Cat is definitely the heir named in Robb's will

[kissdbyfire]

Hi @Elaena Targaryen, nice to see you around! 

Your post made me curious too, so I did a quick search on "oathbreaker" using A Search of Ice and Fire (all novels, TWoW, D&E, TRP, TPatQ) and got... 34 hits? Doesn't it seem like it's an incredibly low number? 

[Darkstream]

On 2017-6-20 at 3:00 AM, 40 Thousand Skeletons said:

Long story short, the only reasonable explanation is that the dagger was planted on purpose to help start the Wot5K, and the only one who could have planned for the assassin to fail was Bloodraven via warging summer and killing the guy himself.  

And what? Did BR fall asleep during the most crucial moment in his plan? Because if Cat had ran out to the library with Robb, Summer Bloodraven would have arrived too late, and Bran would be dead. Seems like quite the risky plan, just as is counting on Bran not dying from his fall.

[WSmith84]

Considering that many Houses followed Daemon Blackfyre, I don't really think that Westerosi lords are that opposed to following a bastard. Jon being a NW member complicates this of course, but Stannis also seemed to believe the North would follow Jon (and follow him in following Stannis, no less).

[kissdbyfire]

4 minutes ago, Darkstream said:

And what? Did BR fall asleep during the most crucial moment in his plan? Because if Cat had ran out to the library with Robb, Summer Bloodraven would have arrived too late, and Bran would be dead. Seems like quite the risky plan, just as is counting on Bran not dying from his fall.

Good points. And the theory that Bloodraven wanted for Bran to fall or orchestrated it or influenced it or whatever never made sense to me b/c when Bran starts climbing Summer is clearly upset, barking his head off and all.

 

2 minutes ago, WSmith84 said:

Considering that many Houses followed Daemon Blackfyre, I don't really think that Westerosi lords are that opposed to following a bastard. Jon being a NW member complicates this of course, but Stannis also seemed to believe the North would follow Jon (and follow him in following Stannis, no less).

Good point too. I had completely forgotten about that.

[Elaena Targaryen]

20 minutes ago, kissdbyfire said:

Hi @Elaena Targaryen, nice to see you around! 

Your post made me curious too, so I did a quick search on "oathbreaker" using A Search of Ice and Fire (all novels, TWoW, D&E, TRP, TPatQ) and got... 34 hits? Doesn't it seem like it's an incredibly low number? 

Hi kiss, it's good to see you too! Yea I've just been lurking occasionally.

Thanks for searching and yes that does seem really low.

The main case I recall off the top of my head that is relevant would be Maester Aemon being offered the crown even though he took similar vows to the NW as a maester. He turned it down and asked to be sent to the Wall to get away from court so his claim could not be used against his younger brother.

Now was it his refusal to be crowned, the people happy with Aegon's rule, being out of sight out of mind, double vows, taking the black, or whatever that worked? Like I said I haven't researched and I have a spotty memory.

13 minutes ago, WSmith84 said:

Considering that many Houses followed Daemon Blackfyre, I don't really think that Westerosi lords are that opposed to following a bastard. Jon being a NW member complicates this of course, but Stannis also seemed to believe the North would follow Jon (and follow him in following Stannis, no less).

Thank you! I forgot and this is important. Stannis felt Jon was the best shot to unite the north, and I don't think he was wrong. Stannis didn't see a problem releasing him from his vows. And you're right there are many cases of lords supporting bastards.

[Darkstream]

On 2017-6-21 at 6:32 AM, 40 Thousand Skeletons said:

I feel like she would be much less willing to burn Shireen for, say, a comatose Jon. We will have to wait for TWOW to find out.  

Or, say, to necessitate an army's ability to travel a couple of leagues, in a light snowfall.

...just saying.

Quote

but I have long thought that Shireen is a big innocent container of Chekov's king's blood 

Heh heh.

[St Daga]

1 hour ago, Elaena Targaryen said:

Davos says "As for the marriage, Tornmen was born of the same incest as Joffrey, and His Grace would sooner see Shireen dead than wed to such." so he seems to think the incest would be the true objection.

I agree that Stannis probably objects more to the incest thing than the bastard thing, but I don't know if he would still allow Shireen to marry a bastard not born of incest. Stannis does have some pretty stiff and proper ideas.

