R+L=J v.47

[Snark_Tamer]

Oh, I agree Aerys could have avoided it by not burning the two elder Starks and I will go along with a price on ones head is a great incentive. But to say it is no longer about Lyanna avoids the issue that without the kidnapping of Lyanna and Robert's feeling that 'she was his' the war ALSO would not have happened, as Rickard and Brandon never would have gone to Aerys in the first place. You can't disentagle these events.

And I think Robert still being hung up on Lyanna fifteen years later suggests for HIM it was really always about Lyanna. I think Rhaegar took what Robert thought was his, so Robert took what Rhaegar thought was HIS (kinghood) when he couldn't get Lyanna back.

[Erudain]

I go with..."it could had been avoided if he just didn't kill Rickard"...Brandon after all DID commit treason by demanding for the crown prince to "come out and die" so he could be punished.

Even so it could be avoided if Aerys didn't make a mockery of a trial by combat defying all the laws and customs of westeros and if he didn't demand the heads of inoccents who did nothing to him and had nothing to do with the present matter.

Let's say....Aerys wants to execute Brandon for treason, Brandon then ask for a trial by combat with Rickard as his champion....Hightower or Jaime fight for the crown and kill Rickard in a fair trial by combat.

Aerys kills Brandon and leaves Ned and Robert alone.

Ned would be pissed? most likely....would he have a reason to revolt?...nope...all the trial process was legal.

[Ygrain]

Oh, I agree Aerys could have avoided it by not burning the two elder Starks and I will go along with a price on ones head is a great incentive. But to say it is no longer about Lyanna avoids the issue that without the kidnapping of Lyanna and Robert's feeling that 'she was his' the war ALSO would not have happened, as Rickard and Brandon never would have gone to Aerys in the first place. You can't disentagle these events.

And I think Robert still being hung up on Lyanna fifteen years later suggests for HIM it was really always about Lyanna. I think Rhaegar took what Robert thought was his, so Robert took what Rhaegar thought was HIS (kinghood) when he couldn't get Lyanna back.

Fifteen years later (and perhaps even since the very beginning), Robert has Lyanna on a pedestal as the ideal he could never have. The degree to which the rebellion was about Lyanna to him is dubious, though, seeing him happily fucking every single whore in the brothel where he was hiding while his betrothed was supposedly being raped.

Lyanna is a non-issue as at the point when the Rebellion started, there occured a breach in the feudal power structure. As long as Aerys' order that Ned and Robert be executed stood and they were in defiance of that order, it didn't matter any more whether Lyanna was with Rhaegar or whether she was returned to the Starks; regardless of her status, the king's authority had to be either reestablished, or defeated. Lyanna was only a secondary goal, rather unimportant in the grand scheme.

You can take a look at the historical parallel of John Lackland who kidnapped Isabela of Angouleme (much younger than him, a famed beauty, and betrothed to another, while John's wife was barren). Her relatives, a powerful noble family, didn't start a war over it, but as good subject, went to their liege, the king of France, to demand justice. Only when John was ordered to return her and refused, did the fighting start - not over Isabela (who, by the way, became John's wife after he got divorced, and the mother of his heir, even though John was defeated) but over sovereignty.

[Ser Creighton]

Please someone make this go away.

Thats what I get for posting when tired.

You were probably tired because you drank Sanka also known as the end of days, the drink that must not be named, the end of evolution, the drink of death,

[Jon Icefyre]

You were probably tired because you drank Sanka also known as the end of days, the drink that must not be named, the end of evolution, the drink of death,

Haha Sanka's not that strong, but still it's funny.

[MtnLion]

Yeah, I get this too. It seems to me there are some who are downright rude if somebody makes a mistake. Treating each other kindly would make these boards more welcoming. There are nice ways to say things and I think we'd all have more fun if we practiced them.

I'm sure that it was not intended to be rude, but a comment on a series that started at least 8 pages back in this series. To make suggestions based upon feelings, rather than supported by the text, is regarded as trolling; especially after repeated good natured attempts to help.

[Alia of the knife]

You were probably tired because you drank Sanka also known as the end of days, the drink that must not be named, the end of evolution, the drink of death,

Haha Sanka's not that strong, but still it's funny.

And as I said to Lady Mary, add Cremora to that and it completes the toxic swill.

