Jump to content

Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.

Crannog Man

Is Jayne Westerling Carrying The Heir Of Winterfell?

Recommended Posts

Quotes are broken for me. I imagine you can figure out which are quotes though.

so are all the manderlies bad swimmers? or just the two we've met thus far (who have not been proven to be bad swimmers, btw)? lots of former professional athletes are fat. this is a very weak point if you can even consider it a point at all.

How many fat swimmers do you know?

ugh. you bring up an argument of rhetoric to cover up the lack of real argument that you have?

Rhetoric? Not only is rhetoric not a bad thing, but is your definition of rhetoric really: "A statement, with actual proof, which flat-out disagrees with my statement. I quote:

You can have it one way or the other, you may have it that the house symbols are merely symbolic, or that they actually mean something.

This is essentially saying, "you're wrong."

If the seashells mean something, then there is no reason for the motto to not mean something, unless it doesn't suit your point. The inverse follows. If you insist on the seashells meaning something, but the motto doesn't support this point, then you haven't proved anything. The converse follows.

Terms such as inverse and converse are used in logical proofs. I have nothing more to say if you are convinced that using logic to reach a conclusion is unhealthy and a sign of a weak argument.

very well, have it your way, i can argue through the rhetoric. first of all, it was YOU that introduced the motto as the be-all-end-all of familial abilities

Did I? Quote, please.

, and this was after you told me that sigils didn't mean anything. so, you introduced your hypocrisy first. secondly, a motto doesn't have to encapsulate everything about a family, if it did, it would be quite a dull family indeed.

If your argument wasn't, I quote:

and what does their sigil need to be to believe that they are sea folk? seashells aren't found in the sea?

Which means: "Since they have a seashell sigil, they are seafolk." My response was, I quote:

If the seashells mean something, then there is no reason for the motto to not mean something, unless it doesn't suit your point. The inverse follows. If you insist on the seashells meaning something, but the motto doesn't support this point, then you haven't proved anything. The converse follows.

which is saying that you are being hypocritical, by saying that sigils can be used to determine family attributes, but mottos can't, because it would make it a dull family. How do sigils avoid this?

however, if a motto mentions specifically water or the ocean, one could infer that the family was in some way seafaring or watergoing. the sigil, in this part, passes the test, as the sigil could have been literally about anything concerning family abilities or interest.

And thus, a motto would not work in this situation why? If, as you put it, claiming family attributes based on a motto, makes for a dull family, how does making an argument based on sigils make it any different?

a lot of characters say a lot of silly or pointless things. why take your lessons from illyrio?

Many characters say silly and pointless things. If your definition of silly or pointless is something meaningless, a bad joke, something which is obviously wrong, or anything which doesn't have import past the scene, then it is silly and pointless. Most of the time, silly and pointless is not defined as, "contrary to my current beliefs." Especially if said statement actually, you know, is meant to come across as profound.

no, but the sun of winter applies very well to a northern family. and why does it have to be on the castle to be appropriate? it seems like a very random idea to have.

It's called sarcasm. You may have heard of it.

why do they have to sleep with mermaids to have a merman as their sigil? this is getting even more bizarre.

See above.

one would imagine it's because they are hunters, obviously.

Do the Baratheons interact with stags in any way that's unique to them?

See the bolded bit.

ferocious and golden, that would be the lannisters.

Why not a piece of golden shit then? It would be golden and ferociously smelly. It would also be a better way of describing Tytos and Stafford Lannister.

i don't know why they'd have to ride purple unicorns in order to put it on their sigil. i mean, you take things very literally when it suits you and then not at all when it doesn't.

The Westerlings have seashells on their sigil, that makes them seafolk.

again, he's from the north, there are lots of wolves in the north, that and it's probably an homage to the starks. i don't understand why that's so hard to understand. if rodrik cassell was a wolf himself, you would ask, "why isn't rodrik cassell 10 wolves?"

See two answers above.

maybe his ancestor was, the one who designed the sigil.

