Who's "they" ?

[ATaleofSalt&Onions]

15 hours ago, corbon said:

and fails to provide an explanation why the Starfall fold think Ashara is the lover and Wylla the side-bit while Robert, who knows Ned best, thinks Wylla is the only 'bit' Ned ever had and never thinks about Ashara at all?

I think we need to be cautious about assuming what everyone at Starfall thinks based on Ned Dayne's story. He wasn't alive at the time and is repeating what he's been told. We don't know if everyone there actually thinks Wylla is Jon's mother or if that's just the cover story they told him. And his source for Ned + Ashara at Harrenhal is Allyria who almost certainly wasn't old enough to have firsthand knowledge of what was going on at the time.

[corbon]

3 hours ago, ATaleofSalt&Onions said:

I think we need to be cautious about assuming what everyone at Starfall thinks based on Ned Dayne's story. He wasn't alive at the time and is repeating what he's been told. We don't know if everyone there actually thinks Wylla is Jon's mother or if that's just the cover story they told him. And his source for Ned + Ashara at Harrenhal is Allyria who almost certainly wasn't old enough to have firsthand knowledge of what was going on at the time.

Understood, to a point. Its a Starfall source and all we have from Starfall. Edric didn't get any of his beliefs about Ned, Ashara, Wylla, Jon etc from Blackhaven.
Maybe not all Starfallians think this (I'd guess most of them don't think anything at all about it), but its come from there and all we have from there thus far. 

[Frey family reunion]

On 10/13/2021 at 4:02 PM, corbon said:

Howland Reed.
Any noncombatants.
10 or more Horses.
Gloves.
Rope.
Tools (you think they don't have a hammer for tent pegs between them, for example?)
Spear shafts or cut branches or similar for leverage
etc

It was an egregious piece of hyperbole, which I tried to point out the humour in. 

While I was being a bit snarky, I'm fairly serious about the fact that based on Eddard's own description of events, and making an assumption that they left this location with an infant, they would not have taken the time to have pulled down a tower that would have taken a great deal of time and effort to have torn down.  My guess is the tower was already a ruin.  

When Ned starts his dream, I think he describes it as how the events appeared as they first unfolded:

Quote

He dreamt an old dream, of three knights in white cloaks, and a tower long fallen, and Lyanna in her bed of blood.

In other words, I think the tower was already long fallen when he first encountered the knights in the Prince's Pass.  Which is why he was able to single handedly (no mention of Howland Reed's help in his memory) pull down the remaining stones, and why they were only enough to make eight cairns.  

If the tower was a structure capable of long term habitation, I don't think he would have taken the time and effort it would have required to have pulled the thing down.  Not just to use as grave markers.  And not if he had an infant to deal with.

So if you want to use an in story example, look to Bran's Tumbledown tower.  some remaining stones hidden in the undergrowth circling a vault underneath.

[ATaleofSalt&Onions]

2 hours ago, corbon said:

Understood, to a point. Its a Starfall source and all we have from Starfall. Edric didn't get any of his beliefs about Ned, Ashara, Wylla, Jon etc from Blackhaven.
Maybe not all Starfallians think this (I'd guess most of them don't think anything at all about it), but its come from there and all we have from there thus far. 

Sure, I just think that there's very obvious reasons why Ned's older family wouldn't tell him the full story if they were aware of it so I treat what he says with a lot of skepticism.

[corbon]

1 hour ago, Frey family reunion said:

While I was being a bit snarky, I'm fairly serious about the fact that based on Eddard's own description of events, and making an assumption that they left this location with an infant, they would not have taken the time to have pulled down a tower that would have taken a great deal of time and effort to have torn down.  My guess is the tower was already a ruin.  

Perhaps, at least partially.

Given its location in the midst of a pass known (in the past) for border raids and military clashes, and its apparent lack as a 'population centre' as most 'castles' are. I think its a fairly high probability it was an abandoned watchtower. That would also make a great hiding place for the KG and anyone with them - a good view (as a watchtower), likely on a local high point overlooking the general roads, and accessible to the main pass but not right 'there' for anyone to spot people there as they travelled through.

