Harrenhal's tourney, then what?

[rotting sea cow]

It has been suggested that the Tourney of Harrenhal was in fact a meeting to gather political support around Prince Rhaegar Targaryen so he could be able to depose his father. Events like the Mad King attending the tourney and Rhaegar himself ignoring his wife to crown Lyanna Stark as Queen of Love and Beauty probably prevented to have the intended effect.

But what was actually the plan? Let's say that Howland Reed doesn't leave the Isle of Faces and thus Lyanna doesn't intervene, etc. What was actually the plan afterwards? Or were just the lords who wanted to force Rhaegar into action?

 

[frenin]

I think that both Rhaegar and the Lords wanted some assurances that whatever they were about to do, both of them could count with the back of the others, so they discuss a few things and after that, Rhaegar from Dragonstone or say Griffin's roost, call a council or directly leads an army against his father.

[The Young Maester]

Aerys arrival at the tourney ruined Rhaegars plans. No doubt Varys was whispering about plots and betrayal at Harrenhal.

I think Rhaegar was going to call a great council of sorts. In this great council the great lords would vote on whether to depose the mad king. Rhaegar probably knew that Aerys wasn’t going to go down without a fight, so it’s likely that a civil war to put Rhaegar on the throne would’ve happened.

[Alexis-something-Rose]

1 hour ago, The Young Maester said:

Aerys arrival at the tourney ruined Rhaegars plans. No doubt Varys was whispering about plots and betrayal at Harrenhal.

I wonder though if Aerys's presence at Harrenhal was really meant to ruin Rhaegar's plans. 

Aerys did not leave the Red Keep since the Defiance of Duskendale. This was the first time people got to actually see him in the flesh. 

In the World book, it says that people were appalled by his appearance and he was not behaving like a sane man. So whatever rumors there were about him, the lords that were present there got to see first hand not just what Aerys looked like now, but also the madness.

By contrast, you have Rhaegar who is completely unlike his father, entering the joust and winning. If push comes to shove, who will the lords throw their weight behind? The king who has lost his mind or his son?

I think that's the purpose Aerys's presence at Harrenhal served. Maybe that's what Rhaegar wanted all along, or maybe Varys took it upon himself to make sure Aerys was at Harrenhal so that everyone could get a could look at him.

[The Young Maester]

1 hour ago, Alexis-something-Rose said:

I wonder though if Aerys's presence at Harrenhal was really meant to ruin Rhaegar's plans. 

Aerys did not leave the Red Keep since the Defiance of Duskendale. This was the first time people got to actually see him in the flesh. 

In the World book, it says that people were appalled by his appearance and he was not behaving like a sane man. So whatever rumors there were about him, the lords that were present there got to see first hand not just what Aerys looked like now, but also the madness.

By contrast, you have Rhaegar who is completely unlike his father, entering the joust and winning. If push comes to shove, who will the lords throw their weight behind? The king who has lost his mind or his son?

I think that's the purpose Aerys's presence at Harrenhal served. Maybe that's what Rhaegar wanted all along, or maybe Varys took it upon himself to make sure Aerys was at Harrenhal so that everyone could get a could look at him.

It’s a good plan to lure the mad king to Harrenhal so the Great lords can witness the kings madness. Maybe that was the plan, make it seem like Rhaegar was going to plot treason. 
I mean both the great council and luring the mad king to Harrenhal are good plans. Because the great council wouldn’t work without the latter.

But I feel that a great council without the mad king present would have been great. Because Rhaegar would’ve put many of the Aerys supporters on the spot. Because not supporting Rhaegar means you would be a traitor to Rhaegars reign. Peer pressure would take in.

[SFDanny]

1 hour ago, The Young Maester said:

It’s a good plan to lure the mad king to Harrenhal so the Great lords can witness the kings madness. Maybe that was the plan, make it seem like Rhaegar was going to plot treason. 
I mean both the great council and luring the mad king to Harrenhal are good plans. Because the great council wouldn’t work without the latter.

But I feel that a great council without the mad king present would have been great. Because Rhaegar would’ve put many of the Aerys supporters on the spot. Because not supporting Rhaegar means you would be a traitor to Rhaegars reign. Peer pressure would take in.

The problem here is the idea the Great Lords of the realm don't know of Aerys's madness well before Harrenhal. While it is true that this is the first time since Duskendale that Aerys leaves the Red Keep, it is not true he has been hidden so no one can see him since his release from captivity. It is a shock for the common folk who see their king in this state. It is not for the Great Lords of the realm who deal with King's Landing. They already know of the King's mental and physical state - even if they haven't seen it personally. As such, it is not part of Rhaegar's plan to use Aerys's appearance as part of preparations for the tourney. It is Aerys's own move, and quite likely Varys's own move, to prevent a dangerous gathering of nobles turning into what Rhaegar no doubt wanted - a de facto Great Council of the Realm. In that regard it would seem to have worked just as Aerys and Varys intended.

But here one must ask the question "would Rhaegar's plan have worked if Aerys had not come to the tourney?" I think the answer is no. Rhaegar tries to bring the nobility of the realm together so he can plead his case to replace his father, but the politics of Westeros don't just work in a binary fashion. It is not just a choice between father and son. Others have their agendas. Most of the High Lords of the realm - Stark, Baratheon, Arryn, Tully, and Lannister - have already made a choice that doesn't include putting Rhaegar on his father's throne. That is what the marriage pacts, including the one destroyed by Aerys at the start of the tourney between House Lannister and House Tully are all about.

What we see at Harrenhal is not just Aerys's display of power in taking Jaime away as a de facto hostage, but the refusal of House Stark and the others to abandon their "southron ambitions" and support Rhaegar. I think in this the dishonoring of Ashara Dayne by a Stark - most likely Brandon Stark - is a key part to understanding the political currents at play at Harrenhal. So too, is the crowning of Lyanna at the end of the tourney. It is Rhaegar's reply to House Stark and its allies that he stands with his father against their ambitions. That there are multiple layers of motives going on here doesn't change the fact Rhaegar tells Westeros he stands between the marriage of House Stark with House Baratheon. He does so by "honoring" Lyanna, just as Aerys "honors" Jaime, but the message is the same.

[The Young Maester]

2 minutes ago, SFDanny said:

The problem here is the idea the Great Lords of the realm don't know of Aerys's madness well before Harrenhal. While it is true that this is the first time since Duskendale that Aerys leaves the Red Keep, it is not true he has been hidden so no one can see him since his release from captivity. It is a shock for the common folk who see their king in this state. It is not for the Great Lords of the realm who deal with King's Landing. They already know of the King's mental and physical state - even if they haven't seen it personally. As such, it is not part of Rhaegar's plan to use Aerys's appearance as part of preparations for the tourney. It is Aerys's own move, and quite likely Varys's own move, to prevent a dangerous gathering of nobles turning into what Rhaegar no doubt wanted - a de facto Great Council of the Realm. In that regard it would seem to have worked just as Aerys and Varys intended.

But here one must ask the question "would Rhaegar's plan have worked if Aerys had not come to the tourney?" I think the answer is no. Rhaegar tries to bring the nobility of the realm together so he can plead his case to replace his father, but the politics of Westeros don't just work in a binary fashion. It is not just a choice between father and son. Others have their agendas. Most of the High Lords of the realm - Stark, Baratheon, Arryn, Tully, and Lannister - have already made a choice that doesn't include putting Rhaegar on his father's throne. That is what the marriage pacts, including the one destroyed by Aerys at the start of the tourney between House Lannister and House Tully are all about.

