R+L=J v.137

[Alia of the knife]

His subconscious dream world has cast the three KG like literal white knights. Everything about them in this dream--the way they speak, their actions--scream "we are knights! we are KG!" That is how Ned remembers them. Yes, it's a fever dream. But we cannot dismiss how Ned recreated him in his head...especially when it's later backed up by other statements, like Jaime's words and his own remembrances and his own dreams. He doesn't remember the KG as standing in his way; Ned remembers them as having sworn to do their duty.

But is recalling them from the standpoint of admiration or regret?

And if it was regret, was it because he had to kill them for something they were doing right, or because they had fallen from grace?

I only say this because of the SSM from Martin regarding Daynes honor, and his answer was somewhat mysterious.

And then there is DS, who on the surface, you have to take his remarks about his cousin with a grain of salt, but this is Martin, so there could also be grains of truth.

[BearQueen87]

But is recalling them from the standpoint of admiration or regret?

And if it was regret, was it because he had to kill them for something they were doing right, or because they had fallen from grace?

I only say this because of the SSM from Martin regarding Daynes honor, and his answer was somewhat mysterious.

And then there is DS, who on the surface, you have to take his remarks about his cousin with a grain of salt, but this is Martin, so there could also be grains of truth.

Does it have to be one or the other?

I think it will later recall that Ned also tells Bran that the KG (with Dayne) were once a shinning example to the world. Now (without Dayne) they are. Something about the time of Dayne (and Hightower and Whent I think we can imply) was more noble and honorable. Especially since Bran remembers that Ned gets very sad after talking about this.

[sgtpimenta]

Didn't they say that because Rhaegar died before his dad?

Exactly. Even if the 3KG didn't knew about the Trident before, by the time Gerold said " Aerys would yet sit the Iron Throne" he already knew Rhaegar died without ever laying his ass on the Iron Throne. Being "Team Aerys" or "Team Rhaegar" has nothing to do with it.

[Ygrain]

That's a much better version of that phrase than "have your cake and eat it too." Yet somehow I'd never heard it that way before.

That's just me misremembering the idiom.

I don't think anyone thinks it was a meaningless inclusion. It's just that it shouldn't be taken as an actual record of the conversation. So analyzing it line by line and drawing conclusions based on the wording is a bit iffy.

You're confusing two things here - (fictional) events and writing. A piece of writing, especially like this one, can and should be analysed line by line, even word by word, and drawing conclusions is perfectly legitimate becacuse the way something is written conveys information to the reader, provided that they are able to grasp it.

[MtnLion]

Didn't they say that because Rhaegar died before his dad?

That is irrelevant. What is relevant is that Hightower is not opposed to Aerys sitting the Iron Throne and being the King of the Seven Kingdoms. He is not proposing that anyone would displace Aerys, at all, in fact he is restating his and the other's personal loyalty to Aerys. And, isn't it noteworthy that Aerys is dead?

[sgtpimenta]

That is irrelevant. What is relevant is that Hightower is not opposed to Aerys sitting the Iron Throne and being the King of the Seven Kingdoms. He is not proposing that anyone would displace Aerys, at all, in fact he is restating his and the other's personal loyalty to Aerys. And, isn't it noteworthy that Aerys is dead?

I don't understand how that is irrelevant. If Prince Rhaegar was killed before his father, any possible coup he could be planning died with him. There is no more Aerys X Rhaegar. There's only Targaryen X the Usurper.

Having said that, I'm not totally convinced that there was such plan, nor that Hightower was on Rhaegar's Team. Maybe Hightower, Dayne and Whent had each his own different reasons to be there.

[Ygrain]

I don't understand how that is irrelevant. If Prince Rhaegar was killed before his father, any possible coup he could be planning died with him. There is no more Aerys X Rhaegar. There's only Targaryen X the Usurper.

How so? They wanted to depose Aerys not because of Rhaegar's ambition but because he was mad. Say that Rhaegar died but the Targs won, would they just kept serving Aerys as if nothing ever happened?

[MtnLion]

I don't understand how that is irrelevant. If Prince Rhaegar was killed before his father, any possible coup he could be planning died with him. There is no more Aerys X Rhaegar. There's only Targaryen X the Usurper.

Having said that, I'm not totally convinced that there was such plan, nor that Hightower was on Rhaegar's Team. Maybe Hightower, Dayne and Whent had each his own different reasons to be there.

Be careful, you are starting to think critically. ;)

[sgtpimenta]

How so? They wanted to depose Aerys not because of Rhaegar's ambition but because he was mad. Say that Rhaegar died but the Targs won, would they just kept serving Aerys as if nothing ever happened?

Sure. What else could they do?

[MtnLion]

Sure. What else could they do?

The subtlety is that they did not want to depose Aerys, as they tell Ned.

