Daenerys’ Refusal to Acknowledge…

[Alester Florent]

The rebellion was justified. Arresting Brandon and his companions was an entirely reasonable response and even if they had been executed without trial for treason, the realm would probably have swallowed that provided it stopped there. But Aerys also killed their fathers (with no legal justification), and then went after other innocents, including a Lord Paramount (and son of his most trusted friend!) At that point he's ripped up the implied contract between him and the realm and the lords are entitled to rebel in self-defence if nothing else.

The "constitutional" approach after the death of Rhaegar and Aerys would have been to install Aegon as king with a regency. He's a baby so he doesn't already carry any ingrained prejudice and they can raise him as they think appropriate. 

Viserys, old enough to remember and hold a grudge, is a much less attractive option.

Notwithstanding that Robert had,  I think, already declared himself King, the "Aegon solution" remained a theoretical option and it's not hard to imagine Ned pushing for it in the aftermath... right up until Tywin killed Aegon. After that it had to be curtains for the Targs.

[King_Tristifer_IV_Mudd]

14 minutes ago, Adelstein said:

The rebellion was justified. Arresting Brandon and his companions was an entirely reasonable response and even if they had been executed without trial for treason, the realm would probably have swallowed that provided it stopped there. But Aerys also killed their fathers (with no legal justification), and then went after other innocents, including a Lord Paramount (and son of his most trusted friend!) At that point he's ripped up the implied contract between him and the realm and the lords are entitled to rebel in self-defence if nothing else.

The "constitutional" approach after the death of Rhaegar and Aerys would have been to install Aegon as king with a regency. He's a baby so he doesn't already carry any ingrained prejudice and they can raise him as they think appropriate. 

Viserys, old enough to remember and hold a grudge, is a much less attractive option.

Notwithstanding that Robert had,  I think, already declared himself King, the "Aegon solution" remained a theoretical option and it's not hard to imagine Ned pushing for it in the aftermath... right up until Tywin killed Aegon. After that it had to be curtains for the Targs.

I agree, if it was just Brandon then I could see it sliding, only because of how he went about what he did. If went to demand that Rhaegar return his sister, and Aerys executed him, no. But since he was screaming threats at the crown Prince (completely justified IMO) it could definitely merit an execution. Though I believe Aerys’ days were numbered already. Either a majority of the kingdoms were planning a coup, or Rhaegar was planning a coup. Or maybe Rhaegar high jacked the original coup. I just can’t for the life of me figure out why Varys ratted on the tourney of Harrenhal. Unless he was planning fAegon already by that point.

[The Gizzard of Oz]

On 1/13/2023 at 1:24 AM, KingEuronGreyjoy said:

Her family’s past will be one of her major challenges when she gets to Westeros. If she refuses to compromise and learn from her family’s past the only way she could rule Westeros is with an iron fist supported by her army and navy of savages and her 3 WMDs. If she can acknowledge that her family deserved to be deposed and that Robert, Ned, and Jon Arryn were completely in the right, she’ll have grown enough to have a possibility to develop into a good queen for Westeros.

I said on another topic that Westeros was prosperous under King Aerys Targaryen.  The Small Folk were safe, happy, and secure.  Aerys was cruel to those he suspected but Tywin or any other Lord were just as cruel to those who crossed them.  The mental state of Aerys was not important as long as the kingdom and the Small Folk are benefiting.  And both were. 

Brandon knew his sister very well.  Maybe intimately as I said on another topic.  He must have known that she ran way on her own.  The pride and hubris of House Stark would never admit to this.  Brandon could not accept this and worked himself up to a rage.  It's beyond stupidity and bad manners to storm into the throne room and threaten the king.  He should have politely asked for an audience and then presented his question to the king.  I am very surprised the Kingsguards were not ordered to cut him down where he stood.  All those morons who escorted him should have been cut down for their brazen disrespect and threats. 

The rebellion can never be justified.  The lives of two boys whose families were most probably conspiring against the Targaryens is not worth the lives and the damages caused by the rebellion.  If that old fool had any sense, he would have told his two wards to get into exile.  They could have gone to King's Landing and beg the king's mercy. 

[Craving Peaches]

4 minutes ago, The Gizzard of Oz said:

They could have gone to King's Landing and beg the king's mercy. 

