The KoLT and Subsequent Events

[John Suburbs]

19 hours ago, Alexis-something-Rose said:

I think it's very doubtful that everyone knew at the tourney that Lyanna was the KotLT, although I'm assuming the truth could have come out over the years. But I like the whole Knight of the Laughing Tree and laughter dying association going on here.

The PtwP we are told was supposed to come from Aerys and Rhaella's line, not just Aerys's. Any child he and Rhaella had could have been the PtwP, any child Rhaegar, Dany or Viserys had could have been the PtwP. Aerys on his own, if we follow what the GoHH vision/prophecy would have been useless. If he could, then maybe he and Rhaella would have been spared their miserable marriage.

I think Varys knows exactly what's up and I think he took interest in Jon. I actually have a post written in my documents that I'm going back and forth on.

I think her voice alone would have been enough, plus the fact that she was not in the stands. Meera's describes the voice as "booming", but we're talking about a 16yo girl -- highly unlikely that anyone would have been fooled.

Yes, PtwP from Aerys/Rhaella. Thanks for giving me something concrete. So Aerys should not expect the PtwP from Lyanna, but he is mad so maybe it won't work for Rhaegar if he defiles her first? You've actually cause me to consider an entirely new possibility for all of this, which I'll post in a few moments.

[John Suburbs]

20 hours ago, corbon said:

snip

Whoa, dude, sorry you had to deal with all that mess above, but @Alexis-something-Rose just gave me a brilliant idea:

Suppose Rhaegar and Lyanna did run away together just as you say. Aerys finds out about it and sends the KG to keep them both at the tower. His plan is to wait until Lyanna gives birth, then seize the child and use him in a pyre to hatch a dragon egg -- pretty much the way Dany did it, and quite possibly what was in store for Rhaegar at Summerhall.

This way, we have the two star-crossed lovers, the evil mad king and the KG dutifully obeying their king and staying true to their friend Rhaegar, since they probably don't know yet what Aerys has planned.

Circles squared?

[John Suburbs]

5 hours ago, kissdbyfire said:

Why? You don’t seem to see them as clues... like Selmy thinking about Rhaegar loving Lyanna, or Ned thinking that Rhaegar was an honourable man.

And yet, Aerys holding Rhaegar and Lyanna captive in the RK and fathering a child on Lyanna is plausible? 

Also, double standards much? You want people to provide evidence for something - even though we both know you will dismiss whatever evidence is given - but at the same time you say you can’t provide any type of textual support for your own ideas. 

I did include Selmy. He does believe this story, but that doesn't make it any truer than Robert thinking Lyanna was kidnapped and raped.

I did include Ned thinking Rhaegar was an honorable man. The question is, what kind of honorable man seduces then runs off with someone's daughter/fiancé, and why would honorable knights who have sworn sacred vows abandon their honor and their vows to support this?

Yes, the Mad King is quite mad. Hadn't you noticed?

I freely admit that my theory is based on a string of assumptions. What I'm not hearing from any of you is that the RL love story theory is too.

[John Suburbs]

5 hours ago, three-eyed monkey said:

On the subject of Rhaegar and Lyanna, rape or love? I think, simply from a narrative point of view, it's important to note we are explicitly handed the rape story whereas we have to dig a little for the clues that suggest it was love. That strongly indicates to me, given the author's style of writing mystery, that it is the latter. And I think it's a rule of thumb that stands up throughout the series.

As for the debate about KoLT and ToJ. There is obviously a layer to the mystery that has not yet been revealed, by GRRM's own admission. Howland Reed connects both events, and I don't expect that to be merely coincidental. Personally, I think that suggests the extra layer will be related to the song of ice and fire as opposed to the game of thrones.

Not really. Martin is highly adept at hiding the truth under layers of deception, not just one. The entire RLJ theory is based on the idea that Ned's story about Wylla is false, and so is the tale about Ashara Dayne: two lies (at least) to cover up one truth.

The Arryn murder was supposedly an old man suddenly dying, but the truth was there for all to see: that Cersei and Jaime did it to hide their incest. But it wasn't that either, was it?

The catspaw as well: Cersei and Jaime, except it turned out to be Joffrey, and his motivation is still questionable.

And don't even get me started on the Purple Wedding.

Yes, I believe this will all come down to Ice and Fire as well.

[John Suburbs]

49 minutes ago, Chris Mormont said:

I disagree with this.

Using your own logic, there is no text evidence that Rhaegar kidnapped and raped Lyanna.  This seems to be the conclusion several people jumped to when Lyanna went missing, but there is nothing to support it. 

The text supports the strong possibility of the 2 falling in love.  Lyanna crying when she hears Rhaegar sing at the feast and Rhaegar naming Lyanna the queen of love and beauty at the tourney. 

Furthermore, the text also points out that Lyanna was not 100% excited to marry Robert.  She had a conversation with Ned regarding Robert's child in the Vale, the fact that she doubted if he could ever be kept to one bed, and her opinion that love could not change a man's nature, is textual proof that she didn't appear to want to marry Robert.

 

There is plenty of text that states explicitly that Rhaegar kidnapped and raped Lyanna, and yet the RLJ love story rejects that text in favor of a solution that is nowhere stated in any text at all. So I find it amusing that people are so willing to throw away the text in favor of their own secret history that is only supported by selective interpretation of a handful of "clues."

Not loving the person you are betrothed to is one thing, running off with a married man nearly 10 years your senior is quite another. And I find it incredible that Lyanna, let alone Rhaegar, would not fully comprehend the consequences of what they were doing and what it would do to the realm or that the KG would forsake their vows to obey the king by supporting this mad plan.

I liken the "clues" to the RLJ love story to the "clues" that led us to believe that Cersei and/or Jaime killed Jon Arryn. One person's clues are another's red herrings, I guess.

 

[kissdbyfire]

1 hour ago, John Suburbs said:

There is plenty of text that states explicitly that Rhaegar kidnapped and raped Lyanna, and yet the RLJ love story rejects that text in favor of a solution that is nowhere stated in any text at all. So I find it amusing that people are so willing to throw away the text in favor of their own secret history that is only supported by selective interpretation of a handful of "clues."

