Howland Reed at the Tower of Joy

[the trees have eyes]

2 hours ago, three-eyed monkey said:

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.

I don't think noblemen are abjectly incapable here, but I do think they are used to others doing these things for them.  Again, the risk of keeping a newborn alive all the way to Starfall without seeking assistance from someone with some experience of caring for the child seems a very large risk.

2 hours ago, three-eyed monkey said:

Howland: You can milk a goat?

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

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

My eyes...

Maybe they put a breastplate on the goat first?  So, Three Two Men, A Goat and a Baby? 

2 hours ago, three-eyed monkey said:

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.

Not the scouting mission, though that was high risk - I mean the infiltration mission.  Mormont asks Jon his wishes before he allows Qhorin to take him.  You can't predict every event but taking a youth on a scouting mission deep in the wilderness when they are on their first ranging without the tradecraft wilderness skills of more seasoned men is a bit daft (it's for story flow and Jon's arc ofc).

Any reveal about Qhorin having a secret identity is far more impactful while they are alive and the penny can drop (Maester Aemon, or Barristan posing as "Arstan") both for the audience and the characters.  Otherwise it's more an Easter egg than a story arc.

[Curled Finger]

1 hour ago, three-eyed monkey said:

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.
 

Right.   I brought it up in relation to the "they".  Ned is stone sound when he thinks the they as well as the numbers of KG and his own posse.  I think the whole point of Dustin's horse is to be very clear that there was plenty of transportation available for whomever "they" were.  

[Corvo the Crow]

57 minutes ago, the trees have eyes said:

I don't think noblemen are abjectly incapable here, but I do think they are used to others doing these things for them.  Again, the risk of keeping a newborn alive all the way to Starfall without seeking assistance from someone with some experience of caring for the child seems a very large risk.

My eyes...

Maybe they put a breastplate on the goat first?  So, Three Two Men, A Goat and a Baby? 

Not the scouting mission, though that was high risk - I mean the infiltration mission.  Mormont asks Jon his wishes before he allows Qhorin to take him.  You can't predict every event but taking a youth on a scouting mission deep in the wilderness when they are on their first ranging without the tradecraft wilderness skills of more seasoned men is a bit daft (it's for story flow and Jon's arc ofc).

Any reveal about Qhorin having a secret identity is far more impactful while they are alive and the penny can drop (Maester Aemon, or Barristan posing as "Arstan") both for the audience and the characters.  Otherwise it's more an Easter egg than a story arc.

Big reveal, Wylla is Howland.

[Frey family reunion]

2 hours ago, Curled Finger said:

Right.   I brought it up in relation to the "they".  Ned is stone sound when he thinks the they as well as the numbers of KG and his own posse.  I think the whole point of Dustin's horse is to be very clear that there was plenty of transportation available for whomever "they" were.  

Is this really that big of an issue?  The easy answer, if you believe Lyanna was at the tower of joy on her deathbed, is Howland and Wylla.  If you believe she wasn't at the tower of joy, then the answer is probably Howland and Starfall's maester, and/or whoever else was caring for Lyanna at Starfall.

[Curled Finger]

21 minutes ago, Frey family reunion said:

Is this really that big of an issue?  The easy answer, if you believe Lyanna was at the tower of joy on her deathbed, is Howland and Wylla.  If you believe she wasn't at the tower of joy, then the answer is probably Howland and Starfall's maester, and/or whoever else was caring for Lyanna at Starfall.

Not a big issue at all.  You made the point, Ser, being Lord Dustin's horse was utilized by someone.  

[Bendric Dayne]

Personally, I'm not married to any ideas concerning Arthur Dayne. There's just nothing concrete pointing towards anything, which means almost anything is possible. Like, if he's alive but wants to convince everyone he's dead, the most logical thing for him to do would be to go so far east that no one would ever find him again. Which, story wise, is as good as him being dead so we can't rely on what the most logical thing would be for him to do. This isn't to say we should throw logic out the window and have Arthur Dayne be the Shrouded Lord just cuz, but it just goes to show that we can't rely on anything to come up with something that will really make sense. 

