Why do people believe the North will continue to try for independance?

[Third World King]

1. I meant that the Lannisters might face their own bannermen betrayal in the near future. To do this, they would most likely back a non-Lannister claimant to the Iron Throne (either Aegon or Stannis).

I really do not understand. Why would the banners under Casterly Rock, betray the Lannisters for Aegon or Stannis? Is there any reason for these assumptions?

2. Even after the Boltons are smashed, the Stark loyalists and Stannis share common enemies (Freys & Lannisters in the south, Others in the north). To install a Stark Lord in Winterfell the North is going to need some sort of protection. Rickon Stark is way too young to rule (as is 'Arya Stark', by the way), and I'm not so sure the North would be able rally behind a child king to fight against the Others or to counter any threat posed by a King on the Iron Throne who has united the South behind him.

If the Southron lords can rally under king Tommen, why do you find it impossible for the Northern lords to rally under Rickon? A regent can rule in Rickon's place until he comes of age- I think Manderly seeks to be that person.

3. Stannis dealt with Mance Rayder. Ned Stark went to KL to die, just as Robb did. Both of them knew in their hearts that they were doing the wrong thing, but they did them anyway. They abandoned the North to the Ironborn, whereas Stannis ended up coming to their aid. Stannis has more 'Stark' in him than Robb or Ned.

......

[Associate Maester]

I could see the North continuing their quest for independence and trying to come to some agreement with Stannis about common enemies and such (if Stannis would be amenable to some agreement. He's gotten more flexible as the books have gone along). Of course, it also depends on if the North starts taking the threat of the Others seriously. I'm not sure they are going to be convinced by Stannis (a Southron). However, if Jon comes along they are bound to take it seriously.

[Lord Varys]

The Lannisters are weak now. Bolton intended to name himself King in the North due to the fact that Lord Tywin was dead (at least that's what Lady Dustin assumes).

With Kevan dead, Jaime missing (and without real authority due to his membership in the KG), and Cersei's public humiliation some of the more powerful bannermen among the Lords of the West might start to think for themselves. This will inevitably become important if Aegon starts to win a few battles, but now the various Lannisters of Casterly Rock could also start to fight each other for precedence. Cersei technically still is Lady of Casterly Rock, and after her come Tommen or Myrcella, but the only grown-up Lannisters left in the west are all no descendants of Lord Tytos. So infighting similar to the Karstark development in the North is not unlikely... Tywin and Kevan kept the lions in line, but they are gone now.

Yeah, a Regency in the North would be possible, but it would only work during peaceful, quiet times, not right now. And I honestly don't see why the other Northern lords would or should accept Wyman Manderly as Regent of King Rickon. And we should also keep in mind that Manderly might be severely wounded right now...

[The Fallen]

3. Stannis dealt with Mance Rayder. Ned Stark went to KL to die, just as Robb did. Both of them knew in their hearts that they were doing the wrong thing, but they did them anyway. They abandoned the North to the Ironborn, whereas Stannis ended up coming to their aid. Stannis has more 'Stark' in him than Robb or Ned.

This is preposterous. Robb had to go south and if you can't understand that then you should touch on another subject. The Ironborn were no more than a nuisance and Robb was on his way to deal with them when he was betrayed. Ask the North if Stannis is a Stark.

[The Wolves]

If I was a Northerner, I would remember that 15 years ago, the jerk that sat on the iron Throne killed the Stark father and son. I would sadly think that history has repeated itself with another jerk on the throne killing yet another Liege Lord and his first born son.

If I lived in the North, I would never forget the 4 dead Starks and would actively endorse seceding from that shit hole. I think they would have tried seceding 15 years ago if Ned wasn't involved with Robert's victory and if Ned and Robert didn't have their brotherly relationship.

The North had to have learned their lesson this second time around. The North needs to be free of that cesspool and all it's treachery and civil wars. The plotting and lying for the throne is a never-ending saga. Let the power-hungry, social-climbing Southerners plot to kill each other. The North should stay the hell home and take care of their own. The only things that King's Landing gives the North are heartache and death .

