Would the Targaryens have won against Robert if Mace Tyrell had been at the Trident?

[TheCrannogDweller]

Another host who'd need several months to arrive at Kings Landing. Kevan was in KL as well, by the way. Furthermore Ned was at KL only hours, maybe just thirty minutes, after Tywin. Remember, he'd rode through the gates of KL at the same time as the Mountain and Ser Armory Lorch scaled the walls of the Red Keep.

30 minutes or 1, it wouldn't have mattered if the whole Lannister army was already in the city and the gates were closed.

Obviously, in that scenario, Kevan would've been left at the Rock, to bring the second army. And I don't think it would've needed that much time to travel to the capital. We see the Lannisters assemble and march two armies with combined strength of 35 000 men quite quickly in the beginning of the WOTFK. Sure, it would've taken them some time, but the capital wouldn't be going anywhere. The Rebels had almost no fleet to speak of, so they couldn't seal the bay, which means that some supplies would've still flowed into the Red Keep. As far as a direct attack goes... 30 000 vs 12 000 on the walls is a pretty good ratio for the defenders. Stannis had trouble breaking 6000 Gold Cloaks with 20 000 men.

[Bright Blue Eyes]

Stannis woud have been inside the city during the first twelve hours, while needing to cross the Blackwater. The rebels approach from the North.

[TheCrannogDweller]

Stannis woud have been inside the city during the first twelve hours, while needing to cross the Blackwater. The rebels approach from the North.

So you're saying that 12 000 Lannisters plus probably another 8000 Crownlanders/Gold Cloaks would've been easily overwhelmed by 30 000 Rebels, while defending the walls of King's Landing?

[Fat Trell]

Such a pointless discussion. Tywin would have never backed a losing horse like Aerys post-Trident. No matter his opinion on whether he could win a bloody campaign against half the continent.

[Capt Captain]

We know the Loyalist force at the Trident had (Stated by the wiki) Several hundred Reach levies.

Now, even if (Big IF) we say that that means 1000 levies, you have to remember what they are, levies.

Mace had an estimated number of 40,000 with him, and you'd only need what, 3x the force of a garrison to maintain the siege against a starving army. ( They won't sally out being so weak and outnumbered)

Stannis would be forced to remain in SE, a rough 38,000 Reach army would march and join up with Rhaegar.

Now Mace and Randyll would command knights and veterans, including levies. The big difference is the equipment, training and discipline of these forces. Levies are easy to break, and with the Rebel forces outnumbered about 2-1 (Slightly more) They would either withdraw as some other users have noted, or get crushed.

35k extra troops could reinforce each flank, and get in the way of the two leaders.

The Dornish would not break, and the Loyalists could go on the counter-offensive with the huge numerical advantage. Even if Stannis did march out and gain the remaining Storm lords, castle walls are a huge multiplier against any army, they'd need at least 3x the amount garrisoned in the city to successfully take it. From what we know, there were 6-8k Gold cloaks. I'd say the Robert had at least 5-10k Stormlanders with him, and we know tat there are about 20k men able to be mustered from the Stormlands. That is not nearly enough to take Kings Landing.

[Bright Blue Eyes]

So you're saying that 12 000 Lannisters plus probably another 8000 Crownlanders/Gold Cloaks would've been easily overwhelmed by 30 000 Rebels, while defending the walls of King's Landing?

Not easily, not at all. But KL isn't a strong castle, just a weakly fortified city with endless miles of walls. Furthermore, the Battle of the Trident brought the Riverlords and Valemen firmly behind Hoster and Jon Arryn, to a certain extent the Stormlords as well, the rebel army actually increased there.

[TheCrannogDweller]

Not easily, not at all. But KL isn't a strong castle, just a weakly fortified city with endless miles of walls. Furthermore, the Battle of the Trident brought the Riverlords and Valemen firmly behind Hoster and Jon Arryn, to a certain extent the Stormlords as well, the rebel army actually increased there.

Both good and interesting points. So, the Rebel army might've swollen to about 50 000 men?

[Bright Blue Eyes]

Both good and interesting points. So, the Rebel army might've swollen to about 50 000 men?

Maybe even 65,000, excluding only the Dornish. Of course they would have to split up to account for supply problems.

[Fire Eater]

A link to a post full of conjecture based upon visions that may or may not be reliable depictions of actual events or may or may not be representative of greater events(i.e. the cloth dragon representing a false Targaryen, not necessarily being an actual event.). Hardly convincing.

