Did Jon deserve it?

[Great Dayne]

Jon and the Wall were one of my favorite parts. I have to admit I was a little disappointed in him when he decided to strike at Ramsay. I loved the fact that he was devoted to his brothers and took the Black seriously. He seemed to me to be committed as Qhorin Halfhand was. His theory of taking in the Wildings made sense. It would be less Wights that they would have to fight and maybe more help on their side.

I think Marsh made up his mind when jon was making his speech to the Wildings to floow him to Winterfell. He was talking about leaving his duties and breaking his oath. Although I can't stand Bowen, i hate to say hh had the right of it. I do not agree with the backstabbing but it should have been approached a different way.

[Fredward]

Taken from a post I made in the most fit to rule thread:

Jon Snow... hmmm. I'm not a fan. Some of his decisions are cool, like taking the hostages for instance. But the decision to go after Mother Mole's wildlings was a bad one. Letting the Weeper through the Wall is a bad one. Sending all his friends/everyone who was loyal to him away was a bad one. The Alyce Karstark thing was totally interfering in realm politics with no excuse.

Then there are all his decisions that are iffy to me but I don't see that he had much choice, loaning from the Iron Bank (no idea how he plans to repay that) letting Wildlings man the Wall without taking vows and only overseen by like on or two brothers, giving his brothers an option to forsake their vows by following him to battle against the Boltons etc.

Also he clearly sucks at even the Wall version of the Game, he should have been aware that he was pissing off Bowen and maybe that builder dude too, it was pretty obvious.

I can see why Bowen did it as a conservative member of the NW (btw I also think Bowen has a grudge against the wildlings for giving him a booboo) but it was stupid since this is gonna make the situation on the Wall a x1000 worse.

[Vastro]

I don't think he deserved backstabbing.

I thought he did well on the wall as LC with all the bullshit has going around there.

[Black Wind]

No, Jon has certainly not deserved to be stabbed. He tried to do what's necessary while saving as many lifes as possible. Though he had to face a very difficult situation to begin with he managed to use most of what was thrown his way to the NW's advantage. And sometimes he simply didn't have any other choice.

However, if one examines the events in ADWD from Bowen's points of view, the situation looks totally different.

While Jon tries to build up a defense against the Others as quickly as possible with all means currently available to him, Bowen thinks that the best option for the NW is the continued support of the Iron Throne. For somebody like Bowen, who cares deeply about rank and proper procedure, letting uncivilised wildlings defend the wall is a really stupid plan. Instead he desperately hopes for more recruits and maybe even some proper knights and that's why his main priority is to stay on good terms with King's Landing. Unfortunately, from his point of view, Jon tries his very best to offend the Lannisters with his decisions as often as possible.

What's worse, Bowen has it in writing that the Lannisters won't send any support unless the Watch plays by their rules:

In SoS, when Tywin and Tyrion discuss the events at the wall, Maester Pycelle proposes Janos Slynt as a possible new Lord Commander if Mormont doesn't return from his ranging. Tywin agrees and orders Pycelle to write a letter to Bowen Marsh:

Send a raven. Write that King Joffrey was deeply saddened to hear of Lord Commander Mormonts death but regrets that he can spare no men just now... Suggest that matters might be quite different once the throne is secure...provided the king has full confidence in the leadership of the Watch. In closing, ask Marsh to pass along His Grace's fondest regards to his faithful friend and servant, Lord Janos Slynt.

In the same chapter Tywin also says: If they do not vote as they are told, the wall will melt before it sees another man.

I think Marsh understood this message well enough when he received Pycelle's letter.

But what happens: Jon Snow, son of traitor Eddard Stark is elected instead. Jon promptly proceeds to execute the Lannisters' favourite candidate, allows Stannis and the army that just attacked Kings Landing to stay at the wall and even starts rescuing wildlings and let them man abandoned castles. Bowen himself might even understand what Jon is trying to do but he also knows that the Lannisters will see the events at the Wall only as a big provocation and possible threat to the Iron Throne. That means, all support from the Lannisters and their allies is lost, unless Jon is removed from his post ( for example by coveniently disappearing during the Hardhome mission).

