So once again...the writers forgot about Gendry

[Ser Davos' Finger Nubs]

1 hour ago, Zorral said:

Sansa has charisma; she has been front and center in most of the great events that have taken place in the 6 - or 7 whatever kingdoms during these last 8 years.  She's been instrumental for many actions -- and she's survived.  Here brother is king.  She's going to be queen.  Edmure is a twit like Jared Kushner.  He persists in blathering when he's accomplished exactly zilch and sat in prison for most of the time.  Just coz you don't like and don't want a woman to be in charge and tell a fellow to stfu -- well, it's fact on the show and that you hate it is dangerously close to sexist, since you are living in the 21st century, not the 14th.

And in the meantime Queen of France, Blanche of Castile, and many another ruling woman of medieval times would take off your head for talking about them the way you talk about Sansa.

You said Edmure has sat in prison most of the time, while Sansa was a prisoner for seasons 2-6...

He is her uncle and her elder, regardless of how incompetent he is. She has been rude and arrogant for the past 2 seasons. 

What if he told her to "sit down" or "shut up" when she was asking for Northern independence? Would that have been ok?

[Anthony Pirtle]

They didn't forget about him. They just wrapped up his story in a more perfunctory manner than you would have liked. I feel the same way about most of the characters, but oh well, this is their show. But seriously, he never had a good claim. He was a bastard, only legitimized by the restored dynasty which wiped out his father's. He was lucky to get what he got.

[King Jon Snow Stark]

40 minutes ago, Ser Davos' Finger Nubs said:

You said Edmure has sat in prison most of the time, while Sansa was a prisoner for seasons 2-6...

He is her uncle and her elder, regardless of how incompetent he is. She has been rude and arrogant for the past 2 seasons. 

What if he told her to "sit down" or "shut up" when she was asking for Northern independence? Would that have been ok?

Yes it would have been it’s how Tullys talk to each other.

[hallam]

6 hours ago, Nowy Tends said:

Say again??? We're talking about Edmure Tully, Lord of Riverrun and Lord Paramount of the Trident. He agreed to be Robb's vassal, yes, but I can't see how he could be Sandra Lannister-Bolton's vassal… what a joke

I was thinking that since it was Arya Stark who singlehandedly murdered the entire Frey clan and baked them in a pie for Walder, that would make her the natural lord of the Riverlands by right of conquest. 

She found Edmure in a dungeon, remember.

[Nowy Tends]

1 minute ago, hallam said:

She found Edmure in a dungeon, remember.

Not to my knowledge.

[the red god]

3 hours ago, Anthony Pirtle said:

They didn't forget about him. They just wrapped up his story in a more perfunctory manner than you would have liked. I feel the same way about most of the characters, but oh well, this is their show. But seriously, he never had a good claim. He was a bastard, only legitimized by the restored dynasty which wiped out his father's. He was lucky to get what he got.

bran had literally no claim nor merit to the throne and look how that turned out. if gendry had no legitimate claim, then the lannisters wouldn't have been dead set on murdering the last remaining bastard of bobby b.

[Anthony Pirtle]

7 hours ago, the red god said:

bran had literally no claim nor merit to the throne and look how that turned out. if gendry had no legitimate claim, then the lannisters wouldn't have been dead set on murdering the last remaining bastard of bobby b.

Of course Bran didn't have a claim. No one claimed he had a claim. He was made king by acclamation. 

Cersei tried to kill as many of Robert's bastards as she could get her hands on, not because they had a justifiable claim, but because none of her children had any more right to the throne than they did. That made them dangerous rallying points for revolts if the truth about Robert having no legitimate heir got out.

The long and short of it is that Gendry had no serious claim before being legitimized, because he was a bastard, and he had no serious claim after being legitimized, because the Targaryens were restored. But he gets to be a Lord Paramount, so good for him.

[RSasoiaf]

Well….

I know this is not about Gendry and here we go but…...

Why the hell does Sandra even have a vote???? She is Lady of Winterfell but JON IS KING IN THE NORTH!!!!!!!

When and how the hell did Sandra depose Jon???? Does Jon not get to vote because he is in prison????? Well….Tyrion sure managed to get to vote so why is Jon not there???? 

Did they just forget Jon is KING IN THE NORTH??? 