You can pound that powdery poison with the flat of your spoon all day long, and still pools of that muddy, oozy crap floats to the top as if its daring you to consume it.

I know, because everytime I go back home to see my eldery Aunt, she proudly makes it for me, poo-pooing that fancy Starbucks stuff, (honeslty, I'd settle for Dunkin' Doughnut). :stillsick:

The things we do for love.

[Jon Icefyre]

Fifteen years later (and perhaps even since the very beginning), Robert has Lyanna on a pedestal as the ideal he could never have. The degree to which the rebellion was about Lyanna to him is dubious, though, seeing him happily fucking every single whore in the brothel where he was hiding while his betrothed was supposedly being raped.

Lyanna is a non-issue as at the point when the Rebellion started, there occured a breach in the feudal power structure. As long as Aerys' order that Ned and Robert be executed stood and they were in defiance of that order, it didn't matter any more whether Lyanna was with Rhaegar or whether she was returned to the Starks; regardless of her status, the king's authority had to be either reestablished, or defeated. Lyanna was only a secondary goal, rather unimportant in the grand scheme.

You can take a look at the historical parallel of John Lackland who kidnapped Isabela of Angouleme (much younger than him, a famed beauty, and betrothed to another, while John's wife was barren). Her relatives, a powerful noble family, didn't start a war over it, but as good subject, went to their liege, the king of France, to demand justice. Only when John was ordered to return her and refused, did the fighting start - not over Isabela (who, by the way, became John's wife after he got divorced, and the mother of his heir, even though John was defeated) but over sovereignty.

Ya agreed Lyanna was most definitely a factor in the rebellion but Aerys was the real reason. If the war was started strictly because of Rhaegar 'kidnapping Lyanna." Then I think Rickard Stark would have called in his banners the moment her found out his daughter was kidnapped. The fact that he went to KL on Aerys command having not called in his banners tells me Rickard was hoping to talk things out/negotiate, which in hindsight was obviously never possible on the account of Aery's madness.

[Snark_Tamer]

I'm sure that it was not intended to be rude, but a comment on a series that started at least 8 pages back in this series. To make suggestions based upon feelings, rather than supported by the text, is regarded as trolling; especially after repeated good natured attempts to help.

Any chance of a reset on the good-natured attempts to help? 8 pages back was the old thread, so I know I for one, had not braved reading through the 46 earlier iterations and have NOT seen much good-naturedness on this one when there was disagreement. I have a history on Harry Potter boards, so while I'm new HERE, I know that the tone set by the veterans carries everyone on a higher level or drags them down into anything goes. I don't mean to be a stinker, but I have seen quite a few unfriendly comments on these boards and if we'd peer correct a little, it just would be a nicer place. I REALLY want to talk about these books with other people who love them, but the mother in me wants to bang some heads together when I see that. Everything can and should be said nicely, even when we disagree, and in writing, we cannot assume tone carries over, so if you're joking, give some sign. I find </sarcasm> is effective.

[corbon]

I'm 50 50 on the matter. It might have been Ned spreading it, or it might have been a lucky coincidence that the one woman rumored to have something with Ned has purple eyes and Targ traits in her family, and he's trying to hide a Targ baby... Maybe it wasn't Ned, but Howland or even Wylla who put up oil in the fire of this rumour?

Its clear from Ned's reaction to Catelyn that he did not start or encourage the rumour. When and where he has the ability, he stamps out all rumouring about Jon's mother. But where he does not have the power, he might be happy to let this one lie.

The main point is though, that there doesn't need to be anyone putting oil on the fire. The rumour about Ashara is a natural conclusion widely and spontaneously reached across westeros as a result of the three 'facts' I mentioned earlier. No one needs to spread it, and its clear from Ned's reaction that he didn't spread it and from Ned Dayne's story that it wasn't spread at Starfall either. The places where it can be found are where the people had no connection to the events, just heard a set of facts and put them together in a logical (but wrong) fashion.

Well I don't think we have indications from the book about Howland and greenseeing, someone correct me if I'm wrong.

We have explicitly that he is not, from Meera.

"Once there was a curious lad who lived in the Neck. He was small like all crannogmen, but b rave and smart and strong as well. He grew up hunting and fishing and climbing trees, and learned all the magics of my people."

