So was Lyanna stupid or something?

[Elrick]

Exactly. Why would Martin go to the trouble of creating a precedent for Targaryen polygamy and then use it sparingly? Because he's trying to set up a future plot twist involving Jon, IMO.

I do remember it mentioned that at some point polygamy was abandoned but I'm unsure when and why this happened exactly. It may have had something do with succession wars or some other issue that Martin never bothered to disclose.

AFAIK they did stop practicing polygamy, but I think that was voluntary, I don't think they were forced by law or something to stop. So there's really no reason why Rhaegar couldn't revive the practice, especially if he thought the future of the world was at stake.

My problem with this idea is that its kind of a reach. For one Rhaegar was a mere prince and may or may not be an heir but he wasn't king so he couldn't just change laws whenever he wanted to.

[Valonquar]

I believe Rickard and Brandon - and likely Ned and Benjen as well - knew all along Lyanna went with Rhaegar willingly. After all, the brothers were at Harrenhal with Lyanna and know of the events there. They, along with the rest of Westerosi nobility, know of the blue roses Rhaegar gave their sister. They know of her reaction to Rhaegar's song. They, I believe, know of Lyanna's and Rhaegar's roles in the Knight of the Laughing Tree saga. They know, I think, of the romance started there between their sister and the Prince. On top of this, Ned, at least, knows of Lyanna's reservations about her betrothal to Robert that follows the tourney. All of this is likely known to Lord Rickard as well via his sons or servant's reports, if not Lyanna's own words to her father - which doesn't stop his announcement of the engagement.

In short, Brandon and Rickard don't act the way the do, I believe, because they believe Lyanna was kidnapped and she was too "stupid" to send a message, but because they - especially Brandon - are outraged that Lyanna and Rhaegar would ignore Rickard's right to choose whom she would marry, coupled with a Northerner's view of polygamy, and the importance of honoring the Stark's given word. Please note that when Brandon shows up at King's Landing demanding for Rhaegar to "come out and die" he says nothing about releasing his sister. Seems to me that is because he knows she wasn't kidnapped.

This seems like a worthy explanation, and it gives some sense to the misinformation dilemma. However it also makes Rickard and Brandon seem even more stupid. Obviously in asoiaf the father is supposed to arrange marriages to the benefit of his family, but the Stark family has always struck me as a kinder, more "modern" family as opposed to other families (at least by the time of the books), like the Lannisters who with both Tytos and Tywin had shitty patriarchs from an upbringing perspective. Stark honor also gives reason why they would feel offense, but where is it mentioned that Northerners have a particularly antagonistic view of polygamy? The feeling I got from the books was that none but the Targaryens practice polygamy in Westeros, but not that it means that they're all really against it or something.

To get to the point, again, the Targaryens are the royal family. Even if Lyanna is the daughter of a high lord, seriously, not much they could've done about it except.. suicide, like they did. This is just my impression, but I've always felt that the Targaryens seemed like an exotic element in Westeros, above common law in a way. If one of their kings decided to take a second wife, I don't think any family would realistically object and wouldn't almost every young noble be betrothed to someone anyhow?

[Maia]

However it also makes Rickard and Brandon seem even more stupid.

It doesn't make Rickard anything, really, since he had no part in this disaster, aside from trying to bail out Brandon. And why is it so difficult to believe that Brandon was stupid/somewhat unpleasant?

Hoster Tully did call him a fool when heard of him heading to KL and he also chose to seriously wound LF, whom he completely outmatched, after Cat had begged him to spare the boy.

I see no reason to think that Brandon was completely wonderful and that his motives/responsibility shouldn't be questioned. As has been pointed above, he demanded that Rhaegar come out and die, not that he let Lyanna go. Which strongly hints that he knew the truth, but saw Lyanna as property and was, consequently, outraged.

[DurararaFTW]

It doesn't make Rickard anything, really, since he had no part in this disaster, aside from trying to bale out Brandon. And why is it so difficult to believe that Brandon was stupid/somewhat unpleasant?

Hoster Tully did call him a fool when heard of him heading to KL and he also chose to seriously wound LF, whom he completely outmatched, after Cat had begged him to spare the boy.

I see no reason to think that Brandon was completely wonderful and that his motives/responsibility shouldn't be questioned. As has been pointed above, he demanded that Rhaegar come out and die, not that he let Lyanna go. Which strongly hints that he knew the truth, but saw Lyanna as property and was, consequently, outraged.

I like how you go from "not completely wonderful" to "sees his family members as property" in two sentences. Just wow.

[History of Westeros]

I see no reason to think that Brandon was completely wonderful and that his motives/responsibility shouldn't be questioned. As has been pointed above, he demanded that Rhaegar come out and die, not that he let Lyanna go. Which strongly hints that he knew the truth, but saw Lyanna as property and was, consequently, outraged.

