FANDOM


  • There's an ongoing discussion of Jon status as the Lord of House Stark, Winterfell, and King of the Trident.

    Facts: Jon is still Jon Snow, not a Stark. Jon was chosen as King in the North. Sansa is the Lady of Winterfell. Sansa is the last known Stark. House Tully is occupied.

    Question: Who is officially the Lord of House Stark? Is Jon the lord of House Stark or is he their sovereign? Did Jon inherit Robb's titles, including King of the Trident?

      Loading editor
    • If jon snow is the king of the north, he can issue a simply issue a proclaimation declaring himself as jon stark.

      Also in the books jon snow was declared the heir to robb and was legimitized , though he does not know about it.

        Loading editor
    • Irritator wrote: If jon snow is the king of the north, he can issue a simply issue a proclaimation declaring himself as jon stark.

      Also in the books jon snow was declared the heir to robb and was legimitized , though he does not know about it.

      Agreed. That's all true. Do you think Jon Snow will do that? And Will that still be the case when Daenerys comes Westeros? She can simply ignore his title and self-legitimatization, with an army of 100,000 and dragons.

        Loading editor
    • If bran reaches winterfell , which is probable , by all laws bran should be the king in the north.

      in the books robb legimtized jon because he thought that bran was dead,so sucession only lay with jon snow.

      And personnaly i think that jon will allow bran to become king as it is his right .

        Loading editor
    • Irritator wrote: If bran reaches winterfell , which is probable , by all laws bran should be the king in the north.

      in the books robb legimtized jon because he thought that bran was dead,so sucession only lay with jon snow.

      And personnaly i think that jon will allow bran to become king as it is his right .

      Yeah, I understand the inheritance of the "King in the North" title. I was more concerned with the titles of Jon being the Lord of Winterfell and House Stark. Sansa is the Lady of Winterfell on HBO Viewer's Guide. Jon Snow, who's King in the North, doesn't have the Stark name. Based on that, Sansa is (officially, behind Bran) the Lord of House Stark and is backing Jon's reign. This makes Jon House Stark's sovereign, not their lord. The Starks are still alive and one is present. As long as they are present, Jon isn't officially the Lord of House Stark or Winterfell.

        Loading editor
    • If rheagar is truly the father of jon , by all laws jon should inherit the Iron throne ahead of his aunt.

      If and when jon learns of this , he would be the rightful king upon the iron throne , and possibly the starks and arryns would back up the claim.If that was the scenario, then jon would appoint Bran as his Warden of the North and expand his claims to be The Lord of The Seven Kingdoms In that case , Bran would be the Lord of winterfell and would swear fealty to jon 

        Loading editor
    • 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

        Loading editor
    • All of this will be rendered moot if Bran tells Jon that Rhaegar is his father. Jon would be king of The Seven Kingdoms. Though, Dany might take issue with that. But you know, political marriges are very common in The Seven Kingdoms.

        Loading editor
    • 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.

        Loading editor
    • 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.

      Bran will also tell Jon that he's not Ned's son, but Rheagar's. That will be a bombshell for Jon. His whole life has been defined by his bastard status, now he finds out he's the heir to the Iron Throne (assuming that Lyanna and Rhaegar married), that will change how he sees everything.

        Loading editor
    • BigBadBruin343 wrote:

      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.

      Bran will also tell Jon that he's not Ned's son, but Rheagar's. That will be a bombshell for Jon. His whole life has been defined by his bastard status, now he finds out he's the heir to the Iron Throne (assuming that Lyanna and Rhaegar married), that will change how he sees everything.

      That'll suck if he's really a royal bastard. Either way I think Dany will need to marry Jon for an alliance with the North and stability. Which mean their children will be named Targaryen and the Stark line will continue through Jon's siblings.

        Loading editor
    • Sansa is the de facto Lady of Winterfell because of her name, but Jon is the King in the North so de jure, he is the Lord of Winterfell.

        Loading editor
    • 79.116.46.44 wrote:
      Sansa is the de facto Lady of Winterfell because of her name, but Jon is the King in the North so de jure, he is the Lord of Winterfell.

      Lord of Winterfell and King in the North are two separate titles. Sansa is the Lady of Winterfell. HBO's GOT Viewer's Guide has Sansa listed as Lady of Winterfell and Jon as King in the North. Jon can't be the "DE jure" Lord of Winterfell because he isn't in the line of inheritance, and him being King doesn't entitle him either. 

        Loading editor
    • So has a decision been reached? Because there is currently an editing war going on in regards to House Stark. It's being changed back and forth concerning who is Lord.

        Loading editor
    • Facts:

      Definitions:

      • De facto: 1. in fact, or in effect, whether by right or not. "the island has been de facto divided into two countries" synonyms: in practice, in effect, in fact, in reality, really, actually
      • De jure: 1. according to rightful entitlement or claim; by right. synonyms: by right, rightfully, legally, according to the law
      Lord of House Stark:
       
      97
       
      153
       
      50
       

      The poll was created at 13:44 on June 30, 2016, and so far 300 people voted.
        Loading editor
    • People don't seem to be paying attention to this discussion so maybe the House Stark page wshould be edited and then locked for a little while? Until the frenzy to edit passes.

        Loading editor
    • 172.56.29.13 wrote: People don't seem to be paying attention to this discussion so maybe the House Stark page wshould be edited and then locked for a little while? Until the frenzy to edit passes.

      You're right. I'll leave a link on Sansa and Jon talk pages, they are very popular right now. Then, I'll message an admin or two.

        Loading editor
    • KING OF THE TRIDENT?! Was there any Riverlord hailing Jon as King of the Trident? Don't say Littlefinger because he's ¬†not even occupied Harrenhal.

      Stop it with the speculation before someone starts considering Jon ah honorary Khal because he's related to Dany or King-Beyond-the-Wall because the Free Folk follow him

        Loading editor
    • Gonzalo84 wrote: KING OF THE TRIDENT?! Was there any Riverlord hailing Jon as King of the Trident? Don't say Littlefinger because he's ¬†not even occupied Harrenhal.

      Stop it with the speculation before someone starts considering Jon ah honorary Khal because he's related to Dany or King-Beyond-the-Wall because the Free Folk follow him

      On the talk page of House Stark, another user said Jon was King in the Trident and Kai200995 said the same thing as you. -Anon of House Stark

        Loading editor
    • It was the Vale and not the Riverlands which swore fealty to Jon, so I can understand calling him King of the Vale but not the Trident.

        Loading editor
    • Gonzalo84 wrote: KING OF THE TRIDENT?! Was there any Riverlord hailing Jon as King of the Trident? Don't say Littlefinger because he's ¬†not even occupied Harrenhal.

      Stop it with the speculation before someone starts considering Jon ah honorary Khal because he's related to Dany or King-Beyond-the-Wall because the Free Folk follow him

      I agree, someone else suggested Jon "inherited" his kingship, including King of the Trident, which is not the case for a number of reasons.

        Loading editor
    • Gonzalo84 wrote:
      KING OF THE TRIDENT?! Was there any Riverlord hailing Jon as King of the Trident? Don't say Littlefinger because he's  not even occupied Harrenhal.

      Stop it with the speculation before someone starts considering Jon ah honorary Khal because he's related to Dany or King-Beyond-the-Wall because the Free Folk follow him

      If the Houses Blackwood and Mallister, two Riverland houses that were mentioned still opposing the Freys this past season, see Jon's victory as Riverland revenge for the Red Wedding like the Manderlys see it for the North; I can see Blackwoods and Mallisters declaring Jon their King.  It remains to be seen if the rest of the Riverlands will follow suit, if they do, King's Landing and the North could have a two front war, advantage: Dany.  

      On a separate note, I don't think Jon will declare himself a Stark, unless the other Nothern lord push for it and even then only do it with Sansa's, (and Bran's) blessing.  If they do push it, then Littlefinger's tendrils in Sansa's ear will grow suspicions and jealousy.  I still believe her when says she sees Jon as a Stark and her brother even if/when Bran says otherwise.  If Sansa becomes falls to petty jealousy and craves power especially due to, then she has learned nothing from all she has been through.  When Jon learns his parentage, I believe he will still argue that he was raised and taught to be a Stark.  When Bran arrives he can testify to LFs true treachery towards the Starks and Arryns, at least I hope he does.

        Loading editor
    • People who think there ever would be a Lord who can't hold a sword at Winterfell did not pay attention. The Northern Lords did decide and Jon is proclaimed. Bran also knows that Jon is rightful king of the Seven Kingdoms. (He did hear Jon's true name.) The North is one of these Kingdoms.

        Loading editor
    • When Jon finds out that he's not Ned's son, it may throw in into a tail spin. He might get really angry about the lies that lead to his mistreatment as a bastard. Everything that shaped his way of thinking is a lie - I think he wont be happy about that at first. it will take time for him to come to grips with the depth of the meaning. Also, he may not want to sit on the iron throne - but remember he also didn't want to be Lord Commander of the NW, nor did he really want to be King in the North. I think the throne will be given to him, and he may turn it down and defer to Dani.

        Loading editor
    • Even if he will find out he is not Ned's son, I don't think that will have a big effect on him. He was raised as Ned's true son and, ironically, from all the Stark children ¬†Jon is the one that resembles Ned the most in every possible way. He will definitely not take the Throne because of his possible "Targaryen claim". Targaryen claim doesn't mean anything right now, it's been too long from the last Targaryen reign; Robert established the Baratheon dynasty and now a Lannister sits on the Throne. Daenerys will not take the throne because it's hers by right, she will conquer it because she has dragons exactly like Aegon.

        Loading editor
    • Jon was treated better than other bastards but he wasn't completed treated as Ned's true son. He still had to eat with the servants or lesser people during meals. He was treated like Sh*t by Catelyn - who had prayed for his death. If its found that Jon is Rhaegars true son, the throne will be his by right, not Dany's. But - it still has to be proven that he is Rhae's true son and not a bastard.

        Loading editor
    • well nobody knows if his parents were married or not, so his claim on the Iron throne is weak. And let's be honest who will clearly believe the story told by a crippled boy that Ned Stark's alledged bastard is actually Rhaegar's son??

        Loading editor
    • Well now there is an edit war over whether House Arryn should be listed as a vassal of House Stark. It should depend on whether or not we list Jon as Lord, as the Vale is sworn to him.

        Loading editor
    • 172.56.29.132 wrote: Well now there is an edit war over whether House Arryn should be listed as a vassal of House Stark. It should depend on whether or not we list Jon as Lord, as the Vale is sworn to him.

      It's literally one person trolling the page. I say trolling because I left two messages on his talk page that there's an ongoing poll about this topic, and they're still editing to their liking. The purpose of the poll was to reach an agreement and prevent an edit war, not keep it going. So as of now I'm waiting until the poll reaches 100+ voters and I'm petitioning the edit/vote to the admins. By the way the user is Jman321, if you look at the history of the editing I kept adjusting the page to the majority vote and leaving the message to refer to this discussion's poll and that didn't help. I'm not editing the page again until the poll has a significant amount of voters, at least a hundred sound pretty good. So keep following the discussion.

        Loading editor
    • 78.113.109.104 wrote: well nobody knows if his parents were married or not, so his claim on the Iron throne is weak. And let's be honest who will clearly believe the story told by a crippled boy that Ned Stark's alledged bastard is actually Rhaegar's son??

      The Starks are held to high esteem, if Bran and Sansa wanted to inform the Houses of Westeros of his claim they will not take it lightly. That's an opinion based on how the Great Houses are treated. No to mention, everyone knows Lyanna and Rhaegar was together for months before the Battle of the Trident and the highlords are aware Ned "fathered" a bastard. Stannis himself said that wasn't Ned's way. There's a lot of gossip in the kingdoms, it's shown more in the books.

        Loading editor
    • Nleonwill wrote: Jon was treated better than other bastards but he wasn't completed treated as Ned's true son. He still had to eat with the servants or lesser people during meals. He was treated like Sh*t by Catelyn - who had prayed for his death. If its found that Jon is Rhaegars true son, the throne will be his by right, not Dany's. But - it still has to be proven that he is Rhae's true son and not a bastard.

      Exactly. Howland Reed is the last firsthand witness of Jon's birth, and then there's the possibility of witnesses and records of the marriage, if it truly happened.

        Loading editor
    • Kai200995 wrote:

      172.56.29.132 wrote: Well now there is an edit war over whether House Arryn should be listed as a vassal of House Stark. It should depend on whether or not we list Jon as Lord, as the Vale is sworn to him.

      It's literally one person trolling the page. I say trolling because I left two messages on his talk page that there's an ongoing poll about this topic, and they're still editing to their liking. The purpose of the poll was to reach an agreement and prevent an edit war, not keep it going. So as of now I'm waiting until the poll reaches 100+ voters and I'm petitioning the edit/vote to the admins. By the way the user is Jman321, if you look at the history of the editing I kept adjusting the page to the majority vote and leaving the message to refer to this discussion's poll and that didn't help. I'm not editing the page again until the poll has a significant amount of voters, at least a hundred sound pretty good. So keep following the discussion.

      I voted on the poll above. I'll give some input as to why Sansa Stark (official), Bran Stark (rightful) should be Lord/Lady and Heir to House Stark. 

      While King Snow/Targ can be a King in the North this does not give him legitimate right to Winterfell and to be a Lord of House Stark. Lyanna like Sansa basically said the same thing to him "You are a Stark to me". However 2 Ladies cannot officially denounce a Targaryen or unlegitimized Bastard as the one True Lord of Winterfell/House Stark without legal rights.

      I'm not exactly sure how that would reflect in to other Great House(s) perspective, but I don't think they'd like the idea of Targaryen being in charge of House Stark.

        Loading editor
    • 151.224.183.20 wrote:
      Kai200995 wrote:

      172.56.29.132 wrote: Well now there is an edit war over whether House Arryn should be listed as a vassal of House Stark. It should depend on whether or not we list Jon as Lord, as the Vale is sworn to him.

      It's literally one person trolling the page. I say trolling because I left two messages on his talk page that there's an ongoing poll about this topic, and they're still editing to their liking. The purpose of the poll was to reach an agreement and prevent an edit war, not keep it going. So as of now I'm waiting until the poll reaches 100+ voters and I'm petitioning the edit/vote to the admins. By the way the user is Jman321, if you look at the history of the editing I kept adjusting the page to the majority vote and leaving the message to refer to this discussion's poll and that didn't help. I'm not editing the page again until the poll has a significant amount of voters, at least a hundred sound pretty good. So keep following the discussion.
      I voted on the poll above. I'll give some input as to why Sansa Stark (official), Bran Stark (rightful) should be Lord/Lady and Heir to House Stark. 

      While King Snow/Targ can be a King in the North this does not give him legitimate right to Winterfell and to be a Lord of House Stark. Lyanna like Sansa basically said the same thing to him "You are a Stark to me". However 2 Ladies cannot officially denounce a Targaryen or unlegitimized Bastard as the one True Lord of Winterfell/House Stark without legal rights.

      I'm not exactly sure how that would reflect in to other Great House(s) perspective, but I don't think they'd like the idea of Targaryen being in charge of House Stark.

      Even with the fact that no one know Jon is a Targaryen, what you are saying is accurate. Jon has no claim over Sansa and Bran as Lord/Head of House Stark. Literally everything Petyr Bealish said in the season finale is true. (Even though I don't agree with his intentions). It's important to note the Lords said they support Jon Snow AND House Stark, not Jon Stark.

        Loading editor
    • Kai200995 wrote:
      Facts:

      Definitions:

      • De facto: 1. in fact, or in effect, whether by right or not. "the island has been de facto divided into two countries" synonyms: in practice, in effect, in fact, in reality, really, actually
      • De jure: 1. according to rightful entitlement or claim; by right. synonyms: by right, rightfully, legally, according to the law
      Lord of House Stark:
       
      22
       
      17
       
      4
       

      The poll was created at 22:44 on July 2, 2016, and so far 43 people voted.

      It looks like we have a clear winner now with only 12 votes away from a total of 100 votes King Jon Snow (de facto) cannot catch and beat Sansa Stark (official).

        Loading editor
    • Sansa should be Queen If it wasn't for Sansa they would have lost the battle, She also told Jon not to do what Ramsay wants and he did, because he was emotional and it almost got everyone killed Sansa is a better ruler and Kit confirmed Jon is to naiveÔĽŅ

      Everyone believes Bran is Dead, Sansa is the rightful heir to the North  especially since Ned is not his father. the only reason the Trident followed Robb was because he was a Tully and whats the beat that Lord Robin Arryn want have the same issue in season 7 he will likly want sansa as Queen cause they are Blood , Sansa is the smarter choice and Once Bran returns he'll even be a better because both Sansa and Bran have influence in the Vale the North and Riverrun

        Loading editor
    • Nleonwill wrote:
      When Jon finds out that he's not Ned's son, it may throw in into a tail spin. He might get really angry about the lies that lead to his mistreatment as a bastard. Everything that shaped his way of thinking is a lie - I think he wont be happy about that at first. it will take time for him to come to grips with the depth of the meaning. Also, he may not want to sit on the iron throne - but remember he also didn't want to be Lord Commander of the NW, nor did he really want to be King in the North. I think the throne will be given to him, and he may turn it down and defer to Dani.


      If Jon is named king, and if marries Dany (the writers made a point of telling us that Dany is single now), he'll let her sit the Iron Throne. As you say: he doesn't really want the throne.

        Loading editor
    • Breexox11 wrote: Sansa should be Queen If it wasn't for Sansa they would have lost the battle, She also told Jon not to do what Ramsay wants and he did, because he was emotional and it almost got everyone killed Sansa is a better ruler and Kit confirmed Jon is to naiveÔĽŅ

      Everyone believes Bran is Dead, Sansa is the rightful heir to the North  especially since Ned is not his father. the only reason the Trident followed Robb was because he was a Tully and whats the beat that Lord Robin Arryn want have the same issue in season 7 he will likly want sansa as Queen cause they are Blood , Sansa is the smarter choice and Once Bran returns he'll even be a better because both Sansa and Bran have influence in the Vale the North and Riverrun

      The Northern Lords want Jon and since they are also the ones who made Robb King, they get the final say.

        Loading editor
    • Breexox11 wrote:
      Sansa should be Queen If it wasn't for Sansa they would have lost the battle, She also told Jon not to do what Ramsay wants and he did, because he was emotional and it almost got everyone killed Sansa is a better ruler and Kit confirmed Jon is to naiveÔĽŅ

      Everyone believes Bran is Dead, Sansa is the rightful heir to the North  especially since Ned is not his father. the only reason the Trident followed Robb was because he was a Tully and whats the beat that Lord Robin Arryn want have the same issue in season 7 he will likly want sansa as Queen cause they are Blood , Sansa is the smarter choice and Once Bran returns he'll even be a better because both Sansa and Bran have influence in the Vale the North and Riverrun

      God forbid Sansa becoming Queen of anything.

        Loading editor
    • BigBadBruin343 wrote:

      Nleonwill wrote:
      When Jon finds out that he's not Ned's son, it may throw in into a tail spin. He might get really angry about the lies that lead to his mistreatment as a bastard. Everything that shaped his way of thinking is a lie - I think he wont be happy about that at first. it will take time for him to come to grips with the depth of the meaning. Also, he may not want to sit on the iron throne - but remember he also didn't want to be Lord Commander of the NW, nor did he really want to be King in the North. I think the throne will be given to him, and he may turn it down and defer to Dani.


      If Jon is named king, and if marries Dany (the writers made a point of telling us that Dany is single now), he'll let her sit the Iron Throne. As you say: he doesn't really want the throne.

      To be fair, any man that marries Daenerys will be a royal consort.

        Loading editor
    • Breexox11 wrote: Sansa should be Queen If it wasn't for Sansa they would have lost the battle, She also told Jon not to do what Ramsay wants and he did, because he was emotional and it almost got everyone killed Sansa is a better ruler and Kit confirmed Jon is to naiveÔĽŅ

      Everyone believes Bran is Dead, Sansa is the rightful heir to the North  especially since Ned is not his father. the only reason the Trident followed Robb was because he was a Tully and whats the beat that Lord Robin Arryn want have the same issue in season 7 he will likly want sansa as Queen cause they are Blood , Sansa is the smarter choice and Once Bran returns he'll even be a better because both Sansa and Bran have influence in the Vale the North and Riverrun

      The actors teased Sansa and Jon will be in conflict with one another because of the reasons you say. No to mention the Vale and Riverrun answers to House Stark, because the actual Starks of Winterfell are related to both the Tullys and Arryns. I have a feeling Sansa's connection to both families will play a role in her influence over the North and war with Cersei. Three Kingdoms/Great Houses are backing Daenerys, and Sansa has influence, at least the blood relation, to two Great Houses. All this also relates to who is the actual lord of House Stark.

        Loading editor
    • Thank you for this poll Kai200995. Now can we officially change the Lord of House Stark to Sansa Stark (official), Bran Stark (rightful) with the Heir slot being empty or none?

        Loading editor
    • To be honest even when Bran comes back, I doubt the North will be running to him for leadership. The Lords literally passed over a true-born Stark who has connections to the Vale and Riverlands in favor of Jon. Sad to say, the North will not want a cripple for a leader.

        Loading editor
    • Kai200995 wrote:

      BigBadBruin343 wrote:

      Nleonwill wrote:
      When Jon finds out that he's not Ned's son, it may throw in into a tail spin. He might get really angry about the lies that lead to his mistreatment as a bastard. Everything that shaped his way of thinking is a lie - I think he wont be happy about that at first. it will take time for him to come to grips with the depth of the meaning. Also, he may not want to sit on the iron throne - but remember he also didn't want to be Lord Commander of the NW, nor did he really want to be King in the North. I think the throne will be given to him, and he may turn it down and defer to Dani.

      If Jon is named king, and if marries Dany (the writers made a point of telling us that Dany is single now), he'll let her sit the Iron Throne. As you say: he doesn't really want the throne.
      To be fair, any man that marries Daenerys will be a royal consort.


      Not if Lyanna and Rhaegar wed in secret. Jon would be king, but he'd let Dany do her thing.

