R+L=J v.103

[Anath]

Hightower would not have, though. Whatever Dayne or Whent did, Hightower was completely loyal to Aerys, as we know from the text. And it's Hightower that says "We swore a vow", not the others.

Yes. And Hightower was all for orders. Twenty years of them. He would probably take everything out of Rhaegar's mouth to be an order, including the vow. As long as Rhaegar didn't specify anything about Aerys, of course. There are lots of possibilities to formulate the vow in a way that don't include the possibility of choosing between Aerys and the fetus. Hightower looks sufficiently brainwashed to believe that Rhaegar would win because well, Rhaegar said so.

[BearQueen87]

IIRC didn't Areys believe in the prophecy too?

I don't believe we know if Aerys believed in it, but he was forced to marry his sister Rhaella because of it, so he was aware of its existence and the importance the Targaryen's placed on it.

[MtnLion]

<snip>

It was not until the end of the war, around the time the Battle of the Trident was being fought, that Robert Baratheon proclaimed his intention to claim the throne.

Ser Oswell Whent was on one knee, sharpening his blade with a whetstone.(aGoT Eddard X)

I think it's easier to sharpen your blade while sitting or kneeling rather than standing. So the fact that he was on his knee, sharpening his blade, does not mean he had just bent the knee to Lyanna's child.

Earlier you object about how I shifted from Ned's perspective of offering an openning for the Kingsguard to withdraw, to the Kingsguard's perspective that Ned and his comrades are not a real threat to their success, or winning the battle. I think that may be because you simply read through too quickly to grasp that I had switched perspectives.

There's more but then it just becomes nitpicking.

Otherwise good job.

Mmm, Robert, Jon Arryn, and Ned seemed to have agreed that Robert would be crowned, as he had the "best" claim. Who had a better claim? Viserys, but he was driven from the mainland, and certainly would risk his life to make a claim. So, in effect Robert prevents Viserys from making his claim by threat of force. That is why the Kingsguard label him Usurper.

I won't argue about the best positions to sharpen your blade, even though I find it easiest to do it standing. I merely pointed out that Whent need not be doing anything, let alone kneeling. Kneeling, or bending the knee has its own special place in this dialog. However, sharpening his sword implies that he is preparing for a battle.

Earlier you may have read through too quickly to understand that I switch perspectives with each line. Ned is offering a chance to withdraw. The Kingsguard don't consider Ned and company a real threat.

[Anath]

I don't believe we know if Aerys believed in it, but he was forced to marry his sister Rhaella because of it, so he was aware of its existence and the importance the Targaryen's placed on it.

This. And in the long run, it doesn't matter. Aerys was so losing it that believing it or not would not make a change in any way regarding his behavior. But given the fact that he and Rhaella were forced at each other instead of just marrying, I'd guess they didn't think it was that important.

[sj4iy]

Yes. And Hightower was all for orders. Twenty years of them. He would probably take everything out of Rhaegar's mouth to be an order, including the vow. As long as Rhaegar didn't specify anything about Aerys, of course. There are lots of possibilities to formulate the vow in a way that don't include the possibility of choosing between Aerys and the fetus. Hightower looks sufficiently brainwashed to believe that Rhaegar would win because well, Rhaegar said so.

Uh, okay. Hightower's not brainwashed. He's the LC of the KG. Whatever he thought about his king, he didn't share it. That's not 'brainwashed', that's 'knowing you have a duty and you do it'.

In any case, he's the odd man out. He's the one that doesn't make sense in this scenario. Why did he stay and why does he refuse to go to his king, Viserys, when he knows him to be without protection? We can't say for sure. But his presence there is a big flashing light that says "look again at this scenario".

[sj4iy]

Here's the big question:

Would the crown prince's standing orders override the KG's duty to protect his king if he KNEW his king was without protection?

[BearQueen87]

Here's the big question:

Would the crown prince's standing orders override the KG's duty to protect his king if he KNEW his king was without protection?

Ah. Obey vs. Protect. The meat and bones of RLJ for at least 10 threads now.

#TeamProtect #TeamJonIsLegit #TeamJustBendTheKneeAlready

[TheLastStark]

Re: It never says one KG must be with the King at all time.

That's true. But this series does not spell out everything for you. Look at when the Kings travel. Does he always have at least one KG with him? Answer: yes.

When Aerys goes to Duskendale: KG

When Robert travels North: KG

When Robert goes hunting: KG

When Dany (a world away) moves about her pyramid: One KG in the form of Barry, the previous LC of the KG in KL.

