Jump to content

Biggest Thing you missed in the books?


Recommended Posts

As to those Frey pies, did you catch this...

At the Lazy Eel in White Harbor...

Quote

Davos called to the proprietor for another cup. When he brought it, he brought him a candle too. "You want food?" the man asked.

"We got meat pies."

"What kind of meat is in them?"

"The usual kind. It's good."

The whores laughed. "It's grey, he means," one said. 

"Shut your bloody yap. You eat them."

"I eat all kinds o' shit. Don't mean I like it."

Davos II, Dance

Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 3/6/2017 at 11:53 AM, Lady Blizzardborn said:

Lemongate has nothing to do with this. If Dany was Lyanna and Rhaegar's child, she still would have been taken out of the country immediately for her own safety, which means she would have no recollection of Dorne unless she came back later. Though I like the idea that Lyanna named her for the first Daenerys as a means of recompense to Elia and the rest of the Martells.

I didn't say they'd be gossiping. There's a natural tendency among the keepers of noble children in the medieval time period to think the child in your care is the best. Undoubtedly as long as Robb and Jon had different women in charge of them there would be a rivalry of sorts between the two women, and that would include bragging about each's achievements. It's unlikely that Cat wouldn't hear Robb's nurse complaining about that bragging wench who looked after the bastard.

Actually it does. If keeping the secret is vital to keeping everyone safe, he'll repress the memories, and as Jon looks like Lyanna Ned would think of his sister more than of Rhaegar.

No, it's not. That would be like saying it's implied that Ted Kennedy, whose name was Edward, was named after my great-grandfather Ted, whose name was Theodore. People do not usually choose their children's names based on them having the same nickname as someone else.

No, it's not. We are told that Ned killed Arthur Dayne, but Ashara's alleged suicide has only speculation attached. Barristan, who was not there, thinks she might have killed herself over her brother's death, or grief over losing her baby, or the man who dishonored her. 

And the information that he loved her comes from a kid who wasn't even born yet when all of this happened. We have no hints that any feelings actually existed between Ned and Ashara...especially if she slept with his brother.

Yes, and it's possible that Dany is just the daughter of a Lyseni whore, but it's not very likely.

That's not how it works. A trueborn son comes before a brother, but legitimized bastards go to the end of the line.

No, he wouldn't. Ashara was younger than her brother who was Lord of Starfall. Even a trueborn Jon Stark, son of Brandon, would not inherit until after Edric who is in direct line for the Lordship after his own father.

An alliance that was made before anyone knew Jon existed, and as such no one could blame Ned for stepping aside in favor of a trueborn son of Brandon's that he wasn't aware existed. Hoster Tully was not going to start a war with his son-in-law over a kid no one knew about, who might not have even survive to adulthood. Robert, on the other hand, would absolutely have started a war over Ned protecting Rhaegar Targaryen's son.

I mentioned Lemongate because the implication of lemongate is that Dany's childhood may be a lie for some reason, so it's relevant. I'm not saying the lemons and the red door were necessarily in Dorne.

"It's unlikely that Cat wouldn't hear Robb's nurse complaining about that bragging wench who looked after the bastard." --I disagree.

"he'll repress the memories" --come on. Not talking about Rhaegar is one thing, but going years without thinking about him while raising Jon is strange.

There are 3 people in asoiaf named Ned, 2 of those being Ned Stark and Ned Dayne. I don't think that GRRM coincidentally named the characters that way. I think he did it as a clue. Naming your child after someone is a thing that people do, especially if a particular person does you a great favor or is your best friend or something along those lines. So the implication seems to be that Ned Stark did some favor for house Dayne that made up for killing Arthur and was deserving of having their new heir named after him.

Legitimized bastards go to the end of the line? Says who? Tell that to Robb who considered giving WF to Jon to keep it away from Tyrion by legitimizing Jon and putting him ahead of Sansa.

It's not about Hoster Tully starting a war over WF. The fact that House Stark and House Tully are allies is part of maintaining peace in an unstable Westeros. If Cat's children are not the heirs to WF, then there is nothing tangible to cement the alliance. That is a perfectly good reason to keep Jon's identity a secret.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 hours ago, 40 Thousand Skeletons said:

I mentioned Lemongate because the implication of lemongate is that Dany's childhood may be a lie for some reason, so it's relevant. I'm not saying the lemons and the red door were necessarily in Dorne.

