The Rhaegar + Lyanna = Jon thread, Part VIII

[FalseSpring]

I have a feeling aemon told jon something before he went off, since aemon and rhegar shared correspondence about "the prince that was promised" and probably about lyanna as well.

Keep in mind I'm still finishing up aFfC =]

[Quanta]

No, please don't get me wrong. There is nothing in the text that says Rhaegar and Lyanna were married, just as there is nothing in the text that says Jon is their son. That being said, it has been argued - by me for one - that the presence of the Kingsguard trio at the Tower of Joy, as opposed to at least one of them racing to join Viserys on Dragonstone, is best explained by the presence of the heir to the throne at the Tower. The first duty of the Kingsguard, as Jaime tells us, is to protect the king, not his son's mistress, nor his bastard child, and not the child of a disproven understanding of prophecy, but to protect the king. Yet, if Ned's dream is to be believed - which I do in its main particulars - these three paragons of "Kingsguarddom" knowingly ignore this first duty to guard Viserys, and instead seemingly follow their dead Prince's last orders in contradiction to their oaths. I think that calls into question whether or not the heir - either a baby Jon or an infant Aegon - is there with the trio. I would continue to argue that fits best with what we know about the events at this time. If they are there to guard the heir, and Jon is that heir, that can only be so if Rheagar and Lyanna were married.

I don't think the presence of the Kingsguard lends much weight to Rheagar and Lyanna being married. The best explanation for their presence is that Rheagar ordered them to guard a pregnant Lyanna. If they were solely dedicated to protecting the King, they should have been in Kingslanding protecting Aerys, or on the trident protecting his heir. Or in Kingslanding protecting Elia and Rheagar's first born son, not in Dorne protecting his pregnant second wife assuming they were married. However, beyond all reason, they are in Dorne. They were there because of orders, probably Rheagar's, possibly Aerys's.

Their continued presence after the death of most of the royal family could be explained by Lyanna's child being the new legitimate King. It could also be because they felt it more honorable or dutiful to fulfill their final orders. Honorable because Visearys is fleeing and the Kingsguard would rather die fighting than run. Dutiful because they feel following their final orders takes presidence over protecting the new King.

[undertow]

Yes, she is in the crypt. Or at least from what we have been told, I doubt Ned would let his sister lie somewhere else.

A second note, as much as I am all for the R+L=J, I have a qualm.

Many people have thought that it would allow Jon to ascend to the throne, this just can't happen. Not that I wouldn't like to see that(though I prefer him as the underdog)Jon is a bastard no matter what the case is, R was already in wedlock and has had children through that marriage. Regardless of how much he "loved" L it doesn't make Jon any less of a bastard. It would be a joy to find out he was a Stargaryen or a Targaryark, but he wont be able to sit on the iron throne unless he was allowed too. Who would be able to do that, Stannis nearly gave him the rights to Winterfell, it wouldn't be likely that "Azor Ahai Reborn" would allow jon the right to the iron throne and a Targaryen wife when he himself has his claim to it.

Who else would be able to legitimize Jon? could Dany?(supposing she won the throne)

Is there anyone else?

What if he takes the thrown as a Stark, not a Targaryen? Because of R+L=J, the only person in the 7 kingdoms with a better claim is Stannis. When Stannis dies (and die he will), Jon accepts / is forced to accept Robb's proclamation, and R+L=J gets made public, Jon has a pretty straightforwards claim as the most legitimate king around. Sansa and the Arryns might present a hiccup in that plan, though.

[Errant Bard]

Aemon Targaryen had a big claim, but Robert was crowned king.

