Jon Snow ReRead Project! Part 5! (DwD)

[Lykos]

Lummel, well done. And let me add some general praise to Rag and bumps!, I wish I could contribute more often. (My main problem is that I have a whole mountain range of weird thoughts attached to every little detail, that I can´t hope to explain in the time available.)

or '"Un roi, un loi, un foi" (one king, one law, one faith) of Louis XIV, wasn't it? Remember how that worked out a hundred or so years later.

I know the maxim "Ein Reich, ein Glaube, ein Kaiser" (one realm, one faith, one emperor, - almost exactly Melissandre´s words). It is attributed to Karl V. in the light of his claim to rule a catholic empire in which the sun never sets.

I guess his son Phillip II and later the "Sun King" as well as Hitler (Ein Volk, ein Reich, ein Führer) referred to this maxim.

Karl V. had to deal with Martin Luther´s theses which later caused the split of the protestant from the catholic church.

(Two interesting tidbits about Thomas Müntzer, who was a follower of Martin Luther and became a radical leader in the Peasant´s War, are that he led the peasants under the rainbow flag and apparently used a symbolic scythe sword.)

The interesting thing about the other sheep not in this pen, that need to be brought in and added to the flock, stands in contrast to the attitude Mel displays later.

For now she seems happy to bring in the Magnar of Thenn, I wonder wether Stannis would really approve? I found Jon´s thoughts about Stannis wanting to marry "the girl on a dying horse" to one of his bannermen much more likely.

This is the first look at the folks at the Wall we get after Mel's big mistake about the "gray girl on the dying horse" is revealed. We don't get to see Jon tell Mel about Alys. That would have been an interesting scene, but it's left to the imagination. Instead, we see Jon hosting a marriage between two Old God believers (assuming the Thenns follow the Old Gods) officiated by Mel, using a R'hllorist rite. This seems to me to be a case of Jon very deliberately throwing Stannis a bone.<snip>

I think it´s Selyse, who is trown a bone by Jon and Mel is happy to dance the dance with Jon, for she wants him to rely on her.

How much you want to bet that Alys and Sigorn stopped at the first heart tree they found on the trip back to Karhold and retook their vows?

That seems very probable to me, do you think Jon, in the role of Alys´ father / lord and the Flint and the Norrey as witnesses would attend this second wedding?

New page, edited to clarify what I refer to.

[Lummel]

Yes, I agree with the both of you it is a very political act on Jon's part to have Melisandre conduct the wedding since it links Alys, Sigorn, Stannis, Selyse and Melisandre in a community of interest getting rid of a potential ground on which they could have criticised Jon.

I thought it was interesting that nobody refers to the old gods in this chapter even though this is as Ibbsen noted this is the wedding of two believers in the old gods brokered by a third.

Yeah, I can imagine the two remarrying at a heart tree, presumably at Karhold in the eyes of the Karstarks and their retainers.

Persuading Alys and Sigorn to get married this way also happens off page. I think that Stannis would probably have preferred to marry Alys to one of his men and Sigorn to one of Selyse's ladies. Lucky Selyse doesn't seem to be too clever...

[Fire Eater]

Very good job, Lummel

"You see fools in your fire, but no hint of Stannis?"

:laugh: For some reason I find this funny, with Stannis put in the same sentence as fools.

"Some say you tucked her away for your own pleasure. It makes no matter to me, so long as she is not with child. I'll get my own sons on her. If you've broken her to saddle, well . . . we are both men of the world, are we not?"

Jon had heard enough. "Ser Axell, if you are truly the Queen's Hand, I pity Her Grace."

We again have Axell being a jackass. Breaking a horse to saddle involves breaking the horse's spirit, so it can let other riders mount it. What Axell was probably saying was "If you kept her as your personal concubine and raped her a few times, I won't hold that against you. I mean we're both guys, right? We're the product of this world." Jon's reply was pretty tame compared to what others might have said in his position.

Jon as a Politician

She had to pay her uncle his just due. With one stroke, Euron had turned a rival into a supporter, secured the isles in his absence, and removed Asha as a threat.

In one stroke, Jon manages to turn a rival, Sigorn, into a supporter, secure Karhold for both Stannis and the NW, and remove the threat of Alys's marriage to Cregan.

Jon Snow met them up the kingsroad half a league south of Mole's Town, before they could turn up at Castle Black, claim guest right, or call for parley. One of Karstark's men had loosed a crossbow quarrel at Ty and died for it.

Jon met them along the kingsroad, and Cregan's party loosed a quarrel at them. Thus, it was Cregan's party who initiated the conflict, and giving Jon justification for imprisoning them.

Foreshadowing:

As he [sigorn] leaned down to kiss her cheek, their breath mingled.

Val kissed him lightly on the cheek. "You have my thanks Lord Snow. For the half-blind horse, the salt cod, the free air. For hope." Their breath mingled, a white mist in the air.

A little hint to Jon and Val's future?

"Two [horn] blasts," he announced. Val

Tormund Giabtsbane had come at last.

Great horns of the North wildly blowing. Rohan had come at last.

-The Return of the King, Battle of Pelennor Fields.

Tormund's arrival is a reference to the arrival of the Rohirrim, which included Eowyn. Like Val, Eowyn is a grey-eyed blonde princess who is a skilled rider and rides a grey horse. Eowyn was also known for her unrequited love for Aragorn, just as Val has towards Jon (at the moment at least), and married Faramir.

Under the sea, the mermen feast on starfish soup, and all the serving men are crabs.

Lord Borrell, whose sigil is a crab, sent Davos, Stannis's Hand (the hand has five fingers like a starfish's five appendages), to White Harbor to meet Manderly, whose sigil is a merman.

You are seeing cinders dancing in the updraft.

"Ashes and cinders."
"Kings and dragons."

The dead will dance here this night.

In the dark the dead are dancing

The last quote is from Patchface in the previous chapter, and one before is from MMD when she "revives" Drogo form his fatal wounds. With cinders=dragons, and cinders dancing in the updraft, Jon may learn of his Targaryen heritage when he is "dead," and he will be revived. Especially since Mel and Jon are talking about "snow" and AAR being reborn with dragons woken from stone, and amidst smoke and salt, like the meat lockers in the ice cells.

Rusted hinges screamed like damned souls when Wick Whittlestick yanked the door wide enough for Jon to slip through.

That brings imagery of the gates of hell/underworld, and Wick is the first one to strike Jon. Jon slips through, and then comes out. I think this may foreshadow Jon's visiting the underworld, and coming back from it.

[Mithras]

She had to pay her uncle his just due. With one stroke, Euron had turned a rival into a supporter, secured the isles in his absence, and removed Asha as a threat.

In one stroke, Jon manages to turn a rival, Sigorn, into a supporter, secure Karhold for both Stannis and the NW, and remove the threat of Alys's marriage to Cregan.

Euron gave Asha to Eric the Anvilbreaker. In the last episode of the TV show, Sigorn’s father tried to break the anvil using Jon’s head. :P

Rusted hinges screamed like damned souls when Wick Whittlestick yanked the door wide enough for Jon to slip through.

That brings imagery of the gates of hell/underworld, and Wick is the first one to strike Jon. Jon slips through, and then comes out. I think this may foreshadow Jon's visiting the underworld, and coming back from it.

Whenever the rusted hinges scream, I immediately recall Aeron. I think there might be some parallels in his story with Jon.

Euron is a godless man according to Aeron. Stannis is a godless man for Jon.

Aeron was terrorized by Euron in his psychopathy. Jon is plagued by Stannis in his always demanding the impossible manners.

Aeron’s ship was smashed by the Fury of Stannis. If the theory that Stannis wrote the Pink Letter is true, then Jon was smashed by Stannis too.

Aeron died and he was then reborn as a new man. Jon will die and when he wakes up, he will be reborn a new man.

Aeron stayed in the bowels of the Casterly Rock, where Jaime’s famous dream takes place. Jon will go to the crypts of Winterfell in his dream to meet his mother just like Jaime did.

[Julia H.]

Wonderful job, as always.

Except for kings and uncles...

Perhaps Alys and Sigorn have to be married by Melisandre so Stannis would be less likely to annul the marriage. If they got married in front of the heart tree, Stannis could easily disregard it and marry off Alys to one of his lords. It won't be so simple if R'hllor is involved.

It is funny that Sigorn seems scared. I understand him though.

Excellent observation of Jon sitting on the lower benches in Jon I GoT and Jon being a lord and a host in this chapter. We can add to this that in GoT the official reason for his removal from the family was that the royal guests might be insulted by his presence. Now he has a queen among his guests.

The girl smiled in a way that reminded Jon so much of his little sister that it almost broke his heart.