"It's unlikely that Cat wouldn't hear Robb's nurse complaining about that bragging wench who looked after the bastard." --I disagree.

"he'll repress the memories" --come on. Not talking about Rhaegar is one thing, but going years without thinking about him while raising Jon is strange.

There are 3 people in asoiaf named Ned, 2 of those being Ned Stark and Ned Dayne. I don't think that GRRM coincidentally named the characters that way. I think he did it as a clue. Naming your child after someone is a thing that people do, especially if a particular person does you a great favor or is your best friend or something along those lines. So the implication seems to be that Ned Stark did some favor for house Dayne that made up for killing Arthur and was deserving of having their new heir named after him.

Legitimized bastards go to the end of the line? Says who? Tell that to Robb who considered giving WF to Jon to keep it away from Tyrion by legitimizing Jon and putting him ahead of Sansa.

It's not about Hoster Tully starting a war over WF. The fact that House Stark and House Tully are allies is part of maintaining peace in an unstable Westeros. If Cat's children are not the heirs to WF, then there is nothing tangible to cement the alliance. That is a perfectly good reason to keep Jon's identity a secret.

They were in Tyrosh. And then they were in Braavos. ;)

Link to comment
Share on other sites

13 hours ago, 40 Thousand Skeletons said:

I mentioned Lemongate because the implication of lemongate is that Dany's childhood may be a lie for some reason, so it's relevant. I'm not saying the lemons and the red door were necessarily in Dorne.

"It's unlikely that Cat wouldn't hear Robb's nurse complaining about that bragging wench who looked after the bastard." --I disagree.

"he'll repress the memories" --come on. Not talking about Rhaegar is one thing, but going years without thinking about him while raising Jon is strange.

There are 3 people in asoiaf named Ned, 2 of those being Ned Stark and Ned Dayne. I don't think that GRRM coincidentally named the characters that way. I think he did it as a clue. Naming your child after someone is a thing that people do, especially if a particular person does you a great favor or is your best friend or something along those lines. So the implication seems to be that Ned Stark did some favor for house Dayne that made up for killing Arthur and was deserving of having their new heir named after him.

Legitimized bastards go to the end of the line? Says who? Tell that to Robb who considered giving WF to Jon to keep it away from Tyrion by legitimizing Jon and putting him ahead of Sansa.

It's not about Hoster Tully starting a war over WF. The fact that House Stark and House Tully are allies is part of maintaining peace in an unstable Westeros. If Cat's children are not the heirs to WF, then there is nothing tangible to cement the alliance. That is a perfectly good reason to keep Jon's identity a secret.

Not when the author needs Ned to not think about a lot of things so that the main mysteries of the series remain mysterious. Ned doesn't think about Rhaegar much, but he also doesn't think about Lyanna much, Brandon much, Rickard much, his mother at all, Ashara at all that we know of. If I didn't know what GRRM was doing here I'd start to wonder if Ned thought period.

Possible, but GRRM reuses names just to reuse them too. There was a Theon Stark, and a Jorah Stark, neither of whom are connected to Theon Greyjoy and Jorah Mormont. There are 17 characters named Jeyne, and two of them are dogs. We have 13 Roberts, only one or two of whom were named after Robert Baratheon. Fourteen Alyns. Eleven Robins. At least ten Bens including Benjen Stark and a Benjicot, but most of them are just Ben. Three Petyr's who were not named for each other. Six Samwells, one a historical Dayne. There were at least seven different Rickards, and they were not all Starks or Stark connected. Six characters named Alys. And actually there was a fourth Ned who lived during the reign of Aerys I. 

Until we have any information that Ned did someone in House Dayne a great favor, we don't know that he did.

Says tradition, which is occasionally outweighed by things like having dragons but Jon has no dragons at present. This is why Roose is sure that Ramsay will kill Fat Walda's baby...because the baby bumps legitimized Ramsay down the line.  

You're forgetting that Robb disinherited Sansa. He also thinks Bran and Rickon are dead, so he can't name them as heirs. And he doesn't know whether Arya is alive or not, so he can't name her either. Robb is literally AT the end of the line in legitimizing Jon and naming him as his heir.

You're the one who said that Ned would risk war by telling Cat that Jon (if Brandon's trueborn son) was the rightful Lord of Winterfell. If you don't think Hoster would start a war over this, then what else were you referring to?

