The three Kingsguard were loyal to Rhaegar, not Aerys.

[Ser Leftwich]

All this is explained by Aerys granting Rhaegar the status of "Protector of the Realm," which reasonable happened.

[SirArthur]

46 minutes ago, John Suburbs said:

And since Aerys is planning to light the whole lot of them up with wildfire anyway, why bother?

As far as I understand the timeline, Chelsted burned, Rhaella was raped and Rossart made Hand within the same day or in a very short period of time. 

So the wildfire plan was put into motion after the defeat at the Trident. Which makes also sense, as Rhaegar was confident to win. So burning the city and Lewyn's army taking KL is almost exclusive to each other. It is still possible that your coup idea happened, as Aerys was starting preperations after the defeat. But it makes no sense that Elia is hostage.  

[John Suburbs]

12 minutes ago, SirArthur said:

As far as I understand the timeline, Chelsted burned, Rhaella was raped and Rossart made Hand within the same day or in a very short period of time. 

So the wildfire plan was put into motion after the defeat at the Trident. Which makes also sense, as Rhaegar was confident to win. So burning the city and Lewyn's army taking KL is almost exclusive to each other. It is still possible that your coup idea happened, as Aerys was starting preperations after the defeat. But it makes no sense that Elia is hostage.  

No, the reason Chelstead was burned was because he discovered the wildfire plot, pleaded with the king to call it off and when he didn't he resigned. Aerys had him arrested and burned. So it was already in motion long before Chelstead died. The WB, in fact, (not the most accurate source, but it's all we got) says the plan was put in motion shortly after the Battle of the Bells, when Rhaegar first realized he had a real fight on his hands.

She wouldn't have been a hostage post-coup. Rhaegar would have found some way to protect her and the children, I would hope. 

[SirArthur]

8 minutes ago, John Suburbs said:

No, the reason Chelstead was burned was because he discovered the wildfire plot, pleaded with the king to call it off and when he didn't he resigned.

You are right. Rhaegar was to busy training his army. We don't need WB for this. The reason why I am so picky is that Dany was born in the summer of 284 and Bells was very early 283. The wiki calculation has (from my head) 6-9 month between Bells and Trident. Which is far too long for that preperation in my mind. 

[Darth Sidious]

Weeellll, the Kingsguard serve the royal family.  So sure.  They would obey the orders of the royal family.  But there is a hierarchy among the royals as to whom they would prioritize their obedience.  That person was King Aerys II.  His orders will override any other order coming from the other members of the royal family.   Aerys was at the top of the food chain. 

I know this is another one of those topic threads attempting to present Jon as the reason why the Kingsguard were at the tower that day.  I do not buy that.   The reasons why those guys were at the tower that day will make for an endless list. 

[kissdbyfire]

It’s a Meereen chapter, I expected better. 

The KG serve the king, and it’s to the king they swear their vows. The king may extend  their ‘services’, most commonly to close family. But the king may also decide to keep all 7 exclusively in his own service. 

ADwD, The Queensguard

“The first duty of the Kingsguard was to defend the king from harm or threat. The white knights were sworn to obey the king’s commands as well, to keep his secrets, counsel him when counsel was requested and keep silent when it was not, serve his pleasure and defend his name and honor. Strictly speaking, it was purely the king’s choice whether or not to extend Kingsguard protection to others, even those of royal blood. Some kings thought it right and proper to dispatch Kingsguard to serve and defend their wives and children, siblings, aunts, uncles, and cousins of greater and lesser degree, and occasionally even their lovers, mistresses, and bastards. But others preferred to use household knights and men-at-arms for those purposes, whilst keeping their seven as their own personal guard, never far from their sides.”

 

[Darth Sidious]

Interesting bit of writing here.  I'm still sticking to my belief in Mance + Lyanna = Snowflake.

[Lord Varys]

There is no textual basis for an unseen power transfer between Aerys II and Rhaegar after the latter's return, nor of any 'coup' taking place.

Rhaegar certainly must have gotten certain powers to do what he did, but Aerys II was still the king and acted as if he was in full control of his castle, city, and kingdoms.

There is also essentially no reason why Rhaegar should have not staged an open coup prior to the Trident if he effectively seized power behind the scenes. Aerys II was mad, and actually not exactly a pillar of the Targaryen cause at this point. Most, if not all, Targaryen loyalists in Westeros would have likely preferred it if a King Rhaegar had ruled at this point rather than having to answer to the Mad King. Not to mention that Rhaegar himself would have also greatly profited if he had not to fear what his loose cannon of a father might be doing back in KL while he was riding to war.

