R+L=J v.30

[Winterfell is Burning]

I don't see how this contradicts my point. As I said, there are other avenues to redress grievances. Challenging someone to a duel is just one of them. Demanding more lands or titles is another one. Violence was not the only means for Robert to settle things.

Robert wanting a duel is different from Robert having to call for a duel.

All those options wouldn't change the fact that Robert let a man steal, deflowered and impregnate his bethroted and did nothing. This isn't a XXI century society, this is a feudal one, based on strength and power. The man that lets another one does that to his bethroted will look weak forever unless he goes for a duel, or call his banners and goes to war and wins.

[Lady Octarina]

All those options wouldn't change the fact that Robert let a man steal, deflowered and impregnate his bethroted and did nothing. This isn't a XXI century society, this is a feudal one, based on strength and power. The man that lets another one does that to his bethroted will look weak forever unless he goes for a duel, or call his banners and goes to war and wins.

Then tell us why he didn't go to war right after Lyanna was "kidnapped", but only after Aerys killed Rickard, Brandon and the other heirs and called for Ned's and Robert's head?

It's not CLEAR at all. So what he named his child Aegon? It like saying that, because Ned name his son Brandon, Catelyn now is an Old Gods worshipper that believes her son is the second coming of Brandon the Builder

I think what Thunder meant is that the conversation between Rhaegar and Elia at the HotU shows that she was aware he wanted a third child, not that she suddenly decided to go prophecy-obsessed like him. And as she knew she couldn't give him that other child...

[Thunder]

It's not CLEAR at all. So what he named his child Aegon? It like saying that, because Ned name his son Brandon, Catelyn now is an Old Gods worshipper that believes her son is the second coming of Brandon the Builder

reread that chapter. They were discussing the prophecy together.

[valyrian_steel]

Random thoughts.

It fit Robert Baratheon's personality to rationalize Lyanna going with Rhaegar. He loved Lyanna and likely refused to believe that she would choose Rhaegar over him. Im not at all surprised that Robert could only accept Lyanna was forced and the winning side writes the history.

If Rhaegar was truly planning to move against Aerys and take the throne, then it would be essential that he have an heir of his body who was not under Aerys control. While it may be true that Aerys kept Elia in the Red Keep in order to assure Dorne's loyalty, having Rhaegar's only son Aegon there also holds a knife over Rhaegar. Perhaps Rhaegar sought to produce an heir Aerys could not reach. Obviously this plan went to hell when the rebellion started but it might have at least been part of the impetous.

[Winterfell is Burning]

Then tell us why he didn't go to war right after Lyanna was "kidnapped", but only after Aerys killed Rickard, Brandon and the other heirs and called for Ned's and Robert's head?

Not knowing where Lyanna is, it would just be pointless.

I also imagine that Jon might have stopped him.

I think what Thunder meant is that the conversation between Rhaegar and Elia at the HotU shows that she was aware he wanted a third child, not that she suddenly decided to go prophecy-obsessed like him. And as she knew she couldn't give him that other child...

I know what he meant, but I just don't agree. Like I said, Elia had nothing to gain, and everything to lose.

And so what Rhaegar couldn't have a third child? His grandfather only had two children himself, and unlike Rhaegar, had no alive siblings (except maybe Rhaelle Baratheon, but it's unclear when she was already alive), it's no reason for Elia to authorize him getting another wife, let alone one of a powerful house.

Besides, we don't even know if poligamist marriage is legal anymore (no King is mentioned as having more than one wife after Maegor), and if it is, we don't know if this needs the King's specific authorization, which is likely- and almost certainly, the High Septon needs to authorize as well.

reread that chapter. They were discussing the prophecy together.

No, they are discussing the name of the baby and then Rhaegar says there must be one more.

Should be said we don't know when exactly Elia became aware she couldn't have another child.

Random thoughts.

It fit Robert Baratheon's personality to rationalize Lyanna going with Rhaegar. He loved Lyanna and likely refused to believe that she would choose Rhaegar over him. Im not at all surprised that Robert could only accept Lyanna was forced and the winning side writes the history.

