What did the Kingsguard plan to do with baby Jon?

[King Viserys Targaryen IV]

So sure that they were ready to risk leaving the boy they were supposedly protecting to whatever fate Ned chose for him just in case they lost instead of sending him with one of them to safety before they knew they would not be facing an army?

Not too long ago, the father of the said child rode off, so sure that he'd win that he didn't bother removing his hostage children from the dual threat of the rebels and the children's mad grandfather. Didn't work too well for the children in question. One would think that they'd learn something from that fiasco and play it safe. They didn't. They risked the kid happily, per Ned's dream.

There was no "what ever fate Ned chose". they were 100% sure that either Ned would have the baby killed or turn him over to Robert which would equal the same thing.

So it was either they win and the baby live or they lose and the baby dies.

Only a promise to his dying sister and the thought of another baby dieing convinced the honorable Ned Stark into treason against his King.

And as far a one King's Guard fleeing with the baby: One; the King's Guard dont flee. And two; even if one did take off, it is a week old baby with out it's mother. So you had better have a wet nurse. So you are talking about one King's Guard and one wet nurse and a week old baby traveling thru enemy territory, trying to keep ahead of an advancing party that is hot on their trail.

Seems like just defeating them at the Tower would be a better idea. Which is something they thought was a very real possibility.

[Anath]

And as far a one King's Guard fleeing with the baby: One; the King's Guard dont flee. And two; even if one did take off, it is a week old baby with out it's mother. So you had better have a wet nurse. So you are talking about one King's Guard and one wet nurse and a week old baby traveling thru enemy territory, trying to keep ahead of an advancing party that is hot on their trail.

Seems like just defeating them at the Tower would be a better idea. Which is something they thought was a very real possibility.

And how were they to know that they'd face just 7 men and not an army? They didn't.

They didn't try to negotiate with Ned, just in case. (What an attitude towards their supposed princess, by the way! They must have been terribly sure that she wouldn't mind at all her brother dying. That's something that even I, with my view of Lyanna as not all that regretful after all, find quite incredible.)

The Kingsguard does not flee - but in this case, it wasn't protecting the king adequately either. If they saw him as the king at all, that's it. Everything was better than sitting around and waiting for someone to come, especially with Lyanna in this state. Sorry but after a hard birth and a bed of blood women are often incapable of taking care of their babies for quite a while. For my mother, in the 20th century and with the luxury of being treated with modern therapies and drugs, it took about 2 months to be able to hold her son independently. Where Jon was concerned, Lyanna was a burden more than anything else. The best plan was leave her behind and have her join them later, not sit around and wait for the rebels or the Martells to find them first.

[King Viserys Targaryen IV]

And how were they to know that they'd face just 7 men and not an army? They didn't.

They didn't try to negotiate with Ned, just in case. (What an attitude towards their supposed princess, by the way! They must have been terribly sure that she wouldn't mind at all her brother dying. That's something that even I, with my view of Lyanna as not all that regretful after all, find quite incredible.)

The Kingsguard does not flee - but in this case, it wasn't protecting the king adequately either. If they saw him as the king at all, that's it. Everything was better than sitting around and waiting for someone to come, especially with Lyanna in this state. Sorry but after a hard birth and a bed of blood women are often incapable of taking care of their babies for quite a while. For my mother, in the 20th century and with the luxury of being treated with modern therapies and drugs, it took about 2 months to be able to hold her son independently. Where Jon was concerned, Lyanna was a burden more than anything else. The best plan was leave her behind and have her join them later, not sit around and wait for the rebels or the Martells to find them first.

So they were supposed to abandon a Targaryen Princess, and mother to the King? And who exactly was going to bring her to them later?

So you think that the three men that Ned calls a shining beacon the the world, were supposed to break their vow and flee, and just leave a dieing 16 year old Princess who was mother to the King behind.

That sounds exactly like the thing that a noble King's Guard should do.

[Donaldys I Trumpagar]

When Ned arrived at the Tower of Joy, the Kingsguard knew King Aerys II and Prince Rheagar had died while Prince Viserys and his pregnant mother had fled to Dragonstone. If they hadn't fought with Ned at the Tower of Joy, what was their plan to do with Jon? Joining Viserys? Keep Jon hidden somewhere across the narrow sea until he comes of age? Join The Golden Company and ask them to go to Westeros when Jon comes of age and defeat Robert and crown Jon? And what if the Golden Company did not believe him or did not want to support him? I don't know how the Golden company would have succeeded in defeating a united Kingdom under King Robert (it's different now because Westeros is not united anymore).

