Poor Stannis! and the Manderly Umber Coalition

[bemused]

Yes, poor Stannis .. sometimes it seems he's doomed to be either doing the right thing for the wrong reasons or the wrong thing for the right reasons.

I confess that I hadn't focused on the longships specifically ( good points), but I always thought that they would be included in the fleet.

So much of what Manderly tells Davos simply doesn't hold up under scrutiny. It's impossible that he would have no seamen at his disposal, being lord of White Harbour itself, and with a number of coastal holds and towns owing him fealty. He mentions Widow's Watch specifically, several times in his discussion with Davos. We first heard of Widow's Watch back when Bran hosted the harvest feast.. in the same chapter where we learned about Robb's orders re: the longships, and Manderly's proposal to build warships and mint northern coins... Later, we learn that Manderly ferries men and supplies up the White Knife to Rodrik Cassel when he moves against Dagmer Cleftjaw. I think all of these things will come up again as the story moves forward.

Next, Wex's story also has to be less than 100% true, as it's told to Davos. I find it hard to believe that he could trail Osha and Rickon halfway across Westeros without being discovered by them , what with Osha's woodsman's skills and Shaggy's senses. And it's equally hard to believe that with secret shipbuilding, etc. going on, the usurping of the Hornwood and Rorik Cassel's defeat, that Osha and Rickon would not have been observed and intercepted by Manderly/Umber men , as Bran was by the clans (watchers would be out).

So I think that rather than trying to somehow sneak them past Bolton or Karstark lands, they were escorted across to Widow's Watch and sent to Skagos by ship .. possibly at least the last leg of the journey by Umber longship. (At this point in the story , I don't think there is an all encompassing Northern Resistance.. but that will come.)

In ADWD, I think Manderly/Umber could actually get Rickon themselves handily, thanks very much, but they are keeping Davos out of the way. They don't want to execute him or imprison him indefinitely , but can't have him returning to Stannis just yet.

But by now, I think there is a co-ordinated Northern Resistance. I think the men swelling Stannis' numbers are being sent by their real leadership.. oh, they'll help Stannis, since he's the enemy of their enemy, but they don't actually want him to take Winterfell. They want to do that themselves.

However, I don't see a Northern force shivering out in the wolfswood. I think that , once more, men and supplies have been being ferried up the White Knife to House Cerwyn as a staging point (Why is Jonelle absent from the wedding host?), then on through a secret passage into the Winterfell crypts. They'll emerge and take WF from within before Stannis can arrive to put his "Trojan Horse" plan into effect.

Unlike most of the proponents of the GNC, I think there are many anomalies that are only explained by Benjen having come into contact with Bloodraven/CotF, having been reaquainted with the reasons for "There must always be a Stark in Winterfell", and having had the existence and workings of the secret entrance/exist revealed to him.

We've been told "Starks must rally the north" (Qhorin) and that the clans were unlikely to ever work together "without a Stark to lead them" (Deepwood maester to Asha)..and we've seen that to be true to an extent, of the other lords, as well. Robb ordered Manderly and Umber to work together, both of whom disliked or distrusted the other beforehand...Benjen has been the Stark in WF before, and they all know him.

We've now seen a number of castles that have hidden passages that lead to water ( a good way to come and go at need) ... e.g., Kings Landing, Storm's End (with Storms end also warded by magic) , Griffon's Roost and (I think Importantly) even the little holdfast that Arya & co escape from with the passage that leads to the shore of the God's Eye.

We've seen the Black Gate - an example of a point of entrance/ exit warded by magic, so that it can't be found or passed except by a specific sort of person who knows to look for it... Yet once such a person has found and opened it for them, other people can pass through.

There are tons of other clues , but I won't enumerate them all here.

What it means for Stannis remains to be seen. I some ways, Stannis has become less brittle and more bendy as the story has progressed... but at the same time, Mel has drained him to the point of danger. The throne he thinks he should sit may not even exist by the time he can get south, and in order to get south, he is going to have to agree to some form of autonomy for the north, whatever title The Stark is given, and whoever The Stark may be.

Jon (who is not dead and will not need resurrecting) has all but been called "king" by the free folk, how will Stannis adapt to that ?

