R+L=J v.30

[lojzelote]

I know that the Wiki isn't gospel, but it says that the crypts were reserved for the Kings in the North and the Lords of Winterfell. I can't remember where, but I'm sure that I read that the crypts were only for them. I think that Ned put Lyanna there because she told him that she was Rhaegar's wife, which would have made her even more of a "royal" than a King in the North. What else could Ned tell Robert? He needed to keep the peace and protect Jon, and keep his promise to his sister. If Brandon died after Rickon he would have been a Lord of Winterfell, even if it was only for a moment. What other story could Ned have told Bran? Bran was just a little kid.

Just my opinion. It sounds good to me.

The crypts are for all Starks. The statues are only for lords and kings.

[Jem]

The vows of the KG mean nothing same as the vows of the NW. People who say those vows matter and people differ. One man is very different from another, even the same person can act differently under different conditions. There are noumerous occasions in the books where members of the KG and NW break/broke their vows repetedly. For example a knight's vows can conflict with a KG vow, so whose to say which one any particular individual will follow? It's only up to him. I don't understand why people are so inflexible when comes to the KG priority issue when there are many examples of the KG history pointing to the other direction.

And people saying that Ser Gerold's response is a reference to the KG vow is open to interpetation.

“Ser Willem Darry is fled to Dragonstone, with your queen and Prince Viserys. I thought you might have sailed with him.”

“Ser Willem is a good man and true,” said Ser Oswell.

“But not of the Kingsguard,” Ser Gerold pointed out. “The Kingsguard does not flee.”

“Then or now,” said Ser Arthur. He donned his helm.

“We swore a vow,” explained old Ser Gerold."

I believe he speaks of a different vow and there is no way to know for sure. I don't belive it's a coincidence that these 3 KG were there. Why isn't Selmy or Jaime? They were the 3 Rhaegar knew he could trust. It wasn't for their fighting abilities, for 3 no matter how gifted are not an army. If Rhaegar wanted to guard his son and wife he would have left at least a small garrison but he only left 3 men, the ones he could trust to follow his orders regardless of their vows. Keep in mind that Rhaegar meant to overthrow Aerys. When he planned this he must have had some of the KG support.

I disagree. If we ignore Arthur's interruption, you can quite clearly follow Gerold's train of thought: The Kingsguard does not flee. We swore a vow. The vow he is referring to is the Kingsguard vow. And the use of the word 'flee' is interesting. If Viserys was their king, going to him would not be fleeing. It would be doing their duty. However, as Jon as their king, if they did leave the ToJ, then it would be fleeing (as Gerold thinks of it) because they would be abandoning their king.

[The guy from the Vale]

No she's not. Other Stark women have been buried there, the lords are the only ones that get statues and swords to guard them.

But she's the only woman to have a statue. Still just as curious as before...

[dragontamer]

I disagree. If we ignore Arthur's interruption, you can quite clearly follow Gerold's train of thought: The Kingsguard does not flee. We swore a vow. The vow he is referring to is the Kingsguard vow. And the use of the word 'flee' is interesting. If Viserys was their king, going to him would not be fleeing. It would be doing their duty. However, as Jon as their king, if they did leave the ToJ, then it would be fleeing (as Gerold thinks of it) because they would be abandoning their king.

It's possible that's the right interpretation but I don't agree with it. As I have stated before the phrase "explained Ser Gerold" is intriguing. If this is an explanation regarding the KG vows it would make no sense for Eddard because he knows nothing of the baby and the marriage since he expects them to be with Viserys so Gerold offered no explanation. But if it's a different vow then the explanation quote is needed.

And I think it would be reckless to avoid Arthur's line, perhaps it was meant to be there in order for Gerold's next remark to be of something else.

[The guy from the Vale]

It's possible that's the right interpretation but I don't agree with it. As I have stated before the phrase "explained Ser Gerold" is intriguing. If this is an explanation regarding the KG vows it would make no sense for Eddard because he knows nothing of the baby and the marriage since he expects them to be with Viserys so Gerold offered no explanation. But if it's a different vow then the explanation quote is needed.

And I think it would be reckless to avoid Arthur's line, perhaps it was meant to be there in order for Gerold's next remark to be of something else.

