sansalittlebird

Could Rhaegar have fought for the other side?

74 posts in this topic

Having thought about this a little more, it seems to me that all this discussion about Lyanna is somewhat beside the point, at least in terms of the OP's original question:

Q: Could Rhaegar have fought for the other side?

A: Only if he was OK having is wife, daughter and baby son burned to death in a vat of wildfire.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
10 hours ago, TMIFairy said:

Cue rebellion by a strange mix of bedfellows:

- Starks

- Baratheons

- Arryn (maybe Tully too)

- Dorne

- the Faith

As almost everything a lot depends on context.

You mentioned Great Lords arranging alliances for their "underlings" - true, but that was "consensual".

You mention Aegon the Original doing same - again true, but he had dragons ...

Here Rheagar does not have dragons - and STAB is unhappy about the ... er ... unasked for modifications to their planned martial alliances.

Dorne is not happy about Ellia's share in Rheagar dropping to 50%.

And the Faith is pissed off by bigamy.

I'd expect Rhaegar the King to become an ex-King very quickly. He would move on and be no longer with us.

Arryn doesn't come into it much(divided "loyalties" and all that) Rickard would much prefer Rhaegar over Bob and may actually have tried it if Rhaegae was a known womanizer, see Mace's example with Bob and Tullys would too prefer their ally to be allied to the Royal house.

For the rest of it; Aegon the Unworthy!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
13 minutes ago, Corvo the Crow said:

Rickard would much prefer Rhaegar over Bob

If you say so.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
11 hours ago, Corvo the Crow said:

 Rickard would much prefer Rhaegar over Bob and may actually have tried it if Rhaegae was a known womanizer, see Mace's example with Bob and Tullys would too prefer their ally to be allied to the Royal house.

Not with Lyanna being the secondary wife. The Tyrells had planned to have Robert set aside Cersei and make Margaery Robert's Queen in her stead. They didn't want her to be Robert's concubine.
A shared queenship between Lyanna and Elia, if that even had been possible officially, would still have pissed off the Starks, Baratheons and the Martells, and it's been pretty established by now that the Targaryens are better off not pissing off Dorne.

The only situation I can see Rickard preferring Rhaegar over Robert (and quite a bit at that) is if 1)Rhaegar is unwed 2)Rhaegar becomes a widower. 
In that case, then yes, of course Rickard would prefer a Queen for a daughter rather than the wife of a Great Lord. But he'd still prefer the wife of a Lord Paramont over a royal mistress, I'd say.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
43 minutes ago, Orphalesion said:

Not with Lyanna being the secondary wife. The Tyrells had planned to have Robert set aside Cersei and make Margaery Robert's Queen in her stead. They didn't want her to be Robert's concubine.
A shared queenship between Lyanna and Elia, if that even had been possible officially, would still have pissed off the Starks, Baratheons and the Martells, and it's been pretty established by now that the Targaryens are better off not pissing off Dorne.

The only situation I can see Rickard preferring Rhaegar over Robert (and quite a bit at that) is if 1)Rhaegar is unwed 2)Rhaegar becomes a widower. 
In that case, then yes, of course Rickard would prefer a Queen for a daughter rather than the wife of a Great Lord. But he'd still prefer the wife of a Lord Paramont over a royal mistress, I'd say.

Well we have no lords paramount but great lords aplenty trying to have their daughters get in the bed with Aegon the unworthy.

Rickard could have tried the same as Renly if Brandon the brainless didn't rode out to die and let the grown ups handle things. Aerys didn't even like the Dornish it seems so who knows.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
5 hours ago, Corvo the Crow said:

Well we have no lords paramount but great lords aplenty trying to have their daughters get in the bed with Aegon the unworthy.

I only remember the Brackens actively doing that, and it was in the hope of Bethany replacing Naerys. The other mistresses were "pursued" by the king.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 4/11/2018 at 9:30 PM, theMADdestScientist_ said:

Tell that to Ned. He thought she was old and smart enough to be more sensible. 

The thing is that Lyanna made a choice, something Elia Martell didn't had the chance to do for example.

First off, no.  You're wrong.  Whether or not you think Lyanna has a choice - in all effect, she does not.  The second most powerful person in the kingdom, who one day will be the king! is asking her to elope.  Whether or not she is into that, at first, is almost immaterial; she doesn't have a choice in how to respond.  It's almost impossible for her to say no.

