Robb's Last Document?

[Elito]

I believe that even if Jon takes the title of king in the north and then Rickon shows up, Jon will let Rickon take his place when he is of age, Jon is very honorable about that king of things. And he really cares about his brother, not to mention that as he saw Summer he know that there is a small possibility of his brothers being still alive.

As for Davos being send to catch Rickon. I know that the mute child points to the map, so do you know where he is? You can redirect me if this has been already discuseed about.

Anyways I believe it makes more sense to have Rickon because the last they know about Bran is that he is incapable of walking, going north even with winter coming, they probably think he is dead already while they know that Rickon is alive and he could be hidden while he grows up, calling a lot least attention than a paralitic boy

[Howling Mad]

If I remember correctly, Maester Aemon faced three temptations to leave the wall. There was a scene where he described each of those circumstances to Jon. So far, Jon has refused temptation twice. First, to join the war; second when Stannis offered him Winterfell. I believe he will refuse temptation a third time when Robb's will is revealed. Finally, on his fourth opportunity, Jon will leave the wall to become King of all Westeros.

Nice observation

[Jem]

As for Davos being send to catch Rickon. I know that the mute child points to the map, so do you know where he is? You can redirect me if this has been already discuseed about.

The strongest evidence points to the island of Skagos.

There are a few threads around about this. Here is one:

[Buried Treasure]

I would be really surprised in that case. Robb seemed very determined, and Catelyn felt defeated when Robb passed on his wis will to his bannermen to be signed.

There's an implication Jon was named, but what we know isn't outright proof.

Jon's name wasn't mentioned at all during the scene in the tent. Robb 'seemed very determined' about naming Jon during an arguement several days earlier. We don't know how much later but the next paragraph after their row begins 'In the days that followed'. You may not believe that Robb changed his mind or had a better idea after he calmed down but surely you must agree it is possible for somebody to change their mind in the course of several days.

As for the scene in the tent, Catelyn felt defeated immediately after Robb finished speaking. She can't have had time to read the document (which Robb held in his hand whilst speaking) and so her feeling defeated was based on the earlier discussion at Oldstones. Robb commanded his 'true and loyal lords' to witness the document but Catelyn was not a lord in her own right and unlike the others in the tent would not have been required to put her seal to it.

Catelyn never thought about the document again, it may be that she did read it and it confirmed her belief Jon was named. If she did not read it then it is possible that somebody else might have been named.

Well it wouldn't have been talking about Robb because Robb would have already been dead by the time it was sent. I do wonder to whom it referred — Jon, Bran, Rickon, some other heir, Robb's crackpot unborn child, etc. — but it's not Robb.

I don't think Lyanna Mormont knew anything. She's doing pretty much the same thing the Blackfish did by continuing to fly the Stark banner - making the point that true loyalty lasts til death and beyond.

Anyways I believe it makes more sense to have Rickon because the last they know about Bran is that he is incapable of walking, going north even with winter coming, they probably think he is dead already while they know that Rickon is alive and he could be hidden while he grows up, calling a lot least attention than a paralitic boy

I more-or-less agree with this. Plus Bran will be pretty useless when it comes to reestablishing the dynasty as he almost certainly can't have children. If the northerners install Bran they will still need Rickon to be his heir and father the next generation of Starks.

A death will release him from his vows though, so technically, if the NW elects another Commander because Jon is dead, and Mel somehow breathes fire into him and he lives again, it would mean he is now free to go on his merry (or not so merry) way to be King in the North or whatever else he wants to do.

The vow says: Night gathers, and now my watch begins. It shall not end until my death.

That's nice and all, but do you really believe the other men of the Night's Watch are going to be so objective about it? They all have opinions and feelings about Jon - the ones who hate him aren't going to wave him merrily on his way and the ones that respect him are going to feel they need him.

[Addam of Hull]

That's nice and all, but do you really believe the other men of the Night's Watch are going to be so objective about it? They all have opinions and feelings about Jon - the ones who hate him aren't going to wave him merrily on his way and the ones that respect him are going to feel they need him.

