Just how many people knew about the incest?

[John Suburbs]

17 hours ago, Lord Varys said:

At Winterfell, he quickly realized that his dear siblings may have been behind Bran's fall - because the boy saw or heard something he should not have seen or heard. But that's not the same as him being sure he saw the twins fucking.

Sure, it is certainly possible that always suspected that Cersei and Jaime were a secret romantic couple, but that's not the same as him knowing that this is the case.

I'd say both Littlefinger and Varys (the latter is the true master of the art of planting an idea in somebody's head without them even realizing that they were manipulated) have no motive telling Stannis anything - because if Robert buys that story Stannis will become presumptive heir to the Iron Throne until Robert fathers some trueborn children, and that's the last thing either of them wants.

And Littlefinger helped Lysa to poison her husband - he wouldn't have done that had he also pointed Stannis to Jaime/Cersei's secret romance. Or rather: he would have, perhaps, only done it after Stannis/Jon had talked with Robert about that. Because that would have been his goal had he given Stannis a hint.

The issue with Pycelle is that this is post hoc - long after Stannis' letter arrived at the Red Keep. Is Pycelle actually referring to knowledge he definitely had when Jon Arryn was dying, or does he just refer to a suspicion he may have had back then which, in his mind, were effectively confirmed by Stannis' letter and Cersei's subsequent actions? We don't know.

True knowledge would imply Cersei actually told Pycelle that the king's children weren't the king's children - and she would have never done that. Varys may have such knowledge, but pretty much nobody else. And Pycelle himself cites Cersei's fear of Varys as a reason why Cersei never actually told him to murder Jon Arryn - which could actually imply that the old man is even imagining things, reading meaning into unspoken words and 'meaningful stares' that was never actually there.

In that sense, I think we can conclude Pycelle's knowledge in AGoT and before was also just a suspicion. Although one can assume that he - and others - grew more convinced as things progressed. First Jon's sudden death (orchestrated by Cersei in Pycelle's mind), then Ned's investigation and his words in front of the court immediately before his arrest, etc. - this certainly should help many smart people to come to a conclusion they would call 'informed'. But all that is not proof - Cersei could just act the way she does because she fears that those rumors are going to ruin herself and her family. And it is clear they would destroy them all considering that the truth of the matter is irrelevant - what's clear is that Robert doesn't love her and would very likely be inclined to side with Jon or Ned against her, never mind whether she actually has an affair with Jaime or not.

The thing is, we know that Cersei feared that something like that would happen in AGoT. That makes it a realistic scenario. And we have no reason to believe that setting aside a wife is a difficult task for a king, nor that this would necessarily provoke opposition from the Faith.

And we don't have to assume that setting aside Cersei would have resulted in her and Robert's children becoming bastards - Robert could have kept them as his children and heirs while simply taking a new young wife.

Right, that's what I mean about maybe dropping Tyrion into the second group. It's just that, if he doesn't think Bran saw them doing the deed, I can't imagine what he thinks Bran might have seen or why he (Tyrion) was on the look-out for some sign that J&C were involved.

I'd be interested in hearing examples of Varys planting ideas in people's heads. But I agree that neither of them wants Robert to sire a true heir, but that's not the goal here for Littlefinger. It's to create a false lead surrounding Jon Arryn's death. If he is planning the murder anyway, then there is little risk that the incest story would get back to Robert, or that he would believe it if it did.

Am I correct in thinking that Stannis admits at some point that Robert would not believe him, which is why he went to Arryn? I believe that was in the books but I haven't had time to look it up yet. In any event, LF may very well have had designs on Stannis' life, but he is a much more difficult target. Either way, Stannis' accusation alone would not carry much weight because it would be seen as self-serving BS. There is no reason to wait to murder Jon until after Robert has been told, in fact there is every reason not to, because the other fruits of this plan are not ripe yet; ie, the enmity between wolf and lion, his lack of suitable title and holdings -- plus the fact that even if charges were to be brought against Cersei, they would be addressed through civilized, legal channels not open warfare.

So Pycelle says that at the time he removed Coleman, his decision was based on knowledge that he would not have for more than a year afterwards? I don't see how anyone can read that exchange and not think that Pycelle knew at that time why Arryn had to die. Whether Cersie told him or not, the fact is he knows, for certain. He would not violate his trust as a master just on a hunch. He knows what to do even though Cersei never comes out and says it.

And let's also not overlook the fact that Jaime and Cersei go to some lengths to hide they dalliances; disguises, meeting outside the Red Keep where, as everybody knows, the walls have ears. There is a very strong possibility that Varys has never received a direct report on any of this, or at the very least, that Cersei does not think he has, which accounts for her reticence to speak openly to Pycelle. But maybe I should have made my list a little more nuanced to include those who are certain because they have confirmation and those who are certain because they just know.

We have every reason to believe setting aside a queen without cause, or simply taking a second queen, would cause an uproar in the faith and across the realm. The last king who tried it was Maegor, who spend nearly his entire realm fighting the Faith Militant and countless rebel lords. The only reason he prevailed was Balerion. If Robert were to try the same thing, he doesn't even have the DoE to justify has actions, nor does he have dragons to enforce his will. Without a valid reason to set Cersei aside, Robert would literally be throwing away a kingdom for a younger, more beautiful queen. If doing this is so simple, then why hasn't it occurred regularly in the past? Plenty of kings have grown tired of their queens, and yet they've contented themselves with mistresses and bastards rather then new queens and new sons.

[John Suburbs]

11 hours ago, Bernie Mac said:

Cersei believes he could, she says as much in the conversation Bran overhears before he is pushed. Being put aside for another Lyanna was a real threat to Cersei.  So it is clear he could do it.

Would he? Probably not, he was not a romantic like Henry VIII who married for love and also needed heirs, Robert may look like him in appearance and past times but Robert had no issue sleeping with whores and moved on very quickly. He also barely cared about the children, both legitimate and illegitimate, that he did have.

Cersei was being paranoid but it was a possibility. Varys reads the letters sent back and forth to Highgarden and knew of the plan for Margaery to seduce the king into bed and then make him marry her, in the same paragraph he calls Ned the real danger because he is close to finding out the truth.

Oh, I'm sure he could do it, but I think the implication in that convo with Jaime in the tower is that it would only be successful if her incest came to light. Notice that she frets that Robert will listen to Ned and how close Ned is to Lady Lysa and her accusations. Without that, Robert has no just cause for taking such an action, and Cersei has every legal right to contest the charges, up to an including a TbC, which she would most likely win. 

Yes, Varys is certain. So as I said above, maybe my list should be more nuanced to separate those who definitely have confirmed knowledge and those who are simply certain it's true, like Tyrion and Pycelle. J&C go to some lengths to hide their dalliances -- disguises, meeting outside the RK, etc. -- so it is possible that Varys has never had an eyewitness account but has merely heard the rumors and is smart enough to see their validity.

[Lady Winter Rose]

2 hours ago, Ran said:

@Lady Winter Rose

To be fair, Ned had been getting pieces of information around the topic of Robert and his children for a good while before that. Sansa was the one who made him realize how all the pieces fit together.

But I never ever read in Ned Chapters Varys or LF even said anything about Cersei cheating.

Sure he got many little pieces, just nothing about that.

[Ran]

22 minutes ago, John Suburbs said:

Oh, I'm sure he could do it, but I think the implication in that convo with Jaime in the tower is that it would only be successful if her incest came to light.

I don't think that's quite right:

 

Quote

"He betrayed one already, or have you forgotten?" the woman said. "Oh, I don't deny he's loyal to Robert, that's obvious. What happens when Robert dies and Joff takes the throne? And the sooner that comes to pass, the safer we'll all be. My husband grows more restless every day. Having Stark beside him will only make him worse. He's still in love with the sister, the insipid little dead sixteen-year-old. How long till he decides to put me aside for some new Lyanna?"
 

She's actually looking at a scenario where the incest isn't the issue, it's merely that Robert decides he wants rid of her and then will turn on her using his power as king to railroad her out of the marriage and set her aside.

She's a short-term thinker on this, and she thinks Robert is a short-term thinker as well. Robert wants her gone, he gets rid of her, and he deals with the consequences later.