OTOH, with Jon and through Jon, Stannis could have something else he's always craved, before there was ever a question of him being king ... friendship.

[Bold Barry Whitebeard]

Stannis should have remembered sooner that be a King mean be Protector of the Realm.

Where was Gondor Stannis was Eddard Stark was captured?

Where was Stannis when Jaime Lannister besieged Riverrun?

Robb Stark was here to protect his people, Stannis wasn't.

Stannis was at Dragonstone and he didn't even declare himself king.

No one knew he was the rightful King, no one knew the truth about the incest. As much as they knew Stannis could even decide to side with his nephew, King Joffrey.

Where was Robb Stark when the Night's Watch called for help? Where was Robb Stark when the Wildlings attacked, and the Others behind them? Off south dying for his Sothron ambitions.

The independent North is dead. The North cannot survive on its own with Winter/The Others coming. Maybe the Iron Throne will be broken at the end of the series, but in Winds of Winter the North will have to work with Stannis, as he is the only one who might bring Southern reinforcements to the North to fight the Others. Jon Snow as King of the North can't rally any support from the South. Nor can Rickon Stark. Right now, the only player who believes in the threat of the Others and has the potential influence to unite the south is Stannis.

[Ferocious Veldt Roarer]

Where was Robb Stark when the Night's Watch called for help? Where was Robb Stark when the Wildlings attacked, and the Others behind them? Off south dying for his Sothron ambitions.

Robb's southron ambitions?

I can't even...

Seriously, bro. For the sake of your argument, you're twisting the book material beyond recognition.

[Bold Barry Whitebeard]

Robb's southron ambitions?

I can't even...

Seriously, bro. For the sake of your argument, you're twisting the book material beyond recognition.

Ok, I was being a little facetious with that last part. But to suggest that Stannis has done nothing for the North as the poster I quoted was suggesting is wrong. Stannis is the one who came to aid the north against the wildlings and the others.

[titanx5]

So the North is just going to kill Stannis after he wins WF? Ja right. The North have absolute no reason to get rid of him, has he done anything wrong to them? No! Do they hate the Baratheons? No! They may not like him, but killing someone after he has helped you would make the Northern Houses look like the most dishonorable bunch houses in the 7k, which I doubt that they are. There is a big difference between killing someone and saying we dont want to go South again. Its Winter and dont think Stannis or any Northern troops are going to moving that much with the snow. Stannis is not declaring himself KotN or even acting ruler of the North.

The North and Stannis and the Norhtern Lords will be staying put and getting the North ready for the Others Invasion, and probably taking over the NW responsibilities, like manning the wall, taking control over some castles since the NW has become an absolute mess especially after ADWD. The GNC involving killing Stannis and declaring another KotN sounds more like some North fans wanting another KotN than actually looking at the situation at hand.

[AliceRose]

No offense, but I clearly remember Stannis and Renly talking about those letters, and Renly saying that Stannis has no proof of that, and Catelyn spending the night thinking about it.

I have to rewrite the discussion. I was answering the following statements:

Hrulj, on 20 Feb 2015 - 3:45 PM, said: And Robb had the duty to refuse such an offer. Stannis found Robb's mother with Renly, didnt he? She didnt go to Stannis. She went to Renly. He has shown where he stands.

Ser Pounce FTW, on 20 Feb 2015 - 3:59 PM, said: Catelyn went to Renly because he had already declared his intentions and she wanted to reason with him. Stannis had not yet done so. That is true

Hrulj, on 20 Feb 2015 - 4:43 PM, said: Stannis had done so. I just finished re-reading that part. Stannis send more than hundred of ravens and 100 knights to read proclamations everywhere.

Then you called Ser Pounce a troll, while you was wrong about the timeline.

Hrulj, on 20 Feb 2015 - 5:14 PM, said: And lords dont have any connection to their homes after war starts. They dont visit towns, villages and castles during the war either?

But tbh, I think you are just trolling, since you are ignoring the obvious.

AliceRose, on 20 Feb 2015 - 6:08 PM, said: Obvious is the fact that Catelyn decides to go to discuss with King Renly in chapter 7 of ACOK, Stannis send his letters in chapter 10 ACOK.

