Jump to content
Sign in to follow this  
Ser Leo Targaryen

Independent North

Recommended Posts

I actually enjoyed the episode overall. It's been such a shitty season overall. I think my expectations were already lowered and I gave up on hoping for things to come together... 

But I cant' really stand by the "Independent North" plot.

I always believed there would be no Iron throne, and it was a pleasing end. Bet in some sort of democracy as well... But the interesting thing about this is to get some balance of powers. No more dynasties.

But with the North independent, it is just a matter of time. Give a generation, Sansa and Bran are gone, and the wars will start again, over a new throne or whatever new symbol they make...

Not that eternal peace was to be expected, but something a bit more balanced with space to grow would have been nice.

And don't get me started with the fact that the King of the 6 kingdoms is from the one Kingdom that doesn't belong to the 6. 

It Reeks of fan service to me. Just to make Sansa a queen of sorts...

She did look stunning with that crown, though! :)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I don't mind the North being an independent kingdom after all is said and done. I actualy would prefer it this way.

But as everything else this season, it's how we got there. It's forced, rushed, illogical and not very belivable.

That council meeting is the single most ridiculous scene of the entire series, from a Westerosi political point of view. Yikes.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Unlike the other kingdoms, the North is both very remote and it had very little history with any of its neighbours. Getting to The Neck in the first place is straying outside the sphere of civilization, and from there you're barely halfway to Winterfell from King's Landing. The North was less involved in the inter-kingdom wars than the others were, less integrated with the central power in King's Landing, and presumably it didn't trade as much with the others either. It being independent wouldn't change much.

As for why the others would not declare independence as well, I guess it's because they saw the benefits of centralized rule to a much greater degree. There would be fewer wars between the small kingdoms, it would be easier to trade and travel in the more densely populated parts of the country, and should another queen come across the sea with funny ideas, they could stand together and whoop her behind before she torches another city.

I presume that Dorne and the Iron Island could get ideas of independence as well, being similarly isolated as the North, but Dorne was in no position to negotiate at this particular meeting, and Yara remembers how her father's rebellions went. Maybe the issue could be raised the next time the council gathers to elect a king, but for now neither of them could press the issue.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Fan service and nothing else...... I mean Bran STARK is king of Westeros, why would any Northern lord be opposed to bending the knee to a Stark. Answer is they wouldnt.......

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Yea, Sansa pulled a pretty bitch move to Bran, "I'm sure you'll make a good king Bran, but I want nothing to do with your Kingdom and want to be Queen of my own. Bye".

 

It almost felt that plot "twist" was just their as an apology for the way Sansa was treated for the first 5 years of the show. I wouldn't past D&D, who only cared about fan service in the past few seasons of this show, regardless of the logic behind it.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I like an independent North but The iron islands have always wanted independence, and Yara and Dany discussed eventual independence on very friendly terms. She would have tried again before bending the knee to a Stark. Dorne is practically a foreign land on the show, and the Dornish have only been part of the seven kingdoms for approx 100 years, why would they sign on to this new and unstable government? I can only really see the logic behind the Vale, the Westerlands and the Riverlands  signing on because they don’t seem to have any separatist streak that we’ve seen in the show or the books really. The Reach is weakened and unstable and Bronn has every reason to want to align with the crown, so I buy that. I guess ditto for the Stormlands. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
10 minutes ago, sifth said:

Yea, Sansa pulled a pretty bitch move to Bran, "I'm sure you'll make a good king Bran, but I want nothing to do with your Kingdom and wan

It almost felt that plot "twist" was just their as an apology for the way Sansa was treated for the first 5 years of the show. I wouldn't past D&D, who only cared about fan service in the past few seasons of this show, regardless of the logic behind it.

I have little doubt that, at least where the Stark kids are concerned, their fates were determined by the outline GRRM gave them.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
32 minutes ago, Anthony Pirtle said:

I have little doubt that, at least where the Stark kids are concerned, their fates were determined by the outline GRRM gave them.

I don't know, the North suddenly becoming independent and no one caring, seems a little too "happily ever after", if you ask me and we all know GRRM doesn't do that.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Posted (edited)
On 5/21/2019 at 12:28 PM, Stormking902 said:

Fan service and nothing else...... I mean Bran STARK is king of Westeros, why would any Northern lord be opposed to bending the knee to a Stark. Answer is they wouldnt.......