The alliance was for the war against Aerys, not for maintaining peace afterwards. And Ned and Cat's marriage was only half of it, the other half being Lysa's marriage to Jon Arryn. Cat is still married to Ned, unlikely to be able to get an annulment, and her husband and children are still right after Jon (if he's legitimate) should anything happen to him. In a setting and culture with high infant and childhood mortality, having one kid in the way is not a deal-breaker.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 3/8/2017 at 3:34 PM, Lady Blizzardborn said:

Not when the author needs Ned to not think about a lot of things so that the main mysteries of the series remain mysterious. Ned doesn't think about Rhaegar much, but he also doesn't think about Lyanna much, Brandon much, Rickard much, his mother at all, Ashara at all that we know of. If I didn't know what GRRM was doing here I'd start to wonder if Ned thought period.

Possible, but GRRM reuses names just to reuse them too. There was a Theon Stark, and a Jorah Stark, neither of whom are connected to Theon Greyjoy and Jorah Mormont. There are 17 characters named Jeyne, and two of them are dogs. We have 13 Roberts, only one or two of whom were named after Robert Baratheon. Fourteen Alyns. Eleven Robins. At least ten Bens including Benjen Stark and a Benjicot, but most of them are just Ben. Three Petyr's who were not named for each other. Six Samwells, one a historical Dayne. There were at least seven different Rickards, and they were not all Starks or Stark connected. Six characters named Alys. And actually there was a fourth Ned who lived during the reign of Aerys I. 

Until we have any information that Ned did someone in House Dayne a great favor, we don't know that he did.

Says tradition, which is occasionally outweighed by things like having dragons but Jon has no dragons at present. This is why Roose is sure that Ramsay will kill Fat Walda's baby...because the baby bumps legitimized Ramsay down the line.  

You're forgetting that Robb disinherited Sansa. He also thinks Bran and Rickon are dead, so he can't name them as heirs. And he doesn't know whether Arya is alive or not, so he can't name her either. Robb is literally AT the end of the line in legitimizing Jon and naming him as his heir.

You're the one who said that Ned would risk war by telling Cat that Jon (if Brandon's trueborn son) was the rightful Lord of Winterfell. If you don't think Hoster would start a war over this, then what else were you referring to?

The alliance was for the war against Aerys, not for maintaining peace afterwards. And Ned and Cat's marriage was only half of it, the other half being Lysa's marriage to Jon Arryn. Cat is still married to Ned, unlikely to be able to get an annulment, and her husband and children are still right after Jon (if he's legitimate) should anything happen to him. In a setting and culture with high infant and childhood mortality, having one kid in the way is not a deal-breaker.

Just because Ned doesn't think about Lyanna, Brandon, Rickard, his mother, or Ashara in his POV doesn't mean he doesn't think about them generally. I'm not going off his POV content, I'm going off the fact that Ned explicitly tells us he hasn't thought about Rhaegar for years, which would be astounding if Jon is Rhaegar's son. Like, how could Ned watch Jon train at fighting or horse riding and never think about Rhaegar?

Yes, GRRM reuses names just to reuse them obviously. There are a million characters and reusing names is more realistic. But he also names characters after each other. Jon Snow is named after Jon Arryn, Robb Stark and Robert Arryn are named after King Robert, Rhaegar's children were named Aegon and Rhaenys. The main POV character in AGOT is named Ned. And although we hadn't met Edric Dayne yet or learned his nickname, he was listed in the AGOT appendix, so GRRM had already named him at that point. Until we run into the random Glover scout Noseless Ned Wood, those are the only 2 characters named Ned. It just so happens that Edric's parents have met Ned, and some mysterious interaction between Ned and House Dayne occurred during the rebellion. So because they know Ned, and some sort of event happened between him and their family, I'm betting Edric is named for Ned Stark, and that's supposed to be a clue to Jon's identity, especially since we learn his nickname in a conversation that also includes info about Jon and Wylla. And it's possible Noseless Ned was also named after Ned Stark, but we don't know how old he is.

But Ramsay was Roose's son, not Roose's older brother's son. There is an argument for Jon to actually be the Lord of WF, not just be ahead of Ned's children in line.

