Skip to main content

game of thrones - Was Robert's rebellion built on a lie?


In Season 7 Episode 7, The Dragon and the Wolf:



When Bran goes in his vision to see Rhaegar and Lyanna getting married he mentions that Robert's rebellion was built on a lie.



Per my understanding it was not. Robert and Starks were not aware about this. Ned only came to know (If Lyanna told him all) only in the end of the war and others were never aware.



Wouldn't it be more appropriate to say that his rebellion was built on a misunderstanding?



I know books have not gone that far but it will be fine if answer can provide context from the books.




Answer



Expanding on Edlothiad's answer, The War never was about Lyanna's abduction! I blame the singers for making out that it was fought as such because fighting for love is better for songs than fighting for your life.


See the timeline of these events.


Tourney of Harrenhal happened in 281 AC in which Rhaegar crowned Lyanna as Queen of Love and Beauty. When the Starks were on their way to Riverrun afterwards for Brandon's marriage, Rhaegar abducted Lyanna.


Brandon went to King's Landing to challenge Prince Rhaegar to "Come out and die". There he got himself imprisoned, the fool along with his friends Elbert Arryn, Jeffory Mallister, Kyle Royce and his squire Ethan Glover. Royal summons went to fathers of the captives, including but not exclusively, Rickard Stark.


Rickard travelled all the way to King's Landing as did fathers of the other captives. Aerys had them all killed (Except Ethan Glover).


How long do you think it took for them to travel? The captives and their fathers, all of them? Months presumably? Or at least Weeks?


Nobody raised any banners for Lyanna, nobody called their sworn swords. Everyone was just watching.


With all the prisoners executed, still no one lifted a finger. However we must note that we do not know how much time did pass between the execution of prisoners and Royal edict calling for deaths of Ned and Bobby B. It could be that they received the word from the same bird that brought the royal command for execution of the young Lords. Still, the realm did nothing in the months of prelude before the war broke out.


The factor which actually started the war was Aerys' orders to have the young Lords Robert and Eddard executed. That's when Jon Arryn called his banners. Not for rescuing Lyanna and returning her back to her betrothed, but to save the lives of his foster sons. This was the year 282 AC.



As you can see, if Robert's Rebellion was indeed built on rescuing Lyanna, why didn't it break out as soon as Lyanna was abducted? Or as soon as Brandon was arrested as the monarch didn't appear to be in the mood to legally return the abducted girl? Brave Lord Robert did nothing till then, remarkable for someone whose words are "Ours is the Fury", no Fury was seen at all. Brave Lord Eddard didn't either even though Winter had come for House Stark. Neither did the honorable Lord Jon Arryn whose words were "As High as Honor". Nor did Lord Hoster Tully who boasted "Family, Duty, Honor". The Silence of the Lions of the Rock who proudly carved "Hear me Roar" on their gates and sigil was deafening. Lord Reaver of Pyke was pretending he wasn't even there. There are your Rebels, such as they are, the Glorious Honorable Lords who supposedly fought against the grave injustice done to Poor Robert Baratheon when bad Dragonprince stole away his Wolf-love.


Robert's Rebellion was based on only one thing, which was the lives and safety of the Young Lords Stark and Baratheon. It was never about Lyanna even though Robert personally wanted Lyanna more than he wanted a crown. But since he never rose until the alternative was his death, We can assume that he wanted his life more than Lyanna.


So Robert's Rebellion wasn't based on a lie. It was based on a truth, the sole truth which is the survival instinct of every living thing. It's just that Bran has been fed the lies that it was to rescue Lyanna.


Comments

Popular posts from this blog

Was the "pure soul" of Harry's what had really hurt Voldemort?

In the Order of the Phoenix, Voldemort possesses Harry, and it hurts. Greatly. I think that Dumbledore explained that it was because Voldemort's rotten soul was incapable of assimilating Harry's pure soul, that Voldemort didn't understand the love and friendship etc that Harry has in his heart. But, I think it was a lie. Remember that in Deathly Hallows, while looking for information regarding Horcruxes, it is discovered that it is in fact possible to merge a soul fragment back, but that the process was extremely painful. Now then, if Voldemort tried to possess Harry, and Harry had a fragment of Voldemort's soul, I think that it could have been the true cause of Voldemort's pain: the fact of having his soul so close of another fragment. I think that Dumbledore knew that fact, but had to lie to Harry because it was inappropriate to let him know that he had one of Voldemort's soul fragments at the moment. Is that right? Or was it truly the pure soul of Harry's...

languages - Do we ever see written English in the Star Wars films?

In Empire Strikes Back , we see a transcription of what R2's beeps and bloops mean, but it's not English (sorry for the low quality, it's from the 2004 DVDs): I'd assume it's what Basic looks like when written, but is there some point in the the Star Wars films we see written English instead? (This sort of spun off from a discussion in How do people understand astromech droids? .) Answer At one point there was English but it has been phased out in subsequent versions of the films. Chris Gould at DVD Active did a comparison of all versions of each of the Star Wars films, and in his comparison of Episode 4 , there are a couple of screenshots showing how the power gauge for the Death Star tractor beam was changed. I imagine there are probably more to be found in his other comparisons but I haven't got around to reading those yet.

star wars - What "exactly" happens when someone turns to the Dark Side?

When I saw the original Star Wars saga as a kid, the concept of the Dark Side imprinted in me was quite simple. You did a bad thing, so you're a bad person so you go to the Dark Side and keep doing bad things. Now, obviously this doesn't hold true in reality. In my mind it is perfectly reasonable for Luke to kill the Emperor and Vader and then just flee the Death Star and rejoin the Alliance. After all they are at war, those are enemy officers that have captured him and are taunting him by threatening with death of all loved ones and the whole operation was intended to kill the Emperor anyway. The same would hold true for Anakin. He could have killed Mace Windu to save the Chancellor and Padme but that doesn't mean he's going to then go mad and kill all Jedis including children. It doesn't add up from a merely psychological point of view. He had a set of objectives and that made him want to keep the Chancellor alive (quite valid by the way, Mace Windu is quite clums...

star trek - Warning regarding forward saucer section in Nemesis?

In Star Trek: Nemesis , just before the Enterprise rams into the Scimitar, Picard sends a text message from his captain's chair arm pad to Troi — who is manning the helm in lieu of the crewman who was just blown out through what was once the view screen — indicating that she should put full impulse on standby. (Literally, if you watch the scene closely, Troi's console prefaces the order with "TXT MSG" !) My question is: Did Picard also somehow warn crew members in the forward saucer section about what was about to happen? The ramming of the Scimitar was a heat of the moment decision. Considering that he also resorted to calling the auto-destruct sequence shortly after (which ended up being offline), he probably was of the mindset that any losses would be acceptable in order to hault Shinzon's march to Earth. Still, I'm curious. Answer The original script indicates that he called for the crew to " brace for impact ". Whether that call (or the comma...