Jump to content

R+L=J v99


davos

Recommended Posts

Absolutely. I recall your post from a while back regarding GRRM's use of if. :)

Not only that. If Rhaegar gave them an order they would follow it.

But that doesn't mean they wouldn't-under-any-circumstances cease to follow it when something more important came up or the situation changed. If Rhaegar gave an order, and they followed it, and then when things changed they stopped following it, then GRRM's quote still exactly and precisely applies.

But no, GRRM said they would follow an order so all reason and logic must be abandoned. If Rhaegar ordered them to kill Aerys, of course they would, unhesitatingly and unflinchingly. GRRM (didn't, actually) said as much.

I'm tired and struggling for time and energy. Can anyone help me with a related discussion?

I have someone insisting that the KG at ToJ didn't know anything before Ned told them stuff. I've pointed out that just from Ned's first line, that he looked for them at the Trident, that their response shows they already know what happened at the Trident and their use of "the Usurper" then indicates they already know Bobby B has won, is no longer just a rebel and been formally crowned.

One part of the counter argument is that 'usurper' is used (by Stannis talking about Daemon Blackfyre) just to mean a claimant, not a successful one. There's actually half a point in that argument, though I'm sure that the capitalisation of Usurper in the KG speech shows an important difference. No way that the other party in my discussion is going to accep that, though, based on past history of the discussion.

So any other details that show they know before Ned tells them? I can't remember, but someone here will have the angles available.

TIA.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

If the KG knew that the Usurper had won the war then why wouldn't they flee with Lyanna and baby? Surely they were sworn to protect them. Unless they had some mindless order such as to never let/assist Lyanna and/or the child leave the tower & defend it under any circumstance.



Okay it may be that Lyanna was in an extended labour, couldn't be moved for days, which culminated in her giving birth just before Ned ascended into the tower. Ned finds her in a pool of blood and she has a fever (from the strain of childbirth, bloodloss and/or from infection from possible extended labour).



If the KG knew about the death of Rhaegar and the fall of KL then why not send for help? They are near Dorne but they couldn't rely on Dorne for help because of Elia. They've been cooped up for a very long time so where have they been getting supplies from? It looks like a mountainous region around the Tower of Joy with PLENTY of places to hide. This leads to another question being why would Rhaegar take Lyanna to the Tower of Joy in Dorne in the first place?! A blind man can see that Dorne is not a safe place for Lyanna or any potential heirs no matter who won the war.



The whole scenario just seems so irrational for persons not portrayed as irrational people. Maybe the point is that there is a bit of the mad king in all of us.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

It seems that all discussions are bound to repeat, which is why I resorted to saving my posts, to save the time.

ToJ dream and reality parallels:

He dreamt an old dream,

He did not think it omened well that he should dream that dream again after so many years.

of three knights in white cloaks,

Three men in white cloaks, he thought, remembering, and a strange chill went through him.

and a tower long fallen,

Ned had pulled the tower down afterward,

and Lyanna in her bed of blood.

“Lord Eddard,” Lyanna called again.

“I promise,” he whispered. “Lya, I promise …”

Promise me, she had cried, in a room that smelled of blood and roses. Promise me, Ned.

Promise me, Ned, his sister had whispered from her bed of blood.

In the dream his friends rode with him, as they had in life.

They were seven, facing three. In the dream as it had been in life.

Ned had pulled the tower down afterward, and used its bloody stones to build eight cairns

They had been seven against three, yet only two had lived to ride away; Eddard Stark himself and the little crannogman, Howland Reed

He dreamt an old dream

In the dream his friends rode with him, as they had in life

They were seven, facing three. In the dream as it had been in life

He did not think it omened well that he should dream that dream again after so many years

In other words: he has had the dream before, many times, in years. He directly confirms parts of the dream as faithfully reflecting reality, and after he wakes up, he elaborates on the details of the event:

It would have to be his grandfather, for Jory’s father was buried far to the south. Martyn Cassel had perished with the rest. Ned had pulled the tower down afterward, and used its bloody stones to build eight cairns upon the ridge. It was said that Rhaegar had named that place the tower of joy, but for Ned it was a bitter memory. They had been seven against three, yet only two had lived to ride away; Eddard Stark himself and the little crannogman, Howland Reed.

Ser Boros Blount guarded the far end of the bridge, white steel armor ghostly in the moonlight. Within, Ned passed two other knights of the Kingsguard; Ser Preston Greenfield stood at the bottom of the steps, and Ser Barristan Selmy waited at the door of the king’s bedchamber. Three men in white cloaks, he thought, remembering, and a strange chill went through him.