^^^^ This times a billion I hope the North tells Stannis entitled ass to shove it sideways up his and go play with his fire witch. I hope to hell the North is away from the South, they have suffered more than anybody and they never even wanted that ugly chair just The Ned, his daughters, ice, and independence. The North wasn't doing it for a crown they did it for love. I hate the South and the great houses. I hope the North don't bow to Stannis or the South.

[Lord Varys]

My point was that both Ned and Robb (to a lesser degree) got hints and feelings (Ned deep within himself, and Robb through Osha) that his place was not in the South. But they did not listen, and were subsequently killed. That's the great tragedy of the Starks, they brought it all upon themselves. Had they stayed at home, none of this would have happened.

And they could have known! Ned got a very powerful sign that the stag and the direwolf would kill themselves in Bran's very first chapter.

Ned left the North vulnerable, and his heir very much alone before he was ready. Robb ended up emulating his father, when he should have looked to the more ancient Starks. Ned himself was a southron Stark of sorts, considering his fostering at the Eyrie and his close friendship to Robert Baratheon. And Robb made severe political mistakes which led to the Ironborn invasion and his subsequent murder.

Beginning by allowing to declare him King in the North. Had Robb declared for either Stannis or Renly, he could very well have been on the winning side of the war. He would have gotten his revenge, and would have been back in the North when the wildlings/Others were on the March. But he fucked things up. And that's because both Ned and Robb tried to play the Game of Thrones without caring all that much about its rules...

[The Fallen]

My point was that both Ned and Robb (to a lesser degree) got hints and feelings (Ned deep within himself, and Robb through Osha) that his place was not in the South. But they did not listen, and were subsequently killed. That's the great tragedy of the Starks, they brought it all upon themselves. Had they stayed at home, none of this would have happened.

And they could have known! Ned got a very powerful sign that the stag and the direwolf would kill themselves in Bran's very first chapter.

Ned left the North vulnerable, and his heir very much alone before he was ready. Robb ended up emulating his father, when he should have looked to the more ancient Starks. Ned himself was a southron Stark of sorts, considering his fostering at the Eyrie and his close friendship to Robert Baratheon. And Robb made severe political mistakes which led to the Ironborn invasion and his subsequent murder.

Beginning by allowing to declare him King in the North. Had Robb declared for either Stannis or Renly, he could very well have been on the winning side of the war. He would have gotten his revenge, and would have been back in the North when the wildlings/Others were on the March. But he fucked things up. And that's because both Ned and Robb tried to play the Game of Thrones without caring all that much about its rules...

There were circumstances out of the control of both Ned and especially Robb that forced them to make the decision to go south. I agree Ned didn't want to get involved in the cesspool that is the royal court. But how is Ned supposed to turn down the King? We know about the impending doom in the North, but no one else, not even the Night's Watch, had any idea of the danger that awaits them. I'm sure even the North took pride in having one of their own as the Hand of the King, who happens to be the second most powerful man in Westeros. Also, Ned may have been fostered in the south, but nothing if not a Northman. Cat says as much, and she would know a southron when she sees one. There really is nothing in the books that would suggest that Ned felt or was viewed as anything other than a Stark of the North.

As far as Robb is concerned he had no choice, but to go south to free his father from imprisonment. Osha's warning never reached him. Even if it had, again, he had no reason to take the superstitions of a wildling seriously. And definitely would not have found it more important than getting his father and sisters out of King's Landing and safely home. I agree that crowning himself King in the North wasn't necessary, but what was he supposed to do? "Guys, I appreciate you guys wanting me to be your king, but I don't feel to good about it."

Finally, neither Ned nor Robb were playing the 'Game of Thrones". That's simply a misconception. Ned discovered Cersei's secret and was simply going to let Robert know. Robb was marching to get his family back from the clutches of the Lannisters. You'd have a better argument if you stated that they died because they were NOT playing the game of thrones.

