Cat is definitely the heir named in Robb's will

[40 Thousand Skeletons]

14 hours ago, ravenous reader said:

He doesn't trap Cat into supporting his decision; he traps her into having no other options than to go along with his will, however reluctantly.  Your argument doesn't make sense in at least one important respect -- if he were so keen on Cat as his heir (which Grey Wind's behavior emphatically refutes, but let's just say you're right about Robb's intention, for argument's sake...), why not just ask Cat to consider being his heir when they were discussing matters at Tristifer's tomb, or at least in private before the meeting?  What's unnecessary is springing it on her.  Why would she refuse?  It's perfect from her point of view.  Once she's the heir and Robb's dead, she can nominate as the next heir whomever the hell she wants, even those ridiculously far-removed relatives she had been suggesting.  And most of all, she can ensure Jon comes nowhere near Winterfell henceforth, which has always been her primary objective.  Why would she hesitate in acceding to his request? Why would she reject that power? There's no need for any trap in that case.

But again...  There is NO NEED to trap her into "having no other options than to go along with his will" if Jon is the heir. SHE ALREADY HAS NO OTHER OPTIONS!  She can complain out loud and no one will care because everyone knows she hates Jon and that's all that would happen. NO NEED FOR A TRAP!  

Aaah, but you ask a good question. Why not ask Cat right there at the end of the "trap" conversation? Well I will tell you . Because the conversation with Cat was only step 1 of a 2-step trap. Robb does not intend for Cat to simply hand over control of his kingdom to someone else (like a Stark descendant in the vale) upon his death. If that were the case, he could just name someone else. He wants her to rule, and needs her to support this decision. Even after threatening her with Jon, Cat still would have likely been reluctant to accept because she is in a broken emotional state, and she (incorrectly) believes that most of the northern lords have a fair amount of disdain for her since she released Jaime and more generally because she is a woman. So in order to complete the trap, Robb needs to show her that she already has the full support of the north.

So after his conversation with Cat went perfectly according to plan, Robb discussed making Cat the heir with all the other lords.

Quote

In the days that followed, Robb was everywhere and anywhere; riding at the head of the van with the Greatjon, scouting with Grey Wind, racing back to Robin Flint and the rearguard.

He probably also discussed moving Cat to Seagard for the duration of the war, since that would be a particularly safe location for her. Seagard is geographically protected from the Lannister armies, and House Mallister would presumably never betray Cat. But of course, Robb needed to first discuss this with Jason Mallister. And sure enough, Robb immediately halts his march and calls a meeting as soon as Lord Jason joins them on the way to the Twins.

Robb first gathers everyone else in his tent and then sends Ser Raynald to escort Cat to the meeting. Once she is there, Robb declares her to be his heir, and it is made clear to Cat that his decision already has the full support of everyone in the tent. They knew about Seagard already, and they also knew she would be named Robb's heir. With Jon as the only other viable option (a folly in Cat's mind), her earlier promise to support Robb in any decision except for naming Jon heir, and the full political support of the north thrown in her face, Cat has no choice but to accept Robb's will. What a great trap! See? Isn't that just an infinitely more satisfying and logical explanation than what you guys are saying?  

This is also a fantastic example of GRRM obfuscating the plot with coincidence. I personally think that GRRM for the most part never uses coincidences to advance the plot, but he does use them to obfuscate the plot. In this case, the coincidence is that Robb was going to call a meeting anyways as soon as they met up with Lord Mallister and he agreed to keep Cat safe at Seagard, but that fact isn't immediately apparent to readers because (somewhat) coincidentally Lord Mallister brings with him the captain of the Myraham, who brings the news of Lord Balon's death. And on its face it looks as if this news was the cause of the meeting, because they talk about taking a soon-to-be weakened Moat Cailin from the Ironborn and Robb talks about how Balon left chaos in his wake due to lacking a will, right before they sign his will. The arrival of the news of Balon obfuscates the fact that they were already going to meet to discuss the attack on Moat Cailin (which clearly was not planned in the 5 minutes between Lord Mallister arriving with the news and the subsequent meeting), and to discuss Robb's heir, something he has been thinking long and hard about.

Another example of this is the death of Tywin. Tywin was probably poisoned by Oberyn and/or Varys, and Varys allows Tyrion to kill a dying man. Similarly, according to my own theories, we have the death of King Robert. Bloodraven successfully lured Robert into the woods with first the white hart (that got devoured by wolves) and then the monstrous boar, and he was perfectly capable of killing Robert without any help. But then Cersei claims credit for the kill because she got Robert drunk. And yet another example is Arya's weasel soup. The prisoners were feigning their injuries and already had a coup planned at Harrenhal via the Brave Companions, but then Arya coincidentally decides to free the prisoners and launch the coup herself. GRRM loves doing this shit.

EDIT: I think you are incorrectly interpreting Grey Wind's behavior. Are Grey Wind and Robb telepathically linked, and Grey Wind constantly expressing Robb's inner emotions? Definitely! But you are wrongly associating Grey Wind's bared teeth with Cat's disagreement over Jon being the heir. You said:

Quote

When Cat starts to argue against Jon's and therefore Ghost's authority as head of the pack, Grey Wind leaps up onto the grave at the foot of the king (hint hint) baring his teeth to her.