I'm tired and struggling for time and energy. Can anyone help me with a related discussion?

I have someone insisting that the KG at ToJ didn't know anything before Ned told them stuff. I've pointed out that just from Ned's first line, that he looked for them at the Trident, that their response shows they already know what happened at the Trident and their use of "the Usurper" then indicates they already know Bobby B has won, is no longer just a rebel and been formally crowned.

One part of the counter argument is that 'usurper' is used (by Stannis talking about Daemon Blackfyre) just to mean a claimant, not a successful one. There's actually half a point in that argument, though I'm sure that the capitalisation of Usurper in the KG speech shows an important difference. No way that the other party in my discussion is going to accep that, though, based on past history of the discussion.
So any other details that show they know before Ned tells them? I can't remember, but someone here will have the angles available.
TIA.

1) Usurper, capitalized, is what Robert says that people still call him. Before he usurped the throne, he was a rebel - usurpation was not his primary goal, he fought to preserve his own life and take revenge on the Targs. Daemon went to war solely because he wanted the crown.

2) If the KG weren't up-to-date, they would have had no idea why Ned is talking about the Trident - no idea that there was a battle or that Robert took part. They should also show concern about Rhaegar, but they don't.

3) Jaime murdering Aerys is an absolute desecration of everything a KG stands for. It should provoke a highly emotional reaction if it was fresh news, but it doesn't. Plus, the KG should be concerned about Aegon, but they're not.

4) Ned names specifically the Queen and Viserys, never mentions Rhaegar and Aegon or Rhaenys. Again, the KG should bother to ask but they don't.

5) Arthur Dayne smiles sadly the moment he sees Ned - he knows what the encounter will come up to because he knows where both parties stand, and the decision had been made before Ned turned up. That wouldn't have been possible without prior knowledge.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

What we really don't know:



1. What the hell did the KG know, and when were they told by whom? I find the concept that they were very well-informed but somehow unable to spirit away Lyanna and her child to a safer place problematic at best...



2. Was Lyanna's child already born when Ned arrived there, or was childbirth only due (very) soon?



If the child was already born, the question is why the hell did they have not yet left, especially if they did not mind Lyanna all that much. There was at least a wet nurse at the Tower - most likely Wylla - so they could have had the chance to take the child and leave for Starfall, or another (relative) secure location, leaving Lyanna in the care of some other people. There must have been some other people there, since Ned, Howland, and Wylla would most likely not have been able to tear the Tower down on their own.



If the child was already born, and if Lyanna was married to Rhaegar, she would have had at least a say in giving input as to who was a mortal enemy of her newborn royal son, even if the KG decided that she was unfit to represent the interests of her infant son (and we are not sure that they did such a thing). It is difficult to explain why the fight between the men broke out, and pretty much impossible that fighting actually began after that weird dream sequence dialogue. That may work in 'The Matrix' movies, but not in ASoIaF. There must have been either additional dialogue, or - much more likely, in my opinion - a completely different conversation.



If the child was not yet born, this could explain a lot of things, actually: Why the KG wanted to prevent a reunion between Ned and Lyanna, why the KG could not actually leave the Tower - they were without a doubt still bound to follow Rhaegar's command -, why there was no chance for a negotiation - if the child had already been born, and if Lyanna was already slowly dying, surely there could have been reached an understanding - the obvious solution would have been to leave the child in the care of Ser Arthur Dayne and the KG, whereas Ned would take his dying/dead sister back home. In that scenario, Ned would not have been forced to disguise Lyanna's child as his bastard - and I guess he would have liked that very much.



3. What's the problem with that 'a KG has always first and foremost to protect the king' rule? First, they swear an oath to every individual king, not to the whole dynasty, or to the eternal/unshakable law of succession. If a king and his recognized heir die, they cannot be sure who will succeed him, nor can they feel honor-bound to favor one of the various claimants over the others. It is not for them (alone) to decide who is going to sit on the Iron Throne.


If this was not the case, then Barristan Selmy could have never legally sworn fealty to Robert Baratheon.



4. What about Gerold Hightower? He must have clearly recognized Rhaegar's authority over him when he decided to obey his command to stay at the Tower after he had found him. No idea how this came to pass, but the best guess would be that the White Bull, too, had become abhorred by the things Aerys had done, and was actually looking forward to Rhaegar taking over as Prince Regent.


Link to comment
Share on other sites

Not only that. If Rhaegar gave them an order they would follow it.