All we have is that Howland saved Ned from Arthur which can mean he isn't dead, but could also mean that he is. The question is, if he's dead like everyone else in the ToJ, why single him out? Even if he died in a more 'special' way than the others, why not just tell us? Like, if Howland killed Arthur then it's 'special' because it's ironic, but that's a nice thing to reveal in the first book. Why make a six or seven book mystery just to reveal that Arthur's death was ironic?

The more I think about it, the less I am convinced about the 'knights dilemma'. I think Arthur had already broken his vows to Aerys by being at the ToJ. The Kingsguard there say, "Our prince wanted us here", not their king. It's safe to assume their king would have wanted them at the Trident, or Kings Landing. If they were going to be protecting anyone from the royal family, it would be Rhaella and her children right? Even if they weren't breaking their vows by being at the ToJ, the knights dilemma still doesn't make sense to me. Ned himself had promised Lyanna to keep Jon safe, which meant lying to his king, which meant forsaking his honor. Why would he kill Arthur just so that Arthur can keep his honor, when Ned is already forsaking his? Wouldn't Ned try to convince Arthur that dying for his honor wasn't worth it? That he should forsake it as Ned himself was doing? Right now, it seems to me that the 'knights dilemma' is a contrived way to have Arthur die at the ToJ whilst satisfying the mystery of Howland saving Ned from Arthur. However, I still think GRRM can find a way to make this happen in a compelling way that isn't contrived. 

Arthur joining the NW makes for a compelling story arch, although I'm not really convinced. He would have to rely quite heavily on luck to pull this off. He'd either have to be lucky enough so as to not get recognized, or for some people to recognize him, but for them to choose not to reveal his true identity. Both of these things are possible, but Arthur can't possibly predict them to be true when he's making the choice to join the NW or not. He just can't choose to join the NW by hoping that people he doesn't know will choose to not reveal his identity. He should be considering worst case scenarios. 'What if someone like Thorne recognizes me and chooses to tell King Robert for a royal pardon? King Robert finds out that Ned lied to him about the ToJ and puts two and two together and realizes that Jon is the son of Rhaegar, not Ned. So he kills the boy and Ned as well, and the whole point of our cover-up is null.' 

If Arthur is alive, what makes most sense to me is that he went to Starfall. His father was probably Lord of Starfall, and since Arthur is believed to be dead, he can't just inherit Starfall publicly. So the public story is that Edric Dayne is Lord of Starfall. I think Edric Dayne would be Arthur's son. This would make Allyria Dayne his aunt, and would explain why GRRM would make a mystery of his parentage. It just bugs me that if Ned Dayne's parents aren't people we know then why not just tell us who they are? Like if Ned's parents are another added sibling of Arthur and Ashara, plus some random lady, then why not just throw their names in the Appendix? I'm assuming his mother will just be some random lady and the reason we don't know her name is because it would be very telling if we knew one of Ned's parents, but didn't know the other one for seemingly no reason. Like even if his father is some new random character, shouldn't people know how he died? If little Ned Dayne is Lord of Starfall at 12 years old, it must be because his father died right? Why not just say that this random dude died falling from a horse or something and that's that, Ned Dayne is Lord of Starfall. The fact that we don't know his parents could be because his father (where he gets his Dayne name from) is somehow important and probably someone we already know. But, like everything else concerning Arthur Dayne, there's just not a lot of concrete evidence, so I'm not married to this idea either. 

So in the end, Arthur probably died at the ToJ somehow. I'd like to think that GRRM tells us that Howland saved Ned from Arthur because it isn't as straightforward as Arthur dying at the ToJ. But in the end any evidence pointing towards any other outcome is very scarce. So we can't come up with anything too convincing, but it's still fun to speculate. So I'm looking forward to any reveal concerning Arthur and the ToJ in general. 

[TheLastWolf]

On 2/28/2023 at 1:19 AM, Bendric Dayne said:

He was beat up by three squires that Lyanna went on to beat, so wouldn't he be more a liability in battle than an asset?

Even Clark Kent had to get his driver's license before donning the cape

[three-eyed monkey]

3 hours ago, Frey family reunion said:

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.

