Big Bad Wolf Posted August 2, 2015 Share Posted August 2, 2015 The blood itself doesn't give them much. Didn't the Stark king marry the Barrow King's heir? That would be required for this theory. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Lady Barbrey Posted August 2, 2015 Author Share Posted August 2, 2015 They would have got the Barrow King's blood through House Blackwood right? Starks and Blackwoods have been marrying for thousands of years No the Starks married the original Barrow King's daughter so they've had a direct line of it from there. I also think this is the "king's line" rather than subsidiaries though might be wrong. You couldn't look at the Stark family tree for Blackwoods, you'd have to look for Starks in the Blackwood family tree directly descended from a king. I think. I'm afraid I'm not well-versed on curses! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Lady Barbrey Posted August 2, 2015 Author Share Posted August 2, 2015 Could someone tell me how to delete repeat posts? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
AryaNymeriaVisenya Posted August 2, 2015 Share Posted August 2, 2015 If its the case you need to marry the heir of the King of the First Men then the Targs still don't have immunity, not even Jon as he is not Eddard's son Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Lady Barbrey Posted August 2, 2015 Author Share Posted August 2, 2015 If its the case you need to marry the heir of the King of the First Men then the Targs still don't have immunity, not even Jon as he is not Eddard's son He's been named Robb's heir. I don't know if there is a proviso in that document about Bran and Rickon having to be dead. Technically, if there is going to be a King of the North, and that document is produced, then Jon's it. But I'm not a Jon+Dany shipper at all so let's hope it is not so restrictive. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Big Bad Wolf Posted August 2, 2015 Share Posted August 2, 2015 Jon was named Robb's heir. Should he be resurrected, he'll be free of his vows, and will be the rightful heir to both the North and the Iron Throne. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Lady Barbrey Posted August 2, 2015 Author Share Posted August 2, 2015 Jon was named Robb's heir. Should he be resurrected, he'll be free of his vows, and will be the rightful heir to both the North and the Iron Throne. Yes you and I are on the same page posting at the same time. That's twice now. I'm not sure about the Iron Throne because I'm not sure he's legitimate, but any King of Westeros who claims the North better have some Stark in them or her or his bloodline won't survive if this theory is close to the truth. Anyway, I wonder if this could ever come to light if it were true? I get the sense that Ned knew nothing about it, but that his dad and Brandon might have. Dying simultaneously like that, with him unexpectedly becoming the new Lord, they might not have had a chance to tell him. Lady Barbrey Dustin might know - in fact, I think she knows far more about it than just this, perhaps to do with other things the Barrow King might have left to his heirs, the Starks. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Lady Barbrey Posted August 2, 2015 Author Share Posted August 2, 2015 The reason I think Brandon might have known is because of his upset reaction when Rhaegar gave her the rose crown. Yandel makes note that it was surprising how irate this made him. I thought about that. If Robert Baratheon had married Lyanna and become the King of Westeros including the North, then there would have been a healthy lineage. It'd be like the Barrow King's daughter marrying a Stark. And the exact same thing would have happened to the Targaryans if Lyanna was able to legitimately marry Rhaegar- Lyanna and Rhaegar's offspring would have healed the Targaryan lineage. But imagine that you were a Stark and knew about this curse, and that Torrhen all those years ago had bent the knee so as to see the demise of the Targaryans. I just don't see them allowing it. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Joe Blackfyre Posted August 2, 2015 Share Posted August 2, 2015 This might even have been one of the reasons Rhaegar was trying to woo Lyanna... to free the Targaryens from the Barrow King's curse and stop the cycle of disaster that keeps happening to them in Westeros. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Lady Barbrey Posted August 2, 2015 Author Share Posted August 2, 2015 This might even have been one of the reasons Rhaegar was trying to woo Lyanna... to free the Targaryens from the Barrow King's curse and stop the cycle of disaster that keeps happening to them in Westeros. Exactly. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
shmewdog Posted August 2, 2015 Share Posted August 2, 2015 I like the theory, but if it's true than Rhaegar wouldn't be the first to try and merge the Stark and Targaryen bloodlines. Cregan Stark negotiated for a royal marriage for his family during the Hour of the Wolf, but it never actually happened. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Lady Barbrey Posted August 2, 2015 Author Share Posted August 2, 2015 I like the theory, but if it's true than Rhaegar wouldn't be the first to try and merge the Stark and Targaryen bloodlines. Cregan Stark negotiated for a royal marriage for his family during the Hour of the Wolf, but it never actually happened. Yes, I saw that too. The thing is that he was promised a Targaryan princess; he didn't promise a Stark princess to the Targaryans. A Targaryan princess for the Starks just makes the Starks a little more influential with more power in the South, and perhaps the possibility of a dragon?, but it wouldn't do the Targaryan king line any good. They wouldn't be breeding children with Stark blood in them to become kings and so the curse wouldn't be lifted. What the Targaryans needed was a Stark "princess" for a Targaryan King or a Stark "prince" for a Targaryan Queen. What might have happened if Cregan had married the Targ princess was that as the Targaryans dwindled out over a few more generations, the Targs might have had to look through female lines for viable heirs. So just as the Baratheons had some claim through their grandmother, the Starks might have had a similar claim through theirs and been in the running for the Westeros throne. The advantage, in other words, was wholly for the Starks, and none at all for the Targaryans, which is just the way Cregan, if he were in the know, would have wanted it. I doubt very much the Starks ever offered up a daughter to the Targs. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Lady Darry Posted August 2, 2015 Share Posted August 2, 2015 I'm not sure about the Iron Throne because I'm not sure he's legitimate, but any King of Westeros who claims the North better have some Stark in them or her or his bloodline won't survive if this theory is close to the truth. Targs have Stark blood. Arryns have Stark blood and Targs married Arryns. And there are also Blackwoods. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Lady Barbrey Posted August 2, 2015 Author Share Posted August 2, 2015 Targs have Stark blood. Arryns have Stark blood and Targs married Arryns. And there are also Blackwoods. If that's true, (and sorry I don't mean to doubt you but I remember looking for any indication of Stark blood in Targs when the world book came out and didn't find any) then there is obviously not enough. I don[t even know if it matters. The thing about the curse is it is about "kings" not obscure or distant relatives. In a way, that's something I don't like about it. I don't think it's just about a drop of the right blood. This curse targets Targaryan kings/queens and their direct heirs and the only way to shift it would be to marry someone that's the rightful king or one of the rightful king's heirs of the North. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Lady Darry Posted August 2, 2015 Share Posted August 2, 2015 If that's true, (and sorry I don't mean to doubt you but I remember looking for any indication of Stark blood in Targs when the world book came out and didn't find any) then there is obviously not enough. I don[t even know if it matters. The thing about the curse is it is about "kings" not obscure or distant relatives. In a way, that's something I don't like about it. I don't think it's just about a drop of the right blood. This curse targets Targaryan kings/queens and their direct heirs and the only way to shift it would be to marry someone that's the rightful king or one of the rightful king's heirs of the North. With the unification of the realm and the establishment of the boy Ronnel Arryn (the King Who Flew) as the first Lord of the Eyrie, there were new opportunities for the house. It was no great surprise when Queen Rhaenys Targaryen arranged the betrothal of young Ronnel to the daughter of Torrhen Stark, for that was but one of the many such marriages she made in the name of peace. Sadly, Lord Ronnel later died a violent death at the hands of his brother Jonos the Kinslayer, but the Arryn line continued through a kinsman and has remained deeply involved in many of the great matters of the Seven Kingdoms. The world of ice and fire So we were both wrong. Stark+Arryn definitely happened, but Ronnel and his half Stark children didn't survive (I think). But drop of blood normally matters. A right drop of Valyrian blood is enough for dragons to like you. Maybe this curse is real (HH definitely is), but I really hope it's not. GRRM made a point how magic is unreliable and how he didn't want to write too much magic into the story. Also he hinted that all magic will go out of this world at the end. Originally he didn't plan to include dragons, because he thought it would be too unrealistic. His friend actually had to convince him to include dragons. So if it turns out that it is all about one curse... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
AryaNymeriaVisenya Posted August 2, 2015 Share Posted August 2, 2015 Jon was named Robb's heir. Should he be resurrected, he'll be free of his vows, and will be the rightful heir to both the North and the Iron Throne. It wouldn't make sense that a piece of paper would override magic! And it would mean Eddard's entire line losing their birthright just to fulfil Targ Jon's goals. That is not going to happen, not least because Jon would not do it unless he came back very, very wrong. Magic has been shown to primarily work with blood. If there is a connection its blood to blood, not pen to paper. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bloodmane Posted August 2, 2015 Share Posted August 2, 2015 If its the case you need to marry the heir of the King of the First Men then the Targs still don't have immunity, not even Jon as he is not Eddard's son Rhaegar married (?) the daughter of the Stark in Winterfell (probably equivalent to King of the North) and produced a son (accepting R+L=J) . It's analogous to the ancient Stark marriage to the daughter of the Barrow King... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
AryaNymeriaVisenya Posted August 2, 2015 Share Posted August 2, 2015 Rhaegar married (?) the daughter of the Stark in Winterfell (probably equivalent to King of the North) and produced a son (accepting R+L=J) . It's analogous to the ancient Stark marriage to the daughter of the Barrow King... The argument is that it has to be a direct line of succession. Which makes the heirs of Bran the inheitors of the crown of the First Men and if he has no children, Rickon. If that is not the case and a non-inheriting daughter can carry it then there is no reason the Targs don't have it from the Blackwood or Arryn marriage through Stark marriages of daughters to Blackwoods and Royces. Now others are saying Jon can rightfully be protected if Robb wrote Jon was his heir therefore legally breaking the direct line of succession. But it just doesn't seem like the laws of man are really applicable to the laws of magic or gods. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
daywatch Posted August 2, 2015 Share Posted August 2, 2015 But isn't such a powerful long-lasting curse not a bit too extreme for magic in asoiaf? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Lady Barbrey Posted August 2, 2015 Author Share Posted August 2, 2015 Rhaegar married (?) the daughter of the Stark in Winterfell (probably equivalent to King of the North) and produced a son (accepting R+L=J) . It's analogous to the ancient Stark marriage to the daughter of the Barrow King... Yes, exactly. And if this is accepted, there are all kinds of things that to me make sense, like why Rhaegar was interested in Lyanna in the first place (a prophecy that her children with him would heal the Targaryan line and produce the prince that was promised). But then we've also got Dany being born posthumously, not a queen, and not in Westeros proper, so the curse doesn't touch her. Also why no Starks married into the Targaryans when other lesser houses did. Almost all of the big names did at one time or another. Hightowers, Arryns, Baratheons, etc. But I think the Starks would not do it. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.