Heresy 228 and one over the eight

[frenin]

9 hours ago, SFDanny said:

Rhaegar gives Lyanna a great honor, just as his father did to Jaime. But the honor he gives has a unspoken symbolism to all. Not that Rhaegar was being disrespectful to Elia - though that may be true to some eyes. Not that Rhaegar's crowning of Lyanna was taboo. But what it said, in addition to honoring Lyanna's beauty, is a declaration to all in attendance of Rhaegar's interest in Lyanna. An interest in who she married, and by symbolically inserting him into the question of Lyanna's love an interest in her betrothal to Robert. Rhaegar was certainly smitten by Lyanna, but what he does symbolically is to say the Targaryens are intruding into the rights of the Starks to decide whom Lyanna will marry. It is this, not Rhaegar thinking Lyanna is beautiful or he has the "hots" for her, that upset Brandon to the point of him having to be restrained. Rhaegar has shown his rejection of the Stark's southron ambitions and the marriages they have help engineer to carry them out. His crowning of Lyanna tells all of Westeros, not only that Lyanna is a beautiful young woman, but more importantly politically that Rhaegar now stands with his father against the High Lords who would oppose their continued rule and power. What was a fractured court of Targaryen versus Targaryen is now united against their plans.

 

As i believe i told you before, for that to be true, the southrons ambitions, whatever they nature might be, needs to be something pubic enough the people get the message plainly, neither the Starks nor Robert suspectany kind of foul play going on there, so to whom  exactly was that declaration if everyone would just misinterpret it??

And why are the Targs like non worried at all of said bethrothals?? They could've said something before and in a more quiet manner yet they were at each other throats.

[Melifeather]

13 hours ago, St Daga said:

I do like the idea of the "drunken oarsmen" being the stand in's for the players in the rebellion. However, I doubt that Rhaegar and Aerys count separately. Their fate was tied anyway, so when Rhaegar lost and died at the Trident, then the hopes of House Targaryen were gone as well. But seven could account for players from kingdoms. We have House Stark/North, House Arryn/Vale, House Tully/Riverlands, House Baratheon/Stormlands, House Lannister/Westerlands, House Targaryen/Crownlands. That leaves some regions unaccounted for. The Reach and Dorne. House Tyrell sided with the crown but changed allegiance after Storm's End was relieved. Dorne also sided with the crown, but might have been more or less forced to support the war effort, based on Aerys holding  Elia. I guess the Reach sat out the most of the war, feasting outside of Storm's End.

But that's eight, which actually makes more sense. Seven oarsman are a problem, drunk or not. That is an uneven number and the craft will not flow forward straight. 

I was thinking more on the subject of the oarsmen. In particular the metaphor itself. Oarsmen power and move The Ship through the water, and certainly the Rebellion moved around the Riverlands before heading south to Kings Landing. The Ship is the stage where the play is performed. I had mentioned the other day that I thought The Ship was the mother of all ships, and it was if it's indeed an allegory for the Rebellion. The thing with allegories is that they encompass more than a single metaphor or thought. That's why they're used. Just take a look at the definition:

Allegory: The representation of abstract ideas or principles by characters, figures, or events in narrative, dramatic, or pictorial form. A story, picture, or play employing such representation.

I think we should expect to see multitudes of ideas and events represented, so the seven oarsmen can be seven houses or seven individuals or both, or even a nod to the Faith. Just as "oarsmen" can be men that are financially driven, desire power, or actual geographical movement. "Drunken" can be actions not normally taken, not thinking clearly, uninhibited, and still include the actual battles in the Riverlands and in the Trident itself.

13 hours ago, St Daga said:

I base this thought on Wendel being noted with a leg of lamb three times in the Red Wedding chapter. It's an odd thing for GRRM to focus on, I think, Lamb's are often seen as sacrificial animals. Lambs are seen as innocent and pure, which is one reason they are used for sacrifice. Even biblically, Jesus, the son of God, was called "the lamb of God" whom was sacrificed for the worlds sins. Anyway, I do wonder if Wyman hoped that Wendel would survive the massacre and when he did not, then this has caused a rift between Wyman and House Frey. Hence the Frey Pies! I also wonder if this contributed to trouble between Roose and Wyman. Those men don't seem to be getting along, and I think it stem's from Wendel's death. Wyman might be regretting his alliance but I don't think he is done trying to take over power in the north.

I agree that the lambs - especially if repeated - is meant to signal a sacrifice, but I don't think it necessarily means it had to be intentional. And I agree with you that it's a sore spot between the allies of Frey, Bolton, and Manderly.

