UnViserion Posted September 9, 2015 Share Posted September 9, 2015 I think it's possible they were married. People are under the impression that since I propose an alternative theory (and a good one, IMO) that I believe it 100%. which is false But there is embarrassingly little evidence to confirm that they were married. Like, seriously there's enough there that you have to consider it but to espouse yourself 100% to it based on the information is laughable. Almost as laughable as intentionally misconstruing and belittling someone elses argument because you can't stand the idea of your beloved theory being wrong. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MtnLion Posted September 9, 2015 Share Posted September 9, 2015 ML, well, it is not up to me to prove that what you claim to be George's picture of Ned's character is false. No, but you are saying that there is another way for Ned to arrive at the idea that the Kingsguard were a wonder, a shining example to the world, and that one of them was the finest knight of them all, Arthur Dayne. I say that Hightower gives the reason that they stand and fight to the death as their vow. You suggest that there is another reason. Ned must know of the other reason, please provide your data, or just buck it up. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MtnLion Posted September 9, 2015 Share Posted September 9, 2015 I think it's possible they were married. People are under the impression that since I propose an alternative theory (and a good one, IMO) that I believe it 100%. which is false But there is embarrassingly little evidence to confirm that they were married. Like, seriously there's enough there that you have to consider it but to espouse yourself 100% to it based on the information is laughable. Almost as laughable as intentionally misconstruing and belittling someone elses argument because you can't stand the idea of your beloved theory being wrong. do tell us where there is a hint that the theory is wrong . . . (It is only beloved to those that cannot accept it. ;) ) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MtnLion Posted September 9, 2015 Share Posted September 9, 2015 This is not 100% sure, tbh. During his chapter in Chataya's brothel, he thinks "why men have passions!!". He could have well meant Rhaegar as well. The difference here is that he knew that, even if Jon was his bastard, he's not like Robert as in he's not around making bastards he wouldn't care for. I'm 50/50 about a marriage between L and R, btw. Makes no difference for me. Ned's recollections of Rhaegar seem almost fond, in sharp contrast from what one would expect of Lyanna's source of dishonor. Lyanna gave birth, that is pretty much beyond contention. The father of Lyanna's child must be Rhaegar. Only marriage would remove it from the condition of dishonor. Ned even portions the blame for Lyanna's early death to Lyanna's "touch of wolf." True, GRRM might be concealing some portion of Ned's balme for Lyanna's death, because he doesn't want us to pick up on Rhaegar being the father. But, still it is a pretty strong point that Rhaegar and Lyanna must have been street legal. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
UnViserion Posted September 9, 2015 Share Posted September 9, 2015 do tell us where there is a hint that the theory is wrong . . . (It is only beloved to those that cannot accept it. ;) ) Where's tangible evidence that the theory is right? Targaryen polygamy.. sure but weak. Hasn't happened in 300+ years and the Faith would probably not recognize it as valid Rhaegar didn't frequent brothels.. a lot of people don't and still don't take a second wife That's just off the top of my head. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Lord Varys Posted September 9, 2015 Share Posted September 9, 2015 Lady Gwyn, on the Glover thing: Well, there is actual good textual evidence suggesting that Rhaegar didn't spend much time at KL after his return from the south. Remember, Jaime's monologue on where Rhaegar was when the wildfire plan was designed? We know Rhaegar trained new levies after his return, he did not spend much time at the Red Keep. He must have presented himself to his royal father and mother once or twice, but the idea that he would have went into the dungeon to talk to Ethan Glover of all people is far-fetched. Ethan could still have told Ned something, I guess, if his direct source wasn't Rhaegar but somebody else, but that would only work convincingly if he wasn't kept in the black cells all the time - which he actually wasn't. I've actually argued and find that still interesting that Glover actually may have been released, exchanged, or escaped long before that. Just because we don't know where he was in-between Brandon's arrest and the tower episode doesn't mean he was at KL all the time. Especially in light of the fact that the tale about 'the fathers' of Brandon's companions being called to KL to answer for their sons crimes has already been revealed