Robb didn't ever explicitly "disinherit" Sansa IIRC. I don't even think that's possible. Tywin never "disinherited" Tyrion, and Randall Tarly apparently didn't have the option of simply "disinheriting" Sam. Robb just straight up named someone else his heir (I'm actually betting on Cat, not Jon). And he threatened to legitimize Jon and name him heir. Jon wouldn't automatically be ahead of Sansa in line because he wouldn't automatically be anywhere in line. There is a fundamental lack of agreement among the nobles on whether or not legitimized bastards can inherit in Westeros. And you say bastards go to the end of the line, but where is the "end" of the line? Siblings? First cousins? Second cousins? Wouldn't all the Karstarks come before Jon by your logic? Cat specifically mentions cousins in the Vale descended from Robb's paternal great grandfather. If you go back far enough, everyone is related.

The alliance was not just for the war against Aerys. We actually know this, since we are told by Lady Dustin that Rickard had southron ambitions. The alliance (influenced by the maesters) was initially created for political reasons, but it ended up being one side of a war after the Mad King killed a bunch of people. Post-Targaryen Westeros is an unstable place in terms of military alliances (obviously, since we have already seen the Greyjoy rebellion and the Wot5K in less than 20 years). It was of vital importance (to the players involved) that the Stark-Tully-Arryn-Baratheon military alliance be maintained to prevent (or win) future conflicts. But if Catelyn was not married to the Lord of WF and her children weren't going to inherit WF, there's really nothing to prevent Hoster/Edmure from siding with someone else in the next conflict. Specifically, since the next conflict (not counting Greyjoy rebellion) turned out to be the Wot5K, imagine Robb trying to go to war with the Tullys fighting on the Lannister side. It would have been a completely different situation. For the sake of the future of House Stark, Cat must be married to Lord Stark, and her children must inherit WF. Yes, they would still be right after Jon in line for now, but that wouldn't matter unless Jon dies before having children. Therefore, Jon's identity would need to be kept secret. At least, that's how Ned would think about it.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

26 minutes ago, 40 Thousand Skeletons said:

Just because Ned doesn't think about Lyanna, Brandon, Rickard, his mother, or Ashara in his POV doesn't mean he doesn't think about them generally. I'm not going off his POV content, I'm going off the fact that Ned explicitly tells us he hasn't thought about Rhaegar for years, which would be astounding if Jon is Rhaegar's son. Like, how could Ned watch Jon train at fighting or horse riding and never think about Rhaegar?

Yes, GRRM reuses names just to reuse them obviously. There are a million characters and reusing names is more realistic. But he also names characters after each other. Jon Snow is named after Jon Arryn, Robb Stark and Robert Arryn are named after King Robert, Rhaegar's children were named Aegon and Rhaenys. The main POV character in AGOT is named Ned. And although we hadn't met Edric Dayne yet or learned his nickname, he was listed in the AGOT appendix, so GRRM had already named him at that point. Until we run into the random Glover scout Noseless Ned Wood, those are the only 2 characters named Ned. It just so happens that Edric's parents have met Ned, and some mysterious interaction between Ned and House Dayne occurred during the rebellion. So because they know Ned, and some sort of event happened between him and their family, I'm betting Edric is named for Ned Stark, and that's supposed to be a clue to Jon's identity, especially since we learn his nickname in a conversation that also includes info about Jon and Wylla. And it's possible Noseless Ned was also named after Ned Stark, but we don't know how old he is.

But Ramsay was Roose's son, not Roose's older brother's son. There is an argument for Jon to actually be the Lord of WF, not just be ahead of Ned's children in line.

Robb didn't ever explicitly "disinherit" Sansa IIRC. I don't even think that's possible. Tywin never "disinherited" Tyrion, and Randall Tarly apparently didn't have the option of simply "disinheriting" Sam. Robb just straight up named someone else his heir (I'm actually betting on Cat, not Jon). And he threatened to legitimize Jon and name him heir. Jon wouldn't automatically be ahead of Sansa in line because he wouldn't automatically be anywhere in line. There is a fundamental lack of agreement among the nobles on whether or not legitimized bastards can inherit in Westeros. And you say bastards go to the end of the line, but where is the "end" of the line? Siblings? First cousins? Second cousins? Wouldn't all the Karstarks come before Jon by your logic? Cat specifically mentions cousins in the Vale descended from Robb's paternal great grandfather. If you go back far enough, everyone is related.

