The three Kingsguard were loyal to Rhaegar, not Aerys.

[Bernie Mac]

9 hours ago, three-eyed monkey said:

 

I feel it has to be one or the other because Hightower would have faced a conflict when he arrived at the tower, (unless of course he had resolved it earlier and was already loyal to Rhaegar over Aerys by the time he left King's Landing).

What conflict? 

Both Aerys and Hightower were aware that Rhaegar was with Lyanna and there does not seem to be any command from Aerys specifically related to Lyanna. 

9 hours ago, three-eyed monkey said:

What do you think Aerys would have expected of his Lord Commander if he knew what Ser Gerold had found at the tower?

What do you think he found? 

9 hours ago, three-eyed monkey said:

 

Kingsguard primarily live to serve their king, and it seems to me that Ser Gerold would best serve Aerys by returning to King's Landing with Rhaegar, Dayne, Whent, and Lyanna.

They are told to obey, if Rhaegar was put in command then he's not got much option but to obey. Lyanna was both the Prince's paramour and an important hostage against the Starks. 

9 hours ago, three-eyed monkey said:

 

Or at least return to King's Landing with Rhaegar to inform the king of the situation at the tower. But Rhaegar obviously did not want that, and it seems Hightower did what Rhaegar wanted.

When you refer to the 'situation' are you talking about her pregnancy? If so it's actually possible that Rhaegar himself left without knowing. 

We don't know how many months there was between Rhaegar leaving and Ned's arrival but given the distances and events it may have been longer than 7/8 months. 

9 hours ago, three-eyed monkey said:

So did he stay at the tower because Rhaegar ordered him, persuaded him, or simply because he chose to? Many readers would say that it must have been an order from Rhaegar, but I think we are given a strong narrative thread, through Aemon, Jaime, and Barristan, to suggest that Hightower did chose to stay.

He was ordered to. had Rhaegar ordered him to return with him he would have done so. 

Aerys was paranoid, if he felt three of his Kingsguard had abandoned him I'm pretty sure Jaime or Barristan would have mentioned it.

[corbon]

13 hours ago, three-eyed monkey said:

Ser Gerold had to choose between doing what he thought would best serve Aerys or doing what Rhaegar wanted. And it seems to me that he chose Rhaegar, by virtue of the fact that he remained at the tower.

Or, he doesn't choose based on his own interpretation of what the king would want (which could be flawed anyway), he chooses based on his honour in upholding his KG vows while doing the most honourable thing.

The vow isn't to 'do everything the king might desire'. Its to protect the King and his family, obey orders, keep secrets, stay silent unless asked, give counsel when asked and defend the King's name and honour.

In other words, he can 'disobey' what he thinks the king might desire him to do if it does not go against his vows - protect the King and his family, obey orders, keep secrets, keep silent unless asked for counsel, offer counsel when asked and defend the King's name and honour. And 'disobey' this way while holding strictly to his vows and honour.
In fact, arguably, a KG might be required by his vows to act against the kings desires if those desires be dishonourable and not expressly commanded. After all, one of the KG duties is to defend the King's honour. 

If you think of the apocryphal "will no one rid me of this turbulent priest" statement from our own history, an honourable KG would not see this as an order to kill Thomas Becket. Its a question, not an order to kill, and doing so would be damaging, not defending, the Kings honour. In fact an honourable KG may well fight to defend Becket under the defending the Kings honour clause.
If, OTOH, Henry had command said KG to "bring me the head of Thomas Becket", the KG could not avoid killing him and still be within his vows - unless something else happened to interfere.

10 hours ago, three-eyed monkey said:

I think this is a good proposal. But if the honorable knights were struggling to keep their vows under Aerys, then I don't see how your proposal is any stronger than what I'm suggesting, that Hightower had sworn himself to Rhaegar, who he believed would ascend to the throne after the rebellion was put down.

Swearing himself to Rhaegar is implicitly, if not explicitly, being prepared to break his vows by not obeying the King's commands.

Its a much more reasonable option for Hightower to merely be following Rhaegar's wishes or orders while still being true to his vows to Aerys.

7 hours ago, Annalee said:

The Kingsguard were loyal to King Aerys.  They were not loyal to Rhaegar.   Rhaegar was just a prince.  He was not even the heir anymore.  Aerys chose Viserys to succeed him.  The Kingsguard were loyal to Aerys all the way to their bitter end.  Their deaths, not his.  They stayed loyal even after Aerys died.  The White Bull made this clear.  He would have done anything in his power to keep Aerys on the throne.  

First, there is no evidence that Rhaegar was ever disinherited. There was talk that Aerys might have intended such at one time, not that it happened. There were suggestions that Aerys do this by some of his advisors, but no evidence that it happened, especially given Rhaegar was given command by Aerys when he returned.

Quote

When Prince Rhaegar and his new wife chose to take up residence on Dragonstone instead of the Red Keep, rumors flew thick and fast across the Seven Kingdoms. Some claimed that the crown prince was planning to depose his father and seize the Iron Throne for himself, whilst others said that King Aerys meant to disinherit Rhaegar and name Viserys heir in his place. 

Quote

Had any whiff of proof come into their hands to show that Prince Rhaegar was conspiring against his father, King Aerys's loyalists would most certainly have used it to bring about the prince's downfall. Indeed, certain of the king's men had even gone so far as to suggest that Aerys should disinherit his "disloyal" son, and name his younger brother heir to the Iron Throne in his stead. 

