Jump to content

Howland Reed at the Tower of Joy


Bendric Dayne

Recommended Posts

31 minutes ago, three-eyed monkey said:

Ned never says he killed Arthur, he never thinks about killing Arthur. But as far as the rumours are concerned, only Ned and Howland returned so the obvious conclusion to jump to is it must have been Ned. Ned's uncomfortable with that I'm sure, just as he is with the rumors about Ashara, but he's in a position where he can't deny either rumor because it would only lead to more questions about the tower and Jon's mother, and he doesn't want that. It's part of the price he has paid to keep his promise.

I think Ned would rather send someone like Arthur to the Wall rather than kill them. If they refused the offer and he had to kill them, then I think he would do that too.

No, you are right.  Ned thinks that Howland saved his life which could mean anything for a man who holds honor so highly.  Just as Sansa begs him to lie and Varys adamantly encourages him to lie about his dear honor before the world.  What greater saving to such a noble man as his honor?  He never outright denies the Ashara rumors either, just amps up the anger and menacingly implores the household to never mention her name again.  Good move actually without saying a word.  He admits nor denies anything.  

The more I read that parting bit the more convinced I am that you are right of it.  Ned Stark understood mercy and more.  That is, if indeed this was an option on the table at all at the TOJ.  

Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 minutes ago, Alester Florent said:

Qhorin Halfhand is a tempting proposition, although wasn't his hand lost after he joined the Watch?

Yes, free folk axed it off. 
 

@three-eyed monkey, what’s the point of having Dayne somehow end up at the Wall as Qhorin Halfhand only to have the Halfhand die early on w/o anyone learning who he really was? 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

21 hours ago, three-eyed monkey said:

Edit: Do you mean Howland pointed out that Arthur was sworn to a bad cause, as Aerys had little concern for protecting the innocent, so Arthur only then realized that and decided that the only thing he could do to maintain his honor was to let Ned kill him?

Sort of.  I think it’s probably more complicated than that.  But yes, the crux of the matter is that Arthur took a vow that would have led to the harm of an innocent life.  And Howland pointed out the Knight’s dilemma to Arthur, which is the impetus that caused Arthur to allow Eddard to kill him, rather than Arthur willfully violate his sworn vow.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

44 minutes ago, Alester Florent said:

Qhorin Halfhand is a tempting proposition, although wasn't his hand lost after he joined the Watch?

Yes, although we don't have a first hand account Jon recounts what he heard. We don't know when it happened, because like much of Qhorin's backstory, it is extremely vague.

Quote

Only thumb and forefinger remained on the hand that held the reins; the other fingers had been sheared off catching a wildling's axe that would otherwise have split his skull. It was told that he had thrust his maimed fist into the face of the axeman so the blood spurted into his eyes, and slew him while he was blind.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

51 minutes ago, kissdbyfire said:

what’s the point of having Dayne somehow end up at the Wall as Qhorin Halfhand only to have the Halfhand die early on w/o anyone learning who he really was? 

When Howland reveals what really happened at the Tower of Joy, including Arthur Dayne surviving and taking the black, we will be able to piece it together, as will Jon. That's when the point of Arthur's arc will be made, which as I said some posts back is essentially that the realm is more important than whoever sits on the Iron Throne. It's a point that will be important to the choice Jon will have to make.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

12 minutes ago, Frey family reunion said:

Sort of.  I think it’s probably more complicated than that.  But yes, the crux of the matter is that Arthur took a vow that would have led to the harm of an innocent life.  And Howland pointed out the Knight’s dilemma to Arthur, which is the impetus that caused Arthur to allow Eddard to kill him, rather than Arthur willfully violate his sworn vow.

