Heresy 71

[Yield.]

Rhaegar is irrelevant in regard to where the story is going. What matters and will matter is that Jon is a son of Winterfell not that he may be the heir to the Iron Throne.

Rhaegar is important to the story only in so far as he's been responsible for having kicked a lot of this off and in providing a convenient smokescreen for Jon's true purpose. He is not relevant to what's going to happen next.

ETA: I would also say that far from being poor writing, it is actually very good writing in that GRRM has successfully diverted attention to the possibility of Rhaegar being Jon's father and away from the significance of Lyanna being his mother.

I agree. Rhaegar is only a smoke screen in Jon's story.

Jon would much more devastated to find out that his 'aunt' is actually his mother and the his 'father' is actually his uncle. Think about all those years Jon spent having nightmares about the cripts of Winterfell and all the while his mother lay there among the ghosts.

Jon has never wanted for a father figure, he had all he needed in Ned. What he always wanted was a mother and to find out that his mother was a Stark will only confirm for him that he truly is a Son of Winterfell.

[Lord Ravenstark]

The short answer is no.

Under the normal rules of succession, if Jon is the legitimate son of Rhaegar Targaryen, the line of succession would run as follows.

Rhaegar was the eldest son of Aerys and therefore the heir. Even though he died before his father, his own heirs come before any other children of Aerys. Thus his son Aegon was next in line before Viserys and Danaerys. Viserys only became heir because Aegon were murdered and Rhaegar therefore left no known heirs.

If young Griff is indeed Aegon, then he comes before Danaerys. If he is a fake, or gets his head bashed in, then if Jon is indeed the legitimate son of Rhaegar he would be next in line, unless he was illegitimate in which case the legitimate heir would still be Danaerys.

Now there are a couple of side issues to this. Whether of not Aegon/Griff is the true heir, his intervention is going to immensely complicate Danaerys' planned return. A year ago in book time she might have sailed from Meereen as the rightful Targaryen heir and the saviour of the ravaged kingdom. Now, albeit there are the dragons, she is just one more pretender.

The other side issue, is that decree of legitimisation drawn up by King Robb. This is a legal document asserting that Jon Snow is actually Jon Stark, the lawful son of Eddard Stark, Lord of Winterfell. Jon cannot, legally, be both the lawful son of Eddard Stark and at one and the same time the lawful son of Rhaegar Targaryen. It means that if Howland Reed really does come crawling out the swamp waving a mouldy parchment asserting that Rhaegar Targaryen and Lyanna Stark were properly wed, Jon gets to choose his father...

I thought that legitimized bastards are at the bottom of the sucession line regardless the age. ( Roose speech about dying before his children - Wanda - taking Dreadfort [childrens are the bane of any house].. )

It would make Bran (missing, believed dead except by Reek, Manderlys, Theon squire, Davos, Reeds, crows, Melisandre, maybe Jon... people who can see things), Rickon (Missing, believed dead... so many time off-screen that he can really be dead), Sansa (alive, with Littlefinger), Arya, Jon (Dead. LC of NW, by law he can't take a lordship), Benjen (Missing, believed dead. If Jon can claim Winterfell, why Benjen can't?) are heirs to Winterfell.

Bran, Rickon, Sansa, Arya are, also, heirs to Riverrun. Once married to Harry, the heir, Sansa's children would have claim to the Eyre, Wintefell and Riverrun.

If R + L = J be adopted by the author, the version which R married L, Jon would be also heir to Red Keep.

Sorry if I'm wrong, anything.

[Black Crow]

I thought that legitimized bastards are at the bottom of the sucession line regardless the age. ( Roose speech about dying before his children - Wanda - taking Dreadfort [childrens are the bane of any house].. )

It would make Bran (missing, believed dead except by Reek, Manderlys, Theon squire, Davos, Reeds, crows, Melisandre, maybe Jon... people who can see things), Rickon (Missing, believed dead... so many time off-screen that he can really be dead), Sansa (alive, with Littlefinger), Arya, Jon (Dead. LC of NW, by law he can't take a lordship), Benjen (Missing, believed dead. If Jon can claim Winterfell, why Benjen can't?) are heirs to Winterfell.

