To The Wall / To The King

[divica]

Just now, kissdbyfire said:

Well, it depends on when the will turns up. As of the end of Dance (f)Arya just got married to Ramsay. 

But if I am not mistaken, Robb thought his sister either lost or dead. 

It doesn't matter when she will turn up. What matters is what Robb thinks about her whereabouts. And he never thought there was a chance of finding her in a near future... 

[kissdbyfire]

2 minutes ago, divica said:

But if I am not mistaken, Robb thought his sister either lost or dead. 

It doesn't matter when she will turn up. What matters is what Robb thinks about her whereabouts. And he never thought there was a chance of finding her in a near future... 

That’s not the point. The point is, if Robb decided to legitimise Jon and name him his heir, he may have added Arya in some way even if he believed she was dead or lost forever, to appease Cat a little. And if he did it, and the will turns up right about “now”, it will create an interesting situation b/c (f)Arya is married to Ramsay Bolton. 

And no, it’s not normal to mention all your siblings and explain why they’re out and leave one out. It’s actually ridiculous to think he forgot her, or thought she wasn’t worth mentioning. 

[divica]

4 minutes ago, kissdbyfire said:

That’s not the point. The point is, if Robb decided to legitimise Jon and name him his heir, he may have added Arya in some way even if he believed she was dead or lost forever, to appease Cat a little. And if he did it, and the will turns up right about “now”, it will create an interesting situation b/c (f)Arya is married to Ramsay Bolton. 

And no, it’s not normal to mention all your siblings and explain why they’re out and leave one out. It’s actually ridiculous to think he forgot her, or thought she wasn’t worth mentioning. 

That is actually a good point. 

However Arya is also a minor. So if Robb did add her he probably named someone regent while she was a minor. There is a good chance it was jon because Robb needs him out of the NW as soon as possible if he dies and arya is not around. 

 

And if Jon gets to live he will know that farya is fake. Besides the fact that there must be more nobles and other people that know she isn't Arya... I Don t think she will try to rule the north... 

[House Of Wolves]

1 hour ago, divica said:

I don t know if the northern lords might also dispute that the will was written thinking bran and rickon were dead. Depending on how they view jon and bastards in general they might want to find any excuse available to not follow jon.

I don t think jon will refuse the throne. Not because he really wants it, but because he is the best choice to unite the north agains the ww. The wildlings won t follow a child. Neither bran or rickon know enough to unite the north and prepare it for the greatest war in generations. It is idiotic to follow children into war. The north needs someone wise to make aliances with the wildlings, the remaining iron born and whoever else might be available...

And while jon might be able to solve a lot of the issues being regent I think he needs to make too many unpopular decisions. He will need enough autority so that people don t question or undermine him.

While Technically anyone could try to dispute Jon For any reason they wanted to. It wouldn't mean that Jon would be clearly the rightful heir. Assuming Robb did Legitimize Jon as Neds True born son . Jon Is next in line to the throne.

I think Jon will accept King in the north before it is discovered his brothers are alive. After that people might not want him to give it up to say Sansa or RIckon who is currently a toddler. Jon himself might not want to give it up, as Being lord of winterfell has always been his secret desire. It will be interesting to see who the northern lords back and if the Starks will stick together through potential disputes over the claim to the throne.

59 minutes ago, Alexis-something-Rose said:

I think Robb's will will have a lot to do with Jon's own emotional state. He refused Stannis's offer, but Robb decided to bypass the people who are next in line for Winterfell, the cousins from the Vale, in favor of legitimizing Jon, buying his freedom from the NW and making him his heir. That speaks to Robb's feelings about Jon and Ned's prayer that Robb and Jon would grow up as close as brothers.

Jon was also very close to accepting Stannis on his offer to make him Lord of Winterfell. I think Jon always insisted it belonged to Sansa because he is trying to prove he does not posses the negative qualities people  say bastards have. Jon wants to be lord of WInterfelll more then anything in the world. He always has. Robb naming Jon his heir frees him of the guilt that he is taking something that does not belong to him. Robbs will give him permission and the right to claim what he has always wanted but has trouble even admitting to himself.

