kg1982 Posted July 19, 2012 Share Posted July 19, 2012 Jon will use Robb's will to take over as regent for Rickon. He can use it to make sure another ambitious lord doesn't claim the title.. Mamderlay and to get people to follow him despite basically deserting the Watch. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Cliche Guevara Posted July 20, 2012 Share Posted July 20, 2012 I don't get why so many people think Jon learning about his Targ heritage would somehow diminish his Stark identity. He's obviously not going to just abandon the north for KL as soon as he finds out. Like other people have said, I see him gleaning more confidence in his unique individual identity from learning who his true parents are while feeling even more duty to protect the realm as the Targ heir. He won't push that claim publicly unless it's required to get the south serious about the threat of the others, but I don't see him completely ignoring it either. Although I agree that I can't see him ever actually setting foot south of the neck. A lot of his non-northern support may come to him up north instead of him going south. That would help him keep his strong sense of Stark identity too. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Faint Posted July 20, 2012 Share Posted July 20, 2012 I don't imagine Jon will lay claim to either of the identities. His very upbringing denied him any identity but that of a bastard and that's how he has always seen himself. Whatever the greater world might regard him as, to himself he'll never be a Stark, to himself he'll never be a Targaryen; he will always be a "Snow." Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sterling Posted July 20, 2012 Share Posted July 20, 2012 I think no matter what happens regarding R + L = J, Jon is going to remain at/North of the wall because if he ends up being a Targ, I don't see how he couldn't be AA, so he's going to have to defeat the Others. He's could claim his inheritance as Lord Targaryan, but he's going to end up wherever the Others are. Assuming he's not actually dead in which case he's a wight and Stannis is going to have to kill him. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
eRome Posted July 20, 2012 Share Posted July 20, 2012 The great irony is that even if he is Rhaegar and Lyanna's child, he's still a bastard. If Aegon is real, he comes next. Then Daenerys.As things stand right now, Stannis is the rightful heir of Westeros, as his elder Robert died without legitimate issue. I'd argue it was within Stannis' power to legitimize Jon Snow and give him Winterfell. I suppose you could argue that since Robb "seceded" from the Iron Throne's rule and declared a new kingdom, or rather the Crown, would have the power to attain or raise lords in the North. Since Robb's dead that duty would fall to his heir. The funny thing is Robb left Snow as his heir, Jon just doesn't know it. Since the King in the North is a Stark, I assume the title Lord of Winterfell comes with the Crown. BUT no one knows Bran is alive, so technically Bran has a claim to the Crown and Winterfell....man this stuff is confusing... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Faint Posted July 20, 2012 Share Posted July 20, 2012 The great irony is that even if he is Rhaegar and Lyanna's child, he's still a bastard.No, not necessarily; in fact, more likely, the opposite is true. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
assjfjgjsgjljljglgjfjsduar Posted July 20, 2012 Share Posted July 20, 2012 The great irony is that even if he is Rhaegar and Lyanna's child, he's still a bastard. If Aegon is real, he comes next. Then Daenerys.Actually, circumstantial evidence suggests that he is legitimate. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
eRome Posted July 20, 2012 Share Posted July 20, 2012 Actually, circumstantial evidence suggests that he is legitimate.Please explain. Rhaegar would have a had to marry Lyanna. For that to be legal he probably would have needed the King's permission too. We're getting into technicalities I know, but I can't see any way he'd be legitimate... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Chaircat Meow Posted July 20, 2012 Share Posted July 20, 2012 Please explain. Rhaegar would have a had to marry Lyanna. For that to be legal he probably would have needed the King's permission too. We're getting into technicalities I know, but I can't see any way he'd be legitimate...Targs can practice polygamy. The three kingsguard at the Tower of Joy who can only have been there to guard the king, otherwise they would go to Viserys. In addition Mormont's raven, which is being warged, calling Jon king (courtesy of Bloodraven). Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
eRome Posted July 20, 2012 Share Posted July 20, 2012 I agree that three Kingsguard at the Tower of Joy is strange and it needs to be explained. Rhaegar was never king, he died before his father, on the Trident. And we know that those three knights were not at the Trident and were probably in the South with Rhaegar before he came North to take command of the Royalist Army at King's Landing. My guess is that Rhaegar put the three knights at the Tower knowing that Eddard or Robert knew that was where Lyanna was being held and he wanted her to be safe. I'm sure they were in love, but married? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tagganaro Posted July 20, 2012 Share Posted July 20, 2012 I see Jon as sort of the ultimate trump card for the Starks. He certainly identifies more as a Stark than he ever would as a Targ. Therefore, I never see him accepting or going after the Iron Throne. He's in a position of some power (assuming he's alive) as he'll probably have an army of wildlings and probably remnants of loyal NW members (assuming NW is no more). If he can, he'll take his army, with Robb's will, get the North to follow him, expel Ramsay and the Boltons as a placeholder kind of King of Winter. I don't' think he'd ever want to usurp from any of his brothers or sisters lordship. If he can, he'll take his army, unite the North, and then turn North and lead his armies against the Others, probably dying in the process. That's how I see it playing out. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Chaircat Meow Posted July 20, 2012 Share Posted July 20, 2012 I agree that three Kingsguard at the Tower of Joy is strange and it needs to be explained. Rhaegar was never king, he died before his father, on the Trident. And we know that those three knights were not at the Trident and were probably in the South with Rhaegar before he came North to take command of the Royalist Army at King's Landing. My guess is that Rhaegar put the three knights at the Tower knowing that Eddard or Robert knew that was where Lyanna was being held and he wanted her to be safe. I'm sure they were in love, but married?The line of succession goes from Aerys to Rhaegar, to R's sons regardless of when R dies. So if R is never king it doesn't matter. Aegon was king on Aery's death, presuming he died after Aerys, which he probably did, and then baby Jon became the king, not Viserys.The question is more why the kingsguard stayed there when the war was lost and the king (Viserys) was on Dragonstone sans his kingsguard. They would have had to leave to protect the king unless they were already with the king.And R can be married to two women. He may think he needs three children, three heads of the dragon and Elia can't give him any more. Also, Aegon I married twice. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
