Heresy 204; of cabbages, prophecies and kings

[Matthew.]

4 hours ago, LynnS said:

I wouldn't say a blank canvas but more a canvas without a frame and a few brush strokes.

It is the context through which every character in-world (that has chosen to opine on the subject) understands Lyanna's disappearance--Robert, Cersei, Viserys, Dany, Barristan, Catelyn, Eddard's own children.

It may be "false," but is hardly a minor or flimsy thing--it is deeply baked into the story as presented. It is fair to say that things such as secret marriages and the "=J" or even the suggestion of romance are things projected onto the frame, but R+L is a part of the narrative, and with 5 out of 7 (if the author is to believed) books complete, no character has seen fit to contradict the narrative.

Now, I wouldn't be surprised if it does end up contradicted, but it is not implausible, nor even poorly established by the text.

[LynnS]

34 minutes ago, Matthew. said:

It is the context through which every character in-world (that has chosen to opine on the subject) understands Lyanna's disappearance--Robert, Cersei, Viserys, Dany, Barristan, Catelyn, Eddard's own children.

It may be "false," but is hardly a minor or flimsy thing--it is deeply baked into the story as presented. It is fair to say that things such as secret marriages and the "=J" or even the suggestion of romance are things projected onto the frame, but R+L is a part of the narrative, and with 5 out of 7 (if the author is to believed) books complete, no character has seen fit to contradict the narrative.

Now, I wouldn't be surprised if it does end up contradicted, but it is not implausible, nor even poorly established by the text.

Oh sure, he did throw out Rhaegar immediately along with Ned and Ashara.  He went even further and eliminated Robert right away. It's deeply baked as far as the singers and characters instory are concerned.  I do think it's flimsy because I don't trust the frame that we have been given.  I think Sly Wren's OP frames an alternative very well.

 

[Matthew.]

29 minutes ago, LynnS said:

Oh sure, he did throw out Rhaegar immediately along with Ned and Ashara.  He went even further and eliminated Robert right away. It's deeply baked as far as the singers and characters instory are concerned.  I do think it's flimsy because I don't trust the frame that we have been given.  I think Sly Wren's OP frames an alternative very well.

 

Having read that theory before, it doesn't present R+L as a false narrative, it is a re-contextualization of his role in her disappearance. A comparison would be Lady Dustin's "Southron Ambitions" rant, which does not contradict the story as we know it, it expands upon it in new and interesting ways.

The above theory still assumes, at a minimum, that Rhaegar is complicit in Lyanna being a hostage.

When I say that we're five books deep, and nothing is contradicting R+L, I do not mean a "love story" interpretation, I mean the basic idea that their stories are entangled--that he kidnapped her, imprisoned her, ran off with her, whatever variation one prefers.

I emphasize the whole "5 out of 7 books" aspect as an acknowledgement of the inescapable awareness that we are reading a story, and the author has done nothing but build upon R+L, rather than undermine it; the most recent 'addition' being Barristan's point of view.

What is revealing about Barristan's point of view is not whether or not what he believes (that Rhaegar loved Lyanna) is true, what's revealing is what he doesn't believe: that Rhaegar is a man falsely accused, that this whole "Rhaegar and the Wolf Girl" thing is an invention of the ballad singers, or enemies of the crown, or whatever. This strongly implies that, at no point after his return to the Red Keep and the march to the Trident, did Rhaegar do anything to dissuade even his own allies from the R+L narrative.

 

[LynnS]

8 minutes ago, Matthew. said:

When I say that we're five books deep, and nothing is contradicting R+L, I do not mean a "love story" interpretation, I mean the basic idea that their stories are entangled--that he kidnapped her, imprisoned her, ran off with her, whatever variation one prefers.

Oh well, I can agree with that.

[Black Crow]

I think that something worth bearing in mind in all of this is that history isn't necessarily shaped by things that actually happened, but by what people believe or were led to believe happened. In this case we don't have an unambiguous event. We have scattered clues and stories, none of them first hand.

In this case the rebellion began with a slightly odd chain of events which began with the simultaneous disappearance of Lyanna Stark and Rhaegar Targaryen, a frightful scene in the throne room and then an order to arrest Eddard Stark and Robert Baratheon, whereupon the Blessed St. Jon of Arryn raised his banners in King Robert's name. The narrative is there, but there are [no pun intended] so many plot holes as to raise so so many doubts as to what was really going on. Is R+L=J "only" a smokescreen.

