Jump to content

Some Questions About Knight of the Laughing Tree


MTGAP

Recommended Posts

Having worked through this thread, I thought I would return to the business of Lyanna rescuing Howland from the squires.

I have to agree that it is unlikely that the squires fought back seriously. In a feudal society, if Lyanna gets significantly hurt, her family are going to have to avenge it, whatever they might privately think about her behaviour. (Imagine Brandon's likely reaction for example.) This will have been self evident to the squires.

However we can still draw some conclusions:

Firstly, Lyanna was forbidden to wear a sword, yet here she is apparently carting round a tourney sword. That hints at her being a rebellious type who pushes at the limits of allowable behaviour.

Secondly, the fact that she laid into the squires with the sword implies at least a certain minimal level of proficiency with them. Which in turn hints that she might also have some proficiency with other weapons.

Thirdly, and to my mind most importantly, her reaction to the situation was not orthodox. The "correct" behaviour of a young lady would surely be to order the squires to desist and to give them a verbal dressing down, backed up by the implied threat of the enmity of House Stark and a possible challenge by Brandon (to their knights). I am sure that this is how Margaery would have handled such a situation for example (substituting Tyrell for Stark and Loras or Garlan for Brandon). Instead though, Lyanna's reaction is to solve the problem unsupported, and to do so by physically attacking those responsible. I think that this is the most revealing insight we have into her character.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

"Lyanna had a touch of it, and Brandon more than a touch. It led them both to an early grave."

Brilliant! This indeed shows that Ned didn't see Lyanna as a passive victim. She somehow actively contributed to the circumstances leading to her death from his POV.

I also think that this

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nadezhda_Durova

might be interesting in the light of all the arguments whether Lyanna would have been able to handle herself in a fight. May have even been Martin's inspiration for her and Arya.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Another point, which I'm not claiming to be evidence per se (and which over time it seems somewhat apparent that perhaps only I care about to begin with) is the full text of Ned describing the wolf's blood in Brandon and Lyanna (emphasis mine):

"Lyanna had a touch of it, and Brandon more than a touch. It led them both to an early grave."

This, to me, seems to be one of the few, if not the only, slip-up that Ned makes regarding Lyanna's fate in the entirety of aGoT. It's one thing to say that Lyanna had some wildness in her. It's a statement that Ned believes that Lyanna did something actively (and involving wildness) that ultimately led to her death.

It's obvious how Brandon's wolf's blood led to his death - riding down to King's Landing and demanding for Rhaegar to "come out and die" was obviously the act of a hothead. But Lyanna?

Sorry I'm so late in responding. :)

It should come as no surprise that I've got an explanation that I feel addresses this point and it's not the first time I've used it. :P

After the events of the tourney at Harenhall it could be that the Starks were nervous for Lyanna. Rhaegar's outlandish antics obviously made many people uncomfortable. I believe that Lyanna's brothers wanted her to return to Winterfell for her own safety but she refused. Now, seeing as she wasn't about to return home they probably made her accept a guard as a compromise. Kind of like Robb at the Whispering Wood where he wouldn't stay out of the battle but was "convinced" to have a guard. So I think that Lyanna, being a bit headstrong and defiant probably felt it was all nonsense and went riding one day either without her guard or with too few of them. That's when Rhaegar abducts her which eventually led to her untimely death and because of this Ned thinks her wilfull actions, her "wolfblood", led her to an early grave.

When I've brought this point up before, it's usually been in R+L=J threads to point out one instance where Ned provides a point of information that seems contrary to the "official" story of what happened between Rhaegar and Lyanna that (for some reason) doesn't seem to get a lot of airtime on the boards.

Obviously, if we take it as a slip-up, it could easily mean that Ned believes that Lyanna, say, ran off with Rhaegar instead of being kidnapped. One could no doubt come up with other possibilities as well.

But it seems even more relevant if Lyanna = KotLT. Running off with someone can be the action of a romantic, and isn't necessarily the sort of thing that is construed with hotheadedness. Entering into the largest tournament in recent memory as a mystery knight and causing a public spectacle would certainliy qualify, and can, of course, be tied to Lyanna's eventual death, o f all of which Ned would be quite aware. In this light, Ned's remark makes perfect sense.