And Ser Addam Marbrand has carried down this proud family tradition throughout the ages, in the same way the Westerlings have carried down their proud family tradition of swimming and collecting seashells?

"There's a tale behind those coins," said Tyrion, "no doubt Pod will confide it to your toes one day....."

I imagine this applies to Pod's secret stashes of coin in some way?

Sam is an embarrassment to House Tarly and was sent to Wall because of it.

Point.

I warned you not to do it, I am not responsible for what I just did to your brain.

I believe this applies. Just so we're clear, it applies to you.

i don't speak in such absolutes. i simply said that it was a possibility. your concrete mind took that as someone making a definitive statement.

Then why are you arguing so vigorously?

ok?

So what's so special about the roses?

yes, bats infest the unused towers. however there no bats ON the castle and house whent was never mentioned to have had sex with bats, by all accounts, they did not ride them into battle, nor were the bats at their "beck-and-call". so, i guess anything's possible.

You don't know much about the erstwhile owners of Harrenhal, do you?

no, the Victarion that kicks pretty much everyone's ass.....except Stannis's.

Like he kicked Howland Reed's ass?

ffs, are you insane? all i said was that having a water sigil could mean that the family may know how to swim fairly well. you again are taking this to a ridiculously unnecessary extreme

This tragedy could have been averted had you mentioned, "just a possibility," and not proceeded to create long posts in response.

so, do you want to bet me that the knight of seashells is still alive? you want to put something on it?

Certainly. How about...let's say four dragons. And a cookie.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

how many fat swimmers do you know?

and again, are all the manderlies fat? i don't think that it was stated that they were, actually.

You can have it one way or the other, you may have it that the house symbols are merely symbolic, or that they actually mean something.

This is essentially saying, "you're wrong."

and the converse must also be true, so are you admitting that you are equally as wrong?

If the seashells mean something, then there is no reason for the motto to not mean something, unless it doesn't suit your point. The inverse follows. If you insist on the seashells meaning something, but the motto doesn't support this point, then you haven't proved anything. The converse follows.

i'm going to say this again and no more, and i'll state it as plainly as can be, so get it through your mind this time, please. the motto mentions only honor, correct? it doesn't mention things like walking or eating or running or going to the privy or horseback riding or catching fish, etc. does this mean that the wesserlings aren't proficient at any of these things because it's not mentioned in their motto?

on the other hand, sea shell ARE depicted in their sigil, so one can assume that they may be fairly familiar with water in one form or another.

note: the fact that seashells are depicted on their sigil does not mean that they aren't proficient at walking or talking or whatever.

simple enough? ok, great.

Terms such as inverse and converse are used in logical proofs. I have nothing more to say if you are convinced that using logic to reach a conclusion is unhealthy and a sign of a weak argument.

if there were any logic in what you had to say, i would be scared by this.

Did I? Quote, please.

"The Westerling's motto is "Honor, not honors" suggesting that if they are famous for anything, it's their sense of honor before reason."

Which means: "Since they have a seashell sigil, they are seafolk." My response was:

If the seashells mean something, then there is no reason for the motto to not mean something, unless it doesn't suit your point. The inverse follows. If you insist on the seashells meaning something, but the motto doesn't support this point, then you haven't proved anything. The converse follows.

which is saying that you are being hypocritical, by saying that sigils can be used to determine family attributes, but mottos can't, because it would make it a dull family. How do sigils avoid this?

see my argument above. assuming mottos and sigils are equal in validity, which they most likely are, and assuming that the other point that i made on that particular topic is not valid (it is), then aren't you also guilty of hypocrisy? you put belief in the motto and not the sigil, and then accuse me of putting belief in the sigil and not the motto (again, ignoring those other points that i made that destroy your weak accusations of hypocrisy).

you are essentially calling yourself a hypocrite.

however, if a motto mentions specifically water or the ocean, one could infer that the family was in some way seafaring or watergoing. the sigil, in this part, passes the test, as the sigil could have been literally about anything concerning family abilities or interest.

