R+L=J v.34

[dragontamer]

@Dragonfish

I believe that we should all know by now that Jaime was not considered protection but hostage by both Aerys and Rhaegar so I don't count him as one of the KG since he didn't stay in KL as 1 of the 7 but as leverage.

Also imo the argument that there was a whole army protecting the royal family, amongst them the king and the 2nd in line to the throne, is wrong. I will use Hightower's words... "But not of the kingsguard".

Also why these three? I understand why Dayne and partly Whent but Hightower? He deprived his army of a competent commander in order to place him as guard in a forsaken place to guard his 2nd (?) wife and child? Two were enough, even better one was enough as captain of a small host.

I don't think that everything is so obvious as most believe, and to repeat my former argument, all information come from Eddard's fever dream.

From The Citadel, So Spake Martin, January 02-2002 :

Q : However, what are the Kingsguards doing fighting Eddard? Eddard would never hurt Lyanna, nor her child. The little one would be safe with Eddard as well, him being a close relative. So I ask you, was there someone else with Lyanna and Jon?"

M : "You'll need to wait for future books to find out more about the Tower of Joy and what happened there, I fear.

I might mention, though, that Ned's account, which you refer to, was in the context of a dream... and a fever dream at that. Our dreams are not always literal."

[Ygrain]

To throw in a couple of points:

- it makes no sense for Aerys to dispatch the KG to guard Lyanna in the middle of nowhere. If he wanted to use her against Rhaegar, he would need her close, in his power, not at a place that would take weeks to reach. Also, if Lyanna was held hostage at Aerys' order, don't you think he would use her mainly against Ned and Robert to stop the Rebellion? Paranoid or not, Aerys still had enough common sense to get such things right.

- don't discount Jaime as a KG just because his family background made him a hostage. He was not locked up in a tower, he was performing his duty, protecting the king, therefore the oaths of´the other KG were not affected.

- dreams needn't be literal as long as they keep the gist. No matter what was actually said, the gist of the dream is that the three KG keep their vows and are at the ToJ on behalf of a KG duty.If this wasn't true, then the dream has no purpose, no meaning at all, and I doubt very much that this would be what GRRM intended

[Dragonfish]

I believe that we should all know by now that Jaime was not considered protection but hostage by both Aerys and Rhaegar so I don't count him as one of the KG since he didn't stay in KL as 1 of the 7 but as leverage.

The fact that he's leverage does not preclude the notion that he still serves and guards the king, as evidenced by the fact that Aerys actually ordered Jaime to bring him Tywin's head. What kind of king sends someone who's just a hostage on a mission like that?

Also imo the argument that there was a whole army protecting the royal family, amongst them the king and the 2nd in line to the throne, is wrong.

What? You think it somehow doesn't matter that there was a whole army protecting them? You don't think that makes a bit of a difference? You don't think that makes any claim that Rhaegar's family was unprotected completely asinine?

I will use Hightower's words... "But not of the kingsguard".

You are completely misapplying that quote. Hightower isn't saying that having a few Kingsguard is somehow better than an entire army or something. He's simply explaining why he and the other two Kingsguard didn't flee like Ser Willem Darry did.

I don't think that everything is so obvious as most believe, and to repeat my former argument, all information come from Eddard's fever dream.

From The Citadel, So Spake Martin, January 02-2002 :

Q : However, what are the Kingsguards doing fighting Eddard? Eddard would never hurt Lyanna, nor her child. The little one would be safe with Eddard as well, him being a close relative. So I ask you, was there someone else with Lyanna and Jon?"

M : "You'll need to wait for future books to find out more about the Tower of Joy and what happened there, I fear.

I might mention, though, that Ned's account, which you refer to, was in the context of a dream... and a fever dream at that. Our dreams are not always literal."

The fact that the dream may not be literal does not mean there are parts of it that may be wrong. George is probably just referring to Ned's description of his companions and Lyanna's scream.

[Old-Growth]

M : "You'll need to wait for future books to find out more about the Tower of Joy and what happened there, I fear.