Quote

When Ned starts his dream, I think he describes it as how the events appeared as they first unfolded:

Thats the dream 'title', not a description within the dream. And the "tower long fallen' can equally (as in without other evidence) be a tower long fallen 'then' or a tower long fallen 'now, 15 years later'.

Quote

In other words, I think the tower was long fallen when he first encountered the knights in the Prince's Pass.  Which is why he was able to single handedly (no mention of Howland Reed's help in his memory) pull down the remaining stones, and why they were only enough to make eight cairns.  

The problem is the actual dream has it as a 'round tower' with no mention of it being fallen or badly damaged, at least at ground level. If your supposition is true, then it would make more sense for the word 'round' to be replaced by the word 'fallen' (or something similar),
And its this that pushes the 'tower long fallen' very strongly IMO to a 'now, not then' type description. The tower needs to be 'round' when Ned arrives, 'up' enough for him to tear it down, and 'down' enough for it to be 'long fallen' 15 years later.

So long as it satisfies all those things, and is not so strong that a handful of men with 10 or so horses couldn't do significant enough damage within a day or so to make it 'fallen', then it works for me.

Quote

They were seven, facing three. In the dream as it had been in life. Yet these were no ordinary three. They waited before the round tower, the red mountains of Dorne at their backs, their white cloaks blowing in the wind. And these were no shadows; their faces burned clear, even now. Ser Arthur Dayne, the Sword of the Morning, had a sad smile on his lips. The hilt of the greatsword Dawn poked up over his right shoulder. Ser Oswell Whent was on one knee, sharpening his blade with a whetstone. Across his white-enameled helm, the black bat of his House spread its wings. Between them stood fierce old Ser Gerold Hightower, the White Bull, Lord Commander of the Kingsguard.

this is actually the clearest cleanest in-lie sequence from the dream. I think any argument that claims this part is not related to 'an actual memory', but entirely 'feverish imaginings' or whatever someone wants to call it, deserves short shrift.

I can see something like this https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:Italian_Coast_Scene_with_Ruined_Tower-1838-Thomas_Cole.jpg
(literally the first image google found under ruined tower') as being workable. An old tower, abandoned, perhaps partially crumbling, but easily turned into something quite habitable for a small group in hiding for a period. And equally, I think it wouldn't necessarily take much time and effort to pull down enough of it to count it as 'fallen' thereafter.

Quote

If the tower was a structure capable of long term habitation, I don't think he would have taken the time and effort it would have required to have pulled the thing down.  Not just to use as grave markers.  

It depends how much time and effort is required.

Quote

So if you want to use an in story example, look to Bran's Tumbledown tower.  some remaining stones hidden in the undergrowth circling a vault underneath.

I don't believe thats enough to satisfy the description.
https://hirstarts.com/ruin/ruin.html for example - I think thats quite a bit more than Bran's tumbledown tower , and still not quite enough for ToJ tower, though maybe at an extreme stretch...

A couple more 'suitable' (excluding squareness!) examples, IMO:
https://www.stockfreeimages.com/24218483/Ruined-tower.html
https://www.alamy.com/medieval-stone-tower-old-abandoned-crumbling-2-wood-doors-low-stone-wall-viviers-france-summer-vertical-image343199711.html

And IMO 'not suitable':
https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:Ruined_Tower_-_geograph.org.uk_-_32550.jpg  (not enough 'shelter value IMO)

(hey, did this one come through as an actual pic?!) This one looks not habitable enough IMO, and a bit dangerous even. But you could see that with not much more 'surviving' it could very easily be quite habitable for a small party.

ETA: I do think the tower used in the TV series was much to big and in much to solid a state for Ned's 'tear it down' thing. It certainly wouldn't qualify as a reasonable facsimile for me!