I don't think Ned knows nothing of the baby. He explicitly takes only six companions with him, and at least one of them (Howland Reed) was indebted to Lyanna. Clearly, if he wanted to assure victory at any cost, he would have brought an army (he was a general, after all). Instead, he chooses to only take his closest confidants to the Tower. The implication being that Ned already suspects what he might find at the Tower of Joy - not very surprising, considering that he might know Lyanna ran away willingly, and that there's simply no reliable birth control in this setting.

However, Ned doesn't want to fight the KG if possible. The dialogue at the Tower of Joy is Ned's way of confirming his suspicions, as well as giving the three King's Guard an out - he basically offers them free conduct if they go to Viserys instead of staying at the ToJ; they refuse, and the two parties begin to fight.

[Ygrain]

It's possible that's the right interpretation but I don't agree with it. As I have stated before the phrase "explained Ser Gerold" is intriguing. If this is an explanation regarding the KG vows it would make no sense for Eddard because he knows nothing of the baby and the marriage since he expects them to be with Viserys so Gerold offered no explanation. But if it's a different vow then the explanation quote is needed.

And I think it would be reckless to avoid Arthur's line, perhaps it was meant to be there in order for Gerold's next remark to be of something else.

Referring to a vow after they repeatedly point out that they are KG and do things the way the KG are supposed to do leaves little space for another vow, IMHO, especially if the said vow was somehow in contradiction with the KG vow. The KG vow is supposed to be an ultimate one, superseding any other. They might choose to follow another vow, or their conscience, but if they do so, they become oathbreakers, as a couple of KG have before them - only the ToJ trio explicitely state they are keeping their vow.

And, Ser Gerold does offer sufficient explanation. Basically, Ned comes to ToJ with his most faithful friends and vassals, which is already pretty telling - he knows he might find something that had better not become publically known. Then, he encounters there the KG, whose location was previously unknown, guarding his sister, who, whether kidnapped or eloped, spent quite some time in the company of a fertile young man. He questions the KG to find out if they are aware of what transpired at KL and why they were not at the places where their oath would be binding them to be, and receives an answer that they are at ToJ doing KG business. If he didn't figure it out the very moment he saw them there, now he definitely does: he needn't know exactly all the whats and hows but he knows that there is an heir of Rhaegar's at the tower.

And, just BTW, if the Starks did know all along that Lyanna went willingly, because she did leave a message saying "I'm leaving with the man I love and we're going to say the words before the hearttree", the figuring out part would be a matter of seconds.

ETA: dammit, theguyfromtheVale was faster :-)

[The Piece Maker]

No she's not. Other Stark women have been buried there, the lords are the only ones that get statues and swords to guard them.

I have just re-read the parts in GoT where Bran goes to the crypts to see Ned's tomb and the part in CoK when Bran & co are hiding from Theon. There is a lot of historical narrative about the Kings & Lords, but no mention of the Stark women, except for Lyanna. But,why would there be? Just because there is no mention of women in the crypts doesn't mean that they aren't there. Where else would they be? There is a placed mentioned where Lady's bones were buried, with the favorite servants. Bran did say that the statues were only for the Kings and Lords, in GoT, so it was unusual for Lyanna to have a statue.

My apologies, I should have checked the facts more carefully. I really can't imagine that there was separate burial areas for women and children only.

[dragontamer]

I don't think Ned knows nothing of the baby. He explicitly takes only six companions with him, and at least one of them (Howland Reed) was indebted to Lyanna. Clearly, if he wanted to assure victory at any cost, he would have brought an army (he was a general, after all). Instead, he chooses to only take his closest confidants to the Tower. The implication being that Ned already suspects what he might find at the Tower of Joy - not very surprising, considering that he might know Lyanna ran away willingly, and that there's simply no reliable birth control in this setting.

However, Ned doesn't want to fight the KG if possible. The dialogue at the Tower of Joy is Ned's way of confirming his suspicions, as well as giving the three King's Guard an out - he basically offers them free conduct if they go to Viserys instead of staying at the ToJ; they refuse, and the two parties begin to fight.

Referring to a vow after they repeatedly point out that they are KG and do things the way the KG are supposed to do leaves little space for another vow, IMHO, especially if the said vow was somehow in contradiction with the KG vow. The KG vow is supposed to be an ultimate one, superseding any other. They might choose to follow another vow, or their conscience, but if they do so, they become oathbreakers, as a couple of KG have before them - only the ToJ trio explicitely state they are keeping their vow.