Bran, Rickon, Sansa, Arya are, also, heirs to Riverrun. Once married to Harry, the heir, Sansa's children would have claim to the Eyre, Wintefell and Riverrun.

If R + L = J be adopted by the author, the version which R married L, Jon would be also heir to Red Keep.

Sorry if I'm wrong, anything.

Its not a question of being wrong, rather its one of those grey areas which keep lawyers lucratively employed for years. In this particular case the whole point of legitimising Jon was to forestall any attempt by Sansa Lannister to claim Winterfell, so clearly it was Jon's birthday rather than the date of his legitimisation which was going to be important.

Benjen on the other hand doesn't come into the picture as all the children of Eddard Stark (including Jon if legitimised) come before him. He would however be the most likely choice as Tutor or regent in the event that the heir was under-age.

[anya1]

There is a blog titled "Game of Thrones & Norse Mythology" http://gameofthrones...gy.blogspot.ca/

Here is a particular entry titled "Ragnarök - The Song of Ice & Fire" located here: http://gameofthrones...f-ice-fire.html

Quoting from it:

What is Ragnarök? It is, quite literally, the song of ice and fire.

But what is a song? Is a song a battle? Do notes fight one another for dominance, with no care or concern for the overall sound? No. That is discord. A song is harmony -- notes working together in unison.

And that is Ragnarök -- the forces of ice & fire uniting as one to attack the world of gods and men.

And that is key to understanding what's really going on in George R. R. Martin's epic fantasy series, A Song of Ice and Fire, upon which the popular HBO show, Game of Thrones, is based (assuming my theory is correct, of course. If it's not, then I'm just delusional, but it should be entertaining either way, so, by all means, read on). The battle is not Dragons vs. White Walkers. It's Dragons & White Walkers vs. Mankind.

...

Thoughts?

[Black Crow]

The parallels with Ragnarok have certainly been discussed before on this thread and quite rightly at some length. There's no doubt that GRRM has drawn upon Norse mythology, but a lot of what's going on beyond the Wall is also very heavily influenced by Celtic mythology and while it would be a mistake for example to claim that the Song of Ice and Fire is Ragnarok with only the names changed to protect the guilty, just as it would be a mistake to expect it to be a rewrite of the Mabinogion or the Tain bo Cuailnge, there iis no question but that elements of all three together with a lot of other stuff (the Ballad of Young Tam Lin for example) have gone into the mix.

[avernite]

All I can say is that Ragnarok always had a different meaning in what I read (twilight/fate of the gods).

But I would certainly say it makes a good point that ASOIAF has Norse influence :)

[Joe Pine]

The other side issue, is that decree of legitimisation drawn up by King Robb. This is a legal document asserting that Jon Snow is actually Jon Stark, the lawful son of Eddard Stark, Lord of Winterfell. Jon cannot, legally, be both the lawful son of Eddard Stark and at one and the same time the lawful son of Rhaegar Targaryen. It means that if Howland Reed really does come crawling out the swamp waving a mouldy parchment asserting that Rhaegar Targaryen and Lyanna Stark were properly wed, Jon gets to choose his father...

To legitimise Jon, Robb's Will could only say ' in event of my death, my heir is my kinsmen Jon'

It's enough to legitimise Jon, doesn't have to make him 'brother' or upset Catelyn in doing so.

A vague wording could be fantastic way of doing that, I'm still unsure how that gets around the Nights Watch oath and probable death.

[Black Crow]

No, what was discussed was legitimisation. There is no such thing as simply declaring someone "legitimate"; the whole point is that the subject be specifically declared or acknowledged to be the lawful son (or daughter) of a particular individual, in this case Eddard Stark.

However this is rather straying off the point and best explored in the R+L=J thread on the main board.

[Joe Pine]

All I can say is that Ragnarok always had a different meaning in what I read (twilight/fate of the gods).

But I would certainly say it makes a good point that ASOIAF has Norse influence :)

I'd pretty much agree.

Ragnarok (Destruction of the Powers) . The apocalyptic final battle between the gods and the giants, involving all creation, in which virtually all life is destroyed and the nine worlds are submerged. The Penguin Book of Norse Myths - Kevin Crossley-Holland.

