Killing an old R+L=J/Kingsguard theory off for good: Fire & Blood

[Lord Varys]

55 minutes ago, Ferocious Veldt Roarer said:

And that would also explain why that assignment filled them with such pride?

Because they were doing their duty to Rhaegar and/or Aerys II until the very end, even after both of them were dead. That is true loyalty, both on a personal level as well as to the Kingsguard ideal and vows.

There is no reason to assume that this is anything more than that.

I mean, read Rickard Thorne's great exit in FaB. He died protecting Prince Maelor. Was the little boy a king? No. But were his deeds less heroic due to the fact that he died protecting a prince rather than the king who he had abandoned? No.

[John Suburbs]

14 hours ago, lomiller said:

There is not theory that "one of the Kingsguard must be with him at all times. "  At present, the only plausible explanation for presence of Kingsguard at the Tower of Joy at that time, with all that had happened and was happening is that they believed Jon to be the rightful King.  The quote from Fire and Blood in the OP does nothing but support the notion that in the absence of other concerns or orders the Kingsguard go to where the King is, and at least some of the Kingsguard seem to have believed that place was the Tower of Joy.

Or, they were ordered to be there by Aerys, their king, whom they are sworn to obey.

[lomiller]

7 hours ago, Daemon The Black Dragon said:

Another plausible explanation for the KG being at the ToJ, they were following orders. KG+Jon doesn't equal that they thought Jon was their rightful King. 

This isn't plausible IMO.  The Kingsgaurd are not automatons mindlessly following their last instructions.  On finding out that the king is dead his final orders to them are meaningless.  Under these circumstances they would probably go to whoever they believe to be the rightful new king. 

[Lord Varys]

14 minutes ago, lomiller said:

This isn't plausible IMO.  The Kingsgaurd are not automatons mindlessly following their last instructions.  On finding out that the king is dead his final orders to them are meaningless.  Under these circumstances they would probably go to whoever they believe to be the rightful new king. 

They would be mindless automatons if they were doing what you suggest. The thing actual human beings would be doing who were given a mission that just kept them out of the entire war which actually killed their king and prince is to continue that mission if there was good reason to do that. And there was. Lyanna and her child were in the middle of nowhere, alone and without protectors but these three guys. And they were or may have been part of the royal family.

Willis Fell did not just bring Jaehaera to Storm's End and then went out to search for his king - nor did he return to his king at all. He was still at Storm's End when Aegon II was dead.

Arys Oakheart doesn't stop his assignment in Sunspear when Joffrey dies, nor does he double-check with Tommen about his mission.

[lomiller]

24 minutes ago, Lord Varys said:

They would be mindless automatons if they were doing what you suggest.

Using their judgment as to how best serve the new king (whoever they think that is) is the diametric opposite of being an automaton. 

24 minutes ago, Lord Varys said:

Arys Oakheart doesn't stop his assignment in Sunspear when Joffrey dies, nor does he double-check with Tommen about his mission.

Apples to oranges.  This doesn't occur at the end of a bloody civil war where the entire power is in flux.  I'm sure there are many similar cases where a king died, there is no reason to expect any disruption in the succession and the Kingsguard in question is doing something deemed vital to whoever the new king is. 

This could not be more different than the Tower of Joy where you would have us believe nearly half the Kingsguard decided to stay in the middle of nowhere while the new king was a child in immanent danger.  Their purpose for being in the middle of nowhere is apparently to prevent a man from seeing his sister and a child who according to you is unimportant.  It makes no sense that they would behave that way let along fight to the death.

 

[Lord Varys]

8 minutes ago, lomiller said:

Using their judgment as to how best serve the new king (whoever they think that is) is the diametric opposite of being an automaton. 

No. The automaton setting is to assume that they automatically think Viserys III or the infant is king now, because Aerys II and the other possible male Targaryen claimants are dead. Kings are not born in this world, they are made. They don't just *become* kings because a predecessor dies.

In fact, with Robert winning the war Viserys III is just a pretender, not really 'the king'.

And the ridiculous idea that those three guys in the middle of nowhere were actually intending to make another Targaryen king in opposition to both Robert Baratheon - the actual new king - and Viserys III - the Targaryen pretender king - is just that - ridiculous.

