Robert's Rebellion as Just War

[SeanF]

It is justice. Rhaegar kidnaped his sister.

We don't know that Rhaegar kidnapped Lyanna. I think it's more likely she willingly eloped with him. And Brandon didn't know either. He didn't try to investigate what happened, he just shouted for Rhaegar to "come out and die."

[SeanF]

I was explicating how Leviathian applies in this instance.

My own opinion is that I can't really blame Jon, Ned and Robert for raising their banners and opposing the king. They may well have brought harm to more people that way than if they just slipped away over the seas though.

I do think they more or less broke the social contract when they declared Robert king before the Trident. That was turning justified resistance to unreasonable commands into a scheme to destroy (by death, exile, or demotion) the whole ruling dynasty. Noble families are always going to throw up some fruitcakes now and

again, that doesn't mean it is reasonable to drive the whole house into exile (or kill them). Do as you would be done unto, and all that. The Starks wouldn't like it if their 8,000 year old line came to an end because rather than removing an unsuitable liege and supporting his son/daughter/grandson, the Boltons/whoever, wiped half of the family out, and stripped them of their lands. So Dany is right to think they are usurpers.

Realistically, was there any alternative to removing the dynasty, once they rebelled?

[viking warrior]

Please explain me how in God's name, Robb Stark could have gathered 110k men from North and Riverlands? Just that, nothing more...

Also, as far as rebels knew, Lannisters would side with the royalists. Only when it became obvious that Tywin is keeping his armies out of the war, rebels started calling him. In no point of the war, rebels had numbers on their side...

This is why I don't assume you have read a lot of military threads. The North is HUGE, many, many times the size of England, the accepted population for the North is around 6-7 mill (Free Northman estimate here). They could manage to gather say 60k men but it would take them half a year or so, and with real life logistics you could never feed such an army assembled in one place (this off course doesn't count for renly's 100k army;). This is why Robb travels south with 18k, many lords held back and there was also a time limit to gather an army. As for the Riverlands; Tywins preemptive raiding and Jaime scattering the riverlands armies in two battles and capturing the de facto lord paramount meant that you had a army with no one in charge. everyone was fleeing back to their own holdings or were slaughtered by Gregor's men.

Edmure did however manage to assemble 11k in a very short notice to fight of Tywin's army. As for RR, the riverlands was split into loyalists, rebells and the ones who watched from the sideline (Freys), half the loyalist army at the Trident was probably riverlanders.

[Mladen]

This is why I don't assume you have read a lot of military threads. The North is HUGE, many, many times the size of England, the accepted population for the North is around 6-7 mill (Free Northman estimate here). They could manage to gather say 60k men but it would take them half a year or so, and with real life logistics you could never feed such an army assembled in one place (this off course doesn't count for renly's 100k army;). This is why Robb travels south with 18k, many lords held back and there was also a time limit to gather an army. As for the Riverlands; Tywins preemptive raiding and Jaime scattering the riverlands armies in two battles and capturing the de facto lord paramount meant that you had a army with no one in charge. everyone was fleeing back to their own holdings or were slaughtered by Gregor's men.

Edmure did however manage to assemble 11k in a very short notice to fight of Tywin's army. As for RR, the riverlands was split into loyalists, rebells and the ones who watched from the sideline (Freys), half the loyalist army at the Trident was probably riverlanders.

First, your assumption is wrong. I have read almost all military threads and know the numbers that figure on those threads. But, if you want to argue that Robb went into war with 20 000 men, and left 40 000 men in the North, do that, but it's foolish to believe so. The numbers would be around 40k, almost 50k. And Robb did have time to gather his army. If not in the first wave, well war lasted for some time? As for Riverlands, arguing that they could gather 50k is laughable. Gregor Clegane pilgrimiged the villages of Riverlands with so few men to do all that, if he had to face force of 50k. No, numbers of Riverlands' soldiers are significantly less.We know that royalists at Trident had 40 000 men, and estimated force of rebels was around 35 000. Also we know that at the same time, Mace Tyrell held a siege against Stannis with Redwynes. All of this suggests that Royalists had significantly larger number than rebels.