This is not totally correct. When Cat starts to argue against Jon being the heir, Grey Wind at first does nothing. They continue to argue calmly for another 90 seconds or so after Cat says a Snow is not a Stark. It is only after Cat brings up Theon's betrayal and compares Theon to Jon that Robb gets angry. Robb had expected Cat to argue against Jon and was not angered by that alone. Here is the full quote:

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.”

“Jon is a brother of the Night’s Watch, sworn to take no wife and hold no lands. Those who take the black serve for life.”

“So do the knights of the Kingsguard. That did not stop the Lannisters from stripping the white cloaks from Ser Barristan Selmy and Ser Boros Blount when they had no more use for them. If I send the Watch a hundred men in Jon’s place, I’ll wager they find some way to release him from his vows.”

He is set on this. Catelyn knew how stubborn her son could be. “A bastard cannot inherit.”

“Not unless he’s legitimized by a royal decree,” said Robb. “There is more precedent for that than for releasing a Sworn Brother from his oath.”

“Precedent,” she said bitterly. “Yes, Aegon the Fourth legitimized all his bastards on his deathbed. And how much pain, grief, war, and murder grew from that? I know you trust Jon. But can you trust his sons? Or their sons? The Blackfyre pretenders troubled the Targaryens for five generations, until Barristan the Bold slew the last of them on the Stepstones. If you make Jon legitimate, there is no way to turn him bastard again. Should he wed and breed, any sons you may have by Jeyne will never be safe.”

“Jon would never harm a son of mine.”

“No more than Theon Greyjoy would harm Bran or Rickon?”

Grey Wind leapt up atop King Tristifer’s crypt, his teeth bared. Robb’s own face was cold. “That is as cruel as it is unfair. Jon is no Theon.”

 

 

[Luddagain]

This is possibly the most a-historical comment i have ever read on this site.

Firstly children do not make the parents their heirs today or in the middle ages.  It is assumed they will die first so making them heirs is not advised (try making a will for example)

The whole point of an heir is to ensure smooth trouble free succession and naming Catelyn would be silly because she has no heirs.  If she took a new husband you are suggesting that some child of hers by an unknown man or her nephew Robin should be the heir.That is beyond stupid and Robb may be silly sometimes but not that silly.

Making her a regent is of course quite possible and even likely and had any one of Robb's siblings been alive then I have little doubt that he would have named her regent or co-regent.If Jeyne had a child then that too would be possible.

I must admit I rather thought that GRRM would have actually have a plot line such that Catelyn herself was pregnant with a sixth child (it was hinted at in her first chapter) which would have been a nice confusing touch but he obviously abandoned the idea.

However the idea that Catelyn would be the official heir to Winterfell is truly absurd. Not only would it go against the rules of inheritance in the South it obviously would breach the whole First men ethos of the North.

Of course IF Robb or any of the Starks do have a child then that child is in a very powerful position potentially, being heir to both The North and Riverun (probably as I think Edmure is sterile - the whole floppy fish song). Now should Bran and Rickon have no heirs and should Sansa eventually marry Robin (or Harry the heir) her children would be heirs to THREE kingdoms. 

 

[40 Thousand Skeletons]

1 minute ago, Luddagain said:

This is possibly the most a-historical comment i have ever read on this site.

Firstly children do not make the parents their heirs today or in the middle ages.  It is assumed they will die first so making them heirs is not advised (try making a will for example)

The whole point of an heir is to ensure smooth trouble free succession and naming Catelyn would be silly because she has no heirs.  If she took a new husband you are suggesting that some child of hers by an unknown man or her nephew Robin should be the heir.That is beyond stupid and Robb may be silly sometimes but not that silly.

Making her a regent is of course quite possible and even likely and had any one of Robb's siblings been alive then I have little doubt that he would have named her regent or co-regent.If Jeyne had a child then that too would be possible.

I must admit I rather thought that GRRM would have actually have a plot line such that Catelyn herself was pregnant with a sixth child (it was hinted at in her first chapter) which would have been a nice confusing touch but he obviously abandoned the idea.

However the idea that Catelyn would be the official heir to Winterfell is truly absurd. Not only would it go against the rules of inheritance in the South it obviously would breach the whole First men ethos of the North.

Of course IF Robb or any of the Starks do have a child then that child is in a very powerful position potentially, being heir to both The North and Riverun (probably as I think Edmure is sterile - the whole floppy fish song). Now should Bran and Rickon have no heirs and should Sansa eventually marry Robin (or Harry the heir) her children would be heirs to THREE kingdoms. 

 

Exactly, the whole point of choosing an heir is to ensure a smooth succession and the stability of your kingdom, and that is precisely why Cat is the best choice.

Just for a moment, pretend that Jon is disqualified based on his dual status of being 1) a bastard and 2) a sworn brother of the Night's Watch. Who could Robb possibly choose that would be a better choice than Cat? She would maintain the political status quo, i.e. no one would immediately be angered over a rival House being named to the regency, and she could preserve the alliance between the north and riverlands and the newly independent kingdom that contains them. AND, if Jeyne is pregnant when Robb dies, Cat is by far the best choice to ensure that his child will be protected and eventually rule the north.

This idea is not nearly as "absurd" as you are making it out to be. 

