3 babies, only 1 mother

[MtnLion]

I think the onus is on anybody arguing that they were fighting to protect Jon's rights to speculate on what they intended to do to protect those rights. Because obviously they were not going to be able to make Jon a king just by standing guard outside the ToJ for the next 16 years.

I dont agree that it is clear 'they wanted to keep Jon for some purpose' or that they went 'into battle for Jon' as that is only one interpretation of the subtext of the scene. I take this scene to be about a tragic, inevitable fight that must occur between honourable foes who are on the opposite sides of a war.

Take Jon, Lyanna, Rhaegar’s last orders and the whole tower of joy out of the equation for a moment. Imagine the same confrontation taking place somewhere else; in the Stormlands or near Kings Landing or at that same Crossroad Inn where everybody else in Westeros seems to meet. The conversation that preceded the fight would still be exactly the same; they did not fight against the rebellion earlier because they were not present for those battles (Trident, KL, Storms End), their fight against the rebellion has not been further delayed as they have not gone elsewhere (to Dragonstone), they are now faced by officers of the rebellion (Ned and companions) and so they will fight against the rebellion now.

If they had fought earlier it might have changed the course of the war (victory at the Trident, Aerys alive) but they didn't and the war was lost. So the kingsguard will still fight (because if you will not surrender or flee then there is no other option) but they have already lost. Even if they win the battle against Ned's 7, others will come in time and eventually they will be killed.

Putting back the context, why was the fight at the tower of joy. Rhaegar left the KG there, they stay to protect Lyanna from bandits and broken men. When Ned rides up that duty is fulfilled, so they fulfill their other duty and fight against the rebellion.

While I agree with the beginning of your post, you lose sight of the reason for the fight at the Tower of Joy. I will show the conversation in its entirety and show the meanings, once more.

“I looked for you on the Trident,” Ned said to them. He expected the King’s Guard to all be with Rhaegar.

“We were not there,” Ser Gerold answered. We were assigned other duties.

“Woe to the Usurper if we had been,” said Ser Oswell. Our swords would have turned the battle at the Trident.

“When King’s Landing fell, Ser Jaime slew your king with a golden sword, and I wondered where you were.” Aerys is dead, Rhaegar is dead, The King’s Guard are all accounted for.

“Far away,” Ser Gerold said, “or Aerys would yet sit the Iron Throne, and our false brother would burn in seven hells.” Jaime’s death would be no loss to their number. They had another assignment that kept them away.

“I came down on Storm’s End to lift the siege,” Ned told them, “and the Lords Tyrell and Redwyne dipped their banners, and all their knights bent the knee to pledge us fealty. I was certain you would be among them.” All of the king’s fielded troops have surrendered. In essence Ned is asking them to surrender, because there are no orders left to be followed, just as Tyrell and Redwyne realized the futility of continuing.

“Our knees do not bend easily,” said Ser Arthur Dayne. We cannot surrender. We learn why, later.

“Ser Willem Darry is fled to Dragonstone, with your queen and Prince Viserys. I thought you might have sailed with him.” The King’s Guard’s place is with the heir, and I thought it was Viserys. If you want to join Willem Darry and guard the king’s heir, you are free to depart.

“Ser Willem is a good man and true,” said Ser Oswell. No slight against Ser Willem, but he has it wrong. He is doing the best that he can with what he has.

“But not of the Kingsguard,” Ser Gerold pointed out. “The Kingsguard does not flee.” We cannot flee a battle, we must guard the king, and follow him regardless of his choice.

“Then or now,” said Ser Arthur. He donned his helm. We could not choose our path when Viserys and the queen were sent to Dragonstone, or now, we must guard the king.

“We swore a vow,” explained old Ser Gerold. This says much more than all of the preceding. The vow is to always have at least one member guarding the king (FfC Jaime relates procedures and vows). This means that they are guarding the king. This means that Lyanna and Rhaegar were married, and that Jon is legitimate, in the eyes of the three King’s Guard.

