The R+L=J thread, part XII

[UnHoly1]

Yes, Martin loves this. He loves showing us characters who have to deal with conflicting oaths. What do you do with conflicting oaths? Where no matter what you do you can't win, not completely. Well, if you're lucky, at least you can sort of prioritize and choose the manner of losing that you can most live with. Ned does this (if R+L=J) when he chooses to betray his best friend and king to protect his innocent nephew. Jaime does this when he chooses to betray his king (whom, it should be noted, he didn't like anyway) in order to protect thousands of innocent KL residents. Jaime even talks about this with Brienne when he says something like (paraphrasing)"They make you swear and swear until there's no way you can honor them all."

Then, I believe Martin twists this concept a bit more with Brienne. She is given a doozy of a "Morton's Fork" choice. Either she vows to kill Jaime, which she doesn't want to do, or she, Hyle, and innocent lad Pod all die (I think innocence is an important concept in ASoIaF). I believe Brienne will say "sword" because it serves the very important immediate need of keeping them all alive. Especially Pod. I think she would possibly die rather than vow to kill Jaime if it was just her life on the line but she won't want to let poor, innocent Pod die. Then, of course, it will be absolutely delicious to follow along with her as she sruggles with the implications and repercussions of vowing to kill Jaime ;)

True.... but with GRRM, maybe she won't have to break her oath to kill Jaime... I never saw the Red Wedding coming... but should have with the Late Frey's banter about Catelyn's request for salt and bread....

with a shock like that.... well, we all really know that no one is safe... but Jaime could go long before he reunites with Brienne. Thus, our beautiful Lady Brienne may be spared...

Alas, this belongs in another thread... my apologies for the derailment....

[Ser Pistus]

I am a fan of the R+L=J theory, but I think I found something against it. Quite a big something, actually. Why did Ned kill the Kingsguard knights and most of his own men?

Imagine the situation. The knights are guarding the Tower. Now Ned Stark comes with his men. And...

Ned: "Sers! Lyanna is my sister and the baby is my nephew. They are my blood. I would never harm them. However, if the Lannister or Baratheon men arrive, they will kill the baby for sure. You cannot save him, sers. But I can."

Okay, if Ned doesn't know about the baby, the scene changes a bit, but not a lot. Like this:

Ned: "I have come for my sister, sers, and don't you dare step in my way."

Ser Arthur Dayne: "I am sorry, Lord Stark. We swore a sacred oath to protect the little prince."

Ned: "To protect the WHAT?"

Even if they only talk about battles and bending knees and whatnot, and not a word about the real issue (like in Ned's dream), that does not change anything. The Kingsguard knights must know that the baby is doomed, unless... unless they give him to his uncle, who can hide him and protect him. If they kill the uncle, they practically kill the baby too.

[Dragonfish]

I am a fan of the R+L=J theory, but I think I found something against it. Quite a big something, actually. Why did Ned kill the Kingsguard knights and most of his own men?

Imagine the situation. The knights are guarding the Tower. Now Ned Stark comes with his men. And...

Ned: "Sers! Lyanna is my sister and the baby is my nephew. They are my blood. I would never harm them. However, if the Lannister or Baratheon men arrive, they will kill the baby for sure. You cannot save him, sers. But I can."

Okay, if Ned doesn't know about the baby, the scene changes a bit, but not a lot. Like this:

Ned: "I have come for my sister, sers, and don't you dare step in my way."

Ser Arthur Dayne: "I am sorry, Lord Stark. We swore a sacred oath to protect the little prince."

Ned: "To protect the WHAT?"

Even if they only talk about battles and bending knees and whatnot, and not a word about the real issue (like in Ned's dream), that does not change anything. The Kingsguard knights must know that the baby is doomed, unless... unless they give him to his uncle, who can hide him and protect him. If they kill the uncle, they practically kill the baby too.

But if there was no baby, then this makes even less sense. Why would the Kingsguard die to protect their dead prince's mistress from her brother?

[Galen M]

I am a fan of the R+L=J theory, but I think I found something against it. Quite a big something, actually. Why did Ned kill the Kingsguard knights and most of his own men?

Imagine the situation. The knights are guarding the Tower. Now Ned Stark comes with his men. And...

Ned: "Sers! Lyanna is my sister and the baby is my nephew. They are my blood. I would never harm them. However, if the Lannister or Baratheon men arrive, they will kill the baby for sure. You cannot save him, sers. But I can."

Okay, if Ned doesn't know about the baby, the scene changes a bit, but not a lot. Like this:

Ned: "I have come for my sister, sers, and don't you dare step in my way."

Ser Arthur Dayne: "I am sorry, Lord Stark. We swore a sacred oath to protect the little prince."

Ned: "To protect the WHAT?"

