promise me

[sweetsunray]

On 26/5/2017 at 7:52 PM, Dorian Martell's son said:

Only the Kings or Lords of winterfell are buried in the crypts. The fact that Lyanna is buried there isan indication that something important plot wise is in there

Nope, all Starks are buried in the crypts. Only the Kings or Lords gets statues. But there are Starks buried in tombs without statues.

[Ygrain]

42 minutes ago, LiveFirstDieLater said:

Just for perspective, Gerold Hightower, the white bull, would have come from King's Landing where he watched the brutal execution of Rickard and Brandon Stark at Aerys command.

He watched many more brutal executions but he is the guy "protect the king, not judge him" and "Aerys would yet sit the IT". I don't think anything (in those few bits of info we have) suggests a change of heart.

42 minutes ago, LiveFirstDieLater said:

If Rheagar returned to Kings Landing with the intention of calling a council and deposing his father, keeping the Kingsguard loyal to him (or disenchanted with Aerys) away so they don't have to pick between their oath and him until after the crown changed hands.

That's certainly one of the reasons and definitely true of Dayne and Whent, but I think that the main reason why no KG can go back to Aerys is Lyanna. If Aerys had the slightest chance to get hold of Lyanna, he would have a hostage both against the rebels and against Rhaegar, and wouldn't hesitate to use her to bring everyone in line (provided he was sane enough and wouldn't want to burn her or something like that), and this would be something Rhaegar couldn't allow to happen. If the KG never get near Aerys, they cannot be ordered to reveal the location of ToJ.

 

19 minutes ago, sweetsunray said:

He made promises to Robert: to protect and help his children (Ned promised to keep his bastard children safe in his mind), to eat boar, to stop the order to assassinate Dany. Varys told him it was too late to revoke the assassination order. Ned didn't eat any boar. And from a dark cell he sure as hell wasn't protecting and helping any of Robert's bastard children.

Ned was unable to keep the promises to Robert, and those are the "broken promises". This becomes more clear because the paragraphs before and after him lamenting broken promises do not mention Lyanna at all, but only current events and open questions: Cat, his daughters, Robb, etc. Only much much later in the chapter do we get a reference to Lyanna, with the memory of Rhaegar crowning Lyanna, and Ned reaching for the thorns.

Now, George imo did want to mislead us into jumping to the conclusion that "broken promises" have to do with Lyanna, because we were already pavlovian trained to think "ah promises -> Lyanna"; so that we think Ned' letter is one meant for Jon. But the sourrounding literary evidence is uncannily different from any previous mind wanderings whenever Ned thinks of promises to Lyanna.

That is true, but Ned also thinks about Jon and wants to tell him something very much - so much that after his death he enters the dreams of Bran and Rickon and tells them something about Jon. 

 

19 minutes ago, sweetsunray said:

Personally I've come to the conclusion it was a letter for Tobho Mott to send Gendry to Winterfell. He was trying to keep at least one promise to Robert, before he'd die.

A nice one!

[sweetsunray]

18 minutes ago, Ygrain said:

That is true, but Ned also thinks about Jon and wants to tell him something very much - so much that after his death he enters the dreams of Bran and Rickon and tells them something about Jon.

And we also have a dream of Jon being watched by Ned as weirwood tree, with Ygritte in the pool (a maidenpool) and turning into bones.

Anyhow, him wanting to talk to Jon and reaching out from beyond the grave could be unrelated to promises. Thinking of things to say to Jon is what he considers once Varys offers him a chance to go to the Wall, and is again quite removed from the paragraphs in which we have "broken promises".

Also Ned seems to talk to Arya, to make her strong and bold enough to try and escape from HH, and that's non-Jon related. Did he make any promise to Arya that he couldn't keep? Might be interesting to look for that, because if he did, then the case for Ned's ghost (in the weriwood) might be related to trying to keep promises, to more than one person, from beyond the grave

18 minutes ago, Ygrain said:

A nice one!