 

34 minutes ago, kissdbyfire said:

And yet, when Robb tells Mormont, Glover, the Greatjon, Edmure, Mallister, and Cat abou his decision, he brings up his dead brothers and the fact that Sansa is married to Tyrion, Arya’s name is conspicuously absent.

“One more matter. Lord Balon has left chaos in his wake, we hope. I would not do the same. Yet I have no son as yet, my brothers Bran and Rickon are dead, and my sister is wed to a Lannister. I’ve thought long and hard about who might follow me. I command you now as my true and loyal lords to fix your seals to this document as witnesses to my decision.”

Again, it makes no sense for Robb to name Arya his heir at this point. It defeats the purpose of him needing to replace Bran And RIckon. It is believed by pretty much everyone including  Robb that Arya is almost certainly dead. Arya's name did not need to be mentioned by Robb. He is stating his brothers are dead and the next in line is Sansa and that he cannot allow Sansa to inherit Winterfell and the north.

[kissdbyfire]

46 minutes ago, House Of Wolves said:

as Being lord of winterfell has always been his secret desire.

 

46 minutes ago, House Of Wolves said:

Jon was also very close to accepting Stannis on his offer to make him Lord of Winterfell. I think Jon always insisted it belonged to Sansa because he is trying to prove he does not posses the negative qualities people  say bastards have. Jon wants to be lord of WInterfelll more then anything in the world. He always has

I don’t think this is true. It’s in the text, sure, and we’re in Jon’s head when he thinks about it. But Jon wanting to be Lord of Winterfell is not exactly about being Lord of Winterfell, but rather about being accepted, feeling like he belongs and is a Stark. My 2p worth. 

Also, not accepting the offer Stannis made is not b/c he doesn’t want to be seen as a treacherous bastard. Again, we are in his head when he ponders the offer. It’s worth remembering that at that time Slynt and others were very keen on getting rid of Jon one way or another, and Jon had no idea at that point that he would become LC. He’s almost ready to accept the offer, then remembers that he will have to burn Wintefell’s heart tree. And then he sees Ghost coming out of the woods on the north side of the Wall, thinks that he belongs to the Old Gods and decides against accepting. 

[The Map Guy]

1 hour ago, kissdbyfire said:

That’s not the point. The point is, if Robb decided to legitimise Jon and name him his heir, he may have added Arya in some way even if he believed she was dead or lost forever, to appease Cat a little

To be fair, Arya and her future husband taking over Winterfell would mean that the Stark name is lost forever.

By legitimatizing Jon Snow to Jon Stark, they can keep the Stark name. Robb wanted that. He asked Catelyn for her opinion and Cat pissed off Robb with her answer. Robb was not in the mood to please his mother.

"Young, and a king," he said. "A king must have an heir. If I should die in my next battle, the kingdom must not die with me. By law Sansa is next in line of succession, so Winterfell and the north would pass to her." His mouth tightened. "To her, and her lord husband. Tyrion Lannister. I cannot allow that. I will not allow that. That dwarf must never have the north."
"No," Catelyn agreed. "You must name another heir, until such time as Jeyne gives you a son." She considered a moment. "Your father's father had no siblings, but his father had a sister who married a younger son of Lord Raymar Royce, of the junior branch. They had three daughters, all of whom wed Vale lordlings. A Waynwood and a Corbray, for certain. The youngest . . . it might have been a Templeton, but . . ."
"Mother." There was a sharpness in Robb's tone. "You forget. My father had four sons."
She had not forgotten; she had not wanted to look at it, yet there it was. "A Snow is not a Stark."
[...]
"Jon's more a Stark than some lordlings from the Vale who have never so much as set eyes on Winterfell."
[...]
"So you pray. Have you considered your sisters? What of their rights? I agree that the north must not be permitted to pass to the Imp, but what of Arya? By law, she comes after Sansa . . . your own sister, trueborn . . ."
". . . and dead. No one has seen or heard of Arya since they cut Father's head off. Why do you lie to yourself? Arya's gone, the same as Bran and Rickon, and they'll kill Sansa too once the dwarf gets a child from her. Jon is the only brother that remains to me. Should I die without issue, I want him to succeed me as King in the North. I had hoped you would support my choice."
"I cannot," she said. "In all else, Robb. In everything. But not in this . . . this folly. Do not ask it."
"I don't have to. I'm the king." Robb turned and walked off, Grey Wind bounding down from the tomb and loping after him.
What have I done? Catelyn thought wearily, as she stood alone by Tristifer's stone sepulcher. First I anger Edmure, and now Robb, but all I have done is speak the truth. Are men so fragile they cannot bear to hear it? She might have wept then, had not the sky begun to do it for her. It was all she could do to walk back to her tent, and sit there in the silence.