At this point however, Bowen can at least hope that Stannis and the North will come to help, should the Others attack.

But then the pink letter arrives and Bowen learns that not only Stannis is dead but that they have lost the support of the whole North, which is at the moment (officially) united under the Boltons. Worse, the Boltons even threaten to attack the wall - not because they want to take over the NW but because they have a personal problem with their Lord Commander.

From Bowen's point of view, Jon with his oh so brilliant new strategies has only managed to isolate the Watch completely from the rest of the realm. All that's left to them are a bunch of wildlings who probably will turn against the Watch at the first opportunity. Worse, the Watch might be attacked from the south very soon. As if they didn't have their hands full with what's lurking north of the wall...

And then, instead of thinking about damage control, Jon announces that he plans to attack Winterfell himself - NOT to defend the Watch but because he was threatened personally. He even openly talks about oathbreaking: I mean to make him answer for those words...but I will not ask my brothers to forswear their vows. Right after this comment, Jon gladly accepts the support of the wildlings and orders his brothers to get to Hardhome to rescue even more wildlings.

Now, if Jon really shows up at Winterfell with a wildling army, the whole realm will of course think that the NW has chosen a Lord Commander who is a turncloak and comes to rescue Mance Rayder with his new friends. And then the Watch is doomed.

So I think, that Bowen really believes he is killing Jon „for the Watch“.

Whether there is a larger conspiracy behind the assassination (attempt) is another question. A lot of posters think that another party has used Bowen for their own purpose and I also think that's very possible.

In this regard, there is an interesting comment in GRRM's „you think he's dead?“-interview, where he mentions that he wrote some of Mel's „daggers in the dark“ warnings almost 10 years ago. This sounds as if he planned the events that lead to the assassination really carefully – maybe not only because this is a major turning point in Jon's arc but also because the people behind the „daggers in the dark“ will play an important part in the future plot.

[MadMartigan]

Did he deserve it? Not at all. He did however bring it on himself. He was making drastic changes to the Night's Watch, and I don't think he did a very good job selling the changes. He basically told his people, "Here is how it's going to be." The only time he really even explained himself was to Bowen and the other two when he basically told them that dead wildlings would mean more White Walkers. Good start. Now gather every other Black Brother and give them a rousing speech in the same vein.

Sending off the only real friends he had was a huge mistake too. He knew that many Brothers thought he was a turncloak, an oathbreaker and a traitor. Now he not only lets wildlings through the Wall, but lets them through in the thousands, and occupies the Wall with them. Not to mention some of them just don't like him because he is "green" and already in command. Jon may be stubborn, but he isn't stupid. Edd was really one of the only people I think Jon could have trusted (that could have protected him) and he sent him away.

[Superior Glokta]

Jon Snow really does know nothing. You could say that both Ned and Jeor Mormont were victims of "daggers in the dark". And Robb / Cat as well. Yet even after Mel repeatedly warns him about said "daggers", Jon can't make the connection. While Stannis is away, Jon seems to make it a point to do everything he can to piss off the old guard in the Night's Watch. He seems to take it for granted that there are thousands of years of conflict between the Wildlings & NW. Sure, Jon Snow is right that the game has changed with the coming of the Others and things need to be done differently. But he simply gave the Wildlings far too much.

In my view, Jon's (possibly) fatal mistake was to let the bastard skinchanger with the Boar into the castle and lockup Ghost. He saw firsthand with Varamyr that wildling skinchangers are no good. He should have put the fear of R'hlor into the Wildlings by gutting the skinchanger as soon as he passed through the gates, then roasted his boar and had a feast.

With Ghost at his side, none of this shit would have gone down, and that is a fact.

