Jump to content

The KoLT and Subsequent Events


John Suburbs

Recommended Posts

Just now, Bael's Bastard said:

It's in the app.

Rhaegar Targaryen

"At Harrenhal, he first beheld Lyanna Stark. He brought teatrs to her eyes with his singing, before crowning her his queen of love and beauty before his wife and half the realm. Sometime later, Rhaegar abducted Lyanna with the aid of Ser Arthur Dayne and Ser Oswell Whent..."

"Lord Robert, Lyanna's betrothed, was consumed by the need to avenge himself on Rhaegar, but the prince could not be found for the first months of the war. Rumor had it that he was in the south with Lyanna, at a place he called the Tower of Joy, near the red mountains of Dorne. But eventually his father sent Ser Gerold Hightower to recall Rhaegar to his duties, though Rhaegar ordered Ser Gerold, Ser Arthur, and Ser Oswell to keep guard over Lyanna in the south.

Giving Ser Jaime the task of protecting his wife and children, Prince Rhaegar swore that, after the war was over, he would see that changes were made-alluding to his father's burgeoning madness, which made Aerys distrust even his own son"

 

Ah, thanks. I don't "app." But at least we have a source for that.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 minutes ago, John Suburbs said:

Sorry, disagree. Rhaegar does not have the power to defy the king and strip him of his KG to guard his girlfriend, regardless of whatever cryptic words GRRM used 15 years ago. Rhaegar has the power to tell a KG who is already assigned to him to perform this or that function, but this order is way beyond anything the KG should just blindly obey because it means then are violating their primary oath, to protect and defend the king.

No need to be sorry about having your opinion. I just don't see any support for where you are coming from.

Rhaegar has the power to command KG. There is nothing inherently defiant to the king about Rhaegar commanding KG, or KG obeying Rhaegar's commands. There is nothing inherently defiant to the king about Rhaegar commanding KG to fulfill a mission away from Aerys's presence, or KG obeying a command of Rhaegar's to fulfill a mission away from Aerys's presence. 

For there to be defiance of Aerys, there would have to be something about Rhaegar's orders, or the KG obeying those orders, that defies the king or his orders to them. As of yet, there is no proof that Rhaegar commanded the KG to do anything that defied Aerys or his orders, or that the KG obeyed an order from Rhaegar that defied Aerys or his orders.

Perhaps we will eventually get some proof or indication that something like this occurred, but based on the information we currently have, there is no basis to assume so.

What is cryptic about GRRM's words? He went out of his way to bring up Rhaegar, his ability to command, the KG obligation to obey, and the KG inclination to obey, in response to a question that made no mention of Rhaegar. He chose to bring up Rhaegar, and to supply that information and clarification.

No, there is no proof that they violated their oaths to Aerys. And if the fevre dream account of their dialogue bears any resemblance to how things actually occurred, those KG, especially Hightower, the most likely of the three to have actually received a direct recent command from Aerys, and thus the most likely to have been put in a position to choose between whether or not to disobey some aspect of a recent and direct command from Aerys, makes clear that they swore a vow, and that had they been in KL Aerys would still be alive and king and Jaime would be dead.

23 minutes ago, John Suburbs said:

Believe this all you want, but if this turns out to be the case then it is a huge plot hole because Aerys had all sorts of means to undo this. There is, in fact, no reason at all to bother with a council because Aerys is virtually defenseless at this point. If he is going to depose his father, he can just do it and hardly anyone would complain about.

What is the plot hole, exactly? You seem to have an assumption that Aerys had some outstanding command that some or all of the three KG disobeyed, but there is no proof or hint that is the case. It is possible, but not something that can be assumed, especially seeing how the KG like Hightower seem to believe they are fulfilling their vows, not breaking them. And since Rhaegar returned to KL after Hightower found him and was commanded to remain, it is likely that he would have been able to persuade Aerys why the KG were and should remain at the TOJ for the time being even if he had been inclined to recall them, just as he was able to persuade Aerys to send for Tywin.

Rhaegar, the KG, and the lords of the realm all share in an illusion that they are in no hurry to shatter. Aside from the fact that there are still people who, even if for their own selfish reasons, support mad Aerys remaining in power, it would set a dangerous precedent for a prince or a king's KG to remove him from power without doing everything possible to make it appear legitimate in the eyes of the realm. If a king can be removed from his throne willy nilly, so can a great lord, so can a small lord, and no prince or lord is looking to undermine their own power, or the power they hope to one day come into. Not to mention the dangers that could come from trying to deal with an internal issue 

44 minutes ago, John Suburbs said:

And sorry, but if Aerys does not want then there and they are there anyway, then they are oath-breakers. You can't break an oath without becoming an oath-breaker. That fact is non-negotiable.

You can't disobey a command you never received. For Dayne and Whent, or Hightower, to be oathbreakers would require them to have actually broken some oath or disobeyed some command they received. Simply not being where Aerys was is not breaking any oath, and unless they received a command from Aerys that they chose to disobey or violate, it is absurd to assume they broke an oath or violated a command simply by obeying Rhaegar's command to them.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, Bael's Bastard said:

It's in the app.

Rhaegar Targaryen

"At Harrenhal, he first beheld Lyanna Stark. He brought teatrs to her eyes with his singing, before crowning her his queen of love and beauty before his wife and half the realm. Sometime later, Rhaegar abducted Lyanna with the aid of Ser Arthur Dayne and Ser Oswell Whent..."

"Lord Robert, Lyanna's betrothed, was consumed by the need to avenge himself on Rhaegar, but the prince could not be found for the first months of the war. Rumor had it that he was in the south with Lyanna, at a place he called the Tower of Joy, near the red mountains of Dorne. But eventually his father sent Ser Gerold Hightower to recall Rhaegar to his duties, though Rhaegar ordered Ser Gerold, Ser Arthur, and Ser Oswell to keep guard over Lyanna in the south.

Giving Ser Jaime the task of protecting his wife and children, Prince Rhaegar swore that, after the war was over, he would see that changes were made-alluding to his father's burgeoning madness, which made Aerys distrust even his own son"

 

Hooray! Not being an apple guy, no app for me. But at last we have the source for this - I've been looking for it on and off for years.