Catelyn had already gone when the letter arrived at Rivverun.

[~No One~]

So the North is just going to kill Stannis after he wins WF? Ja right. The North have absolute no reason to get rid of him, has he done anything wrong to them? No! Do they hate the Baratheons? No! They may not like him, but killing someone after he has helped you would make the Northern Houses look like the most dishonorable bunch houses in the 7k, which I doubt that they are. There is a big difference between killing someone and saying we dont want to go South again. Its Winter and dont think Stannis or any Northern troops are going to moving that much with the snow. Stannis is not declaring himself KotN or even acting ruler of the North.

The North and Stannis and the Norhtern Lords will be staying put and getting the North ready for the Others Invasion, and probably taking over the NW responsibilities, like manning the wall, taking control over some castles since the NW has become an absolute mess especially after ADWD. The GNC involving killing Stannis and declaring another KotN sounds more like some North fans wanting another KotN than actually looking at the situation at hand.

Unless the truth about his "involvement" in Robb's demise ever gets out. The North wants independence, and I fail to see Stan giving it to them. Maybe the War for the Dawn 2.0 will change all this. Who knows?

Plus, there haven't been many happy Stark-Baratheon alliances during these 5 books...let's take a moment to remember the direwolf stabbed with a stag's antler back in the 1990's.

[Bironic]

Unless the truth about his "involvement" in Robb's demise ever gets out. The North wants independence, and I fail to see Stan giving it to them. Maybe the War for the Dawn 2.0 will change all this. Who knows?

Plus, there haven't been many happy Stark-Baratheon alliances during these 5 books...let's take a moment to remember the direwolf stabbed with a stag's antler back in the 1990's.

Why do you think they want independence? Unlike the Ironborn or the dornish, the North (surprisingly imho) doesn't have a history of Rebellions/independence movements against the Iron Throne. And those who have seen how Robb's campaign failed will probably be less eager to support a new King in the North.

[AerionBrightflameII]

The only discrepancy's the North has ever really had with the Iron Throne to my knowledge was; The Hour Of The Wolf and The Giving of The New Gift. The North seems to care very little about what happens south of the Neck at least until The Starks married the Tullys.

The law of hospitality is sacred especially in the North and men from every house in the North most likely lost a Kinsman. I think if it means revenge for the RedWedding they will bend the knee to Stannis.

[Taemlyn Blackfyre]

First off, let's agree that there is a high degree of Rebellion going on in the North. Even if we can't agree on the GNC or how many players are involved or if Stannis is being used, we certainly can move forward with assumptions that the Boltons face significant double-crossing from prominent houses and that Stannis leads a cohort of Northern Lords until Roose and Ramsey can be removed.

But I think we need to go further back here. Not to the Targaryens because the Hour of the Wolf and other such mentions do not apply here (even if Stannis is part Targ). It is easy to forget that the Baratheon Storm Lords were fighting with Stark Loyalists against the Crown. Yes, the Vale and River Lords were part of that alliance, but they've not embraced Stannis as parts of the North have and they haven't exactly been given reason to do so. Robert looked to the North as his allies and the North, given a figurehead and reason for vengeance (Rickard and Brandon) replied in strength. Stannis has saved the Wall from being overwhelmed by Wildlings and crossed to treat with Northern Lords who are loyal to the Starks.

There are differences between Robert and Stannis, but the Vengeance here is just the same. Lannisters, not Targaryens this time, ordered the deaths of Eddard and Robb, plus death and imprisonment of Northlords and heirs. The fealty to Stannis has not lightly been given, but it won't lightly be taken away either. The Kingship, taken foolishly and after Ned's beheading, is not likely to factor much here so long as Stannis gains his goal of uniting the North under a Stark in Winterfell.

Killing off Stannis after doing away with the Boltons would mean severing the Stark alliance with the Riverlands and possibly with the Eyrie. I find it hard to believe that the Arryn Loyalists would side with any King in the North, as only the Blackfish left the Vale to fight in defence of Riverrun. The Riverlands themselves are dotted with conflicting loyalties, to the North, West, South and even to the Targaryens. No King in the North would ever try again to be Overlord of the Riverlands because they have historically been vulnerable to each of the 7Ks except Highgarden and Dorne.