I don't think Arthur needed Howland to point out the conflict in his vows. Arthur would certainly have been amongst those who supported the idea of Rhaegar making a better king, and I think that's what he saw as the solution to the conflict he and every other truly honorable man in the service of Aerys was facing.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

17 minutes ago, three-eyed monkey said:

I don't think Arthur needed Howland to point out the conflict in his vows. Arthur would certainly have been amongst those who supported the idea of Rhaegar making a better king, and I think that's what he saw as the solution to the conflict he and every other truly honorable man in the service of Aerys was facing.

I’m sure deep down Arthur was aware of the conflict in serving under King Aerys, but the issue is how does one, who’s entire life is based on honor and fulfilling one’s vows, navigate the waters when various vows conflict with each other.  

Jaime sure never figured it out.  Even Barristan, realizes that his sworn service to Aerys was problematic:

Quote

But no. That was not fair. He did his duty. Some nights, Ser Barristan wondered if he had not done that duty too well. He had sworn his vows before the eyes of gods and men, he could not in honor go against them … but the keeping of those vows had grown hard in the last years of King Aerys’s reign. He had seen things that it pained him to recall, and more than once he wondered how much of the blood was on his own hands. If he had not gone into Duskendale to rescue Aerys from Lord Darklyn’s dungeons, the king might well have died there as Tywin Lannister sacked the town. Then Prince Rhaegar would have ascended the Iron Throne, mayhaps to heal the realm. Duskendale had been his finest hour, yet the memory tasted bitter on his tongue.

But what really makes it problematic is if Arthur knew that Aerys orders also coincided with Rhaegar’s wishes.  Because it seems that Arthur very much loved and respected Rhaegar.  

Link to comment
Share on other sites

19 minutes ago, Frey family reunion said:

I’m sure deep down Arthur was aware of the conflict in serving under King Aerys, but the issue is how does one, who’s entire life is based on honor and fulfilling one’s vows, navigate the waters when various vows conflict with each other.  

Jaime sure never figured it out.  Even Barristan, realizes that his sworn service to Aerys was problematic:

Jaime did figure it out. When the king is about to kill a bunch of innocent people you stop him. Jaime acted with true honor, he did the right thing and his conscious is clear. Jaime has regrets about some things he has done, like pushing Bran, but he never grieves for Aerys.

Barristan stood by his vow, but he is the one with regrets because he stood by and did nothing.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

45 minutes ago, three-eyed monkey said:

Jaime did figure it out. When the king is about to kill a bunch of innocent people you stop him. Jaime acted with true honor, he did the right thing and his conscious is clear. Jaime has regrets about some things he has done, like pushing Bran, but he never grieves for Aerys.

Barristan stood by his vow, but he is the one with regrets because he stood by and did nothing.

Honour (the real kind) vs duty.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

15 minutes ago, kissdbyfire said:

Honour (the real kind) vs duty.

Exactly. And this point is highlighted further by the fact that killing Aerys was Jaime's most notorious hour, which defined him as a man with shit for honor. Meanwhile, saving Aerys at Duskendale is considered Barristan's finest hour, defining him as a great knight of the kingsguard. Essentially, the true meaning of honor has been lost in Westeros.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Still, Ned and Howland versus Arthur may not have been what happened at all here, enlightening as the conversation is.  I propose a trade was made between Howland and Arthur to Ned though not necessarily with hostility.   Up front I am not married to this alternative nor as passionate about it as some seem to be about possible outcomes already discussed.  It's just an idea I like for its simplicity. 

Meera relates her father's adventures with fondness for Lyanna Stark in particular, but all the Starks.   Ned reinforces Meera's sense of fondness in his own thoughts of her father, Howland Reed.  There is mutual good will here.  In Ned's absence Howland dreams and sends his children to Ned's son Bran with ancient oaths of loyalty.  That worked out well.  Howland seems a bit prescient, doesn't he?  Makes one wonder just how Ned knew to go to the Tower of Joy in the first place.

I submit that Howland Reed was the source of Lyanna's location probably indirectly from Ashara Dayne as they became lovers at Harrenhal.  Arthur loved his sister who may have been married for all I know, to Reed at this time, but was certainly pregnant if not delivered of a child fathered by Howland.  A trip down south kills 2 birds with 1 stone.  Let's go get our girls.  

