Zebra of KotOR Posted April 15, 2014 Share Posted April 15, 2014 I like Jon and support his decision completely. However Marsh was not wrong to stab him. Jon has been pushing the line since he got named Lord Commander. Marching to Winterfell was very much taking part in the affairs of the realm. It was the right thing to do IMO but still the wrong thing too. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Night's_King Posted April 15, 2014 Share Posted April 15, 2014 He did not break a single rule. So he did not break his vows with Ygritte? Well, you probably mean it wouldn't be a breaking of rules if he attacks Ramsay. Read my post above. The two laws collide. Jon is inside the law if he wants to destroy a threat to the NW. Ramsay/Roose are inside the law if they want to rid the North of NW-Rebels. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sylva Santagar Posted April 15, 2014 Share Posted April 15, 2014 He did not break a single rule. Isn't the NW supposed to stay out of the affairs of the Seven Kingdoms?? And isn't Jon constantly supporting Stannis? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ingelheim Posted April 15, 2014 Share Posted April 15, 2014 This is how I see it Jon had the right to defend himself and the NW since Ramsay sent that letter. He threatened the NW and Val, the babies, Shireen, Selyse...they were all his guests. He did the same with Cregan Karstark, when he came to the Wall asking for Alys. He put him in jail, as he threatened her while she was his guest. But I can understand why Bowen did what he did. He hadn't read the letter at the time; from his point of view, he probably thought Jon was joining Stannis for vengeance. So he did not break his vows with Ygritte? Well, you probably mean it wouldn't be a breaking of rules if he attacks Ramsay. Read my post above. The two laws collide. Jon is inside the law if he wants to destroy a threat to the NW. Ramsay/Roose are inside the law if they want to rid the North of NW-Rebels. You can argue Qhorin ordered him to do whatever he needed to do to get himself inside Mance's army. That's why he didn't get killed; Qhorin gave him the orders. Isn't the NW supposed to stay out of the affairs of the Seven Kingdoms?? And isn't Jon constantly supporting Stannis? It is, but Stannis SAVED the NW, while the others don't. I also would say that he isn't constantly supporting Stannis. I think the law collapses here. Ramsay, Jon, and probably Bowen had the right to do what they did. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Roddy the Ruin Posted April 15, 2014 Share Posted April 15, 2014 Isn't the NW supposed to stay out of the affairs of the Seven Kingdoms?? And isn't Jon constantly supporting Stannis?what is he supposed to do when the the Realm interferes in his business? Nothing? What should he do when a lord asks him to break his vows or have him and all the watch destroyed? Jon was completely justified and the closest he has come to breaking his vows was when Mel sent Mance to rescue Arya. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Aegon the Great Posted April 15, 2014 Share Posted April 15, 2014 Jon should've died long ago. He has broken his vows too many times and threatened the neutrality of the Night's Watch. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Chebyshov Posted April 15, 2014 Share Posted April 15, 2014 This is how I see it Jon had the right to defend himself and the NW since Ramsay sent that letter. He threatened the NW and Val, the babies, Shireen, Selyse...they were all his guests. He did the same with Cregan Karstark, when he came to the Wall asking for Alys. He put him in jail, as he threatened her while she was his guest. But I can understand why Bowen did what he did. He hadn't read the letter at the time; from his point of view, he probably thought Jon was joining Stannis for vengeance. Agreed. I feel like if Jon had better communicated his motives behind his actions (all of his ADWD actions...not just responding to the pink letter), he might have avoided this situation. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Roddy the Ruin Posted April 15, 2014 Share Posted April 15, 2014 This is how I see it Jon had the right to defend himself and the NW since Ramsay sent that letter. He threatened the NW and Val, the babies, Shireen, Selyse...they were all his guests. He did the same with Cregan Karstark, when he came to the Wall asking for Alys. He put him in jail, as he threatened her while she was his guest. But I can understand why Bowen did what he did. He hadn't read the letter at the time; from his point of view, he probably thought Jon was joining Stannis for vengeance.Yes, had Jon actually explained himself to the Watch they likely would have been completely with him.Ninja'd Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Queen of Whores Posted April 15, 2014 Share Posted April 15, 2014 Agreed. I feel like if Jon had better communicated his motives behind his actions (all of his ADWD actions...not just responding to the pink letter), he might have avoided this situation.Then we wouldn't have a story though ;) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sylva Santagar Posted April 15, 2014 Share Posted April 15, 2014 what is he supposed to do when the the Realm interferes in his business? Nothing? What should he do when a lord asks him to break his vows or have him and all the watch destroyed? Jon was completely justified and the closest he has come to breaking his vows was when Mel sent Mance to rescue Arya. Hi Ulysses :) I think he was actively helping Stannis, even going as far as giving him military advice. So he was pushing it pretty far.... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Roddy the Ruin Posted April 15, 2014 Share Posted April 15, 2014 Hi Ulysses :)I think he was actively helping Stannis, even going as far as giving him military advice. So he was pushing it pretty far....what could he do? Jon: hey Stanny! Well ummmm, I know you helped us and all, and you have 2x more men then we do....but ummmmm could you leave?Stannis: (a smile creeps across his face for the first time ever) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sylva Santagar Posted April 15, 2014 Share Posted April 15, 2014 what could he do?Jon: hey Stanny! Well ummmm, I know you helped us and all, and you have 2x more men then we do....but ummmmm could you leave?Stannis: (a smile creeps across his face for the first time ever)I see the dilemma, yet I think he did much more for Stannis than he needed to. Let's not forget he is expected to stay neutral, which I think he wasn't... If I remember correctly there are parts in ADwD where Jon knows that he is walking on thin ice when he gives Stannis advice what to do next... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
