“For the watch”

[Lyanna<3Rhaegar]

1 hour ago, LynnS said:

There you go making perfectly logical arguments again.  LOL!  Yes, that is difficult to quibble over.  However consider that Mel's powers are growing at the Wall, including the power of her 'word

That's right.  @Tagganaro We will have no logical reasoning here ser! 

Serious though I love this stuff. I am a very literal person & a very literal reader so much of the foreshadowing & symbolism went right by me especially on the first read so when someone puts something together like that it is amazing to me. Great job @Walda! 

Whether or not this is what is going on its much fun to speculate. I would like to add to what Lynn quoted: I just thought it interesting that Melisandre says she has "smokes" for truth, lust, fear because didn't Jon's wound smoke? Maybe I'm not remembering right, I can't look for the quote right now. 

42 minutes ago, Sydney Mae said:

Not when you consider the lord commander just owned up to treason during his public speech and then goes on to announce his intentions to do something so blatantly illegal like leading a wildling attack on the Warden of the North.  

Nope still treason. If extenuating circumstances can free Bowen Marsh & Co of treason after assassinating their Lord Commander (something that is always, always, always treason in almost any military style group no matter the surrounding circumstances) then surely extenuating circumstances can free Jon of treason for planning to attack a psychopath threatening the LC & the NW right? It can't be both ways. Bowen Marsh is not above the law because he got his little feelings hurt when Jon was making nice with the wildlings (for the good of the watch I might add) I will never understand how when the author wrote this with a very clear bad guy (Ramsay) & good guy (Jon) people still come up with the "Jon, the traitorous bastard, stole Lord of Winterfell, Ramsay Bolton's wife & ruined the NW" For shit sake Ramsay is Lord because he slaughtered everyone in WF & lied about who he was marrying. AFTER HE LOCKED HIS PREVIOUS WIFE IN A TOWER TO CHEW HER OWN FINGERS OFF. He is NOT the one we are supposed to be rooting for. Why is that not clear?? 

On a more serious note I do think Bowen thought he was doing what he had to do for the watch. It's too bad his close minded way of thinking led him to commit murder. 

[LynnS]

39 minutes ago, Sydney Mae said:

Not when you consider the lord commander just owned up to treason during his public speech and then goes on to announce his intentions to do something so blatantly illegal like leading a wildling attack on the Warden of the North.  

Oh I think there will be others present who see it in exactly the opposite way using the same logic that circumstances don't matter.  The assassins lives are forfeit.

[Sydney Mae]

4 minutes ago, Lyanna<3Rhaegar said:

That's right. We will have no logical reasoning here ser! 

Serious though I love this stuff. I am a very literal person & a very literal reader so much of the foreshadowing & symbolism went right by me especially on the first read so when someone puts something together like that it is amazing to me. Great job @Walda! 

Whether or not this is what is going on its much fun to speculate. I would like to add to what Lynn quoted: I just thought it interesting that Melisandre says she has "smokes" for truth, lust, fear because didn't Jon's wound smoke? Maybe I'm not remembering right, I can't look for the quote right now. 

Nope still treason. If extenuating circumstances can free Bowen Marsh & Co of treason after assassinating their Lord Commander (something that is always, always, always treason in any almost any military style group no matter the surrounding circumstances) then surely extenuating circumstances can free Jon of treason for planning to attack a psychopath threatening the LC & the NW right? It can't be both ways. Bowen Marsh is not above the law because he got his little feelings hurt when Jon was making nice with the wildlings (for the good of the watch I might add) I will never understand how when the author wrote this with a very clear bad guy (Ramsay) & good guy (Jon) people still come up with the "Jon, the traitorous bastard, stole Lord of Winterfell, Ramsay Bolton's wife & ruined the NW" For shit sake Ramsay is Lord because he slaughtered everyone in WF & lied about who he was marrying. AFTER HE LOCKED HIS PREVIOUS WIFE IN A TOWER TO CHEW HER OWN FINGERS OFF. He is NOT the one we are supposed to be rooting for. Why is that not clear?? 

On a more serious note I do think Bowen thought he was doing what he had to do for the watch. It's too bad his close minded way of thinking led him to commit murder. 