But that doesn't mean they wouldn't-under-any-circumstances cease to follow it when something more important came up or the situation changed. If Rhaegar gave an order, and they followed it, and then when things changed they stopped following it, then GRRM's quote still exactly and precisely applies.

But no, GRRM said they would follow an order so all reason and logic must be abandoned. If Rhaegar ordered them to kill Aerys, of course they would, unhesitatingly and unflinchingly. GRRM (didn't, actually) said as much.

I'm tired and struggling for time and energy. Can anyone help me with a related discussion?

I have someone insisting that the KG at ToJ didn't know anything before Ned told them stuff. I've pointed out that just from Ned's first line, that he looked for them at the Trident, that their response shows they already know what happened at the Trident and their use of "the Usurper" then indicates they already know Bobby B has won, is no longer just a rebel and been formally crowned.

One part of the counter argument is that 'usurper' is used (by Stannis talking about Daemon Blackfyre) just to mean a claimant, not a successful one. There's actually half a point in that argument, though I'm sure that the capitalisation of Usurper in the KG speech shows an important difference. No way that the other party in my discussion is going to accep that, though, based on past history of the discussion.

So any other details that show they know before Ned tells them? I can't remember, but someone here will have the angles available.

TIA.

Corbon--

While the dialogue suggests that it is likely that the KG knew the information already--based on their tone and lack of surprise or inquiry about further details--I am not sure it matters. Rather than getting caught up in a debate about an issue that is not critical to the analysis--allow the hypothetical that the KG did not know these facts already. I don't think there is any way with the information we have to definitively prove that the KG already knew all of this information--so go with the counter assumption (even though we both agree it appears likely the KG actually did know).

The critical fact for me is that Ned almost certainly is giving the KG a "free pass" to leave and go to Viserys when he speaks of Viserys being on Dragonstone. At that moment--even if the KG knew of none of the facts being spoken by Ned prior to this encounter--the KG are being told that the heir to the Targ throne is on Dragonstone and the KG are free to pass and go to him. But they make no attempt to take Ned up on this offer and respond that the KG do not flee--then or now. The reference to now is critical because if Viserys is the rightful king--going to him on Dragonstone would not be fleeing--it would be reporting to the new king. So the KG must not believe that Viserys is king--and we all know the only way that could be true (hint--the real king is in the tower).

Link to comment
Share on other sites

If the KG knew that the Usurper had won the war then why wouldn't they flee with Lyanna and baby? Surely they were sworn to protect them. Unless they had some mindless order such as to never let/assist Lyanna and/or the child leave the tower & defend it under any circumstance.

Because Lyanna is incredibly sick--to the point of dying in front of the KG's eye. They can't put her and a newborn babe on a wagon and ride hard and fast over the mountains. That's the best way to have both Lyanna and the baby die.

If the KG knew about the death of Rhaegar and the fall of KL then why not send for help? They are near Dorne but they couldn't rely on Dorne for help because of Elia. They've been cooped up for a very long time so where have they been getting supplies from? It looks like a mountainous region around the Tower of Joy with PLENTY of places to hide. This leads to another question being why would Rhaegar take Lyanna to the Tower of Joy in Dorne in the first place?! A blind man can see that Dorne is not a safe place for Lyanna or any potential heirs no matter who won the war.

Actually they were probably bringing up supplies from Starfall, the house of Arthur Dayne. Dorne is a big place with lots of houses.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

If the KG knew that the Usurper had won the war then why wouldn't they flee with Lyanna and baby? Surely they were sworn to protect them. Unless they had some mindless order such as to never let/assist Lyanna and/or the child leave the tower & defend it under any circumstance.

Okay it may be that Lyanna was in an extended labour, couldn't be moved for days, which culminated in her giving birth just before Ned ascended into the tower. Ned finds her in a pool of blood and she has a fever (from the strain of childbirth, bloodloss and/or from infection from possible extended labour).

If the KG knew about the death of Rhaegar and the fall of KL then why not send for help? They are near Dorne but they couldn't rely on Dorne for help because of Elia. They've been cooped up for a very long time so where have they been getting supplies from? It looks like a mountainous region around the Tower of Joy with PLENTY of places to hide. This leads to another question being why would Rhaegar take Lyanna to the Tower of Joy in Dorne in the first place?! A blind man can see that Dorne is not a safe place for Lyanna or any potential heirs no matter who won the war.

The whole scenario just seems so irrational for persons not portrayed as irrational people. Maybe the point is that there is a bit of the mad king in all of us.