And thus, a motto would not work in this situation why? If, as you put it, claiming family attributes based on a motto, makes for a dull family, how does making an argument based on sigils make it any different?

ok, i admit, the westerlings value honor above honors. how does that change anything?

Many characters say silly and pointless things. If your definition of silly or pointless is something meaningless, a bad joke, something which is obviously wrong, or anything which doesn't have import past the scene, then it is silly and pointless. Most of the time, silly and pointless is not defined as, "contrary to my current beliefs." Especially if said statement actually, you know, is meant to come across as profound.

why put any more trust in what illyrio says than what your neighbor says about the economy or immigration? he's a flawed character, not the king of the book.

It's called sarcasm. You may have heard of it.

this word, i don't think it means what you think it means.

Do the Baratheons interact with stags in any way that's unique to them?

i don't know, it's their sigil, maybe they like to think that they're particularly good hunters?

Why not a piece of golden shit then? It would be golden and ferociously smelly. It would also be a better way of describing Tytos and Stafford Lannister.

look, you can put shit on your sigil if you want. normal people will put normal things on theirs.

See two answers above.

lol

And Ser Addam Marbrand has carried down this proud family tradition throughout the ages, in the same way the Westerlings have carried down their proud family tradition of swimming and collecting seashells?

if swimming and collecting seashells is all that seafolk do, then i guess, yes.

I imagine this applies to Pod's secret stashes of coin in some way?

don't blame me for your embarrassment, i'm just quoting the book.

I believe this applies. Just so we're clear, it applies to you.

oic

Then why are you arguing so vigorously?

for my own amusement.

So what's so special about the roses?

you lost me again.

You don't know much about the erstwhile owners of Harrenhal, do you?

that they had bats on their sigil? and that there were bats in the towers? i guess you'll have to enlighten me.

Like he kicked Howland Reed's ass?

i don't remember, what did he do to victarion? i know that stannis was the first to defeat him in any battle.

This tragedy could have been averted had you mentioned, "just a possibility," and not proceeded to create long posts in response.

tragedy for you, entertainment for me.

Certainly. How about...let's say four dragons. And a cookie.

if he's dead , i'll admit i was wrong. if he's not, you have to be my slave in the afterlife.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

why would Lady Sybelle take part in concealing Jeynes Pregnancy or help her to escape? From her point of view there ist about nothing to gain with such an action - while running the high risk of loosing everything.

Even if Jeyne gets away to somewhere safe, it wont be long before the plot is uncovered. There are too many people around who are able to identify her, resulting in some very angry reaction by the Lannisters (Chances are they will extinguish Houses Westerling and Spicer)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

jaime is now the ranking member of house lannister and he doesn't handle things that way. remember, it's tywin that extinguishes houses.

maybe lady westerling had a change of heart when tywin was killed and therefore hadn't much to fear in terms of becoming extinct? maybe she had a change of heart after the freys and lannisters attempted to murder her son after not informing her of their plan in the first place? maybe she had a change of heart when she learned that being the grandmother of the king in the north carries with it certain privileges?

i'm certain that blackfish has a plan and that it doesn't just involve himself. if he didn't, why would he escape? he's not a coward, nor would jaime have put him to the sword had he surrendered. he had little to lose by surrendering, escaping simply makes him a fugitive to be hunted in every corner of 6 kingdoms. it doesn't make sense if a pregnant jeyne didn't escape with him, either. if she weren't pregnant, she would just be the queen dowager without power or banners, but if she was carrying an heir, well, that changes everything.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

how many fat swimmers do you know?

and again, are all the manderlies fat? i don't think that it was stated that they were, actually.

Well, Wyman is fat, and so are his two sons. His daughters aren't.

You can have it one way or the other, you may have it that the house symbols are merely symbolic, or that they actually mean something.

This is essentially saying, "you're wrong."

and the converse must also be true, so are you admitting that you are equally as wrong?

Given that I am arguing against such a position, no. The mottoes was a comparison to support this point.