It's the exact same situation, don't you see? Characters give us two different "versions":

1. Lyanna was kidnapped and raped [repeatedly] by Rhaegar.

2. Rhaegar and Lyanna were in love.

Of course, it's entirely possible and quite likely imo that the truth won't be as simple as either version. That said, the crux here seems to be that you believe there's textual support for 1 but not for 2. And that's where you're leading yourself astray, because all we hear about R&L is second and third  hand accounts. We haven't heard anything by anyone who was there. In other words, Robert saying Rhaegar raped Lyanna is as supported by the text as Selmy saying Rhaegar loved Lyanna. 

[Back door hodor]

So I like this discussion and definitely think that there is more to these events than we know on the surface. In particular i agree that Lyanna is the Kotlt, and i definitely agree with point number 4.

Assumption 2: I think there are definitely those that know(though many may know be dead) I don't think it's as open a secret as say Renlys sexual orientation. And yes Barristan is definitely not the brightest bulb in the pack.

I think there was at least one, and perhaps more than one powerful faction that wanted Aerys off the throne, I say maybe more than one because it seems to me that Tywin and Reagar may have been a faction unto themselves, operating independently of the STAB power block, but there is also hints that they were at one time a part of it(at least Tywin, he attempted to marry Jamie to Lysa and had ties with Steffon Baratheon, dating to the war of the nine penny kings). So what happened?

Also interesting is that the rebels do not declare thier intention to make Robert king immediately, not until after the battle of the bells. Were they waiting for Reagar? Did they have any communication with Tywin? And where was Reagar really? Are we honestly supposed to believe he was boinking Lyanna for half a year while all his plans collapsed?

All things I'd like to know. Your theory is a good as any other I've seen while I don't agree 100 percent with your conclusions I definitely think there is something going on here.

[three-eyed monkey]

2 hours ago, John Suburbs said:

Not really. Martin is highly adept at hiding the truth under layers of deception, not just one. The entire RLJ theory is based on the idea that Ned's story about Wylla is false, and so is the tale about Ashara Dayne: two lies (at least) to cover up one truth.

You misunderstood me. I'm not talking about the layers of deception. I'm talking about how GRRM uses explicit revelation from a character in-world in his mystery-building process and how it compares to readers finding clues and putting the solution together themselves, which leads to a rewarding experience for readers. Take for example, RLJ. Wylla and Ashara are given to us as solutions to the mystery by characters in-world, but to discover the truth the reader needs to put together clues. No one in-world has ever posited Rhaegar and Lyanna as Jon's parents. Nor will they until the reveal.

2 hours ago, John Suburbs said:

The Arryn murder was supposedly an old man suddenly dying, but the truth was there for all to see: that Cersei and Jaime did it to hide their incest. But it wasn't that either, was it?

Again, Catelyn and Ned reason that it must be the Lannisters. Tyrion suspects Cersei. Stannis suspects Cersei. Jon Arryn's squire is even mentioned as a suspect. But no one in-world ever suspects Lysa and Littlefinger right up to the reveal.

3 hours ago, John Suburbs said:

The catspaw as well: Cersei and Jaime, except it turned out to be Joffrey, and his motivation is still questionable.

Same again, Tyrion, Cersei, and Jaime all suspected in-world. No one in-world ever mentions Joffery until Tyrion reasons out the reveal.

3 hours ago, John Suburbs said:

And don't even get me started on the Purple Wedding.

I'm sure you see the pattern by now, Tyrion and Sansa are suspected in-world, Oberyn and even the High Septon are mentioned in connection to the murder, but if you want to know the truth you need to put the clues together. That's just how GRRM writes mystery.

3 hours ago, John Suburbs said:

Yes, I believe this will all come down to Ice and Fire as well.

Agreed.

[corbon]

5 hours ago, John Suburbs said:

Sorry, this is extremely sketchy. Robert is simply alluding to the fact that they are both dead and he is alive. To imagine that you know for certain what Robert unconsciously believes is not a clue; it's just searching for straws.

Ahh.
So your theories are self-admittedly unsupported and riddled-with-problems-even-you-point-out.
But anything that doesn't fit them is not a clue but stretching for straws, even such well known 'tropes' (for lack of a better word) as lovers being reunited in death and the ridiculousness of a rapist 'having' his victim in death together.

Well, at least both sides are out in public for all to see and judge.

Quote

Their holy vows, sworn before the gods, the entire court, the High Septon and the king, are to "protect the king and the royal family, to obey his commands, and to keep his secrets." Nowhere in any of that does it say they can disregard the king's command in favor of the crown prince.

Nowhere have I suggested they have disregarded any orders from the King. 

Quote

So the simple fact is that if the 3KG are at the ToJ at Rhaegar's behest and not the king's, then they have left his side without his leave and thus have forsaken their holy vows and committed an act of treason.

Thats a lie again, several in fact.

There is no need for them to have disobeyed any orders from the King for them to be at ToJ.
They have not left his side without leave - in fact Hightower was explicitly ordered to leave the kings side and return Rhaegar to KL. Its a more than fair assumption that the other two were protecting Rhaegar (the King's heir and family) at the order of the king and as part of that they are required to follow Rhaegar's orders as long as they do not harm the king. We see that many times live, as KG follow orders of many not-King's who have appropriate authority, including the Hand, the Queen, the stand-in-hand, the Lord Commander, the Regent, etc.

Quote

Now, this could very well be the case, but this would require us to assume just as many unproven facts as in my theory: that they are traitors, that Jon is a legitimate member of the royal family, that R&J did run away together . . . So spare me all this talk about lies. Your proposal is chock full of them.

"My theory" (the provenance of which is lost in time after much discussion through many people, I'm just explaining the bits as I understand them)  does not require them to be traitors, if fact utterly the opposite. It does not require Jon to be legitimate Targ (there are still legit options within the theory that we haven't needed to get to if he is a bastard) just sees that as most likely. We know they ran away together, in so much as every relevant data point in world agrees with this, we just don't know if it was consensual or forced.

Quote

Oakheart is with Myrcella in Dorne on the orders of the Queen Regent and the Hand, not the crown prince.

Which demonstrates the KG can take orders from people other than the King, and can have other duties than personally being at the King's side. Whereas you demanded that they be defending the King at the Trident (where he is not) or at KL and strongly implied that they could not possibly be doing their duties unless they were at those places.

Quote

There are also multiple KG still in the capital who can guard the king and the royal family day and night, as their code requires.