[Mother Other]

The parallels with Ragnarok have certainly been discussed before on this thread and quite rightly at some length. There's no doubt that GRRM has drawn upon Norse mythology, but a lot of what's going on beyond the Wall is also very heavily influenced by Celtic mythology and while it would be a mistake for example to claim that the Song of Ice and Fire is Ragnarok with only the names changed to protect the guilty, just as it would be a mistake to expect it to be a rewrite of the Mabinogion or the Tain bo Cuailnge, there iis no question but that elements of all three together with a lot of other stuff (the Ballad of Young Tam Lin for example) have gone into the mix.

Yeppers, he's not going to simply rewrite anything of course. But maybe playing a bit of mash-up to create something completely new. Mythological elements mashed with real life history.

From LoneStarCon3 interview:

AC: The richness and depth of the world draw people to the books – it’s a wide-scale view, but it has a great deal of detail and specificity, too. Where do you draw all that detail from?

GM: People have pointed out that probably the main influence on Ice and Fire is the War of the Roses, and that's certainly true. I've also read about a lot of other medieval conflicts. The Hundred Years War was another huge influence, the Crusades and the Albigensian Crusade, and a lot of details from Scottish history, which was particularly bloody. So you take events from real history, but I don't believe in just transcribing them. Like, taking something that happened to Henry the Eighth and having it happen to my characters in the same way, just change the names? To my mind that's cheating, that's too easy. You take a bit of this, you take a bit of that. You combine them, you rethink them. You add new twists that maybe even a student of history doesn't see coming, and you add fantasy elements to make everything bigger and more colorful.

Interview link here:

http://www.austinchronicle.com/blogs/books/2013-08-29/lonestarcon-3-the-george-r-r-martin-interview/

[Joe Pine]

No, what was discussed was legitimisation. There is no such thing as simply declaring someone "legitimate"; the whole point is that the subject be specifically declared or acknowledged to be the lawful son (or daughter) of a particular individual, in this case Eddard Stark.

However this is rather straying off the point and best explored in the R+L=J thread on the main board.

Yeah, you're right, best not to stray too far into RLJ stuff but with the 'father' dead, legitimisation is an issue.

[wolfmaid7]

if its out of the question, what do you make of the last vision at the house of the undying (blue flower in a chink on the wall, bride of fire) ...

Firstly, the union I spoke of was of a romantic nature. A union of acceptance in the grand scheme of fire and ice is another matter.

Dany may interpret that vision wrong, she may not remember it at all. She may or may not associate it with Jon at all, or they may never meet. Two forces can work together without ever having seen each other. Or they may meet and start fighting each other before it is revealed working with each other means Dany most bridle fire while Jon does the same with ice. It could go several ways, but if we are talking visions Dany must first interpret it correctly; meaning she must have all the facts or recognize him as kin somehow.

[King Tyrion VIII]

I have to disagree with this one though. This is the Song of Ice and Fire and I think the going back is going much further back - to the Smoking Sea of Valyria, back where the Targaryens and their dragons came from.

I cant wait to read about this :commie:

[addicted to snow]

This is a legal document asserting that Jon Snow is actually Jon Stark, the lawful son of Eddard Stark, Lord of Winterfell.

This document is only legal in the eyes of those who followed Rob & held him as their King. The document will mean nothing to 90% of the population of Westeros.

Besides, did rob proclaim Jon a True Born Son of Eddard Stark? or did Rob proclaim Jon to be his (Rob's) heir?

I doubt that Rob would have proclaimed Jon to be Eddard's heir... Eddard was not the King of the North, so it is unlikely that Rob's decree mentioned or concerned Eddard in any way.

[addicted to snow]

Rhaegar is irrelevant in regard to where the story is going.

We shall see...

Somehow, I doubt that GRRM will fail to tie this thread up before the series comes to a close, but we shall see...

It is after all a Song of Ice and Fire... & we see this theme has shown up in so many ways...

[addicted to snow]

In the 3rd Seasom of the HBO Adaptation of ASOIAF, Jojen made an interesting comment while hanging out in the Night Fort's Kitchen. He told Sam that all the Kings & all the armys of Westeros could not stop the Others (Not a 100% accurate quote). If we assume that Jojen was correct, then how is it that the Others were defeated during the Long Night?

- Were ther Others defeated?