Thank you. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

20 hours ago, corbon said:

I could see that if it was just their own words, but hard to see how that would leave the outsiders, Ned, Jaime and Barristan, all still seeing them as the pinnacles of honour and loyalty etc, if they'd had to choose between honour and duty/loyalty.

Better that they'd managed to navigate a tricky line covering both.

Actually, I can;t see this - bit of self correction here. I was being a bit lazy and dropping one point to argue another.

"We swore a vow" is incompatible with forsworn men of honour.

3 hours ago, John Suburbs said:

Sorry, he's dissembling here. If Rhaegar gives an order and it runs counter to the king's orders, then they are breaking their oath to the king. That's the fact. 

The logic gap here is "If... it runs counter to the king's orders". No such thing is suggested or proven.

1 hour ago, John Suburbs said:

Sorry, disagree. Rhaegar does not have the power to defy the king and strip him of his KG to guard his girlfriend,

He didn't strip the king. He left 3 of 7 with his 'girlfriend'. The other 4 of 7 were with the King last he new.  

He later takes 3 of 4 away from the King to defeat the rebels. And leaves 1 of 4 with the King, the one the king wants. No one, not even you, suggests that the 3 removed here are Traitors for allowing themselves to be stripped from the King.

These are facts that have been pointed out previously.

1 hour ago, John Suburbs said:

And sorry, but if Aerys does not want then there and they are there anyway, then they are oath-breakers.

Not remotely true. Their oath does not say "be wherever the King wants me at any and all particular times". Even if it did, they'd all be instant oathbreakers every time the King wished they were in multiple places at once.

1 hour ago, John Suburbs said:

You can't break an oath without becoming an oath-breaker. That fact is non-negotiable.

Indeed. But pay attention to the actual oath before declaring people oathbreakers..

Link to comment
Share on other sites

21 hours ago, John Suburbs said:

Sorry, he's dissembling here

Ah, I see - the strangler scenario all over. Make your own interpretation of events/ vows/ whatever, and dismiss when the author claims otherwise. Seems like a pattern.

We really need TWOW and ADOS ASAP.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

22 hours ago, Bael's Bastard said:

No need to be sorry about having your opinion. I just don't see any support for where you are coming from.

Rhaegar has the power to command KG. There is nothing inherently defiant to the king about Rhaegar commanding KG, or KG obeying Rhaegar's commands. There is nothing inherently defiant to the king about Rhaegar commanding KG to fulfill a mission away from Aerys's presence, or KG obeying a command of Rhaegar's to fulfill a mission away from Aerys's presence. 

For there to be defiance of Aerys, there would have to be something about Rhaegar's orders, or the KG obeying those orders, that defies the king or his orders to them. As of yet, there is no proof that Rhaegar commanded the KG to do anything that defied Aerys or his orders, or that the KG obeyed an order from Rhaegar that defied Aerys or his orders.

Perhaps we will eventually get some proof or indication that something like this occurred, but based on the information we currently have, there is no basis to assume so.

What is cryptic about GRRM's words? He went out of his way to bring up Rhaegar, his ability to command, the KG obligation to obey, and the KG inclination to obey, in response to a question that made no mention of Rhaegar. He chose to bring up Rhaegar, and to supply that information and clarification.

No, there is no proof that they violated their oaths to Aerys. And if the fevre dream account of their dialogue bears any resemblance to how things actually occurred, those KG, especially Hightower, the most likely of the three to have actually received a direct recent command from Aerys, and thus the most likely to have been put in a position to choose between whether or not to disobey some aspect of a recent and direct command from Aerys, makes clear that they swore a vow, and that had they been in KL Aerys would still be alive and king and Jaime would be dead.

What is the plot hole, exactly? You seem to have an assumption that Aerys had some outstanding command that some or all of the three KG disobeyed, but there is no proof or hint that is the case. It is possible, but not something that can be assumed, especially seeing how the KG like Hightower seem to believe they are fulfilling their vows, not breaking them. And since Rhaegar returned to KL after Hightower found him and was commanded to remain, it is likely that he would have been able to persuade Aerys why the KG were and should remain at the TOJ for the time being even if he had been inclined to recall them, just as he was able to persuade Aerys to send for Tywin.

Rhaegar, the KG, and the lords of the realm all share in an illusion that they are in no hurry to shatter. Aside from the fact that there are still people who, even if for their own selfish reasons, support mad Aerys remaining in power, it would set a dangerous precedent for a prince or a king's KG to remove him from power without doing everything possible to make it appear legitimate in the eyes of the realm. If a king can be removed from his throne willy nilly, so can a great lord, so can a small lord, and no prince or lord is looking to undermine their own power, or the power they hope to one day come into. Not to mention the dangers that could come from trying to deal with an internal issue 

You can't disobey a command you never received. For Dayne and Whent, or Hightower, to be oathbreakers would require them to have actually broken some oath or disobeyed some command they received. Simply not being where Aerys was is not breaking any oath, and unless they received a command from Aerys that they chose to disobey or violate, it is absurd to assume they broke an oath or violated a command simply by obeying Rhaegar's command to them.

 

22 hours ago, corbon said:

Actually, I can;t see this - bit of self correction here. I was being a bit lazy and dropping one point to argue another.

"We swore a vow" is incompatible with forsworn men of honour.

The logic gap here is "If... it runs counter to the king's orders". No such thing is suggested or proven.

He didn't strip the king. He left 3 of 7 with his 'girlfriend'. The other 4 of 7 were with the King last he new.  

He later takes 3 of 4 away from the King to defeat the rebels. And leaves 1 of 4 with the King, the one the king wants. No one, not even you, suggests that the 3 removed here are Traitors for allowing themselves to be stripped from the King.

These are facts that have been pointed out previously.

Not remotely true. Their oath does not say "be wherever the King wants me at any and all particular times". Even if it did, they'd all be instant oathbreakers every time the King wished they were in multiple places at once.

Indeed. But pay attention to the actual oath before declaring people oathbreakers..

 

3 hours ago, Ygrain said:

Ah, I see - the strangler scenario all over. Make your own interpretation of events/ vows/ whatever, and dismiss when the author claims otherwise. Seems like a pattern.

