What was really behind Robert's rebellion?

[Humphrey Plantagenet]

The Hightowers “were integral in the foundation of the Citadel and continue to be patrons of both the Citadel and the Faith” and Targaryen loyalists during Roberts Rebellion. Given the literal and metaphorical closeness of the Hightowers and the Citadel is it really likely that the Maesters could orchestrate a Rebellion without the Hightowers discovering it?

[Lady Octarina]

The Hightowers “were integral in the foundation of the Citadel and continue to be patrons of both the Citadel and the Faith” and Targaryen loyalists during Roberts Rebellion. Given the literal and metaphorical closeness of the Hightowers and the Citadel is it really likely that the Maesters could orchestrate a Rebellion without the Hightowers discovering it?

Yes, if it wasn't orchestrated by the Citadel as a whole, but by a particular group of maesters with their own agenda. Maybe for ambition, maybe because they disagree with whatever the Citadel's policy is, who knows?

Anyway, I understand the links between the Citadel and the Hightowers make it odd the idea that they could want to overthrow the Targaryens, but isn't there something about how the Citadel was responsible to some extent to the dragons' extinction? Their aversion to magic, which we learn from Marwyn, could have extended to the Targs themselves. I don't know how Hightowers would fit the equation, but it's not completely impossible maesters were involved in the rebellion.

[Independent George]

Unless more evidence appears in the text, I'm extremely skeptical of any 'Citadel Conspiracy'. I think it's far simpler and far more likely to assume that Mad Aerys had been alienating the nobles for years before he had Rickard and Brandon killed. He may or may not have executed other nobles (personally, I think he had, only because it's unlikely he would start with one of the great houses, but there's no evidence either way), but it seems likely that most of the houses, great and small, looked at Lord Rickard's death and wondered if they would be next. Between Robert's personal charisma and Jon Arryn's diplomacy, it doesn't seem like it would take much to turn people against the Targaryans, particularly once it became clear that this rebellion went far beyond the Defiance of Duskendale.

[Rhaegar Targaryen's Ghost]

I see three major reasons.

1. The obvious. Lyanna obviously didn't get kidnapped, she voluntarily went,and I think Robert knew this, he just wanted to win her back.

2. Theres a big difference between burning Flea Bottom residents, and the Lord and Heir to Winterfell. Something had to be done.

3. The Lords of the kingdoms realized that Rhaegar coming into power would just strengthen the Targaryen dynasty. They knew it would be a lot easier to lead rebellion against the mad king than the golden boy. So they jumped on an opportunity when Robert stepped up to lead.

[Humphrey Plantagenet]

I see three major reasons.

1. The obvious. Lyanna obviously didn't get kidnapped, she voluntarily went,and I think Robert knew this, he just wanted to win her back.

2. Theres a big difference between burning Flea Bottom residents, and the Lord and Heir to Winterfell. Something had to be done.

3. The Lords of the kingdoms realized that Rhaegar coming into power would just strengthen the Targaryen dynasty. They knew it would be a lot easier to lead rebellion against the mad king than the golden boy. So they jumped on an opportunity when Robert stepped up to lead.

These all assume the Great Houses of Westeros wanted the Targs gone. Do you think there's a specific reason they would want this? And did they have a replacement House in mind? Or was the idea to split in to 7 seperate kingdoms again?

If the problem was Aerys being a nut job they could have just helped Rhaegar gain power. So why did they what the whole Royal House removed?

[Lady Octarina]

These all assume the Great Houses of Westeros wanted the Targs gone. Do you think there's a specific reason they would want this? And did they have a replacement House in mind? Or was the idea to split in to 7 seperate kingdoms again?

If the problem was Aerys being a nut job they could have just helped Rhaegar gain power. So why did they what the whole Royal House removed?

I agree with his reasons, and why not, maybe they already planned on putting Robert on the throne. He had Targ blood, therefore a claim, he was young, easy to control on the important questions...

[Humphrey Plantagenet]

I agree with his reasons, and why not, maybe they already planned on putting Robert on the throne. He had Targ blood, therefore a claim, he was young, easy to control on the important questions...

So they want to replace the ruling dynasty with a young guy they can use as a puppet? Fair enough. But Wars are risky things, with hard to anticipate outcomes. Jon Arryn, Hoster Tully & Rickard Stark would be taking a big chance going to war to remove the Targaryens. I can see them co-ordinating their efforts and trying to establish a power block to check Royal authority. Especially if the current incumbent is nuts. But participating in a Citadel lead conspiracy to destroy the Targs? Seems a bit outlandish. And if the Citadel, or some of the Maesters, wanted to get rid of the Targaryens like they got rid of the Dragons, then why not use the same tactics? They’re completely trusted in medical matters so just manipulate the Targs in to dying out. It’s more certain then engineering a War which nobody can guarantee would bring success.

