Learning to Lead II: The Wrath of the Decision Makers? A re-read project of the Daenerys and Jon chapters from ADWD

[Yeade]

A few random thoughts:

Personally, I have a real hard time figuring out when, exactly, Jon decides to let the wildlings pass the Wall on the condition that they fight with the NW against the Others until spring. I've speculated that he's mulling over this option as early as his appeal to the wildlings in Mole's Town, which then serves as a kind of test to see if the wildlings will accept his terms. His markedly lacking answer to Marsh's valid concerns about further attacks by the wildlings at the end of that chapter would also be explained. What's more, I've wondered whether the rangers sent out are tasked with not only scouting enemy dispositions in the Haunted Forest but locating Tormund to deliver Jon's offer of truce. Upon Val's return to Castle Black with Tormund, Jon thinks that she's managed to succeed where seasoned men of the NW have failed, IIRC, implying the two missions have this purpose in common.

On a related note, I find it a tad frustrating that, despite having the most(?) chapters in ADWD, a lot of Jon's decision-making process seems to happen off the page. Besides the development of his wildling resettlement policy, his logic in releasing Val beyond the Wall, marrying Alys Karstark to the Magnar of Thenn, even aiding Melisandre's ploy to send Mance Rayder to fetch Arya and, of course, the missing two-hour council with Tormund after receiving the Pink Letter is hidden from us readers, only referred to obliquely in subsequent chapters.

I bet this quality of opaqueness in Jon's ADWD POVs is similar to Tyrion's in ACOK--GRRM's way of maintaining suspense for twists like Tyrion's Blackwater chain while in the head of a de facto king? Dany's ADWD chapters are structurally akin to Cersei's in AFFC on this point, I suppose, because both queens are at times removed from the goings-on around them and, when they do hold court, in public and in private, the reader suspects they're misinterpreting everything or being tricked by their confidants and trusted advisers, lol.

Springchicken, in addition to Dr. Pepper's argument that Marsh can't be easily removed from his position as Jon's ranking officer, to give Marsh credit, I believe he's competent in the limited scope of his duties as First Steward. He's fine as a caretaker for Castle Black during Jon's day trip beyond the Wall. Furthermore, though Marsh's every action is naturally viewed with suspicion in light of Jon's last chapter, lol, he never disobeys any of Jon's orders so far as I can recall and is never insubordinate to the degree that, say, Janos Slynt is, no matter how much he complains about all that Jon does.

That said, Jon is aware that Marsh and his cohorts, Yarwyck and Cellador, are organizing dissent in the ranks against him, using attendance at Alys's wedding to identify the possible conspirators. By the big debate atop the Wall in Jon XI, he internally considers Marsh et al. as untrustworthy foes. Actually, this wariness on Jon's part begins next chapter, I think, in the discussion there he really could've handled better. My theory's that Jon not unreasonably expects trouble, Melisandre's "daggers in the dark," as Tormund's people cross the Wall but, when nothing dangerous shows, relaxes his guard too much and too soon. Jon XI closes on him thinking of Melisandre's words after Marsh calls him a traitor and oathbreaker, then in Jon XIII he lists this prophecy amongst Melisandre's mistakes along with the gray girl fleeing to the Wall. The suggestion being that Jon feels the time for both is already past, IMO.

But! I'm getting ahead of the re-read again! :blush:

Tagganaro, Harlaw's Book, it is somewhat frequently argued (by Apple Martini mostly, lol) that Jon's advice to Stannis, him basically handing Stannis a how-to manual on winning the loyalty of the northmen, is in fact evidence of Jon's own suitability to be Lord of Winterfell and perhaps King in the North. It can definitely be said that Jon's talents are wasted on the NW, IMO. His musings on greenhouses, for example, strike me as exceptionally modern in that he doesn't simply stop at purchasing glass but comes up with a vocational training program for NW recruits. That's a focus on developing a skilled workforce to meet an economic demand I don't expect of feudal lords, lol. And Jon's constantly constrained by the NW's lack of resources, traditional noninterference and resulting weak political standing, even fixation to the location of the Wall in doing what he feels must be done to defend the realm.

So, one of the conclusions a reader can draw from ADWD is that Jon ought to be a king. In truth, given the current sorry state of the North, I think Jon needs the power of a king to be effective against the Others. Question is, how aware of all this is Jon? The expansion of his role to king of the free folk, encroaching on that of the ruling Stark in his dealings with the Karstarks, is entirely unwitting thus far. I figure Jon won't remain ignorant of his growing influence, but I'm also not sure he'd ever truly abandon the principles of the NW. A combination which could get awkward for everyone involved...

ETA:

After sleeping on it, lol, another question: If Jon and Dany's narrative arcs are to be read as being parallel, isn't Jon's story progression in some ways behind Dany's? While the lives of these two characters definitely have many elements in common, not only are their approaches different but the timing of events doesn't seem to match up.

I've noted before that the aftermath of the assassination attempt in ADWD may leave the Wall in a chaotic and leaderless state similar to that of Meereen at the end of ASOS. Jon's experience with the wildlings is the thematic mirror to Dany's with the Dothraki--cultural dissonance and adaptation aided by a lover, the first for both--but Dany's done with this arc by the end of AGOT while Jon's arguably still working on it. To speculate even further, Jon could be due for a moment not unlike Dany's emergence from Drogo's funeral pyre, unburnt and with three dragons, in his anticipated revival or resurrection, and the future revelation of R+L=J, if true, presents him with a major identity crisis, as Dany suffers in ADWD.

Does GRRM give Jon another advantage over Dany besides his better leadership training and familiarity with his potential subjects in that challenges don't come to Jon until he's psychologically ready to face them? I think good kings and queens can be ruined by circumstances putting so much pressure on them that they can't adjust, their every flaw and insecurity, even minor ones, magnified into fatal misjudgments. Having the opportunity to fail when the stakes are relatively low is perhaps key to developing the confidence and fortitude to successfully navigate deeper waters. Dany's string of victories through ACOK and ASOS, in this view, don't serve her nearly as well as Jon's rather humbling time in AGOT and ACOK.

[Maia]

Jon just repeats the mantra "The NW takes no sides..." or reminds himself that taking the Black removes all a man's past crimes. He wrestles with vengeful feelings but they never dictate his choices or translate into spoken threats.

Maybe, but it is not like Jon is required to work with, say, Boltons, is it? Fortunately for him, he and Stannis have common enemies and he helps Stannis against these enemies, very much "taking part".

And, although the fighting in the North should evoke as much senseless loss of life as fighting the wildlings, we, the readers know that Ramsey is an irrational monster and thus cooperation with Boltons would be impossible.

