Jump to content

Cat is definitely the heir named in Robb's will


Recommended Posts

5 hours ago, Prof. Cecily said:

Oh, dear, I hope I haven't offended you, @kissdbyfire. My sense of humour tends to the freakish, but I mean no harm.

The White Walkers, the Wildlings and the dragons are going to  radically change the political map of northern Westeros.

I can't imagine how it will all turn out. 

No, of course not!

maybe you didn't see it, but I edited my post you just quoted to say the second link worked and the artwork's very cool! :cheers:

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

11 minutes ago, kissdbyfire said:

No, of course not!

maybe you didn't see it, but I edited my post you just quoted to say the second link worked and the artwork's very cool! :cheers:

 

The gods are good. And so are you.

Though in jest, my point is serious. I think the Whitewalkers and the dragons will change Westeros considerably.

I really don't know in what social context the question of Robb's Heir will find a solution. 

Who knows. Mayhaps ADOS will be a 'post-apocolyptic' novel!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 6/16/2017 at 2:08 PM, Prof. Cecily said:

Jeyne's child?

There is some evidence that Jeyne was pregnant by the time Robb left. It is clear that her mother was giving her tansy tea and lying about it, saying it was a fertility potion. It may the case that Jeyne caught on and stopped taking it and managed to get pregnant. The girl Jaime met may have been her younger sister as she is described as having "narrow hips" and Cat had earlier described Jeyne as having hips good for bearing children, i.e. not narrow. And Jaime never explicitly describes seeing Jeyne together with her sister. He only describes her as being with her family, but he wasn't more specific than that. So Jeyne may have actually been gone by that point and met up with the Blackfish, who was sworn to protect her and would certainly take that oath seriously if she was pregnant.

And GRRM said we would be seeing Jeyne in TWOW, and her being pregnant/giving birth would explain this upcoming appearance.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 6/16/2017 at 2:18 PM, The Doctor's Consort said:

Another of PJ’s baseless theories, how original.

So Robb named his heir a Southern foreigner who has no blood connection with the Starks, who worships foreign Gods and has also committed high treason because he didn’t cared about the Starks. Seems legit.

 

On 6/16/2017 at 11:20 PM, Lord Wraith said:

I just wish more people would admit this when they post these ideas.

Well on the flip side why would anyone in the Riverlands support Jon as King of the Riverlands? He worships foreign gods, is a bastard, has taken the Black and has no connection to House Tully. Just because Robb who lost them the war wanted it so?

This is not a PJ theory. Many people have guessed that Cat was the heir, and PJ has made the observation that "Robb threatening to pick Jon and then picking Jon" would not constitute a trap. But beyond that PJ's logic was silly. It was concise and basically nonsense, probably because he was just trying to quickly get Robb's will off the table so that he could present his theories on what is happening in the north. He didn't spend any time on it or present evidence from the text or even make a totally logical argument. I, on the other hand, actually went back and dissected the conversation from earlier in the chapter and tried to illustrate specifically how Robb's trap played out, as well as touch on the basic objections to the idea of Cat being the heir.

I do not hide the fact that I am a PJ fan, and I give him credit when I steal his ideas. I have even started a couple threads just to discuss the validity of certain PJ theories. But I do not consider this to be one of them. I will give him credit for correctly pointing out that naming Jon heir wouldn't constitute a trap while naming Cat would be a trap, but that is pretty obvious once you pay attention to that line, and I don't need PJ to tell me.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 6/16/2017 at 3:03 PM, The Twinslayer said:

Remember that Robb was King of both the North (as a son of Eddard Stark) and the Riverlands (as a grandson of Hoster Tully).  When he named an heir, he was naming someone to rule both parts of his kingdom.  How likely do you think it is that Robb named a foreign bastard with no blood connections to the Tullys ,who worships foreign gods, who is sworn to hold no lands, take no wife, and wear no crowns and has never been South of the Neck, as the King of the Riverlands?  

Having been Lady Stark for 15 years, having spent significant time with every noble house in the North, and potentially being the mother to Robb's half-sibling (if she marries again), Catelyn has a better chance of holding the North than Jon does of holding the Riverlands.   

:agree: 

I think most people assume for some reason that maintaining the "Stark bloodline" was way more important to Robb than keeping his new kingdom intact, but I don't see any good reason to believe that.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 6/16/2017 at 3:14 PM, The Doctor's Consort said:

Cat was a traitor for the whole North to see and the only connection she had with the North was that she was Ned's baby making machine. Her power comes from her children she has no power of her own right.

Robb wasn't naming the head of house Tully but the head of house Stark. No one in the North would have accepted a Tully with no Stark blood, no connection with the North and a known traitor as their overlord. Even Robb wasn't that stupid to think that.

I think you are really overstating the whole "traitor" thing. The only person we know for sure was even angry at Cat was Rickard Karstark, and that's because because he was "denied his vengeance" by her act. The Greatjon, in her defense, names her act to be a "mother's folly", and I think that slightly sexist attitude is probably more indicative of how everyone felt than Karstark's opinion. Carrying out an act deemed to be a "mother's folly" is not in same league as being a "traitor".

Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 6/16/2017 at 4:26 PM, St Daga said:

Possibly neither Robb nor Cat mentions this because they don't see it as a problem in the case of Jon inheriting? You, @40 Thousand Skeletons seem to have a problem with Jon inheriting for this reason, but do people in the north?

LOL, I don't personally have a problem with bastards or oathbreakers, but I think it is safe to assume that some northerners would have a problem with a bastard being king, and that even more would have a problem with an oathbreaker/NW deserter being king.

On 6/16/2017 at 4:26 PM, St Daga said:

Agreed! Bran and Luwin even discuss the possibility of Lord Hornwood's bastard son being named the heir to Hornwood lands, and Lord of the Hornwood. This decision is left unsettled by the war, and with Robb being gone from Winterfell. Ramsay takes Lady Hornwood by force, and marries her. He declares himself Lord of Hornwood because he took it by force (even if he disguised it behind a marriage), not because he legally had the best claim. If the north had not been torn apart by the War of the Five Kings, this action by Ramsay Snow would not have stood.

His action, in fact, did not stand. They hunted down and killed Ramsay for his act and took his friend Reek prisoner... or so they believed.

On 6/16/2017 at 4:26 PM, St Daga said:

I think Robb does care about the Stark blood line. I think Cat cares about it, too, but not nearly as much as Robb. She would prefer the Stark blood line to continue with a nice mixture of Tully blood in the pot, and eventually it might if the story has the blood line come from Arya (however, I am not convinced that Arya has Tully blood but that tinfoil is for another day and another thread).

Both Robb and Cat plainly state that Stark blood is important to who Robb names as his heir in the following exchange.

  Quote
"Mother." There was a sharpness in Robb's tone. "You forget. My father had four sons."
She had not forgotten; she had not wanted to look at it, yet there it was. "A Snow is not a Stark."
"Jon's more a Stark than some lordlings from the Vale who have never so much as set eyes on Winterfell." ASOS-Caatelyn V

Robb plainly wants someone of Stark blood to follow him as his heir. He even seems to think it important that person come from Ned's bloodline, if at all possible. Even Catelyn recognizes this is important, but she tries to derail Robb by claiming that Jon is no Stark, that he is a Snow. Of course, that argument might work for legal names but not for blood, and Robb rightly points out that Jon, despite not carrying the Stark name, is still more of a Stark than some random couins in the Vale.

Jon is certainly more of a Stark than Catelyn, I think we can all agree! The argument that Robb doesn't care about his heir carrying Stark blood doesn't hold water. If that is the case, why even try to have a child with Jeyne Westerling?

Please show me a single other discussion where either Robb or Cat talk about the importance of the Stark bloodline. As far as I know, there aren't any such discussions. They one line that people always come back to is the one you just referenced, which I already addressed in the OP. As I have already said, that entire conversation is, according to the internal logic of this theory, part of Robb's trap and completely disingenuous. Therefore, that line from Robb can't be used as evidence against this theory. The entire point of this theory is that in his conversation with Cat, ROBB IS LYING! Therefore, it is not "plain" that he wants someone of Stark blood to follow him.

Why try to have a child with Jeyne? What are you talking about? Of course he would prefer for his own son via a wife to be his heir. Cat is only being named heir in the event that he has no children. Trying to have children with Jeyne doesn't mean he cares specifically about a person with Stark blood ruling his kingdom if he dies.

On 6/16/2017 at 4:26 PM, St Daga said:

I mentioned on a different thread, and it has been brought up on this thread as well, would Catelyn think she had been trapped if Jon was named heir and Robb declared that Jon should marry Cat? I think she would feel terribly defeated by this declaration. Personally I think it's a terrible "trick" to play on both Jon and Cat, however, children of that union would carry both Stark and Tully blood, and it might make a lot of sense for Robb to do this. Poor Jon and Cat, if that is the case! And even if Robb did do this, since Catelyn is dead, although reborn, she now has a zombie womb and I doubt can breed any more heirs, so I am not sure it would matter. If this is what Robb did, with Catelyn dead, then her only legal female heirs are Sansa and Arya. Sansa is already married, and until Tyrion is dead, I don't think she is free to marry again, leaving Arya as Catelyn's female heir.

Yes, she would, and I think there is a small possibility that this is what happened. It is definitely something I could see GRRM writing. As for the zombie womb thing, you are correct on that point too. It is pretty clear that resurrected people like Cat, Coldhands, and Beric no longer have blood pumping in their bodies. Coldhands obviously has a bunch of blood congealed in his extremities, and he also doesn't need to breathe except to talk. And Cat has a giant slit in her neck. In fact, all of her blood probably drained out of her body in the river. And if your body isn't pumping blood, you can't have babies. It's a medical fact. ;)

On 6/16/2017 at 4:26 PM, St Daga said:

Why do you think Robb was lying? He has not been a known liar before this time, why would he start being a liar now? And about this, of all things? That is a part of your theory that is pretty shaky, no offense.

