Mourning Star

Many people have asked directly and no clear public answer has been given for what, 20 years? It seems like more fun to speculate, and I'd rather discuss the text anyway. It is only in deference to privileged information that this mystery is considered solved. Tyrion's theory is ripe with problems and references the whole way through: The king looked near as splendid as his bride, in his doublet of dusky rose, beneath a cloak of deep crimson velvet blazoned with his stag and lion. The crown rested easily on his curls, gold on gold. I saved that bloody crown for him. Tyrion shifted his weight uncomfortably from one foot to the other. He could not stand still. Too much wine. He should have thought to relieve himself before they set out from the Red Keep. The sleepless night he'd spent with Shae was making itself felt too, but most of all he wanted to strangle his bloody royal nephew. Tyrion is both drunk and self admittedly biased against Joff. Not to say that Joff isn't horrible but rather that this opinion clouds Tyrion's judgment in this specific case. I am no stranger to Valyrian steel, the boy had boasted. The septons were always going on about how the Father Above judges us all. If the Father would be so good as to topple over and crush Joff like a dung beetle, I might even believe it. Joff is not a stranger to Valyrian Steel, he ordered and witnessed Ned's execution on the steps of the Sept. This tells us nothing about the dagger or Joff. He ought to have seen it long ago. Jaime would never send another man to do his killing, and Cersei was too cunning to use a knife that could be traced back to her, but Joff, arrogant vicious stupid little wretch that he was . . . Why use a knife at all? Let alone a unique and identifiable one. Joff was sure to have been present, at the tournament in honor of his own name day, when Robert won the dagger from Littlefinger. He remembered a cold morning when he'd climbed down the steep exterior steps from Winterfell's library to find Prince Joffrey jesting with the Hound about killing wolves. Send a dog to kill a wolf, he said. Even Joffrey was not so foolish as to command Sandor Clegane to slay a son of Eddard Stark, however; the Hound would have gone to Cersei. Instead the boy found his catspaw among the unsavory lot of freeriders, merchants, and camp followers who'd attached themselves to the king's party as they made their way north. Some poxy lackwit willing to risk his life for a prince's favor and a little coin. Tyrion wondered whose idea it had been to wait until Robert left Winterfell before opening Bran's throat. Joff's, most like. No doubt he thought it was the height of cunning. We get a direct reference to the Library, and to the group Mance joined to gain entry to Winterfell and I suspect the Winterfell Library plays a larger role here than most give credit. More below. Joff did not say, "send a dog to kill a dog." Nor did he mean killing Bran. Compare to the quote below. If the theory is that it would be easy to find an assassin using the prince's favor and a little coin, why is an identifiable dagger used at all? Tyrion waffles between Joff being smart and Joff being stupid. The prince's own dagger had a jeweled pommel and inlaid goldwork on the blade, Tyrion seemed to recall. At least Joff had not been stupid enough to use that. Instead he went poking among his father's weapons. Robert Baratheon was a man of careless generosity, and would have given his son any dagger he wanted . . . but Tyrion guessed that the boy had just taken it. Robert had come to Winterfell with a long tail of knights and retainers, a huge wheelhouse, and a baggage train. No doubt some diligent servant had made certain that the king's weapons went with him, in case he should desire any of them. Why would Joff go poking around his father's weapons? Again, why find a special dagger to use at all? And if he could have just taken it, couldn't someone else have? All in all I made much better time than Robert, who was traveling with a ponderous great wheelhouse to keep his queen in comfort. A day south of Winterfell I came up on him and fell in with his company. Freeriders and hedge knights are always attaching themselves to royal processions, in hopes of finding service with the king, and my lute gained me easy acceptance. Like Mance. The why of it still eluded him. Simple cruelty, perhaps? His nephew had that in abundance. It was all Tyrion could do not to retch up all the wine he'd drunk, piss in his breeches, or both. He squirmed uncomfortably. Even Drunk Tyrion can't fathom why Joff would do this except simple cruelty. It was meant as mockery, but she'd cut right to the heart of it, Jaime saw at once. "Not Myrcella. Joffrey." Cersei frowned. "Joffrey had no love for Robb Stark, but the younger boy was nothing to him. He was only a child himself." "A child hungry for a pat on the head from that sot you let him believe was his father." He had an uncomfortable thought. "Tyrion almost died because of this bloody dagger. If he knew the whole thing was Joffrey's work, that might be why . . ." Obviously, Tyrion did not kill Joff. Cersei's assessment of Joff matches his own words, quoted below. He didn't care about Bran. There is no conceivable way Joff could expect to get a pat on the head for this. If it was successful then who would know it was him? And this is the same boy who was hit by his father for using a dagger on a cat. "Joffrey . . . I remember once, this kitchen cat . . . the cooks were wont to feed her scraps and fish heads. One told the boy that she had kittens in her belly, thinking he might want one. Joffrey opened up the poor thing with a dagger to see if it were true. When he found the kittens, he brought them to show to his father. Robert hit the boy so hard I thought he'd killed him." Whoever sent the catspaw, must have done so after Bran fell, making it not a long planned plot (or part of a larger one), but they also used the King's own unique identifiable dagger, and so had to have goals larger than just Bran's death. The reason to use a unique dagger is so it can be found. The Lord of Winterfell is dead, and his heir has marched his strength south to fight the Lannisters. The wildlings may never again have such a chance as this. I knew Mance Rayder, Jon. He is an oathbreaker, yes . . . but he has eyes to see, and no man has ever dared to name him faintheart." The dagger led directly to Ned's death (and Joff's not being a stranger to Valyrian Steel) and the war of the five kings. I think Mance set the fire in the Winterfell Library after looking for information, and that information was likely his reason for being in Winterfell, then digging in the Frostfangs after his return North of the Wall. When the direwolf howled again, Tyrion shut the heavy leather-bound cover on the book he was reading, a hundred-year-old discourse on the changing of the seasons by a long-dead maester. He covered a yawn with the back of his hand. His reading lamp was flickering, its oil all but gone, as dawn light leaked through the high windows. He had been at it all night, but that was nothing new. Tyrion Lannister was not much a one for sleeping. His legs were stiff and sore as he eased down off the bench. He massaged some life back into them and limped heavily to the table where the septon was snoring softly, his head pillowed on an open book in front of him. Tyrion glanced at the title. A life of the Grand Maester Aethelmure, no wonder. "Chayle," he said softly. The young man jerked up, blinking, confused, the crystal of his order swinging wildly on its silver chain. "I'm off to break my fast. See that you return the books to the shelves. Be gentle with the Valyrian scrolls, the parchment is very dry. Ayrmidon's Engines of War is quite rare, and yours is the only complete copy I've ever seen." Chayle gaped at him, still half-asleep. Patiently, Tyrion repeated his instructions, then clapped the septon on the shoulder and left him to his tasks. Outside, Tyrion swallowed a lungful of the cold morning air and began his laborious descent of the steep stone steps that corkscrewed around the exterior of the library tower. It was slow going; the steps were cut high and narrow, while his legs were short and twisted. The rising sun had not yet cleared the walls of Winterfell, but the men were already hard at it in the yard below. Sandor Clegane's rasping voice drifted up to him. "The boy is a long time dying. I wish he would be quicker about it." Tyrion glanced down and saw the Hound standing with young Joffrey as squires swarmed around them. "At least he dies quietly," the prince replied. "It's the wolf that makes the noise. I could scarce sleep last night." Clegane cast a long shadow across the hard-packed earth as his squire lowered the black helm over his head. "I could silence the creature, if it please you," he said through his open visor. His boy placed a longsword in his hand. He tested the weight of it, slicing at the cold morning air. Behind him, the yard rang to the clangor of steel on steel. The notion seemed to delight the prince. "Send a dog to kill a dog!" he exclaimed. "Winterfell is so infested with wolves, the Starks would never miss one." Tyrion hopped off the last step onto the yard. "I beg to differ, nephew," he said. "The Starks can count past six. Unlike some princes I might name." Joffrey had the grace at least to blush. "A voice from nowhere," Sandor said. He peered through his helm, looking this way and that. "Spirits of the air!" Until proven otherwise, I think the kid who can't count, and assumes Bran is quietly dying, is a less likely suspect than the named in chapter one but unseen enemy secretly inside the walls. Mance thinks he'll fight, the brave sweet stubborn man, like the white walkers were no more than rangers, but what does he know? What does he know? I suspect things he learned from the Winterfell Library, and would even go so far as to suggest it was the original target of the expedition. "They're dogs and he's a wolf," said Jon. "They know he's not their kind." No more than I am yours. But he had his duty to be mindful of, the task Qhorin Halfhand had laid upon him as they shared that final fire—to play the part of turncloak, and find whatever it was that the wildlings had been seeking in the bleak cold wilderness of the Frostfangs. "Some power," Qhorin had named it to the Old Bear, but he had died before learning what it was, or whether Mance Rayder had found it with his digging. Why was Mance Rayder digging? What led him there all of a sudden after his return from WInterfell? Like many theories, if it never comes back up, then that itself is an answer. Other than a direct quote from the horse's mouth, which I clearly do not expect, there is no reason to think this would be revealed outside the text in advance of another book. Especially with Mance last seen back inside Winterfell. So while we wait, we may as well enjoy our speculations!

