Robb's Will- Does it matter?

[Bael's Bastard]

The simple fact is, if Robb went through with what he seemed to favor, Jon is legitimized and made a Stark, and Jon is made Robb's heir in Robb's will.

This doesn't tell us whether Jon will pursue or accept being king of the north or lord of Winterfell, this doesn't tell us whether the northern lords will accept or pursue Jon as king or lord, but it tells us that the lord become king of Winterfell and the north legitimized Jon as a Stark, and named him his heir, no exceptions.

If Robb did this, he did it knowing at the very least one of his siblings was alive. Whatever the reason, he put a legitimized (by himself) bastard over Ned and Cat's second eldest, and still living, child.

Robb may have believed his younger brothers dead, his youngest sister dead, and the eldest sister marrying a Lannister. But he knowingly skipped a legitimate child of Ned and Cat, female or otherwise, to make Jon his heir.

Let's not deny what we know. What happens from here is speculative, but Robb clearly legitimized and made Jon his heir over at least one legitimate sibling he knew was still alive.

[Blazfemur]

I heard one theory that I at first dismissed entirely, but after rereading where that occurs in the books it doesn't seem so bad. The idea is that since at the end of ADwD Lord Snow's fate isn't clear, should the worst happen it may not be the end. The Red Woman seems to think of him as important, and if he passed she could possibly revive him by using the blood of a king... In this case, either Mance (assuming he lives) or Shireen. If this happens, Jon could claim that he did in fact serve on the Wall to his dying breath, and could then take up Robb's cause, as he clearly wanted to do multiple times. Given that the will had the seals of all Robb's major lords, and assuming it wasn't destroyed, it could be used as a rallying cry for the northern lords to support Stannis, or perhaps to pick up where they left off before. Its not the most likely outcome by far, but it isn't impossible!

dude, they have mance's baby, the king-beyond-the-wall. remember?

(they arent aware, the babies were swapped. but in mel's head, that baby, is mance's. the king-beyond-the wall. that baby to her, has royal kingsblood)

[Patrick Northcraft]

dude, they have mance's baby, the king-beyond-the-wall. remember?

(they arent aware, the babies were swapped. but in mel's head, that baby, is mance's. the king-beyond-the wall. that baby to her, has royal kingsblood)

OK yes there is that option as well. sorry I forgot about her. I figured the red lady would be able to tell through the fires or something that she isn't the actual child of Mance. through I don't think it's a big deal... just another option for the sacrifice to get to the point of my post.

[Blazfemur]

OK yes there is that option as well. sorry I forgot about her. I figured the red lady would be able to tell through the fires or something that she isn't the actual child of Mance. through I don't think it's a big deal... just another option for the sacrifice to get to the point of my post.

oh exactly. no just supporting. in the end i think it's the blood that matters in magic, not necessarily kingsblood. because really who could tell the difference? and anyone can claim to be king.

[Patrick Northcraft]

oh exactly. no just supporting. in the end i think it's the blood that matters in magic, not necessarily kingsblood. because really who could tell the difference? and anyone can claim to be king.

that also points out some major questions... the importance of 'kingsblood'... Aegon I took the throne through right of conquest, and it had been handed down through inheritance ever since, until the mad king. then Robert I took it through right of conquest... and suddenly we have 5 kings after he dies. I can understand his bloodline being important through rights of conquest, but as to how important Stannis' blood (or any KbtW blood) is, I'm not sure I follow it. as you say, anyone can claim to be king... but they have to prove it through right of conquest, which Robb and all the others, barring Joff, were doing... as opposed to Stannis, who's claim is through inheritance (though kinda conquest as well....)

