Robb's Will- Does it matter?

[IRON BANK]

Jon snow will receive winterfell once he is revived or will at least be its lord protector for Rickon.

[Buried Treasure]

Robb decided to disbar Sansa before he made his choice of heir. If he had named a Vale cousin or a Karstark (which option I still think makes more sense than naming Jon), then nobody would be theorising that they would inherit before Bran or Rickon. So the argument that Robb's named heir would also inherit before the living Stark boys does not hold up.

Plus, looking elsewhere for precedence, Ramsay is definitely older than Walda's unborn baby. Yet Roose Bolton speaks as if the babe would inherit, if Ramsay were not sure to murder it (the 'boy lords are the bane of any house' line). It is the only clue we have of the respective places of legitimized bastards vs trueborn brothers in Westeros and indicates the younger brother comes first if he is trueborn.

[The Bittersteel]

Jeepers

I have written this at least 3 times before but here goes again.

GRRM has drawn his story from REAL life events of the middle ages, especially in the UK and especially Scotland. Obviously with the will he is setting up for a Stark on Stark battle, just as happened in Scottish history.. As of this point in time there are at least 7 and probably 8 LEGITIMATE claimannt to be Lord of Winterfell and just a few less to be King in the North. It depends on which laws you CHOOSE to follow and at the end of the day might is right. Here goes

1. Any living child of Robb Stark by Jeyne Westerling. Now such a child does not yet exist, but until we see he body I am assuming she still lives. We need to wait 9 months from the Red Wedding in case such a child appears. Now Edmure's child will be of a nearly IDENTCAL age, so another baby swap possible. Such a child if a boy would be LoW and KiN. If a Girl then it would be up to the Northern Lords to DECIDE if the girl could be Queen. The claim of boy or girl would be recognised by the IT but the girl would need to be betrothed to a strong Southern Lord to make her claim stick

2. Jon Snow was legitimized by the KiN Robb Stark, therefore is the rightful KiN probably ahead of all others (except a child of Robb's). However his claim would NOT be accepted by the IT unless it were Stannis. Jon would I think be accepted as both LoW OR KiN if he so chose. BUT there may be opposition from Manderley and Glover. Jon would probably have military support from Stannis, the wildings, some of the NW and probably a fair swag of Northern Lords, especially he highlanders. Jon however has his vows and honour which may [prevent him accepting the role

3. Brandon would be the rightful heir via Westerosi Southern rules but has three serious disadvantages. Firstly he is believed to be dead so many would ALWAYS regard him as an imposter, Two he is a cripple and in the era of which we speak being a military leader was pretty uch an essential part of being a Lord. Bran would of course make an ideal Lord BUT it is a question as to whether he would be accepted by the North. Thirdly he is currently becoming a tree, limiting his mobility, fourthly he at present has no army

4. Rickon would be the heir apparent, since it may be assumed Bran will die childless. He has similar disadvantage as Bran in that he may be seen as an imposter BUT he is able bodied and probably has an army in the form of Manderleys and Glovers.

5. Sansa - currently the assumed heir to Winterfell and many want her claim. She will have the support of the Blackfish, Riverlanders and most of the Vale. She is married to a Lannister. However she probaly will not have support in the North, however I think there is a clear intent by GRRM to have Sansa battle one or other of her brothers for the right to Winterfell . At this stage I would expect Sansa to have the Riverland, the Vale, and probably the Tyrells as her supporters. However Sansa is attainted and would not have support of Cersai. Sansa's pwer will come via her choice of husband (assuming Tyrion out of the picture)

6. Arya in her own right also has the problem of being considered dead. She also is about to take vows which might leave her out of the picture.

7. Arya (aka Jeyne Poole) has conferred legitimacy to Ramsay Snow as Lord of Winterfell

8. Whoever are the heirs of the girl who married a Royce. I rather suspect it is in fact the next Frey heir given that one girl called Perarra Royce married Walder Frey.

Just out of interest whih event in Scottish history are you referring to specifically?

The issue with the boys being considered impostors particularly Bran is I believe somewhat mitigated by when they turn up. If it's only say three years after they vanished people who knew them before are going to recognize them and be able to provide legitimacy (Manderly for example) Bran's injuries set him apart as well.