[Nyrhex]

But Catelyn only imprisoned Tyrion in Robert's name, and she took him to the trial. Brandon wanted blood. These two cases are not comparable.

And who is Brandon? Just her brother. After all, Lyanna had a father, who was Warden of the North. If anyone had right to do what Brandon did, it was Rickard.

He did something punishable, and he had no rights to do what he has done. That was on Rickard, not Brandon. Also, what was within his rights is to go to King and ask him, not to shout and demand someone's death. Also, Rheagar wasn't in KL at the time.

Catelyn wanted justice for what she thought Tyrion did. She wanted him dead as much as Brandon wanted to kill Rhaegar. Brandon was willing to exact justice right there and then. It's exactly the same. Catelyn simply wanted to trial him for an act he did back in Winterfell, and not there at an inn. Brandon was looking for Rhaegar and his sister. Assuming that he was in KL, Brandon would have found out where Lyanna is, and exact justice - Execute Rhaegar - and retreive Lyanna. It is as much his duty as it was Ned's or Benjen's. Whoever is closest. Who is Catelyn to Bran? Just his mother. She is not lord paramount of the North, nor the Riverlands. Nor is she the heir to either. Still her action is legitimate. Hoster tully could turn to Tywin Lannister to demand justice for Gregor's actions, or turn to the king. Brandon could have gone to the king, but that is just over-complicating things. His father would need to come south, there would be a trial, all the while his sister is in the clutches of her kidnaper. He chose the faster option - Go after Rhaegar and use his right to exact justice right there in KL, on the spot. Beric was sent to Gregor's home to kill him. It does not have to be a trial in some court. Justice can be done anywhere.

Brandon had every right to do what he did, Rhaegar not being present in KL means nothing other then allowing us to assume he had something to hide. Aerys had no right to arrest Brandon.

Is it? And why would deaths of two men make this war just, if the deaths of innocent doesn't make it? It is laughable to presume that some deaths count and others don't.

Yes it is. A king allows his son to kidnap women and go unpunished, he arrest the person who demands justice, his friends, thier fathers, thier retinues, and then kills them all. He had to go. Did Robert do right when he allowed the killings in retrospect? No. That still does not change the fact that the war was justified against the Targaryens.

[SeanF]

Catelyn arrested Tyrion because she wanted to find out who pushed Bran out of the window. She had no intention of summarily executing him.

Brandon Stark wanted to murder Rhaegar, without troubling to find out whether Rhaegar had kidnapped and raped his sister, or whether she'd gone willingly.

[Mladen]

Catelyn wanted justice for what she thought Tyrion did. She wanted him dead as much as Brandon wanted to kill Rhaegar. Brandon was willing to exact justice right there and then. It's exactly the same. Catelyn simply wanted to trial him for an act he did back in Winterfell, and not there at an inn. Brandon was looking for Rhaegar and his sister. Assuming that he was in KL, Brandon would have found out where Lyanna is, and exact justice - Execute Rhaegar - and retreive Lyanna. It is as much his duty as it was Ned's or Benjen's. Whoever is closest. Who is Catelyn to Bran? Just his mother. She is not lord paramount of the North, nor the Riverlands. Nor is she the heir to either. Still her action is legitimate. Hoster tully could turn to Tywin Lannister to demand justice for Gregor's actions, or turn to the king. Brandon could have gone to the king, but that is just over-complicating things. His father would need to come south, there would be a trial, all the while his sister is in the clutches of her kidnaper. He chose the faster option - Go after Rhaegar and use his right to exact justice right there in KL, on the spot. Beric was sent to Gregor's home to kill him. It does not have to be a trial in some court. Justice can be done anywhere.

Brandon had every right to do what he did, Rhaegar not being present in KL means nothing other then allowing us to assume he had something to hide. Aerys had no right to arrest Brandon.

Actually, at the time, she was appointed as Ned's Regent. She was supposed to rule North in Ned's absence. Also, Catelyn's situation isn't comparable because she wanted a trial, Brandon didn't. I don't understand how anyone can compare such different situations. Brandon wanted to be a prosecutor, judge and executionist. Well, that isn't justice. He commited a crime by threatening Royal personna and Aerys found him accountable for that. What he did, Brandon had no right to do, and even Ned admitted that his hastiness led him to his death.