Many people assume that there is a safer place than ToJ. If the KG believed there was a safer place than ToJ, they would have been there already. Rhaegar and the KG knew there was a war going on, but stayed hidden at ToJ. They were waiting for something--I believe the birth of the baby. ToJ is remote and abandoned. While there are plenty of places to hide--ToJ is viewed as the best place to hide--why would another place be better? And ToJ is the place where the source of their supplies (presumably Starfall) knows to bring new supplies. Dorne was viewed as a good place for this very reason--Arthur Dayne likely suggested the location because it was close enough to Starfall to get supplies but remote enough to be secret. Once the rebels win the war, Lyanna is either too pregnant or too sick to travel, so the best plan is to wait for her to give birth, get better and then perhaps go into exile on Essos. But until they are ready to leave Westeros, ToJ likely seemed like the safest place to be. It had basically remained completely hidden (other than from Hightower) for about a year. That is a pretty safe place to hide--they could not know that someone (Ashara?) would tell Ned where to look.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

What we really don't know:

1. What the hell did the KG know, and when were they told by whom? I find the concept that they were very well-informed but somehow unable to spirit away Lyanna and her child to a safer place problematic at best...

2. Was Lyanna's child already born when Ned arrived there, or was childbirth only due (very) soon?

If the child was already born, the question is why the hell did they have not yet left, especially if they did not mind Lyanna all that much. There was at least a wet nurse at the Tower - most likely Wylla - so they could have had the chance to take the child and leave for Starfall, or another (relative) secure location, leaving Lyanna in the care of some other people. There must have been some other people there, since Ned, Howland, and Wylla would most likely not have been able to tear the Tower down on their own.

If the child was already born, and if Lyanna was married to Rhaegar, she would have had at least a say in giving input as to who was a mortal enemy of her newborn royal son, even if the KG decided that she was unfit to represent the interests of her infant son (and we are not sure that they did such a thing). It is difficult to explain why the fight between the men broke out, and pretty much impossible that fighting actually began after that weird dream sequence dialogue. That may work in 'The Matrix' movies, but not in ASoIaF. There must have been either additional dialogue, or - much more likely, in my opinion - a completely different conversation.

If the child was not yet born, this could explain a lot of things, actually: Why the KG wanted to prevent a reunion between Ned and Lyanna, why the KG could not actually leave the Tower - they were without a doubt still bound to follow Rhaegar's command -, why there was no chance for a negotiation - if the child had already been born, and if Lyanna was already slowly dying, surely there could have been reached an understanding - the obvious solution would have been to leave the child in the care of Ser Arthur Dayne and the KG, whereas Ned would take his dying/dead sister back home. In that scenario, Ned would not have been forced to disguise Lyanna's child as his bastard - and I guess he would have liked that very much.

3. What's the problem with that 'a KG has always first and foremost to protect the king' rule? First, they swear an oath to every individual king, not to the whole dynasty, or to the eternal/unshakable law of succession. If a king and his recognized heir die, they cannot be sure who will succeed him, nor can they feel honor-bound to favor one of the various claimants over the others. It is not for them (alone) to decide who is going to sit on the Iron Throne.

If this was not the case, then Barristan Selmy could have never legally sworn fealty to Robert Baratheon.

4. What about Gerold Hightower? He must have clearly recognized Rhaegar's authority over him when he decided to obey his command to stay at the Tower after he had found him. No idea how this came to pass, but the best guess would be that the White Bull, too, had become abhorred by the things Aerys had done, and was actually looking forward to Rhaegar taking over as Prince Regent.

1. Why? If a single reliable person arrives at ToJ to tell them the news, there is no leak to the secrecy of Jon's very existence. If the KG move away with the baby, they will be revealed and someone inevitably starts wondering what the hell are three paragons of KGhood doing down there with some baby. Whereas, if they stay put and let the Daynes prepare a new hideout and a safe passage - to Essoss, to some other remote location, wherever - they are safe as long as the location is not compromised. However, the preparations take time, so they wait.

2. So, the KG take away the child who, once grown up, will appear with fire and blood and tear the country with another civil war? Sorry if I have hard time seeing Ned consenting to this.

3. Oh, come on. Once Robert dies, Barristan asks the council to excuse him because his place is with the king - Joffrey. Also, the succession line is pretty clear, and unless a body of greater authority, the Great Council, proclaims someone else, it's first son's first-second-third etc. son who inherits. Barristan turned cloak, and he himself admits it.