Pretty convenient for Jon - he didn't lose anybody he cared deeply about to the wildlings (and anyway, there was Ygritte to let him see their "human face") _and_ he isn't required to work with the people that he does have legitimate grudges against.

[Tagganaro]

Thanks, Tze. That is far better parallel than mine.

Anyone have more thoughts on the imagery? Seems like multiple layers of meaning there.

Some further thoughts regarding Jon and leadership.

He stands out for his lack of vengeance as a motivator. Dany swears revenge upon Mago and Jhaqo, Tywin holds eternal grudges, Dorne as well, the Tryells hate the Red Viper for Willas, Balon foolishly choosing to attack the North for revenge, and Jon just repeats the mantra "The NW takes no sides..." or reminds himself that taking the Black removes all a man's past crimes. He wrestles with vengeful feelings but they never dictate his choices or translate into spoken threats.

Jon also never actually sought power. He was not the one to put his own name forth for LC. As leader he never engages in "the game of thrones." Jon's internal dialogue never views the divisions among the Watch, the King's and Queen's men, or the Wildlings as factions he needs to plot to use to secure a power base. Every other plotline has characters playing factions off one another to create an opportunity to rise to or secure power. He never even thinks of Slynt and Thorne as threats to himself or his power as he deals with them.

His humility stands out as well. King Stannis is heaping praise on him and all he does is credit others. When he is being taunted as "boy" he simply ignores it. No other noble in all of Westeros would fail to rise to that bait. No one under his command ever bothers to curry favor. Mel tries and all it does is provoke mistrust. The only successful example of anyone "currying favor" with Jon is Satin which was done by showing promise during battle. While so many other characters' thoughts are consumed with power, Jon's are filled with ideas for glasshouses, the need to formalize archery training, and better to introduce the green recruits to battle than leave them with the horses.

These aren't just contrasts with Dany, but with virtually every other leader in the series (except possibly Ned and this might even be an intentional window into his style.)

I think this is a brilliant observation. This might be kind of weird to say, but I actually see Jon coming very much from a Ned and even King Robert school of leadership (I mean pre-fat drunkard Rebellion-era Robert). Rather than deal with factions or anything like that, he views everyone as pretty much the same and gives everyone an opportunity to prove themselves. It's very effective as you can see, and like Robert he seems to excel at turning enemies into friends (at first other members of the NW who hated him back when he was obnoxious bastard boy, then you see it with the wildlings and Iron Emmett and even Qhorin (when he talks about learning who Jon is and then goes through with his plans to allow Jon to kill him basically).

This is one of my favorite Jon/Edd interactions and I think it deserves a different interpretation.

SNIP- Jon/Edd interactions

I agree with how awesome this interaction is in particular, and all their interactions in general. I think Jon has a lot of respect for Edd, who might complain all the time (but in a hilarious sort of way), but who is generally very capable, loyal, and trustworthy. That's why Jon puts him second in command at Harlot's Tower, probably one of the toughest garrisons in terms of who to trust.

Maybe, but it is not like Jon is required to work with, say, Boltons, is it? Fortunately for him, he and Stannis have common enemies and he helps Stannis against these enemies, very much "taking part".

And, although the fighting in the North should evoke as much senseless loss of life as fighting the wildlings, we, the readers know that Ramsey is an irrational monster and thus cooperation with Boltons would be impossible.

Pretty convenient for Jon - he didn't lose anybody he cared deeply about to the wildlings (and anyway, there was Ygritte to let him see their "human face") _and_ he isn't required to work with the people that he does have legitimate grudges against.

Well, within the NW you don't get much clearer people who he has legitimate grudges against than Janos Slynt and Alliser Thorne. And he doesn't seek revenge on either one of them even though the first killed his father and would gladly kill him and the latter has tried to have him killed more than once. He gives them both a chance to prove themselves, rather than use his position to stick it to them or anything like that.

@Yeade- I am in agreement with you (and AM) that Jon basically vicariously lives through his desire to be King in the North by giving advice to Stannis. As was mentioned earlier, this is a clear area where there is a total overlap. By helping Stannis, Jon is in fact helping the NW as well because there's is almost no chance that the Boltons would ever provide any kind of help to the NW, while Stannis will and does know the danger. I think this gets at the larger issue of how obsolete the original model of the NW has become, and how Jon essentially inherits a dead or dying institution when he is made LC. There is simply no way to stay out of the affairs of the realm when you need to be respected and helped by the other Lords and the approach to the Wall from the South is entirely indefensible. At this point, what's actually best for Jon to fulfill his oath about guarding the realms of Man is to make sure that their is a united North behind a King or Lord of Winterfell that fully understands the dangers the Others entail and is willing to commit significant resources to helping to stop them.

As to your other point, I don't want to get too far ahead, and this is actually touched on anyway earlier, but another thing that to me relays the broken model of the NW is the fact that Bowen Marsh and Othell Yarwyck are essentially second and third in command, even though neither one has any skill at battle or the like. It was talked about earlier, but the NW is essentially divided with regards to Jon's policies and Bowen Marsh's ideas. Of course, the rangers (who to me obviously know the most about the enemy and are the most competent at fighting them), realize that they can't just lock themselves up behind the Wall and hope for the best. There's simply not enough manpower and too much area to cover. On the other hand, the Builders and Stewards are perfectly content to do just that, which sort of raises the question- What kind of authority or knowledge does a Steward or Builder have in military affairs? Why are they even giving counsel to Jon, when they know nothing of the threat and have almost no training at doing anything besides counting and you know building? Why was Bowen Marsh put in charge of the Wall when Jon was with the Wildlings (which delighted Mance to no end) and allowed them to completely trick Bowen Marsh and almost lost the NW the Wall? I think it's a question that has to be resolved. They should not be equals in the NW (a military institution) to Rangers.

[The Sleeper]

This is the second time that Jon says I am a son of Eddard Stark. The third time he will say it is at the discussion on top of the Wall when he assures the Norrey and the Liddle that he will take the hostasges heads if he needs to. The first time he said it (not in words but in actions) was that he decapitated Slynt instead of hanging him. I believe that is what Bowen Marsh's true fear is. Jon dispences the justice of the lord of Winterfell, invokes the honor of the lord of Winterfell and ensures fealty like the lord of Winterfell.

I'm not sure if Jon could not have counted on the Boltons for assistance in detaining the wildlings. Roose is a northman himself and is smart enough to realize that if he wants to claim the North he must rise to its defense. In fact this would help him solidify his role as warden much more than his other actions. Agreed, he has other concerns at the moment, but in the eventuallity of an invasion of a wildling army he would send help. Ramsay, of course is another matter.

