Jump to content
Bael's Bastard

Robert's Rebellion: The River Lords

Recommended Posts

We are told that the Darrys, Rygers, Mootons, and Goodbrooks fought on the side of Rhaegar Targaryen at the Battle of the Trident. while the Mallisters fought on the side of Robert Baratheon together with their Tully lord, and the Freys arrived all after the battle claiming they had planned to join on the side of the rebels. But what about notable riverlands houses like the Blackwoods, Brackens, Whents, and others?

Are we given any indication of which side the Whents came in on? Hoster Tully was married to a Whent, while the brother of Lord Whent served in King Aerys's Kingsguard, though he doesn't appear to have seen action against the rebels until he faced Ned and his companions down south. Harrenhal was very close to where Rhaegar's forces appear to have approached the Trident opposite the forces of the rebels.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I think the Whents would have fought on the side of the Targaryens. I think if there's a House in the riverlands who may have been well aware of what Rhaegar was up to, it has to be them. 

But I do have doubts on the Blackwoods. If they didn't fight on the side of the Targaryens (and I think that's where they would have fought), I woudn't be surprised if they stayed out of the conflict altogether. Tytos Blackwood, talking about the Freys, said that kinship counts for nothing to them in reference to Lucas's murder at the Red Wedding and to Walder Frey's 4th wife. He went far on this one, granted, but if we go by his personal feelings on the matter, Betha Blackwood wasn't just Rhaegar's great-grandmother, she was also Robert's. And a Blackwood (who may or may not have been her sister) is Ned's great-grandmother as well. There's Blackwood blood in all three.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

What happened at Stony Sept and with the Freys indicates... most likely the houses joined with the Rebels... 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I would think the Blackwoods are loyal to the Tullys and therefore to Robert in the rebellion. 

They are one of the last Stark-Tully holdouts after Robb is killed. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I kind of like the idea of the Blackwoods sitting out.  There's too much history for them on both sides.

However, I would guess that if the Brackens showed up on one side or the other, Lord Blackwood would quickly declare for the other.

Or course, the same is also true for the Brackens.

Cat notes how odd it was that both Tytos and Jonas agreed when Rob was declared King.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

We don't know where most of the Riverlords stood, actually. I'm pretty sure the Whents stood with Rhaegar, too, as would have many houses south of the fords of the Trident in 'Targaryen territory'.

The fact that Rhaegar had more men with him than Robert should also be taken into account - Robert wouldn't have had many Stormlanders still with considering his first army was pretty crushed and he was separated from his assets at home. But with the combined might of the North, the Vale, and most of the Riverlands the rebel army should have actually easily outnumbered Rhaegar's troops - which they did not. 

A very good way to explain this is that many Riverlords either stood with Rhaegar or preferred to stay out of the conflict or sent only token forces to either side.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
18 minutes ago, Lord Varys said:

We don't know where most of the Riverlords stood, actually. I'm pretty sure the Whents stood with Rhaegar, too, as would have many houses south of the fords of the Trident in 'Targaryen territory'.

The fact that Rhaegar had more men with him than Robert should also be taken into account - Robert wouldn't have had many Stormlanders still with considering his first army was pretty crushed and he was separated from his assets at home. But with the combined might of the North, the Vale, and most of the Riverlands the rebel army should have actually easily outnumbered Rhaegar's troops - which they did not. 

A very good way to explain this is that many Riverlords either stood with Rhaegar or preferred to stay out of the conflict or sent only token forces to either side.

 

Riverlands will never be united. The Timeline of Ned going back to WF and gathering troops didn't add up. I think he just sent a raven to Benjen. Gathering up strength was hastily done. If Rhaegar was smart he would've stop at SE and picked up some of Mace's men as well. Rhaegar shouldn't have put himself in danger by pursuing the rebels. 

Share this post


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

I'm pretty sure the Whents stood with Rhaegar, too, as would have many houses south of the fords of the Trident in 'Targaryen territory'.

That might explain why the Whents seem to have pretty much gone bankrupt by the time of the series. That being said, Lored Whent clearly wasn't kean on Aerys, hence his role in the Great Tourney Council (although granted, that was in cahoots with Rhaegar).

Given we have quite a long list of houses that stayed with the Crown, I always sort of assumed that all the others not mentioned stayed with Hoster.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
17 hours ago, Widow's Watch said:

I think the Whents would have fought on the side of the Targaryens. I think if there's a House in the riverlands who may have been well aware of what Rhaegar was up to, it has to be them. 