Jon keeps thinking of Arya. This is the second time on-page that Alys has reminded him of his little sister. A few lines later, he gives Alys away as though he were her father. So far Jon has found brothers on the Wall as well as a surrogate father in Lord Mormont, who gave him the sword that was passed on from father to son. Now he has found a new sister and a symbolic daughter – he, who cannot expect to ever have children of his own.

I am reminded of Dany being called Mother by the people she has freed.

Jon socialising off-page:

Val had reminded him of that, on his last visit with her. Jon V ADWD

So he has visited Val several times (it isn't just “when he had last talked to her”). He has also heard her sing to the baby.

Also, in the previous chapter Alys asked him about blood feud between them and knelt in front of him begging for protection. In this chapter, she is playfully asking him to dance (Jon knows better than accept), and she is also touching his hand. They couldn't have reached this level of intimacy without socialising.

“We shall not require your … steward.” The way the man drew out the last word told Jon he had been considering saying something else. Boy? Pet? Whore?

Jon perfectly understands the insinuation, but chooses to ignore it. (It is interesting to compare it with the accusation regarding Val, coming from another of the queen's knights in the same chapter. Those knights must be spending their evenings gossiping about the Lord Commander.) The incident shows how vulnerable Satin is. During the feast, Jon doesn't like they way some of the queen's knights are looking at the steward. Apparently, not everybody can completely leave behind their past just by joining the NW. (As a new recruit, Jon hadn't been allowed to forget his bastard status either.) I still think that is the main reason or at least one of the reasons why Jon keeps Satin by his side. Jon is shielding him from provocation (or from something worse).

“You see fools in your fire, but no hint of Stannis?”

Does Jon mean, even though you see fools... ?

Melisandre:

“When I search for him all I see is snow.”

This is actually ambiguous, and Jon may not understand it the same way as Melisandre. Compare:

“I pray for a glimpse of Azor Ahai, and R'hllor shows me only Snow.” (Melisandre ADwD)

The quote may be symbolic of the restructuring of power between Jon and Stannis. Stannis has disappeared behind snow / Snow.

Melisandre:

“Stannis is the Lord's chosen, destined to lead the fight against the dark. I have seen it in the flames, read of it in an ancient prophecy...”

A few lines later:

“The vision was a true one. It was my reading that was false. I am as mortal as you, Jon Snow. All mortals err.”

And she has just erred again.

Five heartbeats passed. Ten. Twenty. Then Owen the Oaf tittered, and Jon Snow could breathe again. “Two blasts,” he announced. “Wildlings.” Val.

These lines send a shiver down my spine. Are they another instance of foreshadowing?

[Fire Eater]

Euron gave Asha to Eric the Anvilbreaker. In the last episode of the TV show, Sigorn’s father tried to break the anvil using Jon’s head. :P

Whenever the rusted hinges scream, I immediately recall Aeron. I think there might be some parallels in his story with Jon.

a

He hears the hinges scream when Euron Crow's Eye is named King of the Iron Isles.

Five heartbeats passed. Ten. Twenty. Then Owen the Oaf tittered, and Jon Snow could breathe again. “Two blasts,” he announced. “Wildlings.” Val.

These lines send a shiver down my spine. Is that another instance of foreshadowing?

That has a romantic connotation to it when you look at it. The quiet tension and mentioning of heartbeats, and breathing again, similar to descriptions of an incoming kiss. I think Jon will breathe again, or come back from death when Val kisses him. Think "the last kiss" used to resurrect Beric and and Cat, only literally with Val thinking Jon is dead, and giving him one last kiss.

[Lummel]

...Jon keeps thinking of Arya. This is the second time on-page that Alys has reminded him of his little sister. A few lines later, he gives Alys away as though he were her father. So far Jon has found brothers on the Wall as well as a surrogate father in Lord Mormont, who gave him the sword that was passed on from father to son. Now he has found a new sister and a symbolic daughter – he, who cannot expect to ever have children of his own.

I am reminded of Dany being called Mother by the people she has freed...

I like that, Dr. Pepper had a similar notion in Learning to Lead with Daenerys becoming a maternal and Jon a paternal figure, but it seems to me that you're right to point out that this is a direct boond with Alys, not a abstract father over the Watch and wildlings, but more of an ersatz father/brother to Alys as though he is building a substitute family. I think yes, Alys playfulness does imply that they've spent quite a bit of time together inbetween chapters and grown close.

There's a contrast here between Alys given away by Jon and even Jeyne by Reek - both of whom do their best to be supportive of the bride and Joffrey giving away Sansa - other very political marriages that didn't work out well. I like teh detail of Jon giving Alys' hand a squeeze, even though it was perhaps poor Sigorn who was more in need of it :laugh:

[Lummel]

...She had to pay her uncle his just due. With one stroke, Euron had turned a rival into a supporter, secured the isles in his absence, and removed Asha as a threat.

In one stroke, Jon manages to turn a rival, Sigorn, into a supporter, secure Karhold for both Stannis and the NW, and remove the threat of Alys's marriage to Cregan.

...

Under the sea, the mermen feast on starfish soup, and all the serving men are crabs.

Lord Borrell, whose sigil is a crab, sent Davos, Stannis's Hand (the hand has five fingers like a starfish's five appendages), to White Harbor to meet Manderly, whose sigil is a merman...

Oh Borrell sending Davos to Manderley is a neat reading of Patchface!

I don't know if the Alys Signorn marriage has won Karhold to Stannis. To my mind it has won it for Jon, this is the interesting thing, it shifts the relationship between Stannis and Jon in Jon's favour - assuming that both survive into TWOW.

[butterbumps!]

Jon's passiviety – responding to events

We've seen before how Jon in ADWD has been cleaning up after the problems left for him and has been like Daenerys largely responding to the actions of others. His interventions, like saving Mance's son, started subtly but increasingly have larger repercussions. Taking the wildlings on without their having to follow R'hllor or kneel even to Jon in Jon V is a breach with Stannis' policy. As is sending out Val to bring in Tormund under similar conditions, also here with the marriage he is changing the balance of power in the North. When Stannis arrived at the end of ASOS his was the dominant military force in the far north. By the end of ADWD this is not the case – Stannis will not be able to enforce the worship of R'hllor and will be obliged to negiotate and treat with the anti-Bolton forces as an equal.

Can we say this is a reflection of a growth in Jon's confidence as he grows into his position or has he been forced by circumstances into being more pragmatic? Is is an artifical distinction? Jon is pushed into making decisions and these decisions bear the stamp of his character.

I've been trying to pitch this in pieces for a while in various places, and finally just put it more bluntly in a thread today. Jon IX, X and XI seem to be where Jon gains serious momentum as something beyond what those in-universe, as well as readers, would expect of an LC. I think it's fair to say that he's been adding kingly duties onto his Watchman ones.

What if it's actually the case that this is what was intended by the original vows? When you consider that when the vows were created, there were hundreds of kingdoms, un-unified, and that the vows list "waking the sleepers" (i.e. alerting and rallying people) as one of the duties, I don't think it's a stretch to wonder if the Watch, and by extension, the LC were intended to function as the single authority in a time of crisis. How were the 100s of disparate kingdoms supposed to gather together to fight the common enemy, if not by rallying behind an identifiable neutral authority commanding them?

I'm not looking for a loophole to avoid oathbreaking or anything like that. I just wonder if what Jon's gotten himself into in terms of transcending the customary LC role into something closer to a "King for Winter" was implicitly designed into the vow. The vow almost suggests that it's the organization meant to lead men (i.e. including non-Watchmen, who would be following them) in a state of extreme emergency.

"Some say you tucked her away for your own pleasure. It makes no matter to me, so long as she is not with child. I'll get my own sons on her. If you've broken her to saddle, well . . . we are both men of the world, are we not?"

Jon had heard enough. "Ser Axell, if you are truly the Queen's Hand, I pity Her Grace."

We again have Axell being a jackass. Breaking a horse to saddle involves breaking horse's spirit, so it can let other riders mount it. What Axel was probably saying was "If you kept her as your personal concubine and raped her a few times, I won't hold that against you. I mean we're both guys, right? We're the product of this world." Jon's reply was pretty tame compared to what others might have said in his position.

lol, yes, that's pretty much how I understand this as well.

[Ragnorak]

Very nice, Lummel. I like your wedding compare across the book and series. I think you're correct to include Asha as it offers an uncle successfully depriving a niece of agency. I suppose Lady Hornwood's off page marriage might belong on the list too as it offers a possible contrast to what happens when there isn't a son of Eddard Stark to run to.

I'm going to don my squirrel and rabbit fur jingling antler hat, try to embrace my inner prophetic lunatic, and read the tea leaves between the lines...

How is this marriage perceived by the Southron Fool crowd?

