Howland Reed and Arthur Dayne

[kephv]

and i still think the knights of the old kingsguard are alive and well at greywater watch

Ned built eight cairns for the fallen. I think that's enough to suggest they're dead.

[DoomPancakes]

Out of the box thought here...

Where does it list who rode out there with him? Are we positive HR was one of the 7? Or could he have followed them gollum-style and saved the day?

[kephv]

No, HR was one of them. Ned names them all in his ToJ dream.

[corbon]

Why does everyone seem to ignore the fact that this happened several years before ToJ and before Howland just fought through a war with Ned?

The context was KotLT story, which this is exactly contemporary.

But regardless, HR was at the Isle of faces before Harrenhal tourney. He'd just finished up there and that was why he was in the area at all.

And he basically joined up with Ned at the tourney (thanks to Lyanna).

At Harrenhal he clearly lacks ninja-combat skills (being beaten be three aquires that Lyann was able to deal with on her own). But he somehow acquires them while riding with Ned over the next two years? Possible, but much more likely he simply never had them, instead having a high degree of wood/swampsman skills - tracking, camoflage, moving quickly over difficult terrain, that sort of thing.

He probably got better at conventional fighting, to a degree, over those two years with Ned, but it is a laughable proposition to think he turned into a super-combat-ninja during that time.

[corbon]

I would like to point out that although the KG knights were undoubtedly the best of the best (Darkstar's derogatory comments are clearly originated from being jealous), however they were getting old (Dayne was probably older than 40, and Ser Gerold was clearly older) while Ned, and presumably his companions, were in their early twenties. T

Actually Dayne's sister is 'a young maid new at court' and he seems to be a contemporary (close friend) of Rhaegar (unlike the older KG), so he was probably in his mid twenties only - at his very peak in other words.

And some words in parenthesis for the bigamist-Rhaeghar theory:

The ONLY ONE know bigamist Targaryen was Aegon the Conquerer himself, without any doubt. I am deeply convinced that Rhaeghar did NOT marry Lyanna properly (septon and all). That makes Jon a bastard, by all accounts. It may be presumed, however, that Rhaegar, given he is crowned, would have legitimized Jon, and may even name him his heir (however, that, too, would have been a pretty unprecedented case, and may not have been accepted without some turmoil - just think the Dance of the Dragons...).

We should not forget, that everybody was quite sure that the Rebellion will be dealt with easily, until the Battle of the Trident, so even Rhaeghar may have thought that he will ascend to the throne with no problem and carry out all those changes he intended to.

You might want to do some research there before going all bolded caps on us, because you are unfortunately wrong.

Its also made clear in ADwD that no septon is need for a Northern Marriage - just a Heart tree and a witness (KG). And if it was done the northern way in front of a Heart Tree, Bran could yet see it.

The fact is, the only evidence for R+L being married is the response of the KG - they clearly do not believe Viserys is the legal King, so the only way that is true, with them acknowledging Aegon dead, is if there is another legitimate child of Rhaegar. And the only way that happens is a marriage that we don't know about. That is very compelling evidence, all the more compelling for not being obvious at first glance.

[Felagund]

Actually Dayne's sister is 'a young maid new at court' and he seems to be a contemporary (close friend) of Rhaegar (unlike the older KG), so he was probably in his mid twenties only - at his very peak in other words.

That is not decisive. There can easily be 15-20 years in difference between siblings, though it is not a frequent occasion, I admit.

Also, Ser Arthur was considered a living legend. You don't really get that title in your "early twenties". Furthermore: if he was, say, 30, that does not change anything substantially on the main point.

Its also made clear in ADwD that no septon is need for a Northern Marriage - just a Heart tree and a witness (KG). And if it was done the northern way in front of a Heart Tree, Bran could yet see it.

First of all: I don't really think that they could find a heart tree so down south, and though I think Rhaegar would surely agree on a Northern-type marriage for the sake of Lyanna, I kinda doubt that kind of marriage would have been accepted for a member of the (obviously seven-believer) royal house.