1 hour ago, Elaena Targaryen said:

I've always had the impression that Viserys fully intended to marry Dany and have children with her after he claimed the throne. Drogo was just a means to and end. Viserys did not consider their marriage valid and the child irrelevant. Dany belonged to him.

It makes sense that Viserys might have thought of Dany as his and planned to marry her at a later time, but it doesn't dismiss the idea that Dany and Drogo were married, enough that it is recognized in Essos and Westeros. That would make any child of their union legitimate. So that does not explain, to me anyway, why Viserys considered Rhaego to be a bastard. 

Now, he might have been using the term merely as an insult, which many people do in the series, and did not mean it literally.

1 hour ago, Elaena Targaryen said:

If you look into this further don't forget the term natural born and sometimes baseborn is used when discussing a bastard, then you have the Bastards of Wherever and searching the surnames.

Terms such as the Bastard of Winterfell, Bolton, Nightsong, Godsgrace, Driftmark, etc, did trigger in that search. Baseborn and natural born did not, so I might need to extend my research. Thanks for the idea!

1 hour ago, Elaena Targaryen said:

I hope you can research oath breakers as I would love to read it!

At a quick glance, there are not nearly so many times the term oathbreaker is used (compared to bastard), and it mostly comes up in correlation to Jon and Jaime, and what they think about them selves. I am hoping to look into it soon.

 

[kissdbyfire]

9 minutes ago, St Daga said:

I agree that Stannis probably objects more to the incest thing than the bastard thing, but I don't know if he would still allow Shireen to marry a bastard not born of incest. Stannis does have some pretty stiff and proper ideas.

Well, Stannis is the only highborn we've seen so far that believes in a meritocracy...

 

A Storm of Swords - Davos IV 

"I am lowborn," Davos reminded him. "An upjumped smuggler. Your lords will never obey me."

"Then we will make new lords."

 

9 minutes ago, St Daga said:

It makes sense that Viserys might have thought of Dany as his and planned to marry her at a later time, but it doesn't dismiss the idea that Dany and Drogo were married, enough that it is recognized in Essos and Westeros. That would make any child of their union legitimate. So that does not explain, to me anyway, why Viserys considered Rhaego to be a bastard. 

Now, he might have been using the term merely as an insult, which many people do in the series, and did not mean it literally.

 

That's my take on it. 

 

 

[St Daga]

19 hours ago, kissdbyfire said:

Well, Stannis is the only highborn we've seen so far that believes in a meritocracy...

This is a very good point .. but Stannis is using people to create an advantage for himself. I doubt he would consider making Jon Lord of Winterfell if he thought a true born son of Ned's was alive. 

However, Stannis does given Davos and his family great opportunity to better their circumstances and that can not be said of everyone (except Joffrey, who did give Janos Slynt a similar opportunity).

[Prof. Cecily]

 

On 6/22/2017 at 7:10 PM, Elaena Targaryen said:

Spoiler

 

So you truly believe Robb is completely fine with being the last of his eight thousand year line and ending his house? I feel the books themselves and the history they are based on fully prove otherwise.

We all read and analyze the books through a lens and while it's productive to do this from a modern perspective it's also enlightening, and at times essential, to examine the perspective of the time period. We all have our own opinions but really opinions can be anywhere from an educated opinion to flights of fancy, not that I don't enjoy and participate in the whole spectrum myself.  

Yes laws of inheritance are murky because there can be multiple claimants. Claim is the key word. It means being in the line of succession, a right to the rank. Cat can't be the heir since inheritance does not run backwards. Cat can't be the heir because Robb was crowned a dynastic king and Cat is not a queen. (also that House Tully was never a royal house and they have taken House Stark as their liege lord) Cat even says she was taught that the gods make kings. Cat is not even considered the Queen Mother since she was never married to a king, never crowned queen and because inheritance does not run backwards. (Not to mention jumping to a different tree entirely.)

 

Now regarding Jeyne... don't assume I think it's likely she will have a say in northern politics but she does have a right. Jeyne Westerling married King Robb Stark and was crowned his Queen. Jeyne is now the Dowager Queen since she is Robb's widow. The precedent cited in this thread is Lady Hornwood - which isn't a royal house like Robb's case and it's only a minor vassal that the liege lord had not yet made a ruling on the case - would equate with Jeyne before Cat since Jeyne is Robb's widow. Also Lady Hornwood most likely would have to name an heir of Hornwood blood and there are two choices, the bastard or a nephew - so if Jeyne did end up with a choice of Jon or a Vale cousin who would she choose knowing Robb's feelings on the matter? Again not that I believe it will ever come to that for Jeyne,  anymore than Cat, only that the right to do so can be argued.