That would not only treason against Viserys III - the anointed and chosen heir of Aerys II -, having the potential of splitting the front of the remaining Targaryen loyalists in two - Robert Baratheon vs. Viserys III vs. 'the infant king' - it would also be diametrically against the interest of both the mother of the infant and the infant himself.

As Tyrion understands in ADwD - to crown [him] is to kill [him]. If those men had tried to make an infant king they would have ensured that he would get a price on his head - which he wouldn't have gotten had they just kept his very existence a secret - as Ned later did.

Do you actually think those guys wanted to seat an infant on the throne against both Robert Baratheon and the rightful Targaryen heir, Viserys III?

8 minutes ago, lomiller said:

Apples to oranges.  This doesn't occur at the end of a bloody civil war where the entire power is in flux.  I'm sure there are many similar cases where a king died, there is no reason to expect any disruption in the succession and the Kingsguard in question is doing something deemed vital to whoever the new king is.

What usually happens is that the KG go to the new king who won the war, not to the guy who lost it (which wouldn't be Viserys III but actually Robert).

Such assignments continue even if there is a new king, because it is the old king who gave you an order, not the new king. And until such a time as you, as a Kingsguard, have personally acknowledged a new king you are under the old orders. Especially if that's what you want to do. And the three guys at the tower *wanted* to be with Lyanna. Else they would have been with Aerys II, Rhaegar, Viserys III or wherever else they could have been.

8 minutes ago, lomiller said:

This could not be more different than the Tower of Joy where you would have us believe nearly half the Kingsguard decided to stay in the middle of nowhere while the new king was a child in immanent danger.  Their purpose for being in the middle of nowhere is apparently to prevent a man from seeing his sister and a child who according to you is unimportant.  It makes no sense that they would behave that way let along fight to the death.

King Viserys III was not in imminent danger. He was safe with his mother and the garrison of Dragonstone, protected by valiant men and the entire Targaryen fleet.

Those men were at the tower while Robert the Usurper actually stole the Iron Throne. They sat out the war there the entire time. It is completely silly that they would do something for Viserys III they obviously didn't do either for Aerys II or Rhaegar.

And that is actually why the issue raised by @The Twinslayer is of considerable importance:

The argument, that the guys stayed at the tower because Aerys II in KL had 'Kingsguard protection' in the form of Jaime Lannister until the end - because there must be a KG with the king at all times - is officially dead now. This means that the guys with Lyanna were with Lyanna because they were asked/ordered/persuaded/convinced/etc. to do this, and it mattered not at all whether there were KG with any of the other members of royal family, including the king himself. They were under no obligation to look for the king once they learned he was without KG protection.

And that means that all one can draw from their presence at the tower is that them being there was something Rhaegar and/or Aerys II likely thought was a good idea, something that they should do. It means nothing more than that.

One can deduce from this that the child there had royal blood and was somehow important to Rhaegar and/or Aerys II, but we cannot deduce anything about its legal status. Technically, we cannot even deduce from that whether Lyanna and Rhaegar were married, because George explicitly introduced that KG have also protected royal bastards and mistresses.

If Rhaegar and Lyanna were married, and if such a marriage is universally accepted as a valid and proper marriage in the Seven Kingdoms, then - assuming Prince Aegon is dead - Lyanna's child would actually have been Viserys III's presumptive heir by the time of its birth. Such a person is, of course, pretty important. And it is easy to see why the guys at the tower thought it more wise to keep it protected and hidden rather than actually taking it to Dragonstone or risk its discovery by Robert and his people by actually sending one of their number on a quest to Dragonstone.

In fact, they may have even decided that it is wiser to keep the existence of such a child hidden from Queen Rhaella and Viserys III to prevent the Usurper from learning from them should he ever capture them.

Such tactics are hardly new. Aegon II was also not told where his children were going, nor were their protectors told where the king was going. Queen Rhaena did not know where she was sending her own children so that she would not be able to reveal their location, Bran and Rickon do not know where the other goes, etc.

As for the fight to death:

Don't you think the correct thing is to keep a promise you made? If Rhaegar asked them to protect the woman and/or their child with their very life then that's what they should have done. There is no mystery there.