They told Ned they would not flee. But they were lucky after being defeated by Ned and Howland Reed that Ned kept Jon as his own son (which they couldn't have known). Would fleeing not have been safer? I knew they couldn't flee because Lyanna wasn't capable of doing that, but after she would have recovered or died, fleeing would have been their only option to keep him safe.

I just don't get why honourable Ned Stark and honourable Arthur Dayne thought that fighting each other to death was the best solution for baby Jon. Why would Ned kill someone he respected? How could someone like Arthur Dayne have protected Jon when he was almost defeated 2 to 1. Wouldn't it have been better to talk with Ned and come to an agreement? It would have been easier/safer for Ned and his family if Arthur Dayne had taken Jon to Viserys or somewhere across the narrow sea.

Both men must have known to crown him is to kill him. Would Arthur Dayne really have risked Rhaegar's only(?) surviving son to crown him? There was not much change of succeeding. Wouldn't it have been better to talk about it with Ned? Maybe Arthur Dayne would have realised Ned would never harm his nephew and letting Jon go with Ned instead of trying to crown him would have been the safest way.

They could still have tried to kill each other if they didn't find an agreement.

+1. I've always thought that this was a major plot hole or illogic in GRRM's plot -- after the defeat & death of the Targaryens it was over.

Selmy didn't seem to have problem with moving on and serving the new king.

[Aurion]

Besides, Jon is still a bastard -- Rheagar is married to Ellia so the son of one of Rheagar's side wenches is not in line for the throne no matter who the mother is.

Not if Rhaegar married Lyanna polygamously, like Aegon I and Maegor.

[King Viserys Targaryen IV]

+1. I've always thought that this was a major plot hole or illogic in GRRM's plot -- after the defeat & death of the Targaryens it was over.

Selmy didn't seem to have problem with moving on and serving the new king.

But Selmy was injured and fell in battle. He did not surrender.

Then he made the choice that he served the Iron Throne not necessarily the King on the Throne.

If these three had been injured and not been able to fight on and were captured maybe they would do the same thing. But they were not going to kneel or flee.

[falcotron]

And as far a one King's Guard fleeing with the baby: One; the King's Guard dont flee.

The Kingsguard don't flee from defending the King or heir. A KG taking the heir with him to safety would not be fleeing. Another KG staying behind to cut off any pursuit to protect the heir would not be fleeing either. This would be a perfectly reasonable thing to do.

Of course the second problem you raise is a real problem. However you read it, if they have an obligation to protect Jon, they have an obligation to protect Lyanna (unless maybe that obligation was specifically a vow to protect Rhaegar's child, or Jon is somehow a legitimized bastard rather than trueborn, or something even more unlikely). Protecting Jon may be a greater obligation, but still, "I had to break one vow to make it easier/possible to fulfill another vow" is basically Jaime's defense, which it sounds like (from the little we know) the three in question would never have even considered.

[Anath]

So they were supposed to abandon a Targaryen Princess, and mother to the King? And who exactly was going to bring her to them later?

So you think that the three men that Ned calls a shining beacon the the world, were supposed to break their vow and flee, and just leave a dieing 16 year old Princess who was mother to the King behind.

That sounds exactly like the thing that a noble King's Guard should do.

Yes. Leave her with one or two of them to recover while the rest of them flee with their king to defend him.

They could always meet in Essos later.

And for their duty to a Targaryen princess, they're quite eager to kill her brother without consulting her, presumably. Not a good deal of respect for her here.

Of course, it's always possible that I'm wrong and Lyanna wouldn't mind to Ned's death all this much, considering it a sad necessity.

[King Viserys Targaryen IV]

And for their duty to a Targaryen princess, they're quite eager to kill her brother without consulting her, presumably. Not a good deal of respect for her here.

Ned's role as a leader of the rebel forces (the guys that just killed the Crown Prince, the King and a couple Targaryen Prince and Princess) and best friend to the new King (who absolved everyone in killing said Prince and Princesses), outranks him being Lyanna's brother

[Anath]

Ned's role as a leader of the rebel forces (the guys that just killed the Crown Prince, the King and a couple Targaryen Prince and Princess) and best friend to the new King (who absolved everyone in killing said Prince and Princesses), outranks him being Lyanna's brother

And who are they to make the decisions for her? Unless she was actually a prisoner which I don't believe. A part of their duty is Serve.

BTW, the KG of the past served by leaving a real Targaryen queen, Helaena Targaryen, without a KG anywhere close by because her children are more important. Leaving one of them with Lyanna and the other two to save the king by leaving with him would be the only reasonable way to go about it.

Anyway, with them talking all about Aerys and Jaime and not a word about Rhaegar, I doubt they thought they were protecting the king. Nothing in the dream told me that their king was Jon. They were just talking about a vow. Combined with the SSM, I'd think they refer to their vow to serve and do Rhaegar's bidding by staying here against their wishes because he was their prince and nothing else.

