Jump to content

Robb's Last Document?


Casperjd2

Recommended Posts

If his lords honour Robb's command, Jon is King in the North. Doesn't even matter that Bran and Rickon are actually alive, Jon being legitimised puts him as the number one heir.

How it will play out. . .well, who knows?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Yeah, we never actually see the person Robb named. It could be Jon, but it might not be. The people alive who know about it are either in prison (possibly just released from the Twins?) or somewhere in the Neck (Maege Mormont and Galbart Glover). Not sure if it's come into play yet in a way that isn't yet evident.

If his lords honour Robb's command, Jon is King in the North. Doesn't even matter that Bran and Rickon are actually alive, Jon being legitimised puts him as the number one heir.

Not the case, necessarily. Barring political expediency or maneuvering, legitimized bastards come after all trueborn children, including girls. So Jon just being legitimized in and of itself doesn't put him ahead of Bran, Rickon, Arya and Sansa. It's implied that Sansa might be disinherited to prevent the Lannisters from controlling the north through her children with Tyrion. It all depends on how the will is worded. If Robb says something like, "I legitimize Jon Snow and name him my heir," then yeah, it's Jon. But if he says, "I legitimize Jon Snow and name him my heir in the event that my trueborn siblings are dead," then Jon is still at the bottom of the pile. If Robb is "sure" that his brothers and Arya are dead and he did disinherit Sansa, then he could very well have just named Jon the heir outright. But without actually seeing the will, there's no way to know for sure how it's worded or if Jon is even named an heir at all.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Can Robb name one of his bannermen as the king in the north? Even though he may not be related directly but there maybe 4th,5th,6th cousins

He and Catelyn talk about that. They're related to some ... Royces? ... in the Vale and the Karstarks are close kin, but political relations with them have chilled for obvious reasons.

I imagine that the pick is either Jon or someone we haven't seen considered in the book.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Oh. I didn't know.

Where does this get stated in the book?

It's on the Wiki if you look for it and I found this:

http://www.westeros....and_the_Whents/

and this:

http://www.westeros.org/Citadel/Concordance/Entry/Bastards/

Basically it comes down to politics.

Makes it interesting that a Royce was killed in the very first seen. But I just read the part and there is no actual document or Royal Decree. Robb and Cat just talk about it so no proof.

Well yeah that's the point. We don't know definitively whom Robb named.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Yeah so now I am thinking this has no real meaning to the story other than to paint a clearer picture of the honor of the Starks.

Both Rob and Jon both lop heads off people they have judged. So I think its just detail now.

It is important since once the north regroups, it will need a leader. Jon Snow has experience in leading since his time as Lord Commander, which would be an important facet. As much as I love Arya, Sansa and Bran, none of them are generals.

If Sansa is disinherited and this stands, it also means that whatever plot LF is hatching for her falls flat.

But again, it comes down to politics and shows of force more than pieces of paper.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

If Robbs Will makes Jon legitimate, it doesn't mean he becomes a Stark. Just makes him no longer a bastard.

The Great Bastards didn't become Targs, they all kept their last names or made new ones. And were not put in front of the younger heirs in line.

So Jon just being legitimate doesn't make him Heir. But if Robb makes him a Stark then Jon is put next in line if Robb if left with no issue

Link to comment
Share on other sites

If Robbs Will makes Jon legitimate, it doesn't mean he becomes a Stark. Just makes him no longer a bastard.

The Great Bastards didn't become Targs, they all kept their last names or made new ones. And were not put in front of the younger heirs in line.

So Jon just being legitimate doesn't make him Heir. But if Robb makes him a Stark then Jon is put next in line if Robb if left with no issue

It could mean he becomes a Stark. If that's the point of the legitimization, it probably will.

As to where it stands between legitimized male vs. always legit female, I just don't know. Is there any evidence of a consistently applied standard?

If anything, in a state of war, I'd see them more likely to lean towards erring on the side of the agnatic.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Yes, and not only that, he already refused the Lord of Winterfell tittle, why would he choose to become something even bigger, a king, now? No, my opinion is that this king of the north stuff is done for good.

Not the same situation at all. The first offer came from Stannis and Jon would have had to reject his family's gods. He also thought that Winterfell wasn't Stannis' to give. I think it'd be an entirely different outcome if the offer came from Robb.

If Robbs Will makes Jon legitimate, it doesn't mean he becomes a Stark. Just makes him no longer a bastard.

The Great Bastards didn't become Targs, they all kept their last names or made new ones. And were not put in front of the younger heirs in line.

So Jon just being legitimate doesn't make him Heir. But if Robb makes him a Stark then Jon is put next in line if Robb if left with no issue

For all intents and purposes, it does basically make him a "Stark." That's the point of legitimization in the first place, isn't it? He would take the family name; the Great Bastards are kind of a unique set. And if he's legitimized, he'd enter the line of succession, unless Robb specifically disinherits him (and what's the point of that?). That's why you legitimize someone, so that they can legally inherit titles and/or property. The questions are, did Robb actually legitimize Jon, and if he did, did he Robb hash out a specific succession — is it Jon free and clear, or only Jon if all the other kids are dead?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Yes, and not only that, he already refused the Lord of Winterfell tittle, why would he choose to become something even bigger, a king, now? No, my opinion is that this king of the north stuff is done for good.

Learning of Robb's will would make quite the difference.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Archived

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

×
×
  • Create New...