No offense, but I think you may have missed the entire point of the OP... :P. Cat has been "trapped" by Robb. The trap was so impressive, in fact, that it made Cat think to herself: a king indeed. And she hoped that his future trap at MC would work just as well. So this wasn't some trivial trap like a mouse trap; it was a trap worthy of a king, and one that was comparable to his future ambush at MC. This implies that Robb has somehow deceived Catelyn in a significantly clever manner. And if we just go back a few pages to earlier in that chapter, we see the beginnings of Robb's trap unfold before our eyes. So he's not "lying" outright for the sake of lying, and I wouldn't generally deem Robb as a "liar", but he was almost certainly being disingenuous for that entire conversation specifically, because it was all part of his trap to make Cat his heir.

On 6/16/2017 at 4:26 PM, St Daga said:

Well, that is your opinion. And that is fine. I have opinions that color how I view the text as well. But that doesn't mean it is the opinion of the northern lords, or any characters in GRRM's story. However, we all are guilty of projecting our own ideals and judgments on the text, but that doesn't make those personal ideals and judgments beneficial in figuring out the plot. Actually, our own personal ideals and judgments can make us misread the plot because of what we believe or wish.

Maybe I don't want to think of Catelyn as Robb's heir because I personally blame her for so much of went wrong for the north from the very beginning of the story, therefore I think she would not deserve the north. But that is just my opinion coloring my hopes for the text, just as your opinion about Jon inheriting seems to color yours!

No... that isn't my opinion. I don't personally give a fuck about bastards or oathbreaking. I couldn't care less about Jon's oathbreaking were he to inherit the north. And personally, I don't think that I project my own ideals on the text when figuring out the plot, although as best as I can tell from his writing and interviews GRRM and I coincidentally have views on politics, war, religion, and economics that are super-closely aligned. I definitely wished for Aegon to be real after my first read through, but I found it impossible to ignore the evidence for him being fake once I actually thought about it and read forum discussions. But you do bring up a good point. I do think that many readers don't want Cat to be the heir because they blame her for so much of what went wrong. Personally, I think Cat was just a pawn of Bloodraven and I don't blame her for anything. Every "bad decision" on her part was a nefarious setup. Most people don't subscribe to my grand theory though :P.

My point was that based on the text, I think the northerners in the story would prefer Ned's widow to a bastard NW deserter possibly cursed by the Old Gods. 

On 6/16/2017 at 4:26 PM, St Daga said:

Well, we know that Catelyn was dead and came back as a "zombie", we don't know either thing about Jon. We don't know if he is dead at all, and if he isn't dead, then we don't need to worry about him being a zombie. 

Woah there. We do actually know that Jon is quite likely to die. He was stabbed at least several times in the torso, and there was no maester nearby. His best hope to survive is to be brought to a wildling healer and also hope that no major organs were badly damaged. Jon reaching out to Ghost after getting stabbed is exactly like when Robb reached out to Grey Wind just before dying. And generally, there is a lot of foreshadowing of people being brought back from the dead, so we shouldn't be surprised if it happens with Jon. If Jon survives and doesn't need to be resurrected I will go buy a hat and eat it.

On 6/16/2017 at 4:26 PM, St Daga said:

Maybe that is exactly what GRRM is trying to tell us! That every child is equal, no matter if his/her parents were married. That the institution of marriage isn't important to the outcome! That bastard born children are just as worthy and maybe more capable as rulers than their true born counterparts!

Well, yeah, the entire asoiaf story is a giant commentary on social norms, feminism, politics, economics, and religion. It is blatantly clear that GRRM thinks monarchy is inherently a bad form of government and that marriage was historically an institution used to control women and to gain political power. GRRM himself waited almost 2 decades before marrying his current wife, and I'm guessing they are only married for the financial benefits and not because they fundamentally care about marriage in some sort of religious sense. My parents did the same thing (specifically, they saved $750 on their taxes that year).

GRRM definitely doesn't care about children being "bastards", and he doesn't think monarchy should exist at all (99% of Americans would probably agree on that point). If you read some of his other writing, GRRM comes across effectively as a communist. He writes about traditional slavery, like Slaver's Bay in asoiaf, but he also writes about "enslavement" through debt, which is a commentary on the realities of capitalism. One could make the argument that there is little effective difference between the economic structures and wealth distribution of medieval feudalism and modern American capitalism.

And ironically, I think GRRM has written asoiaf so that blood is, in fact, super important, but that it is blood through the female line (X chromosomes) that matters, not the male line (which keeps the family name).

On 6/16/2017 at 4:26 PM, St Daga said:

There has been much debate over the years about what parts of the Night's Watch oath are original and what are added. Who is to say what parts the Old Gods themselves respect? Maybe the Old God's themselves don't give two shits about holding lands, wearing crowns or fathering children! There is too much of the story left for GRRM to tell for us to say how it's going to all play out, but I don't think we have learned all the important things about the Nights Watch or their vows yet, or how it will effect the outcome of the story, or even what is the important part of the vows.