Because Aerys II is such a paragon of virtue and well known for being merciful. It's not like he has had entire families killed over the crimes of only some members. What did Robert do anyway? He's not even related to any 'conspirators'.

Also, why should they beg for mercy when they have done nothing? They haven't even been charged with anything, they've just been ordered to be killed.

[Alester Florent]

1 minute ago, The Gizzard of Oz said:

 

The rebellion can never be justified.  The lives of two boys whose families were most probably conspiring against the Targaryens is not worth the lives and the damages caused by the rebellion.  If that old fool had any sense, he would have told his two wards to get into exile.  They could have gone to King's Landing and beg the king's mercy. 

Robert's family was not conspiring against Aerys because they were dead. Robert was the Lord of Storm's End. He was also Aerys's cousin, and the son of his most trusted friend. If Aerys can kill him for no reason - and none was given - then nobody is safe. Aerys had to go. 

This would have been the moment for Rhaegar to step up, seize control, countermand the order, explain the situation and try to rectify the situation. Bit he didn't because he was more interested in shagging Lyanna than in clearing up the disaster he set in motion.

It's also hard to justify Aerys as acting in the interests of the smallfolk given he was planning to kill everyone in Kings Landing out of spite. To say nothing of Duskendale.

[StarkTullies]

15 minutes ago, The Gizzard of Oz said:

I said on another topic that Westeros was prosperous under King Aerys Targaryen.  The Small Folk were safe, happy, and secure.  Aerys was cruel to those he suspected but Tywin or any other Lord were just as cruel to those who crossed them.

And Mad King Aerys hand-picked Tywin as his hand because of his genocidal atrocities to the Reynes and Tarbecks and their smallfolk, who were neither safe, happy, nor secure.  I'm not blaming Aerys for Tywin's evil actions but he certainly rewarded Tywin for his evil actions, so any argument you have about Aerys protecting the smallfolk goes out the window.

20 minutes ago, The Gizzard of Oz said:

The lives of two boys whose families were most probably conspiring against the Targaryens

Well I have no problems with anybody "conspiring against the Targaryens" as if that is some terrible thing, but there is no evidence whatsoever that they were.  And even less evidence that Brandon and Lyanna were having an affair.  The Starks do not have a racist family tradition to practice incest to "keep their blood pure".

[Alester Florent]

When you look at it objectively, from an IC perspective, what happened is that the King's son kidnapped a woman, and when her brother complained, the King ordered the deaths of her family and her former fiancé for good measure. 

That is not being a good king, or a good person, by any standard. Fortunately in this case the victims/targets were powerful lords able to fight back. 

[Kierria]

2 hours ago, Adelstein said:

When you look at it objectively, from an IC perspective, what happened is that the King's son kidnapped a woman, and when her brother complained, the King ordered the deaths of her family and her former fiancé for good measure. 

That is not being a good king, or a good person, by any standard. Fortunately in this case the victims/targets were powerful lords able to fight back. 

Your point is far from objective.  Eddard would have negative thoughts of Rhaegar if the prince had kidnapped his sister.  Lyanna ran away to avoid Robert.  How she ended up at the Tower of Joy is still a mystery but there is no evidence to show she was abducted.  

[King_Tristifer_IV_Mudd]

1 hour ago, Kierria said:

Your point is far from objective.  Eddard would have negative thoughts of Rhaegar if the prince had kidnapped his sister.  Lyanna ran away to avoid Robert.  How she ended up at the Tower of Joy is still a mystery but there is no evidence to show she was abducted.  

Yeah, Edward probably figured that out by the end of the war. But at the start it almost certainly wasn’t that clear to anyone. Brandon and most of Westeros almost certainly believed that Rhaegar kidnapped her.

[frenin]

14 hours ago, Adelstein said:

Notwithstanding that Robert had,  I think, already declared himself King, the "Aegon solution" remained a theoretical option and it's not hard to imagine Ned pushing for it in the aftermath... right up until Tywin killed Aegon. After that it had to be curtains for the Targs.

Both Ned and Jon Arryn seemed to have pushed Robert onto the throne, there's no reason to believe Ned desired a Targ ruling over him more than Robert.

 

9 hours ago, Kierria said:

but there is no evidence to show she was abducted.  

