Jump to content

Wildlings reaction to the betrayl of LC snow


cwwagner

Recommended Posts

i am definately not new to the forums but i am new to posting on here so bear with me.

Yesterday i finished my second reread of the series in my anticipation for TWOW. Something stuck out to me in the last Jon chapter that i felt like i had to post on here. As i said im not new to these forums especially the TWOW section, however i have not seen any topics regarding what is going to happen at the wall besides the ever so spammed "revival" of Jon. Obviously there is alot of talk of how Mel might revieve him in some fashion, or he will be living warged through ghost, however i dont want to focus on that thought right now, and rather i would like to focus on everything surrounding the daggers in the dark.

Prior to jon being stabbed, there is the gathering at shield hall where it is noted (and talked about a lot previously) that the wildlings out number both the NW and queens men roughly 5:1. In the hall jon declares that he will move south and in response to this he gets an overwhelming ovation from the wildlings, but nothing form NW or queens men.

With this previous thought in mind, i want you to think back to the wildlings walking through the wall in jons previous chapter, many of them showed him hateful looks, others thanked him, some swore an oath to the watch, but IMO most swore their oath soley to jon snow for his generosity to let them through the wall.

So this leaves me at a question, if jon is gone ( only if it is for a short time) what is going to happen between the wildlings and the queens men + NW?

The wildlings are going to see the man who let them through the wall to share their lands betrayed, and "murdered" plus its no secret amongst the wildlings that NW and queens men (besides a select few) do not want them there at all. So how will the wildlings react to this betrayl, how will the NW brothers react to losing the one man who had some sort of connection with the wildlings? IMO no one is safe and there could be some drastic consequences.

There are some things that i am leaving out, i have no doubt about that because i dont have my book in front of me, but im at work and couldnt get this off my mind, so i turn to all of you, and i hope that i can get some good thoughts/responses/theories out of this. If anyone knows of any previous threds regarding this topic please link that into the comments

Well you got to look at Jons Dream. He's standing on the wall telling people to feed the fire when he realises they all left him and yes i know he's in full black armour. So my prediction is this the wildlings kill all the men on the wall and due to Wun Wun killing the knight of the Queens Man i think a fight will occur with them as well now George clearly points out and wants us to see that the Wildlings out number the watch and Queens men. Now im on the theory Jon will be revived by Mel and when he wakes the watch is dead and Mel gives her life for Jon's. Tormound says he'll hold the wall and Jon heads to Winterfell meeting Stannis, Howland Reed and Rickon with Davos. Stannis marches off to take the dreadfort Jon finds out who he is by Howland and down in the Crypts and Rickon and Davos stay in Winterfell Davos taking a fatherly figure to the wild Rickon and teaches him to rule. Jon heads to the wall and when the eventual attack happens everyone flees or is too busy in the midst of everything to help and that sets the scene for the dream that Jon has

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Beginning of the end of the NW (ironically, given the whole "for the Watch" line)



It's a bit like Cersei nurturing the prosecution of Queen Margaery via the relevant religious authority, it is only then a short jump from Queen to Queen-Regent



In this case, having erstwhile 'honourable' brothers of the NW openly assassinating/murdering their LC in "honour of the watch" (as opposed to being 'conscript criminal' mutineers casting aside the NW vows and killing Mormont) has effectively shattered the sanctity of the office and the institution



Having the analogy of Caesar stabbed from all sides by his erstwhile Senatorial colleagues is a great analogy, as that is kinda viewed as the end-point of the Roman Republic



In this case the words "slippery slope" and "where does it end" come to mind, plus there is the notion that one faction at one castle/branch of the NW can do away with a LC whose policies they don't like and in the course of so doing defy the will of the entire NW at all of the branches



A big question of mine isn't so much what are the wildlings going to do (a totally different matter, my money is they will be more interested at descending on Winterfell where Mance is as a third protagonist at the Battle of Winterfell) or even what Melisandre of the Queens men are going to do, rather it is a case of what are the garrisons at Shadow Tower and Eastwatch by the Sea going to do, obviously we have to remember that Jon was something of a compromise or rather resolution candidate resolving a deep-seated split between Denys Mallister at ST and Cotter Pyke at Eeastwatch, they likely won't be impressed with the antics of the NW members at Castle Black, Alliser Thorne is on patrol, no one will ever trust Bowen Marsh again so personally I wonder if the watch will disintegrate into a three-way split if not quite open civil war



NW members at other castles may not have liked the policies, but they respected them, as we can tell from the letters even someone like Cottor Pyke was willing to help wildlings en masse in effect despite the horrendous conditions involved


Link to comment
Share on other sites

They hold children hostages, yes, but the question perhaps is if they have their knives to their throats right *now*. A lot can happen in a few minutes.