What the Old Gods actually care about is irrelevant to how it looks politically to the northern lords. They care about oaths sworn to the Old Gods, even if the Old Gods themselves are apathetic.

On 6/16/2017 at 4:26 PM, St Daga said:

Oh, now, that isn't true at all. Jaime was important because it affected Tywin and Cersei's Lannister pride and arrogance. Jaime was an important hostage as a symbol, and Catelyn made a huge mess of that situation! Time will tell if Cat's releasing Jaime will play out in the eventual return of either Sansa or Arya to Winterfell, but at this point of the story, it has gained nothing. Nothing for the Stark's anyway, it has worked out only okay-ish for Jaime. I mean, after all he is free, but as a captive in Riverrun, at least he had his sword hand! Jaime might not thank unCat for her "gift" of freedom, either.

Unlike Sansa and Arya, Jaime as a KG was not heir to anything and could not be used to broker a marriage contract. His only real value, as far as trading hostages is concerned, was as a commander. Tywin and Cersei may care personally about Jaime, but Cat and Robb care just as much about his sisters. Personal feelings don't generally play a big role in hostage negotiations. My point was that Cat and Robb totally got things backwards in their discussion, saying that Sansa and Arya were of little value just because they were "girls". Barring Jaime being released from his KG vows, Sansa and Arya were arguably much more valuable hostages than he was, and the smart move would have been to offer him in a trade like Cat did, though she did so for emotional reasons. Just think about how politically valuable Sansa and (fake) Arya ended up being once Robb died.

On 6/16/2017 at 4:26 PM, St Daga said:

Catelyn put herself in a similar situation when she chose to travel to and from Kings Landing with only Ser Rodrik as her escort. Pretty much right after Ned made her acting regent in the north. She might not have been captured but she easily could have been. Catelyn makes some pretty poor decision's in this story, decisions that make me question her ability to rule in Winterfell, a place she admittedly never felt a part of, even after more than a decade and five children.

But she was not Queen, only regent. And Ned, and all their children were alive if she were to somehow be captured or killed. Ramsay certainly wouldn't have been able to murder-marry her and claim Winterfell at that point in time, with Ned being alive and well. If Cat were Queen in the North with no heirs, I don't think she would put herself at such risk.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, 40 Thousand Skeletons said:

The girl Jaime met may have been her younger sister as she is described as having "narrow hips" and Cat had earlier described Jeyne as having hips good for bearing children, i.e. not narrow.

GRRM has admitted this to be a mistake on his behalf, The Jeyne Westerling/Theories page on ASOIAF Wiki has a link to this recent edition of Feast http://imgur.com/pYnqxeN

notice there is no mention of her hips

And there is also this SSM http://www.westeros.org/Citadel/SSM/Entry/10068

Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 6/16/2017 at 5:00 PM, Lollygag said:

I don’t disagree with your argument. I just disagree with the weight it carries against other arguments. A lot of what you state above also results if you set the precedent of naming a non-blood heir, only worse. Chaos from an elevated a bastard would only be relevant to isolated incidents. Naming a non-blood heir potentially affects every transfer of power for every house. If you think the Game of Thrones is bad now...

No, none of what I stated results if Cat becomes heir, and it doesn't affect every transfer of power. It only sets a precedent for what happens when a lord dies with no trueborn heir. The same exact situation was foreshadowed with Hornwood. Should they give Hornwood to Donella or should they legitimize Lord Hornwood's bastard. It was up to the liege lord to decide, and Luwin and Ser Rodrik definitely considered both to be options. Making a bastard into the ruler over all the northern lords, however, would be a significantly different situation than just having a bastard as Lord of Hornwood, ruling over smallfolk who either don't give a shit or can't do anything about it.

On 6/16/2017 at 5:00 PM, Lollygag said:

Robb's views on Jon have been perfectly clear. If you disagree with Robb's opinion, that's a different topic.

Robb's views on Jon have not been perfectly clear. The entire point of my OP is that Robb was being disingenuous during his conversation with Cat, because he was in the process of "trapping" her. By that logic, we can't trust anything Robb said specifically in that one conversation, including his views on Jon.

On 6/16/2017 at 5:00 PM, Lollygag said:

Robb did it. Everyone signed. The question is what he did, not whether you or anyone else agrees with it. I didn’t hear any problems from anyone but Cat, and we know where she’s coming from, and Cat isn't the one making the decision, it's Robb. Are you really suggesting that all of the Lords of the Riverlands and all of the Lords of the North combined can't come up with 100 men or whatever price the NW demands? They're really not in a position to turn down any good offer and Robb knows that. Robb never suggests Jon should be an oathbreaker, and besides, the Northererns don't care as much about oathbreaking as you do, and neither does Robb, just ask Jeyne Westerling. See my earlier post on Robb and the Greatjon and how the Northerners presumably break their oaths all the time to the Kings of Winter by rebelling.