What we see at Harrenhal is not just Aerys's display of power in taking Jaime away as a de facto hostage, but the refusal of House Stark and the others to abandon their "southron ambitions" and support Rhaegar. I think in this the dishonoring of Ashara Dayne by a Stark - most likely Brandon Stark - is a key part to understanding the political currents at play at Harrenhal. So too, is the crowning of Lyanna at the end of the tourney. It is Rhaegar's reply to House Stark and its allies that he stands with his father against their ambitions. That their are multiple layers of motives going on here doesn't change the fact Rhaegar tells Westeros he stands between the marriage of House Stark with House Baratheon. He does so by "honoring" Lyanna, just as Aerys "honors" Jaime, but the message is the same.

Yeah I agree with you on the nobles being aware of Aerys’s madness.

I always suspected that Rickard Stark was planning some sort of betrayal alongside his friends Jon Arryn and hoster tully. However what you brought up about Rhaegar crowning Lyanna was quite interesting. Maybe Rhaegar was aware of these southorn ambitions. And crowned Lyanna to send a message tho the message was received differently however.
I really hope the next books will tell us more about these plots that happened during Aerys’s reign.

[rotting sea cow]

36 minutes ago, SFDanny said:

The problem here is the idea the Great Lords of the realm don't know of Aerys's madness well before Harrenhal. While it is true that this is the first time since Duskendale that Aerys leaves the Red Keep, it is not true he has been hidden so no one can see him since his release from captivity. It is a shock for the common folk who see their king in this state. It is not for the Great Lords of the realm who deal with King's Landing. They already know of the King's mental and physical state - even if they haven't seen it personally. As such, it is not part of Rhaegar's plan to use Aerys's appearance as part of preparations for the tourney. It is Aerys's own move, and quite likely Varys's own move, to prevent a dangerous gathering of nobles turning into what Rhaegar no doubt wanted - a de facto Great Council of the Realm. In that regard it would seem to have worked just as Aerys and Varys intended.

I agree

36 minutes ago, SFDanny said:

But here one must ask the question "would Rhaegar's plan have worked if Aerys had not come to the tourney?" I think the answer is no. Rhaegar tries to bring the nobility of the realm together so he can plead his case to replace his father, but the politics of Westeros don't just work in a binary fashion. It is not just a choice between father and son. Others have their agendas. Most of the High Lords of the realm - Stark, Baratheon, Arryn, Tully, and Lannister - have already made a choice that doesn't include putting Rhaegar on his father's throne. That is what the marriage pacts, including the one destroyed by Aerys at the start of the tourney between House Lannister and House Tully are all about.

I don't think the Starks, Baratheons, Arryns and Tullys were prepared to ditch the Targaryens at that point. It took Aerys burning Rickard Stark and his heir as well as demanding Ned's and Robert's heads to make it happen. Even under these blatant injustices, the Baratheons, Tullys and Arryns faced resistance within their own lands. Starting a rebellion out of nowhere, would have faced even more. Certainly they had a viable candidate in Robert but as long as Rhaegar was alive and his qualities appreciated by most, replacing him was a uphill job.

Of course, Rhaegar would have been severely constrained under these circumstances.

Lannister was still an outsider in these schemes. It is unclear whether Tywin would have still gone for Lysa, because a betrothal never materialized even well before Jaime taking vows.

36 minutes ago, SFDanny said:

 

What we see at Harrenhal is not just Aerys's display of power in taking Jaime away as a de facto hostage, but the refusal of House Stark and the others to abandon their "southron ambitions" and support Rhaegar. I think in this the dishonoring of Ashara Dayne by a Stark - most likely Brandon Stark - is a key part to understanding the political currents at play at Harrenhal. So too, is the crowning of Lyanna at the end of the tourney. It is Rhaegar's reply to House Stark and its allies that he stands with his father against their ambitions. That there are multiple layers of motives going on here doesn't change the fact Rhaegar tells Westeros he stands between the marriage of House Stark with House Baratheon. He does so by "honoring" Lyanna, just as Aerys "honors" Jaime, but the message is the same.

 

I strongly disagree on this. There is no indication that Rhaegar made that for political reasons. In fact, nothing hurt his cause more than that. Not only he made a slight to his more fervent supporters (the Dornish, pretty sure that Oberyn also wanted to kill Rhaegar then and there) but that display probably made all the lords present think that Rhaegar was as mad as his father.

 

 

 

 

 

 

[Ser Leftwich]

4 hours ago, Alexis-something-Rose said:

I wonder though if Aerys's presence at Harrenhal was really meant to ruin Rhaegar's plans. 

Aerys did not leave the Red Keep since the Defiance of Duskendale. This was the first time people got to actually see him in the flesh. 

In the World book, it says that people were appalled by his appearance and he was not behaving like a sane man. So whatever rumors there were about him, the lords that were present there got to see first hand not just what Aerys looked like now, but also the madness.

By contrast, you have Rhaegar who is completely unlike his father, entering the joust and winning. If push comes to shove, who will the lords throw their weight behind? The king who has lost his mind or his son?

I think that's the purpose Aerys's presence at Harrenhal served. Maybe that's what Rhaegar wanted all along, or maybe Varys took it upon himself to make sure Aerys was at Harrenhal so that everyone could get a could look at him.

This is the best thing I have read on this forum for years. (Not sarcasm, I am not sure that I have heard this version before.)

[Alexis-something-Rose]

24 minutes ago, Ser Leftwich said:

This is the best thing I have read on this forum for years. (Not sarcasm, I am not sure that I have heard this version before.)

Thanks! Got a whole speculation about the role of Varys in all of this, that maybe he wasn't trying to hinder Rhaegar as much as he was trying to nudge things along the way. 

Varys does his job of informer very well . . . all the while scheming. 

[frenin]

2 hours ago, SFDanny said:

But here one must ask the question "would Rhaegar's plan have worked if Aerys had not come to the tourney?" I think the answer is no. Rhaegar tries to bring the nobility of the realm together so he can plead his case to replace his father, but the politics of Westeros don't just work in a binary fashion. It is not just a choice between father and son. Others have their agendas. Most of the High Lords of the realm - Stark, Baratheon, Arryn, Tully, and Lannister - have already made a choice that doesn't include putting Rhaegar on his father's throne. That is what the marriage pacts, including the one destroyed by Aerys at the start of the tourney between House Lannister and House Tully are all about.

But there is no single hint of this, quite the contrary, Rickard was a kids when Aegon V sent food  to the North, Robert seemed chill with his cousins, no one seemed to plot nothing. 

 

 

2 hours ago, SFDanny said:

What we see at Harrenhal is not just Aerys's display of power in taking Jaime away as a de facto hostage, but the refusal of House Stark and the others to abandon their "southron ambitions" and support Rhaegar. I think in this the dishonoring of Ashara Dayne by a Stark - most likely Brandon Stark - is a key part to understanding the political currents at play at Harrenhal. So too, is the crowning of Lyanna at the end of the tourney. It is Rhaegar's reply to House Stark and its allies that he stands with his father against their ambitions. That there are multiple layers of motives going on here doesn't change the fact Rhaegar tells Westeros he stands between the marriage of House Stark with House Baratheon. He does so by "honoring" Lyanna, just as Aerys "honors" Jaime, but the message is the same.