[Lady Octarina]

So they want to replace the ruling dynasty with a young guy they can use as a puppet? Fair enough. But Wars are risky things, with hard to anticipate outcomes. Jon Arryn, Hoster Tully & Rickard Stark would be taking a big chance going to war to remove the Targaryens. I can see them co-ordinating their efforts and trying to establish a power block to check Royal authority. Especially if the current incumbent is nuts. But participating in a Citadel lead conspiracy to destroy the Targs? Seems a bit outlandish. And if the Citadel, or some of the Maesters, wanted to get rid of the Targaryens like they got rid of the Dragons, then why not use the same tactics? They’re completely trusted in medical matters so just manipulate the Targs in to dying out. It’s more certain then engineering a War which nobody can guarantee would bring success.

I don't think they (the group of Lords and maesters) wanted a war at first - I think Robert was their backup plan, in case they couldn't turn the balance of power to their favor through peaceful means, marriage alliances, and the sort. But then Lyanna pulled a Franz Ferdinand, and the first plan wasn't that guaranteed. But they still tried to act through peaceful means, until Aerys burned some of the most important people in the realm. And now we had the honor an interests of four major Houses at stake, and war was unavoidable.

[Humphrey Plantagenet]

I don't think they (the group of Lords and maesters) wanted a war at first - I think Robert was their backup plan, in case they couldn't turn the balance of power to their favor through peaceful means, marriage alliances, and the sort. But then Lyanna pulled a Franz Ferdinand, and the first plan wasn't that guaranteed. But they still tried to act through peaceful means, until Aerys burned some of the most important people in the realm. And now we had the honor an interests of four major Houses at stake, and war was unavoidable.

That makes sense.

[Rhaegar Targaryen's Ghost]

I don't think they (the group of Lords and maesters) wanted a war at first - I think Robert was their backup plan, in case they couldn't turn the balance of power to their favor through peaceful means, marriage alliances, and the sort.

agreed. for thousands of years the realm was broken into 7 kingdoms and faired pretty well. i think on some deep level, they wanted it to go back the way it was before Aegon's Landing. I believe they were trying to get it back to that with hopes that maybe they could incorporate Rhaegar into holding part of the kingdom, but once the mad king started burning lords, they took a more aggressive route. And though that were able to use Robert the way that they wished.

[Jem]

I don't believe that the plan was to re-form the seven separate kingdoms, simply because this never happened. The 'usurper' won the war, they have had 15+ years, if they were going to break up the kingdom they would have done it by now.

I don't believe the faction of Maesters wanted war either, necessarily. I think they were trying to build a power block of powerful nobles to put pressure on the Targs and force them to a peaceful surrender. I don't think it would be an entirely bloodless coup, but neither do I think that all-out war was part of the plan. Things got out of hand when Rhaegar took Lyanna (I believe this was a strategic move on Rhaegar's part) and then when Aerys killed Brandon and Rickard etc, etc, the ball was rolling out of control by then.

[Screaming Knight]

Thanks lady octarina for posting the link for this thread on r+l. It's easier to consolidate the discussions once they veer off. I believe that Rickard stark had some political ambitions prior to the actions that triggered the rebellion. Not sure if these intentions were based on power, land, allying his house with other strong houses or just trying to bring a wider culture to winterfell. But I think he had strong political motivations for the marriages of his children. I suppose that most marriage alliances are political, but didn't the north typically keep it " in house". Given that aerys was such a shut in, maybe Rickard figured he could quietly gain support from these houses and their bannerman to once again have the north rule itself. I have no evidence to really back this up or anything that would imply Rickard and the north had any reason to be unhappy with the way things were, just have a hunch that he was quietly trying to expand his power. Of course there was a serious cog thrown in the machine once rhaegar and lyanna ran off but we know so little about Rickard that it's hard to back this up anyway.

Changing subjects... Not sure if this was mentioned. ( probably was). After the events that sparked the rebellion, Robert was chosen, I assume, because of his line to the targaryens. This gave them a little more clout when trying to gather others to their cause. I'm sure Jon arryn had all intentions of delegating the balance of power and by all accounts it seems he did just that and more. Robert being able to trace his line to targaryen made him and his armies seem a little more than just rebels.

[Sphinx The Riddle]

id like to know how a guy like Ned would be involved with dudes killing off a whole family line

[Ser_Aeron_Connel]

id like to know how a guy like Ned would be involved with dudes killing off a whole family line

Well, as we know from Ned's "cold rage" after the Lannisters killed Elia, Aegon, and Rhaenys, that he didn't approve of the deaths of all House Targaryen. Presumably he would've allowed them to live in exile, as he wanted Cersei and her kids to do. Also, he's one of the Kingslayer's many detractors. I'm sure he would've been fine with executing Aerys, but killing him by betrayal was not something Ned would've done.

Even if Rickard Stark had plotted to wipe out the Targaryens, Ned probably wouldn't know about it, being 1.) the second son, and 2.) fostered at The Eyrie.

[Screaming Knight]

Well, as we know from Ned's "cold rage" after the Lannisters killed Elia, Aegon, and Rhaenys, that he didn't approve of the deaths of all House Targaryen. Presumably he would've allowed them to live in exile, as he wanted Cersei and her kids to do. Also, he's one of the Kingslayer's many detractors. I'm sure he would've been fine with executing Aerys, but killing him by betrayal was not something Ned would've done.