Bran was almost certain he had never heard this story. "Did he have green dreams like Jojen?"

"No," said Meera, "but he could breathe mud and run on leaves, and change earth to water and water to earth with no more than a whispered word. He could talk to trees and weave words and make castles appear and disappear."

Yeah, I get this too. It seems to me there are some who are downright rude if somebody makes a mistake. Treating each other kindly would make these boards more welcoming. There are nice ways to say things and I think we'd all have more fun if we practiced them.

There are a handful of people who repeatedly and persistently make the same errors and use the same bad logic patterns or wild extrapolations in vain attempts to create counter-theories to the strongest established theories. It can be difficult to keep patience with them.

But noobs generally get treated fairly, it seems to me.

I'm not perfect, and know I've been shorter than some deserved on occasion. I apologise for those occasions, and for others which weren't intended.

But that said, even noobs owe the courtesy of decent research when they come forward with bold counter theories, or make judging statements. Being told you are wrong, and why, isn't an insult, even if it is not dandied up.

See below, for an example. This is really basic, foundational, stuff, but almost every line after the first is in factual error, making the conclusion farcical.

Exactly... betrothed... so it was a sense of honor.

As for Robert's rebellion:

Rhaegar abducts Lyanna 1st.

Good so far, allowing for it almost certainly not being an abduction, but thats easier to type than a longer explanation.

Brandon and Rickard Stark demand Aerys reprimand his son so he kills them 2nd

Err, no. Brandon demands Rhaegar come out and die. Not Aerys 'reprimand his son'. Thats a whole different kettle of fish.

And Rickard makes no demands at all (well, for a Trail by Combat for Brandon).

THEN Robert/Ned go to war.

Err, no. Then Aerys demands Robert and Ned's heads, for no legal reason, and then their Ward, Jon Arryn, refuses and raises his banners in rebellion.

Thats a very important step you've missed out, given it is the exact reason why the rebellion started!

It is absolutely about Lyanna.

Its astonishing then how her 'abduction' is not once mentioned by any player in this little farce. Not Brandon, not Aerys, not Rickard, not Jon Arryn.

1. Brandon committed a crime punishable by death. His death was cruel in manner, but legally inevitable.

2. Rickard elected of his own free will to champion Brandon in a trial by combat that he, Rickard, requested. His death was not illegal as such, just the manner of it.

3. Aerys demand the heads of Robert and Ned, who were innocent, and Jon refused to send Aerys their heads.

These are the facts. Only at the 3rd does war/rebellion come into the picture.

[Twinslayer]

Its astonishing then how her 'abduction' is not once mentioned by any player in this little farce. Not Brandon, not Aerys, not Rickard, not Jon Arryn.

1. Brandon committed a crime punishable by death. His death was cruel in manner, but legally inevitable.

2. Rickard elected of his own free will to champion Brandon in a trial by combat that he, Rickard, requested. His death was not illegal as such, just the manner of it.

3. Aerys demand the heads of Robert and Ned, who were innocent, and Jon refused to send Aerys their heads.

These are the facts. Only at the 3rd does war/rebellion come into the picture.

I think you are right that Jon Arryn and Ned went to war because of Aerys' actions. But in fairness there is one player in the farce who explicitly says he was fighting over Lyanna's abduction and that is Robert:

"I vowed to kill Rhaegar for what he did to her."

"You did," Ned reminded him.

"Only once," Robert said bitterly.

I think it is safe to say that "what he did to her" refers to Lyanna's abduction rather than her death because Robert made his vow before Rhaegar died, which of course is before Lyanna died. So it is fair to argue that Robert went to war over the abduction. Whether he could have drawn Rickard and Jon A. (and Hoster) along with him is a question we can't answer.

I mention this because I have been wondering if Robert's vow to kill Rhaegar was publicly known. If Aerys heard about it, and Brandon had just made the same threat, then Aerys' decision to call for Robert's head -- and maybe even for Ned's -- is more understandable.

And it gets to what I believe to be the underlying point of all of this discussion--does Rhaegar bear the blame, or some of the blame, for causing Robert's Rebellion? And I think the answer is that Rhaegar, Aerys, Brandon and Robert (and Lyanna, if she went willingly) all bear some share of the blame.

