretend Robert to willingly remove his head from his neck to make Uncle happy).

Well, I do question whether Aerys ever actually demanded Robert's head or not, but he joined the rebellion after Jon Arryn called his banners. The rebellion didn't need to start over this demand of Aerys. We are told the rebellion started when Jon Arryn called his banners. Who knows what Robert was thinking at that point? But he and Ned did seem to follow Jon Arryn's lead.

7 hours ago, devilish said:

Brandon went on kickstarting all of it.

Umm. That is a bit of a generalization. If the story that is commonly accepted that Rhaegar kidnapped Lyanna, then Rhaegar was an equal kickstarter. Or if Rhae and Lya eloped, then they bare equal responsibility. This rebellion cannot be laid at Brandon's feet as the soul person who made a mistake that lead to a war that tore apart the country.

7 hours ago, devilish said:

We all know how the rebellion started. Brandon went to KL to confront Rhaegar. Aerys arrests him and he summoned Rickard whom, in turn, went to KL to answer for his son’s crimes. Both were stupidly executed and Aerys went on ordering Arryn to break guest rights and execute both Lord Baratheon and Lord Stark in cold blood. At that point, these three Lords had no choice but to rebel.

We are told in the text that the rebellion started when Jon Arryn raised his banners instead of giving in to Aerys demand. All the other things lead up to that act. And to leave Rhaegar out of any of the blame is unfair and unjust, if this commonly accepted idea is really how it all went down. I am not convinced.

7 hours ago, devilish said:

If Brandon never went to KL then we can safely assume than there would have been any rebellion at all.

I can't assume that. We don't know what might or might not have happened.

7 hours ago, devilish said:

Rickard and Aerys would probably trash a deal (its within both their interest and that of the Martells to punish Rhaegar) which would probably see Rhaegar being disowned, Aegon becoming Aerys heir (popular with the Martells), Viserys marrying Lyanna, Rhaenys marrying Robert and Jon ending up legitimatized as a Targ.

What? There is no way to know if Rickard and Aerys would have worked out a deal. Okay, I will let my daughter be your son's whore, but if there is a child, she needs to marry your other son and that child needs' to be legitimized? I just don't see it. Why would Aerys go for that? Also, Aerys was on the outs with Dorne over his treatment of Elia and her children, he never accepted them and told Rhaegar that Rhaenys "smelled Dornish". If that is how he felt about Rhaenys, no reason to think he would feel differently about Aegon. I don't think Aerys gave two shits about the Martell's, or anyone else, for that matter. If Rhaegar was disowned, I think Aerys would make Viserys his heir (which he did after Rhaegar died, bypassing Aegon and Rhaenys completely), and Lyanna would not be marrying any Targaryen. Rhaenys was 3 or 4, Robert was 20. Could he possibly wait long enough for Rhaenys to grow up to marry and produce heirs? It would be smarter for Lyanna to still marry Robert, and for the crown to give some monetary compensation to the Starks and the Baratheons.

But anything is possible so this idea can't be discounted.

Ultimately, it's a whole lot of guessing because we can't really begin to know what might have happened if ... hell, we don't really know what actually happened anyway.

7 hours ago, devilish said:

Having said that, if Rickard somehow dies before a deal is made and the rebellion still occur with Brandon in command, then expect the North to be more aggressive both in terms of warfare and in terms of demands. Brandon would end up with his own share of glory which will pave the way to the same ‘King in the North’ whispers Robb was subject to. I simply can’t see Brandon being the first to bend the knee to the first Baratheon king, especially one who could barely convince his entire region to join him into the fight.

If that had to happen then Robert would be forced to give his blessing to this ‘king in the North’ status. After all, Hoster joined the war because his daughter is married to him. Not to forget that his friend and mentor Jon Arryn had joined houses with the Tullys and will probably refuse to turn against his new father in law just to appease the young stag.

Which lead us to Lyanna and Jon. Assuming that Brandon does survive the tower of joy then Jon would more certainly, given refuge to the North. Robert would have neither the jurisdiction nor the casus belli needed to assassinate the boy. Which means, Jon will be raised in Winterfell, as Rhaegar’s bastard as a constant reminder that if either Robert or his sons trip then the North already have a ready-made replacement for him.

Again, this is a whole lot of guessing. We can't know. Brandon might have been killed in his first battle and never made it to the toj. Rhaegar might never have died on the Trident, and that would have changed everything for Jon and Lyanna, if Jon is Rhaegar's son and if Lyanna was Rhaegar's lover!  As I said, we barely have good details on what did happen, let alone knowing what might have happened in an alternative reality. It is interesting to think of, however.