Both of these are before Harrenhal. Rhaegar was certainly still being called Crown Prince even after Harrnehal.
Then, in response to Rhaegar dying, we see:

Quote

Birds flew and couriers raced to bear word of the victory at the Ruby Ford. 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

Second, its very doubtful the KG would have any chance of hearing that Viserys had been made heir. They are at an isolated tower in the middle of nowhere, not on the raven network. how are they learning of events happening hundreds of leagues away? 
They did learn, that much is clear from their conversation with Ned. They knew things Ned had not spoke of.
But how did they learn, who from, and when?
I submit that the most likely source of news, after the Trident and again after the Sack, would be Rebels disseminating the news westeros-wide as fast as possible. And the Rebels may not even know, far less care to tell anyone, about Viserys being the new heir.

I think it most likely that the three at the ToJ had only recently heard the news of the Trident and the Sack, and the source was rebel reports that had been received be a secret supporter (Ashara Dayne perhaps?) who knew where they were and could get a message to them.
Given that Ned rode out almost immediately from the sack (the next day after Robert arrived), and can't have taken more than a month or so to get to ToJ with his small band, its likely they have received the news not more than a week or two, maybe even less, before Ned arrives. 
I doubt that news included anything about Viserys being heir.
Even if it did, they may have been still formulated plans and responses, including planning to send one or more of their number to Viserys at Dragonstone, when Ned turned up. They likely didn't expect to be found so quickly (how did Ned know where to find them?) Given Lyanna is dying (dies shortly after Ned arrives, of a fever and consequences) and probably Jon is only a few days or weeks old (puerperal fever can take about 10-14 days to kill), they could well be planning a future split and longer term plans while waiting for her to recover enough to travel safely (or die).

Frankly I think all the options remain open, about them being loyal to Aerys, and even Viserys, if necessary. I just see the most likely one as R+L being married and the three KG believing Jon was their King based on what they knew.

 

[bent branch]

I will just state my opinion that the rumor about Aerys and Rhaegar being at odds is just that, a rumor. Since there are not "sides" between Aerys and Rhaegar, there is no need for the Kingsguard to pick a side. Barristan only confirms there were rumors about there being a rift between father and son. I also renew my standing challenge to find any quotes in the books from someone claiming Tywin "really ruled" the country from someone other than a Lannister loyalist. The rumors about a rift between Aerys and Rhaegar was used as "evidence" the Targaryens were unfit to rule. It is called political propaganda.

[Back door hodor]

Yea, I think it fits with Martin's style of subverting expectations and turning troupes on thier head.

What would be more appropriate than these three paragons of chivalry, beloved by all that remember them, to in fact be traitors and oathbreakers. Not to mention the possibility that they may have aided in the alleged kidnapping and rape of a 15 year old girl, if such a thing did indeed occur.

[Lord Varys]

Men obeying Rhaegar's command are by default Rhaegar's men, even if they were under the impression that what they were doing was not going against the king's interests.

The idea that Hightower had to be pressured, etc. into staying with Lyanna and remained an 'Aerys man' till the end seems to be not very likely, even more so in light what FaB revealed about who actually can command the KG - which historically involves pretty much anyone - Hands, regents, Masters of Whisperers, etc. If men like Marston Waters can depose the king's regent Hand to claim the Handship for himself, if they can besiege the king and the queen in their own castle and still act as if they were 'loyal men' then there is really no reason to believe that Gerold Hightower could not have been an Aerys man and a Rhaegar man at the same time.

Either Hightower preferred to obey Rhaegar rather than Aerys - which is effectively confirmed by the fact that he did not, in fact, return to court - or he saw no issue with staying there at all.

The idea that only the king can command the Kingsguard - or that Rhaegar would have needed any form of 'special authorization' to command them and/or that they had the right to reject a command by the Prince of Dragonstone if he gave them commands they did not want to obey - seems to be pretty much dead. Pretty much anyone at court can and does command the Kingsguard.

In that sense, chances are very high that Gerold Hightower simply obeyed whatever command Rhaegar gave him at the tower - why he may have done that is another matter.

[three-eyed monkey]

8 hours ago, Bernie Mac said:

What conflict? 

Both Aerys and Hightower were aware that Rhaegar was with Lyanna and there does not seem to be any command from Aerys specifically related to Lyanna.  

The conflict of serving a king and a prince who plans to replace that king. And as the honorable members of the kingsguard are struggling to keep their vows under Aerys as he descends into madness, then it is easy to see what side in the conflict Hightower might come down on.

8 hours ago, Bernie Mac said:

What do you think he found? 

Rhaegar, Dayne, Whent and Lyanna, (possibly pregnant). All we know is that Rhaegar could not be found prior to that. And while it is obvious that he was with Dayne, Whent, and Lyanna, they had not been located until Ser Gerold found them.

8 hours ago, Bernie Mac said:

They are told to obey, if Rhaegar was put in command then he's not got much option but to obey.

Unless Rhaegar's orders conflict with his duty to Aerys clearly. Otherwise we would have a ridiculous situation where the easiest way for any prince to ascend to the throne would be to order a member of the kingsguard to kill the king. (That's an extreme example and I'm not suggesting that's what happened here, but extrapolate.)

9 hours ago, Bernie Mac said:

When you refer to the 'situation' are you talking about her pregnancy?

No. I'm talking about Lyanna, regardless of whether she is a prisoner or under protection at the tower, and confirmation of her location, etc.

9 hours ago, Bernie Mac said:

He was ordered to.

Is there any evidence of this? Because if there is then it would save a lot of debate.

7 hours ago, corbon said:

Or, he doesn't choose based on his own interpretation of what the king would want (which could be flawed anyway), he chooses based on his honour in upholding his KG vows while doing the most honourable thing.

