Jump to content

What if Ned Stark attempted to install Jon Snow as King after the TOJ?


Frey Kings

Recommended Posts

It's silly to say the realm wanted the Targaryens gone when Robert had to use his Targaryen bloodline to make his claim.  The Martells and the Tyrells obviously wanted them around.

Jon's paternity would have been doubted even back then even if R+L was true.  Ned could never have pulled it off.  Viserys was the true king.  So if you want to talk about honor, it should have been him on throne.  He was chosen and crowned.  He was their king.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

20 minutes ago, Moiraine Sedai said:

It's silly to say the realm wanted the Targaryens gone when Robert had to use his Targaryen bloodline to make his claim.  The Martells and the Tyrells obviously wanted them around.

Jon's paternity would have been doubted even back then even if R+L was true.  Ned could never have pulled it off.  Viserys was the true king.  So if you want to talk about honor, it should have been him on throne.  He was chosen and crowned.  He was their king.

Viserys was never king in anyone's mind except his own. Aerys might have made him his heir, but if so, that choice died with him. That might have changed had Viserys been stable enough to fulfill the marriage pact signed between Oberyn and Darry, and invaded Westeros and claimed the Iron Throne. But he wasn't, and he couldn't. He was just an exiled son of a dead king with a queen's crown. And if the Targaryens had won the war and Rhaegar and/or his son lived, I doubt Aerys would have found much support if he had tried to assert Viserys as his successor over Rhaegar and his son. In certain circumstances a king might be able to choose their heir, but I doubt that would have flown in a case where there were clear male heirs and a clear succession.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

23 minutes ago, Bael's Bastard said:

Viserys was never king in anyone's mind except his own. Aerys might have made him his heir, but if so, that choice died with him. That might have changed had Viserys been stable enough to fulfill the marriage pact signed between Oberyn and Darry, and invaded Westeros and claimed the Iron Throne. But he wasn't, and he couldn't. He was just an exiled son of a dead king with a queen's crown. And if the Targaryens had won the war and Rhaegar and/or his son lived, I doubt Aerys would have found much support if he had tried to assert Viserys as his successor over Rhaegar and his son. In certain circumstances a king might be able to choose their heir, but I doubt that would have flown in a case where there were clear male heirs and a clear succession.

Which son of Rhaegar? Jon (assuming we find out that Rhaegar is his father) or Aegon son of Elia?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

23 hours ago, Freys Injustice said:

It would be the honorable thing to do.

It would have been a supremely stupid thing to do.

There is a good reason for why Ned would take Jon to raise as his bastard son -- it's because no other path would have guaranteed his safety. Any other path would have endangered the remaining Starks, who had already been reduced to just himself, his son and Benjen, thanks to this war. Just the fact that Jon would have been born Rhaegar's son would have been justification enough for half the realm to want him dead. If he had blown Jon's cover immediately by declaring him king - or even letting anyone outside of those who already knew (like Howland, possibly Wylla and Ashara as well) - put Jon in immediate danger.

Lyanna probably wanted her newborn baby to be safe and healthy before a figurehead for another war.

I just don't foresee a situation where Ned would ever have taken his path even in a fun fantasy "What If" setting. There is no logical, practical or personal reason why Ned would have done something so supremely idiotic.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

54 minutes ago, Bael's Bastard said:

Viserys was never king in anyone's mind except his own. Aerys might have made him his heir, but if so, that choice died with him. That might have changed had Viserys been stable enough to fulfill the marriage pact signed between Oberyn and Darry, and invaded Westeros and claimed the Iron Throne. But he wasn't, and he couldn't. He was just an exiled son of a dead king with a queen's crown. And if the Targaryens had won the war and Rhaegar and/or his son lived, I doubt Aerys would have found much support if he had tried to assert Viserys as his successor over Rhaegar and his son. In certain circumstances a king might be able to choose their heir, but I doubt that would have flown in a case where there were clear male heirs and a clear succession.

I am afraid you are wrong. King Aerys named him heir. Queen Rhaella crowned him. Both Daenerys and GRRM recognized him as Viserys III. He is definitely a true Targ king, just could not rule since he was on exile. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, purple-eyes said:

I am afraid you are wrong. King Aerys named him heir. Queen Rhaella crowned him. Both Daenerys and GRRM recognized him as Viserys III. He is definitely a true Targ king, just could not rule since he was on exile. 

So I guess that Aegon son of Rhaegar is chopped liver?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, Faera said:

I just don't foresee a situation where Ned would ever have taken his path even in a fun fantasy "What If" setting. There is no logical, practical or personal reason why Ned would have done something so supremely idiotic.

:agree:

Ned saw Robert as his king and Stannis after him, he was 100% invested in the Baratheon dynasty and was in no hurry to declare Jon a Targaryen. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

6 hours ago, PCK said:

Would have needed support of the Tyrells & the Reach for it to even have a hope of being successful. I think Ned prioritized Jon's safety over fighting another war and seating him on a throne.