Two books and ten years later and we are still waiting :-(

[dragontamer]

- it makes no sense for Aerys to dispatch the KG to guard Lyanna in the middle of nowhere. If he wanted to use her against Rhaegar, he would need her close, in his power, not at a place that would take weeks to reach. Also, if Lyanna was held hostage at Aerys' order, don't you think he would use her mainly against Ned and Robert to stop the Rebellion? Paranoid or not, Aerys still had enough common sense to get such things right.

I didn't say nor I believe that Lyanna was held hostage under Aerys' orders. I said that imo the 3 KG members were there not to protect the king=Jon but for different reasons we don't know yet.

- don't discount Jaime as a KG just because his family background made him a hostage. He was not locked up in a tower, he was performing his duty, protecting the king, therefore the oaths of´the other KG were not affected.

Jaime was 16, the youngest, newest and less experienced member of the KG. Do you believe that under different circumstances Aerys would have chosen him instead of any other member if he wasn't Tywin's son? I don't think so. Rhaegar thinks otherwise when he speaks with Jaime before leaving to fight at the Trident.

- dreams needn't be literal as long as they keep the gist. No matter what was actually said, the gist of the dream is that the three KG keep their vows and are at the ToJ on behalf of a KG duty.If this wasn't true, then the dream has no purpose, no meaning at all, and I doubt very much that this would be what GRRM intended

The gist of the dream is that there was a confrontation between Eddard+companions and the KG, that Lyanna was there and that she died there. What was said and the way it was said it's not the gist of the dream, it's just Eddard's account of the events and the way he perceived them. Not my words, Martin's words.

As I said in my previous post... what about Sansa and the kiss with Sandor that never happened?

The fact that he's leverage does not preclude the notion that he still serves and guards the king, as evidenced by the fact that Aerys actually ordered Jaime to bring him Tywin's head. What kind of king sends someone who's just a hostage on a mission like that?

What? You think it somehow doesn't matter that there was a whole army protecting them? You don't think that makes a bit of a difference? You don't think that makes any claim that Rhaegar's family was unprotected completely asinine?

The kind that burns alive an innocent man while his son is watching and suffocating, the kind that orders a 16 year old to kill his own father, the kind that orders the death of an entire city. Aerys was mad but Rhaegar sees Jaime as hostage too. He said Jaime so himself.

An army is enough for the royal family but what about KG? When Rhaegar left for KL Lyanna was still pregnant. There was no child, no heir, yet. Aegon, Rhaenys, Elia, Viserys, Aerys and Rhaella were in KL though. Why not send Whent and Hightower and leave Dayne at ToJ with a small host?

Again as Martin said, not me, the account of the ToJ events comes from a fever dream and dreams are not literal. There is obviously some truth in it but not the whole truth.

And remember that Martin refused to answer even vaguely whether there was another with Lyanna and Jon in the Tower. If the answer was as simple as some maid or washer woman I think he might have said something.

[Bear Island Bruiser]

To throw in a couple of points:

- it makes no sense for Aerys to dispatch the KG to guard Lyanna in the middle of nowhere. If he wanted to use her against Rhaegar, he would need her close, in his power, not at a place that would take weeks to reach. Also, if Lyanna was held hostage at Aerys' order, don't you think he would use her mainly against Ned and Robert to stop the Rebellion? Paranoid or not, Aerys still had enough common sense to get such things right.

Which you could equally apply if you wanted to protect her. Bring her into KL to have the army and all the KG to protect her plus have maesters on hand to look after mother and child. Plus if they're just there to protect her you could easily send just 1 KG in charge of a dozen men or so. Remember Myrcella get's just the 1 KG even when she's heir to the throne, there is no other heir on the way soon (after all Tommen is a little young) and the only other guy who has a legitimate claim (following the Baratheon line anyway) to the throne is in open rebellion.

- don't discount Jaime as a KG just because his family background made him a hostage. He was not locked up in a tower, he was performing his duty, protecting the king, therefore the oaths of´the other KG were not affected.

Very true. He easily fulfills a dual role of being part of the KG and keeping Tywin in line (well supposedly, didn't really work out that way did it?)

