The Starks and Queens?

[PrinceHenryris]

Admittedly, I'm kind of spitballing here, but it seems like the Starks aren't quite as patriarchal as some of the other lands North of Dorne.

At the Great Council of 101AC, the Starks spoke in favor of Rhaenys.

Later, the Starks and their banner men fought for the Blacks.

When Bran looks through the Weirwood in Winterfell women figure prominently in the vision.

Like I said, I don't have any concrete ideas, I'd just like to hear some thoughts.

Thanks!

[The Weirwoods Eyes]

I think that when we look at first men culture, which has not been bastardised by the Andals, we see that yes. They were more equal. By looking at the Wildlings, we get a glimpse of life pre Andal invasion. Of course there own culture will also have evolved over time. But the fact women there can choose their own partner (if you examine the stealing of women, in reality very few women are stolen who don't wish to be, either through developing their own martial prowess, or through simply tipping off their family when a suitor is unwanted. See Tormund sons breaking the arm of the boy their sister was not happy to be stolen by, and leaving "longspear" well alone. We know Val takes her own lovers and obviously ygritte is another example, There is no shame in women pursuing their own sexual desires as we see elsewhere in the 7 kingdoms, and no taint on a woman if she is not virgin. In fact if she wishes to no longer be married to a guy, she can just up and leave.  

Women can be leaders, and warriors, women seem to also perhaps be able to hold significant religious position. It is long suspected Val and Dalla were and are some sort of priestesses. 

Of course, I am not trying to make out the free folk have some gender perfect utopia happening. Just pointing out that there are significant differences. So

Given this information, could it be that the North holds less aversion in general to female leadership, and if so that would explain the fact they twice supported female monarchs in the Targaryen dynasty. 

We also have at least one story telling of the Stark crown passing through the female line, with the Bael and the Winter Rose tale. 

[Lord Varys]

We know that there was never a Ruling Queen in the North nor a Ruling Lady of Winterfell. George has long ago confirmed as much.

[Ser Tristan Flowers]

The first men were certainly more matrilinial than the Andals, wich doesn´t really mean that much, since the Andals are straightup misogyn. Asha has the impression that females are not held in high regards among the northmen, from her own experience on the iron isles we shouldn´t expect her to have high standards in that regard.

We can see in Lady Dustin that it´s possible to be a ruler as a woman, but she is very much an exception, and she is only ruling the Barrowlands. If any woman would be crowned queen in the north one should assume there would be massive squabbling over who should marry her and rule in her stead. It would take an exceptionally intelligent and strong woman to rule the north in her own right, though I wouldn´t say it´s impossible. 

[aryagonnakill#2]

There are at least 2 female leaders in the north, Lady Dustin and Maege Mormont.  However the Vale is mainly if not entirely Andal and they accepted Lysa's rule even though many were unhappy with her decisions, so we cannot use accepting a womans rule to means the society is more open to women. 

[Sullen]

2 minutes ago, aryagonnakill#2 said:

There are at least 2 female leaders in the north, Lady Dustin and Maege Mormont.  However the Vale is mainly if not entirely Andal and they accepted Lysa's rule even though many were unhappy with her decisions, so we cannot use accepting a womans rule to means the society is more open to women. 

The South also accepted Cersei as Queen Regent, similarly to Lysa as Lady of the Vale.

[The Weirwoods Eyes]

And don't forget poor Lady Donella Hornwood. She was ruling as Lady of Hornwood until Ramsey forcibly wed her. Though we do have to note that Bran was urged to get her married off ASAP. 

 

[Tanngrisnir]

1 hour ago, Sullen said:

The South also accepted Cersei as Queen Regent, similarly to Lysa as Lady of the Vale.

But they are Regents, witch means they really are only there for the interim, until the heir is old enough to rule, whereas it seems that Lady Dustin and the Mormont ladies actually are leaders of their house. 