At this point, does it even matter what the men of the Night's Watch think? Their numbers are basically non-existent and their authority is localized to the Wall. The situation up there is also extremely tenuous - it's very possible that given all the factions and the end of aDwD that the Watch may fail to exist during tWoW. Even if the Night's Watch does protest, who's going to behead Jon? Assuming Robb's document legitimizes him, removes him from the Night's Watch (as he discussed doing), and names him as his Heir, we have every reason to believe that at least most of the Northern Lords will recognize his authority. The North's loyalty to House Stark is very much so the point of aDwD and even Jon himself makes allies out of Alys Karstark and the new House of Thenn, as well as earning the begrudging approval of the clansmen for his plan with Tormund Giantsbane. At this point, if Jon leaves the Wall, once he's gone, there's nobody to stop him. Plus, if they do as Robb suggests and send a contingent of 10 or 20 or more to take the Black in his place, would the Watch care? What's one controversial member when you can have twenty loyal men?

I'm not suggesting that it's definite, but I think there are plenty of balls in play to give Jon the chance to rule over Winterfell if he so chooses.

[Buried Treasure]

At this point, does it even matter what the men of the Night's Watch think? Their numbers are basically non-existent and their authority is localized to the Wall. The situation up there is also extremely tenuous - it's very possible that given all the factions and the end of aDwD that the Watch may fail to exist during tWoW. Even if the Night's Watch does protest, who's going to behead Jon? Assuming Robb's document legitimizes him, removes him from the Night's Watch (as he discussed doing), and names him as his Heir, we have every reason to believe that at least most of the Northern Lords will recognize his authority. The North's loyalty to House Stark is very much so the point of aDwD and even Jon himself makes allies out of Alys Karstark and the new House of Thenn, as well as earning the begrudging approval of the clansmen for his plan with Tormund Giantsbane. At this point, if Jon leaves the Wall, once he's gone, there's nobody to stop him. Plus, if they do as Robb suggests and send a contingent of 10 or 20 or more to take the Black in his place, would the Watch care? What's one controversial member when you can have twenty loyal men?

I'm not suggesting that it's definite, but I think there are plenty of balls in play to give Jon the chance to rule over Winterfell if he so chooses.

If the arguement is that Jon is somehow free of his oaths because he died then yes it does matter what the men of the NW think - the NW is surely the official authority on whether men are sworn to it or not. Jon and the other northerners can choose to ignore the NW branding Jon a deserter if the NW do not view his death as freeing him from the oaths - but they could choose to ignore the NW branding Jon a deserter even if he doesn't die. Moving away from the question of whether a resurrected Jon is bound to his oaths, I agree that the NW is a weak force that cannot impose authority.

Running with the assumption Jon was named heir by Robb:

- Robb did not have a plan to free Jon from the Watch. He had an idea. He can be excused for not having had a proper plan and implementing it because he died so soon after making his will. He certainly couldn't unilaterially declare Jon free of his oaths as that is not within his authority.

Send 100 men to the Wall and ask the LC to free a sworn brother;

- What 100 men? Volunteers? (he'll be so lucky) prisoners? (does he have that many?) men picked at random from the army? (a good way to lose your bannermans support)

- Did Robb intend to arrange Jon to leave the Watch immediately or only if Robb died in battle?

- What if the LC says no?

Even if Robb had thought these thing through before he died it is unlikely he shared a detailed plan with Mormont & Glover; they were sent as envoys to Howland Reed with battle plans & not intended as envoys for the Wall. Had they chosen to go to the Wall they must have thought their only options would be to ask for Jon to be released (with no offer to sweeten the deal) or try & persuade him to desert.

[Buried Treasure]

d/p

[Peach Fuzz]

Exactly. Plus you also have the fact that the South is to a larger or smaller degree torn apart by war. The Riverlands are basically completely sacked, burnt or worse and there has been a lot of slaughter on all sides. Saltpans doesn't even exist anymore. The Ironborn are raiding the Reach. While the Lannister lands are mostly untouched so far, their army has taken a beating. Aegon is taking everything he can in the Stormlands, so there is bound to be much more fighting before everything is said and done. Only a few areas are completely untouched (Dorne, the Vale), and with Aegon surfacing, Dorne might get involved as well.