[rotting sea cow]

41 minutes ago, Lord Varys said:

There is no textual basis for an unseen power transfer between Aerys II and Rhaegar after the latter's return, nor of any 'coup' taking place.

Rhaegar certainly must have gotten certain powers to do what he did, but Aerys II was still the king and acted as if he was in full control of his castle, city, and kingdoms. 

There is also essentially no reason why Rhaegar should have not staged an open coup prior to the Trident if he effectively seized power behind the scenes. Aerys II was mad, and actually not exactly a pillar of the Targaryen cause at this point. Most, if not all, Targaryen loyalists in Westeros would have likely preferred it if a King Rhaegar had ruled at this point rather than having to answer to the Mad King. Not to mention that Rhaegar himself would have also greatly profited if he had not to fear what his loose cannon of a father might be doing back in KL while he was riding to war.

Indeed. In fact, Jaime makes it clear

"When this battle is done, I mean to call a council. Changes will be made. I meant to do it long ago but... Well it does no good to speak of roads not taken. We shall talk when we return."

 

[three-eyed monkey]

15 hours ago, SirArthur said:

Even if Rhaegar dies and baby king is legit, the rule for the king as king regent defaults either to Aerys or Elia. Someone has to accept their vows. And soon after that Aerys and Elia die, defaulting the queen regency to Rhaella. There is no way around Queen (regent) Rhaella in the popular ToJ scenario. 

I don't get your point. Rhaella would have been queen regent on Dragonstone, in the eyes of Targ loyalists like Willem Darry who considered Viserys to be the king. Robert thought otherwise, obviously. It seems the 3 KG stayed at the ToJ because they did not recognize Viserys as the king, but rather Jon, which suggests Jon was ahead of Viserys in the line of succession, which would be the case if he were legitimate.

However, there are other possibilities such as because Jon was Rhaegar's son and Viserys oft seemed like Aerys in ways Rhaegar did not, or reasons of prophecy?

[three-eyed monkey]

16 hours ago, John Suburbs said:

I don't see how Rhaegar can depose Aerys on his own. He needs muscle to do that. And since it doesn't seem likely that Selmy was involved in any of this, the coup would had to have happened after Rhaegar left for the Trident (unless Selmy had left earlier to link his Reach forces to Lewyn's?) So that would pretty much require the 3KG.

I'm suggesting it played out something like this:

1/ Rhaegar had planned to depose Aerys, going back to Harrenhal, but got distracted with prophecy and Lyanna. Whent was on-board, since he helped organize the tourney, and Dayne too by virtue of him being Rhaegar's closest confidant. I think most people agree with this.

2/ When Ser Gerold arrived at the ToJ, Rhaegar knew he had to pick up the plans he had put on hold, which was "the road not taken". Given that Ser Gerold was a honorable man and keeping his vows had become hard in Aerys final years, as illustrated by the episode with Lord Rickard and Brandon, I'm suggesting that he too would have favored Rhaegar's plan to replace Aerys, as long as it was done in an honorable way of course. Grand council would seem to be the most honorable means available. It could even be argued that this was for Aerys own good, and was a form of protecting him from himself. (This is the classic contradiction of the simple vows Serve, Obey, Protect. What happens when you need to protect the person you serve and obey from themselves?)

3/ Rhaegar returned to King's Landing to marshal the army against the rebels. The rebellion had to be put down before Rhaegar could proceed. Once that was done, he could make the changes he told Jaime about. Jon Darry did not seem surprised by that comment so I'm taking it that he also agreed with Rhaegar. Barristan was not in Rhaegar's inner circle so he did not know at this stage, but what would he have done if he did? It's hard to say but he does reflect that Rhaegar would have made a better king than the three kings  he served, so I think he would have welcomed it. (But as Barristan survived it is important from a story-telling revelation point of view that he didn't know everything, which is explained by him not being in Rhaegar's inner-circle.)

4/ Rhaegar rode to his doom at the Trident, leaving his plans unfulfilled. But if Rhaegar had won then he would have returned to King's Landing, made the changes he mentioned to Jaime, and ended up in the same place the "road not taken" would have brought him if he had taken it. Rhaegar as king, Aerys deposed for his own good, Jon legitimized, etc. Alas, it was not to be and Rhaegar's plan remained the road not taken for ever more.

