Did Jon "steal" Val?

[Dolorous Ali]

I hope so, because I'd love it to see Jon and Val together. I hate the idea of Val marrying anyone from south of the wall, except Jon. But whenever I think about this I get this sense of sadness. Like something that's gone or something with a big potential but will never happen. Maybe it's just me being dour and pessimistic but there's thing about time. I believe Jon is to lead the fight against the Others, so he has little time, and too little time if he is to become a king for relationships.

[Tagganaro]

I don't think so personally. It's one to have one as Lord of Karhold although Harrion may still live.

There are also tons of lords who hate wildlings. Jon said that wildlings would turn Ned's bannermen against Stannis. Imagine making one Lady of WF. If Mors Umber wants to drink from Mance's skull I doubt he would want to serve a wildling so closely associated with Mance.

I think they have some similarities but wildlings seem like anarchists to me and the Northmen may be somewhat savage but they are kneelers and live a life of order. So no pillaging, no stealing/raping daughters, etc. Marriages must be arranged. Bloodlines/line of succession creates order and stability.

I think it would be better for Jon to marry one of the Northern bannermen's daughters. I don't think Jon will ever actually rule the North though unless he's Rickon's regent.

Yes agreed. I don't think Jon will ever truly be King in the North, but I could see him in that position at least while Rickon is, as the regent. I do wonder how Robb's will might play into everything though. If that will shows up (which it is bound to) that will give Jon both a reason and legitimacy to be King in the North.

As far as marrying a banner mans daughter...hmm...I wonder about the girl we were introduced to earlier Manderley's daughter with the blue hair (was it Lyanna, there's so many I lose track haha).

About the wildlings- agreed that there's a lot of hatred but I like the idea that the Starks can serve as bridges between the two populations. If Jon is in control (or Rickon who obviously loves Osha) they can probably serve as intermediaries, since it seems like the wildlings love and respect the Starks as well (I guess due to the Bael the Bard storyline about sharing common blood?).

[ARYa_Nym]

Yes agreed. I don't think Jon will ever truly be King in the North, but I could see him in that position at least while Rickon is, as the regent. I do wonder how Robb's will might play into everything though. If that will shows up (which it is bound to) that will give Jon both a reason and legitimacy to be King in the North.

As far as marrying a banner mans daughter...hmm...I wonder about the girl we were introduced to earlier Manderley's daughter with the blue hair (was it Lyanna, there's so many I lose track haha).

About the wildlings- agreed that there's a lot of hatred but I like the idea that the Starks can serve as bridges between the two populations. If Jon is in control (or Rickon who obviously loves Osha) they can probably serve as intermediaries, since it seems like the wildlings love and respect the Starks as well (I guess due to the Bael the Bard storyline about sharing common blood?).

I don't believe the Bael story actually. GRRM admitted to putting legends in the story like the info we have on Bran the Builder and Lann the Clever.

Apple Martini brought up a good point. Who would have legitimized the bastard? The story sounds romanticized to me and made up. I think it was just supposed to be a parallel to Rhaegar/Lyanna and to get Jon/readers familiar with the mentality of stealing women.

I think if he should marry a bannermen's daughter only if he wants a political life in the North. If he wants to have a normal life in obscurity then maybe Val would work then. The girls' name was Wylla, lol.

I think that the North and the wildlings can mend the patch but it will take little steps. It has to be gradual. Making one Lady is a big step. The heirs will be half wildling.

[Tagganaro]

I don't believe the Bael story actually. GRRM admitted to putting legends in the story like the info we have on Bran the Builder and Lann the Clever.

Apple Martini brought up a good point. Who would have legitimized the bastard? The story sounds romanticized to me and made up. I think it was just supposed to be a parallel to Rhaegar/Lyanna and to get Jon/readers familiar with the mentality of stealing women.

I think if he should marry a bannermen's daughter only if he wants a political life in the North. If he wants to have a normal life in obscurity then maybe Val would work then. The girls' name was Wylla, lol.