 

Quote

Side by side the queen's procession and Hizdahr zo Loraq's made their slow way across Meereen, until finally the Temple of the Graces loomed up before them, its golden domes flashing in the sun. How beautiful, the queen tried to tell herself, but inside her was some foolish little girl who could not help but look about for Daario. If he loved you, he would come and carry you off at swordpoint, as Rhaegar carried off his northern girl, the girl in her insisted, but the queen knew that was folly. Even if her captain was mad enough to attempt it, the Brazen Beasts would cut him down before he got within a hundred yards of her.

There's no evidence to show she wasn't abducted.

 

Quote

  Eddard would have negative thoughts of Rhaegar if the prince had kidnapped his sister. 

Eddard would have negative thoughts of Aerys if the King had killed his fathevand brother.

Perhaps he didn't and it was a trap from the Marsters.

[astarkchoice]

15 hours ago, The Gizzard of Oz said:

I said on another topic that Westeros was prosperous under King Aerys Targaryen.  The Small Folk were safe, happy, and secure.  Aerys was cruel to those he suspected but Tywin or any other Lord were just as cruel to those who crossed them.  The mental state of Aerys was not important as long as the kingdom and the Small Folk are benefiting.  And both were. 

Brandon knew his sister very well.  Maybe intimately as I said on another topic.  He must have known that she ran way on her own.  The pride and hubris of House Stark would never admit to this.  Brandon could not accept this and worked himself up to a rage.  It's beyond stupidity and bad manners to storm into the throne room and threaten the king.  He should have politely asked for an audience and then presented his question to the king.  I am very surprised the Kingsguards were not ordered to cut him down where he stood.  All those morons who escorted him should have been cut down for their brazen disrespect and threats. 

The rebellion can never be justified.  The lives of two boys whose families were most probably conspiring against the Targaryens is not worth the lives and the damages caused by the rebellion.  If that old fool had any sense, he would have told his two wards to get into exile.  They could have gone to King's Landing and beg the king's mercy. 

Nope 

Before duskendale its reported he began to rule stupidly , going for a course of action simply as tywin(who he now saw as rival in both influence and love)  as hand recomended another...thats simply bad leadership. The kingswood brotherhood (shielded by uhappy snallfolk at 1st)  then duskendale  occured and from the  on  aerys is described as paranoid and unstable....a tyrant so bad his own son and vassals  move to unseat him at harrenhal.

Theres 0 evidence theres any stark incest in the slightest  eitther thats simply dafr.

As a vassal lord brandon is no serf, he has rights ! even the king cannot abduct his sister like some common girl and he has every right to demand her return or challenge for it with single combat

The 2 boys where due to the kings own actions lords of their respective regions and entitled to seek vengance, the king having upended the vassalage norms.in the most bizzare and heavy handed way had opened the lords up to every right to rebel at what was now open tyranny and madness.

Bottom.line its all about perspective..from the perspective of normal.vassal rights he had broken them as badly as any king could rhus his lords no longer owed.his fealty.......or if you see the royalty as tyranny anyway and simply  ruling by strength alone then minus dragons and the right marriages/alliances he had long ago forfeited his rule by allowing himself and his house to become so weak they had no claim over stronger houses.

[SeanF]

15 hours ago, The Gizzard of Oz said:

I said on another topic that Westeros was prosperous under King Aerys Targaryen.  The Small Folk were safe, happy, and secure.  Aerys was cruel to those he suspected but Tywin or any other Lord were just as cruel to those who crossed them.  The mental state of Aerys was not important as long as the kingdom and the Small Folk are benefiting.  And both were. 

Brandon knew his sister very well.  Maybe intimately as I said on another topic.  He must have known that she ran way on her own.  The pride and hubris of House Stark would never admit to this.  Brandon could not accept this and worked himself up to a rage.  It's beyond stupidity and bad manners to storm into the throne room and threaten the king.  He should have politely asked for an audience and then presented his question to the king.  I am very surprised the Kingsguards were not ordered to cut him down where he stood.  All those morons who escorted him should have been cut down for their brazen disrespect and threats. 

The rebellion can never be justified.  The lives of two boys whose families were most probably conspiring against the Targaryens is not worth the lives and the damages caused by the rebellion.  If that old fool had any sense, he would have told his two wards to get into exile.  They could have gone to King's Landing and beg the king's mercy. 