It's not based on my moral code, it's an analysis of a theme in the books about oaths and honor. I'm using the literal definition of honor, which is the quality of knowing and doing the right thing. I'm applying that to the conflict in keeping an oath to protect the innocent and and oath to protect a king, when the king is the one the innocent need protecting from. What is the honorable thing to do in that situation? What is the right thing to do?

Jaime raises this exact dilemma with Jon Darry outside Rhaella's bedchamber.

Quote

The day he burned his mace-and-dagger Hand, Jaime and Jon Darry had stood at guard outside her bedchamber whilst the king took his pleasure. "You're hurting me," they had heard Rhaella cry through the oaken door. "You're hurting me." In some queer way, that had been worse than Lord Chelsted's screaming. "We are sworn to protect her as well," Jaime had finally been driven to say. "We are," Darry allowed, "but not from him."

You can't serve both oaths. Darry is breaking his oath to protect Rhaella in order to uphold his oath to Aerys. If it was anyone else raping Rhaella then he would not hesitate to protect her, I hope we all agree that's the right thing to do. However, because the offender is the king he swore to protect it's not so straight forward. If he intervened it would cost him his place in the kingsguard, his honor, and probably his life. But as Maester Aemon says, there comes a day in every man's life when it is not so easy, a day when he must choose.

Jaime chose to protect the people of King's Landing over Aerys. I think lots of us would agree that was the right thing to do. Jaime thinks so, because he never grieves for Aerys. His character is rewarded with a clear conscience for his choice, which tells us that he made the right choice.

In the last years of Aerys reign, Barristan too found the conflict in oaths difficult. He stood back and did nothing, just like Darry outside the bed chamber. He has regrets about that. This tells the reader that this character made the wrong choice.

4 hours ago, Frey family reunion said:

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?  

This is essentially the thematic question raised in the books. It's put to the reader when we learn why Jaime killed Aerys and his insistence that you can't keep all your vows because they conflict. This theme is explored though scenes like that with Rhaella and Jon Darry, Aerys murdering the Starks in the Red Keep, Barristan looking back with regrets. The characters like Jaime and Barristan choose to tackle the conflict in different ways. Jaime's choice leads to a loss of reputation but a clear conscience. Barristan's choice leads to maintained reputation but regret.

Just as GRRM asks the question through his characters, he answers the question that way too as the story develops. He's telling us through the characters that you have a choice. You can choose like Barristan, look away and maintain your reputation but you may end up regretting it. Or you can do as Jaime did, it might cost you your reputation but your conscience will be clear because you did the right thing.

5 hours ago, Frey family reunion said:

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.

There's more to it than that and it is connected to the same theme discussed above. Ned explains his reasons to Bran.

Quote

In truth, the man was an oathbreaker, a deserter from the Night's Watch. No man is more dangerous. The deserter knows his life is forfeit if he is taken, so he will not flinch from any crime, no matter how vile.

Kings too are sworn to protect the realm. It's why they are styled like that - King Robert Baratheon, first of his name, king of blah blah blah, and Protector of the Realm. So kings can be oathbreakers too once they stop protecting the realm and it's people, as they are sworn to do.

As Cersei told Ned, when you play the game of thrones you win or you die. Like a deserter, Cersei knows her life is forfeit if she taken, so she will not flinch from any crime, no matter how vile. Aerys also committed vile crimes, which would have culminated in the wildfire plot if not for Jaime. That again is why Jaime did the right thing.

5 hours ago, Frey family reunion said:

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.

The clearer parallel is actually between Qhorin and Jaime, the boy who wanted to be Arthur Dayne.

[three-eyed monkey]

6 hours ago, the trees have eyes said:

Not the scouting mission, though that was high risk - I mean the infiltration mission. 

Qhorin didn't plan on that when he took Jon with him. But once things went sideways and they couldn't shake their foe, Qhorin devised that as the best way he felt Jon might survive, and even sacrificed his own life to give Jon the best chance of succeeding.