[Balerion06]

Yes, but the problem is that in their world, they are fighting a war. And neither Brandon nor Rickon are able to fit in Robb's position, they are too young, they are children, Jon is older and he is capable to rule The North and fight its enemies and wars as Jon Stark until Bran or Rickon reach adulthood.

And their last boy-king worked out so fantastically for them.

Rickon would actually be the best person to crown as KITN at the current moment, precisely because he's so young. He can literally be betrothed to anyone (without fear of him breaking said marriage pact), his chances of randomly dying on the battlefield are next to zero, his war councils would actually have seasoned and experienced war leaders making decisions instead of an impulsive teenager, and nobody can question his legitimacy to rule Winterfell as a trueborn son of Eddard Stark.

[AryaNymeriaVisenya]

I thinks some are confused. Jon is legitimised by Robb. Legit bastards usually come last after all living true born children. So as the only living Stark not disinherited explicitly he is heir. However that is in case Jeyne westerling doesn't give birth which would push Jon back. Hence he can't be named explicit heir in the will otherwise he would trump Robbs potential child. So Robbs will would make Jon default heir not proclaimed heir.

If Jon were the sort he could push an age based claim but that isn't standard. It's an argument.

Hence, if rickon, bran or arya turn up Jon takes a step back by normal rules.

However as he is not Neds at all this is moot. He's dead last in line behind benjen if he ever comes back.

[cxvb]

Maybe crackpot, but the point of the will might be that Jon gets to repeat Aemon's choice: (Re-)join the night's watch to avoid problems for a younger brother who becomes king (in the north).

[ToTheWolves]

No matter what jon goes through I can't see him ever fighting one of his siblings for winterfell.

[Mr Hodor]

Robert baratheon's will didn't matter, why should robb's will be any different.

[Jon's Queen Consort]

The exact words of Robb’s will will matter. If Robb clearly states “Jon Snow is now Jon Stark and he is my heir” then Jon is his heir no matter what. If Robb has written “Since my brothers are dead Jon Snow now Jon Stark is my heir” then it will be complicated. If Robb’s will is clear enough I don’t see how the false assumptions have the fact that Jon is his heir. Who is sure that Robb wouldn’t have named Jon as his heir even if Bran and Rickon were alive? Only the readers, no one else can be sure.

So it comes down to who is the King’s chosen heir and who will be a better leader. The answer is the Jon in both cases. I believe that the whole mess starts when people start to believe that being a King is a good thing, when in reality is really the opposite. Being the King means that you have the responsibility for everything and being the King of a post apocalyptic Realm is not just a bad thing, it’s a life sentence.

Robert baratheon's will didn't matter, why should robb's will be any different.

I don't know maybe because there are two completely different situations?

[LordQorgyle]

Like someone said above who would a highlord prefer a little child that you can control or teenage that do whatever he wants and that wants the wildlings on the south side of the wall...think about it

[BlackStark]

The exact words of Robb’s will will matter. If Robb clearly states “Jon Snow is now Jon Stark and he is my heir” then Jon is his heir no matter what. If Robb has written “Since my brothers are dead Jon Snow now Jon Stark is my heir” then it will be complicated. If Robb’s will is clear enough I don’t see how the false assumptions have the fact that Jon is his heir. Who is sure that Robb wouldn’t have named Jon as his heir even if Bran and Rickon were alive? Only the readers, no one else can be sure.

So it comes down to who is the King’s chosen heir and who will be a better leader. The answer is the Jon in both cases. I believe that the whole mess starts when people start to believe that being a King is a good thing, when in reality is really the opposite. Being the King means that you have the responsibility for everything and being the King of a post apocalyptic Realm is not just a bad thing, it’s a life sentence.

I don't know maybe because there are two completely different situations?

If Robb wanted Jon to be heir over Bran or Rickon then why would he have left Bran behind to be lord of Winterfell in the first place? But-for their "deaths", is there really any doubt that Bran (then Rickon, then Sansa (were she not married to Tyrion and safely away from the Lannisters), and so on) would be Robb's heir? People act as though Robb was making some judgement on Jon's abilities as a leader and military commander when the will was made rather than it being a result of Jon being the only child of Ned presumed to still be alive that wasn't a captive of their sworn enemy. At the time the will was made, Jon had not distinguished himself as a leader or military tactician. In fact, he would have been viewed as a turncloak as he was with the Wildings at that point. I wonder whether Robb would have actually been as definitive in his will as to name "Jon is my heir" especially since he was a young guy with a young wife with an excellent possibility of producing an heir. Once he had disinherited Sansa and legitimized Jon (thereby raising raising him above the Vale cousins though probably not his other trueborn siblings), there would be no need to be that specific...a boiler-plate statement of "my rightful heirs" would be enough to include Jon without causing any issues with any future children.