Spoiler

 

I think you read this part incorrectly. Robb did know they were at Oldstones and he was merely asking if Cat knew the real name of the castle but it has been forgotten and lost to time.

I think Robb discusses and addresses all of Cat's concerns which leaves her without any argument later at the will signing.

Ok let's back up

Maybe but that does also support any alternate theory.

Robb is equating himself to the heir that failed and lamenting on not having an heir if proof of that. You have to ask yourself "how did Tristifer's heir fail him?" He failed by being the last of his line, by being the end of House Mudd, by being the end of a thousand year old royal dynasty.

I believe he addresses her issues and that leaves her without argument at the will signing. Point by point Robb breaks down the realities for Cat because let's face it she has become quite irrational and delusional at this point. Then he ends by clearly stating she has no say in the matter.

Robb has been trying to get rid of Cat since the beginning of the campaign and they all know it. He has been tired of her confrontational attitude and now in her grief it's unbearable. I love Cat and she's probably my favorite character, she's tragic and I feel she's a Casandra figure. But this is Robb's perspective we are discussing.

No Robb can not just name whoever the fuck he feels like as heir - the heir by definition has to be a claimant. There are claimants and the succession wars would destroy the kingdom.

So the trap.... They all have been having a very hard time and they are losing the war. They have lost family, heirs, castles, vassals and a whole region. They are trudging through the rain to grovel and beg. They finally receive wonderful news - Balon died and Victarion will leave a token force at Moat Cailin so Robb comes up with a great plan to retake it.

Cat's trap was trifold like the plan on MC. Cat has been a downer and quite nasty at times in her grief, which she's aware of. Cat truly was blindsided by being sent to Seagard, she was angered and argued against it but Robb ended it by making it a royal command. Then he pulled out the will (likely naming Jon heir) and Cat was speechless since she did not have an argument against it. Any points she would raise Robb has already shot down and she would look bitter and confrontational again against her sovereign when they finally have something going their way.

It is possible Robb made some provisions for Arya, particularly to appease Cat in her grief. It would explain why Alysane Mormont is with Stannis. We just don't know.

Why would Robb need to name a regent for his child when his queen would be there? Do you think Cat would not help and offer counsel? Do you think the vassals would completely disregard the Queen Mother? The more important appointment would be the war leader as neither Jeyne or Cat are capable.

 

Cat is also looking for Sansa and Arya.

There is plenty of precedent for bastards to inherit. I also find the oath breaker argument weak at this time but I have not studied it enough to debate yet since I didn't think you could break an oath if you were released from the vow. If you want to argue the Old Gods angle then you have to address why the northerners would have a problem with this and not with making Catelyn Tully follower of the Seven their sovereign.

Just because you disagree with another explanation does not mean it fails. This thread was large in scope with many other debatable points so the "trap" itself hasn't really been addressed seriously.

 

This was all my opinion and interpretation and I have not yet read anything that would sway me but I'm sure you feel the same 40 so good luck.

 

Oh well done! I hope you had fun!

 

I enjoy researching like this too but there is never enough time....

Spoiler

 

I remember the first thread I made in the old forum was analyzing the treatment of women and bastards in the different regions. If I recall correctly while the women did seem to be treated different depending on location the bastards didn't seem to be, Dorne and Free Folk exceptions for both, and bastards weren't treated as badly as you would first expect.

If you look into this further don't forget the term natural born and sometimes baseborn is used when discussing a bastard, then you have the Bastards of Wherever and searching the surnames.

Yes I would have loved to read that but I don't think Tywin could have ever admitted it.

 

Now Cersei is interesting... I recall Cat not seating Jon with the other Starks so he would not offend Cersei and Tyrion worries about Cersei's possible reaction to Oberyn bringing his bastard paramour to the royal wedding and seating her on the salt. But then Cersei names a bastard as the grand admiral with a seat on the council.

 

Culturally the treatment of bastards seems to come down to a matter of convenience.

 

Davos says "As for the marriage, Tornmen was born of the same incest as Joffrey, and His Grace would sooner see Shireen dead than wed to such." so he seems to think the incest would be the true objection.

