Howland Reed and Arthur Dayne

[corbon]

Now, others have argued that after the dragons died we don't know of any polygamous marriages by the Targaryens, so perhaps this means they stopped because they were forced to do so.

Aegon III (Reign 131-157AL) is known as Aegon Dragonbane since the last dragons died during his reign. Baelor I (Reign 161-171AL) was married to all three of his sisters. So there is another polygamous Targ, after they've lost the Dragons - and this is Baelor the Blessed, pious in the faith of the Seven far beyond sanity.

IMO since Baelor the Blessed was polygamous, that is plenty of evidence that, at least at that time, the Faith had not outlawed Targaryen polygamy.

Mind you, it seems his marriages were pretty much in name only, since he locked his sister-wives up to avoid them contaminating his thoughts with lust. And was succeeded by his uncle, so apparently didn't have any kids. SO maybe this doesn't really count, though legally it surely does.

Some other kings which we simply don't know about their marriage state (polygamous or not) include Aegon III, Daeron I (died at 18 having been at war since 14ish so very probably not had time to be polygamous) and Viserys II. Doesn't mean they were polygamous, but we can't rule it out as far as I know.

[Dragonfish]

Aegon III (Reign 131-157AL) is known as Aegon Dragonbane since the last dragons died during his reign. Baelor I (Reign 161-171AL) was married to all three of his sisters. So there is another polygamous Targ, after they've lost the Dragons - and this is Baelor the Blessed, pious in the faith of the Seven far beyond sanity.

Baelor was only married to Daena, and not to the other two sisters.

[cybroleach]

Here you switch to the Trio stay and the Tower and fighting Ned and Company because a bad timing instead of because Rhaegar order them to do so.

Not to get overly involved here in a debate I dont care to write a 1000 posts in but you can also search the SSM for an exact quote from the author saying YOU ARE WRONG HERE, and the KG would in fact follow orders from Raegar here.

[SFDanny]

Not to get overly involved here in a debate I dont care to write a 1000 posts in but you can also search the SSM for an exact quote from the author saying YOU ARE WRONG HERE, and the KG would in fact follow orders from Raegar here.

The author does indeed say the Kingsguard would follow an order from Rhaegar. I've never disputed that. In fact, I've argued often they die, they sacrifice their lives, trying to follow Rhaegar's last order. They would absolutely follow an order from Rhaegar that orders them to stay at the Tower of Joy and guard a child who is the rightful heir to the throne. Aegon or a legitimate Jon fits the bill and there is no contradiction within their oaths. But let's look at the quote you reference:

Shaw: Can you explain why the King's Guard chose to stand and fight Ned at the Tower of the Joy instead of protecting the remaining royal family members?

Martin: The King's Guards don't get to make up their own orders. They serve the king, they protect the king and the royal family, but they're also bound to obey their orders, and if Prince Rhaegar gave them a certain order, they would do that. They can't say, "No we don't like that order, we'll do something else."

Notice what the author doesn't say in the the quote you reference is that Viserys is their king. If that was the case there is an obvious contradiction between guarding the king and following Rhaegar's assumed last order to guard the Tower of Joy. What the author has spent pages and pages of text to make it clear is that there is a hierarchy of vows within the oath and the first duty of the Kingsguard is to guard the king, not just to follow the last orders given to them. Read just the most explicit, clear, and unequivocal explanation of this in Ser Barristan's words.

The first duty of the Kingsguard was to defend the king from harm or threat. The white knights were sworn to obey the king's commands as well, to keep his secrets, counsel him when counsel was requested and keep silent when it was not, serve his pleasure and defend his name and honor. Strictly speaking, it was purely the king's choice whether or not to extend Kingsguard protection to others, even those of royal blood. Some kings thought it right and proper to dispatch Kingsguard to serve and defend their wives and children, siblings, aunts, uncles, and cousins of greater or lesser degree, and occasionally even their lovers, mistresses, and bastards. But others preferred to use household knights and men-at-arms for those purposes, whilst keeping their seven as their own personal guard, never far from their sides. (ADwD 737)

So, no, I AM NOT WRONG HERE. You are just missing the point.