If it is treason it is not as bad as the treason that Jon is guilty of.  Bowen's treason would be minor compared to what Jon did and what Jon was about to do.  Bowen didn't kill Jon to punish him for his crimes though.  Bowen did it to stop Jon from doing something awful.

Bowen M would have put Jon under arrest and hanged him for treason if the situation had allowed it but Jon got the wildlings fired up and on his side before the Night Watch could do anything to stop him.  Bowen M did the only thing he could to stop his fool of a commander from starting a war that will do great harm to the Night Watch and their mission to stop the white walkers.  Jon didn't have his priorities right.  He lost his mind over Arya and he was no longer fit to command. 

[LynnS]

3 minutes ago, Lyanna<3Rhaegar said:

Serious though I love this stuff. I am a very literal person & a very literal reader so much of the foreshadowing & symbolism went right by me especially on the first read so when someone puts something together like that it is amazing to me. Great job @Walda! 

Ditto!

[Lyanna<3Rhaegar]

Just now, Sydney Mae said:

If it is treason it is not as bad as the treason that Jon is guilty of.  Bowen's treason would be minor compared to what Jon did and what Jon was about to do.  Bowen didn't kill Jon to punish him for his crimes.  Bowen did it to stop Jon from doing something awful.

Treason is treason. I don't think there are varying degrees when punishment is being doled out for treason. Besides that how is murdering your Lord Commander a minor treason? In whose eyes would that be a minor treason? Not in the eyes of the NW, I'll promise you that. 

I also disagree about Bowen's reasonings. If he merely wanted to stop Jon he could have captured him. Something he probably could have gotten alot more support for & saved himself a head. 

Just because I haven't had this circular conversation in a couple days, what exactly do you think Jon did that was treasonous? 

[Darth Sidious]

1 minute ago, Lyanna<3Rhaegar said:

Treason is treason. I don't think there are varying degrees when punishment is being doled out for treason. Besides that how is murdering your Lord Commander a minor treason? In whose eyes would that be a minor treason? Not in the eyes of the NW, I'll promise you that. 

I also disagree about Bowen's reasonings. If he merely wanted to stop Jon he could have captured him. Something he probably could have gotten alot more support for & saved himself a head. 

Just because I haven't had this circular conversation in a couple days, what exactly do you think Jon did that was treasonous? 

There was no way to "capture" Jon.  Jon on some level knew he was committing treason so he planned it ahead of time to get himself a wildling raiding party on his side so his own brothers can't stop him.  

Bowen Marsh didn't really have a choice.  Jon's madness had to be stopped.  Any responsible and sensible man of the watch could not allow Jon to lead an attack on the Warden of the North and his son.  That was sheer madness on Jon's part.

What happened at the wall was a tragedy and I blame Jon for all of it.  He should have minded his own business instead of making attempts to steal his sister from Ramsay Bolton.  Jon had no business doing that.  

[Sydney Mae]

16 minutes ago, Lyanna<3Rhaegar said:

Treason is treason. I don't think there are varying degrees when punishment is being doled out for treason. Besides that how is murdering your Lord Commander a minor treason? In whose eyes would that be a minor treason? Not in the eyes of the NW, I'll promise you that. 

I also disagree about Bowen's reasonings. If he merely wanted to stop Jon he could have captured him. Something he probably could have gotten alot more support for & saved himself a head. 

Just because I haven't had this circular conversation in a couple days, what exactly do you think Jon did that was treasonous? 

Jon was sooo obsessed with getting Arya.  He would have killed anyone who tried to stop him from leaving to start his war with Ramsay.  Killing him was the only way to stop him.

I read through most of the earlier comments here and you should already know what Jon is guilty of.  Sending Mance Rayder to take your sister away from her husband is illegal.  It's an attack on House Bolton basically.  The icing on that cake of treason is his intent to lead an attack on the Boltons.  Jon is guilty of treason and Bowen had a duty to stop him from making it worse.  I hope you can see that.  I am not attacking you but it puzzles me that after all of the thoughtful posts from Jon's "critics" that you don't see it. 