13 hours ago, St Daga said:

We don't know much about Izembaro. He is fat and used to act any part but now he only wants to portray kings. He must be playing Robert in "the Bloody Hand".  He loses his crown in the privy and he also misplaces his boar spear. "Please the pit" and "give them something that they haven't seen before" are things he says according to Mercy. These two statements remind me of things Baelish or Varys might say, but losing his crown in the shitter is perhaps a nod to Tywin dying on the pot and losing all his power. Tywin wasn't a king but wanted to have all the power of kingship. Perhaps Izembaro is Tywin, except for the fat part!

Again, I'm happy to accept the allegory as applying to more than one character. Tywin was a Bloody Hand who lost his "crown" in the privy, because was there ever any doubt in anyone's mind that Tywin was the true ruler whenever he was Hand? And I agree when Izembaro plays the king and misplaces his boar spear, he's Robert. It's also possible that the comments of "Please the pit" and "give them something that they haven't seen before" could be Varys since he has a background as a mummer. In conclusion, though, one of these people "owns" the land where "The Gate" is. If The Gate does't belong to any particular House, it belongs to the realm and to the king. It's always the king's property to award.

13 hours ago, St Daga said:

Actually, I have wondered if the Ibbenese Whaler isn't a hint at Illyrio/Varys connection, while the Brazen Monkey is a nod to Petyr Baelish. And the Gulltown connection seems to tie nicely to Baelish, who used to work out of Gulltown. I do see the idea of the reek of tar, etc to fit with Ramsay and Roose Bolton, though. I do think there could be a Baelish/Bolton connection. Domeric was warded in the Vale with the Redfort's and there seems to be a play on words with Redfort/Dreadfort. So, perhaps Roose and Littlefinger have been working for a while on the downfall of the Stark's. I think that Roose was responsible for sending the Catspaw to kill Bran. I do think that the Manderly's and Bolton's have been working together for a while, and that the supposed feud over Lady Hornwood's lands was contrived to make them appear to be at cross purposes. I think poor Lady Hornwood was a sacrifice to their goals.

Again, I think its entirely possible that it means all of these things - everything you see and everything I've already mentioned. That is how allegories work - PLUS it plays into the theory that there is a wheel of time replaying the same events over and over. 

[Melifeather]

IMO there is a series of events that run together and I think it goes like this:

1) Rickard seals a marriage alliance with Jon Arryn to marry Lyanna to Robert

2) Sometime early in the tourney, Lyanna chases off the three squires

3) Howland is introduced to the Starks, they collect the armor, come up with the plan, and Howland prays

4) At the end of one of the tourney days, Rhaegar comes upon Robert and Ashara in bed

5) Maybe even that same night, Rhaegar "sings" his little tale to Lyanna, and she "sniffles"

6) the conversation between Ned and Lyanna occurs where she expresses her misgivings

7) Lyanna notices that Ashara danced with many men

8) the following day, the Knight of the Laughing Tree enters the lists

9) The next day the KotLT is noticeably absent, Rhaegar wins the joust

10) Rhaegar places the laurel on Lyanna's lap

11) Lyanna and Howland flee the tourney - spooked that Rhaegar suspected her/them

12) King Aerys II sent out Rhaegar and Gregor Clegane out to look for the Knight of the Laughing Tree

 

[Melifeather]

On 11/25/2019 at 1:24 PM, St Daga said:

Mercy works at the Gate but does not live very close to it, but it's still close enough to take Raff "away from the Gate" to her apartment during the play, kill him, and make it back before the second act when the character that she is playing is supposed to be raped and murdered by the character played by Bobano, a dwarf with the giant fake cock. It makes sense to me that Bobono is playing Tyrion, because they are both dwarfs but it's possible that Bobono's character is someone besides Tyrion. It seems like the play is about the fall of Robert and Ned and the rise of the Lannister's. I have wondered if Arya/Mercy isn't playing the role of Sansa and the rape is a hint at her marriage to Tyrion. But Sansa doesn't die, and the rape is questionable for Sansa, as there is no actual consummation of the marriage, but is that commonly known?

Ready to dig into these allegories. My first thought about Bobono is that it's not necessarily about Tyrion, but rather Tysha and the gang rape she suffered at the hands of Lannister men. Didn't Tywin give each soldier a gold silver coin to pay her so that they could tell Tyrion that she was a prostitute?

I'm going to investigate the colors of Bobono's foot-long cock, because the coloring may be sigil related....I'll be back when I have more.

[St Daga]

 

20 hours ago, corbon said:

Sure. But there is no data that points to that. Only potential allusions from other situations that clearly fail. Everyone who witnessed him joust respects his skills and rank him as one of the very best jousters around.

I will keep this in mind, since you seem to be comfortable with only using specific data points in the text and allusions from other situations are not valid, even though it seems like GRRM, who is quite intelligent in his writing skills and might be trying to tell his story by having us read between the lines. 