[starkfever]

the north will bow down to stannis and swear fealty. Why??? The north remembers! Not only the horrible things that happened to them, but also the good. Wyman's grandchild proves that, they remain loyal to the starks for what the starks did to aid them. Why would they not remain loyal to stannis for the same reason? He is bringing back their liege lord and helping them kill the people who wronged them (freys,boltons, greyjoys). The north remembers and the north will help stannis win. I also believe that stannis will remember what the north did to help him win the iron throne, I mean he did knight davos for smuggling food to them. Now I know he won't let them have their freedom and be a complete separate kingdom(he is too stubborn to do that), but I believe he will give them their due in one way or another. This of course is assuming stannis survives the north with the white walkers and the others coming.

[Gurkhal]

^^^^ This times a billion I hope the North tells Stannis entitled ass to shove it sideways up his and go play with his fire witch. I hope to hell the North is away from the South, they have suffered more than anybody and they never even wanted that ugly chair just The Ned, his daughters, ice, and independence. The North wasn't doing it for a crown they did it for love. I hate the South and the great houses. I hope the North don't bow to Stannis or the South.

They have not suffered the most because that title goes to the Riverlands which seems to have been all but demolished by the WoFK.

Your hatred is not something that I can do something about but as long as the North minds its own business and does its duty of keeping the Wildlings and Others away from the South, and let the Riverlands go of course, I'm almost starting to think it might be an idea to give those blockheads their beloved independence.

[David C. Hunter]

They have not suffered the most because that title goes to the Riverlands which seems to have been all but demolished by the WoFK.

Your hatred is not something that I can do something about but as long as the North minds its own business and does its duty of keeping the Wildlings and Others away from the South, and let the Riverlands go of course, I'm almost starting to think it might be an idea to give those blockheads their beloved independence.

Lol, it just would be better for everyone, especially the Lannisters honestly. I don't fear the Starks getting revenge on the Lannisters, I fear the Dornish, Aegon and Dany getting their revenge for what Tywin did as should you. Hell in the end the Starks maybe the only friends in the world that the Lannisters have. Oh what irony that would be.

Realistically speaking, if the North plans on taking back the Riverlands they will have to move south with the Vale, but not much further. I expect Aegon or Dany to lead the troops to the North in hopes of trying to reclaim the North in the name of House Targaryan. Lannisters may join the Starks...woo

If the Starks wanted independence, then they would get it because no one would try to conquer the North, especially during the Winter. However, I doubt either side will be that logical

[The BlackBear]

“Bear Island knows no king but the King in the North, whose name is STARK.”

This was written by a ten year old girl, who I'm pretty sure we're told had a bit of a crush on Robb (Ok I can't find this in the text I thought Alysane Mormont told Asha, I assume I imagined it :P ). Any pragmatic adult would see that an independant North is unsustainable.

We're looking at this from what the Northerners know. They know that the wars in the south are wrapping up or very nearly will be, (they don't know about Dany or Aegon.) As such they are a single nation against the combined powers of the southerners. They know the throne will want the North back (Renly showed us this.) They also know that they have fuck all men left. They know that they won't be able to do much in winter. They know that when winter ends they'll be in a tough condition (much worse of than the south.) So if they declare independance, they may be independant for all of winter, but when spring comes the Southerners will just sail up the west coast, land their army and kill the 'king in the North.' Anyone with any sense at all in the North knows this.

Stannis has been impressing and effectively helping the Northerners out. To then say that they'd spit in his face, goes against the honorable principles that are so often cited as being greater in Northerners than Southrons.

[Free Northman]

“Bear Island knows no king but the King in the North, whose name is STARK.”

This was written by a ten year old girl, who I'm pretty sure we're told had a bit of a crush on Robb. Any pragmatic adult would see that an independant North is unsustainable.

We're looking at this from what the Northerners know. They know that the wars in the south are wrapping up or very nearly will be, (they don't know about Dany or Aegon.) As such they are a single nation against the combined powers of the southerners. They know the throne will want the North back (Renly showed us this.) They also know that they have fuck all men left. They know that they won't be able to do much in winter. They know that when winter ends they'll be in a tough condition (much worse of than the south.) So if they declare independance, they may be independant for all of winter, but when spring comes the Southerners will just sail up the west coast, land their army and kill the 'king in the North.' Anyone with any sense at all in the North knows this.

Stannis has been impressing and effectively helping the Northerners out. To then say that they'd spit in his face, goes against the honorable principles that are so often cited as being greater in Northerners than Southrons.