6 hours ago, the trees have eyes said:

You can't predict every event but taking a youth on a scouting mission deep in the wilderness when they are on their first ranging without the tradecraft wilderness skills of more seasoned men is a bit daft (it's for story flow and Jon's arc ofc).

Begs the question, why was Qhorin so interested in bringing this green boy with him? As you say, it seems daft but Qhorin doesn't seem the daft type.

6 hours ago, the trees have eyes said:

Any reveal about Qhorin having a secret identity is far more impactful while they are alive and the penny can drop (Maester Aemon, or Barristan posing as "Arstan") both for the audience and the characters.  Otherwise it's more an Easter egg than a story arc.

I think it's too early to make the point, just as it is too early for the reveal from Howland. Jon needs to move to a position where he has a choice to make between pushing a claim for the throne or choosing to defend the the realm. I suspect from a story structure point of view this will be Jon's final plot point, the start of the third act of his story, the big decision that will move him towards the series climax. That's when the point of Arthur's full arc from white cloak protecting the king to black cloak protecting the realm will have relevance to Jon's decision.

[three-eyed monkey]

3 hours ago, Bendric Dayne said:

If Arthur is alive, what makes most sense to me is that he went to Starfall. His father was probably Lord of Starfall, and since Arthur is believed to be dead, he can't just inherit Starfall publicly. So the public story is that Edric Dayne is Lord of Starfall. I think Edric Dayne would be Arthur's son. This would make Allyria Dayne his aunt, and would explain why GRRM would make a mystery of his parentage. It just bugs me that if Ned Dayne's parents aren't people we know then why not just tell us who they are?

Yeah, we don't have much about the Daynes. From what I recall, Arthur's father was the Lord of Starfall. Arthur had a brother and two sisters. We don't have a name for Arthur's brother, but we are told he became Lord of Starfall, presumably after their father had passed. Ned Dayne is the son of Arthur's unnamed brother and so inherited the title. Arthur was Ned's uncle, Ashara and Allyria his aunts.

People often assume that Arthur must have been the younger brother given that the other brother was Lord. I think we shouldn't rule out that Arthur could have been the older brother but he chose the kingsguard over his inheritance. This would parallel Jaime. And committing to knighthood ahead of his inheritance might be part of the reason he is considered "worthy" to carry Dawn.

[Frey family reunion]

57 minutes ago, three-eyed monkey said:

Just as GRRM asks the question through his characters, he answers the question that way too as the story develops. He's telling us through the characters that you have a choice. You can choose like Barristan, look away and maintain your reputation but you may end up regretting it. Or you can do as Jaime did, it might cost you your reputation but your conscience will be clear because you did the right thing.

Once again, I think you are mistaking GRRM’s moral compass or what he is trying to convey as right or wrong through the story, with the moral compass he has given Eddard.  He has made Eddard a sympathetic character, but that’s not the same thing as saying that the author thinks Eddard has all the correct answers for the reader.  

So when the author has Eddard comment that Arthur was the finest knight he ever knew, we have to look at that through the eyes of Eddard and not necessarily the eyes of the author.

As for Jaime, living his life with a clean conscience, I don’t think we’ve read the same story.  Jaime has lived his live with utter self-loathing, knowing that his honor is shit.  He is a casual murderer, murdering Ned’s guards for revenge for the imprisonment of Tyrion.  Casually shoving a child out of a window to keep his and his sister’s secret.  A secret where once again we find Jaime casually disregarding his vows as a Kingsguard by betraying the king he is supposed to serve as he secretly continues an affair with his King’s wife, his sister.

Nor can Jaime blame all of his faults with King Aerys appointing him to the Kingsguard with an ulterior motive.  Especially since Jaime’s main motive for joining the Kingsguard wasn’t a desire to serve and die for the King, but instead so he could keep fucking his sister undisturbed by any unwanted marriage proposals.

So no, I don’t think the author is telling us that Jaime has lived his life with a clear conscience.  

[three-eyed monkey]

7 minutes ago, Frey family reunion said:

Once again, I think you are mistaking GRRM’s moral compass or what he is trying to convey as right or wrong through the story, with the moral compass he has given Eddard.  He has made Eddard a sympathetic character, but that’s not the same thing as saying that the author thinks Eddard has all the correct answers for the reader.  