4. Ser "protect-the-king-not.judge-him"? Someone up the thread quoted the SSM stating that the Crown Prince had authority to command the KG, as well. The one thing that the SSM does not adress is what happens when the Crown Prince's order effectively clashes with the first duty, which, however, occured only after the Crown Prince was dead and all the other KG either died or betrayed.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

What we really don't know:

1. What the hell did the KG know, and when were they told by whom? I find the concept that they were very well-informed but somehow unable to spirit away Lyanna and her child to a safer place problematic at best...

2. Was Lyanna's child already born when Ned arrived there, or was childbirth only due (very) soon?

If the child was already born, the question is why the hell did they have not yet left, especially if they did not mind Lyanna all that much. There was at least a wet nurse at the Tower - most likely Wylla - so they could have had the chance to take the child and leave for Starfall, or another (relative) secure location, leaving Lyanna in the care of some other people. There must have been some other people there, since Ned, Howland, and Wylla would most likely not have been able to tear the Tower down on their own.

If the child was already born, and if Lyanna was married to Rhaegar, she would have had at least a say in giving input as to who was a mortal enemy of her newborn royal son, even if the KG decided that she was unfit to represent the interests of her infant son (and we are not sure that they did such a thing). It is difficult to explain why the fight between the men broke out, and pretty much impossible that fighting actually began after that weird dream sequence dialogue. That may work in 'The Matrix' movies, but not in ASoIaF. There must have been either additional dialogue, or - much more likely, in my opinion - a completely different conversation.

If the child was not yet born, this could explain a lot of things, actually: Why the KG wanted to prevent a reunion between Ned and Lyanna, why the KG could not actually leave the Tower - they were without a doubt still bound to follow Rhaegar's command -, why there was no chance for a negotiation - if the child had already been born, and if Lyanna was already slowly dying, surely there could have been reached an understanding - the obvious solution would have been to leave the child in the care of Ser Arthur Dayne and the KG, whereas Ned would take his dying/dead sister back home. In that scenario, Ned would not have been forced to disguise Lyanna's child as his bastard - and I guess he would have liked that very much.

3. What's the problem with that 'a KG has always first and foremost to protect the king' rule? First, they swear an oath to every individual king, not to the whole dynasty, or to the eternal/unshakable law of succession. If a king and his recognized heir die, they cannot be sure who will succeed him, nor can they feel honor-bound to favor one of the various claimants over the others. It is not for them (alone) to decide who is going to sit on the Iron Throne.

If this was not the case, then Barristan Selmy could have never legally sworn fealty to Robert Baratheon.

4. What about Gerold Hightower? He must have clearly recognized Rhaegar's authority over him when he decided to obey his command to stay at the Tower after he had found him. No idea how this came to pass, but the best guess would be that the White Bull, too, had become abhorred by the things Aerys had done, and was actually looking forward to Rhaegar taking over as Prince Regent.

I will try to respond by the numbers:

1. We cannot be sure what the KG know and when, but based on their tone and apparent lack of surprise or inquiry to Ned, they likely knew the basic facts. If they did know, they probably had not known for long, given that communication likely was restricted to re-supply trips from their supply source (probably Starfall), which would have been intermittent. Once they learned of the fall of the Targ dynasty, ToJ still likely seemed like the safest place until they could arrange to leave Westeros (assuming that was their ultimate plan) or arrange to go wherever they thought would be safest. Until Lyanna was safe to travel and until they had arranged for passage to some place safer, staying at ToJ made sense. Traveling with a new born--even with a wet nurse rather than Lyanna--is still slow and dangerous travel, and it is not clear they would have had any place safer lined up to go to at that point in time.

2. See 1 above, and also Lyanna was either incapacitated in labor--or more likely (IMHO)--quite ill with puerperal fever. The KG were not going to confer with her regarding Ned's approach. Even if they did, the KG were not going to take her obviously biased view regarding her brother to override their knowledge that he is one of the main leaders of the rebellion. Your suggestion of the "obvious" solution makes no sense to me and thus I don't think it can be reasonably described as "obvious" in any sense. First, Lyanna was too ill to travel, so Ned leaving with Lyanna would not work. Do you actually think Lyanna would have agreed to leave without her baby (maybe they don't give her a choice, but still)? I really don't follow your thinking here, and I don't agree that it really matters whether Jon has been born or not at that point in time. Either way, the KG need to keep Jon's existence a secret from Ned and the other rebels--and prevent them from reporting back about the location of ToJ and the existence of Jon (or pregnant Lyanna if she is only in labor at that point). Remember--in the minds of the KG Ned is the enemy--he is one of the main leaders of the rebellion. Under no circumstances can they or would they trust Ned.