At least this broken promise he managed to fulfill after all, with Varys' help. Like really, Varys was sending Gendry along with Yoren together with Ned Stark after his public confession of treason without Ned's involvement and prodding for it? Varys complained to Illyrio that Ned "found the bastard already" weeks before, and he's gonna risk sending that same bastard together with Ned North, even if Varys likely expected Ned to die on the KR, without extracting promises from Ned (promise me, again) that he's gonna keep his mouth shut about Gendry's father? Not gonna happen. I think it was one of Ned's off-page demands for his confession.

[LiveFirstDieLater]

13 minutes ago, Ygrain said:

He watched many more brutal executions but he is the guy "protect the king, not judge him" and "Aerys would yet sit the IT". I don't think anything (in those few bits of info we have) suggests a change of heart.

That's certainly one of the reasons and definitely true of Dayne and Whent, but I think that the main reason why no KG can go back to Aerys is Lyanna. If Aerys had the slightest chance to get hold of Lyanna, he would have a hostage both against the rebels and against Rhaegar, and wouldn't hesitate to use her to bring everyone in line (provided he was sane enough and wouldn't want to burn her or something like that), and this would be something Rhaegar couldn't allow to happen. If the KG never get near Aerys, they cannot be ordered to reveal the location of ToJ.

 

That is true, but Ned also thinks about Jon and wants to tell him something very much - so much that after his death he enters the dreams of Bran and Rickon and tells them something about Jon. 

 

A nice one!

 Wait, what other executions did he watch that were worse?

Anyway hear me out...

Gerold Hightower had to know where the ToJ was since he was sent to get, and successfully retrieved, Rhaegar.

Also, somone presumably told Ned where to find the ToJ (though of course there are a plethora of theories about who).

So it doesn't make sense that the KG were all kept there to keep the location secret. It seems to make more sense that it was either for someone's protection, or to save the KG themselves from having to decide between Rhaegar and their oath to Aerys.

[Ygrain]

45 minutes ago, LiveFirstDieLater said:

 Wait, what other executions did he watch that were worse?

You're forgetting that Aerys had had the penchant for torture and burning for quite some time. Out of those few we have been told, Duskendale comes to mind. Though I don't recall if Hightower was present.

45 minutes ago, LiveFirstDieLater said:

Gerold Hightower had to know where the ToJ was since he was sent to get, and successfully retrieved, Rhaegar.

Aye but that doesn't mean he knew at the time when he left KL. He could have been sent to, say, Summerhal, and receive further instructions only there, far from Aerys.

45 minutes ago, LiveFirstDieLater said:

Also, somone presumably told Ned where to find the ToJ (though of course there are a plethora of theories about who).

Yep but don't forget this is way later, and the person who informed Ned needn't have been the same who informed Hightower. Between Hightower and Ned, there is no-one else (as far as we know) who found the location.

 

45 minutes ago, LiveFirstDieLater said:

So it doesn't make sense that the KG were all kept there to keep the location secret. It seems to make more sense that it was either for someone's protection, or to save the KG themselves from having to decide between Rhaegar and their oath to Aerys.

See above - it could have been all the reasons, and not all of them necessarily applied to all the KG.

[LiveFirstDieLater]

3 minutes ago, Ygrain said:

You're forgetting that Aerys had had the penchant for torture and burning for quite some time. Out of those few we have been told, Duskendale comes to mind. Though I don't recall if Hightower was present.

Aye but that doesn't mean he knew at the time when he left KL. He could have been sent to, say, Summerhal, and receive further instructions only there, far from Aerys.

Yep but don't forget this is way later, and the person who informed Ned needn't have been the same who informed Hightower. Between Hightower and Ned, there is no-one else (as far as we know) who found the location.

 

See above - it could have been all the reasons, and not all of them necessarily applied to all the KG.

I've never been totally clear how mad Aerys was really acting leading up to the rebellion... I mean not cutting your nails and hair isn't the same as burning people alive in the throne room. Anyway, good point about Duskendale, but to be honest if you kidnap the king and let him get rescued execution seems pretty likely.

Im still not clear if Avery's was burning people left and right or if the Rickard/Brandon (then later Chelstead) incident would have stuck out to everyone as particularly gruesome/mad.

