Board Thread:TV Show Discussion/@comment-1399600-20160629121258/@comment-28928085-20160724034123

People can be silly sometimes

1/ Jon doesn't have more claim than Dany on the Iron throne

- Even though it's clear for us that Jon's Rhaegar's son, it's not clear for the Westerosi. Only Bran and Howland Reed know that, but who will buy their story?

- Besides there is no proofs that Rhaegar and Lyanna were married, no wittnesses, nothing. At the moment Jon is still a bastard, just Lyanna's bastard instead of Ned's. So my question is :how can he have a stronger claim to the Iron throne than Dany?

- Why will he take the Iron throne? the WW are coming...

2/ He won't change his name and people calling Jon/Jaherys/Aegon/Aemon Targeryen or whatever are fools

- he doesn't know who is his real father

- he doesn't know anything about the Targeryens or their culture as he was raised in the North

- Being a northener is part of his identity, and l people doesn't change their identity easily, they don't pick names of people they never meet. After 21 years of being called on Snow  he won't say " fuck Jaherys Targeryen now"  lmao

- Being hailed King in the North and a holding the name Targeryen is well...super odd

3/ Regarding the line of succesion/Lordship

- said Jon's identification as Ned's son played an important role in Jon's coronation. My point is the Lords of the North didn't hail Jon king out of nowhere. Their choice wasn't only based on his military skills but also  on his parentage. As someone said it  the Starks rule the North for thousands years, long before the Targeryens or any other family in Westeros: they are a legend. Jon's bastard status was obviously irrelevant but still they elected Ned's Stark last living "son" and the brother of their late King, not a random person, but the last and direct Stark male heir ( by assuming Bran was dead). I don't think the Manderlys, the Glovers, the Mormonts and the knights of the Vale woud even look at him him if they knew he was in fact Rhaegar's son, while Sansa was there ( Btw i'm curious to see their reaction if they know that, that would be awkward)

- As Jon doesn't legally hold the name Stark he can't be lord of Winterfell, which means Sansa is the lord in the absence of Bran. Regarding the lord of House Stark it's however more complicated. Jon is obviously a member of house Stark and being King ( a title above the lord)  and the chief of the family, I assume Jon can be seen as the lord/chief of house Stark. Unless he creates his own house in the same way the Baratheons did ( House Baratheon of King's landing/ Storm's end/ Dragonstone) and moves his seat but it's highly doubful because Winterfell is the most important and protected place in the North.

- It's all D &D: in the book Robb legitimizes Jon, and makes him his heir which means he inherites all his titles ( Lord of Winterfell, King in the North, King of the Trident...), so it's rather simple if Jon becomes King. D&D gave up Robb's letter and made the situation very confusing. I hope they will bring some clarifications on the next season

Ps: To people who believe Jaherys Trageryen (lol)  will marry Dany, ride dragons/unicorns, defeat the WW, and rule the seven kingdoms  with Tyrion as hand of the queen, I have a question for you: are confusing GoT with some kind of Disney fiction?