So when the author has Eddard comment that Arthur was the finest knight he ever knew, we have to look at that through the eyes of Eddard and not necessarily the eyes of the author.

The author creates the theme through the characters. I don't know why you keep going back to Eddard when I'm saying the theme in question is created mainly by Jaime and Barristan.

10 minutes ago, Frey family reunion said:

As for Jaime, living his life with a clean conscience, I don’t think we’ve read the same story.

No, you're not reading what I said. I said Jaime has plenty of regrets, like pushing Bran, but as far as his decision to kill Aerys he has no regrets.

Quote

I promise you, I never grieve for Aerys.

[the trees have eyes]

32 minutes ago, three-eyed monkey said:

Qhorin didn't plan on that when he took Jon with him. But once things went sideways and they couldn't shake their foe, Qhorin devised that as the best way he felt Jon might survive, and even sacrificed his own life to give Jon the best chance of succeeding.

But that's my point.  Why take him on a high risk scouting mission rather than leaving him with the main force of 300 men if it's so vital that he survive?

34 minutes ago, three-eyed monkey said:

Begs the question, why was Qhorin so interested in bringing this green boy with him? As you say, it seems daft but Qhorin doesn't seem the daft type.

It really does.  Jon is a typical teenager, eager for adventure who thinks nothing can happen to him.  Benjen turns him down when he tries to volunteer for a ranging while still a recruit.  Mormont is reluctant to let him go.  They both know he's not really ready for this.  Three scouting parties go out, only one returns iirc.  Qhorin wants his wolf but I'm really leaning to this being GRRM's way of getting Jon in a pickle rather than Qhorin being Dayne and choosing to take Jon on a high risk mission to get to know him.

40 minutes ago, three-eyed monkey said:

I think it's too early to make the point, just as it is too early for the reveal from Howland.

It feels a bit too tenuous for me.  Barristan has a purpose turning up to serve Dany and this has legs because he gets to atone for agreeing to serve Robert, "The Usurper", by serving Dany now.  In general the adults of the Robellion period shuffle off stage to make way for their children.  Qhorin could have been used like Barristan if he were Dayne but in story he's no different to Donal Noye, giving his life in a noble self-sacrifice.  Learning he was Dayne doesn't exalt his actions any more than it diminishes Noye's so unless there was something Qhorin had to impart to Jon, other than an example and adult guidance like from Noye, Aemon and Mormont and arguably Mance too, I don't really see why GRRM would do this.  It feels like a dead end.

That's just me, though 

[Bendric Dayne]

38 minutes ago, three-eyed monkey said:

Arthur had a brother

Do we know this? I don't recall any mention of Arthur having a brother in the books. It might just be that I can't remember, but he doesn't seem to get a mention. Edric calls Ashara and Allyria his aunts, but conveniently doesn't speak of Arthur so he doesn't call him his uncle (if he does, then I'm just not remembering). Edric also never seems to mention his parents at all.

In the 'AWOIAF' app Edric's father isn't listed as a sibling in Arthur's or Ashara's page. He's only mentioned in Edric's page where they say Edric is the son of a sibling of Arthur and Ashara and Allyria. And they mention how Edric is Lord of Starfall after his father's untimely death. So Edric's father is only mentioned twice in an app and never in the books. So he's mentioned as few times as possible and doesn't even have a name. Is GRRM just being lazy? He can easily come up with a name for this dude, he came up with one for Edric's aunt, but not his own father? 

Edric's father is not likely to be Arthur, but what is the reason for GRRM being so mysterious with him if he's just a random sibling who's already dead? If he just gave us a name for him then we wouldn't question that he's sibling to the other Daynes. It seems like an unnecessary mystery IMO if both of his parents are irrelevant.

If Arthur is Edric's father then the app is kind of forced to lie to hide that information. This can explain why any mention of this sibling of Arthur's is mentioned as little as they possibly can. The thing that bugs me the most is that GRRM came up with a name for Edric's aunt (which I get is important because she establishes the connection between him and Beric; but when she gets mentioned Edric can just to refer to her as 'his aunt', GRRM doesn't need to come up with a name for her) but he doesn't come up with a name for his father or mother. If there is no mystery behind their identities, then the only explanation is that GRRM was too lazy to come up with a name for them which I would find hard to believe. 