Ghost's Lunch ( :lol: ), I liked your post. Iirc, Pyke isn't at Eastwatch any more but went to Hardhome, so perhaps he's dead. The one taking his place didn't like Jon.


Link to comment
Share on other sites

I see that the assassination will have some profound impact on the Wall itself. This build up for the Others over 5 books tell me that they will breach the Wall somehow and the reaction to Jon Snow may be the trigger that ultimately allows them through.



I would not be surprised if most of the NW will be killed early in WoW, and if Jon died Mel bringing him back via the Lord of Light. In the end the Wall will be manned by Jon and his loyal wildling, but will be forced to abandon the Wall as the Others overwhelm them


Link to comment
Share on other sites

Speaking of the reaction of the Wildlings, I figure the sound of Ser Hornypants being vivisected by Wun Wun would have gotten the attention of that tower's celebrity guest, Val, and she's probably down the stairs and just about to come out the door as Jon is stabbed, so she'll probably grab Patrek's sword to defend the giant (Patrek no longer using it and being in no condition to object), and that should contribute mightly to the madness as well.


Link to comment
Share on other sites

Agreed. Only a couple POV characters in the near vicinity as well, which could shape the likelihood of the timing of the reveal and aftermath.



4 options with POV possibilities



1. Jon is dead and not to be revived - Jon cannot be POV, Melisandre can, no one else likely to be POV at the beginning of tWoW. If GRRM waited a while to reveal the truth (kinda likely a la Brienne), anyone could conceivably be the POV to reveal it.



2. Jon survived the attack - Jon could be POV, but unlikely as GRRM would not want to reveal Jon being alive by big bold letters on a chapter title like Jon 1 (could disguise it like "Ghost of Castle Black" or something similar). Mel could certainly be POV, or anyone else conceivably if they waited a while to reveal what happened.



3. Jon is in Ghost - a Chapter Title of "Ghost of Castle Black" has new meaning now doesn't it. POV still unlikely to be Jon. Melisandre or anyone else if they waited.



4. Melisandre or unknown reason why Jon is revived - Jon won't be POV as he is dead, and for reasons already stated. Melisandre could be POV during resurrection, but doubtful that GRRM would want us in her head as she does it. Later reveal could have basically any POV character.



The more I think about it, it looks like a later reveal, unless they use Melisandre (Mel has only been a POV once). Of course, there are the possibilities of a one time POV or new POV (although GRRM hinted at no new POVs as I understand), but this seem unlikely for this sort of thing.



There is of course the timeline issue of the Pink Letter coupled with the Winds of Winter Theon chapter. All together we have an interesting conundrum of timing issues for a reveal of whether Jon is alive and what happened at the mutiny.


Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • 2 weeks later...

I have a very crackpot theory of what is about to happen, :cool4: .



First of all I think the people behind the pink letter were Bowen Marsh & co. + the Karhold guy who was taken out of the ice cell and put in a dungeon (forgot his name) + Roose Bolton. I think Bowen Marsh & co. through their intermediary (the Karhold guy whom they could communicate with now that he was out of his ice cell) and Roose Bolton planned the letter.



The letter becoming public was the signal that they were to kill Jon. I think the wall stands as long as the NW is true to its vows and falls when they break them. Therefore, I think by conspiring with Roose Bolton they effectively broke their vows in addition to committing a great crime that of murdering the LC. I think the Wall has fallen and the extreme cold which Jon was feeling were the Others approaching. It always becomes very cold when the Others are around.



Therefore, effectively the irony is that those who were trying to protect the Wall ended up bringing it down.


Link to comment
Share on other sites

While this is largely a reiteration/extension of what sabrecmc posted, I feel it's worth repeating. This whole argument about whether Jon will "break his vows" is moot - because he already has in the strictest sense. He himself acknowledges this literally a page and a half before getting stabbed (911 in my HC) when he thinks, "No man can ever say I made my brothers break their vows. If this is oathbreaking [marching to Winterfell], the crime is mine and mine alone."

Earlier, and perhaps most importantly, when sending Val to find Tormund, Jon thinks about breaking his word to Stannis to keep 'our princess' at Castle Black (515):

"Val is no princess, though. I told him that half a hundred times. It was a feeble sort of evasion, a sad rag wrapped around his wounded word. His father would never have approved. I am the sword the guards the realm of men, Jon reminded himself, and in the end, that must be worth more than one man's honor."