Even if Rickard Stark had plotted to wipe out the Targaryens, Ned probably wouldn't know about it, being 1.) the second son, and 2.) fostered at The Eyrie.

I don't think Rickard was going to try and kill off the targaryens or even declare war, more that he saw an opportunity to expand power and separate the north from southern law because aerys never left the red keep so he probably couldve done it slowly and quietly because it seemed like the king wasn't exactly on top of what was happening in the north.

[Lady Octarina]

I don't think Rickard was going to try and kill off the targaryens or even declare war, more that he saw an opportunity to expand power and separate the north from southern law because aerys never left the red keep so he probably couldve done it slowly and quietly because it seemed like the king wasn't exactly on top of what was happening in the north.

I don't think it was a matter of separating the North from the South, but rather of making the main Houses stronger against the power of the Iron Throne. Like what was happening in the last few centuries of medieval Europe, when the feudal lords were the main force, the kings just weak figures, until things shifted and the kings became the center to which power was gravitating. It's like they were trying to prevent that from happening, or rather reacting to that 300 years after Aegon's conquest, a hundred after the dragons had disappeared. Might have been their first chance to actually do something against Targaryen rule without suffering much - I mean, Aerys was mad, and a weak king, Tywin Lannister had as good as abandoned him, the following Hands were hardly competent. It's unlikely they would find another good opportunity to shift the balance of power to their favor.

[Screaming Knight]

I don't think it was a matter of separating the North from the South, but rather of making the main Houses stronger against the power of the Iron Throne. Like what was happening in the last few centuries of medieval Europe, when the feudal lords were the main force, the kings just weak figures, until things shifted and the kings became the center to which power was gravitating. It's like they were trying to prevent that from happening, or rather reacting to that 300 years after Aegon's conquest, a hundred after the dragons had disappeared. Might have been their first chance to actually do something against Targaryen rule without suffering much - I mean, Aerys was mad, and a weak king, Tywin Lannister had as good as abandoned him, the following Hands were hardly competent. It's unlikely they would find another good opportunity to shift the balance of power to their favor.

I agree. I don't think Rickard ever had intentions of declaring war. Just seeing a good opportunity to strengthen and restore at least the same sense of freedom and independence that the north once had without actually outright declaring it. This is why it's impossible to me not to blame rhaegar and lyanna for the war( obviously assuming she went with him willingly). No one that reacted to their fleeing acted out of turn. Everyone that did react, of course, had a part in the starting of the war, but the war would not have happened if not for rhaegar and lyanna. So to me, theirs were the initial actions that led to a handful of others actions that were behind Roberts rebellion.

[Im With Stannis]

The different theories here are enough to make me laugh. The fact is that Aerys was as mad as Caligula. He probaly had been insulting high lords and brutually killing random people for far longer (I doubt he got the nickname the "Mad King" from only burning two Starks). I'm guessing many Lords thought it would be best to wait for Aerys to die off and replace him with Rheagar. But, when Rheagar ran off with Lyanna, and Aerys responded by killing Rickard and Brandon that was the last straw and the kingdom could not wait any longer.

We saw how easily the rebellion started against Joffrey when good old Ned had his head lopped off. Killing a high Lord is all it really takes. Aerys killed two, and let his kid run off with Lyanna.

[Screaming Knight]

The different theories here are enough to make me laugh. The fact is that Aerys was as mad as Caligula. He probaly had been insulting high lords and brutually killing random people for far longer (I doubt he got the nickname the "Mad King" from only burning two Starks). I'm guessing many Lords thought it would be best to wait for Aerys to die off and replace him with Rheagar. But, when Rheagar ran off with Lyanna, and Aerys responded by killing Rickard and Brandon that was the last straw and the kingdom could not wait any longer.

We saw how easily the rebellion started against Joffrey when good old Ned had his head lopped off. Killing a high Lord is all it really takes. Aerys killed two, and let his kid run off with Lyanna.

Shut down the thread. You nailed it. Never considered that was how the rebellion started. I'm debating rickards intentions and whether a rebellion was imminent regardless of rhaegar and lyanna running off. And it wasn't. Everyone knows how mad aerys was, and that he finally crossed the line. No sense in these threads if we don't expand the topic.

[Screaming Knight]

The different theories here are enough to make me laugh. The fact is that Aerys was as mad as Caligula. He probaly had been insulting high lords and brutually killing random people for far longer (I doubt he got the nickname the "Mad King" from only burning two Starks). I'm guessing many Lords thought it would be best to wait for Aerys to die off and replace him with Rheagar. But, when Rheagar ran off with Lyanna, and Aerys responded by killing Rickard and Brandon that was the last straw and the kingdom could not wait any longer.

We saw how easily the rebellion started against Joffrey when good old Ned had his head lopped off. Killing a high Lord is all it really takes. Aerys killed two, and let his kid run off with Lyanna.

And the list of reasons for the rebellion against Joffrey is far longer than lopping neds head off. Actually, the rebellion started before Ned was killed so that's not a reason at all. The Starks had reason to believe the lannisters killed Jon arryn and tried to kill bran, the lannister men torching riverrun, the entire stark household being slaughtered. All of this occurred before Ned was killed.