The vow isn't to 'do everything the king might desire'. Its to protect the King and his family, obey orders, keep secrets, stay silent unless asked, give counsel when asked and defend the King's name and honour.

In other words, he can 'disobey' what he thinks the king might desire him to do if it does not go against his vows - protect the King and his family, obey orders, keep secrets, keep silent unless asked for counsel, offer counsel when asked and defend the King's name and honour. And 'disobey' this way while holding strictly to his vows and honour.
In fact, arguably, a KG might be required by his vows to act against the kings desires if those desires be dishonourable and not expressly commanded. After all, one of the KG duties is to defend the King's honour. 

I agree he chose based on his honor in upholding his vows, which had grown hard under Aerys, as Barristan attests.

I think it is a given that the kingsguard vow to serve the king, and if you serve someone then it is natural that you serve their interests, and surely it would have been in Aerys interest to hold Lyanna as a hostage at King's Landing given that the Starks were in rebellion.

I don't disagree that there is more to the orders, protect the king and his family, obey orders, and keep the kings secrets. Again, Hightower is doing all of this for Rhaegar at the tower, especially keeping his secrets.

7 hours ago, corbon said:

Its a much more reasonable option for Hightower to merely be following Rhaegar's wishes or orders while still being true to his vows to Aerys.

Rhaegar intended on making changes once the rebellion was dealt with, as he openly admitted to Jaime in Jon Darry's presence. If he admitted it to Jaime then I think the three at the tower would have also known. It's not something an Aerys loyalist would approve of, I would think. Although there is room for Hightower to persuade himself that he is doing it for Aerys own good, it is unlikely he would consider it something Aerys would amicably agree too.

4 hours ago, bent branch said:

I will just state my opinion that the rumor about Aerys and Rhaegar being at odds is just that, a rumor. Since there are not "sides" between Aerys and Rhaegar, there is no need for the Kingsguard to pick a side.

Rhaegar was hardly talking to Jaime about the decor in the Red Keep when he spoke about making changes.

1 hour ago, Back door hodor said:

Yea, I think it fits with Martin's style of subverting expectations and turning troupes on thier head.

I agree with this in principle, but I would say rather than turning the trope on it's head, GRRM has slowly deconstructed the trope, starting well before we even got to the ToJ scene.

50 minutes ago, Lord Varys said:

why he may have done that is another matter.

I agree with your post, but this is the question, isn't it. Motive.

I'm simply saying Hightower could not continue to honorably serve Aerys as he went mad. As Varys told Kevan: There are many like you, good men in service to bad causes … When you have sworn knights vows in front of the gods and men, and you are serious about those vows and your honor, etc, then extracting yourself from service to a bad cause in favor of service to a good cause seems a natural motive, and in Hightower's case switching to Rhaegar, who planned on making changes via grand council, seems a natural solution.

 

[kissdbyfire]

@three-eyed monkey, I agree w/ the gist about vows and promises, and how there is a huge difference between duty and honour. Regarding Dayne, Whent, and Hightower, I think it’s very possible and even likely (IMO) that they made a choice and were truly following Rhaegar and not Aerys. This came up elsewhere a couple of days ago, and I said this,

“Which could mean that they consciously broke their vows to a deranged and dangerous king because they understood that that was what honour, not duty, demanded of them.  “

That said, what @corbon said in reply is also possible, and w/ the info we have at present it’s impossible to be sure either way. I much prefer the idea that the 3KG indeed broke their vows and did the right thing. I think it fits much better in the story. But I am aware I could very well be wrong. 

[Bael's Bastard]

Dayne was, and Whent seems likely to have been, one of the few people that Rhaegar was either close to or put some amount of trust in. But for now, I am inclined to think that Dayne and Whent did not go so far as to brazenly disobey a direct order from Aerys. I am inclined to think that they made every effort to operate within the framework of their vows to Aerys.

There were clearly issues between Aerys and Rhaegar, but as far as we know, it never got to the point where Aerys or Rhaegar took open action against each other. We might have an Aerys faction and a Rhaegar faction, but they are ultimately on the same side, and whatever plotting went on, it does not appear to have gone to the point of open rebellion or treason.

Dayne and Whent very well might have been supportive of Rhaegar's efforts to minimize or remove Aerys's power as king, and see Rhaegar installed as regent, but as of yet, I don't think they were prepared to openly break with Aerys to support Rhaegar, nor do I think Rhaegar himself was prepared to openly break with Aerys.

Now, had Aerys known for certain that these Kingsguard were collaborating with Rhaegar for such purposes, I have little doubt that he would have seen it as treason, and punished it accordingly. But, despite his suspicions of Rhaegar and anyone who was close or seemed close to him, he apparently never felt it confirmed to the extent that he could do this.

While I think Dayne and Whent operated with Rhaegar on whatever he was doing, and while I think they probably justified that they were operating within the framework of their vows in an unprecedented situation, where the very king they were sworn to was the greatest danger to himself and the entire Targaryen regime, I don't think Hightower would accepted such a liberal interpretation.

I am definitely one of those that, until we receive further information, leans towards Hightower having to be persuaded by Rhaegar to remain at the tower against his will.

Ultimately, I think the KG simply obeyed whatever command Rhaegar gave them. Dayne and Whent had been with Rhaegar for what, over a year? So they might not have had any existing order from Aerys that they would have had to break to obey Rhaegar's command. And Hightower's order might have simply been to return Rhaegar to King's Landing.

Rhaegar could have demanded that Hightower remain in return for Rhaegar's return to KL, and taken it upon himself to smooth over any issue Aerys might have had with Hightower or the other KG remaining away once he returned to King's Landing.