Yes, I am suggesting it could actually be difficult to come up with 100 NW volunteers, considering that the NW only has like 1000 people. 100 men would be equal to a full 10% of their current number. Yes, I am sure the NW would accept the deal, but finding 100 men of fighting age to abandon their lives sounds like a legit challenge. And if Jon becomes a king, that is definitely breaking large sections of his NW oath. don't care about oathbreaking at all. But I think at least some portion of the northerners would care a great deal about a NW deserter being their king.

On 6/16/2017 at 5:00 PM, Lollygag said:

This is what you think, not what Robb or any other thinks.

Robb and the rest of the Northerners wanted Jaime kept in captivity. Robb was not ok that Jaime was released, but he couldn’t lash out because he had just made the same mistake by marrying Jeyne Westerling and Robb commanded that no one criticize Catelyn, so we wouldn’t know of direct condemnation, but if you read her chapters carefully, it’s definitely there along with the ramifications of what she did. Some of the people sympathized with her decision as a mother, sure. But the decision that a monarch should make is often in conflict with one a parent should make. Catelyn made the decision of a parent, not a monarch. That's what the Mormont women sympathized with. And that's why it disqualifies her as counsel to the King, and by extension, as monarch. She put her own needs over that of her people. Robb made the same decision for love over his duty as king, and look where he is now.

ASOS Catelyn I

Ser Desmond Grell had served House Tully all his life. He had been a squire when Catelyn was born, a knight when she learned to walk and ride and swim, master-at-arms by the day that she was wed. He had seen Lord Hoster's little Cat become a young woman, a great lord's lady, mother to a king. And now he has seen me become a traitor as well.

Edmure: "You do not understand. Highgarden has declared for Joffrey. Dorne as well. All the south." His mouth tightened. "And you see fit to loose the Kingslayer. You had no right."

ASOS Catelyn II

"Aye, my lady." Lord Rickard Karstark pushed past the Greatjon, like some grim specter with his black mail and long ragged grey beard, his narrow face pinched and cold. "And I have one son, who once had three. You have robbed me of my vengeance."

Catelyn faced him calmly. "Lord Rickard, the Kingslayer's dying would not have bought life for your children. His living may buy life for mine."

The lord was unappeased. "Jaime Lannister has played you for a fool. You've bought a bag of empty words, no more. My Torrhen and my Eddard deserved better of you."

"Leave off, Karstark," rumbled the Greatjon, crossing his huge arms against his chest. "It was a mother's folly. Women are made that way."

"A mother's folly?" Lord Karstark rounded on Lord Umber. "I name it treason."

"Enough." For just an instant Robb sounded more like Brandon than his father. "No man calls my lady of Winterfell a traitor in my hearing, Lord Rickard." When he turned to Catelyn, his voice softened. "If I could wish the Kingslayer back in chains I would. You freed him without my knowledge or consent . . . but what you did, I know you did for love. For Arya and Sansa, and out of grief for Bran and Rickon. Love's not always wise, I've learned. It can lead us to great folly, but we follow our hearts . . . wherever they take us. Don't we, Mother?"

ASOS Catelyn III

"Near three hundred riders and twice as many mounts, melted away in the night." Robb rubbed his temples, where the crown had left its mark in the soft skin above his ears. "All the mounted strength of Karhold, lost."

Lost by me. By me, may the gods forgive me. Catelyn did not need to be a soldier to grasp the trap Robb was in. For the moment he held the riverlands, but his kingdom was surrounded by enemies to every side but east, where Lysa sat aloof on her mountaintop. Even the Trident was scarce secure so long as the Lord of the Crossing withheld his allegiance. And now to lose the Karstarks as well . . .

Cat may have made the decision of a parent and not a monarch, but she was not a monarch at the time. We really do not know what the prevailing attitude of the northern lords is toward Cat. We are mostly left with the impression of Cat's opinion about herself, which you referenced. She considers herself a traitor (as does Karstark, for the nonsensical reason of being denied vengeance), the Greatjon deems it a mother's folly (and proceeds to enthusiastically hug Cat anyways), and she blames herself for losing the Karstark forces, but we don't ever get the explicit opinions of the other northern lords. They may not be mad about it, even if they considered it to be a "folly" like the Greatjon.

On 6/16/2017 at 5:00 PM, Lollygag said:

If you’re angling toward LSH’s power being expanded, possibly greatly, from the BwB, then I think this is entirely possible. The Varamyr prologue chapter hints that Jon will be side-lined and spend a lot of time in Ghost. If things become a lot more chaotic and no Stark materializes, then LHS could become the de facto leader in the void. If Rickon, Bran or Arya materializes before Jon, we could see one of them rule with a LHS regent of sorts. It’s really hard to tell right now. But will LHS attain any power through Robb’s will, nah. Plus, she becomes more interesting to me anyhow if she does what she does without hanging on legalities of Robb’s will. Rule by conquest always makes the more interesting story.