In addition, Jon's abilities as a leader are definitively up for debate, considering the last time we saw him he was face down in the snow bleeding out from stab wounds by the men he was elected to lead.

[Bael's Bastard]

The lords aren't readers, they don't know Bran is alive, and so far only one seems to know Rickon is. The other lords may be forced to carry out Robb's will, or at least try, before any living Stark shows back up. Just as lords may be forced to choose between Aegon over Tommen before Daenerys ever shows up, and without knowing his true identity. What we know is not the same as what characters know or will know.

[BlackStark]

The lords aren't readers, they don't know Bran is alive, and so far only one seems to know Rickon is. The other lords may be forced to carry out Robb's will, or at least try, before any living Stark shows back up. Just as lords may be forced to choose between Aegon over Tommen before Daenerys ever shows up, and without knowing his true identity. What we know is not the same as what characters know or will know.

It is not as though Manderly is a minor lord in the North (he is arguably the most powerful lord left in the North outside of the Boltons). If the will somehow re-emerges, do you really believe he would keep this nugget of information about Rickon secret? Is he really going to let support (if there is any) coalesce around Jon without playing his trump card?

[Bael's Bastard]

Who knows what he'll do or get a chance to do before he possibly dies.

[LordQorgyle]

The lords in the north will never support a guy that will put the wildlings in their lands just like Jon did with the karstarks

[Jon's Queen Consort]

snip

Jon could come before the Vale lordlings no matter what actually. It’s like Larence who is considered a candidate for the Hornwood’s head. I bet that they had some cousins somewhere but their bastard was considered and mentioned as the heir. So yes, Jon will be before some nobodies. Do you seriously believe that the Northern lords would accept them? That’s a joke and not even a good one.

But my point still stands it’s all about the words. If Jon is clearly named Robb’s heir nothing can change it.

[LordQorgyle]

The lords can in the end it's always their decision if they don't want Jon to be the KiN he won't be..And there is a big possibility that some of the lords don't accept him despite Robb's will

[King Viserys Targaryen IV]

The lords can in the end it's always their decision if they don't want Jon to be the KiN he won't be..And there is a big possibility that some of the lords don't accept him despite Robb's will

By the end of the series it will apparent why Jon let the Wildlings into the North.

The will was signed/ witness by Robb's closest Generals and Advisers, many of which died with him at the Red Wedding, the family of those men who are now the heads of those Houses will be honor bound to follow the Will from the King in the North as well as their fathers and brothers.

[James Arryn]

Many people seem to consider this as a real game changer, with Robb naming Jon as his heir being very significant but I'm not sure if I see why.

Firstly, although the idea of the kingdom of the North is still clearly alive and well in the minds of some (Manderlys, Mormonts etc) many of it's strongest supporters are dead or imprisoned. There doesn't seem to be anything left to 're-create' the kingdom as it were, with manpower and support massively reduced during the war. If anything the Riverlands territories are in an even worse state.

Secondly, the will was made with the assumption that Bran and Rickon were dead. If Rickon shows up is Jon still the heir?

Thirdly, Jon has already refused an offer of legitimisation and the North from Stannis, will the will really change his mind?

I guess I just don't see this being that important in the grand scheme of things, what does it change?

Unless something drastic is reintroduced, principle of independent kingdoms is a bell you can't unring. It may not come up again in the near future, but it will certainly come up again.

Jon Arryn is really the boy who said 'the Emperor has no dragons.'

[Raksha 2014]

Robb's will matters only if (A)the witnesses are still alive; (B)they still have the will and produce it; ©no one contests the will with a superior army.

I always wondered why on Westeros Robb did not include a disclaimer that would allow Sansa to inherit (in the event of Jeyne not having a child) if her marriage was annulled or she was widowed. That would have been more fair.