        Loading editor
    • Kai200995 wrote:

      Breexox11 wrote: Sansa should be Queen If it wasn't for Sansa they would have lost the battle, She also told Jon not to do what Ramsay wants and he did, because he was emotional and it almost got everyone killed Sansa is a better ruler and Kit confirmed Jon is to naiveÔĽŅ

      Everyone believes Bran is Dead, Sansa is the rightful heir to the North  especially since Ned is not his father. the only reason the Trident followed Robb was because he was a Tully and whats the beat that Lord Robin Arryn want have the same issue in season 7 he will likly want sansa as Queen cause they are Blood , Sansa is the smarter choice and Once Bran returns he'll even be a better because both Sansa and Bran have influence in the Vale the North and Riverrun

      The actors teased Sansa and Jon will be in conflict with one another because of the reasons you say. No to mention the Vale and Riverrun answers to House Stark, because the actual Starks of Winterfell are related to both the Tullys and Arryns. I have a feeling Sansa's connection to both families will play a role in her influence over the North and war with Cersei. Three Kingdoms/Great Houses are backing Daenerys, and Sansa has influence, at least the blood relation, to two Great Houses. All this also relates to who is the actual lord of House Stark.

      Sophie said that she doesn't really want to be queen, she just wants some credit for the battle.

        Loading editor
    • Jon would be a consort in everything but name. Dany has dragons, the suppport of the South, a larger army, and a navy (which the North lacks). She could sit the Iron Throne regardless of Jon's permission.

        Loading editor
    • dragons are not the property of Jon's aunt.

        Loading editor
    • Drogon certainly is.

        Loading editor
    • No. All dragons will kneel for King Jon.

        Loading editor
    • You clearly know nothing about Dragon behavior.

        Loading editor
    • They will bow down before his hair

        Loading editor
    • Dragons will love Jon. They did ever wish to have a cousin and a true king.

        Loading editor
    • Plus he could ride one of them, probably vision to keep the whole white thing they've started

        Loading editor
    • Drogon wil fight anyone Dany tells him to. Likely verbena Viserion if it came to it.

        Loading editor
    • Irritator wrote:
      If bran reaches winterfell , which is probable , by all laws bran should be the king in the north.

      in the books robb legimtized jon because he thought that bran was dead,so sucession only lay with jon snow.

      And personnaly i think that jon will allow bran to become king as it is his right .

      I agree with this. Bran is the rightful King in the North and Lord of Winterfell. Both Sansa and Jon know he is alive and neither of them gave a response to the bannermen trying to proclaim Jon KITN. So it seems like the debate should be between Bran and Jon as head of House Stark, but should lean toward Bran since the line of succession leans in his favor.

        Loading editor
    • Arya Baratheon wrote:
      Irritator wrote:
      If bran reaches winterfell , which is probable , by all laws bran should be the king in the north.

      in the books robb legimtized jon because he thought that bran was dead,so sucession only lay with jon snow.

      And personnaly i think that jon will allow bran to become king as it is his right .

      I agree with this. Bran is the rightful King in the North and Lord of Winterfell. Both Sansa and Jon know he is alive and neither of them gave a response to the bannermen trying to proclaim Jon KITN. So it seems like the debate should be between Bran and Jon as head of House Stark, but should lean toward Bran since the line of succession leans in his favor.

      Just exactly how Jon and Sansa knew that Bran is alive if they didn't talk about him at all this season and neither did anyone else? Ramsay and Rickon knew that Bran was alive but Ramsay saw to that and made sure the Bastard and her sister doesn't know what Rickon knows, and well following Ramsay's execution so died their last piece of knowledge that their brother Bran is still alive.

        Loading editor
    • The only people who know that bran isn't dead are Sam and gilly

        Loading editor
    • They are not sure if he's dead and it does actually not matter. Even if Sam would have told them they would not know if he's alive. But it still does not matter because the Northern Lords did proclaim Jon as king. They want a king who can hold a sword and lead people against White Walkers. Bran can see the truth about Jon's parents because Bran will help Jon to get his other six kingdoms.

      Bran will never be Lord of anything and Arya will never care for this Robert bastard Gendry. Please accept the truth.

        Loading editor
    • Eko is Oke wrote:
      Arya Baratheon wrote:
      Irritator wrote:
      If bran reaches winterfell , which is probable , by all laws bran should be the king in the north.

      in the books robb legimtized jon because he thought that bran was dead,so sucession only lay with jon snow.

      And personnaly i think that jon will allow bran to become king as it is his right .

      I agree with this. Bran is the rightful King in the North and Lord of Winterfell. Both Sansa and Jon know he is alive and neither of them gave a response to the bannermen trying to proclaim Jon KITN. So it seems like the debate should be between Bran and Jon as head of House Stark, but should lean toward Bran since the line of succession leans in his favor.
      Just exactly how Jon and Sansa knew that Bran is alive if they didn't talk about him at all this season and neither did anyone else? Ramsay and Rickon knew that Bran was alive but Ramsay saw to that and made sure the Bastard and her sister doesn't know what Rickon knows, and well following Ramsay's execution so died their last piece of knowledge that their brother Bran is still alive.

      Jon found out that Bran was alive and beyond the Wall from Sam. Sansa found out that Bran was alive from Theon. In her conversation with Jon when he got Ramsay's letter, she used Bran, as well as Arya and Rickon, as reasons they needed to take Winterfell back for their family. So yes, they both know Bran is alive and he legally comes before both of them in the line of succession.

      In the show, the line of succession is Bran, Sansa, Arya, and then possibly Jon if the bannermen accept him, which they did. 

      In the books, the line of succession is Bran, Rickon, Arya, and Jon or Jon, Bran, Rickon, and Arya, depending on how Robb's will is worded.

        Loading editor
    • 91.56.209.217 wrote:
      They want a king who can hold a sword and lead people against White Walkers. Bran can see the truth about Jon's parents because Bran will help Jon to get his other six kingdoms.

      Bran will never be Lord of anything and Arya will never care for this Robert bastard Gendry. Please accept the truth.

      Oh yeah sure... JON really proved himself against White Walkers in Hardhome (sail away in a boat). Jon's people ~20,000 vs Night King and White Walkers over 100,000 (and they cannot be killed by mere swords or arrows or brute force). OUTCOME = Jon's people 19,999 dead, White Walkers only 100 dead at the very least.

      Night King is coming and Jon can't do shit about it nor he can beat his army nor he will win against him and his army. Best outcome for him is to flee south towards the Capital and seek Daenerys help or to die like a bastard who "knows nothing". 

      Bran won't do anything he'll be killed come season 7. 91.56.209.217 Accept teh truth yourself please.

      This whole series is abut killing nearly all the Starks right from the beginning, with Stark men line nearly extinct do you really think the writers will let Bran live when Northern Lords don't want him as their rightful leader??

        Loading editor
    • Bran did not want Sam to tell Jon about him. Sam did not tell Jon because he did not want Jon to leave. Bran told Rickon that he does not want to be Lord.

      Northern Lords did not care about any phantasy line of succession. Northern Lords did care about Jon getting Winterfell back and that's why Jon is king now. (By the way named as heir by Robb) Northern Lords care about Bran as much as about Gendry rowing until his last day. Bran also does not care about being Lord because he knows that Jon is his rightful king.

        Loading editor
    • Eko is Oke wrote:
      This whole series is abut killing nearly all the Starks right from the beginning

      U did not get what this series is about - That's why all ur predictions for season 6 were totally wrong.

      Robb died because it was Jon's fate to regain Winterfell Bran stays alive because it is Bran's fate to help Jon getting the Iron Throne. Please don't tell me ur expert predictions for season 7. We already know how wrong they are.

        Loading editor
    • 91.56.209.217 wrote:
      Bran did not want Sam to tell Jon about him. Sam did not tell Jon because he did not want Jon to leave. Bran told Rickon that he does not want to be Lord.

      Northern Lords did not care about any phantasy line of succession. Northern Lords did care about Jon getting Winterfell back and that's why Jon is king now. (By the way named as heir by Robb) Northern Lords care about Bran as much as about Gendry rowing until his last day. Bran also does not care about being Lord because he knows that Jon is his rightful king.

      In the books, you're right, Sam didn't tell Jon. In the show, which this wiki is about, he did tell Jon. Also, Bran has never told anyone he didn't want to be lord. Not in the show nor the books. He has been training for lordship of some sort for most of his life and he was given training specifically for Lord of Winterfell in ACOK/Season 2. No where in that time did he say or suggest that that was something he didn't want. 

      You're right about Robb naming Jon his heir in the books, which didn't take Bran and Rickon's survival into account. But that doesn't happen in the show. There's no reason Jon would put himself above Bran, especially when he finds out he's not even Ned's bastard but Ned's sister's bastard.

        Loading editor
    • Arya Baratheon wrote:
      Eko is Oke wrote:
      Arya Baratheon wrote:
      Irritator wrote:
      If bran reaches winterfell , which is probable , by all laws bran should be the king in the north.

      in the books robb legimtized jon because he thought that bran was dead,so sucession only lay with jon snow.

      And personnaly i think that jon will allow bran to become king as it is his right .

      I agree with this. Bran is the rightful King in the North and Lord of Winterfell. Both Sansa and Jon know he is alive and neither of them gave a response to the bannermen trying to proclaim Jon KITN. So it seems like the debate should be between Bran and Jon as head of House Stark, but should lean toward Bran since the line of succession leans in his favor.
      Just exactly how Jon and Sansa knew that Bran is alive if they didn't talk about him at all this season and neither did anyone else? Ramsay and Rickon knew that Bran was alive but Ramsay saw to that and made sure the Bastard and her sister doesn't know what Rickon knows, and well following Ramsay's execution so died their last piece of knowledge that their brother Bran is still alive.
      Jon found out that Bran was alive and beyond the Wall from Sam. Sansa found out that Bran was alive from Theon. In her conversation with Jon when he got Ramsay's letter, she used Bran, as well as Arya and Rickon, as reasons they needed to take Winterfell back for their family. So yes, they both know Bran is alive and he legally comes before both of them in the line of succession.

      In the show, the line of succession is Bran, Sansa, Arya, and then possibly Jon if the bannermen accept him, which they did. 

      In the books, the line of succession is Bran, Rickon, Arya, and Jon or Jon, Bran, Rickon, and Arya, depending on how Robb's will is worded.

      Whether or not Sam told Jon if Bran was alive doesn't register with Jon, because he hasn't seen both Benjen and Bran since season 1 and at this point he "believes" both of them to be dead especially if he was informed that they both were last seen somewhere North of The Wall, something like several years ago...

      As for Sansa, Theon only ever told her that HE didn't kill Bran and Rickon but this doesn't mean that she has any reason to believe they are still alive (same for Arya) especially with what happened to Rickon and Shaggydog, I think Sansa has good reason to believe that Bran is dead as well and was presumably to her killed by Boltons, that's what a cynical person would think, otherwise both Sansa and Jon would at least talk about finding Bran and bringing him home in season finale... but they didn't so there.

        Loading editor
    • Arya Baratheon wrote:

      You're right about Robb naming Jon his heir in the books, which didn't take Bran and Rickon's survival into account. But that doesn't happen in the show.

      Yeah. Just dream on. We don't know if Robb's last will does not exist in the show. But surely there will be the same consequences.

      Bran can't fight and the North does not want or need a ruler who did become a strange wizard. Bran's part in the political system of Westeros is as important as Gendry's: 0 (But Bran is important for the fight against the White Walkers and will have more scenes) Bran did hear Lyanna saying Jon's name. He knows that Lyanna and Rhaegar must have married because Jon is a Targaryen. Jon is Bran's king.

      Just stop denying reality.

        Loading editor
    • Eko is Oke wrote:
      Arya Baratheon wrote:
      Eko is Oke wrote:
      Arya Baratheon wrote:
      Irritator wrote:
      If bran reaches winterfell , which is probable , by all laws bran should be the king in the north.

      in the books robb legimtized jon because he thought that bran was dead,so sucession only lay with jon snow.

      And personnaly i think that jon will allow bran to become king as it is his right .

      I agree with this. Bran is the rightful King in the North and Lord of Winterfell. Both Sansa and Jon know he is alive and neither of them gave a response to the bannermen trying to proclaim Jon KITN. So it seems like the debate should be between Bran and Jon as head of House Stark, but should lean toward Bran since the line of succession leans in his favor.
      Just exactly how Jon and Sansa knew that Bran is alive if they didn't talk about him at all this season and neither did anyone else? Ramsay and Rickon knew that Bran was alive but Ramsay saw to that and made sure the Bastard and her sister doesn't know what Rickon knows, and well following Ramsay's execution so died their last piece of knowledge that their brother Bran is still alive.
      Jon found out that Bran was alive and beyond the Wall from Sam. Sansa found out that Bran was alive from Theon. In her conversation with Jon when he got Ramsay's letter, she used Bran, as well as Arya and Rickon, as reasons they needed to take Winterfell back for their family. So yes, they both know Bran is alive and he legally comes before both of them in the line of succession.

      In the show, the line of succession is Bran, Sansa, Arya, and then possibly Jon if the bannermen accept him, which they did. 

      In the books, the line of succession is Bran, Rickon, Arya, and Jon or Jon, Bran, Rickon, and Arya, depending on how Robb's will is worded.

      Whether or not Sam told Jon if Bran was alive doesn't register with Jon, because he hasn't seen both Benjen and Bran since season 1 and at this point he "believes" both of them to be dead especially if he was informed that they both were last seen somewhere North of The Wall, something like several years ago...

      As for Sansa, Theon only ever told her that HE didn't kill Bran and Rickon but this doesn't mean that she has any reason to believe they are still alive (same for Arya) especially with what happened to Rickon and Shaggydog, I think Sansa has good reason to believe that Bran is dead as well and was presumably to her killed by Boltons, that's what a cynical person would think, otherwise both Sansa and Jon would at least talk about find Bran and bringing him home... but they didn't so there.

      That doesn't make any sense at all. Jon believes Bran is alive. That was part of why he wanted to go to Craster's Keep. He hoped to find him on the way. I don't see what the purpose is in choosing to argue something that goes directly against canon. We see Jon learn that Bran is alive, we see Jon make decisions based on that knowledge, and we see Sansa using that knowledge to push him into reclaiming Winterfell.  It's not even subjective or debatable. It's what's happened onscreen.

      Sansa is the same. She talked about both Bran and Arya earlier in S6. She talks about them in a way that makes it clear that she believes they're both alive. Why are you trying to make arguements based on things that go directly against canon?

        Loading editor
    • 91.56.209.217 wrote:
      Eko is Oke wrote:
      This whole series is abut killing nearly all the Starks right from the beginning
      U did not get what this series is about - That's why all ur predictions for season 6 were totally wrong.

      Robb died because it was Jon's fate to regain Winterfell Bran stays alive because it is Bran's fate to help Jon getting the Iron Throne. Please don't tell me ur expert predictions for season 7. We already know how wrong they are.

      LOL what? I never gave my season 6 predictions... And as for Season 7, let's look at the reality here, the series isn't going to end with no good guys dying anymore. Jesus so many Stark loyalists and Lannister supporters actually makes me sick.

        Loading editor
    • Eko is Oke wrote:
      LOL what? I never gave my season 6 predictions... And as for Season 7, let's look at the reality here, the series isn't going to end with no good guys dying anymore. Jesus so many Stark loyalists and Lannister supporters actually makes me sick.

      Bran maybe dies. But Bran does not die before he meets his king. Bran will fly. This means Bran will warg into a dragon. Jon will ride the dragon. Dany is infertile and has also not much chances to make it until the end. (and a lot of people think she belongs to the "good guys") Gendry maybe does not survive rowing for years (Maybe we find out off screen) The Starks did already pay the price. Now other Houses are going to pay more.

        Loading editor
    • 91.56.209.217 wrote:
      Eko is Oke wrote:
      LOL what? I never gave my season 6 predictions... And as for Season 7, let's look at the reality here, the series isn't going to end with no good guys dying anymore. Jesus so many Stark loyalists and Lannister supporters actually makes me sick.
      Bran maybe dies. But Bran does not die before he meets his king. Bran will fly. This means Bran will warg into a dragon. Jon will ride the dragon. Dany is infertile and has also not much chances to make it until the end. (and a lot of people think she belongs to the "good guys") Gendry maybe does not survive rowing for years (Maybe we find out off screen) The Starks did already pay the price. Now other Houses are going to pay more.

      LOL You are ridiculous. If you think Daenerys will die you are delusional just like the rest of Stark loyalists.

      Go worship your Bastard King in the North... honestly writers themselves even said that the only truly heartwarming moment the Starks will get is Sansa reuniting with Jon, which is what happened and also the reason why Ramsay killed Rickon right before Jon reached him.

        Loading editor
    • You are a true expert aren't you? I remember ur brillant predictions about Jon's parents when u tried to deny Jon's stronger claim for the Iron Throne (Yeah. U surely still dream about Rhaegar not having married the woman he really love.)

      Jon can father Targaryen children. Dany will ever just be the mother of Jon's dragons because she's infertile.

        Loading editor
    • I've seen some trolls in my day, but you by far are the most ridiculous one I have ever met. The reason I denied Jon's claim for the Throne is because he will simply reject given the stature of his character regardless if he has or he doesn't have claim for it.

      A Wikia contributor 91.56.209.217

      dragons are not the property of Jon's aunt.

      A Wikia contributor 91.56.209.217

      No. All dragons will kneel for King Jon.


      Please go and worship your Bastard King in the North. You clearly are in love with him.

        Loading editor
    • The bannermen swear loyalty to Jon,not Bran.

      Maybe he would be Lord but not King.

        Loading editor
    • Jon became Lord Commander, Jon became king in the north. But nobody did care about Jon not wanting to become a leader. The other six kingdoms are going to need Jon as well - before everybody finds out that aunty Dany's pretty clothes do not protect her that much when one of her enemies has the idea to use an arrow.

      Last words Dany hears will be Drogon saying "I told u to wear an armor, mom."

        Loading editor
    • Update: I left a message on an admin's page on the subject of the lord/head of House Stark. I mentioned the poll and it's turnout. Hopefully there's a final answer on this. The edit war on House Stark's page has escalated to the point an admin locked out ALL contributors, I don't mind since I consider that trolling, in my opinion. I conducted this discussion and poll based on canon knowledge of the show, to deescalate an edit war, and give a voice for those users and fans.

      I thank everyone who voted and contributed opinions in this discussion. I'd also like to point out if the final decision isn't in favor of the poll do not take it personally and/or continue an edit war. We spoke and we voted on it, lets leave the rest to the admins. Happy Independence Day for Americans, everyone else have a great day.

      Edit: The current Lord of House Stark is the majority vote of the poll. I didn't edit that page since I said I wouldn't, so I didn't notice until just now.

        Loading editor
    • 65 votes for King Jon Snow... or just King Jon Snow. So the mayority obviously thinks that King Jon should be mentioned in the House Stark article until we find out if Jon will be legitimized by himself or King Robb's last will as Jon Stark - or if he'll find out that he is the Lord of House Targaryen before.

        Loading editor
    • 96 votes for Sansa Stark (official) and Bran Stark (rightful). I think you're shooting blanks here

        Loading editor
    • Only the minority thinks that Sansa or Cersei's Peeping Tom would be the de facto leader of House Stark.

        Loading editor
    • well it's a good thing that House Stark doesn't have a de facto leader then is it?

        Loading editor
    • Currently Jon Snow is the sovereign and overlord of House Stark and Arryn. If Edmure Tully is in his own castle and still possess his vassals and personal guard then he can defect to House Stark as well. In truth Jon is the King of at least two Kingdoms/Regions, all without being the Lord of House Stark.

      I hope he isn't legitimized because it speaks high of his accomplishments and is a great part of his characterization. A bastard, A king of a large domain can form his own House (he won't b/c his children will be bastard -which he hates- and lost poltically if he fails), but he chooses to rally behind House Stark. It also allows Sansa and Bran to not be overlooked and have some political pull, and story. I think him not being the heir to House Stark will allow him to make certain *marriages* moves without compromising House Stark because he's a bastard.

      What I'm getting at is Jon being a Snow instead of a Stark actually has an advantage from a storyline perespective, which had been the case for years. If he was a Stark the entire Nights Watch would be decimated and there'd be no one to warn everyone of the white walkers. Also his hypothetical status as a Stark would've ended with him dead, Sansa dead, and House Stark dead. So I don't see why people are so focused on him being Jon Stark when him being a Snow gives him more possibilities and freedom, and has a lot more to offer. If Sansa was a bastard half the horrible things that happened to her wouldn't have happened

        Loading editor
    • 100.2.249.147

      Well said.

        Loading editor
    • Irritator wrote: If rheagar is truly the father of jon , by all laws jon should inherit the Iron throne ahead of his aunt.

      If and when jon learns of this , he would be the rightful king upon the iron throne , and possibly the starks and arryns would back up the claim.If that was the scenario, then jon would appoint Bran as his Warden of the North and expand his claims to be The Lord of The Seven Kingdoms In that case , Bran would be the Lord of winterfell and would swear fealty to jon 

      And then we could see if there would be a final battle between two Targaryans

        Loading editor
    • Update: An admin listed the majority vote as the lord of House Stark, and made a whole section as to why.

      Furthermore, when the admins discussed this topic on the talk page of TheDragonDemands, it was said our poll basically meant nothing in their decision making process because they didn't create it and it's not about what we want, even though they used the exact same sources and reasons to reach the SAME conclusion of the majority of people in this poll and discussion. If they actually looked at this thread they'd know that.

      Also there might be an edit war still going. I edited the page back to the admin's form, but I guess that won't last. Again, I'm not editing that page after that, I'll let admins handle that since they came up with their own original conclusion. *yes, that's sarcasm*

      Despite what was said I don't think this discussion or poll was a waste of time. Again, I thank everyone for participating and not to be discouraged from creating polls and discussions, it provides an outlet for users. I personally found this discussion fun, I read ALL of your responses, that's where the sporadic kudos are coming from. Feel free to rant on this discussion and my talk page if you want, that's what it's there for essentially, and sorry if I sound like I'm a politician running for office. (I laughed at my prior update because of how formal I sound in my writing). I love that people are still voting.

        Loading editor
    • House Stark
      It makes no sense to me how anyone could argue that Jon Snow is the Lord of WInterfell with any evidence other than their own wishful thinking.
        Loading editor
    • TargaryenBlood wrote:

      House Stark
      It makes no sense to me how anyone could argue that Jon Snow is the Lord of WInterfell with any evidence other than their own wishful thinking.

      The funny part is this was updated AFTER the finale, and she's Lady of Winterfell b/c she's the lord of House Stark AND Jon is still King in the North. Meaning, Sansa and her House is a vassal to Jon's Kingdom.