I've been thinking about this as well. I don't think that women are in a very strong position in the north, but it seems that they are more free than woman in Andal societies. It reminds me a bit of the status of women in european societies (vikings...) before and after christianity was introduced. If some archeologists are correct, women had a bit more freedom and better social standing before, and their role changed after the new religion took root to them beeing more subordniate to men. 

If one looks at the religion of the seven, the roles for women (and also men) seem to be very strictly defined. What we do know of the religion of the first man, doesn't seem to include anything like that. 

[Tanngrisnir]

16 minutes ago, The Weirwoods Eyes said:

And don't forget poor Lady Donella Hornwood. She was ruling as Lady of Hornwood until Ramsey forcibly wed her. Though we do have to note that Bran was urged to get her married off ASAP. 

 

I do not remember, was there a reason given for why he should marry her off ASAP, or was it just stated that he should? 

[The Weirwoods Eyes]

I think basically as it was a time of war, and her lands were very desirable. Manderly wanted to marry her, as she was his cousin, and it would have kept the Hornwood in their hands. But similarly there were several other potential Suitors. 

[Sullen]

9 minutes ago, Tanngrisnir said:

But they are Regents, witch means they really are only there for the interim, until the heir is old enough to rule, whereas it seems that Lady Dustin and the Mormont ladies actually are leaders of their house. 

Take Ladies Oakheart, Whent, and Stokeworth as examples then.

Lady Hornwood was an interim regent too, by the way, as is Dustin, they're both in charge of their respective households because the previous ruler died without leaving an apparent heir and the succession is muddled.

[Tanngrisnir]

1 minute ago, Sullen said:

Take Ladies Oakheart, Whent, and Stokeworth as examples then.

Lady Hornwood was an interim regent too, by the way, as is Dustin, they're both in charge of their respective households because the previous ruler died without leaving an apparent heir and the succession is muddled.

But would not Lady Hornwoods husband be the new Lord, and therefore the right passes through her? I see that as more than just regency, where you usually are more like a caretaker. 
Of course you are right with the Ladies Oakheart, Whent and Stokeworth. 

I think the Mormonts are the only family in the north that at the moment really show a difference where it comes to women holding power. Do you think that the Mormont ladies are recieved as badly in the north, as Brienne in the south ?

[Sullen]

5 minutes ago, Tanngrisnir said:

But would not Lady Hornwoods husband be the new Lord, and therefore the right passes through her? I see that as more than just regency, where you usually are more like a caretaker. 

Marrying Lady Hornwood would give your claim to Hornwood more weight, but it's more symbolic than anything, House Hornwood is essentially dead. Hornwood, as you described, is more of a caretaker, until they (mostly House Stark) shine light on the issue and figure out who actually is the real heir to Hornwood.

5 minutes ago, Tanngrisnir said:

I think the Mormonts are the only family in the north that at the moment really show a difference where it comes to women holding power. Do you think that the Mormont ladies are recieved as badly in the north, as Brienne in the south ?

The Mormonts are noted to be an exception, even in the North, though. The only place I can potentially see them being accepted is beyond the wall, in Dorne, or in the Iron Islands, to be fair.

[Bael's Bastard]

6 hours ago, PrinceHenryris said:

Admittedly, I'm kind of spitballing here, but it seems like the Starks aren't quite as patriarchal as some of the other lands North of Dorne.

At the Great Council of 101AC, the Starks spoke in favor of Rhaenys.

Later, the Starks and their banner men fought for the Blacks.

When Bran looks through the Weirwood in Winterfell women figure prominently in the vision.

Like I said, I don't have any concrete ideas, I'd just like to hear some thoughts.

Thanks!

The Starks actually supported Rhaenys' son, Laenor Velaryon, in the GC of 101. So while they did support Rhaenys' claim over Viserys', their support was for seven year old Laenor to rule, not Rhaenys herself.

In the case of the Dance of the Dragons, the Starks did support Rhaenyra, but in a sense this was consistent with their support of Laenor, as Rhaenyra was Laenor's widow, and Laenor's three sons were her heirs.