That will mean that everyone or at least, Brandon, Ned, Robert and  the Great Lords knew about what was happening there and  they knew nothing.

 

 

 

[nyser1]

Rhaegar had the Targaryen "Madness", even if it came out differently in his lifetime than being a fan of slaughter (all of his actions related to the prophecy suggest this). Would not be surprised if it was not completely thought through.

[SFDanny]

40 minutes ago, frenin said:

But there is no single hint of this, quite the contrary, Rickard was a kids when Aegon V sent food  to the North, Robert seemed chill with his cousins, no one seemed to plot nothing. 

There are, in fact, many hints, clues, whatever you want to call them that point towards this. The greatest being the unique character of the interlocking web of marriage pacts, attempts at marriage pacts, fostering of children between these Great Houses during this period. In the 281 years of Targaryen rule up to this point we see nothing like this. Yet the Starks, the Arryns, the Baratheons, and the Tullys make these ties all under the rule of one king. For what purpose?

The only comparable examples we see in the books is in the run up to the War of the Five Kings the marriage alliances made between the Great Houses in order to win the throne. Margaery's marriages to Renly, Joffrey, and Tommen, and the marriage pact of Myrcella to Trystane look very much akin to the alliance of the Great Houses some twenty years previous. The later are openly alliances to seize the throne. Yet the alliance Rickard, Hoster, Jon, Robert, and almost Tywin made have only benign motives? I think not. I surely think the Targaryens could not think if all just fine business as normal.

In fact it is anything but normal. In Martin's world the overwhelming majority of marriages of the Great Houses we know about are marriages between the High Lords and their children with vassal lords or within the High Lord's kin itself - marriages to cousins.  There is good reason for this. There is an oath of fealty between the High Lord and his vassal. There can be no such thing between the Great Houses themselves. Or rather if there is such a oath of fealty between them it is a great concern for the king. If so, it is treason because they only are supposed to be bound by oaths to serve the king.

So what is this phenomenon we see during Rickard's time? Just good friendship. A passing fad? No, we are told what it is "ambition." Another of those clues you think there is no hint about. One can go on and on about clues Martin lays out pointing to the profoundly political nature of Rickard's political alliances. What I don't understand is how one ignores them.

1 hour ago, frenin said:

That will mean that everyone or at least, Brandon, Ned, Robert and  the Great Lords knew about what was happening there and  they knew nothing.

What makes you think they knew nothing?

[SFDanny]

3 hours ago, rotting sea cow said:

I don't think the Starks, Baratheons, Arryns and Tullys were prepared to ditch the Targaryens at that point. It took Aerys burning Rickard Stark and his heir as well as demanding Ned's and Robert's heads to make it happen. Even under these blatant injustices, the Baratheons, Tullys and Arryns faced resistance within their own lands. Starting a rebellion out of nowhere, would have faced even more. Certainly they had a viable candidate in Robert but as long as Rhaegar was alive and his qualities appreciated by most, replacing him was a uphill job.

Of course, Rhaegar would have been severely constrained under these circumstances.

Lannister was still an outsider in these schemes. It is unclear whether Tywin would have still gone for Lysa, because a betrothal never materialized even well before Jaime taking vows.

To you last point first, it is clear that the marriage pact had gone as far as discussing the dowry. Tywin, at this point, has to believe his schemes to marry Cersei into the royal house are dead and buried. He has gone as far as openly say before council that Rhaegar would be a better king, and he orders the attack on Duskendale knowing it will likely result in Aerys's death. Only Ser Barristan's heroics save him. So all bridges between King and Hand hang only by fraying threads. Yet Rhaegar has his own wife and isn't likely to set her aside for Cersei. No, I think by opening the negotiations for the marriage pact Tywin is clearly moved on to an alliance between the other Great Houses of Rickard's alliance. 

The genius of Aerys's move, probably thought of by Varys, is that it in one fell swoop it not only destroys the marriage pact, but it gives Tywin's heir over to the king as a hostage.

I disagree with your first point here. One has to ask what is the purpose of this highly unusual, one can say unique, up to this point of these marriage pacts between High Lords? It is clearly a political set of alliances, to use all the power of these lords for some purpose. But I didn't say I thought this means the alliance is designed for open armed rebellion against the Targaryens or to put Robert on the throne. Martin has been clear that Robert is chosen to be the new king by the rebels until around the time of the Trident.

My guess is that what unites these ambitious High Lords is to band together to do away with Targaryen overlordship, but not to set up a new king of Westeros. Tywin Lannister and Rickard Stark are highly unlikely to decide to put the other on the Iron Throne. But an alliance of High Lords to recreate kingdoms and create new kingdoms in which each has the title of king seems much more likely. Combine this with overtures to powerful lords in the Reach and one can see a plan in which six of the seven kingdoms renounce their fealty to House Targaryen in the belief that they can control the majority of their vassals in that endeavor. Only Dorne has a marriage tie to the Targaryens that would push them to support Aerys or Rhaegar.

As to your point about Rhaegar being severely constrained, I agree. He is between a rock and a hard place with only his marriage to Elia, his charisma, his factional fighting skills, and his comparison to his father to help him.

[frenin]

1 hour ago, SFDanny said:

There are, in fact, many hints, clues, whatever you want to call them that point towards this. The greatest being the unique character of the interlocking web of marriage pacts, attempts at marriage pacts, fostering of children between these Great Houses during this period. In the 281 years of Targaryen rule up to this point we see nothing like this. Yet the Starks, the Arryns, the Baratheons, and the Tullys make these ties all under the rule of one king. For what purpose?

No, they aren't, unless well, you want to consider them a prove and  the prove seem to be that those ties did in fact overthrew the Targ dynasty, we see a lot of bethrothals between alot of Houses from different Kingdoms, we know that Baratheons and  Lannisters had already married in the last etc.

Eddard and Robert were fostered because it was an honor for them, just as Walder Frey wanted his kids to be fostered in the Eyrie too, Robert was in love with Lyanna and  he was a great match, the only match that is weird is Brandon's.

 

 

1 hour ago, SFDanny said:

The only comparable examples we see in the books is in the run up to the War of the Five Kings the marriage alliances made between the Great Houses in order to win the throne. Margaery's marriages to Renly, Joffrey, and Tommen, and the marriage pact of Myrcella to Trystane look very much akin to the alliance of the Great Houses some twenty years previous. The later are openly alliances to seize the throne. Yet the alliance Rickard, Hoster, Jon, Robert, and almost Tywin made have only benign motives? I think not. I surely think the Targaryens could not think if all just fine business as normal.

Or when the Targs were trying to unite the Realm and  the such, the alliances during the WofT5 are alliances made when there is a war at play, they weren't expecting any war were they?? And if so, why didn't they marry their kids to their vassals to secure those ties?? They certainly couldn't expect their vassals help them to commit treason right??

Why Jaime and  Barrí B made zero alusions to the Targs being upset?? Aerys had a quarrel with his son and  his son had a quarrel with his father.

 

 

1 hour ago, SFDanny said:

In fact it is anything but normal. In Martin's world the overwhelming majority of marriages of the Great Houses we know about are marriages between the High Lords and their children with vassal lords or within the High Lord's kin itself - marriages to cousins.  There is good reason for this. There is an oath of fealty between the High Lord and his vassal. There can be no such thing between the Great Houses themselves. Or rather if there is such a oath of fealty between them it is a great concern for the king. If so, it is treason because they only are supposed to be bound by oaths to serve the king.