[Ygrain]

Very well, then, let us return to the very core of the argument: why does Robb need to name an heir? To avoid a succession crisis, the like of which happened after Balon's death - but that's not the only time we see a succession crisis, nor is it an exact parallel, because Balon had some blood relatives left. The matter of Stark succession is more like that of the Hornwoods - with Lord Hornwood and his legitimate sons dead, there starts a chase for poor Lady Hornwood's hand, because the guy who marries her gets the lands. So: how exactly does naming Cat his heir prevent the succesion crisis? How does it prevent a competition of Lords with eyes on the prize, Winterfell? How does it preserve the Stark bloodline?

Curiously, a solution suggested in the Hornwood case is exactly the same that Robb makes: legitimizing the late Lord's bastard.

 

[kissdbyfire]

@40 Thousand Skeletons, Bloodraven killed Robert?

 

[Prof. Cecily]

1 hour ago, Ygrain said:

Very well, then, let us return to the very core of the argument: why does Robb need to name an heir? To avoid a succession crisis, the like of which happened after Balon's death - but that's not the only time we see a succession crisis, nor is it an exact parallel, because Balon had some blood relatives left. The matter of Stark succession is more like that of the Hornwoods - with Lord Hornwood and his legitimate sons dead, there starts a chase for poor Lady Hornwood's hand, because the guy who marries her gets the lands. So: how exactly does naming Cat his heir prevent the succesion crisis? How does it prevent a competition of Lords with eyes on the prize, Winterfell? How does it preserve the Stark bloodline?

Curiously, a solution suggested in the Hornwood case is exactly the same that Robb makes: legitimizing the late Lord's bastard.

 

Snap!

The Hornwood case was on my mind, too!

[40 Thousand Skeletons]

3 hours ago, Ygrain said:

Very well, then, let us return to the very core of the argument: why does Robb need to name an heir? To avoid a succession crisis, the like of which happened after Balon's death - but that's not the only time we see a succession crisis, nor is it an exact parallel, because Balon had some blood relatives left. The matter of Stark succession is more like that of the Hornwoods - with Lord Hornwood and his legitimate sons dead, there starts a chase for poor Lady Hornwood's hand, because the guy who marries her gets the lands. So: how exactly does naming Cat his heir prevent the succesion crisis? How does it prevent a competition of Lords with eyes on the prize, Winterfell? How does it preserve the Stark bloodline?

Curiously, a solution suggested in the Hornwood case is exactly the same that Robb makes: legitimizing the late Lord's bastard.

Hornwood did not experience a succession crisis. Hornwood passed to Lady Hornwood (originally a Manderly) after her husband and son died. Just like Lady Dustin (originally a Ryswell) inherited Barrowton after her husband died at the ToJ. No crisis there either. Just nice, smooth transitions of ownership and power. House Greyjoy experienced a crisis specifically because nobody was named as Balon's heir, so everyone had to compete for his crown immediately following his death, hence the crisis situation.

Naming Cat as heir would not prevent a competition among the northern Lords to marry her. It would be a similar situation to Lysa in the Eyrie. But that is not a crisis situation at all. That's just politics. Naming Cat would also not preserve the Stark bloodline. But if Robb decided that Jon was not a viable option due to being a bastard in the NW, then there is no choice that can preserve the Stark bloodline, so he might as well name Cat. You could argue that Robb could name a distant relation in the Vale or the closest Stark through the female line in the north or something like that, but really as long as Cat marries into a northern house again her children should have some amount of "Stark blood" in them.

[Red Man Racey]

2 minutes ago, 40 Thousand Skeletons said:

Hornwood did not experience a succession crisis. Hornwood passed to Lady Hornwood (originally a Manderly) after her husband and son died. Just like Lady Dustin (originally a Ryswell) inherited Barrowton after her husband died at the ToJ. No crisis there either. Just nice, smooth transitions of ownership and power. House Greyjoy experienced a crisis specifically because nobody was named as Balon's heir, so everyone had to compete for his crown immediately following his death, hence the crisis situation.

Naming Cat as heir would not prevent a competition among the northern Lords to marry her. It would be a similar situation to Lysa in the Eyrie. But that is not a crisis situation at all. That's just politics. Naming Cat would also not preserve the Stark bloodline. But if Robb decided that Jon was not a viable option due to being a bastard in the NW, then there is no choice that can preserve the Stark bloodline, so he might as well name Cat. You could argue that Robb could name a distant relation in the Vale or the closest Stark through the female line in the north or something like that, but really as long as Cat marries into a northern house again her children should have some amount of "Stark blood" in them.

This relies on the supposition that Robb concludes that Jon is not an option. What's the evidence that he ever reaches this conclusion? The only evidence we see is to the contrary, that Robb has intentions of legitimizing Jon and he even mentions removing Jon from the Night's Watch. There is no evidence that he decides against this course of action. Since it appears that Robb did not reach the conclusion that there was no way to preserve the Stark bloodline, then why would he ever name Cat as heir?

[kissdbyfire]

9 minutes ago, 40 Thousand Skeletons said:

Hornwood did not experience a succession crisis. Hornwood passed to Lady Hornwood (originally a Manderly) after her husband and son died. Just like Lady Dustin (originally a Ryswell) inherited Barrowton after her husband died at the ToJ. No crisis there either. Just nice, smooth transitions of ownership and power. House Greyjoy experienced a crisis specifically because nobody was named as Balon's heir, so everyone had to compete for his crown immediately following his death, hence the crisis situation.