I think that the North and the wildlings can mend the patch but it will take little steps. It has to be gradual. Making one Lady is a big step. The heirs will be half wildling.

Yes. Regardless of if the story is true, the wildlings seem to believe it is. Otherwise, I can't really explain why wildlings show such reverence towards Starks considering their history of war. Like I'm thinking for example of Mance's spear wives in Winterfell, one of whom gets really angry when Theon starts to recite the Stark words.

Haha, yes I forgot all the Manderley names begin with W.

Normally I think it would take gradual steps to integrate the wildlings in, but I'm not sure there's gonna be any time for it. If the Others invade soon then I imagine the North and wildlings will be forced to put their differences aside. Maybe the Karstark/Thenn marriage will help along with Jon and RIckon who are close with wildlings. If Jon is made King in the North/Regent of Rickon and names Val his Lady, I think people would have to follow along. I base this on the scene at the Wall after the wedding where the Northern Hill Lords who came to the wedding were complaining about Jon allowing the wildlings through and Jon was just like "Shut up, I'm a son of Eddard Stark" and they listened lol. He could say that to anyone.

[ARYa_Nym]

Yes. Regardless of if the story is true, the wildlings seem to believe it is. Otherwise, I can't really explain why wildlings show such reverence towards Starks considering their history of war. Like I'm thinking for example of Mance's spear wives in Winterfell, one of whom gets really angry when Theon starts to recite the Stark words.

Haha, yes I forgot all the Manderley names begin with W.

Normally I think it would take gradual steps to integrate the wildlings in, but I'm not sure there's gonna be any time for it. If the Others invade soon then I imagine the North and wildlings will be forced to put their differences aside. Maybe the Karstark/Thenn marriage will help along with Jon and RIckon who are close with wildlings. If Jon is made King in the North/Regent of Rickon and names Val his Lady, I think people would have to follow along. I base this on the scene at the Wall after the wedding where the Northern Hill Lords who came to the wedding were complaining about Jon allowing the wildlings through and Jon was just like "Shut up, I'm a son of Eddard Stark" and they listened lol. He could say that to anyone.

The wildlings believe but the Northmen have never heard the tale.

If they don't like it Ned has other children to choose from. They could favor Sansa as the regent instead provided that the Lady Lannister mess is solved by that time. Another child of Ned's would especially look better when/if it's revealed that he's not "the Ned's" son. At the very least I see him not gaining the support of House Umber which is an important house. They may support Jon as an adviser for the Others but reject him as their king.

I think it's just not politically beneficial for him to marry her. Barriston said that Targaryens made enemies where they could have made friends by marrying the wrong person/for love. I don't believe he loves Val though. He just likes her. Wylla would be much better. The Manderlys are a powerful house.

[Ragnorak]

When Ygritte tells Jon the Bael the Bard story Jon says it isn't true and Ygritte says it is a bard's truth. I think the point is that the Northmen and the Wildlings are one people. Interestingly enough according to the story when the Starks and Wildlings fight the Boltons win.

“Were they your kin?” he asked her quietly. “The two we killed?”

“No more than you are.”

“Me?” He frowned. “What do you mean?”

“You said you were the Bastard o’ Winterfell.”

So there it is—you have Bael’s blood in you, same as me.”

“It never happened,” Jon said.

She shrugged. “Might be it did, might be it didn’t. It is a good song, though. My mother used to sing it to me. She was a woman too, Jon Snow. Like yours.” She rubbed her throat where his dirk had cut her. “The song ends when they find the babe, but there is a darker end to the story. Thirty years later, when Bael was King-beyond-the-Wall and led the free folk south, it was young Lord Stark who met him at the Frozen Ford… and killed him, for Bael would not harm his own son when they met sword to sword.”

“So the son slew the father instead,” said Jon.