And, Ser Gerold does offer sufficient explanation. Basically, Ned comes to ToJ with his most faithful friends and vassals, which is already pretty telling - he knows he might find something that had better not become publically known. Then, he encounters there the KG, whose location was previously unknown, guarding his sister, who, whether kidnapped or eloped, spent quite some time in the company of a fertile young man. He questions the KG to find out if they are aware of what transpired at KL and why they were not at the places where their oath would be binding them to be, and receives an answer that they are at ToJ doing KG business. If he didn't figure it out the very moment he saw them there, now he definitely does: he needn't know exactly all the whats and hows but he knows that there is an heir of Rhaegar's at the tower.

And, just BTW, if the Starks did know all along that Lyanna went willingly, because she did leave a message saying "I'm leaving with the man I love and we're going to say the words before the hearttree", the figuring out part would be a matter of seconds.

ETA: dammit, theguyfromtheVale was faster :-)

If Ned knew where Lyanna was (still can't explain how he found out and not Robert or anyone else, unless he somehow learned it when he went to end the siege at Storm's End) he knew that only 3 KG were with her so he must have decided that 7 men were enough. And there is no hint in his words that he knows of the baby let alone a secret marriage. If he did know and his purpose was to avoid fighting he would have said it to the 3 KG along with his intention not to harm the mother and the child, at least he would have tried to negotiate but we see no such a thing. Ned is naive, close to stupid when comes to those things. He warned Cersei to run with her children before telling Robert of the incest and expected that she would run and hide under a rock like some frightened little cat.

Just to mention Jaime thinks as his greatest act the murder of Aerys.

[FrozenFire3]

I don't think Ned knows nothing of the baby. He explicitly takes only six companions with him, and at least one of them (Howland Reed) was indebted to Lyanna. Clearly, if he wanted to assure victory at any cost, he would have brought an army (he was a general, after all). Instead, he chooses to only take his closest confidants to the Tower. The implication being that Ned already suspects what he might find at the Tower of Joy - not very surprising, considering that he might know Lyanna ran away willingly, and that there's simply no reliable birth control in this setting.

However, Ned doesn't want to fight the KG if possible. The dialogue at the Tower of Joy is Ned's way of confirming his suspicions, as well as giving the three King's Guard an out - he basically offers them free conduct if they go to Viserys instead of staying at the ToJ; they refuse, and the two parties begin to fight.

This post is perfection :bowdown:

DOH!! :dunce:

Sorry Frozenfire3. :blush:

And thanks again for that image. :D

Do you have the other link that shows Lyanna, and then Jon, as well as Viserys?

They were really impactful.

LOL no problem. I didn't specify the gender in my profile ;)

Here are the links to the Graphic Novel's scans:

Lyanna:

http://www.imagebam....821034200156931

http://www.imagebam....f23b2f200280912

Jon:

http://www.imagebam....20add6200156914

Viserys:

http://www.imagebam....f6bd56200190840

Btw, The Graphic Novel: Volume Two will be released on November 27. Just saying :leer:

[Ygrain]

If Ned knew where Lyanna was (still can't explain how he found out and not Robert or anyone else, unless he somehow learned it when he went to end the siege at Storm's End) he knew that only 3 KG were with her so he must have decided that 7 men were enough. And there is no hint in his words that he knows of the baby let alone a secret marriage. If he did know and his purpose was to avoid fighting he would have said it to the 3 KG along with his intention not to harm the mother and the child, at least he would have tried to negotiate but we see no such a thing. Ned is naive, close to stupid when comes to those things. He warned Cersei to run with her children before telling Robert of the incest and expected that she would run and hide under a rock like some frightened little cat.

Just to mention Jaime thinks as his greatest act the murder of Aerys.

Well, he apparently did know and someone most probably tipped him off, since I don't suppose he discovered ToJ on a random detour from Storms' End. And, as we could see, seven men were almost not enough. We do not know how he learned or what exactly, so it's purely up to speculation if he did expect the KG or not.

And please, don't make the mistake of considering Ned stupid. He is not a scheming mastermind like Varys or LF, but still the guy who managed to hide a Targ heir so well that no-one ever suspected, not even the said masterminds. He doesn't have to hint at the baby, and neither do the KG - the point is that both sides know what they are talking about, without saying it aloud. Both live according to the same codes of honour, after all - which is what makes the fight inevitable. He has to get his sister, and they can't let him enter and find out about the baby, and this is, IMHO, the real reason of the fight: keeping Jon's existence secret. If Ned found out, he would be honour-bound to tell Robert. There is no way the KG can know that Lord Stark is willing to sacrifice his honour when it comes to family or children.