[Lord Varys]

5 hours ago, three-eyed monkey said:

I agree with your post, but this is the question, isn't it. Motive.

I'm simply saying Hightower could not continue to honorably serve Aerys as he went mad. As Varys told Kevan: There are many like you, good men in service to bad causes … When you have sworn knights vows in front of the gods and men, and you are serious about those vows and your honor, etc, then extracting yourself from service to a bad cause in favor of service to a good cause seems a natural motive, and in Hightower's case switching to Rhaegar, who planned on making changes via grand council, seems a natural solution.

This is why most of the discussion about this question is entirely moot. We do not really know Ser Gerold Hightower at this point. We don't know him to a degree that we can pretend we know what he was about, or how loyal he was to Aerys or Rhaegar or even his vows as a Kingsguard.

We know the man (mainly) through the memories of a fifteen-year-old unstable teen who may have very well given the impression that the madness of said king was pushing him on a Kingslayer path (or at least on a desertion path) - and both Hightower and Darry and the other KG nudged him into a certain direction to ensure he would not go down that path. Nothing these people did implies they relished in or approved of what Aerys did.

I've been putting forth the idea for some time that Ser Gerold may have been less inclined to support Aerys instead of Rhaegar at the time he arrived at the tower than he may have been when he first tried to ingrain the principles of the Kingsguard in Jaime's mind - assuming he was that much a fan of Aerys even back then.

Aerys' madness was a slippery slope. One imagines that the really bad era only started with the burning of the Starks and the king's paranoia running rampant during the war. The aftermath of Duskendale was bad, but Castamere was much worse by comparison, and it was actually triggered by a real attack on the king.

I don't think Hightower was on board with the covert Great Council idea, though. The fact that Selmy, too, was not involved in that implies that Rhaegar did not actually trust his father's Kingsguard with this. And I really don't think that Selmy is less of a good man in service to a bad cause than Gerold Hightower.

But in the end - the entire invented narrative that Hightower and the others need good reasons to stay with Lyanna on Rhaegar's command, to remain with her after Rhaegar/Aerys' death, to not try to go to Viserys III, etc. is just that - and invented narrative. There is no reason to make things this complicated if basically everybody and their grandmother can command the KG, and even KG like Marston Waters - who besieged his own king and queen in his own castle! - can see themselves as 'loyal'.

If that flies, then basically everything flies. That still means that Ser Gerold needs a motive to follow Rhaegar's command/wishes, of course, but any well-written needs/has a (good) motive - we are under no obligation, however, to fantasize or insist that such a motive has to be tied closely to Kingsguard vows and duties. Could very well be - or not.

The strange idea of Hightower being blackmailed or tricked by Rhaegar into staying with Lyanna doesn't really fly with me. Hightower wouldn't have stayed with Lyanna if he had thought he should not - or even if he thought this was a ridiculous/completely stupid idea he as Lord Commander of the Kingsguard simply should not do. It is very interesting to learn why he did what he did, but at this point we cannot pretend we can make good guesses at his motivation.

However, in the end the idea is very strange that a Lord Commander of the Kingsguard being an 'Aerys man' would actually stay with Lyanna and abandon his king to the mercy of an heir who intended/intends to depose him. If Hightower were an Aerys man in the end there has to be *a very good explanation* for why he did what he did. And I don't a good and easy such explanation. The only reasonable explanation in such a scenario I could see was to assume Aerys commanded Hightower to stay with Lyanna. No idea why he would do such a thing.

In that sense, chances are very high indeed that we would have to count him among the 'Rhaegar men' in the end, although not necessarily his most devoted follower.

[Makk]

On 1/13/2019 at 5:05 PM, three-eyed monkey said:

"We swore a vow," explained old Ser Gerold.

Ned's wraiths moved up beside him, with shadow swords in hand. They were seven against three.

This is often cited in support of Jon being the true heir to the Iron Throne, and by implication legitimate by way of polygamous marriage. I think that is a well-made and perfectly valid argument, (feel free to visit the latest RLJ thread if you disagree), but I don’t think it is the only argument, given the overall theme surrounding vows.

For myself I think it is the only argument, although I have no doubt that Dayne and Whent at least were more loyal to Rhaegar, that isn't really the point. At this stage the Targaryen legacy is in ruins and their rule at and end. They knew Rhaegar is dead and they would have known Lyana was likely dying. The best thing for Jon would be exactly what happened. The one man in the entire seven kingdoms who can and would protect Jon and give him the best possible life shows up and the Kingsguard are prepared to fight and kill him? Almost certainly against Lyana's wishes. Imo they fully intended to crown Jon and try to make him King. Ned didn't understand this as they fought, it completely confused him. As soon as he saw Jon he would have understood.

[corbon]

8 hours ago, three-eyed monkey said:

I think it is a given that the kingsguard vow to serve the king, and if you serve someone then it is natural that you serve their interests, and surely it would have been in Aerys interest to hold Lyanna as a hostage at King's Landing given that the Starks were in rebellion.

I don't agree, let alone think its a given.
When someone goes the way Aerys clearly had, serving them best can very well be against their own desires, since they are no longer capable of consistently judging their own best interests. For a man like Hightower is made out to be, you still have to follow the rules and vows you made. But you don't have to go further than those.

8 hours ago, three-eyed monkey said:

I don't disagree that there is more to the orders, protect the king and his family, obey orders, and keep the kings secrets. Again, Hightower is doing all of this for Rhaegar at the tower, especially keeping his secrets.

And he's doing all of those for Aerys too. And not breaking any of them.

