[aDwD spoilers] Revisiting Rhaegar

[Markus]

There was a lot of fighting going on in the Dornish Marches, fairly early: Summerhall battles, Ashford, likely other skirmishes. Assuming Rhaegar is at the ToJ, it makes sense that he would only be able to head towards KL safely AFTER Robert is fleeing north/to Stony Sept. Staying at the ToJ would be a safer plan, up until he is sure that Loyalist have control of the trip to KL.

I doubt that Rhaegar stayed at the Tower of Joy because he was concerned about his safety. He could easily have gone to KL via loyalist territory or joined the large loyalist forces in the general area to escort him if he didn't think that he would have been safe enough in a large territory in a small group. In fact, we don't even know if he was aware what was happening while he was at the ToJ. So I think it's more likely that he stayed until Lyanna was pregnant or until he was made aware of what had been happening in his absence after the Battle of the Bells.

Lastly, anyone else find it odd/ironic that Robert was so close to the ToJ at the battle of Ashford?

Ashford isn't _that_ near to the ToJ. It's about 200 miles away.

[tipopellet]

I don't see that Lyanna's abduction would have been hushed up. Whoever was with Lyanna or was responsible for her would have sent news of this as soon as possible.

How would they know who kidnapped her? Was it done in a broad daylight, do you think Rhaegar did annonce his intentions or bragged about his conquest afterwards? Why would he do that? Was he really so above thinking about other people's feelings and reactions and consequesces? Looks like the dumbest move ever. I think if he didn't prepare some plan how to amend this for Lyanna's family, for Baratheons and for Elia and her family, he would at least put efforts into it being a secret where she went and with whom until he knew how to fix the mess that would inevitably follow in one form or another.

Moreover, he may not have been in such a rush as you assume. I certainly see no reason to assume that he only had days to plan and act out his next moves after Aegon's birth.

Because the abduction of highborn maiden of very powerfull family bethroned to other powerful family disrespecting the third powerfull family your wife comes from is bound to have some dreadful consequences for which any sane person would be inclined to plan and most probably take some preventive measures. Which does take time. He isn't idiot. He isn't really impulsive. He isn't evil or mad. Why would he not at least try to atone for what he was going to do?

As to an eventual child's status and Elia, we don't know that he didn't think about these points before he "kidnapped" Lyanna. Perhaps he did. Probably even. It wouldn't take much time to inform Elia of his intentions or not inform her as the case may be. It wouldn't take much time to decide he could marry Lyanna or that the child needn't be legitimate to do what it needed to do. Certainly not months or even weeks.

Well, inform her is easy, get her consent and make sure her family agrees with it as well could prove rather tricky. Getting second wife isn't such a simple solution either - this practice somewhat died by the time and it would take an effort to convince nobles, chirch and people that he has a right to do that. There was no garanty that it would work in the end. Especially when everyone would have been pissed on him for kidnapping Lyanna in the first place.

Perhaps Rhaegar's strategy was going incommunicado? This wouldn't have required lots of preparation. And once Lyanna was pregnant -- and possibly married -- there was little the Starks or Robert could do anymore. Or that may have been what Rhaegar believed.

You don't go about treating your most prominent nobles like they're shit. He planned to rule them afterwards, didn't he? That's too arrogant and out of character (what little we know about it) for him to go about his second wedding and third child this way (imho).

Plus, if he was marrying her - he could have done just that, consummate their marriage and that would be it, there were no need to get her pregnant for marriage to Robert being out of question and her family being forced into acceptance. There was no need to go into prolonged hiding with such plan.

We don't know this. Aerys believing Rhaegar was plotting against him doesn't make it so. But even if Rhaegar was moving against Aerys at Harrenhal it doesn't mean he was a patient man in general or incapable of rashness and being emotional. Plotting against your king and father was a special case and may have required patience in Rhaegar's mind. While crowning Lyanna as Queen of Love and Beauty surely seemed a rash and emotional act.