{Catelyn V ASOS}

[House Of Wolves]

35 minutes ago, kissdbyfire said:

 

I don’t think this is true. It’s in the text, sure, and we’re in Jon’s head when he thinks about it. But Jon wanting to be Lord of Winterfell is not exactly about being Lord of Winterfell, but rather about being accepted, feeling like he belongs and is a Stark. My 2p worth. 

Also, not accepting the offer Stannis made is not b/c he doesn’t want to be seen as a treacherous bastard. Again, we are in his head when he ponders the offer. It’s worth remembering that at that time Slynt and others were very keen on getting rid of Jon one way or another, and Jon had no idea at that point that he would become LC. He’s almost ready to accept the offer, then remembers that he will have to burn Wintefell’s heart tree. And then he sees Ghost coming out of the woods on the north side of the Wall, thinks that he belongs to the Old Gods and decides against accepting. 

Sure, Being a Stark is a part of that Desire. Most of his life I think he would have been just happy being considered a Stark but that does not change the fact that Jons greatest desire growing up and all the way up to ADWD is to be Jon Stark Lord of Winterfell. He accepted early in his life he would never be that though. So he tried to keep from admitting it to himself. He does of course eventually admits  it to himself. He thinks to himself on the prospect of marrying Val and becoming the Lord of winterfell, he states  that there was nothing he wanted more. There are other examples in the books just none stated so plainly.

Jon  trying to prove to himself and others that he is honorable and not a treacherous bastard, is the reason for most of Jon's decisions especially earlier on  in the books. While you are right that Jons Ultimate decision was based off the old gods and having to abandon them and his oath to accept Stannis offer.  That being said, Stannis brings up the offer of making Jon lord multiple times and His automatic reaction is to say it belongs to his sister Sansa.  This is not out of love for his sister. This is  him rejecting his desire to be lord of winterfell. This is his fear of being  the treacherous bastard that people told him that bastards were.

[a black swan]

8 hours ago, House Of Wolves said:

Again, it makes no sense for Robb to name Arya his heir at this point. It defeats the purpose of him needing to replace Bran And RIckon. It is believed by pretty much everyone including  Robb that Arya is almost certainly dead. Arya's name did not need to be mentioned by Robb. He is stating his brothers are dead and the next in line is Sansa and that he cannot allow Sansa to inherit Winterfell and the north.

And then who comes after? Why doesn't he mention Arya among his dead siblings? Cat brings up Arya being in line to inherit and Robb already knows that too. He thinks she's dead so why not say it in front of his witnesses? Neither Jon or Arya are mentioned and things are purposely ambiguous. 

Stoneheart is searching for one of her daughters and has Robb's crown not by coincidence.

[Alexis-something-Rose]

2 hours ago, a black swan said:

Stoneheart is searching for one of her daughters and has Robb's crown not by coincidence.

Stoneheart finds out after the fact that Arya is alive, though. After Robb has affix their seals to his will, Catelyn feels defeated. But I can most definitely see her wanting to crown Arya over Jon and bypassing Robb's last wishes. 

It's very possible that Arya's name is mentioned in the will, but she's still an 11 year old girl who will need a regent. Plus Rickon will resurface ahead of her in the story. So whether her name is in the will or not, right now, in the story, it's a moot point because Rickon will trump her.

