Why I think Jon didn't break his vows at the end of ADwD.

[KozySauce]

I know this has probably been discussed at length on here, but I've been itching to get this off my chest so I made an account so I could post this. I'll get right into it:

I'll admit, Jon was getting a little flexible with his vows at the end of ADwD. Leaving the Wall to go break a siege at the castle he was raised in does seem like he's abandoning the Watch to take part in a quarrel of the Seven Kingdoms, but things change when Winter comes. The Pink Letter, no matter who wrote the damned thing, is a threat directed at Jon. As Lord Commander, Jon's job is to preserve the Watch at all costs. Should the Night's Watch fall, the realm will go with it. Since we don't really know who wrote the Pink Letter I'm just going to say it was Ramsay for arguments sake. So, Ramsay writes a letter to Jon telling him to hand over an assortment of people or die. I'm not going to name all the people listed, what's important about them is that they're all allied with either Stannis or the Wildlings (excluding Theon). Stannis and the Wildlings are ALLIES of the Watch. They're helping fight the Others. If Jon were to do as Ramsay asks, he'd be risking desertion from both sides. Jon has worked so hard to organize and maintain these alliances, and the Watch can't afford to lose any more men. On the flip side, if Jon just ignored the letter, he'd still be endangering the Watch. If Ramsay attacks Castle Black, everyone there is in danger. So Jon did the only thing he could do, go and deal with it once and for all. Even if Ramsay didn't write the letter, it's better than waiting and finding out he actually did when he's right on Castle Black's doorstep. Just go to Winterfell and find out what's actually going on. The Night's Watch takes no part, yes, but there's a difference between willingly taking part and being forced to. If someone involves the Watch in a conflict of their own accord, threatens them, it's no longer a matter of JUST the realm. It's now a concern of the Night's Watch and should be dealt with accordingly, because leaving a potential threat to the Watch unaccounted for isn't safe and could potentially endanger the Watch. The Night's Watch vows say nothing of whether or not the Night's Watch should take part in the realms conflicts, it's a political custom. It's a custom that is usually followed, because most of the time the Night's Watch has more important things to worry about. In this case, Jon shouldn't be concerned with anything more than Ramsay potentially endangering mankind by attacking Castle Black when the Others are about to attack. I think Jon was clever for immediately knowing his only option was to ride to Winterfell. It really was for the best, it bothers me that Bowen Marsh and co. couldn't see that.

One last thing, Jon's decision to take only Wildlings with him (yes, I think Jon decided this before he read the letter to everybody, explanation incoming) at first glance seems like he's doing so because it's a personal matter and he doesn't want to involve the Watch with his personal matters. But, imo, this was a smart tactical decision. I know Jon said he encourages his fellow brothers to come fight with him as well, but I think Jon knew full well that it would be only the wildlings who jump to the occasion, not his brothers. I think this is what Jon wanted, that's why he didn't straight up order anyone to fight with him. Jon had the Wildlings on his side as of then, but just recently they were at odds. Jon doesn't fully trust them, no one does. A lot of Free Folk are good people and they know the threat of the Others more than anyone, but it's no secret that many Wildlings don't think to highly of Jon or the Night's Watch in general. If Jon rode to Winterfell with a host of black brothers and wildlings alike, he'd be leaving the Wall in the hands of mostly Wildlings. You don't have to be a master strategist to know that's a bad idea. So, my point is that Jon knows that the Wildlings loyalty is limited and they shouldn't be trusted to man the wall. However, he also knows that in the case of Winterfell, the Wildlings will stay loyal to him. This is a personal matter for them, Ramsay has supposedly been horribly torturing Mance and the spearwives that accompanied him to Winterfell. They want blood, and Jon knows it. This decision should have made both parties happy. The Men of the Watch get to go on as they always have, watching. Jon has spared them of having to question their honor, even though they really wouldn't be breaking any of their vows. The Wildlings, as I said, will get the revenge they desire. It really was a solid plan, too bad Bowen Marsh and his crew thought Jon had to be prison shanked "for the Watch". I honestly can't fathom how this decision was made. Do they even know what's going on? Has Bowen Marsh heard that the Others are literally about to attack? Even if their doubts about Jon's loyalties were at all warranted, was stabbing him to death in front of thousands of Wildlings who just proclaimed their loyalty to him the right way to go about it? I don't think so. Jon has done so much good for the Watch. Unconventionally, yes. But as I said before, things change when Winter comes. I think Mormont saw in Jon a potential LC that could bear the coming hardships, not for himself, but for the Watch.