Aerys got this notion from Varys who seem to know everything.

Agree about Harrenhaal incident, but there are different interpretations why he did that, could have been love rush, could have been honoring her hidden talents (tKoLT).Plus those two events (favoring her at tourney and kidnapping her) are absolutely not of the same magnitude.

[Salander]

No, but Ned's thought here is not consistent with the idea that Rhaegar raped Lyanna. If Ned believed this is what occurred, does it seem likely that his first thought on Rhaegar in a long time would be that he didn't go to brothels? I can promise you that if someone raped my sister, I wouldn't think to myself at some point, "yeah, I'll bet that guy never patronized prostitutes." Just not the sort of thing you say about your sister's rapist.

I...don't see how this point helps you at all. First of all, just because Ned fought Arthur Dayne doesn't mean he didn't "like" him. In fact, we know that he admired him. He expresses no negative thoughts about him. And if someone can fight someone even if they admire him, then why couldn't Ned fight against Rhaegar (or at least, Rhaegar's side) even if he thought well of him? You've undermined your own point, not reinforced it.

Sorry, but there is a matter of elision on "all" points of view. How do you know Ned didn't think about Rhaegar negatively or positively or did a range of pros and cons on him? How do you know that Ned didn't think about him for "a long time"? Ned's point of view starts when Robert comes to ask him to be the hand of the king. We don't know if this is inconsistent or not. There-isn't-any-evidence. One passing thought that isn't (in precis): I hate Rhaegar because he's a kidnapping-raping-sister-killer means what? It doesn't mean anything. It isn't conclusive on anything. It just means that Ned doesn't think Rhaegar would have visited brothels like Robert would. This is where I find the extrapolation of one random comment into Ned thinking Rhaegar is okay a stretch too far or a leap of faith. There is too much projection for my liking.

On the second point: really? I don't think I could state it more categorically, but I will try again. Just because Ned thinks highly of Arthur Dayne as a knight, did not stop him from killing him when Dayne was guarding his sister. It fundamentally reinforces my first point about you making too much of a passing thought Ned had re: Rhaegar. Ned might have admired Rhaegar his princely qualities in comparison to Robert, but it certainly doesn't stop Ned from holding other contrary views on Rhaegar (like him being responsible for the kidnap and death of his sister). Some call it compartmentalising and it is quite common with those who have fought in a war i.e. having respect for some of your enemies, but still killing them anyway.

[Dragonfish]

Because the abduction of highborn maiden of very powerfull family bethroned to other powerful family disrespecting the third powerfull family your wife comes from is bound to have some dreadful consequences for which any sane person would be inclined to plan and most probably take some preventive measures. Which does take time. He isn't idiot. He isn't really impulsive. He isn't evil or mad. Why would he not at least try to atone for what he was going to do?

Regarding this issue, I wonder if Rhaegar "kidnapped" Lyanna while she was en route to the Vale to marry Robert. That would certainly have put a time limit on Rhaegar's ability to plan, and would help explain why he acted so impulsively.

[Dragonfish]

How do you know that Ned didn't think about him for "a long time"?

Because the book says so: "For the first time in years, he found himself remembering Rhaegar Targaryen. He wondered if Rhaegar had frequented brothels; somehow, he thought not."

This line is significant because it's literally the only time Ned thinks about Rhaegar's character, and what Rhaegar would do. Ned "somehow" doesn't think Rhaegar visited brothels. It's difficult to reconcile this quote if Ned thinks Rhaegar raped Lyanna. You have to do a lot of twisting and contorting of this line in order to make it consistent with Ned believing Rhaegar raped her.

On the second point: really? I don't think I could state it more categorically, but I will try again. Just because Ned thinks highly of Arthur Dayne as a knight, did not stop him from killing him when Dayne was guarding his sister.

