Bael's Bastard Posted June 20, 2014 Share Posted June 20, 2014 Secondly, the will was made with the assumption that Bran and Rickon were dead. If Rickon shows up is Jon still the heir? If Robb legitimized Jon then he is older than all of the Stark children, and would come before any of them as a legitimate Stark. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
sj4iy Posted June 20, 2014 Share Posted June 20, 2014 He took his oath before the Old Gods. The High Septon can't release him of those. In theory, the an avatar of the Old Gods (Bloodraven?, Bran?, A CotF?) could. Ooh, how cool would that be? BR somehow releasing him from his vows in the shape of a tree or something XD Or Mormont's raven. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ForgottenKnight Posted June 20, 2014 Share Posted June 20, 2014 No. Robb lost the game of thrones. Whatever hopes, dreams, and desires he had died at the Red Wedding. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
King Viserys Targaryen IV Posted June 20, 2014 Share Posted June 20, 2014 I think that if it were not for the internet, 80% of the readers would not have clue that R+L=J, so Robb's will would be a red herring that most people would be following and assume that Jon was going to either become the Lord of Winterfell or The King in the North. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
sj4iy Posted June 20, 2014 Share Posted June 20, 2014 No. Robb lost the game of thrones. Whatever hopes, dreams, and desires he had died at the Red Wedding. ...the whole point of a will was because he was worried about dying without an heir. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bael's Bastard Posted June 20, 2014 Share Posted June 20, 2014 No. Robb lost the game of thrones. Whatever hopes, dreams, and desires he had died at the Red Wedding. Neither Robb's will nor northern loyalty to House Stark died with Robb, nor has House Bolton done anything to win them over, and their safety net Tywin is dead. The possibility of his death was the point of the will in the first place. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
LordQorgyle Posted June 20, 2014 Share Posted June 20, 2014 If Robb legitimized Jon then he is older than all of the Stark children, and would come before any of them as a legitimate Stark. That's not true even legitimized Jon come always after the sons(boys) of Ned's marriage so Rickon and Bran come always before Jon Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
King Viserys Targaryen IV Posted June 20, 2014 Share Posted June 20, 2014 That's not true even legitimized Jon come always after the sons(boys) of Ned's marriage so Rickon and Bran come always before Jon Robb's will not only legitimized Jon as Jon Stark but also named him his Heir. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ViennaGirl Posted June 20, 2014 Share Posted June 20, 2014 That's not true even legitimized Jon come always after the sons(boys) of Ned's marriage so Rickon and Bran come always before Jon I don't know about this - if Jon is legitimized, I think that would mean his bastard status is extinguished as if it never existed, and he's older than everyone but Robb, so he'd come before them. But I don't think the will will matter in the end. I think events surrounding Jon have gotten weird enough that he's not headed for a ruling position. I think he's either dead (unlikely) or undead (unlikely to rule). I think unJon might save everyone and die, or save everyone and disappear, but I don't think unJon will be king of the north or westeros. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Skagosi High Chef Posted June 20, 2014 Share Posted June 20, 2014 I think it will only be important to Jon on a personal level but will not carry any weight in the line of succession. Jon would not attempt to take Winterfell from his brothers. If he wanted Winterfell he would be there with a fine-ass wildling chick in the hot pools. He has vows to keep people and a realm to protect. As a Jon fan it bothers me that people who love the character as much as me want to cheapen who he is with crown claims and the like. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
LordQorgyle Posted June 20, 2014 Share Posted June 20, 2014 Robb's will not only legitimized Jon as Jon Stark but also named him his Heir. Because Rickon and Bran were"dead"..With a true son of Ned and Catelyn alive No lord in the north will ever support Jon..And in Real Life Monarchy a son of the first marriage comes always first than a second marriage or a legitimized bastard, always Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
chrisdaw Posted June 20, 2014 Share Posted June 20, 2014 I don't understand the point of this post. Obviously things are subject to change but everything anyone posts on here is made with the knowledge of only what has been released. Should I wait until all the books are released in ten years before I ask the question?No, you shouldn't wait to ask the question but in considering how the will could matter you should consider how circumstances can change to allow it, and how long the series has got to go. I mean you cite imprisoned characters who would declare for the KITN as a reason against why the will could matter, when that should be a reason for. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