If the seashells mean something, then there is no reason for the motto to not mean something, unless it doesn't suit your point. The inverse follows. If you insist on the seashells meaning something, but the motto doesn't support this point, then you haven't proved anything. The converse follows.

i'm going to say this again and no more, and i'll state it as plainly as can be, so get it through your mind this time, please. the motto mentions only honor, correct? it doesn't mention things like walking or eating or running or going to the privy or horseback riding or catching fish, etc. does this mean that the wesserlings aren't proficient at any of these things because it's not mentioned in their motto?

And everybody swims as much as they walk, or eat, or run, or shit, or ride, or fish?

on the other hand, sea shell ARE depicted in their sigil, so one can assume that they may be fairly familiar with water in one form or another.

note: the fact that seashells are depicted on their sigil does not mean that they aren't proficient at walking or talking or whatever.

simple enough? ok, great.

Not really, because I've already dealt with this argument in my last post.

Terms such as inverse and converse are used in logical proofs. I have nothing more to say if you are convinced that using logic to reach a conclusion is unhealthy and a sign of a weak argument.

if there were any logic in what you had to say, i would be scared by this.

Some people are scared by logic. It's...actually, no, it's not normal.

Did I? , please.

"The Westerling's motto is "Honor, not honors" suggesting that if they are famous for anything, it's their sense of honor before reason."

And so?

Which means: "Since they have a seashell sigil, they are seafolk." My response was:

If the seashells mean something, then there is no reason for the motto to not mean something, unless it doesn't suit your point. The inverse follows. If you insist on the seashells meaning something, but the motto doesn't support this point, then you haven't proved anything. The converse follows.

which is saying that you are being hypocritical, by saying that sigils can be used to determine family attributes, but mottos can't, because it would make it a dull family. How do sigils avoid this?

see my argument above. assuming mottos and sigils are equal in validity, which they most likely are, and assuming that the other point that i made on that particular topic is not valid (it is), then aren't you also guilty of hypocrisy? you put belief in the motto and not the sigil, and then accuse me of putting belief in the sigil and not the motto (again, ignoring those other points that i made that destroy your weak accusations of hypocrisy).

you are essentially calling yourself a hypocrite.

Actually, I mention the motto to point out the sigil is equally meaningless, and am not putting any weight behind the motto. If you consider this hypocrisy, then I think it proves my point. Why? Because by acknowledging that it is possible that the motto is nonsense, and that the motto is equal to the sigil, then both are meaningless.

however, if a motto mentions specifically water or the ocean, one could infer that the family was in some way seafaring or watergoing. the sigil, in this part, passes the test, as the sigil could have been literally about anything concerning family abilities or interest.

I imagine this is also in the same way Ser Addam is a pyromaniac.

And thus, a motto would not work in this situation why? If, as you put it, claiming family attributes based on a motto, makes for a dull family, how does making an argument based on sigils make it any different?

ok, i admit, the westerlings value honor above honors. how does that change anything?

Do you also admit that Ser Addam Marbrand is on a level with Aerys II in seeing things burn bright?

Many characters say silly and pointless things. If your definition of silly or pointless is something meaningless, a bad joke, something which is obviously wrong, or anything which doesn't have import past the scene, then it is silly and pointless. Most of the time, silly and pointless is not defined as, "contrary to my current beliefs." Especially if said statement actually, you know, is meant to come across as profound.

why put any more trust in what illyrio says than what your neighbor says about the economy or immigration? he's a flawed character, not the king of the book.

Because it actually makes sense.

It's called sarcasm. You may have heard of it.

this word, i don't think it means what you think it means.

So, what does it mean then?

Do the Baratheons interact with stags in any way that's unique to them?

i don't know, it's their sigil, maybe they like to think that they're particularly good hunters?

Stannis or Renly doesn't strike me as being paragons of hunting.

Why not a piece of golden shit then? It would be golden and ferociously smelly. It would also be a better way of describing Tytos and Stafford Lannister.

look, you can put shit on your sigil if you want. normal people will put normal things on theirs.

