R+L = J v 64

[RoamingRonin]

This has probably been covered in one version of this thread or another but I'd be hard pressed to find it:

Can someone tell me real quick why Rhaegar didn't offer marriage to Lyanna? I have my ideas (she was somewhat promised to Robert, I can't recall any recent Targaryens with multiple brides...) but what do you guys think?

[Zupoleon]

Okay, comments?

We swore a vow, explained old Ser Gerold.

Now, we should be certain that there is a king present, the Lord Commander has decided that all three would remain to protect the king. Several things contribute to this conclusion:

The White Bull, as Ser Gerold is known, is quite the stickler when it comes to the comport of Kingsguard duties.

Ser Gerold does not have a friendship with Rhaegar that would favor this decision.

Ser Gerold has already stated that he would slay Jaime to protect Aerys.

Ser Gerold still has a responsibility to see to the safety of the king, and keeping Arthur and Oswell with him only protects the king if the king is present at the tower.

Well done.

[WhiteOwl18]

This has probably been covered in one version of this thread or another but I'd be hard pressed to find it:

Can someone tell me real quick why Rhaegar didn't offer marriage to Lyanna? I have my ideas (she was somewhat promised to Robert, I can't recall any recent Targaryens with multiple brides...) but what do you guys think?

Many of us believe that they actually got married (the Targs had a precedent for polygamy), which is why the KG were at the TOJ (Jon would only be the king if he was legitimate, and he would only be legitimiate if his parents were married).

[maudisdottir]

I have one teeny problem with that well thought out analysis:

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

This being placed here is important because Ned is now changing his offer. He sees that they will not surrender, but he does not want to fight them, he holds these knights in high regard, even years later. He offers them a chance to leave peacefully and do their duty by guarding the heir to the Targaryen dynasty, or so he thinks.

I don't necessarily think this is Ned offering them one final chance at escape (for want of a better word) - I just interpreted this as Ned saying he's surprised to find them still there rather than with Rhaella and Viserys, not that he's giving them one last opportunity to sail off to Dragonstone without having to fight.

My 2 cents!

[RoamingRonin]

Many of us believe that they actually got married (the Targs had a precedent for polygamy), which is why the KG were at the TOJ (Jon would only be the king if he was legitimate, and he would only be legitimiate if his parents were married).

I'm not discounting that he married Lyanna. Just wondering why he didn't make it a public thing.

[Not Dead Just Broken]

I need to do this occasionally:

Let me attempt a dissent.

"I looked for you on the Trident"

As you said, this is Ned wondering why they weren't with the Royalist army. This is a nice way of impugning their honor.

"We were not there," Ser Gerold answered. "Woe to the Usurper if we had been," said Ser Oswell.

Ser Gerold's response is decidedly vague and could be read as tinged with regret. Remember at the time of the Trident, even if R+L=J is correct, Jon is behind Aerys, Rhaegar and Aegon for the Iron Throne. Having three KG defending him is downright insane. I think the false bravado of Ser Oswell is proof of this. Three men wouldn't have changed the course of history. They know that. However, not having a larger presence at the Trident was a mistake and they know it. They didn't avoid the battle out of cowardice, and they didn't avoid it to protect the fourth in line for the throne. They did it because Rhaegar told them to.

“When King's Landing fell, Ser Jaime slew your king with a golden sword, and I wondered where you were.”

Again, Ned is questioning their course of actions. Ned can't believe these respected knights left the King and Aegon in the protection of Jamie Lannister.

“Far away,” Ser Gerold said, “or Aerys would yet sit the Iron Throne, and our false brother would burn in seven hells.”

Now Ser Gerold has picked up some of Ser Oswell's bravado. Again though, he doesn't have a real answer for Ned. Again, having what was at the time 3/4 of the living and loyal KG at the TOJ at the time of the sack of King's Landing would have been ridiculously bad strategy.

“I came down on Storm's End to lift the siege,” Ned told them, and the Lords Tyrell and Redwyne dipped their banners, and all their knights bent the knee to pledge us fealty. I was certain you would be among them.”

I agree that this is an offer by Ned for them to surrender. Ned is still confused as all heck as to what they are doing there. He wants to make sure they know that the last of the Royal army (Tyrell) and navy (Redwyne) have surrendered. This time Arthur Dayne answers him. "Our knees do not bend so easily." I think it is somewhat significant that it is the Dornishman that provides this very Dornish answer. Remember, Ser Gerold is from the Reach and Lord Tyrell's surrender would be significant to him. Arthur Dayne, however, is less likely to care.

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

Again, Ned is offering them a chance to not fight. This time by meeting up with the rest of the Royal forces on Dragonstone.