[cassidyaj]

Very much agree with this. He's protecting the Wall from attack from the south while leaving the NW to protect it from the North! It was BRILLIANT!

[TheNinjaDC]

He didn't break his vows, but I guarantee at some point he will.

The vows are restraining what he can do to save the realm from the ice zombie apocalypse.

[buckslayer1981]

I always thought the same thing too but you can also see why the numbskulls did what they did. Can't wait to see how jon handles this after becoming a wolf than a man. Winds of winter is going to be awesome.

[Mal Malenkirk]

I'll admit, Jon was getting a little flexible with his vows at the end of ADwD. Leaving the Wall to go break a siege at the castle he was raised in does seem like he's abandoning the Watch to take part in a quarrel of the Seven Kingdoms, but things change when Winter comes. The Pink Letter, no matter who wrote the damned thing, is a threat directed at Jon.

And why would someone write such a letter to Jon, hmm? Was it unprovoked? Oh wait, I seem to remember someone authorizing a raid to deprieve Ramsay Bolton of his wife.

Jon had already broken the Watch neutrality several chapters ago. Trying to save your little sister from a monster is heroic stuff. But trying to steal the bride of the heir of a Lord Paramount, when said brides's claim are crucial to his plan, is basically an act of war.

Jon is a great guy and a good leader but a piss poor politician. He acted against the interests of the watch in this matter. Mormont would never have approved of that.

Jon did right by his heart and common decency but failed in his sworn duty. Martin loves this stuff.

[Pod The Impaler]

I know this has probably been discussed at length on here, but I've been itching to get this off my chest so I made an account so I could post this. I'll get right into it:

I'll admit, Jon was getting a little flexible with his vows at the end of ADwD. Leaving the Wall to go break a siege at the castle he was raised in does seem like he's abandoning the Watch to take part in a quarrel of the Seven Kingdoms, but things change when Winter comes. The Pink Letter, no matter who wrote the damned thing, is a threat directed at Jon. As Lord Commander, Jon's job is to preserve the Watch at all costs. Should the Night's Watch fall, the realm will go with it. Since we don't really know who wrote the Pink Letter I'm just going to say it was Ramsay for arguments sake. So, Ramsay writes a letter to Jon telling him to hand over an assortment of people or die. I'm not going to name all the people listed, what's important about them is that they're all allied with either Stannis or the Wildlings (excluding Theon). Stannis and the Wildlings are ALLIES of the Watch. They're helping fight the Others. If Jon were to do as Ramsay asks, he'd be risking desertion from both sides. Jon has worked so hard to organize and maintain these alliances, and the Watch can't afford to lose any more men.

I agree. Jon had held a pretty constant position with regard to the war for the Iron Throne - the Watch did not take part.

Stannis showed up? Helpful for dealing with Mance's army, but misconstrued as a sign that the Watch now sided with Stannis.

Every time the Watch stated its neutrality, it was basically ignored by:

1) The Lannisters, who misliked seeing Stannis there and a Stark bastard in charge.

2) The Boltons, who probably understand but do not care - they want all Starks dead, so none are left who may contest their rule of the North. Stannis sending someone to steal fake Arya (who they know is fake, obviously!) makes a great excuse to slay both the fake Arya and Jon Snow. Someone else gets blamed.