 

20 hours ago, corbon said:

And even the greatest jousters of his age, men who demonstrably were not afraid to beat him, both Barristan Selmy and Arthur Dayne, have 1-2 records against him. (Incidentally, self-correcting an error on my part. The 13-lance bout vs Arthur Dayne ended in a win for Rhaegar, not one of his losses).

Yes, according to Barristan (Artsan Whitebeard), Rhaegar defeated Arthur, but in the end, he did not win the tourney because he did not beat Barristan. Of course, GRRM has thrown some shade on Barristan's memory in this passage, since Barristan mention's Simon Toyne, who should not have been jousting at Storm's End at this time. Any way, if we take the text for what it is, then while Rhaegar beat one of "the greatest jouster's of his age" in SAD, he could not beat another of "the greatest jousters of his age" in Barristan Selmy on that same day. Twelve lances in thirteen bout's in almost worthy of calling a draw on the match. I can only assume that the thirteenth match saw Rhaegar unseating SAD to gain the victory between the two men. And Harrenhal was the first tourney in which Rhaegar defeated both SAD and Barristan, although Rheagar had previously defeated Barristan in the Tourney to celebrate Viserys's birth, although SAD won the final jousting competition. I think Harrenhal stands out as the only time Rhaegar won a tournament jousting competition and was able to beat "the greatest jousters of his age" on the same day. 

I would imagine, although there is no textual proof, that Rhaegar practiced against SAD and Barristan and might have been the victor in those practice matches. People have to practice to be good!

 

20 hours ago, corbon said:

No, his skills are more with the lance than the sword. Cersei's comment is about lancing not swordsmanship. And the Tourney results are jousting, not swordsmanship. I don't recall any evidence that he was a 'great' swordsman, but there is plenty that he was one of the greats as a jouster. Selmy was generally regarded as the greatest lance in the seven Kingdoms (and Dayne the greatest swordsman), but Rhaegar beat him 2-1.

I am not sure why you think that Cersei is the greatest judge of what makes a great jouster, but I think of her looking at Rhaegar much in the way that Sansa looks at Loras at the Hand's Tourney. Pretty men, flashy armor, and a prestigious name. Perhaps she looks at Tournament wins? I understand that the jousting is what you are fixated on, but I happen to think that Rhaegar was quite good with a sword, and that is an important part of being a warrior. When we are first told that Rhaegar wanted to be a warrior, he asked for a sword and armor, not a lance. Obviously Rhaegar must have trained with a lance to become proficient at it, but it was his sword that nearly defeated Robert at the Trident, not his lance.

And while you argue that she must be correct because Jaime doesn't dispute what she says, they are in the middle of an argument and she attempts to distract him with her nakedness and dismisses him as if he were a servant, but before he leaves, he does manage to call her a fool. Of course, she is foolish about many things.

 

20 hours ago, corbon said:

I think Brandon was a very likely a quite good jouster based on the fact that he was a great horseman, heir to a high noble house, bold and aggressive in character, and is listed late in the list of people Rhaegar beat at Harrenhal, which is an indication (not proof) of high level capabilities, or at least, backing yourself as reasonably good. There are a high number of indicative and important factors supporting him being quite good, none against.

Brandon might have been a great jouster, but there is not text that says so. Lyanna might have been a great jouster, but there is no text that says so.  You have connected dot's based on other information in the text to come to your conclusion. Even though no text comments on either Brandon or Lyanna's skills with a lance. That is fine. I understand and do this as well.

Yet, when it comes to Rhaegar's "skills" at the joust, because "everyone" says he was great, then he must have been, even though I question why he won Harrenhal based on other information in the text, trying to connect dots that GRRM has placed in the text, then I am incorrect according to you. It seems like sometimes you are willing to look beyond the direct text and  are willing to read between the lines, and at other times only what is given directly in the text is worth noting. But  when other's wish to do this, you seem to feel like it's manipulating the given text. 

 

20 hours ago, corbon said:

Sigh, yes they are thats the point.

Sigh? This is the condescending vibe that I was talking about before. And although you deny that you are doing so, I gather from your other posts that you are quite intelligent enough to know exactly what you are doing. 

 

20 hours ago, corbon said:

Notice that when Jaime thinks about Loras' abilities, its his aim and balance that Jaime thinks of as most important. Those are skills quite within the capabilities of a teenage girl who is horse-mad and talented.

Aim and balance of the lance! All rider's must be balanced, but jousting involves that as well as aim and balance of the lance, a long, awkward object.

BTW, I understand what the text says that Jaime says about jousting and being a good rider. I get it! But there something more that just riding skills involved. Strength to hold a lance and balance and aim it at a target. Total body strength, upper body strength, arm strength, decent vision. And to gain the skills and strength needed, takes practice. That would be part of the 25% of the equation that Jaime does not apply to riding skill. 

We are chasing this around in circles, and for what point? Agree to disagree and move on, shall we? 