Anyway, I agree they could have been there for one or all of the reasons we've gone through... and it's possible Hightower didn't know where the ToJ was (or that Rheagar was there), but somebody knew and told Ned. Again we have many options at KL or Stormsend, although I tend to lean toward either Ethan Glover or the knight of skulls and kisses.

And I'm not so sure nobody else found the ToJ, just in that (dream mind you) the KG at the ToJ seem well aware of the current events, like Darry's flight and Aerys's death.

[Ygrain]

34 minutes ago, LiveFirstDieLater said:

I've never been totally clear how mad Aerys was really acting leading up to the rebellion... I mean not cutting your nails and hair isn't the same as burning people alive in the throne room. Anyway, good point about Duskendale, but to be honest if you kidnap the king and let him get rescued execution seems pretty likely.

Im still not clear if Avery's was burning people left and right or if the Rickard/Brandon (then later Chelstead) incident would have stuck out to everyone as particularly gruesome/mad.

I don't have the World Book but it depicts Aerys' madness as way more pronounced than it seems from ASOIAF.

34 minutes ago, LiveFirstDieLater said:

Anyway, I agree they could have been there for one or all of the reasons we've gone through... and it's possible Hightower didn't know where the ToJ was (or that Rheagar was there), but somebody knew and told Ned. Again we have many options at KL or Stormsend, although I tend to lean toward either Ethan Glover or the knight of skulls and kisses.

Ethan Glover is my hot candidate, as well, perhaps as a contingency plan by Rhaegar himself. 

 

34 minutes ago, LiveFirstDieLater said:

And I'm not so sure nobody else found the ToJ, just in that (dream mind you) the KG at the ToJ seem well aware of the current events, like Darry's flight and Aerys's death.

They wouldn't have been able to survive in the middle of nowhere on their own, so some kind of connection with the outside world must have existed practically since the beginning. A safe, secret connection, most likely.

[SFDanny]

11 hours ago, Ygrain said:

Off topic, but of particular interest to you, I guess, concerning that supposed change in succession. If Hightower knew that Viserys was named Aerys' heir, he wouldn't have hesitated for a single second what his duty was. But Arthur Dayne? I don't think he would be all too happy to serve a younger version of Aerys, so if the information came through the Daynes (if it came at all, that is), I don't think it would be quite below Arthur to withhold this bit from the White Bull and let the succession run its usual course, to Rhaegar's son.

You're right this is a topic that still interests me quite a lot. I think each of the Kingsguard has a story to tell about their loyalties to Aerys. Hightower is among the most interesting, but I read him differently than I think you do. I don't doubt Ser Gerold's loyalty to Aerys, especially if there is a challenge to his rule from outside the family. We see it as he stands by and sees the unjust murders of Brandon and Rickard. However, I'm uncertain what he would do if Rhaegar called a Great Council to decide Aerys fate. While also a challenge to Aerys's rule, this is a peaceful and lawful way of dealing with the madness Hightower has to have seen in his king as much as anyone does. But this uncertainty is not what makes me think there is a change in the man.

There is an event that takes place alongside of Aerys's order to the Lord Commander to find Rhaegar. That is his command to Prince Lewyn to deliver a message to his family in Dorne by reminding them that Aerys now holds Elia Martell. That, of course, was not the case when Rhaegar ran off with Lyanna. But somehow, through a royal summons, or an armed escort, or stupidity on Elia's part (not my likely choice of the three) or a combination of these factors, Elia and her children leave Dragonstone and travel to King's Landing and into the "protection" of Aerys. I think this open use of Elia, and her children as hostages, is a line Aerys crosses that has profound ramifications to those around him and their view of the king. This along with the renewal of the threat to explicitly include the children as hostages after the battle of the Trident, and the naming of Viserys as his heir over Aegon certainly would have changed any hope the Martell brothers had of a reconciliation with Aerys. They may well have been forced to obey, and punished for their support, but if Dorne had any other options they might well have also called their banners in revolt.

