Robert's Rebellion: The River Lords

[Alexis-something-Rose]

1 hour ago, Bael's Bastard said:

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.

The Whents had 5 sons. By the time the current story rolls around, there's only Shella left. It's not impossible that most of the sons were killed on the Trident, like the three Darrys were.

[Bael's Bastard]

12 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).

IIRC, the North's main forces during Aegon I's conquest and the Dance were huge, tens of thousands I think, but at least in the case of the Dance, it took them forever to gather and march. The North sent a small force of about a couple thousand that participated in some battles, but the main force led by Cregan didn't arrive until both Rhaenyra and Aegon II were dead and Aegon III was crowned. So perhaps Ned led a smaller force south for the Battle of the Bells, and was not joined by many thousands more before the Battle of the Trident. I doubt he led anywhere near the almost twenty thousand Robb led south during the War of the Five Kings.

[Shouldve Taken The Black]

1 hour ago, Bael's Bastard said:

IIRC, the North's main forces during Aegon I's conquest and the Dance were huge, tens of thousands I think, but at least in the case of the Dance, it took them forever to gather and march. The North sent a small force of about a couple thousand that participated in some battles, but the main force led by Cregan didn't arrive until both Rhaenyra and Aegon II were dead and Aegon III was crowned. So perhaps Ned led a smaller force south for the Battle of the Bells, and was not joined by many thousands more before the Battle of the Trident. I doubt he led anywhere near the almost twenty thousand Robb led south during the War of the Five Kings.

Yeah that sounds right. You mobilise your most enthusiastic warriors and gather the rest later. Robbs mobilisation was remarkably fast given the size of the North 

[Shouldve Taken The Black]

1 hour ago, Widow's Watch said:

The Whents had 5 sons. By the time the current story rolls around, there's only Shella left. It's not impossible that most of the sons were killed on the Trident, like the three Darrys were.

I'd always assumed they died in the rebellion. I also always assumed they fought for Hoster. There's no real reason for that, except their treatment in the books seems sympathetic. Cat clearly distrust the Freys, but Sir What's his name who helps her capture Tyrion she sees as a natural ally. And they seem oldschool. YoreN calls Lady Whent a friend of the watch. None of that is evidence of course. 

[Lord Varys]

18 hours ago, Bael's Bastard said:

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.

I expect Lord Walter to have sided with Rhaegar. There is no question about this in my opinion since at least TWoIaF. We don't even know whether Minisa was from the main branch of House Whent - but even if she was, she was dead, and siding with the king could mean that Lord Whent of Harrenhal might be the Lord Paramount of the Riverlands after the end of the war - as it should be, considering that Harrenhal was the seat of kings, not Riverrun.

However, it might be that one of Lord Walter's sons - or more - sided with the rebels, adding to the tragedy of House Whent. Or, perhaps, some of the sons die in battle, and others simply due to accidents and illnesses.

19 hours ago, Shouldve Taken The Black said:

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.

That is the default take on the thing considering that one starts with the assumption that the bannermen of a lord stay true to that lord. But this has little and less bearing in the Riverlands where the Tullys are not exactly powerful or universally accepted liege lords. And since we know a couple of houses who stood with Rhaegar, there is a good chance that others did that, too - or chose to side with neither faction. 

18 hours ago, Bael's Bastard said:

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. 

We actually don't know whether Ned faced a similar conundrum as Robert and Jon in their domains. While we have no evidence that any northern house actually rose against the Starks, there is a good chance that many may have been reluctant to commit many men/troops to Ned's cause, explaining why he was sending a rather small force down south.

I mean, technically Ned should have had had the time to raise troops if he had sent a letter to Benjen commanding him to call the banners. Similarly, Stannis might have started a call to arms before Robert returned to Storm's End. Granted, the lords may have been reluctant to do much while their young lords were still stuck in the Vale, but the marshaling of troops could have began that early.

I find it very likely that Robert was especially lacking in Stormlanders (at least troops, not so much knights and lords) simply because most of the levies of his originally host must have been gone after Ashford. Else he wouldn't have been forced to hide in Stoney Sept. And with the Reach forces in the Stormlands one doesn't think a lot of men trickled from there to the Riverlands - some might have, but not all that many.