Tyrells would have a baby daughter just about that time, good for betrothal, ready to marry when her rose blooms. Mace guarantees her daughter to be a queen 15 years before than it was in the series. Also it was Ned who lifted the siege of SE and he and Mace didn't cross swords and I don't think Ned accepted their surrender in anything less than in an honorable way so no bad feelings either, unlike with Stannis.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 11/17/2017 at 3:29 AM, Pikachu101 said:

When it comes to Ned's relationship with Jon I don't think he knew what to do with him. When he was leaving for King's Landing he just expected Jon to hang around Winterfell with 0 future prospects, it was Jon who took the initiative to join the NW. Honestly I would love to know what Ned was planning on doing with his nephew because he certainly wasn't going to crown him.

Eh, I don't know about this. I think Ned figured he had plenty of time to get his ducks in a row. One of things that came up with Ned is that he still saw Jon as a child even though he was fourteen. When Catelyn wants Jon sent away, his reply is that Jon is just a boy. When he hears that Robb called the banners and is marching, his reply is that Robb is just a boy. When Sansa's betrothal comes up, he thinks that she is only eleven.

Catelyn was twelve when she was betrothed to Brandon who was fourteen.

Robb who was the heir to Winterfell was not promised to anyone. Ironically enough, had he been promised to someone, we might have avoided the whole Frey and Westerling debacles.

Ned was fostered out at the age of eight, but choose to keep the children at Winterfell.

It doesn't seem like Ned was in any kind of a hurry to separate from any of the children, Jon included.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

What if Ned Stark attempted to install Jon Snow as King after the TOJ?

Ned would have nothing to base Jon's claim on.  Jon is not the son of Rhaegar.  Even if he were he is still a bastard.  I can't see anyone outside of the most loyal of the north supporting such a stupid move.  That would have sparked another rebellion. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

10 hours ago, Tygett Lannister said:

Ned might be the most honorable man in Westeros but he wasn't that stupid to install Jon as king.

It would spark another rebellion because Jon has no claim whatsoever.  Jon is just a long faced bastard of unknown parentage to most people.  Besides, Viserys was already crowned on Dragonstone.  Viserys was the rightful king, chosen by Aerys and crowned by Rhaella.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, Tour De Force said:

It would spark another rebellion because Jon has no claim whatsoever.  Jon is just a long faced bastard of unknown parentage to most people.  Besides, Viserys was already crowned on Dragonstone.  Viserys was the rightful king, chosen by Aerys and crowned by Rhaella.

Totally. I can't wait for those decrees to be pulled from some maester to show this is true. I mean, a maester could have done this 18 years ago to avoid a lot of the rumors, war and confusion, and putting of the "wrong" people on the throne... but whatever :dunno:. Who needs actual decrees over rumors anyway?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

War brings hell.  Rhaegar brought hell down on everyone's heads.  That Rhaegar abducted Lyanna is the general belief.  People will blame him for their woes and suffering during the war with Robert.  Say Aerys won the war and still decided to choose Viserys over Rhaegar.  The people will approve because Viserys is still young and an unknown.  Rhaegar by then was a proven disaster, a philandering prince whose royal penis forced the kingdom to war.   If I recall correctly, Varys advised his king to pick Viserys over Rhaegar. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Just now, Widow's Watch said:

And yet, they don't. The only person who ever had something negative to say about the guy is Robert. 

We have not had a large enough sampling of how people feel about Rhaegar. 

All the people know is the realm was wealthy and the economy was booming until Rhaegar kidnapped Lyanna and caused the war. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 minutes ago, Josette DuPres said:

War brings hell.  Rhaegar brought hell down on everyone's heads.  That Rhaegar abducted Lyanna is the general belief.  People will blame him for their woes and suffering during the war with Robert.  Say Aerys won the war and still decided to choose Viserys over Rhaegar.  The people will approve because Viserys is still young and an unknown.  Rhaegar by then was a proven disaster, a philandering prince whose royal penis forced the kingdom to war.   If I recall correctly, Varys advised his king to pick Viserys over Rhaegar. 

In this world as it is set now, the small people don't really chose shit. If you read the World book, Princess and the Queen, Rogue Prince, and now even Sons of the Dragon, you will see that it is all political maneuvering by the upper, imperial level decision makers like the High Septon or Archmaesters, etc. This is not a democratic society and what the smallfolk want means nothing. For one, look at the many Faith/7-sparrow revolts that have happened because the smallfolk did not agree with the way the uppers were making decisions that were contrary to the tenets of their faith. And this includes crowing Aegon I where "the people" were ignored because there is a clear division and out of touch reality with 99% of the lords contrary to the smallfolk opinions...

"When Queen Visenya placed a Valyrian steel circlet, studded with rubies, on her brother's head and Queen Rhaenys hailed him as, "Aegon, First of His Name, King of All Westeros, and Shield of His People," the dragons roared and the lords and knights sent up a cheer...but the smallfolk, the fisherman and field hands and goodwives, shouted loudest of all."

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Archived

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

×
×
  • Create New...