Jump to content

Karstarks are the Real Starks


TurkJedi

Recommended Posts

In Westeros, house name is carried by sons through generations, except Dorne. Starks aren't from the male line of the ancient Stark Kings as Brandon the Daughterless was succeeded by his daughter's son by Bael the Bard. On the other hand, founder of the House Karstark is Karlon Stark, a legitimate son of a King Stark and we have no reason to believe their line was distrupted. So why the hell nobody considers Karstarks as a replacement for Starks, when the Starks of Winterfell are on the verge of extinction?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Who says the Bael story is true? Who says Karstark was formed before Bael? Why would House Stark look to what had become a separate and distinct house when the king had a grandson through his daughter? Viserys I chose his daughter and her sons to succeed him rather than any male line Targ kin.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

The Bael Story mentions Lord Starks, not King Starks. Therefore it is fair to assume that the story takes place in a Westeros ruled by Targaryens, so it can't be more than 300 hundreds years old. Karstarks on the other hand were founded way before that, in the age of kings. For the why part, as i said house names are carried by sons and their sons most of the time and it isn't unheard of for a man to take up the arms of a great house because of lack of heirs. We have Harrold Hardyng as a recent case, his father is from a lesser house in Vale and he will become the next Lord Arryn nevertheless if Robin dies. A Karstark have a much more legitimate claim to the North than a Hardyng does to the Vale. Also I meant today's storyline when i said Starks were on the verge of extinction. Robb is dead, Bran can't reproduce, Rickon will probably die, Arya is very unlikely to have kids Sansa is about to marry the future Vale Lord and Jon is more Targaryen than Stark in addition to being a bastard. In this case I believe Harrion Karstark has a very legitimate claim to the North and can be designated as heir and take up the direwolf banner if he ever returns to the North.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

And his mother is a Stark, so he is genetically 50:50. But he's 100% culturally a Stark.

As for the others, the only evidence for Rickon dying is the name of his wolf, Luwin could be wrong to think Bran can't have kids, I find it unlikely Sansa's marriage will go through or last and Arya is primaopposed to her role in life being reduced to motherhood, rather than having kids per se.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, TurkJedi said:

The Bael Story mentions Lord Starks, not King Starks. Therefore it is fair to assume that the story takes place in a Westeros ruled by Targaryens, so it can't be more than 300 hundreds years old.

Ygritte is famously ignorant of kneeler customs, traditions and titles, so it tells very little.

Also, in her story "One o’ his lords peeled the skin off him and wore him for a cloak.”, which must have meant Bolton, and the last time Bolton stood up to Stark was something like seven hundred years ago. Ygritte's story might be an amalgam of two or more actual events from different times, possibly with a healthy dose of pure BS.

2 hours ago, TurkJedi said:

On the other hand, founder of the House Karstark is Karlon Stark, a legitimate son of a King Stark and we have no reason to believe their line was distrupted.

All the contrary, we have every reason to believe that (if by "disrupted" you mean "a distaff relative changing his surname when inheriting the seat"): simply said, shit happens. Like it did for House Hornwood (proposed solution? Beren Tallhart takes his lady mother's surname and, as Beren Hornwood, becomes heir to the Hornwood).

House Karstark is a thousand years old, inevitably shit has happened to them a few times, too. Just like right now, it's quite probable that Karhold will be inherited by the offspring of Alys Karstark and the Magnar of Thenn. Who, in all likeliness, will take the name Karstark.

And the Vale of Arryn sure as hell isn't going to become the Vale of Hardyng, should Littlerobin kick the bucket without fathering any children of his own.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

These Houses are thousands of years old; I doubt any one of them could claim to be unbroken in the main line for that amount of time. Every House, at some point, will have been carried on by a daughter and her children.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, Ferocious Veldt Roarer said:

Ygritte is famously ignorant of kneeler customs, traditions and titles, so it tells very little.

Also, in her story "One o’ his lords peeled the skin off him and wore him for a cloak.”, which must have meant Bolton, and the last time Bolton stood up to Stark was something like seven hundred years ago. Ygritte's story might be an amalgam of two or more actual events from different times, possibly with a healthy dose of pure BS.

I seem to forgot the story was told by Ygritte and the Bolton part which i also forgot seems incompatible with what i said, so i don't know which comes first but i believe that the story isn't bs. Jon knew the Stark history and i remember that even if he didn't believe the story immediately he couldn't rule it out too, there must be a hole in that part of Stark history. But i've finished the books like 3 years ago so that may be wrong too.