And, just BTW: Cersei herself mentions that she was seriously pondering the exile.

[dragontamer]

Well, he apparently did know and someone most probably tipped him off, since I don't suppose he discovered ToJ on a random detour from Storms' End. And, as we could see, seven men were almost not enough. We do not know how he learned or what exactly, so it's purely up to speculation if he did expect the KG or not.

And please, don't make the mistake of considering Ned stupid. He is not a scheming mastermind like Varys or LF, but still the guy who managed to hide a Targ heir so well that no-one ever suspected, not even the said masterminds. He doesn't have to hint at the baby, and neither do the KG - the point is that both sides know what they are talking about, without saying it aloud. Both live according to the same codes of honour, after all - which is what makes the fight inevitable. He has to get his sister, and they can't let him enter and find out about the baby, and this is, IMHO, the real reason of the fight: keeping Jon's existence secret. If Ned found out, he would be honour-bound to tell Robert. There is no way the KG can know that Lord Stark is willing to sacrifice his honour when it comes to family or children.

And, just BTW: Cersei herself mentions that she was seriously pondering the exile.

If both sides know what they are talking about then the question about Viserys is useless and so is the vague answer. But even if he knew about the baby he couldn't have known about the marriage.

And please can you explain how exactly were the 3 KG planning to protect their king? By staying all alone in the desert after a lost war when they already knew that all Targ family was slaughtered even the children and Elia who pose no immediate threat and with Stannis sailing to Dragonstone after the last survivors? Didn't they guess Jon's fate if captured? The right thing to do was to leave with the baby and leave one behind with Lyanna. If they abided by their primary duty that's what they should do but they didn't.

[lewis92]

its a joke really how much this is discussed, how many times are people going to keep saying the same things

[Ygrain]

If both sides know what they are talking about then the question about Viserys is useless and so is the vague answer. But even if he knew about the baby he couldn't have known about the marriage.

Not at all. As I said in the previous post, Ned is checking if the KG are in touch with the events - if they didn't know that Aerys and Aegon were dead, there was no reason to expect them to go to Dragonstone. But when he heard that they did know, then he inevitably had to start suspecting (or confirming whatever he suspected previously) that there must be another Targ in the ToJ, who, given the circumstances, could only be a child by Lyanna.

It is also possible that the person who tipped Ned off about Lyanna's location didn't know, or didn't inform him, about her pregnancy.

And please can you explain how exactly were the 3 KG planning to protect their king? By staying all alone in the desert after a lost war when they already knew that all Targ family was slaughtered even the children and Elia who pose no immediate threat and with Stannis sailing to Dragonstone after the last survivors? Didn't they guess Jon's fate if captured? The right thing to do was to leave with the baby and leave one behind with Lyanna. If they abided by their primary duty that's what they should do but they didn't.

They could simply be prevented by circumstances - to travel with a newborn, you have to arrange a wetnurse, which may take some time. Besides, they most probably didn't intend to stay over there forever, they were only waiting for Lyanna to recover or pass away, and then they would move one. And, up till Ned turned up, the secrecy and remoteness of the location protected them well enough.

[dragontamer]

its a joke really how much this is discussed, how many times are people going to keep saying the same things

It's a joke really how many act indifferent but come back to tell the rest what a joke it is to keep discussing this. Why bother then?

[dragontamer]

Not at all. As I said in the previous post, Ned is checking if the KG are in touch with the events - if they didn't know that Aerys and Aegon were dead, there was no reason to expect them to go to Dragonstone. But when he heard that they did know, then he inevitably had to start suspecting (or confirming whatever he suspected previously) that there must be another Targ in the ToJ, who, given the circumstances, could only be a child by Lyanna.

It is also possible that the person who tipped Ned off about Lyanna's location didn't know, or didn't inform him, about her pregnancy.

This makes no sense. The mention of Viserys comes after Aerys which implies that in Ned's head this was the line of succession. If he suspected that there was a legitimate child of Rhaegar at the ToJ he would have stopped at Aerys, but Ned posing the question about Viserys means he didn't suspect.

They could simply be prevented by circumstances - to travel with a newborn, you have to arrange a wetnurse, which may take some time. Besides, they most probably didn't intend to stay over there forever, they were only waiting for Lyanna to recover or pass away, and then they would move one. And, up till Ned turned up, the secrecy and remoteness of the location protected them well enough.