King Viserys Targaryen IV Posted June 20, 2014 Share Posted June 20, 2014 Because Rickon and Bran were"dead"..With a true son of Ned and Catelyn alive No lord in the north will ever support Jon..And in Real Life Monarchy a son of the first marriage comes always first than a second marriage or a legitimized bastard, always Not if he was named Heir. The Will did not say "Jon is Heir unless one of my brothers returns from the dead." The King in the North legitimized Jon as Jon Stark heir to the North. its that simple. Now I don't expect Jon to take the Crown but he was named Heir. Anyone that did not support King Robb Stark's wishes and support his named Heir, the now legal son of Ned Stark as the new King would be a traitor as far as the other Bannermen are concerned. Who are they going to support a cripple or a seven year old that is half wildling by now? Or a season leader who has the Stark look and a Valyrian sword on his hip? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Alex21 Posted June 20, 2014 Share Posted June 20, 2014 Because Rickon and Bran were"dead"..With a true son of Ned and Catelyn alive No lord in the north will ever support Jon..And in Real Life Monarchy a son of the first marriage comes always first than a second marriage or a legitimized bastard, always 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. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
FireAndBlood. Posted June 20, 2014 Share Posted June 20, 2014 It may wind up important, but I don't believe Jon would accept Winterfell, regardless of Robb's wishes, if any of his siblings (Bran, Rickon, Sansa, Arya) turned up. Legitimatised or not, there's no way he wouldn't feel like he was screwing them if they were still alive/able to rule. Plus, he's not even Ned's son, so finding out about that would just make it worse. IMO if Jon rules as King/Lord anywhere, he'll be in some kind of position of power beyond the Wall. Or what's left of it. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bael's Bastard Posted June 20, 2014 Share Posted June 20, 2014 That's not true even legitimized Jon come always after the sons(boys) of Ned's marriage so Rickon and Bran come always before JonNonsense, one of the purposes of legitimizing Jon and making him his heir is that he would then jump ahead of Sansa, Tyrion's wife. Legitimizing Jon and making him his heir puts him ahead of the rest of his living siblings. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
LordQorgyle Posted June 20, 2014 Share Posted June 20, 2014 And the Lords in the North will never support a bastard with Ned's Trueborn sons known to be alive Not if he was named Heir.The Will did not say "Jon is Heir unless one of my brothers returns from the dead."The King in the North legitimized Jon as Jon Stark heir to the North. its that simple. Now I don't expect Jon to take the Crown but he was named Heir. Anyone that did not support King Robb Stark's wishes and support his named Heir, the now legal son of Ned Stark as the new King would be a traitor as far as the other Bannermen are concerned.Who are they going to support a cripple or a seven year old that is half wildling by now? Or a season leader who has the Stark look and a Valyrian sword on his hip?But none of the bannermen knew Rickon and Bran were alive...There isn't any Lord that would support Jon with Rickon and Bran known to be alive..Because that's the only motive for Robb to legitimize him Rickon and Bran beying supposebly dead Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bael's Bastard Posted June 20, 2014 Share Posted June 20, 2014 Because Rickon and Bran were"dead"..With a true son of Ned and Catelyn alive No lord in the north will ever support Jon..And in Real Life Monarchy a son of the first marriage comes always first than a second marriage or a legitimized bastard, alwaysYou are making stuff up. Sansa was known to be alive, and yet he made Jon his heir over Ned and Cat's second eldest child. If the will exists, it puts Jon ahead of his half-siblings (really cousins). Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Alex21 Posted June 20, 2014 Share Posted June 20, 2014 It may wind up important, but I don't believe Jon would accept Winterfell, regardless of Robb's wishes, if any of his siblings (Bran, Rickon, Sansa, Arya) turned up. Legitimatised or not, there's no way he wouldn't feel like he was screwing them if they were still alive/able to rule. Plus, he's not even Ned's son, so finding out about that would just make it worse. IMO if Jon rules as King/Lord anywhere, he'll be in some kind of position of power beyond the Wall. Or what's left of it. If Stannis would not have imposed him those conditions about to burn down the weirwood, I think he could have accepted Winterfell We suppose that he is not Eddard's son but we do suppose that he is Rhaegar's son, so based in this theory he has Stark blood to reclaim Winterfell and The North as his "mother" was Lyanna Stark Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
LordQorgyle Posted June 20, 2014 Share Posted June 20, 2014 Nonsense, one of the purposes of legitimizing Jon and making him his heir is that he would then jump ahead of Sansa, Tyrion's wife. Legitimizing Jon and making him his heir puts him ahead of the rest of his living siblings. Sansa is a girl a boy comes always before a girl in sucession mathers Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.