But it's like Ned's death. It's does little to imagine what might have happened if Ned lived, because GRRM needed Ned to die. Just like he needed Robb to die. And just like GRRM needed Robert's Rebellion for his story to work.

 

 

[St Daga]

6 hours ago, Ralphis Baratheon said:

I agree, Guest Right like most other things in the story can at times be grey. I'd be interested to see if GRRM has answered any questions regarding it.

I will have to look into the SSM's. I am curious about it.

6 hours ago, Ralphis Baratheon said:

My guess would be since Theon was kept in Winterfell to be used as a hostage to keep Balon in check I suspect he would have remained with the Starks until Balon died. Then as Balon's heir Theon would presumably become the Lord of the Iron Islands. I think Ned and or Robert naively thought the Iron Born would except Theon as their new Lord when Balon died. Then the Iron Born and the North would have a much better relationship with each other as Robb and Theon were raised together. I think that might have been the plan.

It's not actually a bad plan. I still think it would have worked after Balon died. Victarion is a follower, and I think it would be hard for Asha to have led the Iron Born as she wished. Euron is the wrench in the plan. His devious plotting could throw everything off kilter. I would think that the Iron Born would remember how easily they were defeated when Balon rebelled, and would not risk angering the Iron Throne if Robert decreed that Theon was lord. Theon himself is a wild card because he is a bit of a shit!

6 hours ago, Ralphis Baratheon said:

I forget what the rest of the thread was about it.

I might stumble across it someday. Sometimes things pop up in discussions and really have nothing to do with the intent of the thread, but are interesting in many ways. I like the flow of a discussion that is natural, even if it veers off in several directions, and don't mind if it sticks to the idea of the thread. It feels organic to me, like an actual conversation.

[devilish]

16 hours ago, St Daga said:

 

 

 

Um, nobody needs a concubine, not even a king. They might want concubines, for pleasure, for prestige, for affection, but they don't need them, and they don't have the right to them either. Some noblemen did allow this role for their children, but some did not.

You are deeply mistaken. In a pious world were the only real obstacle between the king and absolute power was religion, concubines played a rather important role.  They provided the king with ‘earthly pleasures’ without risking jeopardizing his standing with the church.  The role of a concubine was more than simply that of warming the king’s bed. She had to be discreet, she must be well versed in court to avoid scandal and on top of that she had to avoid pissing off the queen, which, in some occasions was as politically powerful or even more politically powerful than the King himself (Ex Catherine of Aragon or Isabella of France).

 A poor choice could cause rifts. The Boleyn girl caused a schism followed by (A generation later) a crusade, simply because she couldn’t comprehend her role in society. The rift between the du Barry and Marie Antoinette are also well documented. That is why kings would often choose women from a very restricted pool, mostly with nobility standing. The Boleyns and the De Maillys are classical example of what I am saying.

Don’t underestimate such role though. Concubines like Boleyn and Hurrem Sultan grew extremely powerful figures in the kingdom.

 

To assume that Rickard Stark would be happy that his only daughter, who was betrothed to a Lord Protector, was becoming the mistress of the crown prince, is a bit hard for me to believe. If other people believe that, then great, but I don't think so. Time and more information might change my mind, but as you stated, the world of ASOIAF is a bit different than the real world feudal or medieval times.

I don’t think Rickard would be happy that his only daughter ended up into such situation. He was too high up in society to be happy with the (often extremely generous) scraps thrown by the king. However at a time when non virgins (even among nobility) were considered as damaged goods, he would hardly have a choice. The only solution to that problem would be to gain something out of it. The crown’s gratitude for at least 2 generations followed by a royal marriage (Viserys and Lyanna) and the legitimisation of Jon to a Targ (with lands and titles to be offered soon afterwards) could help a great deal.  The marriage would of course be a farce with Lyanna being Rhaegar’s wife in all but name but that’s  the type of crap second sons have to endure when the rightful heir messed up. Aerys might even promise to marry Aegon to Brandon’s future first born daughter which will help appeasing the Starks a bit further.

My point is that up until Aerys flipped, the situation was a diplomatic mess, nothing more nothing less. No one was considering a revolt.