But the Hornwood widow ended up marrying against her will, to Ramsay Bolton no less, who through this marriage got her lands then left her to die of starvation. Yeah, real smooth. 

Quote

Naming Cat as heir would not prevent a competition among the northern Lords to marry her. It would be a similar situation to Lysa in the Eyrie. But that is not a crisis situation at all. That's just politics. Naming Cat would also not preserve the Stark bloodline.

No, it wouldn't. And if Cat remarries and has more children, the whole thing would get even messier.

 

Quote

But if Robb decided that Jon was not a viable option due to being a bastard in the NW, then there is no choice that can preserve the Stark bloodline, so he might as well name Cat. You could argue that Robb could name a distant relation in the Vale or the closest Stark through the female line in the north or something like that, but really as long as Cat marries into a northern house again her children should have some amount of "Stark blood" in them.

Why on earth would he decide that if he is the one arguing that a bastard can be legitimised via royal decree and that the NW would release Jon if he were to send them 100 men?

As to the second bold, following this logic everyone and their dogs direwoves have a few drops of Stark blood in the north.

[40 Thousand Skeletons]

1 minute ago, kissdbyfire said:

But the Hornwood widow ended up marrying against her will, to Ramsay Bolton no less, who through this marriage got her lands then left her to die of starvation. Yeah, real smooth. 

But that was later. And that only happened because Ramsey is a damn psychopath who forced a marriage on her then flayed the skin off all her fingers and locked her in a room to starve to death in horrible pain, pain so excruciating that she attempted to bite off her own fingers before dying. But she inherited Hornwood with no problems. Did she have pressure to remarry? Sure, and so would Cat in this scenario. But that simply means that Cat will need to choose the most politically viable husband when the time comes and try not to get her fingers flayed by a Bolton.

6 minutes ago, kissdbyfire said:

No, it wouldn't. And if Cat remarries and has more children, the whole thing would get even messier.

Who cares how messy it gets?

6 minutes ago, kissdbyfire said:

Why on earth would he decide that if he is the one arguing that a bastard can be legitimised via royal decree and that the NW would release Jon if he were to send them 100 men?

As to the second bold, following this logic everyone and their dogs direwoves have a few drops of Stark blood. 

In case you missed the entire point of the OP, that whole conversation was a trap. Robb was being totally disingenuous. Yes, Robb could probably legitimize Jon and get him released from his vows, but he and Cat both fail to mention the fact that many northerners would never accept a bastard oathbreaker as their king.

And yes, everyone in the north and their brother has a few drops of Stark blood. GRRM purposefully alludes to this fundamental truth with the very existence of House Karstark. Rickard, before getting his head chopped off, names Robb a kinslayer, which is logical. Everyone knows that the Karstarks originally came from a branch of House Stark. Except for the fact that the Stark-Karstark split was a thousand years ago. If we are going to consider cousins who are a thousand years-worth of generations removed from each other as "kin", then everyone is kin. Unless you isolate your bloodline via incest like the Valyrians did, your genes get spread around the map pretty well over the course of 50 generations.

@40 Thousand Skeletons, Bloodraven killed Robert?

LOL yes , feel free to read my ~26,000 word grand theory on Bloodraven and the weirnet if you have the time and want your mind blown a million times! That sneaky bastard and his greenseer pals inside the weirnet are responsible for pretty much the entire plot.  

Robert was lured out into the woods at the perfect moment to spark the Wot5K first by a rumor of a white hart (suspiciously devoured by wolves) in the kingswood, and then by sightings of the monstrous boar deeper in the woods. And when the boar kills Robert, he stabs the boar in the eye and later declares the boar to be a bastard sent by the gods. So... Bloodraven did it. Obviously these hints alone aren't super convincing. But if you think like I do that it is likely BR also sent (and killed) Bran's assassin, things start to look much more nefarious.

Super summary: Why arm the assassin with Littlefinger's dagger? Really, why arm him at all? It is pretty easy to kill a small child in a coma (not that I have much experience in that department). Obviously the reason for arming the assassin with LF's dagger was specifically to plant the dagger as evidence of an apparent failed attempt on Bran's life. But if that's the case, the only person who could have possibly known the attempt would end in failure is the wolf who tore out the throat of the assassin, or more accurately Bloodraven who was probably warging Summer at the time. The attempt and the dagger cause Cat to go to KL and then capture Tyrion, which pisses off Tywin, and Ned specifically refuses a proposed peace deal with the Lannisters because he looks at the dagger and thinks about the fact that they tried to kill Bran, which we obviously know not to be true. So long story short, planting the dagger and killing Robert were the 2 main events that started the Wot5K, and there is evidence that the weirnet/BR was responsible for both events.

More generally, the story written by GRRM that most heavily parallels asoiaf is arguably And Seven Times Never Kill Man. The story has a primitive race of hairy people called the Jaenshi who live in balance with nature and worship/are telepathically controlled by strange pyramids scattered over their lands. Each colony has one pyramid, just like how each village or castle in asoiaf has its weirwood. The Jaenshi are obviously similar to the COTF, and the pyramids are similar to the weirwoods. The basic plot is that an extremist religious group of humans start taking over the Jaenshi territory on the planet and they destroy all the pyramids as they go along, just like men slaughtering the COTF and cutting down their weirwoods. To defeat the humans, the pyramids send telepathic visions to their leader and convince the humans to burn their winter food supply and kill their children. And on a larger scale, this is exactly what happened with the Wot5K. The weirnet successfully manipulated humans into burning their winter food supply (thanks, Tywin, you asshole) and killing their children (via going to war with each other).

