Lord Varys Posted May 13, 2016 Share Posted May 13, 2016 2 hours ago, Bright Blue Eyes said: Ned doesn't need to come up with any story beyond the basics: "we met them, they're dead, five of my friends are dead, I'm griefing that I had to kill people I respected and lost good friends doing it." There are maybe three people who could dare to press the Lord of the North on such a hurtful story and as his best friend, foster father and father-in-law they are unlikely to do so. It is not about being pressing Eddard Stark, it is about Eddard Stark not being stupid. Ned may have been able to play the 'I'm grieving, don't press me about that' card when talking to Robert about Lyanna, but Ned could not do the same with the Kingsguard he killed. Those were important and famous men, and people would have wanted to know when and how they died. And Ned had virtually no direct connection to them aside from meeting/interacting with them at Harrenhal. Those men weren't his friends. In addition, he would have to tell the families of his friends how the hell they died. If he gave Barbrey Dustin, the Cassels, Glovers, etc. just platitudes about their husbands, sons, cousins having fought bravely, etc. those people might be very irritated. I mean, it is clear that all those families must have known that those guys died fighting the three remaining Kingsguard, right? One would assume that the first question after Ned had delivered his platitudes would be something like that: 'But Lord Eddard, why didn't you take more men with you when confronting those Kingsguard? You must have known that those were very dangerous fighters and we all know that you and Howland Reed weren't exactly great swordsmen. In addition, we also know you had effectively won the war at this point, so there would have no reason for you to confront those knights only with six companions.' The obvious answer to that would be that Ned only took so few men because he wanted to save/free his sister, and thought (or claimed he thought) that he wouldn't be seen as a threat if he came with only so few men. But to give such an answer he would already have to admit/confirm that the three Kingsguard knights and Lyanna Stark were directly connected. The idea that he could have been able to keep these two things separate just doesn't make any sense unless we assume he never talked about that at all. But this is hardly believable. The man even returned Dawn to the Daynes - surely he would also have talked to the families of his friends who died at the tower. And at court the question about the fate of the three knights begins with obvious trivia like the questioned what their chapters in the White Book tell about their deaths. Do we really want to believe that their deaths are described that way: 'Oswell Whent died under unclear circumstances somewhere in the Red Mountains during a mission we know nothing about.' I don't think so. Barristan Selmy would have wanted to write when, how, why, and during what mission those men died. So he would have asked, and Ned would have told him. He would have given him a date of death, a description of the battle (truth a some lies), a story why they fought, and what their mission was - assuming Selmy didn't know that already because he had talked to Prince Rhaegar. Selmy wouldn't have written any lies in the White Book, he would have written that those three Kingsguard died protecting or guarding Lyanna Stark (who had been either Prince Rhaegar's wife, his mistress, or his hostage) from a group led by her brother, Eddard Stark. I'm pretty sure something like that is written in the White Book in the sections on Dayne, Whent, and Hightower. Inquiring about the death of the knights wouldn't be seen as hurtful, either. Especially from the point of view of people who didn't know that the knights were with Lyanna when they died. In that hypothetical scenario (I'm assuming the opposite, that the people at court - and subsequently the rebels, too, after they had taken KL - had known what the mission of those Kingsguard was) nobody interested in the fate of those famous Kingsguard would have connected them to Lyanna Stark's death, and subsequently Eddard Stark would have to deal with more questioners then he would have had he hidden behind his grief by connecting the stories about Lyanna's death and the death of the knights. But to do that, he would have been forced to actually tell a story. A story that answered the basic questions to satisfying degree so that this whole episode could be filed away. We have to keep in mind that the new Baratheon had a vested interest in knowing what had happened to any missing die-hard Targaryen loyalists, most notably the remaining Kingsguard. Ned could not possibly get away with 'Trust me. They are dead.' Not if he wanted to protect Lyanna's child. The whole bastard plan could only work if the whole thing looked as normal and unsuspicious as possible. Ned eagerly explaining what had happened to the Kingsguard and Lyanna would have made a much better impression than him just playing the grief card again and again. Especially combined with the shame card when asked about his bastard. I assume the following: 1. Rhaegar and Lyanna's marriage/relationship status was no secret by the end of the Rebellion. In fact, it was known that they were married (if they were married) since the very beginning of the war. The marriage is most likely the reason why Rhaegar and Lyanna had to hide (from Aerys, not the rebels). 2. It was known at court what the mission of the three Kingsguard was, and Aerys did not countermand any of that after he had heard about it (which he would have after Rhaegar returned to court). People at court - and subsequently the rebels - might also have known that Lyanna was carrying Rhaegar's child. This would make sense because there is no good reason why Rhaegar would keep such a pregnancy a secret if we assume he actually wanted Lyanna to come to court after the war was open. And most certainly if he intended to raise her son as a royal prince at court. 3. Eddard Stark came up with a convincing story and/or possibly even evidence to back his version of events to explain the deaths of the Kingsguard, the death of Lyanna Stark, and the fate of the child she had been carrying (perhaps stillborn). I'm also pretty sure that Eddard Stark had a cover story (i.e. a person who would play the role of Jon Snow's mother convincingly should the need ever arise) in place which purpose it was to disconnect 'Jon Snow' from Lyanna Stark. I do not care about the details and the wetnurses or servants involved, but I'm sure Ned told Robert something to prevent him from ever connecting Ned's bastard and Lyanna in his mind. Anything else would make this entire plot line very unbelievable in my opinion. And considering the fact that George still can juggle around the details on that whole thing until he finally reveals them I'm pretty sure we'll get a convincing story, and not something that is based on stuff like 'Nobody ever knew or suspected that Rhaegar and Lyanna were married, and that Lyanna was pregnant', 'Nobody ever got any details out of Ned Stark about the deaths of those Kingsguard knights', 'Nobody ever knew or ever connected the dots' and 'Nobody aside from Catelyn and Robert ever dared to ask Ned about his bastard'. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.