And they still had to be persuaded to support Rhaenyra and her sons with the Pact of Ice and Fire, which her heir Jacaerys went to Winterfell and sealed.

[lojzelote]

Isn't it said that the Starks suported Rhaenys to cause discord and therefore trouble fo Jaehaerys?

As for Dance of the Dragons, I think they had simply sold their support to the claimant who came with an offer. I don't think it had to do anything with actually caring for Rhaenyra's (or Laenor's) claim.

As for ruling ladies in the South, let's not forget Cersei; she may have lost the regency, but she remains Lady of Casterly Rock by the right of blood, and we know of a historical ruling Lady Lannister in the person of little Sarelle (or was it Cerelle?).

[dreem24]

Yeah for a marriage in times of war(just like Lord Walder)  And they just like him didn't get what was promised and lo and behold the idiotic Stark who had an army and a child king did nothing(hahah what a fool)...

As for how they treat women i guess it depens if high/low born and not much else...

 

[lojzelote]

1 minute ago, dreem24 said:

Yeah for a marriage in times of war(just like Lord Walder)  And they just like him didn't get what was promised and lo and behold the idiotic Stark who had an army and a child king did nothing(hahah what a fool)...

As for how they treat women i guess it depens if high/low born and not much else...

 

Well, that was Cregan's own fault. He gave up on the Targaryen marriage willingly, because he wanted Alysanne Blackwood. Had he cared for the bargain, he could have made Baela or Rhaena to marry him during his stay in King's Landing. They were still available on the marriage market, and there would have been no one to oppose him.

[The hairy bear]

There's also the She-wolves of Winterfell, that ruled North for some time in recent memory, and if the wildling's story of Bael the Bard is true, then all the Lords of Winterfell are descended to female line at least at one point.

I agree that the First Men seem to be more tolerant towards women (or at least strong women) than the Andals.

[Lord Varys]

2 minutes ago, The hairy bear said:

There's also the She-wolves of Winterfell, that ruled North for some time in recent memory, and if the wildling's story of Bael the Bard is true, then all the Lords of Winterfell are descended to female line at least at one point.

I agree that the First Men seem to be more tolerant towards women (or at least strong women) than the Andals.

Not completely sure about that.

The only kingdom who had a Queen Regnant was the Andal-dominated Reach, after all.

The day in which women had prominent roles among the First Men seem to be pretty far in the past, else one would expect some Stark Queen Regnants in the early days (or among the other First Men houses all across Westeros).

Power handed down through the female line shouldn't be uncommon among all the major noble lines. If that didn't happen then Westeros is completely unrealistic setting.

I also don't think the free folk culture favoring women in any way. The whole stealing idea is just abhorrent, and any woman who isn't physically strong or lacks a family who protects her (or has a family who abuses her in place of a husband) is pretty much fucked in this society.

The wildlings value strength. If you are a woman who can stand up to man you get access to the boy's club. If not, then you are probably worse off than in Westeros - especially if you remember Ygritte's contemptuous remarks about weaker women.

In that sense I would assume that the women we met in the books are all members of 'the aristocrats' of the wildlings - those who women who are strong enough to rise to the top. I'd see Dalla and Val more as members of that club than some secret First Men priestesses - however, there is also knowledge preserved among the First Men women in the North and beyond the Wall. But whether that gives them special status or whether this is (beyond the Wall) restricted to women isn't clear.

[dreem24]

3 hours ago, lojzelote said:

Well, that was Cregan's own fault. He gave up on the Targaryen marriage willingly, because he wanted Alysanne Blackwood. Had he cared for the bargain, he could have made Baela or Rhaena to marry him during his stay in King's Landing. They were still available on the marriage market, and there would have been no one to oppose him.

Sorry long time ago when i've read the books.

 

As for woman i dont think in such a society they'be treated well consider our own world now without modern society and everything just... The poor souls...   every culture will have some high points but those are very rare i mean queens and ladys of major houses with some relatives still living and known names...

 

Ps: Sorry for poor english too lazy to correct...