Jon's ADWD story is him consistently putting (at least what he thinks) what is best for the realm above any vow or personal honor. This is the ASOIF version of doing what you think is right regardless of your own interests, which is the essence of all heroic characters in literature. I don't think there's anything wrong with it. Moreover, Jon even allows himself a personal indulgence in sending Mance to save Arya and arguably goading Slynt into being executed. I don't see anyone really questioning his ethics with the former despite the fact it has nothing to do with NW vows. As long as Jon continues to act in (again, at least what he believes is) the interest of the realm, I think his ethics are fine. He doesn't necessarily need to stay at the Wall to do so, especially since dude was headed for the Bastard Showdown anyway.

As for the original topic, this is what has bothered me after recently re-reading as well - why did Bowen chose then to assassinate Jon. Apparently he believed this was the best way in which to ensure support from the Queen's Men, but as others have mentioned they're hardly a formidable force and, as Jon is want to remind us, Bowen is all about numbers. He must recognize that his only chance of survival is a VERY swift getaway, although who he retreats to would probably be a tough decision. Not to mention, doing so would be betraying the NW vows you just killed your LC for not upholding. So yeah, Marsh's lack of pretty basic logical planning seems very out of character to me, but not really a big deal - who really gives a shit about Marsh's motives.

I give a shit about his motives. House Marsh isn't loyal to WF, but to House Dustin. Which again is run by Lady Dustin who's clearly loyal to House Ryswell. Bowen Marsh was a very keen supporter of Janos Slynt, whos been on LF's payroll for a long time to take command of the NW. But as soon as Jon won, and executed Slynt who was just moments ago Marshes favorite to win, Bowen Marsh suddenly had no problem following Jon's command. And then he started whining and complaining about LC Snows decisions, leading up to the point where he stabbed him to death. Over what is overall considered to be a fake letter. The only thing that supports the letter being written by Roose or Ramsay is the wax seal, which would be available to all the sneaky fellas in Winterfell (Including the HM, who says he's a good guy?)

Oh, and do note that when Bowen Marsh was in command following Mormonts death, and left ranging for the Bridge of Skulls, he left Stout in command. Who was considered a madman, instead of for example Jon. It just so happens that House Stout are also loyal to House Dustin. The north remembers, but that doesn't mean it's the Starks they're avenging.

I don't think Bowen Marsh' motives have anything to do with keeping vows to the watch, but rather upholding other promises and arrangements.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I give a shit about his motives. House Marsh isn't loyal to WF, but to House Dustin. Which again is run by Lady Dustin who's clearly loyal to House Ryswell. Bowen Marsh was a very keen supporter of Janos Slynt, whos been on LF's payroll for a long time to take command of the NW. But as soon as Jon won, and executed Slynt who was just moments ago Marshes favorite to win, Bowen Marsh suddenly had no problem following Jon's command. And then he started whining and complaining about LC Snows decisions, leading up to the point where he stabbed him to death. Over what is overall considered to be a fake letter. The only thing that supports the letter being written by Roose or Ramsay is the wax seal, which would be available to all the sneaky fellas in Winterfell (Including the HM, who says he's a good guy?)

Oh, and do note that when Bowen Marsh was in command following Mormonts death, and left ranging for the Bridge of Skulls, he left Stout in command. Who was considered a madman, instead of for example Jon. It just so happens that House Stout are also loyal to House Dustin. The north remembers, but that doesn't mean it's the Starks they're avenging.

I don't think Bowen Marsh' motives have anything to do with keeping vows to the watch, but rather upholding other promises and arrangements.

I agree with some of what you said, but I should point out that Jon was AWOL when Marsh left for the Bridge of Skulls, so it's not as if he could have appointed Jon for command even if he had been so inclined.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Howland Reed, that little sh*t... He did it!

Well, Bowen Marsh dislikes First Men culture. I've got a pet theory that he's from a cadet branch very far removed from the origin, living in andal-influenced lands. And hey, who are the neighbours of the Neck? House Frey, with a history of looking down on First Men in general and the Crannogmen in particular.

It fits GRRM method of operation. He likes to slip people connected to the Freys into doing unhonorable stuff. Chett, the squires from the tale about the KotLT...

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I have a very crackpot theory of what is about to happen, :cool4: .

First of all I think the people behind the pink letter were Bowen Marsh & co. + the Karhold guy who was taken out of the ice cell and put in a dungeon (forgot his name) + Roose Bolton. I think Bowen Marsh & co. through their intermediary (the Karhold guy whom they could communicate with now that he was out of his ice cell) and Roose Bolton planned the letter.