??? Ronnel Arryn was married to the daughter of Torrhen Stark, marriages between Great Houses serve to strenghten the ties between the 7K, they are not seen as treasonous.

 

 

1 hour ago, SFDanny said:

So what is this phenomenon we see during Rickard's time? Just good friendship. A passing fad? No, we are told what it is "ambition." Another of those clues you think there is no hint about. One can go on and on about clues Martin lays out pointing to the profoundly political nature of Rickard's political alliances. What I don't understand is how one ignores them.

We're told he had an ambition from a bitter  woman who blames  everything to the Starks and  want to find a greater reason so his Brandon was denied to her.

 

 

1 hour ago, SFDanny said:

What makes you think they knew nothing?

They had to suffer a rather  severe cognitive dissonance to not make so much of a mention and  not a thought from Ned.

 

 

Quote

To you last point first, it is clear that the marriage pact had gone as far as discussing the dowry. Tywin, at this point, has to believe his schemes to marry Cersei into the royal house are dead and buried. He has gone as far as openly say before council that Rhaegar would be a better king, and he orders the attack on Duskendale knowing it will likely result in Aerys's death. Only Ser Barristan's heroics save him. So all bridges between King and Hand hang only by fraying threads. Yet Rhaegar has his own wife and isn't likely to set her aside for Cersei. No, I think by opening the negotiations for the marriage pact Tywin is clearly moved on to an alliance between the other Great Houses of Rickard's alliance. 

And yet we know that Tywin still had Cersei around for both princes.

 

 

Quote

 The genius of Aerys's move, probably thought of by Varys, is that it in one fell swoop it not only destroys the marriage pact, but it gives Tywin's heir over to the king as a hostage.

It still needs Jaime's approval and we know how much Tywin tried to get Jaime back in the Woft5K.

 

 

Quote

My guess is that what unites these ambitious High Lords is to band together to do away with Targaryen overlordship, but not to set up a new king of Westeros. Tywin Lannister and Rickard Stark are highly unlikely to decide to put the other on the Iron Throne. But an alliance of High Lords to recreate kingdoms and create new kingdoms in which each has the title of king seems much more likely. Combine this with overtures to powerful lords in the Reach and one can see a plan in which six of the seven kingdoms renounce their fealty to House Targaryen in the belief that they can control the majority of their vassals in that endeavor. Only Dorne has a marriage tie to the Targaryens that would push them to support Aerys or Rhaegar.

Why would they become independent?? Especially the Riverlands, they can't hold that new reign.

 

 

 

[SFDanny]

9 hours ago, frenin said:

No, they aren't, unless well, you want to consider them a prove and  the prove seem to be that those ties did in fact overthrew the Targ dynasty, we see a lot of bethrothals between alot of Houses from different Kingdoms, we know that Baratheons and  Lannisters had already married in the last etc.

I'm not sure I understand your point here. Perhaps you could rephrase it, please?

But, no, we don't see a lot of betrothals or marriages between houses of different kingdoms. It is exceedingly rare. In the case of the Great Houses we have 91+ marriages we know about after the Conquest. Of these only three are known to have occurred before Robert's Rebellion and be between the Great Houses themselves. The two in the tome Ned reads from in A Game of Thrones, and the forced marriage between the Starks and Arryns engineered by Rhaenys Targaryen. One forced by the Targaryens, and two that seem inconsequential to either House Lannister or Baratheon. By which I mean it looks like these latter are lesser branches of both houses who at most stand well back in line to inherit the Lordship. They then a very different from the Stark, Tully, Arryn, Baratheon, and Lannister ties during Rickard's day.

But what is unique here is not that it can't happen, but that so much of it occurs during this one period of time under one Targaryen king. We have zero evidence such a thing happened before this in the the 281 years before the tourney. All evidence (hints, clues) point to this being unique. So the attentive reader has to ask why?

As I've pointed  out the expected marriage of a High Lord's children is to his vassal lord's children or cousins in the High Lord's own family. There are occasional marriages of the members of the Great Houses with vassals of other Hight Lords. These too are rare and are often understandable if they are either with houses that share some religious affinity (the Starks and the Royces for example) or are marriages of children far down in the line of succession (here the Arryn's niece that is carried off by the tribes of the Mountains of the Moon on her way to marry a Bracken is an example. But none of these fit Rickard's alliances.

Rickard's alliances fit the pattern of the marriages of Robert's rebellion and those of the War of the Five Kings. They clearly are not love matches. Only Robert professes some love for his betrothed. If they are, as all clues point to, political alliances then one has to ask to what end are they intended. The fact that the Targaryens interfere in two of the betrothals at Harrenhal should tell us something about their aim. Why does House Targaryen object to these ties if they are normal run of the mill things? Because they are not normal, and because they build ties where none should be without royal approval.

9 hours ago, frenin said:

Eddard and Robert were fostered because it was an honor for them, just as Walder Frey wanted his kids to be fostered in the Eyrie too, Robert was in love with Lyanna and  he was a great match, the only match that is weird is Brandon's.

Do I need to remind you that Lord Walder's demands to have Big and Little Walder fostered at Winterfell was part of a rebellion against the Lannister hold on the Iron Throne? What we would expect in peaceful times is that the High Lord would have favored vassals's children fostered with the High Lord's family (Littlefinger) or the children of the High Lord would be fostered at the favored vassals residence (Brandon, or Quentyn.) This shores up the oaths of fealty between vassal and High Lord. That both the second son of the North and the heir to Storm's End are fostered with House Arryn is unusual to say the least. But here you don't ask the right follow up question. What does each Great House get in return for the marriage pacts and the fostering? Is it just friendship? If so why don't we see it happening before this?

9 hours ago, frenin said:

 Why Jaime and  Barrí B made zero alusions to the Targs being upset?? Aerys had a quarrel with his son and  his son had a quarrel with his father.

At Harrenhal we see two Targaryens being upset and doing something to interfere in the marriage pacts being formed between the Great Houses. That is a clue. It is a hint. It is evidence. Evidence that much more is going on at the tourney and in the political struggles in Westeros than you let on.

9 hours ago, frenin said:

??? Ronnel Arryn was married to the daughter of Torrhen Stark, marriages between Great Houses serve to strenghten the ties between the 7K, they are not seen as treasonous.

As I've already pointed out, this case was forced by House Targaryen themselves for their own purposes. In the case of Rickard's web of alliances the Targaryens take move to stop the marriages. Not by a outright declaration saying no such marriages could occur, but by honoring Jaime and Lyanna to stop on marriage and declare royal displeasure with the other. Very different.

9 hours ago, frenin said:

We're told he had an ambition from a bitter  woman who blames  everything to the Starks and  want to find a greater reason so his Brandon was denied to her.

And her bitterness means she isn't telling the truth? Yet we know Brandon and Catelyn's betrothal was not one of love. They hardly knew each other. So what was the aim of the marriage? Ask yourself what does each side get out of it? Hoster sees his beloved Catelyn move to the far North and what tangible thing does Rickard get for marrying his heir to a Tully? It can't be a pledge of swords or a share of the harvest because those are pledged to each High Lord and to the king. It can't be submitting to another lord's justice. Only the king can do that. What then is the bargain made for?

Lady Dustin is bitter, but Lady Dustin is pointing us to the truth. We just don't have it all spelled out.

9 hours ago, frenin said:

They had to suffer a rather  severe cognitive dissonance to not make so much of a mention and  not a thought from Ned.