        Loading editor
    • You don't have to be a Stark to be Lord of Winterfell (Ramsay, Roose). But I tend to agree that Bran is the rightful lord of House Stark while Sansa is, for now, the official lord/lady, even though putting Jon as the de facto lord would make sense. I wouldn't put it that the Starks are vassals to Jon because Jon's kingship is based solely on the idea that he has Ned's blood, making him a Stark in everything but name. The lords of the North wouldn't have made him king if he was, for example, the son of lord Flint of Widow's Watch. I wouldn't delve too much in the whole Jon is a Targ thing because no one but Bran (and Howland Reed) knows at this point that Jon is Lyanna and Rhaegar's son, and even then he doesn't know if he'd still be a bastard or not.

        Loading editor
    • Even though the true Lord of Winterfell is Bran - Bran is NOT THERE. So, he cant be the "sitting" lord. Until Bran comes back to Winterfell - Jon Snow is the de facto lord. No one south of the wall (except the unseen Howland Reed) knows that Jon is Lyanna's son and not Neds Son. So, even though WE know these things, what is happening in the story has to be based on what is known by those in the story. Even though we believe we know that Rhaegar is Jon's father - it has not been specifically and explicitly made known in the show - or the books for that matter. Right now, we don't even know Jon's REAL name. Some believe its Jahaerys, some think its Aegon. I don't think the wiki needs to jump ahead of what's known in the show to update the pages based on what the viewers know - even though it may be obvious to us.

        Loading editor
    • Regarding the Winterfell being a vassal of Jon's kingdom: Winterfell is the seat of the Northern Realm. That's like saying Kings Landing is a vassal to the iron throne. This is a true statement, but an unnecessary distinction.

        Loading editor
    • 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

      To be King in the North, one has to be the incumbent Lord of Winterfell, and that is not Jon Snow. So for the Northern lords (and Lady Lyanna Mormont) to acclaim Jon their king, they were basically betraying House Stark.

      "It was Jon who fought the battle and won back Winterfell."

      Jon was the very reason that battle was nearly lost! The Knights of the Vale won that battle, whereas the Boltons and Umbers had Jon's army on the ropes. Which makes it somewhat comical of the Northerners to be crediting Jon with the victory.

      "It was Jon who revenged Robb not Bran!"

      Arya AVENGED Robb by killing Walder Frey and his sons. Jon AVENGED Rickon by beating the shit out of Ramsay Bolton. Sansa AVENGED Rickon by feeding Ramsay to his own dogs. Avenging one's family, however, does not qualify any of them to be ruler of the North.

      "...I don't think Bran will seek to be king."

      Whether he does or doesn't, so what? Jon didn't want to be king either. But Bran IS the rightful heir to Winterfell and King in the North! Do you really think anyone will let him forget it? And when he does reveal Jon Snow's parentage, it will be up to Jon Snow to do the honourable thing and abdicate his kingship for Bran. Bran has the birthright. He's the only one with experience of ruling (see Season 2). And with his warging and greenseeing being part of his Stark heritage (Bran the Builder was implied to be a greenseer), Bran is more than qualified to rule the North.


        Loading editor
    • Question - Was Ned Stark the King in the North? Does this title pass to the heir like the lordship does?

        Loading editor
    • Yes, it seems to be a hereditary monarchy. No, Ned Stark was not the King in the North. The North had yet to declare independence, and did so after learning of Ned's execution (though that wasn't the only reason). Ned was the Lord Paramount of the North.

        Loading editor
    • Nleonwill wrote:
      Question - Was Ned Stark the King in the North? Does this title pass to the heir like the lordship does?


      The Northern Kingdom was founded by the Starks. Winterfell was founded by the Starks, and was their ruling seat for thousands of years. Winterfell was to the Kings in the North what Paris was to the Kings of France during the Middle Ages: the Royal Demesne! Even when the Starks lost their kingship during the Targaryen Conquest, all the other Northern houses owed them fealty, and the Stark's ruled the North for the Targaryens. So when the Northern lords called for independence, they looked to Robb Stark as the natural choice for their king. Because the Starks WERE kings for a far longer time than the Targaryens, or Baratheons, were. So even though Eddard Stark was never a king, his family is still royalty, title or no!

        Loading editor
    • Nleonwill wrote: Regarding the Winterfell being a vassal of Jon's kingdom: Winterfell is the seat of the Northern Realm. That's like saying Kings Landing is a vassal to the iron throne. This is a true statement, but an unnecessary distinction.

      Umm I'm pretty sure it was said that "House Stark is a vassal of Jon's kingdom". Meaning Jon is overlord of House Stark since he's not a Stark. No one said Winterfell itself is a vassal, even though it's possible for a country/city to be a vassal to another.

        Loading editor
    • I find it funny how some people are still arguing for birthrights and the line of succession in the North. The Northern Lords made it clear that they don't care about any of that when it comes to their sovereign.

        Loading editor
    • 172.56.34.78 wrote:
      I find it funny how some people are still arguing for birthrights and the line of succession in the North. The Northern Lords made it clear that they don't care about any of that when it comes to their sovereign.


      Do you also find it funny, then, that those same lords also abide by the laws of succession when it comes to their OWN lordships and fiefdoms? So if they can just chose their sovereign on a whim, regardless of whom the rightful claimants are, then their own bastard relatives can overthrow them and usurp their own positions in the belief that they're more able to hold them. As lords, they're supposed to uphold the law. And that includes the laws of succession, which apply to ALL noble houses, as well as royalty. And when they brazenly violate their own laws, all they do is undermine the very basis of their own authority. The North is not a democracy, and Jon Snow almost lost that battle. The Northern lords' choice to name Jon their king is just outright foolish!

        Loading editor
    • Renly claimed the Iron Throne and people supported him,¬†Jon is King in the North, Cersei is the Queen of Andals and the First Men and Daenerys is coming to take the Iron Throne even though her dynasty was abolished 20 years go. Laws of succession don't mean much in this show.

        Loading editor
    • The Northern Lords choosing Jon as their King was pretty much pulling a Renly. It's not surprising. Since the beginning the North didn't respect the line of succession. Way back when it discussed whether to support Renly or Stannis, Robb straight up says they should suppprt Stannis because he is the rightful heir, yet the North was like "Nahhhhhhh".

        Loading editor
    • 172.56.2.9 wrote:
      The Northern Lords choosing Jon as their King was pretty much pulling a Renly. It's not surprising. Since the beginning the North didn't respect the line of succession. Way back when it discussed whether to support Renly or Stannis, Robb straight up says they should suppprt Stannis because he is the rightful heir, yet the North was like "Nahhhhhhh".

      SOME people supported Renly. Not everyone did. The Lords of the Stormlands supported Renly because he was the Lord Paramount of the Stormlands. While the Reach (with the possible exception of House Florent, who were Stannis' in-laws) supported Renly because he was marrying Margaery Tyrell. Those whom supported Renly did so because he was either their liege-lord, or was marrying their liege-lord's daughter. The Iron Throne was remote from them, but they still respected the laws of succession, because, as I just explained and will do so again, they ALL USE IT! And let's not forget that Renly and Stannis told the world that Joffrey, Myrcella and Tommen were products of incest, with no lawful claim to either the Iron Throne or the Baratheon name, which was the official pretext of their rebellions.

      Succession laws have existed before Aegon's conquest, so you're fooling yourself by saying "since the beginning the North didn't respect the line of succession"! The Northerners indeed respect the laws of succession, they just wanted to return to the days that they were an independent kingdom. You're misrepresenting their intentions to support your argument.

        Loading editor
    • Wanting to return to return to an independent kingdom is the same as not respecting the laws of succession (Of the Iron Throne which the North is a vassal of). Instead of picking a new soverign, the North could have tried to get to the bottom of the Baratheon succession crisis. Not to

        Loading editor
    • 172.56.2.9 wrote:
      Wanting to return to return to an independent kingdom is the same as not respecting the laws of succession (Of the Iron Throne which the North is a vassal of). Instead of picking a new soverign, the North could have tried to get to the bottom of the Baratheon succession crisis. Not to


      "Wanting to return to an independent kingdom is the same as not respecting the laws of succession (Of the Iron Throne which the North is a vassal of)."

      What are you talking about? The laws of succession existed BEFORE the Iron Throne.

      "Instead of picking a new soverign(sic), the North could have tried to get to the bottom of the Baratheon succession crisis. Not to"

      Again I have to ask; what are you talking about? The North may have chosen independence over the Iron Throne, but they still practiced lines of succession. Why do you think they looked to Robb Stark for leadership? If the Northerners were anything like the Dothraki, they would have chosen the likes of Greatjon Umber, Rickard Karstark or Roose Bolton as their king. But they chose the ancient House Stark, who have practiced stable succession laws long before the Targaryens appeared in Westeros.

        Loading editor
    • Cregan Stark backed up rhaenarya during the Dance of the Dragons Aegon 2 had the better claim to the Iron Throne though. During the great council of 101 at harrenhal , Lord Ellard Stark backed up Laenor Velaryon for being king , despite that in proximity, favour goes to Viserys , the last rider of Balerion the Black Dread himself

        Loading editor
    • Listen I love Jon Snow (a lot), but as long as he's Jon Snow, all of the noble houses of the North are his vassals since they chose and supported him, including House Stark (which is currently Sansa, unless the show officially declare him lord of House Stark and Winterfell). The only reason House Stark is technically royal: his heir(s) is a Stark.

      The line of succession is still relevant because all of those lords and ladies inherited their names and positions, the same way Sansa inherited Winterfell.

      Another point, Jon was proclaimed King to unite the houses of the North and win the coming wars. Once that is done everything will be forever changed and back to their normal pre-WarofFiveKings, meaning Jon Snow is going to retire and Sansa or Bran will continue the Stark line and name, regardless if Jon survives and if they live. Pros of Jon being King and a Snow: he doesn't have the weight of an entire family on his shoulders, he can act as a free agent politically; meaning he can marry and ally himself without compromising House Stark, and if he dies an entire family won't die along with him (Which almost happened with Robb, luckily his siblings were smart enough to know how to survive.)

        Loading editor
    • Jon won't win the war - White Walkers will kill him if he even tries to fight against them.¬†

        Loading editor
    • But he has a dragonsteel sword...and his hair

        Loading editor
    • GreyStark wrote:
      But he has a dragonsteel sword...and his hair

      Do you realize Night King only needs to touch Jon Snow and he'll be turned into White Walker and I hope for something like that then the real war will come.

        Loading editor
    • Honestly I think the perfect ending would be the WW anihilating mankind, the Night King entering a destroyed Red Keep, climbing towards the Iron Throne.. and just as he sits down he cuts himself on a valyrian steel sword forged into the throne and dies. The screen fades to black.

        Loading editor
    • 79.143.165.138 wrote: Honestly I think the perfect ending would be the WW anihilating mankind, the Night King entering a destroyed Red Keep, climbing towards the Iron Throne.. and just as he sits down he cuts himself on a valyrian steel sword forged into the throne and dies. The screen fades to black.

      Or Daenerys die after a victorious battle against the white walkers and her Dragons bring in the new apocalypse.

        Loading editor
    • Eko is Oke wrote:
      GreyStark wrote:
      But he has a dragonsteel sword...and his hair
      Do you realize Night King only needs to touch Jon Snow and he'll be turned into White Walker and I hope for something like that then the real war will come.

      I think The Night King would sooner  kill Jon Snow then "turn him" into a Walker. We still don't know 100% how the White Walkers consistently reproduce. Yes, we saw him do it to Craster's newborn sons. But does he do it with all human babys, or was it just Craster's specific bloodline? And as for the Night King's creation, it may have been something only the CotF could do, which can't be replicated by the White Walkers or Humanity.

      So long as the Night King can parry and dodge Longclaw, Jon's just going to be another Wight (zombie) in his army.


        Loading editor
    • Irritator wrote:
      Cregan Stark backed up rhaenarya during the Dance of the DragonsAegon 2 had the better claim to the Iron Throne though.

      During the great council of 101 at harrenhal , Lord Ellard Stark backed up Laenor Velaryon for being king , despite that in proximity, favour goes to Viserys , the last rider of Balerion the Black Dread himself


      I don't know much about the Dance of the Dragons incident, but when it comes to individual houses they still regard the line of succession as their own personal justification to rule. That Cregan Stark backed Princess Rhaenyra doesn't justify anyone else violating their own oaths to their liege-lords. At least Rhaenyra wasn't a bastard with no legal claim to a royal title.


        Loading editor
    • Kai200995 wrote:
      Listen I love Jon Snow (a lot), but as long as he's Jon Snow, all of the noble houses of the North are his vassals since they chose and supported him, including House Stark (which is currently Sansa, unless the show officially declare him lord of House Stark and Winterfell). The only reason House Stark is technically royal: his heir(s) is a Stark.

      The line of succession is still relevant because all of those lords and ladies inherited their names and positions, the same way Sansa inherited Winterfell.

      Another point, Jon was proclaimed King to unite the houses of the North and win the coming wars. Once that is done everything will be forever changed and back to their normal pre-WarofFiveKings, meaning Jon Snow is going to retire and Sansa or Bran will continue the Stark line and name, regardless if Jon survives and if they live. Pros of Jon being King and a Snow: he doesn't have the weight of an entire family on his shoulders, he can act as a free agent politically; meaning he can marry and ally himself without compromising House Stark, and if he dies an entire family won't die along with him (Which almost happened with Robb, luckily his siblings were smart enough to know how to survive.)

      Personally, I think they should have just named Jon Warden of the North, rather than KitN, or Lord Paramount. He's a better soldier than an administrator (despite his lapse in judgement at the Battle of the Bastards), so he would still command the Northern armies in the name of House Stark. The Northern lords move to acclaim Jon Snow their king is rather poorly thought-out. Bran's presence when he returns could potentially divide loyalties. And even though Bran might not want the job, others will want him to take the Kingship of the North, especially if Jon's reign doesn't work out, or mistakes happen. And if he tells Jon that he's Rhaegar and Lyanna's son, Jon may be honour-bound to abdicate as king. He'd still lead the Northerners on the battlefield, he just wouldn't have to sit for hours hearing petitions and dealing with the minutiae of administration.

        Loading editor
    • What? They can't name him Warden of the North. Warden of the North is the title granted by the King/Queen of the Seven Kingdoms. They want independence that's why they named him King in the North. Bran will have a great role in the war to come but definitely not in the position of leader.

        Loading editor
    • 79.116.46.44 wrote:
      What? They can't name him Warden of the North. Warden of the North is the title granted by the King/Queen of the Seven Kingdoms. They want independence that's why they named him King in the North. Bran will have a great role in the war to come but definitely not in the position of leader.


      If the Northerners are going for independence, then they can simply co-opt the title of Warden and use it for their own business. And what else would you think Brans "great role" involves if he's not King in the North? The office of King, Winterfell and the bloodline which inherits all of that was started by a man who is implied to be a sorcerer (read greenseer), and Bran's abilities come from his Stark heritage (Jojen Reed: "It's in your blood, Bran!"). So do the math! Being a greenseer should enhance his position.

        Loading editor
    • 79.116.46.44 wrote:
      What? They can't name him Warden of the North. Warden of the North is the title granted by the King/Queen of the Seven Kingdoms. They want independence that's why they named him King in the North. Bran will have a great role in the war to come but definitely not in the position of leader.

      If North wants independence or are independent as of that Bastard King in the North, then it's pretty much over for all the North because White Walkers are gonna come and either:

      1) wipe them all out,

      2) force the Northeners to flee South all the while killing others,

      3) kill Northerners and turn them into Wights/White Walkers - in this scenario their numbers would double or triple while the remaining survivors of the North have fled South.

      Also with North being independent wanting independence why in all the Westeros should South and/or (Dany's side) aid the fleeing North who will arrive in the South?

      Finally, the finale battle will be between Dany and her Dragons (FIRE) vs Night King and his White Walkers (ICE). I'm sorry but Jon Snow will die because I don't see him fit in this scenario AT ALL and besides we all know what happens to Kings in the North... or Young Wolf/White Wolf whatever you wanna call Robb/Jon.

        Loading editor
    • Eko is Oke wrote:
      79.116.46.44 wrote:
      What? They can't name him Warden of the North. Warden of the North is the title granted by the King/Queen of the Seven Kingdoms. They want independence that's why they named him King in the North. Bran will have a great role in the war to come but definitely not in the position of leader.
      If North wants independence or are independent as of that Bastard King in the North, then it's pretty much over for all the North because White Walkers are gonna come and either:

      1) wipe them all out,

      2) force the Northeners to flee South all the while killing others,

      3) kill Northerners and turn them into Wights/White Walkers - in this scenario their numbers would double or triple while the remaining survivors of the North have fled South.

      Also with North being independent wanting independence why in all the Westeros should South and/or (Dany's side) aid the fleeing North who will arrive in the South?

      Finally, the finale battle will be between Dany and her Dragons (FIRE) vs Night King and his White Walkers (ICE). I'm sorry but Jon Snow will die because I don't see him fit in this scenario AT ALL and besides we all know what happens to Kings in the North... or Young Wolf/White Wolf whatever you wanna call Robb/Jon.


      The North is where the war with the White Walkers will be decided, and the Northerners are the best adapted to fighting them. Dany's dragons will not themselves be enough to destroy them. They can torch the wights, but the White Walkers are impervious to fire.

        Loading editor
    • 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?

        Loading editor
    • Fenrir51 wrote:
      :So do the math! Being a greenseer should enhance his position.

      LOL - There's no Lord at Westeros who cares about Bran being a greenseer. Only the WW care about that.

      Euron will destroy Dany and Drogon. Dany's army will be helpless. Then Bran arrives and tells them that their king is alive. King Jon names Bran warden in the north.

        Loading editor
    • No, Jon is not the lord of house stark. Winterfell still belongs to Sansa, until Bran comes along. I really don't understand the rights of sucession regarding kingship of the north and I'm not sure that sansa/bran are the rightful heirs to the northern kingdom just because they're the last trueborn starks. I fell like there should be a will, like in the books, but then again I have no idea how the KitN sucessions works. The northern lords chose to go independent and chose their king in both ocasions. I don't know how that worked 300 years ago with the kings of winter.¬†

      I don't think Bran will claim that title, though. I don't think he's interested in being king, he has much more pressing matters to deal with. That would be the case if Jon was dead, then bran would have to unite the north to prepare for the long night, but jon is alive and that part is already covered. Now what bran has to do is finish his training by himself and then team with his brother/cousin since both have to face the night's king at some point. 

      Bran will only reveal Jon's secret parentage to everyone when Dany rides north to take their kingdom. I don't how far his full pontential as 3ER can go, maybe he'll learn how to take others in his vision trips with him(?) he's pretty powerful as it is since he's the only warg who can warg an actual human being, who knows what else he's capable of doing with his powers? Maybe people will believe him when dany threatens Jon with her dragons and the dragons refuse to harm him at all(?) Also, she has tyrion and theon with her. Tyrion is friends with jon and theon is friends with sansa, and both have a pretty soft spot for the starks in general. They'd advise her not to against the starks as they're good people and blah blah blah. 

        Loading editor
    • Kai200995 wrote:

      Irritator wrote: If bran reaches winterfell , which is probable , by all laws bran should be the king in the north.

      in the books robb legimtized jon because he thought that bran was dead,so sucession only lay with jon snow.

      And personnaly i think that jon will allow bran to become king as it is his right .

      Yeah, I understand the inheritance of the "King in the North" title. I was more concerned with the titles of Jon being the Lord of Winterfell and House Stark. Sansa is the Lady of Winterfell on HBO Viewer's Guide. Jon Snow, who's King in the North, doesn't have the Stark name. Based on that, Sansa is (officially, behind Bran) the Lord of House Stark and is backing Jon's reign. This makes Jon House Stark's sovereign, not their lord. The Starks are still alive and one is present. As long as they are present, Jon isn't officially the Lord of House Stark or Winterfell.

      No, Jon is not the lord of house stark/winterfell. Robb was king of the trident, but Edmure was still the Lord of Riverrrun and Lord Paramount of the Trident. Robb was Edmure's king and ruled from the Riverrun castle for quite a while, but that was never his castle. The same thing goes for Jon. He'll probably rule from Winterfell because it is the "capitol" of the north and well, it is kinda his home too. But the castle and lady/lordship belongs to sansa, until bran comes along.

        Loading editor
    • Arya Baratheon wrote:
      91.56.209.217 wrote:
      Bran did not want Sam to tell Jon about him. Sam did not tell Jon because he did not want Jon to leave. Bran told Rickon that he does not want to be Lord.

      Northern Lords did not care about any phantasy line of succession. Northern Lords did care about Jon getting Winterfell back and that's why Jon is king now. (By the way named as heir by Robb) Northern Lords care about Bran as much as about Gendry rowing until his last day. Bran also does not care about being Lord because he knows that Jon is his rightful king.

      In the books, you're right, Sam didn't tell Jon. In the show, which this wiki is about, he did tell Jon. Also, Bran has never told anyone he didn't want to be lord. Not in the show nor the books. He has been training for lordship of some sort for most of his life and he was given training specifically for Lord of Winterfell in ACOK/Season 2. No where in that time did he say or suggest that that was something he didn't want. 

      You're right about Robb naming Jon his heir in the books, which didn't take Bran and Rickon's survival into account. But that doesn't happen in the show. There's no reason Jon would put himself above Bran, especially when he finds out he's not even Ned's bastard but Ned's sister's bastard.

      Bran did not train for lordship for most of his life AT ALL. Remember: Robb came first in line, so Robb was the one being trained all his life to be the head of house stark. Bran wanted to be a KNIGHT and that's what he was training for before his fall. He did train though when he had to become the lord of winterfell after Robb left for war. But that only lasted from the second half of season 1 to the first half of season 2. And you're right, he never said he didn't want to be the lord of his house, but he never expressed he wanted it either. When he was acting lord he was not very happy about it, he was doing it because it was his duty. Bran's duty now is to be the 3ER and help saving the realm. He understood this when he was calling for his brother before jojen stopped him. He understood that he had to choose between love/family and duty and he chose to continue on his path north of the wall. 

      Also, Jon doesn't know that Bran is alive for sure. All he knows is that Sam saw him going beyond the wall. After what happened in Hardhome can Jon really assume that Bran is still alive? Jon doesn't know that Bran found a cozy cave protected with spells to prevent the white walkers for going in, does he? he doesn't know that bran was being protected by the CotF and 3ER. He could only assume that his brother is dead like the rest of the wildlings he couldn't save in hardhome. 