to be at least partially bogus. Elbert Arryn's father, Ronnel Arryn, was actually long dead by that time, having died of a bad belly around the time of Elbert's birth. Thus the theory that Ethan was spared because his father didn't show up doesn't hold any water because Elbert's father didn't show up, either, and he was executed anyway. This means Ethan's story could actually be much more complicated and interesting than we suspect up to that point. If his father did show up, he could perhaps even have won his individual trial for all we know. Anyway trying to sell me the idea that Rhaegar has told Ethan where the tower was so that he could Ned escort there has to give an explanation why the hell this did not help to settle things with the Kingsguard. Or was Rhaegar's plan to get Ned killed this way? Richard Lonmouth as a source for Hightower could only work if Lonmouth wasn't with Rhaegar at that time. We know from TWoIaF that Rhaegar had six companions with him when he left Dragonstone and it is implied that Richard was one of them (the others being Jon Connington, Oswell Whent, Arthur Dayne, and Myles Mooton - some even think the sixth was Lewyn Martell, but in light of Harrenhal I sincerely doubt that). Just because Mooton and Connington later returned to KL doesn't mean Lonmouth returned with them. The idea that Hightower had special source for his search doesn't sound convincing to me, I have to say. Hightower was dispatched by the king, so Hightower would have gotten his preliminary information from Aerys II and, presumably, Varys, who would have had his agents looking for Rhaegar at least since the appointment of Connington (who was only named Hand because Aerys couldn't find Rhaegar, meaning he already searched for him). Hightower may have hints where to look because some informers/spies/people may have seen Rhaegar and Lyanna somewhere in the south, and he may have then found witnesses down there who pointed him in the right direction. I doubt that Aerys would only have sent Hightower - and a small contingent of men (the idea that the Lord Commander of the Kingsguard was traveling on his own during wartime isn't very convincing) - if he had already known where Rhaegar and Lyanna were. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
UnViserion Posted September 9, 2015 Share Posted September 9, 2015 Ned's recollections of Rhaegar seem almost fond, in sharp contrast from what one would expect of Lyanna's source of dishonor. Lyanna gave birth, that is pretty much beyond contention. The father of Lyanna's child must be Rhaegar. Only marriage would remove it from the condition of dishonor. Ned even portions the blame for Lyanna's early death to Lyanna's "touch of wolf." True, GRRM might be concealing some portion of Ned's balme for Lyanna's death, because he doesn't want us to pick up on Rhaegar being the father. But, still it is a pretty strong point that Rhaegar and Lyanna must have been street legal. I would say may have been street legal, to say must have based on that milk-toast evidence is a reach. Science suggests telling yourself something over and over again will eventually lead you to believe it. I think that's what we're seeing here. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MtnLion Posted September 9, 2015 Share Posted September 9, 2015 The significance of Ethan Glover lies in the few details we have, and what remains unsaid. That Glover was held in King’s Landing for the duration of the rebellion makes sense, given Aerys’ intractability regarding Eddard and Robert. Perhaps his father had failed to present himself, perhaps Aerys planned to use him to lure Eddard, perhaps Aerys simply tossed him in the cells and forgot about him, as a spoiled child would a toy. Who knows? The point is that he has been written to be in KL at the beginning of the rebellion and at the ToJ with Ned (who arrived there via KL) at its end. In the Venn diagram of characters’ known movements, or likely movements, he holds a unique place of commonality between Rhaegar, Ned and the ToJ. So one has to ask oneself—“why did the author write it this way?” In what is clearly meant to be an escalating mystery, it’s important to pay attention to details such as this that the author has given us. Unlike real life, details do not present themselves in fiction by accident. The author has to include them with intent. And while intent can occasionally include things such as red herrings and world building, the aforementioned unique spot of overlap that Glover holds in the unfolding tale cannot, and should not, be ignored. In that light, saying what Rhaegar would or would not have done with a conviction that dismisses reasonable speculation using textual hints (which is all we’re ever left with in these situations) smacks far more of fan fiction than said speculation. As for the details, why wouldn’t Rhaegar speak to Glover? If he chanced to discover him in the cells, as Ygrain points out, he would be a perfect candidate to safeguard