Second (and more importantly): She still had a lawful wife. I think bigamy is as much despised by the Old Gods as by the Seven...

The fact is, the only evidence for R+L being married is the response of the KG - they clearly do not believe Viserys is the legal King, so the only way that is true, with them acknowledging Aegon dead, is if there is another legitimate child of Rhaegar. And the only way that happens is a marriage that we don't know about. That is very compelling evidence, all the more compelling for not being obvious at first glance.

This is not evidence, this is speculation (and as such, it is in par with my theory), and it is not made any more probable by a bit by "not being obvious at the first time".

The Kingsguard knights are not for making individual decisions against royal orders. I guess Rhaeghar told them (as their crown prince and as their friend) "Guard this tower, whatever may happen". And they obliged. That's all. They also learned that the Rebellion was victorious and they just wanted to die an honorable death, in my opinion.

I think the changes to be carried out that Rhaegar mentioned to the KG before he left, surely have something to do with the situation of his son. I am almost sure he wanted to legitimize Jon in a way or another, sadly, he did not have the time...

[SFDanny]

That is not decisive. There can easily be 15-20 years in difference between siblings, though it is not a frequent occasion, I admit.

Also, Ser Arthur was considered a living legend. You don't really get that title in your "early twenties". Furthermore: if he was, say, 30, that does not change anything substantially on the main point.

There's nothing decisive about Ser Arthur's age, but I'm in the camp that he is closer to Rhaegar's age than you make out. I say this only because there seems to be a pattern of Rhaegar surrounding himself with young men his age - possibly to better develop loyalties to himself instead of the throne - but Ser Arthur is the first and foremost of his companions. Just a guess.

First of all: I don't really think that they could find a heart tree so down south, and though I think Rhaegar would surely agree on a Northern-type marriage for the sake of Lyanna, I kinda doubt that kind of marriage would have been accepted for a member of the (obviously seven-believer) royal house.

Second (and more importantly): She still had a lawful wife. I think bigamy is as much despised by the Old Gods as by the Seven...

There isn't really a need for spoiler tags on this, so just let me say the important point is the polygamy is not in the least despised by the Targaryens, which is the critical point. Rhaegar seems to be recreating, in his children, Aegon the Conqueror and his sisters as part of his belief that his family will be crucial in fulfilling the prophecy so important to the defeat of the Others and the saving of humankind. While Rhaegar got some of the details wrong, it appears, it also looks like the renewal of polygamous marriage would fit right in with his beliefs of what was necessary. What is or is not the historical position of either the believers of the Old Gods or the New is irrelavent except in two important ways. First, in that we know the followers of both religions accepted Targaryen marriage practices, including polygamy and what both religions considered incest, in a few cases regarding polygamy and many cases regarding incest. Secondly, we know of no evidence showing that either of the two religions were every able to change the law or the practices of the Targaryens in this regard. Unless there is something that shows this to be the case, it makes no difference what the religious beliefs of either religion was regarding polygamy or incest in any case outside the Targaryens. Lastly, we know there are godswoods and heart trees, including weirwoods in the south - just not an abundance of them, so the idea Rhaegar and Lyanna couldn't find a godswood where their vows would be viewed as legitimate just doesn't hold water.

This is not evidence, this is speculation (and as such, it is in par with my theory), and it is not made any more probable by a bit by "not being obvious at the first time".

Of course it's evidence. The conclusions drawn from the evidence are informed speculation.

The Kingsguard knights are not for making individual decisions against royal orders. I guess Rhaeghar told them (as their crown prince and as their friend) "Guard this tower, whatever may happen". And they obliged. That's all. They also learned that the Rebellion was victorious and they just wanted to die an honorable death, in my opinion.

I think the changes to be carried out that Rhaegar mentioned to the KG before he left, surely have something to do with the situation of his son. I am almost sure he wanted to legitimize Jon in a way or another, sadly, he did not have the time...

My understanding is that all of Dance is now open to discussion in all areas of the site excepting the "still reading" forum. So I will remove my spoiler tags.