But I do have doubts on the Blackwoods. If they didn't fight on the side of the Targaryens (and I think that's where they would have fought), I woudn't be surprised if they stayed out of the conflict altogether. Tytos Blackwood, talking about the Freys, said that kinship counts for nothing to them in reference to Lucas's murder at the Red Wedding and to Walder Frey's 4th wife. He went far on this one, granted, but if we go by his personal feelings on the matter, Betha Blackwood wasn't just Rhaegar's great-grandmother, she was also Robert's. And a Blackwood (who may or may not have been her sister) is Ned's great-grandmother as well. There's Blackwood blood in all three.

The Whents certainly seem to have been in on Rhaegar's alleged attempt to use the Harrenhal Tourney as an informal Great Council, but the attempt appears to have been botched, and instead, he ended up alienating both the lords he might have tried to bring draw near (Stark, Baratheon, Arryn), as well as those he was already tied to through marriage (Martell).

While the Whents appear to have cooperated with Rhaegar on the Harrenhal Tourney, and one of them served on Aerys's Kingsguard, Hoster Tully was their lord, and his deceased wife was a Whent, thus his heir Edmure was a Whent on his mother's side, as were his daughters, the new brides of Eddard Stark, Lord of the North, and Jon Arryn, Lord of the Vale.

We don't hear of the Whents sitting out, or arriving late like the Freys, so presumably they did join in on one side or the other. I could see a case being made for either side.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
9 minutes ago, Bael's Bastard said:

but the attempt appears to have been botched, and instead, he ended up alienating both the lords he might have tried to bring draw near (Stark, Baratheon, Arryn), as well as those he was already tied to through marriage (Martell).

Yeah, he really bungled that. Giving Lyanna the rose-crown can't have been the plan from the start right? He had to know how that would go over with the Starks, Bobby B and Martells.

14 minutes ago, Bael's Bastard said:

While the Whents appear to have cooperated with Rhaegar on the Harrenhal Tourney, and one of them served on Aerys's Kingsguard, Hoster Tully was their lord, and his deceased wife was a Whent, thus his heir Edmure was a Whent on his mother's side, as were his daughters, the new brides of Eddard Stark, Lord of the North, and Jon Arryn, Lord of the Vale.

I can't help but think that all those kinship links and feudal loyalty would trump whatever loyalty to whatever Rhaegar what planning. If nothing else I can't help to think that the Whent siding against House Tully would be mentioned in one of the Cat chapters or during Arya's stay in Harrenhal.

Share this post


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

We don't know where most of the Riverlords stood, actually. I'm pretty sure the Whents stood with Rhaegar, too, as would have many houses south of the fords of the Trident in 'Targaryen territory'.

The fact that Rhaegar had more men with him than Robert should also be taken into account - Robert wouldn't have had many Stormlanders still with considering his first army was pretty crushed and he was separated from his assets at home. But with the combined might of the North, the Vale, and most of the Riverlands the rebel army should have actually easily outnumbered Rhaegar's troops - which they did not. 

A very good way to explain this is that many Riverlords either stood with Rhaegar or preferred to stay out of the conflict or sent only token forces to either side.

I could see a case being made for the Whents joining either side. But I would agree that it might have been easier for the royalists to secure River Lords south of the Trident, especially with Lord Tully and the other rebel lords being gathered north of the Trident.

We have good reason to think that lords Tully, Arryn, and Baratheon did receive the support of all their bannermen, whether some sat out, or outright stuck with the Targaryens. Perhaps Ned and Jon rushed south with smaller forces to secure the support of House Tully and rescue Robert before the Battle of the Bells, though more Vale forces should have had time to join before the Battle of the Trident. Maybe it still wasn't enough time for more of the northern forces to join. But I would agree the numbers might indicate a much more divided Riverlands.

I think it would have been easier for River Lords to explain why they didn't participate in the Battle of the Bells, but with seemingly a good deal of time between the Battle of the Bells and the Battle of the Trident, it would be more difficult to explain why they didn't join a side.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, Bael's Bastard said:

We have good reason to think that lords Tully, Arryn, and Baratheon did receive the support of all their bannermen

Actually Robert and Jon Arryn had to put down a rebellion at Gullstown against Targaryen loyalists, and Robert had to defeat some of his own lords in the Stormlands too.

2 minutes ago, Bael's Bastard said:

Maybe it still wasn't enough time for more of the northern forces to join.