But I don't want to open that whole can of worms here!  Feel free to check out that link

[40 Thousand Skeletons]

37 minutes ago, Red Man Racey said:

This relies on the supposition that Robb concludes that Jon is not an option. What's the evidence that he ever reaches this conclusion? The only evidence we see is to the contrary, that Robb has intentions of legitimizing Jon and he even mentions removing Jon from the Night's Watch. There is no evidence that he decides against this course of action. Since it appears that Robb did not reach the conclusion that there was no way to preserve the Stark bloodline, then why would he ever name Cat as heir?

No, I'm not relying on suppositions. I am saying that it must have been obvious to Robb that Jon would be forever viewed as a bastard and a NW deserter by at least some portion of northerners. At the very least, this is not an ideal situation. And due to these obvious obstacles to naming Jon, Robb may have concluded that Cat was the better choice.

I don't know if you read the OP, but my entire point was that the whole conversation you are referring to was a ruse. It was all part of Robb's trap. I would guess he probably did seriously consider naming Jon, but by the time he gets to that conversation with Cat, it seems that he is being totally disingenuous.

[Ygrain]

1 hour ago, 40 Thousand Skeletons said:

Hornwood did not experience a succession crisis. Hornwood passed to Lady Hornwood (originally a Manderly) after her husband and son died. Just like Lady Dustin (originally a Ryswell) inherited Barrowton after her husband died at the ToJ. No crisis there either. Just nice, smooth transitions of ownership and power. House Greyjoy experienced a crisis specifically because nobody was named as Balon's heir, so everyone had to compete for his crown immediately following his death, hence the crisis situation.

Alright then, not a succession crisis - so what should we call it then? Extinct in both male and female line because no legit heir remained? Which would be exactly the case if Robb died without issue.  And your "smooth" transition is, in fact, such an issue that it is brought to the attention of the liege to solve it - Lady Hornwood herself is aware that either she will be required to remarry ASAP, or Larence Snow will be legitimized.

As for Barbrey Dustin, we know next to nothing about the surviving members of House Dustin, she might have some nephew or something like that, just like Anya Waynwood is the head of the house while her son is her heir.

[kissdbyfire]

32 minutes ago, 40 Thousand Skeletons said:

But that was later. And that only happened because Ramsey is a damn psychopath who forced a marriage on her then flayed the skin off all her fingers and locked her in a room to starve to death in horrible pain, pain so excruciating that she attempted to bite off her own fingers before dying. But she inherited Hornwood with no problems. Did she have pressure to remarry? Sure, and so would Cat in this scenario. But that simply means that Cat will need to choose the most politically viable husband when the time comes and try not to get her fingers flayed by a Bolton.

Who cares how messy it gets?

It was soon after but it doesn't even matter how soon it was. And sure, Ramsay is a sadistic psycho but that doesn't even get into the actual succession issues since Ramsay never fathered children. You say Cat will have to choose her future husband well, but it doesn't matter how great her choice is, if she has children w/ this new hubby any Starks left would "never be safe" - her own words to Robb about possible children Jon might have. I will add that Cat still hopes Arya is alive. 

32 minutes ago, 40 Thousand Skeletons said:

In case you missed the entire point of the OP, that whole conversation was a trap. Robb was being totally disingenuous. Yes, Robb could probably legitimize Jon and get him released from his vows, but he and Cat both fail to mention the fact that many northerners would never accept a bastard oathbreaker as their king.

I will have to  a bit here... You're really saying that when Robb says Jon can be legitimised and released from his NW vows he is simply being disingenuous? 

And the bold... I'd like to know what makes you so sure of that. I'd say the northerners are much more likely to accept the right bastard oathbreaker than pretty much anyone else. And by "right" I mean a capable man with Stark blood who was chosen by the king they themselves chose. 

32 minutes ago, 40 Thousand Skeletons said:

And yes, everyone in the north and their brother has a few drops of Stark blood. GRRM purposefully alludes to this fundamental truth with the very existence of House Karstark. Rickard, before getting his head chopped off, names Robb a kinslayer, which is logical. Everyone knows that the Karstarks originally came from a branch of House Stark. Except for the fact that the Stark-Karstark split was a thousand years ago. If we are going to consider cousins who are a thousand years-worth of generations removed from each other as "kin", then everyone is kin. Unless you isolate your bloodline via incest like the Valyrians did, your genes get spread around the map pretty well over the course of 50 generations.

Har! I bolded that part and was going to make the same argument you made a few lines down!

 

32 minutes ago, 40 Thousand Skeletons said:

LOL yes , feel free to read my ~26,000 word grand theory on Bloodraven and the weirnet if you have the time and want your mind blown a million times! That sneaky bastard and his greenseer pals inside the weirnet are responsible for pretty much the entire plot.  

I have read it. Must say I disagree wholeheartedly.

And the rest I'll have to reply a bit later...