[Lyanna<3Rhaegar]

17 minutes ago, Agent Orange said:

There was no way to "capture" Jon.  Jon on some level knew he was committing treason so he planned it ahead of time to get himself a wildling raiding party on his side so his own brothers can't stop him.  

We don't really know that because they never tried. If Bowen believed so strongly about what Jon was doing & it was clearly such a treason why would the whole watch not support him? Also we know Jon didn't "get a wildling raiding party on his side so his own brothers can't stop him." Because we have Jon's POV & not only does he not ever think he is committing treason but that also isn't the reason he asked the wildlings. 

 

20 minutes ago, Agent Orange said:

Bowen Marsh didn't really have a choice.  Jon's madness had to be stopped.  Any responsible and sensible man of the watch could not allow Jon to lead an attack on the Warden of the North and his son.  That was sheer madness on Jon's part.

Bowen Marsh most certainly had a choice. What madness needed stopped? The "Warden of the North" threatened the Lord Commander of the Night's Watch. You're telling me it's treason for Jon to defend himself? 

 

21 minutes ago, Agent Orange said:

What happened at the wall was a tragedy and I blame Jon for all of it.  He should have minded his own business instead of making attempts to steal his sister from Ramsay Bolton.  Jon had no business doing that.  

Right. Except Jon never made any attempt to steal his sister from Ramsay. Not even indirectly. 

 

5 minutes ago, Sydney Mae said:

Jon was sooo obsessed with getting Arya.  He would have killed anyone who tried to stop him from leaving to start his war with Ramsay.  Killing him was the only way to stop him

This is absolutely absurd. Arya doesn't even cross his mind when he is planning on marching on WF. He knows Arya isn't even there! He gives us his reasonings for marching on WF, none of which have to do with Arya. 

 

7 minutes ago, Sydney Mae said:

read through most of the earlier comments here and you should already know what Jon is guilty of.  Sending Mance Rayder to take your sister away from her husband is illegal.  It's an attack on House Bolton basically.  The icing on that cake of treason is his intent to lead an attack on the Boltons.  Jon is guilty of treason and Bowen had a duty to stop him from making it worse.  I hope you can see that.  I am not attacking you but it puzzles me that after all of the thoughtful posts from Jon's "critics" that you don't see it.

Oh I know what people accuse him of I was just curious to know which crime of Jon's you felt was more treasonous than assassinating your LC. 

The reason I don't "see" it after all of the thoughtful posts from Jon critics is that you say things like "Jon send Mance to steal Arya from Ramsay" when if you have read the books, as I'm assuming you have, you know as well as I do that Jon didn't send Mance anywhere. Melisandre sent Mance but not to WF to steal Ramsay's bride, he was sent to locate a fleeing Arya - already left WF. Mance went to WF all on his own or possibly under a secret command from Mel but certainly not at Jon's command. When we both know this & you say the opposite anyway I have a really hard time seeing your point of view. I get why some of Jon's decisions were questionable but he gets blamed for things he didn't do (being obsessed with stealing Arya for one) What has led you to feel he was obsessed with Arya at all? Because I definetely didn't get that impression. 

Jon had no choice but to march on Ramsay. Ramsay made a list of demands that Jon could not comply with if he wanted to & said very explicitly what he would do if Jon didn't fulfill his demands. Maybe from a battle strategic point of view Jon should have waited & let Ramsay attack but I personally think it was a better idea to surprise him. Jon has a basic human right to defend himself & a legal right to defend the NW. 

[kissdbyfire]

2 hours ago, LynnS said:

There you go making perfectly logical arguments again.  LOL!  Yes, that is difficult to quibble over.  However consider that Mel's powers are growing at the Wall, including the power of her 'word':

We have a example of the power of her 'word':

If Melisandre was affecting the assassins in any way; I suspect that she used the power of her word to affect them.  I don't think we know what her capabilities are at this point; but they are changing.

I have wondered why Melisandre didn't name Jon's assassins when she had the chance.  I think the answer is that she planned to intervene to demonstrate her powers to Jon.  She has a purpose for him that depends on him turning to her; something that he avoids.  She knows who they are and has had a chance to 'prepare' them for the moment when she steps in and stops them with a word, a means to demonstrate the trappings of power. Except that she screws up and doesn't make it in time. 