Only power and will combined can make that thing happen. For the moment Jon has neither. Though it's probable he'd get some support and thus power with a claim over a Targaryen inheritance (though it really should be even less credible than Bolton's "Arya"), to have enough support handed over to him just because he said something would keep in line with the way he's been treated so far, and that's bad. (I am talking, among other things, about his killing of Qorin Halfhand and that escapade with the wildlings... he just had to say two words, and poof, it's forgiven and forgotten and he's elected chief because everyone trusts him.) But to have him be forced to to take the throne (heh, it was thrown, he had to catch it) would be ten times worse, it would keep him an undeserving spineless loser, who doesn't work for what he gets, and doesn't even have a will of his own so he just accepts what is handed to him.

Meh, there's a widely known Targaryen (make that two actually) and nobody threw thrones at them.

[SFDanny]

I don't think the presence of the Kingsguard lends much weight to Rheagar and Lyanna being married. The best explanation for their presence is that Rheagar ordered them to guard a pregnant Lyanna. If they were solely dedicated to protecting the King, they should have been in Kingslanding protecting Aerys, or on the trident protecting his heir. Or in Kingslanding protecting Elia and Rheagar's first born son, not in Dorne protecting his pregnant second wife assuming they were married. However, beyond all reason, they are in Dorne. They were there because of orders, probably Rheagar's, possibly Aerys's.

Their continued presence after the death of most of the royal family could be explained by Lyanna's child being the new legitimate King. It could also be because they felt it more honorable or dutiful to fulfill their final orders. Honorable because Visearys is fleeing and the Kingsguard would rather die fighting than run. Dutiful because they feel following their final orders takes presidence over protecting the new King.

When the trio are ordered to the Tower of Joy Aerys is king and he is guarded by at least one member of the Kingsguard and is inside one of the strongest fortresses in all of Westeros with many thousand loyalist forces behind its high walls. Rhaegar certainly has three members of the Kingsguard with him when he fights at the Trident. All of that makes sense. It also makes sense that the trio would follow Rhaegar's orders to guard Lyanna, or Lyanna and her child, under those circumstances. It makes little or no sense for all three to still be there when Ned shows up. By then, as shown by their dialogue with Ned, they know Aerys, Rhaegar, Aegon, Elia, and Rhaenys are all dead. They know they are the only still loyal members of the Kingsguard left alive and free. They know where Viserys is and they have a relatively secure route - through Dorne and then by sea to Dragonstone - to get to him. It is then that the contradiction of oaths comes into play. If all that we are told of the oaths they take is true, at least one of them should be on his way to Dragonstone, not sitting at the Tower with their dead Prince's mistress, or his bastard child. It doesn't make any sense - I don't care how much they loved Rhaegar, or Lyanna, or the newborn child, or believed in Rhaegar's view of a disproven take on old prophecy. Their oath tells them they have to first secure the king - unless the king is already with them and not on Dragonstone. That means at least one of their members needs to be with him. That's not just my view, its also Ned's view who is incredulous to find them still guarding his sister when they should have been elsewhere. Aside from some weird explanation we can't yet see, this trio are either traitors to the Targaryen cause who ignore their oaths and throw away their lives, or they are are men who will fulfill their orders unto their deaths guarding their king. My bet is on the latter. If that is true, and that king is the newborn Jon, it can only be true if Rhaegar and Lyanna were married.

[Curethan]

Well, being that Dayne was Rheagar's best friend, I can see the possibility that Rhaegar had confided in them about the prophecy of fire and ice, or whatever it is that his actions seem to have been motived by. Assuming so, and that they all three were convinced of its veracity, they believed what they were doing there was in the best interests of the dynasty. And maybe, to reconcile their actions with their oaths, they had to die in defence of whatever they were set to guard.

[SFDanny]

Well, being that Dayne was Rheagar's best friend, I can see the possibility that Rhaegar had confided in them about the prophecy of fire and ice, or whatever it is that his actions seem to have been motived by. Assuming so, and that they all three were convinced of its veracity, they believed what they were doing there was in the best interests of the dynasty. And maybe, to reconcile their actions with their oaths, they had to die in defence of whatever they were set to guard.