Thus one assumes the bulk of the strength at the Trident would have been Vale men (although definitely not the entire strength of the Vale), Northmen (not the entire strength) and a good chunk of Rivermen with, perhaps, only the Tullys committing their entire strength to the rebel cause.

Those battle-hardened veterans of the war would likely have been the Vale troops partaking in the Battle of Gulltown, whatever men survived from Robert's battles, and the veterans of the Battle of the Bells (and the smaller battles in the Riverlands).

[Bael's Bastard]

2 hours ago, Lord Varys said:

I expect Lord Walter to have sided with Rhaegar. There is no question about this in my opinion since at least TWoIaF. We don't even know whether Minisa was from the main branch of House Whent - but even if she was, she was dead, and siding with the king could mean that Lord Whent of Harrenhal might be the Lord Paramount of the Riverlands after the end of the war - as it should be, considering that Harrenhal was the seat of kings, not Riverrun.

However, it might be that one of Lord Walter's sons - or more - sided with the rebels, adding to the tragedy of House Whent. Or, perhaps, some of the sons die in battle, and others simply due to accidents and illnesses.

That Lord Walter Whent sided with Rhaegar at the Battle of the Trident isn't stated, implied, or hinted anywhere, so while it is one possibility, there is certainly a question of which battles they fought in, which side(s) they fought on.

Even in the event that Lord Walter did arrange the Harrenhal Tourney on behalf of Rhaegar, in his alleged attempt to stage an informal Great Council to discuss ways and means of dealing with the madness of King Aerys, that was while there was still peace between his lord Tully and his king.

That was before Rhaegar used Lord Walter's tourney to crown Lyanna Stark, sowing conflict with the those he might have won to his cause, alienating his wife's family, and deepening his father's suspicions. That was before Rhaegar likely pissed all parties off even more after he abducted Lyanna in the vicinity of Harrenhal, and all that ensued as a result.

Even if Lord Walter had been in the Rhaegar camp in dealing with Aerys before that, too much had happened to assume he would have still been in the Rhaegar camp after all that, especially after his liege lord pledged his support to Robert.

We don't know that Minisa wasn't from the main branch, so there is no point making assumptions either way. Nor can we assume that they were offered or would have taken Lord Paramount of the Riverlands in order to side against their liege lord. These are all possibilities, but it is all speculative, since none of it is stated, implied, or hinted. 

[Lord Varys]

8 minutes ago, Bael's Bastard said:

That Lord Walter Whent sided with Rhaegar at the Battle of the Trident isn't stated, implied, or hinted anywhere, so while it is one possibility, there is certainly a question of which battles they fought in, which side(s) they fought on.

What is implied is that the Whents were very close to the Targaryens (due to Ser Oswell Whent, a Kingsguard knight) and Lord Walter Whent's involvement with Prince Rhaegar.

We know the Mootons were close to Rhaegar due to Myles Mooton being Rhaegar's squire, and we know the Darrys were close to the Targaryens thanks to Willem Darry and Jonothor Darry.

The Whents were not affected by the abduction of Lyanna as far as we know, nor by the crowning at Harrenhal.

All that makes it not unlikely that the Whents sided with the Targaryens. But I agree - we do not know.

[Bael's Bastard]

2 hours ago, Lord Varys said:

What is implied is that the Whents were very close to the Targaryens (due to Ser Oswell Whent, a Kingsguard knight) and Lord Walter Whent's involvement with Prince Rhaegar.

We know the Mootons were close to Rhaegar due to Myles Mooton being Rhaegar's squire, and we know the Darrys were close to the Targaryens thanks to Willem Darry and Jonothor Darry.

The Whents were not affected by the abduction of Lyanna as far as we know, nor by the crowning at Harrenhal.

All that makes it not unlikely that the Whents sided with the Targaryens. But I agree - we do not know.

House Whent certainly owed their hold on Harrenhal to House Targaryen, but that doesn't mean Lord Walter was especially close to Rhaegar or Aerys. While Ser Oswell, as an individual member of the Kingsguard, appears to be a great candidate to have been among Rhaegar's "closest friends and confidants," it remains to be seen where Lord Walter and his house stood, especially after the tourney and abduction.

