Why didn't Rhaegar challenge Robert to a duel (like Littlefinger vs Brandon)?

[Barty]

Take your complaint to GRRM for writing these:

If the boy was truly Jaime’s seed, Robert would have put him to death along with his mother, and few would have condemned him. Bastards were common enough, but incest was a monstrous sin to both old gods and new, and the children of such wickedness were named abominations in sept and godswood alike. The dragon kings had wed brother to sister, but they were the blood of old Valyria where such practices had been common, and like their dragons the Targaryens answered to neither gods nor men. (Catelyn, ACOK)

The dragons always married their sisters. Septons, lords, and smallfolk had turned a blind eye to the Targaryens for hundreds of years, let them do the same for House Lannister. It would play havoc with Joffrey’s claim to the crown, to be sure, but in the end it had been swords that had won the iron Throne for Robert, and swords could keep Joffrey there as well, regardless of whose seed he was. We could marry him to Myrcella, once we’ve sent Sansa Stark back to her mother (Jaime, ASOS)

You are conveniently forgetting the faith uprising which took 20 years to put down. Their incest had a strong backlash as well - So your argument that the dragons could do anything without consequences holds no water. Westeros was forced to accept incest by fire and blood, not because they thought Targaryens were beyond human.

[Ygrain]

You are conveniently forgetting the faith uprising which took 20 years to put down. Their incest had a strong backlash as well - So your argument that the dragons could do anything without consequences holds no water. Westeros was forced to accept incest by fire and blood, not because they thought Targaryens were beyond human.

Believe me, I'm forgetting nothing. Especially that part when Faith Militant got disbanded and the Targaryens continued in their incestuous traditions well until the very end. It doesn't matter in the least why Westeros gave them a free pass; what matters is that they did, long after the dragons were gone.

[Barty]

Believe me, I'm forgetting nothing. Especially that part when Faith Militant got disbanded and the Targaryens continued in their incestuous traditions well until the very end. It doesn't matter in the least why Westeros gave them a free pass; what matters is that they did, long after the dragons were gone.

Your original post was Westeros played along - maybe you see a 20 year bloody rebellion that took countless lives as played along just because the rebellion was crushed in the end. I however beg to differ.

[The Dornishman's Widow]

Your original post was Westeros played along - maybe you see a 20 year bloody rebellion that took countless lives as played along just because the rebellion was crushed in the end. I however beg to differ.

That was at the very beginning of their empire, before Targaryen rule was firmly established though (I'd say the final consolidation of Targ power was finished at the end of Maegor's reign, but the exact moment is something that can be quibbled about). In that sense, yeah, obviously Harren the Black also didn't play along, but it's not what Ygrain's statement is about...

BTW, I think "20 years" is strongly overstating the length of the uprising. It was 11 years irrc.

[Ygrain]

Your original post was Westeros played along - maybe you see a 20 year bloody rebellion that took countless lives as played along just because the rebellion was crushed in the end. I however beg to differ.

In other words, there was an 11 years uprising and the remaining 270 years or so Westeros gave them a free pass for behaviour that was totally unacceptable for anyone else. I am so very wrong, my apologies.

[Danelle]

BTW, I think "20 years" is strongly overstating the length of the uprising. It was 11 years irrc.

Exactly, the Faith Militant uprising lasted almost a decade and I think that it was the best way to find out whether the Targaryen rule was strong enough, and appaently it was.

[Jon's Queen Consort]

For all those who claim that the Targs hadn't practised polygamy, which is wrong since we don't know every Targ and his family, because of the absence of dragons. How do you explain the fact that Targs continued to practice incest, which we know that is illegal unlike polygame, even after the dragons' death?

[Rickeen Baratheon]

On the matter of Aegon legitimising Daemon, it was wildely believed that the 'trueborn' son was actually not trueborn, but was born from Aemon the Dragonknight. Daemon would've been the better king and, the giving of Blackfyre was perhaps a hint that yes, this 100% blooded Targ should have the throne.

But on point, eh, Rhaegar would've lost. The reason he didn't challenge Robert was because, unlike Robert, I don't think he sees women as objects.