averde Posted April 15, 2014 Share Posted April 15, 2014 Not at all. Bowen Marsh actions may be considered justifiable through an idea of holding up Nights Watch tradition, but legally it was murder. They surrounded him and stabbed him to death. If Marsh wanted to do it legally he should have brought a vote among the Nights Watch to remove Jon from office for breaking Nights Watch law, not kill him. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The Wolves Posted April 15, 2014 Share Posted April 15, 2014 There is no law saying that Jon can't sleep with any woman, so Jon did not break any vows she. He had sex with Ygritte the annoying one. And Jon was not breaking any vows when he was going to march on Winterfell Ramsey Snow threatened the Watch and the LC Jon was going to defend himself and his organization nor was he deserting. And Bowen is stupid to kill the only person that the Wildings are willing to make an alliance with while there are thousands on the Wall. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Cas Stark Posted April 15, 2014 Share Posted April 15, 2014 Not at all. Bowen Marsh actions may be considered justifiable through an idea of holding up Nights Watch tradition, but legally it was murder. They surrounded him and stabbed him to death. If Marsh wanted to do it legally he should have brought a vote among the Nights Watch to remove Jon from office for breaking Nights Watch law, not kill him. Yeah, that's what I'm thinking. On technical grounds, despite being correct, Jon has come close if not outright broken multiple of the NW "guidelines"...but the way to address that is to remove him as LC and then have whatever passes for NW justice, pass sentence and then execute him. A Caesar style stabbing is even less legal than anything he's been doing. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Formerly Tetrarch42 Posted April 15, 2014 Share Posted April 15, 2014 There is no law saying that Jon can't sleep with any woman, so Jon did not break any vows she. He had sex with Ygritte the annoying one.And Jon was not breaking any vows when he was going to march on Winterfell Ramsey Snow threatened the Watch and the LC Jon was going to defend himself and his organization nor was he deserting.And Bowen is stupid to kill the only person that the Wildings are willing to make an alliance with while there are thousands on the Wall.Jon seems to think he broke his vows with Ygritte though. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Red Wedding Cake Posted April 15, 2014 Share Posted April 15, 2014 The Night's Watch was already weary when Jon brought the Wildlings to the wall, and then he was going to bring the Wildlings beyond the Wall to wage battle against House Bolton in support of Stannis Baratheon to also save his baby half sister. The only way he could have been more in violation of his oath was if he was also sleeping with a wildling woman. It sucks because he was just getting interesting, but that's when major characters get killed off. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Arya Targaryen Posted April 15, 2014 Share Posted April 15, 2014 I think Jon did break his vow when he decided to go against Ramsey - however that was not the reason Bowen stabbed him. First: Jon just decided it, he hasn't done anything yet, so it's technically not oathbreaking. Interfereing with the realm's business is not part of the vow, so technically Jon didn't break it by sending Mance or turning on Ramsey. And, as LC, he had the right to go and meet the Lord of Winterfell, other LCs did that too. I think the reason Bowen stabbed him was that he just learned Stannis is dead. For him, it means the NW is supporting the losing side, which is definitely not good FOR THE WATCH. He did the only thing he though would satisfy the Boltons: Kill jon, so maybe they will be left alone. Just imagine for a moment that the overall political situation is completely different (and Bowen knows it): like Stannis outnumbering the Boltons, and has won the war at Winterfell, gaining support from all the northern houses, Lannisters and Tyrells and everybody else are turning on each other, and they have some really serious infight, so the ydefinitely won't have the time and military to march against the NW... in that case, even if Jon did exactly the same things (sending Mance, marching on Ramsey), I doubt Bowen would have stabbed him. So his reason was not the oathbreaking part. It was the overall political situation that surrounded the Watch, and he didn't want to be on the losing side, so he sacrificed Jon. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bedwyck Posted April 15, 2014 Author Share Posted April 15, 2014 Not at all. Bowen Marsh actions may be considered justifiable through an idea of holding up Nights Watch tradition, but legally it was murder. They surrounded him and stabbed him to death. If Marsh wanted to do it legally he should have brought a vote among the Nights Watch to remove Jon from office for breaking Nights Watch law, not kill him. Is there any process for removing a NW commander from office? I was under the impression that a commander was chosen for life. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Lady Blizzardborn Posted April 15, 2014 Share Posted April 15, 2014 For the sake of argument let's say Jon qualifies as a deserter. Oh yes, I recall now in the very first Chapter of AGoT how Eddard Stark and three other men repeatedly stabbed that Night's Watch guy (in the back, no less) with absolutely no warning, no arrest, no sentence passed, no invocation of the authority and law that allowed the execution. :rolleyes: ETA: Can't believe I forgot to include that Ned and the Stabbing Starkmen also did this under cover of darkness. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.