R+L=J v. 36

[shk12344]

Night watch will be disbanded, then he could do whatever he likes.

It won't be disbanded until the scourge of Others have ended. I think it's reasonable to believe that Jon's primary reason for rebirth/resurrection from death would be to martial the forces of the North to fight and defeat the Others. That's what Jon was attempting to do before the assasination attempt and it's will be even more paramount once he is reborn.

After that Jon will pursue any matter he likes......

[Dragonfish]

After Elbert was murdered Jon designated Denys as heir, but that does not mean that he had not married Lysa at that point. Ned and Jon married the Tully girls to secure Hoster's support during the war, and I am pretty sure that includes the support that they took to the Battle of the Bells with them.

Catelyn specifically mentions that Jon Arryn married Lysa in part because he had lost his heirs at the Battle of the Bells. Yes, Hoster Tully was present for that battle, but it's entirely possible that he already had some sort of preliminary agreement with them that involved marrying Cat to Ned, but didn't hammer out the details until later.

Wasn't Cat married before Lyssa?

No, they were married at the same time.

[corbon]

Corbon, I should have said "highly, highly likely" instead of "must." There is nothing for Ned to gain by withholding the information about Hightower and Whent, and much for him to lose. By telling Robert the Lord Commander and Ser Oswell are dead he settles the issue of where they are and what are they doing. By leaving this information out he invites investigation into their fate. Some may question why the two are with Ser Arthur in the Prince's Pass, but that can be explained in ways that Robert understands - the importance for Rhaegar in keeping Lyanna away from him. If he had left it out I think we would know of it. I think Ser Barristan doesn't join Robert if Hightower is still out fighting the fight against the usurper. Or he at least thinks the White Bull is. I can't imagine Robert letting Ser Gerold's fate remain a mystery. I believe there would be some mention of this concern if it still lingered in the present day story line.

We know, or at least we think we know, that Ned lied to Robert, so why would he not reveal these details and make Jon's fate more secure? Ned's tendency to tell as little as possible wouldn't explain such an action to me. He has to construct a believable tale and he has to tell it to at least Robert. These bits of the truth only make the story more believable. My take anyway.

Thanks, solid reasoning as always - I simply hadn't thought of that angle.

Although I don't think he has to 'construct' much at all. Just add "And Hightower and Whent too." between "We did." and "Lost Willam Dustin..."

[Belandra Waters]

When Ned returns to King's Landing and tells Robert of Lyanna's death he must have told him of the deaths of the Ser Arthur, Hightower, and Whent. Some of this news probably precedes him from Starfall via raven to Varys. What exactly Ned tells Robert about the encounter with the Kingsguard is unknown, but something of the deaths of the three and Ned's companions, along with Lyanna must have been given by Ned as an account of the events at the Tower of Joy.

To me, I like to think this report is what determines Ser Barristan's fate. We know he was badly hurt at the Trident, so much of this time he is likely in recovery. We don't know all the reasons why he decides to join Robert's Kingsguard, but I think when he hears his three brothers are dead I think he must have decided that a course to be the last loyal white cloak in service to a mad young Targaryen in exile was too much for him. So, yes, I think he thinks on their deaths a considerable lot. We just don't know yet what he thought.

Both Ser Barristan and Jaime likely knew that Rhaegar set the trio to guard Lyanna, but beyond that, questions of why he did so, or where they were are likely unanswered until Ned makes his report. The why of the orders may have troubled both men, but both also know Rhaegar loved Lyanna, or at least it seems so.

As to others, I don't doubt Varys investigates Ned's report and probably doesn't believe it all. A report seems to have been made about the events that is reflected in both Stannis's comment about a fishwife to Jon, and by Cersei's comments to Ned about who Jon's mother is, and why Lady Ashara killed herself.

The question is what can Varys prove? Not a lot. He may have wanted to be able to sow distrust between Ned and Robert about Ned's account, but what can he turn up that will positively show Ned lies to Robert? That there is a wet nurse in Starfall who claims to be Jon's mother? Ned already told Robert that. That there are tales from the Sisters that Ned fathered a child with a fisherman's daughter? Who may or may not be the same Wylla? What gets him information that he can lay before Robert that says Jon is not Ned's son, but is Rhaegar and Lyanna's? Nothing. He needs an eye witness and all the eye witnesses are either dead, or corroborate Ned's account (Wylla and the Daynes,) or aren't talking (Howland.) And in the end, Robert wants to believe Ned, and Ned poses no threat to anyone in King's Landing as long as he stays in the North. If Ned had brought Jon south with him all that may have changed, but Lord Stark was smart enough to know he couldn't do that.

Thank you! This makes a lot of sense....still leaves some questions but I need some time to formulate them.

[Old-Growth]

I'm an Android owner so I think there's no app for it :dunno: lol.

I thought there was one. If not, why 'tis rank discrimination. (And Cupertino Corporate Ass-Kissing).

[Old-Growth]

SFDanny:

Do we know when Ser Barristan switched to Robert's Kingsguard? Might he have done so before the fall of Kings Landing?