Sure, the North has its own amount of issues (Winterfell being sacked, Stannis outside in the snow, etc) but on the whole, it looks like a whole lot more shit will go down further south, giving the north some time to regroup. I doubt Aegon will be happy with just some bits of the Stormlands, he will most likely try to take Kings Landing, which would draw a much larger portion of the south into warfare. With winter being on its way as well, that means a lot more destruction and suffering before it's finished.

Maybe it's wrong, but I also always got the feelings the northerners were more diligent when it came to preparing for winter and knew how to survive it, since it was a more urgent threat for them than to the southerners.

The lannister lands were chevauchee'd by Robb and the northman a not of pillage. . . He took ashmark ,the crag, and wasn't it said that lady Mormont had taken thousands of cattle . They took some punishment too!

[mhout005]

Longtime lurker, first time poster here...

Anyway, isn't Bran sorta stuck beyond the wall. As in he is never leaving his root chair? I thought that once he was seated there, he could never leave.

[Turgid furgison]

Why does king of the north have to get winterfell? Tommen isnt lord of the rock yet he. does sit the irone throne. King of the north at the wall is what he would be. Any laws can be alter ed by a king and the king most likely proclaimed jon to be his heir. Regardless if stannis is gone jon will be looked to become its leader. Mance helped him broaden his definition of what a king is. But why send the letter through greywater. Howland has more secrets than its safe to have.

[psychogobstopper]

Why does king of the north have to get winterfell? Tommen isnt lord of the rock yet he. does sit the irone throne. King of the north at the wall is what he would be.

The seat of the King in the North was always Winterfell. Your comparison between Casterly Rock and the Iron Throne does not work, because there was no Iron Throne, King's Landing, or Crownlands until Aegon I had united Westeros as one. When the kingdoms were separate, however, there was a King of the Rock, whose seat was Casterly Rock, and whose name was Lannister. That's the more accurate comparison to King in the North and Winterfell. Of course, even that comparison is lacking since Tommen's claim to the Iron Throne isn't derived through a Lannister dynasty but rather House Baratheon, regardless of his true parentage (since Cersei et al. are continuing to represent Tommen as a son of Robert I Baratheon).

[Cinder Stark Targaryn]

Being King of the North or even just Lord Stark of Winterfell will indeed help Jon in fighting the Others, because it will motivate the Northmen better.

As for Jon usurping his brothers, I don't think it is fair to accuse him of being an usurper if he decides to follow the will of his late brother. It would technically be Robb usurping Bran in favor of Jon, I suppose.

That however is neither Jon's choice or fault, nor a bad idea given that even if the whereabouts of Bran, Rickon, Sansa and Arya were publicly known they would still be largely unsuited to rule for various reasons (mainly age).

Agree!!! Besides, I believe that sansa, arya, bran & rickon would support robbs will and unite behind Jon!!

[Buried Treasure]

Agree!!! Besides, I believe that sansa, arya, bran & rickon would support robbs will and unite behind Jon!!

Robb's will was made on the basis that Bran, Rickon and Arya were dead. If they had been known to be alive do you believe that Robb would have named another heir? They are trueborn Starks. Why do you then think that anyone would honour this will when they know that in fact the trueborn heirs still live?

Sansa is a different case, she was disbarred for a specific reason. After hearing of her forced marriage Robb expected her to be raped until she gave Tyrion a child then murdered. He named an alternate heir as he wanted to prevent the Lannisters staking that claim to the North. Robb would have liked to rescue Sansa and make her a widow - and had he somehow achieved that I believe he would have reinstated her into the succession (why not, she's his only living trueborn Stark relative). As we know the marriage was not consumated we speculate that she might get an annulment - which would have the same effect of removing the reason she was disbarred in the first place. So again, why would any loyal northman (or Sansa herself) favour ignoring the trueborn Stark heir just to obey the will Robb made when he was not in possession of all the facts?