I honestly still just disagree that this resolves the issue. It's far from a clear answer. "He was the fourth this year," Ned said grimly. "The poor man was half-mad. Something had put a fear in him so deep that my words could not reach him." He sighed. "Ben writes that the strength of the Night's Watch is down below a thousand. It's not only desertions. They are losing men on rangings as well." "Is it the wildlings?" she asked. "Who else?" Ned lifted Ice, looked down the cool steel length of it. "And it will only grow worse. The day may come when I will have no choice but to call the banners and ride north to deal with this King-beyond-the-Wall for good and all." "Beyond the Wall?" The thought made Catelyn shudder. Ned saw the dread on her face. "Mance Rayder is nothing for us to fear." Ned talking about fear is a huge red flag. One can only be brave when one is afraid. Say what you will about Cat, she was brave with the catspaw. There is reason to suspect Mance would have had a motive from early on. "You're as stupid as you are ugly, Hali," said the tall woman. "The boy's worth nothing dead, but alive … gods be damned, think what Mance would give to have Benjen Stark's own blood to hostage!" "Mance be damned," the big man cursed. "You want to go back there, Osha? More fool you. Think the white walkers will care if you have a hostage?" He turned back to Bran and slashed at the strap around his thigh. The leather parted with a sigh. What we didn't know at the time, and learned in ASOS, was that Mance was in Winterfell and brought a bag of silver. I can't argue with privileged information. But, if no claim to that is being made, then I'm willing to die on this hill. Mance makes more sense as being the one behind the catspaw at every level, from story telling, to motive, to means. There is even hard evidence in the bag of silver linking him to the crime. All that said, I really do appreciate the engagement here by Ran, and the work on this forum in general, it's given me much joy, even if it turns out I'm totally wrong about every tinfoil theory I believe in. I look forward to the day we get another book...