Apparently not because they felt the need to crown Sansa a couple scenes later. So they did somewhat confirm that she was not yet the ruler of the North. So again, why the hell was the KING IN THE NORTH not there to vote??? LOOOL

[Mikkel]

1 hour ago, Anthony Pirtle said:

Cersei tried to kill as many of Robert's bastards as she could get her hands on, not because they had a justifiable claim, but because none of her children had any more right to the throne than they did. That made them dangerous rallying points for revolts if the truth about Robert having no legitimate heir got out.

Not to mention dangerous reminders that any child of Robert's has jet-black Baratheon hair, no matter who their mother is, but not Cersei's (for obvious reasons).

[martianmister]

I think it's obvious that none of the lords had any respect for Edmure and Sansa was trying to stop her uncle from ashaming himself.

[Deminelle]

3 minutes ago, martianmister said:

I think it's obvious that none of the lords had any respect for Edmure and Sansa was trying to stop her uncle from ashaming himself.

For a while I expected them to tell everyone next that Jon has a claim and he will take the throne. 

[AryaNymeriaVisenya]

34 minutes ago, RSasoiaf said:

Well….

I know this is not about Gendry and here we go but…...

Why the hell does Sandra even have a vote???? She is Lady of Winterfell but JON IS KING IN THE NORTH!!!!!!!

When and how the hell did Sandra depose Jon???? Does Jon not get to vote because he is in prison????? Well….Tyrion sure managed to get to vote so why is Jon not there???? 

Did they just forget Jon is KING IN THE NORTH??? 

Apparently not because they felt the need to crown Sansa a couple scenes later. So they did somewhat confirm that she was not yet the ruler of the North. So again, why the hell was the KING IN THE NORTH not there to vote??? LOOOL

Jon hasn't been King in the North since he bent the knee to Daenerys. He is imprisoned and was complicit in her attack on King's Landing before it got out of his control. I don't think Tyrion got a vote, he made the suggestion. Sam was the first to vote on the suggestion

[RSasoiaf]

7 minutes ago, AryaNymeriaVisenya said:

Jon hasn't been King in the North since he bent the knee to Daenerys. He is imprisoned and was complicit in her attack on King's Landing before it got out of his control. I don't think Tyrion got a vote, he made the suggestion. Sam was the first to vote on the suggestion

This is not how it works

Jon bent the knee but he still rules the North. 

The position of King in The North does not vanish. You also did not see Jon abdicate that position. 

And above all, I will repeat, Jon still rules the North, not Sansa!!!!!

[AryaNymeriaVisenya]

Just now, RSasoiaf said:

This is not how it works

Jon bent the knee but he still rules the North. 

The position of King in The North does not vanish. You also did not see Jon abdicate that position. 

And above all, I will repeat, Jon still rules the North, not Sansa!!!!!

Yes the position of King in the North does vanish when you acknowledge a Queen of the Seven Kingdoms. That is the reason Ned wasn't King. Torrhen knelt. She made him Warden of the North, a military position. Sansa has been acting as Lady Paramount all season, co-coordinating the Northern houses. Ned Umber answered to her first, not Jon or Dany. If she were merely Lady of Winterfell he would not have to answer to her at all.

[RSasoiaf]

4 minutes ago, AryaNymeriaVisenya said:

Yes the position of King in the North does vanish when you acknowledge a Queen of the Seven Kingdoms. That is the reason Ned wasn't King. Torrhen knelt. She made him Warden of the North, a military position. Sansa has been acting as Lady Paramount all season, co-coordinating the Northern houses. Ned Umber answered to her first, not Jon or Dany. If she were merely Lady of Winterfell he would not have to answer to her at all.

Then would you care to explain why the Dornish are still princes????? 

You are confusing conquest with someone independent deciding to be a vassal. There are nuances. 

I will grant that the show just does not care or knows how to explain these things. But they could and would not be the same. 

Dorne does not have an equal status to the other 7 kingdoms, therefore, their rulers are still called Princes. 

As for Jon, he was not at war with Dany and Dany was not yet Queen of the 7 Kingdoms. So their relations would have to be formerly set if she ever got to sit the Iron Throne. But from a medieval perspective, Jon would not be in a position of a defeated kingdom. He would be more like an allied Kingdom. And Dany would likely give him the deserving status. If Dany did not, then the North would not have fun with it and there would have to be another war to settle it. 