We see things through Ned's eyes and read things through his thoughts and speeches, but we get very little from Ned about what Rickard planned in the time before the rebellion with his alliances. Dare I say the author doesn't want us to know too much, but occasionally drops some clues. Such as Lady Dustin remarks to Theon. If you're expecting Martin to have laid out the backstory for the reader already, then I think you may be reading the wrong author. He doesn't write that way.

9 hours ago, frenin said:

And yet we know that Tywin still had Cersei around for both princes.

That Tywin might have plots to move Cersei back into possible line to marry the next Targaryen king I don't doubt. I also don't doubt that by this time he knew he had more to gain from Rickard's alliances than waiting on Aerys to change his mind.

9 hours ago, frenin said:

It still needs Jaime's approval and we know how much Tywin tried to get Jaime back in the Woft5K.

I'm not sure what the last half of this has to do with this discussion, but, yes, the success of Aerys's/Varys's scheme to get Jaime in the Kingsguard depends on the young Jaime accepting the post. They enroll his sister to help him be convinced to do so. Jaime's fifteen year old head is besotted with dreams of knightly honor and his sister's body. It takes one night to convince him to give up Casterly Rock. Not exactly a hard sale. Or did you think that Cersei really masterminded this on her own?

9 hours ago, frenin said:

Why would they become independent?? Especially the Riverlands, they can't hold that new reign.

If the five High Lords, or six if one counts the attempt to marry into the powerful families of the Reach, all reject their fealty to the Targaryens and pledge to support each others claim to kingships, then who is to stop them. Not Dorne. Not the focus allied with Dragonstone. Only the vassal lords of the High Lords themselves, if there are enough of them could do so. I would think that an alliance of six kingdoms would likely stop that before it started.

But for my guess to be true, I think the main evidence is the character of the men. I just can't see men as different as Rickard Stark and Tywin Lannister would accept one of their equals to be elevated to the Iron Throne. In the case of the Tullys and the Baratheons it doesn't make them kings again, but it does fulfill a dream of kingship that both likely share. Why accept the Targaryens? The dragons are dead, and the king is mad.

[frenin]

16 minutes ago, SFDanny said:

I'm not sure I understand your point here. Perhaps you could rephrase it, please?

But, no, we don't see a lot of betrothals or marriages between houses of different kingdoms. It is exceedingly rare. In the case of the Great Houses we have 91+ marriages we know about after the Conquest. Of these only three are known to have occurred before Robert's Rebellion and be between the Great Houses themselves. The two in the tome Ned reads from in A Game of Thrones, and the forced marriage between the Starks and Arryns engineered by Rhaenys Targaryen. One forced by the Targaryens, and two that seem inconsequential to either House Lannister or Baratheon. By which I mean it looks like these latter are lesser branches of both houses who at most stand well back in line to inherit the Lordship. They then a very different from the Stark, Tully, Arryn, Baratheon, and Lannister ties during Rickard's day.

 But what is unique here is not that it can't happen, but that so much of it occurs during this one period of time under one Targaryen king. We have zero evidence such a thing happened before this in the the 281 years before the tourney. All evidence (hints, clues) point to this being unique. So the attentive reader has to ask why?

 As I've pointed  out the expected marriage of a High Lord's children is to his vassal lord's children or cousins in the High Lord's own family. There are occasional marriages of the members of the Great Houses with vassals of other Hight Lords. These too are rare and are often understandable if they are either with houses that share some religious affinity (the Starks and the Royces for example) or are marriages of children far down in the line of succession (here the Arryn's niece that is carried off by the tribes of the Mountains of the Moon on her way to marry a Bracken is an example. But none of these fit Rickard's alliances.

 Rickard's alliances fit the pattern of the marriages of Robert's rebellion and those of the War of the Five Kings. They clearly are not love matches. Only Robert professes some love for his betrothed. If they are, as all clues point to, political alliances then one has to ask to what end are they intended. The fact that the Targaryens interfere in two of the betrothals at Harrenhal should tell us something about their aim. Why does House Targaryen object to these ties if they are normal run of the mill things? Because they are not normal, and because they build ties where none should be without royal approval.

The prove is that those ties in the end did end the Targ dynasty.

We know that thet Targs use to foment the marriages between houses of differents Kingdoms and those marriages just as Rickard's (and by Rickard i mean only him), Cregans kids married Royces and his grandkids married Blackwoods again and why you mean so much occured you mean that three houses intermarried?? Robert match was for love and Brandon was marrying within a neighbour kingdom, that's all what Rickard was doing. Why didn't he bethroth both Benjen and Ned then?? Why wouldn't Jon Arryn bethroth Elbert??

The Targs didn't interfere in those matches willingly, there is nothing that tell us that Aerys was against those matches, not a single hint, and no Aerys took Jaime because he was mad at Tywin, not because he didn't like his bethroth.

Who says that those matches should have with royal approval?? Where is stated that??

 

 

45 minutes ago, SFDanny said:

Do I need to remind you that Lord Walder's demands to have Big and Little Walder fostered at Winterfell was part of a rebellion against the Lannister hold on the Iron Throne? What we would expect in peaceful times is that the High Lord would have favored vassals's children fostered with the High Lord's family (Littlefinger) or the children of the High Lord would be fostered at the favored vassals residence (Brandon, or Quentyn.) This shores up the oaths of fealty between vassal and High Lord. That both the second son of the North and the heir to Storm's End are fostered with House Arryn is unusual to say the least. But here you don't ask the right follow up question. What does each Great House get in return for the marriage pacts and the fostering? Is it just friendship? If so why don't we see it happening before this?

10 hours ago, frenin said:

We don't know that's what Waldeer wants and it's rather odd he actually wants that, given that wards in war are hostages, it's far more likely that Cat asked for wards to assure Walder's good faith, we know that before anything went wrong, Walder wanted to foster his grandgrand kid t the Eyrie and Jon Arryn refused.

And why weren't Stannis and Benjen fostered in their respectives lands?? Why was one of Walders grandkids fostered with Jaime with Lord Crakehall?? Why was Harmund Hoare fostered in Casterly Rock?? 

Most of the Great Lords don't know each others,  so there is no point in sending your blood to someone you just don't know with the ability of brainwash your kid against you and your land, to a Lord and even more a Great Lord to foster his blood, there must exist trust or friendship, which is the reason why Jon Arryn wanted his kid with Stannis rather than Tywin or Cersei.

 

56 minutes ago, SFDanny said:

At Harrenhal we see two Targaryens being upset and doing something to interfere in the marriage pacts being formed between the Great Houses. That is a clue. It is a hint. It is evidence. Evidence that much more is going on at the tourney and in the political struggles in Westeros than you let on.

10 hours ago, frenin said:

No, neither Rhaegar nor Aerys showed not even once displeasure with those marriages, so it's impossible to say they were upset and we're told several times that Aerys wanted to fuck with Tywin and he did it whenever he had the chancem Tywin would have never brought Hoster to the Red Keep andVarys to discuss the bethrothal if so.

 

 

1 hour ago, SFDanny said:

As I've already pointed out, this case was forced by House Targaryen themselves for their own purposes. In the case of Rickard's web of alliances the Targaryens take move to stop the marriages. Not by a outright declaration saying no such marriages could occur, but by honoring Jaime and Lyanna to stop on marriage and declare royal displeasure with the other. Very different.