- dreams needn't be literal as long as they keep the gist. No matter what was actually said, the gist of the dream is that the three KG keep their vows and are at the ToJ on behalf of a KG duty.If this wasn't true, then the dream has no purpose, no meaning at all, and I doubt very much that this would be what GRRM intended

Yeah the lines spoken by both parties seem far too specific to 'just be the gist'.. The lines are specific but the actions are the gist. Things like how Ned's wraiths lined up behind him, shadow swords in hand would be fever dream.

[J. Stargaryen]

I`d be inclined to throw my lot in with this. It seems much more likely that they`re referring to a different vow. <snip>

Does it? Why?

[Daemul]

Hey guys, I also wanted to ask, since the Targaryens are immune to fire, and Jon got burnt, doesn't this mean that he's not actual a Targaryen at all, thereby disproving this theory?

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.Joking :devil:

[The Drunkard]

Urge to kill... Rising....

[Daemul]

Urge to kill... Rising....

That's the reaction I wanted :pimp:

[J. Stargaryen]

The gist of the dream is that there was a confrontation between Eddard+companions and the KG, that Lyanna was there and that she died there. What was said and the way it was said it's not the gist of the dream, it's just Eddard's account of the events and the way he perceived them. Not my words, Martin's words.

Whether the ToJ passage from AGoT is a literal word-for-word account of what happened or not, they are the authors words to the audience. Why do you think he wrote them? Are you really arguing that he just meant to write a nice sounding passage, and that it completely escaped him that applying deductive reasoning to said passage leaves us with the overwhelming impression that Jon is the heir to the Targaryen dynasty? Come on.

Let's consider -- forgetting ASoIaF for a moment -- that there is an organization called the Kingsguard. Knowing only their name tell me what you think their (primary) duty is. Guard the king. Right? It's a no-brainer. Their (primary) duty must be to guard the king, unless their name is ironic.

A little bit more information about this group: they swear vows to uphold their duty or duties. Knowing what you know about this theoretical Kingsguard, complete the following sentence for me with the first thing that comes to mind: We swore a vow... The only answer is to guard/protect the king.

Now let's get back to the ToJ passage. When Ser Gerold Hightower says We swore a vow the audience is meant to ask What vow? Since we already know what the most obvious answer to that question is, if the actual answer is something else, there must be some indication of that. If not, then we can't trust any hints and/or clues the author has left for us throughout the series. Does that sound like a good way to describe ASoIaF to you -- that we can't trust the hints and clues left throughout the series?

As I said in my previous post... what about Sansa and the kiss with Sandor that never happened?

What about it?

[Ygrain]

The gist of the dream is that there was a confrontation between Eddard+companions and the KG, that Lyanna was there and that she died there. What was said and the way it was said it's not the gist of the dream, it's just Eddard's account of the events and the way he perceived them.

Call it the gist of the dialogue, then, if you wish. However, the dialogue is there for a purpose, and you might ponder why it is that the dream sequence concentrates mainly on the dialogue, and not on the confrontation, or Lyanna, or her death. It concentrates on what is being said. And since this is not a camera recording but a written text, it all but screams 'important'. That's why I referred to it as the gist of the dream as a whole.

Not my words, Martin's words.

How so? He says that not all parts of the dream are realistic, he doesn't say a thing about what is or is not a gist of the scene, or did you mean something else?

As I said in my previous post... what about Sansa and the kiss with Sandor that never happened?

And what about it? Is it automatically supposed to discredit any personal account of an event?

An army is enough for the royal family but what about KG? When Rhaegar left for KL Lyanna was still pregnant. There was no child, no heir, yet. Aegon, Rhaenys, Elia, Viserys, Aerys and Rhaella were in KL though. Why not send Whent and Hightower and leave Dayne at ToJ with a small host?

I believe that secrecy is the key here. A few posts above, I reminded that Lyanna would be a valuable hostage and leverage against all three men who loved here. The consequences if Aerys would get hold of her would have been dire, for them as well as for herself. Under no condition Aerys could be allowed to learn about here whereabouts, meaning, those guarding her had to be 100 per cent reliable. They couldn't be many, either, as their travel (as well as supplying) might draw attention. Also, I believe that Rhaegar left them behind not just for protection but predominantly to keep the secret - if he took them along to KL, Aerys could override his orders and they would be honour-bound to tell him where Lyanna was if he asked.