I disagree with pretty much that entire post.

[The Snowman]

“Bear Island knows no king but the King in the North, whose name is STARK.”

This was written by a ten year old girl, who I'm pretty sure we're told had a bit of a crush on Robb. Any pragmatic adult would see that an independant North is unsustainable.

We're looking at this from what the Northerners know. They know that the wars in the south are wrapping up or very nearly will be, (they don't know about Dany or Aegon.) As such they are a single nation against the combined powers of the southerners. They know the throne will want the North back (Renly showed us this.) They also know that they have fuck all men left. They know that they won't be able to do much in winter. They know that when winter ends they'll be in a tough condition (much worse of than the south.) So if they declare independance, they may be independant for all of winter, but when spring comes the Southerners will just sail up the west coast, land their army and kill the 'king in the North.' Anyone with any sense at all in the North knows this.

Stannis has been impressing and effectively helping the Northerners out. To then say that they'd spit in his face, goes against the honorable principles that are so often cited as being greater in Northerners than Southrons.

I disagree with pretty much that entire post.

I'm with you Free Northman

Black Bear where did you pull this from?

Lyanna Mormonts crush on Robb?

Where do you get 'The North has no men left' from?

So after all those winters for the past I don't know, 3000 years since the Andals forged their kingdoms and began their invasions of the North they still couldn't break them. You;d think that Harren the Black might've given the west coast of the North a crack? Nothing happened. The Storm Kings large kingdom before them couldn't break the North. The Arryns fought the Starks for 300 years for the 3 Sisters...300 years of on and off warfare...

More invasions than I suppose can be counted of the Andal alliances to invade the North and every time they were thrown back.

The Civil war in the North between Stannis and Bolton consists of likely 1/3 of the troops available to the North. Also I think you are forgetting that that Winter is here and the Others are coming so its time to buckle up and get your valyrian steel and dragonglass out and get ready to start lopping heads

[The BlackBear]

Where do you get 'The North has no men left' from?

So after all those winters for the past I don't know, 3000 years since the Andals forged their kingdoms and began their invasions of the North they still couldn't break them. You;d think that Harren the Black might've given the west coast of the North a crack? Nothing happened. The Storm Kings large kingdom before them couldn't break the North. The Arryns fought the Starks for 300 years for the 3 Sisters...300 years of on and off warfare...

More invasions than I suppose can be counted of the Andal alliances to invade the North and every time they were thrown back.

The Civil war in the North between Stannis and Bolton consists of likely 1/3 of the troops available to the North. Also I think you are forgetting that that Winter is here and the Others are coming so its time to buckle up and get your valyrian steel and dragonglass out and get ready to start lopping heads

Most of the men who returned were Boltons and Karstarks (and as such will fight for them and more than a few will die.) But the North had very few men relative to it's size to begin with, they were slaughtered at the Red Wedding/Duskendale/the Fords. They have men certainly but compared to the South they have very very few.

Yes but the North has never faced all the kingdoms together.

Yes Winter is coming as are the Others. Why then would they make their problems worse by making declaring war on the rest of westeros?

[Free Northman]

Most of the men who returned were Boltons and Karstarks (and as such will fight for them and more than a few will die.) But the North had very few men relative to it's size to begin with, they were slaughtered at the Red Wedding/Duskendale/the Fords. They have men certainly but compared to the South they have very very few.

Yes but the North has never faced all the kingdoms together.

Yes Winter is coming as are the Others. Why then would they make their problems worse by making declaring war on the rest of westeros?

If the North does remain part of the combined Kingdom, it will be because they are forced to by superior numbers, not because it is in their objective interest to do so.

As for the cost benefit to the South of conquering and holding the North - I don't think the calculation makes sense, other than to soothe the pride of some megalomaniac King.

They would lose 5-10 times the troops tha that the Northerners would lose, have no ability to live off the land, it would require prohibitive costs to supply an army at such long distance, and would be exposed to constant attacks along their supply lines. They'd have to maneuvre over unfamiliar terrain and essentially it would cripple the economy of the Seven Kingdoms.

And to gain what in return? The cold, wild North? The taxes they would gain would not repay the cost in many generations.