“Aye,” she said, “but the gods hate kinslayers, even when they kill unknowing. When Lord Stark returned from the battle and his mother saw Bael’s head upon his spear, she threw herself from a tower in her grief. Her son did not long outlive her. One o’ his lords peeled the skin off him and wore him for a cloak.”

“Your Bael was a liar,” he told her, certain now.

“No,” Ygritte said, “but a bard’s truth is different than yours or mine.

[Tagganaro]

The wildlings believe but the Northmen have never heard the tale.

If they don't like it Ned has other children to choose from. They could favor Sansa as the regent instead provided that the Lady Lannister mess is solved by that time. Another child of Ned's would especially look better when/if it's revealed that he's not "the Ned's" son. At the very least I see him not gaining the support of House Umber which is an important house. They may support Jon as an adviser for the Others but reject him as their king.

I think it's just not politically beneficial for him to marry her. Barriston said that Targaryens made enemies where they could have made friends by marrying the wrong person/for love. I don't believe he loves Val though. He just likes her. Wylla would be much better. The Manderlys are a powerful house.

Fair enough. I don't think it's a huge deal either way whether either group believes in Bael the Bard or not.

In the near future, I don't really see anybody but Rickon or Jon being able to be the Stark in Winterfell. Sansa/Alayne and Arya/No One are both stuck with their own identity crises right now and probably won't return to being a "Stark" until at least the end of TWOW. Bran is obviously stuck being a tree. It's a good debate/question- You may be/probably are right about the Northern lords not wanting to accept it: I'm just not sure it's really gonna matter when the Others come through the Wall. And I'm not sure they're going to complain a lot/rebel if Jon/Rickon tells them to deal with it and get over it.

Totally agree that it's not beneficial politically. But then again, Jon couldn't care less about politics lol, and I'm not sure he has a "political purpose" in the story. I get a Last Hero kind of vibe from him- more military purpose than anything else in my opinion. The other Starks certainly have more overtly political futures in my opinion.

[ARYa_Nym]

Fair enough. I don't think it's a huge deal either way whether either group believes in Bael the Bard or not.

In the near future, I don't really see anybody but Rickon or Jon being able to be the Stark in Winterfell. Sansa/Alayne and Arya/No One are both stuck with their own identity crises right now and probably won't return to being a "Stark" until at least the end of TWOW. Bran is obviously stuck being a tree. It's a good debate/question- You may be/probably are right about the Northern lords not wanting to accept it: I'm just not sure it's really gonna matter when the Others come through the Wall. And I'm not sure they're going to complain a lot/rebel if Jon/Rickon tells them to deal with it and get over it.

Totally agree that it's not beneficial politically. But then again, Jon couldn't care less about politics lol, and I'm not sure he has a "political purpose" in the story. I get a Last Hero kind of vibe from him- more military purpose than anything else in my opinion. The other Starks certainly have more overtly political futures in my opinion.

When Jon was considering Stannis' deal I feel like he wasn't considering the political implications. He just had his eye on the prize. He needs to be more conscious of what happens when you alienate people given what happened to him at the end of ADWD. I don't think he would be killed or anything but this is an area where he needs work. His stabbing should be a harsh lesson.

I think that the North is headed for trouble and won't be united. The Others will very least get as far as the Trident I think and based on the interpretations of Season 2's finale they might even get to KL. Of course there could always be a twist there about the Others being bad but we know that Jon is going to fight them at some point because of his dream.

I think that Jon will never be a Stark. The Kings of Winter reject him repeatedly in his dreams. They didn't do this when Ned saw him in his dream.

If Jon wants to remain a Snow/Stark bastard then Val is a good option.

[Budj]

This is getting way off topic, but I don't think Jon would hold on to his title as King in the North or Lord of Winterfell if Rickon came back...especially if he found out he was Ned's sister's son - still a stark by blood, but not in-line for WF.