Jon, in any case and rightly so does not want to fight off the wildling invasion as this would be a useless waste of lives and resources before the onslaught of the real threat.

[butterbumps!]

I'm going to post Dany VII shortly, but first we thought we should have a recap of the last few chapters and discussion points. (Going in order of the book):

Jon VI

Summary: Jon plans with his rangers for the scouting mission; gets his ass kicked thoroughly and happily by "Rattleshirt" (Mance); he receives a letter from Ramsay; Melisandre tries to coax him into joining forces with her.

From the discussion:

• Jon no longer seems to rise to anger, reacting more calmly to Alliser than in aGoT. He doesn't seem provoked by vengeance any longer. He recognizes Alliser as a problem, but separates him in such a way to remove him as a threat while preventing "Anti-Jon" sentiment from forming.
  
• Jon is clearly wistful about earlier, happier days, but cannot seem to retreat into this form of escapism sufficiently. Instead, his forms of escapism tend to take an active and NW-centric bent. The dual between Jon and Mance is a good example of this- Jon was positively gleeful about being beaten by "the better, faster" man here, and event that allowed him to blow off steam as well as practice against someone with superior skill.
  
• Jon is confronted with the friction between love and duty with the arrival of Ramsay's letter about marriage to Arya; Jon refuses to acknowledge that she is his sister- he chooses duty.
  
• Melisandre tries to seduce Jon into joining forces; Jon refuses, saying that he does not wish to be indebted to this woman, and tells her that he mistrusts magic as it is a "sword without a hilt." He doesn't doubt that she has power, but mistrusts the use of such power, especially by Mel. The stunt she pulls with Ghost, where Ghost does not recognize Jon, only serves to reinforce this mistrust. She tells him that he will believe her when 3 of his rangers return to the Wall without eyes.
  

Melisandre I

Summary: She reads the flames; makes plans to save Arya with Mance; reveals Mance to Jon; the 3 rangers are returned dead to the Wall.

From the discussion:

• Her POV is consumed with proving her power to Jon. The irony is that Jon doesn't doubt her power- he just does not trust her.
  
• She puts faith in "trappings of power" but fails to see that such trappings are not universal across cultures and contexts. She think Jon is silly for not assuming the "trappings" she believes are important, but if Jon assumed these trappings, his men and Wildlings alike would laugh in their cups. As it stands, these men laugh at Mel, thinking her zealotry and pomp ridiculous.
  
• She completely misinterprets Jon's person. Worse, her efforts at getting Jon to trust her backfire spectacularly. He sees only trappings with her- smoke and mirrors- and this makes him even more reluctant to trust her, as she obfuscates her motivations, interpretations and the truth.
  
• She uses her visions as a show of dominance; she tells of her visions after anyone can do anything to change plans. She is clearly trying to become Jon's advisor at the Wall, growing increasingly desperate to win him over, and all her efforts only cause more friction and mistrust.
  
• Of note, we learn that Mance, as Rattleshirt, overheard Marsh and his discontents talking at a meal, which he tells Mel about.
  

Jon VII

Summary: Jon takes new recruits into the weirgrove to say vows; they bring 8 Wildlings + a giant back to the Wall; Jon reads over a letter from Stannis.

From the discussion:

• Jon looks over the imperfections at the Wall- the Wall's physical cracks as well as the reduced quality of its manpower. Perhaps the fact that he's taking these new recruits to swear before the sacred grove is symbolic of reversing this, tempering the NW back to its original purpose. It is interesting that Southron recruits have taken to Jon's old gods- a gesture of respect, admiration, faith in him?
  
• A Wildling recruit, Leathers, is able to speak the old tongue and peacefully articulate to the giant that their motives are peaceful; Jon's status as a Stark seems to bring respect from the Wildlings in the grove.
  
• Like in Dany VI, Jon leaves the security of the Wall to perform an "absolution" ritual. Some readers have criticized this as a needless risk; others speculate that there may be importance to this particular weirgrove.
  
• Isolation as an earmark of leadership and heroicism; it was brought up that Jon is acting almost as an "unwitting" King in the North.
  
• There's a comparison in the difference in attitude of Jon to Leathers and Jax versus Dany to the Shavepate and Reznak; Jon remarks that in this chapter he sees "only people," and all are worthy of protection.
  

Dany VI

Summary: Dany leaves the safety of her walls to see her people gathered outside dying of the pale mare; she meets with the GG to go over wedding plans; she meets with Hizdhar; the Second Sons have turned against her; she sleeps with Daario.

From the discussion:

• There were questions about Dany's integration with the Meereenese religion. She doesn't interfere with religious beliefs, but at the same time does not bother to learn about them; this was also brought up as a criticism of Jon regarding the Red God.
  
• There were questions about the level of compassion; some saw her actions beyond the wall as symbolic gestures, and a method of personal penance. She says that their suffering is a divine punishment on her.
  
• Knowing the suffering of your people does not necessarily mean taking responsibility.
  
• Immediately after tending the sick, she bathes and dresses in a tokar for her meeting with the GG. Beyond the wall, she was consumed with thoughts of what her people thought of her; her donning the tokar to ingratiate herself to the elites shows us that she's got a foot in both camps.
  
• The GG tells her of Ghiscari marriage ritual and beseeches her to meet Hizdhar's family; she refuses. Later, Hiz tells her that the rituals aren't important. In Dany VII, Hiz actually washes her feet at the ceremony (she does not reciprocate).
  
• She marries Hiz with the understanding that the Fighting Pits will be reopened, and that Astapor and Yunkai will resume slaving.
  
• She doesn't question how Hiz is keeping the peace.
  

[Yeade]

Tagganaro, interesting thoughts on how the Night's Watch is organized. I feel the problem's that normally the First Ranger is the Lord Commander's second, but the mortality rate in that post has been truly atrocious for the past couple years: Benjen Stark is lost beyond the Wall, presumed dead. His replacement, Jaremy Rykker, is killed by undead Jafer Flowers. His replacement, Thoren Smallwood, dies on Mormont's ranging at the Fist of the First Men, head taken off by a wight bear. There's no First Ranger except Benjen in absentia when Jon's elected, but he may have appointed Black Jack Bulwer, who's known to him from his defense of the Wall. Of course, the Weeper sends Black Jack back to Castle Black sans his body and eyes. Afterwards, my best guess is that Jon's acting First Ranger himself, lol, though perhaps considering Ulmer of the Kingswood for the cursed position seeing as he's given command of the Wall when the wildlings cross.