And one really has to ask oneself whether they actually wanted to win the fight they fought or whether they just wanted to die a glorious death. After all, they did all die, did they not? And their cause and their king was dead, too. Viserys III was a small boy who didn't stand a chance against Robert, and the infant child even less - especially since it apparently didn't resemble Rhaegar, and could thus not even be raised in secret to come forth as a Targaryen pretender in the future.

[Daemon The Black Dragon]

2 hours ago, lomiller said:

This isn't plausible IMO.  The Kingsgaurd are not automatons mindlessly following their last instructions.  On finding out that the king is dead his final orders to them are meaningless.  Under these circumstances they would probably go to whoever they believe to be the rightful new king. 

So there's no other reason for the KG to be at the ToJ, other then the baby must be their choosen King? Following orders, swearing a vow to  Rhaegar to protect Lyanna and the baby, no matter what? Did Willis Fell believed Jaehaera Targaryen was the rightful ruler of Westeros because he didn't go to Aegon lll after the death of Aegon ll or did he stay because he was following orders to keep Jaehaera safe at SE? KG plus baby doesn't automatically make said baby their King, there are other options for them being/staying at the ToJ, that's may only point.

[Lord Varys]

26 minutes ago, Daemon The Black Dragon said:

So there's no other reason for the KG to be at the ToJ, other then the baby must be their choosen King? Following orders, swearing a vow to  Rhaegar to protect Lyanna and the baby, no matter what? Did Willis Fell believed Jaehaera Targaryen was the rightful ruler of Westeros because he didn't go to Aegon lll after the death of Aegon ll or did he stay because he was following orders to keep Jaehaera safe at SE? KG plus baby doesn't automatically make said baby their King, there are other options for them being/staying at the ToJ, that's may only point.

And that's basically the only point you need to dismiss the idea that this other interpretation must be correct.

Even more so, since it is rather unnecessary additional hypothesis to assume the death of Aerys II, and Viserys III coronation, etc. affected the decision-making process of the guys at the tower. We do know for a fact that they were with Lyanna long before Rhaegar and Aerys II died. And we have a pretty good idea why they stayed with her.

Insisting they would have to have *a special reason* to stay with *Jon Snow* has to do with trying to come up with a scenario why *Jon Snow* is *the true king*, not so much with trying to find an answer why they were where they were, and why they did what they did.

Because the point of that particular idea is just to make *Jon Snow* *the king*. It serves no other purpose.

[lomiller]

1 hour ago, Daemon The Black Dragon said:

So there's no other reason for the KG to be at the ToJ, other then the baby must be their choosen King? Following orders, swearing a vow to  Rhaegar to protect Lyanna and the baby, no matter what? Did Willis Fell believed Jaehaera Targaryen was the rightful ruler of Westeros because he didn't go to Aegon lll after the death of Aegon ll or did he stay because he was following orders to keep Jaehaera safe at SE? KG plus baby doesn't automatically make said baby their King, there are other options for them being/staying at the ToJ, that's may only point.

I can't think of one.  Certainly the ones you are offering don't make any sense giving the events of the time.  Also if it was a mundane as "just following orders" why bother to include it in the story at all?  It's a waste of pages and something deserving of being removed in editing if this were the case.  

[lomiller]

2 hours ago, Lord Varys said:

What usually happens is that the KG go to the new king who won the war, not to the guy who lost it (which wouldn't be Viserys III but actually Robert).

So by you own admission they go to whom they believe to be the new king...

2 hours ago, Lord Varys said:

King Viserys III was not in imminent danger. He was safe with his mother and the garrison of Dragonstone, protected by valiant men and the entire Targaryen fleet.

Aeryes is dead, Aegon and his sister were killed when Kings landing was lost, and it's only a matter of time before Dragonstone is attacked.  You think that is "safe"?

[Lord Varys]

1 hour ago, lomiller said:

So by you own admission they go to whom they believe to be the new king...

No, historically, they go to the guy who is the new king, not some pretender. Aenys' Seven stood with Maegor, who usurped the throne but was the actual king, not Aenys' uncrowned son. Maegor's Seven went to Jaehaerys I rather than to Maegor's anointed successor, most of Viserys I's KG stood with Aegon II and Viserys I's chosen heir, and Willis Fell actually delivered Queen Jaehaera Aegon III rather than doing her homage as his rightful queen.