[BrosBeforeSnows]

If Howland really was the Knight of the Laughing Tree (which is probably safe to assume, though still an official mystery), he might've been a better fighter than some people are giving him credit for.

However, poison, nets, or even warging are likely scenarios. We have no idea if Howland (or Ned, for that matter) could warg or not, and there's no word as to whether or not Howland used to travel around with animals of any kind, but such a scenario would tie in pretty well with Bran & Jojen's story, i.e. Howland saved Ned by warging, and Jojen saved Bran with his greendreams.

[SFDanny]

Dragonfish, your post on where Lyanna and Rhaegar may have been married is extremely interesting. I've gone with Ran's theory about a southern "abduction" which, if I understand it correctly, is based mainly on the people who go with Brandon when he rides to King's Landing. It makes some sense that Lyanna would be in the south to attend her brother's wedding, and I've speculated that what may have kicked off the events may have been an attempt to move up Robert's and Lyanna's marriage to go along with Cat's and Brandon's. However, it sure isn't written in stone that Lyanna had to have been in the south. There is so much in this timeline that is still up in the air that it is frustrating in the extreme just to try and eliminate some possibilities. I'll have to turn this new idea over for a while and get back to you on what I think. Thanks, for an intriguing post.

[Felagund]

So, in answer to your challenge to corbon, the answer is Maegor. He had multiple wives as well, and there may have been others. A quick search of the Citadel would have gotten you that answer on your own, but I'm happy to help.

I stand corrected, ser, however, forgive me for relying on primary sources and not on some unwritten, secondary information that is not (yet?) in the canon ;)

Here you switch to the Trio staying at the Tower and fighting Ned and Company because of bad timing instead of because Rhaegar order them to do so. As I noted above this is a possibility, however remote. What you do though is assume the only way for trio to get to Viserys is to "cut" their way out. No, Ned doesn't push the fight, and he wonders why they are there. He wants his sister, and it is quite possible if they turned her over to Ned he would let them go. They don't even attempt to negotiate a way out and to Dragonstone. That is their first duty, but they ignore it - if Viserys is their king. Yet you ignore this problem. Why?

Sorry, I still feel inclined that they were ultimately bound to the promise they made to Rhaegar on protecting Lyanna and the child regardless of his status and the hierarchy of KG oaths. As Professor Tolkien somewhere noted, legends and heros are born when somebody defies the rules set by the world that surrounds him (inaccurate rendering, but that is the main thing :))

When Rhaegar left for the Trident he still had a(t least one :P) wife and two older children (Prince Aegon being the heir), safe and sound in King's Landing. I firmly do not believe that the baby Jon was already his heir because most probably Jon wasn't even born yet when Rhaegar went into war.

(If we accept that Lyanna died from the complications of giving birth, we must assume that Jon was not more than a week old when the fight scene happened (and I was pretty generous here).

Your theory implies that they were married with Lyanna (improbable, but imaginable) or had Jon readily legitimized (which is quite absurd for an unborn child) and also he had already disposed his rightful heir Aegon to a yet unborn child, whose very gender was unsure (so this is also HIGHLY unlikely - sorry for the caps :P) or the KG were pretty up-to-date on the recent events of KL (not very plausible to me).

To me the "we made a vow"-theory, even if it somehow defies the "oath-hierarchy" of the KG, is much more probable.

(Disclaimer: I also do believe (as I have told before) that Rhaegar did want to legitimize his (then) would-be son as soon as he was back from the Battle of the Trident, maybe even trying to make him his heir - being part of those "changes" he wanted to introduce.)

[corbon]

Your theory implies that they were married with Lyanna (improbable, but imaginable) or had Jon readily legitimized (which is quite absurd for an unborn child) ...

First, why is marrying Lyanna improbable?

He is already known to be effectively trying recreate conditions surround Aegon the conqueror ("there must be one more" so he is trying for a third child to create the three heads of the Dragon). And it has been demonstrated that Targaryen polygamy is a solid precedent (especially around the time he is trying to recreate), and there is not the slightest evidence it has been outlawed, just recently unused.

So it follows that he would not be averse from those perspectives to a polygamous marriage.