[China Doll]

I believe Robb might have gone several ways with his will in the worst case scenario where he has no true heir with Jeyne, Arya is dead and Sansa has Lannister babies.

1. He names Jon as heir

2. He names Benjen as heir

3. He names Benjen heir and if he is dead Jon

4. Someone/someones totally under my radar.... (GRRM might totally surprise me)

CLUES:

I believe looking at the conversion he has with his mother gives us the most clues to what Robb is seeking in a candidate. He quickly refutes Cate’s suggestions to some distant Stark relative, “You father’s father had no siblings, but his father had a sister…they had three daughters, all of whom wed Vale lordlings.” Robb then suggest Jon and supports his claim with, “Jon’s more a Stark than some lordling from the Vale who have never so much as set eyes on Winterfell” Therefore we can conclude that Robb is looking for trustworthy candidate with strong Stark blood as well as someone who actually knows Winterfell, not a stranger. Both Jon and Benjen meet these requirements and to be honest I can’t think of anyone else in the series that qualifies under Robb’s requirements.

Next few lines also give us some clues to what is going on in Robb’s mind. If Jon is to be named the heir (or a heir) there are two potential problems. He is a bastard and he has made an oath to take the Black. But Robb claims he has solutions for both those problems. First, “he’s [Jon] legitimized by a royal decree” making Jon a true Stark. Second, Robb believes institutions like the Watch can be easily persuade through brides “If I send the Watch a hundred men in Jon’s place, I’ll wager they find some way to release him from his vows.” If Robb can easily clear these problems for Jon then Benjen is an even simpler problem to solve, right? Well kinda, Benjen IS the first ranger and to replace him is a bit harder. Wouldn’t it all matter on who is the Commander as well? We know the Wall is in desperate of more men but is “a hundred men” > Benjen to Mormont? I’m sure because Jon is a “noob” at the Wall replacing him with “a hundred men” should be quite tempting. At this point in the book we have to assume Robb thinks that Mormont is still the Commander.

PROBLEMS:

The biggest problem with naming Benjen as heir is DOESN’T EVERYONE THINKS HE IS DEAD? I mean lost over the Wall for months to years it’s pretty much a dead end there. Robb wouldn’t be stupid enough to name Benjen heir when he doesn’t even have enough hope for Ayra, “Why do you lie to yourself? Ayra’s gone, the same as Bran and Rickon”.

I think the same problem for naming Benjen heir applies for Jon as well. We know for sure Robb is aware that Jon is at the wall. Duh! But besides that we cannot be certain what else he knows about Jon. I know Jon was exchanging news of home Winterfell through ravens or else how would be had know Lady was dead. At the end of AGoT Jon is heading out with Mormont beyond the wall and I am sure such news was sent out all through Westeros. Robb is aware of this but then we can’t be certain he knows Jon is part of that group. Whatever Robb knows about Jon’s situation I don’t think he would put all his eggs in one basket. Life at the wall is tough and dangerous, not forget easily lost at the wall and even easier over the wall. Plus ravens carrying news is slow and easily lost during a time of battle so news of a bastard brother’s death can be easily lost for months maybe even years. So why name Jon heir when he could very well be dead as well?

Whatever the scenario may be either Jon is named heir or Benjen my main conclusion is Robb is most likely naming more than one successor.

*Bear in mind I have not yet read affc or adwd so apologies if I have missed something discussed in those books relevant to this topic*

[AvengerofWinterfell]

Maybe its just me, but Im actually leaning toward the will ultimately bringing about Jon's heritage (assuming R+L=J). When/If Mormont & Glover find Howland Reed and present him with Robb's will legitimizing Jon, I think Howland will reveal that doing so as Jon was always a Stark (In the event that R & L didnt marry) or that he's always been a Targ (in the event that they did). I mean think about it, Jon's parentage has been a MASSIVE secret since GoT, and Howland Reed is now the only man who knows the secret of the events at ToJ and The PROMISE Ned made to Lyanna. It just seems to fit quite nicely for him to reveal everything to them at that time.

