Do you think Ned Stark had it in him to kill his hostage Theon?

[Accio Euron]

I don't think so unless he had a sure reason to do it. But if it came between protecting his children and Theon, we all know who he would pick.

[NicciTarg]

I think he would. Would he have a spring in his step and song in his heart as he did it? Absolutely not. I think he would spend hours in the godswood contemplating his decision. I think he would mourn him like his own son, perhaps even choosing to keep his body at Winterfell. Ned's sense of honor would prevent him from making any other decision.

I am sure that oaths were pledged, promises given, etc over the whole Theon goes to Winterfell and he is killed if his father decides to start playing grab ass again. Like I said Ned would be honor bound. Also not to do it would be in defiance of what Robert decreed. I think the end result would drive an enormous wedge between the two though.

[Naathi Prince]

Ned has to do it. If the Crown's hostages aren't executed when their parents rebel, then no one will worry about the crown killing their hostage children when they contemplate rebellion.

[Currawong]

There's also Lord Blackwood's son who is sent with Jaime.

And before that, we see that Jaime also has other squires who are the sons of Riverlands lords. They were taken on as squires, but they were also hostages to ensure the continued co-operation of their families. Jaime at one stage reflects that he hopes their fathers do remain loyal, as he'd become rather fond of the boys and would have hated to execute them.

I think Ned would certainly have killed Theon if he had to. Being Ned, he might well have first sent a raven to Balon Greyjoy warning him about the likely death of his son, but if Balon hadn't pulled his head in and stopped whatever rebellion he was starting, then Ned would certainly have executed Theon. As others said, this is the whole point of taking wards / hostages like that in Westeros, and any lord that wasn't prepared to execute one if required would be seen as weak. Ned executed the NW deserter, even though he may have understood why the poor man ran away, because it was his duty to do so. He'd have done the same thing with Theon, if Duty had required it.

[Naathi Prince]

And before that, we see that Jaime also has other squires who are the sons of Riverlands lords. They were taken on as squires, but they were also hostages to ensure the continued co-operation of their families. Jaime at one stage reflects that he hopes their fathers do remain loyal, as he'd become rather fond of the boys and would have hated to execute them.

I think Ned would certainly have killed Theon if he had to. Being Ned, he might well have first sent a raven to Balon Greyjoy warning him about the likely death of his son, but if Balon hadn't pulled his head in and stopped whatever rebellion he was starting, then Ned would certainly have executed Theon. As others said, this is the whole point of taking wards / hostages like that in Westeros, and any lord that wasn't prepared to execute one if required would be seen as weak. Ned executed the NW deserter, even though he may have understood why the poor man ran away, because it was his duty to do so. He'd have done the same thing with Theon, if Duty had required it.

do they all go with Jaime, when he goes off with Brienne?

[Jolene Brown]

do they all go with Jaime, when he goes off with Brienne?

supposedly he and Brienne went off alone - she mentioned to him that he had to go alone, or the Hound would kill Sansa. I do wonder if Ilyn Payne or the squires/hostage will end up playing a role though, especially Ilyn, which would be interested, since he is related to Podrick.

[Currawong]

Well, we don't know if anyone goes with Jaime when he heads off with Brienne! I was simply pointing out the precedent of taking hostage/squires. But if Jaime leaves them with the Lannister forces, I am sure his other commanders - someone like Ser Adam Marbrand, for example - wouldn't hesitate to execute the boys if required.

Getting back to Ned possibly executing Theon though, I think that Ned would certainly have done so if necessary. He would not have liked it, and he may have given Balon Greyjoy one last chance, but he would have done so if push came to shove.

[SerCalius]

I believe Ned would be able to do it if Balon rebelled. He killed Lady, which was his king's command. Now if Robert commanded him to kill Theon, I'm sure he'd do it, hence the distance he kept between himself and Theon. That said, if push came to shove, They (the loyalist forces in a hypothetical Greyjoy Rebellion part II) would probably keep him around and install him as Lord of the Iron Islands after they would take care of Balon.