Even if they only talk about battles and bending knees and whatnot, and not a word about the real issue (like in Ned's dream), that does not change anything. The Kingsguard knights must know that the baby is doomed, unless... unless they give him to his uncle, who can hide him and protect him. If they kill the uncle, they practically kill the baby too.

That's a valid point, but you can also ask the question from the other direction. Why would the KG have stopped Ned from taking his sister home if there was no prince, especially without an explanation. It makes zero sense for them to do that, only protecting a royal prince could explain it.

EDIT: Yeah, what Dragonfish said

[Ser Pistus]

But if there was no baby, then this makes even less sense. Why would the Kingsguard die to protect their dead prince's mistress from her brother?

True.

So my point actually strengthens, not weakens the theory, but there must be something more that we don't know. Interesting.

[Ame]

Did GRRM approve the first couple HBO episodes?

[Xenophon]

Did GRRM approve the first couple HBO episodes?

Approve, no. But he seems to approve of them. ;)

Also, he did speak with the producers during the development of the show, so they got his input that way.

[Galen M]

Approve, no. But he seems to approve of them. ;)

Also, he did speak with the producers during the development of the show, so they got his input that way.

and the producers know the truth of Jon's parentage. It was revealed in an interview that GRRM was "surprised, but pleased" that they were able to figure it out correctly.

[Asarlai]

But if there was no baby, then this makes even less sense. Why would the Kingsguard die to protect their dead prince's mistress from her brother?

Maybe Rhaegar didn't want Lyanna to flee/be taken, and so set them to guard the tower while he went off to battle. He seemed pretty sure that he was going to win; then he dies, the kingdom is taken over, and these Kingsguard are left with a dead royal family, a useless tower, and try to figure out what to do when here arrives one of the "usurpers" to take the tower. Staying true to the last, they must defend the tower, as ordered, even if it isn't particularly worth anything now that Rhaegar is dead. They weren't going to bend the knee anyway; the battle wasn't so much about the tower as it was about their honor and the ending of the war.

[Dragonfish]

Maybe Rhaegar didn't want Lyanna to flee/be taken, and so set them to guard the tower while he went off to battle. He seemed pretty sure that he was going to win; then he dies, the kingdom is taken over, and these Kingsguard are left with a dead royal family, a useless tower, and try to figure out what to do when here arrives one of the "usurpers" to take the tower. Staying true to the last, they must defend the tower, as ordered, even if it isn't particularly worth anything now that Rhaegar is dead. They weren't going to bend the knee anyway; the battle wasn't so much about the tower as it was about their honor and the ending of the war.

The point I was trying to make was that the Kingsguard being willing to fight and die at the Tower of Joy was not evidence against R+L=J. I wasn't trying to say that there was no explanation for the Kingsguard being there if R+L=J is not true.

these Kingsguard are left with a dead royal family

Technically Viserys and Queen Naerys are still alive.

[Asarlai]

The point I was trying to make was that the Kingsguard being willing to fight and die at the Tower of Joy was not evidence against R+L=J. I wasn't trying to say that there was no explanation for the Kingsguard being there if R+L=J is not true.

Well, you said it made less sense, and I just offered up a situation that I think is a legitimate implication from all we know of it.

Technically Viserys and Queen Naerys are still alive.

We're not sure if they know that. Or, if they do, they may not know where they are, or they may have been preparing to go after them when Ned arrived. Maybe not, though; if they know (1) that they're alive, (2) where they are, and (3) that Dragonstone is blockaded by a naval fleet, they may instead choose to trust the loyal man protecting the royal family and make their stand where they had their orders. Not that I think they know all of that; R+L people argue that the Tower of Joy was very isolated, causing Rhaegar and Lyanna to receive very belated news about the war, so if true, the same should hold for the Kingsguard knights.

[Dragonfish]

Well, you said it made less sense, and I just offered up a situation that I think is a legitimate implication from all we know of it.

Ser Pistus said that it didn't make sense for the Kingsguard to fight and die if there was a baby, since they didn't need to protect the baby from his own uncle. My point was that, according to that same logic, it makes even less sense for them to fight and die for Lyanna, since they didn't need to protect her from her own brother. I was just trying to point out the flaw in Ser Pistus' argument; I wasn't saying that the Kingsguard being there made no sense unless there was a baby.

We're not sure if they know that. Or, if they do, they may not know where they are, or they may have been preparing to go after them when Ned arrived. Maybe not, though; if they know (1) that they're alive, (2) where they are, and (3) that Dragonstone is blockaded by a naval fleet, they may instead choose to trust the loyal man protecting the royal family and make their stand where they had their orders. Not that I think they know all of that; R+L people argue that the Tower of Joy was very isolated, causing Rhaegar and Lyanna to receive very belated news about the war, so if true, the same should hold for the Kingsguard knights.

The Kingsguard seem to be aware that Jaime killed the king, so I don't see why they wouldn't also be aware that the rest of the royal family is alive and on Dragonstone.