16 hours ago, John Suburbs said:

It would be much easier for Rhaegar to legitimize Jon than to have his marriage to Elia annulled. It would be kind of problematic for him to then make Jon his heir, unless he's OK with Dorne leaving the kingdom once again. But I don't think that's his goal. Jon is the PwtP that he's been striving for, so legitimate or not, he will be the hero who saves all mankind. Being king is small potatoes compared to that.

I agree. Legitimization of Jon by the king's decree would be far smarter from a political perspective than any proposed annulment of his marriage with Elia or indeed a polygamous marriage, both of which would surely be seen as a slight by Dorne.

I also agree that TPtwP is the elephant in the room, and that any future reveal about the ToJ will relate to this and not the Iron Throne, which is the big red herring in the scene.

In my opinion, it is thematically important that Jon remain a bastard who ascends to power by way of merit, not by way of the laws of inheritance. This is the difference between Jon being the "true king" as opposed to the "rightful king", in the same way Dunk is a "true knight", despite not having been knighted because, funnily enough, the person who could have knighted him died before he did. I use Dunk as an example, but the same theme runs through the novels.

 

[The Commentator]

Having the Kingsguards in his pocket is akin to having the praetorian guards in his pocket.  Rhaegar would not have had to dance around like he did if that were the case.  The fact that Aerys could order him around meant that Rhaegar did not have the backing of the Kingsguard.  Rhaegar had to hide out to do what he was doing.  Whatever that might be.  What he was doing could not be done in the open.  Because he was powerless.  He was not the king.  He was not going to become king.  Aerys was the man of power and the man who was calling the shots.  

[Bael's Bastard]

21 hours ago, SirArthur said:

As far as I understand the timeline, Chelsted burned, Rhaella was raped and Rossart made Hand within the same day or in a very short period of time.

@SirArthur

There appears to have been an unknown number of weeks between Aerys burning Chelsted, which occurred not long before Rhaegar, Darry, and Selmy rode off for the Trident, and Aerys appointing Rossart the Hand, which occurred after news of Rhaegar's death reached the Red Keep.

Aerys burned Chelsted and raped Rhaella not long before Rhaegar, Darry, and Selmy rode off for the Trident:

Quote

"Everything was done in the utmost secrecy by a handful of master pyromancers. They did not even trust their own acolytes to help. The queen's eyes had been closed for years, and Rhaegar was busy marshaling an army. But Aerys's new mace-and-dagger Hand was not utterly stupid, and with Rossart, Belis, and Garigus coming and going night and day, he became suspicious. Chelsted, that was his name, Lord Chelsted." It had come back to him suddenly, with the telling. "I'd thought the man craven, but the day he confronted Aerys he found some courage somewhere. He did all he could to dissuade him. He reasoned, he jested, he threatened, and finally he begged. When that failed he took off his chain of office and flung it down on the floor. Aerys burnt him alive for that, and hung his chain about the neck of Rossart, his favorite pyromancer. The man who had cooked Lord Rickard Stark in his own armor. And all the time, I stood by the foot of the Iron Throne in my white plate, still as a corpse, guarding my liege and all his sweet secrets. (ASOS: Jaime V)

Quote

The sight had filled him with disquiet, reminding him of Aerys Targaryen and the way a burning would arouse him. A king has no secrets from his Kingsguard. Relations between Aerys and his queen had been strained during the last years of his reign. They slept apart and did their best to avoid each other during the waking hours. But whenever Aerys gave a man to the flames, Queen Rhaella would have a visitor in the night. The day he burned his mace-and-dagger Hand, Jaime and Jon Darry had stood at guard outside her bedchamber whilst the king took his pleasure. "You're hurting me," they had heard Rhaella cry through the oaken door. "You're hurting me." In some queer way, that had been worse than Lord Chelsted's screaming. "We are sworn to protect her as well," Jaime had finally been driven to say. "We are," Darry allowed, "but not from him."