If that was the case then by the time Ned arrives they know Rhaegar was wrong. Not only is he dead, but both of his children are dead - the first two heads of the dragon according to his understanding of the prophecy. The trio show they know these facts in their response to Ned, so if they decide to not fulfill their oaths to guard their king, their first duty, then they are doing so knowing that Rhaegar's understanding of the prophecy was wrong. Does it really seem likely that all three men would make such a decision to follow Rhaegar into death to fight for a bastard child while abandoning their honor and their king when they know the child isn't the "third head of the dragon"? Does that sound like the White Bull? Whent? Or the finest knight in the Kingsguard, Ser Arthur Dayne? Makes no sense at all to me, given the facts as we know them. Particularly when to fulfill their oaths all they have to do is send one of their members to Dragonstone? It isn't an either/or proposition. They can guard Lyanna and her child, if she has one, AND guard Viserys - supposedly their new king. The fact they don't send one of their number to Dragonstone speaks volumes about who is at the Tower they die in defense of - most likely the heir is there. That means either Aegon or a newborn legitimate child of Lyanna with Rhaegar.

[Quanta]

There is a major problem with your theory SFDanny, the Kingsguard could not have known that Lyanna's child would have been male. Even if Lyanna and Rheagar were married a daughter would have been behind Visearys in the line of succession. Since Lyanna had to have given birth very shortly before Ned shows up, assuming her bed of blood referenced a birthing bed, then they could not have known her child would be male.

That all being besides the point that if they had any intention of leaving the Seven Kingdoms for any reason they should have taken Lyanna and fled.

My argument is that the 3 who were guarding Lyanna would not flee for any reason, with or without Lyanna because either their duty or honor would not allow it. My guess is that it was honor more than duty. The quote from Ned's dream is something like, "The Kingsguard do not flee". My guess is that they see flight as cowardice and would rather stay and die fighting as their honor and duty demands. None of which requires Lyanna be wed to Rheagar, only that they be ordered to guard her.

As to the other discussion of Jon ascending the Iron Throne, GRRM has gone to great lengths to establish Jon's conmitment to the Night's Watch. Throughout the series Jon's honor has been tried and he's come back more devoted each time. His character is set; he will not leave the Night's Watch. By the end of the series Jon is either going to remain bound by his oath or dead. Pretty much any other result would be bad writting as it would render a good deal of Jon's story up to this point moot. Jon Snow is Ned Stark's son, if not by birth, then by deed.

P.S. Maester Aemon did not have a claim to the Iron Throne. He forswore his claim when he put on his maester's chain. He made this doubly so by joining the Night's Watch just to make sure the point sunk in so no one would try to use him against his younger brother.

[undertow]

I have a hard time believing that GRRM can justify a non-R+L=J plot in the narrative. He's kept it secret for 14 years, so it had better have a damned big impact on the story. If it were Ashara, it could have a minor impact. If it were Wylla, it would have a negligible impact. Lyanna and Rhaegar is the only story that could potentially have an impact equal to its hype.

[SFDanny]

There is a major problem with your theory SFDanny, the Kingsguard could not have known that Lyanna's child would have been male. Even if Lyanna and Rheagar were married a daughter would have been behind Visearys in the line of succession. Since Lyanna had to have given birth very shortly before Ned shows up, assuming her bed of blood referenced a birthing bed, then they could not have known her child would be male.

Well, no, it's not a problem - major or minor. One would assume it is a problem only if we know they receive the news of the results of the sack and the death of Aerys and Aegon, Rhaegar's heir, well before a child is born or a child is born before they get the news and it was a girl. We know Jon is born "eight to nine months" prior to Daenerys. We know she is born "nine moons" after her mother and brother's flight to Dragonstone. All of which puts Jon's birth anywhere from the time of the Sack to about six weeks after it. As it takes some time for news to travel in Westeros (minus working Obsidian Candles) it would be very difficult for the news to reach the Tower of Joy much before Ned gets there, So add the fact the most likely candidate for the cause of Lyanna's death is puerperal fever - something that can develop up to 10 -11 days after a birth, and what you have is the Kingsguard trio doing their duty by order of Rhaegar up to the time news reaches them, which could well be after a child is born, and could still be a week or so before Lyanna dies and Ned arrives.