10 hours ago, frenin said:

This is the thing, you're filling a void you yourself have made, the Targs forced those marriages so the Realm could be more united, so Rickard following the example can't hardly be seen as a negative thing, but we have to believe that not only the Targs did something to stop the bethrothals, Lyanna bethrothal did not stop there.

 

 

1 hour ago, SFDanny said:

And her bitterness means she isn't telling the truth? Yet we know Brandon and Catelyn's betrothal was not one of love. They hardly knew each other. So what was the aim of the marriage? Ask yourself what does each side get out of it? Hoster sees his beloved Catelyn move to the far North and what tangible thing does Rickard get for marrying his heir to a Tully? It can't be a pledge of swords or a share of the harvest because those are pledged to each High Lord and to the king. It can't be submitting to another lord's justice. Only the king can do that. What then is the bargain made for?

Lady Dustin is bitter, but Lady Dustin is pointing us to the truth. We just don't have it all spelled out.

Her bitternes means she's an unreliable narrator, we know that the bethrothal was not for love just as we know that Brandon was gallant and Cat loved her when she met him,  why it can't be harvest?? Rickard had to suffer a rather severe winter in which Egg had to send food to the North, by marrying his heir to Lysa he's making sure of counting with som extra food to feed his people, just as everon would give whatever LF ask for a share of the Vale harvest.

Hoster's grandkid will be the Lord of Winterfell, that's is a very handsome reward from Dorne to the Wall, there are very few Lords that would not want their daughters to marry the heir of Winterfell,

 

 

1 hour ago, SFDanny said:

We see things through Ned's eyes and read things through his thoughts and speeches, but we get very little from Ned about what Rickard planned in the time before the rebellion with his alliances. Dare I say the author doesn't want us to know too much, but occasionally drops some clues. Such as Lady Dustin remarks to Theon. If you're expecting Martin to have laid out the backstory for the reader already, then I think you may be reading the wrong author. He doesn't write that way.

10 hours ago, frenin said:

Again, Ned, Robert and the others have to suffer a rather cognitive dissonance, if they knew about the things that were going on but they don't give it even a thought, Lady Dustin says that Rickard had ambitions, she never even hinted the man shared his views withhis kids, so we don't have a reason to believe they knew about it. That's why Ned and the others have to suffer a rather severe cognitive dissonace, or some selective amnesia, to recall those events but not even hint Rickard was up to no good and the Targs knew it. 

And no, Martin wouldn't have Ned saying what his father was doing, but he'd drop clues that Ned knew that there was some foul play going on there but neither Ned nor Robert, Jaime, Barri B, Mace, Tarly, Tywin, Kevan, Hoster, Aemon (via Rhaegar), Doran or Oberyn ever even hinted that Rickard was up to no good. Barbrey seemed to be the only one with the truth, yet again only her, not every other northern lord even hinted it. The only one Barri B and Jaime had every reason to suspect and so their thoughts and memories tell us is Rhaegar.

 

 

1 hour ago, SFDanny said:

That Tywin might have plots to move Cersei back into possible line to marry the next Targaryen king I don't doubt. I also don't doubt that by this time he knew he had more to gain from Rickard's alliances than waiting on Aerys to change his mind.

10 hours ago, frenin said:

Why Rickard's alliance?? He wasn't the one offerig his daughter and we know that Tywin was indeed waiting for Aerys to change his mind, that's why he keep refusing every request for her and one has to thing that Tywin can't have two alliances can't he?? If that suppose alliance knew that Tywin was aiming for a royal marriage too, sending Lysa to Casterly Rock might be counterproductive to say the least.

 

 

1 hour ago, SFDanny said:

I'm not sure what the last half of this has to do with this discussion, but, yes, the success of Aerys's/Varys's scheme to get Jaime in the Kingsguard depends on the young Jaime accepting the post. They enroll his sister to help him be convinced to do so. Jaime's fifteen year old head is besotted with dreams of knightly honor and his sister's body. It takes one night to convince him to give up Casterly Rock. Not exactly a hard sale. Or did you think that Cersei really masterminded this on her own?

10 hours ago, frenin said:

Another one with cognitive dissonance, why Cersei has absolutely no memories of that ever happening??

 

 

1 hour ago, SFDanny said:

If the five High Lords, or six if one counts the attempt to marry into the powerful families of the Reach, all reject their fealty to the Targaryens and pledge to support each others claim to kingships, then who is to stop them. Not Dorne. Not the focus allied with Dragonstone. Only the vassal lords of the High Lords themselves, if there are enough of them could do so. I would think that an alliance of six kingdoms would likely stop that before it started.

But for my guess to be true, I think the main evidence is the character of the men. I just can't see men as different as Rickard Stark and Tywin Lannister would accept one of their equals to be elevated to the Iron Throne. In the case of the Tullys and the Baratheons it doesn't make them kings again, but it does fulfill a dream of kingship that both likely share. Why accept the Targaryens? The dragons are dead, and the king is mad.

How so?? The Riverlands would not back Hoster, even after Aerys pulled what he pulled half the Riverlands fought for him, in the Stormlands at least 4 houses would not back Robert and we don't know how many more if Robert just decide to secede in the Eyrie at least the Graftons and the Corbrays would back their King,  the only ones that have enough hold of their people are both Tywin and Rickard and they can't defeat the power of the Reach, Dorne and the Crownlands, that's just a recipe for a disastrous civil war, pne that the rebels are not likely to win.

 

Where have ever seen that the Tullys and the Baratheons ever wanted to be Kings?? 

 

 

 

[Lord Varys]

23 hours ago, rotting sea cow said:

But what was actually the plan? Let's say that Howland Reed doesn't leave the Isle of Faces and thus Lyanna doesn't intervene, etc. What was actually the plan afterwards? Or were just the lords who wanted to force Rhaegar into action?

The plan would have depended on what Rhaegar wanted - and considering that Rhaegar seems to have been rather reluctant and timid to openly move against his father (as we see later when he doesn't even dare/isn't even able to remove the old man when he leads his army against the rebels) the best I can guess at is that Rhaegar would have wanted to test the waters how many lords would support Rhaegar in a move to establish himself as Prince Regent 'until such a time until my royal father regain his senses' or something along those lines. The precedent for something like this would have been Aemond taking over for Aegon II while the latter was incapacitated during the Dance.

It cannot have been in Rhaegar's best interests to establish a precedent where a son turns against his father deposes him, nor give the lords the means to actually a depose a king they do not agree with for any reason.

How powerful such 'informal gatherings' can be we see at the end of the Regency of Aegon III - Gyldayn makes clear what Yandel describes as a Great Council in TWoIaF was in fact no Great Council but merely an informal gathering of many lords. Still, they made crucial appointments there, chose regents by lot, appointed a new hand, while the king did essentially nothing (although he his brother Prince Viserys represented him there).

The difficult thing overall would have been to get a majority of the lords on Rhaegar's side - Aerys II may have been visibly mad, but he was apparently also easily influenced and generous to those who supported him - all this could have made more lords 'Aerys fans' than Rhaegar fans. Sort of like Aegon IV apparently had a rather strong power base despite his wanton misrule, never mind that his son and heir showed much more promise as a ruler.

Doesn't mean Rhaegar couldn't have gotten half of the lords at Harrenhal on board with his plans - but half wouldn't have been nearly enough. Half would have meant war.