And Barristan Selmy bent the knee to Robert and served him just as his great predecessors served the likes of Maegor or Aegon II.

Nobody expects the Kingsguard to arbitrarily search out 'the rightful king' and much less to actually declare such a king.

1 hour ago, lomiller said:

Aeryes is dead, Aegon and his sister were killed when Kings landing was lost, and it's only a matter of time before Dragonstone is attacked.  You think that is "safe"?

Sure. Being in castle surrounded by a loyal garrison and a powerful fleet makes you very safe. Much safer, by comparison, than a woman and an infant in the middle of nowhere.

It isn't even a given that Dragonstone would have to be attacked, by the way. The Targaryen fleet was pretty powerful, if it hadn't been destroyed in the night of Dany's birth, and if Queen Rhaella had not died in childbirth, there may have been a way to make a compromise. Say, grant Rhaella and her children Dragonstone as the ancestral kingdom the Targaryens always had, or something along those lines. Viserys III could have formally abdicated, giving up all claims to the Iron Throne, and then everybody would have been happy.

That is hardly impossible considering how many of the other usurpers dealt with close kin. Even Maegor didn't immediately start to butcher his brother's sons. And Daemon II Blackfyre is actually allowed to live as a prisoner at court.

[BRANDON GREYSTARK]

10 hours ago, lomiller said:

This isn't plausible IMO.  The Kingsgaurd are not automatons mindlessly following their last instructions.  On finding out that the king is dead his final orders to them are meaningless.  Under these circumstances they would probably go to whoever they believe to be the rightful new king. 

But they are .

[Back door hodor]

Personally I think if anything the info on the kg complicates the whole situation rather than simplifying it.

Drawing from FaB, and later info on the main series, we learn that kings guard are simply people, not the inhuman bastions of chivalry they are first made out to be.( sure there are exceptions, but even the dragon knight might have boned his sister, who was married to his brother)And as such, these 3 could have a very large number of reasons to be where they are, they are pieces in the game, ask not why they themselves are there but who put them there? And why?

Basically, are they working for Reagar? Or Aerys? 

and if it's the first who else is involved?

[Ygrain]

On 2/24/2019 at 2:25 PM, Maia said:

No, not anymore. FaB proves that the KG could be guarding lesser members of the royal family instead of the king, even when the king was at risk. That's exactly what happened with Aegon II and his children. He didn't have the KG protection when he escaped KL and hid on Dragonstone - and he was in far more danger than Viserys III at the time of the fight at the ToJ, BTW.

Even if they weren't a KG short, would it really be advisable for a KG to be around when Aegon II was being smuggled out of KL under a heap of fish? In this particular scenario, wasn't the king better protect by not having a KG around? (Which may well be the case of ToJ, as well, if Ran's theory about Jon at Starfall is correct - the three KG are protecting him by blocking access to Lyanna, and thus to the knowledge that she had given birth, and by not drawing attention by their presence).

 

[The Twinslayer]

On 2/24/2019 at 8:25 AM, Maia said:

No, not anymore. FaB proves that the KG could be guarding lesser members of the royal family instead of the king, even when the king was at risk. That's exactly what happened with Aegon II and his children. He didn't have the KG protection when he escaped KL and hid on Dragonstone - and he was in far more danger than Viserys III at the time of the fight at the ToJ, BTW.

 

Well, you say it yourself - the 3KG had orders and there likely were "other concerns".

You are right -- FaB does prove that the KG can guard lesser royals.  And it goes further:  it proves that the KG can be away from the king for long stretches of time doing something other than guarding other royals.  When Jaehaerys and Alysanne prepared to make their journey to Winterfell, they sent the KG ahead of them:  "Their dragons would be with them, of course, but beyond the Neck the distances were great and the roads poor, and the king had grown tired of flying ahead and waiting for his escort to catch up.  This time, he decreed, his Kingsguard, servants, and retainers would go ahead of him, to make things ready for his arrival."

So now Jaehaerys is in King's Landing and the Kingsguard are on their way to Winterfell.  Does Jaehaerys hurry to join them?  No.  Envoys from the Free Cities and Pentosh show up in King's Landing seeking diplomatic assistance.  "It was a proposal that neither the king nor his council felt he could refuse, but it would mean postponing His Grace's planned progress to the North."  Alysanne goes on ahead, and when Jaehaerys finally joins her, they have been "half a year apart."  