Its not an inherited title. Next they could be ruled by a Lannister or a Hightower.

What gets me is why the other 6 Kingdoms that follow the 7 would be OK with the Greenseer of the Old Gods being King. How is that coronation going to go. The faith must be absolutely decimated in the books for this to happen

Edited by AryaNymeriaVisenya

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 5/21/2019 at 6:28 AM, Stormking902 said:

Fan service and nothing else...... I mean Bran STARK is king of Westeros, why would any Northern lord be opposed to bending the knee to a Stark. Answer is they wouldnt.......

No. The answer is: Because the next one probably wouldn’t be.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

It is actually a clever move by Sansa here. Particularly if she remarries Tyrion. It would be a dynastic marriage of convenience and Tyrion would not appear too often at Winterfell to cram her style. 

As queen in the north, Sansa has complete autonomy. Which is probably better than trying to rule in the South. Tyrion has that headache. He is effectively Prime Minister and Bran is little more than a figurehead.

Marrying Tyrion would give her descendants the North and the Rock making two out of the eight votes for the next king. They would undoubtedly have the necessary quorum through dynastic marriages by the time Bran passed on and it is quite possible that the next King would also be a greenseer and 3ER.

Meanwhile, Jon is in effect King beyond the wall. To the extent the title has any meaning at all. Quite likely a majority of the Watch are wildings at this point. With the NK gone, there is no need for the wall.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
6 hours ago, hallam said:

It is actually a clever move by Sansa here. Particularly if she remarries Tyrion. It would be a dynastic marriage of convenience and Tyrion would not appear too often at Winterfell to cram her style. 

As queen in the north, Sansa has complete autonomy. Which is probably better than trying to rule in the South. Tyrion has that headache. He is effectively Prime Minister and Bran is little more than a figurehead.

Marrying Tyrion would give her descendants the North and the Rock making two out of the eight votes for the next king. They would undoubtedly have the necessary quorum through dynastic marriages by the time Bran passed on and it is quite possible that the next King would also be a greenseer and 3ER.

Meanwhile, Jon is in effect King beyond the wall. To the extent the title has any meaning at all. Quite likely a majority of the Watch are wildings at this point. With the NK gone, there is no need for the wall.

The wall mostly still stands. It’s purpose is being a prison and it was that before they knew the night king was back. When Jon first went to the Nights watch it was not a glamorous place. There will always be a Night’s Watch. It’s Tyrion preferred method of punishment for nobles, bastards and broken men. In a few years there could be a few 100 non wildlings at the wall because of Tyrion/Bran and Sansa using it as a way to punish men they don’t want to kill.

The NW was the least problematic thing in the episode. The NW went back to what it was in the second episode of the first season just like Jon. A place remove bastards and broken men from society. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

There are several issues with this question.

First and obvious one, Sansa is not the ruler of the North. Which is made obvious by her being crowned after the council scene. So its pretty damn obvious she was not yet Queen in the North when she asked for independence. 

So who was the ruler of the North? JON!!!!!!!!! 

As far as we have seen, Jon had not been deposed. So he was still acting KING IN THE NORTH. 

Therefore, any independence stuff should have been Jon´s call and Jon alone. 

Also, if Jon could or would not be KING IN THE NORTH, Bran would still be above Sansa. Now we know Bran abdicated the Lord of Winterfell position in favor of Sansa. But Bran said nothing yet about the KING IN THE NORTH title. And Bran would no doubt have a say on that title. 

So, if Bran wants to be King, which in the end seems to be what he wants, why does he not also want to be KING IN  THE NORTH? And this admitting they somehow got Jon out of the way…..which they really did not. They just seem to forget Jon should still be KING IN THE NORTH. 