 

[Melifeather]

5 hours ago, Black Crow said:

I think that something worth bearing in mind in all of this is that history isn't necessarily shaped by things that actually happened, but by what people believe or were led to believe happened. In this case we don't have an unambiguous event. We have scattered clues and stories, none of them first hand.

In this case the rebellion began with a slightly odd chain of events which began with the simultaneous disappearance of Lyanna Stark and Rhaegar Targaryen, a frightful scene in the throne room and then an order to arrest Eddard Stark and Robert Baratheon, whereupon the Blessed St. Jon of Arryn raised his banners in King Robert's name. The narrative is there, but there are [no pun intended] so many plot holes as to raise so so many doubts as to what was really going on. Is R+L=J "only" a smokescreen.

 

 

"As in our own world, history is written by the victors, who often skew truth toward more flattering legend. In an attempt to condense hundreds of years and to represent disparate cultures’ beliefs while coming to some sort of truthful conclusion, Maester Yandel has presented a history that is undeniably distorted. These far-off places and long-dead men refuse to give up all their secrets. For example, Valyrians insist they descended from dragons, and Ironborns believe they come from fish, but these elements of “history” are born out of religion. Where did these people actually come from? Often the answer is only speculation. https://bookpage.com/interviews/17465-george-r-r-martin#.WnhBuGaZPuQ

 

“The queen has a good heart,” Daario purred through his deep purple whiskers, “but that one is be told; too simple and fanciful to be true history." 

 

"Those old histories are full of kings who reigned for hundreds of years, and knights riding around a thousand years before there were knights."

 

"Ask Edmure how chivalrous I am, thought Jaime. Ask him about the trebuchet. Somehow he did not think the maesters were like to confuse him with Prince Aemon the Dragonknight when they wrote their histories."

 

"History is written by the victors."  - Winston Churchill

 

I believe the true history was much sinister.

 

 

[LynnS]

Quote

Perhaps the book’s greatest strength—and Martin agrees—is the sumptuous illustrations that bring these stories to life. The author collaborated with Random House on choosing the fantasy artists featured in the book, and the artwork ranges from paintings to digital images, from portraits of kings to gory, blood-soaked battle scenes. Martin especially enjoyed working with Ted Nasmith to create the definitive representations of castles such as Winterfell and Casterly Rock. “We went back and forth to get the look of all those castles exactly as I imagine them,” Martin promises.

Some of these illustrations should be poster sized and autographed. 

[JNR]

21 hours ago, Matthew. said:

The bolded is not accurate.

A "blank canvas" would be Lyanna and Rhaegar coincidentally disappearing at the same time, and the readers erroneously linking those two events.

The question is this: What happened to them after they disappeared until the time they reappeared?  This we are simply not told.  At all.  

We can't do it for a single day for Rhaegar; nor can we do it for a single day for Lyanna.  

We can't show they were together at any time, and we can't show they were apart at any time.  We can't show what they were doing.  We can't show who was with them.  We don't know where they were.  Even on the subject of the process by which they disappeared, we have wildly conflicting stories.

There is quite simply nothing there.

This is what makes the time in which they were both gone -- the time of their supposed relationship -- a blank canvas.  If readers want to imagine something that fills up the canvas, they can, of course, and GRRM has made it easy, but there are no facts on this subject of any sort.

Not a single fact, at any time anywhere in canon, is provided for Rhaegar until in Jaime's memory he "returns from the south," whatever that means.  We don't know exactly when he did, but it appears he has been gone roughly eight months or more at that time. 

Not a single fact, any time anywhere in canon, is provided for Lyanna until in Ned's memory he finds her... somewhere... and "gives up her hold on life."  This appears to be well over a year after she disappeared.

In short, yes, the time in which they were gone is a blank canvas.  

If you think you can demonstrate otherwise, by all means do it.  Tell me something factual about those eight missing months of Rhaegar's or the year + of Lyanna's.

But of course it can't be done, and it never has been done.  And it's not likely to be done until TWOW is out.

[JNR]

20 hours ago, LynnS said:

I wouldn't say a blank canvas but more a canvas without a frame and a few brush strokes.

17 hours ago, Brad Stark said:

So J=R+L might be true or might be misdirection, but the canvas clearly has been painted with the artist leaving interpretation to the viewer of his art for now.