Ned’s wraiths moved up beside him, with shadow swords in hand. They were seven against three. This is simple accounting. We know that Ned built eight cairns for the fallen, from the stones of the Tower of Joy. Three King’s Guard and five companions died there. Ned and Howland are the only survivors of the fight. Lyanna's bones we know are returned to Winterfell's crypts.

“And now it begins,” said Ser Arthur Dayne, the Sword of the Morning. He unsheathed Dawn and held it with both hands. The blade was pale as milkglass, alive with light. Ned had a special admiration for the King’s Guard and Ser Arthur in particular.

“No,” Ned said with sadness in his voice. “Now it ends.” In his memory Ned knows the ending, at the time he may have been filled with apprehension. This may especially be true in that 70 against these three may not prevail.

Edited for formatting.

[FanTasy]

“We swore a vow,” explained old Ser Gerold. This says much more than all of the preceding. The vow is to always have at least one member guarding the king (FfC Jaime relates procedures and vows). This means that they are guarding the king. This means that Lyanna and Rhaegar were married, and that Jon is legitimate, in the eyes of the three King’s Guard.

I agree with most of what you're explaining here. Thanks for putting the dialogue here.

I agree with that it is plausible that the three Kingsguard were there to guard who they tought was their rightful king.

After ADWD and assuming Baby Aegon was not killed and brought into safety before the sack of Kings Landing, they could be guarding Baby Aegon.

I'm rereading all texts that refer to the Tower of Joy at the moment, to check if it is absolutely clear that Ned found Lyanna there.

The dream sequence seems to hint at that, but only because Ned hears his name being called. He dreams it is Lyanna but actually it is his steward who awakes him. And let's remember that GRRM said somewhere in an interview that we shouldn't take the dream sequence too literally :devil:

[MtnLion]

I agree with most of what you're explaining here. Thanks for putting the dialogue here.

I agree with that it is plausible that the three Kingsguard were there to guard who they tought was their rightful king.

After ADWD and assuming Baby Aegon was not killed and brought into safety before the sack of Kings Landing, they could be guarding Baby Aegon.

I'm rereading all texts that refer to the Tower of Joy at the moment, to check if it is absolutely clear that Ned found Lyanna there.

The dream sequence seems to hint at that, but only because Ned hears his name being called. He dreams it is Lyanna but actually it is his steward who awakes him. And let's remember that GRRM said somewhere in an interview that we shouldn't take the dream sequence too literally :devil:

I am sure that the mention of Jaime slaying Aerys included an exchange about Elia and children. Aegon indeed would inherit before Jon, but it is clear that these three know that Jon is the heir. There is nothing else that would explain their not taking Ned's offer to depart for Dragonstone to guard Viserys. Also, Ned mentions "Prince" Viserys, implying that Ned believes that they will see him as the heir, too.

As for Aegon being present at the Tower of Joy, was he taken from King's Landing before Aerys died? I doubt that, since Aerys was holding Elia and her children to ensure Dorne's loyalty.

[FanTasy]

There is nothing else that would explain their not taking Ned's offer to depart for Dragonstone to guard Viserys. Also, Ned mentions "Prince" Viserys, implying that Ned believes he is the heir.

At that time Ned knew Aerys was dead, that Rhaegar was dead, that Rhaegars children were dead. Wouldn't he refer to Viserys as 'king' or 'the king you must guard'?

Edit: ah, I think I know what you mean, that Ned called Viserys Prince because he (Ned) knew:

1- R+L=J?

2- R married L and this marriage with a second wife was considered legitimate by Ned so J was the rightful king and Viserys his heir?

[MtnLion]

At that time Ned knew Aerys was dead, that Rhaegar was dead, that Rhaegars children were dead. Wouldn't he refer to Viserys as 'king' or 'the king you must guard'?

Edit: ah, I think I know what you mean, that Ned called Viserys Prince because he (Ned) knew:

1- R+L=J?

2- R married L and this marriage with a second wife was considered legitimate by Ned so J was the rightful king and Viserys his heir?

Definition of "Prince"

Prince is a general term for a ruler, monarch or member of a monarch's or former monarch's family, and is a hereditary title in the nobility of some European states.