Selyse is no Cat Stark who can act with certainty that Ned will have her back so much that he'll lie to a king and claim he ordered her actions. She is no Ollena Tyrell either who can wield power in her House in her own right. Power flows from Stannis and only Stannis. Even Mel's power flows from the faith and trust Stannis has placed in her-- Melisandre has the king's ear. Stannis left these people at Eastwatch. He has no use for them and they wield no power with him.

This means that neither Selyse or Axell really has the authority in the Stannis camp to go making marriage matches without risking bringing some heat down upon themselves... and heat in the Stannis world is bad. While Stannis does say essentially the exact same thing as Axell about a king needing to be open handed, Stannis has his own list of who he wants to give prime rewards to and being left at Eastwatch with Selyse probably means you're at the bottom of that list if you're even on it at all.

“Horpe and Massey aspire to your father’s seat. Massey wants the wildling princess too. He once served my brother Robert as squire and acquired his appetite for female flesh. Horpe will take Val to wife if I command it, but it is battle he lusts for. As a squire he dreamed of a white cloak, but Cersei Lannister spoke against him and Robert passed him over. Perhaps rightly. Ser Richard is too fond of killing. Which would you have as Lord of Winterfell, Snow? The smiler or the slayer?”

Remember, Stannis plans to give Winterfell and Val as a package to the new Lord Paramount of the North. It seems that Axell is trying to sleaze his way into a Winterfell lordship by claiming half of that package deal for himself. Considering that Selyse will eventually pick Ser Patrick as a match for Val I think we can assume that this is Axell's solo notion and primarily a delusion in his own head. He's probably rather fortunate that he's failing since I suspect Stannis would simply burn him alive to free Val up to remarry (assuming Axell miraculously didn't get stabbed to death on his wedding night.) Since Axell was Val hunting since he arrived and Selyse showed no interest in the Wildling Princess I think Axell is scheming and Selyse still believes marriages are affairs best left to her husband lest she feel his wrath.

Selyse might have objected to a Jon arranging a marriage but not with Melisandre performing the service. She likely knew nothing of the affair prior to knowing of Mel's involvement. So picking Mel is a politically astute move because it ensures Selyse and Co. will embrace his actions here and offers insulation should Stannis object later (though I suspect revealing the Karstark betrayal would suffice to save Jon regardless of how upset Stannis could get over such a marriage.) Mel sort of has to go along with what Jon wants since she screwed up and there's an Alys and not an Arya. She needs this vision to work out into something important for Jon in order to bolster the importance of her visions. Even though Mel is a good tactical choice politically, I think Jon's arranging of a marriage (any marriage) opens up the doors for a Selyse to consider doing the same.

Axell may well be alluding to marriages to Selyse in his efforts to scheme his own to Val. Ser Patrick has probably openly complained about a Wildling getting a reward he feels is his if Axell is mentioning it to Jon. Aside from the political aspirations of Selyse and the Sycophants, this wedding is a hell of a lot more interesting than dealing with Cotter Pyke. It is the very type of thing Selyse would want to be happening at "her court." If Jon as a mere Lord Commander can start arranging marriages, why can't a queen? At least that's how I suspect Selyse starts viewing things (or those around her start telling her to view things) that let's her overcome her reluctance to interfere in the political dealings of her husband. So Jon arranging a marriage here offers cover for Selyse to start doing the same even though she knows Stannis would blow a gasket at her doing so. The company she keeps knows they are at the very bottom of the pecking order and likely encourage her to grant them the very things they'll never get from Stannis justifying her match making authority relative to Jon's. So while Selyse may well have intended to move on to the Nightfort initially. her proximity to Mel, the taste of Southron courtly intrigue surrounding the marriage, and the opportunity she feels Jon has opened for her to arrange marriage rewards for her followers (as opposed to her husband's) conspire to make Castle Black her home.

“A northern maid and a wildling warrior, bound together by the Lord of Light.” Ser Axell Florent slipped into Lady Alys’s vacant seat. “Her Grace approves. I am close to her, my lord, so I know her mind. King Stannis will approve as well.”

“Not all agree, alas.” Ser Axell’s beard was a ragged brush beneath his sagging chin; coarse hair sprouted from his ears and nostrils. “Ser Patrek feels he would have made a better match for Lady Alys. His lands were lost to him when he came north.”

I don't think Stannis would approve of this match given that he'd most certainly prefer to marry Alys to one of his own. Given the Karstark betrayal I don't think he'd punish Jon, but approve seems quite a stretch. Stannis has a plan for uniting the North and the Wildlings and it was very clearly a Lord of Winterfell and Val marriage and not a Karstark one. Selyse struck me as in total awe of Mel and just thrilled to have a Red God wedding after a severe Cotter Pyke overdose amidst a complete void of southern courtly comforts. So I don't think "approve" even enters the equation at this point in time for Selyse. Aside from the buttering Jon up to weasel Val's location facet, I think we can read this approval nonsense as clues into Axell's thinking-- primarily that he can get Selyse to approve marriages now and that he thinks he can sell "Stannis will approve" as a beg forgiveness instead of ask permission option.

Kingly Actions

Jon's thoughts on this I think are probably quite different from how they are publicly perceived. Last chapter he tells Alys that marriages and inheritance are matters for a king and yet he goes about solving her marriage and inheritance problems this very next chapter. Jon's thinking is revealed when he talks to Cregan:

Karhold belongs to Lady Alys. And she has given her hand in marriage to Sigorn, Magnar of Thenn.

Now there's truth in this in that it seems clear Alys went along with this given her circumstances, but Cregan obviously thinks it is Jon's act since he asks if he sampled Alys first. The Flint and Norrey I suspect think this is Jon's act as well. I think part of the reason they didn't dump their wine at the toast is because they're here to size up Jon and don't want to be perceived as objecting to this marriage that they view as arranged by Jon. The other part is that I get the sense these are two coy old men who aren't about to tip their hands over a toast. They have a far more important agenda than defending the North's honor against a mustache. While Jon tells himself that it was Alys through his words to Cregan I suspect he's the only one who thinks of it this way including Alys and Sigorn. Jon is even giving Alys away like Joffrey did with Sansa when a King usurped the role of a father or brother based on kingly authority. I think this is a case where the character's own POV mutes the truth of how his actions are truly perceived by others.

Patchface

Under the sea the mermen feast on starfish soup, and all the serving men are crabs,” Patchface proclaimed as they went. “I know, I know, oh, oh, oh.”

This seems to be one of those clearly prophetic Patchface lines. Generally I take this to mean that House Crabb of the Sisters will use their lighthouse trick to serve starfish to House Manderly. The starfish are clearly <insert anything because I haven't the slightest clue.> The swords and stars are the only one that comes to mind though I can't quite envision how that might come about without making stuff up. "Starfish" ought to be a sigil based on that interpretation but every sigil I can find with stars just doesn't make any sense and the one with an actual starfish (House Ruthermount) hasn't made an appearance yet.

An alternative idea I've pondered is that it foretells the involvement of Essos in Westerosi affairs. If Myr is pronounced Mur like gold, frankincense, and myrrh, than Myrmen is pronounced mermen and the Trade War involving Lys, Tyrosh and Myr might spill over into Westeros and the North with some influence from a Dany liberating Volantis, taking Pentos, and generally causing continental chaos. No idea how to guess at even a plausible chain of events there but I'm throwing it out there.

AA Reborn

When the red star bleeds and the darkness gathers, Azor Ahai shall be born again amidst smoke and salt to wake dragons out of stone. Dragonstone is the place of smoke and salt.”

Jon had heard all this before. “Stannis Baratheon was the Lord of Dragonstone, but he was not born there. He was born at Storm’s End, like his brothers.”

For what its worth this is very intentionally Dany-centric. Pointing out that Stannis wasn't born on Dragonstone right after talking about dragons waking from stone is like flat out saying "Dany is AA."

[Lummel]

...I wish I could contribute more often. (My main problem is that I have a whole mountain range of weird thoughts attached to every little detail, that I can´t hope to explain in the time available.)...

Don't worry about it, we're glad that you join in when you can :)

...Jon IX, X and XI seem to be where Jon gains serious momentum as something beyond what those in-universe, as well as readers, would expect of an LC. I think it's fair to say that he's been adding kingly duties onto his Watchman ones.

What if it's actually the case that this is what was intended by the original vows? ...How were the 100s of disparate kingdoms supposed to gather together to fight the common enemy, if not by rallying behind an identifiable neutral authority commanding them?...

Hmm well if we're speculating about the beginning of things...I suppose I'd say that it may not have been a case of 100 kingdoms but of the dozen or so which later became the north and given that the military arm of the Watch is made up of rangers the implication to my mind is more about patrol and skirmishing, equally that any fighting that they were required to do was on that scale. Since the White Walkers are a supernatural enemy vulnerable to obsidian perhaps it makes better sense to imagine a small, experienced force, able to live off the land and capable of using appropriate weapons keeping the white walkers off the realms of men than big coalition armies marching around the north. Although intrinsically the watch was a coalition of forces from the 100 kingdoms, so neutrality was a sensible requirement when you need Brackens and Blackwoods to serve side by side.

