devilish Posted May 13, 2015 Share Posted May 13, 2015 We know that Jon Snow is older than Sansa, Brandon, Arya and Rickon Stark. So if lets say King Stannis decide to make him a Stark, would he be entitled to the Lord of Winterfell title ahead of them? Also lets say R+L = J then Stannis would be legalizing a Targeryan rather than a Stark. Would Jon Targeryan have more right to the iron throne than Danny and Aegon? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TheSmallOther Posted May 13, 2015 Share Posted May 13, 2015 We know that Jon Snow is older than Sansa, Brandon, Arya and Rickon Stark. So if lets say King Stannis decide to make him a Stark, would he be entitled to the Lord of Winterfell title ahead of them? Also lets say R+L = J then Stannis would be legalizing a Targeryan rather than a Stark. Would Jon Targeryan have more right to the iron throne than Danny and Aegon? If Jon gathers an army which can counter Danny's dragons, then the answer is 'yes'. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Pikachu101 Posted May 13, 2015 Share Posted May 13, 2015 We know that Jon Snow is older than Sansa, Brandon, Arya and Rickon Stark. So if lets say King Stannis decide to make him a Stark, would he be entitled to the Lord of Winterfell title ahead of them? Also lets say R+L = J then Stannis would be legalizing a Targeryan rather than a Stark. Would Jon Targeryan have more right to the iron throne than Danny and Aegon? Yes and no, legally he does come before Rickon and Arya but the ultimate question is; who will support him over these three? Jon Targaryen won't have more rights over Aegon because Aegon's older than him. Besides the Targaryens have no claim, both Dany and YG are taking back the throne through conquest because they lost their legal right in Robert's Rebellion. Also as far as Dany's concerned Stannis is a usurper so why would she recognise his right to legitimise bastards? If Jon gathers an army which can counter Danny's dragons, then the answer is 'yes'. He won't though. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JonisHenryTudor Posted May 13, 2015 Share Posted May 13, 2015 We know that Jon Snow is older than Sansa, Brandon, Arya and Rickon Stark. So if lets say King Stannis decide to make him a Stark, would he be entitled to the Lord of Winterfell title ahead of them? Also lets say R+L = J then Stannis would be legalizing a Targeryan rather than a Stark. Would Jon Targeryan have more right to the iron throne than Danny and Aegon? Well here is the thing. The Targs are no longer the rightful heirs, they lost that title in RR. The Baratheons are the rightful heirs now. So if a Targ sits the throne, it will be through force, not succession. And in that case, it will not matter because whomever wins begins the new line. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JonisHenryTudor Posted May 13, 2015 Share Posted May 13, 2015 Yes and no, legally he does come before Rickon and Arya but the ultimate question is; who will support him over these three? Jon Targaryen won't have more rights over Aegon because Aegon's older than him. Besides the Targaryens have no claim, both Dany and YG are taking back the throne through conquest because they lost their legal right in Robert's Rebellion. Also as far as Dany's concerned Stannis is a usurper so why would she recognise his right to legitimise bastards? He won't though. Not so sure about that. If one thing can be gleaned from the latest books, it is that a northern army is beginning to develop. I suspect that will be led by Jon and the Starks. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
corbon Posted May 13, 2015 Share Posted May 13, 2015 Also lets say R+L = J then Stannis would be legalizing a Targeryan rather than a Stark. Would Jon Targeryan have more right to the iron throne than Danny and Aegon? :shocked: No. For Jon's potential legitimisation by Stannis to mean anything, Stannis would have to be accepted as King. If Stannis is accepted as King, no Targaryen has any claim to the throne. No Targaryen (Jon) can have a claim that rests on Stannis' acts as king as their claim and Stannis' kingship are mutually exclusive. Incidentally, Aegon (if real) would be ahead of Jon anyway. Aegon and Jon are half-brothers (assuming R+L=J), with Aegon the older by a bit more than a year. Legitimisation, if it is even relevant (Targaryen Polygamy), has no effect on that. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JonisHenryTudor Posted May 13, 2015 Share Posted May 13, 2015 :shocked: No. For Jon's potential legitimisation by Stannis to mean anything, Stannis would have to be accepted as King. If Stannis is accepted as King, no Targaryen has any claim to the throne. No Targaryen (Jon) can have a claim that rests on Stannis' acts as king as their claim and Stannis' kingship are mutually exclusive. Incidentally, Aegon (if real) would be ahead of Jon anyway. Aegon and Jon are half-brothers (assuming R+L=J), with Aegon the older by a bit more than a year. Legitimisation, if it is even relevant (Targaryen Polygamy), has no effect on that. That only works if the Targs were still in power. Since they are not, then age matters little. If Jon conquered the 7 kingdoms, the IT is his until someone says otherwise. If the Targs are still in power, then you have a point. Since they are not, it is a moot point. At this point in the game, it isn't abotu succession but about conquest....well from a Targ pov. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Pikachu101 Posted May 13, 2015 Share Posted May 13, 2015 :shocked: No. For Jon's potential legitimisation by Stannis to mean anything, Stannis would have to be accepted as King. If Stannis is accepted as King, no Targaryen has any claim to the throne. No Targaryen (Jon) can have a claim that rests on Stannis' acts as king as their claim and Stannis' kingship are mutually exclusive. Incidentally, Aegon (if real) would be ahead of Jon anyway. Aegon and Jon are half-brothers (assuming R+L=J), with Aegon the older by a bit more than a year. Legitimisation, if it is even relevant (Targaryen Polygamy), has no effect on that. :agree: Not so sure about that. If one thing can be gleaned from the latest books, it is that a northern army is beginning to develop. I suspect that will be led by Jon and the Starks. Right now the Northern army is at a disadvantage; they were crippled by the Red Wedding and their only defence against Stannis' army is the Northern winter. From all the regions the North is actually one of the armies that isn't ready to fight; they lack the men, resources, equipment and they're seriously divided. That's why Littlefinger is plotting for Sansa to marry Harry, it's the only way he can secure the untouched Vale army. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
OmnomnomPomelo Posted May 13, 2015 Share Posted May 13, 2015 In my opinion: Stark question: Jon is a bastard, so he can't inherit before the younger Starks, also can't inherit at all normally.If he would be legitimized by let's say king Stannis, then he is a Stark, not a bastard anymore, so I think he would inherit before Bran, Rickon, Sansa and Arya, coz he's older.If his parents are Rhaegar and Lyanna, then there are 2 options:1) They married: Jon is not a bastard, but can't inherit before Bran, Rickon, Sansa and Arya, coz he is not a son of past Lord Eddard Stark.2) They didn't marry: Jon is a bastard, no chance to inherit. Targaryen/Iron Throne question: if Jon is son of Rhaegar and Lyanna, then the options are:1) Rhaegar and Lyanna didn't marry: Jon is a bastard, doesn't inherit.2a) Rhaegar and Lyanna married AND "Aegon" is really the son of Rhaegar: Aegon is older than Jon, so Jon doesn't inherit.2b) Rhaegar and Lyanna married AND "Aegon" is not the son of Rhaegar: Jon is the Targaryen heir, so he could inherit (but the Targaryens are defeated, Baratheons/Lannisters sit the Iron Throne, and Stannis proclaimed himself to be king.) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Gerg Sknab Posted May 13, 2015 Share Posted May 13, 2015 Is everyone forgetting that Robb bequeathed the Lordship of Winterfell to Jon Snow back in ASOS (can't remember the exact chapter) Catelyn was wroth in anger over Robb's decision. That may not mean a whole heck of alot if the will was lost or never made to Howland Reed ( IIRC that was who was supposed to diseminate the information).What might be really interesting is there could be two Jon Snows making claim, Ned's true bastard on Sisterton and Lord Snow the crow. Now the funny thing there is Jon Snow Sisterton has a better claim as he Ned's get, he is the elder, and he never spoke the Night Watch words. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Lord Varys Posted May 13, 2015 Share Posted May 13, 2015 As a legitimized Stark bastard Jon Stark would come before any of Catelyn's surviving children as he would be Ned's eldest surviving son. Robb's will named Jon heir over Sansa, yet it is unclear whether his legitimation decree and status as chosen heir would help him against either Bran or Rickon. Not to mention that the North would neither want nor accept a former NW Lord Commander as Lord of Winterfell. As a Targaryen Jon could press his claim against both Aegon (proclaiming that he is fake; saying that he, Jon Targaryen, is Rhaegar's son by his 'love wife' while Rhaegar discarded both Elia and her children when he married Lyanna) and Daenerys (women should not rule). Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