I've often wondered whether Mel knew - or thought she knew - the outcome of the assassination attempt and b/c of this knowledge she deliberately lets it run its course. I don't think that's the case, but I find the possibility intriguing. 

[Harlaw's Book the Sequel]

7 minutes ago, kissdbyfire said:

I've often wondered whether Mel knew - or thought she knew - the outcome of the assassination attempt and b/c of this knowledge she deliberately lets it run its course. I don't think that's the case, but I find the possibility intriguing. 

Doesn't Mel in her chapter think something along the lines of "Unbelievers don't believe it's too late," so I do think Mel letting the assassination attempt take its course is a possibility.  

[kissdbyfire]

1 hour ago, Sydney Mae said:

If it is treason it is not as bad as the treason that Jon is guilty of.  Bowen's treason would be minor compared to what Jon did and what Jon was about to do.  Bowen didn't kill Jon to punish him for his crimes though.  Bowen did it to stop Jon from doing something awful.

Treason is treason, and it's punishable by death. There's no 1st degree/2nd degree treason.

1 hour ago, Sydney Mae said:

Bowen M would have put Jon under arrest and hanged him for treason if the situation had allowed it but Jon got the wildlings fired up and on his side before the Night Watch could do anything to stop him. 

This is is absolutely ridiculous, and the only thing it shows is how stupid Marsh is. Because Jon told him and Yarwick that he would let the wildlings pass. So, picking the exact moment when the wildlings are all "fired up" and on Jon's side, besides being right there in a nearby building instead of north of the Wall, is just an incredibly dumb move.

 

1 hour ago, Sydney Mae said:

Bowen M did the only thing he could to stop his fool of a commander from starting a war that will do great harm to the Night Watch and their mission to stop the white walkers.  Jon didn't have his priorities right.  He lost his mind over Arya and he was no longer fit to command. 

Jon had his priorities exactly where they should be. To each their own and all that, but you should stick to facts and not fan fiction. 

[LynnS]

34 minutes ago, kissdbyfire said:

I've often wondered whether Mel knew - or thought she knew - the outcome of the assassination attempt and b/c of this knowledge she deliberately lets it run its course. I don't think that's the case, but I find the possibility intriguing. 

I agree, that is another possibility.

[Clegane'sPup]

2 hours ago, Sydney Mae said:

If it is treason it is not as bad as the treason that Jon is guilty of. 

Actually the men of the NW aren't committing treason. They are not trying to overthrow the government of KL. What the men of the NW are doing is committing a mutiny.

2 hours ago, Sydney Mae said:

Bowen's treason would be minor compared to what Jon did and what Jon was about to do

I'm merely checking to find out if you and I are thinking along the same lines. In story Jon Snow is the LC of the KW.  When his men tried to kill him is that considered mutiny?

2 hours ago, Sydney Mae said:

Bowen didn't kill Jon to punish him for his crimes though.  Bowen did it to stop Jon from doing something awful.

Help me out with the awful part.

2 hours ago, Agent Orange said:

Jon on some level knew he was committing treason so he planned it ahead of time to get himself a wildling raiding party on his side so his own brothers can't stop him. 

It could be said that by LC Snow granting assistance to Stannis, one of the many self proclaimed Kings of Westeros, it is indeed treason against the Throne. Yet, it was Stannis who answered the call for help when the Throne did not.

2 hours ago, Agent Orange said:

What happened at the wall was a tragedy and I blame Jon for all of it.  He should have minded his own business instead of making attempts to steal his sister from Ramsay Bolton.  Jon had no business doing that.

In the story the NW think the wildling/free folk are their problem until something prompts LC Mormont to think that the NW have forgot their purpose. Five books so please bare with me. Whacha tink the NW purpose was before they forgot what their purpose was?