The alliance was not just for the war against Aerys. We actually know this, since we are told by Lady Dustin that Rickard had southron ambitions. The alliance (influenced by the maesters) was initially created for political reasons, but it ended up being one side of a war after the Mad King killed a bunch of people. Post-Targaryen Westeros is an unstable place in terms of military alliances (obviously, since we have already seen the Greyjoy rebellion and the Wot5K in less than 20 years). It was of vital importance (to the players involved) that the Stark-Tully-Arryn-Baratheon military alliance be maintained to prevent (or win) future conflicts. But if Catelyn was not married to the Lord of WF and her children weren't going to inherit WF, there's really nothing to prevent Hoster/Edmure from siding with someone else in the next conflict. Specifically, since the next conflict (not counting Greyjoy rebellion) turned out to be the Wot5K, imagine Robb trying to go to war with the Tullys fighting on the Lannister side. It would have been a completely different situation. For the sake of the future of House Stark, Cat must be married to Lord Stark, and her children must inherit WF. Yes, they would still be right after Jon in line for now, but that wouldn't matter unless Jon dies before having children. Therefore, Jon's identity would need to be kept secret. At least, that's how Ned would think about it.

Because he's thinking of his sister, who Jon looks like, and who liked riding and fighting. 

We don't know that. Is it possible? Yes. But it's also possible that Edric's father wasn't home from the war yet, and hadn't even met his wife let alone married her. Ashara may have been the only one home when Ned returned the sword. I could however see them naming Edric after Eddard if in addition to bringing the sword he also brought news that Arthur wasn't really dead. Unlikely but possible. 

Yeah, and it is entirely inconsistent with Ned's character to claim to be Lord of Winterfell--which he never wanted or expected to be--if he has a legitimate nephew who is really the Lord of Winterfell.

Pretty sure he did. And yes it IS possible to do so. Tywin was still hoping to convince Jaime to leave the Kingsguard, and didn't want to risk damaging the Lannister reputation by disinheriting Tyrion, because people would absolutely have talked about that and his motives for having done it. Randyll forced Sam into the Night's Watch for the same reason: it saves him the trouble of admitting to why he didn't want his son to inherit.

No, the Karstarks would not come before Jon by my logic. They split back when the Starks were still Kings in the North, and are hardly even related to the Starks anymore.

Let me explain it by removing Benjen from the Night's Watch and giving him a son named Torrhen, and giving Rickard a little brother named Cregan who has a daughter named Marna. The line after Ned goes Robb> Bran> Rickon> Torrhen> Sansa> Arya> legitimized Jon> Cregan> Marna> distant relatives in the Vale> more distant relatives including the Umbers and Cerwyns.

This is how it goes regardless of whether Jon is Brandon's son or Ned's or Lyanna's. Rickard's line all go ahead of his brother Cregan's line, but Jon is at the very end of Rickard's line because he's a legitimized bastard. And unless someone has the military power to jump the line, this is pretty much how things go until you get a really mixed up succession with multiple lines crossing as is most likely the problem with determining who the Rosby heir is.

I see you're taking Barbrey Dustin's word as gospel here, and she may actually even be telling the truth but we don't know. What Rickard had planned died with Rickard. Hoster Tully was fine with Ned marrying Cat in Brandon's stead but he also made Jon Arryn marry Lysa in order to get Hoster to commit his soldiers to the rebellion. The point of the double-wedding was getting Hoster firmly into the rebellion. Ned isn't a politician and had no ambitions, Southron or otherwise, so his father's ideas had no bearing on his the choices he made after the war. Nor would anyone have faulted Ned for finding out that Brandon had a son who was the rightful heir to Winterfell (if trueborn) and giving way to the child, acting as Lord Protector for the boy.

It's one thing for us to know what's happened, it's quite another to expect the characters to have psychic powers and know that Balon is going to rebel and that the Wot5K is going to happen. You're projecting our knowledge onto characters who would not have had it.

I'm not sure which to mention first, the child mortality point--which is valid, especially considering that Hoster had no trouble killing an inconvenient child before--or the fact that you know darn well the next conflict was the Greyjoy rebellion and there is no way Hoster Tully would have sided with the Ironborn in that. You don't get to not count it. You cited it above as evidence of the need for the alliance to continue, you can't cut it now. That's trying to have it both ways.

Robb wouldn't be going to war. Jon would be going to war, with Robb by his side, and since it was Catelyn's husband and her childrens' father who was taken captive by the crown (not to mention them still having the girls), Hoster and Edmure would still have been on team KitN, as would Brynden.

No, it's not. The Ned who warned Cersei that he knew the truth about her children and was going to tell Robert would not have deprive a trueborn, Brandon's-son-Jon of his rightful inheritance. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 hours ago, Lady Blizzardborn said:

Because he's thinking of his sister, who Jon looks like, and who liked riding and fighting. 