And politically, marrying Lyanna would have solved most of the problems involved with 'abducting' her, at least until Brandon and Aerys went nuts while he was away (which he probably didn't know about until later). The Starks can hardly complain too loudly if their girl is legally married to the crown prince. A few suitable gifts (lands, keeps, titles, that sort of thing) and they'll get over it quick enough. The Baratheon's too can be bought off once the Starks are happy - though Roberts personal flaws may make that trickier than expected. No one else will care.

The main thing is to get her married and pregnant ASAP so that the best they can do is accept the situation rather than fight it (hence the disappearing so neither the Starks or Robert can do anything stupid trying to get her back before it's all a done deal and too late to change - but Brandon does something unexpectedly stupid without a hope of getting her back from it anyway).

And mechanically a quiet marriage is very easy to arrange, either the northern way or with a reliable or unknowing Septon. He has some KG as witnesses (Arthur Dayne at the least).

Your theory implies ... and also he had already disposed his rightful heir Aegon to a yet unborn child, whose very gender was unsure (so this is also HIGHLY unlikely - sorry for the caps :P) or the KG were pretty up-to-date on the recent events of KL (not very plausible to me).

Second, the KG are pretty up to date on events in KL. If nothing else, Ned tells them, but frankly they didn't seem surprised by Ned's little chat.

It hangs together very well actually. Varys, who has switched Aegon, sends a message to Ashara (ex Elia's handmaid) to prepare to take Aegon into exile (later to become Lemore). Ashara is in regular contact with Arthur nearby at ToJ (ToJ would have required some local support, and Starfall is the nearest place, and Arthur's home), so the KG at ToJ are informed of events at KL. Hence they are not surprised by Ned's dialogue, and have ready answers.

To me the "we made a vow"-theory, even if it somehow defies the "oath-hierarchy" of the KG, is much more probable.

Really? A theory that stands on an otherwise unevidenced 'order' by the crown prince (not the king) superceding the clearly primary function of the KG - to guard the King, which is backed by text, is more probable?

Well, we'll just have to agree to disagree.

[corbon]

Baelor was only married to Daena, and not to the other two sisters.

Ah well. I misread the sentence, sorry.

and confined his sisters, Rhaena, Elaena, and Daena Targaryen, to whom he was married in the Maidenvault so they did not tempt him with carnal thoughts

[Dragonfish]

First, why is marrying Lyanna improbable?

He is already known to be effectively trying recreate conditions surround Aegon the conqueror ("there must be one more" so he is trying for a third child to create the three heads of the Dragon). And it has been demonstrated that Targaryen polygamy is a solid precedent (especially around the time he is trying to recreate), and there is not the slightest evidence it has been outlawed, just recently unused.

So it follows that he would not be averse from those perspectives to a polygamous marriage.

You know, it only just occurred to me that if Rhaegar was trying to recreate the conditions surrounding Aegon the Conqueror, then he most likely expected his son to marry his sisters, as the original Aegon did. But in order for this to happen, both of Aegon's sisters would have to be legitimate (since it would be scandalous for a king to marry a bastard). In other words, Rhaegar most likely had to ensure that his and Lyanna's daughter was legitimate out of necessity. And for those who believe Rhaegar changed his mind and decided that his child with Lyanna would be the Prince Who Was Promised, this argument works even better. After all, the only way Rhaegar's child could be considered a prince is if he was legitimate. So whether you believe that Rhaegar expected to make a daughter or the actual PWWP, it is highly likely that he needed to make sure that this child was legitimate.

Of course, this doesn't address Felagund's argument that Rhaegar was hoping to make his and Lyanna's child legitimate by decree. To that I will simply say that while this was a viable option for Rhaegar, I still think he would have preferred to follow the polygamy route. Partly because he was likely already planning on re-instituting polygamy for his children, partly because he loved Lyanna, and partly because he didn't want his and Lyanna's child to carry the stain of having been born a bastard.

It hangs together very well actually. Varys, who has switched Aegon, sends a message to Ashara (ex Elia's handmaid) to prepare to take Aegon into exile (later to become Lemore). Ashara is in regular contact with Arthur nearby at ToJ (ToJ would have required some local support, and Starfall is the nearest place, and Arthur's home), so the KG at ToJ are informed of events at KL. Hence they are not surprised by Ned's dialogue, and have ready answers.