Lyanna was almost dead when Ned arrived. This means that even at the ToJ a wetnurse was needed. I doubt Lyanna could nurse the baby at her condition and btw she was in such a bad shape that they couldn't know how long she could live so arrangements for a wetnurse had to be made either way. And waiting for Lyanna while endangering their king means that they don't stick to their first duty.

[The guy from the Vale]

As I said before, Ned mentioning Viserys is mainly Eddard giving the King's Guard a way out that would be perceived as honorable by the Westerosi nobility: Since noone except for them and Ned knows about Jon, they can proclaim Viserys king and go to Dragonstone. Gerold and Arthur decline this offer by referring to their vow.

[dragontamer]

As I said before, Ned mentioning Viserys is mainly Eddard giving the King's Guard a way out that would be perceived as honorable by the Westerosi nobility: Since noone except for them and Ned knows about Jon, they can proclaim Viserys king and go to Dragonstone. Gerold and Arthur decline this offer by referring to their vow.

So you believe that if they accepted Ned would just allow them to leave?

[Ygrain]

This makes no sense. The mention of Viserys comes after Aerys which implies that in Ned's head this was the line of succession. If he suspected that there was a legitimate child of Rhaegar at the ToJ he would have stopped at Aerys, but Ned posing the question about Viserys means he didn't suspect.

Not necessarily in Ned's head, but in the eyes of the rest of the world, Viserys was indeed the next in the line of succession. Besides, if he didn't know the whole truth, at that point he must have been wondering why the KG are protecting a mere bastard when they are duty-bound elsewhere. It is possible that the full extent of what the KG rpesence at ToJ means dawned on him only then.

Lyanna was almost dead when Ned arrived. This means that even at the ToJ a wetnurse was needed. I doubt Lyanna could nurse the baby at her condition and btw she was in such a bad shape that they couldn't know how long she could live so arrangements for a wetnurse had to be made either way. And waiting for Lyanna while endangering their king means that they don't stick to their first duty.

Yes, the nurse was most probably needed there even before Ned's arrival, but this still means that it took some time to get her, especially if Lyanna did die of puerperal fever, which would take several days to set in and therefore postpone the necessity to look for one. And, if Lyanna's state meanwhile deteriorated so that it became clear that she wouldn't last long, they were not really endangering Jon by staying, since they didn't know their location was compromised.

Another factor which may have required them to stay at ToJ was the need for secrecy - as KG, they might have easily been recognized if they tried to organize a secret passage for Jon, so it is possible they left this to someone trustworthy but less conspicuous (Ashara or some other confidant).

So you believe that if they accepted Ned would just allow them to leave?

Of course. It would be the honourable thing to do. Chivalrous.

[Davos' fingertip]

Anyone else think GRRM made Arya and Jon Snow fond of each other because Arya is supposed to be like Lyanna Stark, who is Jon Snow's mother.

[corbon]

If Ned knew where Lyanna was (still can't explain how he found out and not Robert or anyone else, unless he somehow learned it when he went to end the siege at Storm's End) he knew that only 3 KG were with her

Fail. The one does not require the other. All he needs to know is that this is where she was to be found.

And there is no hint in his words that he knows of the baby let alone a secret marriage.

Indeed. All he has to know is that this is the location where she can be found.

This makes no sense. The mention of Viserys comes after Aerys which implies that in Ned's head this was the line of succession. If he suspected that there was a legitimate child of Rhaegar at the ToJ he would have stopped at Aerys, but Ned posing the question about Viserys means he didn't suspect.

Not necessarily - as noted by others, he's giving the KG an apparently honourable way out.

But yes, I don't think he suspects. I think he never suspected Jon is legit, because he's never thought about the events, that conversation, and what it meant beyond the pain of losing his friends and then his sister. Very Ned - he's not unintelligent at all, just wilfully blind in some areas.

But I don't think we'll actually get confirmation of that sort of detail around ToJ myself.

So you believe that if they accepted Ned would just allow them to leave?

Probably, yes. He has no personal beef with them, is at odds with Robert already (and is doing something he will never tell Robert of anyway) and simply doesn't care about the final fate of these KG, or even Viserys, any more. THe rebellion has succeeded, the mad king is dead, he's just here to get back his beloved baby sister and then go home.