“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.”

This is probably the exchange I read most differently. I think this is generally read as two men speaking with one voice. However, it could easily be read as dissent from Ser Oswell. Again, even if R+L=J is true, staying around the ToJ forever makes no sense. It's entirely possible that Ser Oswell has advocated this course of action and Ser Gerold has decided that it would be unKingsguardly of them to flee. This idea of moving Jon to Dragonstone being fleeing is very strange. Dragonstone is still in Westeros. They aren't fled to Essos yet. Jon is movable even if a dying Lyanna Stark isn't. They could have gotten a wet nurse at Starfall and joined Viserys on Dragonstone. It would have been better protection for Jon. Ser Gerold is being stubborn. The KG doesn't surrender either but they don't make any comment about Barristan turning his cloak.

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

Ser Arthur clearly sided with Ser Gerold in the dispute. Note that Ser Oswell doesn't speak again.

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

GRRM adds the modifier "old" here to Ser Gerold's name. There's a stubbornness here and his being old speaks to that.

None of this says anything about R+L=J. Ser Gerold's dug in, absolutely, but he was dug in when Jon was 4th in the line of succession before the Trident and 3rd in the line of succession after the Trident. And digging in as an action, doesn't indicate that the child either is Jon or the rightful heir (and not a bastard). Going to Dragonstone would have made just as much sense. Ser Gerold's actions after the Trident seem more to do with dying with honor as much as anything else. Who he's protecting is irrelevant. It could easily be Aegon, Meera Reed or any other R+L candidate or just Lyanna herself. After all, she is the Helen of Troy here.

[corbon]

This has probably been covered in one version of this thread or another but I'd be hard pressed to find it:

Can someone tell me real quick why Rhaegar didn't offer marriage to Lyanna? I have my ideas (she was somewhat promised to Robert, I can't recall any recent Targaryens with multiple brides...) but what do you guys think?

1. She's already promised to another, so success would require a sgnificant about-face, from Rickard, and loss of face.

2. He's already married to the girl Aerys chose for him. And distrusted by Aerys. So he's very likely to find Aerys forbidding any such wedding. Aerys married for duty over love, you think he's going to let the son he distrusts get away with a double marriage, for love?

3. Polygamy isn't a common practice, even for Targs recently, so he risks having the request turned down on those grounds. Its very easy to turn down a request, especially with all the other factors. The level of 'will' required to fight to break an existing marriage due to ploygamy is much much higher. Easier to ask forgiveness than permission, by exponentially increased factors on this issue.

[corbon]

None of this says anything about R+L=J. Ser Gerold's dug in, absolutely, but he was dug in when Jon was 4th in the line of succession before the Trident and 3rd in the line of succession after the Trident.

And this is where the dissent fails. He should not be dug in unless the King is here. The primary purpose of the KG (as an organisation) is to protect the King and we see the lengths they go to to make sure at least one of their number is doing that at all times in the meeting Jaime holds. Before and after the Trident the KG organisation's primary mission was being attended to by Jaime, so they are fine dug in here. Its only after the Sack (for these guys, once they get that news) that thngs change for them.

Unless the King is here (not-dead Aegon or legitimate Jon), Prince Viserys should be Ser Gerold's King now, and he is not protected by the KG. And they know it. So they should not be dug in here, with their primary mission unattended to.

But yet he's still dug in, absolutely....

[corbon]

Ser Gerold's response is decidedly vague and could be read as tinged with regret. Remember at the time of the Trident, even if R+L=J is correct, Jon is behind Aerys, Rhaegar and Aegon for the Iron Throne. Having three KG defending him is downright insane. I think the false bravado of Ser Oswell is proof of this. Three men wouldn't have changed the course of history. They know that. However, not having a larger presence at the Trident was a mistake and they know it. They didn't avoid the battle out of cowardice, and they didn't avoid it to protect the fourth in line for the throne. They did it because Rhaegar told them to.

Its not insane at all. Rhaegar has 3KG and an army. Aerys and Aegon and Viserys have 1KG, an invincible Keep and thousands of soldiers and Goldcloaks protecting them. And Rhaegar, 3KG and an army between the enemy and them. As you agree, another 3 men at the Trident or Sack probably wouldn't have made a lot of difference really. Even these three, for all their bravado.

Lyanna and her unborn babe have... secrecy. And an abandoned tower. They need a force strong enough to withstand random bandits, wild animals etc, (for whom secrecy is no defence) and yet which is utterly reliable and small enough to be able to keep hidden and maintain their primary defence.

I think the dispositions make perfect sense. Its only hindsight and later events (Trident and Sack) leading to clearly a betrayal (someone had to have betrayed their location to Ned) that makes the dispositions look weak.