 

 

[UnFit Finlay]

2 hours ago, Headfallsoff said:

Renly doesn't benefit in the same way and it's risky if he just told Robert directly. Read my links and my other points.

I haven't read TWOIAF but I just read the wiki and it says The Small Council urged Aerys I to put aside his marriage because he had no heirs and there were even rumours he hadn't consummated the marriage. Cersei birthed Robert three healthy heirs.

There are numerous examples of unhappy royal marriages in Westerosi history, and each time the pair have just had to suffer through.

eg. Maegor the Cruel dealt with his marital dissatisfaction by taking multiple wives, but that's not an option anymore. Aegon IV refused to grant Naerys' request to join the Faith as a septa after she provided an heir in Daeron, even though he was happily rooting his way through the Seven Kingdoms and ultimately starting trying to set up his bastard Daemon Waters/Blackfyre as an alternative heir. (Agentknitter on reddit)

It's still evidence that it could be done. The only thing that stopped it those cases was loyalty from Aerys, spite from Aegon and political considerations, which as I've pointed out weren't really an issue in this scenario.

Quote

 

Robert doesn't like confrontation and openly spitting in Tywin's face is just calling for war. He let Cersei dictate his life.

That's because Aerys was quite popular in his youth. The Lannisters aren't, and no one liked Stannis either. Renly took advantage of the confusion to present himself as the best and it worked.

 

What were you saying about presenting our opinions as fact.....?

Aerys being popular is his youth doesn't explain why the likes of Stannis agonised over whether to side with him, even after he'd clearly demonstrated that he was insane.

Quote

 

He did it quite easily. Almost everyone from the Reach and Stormlands followed him. There were really, very few things that could have stopped him.

That's because Tywin was biding his time and  still hoping to have Cersei as queen. And what exactly would happen if he went into rebellion? He'd be put down immediately. Not in this case.

 

 

You keep saying that but you've provided nothing to support it. Why would he have immediately lost against Aerys, but not against Robert?

Also, could you please try and break up your replies with the points that you're responding to? It's quite difficult to work out who you're referring to in the first bit there. Renly or Tywin?

Quote

He was also a young man and I imagine was better able to take slights against his character. In AGOT he was a man who seemingly had everything he wanted, his daughter as queen, his grandchildren ready to take the throne, everything bar Jaime as his heir. He would definitely go to war.

 

And then he'd lose. Badly.

Quote

 

Tywin only got off because Robert died in the boar hunt. He was hoping to kidnap the Hand of the King too, Robert's best friend. 

Tywin had a shit ton of gold and could buy sellswords, and he could spin the propaganda in his favour: "Look, he's putting aside his wife just because he got tired of her, what kind of example does that set for our people, do you want that to be a tradition? What if his heir marries into your family, and then he tosses her aside just because due to Robert's example? What if you marry your daughter into another House and they do the same?" I bet a ton of smaller houses wouldn't want that. Also just because the Lord Paramount of a region would follow Robert doesn't mean all their vassals will. Let's take your own example of Robert's vassals rebelling against him when he went to war.

 

Tywin murdered children and his son murdered the King he'd sworn to protect. No amount of propaganda is going to get the Realm to take up arms for him.

That's another point, actually. Is Tywin really going to rebel when his son, daughter and Grandchildren are in King's Landing? Robert might release Cersei and the kids but Jaime's Kingsguard for the rest of his life, which wouldn't have been long given his history of guarding Kings during rebellions.

My example was about Lords showing loyalty to their King over their liege Lord. In this case, you're speculating that Lords might possibly break their oaths to BOTH in favour of a rebel Lord Paramount who they owe no fealty to? Why on earth would they?

Plus, again, you're talking like we don't know these Lords. In the period that we're talking about, how many Northern Lords are going to raise up against Ned Stark for Tywin Lannister? What about Hoster Tully or Jon Arryn? Or Renly himself? It's possible that SOME might but surely not enough to swing the tide of the war even slightly. All it would mean was that, say, Ned would have to stop to hang Roose Bolton (though Roose is way too smart) before going after Tywin.

[Bernie Mac]

2 hours ago, Headfallsoff said:

 

EDIT: And why not betroth Tommen to Margaery, if Joffrey wasn't available? That gives them the same amount of power with less risks - and there's only a 6 year age difference. In the letter it was mentioned that they were trying to make Margaery Robert's queen, not his mistress.

You've answered it in your own post, there was a six year age difference. Men being older than their wives was not a problem, but women being older decreased the chances of offspring.

For women in the middle ages there was a window for birth, at a certain age it became a lot trickier and life threatening, both for the mother and unborn baby. I think GRRM has a slight misconception about the age and gone slightly overboard with this but in his world noble women are all marrying and trying for children before they hit 20.

 

2 hours ago, Headfallsoff said:

No.... we don't know that either. There's a lot of evidence that supports Renly knew. He had Edric Storm in his castle, for example.

That is not evidence that he knew. The Florents, being nobles, were able to pressure Robert into taking responsibility of the bastard they had with one of their own and forced him to acknowledge Edric.

Robert had him fostered at Storm's End, Renly, not even being a teenager when Edric was born, did not choose this.

This is not evidence that Renly knew.

2 hours ago, Headfallsoff said:

 

He was a member of the Small Council, who all knew except for Barristan. He had reasons for waiting to reveal it to Robert. He had reasons for not telling Ned. He had reasons for not admitting he knew about it later. And the examples I gave above showed that kings didn't put aside their wives just because they didn't like them. 

Jon Arryn himself was in the dark till Stannis told him, so at one point there was at least three people who did not know, Renly, Jon and Barristan.

Both Varys and Littlefinger have their own spy networks, Renly does not. Pycelle may have been able to deduce from Jon Arryn's investigation as he was using the Maester's library for research.

What reasons does he have for not telling Ned? He is telling Ned that Cersei will end the two of them if she gains power. Why would he withhold the Lannister affair? Why would he withhold her part in Jon Arryn's death?

He can easily frame it so that Cersei is guilty and her children are not, this still gets Cersei arrested. He does not.

 

2 hours ago, Headfallsoff said:

There's also Loras. He would be a terrible brother if he did this knowing full well there was a small chance Cersei would be neutralized. And we know he's not a terrible brother and he loves Margaery, as Joffrey was killed because Olenna feared Loras would become the new Kingslayer if he ever laid a hand on her.

Yeah, you are thinking of a modern day mindset. The Howards were the most powerful family during Henry VIII's reign

In both 1538 and 1546 her father petitioned^[1] for her to be married to Thomas Seymour. The King gave his approval for the match, but her brother, Henry, Earl of Surrey, objected strongly, as did the Duchess herself; and the marriage did not take place. Surrey then suggested that the Duchess should seduce the aged King, her father-in-law, and become his mistress, to "wield as much influence on him as Madame d'Etampes doth about the French King".

Women were constantly used as pawns, that does not mean their fathers and brothers did not love them, they never really considered that women would be punished for tempting men and in most cases they were not.

Noble sons were supposed to fight and lead battles, noble daughters were supposed to be graceful and charming to the opposite sex.

2 hours ago, Headfallsoff said:

If Renly did that, he would be a full on moron. As I explained in another thread, Renly was very transparent in his efforts, so much so that even Stannis knew.

And yet Stannis does not assume Renly knows the truth. Cat, Stannis, Brienne and many other nobles are present when Renly reveals his plan, while at the same time laughing at Stannis' story of incest. None of them see that as a contradiction.

Why is it some readers think it is obvious when the characters who inhabit this world, know far more about what is and is not possible don't come to the same conclusion?

2 hours ago, Headfallsoff said:

 

 

And I don't know why people are so passionate about this. Does it make Renly a better or worse person if he did or didn't know? Hardly.

 

Neither. This debate has nothing to do with making Renly a better person, he was still trying to usurp the Throne.

This is the problem, most people who argue that Renly did know are not doing so because they like the character, most people who argue that he did know tend to be Stannis fans and/or people who dislike Renly for not supporting the rightful king. One side is more biased towards a character than the other and its not the side that think Renly was in the dark. Renly's a Usurper either way.