And Ser Addam Marbrand has carried down this proud family tradition throughout the ages, in the same way the Westerlings have carried down their proud family tradition of swimming and collecting seashells?

if swimming and collecting seashells is all that seafolk do, then i guess, yes.

I imagine this applies to Pod's secret stashes of coin in some way?

don't blame me for your embarrassment, i'm just quoting the book.

Yeah, I don't think you know what sarcasm means.

I believe this applies. Just so we're clear, it applies to you.

oic

Then why are you arguing so vigorously?

for my own amusement.

Kay.

So what's so special about the roses?

you lost me again.

This sigil is also virtually meaningless.

You don't know much about the erstwhile owners of Harrenhal, do you?

that they had bats on their sigil? and that there were bats in the towers? i guess you'll have to enlighten me.

Most of the bat ones were a bit...shall we say, creepy.

Like he kicked Howland Reed's ass?

i don't remember, what did he do to victarion? i know that stannis was the first to defeat him in any battle.

He wasn't exactly partying at Moat Cailin.

This tragedy could have been averted had you mentioned, "just a possibility," and not proceeded to create long posts in response.

tragedy for you, entertainment for me.

It's a reference to a webcomic.

Certainly. How about...let's say four dragons. And a cookie.

if he's dead , i'll admit i was wrong. if he's not, you have to be my slave in the afterlife.

Sure. In the meantime, let's agree to disagree.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Not to be a spoilsport here, but this discussion has leapt way beyond A Storm of Swords and skips all the way to the end of the next book. While I didn't have anything ruined for me, please try to be mindful of people who haven't finished ASOS yet, let alone moved on to AFFC. Sorry, I just really hate spoilers and feel the compulsion to stick up for people who are in this forum because they're still reading and trust that when a forum says no spoilers from other books, there won't be any.

To address the actual question raised by the OP--no, I don't think Jeyne is carrying the heir to Winterfell. I agree with another poster that her family, namely her mother, has way too much to lose if indeed she is carrying Robb Stark's child. Her character is shrouded in mystery, though, so I do believe there is more to her than we're being told. As someone else pointed out, maybe GRRM hasn't even figured out what that is yet, though.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

oooh, i really hope jeyne is pregnant. when at the end of feast for crows

Spoiler
i found out jeyne wasnt pregnnant i was gutted, hated her mum nearly as much as lord frey (nearly).
now i really really hope she is pregnant, that would make such a nice surprise. but hey, this is grrm, if she is pregnant she'll probably just have a miscarriage -.-

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Not to be a spoilsport here, but this discussion has leapt way beyond A Storm of Swords and skips all the way to the end of the next book. While I didn't have anything ruined for me, please try to be mindful of people who haven't finished ASOS yet, let alone moved on to AFFC.

Good enough that I skipped from the middle of first page right to the end to see if the discussion of swimming abilities is still going on.

I would like to present my opinion, that swimming ability depends mainly on... if you learned it, or no. Simple.

I don't see any first-time swimmer thrown into deep waters doing good just because he has a ship in sigil, or because his house motto is...anything, really.

Similarly, I do not think that anyone would be destined to drown in any mass of water deeper than bath tub, just because he has a cat in sigil and a fat grandfather.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Just wanted to put in that in the TV series, Talisa is pregnant. While I know the TV series isn't exactly the same as the book, and Talisa gets a lot of hate, I think it's worth putting out there, because the scene was way to dramatic for Talisa to just be like, "Oh whoops, miscalculation. I'm not actually pregnant." And do remember that Martin is part of the writing process in the series. The TV series isn't going to stray from the book story with something as important as Robb's heir. But her pregnancy is going to create a lot of implications later on. There is the possibility that Talisa is killed during the RW, but I feel like Robb's queen still has an important part to play in the books, and therefore can't easily be removed from the TV show. So if she doesn't die at the Red Wedding, and is captive, isn't the only way for the TV series and the books to be somewhat parallel is by having Jeyne be pregnant too?

Although, I'm not sure if this moon tea can also act as an abortion rather than just a contraceptive. Maybe when they capture Talisa, they'll feed her something to kill the child. But I'm betting they don't have technology nearly that advanced, or there wouldn't be so many bastards walking around.