Basically, the TV show gave it away in Season 1, when Cersei told Joffrey that the North cannot be conquered and held by any outside force lacking Dragons.

[Lord Varys]

Anyway, we have to admit that Lyanna Mormont's letter dates from the very beginning of Stannis's campaign. He demands homage, and pretty much no one answers, or cares all that much. Then he sends out envoys and gains Mors Umber's allegiance, and the Manderlys (although he doesn't know it yet).

When he marches on Deepwood, he wins the mountain clans and Bear Island. Obviously Alysane Mormont didn't give a fig about Lyanna's bold statement. If I'm mot mistaken, Alysane would be the eldest Mormont girl left back in the North - Dacey is dead, and one or two of the other daughters are with Lady Maege and Galbart Glover in the Neck.

The North could only pursue its pursue of independence by spitting in Stannis's face. They would effectively be forced to murder the man who came to their aid and who picked up the fallen torch of House Stark in the North? Neither of these Northern cowards who hold their memories so dear

1. Came to the aid of the NW (Crowfood and Whoresbane could have moved their asses, could they not?).

2. Dared to defy Roose Bolton openly. Lord Wyman would not have been able to plot revenge/Stark restoration without the opportunities provided by Lord Davos (proving his loyalty by 'killing' him & recruiting a man to pick up Rickon). I daresay, Wyman would have not even gotten his son back without Stannis's help!

So we should really believe that all those honorable northern lords who have to thank Stannis for giving them the very backbone to fight against the Boltons (if Stannis had not come North, all the northern cowards would have declared for Roose!) are going to defect him as soon as the common enemy no. 1 (the Boltons) are defeated, while the Freys/Lannisters and the Others are still standing? I don't think so. And I'm also quite sure most of the Lords are more than happy that this secession thing is over. It would be bad for trade, bad for stability, bad for pretty much everything, especially during winter. I don't think the south would care all that much about providing them with food if they are technically no longer part of the Seven Kingdoms...

As to Ned's and Robb's mistakes:

They did play the Game of Thrones. But they did not care to inform themselves about the rules. If you are in the game for power, you have to be ruthless and ambitious, you cannot become Hand of the King, Lord Regent, and Protector of the Realm and then declare to your not-so-trustworthy ally that you don't care about all that, that you would like to go home.

You also don't declare yourself king in the middle of a war with plenty of other kings around who all have also claims to your so-called kingdom, and who most likely will strike deals which may very well give them twice or triple your manpower. And you most certainly don't expect you vassals to stick to you until the very end, even after all is lost. Roose Bolton stated after the Blackwater that it is really sad that King Robb would never ever bend the knee to the Lannisters. The Red Wedding was a consequence of Robb's stubbornness, and he shown a pragmatical side, things might very well have ended differently.

Oh, and Osha's warning did reach Robb. She tells Bran that she has told him, and Bran repeats it, too, if I remember correctly. Even Ned had all the cards in his hand. He talked to Gared, he knew about the Others, and he choose to ignore it. Defying Robert's wishes would have cost Ned pretty much nothing. We know as much from a statement of Cersei's: She expected Ned to decline the offer, and she would most likely never have plotted against Ned if he had remained at Winterfell. Robert would have been pissed, yes, but that would have passed, and the Starks would have endured. They would have been ready when winter came. Now they are not.

[The Snowman]

If the North does remain part of the combined Kingdom, it will be because they are forced to by superior numbers, not because it is in their objective interest to do so.

As for the cost benefit to the South of conquering and holding the North - I don't think the calculation makes sense, other than to soothe the pride of some megalomaniac King.

They would lose 5-10 times the troops tha that the Northerners would lose, have no ability to live off the land, it would require prohibitive costs to supply an army at such long distance, and would be exposed to constant attacks along their supply lines. They'd have to maneuvre over unfamiliar terrain and essentially it would cripple the economy of the Seven Kingdoms.

And to gain what in return? The cold, wild North? The taxes they would gain would not repay the cost in many generations.

Basically, the TV show gave it away in Season 1, when Cersei told Joffrey that the North cannot be conquered and held by any outside force lacking Dragons.