Sorry, this line of thinking just doesn't hold up anymore after A Dance with Dragons. Selmy confirms what Jaime tells us earlier. There is a hierarchy of vows within the Kingsguard's Oath. First and foremost is the first duty to guard the King - the orders of a dead prince don't come close to overriding that responsibility. The fact (or piece of evidence if you will) that all three of the Kingsguard trio are still at the Tower of Joy points very, very strongly that the heir to the throne is there with them instead of sitting on Dragonstone with Rhaella. The idea that they are just there following Rhaegar's order as a normal Kingsguard response to having been given royal orders, just doesn't hold up to any scrutiny. If they are there, as it appears, knowing full well that at least one of their number needs to be with Viserys, then they are traitors to their oaths. They have abandoned the core of the vows that make their life meaningful. One can argue they all make the same decision that Selmy does to abandon Viserys, but one can't any longer argue that they stay true to their vows by guarding a mistress of a dead prince and possibly her child. That doesn't pass the laugh test any longer.

We are faced with one of three choices based on the actions of the Kingsguard. One, the Kingsguard and Ned's company meet in a remarkable example of bad timing. Meaning the trio has just learned of the news of King's Landing and the Trident and hasn't been able to leave the Tower when Ned shows up. If so, we would think that they would do everything they could to get at least one of their members free from the confrontation so he can get to Dragonstone, but that seems exactly opposite from what they do from Ned's dream recounting of events. The trio, if anything, presses the fight on Ned instead of negotiating to get to Viserys. Or, second, the trio, the three men Ned seems to view of the epitome of what a Kingsguard should be, betray their vows and abandon Viserys. Or, three, the trio die fulfilling their vows to guard their king and their orders from, most likely Rhaegar, because their king is there with them. Given what we know so far, all evidence points to the last possibility.

Now, one shouldn't make the mistake that this very strong evidence then leads to the inescapable conclusion that Lyanna and Rhaegar married and their child was the rightful heir to the throne and it is that child that the trio die trying to save from Ned. I think this is likely the case, but A Dance with Dragons does something else beside putting a stake through the heart of your version of these events. It also, for the first time, gives us a very strong new contender for the role of the heir to the throne whom the Kingsguard trio are guarding. Prior to this book it was easy to dismiss Aegon being alive, but we now have someone claiming he is Rhaegar's heir Aegon and having strong support from others in the story saying his claim is, in fact, true. Aegon could have been at the Tower, and if he was all of the Kingsguard's actions make sense. In short, while the actions of the Kingsguard trio strongly support a legitimate Jon as the son of Rhaegar and Lyanna, this is only true if he and not Aegon is the king the trio is defending. Only other clues point to which, Aegon's or Jon's, is the right claim.

[Aengus Millen]

I always imagined Ned cowering behing Howland while he fought Arthur but I guess this makes more sense.

[LuisDantas]

This has probably been said already, and I am too lazy to look up, but from Ned's flashback in AGoT it is clear that Arthur Dayne and his two companions just would not surrender. They probably did not even expect to survive that fight. Their vow gave them no honorable options other than winning or dying, alas.

For that reason, an honorable, chivalrous fight was not really an option. There is a reason why Ned and Howland Reed had five against only three Kingsguard men. You take those numbers to be honorable, and in that specific case you don't do that to scare them into surrendering either; you fight to survive win and accept that there is no possibility of a truly honorable victory.

As for how, we can only speculate until we learn the specifics from Reed or someone very close to him; there is a very small chance that his children know some bits, but I doubt it. For all we know the fight began with two of Ned's group keeping the other two white cloaks busy while the other five surrounded and overpowered the legendary Sword of the Morning, if only for a moment. Formidable as he was, five to one is a very dangerous disadvantage, and that group was obviously made of very skilled fighters. Maybe a net or poison figured into that fight, but we neither know that nor is it really necessary to assume either. Even Arthur Dayne would be seriously hurt or at least tired after such a fight.

[Sel(l)mysword]

Okay here's my logic and theory...