Hmmm...but if Ashara knew Aegon was alive, wouldn't she have told Arthur? And if Arthur knew, why would he and the other two Kingsguard still be guarding Jon, given that Aegon would be ahead of him in the line of succession?

[corbon]

Hmmm...but if Ashara knew Aegon was alive, wouldn't she have told Arthur? And if Arthur knew, why would he and the other two Kingsguard still be guarding Jon, given that Aegon would be ahead of him in the line of succession?

Hmm, probably, you would think...

Unless there were two separate messages, or Varys told Ashara that Arthur must not know about Aegon because Ser Arthur Dayne couldn't 'hide' and couldn't leave his king unguarded?

[Felagund]

Well, we'll just have to agree to disagree.

At least we can agree on that :D

What my argument is based on: we have two different (putative) scenarios here: Rhaegar being married to Lyanna and the knights having a hotline to KL. Both have a certain probability (quite low, in my opinion). They are independent, so the probability of the occurrence of both is the product of the probability of the two (which is thus lower than both).

My theory presumes only one event (Lyanna not being the legitimate wife of Rhaegar at the moment - and the KG-intelligence stuff is irrelevant here), so the probability should be higher, in my opinion

All in all, my argument is based purely on the Occam's Razor principle :)

I also still do not believe that poligamy was as often and as accepted as it is said before. The only canonical case is Aegon I. and I have just learnt about Maegor through this So Spake Martin-section. I do not think that was quite regulary. Both of them were early kings (with dragons and such) and there is no account on others, so I think that as the Targaryen kings fit themselves in to westerosi society, they abandonded this habit.

Rhaegar, however, was himself a very model of chivalry, so I really cannot imagine that he just went on violating the Faith in such a way. That is one more argument on my theory. I think he wanted to choose the "safe way" to have a third lawful child with legitimizing his bastard.

[Dragonfish]

What my argument is based on: we have two different (putative) scenarios here: Rhaegar being married to Lyanna and the knights having a hotline to KL. Both have a certain probability (quite low, in my opinion). They are independent, so the probability of the occurrence of both is the product of the probability of the two (which is thus lower than both).

My theory presumes only one event (Lyanna not being the legitimate wife of Rhaegar at the moment - and the KG-intelligence stuff is irrelevant here), so the probability should be higher, in my opinion

All in all, my argument is based purely on the Occam's Razor principle :)

Occam's Razor requires that you give the simplest explanation that fits all the available information we have. Your explanation, however, does not do a good job of accounting for why the Kingsguard were at the ToJ, IMO. So I think the polygamy explanation would be the most parsimonious one here.

I also still do not believe that poligamy was as often and as accepted as it is said before. The only canonical case is Aegon I. and I have just learnt about Maegor through this So Spake Martin-section. I do not think that was quite regulary. Both of them were early kings (with dragons and such) and there is no account on others, so I think that as the Targaryen kings fit themselves in to westerosi society, they abandonded this habit.

The habit probably was abandoned in the sense that it fell out of practice, but that does not mean it was explicitly outlawed. As far as we know, polygamy may have the same status as the Trial of Seven from The Hedge Knight: technically legal but rarely practiced.

And anyway, for the purposes of this discussion, it doesn't really matter how well-accepted polygamy was among the rest of Westeros. The only thing that matters is whether Rhaegar believed he could get away with it, and whether the Kingsguard would have accepted his marriage to Lyanna as legitimate. Since it is not the the Kingsguard's place to question or judge their sovereign, I think they would have accepted his new marriage. And since Rhaegar clearly believed he had clout (he planned on calling a great council to make major changes), and was clearly willing to flout social convention (by running off with a betrothed Lyanna), I see no reason to think that he would not believe he could get away with re-instituting polygamy.

Rhaegar, however, was himself a very model of chivalry, so I really cannot imagine that he just went on violating the Faith in such a way.

Uh...so how is running off with the betrothed daughter of a Great House and having sex with her out of wedlock a model of chivalry? I think you have this backwards here. If Rhaegar was really so chivalrous, then he would marry Lyanna rather than make her his mistress.