But what gets lost here, I think, is the probability that Hightower was forced to deliver the same message to Rhaegar that Lewyn must tell Dorne. I believe Rhaegar is very much in love with Lyanna at this point, but that does not mean he doesn't love his children with Elia, or that he doesn't care what happens to Elia. Fundamentally, Rhaegar has to defend the Targaryen claim to the throne if he wants his dynasty to continue, but that does not mean a threat to his children and Elia is not a major factor in his decision to return when he does. Certainly, Rhaegar has to know of the threat once he arrives back in King's Landing.

So, when I look at Hightower and his decision to follow Rhaegar's order and stay at the tower, I have to wonder if this is not the bridge too far for Ser Gerold. I don't doubt that Aerys has extended the command of his Kingsguard to include his family. As such, when Rhaegar commands him to stay, he gives him a lawful order his oath tells him to obey. But in so doing Hightower surely knows he is free of Aerys's madness and use of him against innocents within the royal household. As Lord Commander, he could also have told Rhaegar his role was to be with Aerys and to protect him against all others, including his son, and to obey his king's orders even if it meant the lives of Rhaenys and Aegon. He doesn't and I think this is a Rubicon for Hightower. He stays, and does what Rhaegar wants him to do.

As I said, each of the Kingsguard has their own arc in their loyalty to Aerys. Dayne and Whent are likely Rhaegar's men as far back as the tourney at Harrenhal, if not well before. Barristan decides he cannot follow Viserys into exile because of the same madness he sees in the young prince he also sees in his father. Lewyn and Hightower we have talked about. And it is interesting that Rhaegar is comfortable in talking about calling a council in front of both Darry and Jaime before he leaves at the Trident. I think Rhaegar has worked to convince each and every one of the sworn brothers there need be changes made if he returns victorious from the Trident. How successful he was with each is, indeed, an interesting question.

In short, I don't think we know what Hightower's reaction would have been to learn Viserys was named as Aerys's heir.  He might well have drawn the same conclusion that Viserys was a second mad king that Ser Barristan did.

Now, back to our earlier discussion. I think we can limit the time period further than I did previously. Assuming that I'm right that the marriage to Cersei takes place only after Ned delivers the news to Robert of Lyanna's death, then we can be certain Ned arrives in King's Landing before the turn of the year from 284 to 285. Why? The World of Ice & Fire tells us what year Robert and Cersei's wedding takes place.

Quote

The events of Robert's Rebellion are revealed elsewhere and need no retelling save to note that Lord Tywin led a great Lannister host out of the west to capture King's Landing and the Red Keep for Robert Baratheon. Nigh unto three hundred years of Targaryen rule were brought to an end by the swords of Lord Tywin and his westermen. The following year, King Robert I Baratheon took Lord Tywin's daughter, the Lady Cersei, to wife, joining two of the greatest and noblest houses in all Westeros. (TWoI&F 204) bold emphasis added.

Given that the sack is absolutely in 283 (one of the few dates Martin gives us in the A Game of Thrones appendix) we can be sure the wedding takes place in 284. If I'm right about Ned's arrival in King's Landing to tell Robert the news of Lyanna's death, then he gets there in 284. Likely late in the year. That still does not rule out your scenario.

 

[Ralphis Baratheon]

15 hours ago, HaeSuse said:

Oh dear jesus christ. I am not saying he would take the name Waters. I can't say that loudly enough, can I? This member of asoiaf.westeros.org is very much NOT implying that Jon Snow should, would or could take the last name Waters. However, what I AM doing is trying to ask if there could possibly be symbolism just in the very fact that he could possibly have turned out to have been a Waters.

 

For instance, there is symbolism in Viserys wearing a crown of gold that Drogo gave him, even though he never sat the iron throne. There is symbolism in Cersei having a valonquar, even if it turns out to be Jamie instead of Tyrion. There can be symbolism in things that are yet to come, or will never come at all. GRRM doesn't rely solely on symbolism of the true, the fact, the real. He also uses symbolism of the false, the lies, the yet to come, the never to come.

 

Oh, just forget it. I was never here.

Relax. I'm actually trying to understand what your getting at. You don't need to get upset. 

I thought you were implying that there was some specific symbolism between the last name Waters and Jon Snow in the books and I asked what that was so I could better understand what your trying to say.

As of right now I don't remember anything in the books that relates Waters to Jon Snow.