As far as Ned knew, Arthur Dayne was guarding a prisoner. That's a routine thing during war, even if the prisoner happens to be Ned's sister. But if his sister had not been treated well, as her highborn station demanded? I don't think Ned would have admired Arthur Dayne so much. Certainly I don't think he would have admired him if he had raped Lyanna. That's not usually something that elicits respect. Similarly, I doubt Ned would admire Rhaegar at all if he raped his sister. And I also don't see why Ned would think that Rhaegar "somehow" didn't frequent brothels, if he was someone who was not above rape.

[Tyroshi Sellsword]

This line is significant because it's literally the only time Ned thinks about Rhaegar's character, and what Rhaegar would do. Ned "somehow" doesn't think Rhaegar visited brothels. It's difficult to reconcile this quote if Ned thinks Rhaegar raped Lyanna. You have to do a lot of twisting and contorting of this line in order to make it consistent with Ned believing Rhaegar raped her.

No, it doesn't prove that, and it doesn't require much twisting or contorting to believe that Ned would think this about his sister's rapist. A person who commits rape doesn't do anything as consensual as PAY for sex: they take what they want without any permission. Prostitution is, after all, generally consensual. Rape is not. Ned thinking this could be him thinking, "Rhaegar wouldn't pay a prostitute if he wanted some strange, he'd just rape someone."

NOTE: I do not think Rhaegar raped Lyanna. I just think you are privileging your interpretation of this thought when others are quite possible and not difficult to get to.

[Dragonfish]

No, it doesn't prove that,

Please point to the part of my post where I said anything about proof.

and it doesn't require much twisting or contorting to believe that Ned would think this about his sister's rapist. A person who commits rape doesn't do anything as consensual as PAY for sex: they take what they want without any permission. Prostitution is, after all, generally consensual. Rape is not. Ned thinking this could be him thinking, "Rhaegar wouldn't pay a prostitute if he wanted some strange, he'd just rape someone."

Again, you have to read to context of the chapter. Ned ties brothels and bastards to the question of why the gods fill men with lust. So later, when he wonders if Rhaegar visited brothels, the implication is that Rhaegar was not a lustful man.

Yes, I understand there are alternative interpretations. But those alternatives do require twisting the line, whereas my interpretation does not. All mine requires is a simple reading: Ned does not think Rhaegar was the sort of man to stoop to visiting brothels. It's the simplest reading of the line. What is more, it is consistent with the things that most people say about Rhaegar. This is what I think makes it a better-supported interpretation.

[tipopellet]

Lyanna was en route to the Vale to marry Robert.

I don't think it likely because a) it was never mentioned unlike Brandon's wedding B) Usually weddings were done after both bride and groom are adults (if there is no war, urgent need for heir etc), Lyanna was barely 15, Robert was 18, most probably they would have stayed bethroned for a year, maybe even two more. See Cathelyn and Brandon. c) Why would they marry at Vale and not at Winterfell or at Storm End? d) Two weddings in one family at two different locations at virtually the same time doesn't make sense.

[Salander]

I only use the word "fact" when something is actually a fact. I never said it was a fact that Ned is merely trying to distract Robert from thoughts of Rhaegar and Lyanna in this scene. I merely offered it as an alternative, because you were giving only one interpretation of that scene and acting as if it was the only one.

Nope. You use the words "fact" and "evidence" quite often, and in relation to issues highly contested.

So are you saying that Ned holds no antipathy for the man who supposedly raped his sister?

Actually, you're the one implying that. My position is: we don't know because Ned ever states that explicitly and no other point of view character outlines what Ned's views are on the matter. He does, however, appear to agree with Robert's version of events about Rhaegar raping Lyanna.

I'm sorry, but Ned's thought on Rhaegar in this chapter is pretty significant, because it's the only thought Ned has on Rhaegar. And the fact that his only thought about him in a long time happens to be somewhat positive, implies that Ned doesn't really think ill of Rhaegar. That is very, very difficult to reconcile with the theory that Lyanna was raped.