Ohh…..and by the way…..if the North then gets independent, what jurisdiction does Bran have over Jon???? Or anyone outside the North? Does the North not condone what Jon did? I am pretty sure Sansa was ok with killing Dany. So why the hell would she not see Jon as still her king??? 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Posted (edited)

An independent North with a Stark king of the remaining 6 kingdoms is just dumb and a complete betrayal by D&D of the entire Westeros/ASOIAF universe.  We spent 6 seasons (and all of the books) learning about just how much the Lannisters and Starks hate each other, the Greyjoys and the Starks hate each other, the Martells and the Lannisters hate each other.  Yes, a lot of the lord paramount families are gone, but the remaining lords in those kingdoms surely have mistrust of other kingdoms/families in a similar fashion.  The idea that, at a minimum, Dorne and the Iron Islands would not demand independence the minute the North demands it is laughable - and that's ignoring who the King is - put a Stark on the throne, and I doubt most of the Westerlands would be very thrilled and might demand independence too.  The Reach and the Stormlands probably would be a more neutral.  About the only areas that would be ok with a Stark king are the Riverlands and the Vale, but even they would probably have issues with the North being independent.

Just think back to that rich, complex, political universe that made you love the books and early seasons of the show, and ask, if you had read a political scene like this, would you have kept interest in the story?  It's laughable.  Almost none of it makes sense, and it feels like D&D just didn't care anymore, and wanted to just be done with the show so they can get on to f'ing up Star Wars.  

Edited by Lord Stackspear

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Posted (edited)
17 minutes ago, RSasoiaf said:

There are several issues with this question.

First and obvious one, Sansa is not the ruler of the North. Which is made obvious by her being crowned after the council scene. So its pretty damn obvious she was not yet Queen in the North when she asked for independence. 

So who was the ruler of the North? JON!!!!!!!!! 

As far as we have seen, Jon had not been deposed. So he was still acting KING IN THE NORTH. 

Therefore, any independence stuff should have been Jon´s call and Jon alone. 

Also, if Jon could or would not be KING IN THE NORTH, Bran would still be above Sansa. Now we know Bran abdicated the Lord of Winterfell position in favor of Sansa. But Bran said nothing yet about the KING IN THE NORTH title. And Bran would no doubt have a say on that title. 

So, if Bran wants to be King, which in the end seems to be what he wants, why does he not also want to be KING IN  THE NORTH? And this admitting they somehow got Jon out of the way…..which they really did not. They just seem to forget Jon should still be KING IN THE NORTH. 

Ohh…..and by the way…..if the North then gets independent, what jurisdiction does Bran have over Jon???? Or anyone outside the North? Does the North not condone what Jon did? I am pretty sure Sansa was ok with killing Dany. So why the hell would she not see Jon as still her king??? 

Sansa could have been asking for an independent north for Jon but once Jon took the black he gave up the throne. The North was given independence before Jon was punished. Sansa says the north just lost their king before he takes the boat. 

So it 7 kingdoms picked a king. The king made the north independent but the north’s king just killed the previous queen of the 7 kingdom in the capital city. Jon is a captured man and he is facing the ruling of the kingdom he was captured in. He was sentenced to the wall. Once he takes the black he gives up the northern Throne and claims to the southern one too. Sansa becomes queen since she was Jon’s heir. And Bran has no one to come after his throne. 

Jon does not want to rule. Bran gave Jon an out. Jon is basically Aemon. 

Edited by King Jon Snow Stark

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Obviously Theresa May hasn't watched Game of Thrones. She could have learned something from Sansa.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, RSasoiaf said:

 

So who was the ruler of the North? JON!!!!!!!!! 

As far as we have seen, Jon had not been deposed. So he was still acting KING IN THE NORTH. 

 

 

No, he wasn't anymore. As Lyanna Mormont said in ep1 : what are you now ? a Lord ? nothing at all ?

As he bent the knee, Daenerys was the ruler and she named him warden of the North. That's what he is.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Posted (edited)
2 hours ago, valgrel said:

No, he wasn't anymore. As Lyanna Mormont said in ep1 : what are you now ? a Lord ? nothing at all ?

As he bent the knee, Daenerys was the ruler and she named him warden of the North. That's what he is.

Daenerys was officially queen yet. Sansa says The North just lost their King during the last scene with 4 Starks. So Jon was still viewed as King. He loses all his titles once he takes the NW oath. 

Edited by King Jon Snow Stark

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
Sign in to follow this  

×