The commanders of the other castles are essentially Jon's unit leaders, but Castle Black is an exception because the Lord Commander's expected to take his seat there. While Marsh is castellan and thus Jon's default ranking officer at Castle Black, I'm not sure whether this translates to overall command of the entire Wall. Functionally speaking, it can be argued that Marsh and Yarwyck are Jon's staff officers, IMO, in that the chain of command seems to go directly from Jon to every individual black brother with or without any input from the First Steward or First Builder.

Perhaps the lines of authority are so tangled because the NW is so diminished from its former strength of tens of thousands? In this view, I think Jon's not only reforming the NW back to its original purpose of defending the realm against the Others but overhauling its command structure by garrisoning the other castles and appointing commanders who report only to him. The First Steward and First Builder then have special permission from the Lord Commander to do assigned duties with manpower drawn from the NW as a whole but don't necessarily have a place at all in the chain of command except as the Lord Commander orders. I honestly have no idea if this would make for a viable military organization!

Regarding the Boltons, neither they nor any other northern house respond to the NW's repeated pleas for help against the wildlings, and the wildlings are at least widely known to be a real threat. As I wrote in another thread on this topic, I believe the biggest obstacle to the NW receiving aid from kings and lords besides Stannis is that, unless there's a red priestess whispering in your ear about Azor Ahai and the war for the dawn, the Others sound like the ravings of a madman. Even Stannis I doubt would've come to the Wall if he hadn't been so short of other options after his defeat on the Blackwater. The hill clansmen, Flint and Norrey, begin to take an interest in the NW's affairs not because they care about the Others, IMO, but because Jon Snow, the last son of Eddard Stark and potential heir to Winterfell, is Lord Commander. The Boltons are probably more interested in killing Jon than hearing of the NW's troubles, and I imagine the rest of the northmen will ultimately end up on the Wall for Jon, too, pending Robb's will.

[Aemrys]

Jon strikes me as a much more competent leader than Dany. Jon was basically taught how to lead, like Robb. Unlike Dany who seems more like a lost child in the role of leadership, that has her moments of wisdom from time to time. That being said Dany was never well taught, unlike Jon. Which stands as a strong constrast. When Robb was being groomed for Lordship, Jon was picking up the same teachings while they were not directed at him. Dany only had a mad idiot brother to "teach" her. However that's not saying Jon had flawes in his leadership. He's inexperienced after all, despite having picked up good teachings.

Honestly, I see Jon's leadership decisions overall as justified and right. The opposition (Bowen Marsh), seems like a blind fool. When Jon got through to him and the others about Hardhome, and every wildling there being destined for wight transformation if they did not send help. Bowen refused to listen to read later when the same applied to Tormund and his wildlings (and all wildlings in general), when the exact same scenario applied there. The more wildlings on the north side of the Wall equals more wights and stronger army for the Others. At first the food supply vs man power ratio was a huge and unsolvable issue. But even then it would have been better to have less wights and more wildlings on the south side of the Wall. However when Jon solved this by sealing a deal with the braavosi banker, the ratio issue became far smaller, and frankly Bowen's side became a faction with stubborn idiocy. If anything, Jon lacked in leadership qualities by not putting out the right arguments. He's magnificent in consulting his officers and listening to people. But I would have stressed the wight/Others issue constantly whenever Bowen threw a grunt in my face. "Have it your way then. We'll take on an additional 10 000 wights. It sounds like a good plan you have there, Bowen".

[tze]

I think a working relationship between Jon and the Boltons was a practical impossibility from the Boltons' standpoint, for the very simple fact that Jon could far too easily have torpedoed their "Arya" charade. We know the LC of the Watch has visited the Warden of the North in the past, and it would have looked very weird if Jon came to a feast or some sort of gathering and the Boltons wouldn't let Jon see his own sister. The Boltons couldn't rely on just sending Jon letters from "Arya" because Jon would know Arya's handwriting, not to mention that Jon and Arya were so close that they were sure to have mutual knowledge of personal events that Jeyne (because she spent all of her time with Sansa) wouldn't have known about. Jon would have had multiple ways to spot a fraud even if he never came face-to-face with Jeyne, and the other Lords of the North would listen to the word of the last son of Eddard Stark. Jon was the sort of liability the Boltons simply couldn't afford.

The leadership structure at the Wall is interesting because unlike the feudal structure in the rest of Westeros, leadership positions at the Wall derive not from blood, but solely from the Lord Commander's orders. In this way, the LC actually has greater authority at the Wall than the King technically has over his feudal vassals, because it's been made clear time and again that although the royal family perpetuates the fiction that the nobility's status flows from royal authority, that's not necessarily true "on the ground". If it were, the Freys in Riverrun wouldn't be threatened at all by Edmure's survival (and the potential survival of a son with Roslin).

In ASOS, upon Jon's ascension to Lord Commander, the very first thing Bowen Marsh says to him is that Marsh "would be glad to continue as Lord Steward if that was Lord Snow's wish." Jon can replace Bowen Marsh, Othell Yarwyck, Cotter Pyke, or Ser Denys Mallister at any time. Such a move might not be popular among the men, but none of these people would have any basis for challenging it should Jon choose to replace them. In that sense, the fact that Marsh keeps challenging Jon is both foolish and prudent---foolish because Jon is perfectly capable of replacing him if he feels Marsh isn't up to snuff, prudent because Jon hasn't replaced him thus far but a new LC might feel differently, so if Jon were to die en route to the weirwood grove, Marsh might find himself losing all power at the Wall under the new regime.

It's interesting to look at the structural changes Jon and Dany make in each place's "leadership" structure. Dany moves into Meereen and completely replaces the preexisting leadership structure, save only the Shavepate and Reznak, and we really have no idea what positions either man held prior to Dany's arrival. Jon replaces the Master-At-Arms of Castle Black, and he names new First Rangers as they drop like flies, but he does not remove anyone else from power who was already in power upon his ascension. But by opening up new castles, he's basically raising up new garrison commanders with loyalty solely to him, in that their positions derive from Jon's authority; they would have to realize that a new Lord Commander could strip them of their commands just as easily as Jon raised them up, so they have very good reasons to promote and support his reforms. I can see why he didn't replace any of the other commanders, and it speaks well of him that he wanted experienced men over his own friends and supporters. (And since Jon didn't campaign for LC, he didn't make anyone any promises, so he doesn't "owe" any of his supporters choice commands or things of that sort in exchange for voting for him as LC.)