From Stannis concerning Edric Storm

 "Did the boy charm you? He has that gift. He got it from his father, with the blood. He knows he is a king's son, but chooses to forget that he is bastard-born. And he worships Robert, as Renly did when he was young. My royal brother played the fond father on his visits to Storm's End, and there were gifts ... swords and ponies and fur-trimmed cloaks. The eunuch's work, every one. The boy would write the Red Keep full of thanks, and Robert would laugh and ask Varys what he'd sent this year. Renly was no better. He left the boy's upbringing to castellans and maesters, and every one fell victim to his charm. Penrose chose to die rather than give him up." The king ground his teeth together. "It still angers me. How could he think I would hurt the boy? I chose Robert, did I not? When that hard day came. I chose blood over honor."

-  and -

"I have told you, no."

 "He is only one baseborn boy, against all the boys of Westeros, and all the girls as well. Against all the children that might ever be born, in all the kingdoms of the world."

 "The boy is innocent."

 "The boy defiled your marriage bed, else you would surely have sons of your own. He shamed you."

 "Robert did that. Not the boy. My daughter has grown fond of him. And he is mine own blood."

I've always had the impression that Viserys fully intended to marry Dany and have children with her after he claimed the throne. Drogo was just a means to and end. Viserys did not consider their marriage valid and the child irrelevant. Dany belonged to him.

I hope you can research oath breakers as I would love to read it!

 

I hope you can research oath breakers as I would love to read it!

An interesting point about Queen Jeyne.

Though with the failed rebellion, and the prohibition to marry for two years, I wonder how much of a player she'll be in TWOW.

And yes, all hail https://asearchoficeandfire.com/

This marvellous search engine puts our researches on an entirely different level!

[Jon's Queen Consort]

On 19/6/2017 at 2:23 AM, 40 Thousand Skeletons said:

snip

I love the fact that you say that you haven't copied PJ's theory but you have said nothing about how baseless this is.

On 19/6/2017 at 2:29 AM, 40 Thousand Skeletons said:

I think you are really overstating the whole "traitor" thing. The only person we know for sure was even angry at Cat was Rickard Karstark, and that's because because he was "denied his vengeance" by her act. The Greatjon, in her defense, names her act to be a "mother's folly", and I think that slightly sexist attitude is probably more indicative of how everyone felt than Karstark's opinion. Carrying out an act deemed to be a "mother's folly" is not in same league as being a "traitor".

You are wrong, Cat herself had told that it was treason, Robb had sent her to house arrest because what she did was treason. Also no one would follow a person who he calls mad or the woman who had caused such animosity between Robb's major supporters.

[Daeronstarkaryen]

Post like this prove we need winds more than ever. We re read and re read over and over again AND start to see things that aren't there. Sometimes u have to call a spade a spade. Robb named Jon his heir. IT.IS.KNOWN 

[40 Thousand Skeletons]

12 minutes ago, Daeronstarkaryen said:

Post like this prove we need winds more than ever. We re read and re read over and over again AND start to see things that aren't there. Sometimes u have to call a spade a spade. Robb named Jon his heir. IT.IS.KNOWN 

I agree with the sentiment that there are many posts where people are reading into shit that isn't there, and sometimes you have to call a spade a spade.

However, I do not post such things. This thread is based on a straightforward interpretation of the text. If anything, I would (and have) argue that assuming Jon is the heir is twisting the meaning of the text and refusing to call a spade a spade.

 

[Daeronstarkaryen]

15 minutes ago, 40 Thousand Skeletons said:

I would (and have) argue that assuming Jon is the heir is twisting the meaning of the text and refusing to call a spade a spade.

 

How is taking Robb at face value when he says he plans to make jon is heir twisting the text? Even the text said cat stood there defeated there would be no bigger defeat than having to accept jon as heir to winterfell. I'll never understand people who like cat or would even want her to be the heir .( not saying u specifically just in general) 

[40 Thousand Skeletons]

1 hour ago, Daeronstarkaryen said:

How is taking Robb at face value when he says he plans to make jon is heir twisting the text? Even the text said cat stood there defeated there would be no bigger defeat than having to accept jon as heir to winterfell. I'll never understand people who like cat or would even want her to be the heir .( not saying u specifically just in general) 

I agree there would be no bigger defeat than accepting Jon as heir. But being named heir herself would also make her feel defeated.