OK, let's define the borders of the canvas chronologically.

They are: from the time at which they were both known to be gone... to 

1) In Rhaegar's case, the time at which he "returned from the south"  

2) In Lyanna's case, the time months later at which Ned found her

Now tell me what GRRM's brush strokes are, inside that chronological canvas, for either Rhaegar or Lyanna.

Show me something that was not imagined by the fans.

[Matthew.]

7 hours ago, Black Crow said:

The narrative is there, but there are [no pun intended] so many plot holes as to raise so so many doubts as to what was really going on. Is R+L=J "only" a smokescreen.

This isn't (at least for me) even a point of contention; I think it's reasonable to wonder whether Lyanna was a political hostage meant to weaken the Stark-Baratheon-Arryn-Tully alliance, or if she was being used in an attempt to hatch dragons, etc.

What I disagree with is attempts to characterize "Rhaegar was involved in Lyanna's disappearance" as though it's a bit of implausible fan fancy, a speculative invention that is no more a part of the narrative than suggesting that Lyanna was in Highgarden, or under the sea, or on the moon. The author is clearly establishing a context through which we are meant to analyze her story, and not all assumptions are created equal.

More to the point, I just don't see any discussion value to incredulity of the text for its own sake--of course the 'information' we have to work with is unverifiable, but that observation is only interesting as a springboard to compare contradictory in-world points of view and narratives, as opposed to just dismissing textual content outright because it "might be wrong." The latter only leads us to the absence of discussion.

[LynnS]

8 hours ago, Black Crow said:

I think that something worth bearing in mind in all of this is that history isn't necessarily shaped by things that actually happened, but by what people believe or were led to believe happened. In this case we don't have an unambiguous event. We have scattered clues and stories, none of them first hand.

In this case the rebellion began with a slightly odd chain of events which began with the simultaneous disappearance of Lyanna Stark and Rhaegar Targaryen, a frightful scene in the throne room and then an order to arrest Eddard Stark and Robert Baratheon, whereupon the Blessed St. Jon of Arryn raised his banners in King Robert's name. The narrative is there, but there are [no pun intended] so many plot holes as to raise so so many doubts as to what was really going on. Is R+L=J "only" a smokescreen.

Yes and I do take Matthew's point.  The love story is certainly baked into the narrative and it's probably too obvious for that reason especially given the scanty and conflicting details.  @Sly Wren analysis makes a lot of sense to me and answers most of the vexing questions without the necessity of making Jon into the son of ice and fire.

It isn't just the love story, but the prophecies as well.  If Rhaegar needed a third child; Dany seems to be the one who fits the prophecy.  He may have produced the Prince who is promised a dragon and the mother of dragons to provide the dragon.  Whatever sacrifices were needed to wake the great dragon and hatch dragon eggs were provided by Dany.  The end result was waking the dead or the resurrection of Rhaegar as I said before; the creation of a Great Dragon.  Aemon tells us straight out that Jon is the son of winter(fell).  So of course he has a part to play in the song or restoring the natural balance to the song.

Jon just isn't part of the dragon making or Rhaegar's plan for dragon making if he had one.  As for the blood requirements for riding a dragon or being one of the heads of the dragon; we've already been told it's not a requirement.  That seems more relevant to Tyrion or Victarion to me.

There is also an idea that the Targs needed Targ bastards for sacrifice to hatch dragon eggs but we already know that wild dragons hatch without any sorcery.  So a child sacrifice is reserved for something else.  Starting with Mirri calling the 'shapes of shadows' into the tent: the great wolf and the man limned in flame (the great dragon); sacrificing an unborn child to resurrect the dead.  It's the black dragon that is covered in her blood. Followed by the sacrifice of holy blood (godswife) with a dragon bursting from Mirri's brow.

An example of knowing when a prophecy has come to pass only after it manifests and without any conscious knowledge or intervention. Dany also died and was reborn amidst salt tears and smoke. 
 

Quote

A Game of Thrones - Daenerys IX

"… don't want to wake the dragon …"

She could feel the heat inside her, a terrible burning in her womb. Her son was tall and proud, with Drogo's copper skin and her own silver-gold hair, violet eyes shaped like almonds. And he smiled for her and began to lift his hand toward hers, but when he opened his mouth the fire poured out. She saw his heart burning through his chest, and in an instant he was gone, consumed like a moth by a candle, turned to ash. She wept for her child, the promise of a sweet mouth on her breast, but her tears turned to steam as they touched her skin.