 

32 minutes ago, 40 Thousand Skeletons said:

Robert was lured out into the woods at the perfect moment to spark the Wot5K first by a rumor of a white hart (suspiciously devoured by wolves) in the kingswood, and then by sightings of the monstrous boar deeper in the woods. And when the boar kills Robert, he stabs the boar in the eye and later declares the boar to be a bastard sent by the gods. So... Bloodraven did it. Obviously these hints alone aren't super convincing. But if you think like I do that it is likely BR also sent (and killed) Bran's assassin, things start to look much more nefarious.

Super summary: Why arm the assassin with Littlefinger's dagger? Really, why arm him at all? It is pretty easy to kill a small child in a coma (not that I have much experience in that department). Obviously the reason for arming the assassin with LF's dagger was specifically to plant the dagger as evidence of an apparent failed attempt on Bran's life. But if that's the case, the only person who could have possibly known the attempt would end in failure is the wolf who tore out the throat of the assassin, or more accurately Bloodraven who was probably warging Summer at the time. The attempt and the dagger cause Cat to go to KL and then capture Tyrion, which pisses off Tywin, and Ned specifically refuses a proposed peace deal with the Lannisters because he looks at the dagger and thinks about the fact that they tried to kill Bran, which we obviously know not to be true. So long story short, planting the dagger and killing Robert were the 2 main events that started the Wot5K, and there is evidence that the weirnet/BR was responsible for both events.

More generally, the story written by GRRM that most heavily parallels asoiaf is arguably And Seven Times Never Kill Man. The story has a primitive race of hairy people called the Jaenshi who live in balance with nature and worship/are telepathically controlled by strange pyramids scattered over their lands. Each colony has one pyramid, just like how each village or castle in asoiaf has its weirwood. The Jaenshi are obviously similar to the COTF, and the pyramids are similar to the weirwoods. The basic plot is that an extremist religious group of humans start taking over the Jaenshi territory on the planet and they destroy all the pyramids as they go along, just like men slaughtering the COTF and cutting down their weirwoods. To defeat the humans, the pyramids send telepathic visions to their leader and convince the humans to burn their winter food supply and kill their children. And on a larger scale, this is exactly what happened with the Wot5K. The weirnet successfully manipulated humans into burning their winter food supply (thanks, Tywin, you asshole) and killing their children (via going to war with each other).

But I don't want to open that whole can of worms here!  Feel free to check out that link

 

[40 Thousand Skeletons]

12 minutes ago, kissdbyfire said:

It was soon after but it doesn't even matter how soon it was. And sure, Ramsay is a sadistic psycho but that doesn't even get into the actual succession issues since Ramsay never fathered children. You say Cat will have to choose her future husband well, but it doesn't matter how great her choice is, if she has children w/ this new hubby any Starks left would "never be safe" - her own words to Robb about possible children Jon might have. I will add that Cat still hopes Arya is alive.

Let me try to articulate my point differently. When Balon died, chaos ensued because the Ironborn unexpectedly lost their liege lord and king, they were in the middle of a war, and the succession was ambiguous. Theon was a prisoner and a stranger besides, and Balon hadn't named an heir in his place. By contrast, there was no crisis of inheritance/rule when control of Hornwood passed to Donella Manderly Hornwood, or when control of Barrowton passed to Barbrey Ryswell Dustin. The only consequence for Lady Hornwood as far as the succession was concerned was that a new heir be named, either via legitimization of a bastard (similar to Jon) or via Donella taking a new husband with blood ties to House Hornwood, which would be the same thing as Cat inheriting Winterfell and naming a new husband who has some sort of blood tie to House Stark. Being killed by Ramsey was a direct consequence of Ramsey being a psychopath and Donella not taking proper precautions to protect herself from said psychopath kidnapping her on the road on her way back from the Harvest Festival. And Lady Dustin will be just fine without ever remarrying, right up until the roof of the Great Hall in WF crashes on top of her head. Or at least I think that's what awaits her in TWOW.  

But yes, Cat's hope that Arya is alive would be an obstacle. 

33 minutes ago, kissdbyfire said:

I will have to  a bit here... You're really saying that when Robb says Jon can be legitimised and released from his NW vows he is simply being disingenuous? 

I think he is being serious about his threat and the practicality of legitimizing Jon/getting him out of the NW, but he is being disingenuous about his intent. He is bluffing. At this point in time (the King Tristifer convo), Robb has already decided on Cat being his heir, and this is the first step in trapping her into supporting the decision.

40 minutes ago, kissdbyfire said:

And the bold... I'd like to know what makes you so sure of that. I'd say the northerners are much more likely to accept the right bastard oathbreaker than pretty much anyone else. And by "right" I mean a capable man with Stark blood who was chosen by the king they themselves chose. 

I am just assuming based on the general comments on bastards and oathbreakers in asoiaf. Would anyone really prefer to have a known oathbreaker and bastard for their king over someone who is not those things? I just don't see why they should be so attached to "Stark blood".

53 minutes ago, kissdbyfire said:

I have read it. Must say I disagree wholeheartedly.

LOL Yes, that is the general consensus  

Just for a moment, imagine a crazy future where my theory proves to be generally correct. Imagine how stunned you would be and what a genius you would then consider me to be.

I mean, come on, it's staring us in the face . What is a werewolf? were = man, wolf = wolf, werewolf = man-wolf. Duh. Now... what is a weirwood????!!!!! Ahem...  WEIR-wood... WERE-wood??... MAN-TREE?? weirwood = werewood = man-tree  

Weirwoods are tree-people, it is known. In fact, they probably aren't even evolved from trees. They are probably just pure people, who are essentially really flexible. You know... like flexible enough to grow roots and a big tree-like appendage out of your body. Have you ever seen or heard of a weirwood acorn???!! I sure haven't.  This is me being half serious...  