We really need TWOW and ADOS ASAP.

No, sorry. Rhaegar does not have the power to command the KG in this way. He can tell them to get his horse ready, to attend him here and there, but not to take off and leave the king defenseless. If he can order the KG to do this then he can order them to just up and kill the king, because it's basically the same thing. And countless crown princes would have undoubtedly done that very thing.

But I have yet another idea as to how if might have all gone down that I think will satisfy this conflict, but I'm going to put it on @three-eyed monkey's other thread. Stay tuned.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

58 minutes ago, John Suburbs said:

No, sorry. Rhaegar does not have the power to command the KG in this way. He can tell them to get his horse ready, to attend him here and there, but not to take off and leave the king defenseless. If he can order the KG to do this then he can order them to just up and kill the king, because it's basically the same thing. And countless crown princes would have undoubtedly done that very thing.

But I have yet another idea as to how if might have all gone down that I think will satisfy this conflict, but I'm going to put it on @three-eyed monkey's other thread. Stay tuned.

GRRM's statements about what Rhaegar and the KG can and would do > your baseless opinions about what Rhaegar and the KG can and would do.

I don't expect you to take my word for it, but I suggest you do a study of all the KG in the current story, and all the KG in the historical stories, and see all the people, kings or otherwise, who have had the power to command KG, and all the people, kings or otherwise, who KG have obeyed, with no hint or suggestion of them betraying their vow(s) or disobeying their king's command(s) by doing so.

I don't know where you are getting the idea that KG can't be commanded by someone other than the king to go somewhere and do something something other than where the king is, but it is without support. It would be one thing in a situation where the king forbade them to obey such a command, or issued a contrary command, but there is no hint that this is what happened in the case we are discussing.

Aerys had four KG with him before Rhaegar returned, and still had one KG, Jaime, with him when Rhaegar left for the Trident with three KG, though Jaime was more a hostage to Aerys than a protector for him. Aerys had hundreds or thousands of men guarding King's Landing, the Red Keep, himself, his wife, son, daughter-in-law, and grandchildren. Three-to-six KG weren't going to make the difference, as the three dead KG at the TOJ and the two dead and one nearly dead KG at the Trident make clear.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, Bael's Bastard said:

GRRM's statements about what Rhaegar and the KG can and would do > your baseless opinions about what Rhaegar and the KG can and would do.

I don't expect you to take my word for it, but I suggest you do a study of all the KG in the current story, and all the KG in the historical stories, and see all the people, kings or otherwise, who have had the power to command KG, and all the people, kings or otherwise, who KG have obeyed, with no hint or suggestion of them betraying their vow(s) or disobeying their king's command(s) by doing so.

I don't know where you are getting the idea that KG can't be commanded by someone other than the king to go somewhere and do something something other than where the king is, but it is without support. It would be one thing in a situation where the king forbade them to obey such a command, or issued a contrary command, but there is no hint that this is what happened in the case we are discussing.

Aerys had four KG with him before Rhaegar returned, and still had one KG, Jaime, with him when Rhaegar left for the Trident with three KG, though Jaime was more a hostage to Aerys than a protector for him. Aerys had hundreds or thousands of men guarding King's Landing, the Red Keep, himself, his wife, son, daughter-in-law, and grandchildren. Three-to-six KG weren't going to make the difference, as the three dead KG at the TOJ and the two dead and one nearly dead KG at the Trident make clear.

Sure, I question that quote. I question its accuracy, it's validity, everything about it. Just because it's on the Internet doesn't mean it's true. Believe it if you want, but the fact is that it does run counter to everything in the book. 

I'm not sure all of these examples you are referring to, but I guarantee you that there is no case equivalent to this where a KG followed an order like this from a man that the king himself suspected of treason, unless the KG was in on the treason himself. And I'm talking about actual undisputed kings here, not minors under regency or instances where the rightful king is in question.

If things are as you say, then it would have been a simple matter for princes, queens and virtually anybody else to simply strip the king of his guards and then kill him. Cersei wouldn't have had to do all that nonsense with the boar, just dispatch the KG here, there and anywhere and then off the king while he was in his cups. Your proposal effectively abolishes the entire notion of the Kingsguard as the king's guard -- they are for anyone to do with as they please.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

8 hours ago, John Suburbs said:

He can tell them to get his horse ready, to attend him here and there, but not to take off and leave the king defenseless.

Except that this is not what happened. We can see the KG gathering and leaving the king without even one of their number for only the shortest time, so if Rhaegar commanded all the KG away, that would probably be a problem. This is supported by Jaime requesting that Darry or someone should stay at home, so that he could go fight at the Trident. But Rhaegar's actions left Aerys with 4 KG, who take turns in guard duty, anyway (when Aerys is raping Rhaella, it's Jaime and Darry keeping guard behind the door, not all 4). Since the king is not protected by all 7 at the same time at all times, it is blatantly incorrect to state that he must be protected by all 7 at all times and that some of them cannot be assigned to other tasks by anyone else but king himself.

- BTW, we even see a scenario where the king is left without ANY KG, by someone else's order, when Larys smuggles Aegon out of KL.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

15 hours ago, John Suburbs said:

Sure, I question that quote. I question its accuracy, it's validity, everything about it. Just because it's on the Internet doesn't mean it's true. Believe it if you want, but the fact is that it does run counter to everything in the book. 

I'm not sure all of these examples you are referring to, but I guarantee you that there is no case equivalent to this where a KG followed an order like this from a man that the king himself suspected of treason, unless the KG was in on the treason himself. And I'm talking about actual undisputed kings here, not minors under regency or instances where the rightful king is in question.

It really doesn't "run counter to everything in the book." It is actually in line with how princes and others in positions of authority are portrayed, both in the main series and the books about the past, as having the authority to command the Kingsguard, and the Kingsguard obeying them, without any hint that it is disobedient or traitorous to the king.

In the case of Prince Rhaegar, we have evidence that all seven KG were obeying his commands and orders prior to his death (the three KG who were at the Tower of Joy at his command, the three KG who were under his command at the Trident, and Jaime who was in King's Landing at his command), and no hint that was disobedient or traitorous to King Aerys.