3) Stannis & Selyse. Ever since they arrived, they treat the Watch like it is subordinate to them and their causes. While Stannis knows the tradition of the Watch's independence, he thinks the whole Ahor Azai thing more or less overrides it. Selyse doesn't know or care - Stannis is king and she is queen and must be obeyed by all; in her mind, even wildlings, even the Watch.

4) Some of the men of the Night's Watch, particularly those who oppose Jon Snow. Slynt, Thorne, Bowen Marsh - these men actually did more kow-towing to Stannis and the occupants of Iron Throne than Jon Snow ever did. Multiple times they acted as if the watch should fealty to the throne or treat Stannis like he has the right to give orders at the Wall. Where Jon resists deferring to these monarchs, they criticize him. Where Jon doesn't, it is only because of the needs of the Watch and the fact that Stannis' army occupying the wall could put an end to the Watch if it came to actual battle.

Ironically, the only outside force that respects the independence of the Watch is the Wildlings. They know the crows' ways as well as the crows do themselves. (Jon is personally respected by those he made his name fighting beside or fighting against. And somewhat by Stannis and Melisandre, but none of the people who follow them.)

Jon, for his part, is still fighting for the Watch as an independent force. Yes, his emotions over "Arya" get him mixed up, but in truth, the "rescue" was Melisandre's idea. The situation with Alys Karstark came to his doorstep, not the other way around. The Pink Letter provided one thing - confirmation that the Boltons and their allies dismissed the idea that the Watch were not foes. They planned to attack the Wall and crush the Watch, clearly.

Jon could have just read the latter, then burned it and sworn Clydas to secrecy about its contents. Jon did not have to read it out aloud to a hall full of men, be he was being honest. The upcoming mission to Hardhome was just as important to him, and so Jon decided that he would throw himself at the Bolton issue alone, rather than scuttle the Hardhome mission which was more important to the Watch and the wildlings. This is Jon trying to keep his vows and save the Watch from threats which are both North and South of the Wall.

Of course, Bowen Marsh and company did not agree, but then again, these same men had been undermining Jon since the day he took over. And they were ready to assasinate him a few minutes after the letter was read out, so it is no wonder that the letter casts the whole Ides of Marsh attack in a conspiratorial light.

[Chaircat Meow]

Jon was the commander of an organization sworn to take no part in the wars of the realm but he decided to lead an attack on the Lord of Winterfell and the Warden of the North. That's oath-breaking.

Paragraphs are a damn good idea, btw

[sj4iy]

I think that since we don't actually know what Jon was planning, it's impossible to say either way. It very likely lies in a gray area where it can be justified but perhaps isn't in the spirit of the rules.

But I think a lot of people jump to conclusions about what he was planning, when the text never makes it clear what his plan actually is other than riding south to Winterfell and making Ramsay pay. But nothing more. Especially considering that Jon had planned on riding to Winterfell alone until he had people volunteer to come with him. So it's very, very unlikely he went to attack. And he wasn't going on a rescue mission, because he knows that Arya is not at Winterfell. So basically, I don't know what Jon's actual plan could have been at that point, because we lack the information to make sense of it.

[butterbumps!]

Jon was the commander of an organization sworn to take no part in the wars of the realm but he decided to lead an attack on the Lord of Winterfell and the Warden of the North. That's oath-breaking.

Paragraphs are a damn good idea, btw

agreed on the paragraph breaks, but I'm pretty sure that when Jon announces how he intends to ride for Winterfell with the implication of performing what's presumably a one-man siege ("unless anyone wants to join me"), that it's not truly what he's planning to do.

[Chaircat Meow]

Please people.

Jon meant to go to Winterfell/skulk along the kingsroad with the wildlings on board. Saying he meant to go alone was rhetorical flourish; he knew what he wanted before he made the speech.

[butterbumps!]

Please people.