[Old-Growth]

It won't be disbanded until the scourge of Others have ended. I think it's reasonable to believe that Jon's primary reason for rebirth/resurrection from death would be to martial the forces of the North to fight and defeat the Others. That's what Jon was attempting to do before the assasination attempt and it's will be even more paramount once he is reborn.

After that Jon will pursue any matter he likes......

I assume you mean that the scourge is ended once for all, otherwise the Night's Watch cannot be disbanded. Since the White Walkers have a disconcerting habit of reappearing. ......

[SFDanny]

SFDanny:

Do we know when Ser Barristan switched to Robert's Kingsguard? Might he have done so before the fall of Kings Landing?

We don't know exactly when, but we know it is not that early. Ser Barristan is not even in King's Landing when Tywin displays the bodies of Elia and her children. We are told he is still recovering from his wounds and does not know if he could have restrained himself if he saw Robert gloating over the bodies. So, it is a very safe bet he doesn't join Robert before he is well enough to come to King's Landing and receive a pardon like Jaime, Pycelle, and Varys do at the coronation. It is only my speculation, but I think it is sound, that he wouldn't do so as long as his three loyalist brothers are out there still fighting. When he hears the news of their deaths, I think he must have given up knowing he was the only one left and knowing Viserys nature. He had to see it as a lost cause, at that point, and it makes sense he would accommodate himself to Robert then. I think it is important that in Ned's dream conversation it is only Jaime that is singled out as a false brother. It would indicate the Kingsguard trio at the tower haven't heard of Selmy going over to the other side.

[SFDanny]

I thought there was one. If not, why 'tis rank discrimination. (And Cupertino Corporate Ass-Kissing).

LOL, after decades of Redmond corporate ass-kissing it's about time Apple gets its turn. :lol: (written from my Mac)

btw, really I'm for all formats having access to everything. I waited too many years for apps that never came to the mac because of sweetheart deals that kept developers from developing for alternate platforms. Monopolies suck.

[Old-Growth]

And as for those of us that use Linux.... But I sometimes think that the chief class of apps in which Windows had the advantage was games..... You no doubt have something else in mind....

Wasn't Robert's pardon of Ser Barristan granted on the field after the Battle of the Trident?

[Black Wolf Smith]

Are we presuming that Ned told someone that he met and killed all of three of thos Kingsguard members in one spot? He was furious with Robert when he left King's Landing to go lift the siege on Storm's End. He may have left it open to conjecture that one or all of them were casualties at Storm's End. Only he and Howland Reed knew about the fight at the tower.

I mention this because we have never seen any accounting of those three being killed being offered to anyone, except Brandon, and it is not clear that locality was mentioned then.

I agree, that was what I was trying to say. He told Robert that he went south and had tracked down Hightower, Dayne, and Whent, all of them chose to death, over surrendering, and then told Robert about finding Lyanna. Ned being Ned, did not offer "war stories" just said what needed to be said, and nothing else.

We don't know exactly when, but we know it is not that early. Ser Barristan is not even in King's Landing when Tywin displays the bodies of Elia and her children. We are told he is still recovering from his wounds and does not know if he could have restrained himself if he saw Robert gloating over the bodies.

IIRC Barristan was injuried at the Trident. He was out cold(like Tyrion at blackwater). Roberts men wanted to slash his throat. Robert said no, that he had fought with honor and loyalty that he was to be spared. By the time he woke up the war was over and then he was offered a pardon, which he accepted.

There are too many n00bs last 24 hours to name, so all of you Welcome to the boards.

[dragontamer]

Jon can be freed of his vows by the king. We have King Stannis, and we have King Robb. Robb was fully aware of Jon's status, but did not have a male heir, so Robb frees Jon of his vows, and appoints him heir to the crown and Winterfell.

I am not sure if Robb’s will has any validity at all. I mean at a time they were 5 kings or to be more accurate 5 claimants of the throne. So if one of them legitimizes a bastard does it mean that another acknowledges this? I think not. If Stannis for example dies and Tommen is the last king standing I doubt the Lannisters will accept Robb’s decree, it’s like accepting his right as king to make these decisions.

[Black Wolf Smith]

I am not sure if Robb’s will has any validity at all. I mean at a time they were 5 kings or to be more accurate 5 claimants of the throne. So if one of them legitimizes a bastard does it mean that another acknowledges this? I think not. If Stannis for example dies and Tommen is the last king standing I doubt the Lannisters will accept Robb’s decree, it’s like accepting his right as king to make these decisions.

While I agree with your point, GRRM has said that with succession, it was more about who had the power to back it up, over what the law said. If Robb did leave Jon his throne in his will (also leaving Rickon, and Bran out, as he thought they were dead) the North will follow, right or wrong. Even when It gets sticky, such as Manderly bringing out Rickon, some would still follow Jon ( which could lead to a war with-in a war) in to Hell if need be.

[Bear Island Bruiser]

What do you mean he had no right to be king? If Aegon was dead and Jon was a bastard, then Viserys most certainly was the king in the eyes of those who were loyal to the Targaryens.