[Bernie Mac]

1 hour ago, John Suburbs said:

Oh, I'm sure he could do it, but I think the implication in that convo with Jaime in the tower is that it would only be successful if her incest came to light. Notice that she frets that Robert will listen to Ned and how close Ned is to Lady Lysa and her accusations. Without that, Robert has no just cause for taking such an action, and Cersei has every legal right to contest the charges, up to an including a TbC, which she would most likely win. 

 

That is not the implication at all. Cersei is worried about being put aside, if Robert knew the truth she'd have no head, she'd not be put aside she be executed. The language is very deliberate. Unless you are arguing that GRRM does not know the meaning of the word, which I don't think you are, then you have to accept that GRRM knew what he was writing.

She'd also not be concerned with who her replacement was because she'd be dead, her children would be dead. Who replaces a dead Queen is inconsequential.

[Ran]

10 minutes ago, Bernie Mac said:

And yet Stannis does not assume Renly knows the truth. Cat, Stannis, Brienne and many other nobles are present when Renly reveals his plan, while at the same time laughing at Stannis' story of incest. None of them see that as a contradiction.

Why is it some readers think it is obvious when the characters who inhabit this world, know far more about what is and is not possible don't come to the same conclusion?

 

Just wanted to highlight this because it's so spot-on. Very well said.

The characters in the world believe that there is a potential for Robert to set Cersei aside in favor of Margaery, and these characters include characters who knew nothing of the incest or who either know or believe that Renly did not know about it.

That's all we need to know. We don't understand the full mechanics, because GRRM didn't lay it out, but he laid out clear evidence that people around Renly who learned or knew of his plot didn't think it strange that he didn't know about or believe in the incest. And therefore we just have to accept that there was some sense to his plan. We've laid out multiple possibilities, from Renly just aiming to make Margaery queen without supplanting Cersei's children, to his finding some pretense to invalidate them, to his quietly murdering them, that don't require him to believe they're abominations.

10 minutes ago, Bernie Mac said:

This is the problem, most people who argue that Renly did know are not doing so because they like the character, most people who argue that he did know tend to be Stannis fans and/or people who dislike Renly for not supporting the rightful king. One side is more biased towards a character than the other and its not the side that think Renly was in the dark. Renly's a Usurper either way.

And this is very much true as well. Renly was a flawed figure who leapt to a crown he wanted because he had an excuse -- protecting himself -- and that's the sort of thing I negatively judge Stannis for (for abandoning Robert and ignoring Ned's efforts to contact him; had he told Ned, Ned would have played the same role as Jon Arryn did ... but Stannis had such a huge chip on his shoulder about Ned that he preferred to leave him and Robert to the lions rather than doing his duty) and the sort of thing I negatively judge Jaime for (for killing Aerys rather than doing the minimum needed to stop his mad plan while following the spirit of his vows). Renly is definitely an usurper. But he didn't know, because the conversations he has and the details around it show that he didn't. You have to ignore the evidence of Renly's and Stannis's conversation, and Renly's conversation with Catelyn, to cook up this idea that he had to know about it.

[Lord Varys]

4 hours ago, Headfallsoff said:

Maybe, but he could cause considerable destruction, even ravage the Reach like he did the Riverlands.

On his own, Tywin could do little more than go down with a bang. Against House Lannister, most of Westeros would stand with Robert. He would have the North, the Riverlands, the Vale, the Crownlands, the Narrow Sea, the Stormlands, the Reach, and, perhaps, even Dorne, with a token force.

Considering that Tywin is no moron he might even clench his teeth harder than Stannis and not rise in rebellion - because he would know that this could only end in the disgrace and downfall of his house.

You have to keep in mind that Tywin's war plans prior to Robert's death - which turned the whole thing in a war of succession - was actually to prevent an escalation of violence. He tried to lure Ned into a trap, to capture him and then exchange him for Tyrion. He had no intention to go to war with Robert.

I mean, I certainly am one of the people who say Robert was only a shadow of himself in 298 AC, a man who may have faced real problems in a war against a Targaryen pretender backed by tens of thousands of Dothraki, but Robert was still infinitely more popular than Tywin. Tywin is feared and respected, but nobody but Kevan ever loved that man. And that's a very deciding factor if you want to fight a war against a superior enemy.

4 hours ago, Headfallsoff said:

Renly didn't talk about the goldcloaks at all so I'm assuming he thought they would be on Cersei's side.

Renly talked about a coup in the castle. It is Ned who later brings the City Watch into the equation in an attempt to prevent fighting between his own men and Cersei's in the castle. Renly's plan was to settle the succession in the castle and only then communicate with the city and the outside world. The City Watch becomes a non-factor as soon as you control the throne/royal family. They would not act against you and your interests if the queen and new king are effectively your hostages.

4 hours ago, Headfallsoff said:

See, your problem is that you think Renly wants to get rid of Cersei merely because he disliked her and you can't figure out the reason for the dislike. It could be that Renly wanted to get rid of Cersei because he wanted The Tyrells to rise up and then he could act as the gatekeeper to royal favour in court, since all the nobles who wanted an in with the new regime  would come to him. Cersei was the 2nd most powerful person in court after Jon Arryn died and the court was filled with Lannisters, so Renly would want Margaery who was sympathetic to his interests to replace her. It could be it was to increase his own power and to help Loras' family.

Why should Renly want to make the Tyrells a power at court? He is not some Tyrell puppet.

Renly was not necessarily all that close with House Tyrell aside from Loras. There is a reason, one assumes, that Mace and none of his sons are with 'King Renly' on his progress/campaign. This looks like lukewarm support while Renly's victory is not assured. Keeping their distance the way did enables Mace and his older sons to jump ship - as they then do, when Renly suddenly dies. They could have also done that had Renly been killed in a battle against Stannis, Joffrey, or Robb.

And Margaery is not really a player in those books, anyway. She is a 14-year-old girl in AGoT, and a girl besides who is not exactly eager to be queen. She is used by Renly and her father as a pawn, she does not desire this role for herself - although we can be sure she seems to have been happy with the kind of life she was to hoping to live as Tommen's queen.

4 hours ago, Headfallsoff said:

I don't think people view killing cousins as kinslaying. Rhaegar was Robert's cousin.

No, it is not kinslaying, as I said, but the Dany case is still the murder of an innocent reasonably close relative. Renly has no problem with that. That is a hint as to what kind of man he is compared to, say, Ned - for whom the possible murder of his nephew Jon Snow clearly was a major issue, just as the murders of Rhaegar's wife and children were. Renly likely had as much empathy/compassion for Elia and her children as Mace and Paxter show when the Small Council discusses those murders in ASoS - where Mathis Rowan nearly explodes...

4 hours ago, Headfallsoff said:

Jaime knew. Cersei knew. Stannis knew. Littlefinger knew. Varys knew. Gregor, who isn't exactly sharp, and his followers all knew. That's a lot of people, that's even more than those who knew of the twincest so it must have been some time.

Varys may have known, but Stannis, Littlefinger, etc. only suspect. Once the letter is out this suspicion can become almost certainly by looking how Cersei and the Lannisters reacted, etc. but even that's not necessarily proof of anything. As I said - Cersei's actions, for instance, are also coherent with a mother defending her trueborn children from evil and potentially very dangerous slander.

4 hours ago, Headfallsoff said:

I don't think Robert chose Renly to be Master of Laws because of his ability, but because of nepotism so his age wouldn't matter much. I'd say it was most probable that Renly was named as Master of Laws at 18, close to Stannis' age when he became Master of Ships.

Sure, but we can be reasonably certain that Renly wasn't Master of Laws while he was still a minor. Also, one imagines that Renly was only chosen after his predecessor died, resigned, was dismissed for some reason. Robert didn't wake up one morning insisting to make his baby brother Master of Laws. There would have been an office to fill and somebody - possibly Robert himself, but perhaps also Jon or Stannis - came up with the idea to grant that office to Renly.

4 hours ago, Headfallsoff said:

GRRM explains that Stannis didn't tell Robert because he had bad relations with him and wasn't sure Robert would believe him. What if tbat did happen and be was left in KL with Lannistrrs surrounding him on all sides? In this case I think self preservation is a valid excuse.