And there are 4 other KG still available to protect the King. 
The first two are in the same situation as Arys Oakheart, except there are two instead of one. They have been detached under Aerys' command to protect his family and are under Rhaegar's orders while they do so, though we assume he cannot order them to harm the king.
The third, Hightower, was expressly dispatched by Aerys to find Rhaegar.
Meanwhile, back in the capital we have Darry, Selmy, Martell and Lannister, all available to guard the king day and night.
Its not the fault or responsibility on the three at ToJ that some of the other four also, later, get detached, at the King's command, to other duties. 

Quote

This is not so with the 3KG, who left the king with only 1KG who cannot possible guard him day and night, and he is a mere boy with maybe a year in a white cloak, and both he and his father harbor personal grudges against the king.

No they did not. Once again you make up lies to support your contentions.
Two left the King with 5KG, the other with 4. While they were at ToJ he still had 4 others to protect him.
Some of those KG were later detached to other duties, and returned. 3 of them were detached before the Trident, but even then, that was with Aery's blessing. Jaime has to stay because Aerys wants him by his side as protection.

Quote

Prince Rhaegar shook his head. "My royal sire fears your father more than he does our cousin Robert. He wants you close, so Lord Tywin cannot harm him. I dare not take that crutch away from him at such an hour."

You are also equivalently calling Selmy, Martell and Darry treasonous for leaving Aerys with only Lannister when the went to the Trident. Yet even Mad Aerys seeing traitors under every brick didn't think that.
 

Quote

Of course they are, but on who's orders? My proposal is perfectly consistent with the mad king acting madly, the KG, their vows . . . while yours has all these utterly unproven, assumptions about the noble prince suddenly acting madly, unknown loopholes in the KG's vows and secret dual-marriages.

Your proposal is inconsistent with many other things.
Mine, contrary to your irrational claims about it, has them acting in full honour, holding strongly to their vows, exactly as they indicate in their conversation with Ned.
Mine has the benefit of fitting with the data we have, as well as the worldviews of those who were present at the time, both Ned and the 3.

Quote

Sorry, but no. Only Ned describes Dayne as "the finest knight I ever saw," which now that I look at it does not necessarily mean he thought him to be noble or honorable either, although these would certainly be qualities that Ned would use to judge his "fineness." Everybody else talks about his skill as a fighter and his magic sword.

From Maester Yandel, writing for the Baratheon/Lannister dynasty - Arthurs enemies, not Ned.

Quote

At five-and-ten, Ser Jaime Lannister was already a knight—an honor he had received from the hand of Ser Arthur Dayne, the Sword of the Morning, whom many considered to be the realm's most chivalrous warrior. Jaime's knighthood had been won during Ser Arthur's campaign against the outlaws known as the Kingswood Brotherhood, and none could doubt his prowess.

Same source again.

Quote

Though many houses have their heirloom swords, they mostly pass the blades down from lord to lord. Some, such as the Corbrays have done, may lend the blade to a son or brother for his lifetime, only to have it return to the lord. But that is not the way of House Dayne. The wielder of Dawn is always given the title of Sword of the Morning, and only a knight of House Dayne who is deemed worthy can carry it.

For this reason, the Swords of the Morning are all famous throughout the Seven Kingdoms. There are boys who secretly dream of being a son of Starfall so they might claim that storied sword and its title. Most famous of all was Ser Arthur Dayne, the deadliest of King Aerys II's Kingsguard, who defeated the Kingswood Brotherhood and won renown in every tourney and mêlée. He died nobly with his sworn brothers at the end of Robert's Rebellion, after Lord Eddard Stark was said to have killed him in single combat. Lord Stark then returned Dawn to Starfall, and to Ser Arthur's kin, as a sign of respect.

From Jaime:

Quote

After, Gerold Hightower himself took me aside and said to me, 'You swore a vow to guard the king, not to judge him.' That was the White Bull, loyal to the end and a better man than me, all agree."

Barristan Selmy showing his respect for Hightower:

Quote

Ser Gerold Hightower himself heard my vows … to ward the king with all my strength … to give my blood for his … I fought beside the White Bull and Prince Lewyn of Dorne … beside Ser Arthur Dayne, the Sword of the Morning. Before I served your father, I helped shield King Aerys, and his father Jaehaerys before him

Hightower honourably offering to leave the Tourney at Harrenhal for duty protecting the Queen and Viserys so fresh-made Brother Jaime could compete:

Quote

The thought frightened him so badly that he could hardly eat at that night's feast, Pycelle avows. Accordingly, Aerys II summoned Ser Jaime to attend him (whilst squatting over his chamberpot, some say, but this ugly detail may have been a later addition to the tale), and commanded him to return to King's Landing to guard and protect Queen Rhaella and Prince Viserys, who had not accompanied His Grace to the tourney. The lord commander, Ser GeroldHightower, offered to go in Ser Jaime's stead, but Aerys refused him.

Hightower and Darry at least are accorded the greatest respect by pretty much everyone, and not just for their prowess with swords.

Quote

But let's say that Dayne and the rest are paragons of knightly virtue and chivalry, what explains this decision to forsake their vows and abandon their king in his time of greatest need? Why is it that your theory has multiple people -- Rhaegar, the KG, even Aerys -- acting in the exact opposite way they should?

I keep explaining to you, and you keep ignoring the explanations to spout the same nonsense back again, they are not forsaking their vows, they are following them. As they themselves indicate. 
Its only your odd ideas that insist they are, counter to the text.

Rhaegar acts exactly as he should, other than the initial disappearance, which is for other parts of the theory to discuss.
When Hightower finds him and gives him the King's orders to return, he does. He then takes command, not deposing Aerys, and attempts to win the war for Aerys.

The KG act exactly as they should. They follow orders given by legitimate authorities, protecting the king and the royal family, obeying his commands, keeping his secrets. Dayne and Whent have orders to protect Rhaegar and his family, which includes following his orders so long as they do not contradict their vows. They are doing so.They have no orders that we know of to abandon Rhaegar's family or disobey his orders in order to return to the King's side.
Hightower has orders to find Rhaegar and get him to come back  to KL to take command. He has done that. We don't know what the explicit wording of his order from Aerys was, or what subsequent orders from Rhaegar he had after he found him, but its clear he believes he is acting within his vows, and with honour, so its a bit silly for you to assume he's not given how little we know.
Selmy, Martell, Darry and Lannister are acting exactly as they should.

Aerys is acting exactly as he should - within the bounds of his paranoia and madness. He orders Rhaegar, whom he both trusts and mistrusts, but ultimately relies on more than any other (and should do, he's a highly capable heir), to return and take command - even though Hightower for example successfully commanded armies in the War of the Nine-penny Kings. Rhaegar is the logical choice, presents a united front to the realm and ultimately can only have the best interests for Aerys and his family at heart, since in the Targaryens are deposed, so is Rhaegar.