[St Daga]

2 minutes ago, Melifeather said:

Ready to dig into these allegories. My first thought about Bobono is that it's not necessary about Tyrion, but rather Tysha and the gang rape she suffered at the hands of Lannister men. Didn't Tywin give each soldier a gold coin to pay her so that they could tell Tyrion that she was a prostitute?

I think the soldiers paid a silver coin each, and Tyrion gave her a gold coin. 

[St Daga]

1 hour ago, Melifeather said:

I think we should expect to see multitudes of ideas and events represented, so the seven oarsmen can be seven houses or seven individuals or both, or even a nod to the Faith. Just as "oarsmen" can be men that are financially driven, desire power, or actual geographical movement. "Drunken" can be actions not normally taken, not thinking clearly, uninhibited, and still include the actual battles in the Riverlands and in the Trident itself.

I certainly expect to find that there are multiple echoes into past events when reading current events, or vice versa. I really think that is how GRRM is telling the story of the past, we just have to be open to seeing it, and open to making connections within the story.

 

1 hour ago, Melifeather said:

I agree that the lambs - especially if repeated - is meant to signal a sacrifice, but I don't think it necessarily means it had to be intentional. And I agree with you that it's a sore spot between the allies of Frey, Bolton, and Manderly.

Another odd thing about that leg of lamb at the Red Wedding is that a leg of lamb is noted in Dany's visions in the House of the Undying, the king she see's with a wolfs head and a crown is also holding a leg of lamb like a scepter.  I have tried to tie that to Wendel in some way (I think is body type is too different to be mistaken for Robb, although I have explored that idea), but I also think it's likely that Robb Stark was a sacrifice of some sort, his death was a step that needed to happen to continue a course of events that need to happen. It certainly seems like several of the major events in our story have been manipulated by some kind of outside influence. Bloodraven in the cave is likely, but it seems like there must be at least one more outside influence, that would work to balance Bloodraven's agenda. A yin and yang force in the story.

 

1 hour ago, Melifeather said:

In conclusion, though, one of these people "owns" the land where "The Gate" is. If The Gate does't belong to any particular House, it belongs to the realm and to the king. It's always the king's property to award.

I am interested in why The Gate is called that. What gate dose it represent? When I think of the Westeros, a couple things come to mind.

The Stepstones, which used to be a landed passage from Essos. Something broke that gate, but we are still seeing activity in that location, and some of the golden company is probably still suck out there.

We also seem to have the Neck, guarded by Moat Cailin. Still a major stronghold when trying to push up from the south, it's vulnerable from other directions. It's crumbling nature could indicate that it was also attempted to be destroyed, but this only partially destroyed it's purpose. One of it's towers is called the Gatehouse Tower, which is squat and wide and still strong, although it has tree's growing out of the stones on the northern side of the tower.  The castle complex is still a great bottle-neck and can be used as a defensive position. I have always found it odd that Moat Cailin is not manned at all times, just used in times of need. I wonder if for some reason it's forbidden to have someone "always" at that fortress?

ETA: The Gate was built on an old foundation, and I wonder if this could be the same for Moat Cailin. We have three towers remaining but the complex had as many as twenty towers, and there seems to be that black basalt that probably served as a wall, but perhaps was part of a structure that was destroyed, but it's footprint remains.

Then we have the wall, which is currently standing, and has several "gates" within (or below) it's structure, but might serve as a great gate itself and is tied to Mel's hint's of it being a great "hinge". I see the wall as still serving it's purpose, but there seems to be an attempt in play to destroy it. I think you think that the magic of the gate has already been breached, since Jon and Stannis allowed the wildling's to pass through.

ETA: Could the wall have been build on the foundation of something previously destroyed, like The Gate theater?

Will we see something at The Gate in Braavos that will hint to us about something that will happen in one of the three locations I mentioned. Or possibly at all three locations?

 

1 hour ago, Melifeather said:

Again, I think its entirely possible that it means all of these things - everything you see and everything I've already mentioned. That is how allegories work - PLUS it plays into the theory that there is a wheel of time replaying the same events over and over. 

[Melifeather]

5 hours ago, St Daga said:

I am interested in why The Gate is called that. What gate dose it represent? When I think of the Westeros, a couple things come to mind.

Whenever I'm working on an allegory I like to remind myself of the various definitions. Here's one for gate:

A path or way.

A particular way of acting or doing; manner.

A structure that can be swung, drawn, or lowered to block an entrance or a passageway.

 

The Gate may be an allegory for all gates - all pathways, all mechanisms that lead to something, all structures that can be swung, drawn, lowered, all entrances, and all passages. The Neck is a passageway that leads to the North. Moat Cailin is a gate that guards the north.