8 hours ago, three-eyed monkey said:

Rhaegar intended on making changes once the rebellion was dealt with, as he openly admitted to Jaime in Jon Darry's presence. If he admitted it to Jaime then I think the three at the tower would have also known. It's not something an Aerys loyalist would approve of, I would think. Although there is room for Hightower to persuade himself that he is doing it for Aerys own good, it is unlikely he would consider it something Aerys would amicably agree too.

But first, Rhaegar was submitting to Aerys and wining the war, reunifying the country. Then he appeared to be looking for a way to save Aerys from himself, not cast him down. The Mad King was clearly harming his own interests frequently. Rhaegar wasn't plotting a revolution or usurpation, he was looking for a safe transfer of power to protect the King from himself as well as the kingdom. Dutiful above all, remember.

And as I said above, just because its not something Aerys would amicably agree with, does not make it something that Hightower couldn't support within his vows.

13 hours ago, bent branch said:

I will just state my opinion that the rumor about Aerys and Rhaegar being at odds is just that, a rumor. Since there are not "sides" between Aerys and Rhaegar, there is no need for the Kingsguard to pick a side. Barristan only confirms there were rumors about there being a rift between father and son. I also renew my standing challenge to find any quotes in the books from someone claiming Tywin "really ruled" the country from someone other than a Lannister loyalist. The rumors about a rift between Aerys and Rhaegar was used as "evidence" the Targaryens were unfit to rule. It is called political propaganda.

I think this very much needs to be brought into people's consciousness here.
Although there were supposedly 'factions' at court, they seem to be more about the courtiers than the Targaryens themselves. Aerys' 'side' is Rhaegar's 'side', even if they don't appear to be entirely in agreement about some things.

8 hours ago, three-eyed monkey said:

I'm simply saying Hightower could not continue to honorably serve Aerys as he went mad. As Varys told Kevan: There are many like you, good men in service to bad causes … When you have sworn knights vows in front of the gods and men, and you are serious about those vows and your honor, etc, then extracting yourself from service to a bad cause in favor of service to a good cause seems a natural motive, and in Hightower's case switching to Rhaegar, who planned on making changes via grand council, seems a natural solution.

Perhaps not always. But he can do the best he can. It may well be that not returning to KL is his way of navigating that very difficult, potentially impossible, path between his personal honour and his KG vows. Not being around Aerys while legitimately following his orders and vows removes him from being around when Aerys creates impossible situations such as the murder of Rickard Stark.

5 hours ago, Bael's Bastard said:

Dayne was, and Whent seems likely to have been, one of the few people that Rhaegar was either close to or put some amount of trust in. But for now, I am inclined to think that Dayne and Whent did not go so far as to brazenly disobey a direct order from Aerys. I am inclined to think that they made every effort to operate within the framework of their vows to Aerys.

I agree.
It seems very clear from their responses to Ned that they still served Aerys, and thus the vow they swore, which they were clearly upholding to the death, was their KG vows. I can't see any other interpretation (at least so far) being legit when they claim Aerys would "yet sit the throne" had they been around during the Sack.

5 hours ago, Bael's Bastard said:

There were clearly issues between Aerys and Rhaegar, but as far as we know, it never got to the point where Aerys or Rhaegar took open action against each other. We might have an Aerys faction and a Rhaegar faction, but they are ultimately on the same side, and whatever plotting went on, it does not appear to have gone to the point of open rebellion or treason.

Dayne and Whent very well might have been supportive of Rhaegar's efforts to minimize or remove Aerys's power as king, and see Rhaegar installed as regent, but as of yet, I don't think they were prepared to openly break with Aerys to support Rhaegar, nor do I think Rhaegar himself was prepared to openly break with Aerys.

Now, had Aerys known for certain that these Kingsguard were collaborating with Rhaegar for such purposes, I have little doubt that he would have seen it as treason, and punished it accordingly. But, despite his suspicions of Rhaegar and anyone who was close or seemed close to him, he apparently never felt it confirmed to the extent that he could do this.

Agreed with all of these.

5 hours ago, Bael's Bastard said:

While I think Dayne and Whent operated with Rhaegar on whatever he was doing, and while I think they probably justified that they were operating within the framework of their vows in an unprecedented situation, where the very king they were sworn to was the greatest danger to himself and the entire Targaryen regime, I don't think Hightower would accepted such a liberal interpretation.

I am definitely one of those that, until we receive further information, leans towards Hightower having to be persuaded by Rhaegar to remain at the tower against his will.

Probably yes, though I could see him deciding that he'd had enough and staying away from Aerys as much as possible while strictly honouring his vows was the only path forward he could live with.

5 hours ago, Bael's Bastard said:

Ultimately, I think the KG simply obeyed whatever command Rhaegar gave them. Dayne and Whent had been with Rhaegar for what, over a year? So they might not have had any existing order from Aerys that they would have had to break to obey Rhaegar's command. And Hightower's order might have simply been to return Rhaegar to King's Landing.

Rhaegar could have demanded that Hightower remain in return for Rhaegar's return to KL, and taken it upon himself to smooth over any issue Aerys might have had with Hightower or the other KG remaining away once he returned to King's Landing.

Its even possible that Hightower (or one of the other two) returned or partially returned with Rhaegar, but avoided Aerys long enough until Rhaegar was given command and assigned him back to ToJ. I think this is unlikely though - there are many other places Rhaegar could have assigned him  then and too high a risk Aerys would have demanded to see Hightower.