I am not angling toward anything in particular, but I don't doubt that if Cat is the heir, GRRM will make it relevant.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 minutes ago, Livesundersink said:

GRRM has admitted this to be a mistake on his behalf, The Jeyne Westerling/Theories page on ASOIAF Wiki has a link to this recent edition of Feast http://imgur.com/pYnqxeN

notice there is no mention of her hips

And there is also this SSM http://www.westeros.org/Citadel/SSM/Entry/10068

Some editions have the narrow hips and some don't. Significantly, a 2005 edition is missing the "narrow hips" reference as far as I know. So perhaps the "most recent" edition could have simply been from the same file as that 2005 edition? I'm not sure. But it is not definitive and GRRM has neglected to provide us with clarity.

As for the SSM, I don't trust it at all. It was a quick question from fans asked during a book signing, arguably the worst time to ask GRRM questions about the plot. What was the exact wording of their question? What was the exact wording of his response? Was this fan telling the truth? I am going to give them the benefit of the doubt and say the fan who wrote that SSM was being honest, but I do not trust them not to mischaracterize GRRM's answer. I am certainly not going to take this super vague SSM as "proof" that the "narrow hips" description was a mistake. In fact, I think it would be a very odd mistake for GRRM to make. Cat specifically noted that Jeyne had good hips for bearing children. Renly's eye color is much less important.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 6/16/2017 at 5:12 PM, Darkstream said:

I don't see this as a viable reason that Robb would need to trap her into accepting  his wish to name her his heir. Do you really think someone is going to turn down a position of this much power and prestige, just because they are depressed and exhausted?

Yes.

On 6/16/2017 at 5:12 PM, Darkstream said:

Besides, what duty would Robb naming her heir, necessitate her having to perform at this time? This would just be a back up plan, which would only come to fruition should Robb be killed, and not have managed to produce an heir of his own by that time. And might I remind you of the Tully words: "Family, Duty, Honor". Cat is not one who would turn her back on this request of her son. I would think she would be honored to accept this duty in service to her son family.

Family words are largely meaningless. People are who they are, and that isn't going to be changed be a family motto.

On 6/16/2017 at 5:12 PM, Darkstream said:

Also, do you not think, in the case that she would need convincing, that it would be more prudent of Robb to just inform her of his wishes, and should she refuse, then he could play the Jon card as his only other alternative?

No, because it wasn't just the Jon card. He had to both threaten her with Jon and get the support of all the other lords there, then do the surprise reveal in the tent in front of everyone.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 6/16/2017 at 5:32 PM, ravenous reader said:

No, indeed.  Cat is a control freak with serious 'stepmonster' issues.  She would jump at the chance -- no need for a trap!

As I've indicated upthread to @40 Thousand Skeletons, this is the weakest part of his argument, failing to take into account the motivations of either Cat or Robb, essentially deconstructing the premise from within.  Nevertheless, 40000 persists, and by drawing our eyes to 'the trap,' and away from the intrinsic motivations of two individuals who are both known to be predominantly emotional, not to mention stubborn, in their decision-making -- he thereby traps us in his maze of tinfoil!

I am not trying to draw your eyes away from the motivations of Cat and Robb, quite the opposite. I am trying to point out that Robb was disingenuous in that conversation, and therefore any information pertaining to his motives gleaned from said conversation is not dependable info. And many people are arguing that Robb cares more about the Stark bloodline than the preservation of his kingdom while I am making the point that, outside of that potentially disingenuous conversation, there is no evidence for this.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

22 minutes ago, 40 Thousand Skeletons said:

Some editions have the narrow hips and some don't. Significantly, a 2005 edition is missing the "narrow hips" reference as far as I know. So perhaps the "most recent" edition could have simply been from the same file as that 2005 edition? I'm not sure. But it is not definitive and GRRM has neglected to provide us with clarity.

As for the SSM, I don't trust it at all. It was a quick question from fans asked during a book signing, arguably the worst time to ask GRRM questions about the plot. What was the exact wording of their question? What was the exact wording of his response? Was this fan telling the truth? I am going to give them the benefit of the doubt and say the fan who wrote that SSM was being honest, but I do not trust them not to mischaracterize GRRM's answer. I am certainly not going to take this super vague SSM as "proof" that the "narrow hips" description was a mistake. In fact, I think it would be a very odd mistake for GRRM to make. Cat specifically noted that Jeyne had good hips for bearing children. Renly's eye color is much less important.