Regardless of this pure conjecture based on shoddy at best evidence, we have seen that being mounted doesn't guarantee victory in single combat.

And no, an injury preventing prolonged riding doesn't mean it necessarily needs to be serious. A badly rolled ankle or a shallow cut along the instep or thigh could make riding too uncomfortable or dangerous to ride. Hardly serious.

Did you even look at the text provided? The trio of visions in which that one came were very literal: Viserys getting his "crown of gold," and Dany's son, Rhaego, riding after having burnt a city.

Shoddy evidence at best? Well, you are entitled to your opinion (and I wish you would state it as much instead of matter-of-factly), but that is good evidence, IMO, that Rhaegar dismounted. Daemon dismounted for a foe, and you find it hard to believe Rhaegar would do the same?

It is implied to be a serious wound, if it was a shallow cut across the thigh then it just needed some padding for comfort.

The impression of Robert and Rhaegar duking it out on foot comes probably from Amoka's painting of the scene, but that's not from the books.

Rubies flew like drops of blood from the chest of a dying prince, and he sank to his knees in the water, and with his last breath murmured a woman's name

Lol, I knew some people would start using this ridiculous piece of Rhaegy fanfic as an actual fact.

When you find an argument you don't agree with, you call it names? Very mature (I can't find sarcasm font). Did you even actually look at and consider the evidence? Rhaegar was afoot when he died on the Tridebnt, and according to Ned they were on destriers. They were knights, and so naturally they would be mounted. Dameon Blackfyre dismounted for a foe, would it be too hard to believe Rhaegar did the same?

If he was such a Great Warrior he would have been smart enbough to not try to beat a man with plate armor with a sword.

Men have killed men wearing plate armor with swords in ASOIAF like Tarly, Daemon Blackfyre, Arthur Dayne, Lyn Corbray, Gwayne Corbray, etc.

[Universal Sword Donor]

Did you even look at the text provided? The trio of visions in which that one came were very literal: Viserys getting his "crown of gold," and Dany's son, Rhaego, riding after having burnt a city.

Shoddy evidence at best? Well, you are entitled to your opinion (and I wish you would state it as much instead of matter-of-factly), but that is good evidence, IMO, that Rhaegar dismounted. Daemon dismounted for a foe, and you find it hard to believe Rhaegar would do the same?

It is implied to be a serious wound, if it was a shallow cut across the thigh then it just needed some padding for comfort.

Rubies flew like drops of blood from the chest of a dying prince, and he sank to his knees in the water, and with his last breath murmured a woman's name

When you find an argument you don't agree with, you call it names? Very mature (I can't find sarcasm font). Did you even actually look at and consider the evidence? Rhaegar was afoot when he died on the Tridebnt, and according to Ned they were on destriers. They were knights, and so naturally they would be mounted. Dameon Blackfyre dismounted for a foe, would it be too hard to believe Rhaegar did the same?

Men have killed men wearing plate armor with swords in ASOIAF like Tarly, Daemon Blackfyre, Arthur Dayne, Lyn Corbray, Gwayne Corbray, etc.

A shallow wound across the leg would need more than padding. It would still rub and chafe like hell riding a horse. That's a real easy way for it to get inflamed and infected.

As to falling to his knees., I don't think it's incredibly likely, but hitting someone hard enough to crush their chest would probably knock them out of their saddle. I don't really see Rhaegar falling *forward* if he's hit that hard in the chest.

[Fat Trell]

Did you even look at the text provided? The trio of visions in which that one came were very literal: Viserys getting his "crown of gold," and Dany's son, Rhaego, riding after having burnt a city.

Shoddy evidence at best? Well, you are entitled to your opinion (and I wish you would state it as much instead of matter-of-factly), but that is good evidence, IMO, that Rhaegar dismounted. Daemon dismounted for a foe, and you find it hard to believe Rhaegar would do the same?

.

Literal visions that included an adult version of a child who was born with severe deformities and died soon after? Clear as crystal, obviously.

I am not the one who introduced their view of how the fight happened as fact.

Who is talking about Daemon? Where is that coming from? Daemon is more analogous to Robert than Rhaegar anyway; a rebellious martial leader opposing an entrenched bookish one.

Why have we had no indication of this apart from some half baked visions in Qarth and a cryptic comment by Jorah that could mean any number of things? Why hasn't Jon C mentioned how his Silver Prince bested the Usurper? Why didn't Viserys launch into a tirade on the subject? Why doesn't Cersei ruminate on how if only Rhaegar had put aside his honor, the right man would have come back? Why doesn't Jorah outright state this when praising Rhaegar to Dany? Why does no one discuss something that seems so noteworthy?