I've usually written my alternate explanation in the R + L = J threads as well, but I've long since tired of arguing against that theory. It seems once people get an idea in their head there's no changing there minds. :P

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Having worked through this thread, I thought I would return to the business of Lyanna rescuing Howland from the squires.

I have to agree that it is unlikely that the squires fought back seriously. In a feudal society, if Lyanna gets significantly hurt, her family are going to have to avenge it, whatever they might privately think about her behaviour. (Imagine Brandon's likely reaction for example.) This will have been self evident to the squires.

However we can still draw some conclusions:

Firstly, Lyanna was forbidden to wear a sword, yet here she is apparently carting round a tourney sword. That hints at her being a rebellious type who pushes at the limits of allowable behaviour.

I never felt that passage suggested that she was wearing a sword. No doubt there were lots of tents and pavillions set up with lots of tourney swords laying around. It would have been easy for her to grab one once she saw what was happening.

Secondly, the fact that she laid into the squires with the sword implies at least a certain minimal level of proficiency with them. Which in turn hints that she might also have some proficiency with other weapons.

I don't think that it implies that at all. Let me give you an example. Two men get into a fight in someones house and the woman of the house grabs a mop and lays into them in order to drive them out. Doing so doesn't imply that the woman has been trained in stick fighting. It just means she's grabbed the nearest thing at hand and started whacking people, which is the feeling I get from reading that passage.

Thirdly, and to my mind most importantly, her reaction to the situation was not orthodox. The "correct" behaviour of a young lady would surely be to order the squires to desist and to give them a verbal dressing down, backed up by the implied threat of the enmity of House Stark and a possible challenge by Brandon (to their knights). I am sure that this is how Margaery would have handled such a situation for example (substituting Tyrell for Stark and Loras or Garlan for Brandon). Instead though, Lyanna's reaction is to solve the problem unsupported, and to do so by physically attacking those responsible. I think that this is the most revealing insight we have into her character.

Well, her dumping of wine onto Benjen's head certainly shows she was unorthodox and not too concerned what people thought about it either. I think it could be that Lyanna sometimes reacted without thinking but doesn't necessarily support her being the KotLT because it certainly involved a lot of planning and no doubt help from at least a few people which would make the deed the opposite of impulsive.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Sorry I'm so late in responding. :)

It should come as no surprise that I've got an explanation that I feel addresses this point and it's not the first time I've used it. :P

After the events of the tourney at Harenhall it could be that the Starks were nervous for Lyanna. Rhaegar's outlandish antics obviously made many people uncomfortable. I believe that Lyanna's brothers wanted her to return to Winterfell for her own safety but she refused. Now, seeing as she wasn't about to return home they probably made her accept a guard as a compromise. Kind of like Robb at the Whispering Wood where he wouldn't stay out of the battle but was "convinced" to have a guard. So I think that Lyanna, being a bit headstrong and defiant probably felt it was all nonsense and went riding one day either without her guard or with too few of them. That's when Rhaegar abducts her which eventually led to her untimely death and because of this Ned thinks her wilfull actions, her "wolfblood", led her to an early grave.

Yeah, come to think of it, I think it was with you that I had this discussion a while back :P

Like I said, it's not evidence per se, I'll just let others decide which of the explanations is poetic and insightful, and which of the explanations is so thin as to make Nicole Richie look like Rosie O'Donnell. :D

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Yeah, come to think of it, I think it was with you that I had this discussion a while back :P

Like I said, it's not evidence per se, I'll just let others decide which of the explanations is poetic and insightful, and which of the explanations is so thin as to make Nicole Richie look like Rosie O'Donnell. :D

:lol:

Well, I've been wrong once before so there's always that unlikely chance of it happening again. :wideeyed:

But I do agree that your theory is rather poetic and romantic. Just the feeling one gets from readin ASoIaF. :P

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • 4 weeks later...