That all being besides the point that if they had any intention of leaving the Seven Kingdoms for any reason they should have taken Lyanna and fled.

Which means that when they find out the news they likely couldn't flee with Lyanna - her being too near her due date or still recovering, or not recovering, from just having given birth to a child.

My argument is that the 3 who were guarding Lyanna would not flee for any reason, with or without Lyanna because either their duty or honor would not allow it. My guess is that it was honor more than duty. The quote from Ned's dream is something like, "The Kingsguard do not flee". My guess is that they see flight as cowardice and would rather stay and die fighting as their honor and duty demands. None of which requires Lyanna be wed to Rheagar, only that they be ordered to guard her.

Yeah, but I buy this line of reasoning much less than I do almost any other. The Kingsguard swore an oath that places their responsibility to their king and to his family over any such questions as personal honor. The Kingsguard doesn't flee as Ser Arthur says because, as Ser Gerold explains, "[w]e swore a vow." That vow was to protect their king, not to win glory or defend one's personal honor before duty. So, no, it means they certainly don't bend their knees to other kings, as Ser Arthur says, nor do they run away, even if it means their own life - when it comes to doing their duty - but if to do their duty to safeguard their king it means they must run, and run as fast as they can - then that's what they must do. Personal glory or honor doesn't enter into it. That is if you believe these men are true to their vows, which I do.

As to the other discussion of Jon ascending the Iron Throne, GRRM has gone to great lengths to establish Jon's conmitment to the Night's Watch. Throughout the series Jon's honor has been tried and he's come back more devoted each time. His character is set; he will not leave the Night's Watch. By the end of the series Jon is either going to remain bound by his oath or dead. Pretty much any other result would be bad writting as it would render a good deal of Jon's story up to this point moot. Jon Snow is Ned Stark's son, if not by birth, then by deed.

I agree with you here. My bet is the Jon ends up both true to his oath and dead. Just my guess. Of course, that doesn't mean he won't be tempted to forsake his vows or that the struggle to decide won't take up much of the remaining series.

P.S. Maester Aemon did not have a claim to the Iron Throne. He forswore his claim when he put on his maester's chain. He made this doubly so by joining the Night's Watch just to make sure the point sunk in so no one would try to use him against his younger brother.

Maester Aemon makes it very clear he had very hard choices to make in keeping his vows as maester and member of the Night's Watch. So while it would be hard for me to see him making any other choice than what he does, it was still a choice of his not to renounce his vows and take up a claim to the throne. If he had done so, at least at some of the points in his life, he would likely have had support for his claim.

[Curethan]

The nature of prophecies in ASoiF seems to be that they are bifurcated - if, than, else type equations (the fire casts many shadows, the unclear green dreams that could have multiple interpretations et al). Is it not possible that Rheagar knew of the possibility that he and his first two children would die, in which case he might have prepared for this eventuality?

Witness the different interpretations of duty/loyalty that Stannis' hand (one of the Florents) had, compared to what he would have done if he held to Stannis' faith, for an example of my meaning.

I merely present this arguement that the possibility is there for the Kingsguard to be there whilst still holding to their honour. Really, it is specualtion either way and cannot really support or deny the theory that R+L=J imho.

[FalseSpring]

Wasn't the third head of the dragon supposed to be female? Rheghar's third child shouldve been Visenya to go along with Aegon the conquerer's sisters. So Maybe if it was female, she would be the third head, if it was male, it would be the heir.

[Drowned Princess]

Wasn't the third head of the dragon supposed to be female? Rheghar's third child shouldve been Visenya to go along with Aegon the conquerer's sisters. So Maybe if it was female, she would be the third head, if it was male, it would be the heir.