We don't know that. Is it possible? Yes. But it's also possible that Edric's father wasn't home from the war yet, and hadn't even met his wife let alone married her. Ashara may have been the only one home when Ned returned the sword. I could however see them naming Edric after Eddard if in addition to bringing the sword he also brought news that Arthur wasn't really dead. Unlikely but possible. 

Yeah, and it is entirely inconsistent with Ned's character to claim to be Lord of Winterfell--which he never wanted or expected to be--if he has a legitimate nephew who is really the Lord of Winterfell.

Pretty sure he did. And yes it IS possible to do so. Tywin was still hoping to convince Jaime to leave the Kingsguard, and didn't want to risk damaging the Lannister reputation by disinheriting Tyrion, because people would absolutely have talked about that and his motives for having done it. Randyll forced Sam into the Night's Watch for the same reason: it saves him the trouble of admitting to why he didn't want his son to inherit.

No, the Karstarks would not come before Jon by my logic. They split back when the Starks were still Kings in the North, and are hardly even related to the Starks anymore.

Let me explain it by removing Benjen from the Night's Watch and giving him a son named Torrhen, and giving Rickard a little brother named Cregan who has a daughter named Marna. The line after Ned goes Robb> Bran> Rickon> Torrhen> Sansa> Arya> legitimized Jon> Cregan> Marna> distant relatives in the Vale> more distant relatives including the Umbers and Cerwyns.

This is how it goes regardless of whether Jon is Brandon's son or Ned's or Lyanna's. Rickard's line all go ahead of his brother Cregan's line, but Jon is at the very end of Rickard's line because he's a legitimized bastard. And unless someone has the military power to jump the line, this is pretty much how things go until you get a really mixed up succession with multiple lines crossing as is most likely the problem with determining who the Rosby heir is.

I see you're taking Barbrey Dustin's word as gospel here, and she may actually even be telling the truth but we don't know. What Rickard had planned died with Rickard. Hoster Tully was fine with Ned marrying Cat in Brandon's stead but he also made Jon Arryn marry Lysa in order to get Hoster to commit his soldiers to the rebellion. The point of the double-wedding was getting Hoster firmly into the rebellion. Ned isn't a politician and had no ambitions, Southron or otherwise, so his father's ideas had no bearing on his the choices he made after the war. Nor would anyone have faulted Ned for finding out that Brandon had a son who was the rightful heir to Winterfell (if trueborn) and giving way to the child, acting as Lord Protector for the boy.

It's one thing for us to know what's happened, it's quite another to expect the characters to have psychic powers and know that Balon is going to rebel and that the Wot5K is going to happen. You're projecting our knowledge onto characters who would not have had it.

I'm not sure which to mention first, the child mortality point--which is valid, especially considering that Hoster had no trouble killing an inconvenient child before--or the fact that you know darn well the next conflict was the Greyjoy rebellion and there is no way Hoster Tully would have sided with the Ironborn in that. You don't get to not count it. You cited it above as evidence of the need for the alliance to continue, you can't cut it now. That's trying to have it both ways.

Robb wouldn't be going to war. Jon would be going to war, with Robb by his side, and since it was Catelyn's husband and her childrens' father who was taken captive by the crown (not to mention them still having the girls), Hoster and Edmure would still have been on team KitN, as would Brynden.

No, it's not. The Ned who warned Cersei that he knew the truth about her children and was going to tell Robert would not have deprive a trueborn, Brandon's-son-Jon of his rightful inheritance. 

It's consistent with Ned's character if he believes he is doing it to protect his family.

As far as I know, disinheriting people is only ever mentioned in terms of naming a new heir in place of a current heir. But I don't think it ever says explicitly that family members can be totally removed from the line of succession. I could be wrong on that. But either way, I'm fairly certain Robb never "disinherited" Sansa. He wrote a will that we don't yet know the contents of, but presumably he named a new heir, probably either Jon or Cat.

Why would Brandon's line (Jon) not be ahead of Ned's line if Rickard's line is ahead of Cregan's? That seems totally arbitrary and I don't know of anything in the text to back it up.

I didn't count the Greyjoy rebellion precisely because there is no way Hoster would have sided with Balon. That example does not apply to my point. It was a totally one-sided conflict, and the Stark-Tully alliance had basically zero effect on the outcome. By contrast, the Stark-Tully alliance was a key factor in the Wot5K.