And remember that Martin refused to answer even vaguely whether there was another with Lyanna and Jon in the Tower. If the answer was as simple as some maid or washer woman I think he might have said something.

Of course he refused. If he answered "a wetnurse", or "Wylla", whom we know to be poising as Jon's mother, he would have spilt the beans. He's basically pulling a Ned - not lying but refusing to tell :P

[Bear Island Bruiser]

I believe that secrecy is the key here. A few posts above, I reminded that Lyanna would be a valuable hostage and leverage against all three men who loved here. The consequences if Aerys would get hold of her would have been dire, for them as well as for herself. Under no condition Aerys could be allowed to learn about here whereabouts, meaning, those guarding her had to be 100 per cent reliable. They couldn't be many, either, as their travel (as well as supplying) might draw attention. Also, I believe that Rhaegar left them behind not just for protection but predominantly to keep the secret - if he took them along to KL, Aerys could override his orders and they would be honour-bound to tell him where Lyanna was if he asked.

I'm with you on the most part but when it comes to keeping information from Aerys sending the Kings Guard, sworn to protect and obey the King above all else, doesn't follow for me. Perhaps Dayne, maybe Whent as well, would obey Rhaegar over Aerys but never Hightower. Look at the we don't judge the king we obey speech. OK not telling him that Lyanna was there is not exactly strictly disobeying him but it's treading a pretty thin line for someone who took that vow so seriously.

If I wanted to keep information form Aerys the Kingsguard would be the very last people I'd choose

[Ygrain]

I'm with you on the most part but when it comes to keeping information from Aerys sending the Kings Guard, sworn to protect and obey the King above all else, doesn't follow for me. Perhaps Dayne, maybe Whent as well, would obey Rhaegar over Aerys but never Hightower. Look at the we don't judge the king we obey speech. OK not telling him that Lyanna was there is not exactly strictly disobeying him but it's treading a pretty thin line for someone who took that vow so seriously.

If I wanted to keep information form Aerys the Kingsguard would be the very last people I'd choose

I don't think Rhaegar chose them, but perhaps made use of them once they were there. We do not know how, and when, the three KG occured at ToJ. As Rhaegar's closest friend, Dayne was possibly assigned as his personal bodyguard and was there since the very beginning. Some time between the death of Brandon and Rickard, which he witnessed, and Rhaegar's return to KL, when he is already not there, Hightower left KL and somehow got to ToJ. A common theory is that he was sent to look for Rhaegar. If Dayne had been missing too, Starfall would be a logical place to visit, and from there, Rhaegar could easily be notified. At this point, Rhaegar's authority of the second after Aerys is even strengthened by the fact that Aerys wants him as his Hand and Commander of armies, so in Aerys' absence, the KG obey Rhaegar, unless it somehow contradicts Aerys' orders. If Aerys never specified that Hightower had to return to KL with Rhaegar, he would be at Rhaegar's disposal, therefore all Rhaegar has to do is to make sure Hightower doesn't find himself in a situation where Rhaegar's and Aerys' orders would clash. As long as Hightower doesn't get a direct order from Aerys, Rhaegar's secret is perfectly safe with him, and since Aerys doesn't know where Hightower is, he cannot command him. No oaths broken.

[Zupoleon]

Just because Dayne, Whent & Hightower may be obeying Rhaegar's orders, it does not mean they are automatically disobeying Aerys. It's not an either / or scenario.

Furthermore, I imagine there was a certain level of pragmatism in the choices made by Rhager and the 3 KG. Rhaegar is about to lead the Royal Army into battle (no guarantee of success). It would be quite foolish to have all your eggs in KL's basket should he fail. Having 3 KG protecting what might become the last remnant of your dynasty in a worst case scenario (far away from the chaos) is quite wise IMO. No oaths broken, but rather preparing for all possibilities...

[Erudain]

That's the reaction I wanted :pimp:

attention seeking is nothing to be proud off... :whip:

[Dragonfish]

The kind that burns alive an innocent man while his son is watching and suffocating, the kind that orders a 16 year old to kill his own father, the kind that orders the death of an entire city.