Show me the quote from the author saying it was Joff and obviously the debate would be over. Until then it's all fan fiction. I'm surely not the first to suggest Mance sent the catspaw. As I've said, it's impossible to argue with privileged information, but nowhere in the canon does it say Joff did it. Nor have I ever seen a quote from the author saying it. But please, do share... If Ran wants this debate quashed then so be it, I'll stop, it's his forum, but I don't think asking for evidence or making an argument based on the text are out of line here.

What letter? Does GRRM say in black and white that Joff did it? Or is this the same comment about evidence being in Storm? Like a bag of silver... I think you are wrong. But as someone with direct access to GRRM, if you swear he has told you without a doubt that it was Joff, then I'm hardly in a position to argue with such privileged information. But, I know no canon but what is written. Joff is not the only name explicitly connected to the crime, there are multiple other characters accused, like Tyrion. We watch Joff order Ned's execution with Valyrian steel, literally the same steel he is holding in his hand when saying this line, we know, without a doubt, that Joff is no stranger to Valyrian Steel. Tyrion just wasn't there. How would Joff remember the assassin attacking Cat? "Have a care, Your Grace," Ser Addam Marbrand warned the king. "Valyrian steel is perilously sharp." "I remember." Joffrey brought Widow's Wail down in a savage two-handed slice, onto the book that Tyrion had given him. The heavy leather cover parted at a stroke. "Sharp! I told you, I am no stranger to Valyrian steel." It took him half a dozen further cuts to hack the thick tome apart, and the boy was breathless by the time he was done. Sansa could feel her husband struggling with his fury as Ser Osmund Kettleblack shouted, "I pray you never turn that wicked edge on me, sire." Even Tyrion's memory alludes to Ned's execution for the reader's behalf, Ned was executed on the steps of Baelor's Sept: I am no stranger to Valyrian steel, the boy had boasted. The septons were always going on about how the Father Above judges us all. If the Father would be so good as to topple over and crush Joff like a dung beetle, I might even believe it. Was Mance even in Winterfell during Robert's visit in the TV show? Are we using the TV show as evidence of book canon now?

My favorite sword without a hilt quote: "There was a knight once who couldn't see," Bran said stubbornly, as Ser Rodrik went on below. "Old Nan told me about him. He had a long staff with blades at both ends and he could spin it in his hands and chop two men at once." "Symeon Star-Eyes," Luwin said as he marked numbers in a book. "When he lost his eyes, he put star sapphires in the empty sockets, or so the singers claim. Bran, that is only a story, like the tales of Florian the Fool. A fable from the Age of Heroes." The maester tsked. "You must put these dreams aside, they will only break your heart."

I think there is a fair bit of textual evidence that directly contradicts this. I think trials happened, but I think we will see first hand how this can backfire, as the "Old Gods" appear to be the dead gone down into the trees, along with their biases and their hates. I don't think they are some source of objectivity or fairness. I think their "truth" is as subject to opinion as our own. Also, I think this is part of why violating Guestright is such a sin, those souls would linger on in your Weirwood. But, I don't think every sacrifice was a a trial either. I do not agree with this. Criminals can still be sacrifices. I don't see any reason to think "the greens faction", whoever they are, are any less self serving than any other group. I wouldn't be surprised to learn that not all singers agree and/or are the same "faction". In fact I think this is likely. I will be shocked if the children/weirwoods aren't directly linked to the return of the Others.

I can't help but point out that The Tower of Joy, "Joyous Gard" in Arthurian legend, was previously called the "Dolorous Gard" before it is renamed by Lancelot, and reverts to this name after he breaks with Arthur.