The whole point I was trying to make is simply that another war (after Robert's rebellion) in the near future was possible, if not likely, given the political climate. If B+A=J, then Jon would have at least have a claim to WF, which could threaten the Stark-Tully military alliance. Ned may have thought it in the best interest of House Stark to keep Jon's identity a secret.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

10 hours ago, 40 Thousand Skeletons said:

It's consistent with Ned's character if he believes he is doing it to protect his family.

As far as I know, disinheriting people is only ever mentioned in terms of naming a new heir in place of a current heir. But I don't think it ever says explicitly that family members can be totally removed from the line of succession. I could be wrong on that. But either way, I'm fairly certain Robb never "disinherited" Sansa. He wrote a will that we don't yet know the contents of, but presumably he named a new heir, probably either Jon or Cat.

Why would Brandon's line (Jon) not be ahead of Ned's line if Rickard's line is ahead of Cregan's? That seems totally arbitrary and I don't know of anything in the text to back it up.

I didn't count the Greyjoy rebellion precisely because there is no way Hoster would have sided with Balon. That example does not apply to my point. It was a totally one-sided conflict, and the Stark-Tully alliance had basically zero effect on the outcome. By contrast, the Stark-Tully alliance was a key factor in the Wot5K.

The whole point I was trying to make is simply that another war (after Robert's rebellion) in the near future was possible, if not likely, given the political climate. If B+A=J, then Jon would have at least have a claim to WF, which could threaten the Stark-Tully military alliance. Ned may have thought it in the best interest of House Stark to keep Jon's identity a secret.

Jon is part of the family, and he would not put protecting part of the family ahead of protecting all of it. And he still could have told Catelyn the truth. It's not like she was so fair-minded and selfless that she would spread the news around that she wasn't the Lady of the North and her oldest was not supposed to be heir to Winterfell.

And Sansa being disinherited could well be part of it. That kind of thing tends to be done in wills.

I didn't say Brandon's line overall would be after Ned's line. If Brandon had a legitimate son, then he would absolutely be AHEAD of Ned and Ned's kids. I was talking about the circumstance of Brandon having an illegitimate son who was later legitimized. 

Maybe if I explain it this way...

Let's say that Brandon is Jon's father, but Jon is still a bastard. Ned is now Lord of Winterfell, but he gets Robert to legitimize Jon as Brandon's son. Jon does not get to go to the head of the line and bump everybody else. Even legitimized, he was still born a bastard which puts him below the trueborn Ned and Ned's trueborn children. It doesn't matter that he was the son of Ned's older brother. 

Okay, when you put it that way it does make sense. So, not counting the Greyjoy Rebellion, there is no other war for 15 years. I don't consider 15 years out to be the "near" future. And actually with Robert married into House Lannister, Jon Arryn as Hand, and the Targaryens all but destroyed, the political climate is pretty stable. No one was going to risk going up against the guy who killed Rhaegar and Tywin Lannister. Add in Jon Arryn and Ned Stark to the Baratheon-Lannister coupling, and the likelihood of anyone rebelling is even lower. The houses that would have been most likely to rebel would have been the Pro-Targ houses and they were busy licking their wounds and trying to forge new alliances with the Baratheons and Lannisters so they wouldn't end up exiled. Robert was pretty generous about accepting fealty from those who had fought on the other side. There's really no reason to expect things to blow up at a moment's notice. And the longer they go with no problems, the less likely there would be any danger in revealing that Jon was Brandon's son, particularly to Catelyn. I could see not telling Jon, lest he get pouty and go ask the Boltons for an army or something.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I missed the entire R+L=J...even when I read about it online, I STILL didn't know who R and L were.  Who is Rhaegar?  Who is Lyanna?  What the heck is The Tower of Joy?

I knew Ned had a sister who'd been engaged to Robert, but I didn't catch her name, and I certainly couldn't keep the Targaryen names straight.

But I DID solve the mystery of who murdered Jon Arryn, in the very first book.  Or, at least, some of the mystery.

It was blatantly clear to me that the murderer was Lysa, and the motive was to keep Sweet Robin at home. Part of Ned's investigation reveals how many people were plotting over where Robin would go to be fostered, yet he was glued to Lysa's breast.  I didn't figure out Littlefinger's role, but I did know it was Lysa!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

5 hours ago, Lady Blizzardborn said:

Jon is part of the family, and he would not put protecting part of the family ahead of protecting all of it. And he still could have told Catelyn the truth. It's not like she was so fair-minded and selfless that she would spread the news around that she wasn't the Lady of the North and her oldest was not supposed to be heir to Winterfell.