[The Swaggering Bravo]

Did he deserve it? Not at all. He did however bring it on himself. He was making drastic changes to the Night's Watch, and I don't think he did a very good job selling the changes. He basically told his people, "Here is how it's going to be." The only time he really even explained himself was to Bowen and the other two when he basically told them that dead wildlings would mean more White Walkers. Good start. Now gather every other Black Brother and give them a rousing speech in the same vein.

Sending off the only real friends he had was a huge mistake too. He knew that many Brothers thought he was a turncloak, an oathbreaker and a traitor. Now he not only lets wildlings through the Wall, but lets them through in the thousands, and occupies the Wall with them. Not to mention some of them just don't like him because he is "green" and already in command. Jon may be stubborn, but he isn't stupid. Edd was really one of the only people I think Jon could have trusted (that could have protected him) and he sent him away.

He needed trustworthy men in the other castles, and Janos Slynt was basically the only one who thought he was a turncloak, the rest he sent away or wouldn't do anything since he shortened Janos' head by a few hairs. That wasn't even his real problem, Bowen and the others didn't act because of that.

[Ororo727 Jon Snow Fangirl]

Interfering with the affairs of the realm is not included in the oath but I think desertion is covered by "I shall live and die at my post" so the question sort of comes down to what constitutes desertion. Would it have been desertion for Jon to have gone off to fight alongside Robb in the War of Five Kings? If so (and I think so), it's also desertion for Jon to go off and fight Ramsay. So I think in terms of oathbreaking, the law is on Bowen Marsh's side. I also think that Jon knows damn well that the NW fight against the others is more important than whatever Ramsay Bolton is doing, so he is making the wrong decision in leaving. Ultimately though, I think that death is not a reasonable penalty for oathbreaking or desertion, especially under these circumstances. It sort of comes down to the issue oh whether honor=morality which GRRM uses to challenge the reader on issues of Ned lying and abandoning his honor to protect his daughters or Jaime abandoning his oath and honor to kill Aerys while saving thousands. So I think Jon made the wrong decision because he should have known that the Others were the real fight, but that his decision was not immoral, and certainly not the kind of action that deserves punishment of death. Of course, I don't think he is actually dead, but that was the intention of Bowen Marsh.

Post only mean your specific job for the NW, it doesn't mean that you can never leave the wall. If that were the case, what is the purpose of rangers? What some people forget is that Ramsay threatened Jon and the NW. With the threat of the Other's at hand, going to WInterfell with wildlings and handling The Bastard was the smart thing to do in order to allow the NW to concentrate on the threat to the entire realm. Marsh and the other assasins are much like Cercei, they cannot see the bigger picture and can only focus on the one issue that is written in large print. They are not be smart enough to read the fine print.

[Superior Glokta]

Post only mean your specific job for the NW, it doesn't mean that you can never leave the wall. If that were the case, what is the purpose of rangers? What some people forget is that Ramsay threatened Jon and the NW. With the threat of the Other's at hand, going to WInterfell with wildlings and handling The Bastard was the smart thing to do in order to allow the NW to concentrate on the threat to the entire realm. Marsh and the other assasins are much like Cercei, they cannot see the bigger picture and can only focus on the one issue that is written in large print. They are not be smart enough to read the fine print.

Okay thats all well and good but I see one problem with this. Ramsays entire letter.......ahem.......REEKED of bullshit. Jon Snow reads the letter and just assumes its legit? If Ramsay had truly killed Stannis, he would have attached a piece of his flayed skin along with it as proof. If you recall, when Ramsay sends his letter to Asha, he includes a piece of the turncloak's skin along with it. Going back further, Roose Bolton offers Cat a piece of human beef jerky, charmer that he is. That just seems to be their deal. They always send emails w/ attachments (human skin).

So the whole argument for Jon Snow clearing out Winterfell hinges on the word of RAMSAY FREAKIN BOLTON?!?!? Jon Snow, you know nothing.