Only death can pay for life. I enjoyed the opening post here, and I would go even a step further. Please pardon my rant! The story explores "the heart in conflict with itself", which I think is the very core of what life is, hard choices, free will. Life is conflict. Life is inherently a state of change. All living things consume to survive. Life is a fleeting struggle. Nothing burns like the cold. But only for a while. Then it gets inside you and starts to fill you up, and after a while you don't have the strength to fight it. It's easier just to sit down or go to sleep. They say you don't feel any pain toward the end. First you go weak and drowsy, and everything starts to fade, and then it's like sinking into a sea of warm milk. Peaceful, like. Peace is death, or perhaps, at best, its lesser cousin, a dream. "Look at them. They're young and strong, full of life and laughter. And lust, aye, more lust than they know what to do with. There will be many a bastard bred this night, I promise you. Why pity?" "Because it will not last," Catelyn answered, sadly. "Because they are the knights of summer, and winter is coming." "Lady Catelyn, you are wrong." Brienne regarded her with eyes as blue as her armor. "Winter will never come for the likes of us. Should we die in battle, they will surely sing of us, and it's always summer in the songs. In the songs all knights are gallant, all maids are beautiful, and the sun is always shining." Winter comes for all of us, Catelyn thought. For me, it came when Ned died. It will come for you too, child, and sooner than you like. She did not have the heart to say it. The idea that there is some theoretical perfect natural equilibrium is a illusion. The natural order is one of constant change and constant conflict. Change is natural and inevitable. All men must die, and this is not unique to men. Night follows day, spring follows winter. Species evolve (change) or go extinct. "Gone down into the earth," she answered. "Into the stones, into the trees. Before the First Men came all this land that you call Westeros was home to us, yet even in those days we were few. The gods gave us long lives but not great numbers, lest we overrun the world as deer will overrun a wood where there are no wolves to hunt them. That was in the dawn of days, when our sun was rising. Now it sinks, and this is our long dwindling. The giants are almost gone as well, they who were our bane and our brothers. The great lions of the western hills have been slain, the unicorns are all but gone, the mammoths down to a few hundred. The direwolves will outlast us all, but their time will come as well. In the world that men have made, there is no room for them, or us." She seemed sad when she said it, and that made Bran sad as well. It was only later that he thought, Men would not be sad. Men would be wroth. Men would hate and swear a bloody vengeance. The singers sing sad songs, where men would fight and kill. Seasons lasting for years is, I believe, a manifestation of a magical resistance to change, a resistance to the natural order of things. "A man must know how to look before he can hope to see," said Lord Brynden. "Those were shadows of days past that you saw, Bran. You were looking through the eyes of the heart tree in your godswood. Time is different for a tree than for a man. Sun and soil and water, these are the things a weirwood understands, not days and years and centuries. For men, time is a river. We are trapped in its flow, hurtling from past to present, always in the same direction. The lives of trees are different. They root and grow and die in one place, and that river does not move them. The oak is the acorn, the acorn is the oak. And the weirwood … a thousand human years are a moment to a weirwood, and through such gates you and I may gaze into the past." Even Weirwoods cannot withstand the flow of time forever, no matter how much they may try.

I don't think the reader is presented with any real evidence Joffrey was involved. But, feel free to try and make any case you want using the text. This I disagree with. The assassin had been paid, and there was no need for a special dagger to kill a cripple. So I'm saying that the best explanation for the assassin using a unique dagger at all was to leave it so it would be found after the deed was done. The dagger being unique and identifiable is a major plot point. But, it does point to someone in the king's party... which is the whole point, and what plays out in the story. If Bran was dead with the knife sticking out of him? It would have proceeded much the same as it did in the story where Bran was in a coma still anyway. True, which is why there still needs to be an explanation for using the dagger at all. I don't think I'm discounting something here, I think you are ignoring a major plot point. It wasn't just any knife. There is a reason to suppose it was meant to be found, because why else would it be there at all? Again, I think handwaving away clearly intentional things in the writing you can't explain is a disservice to yourself and the story. I don't know why you think the theory that it's just bad writing would be convincing. I disagree. I think the dagger was meant to be found by the person behind the assassin in the story. I think the author meant to take you for a ride, and has succeeded. It's not clumsy its intentionally nonsensical. Think for yourself, see what is there. Or rely on vague quotes from 20+ years ago before ASOS was even released, after all this author has never adjusted his plan for anything right? I'm just pointing out what is there in black and white. Not to mention, we literally receive the reveal that Mance was in Winterfell in ASOS. He is mentioned repeatedly in AGoT. Just don't say you were not warned. Why would you be on a forum about these books except to discuss theories about them? Again, you fall back to dismissive handwaving rather than actually addressing the text or theory at hand. That some theories are almost certainly destined to be wrong doesn't mean they all will be. Believe what you want, entertainment is literally the point here. What people believe won't change the story. But, I think most every person I've talked to about Tyrion's piss drunk blaming of Joff theory realizes it makes no sense and is activly undermined by the text itself. And, I do find the cultlike insistence on it somehow being true because of a vaguely worded quote from 20+ years ago (before ASOS was published) to be laughable. The OP was literally asking for better explanations since it's apparent to many readers that that theory is fundamentally flawed. I think my case is supported by the text, and I have repeatedly quoted the text in making it. All you seem to contribute around here is pique lol