What Ned is saying is that the uncrowned king Viserys is at Dragonstone. He does not yet know of the Prince within the Tower of Joy, that his sister has just given birth to. It certainly seems that Ned guards that secret well, even in his thoughts.

[TheKingofSkagos]

I really don't think Aegon was smuggled to the Tower of Joy because Varys's best buddy Illyrio is in Pentos. He would only send Aegon to the person he trusts the most, Illyrio.

[corbon]

I think the onus is on anybody arguing that they were fighting to protect Jon's rights to speculate on what they intended to do to protect those rights. Because obviously they were not going to be able to make Jon a king just by standing guard outside the ToJ for the next 16 years.

No need.

They aren't 'protecting his rights'.

The are fulfilling their vows.

Their vows are to protect the king. Robert can call himself king all he likes, but he is nothing more than a usurping rebel. When Aerys died, his kingship passed to his heir, regardless of actual crowning or not. To the KG, there cannot be another 'real' king while Aerys' line continues.

What plans they had are irrelevant. Clearly they weren't able to move out from ToJ, if that is what they planned (they surely must at some stage), until Lyanna died or recovered. Nor should it have been urgent that they did so - ToJ was supposed to be a secret location deep in friendly territory. (We still don't know how Ned knew they were there.)

[Brucolac]

You do have to wonder how he found them, I doubt it was from turning over every stone in the Seven Kingdoms.

It is pretty up in the air what powers Howland Reed has, and he is traveling with Ned.

A non-magical option is Ashara Dayne who has been said to not be tied to a location during the war and is perhaps in communication with both Arthur and Eddard.

Was a Measter brought in for Lyanna, possibly there really is a conspiracy going on there and they tipped him off.

Personally, I miss the flashbacks that were lost in AGoT with Eddard's death and am glad Bran will have a chance to have glimpses of the past going foward-it will give GRRM a tool to reveal limited portions of it since he has said he doesn't want to use Howland Reed who would be a total reveal. Jaime's are interesting, but he was just a pawn back then.

[The Great Cornholio!]

This thread is nice and all, and people have come up with some real interesting baby swapping theories. But, one thing that is not explained is why people would baby swap in the first place. The baby swapping would have occurred before things were going poorly for the Targaryens for it to be effective. Unless someone has a crystal ball we dont know about.

[Brucolac]

Well, Aegon, was supposedly swapped out with a commoner to protect him, but it is equally possible that it is someone claiming his identity and birth right with a baby that would look right for a second chance at power. The same goes for any infant Targaryens at that time.

[The Great Cornholio!]

Well, Aegon, was supposedly swapped out with a commoner to protect him, but it is equally possible that it is someone claiming his identity and birth right with a baby that would look right for a second chance at power. The same goes for any infant Targaryens at that time.

I agree with the latter. There are many people that have Targaryen like looks in the series, yet are not Targaryens. He could easily be a fake without any magic.

[corbon]

This thread is nice and all, and people have come up with some real interesting baby swapping theories. But, one thing that is not explained is why people would baby swap in the first place. The baby swapping would have occurred before things were going poorly for the Targaryens for it to be effective. Unless someone has a crystal ball we dont know about.

Well, many people posit that the swap happened before the sack, and I agree that that begs the question 'why'? The Red Keep was well defended and impregnable (it has still never been taken by force, only by treachery).

But there are multiple possible reasons. A plan with Rhaegar to get Aegons away from Aerys' 'care' 'just in case'? Simple security measures that worked? Some dodgy trick by Varys for Blackfyre reasons (assuming he is Blackfyre favouring)? Plenty of other possibilities are out there.

I just don't happen to 'feel' any of them are right, IMO - based more on intuitive feel than known facts (because we simply don't know many facts - we have vast gaping holes in our knowledge base here). But I won't argue against most of them, because again, we simply don't have the facts to make an argument for or against

The difficulty is that if the switch is very last minute, after the sack begins, where did Varys get the baby from?