Now, for reasons, consider:

• No one in King's Landing knew where Rhaegar was

After the Battle of the Bells Aerys was desperate for Rhaegar, so he tasks Hightower with locating him and returning him to King's Landing

After some period of time, it could have been months, Hightower finds Rhaegar and relays the command

Rhaegar, who never travels without his sworn shields (Whent and Dayne) leave

Hightower knowing that Lyanna was royal family is stuck at the tower, being the only Kingsguard available and Lyanna cannot travel

Rhaegar arrives nearby King's Landing cannot risk Aerys summoning Whent or Dayne and interrogating them about where, what and with whom Rhaegar had been, picks up the Kingsguard of Lewyn and/or Barristan tasking Whent and Dayne to return to the tower; perhaps by a very long route to avoid being followed or arriving too soon

Rhaegar dies at the Trident along with Lewyn and Jonothor (who had been present the night of Chelsted's roasting)

Aerys is slain by Jaime

Some time passes between events and arrival of the news at the tower. Jon is born between Chelsted's roasting and a fortnight after the fall of King's Landing. Jon's birth and the news of Aerys' death force the Kingsguard; Whent, Dayne, and Hightower; to remain at the tower until the situation is resolved. They hope that Lyanna will be well enough to travel before their secret location is discovered.

[IceFire125]

• Hightower knowing that Lyanna was royal family is stuck at the tower, being the only Kingsguard available and Lyanna cannot travel

Some time passes between events and arrival of the news at the tower. Jon is born between Chelsted's roasting and a fortnight after the fall of King's Landing. Jon's birth and the news of Aerys' death force the Kingsguard; Whent, Dayne, and Hightower; to remain at the tower until the situation is resolved. They hope that Lyanna will be well enough to travel before their secret location is discovered.

I would like to add, Hightower knew his place, even though he's the LC of the Kingsguard. He would not question Rhaegar regarding the validity of his marriage with Lyanna. I reckon, after Dayne and Whent return to the tower, there was a long conversation between the three. One of the topic was of course, where's the evidence that Rhaegar and Lyanna got married. In my opinion, this is the core point of contention to why he stayed until Ned arrived with his party.

If there was no proof that Rhaegar and Lyanna were married, upon hearing the death of Aerys. He would have right away saddle up and travel to Dragonstone, if he knew Viserys was there or attempt to go there. If not, he would still leave the tower and go search. He's bound knowing that after Aerys and Aegon's death, Viserys is the next in line to the throne. If there was no news regarding Aegon's death, he would still need to leave the tower and search for him. Regardless, there is nothing bounding him to the tower, Lyanna was a mistress, not royalty. He would try to command/encouraged Dayne and Whent to follow their oath to search with him, but if they refuse, Hightower would leave voluntarily or fight if Dayne and Whent would go against their oath to protect the next line (Viserys or Aegon-if no news of death).

However, from the text, I believe the evidence was enough for Hightower to not only have caused to stay at the tower, but to also stay until death to protect Jon, the true heir to the throne.

I would love it, if there was this scene, maybe towards the end of ADOS, that Jon on the back of a dragon, fly towards the red mountains of Dorne. Land to where the cairns are still standing and approach three cairns of noticeable difference to the others, to where he put the thoughts together in his head. That these are of Hightower, Dayne and Whent, the White Shadows to lay their lives for him in the early days of his life.

[addicted to snow]

You cannot keep your cake and eat it, too, you know.

That is such a funny statement seeing that I have seen you on more than one occasion argue that the dream dialog cannot be considered the actual dialog...

---

It's so funny that some of the regulars (but not all) here actually care nothing about being correct or even consistent, they only want to win arguments...

[sgtpimenta]

The subtlety is that they did not want to depose Aerys, as they tell Ned.

They don't. They say that they would kill a kingslayer before he could earn his nickname. But to depose is not to kill.

Alas, sometime all we can do is to agree in disagree. Till we have more data, all we can do is try to decipher what we have, and each of us have our own interpretations.

However, from the text, I believe the evidence was enough for Hightower to not only have caused to stay at the tower, but to also stay until death to protect Jon, the true heir to the throne.

They were defeated. And yet Jon is well and alive. Ned would never kill his own nephew, and Lyana knew that. If she was royal family, couldn't she command the Kingsguard and avoid their deaths?

[Ygrain]

They don't. They say that they would kill a kingslayer before he could earn his nickname. But to depose is not to kill.

"Would YET sit the throne" doesn't sound much like deposing.

They were defeated. And yet Jon is well and alive. Ned would never kill his own nephew, and Lyana knew that. If she was royal family, couldn't she command the Kingsguard and avoid their deaths?

Indeed, Ned wouldn't. What would Robert do, though, and Tywin, were they to find out that there is another son of Rhaegar's?

Lyanna's ability to command the KG had the same limitations as Rhaegar's - the duty to protect the king would have priority. Ned was honour-bound to act in the best interest of his new liege, Robert, and that would mean revealing Jon, and even if he could be persuaded to keep Jon's existence secret the way he did, he would never support Jon's claim as king.