Was doing some rereading and noticed something in Catelyn's POV that may contribute to the discussion of the Knight of the Laughing Tree. It might counter the argument made by several members that Ned could not be the KOTLT because of his height.

Jon Targ:

Thank you for posting that info. Obviously, it only strengthens my argument that Ned could not have been confused with a small person as he was 18 and, by all accounts, a man grown.

In regards to Ned's height, he may not have been very tall when he was 18. In A Game of Thrones ( u.s. paperback ) pp. 59 Catelyn makes the following statement:

He looked somehow smaller and more vulnerable, like the youth she had married in the sept at Riverrun, fifteen long years gone.

This may indicate that Ned not being the KOTLT based on an assumption of his being too tall is an invalid argument.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

smaller and more vulnerable,

Several points here that do not make this a significant piece of information:

(1) People don't grow 4 inches between 18 and 21. It just doesn't happen. He _could_ have grown an inch, though. That would mean he went from slightly below average to average in that span, perhaps.

(2) More importantly, Ned Stark is now an adult, middle-aged man. He is in fact probably a little _heavier_ in body than he was when Catelyn married him. He may have attained his full height by that time, but in all probability his frame would still fill out a bit. So at his wedding, he could have looked a little lanky, which would give an impression of smallness, and now he looks more solid and "larger".

(3) Finally, she's talking about him "looking" like that. She may also mean that when she married him, he also looked smaller and more vulnerable to her. This does not necessarily mean he actually was, in any physical sense, but it was merely an impressions he had at that point. Remember, his brother Brandon was taller, and we know she compared Ned to Brandon. One of her first impressions was that he was shorter than his brother, and that impression may have stuck and colored her perceptions on her wedding day.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Out of all the potential candidates, I favour Howland Reed himself. But the arguments presented here are good, imo, for Ned and Lyanna.

I would note that Meera never says the little crannogman couldn't ride a horse or joust. She's says he was "more accustomed" to being in a boat and holding an oar than riding and holding a lance. She doesn't say "unaccustomed." Reed's a crannogman, but he's also a noble of Westeros and a bannerman to House Stark. It's not inconceivable that he's been exposed to such things as riding and jousting. T

We don't know when Stark and Reed become such good friends. It may stem- as has been noted- from the war. It may have occurred earlier. GRRM hasn't graced us with much information on Stark's childhood other than being a ward of Arryn with Robert Baratheon. We know that Howland Reed hasn't visited Winterfell much (if at all) since the Rebellion, but we know nothing of how often he may have visited there before (and, perhaps, learned to ride and joust).

Meera also states that the little crannogman in the tale is different in some ways than his fellows, and though small of stature he's "brave and smart and strong." \

Whether the tKoLT is Howland, Ned, or Lyanna, an investigation by Rhaegar through the squires will bring him to Lyanna. I don't think the wild she-wolf has to be tKoLT in order to impress Rhaegar and so set our tragic tale ("but that's a sadder story") into motion.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Several points here that do not make this a significant piece of information:

(1) People don't grow 4 inches between 18 and 21. It just doesn't happen. He _could_ have grown an inch, though. That would mean he went from slightly below average to average in that span, perhaps.

Dennis Rodman grew from under 6' to 6'6" in 1979- he was 18. He grew about two more inches after that.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Dennis Rodman grew from under 6' to 6'6" in 1979- he was 18. He grew about two more inches after that.

Possibly true, but this was unusual, you would agree?

My rule of thumb is that any theory that requires something remarkable to happen without remark, is flawed. If Ned grew from noticably short to average in the space of a few years, someone should remark directly that Ned was noticably short in his youth (the above quote doesn't fit that bill, to me). Otherwise what we are positing is a pretty cheap authorial trick - keeping vital information from the reader by artifice.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I'm in agreement on this. When i first read the account of the little crannogman praying at the Isle of Faces and then winning at jousting, I took it as an example of the COTF still having powers in Westeros. I still think that way. Why Rheagar crowned Lyanna was only important, in my mind, for the scandal it created. His motivations were irrelevant. Unless, of course, his motivation was a love for Lyanna. In that case, to show his wife up in that manner would certainly seem to retract from the picture of Rheagar being so honorable. Basically, the man would be an a**hole.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Possibly true, but this was unusual, you would agree?