[corbon]

8 minutes ago, ATaleofSalt&Onions said:

Sure, I just think that there's very obvious reasons why Ned's older family wouldn't tell him the full story if they were aware of it so I treat what he says with a lot of skepticism.

Oh, so do I. Big time. I think its obviously rubbish - to us. We know Ned isn't and wasn't, the 'fool around' type, yet Ned was in love with Ashara whilst tumbling Wylla? Its obviously wrong. But people who don't know Ned personally, such as Starfallians, especially children, don't understand that.

I'm not suggesting that no one at Starfall knows the truth - very senior members of the house back then may well have been in on it. Just that the wider Starfallian populace, and especially the children, only know what has been widely 'seen' or publicly told. 

But it does tie in with what Robert thinks - not exactly, Robert think's Wylla was Ned's 'one time', Ashara's not even in the picture. And there must be a reason it ties in.
So how does Robert think that?

Some people argue that Ned told Robert the whole story way back, because Robert says Ned told him Wylla's name once before. But IMO thats inconsistent with what GRRM shows us. Ned gets angry and stiff every time Jon's parentage comes up, even with Robert, and shuts down the conversations as hard as he can with minimal to no information from his side. Thats not consistent with him 'telling all' to Robert in the past. If Ned has a 'story' he told Robert, then he should be willing to tell that story again, not just to Robert, but to Cat and anyone who asks. That story is his cover for R+L=J. He should be encouraging that rumour, not shutting down all the gossip at Winterfell. Winterfellians should all know Wylla was Jon's mother, but there is no mention of her from anyone at Winterfell at all.
To me, the only way I can think of, or have heard from anyone else, that this all fits together is if Ned didn't tell Robert about Wylla*, but Robert found out about her from another source - which is very likely to be a report on Ned's visit to Starfall, where it appears Wylla is the accepted mother. Remember that newly crowned King Robert has kept Varys the Spider as his Master of Whispers despite Varys being Aerys' man. And Varys is in an uncertain position needing to prove his value to his new master. Do you think King Robert, after having had a huge fight with his best friend who then immediately left the capital for Storms End and then disappears with a small band of friends, doesn't want to hear anything he can about what Ned is up to? Of course, the 'loved Ashara while boning Wylla' part is silly romantic children's nonsense by Allyria that both we and Robert can tell is clearly untrue due to our personal knowledge of Ned, so whether that was in the report or not, Robert is going to ignore it.
*no, I am of course not denying that Ned did tell Robert Wylla's name. I'm positing that, consistent with the conversation we saw (and from a Vary report most likely), Robert went into the earlier conversation with Ned with preconceived ideas, and Ned said as little as possible but did tell Robert that the name of the 'wetnurse' (the unofficial 'cover' for the bastard's mother in Robert's head - thats an old game dating as far back in part as Moses)was Wylla. 

In fact, I think the mostly likely scenario that resolves all these different views, including the 'they' at TOJ and the 'starving baby' problem, is that Wylla was selected by Arthur Dayne as a safe and reliable wetnurse for Lyanna's child and was already at ToJ when Ned arrived. Thus when Ned arrives at Starfall, Wylla is with him and nursing Jon. Jon is treated as Ned's blood/son at Starfall, so Starfallians, many of whom would have seen Ned and Wylla and Jon arrive together, believe Wylla is Jon's mother, absent any better option presenting itself. Varys supplies Robert a report from Starfall that says Ned arrived with Wylla and Jon, possibly including Starfallian rumours about Jon's parentage. Thus, everything is consistent with what we see.
Cat doesn't see any such report of course so all she hears about is the suicide of the beautiful noble maiden (who may have already had a rumoured Stark connection to her disgrace at/after Harrenhal) coinciding with Ned bringing home a bastard, and thus her belief. Similar for Cersei who hears various bits and pieces and rumours.
No doubt I'm not correct in every detail here. But there has been no other explanation that is consistent with Ned's behaviour, Edric's beliefs, Cat's beliefs and Robert's beliefs.