1) Dayne was unquestionably the greatest knight of his time, in honor and swordsmanship (by Eddard, Barristan, and Jaime)

2) Jaime, the top sword in westeros at the time, vouched for Dayne's ability in outnumbered combated (boasting 5:1)

3) Compared to Dayne regarding skill in combat, TKotLT story would suggest Howland Reed is across the narrow sea

4) ToJ ended with Eddard & Howland v. Dayne, only 2:1

5) Dayne already had Eddard on the ropes at the point when HR made his move, whatever it was, to allow a fatal blow to Dayne

I find it hard to believe that move involved a traditional weapon, including trident or bow or net, simply because of Dayne's prowess in combat. I don't think GRRM would kill the SotM simply by way of combat. The concept is similar to the killing of unbeatable Khal Drogo: a battle wound is infected by a slave. Also, Jaime's unbeatable swordplay is lost with his hand, Robb Stark's undefeated army is slain to bits at the dinner table. To beat the unbeatable with a fair narrative the balance has to *be* tipped away from their favor.

So, blah blah blah, my theory is this: I believe Howland Reed at least attempted to slip into Dayne's skin, both allowing the fatal blow to fall on Dayne and at the same time debilitate HR just enough to keep him in Greywater for all of our time as readers in *westeros*.

This is just my theory...add on or shoot it to pieces. I'm just throwing it out there :dunno:

[Slurms McKenzie]

So, blah blah blah, my theory is this: I believe Howland Reed at least attempted to slip into Dayne's skin, both allowing the fatal blow to fall on Dayne and at the same time debilitate HR just enough to keep him in Greywater for all of our time as readers in *westeros*.

This is just my theory...add on or shoot it to pieces. I'm just throwing it out there :dunno:

I won't shoot it to pieces. I like your theory. It has style and pazzaz.

[The King in the South]

That is not decisive. There can easily be 15-20 years in difference between siblings, though it is not a frequent occasion, I admit.

Also, Ser Arthur was considered a living legend. You don't really get that title in your "early twenties". Furthermore: if he was, say, 30, that does not change anything substantially on the main point.

First of all: I don't really think that they could find a heart tree so down south, and though I think Rhaegar would surely agree on a Northern-type marriage for the sake of Lyanna, I kinda doubt that kind of marriage would have been accepted for a member of the (obviously seven-believer) royal house.

Second (and more importantly): She still had a lawful wife. I think bigamy is as much despised by the Old Gods as by the Seven...

This is not evidence, this is speculation (and as such, it is in par with my theory), and it is not made any more probable by a bit by "not being obvious at the first time".

The Kingsguard knights are not for making individual decisions against royal orders. I guess Rhaeghar told them (as their crown prince and as their friend) "Guard this tower, whatever may happen". And they obliged. That's all. They also learned that the Rebellion was victorious and they just wanted to die an honorable death, in my opinion.

I think the changes to be carried out that Rhaegar mentioned to the KG before he left, surely have something to do with the situation of his son. I am almost sure he wanted to legitimize Jon in a way or another, sadly, he did not have the time...

The Kingsguard serves to protect the King, not serve the royal family. Once Rhaegar, Aerys, Aegon, and Rhaenys were dead, they would have went straight for Viserys, because as we can clearly see they are unwavering in their loyalty and would not hesitate to die for their king.

Unless Viserys wasn't the King then. Which would only work if Jon was legitimized. The Kingsguard may have liked Rhaegar, trusted Rhaegar, and even obeyed Rhaegar, but they would have never chosen his bastard child over their King. Unless that bastard child was their king.

[SFDanny]

So, blah blah blah, my theory is this: I believe Howland Reed at least attempted to slip into Dayne's skin, both allowing the fatal blow to fall on Dayne and at the same time debilitate HR just enough to keep him in Greywater for all of our time as readers in *westeros*.

This is just my theory...add on or shoot it to pieces. I'm just throwing it out there :dunno:

It's a very nice theory, but don't be too crushed when you learn it's been thought of before. Do a quick search for "Superwarg" and I think you will find many pages of discussion on it already.

[Sel(l)mysword]

It's a very nice theory, but don't be too crushed when you learn it's been thought of before. Do a quick search for "Superwarg" and I think you will find many pages of discussion on it already.