And even if we accept that she made her choice, it's also clear that she regretted it, because she was being kept under armed guard at the Tower of Joy.  She was a hostage, pure and simple, and if you think she was happy to be off in the middle of nowhere, thousands of miles from anyone she knew or cared about or who could support her, having the child of a man who was going off to defend his right to kill her family members... well, that is sort of tough to swallow, no?

And all of that ignores the fact that she's in her mid-teens and Rhaegar is in his mid-20s, a significant age and maturity difference.

Maybe, maybe we grant that Lyanna made a choice to elope.  But we know she was denied the choice to go home, so it's absurd to blame her for what turns into a kidnapping.  If I make a choice to go to eat at McDonald's, but then am held hostage there and forced to cook burgers for a year, would you say that it was my choice to there for that long?  Of course not - my original choice is completely divorced from the reality of what happened to me

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 4/12/2018 at 4:19 PM, John Suburbs said:

Well, it seems to me that if she is going willingly, she's not being held against her will. She is 16, maybe 17, which in this world qualifies her as an adult. I'm in no way blaming Lyanna for anything, but the actual circumstances of her situation might have a lot to do with why Rhaegar could not have fought for the other side.

Is this a serious argument?  I mean.... is anyone actually this dumb?  How in the WORLD does "if she goes willingly, she can't be held against her will" hold up in any logic test?

If I get on the school bus willingly, and then the driver whips out a gun and holds me hostage, am I a willing participant?  Obviously not.  Whether Lyanna goes willingly in the first place, she is being held there by armed force.  Alone.  Without being allowed to contact her family or friends, or the ones that Rhaegar's dad didn't brutally murder.

On 4/12/2018 at 4:19 PM, John Suburbs said:

Sorry, I don't see how you can square this with your statement above that has adult Rhaegar guilty of abducting "barely teen" Lyanna regardless of whether she came along willingly or not. If he abducted her, that is a major slight against both House Stark and House Baratheon -- on the same level as Catelyn's abduction of Tyrion, even more so because the Starks like Lyanna -- and that can't be glossed over with "don't worry, I have her in a safe place. Now let's go get me my throne."

Whether or not Lyanna does willingly, Rhaegar running off with her is STILL a major slight.  From Rhaegar's perspective, it barely matters if she's a willing accomplice or a victim of kidnap.  Either way he's committing a major sin against two of his most powerful vassals.

I agree with you that the Targaryens are done, regardless of what Rhaegar does on coming back up north to Kings Landing.  There is no way for him to make amends.  But he doesn't even bother to try; his actions explicitly state "I and my family can do whatever we want, whenever we want, to whoever we want, and no one has any recourse to that, and we will fight and kill people to keep those rights."  If he made the slightest attempt at giving justice to the Starks, Baratheons, Mallisters, Royces, Vances, Glovers, etc. and holding Aerys responsible, then I'd have a higher opinion of Rhaegar.

On 4/12/2018 at 4:19 PM, John Suburbs said:

I would bet that most Westerosi would consider it more immoral and unethical for a crown prince to take up arms against his own father than to remain loyal to a tyrant.

I'm almost positive you are wrong.  Rhaegar is actively plotting to depose his own father even before the events that spark Robert's Rebellion, and many if not most Westerosi nobles are way on board with that. And again, as I sort of said above, Rhaegar doesn't have to fight for the rebels.  The binary nature of your argument is silly; there is a lot he can do in between "fight to keep Aerys on his throne" and "fight to replace him".  Arresting him, for one.  Staying out of the conflict but telling the rebels that he supports their grievances, but can't take up arms against his father.  He doesn't even bother to try.  He shows up, grabs his sword, and goes off to kill the morally-in-the-right rebel lords.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, cpg2016 said:

Is this a serious argument?  I mean.... is anyone actually this dumb? 

is there any need for the petty insults?  

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 4/5/2018 at 3:20 PM, Ferocious Veldt Roarer said:

The eldest son stands to inherit, so, all the others would have perfectly legit reasons. But, no, nope (that I can recall). Not even Maegor the Cruel, not even Daemon Blackfyre - both made a grab at the throne, all right, but not when their father was sitting on it.

Umm Aegon the Unworthy murdered his father Viserys II to get the throne, and I don't think he was the only one. Jaeherys II?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
5 hours ago, cpg2016 said:

Is this a serious argument?  I mean.... is anyone actually this dumb?  How in the WORLD does "if she goes willingly, she can't be held against her will" hold up in any logic test?