Whatever Aerys or his lickspittles suspected, there's no statement or hint that Aerys took the step of declaring Rhaegar, or any of the KG for that matter, traitors. He could've made the accusation and put to the test whether his KG and the lords of the realm would have supported him, but for whatever reason he didn't take the step from suspicion to charges.

When Brandon rode into KL shouting for Rhaegar to come out and die, Aerys charged him and his companions with plotting to murder Rhaegar, and summoned their fathers to answer the charge. He was willing to accuse and execute the Starks, Arryns, Royces, and Mallisters for a plot against Rhaegar, but not to make such charges against Rhaegar.

When Aerys couldn't find Rhaegar before the Battle of the Bells, he "turned to the next best thing" (ASOS: Jaime III) and elevated Rhaegar's friend Jon Connington to the office of Hand, one of the most likely candidates, along with Dayne and Whent, to have been among the half dozen closest friends and confidants that had taken to the road with him when he  abducted Lyanna.

When Rhaegar finally returned to KL after the Battle of the Bells, it was to take charge of the Targaryen forces. Aerys could have accused and arrested him. He could have commanded the four present KG, Selmy, Darry, Martell, and Lannister, or the "several thousand loyalists" in the Red Keep with him (AGOT: Eddard II) to seize Rhaegar. But instead, Rhaegar led the loyalists.

Before Rhaegar set off for the Trident, he had even succeeded in persuading Aerys to swallow his pride and send for Tywin. To the extent that, even after Rhaegar's death, when Tywin arrived at the gates of KL professing loyalty, Aerys "anxiously ordered the gates to be opened, thinking that at last his old friend and former Hand had come to his rescue" (TWOIAF).

When Aerys finally did call one of his KG a traitor, it was the deceased Lewyn Martell. Why did he call Lewyn a traitor? Because somehow "he had gotten it in his head that Prince Lewyn must have betrayed Rhaegar on the Trident" (ASOS: Jaime V).

None of which is to suggest that Aerys did not truly suspect, or go through bouts of suspicion again, Rhaegar. His suspicions must have been real enough at time, and there can be no doubt that his lickspittle small councilors accused Rhaegar of disloyalty and perfidy, but he remained the heir, with the power to command KG, and command the Targaryen army.

There need not be any known "equivalent" case to demonstrate that your understanding of the Rhaegar situation in particular, who can command the KG and who the KG will obey in general, is without basis from the books.

Regarding examples where a prince, Hand, etc. has the authority to command and be obeyed by KG include The Hedge Knight, in which Prince Daeron informs us:

Quote

"My father has commanded the Kingsguard to fight with him."

"The Kingsguard?" said Dunk, appalled.

"Well, the three who are here. Thank the gods Uncle Baelor left the other four at King's Landing with our royal grandfather."

Egg supplied the names. "Ser Roland Crakehall, Ser Donnel of Duskendale, and Ser Willem Wylde."

"They have small choice in the matter," said Daeron. "They are sworn to protect the lives of the king and royal family, and my brothers and I are blood of the dragon, gods help us."

In other words:

- Prince Baelor, the eldest son and heir and Hand of King Daeron II, had the authority to command the three Kingsguard to accompany him and his family to the Ashford Tourney in the Reach, while leaving the remaining four Kingsguard in King's Landing with the king.

- Prince Maekar, the youngest of Daeron II's four sons, had the authority to command the three Kingsguard present at the Ashford Tourney to fight in the Trial of Seven on behalf of his second son Aerion, fourth grandson of the king.

Off the top of my head, in A Clash of Kings, Tyrion, acting as Hand of King Joffrey, who ruled in his own right, sent Ser Arys Oakheart with Myrcella to Dorne. Later, during the riot after they made their way back from sending Myrcella off, Tyrion commanded the three remaining KG to ride escort to a herald commanding people to return to their homes.

Rhaegar might not have been the Hand of the King, but both the books and GRRM's interview make clear that he had the authority to command KG, and that the KG would and did obey Rhaegar.

19 hours ago, John Suburbs said:

If things are as you say, then it would have been a simple matter for princes, queens and virtually anybody else to simply strip the king of his guards and then kill him. Cersei wouldn't have had to do all that nonsense with the boar, just dispatch the KG here, there and anywhere and then off the king while he was in his cups. Your proposal effectively abolishes the entire notion of the Kingsguard as the king's guard -- they are for anyone to do with as they please.

That is simply not true, and you are making baseless assumptions, and jumping to baseless conclusions. Princes, queens, etc. do not have the authority to just strip a king of his guards and kill him. A king could conceivably choose to keep all of his KG to himself, and keep all the authority to command them to himself, but it is clear that many, perhaps most, kings since Aegon's Conquest did not do that, and Aerys is no exception.

The KG are not just for anyone to command, but Rhaegar is not just anyone. He is the prince and heir of King Aerys, and he remained so up to the moment Robert killed him in the Trident, prior to which, he clearly had the authority to command and be obeyed by KG.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

15 hours ago, Ygrain said:

Except that this is not what happened. We can see the KG gathering and leaving the king without even one of their number for only the shortest time, so if Rhaegar commanded all the KG away, that would probably be a problem. This is supported by Jaime requesting that Darry or someone should stay at home, so that he could go fight at the Trident. But Rhaegar's actions left Aerys with 4 KG, who take turns in guard duty, anyway (when Aerys is raping Rhaella, it's Jaime and Darry keeping guard behind the door, not all 4). Since the king is not protected by all 7 at the same time at all times, it is blatantly incorrect to state that he must be protected by all 7 at all times and that some of them cannot be assigned to other tasks by anyone else but king himself.

- BTW, we even see a scenario where the king is left without ANY KG, by someone else's order, when Larys smuggles Aegon out of KL.

I never said he had to be protected by all seven at all times. That would be unworkable since they have to sleep sometimes, so naturally they take turns, apparently two at a time except in court or at formal occasions where all, or most, of the seven is warranted.