Well this is becoming a proverbial can of worms, i just checked my edition of Feast that was published in 2011 whilst it is hardcover the chapters and page numbers match the UK paperback, my copy has the hips in it. the copy in the link i mentioned i discovered is a US version meaning the hips may have only been removed in certain regions.

this is the particular issue of Feast that i own

https://www.amazon.co.uk/Hardback-reissue-Martin-George-Hardcover/dp/B00JYHPJII/ref=sr_1_8?ie=UTF8&qid=1497837626&sr=8-8&keywords=feast++for+crows

Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 minutes ago, Livesundersink said:

Well this is becoming a proverbial can of worms, i just checked my edition of Feast that was published in 2011 whilst it is hardcover the chapters and page numbers match the UK paperback, my copy has the hips in it. the copy in the link i mentioned i discovered is a US version meaning the hips may have only been removed in certain regions.

this is the particular issue of Feast that i own

https://www.amazon.co.uk/Hardback-reissue-Martin-George-Hardcover/dp/B00JYHPJII/ref=sr_1_8?ie=UTF8&qid=1497837626&sr=8-8&keywords=feast++for+crows

Yes, others have debated this specific issue at length. Long story short, the info we have is inconclusive. I have whatever ebook edition exists on Google Books and an old paperback, both with the "narrow hips" included. I would like to think if this was a legit mistake affecting such a big plot point, that GRRM would have made sure it was corrected, and that the Google and iTunes versions would be correct. But we just don't know.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I would argue that, if lacking evidence to the contrary, it would be most likely that a feudal King in a feudal Kingdom that is based entirely on bloodlines for inheriting would care about handing over his 8000 year-old seat to another family and that even if he doesn't, the rest of the world (i.e. Robb's lords) certainly would. To give away the Stark seat of power to a Southern family would be ending an 8000 dynasty; that would be one of the most shocking acts in Westerosi history - the King who gave away his throne.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

7 minutes ago, WSmith84 said:

I would argue that, if lacking evidence to the contrary, it would be most likely that a feudal King in a feudal Kingdom that is based entirely on bloodlines for inheriting would care about handing over his 8000 year-old seat to another family and that even if he doesn't, the rest of the world (i.e. Robb's lords) certainly would. To give away the Stark seat of power to a Southern family would be ending an 8000 dynasty; that would be one of the most shocking acts in Westerosi history - the King who gave away his throne.

But it would be ending because all the people died except for one bastard who has already sworn his life to the NW, not because Robb or anyone else went out of their way to end it.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 6/16/2017 at 5:26 PM, kissdbyfire said:

He'd have to die before turning into a zombie, and since he didn't (yet)... :P

LOL Same way as I'd feel about a scary vengeful queen... SCARED! :eek:

But my dead nan, who is not a zombie btw, would do better than Cersei! :lol:

now have to go back and find that post of yours I haven't replied to yet...

LOL I'm betting he is gonna die. It didn't look too good for him. And of course, resurrecting a dead Jon to make him a savior figure will play perfectly into the Old Gods' master plan :P 

On 6/16/2017 at 6:46 PM, kissdbyfire said:

Can you elaborate on this a bit? 

Why? I'm not trying to be super dense/a pain in the arse here but I really fail to see what you're driving at with this. And also how are the OG causing/planning everything? 

Wait. We know Ned dislikes (to put it mildly) the Lannisters from the get-go. You know, there's Tywin sitting on his arse until the war was pretty much decided, then Jaime arrogantly sitting on the IT (this is minor though), and then the savage and brutal murders of Rhaenys and Aegon... And then, in the present time we have Lysa's secret msg accusing the Lannisters of murdering Jon Arryn, who was like a father to Ned. So I don't really see the fact that Ned didn't make peace w/ the Lannisters as nothing more than what was expected. Unless you're actually saying that Bloodraven skinchanged into Tywin and basically took up residence in him for the duration of RR, then later into Jaime, then Tywin again just to give Lorch and Clegane the order to kill Rhaegar's children? Because that would be a tad too silly. 

Huh? First, I'm not sure who or what is the weirnet in your opinion. But from what I've read so far, the weirnet is responsible for every major event since RR or something... but it/they don't have free will? And skinchanging into humans, despite the abomination stigma, is something that's not that outrageously hard for a skilled skinchanger. Sure, Varamyr fails in the Prologue, and we know he's skilled, but he was weak and dying. The point is, it's been done before. So, it feels a bit convoluted to have this super weirnet controlling everything just to do so,etching that's been done already. Bran has done it even before he reached the cave. And if I may, why does the weirnet want to skinchange into humans? To have power and manipulate everything? B/c I thought the premise here is that it's already doing just that? So, the weirnet manipulates everything and everyone just so they can skinchange into humans to manipulate everything and everyone? I gotta tell you, this whole thing is doing my head in! :lol:

Why? 

What makes you think Jaqen's mission was to go beyond the Wall to kill Bloodraven? And what makes you think Rorge and Biter were on the same mission? 

I won't comment on the wolf pack running around eating greenseers because I have no idea what to say to that tbh. But not b/c I'm blown away, more because I'm in shock. :wideeyed:

:rofl: 

I assume you have only read the first 1 or 2 parts of my grand theory, which talked mainly about the weirwoods being tree-people and the existence of time travel. Part 3 (the final part) actually brings it all together and maps out the details of the "master plan" of the Old Gods, and how Bran, Jon, and Dany are the central pawns in their nefarious warmongering. Long story short, the Old Gods - who are simply the collective of living greenseers that make up the weirnet (like BR) and are trying to enslave humans to ensure their survival - are taking advantage of the AAR prophecy (which they may have created in the first place) to make Jon and Dany into savior figures who will lead mankind into a genocidal war against the Others (who they probably created in the first place to help them control humans). And that is super evil, because the Others are totally cool guys who are just forced to live underground due to some unfortunate genetic mutations. I think a big part of the ending of asoiaf may be that humans will have to procreate with the Others (you know, the other humans) and transform the human race in order to prepare to an upcoming ice age, which would be extremely similar to the plot of In the House of the Worm.