I don't like Cat or want her to be the heir, but I think she is. I didn't want Dany to greenlight the torture of innocent people, but it happened.

Robb was in the process of "trapping" Cat, as she alluded to in the last line of the chapter, so to call a spade a spade, we should assume Robb was tricking her into something significant in their earlier conversation and, therefore, he was being disingenuous when he claimed that he would make Jon his heir, which was the basically the point of the entire conversation.

Earlier in ASOS, Robb traps Cat in a much less impressive trap, showing us that Robb is capable of such behavior and has quickly learned some things about diplomacy since becoming a king. Cat even noted that:

Quote

On his head was the sword crown they had fashioned him of bronze and iron. He bears it more comfortably now. He bears it like a king.

Anyways, here is Robb's "warm-up" trap from ASOS Catelyn II. First, Robb summoned Cat to the great hall when everyone was still there, and the following conversation ensued:

Quote

“Leave off, Karstark,” rumbled the Greatjon, crossing his huge arms against his chest. “It was a mother’s folly. Women are made that way.”

“A mother’s folly?” Lord Karstark rounded on Lord Umber. “I name it treason.”

“Enough.” For just an instant Robb sounded more like Brandon than his father. “No man calls my lady of Winterfell a traitor in my hearing, Lord Rickard.” When he turned to Catelyn, his voice softened. “If I could wish the Kingslayer back in chains I would. You freed him without my knowledge or consent … but what you did, I know you did for love. For Arya and Sansa, and out of grief for Bran and Rickon. Love’s not always wise, I’ve learned. It can lead us to great folly, but we follow our hearts … wherever they take us. Don’t we, Mother?”

Is that what I did? “If my heart led me into folly, I would gladly make whatever amends I can to Lord Karstark and yourself.”

Lord Rickard’s face was implacable. “Will your amends warm Torrhen and Eddard in the cold graves where the Kingslayer laid them?” He shouldered between the Greatjon and Maege Mormont and left the hall.

Robb made no move to detain him. “Forgive him, Mother.”

“If you will forgive me.”

“I have. I know what it is to love so greatly you can think of nothing else.”

Catelyn bowed her head. “Thank you.” I have not lost this child, at least.

“We must talk,” Robb went on. “You and my uncles. Of this and … other things. Steward, call an end.”

... [blah blah blah introduction of the Westerlings] ...

The maid came forward last, and very shy. Robb took her hand. “Mother,” he said, “I have the great honor to present you the Lady Jeyne Westerling. Lord Gawen’s elder daughter, and my … ah … my lady wife.”

The first thought that flew across Catelyn’s mind was, No, that cannot be, you are only a child.

The second was, And besides, you have pledged another.

The third was, Mother have mercy, Robb, what have you done?

Only then came her belated remembrance. Follies done for love? He has bagged me neat as a hare in a snare. I seem to have already forgiven him. Mixed with her annoyance was a rueful admiration; the scene had been staged with the cunning worthy of a master mummer … or a king. Catelyn saw no choice but to take Jeyne Westerling’s hands. “I have a new daughter,” she said, more stiffly than she’d intended. She kissed the terrified girl on both cheeks. “Be welcome to our hall and hearth.”

 

OK, so we have established that as of ASOS Catelyn II, Robb is acting more like a king, and was capable at least of enough trickery to stage a scene with the cunning worthy of a master mummer... or a king. So if we are calling a spade a spade, we should expect Robb's later "trap" in ASOS Catelyn V to be even more impressive than this one, and we should be on the lookout for some more master mummery. And SURE ENOUGH, it seems clear that Robb was setting up his second trap with their private conversation that ended with Robb disingenuously declaring that Jon would be named his heir, you know, like a master mummer would do. His trap was so impressive in fact, that Cat compares it to his military plan for taking Moat Cailin. And I explained how this trap was laid out in the OP.

Other spades...

Robb informed everyone except Cat that she was being sent to Seagard after the wedding to keep her safe. Why didn't he tell Cat? Because this info was directly related to her being heir and part of his trap. Upon learning she is being named the heir, she is immediately made aware that all the other lords there are already on board with this decision and support it. And since she explicitly promised to support Robb in any decision other than naming Jon as heir, she has been trapped into fully supporting Robb. And really, this is the only possible decision Robb would even need her support for. Cat holds little power over anyone other than herself.