[40 Thousand Skeletons]

1 hour ago, Ygrain said:

Alright then, not a succession crisis - so what should we call it then? Extinct in both male and female line because no legit heir remained? Which would be exactly the case if Robb died without issue.  And your "smooth" transition is, in fact, such an issue that it is brought to the attention of the liege to solve it - Lady Hornwood herself is aware that either she will be required to remarry ASAP, or Larence Snow will be legitimized.

As for Barbrey Dustin, we know next to nothing about the surviving members of House Dustin, she might have some nephew or something like that, just like Anya Waynwood is the head of the house while her son is her heir.

Yes, and in this scenario, it would be up to the new liege lord, Cat, to resolve the issue in an expedient and politically practical manner. The situation would be exactly the same as Lady Hornwood (hopefully minus one psychopath), and it would not resemble the chaotic scrambling of the ironborn.

That's true, we don't know much about the House Dustin situation.

[kissdbyfire]

25 minutes ago, 40 Thousand Skeletons said:

Let me try to articulate my point differently. When Balon died, chaos ensued because the Ironborn unexpectedly lost their liege lord and king, they were in the middle of a war, and the succession was ambiguous. Theon was a prisoner and a stranger besides, and Balon hadn't named an heir in his place. By contrast, there was no crisis of inheritance/rule when control of Hornwood passed to Donella Manderly Hornwood, or when control of Barrowton passed to Barbrey Ryswell Dustin. The only consequence for Lady Hornwood as far as the succession was concerned was that a new heir be named, either via legitimization of a bastard (similar to Jon) or via Donella taking a new husband with blood ties to House Hornwood, which would be the same thing as Cat inheriting Winterfell and naming a new husband who has some sort of blood tie to House Stark. Being killed by Ramsey was a direct consequence of Ramsey being a psychopath and Donella not taking proper precautions to protect herself from said psychopath kidnapping her on the road on her way back from the Harvest Festival. And Lady Dustin will be just fine without ever remarrying, right up until the roof of the Great Hall in WF crashes on top of her head. Or at least I think that's what awaits her in TWOW.  

But yes, Cat's hope that Arya is alive would be an obstacle. 

We don't disagree completely here. But my point was that the mess afterwards (new husband, children etc) would be just as bad and one someone who wants to name an heir to avoid succession problems should consider imo.

Quote

I think he is being serious about his threat and the practicality of legitimizing Jon/getting him out of the NW, but he is being disingenuous about his intent. He is bluffing. At this point in time (the King Tristifer convo), Robb has already decided on Cat being his heir, and this is the first step in trapping her into supporting the decision.

No, sorry. There's simply no indication that Robb is bluffing. None whatsoever. That would be pulling a shock/twist out of thin air, and that's not Martin's style.

Quote

I am just assuming based on the general comments on bastards and oathbreakers in asoiaf. Would anyone really prefer to have a known oathbreaker and bastard for their king over someone who is not those things? I just don't see why they should be so attached to "Stark blood".

I'd say it depends on who each individual is rather than which label they've been slapped on with.

Quote

LOL Yes, that is the general consensus  

Quote

Just for a moment, imagine a crazy future where my theory proves to be generally correct. Imagine how stunned you would be and what a genius you would then consider me to be.

Without a doubt! But I know it's not gonna happen...

 

Quote

I mean, come on, it's staring us in the face . What is a werewolf? were = man, wolf = wolf, werewolf = man-wolf. Duh. Now... what is a weirwood????!!!!! Ahem...  WEIR-wood... WERE-wood??... MAN-TREE?? weirwood = werewood = man-tree  

 

Quote

Weirwoods are tree-people, it is known. In fact, they probably aren't even evolved from trees. They are probably just pure people, who are essentially really flexible. You know... like flexible enough to grow roots and a big tree-like appendage out of your body. Have you ever seen or heard of a weirwood acorn???!! I sure haven't.  This is me being half serious...  

 

[Prof. Cecily]

3 hours ago, 40 Thousand Skeletons said:

Hornwood did not experience a succession crisis. Hornwood passed to Lady Hornwood (originally a Manderly) after her husband and son died.

Spoiler

 

Just like Lady Dustin (originally a Ryswell) inherited Barrowton after her husband died at the ToJ. No crisis there either. Just nice, smooth transitions of ownership and power. House Greyjoy experienced a crisis specifically because nobody was named as Balon's heir, so everyone had to compete for his crown immediately following his death, hence the crisis situation.

Naming Cat as heir would not prevent a competition among the northern Lords to marry her. It would be a similar situation to Lysa in the Eyrie. But that is not a crisis situation at all. That's just politics. Naming Cat would also not preserve the Stark bloodline. But if Robb decided that Jon was not a viable option due to being a bastard in the NW, then there is no choice that can preserve the Stark bloodline, so he might as well name Cat. You could argue that Robb could name a distant relation in the Vale or the closest Stark through the female line in the north or something like that, but really as long as Cat marries into a northern house again her children should have some amount of "Stark blood" in them.

 

 

Mmmm.

Just recently I read this chapter on my third rereading of ACOK.