Jon meant to go to Winterfell/skulk along the kingsroad with the wildlings on board. Saying he meant to go alone was rhetorical flourish; he knew what he wanted before he made the speech.

no, of course. but my point is that that's the explicitly stated plan, and if we can understand that he's not literally planning to do the utterly moronic plan that's explicitly stated, then maybe we shouldn't presume too much about how Jon's apparently oathbreaking in that scene. More like how it's probably not how it looks, is what I mean.

[Chaircat Meow]

no, of course. but my point is that that's the explicitly stated plan, and if we can understand that he's not literally planning to do the utterly moronic plan that's explicitly stated, then maybe we shouldn't presume too much about how Jon's apparently oathbreaking in that scene. More like how it's probably not how it looks, is what I mean.

We might find out if there was more to the plan than meets the eye in the next book.

The idea that Jon was unwilling to make the gruesome compromises needed to keep his job, and probably thought that wouldn't be enough anyway, and so thought f**k it and decided he'd go and kick Ramsay's butt with a bunch of rubbish soldiers does seem plausible enough to me though. I only delve deeper into what we are told, or can very obviously deduce, if there seems to be a reason to and in this case there doesn't.

[sj4iy]

Please people.

Jon meant to go to Winterfell/skulk along the kingsroad with the wildlings on board. Saying he meant to go alone was rhetorical flourish; he knew what he wanted before he made the speech.

...but Jon had absolutely NO IDEA how many Wildlings would join him. He made his plans beforehand, without any knowledge of who would volunteer (if anyone). But he clearly announces his plan to go alone, without any word of "but if not enough people join me, I won't go". So it's very reasonable to assume that had no one volunteered, he would have gone anyway and carried out his plan anyway.

[Chaircat Meow]

...but Jon had absolutely NO IDEA how many Wildlings would join him. He made his plans beforehand, without any knowledge of who would volunteer (if anyone). But he clearly announces his plan to go alone, without any word of "but if not enough people join me, I won't go". So it's very reasonable to assume that had no one volunteered, he would have gone anyway and carried out his plan anyway.

No, it's not.

[Mithras]

Choosing sides/taking part in the affairs of the Realm is a lame accusation made to Jon. They are in a time of crisis and not choosing any sides is not an option for any of them. Jon chose Stannis over the Lannisters because that was better for the good of the Realm concerning the threat of the Others. Not to mention, if he didnot cooperate with Stannis, he could have killed them all and taken what he wanted by force.

Qhorin taught Jon that the safety of the Realm is their only concern, not their precious honors or vows.

[The Santa of House Claus]

I do agree with you about Jon's action, he may not have had it flushed out as exactly as you described, but he is smart enough to have the general ideas you brought up.

As for Bowan Marsh & Co. They do know about the Others, but their distrust of Wildlings goes much deeper then Jon's who has both ridden with the Wildlings and not been in the Watch as long as Bowan Marsh & Co. My biggest problem with Jon was not the decisions he made, but his lack of ability or real attempt to win Bowan Marsh & Co. over to his side. That is what really caused the tension between them. Jon was acting more like a dictator then a leader. The commands he was issuing seemed to be the best for the Watch in these extreme circumstances, but they went against all the centuries of policy the Night's Watch had, they had grown to view the Wildlings as the main enemy and the reason for the Wall, not the Others.

I do not condom Jon for this, he was thrust to leadership at a young age and at a crucial time, very like Robb and Dany. All have made mistakes, the difference being their circumstances, but that is not the topic here.

Jon worked to defend the Realm from the Others, that was what drove the decisions he made, be it deciding to march south and cut out Ramsey's heart, let the Wildlings through the Wall, send Sam and Maester Aemon (his two biggest allies) to Old Town, or let Stannis have Castles and supplies.

[butterbumps!]

We might find out if there was more to the plan than meets the eye in the next book.