I maintain my point: I don't think it is and I think you put too much stock in this passing thought in order to make claim to Ned thinking that Rhaegar is a good person. Ned, as far as I'm aware, has never made such a claim.

In what way is Dany "taking what she wanted" in this scene? She doesn't want to marry Hizdahr, but she has to. She wants Daario. I don't see how you can possibly argue that Dany is "taking what she wanted." It just seems like you're reading a different book.

I repeat: I fundamentally disagree with your interpretation of this. Once again: my view is Dany is talking about taking what she wants because she's Queen. I do agree with you, however, you and I appear to be reading very different works. Mine is based on a close textual analysis and doesn't need "Ifs, buts, maybes, convoluted hypotheses, conspiracies, polygamous marriages and the construction of other characters as villains (e.g. Brandon Stark and Rickard Stark) in order to continue the romantic narrative trope, and make it fit.

As an aside: can anyone think of a love affair in the series that doesn't end in tragedy or have an "ick" factor to it? (On textual evidence and not through extrapolation).

The story itself is relevant. But that's not what I was referring to as being technically irrelevant. I was talking about your statement, "a sad story made possible by an irresponsible Crown Prince." This point, while relevant to the larger discussion at hand ("Revisiting Rhaegar"), was not relevant to the specific question we were debating, namely, whether or not Meera calling it a "sad story" implies that Lyanna was kidnapped. I'm arguing that the story is sad either way, and therefore Meera's statement is not evidence for either theory. Your statement about Rhaegar being irresponsible was outside the scope of this specific argument.

Is the story relevant or not? I have always claimed that it IS relevant. My point, as stated in my earlier post, is an indication of how this story has been taught to the Reed children (to provide another point of view to the claim that "no-one" thinks ill of Rhaegar except Robert). The story, as part of the Reed family tradition and oral history IS important. Why? Because it is from the perspective of an eye witness in the battle and at the ToJ.

As I've said in multiple threads, Selmy isn't that biased, because he's honest with Dany about her father's madness.

UUh-huh and as I've said in response - multiple times now - Selmy isn't unbiased. How can he be? He was part of the KG, was a Targ supporter, took part in the conflict, worked for the Targs, worked for Robert and was then dismissed from the KG by Joffrey. This makes him biased - in terms of being involved. Yes, I agree, he was honest with Dany about her father's madness and also, importantly, about whether he would give her his loyalty. Now, however, as I've already stated, Dany stops him from giving a full account of events.

That is a pretty gross misreading of the text. First of all, there were great Targs. Selmy doesn't need to search for the Targs who were "the least crazy" in order to find a good one. Aegon V is one of those "great Targs", and Selmy specifically states that Rhaegar was better than even him. That's a superlative compliment, not a statement about Rhaegar being the "least bad" of them all.

Seriously? My interpretation is a gross misreading? Let me put that list out for you again: Mine is based on a close textual analysis and doesn't need "Ifs, buts, maybes, convoluted hypotheses, conspiracies, polygamous marriages and the construction of other characters as villains (e.g. Brandon Stark and Rickard Stark) in order to continue the romantic narrative trope, and make it fit.

[Tyroshi Sellsword]

Again, you have to read to context of the chapter. Ned ties brothels and bastards to the question of why the gods fill men with lust. So later, when he wonders if Rhaegar visited brothels, the implication is that Rhaegar was not a lustful man.

It's very easy to find this chapter online if you Google it, and yes, I reread the chapter. I don't think the implication is that Rhaegar was not lustful. Plainly he was capable of seemingly insane actions based on his lust for Lyanna. It's a contrast of what Robert would do for lust and what Rhaegar would do.