eRome Posted July 20, 2012 Share Posted July 20, 2012 Anything is possible. Everything on here is conjecture anyway. I understand the line of succession; I just used that as an example of the timeline. Sorry, should have been more clear. The whole point hinges on Jon be legitimate. If he's not he's out of the line of succession.The problem with the argument that the reason there are three Kingsguard at the Tower of Joy is because they're guarding the heir (Jon) is that they weren't at the Trident or King's Landing, meaning it's not like upon Rhaegar and Aegon's death they rushed to defend the next-in-line. My argument is that when Rhaegar took Lyanna to the Tower of Joy, he took Dayne, Whent and Hightower with him to protect Lyanna. Then they stayed there, when Rhaegar went north to King's Landing after the Battle of the Bells to lead the Royal Army to the Trident. We know this because Eddard says that he missed them, the knights, on the Trident.I get that Targaryen's can have multiple wives. But, and please correct me if I'm wrong, the precedent is that if they have multiple wives they are themselves Targaryens. Aegon I married his two sisters.I'm actually much more interested in your raven theory. Who is the warg behind it Bran? Bloodraven? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Chaircat Meow Posted July 20, 2012 Share Posted July 20, 2012 Anything is possible. Everything on here is conjecture anyway. I understand the line of succession; I just used that as an example of the timeline. Sorry, should have been more clear. The whole point hinges on Jon be legitimate. If he's not he's out of the line of succession.The problem with the argument that the reason there are three Kingsguard at the Tower of Joy is because they're guarding the heir (Jon) is that they weren't at the Trident or King's Landing, meaning it's not like upon Rhaegar and Aegon's death they rushed to defend the next-in-line. My argument is that when Rhaegar took Lyanna to the Tower of Joy, he took Dayne, Whent and Hightower with him to protect Lyanna. Then they stayed there, when Rhaegar went north to King's Landing after the Battle of the Bells to lead the Royal Army to the Trident. We know this because Eddard says that he missed them, the knights, on the Trident.I get that Targaryen's can have multiple wives. But, and please correct me if I'm wrong, the precedent is that if they have multiple wives they are themselves Targaryens. Aegon I married his two sisters.I'm actually much more interested in your raven theory. Who is the warg behind it Bran? Bloodraven?I didn't say that though. The question was why are they still there when Viserys has no kingsguard left. Answer, Viserys is not the king, jon is (was). Oh Bloodraven. And its not my theory. Its been on the boards a bit, put forward by Apple Martini. I did cotton onto it myself though.As for multiple wives, yes, but R didn't marry another Targ at all because Elia was Dornish and Dany wasn't available because she hadn't been born. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
pitakon Posted July 20, 2012 Share Posted July 20, 2012 how can a dead guy claim anything? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Chaircat Meow Posted July 20, 2012 Share Posted July 20, 2012 He's not dead!!!! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
eRome Posted July 20, 2012 Share Posted July 20, 2012 I hope we can all agree that Jon Snow is not dead! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
the north remebers Posted July 20, 2012 Share Posted July 20, 2012 So we all know (presuming you've read it) that in a Dance with Dragons, Stannis offers Jon Winterfell.He has the oppertunity to follow after Ned and become Lord Jon Stark, with Val as his wife.Yet he says no, again and again, because he wishes to stay loyal to the Night's Watch.And of course for other internal reasons of his bastardry and his feelings of being an outsider.But, the Night's Watch have now betrayed him, stabbed him, and rejected him as Lord Commander.So, now that's possibly out of the way, does that mean Jon's loyalty to them will fall and fail?Assuming that it might, and assuming Jon is the product of Rhaegar and Lyanna,Do you think that maybe, if a time does arise that he learns of his royal bloodline,He will leave the Night's Watch to take up his Targaryen Claim to the throne?It make some sense. It means he will feel a part of something, knowing his parentage.It also gives him a chance to become involved in the thick of the war, and the main narrative.Maybe it can even connect with his wildling alliance, bringing them in as an army?Thoughts?This is of course, presuming he has not met an untimely death. jon character is not likely to throw away his vows even if they kicked him out Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
assjfjgjsgjljljglgjfjsduar Posted July 20, 2012 Share Posted July 20, 2012 I agree that three Kingsguard at the Tower of Joy is strange and it needs to be explained. Rhaegar was never king, he died before his father, on the Trident. And we know that those three knights were not at the Trident and were probably in the South with Rhaegar before he came North to take command of the Royalist Army at King's Landing. My guess is that Rhaegar put the three knights at the Tower knowing that Eddard or Robert knew that was where Lyanna was being held and he wanted her to be safe. I'm sure they were in love, but married?That does not explain, at all, why they were still at the Tower when Aerys, Rhaegar and Aegon were dead and Viserys should have been king. It also doesn't explain Mormont's warged raven calling Jon "king."GRRM was asked about Targaryen polygamy and said that there "may be" some more modern examples of it. *cough* Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.