Amen. Nowhere is it written that all the Starks have been honorable/just/good/smart whatever. Throughout most of this thread people are acting as if the Starks are always the good guys, regularly skipping over options that would indicate negativity in them. That's just old-fashion bias.

We have good information on about 6-7 Starks, decent info on a few more and vague info on random others. There have literally been thousands of Starks. Extremely small sample size.

[History of Westeros]

I like how you go from "not completely wonderful" to "sees his family members as property" in two sentences. Just wow.

Not only is that not necessarily implied, but it wouldn't be that strange. Tywin thinks of his children pretty darn near to property, and look at Randyll Tarly. Extremely imperious lords are nothing odd. Why not Rickard?

[DurararaFTW]

Not only is that not necessarily implied, but it wouldn't be that strange.

I wasn't talking about what he implied, I'm quoting his post.

Tywin thinks of his children pretty darn near to property, and look at Randyll Tarly. Extremely imperious lords are nothing odd. Why not Rickard?

Tywin hates one of his sons for killing his wife in childbirth, he loves the other and Randyll hates his older son for being everything he doesn't want him to be after trying to change him for 15 years. Nothing suggest they regarded their children as property, and what do mean you nothing odd, Tywin is the most evil villain after Joffrey. Randyll is widely as hardest badass in Westeros. they are hardly representatives for what the average lord is like. Also we were talking about Brandon, not Rickard. Literally all we know about Rickard is that he was summoned to stand trail with his son and thought his best shot at making it out of King's Landing alive was trail by combat when he saw Aerys was bat****.

[Alexius]

Why not Rickard?

Because Ned hadn't shown any signs of such treatment? (In contrast with Tywin's children and Sam).

It's interesting how eager people to demonize Rickard and Brandon in order to idealize Lyanna and Rhaegar. Rhaegar is so cool that he cannot be responsible for Robert's Rebellion, no way. :rolleyes:

[Valonquar]

It doesn't make Rickard anything, really, since he had no part in this disaster, aside from trying to bail out Brandon. And why is it so difficult to believe that Brandon was stupid/somewhat unpleasant?

Hoster Tully did call him a fool when heard of him heading to KL and he also chose to seriously wound LF, whom he completely outmatched, after Cat had begged him to spare the boy.

I see no reason to think that Brandon was completely wonderful and that his motives/responsibility shouldn't be questioned. As has been pointed above, he demanded that Rhaegar come out and die, not that he let Lyanna go. Which strongly hints that he knew the truth, but saw Lyanna as property and was, consequently, outraged.

Maybe I've misunderstood something, but wasn't Rickard executed along with Brandon at King's Landing? What, was Brandon captured there and kept until Rickard came after him?

As for assuming that the Starks are sympathetic characters; while it's likely that some Starks may have been cruel men, as even Bran thinks when he's in the crypts and names like "Night's King" and "The Hungry Wolf" imply, by large they've been presented as almost universally good. You've got Bran the Builder (obviously a positive title), people like the Stark who burned his fleet in grief when his father disappeared etc, and the Starks of the books are clearly a functional family as opposed to most others we know of (Martell, Lannister, Arryns, Targaryens, Tarly, Clegane and so forth.) If we ever get more knowledge of Rickard's character, I'd be surprised if he's some tyrannical patriarch and not a good father, considering that Benjen and Ned are pretty positive characters and Lyanna and Brandon are pretty much presented as more adult versions of Arya and Rickon.

[Thefalconemperor]

That's what the text says. You can infer and imply and theorise all you want, but I can guarantee you're wrong. Because without the quotes to back it up, these fanwank theories are just gigantic, pointless wastes of time and bandwidth.

Martin let it obvious enough so that you average intelligence man or woman could know fo sure there's more to it.

[DurararaFTW]

Maybe I've misunderstood something, but wasn't Rickard executed along with Brandon at King's Landing? What, was Brandon captured there and kept until Rickard came after him?

Yes. Brandon and six companions went to the Red keep to tell Rhaegar to come out and die. They were captured then Aerys ordered each of their fathers to come to King's Landing to stand trail with their sons. They all got burned alive (save for Brandon's young squire who was spared and went straight to Ned, he later died at the Tower of Joy fighting alongside Ned and Howland).

[Nnorb]

Martin let it obvious enough so that you average intelligence man or woman could know fo sure there's more to it.

I stand in awe of your well-reasoned arguments, and elegant wordplay.

[Maia]

Because Ned hadn't shown any signs of such treatment?

Is it a surprise that he didn't, after Starks got massively burned by it in the previous generation? And how is it supposed to be representative for his brother?