Arthur Dayne would have known Ned and his posse were coming and his good brother would have been among them to soften what blows awaited him.  Arthur would have girded his loins to accept what Ned's honor would accept, death or even trade.  Your sister for my sister.  I imagine in Arthur's mind he knows this means going away, leaving his life and identity.  The Watch?  Sure.  The Quiet Isle?  Sure.  Random Red Shirt in the Neck?  Sure.  His concern is getting his Rhaegar sympathizing sister and her baby safely away from Baratheon reach forever.  

The Sword of the Morning cannot do this in front of witnesses.  He had to wait for his "brothers" to be killed as well as the rest of Ned's crew.  Then Howland calls time out and they talk.  That "they" we keep talking about actually comes up in the crypts with Robert.  "They" is real, not ravings.  Someone else was there.  We still can't know who it was, but it was either someone disposable or someone very close.   We know Ned and Howland split up.  I assume Arthur accompanies Howland as far as the Neck, where he goes with Ashara and Meera while Howland goes to deliver Jon and Wylla to Cat.  Oh joy.  Ned eventually comes home and no one is none the wiser.  Arthur and Howland and Ned have all virtually performed the same trick at the same time.   Their honor is intact and at least one lady is happy.     

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Quote

They had been seven against three, yet only two had lived to ride away; Eddard Stark himself and the little crannogman, Howland Reed.

AGOT, Eddard X

These are Eddard's own thoughts after he wakes from the fever dream.  So unless he's lying to himself, Arthur and everyone else is dead.  If he were speaking, I might suspect trickery with the wording, but it's his own thoughts.

I suspect that Howland helped simply by dividing Arthur's attention and effort.  Essentially, more men than he could handle.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

35 minutes ago, Nevets said:

AGOT, Eddard X

These are Eddard's own thoughts after he wakes from the fever dream.  So unless he's lying to himself, Arthur and everyone else is dead.  If he were speaking, I might suspect trickery with the wording, but it's his own thoughts.

I suspect that Howland helped simply by dividing Arthur's attention and effort.  Essentially, more men than he could handle.

Right and he thinks about them finding him with Lyanna and Howland taking his hand when he's with Robert in the crypts.  I want to say he also thinks of the 8 cairns right there, too.  It's possible He goes back down and finishes Dayne off, but awkward? 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 minutes ago, Curled Finger said:

Thank YOU, Lady for taking that bullet for the rest of us. 

Right? I’m being so altruistic lately… PJ the other day, OotGH today. Phew, I’m exhausted and need a holiday now. :lmao:

Link to comment
Share on other sites

6 hours ago, three-eyed monkey said:

Lots of women die in childbirth in the books, even when attended by midwives and maesters. It's a big risk either way.

Infant mortality and, more rarely, maternal mortality, are still a problem today but most people still opt for hospital or at least a midwife for a home birth.  People look to minimise risk when the consequences are so awful.  But why take the risk with the third head of the dragon?  Particularly as Rhaegar knows from Elia's experience how difficult and dangerous childbirth can be for both mother and child.

It's possible but it seems a huge gamble.  Rhaegar's wife and children are at The Red Keep and however unstable Aerys has become, ordering this grandchild's execution seems unlikely so I don't know that Rhaegar would be so concerned with secrecy above all else as to risk both mother and child.  I mean Lyanna dies so maybe he did but it's almost like he was inviting this.

6 hours ago, three-eyed monkey said:

Mance and Dalla's son give us a clue to this. He was fed on goats milk until a wet nurse could be found. And what did Stannis have to say about that?

I suspect Jon was on goats milk until he reached Starfall.