[divica]

10 minutes ago, Alexis-something-Rose said:

Stoneheart finds out after the fact that Arya is alive, though. After Robb has affix their seals to his will, Catelyn feels defeated. But I can most definitely see her wanting to crown Arya over Jon and bypassing Robb's last wishes. 

It's very possible that Arya's name is mentioned in the will, but she's still an 11 year old girl who will need a regent. Plus Rickon will resurface ahead of her in the story. So whether her name is in the will or not, right now, in the story, it's a moot point because Rickon will trump her.

I think the crux of the matter is that it looks really complicated to decide who will rule the north. 

By law it looks like Jon will be the first in line. But then we have the feelings of people about the starks and how they will reappear in the story... 

Another important fact is the personality of each Stark.

Arya won t ever accept the position, it is against everything she wants.

Rickon is being raised by a wildling and had problems with his connection to his direwolf. With all the war going on he will keep being traumatized. I Don t know if he will ever have the education or mental capacity to rule. 

Sansa will be tied to the vale. It is unlikely that she will ever be the first choice to rule the north if she is married to a vale lord... 

Bran is the hardest to predict. If he comes out of the cave and is still a normal human being he could be a good choice. 

[a black swan]

3 hours ago, Alexis-something-Rose said:

Stoneheart finds out after the fact that Arya is alive, though. After Robb has affix their seals to his will, Catelyn feels defeated. But I can most definitely see her wanting to crown Arya over Jon and bypassing Robb's last wishes. 

It's very possible that Arya's name is mentioned in the will, but she's still an 11 year old girl who will need a regent. Plus Rickon will resurface ahead of her in the story. So whether her name is in the will or not, right now, in the story, it's a moot point because Rickon will trump her.

Defintely, when Robb points out that Arya is surely dead by now Cat acquiesced. It's just very strange that GRRM declines to include her among the siblings Robbs thinks are dead when he read out the Will. Unless, like you suggested, he left her name in the Will - perhaps to placate Cat? Who is now, as LS, searching for her one remaining daughter who has a claim, with some greater goal in mind. 

This topic covers it all:

Regarding Rickon, I doubt he lives long enough to make an impact. If another Stark bites the dust, it's most likely him. With Bran unavailable, the Will resurfacing gives Jon legitimacy and I think he will be crowned. 

[frenin]

18 hours ago, divica said:

Another big problem with the will. As long as robb legitmized jon he automatically becomes his heir because he is his oldest brother. So, even if rickon and bran do appear if jon is released from his vows (a complicated prospect) he his the legitimate heir.

We don't know that, a legit bastard may perfectly come behind all the trueborn children. Martin himself has said that it's more complicated than that. Btw i find very hard to swallow that anyone would go over Jon, being Rickon and Bran an option.

 

18 hours ago, House Of Wolves said:

 A lot of people overlook this Fact. As Catelyn told Robb when he was planning to name Jon his heir. Once it is done it cannot be undone. Robbs will assuming the very likley aspect that Robb Legitimized  Jon. Then Jon becomes the rightful heir over all the other Stark children. There would only be a few ways to refute Jon as the rightful King.

Cat was referring to the fact that Jon can't become a bastard again. And Cat is very much worried about the threat Jon and his future kids might pose over her children's rights.

 

18 hours ago, House Of Wolves said:

1. If you deny that Robb was king. If you can deny Robb was king then you could say he had no right to Legitimize Jon. But people are going to have a hard time convincing many in the North Robb was never a king.

2.  You could make the argument he was not the rightful king if it was ever discovered Jon was not Neds son , then some might refute his claim to the throne. People could though based on Robbs wording still say he had the rightful claim to the North. Jon not being Neds son I could possibly see becoming a problem for Jons claim down the line in the books.

3. also if Jon himself refused the throne.

The will was made with the idea of Bran and Rickon being dead, if they are alive the will is pretty much invalid.