Quote

A Game of Thrones - Daenerys IX

Dany released her wrist. My son is dead, she thought as Jhiqui left the tent. She had known somehow. She had known since she woke the first time to Jhiqui's tears. No, she had known before she woke. Her dream came back to her, sudden and vivid, and she remembered the tall man with the copper skin and long silver-gold braid, bursting into flame.

She should weep, she knew, yet her eyes were dry as ash. She had wept in her dream, and the tears had turned to steam on her cheeks. All the grief has been burned out of me, she told herself. She felt sad, and yet … she could feel Rhaego receding from her, as if he had never been.

 

Quote

A Dance with Dragons - Tyrion II

"Viserys was Mad Aerys's son, just so. Daenerys … Daenerys is quite different." He popped a roasted lark into his mouth and crunched it noisily, bones and all. "The frightened child who sheltered in my manse died on the Dothraki sea, and was reborn in blood and fire. This dragon queen who wears her name is a true Targaryen. When I sent ships to bring her home, she turned toward Slaver's Bay. In a short span of days she conquered Astapor, made Yunkai bend the knee, and sacked Meereen. Mantarys will be next, if she marches west along the old Valyrian roads. If she comes by sea, well … her fleet must take on food and water at Volantis."

I think it's very curious that Illyrio says that Viserys was Aery's son, but that Dany is quite different.  A true Targaryen but perhaps not the daughter of Aerys.  In some respects, Illyrio seems just as invested in Dany as he is with Aegon. The fact that he gifted Dany with dragon eggs rather than Viserys says something about who he supports.  He seems to know something about rebirth through blood and fire.

So I don't quite trust him when he says the eggs are long dead; just pretty baubles. The black egg is larger than the other two and I think it likely to be Rhaegar's egg (a descendant of Balerion the black dread) while the other two were viable eggs acquired at Asshai where Bran sees a wild dragon in his coma vision.  I do think that the souls of Targs are bound with dragon eggs in some way and become their soul containers should they die with the egg unhatched.  That gives them a potential second life as a dragon, not unlike Starks and their direwolves.  Dany's dragon dreams seem very similar to wolf dreams with the dragon initiating the contact and a transformation of the soul. There is no pain, so the fire is a spiritual fire, perhaps binding the soul to the dragon.
 

Quote

A Game of Thrones - Daenerys III

Yet when she slept that night, she dreamt the dragon dream again. Viserys was not in it this time. There was only her and the dragon. Its scales were black as night, wet and slick with blood. Her blood, Dany sensed. Its eyes were pools of molten magma, and when it opened its mouth, the flame came roaring out in a hot jet. She could hear it singing to her. She opened her arms to the fire, embraced it, let it swallow her whole, let it cleanse her and temper her and scour her clean. She could feel her flesh sear and blacken and slough away, could feel her blood boil and turn to steam, and yet there was no pain. She felt strong and new and fierce.

Once again, who is the singing dragon if it isn't Rhaegar?  And who is the second voice remembering the nightmare of the Trident?

Quote

A Storm of Swords - Daenerys III

That night she dreamt that she was Rhaegar, riding to the Trident. But she was mounted on a dragon, not a horse. When she saw the Usurper's rebel host across the river they were armored all in ice, but she bathed them in dragonfire and they melted away like dew and turned the Trident into a torrent. Some small part of her knew that she was dreaming, but another part exulted. This is how it was meant to be. The other was a nightmare, and I have only now awakened.

Three mounts you must ride:

Quote

A Clash of Kings - Daenerys IV

"Three?" She did not understand.

. . . three heads has the dragon . . . the ghost chorus yammered inside her skull with never a lip moving, never a breath stirring the still blue air. . . . mother of dragons . . . child of storm . . . The whispers became a swirling song. . . . three fires must you light . . . one for life and one for death and one to love . . . Her own heart was beating in unison to the one that floated before her, blue and corrupt . . . three mounts must you ride . . . one to bed and one to dread and one to love . . . The voices were growing louder, she realized, and it seemed her heart was slowing, and even her breath. . . . three treasons will you know . . . once for blood and once for gold and once for love . . .

 

 

[LynnS]

25 minutes ago, JNR said:

OK, let's define the borders of the canvas chronologically.