 

[Lyanna<3Rhaegar]

13 minutes ago, Clegane'sPup said:

could be said that by LC Snow granting assistance to Stannis, one of the many self proclaimed Kings of Westeros, it is indeed treason against the Throne. Yet, it was Stannis who answered the call for help when the Throne did not

I'm actually surprised this isn't brought up more often. It's quite a conundrum to me. He is assisting Stannis. Giving room & food isn't necessarily helping Stannis to win the war besides that Stannis the only one who answered the plea for help so I think we can let that alone BUT Jon doesn't stop there. He even goes as far as to tell Stannis the best way to gather a northern army. This is definitely "taking part in matters of the realm" & something Jon was not honor or duty bound to offer (like food etc) But it also isn't actually giving anything. It's only advice, words, & words are wind. I don't think Jon is a traitorous bastard for helping the Mannis but I do see how it can be argued & don't necessarily disagree with it. 

[Walda]

16 hours ago, Tagganaro said:

it seems like a pretty big power-up for Melisandre to essentially be able to warg human beings like that.

I don't think Melisandre is warging anyone, I think she has cast a shadow force-field around Jon. Wick is pushed back by it (because he managed to get to Jon's neck before it was in place), and Bowen and the sholder-blade knife are able to get their knives in with difficulty because they had enough momentum before the shield went up, to get them in (with unexpected effort) before being blown back.

Or perhaps she has a shadow physically fighting them, one at a time. It is a dark night before they go to the Sheildhall

Quote

“Mully, help Clydas back to his chambers. The night is dark, and the paths will be slippery with snow. Satin, go with them.”

so it woudn't be particularly easy to see a shadow in the yard. Although, if Melisandre was giving birth to it, the way she did with Davos, they probably wouldn't miss that. Although they probably wouldn't be screaming at that, either (well, Davos didn't). Something is making them scream. A shadow giant might do that.

I don't think Melisandre is controlling the bodies or the minds of Jon's attackers in any way, beyond having a shadow force field or a shadow attacker of great strength protecting Jon. I agree, having Melisandre suddenly warg at least four human beings, without any symptom of being able to warg anyone before, or any inkling of her power from any other warg, is implausible. When she destroyed Varamyr/Orell's eagle, is about as close to warging as she ever came - but it seems to be something other than warging itself.

The only foreshadowed ways of Melisandre controlling people is through ceremonies with an element of burning the unfaithful and the false gods, and Mance's ruby. Jon has no ruby, nor any of his attackers.

Also, I remember now,

Quote

“Cold,” said Renly in a small puzzled voice,

(ACoK, Ch.33 Catelyn IV)

Melisandre's shadows are cold, not hot. So the smoking wound and the difficulty getting Longclaw out are probably due to her shadow-magic, rather than the Others. If the degree of cold is indicative of the strength of the spell or the shadow-daemon, it is very strong. But, it is also a very cold night to start off with.

The destruction of Orell's eagle seemed to be a hot magic. The bird burned from the inside. I suppose Bowen Marsh's reaction might be the result of a sudden burning heart attack, but Wick's is more as if a big invisible policeman has picked him up under the armpits and dragged him off, pinning back his forearms.

Anyway, I'm pretty sure Melisandre wants Jon alive, and Lord Commander. The only person she is less likely to want dead is Stannis. Jon is critical to her cause, she has invested a lot in getting him to her cause, and when Melisandre misinterprets things, it is because she has invested in them - meaning even if the fires indicated that she should prepare for Jon Snow's death, that it was unavoidable, she wouldn't see it, would keep trying to save him. She won't give up on Stannis as Azor Ahai, even when her flames are telling her different. She won't lift a finger to save Hardhome, in fact would go some way to prevent it's salvation. I don't know how it is that Patchface is still alive and jesting in her presence, when Alester Florent has been burnt, but Melisandre wouldn't mind sacrificing him.

Jon, though, she wouldn't toy with. She believes she needs him, and she does everything she can to show him upfront she is a loyal ally. Just that, she is slippery by nature. She can't help channelling Ygritte, and enslaving Mance, and in her enthusiasm, mistaking Alys for Arya. Every attempt to make Jon trust her, reveals the deceits and seductions she uses to get her way...but she sincerely wants Jon alive. I don't think she would let him face the daggers in the dark just to prove her point, when she knew exactly who would wield them. That seems as little in character as suddenly turning warg.