[XSarellaX]

We are assuming they received word of the Sack in time to actually plan anything... For all we know, by the time they found out, Ned could be knocking on their door. Some people here know the timeline way better than I do.. How long did it take for Ned to find the ToJ after he left KL?

[Humble Maester]

The interesting thing, though not know to the KG at ToJ, is that Jon wasn't actually the next in line. Aerys II had practically attained Rhaegar's line after Trident so Viserys was the true heir.

Sort of off-topic I guess, but not an issue that is often noted.

(The source is TWOIAF:)

When the news reached the Red Keep, it was said that Aerys cursed the Dornish, certain that Lewyn had betrayed Rhaegar. He sent his pregnant queen, Rhaella, and his younger son and new heir, Viserys, away to Dragonstone, but Princess Elia was forced to remain in King’s Landing with Rhaegar’s children as a hostage against Dorne.

[JonisHenryTudor]

When Ned arrived at the Tower of Joy, the Kingsguard knew King Aerys II and Prince Rheagar had died while Prince Viserys and his pregnant mother had fled to Dragonstone. If they hadn't fought with Ned at the Tower of Joy, what was their plan to do with Jon? Joining Viserys? Keep Jon hidden somewhere across the narrow sea until he comes of age? Join The Golden Company and ask them to go to Westeros when Jon comes of age and defeat Robert and crown Jon? And what if the Golden Company did not believe him or did not want to support him? I don't know how the Golden company would have succeeded in defeating a united Kingdom under King Robert (it's different now because Westeros is not united anymore).

They told Ned they would not flee. But they were lucky after being defeated by Ned and Howland Reed that Ned kept Jon as his own son (which they couldn't have known). Would fleeing not have been safer? I knew they couldn't flee because Lyanna wasn't capable of doing that, but after she would have recovered or died, fleeing would have been their only option to keep him safe.

I just don't get why honourable Ned Stark and honourable Arthur Dayne thought that fighting each other to death was the best solution for baby Jon. Why would Ned kill someone he respected? How could someone like Arthur Dayne have protected Jon when he was almost defeated 2 to 1. Wouldn't it have been better to talk with Ned and come to an agreement? It would have been easier/safer for Ned and his family if Arthur Dayne had taken Jon to Viserys or somewhere across the narrow sea.

Both men must have known to crown him is to kill him. Would Arthur Dayne really have risked Rhaegar's only(?) surviving son to crown him? There was not much change of succeeding. Wouldn't it have been better to talk about it with Ned? Maybe Arthur Dayne would have realised Ned would never harm his nephew and letting Jon go with Ned instead of trying to crown him would have been the safest way.

They could still have tried to kill each other if they didn't find an agreement.

Well for a short, concise answer. Ned fought for the rebels, and the KG stood opposite the rebels. The rebel "hate" of Targs could have been enough of a reason for Dayne to fight. For all they knew, Ned could have killed the baby.

[JonisHenryTudor]

Yes. Leave her with one or two of them to recover while the rest of them flee with their king to defend him.

They could always meet in Essos later.

And for their duty to a Targaryen princess, they're quite eager to kill her brother without consulting her, presumably. Not a good deal of respect for her here.

Of course, it's always possible that I'm wrong and Lyanna wouldn't mind to Ned's death all this much, considering it a sad necessity.

But we have no idea what Rhaegar ordered them to do. Being at the ToJ suggests that they were there on Rhaegar's orders, not Maddy Daddy.

As far as Lyanna is concerned. The prince in her belly was more important than Lyanna. They were there for Jon, not Lyanna. Lyanna's feelings towards Ned were likely a moot point.

[Sly Wren]

The interesting thing, though not know to the KG at ToJ, is that Jon wasn't actually the next in line. Aerys II had practically attained Rhaegar's line after Trident so Viserys was the true heir.

Sort of off-topic I guess, but not an issue that is often noted.

(The source is TWOIAF:)

But they could have known. They seem unsurprised by anything Ned says--even Jaime's killing of Aerys, which you'd think would merit at least a "WHAT?" If they have all that info, why couldn't they know that Aerys had named Viserys his heir after the Trident? Presumably that's why Darry went with them.

And it IS on topic--if Jon isn't the heir, what were these guys planning to do? Where is Jon? These guys don't mention him at all--just Aerys. Not sure they were planning on doing anything with the baby.

[Humble Maester]

But they could have known. They seem unsurprised by anything Ned says--even Jaime's killing of Aerys, which you'd think would merit at least a "WHAT?" If they have all that info, why couldn't they know that Aerys had named Viserys his heir after the Trident? Presumably that's why Darry went with them.