I agree, I think regardless of the sex of the child Rhaegar would forsake everything for it to be protected because of his obsessive belief in the prophecy of the dragon with three heads. I think that Rhaegar put that prophecy above everything else, even his siblings. If he believed Viserys was that important then he would have been mentoned in the vision Dany sees of Rhaegar and Elia, but he's not. Rhaegar says "there must be one more". He can't then believe the third would have already been born to say this, yet Viserys was already around. Therefore he would definitely place his third child ahead of Viserys and Dany-foetus, in order (in his mind) to fulfil the prophecy, the prophecy that was more important than his own life. And I think the remaining Kingsguard would follow him on that, necessitating a split of the Kingsguard.

It seems to me that everything that happpened, happened quickly, and so the news of Aegon and Rhaenys's murders would not have reached the ToJ yet when the three Kingsguard were given their orders, or they may not even have happened yet; and so the three-headed dragon the way Rhaegar believed it would still have been a possibility. At that point there would then be Kinsguard at Kings Landing with Aerys and the other two heads, and so enough to guard Lyanna and the baby - the third head - would be at the ToJ. The important part being that all three supposed 'heads' were being guarded - as was the king - despite the fact that Viserys and Dany were not, since they were not as important to the prophecy. Rhaegar himself's death again is somewhat incidental - it's the three heads that matter.

Do we know if Aerys was aware of the prophecy and what effect it had on him if he did? The only bit I can't reconcile is the difference between orders to the Kingsguard from the royal family and orders from the King Himself...

[SFDanny]

I agree, I think regardless of the sex of the child Rhaegar would forsake everything for it to be protected because of his obsessive belief in the prophecy of the dragon with three heads. I think that Rhaegar put that prophecy above everything else, even his siblings. If he believed Viserys was that important then he would have been mentoned in the vision Dany sees of Rhaegar and Elia, but he's not. Rhaegar says "there must be one more". He can't then believe the third would have already been born to say this, yet Viserys was already around. Therefore he would definitely place his third child ahead of Viserys and Dany-foetus, in order (in his mind) to fulfil the prophecy, the prophecy that was more important than his own life. And I think the remaining Kingsguard would follow him on that, necessitating a split of the Kingsguard.

Your view of what Rhaegar thought about the prophecy may or may not be correct, but to my way of thinking it's not really the point. It is almost certain that it is Rhaegar who ordered the Kingsguard to the Tower - given Martin's remarks on the subject <see the last thread> - but the question is really centered around the conduct of the Kingsguard after they find out Rhaegar, Aerys, Elia, Rhaenys, and Aegon are all dead AND therefore Rhaegar's view that his children are the three heads of the dragon in fulfillment of ancient prophecy was untrue. So let's assume what you say is true about Rhaegar's motivations. When he is dead, when the Kingsguard know by the deaths of his oldest two children (assuming the presence of another) that Rhaegar was wrong in his belief that his children would make up the three heads of the dragon and fulfill the prophecy, then why would three intelligent men, all said to be paragons of what it takes to be a members of the Kingsguard, choose to follow the orders of a dead prince and a disproven prophecy in exclusion of the oath that defines them? Not that they can't do both, but they choose to do one in exclusion of the most important thing their oath tells them they must do, guard their new king. Does that make any sense? I don't think so.

Their actions only really make sense if their is no contradiction between those actions and their oaths; meaning their is no contradiction between all of them staying at the Tower of Joy to guard Lyanna, and perhaps her child, and guarding the heir to the throne. Because the heir to the Targaryen throne is already with them. Then, and only then, is ignoring Viserys understandable. Daenerys doesn't enter into their calculations because at one to two months pregnant Rhaella maybe the only one who knows at this point she is carrying another child of Aerys.

Now that does not mean the heir is Jon, but given the timing of his birth and how he shows up and the rumors around his birth, Jon has to be the top candidate for the heir at the Tower. If he is, that can only be true if he is the legitimate son of Rhaegar and Lyanna. Which means that somewhere in the months of seclusion the two wed.