 

Moat Cailin still has a chest-deep moat filled with lizard lions. The Kingsroad runs atop a causeway which is a dry road through the bogs. The three remaining towers of Moat Cailin block the causeway and anyone that wants to pass by must pass beneath and between the towers. Going around the towers means venturing out into the bogs.

 

Whitewalls was said to be near the shores of the God's Eye, but closer to Maidenpool than Kings Landing. It could not have been located past the south end of the lake, because Dunk and Egg took a ferry across the God's Eye when they were traveling to Whitewalls from Stoney Sept. Just an aside, the ferry was called "Ned's ferry", which might be a clue left by the author to direct our attention to the area. I've always wondered why the Rebel forces retreated north after defeating the loyalist forces at Stoney Sept. I haven't been able to find any details of what happened between Stoney Sept and the Battle at the Trident, but I do suspect that Jon Arryn did not bring his army to Stoney Sept. He went to Riverrun to marry Lysa, but he's not credited with helping Ned and Hoster free Robert, so where did he go and what did his army do?

 

The plays held at The Gate are allegories for multiple events held in multiple locations, but all the locations are in areas that would be considered "gates". We may need to add "roads" and "inns" under the allegory of "gates", because Tyrion met Tysha somewhere between Lannisport and Casterly Rock, took refuge in an inn, and she was later raped in the guards' barracks, which sound like permanent housing set up for Lannister soldiers - maybe right there at Casterly Rock.

 

I think the only conclusion we can be confident of for now is that The Gate is somewhere in the Riverlands and close to The Ship - well, The Ship encompasses the Riverlands all the way down to Kings Landing! Har!

 

5 hours ago, St Daga said:

The Stepstones, which used to be a landed passage from Essos. Something broke that gate, but we are still seeing activity in that location, and some of the golden company is probably still suck out there.

We also seem to have the Neck, guarded by Moat Cailin. Still a major stronghold when trying to push up from the south, it's vulnerable from other directions. It's crumbling nature could indicate that it was also attempted to be destroyed, but this only partially destroyed it's purpose. One of it's towers is called the Gatehouse Tower, which is squat and wide and still strong, although it has tree's growing out of the stones on the northern side of the tower.  The castle complex is still a great bottle-neck and can be used as a defensive position. I have always found it odd that Moat Cailin is not manned at all times, just used in times of need. I wonder if for some reason it's forbidden to have someone "always" at that fortress?

I agree the Stepstones would be another "gateway" or "passageway" between Essos and Westeros.

I've read other people's assertions that Moat Cailin would be vulnerable from the north, but I'm not so sure I believe that. There are still three towers blocking the causeway with a moat and bogs to the west and the Bite to the east. It's probably not manned at all times, because it's a ruin. The Ironborn tried holding it, but had no access to support their men with food, water, or supplies. The Boltons, Freys, and Manderlys easily kept them blocked off. They only wanted Theon to go in there and speed up the process. I don't recall why the Ironborn didn't bring support up from the south.

 

5 hours ago, St Daga said:

ETA: The Gate was built on an old foundation, and I wonder if this could be the same for Moat Cailin. We have three towers remaining but the complex had as many as twenty towers, and there seems to be that black basalt that probably served as a wall, but perhaps was part of a structure that was destroyed, but it's footprint remains.

An old theory around these parts is that Moat Cailin was once the location of a wall similar to the Wall, sort of in the vein of Hadrian's Wall and Antoinine Wall. If both Walls are hinges then the two mirrors reflect each other.

[corbon]

3 hours ago, St Daga said:

 

I will keep this in mind, since you seem to be comfortable with only using specific data points in the text and allusions from other situations are not valid, even though it seems like GRRM, who is quite intelligent in his writing skills and might be trying to tell his story by having us read between the lines. 

Thats not correct. Allusions are fine, many are excellent. But if the hard data contradicts them, then the interpretation can't right. the allusion needs to be adapted to fit the hard data or discarded. 

3 hours ago, St Daga said:

I would imagine, although there is no textual proof, that Rhaegar practiced against SAD and Barristan and might have been the victor in those practice matches. People have to practice to be good!

Agreed. And I know from experience, that its practicing with people who are really good that best improves one's own skills.

3 hours ago, St Daga said:

I am not sure why you think that Cersei is the greatest judge of what makes a great jouster,

I don't, I explicitly said so.

3 hours ago, St Daga said:

but I think of her looking at Rhaegar much in the way that Sansa looks at Loras at the Hand's Tourney. Pretty men, flashy armor, and a prestigious name.

I have more respect for her than that. I agree that she twists and views things from her own prism, and the prism in this case may well be the one you suggest. But I don't think she's the empty-headed fool Sansa was. She wants to be a man remember. I think she pays attention to many things.