I also agree that there is a possibility that today's Karstark line was distrupted but there is also a possibility that it wasn't, a much bigger possibility than Winterfell Starks descending from the male line.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

16 hours ago, TurkJedi said:

Jon is more Targaryen than Stark

Why? If anything, he's a lot more Stark than Targaryen since genetically he is 50 - 50 but culturally he is 100% Stark. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

14 minutes ago, kissdbyfire said:

Why? If anything, he's a lot more Stark than Targaryen since genetically he is 50 - 50 but culturally he is 100% Stark. 

If the RLJ hypothesis turns out to be true then, going by Jon's grandparents, genetically he is:

25% Blackwood

25% Targaryen

50% Stark - Rickard and Lyarra were both Starks and close cousins

Culturally he indeed is 100% Northman with Stark inclinations :)

If we go to great-grandparents, a cute fact is that the 25% Blackwood and 25% Targaryen part does not change due to sibling incest. So:

25% Blackwood

25% Targaryen

25% Stark

12,5% Mountain Flints

12,5% Locke

12,5% = 1/8th

Lots of blood of the First Men on BOTH sides :)

 

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

5 minutes ago, TMIFairy said:

If the RLJ hypothesis turns out to be true then, going by Jon's grandparents, genetically he is:

25% Blackwood

25% Targaryen

50% Stark - Rickard and Lyarra were both Starks and close cousins

Culturally he indeed is 100% Northman with Stark inclinations :)

If we go to great-grandparents, a cute fact is that the 25% Blackwood and 25% Targaryen part does not change due to sibling incest. So:

25% Blackwood

25% Targaryen

25% Stark

12,5% Mountain Flints

12,5% Locke

12,5% = 1/8th

Lots of blood of the First Men on BOTH sides :)

 

 

 

 I obviously went just for the parents, but nice breakdown. :)

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

22 minutes ago, kissdbyfire said:

 I obviously went just for the parents, but nice breakdown. :)

Glad you found it of interest, My Lady :)

Such a detailed breakdown at the next level might not be possible, as I do not think GRRM published Locke, Flint or Blackwood genealogies.

I suppose I was inspired by a family chart for Elrond the Half Elven, down to the 1/16th (or 6,25%) Maia ...

Link to comment
Share on other sites

19 hours ago, TurkJedi said:

In Westeros, house name is carried by sons through generations, except Dorne. Starks aren't from the male line of the ancient Stark Kings as Brandon the Daughterless was succeeded by his daughter's son by Bael the Bard. On the other hand, founder of the House Karstark is Karlon Stark, a legitimate son of a King Stark and we have no reason to believe their line was distrupted. So why the hell nobody considers Karstarks as a replacement for Starks, when the Starks of Winterfell are on the verge of extinction?

Except a running theme is that male-line succession is stupid. And there's some evidence that it's an Andal idea anyway, so it may not even apply to Starks before Andalization.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

21 hours ago, TurkJedi said:

In Westeros, house name is carried by sons through generations, except Dorne.

In Westeros a house name is carried by sons and heirs. By Westerosi customs a land or a castle cannot change it's ruling family naturally through inheritance, only through usurpation or by a decision of a king/higher lord. So anyone who inherits, say, the North, is retaining or gaining a Stark surname no matter what. If a heir is a daughter, her husband gets her surname and not other way around, like what happened during a Lannister history; if a heir is a bastard, he gets legitimised and gets the surname like what was discussed about the Hornwood issue; if a heir is a member of another house, he changes his surname, like we know would happens if Harry Hardyng inherits the Vale. So if the story of Bael the Bard was true, his son was as true Stark as any others because he legitimately inherited the North as a Stark through his mother. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Assuming the story is true, it doesn't change much.

The system the OP is describing is agnatic primogeniture, where only males of an unbroken male line can inherit. Winterfell has never been held by a woman in her own right, but we see quite clearly in Westeros that most seats are inherited by agnatic-cognatic systems, so women can both have claims and pass them to their children. Clearly Winterfell is one such seat.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

9 hours ago, kissdbyfire said:

Why? If anything, he's a lot more Stark than Targaryen since genetically he is 50 - 50 but culturally he is 100% Stark. 

Not to mention the words of one Aemon Targaryen: 

"You are a son of Winterfell, a nephew of Benjen Stark. It must be you or no one."

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Archived

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

×
×
  • Create New...