vassily targark Posted April 11, 2015 Share Posted April 11, 2015 sorry i didn't mean to spoil. i just deleted my post. i know it's not a related to the show topic, but a lot of you refered to it a few times. i thought it was not that bad. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
sj4iy Posted April 11, 2015 Share Posted April 11, 2015 I suppose it would depend on how Robb's decree was worded. Another problem is that most people probably wouldn't recognize any of Robbs kingly decrees. It doesn't matter whether or not people acknowledged Robb as King (although pretty much the entire North did)...he was the Lord of Winterfell and head of the Stark family- and as such had the power to name Jon a Stark. The only thing affected by Robb's failed campaign was his ability to name Jon as the heir to the King in the North. But if Robb legitimized him as a Stark, then people would see him as a Stark. Just like had Ned named Jon a Stark, he would have been a Stark. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
sj4iy Posted April 11, 2015 Share Posted April 11, 2015 sorry i didn't mean to spoil. i just deleted my post. i know it's not a related to the show topic, but a lot of you refered to it a few times. i thought it was not that bad. It's not the issue of referring to the show. We all do that these days. It's the fact that it was a spoiler for an episode that hasn't aired yet. Most people would rather just wait for two days and see it for themselves. Anyway, you don't have to delete your post- just use the spoiler tags, as mentioned above. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RumHam Posted April 11, 2015 Share Posted April 11, 2015 It doesn't matter whether or not people acknowledged Robb as King (although pretty much the entire North did)...he was the Lord of Winterfell and head of the Stark family- and as such had the power to name Jon a Stark.The only thing affected by Robb's failed campaign was his ability to name Jon as the heir to the King in the North. But if Robb legitimized him as a Stark, then people would see him as a Stark. Just like had Ned named Jon a Stark, he would have been a Stark. This is not correct. Only a king can legitimize a bastard. In what way? Well if it says "I hereby remove the stain of bastardy from Jon Snow" then you could argue that it would work. If it said "I hereby name Jon Snow a legitimate Stark" then probably not. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
sj4iy Posted April 11, 2015 Share Posted April 11, 2015 This is not correct. Only a king can legitimize a bastard. My point is that the North would absolutely see Jon as a Stark. Even Stannis sees this. It doesn't matter whether people believed Robb to be a king or not...Jon would still be a Stark in all sense of the word. Of course, I think this is an absolutely pointless conversation because Jon is a legitimate Targ to begin with. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The Agency of Sansa Stark Posted April 11, 2015 Share Posted April 11, 2015 Jon would still be a Stark in all sense of the word.Of course, I think this is an absolutely pointless conversation because Jon is a legitimate Targ to begin with.Would you care to list the textual evidence that supports this? I can wait. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
sj4iy Posted April 11, 2015 Share Posted April 11, 2015 Would you care to list the textual evidence that supports this? I can wait. Wow, the attitude- have I offended you in some way? RumHam knows very well why I think Jon is legitimate...I've posted it time and time again. Anyway, wait all you want. Or look it up. I've explained my reasons for believing Jon is legitimate time and time again in these threads. But I'm not about to re-list something I've explained in great detail over and over again since the 70th or 80th R+L=J thread. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
addicted to snow Posted April 11, 2015 Share Posted April 11, 2015 Wow, the attitude- have I offended you in some way? RumHam knows very well why I think Jon is legitimate...I've posted it time and time again. Anyway, wait all you want. Or look it up. I've explained my reasons for believing Jon is legitimate time and time again in these threads. But I'm not about to re-list something I've explained in great detail over and over again since the 70th or 80th R+L=J thread. Translation:: She would tell you, but her 'textual evidence' is shaky at best... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BearQueen87 Posted April 11, 2015 Share Posted April 11, 2015 *rolls eyes* anyway...sent a request to close, so we'll probably have a new thread here soon. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.