He's got no right to be king as he doesn't sit on the Iron Throne and has lost the country by conquest. You also assume that the Kings Guard were loyal to the Targaryeans, which to my eyes they weren't. They were loyal to the King, who happened to be a Targaryean. Bit of a difference. The king (as in the institution not the person) they swore to protect is gone. Ergo they follow the last orders given to them to the death.

[Bear Island Bruiser]

Jon can be freed of his vows by the king. We have King Stannis, and we have King Robb. Robb was fully aware of Jon's status, but did not have a male heir, so Robb frees Jon of his vows, and appoints him heir to the crown and Winterfell.

Is that right? Can a king free someone of their vows to the Nights watch? Sorry I genuinely don't know. Is there a precedent for this?

[The guy from the Vale]

Is that right? Can a king free someone of their vows to the Nights watch? Sorry I genuinely don't know. Is there a precedent for this?

Not for the NW per se, but the King's Guard has such a precedent: Joffrey/Cersei dismissing Barristan (who also was the Lord Commander). And since both organisations seem to be taken as similar (taking vows for life and all that), it is certainly plausible that such a KG precedent could be considered valid for the NW, too.

[Bear Island Bruiser]

I am not sure if Robb’s will has any validity at all. I mean at a time they were 5 kings or to be more accurate 5 claimants of the throne. So if one of them legitimizes a bastard does it mean that another acknowledges this? I think not. If Stannis for example dies and Tommen is the last king standing I doubt the Lannisters will accept Robb’s decree, it’s like accepting his right as king to make these decisions.

He's also not claiming to be the King of Westeros but only the King of the North. As the Nights Watch was outside the business of the Kingdoms would this be enough to count? I mean before the conqueror joined all the kingdoms could any of the Kings free someone from their vows to the watch? OK given the North is the closest kingdom but if the Prince of Dorne got ticked off and exiled someone to the Wall could the King of the North just free them from their vows?

[Gi_Varotti]

When Ned says "your Prince Viserys" in the dialog he is letting them know that as far as he knows Viserys is the last heir. The Kingsguard are at least smart enough to know the difference between a newborn and a year old baby. Aegon was about a year old when King's Landing fell.

Maybe the marriage did happen and they were there to protect Jon (I really don't think Lyanna and Rhaegar married). Maybe they were there for a reason that we couldn't have even imagined...

I thought there was one. If not, why 'tis rank discrimination. (And Cupertino Corporate Ass-Kissing).

LOL.

Jon can be freed of his vows by the king. We have King Stannis, and we have King Robb. Robb was fully aware of Jon's status, but did not have a male heir, so Robb frees Jon of his vows, and appoints him heir to the crown and Winterfell.

Yep, but Jon hasn't accepted it. I don't think he wants to leave the Night's Watch...

[Ygrain]

He's got no right to be king as he doesn't sit on the Iron Throne and has lost the country by conquest. You also assume that the Kings Guard were loyal to the Targaryeans, which to my eyes they weren't. They were loyal to the King, who happened to be a Targaryean. Bit of a difference. The king (as in the institution not the person) they swore to protect is gone. Ergo they follow the last orders given to them to the death.

Since when does might make right?

Also, you might want to re-read the history of Westeros a bit. Before the Targs came with blood and fire, there were separate kingdoms, each with its own dynasty. The Targs did not take over from a particular dynasty like Robert did, but they created an institution of a single king over the Seven kingdoms, which did not previously exist and which was in this inseparable from the Targ dynasty because king equalled Targ. It is no different from the rest of the feudal system in which the institution is passed down by bloodline, therefore by the death of the liege the claim automatically passes to his heirs. You can set the heirs aside by might but it doesn't mean that their claim is void, only that they lack the means to get back what is rightfully theirs. When the Targs lose at the Trident and KL, their supporters cease the fighting not because they perceive Robert as a new rightful king but because they don't want to commit suicide. However, the KG are sworn to do exactly that - to fight to the death, no matter the odds. They are the KG of the Targ kings, and as long as there is a Targ heir alive, their loyalty is bound to him, not to someone who happens to be sitting on the Iron Throne.

[Bear Island Bruiser]

Since when does might make right?

However, the KG are sworn to do exactly that - to fight to the death, no matter the odds. They are the KG of the Targ kings, and as long as there is a Targ heir alive, their loyalty is bound to him, not to someone who happens to be sitting on the Iron Throne.

Not what I said at all. But I'd say there are no more Targ kings as there is no more Targ Kingdom. That's the point here. The KG obviously swear an oath to the position of the king not the actual person who is the king as otherwise they'd move on when the old one died. These KG have sworn an oath to the Kings of Westeros. Viserys is not a king as he doesn't rule Westeros, Robert isn't King as he stole the throne. Ergo in their eyes there is no king of Westeros so the honourable thing to do, to fulfill their vows, is follow their orders to the end.

It's a theory and the one that makes the most sense to me as it doesn't require any additional suppositions or actions to be true.