The saving grace for us all is that the final two books (which I think will be five, but that is another thread) ought to be less about laying trails, true and false, yet more about weaving a finale that will still lead to conjecture and at the same time wrap things up nicely. Stannis will be thereabouts, but without a viable heir, he isn't future-proof. Therefore, an alliance will be the likely outcome.

[Bironic]

Killing off Stannis after doing away with the Boltons would mean severing the Stark alliance with the Riverlands and possibly with the Eyrie. I find it hard to believe that the Arryn Loyalists would side with any King in the North, as only the Blackfish left the Vale to fight in defence of Riverrun. The Riverlands themselves are dotted with conflicting loyalties, to the North, West, South and even to the Targaryens. No King in the North would ever try again to be Overlord of the Riverlands because they have historically been vulnerable to each of the 7Ks except Highgarden and Dorne.

While I (partiallly) agree with most of your arguments, but I don't see why the Riverlanders or the Valemen should care about Stannis. Stannis has never done them any good. And the current "government" in both regions is against Stannis (LF in the Vale, Frey-Lannister-Tarly in the Riverlands).

The Riverlands are also easy to conquer from the south (Highgarden). They share no borders with Dorne and the Stormlands.

[bemused]

Why do you think they want independence? Unlike the Ironborn or the dornish, the North (surprisingly imho) doesn't have a history of Rebellions/independence movements against the Iron Throne. And those who have seen how Robb's campaign failed will probably be less eager to support a new King in the North.

The north wants autonomy. Independence would suit the northern lords best, I think. When we reach the "end" , it may be that X number of kings (say, 3-5 , not dozens) under a high king might be best.. unless of course the Others are utterly defeated, with no way to ever make a comeback. ...I'm just thinking out loud, here , but ..

I have a strong feeling that it was a grave error for Torrhen to bend the knee to Aegon, and that his dissenting son was right, in terms of what would be best in the long run. However , neither Torrhen nor Aegon had an inkling that the Others would be back in 300 yrs.... and that it might be better for the health of the NW (and potentially everyone else), if there were 7 kings each feeling he had an individual agreement with the NW to live up to, rather than have KL alone being responsible for seeing that they lived up to it, among all the crown's other concerns . I think the conquest made it easier to let things slide.

The resulting consequences were also bad for The New Gift.. It could only work as planned if things did not slide . When it was given, the NW had probably ten times it's current strength. Over time, as the NW declined ,wildling raids would increase, making life less stable for any tenant farmers, etc.

I think it's pretty obvious that the Northern Lords do want a new King in the North - in fact, if not in name. Everyone except the Boltons wants it to be a Stark .. Roose wants it to be himself.

Aside : I don't know to what degree Roose is steeped in sorcery.. and wonder what (if anything) it will turn out to mean that, at the wedding, Ramsay asks, "Who comes before the god?" , while Theon's response says that the bride comes seeking the blessings of the gods on her marriage... do the Boltons have some other religious affiliation?

[Joe Pine]

The only discrepancy's the North has ever really had with the Iron Throne to my knowledge was; The Hour Of The Wolf and The Giving of The New Gift. The North seems to care very little about what happens south of the Neck at least until The Starks married the Tullys.

The law of hospitality is sacred especially in the North and men from every house in the North most likely lost a Kinsman. I think if it means revenge for the RedWedding they will bend the knee to Stannis.

Good post. I agree, I think revenge on the Freys and a sacking of The Twins will be on the minds of many Houses in the north. Stannis serves as an opportunity, a figurehead to gather, an experienced commander, but he's not 'their king', it might be an uneasy alliance of interests to get Winterfell and deal with the Boltons, but it would work.

For any revenge on the Freys passing Moat Caitlin, the neck and the Crannogmen, might see an interesting twist or two added to the 'Kill the Freys' parties minds.

[Tijgy]

Why would Eddards capture concern him?

Maybe because Ned died because he was supporting Stannis' claim? Where was Stannis during Got? Sitting in dragonstone while he already knew about Joffrey's real father?

And he did nothing openly to support his own claim.

Stannis had done so. I just finished re-reading that part. Stannis send more than hundred of ravens and 100 knights to read proclamations everywhere.