[ATaleofSalt&Onions]

1 hour ago, corbon said:

But it does tie in with what Robert thinks - not exactly, Robert think's Wylla was Ned's 'one time', Ashara's not even in the picture. And there must be a reason it ties in.
So how does Robert think that?

Personally I don't think Ned ever had a romantic fling with Ashara, and I think Robert knows that

1 hour ago, corbon said:

Some people argue that Ned told Robert the whole story way back, because Robert says Ned told him Wylla's name once before. But IMO thats inconsistent with what GRRM shows us. Ned gets angry and stiff every time Jon's parentage comes up, even with Robert, and shuts down the conversations as hard as he can with minimal to no information from his side. Thats not consistent with him 'telling all' to Robert in the past. If Ned has a 'story' he told Robert, then he should be willing to tell that story again, not just to Robert, but to Cat and anyone who asks. That story is his cover for R+L=J. He should be encouraging that rumour, not shutting down all the gossip at Winterfell. Winterfellians should all know Wylla was Jon's mother, but there is no mention of her from anyone at Winterfell at all.

I think I'm familiar with your position on this and don't want to rehash a drawn out semantic debate, but I personally think your reading of the text is pretty idiosyncratic. It relies on handwaving away textual evidence that to me and most other people is pretty clear because you personally think Ned wouldn't do what it implies, in favor of assumptions that have no direct textual evidence. As for me, I don't really have a problem with the straightforward reading most people adhere to. While Ned does try to move off the subject ASAP with Robert as it's obviously an uncomfortable/dangerous one, he does answer Robert's question whereas he simply shut Cat down , demanded she never bring it up again, and tell him where she heard Ashara's name. The difference is that Ned doesn't have to tell Catelyn shit, while Robert is the one person in Westeros who Ned answers to. I don't find it odd that Ned does not otherwise spread or encourage the Wylla rumor, for a few reasons. Firstly, I think Ned simply wants as little information (whether real or fake) as possible about this subject to get out. The more people who know who Jon's mother supposedly is, the more people who could potentially poke holes in the story. Secondly, Ned lies when he has to, but he obviously doesn't like it and I don't think he'd find telling anyone other than Robert that Jon's mother was Wylla to be necessary. Expanding on that, and this might be the most important, spreading the Wylla story to the point where everyone at Winterfell "knows" that Wylla is Jon's mom would require lying to Jon about who his mother was. Keeping Jon in the dark about the whole thing was surely painful enough, but I don't think Ned would ever want to take that extra step and actively deceive him about who his mother was. 

[corbon]

35 minutes ago, ATaleofSalt&Onions said:

It relies on handwaving away textual evidence that to me and most other people is pretty clear

Like what?

35 minutes ago, ATaleofSalt&Onions said:

in favor of assumptions that have no direct textual evidence.

Like what?

 

[Frey family reunion]

6 hours ago, corbon said:

Perhaps, at least partially.

Given its location in the midst of a pass known (in the past) for border raids and military clashes, and its apparent lack as a 'population centre' as most 'castles' are. I think its a fairly high probability it was an abandoned watchtower. That would also make a great hiding place for the KG and anyone with them - a good view (as a watchtower), likely on a local high point overlooking the general roads, and accessible to the main pass but not right 'there' for anyone to spot people there as they travelled through.

Thats the dream 'title', not a description within the dream. And the "tower long fallen' can equally (as in without other evidence) be a tower long fallen 'then' or a tower long fallen 'now, 15 years later'.

The problem is the actual dream has it as a 'round tower' with no mention of it being fallen or badly damaged, at least at ground level. If your supposition is true, then it would make more sense for the word 'round' to be replaced by the word 'fallen' (or something similar),
And its this that pushes the 'tower long fallen' very strongly IMO to a 'now, not then' type description. The tower needs to be 'round' when Ned arrives, 'up' enough for him to tear it down, and 'down' enough for it to be 'long fallen' 15 years later.