If Rhaegar was truly planning to move against Aerys and take the throne, then it would be essential that he have an heir of his body who was not under Aerys control. While it may be true that Aerys kept Elia in the Red Keep in order to assure Dorne's loyalty, having Rhaegar's only son Aegon there also holds a knife over Rhaegar. Perhaps Rhaegar sought to produce an heir Aerys could not reach. Obviously this plan went to hell when the rebellion started but it might have at least been part of the impetous.

Well, wouldn't it be easier to send Elia and the kids on a trip instead? To Dorne or, heck, even to the Dragonstone itself. It was certainly not impossible to leave the Red Keep before the war started.

[Lady Tippy Wolfsbane]

It's not CLEAR at all. So what he named his child Aegon? It like saying that, because Ned name his son Brandon, Catelyn now is an Old Gods worshipper that believes her son is the second coming of Brandon the Builder

It's quite clear that Elia had accepted Rhaegar's belief in the prophecies, even if she didn't fully believe in them. That is all that is needed to understand why she would have accepted him taking another wife. Also, the Catelyn example is a totally different situation.

Elia had EVERY reason to accept Rhaegar taking a second wife, since her position may have depended on it.

[Dragonfish]

All those options wouldn't change the fact that Robert let a man steal, deflowered and impregnate his bethroted and did nothing. This isn't a XXI century society, this is a feudal one, based on strength and power. The man that lets another one does that to his bethroted will look weak forever unless he goes for a duel, or call his banners and goes to war and wins.

By this logic, shouldn't someone have challenged Aegon IV when he deflowered one of his lord's maiden daughters, or Robert when he deflowered a Florent on Stannis' wedding night? And if not, then what's the difference?

[Alia of the knife]

Well, yeah, that's exactly my point. He doesn't believe Rhaegar raped Lyanna because he has firsthand knowledge, he believes it because he wants to believe it. It's the only thing keeping him together.

I understand that.

What I meant is that when a person who sees attributes in other people similar to themselves, often are uncomfortable with it.

Robert's line was founded by a Valaryian bastard Half Brother of ATC, and then later his Grandmother was a Targaryen, so as much as he hated them later on, he also can't escape them, because they are apart of him as well.

He and Rhaegar weren't really alike, but he and Aegon the Unworthy sound quite similar, at least to me.

[Dragonfish]

I understand that.

What I meant is that when a person who sees attributes in other people similar to themselves, often are uncomfortable with it.

Robert's line was founded by a Valaryian bastard Half Brother of ATC, and then later his Grandmother was a Targaryen, so as much as he hated them later on, he also can't escape them, because they are apart of him as well.

He and Rhaegar weren't really alike, but he and Aegon the Unworthy sound quite similar, at least to me.

Ok...I'm having trouble understanding what this has to do with whether and to what degree we should give Robert's views on Rhaegar any credence. Yes, Robert has Targaryen blood. That still doesn't change the fact that he still hates the Targaryens in general, and Rhaegar in particular, and clearly has a very biased perspective when it comes to the latter's actions.

[corbon]

I know what he meant, but I just don't agree. Like I said, Elia had nothing to gain, and everything to lose.

Except that this is just a constructed position where you assume everybody (Elia in particular) thinks the way you think. Its possible she does, and also possible, if not probable, that she simply doesn't have the same assessment.

To me this is similar to the reasoning that sees people thinking Syrio is an idiot for not picking up a fallen sword to defend himself with. It assumes that the reader understands the situation, the context and the dynamics better than the participant. I prefer to think that the participant understands all three a bit vast amount better and if not previously demonstrated to be 'stupid', then if the reader thinks there is something 'obvious' missing its probable that the reader is the one who doesn't understand the scenario correctly.

I should add that I don't think this is 'as bad' a case of such faulty logic as the Syrio example. In this case you might be right and Elia could think exactly the way you do - the difference here is that we don't get any viewpoint of her actions, responses or thoughts, even indirectly. She's essentially nothing more than a pawn in the game as far as we know (she is certainly more than that to her and those around her - a piece with agency of its own, rather than a little wooden toy being pushed around by others).

However, there are also many other ways Elia could have approached things. Some or all of your 'construct' of how she 'should' think about gain and loss could be utterly wrong.