They wanted independence. They chose a Stark. They failed. It is not his ambition to win the throne. Its his duty. Stannis hopes that human decency exists.

I think you got your timeline wrong.

Robb and his banner man went south before he knew somebody was challenging Joffrey's claim.

During the war council, he was named King in the North because they would never bow to Joffrey (and Cersei). They still didn't know Joffrey was a bastard.

And they only knew about Renly's claim. Robb refused to support this claim because Stannis was the older brother. Stannis never had not yet proclaimed his claim. If he had did it sooner, Robb would maybe have supported Stannis. But Stannis was too late.

[~No One~]

Why do you think they want independence? Unlike the Ironborn or the dornish, the North (surprisingly imho) doesn't have a history of Rebellions/independence movements against the Iron Throne. And those who have seen how Robb's campaign failed will probably be less eager to support a new King in the North.

Sorry for not replying earlier, haven't been around for awhile.

My opinion is based on the fact that they declared independence. Yes, their King died, but afaik, they haven't changed their minds. It isn't written either way what their current ambitions are, explicitly, although regardless of whether or not you believe in the GNC, something is going on up North.

I'm assuming it's a fight for independence, because if you try something once, fail, then quit...well, then, you suck. If that's the case, I'll be rethinking my preference for the North. :P

[Bastetcat]

He was in full right to do that. Robb was the enemy who wanted to take half the kingdom away. Yet he doesnt hold that against the entire family and seeks to put them back in powerr

 

The North wouldn't have named a different king, Stannis would step up in TIME. He was sulking in silence in Dragonstone, and realized he should be doing something after there was a king at every corner of Westeros. Ned acknowledged Stannis's right, and Robb did also. But Stannis was sleeping in an island, and acted to late. That were big problems which needed to be solved, and Stannis didn't do anything.  When he realized he is the king, there was 3 kings already. So Umber was right when he sad they need someone who helps the north, rule the north the way they need it. No southern lord or king had done this before. They want the north to pay the taxes, but anytime the north wants(needs!) something the southern kill they lords.
So: my opinion is this: Stannis was late.
If you like: "The late Lord Fray King Stannis" 

[Curled Finger]

Admittedly I have changed my tune about Stannis a great deal since my first read.  It was much simpler when he was just a jerk with no redeeming qualities.   Stannis' departure from Mel allows him to make more wholly Stannis decisions.   She influences him to pay homage to her Red God which never fails to make people afraid and disgusted.  Stannis does much better in touch with his Baratheonness rather than his Azor Ahainess and I think this is because he can identify with conquer and rule far more easily than being the savior of humanity.   I see more of the determined, clever, intelligent commander Stannis in the Theon sample chapter than has been present in several books.  He is thinking ahead. He can't possibly be thick enough to trust any of the Northmen.   Make no mistake, Stannis is a self serving opportunist.   This isn't necessarily a bad thing in all circumstances.   He is aware of intelligence he isn't getting.   It seems likely that Winterfel will fall to someone already inside, but there is no reason to discount the importance of his campaign enroute.   As to the North, their independence is paramount until the White Walkers come, then it may be to their advantage to have a strong alliance with a Southern "King".  Perhaps prior to that Stannis may presented with an opportunity to command that Manderly or Umber Fleet against the Iron Born.   And they may decide his Red Witch killed Jon if Rickon doesn't show up.  There are so many possibilities at this juncture. 

[MorgulisMaximus]

“Stannis is pure iron, black and hard and strong, yes, but brittle, the way iron gets. He'll break before he bends.”

Stannis lacks the flexibility needed to survive the Game of Thrones. That is why Melissandre is so important to him. She has no problem doing the dirty work he can't bring himself to do.

But Stannis is now stuck three days from Winterfell with a starving army and without Melissandre. A flexible military commander would accept reality and flee north to Castle Black (as some of his advisors suggested). But Stannis is inflexible and is determined to stay and fight. When Napoleon's Grand Army was decimated by the Russian winter and the Cossacks what did he do? He abandoned his dying army, fled to Paris... and survived to fight another day. Napoleon was always flexible and opportunistic. Stannis is rigid and brittle and he is destined to break and die on the battlefield against the Boltons. 