IF they inaded the west coast the Northeners could easily go guerilla warfare on their ass especially with the huge forests available to them.

Also the simple fact that Moat Cailin has never been taken from the South. The Andlas died by the thousands on the causeway,

Also they cut supply lines as you said and they would be a real deep trouble

[Free Northman]

Anyway, we have to admit that Lyanna Mormont's letter dates from the very beginning of Stannis's campaign. He demands homage, and pretty much no one answers, or cares all that much. Then he sends out envoys and gains Mors Umber's allegiance, and the Manderlys (although he doesn't know it yet).

When he marches on Deepwood, he wins the mountain clans and Bear Island. Obviously Alysane Mormont didn't give a fig about Lyanna's bold statement. If I'm mot mistaken, Alysane would be the eldest Mormont girl left back in the North - Dacey is dead, and one or two of the other daughters are with Lady Maege and Galbart Glover in the Neck.

The North could only pursue its pursue of independence by spitting in Stannis's face. They would effectively be forced to murder the man who came to their aid and who picked up the fallen torch of House Stark in the North? Neither of these Northern cowards who hold their memories so dear

1. Came to the aid of the NW (Crowfood and Whoresbane could have moved their asses, could they not?).

2. Dared to defy Roose Bolton openly. Lord Wyman would not have been able to plot revenge/Stark restoration without the opportunities provided by Lord Davos (proving his loyalty by 'killing' him & recruiting a man to pick up Rickon). I daresay, Wyman would have not even gotten his son back without Stannis's help!

So we should really believe that all those honorable northern lords who have to thank Stannis for giving them the very backbone to fight against the Boltons (if Stannis had not come North, all the northern cowards would have declared for Roose!) are going to defect him as soon as the common enemy no. 1 (the Boltons) are defeated, while the Freys/Lannisters and the Others are still standing? I don't think so. And I'm also quite sure most of the Lords are more than happy that this secession thing is over. It would be bad for trade, bad for stability, bad for pretty much everything, especially during winter. I don't think the south would care all that much about providing them with food if they are technically no longer part of the Seven Kingdoms...

As to Ned's and Robb's mistakes:

They did play the Game of Thrones. But they did not care to inform themselves about the rules. If you are in the game for power, you have to be ruthless and ambitious, you cannot become Hand of the King, Lord Regent, and Protector of the Realm and then declare to your not-so-trustworthy ally that you don't care about all that, that you would like to go home.

You also don't declare yourself king in the middle of a war with plenty of other kings around who all have also claims to your so-called kingdom, and who most likely will strike deals which may very well give them twice or triple your manpower. And you most certainly don't expect you vassals to stick to you until the very end, even after all is lost. Roose Bolton stated after the Blackwater that it is really sad that King Robb would never ever bend the knee to the Lannisters. The Red Wedding was a consequence of Robb's stubbornness, and he shown a pragmatical side, things might very well have ended differently.

Oh, and Osha's warning did reach Robb. She tells Bran that she has told him, and Bran repeats it, too, if I remember correctly. Even Ned had all the cards in his hand. He talked to Gared, he knew about the Others, and he choose to ignore it. Defying Robert's wishes would have cost Ned pretty much nothing. We know as much from a statement of Cersei's: She expected Ned to decline the offer, and she would most likely never have plotted against Ned if he had remained at Winterfell. Robert would have been pissed, yes, but that would have passed, and the Starks would have endured. They would have been ready when winter came. Now they are not.

However, Martin does continue to provide hints in the subtexts throughout the books that being mere lords of Winterfell, and relying on Stannis for their deliverance would be disappointing for the Starks. Off the top of my head I recall the following references:

The reference to all the Starks Kings in the crypts, with their crowns, only to arrive at Torhenn and the specific comment that these Starks lacked the crowns of their proud ancestors and were only lords.

The reference by Lady Dustin to Theon that Roose might aspire to being more than just Warden of the North. Why not be KING in the North? The immediate comparison that springs to mind is that if a BOLTON can aspire to Kingship of the North, then being satisfied with being mere Lords of Winterfell is actually an insult to the Starks. A Stark aspiring to less than a Bolton is simply unjustifiable.

