Jump to content
Sign in to follow this  
Moiraine Sedai

The Rebels. Targets of divine retribution.

Recommended Posts

Robert's Rebellion hurt the Targaryen family. Two innocent children, Prince Viserys and Princess Daenerys, were forced into exile.  Years of undeserved hardship followed the children. 

Are the rebel families now facing  retribution for their wrongs?  I believe they are. The Baratheons and their allies during the rebellion have fallen on hard times.  Largely through their own fault, they are presently homeless.  I have no wish to see them rise again.  They are getting their just desserts.  

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
16 minutes ago, Moiraine Sedai said:

Robert's Rebellion hurt the Targaryen family. Two innocent children, Prince Viserys and Princess Daenerys, were forced into exile.  Years of undeserved hardship followed the children. 

Are the rebel families now facing  retribution for their wrongs?  I believe they are. The Baratheons and their allies during the rebellion have fallen on hard times.  Largely through their own fault, they are presently homeless.  I have no wish to see them rise again.  They are getting their just desserts.  

 

 

I’ll be generous and say that Brandon blundered his entourage blundered their way into a treasonous act, but only because on the surface, the Targaryen prince abducted Lyanna Stark for his own selfish ends. Polygamy, in that world, is not allowed, so even if Rhaegar had the best intentions, what he did was a crime in the eyes of any average Westerosi. We also have no proof that Rickard, Eddard, Robert, and the fathers of Brandon’s entourage deserved to die, yet Aerys sentenced them to die anyway.
Was that not unjust? Was that not tyrannical? Did Aerys and Rhaegar not do terrible things which resulted in millions dying?

To the seven hells with House Targaryen, I say. When you strip them down, they’re a bunch of deformed Aryans relying on eugenics to stay in power while their fire burns the world over and over. The rebels did horrid things too, sure, and it’s tempting to say that their families are being punished for their sins, but then it’s also telling that Daenerys is the only one of her family to get a chance at redemption. If the gods are punishing the rebels, then they punished House Targaryen too, and in the case of Aerys and Rhaegar, rightly so.

Edited by Canon Claude

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I believe Robert B and Rickard Stark were plotting against House Targaryen from the beginning.  That's treason.  Lyanna, Ned, and Brandon were active participants in that plot.  They were old enough to know it's wrong.  Executing them was legal.  

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
5 minutes ago, Moiraine Sedai said:

I believe Robert B and Rickard Stark were plotting against House Targaryen from the beginning.  That's treason.  Lyanna, Ned, and Brandon were active participants in that plot.  They were old enough to know it's wrong.  Executing them was legal.  

Interesting. Do you actually have any proof for that?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
59 minutes ago, Moiraine Sedai said:

Are the rebel families now facing  retribution for their wrongs? 

No. The Targaryens are facing the divine retribution for what they were doing in Westeros for 300 years.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
21 minutes ago, Moiraine Sedai said:

I believe Robert B and Rickard Stark were plotting against House Targaryen from the beginning.  That's treason.  Lyanna, Ned, and Brandon were active participants in that plot.  They were old enough to know it's wrong.  Executing them was legal.  

Believe it all you want, but until GRRM confirms it, it’s just, to quote Alan Rickman, idle speculation.

Edited by Canon Claude

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, Moiraine Sedai said:

I believe Robert B and Rickard Stark were plotting against House Targaryen from the beginning.  That's treason.  Lyanna, Ned, and Brandon were active participants in that plot.  They were old enough to know it's wrong.  Executing them was legal.  

Prove it.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Maybe you should take this one up with George himself. I don't have the exact quote with me atm, but he did say that Robert's Rebellion was largely justified. I do believe that Rickard Stark, Jon Arryn and Hoster Tully were forming an anti-Arys coalition through marriages and warding their children off. And given Arys's increasingly unhinged behaviour, who could blame the high lords for wanting a change in leadership?

Your argument really suffers for ignoring the cause of Robert's Rebellion. Rickard Stark went South to treat with his King, negotiate his heirs freedom, and head back North again. That's what he expected. He didn't expect to have to fight a trial by combat, against fire. He didn't expect to be roasted alive. Or to have his heir strangle to death trying to free him. 

Feudalism relies on a contract; give the King obediance in exchange for the King's protection. Arys broke that contract in a massive way, by not just executing a High Lord and his heir, but torturing them to death. Then he ordered Jon Arryn to send his wards off to die. Arys overstepped his legal bounds. Once he did that, Roberts Rebellion was justified. 

Viserys and Dany were innocents who shouldn't have suffered, its true. Their experience, and the murder of their cousins on war criminal Tywin's orders, casts a pall over Robert's final victory. It's similar to how the Allies cause in World War 2 was just, but their war methods often were just as bad as the Axis. It doesn't change the fact that Arys Targaryen had to be gotten rid of.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
5 hours ago, Moiraine Sedai said:

They are getting their just desserts.  