      Last, Jon wouldn't fight bran for the KitN title as much as Bran wouldn't fight Jon either. Bran has more important things to deal with. He has to finish his training by himself, he has a LOT to learn and process. He literally got the history of westeros uploaded onto his brain. Can he really bother with ruling the north when he has his dear brother/cousin who is more than capable for this job? 

        Loading editor
    • Bran did not train for lordship for most of his life AT ALL. Remember: Robb came first in line, so Robb was the one being trained all his life to be the head of house stark. Bran wanted to be a KNIGHT and that's what he was training for before his fall. He did train though when he had to become the lord of winterfell after Robb left for war. But that only lasted from the second half of season 1 to the first half of season 2. And you're right, he never said he didn't want to be the lord of his house, but he never expressed he wanted it either. When he was acting lord he was not very happy about it, he was doing it because it was his duty. Bran's duty now is to be the 3ER and help saving the realm. He understood this when he was calling for his brother before jojen stopped him. He understood that he had to choose between love/family and duty and he chose to continue on his path north of the wall.¬†

      Also, Jon doesn't know that Bran is alive for sure. All he knows is that Sam saw him going beyond the wall. After what happened in Hardhome can Jon really assume that Bran is still alive? Jon doesn't know that Bran found a cozy cave protected with spells to prevent the white walkers for going in, does he? he doesn't know that bran was being protected by the CotF and 3ER. He could only assume that his brother is dead like the rest of the wildlings he couldn't save in hardhome. 

      Last, Jon wouldn't fight bran for the KitN title as much as Bran wouldn't fight Jon either. Bran has more important things to deal with. He has to finish his training by himself, he has a LOT to learn and process. He literally got the history of westeros uploaded onto his brain. Can he really bother with ruling the north when he has his dear brother/cousin who is more than capable for this job? 

      Actually, Bran DID train for lordship from an early age. It's true that he wanted to be a knight in the Kingsguard, but the very reason his father took him to witness an execution was because his father wanted to prepare him for the role of commanding his brother's holdfasts, which would have involved dispensing justice and other details of administration. Whatever he planned to do with his future, his father wanted him to learn the skills and responsibilities to be his older brother's lieutenant within the demesne of Winterfell. And despite his earlier feelings about ruling Winterfell, he was proud of his performance in its governance. Ser Rodrik and Maester Luwin approved of the decisions he made.

      "Bran's duty is to be the 3ER."

      And why exactly does that negate his responsibilities as the heir to Winterfell? The founder of the Stark line and the institutions of the North was himself a greenseer. Bran was born a greenseer, because he's descended from a greenseer. And being greenseer is NOT some office like being a Maester. It's an ABILITY, not a reason for him to bow out of his legal responsibilities as a lord.

      And if Bran already has the Three-eyed Raven's knowledge pumped into his head, then he doesn't need to finish his training. He just needs to process this knowledge. Why would you need to "continue training" when you already possess your instructor's knowledge?

        Loading editor
    • 189.70.43.19 wrote: No, Jon is not the lord of house stark/winterfell. Robb was king of the trident, but Edmure was still the Lord of Riverrrun and Lord Paramount of the Trident. Robb was Edmure's king and ruled from the Riverrun castle for quite a while, but that was never his castle. The same thing goes for Jon. He'll probably rule from Winterfell because it is the "capitol" of the north and well, it is kinda his home too. But the castle and lady/lordship belongs to sansa, until bran comes along.

      Thank you! It's so simple to understand this, but people are going fanboy/girl crazy to the point they aren't thinking. I personally think Jon is more of Ned Stark than his other siblings, but its clear that Sansa is Lady/Lord of Winterfell and House Stark, for these reasons above.

        Loading editor
    • 79.231.127.240 wrote:
      Fenrir51 wrote:
      :So do the math! Being a greenseer should enhance his position.
      LOL - There's no Lord at Westeros who cares about Bran being a greenseer. Only the WW care about that.

      No, they should care that he's Ned Stark's trueborn son. There is also no law stating that one has to abandon their inheritance because he's a greenseer. But because the ability is part of his heritage, and that Bran the Builder was in all likelihood a greenseer, and because it offers a MASSIVE potential advantage in the service of military and political strategy, it should ADD to Bran's qualities as a ruler of the North. Bran also has experience in governance that Sansa and Jon just don't have. Jon's just some lucky idiot who nearly threw away his strategy for the Battle of the Bastards on an impulse. And apart from his Valyrian steel sword, he's just a normal human being, all things considered.

        Loading editor
    • Jon is the prince who was promised. Bran is just his assistant. Deal with it.

        Loading editor
    • Kai200995 wrote:

      189.70.43.19 wrote: No, Jon is not the lord of house stark/winterfell. Robb was king of the trident, but Edmure was still the Lord of Riverrrun and Lord Paramount of the Trident. Robb was Edmure's king and ruled from the Riverrun castle for quite a while, but that was never his castle. The same thing goes for Jon. He'll probably rule from Winterfell because it is the "capitol" of the north and well, it is kinda his home too. But the castle and lady/lordship belongs to sansa, until bran comes along.

      Thank you! It's so simple to understand this, but people are going fanboy/girl crazy to the point they aren't thinking. I personally think Jon is more of Ned Stark than his other siblings, but its clear that Sansa is Lady/Lord of Winterfell and House Stark, for these reasons above.

      This does actually not realy matter because Jon will find out that he is the Lord of another House. In the end some Stark will be warden in the North and Jon Targaryen will still be their king.

        Loading editor
    • 79.231.101.41 wrote:
      Jon is the prince who was promised. Bran is just his assistant. Deal with it.


      No one is the "prince that was promised". He's a figure from the Lord of Light religion, whom allegedly lived thousands of years before the main story. Bran is not obligated to be anyone's "assistant". Why would he be Jon's sidekick when he can simply take over his mind?

        Loading editor
    • All Starks and also Jon have the ability to warg. But the other Starks did not have the time for recognizing their abilities with a speaking tree. Jon is not just able to warg but also more than likely immune against dragon fire after Viserion is bound to him. Bran was just able to warg into Hodor (didn't end well for him. Thank u Bran.) So just stop with ur "Bran Stark superhuman" theories.

      All scenes of Bran in season 6 were either about Jon, the WW or Hodor. He's not more than a secondary character with even less fans than aunty Dany has. Bran's primary purpose is to tell his cousin that Lyanna did give Jon the name Jaehaerys Targaryen.

      But oh, I forgot Bran's huge scenes in season 5. Bran is clearly the most important character after eternal-rowing-Gendry.

        Loading editor
    • 79.231.101.41 wrote:
      All Starks and also Jon have the ability to warg. But the other Starks did not have the time for recognizing their abilities with a speaking tree. Jon is not just able to warg but also more than likely immune against dragon fire after Viserion is bound to him. Bran was just able to warg into Hodor (didn't end well for him. Thank u Bran.) So just stop with ur "Bran Stark superhuman" theories.

      All scenes of Bran in season 6 were either about Jon, the WW or Hodor. He's not more than a secondary character with even less fans than aunty Dany has. Bran's primary purpose is to tell his cousin that Lyanna did give Jon the name Jaehaerys Targaryen.

      But oh, I forgot Bran's huge scenes in season 5. Bran is clearly the most important character after eternal-rowing-Gendry.


      The series has none of the other Starks depicted with warging abilities. And as for Jon "being immune to fire" I guess he should have realized that when he burnt his hand hurling a lantern at a re-animated wight back in the First Season. And unfortunately for you, Bran is definitely the only character with superhuman powers more useful than being immune to fire.

      "All Bran's scenes in season 6 were either about Jon, the WW or Hodor."

      Bran is the main asset against the White Walkers for a reason. Only one scene of his was about Jon, who demonstrates himself to be no more prepared to battle the White Walkers than he was to face down a rank amateur general like Ramsay Bolton. And Hodor was a supporting-character in Bran's story. Not the other way around!

      "He's not more than a secondary character with less fans than aunty Dany has."

      A "secondary character" with his own distinct story-arc, the name of his actor in the opening sequence, and one of the five main characters, according to GRRM himself. And why should this perception of yours about his fanbase have any impact on his role in the story?

      And Gendry is no more important to the overall story than Penny the Dwarf. He's not even Robert Baratheon's only-surviving child in the books.

        Loading editor
    • It's really funny to see some people still "predicting" the future of the series although they were wrong with everything about Jon.

      Jon did already warg in the books and it is more than likely that Jon has this ability in the show as well. He probably already did it but couldn't remember after he returned into his body. GRRM also confirmed that Daenerys was not always immune to all kinds of fire. So it will be a sad moment for you when dragon fire will confirm that Jon has dragon't blood because he was born in the blood of his dieing mother (like Tyrion and Tyrion's half-sister Dany)

      Please continue with ur funny dreams. This is even more funny like people predicting Jon would ever stay at the Night's Watch or never come back last year.

      Let's look at my prediction list:

      Jon dieing and brought back - released from his oath - happened

      Jon becoming king - 1/7 already happened

      Jon being a Targaryen as well as a Stark - confirmed

      Jon being the prince who was LITERALLY promised by his mother - confirmed

      Jon riding Viserion and becoming immune against fire - more than likely

      Looks not that bad until now

      The Lordship of Winterfell will never be adressed as an issue during the last 13 episodes because King Jon has of course more important stuff to do and Northern Lords obviously did not care about your "super Bran" rules.

        Loading editor
    • 79.231.101.41 wrote:
      It's really funny to see some people still "predicting" the future of the series although they were wrong with everything about Jon.

      Jon did already warg in the books and it is more than likely that Jon has this ability in the show as well. He probably already did it but couldn't remember after he returned into his body. GRRM also confirmed that Daenerys was not always immune to all kinds of fire. So it will be a sad moment for you when dragon fire will confirm that Jon has dragon't blood because he was born in the blood of his dieing mother (like Tyrion and Tyrion's half-sister Dany)

      Please continue with ur funny dreams. This is even more funny like people predicting Jon would ever stay at the Night's Watch or never come back last year.

      Let's look at my prediction list:

      Jon dieing and brought back - released from his oath - happened

      Jon becoming king - 1/7 already happened

      Jon being a Targaryen as well as a Stark - confirmed

      Jon being the prince who was LITERALLY promised by his mother - confirmed

      Jon riding Viserion and becoming immune against fire - more than likely

      Looks not that bad until now

      The Lordship of Winterfell will never be adressed as an issue during the last 13 episodes because King Jon has of course more important stuff to do and Northern Lords obviously did not care about your "super Bran" rules.

      "It's funny to see some people "predicting" the future of the series although they were wrong with everything about Jon."

      It doesn't take much to predict where this show is going.

      "Jon did already warg in the books.."

      But in six seasons, he hasn't warged ONCE! Nor has Arya. So why would you expect it now?

      "So it will be a sad moment for you..."

      I think I can live with it.

      "...when dragon't(?) fire will confirm that Jon was born in the blood of his dieing(sic) mother (like Tyrion and his half-sister Dany)."

      In Season One, Jon was BURNT by a lantern when he killed a wight. In the same season, Tyrion felt pain from a naked flame when he was having a little game with Shae, who he had just met. So this "sad moment" won't be coming! Sorry!

      Everyone knew that Jon was going to be resurrected! Everyone KNEW that Jon was the lovechild of Rhaegar Targaryen and Lyanna Mormont. It's been an open secret for years.

      Jon being the King in the North, if anything, looks like a contrivance by the show creators. In the book, most of the Northern lords don't seem to be aware of Robb's will to legitimze Jon Snow and name him his heir. Not only that, but an Ironborn named Wex survived the Bolton sack of Winterfell, and saw the departures of Bran and Rickon. He communicated this information to Wyman Manderly of White Harbor, who dispatches Davos Seaworth to the island Skagos to find Rickon. So in the books at least, they know that Bran and Rickon are alive, so Robb's will would be redundant. The same will they decided not to include in the TV version. So Jon's acclamation as king looks like a desperate act of a people who need a leader. They choose Jon because they BELIEVE that he's Ned's son, and they need a king because they no longer want to serve the Iron Throne. Trouble is that Jon's untested as a ruler. It was Jon's fault that the Battle of the Bastards was almost a defeat, and if these Northern lords were there to see it, they might have thought differently about electing him as their overlord.

      "Jon being the prince was LITERALLY promised by his mother - confirmed."

      No, she asked Ned to promise her - to keep Jon safe. That which you pass off a "evidence" is clutching at straws. Plenty of people think it's Daenerys ("The dragon must have three heads...but I am too old to be one of them. I should be with her, showing her the way, but my body has betrayed me." - Maester Aemon).

      Jon's "important things to do" involves marshalling the Northern forces for the imminent White Walker attack. A job he can do without being their king.

      "The Lordship of Winterfell will never be addressed as an issue..."

      I think Kit Harington and Sophie Turner suggested the opposite was true in recent interviews.

        Loading editor
    • U probably also believed them when they "explained" that Jon won't come back. lol

      "Everyone KNEW that Jon was the lovechild of Rhaegar Targaryen and Lyanna Mormont."

      Yeah. That's why Lady Mormomnt made him king. lol

      -> Just an example of how you pick out parts of a post and ignore parts which falsify ur theories.

      I already explained that GRRM confirmed that also Dany was not immune to all kinds of fire before she met the dragons. After The White Wolf has bound with the white dragon, fire won't be able to harm him.

      Jon's fate is to lead whole Westeros as king against the White Walkers. That's why Peeping Tom had two visions about the Tower of Joy.

      By the way he was made king because he has Ned Stark's blood and they refered to the scene when Ned tells him "You have not my name but my blood" They did not give a flying f about Sansa being Ned's legitimate daughter. They also won't give a flying f about Bran, who is obviously not able to lead people, being alive.

      It was already spoiled that season 7 will not be about the war against the WW but season 8. For some reason King Jon will head to King's Landing. Probably because littlefinger tries to deliver Sansa to Cersei like he promised. Bran seems to have nearly as much scenes as in season 5 (lol) and Viserion will reveal Jon's secret before Bran arrives to tell them more about it.

        Loading editor
    • 79.231.101.41 wrote:
      U probably also believed them when they "explained" that Jon won't come back. lol

      "Everyone KNEW that Jon was the lovechild of Rhaegar Targaryen and Lyanna Mormont."

      Yeah. That's why Lady Mormomnt made him king. lol

      -> Just an example of how you pick out parts of a post and ignore parts which falsify ur theories.

      I already explained that GRRM confirmed that also Dany was not immune to all kinds of fire before she met the dragons. After The White Wolf has bound with the white dragon, fire won't be able to harm him.

      Jon's fate is to lead whole Westeros as king against the White Walkers. That's why Peeping Tom had two visions about the Tower of Joy.

      By the way he was made king because he has Ned Stark's blood and they refered to the scene when Ned tells him "You have not my name but my blood" They did not give a flying f about Sansa being Ned's legitimate daughter. They also won't give a flying f about Bran, who is obviously not able to lead people, being alive.

      It was already spoiled that season 7 will not be about the war against the WW but season 8. For some reason King Jon will head to King's Landing. Probably because littlefinger tries to deliver Sansa to Cersei like he promised. Bran seems to have nearly as much scenes as in season 5 (lol) and Viserion will reveal Jon's secret before Bran arrives to tell them more about it.


      "U probably believed them when the "explained" that Jon won't be coming back, lol."

      Uh no, genius! I said "everybody knew he was coming back"! I remember what I said, so keep your dishonest strawmen to yourself!

      "Yeah. That's why Lady Mormont made him king. lol"

      You think he's King in the North because he's Rhaegar and Lyanna Stark's child? FFS, you're special! He's either King in the North, or King of the Seven Kingdoms, but he can't be both! The Northerners didn't aclaim him king just so he can sit on the Iron Throne, with their help! They specifically wanted independence from the south. This would be a conflict of interest for them!

      "> Just an example how you out parts of a post and ignore parts which falsify ur theories."

      Yeah, it must be why I leave the FULL QUOTES OF THE OTHER PERSON ABOVE IN MY OWN POSTS! Are you blind?!

      "I already told you that GRRM confirmed that Dany was also not immune to all kinds of fire before she met the Dragons."

      Dany, in the pilot episode, was impervious to the heat of her scalding hot bath she took before she met Khal Drogo. Later in the First Season, she picked up one of the dragon eggs she left on a brazier. Irri took it out of her hands, scalding herself. But then she noticed Dany's hands were unmarked. Regardless of whether Jon rides a dragon or not, he's demonstrably not immune to extreme heat, unlike Dany.

      "Jon's fate is to lead the rest of Westeros as king against the White Walkers.."

      Not if Daenerys and/or Cersei have anything to say about it. Jon only has the North and the Vale on his side (the latter depends on how long Littlefinger co-operates with him).

      "..That's why Peeping Tom had two visions of the Tower of Joy."

      The first part of the vision was merely the backdrop of Bran's own storyline. They saved the revelation about Jon till last. And as far as Jon being named King in the North right after, this revelation doesn't exactly work in his favour, especially when his new subjects find out he's really a Targaryen; whom the Northerners have no wish to be bowing the knee to again.

      "They won't give a flying f about Bran, who is obviously not able to lead people, being alive(?)"

      They will if they knew who he was. And as a greenseer-king, he can predict what the White Walkers do, and confound their movements at every turn. He doesn't need to personally lead cavalry charges or shield wall phalanxes.

      That last paragraph was just gibberish. There is no reason for Jon to go to King's Landing (uh, White Walkers, remember?). Littlefinger handing Sansa over to Queen Cersei? It will by now be common knowledge that Littlefinger led the Knights of the Vale to House Stark's aid! The same man who "promised" Cersei that he'll take Winterfell for House Lannister also noted how that woman was losing power by the day. And I'm sure he'll be aware of just how many noble houses have turned against Cersei since her latest escapade, so he has no future hitching his wagon to House Lannister.

      "..and Viserion will reveal Jon's secret before Bran arrives to tell them more about."

      Huh?!? Viserion, THE DRAGON, will "reveal Jon's secret"? Viserion the dragon will gnash his teeth, belch fire, and fly with his brothers. It has no more idea who Jon is, any more than Drogon, Rhaegal or the Mother of frigging Dragons herself!

      You're clutching at straws, again!

        Loading editor
    • U are really a genius because u are able to predict that series stuff will never happen in the books and book stuff will never happen in the series - because u do not like it. Did work great until now - Didn't it?

      But I'm convinced. Bran is clearly the Greenseer-Queen like Neville Longbottom is the choosen one in Harry Potter. Bran will just greensee everything and then he will marry Gendry because the two mvps who have so much important scenes together are clearly the most important guys.

        Loading editor
    • "I can greensee"

      "Oh, really little wizard? Then we will make you immediately Queen."

        Loading editor
    • 79.231.101.41 wrote:

      Kai200995 wrote:

      189.70.43.19 wrote: No, Jon is not the lord of house stark/winterfell. Robb was king of the trident, but Edmure was still the Lord of Riverrrun and Lord Paramount of the Trident. Robb was Edmure's king and ruled from the Riverrun castle for quite a while, but that was never his castle. The same thing goes for Jon. He'll probably rule from Winterfell because it is the "capitol" of the north and well, it is kinda his home too. But the castle and lady/lordship belongs to sansa, until bran comes along.

      Thank you! It's so simple to understand this, but people are going fanboy/girl crazy to the point they aren't thinking. I personally think Jon is more of Ned Stark than his other siblings, but its clear that Sansa is Lady/Lord of Winterfell and House Stark, for these reasons above.

      This does actually not realy matter because Jon will find out that he is the Lord of another House. In the end some Stark will be warden in the North and Jon Targaryen will still be their king.

      How do you think that will play out? The North isn't strong enough or concerned with the Iron Throne, and that is Jon's current army. No to mention Jon probably will not care. He never wanted anything to do with the politics of the kingdoms after he found out about the white walkers. Claiming the iron throne essentially will not benefit him, saving Winterfell with Sansa was. He was literally forced in ALL of his formal leadership roles.

      On the other hand this discussion is about the Lord of House Stark/Winterfell and Jon's role in it. The contributor I quoted above basically just explained the situation, and no one will listen because their fantasy and fanfiction dreams basically came to life when Jon was named King in the North, and they want to fight anything that might compromise it. This is coming from a Jon Snow fan.

        Loading editor
    • Kai200995 wrote:

      79.231.101.41 wrote:

      Kai200995 wrote:

      189.70.43.19 wrote: No, Jon is not the lord of house stark/winterfell. Robb was king of the trident, but Edmure was still the Lord of Riverrrun and Lord Paramount of the Trident. Robb was Edmure's king and ruled from the Riverrun castle for quite a while, but that was never his castle. The same thing goes for Jon. He'll probably rule from Winterfell because it is the "capitol" of the north and well, it is kinda his home too. But the castle and lady/lordship belongs to sansa, until bran comes along.

      Thank you! It's so simple to understand this, but people are going fanboy/girl crazy to the point they aren't thinking. I personally think Jon is more of Ned Stark than his other siblings, but its clear that Sansa is Lady/Lord of Winterfell and House Stark, for these reasons above.
      This does actually not realy matter because Jon will find out that he is the Lord of another House. In the end some Stark will be warden in the North and Jon Targaryen will still be their king.
      How do you think that will play out? The North isn't strong enough or concerned with the Iron Throne, and that is Jon's current army. No to mention Jon probably will not care. He never wanted anything to do with the politics of the kingdoms after he found out about the white walkers. Claiming the iron throne essentially will not benefit him, saving Winterfell with Sansa was. He was literally forced in ALL of his formal leadership roles.

      On the other hand this discussion is about the Lord of House Stark/Winterfell and Jon's role in it. The contributor I quoted above basically just explained the situation, and no one will listen because their fantasy and fanfiction dreams basically came to life when Jon was named King in the North, and they want to fight anything that might compromise it. This is coming from a Jon Snow fan.

      OMG so many Jon Snow/King fans and their fantasies, it's actually causing a headache to read what "Wikia Contributors" are posting.

        Loading editor
    • Kai200995 wrote:

      How do you think that will play out? The North isn't strong enough or concerned with the Iron Throne, and that is Jon's current army. No to mention Jon probably will not care. He never wanted anything to do with the politics of the kingdoms after he found out about the white walkers. Claiming the iron throne essentially will not benefit him, saving Winterfell with Sansa was. He was literally forced in ALL of his formal leadership roles.

      For some experts it was impossible that Jon leaves the Night's Watch. It was impossible that he becomes king in the North. He did neither want to become Lord Commander or be brought back from the dead nor did he want to become king of anything. Now the man who had no chance to become king already is one...