3 hours ago, St Daga said:

Perhaps she looks at Tournament wins? I understand that the jousting is what you are fixated on, but I happen to think that Rhaegar was quite good with a sword, and that is an important part of being a warrior. When we are first told that Rhaegar wanted to be a warrior, he asked for a sword and armor, not a lance. Obviously Rhaegar must have trained with a lance to become proficient at it, but it was his sword that nearly defeated Robert at the Trident, not his lance.

I don't disagree he was an able swordsman. Its the jousting thats in question though, and the jousting where the hard data lies, mostly.

3 hours ago, St Daga said:

And while you argue that she must be correct because Jaime doesn't dispute what she says, they are in the middle of an argument and she attempts to distract him with her nakedness and dismisses him as if he were a servant, but before he leaves, he does manage to call her a fool. Of course, she is foolish about many things.

Its not proof, not "must", but another solid data point coming down the same way as all the others.

3 hours ago, St Daga said:

Brandon might have been a great jouster, but there is not text that says so. Lyanna might have been a great jouster, but there is no text that says so.  You have connected dot's based on other information in the text to come to your conclusion. Even though no text comments on either Brandon or Lyanna's skills with a lance. That is fine. I understand and do this as well.

Yet, when it comes to Rhaegar's "skills" at the joust, because "everyone" says he was great, then he must have been, even though I question why he won Harrenhal based on other information in the text, trying to connect dots that GRRM has placed in the text, then I am incorrect according to you. It seems like sometimes you are willing to look at beyond the direct text, and at other times you are willing to read between the lines. But only when it comes to proving your point, and when other's wish to do this, you seem to feel like it's manipulating the given text. 

Yes. Connecting those dots is fine and good. But then they get examined against the hard data. In this case all of the hard data is against the dot connection. Therefore the dot connection is not valid. IMO. 

3 hours ago, St Daga said:

Sigh? This is the condescending vibe that I was talking about before. And although you deny that you are doing so, I gather from your other posts that you are quite intelligent enough to know exactly what you are doing. 

Sorry, Frustration. Not deliberately condescending. You literally called my argument an assumption (further below), and literally denied the text that proves it, even though that text has already been quoted in this discussion.  

3 hours ago, St Daga said:

Aim and balance of the lance! All rider's must be balanced, but jousting involves that as well as aim and balance of the lance, a long, awkward object.

BTW, I understand what the text says that Jaime says about jousting and being a good rider. I get it! But there something more that just riding skills involved. Strength to hold a lance and balance and aim it at a target. Total body strength, upper body strength, arm strength, decent vision. And to gain the skills and strength needed, takes practice. That would be part of the 25% of the equation that Jaime does not apply to riding skill. 

Of course it is. The other 25% (I expect more than that, humans, including Jaime, tend to use casual overestimation language in such a phrase, to ensure the point is made) contributes too of course. Just not as much. High skill with horsemanship and a little skill with the others, will beat high skill with the others and a little skill with horsemanship - mostly. In GRRMs world.

But given GRRM has 10 year old Barristan managing, if barely, (and Lady Lance apparently more than barely), and Lyanna's other characterisations (such as beating Benjen with a sword-stick) I think its more than reasonable to assume that Lyanna had enough of the other factors to get by. And unreasonable to assume  (or argue) she didn't.

3 hours ago, St Daga said:

We are chasing this around in circles, and for what point? Agree to disagree and move on, shall we? 

Sure

[Bael's Bastard]

@corbon

There was also Daena the Defiant:

Daena is the most famed of the three sisters, and was the most loved—for her beauty as much as her fierce courage. She was known as a skilled horsewoman, a fearsome archer with the Dornish bow her brother Daeron had brought back from his conquests, and she was practiced at riding at rings (though she was never allowed to ride in a tourney, despite her efforts to the contrary).

— The World of Ice and Fire - The Targaryen Kings: Baelor I

Regarding the size, skill, and booming voice of the KOTLT, let's not forget that Aerys was convinced that the mystery knight was a 15 year old Jaime Lannister. A prodigy with a sword, no doubt, but still less than a man grown, and the greenest of green knights.

Our only real candidates are minors like Jaime and Lyanna, and a full grown adult Howland who was smaller than fifteen year old or less squires. There's no getting around the fact that a relatively small person defeated three knights who were at least good enough to become day 1-2 champions.

 

[frenin]

2 hours ago, Bael's Bastard said:

@corbon

There was also Daena the Defiant:

Daena is the most famed of the three sisters, and was the most loved—for her beauty as much as her fierce courage. She was known as a skilled horsewoman, a fearsome archer with the Dornish bow her brother Daeron had brought back from his conquests, and she was practiced at riding at rings (though she was never allowed to ride in a tourney, despite her efforts to the contrary).