So just to be clear, I don't actually think that Arthur is Edric's father for a bunch of reasons, but I still think it could be possible. Unless there's some damning information that I can't recall. Either way I feel like there should be some sort of mystery regarding one of Edric's parents which would explain why we have so little information on them. If there isn't, it's fine I guess, it would just bug me.

[kissdbyfire]

1 minute ago, Bendric Dayne said:

Do we know this?

Yes. Arthur Dayne’s brother is Edric “Ned” Dayne’s dad.

[Frey family reunion]

1 hour ago, three-eyed monkey said:

The author creates the theme through the characters. I don't know why you keep going back to Eddard when I'm saying the theme in question is created mainly by Jaime and Barristan.

The reason I keep going back to Eddard, is because Eddard is the one who called Arthur the finest knight he knew.  So the question is, what happened at the tower of joy that elevated Arthur above everyone else?

My guess is, Eddard would not consider Arthur the finest knight he knew because Arthur had betrayed his oath to Aerys in favor of Rhaegar.  

So something happened at the tower of joy which very much impressed Eddard as it came to Arthur’s honor.

What I think happened is that Arthur found a way around Jaime’s knight dilemma.  He knew he couldn’t carry out a vow he made as a Kingsguard without violating a more basic vow he took as a knight.  But he also knew he took a vow to Aerys to serve him throughout his life.  So as not to violate that vow, he let Eddard kill him. And my guess is in the heat of battle, it was Howland who stepped in and reminded Arthur that he was a knight before he was a Kingsguard, and unlike Gerold and Whent who fought to the death to try and stop Eddard and company from preventing them from carrying out their vow to Aerys, Arthur let Eddard win, died on the sword, and died keeping his honor intact.

[Frey family reunion]

28 minutes ago, kissdbyfire said:

Yes. Arthur Dayne’s brother is Edric “Ned” Dayne’s dad.

Yep, from ASOS:

Quote

"There was an Arthur Dayne," she remembered.  "The one they called the Sword of the Morning".

"My father was Ser Arthur's elder brother.  Lady Ashara was my aunt.  I never knew her, though.  She threw herself into the sea from atop the Palestone Sword before I was born."

 

[Bendric Dayne]

52 minutes ago, kissdbyfire said:

Yes. Arthur Dayne’s brother is Edric “Ned” Dayne’s dad.

 

22 minutes ago, Frey family reunion said:

Yep, from ASOS:

 

Ah yes. I definitely did not remember that quote. Either way he could be a cover up but I doubt it. Like I mentioned earlier, I don't actually believe that Arthur is Edric's father. I'm still curious as to what everyone thinks about Edric's father not having a name. Was GRRM just being lazy? He comes up with a name for the aunt but not the father which I think is weird. It can be nothing in the end but you never know. There could be some mystery regarding him, but I don't really see the point tbh. It just kind of bugs me that he is given no name for seemingly no reason other than GRRM not wanting to give him one.

[kissdbyfire]

4 minutes ago, Bendric Dayne said:

 

Ah yes. I definitely did not remember that quote. Either way he could be a cover up but I doubt it. Like I mentioned earlier, I don't actually believe that Arthur is Edric's father. I'm still curious as to what everyone thinks about Edric's father not having a name. Was GRRM just being lazy? He comes up with a name for the aunt but not the father which I think is weird. It can be nothing in the end but you never know. There could be some mystery regarding him, but I don't really see the point tbh. It just kind of bugs me that he is given no name for seemingly no reason other than GRRM not wanting to give him one.

I don’t think there’s any mystery in Edric’s dad not having a name yet. W/ soooo many characters he has to give names to, it’s understandable he just didn’t bother w/ one he wasn’t going to use or at least not immediately. I mean, Ned’s mum remained nameless for decades. 

[Many-Faced Votary]

And we still don't know anything about Lady Lyarra!