[Fire Eater]

A shallow wound across the leg would need more than padding. It would still rub and chafe like hell riding a horse. That's a real easy way for it to get inflamed and infected.

As to falling to his knees., I don't think it's incredibly likely, but hitting someone hard enough to crush their chest would probably knock them out of their saddle. I don't really see Rhaegar falling *forward* if he's hit that hard in the chest.

I don't think Robert would have let that stop him from riding to KL, this is a guy who fought at Stiney Sept even recuperating from a wound taken at Ashford. The wound had to be serious for him to give Ned command to take KL.

I was talking about Rhaegar dismounting, meaning he voluntarily got off his horse, no knocked off.

Literal visions that included an adult version of a child who was born with severe deformities and died soon after? Clear as crystal, obviously.

I am not the one who introduced their view of how the fight happened as fact.

The vision Rhaego was if MMD hadn't performed her spell, and the man matched the description of Dany's dream of him in AGoT. Rhaegar was literally killed.

OK, fair enough. I thought that is good evidence.

Who is talking about Daemon? Where is that coming from? Daemon is more analogous to Robert than Rhaegar anyway; a rebellious martial leader opposing an entrenched bookish one.

Daemon was chivalrous like Rhaegar was. The chivalric code would have the knight dismount when his opponent is off his horse. Rhaegar was good warrior as well, he was knighted at 17.

Why have we had no indication of this apart from some half baked visions in Qarth and a cryptic comment by Jorah that could mean any number of things? Why hasn't Jon C mentioned how his Silver Prince bested the Usurper? Why didn't Viserys launch into a tirade on the subject? Why doesn't Cersei ruminate on how if only Rhaegar had put aside his honor, the right man would have come back? Why doesn't Jorah outright state this when praising Rhaegar to Dany? Why does no one discuss something that seems so noteworthy?

The vision was literal. Also, Jon Connington obviously wasn't at the Battle of the Trident, he was exiled after the Battle of the Bells. Viserys was eight at the time of the Rebellion, you can't expect him to remember every detail, especially since he wasn't present at the battle either, nor was Cersei. Why would Jorah want to mention details of how her brother died at the battle where Jorah fought on the opposite side when comparing her to Rhaegar? That would be very awkward, "You arelike Rhaegar who dismounted when he fought Robert, which got himself killed." Besides, Jorah said "Rhaegar fought valiantly, Rhaegar fought nobly, Rhaegar fought honorably. And Rhaegar died." Very few characters we have met were at the Trident.

[Universal Sword Donor]

I don't think Robert would have let that stop him from riding to KL, this is a guy who fought even recuperating from a wound at Stoney Sept. The wound had to be serious for him to give Ned command to take KL.

I was talking about Rhaegar dismounting, meaning he voluntarily got off his horse, no knocked off.

Robert sent away his maester to care for Barristan. He was conscious and smart enough to ignore Roose Bolton, so he probably wasn't on MotP (or maybe it hadn't taken effect). Robert fought at Stony Sept because he needed to or he would die. The rebellion is essentially over after the Trident. He doesn't have to hurry anywhere. The reason Ned rushed ahead is likely because Robert can't or shouldn't ride.

I was saying Rhaegar probably didn't fight dismounted. If you get hit in the chest hard enough to shatter the breastplate, you're not going to fall to your knees. It's liable to knock you over. We know that Robert was strong enough to wield it one handed and that Ned had trouble picking it up. That is a ton of force.

[Fat Trell]

The vision Rhaego was if MMD hadn't performed her spell, and the man matched the description of Dany's dream of him in AGoT. Rhaegar was literally killed.

OK, fair enough. I thought that is good evidence.

Daemon was chivalrous like Rhaegar was. The chivalric code would have the knight dismount when his opponent is off his horse. Rhaegar was good warrior as well, he was knighted at 17.

The vision was literal. Also, Jon Connington obviously wasn't at the Battle of the Trident, he was exiled after the Battle of the Bells. Viserys was eight at the time of the Rebellion, you can't expect him to remember every detail, especially since he wasn't present at the battle either, nor was Cersei. Why would Jorah want to mention details of how her brother died at the battle where Jorah fought on the opposite side when comparing her to Rhaegar? That would be very awkward, "You arelike Rhaegar who dismounted when he fought Robert, which got himself killed." Besides, Jorah said "Rhaegar fought valiantly, Rhaegar fought nobly, Rhaegar fought honorably. And Rhaegar died." Very few characters we have met were at the Trident.