[Galen M]

The Kingsguard seem to be aware that Jaime killed the king, so I don't see why they wouldn't also be aware that the rest of the royal family is alive and on Dragonstone.

BTW, it's Queen Rhaella, not Narys.

They seem pretty aware of current events, since they talk about how Ser Darry fled with the Prince, but the Kingsguard do not run. It makes no sense for them to make a last stand to protect Lyanna from her own brother if they know Rhaegar is dead (which they know). It could be argued that they were guarding Rhaegar's play toy, but that falls apart once he died. If Viserys was the true heir to the Iron Throne, they'd be there with him. If it's Rhaegar's son, they'd guard him. It really only leaves one conclusion, unless there is some MAJOR information about the tower that we don't know.

[Ser Shabutie]

and the producers know the truth of Jon's parentage. It was revealed in an interview that GRRM was "surprised, but pleased" that they were able to figure it out correctly.

I believe GRRM's reaction to the producers figuring out "Jon's parentage" correctly also further strengthens that Jon's parents are not as obvious as Ned+Wylla.

Why would he be surprised if he's been telling us the whole time? :D

[Galen M]

I believe GRRM's reaction to the producers figuring out "Jon's parentage" correctly also further strengthens that Jon's parents are not as obvious as Ned+Wylla.

Why would he be surprised if he's been telling us the whole time? :D

yes, that was my point. I had previously posted that interview was the strongest evidence for RLJ since the release of Book One.

[Asarlai]

They seem pretty aware of current events, since they talk about how Ser Darry fled with the Prince, but the Kingsguard do not run. It makes no sense for them to make a last stand to protect Lyanna from her own brother if they know Rhaegar is dead (which they know). It could be argued that they were guarding Rhaegar's play toy, but that falls apart once he died. If Viserys was the true heir to the Iron Throne, they'd be there with him. If it's Rhaegar's son, they'd guard him. It really only leaves one conclusion, unless there is some MAJOR information about the tower that we don't know.

No, Ned says those things, and Arthur Dayne makes responses. We don't know how much of it he already knew. And they wouldn't choose to guard the Tower of Joy on their own volition; their dead prince gave them an order, the kingdom is gone, they have nowhere else to go, and they're making their last stand for their honor. They would do the same if the tower was empty and Rhaegar had still told them to hold it.

[Asarlai]

yes, that was my point. I had previously posted that interview was the strongest evidence for RLJ since the release of Book One.

No, the strongest evidence against N+W, which is the stated explanation. It doesn't mean that R+L is any more valid than N+A or some other combination; indeed, given the popularity of the R+L theory and how often Mr. Martin is asked about it, would he really be surprised if someone thought it was that?

[Galen M]

No, Ned says those things, and Arthur Dayne makes responses. We don't know how much of it he already knew. And they wouldn't choose to guard the Tower of Joy on their own volition; their dead prince gave them an order, the kingdom is gone, they have nowhere else to go, and they're making their last stand for their honor. They would do the same if the tower was empty and Rhaegar had still told them to hold it.

No, their Prince was still alive, Viserys did not die until 15 years later. It doesn't matter what Rhaegar said, their new responsibility was to the true heir to the Iron Throne. If it was Viserys, why weren't they with him. They definitely knew that Rhaegar was dead, and they make it pretty clear they know about the others. There is never a look of shock or doubt, but yes, they could just be stoically taking the news. However, Gerold says "We swore a vow." Their vow was to protect the royal family, not a useless tower or a play thing. Unless RLJ, Viserys and Rhaella were the only remaining members of the royal family. How do you reconcile them not protecting the two of them?

[Galen M]

No, the strongest evidence against N+W, which is the stated explanation. It doesn't mean that R+L is any more valid than N+A or some other combination; indeed, given the popularity of the R+L theory and how often Mr. Martin is asked about it, would he really be surprised if someone thought it was that?

Evidence against NWJ is automatically evidence in favor of RLJ (and evidence in favor of NAJ). We have what, 1000 members here? I'm sure the book has sold a million copies. People who believe (or are even aware of) RLJ are still the vast minority. However, you are correct, that it does not contradict NAJ.

[SFDanny]

No, Ned says those things, and Arthur Dayne makes responses. We don't know how much of it he already knew. And they wouldn't choose to guard the Tower of Joy on their own volition; their dead prince gave them an order, the kingdom is gone, they have nowhere else to go, and they're making their last stand for their honor. They would do the same if the tower was empty and Rhaegar had still told them to hold it.

They certainly do have someplace else to go - to Dragonstone and Viserys. Their first duty, as Jaime calls it, is to protect their king, so one has to wonder how the order of a dead prince takes precedence over that part of the Kingsguard oath? I think it doesn't and the explanation has to do with Viserys status - his not being the Targaryen heir. Someone else is and that person is at the tower.