In my opinion not for a man with as rigid morals as Stannis. If you are about the law and justice then you do the right thing no matter the cost. And Stannis failed to do that. Nobody said he had to personally tell Robert. He could have retreated to Dragonstone to send a letter or envoy (Davos, who he also sends to the Stormlords as an envoy) to Robert. Or he could have reached out to Ned in that capacity, telling him about his suspicions about Cersei/Jaime and Jon's death to use Ned the same way as he originally intended to use Jon. But he couldn't bring himself to do that, could he? Because he was hurt that his royal brother favored Ned Stark over him yet again. Stannis wanted to be Hand, he wanted to be Robert's true brother, but the brother Robert chose was Ned Stark. This is the reason why Stannis always stresses the fact that he and Ned weren't friends. He cannot stand him because he stands between him and Robert.

4 hours ago, Headfallsoff said:

The High Septon protested against Maegor's marriage to Rhaena.

Before the power of the Faith was broken. And, in my opinion, because such a marriage was seen as an indication that Aegon I wanted to continue the incest policy - not to mention the Hightower desire to marry one of their own daughters into the royal family. As an isolated incident I don't think such an uncle-niece match would have been a scandal. The Starks did things like that in the past, Victarion and Asha consider it, and nobody ever condemned such avuncular marriages.

But as I said - even if that had been an issue, there would also have been the chance to have Cersei herself take Renly as her second husband.

4 hours ago, Headfallsoff said:

And it could also be Renly didn't want to get married, considering he's gay and all. The Maragery plan allows him to get power while remaining unattached.

But he quickly marries Margaery himself after his brother's death, doesn't he?

The best evidence that Renly was actually himself after the throne is the fact that he acts very quickly after Ned refused his offer. Which I see as evidence that Renly immediately started to make plans to seize the crown himself after he realized Robert would die. If he hadn't had such plans he wouldn't have crowned himself this quickly after Robert's death, and he wouldn't have been able to raise as large a host as he did as quickly as he did. We have to assume that he sent ravens about his intentions all across the Reach and the Stormlands as soon as he reached Storm's End - assuming he went there before he and Loras made way to Highgarden.

Renly does not act like a man who is afraid for his life. If this were the case he would have retreated to Storm's End to wait out the war there and try to ally himself with whatever faction could need his help against the Lannister. But with the prospect of him controlling both the Stormlands and the Reach (and his confidence that Dorne would support him, too) he was effectively the most powerful man in Westeros after Robert's death. He had no reason to be afraid and could be very confident that he would win the Iron Throne - which he actually was.

[Headfallsoff]

14 hours ago, UnFit Finlay said:

It's still evidence that it could be done. The only thing that stopped it those cases was loyalty from Aerys, spite from Aegon and political considerations, which as I've pointed out weren't really an issue in this scenario.

What were you saying about presenting our opinions as fact.....?

Aerys being popular is his youth doesn't explain why the likes of Stannis agonised over whether to side with him, even after he'd clearly demonstrated that he was insane.

You keep saying that but you've provided nothing to support it. Why would he have immediately lost against Aerys, but not against Robert?

Also, could you please try and break up your replies with the points that you're responding to? It's quite difficult to work out who you're referring to in the first bit there. Renly or Tywin?

And then he'd lose. Badly.

Tywin murdered children and his son murdered the King he'd sworn to protect. No amount of propaganda is going to get the Realm to take up arms for him.

That's another point, actually. Is Tywin really going to rebel when his son, daughter and Grandchildren are in King's Landing? Robert might release Cersei and the kids but Jaime's Kingsguard for the rest of his life, which wouldn't have been long given his history of guarding Kings during rebellions.

My example was about Lords showing loyalty to their King over their liege Lord. In this case, you're speculating that Lords might possibly break their oaths to BOTH in favour of a rebel Lord Paramount who they owe no fealty to? Why on earth would they?

Plus, again, you're talking like we don't know these Lords. In the period that we're talking about, how many Northern Lords are going to raise up against Ned Stark for Tywin Lannister? What about Hoster Tully or Jon Arryn? Or Renly himself? It's possible that SOME might but surely not enough to swing the tide of the war even slightly. All it would mean was that, say, Ned would have to stop to hang Roose Bolton (though Roose is way too smart) before going after Tywin.

I don't think Aerys ever set his wife aside. What? (And as I already said it was because the marriage was barren).

When Maegor wanted to take a second wife, no Septon would allow it, and he even had to go into exile.

Naerys could have died from another pregnancy, and The High Septon agreed to her joining the Silent Sisters because she could produce no more heirs. Not similar to Cersei's case.

Fine, It was probably because Aerys was popular and charismatic in his youth. And Stannis agonized over it because he is obsessed with duty. 

You first said Renly wouldn't have a problem setting aside Cersei with no legal justification because he wanted to take the throne with no legal justification. I said the two situations were not similar because one has a high chance of success and the other doesn't. In the first instance, there is no instance of a queen who had been married for 2 decades and birthed three healthy heirs being set aside. But in ACOK, Renly was set to take the throne and would have done so easily. Now you're talking about Tywin. I think you're confused.

Then consider this: Tywin wouldn't go to war against Aerys because even if he won he has no claim to the throne at all, and he had no justification that would swing the lords to support him.

Why on earth would they? I explained that Robert would set a bad precedent that would be terrible for everybody. If marriages can be dissolved on a whim, how can alliances even be made and sustained? For eg Walder Frey was going to marry his daughter to Robb but if Robb could just dissolve that marriage after the war was over he would have no reason to. And Tywin has gold which means he can bribe people.  He also has someone people can follow in Joffrey - Robert's heir. Margaery might not even have children with Robert, and even if she did and they were legitimized, again that would create a terrible precedent no one would want. 

That's a good point. But if Renly was doing this without knowledge of the incest, it would have been through a mock trial most likely. So Tywin would have come to the capital, and could have smuggled the children out if things don't go Cersei's way. (And it's very hard to win a mock trial, Tyrion was only convicted because Cersei controlled the proceedings and because he was a dwarf. In this scenario Cersei controls the court and the Lannisters are feared.)

And if Robert killed all the Lannisters in the building, that's be even more terrible for his career. Even if Tywin doesn't rebel, he could face rebellions like Maegor did.

I disagree. No would would appreciate going to war for a lazy fat king who couldn't control his dick. Robert was clearly in the wrong. They would prefer to stay out of it. Maybe Ned would follow him out of loyalty but the others could stay neutral. The Faith wouldn't take kindly to it as well. And I'm not saying Tywin would necessarily win the war - just that it would be long and bloody and cause a lot of instability in Robert's kingdom and maybe even mass rebellions and give Robert an unsavory reputation. Or Tywin could even declare the Westerlands independent, close off his borders, and stop paying taxes.

[EDITED]

[Lord Varys]

3 hours ago, John Suburbs said:

Right, that's what I mean about maybe dropping Tyrion into the second group. It's just that, if he doesn't think Bran saw them doing the deed, I can't imagine what he thinks Bran might have seen or why he (Tyrion) was on the look-out for some sign that J&C were involved.

He could have thought Bran might have overheard them scheming, planning a murder, a coup, whatever. Tyrion knows what his siblings are capable of.

And, quite frankly, Bran also overheard them plotting and scheming. He got information that was damaging to Cersei/Jaime as them having sex.

3 hours ago, John Suburbs said:

I'd be interested in hearing examples of Varys planting ideas in people's heads. But I agree that neither of them wants Robert to sire a true heir, but that's not the goal here for Littlefinger. It's to create a false lead surrounding Jon Arryn's death. If he is planning the murder anyway, then there is little risk that the incest story would get back to Robert, or that he would believe it if it did.

Oh, I'd say convincing Selmy to rediscover his Targaryen allegiance, convincing Drogo to invade the Seven Kingdoms via the wine seller attempt (which I see as a huge setup with there not being poison in the wine at all), and him goading Tyrion into murdering his father.

I'm pretty sure Littlefinger never planned to murder Jon Arryn - even if he did at one point it would have been because he was investigating Cersei/Jaime, because that was essentially endangering his own position at court (Stannis getting more influence at court could have led to his dismissal) - I think Littlefinger suggested to Lysa to murder Jon because she tried to prevent Robert from becoming Stannis' ward. Lysa in her fear and paranoia would only have done that because Littlefinger could ensure her that nobody would ever suspect them - because the Lannisters had the much better motive, which is also the reason why Littlefinger convinced her to sent the letter to Cat.