[John Suburbs]

16 hours ago, lomiller said:

I can't think of one.  Certainly the ones you are offering don't make any sense giving the events of the time.  Also if it was a mundane as "just following orders" why bother to include it in the story at all?  It's a waste of pages and something deserving of being removed in editing if this were the case.  

Aerys to Hightower: You, Whent and Dayne go to the tower and remain their until you hear directly from me. You may hear rumors of my death. Ignore them. Swear your vow to me that you are to protect the baby with your lives until I arrive. Look for me in the skies . . .

[Ferocious Veldt Roarer]

19 hours ago, Daemon The Black Dragon said:

So there's no other reason for the KG to be at the ToJ, other then the baby must be their choosen King? Following orders, swearing a vow to  Rhaegar to protect Lyanna and the baby, no matter what?

Other reason that would still keep the story both compelling and logical? Nope, there's not. The "they just followed orders, nothing to see here, move on" variant makes it all bland and irrelevant, and I reject it simply because GRRM is not a shitty writer. (Lazy, though... that's another story).

Quote

Did Willis Fell believed Jaehaera Targaryen was the rightful ruler of Westeros because he didn't go to Aegon lll after the death of Aegon ll or did he stay because he was following orders to keep Jaehaera safe at SE? KG plus baby doesn't automatically make said baby their King, there are other options for them being/staying at the ToJ, that's may only point.

Apples to oranges. Willis Fell wasn't three knights, who had lot of possibilities open for them, like splitting forces (Ser Willis physically couldn't). We don't have a POV character remembering Willis Fell boasting about how incredibly proud he was of his assignment. We don't know if there had been a situation when Aegon II was deprived of KG protection and Ser Willis was aware of that status quo. And Ser Willis is a footnote in tie-in material, not some legendary hero worshiped by a few central characters of the books. So, apples and dragons, really.

[Lord Varys]

11 hours ago, Back door hodor said:

Personally I think if anything the info on the kg complicates the whole situation rather than simplifying it.

Drawing from FaB, and later info on the main series, we learn that kings guard are simply people, not the inhuman bastions of chivalry they are first made out to be.( sure there are exceptions, but even the dragon knight might have boned his sister, who was married to his brother)And as such, these 3 could have a very large number of reasons to be where they are, they are pieces in the game, ask not why they themselves are there but who put them there? And why?

You make an important point here.

Those people who buy into the fairy-tale that Arthur Dayne, Oswell Whent, and Gerold Hightower were some great guys just because some (POV) characters have fond memories of them are basically allowing themselves to be fooled.

There are no ideal characters in this world, and the idea that just because some people think they are doesn't mean it makes sense for us to buy that stuff like naive children.

5 hours ago, Ygrain said:

Even if they weren't a KG short, would it really be advisable for a KG to be around when Aegon II was being smuggled out of KL under a heap of fish? In this particular scenario, wasn't the king better protect by not having a KG around? (Which may well be the case of ToJ, as well, if Ran's theory about Jon at Starfall is correct - the three KG are protecting him by blocking access to Lyanna, and thus to the knowledge that she had given birth, and by not drawing attention by their presence).

The same can be said for Viserys III. He was just as safe with his garrison and fleet on Dragonstone than he would have been with one guy more. And one of the tower guys trying to get to him could have actually drawn attention to Lyanna and the child. Not to mention the pointlessness of abandoning a (dying) woman and her infant child who was already down to three protectors.

5 hours ago, The Twinslayer said:

You are right -- FaB does prove that the KG can guard lesser royals.  And it goes further:  it proves that the KG can be away from the king for long stretches of time doing something other than guarding other royals.

Kingsguard are now confirmed to be just seven guys with white cloaks, basically. They are a propaganda tool, and little more. They are too few to be an actual proper bodyguard of a king who faces actual danger in battle or during a riot or something along those lines.