It seems to me that everything that happpened, happened quickly, and so the news of Aegon and Rhaenys's murders would not have reached the ToJ yet when the three Kingsguard were given their orders, or they may not even have happened yet; and so the three-headed dragon the way Rhaegar believed it would still have been a possibility.

Of course they were given their orders well before the news of the deaths of Rhaegar's children arrives at the Tower. The deaths occur after Rhaegar's own death by about a week, and about the same time as the death of Aerys, so their is no question that the only two men who could have ordered the three Kingsguard to stay at the Tower did so much in advance of these events. It is likely that they were given the orders when Rhaegar leaves the south and takes up command of the royalist response to the rebellion. This is after the Battle of the Bells and many months previous to the Battle of the Trident and the Sack of King's Landing - in fact, about the time of Jon's conception.

At that point there would then be Kinsguard at Kings Landing with Aerys and the other two heads, and so enough to guard Lyanna and the baby - the third head - would be at the ToJ. The important part being that all three supposed 'heads' were being guarded - as was the king - despite the fact that Viserys and Dany were not, since they were not as important to the prophecy. Rhaegar himself's death again is somewhat incidental - it's the three heads that matter.

Assuming again that Rhaegar's orders are motivated by the prophecy, something I think is true but think that other factors weigh heavily here as well - his love of Lyanna being the most important example, then, yes, the stationing of the Kingsguard makes sense. The orders make sense at the time Rhaegar gives the order. It does not make sense when the Kingsguard trio becomes aware, many months later, of the events of the Trident and the Sack of King's Landing. At that point their oaths bind them to protect their king as their first duty and the continued stationing of all three remaining loyalist members of the Kingsguard at the Tower makes no sense unless the heir is there with them.

Do we know if Aerys was aware of the prophecy and what effect it had on him if he did? The only bit I can't reconcile is the difference between orders to the Kingsguard from the royal family and orders from the King Himself...

We don't know if Aerys was aware of the prophecy, but we do know that Rhaegar appears to be the one given the responsibility by his father to command the loyalist response, including the disposition of the Kingsguard.

[Guest Other-in-Law]

On the question of who the KG should protect if Lyanna was married to Rhaegar but had not yet given birth when they learned Aerys had died, I believe they would have to wait to see what sex the child was. There are real world examples of posthumous rulers. In the first case, his uncle Philip didn't immediately declare himself king after the Hutin's death, but had to wait to find out. I'd say the KG would have had to do the same.

[The SmilingKnight]

I think atleast Arthur Dayne believed in the prophecy and to an extent forswore his vows to guard "the king". Probably the other two Kingsguard as well.

The situation just before the war was far less simple then it seems at first look. Aerys was the king still in name but i think everyone knew what he was and that Rheagar will be King shortly.

Also we dont know what the prophecy is- as far as i can tell. It definetly wasnt only about Dragin heads.

We can deduce that it was about coming of long winter, Others showing up again and the prince that was promised who was supposed to play a significant role in saving all humanity.

Now thats important - "all humanity".

What would a kingsguard do if breaking his vows - not following them to the letter - would save whole human race, all of Westeros and even the world - and following them would?

And yet we have no idea about the details of the prophecy at all.

Those could be sufficient for three kingsguard to not follow their original task of protecting either Aerys or Rhaegar but to stay and protect Lyannas child (doesnt matter if its female or male at all) not because it was the next king, but because of the child's role in saving the world.

Also, they could have believed prophecy so much that they were certain the child would be male.

Yes we all know how adamant were those legendary kingsguard at their duty and vows, but this situation was something entirely different.

As we know the whole Song of Ice and Fire is about men trying to hold their vows in situations and events that do not allow it at all. From that conflict one of the most powerful stories, moments and memorable characters are born.

Those times, so far, are the most crucial and most significant times in all of the story.