[corbon]

I think you are right that Jon Arryn and Ned went to war because of Aerys' actions. But in fairness there is one player in the farce who explicitly says he was fighting over Lyanna's abduction and that is Robert:

I think it is safe to say that "what he did to her" refers to Lyanna's abduction rather than her death because Robert made his vow before Rhaegar died, which of course is before Lyanna died. So it is fair to argue that Robert went to war over the abduction. Whether he could have drawn Rickard and Jon A. (and Hoster) along with him is a question we can't answer.

Robert says this years after the fact. There is no mention of him saying it before the rebellion started.

None of his actions in the past support the notion that he actually loved her, or truly went to war to get her back, so its extreeeemly likely that this is a post hoc affectation on Robert's part because its crucial for his self-image. Its not impressive to admit that your fiance ditched you for another man, and it also sounds a lot better to say you rebelled over a woman's honour than because it was that or die.

Robert went to war because he had no choice. It was that or die, and Jon made that choice for him already. Once he was at war, he used a different justification, Lyanna. But there is no evidence at all that he used this justification to go to war, and plenty that he did not - he didn't have the opportunity frankly as Jon Arryn declared rebellion on his behalf, and he can't back down from that.

[Twinslayer]

Robert says this years after the fact. There is no mention of him saying it before the rebellion started.

None of his actions in the past support the notion that he actually loved her, or truly went to war to get her back, so its extreeeemly likely that this is a post hoc affectation on Robert's part because its crucial for his self-image. Its not impressive to admit that your fiance ditched you for another man, and it also sounds a lot better to say you rebelled over a woman's honour than because it was that or die.

Robert went to war because he had no choice. It was that or die, and Jon made that choice for him already. Once he was at war, he used a different justification, Lyanna. But there is no evidence at all that he used this justification to go to war, and plenty that he did not - he didn't have the opportunity frankly as Jon Arryn declared rebellion on his behalf, and he can't back down from that.

Yeah, it is possible that this is post-hoc rationalization on Robert's part. In addition to the points you make, I think it's possible that Robert hates being King, he hates being married to Cersei, and he thinks he would have been happy being Lord of Storm's End/married to Lyanna. And he chooses to blame Rhaegar for ruining all of that.

But we can't rule out the alternative possibility -- that what Robert said to Ned is true and that he reacted to Lyanna's abduction the same way Brandon did. He seems like a pretty hot-headed guy and I could see him running around the Vale (probably drunk) vowing to kill Rhaegar for stealing his fianc&eacute;.

If that is the case, your sequence of events would need to change to show:

1. Rhaegar abducts Lyanna.

2. The heir to Winterfell and The Lord of Storm's End respond by threatening Rhaegar's life.

3. Aerys responds by ordering the deaths of The Lord of Storm's End plus The Lord of Winterfell and his two heirs.

4. Jon A., Robert and Ned call their banners.

[Twinslayer]

Sorry, double post.

[Jon Icefyre]

I think you are right that Jon Arryn and Ned went to war because of Aerys' actions. But in fairness there is one player in the farce who explicitly says he was fighting over Lyanna's abduction and that is Robert:

I think it is safe to say that "what he did to her" refers to Lyanna's abduction rather than her death because Robert made his vow before Rhaegar died, which of course is before Lyanna died. So it is fair to argue that Robert went to war over the abduction. Whether he could have drawn Rickard and Jon A. (and Hoster) along with him is a question we can't answer.

Well in GOT when Ned and Robert are talking about assassinating Dany, Robert acknowledges what Aerys did to Brandon and Rickon as well as Rhaegar 'kidnapping' Lyanna :

"Nonetheless," Ned said, "the murder of children . . . it would be vile . . . unspeakable . . . "

"Unspeakable?" the king roared. "What Aerys did to your brother Brandon was unspeakable. The way your lord father died, that was unspeakable. And Rhaegar . . . how many times do you think he raped your sister? How many hundreds of times?" His voice had grown so loud that his horse whinnied nervously beneath him. The king jerked the reins hard, quieting the animal, and pointed an angry finger at Ned. "I will kill every Targaryen I can get my hands on, until they are as dead as their dragons, and then I will piss on their graves."