Other then rain(which is Water) comes down as Snow when it's raining in a cold enough climate. So if there is rain in the warmer Crownlands it would become Waters but if there is rain in the much colder North it will become Snow. That could mean that if Rhaegar and the loyalist had won Robert's Rebellion Rhaegar might have took Jon to King's Landing/Crownlands where he would have been a Waters. However since Rhaegar lost and Ned brought Jon North he became a Snow. Snow becomes Water(s) in the South and Water(s) becomes Snow in the North. Though I'm no scientist. Is this the type of symbolism you might be looking for? I'm honestly trying here buddy.

[HaeSuse]

5 hours ago, Ralphis Baratheon said:

Relax. I'm actually trying to understand what your getting at. You don't need to get upset. 

I thought you were implying that there was some specific symbolism between the last name Waters and Jon Snow in the books and I asked what that was so I could better understand what your trying to say.

As of right now I don't remember anything in the books that relates Waters to Jon Snow.

Other then rain(which is Water) comes down as Snow when it's raining in a cold enough climate. So if there is rain in the warmer Crownlands it would become Waters but if there is rain in the much colder North it will become Snow. That could mean that if Rhaegar and the loyalist had won Robert's Rebellion Rhaegar might have took Jon to King's Landing/Crownlands where he would have been a Waters. However since Rhaegar lost and Ned brought Jon North he became a Snow. Snow becomes Water(s) in the South and Water(s) becomes Snow in the North. Though I'm no scientist. Is this the type of symbolism you might be looking for? I'm honestly trying here buddy.

No, you miss my point. I made it clear, I thought. Maybe there is a language barrier. No worries. See ya around.

[LiveFirstDieLater]

16 hours ago, Ygrain said:

I don't have the World Book but it depicts Aerys' madness as way more pronounced than it seems from ASOIAF.

Ethan Glover is my hot candidate, as well, perhaps as a contingency plan by Rhaegar himself. 

 

They wouldn't have been able to survive in the middle of nowhere on their own, so some kind of connection with the outside world must have existed practically since the beginning. A safe, secret connection, most likely.

I'd agree that the Worldbook makes Aerys out to be crazier (and seemingly for longer) but I'm not at all clear on the timeline and how much was just odd/eccentric/paranoid at least at first. 

Glover would be my first bet as well... Cheers.

So my only point in the KG at the ToJ having information from outside is that it means they made a conscious decision to stay and wait for Ned (or someone) to show up. 

This is particularly interesting since they knew Viserys fled to Dragonstone and yet the year still felt their duty wasn't the the ToJ... this leads me to believe they had to know Rheagar had a male heir there before Ned showed up. After all if the child wasn't born yet (it could have been a girl) then Viserys could be heir and their duty would be with him.

[Ygrain]

5 minutes ago, LiveFirstDieLater said:

So my only point in the KG at the ToJ having information from outside is that it means they made a conscious decision to stay and wait for Ned (or someone) to show up. 

Why? Transporting a seriously ill woman wouldn't be easy even if they didn't have to consider other factors, like secrecy and their rather famous faces, not to mention a newborn. And if they move, where to, and how? They would need another secret hideout, supplies, means of transport... Perhaps the Daynes were preparing a secret passage to Essos or elsewhere for them, and Ned turned up before the preparations were ready, or Lyanna was simply too sick to be moved.

5 minutes ago, LiveFirstDieLater said:

This is particularly interesting since they knew Viserys fled to Dragonstone and yet the year still felt their duty wasn't the the ToJ...

Huh? Didn't you mean "their duty WAS at the ToJ"?

5 minutes ago, LiveFirstDieLater said:

this leads me to believe they had to know Rheagar had a male heir there before Ned showed up. After all if the child wasn't born yet (it could have been a girl) then Viserys could be heir and their duty would be with him.

I do agree that Jon had most likely been born before Ned showed up but if RL cases are anything to go by, they would wait for the baby to be born to establish who their duty was to (interregnum).

[SFDanny]

7 minutes ago, LiveFirstDieLater said:

So my only point in the KG at the ToJ having information from outside is that it means they made a conscious decision to stay and wait for Ned (or someone) to show up.