Jaime had only seen Rhaella once after that, the morning of the day she left for Dragonstone. The queen had been cloaked and hooded as she climbed inside the royal wheelhouse that would take her down Aegon's High Hill to the waiting ship, but he heard her maids whispering after she was gone. They said the queen looked as if some beast had savaged her, clawing at her thighs and chewing on her breasts. A crowned beast, Jaime knew. (AFFC: Jaime II)

Quote

The day had been windy when he said farewell to Rhaegar, in the yard of the Red Keep. The prince had donned his night-black armor, with the three-headed dragon picked out in rubies on his breastplate. "Your Grace," Jaime had pleaded, "let Darry stay to guard the king this once, or Ser Barristan. Their cloaks are as white as mine."

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."

Jaime's anger had risen up in his throat. "I am not a crutch. I am a knight of the Kingsguard."

"Then guard the king," Ser Jon Darry snapped at him. "When you donned that cloak, you promised to obey."

Rhaegar had put his hand on Jaime's shoulder. "When this battle's done I mean to call a council. Changes will be made. I meant to do it long ago, but . . . well, it does no good to speak of roads not taken. We shall talk when I return."

Those were the last words Rhaegar Targaryen ever spoke to him. Outside the gates an army had assembled, whilst another descended on the Trident. So the Prince of Dragonstone mounted up and donned his tall black helm, and rode forth to his doom. (AFFC: Jaime I)

But it wasn't until after the news of Rhaegar's death at the Trident reached Aerys at the Red Keep that he named Rossart his Hand:

Quote

Birds flew and couriers raced to bear word of the victory at the Ruby Ford. When the news reached the Red Keep, it was said that Aerys cursed the Dornish, certain that Lewyn had betrayed Rhaegar. He sent his pregnant queen, Rhaella, and his younger son and new heir, Viserys, away to Dragonstone, but Princess Elia was forced to remain in King's Landing with Rhaegar's children as a hostage against Dorne. Having burned his previous Hand, Lord Chelsted, alive for bad counsel during the war, Aerys now appointed another to the position: the alchemist Rossart—a man of low birth, with little to recommend him but his flames and trickery. (TWOIAF: The Fall of the Dragons - The End)

22 hours ago, SirArthur said:

So the wildfire plan was put into motion after the defeat at the Trident. Which makes also sense, as Rhaegar was confident to win. So burning the city and Lewyn's army taking KL is almost exclusive to each other. It is still possible that your coup idea happened, as Aerys was starting preperations after the defeat. But it makes no sense that Elia is hostage.  

The decision to execute the wildfire plot occurred some time after Rhaegar's death, and the command to execute the wildfire plot occurred after Tywin and his forces were let into King's Landing and began sacking the city, but the preparations for the wildfire plot, and the placing of the wildfire throughout King's Landing, began some time after Rhaegar's returned after the Battle of the Bells, and some time before the execution of Chelsted, and Rhaegar riding off to the Trident:

Quote

He floated in heat, in memory. "After dancing griffins lost the Battle of the Bells, Aerys exiled him." Why am I telling this absurd ugly child? "He had finally realized that Robert was no mere outlaw lord to be crushed at whim, but the greatest threat House Targaryen had faced since Daemon Blackfyre. The king reminded Lewyn Martell gracelessly that he held Elia and sent him to take command of the ten thousand Dornishmen coming up the kingsroad. Jon Darry and Barristan Selmy rode to Stoney Sept to rally what they could of griffins' men, and Prince Rhaegar returned from the south and persuaded his father to swallow his pride and summon my father. But no raven returned from Casterly Rock, and that made the king even more afraid. He saw traitors everywhere, and Varys was always there to point out any he might have missed. So His Grace commanded his alchemists to place caches of wildfire all over King's Landing. Beneath Baelor's Sept and the hovels of Flea Bottom, under stables and storehouses, at all seven gates, even in the cellars of the Red Keep itself.

"Everything was done in the utmost secrecy by a handful of master pyromancers. They did not even trust their own acolytes to help. The queen's eyes had been closed for years, and Rhaegar was busy marshaling an army. But Aerys's new mace-and-dagger Hand was not utterly stupid, and with Rossart, Belis, and Garigus coming and going night and day, he became suspicious. Chelsted, that was his name, Lord Chelsted." It had come back to him suddenly, with the telling. "I'd thought the man craven, but the day he confronted Aerys he found some courage somewhere. He did all he could to dissuade him. He reasoned, he jested, he threatened, and finally he begged. When that failed he took off his chain of office and flung it down on the floor. Aerys burnt him alive for that, and hung his chain about the neck of Rossart, his favorite pyromancer. The man who had cooked Lord Rickard Stark in his own armor. And all the time, I stood by the foot of the Iron Throne in my white plate, still as a corpse, guarding my liege and all his sweet secrets.