When Aerys stays in the Red Keep during the Rebellion: One KG in the form of Jaime (both for KG and political reasons)

Seriously. Hightower is a giant red flashing arrow.

Nothing in the conversation in Ned's dream/flashback indicates the KG's facial expressions or tones when talking. So there is really nothing to show that they knew of the sack of KL. And if you want to use the usurper line, look back(pg 2 i think) in this thread and you can see my take on that.

[sj4iy]

Nothing in the conversation in Ned's dream/flashback indicates the KG's facial expressions or tones when talking. So there is really nothing to show that they knew of the sack of KL. And if you want to use the usurper line, look back(pg 2 i think) in this thread and you can see my take on that.

Uh, read it again.

“I looked for you on the Trident,” Ned said to them.

“We were not there,” Ser Gerold answered.

“Woe to the Usurper if we had been,” said Ser Oswell.

They know that Robert won that battle, otherwise, how would Oswell have known to say "Woe to the Usurper if we had been"? Ned gives them no details. Their tone throughout the entire conversation is that they know very well what happened at the Trident and KL.

[stateofdissipation]

To me, the big line is 'we swore a vow'. They wouldn't have sworn a vow to Rhaegar. Obeyed his orders, yes...but not swear a vow. If they were obeying Rhaegar's orders and only that, I would have expected them to say something like "We have our orders". But the vow they swore was to protect the king. That's what really gets me about that conversation more than anything else.

“We swore a vow,” explained old Ser Gerold.--aGoT page 410

The vows of the kingsguard were common knowledge... hardly in need of explanation. Unless Hightower planned on losing the battle, what he meant would forever remain a mystery to the man he had just explained it to.

When I died in the battle of the Trident. I fought for Prince Rhaegar though he did not know my name. I could not tell you why, save the lord I served served a lord who served a lord who had decided to support the dragon rather than the stag.--The Elder Brother aFfC page 531

Hightower stood in front of a round tower with the red mountains of Dorne at his back facing Ned-son of a murdered father, younger brother of a murdered older brother, and older brother of the girl in the tower. He did so not because the lord he served or the lord the lord he served decided. He did not do so because it was the right thing to do. He did so because he swore a vow... it was no longer his decision, it was his duty.

You seem a decent fellow, I hate to kill you.---Indigo Montoya the Princess Bride

The vow intended to explain that the kingsguard were guarding the king in the tower required the kingsguard to be defeated to explain anything. The vow used to explain why the fight was going to happen gives an explanation that is complete without another discovery.

[BearQueen87]

Uh, read it again.

“I looked for you on the Trident,” Ned said to them.

“We were not there,” Ser Gerold answered.

“Woe to the Usurper if we had been,” said Ser Oswell.

They know that Robert won that battle, otherwise, how would Oswell have known to say "Woe to the Usurper if we had been"? Ned gives them no details. Their tone throughout the entire conversation is that they know very well what happened at the Trident and KL.

:agree:

Like MtnLion points out in the TOJ analysis, the KG know what has happened. They've gotten all the news--Rhaegar, Aerys, and Aegon's death--most likely at the same time.

[TheLastStark]

Earlier you object about how I shifted from Ned's perspective of offering an openning for the Kingsguard to withdraw, to the Kingsguard's perspective that Ned and his comrades are not a real threat to their success, or winning the battle. I think that may be because you simply read through too quickly to grasp that I had switched perspectives.

-Not sure where you got this from?

Mmm, Robert, Jon Arryn, and Ned seemed to have agreed that Robert would be crowned, as he had the "best" claim. Who had a better claim? Viserys, but he was driven from the mainland, and certainly would risk his life to make a claim. So, in effect Robert prevents Viserys from making his claim by threat of force. That is why the Kingsguard label him Usurper.

I won't argue about the best positions to sharpen your blade, even though I find it easiest to do it standing. I merely pointed out that Whent need not be doing anything, let alone kneeling. Kneeling, or bending the knee has its own special place in this dialog. However, sharpening his sword implies that he is preparing for a battle.

Earlier you may have read through too quickly to understand that I switch perspectives with each line. Ned is offering a chance to withdraw. The Kingsguard don't consider Ned and company a real threat.

From Ned's perspective, it does not seem wise IMO to let three of the most dangerous knights in Westeros to leave and join Viserys on Dragonstone. And from the KL perspective, if they had just found out about Viserys on Dragonstone, and thought they were going to win the battle they would not stop and have a discussion about what to do next in front of the enemy, first kill them then worry about how to get there(All assuming that's where they wanted to go).