[Garlan Marius]

Ned has to do it. If the Crown's hostages aren't executed when their parents rebel, then no one will worry about the crown killing their hostage children when they contemplate rebellion.

This is it. The fact that the characters in the story are actually worried about their kin when they are held hostage shows that execution is not an empty threat. Ned must be able to kill Theon.

[Hear Us Roar]

If Balon rebelled killing Theon would not change a thing so Ned would not do it.

[Im no Ser]

Theon's hostage status wasn't there to muzzle Balon, it was to place a Greyjoy who rejected the traditions of the IronBorn way on the Sea Stone chair. One who not only plead fealty to Winterfell, but also had a close personal bond with the Warden of the North.

We see one other highborn Ironborn hostage - Baelor Blacktyde. When he returns to the Iron Isles it's as a worshipper of the seven and a major proponent of ending the war against Winterfell.

That's Balon's immediate concern when Theon returns - that his son is lost to him, not physically but ideologically. Fortunately for Balon, and unfortunately for everyone else, Theon immediately caves to his father's wishes. One wonders how differently it would have played out if Theon's return was after Balon's death.

Ironically, Balon's other living child was completely ready to break with the tradition of enmity with the North.

OTOH I recognize I appear to be in the minority. :wideeyed:

[Grip]

I dont think Ned could actually have killed Theon would Balon have rebelled again, he doesnt seem to have it in him. One can wonder though what happens if Robert, or whoever sits the Iron Throne, ordered Theon to be beheaded? Would Ned dare risk the wrath of the throne for a "hostage"?

[Currawong]

There is no reason why taking Theon as hostage couldn't do both. Ultimately, most desirable outcome was to have a person on the Sea Stone chair who was sympathetic / loyal to the ways of the north. But in the meantime, having Theon at Winterfell, and Balon knowing that Ned would execute him if required, was an effective surety against further rebellion. Whether Balon actually valued his son over Asha is another issue of course, but the principle was there :)

It would be quite normal to have that sort of double outcome as a desirable aspect of many of those ward/hostage situations. Certainly it is a threat against further rebellion. But if the boy (or in some cases, girl) is treated well and gets along with the 'captor' family, then there is every likelihood of the younger generation developing understanding and even friendship, and also having the ward/hostage grow up less hostile in general to that family. Also don't forget that arranged marriages were the norm, and there would always be the possibility of arranging a strategic marriage alliance at a later date. Sometimes to the immediate family of the captor(s), or possibly to another closely allied noble family. We see that with Jaime and Lord Jonos Bracken - Jonos is scornful that Jaime has accepted Hoster Blackwood as a hostage, so Jaime neatly tells him that he can provide one too, and send one of his five daughters to KL as it is a great honor to serve the queen! Certainly the girl would be a 'hostage', but of course she would also be well placed to have a suitable marriage arranged for her while at court.

[Sword in the Morning]

He would have done it for sure. Ned is the type of man who doesn't make a threat unless he's willing to carry it out.

[Pope Killdragon]

To stop another rebellion? In an instant. He was never that close to Theon. I believe the quote from one Theon's povs goes like this: ".... the shadow of his sword was always between us." Theon wasn't a child and Eddard raised him so that he wasn't treated cruelly or ostracized but he also knew that one day, he might have to kill him and Ned was prepared for that.

[Give Cersei some LOVE]

it really is no use to argue against neddards. The Ned can really do no harm and wrong.

[Pope Killdragon]

I mean, he isn't some cuddly teddie bear. He was a war veteran, Lord of Winterfell, Warden of the North and a cold, hard man who was able to do what needed to be done. I'm a neddard, but I just don't believe he was some angel what fell down from the heavens.

[danm_999]

I'd daresay Ned had a byplay in mind keeping Theon as a ward. I don't think it was ever his intention to automatically kill Theon if Balon rose up again.