They are: from the time at which they were both known to be gone... to 

1) In Rhaegar's case, the time at which he "returned from the south"  

2) In Lyanna's case, the time months later at which Ned found her

Now tell me what GRRM's brush strokes are, inside that chronological canvas, for either Rhaegar or Lyanna.

Show me something that was not imagined by the fans.

Of course you know I can't and I have an issue with all of this as well.  So I don't dispute your point.  What we are told is undefined.  But we are shown something in the right hand while the left hand conceals something else.  We still don't know what that will be.  For that reason, I won't dismiss Robert because we are told right out of the gate: don't look here and he made Robert into such an unlikeable character that nobody would look twice at him.  How can he compete with a rock star like Rhaegar?

As far as filling in the narrative, that seems to be exactly what GRRM intended.

[Matthew.]

41 minutes ago, JNR said:

If you think you can demonstrate otherwise, by all means do it.  Tell me something factual about those eight missing months of Rhaegar's or the year + of Lyanna's.

The absence of verifiable fact is not the same thing as a blank canvas--a blank canvas would imply that we have so few context clues that we cannot even begin to reasonably speculate about why Lyanna and Rhaegar disappeared, and what might have motivated their disappearances, and that is simply not the case.
 

41 minutes ago, JNR said:

This is what makes the time in which they were both gone -- the time of their supposed relationship -- a blank canvas.  If readers want to imagine something that fills up the canvas, they can, of course, and GRRM has made it easy, but there are no facts on this subject of any sort.

When someone says "I think Rhaegar loved Lyanna," they are not imagining this out of thin air, they are coming to a conclusion based on the contents of A Song of Ice and Fire (that, for some reason or another, several in-world characters have also come to this conclusion)-- a conclusion that might turn out to be wrong, but "might be wrong" in this context is not especially important. Similarly, "Lyanna as hostage," is not a fan imagining, it is a part of the story.

With all due respect, there are a variety of subjects - eg, Craster's wives - where you give these responses that are essentially "well, I guess the reader can believe the in-world characters if they want to. *eyeroll*" 

As opposed to what? 

The very nature of this forum, and fan discussion in general, is to explore the unverifiable, to collect scattered clues and see if we can piece together the story within the story; if we're not doing that, what would we be doing? Restating facts at each other? 

[wolfmaid7]

16 hours ago, Matthew. said:

Having read that theory before, it doesn't present R+L as a false narrative, it is a re-contextualization of his role in her disappearance. A comparison would be Lady Dustin's "Southron Ambitions" rant, which does not contradict the story as we know it, it expands upon it in new and interesting ways.

The above theory still assumes, at a minimum, that Rhaegar is complicit in Lyanna being a hostage.

When I say that we're five books deep, and nothing is contradicting R+L, I do not mean a "love story" interpretation, I mean the basic idea that their stories are entangled--that he kidnapped her, imprisoned her, ran off with her, whatever variation one prefers.

I emphasize the whole "5 out of 7 books" aspect as an acknowledgement of the inescapable awareness that we are reading a story, and the author has done nothing but build upon R+L, rather than undermine it; the most recent 'addition' being Barristan's point of view.

What is revealing about Barristan's point of view is not whether or not what he believes (that Rhaegar loved Lyanna) is true, what's revealing is what he doesn't believe: that Rhaegar is a man falsely accused, that this whole "Rhaegar and the Wolf Girl" thing is an invention of the ballad singers, or enemies of the crown, or whatever. This strongly implies that, at no point after his return to the Red Keep and the march to the Trident, did Rhaegar do anything to dissuade even his own allies from the R+L narrative.

 

I have to disagree if anything the author planted certain "beliefs" that R and L were a thing.Some fans use that and conclude "J" 

There is a fundamental difference Matthew.What's missing is factual elements.Its not like the belief isn't wildly held in story.There is just no fact anywhere.

For instance,and I am not saying this because I believe Robert is Jon's dad.

If I take for instance one aspect of this,that Rhaegar loved Lyanna ,and weigh it against if Robert did there is a problem.

It has nothing to do with what Robert said and did.I only have to look at Ned.Ned gave and said factual things to indicate this as proof.

There is nothing like this in a Rhaegar Lyanna supposed romance.A lot of people believe something they have no facts to back up.

No one can tell  anything of what Rhaegar said "actually" said.