What is improbable is that Rhaegar would be able to send the three most prominent members of the KG, including the Lord Commander who must attend small council meetings, halfway across the continent at a time when the king is under such a grave threat. If there was some urgent reason for the king, I could see it, and so would Aerys. But to stand watch over Rhaegar's baby mama? Sorry, no way. There is either a betrayal here somewhere or Aerys wanted the KG there. It's that simple.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, Bael's Bastard said:

It really doesn't "run counter to everything in the book." It is actually in line with how princes and others in positions of authority are portrayed, both in the main series and the books about the past, as having the authority to command the Kingsguard, and the Kingsguard obeying them, without any hint that it is disobedient or traitorous to the king.

In the case of Prince Rhaegar, we have evidence that all seven KG were obeying his commands and orders prior to his death (the three KG who were at the Tower of Joy at his command, the three KG who were under his command at the Trident, and Jaime who was in King's Landing at his command), and no hint that was disobedient or traitorous to King Aerys.

Whatever Aerys or his lickspittles suspected, there's no statement or hint that Aerys took the step of declaring Rhaegar, or any of the KG for that matter, traitors. He could've made the accusation and put to the test whether his KG and the lords of the realm would have supported him, but for whatever reason he didn't take the step from suspicion to charges.

When Brandon rode into KL shouting for Rhaegar to come out and die, Aerys charged him and his companions with plotting to murder Rhaegar, and summoned their fathers to answer the charge. He was willing to accuse and execute the Starks, Arryns, Royces, and Mallisters for a plot against Rhaegar, but not to make such charges against Rhaegar.

When Aerys couldn't find Rhaegar before the Battle of the Bells, he "turned to the next best thing" (ASOS: Jaime III) and elevated Rhaegar's friend Jon Connington to the office of Hand, one of the most likely candidates, along with Dayne and Whent, to have been among the half dozen closest friends and confidants that had taken to the road with him when he  abducted Lyanna.

When Rhaegar finally returned to KL after the Battle of the Bells, it was to take charge of the Targaryen forces. Aerys could have accused and arrested him. He could have commanded the four present KG, Selmy, Darry, Martell, and Lannister, or the "several thousand loyalists" in the Red Keep with him (AGOT: Eddard II) to seize Rhaegar. But instead, Rhaegar led the loyalists.

Before Rhaegar set off for the Trident, he had even succeeded in persuading Aerys to swallow his pride and send for Tywin. To the extent that, even after Rhaegar's death, when Tywin arrived at the gates of KL professing loyalty, Aerys "anxiously ordered the gates to be opened, thinking that at last his old friend and former Hand had come to his rescue" (TWOIAF).

When Aerys finally did call one of his KG a traitor, it was the deceased Lewyn Martell. Why did he call Lewyn a traitor? Because somehow "he had gotten it in his head that Prince Lewyn must have betrayed Rhaegar on the Trident" (ASOS: Jaime V).

None of which is to suggest that Aerys did not truly suspect, or go through bouts of suspicion again, Rhaegar. His suspicions must have been real enough at time, and there can be no doubt that his lickspittle small councilors accused Rhaegar of disloyalty and perfidy, but he remained the heir, with the power to command KG, and command the Targaryen army.

There need not be any known "equivalent" case to demonstrate that your understanding of the Rhaegar situation in particular, who can command the KG and who the KG will obey in general, is without basis from the books.
 

But don't you see how utterly inconsistent this is with the text? Aerys thinks Rhaegaer is trying to dethrone him, so why is he protecting him from these kidnapping accusations instead of summoning him to court? Whether it was kidnapping or not, it still shows Rhaegar as unfit to rule.

Later, after Rhaegar's little caper has unleashed revolution across the kingdom, why is Aerys suddenly so trusting of Rhaegar that he not only gives him command of an army but also hands over control of the only force that he does trust, his kingsguard? Why would not one of the 3KG at the ToJ ever stop to think, gee, the king suspects Rhaegar of treason, maybe sending us all this way to watch over his girlfriend is part of a plot to overthrow our king? They most certainly would not be thinking, king, crown prince, whatever, orders are orders.

Why does he suspect Lewyn of treason simply for dying in his defense, and yet says not a peep about the 3KG who have been gone for who knows how long, doing nothing but watching over the woman who brought all this danger to the king? By any stretch of the imagination, in what way is that honoring the most core element of their oath: to protect and defend the king with their lives? Sorry, but this one stricture overrules any and all other commands, and certainly commands from the crown prince to while away the days protecting his girlfriend when the king is in mortal danger.

All of this goes away, of course, if Aerys is the one calling the shots. He had Lyanna taken, he impregnated her, he forced Rhaegar to defend him the same way he forced Lewyn, he ordered the KG to the tower . . .

Quote

Regarding examples where a prince, Hand, etc. has the authority to command and be obeyed by KG include The Hedge Knight, in which Prince Daeron informs us:

In other words:

- Prince Baelor, the eldest son and heir and Hand of King Daeron II, had the authority to command the three Kingsguard to accompany him and his family to the Ashford Tourney in the Reach, while leaving the remaining four Kingsguard in King's Landing with the king.

- Prince Maekar, the youngest of Daeron II's four sons, had the authority to command the three Kingsguard present at the Ashford Tourney to fight in the Trial of Seven on behalf of his second son Aerion, fourth grandson of the king.

Off the top of my head, in A Clash of Kings, Tyrion, acting as Hand of King Joffrey, who ruled in his own right, sent Ser Arys Oakheart with Myrcella to Dorne. Later, during the riot after they made their way back from sending Myrcella off, Tyrion commanded the three remaining KG to ride escort to a herald commanding people to return to their homes.

Rhaegar might not have been the Hand of the King, but both the books and GRRM's interview make clear that he had the authority to command KG, and that the KG would and did obey Rhaegar.

That is simply not true, and you are making baseless assumptions, and jumping to baseless conclusions. Princes, queens, etc. do not have the authority to just strip a king of his guards and kill him. A king could conceivably choose to keep all of his KG to himself, and keep all the authority to command them to himself, but it is clear that many, perhaps most, kings since Aegon's Conquest did not do that, and Aerys is no exception.

The KG are not just for anyone to command, but Rhaegar is not just anyone. He is the prince and heir of King Aerys, and he remained so up to the moment Robert killed him in the Trident, prior to which, he clearly had the authority to command and be obeyed by KG.