In fact, it makes far more sense he keep Theon alive and happy if Balon rebels again, because his uses alive are far greater than the uses for him being dead.

[Pope Killdragon]

I'd daresay Ned had a byplay in mind keeping Theon as a ward. I don't think it was ever his intention to automatically kill Theon if Balon rose up again.

In fact, it makes far more sense he keep Theon alive and happy if Balon rebels again, because his uses alive are far greater than the uses for him being dead.

That's inconsistent with Ned's character, though. He didn't plot or hatch clever back-up plans. He didn't play the game until he was forced to. Besides. Theon's life is worthless if the Greyjoys rebel again. They'll be crushed and their seat and incomes given to the crown or an Islander house like the Harlaws. I don't see why it's so out of the realm of reality that someone like Ned Stark would be capable of killing a hostage. Someone he's always understood was a hostage and so never grew close to.

[danm_999]

That's inconsistent with Ned's character, though. He didn't plot or hatch clever back-up plans. He didn't play the game until he was forced to.

Like he never managed to hide Jon Snow's true parentage?

He didn't play the Southron Game of Thrones, but Northern politics? He sure as hell understood them.

He knew how to get most major Northern houses to not just like him, but love him. The man became an institution; Wyman Manderly still supports his son's memory. The Mountain Clans are marching through an unholy blizzard with Stannis to save Ned's daughter. Jon Snow was elected Lord Commander because he was a bastard son of Ned's. This is because of Ned. He knew how to foster a strong relationship with White Harbour, the Umbers, the Mountain Clans, Deepwood Motte and Torrhen's Square.

He, from personal experience, understood that one of the best ways to build alliances was to form childhood friendships (which is why he wanted to bring Bran to King's Landing to befriend Joffrey and Tommen).

He taught Jon and Robb half a dozen key lessons and crucial lessons to survive in the North; that the Umbers only respect strength, that the Boltons must be watched, that the man passing the sentence must swing the sword, and that a lord can love his men, but must be wary of getting too close, as he may one day have to judge them.

It was the court intrigue, and the little birds, and the excessive espionage, and Machiavellian plots of King's Landing that undid Ned.

Besides. Theon's life is worthless if the Greyjoys rebel again.

.

Au contraire. If Balon rebels again, where is the profit in killing Theon? Will killing him stop the Rebellion? No, this is closing the stable door after the horse has bolted. Balon would likely have written off Theon as lost to him in that event.

If Balon rebels again, Theon is actually very, very useful if he's on your side. Far more useful than he is dead. With Theon, you ruin Balon's succession planning. In AFFC, Aeron Damphair gives us some insight into what the problem really is for Balon with Theon being in Stark custody:

Balon had shaken his head in despair when he heard what Aeron had to tell him of his last remaining son. “The wolves have made a weakling of him, as I feared,” the king had said. “I pray god that they killed him, so he cannot stand in Asha’s way.

With Theon alive, Balon has a more difficulty naming Asha or one of his brothers as successor. Euron only wins the Kingsmoot in AFFC because Theon is widely believed to be dead.

It's a similar play that we see in the Mystery Knight, Bloodraven explains to Dunk why he wouldn't kill Daeron:

Dead, young Daemon is a hero. Alive, he is an obstacle in my half brother's path. He can hardly make a third Blackfyre king whilst the second remains so inconveniently alive.

They'll be crushed and their seat and incomes given to the crown or an Islander house like the Harlaws.

Or, you could give it to a Theon with Northern sympathies. That's going to be much more palpable for the Iron Islands than the Iron Throne controlling things.

I don't see why it's so out of the realm of reality that someone like Ned Stark would be capable of killing a hostage. Someone he's always understood was a hostage and so never grew close to.

It just makes little sense when push comes to shove. There's no real tangible benefit to killing Theon on Ned's side in a potential rebellion. Theon is supposed to act as a deterrant against future rebellions, not as a punishment to designed to cow the Ironborn once they've risen up.