Quote

Do not refuse my friendship, Jon. I have seen you in the storm, hard-pressed, with enemies on every side. You have so many enemies. Shall I tell you their names?”
“I know their names.”
“Do not be so certain.” The ruby at Melisandre’s throat gleamed red. “It is not the foes who curse you to your face that you must fear, but those who smile when you are looking and sharpen their knives when you turn your back. You would do well to keep your wolf close beside you. Ice, I see, and daggers in the dark. Blood frozen red and hard, and naked steel. It was very cold.”

(ADwD, Ch.03 Jon I)

Melisandre consistently, earnestly, warns Jon, tells him to keep his wolf beside him, tells him the signs. But it is like Bran trying to warn Alebelly - her vision and her conviction that it is correct and must happen, doesn't give Jon a clear idea of how he can circumvent this fate. Her previous efforts have in fact left him doubtful it will happen as she says. Still, we don't see Melisandre trying to exploit this to show off her power. Melisandre has never been as fatalistic as Jojen about her ability to change her visions of the future.

In this instance, Melisandre didn't feel death was inevitable  (unlike the wildlings at Hardhome, or Jojen with Alebelly). She repeatedly tells Jon the signs as plainly as she can. And, alone among the Queens people, she comes to the Sheildhall. Not to hear Jon (she already knows what he has to say), but to protect him from his enemies.

She knows names, but I don't think the names she knows are Whittlestick Wick or Bowen Marsh. Jon is not in a storm. Ice, naked steel, blood frozen red and hard, we have not seen yet. Melisandre misidentifies things sometimes, but she reports the content of her visions as clearly as she can,  and those elements don't seem to have been fufilled, although there are daggers in the dark.

She is an all or nothing kind of woman, too. It seems completely out of character that she would let a blade touch Jon, if she could help it. So I'm inclined to think this isn't playing out quite how she expected.

[LynnS]

8 hours ago, Walda said:

She is an all or nothing kind of woman, too. It seems completely out of character that she would let a blade touch Jon, if she could help it. So I'm inclined to think this isn't playing out quite how she expected.

Well damn.  I really wanted this to be about magic but now that I've looked at the passage again; I'm not seeing it:
 

Quote

A Dance with Dragons - Jon XIII

Wun Weg Wun Dar Wun howled again and gave Ser Patrek's other arm a twist and pull. It tore loose from his shoulder with a spray of bright red blood. Like a child pulling petals off a daisy, thought Jon. "Leathers, talk to him, calm him. The Old Tongue, he understands the Old Tongue. Keep back, the rest of you. Put away your steel, we're scaring him." Couldn't they see the giant had been cut? Jon had to put an end to this or more men would die. They had no idea of Wun Wun's strength. A horn, I need a horn. He saw the glint of steel, turned toward it. "No blades!" he screamed. "Wick, put that knife …"

… away, he meant to say. When Wick Whittlestick slashed at his throat, the word turned into a grunt. Jon twisted from the knife, just enough so it barely grazed his skin. He cut me. When he put his hand to the side of his neck, blood welled between his fingers. "Why?"

"For the Watch." Wick slashed at him again. This time Jon caught his wrist and bent his arm back until he dropped the dagger. The gangling steward backed away, his hands upraised as if to say, Not me, it was not me. Men were screaming. Jon reached for Longclaw, but his fingers had grown stiff and clumsy. Somehow he could not seem to get the sword free of its scabbard.

Wick isn't being forced away from Jon.  Jon sees the blade coming and moves out of the way.  The blade grazes his neck.  Whether Jon realizes it or not, this is a serious wound.  Blood wells up between his fingers when he places his hand on his neck.  That accounts for the problems he has with blood freezing on his glove hand when he tries to reach for his sword moments later.

Then Wick attempts to stab Jon again and Jon disarms him.  Wick backs away rather than being forced away. Wick doesn't actually say "it wasn't me".  He makes a gesture with upraised hands once he is disarmed.

Quote

Then Bowen Marsh stood there before him, tears running down his cheeks. "For the Watch." He punched Jon in the belly. When he pulled his hand away, the dagger stayed where he had buried it.

Bowen Marsh is standing before Jon.  He isn't being forced away or prevented in any way.

As for the screaming; that could be a reaction to witnessing the assassination or something to do with Wun Wun.    