[wolfmaid7]

36 minutes ago, Matthew. said:

The absence of verifiable fact is not the same thing as a blank canvas--a blank canvas would imply that we have so few context clues that we cannot even begin to reasonably speculate about why Lyanna and Rhaegar disappeared, and what might have motivated their disappearances, and that is simply not the case.
 

When someone says "I think Rhaegar loved Lyanna," they are not imagining this out of thin air, they are coming to a conclusion based on the contents of A Song of Ice and Fire (that, for some reason or another, several in-world characters have also come to this conclusion)-- a conclusion that might turn out to be wrong, but "might be wrong" in this context is not especially important. Similarly, "Lyanna as hostage," is not a fan imagining, it is a part of the story.

With all due respect, there are a variety of subjects - eg, Craster's wives - where you give these responses that are essentially "well, I guess the reader can believe the in-world characters if they want to. *eyeroll*" 

As opposed to what? 

The very nature of this forum, and fan discussion in general, is to explore the unverifiable, to collect scattered clues and see if we can piece together the story within the story; if we're not doing that, what would we be doing? Restating facts at each other? 

Absence of verifiable fact is a fallacy.

That is holding out for a hope.To quote you we are 5 books in.

[Black Crow]

Its probably worth at this point reverting to the original synopses, or rather what they emphasise. The story has moved on since the synopses were drafted and even at the time he warned that nothing was set in stone, but 13 chapters had been written setting the scene and we get an interesting insight into how he viewed the overarching themes of his intended story.

The detail needn't detain us. What's important is the emhasis on House Stark and the children of Winterfell; and the tearing apart of Westeros by the feud between the Starks and the Lannisters and eventually "the Wolf and the Lion" hunting together to face the horror from the north. Huse Targaryen by contrast seems to have a much lesser role confined to Danaerys the Dragonlord and her followers.

I think its probably fair to say that the House Targaryen has assumed greater importance as the story develops, but in these early stages its the Starks and the Lannisters. As written we also have the mysterious plotting of Varys and Illyrio to bring this rivalry to battle. It now appears that it was something to do with Young Griff, but does it go back further, back to the provoking of Robert's Rebellion. If the feud was manipulated in the run-up to Robert's death was the Lyanna business similarly manipulated and if so by who? While Tywin Lannister might seem the obvious candidate was he in turn being manipulated?

[Black Crow]

2 hours ago, Matthew. said:

When someone says "I think Rhaegar loved Lyanna," they are not imagining this out of thin air, they are coming to a conclusion based on the contents of A Song of Ice and Fire (that, for some reason or another, several in-world characters have also come to this conclusion)-- a conclusion that might turn out to be wrong, but "might be wrong" in this context is not especially important. Similarly, "Lyanna as hostage," is not a fan imagining, it is a part of the story.

It all depends where the story is really going. At the outset we're told that Lyanna was abducted, repeatedly raped and eventually died, according to Robert Baratheon, First of his name. Then we get a diametrically opposed version which turns it into a great love story, but in neither case do we get any detail or verifiable facts. So why should we believe the second version just because it contradicts the first.

GRRM delights in unreliable narrators and here we have two.

[Melifeather]

I think it's important to recall the victors of Robert's Rebellion. If it's the victors that dictate the historical record then the abduction/rape story is their version. That doesn't necessarily mean that this makes the love story true. Where would Viserys and Daenerys get the idea that Rhaegar loved Lyanna other than Barristan's assertions, which I might point out are his opinion based on the amount of information he was privy to. He wasn't close to Rhaegar like JonCon was. He was outside Rhaegar's inner circle, but part of the Kingsguard whose job it was to protect the King without question. I think Barristan saw himself as honorable and heroic and as such tended to believe that Rhaegar shared these qualities, but Selmy's position was limited by his more formal relationship than personal with the Prince.

[LynnS]

 

2 hours ago, Black Crow said:

If the feud was manipulated in the run-up to Robert's death was the Lyanna business similarly manipulated and if so by who? While Tywin Lannister might seem the obvious candidate was he in turn being manipulated?

We are told that Varys was responsible for the rot in Aerys' rule and responsible for seeing traitors everywhere he looked.  I do think he cooked up the plan to lure Rhaegar and Brandon to a meeting and trap them with treason if Barristan's story about the perfumed seneshal is a repeat of something he's already seen.  Varys also plays two ends against the other, never afraid of the double-cross and think Tywin's was employed for the kidnapping of Lyanna.