3 hours ago, John Suburbs said:

Am I correct in thinking that Stannis admits at some point that Robert would not believe him, which is why he went to Arryn? I believe that was in the books but I haven't had time to look it up yet. In any event, LF may very well have had designs on Stannis' life, but he is a much more difficult target. Either way, Stannis' accusation alone would not carry much weight because it would be seen as self-serving BS. There is no reason to wait to murder Jon until after Robert has been told, in fact there is every reason not to, because the other fruits of this plan are not ripe yet; ie, the enmity between wolf and lion, his lack of suitable title and holdings -- plus the fact that even if charges were to be brought against Cersei, they would be addressed through civilized, legal channels not open warfare.

Stannis does see Jon's death as further evidence that his suspicions are correct. He thinks Cersei had him murdered. That certainly puts both Stannis and Robert in more danger, but it also gives Stannis a much better case to present to Robert. He can say: 'Jon and I investigated your wife and children and then Jon suddenly died.' I mean, in what world would Robert just shrug off such an accusation? He doesn't love Cersei, and he himself wonders how Joffrey can be his son.

Littlefinger's own plans revolve around being everybody's friends - he only fuels the already existing enmity between Ned and the Lannisters, he does not create it. And he does that to remain/become a potential crucial ally for both sides. That's his entire modus operandi. But Stannis sees through him like Tyrion. He cannot work with him and thus he would, in my opinion, never give Stannis any knowledge he could use to strengthen his position at court.

Littlefinger himself may have told Robert about Cersei/Jaime long ago - assuming he could make a good case for that and believed Robert would favor him even more after that - but the fact that Stannis would have also profited from that would have stopped him.

Just as Varys never spilled the beans to anyone important - he likely planned to use this information as a means to discredit/ruin Robert (or Joffrey) and their allies when the time for the Targaryen restoration project had come. And poor Tyrek might still have to play a role in that department. We still don't know how George is going to end the plot of Cersei's children. Will they just die, or will they be disgraced and be publicly denounced as bastards born of incest before they die? We have to wait and see.

3 hours ago, John Suburbs said:

So Pycelle says that at the time he removed Coleman, his decision was based on knowledge that he would not have for more than a year afterwards? I don't see how anyone can read that exchange and not think that Pycelle knew at that time why Arryn had to die. Whether Cersie told him or not, the fact is he knows, for certain. He would not violate his trust as a master just on a hunch. He knows what to do even though Cersei never comes out and says it.

I think it is enough for him to know that Cersei wanted Jon Arryn dead. He doesn't need to know that what he believes about the parentage of Cersei's children is actually true. It could be enough for him to believe that Robert would believe Jon if he made such accusations.

But, again, my issue is about the difference between belief and knowledge. Knowledge means that somebody who knew actually told Pycelle (which I don't buy) or that Pycelle actually has evidence/proof making his conviction knowledge rather than a strong belief. And I can't even imagine what such evidence/proof could be.

3 hours ago, John Suburbs said:

And let's also not overlook the fact that Jaime and Cersei go to some lengths to hide they dalliances; disguises, meeting outside the Red Keep where, as everybody knows, the walls have ears. There is a very strong possibility that Varys has never received a direct report on any of this, or at the very least, that Cersei does not think he has, which accounts for her reticence to speak openly to Pycelle. But maybe I should have made my list a little more nuanced to include those who are certain because they have confirmation and those who are certain because they just know.

I think Varys helped Cersei to arrange her meeting with Jaime back when she fucked him into joining the KG - and to convince Aerys II to actually accept Jaime as a KG. I think that's why Cersei told Tyrion once that when she first came to court she thought for a long time that Varys was her best friend there. That would be a reference to her time at court under Aerys II, and it allows her to actually confess her love for Jaime to Varys. Back then she was not yet married to Robert and the risk would have been considerably lower.

Just think of Varys helping Cersei to meet Jaime in a similar way he helped Tyrion to meet Shae again and again.

3 hours ago, John Suburbs said:

We have every reason to believe setting aside a queen without cause, or simply taking a second queen, would cause an uproar in the faith and across the realm. The last king who tried it was Maegor, who spend nearly his entire realm fighting the Faith Militant and countless rebel lords. The only reason he prevailed was Balerion. If Robert were to try the same thing, he doesn't even have the DoE to justify has actions, nor does he have dragons to enforce his will. Without a valid reason to set Cersei aside, Robert would literally be throwing away a kingdom for a younger, more beautiful queen. If doing this is so simple, then why hasn't it occurred regularly in the past? Plenty of kings have grown tired of their queens, and yet they've contented themselves with mistresses and bastards rather then new queens and new sons.

No king actually grew tired of his queen the way Robert did, did they? At least none of the Targaryen kings. They either loved their queens or wanted to keep them against their will because they liked the power they had over them (Aegon IV). But there were kings who set aside their wives - Baelor set aside Queen Daena, and Aerys I was urged to set aside Queen Aelinor. Nobody saw a problem there.

This wouldn't have been bigamy or polygamy - like Maegor's many marriages (and he only took a second wife, one imagines, because it was out of the question that the High Septon would annul the marriage between his own niece and Maegor!) - it would be the end of one marriage and the start of a new one.

There seem to be different rules for kings in that department than for other people, even princes. Daemon could not set aside Rhea Royce, he had to petition his royal brother who refused him. But a king doesn't have to ask anybody, apparently, when he wants to rid himself of a wife.

How much sense this makes in the context of what we know about annulments, etc. is unclear at this point.

One should George ask what exactly he thinks Renly wanted to accomplish with Margaery and Robert there. But it is clear that he intended to make Margaery Robert's new and only queen, and that Cersei feared Robert could simply replace her with a new Lyanna. She does say this to Jaime early on in AGoT. It is an established fact in those novels, we cannot go behind that.

Just as it is a fact that Renly didn't know about the incest, didn't even suspect it. Because as @Ran has pointed out repeatedly - Renly would have talked and acted much differently if he had known. And that starts in AGoT and ends in ACoK.

[Chaircat Meow]

What about Lord Tywin?

Please forgive vague references, it has been a long time since I read the books for the last time – happy to be corrected.

Two things.

One. We’re told that the offer from Tywin to foster Sweetrobin was to secure the silence of the Vale wrt Jon’s death and the twincest. We’re also told Lord Tywin had never offered to foster before. So, would one not presume that if Cersei and Pycelle asked Tywin to do this they’d have to explain why. Therefore, even though Cersei obviously wouldn’t tell her father about the incest, Tywin would at least have known Jon and Stannis were conspiring to unseat the Lannisters and his grandchildren from the throne, maybe under odd pretences.

Two. When Tywin sends Tyrion to the capital as acting hand he rattles off a list of mistakes he wants investigated, including the demise of Ned. Notably, Tywin never thinks to tell Tyrion to investigate things such as, why Robert died all of a sudden, why Stannis came for the throne, why honourable Ned Stark turned on his best friend’s son, etc. If Tywin really went into the war initially thinking it was all to do with the Catnap he must have got a pretty rude shock when Robert died and the whole country ended up arrayed against Joff. Yet he never mentions this, expresses surprise or asks for it to be investigated, even though it put him in a near impossible situation. He takes events very much in his stride, which suggests they were not unexpected. I would suggest therefore that Tywin knew, for about a year from Cersei and Pycelle, that there was plot to remove his grandchildren from the succession and consequently he likely knew something about the twincest allegations before they were made public, even if he didn't believe them.

[Bernie Mac]

15 minutes ago, Headfallsoff said:

I don't think Aerys ever set his wife aside. What?

He didn't, but it was something he was advised to do meaning it is a possibility.

His small council, at their wits' ends, hoped it was simply some dislike of her that moved him, and thus they urged him to put her aside to take another wife. But he would not hear of it.    

So it is not some impossible action for a king to set aside his wife.

15 minutes ago, Headfallsoff said:

When Maegor wanted to take a second wife, no Septon would allow it, and he even had to go into exile.