Ned and Littlefinger are talking about why Jon Arryn was offed, which is for figuring out about Cersei and Jaime based on the appearance of Robert's bastards. I agree with your interpretation, which is that he was thinking that there was no way that Rhaegar would have gone out and spawned half a dozen bastards in brothels like her fiance Robert did. OTOH, Robert probably wouldn't have abducted someone else's fiancee and caused a national incident, either. He simply did not value sex in that way and would rather pay a prostitute and not make a big deal of it. Rhaegar saw it as worth destroying the kingdom for, and to Robert it was just fucking.

Earlier in the chapter, Lyanna says the line about how Robert couldn't keep to one bed. Neither could Rhaegar, as it turned out, as Elia of Dorne could attest. The line could also be interpreted that Rhaegar did not fulfill his lust in such a gauche way, and preferred raping highborn ladies privately in towers for a year. He wouldn't condescend to pay for it when he could just take it. Honestly, in hindsight, once you believe the R+L love theory, it's easy to see it as a testament to Rhaegar's sexual exclusivity, but it easily could be seen as more a statement about his methods for fulfilling his lust being different from Robert's.

Yes, I understand there are alternative interpretations. But those alternatives do require twisting the line, whereas my interpretation does not. All mine requires is a simple reading: Ned does not think Rhaegar was the sort of man to stoop to visiting brothels. It's the simplest reading of the line. What is more, it is consistent with the things that most people say about Rhaegar. This is what I think makes it a better-supported interpretation.

I don't think they do. I think the theory (and it is still only a theory) that Rhaegar and Lyanna were in love causes you to twist it one way, but if you think Rhaegar raped Lyanna, you could easily think of it the other way.

[cyvassechamp]

OK, I know this one is far-fetched, but we all know about GRRM's tool of the "unreliable narrator." Just because a character says another character is dead, we can't assume it's true unless we see a body, and even then... ;) i.e. Lady Stoneheart. Anyway, Mirri Maz Duur seems to me to be the ultimate unreliable narrator... she has both a motive to lie and a history of deception. And I reread that chapter in GofT. Ser Jorah does mention that the "women" said he was a monster, indicating that others saw the baby, but now we know about glamors and tricks an Asshai priestess might perform to convince the Dothraki women to stay away from the baby. Perhaps he will still be the stallion that mounts the world? On a dragon? The third head? Dany has several visions of a tall man with copper skin and her purple eyes. Maybe Drago will come back to Dany in the form of their son... there has been much speculation about parts of the maegi's prophecy coming true. Just a crazy, crazy thought. Have I totally lost it?

And then the real question is, what happened to him?

[Dragonfish]

Sorry to respond so late and rehash an old thread. Been having computer trouble.

Nope. You use the words "fact" and "evidence" quite often, and in relation to issues highly contested.

Yes, I do use the word "fact" quite a bit. I never said I didn't. But as I pointed out in the post you quoted, I only use the word "fact" when something is actually a fact. I might use facts to support my interpretations of events, but that does not mean I consider these interpretations to be facts (though I might consider them to be "stronger" or better-supported than others). Can you point to a spot where I've said that something is a fact, when in reality it is not a fact?

Actually, you're the one implying that.

Uhh...no, I'm saying Ned thinks well of Rhaegar because he knows he didn't rape Lyanna.

My position is: we don't know because Ned ever states that explicitly and no other point of view character outlines what Ned's views are on the matter. He does, however, appear to agree with Robert's version of events about Rhaegar raping Lyanna.

No, Ned never explicitly agrees with Robert in the scene where Lyanna's rape is discussed. He never even comments on it.

I maintain my point: I don't think it is and I think you put too much stock in this passing thought in order to make claim to Ned thinking that Rhaegar is a good person. Ned, as far as I'm aware, has never made such a claim.

Ned has never made that claim explicitly, no. But it's strange that Ned would think this way of the man who supposedly kidnapped and raped his sister.

I repeat: I fundamentally disagree with your interpretation of this. Once again: my view is Dany is talking about taking what she wants because she's Queen.