I don't know what you are talking about, Littlefinger wasn't even in Winterfell to know that Bran had "fallen", let alone plot an assassination attempt. However, the only reason to send the king's unique dagger to kill a cripple in bed (when a pillow would do) is if it was meant to be found after the deed was done. I do think causing strife was a clear goal of the catspaw attempt on Bran's life. At the end of the day you can handwave anything away as just being how it was written and having no meaning, but I think you are doing yourself a disservice. How did Mance discover where the Horn of Joramun was? Did they find it? I don't think his timing of going to the Frostfangs to dig after his trip to Winterfell was a coincidence. Counterpoint, the assassination attempt on Bran was a distraction from the fire in the Library, and discovering how to defeat the Others was the priority. Mance thinks he'll fight, the brave sweet stubborn man, like the white walkers were no more than rangers, but what does he know? He can call himself King-beyond-the-Wall all he likes, but he's still just another old black crow who flew down from the Shadow Tower. Even with the attempt having failed, the dagger caused dissention south of the Wall (and presumably would have been left at the scene if the attempt had been successful for just this purpose), and nobody even wonders if there was another reason the library was involved. I don't think it's a coincidence that it is the same scene where Tyrion shows the readers the priceless ancient flammable scrolls before exiting the Library and hearing Joff say his (later misquoted) send a dog to kill a dog quote. I don't know what you are trying to say about names from a hat, there are not many options for people secretly in Winterfell with motive means and hard evidence linking them to the crime... Nor are there many with as up in the air a relationship as Jon and Mance. So I guess I just don't think you could pull a name from a hat and it be the same here at all... Mance wouldn't know the details of what happened after he left Winterfell and would want to find out if there was any suspicion he was involved. The assassin could have been caught and tortured for all he knew. "Aye, and long before them came the Horned Lord and the brother kings Gendel and Gorne, and in ancient days Joramun, who blew the Horn of Winter and woke giants from the earth. Each man of them broke his strength on the Wall, or was broken by the power of Winterfell on the far side . . . but the Night's Watch is only a shadow of what we were, and who remains to oppose the wildlings besides us? The Lord of Winterfell is dead, and his heir has marched his strength south to fight the Lannisters. The wildlings may never again have such a chance as this. I knew Mance Rayder, Jon. He is an oathbreaker, yes . . . but he has eyes to see, and no man has ever dared to name him faintheart." But if this theory is right, there is no doubt that sending the catspaw worked. I suspect Mance will have a justification for his actions, saving his people, mercy for a crippled boy, but I do think he's capable of ordering a child's death, a theme that we see built up in the series. "There is power in a king's blood," the old maester had warned, "and better men than Stannis have done worse things than this." The king can be harsh and unforgiving, aye, but a babe still on the breast? Only a monster would give a living child to the flames. And, Mance does love the sound of his own voice. Bael wrote his own songs, and lived them. I only sing the songs that better men have made. More mead?" ... Mance Rayder smiled, as Jon had hoped he would. The king was plainly a man who liked the sound of his own voice. "You will have heard stories of my desertion, I have no doubt." While I clearly disagree, I would point out that I actually think this too ties back to the start of the story and some of the major moral themes. His lord father smiled. "Old Nan has been telling you stories again. In truth, the man was an oathbreaker, a deserter from the Night's Watch. No man is more dangerous. The deserter knows his life is forfeit if he is taken, so he will not flinch from any crime, no matter how vile. But you mistake me. The question was not why the man had to die, but why I must do it." And you may also note that if this theory is correct, Mance did not not wield the knife, another mark against him, on top of trying to kill a child. Tell me, my honorable Lord Eddard, how are you any different from Robert, or me, or Jaime?" "For a start," said Ned, "I do not kill children. Just do not say you were not warned.

Tyrion presumes the dagger was in the baggage train, not an armory. Robert had come to Winterfell with a long tail of knights and retainers, a huge wheelhouse, and a baggage train. No doubt some diligent servant had made certain that the king's weapons went with him, in case he should desire any of them. I obviously cannot provide a perfect explanation, only what we get from Mance himself. I won't pretend this theory can be declared fact, but it does seem to me the best explanation for what we know. I think Mance stole the dagger from the baggage train, maybe after a song and a few rounds of drinks, which doesn't seem remarkably more difficult to me than the rest of his adventure. "The Wall can stop an army, but not a man alone. I took a lute and a bag of silver, scaled the ice near Long Barrow, walked a few leagues south of the New Gift, and bought a horse. All in all I made much better time than Robert, who was traveling with a ponderous great wheelhouse to keep his queen in comfort. A day south of Winterfell I came up on him and fell in with his company. Freeriders and hedge knights are always attaching themselves to royal processions, in hopes of finding service with the king, and my lute gained me easy acceptance." He laughed. "I know every bawdy song that's ever been made, north or south of the Wall. So there you are. The night your father feasted Robert, I sat in the back of his hall on a bench with the other freeriders, listening to Orland of Oldtown play the high harp and sing of dead kings beneath the sea. I betook of your lord father's meat and mead, had a look at Kingslayer and Imp . . . and made passing note of Lord Eddard's children and the wolf pups that ran at their heels." "Bael the Bard," said Jon, remembering the tale that Ygritte had told him in the Frostfangs, the night he'd almost killed her. "Would that I were. I will not deny that Bael's exploit inspired mine own . . . but I did not steal either of your sisters that I recall. Bael wrote his own songs, and lived them. I only sing the songs that better men have made. More mead?" If I'm waxing poetic, I think that where Bael stole Lord Stark's future (his only daughter, and by extension grandson), Mance stole Lord Stark's past, the knowledge of the library, and now he is back in Winterfell, possibly with access to the crypts: "To see these crypts. Where are they, m'lord? Would you show me?" Holly toyed with a strand of her hair, coiling it around her little finger. "Deep and dark, they say. A good place for touching. All the dead kings watching." "Did Abel send you to me?" "Might be. Might be I sent myself. But if it's Abel you're wanting, I could bring him. He'll sing m'lord a sweet song." Every word she said persuaded Theon that this was all some ploy. But whose, and to what end? What could Abel want of him? The man was just a singer, a pander with a lute and a false smile. He wants to know how I took the castle, but not to make a song of it. The answer came to him. He wants to know how we got in so he can get out. Lord Bolton had Winterfell sewn up tight as a babe's swaddling clothes. No one could come or go without his leave. He wants to flee, him and his washerwoman. Theon could not blame him, but even so he said, "I want no part of Abel, or you, or any of your sisters. Just leave me be." But, if you think the dagger was kept in the Winterfell armory, which I suppose is possible, I would suggest that Bran may have told us a way in: The howling chased him all the way up the tree, until finally he jumped off onto the armory roof and out of sight. ... The best way was to start from the godswood, shinny up the tall sentinel, and cross over the armory and the guards hall, leaping roof to roof, barefoot so the guards wouldn't hear you overhead. ... He liked the birds: the crows in the broken tower, the tiny little sparrows that nested in cracks between the stones, the ancient owl that slept in the dusty loft above the old armory. Bran knew them all.