I am sorry, but I honestly find this POV completely wrong. Instead of going to King and asking for justice, he shouted "come out and die". To see that as justice is to have no idea what justice means.

Yes it is. A king allows his son to kidnap women and go unpunished, he arrest the person who demands justice, his friends, thier fathers, thier retinues, and then kills them all. He had to go. Did Robert do right when he allowed the killings in retrospect? No. That still does not change the fact that the war was justified against the Targaryens.

And those that killed, raped, smashed the head of a baby should go unpunished? Come on... This is blatantly laughable logic.

[viking warrior]

First, your assumption is wrong. I have read almost all military threads and know the numbers that figure on those threads. But, if you want to argue that Robb went into war with 20 000 men, and left 40 000 men in the North, do that, but it's foolish to believe so. The numbers would be around 40k, almost 50k. And Robb did have time to gather his army. If not in the first wave, well war lasted for some time? As for Riverlands, arguing that they could gather 50k is laughable. Gregor Clegane pilgrimiged the villages of Riverlands with so few men to do all that, if he had to face force of 50k. No, numbers of Riverlands' soldiers are significantly less.We know that royalists at Trident had 40 000 men, and estimated force of rebels was around 35 000. Also we know that at the same time, Mace Tyrell held a siege against Stannis with Redwynes. All of this suggests that Royalists had significantly larger number than rebels.

Robb left with 20k in a hurry, And the Irnonborn took Mout Callin remember? Manderley was ordered to stay back and build a fleet, and so he did, 50 ships with an adequate crew of say 100 or per ship (=5k). Given the fact that Bolton so far has raised around 4k troopes from his lands it's not unfair to assume that Manderely, controlling lands larger and more furtile than the boltons should be able to raise a larger force, say 10k. This goes for the other lords aswell, they should each and everyone be able to raise 3-4k from their lands. So when you then ad up the lords who didn't actually send men with robb in the first place; skagosi(3-5k), mountain clans(3k with stannis, probably the same still left back), ryswells and dustins aswell as reeds, you reach quite a high number.

The thing is that these are estimates, not rocket science, meaning they are off course a few thousands off, and they are off course not 60 k on the spot, more like 58 356, the thing is that we are kinda on the same page when it comes to the north; 45-55k.

[Mladen]

Robb left with 20k in a hurry, And the Irnonborn took Mout Callin remember? Manderley was ordered to stay back and build a fleet, and so he did, 50 ships with an adequate crew of say 100 or per ship (=5k). Given the fact that Bolton so far has raised around 4k troopes from his lands it's not unfair to assume that Manderely, controlling lands larger and more furtile than the boltons should be able to raise a larger force, say 10k. This goes for the other lords aswell, they should each and everyone be able to raise 3-4k from their lands. So when you then ad up the lords who didn't actually send men with robb in the first place; skagosi(3-5k), mountain clans(3k with stannis, probably the same still left back), ryswells and dustins aswell as reeds, you reach quite a high number.

The thing is that these are estimates, not rocket science, meaning they are off course a few thousands off, and they are off course not 60 k on the spot, more like 58 356, the thing is that we are kinda on the same page when it comes to the north; 45-55k.

Robb went south with 20k. With him went the mojority of Karstarks, Glovers, Mormonts, Umbers, Boltons' army, and good part of Manderly's. That leaves:

1. Other part of Manderly's army - around 5k

2. Northern clans - 3k

3, Skagosi clans - around 5k

4. Crannogmen - maximum 5k

5. Soldiers from different Houses - maximum 10k

All of this isn't more than 50 000 men, at best. And Moat Cailin wasn't immediately taken after Robb's campaign...

Thing is, we know, that victory wasn't piece of cake for the rebels, and that outcome wasn't certain. Yet, they fought for they believed there were no other way out of the mess Aerys created.