If I get on the school bus willingly, and then the driver whips out a gun and holds me hostage, am I a willing participant?  Obviously not.  Whether Lyanna goes willingly in the first place, she is being held there by armed force.  Alone.  Without being allowed to contact her family or friends, or the ones that Rhaegar's dad didn't brutally murder.

Whether or not Lyanna does willingly, Rhaegar running off with her is STILL a major slight.  From Rhaegar's perspective, it barely matters if she's a willing accomplice or a victim of kidnap.  Either way he's committing a major sin against two of his most powerful vassals.

I agree with you that the Targaryens are done, regardless of what Rhaegar does on coming back up north to Kings Landing.  There is no way for him to make amends.  But he doesn't even bother to try; his actions explicitly state "I and my family can do whatever we want, whenever we want, to whoever we want, and no one has any recourse to that, and we will fight and kill people to keep those rights."  If he made the slightest attempt at giving justice to the Starks, Baratheons, Mallisters, Royces, Vances, Glovers, etc. and holding Aerys responsible, then I'd have a higher opinion of Rhaegar.

I'm almost positive you are wrong.  Rhaegar is actively plotting to depose his own father even before the events that spark Robert's Rebellion, and many if not most Westerosi nobles are way on board with that. And again, as I sort of said above, Rhaegar doesn't have to fight for the rebels.  The binary nature of your argument is silly; there is a lot he can do in between "fight to keep Aerys on his throne" and "fight to replace him".  Arresting him, for one.  Staying out of the conflict but telling the rebels that he supports their grievances, but can't take up arms against his father.  He doesn't even bother to try.  He shows up, grabs his sword, and goes off to kill the morally-in-the-right rebel lords.

How do I "like" this post

 

Rhaegar and Lyanna were crappy people. Theyd have to be willfully ignorant and not receiving any news at all to be even slightly decent people. If word got thereabout KL's events and the following war, then they'e both selfish monsters. Lyanna especially, as unlike Rhaegar she actually was working against her own family's well being and put essentially her entire house to the torch over a fling and an unborn child.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
6 hours ago, cpg2016 said:

First off, no.  You're wrong.  Whether or not you think Lyanna has a choice - in all effect, she does not.  The second most powerful person in the kingdom, who one day will be the king! is asking her to elope.  Whether or not she is into that, at first, is almost immaterial; she doesn't have a choice in how to respond.  It's almost impossible for her to say no.

And even if we accept that she made her choice, it's also clear that she regretted it, because she was being kept under armed guard at the Tower of Joy.  She was a hostage, pure and simple, and if you think she was happy to be off in the middle of nowhere, thousands of miles from anyone she knew or cared about or who could support her, having the child of a man who was going off to defend his right to kill her family members... well, that is sort of tough to swallow, no?

And all of that ignores the fact that she's in her mid-teens and Rhaegar is in his mid-20s, a significant age and maturity difference.

Maybe, maybe we grant that Lyanna made a choice to elope.  But we know she was denied the choice to go home, so it's absurd to blame her for what turns into a kidnapping.  If I make a choice to go to eat at McDonald's, but then am held hostage there and forced to cook burgers for a year, would you say that it was my choice to there for that long?  Of course not - my original choice is completely divorced from the reality of what happened to me

We don' KNOW she wasn't allowed to leave, thats still very much guesswork. At the least, one of these two people sucked, hard, and it was probably both.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 hours ago, Leonardo said:

Rhaegar and Lyanna were crappy people. Theyd have to be willfully ignorant and not receiving any news at all to be even slightly decent people. If word got thereabout KL's events and the following war, then they'e both selfish monsters. Lyanna especially, as unlike Rhaegar she actually was working against her own family's well being and put essentially her entire house to the torch over a fling and an unborn child.

Lyanna was what, 14, 15 at most? Even if she did run off I don't think it would make her a horrible person, a teenager is expected to be short-sighted and selfish after all. The in-his-mid-twenties crown prince, on the other hand, is really, really hard to justify.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Lyanna was 16 at death in 283AC. So, at abduction her age is either 15 or 16.

Which puts her exploits at the tournament in Harrenhall in 281AC in "mega uber teen-powersTM" territory.

If she did elope, she could be given some leeway for horomal-teen-fanny-think-mode. But this still makes her stupid.

Rheagar? He should had known better. He dug his own grave. No pity from me.

Edited by TMIFairy

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!


Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.


Sign In Now