a message for Ned in the event that exactly what ended up happening happened. And I certainly don’t think the text indicates any strength of position on Rhaegar’s part. He couldn’t or wouldn’t stop his father’s mad careening from one Hand to the next, blinded himself to (or couldn’t prevent) the wildfire plot and the abuse of his mother, and refused to take Jaime Lannister with him to the Trident because he had to cater to his father’s fragile mental state: “He wants you close, so Lord Tywin cannot harm him. I dare not take that crutch away from him at such an hour.” Anyway, I’m in agreement with Ygrain And UL—Glover is just one candidate, not the only one, though he is in my opinion the most compelling one. Hi, Lady G, thanks for visiting. I really like Ethan, he ties Brandon (never asking for Lyanna back) to Rhaegar, Ned and the tower of joy, too. I don't know how that reveal will work though, because poor Ethan died. (Maybe Howland will tell us a riveting story!) I looked at the composition of the party, and found two remarkable members. Ethan and Howland. Neither are warriors. Neither are going to be fit for a long or fast horseback travel. I can accept that Howland put himself in the group based upon the strength of his debt to the Knight of the Laughing Tree. But, Ethan I puzzled over for a long time. Why, on Planetos, is a recent release from Aerys' prisons going to be travelling, at all, instead of recovering health and strength? (I credit GRRM with realism, I hope that I am correct.) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ygrain Posted September 9, 2015 Share Posted September 9, 2015 Targaryen polygamy.. sure but weak. Hasn't happened in 300+ years and the Faith would probably not recognize it as valid Let me quote Lady G's apt post: Unlike real life, details do not present themselves in fiction by accident. The author has to include them with intent. Targ polygamy was introduced for a reason, and up till recently, all the Faith could do was shuffle their feet and say "yes, my lord". Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MtnLion Posted September 9, 2015 Share Posted September 9, 2015 Multipost disregard Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
purple-eyes Posted September 9, 2015 Share Posted September 9, 2015 Ned's recollections of Rhaegar seem almost fond, in sharp contrast from what one would expect of Lyanna's source of dishonor. Lyanna gave birth, that is pretty much beyond contention. The father of Lyanna's child must be Rhaegar. Only marriage would remove it from the condition of dishonor. Ned even portions the blame for Lyanna's early death to Lyanna's "touch of wolf." True, GRRM might be concealing some portion of Ned's balme for Lyanna's death, because he doesn't want us to pick up on Rhaegar being the father. But, still it is a pretty strong point that Rhaegar and Lyanna must have been street legal. He did not blame Rhaegar because it is his sister who did this willingly due to her love in Rhaegar and wishes to escape from Robert. He did blame Lyanna for her own tragedy even he loved her so much, just like he blamed Brandon for his recklessness. Why can you draw a conclusion that this means they were legally married? It is a pretty big leap there. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MtnLion Posted September 9, 2015 Share Posted September 9, 2015 Duplicate post. Hosed up proxy, sorry. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
purple-eyes Posted September 9, 2015 Share Posted September 9, 2015 Nope, look at the dialog, the Kingsguard say it too. When did KG say R and L got married? You are in this track again: Why KG was there? Because there was a king inside. How there was a king inside? Because R and L got married. Dude, KG is KG, they are not marriage certificates. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MtnLion Posted September 9, 2015 Share Posted September 9, 2015 He did not blame Rhaegar because it is his sister who did this willingly due to her love in Rhaegar and wishes to escape from Robert.Lyanna did what willingly?He did blame Lyanna for her own tragedy even he loved her so much, just like he blamed Brandon for his recklessness.Yes, but no blame for Rhaegar who took her, or raped her, or dishonored her?Why can you draw a conclusion that this means they were legally married?It is a pretty big leap there.No, that is not the only thing, look at the dialog, the Kingsguard are dying to protect the king, who is NOT Viserys. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Lord Varys Posted September 9, 2015 Share Posted September 9, 2015 ML, okay then, that's easy: Ned thinks that the Kingsguard was once a shining example to the world because he grew up hearing the tales of Ser Corlys Velaryon, Ser Ryam Redwyne, Prince Aemon the Dragonknight, Ser Duncan the Tall, and all the other legendary Kingsguard. And he knew what kind of men Gerold Hightower, Oswell Whent, Barristan Selmy, Jonothor Darry, and Lewyn Martell were in comparison to scum like Jaime Lannister, Mandon Moore, Meryn Trant, Boros Blount, and Preston Greenfield. The text doesn't suggests or even imply that his assessment of the Kingsguard being once a shining example to the world has anything to do with the tower of joy. You are saying that this is the case, but you cannot prove it. Ser Arthur Dayne is a special case, but he is described as great knight, not as the exemplary Kingsguard. Being a great Kingsguard doesn't mean you have to be a great knight and vice versa. As of yet it is completely unclear why Ned considers Arthur to be this great guy, but if this had anything to do with the tower than Ned would also have mentioned Gerold and Oswell as being similarly great - which he does not. Thus it is very unlikely that the tower has anything to do with Ned's assessment there. Besides, protecting a member of the royal family is what even a bad Kingsguard should do. You don't praise somebody just because he actually does what he has sworn to do, right? Keeping a promise isn't a great accomplishment or something that deserves special praise. Robert's Kingsguard presumably protects him, too, yet Ned still doesn't deem them shining examples. Why is that? And come to think of it, Ned cannot possibly praise the three knights at the tower as shining examples to the world if he was thinking about the events at the tower. After all, the world doesn't know about that whole thing, right? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
purple-eyes Posted September 9, 2015 Share Posted September 9, 2015 Lyanna did what willingly?Yes, but no blame for Rhaegar who took her, or raped her, or dishonored her?No, that is not the only thing, look at the dialog, the Kingsguard are dying to protect the king, who is NOT Viserys. She ran off with Rhaegar willingly. Nobody forced her. She did it by her free will due to her "wolf blood". Rhaegar did not rape her. She slept with him willingly. This is why Ned did not blame Rhaegar. His sister shared the equal blame for this. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
UnViserion Posted September 9, 2015 Share Posted September 9, 2015 Let me quote Lady G's apt post: Targ polygamy was introduced for a reason, and up till recently, all the Faith could do was shuffle their feet and say "yes, my lord". I don't buy the comparison between Rhaegar possibly having 2 wives and Aegon the Conquerer with his sister wives. Again, I think it's kind of weak. It would also be (as far as I know) the first time in over 300 years that this happened, and judging by the current state of Targaryen affairs at the time I'm not so sure the faith would just shuffle their feet this time around. Is there a parallel between the wife of duty and the wife of love? Possibly Aegon had Visenya (duty) and Rhaenys (love) Rhaegar had Elia (duty) and Lyanna (love) Even that is silly because Rhaegar and Lyanna didn't spend nearly enough time together to have fallen in love. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Lord Varys Posted September 9, 2015 Share Posted September 9, 2015 The Faith certainly wouldn't have condoned Rhaegar's polygamy, and both Aerys and the High Septon would have destroyed him if there hadn't been a rebellion. Perhaps they did, and that was the reason why Rhaegar and Lyanna had to hide? But that doesn't mean that Rhaegar wasn't stupid enough to do it anyway. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Consigliere Posted September 9, 2015 Share Posted September 9, 2015 Even that is silly because Rhaegar and Lyanna didn't spend nearly enough time together to have fallen in love. And what is the minimum amount of time two people need to spend together in order to fall in love? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ygrain Posted September 9, 2015 Share Posted September 9, 2015 I don't buy the comparison between Rhaegar possibly having 2 wives and Aegon the Conquerer with his sister wives. Again, I think it's kind of weak. It would also be (as far as I know) the first time in over 300 years that this happened, and judging by the current state of Targaryen affairs at the time I'm not so sure the faith would just shuffle their feet this time around. Not getting your point here. This is not about comparing Rhaegar and Aegon but about the reason why the Targ polygamy is included in the story at all. It has been suggested to Dany, but she doesn't really need, or desire, multiple spouses. Now, which Targ in the story would have the need as well as desire to marry a second wife? Rhaegar. So as not to set aside the wife he doesn't love but respects, and not dishonour the woman he loves by bedding her without marriage and fathering a bastard on her. Even that is silly because Rhaegar and Lyanna didn't spend nearly enough time together to have fallen in love. 1) You don't know how much time they spent together 2) You don't need much time for infatuation (and love may have come later) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.