[TrueMetis]

Okay thats all well and good but I see one problem with this. Ramsays entire letter.......ahem.......REEKED of bullshit. Jon Snow reads the letter and just assumes its legit? If Ramsay had truly killed Stannis, he would have attached a piece of his flayed skin along with it as proof. If you recall, when Ramsay sends his letter to Asha, he includes a piece of the turncloak's skin along with it. Going back further, Roose Bolton offers Cat a piece of human beef jerky, charmer that he is. That just seems to be their deal. They always send emails w/ attachments (human skin).

So the whole argument for Jon Snow clearing out Winterfell hinges on the word of RAMSAY FREAKIN BOLTON?!?!? Jon Snow, you know nothing.

Cause Jon would clearly now about Asha letter with Theons skin attached. I'm going to go with the very obvious military standby, hope for the best plan for the worst. People who take a threat at its word when it is a bluff are seen as overreacting, people who don't react to a threat when it turns out to be true fucking die.

[Ororo727 Jon Snow Fangirl]

The Boltons are the new Wardens of the North. The NW is completely unprotected from the South, so your saying that he should have ignored the threat from the Wardens of the North and risk the all of the lives NW from attacks from both sides of the wall because the letter was only from Ramsay and not Roose?

[David Selig]

I don't get how is going away a good plan even if we put aside the oathbreaking. It's freaking winter, people can barely move and we saw what happened to Stannis's army on their way to Winterfell. It's much better to stay at the Wall and wait for Ramsay to come - even the minimal forficition is better than nothing and this way it's Ramsay's forces who would have to pass 1000 miles through terrible weather, not Jon's..

[OnionAhaiReborn]

Post only mean your specific job for the NW, it doesn't mean that you can never leave the wall. If that were the case, what is the purpose of rangers? What some people forget is that Ramsay threatened Jon and the NW. With the threat of the Other's at hand, going to WInterfell with wildlings and handling The Bastard was the smart thing to do in order to allow the NW to concentrate on the threat to the entire realm. Marsh and the other assasins are much like Cercei, they cannot see the bigger picture and can only focus on the one issue that is written in large print. They are not be smart enough to read the fine print.

Well this is why I said the part about living and dying at the post is referring to desertion and then asked what constitutes desertion. I wasn't applying a rigid literal interpretation and saying it meant you couldn't leave the wall. But I think if it would have been desertion if Jon had not been stopped from leaving to go join Robb in a war over the affairs of the realm, it is also desertion to leave to go fight Ramsay. Ramsay is threatening the NW, it's true, but only if Jon decides he is going to use the forces of the NW to protect fake Arya, which I think would definitely constitute involving the NW in the affairs of the realm- keeping a Lord's wife from him because you don't like the Lord. So when Jon decides to go off to prevent a threat to the NW that is only a threat because he is going to involve the NW in the affairs of the realm, I do think this constitutions desertion and oathbreaking.

[TrueMetis]

I don't get how is going away a good plan even if we put aside the oathbreaking. It's freaking winter, people can barely move and we saw what happened to Stannis's army on their way to Winterfell. It's much better to stay at the Wall and wait for Ramsay to come - even the minimal forficition is better than nothing and this way it's Ramsay's forces who would have to pass 1000 miles through terrible weather, not Jon's..

Actually in this way Ramsay's forces would have to pass 1000 miles through terrible weather in addition to being harassed by Jon's forces. This would give the NW more time to prepare. Jon's forces would also have been made mostly of wildings who, aside from being useless in a siege, are well equipped for harsh winter conditions.

[mor2]

Did Jon deserve it?

ohhh most defiantly yes! and I say those words despite the fact that Jon used to be my favourite POV and I think he done all the right things, but for the sake of the story he had to go, because he was setup to high and from here could only do more AWESOME STUFF, making him even more a fantasy super hero kliche.