So long as it satisfies all those things, and is not so strong that a handful of men with 10 or so horses couldn't do significant enough damage within a day or so to make it 'fallen', then it works for me.

this is actually the clearest cleanest in-lie sequence from the dream. I think any argument that claims this part is not related to 'an actual memory', but entirely 'feverish imaginings' or whatever someone wants to call it, deserves short shrift.

I can see something like this https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:Italian_Coast_Scene_with_Ruined_Tower-1838-Thomas_Cole.jpg
(literally the first image google found under ruined tower') as being workable. An old tower, abandoned, perhaps partially crumbling, but easily turned into something quite habitable for a small group in hiding for a period. And equally, I think it wouldn't necessarily take much time and effort to pull down enough of it to count it as 'fallen' thereafter.

It depends how much time and effort is required.

I don't believe thats enough to satisfy the description.
https://hirstarts.com/ruin/ruin.html for example - I think thats quite a bit more than Bran's tumbledown tower , and still not quite enough for ToJ tower, though maybe at an extreme stretch...

A couple more 'suitable' (excluding squareness!) examples, IMO:
https://www.stockfreeimages.com/24218483/Ruined-tower.html
https://www.alamy.com/medieval-stone-tower-old-abandoned-crumbling-2-wood-doors-low-stone-wall-viviers-france-summer-vertical-image343199711.html

And IMO 'not suitable':
https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:Ruined_Tower_-_geograph.org.uk_-_32550.jpg  (not enough 'shelter value IMO)

(hey, did this one come through as an actual pic?!) This one looks not habitable enough IMO, and a bit dangerous even. But you could see that with not much more 'surviving' it could very easily be quite habitable for a small party.

ETA: I do think the tower used in the TV series was much to big and in much to solid a state for Ned's 'tear it down' thing. It certainly wouldn't qualify as a reasonable facsimile for me!

Nah, I think all of the towers you showed are too big, for a single person to tear down and would provide way more stones than what would be needed to make eight cairns.  Thus no reason to pull the tower down.  

I’d guess about a four to five foot high base perhaps surrounding a subterranean vault.  Probably not someplace you would bring your pregnant girlfriend for her honeymoon.

Of course I’m not visualizing an inhabited dwelling, my guess, is it might have been more  useful as a furnace and chimney.

[corbon]

Just now, Frey family reunion said:

Nah, I think all of the towers you showed are too big, for a single person to tear down and would provide way more stones than what would be needed to make eight cairns.  Thus no reason to pull the tower down.  

Its not a just single person. Ned has Howland Reed, maybe a few servants etc, and at least 10 horses. 

[Frey family reunion]

Just now, corbon said:

Its not a just single person. Ned has Howland Reed, maybe a few servants etc, and at least 10 horses. 

If Ned had remembered that the mysterious “they” pulled down the tower, I might agree with you.  But he remembers that he pulled down the tower.  And it’s not like Ned to hog all the credit.

The bigger the production the less likely it would have happened.  After all he just needed something to mark graves, and then he and Howland needed to move on.  I don’t see a Dornish construction crew coming out and hooking the horses up to harnesses.  I think we’re getting a bit carried away here.

[corbon]

8 minutes ago, Frey family reunion said:

If Ned had remembered that the mysterious “they” pulled down the tower, I might agree with you.  But he remembers that he pulled down the tower.  And it’s not like Ned to hog all the credit.

The bigger the production the less likely it would have happened.  After all he just needed something to mark graves, and then he and Howland needed to move on.  I don’t see a Dornish construction crew coming out and hooking the horses up to harnesses.  I think we’re getting a bit carried away here.

And I think you are being weirdly irrational. You yourself explain that Ned 'tore down' the tower, but at the same time insist it was already down and he basically just grabbed a few broken rocks for cairns.
Destroying a few remnant 4-5 ft high walls from and already destroyed 'tower' isn't 'tearing it down'.

A straw man Dornish construction crew is getting carried away, I agree. Ned and a crowbar/lever up top while Howland leads half a dozen horsed roped to some key stones is easily enough to bring down most of those towers.