 

18 hours ago, divica said:

And while jon might be able to solve a lot of the issues being regent I think he needs to make too many unpopular decisions. He will need enough autority so that people don t question or undermine him.

That's kind of the point of having regents. 

 

18 hours ago, divica said:

I don t think jon will refuse the throne. Not because he really wants it, but because he is the best choice to unite the north agains the ww. The wildlings won t follow a child. Neither bran or rickon know enough to unite the north and prepare it for the greatest war in generations. It is idiotic to follow children into war. The north needs someone wise to make aliances with the wildlings, the remaining iron born and whoever else might be available...

I doubt that he is going to accept it, as long as Rickon and Bran are alive, is hard to believe his reig is going to be uncontested, being  regent for his brothers solve all those issues. Which is in the end if the northern lords give in and make Jon their regent.

[House Of Wolves]

7 hours ago, a black swan said:

And then who comes after? Why doesn't he mention Arya among his dead siblings? Cat brings up Arya being in line to inherit and Robb already knows that too. He thinks she's dead so why not say it in front of his witnesses? Neither Jon or Arya are mentioned and things are purposely ambiguous. 

Stoneheart is searching for one of her daughters and has Robb's crown not by coincidence.

 

2 hours ago, a black swan said:

Defintely, when Robb points out that Arya is surely dead by now Cat acquiesced. It's just very strange that GRRM declines to include her among the siblings Robbs thinks are dead when he read out the Will. Unless, like you suggested, he left her name in the Will - perhaps to placate Cat? Who is now, as LS, searching for her one remaining daughter who has a claim, with some greater goal in mind. 

This topic covers it all:

Regarding Rickon, I doubt he lives long enough to make an impact. If another Stark bites the dust, it's most likely him. With Bran unavailable, the Will resurfacing gives Jon legitimacy and I think he will be crowned. 

 

It is definitely and interesting theory that Arya could have been named in his will.  I will even admit it is possible Robb could have Mentioned Arya somewhere in his will as an appeasement  to his mother. That being said even Cat seems to have accepted that Arya is almost certainly dead at this point. It would have been extremely Foolish and I mean next level Foolish/stupid to put in a will that If a little girl who had been missing for  close to two years, Believed to be dead should one day show up that she would Become his heir over the other he was naming. Even a stupid person should be able to see the potential problems that could arise from putting that in the will. I mean people have already used a fake Arya in the books without the will.  It seems like a big risk to put into your will for someone you are certain is already dead.

The fact that Arya is not mentioned by Robb is interesting but to me it is not surprising. The whole point of the will nameing a new heir is that his Current heir Sansa Is unfit and he is naming a new Heir. So when he is talking to the lords he explains his two brothers are dead , making his sister Sansa his current rightful heir. He explains that because she is married to a Lannister that she is unfit to be his heir and asks them to sign a document his choice for new heir. Robb does not need to talk about those who would have come next in line naturally after Sansa. Sure he could have mentioned his probably dead Sister Arya . He could have mentioned his probably dead uncle Benjan Stark. He could have Mentioned those who would come after that.  He was not trying to say others who came after Sansa were unfit. He was trying to say his current heir Sansa  was unfit and that he was naming a new person his heir and wanted the lords to back his decision with there signatures.

[House Of Wolves]

50 minutes ago, frenin said:

Cat was referring to the fact that Jon can't become a bastard again. And Cat is very much worried about the threat Jon and his future kids might pose over her children's rights.

The will was made with the idea of Bran and Rickon being dead, if they are alive the will is pretty much invalid.

Yes she is worried more about  the future problems  of Jon being Legitimized  Because she believes  Bran, RIckon and Arya to be dead. She knows Jon himself is not really a threat to Robb himself, as  he is  already named king but she also knows that Legitimizing Jon makes him Neds true born son and People could eventually back him or his sons over Robb's descendants in the future. Therefore once Jon becomes a Stark he cant be named a bastard once again. He becomes Neds true born son.