Me, I don't think that is actually as hard as it sounds. Just about any baby of roughly the right size would do (maybe), as long as it didn't have signififcantly different hair. None of the sack-ers are likely to 'know' baby Aegon, and it is unlikely once the sack starts that any of the royal intmates will be around later to identify the body (or not!) anyway. All Varys needs to do is grab a baby roughly similar and make sure that the head is smashed in 'after'. He could easily (easy being a relative term here) have snatched a serving woman's babe or similar, and made sure she was dead ('killed during the sack') to avoid awkward loose ends afterwards, and used the secret passages to switch the babes even as Lorch and Gregor are doing their killing spree in the outer rooms.

It is even possible that there were closely similar looking babes 'around' being cared for in the Red Keep for future security purposes (like the body doubles either Myrcella or Tommen get at one stage IIRC?)

There is of course still the option that there was no baby swap too.

[Alia of the knife]

That is where we get the entire recollection, in Selmy’s head. He just never pins it down, even in his memories. He may eventually relate the story to someone and feel free to pin it down, and I am eager to read it, if he does. I would add, “yet”. That would include if it were Brandon or Ned, though I place both of those far, far down the list.It was a sudden thought, when I realized that the usage Barristan uses represented House Stark. Combined with a possible rape of Ashara by Aerys, it made a little sense.This is probably a planted rumor, by Ned and Ashara, to cover for Jon's coloration, if he appears to have Targaryen coloration as he matures. (It makes sense to me.) There is also the planted fisherman's daughter tale, too. Wylla seems to end up being a common name. Well, I wait on evidence, instead of the obviously contrived story that Lady Dustin gives the Bolton's spy.That depends on the number of Points of View involved, and GRRM has included a lot of them. We need to assay the evidence offered for its veracity and applicability. At some point we may have enough information to support or dismiss Lady Dustin's ramblings, but until then I avoid leaping to conclusion that Brandon was a man-whore. Yes, we need the point of view from a perspective other than Robert's to get to that point, though.Ned was the perpetrator of that, it was his secret, and for a very good reason. Jon was dead if the truth was ever discovered. I still see no eveidence of that. There is nothing to support Brandon + Ashara. We know "man dishonored Ashara at Harrenhall", nothing more. If you have found another reminiscence of Ashara and Brandon being close at Harrenhal, I would love to know where.

Brandon asked her to dance, because Ned was too shy.

(Have you never seen a situation where the "cool" guy goes over to the pretty girl for his "un-cool" friend/brother and ask for a dance, or conversation on behalf of that person, only to find out the pretty girl really liked the "cool" guy, sooooooooo the cool guy takes advantage of the situation)?

As I said, it doesn't make Brandon an evil guy, it just makes him a jerk.

And any guy that says theres nothing better than a bloody sword has all the potential to be a jerk.

I'm not anti-Brandon, nor do I think he was a "man-whore," however, I do think he was a very strong and charasmatic personality,(the alpha male), and if something pretty offered herself to him, I don't think he'd turn it down.

If Brandon got her pregnant from a one night stand, then Ned may have been willing to stand in for him, and take responsibility, and it's poignant for Neds character, because he loves her despite knowing she really wanted his Brother.

Remember Cersei's scorn: "Your Brother was meant to lead, your just a soldier."

And later Ned to Cat: "It was all meant for Brandon- Winterfell, you...."

It would seem there could be a potential for repressed resentment, but of course Ned would never have been disloyal to Brandon.

But all this opens up the dialogue on the Starks and their relationships, which I have a feeling are going to be just as bizarre as the Targaryens.

In the end, Ned still stands in for Brandon, taking everything that wasn't meant for him.

[The Great Cornholio!]

Well, many people posit that the swap happened before the sack, and I agree that that begs the question 'why'? The Red Keep was well defended and impregnable (it has still never been taken by force, only by treachery).

But there are multiple possible reasons. A plan with Rhaegar to get Aegons away from Aerys' 'care' 'just in case'? Simple security measures that worked? Some dodgy trick by Varys for Blackfyre reasons (assuming he is Blackfyre favouring)? Plenty of other possibilities are out there.