Nobody acts opposite to the way they should.
They just don't act in ways that match your ideas - because your ideas aren't supported by the text, as you yourself admit. 
Best to change ideas so that they are supported by the text and everyone is acting as you would expect, within normal parameters.

Quote

Well, that's the same answer I can give to my theory as well. Either she told him and Ned decided that it was best to cover it up, or she died before she could tell him the whole story and Ned remained clueless.

Yep. Kissed-By-Fire said, you answered your own questions. So what is the point actually?

Quote

Wow, this is really stretching things. First off, a sitting Targaeryen king has never been deposed by council, not even the maddest of the mad like Maegor and Aegon III. The closest you get is the passing over of a possible legitimate heir, like Laenor Valaryon or Maegor, son of Aerion Brightflame. So sorry, but there is in fact no legally precedented way to do this in Westeros.

There had never been a great council before the first one was called. Did that make it illegitimate, and thus every Targaryen king since also illegitimate? 
Just because there is no precedent for something does not make it illegitimate. 
 

You have made no argument here.

Quote

Secondly, no, it is not possible for the KG to support a council and not foreswear their oaths. Nowhere in any of the oaths that we've seen does it say, "unless a council says its OK or it is to protect the king from himself or the king is abusing his power."

You already quoted the oath, and I pointed out that they were not breaking any part of it.
Not having explicit instructions about what to do in every situation is not required for them to hold to their oaths. They just have to not break them.

Quote

 The KING, has commanded the KG to protect the crown prince. The KING commands Hightower to retrieve Rhaegar. And now suddenly you have Rhaegar commanding the KG to attend to his own personal matters and leave the KING virtually unprotected? And they just obey this command without checking with the KING first, and then depart without his leave?

He's not unprotected, that is very clear. 

And no, the obviously don;t have to check with the king every time they do anything at all, as you suggest. Especially not when he is 100s of leagues away. They go about there business, follow their orders and vows, until they get different instructions or come up against something that goes against their vows.

And they didn't depart without his leave. The first two departed with his leave long before, and have not yet returned, nor received any contradictory order from the King. The third parted at the King's express command, and has not yet returned from that task.

Quote

Sorry, friend, but no, no and no. This would be about as blatant a violation of their holy vows and the code of their sacred order as can be. If Joffrey were to order Selmy to travel across country on some personal errand, do you think he would just go and not clear it with the king first?

Thats not the same thing. Robert didn't assign KG to Joffrey and Rhaegar isn't ordering these KG to leave the kings side, the King has already done that. He's ordering them to stay at their current post and protect his family (bastard or legit, wife or mistress, or victim), which is part of their duties, their vows. 

Suppose Robert did, and Joffrey was a bit older, in his twenties, with, say, Meryn Trant assigned to him. If Robert was hunting in the Kingswood and Joffrey decided to visit Lannisport, would Meryn find Robert to get permission to go with him? Of course not, he'd follow his duties and vows and go with Joffrey. If, once at Lannisport, Joffrey received word he was ordered back to KL to take command of Robert's armies, but needed someone to protect his family in Lannisport, so Trant must stay behind, Trant would stay behind. Without going back to get perission of Robert first.. And it would not be Treason, unless Robert then ordered Trant back as well and he refused. 

Suppose Rhaegar won at the Trident, but not conclusively. Suppose he detached Darry with part of his forces to get ahead of the retreating rebels while he pursued them with the main force. Would Darry check with the King first? Would he be treasonous for not being at the King's side? No. Darry would obey his legitimate orders, be still within his vows, would have a new task ordered by Rhaegar and would not be failing to "protect the king and the royal family, obey his commands, and keep his secrets".

Quote

Sorry, but again, no, no and no. The DoE has never been used to justify multiple marriages because no Targaryen has ever tried one since Maegor. This is not an opinion, it's a fact. Every time the DoE has been invoked it has been to excuse the marriage of brother to sister. This is in perfect keeping with its basic tenant: the Valyrians follow the customs of Old Valyria, not the Andals, and while it was customary for Valyrians to wed brother and sister, it was not customary to practice polygamy. From the World Book:

Once again, lack of a direct precedent does not cover all of what is possible. Multiple marriage partners have been proposed for or by Targaryens more than once, they've just been turned down for political reasons. If it were impossible, they wouldn't have been proposed.
Read your own quote. Multi-marriages by Valyrians was not customary but was not without precedent and clearly entirely legal.

The Doctrine of Exceptionalism:

Quote

The Targaryens were not like other men as they rode dragons and were the only ones in the world since the Doom of Valyria. In addition, they did not have their roots in Andalos, but in Valyria, where different laws and traditions held sway. The Targaryens wed brother to sister as the Valyrians had always done, and as the gods had made them this way, it was not for men to judge.

The basic tenants are that the Targaryens are different from other men, and follow different laws and traditions. It was not for other men to judge them.
It is explicitly applied to incest, but can also be applied to other things. And its clear that multi-marriages were legal, if not customary, in Valyria.
It is also clear that Targaryen multi-marriages are apparently within the bounds of the Doctrine of Exceptionalism, or Aegon the Conqueror's marriage to Rhaenys, and all his issue thereof, (which covers practically the entire Targaryen Dynasty) are illegitimate in the eyes of the Faith.
Since the Faith acknowledges all those many Targaryen Kings and family members through history as legitimate, it must therefore accept Rhaenys' marriage to Aegon as legitimate.

If it was applied (and I only suggest that it might be, and this solves many potential issues within the story), then clearly Rhaegar thought he could make it stick.
I think he understood a lot more about it than readers do.
 

Quote

So it has happened, but it is hardly a custom. So for Rhaegar to suddenly and secretly take another wife and expect the realm to be OK with this because of exceptionalism is an extremely rash act, completely out of character with the Rhaegar of people's memories. And it is utterly unimaginable that the KG would forsake their vows to go along with this plan because that is exactly what they would be doing if the king did not grant them leave to do so.

This is nothing more than your personal assertion.
How about, instead of deciding you have complete understanding of these things, and that characters therefore act out of character, you realise that perhaps your understanding isn't complete, and the characters aren't in fact acting out of character.

There is no forsaking of vows happening, whether there is a second marriage or not. 