[Minsc]

Note that Aerys married his sister, when he himself was crown prince (his father chose the bride). Thats the crown prince (not King) getting away with with the abomination of incest. Yet apparently its therefore highly illegal and impossible for a different crown prince to even try polygamy, even though that is not an abomination at anywhere near the same level of disparagement..

The difference as you mentioned is that for Aerys his father(or grandfather) chose the bride and forced them to wed, while that father(or grandfather) was king meaning that Aerys's marriage had the full backing of the IT and the head of House Targaryen. In contrast, Rhaegar's actions were in the direct contrast to his father's permission (in how he doesn't know about it) meaning it doesn't have the backing of the IT and House Targaryen.

Thus, giving much less powerful backing for his actions with Lyanna thus open to objections including from his own father (aka the king and head of House Targaryen) who is deeply resentful that he had to marry for duty and thus might refuse Rhaegar's effort to marry for love out of spite.

[Barty]

In other words, there was an 11 years uprising and the remaining 270 years or so Westeros gave them a free pass for behaviour that was totally unacceptable for anyone else. I am so very wrong, my apologies.

I stand corrected on the length issue(dont know why I have 20 years in my head).

Either way, How is that giving a free pass?? By definition free pass means not objecting to said behavior. Westeros objected and was brutally put down. Again - the difference is in playing along and being forced to play along. Take any dictatorship in today's world - If Bashar Al Assad commits crimes and gets away with them, it does not mean the people of Syria are giving him a free pass to commit said crimes.

And the whole faith uprising is one incident - how can you say the Targs did not answer for their actions after ADoD or RR??

[Ygrain]

The difference as you mentioned is that for Aerys his father(or grandfather) chose the bride and forced them to wed, while that father(or grandfather) was king meaning that Aerys's marriage had the full backing of the IT and the head of House Targaryen. In contrast, Rhaegar's actions were in the direct contrast to his father's permission (in how he doesn't know about it) meaning it doesn't have the backing of the IT and House Targaryen.

Thus, giving much less powerful backing for his actions with Lyanna thus open to objections including from his own father (aka the king and head of House Targaryen) who is deeply resentful that he had to marry for duty and thus might refuse Rhaegar's effort to marry for love out of spite.

So, now we're from "polygamy is impossible for Targaryens" to "polygamy is impossible for Rhaegar personally"?

Once again: yes, Aerys was unlikely to approve. Doesn't make Rhaegar's second marriage automatically invalid, Aerys would have to take steps to invalidate it like Tywin did, but he couldn't invalidate what he didn't know of.

[Ygrain]

I stand corrected on the length issue(dont know why I have 20 years in my head).

Either way, How is that giving a free pass?? By definition free pass means not objecting to said behavior. Westeros objected and was brutally put down. Again - the difference is in playing along and being forced to play along. Take any dictatorship in today's world - If Bashar Al Assad commits crimes and gets away with them, it does not mean the people of Syria are giving him a free pass to commit said crimes.

And the whole faith uprising is one incident - how can you say the Targs did not answer for their actions after ADoD or RR??

Westeros put up with the Targ incest for almost 300 years. What was originally forced became later a custom.

ADoD did not affect the special-for-Targs rules as they continued the incest afterwards and set their own rules of succession, and using RR to invalidate events that took place before it is kinda moot point.

Once again: why do you think that GRRM put those sentences there? Why does he have many characters and repeatedly point out that Targaryens could do what no-one else could, even without the dragons?

[Minsc]

So, now we're from "polygamy is impossible for Targaryens" to "polygamy is impossible for Rhaegar personally"?

No, it means that Targaryen polygamy has it is limits just like all marriages in Westeros. Simply, in the sense that sons and daughters cannot just run away from their families and get married without their parent's permission for the marriage to be fully recognized. the fact that it is a polygamous marriage just makes it more difficult in how that is even more against general custom of most in their society.

[Barty]

Westeros put up with the Targ incest for almost 300 years. What was originally forced became later a custom.

ADoD did not affect the special-for-Targs rules as they continued the incest afterwards and set their own rules of succession, and using RR to invalidate events that took place before it is kinda moot point.

Once again: why do you think that GRRM put those sentences there? Why does he have many characters and repeatedly point out that Targaryens could do what no-one else could, even without the dragons?