[three-eyed monkey]

1 hour ago, Lord Varys said:

This is why most of the discussion about this question is entirely moot. We do not really know Ser Gerold Hightower at this point. We don't know him to a degree that we can pretend we know what he was about, or how loyal he was to Aerys or Rhaegar or even his vows as a Kingsguard.

We know the man (mainly) through the memories of a fifteen-year-old unstable teen who may have very well given the impression that the madness of said king was pushing him on a Kingslayer path (or at least on a desertion path) - and both Hightower and Darry and the other KG nudged him into a certain direction to ensure he would not go down that path. Nothing these people did implies they relished in or approved of what Aerys did.

I've been putting forth the idea for some time that Ser Gerold may have been less inclined to support Aerys instead of Rhaegar at the time he arrived at the tower than he may have been when he first tried to ingrain the principles of the Kingsguard in Jaime's mind - assuming he was that much a fan of Aerys even back then.

Aerys' madness was a slippery slope. One imagines that the really bad era only started with the burning of the Starks and the king's paranoia running rampant during the war. The aftermath of Duskendale was bad, but Castamere was much worse by comparison, and it was actually triggered by a real attack on the king.

I don't think Hightower was on board with the covert Great Council idea, though. The fact that Selmy, too, was not involved in that implies that Rhaegar did not actually trust his father's Kingsguard with this. And I really don't think that Selmy is less of a good man in service to a bad cause than Gerold Hightower.

But in the end - the entire invented narrative that Hightower and the others need good reasons to stay with Lyanna on Rhaegar's command, to remain with her after Rhaegar/Aerys' death, to not try to go to Viserys III, etc. is just that - and invented narrative. There is no reason to make things this complicated if basically everybody and their grandmother can command the KG, and even KG like Marston Waters - who besieged his own king and queen in his own castle! - can see themselves as 'loyal'.

If that flies, then basically everything flies. That still means that Ser Gerold needs a motive to follow Rhaegar's command/wishes, of course, but any well-written needs/has a (good) motive - we are under no obligation, however, to fantasize or insist that such a motive has to be tied closely to Kingsguard vows and duties. Could very well be - or not.

The strange idea of Hightower being blackmailed or tricked by Rhaegar into staying with Lyanna doesn't really fly with me. Hightower wouldn't have stayed with Lyanna if he had thought he should not - or even if he thought this was a ridiculous/completely stupid idea he as Lord Commander of the Kingsguard simply should not do. It is very interesting to learn why he did what he did, but at this point we cannot pretend we can make good guesses at his motivation.

However, in the end the idea is very strange that a Lord Commander of the Kingsguard being an 'Aerys man' would actually stay with Lyanna and abandon his king to the mercy of an heir who intended/intends to depose him. If Hightower were an Aerys man in the end there has to be *a very good explanation* for why he did what he did. And I don't a good and easy such explanation. The only reasonable explanation in such a scenario I could see was to assume Aerys commanded Hightower to stay with Lyanna. No idea why he would do such a thing.

In that sense, chances are very high indeed that we would have to count him among the 'Rhaegar men' in the end, although not necessarily his most devoted follower.

I agree we don't have much information on Hightower, but the point of the OP is to demonstrate his motive can be pieced together using a parallel character, given that parallel set-up is part of the narrative style of the series.

If the honorable old Ser Barristan felt that keeping his vows was hard in Aerys' later years then how should we think the honorable old Ser Gerold would feel about it? If Barristan thinks Rhaegar would have been a better king, then why not Ser Gerold? It's interesting that Barristan connects these points in his reflections, because the obvious conclusion here is that keeping your knightly vows would be a lot easier under Rhaegar.

For me at least, that's enough to suggest Hightower did favor Rhaegar, and the bonus is it makes sense of why Hightower stayed at the tower without any need for the assumption of orders or persuasion.

1 hour ago, Makk said:

For myself I think it is the only argument, although I have no doubt that Dayne and Whent at least were more loyal to Rhaegar, that isn't really the point. At this stage the Targaryen legacy is in ruins and their rule at and end. They knew Rhaegar is dead and they would have known Lyana was likely dying. The best thing for Jon would be exactly what happened. The one man in the entire seven kingdoms who can and would protect Jon and give him the best possible life shows up and the Kingsguard are prepared to fight and kill him? Almost certainly against Lyana's wishes. Imo they fully intended to crown Jon and try to make him King. Ned didn't understand this as they fought, it completely confused him. As soon as he saw Jon he would have understood.

I agree that they fully intended to crown Jon, and that is why they fought Ned and company. But I would question whether that is because they thought Jon was the lawful heir, which would require a legitimate marriage, or was it for other reasons?

Such as, he was Rhaegar's son as opposed to Viserys, who even at a young age oft seemed like he was his father's son in ways Rhaegar never did?

Or was because of Rhaegar's belief that Jon was a child of prophecy, given the rich war of the dawn symbolism and direct metaphorical connection to the Others in Ned's dream, which hint at the ToJ being more relevant to the song of ice and fire than the game of thrones?

Like I said, I don't think it's the only argument.

 

 

 

[corbon]

10 hours ago, Lord Varys said:

Men obeying Rhaegar's command are by default Rhaegar's men, even if they were under the impression that what they were doing was not going against the king's interests.

The way you state this seems to be saying that they are Rhaegar's men  over being Aerys' men. And so does the rest of the post. But thats both a functionally irrational statement (taking orders from a Lt does not mean you would obey the Lt over a Cpt) and contrary to the text (they claim Aerys would still sit the Iron throne if they had been present), so I don't understand what you are saying here.