Aerys II being there clearly put an end to any of those plans. It prevented Rhaegar from openly discussing the mad dragon in the room while said dragon could actually discuss things with various crucial lords. Many a knight would have attended the tourney, but nobody was prepared for war or battle - if the king had pointed the finger at traitors the people would have obeyed his commands.

20 hours ago, Alexis-something-Rose said:

I think that's the purpose Aerys's presence at Harrenhal served. Maybe that's what Rhaegar wanted all along, or maybe Varys took it upon himself to make sure Aerys was at Harrenhal so that everyone could get a could look at him.

That is an interesting idea, and there may be some truth to this, but if this was a subtle effect of Varys' suggestion to convince Aerys II to go then it doesn't seem to have something Rhaegar counted on, considering he himself tells Jaime that he had abandoned his earlier plans when he promises him he would do something after the Trident.

16 hours ago, SFDanny said:

The problem here is the idea the Great Lords of the realm don't know of Aerys's madness well before Harrenhal. While it is true that this is the first time since Duskendale that Aerys leaves the Red Keep, it is not true he has been hidden so no one can see him since his release from captivity. It is a shock for the common folk who see their king in this state. It is not for the Great Lords of the realm who deal with King's Landing. They already know of the King's mental and physical state - even if they haven't seen it personally. As such, it is not part of Rhaegar's plan to use Aerys's appearance as part of preparations for the tourney. It is Aerys's own move, and quite likely Varys's own move, to prevent a dangerous gathering of nobles turning into what Rhaegar no doubt wanted - a de facto Great Council of the Realm. In that regard it would seem to have worked just as Aerys and Varys intended.

You have to differentiate between people hearing rumors and getting reports via letters and talks from court visits and such - and the effects of witnessing something for yourself has. And how many (great) lords had visited court in the last years or cared much about the king while Tywin was still running things as Hand we really don't know. One assumes that a significant fraction of the nobility attended Rhaegar's wedding at the Great Sept a couple of years back - and Aerys II was there, too - but that would have been it.

In fact, a king doing nothing and the Realm effectively running itself should have been the wet dream of any of the great lords whose domains were far away from KL. It means they can do whatever the hell they want. Very few would have wanted to exchange the Mad King who was effectively never leaving his castle (and thus effectively only burning some of the morons who were stupid enough to hang out with or interact with him) with a king who cared.

16 hours ago, SFDanny said:

But here one must ask the question "would Rhaegar's plan have worked if Aerys had not come to the tourney?" I think the answer is no. Rhaegar tries to bring the nobility of the realm together so he can plead his case to replace his father, but the politics of Westeros don't just work in a binary fashion. It is not just a choice between father and son. Others have their agendas. Most of the High Lords of the realm - Stark, Baratheon, Arryn, Tully, and Lannister - have already made a choice that doesn't include putting Rhaegar on his father's throne. That is what the marriage pacts, including the one destroyed by Aerys at the start of the tourney between House Lannister and House Tully are all about.

What we see at Harrenhal is not just Aerys's display of power in taking Jaime away as a de facto hostage, but the refusal of House Stark and the others to abandon their "southron ambitions" and support Rhaegar. I think in this the dishonoring of Ashara Dayne by a Stark - most likely Brandon Stark - is a key part to understanding the political currents at play at Harrenhal. So too, is the crowning of Lyanna at the end of the tourney. It is Rhaegar's reply to House Stark and its allies that he stands with his father against their ambitions. That there are multiple layers of motives going on here doesn't change the fact Rhaegar tells Westeros he stands between the marriage of House Stark with House Baratheon. He does so by "honoring" Lyanna, just as Aerys "honors" Jaime, but the message is the same.

There is pretty much no evidence for any of this, and especially this weird interpretation of the crowning of Lyanna as well as the Ashara affair sounds like a very strange interpretation to me. The idea that both a man as rash as Brandon - and a man who showed so poor political judgment as Rhaegar when crowning Lyanna - would have made calculated moves in their actions there (assuming Brandon even was the guy having an affair with Ashara, which I'm not sure he did) doesn't really ring true to me.

The entire Howland-Lyanna buildup makes little sense when Rhaegar honoring Lyanna with the crown has basically nothing to do with what she may have done as mystery knight.

Not to mention that everything we get from Robert about his hatred for his cousin Rhaegar over the Lyanna affair implies that this whole thing is, at the core, just a jealousy thing, caused by the prickly honor of a self-absorbed nobleman. It is very much a tragedy.

16 hours ago, The Young Maester said:

Yeah I agree with you on the nobles being aware of Aerys’s madness.

I always suspected that Rickard Stark was planning some sort of betrayal alongside his friends Jon Arryn and hoster tully. However what you brought up about Rhaegar crowning Lyanna was quite interesting. Maybe Rhaegar was aware of these southorn ambitions. And crowned Lyanna to send a message tho the message was received differently however.
I really hope the next books will tell us more about these plots that happened during Aerys’s reign.

Rickard may have aimed at the same things Tywin wanted for his family - a royal match, a seat on the council, a share in the government of the Realm. He was more open to political intrigue and to involve himself in southern affairs than previous Starks. But the very idea that the isolated Starks could be heading some anti-Targaryen (or even anti-central monarchy) movement makes no sense whatsoever. They had little in common with their noble peers due to not even following the Seven and Rickard would have actually contested with his peers for spots at court and prestigious noble and royal matches.

I mean, the very idea that the son of one of Aerys II's best childhood friends - who also happened to be a close relation of the king - would have considered moving against the Targaryens without the very personal grudges he developed over the Lyanna issue makes no sense. And Rickard definitely didn't plan for any of that. In fact, if there is any truth to his 'southron ambitions' then he, Rickard, would have gladly dissolved the betrothal between Robert and Lyanna in favor of making his daughter the second wife of Rhaegar Targaryen if the latter had ever formally approached him in this matter.

After all, if the man had ambitions then Rhaegar as the future king would have been the man who could have fulfilled them in a way Robert never could. We don't yet know whether Lord Rickard even was at Harrenhal - the reactions of his sons to the Lyanna thing may indicate he was not (although I'm not sold on this).

16 hours ago, rotting sea cow said:

I don't think the Starks, Baratheons, Arryns and Tullys were prepared to ditch the Targaryens at that point. It took Aerys burning Rickard Stark and his heir as well as demanding Ned's and Robert's heads to make it happen. Even under these blatant injustices, the Baratheons, Tullys and Arryns faced resistance within their own lands. Starting a rebellion out of nowhere, would have faced even more. Certainly they had a viable candidate in Robert but as long as Rhaegar was alive and his qualities appreciated by most, replacing him was a uphill job.

The Tullys weren't even on board. Robert, Jon, and Ned had to invade the Riverlands and meet Hoster's demands to get him to come on board. That is all we need to know about Hoster's willingness to support these people. If Aerys II had had the sense to offer Viserys' hand to either Catelyn or Lysa early on during the Rebellion, the rebels would have never gotten any Tully support.

16 hours ago, rotting sea cow said:

I strongly disagree on this. There is no indication that Rhaegar made that for political reasons. In fact, nothing hurt his cause more than that. Not only he made a slight to his more fervent supporters (the Dornish, pretty sure that Oberyn also wanted to kill Rhaegar then and there) but that display probably made all the lords present think that Rhaegar was as mad as his father.

We should not overplay this. Think of how Gyldayn talks about various men crowning various women queen of love and beauty at various tourneys. Rhaegar choosing Lyanna was unusual and somewhat of a slight towards his wife who was present, but it wasn't something completely out of line. What was was the later abduction (and marriage, if it happened publicly) of Lyanna. That would have made Rhaegar as mad or even madder than his father.