[Walda]

12 hours ago, Lyanna<3Rhaegar said:

He even goes as far as to tell Stannis the best way to gather a northern army. This is definitely "taking part in matters of the realm" & something Jon was not honor or duty bound to offer (like food etc)

As part of his guest-right, Stannis can expect Jon to do what he can to secure his safety when he rides from Castle Black. At least for as long as he rides through the lands of the Night's Watch.

When Lysa sent Tyrion out to die in the Mountains of the Moon, even she had stone faced Lyn Corbray secure his passage as far as the Bloody Gate. Lord Manderley gave his Frey guests safe passage to the Barrowlands, and professed a willingness to accompany them all the way to Barrowtown, but they wanted to move at a faster pace, so he gifted them three fleet horses.

When even such as these take the letter, if not the spirit, of guest-right so seriously, Jon's suggestion that Stannis avoids the Umber's lands and the Kings Road, could pass as merely what he owes Stannis by rights. But he is pushing the envelope. The spears he gives the King's men are arms, even if they are not swords.

He didn't have to tell Stannis how he could recruit men as he rides, although that was really a bargain, an exchange - getting Stannis to cede his command of the kneelers to the Lord Commander of the Night's Watch, in exchange for men that would only respond to requests made to them in person, men that Jon could not control or dictate to.

But Stannis took the risk, and Jon gave him guides, as Guest-right minimally demanded he provide. He chose men for that task that could secure Stannis invitations from the clans-folk (which I would think was just the right thing to do, for both the neighbours and the guests, although clearly beyond the generosity of Lady Arryn or Lord Manderly). He also gave Stannis tips re ask not command, to fight the Ironborn. Praise their daughters beauty, allow them to feast him, the Flint and Big Bucket are the keys to the guest-right train that will carry Stannis all the way to Deepwood Motte. All of which is generous to a fault, and most of which was absolutely necessary to prevent Stannis stuffing up too much.

Suggesting that Stannis attack the Ironborn at Deepwood Motte was probably on the outside of a generous host's duty, though. Likewise, his pointing out the weaknesses of the castle's defences. Here he can say 'the Night's Watch played no part' only in the sense that it was Stannis and the clansmen doing what the Night's Watch Lord Commander suggested.

While sending requests for men to defend the wall to all the kings was only fair, and not a breach of the Night's Watch's code of independence, entertaining a King at the wall probably is. From Queen Alysanne's time at least, it has been an allowable breach, but the watch has suffered from her time because of it. In Mormont's time it led to Waymar taking command as rangers within six months of joining the watch to appease the Royces, and before that, Aemon being sent to the wall essentially to ensure the new Targaryen King had a trusty there. Aemon was not a bad thing for the watch, but the Targaryen loyalists, especially after Robert's rebellion, seem to have created a natural fault line in the Watch, especially when there have been Starks (who have been interfering with the independence of the Night's Watch since before the conquest) in key positions. Benjen for example. The Lannisters have gone one better even than the Targaryens, sending their most corrupt goldcloaks with a coded demand to make their leader Commander of the Night's Watch, Or Else. Then Cersei followed up with 100 men specifically selected for the purpose of assassinating the elected commander, when their candidate did not get in.

There is no law that says the Lords of the Realm are not to interfere with the watch. For the Royces, Mormonts, Starks, and Targaryens, its a time-honoured tradition. But still, not good for the watch. In fact, it would seem that, of all the Lord Commanders since Quellon, Jon Snow is the one that kow towed least to the Lords of Westeros. And he is paying the price for that.

[Clegane'sPup]

22 hours ago, Lyanna<3Rhaegar said:

I'm actually surprised this isn't brought up more often. It's quite a conundrum to me. He is assisting Stannis. Giving room & food isn't necessarily helping Stannis to win the war besides that Stannis the only one who answered the plea for help so I think we can let that alone BUT Jon doesn't stop there. He even goes as far as to tell Stannis the best way to gather a northern army. This is definitely "taking part in matters of the realm" & something Jon was not honor or duty bound to offer (like food etc) But it also isn't actually giving anything. It's only advice, words, & words are wind. I don't think Jon is a traitorous bastard for helping the Mannis but I do see how it can be argued & don't necessarily disagree with it. 