No way, hahaha! That's awesome! Thanks for the link :D

[Felagund]

polygamy is not in the least despised by the Targaryens, which is the critical point.

There was not more than one documented case of Targaryen poligamous marriage, and that was Aegon the Conqueror, who is an exception himself in many ways. Furthermore he married his sisters before setting out for Westeros. I don't really know whether he was under the Faith of the Seven, or not, but I imagine they (he and her sister-wives) were not, but they made a truce with the Faith on the terms that they adopt the Seven and in turn the Faith backs Aegon's rule while overlooking his poligamous marriage. So that was a one-time exception and none of the 16 kings that came after dared to violate the Faith in such a way, so I think it is too much of a thin ice to base a strong theory on. With all due respect, I think it renders the rest of your speculation invalid.

Sorry, this line of thinking just doesn't hold up anymore after A Dance with Dragons. Selmy confirms what Jaime tells us earlier. There is a hierarchy of vows within the Kingsguard's Oath. First and foremost is the first duty to guard the King - the orders of a dead prince don't come close to overriding that responsibility. The fact (or piece of evidence if you will) that all three of the Kingsguard trio are still at the Tower of Joy points very, very strongly that the heir to the throne is there with them instead of sitting on Dragonstone with Rhaella.

It is very undecisive how much the knights knew what was really happening outside the tower (which was obviously pretty out-of-traffic to keep secret), and the conversation with Ned doesn't really help it a bit. It may be that they just learned from Ned that Aerys was dead and Viserys fled, but they had a pretty good poker-face (however, they name Robert 'Usurper', which may point to that they know it already that he has been ascended to the throne). If so, the would be obliged to go after Viserys, however, the only way to do so is to cut themselves through Ned's companions.

Anyway, that happened...

[corbon]

There was not more than one documented case of Targaryen poligamous marriage, and that was Aegon the Conqueror

Go do that research. You are still wrong in the basic fact here

.

At least italics is a step down from bolded caps. :cool4:

[Felagund]

Go do that research. You are still wrong in the basic fact here

Okay: show me just one Targaryen king (other than Aegon I., of course) who had more than one legitimate wives at the same time (mistresses, paramours, one-time affairs and such do not count, of course)

[SFDanny]

There was not more than one documented case of Targaryen poligamous marriage, and that was Aegon the Conqueror, who is an exception himself in many ways. Furthermore he married his sisters before setting out for Westeros. I don't really know whether he was under the Faith of the Seven, or not, but I imagine they (he and her sister-wives) were not, but they made a truce with the Faith on the terms that they adopt the Seven and in turn the Faith backs Aegon's rule while overlooking his poligamous marriage. So that was a one-time exception and none of the 16 kings that came after dared to violate the Faith in such a way, so I think it is too much of a thin ice to base a strong theory on. With all due respect, I think it renders the rest of your speculation invalid.

With all due respect, you're jumping to some pretty amazing and unwarranted conclusions. First, look at these quotes from the author:

June 06, 2001

TARGARYEN POLYGAMY

First off all I want to thank you for the one of the best fantasy novels I ever read. Then I would like to ask one question: In the SOS Jora Mormont told to Dany that Aegon The Dragon had two wives and she could take two husbands. The question is if there were any other precedents of polygamy among Targaryens besides Aegon the First.

Yes, there were.

Maegor the Cruel had eight or nine wives, I seem to recall, though not all of them were simultaneous. He beheaded a few of them who failed to give him heirs, a test that all of them ultimately failed.

There might have been a few later instances as well. I'd need to look that up... (or make that up, as the case might be). http://www.westeros.org/Citadel/SSM/Entry/Targaryen_Polygamy/

July 27, 2008

[Questions concerning Targaryen polygamy.]

Maegor the Cruel has multiple wives, from lines outside his own, so there was and is precedent. However, the extent to which the Targaryen kings could defy convention, the Faith, and the opinions of the other lords decreased markedly after they no longer had dragons. If you have a dragon, you can have as many wives as you want, and people are less likely to object.” http://www.westeros....com_Forum_Chat/

April 15, 2008

POLYGAMY IN WESTEROS

[Would polygamous marriages be accepted in Westeros today, especially if Targaryens were involved?]