Quote

This is exactly my point. We have no idea what Rhaegar was thinking, where he was. So how can you possible claim with the utmost certainty that he and Lyanna ran off together?

Where is this utmost certainty on my side? I'm saying there is a lot we don't know, pointing to clues rather than certainty.
Its you who speaks in absolutes and insist that characters are acting out of character and can and can't do these things that you alone have decided. 

Quote

They did. The facts are clear: the king was in King's Landing fighting for his life and they were hundreds of miles away guarding the results of some crazy scheme by the crown prince. Rationalize their vows all you will, but If they were not there on Aerys' orders, they abandoned him.

Bullshit. This has been answered far to many times already. 

Quote

Facts are facts. You keep talking about evidence, but I have yet to see it. You have nothing but speculation, and even that leads to an endless series of contradictory conclusions. Rhaegaer is dutiful and level-headed, yet he runs off with Lyanna in this mad plan to produce a mythical hero, and somehow convinces three of the leading knights in the realm to foresake their holy vows and go along with it. This abduction is what set the world on fire; it's what precipitated all of the bloodshed, and your level-headed, dutiful Rhaegar would have to have know what the repercussions would be of abducting the daughter of a high lord who was already betrothed to another high lord. Sorry, but unless you can work out this conflict, even your theories don't hold any water: was Rhaegar sane, or was he mad?

The only contradictory conclusions are caused by you running parts of one theory together with irrational statements of your own that have no foundations.
I'm just gonna leave this for others to read and make their own conclusions. At least as best I can. 

Quote

You "think" he found out and was trying to protect her. Thinking is not knowing, and it hardly counts as a clue. My theory goes deeper than what we know as well, and it remains perfectly consistent with all the characterizations of the major players in this drama.

And yet... you complain constantly about people acting out of character, or situations you can;t resolve, and admit no textual foundations for most of your ideas.

Quote

Sorry, but your fatal mistake is that you reach a conclusion that you are comfortable with and then view any and all text through that lens. The right way to do it is to consider all possible solutions, and then let facts either prove or disprove them until there is only one left. Right now, the evidence is too sketchy to rule anything out.

As I see it, I consider all the evidence, and all the characterizations, assess them both individually and as a whole, and try to fit a theory that explains them all.
Each to his own...

4 hours ago, John Suburbs said:

Whoa, dude, sorry you had to deal with all that mess above, but @Alexis-something-Rose just gave me a brilliant idea:

Suppose Rhaegar and Lyanna did run away together just as you say. Aerys finds out about it and sends the KG to keep them both at the tower. His plan is to wait until Lyanna gives birth, then seize the child and use him in a pyre to hatch a dragon egg -- pretty much the way Dany did it, and quite possibly what was in store for Rhaegar at Summerhall.

This way, we have the two star-crossed lovers, the evil mad king and the KG dutifully obeying their king and staying true to their friend Rhaegar, since they probably don't know yet what Aerys has planned.

Circles squared?

Fails on numerous points and lacks textual support for major pillars.
So no.
OTOH, if new information comes to light... just about anything is possible. I'll wait until it does though.

4 hours ago, John Suburbs said:

I did include Selmy. He does believe this story, but that doesn't make it any truer than Robert thinking Lyanna was kidnapped and raped.

Selmy knows Rhaegar far better than Robert, and spent time with him after the events where he could learn more.
Robert literally knows nothing directly, and doesn't even believe his own wild claims. He doesn't even know Lyanna, really, as he says things about her than Ned contradicts several times.

When information clashes, you need to assess the sources. Some have greater value than others. That doesn't make one correct and another false, but it does make one more likely to be true than another.

Quote

I did include Ned thinking Rhaegar was an honorable man. The question is, what kind of honorable man seduces then runs off with someone's daughter/fiancé, and why would honorable knights who have sworn sacred vows abandon their honor and their vows to support this?

No, the question is, if he is an honourable man (and considered honourable even after the fact by other honourable men from both sides who had contact with him or Lyanna), then is "seducing then running off with another man's daughter/fiance" an accurate and complete summation of events?
Answer clearly is no.

As to the Kingsguard, since even their enemies acknowledge them to be men of honour and/or respect after the fact, perhaps it might be a good idea to reassess the claim that they abandoned their honour and vows, even if you don't believe their own words and actions at the end?

Quote

Yes, the Mad King is quite mad. Hadn't you noticed?

I freely admit that my theory is based on a string of assumptions. What I'm not hearing from any of you is that the RL love story theory is too.

You haven't really listened much, doing so might help with the hearing thing. You asked for clues, you got them. Clues don't equal certainty. 

3 hours ago, kissdbyfire said:

It's the exact same situation, don't you see? Characters give us two different "versions":

1. Lyanna was kidnapped and raped [repeatedly] by Rhaegar.

2. Rhaegar and Lyanna were in love.

Of course, it's entirely possible and quite likely imo that the truth won't be as simple as either version. That said, the crux here seems to be that you believe there's textual support for 1 but not for 2. And that's where you're leading yourself astray, because all we hear about R&L is second and third  hand accounts. We haven't heard anything by anyone who was there. In other words, Robert saying Rhaegar raped Lyanna is as supported by the text as Selmy saying Rhaegar loved Lyanna. 

While I generally agree here, its worth pointing out that the only source that Lyanna was raped by Rhaegar is Robert and Bran, who is merely parroting back Robert's regime's history as he has heard. Robert has literally no source for that except his own head-canon. He wasn't there, never spoke to anyone who was and is as biased a possible 'source' as you can get with no direct link to the actual facts.
Not even Yandel writes that Rhaegar raped Lyanna.
No one who actually had any connection to the events thinks badly of Rhaegar, or Lyanna, except Ned assigns some portion of blame to Lyanna's wolf blood.

I don't know about love, though there are clues.
But Robert's story has zero value in terms of determining the actual facts. Ned's and Barristan's thoughts carry infinitely more weight in assessing this.

[kissdbyfire]

8 minutes ago, corbon said:

While I generally agree here, its worth pointing out that the only source that Lyanna was raped by Rhaegar is Robert and Bran, who is merely parroting back Robert's regime's history as he has heard. Robert has literally no source for that except his own head-canon. He wasn't there, never spoke to anyone who was and is as biased a possible 'source' as you can get with no direct link to the actual facts.
Not even Yandel writes that Rhaegar raped Lyanna.
No one who actually had any connection to the events thinks badly of Rhaegar, or Lyanna, except Ned assigns some portion of blame to Lyanna's wolf blood.