Where do you get the idea that the KG with Baelor at Asheford were there in defiance of the king? Attending your prince at tourney is a perfectly acceptable use of KG; having them stand watch over your girlfriend while armies are marching on your king is not.

Only kingsguard can defend the honor of the blood royal. That's the law.

Joffrey was not ruling in his own right when Oakheart was sent to Dorne. Cersei was regent, and Joffrey was there when he departed, so obviously he approved of it. Yes Tyrion, as Hand to a king under regency, can order the KG to do things like restore order in the capital. He cannot order them to guard Shae in her manse. He hires Ibbenese for that.

So sorry, your examples are pitiful. Royals can command their assigned KG to do all sorts of things, but not to take off on a babysitting mission for their side action halfway across the country while their king is in mortal peril. The KG's first and foremost responsibility is to protect the king. Any order that conflicts with that duty, other than from the king himself, is invalid.

A more accurate comparison would be the tale of Ser Olyver Bracken and Ser Raymund Mallery, two KG who turned their cloaks on Maegor I, who was also mad as a hatter, in support of Jaehaerys. When J ascended the throne, did he thank these two for their role in overthrowing the mad tyrant? No. He declared them both oath-breakers and sent them to the Wall. This is the seriousness with which these oaths are made: no matter how unpleasant your king turns out to be, you are honor-bound to protect and defend him against all enemies. Break that oath, for whatever noble reason, and you are an oath-breaker.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

26 minutes ago, John Suburbs said:

Later, after Rhaegar's little caper has unleashed revolution across the kingdom,

No, what “unleashed revolution across the kingdom” was a king who was clearly insane demanding the heads of two nobles whose protection had been entrusted to a third, after said mad, deranged, unfit-to-rule king had already murdered two nobles. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

7 minutes ago, kissdbyfire said:

No, what “unleashed revolution across the kingdom” was a king who was clearly insane demanding the heads of two nobles whose protection had been entrusted to a third, after said mad, deranged, unfit-to-rule king had already murdered two nobles. 

No, it is widely accepted that the kidnapping is what touched off the whole thing. That was the completely unexpected act that took everyone by surprise. Arryn refusing to turn over the boys and calling his banners was what kicked off the fighting, but the real cause was Lyanna's abduction. Everything else flowed from that. Just like the cause of the Wot5K was Tyrion's abduction, not Tywin's attack at the Golden Tooth.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, John Suburbs said:

No, it is widely accepted that the kidnapping is what touched off the whole thing.

No, it really isn’t. Or else, support your claim. Lyanna vanished, and the Rebellion kicked off many months later. 

1 minute ago, John Suburbs said:

That was the completely unexpected act that took everyone by surprise. Arryn refusing to turn over the boys and calling his banners was what kicked off the fighting, but the real cause was Lyanna's abduction. Everything else flowed from that. Just like the cause of the Wot5K was Tyrion's abduction, not Tywin's attack at the Golden Tooth.

Again, no. Many months in between, like I said. If Lyanna’s abduction/whatever is to blame, then we can also blame the tourney at HH? Or maybe Aerys’ mum and dad for having fathered him? Nope, the trigger to the Rebellion was Aerys demanding that Arryn murders his wards and send their heads to KL. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

The most likely version of the conversation at the ToJ, assuming, like this OP, that the KG can't do anything without explicit orders from the King:

Rhaegar: Guards, make sure Lyanna doesn't leave this tower until I come and get her.

Dayne: Not to leave the tower... even if you come and get her.

Hightower: [hiccups]

Rhaegar: No, no. *Until* I come and get her.

Dayne: Until you come and get her, we're not to enter the tower.

Rhaegar: No, no, no. You *stay* in the tower, and make sure *she* doesn't leave.

Dayne: And you'll come and get her.

Hightower: [hiccups]

Rhaegar: Right.

Dayne: We don't need to do anything, apart from just stop her entering the tower.

Rhaegar: No, no. *Leaving* the tower.

Dayne: Leaving the tower, yes.

Rhaegar: All right?

Hightower: [hiccups]

Dayne: Right. Oh, if, if, if, uh, if, if, uh, if, if, if, we... oh, if... oh...

Rhaegar: Look, it's quite simple. You just stay here, and make sure she doesn't leave the tower. All right?

Hightower: [hiccups]

Dayne: Oh, I remember, uh, can she leave the tower with us?

Rhaegar: No, no, no, no, you just keep her in here, and make sure...

Dayne: Oh yeah, we'll keep her in here, obviously, but if she had to leave, and we were with her...

Rhaegar: No, just keep her in here...

Dayne: Until you, or anyone else...

Rhaegar: No, not anyone else. Just me.

Dayne: Just you.

Hightower: [hiccups]

Rhaegar: Get back.

Dayne: Get back.

Rhaegar: All right?

Dayne: Right, we'll stay here until you get back.

Rhaegar: And make sure she doesn't leave.

Dayne: What?

Rhaegar: Make sure she doesn't leave.

Dayne: Lyanna?

Rhaegar: Yes, make sure she doesn't leave.

Dayne: Oh, yes, of course.

[Points at Hightower]

Dayne: I thought you meant him. You know, it seemed a bit daft me I were to guard him when he's a guard.

Rhaegar: Is that clear?

Hightower: [hiccups]

Dayne: Oh, quite clear. No problems.

Rhaegar: Right.

[Rhaegar turns to leave the tower, both guards follow him]

Rhaegar: Where are you going?

Dayne: We're coming with you.

Rhaegar: No, no, no. I want you to stay here and make sure *she* doesn't leave.

Dayne: Oh, I see. Right.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

22 hours ago, kissdbyfire said:

No, it really isn’t. Or else, support your claim. Lyanna vanished, and the Rebellion kicked off many months later. 

Again, no. Many months in between, like I said. If Lyanna’s abduction/whatever is to blame, then we can also blame the tourney at HH? Or maybe Aerys’ mum and dad for having fathered him? Nope, the trigger to the Rebellion was Aerys demanding that Arryn murders his wards and send their heads to KL. 

The World Book for starters:

Quote

Not ten leagues from Harrenhal, Rhaegar fell upon Lyanna Stark of Winterfell, and carried her off, lighting a fire that would consume his house and kin and all those he loved -- and half the realm besides.