Leaving Marsh in command at the Wall makes sense in that the Old Bear did the same thing when he went ranging. Problem is, there's evidence that the Old Bear didn't always give commands solely on the basis of merit---he sent Waymar Royce in charge of a ranging even though he knew Royce was unprepared, all because of Royce's name and connections. I think Jon might be subconsciously assuming that leaving Marsh in charge at Castle Black is appropriate because Mormont did the same. But at the same time, I don't think Jon has technically left the Watch in Marsh's hands, only Castle Black---I don't think Marsh has any authority over the commanders at the Shadow Tower, Eastwatch, or any of the newly-opened castles. The thing is, I don't think Marsh necessarily realizes that.

[kg1982]

For the Arya charade why did no one question the fact that Jon didn't show up. We've seen high ranking members leave the Wall before... Benjen at Winterfell. Ramsey even sent Jon an invite, which was quite a risky gambit. A wedding with all the noble Northern houses assembled would be a perfect event for a LC desperate for resources to plead his case directly to the noble lords.

I think that two insights can be gleaned from it

1. Roose surmises that Jon has gone all out in his support for Stannis (rightly), but is willing to keep up fiction of NW neutrality. He's a cautious man and doesn't think Stannis will win. Hence we can probably surmise that Roose is incapacitated by Pink Letter time.

2. The Northern lords knew that Arya was a fake, but were willing to play along and bide their time. I think there'd be louder objections to the abuse if it was really The Ned's little girl. Doesn't say nice things about the Northerners that they're willing to let an innocent girl be abused.

[The Sleeper]

Regarding the Boltons, neither they nor any other northern house respond to the NW's repeated pleas for help against the wildlings, and the wildlings are at least widely known to be a real threat. As I wrote in another thread on this topic, I believe the biggest obstacle to the NW receiving aid from kings and lords besides Stannis is that, unless there's a red priestess whispering in your ear about Azor Ahai and the war for the dawn, the Others sound like the ravings of a madman. Even Stannis I doubt would've come to the Wall if he hadn't been so short of other options after his defeat on the Blackwater. The hill clansmen, Flint and Norrey, begin to take an interest in the NW's affairs not because they care about the Others, IMO, but because Jon Snow, the last son of Eddard Stark and potential heir to Winterfell, is Lord Commander. The Boltons are probably more interested in killing Jon than hearing of the NW's troubles, and I imagine the rest of the northmen will ultimately end up on the Wall for Jon, too, pending Robb's will.

I think a working relationship between Jon and the Boltons was a practical impossibility from the Boltons' standpoint, for the very simple fact that Jon could far too easily have torpedoed their "Arya" charade. We know the LC of the Watch has visited the Warden of the North in the past, and it would have looked very weird if Jon came to a feast or some sort of gathering and the Boltons wouldn't let Jon see his own sister. The Boltons couldn't rely on just sending Jon letters from "Arya" because Jon would know Arya's handwriting, not to mention that Jon and Arya were so close that they were sure to have mutual knowledge of personal events that Jeyne (because she spent all of her time with Sansa) wouldn't have known about. Jon would have had multiple ways to spot a fraud even if he never came face-to-face with Jeyne, and the other Lords of the North would listen to the word of the last son of Eddard Stark. Jon was the sort of liability the Boltons simply couldn't afford.

Agreed on the Boltons. I just think we should put things into perspective. Whatever their immediate concerns Roose would be forced to take a hand as Warden in case of:

1. An uncontrollable incusrion of wildling which seemed inevitable had Jon not let them through and settled them on the Night's Watch castles. This is a mass exodus not a conquest and it can still take place. The Weeper probably also has a substantial following.
   
2. The invasion of an undead army.
   

Now, that I think about it, it would have been prudent of Jon to attend the wedding at Winterfell as a means of demonstrating neutrality in practice. He was invited after all and it seems expected of a LC to be present at such an event. And wouldn't that have opened a can of worms.

[kg1982]

Yep and then told everyone that it was Jeyne Poole, not Arya. The gambit only worked for Bolton because he knew Jon was incapable of maintaining neutrality. He was outright pulling for Stannis; I'm sure Roose guessed who was feeding Stannis military advice. Bolton also guessed that Jon would be disgusted to see his sister used as a pawn.

Ironically, the only reason why the Arya ruse went on as long as it did was because Jon didn't attend the wedding. Once Jon took one look at Arya Roose had to be aware the ruse was up.

[Yeade]

As always, tze, you leave the rest of us little to say. :laugh:

It's precisely what you note about the NW's organization being completely at the Lord Commander's discretion that makes me think Bowen Marsh's betrayal of Jon can't be equated to how Ned and Robb are betrayed despite certain superficial similarities (e.g. Stark men running afoul of matters of honor, Grey Wind and Ghost being ignored). My impression's that the authority of the Hand of the King versus that of the Queen (Regent) and Small Council is negotiable depending on the wishes of the king, and the king's royal authority is in turn reliant on the cooperation of the nobility, to whom the smallfolk are beholden.

Jon, OTOH, is granted executive power over every individual black brother when he's elected Lord Commander. He's the head of a single military organization, and his orders are absolute so long as the chain of command stays intact. The men of the NW, however, are not conditionally bound to his office like the alliance of bannermen under a king. You cannot honorably leave the NW for any reason, under penalty of death, whereas I don't think Robb or his other lords put the Karstarks on the to-kill list after the Lannisters when they formally withdraw their support of the King in the North...?

Well, I may be mistaken as I really don't remember much of that stuff, lol. Point is, the NW strikes me as basically military in nature and, by that standard, what Marsh does is outright mutiny, perhaps even ironically treason. No army in existence would ever condone summarily knifing your commanding officer over any disagreement, no matter how vehement, about orders. You can refuse to carry out an order you object to and suffer the consequences, usually arrest and trial, but you don't act against the man who gives the order. And, as I understand it, that's because belief in the chain of command is often the only thing keeping an army from disintegrating entirely under the enormous stresses of combat.

just an Other, the problem with the Boltons and the other northern houses, for that matter, is that they've already ignored the NW calling for aid when the Wall's about to be overrun by Mance Rayder in ASOS. I can see a couple reasons for this that are unlikely to have changed since: 1) The NW's claims of the danger are not taken seriously because either the NW as an institution is held in contempt or the wildlings are not considered a threat regardless of their numbers. 2) The game of thrones is so all-consuming that none of the players have the least bit of attention to spare for an ostensibly neutral faction sworn to defend the realm as a whole.

Again, Stannis is the only king or lord who can overcome both these objections because, after the Blackwater, he has no recourse in winning the Iron Throne except to save the realm and Melisandre has enough influence to convince him that an apocalyptic force may exist beyond the Wall for him to fight.