And remember the words of Arthur Dayne "Now it begins"?

I fear he wasnt talking about fighting Ned at all.

[Prince of the North]

And remember the words of Arthur Dayne "Now it begins"?

I fear he wasnt talking about fighting Ned at all.

I agree with you on this, SK! I think Elia and Arthur and Ashara Dayne (and probably others) were all in Rhaegar's "inner circle" in terms of trying to fulfill the prophecy and I posted the following awhile back about what I think may have been referred to when Arthur said "Now it begins" and Ned replied "No, now it ends".

I have yet another alternate explanation of Ned's and Arthur's exchange (surprise!) Could it have been that, in finding out about Lyanna's whereabouts, Ned also found out a bit about a mad plan to fulfill a prophecy? When Arthur said "And now it begins", could he have been referring to the War for the Dawn (or, at least, beginning preparations for it) while Ned answering "No, now it ends" could have been merely saying that he was there to put an end to this madness and bring his sister home? I don't know. Just throwin' that out there...

[The SmilingKnight]

I think thats most likely too, yes. Looking at it now.

Certainly he could have been referring to both in a sense since the fight with Eddard was an event in a long chain of events they were anticipating.

/

No matter their vows and legends told about some we know very well that men of the kingsguard are in the end - just men. Examples are many. If you want to - you can see those as clues Martin left around.

I think, between Aerys clearly being an insane monster, Rhaegars discovery of the prophecy and war starting to unfold in a way confirming the prophecy on a global scale - it was enough for some of them to find themselves in an impossible situation of choosing between blindly following their duty as robots or accepting the higher duty of trying to help save the whole world.

[the average Other]

Regarding the story of Bael the Bard, does anyone else think it strange that Jon hadn't heard it before? Old Nan is supposed to know, like, every story in the North, but she never told the kids this one. Even if it is essentially a story about wildlings it takes place in Winterfell, so I'd expect the Starks and the people of the North to at least know of it, even if it isn't exactly their favourite story.

So why didn't Nan tell it? Did Ned order her not to, because he didn't want people comparing Bael and his Stark girl to Rhaegar and Lyanna and getting ideas? Or maybe Old Nan drew the same conclusions about Lyanna and Jon as we did, and chose to stay quiet about it herself.

Could be yet another hint pointing at R+L=J. Sorry if this has been discussed before.

[SFDanny]

I think atleast Arthur Dayne believed in the prophecy and to an extent forswore his vows to guard "the king". Probably the other two Kingsguard as well.

I have no problem believing Ser Arthur bought into Rhaegar's version of prophecy, up until King's Landing falls and Rhaegar's children die. Ser Arthur, Whent, and Hightower are seemingly intelligent men who can be assumed to understand Rhaegar's vision was wrong when not only he, but his children, die before fulfilling any part of being "three heads of the dragon."

None of which means Ser Arthur or Ser Oswell or Ser Gerold "forswore" their vows by guarding Lyanna up to when they receive the news of the events at the Trident and King's Landing. They are there on orders, almost certainly Rhaegar's orders, and as such they are fulfilling their vows while other members of the White Swords guard Aerys and Rhaegar. The only way we get to the three being oathbreakers is if they ignore their duty to guard their new king in the chaos that follows the Sack.

In that situation the three men have either decided their duty lies in staying at the Tower or they are overcome by the course of events before they can do anything about it. The latter case seems very unlikely to me given that all it would take would be for one of their members to travel through Dorne, a still loyal province, to the port of Starfall, something Ned does later on when he returns the Sword of the Morning to the Daynes - under much more dangerous circumstances. Once reaching the port of Starfall, a trip by ship to Dragonstone, with Robert's forces still lacking the battle fleet to attack the island for many months, would seem something a skilled knight of the Kingsguard would have no trouble attempting. So unless we think the news of the Sack reaches the Tower of Joy almost immediately before Ned arrives, then it is hard to understand why one of them doesn't attempt the trip - unless they have no need to do so because the heir is already with them.

