• Content count

  • Joined

  • Last visited

About Sophist

  • Rank

Profile Information

  • Gender

Recent Profile Visitors

687 profile views
  1. We know that Wyman's son is "home". I don't know if he traveled with Wyman. I'm sure others trickled home too, but we aren't told that as far as I can remember.
  2. Well, the legal issues related to the effect of a document are mostly semantic, so it's fair to treat those as important here. For example, the "pretermitted heir" concept applies to wills, but not to, say, contracts. It would not apply to a simple declaration (a document that's not a will) regarding the order of succession. So yeah, I think word choice is important for that reason at least. But it's also important because we're missing key facts about the document. We don't know what it says. We don't know its form. Under these circumstances, we have to consider all the logical possibilities. That makes it not so much a semantic issue as a logical one.
  3. The passage you quote implies that it's a will, but doesn't expressly say so. In fact it rather oddly uses the more cumbersome phrase "this document". There are "documents" other than wills which could declare the succession, and we need to consider them as logically possible since we've never seen the original.
  4. There are lots of unstated assumptions in this thread. I'd like to try to make them explicit and deal with them from a legal perspective (after all, as a matter of practicalities, lots of things might happen). Let's start with the basics: did Robb write an actual will? Without seeing the document, we don't know this for sure. It's possible that it's simply a decree of legitimation for Jon, with Robb simply assuming the consequences of that. I'll start with option 2 and assume that Robb declared Jon legitimate but nothing else. Here are the possibilities: 1. Jon is already legitimate because R+L married or otherwise legitimated him. If this comes to light before Robb's decree, then the decree is irrelevant. Jon would have no claim to Winterfell in this case because he's not Ned's son, unless no other candidates remain alive. Nor would a meaningless decree of legitimacy, standing alone, have any impact on the succession to the KitN. 2. Jeyne is pregnant. In this case, legitimating Jon would have no effect on the succession to KitN -- children come before brothers (and see #2 below) -- but could affect his status as Lord of Winterfell assuming that case #1 remains unknown. 3. As a legitimated claimant to Winterfell, Jon might have to contest claims by Bran, Arya, and Sansa (see below). If the decree becomes public at a time when everyone thinks Bran and Arya are dead, and Sansa is missing, then Rickon might contest his claim. Now let's assume that Robb wrote a will in which he BOTH (a) legitimated Jon; and (b) named him his heir to either or both of KitN and Winterfell. Here are the options; bear in mind the options above because some of the problems may come into play below too: 1. If Jon is a trueborn son of R+L, then the will is moot. Jon is the heir to Westeros and wouldn't need a separate kingdom. 2. If Robb assumed that Bran, Arya, and Rickon were dead, and Sansa missing, he might not have mentioned them. If he didn't mention them, then there'd be what at common law was called a "pretermitted heir" issue. Simplifying, if the maker of a will doesn't know about the existence of an heir and therefore doesn't mention him/her, that heir still has a claim regardless of the terms of the will. We'd need to know the exact terms of the will in order to determine if this is a problem. 3. While it seems that Kings can name their heirs, that's much less clear for lesser titles. Without detailing the reasons for this, I think everyone can recognize that having estates transfer by decree rather than by law would be problematic and likely to be contested. In this situation, Robb might be able to designate Jon as his heir as KitN, but not to Winterfell (assuming anyone else is alive to make a claim). In short, unless someone is willing to state explicitly all the conditions in which the decree/will would operate, plus the exact terms of the document, it's impossible to make any definitive statements about it.
  5. I don't think anyone has mentioned this yet: Arya killing The Tickler. "Is there gold in the village?" She was so traumatized by having to watch his torture and this was both justice and an emotional release which really moved me. I wouldn't rate it as highly as the funeral pyre scene, but it's damn good.
  6. The question of who gets to rule, at least until very recently, was rarely a legal question, but always a military/political one. IMO, it doesn't matter what Jon's "legitimacy" status might be at law, it matters what the Northern Lords will accept. His "legitimacy" might have some indirect impact on how readily they accept him, but in times of crisis those issues tend to become secondary. I'm personally of the view that Jon is the legitimate son of R+L, but that probably doesn't matter for ruling the North anyway.
  7. The law of Westeros is unclear, but if we're looking for real-life examples, Henry VII descended from Edward III via John Beaufort, one of the subsequently legitimised "Beaufort Bastards".
  8. I agree that the tower probably refers to Winterfell. I'm still thinking about the rest, but very plausible. One small note: Apple Martini is a she.
  9. I see her as the Lady of the Lake. She'll retire to the God's Eye, where she'll eventually give Jon the sword he needs.
  10. And she named her wolf Nymeria.
  11. Not a seer, just one who understands people and what they're likely to do.
  12. I think the point of these comments is to contrast Ned's "predictions" with what actually happens. Ned's promises/predictions won't come true because he's poor at judging the future. It wouldn't surprise me at all if the exact opposite happened. In contrast, when Jon tells Arya that they'll find her frozen at the end of winter, we should take that very seriously indeed because Jon's the one with foresight.
  13. I agree with this. I've said for years that LS is Arya's metaphorical vengeance. I think, as you do, that Arya will forego the path of vengeance when she gives the gift of mercy to LS.
  14. If you believe the legends, the Wall was built long before Valyrian steel would have been available. Dragonglass, though, would be a good alternative.