[Mister Smikes]

21 minutes ago, Frey family reunion said:

If Ned had remembered that the mysterious “they” pulled down the tower, I might agree with you.  But he remembers that he pulled down the tower.  And it’s not like Ned to hog all the credit.

The bigger the production the less likely it would have happened.  After all he just needed something to mark graves, and then he and Howland needed to move on.  I don’t see a Dornish construction crew coming out and hooking the horses up to harnesses.  I think we’re getting a bit carried away here.

When I was in Ireland, I visited a few ancient ruins, since I like that sort of thing.  Some were castles or forts of natural stones fitted together without mortar.  In one case, there being no-one to stop me, I even went inside and climbed the stone stairs, despite signs clearly warning me not to do such a foolish thing.   Had I wanted to do anything so mean and destructive with an ancient set of ruins, I could probably have just grabbed the fitted stones one by one and removed them.  

I never imagined the Tower of Joy were anything so crude, however.  But maybe I'm wrong.  

[Walda]

10 minutes ago, Mister Smikes said:

I never imagined the Tower of Joy were anything so crude

Do we know how old the Tower of Joy is? 

I am thinking of the Broken Tower of Winterfell:

Quote

Once it had been a watchtower, the tallest in Winterfell. A long time ago, a hundred years before even his father had been born, a lightning strike had set it afire. The top third of the structure had collapsed inward, and the tower had never been rebuilt. Sometimes his father sent ratters into the base of the tower, to clean out the nests they always found among the jumble of fallen stones and charred and rotten beams. But no one ever got up to the jagged top of the structure now except for Bran and the crows.

He knew two ways to get there. You could climb straight up the side of the tower itself, but the stones were loose, the mortar that held them together long gone to ash, and Bran never liked to put his full weight on them.

(AGoT, Ch.08 Bran II)

A tall tower, especially one as a beacon, on a hill, is going to attract lighting

[Daeron the Daring]

54 minutes ago, corbon said:

And I think you are being weirdly irrational. You yourself explain that Ned 'tore down' the tower, but at the same time insist it was already down and he basically just grabbed a few broken rocks for cairns.
Destroying a few remnant 4-5 ft high walls from and already destroyed 'tower' isn't 'tearing it down'.

A straw man Dornish construction crew is getting carried away, I agree. Ned and a crowbar/lever up top while Howland leads half a dozen horsed roped to some key stones is easily enough to bring down most of those towers.

I think most people have an interpretation issue when it comes to the "Ned tore the tower down" phrase. I think it clearly means he had other people doing it. That's not taking away the credits in any way (as some suggest), but referring to things as usually anyone would do, honor and anyithing like that not being a factor in this. You buy some land, and build a house on it, you say. In reality you hire a crew of a few people who build it. Yet you will always say you built it, as that's the usual wording anyone would use, honor doesn't change that or anything. It's not a credit that anyone has to take away, it's not an achievement that you tore down a tower (alone or not) that you would seize from random peasants. 

And nowhere in the text it is mentioned that the tower was torn down to make those cairns. That they've been made out of the tower's material is a different thing, but the text clearly doesn't say "Ned teared the place down so he could build 8 cairns out of it".. (this part isn't really dedicated to you, tho). 

[Daenerysthegreat]

9 hours ago, corbon said:

 

 

 

They I think means howland reed and the servants

[Daenerysthegreat]

2 hours ago, Daeron the Daring said:

I think most people have an interpretation issue when it comes to the "Ned tore the tower down" phrase. I think it clearly means he had other people doing it. That's not taking away the credits in any way (as some suggest), but referring to things as usually anyone would do, honor and anyithing like that not being a factor in this. You buy some land, and build a house on it, you say. In reality you hire a crew of a few people who build it. Yet you will always say you built it, as that's the usual wording anyone would use, honor doesn't change that or anything. It's not a credit that anyone has to take away, it's not an achievement that you tore down a tower (alone or not) that you would seize from random peasants. 