And it IS on topic--if Jon isn't the heir, what were these guys planning to do? Where is Jon? These guys don't mention him at all--just Aerys. Not sure they were planning on doing anything with the baby.

Well I considered it somewhat off-topic because I doubted they had heard of Aerys' decision. Of course it's possible they had gotten updates while staying at the tower but that'd really make me wonder why they'd all three stay there if they knew their true king was elsewhere.

[Sly Wren]

Well I considered it somewhat off-topic because I doubted they had heard of Aerys' decision. Of course it's possible they had gotten updates while staying at the tower but that'd really make me wonder why they'd all three stay there if they knew their true king was elsewhere.

Fair enough--but, as I said, they seem to know everything else, including Aerys' death. How do they know that and yet not know what should be a very important detail: who the heir is? Just seems they really could have known. And if they know, would assume it would go into the decision making re: baby.

Plus, what if they weren't staying at the tower? Nothing in the scene says they were. If they were at a place with raven post, could have been fully apprised of all the key goings on--which would explain their lack of surprise in the scene. And maybe why they are on the road--near a watchtower on the road.

It's a dreamed memory--maybe Ned's memory just skips the KG's reactions--totally possible. But the conversation is the clearest part of the dream, hands down. Just seems like they know a lot. And there's no evidence they've been staying in the tower. Just that they are there when Ned and co. ride up. So, Viserys as heir--could easily be on the table re: what they might do with baby.

[Sly Wren]

There was no "what ever fate Ned chose". they were 100% sure that either Ned would have the baby killed or turn him over to Robert which would equal the same thing.

So it was either they win and the baby live or they lose and the baby dies.

Only a promise to his dying sister and the thought of another baby dieing convinced the honorable Ned Stark into treason against his King.

Even though we have very little evidence and very big gaps in determining anyone's motives--this just doesn't seem to hold. Perhaps the KG do think Ned is as child-killer-ish as Tywin--though they seem to have info from King's Landing and other events. They do not seem surprised to see Ned--seems they might have heard that Ned was furious re: the murders of Elia and her children.

But even if they don't have the info--the idea that the only reason Ned didn't turn Jon over to Robert was Lyanna's promise--Ned was horrified by what Tywin did to the Targaryen children. He was furious with Robert for condoning it. It caused a big rift. Why on earth would he hand ANY child over, let alone Lyanna's? Temporary insanity?

Again, we don't know the KG knew about the rift re: murder of children. But they do seem to know a lot and not be at all surprised to see Ned. Seems like they could have been up to date. Which means that their knowing about Ned's clash with Robert re: children is at least possible. And a possible factor is determining what to do with baby.

[TimJames]

Arthur Dayne was not an honorable man: he was a moral coward who watched people burn to death and either did nothing or tried to play kingmaker with Rhaegar. They couldn't have killed Aerys but they could have thrown down their swords and resigned (when Brienne swore fealty to Catelyn, Catelyn swore never to force Brienne to dishonor herself. I think this applies every time a knight swears fealty). That's what Eddard would have done, and I believe it was Barrestan who once said that dying with honor is better than living without it.

I think the three kingsguards were planning on using Lyanna and Jon Snow as hostages to exchange for their safe exile to Essos (as apposed to having their heads mounted on pikes). They couldn't flee because if they did Lyanna would try to escape to be reunited with her brother. Nor could they abandon her because then they would have no way to get off the continent.

[Donaldys I Trumpagar]

Arthur Dayne was not an honorable man: he was a moral coward who watched people burn to death and either did nothing or tried to play kingmaker with Rhaegar. They couldn't have killed Aerys but they could have thrown down their swords and resigned (when Brienne swore fealty to Catelyn, Catelyn swore never to force Brienne to dishonor herself. I think this applies every time a knight swears fealty). That's what Eddard would have done, and I believe it was Barrestan who once said that dying with honor is better than living without it.

I think the three kingsguards were planning on using Lyanna and Jon Snow as hostages to exchange for their safe exile to Essos (as apposed to having their heads mounted on pikes). They couldn't flee because if they did Lyanna would try to escape to be reunited with her brother. Nor could they abandon her because then they would have no way to get off the continent.

Not entirely off-base -- I think there is something kinda foul about Dayne wanting to guard against Rhaegar's kidnap victim being rescued. Especially since Dayne wasn't really (directly) obeying an order of the king, Aerys, he was acquiescing to a plea from his pal, Rhaegar. Not at all what the Kingsguard is supposed to be doing.

At least that (i.e., self-interest & friendship with Rhaegar) would be a reasonable explanation for Dayne's intransigence, as opposed to the nonsense plot-line about him standing up for "honor."