My rule of thumb is that any theory that requires something remarkable to happen without remark, is flawed. If Ned grew from noticably short to average in the space of a few years, someone should remark directly that Ned was noticably short in his youth (the above quote doesn't fit that bill, to me). Otherwise what we are positing is a pretty cheap authorial trick - keeping vital information from the reader by artifice.

The growth is unusual, yes. But Eddard Stark doesn't think about that particular story at all, and he's certainly never told the story to his children (or anyone else it would seem). It's not a cheap trick to not mention something that never comes up in conversation. He also doesn't spend much time reflecting on his own past. It's from Catelyn's POV we get the fact that Eddard married her in his dead brother's stead as custom demanded, not from Eddard.

Again, I'm not agreeing with the Eddard=tKoLT theory, but I don't think the lack of mention of Eddard's size is much evidence to exclude him. He's described as the "quiet wolf" and "shy" in Meera's tale. Eddard isn't verbose, but he isn't shy when we meet him. While we're privy to his self-doubts, to everyone around him he's confident, stern, and commanding. The Lannisters fear him. Obviously, the Eddard Stark we know isn't the same Eddard Stark at the Harrenhal tourney, who probably resided as much in Brandon's shadow as anywhere else.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

It's not a cheap trick to not mention something that never comes up in conversation.

Ned's appearance doesn't come up in conversation? Or Ned's past doesn't come up in conversation?

Whether Ned spoke of the KotLT story is irrelevant to whether this should have been mentioned. There are a dozen places in the book where it could have been done with no artifice whatsoever, completely naturally. If Ned used to be very short and then grew a remarkable amount in a short time, and this is crucial to understanding a key plot point, and the information could have been easily inserted into the narrative, then a failure to do so by the author is a pretty cheap authorial trick IMO.

Even if you don't agree with that, positing an unmentioned but radical change in Ned's height in order to make him fit as a candidate seems to me to be cruft - unnecessary complexity.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Ned's appearance doesn't come up in conversation? Or Ned's past doesn't come up in conversation?

Whether Ned spoke of the KotLT story is irrelevant to whether this should have been mentioned. There are a dozen places in the book where it could have been done with no artifice whatsoever, completely naturally. If Ned used to be very short and then grew a remarkable amount in a short time, and this is crucial to understanding a key plot point, and the information could have been easily inserted into the narrative, then a failure to do so by the author is a pretty cheap authorial trick IMO.

Even if you don't agree with that, positing an unmentioned but radical change in Ned's height in order to make him fit as a candidate seems to me to be cruft - unnecessary complexity.

On your last: it does. But I don't think it's dismissable simply because GRRM hasn't seen fit to give us Eddard Stark's growth chart year by year.

Ned isn't an important person during the Harrenhal Tourney. Brandon is the heir. Eddard isn't. Brandon is the "wild wolf," and- I think anyway- we're given a vision of him as charismatic, athletic, and all-in-all your All-Westeros Quarterback (to blend our world into their's). He's unhorsed by Rhaegar, but he's probably a pretty good jouster. GRRM has said he was the better swordsman of the two. Eddard is the "quiet wolf," and- except for Brandon helping him out with Ashara- he's barely noticed by the celebrating throngs of nobles and notables as he sits there a shy wallflower.

Plus, I don't think we have to be talking about some massive growth here. An Eddard Stark who's 5'4" or 5'5" at Harrenhal, but is 5'8" or 5'9" by the time the war is over might well have gone from "short of stature" to "average height" without anyone thinking it reason enough to make note of it 15 years later. Catelyn was not at the Harrenhal tourney so far as we know. She certainly doesn't think about it, I don't think. Eddard Stark didn't compete in the lists as Eddard Stark. So why would anybody there take note of him at all (and most especially his size) who is still alive when AGOT begins to ponder about this?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Obviously, the Eddard Stark we know isn't the same Eddard Stark at the Harrenhal tourney, who probably resided as much in Brandon's shadow as anywhere else.

