Jump to content

Are Jon's Vows Fulfilled?


Chris Mormont

Recommended Posts

24 minutes ago, Chris Mormont said:

If Jon is resurrected by Melisandre like Beric Dondarrion then are his vows with the Nights Watch fulfilled?  Can he leave without losing honor or being a deserter?

 

Without losing honor, no. He will clearly still be alive at one point, so regardless of wall magic and legal agreements, He will have abandoned his post. He'll sacrifice his honor for the good of other people though, the same as Ned would do.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I don't think a temporary "death" is going to get him out of his vows.  GRRM is not the type to be giving out free passes like that.  He will be still alive, so he would be breaking his vows if he does leave.  While he might leave eventually, I think he will hang around for a while longer.  And when he does leave, it will be because he believes that he can more effectively "guard the realms of men" outside the NW than inside it.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

He is definitely not staying in the NW. Considering the title of the next episode is "oathbreaker" I am assuming there are some who will not be ok with this. I also seem to remember Bloodraven was once a man of the NW and he was able to leave, so maybe it won't be universally disliked.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 hours ago, CJ McLannister said:

When Coldhands leads Sam through the hidden gate, the vows are shown to mean more than just a legal promise to stay at the Wall.

But Coldhands didn't lead Sam through the gate.  Coldhands led Sam to the gate and Sam, as a sworn member, was able to open it.  Sam also had to open it so that Bran's party could pass through.  I assumed that Coldhands couldn't pass the wall because the wall is warded against the dead.  Could I be wrong and the reason Coldhands couldn't open the gate was because, being dead, his watch had ended and he was no longer a member of the NW?

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

To quote myself from an earlier thread...

Night gathers, and now my watch begins. It shall not end until my death...I pledge my life and honor to the Night's Watch, for this night and all the nights to come.

If Jon is resurrected, he is not dead anymore. Therefore, his watch is not over. He will break his oath if he leaves permanently. "Nights to come" means "all nights in the future".

Sure, some might think those rules doesn´t mean much and should be broken for the greater good, yada, yada. That doesn´t make them any less broken. I mean - how will you convince the great lords about this? That Jons resurrection somehow should able him to leave the watch without lost honor or consequences? I would like to hear that speech.

This, in short, is bad fanfiction. GRRM won´t make it this easy for him. Nor will he hand Daenerys the Iron throne on a silver platter. It simply doesn´t work like that.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

12 minutes ago, Protagoras said:

To quote myself from an earlier thread...

Night gathers, and now my watch begins.It shall not end until my death...I pledge my life and honor to the Night's Watch, for this night and all the nights to come.

If Jon is resurrected, he is not dead anymore. Therefore, his watch is not over. He will break his oath if he leaves permanently. "Nights to come" means "all nights in the future".

Sure, some might think those rules doesn´t mean much and should be broken for the greater good, yada, yada. That doesn´t make them any less broken. I mean - how will you convince the great lords about this? That Jons resurrection somehow should able him to leave the watch without lost honor or consequences? I would like to hear that speech.

This, in short, is bad fanfiction. GRRM won´t make it this easy for him. Nor will he hand Daenerys the Iron throne on a silver platter. It simply doesn´t work like that.

This is wrong, the first part "It shall not end until my death" is stating when the oath is fulfilled/ends then there is visual separation between this part and the second part. The second part "I pledge my life and honor to the Night's Watch, for this night and all the nights to come" is talking about where this oath holds within the life/time of the first part. This means when Jon dies his oaths will have been fulfilled any new life he gains after death will not be bound by the oaths of the old one. Also  a reason the NW oaths end at death could be to prevent the undead from using NW related thing such as the black gate.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

This reminds me of Futurama actually "you are technically correct...the best kind of correct!"

Technically yea his vows are fulfilled. Should and will the NW have a problem with it? Yes. 

Fortunately, (and a credit to the Snowflake) Jon's not the type of person who would think/bring up this loophole. Someone might use it as a means to get Jon out but I highly doubt it will stem from Jon.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

It always seemed like a very weasle-ish technicality to me if this logic was used to justify Jon taking an inheritance or leaving the watch.
It's a matter of judgement, but in my eyes, if he lives, he's beholden to his oaths

Link to comment
Share on other sites

It depends on who you ask: for people who are at the Wall and who will witness his rebirth, his "watch is officially ended". For northern nobility who are not at the Wall and therefore will not believe the story of his death and resurrection - he is an oathbreaking deserter and Ned Stark's bastard who allied himself with hated wildlings and a witch of foreign religion and who marches on south to usurp Rickon's place as Robb Stark's heir and Lord of Winterfell - I believe by that time Stannis will defeat Boltons, and Davos will bring Rickon to Lord Manderly, after which Onion Knight will go to the Wall to fetch king's family and get involved in Jon's resurrection storyline while Stannis sails with Manderly fleet captained by Asha Greyjoy and northern soldiers to take Dragonstone, and then King's Landing.

Jon will not give two figs about what people think of his decisions and continue to fulfill his vows of Night's Watch - just not in the capacity of Lord Commander. He understands that in order to protect the realms best way possible (the North in particular) he needs real political power. And the people in the North will only follow Lord Stark of Winterfell. Thankfully, he has Stark blood but he needs to become Lord of Winterfell or Lord Regent of Winterfell in Rickon's name if he wishes to order northerners to go to the Wall and guard nineteen castles of Night's Watch. Of course, Lord Manderly will refuse to give away Rickon to Jon for the reasons stated above, and for the fact that Lord Manderly will practically rule the North in all but the name.

So yeah, that is what I believe his arc to be in Winds and whether his vows are "broken" depends on who you ask, IMO.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I think it mainly depends on if you are someone who believes in the letter of the law or the spirit of the law. 

Letter of the law - Jon died, his watch has ended.

Spirit of the law - Jon isn't dead anymore, watch is still going.

Also Jon wouldn't be stealing Bran or Rickon's inheritance, if you remember, Robb legitimatized Jon and made him his heir before the Red Wedding.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 hours ago, The Fresh PtwP said:

This reminds me of Futurama actually "you are technically correct...the best kind of correct!"

Technically yea his vows are fulfilled. Should and will the NW have a problem with it? Yes. 

Fortunately, (and a credit to the Snowflake) Jon's not the type of person who would think/bring up this loophole. Someone might use it as a means to get Jon out but I highly doubt it will stem from Jon.

I could see Bowen Marsh rising to grade 1 bureaucrat and he would then really love to point out this technicality. That is if he can manage to maintain his head long enough

Link to comment
Share on other sites

11 hours ago, Drogo_1 said:

He is definitely not staying in the NW. Considering the title of the next episode is "oathbreaker" I am assuming there are some who will not be ok with this. I also seem to remember Bloodraven was once a man of the NW and he was able to leave, so maybe it won't be universally disliked.

Bloodraven wasn't allowed to leave though, he disappeared. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Archived

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

×
×
  • Create New...