So far as the Others are concerned, exactly how is Jon to persuade the Boltons that, yes, the monsters of your wet nurse's fairy tales do exist? I find that willingness to believe in the Others is directly proportional to imagination and time spent at the Wall or beyond it. Hence why Tyrion's the only character south of the Wall who's ever been wary of what's lurking in the Haunted Forest but Marsh and his ilk are stubbornly blind to the facts right before them. Not to mention, while most of the northmen would probably accept Jon at his word as a Stark in all but name and maybe send men to verify his tales of ice zombies, I can't quite see the Boltons going along with Jon's suggestions because they'd be too suspicious of his ulterior motives, whether he has any or no.

Finally, kg1982, do you mean to say it would've been a good idea for Jon to accept Ramsay's invitation to his and fake!Arya's wedding? My initial reaction's that Jon would've shortly been without a head or with a crown had he done so, neither of which is a desirable outcome. It just doesn't seem prudent to me to attend a wedding hosted by a family that, given an affiliation with the Lannisters, could've been involved in treacherously killing your brother at another wedding. Besides, at that point, Tormund's people haven't been added to the Wall's defenses, leaving it badly undermanned in case of attack by wildlings or the Others.

[kg1982]

Finally, kg1982, do you mean to say it would've been a good idea for Jon to accept Ramsay's invitation to his and fake!Arya's wedding? My initial reaction's that Jon would've shortly been without a head or with a crown had he done so, neither of which is a desirable outcome. It just doesn't seem prudent to me to attend a wedding hosted by a family that, given an affiliation with the Lannisters, could've been involved in treacherously killing your brother at another wedding. Besides, at that point, Tormund's people haven't been added to the Wall's defenses, leaving it badly undermanned in case of attack by wildlings or the Others.

Yes. That is exactly what I mean. Jon needs men and resources from the North to fight the Others. The Winterfell wedding is a way for Jon Snow to plead for his cause to the Warden of the North and the high lords in person. The Night's Watch takes no part in the affairs of men, and Jon points out (dishonestly of course) that he has no sisters, only brothers. If he was a neutral arbitrator, he'd attend the wedding to plead for the greater good of the realm. Jon has no way of knowing that Arya is fake and Roose Bolton is too cautious to kill the LC of the Night's Watch, especially considering that he's already openly suspected of killing Robb. Jon could have put a monkey wrench in the Boltons' plans just by showing up and pointing out the obvious. However, Roose Bolton knows that Jon is personally connected to the situation and is likely to react emotionally. The gambit that the Boltons were playing at wouldn't have worked if Jeor Mormont were still Lord Commander and he had shown up at Winterfell with his steward, Jon Snow, to plead for men.

Of course, there are two caveats. The Wall is still in a state of flux, so that is a good reason for Jon to remain. Second, Jon doesn't know what the games the lords are playing. It seems that quite a few people suspect that Arya is fake. Jon could upset their plans.

[Winterfellian]

Yes. That is exactly what I mean. Jon needs men and resources from the North to fight the Others. The Winterfell wedding is a way for Jon Snow to plead for his cause to the Warden of the North and the high lords in person. The Night's Watch takes no part in the affairs of men, and Jon points out (dishonestly of course) that he has no sisters, only brothers. If he was a neutral arbitrator, he'd attend the wedding to plead for the greater good of the realm. Jon has no way of knowing that Arya is fake and Roose Bolton is too cautious to kill the LC of the Night's Watch, especially considering that he's already openly suspected of killing Robb. Jon could have put a monkey wrench in the Boltons' plans just by showing up and pointing out the obvious. However, Roose Bolton knows that Jon is personally connected to the situation and is likely to react emotionally. The gambit that the Boltons were playing at wouldn't have worked if Jeor Mormont were still Lord Commander and he had shown up at Winterfell with his steward, Jon Snow, to plead for men.

Of course, there are two caveats. The Wall is still in a state of flux, so that is a good reason for Jon to remain. Second, Jon doesn't know what the games the lords are playing. It seems that quite a few people suspect that Arya is fake. Jon could upset their plans.

Jon does need men and resources, but does he have any guarantees that Bolton is going to help? There is no evidence that support Roose Bolton as a friend of the watch. What's going to change now that they are allied with the Lannisters, who have always looked at the wall with the typical Southron prejudice? Furthermore, Jon knows his father never trusted Roose, and that he got the position as warden of the north as a payment for betraying Robb. It would have been a suicide quest to go to Winterfell.

As to the wedding, Jon surely would have recognized Jeyne and Roose Bolton's hold of Winterfell relies on wedding relies in the marriage to ''Arya'' Do you think we would have let a person with the power to call off his bluff to simply walk away?

As to Roose not killing the LC out of caution, I don' see your reasoning for thinking this way. After all, he did kill his liege lord and the King in the North on a wedding while he was under the protection of guest right. The bastard commander of the NW will be nothing compared to that. What's more, caution will probably motivate him to kill Jon since he has the power to expose him as a liar and Arya as an imposter.

[kg1982]

Jon does need men and resources, but does he have any guarantees that Bolton is going to help? There is no evidence that support Roose Bolton as a friend of the watch. What's going to change now that they are allied with the Lannisters, who have always looked at the wall with the typical Southron prejudice?

Roose Bolton isn't going to be the only lord there. This is a main social gathering of the lords of the North, probably one of the only times that all the lords would be in one place during the winter. It is basically the only chance that the Lord Commander of the Night's Watch is going to have to beg for much needed resources. Perhaps the Umbers or the Manderlays would be willing to help. Perhaps Roose Bolton could be shamed into helping.

Furthermore, Jon knows his father never trusted Roose, and that he got the position as warden of the north as a payment for betraying Robb. It would have been a suicide quest to go to Winterfell.

Roose Bolton betrayed Robb to become Warden of the North. As far as Jon knows, Roose Bolton doesn't have any reason to kill him. Jon doesn't know that Arya is really Jeyne Poole.

As to the wedding, Jon surely would have recognized Jeyne and Roose Bolton's hold of Winterfell relies on wedding relies in the marriage to ''Arya'' Do you think we would have let a person with the power to call off his bluff to simply walk away?

Jon doesn't know that Arya is a fake. In fact, if he did, Jon himself might do something like send out a letter to the lords of the North, proclaiming her as such, similar to what Stannis did. It would definitely lead to a sticky situation when Jon arrived at Winterfell and proclaimed the obvious, but Jon doesn't know this.