Explain to me how Dany's daydreaming about Daario carrying her off at swordpoint indicates that she's taking what she wants.

I do agree with you, however, you and I appear to be reading very different works. Mine is based on a close textual analysis and doesn't need "Ifs, buts, maybes, convoluted hypotheses, conspiracies, polygamous marriages and the construction of other characters as villains (e.g. Brandon Stark and Rickard Stark) in order to continue the romantic narrative trope, and make it fit.

No, your theory is based on ignoring what everyone says about Rhaegar, except for Robert, who is the most biased source available on Rhaegar's character.

Is the story relevant or not? I have always claimed that it IS relevant. My point, as stated in my earlier post, is an indication of how this story has been taught to the Reed children (to provide another point of view to the claim that "no-one" thinks ill of Rhaegar except Robert). The story, as part of the Reed family tradition and oral history IS important. Why? Because it is from the perspective of an eye witness in the battle and at the ToJ.

Yes, and my point, as stated in my earlier post, is that nothing in the way the Reeds describe the story indicates one way or another what they think of Rhaegar.

UUh-huh and as I've said in response - multiple times now - Selmy isn't unbiased. How can he be? He was part of the KG, was a Targ supporter, took part in the conflict, worked for the Targs, worked for Robert and was then dismissed from the KG by Joffrey. This makes him biased - in terms of being involved. Yes, I agree, he was honest with Dany about her father's madness and also, importantly, about whether he would give her his loyalty. Now, however, as I've already stated, Dany stops him from giving a full account of events.

The point I'm making is that if Barristan felt he needed to be honest with Dany about her father's madness, then I see no reason why he would not also be honest if Rhaegar displayed any similar madness or paranoia or cruelty. Yet Barristan considers him to be the best Targaryen of them all, even better than Aegon V. You can try to rationalize this away all you want, but this a pretty significant line.

Seriously? My interpretation is a gross misreading? Let me put that list out for you again: Mine is based on a close textual analysis and doesn't need "Ifs, buts, maybes, convoluted hypotheses, conspiracies, polygamous marriages and the construction of other characters as villains (e.g. Brandon Stark and Rickard Stark) in order to continue the romantic narrative trope, and make it fit.

You haven't addressed my specific point. You're claiming that Barristan is saying that Rhaegar was merely the least bad Targ. I don't see how this claim can possibly stand up under scrutiny, given what I said in my last post.

[No One Truly]

I think the clues point to Rhaegar being.. well, lonely.

He starts off as a bookish little nerd, probably a quiet, shy, dutiful kid. In my head, he's brilliantly book smart and "that kid" who is good at anything he puts his hands on... but he doesn't enjoy any of it. He's so good that he's peerless, so he's terribly lonely. He reads into the prophecies and decides he must be a knight in order to fulfill them for the good of the realm. So even though he doesn't want to do it and doesn't find joy, he becomes a knight. He dutifully goes into a loveless marriage with Elia, too.

Lyanna, with her wild and passionate personality, was everything that Rhaegar wasn't - bursting with life and passion, not very dutiful, wild, and happy. Falling in love with her was probably like seeing just how meaningless Rhaegar's life had been. So Rhaegar makes the only emotional decision he ever made and runs off with her, abandoning all of his carefully laid plans for a shot at happiness.

[Tyroshi Sellsword]

Uhh...no, I'm saying Ned thinks well of Rhaegar because he knows he didn't rape Lyanna.

Does Ned really think well of Rhaegar? I feel like I refuted this point somewhere. We don't really know how he felt about him, only that he didn't go to brothels (maybe instead, he just abducted and raped people... it's not necessarily a compliment).

he point I'm making is that if Barristan felt he needed to be honest with Dany about her father's madness, then I see no reason why he would not also be honest if Rhaegar displayed any similar madness or paranoia or cruelty. Yet Barristan considers him to be the best Targaryen of them all, even better than Aegon V. You can try to rationalize this away all you want, but this a pretty significant line.