[RSasoiaf]

13 minutes ago, AryaNymeriaVisenya said:

Yes the position of King in the North does vanish when you acknowledge a Queen of the Seven Kingdoms. That is the reason Ned wasn't King. Torrhen knelt. She made him Warden of the North, a military position. Sansa has been acting as Lady Paramount all season, co-coordinating the Northern houses. Ned Umber answered to her first, not Jon or Dany. If she were merely Lady of Winterfell he would not have to answer to her at all.

By the way, if you wish to see an example on how Dorne did not have the same status, notice their succession laws. 

In Dorne, women get to be in line at the same level as men. And they keep this law which is not the same as the rest of the 7 kingdoms. 

This is where you can see the nuances. Dorne is a vassal kingdom and they have their own laws. Sure they will support the Iron Throne in wars if called. But they have their independent law which is dictated by Dorne and Dorne alone. 

[AryaNymeriaVisenya]

8 minutes ago, RSasoiaf said:

Then would you care to explain why the Dornish are still princes????? 

You are confusing conquest with someone independent deciding to be a vassal. There are nuances. 

I will grant that the show just does not care or knows how to explain these things. But they could and would not be the same. 

Dorne does not have an equal status to the other 7 kingdoms, therefore, their rulers are still called Princes. 

As for Jon, he was not at war with Dany and Dany was not yet Queen of the 7 Kingdoms. So their relations would have to be formerly set if she ever got to sit the Iron Throne. But from a medieval perspective, Jon would not be in a position of a defeated kingdom. He would be more like an allied Kingdom. And Dany would likely give him the deserving status. If Dany did not, then the North would not have fun with it and there would have to be another war to settle it. 

The Dornish never knelt to Aegon, they married into House Targaryen and so kept their titles. 'Unbowed, Unbent, Unbroken'

[Orphalesion]

With all those titles it's also important to remember that for the whole series people gave themselves all sorts of titles (King of Westeros, King in the North etc.)....without ever having the chance to consolidate their titles. Renly, Stannis, Robb, Balon, Jon...they were all just rebels from the perspective of the Iron Throne and never were able to force the Seven Kingdoms to accept and acknowledge their sovereignty.

There wasn't an officially recognized King in the North in the entire show, just claimants to the title, until Sansa managed to have the "Six" Kingdoms recognize her succession. She's the first internationally recognized Monarch in the North since Torrhen Stark.

"Calling yourself king doesn't make you one..."

[RSasoiaf]

So you people are telling me that the Lannisters could have invited Bran over and ask him to stop the war??? 

Is this really what you people are telling me??? 

Because its the same situation but just reversed. Robb was declared King in the North and Bran was acting Lord of Winterfell. 

Do you really think Bran would have the power to do that kind of stuff without Robb?

Just to get things clear

[RSasoiaf]

43 minutes ago, Orphalesion said:

With all those titles it's also important to remember that for the whole series people gave themselves all sorts of titles (King of Westeros, King in the North etc.)....without ever having the chance to consolidate their titles. Renly, Stannis, Robb, Balon, Jon...they were all just rebels from the perspective of the Iron Throne and never were able to force the Seven Kingdoms to accept and acknowledge their sovereignty.

There wasn't an officially recognized King in the North in the entire show, just claimants to the title, until Sansa managed to have the "Six" Kingdoms recognize her succession. She's the first internationally recognized Monarch in the North since Torrhen Stark.

"Calling yourself king doesn't make you one..."

The last quote is a very simple quote. 

It goes over the fact that no one started calling themselves King. Neither Robb or Jon did that. 

They were called that by their people. Which gets things much more complicated. It means there is a real independence movement behind them. It means that even if they are killed, someone else may take that idea forward. Because the idea is there. 

Now, granted, they need to be recognized. This much is true. And its also true the Iron Throne never did that. But the North did manage to overthrow the Iron Throne when they kicked the Boltons out. The Boltons were in fact the Iron Throne recognized wardens of the North. So when the North did that, and with active support from the Vale, the North became indeed independent. There was no way the Iron Throne had any power anymore over the North. Neither did Dany, whatever she was at the time. 

So, when Jon meets Dany the North is in fact independent. 

You are independent the day that none can force you do anything. And Jon was not forced into anything. Which is much different from is ancestor who was in a position of bend the knee or get barbecued.