My point in the whole situation is that this is that this is probably one instance where Jon let his emotions and family connection outweigh his duty as Lord Commander, which ultimately gets him killed (and yes, going south with Wildlings was a bad, rash decision.) Apparently it is considered proper form to invite the LC of the Night's Watch to a huge event like the wedding of the Warden of the North's heir (otherwise why would the Boltons risk a raven invite) and it gives Jon a chance to do face-to-face politicking with the Northern lords and perhaps get much needed men and resources. Ramsay Bolton is an unpleasant man, but Jon as LC is supposed to be worried about the Night's Watch, not concerned about his sister's marriage.

[Maia]

I don't think Robb or his other lords put the Karstarks on the to-kill list after the Lannisters when they formally withdraw their support of the King in the North...?

When Greatjon threatened to leave, back in AGOT, Robb told him that it _would_ put him on "to-kill" list.

Point is, the NW strikes me as basically military in nature and, by that standard, what Marsh does is outright mutiny, perhaps even ironically treason.

How can this be treason, when your commander is already commiting a treason of his own? As Jon's oathbreaking clearly was, in Marsh's eyes and really, objectively too. Jon sent people to steal back Arya, he is marching to fight Ramsey, even his advice to Stannis may be construed in such a way, as Jon himself admitted.

the problem with the Boltons and the other northern houses, for that matter, is that they've already ignored the NW calling for aid when the Wall's about to be overrun by Mance Rayder in ASOS.

Well, Roose Bolton was in the south, wasn't he? Where Robb took him, BTW. And Ramsey was "fighting Ironborn" officially? So it isn't like there aren't extenuating circumstances.

Umbers, presumably considered themselves the second line of battle, should the wildlings break through.

Manderlies - again, Ironborn? And squabble with Ramsey, of course.

Karstarks... I really don't understand why they didn't show up. Protecting the North against wildlings would have helped them to look worthy of taking over instead of Alys, a woman, or even from the main branch males, what with 2 of Lord Rickard's sons dead and Harrion's fate being uncertain over periods of time.

The mountain chiefs look the worst, though. They didn't send people south with Robb, they weren't fighting Ironborn - they just sat on their asses, apparently, despite being relatively close and hating and fearing wildlings as much as any other northmen.

In fact, their inaction looks completely unbelievable, particularly in the light of them being all gung-ho about going to fight a much more futile (from their PoV) attack on Winterfell under Stannis. Not to mention that not even when Jon is forced to man the Wall with the wildlings, do they offer their own men, IIRC. Maybe they don't have maesters and can't be reached by raven? But even so, surely NW would have sent mounted messengers...

So far as the Others are concerned, exactly how is Jon to persuade the Boltons that, yes, the monsters of your wet nurse's fairy tales do exist?

Send a wight for their inspection? It was an ironic tragedy that Mormont sent Thorne to solicit aid from the Throne, when Tyrion was acting Hand. If not for personality conflict with Thorne, Tyrion and the court would have seen the self-moving wight hand and IMHO had been convinced to do something as soon as possible. Even Tywin would have been convinced by something like that. Alas, it was not to be.

But Jon certainly could present _very_ strong arguments as far as persuasion of Boltons and Co. is concerned. Of course, it never crosses his mind, since he has a huge grudge against them and wants Stannis to destroy them instead.

Yea, I don't think that Jon would have lived long, if he had accepted that wedding invitation. Alternatively, Roose may have tried to barter his support of the Watch for Jon's support of fake Arya's identity. It may not have been such a bad trade for the North, even, but I don't see Ramsey going for it. It would have been an interesting test for Jon, though.

P.S: Something else occurred to me, what with "dead things in the water", no NW ships to patrol left and wildlings slipping _around_ the Shadow Tower, could it be that when push comes to show the Wall will be revealed as a gigantic Maginot line - i.e. useless for it's intended purpose? If wildlings can do it, so can the Others, surely? I suddenly have a very bad feeling about that blizzard and impending Battle of Ice...

[Ice Turtle]

How can this be treason, when your commander is already commiting a treason of his own? As Jon's oathbreaking clearly was, in Marsh's eyes and really, objectively too. Jon sent people to steal back Arya, he is marching to fight Ramsey, even his advice to Stannis may be construed in such a way, as Jon himself admitted.

Marsh doesn't have legal authority to act against Jon. The story about the Night's King and all the other awful Lord Commanders tells us one thing very clearly - there is only one person that has authority to act against LC - Stark in Winterfell. And from this it's clear that NW can't function without Winterfell, because there will be no one to control them and no one to protect them from the South.

[Winterfellian]

Am still, not following your logic in assuming Jon will be perfectly safe at Winterfeel and what's more why would Bolton want someone there who can genuinely call off his bluff. Anyway,

Roose Bolton isn't going to be the only lord there. This is a main social gathering of the lords of the North, probably one of the only times that all the lords would be in one place during the winter. It is basically the only chance that the Lord Commander of the Night's Watch is going to have to beg for much needed resources. Perhaps the Umbers or the Manderlays would be willing to help. Perhaps Roose Bolton could be shamed into helping.

First of all, there will be lots of Freys attending the wedding so it is not a gathering of Northernmen exclusively. It is very clear in Reeek's chapters how tense situation is, why would Bolton bring someone that can add to the fuel even more? Or are you suggesting that Jon goes there uninvited? The minute Jon showed up every northmen there will think it weird that he's not allowed to see his sister (in case Rooose forbids it) and if he does Jon will inmediately recognize Jeyne. Is a loose-loose situation for Roose, so why would he let it happen?

In the case of the Manderly's, as far as Jon knows they ignored Stannis's envoy so he doesn't know where they stand. He knows the Umbers are divided with half of them casting their lot with Stannis and the others with Roose. Counting on the support of divided people is almost hopeless.

Roose Bolton betrayed Robb to become Warden of the North. As far as Jon knows, Roose Bolton doesn't have any reason to kill him. Jon doesn't know that Arya is really Jeyne Poole.

Jon might consider that his assistant to Stannis will give Roose sufficient excuse to execute him or at least detain him on the basis that he's involving the Night's Watch in the war despite of the paper shield he sent earlier. Roose already swore fealty to Tommen and Stannis is a pretenders of Tommen's throne so it stands to reason that he will view Stannis staying in the wall as a breach of the neutrality of the Night's Watch. We, the readers know the exact circumstances that led to Stannis's stay and that Jon had no choice. The distinction may escape Rosse Bolton.