Barristan's description of Rhaegar depicts him as being a depressive/obsessive. That doesn't make him a bad person, necessarily, but it doesn't exactly mean he's sane either. He did something crazy when he ran off with Lyanna, madness runs in his family, and he was clearly a little off himself. The broody, melancholic scholarly type can seem romantic, until you have to deal with it every day. Just saying there might be a different way to look at this that isn't so dreamy/romantic/tragic.

[Dragonfish]

Does Ned really think well of Rhaegar? I feel like I refuted this point somewhere. We don't really know how he felt about him, only that he didn't go to brothels (maybe instead, he just abducted and raped people... it's not necessarily a compliment).

We don't truly know what Ned thought of Rhaegar, no. But it seems odd that Ned would say this thing about him if he believed he raped his sister. Remember, he's not actually making a factual statement that Rhaegar never frequented brothels; he's guessing that he probably didn't, based on something else he knows about him. In other words, he's making a judgment about Rhaegar based on what he knows of Rhaegar's character. So we have to ask ourselves, what is it about Rhaegar's character that makes Ned think he never frequented brothels?

Now, there are two possibilities that have been proposed in this thread:

1) Ned knows Rhaegar was not a lustful person, and would never stoop so low as to visit a brothel (a la Ned himself).

Advantages to this theory: it is consistent with everything else we've been told about Rhaegar by those who actually knew him.

Disadvantages: it is inconsistent with what Robert and Bran say about him. But Robert is a hugely biased source, and Bran wasn't even born when all this happened. We don't know where he learned this info, but it's doubtful it came from Ned himself, given how little he likes to talk about Lyanna. Most likely this version of events is the current regime's version of history, and Bran picked up on it that way.

2) Ned knows Rhaegar preferred to satisfy his lust by kidnapping and raping women.

Advantages to this theory: it's more consistent with what Robert and Bran say about Rhaegar, but I've already addressed how reliable they are as witnesses.

Disadvantages: this really doesn't sound like Rhaegar at all, based on what almost every character has said about him, and how they remember him. Furthermore, you'd think Robert would have brought this up at least once, just to drive home how evil he was. You'd also think that if this was the sort of thing he was into, word would have gotten out, and he would have been much less beloved of the small folk, and regarded more as a latter-day Aegon IV than anything else. Yet almost everyone in the story we meet has fond memories of him. Finally, the symbolism of Lyanna still holding the blue roses Rhaegar gave her implies that she was still attached to him, which would be odd if he raped her or was otherwise prone to rape.

Now, when I look at these two interpretations, I see more problems for the second one than for the first one. The second one simply has more inconsistencies that are harder to explain away. That is why the first interpretation is stronger, in my view.

Barristan's description of Rhaegar depicts him as being a depressive/obsessive. That doesn't make him a bad person, necessarily, but it doesn't exactly mean he's sane either.

I've always thought he depicted him as melancholic rather than depressed.

Regardless, Barristan still says he was the greatest Targ of them all. It's amazing how often people try to ignore this or rationalize it away.

He did something crazy when he ran off with Lyanna, madness runs in his family, and he was clearly a little off himself.

First, if running off with Lyanna makes him crazy, then that makes Lyanna crazy as well, since you've already admitted that she probably went willingly.

Second, madness does run in his family, but so does greatness. Incest exacerbates positive traits as well as negative ones.

Third, I'm not sure where you're getting that he was "clearly a little off." Evidence?

[TheKingsWolf]

Frankly, the Rhaegar lovers are really having to twist the story to come up with a reasonable argument for why he's a saint and whatnot. It is pretty simple to see that his actions were both self-serving and incredibly vain. Although he did not directly begin the war, his actions did, and for anyone with any level of intelligence it was obvious that what he did was going to cause some serious problems.