[Dragonfish]

Hmm, probably, you would think...

Unless there were two separate messages, or Varys told Ashara that Arthur must not know about Aegon because Ser Arthur Dayne couldn't 'hide' and couldn't leave his king unguarded?

Technically possible, I suppose, but it stretches credulity for me.

[SpicyTurkey]

Howland dressed as a girl and tricked Dayne. That's my theory.

[Cydal]

Ned says to Bran, in AFFC, "The finest knight I ever saw was Ser Arthur Dayne, who fought with a blade called Dawn, forged from the heart of a fallen star. They called him the Sword of the Morning, and he would have killed me but for Howland Reed."

Does this mean that Reed used poison to defeat Arthur Dayne? The crannogmen are famous for their poisoned arrows. Arthur Dayne was supposedly the greatest knight ever, so it seems unlikely that Reed could have done much against him in hand to hand combat, and two on one was nothing to Dayne. Jaime says, "I learned from Ser Arthur Dayne, the Sword of the Morning, who could have slain all five of you with his left hand while he was taking a piss with his right..." So was Dayne sniped by Reed in order to save Ned's life?

Apologies if this is well covered territory: the search function is down.

In AFFC? Neither Ned nor Bran was in AFFC. I think you mean ACOK.

[Felagund]

does not do a good job of accounting for why the Kingsguard were at the ToJ, IMO.

Yes it does. Rhaegar told them so. End of story.

(Why Rhaegar told them so is another story...)

The habit probably was abandoned in the sense that it fell out of practice, but that does not mean it was explicitly outlawed. As far as we know, polygamy may have the same status as the Trial of Seven from The Hedge Knight: technically legal but rarely practiced.

I think we won't agree on this one. You say it was the rule (or close enough), I say it was the exception, and rather "suffered" by the Faith than tolerated, when it was actually practiced. And we still don't know what did the Old Gods "say" in the matter...

[Dragonfish]

Yes it does. Rhaegar told them so. End of story.

(Why Rhaegar told them so is another story...)

That explains why they were there to begin with, but it doesn't explain why they stayed there, after the rest of the royal family was killed and their supposed new king was on Dragonstone without Kingsguard protection. I mean, what would they have done if Rhaegar died but Aerys was still alive in King's Landing? Just sit and wait there forever? Even if there were no Kingsguard members guarding Aerys? Would they still have stayed if Rhaegar's orders were to guard a wheel of cheese he was particularly fond of? And what if Viserys came back with an army to retake the throne? Would they just stay at the tower until he figured out where they were and ordered them to come back?

The simple fact is, if Viserys was truly their king, then the Kingsguard would have to choose between their oath to follow orders and their oath to guard the King. You're basically saying that they chose to follow the former oath, even though it is canonical that the latter oath is their first and primary duty. I'm sorry, but I don't think this argument holds water.

I think we won't agree on this one. You say it was the rule (or close enough), I say it was the exception, and rather "suffered" by the Faith than tolerated, when it was actually practiced. And we still don't know what did the Old Gods "say" in the matter...

It was the exception as far as most Westerosi were concerned, but it was the rule for Targaryens and their spouses (several of whom were actually not Targaryens), every bit as much as incest was and is the rule for Targaryens.

Besides, Rhaegar already demonstrated that he's willing to flout social convention by running off with the betrothed daughter of a major house, so I see no reason why he would balk from reviving polygamy just because the other Westerosi would disapprove.

[SFDanny]

I stand corrected, ser, however, forgive me for relying on primary sources and not on some unwritten, secondary information that is not (yet?) in the canon ;)

I'd say quotes from the author qualify as a primary source. Not from the books, but primary nonetheless. Anyway, I'd highly recommend the Citadel to you. Many enlightening interviews and emails from Martin about the series. Well worth the time.

Sorry, I still feel inclined that they were ultimately bound to the promise they made to Rhaegar on protecting Lyanna and the child regardless of his status and the hierarchy of KG oaths.

Bound to Rhaegar's order over their first duty to guard the king? Assuming Viserys is their rightful king, please reread Selmy's quote above and tell me just how that works?

