Jump to content

Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.

sansalittlebird

Could Rhaegar have fought for the other side?

Recommended Posts

Could Rhaegar done differently? Uhmm, no, not after he took off with Lyanna Stark. Rheagar was fighting for his family, his thing with Lyanna Stark, mayhaps a prophecy thing. It was inevitable, it was doomed, that's the beauty and the tragedy of it.

There's no way he would've joined the rebels against King Aerys II, his father, his family. Even if he'd tried, Robert would've killed him forthwith. Because of Lyanna, whom Robert considered his property. Oh, and his lady love. (It probably never entered Robert's mind that Lyanna would find him loathsome and prefer the silver prince over him.)

Did Lyanna know the prophecies (from Rhaegar) and believe them, or was she just dazzled by the silver prince? I don't think we'll ever know.

Share this post


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

by murdering Rickard, Brandon and the Vale nobles Aerys cleverly nailed Rhaegar's balls to the throne. The Young Mad Dragon could not go over to the rebellion after that ...

That's an interesting thought. I always wondered why Aerys acted so harshly towards people threatening Rhaegar given the tension between them, but always put it down to Family First + Areys is Bonkers. That he did it to tie Rhaegar to him is interesting. That would work if he thought that there was a Grand Alliance being formed against him, and rebellion was inevitable.

Another thought - this could have been a suggestion from Varys. If Varys had a hand in Brandon and Rickard's death that would be an interesting reveal. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
15 hours ago, Ferocious Veldt Roarer said:

Son against father? I can't recall a single case, especially where the Iron Throne is concerned.

 

13 hours ago, 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).

Old Lord Hunter was poisoned by his youngest son. 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
41 minutes ago, Shouldve Taken The Black said:

Another thought - this could have been a suggestion from Varys. If Varys had a hand in Brandon and Rickard's death that would be an interesting reveal. 

This would be in line with Varys agenda of distabilising the realm.

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
5 minutes ago, TMIFairy said:

This would be in line with Varys agenda of distabilising the realm.

It could be in line with any number of theories about Varys - it could prove he was loyal to the Targaryens and gave Aerys sound advice (which backfired) about how to tie Rhargar to him, it could prove he's a Blackfyre supporter and was looking to extinguish the Targaryen line by launching the Rebellion. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
55 minutes ago, Shouldve Taken The Black said:

 

Old Lord Hunter was poisoned by his youngest son. 

 

"Misfortune" has found Gregor's father also, but a prince in an open rebellion against his father is another thing.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
37 minutes ago, Shouldve Taken The Black said:

It could be in line with any number of theories about Varys - it could prove he was loyal to the Targaryens and gave Aerys sound advice (which backfired) about how to tie Rhargar to him, it could prove he's a Blackfyre supporter and was looking to extinguish the Targaryen line by launching the Rebellion. 

True. Although I am of the "Varys Blackfyre"  persuasion in this case it could be either :)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
7 minutes ago, The Sunland Lord said:

"Misfortune" has found Gregor's father also

Tywin was rather unfortunate in the privy too.

 

7 minutes ago, The Sunland Lord said:

but a prince in an open rebellion against his father is another thing

Point taken. The stigma is probably far too great, so it's not impossible, but very unlikely. People expect brothers to fall out, and you can always throw suspicion on your brother's legitimacy or something if you really want a legal pretext for rebellion, but there isn't much of an excuse for rebelling against your father, either in legal or ethical terms. 

Rhaegar appeared to be going for some sort of arrangement that would have meant stripping Aerys of his power, and himself (or someone/s becoming regent. It may have come to war to achieve that, but I'm guessing he was wanting a minimally violent coup of some kind. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

England - Henry II's wifu and sons rebelled against him.

He won.

But no chop-chop after the rebellion - reconciliation and a Happy Family again :)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 minutes ago, TMIFairy said:

England - Henry II's wifu and sons rebelled against him.

He won.

But no chop-chop after the rebellion - reconciliation and a Happy Family again :)

It's happened in history a few times. It may be that Westrosi culture frowns on it more, or it may be just a matter of us not knowing of any examples. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
18 minutes ago, Shouldve Taken The Black said:

It's happened in history a few times. It may be that Westrosi culture frowns on it more, or it may be just a matter of us not knowing of any examples. 

This is my take on the issue - and I shall stand firm :)

Several thousands of years of history - there MUST had been ambitious sons eager for the kingship. "No one is as accursed as the kin slayer", "guest right is sacrosant" - we've seen these cultural axioms tramped and spat upon, the perps rewarded  - so why not patricide?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
27 minutes ago, TMIFairy said:

This is my take on the issue - and I shall stand firm :)

Several thousands of years of history - there MUST had been ambitious sons eager for the kingship. "No one is as accursed as the kin slayer", "guest right is sacrosant" - we've seen these cultural axioms tramped and spat upon, the perps rewarded  - so why not patricide?

Oh I agree. It would be utterly unrealistic if it never, ever happened. We just know that it hasn't in the case of the Targaryens, and is rare enough that we can't think of any examples in the Westrosi history we know of

I reckon Old Nan's stories are filled with stories of kings' sons killing their fathers then being punished by the Old Gods in exciting and interesting ways.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 08/04/2018 at 3:19 AM, BRANDON GREYSTARK said:

Not after the battle of the Bells , EDDARD STARK and JON ARRYN crowned Robert as king .

Is that right? I thought Robert only expressed his intention to become king before the Trident, and was crowned after it.

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
12 hours ago, Shouldve Taken The Black said:

Is that right? I thought Robert only expressed his intention to become king before the Trident, and was crowned after it.

 

. In an interview, Martin says something that indicates that Robert expressed his indication to become king around the Battle of the Trident, but wasn't crowned until late 283 AC.

Share this post


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

In an interview, Martin says something that indicates that Robert expressed his indication to become king around the Battle of the Trident, but wasn't crowned until late 283 AC.

Yeah, that's what it says in the Wiki.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

So - voicing of intent - and I understand that some sort of acceptance of idea by rest of STAB - is pre-Ruby Ford.

The execution - after taking KL but before the surrender of Dragonstone. So presumably after Mace throws in the towel. Tywin must had accepted as well.

Was Ned at the coronation? At that time he should had been on ToJ mission and/or fighting Dorne (Cersei mentions fighting there).

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I think Robert was proclaimed king (without coronation, tho) right after entering King's Landing; Tywin had already decided to accept the decision, hence his bloody "gifts", and Mace submitted when Ned arrived at Storm's End.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 4/4/2018 at 5:41 PM, theMADdestScientist_ said:

Her brother wanted to kill Rhaegar, do you understand what this means? what was done to Brandon and Rickard Stark was an atrocity. But Brandon wanted Rhaegar dead, got it? even in his utter madness, Rhaegar can't even blame Aerys for killing a man that wanted to kill him. That nonetheless, was enough for Rhaegar to realize his father was insane, and that's why he said what he said to Jaime.

And what about Rickard?  I won't even read the rest of your argument, because you are both wrong in what your wrote (words aren't the same as deeds, especially not words in the heat of the moment), and you ignored contradicting evidence.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

×