I just don't happen to 'feel' any of them are right, IMO - based more on intuitive feel than known facts (because we simply don't know many facts - we have vast gaping holes in our knowledge base here). But I won't argue against most of them, because again, we simply don't have the facts to make an argument for or against

The difficulty is that if the switch is very last minute, after the sack begins, where did Varys get the baby from?

Me, I don't think that is actually as hard as it sounds. Just about any baby of roughly the right size would do (maybe), as long as it didn't have signififcantly different hair. None of the sack-ers are likely to 'know' baby Aegon, and it is unlikely once the sack starts that any of the royal intmates will be around later to identify the body (or not!) anyway. All Varys needs to do is grab a baby roughly similar and make sure that the head is smashed in 'after'. He could easily (easy being a relative term here) have snatched a serving woman's babe or similar, and made sure she was dead ('killed during the sack') to avoid awkward loose ends afterwards, and used the secret passages to switch the babes even as Lorch and Gregor are doing their killing spree in the outer rooms.

It is even possible that there were closely similar looking babes 'around' being cared for in the Red Keep for future security purposes (like the body doubles either Myrcella or Tommen get at one stage IIRC?)

There is of course still the option that there was no baby swap too.

It all just seems pointless to me. If you can get one out, you can get the other.

[corbon]

It all just seems pointless to me. If you can get one out, you can get the other.

It is quite definitely a lot easier to 'fake' a baby than a much older child.

And the male child is (sadly) a lot more important that the female child in this society.

And if things are all happening at the last minute, then its entirely probably that no, it isn't a case of 'if you can do one you can do the other'.

Purely apart from having an available double, its possible Aegon was switch while little Rhaenys was being murdered. Or Aegon was switched first and then it was too late to do Rhaenys. Who knows.

[corbon]

Brandon asked her to dance, because Ned was too shy.

(Have you never seen a situation where the "cool" guy goes over to the pretty girl for his "un-cool" friend/brother and ask for a dance, or conversation on behalf of that person, only to find out the pretty girl really liked the "cool" guy, sooooooooo the cool guy takes advantage of the situation)?

As I said, it doesn't make Brandon an evil guy, it just makes him a jerk.

Its also possible that Brandon was the one actually hanging out with Ashara in the first place and only asked 'his' girl to dance with the younger brother as something nice or inclusive.

Notice that the guys she dances with would fit with Brandon much better than Ned - Connington, Oberyn and Arthur are around Brandon's age or a bit older and Lords or Heirs or VIPs themselves, not junior sons.

If I was at this 'party' the dynamic I would 'expect' to see is that the elites hang out together and they have a few hangers on. Brandon, Connington, Arthur and Oberyn fit fairly closely together as 'elites' while Ned as the shy younger brother, heir to nothing, would fit as the hanger-on. And Ashara fits with the elites as well - maybe slightly younger (maybe not), but sister of the Crown Princes best friend, handmaiden to the queen, vivacious and attractive (even beautiful probably) Lady of the Court... she's way out of Ned's league but exactly right for Brandon and co.

Maybe Brandon danced with Ashara already but Howland didn't see it? Maybe Brandon just didn't like dancing?

Or maybe Brandon never interacted with her at all other than to step up for Ned?

At this stage we really have little idea other than informed speculation.

[Brucolac]

It seems to me that Oberyn has the same social status as Ned, both being the second son of one of the great houses. Not that it matters really, I doubt anyone would refuse to dance with Ned if he had just asked. I think that it is mostly a parable to illustrate their two personalities, Ned is quiet and doesn't assert himself and from that glimpse of Brandon, he looks after his brother and helps him out. That trait is shown again in Brandon when he tries to rescue his sister and then when he chokes himself to death trying to help his father. Being a dick to them seems to be missing from the text.

Isn't that Cersei quote only from the Television show?

[corbon]

It seems to me that Oberyn has the same social status as Ned, both being the second son of one of the great houses.

Oberyn might have been the virtually the Heir at that stage, especially to non-Martells who expect men to rule. Although their mother was still ruling (she died during or shorty after the rebellion according to the wiki) Doran doesn't seem to have been present at Harrenhal and it is possible that he already stayed behind generally to rule or learn the arts of rulership. Oberyn was at that stage the next in line, with Doran yet to have any issue and Elia now a royal.