How does this follow? We have abundant evidence pointing to the Kingsguard being at the Tower to guard Lyanna. We have the evidence of Lyanna dying there. The logical conclusion is that at least some of the three men are there performing that duty as Lyanna cannot be moved. Not they are there waiting for Ned to show up. With all respect to BC's gunfight at OK corral scenario, this is not evidence in support of it.

[LiveFirstDieLater]

46 minutes ago, Ygrain said:

Why? Transporting a seriously ill woman wouldn't be easy even if they didn't have to consider other factors, like secrecy and their rather famous faces, not to mention a newborn. And if they move, where to, and how? They would need another secret hideout, supplies, means of transport... Perhaps the Daynes were preparing a secret passage to Essos or elsewhere for them, and Ned turned up before the preparations were ready, or Lyanna was simply too sick to be moved.

Huh? Didn't you mean "their duty WAS at the ToJ"?

I do agree that Jon had most likely been born before Ned showed up but if RL cases are anything to go by, they would wait for the baby to be born to establish who their duty was to (interregnum).

Haha sorry yes I clearly meant WAS...

the point I was trying to make was that the KG didn't go to Viserys. They seemed certain that they're duty was at the ToJ. Which makes sense if there was already a baby boy born.

If Lyanna is pregnant (and maybe having a hard pregnancy and/or is unwell) it's no sure thing that a baby would survive or be born a boy...

42 minutes ago, SFDanny said:

How does this follow? We have abundant evidence pointing to the Kingsguard being at the Tower to guard Lyanna. We have the evidence of Lyanna dying there. The logical conclusion is that at least some of the three men are there performing that duty as Lyanna cannot be moved. Not they are there waiting for Ned to show up. With all respect to BC's gunfight at OK corral scenario, this is not evidence in support of it.

The issue is that the KG's duty would be with Viserys and not at the ToJ unless:

Lyanna and Rheagar got married (so her child would be legitimate) and they knew she'd have a boy.

Or, a male child was already born when Ned arrived. (It makes even more sense if the child was born before Rheagar left, so he could be legitimized.)

[SFDanny]

15 minutes ago, LiveFirstDieLater said:

The issue is that the KG's duty would be with Viserys and not at the ToJ unless:

Lyanna and Rheagar got married (so her child would be legitimate) and they knew she'd have a boy.

Or, a male child was already born when Ned arrived. (It makes even more sense if the child was born before Rheagar left, so he could be legitimized.)

I understand the question of the first duty of the Kingsguard and what Viserys designation as heir would mean for loyal members of the Sworn Brotherhood. I have a four part essay about it in my signature. It is the jump to waiting for Ned that I don't get.

By the way. It doesn't matter if Jon is legitimate or if Aegon is still alive. Once Viserys is designated Aerys's heir, he is the new king upon Aerys's death.

[The Twinslayer]

On 5/28/2017 at 6:01 PM, SFDanny said:

It is important to look at whole quotes and not truncate them.

Here it is critical to note that Lyanna's fears are gone when Ned gives her his promises. That tells us two things. First that Lyanna feared Ned would not promise her something, and, second, that Ned did promise her something that removed those fears. It is beyond silly to believe that the location of Lyanna's remains is the promise that removes her fears. The idea Ned would not bury his sister in the crypts has no basis from anything in the books. Eddard may well have made such a promise, but that is not what removed Lyanna's fear,

The reader has to ask what promise could Lyanna ask that could possibly test Ned's loyalty to his sister? The answer is very likely to be Ned's loyalty to someone else. Who can that be? Catelyn? Ashara? Robert? Ned, himself?

A case can be made for all of these, but I think the only strong case is that Lyanna worried about Ned's loyalty to his closer-than-a-brother and new king, Robert. If true, the only promise that would test Ned's loyalty between Robert or Lyanna is if Jon is Rhaegar's son and Lyanna is his mother. Then bringing Jon home and claiming him as his natural son, as we know Ned did, would be treason to his king and breaking of his oath of fealty to Robert. This is what makes most sense and is the most likely.