      He again will not want to sit on the Iron Throne and he again will not need the biggest army. But he would go South if one of his cousins is in danger.

      Let's look who's already with the dragons:

      Tyrion - one of Jon's best friends

      Theon - The man who owes Jon more than anyone

      And then there's Sam in the South  now. Where could Jorah Mormont, son of a Lord Commander of the Night's Watch, find a cure? Which other secrets could be hidden at Oldtown if there arrived a Raven about the second marriage of the crown prince?

      When Dany fails and probably dies (the true enemie brings the storm, Euron is the storm), there could be three important advisors who do not just know who but also what a person Jaehaerys Targaryen is. and there will also be the guy who was the first man to kill a White Walker since 1.000 years.

      There are as much hints in the books for Jon riding a dragon as there are for the confirmed fact that Jon is the son of Rhaegar. But of course his haters are still able to find hundreds of senseless "arguments"...

        Loading editor
    • 79.231.101.41 wrote:
      U are really a genius because u are able to predict that series stuff will never happen in the books and book stuff will never happen in the series - because u do not like it. Did work great until now - Didn't it?

      But I'm convinced. Bran is clearly the Greenseer-Queen like Neville Longbottom is the choosen one in Harry Potter. Bran will just greensee everything and then he will marry Gendry because the two mvps who have so much important scenes together are clearly the most important guys.


      Yeah, whatever, just muddy the waters!

        Loading editor
    • Greenseer-Queen Bran - How is Tyrion - one of Jon's best friends? because the travelled together on the way to the Wall when Jon was joining the Nights Watch? Outside of that, Jon hasn't been around Tyrion.

      And Theon - The man who owes Jon more than anyone? What does Theon owe Jon? Theon caused the downfall of Wintefell and caused it to fall into the hands of the Boltons but does that mean Theon owes Jon more than anyone?

      Please give more details...

        Loading editor
    • Jon became one of Tyrion's closest friends. In the books they became as close as brothers during their journey to the wall.

      Theon did treat Jon bad during childhood. Then he did betray the brother they loved both. Theon thinks that he deserves to be executed by Jon.

        Loading editor
    • They certainly developed a newfound respect for each other, but "as close as brothers"... no, that's a massive exaggeration.

        Loading editor
    • Greenseer-Queen Bran wrote:
      Jon became one of Tyrion's closest friends. In the books they became as close as brothers during their journey to the wall.

      Theon did treat Jon bad during childhood. Then he did betray the brother they loved both. Theon thinks that he deserves to be executed by Jon.


      Jon and Tyrion have not seen each other since the First Season, so they've been apart for at least three years. And considering that Jon almost deserted the Night's Watch to fight for Robb Stark, and Tyrion Lannister was on the other side of that conflict; they may not have been so chummy with each other.

      Funnily enough, Theon still refused to come to Castle Black with Sansa. He went to the Iron Islands instead. I fail to see what debt Theon owes to him.

        Loading editor
    • People who did not notice that Jon and Tyrion became close friends (another hint which implied that they are probably nephew and uncle) really fail to see things. Jon is besides Jaime the only person Tyrion likes not because he's attracted to that person or thinks he's funny. He did not like Robb but he clearly considers Jon as a friend.

        Loading editor
    • Greenseer-Queen Bran wrote:
      People who did not notice that Jon and Tyrion became close friends (another hint which implied that they are probably nephew and uncle) really fail to see things. Jon is besides Jaime the only person Tyrion likes not because he's attracted to that person or thinks he's funny. He did not like Robb but he clearly considers Jon as a friend.


      We all noticed that they were friendly to each other. But for the reasons I just explained to you, their friendship would not have been so solid after several years of not seeing each other. Not to mention that they were on opposite sides (yes, the Night's Watch were neutral, but Jon's sympathies were squarely with House Stark), their brief friendship would need some reconciling. And no, I don't think there was any hint whatsoever that they were uncle and nephew. And it is you who is "failing to see things", blinded as you are by your fanboy fantasies.

        Loading editor
    • People who did pay attention to the chapters with Tyrion know that Tyrion for sure understands why Jon was loyal to his brother. Tyrion did hate his family also for killing the family of his wife.

      Tyrion will be very proud when he hears that he's not the only "bastard" who did gain power at Westeros.

        Loading editor
    • Greenseer-Queen Bran wrote: People who did pay attention to the chapters with Tyrion know that Tyrion for sure understands why Jon was loyal to his brother. Tyrion did hate his family also for killing the family of his wife.

      Tyrion will be very proud when he hears that he's not the only "bastard" who did gain power at Westeros.

      I am pretty observant, thank you. I have read the books...completing 5 now. I have seen all the seasons at least three times and some episodes more than that. - not to mention Ive listened to countless reviews on youtube. I don't want to belabor the point, but the Tyrion and Jon's travel together didn't end with them being best buds. I think they respected each other more - but best friends is reading more into the script that what is there. But, hey - its your opinion. I think there is a tiny hint of question about Tyrion not being Tywin's son - mostly on Tywins part. I think the slightest hint of a question was thinly placed as a marker that we could look back to when the "Truth" comes out. I think its very possible that the Mad King is Tyrion's father. Not sure of the timeline of it all - but its possible and I think GRRM could 'splain it somehow.

      I don't think Tyrion hated his family for killing Sansas family - He sure didn't like it and sympathized with Sansa. He hated his father for other reasons and I think wanted Cerci to love him - but accepted that she, like their father hated him.

        Loading editor
    • Jon's friendship with Tyrion was more of respect than actual liking. Tyrion basically educated Jon that being of noble blood (and the training that comes with it) and not being criminal still doesn't make him better than anyone nor does he deserve anything. In the books that role was given to a member of the Night's Watch. Depending on Jon's time with Tyrion as an opportunity for unifying the kingdoms is unrealistic...but Beinoff and Weiss is in a rush to finish the high point of their careers the show, so they would do something like that instead of producing quality writing.

      This does relate to the topic of the discussion because Sansa, being the last Stark (for now) and her marriage to the southern Lannisters may be the one of the factors of House Stark combining their forces with House Targaryen. Imagine Daenerys commanding a court meeting with Sansa Stark the wife of her Hand, and use that opportunity to discuss an alliance and what's going on with the whitewalkers. D has 3 dragons, nobody is denying her summons.

        Loading editor
    • Dragons are not property. Soon the only surviving dragons will be bound to Jon and Tyrion.

        Loading editor
    • Jon and Tyrion respect each other, the latter sees a kindred spirit in Jon, due to both of them being outsiders.

      I think that Dany, Tyrion and Jon will ride each of the three dragons in the final battle with the White Walkers. Dany will ride Drogon, Jon will ride Rhaegal ,which will be fitting as Rhaegal is named after Jon's father, Tyrion will ride Viserion. Might go down that way or not.

        Loading editor
    • 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 while 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  people don't change their identity easily, they don't pick surnames of people they never meet. After 21 years of being called Jon Snow  he won't say " fuck I'm Jaherys Targeryen now"  lmao

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

      3/ Regarding the line of succesion/Lordship

      - Jon's identification as Ned's son played an important role in his 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 would even consider Jon as an option 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, it would be very 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 eldest 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's fault : in the book Robb legitimizes Jon, and makes him his heir which means he inherits 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 about the line of succesion 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 peacefully with Tyrion as hand of the queen, I have a question for you: are confusing GoT with some kind of Disney fiction?

        Loading editor
    • Will be interesting to see if he claims the name Stark or not.

        Loading editor
    • GaiaTanner wrote:
      2/ He won't change his name and people calling Jon/Jaherys/Aegon/Aemon Targeryen or whatever are fools

      No. They can lip read and are sure that Lyanna said "his name is ****aerys Targaryen". Jon does not need to change his name. It is already his name.

      Of course Jon will not marry his aunty. Why should he? Rhaegar says in the books that Jon IS the song of ice and fire. Aunty Dany is not that much important.

      People who think aunty Dany will survive are the people who did watch too much disney movies. Jon is the only fertile Targaryen (at least until he legitimizes Tyrion) and he will of course become Lord of House Targaryen.

        Loading editor
    • Greenseer-Queen Bran wrote:

      No. They can lip read and are sure that Lyanna said "his name is ****aerys Targaryen". Jon does not need to change his name. It is already his name.

      We don' know his birthname,  like people in Westeros and Jon himself, so he's still Jon Snow. The point of revealing Jon's birthname is to show that he has royal blood, but it doesn't mean he will use it. Adopted children don't take bacck the name their biological parents gave them, especially when they don't know who these parents were, and Jon is in this exact position. 

      - Lyanna never said Targeryen, she said " His name is xxxxxx, if he finds out you know he will kill him, you know he will, you have to protect him" ( she ony said two syllabes, you just heard what you wanted to hear). It means we still don't know if Rhaegar and Lyanna were married or not

      - Rhaegar never said in the books that Jon was the PtwP/ the Song of Ice and Fire, he was dead for months when Jon was born lol. Rhaegar always thought it was his first son Aegon, that's what he said in Danny's vision in the House of the Undyings; 

      "Rhaegar: Aegon. What better name for a king

      Elia: Will you make a song for him?

      Rhaegar: He has a song. He is the prince that was promised, and his is the song of ice and fire. There must be one more. The dragon has three heads."

      Once again you just read/heard what you wanted to read/hear, but it doesn't mean it's factual and real. Concerning Jon and Dany's possible wedding. I just hope it doesn't happen, because it's too predictable and Disney-like and not GRRM's style, but Dany seeks an alliance via a marriage, and who better than the King in the North? But I'm sure D&D will make some fanservice. 

      - You should learn how to read irony, I never said Dany will make it to the end, I said the exact  opposite actuallly...

      - I won't even try to argue wih you on Tyrion's legitimation as a Targeryen and Jon becoming Lord of House Targeryen, because:

      1/ It's still far from happening in the books or on the show

      2/ It's your own dreams, but it doesn't mean it's factual

      3/ It's only fangirling

      ‚Äč

        Loading editor
    • Is howland reed still alive? Because now if he is alive, he will be the only one who was present in the TOJ

        Loading editor
    • Yes. He and Bran are the only ones who know. Probably Meera too now.

        Loading editor
    • Godzillavkk wrote: Will be interesting to see if he claims the name Stark or not.

      Honestly, if that is the case, I'll be the first person to name him lord of House Stark and Winterfell. I just think people are jumping to conclusions because of how popular he is. HBO named Sansa Lady of Winterfell AFTER the season finale (I was checking for updates for the past three episodes), she inherited that title b/c she's the "last" Stark. As I said before if they give him the Stark name I'll be okay, but it'll suck since he earned everything by being a Snow, and he might be a royal bastard/legitimate child in the long run.

        Loading editor
    • We'll have to wait and see.

        Loading editor
    • GaiaTanner wrote:

      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 while 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  people don't change their identity easily, they don't pick surnames of people they never meet. After 21 years of being called Jon Snow  he won't say " fuck I'm Jaherys Targeryen now"  lmao

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

      3/ Regarding the line of succesion/Lordship

      - Jon's identification as Ned's son played an important role in his 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 would even consider Jon as an option 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, it would be very 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 eldest 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's fault : in the book Robb legitimizes Jon, and makes him his heir which means he inherits 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 about the line of succesion 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 peacefully with Tyrion as hand of the queen, I have a question for you: are confusing GoT with some kind of Disney fiction?

      I agree, I was coming from another perspective; he wasn't named Stark AND King in the North; he was named Jon Snow, the White Wolf (coat of arms for Stark bastards and Jon according to awoiaf), the King in the North.

      Also Robb Stark was named King of the Trident, yet his Uncle was still Lord of Riverrun and House Tully by rights and name, while Robb reigned from his castle as his king. So Jon can be King in the North and rule from Winterfell without actually being the legal head of House Stark and Winterfell. Bran is also coming back so this is going to be very interesting, since fans wont debate his claim since he's a boy, unlike Sansa.

      In the book we're not sure who's going to be left standing to hold Winterfell and how. Stannis is currently alive, Jon is dead, and I can see Sansa (if she actually marry House Arryn) take Winterfell all by her own. But! There will be another discussion of who gets Winterfell depending on the outcome of Stannis's battle and Jon's course of action.

      Legally there's still no place for legitimized bastards over trueborn heirs, meaning Jon Stark may still not have a stronger claim. Robb also legitimized Jon when Sansa was captured and powerless. Martin made it clear that Sansa is actively involved in a plot to take her claim, we don't know if she or the house of Stark/Arryn will simply ignore her claim. In the book universe they wouldn't, Women ruling their own Houses is much more common and respected in the books (especially if they're capable of giving birth to heirs or already have one), in the show the D&D purposely erased this.

        Loading editor
    • You forget that Yara has a claim to the Salt Throne and Theon is backing her. And judging by the situation, I don't think Bran has any interest in ruling unless Jon is slain somehow and Sansa refuses the crown. Honestly book worshippers beginning to sound like this https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5AvrBFlJeMs

        Loading editor
    • Godzillavkk wrote: You forget that Yara has a claim to the Salt Throne and Theon is backing her. And judging by the situation, I don't think Bran has any interest in ruling unless Jon is slain somehow and Sansa refuses the crown. Honestly book worshippers beginning to sound like this https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5AvrBFlJeMs

      I don't think Bran has any interest in ruling either, but he has to announce himself to the North if he's expecting to counter the white walkers, and the north actually remember Bran from when he ruled as the Prince of Winterfell. I don't think he's going to invoke his claim for King in the North, I was speaking of Winterfell and House Stark.

      I got that book information from general summaries from the internet I haven't even read what was being mentioned. The Salt Throne is being fought over by the Greyjoys, they don't actually pose a threat to the Starks. They pose a threat to Daenerys, especially if Euron tries to marry or unite with Cersei out of spite for being denied by Daenerys and his neice.

        Loading editor
    • Well I predict Bran will return much to everyones surprise and there will be much rejoicing (yea yea) Bran say he has no interest in ruling. Instead he could serve as the bridge that causes Daenarys to realize the WW sre comming and agree to fight them along with Jon via warging abilities. Then comes a problem which I'm surprised no one seems to be talking about... finding wintergear for the Unsullied and Dothraki because their not properly equipped for a battle in Winter.

        Loading editor
    • Godzillavkk wrote:
      You forget that Yara has a claim to the Salt Throne and Theon is backing her. And judging by the situation, I don't think Bran has any interest in ruling unless Jon is slain somehow and Sansa refuses the crown. Honestly book worshippers beginning to sound like this https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5AvrBFlJeMs


      Jon had no interest in ruling either, but the Northerners wanted their own king so badly. And when Bran returns (and is recognized and/or able to prove who he is), some Northern nobles might be eager to change their minds about who they want as King. Not only that, but Bran's going to have to tell Jon who his parents are, and Jon being Jon, would have to do the honourable thing and relinquish the Kingship to Bran. It's not about who "wants" what. It is a duty! A duty one cannot just run away from it, and Bran is the last trueborn son (the last actual son for that matter) of Eddard Stark. He MUST rule, because he has no choice. He's the last legitimate son of his own bloodline, and North exists as a kingdom because of the Stark's, and it falls to Bran to live up to his house's legacy.

      Bran also demonstrated himself to be a competent ruler, for a ten year old, from what we saw of him in Season 2. And he's the only living Stark with any experience of ruling.

        Loading editor
    • It all depends on a lot of things. Will Bran wish to claim the Kingship or not? Will Jon be willing to be King or not? What will the Lords think of this? One thing is for sure, they better resolve it quickly and without any bloodshed. In-fighting in not helpful against White Walkers an. Alternatly they could discuss this issue AFTER and IF the Walkers are defeated. Because in emergencies like the ones they are in, there's probably no time for arguing about who's king and who isn't.

        Loading editor
    • Well, like I said, being a lord or king is a duty, not just something which one can take or refuse at will. If Jon knows that he's not Ned Stark's son, then he will have zero right to be King in the North. It's one thing to have a right to the Iron Throne, but Kingship in the North is specifically tied to the Lordship of Winterfell. And if Jon is not Ned Stark's son, then it is natural that Bran should take it. It's one thing to have a birthright as a lord, but you can't just refuse. The people of the North need a ruler, and if Bran simply refuses it, they'll look for someone else, and Bran would be deprived of all status. Even if he didn't want the job, Jon and Sansa would simply force and cajole him to take it anyway, because that's how things work in their society. And unlike some commentators of this series I've read about, I don't see how being a greenseer would stand in the way of that. House Stark and its kingdom was founded by a man who was said to have used sorcery in his building projects (the Wall, Winterfell and Storm's End). Bran's abilities as a greenseer are clearly lampshaded to be part of his heritage, so it just makes him an even better fit as a king.

      If Bran is King, then Sansa and Jon would hold power anyway. Sansa would be at Bran's side, acting as his "Hand", and Jon could take up the duties of the Warden of the North. He would command the North's armies without the additional kingly responsibilities of civil governance, since Jon is a soldier and not a politician or administrator. And if they survive the war with the White Walkers, Jon would have ample opportunity to make his claim for the Iron Throne.

        Loading editor
    • Interestingly this brings up something I'm a bit worried about. Should Bran actually tell Jon the truth? Think about it, all the Stark children and Jon have been raised to believe that Rhaegar Targaryean was perverted and violent man who kidnapped Lyanna and raped her. But in addition to Jon being Rhaegar and Lyanna's son, signs have also appeared in both the books and show and Rhaegar was actually a very honorable man and he didn't kidnapp Lyanna, they actually loved eachother and tried eloping. But it's going to be tnigh impossible for Jon and Sansa to accept this unless Bran finds a way to bring them into his visions. And even if he did successfully show them, Jon and Sansa's already difficult situation might get even more difficult. And what of the Northern Bannermen? I don't know if Bran can show visions to large groups. And even if they do learn the truth, would they still acept Jon, be he King or not?

      Personally, I think it should go like this, regardless of who's King in the North and who is not. Bran either does not tell Jon anythingout of concerns for what I've types above, or he tells Jon a half-truth. In case you don't know, a half-truth is a hybrid of being truthful and lying. It's where you tell someone something, but you don't reveal EVERYTHING to them, you withold some of the infomration. If Bran told Jon that Lyanna was his mother, but DIDN'T tell him that Rhaegar was his father, and showed Jon the vison he saw, he might be able to avoid the fears I've typed above. Jon however will later learn the truth some other way though, possibly involving Daenary's.

        Loading editor
    • Godzillavkk wrote:
      Interestingly this brings up something I'm a bit worried about. Should Bran actually tell Jon the truth? Think about it, all the Stark children and Jon have been raised to believe that Rhaegar Targaryean was perverted and violent man who kidnapped Lyanna and raped her. But in addition to Jon being Rhaegar and Lyanna's son, signs have also appeared in both the books and show and Rhaegar was actually a very honorable man and he didn't kidnapp Lyanna, they actually loved eachother and tried eloping. But it's going to be tnigh impossible for Jon and Sansa to accept this unless Bran finds a way to bring them into his visions. And even if he did successfully show them, Jon and Sansa's already difficult situation might get even more difficult. And what of the Northern Bannermen? I don't know if Bran can show visions to large groups. And even if they do learn the truth, would they still acept Jon, be he King or not?

      Personally, I think it should go like this, regardless of who's King in the North and who is not. Bran either does not tell Jon anythingout of concerns for what I've types above, or he tells Jon a half-truth. In case you don't know, a half-truth is a hybrid of being truthful and lying. It's where you tell someone something, but you don't reveal EVERYTHING to them, you withold some of the infomration. If Bran told Jon that Lyanna was his mother, but DIDN'T tell him that Rhaegar was his father, and showed Jon the vison he saw, he might be able to avoid the fears I've typed above. Jon however will later learn the truth some other way though, possibly involving Daenary's.

      Howland Reed of Greywater Watch is really the only other person in that world who's aware of Jon's birth, so Meera would have to travel home to fetch him. And hopefully, Bran can demonstrate his greensight in other ways, not least his ability of warging into animals or predicting the near-future. As someone who has also inherited the knowledge of the Children of the Forest and past greenseers, Bran could put them to effective use (hammer of the waters, for instance).

      Personally, I think the fact that Prince Rhaegar had two Kingsguards at the Tower of Joy with Lyanna is an indication that she was birthing a legitimate royal. This must have occurred to both Eddard and Howland, even before they rode to the location. I doubt that Rhaegar would have used them to protect someone who was only his mistress or captive. I believe it would make more sense, even to the partisan perspectives of Jon and Sansa, that two elite, royal guards had sacrificed their lives to protect a future prince than merely guarding their master's captive for no other reason than just "orders". Especially since Rhaegar had been dead for weeks at that point.

        Loading editor
    • I am absolutely positive that Bran will tell Jon the truth, perhaps even as early as the first episode, if he makes it back to Winterfell that early. This piece of information can't just be given to us because it's a cool little fact - it will greatly impact Jon Snow's character. Since the first episode, Jon has struggled with not having the knowledge of who his mother is. How will he come to accept his true parentage? How will he look at Daenerys when she inevitably comes to Westeros? Will he have an identity crisis? Put simply, this is all gold for character struggle and development. I can't imagine Bran holding it back from Jon. (Also, it needs to be explained to the audience! There are lots of people who actually seem to think that Ned and Lyanna were in a Jaime-Cersei situation.)


      But I can imagine them holding it back from the other lords of the North, since they might not be as open-minded.

        Loading editor
    • I agree that Bran's Greenseer abilities would be very effective in the final battle against the Walkers. As for Howland Reed, it'll be a long journey for Meera since Greywater Watch is on the other side of the North. Then again, Howland might have been at Winterfell with the other lords when Jon was proclaimed King.

      Bran should reveal it to Jon in private, and if possible, through Bran's visions we should see Lyanna and Rhaegar interacting with eachother as if they were legally married so Jon learns Rhaegar was not a monster. Jon will probably ask for some alone time for him to take it in. Bran however should promise that his lips will be sealed about this.

      I wonder if Bran should reveal this to Sansa as well? Or to Arya if she ever returns home? If so, I think it should be AFTER Daenary's arrives and takes King's Landing, so they hopefully won't oppose the Kingdom of the North working with a Targaryean. Then again maybe the other Lords of the North will be unwilling to do so. If so, I can only see one solution. At least one of the Starks(Including Jon) has to say "The White Walkers are at our doorstep and are bent on killing us all! This is no time for past hatred. Because we need to assemble all the remaining armies in Westeros, and meet the Walkers."