Finally, and perhaps most importantly, the entire point of naming an heir was to avoid the type of "chaos" that ensued when Balon died. In other words... Robb's heir should be someone who is the known and agreed upon choice, but also someone who is, you know, made aware they have been named the heir to a kingdom and also preferably somewhere in the vicinity of Robb's army and bannermen! Not only does Robb apparently think (according to most people on the forum) that naming Jon heir without telling him was a fine idea, ROBB DOESN'T EVEN KNOW IF JON IS ALIVE OR WHERE HE IS IF HE IS ALIVE, and he certainly didn't bother checking with the NW to get a status update before signing his will.

In fact, where is Jon when Robb is naming his heir??? OH YEAH... he is meeting with Mance Rayder. 

For all the people at the Wall know, Jon is dead, along with about 300 other good men who were attacked at the Fist. And even the people who were at the fist think Jon and the other scouting parties are likely dead.

Quote

That was only because of Jon, though. If it weren't for Jon, none of them would have liked me. And now Jon was gone, lost in the Skirling Pass with Qhorin Halfhand, most likely dead. Sam would have cried for him, but those tears would only freeze as well, and he could scarcely keep his eyes open now.

But yes, everyone seems to think that it is a no-brainer that Robb named a bastard would-be oathbreaker and potentially dead (but at a bare minimum MIA) person as his heir without anyone telling Jon, when really that is ridiculous because it would fail to address the entire point of naming an heir: avoiding chaos in the event of Robb's death. What happened when Robb died? Did his heir Jon immediately take over in a smooth, nonchaotic fashion? No. Unfortunately for Robb's kingdom, his heir was killed with him.

[40 Thousand Skeletons]

On 6/23/2017 at 2:39 PM, The Doctor's Consort said:

I love the fact that you say that you haven't copied PJ's theory but you have said nothing about how baseless this is.

You are wrong, Cat herself had told that it was treason, Robb had sent her to house arrest because what she did was treason. Also no one would follow a person who he calls mad or the woman who had caused such animosity between Robb's major supporters.

My whole OP was implied to be non-baseless you silly goose  

Actually you are wrong . Cat put herself under house arrest and was released upon Robb's arrival. Cat didn't cause so much animosity. Karstark was just pissed off about his sons dying and taking out his anger on Cat which was nonsense. He had it in his head that he would get the chance to take his vengeance out on Jaime. Realistically, that was never going to happen.

[40 Thousand Skeletons]

On 6/22/2017 at 1:49 PM, WSmith84 said:

Considering that many Houses followed Daemon Blackfyre, I don't really think that Westerosi lords are that opposed to following a bastard. Jon being a NW member complicates this of course, but Stannis also seemed to believe the North would follow Jon (and follow him in following Stannis, no less).

Half the point of the Blackfyre rebellion was specifically to show that a good number of Westerosi lords are not OK with following a bastard.

[40 Thousand Skeletons]

On 6/22/2017 at 1:48 PM, Darkstream said:

And what? Did BR fall asleep during the most crucial moment in his plan? Because if Cat had ran out to the library with Robb, Summer Bloodraven would have arrived too late, and Bran would be dead. Seems like quite the risky plan, just as is counting on Bran not dying from his fall.

Yet his plan worked out perfectly. Check out my grand theory on Bloodraven and the weirnet if you want all the details  

[WSmith84]

Just now, 40 Thousand Skeletons said:

Half the point of the Blackfyre rebellion was specifically to show that a good number of Westerosi lords are not OK with following a bastard.

Yet a good number did. And Stannis still expects the North to follow Jon. Daemon Blackfyre wasn't an unsupported nobody; plenty of people considered him his father's true heir because of his skill at arms and fancy sword.

[40 Thousand Skeletons]

Just now, WSmith84 said:

Yet a good number did. And Stannis still expects the North to follow Jon. Daemon Blackfyre wasn't an unsupported nobody; plenty of people considered him his father's true heir because of his skill at arms and fancy sword.

Stannis didn't exactly have a lot of options. Though I do think that he subsequently learned Rickon was alive and is currently allied with Manderly and company. My point is that it was a super mixed bag as far as lords supporting a bastard went, and I wouldn't be surprised if the north was a similar mixed bag. It is, at a minimum, not ideal for Jon to be a bastard if Robb wants to make him the heir.