Then and now I'm not sure that numbers will help. But we'll see.

In terms of transcending the role of Lord Commander I suppose we can look at that in three ways:

1. Acting as a king

Acting as the senior Stark

Pushing the boundaries of the role of Lord Commander of the Night's Watch

But in terms of this chapter we could interpret Jon's actions as falling into all three. Jon told Alys as Ragnorak pointed out that disposing of her in marriage was the prerogative of the king - so he is acting as a king. However she appealed to Jon as a kinsman and senior representative of the Starks - so he's acting as Señor Stark. And when you come down to it 'protecting the realms of men' is open to interpretation - where does that duty end? If arranging a marriage helps the watch to defend the realms of men isn't this a necessary thing for them to do. I'd say if we take 'protecting the realms of men' as the watch's primary duty where is the end to the extent they could quite legitimately intervene in the internal affairs of Westeros? So long as they don't breach the other conditions of the oath surely the door is wide open?

ETA But I think we can take this a bit further by thinking about Jon's character for instance:

1. Jon acts like the King because L+R=J, kinglyness is genetic and so GRRM's portrayal of Jon in ASOIAF is in ironic contrast to those who claim to be kings but like the crown gene

Jon acts as the senior stark because of his upbringing and admiration for The Ned who is his primary role model, in the absence of a senior Stark he steps into that vacuum

A primary component of Jon's character is his sense of duty and obligation whether to his family or his oath, these are serious matters for him and he can't escape the logic of his position

[Lummel]

...Axell may well be alluding to marriages to Selyse in his efforts to scheme his own to Val. Ser Patrick has probably openly complained about a Wildling getting a reward he feels is his if Axell is mentioning it to Jon. Aside from the political aspirations of Selyse and the Sycophants, this wedding is a hell of a lot more interesting than dealing with Cotter Pyke. It is the very type of thing Selyse would want to be happening at "her court." If Jon as a mere Lord Commander can start arranging marriages, why can't a queen? At least that's how I suspect Selyse starts viewing things (or those around her start telling her to view things) that let's her overcome her reluctance to interfere in the political dealings of her husband. So Jon arranging a marriage here offers cover for Selyse to start doing the same even though she knows Stannis would blow a gasket at her doing so. The company she keeps knows they are at the very bottom of the pecking order and likely encourage her to grant them the very things they'll never get from Stannis justifying her match making authority relative to Jon's. So while Selyse may well have intended to move on to the Nightfort initially. her proximity to Mel, the taste of Southron courtly intrigue surrounding the marriage, and the opportunity she feels Jon has opened for her to arrange marriage rewards for her followers (as opposed to her husband's) conspire to make Castle Black her home.

...

Now there's truth in this in that it seems clear Alys went along with this given her circumstances, but Cregan obviously thinks it is Jon's act since he asks if he sampled Alys first. The Flint and Norrey I suspect think this is Jon's act as well. I think part of the reason they didn't dump their wine at the toast is because they're here to size up Jon and don't want to be perceived as objecting to this marriage that they view as arranged by Jon. The other part is that I get the sense these are two coy old men who aren't about to tip their hands over a toast. They have a far more important agenda than defending the North's honor against a mustache. While Jon tells himself that it was Alys through his words to Cregan I suspect he's the only one who thinks of it this way including Alys and Sigorn. Jon is even giving Alys away like Joffrey did with Sansa when a King usurped the role of a father or brother based on kingly authority. I think this is a case where the character's own POV mutes the truth of how his actions are truly perceived by others.

...

For what its worth this is very intentionally Dany-centric. Pointing out that Stannis wasn't born on Dragonstone right after talking about dragons waking from stone is like flat out saying "Dany is AA."

Hmm, yes I agree on Daenerys, this is particularly striking since this is the chapter in which Melisandre says that she makes mistake too. In which case she can be mistaken about Azor Ahai and as it happens we know somebody who has rather successfully woken some stone dragons...

Poor Melisandre, she really is an object lesson in the pit falls of blind faith.

I'm not sure if we should take what Jon says to Cregan at face value as a reflection of what he thinks. Alys choosing to marry Sigorn is a stronger argument than Jon saying that he strongarmed her into it. The first doesn't allow any possibility of Cregan legitimately objecting - the women made a decision of her own free will, while the second suggests compulsion and a fair ground for the marriage to be repudiated.

Also Jon is on bad ground here, he can hardly claim a right to act in the place of a king or as señor stark or as Lord Commander of the Watch in respect of his duty to protect the realms of men even if any of those did drive his thinking. The only safe argument is that Alys is a legal adult acting out of her own free will while Cregan and co were fixing on infringing her rights.

I like your take that Jon here is the inspiration for Selyse's matchmaking wedding schemes and I think based on GRRM's description of her at the wedding that's a strong reading. She is completed wowed and for the men in her service this is obviously a fantastic opportunity to steal a march on their potential rivals who were sent down south by getting the brides and hopefully the broad rolling lands to go with them. Arranging marriages, Selyse might well feel, falls better into the purview of a Queen that the warlike attributes of a king.

[butterbumps!]

Hmm well if we're speculating about the beginning of things...I suppose I'd say that it may not have been a case of 100 kingdoms but of the dozen or so which later became the north and given that the military arm of the Watch is made up of rangers the implication to my mind is more about patrol and skirmishing, equally that any fighting that they were required to do was on that scale. Since the White Walkers are a supernatural enemy vulnerable to obsidian perhaps it makes better sense to imagine a small, experienced force, able to live off the land and capable of using appropriate weapons keeping the white walkers off the realms of men than big coalition armies marching around the north. Although intrinsically the watch was a coalition of forces from the 100 kingdoms, so neutrality was a sensible requirement when you need Brackens and Blackwoods to serve side by side.

Then and now I'm not sure that numbers will help. But we'll see.

In terms of transcending the role of Lord Commander I suppose we can look at that in three ways:

1. Acting as a king

Acting as the senior Stark

Pushing the boundaries of the role of Lord Commander of the Night's Watch

But in terms of this chapter we could interpret Jon's actions as falling into all three. Jon told Alys as Ragnorak pointed out that disposing of her in marriage was the prerogative of the king - so he is acting as a king. However she appealed to Jon as a kinsman and senior representative of the Starks - so he's acting as Señor Stark. And when you come down to it 'protecting the realms of men' is open to interpretation - where does that duty end? If arranging a marriage helps the watch to defend the realms of men isn't this a necessary thing for them to do. I'd say if we take 'protecting the realms of men' as the watch's primary duty where is the end to the extent they could quite legitimately intervene in the internal affairs of Westeros? So long as they don't breach the other conditions of the oath surely the door is wide open?

ETA But I think we can take this a bit further by thinking about Jon's character for instance:

1. Jon acts like the King because L+R=J, kinglyness is genetic and so GRRM's portrayal of Jon in ASOIAF is in ironic contrast to those who claim to be kings but like the crown gene

Jon acts as the senior stark because of his upbringing and admiration for The Ned who is his primary role model, in the absence of a senior Stark he steps into that vacuum

A primary component of Jon's character is his sense of duty and obligation whether to his family or his oath, these are serious matters for him and he can't escape the logic of his position

I might be asking something slightly different about the Watch's original authority. Until the Conquest, there was no central authority, as there were "hundreds of kingdoms" on the Westeros landmass. That means disunity.

Adjacently, we have the vows, which outline the following duties:

I am the sword in the darkness. I am the watcher on the walls. I am the fire that burns against the cold, the light that brings the dawn, the horn that wakes the sleepers, the shield that guards the realms of men.

The vows articulate that the Watch keeps vigil, and "wakes the sleepers," which I can only assume means "look out for danger, and warn/ rally those outside of the Watch of said danger." That they're "waking sleepers" in particular seems to imply that one of their major duties is to alert/ rally/ lead those who "sleep," i.e. those who are not keeping Night vigil, aka the realms of men who aren't sworn brothers. From the vows themselves, I'm not so sure the Watch was intended to be the sole fighting force to deal with Others. It rather sounds like they're the ones who remain on the lookout for the Others, who alert the realms of the danger, and who form the first line of defense against it.

Putting this together with the way "the realms" looked, with disparate, un-unified kingdoms, I'm wondering if what's embedded here is the idea that in extreme crisis, i.e. the Watch does spy an Others return, that they alert the "sleepers" to rally and lead them in the attack. As in, the Watch wasn't intended to fight against winter alone, but be stationed as a permanent lookout, first defense, and warning system that men from the rest of the realm would follow into battle.