- Or did they get what they were after & retreat of their own accord?

- Or did the Last Hero make it to the Heart of Winter & negociate some sort of deal? If so, will Val guide Jon to the Heart of Winter to strike a similiar deal? & which body will Jon be traveling in?

There is plenty of foreshadowing that Val & Ghost will become close companions in the Winds of Winter. Hopefully, Jon can find a way to keep from loosing himself inside of Ghost before it is too late. I would imagine that Ghost's 'effect' will dramatically change Jon's personality - and not for the better in many regards.

Thoughts?

[Black Crow]

This document is only legal in the eyes of those who followed Rob & held him as their King. The document will mean nothing to 90% of the population of Westeros.

Besides, did rob proclaim Jon a True Born Son of Eddard Stark? or did Rob proclaim Jon to be his (Rob's) heir?

I doubt that Rob would have proclaimed Jon to be Eddard's heir... Eddard was not the King of the North, so it is unlikely that Rob's decree mentioned or concerned Eddard in any way.

As to the first point. In this case the only people who matter are those who recognise Robb as the King in the North. As I've said before I believe that the real significance of the decree is that it allows Jon to choose, and to use it to be a Stark rather than a Targaryen.

As to the seond. Yes, Robb did indeed legitimise him as the true born son of Eddard Stark. As I said above the only way that a bastard can be legitimised is to acknowledge him as the lawful son of a named individual, which is why Catelyn got so upset and argued that even if Jon did not become Lord of Winterfell (King in the North didn't come into it) his sons would be able to challenge those of her own children at a later date.

[Black Crow]

In the 3rd Seasom of the HBO Adaptation of ASOIAF, Jojen made an interesting comment while hanging out in the Night Fort's Kitchen. He told Sam that all the Kings & all the armys of Westeros could not stop the Others (Not a 100% accurate quote). If we assume that Jojen was correct, then how is it that the Others were defeated during the Long Night?

- Were ther Others defeated?

- Or did they get what they were after & retreat of their own accord?

- Or did the Last Hero make it to the Heart of Winter & negociate some sort of deal? If so, will Val guide Jon to the Heart of Winter to strike a similiar deal? & which body will Jon be traveling in?

There is plenty of foreshadowing that Val & Ghost will become close companions in the Winds of Winter. Hopefully, Jon can find a way to keep from loosing himself inside of Ghost before it is too late. I would imagine that Ghost's 'effect' will dramatically change Jon's personality - and not for the better in many regards.

Thoughts?

Ah well, this one has been discussed here many times and is at the heart of heresy. Its why some of us think that the Long Night was ended by a pact of some kind and that the white walkers are just the hired guns from Texas rather than the real adversaries - the children.

[Saint Alia]

Let me start off by saying: this is my first post on the Heresy threads, I've been lurking on reading on them a while and I have to add that I love some of the debates I've come across.

I actually have a question loosely related to Jon and his status as "heir"

If we look at the Night's Watch Oath:

Night gathers, and now my watch begins. It shall not end until my death. I shall take no wife, hold no lands, father no children. I shall wear no crowns and win no glory. I shall live and die at my post. I am the sword in the darkness. I am the watcher on the walls. I am the fire that burns against the cold, the light that brings the dawn, the horn that wakes the sleepers, the shield that guards the realms of men. I pledge my life and honor to the Night's Watch, for this night and all nights to come.

I don't quite understand how, given his vows, Jon would be able to be declared the heir to Winterfell. Even in ADWD, when Stannis brings up the idea - I don't know if I missed some sort of loophole regarding this?

Sorry if this has been asked before, and I somehow missed this.

[Black Crow]

Let me start off by saying: this is my first post on the Heresy threads, I've been lurking on reading on them a while and I have to add that I love some of the debates I've come across.

I actually have a question loosely related to Jon and his status as "heir"

If we look at the Night's Watch Oath:

I don't quite understand how, given his vows, Jon would be able to be declared the heir to Winterfell. Even in ADWD, when Stannis brings up the idea - I don't know if I missed some sort of loophole regarding this?

Sorry if this has been asked before, and I somehow missed this.

It all comes back, as Robb discussed, to "buying him out", but as I said this is really an issue for the R+L=J thread