"My Sworn Brothers were all away, you see, but Aerys liked to keep me close. I was my father's son, so he did not trust me. He wanted me where Varys could watch me, day and night. So I heard it all." He remembered how Rossart's eyes would shine when he unrolled his maps to show where the substance must be placed. Garigus and Belis were the same. "Rhaegar met Robert on the Trident, and you know what happened there. When the word reached court, Aerys packed the queen off to Dragonstone with Prince Viserys. Princess Elia would have gone as well, but he forbade it. Somehow he had gotten it in his head that Prince Lewyn must have betrayed Rhaegar on the Trident, but he thought he could keep Dorne loyal so long as he kept Elia and Aegon by his side. The traitors want my city, I heard him tell Rossart, but I'll give them naught but ashes. Let Robert be king over charred bones and cooked meat. The Targaryens never bury their dead, they burn them. Aerys meant to have the greatest funeral pyre of them all. Though if truth be told, I do not believe he truly expected to die. Like Aerion Brightfire before him, Aerys thought the fire would transform him . . . that he would rise again, reborn as a dragon, and turn all his enemies to ash. (ASOS: Jaime V)

 

[John Suburbs]

22 hours ago, SirArthur said:

You are right. Rhaegar was to busy training his army. We don't need WB for this. The reason why I am so picky is that Dany was born in the summer of 284 and Bells was very early 283. The wiki calculation has (from my head) 6-9 month between Bells and Trident. Which is far too long for that preperation in my mind. 

We're getting a little off-topic, but I agree. We need at least seven or eight months between the wedding at Riverrun and the sack of King's Landing, since Robb is supposed to be a few weeks older than Jon, who was born on or about the sack. So that means Ned and Robb had their full army together for all this time but never thought to march on King's Landing and put an end to it. Instead, they apparently just dickered around the Riverlands fighting little skirmishes while Rhaegar and Aerys marshalled their forces.

I still contend, however, that the World Book confirms that the Battle of Asheford did not take place until after the wedding, not before the Battle of the Bells as most people believe. So that would account for some of the time, but not all. I'm in the minority in that belief, but that's the way it's written in the WB.

[corbon]

54 minutes ago, John Suburbs said:

We're getting a little off-topic, but I agree. We need at least seven or eight months between the wedding at Riverrun and the sack of King's Landing, since Robb is supposed to be a few weeks older than Jon, who was born on or about the sack. So that means Ned and Robb had their full army together for all this time but never thought to march on King's Landing and put an end to it. Instead, they apparently just dickered around the Riverlands fighting little skirmishes while Rhaegar and Aerys marshalled their forces.

Its not certain they had all their army in the early battles.
It must take quite a long time to muster all the levies and march them south. Yet the early battles happen in a lightning rush (in campaign terms) and have to include time for Ned (long way) and Robert (relatively short way) to get home before they go off to fight. Plus there is the time needed to quell the local Royalist supporters (some House in every region stayed loyal to the Targaryens).

I think that the early battles, up to and including Battle of the Bells, are fought with very much smaller forces, just those that can be mustered and marched in a few weeks or less, mostly Lords, great and small, and their household troops and similar. Probably almost entirely mounted and numbering in the low thousands, maybe with a few spearmen and archers from the more local regions or vassals.
That also explains how Robert can fight 3 battles in a day at Summerhall.

Than after the Battle of the Bells, there is a pause for several reasons - the weddings to finalise the alliance, plus waiting for the bulk of the armies to arrive, the levies, spearmen and archers. That may still take several months more, plus there are still the Loyalist lords to clear out and supply and communication lines to secure. By the time they are actually ready to march on KL with a force sufficient to take it from a few thousand gold cloaks, the Royalists have recovered much of their scattered first army, plus have their own levies etc coming in and now KL has a much larger defending army and the Rebels still don;t have enough to take it, in truth. Without a navy to blockade it, they have little chance of taking a well defended KL.

That introduces the need for negitions to secure additional allies. The Lannisters are not committed yet - who is talking to them and how long will they take? The Greyjoys? What negotiations there? 