[AvengerofWinterfell]

In that case he can still accept regency. He will be de facto King. Rickon is like... 7-8? Bran is stuck in a tree, Sansa is disinherited, Arya... will anyone recognize her if she turns up? (Actually, I think Jon will...)

especially if she still has Needle.

[AvengerofWinterfell]

Yeah, because autonomy in the last few years worked out great for them. Oh, wait...

The "King in the North" idea was an epic failure. I hope the Northern lords have learned their lesson, but a lot of them seem too stupid for that.

King in the North only became an epic failure due to things Robb didnt see coming. Granted I didnt think he shouldve declared independence, but it still couldve worked had

a) Edmure done what he told him to do instead of assuming

B) Theon not betrayed him

c) Roose Bolton not betrayed him.

Had the bait and trap he set up for Tywin Lannister worked then this would all be over essentially because KL would've likely been taken by Stannis and Tywin destroyed in the field but alas it didnt work that way. Theon's betrayal undermined him much more as it meant his own seat of power was captured, and Roose plotting with Ramsay and others just made it all go to hell in a hand basket.

[LuisDantas]

It's his liege lord. And yes, Manderly says that ... but he sends Davos after Rickon. Bran's the new liege lord, not Rickon. I have an idea that Manderly might be doing some word play and may renege on the offer of loyalty to Stannis. The other northern lords are only backing Stannis so he can help them avenge Robb and Ned and get the Starks back in Winterfell. Stannis is a means to an end to them. If the North goes back to being just another Iron Throne property, it means that all of those people died for nothing. Maybe that's fine with you, but I find that extremely distasteful and hope they keep fighting for independence.

It is political pragmatism. Stannis needs victories and allies in the North to have a shot as King. The Northern people need soldiers to fight the Freys, Boltons and Lannisters. Both have common cause against the Boltons, and both groups have plenty of dangers ahead without turning against each other.

To some extent, Manderly is hoping that Stannis dies or wears himself away during his military campaign in the North. Failing that, the size of his army compared to those of the Northern proper will carry a lot of influence on the exact terms of their later agreements. Besides, who knows how long Stannis will survive anyway? Even if he thrives in the North he has a long way to go and a lot of foes to fight until he reaches King's Landing. And then he will have to actually live in King's Landing or risk having people there plotting against him. Then there are the Houses of the Vale, there is Dorne, there are even the pirates and the Ironmen.

Lord Wyman Manderly may well have concluded that it is a fairly small price to pay for the eventual return to loyalty to the Starks. And for all anyone can tell, it may take only a short time.

That said, it is equally true that the Manderlys, the Mormonds and others are definitely seeing some point in avenging the Starks (and rescuing and securing the survivors) even if it eventually leads to a re-unified Westeros. Although it seems to me that many among them don't believe Westeros will have a true unified rule any time soon, for good reason. All the Kingdoms are stretched thin for food as it is, not much room for playing at army leader until the Winter comes and goes.

[Bride of Winter]

If I remember correctly, Maester Aemon faced three temptations to leave the wall. There was a scene where he described each of those circumstances to Jon. So far, Jon has refused temptation twice. First, to join the war; second when Stannis offered him Winterfell. I believe he will refuse temptation a third time when Robb's will is revealed. Finally, on his fourth opportunity, Jon will leave the wall to become King of all Westeros.

interesting thought. though i would have considered his time with the Wildlings and Ygritte his second temptation, which makes his refusal of Stannis' offer of Winterfell his third (which makes sense because that's what Jon always wanted, but he made the final decision the Watch is his place)

anyway, that way Robb 'officially' giving him Winterfell would turn the tables.

[Groat]

interesting thought. though i would have considered his time with the Wildlings and Ygritte his second temptation, which makes his refusal of Stannis' offer of Winterfell his third (which makes sense because that's what Jon always wanted, but he made the final decision the Watch is his place)

anyway, that way Robb 'officially' giving him Winterfell would turn the tables.

3 temptations for Jon. 1 for blood, 1 for love, and 1 for.... power or gold maybe. Hmm, a very interesting thought, I do like the 3 temptations Jon refused idea, it fits with him being a Targ.