Mance Rayder is (presumably) alive and in Winterfell. What was Mance digging for in the Frostfangs? Did he find it? Is there a connection to the rare old information that burned, or was stolen from, Winterfell's Library? How would the knowledge that Mance tried to have Bran killed impact his relationship with Jon? What game are you playing, priestess? Did you have some other task for Mance?

It is in ASOS that we find out Mance was there. "The Wall can stop an army, but not a man alone. I took a lute and a bag of silver, scaled the ice near Long Barrow, walked a few leagues south of the New Gift, and bought a horse. A Storm of Swords - Jon I I would go so far as to say that this was GRRMs plan from the start too! It always surprises me how early Mance's name shows up in the story on a reread, especially knowing he was in Winterfell for Robert's visit! The man had been taken outside a small holdfast in the hills. Robb thought he was a wildling, his sword sworn to Mance Rayder, the King-beyond-the-Wall. It made Bran's skin prickle to think of it. He remembered the hearth tales Old Nan told them. The wildlings were cruel men, she said, slavers and slayers and thieves. They consorted with giants and ghouls, stole girl children in the dead of night, and drank blood from polished horns. And their women lay with the Others in the Long Night to sire terrible half-human children. A Game of Thrones - Bran I "Is it the wildlings?" she asked. "Who else?" Ned lifted Ice, looked down the cool steel length of it. "And it will only grow worse. The day may come when I will have no choice but to call the banners and ride north to deal with this King-beyond-the-Wall for good and all." "Beyond the Wall?" The thought made Catelyn shudder. Ned saw the dread on her face. "Mance Rayder is nothing for us to fear." "There are darker things beyond the Wall." She glanced behind her at the heart tree, the pale bark and red eyes, watching, listening, thinking its long slow thoughts. His smile was gentle. "You listen to too many of Old Nan's stories. The Others are as dead as the children of the forest, gone eight thousand years. Maester Luwin will tell you they never lived at all. No living man has ever seen one." A Game of Thrones - Catelyn I

Ned's execution, preformed with the Valyrian Steel blade Ice. Joff even uses the executioners stroke on Tyrion's gift of books. In my opinion it was Mance, the shadowcat, who sent the catspaw and burned the Winterfell Library before returning north of the Wall to dig in the Frostfangs and gather the Wildlings. He was there, had motive, means and a bag of silver. "The Wall can stop an army, but not a man alone. I took a lute and a bag of silver, scaled the ice near Long Barrow, walked a few leagues south of the New Gift, and bought a horse. All in all I made much better time than Robert, who was traveling with a ponderous great wheelhouse to keep his queen in comfort. A day south of Winterfell I came up on him and fell in with his company. Freeriders and hedge knights are always attaching themselves to royal processions, in hopes of finding service with the king, and my lute gained me easy acceptance." He laughed. "I know every bawdy song that's ever been made, north or south of the Wall. So there you are. The night your father feasted Robert, I sat in the back of his hall on a bench with the other freeriders, listening to Orland of Oldtown play the high harp and sing of dead kings beneath the sea. I betook of your lord father's meat and mead, had a look at Kingslayer and Imp . . . and made passing note of Lord Eddard's children and the wolf pups that ran at their heels." Mance fell in with the King's company, and the Valyrian dagger was likely in the baggage train. "And when he did not, you knew your danger was worse than ever, so you gave your catspaw a bag of silver to make certain Bran would never wake." "Did I now?" Jaime lifted his cup and took a long swallow. "I won't deny we talked of it, but you were with the boy day and night, your maester and Lord Eddard attended him frequently, and there were guards, even those damned direwolves . . . it would have required cutting my way through half of Winterfell. And why bother, when the boy seemed like to die of his own accord?" Mance had reason to see a Stark of Winterfell dead, cause dissention in the south (sending the catspaw with the king's dagger), get into the Winterfell Library, and might even have seen it as a mercy. "North of the Wall it is. Hemlock is a sure cure, but a pillow or a blade will work as well. If I had given birth to that poor child, I would have given her the gift of mercy long ago."