All in all I see no problems with 'the big pause' between the Battle of the Bells and the Battle of the Trident. There are many potential reasons why the rebels couldn't 'make a move' for a long time, and indeed, eventually it was the Royalists who made the next move (I wonder if that wasn't a mistake pressured by Aerys, myself, given the description of much of Rhaegar's forces as being raw and new).

54 minutes ago, John Suburbs said:

I still contend, however, that the World Book confirms that the Battle of Asheford did not take place until after the wedding, not before the Battle of the Bells as most people believe. So that would account for some of the time, but not all. I'm in the minority in that belief, but that's the way it's written in the WB.

If does not impute a timing. You are assuming that the reference is in chronological order, but there is no necessity for it to be so.

Quote

More victories were to come for Lord Robert and the stormlords as they marched to join forces with Lord Arryn and the Northmen who supported their cause. Rightly famed is Robert's grand victory at Stoney Sept, also called the Battle of the Bells, where he slew the famous Ser Myles Mooton—once Prince Rhaegar's squire—and five men besides, and might well have killed the new Hand, Lord Connington, had the battle brought them together. The victory sealed the entry of the riverlands into the conflict, following the marriage of Lord Tully's daughters to Lords Arryn and Stark.

The royalist forces were left reeling and scattered by such victories though they did their best to rally. The Kingsguard were dispatched to recover the remnant of Lord Connington's force, and Prince Rhaegar returned from the south to take command of the new levies being raised in the crownlands. And after a partial victory at Ashford, which led to Robert's withdrawal, the Stormlands were left open to Lord Tyrell. Bringing the might of the Reach to bear, the reachlords swept away all resistance and settled in to besiege Storm's End. Shortly afterward, the host was joined by Lord Paxter Redwyne's mighty fleet from the Arbor, completing the siege by land and sea. That siege wore on until the conclusion of the war.

Seems to me its telling of Rebel successes regionally, first, then covering the responses and regional success of the Loyalists.

[John Suburbs]

9 hours ago, three-eyed monkey said:

I'm suggesting it played out something like this:

1/ Rhaegar had planned to depose Aerys, going back to Harrenhal, but got distracted with prophecy and Lyanna. Whent was on-board, since he helped organize the tourney, and Dayne too by virtue of him being Rhaegar's closest confidant. I think most people agree with this.

2/ When Ser Gerold arrived at the ToJ, Rhaegar knew he had to pick up the plans he had put on hold, which was "the road not taken". Given that Ser Gerold was a honorable man and keeping his vows had become hard in Aerys final years, as illustrated by the episode with Lord Rickard and Brandon, I'm suggesting that he too would have favored Rhaegar's plan to replace Aerys, as long as it was done in an honorable way of course. Grand council would seem to be the most honorable means available. It could even be argued that this was for Aerys own good, and was a form of protecting him from himself. (This is the classic contradiction of the simple vows Serve, Obey, Protect. What happens when you need to protect the person you serve and obey from themselves?)

3/ Rhaegar returned to King's Landing to marshal the army against the rebels. The rebellion had to be put down before Rhaegar could proceed. Once that was done, he could make the changes he told Jaime about. Jon Darry did not seem surprised by that comment so I'm taking it that he also agreed with Rhaegar. Barristan was not in Rhaegar's inner circle so he did not know at this stage, but what would he have done if he did? It's hard to say but he does reflect that Rhaegar would have made a better king than the three kings  he served, so I think he would have welcomed it. (But as Barristan survived it is important from a story-telling revelation point of view that he didn't know everything, which is explained by him not being in Rhaegar's inner-circle.)

4/ Rhaegar rode to his doom at the Trident, leaving his plans unfulfilled. But if Rhaegar had won then he would have returned to King's Landing, made the changes he mentioned to Jaime, and ended up in the same place the "road not taken" would have brought him if he had taken it. Rhaegar as king, Aerys deposed for his own good, Jon legitimized, etc. Alas, it was not to be and Rhaegar's plan remained the road not taken for ever more.

I agree. Legitimization of Jon by the king's decree would be far smarter from a political perspective than any proposed annulment of his marriage with Elia or indeed a polygamous marriage, both of which would surely be seen as a slight by Dorne.

I also agree that TPtwP is the elephant in the room, and that any future reveal about the ToJ will relate to this and not the Iron Throne, which is the big red herring in the scene.