Perhaps just as importantly, Oberyn was already a celebrated warrior and rake. At 16 (so 4-6+ years before Harrenhal) he was found in bed with a lord's paramour and fought the lord in a duel (who died of festering wounds, possibly poisoned, hence the title 'Red Viper'). And he already has acknowledged bastards (Arianne, not sure about the ages of the other sand snakes). So he fits in with the 'elite' group (and age bracket, around 20-25) even if technically he has only the same status as Ned (second son).

Ned on the other hand is Ned-no-name, a backwoods kid nobody has heard of (in his own right) who has no significant deeds to his name and is apparently shy. And a few years younger than the others (18 compared to 20+). He definitely seems likely to fit in the 'hangers on' category.

[Alia of the knife]

Its also possible that Brandon was the one actually hanging out with Ashara in the first place and only asked 'his' girl to dance with the younger brother as something nice or inclusive.

Notice that the guys she dances with would fit with Brandon much better than Ned - Connington, Oberyn and Arthur are around Brandon's age or a bit older and Lords or Heirs or VIPs themselves, not junior sons.

If I was at this 'party' the dynamic I would 'expect' to see is that the elites hang out together and they have a few hangers on. Brandon, Connington, Arthur and Oberyn fit fairly closely together as 'elites' while Ned as the shy younger brother, heir to nothing, would fit as the hanger-on. And Ashara fits with the elites as well - maybe slightly younger (maybe not), but sister of the Crown Princes best friend, handmaiden to the queen, vivacious and attractive (even beautiful probably) Lady of the Court... she's way out of Ned's league but exactly right for Brandon and co.

Maybe Brandon danced with Ashara already but Howland didn't see it? Maybe Brandon just didn't like dancing?

Or maybe Brandon never interacted with her at all other than to step up for Ned?

At this stage we really have little idea other than informed speculation.

Those were my thought as well.

I just think the opportunity to have more dialogue about the Starks is whats being set-up in ADWD with throwing Brandons personality under the microscope,( though I know Lady Dustin may be unreliable due to her own scorned position), she did allude to Stark ambitions which are intrigueing.

[Alia of the knife]

It seems to me that Oberyn has the same social status as Ned, both being the second son of one of the great houses. Not that it matters really, I doubt anyone would refuse to dance with Ned if he had just asked. I think that it is mostly a parable to illustrate their two personalities, Ned is quiet and doesn't assert himself and from that glimpse of Brandon, he looks after his brother and helps him out. That trait is shown again in Brandon when he tries to rescue his sister and then when he chokes himself to death trying to help his father. Being a dick to them seems to be missing from the text.

Isn't that Cersei quote only from the Television show?

I definitely think we're seeing the two Brothers personalities compared.

I don't think he doesn't love his Brother because maybe he took an opportunity, and that could qualify him for momentary "jerkness."

He just may think that Ned will eventually see the reality of the situation, (with Ashara), and get over it, thus meaning that Brandon didn't take it seriously.

And I don't think Brandon didn't love his Father, or his Sister, but that factor doesn't disqualify him for ruthlessness, and perhaps a touch of cruelty when it comes to being honed for Leadership.

If he had gotten hold of Lyanna first and found out she went with Rhaegar willingly, it's not outside the possibility he may have killed her himself.

How could he someday rule the North if he couldn't even control the females of his Household?

(And thats also an unpleasant reality that Rickard may have been forced to deal with if Lyanna had been turned over to him).

I think anything the writers, (with Martins blessing), puts into the series, is because they know what Martins intentions are.

As I said, I think what we are seeing is a lead-up to the dialogue on the Starks, (as can also be seen via Brans visions).

- their ability to warg unlike other Houses

- Human sacrifice in their past

- Rumors of a Stark marrying an Other, (abomination).

- Why they sat out the Blackfyre Rebellion, apparently not taking sides, and not suffering the same scorn from the Targaryens, (at least that we know of as they still maintained their status as Wardens of the North), that were reserved for other Houses who may have chosen to stay out of it.