 

I think you are vastly underestimating the importance Northerners (particularly the Starks) attach to their final resting place.  That message is drummed into the books from the very start with Ned's visit to the tombs with Robert.  The fact that all of the dead of House Stark are down there is highly significant.  Robert saying that Lyanna should be buried somewhere brighter is met by Ned's statement that these crypts are her place because she was "a Stark of Winterfell."  And there's the fact that Ned felt it important to bring her bones back when he left the bones of his fallen companions in the south -- which he regrets deeply, as we know from his thoughts on Jory Cassels' death:  

"I gave them over to the silent sisters, to be sent north to Winterfell.  Jory would want to lie beside his grandfather."  It would have to be his grandfather, for Jory's father was buried far to the south.

It is also significant that he has built or designated tombs for each of his children and shown them to Robb.  Even if Sansa marries Joffrey and becomes queen of the seven kingdoms, she is to be buried in the Winterfell crypts, far from her husband and children.  

And you appear to be forgetting how angry Lady Dustin is about the fact that Ned failed to bring her husband's bones back, and that she intends to take revenge on Ned by making sure his bones never make it back to Winterfell.

All of that demonstrates that it would have been very important to Lyanna that her bones be returned to Winterfell, and as I said before, that is the only thing we know for sure that she discussed with Ned on her deathbed (she told Ned that she wanted to be buried beside her father and Brandon).  She would naturally be afraid that Ned would bury her body in the south because he had to deal not only with her body but also with the bodies of 5 dead Northern lords and three Kingsguard.    

If this is the promise Ned made, then we can only speculate as to why it made the fear leave her eyes.  But I can think of several reasons.  One is that there may be a reason the dead Starks are all in the crypts:  if the crypts are warded against the Others, this would prevent the Others from resurrecting them as wights.  That would be a powerful motivation for House Stark to bury all their dead there.  A more mundane explanation would be that Lyanna feels responsible for the deaths of Rickard and Brandon and she is afraid that Ned is going to treat her as an outcast by depriving her of the family burial as a punishment for her role in their deaths.  An alternative (or additional) reason is that if she was kidnapped (or if she went willingly but later became a prisoner), she -- like Sansa later on -- would have spent much of her time in captivity longing to be home.  Ned's promise to take her home would feel like a rescue.

Finally, I think you are shortchanging GRRM a bit here.  If you are correct and the promise has to do with protecting Jon, GRRM intended for that to be a mystery.  In that case, he has heavily implied that the promise related to burying Lyanna in the Winterfell crypts as a red herring.  But if that possibility is really "beyond silly" as you have suggested, then GRRM did a lousy job writing that scene.  

[Wolfgirly]

On 30/05/2017 at 11:13 AM, Prof. Cecily said:

 

You can find  references from all the books of ASoIaF to the silver strings, the opening feast of the Harrenhal tourney and much more at this search engine

https://asearchoficeandfire.com/

While this search engine is elegant and easy to use, it has two quirks- you must use the right keywords and you have to spell the key words correctly.

I hope you have as much fun with it as do I!

Perhaps the most enjoyable way to research the harp would be to listen to medieval harp music as you read the saga or browse this forum.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=a91gLsJNHmQ

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=tZFzYlCNrKo

 

 

 

Thanks so much for posting these links. I'll have a look at those.

[The Twinslayer]

On 5/30/2017 at 1:40 AM, Ygrain said:

I think that the rumours of Ashara as Jon's mother rely mainly on her having a baby, but you are right that Cersei speculating on the mother's identity as a Dornish peasant does seem to point to some general knowledge of Jon being from Dorne. However... one thing occured to me: do we know for sure that Ned went to Starfall directly from ToJ? IIRC, that quote I posted above mentions killing Dayne and returning Dawn in a single sentence but that doesn't necessarily mean there was no considerable passage of time between the two events, and I don't recall any other instance when this is mentioned. You know, it has always bugged me a bit, that Ned goes happily wandering around Dorne while there are Lyanna's bones to be interred and Robert to report to. What if - what IF! - after the ToJ showdown, Ned sent Wylla with Jon to Starfall, went back to his troops and to KL, made up with Robert and sent Lyanna north with most of the army, and then travelled with his men to Starfall, where he returned Dawn and recovered "his natural son". Hence, there would be absolutely no connection between Lyanna and Jon, because that would be two separate trips, two separate locations. It might also be perfectly convincing to tell Robert that the journey to Starfall was not only about Dawn but that there was this Dornish girl who he had met and who wrote him that she had a baby, and Robert wouldn't suspect a thing.

