***Spoilers**** How much do the Northern Lords believe about their King?

[A Bastard Brother]

After Lyanna Mormont provided the push Jon is KITN. Here are my questions about what the northern lords know:

Do they all know he was killed and resurrected? By the magic of the Red God? How does that fit with the Old God Beliefs? I assume they must know since he went from Lord Commander of the NW to KITN and no one is trying to kill him for desertion.

Do they all know/believe he killed a white walker? Do they know/believe he is a warg? Or do they take these as tales from the wildlings they don't trust?

All his parentage is great, but how will anyone ever find out? What does it take to make the proof believable? I know threads on just this have gone round and round, so not really my focus, just another question.

I think a lot of this has to be mentioned and talked about and he must be becoming a living legend/myth to some, but what is believed? It is all true, but without being a witness could you believe it? What role will Davos (a knight) and Tormund (a wildling) play in trying to convince the Northern Lords who don't have much place for knights and spent thousands of years fighting wildlings? Who else can confirm any of this?

 

Or do we get the TV type answer, they all believe it and we move on with no further questions?

[Kytheros]

Howland Reed could stand as witness to Lyanna being his mother.

Once you accept that Lyanna is Jon's mother, and start thinking about who his father might be, Rhaegar Targaryen jumps to the top of the list rather easily. It is, after all, common knowledge that Rhaegar took Lyanna, and Rhaegar didn't get involved in the Rebellion until many months after it had started, and Lyanna wasn't found until after everything else and that Ned and friends killed two (in the show, three in the books) Kingsguard (including the Commander in the books) where they found Lyanna.

As for "proving" Targaryen lineage, he'll likely be able to bond with and control a dragon. Without that, anyone who believes that he is Lyanna's son would still probably assume that he's Rhaegar's son as well.

The truly hard part would be proving that Jon is legitimate, if indeed he is.

 

I expect that Bran will have questions for Howland Reed - and that he'll want to tell Jon about it.

[Rumy Stark]

19 hours ago, A Bastard Brother said:

After Lyanna Mormont provided the push Jon is KITN. Here are my questions about what the northern lords know:

Do they all know he was killed and resurrected? By the magic of the Red God? How does that fit with the Old God Beliefs? I assume they must know since he went from Lord Commander of the NW to KITN and no one is trying to kill him for desertion.

Do they all know/believe he killed a white walker? Do they know/believe he is a warg? Or do they take these as tales from the wildlings they don't trust?

All his parentage is great, but how will anyone ever find out? What does it take to make the proof believable? I know threads on just this have gone round and round, so not really my focus, just another question.

I think a lot of this has to be mentioned and talked about and he must be becoming a living legend/myth to some, but what is believed? It is all true, but without being a witness could you believe it? What role will Davos (a knight) and Tormund (a wildling) play in trying to convince the Northern Lords who don't have much place for knights and spent thousands of years fighting wildlings? Who else can confirm any of this?

 

Or do we get the TV type answer, they all believe it and we move on with no further questions?

I hope we get the answers to many of these questions. It's especially important to know whether people know about his resurrection or whether they think he is a deserter, etc, because in the first case they're being asked to believe something that, while true, is unbelievable, and in the second case it seems like they wouldn't just gloss over it. Ramsay certainly believed him a deserter. 

Honestly to me it seemed like the force behind the King in the North thing was largely an apology for everything that happened at and after the Red Wedding. The North was in good shape under the Starks and it absolutely fell apart and into the hands of a crazy sadist once Robb was dead, and no one lifted a hand to do a thing about it, even when called upon, so I think that moment was born largely out of serious guilt and the desire for The North to return to what it was under previous Stark rule. At that point they were willing to take whatever they could get, in terms of Stark leadership. 

[jrod]

8 minutes ago, Rumy Stark said:

I hope we get the answers to many of these questions. It's especially important to know whether people know about his resurrection or whether they think he is a deserter, etc, because in the first case they're being asked to believe something that, while true, is unbelievable, and in the second case it seems like they wouldn't just gloss over it. Ramsay certainly believed him a deserter. 

Honestly to me it seemed like the force behind the King in the North thing was largely an apology for everything that happened at and after the Red Wedding. The North was in good shape under the Starks and it absolutely fell apart and into the hands of a crazy sadist once Robb was dead, and no one lifted a hand to do a thing about it, even when called upon, so I think that moment was born largely out of serious guilt and the desire for The North to return to what it was under previous Stark rule. At that point they were willing to take whatever they could get, in terms of Stark leadership. 

Proving the resurrection part would be about the easiest.  Just lift up his shirt and show them all the stab wounds.  The men of the NW would also attest to it, and wouldn't stand a deserter, so I have a feeling the lords may believe them.  The Northern lords WOULDN'T believe the freefolk though.

It is tough to know what the North hears from the NW and what they don't.  Obviously hear about Jon's skills in battle (not perfect but he's still alive), but it will be interesting to see how much they know, what they actually believe, etc.