In my opinion, it is thematically important that Jon remain a bastard who ascends to power by way of merit, not by way of the laws of inheritance. This is the difference between Jon being the "true king" as opposed to the "rightful king", in the same way Dunk is a "true knight", despite not having been knighted because, funnily enough, the person who could have knighted him died before he did. I use Dunk as an example, but the same theme runs through the novels.

 

I can agree with this, but to add: what would make Rhaegar suddenly divert from his plans to take the crown to the prophecy of the three heads? One answer is Lyanna Stark hearing the truth about the Song of Ice and Fire from Howland Reed, who got it directly from the Green Men.

[three-eyed monkey]

24 minutes ago, John Suburbs said:

I can agree with this, but to add: what would make Rhaegar suddenly divert from his plans to take the crown to the prophecy of the three heads? One answer is Lyanna Stark hearing the truth about the Song of Ice and Fire from Howland Reed, who got it directly from the Green Men.

Yeah I agree. Howland is the link between the Isle of Faces and Green Men, who are obviously part of the endgame by virtue of their association with Spring, through Lyanna and the KotLT, to the ToJ. Again, it strongly suggests the ice and fire theme is the dominant theme at the ToJ and the game of thrones is just small potatoes as you put it.

[Lord Varys]

15 hours ago, Widowmaker 811 said:

Having the Kingsguards in his pocket is akin to having the praetorian guards in his pocket.  Rhaegar would not have had to dance around like he did if that were the case.  The fact that Aerys could order him around meant that Rhaegar did not have the backing of the Kingsguard.  Rhaegar had to hide out to do what he was doing.  Whatever that might be.  What he was doing could not be done in the open.  Because he was powerless.  He was not the king.  He was not going to become king.  Aerys was the man of power and the man who was calling the shots.  

Not really. The KG are just seven dudes, the praetorian guard were a strong contingent of actual troops.

23 hours ago, three-eyed monkey said:

I don't get your point. Rhaella would have been queen regent on Dragonstone, in the eyes of Targ loyalists like Willem Darry who considered Viserys to be the king.

Viserys III was king after his father's death because King Aerys II named him his heir. Rhaella wouldn't have been 'the Queen Regent' then because there is no default setting for the mother of a minor king to serve as his regent. Others could do that just as well. Alyssa Velaryon is only allowed to serve as regent because she has a strong man at her side in Rogar Baratheon who serves as Hand and Protector of the Realm. Cersei, too, has to seize the regency after her husband's death, it is never offered to her. In fact, Robert Baratheon names Eddard Stark Lord Regent and Protector of the Realm on his deathbed, not his loving wife.

Rhaella can be seen as Viserys III's guardian and mother, but considering that the boy did never rule anything but Dragonstone - and that only for a very short time - it makes no sense to see her as his regent.

10 hours ago, John Suburbs said:

I can agree with this, but to add: what would make Rhaegar suddenly divert from his plans to take the crown to the prophecy of the three heads? One answer is Lyanna Stark hearing the truth about the Song of Ice and Fire from Howland Reed, who got it directly from the Green Men.

Any theory putting forth such an idea has to also explain why the hell Howland Reed has shown no interest whatsoever in Jon Snow up to this point.

It is very likely that Howland got very important information on the Others and the ancient past of Westeros on the Isle of Faces, but information relating to the promised prince prophecy? Hardly very likely.

Neither is it very likely that this fan theory of 'the Song of Ice and Fire' being a person rather than a series of important events connected to a person has any merit in the minds of the characters. If the promised prince were to be born from a union of ice (Starks) and fire (Targaryens) then there would have been many such unions in the past, at least from the point on the Targaryens were actively trying create the promised prince (which they did at least since the days of Aegon V). Aerys II would have looked for a Stark bride for his son and heir, not some Volantene noblewoman or a Dornish princess.

[three-eyed monkey]

24 minutes ago, Lord Varys said:

Viserys III was king after his father's death because King Aerys II named him his heir. Rhaella wouldn't have been 'the Queen Regent' then because there is no default setting for the mother of a minor king to serve as his regent. Others could do that just as well. Alyssa Velaryon is only allowed to serve as regent because she has a strong man at her side in Rogar Baratheon who serves as Hand and Protector of the Realm. Cersei, too, has to seize the regency after her husband's death, it is never offered to her. In fact, Robert Baratheon names Eddard Stark Lord Regent and Protector of the Realm on his deathbed, not his loving wife. 