The most ridiculous arguments I have seen in this thread so far:

1. Everyone going silent should not be considered a negative.

2. Elia was fine with all of it.

3. The commoners opinion should carry weight.

4. The Starks had no right to be angry because at some point in the past some Targaryen had multiple wives.

[Dragonfish]

The most ridiculous arguments I have seen in this thread so far:

1. Everyone going silent should not be considered a negative.

I'm not sure what you mean by this, could you elaborate?

2. Elia was fine with all of it.

We don't know if she was or wasn't, but it's not ridiculous to argue that she was, given that knew about the prophecy, and as a Dornishwoman she likely would have had looser sexual mores.

3. The commoners opinion should carry weight.

I definitely think their opinion should be taken with a large grain of salt, but I don't think it should be dismissed completely.

4. The Starks had no right to be angry because at some point in the past some Targaryen had multiple wives.

I can't think of a single person who's been arguing this. Hooray for strawman arguments!

[TheKingsWolf]

1. Some people try to claim that when Rhaegar crowned Lyanna that the crowd only went silent out of surprise. If you want to try and stick to a straight reading of the text as you claim this is clearly not the simplest conclusion.

2. No wife is hunky dory about her husband abandoning her and her children to take up a young lover. It is a massive assumption to claim that she believed in any prophecy or supported it.

3. He started the war by doing something that was clearly a huge insult to three of the seven houses. There should be no real argument here based on the reactions of all parties involved.

4. The commoners know nothing. Their opinion is worth absolutely nothing. If you need me to cite examples there are too many to list.

5. Many people have tried to claim that because there was a history of Targaryen polygamy that everything was acceptable. There have also been numerous claims that Brandon in fact overreacted, and that Lord Rickard was apparently couldn't be bothered about his daughters abduction.

You, and numerous others are obsessed with Rhaegar fitting into your whole J=R+L theory so you make ridiculous arguments in favor of his sainthood.

[The King in the South]

1. Some people try to claim that when Rhaegar crowned Lyanna that the crowd only went silent out of surprise. If you want to try and stick to a straight reading of the text as you claim this is clearly not the simplest conclusion.

2. No wife is hunky dory about her husband abandoning her and her children to take up a young lover. It is a massive assumption to claim that she believed in any prophecy or supported it.

3. He started the war by doing something that was clearly a huge insult to three of the seven houses. There should be no real argument here based on the reactions of all parties involved.

4. The commoners know nothing. Their opinion is worth absolutely nothing. If you need me to cite examples there are too many to list.

5. Many people have tried to claim that because there was a history of Targaryen polygamy that everything was acceptable. There have also been numerous claims that Brandon in fact overreacted, and that Lord Rickard was apparently couldn't be bothered about his daughters abduction.

You, and numerous others are obsessed with Rhaegar fitting into your whole J=R+L theory so you make ridiculous arguments in favor of his sainthood.

Can we stop saying that the kidnapping/eloping started the war? The war was started when Jon Arryn raised his banners, or more indirectly when Aerys murdered Rickon and Brandon and demanded Ned and Robert's heads. The R+L leaving started a chain of events that lead to the war, but it is not the reason the war started

[TheKingsWolf]

Can we stop saying that the kidnapping/eloping started the war? The war was started when Jon Arryn raised his banners, or more indirectly when Aerys murdered Rickon and Brandon and demanded Ned and Robert's heads. The R+L leaving started a chain of events that lead to the war, but it is not the reason the war started

Can we stop saying it didn't start the war. The consequences of Rhaegar's actions was that the war started. In fact in AGOT when we are first introduced to the conflict they make a point of discussing how Rhaegar's abduction precipitated it. You're playing games because you're infatuated with Rhaegar. Here is what isn't debatable. Rhaegar knew his actions would have serious consequences as proved by his fleeing. He didn't care and acted anyway. Because of this a war started. It's a stupid argument and it doesn't change the selfish vanity of his actions so it's really irrelevant.