If Jon Arryn had just surrendered Robert and Ned, nobody would have been safe from Aerys.

[Terrorthatflapsinthenight9]

1 minute ago, SeanF said:

If Jon Arryn had just surrendered Robert and Ned, nobody would have been safe from Aerys.

Not counting that Aerys had also murdered his nephew and heir without a trial.

[King_Tristifer_IV_Mudd]

15 minutes ago, Terrorthatflapsinthenight9 said:

Not counting that Aerys had also murdered his nephew and heir without a trial.

Anyone that can’t see that turning Rob and Ned over wouldn’t have been end of it, is someone who’s opinion can’t be taken seriously.

[Skahaz mo Kandaq]

Daenerys is already a fine ruler.  The issue of whether the Targaryens deserved to be deposed is not a factor.  I suspect Rickard, Robert, and Hoster were planning to overpower the Targaryens.  That was an act of rebellion.  Any Targaryen will be within their rights to execute Rickard, Robert, Hoster, and any other party who was helping them.  

[Nathan Stark]

3 hours ago, Gentlemen Prefer Blondes said:

Daenerys is already a fine ruler.  The issue of whether the Targaryens deserved to be deposed is not a factor.  I suspect Rickard, Robert, and Hoster were planning to overpower the Targaryens.  That was an act of rebellion.  Any Targaryen will be within their rights to execute Rickard, Robert, Hoster, and any other party who was helping them.  

You can't execute people for crimes they haven't committed yet. Even if your suspicions were correct and Rickard, Robert and Hoster were all planning rebellion, all Arys did was create a nasty public spectacle that gave those lords families very good reason to rebel. 

Not that I believe the Starks, Baratheons, Arryns or anyone was else was plotting rebellion, but there is an interesting kernel in this comment. All of the noble Houses were hedging their bets. Everyone knew of the last 80 years of Targaryen history. The dynasty was on increasingly shaky footing all through the Blackfyre rebellions, the issues during Aegon V's reign, the tragedy at Summerhall, Rhealla's fertility issues, Arys's slipping grip on reality, Viserys seemingly showing concerning signs. Literally the only bright spot in all of this is Rheagar, who is only well adjusted and stable in comparison to the other men of the family.

To be blunt, House Targaryen looked like a failing dynasty. Why wouldn't the Starks want to establish alliances and marriage pacts with other ruling Houses? Why wouldn't House Arryn seek better relations with the Starks and Baratheons by raising their sons as wards? Why wouldn't Hoster Tully seek to establish his House as fully as possible with the Stark, Arryn, Baratheon alliance? Why wouldn't Tywin Lannister plan on proposing a Jaime Lysa match? Why wouldn't the Martells attempt to offer Elia and Oberyn as suitable matches for Jaime and Cersei? House Targaryen is not a sure bet to rule Westeros anymore, so the Lords Paramount need to prepare for a possible future without them.

As I said, Rheagar was the one relatively good bright spot in all of this, and my own suspicion is that the STAB alliance would have found him to be an acceptable alternative to mad Arys. And then, whatever happened with Lyanna happened, and that was the end of that.

TLDR is, the Starks, Baratheons and Tullys cannot be blamed for trying to secure their fortunes in case House Targaryen collapsed. Because that's what everyone else was doing too.

[Angel Eyes]

8 hours ago, Gentlemen Prefer Blondes said:

Daenerys is already a fine ruler. 

How so?

[Alester Florent]

12 hours ago, frenin said:

Both Ned and Jon Arryn seemed to have pushed Robert onto the throne, there's no reason to believe Ned desired a Targ ruling over him more than Robert.

Exactly what happened remains somewhat unclear. It was fairly late in the day that Robert declared his intention to take the throne, late in the war, but at a time when both Rhaegar and Aerys were still alive and deposing both of them was clearly necessary. At that point, claiming to be acting on behalf of Aegon would have been a nonsense, and Robert made an attractive figurehead for the Aerys-deposition movement: he's widely popular, a provenly great war-leader, and his dynastic claim doesn't supersede the Targs', it's the closest of anyone outside the immediate royal family. But at this point it's a combination of expediency, propaganda and perhaps hot-headed ambition. The war is still very much in the balance and Robert doesn't have himself crowned, even in an informal, impromptu crowning, like Robb's, until after the sack of King's Landing. Exactly what happens at the end of the war remains up in the air.