Without divine intervention (which is always a possibility), the odds of defeating the Boltons are likely insurmountable. First he needs to defeat the Frey war party. Then Ramsay will launch a furious Ramsay-style attack. If somehow he miraculously survives Ramsay, his army will be depleted. There will be death, dissertions, even more cannabalism and possibly open revolt. And he still needs to march three days to Winterfell, scale the 80-foot walls while being attacked by rocks, arrows and scalding oil. Then he needs to fight Roose Bolton forces which are now many times the size of his remaining forces, better fed and better rested. Realistically,without the advantage of surprise, Medieval siege warfare requires an attacking force many times the size of the defending force. Stannis has no chance of prevailing... 

Theon will escape with Asha from the doom of Stannis. They will return to the Iron Isles to face Euron Crows Eye.

 

[Ser Biscuit]

If the North betrays Stannis then I will become a Walder Frey supporter since his actions would have been 100% correct in ridding Westeros of Northern Lords.

For the very fact that the Wall was saved - the North owes Stannis. That Stannis left the Wall to go liberate Winterfell is a cherry on top. The Starks are currently the most decimated major House in the realm, and completely are dependent on outsiders. The Starks/the North are not in any position to back stab anybody after all they've been through. Robb Stark easily had one of if not THE worst reign of any Northern King ever, and by sheer luck that had nothing to do with him his siblings remain alive currently. The North should be kissing Stannis' feet, not plotting against him.

According to the North the reason why independence was declared was in defiance to the Lannisters. If that was the real reason, then there should be no reason why they shouldn't take Stannis as their King, which would still be in defiance to the Lannisters and also lawful since he is Robert's brother and legitimate heir. But if they insist that only a Stark can be King of them then it would make the reasoning they gave before Robb went South nothing but a lie/excuse for them to crown themselves. And it would make Robb an even bigger traitor than what he appears. And an disingenuous one at that.

The North should not make the same mistake Robb did. Robb should have declared for Stannis, and he should sent someone smarter as his ambassador, not his mother. Catelyn showed no interest in treating with Stannis. And even when Renly died she fled the scene rather than immediately going to Stannis. Everything she did toward Stannis was insulting to his position as the lawful King. Don't make the same mistake in spurning Stannis, Northern Lords.

And as an aside, the idea that Davos would be at odds with/may forsake Stannis over some seven year old Stark is completely laughable. There is no way in hell that Davos will choose Rickon or any Stark over Stannis. Stannis is his man through and through, bones to bones. Davos already has children and even his own children couldn't turn him against Stannis, but Rickon is some amazingly special kid that will? Get out of here. If Manderly goes back on his word, Davos would hate him and the rest of the North just as much as Stannis will.

[bemused]

Quote

If the North betrays Stannis 

You can't really betray a king you haven't fully accepted, or formally sworn fealty to... but if you mean turning on Stannis outside WF and fighting against him, I don't think that's their intention at all. I think they're perfectly willing to ally with Stannis , just not willing to remain subjects of  whoever rules from King's Landing.

I think they intend to take WF from within before Stannis gets there, so that it will be in Northern hands, and Stannis won't be free to bestow it on anyone of his choosing. That doesn't mean they won't give him any aid.

12 hours ago, Ser Biscuit said:

According to the North the reason why independence was declared was in defiance to the Lannisters. If that was the real reason, then there should be no reason why they shouldn't take Stannis as their King, which would still be in defiance to the Lannisters and also lawful since he is Robert's brother and legitimate heir. But if they insist that only a Stark can be King of them then it would make the reasoning they gave before Robb went South nothing but a lie/excuse for them to crown themselves. And it would make Robb an even bigger traitor than what he appears. And an disingenuous one at that.

The real reason is given by the Greatjon a little way into his speech... “Why shouldn’t we rule ourselves again? It was the dragons we married, and the dragons are all dead!”

Torrhen knelt to Aegon (the dragons) only because he had real dragons, that had already caused much destruction .. and it was a negotiated agreement (much like a marriage contract).

"Traitor"  is used very freely by some characters (and many posters), but it's really a very complicated matter, and entirely debatable in the current political situation.