        Loading editor
    • I assume Bran would only reveal this information to his immediate family. Arya, if she returns, will probably be told eventually. As for what Jon does later, he can simply tell the Northern lords that Bran is their true king and he's willing to serve him. And Jon would be the North's main general.

      The Wall is also a long way from the North, so they might just travel at the speed of plot for that one.

      I think Daenerys will have made it back to Westeros by Episode 7x1 in any case. Bran (assuming he's in the first episode) may be spending some time at Castle Black. With the White Walker attack, either Bran, Meera, Edd Tollett and the rest of the Night's Watch abandon Castle Black due to being overwhelmed, or a raven will be sent warning Jon of the attack, who then leads a force there to help in their defence before they're forced to abandon the castle after it's overrun, and retreat back to Winterfell.

      And speaking of the Wall (tangent alert!), unlike many people online, I doubt that the mark on Bran's arm is going to play a part in the White Walkers passing through it. In the First Season, Jon Snow had to burn a re-animated wight of the Night's Watch brother named Jafer Flowers mere hours after it had been dragged inside. Castle Black is on the south side of the Wall, behind where the magical barrier theoretically should be. So if there is magic built into the foundations, then it clearly hasn't worked in a long time. I don't even know if the White Walkers are going to use the Horn of Joramun either. I suspect that the White Walkers have made no effort to assault the Wall in six seasons because they've got all the time they need. They must be aware that most of the Wall is unmanned anyway, so they're most likely going to climb over it, much as the Free Folk have done, and spill down into Castle Black (Samwell Tarly mentioned steps built into the Wall in Season 3). Other than that, if magic was the only thing keeping them out, then why go through the monstrous expense of a 300 mile, 700 foot high wall, which was originally manned by an army of thousands?

        Loading editor
    • I also predicted the Watch would eventually abandon Castle Black. But I think their going to fight the walkers as well in the end.

        Loading editor
    • Lots of fans are hypocrites. They spend their time highlighting Jon's Targeryen heritage calling him Jon/Jaherys/Aemon Targeryen or whatever his name is but when someone challenges his tittle as KitN because he's not Ned Stark's son ( he wouldn't be elected King if the Lord knew he was the son of a Targeryen), they're like ¬†"oh but he's a Stark through is mother side, and he's more a Stark than the others and he was raised in the North blablabla". But seriously the day the truth is revealed ( it's doubful but just imagine). Who will they follow Jon or Bran?¬†

      They chose a bastard over a trueborn girl, which is somehow understandable, because the North is a military society and they needed a leader. However they won't choose a Targeryen over a Stark. And let's hope LF learns none of that because he will fcertainly fuck everything up with this bomb

        Loading editor
    • I think you guys are missing the most important aspect of Jon getting hailed the King In the North. The Northmen are essentially writing/rewriting the rulebook and laws as they are going along. The current rules of succession came from the Iron Throne and might also have been sanctioned by the Faith of the Seven. European Monarchs, for example, used to need a special bottle of oil from the Vatican to "anoint" their rulers.

      Here is the thing, the North decided to stop following the Iron Throne when they declared Robb king. Roose Bolton forced them back into the fold but you can't follow the Iron Throne and still have a King in the North. Most of them could not give two shits about the Faith of the Seven. The old gods have no priests. Last I looked, the North had no constitution. By tradition, the King in the North is named Stark. But that can be loosely interpreted to mean "the King in the North has Stark blood", which Jon undoubtedly has.

      So really, the only people who can object is Sansa, Arya and Bran. I think we can all agree that Arya and Bran who love and adore their brother would never contest his claim. If anything, they will go out of their way to take themselves out of consideration. Bran's paralysis apparently rendered him incapable of having children. That alone he can use to take himself out of consideration. Arya might be interested in leading Stark forces but she isn't going to want to be Queen of the North or Lady of Winterfell.

      Only Sansa might try something but at this point, she has NO Northern support. The Free Folk don't know her and don't care about her. She got called a Lannister and a Bolton when she was talking to House Mormont. House Mormont gave their support to Jon, not her. Lord Glover clearly thought Sansa was an entitled little shit who didn't understand how betrayed the North felt by Robb and his inability to keep a simple marriage bargain with Walder Frey. Replaying the scene, he only seemed to have received them because of Jon. So if Sansa wants to try something. She'll have to do it as an invader with the Knights of the Vale and possibly Tully forces (pretty sure Jon is going to take back the Riverlands, probably with help from Euron as a surprise twist because everybody is expecting him to ally with Cersei, next season). Which is going to go down SOOOO well in the North!

      Jon can continue to call himself Snow. Change his name to Stark or start calling himself Targaryen. At this point, it doesn't matter. They hailed him king because of who Jon is as a person. They might change their mind if one of the trueborn kids return and press their claim against his. But we know only Sansa might try that and in my opinion, she won't get far with actual Northmen!

        Loading editor
    • They didn't elect Jon for his personality lol. Hailing a bastard King is kind of unusual but in this case it's not schocking if you take the northern Lord perspective. They chose in their eyes, the brother of their late King and the last living son of their liege Lord, Ned Stark. That's exactly what Lyanna Mormont said " in his vein flows Ned Stark's blood", she didn't say "Stark blood" but she mentionned Ned Stark, therefore Jon's identification as Ned Stark's son is very important in his crowning. The knights of the Vale, especially Lord Royce, came and hailed Jon king in the remembrance of Ned Stark, because he was raised in the Valeamong them. They wouldn't did it if for the son of a Targeryen. That's why I think the revelation of his true father's identity would be problematic for everybody. And LF would seize the occasion to bring chaos and mess Sansa's head (" See how this dragon usurped your little brother's title, see how another dragon sail south to invade your country, the two dragons will certainly marry to subject the North...").

      Jon better keeps his mounth shut if he wants the North to stay united

        Loading editor
    • GaiaTanner wrote: They didn't elect Jon for his personality lol. Hailing a bastard King is kind of unusual but in this case it's not schocking if you take the northern Lord perspective. They chose in their eyes, the brother of their late King and the last living son of their liege Lord, Ned Stark. That's exactly what Lyanna Mormont said " in his vein flows Ned Stark's blood", she didn't say "Stark blood" but she mentionned Ned Stark, therefore Jon's identification as Ned Stark's son is very important in his crowning. The knights of the Vale, especially Lord Royce, came and hailed Jon king in the remembrance of Ned Stark, because he was raised in the Valeamong them. They wouldn't did it if for the son of a Targeryen. That's why I think the revelation of his true father's identity would be problematic for everybody. And LF would seize the occasion to bring chaos and mess Sansa's head (" See how this dragon usurped your little brother's title, see how another dragon sail south to invade your country, the two dragons will certainly marry to subject the North...").

      Jon better keeps his mounth shut if he wants the North to stay united

      Firstly, what do you mean he wasn't hailed because of his personality? They didn't gather at Winterfell overnight. Plus Castle Black isn't so isolated that communication is impossible. Littlefinger was able to get a message to Sansa, Ramsey could send his threat. So you can bet that every northern lord sent a messenger to Castle Black to get Jon's full history before they even showed up in Winterfell. Once they arrived in Winterfell, they also would have talked with those who had been in the battle and got a measure of things. Jon Snow is not an unknown person in the North. By the time we the viewers caught up to them, they all probably had a measure of Jon's character. Both from his time in Castle Black, and from the battle report. They hailed Jon king because he's an experienced military commander. I will bet you that if Rickon had survived, Rickon would be acknowledged as Lord of Winterfell but NOT hailed as King in the North. Lord Stark of Winterfell, does not have to be King in the North since the Iron Throne still stands. I maintain Jon was hailed because he's Jon!

      As for blood, I quote from season 1 "You might not have my name, but you have my blood," Ned Stark to Jon as he was leaving for the wall. You are getting way too hung up on the details. Ned Stark knew Jon wasn't his son but felt that him having Lyanna's blood was enough. Also, he was raised as Ned Stark's son.

      Yes, he has Targaryen blood and that might mean we might see him warging into Dragons next season. But he wasn't raised Targaryen. Jon is not Daenerys who had a loyalist treat him like a prince until the death of said loyalist. Jon didn't have a name that opened doors. Even if it was just so he could beg for food. He doesn't think or was encouraged to think he had a blood claim to the Iron Throne. By nurture, he is Ned Stark's son. A son who has proved himself to the North!

      The North isn't going to turn on him if they find out that he's half Targaryen. Indeed, that might actually get the North out of a tricky position with Daenerys. If you remember back to Robb's hailing, "It was the dragons we bent the knee too. Why shouldn't we govern ourselves now that they are gone." - That was a catalyst for why the North didn't declare for Stannis but instead opted to go with Robb. Now the north doesn't have to wrestle with any moral dilemma when Daenerys comes.

      Lastly, again, crown disputes happen when someone challenges the sovereign right to be sovereign. Sansa might but Bran and Arya won't. If Bran comes back and forfeits all his claim in favour of Jon, who is going to tell him "No! You must fight your brother for your right!" The North will be unstable if Jon turns up with a dragon is overblown, IMO. Especially since the easy, elegant solution to Jon's problem, should he have any, is simply to marry Sansa. At that point, he would be Ned Stark's nephew and his son-in-law! All problems solved!

        Loading editor
    • Tinnic wrote:

      GaiaTanner wrote: They didn't elect Jon for his personality lol. Hailing a bastard King is kind of unusual but in this case it's not schocking if you take the northern Lord perspective. They chose in their eyes, the brother of their late King and the last living son of their liege Lord, Ned Stark. That's exactly what Lyanna Mormont said " in his vein flows Ned Stark's blood", she didn't say "Stark blood" but she mentionned Ned Stark, therefore Jon's identification as Ned Stark's son is very important in his crowning. The knights of the Vale, especially Lord Royce, came and hailed Jon king in the remembrance of Ned Stark, because he was raised in the Valeamong them. They wouldn't did it if for the son of a Targeryen. That's why I think the revelation of his true father's identity would be problematic for everybody. And LF would seize the occasion to bring chaos and mess Sansa's head (" See how this dragon usurped your little brother's title, see how another dragon sail south to invade your country, the two dragons will certainly marry to subject the North...").

      Jon better keeps his mounth shut if he wants the North to stay united

      Firstly, what do you mean he wasn't hailed because of his personality? They didn't gather at Winterfell overnight. Plus Castle Black isn't so isolated that communication is impossible. Littlefinger was able to get a message to Sansa, Ramsey could send his threat. So you can bet that every northern lord sent a messenger to Castle Black to get Jon's full history before they even showed up in Winterfell. Once they arrived in Winterfell, they also would have talked with those who had been in the battle and got a measure of things. Jon Snow is not an unknown person in the North. By the time we the viewers caught up to them, they all probably had a measure of Jon's character. Both from his time in Castle Black, and from the battle report. They hailed Jon king because he's an experienced military commander. I will bet you that if Rickon had survived, Rickon would be acknowledged as Lord of Winterfell but NOT hailed as King in the North. Lord Stark of Winterfell, does not have to be King in the North since the Iron Throne still stands. I maintain Jon was hailed because he's Jon!

      As for blood, I quote from season 1 "You might not have my name, but you have my blood," Ned Stark to Jon as he was leaving for the wall. You are getting way too hung up on the details. Ned Stark knew Jon wasn't his son but felt that him having Lyanna's blood was enough. Also, he was raised as Ned Stark's son.

      Yes, he has Targaryen blood and that might mean we might see him warging into Dragons next season. But he wasn't raised Targaryen. Jon is not Daenerys who had a loyalist treat him like a prince until the death of said loyalist. Jon didn't have a name that opened doors. Even if it was just so he could beg for food. He doesn't think or was encouraged to think he had a blood claim to the Iron Throne. By nurture, he is Ned Stark's son. A son who has proved himself to the North!

      The North isn't going to turn on him if they find out that he's half Targaryen. Indeed, that might actually get the North out of a tricky position with Daenerys. If you remember back to Robb's hailing, "It was the dragons we bent the knee too. Why shouldn't we govern ourselves now that they are gone." - That was a catalyst for why the North didn't declare for Stannis but instead opted to go with Robb. Now the north doesn't have to wrestle with any moral dilemma when Daenerys comes.

      Lastly, again, crown disputes happen when someone challenges the sovereign right to be sovereign. Sansa might but Bran and Arya won't. If Bran comes back and forfeits all his claim in favour of Jon, who is going to tell him "No! You must fight your brother for your right!" The North will be unstable if Jon turns up with a dragon is overblown, IMO. Especially since the easy, elegant solution to Jon's problem, should he have any, is simply to marry Sansa. At that point, he would be Ned Stark's nephew and his son-in-law! All problems solved!

      Wish everyone would stop misspelling "Ramsay", maybe we should start misspelling "Jon" as well?

      All problems solved? Not even close - Night King is coming for Jon's head (or even better, turn him into a White Walker). Also King cannot rename himself Stark, otherwise everyone in Westeros would name themselves King.

      If what you say about Bran is true - then Stark family line is as of now DEAD (huge thanks to Ramsay Bolton for that) soon to be extinct anyway! And since only 1 Stark will survive along with 1 Lannister and 1 Targaryen in the way these series is going... Effectively those 3 will cooperatively restore Westeros to the peace it has been waiting for so long.

        Loading editor
    • Tinnic wrote:
      I think you guys are missing the most important aspect of Jon getting hailed the King In the North. The Northmen are essentially writing/rewriting the rulebook and laws as they are going along. The current rules of succession came from the Iron Throne and might also have been sanctioned by the Faith of the Seven. European Monarchs, for example, used to need a special bottle of oil from the Vatican to "anoint" their rulers.

      Here is the thing, the North decided to stop following the Iron Throne when they declared Robb king. Roose Bolton forced them back into the fold but you can't follow the Iron Throne and still have a King in the North. Most of them could not give two shits about the Faith of the Seven. The old gods have no priests. Last I looked, the North had no constitution. By tradition, the King in the North is named Stark. But that can be loosely interpreted to mean "the King in the North has Stark blood", which Jon undoubtedly has.

      So really, the only people who can object is Sansa, Arya and Bran. I think we can all agree that Arya and Bran who love and adore their brother would never contest his claim. If anything, they will go out of their way to take themselves out of consideration. Bran's paralysis apparently rendered him incapable of having children. That alone he can use to take himself out of consideration. Arya might be interested in leading Stark forces but she isn't going to want to be Queen of the North or Lady of Winterfell.

      Only Sansa might try something but at this point, she has NO Northern support. The Free Folk don't know her and don't care about her. She got called a Lannister and a Bolton when she was talking to House Mormont. House Mormont gave their support to Jon, not her. Lord Glover clearly thought Sansa was an entitled little shit who didn't understand how betrayed the North felt by Robb and his inability to keep a simple marriage bargain with Walder Frey. Replaying the scene, he only seemed to have received them because of Jon. So if Sansa wants to try something. She'll have to do it as an invader with the Knights of the Vale and possibly Tully forces (pretty sure Jon is going to take back the Riverlands, probably with help from Euron as a surprise twist because everybody is expecting him to ally with Cersei, next season). Which is going to go down SOOOO well in the North!

      Jon can continue to call himself Snow. Change his name to Stark or start calling himself Targaryen. At this point, it doesn't matter. They hailed him king because of who Jon is as a person. They might change their mind if one of the trueborn kids return and press their claim against his. But we know only Sansa might try that and in my opinion, she won't get far with actual Northmen!

      "I think you guys are missing the most important aspect of Jon getting hailed as King in the North."

      No we're not! Jon being a Targaryen on his father's side is bad for his claim to Winterfell. Jon being acclaimed King in the North over his trueborn siblings is tantamount to treason. Little Lyanna Mormont can pout and say that Jon Snow's bastardy is of no importance all she wants, but if she had any bastard siblings or cousins with extensive military backgrounds, and they thought they were more fit to rule Bear Island than she, Lady Mormont would definitely care then!

      The Northern lords are not "re-writing" any rulebook on laws of succession, that's bullshit! Nor did the Iron Throne dictate the laws of succession. Those existed centuries BEFORE the Targaryen conquest. The Northerners practice male-line primogenture within the bounds of marriage, which is quite a common form of hereditary monarchy across cultural lines. They chose Jon Snow because a) they think he's Ned Stark's son, b) because they want to be independent, and c) because because he led the army which emerged victorious at the Battle of the Bastards, even though the battle was actually won by the Knights of the Vale. They're willing to compromise with tradition in this one instance, but it would be a different story if it was their own inherited lordships which were being disputed by their bastard-kin. It was a stroke of hypocrisy for the Northern lords to choose Jon over Sansa, and it shows a lack of wisdom on their part to acclaim as their king a guy who proved himself an incompetent general in the field. They're just desperate for a leader of their newly-independent kingdom.

      We don't know how Bran will react to Jon being King. As the strongest claimant to Winterfell, it is not only Bran's birthright, but it is his responsibility to be their king. To shirk his lordly duties would be seen as selfish and cowardly. It is totally irrelevant whether Bran wants to be king. He HAS to be king. And I don't believe Jon would keep it from him either, especially when he learns who his real parents were. It would be within Jon's character to abdicate as king in Bran's favour. He doesn't even need to tell everyone the true reason; he could just tell them that Bran's their true king and he's willing to serve him. So no, I don't agree that Bran would wilfully back out of the succession. He might not want to be king, but neither he or his people would let him refuse it.

      By the way, we don't know that Bran is infertile. This sentiment was expressed by Ned's pessimism in the books, but it's obvious that they not completely sure how his extensive his paralysis is. If they truly thought Bran couldn't conceive, they would have named Rickon as Jon's heir, and not spent hours instructing Bran on administration. In any case, Daenerys is supposedly infertile after her miscarriage with Khal Drogo's child. But I've heard no one dispute her right to the Iron Throne over that issue.

        Loading editor
    • Jon Snow was acclaimed as King in the North, not as Lord of Winterfell. This is just like hat happened to Robb Stark in season 1, election by acclamation was a common practice in history until the kings started associating sons to their thrones while they were alive (i.e. having them elected king along with them so that they could succeed them). And, although they ere king and obetained the loyalties of their subjects, they didn't inherit any lands or titles along with their election.

      Therefore, Jon may be the King in the North, but he is still a bastard of House Stark. Until Bran returns, Sansa is officially the Lady of Winterfell and the head of House Stark.

        Loading editor
    • Fenrir51 wrote:

      Tinnic wrote:
      I think you guys are missing the most important aspect of Jon getting hailed the King In the North. The Northmen are essentially writing/rewriting the rulebook and laws as they are going along. The current rules of succession came from the Iron Throne and might also have been sanctioned by the Faith of the Seven. European Monarchs, for example, used to need a special bottle of oil from the Vatican to "anoint" their rulers.

      Here is the thing, the North decided to stop following the Iron Throne when they declared Robb king. Roose Bolton forced them back into the fold but you can't follow the Iron Throne and still have a King in the North. Most of them could not give two shits about the Faith of the Seven. The old gods have no priests. Last I looked, the North had no constitution. By tradition, the King in the North is named Stark. But that can be loosely interpreted to mean "the King in the North has Stark blood", which Jon undoubtedly has.

      So really, the only people who can object is Sansa, Arya and Bran. I think we can all agree that Arya and Bran who love and adore their brother would never contest his claim. If anything, they will go out of their way to take themselves out of consideration. Bran's paralysis apparently rendered him incapable of having children. That alone he can use to take himself out of consideration. Arya might be interested in leading Stark forces but she isn't going to want to be Queen of the North or Lady of Winterfell.

      Only Sansa might try something but at this point, she has NO Northern support. The Free Folk don't know her and don't care about her. She got called a Lannister and a Bolton when she was talking to House Mormont. House Mormont gave their support to Jon, not her. Lord Glover clearly thought Sansa was an entitled little shit who didn't understand how betrayed the North felt by Robb and his inability to keep a simple marriage bargain with Walder Frey. Replaying the scene, he only seemed to have received them because of Jon. So if Sansa wants to try something. She'll have to do it as an invader with the Knights of the Vale and possibly Tully forces (pretty sure Jon is going to take back the Riverlands, probably with help from Euron as a surprise twist because everybody is expecting him to ally with Cersei, next season). Which is going to go down SOOOO well in the North!

      Jon can continue to call himself Snow. Change his name to Stark or start calling himself Targaryen. At this point, it doesn't matter. They hailed him king because of who Jon is as a person. They might change their mind if one of the trueborn kids return and press their claim against his. But we know only Sansa might try that and in my opinion, she won't get far with actual Northmen!

      "I think you guys are missing the most important aspect of Jon getting hailed as King in the North."

      No we're not! Jon being a Targaryen on his father's side is bad for his claim to Winterfell. Jon being acclaimed King in the North over his trueborn siblings is tantamount to treason. Little Lyanna Mormont can pout and say that Jon Snow's bastardy is of no importance all she wants, but if she had any bastard siblings or cousins with extensive military backgrounds, and they thought they were more fit to rule Bear Island than she, Lady Mormont would definitely care then!

      The Northern lords are not "re-writing" any rulebook on laws of succession, that's bullshit! Nor did the Iron Throne dictate the laws of succession. Those existed centuries BEFORE the Targaryen conquest. The Northerners practice male-line primogenture within the bounds of marriage, which is quite a common form of hereditary monarchy across cultural lines. They chose Jon Snow because a) they think he's Ned Stark's son, b) because they want to be independent, and c) because because he led the army which emerged victorious at the Battle of the Bastards, even though the battle was actually won by the Knights of the Vale. They're willing to compromise with tradition in this one instance, but it would be a different story if it was their own inherited lordships which were being disputed by their bastard-kin. It was a stroke of hypocrisy for the Northern lords to choose Jon over Sansa, and it shows a lack of wisdom on their part to acclaim as their king a guy who proved himself an incompetent general in the field. They're just desperate for a leader of their newly-independent kingdom.

      We don't know how Bran will react to Jon being King. As the strongest claimant to Winterfell, it is not only Bran's birthright, but it is his responsibility to be their king. To shirk his lordly duties would be seen as selfish and cowardly. It is totally irrelevant whether Bran wants to be king. He HAS to be king. And I don't believe Jon would keep it from him either, especially when he learns who his real parents were. It would be within Jon's character to abdicate as king in Bran's favour. He doesn't even need to tell everyone the true reason; he could just tell them that Bran's their true king and he's willing to serve him. So no, I don't agree that Bran would wilfully back out of the succession. He might not want to be king, but neither he or his people would let him refuse it.