 

Well, if Barbrey's story is accurate, then it would not surprise me to find that Brandon made "sweet words" part of his seduction. Many people do that, men and woman. But we only have that account of Brandon from one person, and her intent is very questionable. Although, it would not surprise me to find that Brandon also spent some time with Bethany Ryswell before her marriage to Roose and might be the father of Domeric Bolton.

Scandals of this kind don’t sit very well in medieval/GOT mindset. We know that through Lysa-LF affair. In normal circumstances the nobleman in question will try and contain the scandal by making sure it doesn’t leak. However, if the cat is out then there will be friction especially if Rickard refuses to marry his first born to Barbrey. Brandon knows that very well. He also knows that the Starks would put honour above anything and his honourable father might do something extremely silly because of it (exile? Forced marriage?). Being a womaniser with links in the Riverlands and the Vale he would probably know that the Tully Girl is quite a stunner. So seriously, would he want to risk losing the chance of marrying the Jessica Alba of Westeros for some fling with average jane?

So knowing the type he probably lied quite a lot to avoid that from happening.

 

Ned claimed that Brandon had the "wolf blood" that lead him to an early grave but also felt his brother always knew what do do in a given situation. This does not sound like a rash person, prone just to fits of temper. I think that Brandon was probably a bit like Robb, who did have bouts of temper and made a very poor choice based on sex, but he also was a thoughtful and successful military commander and he cared about his people and family. I think there is more to Brandon's story than we know and it might shed a different light on him when it's revealed.

I cannot agree with you on that. Brandon keeps doing the silly ‘irrational’ thing time and time again.

He is sent to the Rills where he ends up having sex with the Lord’s daughter. No one would bat an eyelid if he did those things with smallfolk but what he did, well, that’s quite a red line. His father might be the most powerful Lord in the North but at the Rills, Lord Ryswell is THE Lord. If Brandon was caught red-handed then he might end up badly before daddy could come to the rescue

He accepted LF duel. We all know that LF is useless with the sword but Brandon can’t be 100% sure of that. If Brandon was killed or hurt by that duel then there would be a rift between the Tullys and the Starks for generations to come. Also god knows how Lord Tully would react that his ward (ie a person with permanent guest rights) ended up killed under his nose.

He went ballistic when Lyanna was crown lady of beauty. Robert is hardly Kessinger in terms of diplomacy but even he allowed that little thing to slide. Rhaegar might have been as delicate in terms of diplomacy as an elephant, however he’s still the crown prince and at a higher standing to both Robert and Brandon

He went confronting Rhaegar in KL. Don’t take me wrong, I think he shouldn’t have died or even kept arrested for long. In my opinion, Brandon provided Aerys with the golden opportunity to bring Rickard to KL and demonstrate, with facts, that no matter how powerful Kings/Wardens can be, they can’t possible be expected to anticipate every silly move their children do.  However, in technical terms Brandon did committed treason.

No, the Stark's felt the insult, not Robert. I don't think that Crown was laid in Lyanna's lap as an honor, but a warning, and one that the Stark's understood but Robert did not. Robert also isn't the smartest cookie in the jar. One can assume (although I hate to do that) that Robert's reign would have quickly fallen apart if not for Jon Arryn and probably Stannis.

I think that the crown was laid in Lyanna’s lap because Rhaegar was obsessed with this ‘prophecy’ thing. The Stark girl was as ice as can come and he would risk losing everything just to have her.  May I remind you that Robert was a Baratheon. Robert’s father and Aerys were cousins and he died serving the king. The Baratheons were, till Aerys flipped, as loyal as can be. There was no need for Rhaegar to warn Robert of anything especially since he kidnapped his fiancée few days later. What sort of warning is that?

 

No, as my OP stated, Robert was sitting around in the vale, drinking ale or getting into food fights, or something. Isn't it odd that if Rhaegar truly kidnapped his fiance, that Robert just decided to sit around chillin'? Something is missing from what we know

Actually it’s the wisest move. At that point, anything that showed a hint of aggression could easily be interpreted as treason. Such situation required careful diplomatic actions, something, the Starks had always struggled with (think of Ned a generation later).

As said before Ned’s assessment of Brandon is right (as said too many people point to the same thing). However I often question whether the quiet wolf has projected his brother into Robert. Throughout the series Ned portrayed Robert as some sort of oaf with no diplomatic skills whose prone to allow rage taking over his better judgement. Yet if we analyse the stag’s action we see that its not the case.

He didn’t fly off the handle when Lyanna was kidnapped.

During the rebellion he forgave and convinced all his former enemies to fight for him. The way he dealt with an injured Selmy is a diplomatic masterstroke.