I've never sharpened a sword so I wouldn't know.

Probably

[TheLastStark]

It is the use of the word usurper. No one ever seems to look it up or see how it is used in context within the world of aSoIaF.

“ Must the rightful Lord of the Seven Kingdoms beg for help from widow women and usurpers? ^[3] ”

- Melisandre

“ The Starks seek to steal half my kingdom, even as the Lannisters have stolen my throne and my own sweet brother the swords and service and strongholds that are mine by rights. They are all usurpers, and they are all my enemies.^[2] ”

- Stannis

“ Daemon Blackfyre was a rebel and usurper.^[11] ”

– Stannis Baratheon, to Ser Justin Massey

As you can see, the term usurper is used to describe people who have made a claim to the throne, not to have actually won it. If anything this line only shows that they had knowledge of the Trident where Robert first made his claim to the throne.

It was not until the end of the war, around the time the Battle of the Trident was being fought, that Robert Baratheon proclaimed his intention to claim the throne.

[TheLastStark]

Uh, read it again.

“I looked for you on the Trident,” Ned said to them.

“We were not there,” Ser Gerold answered.

“Woe to the Usurper if we had been,” said Ser Oswell.

They know that Robert won that battle, otherwise, how would Oswell have known to say "Woe to the Usurper if we had been"? Ned gives them no details. Their tone throughout the entire conversation is that they know very well what happened at the Trident and KL.

Uh, you read it again, then look up the word usurper and the context in which it is used in the world of aSoIaF. It does NOT mean that someone has taken the throne/KL/crown, only that they have made a claim to it. So no, sorry, it doesn't mean they knew anything past the Trident.

[MtnLion]

They might have actually sworn a vow to Rhaegar to protect the prophecy child. After all, it's widely speculated that Arthur and Oswell, at least, were ready to break their vow to protect Aerys and replace him with Rhaegar. Rhaegar might have wanted some extra assurance or thought the child was important enough to merit more than a mere order.

Nope, Ned does not know of any other vow for the Kingsguard to be referring to than the Kingsguard's vow to protect and defend the king. If they aren't living up to the Kingsguard vow, then Ned has no basis for what he says about them being a shining example to the world.

I think it makes sense if a marriage hadn't taken place and Rhaegar needed something to bind Ser Gerold to the child, just in case he started having some notions about going back to Aerys and protect him. And then of course he'd have to make Arthur and Oswell swear, as well. As obedient and stucker to the rules as he was, Gerold Hightower probably had two brain cells to connect and ask this simple question, "Hey, why me alone? Is there something you aren't telling me? Guys?"

Then why wouldn't someone have said so, instead of, "we were far away"?

[Lord Varys]

This would depend on whether a new king was recognized by the Realm (or the individual KG). We know that Kingsguard took part in wars of succession, after all.

Whatever vow the individual Kingsguard swore, it would have ended with the death of the king. He would only have to protect and obey a new king, if such a king was crowned and recognized.

For instance, let us assume that Prince Jaehaerys, the eldest son of Aegon II, had not been killed. Ser Rickard Thorne, the Kingsguard protecting the younger Prince Maelor is sent to a secret location (in truth Oldtown, but lets assume it is some remote location on Crackclaw Point).

In our scenario, Aegon II is killed during the Dance at some point, but Prince Jaehaerys is still alive and is proclaimed King Jaehaerys II by the Green loyalists. Now, what if Thorne's last orders were to protect Prince Maelor at all cost, and to remain hidden until the war was over?

He would most likely have stayed hidden.

In that sense it is not unlikely whatsoever that the three Kingsguard at the Tower of Joy were following someone's orders until the very end. The chance that they followed Aerys' orders are pretty low, it is much more likely that they followed Rhaegar's orders to the letter is very likely.

The idea that they just protected 'their new king/queen', Lyanna's (unborn?) child is not very likely, in my opinion, since that would mean they themselves had already sworn an oath to the new king, decided on their own what was best for the child, and were prepared to die to just separate the uncle from his nephew/sister. That does ring right to me.

The idea that KG-less kings need the KG coming to them as soon as possible is also somewhat strange. A king without a Kingsguard can always name a knight his KG on a whim, especially if one than one spot is empty - Prince Lewyn Martell and Ser Jonothor Darry died at the Trident, thus King Viserys III - or the Dowager Queen Rhaella - could have easily named a knight of her retinue to the Kingsguard, if he so pleased.