My point in the whole situation is that this is that this is probably one instance where Jon let his emotions and family connection outweigh his duty as Lord Commander, which ultimately gets him killed (and yes, going south with Wildlings was a bad, rash decision.) Apparently it is considered proper form to invite the LC of the Night's Watch to a huge event like the wedding of the Warden of the North's heir (otherwise why would the Boltons risk a raven invite) and it gives Jon a chance to do face-to-face politicking with the Northern lords and perhaps get much needed men and resources. Ramsay Bolton is an unpleasant man, but Jon as LC is supposed to be worried about the Night's Watch, not concerned about his sister's marriage.

Jon does let his feelings for his family interfere sometimes with his duty. But not going to this wedding wasn't one of them. It was simple caution for the things I already listed above.

ETA: I might be wrong but I always felt that the letter Jon received announcing Arya's marriage was very much a taunt. It wasn't an invitation of any kind. They were sort of testing him (probably already considering him a traitor for aiding Stannis) to see were his loyalties truly were.

[Lykos]

Ice Turtle, yes the King in / Warden of the North has legal authority over the Night´s Watch deserters and sorting things out when fights broke out inside the NW, but up to now Jon is working under the premise that the King´s justice ends at the Wall, though he might change his mind in his next chapter as I wondered in another thread.

Can any one see a significance of Tormund mentioning Harmond Umber "the Drunken Giant" who helped defeat Raymun Redbeard the "King beyond the "Wall"?

Maybe Jon remembers another "King beyond the "Wall" when he thinks: "The Night's Watch takes no part. Kill the boy and let the man be born. You know nothing Jon Snow." Bael the Bard. The lord of Winterfell Brandon "the Daughterless" sends the crows after him to retrieve his daughter. So the Night´s Watch did take part in Ygritte´s story.

<snip>

I would really love to read more about your Idea that Stark in Winterfell has a traditional authority over the NW. Maybe that´s the reason the pink letter was signed "Trueborn Lord of Winterfell", but that´s for the thread quoted above or the next Jon chapter.

Yes. That is exactly what I mean. Jon needs men and resources from the North to fight the Others. The Winterfell wedding is a way for Jon Snow to plead for his cause to the Warden of the North and the high lords in person. The Night's Watch takes no part in the affairs of men, and Jon points out (dishonestly of course) that he has no sisters, only brothers. If he was a neutral arbitrator, he'd attend the wedding to plead for the greater good of the realm. Jon has no way of knowing that Arya is fake and Roose Bolton is too cautious to kill the LC of the Night's Watch, especially considering that he's already openly suspected of killing Robb. Jon could have put a monkey wrench in the Boltons' plans just by showing up and pointing out the obvious. However, Roose Bolton knows that Jon is personally connected to the situation and is likely to react emotionally. The gambit that the Boltons were playing at wouldn't have worked if Jeor Mormont were still Lord Commander and he had shown up at Winterfell with his steward, Jon Snow, to plead for men.

Of course, there are two caveats. The Wall is still in a state of flux, so that is a good reason for Jon to remain. Second, Jon doesn't know what the games the lords are playing. It seems that quite a few people suspect that Arya is fake. Jon could upset their plans.

As you said the situation at the Wall isn´t settled at all, the military power lies with the only king that answered the Night´s Watch´s call for help, Stannis.

I think at best Jon could have send an envoy to represent the Night´s Watch and asses the situation at Winterfell, but there was close to no chance at all that Bolton would have send him men with Stannis at the Wall.

The best a Lord Commander of the NW could have hoped for was the promise to give the defeated fighters of Stannis the chance to take the black.

Regarding Ramsay´s letter, I don´t think it was an invitation. It was informing the Jon of the fact´s. Moat Calin has fallen, Roose Bolton the Lannister´s Warden of the North is accepted by the lords that signed the letter and Ramsay Bolton is going to claim Winterfell by marrying Arya Stark, Lady of Winterfell since Sansa is wanted for her part in the murder of Joffrey.

I had the impression that the Boltons might have preferred it , if Jon had chosen to intervene and given them the chance to remove this lingering threat. I think Roose is aware of Robb´s letter. At first I saw the pink letter as second attempt to provoke Jon, but there is so much that I can´t make sense of in it.

Finaly I want to give you an example why I see Jon´s handling of Stannis as a masterpiece of leadership, and I think it´s also a good chance that this was the moment Jon decided to recruit the wildlings in answer to Yeade.

"...Even if she accepts her husband, that does not mean the wildlings will follow him, or you. The only man who can bind them to your cause is Mance Rayder.”

“I know that,” Stannis said, unhappily. “I have spent hours speaking with the man. He knows much and more of our true enemy, and there is cunning in him, I’ll grant you. ..."

"...There are nineteen forts along the Wall, and you have men in only three of them. I mean to have every one of them garrisoned again before the year is out.”

“I have no quarrel with that, Sire, but it is being said that you also mean to grant these castles to your knights and lords, to hold as their own seats as vassals to Your Grace.”

Dance, Jon I.

I think it was the best thing Jon could do, given his aims: fortifying the Wall´s defences and taking up his father´s and uncle´s plan of resettling the Gift, Saving as many men as possible from becoming wights and thus limmitting the threat, and limitting the influence of Stannis and his army.

He had to offer Stannis a solution to his need to a victorious battle to win over the North. Showing him a way to win the Mountain Clan´s to his cause on the way to Deepwood Motte instead of attacking the Dreadfort with wildlings showed a lot of forethought.

Most likely a lot of wildlings would have deserted Stannis and caused a lot of problems, since it would have been raiders and Thenns.

In case of the siege going badly a desperate Stannis would have returned to Castle Black, so Jon´s taking part was in the interest of the Watch just as Bowen Marsh thought he was acting in the interest of the Watch by supporting the Lannister´s candidate for LC, since at that tim the Lannisters seemed to be the strongest party of the war for the throne and their victory must have looked certain to him.

A reminder. Jon overheard this discussion between Thorne, Marsh and Slynt. At last I want to ask if anyone remembers any hints that Marsh was friendly towards Thorne other than this and his remark in Game that he thinks the names Thorne gives his recruits droll.

[kg1982]

Jon gets too involved with Stannis because it helps him extract personal vengeance for the Starks. It didn't serve the Night's Watch's purposes for Jon to do Stannis's battle planning and remain on Team Stannis! In fact, it makes it harder for him to get stronger factions on board. Yes Stan defended the Wall, but he really is on his quest for the Iron Throne again by the end of the book. Jon sent Mance after Arya, which didn't serve any purpose for the NW and was the actual impetus for the Pink Letter.

With a lot of respects, Jon's focus on Winterfell and his family rather than the greater good leads to the chaos on the Wall in the last chapter. It's a rerun of some of the conflicts he faced in AGOT, but he sent everyon who kept him from doing something stupid away and as LC, his actions end up adversely affecting the NW as a whole.