We can also guesstimate a little bit more which kings reserved the KG for themselves, and which extended it to others:

Aegon I had a Kingsguard for himself, King Aenys, too - which is very evident in the fact that Aenys does not send any KG with Aegon and Rhaena when they go on their progress - Maegor's KG are his men, too, although he makes a KG the sworn shield/gaoler of his nephew and heir, Prince Viserys. Jaehaerys I reserves his Kingsguard for himself, especially after Alysanne got her own protector. Viserys I was apparently the first to properly open up the KG for the royal heirs. First when Rhaenyra asked for Criston Cole as a sworn shield, and then later when he assigned Erryk Cargyll to Rhaenyra as a sworn shield. Lorent Marbrand is also on Dragonstone when Viserys I dies, so one can speculate that Jacaerys Velaryon as Rhaenyra's heir also got his own sworn shield from the KG.

Aegon II had his KG reserved for his own person, until they were charged with protecting his children, Rhaenyra kept her Queensguard to herself, too, whereas the regents apparently extended KG protection to both Aegon III and Jaehaera.

49 minutes ago, Ferocious Veldt Roarer said:

Other reason that would still keep the story both compelling and logical? Nope, there's not. The "they just followed orders, nothing to see here, move on" variant makes it all bland and irrelevant, and I reject it simply because GRRM is not a shitty writer. (Lazy, though... that's another story).

That is a straw man. Nobody says 'nothing to see here' in relation to the KG at the tower. Just that it doesn't mean 'the king' is there, because there is no reason to assume anyone ever saw Lyanna's child as 'the/a king'.

It certainly implies that Lyanna was very important to Rhaegar and/or Aerys II and that the child she may have had was, most likely, Rhaegar's son. But it doesn't say more than that.

49 minutes ago, Ferocious Veldt Roarer said:

Apples to oranges. Willis Fell wasn't three knights, who had lot of possibilities open for them, like splitting forces (Ser Willis physically couldn't). We don't have a POV character remembering Willis Fell boasting about how incredibly proud he was of his assignment. We don't know if there had been a situation when Aegon II was deprived of KG protection and Ser Willis was aware of that status quo. And Ser Willis is a footnote in tie-in material, not some legendary hero worshiped by a few central characters of the books. So, apples and dragons, really.

Willis Fell could have remained with his king rather than choosing to protect a simpleton girl instead of His Grace, more over, a girl who as per the Great Council and Green ideology didn't have a claim to the Iron Throne, anyway. It would have been sad if the girl died, sure, but compared to Jaehaera's life King Aegon II's safety was of much greater importance.

If the 'first duty' of the KG truly was the ensure the safety of the king, then both Willis Fell and Rickard Thorne failed spectacularly, because they actually allowed the future murderer of Aegon II to see to his safety.

When the king was in his poppy dreams, it was Larys Strong who commanded them, no one else. If those guys can follow the Master of Whisperers in absence of some other guy who knows what to do, then the guys at the tower can just as well continue with whatever mission kept them with Lyanna in the first place. There is no reason to believe that such men always think how to get back to the king or how to help arrange the safety of the king from afar.

Willis Fell is the best example for this kind of thing. He brings Jaehaera to Storm's End safety - and then he just stays there, doing nothing. He even stays there after Aegon II reveals he has taken Dragonstone and killed his half-sister. He does try to get to him there, despite the fact that he has every reason to believe he, Willis Fell, is the last man of Aegon II's Kingsguard that's still alive.

Nor does he bring Jaehaera back to her father after Aegon II has returned to KL. He doesn't even go to him king on his own, leaving Jaehaera in the hands of her Baratheon protectors.

He basically does exactly what Dayne, Whent, Hightower, and Oakheart did, too. Continue with the given assignment, don't give a damn about the overall political situation.

FaB is no longer 'tie-in material' or any other such stuff. It is a book in its own right now, and a pretty large one at that. One can even read the thing as a work in its own right, not giving a damn about the later stuff.

[The Twinslayer]

51 minutes ago, Lord Varys said:

Willis Fell could have remained with his king rather than choosing to protect a simpleton girl instead of His Grace, more over, a girl who as per the Great Council and Green ideology didn't have a claim to the Iron Throne, anyway. It would have been sad if the girl died, sure, but compared to Jaehaera's life King Aegon II's safety was of much greater importance.

If the 'first duty' of the KG truly was the ensure the safety of the king, then both Willis Fell and Rickard Thorne failed spectacularly, because they actually allowed the future murderer of Aegon II to see to his safety.