If you have some huge fire-breathing dragons, you can get people to accept a lot of things that they might otherwise have problems with.

http://www.westeros....my_in_Westeros/

So, in answer to your challenge to corbon, the answer is Maegor. He had multiple wives as well, and there may have been others. A quick search of the Citadel would have gotten you that answer on your own, but I'm happy to help.

Now, others have argued that after the dragons died we don't know of any polygamous marriages by the Targaryens, so perhaps this means they stopped because they were forced to do so. The problem is we don't know that the custom was stopped at all, much less forcibly stopped by the Faith putting breaks on Targaryen power. We do know they didn't stop the Targaryens from continuing sibling marriage. A custom that we know the Faith views as abhorrent. So, if the Faith has the power to stop Targaryen polygamy, why not Targaryen incest? No, I think if the custom dies out it is for other reasons. The Targaryens rule with the power of dragons for about the first half of their dynasty, but after the dragons die what keeps them in power? The answer is, I think, in the use of marriage to form alliances. The most prominent example being the marriage that brings Dorne into Targaryen control. But whatever the reason we don't know of late Targaryen polygamy, we have to say we can't draw the conclusion that it was stopped by others. We simply have no evidence that this is so.

The part of this you ignore seems to be how well Targaryen polygamy fits into what we know of Rhaegar's vision of his children and prophecy. Even if the Faith had stopped the Targaryen custom, it makes absolute sense that Rhaegar wanted to bring it back. He is recreating Aegon and his sisters, and that means polygamy. So, the idea of a polygamous marriage between Rhaegar and Lyanna is far from "invalid." It looks likely.

It is very undecisive how much the knights knew what was really happening outside the tower (which was obviously pretty out-of-traffic to keep secret), and the conversation with Ned doesn't really help it a bit. It may be that they just learned from Ned that Aerys was dead and Viserys fled, but they had a pretty good poker-face (however, they name Robert 'Usurper', which may point to that they know it already that he has been ascended to the throne). If so, the would be obliged to go after Viserys, however, the only way to do so is to cut themselves through Ned's companions.

Anyway, that happened...

Here you switch to the Trio staying at the Tower and fighting Ned and Company because of bad timing instead of because Rhaegar order them to do so. As I noted above this is a possibility, however remote. What you do though is assume the only way for trio to get to Viserys is to "cut" their way out. No, Ned doesn't push the fight, and he wonders why they are there. He wants his sister, and it is quite possible if they turned her over to Ned he would let them go. They don't even attempt to negotiate a way out and to Dragonstone. That is their first duty, but they ignore it - if Viserys is their king. Yet you ignore this problem. Why?

[Dragonfish]

Lastly, we know there are godswoods and heart trees, including weirwoods in the south - just not an abundance of them, so the idea Rhaegar and Lyanna couldn't find a godswood where their vows would be viewed as legitimate just doesn't hold water.

Yes, there are plenty of weirwoods on the Isle of Faces in particular, and Rhaegar and Lyanna could easily have hidden there. In fact, if Lyanna was "taken" somewhere in the South, it would be a natural, out-of-the-way yet close-by spot to hide out from pursuers and wait until the coast was clear, so to speak.

That said, I also have a bit of a pet theory that Rhaegar and Lyanna may have hidden and married on Skagos, of all places. I have basically no evidence of this, but two things put this thought in my head:

1) This line from Roose Bolton in ADWD: "The Umbers keep the first night too, deny it as they may. Certain of the mountain clans as well, and on Skagos...well, only heart trees ever see half of what they do on Skagos." The line about the heart trees is what started my thinking on this. It's ambiguous and has no direct connection to my theory, but it did make me wonder if the author was hinting that something secret and important occurred on Skagos, and that we would eventually find out about this, either through Bran's ability to see through the weirwoods, or through Davos' chapters. Which, incidentally, leads me to the second thing that planted this idea in my head.

