Summer Posted November 12, 2006 Share Posted November 12, 2006 Summer, I think Jon's name is "Snow" because that's the name for bastards in the north and that's where he and Ned live. I assume you're right but we know he was milk brother to Edric Dayne Lord of Starfall and by that age, you would be named. Seeing how this all took place South he should not be named Snow. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Shewoman Posted November 12, 2006 Share Posted November 12, 2006 Northern Ned was claiming Jon as his bastard son. Hence he named him "Jon Snow." I'm not sure if we've heard of other Stark bastards, but if there were any they would have carried the "Snow" name as well? Do you see something significant in the fact that Jon has a Northern name other than that's what Ned's bastard would be named? I don't think where a bastard is born is as important in the naming as the family whose bastard the child is--the place in which the child grows up. Probably most bastards are born in the same general area in which their parents live, but during wartime I'm sure Jon wasn't the only one born far from home. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tyrion's Song Posted November 13, 2006 Share Posted November 13, 2006 I don't know if this has been mentioned before (it prolly has though), but it seems odd to me that, if in fact, Jon is the result of Rhaegar's and Lyanna's lovemaking, he doesn't look anything at all like a Targaryen! He looks a lot like Eddard though, but he hasn't got any of the traditional Targaryen trademarks, ie. the silver hair and odd-colored eyes. Returning to his very Stark-ish look (which of course isn't a mystery with a Stark mother. However..), a pretty obscene theory could be another case of incest. This time between Lyanna and Ned; we keep/kept hearing about how much he cared about her. Perhaps it was more than just brotherly love?! Nah that would conflict with Neddy's silly honor. So thats not a very likely scenario. All I really wanted to say is that I'm not (yet) entirely bought on the whole L+R=J "theory". It just seems off that Jon should be Targaryen when he doesn't look anything like them. This got me thinking. I share most of my mother's features in terms of eye color, hair color etc. Are you saying I need to revaluate what I should call my uncle? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The Winged Shadow Posted November 13, 2006 Share Posted November 13, 2006 did rhaegar had dark or light skin? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Stratonice Posted November 13, 2006 Share Posted November 13, 2006 If Jon is a bastard and born in the South why is his name Snow? I'm sure I know this but I can't remember... The rules of how it applies isn't really specified but these bastards names seems to be reserved for (recognized) bastards by nobility (one or both parents). Since Ned is the only known parent of Jon and he is a northern Lord, Jon gets the surname Snow. Or more generally, I think the name is applied based on where the noble parent came from. But I don't know how it would work if both parents are nobles. The only example we have of that (at least that I can think of right now) is Edric Storm and he would get that name from both sides unless I misremember. But I assume the father's home area would come before the mother's (if he's known and of the nobility) though I don't really have anything to base this assumption on. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Summer Posted November 13, 2006 Share Posted November 13, 2006 Nobility has no importance here really. Whatever you are, from hedge knight to King if you father a bastard than he will take the name Snow, Storm, Waters etc etc. The proof that the origins of the Father has no importance is found with Robert childern. Edric, Gendry and the girl found at the Eerie all have different names. Same Father tough... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Happy Ent Posted November 13, 2006 Share Posted November 13, 2006 Nobility has no importance here really. Whatever you are, from hedge knight to King if you father a bastard than he will take the name Snow, Storm, Waters etc etc. No. Only noble bastards have surnames. Because only nobles have surnames in the first place. Nobody else needs a surname. The surname signifies nobility, the fact that it is Snow or Flowers or Pyke signifies that the individual has no place in the line of succession. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Not another Stark Posted November 13, 2006 Share Posted November 13, 2006 Targ features, just like Lannister features, follow real-world rules and are recessive, as opposed to Baratheon and Stark dark-hair features, for instance. That's why Cersei's offspring manages to keep the Lannister looks, because they're quite incestuous. Otherwise, they'll be just like Gendry ("the seed is strong") or his half-sister they unknowingly meet in the Riverlands (was it Stoney Sept?). Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Stratonice Posted November 13, 2006 Share Posted November 13, 2006 Nobility has no importance here really. Whatever you are, from hedge knight to King if you father a bastard than he will take the name Snow, Storm, Waters etc etc. Since Happy Ent has already provided an excellent answer to this, I won't repeat it but simply agree with that interpretation. The proof that the origins of the Father has no importance is found with Robert childern. Edric, Gendry and the girl found at the Eerie all have different names. Same Father tough... The fact that Robert's bastards has different names does not necessarily prove I was wrong about the fathers origins being important because Edric Storm is the only one he ever recognized and he is therefore the only one who would have the right to even a bastards surname through him if I've understood things correctly. I don't even recall ever reading that Gendry has one. But it is interesting that Mya has one. Do we ever learn who her mother is/was??? I don't remember... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
PetiteFlower Posted November 13, 2006 Share Posted November 13, 2006 Wasn't Mya the first of Robert's bastards? Didn't Ned say that he used to visit and play with her at first? She was conceived during the war. SHE doesn't know who her father was, but it's certain that her mother did. Robert didn't publically acknowledge her, but he at least did so to her mother. Edric is the only one publically acknowledged because his MOTHER was highborn. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Shewoman Posted November 13, 2006 Share Posted November 13, 2006 I think the name depends on 1) the father acknowledging that this is his bastard child, who then receives the name for a bastard in that family/area of Westeros or 2) if the father does not acknowledge the child, he or she is given the name for a bastard in that part of the country has. Mya Stone, I think, was not formally acknowledged by Robert, so she (unlike Edric) has the general name for a bastard in the Vale. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
PetiteFlower Posted November 13, 2006 Share Posted November 13, 2006 Or she's a Stone because her mother lived in the Vale and she was raised there...Edric's mother lived in the stormlands and he was raised there. I think where the person is raised matters more then who the parents are, when it comes to which bastard name is used. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Summer Posted November 14, 2006 Share Posted November 14, 2006 No. Only noble bastards have surnames. Because only nobles have surnames in the first place. Nobody else needs a surname. The surname signifies nobility, the fact that it is Snow or Flowers or Pyke signifies that the individual has no place in the line of succession. Thanks for clearing that up. But as mentioned above, this wouldn't explain why Mya has the name Stone. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Enguerrand Posted November 14, 2006 Share Posted November 14, 2006 I think it has to do with if the father claims responsbility, if so, the bastard gets the corresponding bastard name. If no father is acknowledged they go by the place that the child was found. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
A wilding Posted November 14, 2006 Share Posted November 14, 2006 Do we know of any case at all where a bastard was given a different surname to the standard one where he was raised? Because I can't think of any. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bronn Stone Posted November 14, 2006 Share Posted November 14, 2006 While Robert never formally acknowledged Mya Stone, we do know from Eddard's POV that he stayed in contact with her long after he'd wearied of her mother. Her parentage was no secret in the Vale. And this may be why Lord Arryn treated her as a highborn bastard even though by a rigid interpretation of the rules she might not have been entitled to the surname. One of my dreams is that someday GRRM decides that after killing Vardis Egen, Bronn celebrated with a truly gruesome serving wench, who then got knocked up and named her whelp after his father - and calls him "Stone" on account of his father being made first a knight then Lord Stokeworth. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Weirwood_Grin Posted November 15, 2006 Share Posted November 15, 2006 This is just a thought, but I have determined it worthy of being entertained. Eddard Stark and Howland Reed, along with perhaps five other companions, arrive at the Tower of Joy, met by Arthur Dayne and two(correct me if I'm wrong) other members of the Kingsguard. The KG would have had to have been there waiting for Eddard, a young leader of the rebellion. If they had been trailing him, the confrontation would have come about after Stark's company had dismounted and entered the tower. Here I see two possible impeti: either Rhaegar commanded Dayne to protect Lyanna and slay Ned if he should approach, or Aerys, smelling defeat in the air (evidenced by his plan to raze KL mit wildfyre), commanded the KG to execute Lyanna as a traitor against the crown. Ser Arthur Dayne admitted to knowing of Aerys' madness, and serves him nonetheless out of duty, cursing his oathbreaking brothers. This trait may have been enough to steady his hand against Lyanna, particularly if Eddard had indeed fathered a bastard by his relative (sister? cousin?) Ashara Dayne. In a related topic, did not Arya meet a young Dayne, lord of Starfall, among the brothers without banners? I do not recall his age, but might he be the bastard of Ned and Ashara, forsaken by Ned in favor of Jon Snow, son of lyanna and rhaegar and heir to the throne? Again, these are just thoughts, but they stimulate thought and conversation, which is why we're here. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Stratonice Posted November 15, 2006 Share Posted November 15, 2006 This is just a thought, but I have determined it worthy of being entertained. Eddard Stark and Howland Reed, along with perhaps five other companions, arrive at the Tower of Joy, met by Arthur Dayne and two(correct me if I'm wrong) other members of the Kingsguard. The KG would have had to have been there waiting for Eddard, a young leader of the rebellion. If they had been trailing him, the confrontation would have come about after Stark's company had dismounted and entered the tower. Here I see two possible impeti: either Rhaegar commanded Dayne to protect Lyanna and slay Ned if he should approach, or Aerys, smelling defeat in the air (evidenced by his plan to raze KL mit wildfyre), commanded the KG to execute Lyanna as a traitor against the crown. Ser Arthur Dayne admitted to knowing of Aerys' madness, and serves him nonetheless out of duty, cursing his oathbreaking brothers. This trait may have been enough to steady his hand against Lyanna, particularly if Eddard had indeed fathered a bastard by his relative (sister? cousin?) Ashara Dayne. If the three KG were there to kill her instead of to protect her, then it does change a lot of things but I don't think it really fits. The three were not present at the Trident, they were not in KL and not on Dragonstone. Why would they arrive after Ned??? And if they were there before him, why not just kill her and go, why wait and then try to prevent Ned from seeing her? Oh, and I don't think Ashara Dayne was related to the Starks at all, she was definitley NOT Neds sister! I do agree with the possibility of Aerys wanting Lyanna (and the child she presumably was carrying) dead though. It would explain why she was at the TOJ instead of somewhere in KL or Dragonstone. It would also explain what Ned meant when he told Robert that he thought the rebellion was all about putting a stop to the killing of children. In a related topic, did not Arya meet a young Dayne, lord of Starfall, among the brothers without banners? I do not recall his age, but might he be the bastard of Ned and Ashara, forsaken by Ned in favor of Jon Snow, son of lyanna and rhaegar and heir to the throne? The problem I see with this is the fact that his name is Dayne. If he was Ned's (or anyone's for that matter) bastard by Ashara then he wouldn't have any right to the family name. If Ned and Ashara were married, Ned wouldn't be expected to marry Cat and the child would be named Stark not Dayne). While Robert never formally acknowledged Mya Stone, we do know from Eddard's POV that he stayed in contact with her long after he'd wearied of her mother. Her parentage was no secret in the Vale. And this may be why Lord Arryn treated her as a highborn bastard even though by a rigid interpretation of the rules she might not have been entitled to the surname. Yes, this could very well be the explanation for it. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Not another Stark Posted November 15, 2006 Share Posted November 15, 2006 Ned Dayne is roughly 4 years younger than Jon, he states he's 12 to Arya in ASOS. Could be that he was tricked and that he's a bit older, but if he really were 15-y old, it would be a bit too obvious - not to mention it would've been even more obvious when he was a younger child. Other people and Ned himself would have serious doubts if he clearly looked older and was bigger than a, say, 8 y old kiddie. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Shewoman Posted November 15, 2006 Share Posted November 15, 2006 Stratonice, I believe Weirwood Grin was referring to Ashara as Arthur Dayne's sister, not Ned's. Why would Aerys consider Lyanna a traitor against the crown? And N. A. Stark is right; Ned Dayne is much too young to be a child of Ned's and Ashara's unless we suggest that they conceived a child a couple of years after the war ended. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.