When the king was in his poppy dreams, it was Larys Strong who commanded them, no one else. If those guys can follow the Master of Whisperers in absence of some other guy who knows what to do, then the guys at the tower can just as well continue with whatever mission kept them with Lyanna in the first place. There is no reason to believe that such men always think how to get back to the king or how to help arrange the safety of the king from afar.

Willis Fell is the best example for this kind of thing. He brings Jaehaera to Storm's End safety - and then he just stays there, doing nothing. He even stays there after Aegon II reveals he has taken Dragonstone and killed his half-sister. He does try to get to him there, despite the fact that he has every reason to believe he, Willis Fell, is the last man of Aegon II's Kingsguard that's still alive.

Nor does he bring Jaehaera back to her father after Aegon II has returned to KL. He doesn't even go to him king on his own, leaving Jaehaera in the hands of her Baratheon protectors.

He basically does exactly what Dayne, Whent, Hightower, and Oakheart did, too. Continue with the given assignment, don't give a damn about the overall political situation.

 

Willis Fell’s actions actually tell us more than that.  TPATQ says that when Fell and Thorne were ordered to leave the king, “Princess Jaehaera, a sweet and simple girl of six, was put in the charge of Ser Willis Fell, who swore to bring her safely to Storm’s End.”

So if someone at Storm’s End asked Willis what he was doing there while the king had no kingsguard protection, it would go something like this:

”Your king has fled to Dragonstone with a bastard knight.  He has no kingsguard protection,” said Lord Baratheon.

“I have to be here.  I swore a vow,” explained old Ser Willis.

[Lord Varys]

4 minutes ago, The Twinslayer said:

Willis Fell’s actions actually tell us more than that.  TPATQ says that when Fell and Thorne were ordered to leave the king, “Princess Jaehaera, a sweet and simple girl of six, was put in the charge of Ser Willis Fell, who swore to bring her safely to Storm’s End.”

So if someone at Storm’s End asked Willis what he was doing there while the king had no kingsguard protection, it would go something like this:

”Your king has fled to Dragonstone with a bastard knight.  He has no kingsguard protection,” said Lord Baratheon.

“I have to be here.  I swore a vow,” explained old Ser Willis.

Hihi, yeah. 

But, no, the knights at the tower couldn't have possibly sworn a vow to Rhaegar to protect Lyanna and her (unborn) child with their life.

That would defeat the entire purpose of them being 'Kingsguard'. They must all be about the king, because *Jon Snow* was born *the king*. 

That's why people had so great an issue with the prospect of Aerys II naming Viserys his heir rather than Aegon (although common sense should dictate that a father would prefer a younger son who can walk and talk over an infant born to a mother he did not particularly like), that's why Kingsguard are supposed to care about 'the line of succession' and decide or have an opinion on who is 'the king'.

That's why it is important that they are with Lyanna, not because she was a woman in danger or it may be the right thing to do, no, it has to be about her child being the king.

And that's just a completely silly idea. Even if Jon is going to be king, if it were to come out that he already was *the king* in a sense when he was born, all his accomplishments making him king would be just superficial. His story would be one about a guy who was tricked out of his *birthright* by his evil uncle who then stole his identity and murdered his Kingsguard and when he finally regains his identity he only takes back what was always his. That's just silly and completely unworthy of any kind of narrative arc Jon may have had in this regard - not that I think there will be much focus on that stuff, but if he did then the story of a sort ragged, obscure prince eventually proving his worth to be a king is much, much better than the idea he was born with a little crown on his head.

One would have, perhaps, a case there if any Kingsguard had actually assembled at that tower after Aerys II and Rhaegar were dead. But with them being with Lyanna for most of the war it simply makes no sense to ascribe such a symbolic meaning to this entire thing.

In fact, this entire thing utterly destroys this idea that KG are more than henchmen who do as they are told by anyone who they think has authority. And that apparently can be pretty much anyone at court. I mean, as far as we know Strong pulled that off without even bringing the Queen Dowager into it - else Alicent and Helaena may have disappeared, too.

There is no first or second or third, etc. duties of the Kingsguard. There is only one. Do as you are told. By the king or his representatives - which can be the queen, the Hand, other royal family, and clubfooted councilmen. The fact that you are allowed to call yourself 'Kingsguard' doesn't mean you actually have a right to guard the king.