The pride all the Stark loyalist readers is obviously meant to feel when Lyanna Stark states that the North knows only one King and his name is Stark really sets us up for nothing but disappointment should the Starks end up being less than Kings by the end of the series.

The disquiet that Jon feels when thinking about Stannis taking Winterfell goes something like:" Winterfell had seen a lot of battles outside its ancient walls over the centuries, but never one without a Stark on one side or the other". This is intended to generate in us a sense of dissatisfaction with Stannis being the one taking Winterfell back. A sense of "something is out of place."

The constant references to the ancient Stark Kings, the building of the Wolf's Den and the exploits and victories of the Old Kings of Winter continuously generates a feeling of dissatisfaction at the current state of affairs, where the Northmen are vassals to the Iron Throne.

Davos's reference of the Old Mint in White Harbor, reminding us that the North once minted its own coinage, until the Targaryens conquered them. The building's former magnificence is in stark contrast to the squallid refugee center it has now become. Another hint that the natural state of affairs is northern independence.

The otherness of the North, as communicated to Davos by Ser Bartimus: " There is a lot you southroners don't know about the North."

The disdain with which the Mountain Clans refer to the southroners:" We would have had the castle and the girl by now if you prancing southron jackanapes didn't piss your satin breeches at a little snow."

And the fact that Robb's will is on its way North, and that he is held in such high esteem by many northerners - the Manderly girl at White Harbor springs to mind - tells me that the Kingdom of the North is not dead.

I quote all of the above from memory, so forgive the odd error in recollection.

The point is that Martin would know by now that all the groundwork he created for the creation of the Kingdom of the North would generate a massive sense of disappointment with a lot of readers if the North ended with anything less than independence by the end of the series.

They may be down to only a handful of people by the end, and that would be fine, but if these ragged survivors are independent, then all would be well that end's well, in the view of most readers, I reckon.

Martin knows this, because he most carefully and craftily set these expectations up within our minds, through the way he wrote the story. In his latest interview he goes as far as saying that the North is special in deciding who can rule it, compared to the other Seven Kingdoms.

The North will be free in the end. I am quite sure of that. Hence my name.

[The BlackBear]

I'm not saying it would be easy, but if you kill the king, if you kill the lords the North fragments. You simply do what was done to the ironborn and keep smacking them down when they rebel. I'm not talking about a protracted stay, just get in cause some damage and prove your point then get out. The North will soon get sick of constatntly having to fight off the Southerners.

I don't think GRRM gives a shit about making readers happy. I fail to see how GRRM showing how great things had been when they were winning the war, but now are bad because they lost, hint that he'd make them kings again. He shows that whilst in 'standard' fantasy, everything works out well and they become kings and good conqers evil, in real life no such thing happens. And he's nothing if not realistic.

[Free Northman]

I'm not saying it would be easy, but if you kill the king, if you kill the lords the North fragments. You simply do what was done to the ironborn and keep smacking them down when they rebel. I'm not talking about a protracted stay, just get in cause some damage and prove your point then get out. The North will soon get sick of constatntly having to fight off the Southerners.

I don't think GRRM gives a shit about making readers happy. I fail to see how GRRM showing how great things had been when they were winning the war, but now are bad because they lost, hint that he'd make them kings again. He shows that whilst in 'standard' fantasy, everything works out well and they become kings and good conqers evil, in real life no such thing happens. And he's nothing if not realistic.

I disagree.

He likes giving us what we want, but at a price.

Robb kicks the Lannisters asses, but loses his life.

Jon gets to be Lord Commander - but gets assassinated.

Arya gets to be a super assassin - but has to give up her humanity.

The Frey's get to do the Red Wedding, and in return we see Merret being strung up and some Frey Pies being cooked, and that's just the beginning.

Bolton takes the North, but a northern plot is shown to be unfolding to wreak bloody vengeance on them.

Martin will give us an independent North, but will kill off half the people in the North and a bunch more Starks to achieve that. A bittersweet ending, remember, with the final book's initial title being A Time for Wolves.

If Jon has to sacrifice his life to win the North's independence, well, that would be a price gladly paid.