The way he dealt with the Greyjoy rebellion is something that reminds me of elite Roman diplomacy rather than that of some medieval warlord

He kept Tywin under check, by keeping Jamie in the KG which meant that his son Tommen would have probably inherited CR

He gave the Stormlands to the most diplomatic savvy of all Baratheons which paved the way to an unlikely alliance between Baratheons and Tyrells

These are not the actions of a brute with little IQ and a fiery temper but of a well calculating king whose quite versed in diplomacy.

Well, I do question whether Aerys ever actually demanded Robert's head or not, but he joined the rebellion after Jon Arryn called his banners. The rebellion didn't need to start over this demand of Aerys. We are told the rebellion started when Jon Arryn called his banners. Who knows what Robert was thinking at that point? But he and Ned did seem to follow Jon Arryn's lead.

Why on earth would Arryn lie? Sure, he lost his nephew and heir in the Brandon’s incident. However that should have made him more aware in not joining any war whatsoever. If Jon died,  the entire Arryn clan would have died with him. Also Arryn doesn’t strike me as a very ambitious guy either. He could have easily kept the two boys under a short lead and claim glory for himself but he didn’t.

Umm. That is a bit of a generalization. If the story that is commonly accepted that Rhaegar kidnapped Lyanna, then Rhaegar was an equal kickstarter. Or if Rhae and Lya eloped, then they bare equal responsibility. This rebellion cannot be laid at Brandon's feet as the soul person who made a mistake that lead to a war that tore apart the country.

I hate myself for saying it, but unfortunately its not how things work. Rhaegar was a crown prince who was appointed by the gods to one day rule over Westeros. Brandon was just the son of some Lord whom the Targs were kind enough to allow him to administer the land on their behalf. Their standing is completely different. As said in technical terms what Brandon did was treason.

 

What? There is no way to know if Rickard and Aerys would have worked out a deal. Okay, I will let my daughter be your son's whore, but if there is a child, she needs to marry your other son and that child needs' to be legitimized? I just don't see it. Why would Aerys go for that? Also, Aerys was on the outs with Dorne over his treatment of Elia and her children, he never accepted them and told Rhaegar that Rhaenys "smelled Dornish". If that is how he felt about Rhaenys, no reason to think he would feel differently about Aegon. I don't think Aerys gave two shits about the Martell's, or anyone else, for that matter. If Rhaegar was disowned, I think Aerys would make Viserys his heir (which he did after Rhaegar died, bypassing Aegon and Rhaenys completely), and Lyanna would not be marrying any Targaryen. Rhaenys was 3 or 4, Robert was 20. Could he possibly wait long enough for Rhaenys to grow up to marry and produce heirs? It would be smarter for Lyanna to still marry Robert, and for the crown to give some monetary compensation to the Starks and the Baratheons.

Money would cheapen things up and there’s no way that a medieval high Lord would marry damaged goods.

My plan would allow all houses to leave this sad act with their heads held high while feeling that some sort of justice had been made

With Rhaegar disowned both Martells and the Starks will get their pound of flesh. The Dornish will see their own Aegon becoming king earlier then expected

Lyanna would end up married to a high born of a higher standing to Robert

Robert would be married off to a person that strictly speaking is of higher standing to Lyanna. He can wait because he’s got brothers to succeed him if needed (also he’s 20 not 92 + in 10 years time he would probably be able to marry her)

Jon would be legitimised and given lands and titles fitted to his standing

The Starks are given first preference to marry Aegon (another big plus)

 

Again, this is a whole lot of guessing. We can't know. Brandon might have been killed in his first battle and never made it to the toj. Rhaegar might never have died on the Trident, and that would have changed everything for Jon and Lyanna, if Jon is Rhaegar's son and if Lyanna was Rhaegar's lover!  As I said, we barely have good details on what did happen, let alone knowing what might have happened in an alternative reality. It is interesting to think of, however.

True. There again, Ned was a second son ie a man programmed to serve his Lord and brother. Most of the decisions taken by him (including the Cersei mess) were taken with the administrator thinking cap hat on not that of a born strategist of a 1st born. GRRM loves doing these sorts of parallels. The older brother tends to be a dreamer who focus on the bigger picture (Tywin, Robert, Balon, Hoster, Doran). The younger brother is more level headed, he’s more of an administrator type of guy and tend to get lost when given the bigger picture (Kevan, Stannis, Victarion, Brynden and Oberyn)