Since there was no central authority Pre-Conquest, I'm wondering if the LC was intended to take this role during crisis. That, essentially, the LC would become a "King for Winter" in that he'd be the person at the head of the organization all of these un-unified kingdoms would follow during the crisis. Not a permanent IT, but something like the central authority the Targs created located in the North temporarily for a state of emergency.

If the Watch was intended to be the single group charged with vanquishing winter, then "waking sleepers" would likely not be part of the vow. Especially in light of the status quo at the time of the Watch's creation, I can't imagine anyone else who'd serve the role of a crisis rallying figure other than the LC. Even the Starks, because unlike the Starks, the Watch is supposedly neutral and ostensibly enemies to no one.

So I'm suggesting that the LC position was designed in such a way to transcend beyond simply the head of the Watch during a winter crisis. That perhaps at least when it comes to rallying and unifying, this might actually be what an LC does when the Others come. That the Watch's set-up as being a neutral authority allows it to become the dominant authority by design in crisis.

Now, I'm not sure that Jon's been performing this role in the way I suggested exactly-- I don't think he's done a hell of a lot of "sleeper waking" and committing to a dominant authority role in service to his vows intentionally. And by this point in his arc, I don't think he's gone back to the vows and understood his duty this way at all yet.

But because of the way the Watch was designed (neutral), I think it's fairly inevitable that the LC during a winter crisis would be increasingly put into this authority role, especially given the state of disunity the realm is facing. I think more explicitly, I'm suggesting neutrality was customary not merely to protect the Watch during times of winter peace, but also to enable it to lead the realms against the common enemy.

As it pertains to your comments, I don't think this is Martin's way of validating "kingly genes" as much as saying something about the nature of the Watch and LC as being the actual dominant central authority for crisis.

[Ragnorak]

Wonderful job, as always.

Except for kings and uncles...

Perhaps Alys and Sigorn have to be married by Melisandre so Stannis would be less likely to annul the marriage. If they got married in front of the heart tree, Stannis could easily disregard it and marry off Alys to one of his lords. It won't be so simple if R'hllor is involved.

It is funny that Sigorn seems scared. I understand him though.

Jon socialising off-page:

Val had reminded him of that, on his last visit with her. Jon V ADWD

So he has visited Val several times (it isn't just “when he had last talked to her”). He has also heard her sing to the baby.

Also, in the previous chapter Alys asked him about blood feud between them and knelt in front of him begging for protection. In this chapter, she is playfully asking him to dance (Jon knows better than accept), and she is also touching his hand. They couldn't have reached this level of intimacy without socialising.

“You see fools in your fire, but no hint of Stannis?”

Does Jon mean, even though you see fools... ?

Melisandre:

“When I search for him all I see is snow.”

This is actually ambiguous, and Jon may not understand it the same way as Melisandre. Compare:

Based on the other references in series I think the religion officiating the ceremony doesn't matter. Ramsay forces Lady Hornwood into a marriage at swordpoint in a way that sparks widespread outrage, but no one questions the marriage's validity. Re-widowing Lady Hornwood seems to be the solution. Asha thinks her marriage with a seal standing in is valid enough to politically neuter her. I do agree that having Mel perform the ceremony does help force Stannis to accept it publicly should he return and be unhappy at some future point.

Sigorn being afraid of Alys is quite funny. Jon has had thoughts about Styr or Sigorn since Clash and none of them were in line with "will be terrified of 16 year old girl." It is believable under the circumstances just funny given how poorly all of Jon's efforts to win over or intimidate Sigorn have fallen flat.

It is good that you pointed out all of the off page interactions Jon has. We never see him dealing with Val after the battle or before he sends her out but their dealings are occasionally referenced. Jon would have had to go over options with Alys (which would have included the Southron Fools she apparently found less appealing than a Wildling) and then introduce her to Sigorn and discuss her plans for a return to Karstark to know who she is and isn't willing to pardon for his conversation with Cregan. There's a good deal of off page dealings we don't get to witness with Jon. He occasionally mentions repeated disappointment with Mel's answers even though, like last chapter, we don't get to see Jon deal with her at all. We never get to see Jon learning the Old Tongue from Leathers or hearing stories from Wun Wun either. One effect it has is to emphasize the constant work. This wedding feast and Jon's sparring with "Rattleshirt" are about the only two breaks I think we see Jon take. What do you think the impact of omitting these parts from the "on screen" telling is?

I like your double edged reading of fools in the fire. I'd also like to add that given what we know of Stannis and his march "snow" is actually a pretty accurate prophetic vision. Jon knows it I snowing to the south so I imagine Mel does too. "Stannis is hampered by blizzard conditions" never occurs to Mel. She seems to think the snow is somehow blocking her seeing Stannis (which sort of fits with the fire vs. ice imagery in the wedding scene.)

I've been trying to pitch this in pieces for a while in various places, and finally just put it more bluntly in a thread today. Jon IX, X and XI seem to be where Jon gains serious momentum as something beyond what those in-universe, as well as readers, would expect of an LC. I think it's fair to say that he's been adding kingly duties onto his Watchman ones.

What if it's actually the case that this is what was intended by the original vows? When you consider that when the vows were created, there were hundreds of kingdoms, un-unified, and that the vows list "waking the sleepers" (i.e. alerting and rallying people) as one of the duties, I don't think it's a stretch to wonder if the Watch, and by extension, the LC were intended to function as the single authority in a time of crisis. How were the 100s of disparate kingdoms supposed to gather together to fight the common enemy, if not by rallying behind an identifiable neutral authority commanding them?

I'm not looking for a loophole to avoid oathbreaking or anything like that. I just wonder if what Jon's gotten himself into in terms of transcending the customary LC role into something closer to a "King for Winter" was implicitly designed into the vow. The vow almost suggests that it's the organization meant to lead men (i.e. including non-Watchmen, who would be following them) in a state of extreme emergency.

I think the idea that the LC would take the lead in a crisis when there were hundreds of kingdoms has merit. I'm not sure that leadership would extend to marriages though. It is an angle worth pondering.

In terms of transcending the role of Lord Commander I suppose we can look at that in three ways:

1. Acting as a king

Acting as the senior Stark

Pushing the boundaries of the role of Lord Commander of the Night's Watch

But in terms of this chapter we could interpret Jon's actions as falling into all three. Jon told Alys as Ragnorak pointed out that disposing of her in marriage was the prerogative of the king - so he is acting as a king. However she appealed to Jon as a kinsman and senior representative of the Starks - so he's acting as Señor Stark. And when you come down to it 'protecting the realms of men' is open to interpretation - where does that duty end? If arranging a marriage helps the watch to defend the realms of men isn't this a necessary thing for them to do. I'd say if we take 'protecting the realms of men' as the watch's primary duty where is the end to the extent they could quite legitimately intervene in the internal affairs of Westeros? So long as they don't breach the other conditions of the oath surely the door is wide open?

ETA But I think we can take this a bit further by thinking about Jon's character for instance:

1. Jon acts like the King because L+R=J, kinglyness is genetic and so GRRM's portrayal of Jon in ASOIAF is in ironic contrast to those who claim to be kings but like the crown gene

Jon acts as the senior stark because of his upbringing and admiration for The Ned who is his primary role model, in the absence of a senior Stark he steps into that vacuum

A primary component of Jon's character is his sense of duty and obligation whether to his family or his oath, these are serious matters for him and he can't escape the logic of his position

I think the kingly aspects are largely a literary theme, though when we hit Alys I think it takes a hard turn toward de facto king as Jon rises to fill a void he can no longer tolerate. Alys is also a bit of a mirror for Gilly coming to him for a king's protection back in Clash even down to the oversized Nights Watch cloak last chapter.

When Jon is meeting with Cregan he tries to figure out what Ned or Uncle Benjen would have done. We already know from GoT what Jon thinks Ned would do-- the right thing, no matter what. This seems to be exactly what Jon is doing now only his view of Ned is such that he still doesn't understand how difficult it was for Ned to figure out the "right thing" and carry the burden of the decision forward-- Promise me. I suppose one angle that hasn't been brought up is how powerful an appeal to Jon to act like Ned really is. Would Jon have done all this if Alys had made a different appeal that didn't invoke Ned? Hmm... Gilly's appeal invoked Robb and not Ned, the brother king and not the father lord. Maybe there's something worth considering in that.

[butterbumps!]

I think the idea that the LC would take the lead in a crisis when there were hundreds of kingdoms has merit. I'm not sure that leadership would extend to marriages though. It is an angle worth pondering.

I agree with you. I'm not sure that everything Jon does that's beyond the typical understanding of an LC falls under what I'm trying to suggest a "Winter LC's" role might be. I'm definitely not looking to argue that what Jon does is always or even intentionally within the spirit of the vow, as I laid out.