The coronation not so much. Rhaegar certainly miscalculated how it affected the Starks present and, especially, cousin Robert (and he should have known the latter considering the long Baratheon history of suppressed ambition and their general tendency to brood over real or imagined slights). But he clearly must have been correct that whatever irritation this caused with the Dornish and the Starks there could have been quickly resolved - especially if he had time to talk to them. The abduction was nothing he could talk away.

12 hours ago, SFDanny said:

To you last point first, it is clear that the marriage pact had gone as far as discussing the dowry. Tywin, at this point, has to believe his schemes to marry Cersei into the royal house are dead and buried. He has gone as far as openly say before council that Rhaegar would be a better king, and he orders the attack on Duskendale knowing it will likely result in Aerys's death. Only Ser Barristan's heroics save him. So all bridges between King and Hand hang only by fraying threads. Yet Rhaegar has his own wife and isn't likely to set her aside for Cersei. No, I think by opening the negotiations for the marriage pact Tywin is clearly moved on to an alliance between the other Great Houses of Rickard's alliance. 

We have textual evidence indicating that Tywin remained a Targaryen man until even the Battle of the Bells. He wanted to be recalled to court, he wanted Aerys II to beg, he did not want to depose him and replace him with somebody else. We also have evidence that Cersei was called to court to make her (eventually) Rhaegar's second wife after Elia's early death (in childbirth or due to her general ill health) or at least the bride of Prince Viserys.

Tywin also wanted a fine match for his son and heir, but that's what every lord wants for his son. There is nothing mysterious about this.

12 hours ago, SFDanny said:

I disagree with your first point here. One has to ask what is the purpose of this highly unusual, one can say unique, up to this point of these marriage pacts between High Lords? It is clearly a political set of alliances, to use all the power of these lords for some purpose. But I didn't say I thought this means the alliance is designed for open armed rebellion against the Targaryens or to put Robert on the throne. Martin has been clear that Robert is chosen to be the new king by the rebels until around the time of the Trident.

This is not 'highly unusual' considering that we don't know how many great houses were interrelated to what degree due to marriages involving most of them throughout the Targaryen reign. Just because the Starks and the Lannisters were somewhat insular in the marriage department in the last couple of generations (although we have no clue how the houses they took their brides from where connected to other great houses) doesn't mean this was also the case for the Tullys, Tyrells, Arryns, Hightowers, Baratheons, and Martells.

And the idea that marriage alliances can and ever did form lasting political alliances in Westeros or real world medieval nobility is actually quite laughable. Such alliances can strengthen ties - but they do not erase personal ambitions and short-term or long-term political agendas. Kings and lords have warred against the families and countries of their wives, just as they calculatingly entered into marriage contracts to have a justification to steal land.

We have no indication that Hoster, Rickard, Robert, and Jon actually were friends. Hoster especially is a guy who just wanted to make great matches for his daughters. Jon only married Lysa because he wanted the Tullys on Robert's side, Robert wanted Lyanna because he apparently loved her, and Cat was betrothed to Brandon because Rickard supposedly had southron ambitions - which essentially translates to 'Rickard Stark did no longer want to marry his children only to fellow northern women'.

12 hours ago, SFDanny said:

My guess is that what unites these ambitious High Lords is to band together to do away with Targaryen overlordship, but not to set up a new king of Westeros. Tywin Lannister and Rickard Stark are highly unlikely to decide to put the other on the Iron Throne. But an alliance of High Lords to recreate kingdoms and create new kingdoms in which each has the title of king seems much more likely. Combine this with overtures to powerful lords in the Reach and one can see a plan in which six of the seven kingdoms renounce their fealty to House Targaryen in the belief that they can control the majority of their vassals in that endeavor. Only Dorne has a marriage tie to the Targaryens that would push them to support Aerys or Rhaegar.

There is pretty much no evidence to support such an idea. Nor is there any hint to the advantage any of those lords would have gotten from such a strange idea. Such a thing would have reduced the overall influence any of these men could have had on the Small Council or as Hand in a united Realm as well as reducing the incomes in taxes and tariffs and rents these men could have collected in a prosperous united Realm - while increasing the risk of considerable losses due to the inevitable warfare that would threaten those kingdoms in the future.

The very idea that those men were stupid enough to trick each other into believing they could or would keep the peace is laughable. Especially since they all - especially those who actually wore crowns three centuries ago - would remember what ancients claims they believe they had to the various border regions. The borders between the Reach, the Westerlands, the Riverlands, the Stormlands, Dorne, etc. were all fluid, drawn anew after each of the wars that were fought between those kingdoms. The idea that they were somehow magically content with the borders as they are is completely unrealistic.

[SFDanny]

Quote

When the Stark line was nearly obliterated by Mad King Aerys after Rhaegar's abduction of Lyanna, some misguided men laid the blame at the feet of the late Lord Rickard, whose alliance by blood and friendship tied the great houses together and ensured they would act together in response to the Mad King's crimes. (TWoI&F 142)

@Lord Varys, we have been down this road before. I don't want to hijack someone else's thread with all the issues that tie into the events of Harrenhal. What I do want to do is say that the idea that politics don't play into those events is foolish. Martin's world is a world of political intrigue. The influence of the so-called "STAB alliance" included.

I post the above quote to show one more bit of evidence, one more hint, and one more clue that the Rickard's "southron ambitions" was not just a case of a new fad among the High Lords of Westeros.

First, the quote is proof of in-world beliefs that the alliances where explicitly political and aimed at the Targaryens. Now, one can disagree with those beliefs, but one cannot dismiss them with a wave of the hand saying they did not exist. I think much of the evidence I've cited and much more supports the beliefs of these "misguided men."

 We also have in the quote the refutation of their views from a pro-Baratheon/Lannister source that gives us the view that seems - writing his history for King Robert and his heirs -   to support the idea it is perfectly acceptable for the High Lords to have formed these ties in anticipation of the "Mad King's crimes." The alliances are long in making and predate any crime against the High Lords that we know. Not that they were an alliance to support each other economically. Not that they were an outbreak of love matches that got out of hand. But that they were formed to work together to work against at least one Targaryen king. This historian believes such a rendering of this history is acceptable to Robert's eyes. Hint. Clue. Evidence.

Please don't insult my intelligence with any more nonsense of "nothing supports."The evidence is clearly there. If you disagree with what it tells you, that's fine. Argue why you think so, but don't tell me the evidence is not there.

[Son of Man]

On 10/14/2019 at 7:14 AM, rotting sea cow said:

It has been suggested that the Tourney of Harrenhal was in fact a meeting to gather political support around Prince Rhaegar Targaryen so he could be able to depose his father. Events like the Mad King attending the tourney and Rhaegar himself ignoring his wife to crown Lyanna Stark as Queen of Love and Beauty probably prevented to have the intended effect.

But what was actually the plan? Let's say that Howland Reed doesn't leave the Isle of Faces and thus Lyanna doesn't intervene, etc. What was actually the plan afterwards? Or were just the lords who wanted to force Rhaegar into action?

 

*suggested

That word is indeed the key.  It's been suggested but not proven.  Perhaps it happened the way it's been told.  Whent called a tourney.  Aerys, Rhaegar, Robert, Lyanna showed up.  Rhaegar either got pissed at his wife about something and insults her in public or he does something stupid.