I don;t know about love, though there are clues.
But Robert's story has zero value in terms of determining the actual facts. Ned's and Barristan's thoughts carry infinitely more weight in assessing this.

Oh I know. I decided to go w/ just the two examples I used b/c I had already brought up the others previously. 

[Nevets]

5 hours ago, John Suburbs said:

I think her voice alone would have been enough, plus the fact that she was not in the stands. Meera's describes the voice as "booming", but we're talking about a 16yo girl -- highly unlikely that anyone would have been fooled.

I doubt that.  Given that everybody and his brother and their families was there, I don't think the absence of the Stark girl would have been noticed, or remarked on even if it was. and the most that could be discerned from the voice would (maybe) be that it wasn't an adult male.  However, Jaime was 15 at the time, and there is a long tradition of underage boys sneaking in as mystery knights (e.g., Barristan at age 10).  That would be more likely believed than it being a girl.  And without knowing what connects the squires, there is no reason to suspect Lyanna in any event.

4 hours ago, John Suburbs said:

There is plenty of text that states explicitly that Rhaegar kidnapped and raped Lyanna, and yet the RLJ love story rejects that text in favor of a solution that is nowhere stated in any text at all. So I find it amusing that people are so willing to throw away the text in favor of their own secret history that is only supported by selective interpretation of a handful of "clues."

There is plenty of text saying that Robert, and others, believe that Rhaegar kidnapped and raped Lyanna.  Others, like Barristan, believe that they were in love.  None of them witnessed anything, or has even heard from anyone who did.  I expect that the truth is somewhere in the middle.  Assuming we get a definitive answer, which I doubt.  Probably more details, but nothing conclusive.

4 hours ago, John Suburbs said:

I liken the "clues" to the RLJ love story to the "clues" that led us to believe that Cersei and/or Jaime killed Jon Arryn. One person's clues are another's red herrings, I guess.

Oh, we have red herrings in RLJ.  Wylla and Ashara Dayne qualify in that respect.  I think it is clear neither of them is his mother.

[John Suburbs]

18 hours ago, kissdbyfire said:

It's the exact same situation, don't you see? Characters give us two different "versions":

1. Lyanna was kidnapped and raped [repeatedly] by Rhaegar.

2. Rhaegar and Lyanna were in love.

Of course, it's entirely possible and quite likely imo that the truth won't be as simple as either version. That said, the crux here seems to be that you believe there's textual support for 1 but not for 2. And that's where you're leading yourself astray, because all we hear about R&L is second and third  hand accounts. We haven't heard anything by anyone who was there. In other words, Robert saying Rhaegar raped Lyanna is as supported by the text as Selmy saying Rhaegar loved Lyanna. 

". . . Robert saying Rhaegar raped Lyanna is as supported by the text as Selmy saying Rhaegar loved Lyanna."

Exactly, which is to say that neither one of these beliefs is necessarily true. From what I gather your argument to be, you are saying that just because Robert's account is false, then Selmy's must be true. But it doesn't work that way, especially since, as you say, "it is entirely possible and quite likely . . . that the truth won't be as simple as either version."

I never said there was textual support for any of this. I was perfectly clear in the OP that there is no proof, so don't ask for it.

But it seems to me that we're not too far apart on this. We both agree that the story as told thus far is inadequate. So if your only complaint is that there is no proof of what I'm saying, I agree with you 100 percent on that. But that doesn't mean we should just arbitrarily reject the idea. There was no proof that Littlefinger killed Jon Arryn either, and an abundance to text that pointed directly at Cersei and Jaime.

 

[kissdbyfire]

1 hour ago, John Suburbs said:

Exactly, which is to say that neither one of these beliefs is necessarily true. From what I gather your argument to be, you are saying that just because Robert's account is false, then Selmy's must be true.

I will have to come back, but for now... no, that's not what I'm saying. Not at all. It is you who have been considering Robert's belief while altogether dismissing Selmy's. 

[Alexis-something-Rose]

Never mind.

[John Suburbs]

16 hours ago, three-eyed monkey said:

You misunderstood me. I'm not talking about the layers of deception. I'm talking about how GRRM uses explicit revelation from a character in-world in his mystery-building process and how it compares to readers finding clues and putting the solution together themselves, which leads to a rewarding experience for readers. Take for example, RLJ. Wylla and Ashara are given to us as solutions to the mystery by characters in-world, but to discover the truth the reader needs to put together clues. No one in-world has ever posited Rhaegar and Lyanna as Jon's parents. Nor will they until the reveal.

Sorry, but this is the exact same situation. Wylla and Ashara are given to us as solutions, but to discover the truth readers need to pull together clues. No one in-world has ever posited that Aerys kidnapped both Rhaegar and Lyanna, nor will they until the reveal.

The mistake you and others are making is that you see these vague "clues" that you interpret in ways that support your conclusion, even though they are wide open to any number of other conclusions. At the same time, you reject or simply ignore any clues that don't fit your theory. Why, for instance, would Aerys go through all this trouble protecting and defending the crown prince whom he suspects of trying to depose him? What better opportunity to convince the realm, and Rhaegar's supporters in particular, that this is not the stable, intelligent man they thought he was, but is actually mad and rash enough to sacrifice everything, including peace in the realm itself, for his own lusts?

Why would any of the kingsguard, let alone three of them including the Lord Commander, go along with this? These are all serious, sober, and honorable men who take their vows and their duties extremely seriously. Do you really believe they would just throw their honor out the window because they actually believe this cockamamie story about ice and fire and a hero prince who will save the world from mythical enemies that haven't been seen nor heard from since before recorded history -- if they ever even existed at all?

If Rhaegar was planning to depose his father, why on earth would he take such a sudden and dramatic left turn that can only serve to inflame the very lords he needs to support his claim? It this little caper was conducted out in the woods with only Lyanna, Rhaegar and his best friends as witness, how and why did the news leak out that he abducted her? And why would he take her from Harrenhal all the way across the continent to some lonely, crumbling, indefensible tower in the Dornish Marches when his seat on Dragonstone is only a day or two ride/sail away?

Sorry, but there are simply too many counter-clues to this whole love-story theory that overwhelm the extremely sketchy evidence that is being used to defend it.