The letter becoming public was the signal that they were to kill Jon. I think the wall stands as long as the NW is true to its vows and falls when they break them. Therefore, I think by conspiring with Roose Bolton they effectively broke their vows in addition to committing a great crime that of murdering the LC. I think the Wall has fallen and the extreme cold which Jon was feeling were the Others approaching. It always becomes very cold when the Others are around.

Therefore, effectively the irony is that those who were trying to protect the Wall ended up bringing it down.

Not saying you are wrong because Marsh was always concerned about being viewed as an enemy to the crown. But if the plan was to kill Jon they could've waited till he left and killed on his way there. Killing him in front of everyone seems more spur of the moment and unplanned. I think this action puts an end to the Night Watch. It'll probably be replaced by multiple factions.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Knowing more about the timeline of the actual conspiracy would be interesting. I do not understand why they acted when they did instead of before the Wildlings were through the Wall. Is is possible that they have a plan for Wun wun and the rest? Otherwise it just seems like ahorrinle decision to kill Jon when they did.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • 11 months later...

While this is largely a reiteration/extension of what sabrecmc posted, I feel it's worth repeating.  This whole argument about whether Jon will "break his vows" is moot - because he already has in the strictest sense.  He himself acknowledges this literally a page and a half before getting stabbed (911 in my HC) when he thinks, "No man can ever say I made my brothers break their vows.  If this is oathbreaking [marching to Winterfell], the crime is mine and mine alone."  

 

Earlier, and perhaps most importantly, when sending Val to find Tormund, Jon thinks about breaking his word to Stannis to keep 'our princess' at Castle Black (515):

 

"Val is no princess, though.  I told him that half a hundred times.  It was a feeble sort of evasion, a sad rag wrapped around his wounded word.  His father would never have approved.  I am the sword the guards the realm of men, Jon reminded himself, and in the end, that must be worth more than one man's honor."

 

Jon's ADWD story is him consistently putting (at least what he thinks) what is best for the realm above any vow or personal honor.  This is the ASOIF version of doing what you think is right regardless of your own interests, which is the essence of all heroic characters in literature.  I don't think there's anything wrong with it.  Moreover, Jon even allows himself a personal indulgence in sending Mance to save Arya and arguably goading Slynt into being executed.  I don't see anyone really questioning his ethics with the former despite the fact it has nothing to do with NW vows.  As long as Jon continues to act in (again, at least what he believes is) the interest of the realm, I think his ethics are fine.  He doesn't necessarily need to stay at the Wall to do so, especially since dude was headed for the Bastard Showdown anyway.

 

As for the original topic, this is what has bothered me after recently re-reading as well - why did Bowen chose then to assassinate Jon.  Apparently he believed this was the best way in which to ensure support from the Queen's Men, but as others have mentioned they're hardly a formidable force and, as Jon is want to remind us, Bowen is all about numbers.  He must recognize that his only chance of survival is a VERY swift getaway, although who he retreats to would probably be a tough decision.  Not to mention, doing so would be betraying the NW vows you just killed your LC for not upholding.  So yeah, Marsh's lack of pretty basic logical planning seems very out of character to me, but not really a big deal - who really gives a shit about Marsh's motives

 

We have seen before that the letters which arrive at Castle Black not necessarily goes (first or at all) to the addressed man. The letter which said Slynt is the trusted friend (or something similar) of Tywin Lannister has to come from somewhere. The Pink Latter's wax was suspiciously smashed - maybe someone had read it beforehand. In one of Cercei's POV chapter she said Snow has to die or KL won't send more (what a joke!) help. Even if the planned 100 man and assassin didn't have the time to reach the Wall, the letter could have. I believe that the letter was send, and this is the main reason behind Jon's assassination. And we have seen Bowen's fear of Tywin. From Davos's chapter we got the info that Tywin's death haven't reached the Wall. This could mean Cercei made sure the letter is "terrifying" - we know this is the only thing Cercei is good at: making treats of daddy's power.    :box:

 

Bowen is totally terrified in my opinion:
1. Jon killed Slynt, Tywin's "friend".
2. Jon basically sent Thorne to die.
3. Jon let the gates open - for another invasion.
4. Jon helps Stannis.
5. Jon let the Free Folk through the gates.
6. Jon become their leader.
7. Jon goes to war against the Lannister-Bolton union.

8. Oh, and he is ungodly - he believes in the "demontreegods"

9. Jon waste the food supplies on wildlings. 
10. He is a monster - warg.

11. He let the unworthy man(?! Satin and co.) to grand positions.

etc... :bang:

 

Poor Jon, he couldn't be more unhealthy for the Night Watch. He is totally corrupt, man!   :lmao:  :P

 

Edit: spelling

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.

×
×
  • Create New...