      By the way, we don't know that Bran is infertile. This sentiment was expressed by Ned's pessimism in the books, but it's obvious that they not completely sure how his extensive his paralysis is. If they truly thought Bran couldn't conceive, they would have named Rickon as Jon's heir, and not spent hours instructing Bran on administration. In any case, Daenerys is supposedly infertile after her miscarriage with Khal Drogo's child. But I've heard no one dispute her right to the Iron Throne over that issue.

      Why do you keep ignoring Jon's extensive history? He was the goddamn commander of the goddamn Night's Watch! Jon's history did not start with the Battle of Bastards. Also, incompetent general in the field? You think those Northern lords, almost all of whom did not join the Stark's this time around because they lost family under Robb Stark are going to hold it against Jon that he lost it after watching Rickon get butchered? I don't think you understand the North if you think THAT is a problem with the Northern bannermen. If anything, it shows Jon's character because despite Rickon being the Trueborn, Jon did everything he could to try and save his brother. This showed them that Jon wasn't trying to seize power. He really, truly just wanted to save his family and free the people of Winterfell from the tyranny of the Boltons.

      Jon fell for a psychological trap that involved his brother. Most of the Northern lords sitting there would fall for it too and they know it! It's easy being an armchair general and going "You idiot!" but people wouldn't wage psychological warfare unless they were effective. Let's also be clear here. Even Tywin Lannister would have fallen for that trap had it been Jamie who had been made to run while a psycho tried to shoot him down. Hell, Cersei would have fallen for that too for any of her children or Jamie! Jamie himself would do that for Tyrion and the rest of his family! Book Stannis, Renley, The Martells, The Tyrells, pretty much everybody in those houses has someone they loved enough to try and rescue at all costs.

      Ramsay's trick wouldn't have worked on Daenerys. But that's because she literally has no one she loves enough to cause a reaction like that. But honestly, remember that Brandon Stark strangled himself trying to save his father from the Mad King! True Starks are expected to act how Jon did. The fact that Sansa is now cold blooded enough to sacrifice both Jon and Rickon is a good sign she has completely sacrificed her identity as a Stark in ordered to survive. You might admire that. But that's something that would turn the stomach of most Northmen.

      Bad'Wolf wrote: Jon Snow was acclaimed as King in the North, not as Lord of Winterfell. This is just like hat happened to Robb Stark in season 1, election by acclamation was a common practice in history until the kings started associating sons to their thrones while they were alive (i.e. having them elected king along with them so that they could succeed them). And, although they ere king and obtained the loyalties of their subjects, they didn't inherit any lands or titles along with their election.

      Therefore, Jon may be the King in the North, but he is still a bastard of House Stark. Until Bran returns, Sansa is officially the Lady of Winterfell and the head of House Stark.

      This! So much this! Of course, at this point, Jon can claim the land of the Boltons, Karstaks and Umbers as his own. But that's not here or there! Jon's goal at the moment is to forge alliances and bring people together to stand against the Night King. Assuming he survives and only if he survives that any issue of his "seat of power", who inherits his title or anything like that even becomes an issue!

        Loading editor
    • Tinnic wrote: Why do you keep ignoring Jon's extensive history? He was the goddamn commander of the goddamn Night's Watch! Jon's history did not start with the Battle of Bastards. Also, incompetent general in the field? You think those Northern lords, almost all of whom did not join the Stark's this time around because they lost family under Robb Stark are going to hold it against Jon that he lost it after watching Rickon get butchered? I don't think you understand the North if you think THAT is a problem with the Northern bannermen. If anything, it shows Jon's character because despite Rickon being the Trueborn, Jon did everything he could to try and save his brother. This showed them that Jon wasn't trying to seize power. He really, truly just wanted to save his family and free the people of Winterfell from the tyranny of the Boltons.

      Jon fell for a psychological trap that involved his brother. Most of the Northern lords sitting there would fall for it too and they know it! It's easy being an armchair general and going "You idiot!" but people wouldn't wage psychological warfare unless they were effective. Let's also be clear here. Even Tywin Lannister would have fallen for that trap had it been Jamie who had been made to run while a psycho tried to shoot him down. Hell, Cersei would have fallen for that too for any of her children or Jamie! Jamie himself would do that for Tyrion and the rest of his family! Book Stannis, Renley, The Martells, The Tyrells, pretty much everybody in those houses has someone they loved enough to try and rescue at all costs.

      Ramsay's trick wouldn't have worked on Daenerys. But that's because she literally has no one she loves enough to cause a reaction like that. But honestly, remember that Brandon Stark strangled himself trying to save his father from the Mad King! True Starks are expected to act how Jon did. The fact that Sansa is now cold blooded enough to sacrifice both Jon and Rickon is a good sign she has completely sacrificed her identity as a Stark in ordered to survive. You might admire that. But that's something that would turn the stomach of most Northmen.


      Bad'Wolf wrote: Jon Snow was acclaimed as King in the North, not as Lord of Winterfell. This is just like hat happened to Robb Stark in season 1, election by acclamation was a common practice in history until the kings started associating sons to their thrones while they were alive (i.e. having them elected king along with them so that they could succeed them). And, although they ere king and obtained the loyalties of their subjects, they didn't inherit any lands or titles along with their election.

      Therefore, Jon may be the King in the North, but he is still a bastard of House Stark. Until Bran returns, Sansa is officially the Lady of Winterfell and the head of House Stark.

      This! So much this! Of course, at this point, Jon can claim the land of the Boltons, Karstaks and Umbers as his own. But that's not here or there! Jon's goal at the moment is to forge alliances and bring people together to stand against the Night King. Assuming he survives and only if he survives that any issue of his "seat of power", who inherits his title or anything like that even becomes an issue!

      I don't care if Jon was in the Night's Watch, charging at the enemy army BY YOURSELF, with no planning is an act of INCOMPETENCE! Call me an "armchair general" all you like, but it's true! As a former commander of the Night's Watch, Jon should have known better. He did fall into a psychological trap set by Ramsay, but Sansa warned him about that the night before. And since his act cost him the lives of most of his own cavalry, which were loaned to him by the few Northern lords whom supported him, they're not going to be so easy to replace! Even Davos Seaworth and Tormund Giantsbane thought he was being foolish.

      Sansa knows Ramsay enough to realize what he'll do with Rickon. Her coldness on the matter does not mean she "sacrificed her identity as a Stark. This No True Scotsman fallacy you're applying to the Starks is just dumb! And don't presume to tell me I admire that that when I don't!

      Robb Stark was acclaimed King in the North because he was already their feudal superior to begin with. Belonging to the same dynasty which has ruled the North for thousands of years, it was more of a confirmation of his status than an election.

      The inheritance of Winterfell and the Kingship of the North are not "tiny issues"! Just because such things don't matter to you as an outsider, doesn't mean it should be irrelevant to the characters as well! Stannis and Renly waged war with the Lannisters over who the true king is. Daenerys is leading an armada to Westeros for the purpose of placing HERSELF on the Iron Throne! The North is not a democracy, and they don't choose their kings for their generalship (or lack thereof in Jon's case). Jon is a false king both due to his supposed bastardy, and because he's a Targeryan on his fathers side.

      There's a fan theory out there stating that Tyrion is the secret lovechild of King Aerys and Joanna Lannister. I personally don't believe it, but if this is true then he has no claim to Casterly Rock. As a paternal Targaryen, Jon has as much right to Winterfell as Joffrey and Tommen (both Jaime's natural sons) had to the Iron Throne. I don't care if Jon takes after Ned more than his other children. I don't give a shit if people think that Jon is the most Starkiest Stark whom ever Starked! Okay? Total irrelevance, and not a reason to make someone your king. The Northerners did not choose Jon for his "character"! Being the "son" of Ned Stark was the real clincher here. And if Jon really did take after his (step)father, he wouldn't have jeopardized his entire army in a moment of rage!

      In a feudal society like Westeros, kings need their own lands and holdings apart from that of their vassals. Many vassals might be lords because they owe their estates to their rulers whom granted them those lands. But some vassals had already ruled their lands independently before they submitted to the authority of a more powerful king. The Starks have always ruled Winterfell. They may have given their allegiance to House Targaryen once, but Winterfell was ALWAYS theirs. They even built the castle and settled its lands. Winterfell is to the kings in the North what Paris and the surrounding "Ile-de-France" region was to the Medieval French kings: the royal demesne! King's Landing and the surrounding province of the Crownlands is the "Ile-de-France" of Westeros, because they're the personal holdings of the king. Without which he would be at the mercy of his landholding vassals. If Jon is King in the North, that should also make him the official Lord of Winterfell. If he has no holdings, no capital, then his office as king has no meaning.

        Loading editor
    • Tinnic wrote:

      Ramsay's trick wouldn't have worked on Daenerys. But that's because she literally has no one she loves enough to cause a reaction like that. But honestly, remember that Brandon Stark strangled himself trying to save his father from the Mad King! True Starks are expected to act how Jon did. The fact that Sansa is now cold blooded enough to sacrifice both Jon and Rickon is a good sign she has completely sacrificed her identity as a Stark in ordered to survive. You might admire that. But that's something that would turn the stomach of most Northmen.

      Sansa and Arya will have a showdown sometime very soon, if Sansa's plot will work out (I mean it really should - they kept her alive for so long). And all of this was leading her up to this - To finally stop ACTING like a STARK.

        Loading editor
    • Thank you Fenrir51 to point out Jon was not elected out of nowhere. He was choosen as Ned Stark's last male son,that's why Lyanna Mormont said "Ned Stark's blood runs though his vein", Ned Stark precisely, not another Stark. Jon would have been seen as a foreigner if they knew he was a Targeryen, an invader through his father's side. Therefore the northern lords followed the male line, they just chose a bastard over a trueborn girl, which is not surprising considering the North is a martial and rough society. The revelation of Jon's parentage weakens his claim as King, I don't think the Lords who elected him will still follow him if they knew their choice was made on a wrong basis.

        Loading editor
    • Until Season 7, Jon still has a bastard and have to change his banner to sigil the White Wolf, instead of black/grey look.

        Loading editor
    • Thats true . Bastards typically invert the colour scheme of their families sigils.(Ex:Daemon Blackfyre had a black dragon in a red backround as opposed to the Targaryen's sigil of a red dragon in a black background)

        Loading editor
    • Irritator wrote:
      Thats true . Bastards typically invert the colour scheme of their families sigils.(Ex:Daemon Blackfyre had a black dragon in a red backround as opposed to the Targaryen's sigil of a red dragon in a black background)

      An interesting note: since bastards invert the colors of the family sigil, even tho Ramsay Bolton was legitimized, his inverted sigil is a white background with an icy blue and white flayed man on a black cross. the icy blue figure reminds me of the White Walkers in the white background (snow). It doesnt really connect with Ramsay at all but it is still interesting to me

        Loading editor
    • At the end of Season 6, Jon Snow had said that their "true enemy will not wait out the storm. ¬†He brings the storm." ¬†Jon was expecting the Night King and would ready the North's defense against the White Walkers.

      My concern is what Jon did not know in the meantime.  The Night King had planted a mark on Bran Stark's arm so that he and his army could break into the Three-eyed Raven's shelter.  I fear that the Wall would not hold off the White Walkers because of Bran's mark.  What happens if Bran was revealed to be the one who led the White Walkers into the lands south of the wall?

        Loading editor
    • 61.173.73.204 wrote:
      At the end of Season 6, Jon Snow had said that their "true enemy will not wait out the storm.  He brings the storm."  Jon was expecting the Night King and would ready the North's defense against the White Walkers.

      My concern is what Jon did not know in the meantime.  The Night King had planted a mark on Bran Stark's arm so that he and his army could break into the Three-eyed Raven's shelter.  I fear that the Wall would not hold off the White Walkers because of Bran's mark.  What happens if Bran was revealed to be the one who led the White Walkers into the lands south of the wall?


      The Night King's marking on Bran isn't part of a strategy to bring down the Wall! If it was, Benjen wouldn't have needed to save Bran and Meera in the woods from a group of wights chasing after them. Hodor's sacrifice in the cave would have been meaningless if the White Walkers intended to spare Bran, just so they could send him through the Wall. Bran's inherited knowledge from the Three-eyed Raven should have a remedy for the Night King's mark, even if it did prove to be a further problem. Although the mere fact that the wights were trying to kill him disproves that notion. Furthermore, we saw in the First Season that a wight was brought into Castle Black, then became re-animated mere hours later and tried to kill Jon Snow. This incident, by itself, indicates that whatever magic is meant to be protecting the Wall is NOT working! The White Walkers and their undead army can ALREADY pass through the Wall, and they don't need Bran to fufill that need!

        Loading editor
    • If that is the case, how came Benjen ended up parting ways with Bran and Meera when they were closing into the Wall? ¬†Like you said, a wight was brought into Castle Black without anyone knowing in Season One.

        Loading editor
    • 61.173.73.204 wrote:
      If that is the case, how came Benjen ended up parting ways with Bran and Meera when they were closing into the Wall?  Like you said, a wight was brought into Castle Black without anyone knowing in Season One.


      Perhaps Benjen would have dropped dead upon passing through. But this does not alter the fact that a wight was re-animated on the OTHER SIDE of the Wall, where most of Castle Black is situated. There may be a magical field protecting the Wall, but it clearly isn't working as well as it should. The Wall is much bigger than the Cave of the Three-eyed Raven, so the structure itself is the real defensive measure, whereas as the magical wards in the Wall are clearly out of working order. The White Walkers might get in by sending their undead foot soldiers up the Wall, before re-animating them again if they collapse on the other side of the barrier. In any case, for the reasons I just mentioned, Bran is not part of the Night King's plan to come through the Wall. They came into that cave specifically to kill him, which is why they pursued them out of the cave and into the woods.

        Loading editor
    • Ramsey Bolton is the real king in the north!!!

        Loading editor
    • Maybe someone should have told Ramsay that before he died?

        Loading editor
    • I'm really annoyed that lord Frey is dead

        Loading editor
    • You're upset that that old teacherous pervert is dead? I'm happy that the orchestrators of the Red Wedding are gone and Robb is avenged.

        Loading editor
    • Ramsay Bolton was never King in the North but just Warden of the North. ¬†At some point, Ramsay appeared to be independent from the Iron Throne since Tywin Lannister's death.

      As for Walder Frey, he did deserve his death because he masterminded the Red Wedding.  At one point, it was foolish of Catelyn Stark to make that marriage contract with him at the first place.  Second, Robb Stark broke the marriage contract out of love.  Now, it's no use to debate on that subject.

      Now for the upcoming season, I doubt that Castle Black would hold off the Night King for long.  What are the chances for the Sansa, Bran, and Jon to reunite?  By the way, Arya Stark was planning to kill Cersei Lannister out of vengeance and Ser Gregor Clegane for leading brutal tortures in Harrenhal.  Would there be any survivors if the Wall fell?  Where would Samwell Tarly go if it comes to that?  

      Another fact was that Bran Stark learned how the White Walkers came into being before Samwell Tarly did.  Sometimes, secrets may not be found in books.

        Loading editor
    • 194.74.102.133 wrote:
      I'm really annoyed that lord Frey is dead


      We're probably not in agreement, but I'm more "annoyed" (which isn't really the right word in this context) in the way that he died. It just felt too much like... fan service to me. I guess I could see Arya taking out Lothar and Black Walder... maybe. But I wish that Walder Frey simply died in his sleep. The show's made a point that he's getting quite old, and it would really continue the "harsh reality" that the show's put forward: not all evil people are punished, and not everyone is avenged. There isn't always justice.

      Of course, I think Walder would have a "post-humous" punishment: with his death, and presumably Lothar, Black Walder, and Stevron(?), House Frey will descend into chaos without a proper line of succession. Ultimately, it could return to a status quo ante bellum. The Red Wedding was all for nothing but a few short years of serving as Lords Paramount over a region that they hardly could claime rule over in the first place. It's definitely a stain on their legacy. Same for the Boltons too, for that matter. They ruled the North for a few short years and ultimately were driven to extinction.

        Loading editor
    • The acclamation of Jon Snow as King in the North was more like explicit fan-service, to me as well. And while I agree that Walder Frey is a rare, unashamedly villainous character, he's ultimately small fry in the game of Westerosi politics and has basically outlived his usefulness in the story.

        Loading editor
    • Fenrir51 wrote:
      The acclamation of Jon Snow as King in the North was more like explicit fan-service, to me as well. And while I agree that Walder Frey is a rare, unashamedly villainous character, he's ultimately small fry in the game of Westerosi politics and has basically outlived his usefulness in the story.

      I don't disagree. All I'm saying is that I wasn't really a fan in the manner that he died, that's all. I think it would have been better if he simply died in his sleep. Thus, House Frey descends into chaos (if Lothar, Black Walder, and Stevron all died too).

      I'm also inclined to agree with you about Jon Snow, but with the reveal of his heritage, it almost feels... natural to me, in a strange sort of way. Not that the Targaryens were the Kings in the North, of course, but they were kings.

        Loading editor
    • Being the descendant of House Stark through the female-line, Jon's claim is weaker than it would have been if he truly was Ned's bastard. Trueborn or illegitimate, Jon has a much stronger claim to the Iron Throne than he does to Winterfell. The Targaryens, in their capacity as Kings of the Andals, Rhoynar and the First Men, were kings of the North, but they were not Kings in the North, which was a title created and inherited by the Starks. They had separately-crafted institutions of rulership. Even when Torrhen Stark abdicated as king and gave his allegiance to Aegon the Conqueror, his family still enjoyed the direct allegiance of every noble house in the North. When he finds out, Jon cannot tell anyone he's a Targaryen by birth. And to prevent further problems down the road, I think he should abdicate as king in favour of Bran and accept the position of Warden of the North, allowing him to lead his country in war rather than being burdened by all the other responsibilities of being its king.

        Loading editor
    • Bran will become latrine captain in the North.

      King Jon: "As you all know too well, it's long past time to dig a new latrine pit. Lady Sansa and I have decided to appoint a latrine captain to oversee this crucial task. Bran. Seems like a good job for the son of a Tully ginger."

      It is known.

        Loading editor
    • Jon Snow is going to repeat his own performance at the Battle of the Bastards and charge like a headless chicken at the White Walkers, who will kill him again. And then they will chop up his body and re-arrange it in one of those weird symbols like they did to all the other wildlings in past episodes. Jon needs Bran to warg him, like he did Hodor, in case he does something really stupid again.

      Keep digging your own latrine-pit, son!

        Loading editor
    • Fenrir51 wrote:
      Jon Snow is going to repeat his own performance at the Battle of the Bastards and charge like a headless chicken at the White Walkers, who will kill him again. And then they will chop up his body and re-arrange it in one of those weird symbols like they did to all the other wildlings in past episodes. Jon needs Bran to warg him, like he did Hodor, in case he does something really stupid again.

      Keep digging your own latrine-pit, son!

      Fully agree. King or no king, he's still a bastard who knows nothing. I cannot understand how people can like such a badly written character? There are and were several other characters who were written much better than he was and yet people didn't care and pretty much hated them in all kinds of aspects.

        Loading editor
    • Just like you know nothing? Because you never stop trolling.

        Loading editor
    • Right back at ya, troll!

        Loading editor
    • Eko is Oke wrote: Right back at ya, troll!

      Eko, when you (and only you) provoke other users at every turn, shouldn't that tell you something about your behavior?

        Loading editor
    • Well I'm not the first one to provoke anyone. Everyone is entitled to their own opinion BUT if I get criticized about it after by others then it's clearly them who have problem with me and it's obviously they who are using slurs to provoke me. Now tell me is that fair?

      Don't bother a snake and it won't bother you. Simple as

        Loading editor
    • Stop adding fuel to this guys. Godzillavk - if you don't like a comment then don't respond to it. It's that simple.

        Loading editor
    • Meera is so annoyed by Bran. So she will leave him. So Bran wargs into squirrels. Daenerys will die and marry the Night's King. Then White Walker Dany kills Bran. Bran becomes latrine captain behind the wall. Then King Jon flies on Rhaegal and destroys them with fire. (No more fire immunity for Dany since she is a White Walker.) Finally Jar-Jar Binks does marry Bran because they both have so much fans.

        Loading editor
    • Greenseer-Queen Bran wrote: Meera is so annoyed by Bran. So she will leave him. So Bran wargs into squirrels. Daenerys will die and marry the Night's King. Then White Walker Dany kills Bran. Bran becomes latrine captain behind the wall. Then King Jon flies on Rhaegal and destroys them with fire. (No more fire immunity for Dany since she is a White Walker.) Finally Jar-Jar Binks does marry Bran because they both have so much fans.

      You just made my day, sir.

        Loading editor
    • Greenseer-Queen Bran wrote: Meera is so annoyed by Bran. So she will leave him. So Bran wargs into squirrels. Daenerys will die and marry the Night's King. Then White Walker Dany kills Bran. Bran becomes latrine captain behind the wall. Then King Jon flies on Rhaegal and destroys them with fire. (No more fire immunity for Dany since she is a White Walker.) Finally Jar-Jar Binks does marry Bran because they both have so much fans.

      That jar jar plot twist is amazing

        Loading editor
    • Greenseer-Queen Bran wrote:
      Meera is so annoyed by Bran. So she will leave him. So Bran wargs into squirrels.

      Daenerys will die and marry the Night's King. Then White Walker Dany kills Bran. Bran becomes latrine captain behind the wall. Then King Jon flies on Rhaegal and destroys them with fire. (No more fire immunity for Dany since she is a White Walker.) Finally Jar-Jar Binks does marry Bran because they both have so much fans.


      You're kind of special, aren't you?!

        Loading editor
    • So, Jon Snow is the King, but no the lord of House Stark. So is assure to say that's the begginig of House Snow?!

        Loading editor
    • Everybody knows nothing. He can legitimize himself as Jon Stark or find out that he's rightful Lord of House Targaryen. We will find out after 8 months.

      Mesa just curious if Bran stays member of House Stark or joins House Binks.

        Loading editor
    • The goal of this discussion was to point out the facts of the political status of House Stark, The King In The North, and Lord of Winterfell titles.

      The fact is Jon is a bastard and was still regarded as such during the entire annointment of him as King. That means he cannot inherit his family's entitlements. He was elected as King he did not inherit it. Sansa, as a Stark, was robbed of her claim as Queen but she still inherited and earned her title as Lady of Winterfell; Only a Stark can inherit Winterfell. (The Boltons took the Castle as Wardens of the North not Lords of Winterfell; Sansa child with Tyrion was to inherit Winterfell) The title of King in The North isn't the same as Lord of Winterfell. Technically any noble family or bastard or individual capable of unifying the North (through war or purpose) can be the King in The North; That so happened to be Lords of House Stark until Jon Snow and Sansa, where the titles split for the first time. Jon Snow, a bastard with Stark Blood, united the Northern Houses in the Battle of the Bastards and after. And Sansa, the last known Stark, did the same yet she actually won the war through an alliance. So Sansa is the LoW through right and conquest. Jon is KitN through an election by the Northern Houses.