Someone probably has brought it up before.

This is the way I see it --- keeping it short. Marsh was not the brains behind the mutiny.

Stannis shows up thanks to Davos learning to read, and Stannis smashes the wildlings.

Mormont, the LC who died at Craster’s due to a mutiny, tasked Sam with reminding the NW with that which they forgot.  Reminds me of the Others that were creeping around during the prologue of the first book.

Bottom line for me is that LC Jon Snow did not send Mance to WF. Mance went there on his own accord. Jon sent Mance to intercept a girl on a horse. Missy Mel and her frequently misinterpreted visions and her imaginings and powders needed to get in there and mix stuff up a bit.

A Dance with Dragons - Melisandre I      Her sleeves were full of hidden pockets, and she checked them carefully as she did every morning to make certain all her powders were in place.       Powders to turn fire green or blue or silver, powders to make a flame roar and hiss and leap up higher than a man is tall, powders to make smoke.       A smoke for truth, a smoke for lust, a smoke for fear, and the thick black smoke that could kill a man outright.     The red priestess armed herself with a pinch of each of them.   The carved chest that she had brought across the narrow sea was more than three-quarters empty now.       And while Melisandre had the knowledge to make more powders, she lacked many rare ingredients.       My spells should suffice. She was stronger at the Wall, stronger even than in Asshai. Her every word and gesture was more potent, and she could do things that she had never done before.      Such shadows as I bring forth here will be terrible, and no creature of the dark will stand before them.    With such sorceries at her command, she should soon have no more need of the feeble tricks of alchemists and pyromancers.

 

Four books leading to the last published 2011 book. Context is relevant.

Given that Jon had no ambition to become LC ---- and that Maester Aemon & Samwell set upon the idea that Jon during the choosing should become LC I’m gonna have to go with the author has some sorta plan in mind ---- book one did set up the Other’s as the perceived enemy.  Aren’t they the ones the wildings are running from?

For me the biggest mind fuck of the ASOIAF never ending story is the pink/bastard letter. During these LC Snow traitor treads people need to remember that their favorite author not LC Snow decided that The Mance was to go to WF.

[Bowen Marsh]

On 12/3/2017 at 6:33 PM, Sydney Mae said:

If it is treason it is not as bad as the treason that Jon is guilty of.  Bowen's treason would be minor compared to what Jon did and what Jon was about to do.  Bowen didn't kill Jon to punish him for his crimes though.  Bowen did it to stop Jon from doing something awful.

Bowen M would have put Jon under arrest and hanged him for treason if the situation had allowed it but Jon got the wildlings fired up and on his side before the Night Watch could do anything to stop him.  Bowen M did the only thing he could to stop his fool of a commander from starting a war that will do great harm to the Night Watch and their mission to stop the white walkers.  Jon didn't have his priorities right.  He lost his mind over Arya and he was no longer fit to command. 

Oh I would have arrested that idiot to stop him from attacking the Boltons and making worse the war that he started.  He will die from a hanging shortly thereafter.  But the wildling posse would get in the way of arresting him.  I had no other choice but to execute him.  He deserved it.  He was doing more harm than good. 

 

[Bowen Marsh]

On 12/3/2017 at 7:17 PM, Lyanna<3Rhaegar said:

Right. Except Jon never made any attempt to steal his sister from Ramsay. Not even indirectly. 

Oh?  Are you saying Jon was going to return Arya back to Ramsay?  Any other course of action is treason and an act of war.  Either way that idiot Jon was wrong to interfere with Bolton affairs. 

Look, Jon chose Mance because the wildling has already proven he can get in and out of Winterfell.  Why all the trouble of getting the women from Mole's Town?  Why the elaborate disguise?  Because Jon knew full well that his underlings may have to sneak Arya out of Winterfell.  Do you really think Jon would stop at the thought of sending wildlings to Winterfell?  It's obvious from reading his own thoughts in those chapters that Jon would have stopped at nothing to get Arya.   Mance killed members of the Bolton household.  That's a violation of the ancient tradition of guest rights.  Jon sent Mance so Jon takes the blame for that too.