I just can't imagine Ned pulling wool over everyone's eyes if he turned up with Lyanna's bones and a baby, so, IMHO, the two events must have been separated somehow.

Well, yeah, I do think that Ned went to KL to report to Robert, I just don't think Jon was anywhere around.

The only thing we know for sure is that Ned went to Starfall at least once after the toj battle, which was after the battle of the Trident, the Sack of King's Landing, and the lifting of the siege of Storm's End.  We don't know whether Ned paid a visit to Starfall before all those things happened -- perhaps searching for allies or for his sister in the early days of the Rebellion.  

We do know that Catelyn learned "in the first year of her marriage" that Ned had fathered a child.  So either Ned notified Cat that someone was carrying his child while the woman was still pregnant, or he announced that Jon was his son some time within the first twelve months after he married Cat, or Cat arrived in Winterfell to find Jon already there some time within twelve months of the marriage.    

The tricky thing here is that we do not know when Ned and Cat were married relative to the time of the Sack.  We know it was after the Battle of the Bells.  If that was a few weeks prior to the Trident (as Jaime's POV in ACOK implies), then there would be plenty of time for Ned to go from his wedding in Riverrun, to the Trident, to KL, to Storm's End, and to Starfall all in time to father a child with Ashara or Wylla or whomever after the toj battle.  If Ned's wedding happened early in the war (like, 9 months before the Sack of King's Landing, as some have suggested), it is hard to see how Catelyn could find out about Jon (while Ned was still away) within the first year of her marriage.    

[LiveFirstDieLater]

1 hour ago, SFDanny said:

I understand the question of the first duty of the Kingsguard and what Viserys designation as heir would mean for loyal members of the Sworn Brotherhood. I have a four part essay about it in my signature. It is the jump to waiting for Ned that I don't get.

By the way. It doesn't matter if Jon is legitimate or if Aegon is still alive. Once Viserys is designated Aerys's heir, he is the new king upon Aerys's death.

I'm not sure what's unclear... but I'm looking at two senerios and comparing them to the KG behavior we see...

Option 1: Lyanna had one child, Rhaegar must have gotten her pregnant, ordered the KG to stay, and left all likely before knowing Lyanna was pregnant at all (but at least well before knowing a gender). Then the KG stay, even as news of the Rebelion's successes arrive, without knowing the gender of the child (presumably because of an R+L wedding, otherwise I struggle to make their behavior fit their duty).

Option 2: Lyanna got pregnant at Harrenhall, then gives birth to a boy. Rheagar legitimizes him, through decree or marriage, before leaving the ToJ. The KG reasoning becomes pretty clear after that.

As for naming Viserys the heir... Who witnessed that? Or was it just a Worldbook wildcard (honestly I don't remember)? But either way, an heir's heir traditionally comes before a second son... and if these men were willing to depose a mad king, would they recognize his inheritance decrees as valid anyway? 

Anyway, it's all sort of moot, I have a hard time understanding how the KG's duty could be so clear unless their was already a son of Rhaegar born at the ToJ when Ned arrives.

[The Commentator]

On 5/30/2017 at 10:45 AM, HaeSuse said:

 

 

 

I think you guys miss my point. I know that they take the name according to their upbringing. I'm not claiming Jon should change his bastard last name. Or that it would even be worth mentioning, except that GRRM uses symbolism like no one else. And I'm asking for thoughts on whether the surname Waters would possibly have any bearing on Jon as a person, his story arc, the greater plot of the books, etc. Regardless of the above quoted stuff, does Jon Waters potentially bring any new symbolism into the books?

One symbolism that I would see happen is this, based on the tempering of Lightbringer.  The first attempt was tempered with Water.  And if Jon is Jon Waters, that would be a sweet end to his story arc as the first victim of the creation of Lightbringer.