None of these examples contradict anything I've said. Aerys was crazy, but there was also a certain logic to his actions. He demanded and expected loyalty from others, and reacted harshly when he thought they weren't giving it. And based on the fact that he sent Jaime to kill Tywin, he clearly thought that Jaime was still there to serve him.

Aerys was mad but Rhaegar sees Jaime as hostage too. He said Jaime so himself.

You're not getting it. Yes, Jaime was a hostage. No one is contradicting that. But just because he was a hostage doesn't mean he also wasn't there to serve the king as Kingsguard. Nothing you've said so far contradicts that.

An army is enough for the royal family but what about KG?

As I said, there were at various times four Kingsguard left in King's Landing. Occasionally they went other places to fulfill certain tasks, but there was always at least one left to guard the king and the royal family.

When Rhaegar left for KL Lyanna was still pregnant. There was no child, no heir, yet. Aegon, Rhaenys, Elia, Viserys, Aerys and Rhaella were in KL though. Why not send Whent and Hightower and leave Dayne at ToJ with a small host?

As Ygrain said, secrecy. Bringing a host would mean bringing potential informers, people who could tell Varys where Lyanna was being kept.

Again as Martin said, not me, the account of the ToJ events comes from a fever dream and dreams are not literal. There is obviously some truth in it but not the whole truth.

Well obviously it doesn't give the whole truth, but that doesn't mean that anything it depicts could be false.

[dragontamer]

Whether the ToJ passage from AGoT is a literal word-for-word account of what happened or not, they are the authors words to the audience. Why do you think he wrote them? Are you really arguing that he just meant to write a nice sounding passage, and that it completely escaped him that applying deductive reasoning to said passage leaves us with the overwhelming impression that Jon is the heir to the Targaryen dynasty? Come on.

What about it?

Of course there was a reason, the same way there was a reason (and maybe need) for the readers to learn about it through a fever dream. Keep in mind that when Martin was asked about the ToJ he could just say that the readers will learn more in future books but he made a point to say that it was a memory through a fever dream, imo clearly implying that things didn’t happen exactly that way.

The thing about Sansa is to remind that even an eyewitness can be wrong, the whole thing with the unreliable narrator.

Let's consider -- forgetting ASoIaF for a moment -- that there is an organization called the Kingsguard. Knowing only their name tell me what you think their (primary) duty is. Guard the king. Right? It's a no-brainer. Their (primary) duty must be to guard the king, unless their name is ironic.

A little bit more information about this group: they swear vows to uphold their duty or duties. Knowing what you know about this theoretical Kingsguard, complete the following sentence for me with the first thing that comes to mind: We swore a vow... The only answer is to guard/protect the king.

Now let's get back to the ToJ passage. When Ser Gerold Hightower says We swore a vow the audience is meant to ask What vow? Since we already know what the most obvious answer to that question is, if the actual answer is something else, there must be some indication of that. If not, then we can't trust any hints and/or clues the author has left for us throughout the series. Does that sound like a good way to describe ASoIaF to you -- that we can't trust the hints and clues left throughout the series?

The primary duty of the kingsguard is to protect the king, no arguing with that, but let's not forget that there are a few examples that prove that it's one thing what they should do and another what they actually do.

After all they are still only men, Gyles Greycloak, ser Arryk and ser Erryk, Criston Cole, Lucamore Strong, Jaime.... they all broke their vows one way or the other.

The fact that it was expected of them to hold their vows doesn't mean that they did so and that's the reason I believe that's important whether or not the passage we read is literal. So yes, if you asked me what the "duty of the kingsguard is...... " I would say "to protect" but does this mean that they did it?

None of these examples contradict anything I've said. Aerys was crazy, but there was also a certain logic to his actions. He demanded and expected loyalty from others, and reacted harshly when he thought they weren't giving it. And based on the fact that he sent Jaime to kill Tywin, he clearly thought that Jaime was still there to serve him.

You're not getting it. Yes, Jaime was a hostage. No one is contradicting that. But just because he was a hostage doesn't mean he also wasn't there to serve the king as Kingsguard. Nothing you've said so far contradicts that.