Rhaella can be seen as Viserys III's guardian and mother, but considering that the boy did never rule anything but Dragonstone - and that only for a very short time - it makes no sense to see her as his regent.

Yeah I agree with this. Sorry, I was just confused about the point that @SirArthurwas making about regency. What I should have said was - if anyone saw Rhaella as regent then it may have been the remaining loyalists on Dragonstone, but I fail to see how there is no getting around her?

[John Suburbs]

20 hours ago, corbon said:

Its not certain they had all their army in the early battles.
It must take quite a long time to muster all the levies and march them south. Yet the early battles happen in a lightning rush (in campaign terms) and have to include time for Ned (long way) and Robert (relatively short way) to get home before they go off to fight. Plus there is the time needed to quell the local Royalist supporters (some House in every region stayed loyal to the Targaryens).

I think that the early battles, up to and including Battle of the Bells, are fought with very much smaller forces, just those that can be mustered and marched in a few weeks or less, mostly Lords, great and small, and their household troops and similar. Probably almost entirely mounted and numbering in the low thousands, maybe with a few spearmen and archers from the more local regions or vassals.
That also explains how Robert can fight 3 battles in a day at Summerhall.

Than after the Battle of the Bells, there is a pause for several reasons - the weddings to finalise the alliance, plus waiting for the bulk of the armies to arrive, the levies, spearmen and archers. That may still take several months more, plus there are still the Loyalist lords to clear out and supply and communication lines to secure. By the time they are actually ready to march on KL with a force sufficient to take it from a few thousand gold cloaks, the Royalists have recovered much of their scattered first army, plus have their own levies etc coming in and now KL has a much larger defending army and the Rebels still don;t have enough to take it, in truth. Without a navy to blockade it, they have little chance of taking a well defended KL.

That introduces the need for negitions to secure additional allies. The Lannisters are not committed yet - who is talking to them and how long will they take? The Greyjoys? What negotiations there? 

All in all I see no problems with 'the big pause' between the Battle of the Bells and the Battle of the Trident. There are many potential reasons why the rebels couldn't 'make a move' for a long time, and indeed, eventually it was the Royalists who made the next move (I wonder if that wasn't a mistake pressured by Aerys, myself, given the description of much of Rhaegar's forces as being raw and new).

If does not impute a timing. You are assuming that the reference is in chronological order, but there is no necessity for it to be so.

Seems to me its telling of Rebel successes regionally, first, then covering the responses and regional success of the Loyalists.

True about the initial battles. They must have been rather small to have happened so quickly. If we have a war that lasted "nearly a year", as Ned puts it, and eight months or so between the wedding the sack, than all that fighting in Gulltown, the Stormlands and the Reach had to happen in four months or less. Plus we also have Ned's flight north, through the mountainous Vale, never knowing which house is hostile, then rally his banners, wait for them to show up, march down the Kingsroad . . . Possible, but . . .

My understanding is that the BotB pitted the armies of the Riverlands and the North vs. the loyalist host under Connington. I'm not sure where Jon Arryn is, but considering that Ned, Robert, Hoster and Jon are all at the wedding, then their four individual hosts are pretty much united at this point. 40,000 men should be plenty to take a city from 1000 gold cloaks and a few thousand loyalists in the Red Keep.

So with this force intact, I don't see the sense of stamping out all of the little loyalist lords in the Riverlands, whose forces should be with Selmy and Darry now, so they're no threat to Robert's rear, rather than simply marching on KL and putting an end to it. Eventually, they will have to take the city, so does it make sense to do that with a full army at your back when your foe is still getting its act together? Or do you wait until their army is ready to go and face them in the field first? In the latter scenario, you either lose the rebellion right then and there, or now you have to take the very same city with maybe half the men you had before, or less. I'm no military strategist, but to me it makes sense to strike with overwhelming force first before your enemy has created a counter force.

But this all changes if Mace is marching his host up the Rose Road. Now, Robert must deal with this threat first before he can consider attacking the capital. When he lost at Ashford, Mace diverted some of his host to the capital, which then followed Rhaegar to the Trident, while he went on the Storm's End. 

The World Book lists virtually every other event since the Dawn Age in chronological order, including every other battle in Robert's Rebellion. It seems implausible that they would list this one battle out of order. But I'm waiting for F&B 2 to find out for sure.