Board Thread:TV Show Discussion/@comment-1399600-20160629121258/@comment-186.176.157.74-20160712025028

Kai200995 wrote:

114.71.100.55 wrote: For now, Sansa is Lady Stark and head of house Stark. When Bran returns, he will be Lord Stark but not the King of the North. People already swore his loyalty to Jon. It was Jon who fought battle and won back Winterfell. It was Jon who revenged Rob not Bran. Bestway for Jon to be Stark now is Sansa acknowledging him as Stark and show support. Jon, as king, can declare himself legitimate but it is just funny and will be his achilles, especially when Bran returns. Although, I don't think Bran would seek to be king Exactly. People think because Jon is King in the North, he's automatically head of House Stark. Jon is not a Stark. He wasn't named King because he was a Stark. They named him the "The White Wolf" because that is the sigil of the House Stark in reverse colors, the sigil of any Stark bastard.

Bran is definitely coming back, and he will be named Lord of Winterfell and House Stark. For Now, Sansa is officially the lord of House Stark, Jon is the "de facto" lord of House Stark since he isn't a Stark, for more reasons than one. Legitimately, the Lord of Winterfell is Bran, but since he's presumed dead it's Sansa. Only then would it be Jon. However, effectively, let's assume that Bran gets back to Winterfell (which he most certainly will). I believe there will be a similar situation as the one with Theon and Yara. Theon is the rightful heir of King Balon Greyjoy, however, he supports Yara's claims in spite of his own right. Bran will not take a leadership role I think. He'll take a similar role to what Melisandre was to Stannis and he will support Jon's claim rather than act upon his own right. As for Sansa being the head of House Stark, she's the Lady of Winterfell similar to how Bran was the Lord during the War of the Five Kings (different circumstances I know but it's pretty similar). She rules the castle and manages affairs but Jon is the true Lord Stark in the eyes of the North even if they don't call him Stark. "Bear island knows no king but the King in the North, whose name is STARK". They still call him Snow because that's what he is, a bastard, but if he uses his right as king to legitimize himself, then I don't think any of the Lords would object. Now, as to whether Jon would actually do that or not is yet to be seen, I think he'd need some convincing since having the Stark name officially might be more powerful.

Basically, under normal circumstances, Jon has no right to be head of House Stark, Bran would be and then Sansa, but Game of Thrones is heading to a direction the rules of Westeros' nobility are being bent. A female Queen with Cersei, Daenerys and Yara, leaving the Night's Watch to fight for something bigger, King in the North itself, wildlings alongside Northern armies. That's why I think that even if Jon is a royal bastard (If Rhaegar and Lyanna didn't marry) then Jon would still have the claim to the throne. Not through right, but because rules are being bent, by having the support of half the kingdoms and by his previous actions making him a good and viable leader. They already ignored his bastardhood once to make him a King, why not do it again?