I assume Val or one of the other women knew what to do.  Ned and Howland are two man childs at this point in story with no practical parenting or goat-milking skills so watching them try to milk wild goats across Dorne or leave a blazing trail as two Northern noblemen buying goat's milk or swaddling clothes for a motherless newborn while asking the way to Starfall tickles me somewhat.  It is possible and "needs must" but it seems a big ask for two soldiers used to having squires, serving men and retainers.  I think we can say that the sooner a nursemaid is on hand the better for all concerned.

Stannis sending to the mountain clans echoes the likely scenario of Ned and Howland offering a generous payment to a local woman to accompany them and care for the child but of course that leaves another witness and voice to tell.  Secrecy is tricky here.  Did they camp out every night?  Good enough for soldiers, not so good for babies.

6 hours ago, three-eyed monkey said:

Everyone at the Wall knows the name Arthur Dayne but most would have ever seen the man up close. There are a few who probably did, like Rykker and Thorne, and there was one person at the Wall who I believe worked it out, but I'll come back to them.

I'm with the "only two had lived to ride away" being definitive and why Ned is so sad remembering the death, pointless as it was, of a man he admired so much. 

The other problem, beyond recognition, with Qhorin being Dayne is that he deliberately chooses Jon for the scouting mission in The Skirling Pass, a high risk mission, then gives Jon a virtual suicide mission to infiltrate The Wildlings (and makes Jon kill him).  If he's Dayne he knows who Jon is and presumably some of what Rhaegar found in those books, yet here he is buying into the narrative that The Wildlings are the enemy and Rhaegar's child of prophecy can be sacrificed to stop "savages in skins from stealing women" as Mormont put it. 

Qhorin seems a typical man of The Watch, smarter than Marsh or Smallwood, more honourable than Thorne or Slynt, but in the same boat as Donal Noye or Denys Mallister, admirable enough and with his own courage and sense of honour and duty but with his focus on the wrong version of The Watch's purpose.  He can be all this without being Dayne hidden in plain sight like Selmy was and, unlike Selmy but rather like Craster, he's dead so any identity reveal seems too late.

I've enjoyed your posts, though, even if I'm not sold :cheers:

Link to comment
Share on other sites

6 hours ago, the trees have eyes said:

Infant mortality and, more rarely, maternal mortality, are still a problem today but most people still opt for hospital or at least a midwife for a home birth.  People look to minimise risk when the consequences are so awful.  But why take the risk with the third head of the dragon?  Particularly as Rhaegar knows from Elia's experience how difficult and dangerous childbirth can be for both mother and child.

It's possible but it seems a huge gamble.

It may have been a gamble Rhaegar was forced to take.

Summerhall is likely to be somewhere Rhaegar and Lyanna visited on their travels, and I'd speculate that's where Jon was conceived, based on nothing but a sense of poetry. Starfall would be an obvious destination if they were looking for a castle with a maester and midwife and a household they felt they could trust. The Tower of Joy is between both places and on the route. It may be that Rhaegar planned on taking Lyanna to Starfall but the child came early or a heavily pregnant Lyanna was unable to travel any further.

6 hours ago, the trees have eyes said:

Rhaegar's wife and children are at The Red Keep and however unstable Aerys has become, ordering this grandchild's execution seems unlikely so I don't know that Rhaegar would be so concerned with secrecy above all else as to risk both mother and child.  I mean Lyanna dies so maybe he did but it's almost like he was inviting this.

There's grandchildren and then there's a half-Stark bastard. Aerys didn't seem too enamored with his Dornish-smelling grandchildren, who he had brought back to King's Landing to pretty much act as hostages. Do you think Doran could have moved against the king without fear for those hostages, just because they were the king's grandchildren? I doubt it. With the Stark's in rebellion, Lyanna and child would be more valuable to Aerys than Elia and her children.