Barristan Selmy:

Quote

Prince Rhaegar loved his Lady Lyanna, and thousands died for it.

The wiki:

Quote

The next year, Rhaegar seemingly kidnapped Lyanna, for reasons unknown. This act ultimately triggered Robert's Rebellion and the downfall of House Targaryen.

So both in-story and in the fandom, the kidnapping was the spark that lit the fire. Nobody flew into a rage and demanded Rhaegar's head after Harrenhal. Nobody committed treason at Aerys' birth.

By your logic, it wasn't Aerys' order that started the war, it was Jon Arryn calling his banners, and even then first blood was not shed until Gulltown, and this was against Arryn's bannermen, not Aerys'. Regardless of whether Aerys called for Jon/Rob's heads or not, the war was coming because they both would have called their own bannermen to bring justice to Rick, Bran and Lyanna. But the war would not have happened (not at this time and in this way) if Lyanna had not been kidnapped. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

 

On 1/17/2019 at 5:17 AM, Bael's Bastard said:

I have the app on my Samsung.

Well, I guess I'm too old to work that shit out. :blush:
Its not available in the Play Store here, for whatever reason. I can find it on Apple store on

23 hours ago, John Suburbs said:

What is improbable is that Rhaegar would be able to send the three most prominent members of the KG, including the Lord Commander who must attend small council meetings, 

:bang: He didn't "send them away".
Whent and Dayne were already away, had been since the new year when Rhaegar left KL with them on a long journey that ended (well, not ended, but had a significant milestone) close to Harrenhal with the abduction of Lyanna. 
Hightower had already been sent away, by Aerys (to get Rhaegar to come back and take command).

22 hours ago, John Suburbs said:

But don't you see how utterly inconsistent this is with the text? Aerys thinks Rhaegaer is trying to dethrone him, so why is he protecting him from these kidnapping accusations instead of summoning him to court? Whether it was kidnapping or not, it still shows Rhaegar as unfit to rule.

No. Aerys does not think Rhaegar is trying to depose him. That is not in the text. There are rumours and hints that a faction at court were trying to convince Aerys of this in the text, and that Aerys had occasional suspicions of this (he's mad and paranoid and gets weird ideas sometimes for a while - especially when they are being constantly fed to him by courtiers), but more pertinently there are clear textual indications that Aerys did not think Rhaegar was trying to depose him. Aerys wanted Rhaegar to take command of the war effort even before the Battle of the Bells. When he couldn't find Rhaegar he appointed a Rhaegar-substitute (Connington - young, bold, and a noted Rhaegar-ite) as Hand and when Connington failed Aerys sent Hightower to go get Rhaegar back. Aerys chose Rhaegar to take command. Twice. That is direct textual counter to the idea that Aerys thought Rhaegar wanted to depose him.
Plus you've got the whole Brandon thing. If Aerys thinks Rhaegar is trying to depose him, then he has a great opportunity to allow Brandon's challenge to Rhaegar. Instead, he murders Brandon and nearly everyone involved. He brooks no slur on his heir Rhaegar and considers it treason for anyone to oppose Rhaegar. That is not the action or thought process of someone who thinks Rhaegar is going to depose him.
 

22 hours ago, John Suburbs said:

Later, after Rhaegar's little caper has unleashed revolution across the kingdom, why is Aerys suddenly so trusting of Rhaegar that he not only gives him command of an army but also hands over control of the only force that he does trust, his kingsguard?

YES. Thats quite clearly the case in the text. Instead of thinking this fact is ridiculous, try getting rid of the counter-textual notion that Aerys thinks Rhaegar is trying to depose him and suddenly the fact works!

22 hours ago, John Suburbs said:

Why would not one of the 3KG at the ToJ ever stop to think, gee, the king suspects Rhaegar of treason, maybe sending us all this way to watch over his girlfriend is part of a plot to overthrow our king? They most certainly would not be thinking, king, crown prince, whatever, orders are orders.

Because the king clearly doesn't suspect Rhaegar of treason any more since he's given orders for Rhaegar to take over!

22 hours ago, John Suburbs said:

Why does he suspect Lewyn of treason simply for dying in his defense,

Because he's a mad paranoic, and dying (and losing) is a failure.

22 hours ago, John Suburbs said:

and yet says not a peep about the 3KG who have been gone for who knows how long, doing nothing but watching over the woman who brought all this danger to the king?

Because they are not in his current thoughts and all they have done is follow their orders without failing.

22 hours ago, John Suburbs said:

Where do you get the idea that the KG with Baelor at Asheford were there in defiance of the king? Attending your prince at tourney is a perfectly acceptable use of KG; having them stand watch over your girlfriend while armies are marching on your king is not.
 

He doesn't. They weren't there in defiance of their king.
Neither were the KG at the ToJ. In fact they specifically state that if they had the chance, Aerys would still be king.

22 hours ago, John Suburbs said:

Only kingsguard can defend the honor of the blood royal. That's the law.

Err, no. I think I have some idea what you mean, but you've badly misworded it. Others can also defend the honour of the blood royal (there are many example of Sworn Shields to blood royals who were not KG.
The Hound - Prince Joffrey
Harwin Strong - Rhaenyra
Dunk - Egg
At least one case if not more in FaB (not available for searching on asearchoficeandfire.com).

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, corbon said:

:bang: He didn't "send them away".

Whent and Dayne were already away, had been since the new year when Rhaegar left KL with them on a long journey that ended (well, not ended, but had a significant milestone) close to Harrenhal with the abduction of Lyanna. 
Hightower had already been sent away, by Aerys (to get Rhaegar to come back and take command).

Whatever. They were at the Tower of Joy because that is where Rhaegar told them to be. They are not in King's Landing protecting their king with their lives, as their oaths require, they are instead hundreds of miles away looking after Rhaegar's interests. So sorry, but even if they cop the attitude that "we stayed at the ToJ because Aerys himself didn't order us back" that is a pitiful excuse because they are sworn to protect the king and everybody on the entire continent knows that the king's life is in danger.