So the vision is hypothetic in nature then? What's to say it isn't metaphoric as well? Certainly seems to make more sense that way. Blows to the chest that shatter your ribcage don't knock you to your knees.

Daemon was chivalrous in battle. Chasing another women while you yourself are married and have several children isn't chivalrous. But hey, Rhaegar did that too, maybe you're on to something.

Rhaegar is a good warrior, its not what defines him. Martial skill was what defined Daemon and Robert. Like Daeron, Rhaegar's passion lay in learning.

Point being, Daemon to Rhaegar isn't a direct comparison. Arguing that since Daemon dismounted, obviously Rhaegar did as well, is a reach at best.

Of which you have no proof. And even if it was, where does the vision being true also require that Rhaegar wounded and unhorsed Robert and then dismounted? Would it not be just as likely that Robert unhorsed Rhaegar? Or that Rhaegar's horse's hoof got stuck in a sinkhole in the riverbed? Or that Robert's did the same?

We have met several people who were at the Trident. It is a famous battle. Scores, if not hundreds of men watched them fight. Even if none of the POV characters or ones we've met saw their combat, why do none repeat the tale that all these men saw? Why do we know of men diving into the river to grab rubies but not of Rhaegar's infallible honor?

There is simply no evidence beyond half thought conjecture backing your point.

[tydides]

It wouldn't have happened, even if mace was really invested. He needed to keep the Baratheon naval power in check, as it posed a direct threat to Kings Landing, Old Town, Sunspear, and Vale loyalists. Stannis was a bit too important and well placed to be allowed to break through an undermanned siege. They needed to fully control the south to keep the alliance going. And, the army was just to slow to move. Remember how long it was taking Renly? It would take longer, as Mace was unwilling and the Trident was farther than Kings Landing.

[Universal Sword Donor]

It wouldn't have happened, even if mace was really invested. He needed to keep the Baratheon naval power in check, as it posed a direct threat to Kings Landing, Old Town, Sunspear, and Vale loyalists. Stannis was a bit too important and well placed to be allowed to break through an undermanned siege. They needed to fully control the south to keep the alliance going. And, the army was just to slow to move. Remember how long it was taking Renly? It would take longer, as Mace was unwilling and the Trident was farther than Kings Landing.

The Baratheon naval power? You mean the naval power that Stannis had to build after the sack of KL. They didn't even have ships to get to Dragonstone.

[Fire Eater]

So the vision is hypothetic in nature then? What's to say it isn't metaphoric as well? Certainly seems to make more sense that way. Blows to the chest that shatter your ribcage don't knock you to your knees.

Except if the spike from the war hammer pierces you heart, and it specifically said "sank to his knees" not knocked.

Rhaegar is a good warrior, its not what defines him. Martial skill was what defined Daemon and Robert. Like Daeron, Rhaegar's passion lay in learning.

Rhaegar did possess martial skill, and he was noted to be a skilled knight. How come he cant be defined by both learning and martial skill?

Point being, Daemon to Rhaegar isn't a direct comparison. Arguing that since Daemon dismounted, obviously Rhaegar did as well, is a reach at best.

A battle fought over royalty marrying off another man's love, Lyanna for Robert and Daenerys for Daemon. Daemon proves that it wasn't out of place for Rhaegar to have dismounted.

Of which you have no proof. And even if it was, where does the vision being true also require that Rhaegar wounded and unhorsed Robert and then dismounted? Would it not be just as likely that Robert unhorsed Rhaegar? Or that Rhaegar's horse's hoof got stuck in a sinkhole in the riverbed? Or that Robert's did the same?

Viserys's vision was literal as was the one of a grown Rhaego. A prince with rubies in his armor, Rhaegar, died on the banks fighting on a river, that was clearly Rhaegar, and a pretty literal vision. What more proof do you kneed that it was literal? All the other visions in that set were literal. Rhaegar would have unhorsed Robert, and then dismounted, because Rhaegar was very chivalrous. Rhaegar was a good jouster, and could have wounded Robert and knocked him off his horse with a war lance, or other than that, Rhaegar could have wounded Robert before or after he dismounted.

We have met several people who were at the Trident. It is a famous battle. Scores, if not hundreds of men watched them fight. Even if none of the POV characters or ones we've met saw their combat, why do none repeat the tale that all these men saw? Why do we know of men diving into the river to grab rubies but not of Rhaegar's infallible honor?