10 hours ago, Lord Varys said:

The idea that only the king can command the Kingsguard - or that Rhaegar would have needed any form of 'special authorization' to command them and/or that they had the right to reject a command by the Prince of Dragonstone if he gave them commands they did not want to obey - seems to be pretty much dead. Pretty much anyone at court can and does command the Kingsguard.

In that sense, chances are very high that Gerold Hightower simply obeyed whatever command Rhaegar gave him at the tower - why he may have done that is another matter.

These parts I agree with completely.

13 minutes ago, three-eyed monkey said:

I agree we don't have much information on Hightower, but the point of the OP is to demonstrate his motive can be pieced together using a parallel character, given that parallel set-up is part of the narrative style of the series.

If the honorable old Ser Barristan felt that keeping his vows was hard in Aerys' later years then how should we think the honorable old Ser Gerold would feel about it? If Barristan thinks Rhaegar would have been a better king, then why not Ser Gerold? It's interesting that Barristan connects these points in his reflections, because the obvious conclusion here is that keeping your knightly vows would be a lot easier under Rhaegar.

For me at least, that's enough to suggest Hightower did favor Rhaegar, and the bonus is it makes sense of why Hightower stayed at the tower without any need for the assumption of orders or persuasion.

The problem is, Hightower himself declares that Aerys would still sit the Iron Throne had the three been present at the Red Keep.
Any theory that does not fit this data point is untenable IMO.

Quote

"When King's Landing fell, Ser Jaime slew your king with a golden sword, and I wondered where you were."

"Far away," Ser Gerold said, "or Aerys would yet sit the Iron Throne, and our false brother would burn in seven hells."

 

[three-eyed monkey]

14 minutes ago, corbon said:

The problem is, Hightower himself declares that Aerys would still sit the Iron Throne had the three been present at the Red Keep.
Any theory that does not fit this data point is untenable IMO.

Aerys would still sit on the Iron Throne because Rhaegar was dead and with him their ready-made replacement. Who could they crown instead at that stage? Their knees do not bend easily, so it would have to be someone worthy. I'm not saying they wanted to replace Aerys with just anyone, they specifically wanted to replace Aerys with Rhaegar.

So I don't see the problem with that data point tbh.

[corbon]

5 minutes ago, three-eyed monkey said:

Aerys would still sit on the Iron Throne because Rhaegar was dead and with him their ready-made replacement. Who could they crown instead at that stage? Their knees do not bend easily, so it would have to be someone worthy. I'm not saying they wanted to replace Aerys with just anyone, they specifically wanted to replace Aerys with Rhaegar.

So I don't see the problem with that data point tbh.

Right, sorry, I do recall seeing that argument before.

I don;t think much of it though. If Aerys is bad enough that they can break their oaths to depose him, then he's bad enough they can break their oaths to depose him, whether the replacement be Rhaegar or any other. Hightower nowhere displays any 'Rhaegarism'.

But we can agree to disagree.

[kissdbyfire]

11 minutes ago, corbon said:

The way you state this seems to be saying that they are Rhaegar's men  over being Aerys' men. And so does the rest of the post.

With what we know at present we have to at least consider the possibility of that happening. At some point, and for whatever reason (but most likely imo, a combo of reasons), Dayne. Whent and Hightower break their KG vows and unequivocally side w/ Rhaegar. But...

<snip>

11 minutes ago, corbon said:

and contrary to the text (they claim Aerys would still sit the Iron throne if they had been present), so I don't understand what you are saying here.

This may have been part of the “deal”. We do have Rhaegar telling Jaime he was planning on making changes, and that he regretted not having acted sooner. There’s a whole lot that was triggered at some point. IMO this point is Rickard and Brandon’s “execution”. Aerys had to go, and stay go. I think that, with what we have, we must at least allow for the possibility that Rhaegar came clean about his ideas to those he hadn’t before, like Hightower (b/c I think it very likely that Dayne and Went were already acting as they’re sworn to Rhaegar imo). And Hightower goes w/ it; against his vows, but for the greater good. Only the idea is to remove Aerys as “diplomatically”as possible and keep the Targ dynasty in power. So Rhaegar has them staying at the ToJ, and goes back to KL to lead the loyalist army. The rest is history...  

And to be clear, I’m not saying this is what happened, only that it could have happened. 

11 minutes ago, corbon said:

These parts I agree with completely.

The problem is, Hightower himself declares that Aerys would still sit the Iron Throne had the three been present at the Red Keep.

Yes, and Jaime was the wild card. 

Also, @Lord Varys, I have seen you argue differently before regarding the KG duty to follow orders from anyone but the king. 

Yes, usually they do protect and obey royals in general, especially the king’s immediate family. But we know that that is at the kings’ orders.  

 

[Jô Maltese]

4 hours ago, Lord Varys said:

This is why most of the discussion about this question is entirely moot. We do not really know Ser Gerold Hightower at this point. We don't know him to a degree that we can pretend we know what he was about, or how loyal he was to Aerys or Rhaegar or even his vows as a Kingsguard.

We know the man (mainly) through the memories of a fifteen-year-old unstable teen who may have very well given the impression that the madness of said king was pushing him on a Kingslayer path (or at least on a desertion path) - and both Hightower and Darry and the other KG nudged him into a certain direction to ensure he would not go down that path. Nothing these people did implies they relished in or approved of what Aerys did.

I've been putting forth the idea for some time that Ser Gerold may have been less inclined to support Aerys instead of Rhaegar at the time he arrived at the tower than he may have been when he first tried to ingrain the principles of the Kingsguard in Jaime's mind - assuming he was that much a fan of Aerys even back then.