Quote

Again, Catelyn and Ned reason that it must be the Lannisters. Tyrion suspects Cersei. Stannis suspects Cersei. Jon Arryn's squire is even mentioned as a suspect. But no one in-world ever suspects Lysa and Littlefinger right up to the reveal.

Same again, Tyrion, Cersei, and Jaime all suspected in-world. No one in-world ever mentions Joffery until Tyrion reasons out the reveal.

OK, so how are these different? Robert suspects kidnap/rape. Selmy and Dany call it love. Ned is ambiguous. Nobody suspects Aerys right up to the reveal.

If you are saying that the love story is true, then the equivalent to the Arryn murder would be that most suspect old age, Lysa calls it murder by the Lannisters and the Starks believe her -- and then it turns out to be murder by the Lannisters after all. To the catspaw, it was Cersei and Jaime, just as suspected in-world.

Quote

I'm sure you see the pattern by now, Tyrion and Sansa are suspected in-world, Oberyn and even the High Septon are mentioned in connection to the murder, but if you want to know the truth you need to put the clues together. That's just how GRRM writes mystery.

Yes, I see the pattern, but I'm not sure you do. Tyrion, Sansa, et al are suspected, but the truth is someone else entirely. Meanwhile we had all sorts of "clues" that the plotter with Sansa was working against Lady O and the Tyrells, only to find out they were co-conspirators all along. And if you really looked at the clues, you will see that they were not even plotting to kill Joffrey, but Tyrion. I can't wait until we get that reveal. But as I said, don't get me started. 

[three-eyed monkey]

2 hours ago, John Suburbs said:

Sorry, but this is the exact same situation. Wylla and Ashara are given to us as solutions, but to discover the truth readers need to pull together clues. No one in-world has ever posited that Aerys kidnapped both Rhaegar and Lyanna, nor will they until the reveal.

[snip]

Sorry, I also misread you it seems. I wasn't arguing against your theory, I was arguing that Rhaegar didn't rape Lyanna, but as you so rightly point-out Dany and Barristan both explicitly express that Rhaegar loved Lyanna, a glaring oversight on my behalf, and that does change my opinion on it being love, from Rhaegar's perspective at least. And thank you for reminding me of that, as I have always believed Rhaegar's primary motive was duty.

Like I said, I believe there is an extra layer to the ToJ concerning the song of ice and fire as opposed to the game of thrones. I don't support any theory that puts Jon on the Iron Throne or means he was born legit, so I snipped that criticism as it doesn't really apply to me.

As for the purple wedding, Arryn murder, etc. I don't disagree with you. I'm was just demonstrating a rule of thumb, not an exact science because GRRM says he likes to establish patterns so that he can break them, simply a rule of thumb we can use when it comes to mysteries in the series. And it is a rule of thumb that stands up in every one of the cases you cited, in that in-world characters will not solve mysteries for the reader until the reveal.

 

[John Suburbs]

18 hours ago, corbon said:

snip

Your understanding of the KG and their vows is woefully inadequate. They vow to obey the king. The king is the utmost authority in the land. No one can override his commands. If he commands them to guard the crown prince, they will. If he commands them to clap the crown prince in irons and send him to a black cell, they'll do that too. So to suggest that Rhaegar can just tell them to slip back to the ToJ without the king's leave is absurd.

But now you say that this was at the order of the king. I agree. The question is why. Aerys never gave a rat's ass about Rhaegar's legitimate children, but now, at a time when his reign and his life are in mortal danger, he is depriving himself of three of his most capable guards to play nursemaid to Rhaegar's girl-toy? I think not, especially since he is convinced that Rhaegar is planning to depose him.

Your other statements are equally wrong.

AIR, Cersei gave the command to Oakheart, since Tyrion wasn't crazy about sending a marcher lord to Dorne. Cersei is Queen Regent for underaged Joffrey, so she rules with full authority in his name, and in this circumstance can countermand one of his orders if it ever came to that. Rhaegar is not regent, he is not Hand. There is absolutely no way any KG could rationalize their vows to mean they can defy the king on the orders of the crown prince.

Long before Rhaegar left for the Trident, it was clear that Aerys would have one KG. And now you propose that it never dawned on Aerys to recall his other knights -- the most fearsome in the land -- to protect their king? Hogwash. You'll have to do much better than that.

So Rhaegar and his buddies take Lyanna on the belief that they can simply use a council of all the high lords to interpret the DoE in this utterly new way, despite the fact that this act is going to make certain enemies of:

the Martells -- overlords to the Daynes and whose daughter will now have to share a husband

the Baratheons -- whose bride has just been stolen

the Starks -- whose daughter has just been stolen

the Tullys -- who have been busy building alliances to resist the crown

the Lannisters -- who are sore over the loss of their son to the KG and the spurning of their daughter as princess.

Please, you keep saying that your theories are in perfect keeping with character, but they obviously are not. Intelligent, thoughtful Rhaegar has suddenly gone mad, throwing his succession plans all to hell; experienced men of the world blithely go along with this mad plan; meanwhile, mad Aerys is suddenly so concerned about the safety of his bastard grandson that he sends his most formidable guards to protect him. This simply cannot be the answer here.

 

[John Suburbs]

18 hours ago, corbon said:

Fails on numerous points and lacks textual support for major pillars.

So no.
OTOH, if new information comes to light... just about anything is possible. I'll wait until it does though.

Um, care to elaborate on what points and pillars you are talking about? We have R&L in love. Isn't that one of your pillars? We have Aerys ordering the KG to the ToJ? Isn't that another?

Quote

Selmy knows Rhaegar far better than Robert, and spent time with him after the events where he could learn more.
Robert literally knows nothing directly, and doesn't even believe his own wild claims. He doesn't even know Lyanna, really, as he says things about her than Ned contradicts several times.

When information clashes, you need to assess the sources. Some have greater value than others. That doesn't make one correct and another false, but it does make one more likely to be true than another.

And you don't think it's possible that Rhaegar would let Selmy think what he wants, considering that doing otherwise might cause him to doubt his loyalty to the crown just as they are heading into the battle that will decide their fate?

And once again, my alt theory has no conflict here: Rhaegar did love Lyanna, or at least he thought he did.

Quote

No, the question is, if he is an honourable man (and considered honourable even after the fact by other honourable men from both sides who had contact with him or Lyanna), then is "seducing then running off with another man's daughter/fiance" an accurate and complete summation of events?
Answer clearly is no.

So in what way does Rhaegar honorably break his marriage vows and toss the entire realm into war?