 — The World of Ice and Fire - The Targaryen Kings: Baelor I

Regarding the size, skill, and booming voice of the KOTLT, let's not forget that Aerys was convinced that the mystery knight was a 15 year old Jaime Lannister, a prodigy with a sword, perhaps, but still less than a man grown, and the greenest of green knights.

 No matter how one slices it, our only real candidates are teenaged minors like Jaime and Lyanna, and full grown adults like Howland that are smaller than fifteen year old squires.

 

Do we know how tall was Jaime back in the day?? A man grown is 16 years in those days an not always are a hreat difference between a 16 years old and a guy of 16-19 like Howland might be.

Aerys is hardly an evidence imo, a mad man would believe anyything his paranoia feeds him.

And while i believe that there is no better answer than Lyanna i still find very hard to believe that someone would connect all the data,  how Aerys/Rhaegar would know the girl was half a horse and the likes and even there a 14 year old beeating grown men is hard to swallow.

[Lady Dyanna]

I haven’t read through this entire thread, but it just happened to dawn on me.... None of us have any clue whatsoever exactly what LYARA STARK was doing at this point in time. Curiously GRRM has left her completely off the canvas. Maybe he never realized something as simple as the fact that her eyes are GREEN and not blue, purple, or silver.

Not to mention the horses. I really think that their color is tied to houses. Not to mention that they are always a form of transportation. It would be kinda silly for a car to ride a person. Though I believe there is a song that to save a horse you might need to ride a cowboy. lol. 

[Lady Dyanna]

I mean seriously. Was Lyarra a little bird just like Sansa is. Or is she a MOCKING BIRD just like Baelish? 

[SFDanny]

10 hours ago, frenin said:

As i believe i told you before, for that to be true, the southrons ambitions, whatever they nature might be, needs to be something pubic enough the people get the message plainly, neither the Starks nor Robert suspectany kind of foul play going on there, so to whom  exactly was that declaration if everyone would just misinterpret it??

I'm assuming that what you are saying is that the agenda behind Lord Rickard need be publicly widely known for the message Rhaegar sent to the Starks and Robert with his crowning of Lyanna to be widely understood by those in attendance at the Harrenhal. Do I have that right? If so, nothing could be further from the truth. What the people need understand is first that Robert and Lyanna are betrothed to one another, and second Rhaegar is interfering in that betrothal with the message, stated quite publicly of his bestowing the crown of roses to Lyanna. What secret plans Lord Rickard is constructing obviously he keeps to himself and those he conspires with to carry them out.

To the first:

Quote

The crowning of the Stark girl, who was by all reports a wild and boyish young thing with none of the Princess Elia delicate beauty, could only have been mean to win the allegiance of Winterfell to Prince Rhaegar's cause, Symond Staunton suggested to the king.

Yet if this were true, why did the Lady Lyanna's brothers seem so distraught at the honor the prince had bestowed upon her? Brandon Stark, the heir to Winterfell, had to be restrained from confronting Rhaegar at what he took as a slight upon his sister's honor, for Lyanna Stark had long been betrothed to Robert Baratheon, Lord of Storm's End. Eddard Stark, Brandon's younger brother and a close friend to Lord Robert, was calmer but no more pleased. As for Robert Baratheon himself, some say he laughed at the prince's gesture, claiming that Rhaegar had don no more than pay her due ... but those who knew him better say the young lord brooded on the insult, and that his heart hardened toward the Prince of Dragonstone from that day forth. (TWoI&F 126-127 bold emphasis added.

The betrothal was no secret, nor was it new and unknown to Westerosi nobility.

Moreover, and to the second point, a close read of this tells us exactly what the problem is. Lyanna was promised by Lord Rickard to Robert. It is the interference of Rhaegar in Rickard's promise and by implication his questioning whether Lyanna belonged to Robert by that promise that outrages Brandon. Not that Rhaegar's honoring of Lyanna's beauty was too "fresh" a display and a slight of Lyanna's honor.

Please note her that nothing is said of Lyanna's reaction to any of this.

But let me also say, that to any reader of the series must know, the breaking of marriage pacts, by who ever does it, is the stuff by which wars and blood feuds are started. I'm not sure how anyone can miss this fact.

10 hours ago, frenin said:

And why are the Targs like non worried at all of said bethrothals?? They could've said something before and in a more quiet manner yet they were at each other throats.

The idea the Targaryens are not worried about Rickard's marriage pacts is silly. Any king would be worried to see pacts between his vassals that subverted their oaths of fealty to the crown. What is it that Cersei says to Robert right before he hits her?

Quote

The queen looked to her husband. "If any man dared speak to a Targaryen as he has spoken to you -"

"Do you take me for Aerys?" Robert interrupted.

"I took you for a king. Jamie and Tyrion are your own brothers, by all the laws of marriage and the bonds we share. The Starks have driven off the one and seized the other. This man dishonors you with every breath he takes, and yet you stand there meekly, asking if his leg pains him and would he like some wine." (AGoT 338) bold emphasis added

What is it Hoster Tully demands before he enters the rebellion? The marriage of both of his daughters to two rebel lords.