And Sansa being disinherited could well be part of it. That kind of thing tends to be done in wills.

I didn't say Brandon's line overall would be after Ned's line. If Brandon had a legitimate son, then he would absolutely be AHEAD of Ned and Ned's kids. I was talking about the circumstance of Brandon having an illegitimate son who was later legitimized. 

Maybe if I explain it this way...

Let's say that Brandon is Jon's father, but Jon is still a bastard. Ned is now Lord of Winterfell, but he gets Robert to legitimize Jon as Brandon's son. Jon does not get to go to the head of the line and bump everybody else. Even legitimized, he was still born a bastard which puts him below the trueborn Ned and Ned's trueborn children. It doesn't matter that he was the son of Ned's older brother. 

Okay, when you put it that way it does make sense. So, not counting the Greyjoy Rebellion, there is no other war for 15 years. I don't consider 15 years out to be the "near" future. And actually with Robert married into House Lannister, Jon Arryn as Hand, and the Targaryens all but destroyed, the political climate is pretty stable. No one was going to risk going up against the guy who killed Rhaegar and Tywin Lannister. Add in Jon Arryn and Ned Stark to the Baratheon-Lannister coupling, and the likelihood of anyone rebelling is even lower. The houses that would have been most likely to rebel would have been the Pro-Targ houses and they were busy licking their wounds and trying to forge new alliances with the Baratheons and Lannisters so they wouldn't end up exiled. Robert was pretty generous about accepting fealty from those who had fought on the other side. There's really no reason to expect things to blow up at a moment's notice. And the longer they go with no problems, the less likely there would be any danger in revealing that Jon was Brandon's son, particularly to Catelyn. I could see not telling Jon, lest he get pouty and go ask the Boltons for an army or something.

I agree that I think he would be more likely than not to tell Cat, but we know for a fact he didn't tell Cat, and I still consider B+A=J possible. I don't think it is necessarily inconsistent with Ned's character.

Yes, I suppose Robb likely has the authority to disinherit Sansa in his will.

OK, but why would legitimized Jon be ahead of Cregan's trueborn line?

Yes, put that way, things sound stable. But a 300 year old dynasty had just ended and I find it plausible that Ned may have thought it was in the best interest of House Stark to do everything possible to solidify their military alliances, and Ned's marriage was a key part of that. And look at the Wot5k. House Tully ended up being the only one on their side after the Baratheons did their own thing and Lysa did nothing.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

53 minutes ago, 40 Thousand Skeletons said:

<snip

OK, but why would legitimized Jon be ahead of Cregan's trueborn line?

<snip

Because Jon is still from Rickard's line and all of Rickard's line is senior to Cregan's line. Cregan might dispute Jon's place in the succession, but more than likely the ruling would end up with Jon's place affirmed...unless Cregan had dragons. :D

Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 3/10/2017 at 4:13 PM, Lady Blizzardborn said:

Because Jon is still from Rickard's line and all of Rickard's line is senior to Cregan's line. Cregan might dispute Jon's place in the succession, but more than likely the ruling would end up with Jon's place affirmed...unless Cregan had dragons. :D

Why is Rickard's line ahead of Cregan's but Brandon's line is not ahead of Ned's?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Not the place for succession rules, but I'll jump in.

There's no clear rules for what happens when bastards are legitimized. Just as there are no clear rules for the succession itself.

Brandons trueborn son would indeed come ahead of Ned and all his family, but Brandon never married. Accepting your premise as Jon as Brandon's son, it would be likely that if and when he was legitimized, there would probably be a note about where he would fall in the succession. When Aegon 4 legitimized his bastards, he placed them behind Daeron in succession. But Ned, having petitioned Robert to make Jon Jon Stark, might put Jon behind his children, or name Jon his heir, or heir after his sons. One of the reasons GRRM has had so much success with basing his books on the Wars of the Roses is that there weren't any rules then either. Quite often it was decided through battle and war.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

9 hours ago, 40 Thousand Skeletons said:

Why is Rickard's line ahead of Cregan's but Brandon's line is not ahead of Ned's?

Because Brandon had no legitimate children. All of Rickard's line, including any legitimized bastards of his trueborn children, come before Cregan.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.

×
×
  • Create New...