Yes, that is a second wife, but putting one of the wives aside was an option

When it became known, the two half-brothers quarreled bitterly. Nor was His Grace alone in his wroth. Manfred Hightower, father of Lady Ceryse, made protest to the king, demanding that Lady Alys be put aside.

Many queens have been under the threat of being put aside.

15 minutes ago, Headfallsoff said:

Aegon IV didn't even try because he knew the consequences.

That is never claimed. He simply did not care. Naerys wanted to be put aside, Aegon IV did not.

When Prince Daeron was born on the last day of 153 AC, Grand Maester Alford warned that another pregnancy might kill her. Naerys was said to address her brother thus: "I have done my duty by you, and given you an heir. I beg you, let us live henceforth as brother and sister." We are told that Aegon replied: "That is what we are doing." Aegon continued to insist his sister perform her wifely duties for the rest of her life.    

His paramours lived at court with him, he did not care about marrying them.

 

15 minutes ago, Headfallsoff said:

You first said Renly wouldn't have a problem setting aside Cersei with no legal justification because he wanted to take the throne with no legal justification. I said the two situations were not similar because one has a high chance of success and the other doesn't. In the first instance, there is no instance of a queen who had been married for 2 decades and birthed three healthy heirs being set aside. But in ACOK, Renly was set to take the throne and would have done so easily. Now you're talking about Tywin. I think you're confused.

I think you are. The chances of both were pretty much the same.

Renly did not take the throne, the only person to successfully usurp the Throne was Robert Baratheon. Him being the only person to successfully put aside his wife is just as likely.  Becoming King is harder to do in principle than putting aside a wife and taking another.

Though we are getting away from the real point, the success of failure of said plan does not mean there was no plan. There clearly was, Renly mentions it, Cersei is paranoid about it and Varys discovers it in the letters from Renly to the Tyrells in Highgarden.

There was a plan to have Cersei put aside, that is indisputable. Whether that plan would have succeeded is another topic entirely.

15 minutes ago, Headfallsoff said:

Then consider this: Tywin wouldn't go to war against Aerys because even if he won he has no claim to the throne at all, and he had no justification that would swing the lords to support him.

That was a gamble Renly was willing to take if it meant removing Cersei from power.

Though Tywin does not hold his 'Baratheon' grandchildren, the King does. They are more likely to side with their father than their grandfather, just as Henry VIII's daughters ultimately sided with their father than their mother's families.

15 minutes ago, Headfallsoff said:

Why on earth would they? I explained that Robert would set a bad precedent that would be terrible for everybody. If marriages can be dissolved on a whim, how can alliances even be made and sustained?

This is a poor argument. When Robert usurped the Throne from the still living Viserys and Daenarys did the realm break down with second and third cousins doing the same for Lordships?

No, of course not, isolated incidents, even by kings, don't become the norm.

15 minutes ago, Headfallsoff said:

 

For eg Walder Frey was going to marry his daughter to Robb but if Robb could just dissolve that marriage after the war was over he would have no reason to.

But Robb clearly did think he could do that. Did the Northern and Riverland Lords who called Robb king do the same?

 

 

[RYShh]

I would say Tywin knew when he asked to foster Sweetrobin, he knew Jon Arryn was up to something, and he knew if Robert learns that they had no chance against the combined power of Stormlands, the North, the Riverlands and the Vale.  But luckily for him, the Vale never entered into the war anyway, and Baratheons divided among themselves.

[Headfallsoff]

 

1 hour ago, Lord Varys said:

Renly talked about a coup in the castle. It is Ned who later brings the City Watch into the equation in an attempt to prevent fighting between his own men and Cersei's in the castle. Renly's plan was to settle the succession in the castle and only then communicate with the city and the outside world. The City Watch becomes a non-factor as soon as you control the throne/royal family. They would not act against you and your interests if the queen and new king are effectively your hostages.

Why should Renly want to make the Tyrells a power at court? He is not some Tyrell puppet.

Renly was not necessarily all that close with House Tyrell aside from Loras. There is a reason, one assumes, that Mace and none of his sons are with 'King Renly' on his progress/campaign. This looks like lukewarm support while Renly's victory is not assured. Keeping their distance the way did enables Mace and his older sons to jump ship - as they then do, when Renly suddenly dies. They could have also done that had Renly been killed in a battle against Stannis, Joffrey, or Robb.

And Margaery is not really a player in those books, anyway. She is a 14-year-old girl in AGoT, and a girl besides who is not exactly eager to be queen. She is used by Renly and her father as a pawn, she does not desire this role for herself - although we can be sure she seems to have been happy with the kind of life she was to hoping to live as Tommen's queen.

In my opinion not for a man with as rigid morals as Stannis. If you are about the law and justice then you do the right thing no matter the cost. And Stannis failed to do that. Nobody said he had to personally tell Robert. He could have retreated to Dragonstone to send a letter or envoy (Davos, who he also sends to the Stormlords as an envoy) to Robert. Or he could have reached out to Ned in that capacity, telling him about his suspicions about Cersei/Jaime and Jon's death to use Ned the same way as he originally intended to use Jon. But he couldn't bring himself to do that, could he? Because he was hurt that his royal brother favored Ned Stark over him yet again. Stannis wanted to be Hand, he wanted to be Robert's true brother, but the brother Robert chose was Ned Stark. This is the reason why Stannis always stresses the fact that he and Ned weren't friends. He cannot stand him because he stands between him and Robert.

Before the power of the Faith was broken. And, in my opinion, because such a marriage was seen as an indication that Aegon I wanted to continue the incest policy - not to mention the Hightower desire to marry one of their own daughters into the royal family. As an isolated incident I don't think such an uncle-niece match would have been a scandal. The Starks did things like that in the past, Victarion and Asha consider it, and nobody ever condemned such avuncular marriages.

But as I said - even if that had been an issue, there would also have been the chance to have Cersei herself take Renly as her second husband.

But he quickly marries Margaery himself after his brother's death, doesn't he?

The best evidence that Renly was actually himself after the throne is the fact that he acts very quickly after Ned refused his offer. Which I see as evidence that Renly immediately started to make plans to seize the crown himself after he realized Robert would die. If he hadn't had such plans he wouldn't have crowned himself this quickly after Robert's death, and he wouldn't have been able to raise as large a host as he did as quickly as he did. We have to assume that he sent ravens about his intentions all across the Reach and the Stormlands as soon as he reached Storm's End - assuming he went there before he and Loras made way to Highgarden.

Renly does not act like a man who is afraid for his life. If this were the case he would have retreated to Storm's End to wait out the war there and try to ally himself with whatever faction could need his help against the Lannister. But with the prospect of him controlling both the Stormlands and the Reach (and his confidence that Dorne would support him, too) he was effectively the most powerful man in Westeros after Robert's death. He had no reason to be afraid and could be very confident that he would win the Iron Throne - which he actually was.

If Renly was going to grab the heirs, wouldnt he have to fight the goldcloaks because they were Lannister soldiers.

Because that also increases his own power.

"By doing this (getting rid of Cersei and getting Robert a better wife), he becomes Robert's golden boy, making him the most powerful man at court. Anything he wants he gets. Not to mention Margaery, who'll be Renly's ally, will be whispering in Robert's ear. With Robert's passive attitude towards ruling, Renly will be the most powerful man in all the Seven Kingdoms."

"It changes the power dynamics of court. He's not only the king's brother but someone known to be intimately close to the new royal line. Once Robert's gone, the Lannisters will have all the influence, and since we know they hate him, he'll be in a precarious position. 

Putting a more favorable family in power keeps him politically relevant and elevates him as people wanting to get in with the new queen might look to him. Medieval (and by extension Westerosi) politics are all about personal ties, so having been an instrumental part of gaining them the throne means lots of rewards from the Tyrells (lands, offices, honors, incomes and everything else that comes with such favoritism). 

Margaery is ESSENTIAL to the plan. Letting other families possibly fill the vacuum would mean he gains nothing. If he puts a family he's extremely close with means he gets all the goodies that come with a change in power." (cstaple on Reddit).

GRRM said the Margaery in the show is what book Margaery would be like is she's older. So on some level she is manipulative and ambitious and wants to be queen. She manipulated both Sansa and Tommen.