As Professor Tolkien somewhere noted, legends and heros are born when somebody defies the rules set by the world that surrounds him (inaccurate rendering, but that is the main thing :))

In this case the heroism of the Kingsguard trio is in refusing to accept the new rules set by Robert and maintaining their loyalty to the Targaryen king against overwhelming odds. That sounds like heroism to me. Abandoning Viserys like Selmy did, doesn't sound heroic to me. Understandable, yes. Heroic, no.

When Rhaegar left for the Trident he still had a(t least one :P) wife and two older children (Prince Aegon being the heir), safe and sound in King's Landing. I firmly do not believe that the baby Jon was already his heir because most probably Jon wasn't even born yet when Rhaegar went into war.

(If we accept that Lyanna died from the complications of giving birth, we must assume that Jon was not more than a week old when the fight scene happened (and I was pretty generous here).

We agree Jon wasn't his heir when Rhaegar went to the Trident. My belief is simply Jon is the legitimate third child of Rhaegar and becomes the rightful heir after Aerys, Rhaegar, and Aegon are all killed at the Trident and the sack of King's Landing. I have never thought Rhaegar set aside Aegon in favor a child he never saw or even knew would survive childbirth. If Jon is the rightful king when Ned arrives it is simply because those in line for the throne before him are dead.

Jon is born sometime between the sack (which takes place a week to ten days or so after the Battle of the Trident) and six weeks or so later. It fits within Martin's statement that Jon is "eight or nine months" older than Daenerys who is born "nine moons" after her mother and brother's flight to Dragonstone. We have Ned traveling from Robert's coronation, shortly after the sack, to Storm's End and then on to the Prince's Pass to the Tower of Joy. Six weeks is certainly possible in this scenario. If Lyanna dies from puerperal fever as many have speculated here, the window is about up to eleven days before Ned's arrival for the birth to take place. It fits.

Your theory implies that they were married with Lyanna (improbable, but imaginable)

Quite probable as the actions of the Kingsguard point to this.

or had Jon readily legitimized (which is quite absurd for an unborn child)

Never even suggested this was the case. Only the king can remove the "taint of bastardy" and the idea that Aerys did so before Jon was born is, I agree, absurd.

and also he had already disposed his rightful heir Aegon to a yet unborn child, whose very gender was unsure (so this is also HIGHLY unlikely - sorry for the caps :P)

As I said above, I've never even suggested Aegon is disposed. I think Aegon is dead, and the Kingsguard knew of his death along with the other news from King's Landing.

or the KG were pretty up-to-date on the recent events of KL (not very plausible to me).

One can dismiss the discussion in Ned's dream, but a straightforward interpreation of the Kingsguard's responses to Ned point to them knowing what happened in King's Landing. As this is news of about six weeks previously and only the most important and widely circulated news in all of Westeros, this doesn't seem surprising to me in the least. One doesn't even need to suppose any special method of getting the information to assume the news beats Ned to the Tower of Joy, when Ned has to travel with his army to Storm's End before he even starts for the Prince's Pass.

To me the "we made a vow"-theory, even if it somehow defies the "oath-hierarchy" of the KG, is much more probable.

The "vow" they make and boast about keeping seems to me simply to be their Kingsguard Oath.

(Disclaimer: I also do believe (as I have told before) that Rhaegar did want to legitimize his (then) would-be son as soon as he was back from the Battle of the Trident, maybe even trying to make him his heir - being part of those "changes" he wanted to introduce.)

As I've said, I don't believe any of this.

All in all, my argument is based purely on the Occam's Razor principle :)

Which isn't worth anything in fantasy literature. Occam's Razor is often explained as "if you hear hoofbeats, think horses not zebras." Which while being extremely biased against places where zebras predominate, gets the idea across quite well. In a fantasy world, one has to not only entertain the possibility of zebras (or zorses as Martin seems to call them) but also unicorns, hippogriffs, pegasi, etc. Add to all of this the simple propostion that what is written about is going to include things that are not of mundane explaination much more often than not, and Occam's Razor is as useless as a warm bucket of piss.

[4rcane]

she is one of the candidates, but so is Reed, mind you I believe it was Lyanna, but we don't know for sure.

It can't possibly be Reed. He can't ride a horse