So she told Ned what she says later? "Your butcher's boy attacked the prince." Or is that an example of her "growing"? After all character development does not have to be for the better. The point remains, we do not know what she told Ned. And it doesn't really matter. When called upon to defend her sister she did not. Did she change for the better though? I'm not so sure. I also think you are kind of skipping over the irony that what we are reading here is literally the Song of Ice and Fire. So Sansa's story, could literally be described as a song. The lesson isn't that there is nothing to take from songs and stories, or that there is no truth in them. However her story unfolds, she still has a lot of growing up to do. I could easily see her becoming ruthless and practical because of some misguided notion that "life isn't a song". Or I could see her remember the lessons of her songs and stories and Stark upbringing before it's too late. Right... It's wrong to lie and not come to the defense of a sibling inside or outside of a formal trial setting. The whole type of trial discussion was in response to someone else. As I said, this is not a formal trial, and that isn't relevant to the morality of the situation anyway. She is asked to tell the truth in defense of her family and she chooses not to, the result is the death of her wolf. It's possible she grows into a better person, but I haven't seen much evidence of that yet. Helping Dontos was probably her most "good" moral action, but I could see how the result might be taken by her character as a lesson against showing mercy (which I have to believe is not a "good" lesson, nor the point of this story). As I said before, I think her story could still go either way.

How can you possibly think this? Are we reading the same series? In a series full of heinous crimes how do these even compare? People starved till they eat themselves, babies heads smashed into walls, son strangled trying to save his slow cooked dad, being burned alive, flayed, etc. I’ll assume this is just exaggeration and move on… Justice isn’t easy and not always clear. The very question of what justice is, is one of the big themes explored by the series. Maybe, I think his case is an interesting one, I’ll give you that. After all, the series starts with a runaway brother of the Watch being executed by Ned in the name of Justice. If Daeron is to be believed, we only get his side of the story and while it’s entirely possible he was telling the truth, we don’t know that. It seems hypocritical to accept that he was innocent while at the same time suggesting that what we are told about the old man is false. That said, I’m inclined to agree that killing him seemed morally wrong, even if it’s “legal” to kill a Night’s Watchman who abandoned his oath. I am inclined to agree that Faceless Murderers are not a morally upstanding organization. As you said, the crimes of the old man are unclear. It is also unclear what the motives or justifications of the Faceless Men are. However, it does seem to me that they follow some sort of code, and I’m hopeful we learn more in the future. Stoneheart is a thing, not at all in agreement that this is Jon’s fate. Is it worse? I’m not sure I agree with the assessment or judgement at all. Mercy is never a mistake… what is mercy? Another big question I think see explored by the series. Dark does not mean evil. This is some Melisandre logic. I’m with Davos on this, full of doubt. Highheart is referring to heart trees. Heart trees (Weirwoods) turn to stone when they die, Stoneheart is dead. He could almost smell the place, earthy and brooding, the smell of centuries, and he remembered how dark the wood had been even by day. That wood was Winterfell. It was the north. This seems like a wild leap without coherent logic. When I read the Ghost of Highheart’s words it seems she is talking about Arya’s grief, not grief she will cause.

I don't think I am, but that's ok, we can disagree. Joff's "aim" in investigating the sounds and assaulting Mycah was not to protect Sansa, that's a dishonest description of events. Sansa didn't put it this way, this account was never given by her. This is why it's fanfiction. I am certainly being a little dramatic by calling it fan fiction, but a dishonest hypothetical account that did not appear in the story fits the bill. You clearly disagree and think it's a meaningful argument. I think we've long since past the point of constructive debate here.

It's not true to what happened and she didn't do that, this is what makes it fan fiction... He literally says he wants to see what's going on. Joff gives the reason he wants to go... to see. Then he says he wants to see how good Mycah is... saying his stated aim was to protect Sansa from hidden fighters is just not true. This sort of dishonesty about events and it being suggested as some alternate story where this is what Sansa says is exactly why I call it fan fiction lol

I assume that people have already read the text being discussed. This is objectively untue: That's Joff's stated aim was to keep Sansa safe from the (then hidden) fighters. "I want to see what it is." Joffrey turned his horse in the direction of the sounds, and Sansa had no choice but to follow. The noises grew louder and more distinct, the clack of wood on wood, and as they grew closer they heard heavy breathing as well, and now and then a grunt. "Someone's there," Sansa said anxiously. She found herself thinking of Lady, wishing the direwolf was with her. "You're safe with me." Joffrey drew his Lion's Tooth from its sheath. The sound of steel on leather made her tremble. "This way," he said, riding through a stand of trees. What you wrote was fanfiction, one could go through it point by point but why bother, as you said anyone can read the text and see the clearly dishonest portrayal of events.