The will does not become invalid if Bran and Rickon are found out to be alive. It does not matter what the intent or the reasons of Robb 's Will being signed were. The fact is if he Legitimized Jon as Neds true born son.  He becomes the oldest living  of Ned Stark's sons. The will makes Jon the rightful heir of Winterfell. If Robb simply named Jon his heir then it would matter that Bran and RIckon were alive but If he Legitimized Jon removing his bastard blood , then he becomes not only the written heir but also the rightful heir. the only way for anyone to dispute this is to dispute that Robb had the power to legitimize Jon , which is to deny Robb was ever King.  Again not many people in the north other then people like the Boltons,  are going to call Robb a traitor who was never a king.

[frenin]

1 minute ago, House Of Wolves said:

Yes she is worried more about  the future problems  of Jon being Legitimized  Because she believes  Bran, RIckon and Arya to be dead. She knows Jon himself is not a threat to Robb   already named king but she also knows that Legitimizing Jon makes him Neds true born son and People could eventually back him or his sons over Robb's Descendants in the future.

No, she has always been worried about the threat Jon and his descendants might pose to her offspring, from Robb to Rickon.

 

2 minutes ago, House Of Wolves said:

The will does not become invalid if Bran and Rickon are found out to be alive. It does not matter what the intent or the reasons of Robb 's Will being signed were.

It will be invalid for those who swear it, because Robb's brothers being dead was a very specific reason, that without saying that we don't know what Robb wrote but whatever he wrote was because his brothers were supposed to be dead.

 

6 minutes ago, House Of Wolves said:

The fact is if he Legitimized Jon as Neds true born son.  He becomes the oldest Stark son.

No, it makes him legit, not really trueborn.

 

7 minutes ago, House Of Wolves said:

This will make Jon the rightful heir of Winterfell.

Untrue, Jon can perfectly go after all the  trueborn kids. The thing is, we don't really know it. And it goes with whatever the lords may feel, and people like Wyman already have their chosen ones so...

 

11 minutes ago, House Of Wolves said:

If he simply named Jon his heir then it would matter that Bran and RIckon were alive but If he Legitimized Jon removing his bastard blood , then He becomes not only the written heir but also the rightful heir.

No. Martin himself has said that situations are foggy, so it makes zero sense assuming this.

 

 

 

 

 

[rotting sea cow]

38 minutes ago, House Of Wolves said:

It is definitely and interesting theory that Arya could have been named in his will.  I will even admit it is possible Robb could have Mentioned Arya somewhere in his will as an appeasement  to his mother. That being said even Cat seems to have accepted that Arya is almost certainly dead at this point. It would have been extremely Foolish and I mean next level Foolish/stupid to put in a will that If a little girl who had been missing for  close to two years, Believed to be dead should one day show up that she would Become his heir over the other he was naming. Even a stupid person should be able to see the potential problems that could arise from putting that in the will. I mean people have already used a fake Arya in the books without the will.  It seems like a big risk to put into your will for someone you are certain is already dead.

The fact that Arya is not mentioned by Robb is interesting but to me it is not surprising. The whole point of the will nameing a new heir is that his Current heir Sansa Is unfit and he is naming a new Heir. So when he is talking to the lords he explains his two brothers are dead , making his sister Sansa his current rightful heir. He explains that because she is married to a Lannister that she is unfit to be his heir and asks them to sign a document his choice for new heir. Robb does not need to talk about those who would have come next in line naturally after Sansa. Sure he could have mentioned his probably dead Sister Arya . He could have mentioned his probably dead uncle Benjan Stark. He could have Mentioned those who would come after that.  He was not trying to say others who came after Sansa were unfit. He was trying to say his current heir Sansa  was unfit and that he was naming a new person his heir and wanted the lords to back his decision with there signatures.

Just to clarify because my little theory was quoted. I don't think that Arya was mentioned in the will, because the reasons you mention. Nevertheless, an alive Stark would cloud the waters, as some will claim that the will was made under false premises.