But I'm curious about figuring what an LC is supposed to actually do during a winter crisis. I don't think it's so cut and dry that an LC who does things beyond explicitly internal Watch matters is breaking vows, or that anyone who appeals to an LC's authority isn't doing so almost by the design of the Watch-- that it would be almost an inevitable conclusion based on the way the Watch has been designed.

For example, is it Jon's duty to make the realm listen and follow if they're not initially inclined?

[Lummel]

...Now, I'm not sure that Jon's been performing this role in the way I suggested exactly-- I don't think he's done a hell of a lot of "sleeper waking" and committing to a dominant authority role in service to his vows intentionally. And by this point in his arc, I don't think he's gone back to the vows and understood his duty this way at all yet.

But because of the way the Watch was designed (neutral), I think it's fairly inevitable that the LC during a winter crisis would be increasingly put into this authority role, especially given the state of disunity the realm is facing. I think more explicitly, I'm suggesting neutrality was customary not merely to protect the Watch during times of winter peace, but also to enable it to lead the realms against the common enemy.

As it pertains to your comments, I don't think this is Martin's way of validating "kingly genes" as much as saying something about the nature of the Watch and LC as being the actual dominant central authority for crisis.

I wasn't intending to be serious about the royal genes :laugh: Its a fair speculation that originally the Watch may have had more of a leadership or co-ordinating role. Certainly the warning role seems more than reasonable. Irrespective of speculation it is a fact that there is a power vacuum over parts of the north now and contested authorities over the rest and there is a need for co-ordination and leadership beyond security matters.

We see Jon growing into that power vacuum - explicitly waking the sleeping hill clans for example, and if one wants to be lawyerly about it the wording of the oath could be construed as allowing, enabling or even requiring that the Watch takes such a leadership role. If Jon sees it that way is another question, there's room enough for more GRRM irony - 'actually the oath says he can do all those things...'

... One effect it has is to emphasize the constant work. This wedding feast and Jon's sparring with "Rattleshirt" are about the only two breaks I think we see Jon take. What do you think the impact of omitting these parts from the "on screen" telling is?

...

I think the kingly aspects are largely a literary theme, though when we hit Alys I think it takes a hard turn toward de facto king as Jon rises to fill a void he can no longer tolerate. Alys is also a bit of a mirror for Gilly coming to him for a king's protection back in Clash even down to the oversized Nights Watch cloak last chapter.

When Jon is meeting with Cregan he tries to figure out what Ned or Uncle Benjen would have done. We already know from GoT what Jon thinks Ned would do-- the right thing, no matter what. This seems to be exactly what Jon is doing now only his view of Ned is such that he still doesn't understand how difficult it was for Ned to figure out the "right thing" and carry the burden of the decision forward-- Promise me. I suppose one angle that hasn't been brought up is how powerful an appeal to Jon to act like Ned really is. Would Jon have done all this if Alys had made a different appeal that didn't invoke Ned? Hmm... Gilly's appeal invoked Robb and not Ned, the brother king and not the father lord. Maybe there's something worth considering in that.

Thinking about those two breaks, I wouldn't claim the wedding feast as a break - isn't it another duty: "Sigorn might take it as a slight if he did not appear" ?

I like the repetition. First time Jon demurs but questions Mormont, this time he acts. Actually his action is an interesting rebuttal to Mormonts' toleration of Craster. Stannis tolerated Karstark, but Alys points out that this was a mistake. Jon's instinct (or really Sam's instinct) by implication was the right one - your allies have to have moral integrity to be worth having. Without it they are unreliable.

The power of the appeal to The Ned...if only those hard pressed builders knew, they'd have been able to win themselves easier working conditions right away!

...For example, is it Jon's duty to make the realm listen and follow if they're not initially inclined?

Hmm, doesn't former Lord Commander Mormont agree with you what with his appeal to Tyrion to make the King and court listen and the ravenmails sent south?

[Julia H.]

That has a romantic connotation to it when you look at it. The quiet tension and mentioning of heartbeats, and breathing again, similar to descriptions of an incoming kiss. I think Jon will breathe again, or come back from death when Val kisses him. Think "the last kiss" used to resurrect Beric and and Cat, only literally with Val thinking Jon is dead, and giving him one last kiss.

The romantic connotations are wonderful. I was thinking in terms of death and rebirth (and Val), but the heartbeat and the breathing do evoke a kiss.

I like that, Dr. Pepper had a similar notion in Learning to Lead with Daenerys becoming a maternal and Jon a paternal figure, but it seems to me that you're right to point out that this is a direct boond with Alys, not a abstract father over the Watch and wildlings, but more of an ersatz father/brother to Alys as though he is building a substitute family. I think yes, Alys playfulness does imply that they've spent quite a bit of time together inbetween chapters and grown close.

There's a contrast here between Alys given away by Jon and even Jeyne by Reek - both of whom do their best to be supportive of the bride and Joffrey giving away Sansa - other very political marriages that didn't work out well. I like teh detail of Jon giving Alys' hand a squeeze, even though it was perhaps poor Sigorn who was more in need of it :laugh:

Jon giving Alys's hand a squeeze is one of several instances of small kindnesses Jon extends to others.

After the prayer and the vow in the weirwood grove in ADwD, Jon “gave Horse a hand to pull him up”. Jon is Horse's commander but at the same time a much younger man and he doesn't consider it beneath him to perform this small courtesy.

He did the same after taking his own vow in GoT. Jon held out a hand to pull Sam back to his feet.

Another instance was also in GoT, when Jon and Tyrion were travelling north with Benjen. After Jon (and Ghost) taught Tyrion a lesson, Jon came around behind him, slid his hands under his arms, and lifted him easily to his feet. Then he picked up the book and handed it back. (Tyrion hadn't asked him to do the latter.) And then: Jon picked up the wineskin and handed it to Tyrion. Considering what had just happened between them, this was quite a generous gesture.

The recurrence of the word hand in these quotes underlines that it is in Jon's character to extend a helping hand to people who need it. He is also in the habit of pulling people back to their feet. That's also what he did with regard to Alys, who knelt in front of him.

Hmm well if we're speculating about the beginning of things...I suppose I'd say that it may not have been a case of 100 kingdoms but of the dozen or so which later became the north and given that the military arm of the Watch is made up of rangers the implication to my mind is more about patrol and skirmishing, equally that any fighting that they were required to do was on that scale. Since the White Walkers are a supernatural enemy vulnerable to obsidian perhaps it makes better sense to imagine a small, experienced force, able to live off the land and capable of using appropriate weapons keeping the white walkers off the realms of men than big coalition armies marching around the north. Although intrinsically the watch was a coalition of forces from the 100 kingdoms, so neutrality was a sensible requirement when you need Brackens and Blackwoods to serve side by side.

Then and now I'm not sure that numbers will help. But we'll see.

In terms of transcending the role of Lord Commander I suppose we can look at that in three ways:

1. Acting as a king

Acting as the senior Stark

Pushing the boundaries of the role of Lord Commander of the Night's Watch

But in terms of this chapter we could interpret Jon's actions as falling into all three. Jon told Alys as Ragnorak pointed out that disposing of her in marriage was the prerogative of the king - so he is acting as a king. However she appealed to Jon as a kinsman and senior representative of the Starks - so he's acting as Señor Stark. And when you come down to it 'protecting the realms of men' is open to interpretation - where does that duty end? If arranging a marriage helps the watch to defend the realms of men isn't this a necessary thing for them to do. I'd say if we take 'protecting the realms of men' as the watch's primary duty where is the end to the extent they could quite legitimately intervene in the internal affairs of Westeros? So long as they don't breach the other conditions of the oath surely the door is wide open?

ETA But I think we can take this a bit further by thinking about Jon's character for instance:

1. Jon acts like the King because L+R=J, kinglyness is genetic and so GRRM's portrayal of Jon in ASOIAF is in ironic contrast to those who claim to be kings but like the crown gene

Jon acts as the senior stark because of his upbringing and admiration for The Ned who is his primary role model, in the absence of a senior Stark he steps into that vacuum

A primary component of Jon's character is his sense of duty and obligation whether to his family or his oath, these are serious matters for him and he can't escape the logic of his position

I would say as far as Jon is concerned, he is ready to go to any lengths to protect the realms of men. He learned it from the Halfhand that your honour is worth no more than your life, and there is no but if you are a man of the Night's Watch. That pretty much means you must do anything for the safety of the realm. In case of conflicting interests, you do not serve the IT but the realm. Perhaps that's what keeping your vows truly means.

I might be asking something slightly different about the Watch's original authority. Until the Conquest, there was no central authority, as there were "hundreds of kingdoms" on the Westeros landmass. That means disunity.

Adjacently, we have the vows, which outline the following duties:

I am the sword in the darkness. I am the watcher on the walls. I am the fire that burns against the cold, the light that brings the dawn, the horn that wakes the sleepers, the shield that guards the realms of men.