7 hours ago, the trees have eyes said:

I assume Val or one of the other women knew what to do.  Ned and Howland are two man childs at this point in story with no practical parenting or goat-milking skills so watching them try to milk wild goats across Dorne or leave a blazing trail as two Northern noblemen buying goat's milk or swaddling clothes for a motherless newborn while asking the way to Starfall tickles me somewhat.  It is possible and "needs must" but it seems a big ask for two soldiers used to having squires, serving men and retainers.  I think we can say that the sooner a nursemaid is on hand the better for all concerned.

Milking a goat is not that complicated and it's not an uncommon practice in Westeros when mother's milk runs dry and no wet nurse is available. When Lady Glover's milk ran dry, Asha sent her men to find a wet nurse, but all they could find was a goat. I really don't think it's beyond Ned or Howland to milk a goat, no more than skinning a rabbit, cooking food, or gathering firewood.

Howland: You can milk a goat?

Ned: Uh-huh. You can milk anything with nipples.

Howland: I have nipples, Ned. Can you milk me?

7 hours ago, the trees have eyes said:

Did they camp out every night?  Good enough for soldiers, not so good for babies.

Yes, same as they would have if Wylla was with them on the journey to Starfall.

7 hours ago, the trees have eyes said:

I'm with the "only two had lived to ride away" being definitive and why Ned is so sad remembering the death, pointless as it was, of a man he admired so much. 

When Ned thinks about the Tower of Joy he gets sad because of Lyanna. Ned never thinks of killing Arthur or being sad because he killed someone he admired.

Quote

They had been seven against three, yet only two had lived to ride away; Eddard Stark himself and the little crannogman, Howland Reed.

They is the subject of the sentence, and they had been seven against three, not seven and three. They is Ned and his companions, and the second clause of the sentence refers to the subject, which is they, who were seven. So only two of Ned's companions rode away.

7 hours ago, the trees have eyes said:

The other problem, beyond recognition, with Qhorin being Dayne is that he deliberately chooses Jon for the scouting mission in The Skirling Pass, a high risk mission, then gives Jon a virtual suicide mission to infiltrate The Wildlings (and makes Jon kill him). 

I don't think Qhorin thought it was a suicide mission to scout the pass. The idea of scouting missions is to return and report. I mean it's war and they are in hostile territory already at the Fist. Qhorin might have felt Jon was as safe with him.

Qhorin's interest in Jon was immediate. He seems to be testing Jon's character when he orders him to kill Ygritte, which is natural when we consider the Targaryen coin flip between mad or great.

Qhorin talks of maids on wedding nights, which Jon finds odd but is afraid to ask what he's referring to. This is the exact same technique GRRM uses in Ned's conversation with Bran. There's more to know but the pov was afraid to ask or later wished he had asked. What wedding do you think Qhorin is referring to? What do you think he means when he adds that he forgot how beautiful a fire could be? It can't be too long since he's seen a fire. This all seems to me to be Qhorin, sitting with Rhaegar's son, quietly thinking back to Lyanna and Rhaegar.

Then, when the mission goes sideways thanks to Orell seeing them through his eagle, and they are hunted down, he gives his own life to give Jon a chance at survival.

8 hours ago, the trees have eyes said:

If he's Dayne he knows who Jon is and presumably some of what Rhaegar found in those books, yet here he is buying into the narrative that The Wildlings are the enemy and Rhaegar's child of prophecy can be sacrificed to stop "savages in skins from stealing women" as Mormont put it. 

Qhorin seems a typical man of The Watch, smarter than Marsh or Smallwood, more honourable than Thorne or Slynt, but in the same boat as Donal Noye or Denys Mallister, admirable enough and with his own courage and sense of honour and duty but with his focus on the wrong version of The Watch's purpose. 

Qhorin sent Stonesnake back to Mormont with instructions to tell the Old Bear that the trees have eyes again, which suggests that he's realizing that there's more going on than a wildling invasion.

I agree he would have talked about prophecy with Rhaegar, the realms pending doom, the Long Night, the war for the dawn, the prince that was promised, the dragon has three heads, and all that. That adds to Arthur's motive to take the black in the first place.