So I think it was a bit of both for Robert but Aery's actions is the thing that gave justification to the rebellion. Also I think a lot of ppl get really lost in Robert's hatred for Rhaegar causing them to overlook/vastly understimate Robert's hatred for Aerys and the Targs in general. Remember Aerys Targaryen is the reason both of Robert's parents are dead, I think Robert's hatred for the royal family aka the Targs started much earlier than ppl realize. Also in regards to Lyanna, I honestly think if it was someone other than a Targaryen that vanished with Lyanna we would not have gotten the same reaction out of Robert, I mean don't get me wrong he would have still been pissed, but I don't think the anger would have even compared to the anger he feels for the Targs. In my opinion Robert's feelings for Lyanna years after the war was directly related to his hatred for the Targs, in fact I'd go as far as to say Robert's hatred for Rhaegar Targaryen and the Targs in general actually magnified his love for Lyanna. Out of all the men Robert's betrothed could have disappeared with, it had to be the one man(Rhaegar) who belonged to the house Robert had already hated the most(Targaryen) in my opinion. So that really magnified Robert's hatred for house Targaryen which also happened to magnify Robert's love for Lyanna, which I think was not actually love at all and instead was a maddening jealousy covered by the frontial appearance of love.

Deep down I think Robert knew Rhaegar didn't kidnap Lyanna, and I think he just couldn't stand the thought that out of all the men and women in Westeros that fall in love, it had to be his own bethrothed falling in love with Rhaegar Targareyn and vise versa. Robert's parents gave up their lives to try to find Rhaegar a wife on the orders of Aerys, so to see Rhaegar abandon his own wife Elia for another woman who happened to be engaged to Robert(Lyanna)and Aerys seeming to condone it after everything Robert's parents did to try to find Rhaegar a wife probably infuriated Robert. I'm sure he saw Rhaegar's action as well as Aerys reaction towards it as a slap to the face considering Robert's parents died on the way back from a unsuccessful mission trying find Rhaegar a wife, and he saw his parent's ship wreck/parent's die with his own eyes as he was watching them come home from afar, that had to have left some emotional scars. Robert's parent's sacrifice was for nothing in Robert's eyes since Rhaegar ended up abandoning his wife for another woman anyway and Aerys seeming to allow it....

Aerys actions towards Brandon and Rickard was the last straw for Robert, after all Ned was like a brother to him so I'm sure it effected him realizing that Aerys was not just responsible for killing his parents(though not on purpose) but was also responsible for killing the father and brother of the man he thought of as a brother himself(Ned) which were both caused by something directly related to Aery's son Rhaegar.

[Ygrain]

A good catch, Jon. This is an aspect that rarely gets mentioned, and the basis for it is spelled out in the books.

[corbon]

But we can't rule out the alternative possibility -- that what Robert said to Ned is true and that he reacted to Lyanna's abduction the same way Brandon did. He seems like a pretty hot-headed guy and I could see him running around the Vale (probably drunk) vowing to kill Rhaegar for stealing his fiancé.

If that is the case, your sequence of events would need to change to show:

1. Rhaegar abducts Lyanna.

2. The heir to Winterfell and The Lord of Storm's End respond by threatening Rhaegar's life.

3. Aerys responds by ordering the deaths of The Lord of Storm's End plus The Lord of Winterfell and his two heirs.

4. Jon A., Robert and Ned call their banners.

Sorry, but you don't get to invent stuff, thats GRRMs job. It could have happened, but there is no evidence it did, since we are told something very different. A pig may have flown past, but there is no reason it did.

[Twinslayer]

Well in GOT when Ned and Robert are talking about assassinating Dany, Robert acknowledges what Aerys did to Brandon and Rickon as well as Rhaegar 'kidnapping' Lyanna :

"Nonetheless," Ned said, "the murder of children . . . it would be vile . . . unspeakable . . . "

"Unspeakable?" the king roared. "What Aerys did to your brother Brandon was unspeakable. The way your lord father died, that was unspeakable. And Rhaegar . . . how many times do you think he raped your sister? How many hundreds of times?" His voice had grown so loud that his horse whinnied nervously beneath him. The king jerked the reins hard, quieting the animal, and pointed an angry finger at Ned. "I will kill every Targaryen I can get my hands on, until they are as dead as their dragons, and then I will piss on their graves."