I have postulated in the past though that he would not take WF as his seat, but maintain the claim as King....keeping Rickon as heir to WF. Perhaps his resurrection will proclaim him the next King of Winter ;)

Something more on topic - I think Val used the term Lord Crow a) because Jon kind of dissed her before she left by pulling away during an intimate moment and again when she got back with Tormund and b ) she doesn't seem the type to want her affections publicly known so I would hazard a guess she didn't take to well to Tormund pushing the issue...

[pitakon]

yes, but sam is the better thief.

[Tagganaro]

When Jon was considering Stannis' deal I feel like he wasn't considering the political implications. He just had his eye on the prize. He needs to be more conscious of what happens when you alienate people given what happened to him at the end of ADWD. I don't think he would be killed or anything but this is an area where he needs work. His stabbing should be a harsh lesson.

I think that the North is headed for trouble and won't be united. The Others will very least get as far as the Trident I think and based on the interpretations of Season 2's finale they might even get to KL. Of course there could always be a twist there about the Others being bad but we know that Jon is going to fight them at some point because of his dream.

I think that Jon will never be a Stark. The Kings of Winter reject him repeatedly in his dreams. They didn't do this when Ned saw him in his dream.

If Jon wants to remain a Snow/Stark bastard then Val is a good option.

agreed. I don't think Jon really cares about politics (that's one of his redeeming qualities lol). He'll do what he wants and let other people think what they want about it.

[tubbletian]

I did forget to mention that with R+L=J then you have some potential parallels with Rhaegar stealing a wild northern princess. Hard to guess how deep those might go without much of the original Rhaegar and Lyanna story but it is worth throwing out there.

This was the first thing I thought when I read the OP. But here's hoping that it has a nicer ending for everyone.

I love the Intermediaries to the Old Gods thread. One of my biggest curiosities is whether or not Val has a role to play in Jon's healing/resurrection based on that thread. He is stabbed right in front of her tower. This whole idea that Jon might have stolen Val just adds fuel to that curiosity. Plus I confess to a certain prurient interest in a supernatural Mel/Val cat fight.

This. Forever and ever. But I sense this struggle coming regardless of Jon and their (IMO quite obvious) affection for him, just because they are polar opposites. Am about read the Intermediaries to the Old Gods thread, but am already gearing for Val to show her true feelings after Jon's attack, and can see this being a catalyst for said cat fight.

[Rohed]

The basic idea is that Tormund is a religious leader and Dalla and Val are priestesses (Norse priestesses are Vala.)

Some of the supporting ideas are that Val claims to have "heard" that Jon didn't kill Jarl, but Jon is the only survivor so who did she hear it from? Val seems to know what Mel sees in her fires. How? Val sings which is frequently associated with magic. Ghost's curious reaction to her. That she somehow knew exactly where to find Tormund and knew the exact day she'd be back. It is an excellent thread.

Didnt Jon tell Mance or Tormend when he was sent to treat with them?

I havnt read the other post yet, but would Val know how to talk to the ravens, like the south forgot. I do like the whole idea.

And as far as the gleading thing.. She said Jon was welcome into her bed, then said she would cut it off if he wanted help to keep his vow. Mabie a little tiffed that he is refusing her so she offers the alturnative.

[Ser Pollo Loco]

Didnt Jon tell Mance or Tormend when he was sent to treat with them?

I havnt read the other post yet, but would Val know how to talk to the ravens, like the south forgot. I do like the whole idea.

And as far as the gleading thing.. She said Jon was welcome into her bed, then said she would cut it off if he wanted help to keep his vow. Mabie a little tiffed that he is refusing her so she offers the alturnative.

He fell, mance sent feints all down the wall, someone could have seen the bodies

[Tagganaro]

Didnt Jon tell Mance or Tormend when he was sent to treat with them?

Actually, I just realized this as well. Jon tells Val this when he goes to treat with Mance in ASOS. He says to Val:

"I was sorry when Jarl fell."