3. I don't think the KG thought there was a succession issue. Danye and Whent presumably were at the wedding of Rhaegar and Lyanna and reported this information to Hightower. Sure, a GC can always call the succession into question, but generally, the next in line under normal rules becomes king. The KG knew that Rhaegar considered this child to be his legitimate child and thus next in line after Aegon if a boy. The KG had no reason to believe there was a succession question to consider between Jon and Viserys. In the minds of the KG, Jon was the legitimate son of Rhaegar--unless and until successfully challenged at a GC--and there was no real discretion by the KG to consider anyone other than Jon to be the next king.

4. I disagree strongly with this point of yours. Hightower did not flip from Aerys to Rhaegar--he explicitly states that if he had been at KL, Jaime would be dead and Aerys still king. Hightower is the one that tells Jaime that the KG are not there to judge the king. No, while we don't know for sure how Rhaegar got Hightower to stay at ToJ, the best theory I have heard is that Rhaegar told Hightower that Rhaegar would agree to go back to KL--and thus allow Hightower to fulfill his duty to Aerys to obey his command to find Rhaegar and get Rhaegar back to KL--only if Hightower agreed to stay at ToJ. The reason for this arrangement, apparently, would be to prevent Aerys from ordering Hightower to tell Aerys where Lyanna is hiding--i.e., the location of TOJ. In that way, Hightower could still fulfill his duty to Aerys by getting Rhaegar back to KL, but Rhaegar can keep the location a secret. Of course, once the rest of the royal family is dead, Hightower is at ToJ because he is guarding the new king (but I know that is not what you are referencing in terms of Hightower being at ToJ).

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Maybe Rhaegar & the KG knew about the mad kings wildfire plot which would give them reason to believe that if he died and the city fell then Aegon & Rhaenys would be dead and Jon would be king. This is a very easy explanation as to why the KG were so adamant to protect Jon and so proud to take that last stand.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Maybe Rhaegar & the KG knew about the mad kings wildfire plot which would give them reason to believe that if he died and the city fell then Aegon & Rhaenys would be dead and Jon would be king. This is a very easy explanation as to why the KG were so adamant to protect Jon and so proud to take that last stand.

Jaime makes quite clear that Rhaegar never knew, and if he didn't know, neither did ToJ.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

What makes you think that LB is a literal sword?

I think it's a literal sword. But I think if we get a Nissa Nissa (and I'm not entirely sure we need one), it would be Arya. I don't think Dany would wield a sword- she's not a warrior. Jon, otoh, has been training constantly with swords from the moment we met him.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

The ToJ is a ruined and disused tower in a remote region. It's probably one of a number or ruins in the area (we know of at least one other, the Vulture's Roost). Unless there's a leak from somewhere, it's a pretty safe place to be. The biggest issue with the ToJ as a hideout is supply -- it's a fair bet that the 3KG aren't spending their days farming -- so until the supply line to the ToJ is endangered, there would be no good reason to move on, certainly not if it means taking the risk of moving a newborn and a very sick mother.



I think it's also a fair bet that the supply line could be shorter than the journey to Starfall. It's tempting to see Starfall as the heart of everything with Dayne at the ToJ, but Starfall's actually not that close to the ToJ. There may have been regular supplies coming in from Kingsgrave, perhaps a day's rather than a week's journey from the ToJ. This wouldn't even need the cooperation of House Manwoody, as presumably there's a town there someone from the ToJ could wander into incognito to pick up a bit of shopping and gossip. The raven network keeps information flowing around Westeros pretty fast, and I see no reason that news wouldn't reach the ToJ a lot faster than Ned did.


Link to comment
Share on other sites

Yes you are right. Damn I thought that would be quite an elegant explanation on why the KG would overlook Aegon and Rhaenys to defend 'the King'.

What do you mean overlook? Jaime was at KL and no one knew that he would kill Aerys. And no one knew that Tywin would fool the King into opening the gates. The KG has no reason to suspect that Aegon and Aerys and Rhaenys were in mortal danger.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

What do you mean overlook? Jaime was at KL and no one knew that he would kill Aerys. And no one knew that Tywin would fool the King into opening the gates. The KG has no reason to suspect that Aegon and Aerys and Rhaenys were in mortal danger.

I think Rachelle means mortal danger from the wild fire--not Jaime or Tywin.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.

Guest
This topic is now closed to further replies.
×
×
  • Create New...