People need to understand that in these situations things are not rarely crystal clear. The would-be subjects of a potential heir of Winterfell have also something to say. Who would they prefer? A child lord, a girl, a broken boy who is nevertheless inaccessible, someone married to the Lannisters or a legitimized very Stark-looking bastard with experience in command?

On the other hand, that bastard broke some very holy vows. The child is supported by the powerful White Harbor. The broken boy has some awesome powers. That Sansa Lannister is coming with an army and tons of food. And the girl comes with their late king crown, an army and her undead mother.

 

[House Of Wolves]

32 minutes ago, rotting sea cow said:

Just to clarify because my little theory was quoted. I don't think that Arya was mentioned in the will, because the reasons you mention. Nevertheless, an alive Stark would cloud the waters, as some will claim that the will was made under false premises.

People need to understand that in these situations things are not rarely crystal clear. The would-be subjects of a potential heir of Winterfell have also something to say. Who would they prefer? A child lord, a girl, a broken boy who is nevertheless inaccessible, someone married to the Lannisters or a legitimized very Stark-looking bastard with experience in command?

On the other hand, that bastard broke some very holy vows. The child is supported by the powerful White Harbor. The broken boy has some awesome powers. That Sansa Lannister is coming with an army and tons of food. And the girl comes with their late king crown, an army and her undead mother.

 

While I would agree that ultimately  The Norther lords could  Potentially follow any # of the Stark Children. I think who comes first Becomes really important as well. Will it be Rickon being named King? Will it be the Will and Jon being named King. Will it be Sansa Coming North with the support of the Vail. Who comes first definitely will matter a lot because it could become hard to toss one Stark aside for another.

That being said it would be hard to refute Jon as being the Rightful King should the Will surface. I mean it is the word of King Robb signed by almost every significant Lord of the north and even the Tully's in Riverrun.  While not impossible that is going to be hard thing for someone with Honor and who was Loyal To King Robb to try and deny.

 

41 minutes ago, frenin said:

No, she has always been worried about the threat Jon and his descendants might pose to her offspring, from Robb to Rickon.

You are right she was. I should have said that when Arguing with Robb she did concede to him that if  Jon was not a threat to Robb or her son that his children might be a different story .

41 minutes ago, frenin said:

It will be invalid for those who swear it, because Robb's brothers being dead was a very specific reason, that without saying that we don't know what Robb wrote but whatever he wrote was because his brothers were supposed to be dead.

No, it makes him legit, not really trueborn.

Untrue, Jon can perfectly go after all the  trueborn kids. The thing is, we don't really know it. And it goes with whatever the lords may feel, and people like Wyman already have their chosen ones so...

No. Martin himself has said that situations are foggy, so it makes zero sense assuming this.

 

Sure anyone who wanted to deny it and say it was invalid could that doesn't mean it is not valid because it is valid. Based off the Laws of there land, A King may  and only a King may Legitimize a bastard Born Child. Doing so will make that child no different then any other of his children. Call it true born or what ever Jon becomes no different then the other Stark children. While anyone who wanted to could Deny Jon after the Will was discovered. This does not make the Will invalid. Robb and almost every lord of note singing the Will is about as valid of a will as it could possibly get.

[frenin]

2 minutes ago, House Of Wolves said:

Sure anyone who wanted to deny it and say it was invalid could that doesn't mean it is not valid because it is valid.

It is not valid.

 

3 minutes ago, House Of Wolves said:

Based off the Laws of there land, A King may  and only a King may Legitimize a bastard Born Child

True.

 

3 minutes ago, House Of Wolves said:

Doing so will make that child no different then any other of his children. Call it true born or what ever Jon becomes no different then the other Stark children

Different?? No, but he may come behind the trueborn kids. Btw, i want to know where have you gotten that law of the land.

 

5 minutes ago, House Of Wolves said:

While anyone who wanted to could Deny Jon after the Will was discovered. This does not make the Will invalid. Robb and almost every lord of note singing the Will is about as valid of a will as it could possibly get.

A will signed under false premises it's not valid... A will signed under the premise that Robb's bros are dead will without get people to question the will.