Also, here is your typical noble, who loved his family - Hoster Tully. What did he do to Lysa, when she resisted playing her role as his merchandise, hm? Ditto, his quarrel with his brother.

It's interesting how eager people to demonize Rickard and Brandon in order to idealize Lyanna and Rhaegar. Rhaegar is so cool that he cannot be responsible for Robert's Rebellion, no way. :rolleyes:

Well, why should he be responsible for the Rebellion? If not for Brandon's rashness and Aerys's abrupt turn to the worse in his madness, it wouldn't have happened, IMHO.

I am sick and tired of demonizing Lyanna and Rhaegar and insistance that all male Starks _must_ be sweetness and light and only get targeted through no fault of their own. What R&L did was less unreasonable, by far, than what Robb did by marrying Jeyne Westerling. It should have merely resulted in some unpleasantness. They were not responsible for idiocy/madness of their family members, which led to war.

And Lyanna died clutching the crown of the Queen of Beauty - no way did Rhaegear abduct and rape her.

[morgalel]

Lyanna isn't stupid. Rheagar kidnapped her and locked her in a tower between rapes, because he was a horny, insane Targaryen. Basically Viserys writ large.

That's what the text says. You can infer and imply and theorise all you want, but I can guarantee you're wrong. Because without the quotes to back it up, these fanwank theories are just gigantic, pointless wastes of time and bandwidth.

Several people (Jorah, Barristan) explicitely say that Viserys is nothing like Rhaegar, Ned thinks he did not go to brothels (quite strange trait for a "horny Targaryen" ). In fact the only person who describes Rhaegar as a rapist is Robert.

[DurararaFTW]

What R&L did was less unreasonable, by far, than what Robb did by marrying Jeyne Westerling.

Rhaegar was married and had kids. And Robb didn't make a spectacle of his unfaithfulness to his wife as Rhaegar did at Harrenhal. And actually tried to make it up to the Freys, as opposed to completely discommunicating everyone afterwards for half a year marrying Jeyne was just as blind and stupid but Rhaegar was the crownprince and about ten years older and did a lot less fas as owning up to what he did afterwards. As far as we know at least.

it's possible that it'll be revealed in Barristan's POV that not only did Lyanna willingly ran off with him and he wasn't informed of what Brandon did and sent tons of letters to Ned that all got lost in the mail and he was busy explaining to Robert what was what when he was getting his torso bashed in but until we do my benefit of the doubt only goes so far.

[Nnorb]

Several people (Jorah, Barristan) explicitely say that Viserys is nothing like Rhaegar.

The same people who say Aerys was a 'good man' who 'made mistakes.' Right.

Ned thinks he did not go to brothels (quite strange trait for a "horny Targaryen" ).

Why would he need brothels when he could just abduct random noblewomen? He probably got off on it, like Aerys with his fire fetish.

In fact the only person who describes Rhaegar as a rapist is Robert.

Well Robert does have a vested interest in Rheagar being a complete douche.

It's a good thing the truth mirrored his bias exactly. =p

[Shemy]

Lyanna isn't stupid. Rheagar kidnapped her and locked her in a tower between rapes, because he was a horny, insane Targaryen. Basically Viserys writ large.

That's what the text says. You can infer and imply and theorise all you want, but I can guarantee you're wrong. Because without the quotes to back it up, these fanwank theories are just gigantic, pointless wastes of time and bandwidth.

The text also mentions multiple good points from quite a few characters about Rhaegar that would make kidnapping Lyanna to rape her seem completely out of character against the word of a love-sick king.

Hey ho we have a contradiction in the books, what to believe?

[Alexius]

It should have merely resulted in some unpleasantness.

Yeah. Offending three great houses and then letting his mad father deal with it surely could led only to some minor unpleasantness if any. :rolleyes:

And Lyanna died clutching the crown of the Queen of Beauty - no way did Rhaegear abduct and rape her.

Why do we take it for granted that if Lyanna loved him then he didn't abduct her?

[morgalel]

The same people who say Aerys was a 'good man' who 'made mistakes.' Right.

No. Jorah does not speak about him, and Barristan says he was crasy.

Why would he need brothels when he could just abduct random noblewomen? He probably got off on it, like Aerys with his fire fetish.

noblewomEn ? For all we know he abducted one noblewoman. (And he did not get off on it.)

It's a good thing the truth mirrored his bias exactly. =p

And how exactly do you know The Truth ?

[Nnorb]

Yeah. Offending three great houses and then letting his mad father deal with it surely could led only to some minor unpleasantness if any. :rolleyes:

Exactly, I mean come on, this is Rheagar we're talking about here. He's so strong and smart and pretty and dreamy and aweseome. Nothing bad could ever happen to Rheagar.

:D