Essentially, IMO, there is a lot of stamping and shouting over how Elia should be 'unable to (happily?) accept a second marriage', but none of it is based on compelling evidence, just a lot of supposition about how things 'must' work - and that 'must' while a logical construct, is not the only logical construct.

Besides, we don't even know if poligamist marriage is legal anymore (no King is mentioned as having more than one wife after Maegor), and if it is, we don't know if this needs the King's specific authorization, which is likely- and almost certainly, the High Septon needs to authorize as well.

Its very simple. The current position is that Targaryen polygamy is legally acceptable because we know its been legal before and haven't heard anything about it ceasing to be legal - thats how laws work.

And GRRM has backed this up by saying that not only was Maegor the Cruel a poligamist, but that there may have been more Targaryen poligamists after that, but he was't sure. And then leaving a lot of Targaryen marital statuses (statii?) unvisited.

Consequently its all very pointless claiming that we don't know if its still legal and it hasn't been done since way back.

The fact is to the best of our knowledge the default has to be "it is legal" (was, and no mention of a change), and that there may, by word of 'god' be more recent examples that have not been specified.

[Lady Tippy Wolfsbane]

I want to add that I don't think marrying Rhaegar would have jeopardized Lyanna's honor in any way, IMO.

[Alia of the knife]

Ok...I'm having trouble understanding what this has to do with whether and to what degree we should give Robert's views on Rhaegar any credence. Yes, Robert has Targaryen blood. That still doesn't change the fact that he still hates the Targaryens in general, and Rhaegar in particular, and clearly has a very biased perspective when it comes to the latter's actions.

Yes, Robert apparently had a bias view of Rhaegar. I wonder what Rhaegar thought of Robert?

I bet he wasn't objective.

1). Obviously Martin, Roberts creator, doesn't seem to think he was such a bad guy, and I think thats intrigueing.

2). I tend to believe MARTINS literary intent for all the characters is that there is a little bit of truth in their POV's along with their delusion.

Aerys was insane, but he wasn't wrong that Rhaegar may have been plotting against him. Robert may have thought Lyanna was raped when it was consenual, but we don't know for a fact she went willingly, especially as Dany remembers/recalls Rhaegar taking "his Northern girl at swordpoint."

Maybe a ruse to protect her honor, but, maybe not.

3). Much of what the Taryaryen faction, (Viserys, Dany, Cersei, Jaimie-who-just-recently-threw-a-kid-out-the-window), believe, falls under the category of bias as well, probably also the Authors intent.

Everyone believes something different, but not entirely incorrect.

The one who seems to come the closest to being objective is Selmy. He liked Rhaegar, but he also compared his love of Lyanna to a slow poison that infected a Kingdom.

If you will excuse me, I am going to bed now, so I can go to work in the morning.

Good Night.

[Dragonfish]

Yes, Robert apparently had a bias view of Rhaegar. I wonder what Rhaegar thought of Robert?

I bet he wasn't objective.

So?

1). Obviously Martin, Roberts creator, doesn't seem to think he was such a bad guy, and I think thats intrigueing.

I still don't see how it's relevant to the discussion. The credibility of his judgment of Rhaegar's character has absolutely nothing to do with how good a guy he was.

2). I tend to believe MARTINS literary intent for all the characters is that there is a little bit of truth in their POV's along with their delusion.

Aerys was insane, but he wasn't wrong that Rhaegar may have been plotting against him. Robert may have thought Lyanna was raped when it was consenual, but we don't know for a fact she went willingly, especially as Dany remembers/recalls Rhaegar taking "his Northern girl at swordpoint."

Maybe a ruse to protect her honor, but, maybe not.

There may be some truths in some of the things Robert believes, but that does not mean there is some truth in what he specifically believes regarding Rhaegar.

Also, IMO the context of Dany's quote makes it seem like she's describing a rescue, not a kidnapping.

3). Much of what the Taryaryen faction, (Viserys, Dany, Cersei, Jaimie-who-just-recently-threw-a-kid-out-the-window), believe, falls under the category of bias as well, probably also the Authors intent.

Everyone believes something different, but not entirely incorrect.