Maybe you're right. But I think a large part of Stannis' inaction is just a plot hole to keep the Lannisters in power.

Good point about the avuncular marriages.

Margaery was Loras' sister. And Renly stayed a bachelor at an age where by all rights he should have been married off, perhaps hinting that he didn't desire marriage for himself.

OK, never said Renly acted out of fear for his life. Its clear he likes attention and wants to be king mostly for that reason.

[Ran]

30 minutes ago, RYShh said:

I would say Tywin knew when he asked to foster Sweetrobin, he knew Jon Arryn was up to something, and he knew if Robert learns that they had no chance against the combined power of Stormlands, the North, the Riverlands and the Vale.  But luckily for him, the Vale never entered into the war anyway, and Baratheons divided among themselves.

I feel like that was all Cersei's doing, and Tywin agreed because it was a useful lever against the Vale in the future. Personally, it seems pretty clear to me that Tywin was on board with Cersei's "the sooner the better", re: Robert's death, but he didn't have to know or suspect anything behind Jon Arryn's death. As Kevan said, he was blind to what Cersei and Jaime were.

[Headfallsoff]

3 hours ago, Bernie Mac said:

You've answered it in your own post, there was a six year age difference. Men being older than their wives was not a problem, but women being older decreased the chances of offspring.

For women in the middle ages there was a window for birth, at a certain age it became a lot trickier and life threatening, both for the mother and unborn baby. I think GRRM has a slight misconception about the age and gone slightly overboard with this but in his world noble women are all marrying and trying for children before they hit 20.

 

That is not evidence that he knew. The Florents, being nobles, were able to pressure Robert into taking responsibility of the bastard they had with one of their own and forced him to acknowledge Edric.

Robert had him fostered at Storm's End, Renly, not even being a teenager when Edric was born, did not choose this.

This is not evidence that Renly knew.

Jon Arryn himself was in the dark till Stannis told him, so at one point there was at least three people who did not know, Renly, Jon and Barristan.

Both Varys and Littlefinger have their own spy networks, Renly does not. Pycelle may have been able to deduce from Jon Arryn's investigation as he was using the Maester's library for research.

What reasons does he have for not telling Ned? He is telling Ned that Cersei will end the two of them if she gains power. Why would he withhold the Lannister affair? Why would he withhold her part in Jon Arryn's death?

He can easily frame it so that Cersei is guilty and her children are not, this still gets Cersei arrested. He does not.

 

Yeah, you are thinking of a modern day mindset. The Howards were the most powerful family during Henry VIII's reign

In both 1538 and 1546 her father petitioned^[1] for her to be married to Thomas Seymour. The King gave his approval for the match, but her brother, Henry, Earl of Surrey, objected strongly, as did the Duchess herself; and the marriage did not take place. Surrey then suggested that the Duchess should seduce the aged King, her father-in-law, and become his mistress, to "wield as much influence on him as Madame d'Etampes doth about the French King".

Women were constantly used as pawns, that does not mean their fathers and brothers did not love them, they never really considered that women would be punished for tempting men and in most cases they were not.

Noble sons were supposed to fight and lead battles, noble daughters were supposed to be graceful and charming to the opposite sex.

And yet Stannis does not assume Renly knows the truth. Cat, Stannis, Brienne and many other nobles are present when Renly reveals his plan, while at the same time laughing at Stannis' story of incest. None of them see that as a contradiction.

Why is it some readers think it is obvious when the characters who inhabit this world, know far more about what is and is not possible don't come to the same conclusion?

Neither. This debate has nothing to do with making Renly a better person, he was still trying to usurp the Throne.

This is the problem, most people who argue that Renly did know are not doing so because they like the character, most people who argue that he did know tend to be Stannis fans and/or people who dislike Renly for not supporting the rightful king. One side is more biased towards a character than the other and its not the side that think Renly was in the dark. Renly's a Usurper either way.

If the Tyrells just waited 5 years, Tommen would be 13 and Margaery 19, I don't think she would be infertile then. And are you really arguing that Margaery being older would make it more dangerous for her to go through pregnancy?  They also married Tommen to her later anyway. And the marriage itself would bring them power.

OK, but it's a factor which supports that he might have known.

Littlefinger might have told him, or he might have figured it out like how Stannis might have figured it out.

He wouldn't tell Ned because: Ned would immediately tell Robert, and there is the danger that Robert would abdicate for Stannis, there is the danger Robert marries someone else, there is the danger Ned himself marries Sansa to Robert.

If Ned was told of the twincest, it's natural he would assume the children are bastards as well.

I don't think Loras has the mind of a politician.

I don't dislike Renly, in fact I like him so...

39 minutes ago, Bernie Mac said:

He didn't, but it was something he was advised to do meaning it is a possibility.

His small council, at their wits' ends, hoped it was simply some dislike of her that moved him, and thus they urged him to put her aside to take another wife. But he would not hear of it.    

So it is not some impossible action for a king to set aside his wife.

Yes, that is a second wife, but putting one of the wives aside was an option

When it became known, the two half-brothers quarreled bitterly. Nor was His Grace alone in his wroth. Manfred Hightower, father of Lady Ceryse, made protest to the king, demanding that Lady Alys be put aside.

Many queens have been under the threat of being put aside.

That is never claimed. He simply did not care. Naerys wanted to be put aside, Aegon IV did not.

When Prince Daeron was born on the last day of 153 AC, Grand Maester Alford warned that another pregnancy might kill her. Naerys was said to address her brother thus: "I have done my duty by you, and given you an heir. I beg you, let us live henceforth as brother and sister." We are told that Aegon replied: "That is what we are doing." Aegon continued to insist his sister perform her wifely duties for the rest of her life.    

His paramours lived at court with him, he did not care about marrying them.

 

I think you are. The chances of both were pretty much the same.

Renly did not take the throne, the only person to successfully usurp the Throne was Robert Baratheon. Him being the only person to successfully put aside his wife is just as likely.  Becoming King is harder to do in principle than putting aside a wife and taking another.

Though we are getting away from the real point, the success of failure of said plan does not mean there was no plan. There clearly was, Renly mentions it, Cersei is paranoid about it and Varys discovers it in the letters from Renly to the Tyrells in Highgarden.

There was a plan to have Cersei put aside, that is indisputable. Whether that plan would have succeeded is another topic entirely.

That was a gamble Renly was willing to take if it meant removing Cersei from power.

Though Tywin does not hold his 'Baratheon' grandchildren, the King does. They are more likely to side with their father than their grandfather, just as Henry VIII's daughters ultimately sided with their father than their mother's families.

This is a poor argument. When Robert usurped the Throne from the still living Viserys and Daenarys did the realm break down with second and third cousins doing the same for Lordships?

No, of course not, isolated incidents, even by kings, don't become the norm.

But Robb clearly did think he could do that. Did the Northern and Riverland Lords who called Robb king do the same?

Yeah that's cause he hadn't consummated.

Alys was Maegor's second wife. He was told to put her aside because he couldn't legally get rid of his first wife and their marriage was seen as a sin.

But he didn't love her, so why didnt he agree? There must have been consequences.

Renly had a claim because he was Robert's brother and Robert had a claim through his Targaryen blood. But Tywin doesn't have any claim. And Renly had 80,000 men. He was definitely going to win.

But it would be very hard to convince The Tyrells, is the thing. If Renly was working in isolation I could buy it but he was working with the tyrells.

You do realize 2 out of the 5 kings were usurpers because of Robert's precedent?

Really? Robb thought he could put aside his Frey wife after the war? I don't remember that.

But I can see I'm outvoted, so I'm just going to quietly leave.

[Bernie Mac]

50 minutes ago, RYShh said:

I would say Tywin knew when he asked to foster Sweetrobin, he knew Jon Arryn was up to something, and he knew if Robert learns that they had no chance against the combined power of Stormlands, the North, the Riverlands and the Vale.  But luckily for him, the Vale never entered into the war anyway, and Baratheons divided among themselves.

 

Cersei and Jaime's reaction to Kevan finding out in AFFC suggests that he (and Tywin did not know, that they were in the dark).