Feel free to read all 3 parts of my grand theory when you have a lot of spare time. It's totally worth it though, because unlike everybody else, my grand theory is correct :P. It will address all your questions about the motivations and capabilities of the Old Gods. But I will answer some of your unaddressed points here.

As to the point about the dagger and Ned's failed coup I was referring to this line from AGOT:

Quote

"You forget," Ned told him. "You forget Jon Arryn. You forget Jory Cassel. And you forget this." He drew the dagger and laid it on the table between them; a length of dragonbone and Valyrian steel, as sharp as the difference between right and wrong, between true and false, between life and death. "They sent a man to cut my son's throat, Lord Baelish."

Littlefinger sighed. "I fear I did forget, my lord. Pray forgive me. For a moment I did not remember that I was talking to a Stark." His mouth quirked. "So it will be Stannis, and war?"

So while there were many reasons for Ned's coup, the most prominent in Ned's mind was the assassination attempt on Bran's life. With Robert dead, the attack on Bran made war inevitable. And thus, I blame both events on the Old Gods. Also, both acts were carried out by animals that could have easily been skinchanged. A white hart lured Robert into the forest, wolves devoured the white hart, and the boar killed Robert. And Summer killed the assassin. No one could have planted LF's dagger (which was obviously planted on purpose) without knowing the assassin would fail, and there was no way to plan for the assassin failing unless you were planning on warging Summer, which is exactly what happened. Who hired the assassin? My best guess would be Mance, who has been a pawn of theirs since his near death experience getting mauled by a shadowcat (also skinchanged, duh), and who also claims to have brought a bag of silver with him to WF like the silver found where the assassin was sleeping (who for some reason did not keep the silver on his person). Mance would also be able to climb through the window of the WF library to set it on fire, and coordinating the attempt on Bran seems like a better reason to go into WF undercover and risk his life than his stated claims.

The weirnet would be the ultimate target for the Faceless Men in a religious sense, because they believe life contains suffering and death brings peace, and the weirnet is (if I am correct) a living Hell on Planetos, containing the tortured, enslaved souls of hundreds or perhaps thousands of greenseers.

I think their mission may have been to kill BR because I think Biter and Rorge were also FM, and they were heading to the Wall under cover for some reason. It must be a hard target to kill if you need 3 FM to do it. Why would FM join the NW? Maybe because they wanted to go ranging north of the Wall. And like I said, there is evidence that the FM are working for the fAegon Blackfyre cause, and BR is the arch rival of Bittersteel, the founder of the GC. All of these things together with the religious motivation makes me think that BR may have been Jaqen's mission, but he changed up his plans and wormed his way into Marwyn's inner circle, probably because Marwyn's glass candle started burning, and that would be a super useful tool for FM activities.

As for the wolfpack running around devouring greenseers, I have no confidence in that theory, but I do think it will probably happen because it would answer the following 2 questions: 1) Assuming my grand theory is generally correct, how will Bran destroy the weirnet? and 2) WTF is Chekov's wolfpack going to be used for? I can't think of a great tactical situation against humans where a wolfpack would save the day. As Big Walder pointed out to Bran, wolves are not particularly threatening to armored humans. And it would be cool if Arya and Bran basically teamed up at the very end of asoiaf to save the world for everyone they love. Bran could use his fully trained powers to temporarily keep the Old Gods at bay, and Arya could lead the wolves in to literally devour the Old Gods. Obviously this is highly speculative. :D 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 hours ago, 40 Thousand Skeletons said:

I think you are really overstating the whole "traitor" thing. The only person we know for sure was even angry at Cat was Rickard Karstark, and that's because because he was "denied his vengeance" by her act. The Greatjon, in her defense, names her act to be a "mother's folly", and I think that slightly sexist attitude is probably more indicative of how everyone felt than Karstark's opinion. Carrying out an act deemed to be a "mother's folly" is not in same league as being a "traitor".

You are the master of understating. :lmao:

It was treason. She was kept prisoner after that. The "mother folly" sexist defense is only good to avoid a execution, not to exonerate her. Cat herself admits it:

Quote

"I did," Catelyn said firmly. "I understood what I was doing and knew it was treasonous. If you fail to punish me, men will believe that we connived together to free Jaime Lannister. It was mine own act and mine alone, and I alone must answer for it. Put me in the Kingslayer's empty irons, and I will wear them proudly, if that is how it must be." (aSoS, Catelyn I)

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Archived

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

Guest
This topic is now closed to further replies.
×
×
  • Create New...