The first three are biased, I'll grant you, but how exactly is Jaime biased? He's not exactly a Targaryen loyalist. Yes, he admires Rhaegar, but that's entirely the point. You can't use his admiration for Rhaegar as evidence that his admiration for Rhaegar is based on bias.

[Ygrain]

Not necessarily, but he should know that was irresponsible. There was no point in calling the banners for Lyanna because:

a) She was a hostage;

B) They didn't knew where she was.

???How was she a hostage? And since when you can't demand the return of someone because you don't know their location?

But as soon as Rhaegar resurfaced, there would be at best, a duel. Like I said, Robert HAS TO FIGHT, even if he didn't liked Lyanna- it's a matter of honor and survival.

Lands, titles, riches, another bride of an outstanding family (there is this pretty blonde, her father was a Hand :D)

Again, the risk is not necessarily Rhaegar himself, and maybe not even the Starks themselves- although if Elia trusted her life and the life of her son to a family she never met based on reputation alone, that is stupid.

Who's to say that the second son wouldn't want the throne? If he called the Starks to war, would they refuse? I doubt it- specially if Brandon was Lord of Winterfell.

Again, there's absolutely nothing to be gained, and everything to be lost.

As if she had something to gain by refusing to cooperate. There is no way she can stop Rhaegar, he will do what he wants anyway. If she refuses to cooperate or outright opposes him, she risks turning him against herself, and then she might be in exactly the same situation as before, but without Rhaegar's good graces.

Oh, and Renly and Stannis being of the same mother didn't exactly help anything.

[SteelAndSnow]

Lands, titles, riches, another bride of an outstanding family (there is this pretty blonde, her father was a Hand :D)

It's a stain on his honor. It would be a stain on any man's honor and knowing what we know about Robert, the effect was probably tenfold.

I'm pretty sure he would have wanted a duel or war (well, maybe not war; that is streching it a little but a duel definitely) BUT like I said earlier, we cannot discount the presence and influence of Jon Arryn (and Tully and Stark as well probably) who would have exhausted other avenues.

[corbon]

It's a stain on his honor. It would be a stain on any man's honor and knowing what we know about Robert, the effect was probably tenfold.

I'm pretty sure he would have wanted a duel or war (well, maybe not war; that is streching it a little but a duel definitely) BUT like I said earlier, we cannot discount the presence and influence of Jon Arryn (and Tully and Stark as well probably) who would have exhausted other avenues.

Is it?

Isn't it a stain on Stark honour, not Baratheon honour?

She's promised to him, but until they are married, its her family's job to protect her, not his.

Robert Baratheon's honour is not in question here. Only the fact that Rhaegar stole the pretty toy that Robert wanted, and had been promised. It still wasn't actually stolen from him though.

[dragontamer]

Its very simple. The current position is that Targaryen polygamy is legally acceptable because we know its been legal before and haven't heard anything about it ceasing to be legal - thats how laws work.

And GRRM has backed this up by saying that not only was Maegor the Cruel a poligamist, but that there may have been more Targaryen poligamists after that, but he was't sure. And then leaving a lot of Targaryen marital statuses (statii?) unvisited.

Consequently its all very pointless claiming that we don't know if its still legal and it hasn't been done since way back.

The fact is to the best of our knowledge the default has to be "it is legal" (was, and no mention of a change), and that there may, by word of 'god' be more recent examples that have not been specified.

I don't think the point is whether it is legal or not. Obviously since it has happened in more than one occasion we can conclude that at least it's acceptable and most likely legal too.

The thing though is that Lyanna was not a Targaryen and I find it hard to believe that the Starks would approve polygamy for one of them. But even if they did and it was all done legally why all the secrecy?

Is it?

Isn't it a stain on Stark honour, not Baratheon honour?

She's promised to him, but until they are married, its her family's job to protect her, not his.

Robert Baratheon's honour is not in question here. Only the fact that Rhaegar stole the pretty toy that Robert wanted, and had been promised. It still wasn't actually stolen from him though.

According to this Robert would be pissed but if Rickard broke the marriage contract and favored a union with the Targaryens there was nothing he could do, for they weren't married yet. And I believe if Rickard had the chance he would have said yes with all his ambitious plans for power.