Tyrion enjoys the fact that his father was wrong as when he meets him in the Riverlands Tywin tells him that neither the North or Vale are likely to get involved. He's right about the Vale, but wrong about the North.

Had Tywin known the truth and known that the entire realm would be close to rebelling he'd not be raiding the Riverlands, there are potential allies there and none were available to him after he attacked.

Had Tywin been expecting war his extended family would have married outside of the Westerlands rather than within it, he'd actually have more foster children at Casterly Rock and he's have hired a bigger and better sellsword company than the small and rather ineffectual Brave Companions.

Tywin was blindsided by the events. Cersei would not be relying on Lancel Lannister to dispose of the King if Tywin did know, she'd have more competent people to rely on.

 

53 minutes ago, Headfallsoff said:

 

If Renly was going to grab the heirs, wouldnt he have to fight the goldcloaks because they were Lannister soldiers.

No, they are, in principle, Baratheon soldiers. In practice they are Littlefinger's or who ever knows their right price.

But Renly can't, not now that Ned, the Hand, has told him no.

53 minutes ago, Headfallsoff said:

 

"By doing this (getting rid of Cersei and getting Robert a better wife), he becomes Robert's golden boy, making him the most powerful man at court. Anything he wants he gets. Not to mention Margaery, who'll be Renly's ally, will be whispering in Robert's ear. With Robert's passive attitude towards ruling, Renly will be the most powerful man in all the Seven Kingdoms."

No, Robert or her father and brothers would be.

Renly is already one of the most powerful men in the seven kingdoms, he can't get much more powerful and another Bride and her family does not leave him much room to grow.

Renly was happy with Ned being Regent and Hand, power was not his motivation, removing Cersei was.

53 minutes ago, Headfallsoff said:

"It changes the power dynamics of court. He's not only the king's brother but someone known to be intimately close to the new royal line. Once Robert's gone, the Lannisters will have all the influence, and since we know they hate him, he'll be in a precarious position. 

Not really. Renly was pretty much ruling the kingdom while Robert was away. He's not going to improve his positon unless Robert makes him Hand, which seemed unlikely given his loyalty and love of Ned.

53 minutes ago, Headfallsoff said:

Putting a more favorable family in power keeps him politically relevant and elevates him as people wanting to get in with the new queen might look to him. Medieval (and by extension Westerosi) politics are all about personal ties, so having been an instrumental part of gaining them the throne means lots of rewards from the Tyrells (lands, offices, honors, incomes and everything else that comes with such favoritism).

Renly's problem is not relevancy, he's loved by the nobles and commons alike, one of the most powerful Lords in the realm and has a highly influential seat on the Small Council.

His problem is Cersei. Not her children, just Cersei. He's aware that she is a threat to him.  

53 minutes ago, Headfallsoff said:

 

 

Margaery is ESSENTIAL to the plan. Letting other families possibly fill the vacuum would mean he gains nothing. If he puts a family he's extremely close with means he gets all the goodies that come with a change in power." (cstaple on Reddit).

He still gains little.

Whether it is the Tyrells or some other family they still take over that vacuum.

But once again, it is Cersei he has issue with. Not her House, not her children but Cersei.

53 minutes ago, Headfallsoff said:

 

Margaery was Loras' sister. And Renly stayed a bachelor at an age where by all rights he should have been married off, perhaps hinting that he didn't desire marriage for himself.

That is not true. Renly is 21. Edmure is much older, Stannis was 23 when he married, Brandon was not due to marry till 21, same with Robert.

Men can marry when they want, there is less of a rush. There was nothing unusual with Renly not being married in AGOT.

53 minutes ago, Headfallsoff said:

OK, never said Renly acted out of fear for his life. Its clear he likes attention and wants to be king mostly for that reason.

He does though.

Lord Renly took a step back, taut as a bowstring. "Every moment you delay gives Cersei another moment to prepare. By the time Robert dies, it may be too late … for both of us."

"Then we should pray that Robert does not die."

 

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

 

"On the night of Robert's death, I offered your husband a hundred swords and urged him to take Joffrey into his power. Had he listened, he would be regent today, and there would have been no need for me to claim the throne."

 

   "Ned refused you." She did not have to be told.

 

"He had sworn to protect Robert's children," Renly said. "I lacked the strength to act alone, so when Lord Eddard turned me away, I had no choice but to flee. Had I stayed, I knew the queen would see to it that I did not long outlive my brother."

 

Renly was in fear of his life. From his POV Ned was rejecting the idea of going against Cersei and yet he was arrested, he could only presume that the same would happen to him or worse his plot be tortured out of Ned and Ned used against him.

[Chaircat Meow]

46 minutes ago, Bernie Mac said:

 

Cersei and Jaime's reaction to Kevan finding out in AFFC suggests that he (and Tywin did not know, that they were in the dark).

Tyrion enjoys the fact that his father was wrong as when he meets him in the Riverlands Tywin tells him that neither the North or Vale are likely to get involved. He's right about the Vale, but wrong about the North.

Had Tywin known the truth and known that the entire realm would be close to rebelling he'd not be raiding the Riverlands, there are potential allies there and none were available to him after he attacked.

Had Tywin been expecting war his extended family would have married outside of the Westerlands rather than within it, he'd actually have more foster children at Casterly Rock and he's have hired a bigger and better sellsword company than the small and rather ineffectual Brave Companions.

Tywin was blindsided by the events. Cersei would not be relying on Lancel Lannister to dispose of the King if Tywin did know, she'd have more competent people to rely on.

I'm pretty sure if you read the scene at the Crossroads Inn carefully Tywin is indulging in smack-talk with Tyrion. He claims 'the war is as good as won' because he's beaten the Tullys to try and shame Tyrion into doing something in the field (chase down Dondarrrion). His later words reveal he knew full well the war wasn't done - he's actually pleased when Robb does prove him wrong by marching down the causeway (so he can defeat him quickly)  and he's got his eye on Stannis all the time. 

I think if he was truly blindsided he would have given instructions to Tyrion to find out what on earth happened when he sent him to king's landing. I think the fact he offered to foster for the first time with sweetrobin means he had come to believe he was under threat about 1/2 to 1 year before the novel begins. 

[RYShh]

1 hour ago, Ran said:

I feel like that was all Cersei's doing, and Tywin agreed because it was a useful lever against the Vale in the future. Personally, it seems pretty clear to me that Tywin was on board with Cersei's "the sooner the better", re: Robert's death, but he didn't have to know or suspect anything behind Jon Arryn's death. As Kevan said, he was blind to what Cersei and Jaime were.

 

33 minutes ago, Bernie Mac said:

 

Cersei and Jaime's reaction to Kevan finding out in AFFC suggests that he (and Tywin did not know, that they were in the dark).

Tyrion enjoys the fact that his father was wrong as when he meets him in the Riverlands Tywin tells him that neither the North or Vale are likely to get involved. He's right about the Vale, but wrong about the North.

Had Tywin known the truth and known that the entire realm would be close to rebelling he'd not be raiding the Riverlands, there are potential allies there and none were available to him after he attacked.

Had Tywin been expecting war his extended family would have married outside of the Westerlands rather than within it, he'd actually have more foster children at Casterly Rock and he's have hired a bigger and better sellsword company than the small and rather ineffectual Brave Companions.

Tywin was blindsided by the events. Cersei would not be relying on Lancel Lannister to dispose of the King if Tywin did know, she'd have more competent people to rely on.

 

 

Why are we assuming that Kevan knows all of Tywin's secrets? I am pretty sure Tywin had his own secrets that even Kevan didn't know about.

I think Tywin knew that he couldn't gain any ally from the Riverlands since the Tully girls were married to the Vale and the North, so weakening them before the main conflict seems like a better idea.

Which children of Tywin could marry? His cousins are almost irrelevant since they can wait forever to be an heir to the Casterly Rock. Jaime was a Kingsguard, and Tyrion was an imp that he hates, so he didn't have many options at that point. Ned would never give one of his sons as a squire to Tywin, as well as Jon didn't give Sweetrobin, the Dorne hates him so they wouldn't give them anything as well, and Tyrell brothers were already knights so he didn't have many option on that regard, only Sweetrobin and he failed on that too.