What happens to the Lannisters tho?? They are the de facto royal house. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

While I believe your Targ-stan rant was a bit much, Rhaegar and Robert were technically second cousins, so it's possible that Robert kinslayed at the Trident in the eyes of the gods.   However, kinslaying is a personal crime, that is only the kinslayer pays the price, so Robert's bad fortune in love, marriage, and parenthood could be divine retribution.   After all, Bael the Bard's son had similar woes after he unwittingly killed his father.  And Robert knew his connection with Rhaegar, which would likely be worse.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The story was so hideous she suspected it had to be true.   CoK Cat7

The above quote is taken from Cat. Right after Jamie tells his tale of the burning Brandon.

Every character in the book has a slightly different tale to tell of the same events.  We all assume each person speaks of past events honestly.

It’s so much easier to believe in a “Mad King” and hideous tale than a “King” and common tale.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
19 minutes ago, Fool Stands On Giant’s Toe said:

Every character in the book has a slightly different tale to tell of the same events.

Well, not really. All that are aware of what happened there agree that it was horrific and disgusting, only  Jaime reveals the details. There has never been a point in which Aerys's actions had been exonerated...by anyone.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The murder of children usually does trigger a spiral of violence that haunts the involved parties. You also see that with Theon Greyjoy. His murder of the children is slowly but surely destroying him, also, Jaime crippling Bran led to his own mutilation, etc.

The murder of the Mad King and Elia and her children - and the subsequent refusal of King Robert to punish the perpetrators - is the original sin of the Baratheon regime. And one of the crucial elements which led to their downfall. And it will also be what is going to lead to the destruction of the Lannisters.

This whole thing is a simmering poison, a festering wound people always come back to when they make political decision.

And that is all deliberate because other heinous acts like the execution of the Starks are far less relevant, even for the Starks themselves. Ned does never explicitly state that he had to go to war because he wanted to avenge his father and brother.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, frenin said:

Well, not really. All that are aware of what happened there agree that it was horrific and disgusting, only  Jaime reveals the details. There has never been a point in which Aerys's actions had been exonerated...by anyone.

Who else tells us what happened?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 minutes ago, Fool Stands On Giant’s Toe said:

Who else tells us what happened?

Barristan makes note of the events in A Dance of Dragons. He was there as well as Jaime.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Lord Varys said:

And one of the crucial elements which led to their downfall.

At no point this happens tho, the destruction of the Baratheons is due incest and infighting which unless Aerys and Elia were pulling the strings from the other world, had nothing to do with them.

 

1 hour ago, Lord Varys said:

And that is all deliberate because other heinous acts like the execution of the Starks are far less relevant, even for the Starks themselves. Ned does never explicitly state that he had to go to war because he wanted to avenge his father and brother.

Besides it being obvious... Martin does state it. That was the point of no return and, along with the abuction, is mentioned several times by several people. And once the remaining Targs start meeting some opposition, Young G is right now in Baratheon soil, trying to gain over Baratheon loyalists whom whether they decide to side with him or not will surely have a far different version of the event than Connington,  is bound to be thrown at their face, at least the show got that right

 

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I’m not defending the mad king. Just a lot doesn’t add up. Cat never heard what happened? 5 men went to challenge a prince? And not 7? Brandon rides away from his father’s wedding and none follow? Or try to get him to rethink his plan during the weeks travel from RR to KL? It’s all a bit suspicious to me.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 hours ago, Nathan Stark said:

Maybe you should take this one up with George himself. I don't have the exact quote with me atm, but he did say that Robert's Rebellion was largely justified. I do believe that Rickard Stark, Jon Arryn and Hoster Tully were forming an anti-Arys coalition through marriages and warding their children off. 

Nothing indicates that they were doing that at all. You can look at that alliance through Hoster Tully's actions. He is the only one whose actions we know for sure.

Hoster Tully is basically the Walder Frey of Robert's Rebellion. Walder did not choose sides until Catelyn agreed to his terms, then he threw in with Robb, allowed him to cross. Hoster Tully did not enter the war until he got a marriage out of it for Lysa and likely a confirmation from Ned that he would take Brandon's place and marry Catelyn. 

I bet that if the loyalists had something to offer him that suited his own ambitions and had come sniffing around him, that he would have thrown in with them instead of the rebellion.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
49 minutes ago, Alexis-something-Rose said:

Nothing indicates that they were doing that at all. You can look at that alliance through Hoster Tully's actions. He is the only one whose actions we know for sure.

Hoster Tully is basically the Walder Frey of Robert's Rebellion. Walder did not choose sides until Catelyn agreed to his terms, then he threw in with Robb, allowed him to cross. Hoster Tully did not enter the war until he got a marriage out of it for Lysa and likely a confirmation from Ned that he would take Brandon's place and marry Catelyn. 

I bet that if the loyalists had something to offer him that suited his own ambitions and had come sniffing around him, that he would have thrown in with them instead of the rebellion.

Most of the Lords paramount traditionally married into the families of their bannermen, which makes the sudden determination of the Starks and Barratheonss to form marriage alliances with each other rather unusual. Plus, Hoster had Catelyn betrothed to the heir of House Stark well before the rebellion began. I say the actions taken to build alliances among the lords paramount points to a larger intent to form an anti-Targaryen block in Westeros. Hoster Tully insisting that Ned marry Cat isn't sufficient evidence to suggest that this political arrangement didn't happen.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

Sign in to follow this  

×
×
  • Create New...