The vows articulate that the Watch keeps vigil, and "wakes the sleepers," which I can only assume means "look out for danger, and warn/ rally those outside of the Watch of said danger." That they're "waking sleepers" in particular seems to imply that one of their major duties is to alert/ rally/ lead those who "sleep," i.e. those who are not keeping Night vigil, aka the realms of men who aren't sworn brothers. From the vows themselves, I'm not so sure the Watch was intended to be the sole fighting force to deal with Others. It rather sounds like they're the ones who remain on the lookout for the Others, who alert the realms of the danger, and who form the first line of defense against it.

Putting this together with the way "the realms" looked, with disparate, un-unified kingdoms, I'm wondering if what's embedded here is the idea that in extreme crisis, i.e. the Watch does spy an Others return, that they alert the "sleepers" to rally and lead them in the attack. As in, the Watch wasn't intended to fight against winter alone, but be stationed as a permanent lookout, first defense, and warning system that men from the rest of the realm would follow into battle.

Since there was no central authority Pre-Conquest, I'm wondering if the LC was intended to take this role during crisis. That, essentially, the LC would become a "King for Winter" in that he'd be the person at the head of the organization all of these un-unified kingdoms would follow during the crisis. Not a permanent IT, but something like the central authority the Targs created located in the North temporarily for a state of emergency.

If the Watch was intended to be the single group charged with vanquishing winter, then "waking sleepers" would likely not be part of the vow. Especially in light of the status quo at the time of the Watch's creation, I can't imagine anyone else who'd serve the role of a crisis rallying figure other than the LC. Even the Starks, because unlike the Starks, the Watch is supposedly neutral and ostensibly enemies to no one.

So I'm suggesting that the LC position was designed in such a way to transcend beyond simply the head of the Watch during a winter crisis. That perhaps at least when it comes to rallying and unifying, this might actually be what an LC does when the Others come. That the Watch's set-up as being a neutral authority allows it to become the dominant authority by design in crisis.

Now, I'm not sure that Jon's been performing this role in the way I suggested exactly-- I don't think he's done a hell of a lot of "sleeper waking" and committing to a dominant authority role in service to his vows intentionally. And by this point in his arc, I don't think he's gone back to the vows and understood his duty this way at all yet.

But because of the way the Watch was designed (neutral), I think it's fairly inevitable that the LC during a winter crisis would be increasingly put into this authority role, especially given the state of disunity the realm is facing. I think more explicitly, I'm suggesting neutrality was customary not merely to protect the Watch during times of winter peace, but also to enable it to lead the realms against the common enemy.

As it pertains to your comments, I don't think this is Martin's way of validating "kingly genes" as much as saying something about the nature of the Watch and LC as being the actual dominant central authority for crisis.

I love the idea how Jon with all his reforms may actually be going back to the origins of the NW. That can be tied up with the blood of the First Men remembering things otherwise forgotten and with Mormont saying that the NW ought to remember.

“... if the Night's Watch doesn't remember, who will?”

A King, a Senior Stark and a Lord Commander becoming King for Winter … Jon is all of these.

Based on the other references in series I think the religion officiating the ceremony doesn't matter. Ramsay forces Lady Hornwood into a marriage at swordpoint in a way that sparks widespread outrage, but no one questions the marriage's validity. Re-widowing Lady Hornwood seems to be the solution. Asha thinks her marriage with a seal standing in is valid enough to politically neuter her. I do agree that having Mel perform the ceremony does help force Stannis to accept it publicly should he return and be unhappy at some future point.

Sigorn being afraid of Alys is quite funny. Jon has had thoughts about Styr or Sigorn since Clash and none of them were in line with "will be terrified of 16 year old girl." It is believable under the circumstances just funny given how poorly all of Jon's efforts to win over or intimidate Sigorn have fallen flat.

It is good that you pointed out all of the off page interactions Jon has. We never see him dealing with Val after the battle or before he sends her out but their dealings are occasionally referenced. Jon would have had to go over options with Alys (which would have included the Southron Fools she apparently found less appealing than a Wildling) and then introduce her to Sigorn and discuss her plans for a return to Karstark to know who she is and isn't willing to pardon for his conversation with Cregan. There's a good deal of off page dealings we don't get to witness with Jon. He occasionally mentions repeated disappointment with Mel's answers even though, like last chapter, we don't get to see Jon deal with her at all. We never get to see Jon learning the Old Tongue from Leathers or hearing stories from Wun Wun either. One effect it has is to emphasize the constant work. This wedding feast and Jon's sparring with "Rattleshirt" are about the only two breaks I think we see Jon take. What do you think the impact of omitting these parts from the "on screen" telling is?

I like your double edged reading of fools in the fire. I'd also like to add that given what we know of Stannis and his march "snow" is actually a pretty accurate prophetic vision. Jon knows it I snowing to the south so I imagine Mel does too. "Stannis is hampered by blizzard conditions" never occurs to Mel. She seems to think the snow is somehow blocking her seeing Stannis (which sort of fits with the fire vs. ice imagery in the wedding scene.)

I think the idea that the LC would take the lead in a crisis when there were hundreds of kingdoms has merit. I'm not sure that leadership would extend to marriages though. It is an angle worth pondering.

I think the kingly aspects are largely a literary theme, though when we hit Alys I think it takes a hard turn toward de facto king as Jon rises to fill a void he can no longer tolerate. Alys is also a bit of a mirror for Gilly coming to him for a king's protection back in Clash even down to the oversized Nights Watch cloak last chapter.

When Jon is meeting with Cregan he tries to figure out what Ned or Uncle Benjen would have done. We already know from GoT what Jon thinks Ned would do-- the right thing, no matter what. This seems to be exactly what Jon is doing now only his view of Ned is such that he still doesn't understand how difficult it was for Ned to figure out the "right thing" and carry the burden of the decision forward-- Promise me. I suppose one angle that hasn't been brought up is how powerful an appeal to Jon to act like Ned really is. Would Jon have done all this if Alys had made a different appeal that didn't invoke Ned? Hmm... Gilly's appeal invoked Robb and not Ned, the brother king and not the father lord. Maybe there's something worth considering in that.

I realize that in Westeros it is usually not a problem which gods sanctioned a marriage. But Stannis requires his subjects to follow the Red God, and Melisandre has already suggested to Jon once (and Stannis did not object) that a “... vow sworn to a tree has no … power...”.

I would love to read about the conversation in which Jon and Alys go over possible suitors and Alys settles for Sigorn. What did she say about the Southron fools? (I'm reminded of a type of folksongs in which a girl lists and mocks her suitors one by one until she gets to the last name on the list, the name of her true love.)

One effect of the omissions is that we can speculate over what is left out as much as we like. :laugh: Reading this thread has taught me how “tight” GRRM's writing is – no word is superfluous, and every little detail has significance, even the most innocent-looking line can contain a sly reference to another one perhaps several books away – or to an off-page detail we are invited to pick up on. I think the overall impact is that the reader is involved in the creative process. It is like being invited into the world of the novel beyond the actual words, like the author saying, “Dear Reader, enter and discover this world for yourself, pick your own toppings, peek behind the curtains, find your own way in the labyrinth...” and so on.

"Blizzard conditions..." LOL. BTW, seeing snow in fire must be quite a singular image.

The Gilly – Alys contrast is a great catch. When Gilly approached him, Jon was a king's brother with no authority of his own. He was also Lord Mormont's squire and “adopted son” possibly being groomed for command. So he turned to this authority figure and was promptly told he couldn't help everybody and it wasn't his job to help everybody (a piece of advice Jon didn't take to heart too much, but then they did leave an axe on the table as “answered prayer” for Craster's wives).

Now Jon is Ned Stark's heir, a position of authority and a position he wants to be worthy of.

But as it happens, Jon is also Robb Stark's legal heir although he doesn't know. Nor can Alys know that – the Karstarks were estranged from the Stark camp after the execution.

On the other hand... is it possible that others in the North know? There were several lords fixing their seals to the document that made Jon heir to Winterfell. Lady Maege was there, too, and she is still alive. What is more, her daughter is marching with Stannis. Is it possible that after the Redding Wedding word spread among the survivors and the northmen who eventually joined Stannis actually know the contents of Robb Stark's will?

[Elkrider]

Butterbumps' idea that the LC's role is to become supreme leader in times of crisis is an interesting one, as is the implication that the NW is not the only force capable of fighting against the Others. It contradicts the idea (mentioned in the Heresy threads?) that only the NW brother who swore his oath in front of a weirwood can fight them. I also wonder what the implications for the Long Night would have been. Did the Last Hero become that rallying figure? Were there any other times when it happened? The Long Night is the only time the Others are explicitly mentioned as attacking, but in AGOT Mormont mentions to Tyrion, "White Walkers are being seen for the first time in a thousand years", implying that there have been more recent sightings, if not attacks, than the Long Night 1000 years ago.