No, we know of plenty of Northmen who were present at the battle. Top of my head, Jorah Mormont and Roose Bolton.

Share this post


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

Riverlands will never be united. The Timeline of Ned going back to WF and gathering troops didn't add up. I think he just sent a raven to Benjen. Gathering up strength was hastily done. If Rhaegar was smart he would've stop at SE and picked up some of Mace's men as well. Rhaegar shouldn't have put himself in danger by pursuing the rebels. 

If the rebels had less than forty thousand, I would guess that Ned gathered only a very small amount of the North's potential forces before rushing south for the wedding and Battle of the Bells, and the rest of the northern forces never made it or never left before the Battle of the Trident. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, Shouldve Taken The Black said:

Actually Robert and Jon Arryn had to put down a rebellion at Gullstown against Targaryen loyalists, and Robert had to defeat some of his own lords in the Stormlands too.

Yes, that was a typo, I meant "didn't." Even though Jon and Robert supposedly secured their control over the Vale and Stormlands before the Battle of the Bells and Trident, I think the fact that they were outnumbered by forty thousand royalists indicates they still did not receive the full military support of the loyalists among their bannermen they had apparently subdued.

3 minutes ago, Shouldve Taken The Black said:

No, we know of plenty of Northmen who were present at the battle. Top of my head, Jorah Mormont and Roose Bolton.

Yes, but the potential strength of the north is much more than what must have been present if the combined rebel forces were less than the royalist's forty thousand. Less than forty thousand indicates that significant portions of the Northern, Vale, Riverlands, and Stormlands forces were present at the Trident, whether some were commanded to remain, some didn't have time to make it, some sat out, or some fought with Rhaegar.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, Bael's Bastard said:

Even though Jon and Robert supposedly secured their control over the Vale and Stormlands before the Battle of the Bells and Trident, I think the fact that they were outnumbered by forty thousand royalists indicates they still did not receive the full military support of the loyalists among their bannermen they had apparently subdued.

Almost certainly. Plus the Tyrells were occupying the Stormlands, so recruiting from there would have been difficult.

 

2 minutes ago, Bael's Bastard said:

Yes, but the potential strength of the north is much more than what must have been present if the combined rebel forces were less than the royalist's forty thousand

True. Now that I think of it, the North rarely appears to go for a full on mobilisation during a war though. In both the Dance and Wo5K’s rebellion, they seem to leave many behind (less so in the latter case).

Share this post


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

True. Now that I think of it, the North rarely appears to go for a full on mobilisation during a war though. In both the Dance and Wo5K’s rebellion, they seem to leave many behind (less so in the latter case).

The North has to deal with Wildling and (like we see during wo5k) Ironborn to deal with so full committing their army is very risky.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
29 minutes ago, Ylath's Snout said:

Yeah, he really bungled that. Giving Lyanna the rose-crown can't have been the plan from the start right? He had to know how that would go over with the Starks, Bobby B and Martells.

I don't believe Lyanna was on his radar before the Harrenhal Tourney.

On one hand, I think Rhaegar's crowning of Lyanna was only because of the matter of the defense of Howland Reed against the squires, and the Knight of the Laughing Tree against the knights. But it is hard to see how Rhaegar wouldn't have seen how it could be interpreted, considering his father's suspicions towards him. There is a good chance Rhaegar and Brandon had a face to face before the crowning of Lyanna, as Rhaegar had defeated Brandon, and Brandon would have had to ransom or forego ransoming his arms, armor, and horse from Rhaegar. I suspect that it was Rhaegar's crowning of Lyanna that turned Aerys's suspicions and enmity towards House Stark, despite his possible "innocent" intentions.

Whatever the case, it would seem that his actions at Harrenhal ended up having the opposite of effect that it was allegedly intended to have, from gathering the support of the great lords, and his alleged abduction of Lyanna later only exacerbated that.

39 minutes ago, Ylath's Snout said:

I can't help but think that all those kinship links and feudal loyalty would trump whatever loyalty to whatever Rhaegar what planning. If nothing else I can't help to think that the Whent siding against House Tully would be mentioned in one of the Cat chapters or during Arya's stay in Harrenhal.

I might lean toward agreeing with you. And I suspect that, if that is the case, aside from seemingly being one of Rhaegar's small circle of close confidants, Rhaegar may have kept Ser Oswell in the south in part to avoid a scenario where he would be asked to lead men against his own house.

Share this post


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

Sorry, I realised that was likely the case a second after I posted.

No problem, thanks for pointing out the error.

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

×