He doesn't do any independent investigation of events or interviews with witnesses... which is usually what one would look for in a non adversarial system. Aren't they though? Making accusations, calling witnesses, proposing punishments... it seems to me that they are acting on behalf of their children here. Again, I don't think the comparison is that meaningful nor was this a traditional court setting. Sometimes. Sometimes not taking a side is still taking a side. Inaction is a choice just like action is. Not telling the truth when called on to do so is dishonest, and, when it would benefit one side, refusing to testify is de facto taking a side. Again, you can make your own conclusions, but I see this as a betrayal by Sansa.

A character's actions and thoughts so far in the story is what we have to work with when trying to predict the future. As I said before, I'm not totally sold on what direction Sansa will take in the Sweetrobin question. It does seem like Sweetrobin is being "poisoned", and it seems Littlefinger expects Harry to be the heir, and he is trying to set up Sansa and Harry. This would seem to place Sansa in a position to be complicit with (either knowingly or in ignorance) the plot to see her cousin dead and marry his heir... or for her to oppose this plot. We can hope so for her sake. But there is Ned wisdom and then there is Littlefinger wisdom, I still hold out some hope that she will take after her real father. But, it does seem to be in Sansa's nature to act in her self interest over loyalty to her family, at least so far. I think that's the connection here.

One calls on a witness to tell the truth, this is true no matter who calls them or why they were called. A witness can be asked to tell the truth if it is for the sake of the defense, accuser, or just for the sake of truth. Being called on to defend Arya, is being called on to tell the truth for the sake of defending her... which is exactly what happened. Ned and Cersei are clearly the ones acting on behalf of their children here. In a non adversarial system the judge should be part of the investigation, of which there is no evidence here. It may exist in theory but we have not seen it... I wouldn't mind, after the main series is complete, till then it's not exactly my first request. Not taking a side, especially in a situation like this, is still taking a side. Refusing to come to her sisters defense, or even just stating the truth as she knew it (which would be a defense of Arya in this case), was a betrayl imo. It can happen, but it is only necessary in an adversarial system. In an inquisitorial system there is no right to face your accused or right for the defense to call witnesses. Again, I'm not sure this distinction is meaningful here, this was hardly a formal court setting to begin with.

And you are entitled to your opinion no matter how wrong it is. Below is fan fiction, and it's both ridiculous and disingenuous to pretend otherwise. "A butcher's boy who wants to be a knight, is it?" Joffrey swung down from his mount, sword in hand. "Pick up your sword, butcher's boy," he said, his eyes bright with amusement. "Let us see how good you are."

As I keep saying, I don't know why you brought up this distinction at all or why you think it's meaningful. Ned calls on Sansa to defend Arya... That's why he does it, to refute the story put forward by Joffrey. That a witness is asked to tell the truth in any system I've ever heard of doesn't seem relevant to anything here, except that Sansa is clearly not honest. I see this as a betrayal. I was providing you with history in regards to one of the defining characteristic differences between these types of systems since you seem to be interested in the topic. England makes for a good comparison to Westeros, and this history is critical to understanding comparative legal systems. I could have pointed to the Sixth Amendment of the US Constitution, but it seemed less relevant of an example here. We do not have the codified laws of Westeros, but if you are trying to place this event into either an adversarial or non-adversarial bucket, I think it leans toward adversarial. We have an accuser and defendant both making statements to the judge (king) and he then makes a determination (or in this case no real legal judgment). The presence of an accuser, the defense calling a witness, and the lack of any independent investigation by the "court", make me inclined to call this adversarial. But again, the distinction doesn't seem very meaningful here, this was clearly no official trial.

You're supposed to tell the truth no matter what system you are in. I do not see any actual distinction here. Also, again, she is called on by the defense, Ned. Because the ecclesiastical court system in Europe, including England, was an inquisitorial system and this distinction (the need for an accuser) was a big deal. If you are interested in the subject, the history is very interesting, but just to give you a brief synopsis I'll quote Wikipedia: Beginning in 1198, Pope Innocent III issued a series of decretals that reformed the ecclesiastical court system. Under the new processus per inquisitionem (inquisitional procedure), an ecclesiastical magistrate no longer required a formal accusation to summon and try a defendant. Instead, an ecclesiastical court could summon and interrogate witnesses of its own initiative. If the (possibly secret) testimony of those witnesses accused a person of a crime, that person could be summoned and tried. In 1215, the Fourth Council of the Lateran affirmed the use of the inquisitional system. The council forbade clergy from conducting trials by ordeal or combat. As a result, in parts of continental Europe, the ecclesiastical courts operating under the inquisitional procedure became the dominant method by which disputes were adjudicated. In France, the parlements — lay courts — also employed inquisitorial proceedings.[4] In England, however, King Henry II had established separate secular courts during the 1160s. While the ecclesiastical courts of England, like those on the continent, adopted the inquisitional system, the secular common law courts continued to operate under the adversarial system. The adversarial principle that a person could not be tried until formally accused continued to apply for most criminal cases. In 1215 this principle became enshrined as article 38 of the Magna Carta: "No bailiff for the future shall, upon his own unsupported complaint, put anyone to his law, without credible witnesses brought for this purposes."