[Nyrhex]

Actually, at the time, she was appointed as Ned's Regent. She was supposed to rule North in Ned's absence. Also, Catelyn's situation isn't comparable because she wanted a trial, Brandon didn't. I don't understand how anyone can compare such different situations. Brandon wanted to be a prosecutor, judge and executionist. Well, that isn't justice. He commited a crime by threatening Royal personna and Aerys found him accountable for that. What he did, Brandon had no right to do, and even Ned admitted that his hastiness led him to his death.

I am sorry, but I honestly find this POV completely wrong. Instead of going to King and asking for justice, he shouted "come out and die". To see that as justice is to have no idea what justice means.

Who says Brandon didn't want to have a trial right there? Because we have 4 words, we know exactly what would have happened?

How about Rhaegar is there, walks down, and:

"Rhaegar Targaryen, you have kidnaped my sister, tell me where she is and I'll kill you quick" - The accusation, the judgment if guilty, and the possibility to hear Rhaegar out.

"She went willingly, just ask her". - The defense.

Is that realy that hard to imagin? Because we are told that he shouted for Rhaegar to come out and die, we know that he meant to murder him without trial? Did he shout "Rhaegar Targaryen, come out and die"? We don't know. We know "come out and die". We know it was meant for Rhaegar, but we have only a partial quote. Don't you think there might have been more then 4 words? It was known to be meant for Rhaegar, but it's not specified in the quote. That is the part of the quote that interested Aerys. He ignored Rhaegar's actions, and pretended that it was a murder threat, rather then a summons for a field trial in the yard.

And how can you not see how rediculus your logic is, when you deny Brandon's right to charge and trail Rhaegar, but Aerys can do exactly that when he arrests Brandon instead of asking "errm ,what do you mean, come out and die?". Aerys is the king, so he can arrest someone, accuse him, and find him guilty. Brandon cannot, as the representative of his family, when demanding justice for Rhaegar's kidnapping of his sister?

Catelyn is not in the North, she left Rodrik there. She took Tyrion in the Riverlands, and took him to the Vale, so that Tywin could not sent men after her. Brandon went after Rhaegar. He wants his sister back, and to punish Rhaegar. Pretending that Aerys locking him up for that is in any way shape or form lawful or just is to have no understanding of what those words mean.

And those that killed, raped, smashed the head of a baby should go unpunished? Come on... This is blatantly laughable logic.

Robert did wrong. Is it justification to continue the Targaryens' rule because of it? No. And that logic is laughable.

[Mladen]

Who says Brandon didn't want to have a trial right there? Because we have 4 words, we know exactly what would have happened?

How about Rhaegar is there, walks down, and:

"Rhaegar Targaryen, you have kidnaped my sister, tell me where she is and I'll kill you quick" - The accusation, the judgment if guilty, and the possibility to hear Rhaegar out.

"She went willingly, just ask her". - The defense.

Is that realy that hard to imagin? Because we are told that he shouted for Rhaegar to come out and die, we know that he meant to murder him without trial? Did he shout "Rhaegar Targaryen, come out and die"? We don't know. We know "come out and die". We know it was meant for Rhaegar, but we have only a partial quote. Don't you think there might have been more then 4 words? It was known to be meant for Rhaegar, but it's not specified in the quote. That is the part of the quote that interested Aerys. He ignored Rhaegar's actions, and pretended that it was a murder threat, rather then a summons for a field trial in the yard.

And how can you not see how rediculus your logic is, when you deny Brandon's right to charge and trail Rhaegar, but Aerys can do exactly that when he arrests Brandon instead of asking "errm ,what do you mean, come out and die?". Aerys is the king, so he can arrest someone, accuse him, and find him guilty. Brandon cannot, as the representative of his family, when demanding justice for Rhaegar's kidnapping of his sister?

Catelyn is not in the North, she left Rodrik there. She took Tyrion in the Riverlands, and took him to the Vale, so that Tywin could not sent men after her. Brandon went after Rhaegar. He wants his sister back, and to punish Rhaegar. Pretending that Aerys locking him up for that is in any way shape or form lawful or just is to have no understanding of what those words mean.