ADoD was never about the incest. It was about a King who wanted to place his daughter on the throne before his son - a clear violation of Andal law- and it ended with him not succeeding. Their own set of rules?? I'm sorry but after the dance the Targaryens followed the law of succession that the Westerosi lords made for them - or do you think the 12 year old Aegon made the new succession rules(and then decided his mother's side was wrong and all women should be placed last)??

GRRM put also put another sentence in the books - "Words are Wind". Doesnt matter what any character says about the Targaryens - its their actions and consequences which I use to judge.

[Jon's Queen Consort]

ADoD was never about the incest. It was about a King who wanted to place his daughter on the throne before his son - a clear violation of Andal law- and it ended with him not succeeding. Their own set of rules?? I'm sorry but after the dance the Targaryens followed the law of succession that the Westerosi lords made for them - or do you think the 12 year old Aegon made the new succession rules(and then decided his mother's side was wrong and all women should be placed last)??

GRRM put also put another sentence in the books - "Words are Wind". Doesnt matter what any character says about the Targaryens - its their actions and consequences which I use to judge.

Well the Targs are not Andals. I think that it was quite clear by now.

[Barty]

Well the Targs are not Andals. I think that it was quite clear by now.

Thats super subjective. Targs follow the Andal faith and they have as much Andal blood in them as any westerosi lord.

Either way the point is the King tried to break the law his people followed and the law which the Andal faith upheld(the laws of gods and men) and this apparently did not sit well with a lot of lords and the Targs paid for it.

[Jon's Queen Consort]

followThats super subjective. Targs the Andal faith and they have as much Andal blood in them as any westerosi lord.

Either way the point is the King tried to break the law his people followed and the law which the Andal faith upheld(the laws of gods and men) and this apparently did not sit well with a lot of lords and the Targs paid for it.

Do they? Then why keep practising incest? The faith sees incest as an illegal abomination. So no, they don't follow the Faith they pretend to follow the Faith when the only think that they are following is their own law.

[King Tam Stark]

because he didn't have control of his actions he was only the gods tool to fulfill a prophecy....

[Barty]

Do they? Then why keep practising incest? The faith sees incest as an illegal abomination. So no, they don't follow the Faith they pretend to follow the Faith when the only think that they are following is their own law.

Christianity sees sex before marriage as sin as well - So everyone who has sex before marriage is not really christian?? Any Jew(or Hindu) who eats pork(or Beef) is only pretending to be Jew(or Hindu)?? Try explaining that to them.

And we are way off topic. :)

[Ygrain]

No, it means that Targaryen polygamy has it is limits just like all marriages in Westeros. Simply, in the sense that sons and daughters cannot just run away from their families and get married without their parent's permission for the marriage to be fully recognized. the fact that it is a polygamous marriage just makes it more difficult in how that is even more against general custom of most in their society.

Sure they can. Once you say the words, you are in, and the marriage is valid. The parents can: 1) make sure no-one finds out, like Tywin did (and Tyrion is still married to Tysha before the Seven) or 1) apply with the Faith for the marriage to be annulled, e.g. for non-consumption (Tyrion and Sansa). If and how a marriage before the old gods can be annulled, we do not know.

Aerys could forbid Rhaegar to marry beforehands. What, and if, he could do afterwards, especially when Lyanna was safely pregnant, is one big unknown, but first and foremost, it would require him to take some action to invalidate the marriage. Until then, a vow before gods holds.

ADoD was never about the incest. It was about a King who wanted to place his daughter on the throne before his son - a clear violation of Andal law- and it ended with him not succeeding. Their own set of rules?? I'm sorry but after the dance the Targaryens followed the law of succession that the Westerosi lords made for them - or do you think the 12 year old Aegon made the new succession rules(and then decided his mother's side was wrong and all women should be placed last)??

GRRM put also put another sentence in the books - "Words are Wind". Doesnt matter what any character says about the Targaryens - its their actions and consequences which I use to judge.

ADoD was not about violation of Andal law but about a powergrab in the royal family. Did Alicent Hightower think "OMGs this is against the custom!", or did she rather go "yay my son for a king!"? If she didn't make that move, do you think that the rest of Westeros would rise against Rhaenyra?

You say that you judge by actions? Judge then! Targaryens were the only ones practicing relationships perceived by both religions of Westeros and all of its people as abominable, for almost 300 years. What does it say about their position in the society?