Quote

No. Aerys does not think Rhaegar is trying to depose him. That is not in the text. There are rumours and hints that a faction at court were trying to convince Aerys of this in the text, and that Aerys had occasional suspicions of this (he's mad and paranoid and gets weird ideas sometimes for a while - especially when they are being constantly fed to him by courtiers), but more pertinently there are clear textual indications that Aerys did not think Rhaegar was trying to depose him. Aerys wanted Rhaegar to take command of the war effort even before the Battle of the Bells. When he couldn't find Rhaegar he appointed a Rhaegar-substitute (Connington - young, bold, and a noted Rhaegar-ite) as Hand and when Connington failed Aerys sent Hightower to go get Rhaegar back. Aerys chose Rhaegar to take command. Twice. That is direct textual counter to the idea that Aerys thought Rhaegar wanted to depose him.
Plus you've got the whole Brandon thing. If Aerys thinks Rhaegar is trying to depose him, then he has a great opportunity to allow Brandon's challenge to Rhaegar. Instead, he murders Brandon and nearly everyone involved. He brooks no slur on his heir Rhaegar and considers it treason for anyone to oppose Rhaegar. That is not the action or thought process of someone who thinks Rhaegar is going to depose him.

From Gyldane:

Quote

Once safely returned to King's Landing, HIs Grace refused to leave the Red Keep for any cause and remained a virtual prisoner in his own castle for the next four years, during which time he grew ever more wary of those around him, Tywin Lannister in particular. His suspicions extended even to shi own son and heir. Prince Rhaegar, he was convinced, had conspired  with Tywin Lannister to have him slain at Duskendale.

Convinced that the smallfolk and lords were plotting against his life and fearing that even Queen Rhaella and Prince Rhaegar might be part of these plots, he reached across the Narrow Sea to Pentos and imported a eunuch named Varys to serve as his spymaster . . .

Meanwhile, King Aerys was becoming ever more estranged from his own son and heir. Early in the year 279 AC, Rhaegar . . . was formally betrothed to Princess Elia Martell.   . . . but Aerys II did not attend. He told the small council that he feared an attempt upon his life left if he left the confines of the Red Keep . . .

When Prince Rhaegar and he new wife chose to take up residence on Dragonstone instead of the Red Keep, rimors flew thick and fast across the Seven Kingdoms. Some claimed that the crown prince was planning to depose has father and seize the Iron Throne for himself, whilst others said that King Aerys meant to disinherit Rhaegar and name Viserys in his place.

Above all, Aerys was suspicious; suspicious of his own son and heir, Prince Rhaegar; , suspicious of his host, Lord Whent, suspicious of every lord and knight who had come to Harrenhal . . .

So don't tell me there is no text that says Aerys thought Rhaegar was trying to dethrone him. There is plenty of text. These are not "occasional suspicions," this is a mounting fear that began four years prior at Duskendale and culminated at Harrenhal. And all the while, he has Chelstead, Merryweather, Staunton, Velaryon, Varys and Rossart whispering all kinds of conspiracy theories in his ear.

Of course he would want Rhaegar to lead his armies. How would it look to Dorne, the Reach and any other loyalists that not even the crown prince supports him. He has Rhaegar over a barrel, just as he has Lewyn Martell, by holding his family. Why else do you think they were brought to the Red Keep after the tourney instead of back home to Dragonstone? Connington was "the next best thing" because his desire to spare Elia would make him just as pliant as Rhaegar, not because he thought he was the best for the job. He obviously wasn't. So he already suspected Rhaegar of plotting against him before Lyanna, and her abduction has led to rebellion that is now poised to overthrow his reign. In what possible way has Rhaegar given Aerys any reason at all to suddenly trust him with his armies and his guards? You really need to start reading between the lines. That's where most of the story exists with Martin.

Quote

YES. Thats quite clearly the case in the text. Instead of thinking this fact is ridiculous, try getting rid of the counter-textual notion that Aerys thinks Rhaegar is trying to depose him and suddenly the fact works!

Because the king clearly doesn't suspect Rhaegar of treason any more since he's given orders for Rhaegar to take over!

If you can give a single reason as to why Rhaegar is suddenly so trustworthy, I would give you the benefit of the doubt. Once again, this a theory that requires us to believe that everything is exactly as it seems. But it all falls apart upon even the most rudimentary scrutiny. Why does Aerys suddenly trust Rhaegar after all he's done? Why does Rhaegar wish to make changes now that's he back in his father's good graces? Why is Rhaegar using Elia to ensure the loyalty of Lewyn but not Rhaegar?

Quote

Because he's a mad paranoic, and dying (and losing) is a failure.

And this mad, dying paranoia only applies to Lewyn but not to Rhaegar. Why?

Quote

Because they are not in his current thoughts and all they have done is follow their orders without failing.

Rebellion is all around him, all of his kingsguard -- the only people he does trust -- are gone, save for the one young boy whom he does not trust, and never once does he think that maybe he needs a little more protection? No, they are ogg protecting Rhaegar's baby mama for months on end, and Aerys is perfectly fine with that. Please.

2 hours ago, corbon said:

He doesn't. They weren't there in defiance of their king.
Neither were the KG at the ToJ. In fact they specifically state that if they had the chance, Aerys would still be king.

Exactly, which is why this example is not even remotely comparable to the ToJ. They had every chance, months in fact, to return to KL and fulfill their oaths by protecting their king. Instead, they violated their oaths to stay with Lyanna. So yes, if they hadn't become oath-breakers, Aerys would still sit the Iron Throne.

 

Quote

Err, no. I think I have some idea what you mean, but you've badly misworded it. Others can also defend the honour of the blood royal (there are many example of Sworn Shields to blood royals who were not KG.
The Hound - Prince Joffrey
Harwin Strong - Rhaenyra
Dunk - Egg
At least one case if not more in FaB (not available for searching on asearchoficeandfire.com).

I was speaking of a Trial by Combat or, in Baelor's case, a Trial of Seven. It's not a law, however; more of a custom. According to Cersie, a KG must defend a royal "when the queen's honor is at stake." Otherwise, a KG is usually chosen to defend a royal, since they are supposed to be the most fearsome knights in the land. Except when one royal is accusing another; then both may choose a non-KG.






































































































































 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Archived

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

×
×
  • Create New...