Quote

As to the Kingsguard, since even their enemies acknowledge them to be men of honour and/or respect after the fact, perhaps it might be a good idea to reassess the claim that they abandoned their honour and vows, even if you don't believe their own words and actions at the end?

I never claimed they abandoned their honor or their vows. I've claimed all along that they were at the ToJ on direct orders from the king. You were the one claiming they were obeying Rhaegar, or not . . . I'm not really sure anymore.

Quote

You haven't really listened much, doing so might help with the hearing thing. You asked for clues, you got them. Clues don't equal certainty. 

I know they don't. So why do you keep insisting that they mean exactly what you think they mean to the exclusion of all other possibilities?

Quote

While I generally agree here, its worth pointing out that the only source that Lyanna was raped by Rhaegar is Robert and Bran, who is merely parroting back Robert's regime's history as he has heard. Robert has literally no source for that except his own head-canon. He wasn't there, never spoke to anyone who was and is as biased a possible 'source' as you can get with no direct link to the actual facts.
Not even Yandel writes that Rhaegar raped Lyanna.
No one who actually had any connection to the events thinks badly of Rhaegar, or Lyanna, except Ned assigns some portion of blame to Lyanna's wolf blood.

I don't know about love, though there are clues.
But Robert's story has zero value in terms of determining the actual facts. Ned's and Barristan's thoughts carry infinitely more weight in assessing this.

The point is that Martin routinely uses multiple deceptions to hide what really happened. So when people say that the predominant tale in-story is that Rhaeagar kidnapped Lyanna but there are clues suggesting this might be the case, they automatically assume that this is just a simple deception: one truth covered by one lie. But Martin is a tricksy writer. More than once, he has covered truth under multiple lies. This happened (or is still happening) with the Arryn murder, the Red Wedding, the Purple Wedding . . .

The royal children are a perfect example of this. It's pretty clear right from the start that Robert is not their father, and this causes the reader to reach all sorts of conclusions: that Jon Arryn was killed to hide this fact; that C/J sent the catspaw. People assumed that they saw right through the subterfuge to the real story, but they weren't even close.

[corbon]

37 minutes ago, John Suburbs said:

Your understanding of the KG and their vows is woefully inadequate. They vow to obey the king. The king is the utmost authority in the land. No one can override his commands. If he commands them to guard the crown prince, they will. If he commands them to clap the crown prince in irons and send him to a black cell, they'll do that too. So to suggest that Rhaegar can just tell them to slip back to the ToJ without the king's leave is absurd.

I'm about done here. I'm not sure what it is anymore, but you just refuse to pay attention to what as said and continually misrepresent what I say in a mismatch of other ideas.
We agree, the KG obeys the King and will never go against his orders.
If they command him to clap the prince in irons they will - at least if they do not they will consider themselves and be considered by others as oathbreakers and forsworn.

But Rhaegar never needs to tell them to 'slip back to the ToJ without the kings leave'. They don't need the kings leave to go away, they are already away, already following the kings orders, and have received no countermanding orders from the king. They are already absent the king, at the King's command, and lawfully following Rhaegar's orders so long as it does not break their vows. 

37 minutes ago, John Suburbs said:

AIR, Cersei gave the command to Oakheart, since Tyrion wasn't crazy about sending a marcher lord to Dorne. Cersei is Queen Regent for underaged Joffrey, so she rules with full authority in his name, and in this circumstance can countermand one of his orders if it ever came to that. Rhaegar is not regent, he is not Hand. There is absolutely no way any KG could rationalize their vows to mean they can defy the king on the orders of the crown prince.

Nobody is suggesting they are defying the King! Except you, when you mismatch my explanations with your ideas.

17 minutes ago, John Suburbs said:

Um, care to elaborate on what points and pillars you are talking about? We have R&L in love. Isn't that one of your pillars? We have Aerys ordering the KG to the ToJ? Isn't that another?

No, I'm not going to extend this conversation into new areas unless you start better attention in the old, unless someone else asks. Too much time wasting for no value.
R&L in love is not a 'pillar'.
Aerys didn't 'order the KG to the ToJ'. He ordered two of them to protect Rhaegar and his family (we don't know the exact wording, but thats the apparent effect) and they follow Rhaegar around Westeros for a long time without coming back to KL and getting new orders from the King. The other was told to go find Rhaegar and get him back (again, we don;t know the exact wording) and has done exactly that but not yet returned to KL for new orders from the King. They end up at the ToJ while following the orders Aerys gave them, which is significantly different from being directly ordered to be there.

You'll also note that Hightower was sent to get Rhaegar to take command of the war effort (as always, we don;t know the exact wording, only the effects). It is Rhaegar who is deciding which KG go where once he is in command, as per the orders of the King. and with acknowledgment of the Kings needs. Legally apparently. You'll note that when Jaime pleads to leave another in his place as Rhaegar is leaving for the Trident, its Rhaegar who is choosing who goes and stays. But doing so with an eye to the needs and wishes of the King. And with the Kings agreement, apparently. Certainly no one, not even you, is accusing Darry, Selmy and Martell of treason for leaving with Rhaegar. 

17 minutes ago, John Suburbs said:

I never claimed they abandoned their honor or their vows. I've claimed all along that they were at the ToJ on direct orders from the king. You were the one claiming they were obeying Rhaegar, or not . . . I'm not really sure anymore.

You keep insisting that my explanations have them abandoning their vows. I keep explaining that they are not, and you ignore the explanations and come back with the same insistence that I am having them abandon their vows and honour.

 

[kissdbyfire]

3 hours ago, John Suburbs said:

Sorry, but this is the exact same situation. Wylla and Ashara are given to us as solutions, but to discover the truth readers need to pull together clues. No one in-world has ever posited that Aerys kidnapped both Rhaegar and Lyanna, nor will they until the reveal.

That wouldn’t be a reveal, but rather an asspull. And that’s definitely not Martin’s style. This fits exactly w/ an example given by the man himself. Brb.

Here it is, @John Suburbs. 

“He conceded that internet speculation and conspiracy theories abound about how the story will unravel – but that did not influence him, even though he had been dropping clues along the way. "I've been planting all these clues that the butler did it, then you're halfway through a series and suddenly thousands of people have figured out that the butler did it, and then you say the chambermaid did it? No, you can't do that."

In this case, Aerys kidnapping and holding Lyanna (w/ or w/o Rhaegar), and raping her and fathering a child on her is... the chambermaid.