[Blazfemur]

that also points out some major questions... the importance of 'kingsblood'... Aegon I took the throne through right of conquest, and it had been handed down through inheritance ever since, until the mad king. then Robert I took it through right of conquest... and suddenly we have 5 kings after he dies. I can understand his bloodline being important through rights of conquest, but as to how important Stannis' blood (or any KbtW blood) is, I'm not sure I follow it. as you say, anyone can claim to be king... but they have to prove it through right of conquest, which Robb and all the others, barring Joff, were doing... as opposed to Stannis, who's claim is through inheritance (though kinda conquest as well....)

meh. the horse wasnt king, with mirri maz duur or whatever. arguably it can be construed that she sacrificed daenerys' baby for drogo's state but, that baby was never pronounced king either.

and, further, mirri maz duur wasnt royalty to hatch those baby dragons from their eggs.

i think it's just blood, man. in general. melisandre may have misinterpreted royal blood though. the act of neede dkingsblood gives them an excuse to pursue "kings"

[sj4iy]

The Riverlands will never support Jon even the Blackfish said it

Because the Blackfish thinks that Ned cheated on Catelyn. Take that out of the equation and BOOM, probably not so much hatred anymore.

[UnmaskedLurker]

Many Northern lords might think it would be fairer for Rickon or Sansa to inherit the title, seeing as Robb didn't have all the facts, but their opinions don't matter - even if they could be 100% sure Robb would have preferred Bran or Rickon over Jon, they would still be obliged to act on what Robb put down.

The original DoD happened because the King's will was not respected, and in that case all the facts were known by the King. This is not a modern court of law (and even in a court, wills are sometimes overturned). If the banners do not want to accept the will, they can do what was done when Aegon II was put on the throne against the terms of the will of Viserys I. I am not saying it will ever actually do down this way, I am just saying that the will alone does not end all discussion of who would be supported as KitN.

[Amber W]

The original DoD happened because the King's will was not respected, and in that case all the facts were known by the King. This is not a modern court of law (and even in a court, wills are sometimes overturned). If the banners do not want to accept the will, they can do what was done when Aegon II was put on the throne against the terms of the will of Viserys I. I am not saying it will ever actually do down this way, I am just saying that the will alone does not end all discussion of who would be supported as KitN.

You're right. I was thinking on how that poster seemed to interpret the will vs. how I think wills work, but I can see I indeed made some sweeping statements that aren't entirely correct :p Thanks for pointing it out!

[Lonin]

Robb's will not only legitimized Jon as Jon Stark but also named him his Heir.

I agree. I believe the "app" states that the will did both.

It's interesting that the will did both, somewhat redundant - a legitimized Jon is Robb's heir.

King's wills naming heirs don't seem to be followed that much in Westeros... However, once legitimized is permanent.

[UnmaskedLurker]

You're right. I was thinking on how that poster seemed to interpret the will vs. how I think wills work, but I can see I indeed made some sweeping statements that aren't entirely correct :P Thanks for pointing it out!

Well, with respect to the question about how a will works, at least under typical American law, it is not always clear that the will would be respected merely as written. There are a number of theories under which a will can be overturned. Here I think that Rickon (and Bran if he came back) would have a strong case that Robb's "mistake of fact" that he thought they were dead would be a basis in court to overthrow the will--at least with respect to naming Jon as heir. But this is essentially medieval inheritance rules, which are, as you seem to acknowledge, quite a bit different than modern courtroom legal interpretation.

[ToTheWolves]

Because the Blackfish thinks that Ned cheated on Catelyn. Take that out of the equation and BOOM, probably not so much hatred anymore.

Read a theory on here a little while ago about the blackfish only giving off the impression of not "supporting" or "trusting" jon to Jamie to not draw any lannister or unwanted attention to jon snow, one of the supporting statements was that fact that the blackfish still had the stark banner flying high, knowingly thinking all the starks were dead & sansa a lannister by marriage.leaving only a is he/is he not legitimized jon snow. The theory was way more well worded and neatly drawn out than what I've written here though. Thought it was pretty interesting though.