If, for example, Rhaegar had gone away leaving only 1KG (say Dayne), won the Trident, defeated the rebels and returned to find Dayne, Lyanna and her child dead at the hands of a handful of nameless draft-dodgers, a pack of wolves or other random bandits, he'd look a right idiot wouldn't he?

Again, even if R+L=J is true, staying around the ToJ forever makes no sense. ...

Jon is movable even if a dying Lyanna Stark isn't.

Forever? no. But so long as their primary defence, secrecy, holds, they have some time. Time enough to wait for Lyanna to recover, or die, maybe. Unfortunately it doesn't hold, but they are unlikely to know that until its too late.

And while Jon may be movable, its a heck of a lot better for him if his mother recovers. Which she might. I'd not want to be the KG explaining to a young King that they abandoned his mother to die soon after his birth.

Secrecy has held for months. Chances are high that it will hold for a little bit longer, long enough so that the Lyanna may recover (enough to move) or die, and then they won't simply be abandoning her entirely. Certainty of death + risk during travel vs risk of death + risk of staying put now and travelling later when travel risk may be lower. I'd probably call the same way with the same information. It was wrong, but it was still the best call to make with teh nowledge they had, perhaps.

[BerserkZR]

None of this says anything about R+L=J. Ser Gerold's dug in, absolutely, but he was dug in when Jon was 4th in the line of succession before the Trident and 3rd in the line of succession after the Trident. And digging in as an action, doesn't indicate that the child either is Jon or the rightful heir (and not a bastard). Going to Dragonstone would have made just as much sense. Ser Gerold's actions after the Trident seem more to do with dying with honor as much as anything else. Who he's protecting is irrelevant. It could easily be Aegon, Meera Reed or any other R+L candidate or just Lyanna herself. After all, she is the Helen of Troy here.

The dragon has three heads ...

[Black Crow]

Let me attempt a dissent.

I like this analysis. At no point do they say that it is their duty to be standing outside the Tower of Joy. Instead there is a collective bitterness that they were not where they should have been when they should have been. They are not doing their duty, but have failed in their duty because Rhaegar couldn't keep his breeches fastened.

[Ygrain]

I like this analysis. At no point do they say that it is their duty to be standing outside the Tower of Joy. Instead there is a collective bitterness that they were not where they should have been when they should have been. They are not doing their duty, but have failed in their duty because Rhaegar couldn't keep his breeches fastened.

/cough/

We are Kingsguard, Kingsguard, Kingsguard, we swore a vow... totally not referring to duty, I see.

ETA: You're basically saying that they are repeatedly emphasizing their status as Kingsguard but are totes cool with bein gin dereliction of their primary duty.

I'm a firefighter, I don't flee, I'm a firefighter, I put out fires, I'm a firefighter, I save people... oh, there's a fire I should be putting out elsewhere? ORLY? Don't you say so...

[FrozenFire3]

Okay, comments?

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

Now, we should be certain that there is a king present, the Lord Commander has decided that all three would remain to protect the king. Several things contribute to this conclusion:

• The White Bull, as Ser Gerold is known, is quite the stickler when it comes to the comport of Kingsguard duties.

• Ser Gerold does not have a friendship with Rhaegar that would favor this decision.

• Ser Gerold has already stated that he would slay Jaime to protect Aerys.

• Ser Gerold still has a responsibility to see to the safety of the king, and keeping Arthur and Oswell with him only protects the king if the king is present at the tower.

Very good integration to your thorough, dissecting analysis.

/cough/

We are Kingsguard, Kingsguard, Kingsguard, we swore a vow... totally not referring to duty, I see.

ETA: You're basically saying that they are repeatedly emphasizing their status as Kingsguard but are totes cool with bein gin dereliction of their primary duty.

I'm a firefighter, I don't flee, I'm a firefighter, I put out fires, I'm a firefighter, I save people... oh, there's a fire I should be putting out elsewhere? ORLY? Don't you say so...

:lol: Back to the bittersweet ToJ: for us (as for Jon), it's like coming back home ;)

[WhiteOwl18]

I'm not discounting that he married Lyanna. Just wondering why he didn't make it a public thing.

Sorry, I misunderstood you.

[Queen Alienor]

I've read the theory that Aegon was at the ToJ multiple times now. It would explain the KG even if Jon wasn't legitimate, but doesn't it break at a simple point? Ned believes Aegon to be dead. I don't have the exact quote, but that is quite clear. If Aegon had been there, Ned would have found him. He would know that Aegon is alive and not think of how the dead baby prince looked like 15 years later. Is there an explanation for this I missed? Because I never really understood that.