Aerys' madness was a slippery slope. One imagines that the really bad era only started with the burning of the Starks and the king's paranoia running rampant during the war. The aftermath of Duskendale was bad, but Castamere was much worse by comparison, and it was actually triggered by a real attack on the king.

I don't think Hightower was on board with the covert Great Council idea, though. The fact that Selmy, too, was not involved in that implies that Rhaegar did not actually trust his father's Kingsguard with this. And I really don't think that Selmy is less of a good man in service to a bad cause than Gerold Hightower.

But in the end - the entire invented narrative that Hightower and the others need good reasons to stay with Lyanna on Rhaegar's command, to remain with her after Rhaegar/Aerys' death, to not try to go to Viserys III, etc. is just that - and invented narrative. There is no reason to make things this complicated if basically everybody and their grandmother can command the KG, and even KG like Marston Waters - who besieged his own king and queen in his own castle! - can see themselves as 'loyal'.

If that flies, then basically everything flies. That still means that Ser Gerold needs a motive to follow Rhaegar's command/wishes, of course, but any well-written needs/has a (good) motive - we are under no obligation, however, to fantasize or insist that such a motive has to be tied closely to Kingsguard vows and duties. Could very well be - or not.

The strange idea of Hightower being blackmailed or tricked by Rhaegar into staying with Lyanna doesn't really fly with me. Hightower wouldn't have stayed with Lyanna if he had thought he should not - or even if he thought this was a ridiculous/completely stupid idea he as Lord Commander of the Kingsguard simply should not do. It is very interesting to learn why he did what he did, but at this point we cannot pretend we can make good guesses at his motivation.

However, in the end the idea is very strange that a Lord Commander of the Kingsguard being an 'Aerys man' would actually stay with Lyanna and abandon his king to the mercy of an heir who intended/intends to depose him. If Hightower were an Aerys man in the end there has to be *a very good explanation* for why he did what he did. And I don't a good and easy such explanation. The only reasonable explanation in such a scenario I could see was to assume Aerys commanded Hightower to stay with Lyanna. No idea why he would do such a thing.

In that sense, chances are very high indeed that we would have to count him among the 'Rhaegar men' in the end, although not necessarily his most devoted follower.

  fully with you M'Lord (it's not that often !). These are the ideas I was trying to explicit a few posts above.

[Bastard of Bournemouth]

@everyone. Fascinating thread. I'm with @Bernie Mac. There doesn't have to be a contradiction. Aerys could have instructed any number of Kings guard to accompany, or subsequently summon Rhaegar, and worded it in a way that allowed them a degree of leeway. 

Investing Rhaegar with command of the Targaryen forces  isn't the same as favouring him for monarch over Viserys. Aerys could easily have said to Hightower:

"Go find Rhaegar and ensure he reaches the Trident. Until the war is won he is your commander in all things."

Hightower relays the message, Rhaegar leaves and instructs Hightower to stay. Hightower would be obeying a wartime command from his commander. He might not agree with it, but there's no treason per se.

That's not to say there was no schism between Aerys and Rhaegar, or that there weren't divisions at court, but Aerys did (ostensibly at least!) kill Brandon for his threats against Rhaegar, so there is a textual basis for Targaryen solidarity of some kind. 

[corbon]

1 hour ago, kissdbyfire said:

I think that, with what we have, we must at least allow for the possibility that Rhaegar came clean about his ideas to those he hadn’t before, like Hightower (b/c I think it very likely that Dayne and Went were already acting as they’re sworn to Rhaegar imo). And Hightower goes w/ it; against his vows, but for the greater good. Only the idea is to remove Aerys as “diplomatically”as possible and keep the Targ dynasty in power. So Rhaegar has them staying at the ToJ, and goes back to KL to lead the loyalist army. The rest is history...  

I just can't square breaking their KG vows with 'we swore a vow' combined with declaring Aerys would still sit the  throne if they'd been around.
If they (he) just broke their vows to Aerys to swear another to Rhaegar, then they are oathbreakers, and too honest to not admit it to themselves. There is no way they could so proudly and defiantly state swearing a vow as a reason to defy Ned even after the war is clearly lost if they know themselves in their hearts to be oathbreakers, even if the oathbreaking was moral and necessary.

[corbon]

11 minutes ago, Bastard of Bournemouth said:

@everyone. Fascinating thread. I'm with @Bernie Mac. There doesn't have to be a contradiction. Aerys could have instructed any number of Kings guard to accompany, or subsequently summon Rhaegar, and worded it in a way that allowed them a degree of leeway. 

Investing Rhaegar with command of the Targaryen forces  isn't the same as favouring him for monarch over Viserys. Aerys could easily have said to Hightower:

"Go find Rhaegar and ensure he reaches the Trident. Until the war is won he is your commander in all things."

Hightower relays the message, Rhaegar leaves and instructs Hightower to stay. Hightower would be obeying a wartime command from his commander. He might not agree with it, but there's no treason per se.

That's not to say there was no schism between Aerys and Rhaegar, or that there weren't divisions at court, but Aerys did (ostensibly at least!) kill Brandon for his threats against Rhaegar, so there is a textual basis for Targaryen solidarity of some kind. 

Agreed.
Its not that they must have kept their vows to Aerys while doing as Rhaegar commands, its that its entirely possible that they did so without breaking their vows, and their own statements and attitudes are not those of oathbreakers.

I don't understand why people fight so hard against them having held true when it easily fits so well with everything. And them forswearing themselves does not.

I can see how Ned, Jaime and Barristan might be unaware of the true situations, and so hold them up to (as) a standard they might have possibly failed. Even though it goes against characterisation.
But they clearly don't hold themselves as forsworn.