As I said, there were at various times four Kingsguard left in King's Landing. Occasionally they went other places to fulfill certain tasks, but there was always at least one left to guard the king and the royal family.

If you honestly believe that 16 year old Jaime was considered by both Aerys and Rhaegar as adequate representation of the KG for Aerys and almost the entirely royal family that’s fine with me. On the other hand Lyanna had the three most distinguished KG members to guard her and that’s seems reasonable. I don’t agree but I have no argument to offer if that’s what you really believe.

As Ygrain said, secrecy. Bringing a host would mean bringing potential informers, people who could tell Varys where Lyanna was being kept.

Well obviously it doesn't give the whole truth, but that doesn't mean that anything it depicts could be false.

How does a washer woman or a cook serve better the need for secrecy than a few trusted knights? I see no difference.

If Martin makes a note to say us that it was a dream and not to take it literally I will consider it important.

[Dragonfish]

If you honestly believe that 16 year old Jaime was considered by both Aerys and Rhaegar as adequate representation of the KG for Aerys and almost the entirely royal family that’s fine with me. On the other hand Lyanna had the three most distinguished KG members to guard her and that’s seems reasonable. I don’t agree but I have no argument to offer if that’s what you really believe.

Aerys and the royal family had a frickin' army to protect them. Why won't you get this? Why do so many people on these boards think three Kingsguard somehow trumps thousands of men in a heavily fortified city with access to the sea that has never been taken by siege?

I'd also remind you again that there were three other Kingsguard who were in and around King's Landing and various points, and who were defending the king by fighting on the Trident.

How does a washer woman or a cook serve better the need for secrecy than a few trusted knights? I see no difference.

What? You were talking about a host of people, not "a few trusted knights." There's a much greater chance of keeping a secret with a few handpicked servants instead of a whole army.

If Martin makes a note to say us that it was a dream and not to take it literally I will consider it important.

I'm not saying it's unimportant, I'm saying that you're reading too much into it. Again, "non-literal" doesn't mean "wrong." The dream is probably accurately giving us the gist of what happened, even if some things are embellished, like Ned's companions appearing as wraiths.

[J. Stargaryen]

Of course there was a reason, the same way there was a reason (and maybe need) for the readers to learn about it through a fever dream. Keep in mind that when Martin was asked about the ToJ he could just say that the readers will learn more in future books but he made a point to say that it was a memory through a fever dream, imo clearly implying that things didn’t happen exactly that way.

Again, whether the ToJ passage is literal or not is not necessarily important. Think of the House of the Undying, for example. More important are the words on the page. And the words in the ToJ passage, as laid out by GRRM, constitute a big clue regarding Jon's parentage. Do you think that was an accident? That he didn't realize what he was implying?

Correct me if I'm wrong, but you seem to be proposing that since GRRM mentioned that the ToJ was a fever dream that it somehow gives him a get out of jail free card regarding what was said and implied during that passage. I disagree. And further, I don't think he makes these implications in his book just so he can tell us we were Punk'd years later.

The thing about Sansa is to remind that even an eyewitness can be wrong, the whole thing with the unreliable narrator.

I'll refer you to Ygrain's answer, which adequately refutes this as a viable argument here.

The primary duty of the kingsguard is to protect the king, no arguing with that, but let's not forget that there are a few examples that prove that it's one thing what they should do and another what they actually do.

After all they are still only men, Gyles Greycloak, ser Arryk and ser Erryk, Criston Cole, Lucamore Strong, Jaime.... they all broke their vows one way or the other.

The fact that it was expected of them to hold their vows doesn't mean that they did so and that's the reason I believe that's important whether or not the passage we read is literal. So yes, if you asked me what the "duty of the kingsguard is...... " I would say "to protect" but does this mean that they did it?

<snip>

Ygrain also adequately answered this by pointing out that it would be odd to break their vows while saying to Ned We swore a vow. Not to mention Ned's high opinion of these KG and his extremely low opinion of Jaime for, ya know, breaking his KG vow.

Don't you think that makes more sense than what you're suggesting? Btw, are you even suggesting anything other than it could have happened because we can't rule it out. Because that isn't a valid argument.