So that's how she would have heard of it. He told her himself.

[Scipio Africanus]

When Jon was considering Stannis' deal I feel like he wasn't considering the political implications. He just had his eye on the prize. He needs to be more conscious of what happens when you alienate people given what happened to him at the end of ADWD. I don't think he would be killed or anything but this is an area where he needs work. His stabbing should be a harsh lesson.

He would've been Caesered anyway. Too many factions were inconvinienced by his presence alone. There have been many great posts about this in the theory on Jon's attack. But basically too many people wanted him out of the picture. Marsh (and Thorne) is just a patsy for the following factions:

- Meleissandre, taking extreme interest in Jon, for reasons yet unknown wants him to subject to her, she is increasingly desperate to make him listen (which he is reluctant to do up to that point), maybe an assasination would make him trust her more

- Selyse / Stannis, might've learned from the Karstarks that Robb had named Jon is heir as KING IN THE NORTH, obviously a nuissance considering the bulk of Stan's forces are northmen and wouldn't follow him anymore

- Mance Rayder, still considers himself King Beyond the Wall, might see Jon as a threat to said title as Jon is doing a good job and uniting Wildlings

- Roose Bolton, may have known himself or heard from the Mallisters that Robb named Jon his heir, can't have that as Warden in the North

- Cercei Lannister, all Starks must die!!!!!1, unlikely candidate since she was too busy gettin' nekkid in KL, but she did plot to assassinate Jon by Marsh

- Wymen Manderly, unlikely candidate, but may have considered Jon a threat when he was plotting to put Rickon in Winterfell (and being a child Manderly would hold power over him and the PR in the rest of the North would be priceless), may have known that Robb named Jon his heir

All in all Jon's stabby adventure was inevitable no matter what he did.

[Jayce]

I don't think Jon will be King of the North or Warden of the North, he had that offer and although he might of answered different if the circumstances was different (as would anyone) he has made a choice and I believe he will stick by it. Neither do I think that the North in general would accept Val as their leader's wife, be he King or Warden.

I also don't think he will drop the NW or his vow over a technicality.

However I do think that the NW will be completely shattered and thus not a technicality, Jon will survive because he won't be there (in Ghost, or outcast, or even with the Wildlings, and Val, somewhere). I think this will happen because the Others will succeed in destroying the Wall and sweep through Westeros taking most if not all of it (I don't think Dany will make it to Westeros before the Others take it).

I was going to write lots of thoughts here, but I'll skip it and get to the point, I think after all is said and done, through various mechanisms Jon is going to end up being the final King of Westeros in this tale, as a Saviour, maybe as a Conqueror (depending on the mechanisms), as something. That means taking Val as his wife, and Queen, will not be an issue because when someone is in such a position they can get away with things that others can not (like the Targ-polygamy).

[WintersKing]

I know it won't play out this way, but I'd love for Jon to get Val at the very least. I'd much rather prefer that than others like Dany. I don't dislike Dany, but I don't think it would fit either character (mainly Jon) to end up together. Val is perfect for his character.

As for a Val and Mel fight that would be awesome, but I don't want it to be for Jon's soul. If Val is the queen Other then I hope they're not all as bad as we're led to believe.

[Jayce]

If Val is the queen Other then I hope they're not all as bad as we're led to believe.

:eek:

I hadn't even considered this!

Edit: Though I will say that the Others do not seem to be as bad as they have been made out so far. I claim this mainly because with the exception of the First of the First Men fight they only seem to attack once attacked.

[Scipio Africanus]

Edit: Though I will say that the Others do not seem to be as bad as they have been made out so far. I claim this mainly because with the exception of the First of the First Men fight they only seem to attack once attacked.

The Others are most certainly evil. They're actively performing genocide on all living things and turning them into meatshields with order to make more meatshields for them. Hardhome and the Wight attack on Jon/Jeor is evidence for this.

Their motives and moral compass however are probably alien, that much is true.