As the end draws near Qhorin makes Jon recite his oath, which is about defending the realm from the Others when darkness gathers. Then he says this:

Quote

The flames were burning low by then, the warmth fading. "The fire will soon go out," Qhorin said, "but if the Wall should ever fall, all the fires will go out."

I think he's clearly worried about the Others here, who it is said hate fire. Why would wildlings put all the fires out?

8 hours ago, the trees have eyes said:

I've enjoyed your posts, though, even if I'm not sold :cheers:

Thank you. I appreciate the robust argument.:cheers:

Link to comment
Share on other sites

11 hours ago, Curled Finger said:

I want to say he also thinks of the 8 cairns right there, too. 

While every corpse has a cairn, not every cairn has a corpse.

The story goes that Arthur died at the tower, but it wouldn't take long for someone to figure out something's not quite right with the story if there were only seven cairns. Seven died in the fight. Three survived. I like those numbers in this context.

Ned is not usually the type to leave his fallen men behind.
 

Quote

 

"Jory and the others …"

"I gave them over to the silent sisters, to be sent north to Winterfell. Jory would want to lie beside his grandfather."

It would have to be his grandfather, for Jory's father was buried far to the south. Martyn Cassel had perished with the rest.

 

Ned would surely have shown Martyn the same respect he'd later show Jory, but at the time circumstance prevented Ned from returning the bodies of his men back North. However, he had years to come back for their remains and return them to their families. He returned Lord Dustin's horse, but never over the next 15 years or so did he do anything about returning his bones, much to Lady Dustin's annoyance. I don't think Ned was the type of lord who would needlessly disrespect his bannermen like that.

Again, this is part of the price Ned paid to keep his promise. Just like he could not deny the rumors about Ashara, or him slaying Arthur, he could not allow the cairns to ever be excavated with without risking the truth being exposed. Better that he left them untouched and suffered the disdain of Lady Dustin and any other families that might think less of him for it.

Not just the northern families though. I really feel Ned would have done the same for the fallen kingsguard and their families if he could.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

15 hours ago, three-eyed monkey said:

Jaime did figure it out. When the king is about to kill a bunch of innocent people you stop him. Jaime acted with true honor, he did the right thing and his conscious is clear. Jaime has regrets about some things he has done, like pushing Bran, but he never grieves for Aerys.

Barristan stood by his vow, but he is the one with regrets because he stood by and did nothing.

The problem is you're kind of assuming that characters who are reputed to be "virtuous" in the Westeros setting are considered virtuous based on your moral code.  But it doesn't seem that everyone operates in the same way.

Obviously Eddard had every reason to hate and want to kill Aerys Targaryen.  Despite this, Eddard despises Jaime because he sees Jaime as an oathbreaker.  Jaime should have been defending Aerys, not killing him, because he swore an oath.

Eddard, personally, executes another man, a man completely broken, because he violated his oath and abandoned the Night's Watch.  For Eddard it didn't matter why he deserted, the fact that he did desert subjected him to the death penalty.

So now, the reader is relying on Eddard's POV, when Eddard says that Arthur is the most honorable knight he knew.  It's doubtful based on Eddard's moral compass, that he would have given Arthur that honor, if Arthur had already abandoned his vow to Aerys and knowingly betrayed Aerys.  

So the question remains, how does a Kingsguard stay loyal to his solemn vow to a King, yet still maintain his earlier, more basic vows to protect the weak and the innocent?  

So I can see that you're espousing the Qhorin is secretly Arthur theory.  Which to be honest, I find fairly silly.  But I understand how you came to the conclusion.  I think GRRM has intentionally created parallel between the two characters.

Now just because he has created a parallel, doesn't mean he's hinting at a secret identity.  So if GRRM wants us to equate Qhorin with Arthur, perhaps he also wants to create a parallel in how each character met his fate.  That he allowed a "Stark" to kill him.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.

×
×
  • Create New...