Assuming the Harrenhal Tourney was indeed Rhaegar's plot, it is possible that Lord Walter was convinced to put the tourney on only out of concern about the growing madness of Aerys, and only at the urging of his brother Ser Oswell. But Rhaegar didn't actually accomplish his alleged aims for the tourney, and his actions concerning Lyanna at the tourney and after put all his alleged aims for the tourney far out of reach.

While Mooton and the Darrys took part in the fighting, Rhaegar kept Ser Oswell down south, far away from the fighting. This might be for no other reason than because he trusted him and could rely on him for the task. But it is not inconceivable that, in the event that his family had joined in on the other side, Rhaegar wanted to avoid putting him in a situation where he might have to choose between his family and his vows in the heat of battle.

[Lord Varys]

4 hours ago, Bael's Bastard said:

House Whent certainly owed their hold on Harrenhal to House Targaryen, but that doesn't mean Lord Walter was especially close to Rhaegar or Aerys. While Ser Oswell, as an individual member of the Kingsguard, appears to be a great candidate to have been among Rhaegar's "closest friends and confidants," it remains to be seen where Lord Walter and his house stood, especially after the tourney and abduction.

Keep in mind that what Lord Walter did could be construed as treason. He did not only arrange a tourney, he arranged a tourney for the Prince of Dragonstone for a rather nefarious purpose. And Lord Walter would have known that and would have approved of it, or else he would have told Ser Oswell to tell Prince Rhaegar to keep his money and bother some other lord with a big castle with his idea of a tourney.

He wouldn't have done that if he hadn't felt close to Ser Oswell and Rhaegar.

4 hours ago, Bael's Bastard said:

Assuming the Harrenhal Tourney was indeed Rhaegar's plot, it is possible that Lord Walter was convinced to put the tourney on only out of concern about the growing madness of Aerys, and only at the urging of his brother Ser Oswell. But Rhaegar didn't actually accomplish his alleged aims for the tourney, and his actions concerning Lyanna at the tourney and after put all his alleged aims for the tourney far out of reach.

The purpose of the tourney must have been made clear to Lord Walter or else the tourney wouldn't have been as grand as it was, nor would he have invited so many lords as he apparently invited. The Starks most likely wouldn't have shown up if they hadn't been explicitly invited.

That Rhaegar didn't have his covert Great Council doesn't really have much to do with that. That only became clear when Aerys II himself announced he, too, would attend the tourney.

4 hours ago, Bael's Bastard said:

While Mooton and the Darrys took part in the fighting, Rhaegar kept Ser Oswell down south, far away from the fighting. This might be for no other reason than because he trusted him and could rely on him for the task. But it is not inconceivable that, in the event that his family had joined in on the other side, Rhaegar wanted to avoid putting him in a situation where he might have to choose between his family and his vows in the heat of battle.

Here the time line makes things murky. The decision to leave Whent with Lyanna might have come before House Whent declared for one side. Did the Riverlords all declare themselves before or after the Battle of the Bells? We don't know. The Freys didn't rush to Hoster after the double wedding but only (sort of) came to the Trident. 

This makes it very likely that a good deal of strategy after the Battle of the Bells revolved around recruiting the Riverlords to one side or the other. And that, in turn, makes it likely that Hoster had only a very small force of Rivermen with Ned at Stoney Sept.

You have to keep in mind that much time apparently passed between Stoney Sept and the Trident.

In any case, if the Whents had sided with Robert, it is really odd that they are in as bad a shape as they are after the Rebellion. I mean, they are pretty much done. Shella Whent has pretty much nothing left. And while tragedy and bad investments, etc. could also have contributed to that, Robert actually being as kind to the Whents as he was to the Darrys and Conningtons and Merryweathers after the war would make some sense.

[Ran]

Keep in mind that what Lord Walter did could be construed as treason.

What he allegedly did. A maester's scribblings are not primary evidence.

[Lord Varys]

12 hours ago, Ran said:

What he allegedly did. A maester's scribblings are not primary evidence.

Aerys II would not care, no?

And don't we think that Yandel just sort of confirmed/elaborated on that the things Rhaegar in Jaime's ASoS memories and Selmy in ADwD hinted at?

Rhaegar made it clear that he had plotted in the past, and Selmy made it clear that Rhaegar had trusted friends in the KG that were not Barristan Selmy.