[CrypticWeirwood]

I don’t see that the northern lords too much care about FakeJon's real parents.  He's done the job, and that's all that matters to them.

[Charlie Hustle]

3 minutes ago, CrypticWeirwood said:

I don’t see that the northern lords too much care about FakeJon's real parents.  He's done the job, and that's all that matters to them.

i agree. Most of the north dont care about all that political crap. They just want stability. The only person who actually care about politics is LF, and he aint even from the north.

 

 

[scotcat]

Of these questions, I'd say the easiest to prove right off the bat would be the resurrection.  All it would require is Jon taking off his shirt & showing off the many stab wounds (I believe one looked pretty much right over his heart).

As for his parentage - Howland Reed.  He's the only other person present.  And it's known he was present because the story of them going to ToJ is known.

[A Bastard Brother]

2 hours ago, Rumy Stark said:

Honestly to me it seemed like the force behind the King in the North thing was largely an apology for everything that happened at and after the Red Wedding. The North was in good shape under the Starks and it absolutely fell apart and into the hands of a crazy sadist once Robb was dead, and no one lifted a hand to do a thing about it, even when called upon, so I think that moment was born largely out of serious guilt and the desire for The North to return to what it was under previous Stark rule. At that point they were willing to take whatever they could get, in terms of Stark leadership. 

^ This so much. I did have the feeling they were trying to correct the Bolton mistake to some degree.

 

2 hours ago, CrypticWeirwood said:

I don’t see that the northern lords too much care about FakeJon's real parents.  He's done the job, and that's all that matters to them.

I see the need for the Northern Lords to believe/understand as there will have to be a strong backing from his "Kingdom" if it is to expand at all or be taken seriously from the South.

 

1 hour ago, scotcat said:

Of these questions, I'd say the easiest to prove right off the bat would be the resurrection.  All it would require is Jon taking off his shirt & showing off the many stab wounds (I believe one looked pretty much right over his heart).

As for his parentage - Howland Reed.  He's the only other person present.  And it's known he was present because the story of them going to ToJ is known.

I don't know about the lift the shirt and show. He had a fresh wound on his face at the time and now it was a scratch. Did the wounds begin to heal once he was resurrected? If not showing a gaping hole to the heart that doesnt beat might not be the best answer. I could see that being an issue for some to trust him as king... the undead are the problem and you want to follow an undead king?

Howland Reed may carry weight in the North, but again, what about the other lands?

 

I do think the North NEEDS to know he was not a deserter, and the only way a watch ends is through death. SO i do think they need to know it all. Hell I was mad when they didnt go into enough detail about the Halfhand making him follow the wildlings. In the books it was planned out than a single line and a fight. To some they may think he left twice now. 

The men of the Nights Watch are probably going to have to be the best source to confirm death/resurrection. As for parentage Howland Reed or the crypts. Remember the Lords of Winterfell are buried there. Which is why it was strange Ned buried Lyanna there. I am one who thinks his true parentage is hidden in the crypts. Yes technically Rickon died before the Starks re-took Winterfell, but if the Castle was contested than maybe they see him as having been Lord. Maybe when placing Rickon and being down there they uncover something. Speaking of which where the hell did Ned's bones go in the show?

[aryagonnakill#2]

Well, his stab wounds didn't seem to be magically sewed up after he got revived, but they could have healed I suppose.  In any event taking off his shirt should do the trick.

[Quyen Thuy Tran]

This is just tivi type when they need to rush the thing, believe and move on without questions lol

[Lord Varys]

The show will never again mention that resurrection thing. They made a few jokes about that and made it his excuse to leave the Night's Watch without ever addressing this point. They are clearly incompetent to deal with such an easy and too uncomfortable to try.

This will never come up again. Trust me on that one.

And neither will they address the NW or Jon being a deserter. They have no time and don't care about details like that.

You are talking about a show which makes no sense in regards to motivation and plot for most of time. This is more than just evident by now.

[A Bastard Brother]

1 minute ago, Quyen Thuy Tran said:

This is just tivi type when they need to rush the thing, believe and move on without questions lol

I know. I am too detail orientated for the show. Part of why I loved the books. 

[jrod]

9 minutes ago, Lord Varys said:

The show will never again mention that resurrection thing. They made a few jokes about that and made it his excuse to leave the Night's Watch without ever addressing this point. They are clearly incompetent to deal with such an easy and too uncomfortable to try.

This will never come up again. Trust me on that one.

And neither will they address the NW or Jon being a deserter. They have no time and don't care about details like that.

You are talking about a show which makes no sense in regards to motivation and plot for most of time. This is more than just evident by now.

I thought they subtly sewed up the desertion thing when he told Edd "My watch has ended", being his watch "shall not end until my death".  He died, his watch is over, he is not a deserter.

I agree the show glances over a lot of stuff, but to me the whole deserter thing is a bunch of crap.  The men of the NW know he died, and obviously don't view him as a deserter (being he hung out at Castle Black for quite a while fully showing he wasn't a NW brother anymore).