[divica]

11 minutes ago, frenin said:

A will signed under false premises it's not valid... A will signed under the premise that Robb's bros are dead will without get people to question the will.

I have no idea why you think this. A will signed under any premise is valid. The end. You can contest the spirit of the will (I think this is the english expression) but not the letter of the will. Witch means that under the law what is written on the will is valid, whatever it may be. However the people might use whatever arguments they want to try to invalidate the will because they don t want to follow jon… 

14 minutes ago, frenin said:

Different?? No, but he may come behind the trueborn kids. Btw, i want to know where have you gotten that law of the land.

I also have no idea where you got this. Once a bastard is legitimized he is equal to his siblings. There isn t first class sons and second class sons when they all have the same last name… 

16 minutes ago, frenin said:

It is not valid.

Why? Are you saying that a oath made under false premises isn t valid? I am sorry but once the words/lettters are said/written they are valid...

25 minutes ago, House Of Wolves said:

You are right she was. I should have said that when Arguing with Robb she did concede to him that if  Jon was not a threat to Robb or her son that his children might be a different story .

That was completly irrational. Any child from his siblings or the cousins she wanted to name heir would become a threat to robb's line. 

1 hour ago, frenin said:

It will be invalid for those who swear it, because Robb's brothers being dead was a very specific reason, that without saying that we don't know what Robb wrote but whatever he wrote was because his brothers were supposed to be dead.

It doesn t matter that his siblings might be alive. Once people sign a document it becomes valid. Even if the nobles were blackmailed into signing the document it would be valid under the law...

1 hour ago, frenin said:

No, it makes him legit, not really trueborn

This is wrong. Once legitimized a bastard has the same right as a trueborn son. Hell, if I am not mistaken ramsay is never worried that if walda gets pregnant his sibling will automatically inherit the Bolton lands. He is worried that the freys will want him to become lord and that his position will be weakned.

1 hour ago, frenin said:

No. Martin himself has said that situations are foggy, so it makes zero sense assuming this.

Obviously it is a confusing situation. Just because robb removed his bastard status doesn t mean the lords have seen jon as a bastard his entire life. That some might prefer to follow bran or rickon. That some might think that robb would never have legitimized jon if he knew his brothers were alive. However noone of this arguments invalidates de will. Just that there is the law and then there is the lords that have power to go against the law.

2 hours ago, frenin said:

We don't know that, a legit bastard may perfectly come behind all the trueborn children. Martin himself has said that it's more complicated than that. Btw i find very hard to swallow that anyone would go over Jon, being Rickon and Bran an option.

It isn t that hard to imagine. Jon is an adult, has experience in war and leading, has the support of the wildlings, is known to the clans and helped the karstark heir regain her lands. Besides now the king in the north legitimized him and made him his heir. Jon has everything in his favor. The only reason someone wouldn t chose jon is if they don t like bastards or jon.

2 hours ago, frenin said:

I doubt that he is going to accept it, as long as Rickon and Bran are alive, is hard to believe his reig is going to be uncontested, being  regent for his brothers solve all those issues. Which is in the end if the northern lords give in and make Jon their regent.

That isn t true. A regent that has to make a lot of unpopular decisions is in a very weak position. The amount of aliances, agreements, loans and other problematic decisions jon has to make is too much for a regent. I doubt a regent even has the authoroty to make a series of vital decisions without a lot of support.

 

[House Of Wolves]

31 minutes ago, frenin said:

It is not valid.

I guess we will just have to agree to disagree on if the will itself is valid or not based off the circumstances.

 

32 minutes ago, frenin said:

Different?? No, but he may come behind the trueborn kids. Btw, i want to know where have you gotten that law of the land.

 

 I will admit I am wrong about the Law of succession . I just looked it up on Wiki and it states that it is unknown who comes before the other. There is no information on who would become next in line between natural born children and a bastard who becomes Legitimized by the king. I would still say being named successor on a will and legitimized would still make the bastard the rightful heir over the natural born children. But if there was no will then it is speculation at least according to wiki there is nothing stated in the books on who would come first.