This logic doesn't make a lot of sense. Plenty of people undergo personal, emotional growth without an accompanying change in their height. The two don't necessarily have anything to do with each other. What's more, that personal, emotional growth has been noted in the text, while there has been nothing about Ned getting taller.

Ned isn't an important person during the Harrenhal Tourney. Brandon is the heir. Eddard isn't.

This is an odd argument to make. If Ned is the Knight of the Laughing Tree, then Ned is an important figure in the story about the Knight of the Laughing Tree. If he was slight of stature at the time of Harrenhal--and a 5'4" 18-year-old male is slight of stature, even if he has a late growth spurt--it could have been noted then.

Sword of the Evening:

You might have a point if Catelyn said that right after Ned took off a pair of boots with six-inch heels. But in context, Catelyn's clearly not talking about his physical height; he's in a moment of indecision and self-doubt, so he looks less commanding, hence "smaller and more vulnerable." If Catelyn were referring to Ned's physical height, the words "more vulnerable" wouldn't make a lot of sense.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

This logic doesn't make a lot of sense. Plenty of people undergo personal, emotional growth without an accompanying change in their height. The two don't necessarily have anything to do with each other. What's more, that personal, emotional growth has been noted in the text, while there has been nothing about Ned getting taller.

This is an odd argument to make. If Ned is the Knight of the Laughing Tree, then Ned is an important figure in the story about the Knight of the Laughing Tree. If he was slight of stature at the time of Harrenhal--and a 5'4" 18-year-old male is slight of stature, even if he has a late growth spurt--it could have been noted then.

The Knight of the Laughing Tree is an important person in the story Meera tells. He becomes an important person at the Harrenhal tourney because of what he did. Eddard Stark is never an important person at Harrenhal to the other attendees. If he's anything, he's the younger son of Brandon Stark...what's his name? Oh. Eddard. The quiet one. Not exactly someone a Jaime or a Barristan or anybody else we've come across 15 years later is likely to have a sudden realization that Eddard Stark is a bigger fellow then he was back then. And that's a key point to remember on this: all the information we're getting about Harrenhal is nearly two decades old. The people who were there are either dead or that much older themselves. Who- besides Eddard who doesn't think about it and Catelyn who I don't think was there- would have been so interested in Eddard Stark as to make mention 15 years later of his physical growth in the course of AGOT?

And while it's been asserted that GRRM could have snuck a sentence or two about Eddard Stark's physical growth between Harrenhal and the start of AGOT, can anyone really think of a point in the tale when it would make sense to actually have that?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

And while it's been asserted that GRRM could have snuck a sentence or two about Eddard Stark's physical growth between Harrenhal and the start of AGOT, can anyone really think of a point in the tale when it would make sense to actually have that?

In Meera's story itself. If GRRM wanted to leave open the possibility that Ned was the KotLT, he could have had Meera mention it at that point.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

In Meera's story itself. If GRRM wanted to leave open the possibility that Ned was the KotLT, he could have had Meera mention it at that point.

Perhaps. As I've said, I'm inclined to think Howland Reed is the mystery knight. Other than the crannogman in the tale and the tKoLT, I don't recall anyone else's size being part of the tale, however. Unless GRRM was trying to make it obvious Eddard is the mystery knight, I don't see how he fits it in there.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

This is kind of a phony argument, then, because I think Howland was the KotLT as well. And the height issue doesn't figure heavily in my thought-process either; it's just that, if the KotLT was anybody other than Howland, and the old gods didn't take a hand on his behalf somehow, then a good half of the story seems kind of irrelevant to me.

And perhaps it would be a little obvious for Ned's height to be mentioned in the story itself. But there are other places as well; for ex., when Robert is reminiscing with Ned about their days with Jon Arryn, a brief mention that Ned used to be a scrawny little kid would suffice.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Archived

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

×
×
  • Create New...