Julia H.--Have you seen the Great Northern Conspiracy threads? They go into more detail about Robb's will, the gossip chain between the Northerners, and what they may or may not know.

[Julia H.]

Julia H.--Have you seen the Great Northern Conspiracy threads? They go into more detail about Robb's will, the gossip chain between the Northerners, and what they may or may not know.

Thanks! :) I was sure this must have been discussed somewhere, but I have seen very few of the threads yet. I'll check out that one.

[Ragnorak]

Speaking of the GNC we get our two mountain clan leaders showing up and they don't seem to leave even by the end of the book.

Old Flint and The Norrey had been given places of high honor just below the dais. Both men had been too old to march with Stannis; they had sent their sons and grandsons in their stead. But they had been quick enough to descend on Castle Black for the wedding. Each had brought a wet nurse to the Wall as well. The Norrey woman was forty, with the biggest breasts Jon Snow had ever seen. The Flint girl was fourteen and flat-chested as a boy, though she did not lack for milk. Between the two of them, the child Val called Monster seemed to be thriving.

“You are prettier than me, but my breasts are larger. The maesters say large breasts produce no more milk than small ones, but I do not believe it. Have you ever known a wet nurse with small teats? Yours are ample for a girl your age, but as they are bastard breasts, I shan’t concern myself with them.”

They are a curious pair to show up for the wedding. Jon sent Stannis to them for men and they granted those men (who seem very intent on saving The Ned's girl and less so on serving Stannis) and then they show up for a wedding that by all outward appearances is arranged by Jon. They also each show up with a wet nurse for what they believe to be Mance Rayder's son. I think it is obvious that they're not just here for the wedding. For what it is worth, Ned's grandmother was a Flint so Jon and the Old Flint may well be related-- grandnephew, first cousin, first cousin once removed? Jon's great, great, grandparents would be the common ancestor if Ned's grandmother was a sister to the Old Flint's ancestor. Makes for an interesting contrast to Cregan's claim of kinship.

Back to the Wedding

Thinking about those two breaks, I wouldn't claim the wedding feast as a break - isn't it another duty: "Sigorn might take it as a slight if he did not appear" ?

Well yes, but Jon's life is an endless litany of duty. The feast is a relative respite. I think he enjoys it too even though he's consumed with duty while he's there-- Alys send me your starving, the Wildling pipes sounding sweeter recalls the task he gave Val, there's the butter that's almost gone, his worries about the political fallout or the Flint, Norrey or Ser Patreck starting a conflict. Still it is a far cry from the dread he feels at the task of telling Stannis "No." or signing the paper shield. Part of his desire to not attend is the call of other duties as opposed to a dislike of the celebration itself. Its failures as a break is a sad commentary on what passes for fun in Jon's life I suppose. Still, it isn't work.

Back in Learning to Lead I commented on the Watch's participation in the wedding. They had to design a sigil, make the cloaks, possibly a dress for Alys too as she probably didn't pack a wedding gown (though perhaps Selyse's women did that.) This is a fairly historic event even if Selyse is a piss poor substitute for Good Queen Alysanne. Jon repeatedly comments on what a good job they did which speaks to individuals taking pride in their piece of participation in this occasion. The stress of existential threats tends to make for historic times but they're easier to appreciate in the moment when they come in the form of wedding feasts instead of undead hordes. This recalls the past glory of the Watch in a tangible way men can easily feel and identify with especially those involved in making it happen. These men get to dance with women attending a queen-- hell just getting to dance with women period is a momentous thing for them. Jon has been stressed and driving his men pretty hard and this is probably the first celebratory moment at the Wall since Jon said his vows.

Hmm... when Jon said his vows he was given a special meal as a reward. Perhaps there's a food as emotional or morale currency angle to toy with. For Hobbs that is definitely true since he is always giving Sam food and threw in extra servings for Jon when the news of Ned came.

Back in LtL I also said that this is probably the first wedding at the Wall since the Night King. Bumps speculation has me wondering though. When the Watch had holdfasts in the Gift and the LC had smallfolk to care for like any other lord would people get married at the Wall? Would the LC arrange marriages for people much like a local lord would like we see Randa say her father tried to do for Mya? Is there an undercurrent of the Watch returning to some of its past glory as it returns to its true purpose? Or more specifically to Butterbumps's speculation, is there a return to a more normal participation in the routine traditions of civilized society as the people who make up the realms of men reoccupy the territory under their protection?

The Cold

Everyone seems to be freezing at this wedding as Jon notes.

Even Melisandre’s fire was shivering; the flames huddled down in the ditch, crackling softly as the red priestess sang. Only Ghost seemed not to feel the chill.

Jon fails to note himself who also seems quite unbothered by this cold.

The snowfall was light today, a thin scattering of flakes dancing in the air

But Alys says:

If I’m to be buried beneath this snow, I’d like to die a woman wed.

Jon heads from this ceremony that everyone else finds freezing to the ice cells and then finds the wedding celebration is so hot he feels suffocated. I haven't been paying specific attention to this. Are there other examples of Jon's insane internal thermostat?

On the other hand... is it possible that others in the North know? There were several lords fixing their seals to the document that made Jon heir to Winterfell. Lady Maege was there, too, and she is still alive. What is more, her daughter is marching with Stannis. Is it possible that after the Redding Wedding word spread among the survivors and the northmen who eventually joined Stannis actually know the contents of Robb Stark's will?

Nice catch on the use of "hands."

There is good reason to suspect a great many lords in the North know a great deal more than they are letting on.

The Bastard’s boys, aye. He was dead, but now he’s not. And paying good silver for wolfskins, a man hears, and maybe gold for word of certain other walking dead.” He looked at Bran when he said that, and at Summer stretched out beside him.

This isn't just about the Liddle recognizing Bran as one person. Bolton has been paying money for dead wolves and word of the fairly obvious Bran the Cripple with the direwolf and retarded giant Hodor. So the Boltons are effectively spreading word that Bran and Rickon live by offering money for their known whereabouts. That the bastard was supposed to be dead and now isn't reeks of some form of treachery especially when combined with the reward for the supposedly already dead Starks. So just Ramsay's reward offer spreads word of Stark children surviving and treachery in their downfall.

Everyone knows Roose was in on the Red Wedding.

“My lords may not know,” said Qyburn, “but in the winesinks and pot shops of this city, there are those who suggest that the crown might have been somehow complicit in Lord Walder’s crime.”
The other councillors stared at him uncertainly. “Do you refer to the Red Wedding?” asked Aurane Waters. “Crime?” said Ser Harys. Pycelle cleared his throat noisily. Lord Gyles coughed.
“These sparrows are especially outspoken,” warned Qyburn. “The Red Wedding was an affront to all the laws of gods and men, they say, and those who had a hand in it are damned.”
Cersei was not slow to take his meaning. “Lord Walder must soon face the Father’s judgment. He is very old. Let the sparrows spit upon his memory. It has nought to do with us.”
“No,” said Ser Harys. “No,” said Lord Merryweather. “No one could think so,” said Pycelle. Lord Gyles coughed. ”

When the people who normally arrive at such politically astute observations like Sansa cast a spell on Joffrey then turned into a bat and flew away all say "Tywin did it" the guilt is pretty damn obvious. Roose is Tywin's pick for the new Lord Paramount, had no Bolton men taken hostage, is given Winterfell for his bastard son (who see above spread word of his own guilt) and gets Arya as a bride from the Lannisters. That is not a difficult puzzle to put together even without Robbett Glover spreading word or the survivors from the Winterfell battle joining Stannis and spreading the word. Everyone knows the Bolton Red Wedding truth and knows of some form of Bolton treachery at Winterfell even if they don't know exactly what it was.

We don't know where Robb's will is but we do know that Lady Stoneheart likely made it to the Neck and back from Jaime in Feast where discussing the tracking of the BwB mentions her disappearing into the Neck. That means that the people who were on their way to the Neck before Cat died have had plenty of time to make it to the Neck and elsewhere. Lyanna Mormont's letter hints at word of the Will making it back since there are not supposed to be any Starks left to be king. With Maege as one of the messengers this seems more likely. Galbart Glover being the other adds speculation that Robett may know too which connects to Manderly and Manderly connects to the Umbers since they've been working together to build ships since the Harvest Festival. These two clan leaders showing up is ripe with speculation that they know about the Will. It is hard to say with certainty exactly who knows what and when (and what the reaction will be), but that word has spread beyond Mormont and Glover is a virtual certainty. The GNC threads have some more specific speculation but it seems safe to say that at this point any lord in the North could reasonably know about Robb's will.