A king can also decide to appoint all his Kingsguard to other members of his family, or decide that he does not need KG protection at all. It is really up to him, and I'm pretty sure that a KG insisting that his oath demanded of him to protect an adult king against his will would risk to lose his head rather sooner than later...

Another tidbit on the dream:

I can only repeat myself there: The thought that Ned and the knights really exchanged the words they say in the dream in exactly the ritualistic manner they are exchanged in there makes no sense to me whatsoever. Yeah, perhaps the KG knew already about the Trident and the Sack, perhaps not - I cannot imagine how anyone would have told them where Rhaella and Viserys were, by the way.

In my opinion, the dream is the way Ned chose to remember this last meeting, and he reconstructed it this way, because he knows that he is responsible for the deaths of those men - men who, as he perhaps only realized later, died for the right (or at least a just) cause. Since he clearly wanted to kill them at the tower - and succeeded in that - I'd be very surprised if he considered them true knights and just men at that particular point in his life. Somehow I doubt that...

[stateofdissipation]

I think it makes sense if a marriage hadn't taken place and Rhaegar needed something to bind Ser Gerold to the child, just in case he started having some notions about going back to Aerys and protect him. And then of course he'd have to make Arthur and Oswell swear, as well. As obedient and stucker to the rules as he was, Gerold Hightower probably had two brain cells to connect and ask this simple question, "Hey, why me alone? Is there something you aren't telling me? Guys?"

As obedient and stucker to the rules as he was.

Just wondering what the basis for your characterization of the White Bull as such actually is.

He really is not mentioned that often... this is the quote about him that comes closest to matching the description

"As for Lord Rickard, the steel of his breastplate turned cherry-red before the end, and his gold melted off his spurs and dripped down into the fire. I stood at the foot of the Iron Throne in my white armor and white cloak, filling my head with thoughts of Cersei. After, Gerold Hightower himself took me aside and said to me, ‘You swore a vow to guard the king, not to judge him.' That was the White Bull, loyal to the end and a better man than me, all agree."--Jamie Lannister-aCoK 721

[sj4iy]

Uh, you read it again, then look up the word usurper and the context in which it is used in the world of aSoIaF. It does NOT mean that someone has taken the throne/KL/crown, only that they have made a claim to it. So no, sorry, it doesn't mean they knew anything past the Trident.

Well, I never said anything at all about 'usurper' and what it meant, although it's obvious from this use that they are talking about someone taking the throne. I said they knew that Robert won the Battle at the Trident. They wouldn't have KNOWN THAT if someone else hadn't have told them. I think it's sort of ridiculous to claim that they didn't know anything that happened after that when they clearly knew up to THAT particular point and seem absolutely nonchalant about anything else Ned says. "Oh, well, I'll concede they knew part but not all!" No, they knew all of it somehow.

[BearQueen87]

Uh, you read it again, then look up the word usurper and the context in which it is used in the world of aSoIaF. It does NOT mean that someone has taken the throne/KL/crown, only that they have made a claim to it. So no, sorry, it doesn't mean they knew anything past the Trident.

It's not just that the 3KG know that Robert made a claim for the throne. Look at how they do not react to anything--the huge big pieces of news

1) KL is fallen

2) Aerys is dead

3) Aerys is dead by the hand of Jaime Lannister, their sworn brother

They know what has been happening in and around KL. And before someone says "it's a dream...." yes it is, but Ned remembers them clearly and distinctly, and he remembers that they were not surprised by the HUGE news.

[TheLastStark]

Uh, read it again.

“I looked for you on the Trident,” Ned said to them.

“We were not there,” Ser Gerold answered.

“Woe to the Usurper if we had been,” said Ser Oswell.

They know that Robert won that battle, otherwise, how would Oswell have known to say "Woe to the Usurper if we had been"? Ned gives them no details. Their tone throughout the entire conversation is that they know very well what happened at the Trident and KL.

Nope you said KL too.

It's not just that the 3KG know that Robert made a claim for the throne. Look at how they do not react to anything--the huge big pieces of news

1) KL is fallen

2) Aerys is dead

3) Aerys is dead by the hand of Jaime Lannister, their sworn brother

They know what has been happening in and around KL. And before someone says "it's a dream...." yes it is, but Ned remembers them clearly and distinctly, and he remembers that they were not surprised by the HUGE news.

I understand, but at the same time these 3 strike me as the type to have perfect poker faces and not reveal any of their emotions.