LordQorgyle Posted May 13, 2015 Share Posted May 13, 2015 Lord Varys that would depend normally a son from a marriage comes always before a legitimized bastard, we don't know how it works in George's world but normally Jon would come after Bran and Rickon and before Sansa and Arya Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ferocious Veldt Roarer Posted May 13, 2015 Share Posted May 13, 2015 We know that Jon Snow is older than Sansa, Brandon, Arya and Rickon Stark. So if lets say King Stannis decide to make him a Stark, would he be entitled to the Lord of Winterfell title ahead of them? Depends on exactly how many fucks people give about what Lord Stannis decrees. But it's a hypothetical situation, it actually happened, but with Robb. Believing Bran and Rickon to be dead, he legitimized Jon Snow and named him his heir. Now, with at least Rickon coming back from the dead, and simultaneously Robb's will being around, things got, simply put, awkward for all involved. And should they (or their champions) decide to compete for Winterfell, they both would have a pretty good case. No, I don't believe there is any clear-cut, unambiguous answer. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Gerg Sknab Posted May 13, 2015 Share Posted May 13, 2015 Lord Varys that would depend normally a son from a marriage comes always before a legitimized bastard, we don't know how it works in George's world but normally Jon would come after Bran and Rickon and before Sansa and Arya We know Robb was unwilling to allow Sansa Lannister to inherit which was the purpose of his will to disinherit her. Whether there were codicils in the will giving Bran, Rickon and Arya precedence if alive we do don't know Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
LordQorgyle Posted May 13, 2015 Share Posted May 13, 2015 Robb never disinherited Sansa and we have an example of a legitimized bastard(Ramsay), and his father, Roose tell us that a son of him and Fat Walda would come before Ramsay in the line of sucession, so it is logical that Rickon and Bran would come before Jon Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Gerg Sknab Posted May 13, 2015 Share Posted May 13, 2015 Robb never disinherited Sansa and we have an example of a legitimized bastard(Ramsay), and his father, Roose tell us that a son of him and Fat Walda would come before Ramsay in the line of sucession, so it is logical that Rickon and Bran would come before Jon You are sure of that? Catelyn's reaction to Robb's will runs counter to your assumption. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
LordQorgyle Posted May 13, 2015 Share Posted May 13, 2015 It is never said in the books that Sansa is disinherited only that Robb nominates an heir (probably Jon) who is neither of his sisters, no reference to Sansa or Arya being disinherited, saying they were is pure conjecture Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ferocious Veldt Roarer Posted May 13, 2015 Share Posted May 13, 2015 It is never said in the books that Sansa is disinherited only that Robb nominates an heir (probably Jon) who is neither of his sisters, no reference to Sansa or Arya being disinherited, saying they were is pure conjecture “A king must have an heir. If I should die in my next battle, the kingdom must not die with me. By law Sansa is next in line of succession, so Winterfell and the north would pass to her.” His mouth tightened. “To her, and her lord husband. Tyrion Lannister. I cannot allow that. I will not allow that. That dwarf must never have the north.” Gee, maybe Robb bothered enough to put "I will not allow that" in writing? It seemed kinda important to him. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
LordQorgyle Posted May 13, 2015 Share Posted May 13, 2015 As i said we don't know that, he said that in particular to Catelyn i think, it is never expecifically said that Robb will/was disenherited her, only that he choosed an heir and that is not Sansa or Arya, the rest is conjecture or guessing Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Gerg Sknab Posted May 13, 2015 Share Posted May 13, 2015 It is never said in the books that Sansa is disinherited only that Robb nominates an heir (probably Jon) who is neither of his sisters, no reference to Sansa or Arya being disinherited, saying they were is pure conjecture As is your assumption Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.