[John Hulboy]

Robb's will has meaning for jon an his northern subjects and whoever in the river lands supports the King in the North.its a game changer IMHO.lol I,m more interested in where Lady Mormont Glover and the other men Robb sent into the neck to find Reed an his followers are at .i hope they are on there way to Jon .i think they are all waiting in the wolfswood near winterfell just waiting to crush the Boltons and Freys .but back to ur ? Yes the will has big meaning it says that Jon us indeed Jon stark King of the North

[Bael's Bastard]

Robb commanded those with him as his loyal lords to affix their seals to his decision, which he and they presumably did.

If his decision was to legitimize Jon and name him heir, that is what they affixed their seals to.

They could choose to break it with Robb dead, but for who?

Boltons that they likely all hate?

Rickon who may or may not show up before the will is made public, and even then, will be at best a figurehead with a regent for a long time before he is able to lead anyone?

Whether Jon accepts being Robb's successor or not (probably more meaningful coming from Robb and lords of the north than from Stannis with strings attached), if it becomes public he should be recognized as legit in the north, and should receive significant support from northern houses to succeed Robb.

[sj4iy]

Read a theory on here a little while ago about the blackfish only giving off the impression of not "supporting" or "trusting" jon to Jamie to not draw any lannister or unwanted attention to jon snow, one of the supporting statements was that fact that the blackfish still had the stark banner flying high, knowingly thinking all the starks were dead & sansa a lannister by marriage.leaving only a is he/is he not legitimized jon snow. The theory was way more well worded and neatly drawn out than what I've written here though. Thought it was pretty interesting though.

Hmm, interesting. I'll have to check it out. But I still think that the Blackfish is probably being straightforward about it, since Jon would be an affront to his House.

[Amber W]

Well, with respect to the question about how a will works, at least under typical American law, it is not always clear that the will would be respected merely as written. There are a number of theories under which a will can be overturned. Here I think that Rickon (and Bran if he came back) would have a strong case that Robb's "mistake of fact" that he thought they were dead would be a basis in court to overthrow the will--at least with respect to naming Jon as heir. But this is essentially medieval inheritance rules, which are, as you seem to acknowledge, quite a bit different than modern courtroom legal interpretation.

The way I see it, the Northern lords can either decide to follow the will or to disregard it. If they follow it, Jon is the heir - if not, any other living Stark could be. I'm not saying it would necessarily be morally wrong of them to disregard the will in favour of another Stark, I'm just saying that the will as we know it doesn't seem to leave room for interpretation, e.g. claiming that crowning Rickon is in accordance with Robb's will.

In the modern world, any of the living Starks might challenge the will and likely win their case, but I doubt such a thing would be possible in Westeros. Not that I think it would ever come to that: from everything we know about Jon (especially his reaction when previously offered Winterfell), it's clear that he would never want to inherit if he knew Bran or Rickon to be alive, so from a practical viewpoint that renders the point moot anyway.

[ViennaGirl]

Read a theory on here a little while ago about the blackfish only giving off the impression of not "supporting" or "trusting" jon to Jamie to not draw any lannister or unwanted attention to jon snow, one of the supporting statements was that fact that the blackfish still had the stark banner flying high, knowingly thinking all the starks were dead & sansa a lannister by marriage.leaving only a is he/is he not legitimized jon snow. The theory was way more well worded and neatly drawn out than what I've written here though. Thought it was pretty interesting though.

This. I'm pretty sure this argument is part of the Great Northern Conspiracy theory, which is here and also on reddit. Blackfish is throwing Lannisters off the trail of Jon by insisting he's just a bastard who's a terrible person.

http://asoiaf.westeros.org/index.php/topic/77828-the-great-northern-conspiracy-reexamined/

[John Hulboy]

I also saw some good threads about Blackfish knowing about Jon an supporting him by sending 2 loyal men to the wall they should be showing up real soon if they got on a boat at Maidenpool

[Starkfaithful85]

it will matter because even though jon has turned down the north from stannis, due to heart tree burning and NW vows...i believe that after jon's assaination attempt he will realize that to protect the realm he has to break his vows...possibly foreshadowed by quorin halfhan and jons time with the wildlings

[Luddagain]

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.