What is that Lord Walder Frey demands before he lets the Northern army pass and joins the rebellion? A marriage pact with Robb Stark.

Over and over again we see critical alliances built through marriages that result in who sides with whom in wars. What idiot would sit the Iron Throne and not worry about growing alliances between his High Lords? Not the paranoid Aerys, and certainly not Crown Prince Rhaegar.

[frenin]

26 minutes ago, SFDanny said:

I'm assuming that what you are saying is that the agenda behind Lord Rickard need be publicly widely known for the message Rhaegar sent to the Starks and Robert with his crowning of Lyanna to be widely understood by those in attendance at the Harrenhal. Do I have that right? If so, nothing could be further from the truth. What the people need understand is first that Robert and Lyanna are betrothed to one another, and second Rhaegar is interfering in that betrothal with the message, stated quite publicly of his bestowing the crown of roses to Lyanna. What secret plans Lord Rickard is constructing obviously he keeps to himself and those he conspires with to carry them out.

 

People already knew that Robert and Lyanna were bethrothed,  there is no need for that to be a secret, but if they don't know that there is a conspiration around the bethrothal, they only are going to see Rhaegar hitting on Lyanna without an ounze of shame, but they are not getting the part that Rhaegar is interfering in the bethrothal, he can't, or he's doing it for the good of his house/realm, only that Rhaegar is being an asshole.

 

26 minutes ago, SFDanny said:

The betrothal was no secret, nor was it new and unknown to Westerosi nobility.

Moreover, and to the second point, a close read of this tells us exactly what the problem is. Lyanna was promised by Lord Rickard to Robert. It is the interference of Rhaegar in Rickard's promise and by implication his questioning whether Lyanna belonged to Robert by that promise that outrages Brandon. Not that Rhaegar's honoring of Lyanna's beauty was too "fresh" a display and a slight of Lyanna's honor.

Please note her that nothing is said of Lyanna's reaction to any of this.

But let me also say, that to any reader of the series must know, the breaking of marriage pacts, by who ever does it, is the stuff by which wars and blood feuds are started. I'm not sure how anyone can miss this fact.

Is it?? It seems to  me that people thought Rhaegar had insulted Lyanna, Robert and Elia precisely because he was hitting on her with the crown, Rhaegar, especially as King, doesn't have any say in Rickard's and Robert's marriage plans, nor his actions can do more than upset them.

 

 

26 minutes ago, SFDanny said:

The idea the Targaryens are not worried about Rickard's marriage pacts is silly. Any king would be worried to see pacts between his vassals that subverted their oaths of fealty to the crown. What is it that Cersei says to Robert right before he hits her?

Quote

I'd say that his marriage pacts don't do nothing of the sort, they weren't worried, there is no reason to believe that Robert planned to betray his cousins prior the Robellion an there is no reason to believe he had any ill feelings towards any of them prior Harrenhall, the same goes for the others.

Nor the pacts had any sign of alert, Robert was marrying Lyanna out of love, not precisely because he was planning something.

 

 

26 minutes ago, SFDanny said:

What is it Hoster Tully demands before he enters the rebellion? The marriage of both of his daughters to two rebel lords.

What is that Lord Walder Frey demands before he lets the Northern army pass and joins the rebellion? A marriage pact with Robb Stark.

Over and over again we see critical alliances built through marriages that result in who sides with whom in wars. What idiot would sit the Iron Throne and not worry about growing alliances between his High Lords? Not the paranoid Aerys, and certainly not Crown Prince Rhaegar.

But nobles are bethrothed all the time and that not necessarily result in war, Jeyne Arryn demanded a dragon to join the Blacks, i do't really see your point, there was no war on the sight, so why would they suspect anything?? Both of them were at each other throat, they don't show any sign of wary against his high lords bar Tywin.

[LynnS]

On 11/26/2019 at 5:45 PM, corbon said:

Perhaps due to a Stark-Stark union? 

Blech.  Not on my list.  If we are going to have something truly horrible in Jon's ancestry; let it be Aerys.  Imagine his reaction in learning that he's not only a bastard, but a bastard born of rape, by the king who murdered your relatives, in the most horrific way and who's mother then died giving birth to him.   He would go out of his mind. 

[Lady Dyanna]

Ya know if Brandon was betrothed to Barbery Dustin. And she got back a red horse from Ned and he got Catelyn...

[Lady Dyanna]

And Brandon liked a particular type of bloody sword

[Lady Dyanna]

And Bethany Bolton only had one child to Rose Bolton

[Lady Dyanna]

That was raised by Barbery Dustin. Whom seemed quite fond of him.