And finally, when we have no arguments, we go to fanfiction to invent some story. We know what Brandon said, what he shouted, we know that his own brother believes his death was consequence of his temper. Don't you think that Ned would actually say "my brother was killed unjustly", instead of "wolf-blood led him to his death". Was Aerys' doings justice? No, but neither were Brandon's. He should have known that there are ways to deal with the situation without provoking violence. He chose the worst way and he paid for it.

Brandon had right to ask Rhaegar about Lyanna, but he had no right to be prosecutor and the judge. And he wanted to be that. He didn't come and say "you kidnapped my sister, you should pay for your crimes", he said "come out and die". There is a big difference there...

Catelyn was appointed by Ned with Governership of the North, and she had right to imprison Tyrion in King's name so he could have trial. Brandon had no intentions of trial. It seems that you are unable to see the nuances in these two cases. After all, devil is in the detail. And Brandon's poor judgement is not justice, plain and simple. No matter how hard you try to present it as one.

Robert did wrong. Is it justification to continue the Targaryens' rule because of it? No. And that logic is laughable.

Who said about justification to continue Targaryen rule? The moment Robert failed to punish Clegane and Lorch, his entire quest became questionable. When he was pardoned them for the most henious crimes in RR, he gave green light to all those who called him Usurper. Instead of bringing peace, with one action, Robert clearly stated that justice was never his cause... And that is what truly matters...

[viking warrior]

Robb went south with 20k. With him went the mojority of Karstarks, Glovers, Mormonts, Umbers, Boltons' army, and good part of Manderly's. That leaves:

1. Other part of Manderly's army - around 5k

2. Northern clans - 3k

3, Skagosi clans - around 5k

4. Crannogmen - maximum 5k

5. Soldiers from different Houses - maximum 10k

All of this isn't more than 50 000 men, at best. And Moat Cailin wasn't immediately taken after Robb's campaign...

Thing is, we know, that victory wasn't piece of cake for the rebels, and that outcome wasn't certain. Yet, they fought for they believed there were no other way out of the mess Aerys created.

Northern clans are a little off imo, as for the other houses, two houses of the flints, Ryswells, Reeds, Dustins and Hornwoods. Remember that these lands lays several hundred kilometers to the south meaning better lands and more people summing these up should be more like 15k. And we also still see that the houses that has already contributed men still class up more. Anyway, we're clearly arguing about crumbs, no big 30k numbers here. as for Robb not gathering more men, he didn't have the authority that Ned had, he was a boy of 14, not exactly something to fear, those who didn't send soldiers did so because they didn't feel obligated to do so most probably.

[Mladen]

Northern clans are a little off imo, as for the other houses, two houses of the flints, Ryswells, Reeds, Dustins and Hornwoods. Remember that these lands lays several hundred kilometers to the south meaning better lands and more people summing these up should be more like 15k. And we also still see that the houses that has already contributed men still class up more. Anyway, we're clearly arguing about crumbs, no big 30k numbers here. as for Robb not gathering more men, he didn't have the authority that Ned had, he was a boy of 14, not exactly something to fear, those who didn't send soldiers did so because they didn't feel obligated to do so most probably.

Well, I doubt Northerners looked at it that way. After all, we know all of them came to Winterfell to pledge their alliegences to King Robb. I doubt Robb sent ravens to Nortern clans or Skagos, and we know about Howland staying at the Neck, and Manderly building a fleet. So, at that point, I believe Robb couldn't have get more soldiers... That didn't have anything with authority, for Ned was alive at that moment.

[viking warrior]

Well, I doubt Northerners looked at it that way. After all, we know all of them came to Winterfell to pledge their alliegences to King Robb. I doubt Robb sent ravens to Nortern clans or Skagos, and we know about Howland staying at the Neck, and Manderly building a fleet. So, at that point, I believe Robb couldn't have get more soldiers... That didn't have anything with authority, for Ned was alive at that moment.

The likes of the two Flints aswell as the Dustins and the Ryswells are not mentioned sending men I think, these 4 amounts to 15k atleast, it was Robb gathering the banners not Ned.