And somethhing else, if Rhaegar intended to overthrow his father why did he rush things by "abducting" Lyanna and not wait, ascend to the throne and then as king marry Lyanna or whatever? Then he wouldn'd need his approval or anything. A secret arrangement with Rickard was all that was needed.

[kg1982]

According to this Robert would be pissed but if Rickard broke the marriage contract and favored a union with the Targaryens there was nothing he could do, for they weren't married yet. And I believe if Rickard had the chance he would have said yes with all his ambitious plans for power.

There is nothing to suggest that Lord Rickard's plans involved Targaryens. In fact, there is reason to believe that it was anti-Targ. My theory is that the lords might have wanted a Magna Carta sort of deal and were forming a block to push that angle. Lord Rickard was at Winterfell when his children went to the Harrenhal tourney, so he wouldn't have known of any of plots.

And somethhing else, if Rhaegar intended to overthrow his father why did he rush things by "abducting" Lyanna and not wait, ascend to the throne and then as king marry Lyanna or whatever? Then he wouldn'd need his approval or anything. A secret arrangement with Rickard was all that was needed.

I think that it had to do with the prophecy and love rather than Rhaegar thinking rationally.

[Sinslash]

grrr Now I'm confused AGAIN. I did ask if this whole R+L=J would still leave Jon Snow a bastard (this time Rhaegar's bastard instead of Eddard's) therefore not really a legitimate heir. And I was told he's still a legitimate heir (or at least has better claim than Daenerys) because Rhaegar is Targaryen and for them polygamy was OK. So I thought the whole thing was resolved (among the fans, anyway, since this is just a theory). Guess it wasn't.

This is what I think of the Rhaegar thing:

Rhaegar was a mysterious person, nobody really knew him.

Initially though, he hasn't done anything bad.

And he was kind of a genius or something like that.

So he was generally thought of in high regard.

Then he crowned Lyanna instead of his wife.

And disappeared with her.

Based on that, people may have thought ill of him.

Especially Brandon Stark (Lyanna's brother), Rickard Stark (Lyanna's father), and Robert Baratheon (Lyanna's bethrothed).

Remember this was in a Medieval-ish setting, where women were generally thought of as weaker than men, in terms of power, rank, or what have you.

So it was easier to conclude that Rhaegar abducted Lyanna rather than Lyanna eloping with Rhaegar, as she was already bethrothed.

Prior to that, Rhaegar DID give her the tourney crown thingy, that makes him kind of an instigator.

Lyanna (who was bethrothed) had nothing to do with Rhaegar (who was married) before that, as far as we know.

Brandon and Rickard did go ask for Lyanna back.

But we all know how King Aerys responded to that.

So as a result, we got a dead Brandon, a dead Rickard, and no Lyanna.

That did it; Robert got mad and rebelled.

He's gotta get his Lyanna back.

Now, Rhaegar had to go to war with him.

And died.

As for my thoughts on Elia:

She was the wife - in Medieval times, the wife must obey the husband.

Daenerys' vision may imply that regardless of what Elia thinks is right or good for her or what, she knew or can assume that her beloved husband needed another offspring as he believed in some prophecy.

The dragon has three heads, there must be one more.

Who knows, this might have been their conversation:

Rhaeger: "I need another baby."

Elia: "Hey don't look at me - I'm done, dude. Go find another baby mama! Take Cersei."

Rhaegar: "Pass."

Elia: "Take the Stark girl then."

Rhaegar: "Fine."

Hehe :P

[dragontamer]

There is nothing to suggest that Lord Rickard's plans involved Targaryens. In fact, there is reason to believe that it was anti-Targ. My theory is that the lords might have wanted a Magna Carta sort of deal and were forming a block to push that angle. Lord Rickard was at Winterfell when his children went to the Harrenhal tourney, so he wouldn't have known of any of plots.

The gist of my post was the former statement about Starks' opinion over polygamy and the question asked about the secrecy. This argument was only to prove through another's argument that Robert couldn't/wouldn't protest.

I think that it had to do with the prophecy and love rather than Rhaegar thinking rationally.

As far as the love part he waited almost a year, I think he could wait a little longer. As far as the prophecy no suggestion is made that he needed the third head right now and then.