So building a bit on Sly Wren's analysis; I'd say this wasn't just a straight forward smash and grab but something designed to outrage Brandon and Robert.  From Robert we get the notion that Lyanna has been stained and he will never forget what 'Rhaegar did to her'.

Quote

A Dance with Dragons - Epilogue

She will never wash the stain away, no matter how hard she scrubs. Ser Kevan remembered the girl she once had been, so full of life and mischief. And when she'd flowered, ahhhh … had there ever been a maid so sweet to look upon?

This is in reference to Cersei's walk of shame.  Shaming Lyanna publicly in similar manner would have Tywin's fingerprints and the knights without honor all over it.  She may or may not have been raped but Robert could be excused for thinking she had been raped hundreds of time and why he thinks she should have been buried on a hill with the rain to wash her clean.  It would also explain Catelyn's reaction to the news about Lyanna.  

I think Varys' hand is stained with the kidnapping:

Quote

A Game of Thrones - Eddard IV

The councillor Ned liked least, the eunuch Varys, accosted him the moment he entered. "Lord Stark, I was grievous sad to hear about your troubles on the kingsroad. We have all been visiting the sept to light candles for Prince Joffrey. I pray for his recovery." His hand left powder stains on Ned's sleeve, and he smelled as foul and sweet as flowers on a grave.

In this circumstance, you can understand why Ned would love Robert for loving Lyanna. Had she lived, she would still be his bride.

[Frey family reunion]

On 2/4/2018 at 10:28 AM, PrettyPig said:

This will sound nutty, but I've been wondering if the Mountain wasn't one of them.   I've been delving a bit into Rhaegar's supposed character, and there are some idiosyncrasies between what we're told about him on page and some of his actions that we've heard about.   Personally knighting Gregor Clegane is one of these, to me - this is a man who deliberately mutilated his young brother for no other reason than a broken toy, who is suspected of killing his father and wives, and who has committed countless atrocities throughout the story.    This character/personality was firmly in place even when the Mountain was a boy ....yet, Rhaegar Targaryen himself confers knighthood upon this literal monster.   The only two other people in the story to receive this honor are Myles Mooton and Richard Lonmouth...both of whom are ALSO suspected of accompanying Rhaegar on his walkabout in the riverlands.

In addition, the Mountain is very clearly Lord Tywin's creature.  In the World Book we received the info that Rhaegar had also passed the Lannister Litmus Test, with Tywin making his feelings known about Rhaegar being the better king during Aerys' imprisonment at Duskendale.     I'm immediately suspicious of anyone that Tywin favors, and lean toward the idea that Rhaegar and Tywin were two peas in a cold-blooded pod - Tywin would have been in a position to groom Rhaegar for rule during his tenure as Hand, and I have a feeling that the friendship package came with the Gregor Clegane bonus feature.

Regarding this tidbit:

Rhaegar's posse totaled lucky number 7.    Seven is a holy number, both in Westeros and real life, and Rhaegar brought his "closest friends and confidants" on this quest, meaning they were all in on a big secret and all knew what they were looking for.   I've said this before and will say again:   If you were thinking that you might encounter/were planning to encounter some old and mystical power on your quest, doesn't it make sense that you more or less 'arm yourself in your faith' and ensure your retinue be the correct/holy number of people?       I'm not convinced that Rhaegar had put together this posse just to find his new girlfriend. He was expecting something...bigger.

It is an interesting tidbit we’re given that Rhaegar knighted Gregor.  It would have been right around the time of the Harrenhal tourney as well.  For someone with such a negative reputation it seems odd that the crown prince himself would have knighted him.  It was the Lannisters who owed a debt to the Cleganes you would think Tywin or Kevan would have been the ones to have knighted him.

And it’s not just any toy that Sandor takes from Clegane, but it’s a puppet knight.  It’s an interesting symbol to attach to Gregor.  I wonder if it just stands for the idea that Gregor is a mindless brute willing to do his master’s bidding no matter the task, or if it might mean something more. There are a few characters out there who we’re told are plagued with headaches, Gregor being one, and the Frey who got himself hung trying to free Petyr Frey, being the other (Merritt I think). Both are described as fairly stupid louts.  I wonder if the headaches may be a symptom of the presence of a skinchanger re: telepath invading the character’s mind.