The situation just before the war was far less simple then it seems at first look. Aerys was the king still in name but i think everyone knew what he was and that Rheagar will be King shortly.

I disagree completely here. It is obvious that Aerys was effected by the events at Duskendale many years before, but the extent of his madness doesn't become clear until he deals with Brandon and his company is such a monstrous manner.

Also we dont know what the prophecy is- as far as i can tell. It definetly wasnt only about Dragin heads.

True, but we know Rhaegar once thought he was the fulfillment of the prophecy and that he later thought his children were the "three heads of the dragon." Both of these versions of the prophecy are disproven with their deaths.

We can deduce that it was about coming of long winter, Others showing up again and the prince that was promised who was supposed to play a significant role in saving all humanity.

Now thats important - "all humanity".

What would a kingsguard do if breaking his vows - not following them to the letter - would save whole human race, all of Westeros and even the world - and following them would?

You might be right if the Kingsguard thought they were still critical to the prophecy's fulfillment, but from what we know they had to know Rhaegar was wrong. Breaking their vows in order to save humanity, when there is still no threat from the Others, for a understanding of an ancient prophecy that has been proven by events to be wrong, seems to be quite a stretch in our view of these three men. Ned certainly can't understand why they didn't do their duty and why they are still guarding his sister. Of course, Ned doesn't know of the prophecy - that we know of - but even so his questions to the trio show that he doesn't understand why they are there.

And yet we have no idea about the details of the prophecy at all.

We know some details - those you have already stated - and we know from Maester Aemon something about what Rhaegar thought.

Those could be sufficient for three kingsguard to not follow their original task of protecting either Aerys or Rhaegar but to stay and protect Lyannas child (doesnt matter if its female or male at all) not because it was the next king, but because of the child's role in saving the world.

Their task to guard Aerys and Rhaegar was given to others of their order and as such they were free to follow the orders given to them by Rhaegar. They never had to make a decision contrary to their vows concerning guarding their king - up until they receive the news of the Trident and the Sack - and then only if Viserys is their King.

As to Lyanna's child's role in "saving the world," there is no such threat at the time and we know Rhaegar's version of the prophecy had Aegon as the Prince Who Was Promised - not any child of Lyanna.

Also, they could have believed prophecy so much that they were certain the child would be male.

I don't think they could have taken the chance that it was not the heir, if Lyanna had married Rhaegar.

Yes we all know how adamant were those legendary kingsguard at their duty and vows, but this situation was something entirely different.

It's entirely different in that the line of Targaryen rule that they are sworn to protect is under peril like it had never been in the past. Which would call for them to fulfill their first duty and protect their new king. There is nothing to show that humanity is under threat of extinction from a resurgent ancient enemy that would mitigate that duty in anyone's eyes.

As we know the whole Song of Ice and Fire is about men trying to hold their vows in situations and events that do not allow it at all. From that conflict one of the most powerful stories, moments and memorable characters are born.

I agree with you here. It is a theme that runs through all of Martin's story, and that is why it is so unbelievable that these three men aren't confronted by the different loyalties their vows would seem to indicate they must address - following Rhaegar's last orders and their first duty to guard their king. The idea that there isn't a problem for the trio is simply unbelievable if we assume the facts as we have them now - all three staying at the Tower when one of their number should be headed to Dragonstone.

Those times, so far, are the most crucial and most significant times in all of the story.

And remember the words of Arthur Dayne "Now it begins"?

I fear he wasnt talking about fighting Ned at all.

I think the story present represents the most critical of times in all the story, background or otherwise - excluding possibly only the time of the Last Hero. Martin is showing us, almost as a side story to the political infighting that plagues Westeros, the rising existential threat to humanity from the Others, and the rebirth of the dragons in response. I seriously doubt Ser Arthur is referencing something that occurs some fifteen years later when he says "Now it begins." If he did so, he was wildly wrong in his timing.