So I think it was a bit of both for Robert but Aery's actions is the thing that gave justification to the rebellion. Also I think a lot of ppl get really lost in Robert's hatred for Rhaegar causing them to overlook/vastly understimate Robert's hatred for Aerys and the Targs in general. Remember Aerys Targaryen is the reason both of Robert's parents are dead, I think Robert's hatred for the royal family aka the Targs started much earlier than ppl realize. Also in regards to Lyanna, I honestly think if it was someone other than a Targaryen that vanished with Lyanna we would not have gotten the same reaction out of Robert, I mean don't get me wrong he would have still been pissed, but I don't think the anger would have even compared to the anger he feels for the Targs. In my opinion Robert's feelings for Lyanna years after the war was directly related to his hatred for the Targs, in fact I'd go as far as to say Robert's hatred for Rhaegar Targaryen and the Targs in general actually magnified his love for Lyanna. Out of all the men Robert's betrothed could have disappeared with, it had to be the one man(Rhaegar) who belonged to the house Robert had already hated the most(Targaryen) in my opinion. So that really magnified Robert's hatred for house Targaryen which also happened to magnify Robert's love for Lyanna, which I think was not actually love at all and instead was a maddening jealousy covered by the frontial appearance of love.

I don't know that Robert hated Aerys (or Rhaegar) because his parents died in an accident. He never says anything to suggest that. But I agree he hates House Targ. He hates Rhaegar for what he "did" to Lyanna. He even vowed to kill Rhaegar for it, and did. He hates Aerys for backing Rhaegar's play and for killing Rickard and Brandon. He deposed Aerys for it.

But if you think about how the Rebellion was sold, it probably involved both. "look at these Targs, they run off with your daughter (or sister or fiancé) and when you complain they murder you (or try to). Then there is this dramatic single-combat on the Trident that everyone (including both Robert himself and Viserys) think was all about Lyanna. I think the abduction of Lyanna was probably some of the most powerful propaganda in the Robert/Ned arsenal and probably it gained them a lot of support.

[Twinslayer]

Sorry, but you don't get to invent stuff, thats GRRMs job. It could have happened, but there is no evidence it did, since we are told something very different. A pig may have flown past, but there is no reason it did.

I don't get your point at all. GRRM is the one who has Robert saying he vowed to kill Rhaegar for abducting Lyanna and that he followed through on that vow. You are saying that is a lie told by Robert. I am just saying it might be a lie or it might be the truth. How am I guilty of trying to invent something different than what we are told in the text?

[corbon]

Also I think a lot of ppl get really lost in Robert's hatred for Rhaegar causing them to overlook/vastly understimate Robert's hatred for Aerys and the Targs in general. Remember Aerys Targaryen is the reason both of Robert's parents are dead, I think Robert's hatred for the royal family aka the Targs started much earlier than ppl realize. Also in regards to Lyanna, I honestly think if it was someone other than a Targaryen that vanished with Lyanna we would not have gotten the same reaction out of Robert, I mean don't get me wrong he would have still been pissed, but I don't think the anger would have even compared to the anger he feels for the Targs. In my opinion Robert's feelings for Lyanna years after the war was directly related to his hatred for the Targs, in fact I'd go as far as to say Robert's hatred for Rhaegar Targaryen and the Targs in general actually magnified his love for Lyanna. Out of all the men Robert's betrothed could have disappeared with, it had to be the one man(Rhaegar) who belonged to the house Robert had already hated the most(Targaryen) in my opinion. So that really magnified Robert's hatred for house Targaryen which also happened to magnify Robert's love for Lyanna, which I think was not actually love at all and instead was a maddening jealousy covered by the frontial appearance of love.

This does not tally with Robert seeming to be a core Targ loyalist at Harrenhal. He's drinking heavily with Rhaegar's ex-squire, and he supports King Aerys when Aerys declares the KotLT no friend. that doesn't seem to be a man who hates the Targaryens for the death of his parents, at sea.

I get that its possibly Robert could blame the Targs for the death of his parents, but that is merely a possibility, without any real evidence and doesn't fit Robert's earlier behaviour.

No, IMO Robert is just a big man with few brains (or rather, little will to exercise them beyond war) but a big heart, so when he's in, he's all in. Once he had to go to war, and he did, in order to make himself feel better about Lyanna he demonised the Targs, and being Robert, ended up totally indoctrinated by his own bullshit.