[aquintus]

Ned would never kill his own nephew

The KG don't know this, and they can't afford to assume that he won't and be wrong. The fact is that they know that Ned was present during the sack while Rhaegar's other children were murdered. They don't know the extent of Ned's involvement those murders or his feelings towards them, and again, they can't afford to just take him on his word that he disagreed with the murders and be wrong.

, and Lyana knew that.

Did she?

"There was fear in her eyes, while she called for "Ned" to promise her something. When her brother gave his word, the fear left her. "

Why would she have fear in her eyes unless she believes that Ned might harm Jon (even if only indirectly by handing him over to Robert)?

If she was royal family, couldn't she command the Kingsguard and avoid their deaths?

She was in the Tower at the time, and the KG weren't. Even if she would have ordered them to let Ned through, she might not have been in position to do so. Not that it would matter, since it's already been established that their duty to protect the king supersedes their duty to follow orders, especially orders that are given to them by people other than the king. An order that would put the king in danger would likely be ignored.

[SnowShark]

What is the view on why no Westerosi question that Jon is Ned's? They accept that he would compromise his honour and father a bastard but not that he might be compromising it by lying? There is speculation about the mother (a Cat POV in ACOK talks of whispers in plural about Ashara) but it seems a little odd that no one in what is quite a "gossipy" society seems to have at least posited the idea that Jon is not Ned's and therefore considered Lyanna themselves because of the physical resemblance and well-known timings. Is claiming a bastard an act of such societal significance that it doesn't occur to anyone it might not be true, even when it's entirely out of character?

[ToTheWolves]

You don't know that...

I was asking not making a statement.

[Consigliere]

What is the view on why no Westerosi question that Jon is Ned's? They accept that he would compromise his honour and father a bastard but not that he might be compromising it by lying? There is speculation about the mother (a Cat POV in ACOK talks of whispers in plural about Ashara) but it seems a little odd that no one in what is quite a "gossipy" society seems to have at least posited the idea that Jon is not Ned's and therefore considered Lyanna themselves because of the physical resemblance and well-known timings. Is claiming a bastard an act of such societal significance that it doesn't occur to anyone it might not be true, even when it's entirely out of character?

The simple answer is that there was no reason to. As Catelyn notes, many men fathered bastards and she was not even surprised when she learned that Ned had fathered a bastard. The honourable Ned Stark forgetting his honour just once and fathering a bastard but instead of abandoning the child, like most others, he brings him home and raises him as a son is fitting and believable with what people know of Ned's character. Why would the honourable Ned claim a bastard as his own if it weren't true? Also, as LF mentions, it is considered rude to pry into the origins of a man's natural children.

It is also worth noting that we (readers) are privy to Ned's thoughts and thus have more information surrounding Lyanna's death i.e. dying in a "bed of blood", which allows us to make the connection. Furthermore, this was a war where momentous events tooks place: The Targaryen dynasty fell, a new king was proclaimed, many lords exiled/losing all or part of their lands, many great knights died, and no doubt many "war babies" were born. Far more to 'gossip' about than trying to figure out whether Ned Stark really fathered a bastard, especially when there is no reason to doubt his word.

[Ygrain]

The simple answer is that there was no reason to. As Catelyn notes, many men fathered bastards and she was not even surprised when she learned that Ned had fathered a bastard. The honourable Ned Stark forgetting his honour just once and fathering a bastard but instead of abandoning the child, like most others, he brings him home and raises him as a son is fitting and believable with what people know of Ned's character. Why would the honourable Ned claim a bastard as his own if it weren't true? Also, as LF mentions, it is considered rude to pry into the origins of a man's natural children.

It is also worth noting that we (readers) are privy to Ned's thoughts and thus have more information surrounding Lyanna's death i.e. dying in a "bed of blood", which allows us to make the connection. Furthermore, this was a war where momentous events tooks place: The Targaryen dynasty fell, a new king was proclaimed, many lords exiled/losing all or part of their lands, many great knights died, and no doubt many "war babies" were born. Far more to 'gossip' about than trying to figure out whether Ned Stark really fathered a bastard, especially when there is no reason to doubt his word.

I might also add a Stannis parallel - that people like to believe the worst about those more honourable than themselves. The honourable Ned having slipped is such a delicious gossip, after all.

[markg171]

The KG don't know this, and they can't afford to assume that he won't and be wrong. The fact is that they know that Ned was present during the sack while Rhaegar's other children were murdered. They don't know the extent of Ned's involvement those murders or his feelings towards them, and again, they can't afford to just take him on his word that he disagreed with the murders and be wrong.

Did she?

"There was fear in her eyes, while she called for "Ned" to promise her something. When her brother gave his word, the fear left her. "

Why would she have fear in her eyes unless she believes that Ned might harm Jon (even if only indirectly by handing him over to Robert)?

She was in the Tower at the time, and the KG weren't. Even if she would have ordered them to let Ned through, she might not have been in position to do so. Not that it would matter, since it's already been established that their duty to protect the king supersedes their duty to follow orders, especially orders that are given to them by people other than the king. An order that would put the king in danger would likely be ignored.

No it hasn't