Imagine then a situation where the rebels take KL and both Aerys and Rhaegar have died in the manner they actually did, but Aegon is still alive. Let's say that Jaime, having killed Aerys, remembers about Rhaegar's kids, goes to the tower and manages to protect them. The rebel leaders are left with a lawful king (Aegon), actually in the Red Keep, and over whom they have full control. Suddenly, the opportunity for a regency presents itself, which might appeal more to Ned than having the baby king killed. And Ned is first on the scene.

What's more, Robert has no real aptitude for or interest in ruling. It probably wouldn't take a lot to talk him out of actually claiming the throne once you start showing him the amount of paperwork necessary.

I think the key here might be that not only does Aegon have to survive but Lyanna too. If she survives, then Robert gets her back and can go back to Storm's End with his war aims achieved and having taken his revenge on Rhaegar, feeling as pleased as punch, and perhaps more inclined to be generous towards Rhaegar's blameless kids.

The survival of Lyanna and Aegon also changes the wider political position. The Martells are likely to be keen on King Aegon with a regency, as is Tywin, because he doesn't have the opportunity to get his fingers into government by marrying Cersei to Robert. We can probably assume the Tyrells would also prefer this outcome in the scenario suggested. If Aegon survives the initial sack (where his death can be put down to lol whoops) he becomes much harder to dispose of later without sparking a second civil war.

Remember also the conversation Ned and Robert have in AGoT about the war. Ned remembers it as a rebellion to rid the realm of a tyrant; Robert to rid the realm of Targaryens. But while Robert obviously had a beef with Rhaegar personally, and had reason to hate Aerys, I suspect his general Targ-hatred is a backwards projection accounting for fourteen years of bitterness over the death of the woman he adored, and had Lyanna been "restored" to him, that probably wouldn't have developed.

It's obviously a complete hypothetical. But not I think an unimaginable one.

[Angel Eyes]

55 minutes ago, Adelstein said:

Exactly what happened remains somewhat unclear. It was fairly late in the day that Robert declared his intention to take the throne, late in the war, but at a time when both Rhaegar and Aerys were still alive and deposing both of them was clearly necessary. At that point, claiming to be acting on behalf of Aegon would have been a nonsense, and Robert made an attractive figurehead for the Aerys-deposition movement: he's widely popular, a provenly great war-leader, and his dynastic claim doesn't supersede the Targs', it's the closest of anyone outside the immediate royal family. But at this point it's a combination of expediency, propaganda and perhaps hot-headed ambition. The war is still very much in the balance and Robert doesn't have himself crowned, even in an informal, impromptu crowning, like Robb's, until after the sack of King's Landing. Exactly what happens at the end of the war remains up in the air.

Imagine then a situation where the rebels take KL and both Aerys and Rhaegar have died in the manner they actually did, but Aegon is still alive. Let's say that Jaime, having killed Aerys, remembers about Rhaegar's kids, goes to the tower and manages to protect them. The rebel leaders are left with a lawful king (Aegon), actually in the Red Keep, and over whom they have full control. Suddenly, the opportunity for a regency presents itself, which might appeal more to Ned than having the baby king killed. And Ned is first on the scene.

 

Why did Jaime just "forget" about the kids? If there's anything to know about Tywin, don't trust him to treat children of enemy combatants well, just ask the Tarbeck kid who got thrown down a well by Amory Lorch (and something Robb conveniently forgot since he never tried to ensure Sansa's safety).

[Alester Florent]

3 minutes ago, Angel Eyes said:

Why did Jaime just "forget" about the kids?

You'll have to ask Jaime.

I would guess that he was shellshocked by the enormity of what he had done - and the general situation - and wasn't really thinking clearly - and that he was so focussed on Aerys that by the time he registered that Rhaegar's kids might be in danger that he reckoned it was too late. But that is a complete guess.

Obviously it didn't happen, but it's not implausible that it could have. It's just one of a number of potential scenarios that sees Aegon survive until Ned's arrival, and perhaps the one that requires least change to the "real" course of events.