2) Davos is heading to Skagos. Why? No, I don't mean why he decided to go there, that's obvious. What I mean is: why did the author have Davos go to such an out-of-the-way location? In what way would it serve the story to have Davos travel to an island that, for all intents and purposes, is disconnected from the larger story? Perhaps George is just engaging in a bit of worldbuilding, but I have a feeling that there is more to it than that. In particular, I think his reasons for sending Davos to Skagos are the same as his reasons for having him end up on the Three Sisters early in ADWD: it's an opportunity for him to drop some exposition related to the rebellion. I'm thinking that while Davos is on our friendly neighborhood cannibal-island, he'll meet some people who met Rhaegar and Lyanna back before the war, and who'll tell Davos about their nuptuals.

There are a couple reasons why this scenario makes sense to me:

1) If Lyanna was "taken" in the North, then it would be difficult for them to travel by land down to the ToJ. If they went by ship, however, then they could travel south and around to the other end of Dorne, where they could stop off at Starfall and travel the rest of the way by land to their destination. Now, if they decided to go this route, then they would essentially be circumventing all the heart trees along the way. But if they decided to stop off on Skagos first, before heading back south, then that problem would be solved. No one would think to look for them on Skagos, after all, and while the island is most likely quite dangerous, I think Rhaegar was so confident of his and Lyanna's roles in the prophecy that the thought of them dying before they could make a third head probably never occurred to him.

(Of course, if Lyanna was actually taken in the south, as may very well be the case, then there's basically no reason for them to head to Skagos. In that case, I think it's more likely they would have gone to the Isle of Faces, for reasons I laid out above.)

2) With Rhaegar and Lyanna spending so much time either in transit to Starfall or hiding out at such an isolated location, it makes sense that they would not hear about Brandon and Rickard's executions and the beginning of the war until they returned to civilisation. This would also help explain why Rhaegar did not return to King's Landing until a few months into the war, though I think there are other explanations for this as well.

3) This theory might also help explain why Davos' story wasn't continued in ADWD after he agreed to go get Rickon, despite the fact that there was still over half a book left to go. Sure, his chapters may not have been included due to a lack of room, but I haven't heard of any Davos chapters that were meant to be in ADWD but were held back for TWOW (if any of you have heard of these chapters, please correct me on this). So instead, I think George decided from the outset that his story was best continued in TWOW. And in particular, I think he may have wanted to hold off on the reveal of Rhaegar and Lyanna's marriage until that book, hence the abrupt ending to Davos' storyline in ADWD.

Now, as I said before, my speculation is almost completely baseless. Still, speculation can be fun with or without evidence, and with this theory now in my head, I'm starting to heavily anticipate Davos' chapters in the next book.

[scurvy]

No, I thought it was implied that Ned and Howland had to fight through and kill the three Kingsguard before he ever got to Lyanna. And if you think about why the Kingsguard would have been there, it makes sense that they absolutely would not negotiate or let Ned or his men pass.

...

People keep complaining that we haven't "seen" Dayne fight. Well obviously we haven't, he's dead. That's why Martin has to rely on dialogue and recollection to impart how skilled he was. And on that end, there's absolutely no reason to think that he was anything but an incredibly skilled knight.

If they were there b/c R+L=J, then perhaps it was Reed who convinced Dayne to lay down his sword and let Ned raise J as his bastard, preserving R's bloodline. Especially in light of Ned's disapproval of the killing of the other Targ children and Ellia.

We also don't have any definitive proof the Arthur Dayne is dead. We just know he didn't kill Ned and Reed saved Ned's life. People presumed to be dead have proven not to be several times. I'm not sure Dayne's death is a sure thing. It's also possible he asked Ned to kill him b/c he wouldn't serve Robert nor did he want to go to the Wall. And, Ned dispatched him in a seppuku type beheading. This would also lead to Ned's description of Dayne as essentially the perfect knight.

Howland Reed is obviously a key character.who needs to emerge from his bog to fill in the details. With his children not even cast for the tv series it's making me wonder if he's ever going to show in the books, though.