By the way, MtnLion, I really liked your analysis!

[Ghost's Shadow]

There's no proof whatsoever of Aegon being at the ToJ, but the unwillingness to believe that Rhaegar wouldn't have treated Lyanna Stark like a whore and did the right thing and married her.

Let's not go there again. ;)

[corbon]

I've read the theory that Aegon was at the ToJ multiple times now. It would explain the KG even if Jon wasn't legitimate, but doesn't it break at a simple point? Ned believes Aegon to be dead. I don't have the exact quote, but that is quite clear. If Aegon had been there, Ned would have found him. He would know that Aegon is alive and not think of how the dead baby prince looked like 15 years later. Is there an explanation for this I missed? Because I never really understood that.

By the way, MtnLion, I really liked your analysis!

If dead baby Aegon was actually the pisswater prince then Ned could possibly be unaware that a baby at ToJ was the real Aegon.

It requires some mental gymnastics to get real-Aegon there, but its not 100% impossible. Given that some people will accept any excuse, however slim, to avoid either R+L=J or Rhaegar marrying Lyanna (OMG, he's not a total asshole all the way maybe? Impossible!) the possibility, however remote or ridiculous, of Aegon being at ToJ (thus explaining the KG actions there without a R+L=legit Jon) ought to be included in an analysis.

[Lady Gwynhyfvar]

I've read the theory that Aegon was at the ToJ multiple times now. It would explain the KG even if Jon wasn't legitimate, but doesn't it break at a simple point? Ned believes Aegon to be dead. I don't have the exact quote, but that is quite clear. If Aegon had been there, Ned would have found him. He would know that Aegon is alive and not think of how the dead baby prince looked like 15 years later. Is there an explanation for this I missed? Because I never really understood that.

By the way, MtnLion, I really liked your analysis!

Simple answer is no. The whole Aegon at ToJ theory founders on the rocks of poor logic and poor grasp of the facts, imo.

There are a couple versions of this that I've seen and while I'm not sure which one is currently floating around, each has issues, so let's review the options:

One baby at ToJ: "Jon is really Aegon"-- this completely ignores his Stark looks, Aegon's age and Lyanna's manner of death, not to mention a host of other things like symbolism and narrative cohesion. Sure, like Corbon says, it's possible that Rhaegar had his son smuggled away early in the Rebellion, and that Ned saw a dead pisswater prince and is remembering that. But then we must circle back to the three items above. I honestly don't think this has a canon leg to stand on.

Two babies at ToJ: "Aegon was snuck away from KL and guarded at the ToJ along with Lyanna and Jon"-- this one allows that R+L=J but adds the improbable wrinkle of Lyanna being a nanny for Rhaegar's older child. Again, it's possible Ned saw a dead substitute child, but in this case he would have realized when he found two babies at the ToJ that something strange was going on. I think this theory also requires that Ned is the one who sent Aegon off to be raised in secret, or that he secretly allowed one of the KG to survive and flee with the child. The narrative issues are huge and lead to needless complication of the plot. In fact, the details of this one are sketchy and fail to account for all aspects of the facts as we know them (and I'm not talking about inferences or conclusions here, but textual facts) This theory, imo, is simply a weak effort to deny that the KG remained at the ToJ to guard Jon by co-opting the argument that the true King was present.

I think there's another "one baby" version where Lyanna was simply at the ToJ caring for Aegon, who is spirited away after her death and Jon really is Ned's bastard. I think that's where the "Lyanna died from an infected wound" theory came up? That one makes so little narrative sense it makes my head hurt.

I don't see any other options for suggesting Aegon was at the ToJ, though I'm sure someone will correct me if I've missed one.

[Black Crow]

/cough/

We are Kingsguard, Kingsguard, Kingsguard, we swore a vow... totally not referring to duty, I see.

ETA: You're basically saying that they are repeatedly emphasizing their status as Kingsguard but are totes cool with bein gin dereliction of their primary duty.

I'm a firefighter, I don't flee, I'm a firefighter, I put out fires, I'm a firefighter, I save people... oh, there's a fire I should be putting out elsewhere? ORLY? Don't you say so...

Nah, what I'm saying is that they are not cool at all, they are pissed. They are the Kingsguard, they know they should have been at the Trident and at King's Landing doing their duty, but instead they were ordered to guard Rhaegar's bit on the side down here in Hicksville, Hayseed County. As a result its all gone down the pan and they have failed in their duty, which is why they are bitter and twisted and why they are not even trying to defend the Tower or get the baby away, but have come out to die.

[servant of the drowned god]

I taught i was clever when i theorized this while reading GOT. oh well. I kind of hope his parentage will remain a mystery.