And nowhere in the text it is mentioned that the tower was torn down to make those cairns. That they've been made out of the tower's material is a different thing, but the text clearly doesn't say "Ned teared the place down so he could build 8 cairns out of it".. (this part isn't really dedicated to you, tho). 

It's like this

I open a gift I take it. 

I then use the wrapper which I tore for other purposes

[Daenerysthegreat]

3 hours ago, Walda said:

Do we know how old the Tower of Joy is? 

I am thinking of the Broken Tower of Winterfell:

(AGoT, Ch.08 Bran II)

A tall tower, especially one as a beacon, on a hill, is going to attract lighting

Won't only electric towers attract lighting

[Walda]

3 hours ago, Daenerysthegreat said:

Won't only electric towers attract lighting

Actually, the highest point on the landscape, the shortest path from earth to cloud, is where the lighting will strike.

That is why you avoid taking shelter under the tree at the top of the hill. Also avoid being the tallest thing in the field - or you will be the conductor!

Another thing to remember in a storm is that water conducts electricity very well, so even if a tall thing is made of wood or stone, if it is also covered in water it can kill you if you're touching it when lighting strikes.

All that is IRL stuff you should know. But physics in Westeros is not noticeably different, even in places where it really ought to be (GRRM knows it aint hard scifi)

The Broken Tower in Winterfell suffered the fate of some real life medieval towers and church steeples. There's a reason skyscrapers have lighting rods and it isn't just so storm photographers can get great shots.

Here is a source. Bell-ringers in the church were particularly at risk of electrocution, as it was thought ringing the bells would drive lighting away. Belltower, wet rope, big metal bell ... But wait! It gets worse. After the medieval, when Europe started manufacturing gunpowder, where do you think the local militias usually kept their powder? Yes, a number of medieval churches are no longer with us because their belltower exploaded in a storm.

[Frey family reunion]

5 hours ago, Daenerysthegreat said:

 

 

They I think means howland reed and the servants

So Ned forced some Dornish servants into indentured servitude, to pull down an inhabited tower?  Afterwards did he also have them dig their own shallow graves to silence what they saw?  Or did he just make them pinkie swear?

Then they sawed up Lyanna, put her in a big pot to boil, so they could carry her bones?

And then they decide to trek through enemy territory with a baby in tow, through the Mountains of Dorne, just so they could get a sword back to their enemy House Dayne?  When they could have returned the sword at any later time?

The more people you start to insert into this scenario, and the more unnecessary actions you put in the scenario the less likely it becomes.

I think based on the evidence at hand, I would at most put one additional person at the tower, the wet nurse Wylla.  So the delineation of responsibilities should be fairly clear.  Howland dug the graves, Ned pulled down the tower to mark the graves, and Wylla saw to the infant.

 They then rode off on three horses.  Ned’s horse, Howland’s horse, and presumably the red stallion for Wylla and the boy.

And the reason they made the decision to take an arduous, dangerous journey to Starfall should be pretty simple, they weren’t returning a sword to Starfall, they were returning a child to her mother, who was in Starfall.

ETA: And let’s not forget that while we’re treating this as some type of uninhabited wilderness, it really wasn’t.  Prince’s Pass was inhabited and controlled by House Manwoody.

And in case you forgot, Lord Manwoody was one of the lords that accompanied Oberyn to King’s Landing to get justice for Elia.  And more than that, he along with Damon Sands acted as Oberyn’s squire before Oberyn’s duel with the Mountain.  The fact that Damon Sand was in truth a prior squire of Oberyn’s makes it a decent bet that Lord Manwoody could have also been a former squire of Oberyn.  A long winded reason to say that House Manwoody was probably pretty close to Elia’s very protective brother.

Which makes it an even odder place to bring servants and maesters, and set up house for your pregnant paramour, a decision that has apparently caused a lot of anger among the Dornish, that you are putting her amongst.