[Ororo727 Jon Snow Fangirl]

Well this is why I said the part about living and dying at the post is referring to desertion and then asked what constitutes desertion. I wasn't applying a rigid literal interpretation and saying it meant you couldn't leave the wall. But I think if it would have been desertion if Jon had not been stopped from leaving to go join Robb in a war over the affairs of the realm, it is also desertion to leave to go fight Ramsay. Ramsay is threatening the NW, it's true, but only if Jon decides he is going to use the forces of the NW to protect fake Arya, which I think would definitely constitute involving the NW in the affairs of the realm- keeping a Lord's wife from him because you don't like the Lord. So when Jon decides to go off to prevent a threat to the NW that is only a threat because he is going to involve the NW in the affairs of the realm, I do think this constitutions desertion and oathbreaking.

The NW is already involved in the affairs of the realm. Tywin Lannister started interfering with the NW when he sent the letter suggesting Slynt to be LC. Stannis, the only king to actually send troops to the NW and take Jon's request serious, has taken up post at Castle Black. The NW is the realms only chance to prevent annihilation at this junction of the game. Jon is in NO WAY deserting his post, not in any way, shape or form. The Bastard is involving himself in the business of the NW, not the other way around.

[Ororo727 Jon Snow Fangirl]

I don't get how is going away a good plan even if we put aside the oathbreaking. It's freaking winter, people can barely move and we saw what happened to Stannis's army on their way to Winterfell. It's much better to stay at the Wall and wait for Ramsay to come - even the minimal forficition is better than nothing and this way it's Ramsay's forces who would have to pass 1000 miles through terrible weather, not Jon's..

And risk the lives of the innocent women and children inhabiting the Gift?

[Superior Glokta]

One other thing. Who the fuck is supposed to hold down the Wall while Jon is off getting himself killed? From what I can tell, the only person keeping the Queens Men / NW / Wildings from slaughtering each other at the Wall is Jon Snow. He is the only guy who can talk with Wildlings / NW / and to a much lesser extent, the Queens Men as equals. Are we to believe that Dolorous Edd would be able to keep this tenuous peace? Seems that by leaving the Wall, Jon is dooming it. Damned if you do, damned if you dont.

[kephv]

Certainly not. You don't have a right to ice the LC just because you don't agree with him, especially if his ideas are sound. I don't even think they had a large backing, which is why the went the cowards way and stabbed him in the back.

[OnionAhaiReborn]

The NW is already involved in the affairs of the realm. Tywin Lannister started interfering with the NW when he sent the letter suggesting Slynt to be LC. Stannis, the only king to actually send troops to the NW and take Jon's request serious, has taken up post at Castle Black. The NW is the realms only chance to prevent annihilation at this junction of the game. Jon is in NO WAY deserting his post, not in any way, shape or form. The Bastard is involving himself in the business of the NW, not the other way around.

Well you're right that outsiders like Tywin and Ramsay have involved themselves in the affairs of the NW, but in order for you to say that Jon is not abandoning his post you have to say that one of these guys poses an immediate threat to the NW and it's mandate to defend against the Others. Ramsay is threatening the NW unless he gets Arya back. Jon doesn't even have "Arya" yet. But if he did, under the mandate of the NW he would have absolutely no right to shelter her. Sorry, there is just isn't a lot of wiggle room on this. If Ramsay says, "I will come fight you guys if you start killing Others" then the NW has a good reason to fight Ramsay because Ramsay is trying to prevent them from doing what the NW is supposed to do, but he is saying "I will come fight you guys if you keep my wife from me," which is not something the NW is supposed to be doing. Now, to be clear, I think Ramsay is an asshole and Jon is great and I don't think he should be killed for what he does- I don't think anyone should be killed for something done in anger that is not even an immoral decision. On the other hand, Jon should realize that his fight against the Others is more important than anything else and not go running off, and I think he has clearly broken the oath.