How do you interpret these texts in terms of an inheritance crisis?

Quote

"Why can't you marry her?" Bran asked. "You said she was comely, and Beth would have a mother."

The old knight put a hand on Bran's arm. "A kindly thought, my prince, but I am only a knight, and besides too old. I might hold her lands for a few years, but as soon as I died Lady Hornwood would find herself back in the same mire, and Beth's prospects might be perilous as well."

"Then let Lord Hornwood's bastard be the heir," Bran said, thinking of his half brother Jon.

"Then let Lord Hornwood's bastard be the heir," Bran said, thinking of his half brother Jon.

Ser Rodrik said, "That would please the Glovers, and perhaps Lord Hornwood's shade as well, but I do not think Lady Hornwood would love us. The boy is not of her blood."

"Still," said Maester Luwin, "it must be considered. Lady Donella is past her fertile years, as she said herself. If not the bastard, who?"

A Clash of Kings - Bran II

Quote

"I will, ser," said Leobald, and only then raised the matter of Lady Hornwood. Poor thing, with no husband to defend her lands nor son to inherit. His own lady wife was a Hornwood, sister to the late Lord Halys, doubtless they recalled. "An empty hall is a sad one. I had a thought to send my younger son to Lady Donella to foster as her own. Beren is near ten, a likely lad, and her own nephew. He would cheer her, I am certain, and perhaps he would even take the name Hornwood . . ."

"If he were named heir?" suggested Maester Luwin.

". . . so the House might continue," finished Leobald.

Bran knew what to say. "Thank you for the notion, my lord," he blurted out before Ser Rodrik could speak. "We will bring the matter to my brother Robb. Oh, and Lady Hornwood."

A Clash of Kings - Bran II

 

[Jon Ice-Eyes]

It really is a sign of how starved we are for good topics right now that this thread is getting any play at all. 

This theory is sub-fanfic bad. Points for close reading! But still. This isn't a high school short story assignment. 

[ravenous reader]

2 hours ago, Jon Ice-Eyes said:

It really is a sign of how starved we are for good topics right now that this thread is getting any play at all. 

This theory is sub-fanfic bad. Points for close reading! But still. This isn't a high school short story assignment. 

LOL.  Actually, @40 Thousand Skeletons's idea of exploring this is not all that silly, although I may disagree with most of his conclusions.  To be honest, the 'trap' as he correctly points out has not really been explained satisfactorily.  There are also certain subtle indications in the text that this may have happened, against all expectation.  For example, we've encountered the rationale of 'keeping ones treasures in separate purses' before, in the specific context likewise of safeguarding Robb's heirs by keeping them in separate locations from one another.  Compare:

Quote

 

A Storm of Swords - Catelyn V

Catelyn turned to her son. "I mean no offense to Lord Jason," she said stiffly, "but if I cannot continue on with you, I would sooner return to Riverrun."

"I left my wife at Riverrun. I want my mother elsewhere. If you keep all your treasures in one purse, you only make it easier for those who would rob you. After the wedding, you shall go to Seagard, that is my royal command." Robb stood, and as quick as that, her fate was settled.

 

(the heir and the spare, assuming Robb's wife might conceive)

with:

Quote

A Clash of Kings - Bran VII

"Hodor, down," said Bran. Hodor went to his knees beside the maester.

"Listen," Luwin said to Osha, "the princes . . . Robb's heirs. Not . . . not together . . . do you hear?"

The wildling woman leaned on her spear. "Aye. Safer apart. But where to take them? I'd thought, might be these Cerwyns . . ."

Here the heir and the spare represents Bran and Rickon respectively.

Reluctantly, I'll admit that GRRM may have chosen the cockamamie idea of making Cat Robb's heir, despite it making no sense on most fronts, not least from the point of view of Robb's motivation. Sometimes, GRRM's disdain for the obvious prompts him into constructing such convoluted twists in the plotlines that he neglects the healthy continuity of basic characterisation.  A classic case in point is the solution of Joffrey as the one who organised Bran's assassination attempt.  The whole (un)familiarity-with-Valyrian-steel schtick (and don't get me started on those ellipses...) is so stretched and trite to the point of being unconvincing, not to mention the flimsy motivation, on the one hand, as well as inexplicable lack of motivation, on the other hand, we are expected to swallow regarding the roles in the whole affair of Joffrey and Cersei, respectively.  But at least we were surprised -- Ha!  Gotcha!  

[Darkstream]

6 hours ago, 40 Thousand Skeletons said:

Just for a moment, imagine a crazy future where my theory proves to be generally correct. Imagine how stunned you would be and what a genius you would then consider me to be.

Honestly, this seems to be the driving factor behind all of the theories I've seen you put forth. I get the impression that you are just rolling the dice against the odds, in the hopes that you fluke out, making you look like a genius. 

Robb naming Cat as his heir is absurdly illogical, is not supported by the text - and in fact contradicts the text - and all evidence you've used to support this theory relies on some unfounded supposition that Robb is feigning ignorance, in order to set an unnecessary trap. Why would he need to trap Cat into becoming the most powerful person in the North? That just doesn't make any sense at all. Being named heir would give Cat the power to do whatever she wished, and insure that Jon would never have the opportunity to inherit Winterfell - something she is vehemently against. Why wouldn't she jump at this opportunity, instead of having to be manipulated into accepting it?