[Ned's Epic Beard]

And finally, when we have no arguments, we go to fanfiction to invent some story. We know what Brandon said, what he shouted, we know that his own brother believes his death was consequence of his temper. Don't you think that Ned would actually say "my brother was killed unjustly", instead of "wolf-blood led him to his death". Was Aerys' doings justice? No, but neither were Brandon's. He should have known that there are ways to deal with the situation without provoking violence. He chose the worst way and he paid for it.

You are a believer in R+L and yet you say that we should only believe what other people said about what brandon said? By that logic we should also conclude that Rheagar indeed kidnapped lyanna because Robert and bran said it so?

[Nyrhex]

And finally, when we have no arguments, we go to fanfiction to invent some story.

Exactly. If we have no idea what Brandon was going to do, we'll just go with Aerys' version of events. Because that is logical...

Like we go with the theory that Rhaegar and Lyanna eloped to marry, and that Jon Snow is actually thier legal son. Nope, not fanfiction at all.

FFS, at least Brandon had the legal right for what he did. Aerys arresting him for the wording, ignoring Rhaegar's actions in the process, and you pretending that Brandon said nothing else for the weeks he was there until his father arrived is just that - pretending, and fanfiction to invent a story that up to a certain point, anything at all of what the Targaryens did during the "Lyannagate" was somehow justified.

We know what Brandon said, what he shouted, we know that his own brother believes his death was consequence of his temper. Don't you think that Ned would actually say "my brother was killed unjustly", instead of "wolf-blood led him to his death". Was Aerys' doings justice? No, but neither were Brandon's. He should have known that there are ways to deal with the situation without provoking violence. He chose the worst way and he paid for it.

One option is to wait for a trial headed by Aerys, while Lyanna is in the hands of Rhaegar. The other, use your right to exact justice right there and then, and finish it swiftly, without involving the crown, and get your sister back ASAP. But you are right. Brandon should not have gone alone like that. He should have done like Mace and Robb and bring an army. He had more justification then either. All he had to do was return north, tell his father of what happened....

and wait for the next few weeks while his sister was held by Rhaegar. He acted so because he was thinking of his sister.

Who said about justification to continue Targaryen rule? The moment Robert failed to punish Clegane and Lorch, his entire quest became questionable. When he was pardoned them for the most henious crimes in RR, he gave green light to all those who called him Usurper. Instead of bringing peace, with one action, Robert clearly stated that justice was never his cause... And that is what truly matters...

His entire quest? Aerys demanded his head. Elia and her children could have been used to attempt a restoration of the Targaryens to power. That action was bringing peace. It was either that or sending them to the Watch or the Silent sisters. He pardoned them. He accepted that what they did was a crime, and then that it is not worth punishing. Aerys accepted that Brandon had no right, because he did not see Rhaegar's act as a crime at all.

[Mladen]

You are a believer in R+L and yet you say that we should only believe what other people said about what brandon said? By that logic we should also conclude that Rheagar indeed kidnapped lyanna because Robert and bran said it so?

The difference between two cases is that Jaime was in the Red keep at the time when Brandon came, and Bran wasn't even born at the time of Lyanna's abduction, and Robert knew so little about Lyanna to begin with. So, unlike Bran or Robert, Jaime is indeed more reliable source.

[Jon Snow's doggy]

I think there is a lot of "apples and oranges" going on on this discussion.

We do not try to explain the seasons by referencing Earth and its voyage around the Sun. As smart as the Citadel is (I assume they are good at math...), all they can come up with is post facto "Well, Winter is here!"

Nor is it useful to try to discuss dominant and recesive genes. (Baratheons ALWAYS produce black haired offspring? No exceptions?)

In short, ASIAF is subtly different from Earth.

As entertaining as this topic is, and I devoured it, I do not think that Augustinian or Thomist principles apply to Westeros. A "just war" is determined by who won. What moral or legal justification did the Targs have to Conquer Westeros? How many generations did it take to legitimize them? Did dragons legitimize them?

Henry IV was a Usurper. Did Henry V legitimize the new Lannister, err... Lancastrian dynasty? And did Henry VI then de-legitimize it? (To add applesauce to the orange juice.)

[Queen‍‍‍‍‍‍ Alysanne‍‍™]

I think the problem is we are basing "justice" only on the opinions of nobles, the commonfolk must also be taken into account.