        Loading editor
    • Kai200995 wrote:
      The goal of this discussion was to point out the facts of the political status of House Stark, The King In The North, and Lord of Winterfell titles.

      The fact is Jon is a bastard and was still regarded as such during the entire annointment of him as King. That means he cannot inherit his family's entitlements. He was elected as King he did not inherit it. Sansa, as a Stark, was robbed of her claim as Queen but she still inherited and earned her title as Lady of Winterfell; Only a Stark can inherit Winterfell. (The Boltons took the Castle as Wardens of the North not Lords of Winterfell; Sansa child with Tyrion was to inherit Winterfell) The title of King in The North isn't the same as Lord of Winterfell. Technically any noble family or bastard or individual capable of unifying the North (through war or purpose) can be the King in The North; That so happened to be Lords of House Stark until Jon Snow and Sansa, where the titles split for the first time. Jon Snow, a bastard with Stark Blood, united the Northern Houses in the Battle of the Bastards and after. And Sansa, the last known Stark, did the same yet she actually won the war through an alliance. So Sansa is the LoW through right and conquest. Jon is KitN through an election by the Northern Houses.


      This is a feudal society, so even kings need land-holdings of their own to set them up alongside their vassals. It would be a bizarre arrangement if Jon was King and Sansa or Bran the reigning Lady/Lord of Winterfell. Winterfell is the ruling seat of the North, which would need to be in the king's own possession, otherwise he's just the ruler in name only. A king without a royal demesne in a society like Westeros would not have the means to receive an income from taxes from the peasantry, to recruit men-at-arms to enforce his rule or protect himself in the event of a rebellion. Not to mention that the lands of Winterfell was the very foundation for the Kingdom of the North, and all of the other important houses owed fealty to the Starks to ensure their own security. The Lordship of Winterfell and the Kingship In the North are closely-tied togther as the kingship of France was to the Countship of Paris, or the Dukedom of Normandy with the Countship of Rouen in Medieval times.

        Loading editor
    • Kai200995 wrote:The fact is Jon is a bastard and was still regarded as such during the entire annointment of him as King.

      So what? He can legitimize himself and name himself Lord of Winterfell if he wants. He can do anything because he is the king.

        Loading editor
    • Greenseer-Queen Bran wrote:
      Kai200995 wrote:The fact is Jon is a bastard and was still regarded as such during the entire annointment of him as King.
      So what? He can legitimize himself and name himself Lord of Winterfell if he wants. He can do anything because he is the king.


      Yeah, he can do anything he wants. He can even abdicate.

        Loading editor
    • He also can name Bran and Jar-Jar wardens behind the wall. Because only behind the wall at least some people know that Bran ever existed and care if he still does. Ok. Some people in the North maybe know him because they did hear stories about the Peeping Tom who was thrown out of a window.

        Loading editor
    • Greenseer-Queen Bran wrote:

      Kai200995 wrote:The fact is Jon is a bastard and was still regarded as such during the entire annointment of him as King.

      So what? He can legitimize himself and name himself Lord of Winterfell if he wants. He can do anything because he is the king.

      He doesn't need to legitimise himself, he can just make his own house. King Benedict Rivers (A Blackwood/Bracken bastard) founded House Justman

        Loading editor
    • GreyStark wrote:

      Greenseer-Queen Bran wrote:

      Kai200995 wrote:The fact is Jon is a bastard and was still regarded as such during the entire annointment of him as King.

      So what? He can legitimize himself and name himself Lord of Winterfell if he wants. He can do anything because he is the king.

      He doesn't need to legitimise himself, he can just make his own house. King Benedict Rivers (A Blackwood/Bracken bastard) founded House Justman

      I would actually love to see that happen!

        Loading editor
    • Greenseer-Queen Bran wrote:
      He also can name Bran and Jar-Jar wardens behind the wall. Because only behind the wall at least some people know that Bran ever existed and care if he still does. Ok. Some people in the North maybe know him because they did hear stories about the Peeping Tom who was thrown out of a window.


      I dread the day someone hires you as a screenplay writer.

        Loading editor
    • GreyStark wrote:

      Greenseer-Queen Bran wrote:

      Kai200995 wrote:The fact is Jon is a bastard and was still regarded as such during the entire annointment of him as King.

      So what? He can legitimize himself and name himself Lord of Winterfell if he wants. He can do anything because he is the king.

      He doesn't need to legitimise himself, he can just make his own house. King Benedict Rivers (A Blackwood/Bracken bastard) founded House Justman

      Yeah, even i was thinking the same .

        Loading editor
    • He might even keep the name Snow, possibly as a way of reminding himself about who he thinks he is.

        Loading editor
    • Greenseer-Queen Bran wrote:

      Kai200995 wrote:The fact is Jon is a bastard and was still regarded as such during the entire annointment of him as King.

      So what? He can legitimize himself and name himself Lord of Winterfell if he wants. He can do anything because he is the king.

      1. Kings and Queens can't do whatever they want without starting civil war and/or dying. Roberts Rebellion and the War of Five Kings literally proved this.

      2. Legitimizing himself doesn't make his claim stronger to the LoW title. Legitimized Bastards are last in the line of inheritance because they legally have no place in it.

      3. JON DOESNT HAVE TO BE LORD OF WINTERFELL TO BE KING IN THE NORTH! Let's repeat that.

      4. Robb was King of the Trident yet he wasn't Lord of Riverrun because he didn't have a legal claim to the land. He ruled from Riverrun's castle with the suppport of the Lord of Riverrun. Sound familiar? Jon is King In the North due to the support of the noble northern houses. He rules from the Castle of Winterfell with the consent and support of the Lady of Winterfell, even though he doesn't have a legal claim to Winterfell.

      5. Read 1, 2, 3, 4 again.

      6. I love Jon too but he'll never be the LoW or lord of House Stark until his siblings are dead or out of reach;This is the same reason Jon isn't the Lord of Bear Island: he has no legal (hereditary) over Lyanna.

        Loading editor
    • Why would Jon be lord of bear island? I think your getting your lyannas confused

        Loading editor
    • Also we don't know whether he is legitimate or not , there is no confirmation. So , is he rightful? And also , would people believe him if he says he is son of Rhaegar and Lyanna¬†?If Ned Stark revealed it , it would be believed, as Ned was an honourable man and not a man to father bastards . Also he is widely respected for his honesty. Why would he lie about that? But he is dead , so only Bran and Howland Reed know about it . If they reveal it, would the great and small lords of the realm believe it? Thats doubtful .

        Loading editor
    •   Loading editor
    • Irritator wrote:
      Also we don't know whether he is legitimate or not , there is no confirmation. So , is he rightful? And also , would people believe him if he says he is son of Rhaegar and Lyanna ?If Ned Stark revealed it , it would be believed, as Ned was an honourable man and not a man to father bastards. Also he is widely respected for his honesty. Why would he lie about that? But he is dead , so only Bran and Howland Reed know about it . If they reveal it, would the great and small lords of the realm believe it? Thats doubtful .

      As far as the North is concerned, Bran and Howland Reed don't need to tell the minor lords of the North anything, as doing so might cause an insurrection against Jon as King. They need to relate this information personally to Jon.

      Any claim to the Iron Throne that Jon has would not be in the interests of the Northern lords, who don't even want to be in the Seven Kingdoms anymore. If any of them got wind of Jon's true birth, it will sow discord among the Northern houses who will then resent Jon as a false pretender in the North.

      Convincing all the other great and small houses in the south, however, will not be as important as convincing Daenerys herself. And the worst case scenario of this would be if a paranoid Daenerys decides that Jon is a threat to her claim to the Iron Throne. Best case would be if Danerys takes him as a husband (as icky as that incestous pairing is) to preserve House Targaryen's future, and Jon can relinquish his Kingship in the North to Bran, while he rules with Daenerys in King's Landing.

        Loading editor
    • Bran won't even be in charge at Winterfell when Jon goes South. Jon names Sansa acting Lady of Winterfell and Bran will just watch when Sansa and Arya execute littlefinger.

      Meanwhile, Sam and Jorah figure out the truth about the real Lord of House Targaryen after Sam told Jorah, that the king did take revenge for the death of his father.

        Loading editor
    • Whether these are real or not, you shouldn't be spreading them around or you'll get yourself banned.

        Loading editor
    • That leak was seriously illogical so I wouldn't¬†take that seriously.

      Sansa can't be "acting" LoW when she already is. 

        Loading editor
    • I'm just wondering, what's the policy for necroposting here, I'm usually on the Rwby wiki, and we consider comments on stuff older than three months to be necroposting. Like this thread whichever is five months old

        Loading editor
    • Fenrir51 wrote:
      This is a feudal society, so even kings need land-holdings of their own to set them up alongside their vassals. It would be a bizarre arrangement if Jon was King and Sansa or Bran the reigning Lady/Lord of Winterfell. Winterfell is the ruling seat of the North, which would need to be in the king's own possession, otherwise he's just the ruler in name only. A king without a royal demesne in a society like Westeros would not have the means to receive an income from taxes from the peasantry, to recruit men-at-arms to enforce his rule or protect himself in the event of a rebellion. Not to mention that the lands of Winterfell was the very foundation for the Kingdom of the North, and all of the other important houses owed fealty to the Starks to ensure their own security. The Lordship of Winterfell and the Kingship In the North are closely-tied togther as the kingship of France was to the Countship of Paris, or the Dukedom of Normandy with the Countship of Rouen in Medieval times.

      I understand why using real life sources may seem plausible but we're talking about the Game of Thrones universe.

      As I said before, Robb was King of the Trident (Riverlands) and ruled from the ruling seat of the Riverlands, Riverrun, but that did not make him Lord of Riverrun*, that title belonged to Edmure Tully. Which parallel to the following; Jon is the King in the North, and rules from the ruling seat of the North, Winterfell, but he is not the Lord of Winterfell*, that's currently Sansa Stark. Sansa was passed over for being the monarch of the entire North, but that did not disinherit her from her seat as LoW.

      • *Even though Robb [the grandson of Hoster Tully and Jon [the bastard and last living son of Ned Stark] both were Kings of the respective regions they weren't next in line for those individual lordships. Despite the fact they can and did rule from their seats. You can be the King of the entire region but that doesnt mean you can inherit your half sister or uncle house; the rules of inheritance still apply to land.
        Loading editor
    • King Antonio Of House Quicksilver
      King Antonio Of House Quicksilver removed this reply because:
      Rather not complain on the page. But seriously... what happened to my post?
      15:30, March 11, 2017
      This reply has been removed
    • Kai200995 wrote:
      I understand why using real life sources may seem plausible but we're talking about the Game of Thrones universe.

      As I said before, Robb was King of the Trident (Riverlands) and ruled from the ruling seat of the Riverlands, Riverrun, but that did not make him Lord of Riverrun*, that title belonged to Edmure Tully. Which parallel to the following; Jon is the King in the North, and rules from the ruling seat of the North, Winterfell, but he is not the Lord of Winterfell*, that's currently Sansa Stark. Sansa was passed over for being the monarch of the entire North, but that did not disinherit her from her seat as LoW.

      • Even though Robb [the grandson of Hoster Tully and Jon [the bastard and last living son of Ned Stark] both were Kings of the respective regions they weren't next in line for those individual lordships. Despite the fact they can and did rule from their seats. You can be the King of the entire region but that doesnt mean you can inherit your half sister or uncle house; the rules of inheritance still apply to land.

      I understand that using real life sources of Medieval society for the Game of Thrones universe is a plausible means of understanding Westerosi society, precisely because JRR Martin has used it as his inspiration for his story. To pretend otherwise and come up with excuses to explain away plot inconsistencies is simply wrong.

      Robb Stark being King of the Trident as well as the North is analogous to King Edward I Plantagenet being Lord Paramount of Scotland, while Robert Balliol sat on the Scottish throne, or being Lord of Ireland while only having direct rule over the Pale of Dublin with the Lord Lieutenant of Ireland governing in his name. Even the Baratheon's and Targaryens was the direct sovereign of each of the Seven Kingdoms without owning estates in any of them. But they still had the Crownlands as their personal fiefdom. The lands of Winterfell are the bedrock of the Kingdom of the North, and Jon needed to capture Winterfell before he could rally the Northern houses to his cause. A cause his sister started.

        Loading editor
    • The lord lieutenant didn't really govern Ireland. The Irish nobility tolerated him until they say the chance to rebel. And that was pretty often (33 wars in 800 years)

        Loading editor
    • GreyStark wrote:
      The lord lieutenant didn't really govern Ireland. The Irish nobility tolerated him until they say the chance to rebel. And that was pretty often (33 wars in 800 years)


      The King of England was the "Lord of Ireland", while the Lord Lieutenant was his viceroy in the country. Although, I did say that he really only controlled the Pale of Dublin. Some of the Irish lords were Anglo-Normans who held lands in England and Wales, such as the Earl Marshals of Pembrokeshire whom also owned lands in Leinster. Those who held land on both sides of the Irish Sea tended to stay loyal and were a counterbalance to the Gaelic Irish kings that endured under English hegemony.

        Loading editor
    • Fenrir51 wrote:
      Kai200995 wrote:
      I understand why using real life sources may seem plausible but we're talking about the Game of Thrones universe.
      As I said before, Robb was King of the Trident (Riverlands) and ruled from the ruling seat of the Riverlands, Riverrun, but that did not make him Lord of Riverrun*, that title belonged to Edmure Tully. Which parallel to the following; Jon is the King in the North, and rules from the ruling seat of the North, Winterfell, but he is not the Lord of Winterfell*, that's currently Sansa Stark. Sansa was passed over for being the monarch of the entire North, but that did not disinherit her from her seat as LoW.
      • Even though Robb [the grandson of Hoster Tully and Jon [the bastard and last living son of Ned Stark] both were Kings of the respective regions they weren't next in line for those individual lordships. Despite the fact they can and did rule from their seats. You can be the King of the entire region but that doesnt mean you can inherit your half sister or uncle house; the rules of inheritance still apply to land.
      I understand that using real life sources of Medieval society for the Game of Thrones universe is a plausible means of understanding Westerosi society, precisely because JRR Martin has used it as his inspiration for his story. To pretend otherwise and come up with excuses to explain away plot inconsistencies is simply wrong.

      Robb Stark being King of the Trident as well as the North is analogous to King Edward I Plantagenet being Lord Paramount of Scotland, while Robert Balliol sat on the Scottish throne, or being Lord of Ireland while only having direct rule over the Pale of Dublin with the Lord Lieutenant of Ireland governing in his name. Even the Baratheon's and Targaryens was the direct sovereign of each of the Seven Kingdoms without owning estates in any of them. But they still had the Crownlands as their personal fiefdom. The lands of Winterfell are the bedrock of the Kingdom of the North, and Jon needed to capture Winterfell before he could rally the Northern houses to his cause. A cause his sister started

      Okay, but as I repeated 5 times already Lord of Winterfell isn't the same title as King in the North. Lord of Riverrun isn't the same title as King of the Trident.

      Robb was King of the Trident while Edmure was Lord of Riverrun

      Jon is King in the North while Sansa is Lady of Winterfell.

      It's really not that complicated. Not as complicated as who's really the Lord of House Stark; in name its Sansa, in rank its Jon [out of his siblings], by right its Bran.

      Don't get me wrong if its said in the show that Sansa is no longer Lady of Winterfell on screen or through HBOs Viewers Guide then that's it. For now Sansa is Lady of Winterfell. *Excuse the Typos*

        Loading editor
    • Kai200995 wrote: Okay, but as I repeated 5 times already Lord of Winterfell isn't the same title as King in the North. Lord of Riverrun isn't the same title as King of the Trident.

      Robb was King of the Trident while Edmure was Lord of Riverrun

      Jon is King in the North while Sansa is Lady of Winterfell.

      It's really not that complicated. Not as complicated as who's really the Lord of House Stark; in name its Sansa, in rank its Jon [out of his siblings], by right its Bran.

      Don't get me wrong if its said in the show that Sansa is no longer Lady of Winterfell on screen or through HBOs Viewers Guide then that's it. For now Sansa is Lady of Winterfell. *Excuse the Typos*

      You could repeat yourself 5000 times and you'd still miss the premise that the Kingship of the North is dependent on the possession of the estate of Winterfell, as I've just explained to you and others multiple times on this thread. Youd can't be King in the North WITHOUT being Lord of Winterfell in the same way as one can't be Lord of the Seven Kingdoms without being ruler of King's Landing.

      You can't be Lord Paramount of the Stormlands without being Lord of Storm's End.

      You can't be Lord Paramount of the Westerlands without being Lord of Casterly Rock.

      You can't be Lord Paramount of the Reach without being Lord of Highgarden.

      You can't be Prince of Dorne without being Lord of Sunspear.

      Get it?!? It's "really not that complicated"!

        Loading editor
    • Guys, I happen to come across this blog and found it very useful so i thought its worth sharing. Here's how to watch GOT7 outside US¬†http://bit.ly/2ucobCj

        Loading editor
    • Fenrir51 wrote:

      You could repeat yourself 5000 times and you'd still miss the premise that the Kingship of the North is dependent on the possession of the estate of Winterfell, as I've just explained to you and others multiple times on this thread. Youd can't be King in the North WITHOUT being Lord of Winterfell in the same way as one can't be Lord of the Seven Kingdoms without being ruler of King's Landing.

      You can't be Lord Paramount of the Stormlands without being Lord of Storm's End.

      You can't be Lord Paramount of the Westerlands without being Lord of Casterly Rock.

      You can't be Lord Paramount of the Reach without being Lord of Highgarden.

      You can't be Prince of Dorne without being Lord of Sunspear.

      Get it?!? It's "really not that complicated"!

      YAWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWN

      The facts:

      • Sansa is still Lady of Winterfell, while Jon is King in the North according to HBO's Viewer's Guide. (because the titles aren't the same)
      • "Lord Paramount" is a title granted by the monarchy to those Houses charged with ruling an entire region. Lord Paramounts have changed throughout the series
      • Lord Paramount literally had nothing to do with this discussion.
      • You want to know how the Kingship of the North and the Trident isn't reliant on being the head of the principal House in the region? Look no further¬†:
        • Robb was King of the Trident while Edmure was Lord of Riverrun
        • Jon is King in the North while Sansa is Lady of Winterfell.


      It's still really not that complicated ;)


      PSA: Keep the attitude on a minimum. I created this thread to share ideas and information on the subject of the remaining Stark children and their political positions and influence. Right now Jon is KitN and Sansa is LoW, Brain position is to be determined once he arrives in Winterfell, and Arya as the youngest has no formal position. The end.

      Who's head of House Stark? As siblings, with two of them in significant positions ruling in the name of House Stark, each have a say in the political decisions of House Stark. However, Jon Snow as the sovereign of the entire Northern realm, including Winterfell, has the final say of the affairs of the realm, and within House Stark since he outranks Sansa Stark (current Lord of Winterfell). Hence, Jon Snow is the de facto head of House Stark , Sansa Stark is officially head of House Stark as the only present Stark with the name. Unless both Jon and Sansa hand over their titles, Bran will not have any official influence on House Stark decisions but will more than likely be an advisor, same goes for Arya.

      Time will tell.

        Loading editor
    • Kai200995 wrote:

      Fenrir51 wrote:

      You could repeat yourself 5000 times and you'd still miss the premise that the Kingship of the North is dependent on the possession of the estate of Winterfell, as I've just explained to you and others multiple times on this thread. Youd can't be King in the North WITHOUT being Lord of Winterfell in the same way as one can't be Lord of the Seven Kingdoms without being ruler of King's Landing.

      You can't be Lord Paramount of the Stormlands without being Lord of Storm's End.

      You can't be Lord Paramount of the Westerlands without being Lord of Casterly Rock.

      You can't be Lord Paramount of the Reach without being Lord of Highgarden.

      You can't be Prince of Dorne without being Lord of Sunspear.

      Get it?!? It's "really not that complicated"!

      YAWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWN

      The facts:

      • Sansa is still Lady of Winterfell, while Jon is King in the North according to HBO's Viewer's Guide. (because the titles aren't the same)
      • "Lord Paramount" is a title granted by the monarchy to those Houses charged with ruling an entire region. Lord Paramounts have changed throughout the series
      • Lord Paramount literally had nothing to do with this discussion.
      • You want to know how the Kingship of the North and the Trident isn't reliant on being the head of the principal House in the region? Look no further¬†:
        • Robb was King of the Trident while Edmure was Lord of Riverrun
        • Jon is King in the North while Sansa is Lady of Winterfell.


      It's still really not that complicated ;)


      PSA: Keep the attitude on a minimum. I created this thread to share ideas and information on the subject of the remaining Stark children and their political positions and influence. Right now Jon is KitN and Sansa is LoW, Brain position is to be determined once he arrives in Winterfell, and Arya as the youngest has no formal position. The end.

      Who's head of House Stark? As siblings, with two of them in significant positions ruling in the name of House Stark, each have a say in the political decisions of House Stark. However, Jon Snow as the sovereign of the entire Northern realm, including Winterfell, has the final say of the affairs of the realm, and within House Stark since he outranks Sansa Stark (current Lord of Winterfell). Hence, Jon Snow is the de facto head of House Stark , Sansa Stark is officially head of House Stark as the only present Stark with the name. Unless both Jon and Sansa hand over their titles, Bran will not have any official influence on House Stark decisions but will more than likely be an advisor, same goes for Arya.

      Time will tell.


      If you're going to pull rank and lecture people on their attitudes, you might try living up to it by not responding with an exaggerated yawn and being condescending. I pointed out the inconsistencies in your posts, and got some dismissive BS for my trouble. Whatever!

        Loading editor
    • Kai200995
      Kai200995 removed this reply because:
      12:02, August 7, 2017
      This reply has been removed
    • House Stark Update

      The "Uncertain Status" of House Stark has been resolved over the last two episodes.

      1. The Lord of House Stark is both Sansa & Jon Snow. They both share titles of influence in the North and within the family
      • In the first episode Jon makes Alys Karstark & Lord Umber swear allegiance to House Stark. Which confirms Jon, though not a Stark himself, rules under House Stark banners as