I do realize this is supposed to be about the books, and strictly canon, but I feel like it was too important a fact to be ignored and actually could be a hint towards future plot twists in the books.

But back on track:

I feel like the differences in the comparisons and the switching idea is pretty possible. Probably not Eleyne as she would need to be really good at acting. Jaime put her at around 15 or 16 at an estimate, so Eleyne would be too young. The Lannisters would rage if Jeyne's mother failed to keep Jeyne captive and keep her from being pregnant, and Sybell seems the Olenna type. A strong, cunning matriarch that leads the family and has her own agenda playing the GoT. It does seem sort of unlikely that Jeyne swum out of Riverrun while pregnant stealthily in the night beside the Blackfish, but if she's still out there, I'm betting she's still with the Blackfish. Maybe some other plans were used to sneak her out the castle. The Blackfish is quite crafty, and it wouldn't be surprising if he had a plan. (This is reminding me of a certain other Jeyne's escape from a castle.)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

this is ridiculous. A person can swim if he has spent a lot of time around water/in the water. It has nothing to do with whats on your sigil or who is in your house, it is about whether or not you have spend time getting into the water and swimming

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I honestly think she is pregnant , other wise the Starks would be " extinct "

Bran, Rickon, sansa and arya are still alive, and if jayne's mother made sure she didn't conceive for the year she was married to robb why would she conceive the day before he leaves to die? As George's last FU to the stark children?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Bran, Rickon, sansa and arya are still alive, and if jayne's mother made sure she didn't conceive for the year she was married to robb why would she conceive the day before he leaves to die? As George's last FU to the stark children?

That comment was made a year ago and I have totally changed my decision

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Bran, Rickon, sansa and arya are still alive, and if jayne's mother made sure she didn't conceive for the year she was married to robb why would she conceive the day before he leaves to die? As George's last FU to the stark children?

You have forgotten Snow

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

One interesting thing to note regarding Sybell Spicer and her relationship to the Lannister's is that her grandmother was Maggy the Frog who gave Cersei all of those prophecies that have haunted her. Not sure if it means anything, but there could be a connection here and might indeed leave the possibility open that Sybell is lying to Jaime. The fact that Tywin is dead at this point means Jaime can't corroborate her story. And just to chime in on the whole hips debate: there is no doubt in my mind Jaime is seeing someone other than Jeyne. Not only does Catelyn mention how beautiful Jeyne is she mentions the size of her hips at least three times, including once at the end of her chapter (a final thought to leave with the reader). Jaimie describes the physical appearance of many women in this book, but never once mentions hip size with the exception of when he sees Jeyne (who he also thinks is just ehh in the looks department and young looking). Not saying that means Jeyne is pregnant, but she's on the run with the Blackfish for sure.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

i think highborn people can swim pretty well. i cant remember were but there's mention of Jon learning to swim in the moat of winterfell. Arya considers junping of the ferry so she can swim. in fact i think there's more people that can swim that cant character wise. so im pretty certain jeyne can swim but i think that the heir of winterfell has already been born. thats why the blackfish refuses to yield because he has the child but no way of getting him out. and why would he take jeyne with him that would just look more conscpicous. Im not sure about timings but say jeyne gets pregnant before Robb has even left but doesn't notice for like a month. then she does tells blackfish but hes not going to risk sending a bird because if it was intercepted then the lannisters would know and you can imagine the consequences. I also think it is a bit poetic that the king in the north would be born at riverun just like his father even though there seats are at winterfell. about the blackfish swimmin out with a babe. that i dont get but there must have been some way a secret tunnel mayhaps.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

i mean... you guys don't think maybe someone could have smuggled her out on a little boat? if davos did it with onions, surely someone else could have done it with jeyne!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

It doesn't say she's pregnant, I'm only reading part 2 and don't know whats happened to her yet after the wedding. It does say before the wedding that they are trying and Catelyn says he's young and has time ... :(

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

×