The idea that Jon was unwilling to make the gruesome compromises needed to keep his job, and probably thought that wouldn't be enough anyway, and so thought f**k it and decided he'd go and kick Ramsay's butt with a bunch of rubbish soldiers does seem plausible enough to me though. I only delve deeper into what we are told, or can very obviously deduce, if there seems to be a reason to and in this case there doesn't.

I actually think we have really good reason to question the entire thing from the time the letter arrives to the end. He's not an idiot when it comes to Northern military strategy, and he's thought about how to defend in the event of a southern attack before. In detail. I mean, we get a lot of page space devoted to Jon's various military musings. And there's a lot of page space devoted to Jon's musing on how the Mance mission has likely gone awry prior to chapter XIII. I don't think the letter took Jon by surprise (his internal monologue is remarkably devoid of emotion), and it's a bit much to imagine that Jon, who's schooled Stannis in Northern military strategy, would completely forget everything he's ever known in this circumstance. Especially bearing mind that he knows Arya is not in Rams' grasp.

I think Jon's "if this is oathbreaking, then no man can say I made my brothers break their vows" is another clue. It seems to be taken to mean what a Bowen would say of his subsequent actions, but rather, I think Jon's referring to how literally no man can say the Watchmen will be held accountable for whatever Jon's next planning in the event it fails. Meaning, Lannister and Bolton won't have reason to retaliate on the Watch.

I wonder if the bigger oathbreaking issue is what brought the letter about-- the Arya mission. I think the oathbreaking at the end might be feigned, and a way for Jon to set the earlier incident to rights.

[sj4iy]

No, it's not.

Okay then, you're the expert. You seem to know exactly what he was planning and whether or not it was something he could do alone. Apparently Jon's own words aren't enough to convince you, but I'll state them here anyway:

“The Night’s Watch will make for Hardhome. I ride to Winterfell alone, unless ...” Jon paused. “... is there any man here who will come stand with me?”

So, tell me, where, in that sentence, do you get the impression that Jon's plan doesn't account for him being alone, especially since he says he will go to Winterfell alone.

If Jon had made these plans AFTER he asked for volunteers, I might see your point. But he doesn't. He can't make plans when he has no idea how many people, if ANY, will volunteer.

[sj4iy]

I do agree with you about Jon's action, he may not have had it flushed out as exactly as you described, but he is smart enough to have the general ideas you brought up.

As for Bowan Marsh & Co. They do know about the Others, but their distrust of Wildlings goes much deeper then Jon's who has both ridden with the Wildlings and not been in the Watch as long as Bowan Marsh & Co. My biggest problem with Jon was not the decisions he made, but his lack of ability or real attempt to win Bowan Marsh & Co. over to his side. That is what really caused the tension between them. Jon was acting more like a dictator then a leader. The commands he was issuing seemed to be the best for the Watch in these extreme circumstances, but they went against all the centuries of policy the Night's Watch had, they had grown to view the Wildlings as the main enemy and the reason for the Wall, not the Others.

I do not condom Jon for this, he was thrust to leadership at a young age and at a crucial time, very like Robb and Dany. All have made mistakes, the difference being their circumstances, but that is not the topic here.

Jon worked to defend the Realm from the Others, that was what drove the decisions he made, be it deciding to march south and cut out Ramsey's heart, let the Wildlings through the Wall, send Sam and Maester Aemon (his two biggest allies) to Old Town, or let Stannis have Castles and supplies.

He never threatens to cut Ramsay's heart out. That's what Ramsay threatens to do to Jon, not vice versa. He simply says "I mean to make him answer for those words".

[Consigliere]

I agree that there is more to Jon's plan than just attacking Winterfell. Earlier he advises Stannis against attacking the Dreadfort. So why would he think that he can take Winterfell with a couple hundred Wildlings? Also in Jon X he is aware that it is snowing heavily in the south and mentions that the kingsroad two days ride from CB is impassable.