Rhaegar's honor was pretty much accepted matter-of-factly throughout Westeros. Why would anybody need to mention every detail? Besides, it may be revealed later in the series.

There is simply no evidence beyond half thought conjecture backing your point.

Yes there is, if you pay attention, IMO. Dany's vision literally showed Rhaegar dismounted and sinking to his knees in the Trident, and Rhaegar and Robert were both knights and would have been mounted for battle.

[Fat Trell]

Except if the spike from the war hammer pierces you heart, and it specifically said "sank to his knees" not knocked.

Rhaegar did possess martial skill, and he was noted to be a skilled knight. How come he cant be defined by both learning and martial skill?

A battle fought over royalty marrying off another man's love, Lyanna for Robert and Daenerys for Daemon. Daemon proves that it wasn't out of place for Rhaegar to have dismounted.

Viserys's vision was literal as was the one of a grown Rhaego. A prince with rubies in his armor, Rhaegar, died on the banks fighting on a river, that was clearly Rhaegar, and a pretty literal vision. What more proof do you kneed that it was literal? All the other visions in that set were literal. Rhaegar would have unhorsed Robert, and then dismounted, because Rhaegar was very chivalrous. Rhaegar was a good jouster, and could have wounded Robert and knocked him off his horse with a war lance, or other than that, Rhaegar could have wounded Robert before or after he dismounted.

Rhaegar's honor was pretty much accepted matter-of-factly throughout Westeros. Why would anybody need to mention every detail? Besides, it may be revealed later in the series.

Yes there is, if you pay attention, IMO. Dany's vision literally showed Rhaegar dismounted and sinking to his knees in the Trident, and Rhaegar and Robert were both knights and would have been mounted for battle.

A blow that shatters armor will knock you back, not forward. When you fall to your knees, you fall forward.

Rhaegar is mentioned to have held more passion for learning and music than for martial training by Barristan, someone who should have known him reasonably well.

Ok.

Viserys' vision was literal. Rhaego's vision was hypothetic. What's to say Rhaegar's wasn't metaphoric? Many argue the cloth dragon and the stone beast are metaphors, why not this vision?

Rhaegar could have fallen off his horse, because he was fighting in a riverbed. Rhaegar could have been unhorsed, because Robert was a great warrior.

Even if we accept this theory that Rhaegar and Robert fought afoot, there are literally dozens of ways they could have ended up there. You insist this one specific theory is justified via two unclear references.

I have been paying attention. I went and reread the House of the Undying chapter. Went and reread the wiki entry on the Trident and the referenced pages. No where along the way did this theory gain merit. Why would no one mention that Rhaegar clearly had the upper hand in their duel? Why would the multiple Rhaegar sympathizers we've run across not bring this up? How have we not heard this?

Can you give one good reason as to why such an important detail in this duel hasn't been mentioned? One? Why does no one disparage Robert for this? Why does no one praise Rhaegar for it?

[Winterfell is Burning]

So the vision is hypothetic in nature then? What's to say it isn't metaphoric as well? Certainly seems to make more sense that way. Blows to the chest that shatter your ribcage don't knock you to your knees.

Daemon was chivalrous in battle. Chasing another women while you yourself are married and have several children isn't chivalrous. But hey, Rhaegar did that too, maybe you're on to something.

Rhaegar is a good warrior, its not what defines him. Martial skill was what defined Daemon and Robert. Like Daeron, Rhaegar's passion lay in learning.

Point being, Daemon to Rhaegar isn't a direct comparison. Arguing that since Daemon dismounted, obviously Rhaegar did as well, is a reach at best.

Of which you have no proof. And even if it was, where does the vision being true also require that Rhaegar wounded and unhorsed Robert and then dismounted? Would it not be just as likely that Robert unhorsed Rhaegar? Or that Rhaegar's horse's hoof got stuck in a sinkhole in the riverbed? Or that Robert's did the same?

We have met several people who were at the Trident. It is a famous battle. Scores, if not hundreds of men watched them fight. Even if none of the POV characters or ones we've met saw their combat, why do none repeat the tale that all these men saw? Why do we know of men diving into the river to grab rubies but not of Rhaegar's infallible honor?

There is simply no evidence beyond half thought conjecture backing your point.

But the perfect silver prince can't fail. And if he does, has to be because he is too good, chivalrous and honorable.

[C0bR]

Just a note - Rhaegar is never called honorable or chivalrous, so we can throw that notion off the window too.