(Spoiler Alert) Why Jon Snow AA

[garion77]

Garion- I really commend you for the pererverance and insight that you've demonstrated in the short time you've been posting here. You've made some really good points, but alas, Needle posted this quite a while ago and I think it covers all or most of what your recent posts have been about. Keep up the good work though, and keep on thinking about this stuff. The NW be Lightbringer is IMO a birlliant insight

Thanks Imp... It's greatly apreciated and I love this site. A lot of good people.

I read Needle post and it's what I was thinking... It didn't make sense for Jon the ******* son of Ned Stark to abandon his duty to the NW and march a wildling army north... The same army he advised Stannis not to... It just don't add up... Add the NW never interfered in the wars of the kingdoms... Even when they were ten thousand men strong with Knights and Lords... They still stayed out of the affairs of the Kingdom...

The only difference with Needle theory and mine is I don't think Mel brought the dead back to act like Jon. The dead when risen it hard to predict and control their actions. UnCat isn't the same person she was living... I think Mel used the guy who was trying to force the Umber girl to marry him and she glamored him like Rattleshirt... Mel probably promised him his freedom or the Umber girl if he did her a little favor...

And the NW being Lightbringer is in the Oath... "I am the fire that burn against the cold, the LIGHT that brings the dawn"...

 

[The Imp]

Thanks Imp... It's greatly apreciated and I love this site. A lot of good people.

I read Needle post and it's what I was thinking... It didn't make sense for Jon the ******* son of Ned Stark to abandon his duty to the NW and march a wildling army north... The same army he advised Stannis not to... It just don't add up... Add the NW never interfered in the wars of the kingdoms... Even when they were ten thousand men strong with Knights and Lords... They still stayed out of the affairs of the Kingdom...

The only difference with Needle theory and mine is I don't think Mel brought the dead back to act like Jon. The dead when risen it hard to predict and control their actions. UnCat isn't the same person she was living... I think Mel used the guy who was trying to force the Umber girl to marry him and she glamored him like Rattleshirt... Mel probably promised him his freedom or the Umber girl if he did her a little favor...

And the NW being Lightbringer is in the Oath... "I am the fire that burn against the cold, the LIGHT that brings the dawn"...

It's absolutely in the oath, but it's like the guy walking out of the factory every day pushing an empty wheelbarrel. They couldn't figure out what he was stealin g, and then it turned out he was stealing wheelbarrels.

The light that brings the dawn is so obvious and has been repeated so many times it's almost invisible, so nice catch.

 

[garion77]

It's absolutely in the oath, but it's like the guy walking out of the factory every day pushing an empty wheelbarrel. They couldn't figure out what he was stealin g, and then it turned out he was stealing wheelbarrels.

The light that brings the dawn is so obvious and has been repeated so many times it's almost invisible, so nice catch.

I like that Imp... Sometimes you are looking so hard for something else that what you are really looking for is right in your eyes... We know with the cold come the Others... "I am the fire against the cold"...

A flaming sword just isn't GRRM style... And by giving Stannis the fake sword GRRM is teaching us a lesson... It isn't the sword that makes the man... It's the man that makes the sword... Jon is bringing glory and honor back to the NW. With the wildling to replendish their ranks, Jon is forging his sword... Lightbringer/NW...

It's something else in the Oath... "I am the horn that wakes the sleepers"... Is the Children the sleepers? Or those stone Dragons Mel is always talking about... Of all the places you would thought Mel would have ended up, can one person tell me did they expected the Wall?

I think all those references mean something in the Oath... GRRM just didn't throw together some generic words for the NW Oath... He thought hard on that Oath... Like the Imp said, every time I read the NW Oath it bring chills down my spine...

 

[Needle]

Thanks Imp... It's greatly apreciated and I love this site. A lot of good people.

I read Needle post and it's what I was thinking... It didn't make sense for Jon the ******* son of Ned Stark to abandon his duty to the NW and march a wildling army north... The same army he advised Stannis not to... It just don't add up... Add the NW never interfered in the wars of the kingdoms... Even when they were ten thousand men strong with Knights and Lords... They still stayed out of the affairs of the Kingdom...

The only difference with Needle theory and mine is I don't think Mel brought the dead back to act like Jon. The dead when risen it hard to predict and control their actions. UnCat isn't the same person she was living... I think Mel used the guy who was trying to force the Umber girl to marry him and she glamored him like Rattleshirt... Mel probably promised him his freedom or the Umber girl if he did her a little favor...

And the NW being Lightbringer is in the Oath... "I am the fire that burn against the cold, the LIGHT that brings the dawn"...

Just to be clear on what I am saying in this theory, Mel did not bring back the dead to act like Jon. Mel only reanimated the body, it is Jon who through his warging ability is controlling it.

 

[garion77]

Just to be clear on what I am saying in this theory, Mel did not bring back the dead to act like Jon. Mel only reanimated the body, it is Jon who through his warging ability is controlling it.

I don't see Jon being good enough Warg to pull that off... That's not his strong suit... Bran got good because he is crippled and have the greenseer boy helping him with his abilities... And Bran is a greenseer himself...

I don't believe Jon could warg into a reanimated body because it's still dead... Even the guy in the beginning couldn't do that... He even needed to be close or touching the lady to warg her body... I don't think you can warg the dead even if it's reanimated... If that's possible Jon could warg the Others or a wight...

 

[The Imp]

I don't see Jon being good enough Warg to pull that off... That's not his strong suit... Bran got good because he is crippled and have the greenseer boy helping him with his abilities... And Bran is a greenseer himself...

I don't believe Jon could warg into a reanimated body because it's still dead... Even the guy in the beginning couldn't do that... He even needed to be close or touching the lady to warg her body... I don't think you can warg the dead even if it's reanimated... If that's possible Jon could warg the Others or a wight...

And yet Arya was effortlessly able to warg into a cat when the need arose. There might be somthing foreshadowing there btw, warging into Cat??

Varamyr saw Jon for the first time and thought he was a very powerful warg, although untrained. Bran was with Jojen, but Jojen was able to teach Bran nothing about warging. I think that you underestimate how powerful Jon may have grown over the course of aDWD. Not everything that happens to a POV character happens in their POV chapters I think he and Mel have been doing secret work over the course of the book, and that work resulted in something that will closely resemble Needle's theory.

 

[Tywin]

I love these interesting theories, but my money is still on one of the simple ones, like that Mel just heals him (or that he's dead).

 

[garion77]

And yet Arya was effortlessly able to warg into a cat when the need arose. There might be somthing foreshadowing there btw, warging into Cat??

Varamyr saw Jon for the first time and thought he was a very powerful warg, although untrained. Bran was with Jojen, but Jojen was able to teach Bran nothing about warging. I think that you underestimate how powerful Jon may have grown over the course of aDWD. Not everything that happens to a POV character happens in their POV chapters I think he and Mel have been doing secret work over the course of the book, and that work resulted in something that will closely resemble Needle's theory.

Needle could be right... But the whole warging dead bodies just seem like too much work. Why not take the guy who is plotting against Stannis and glamore him like she did Mance? She kill two birds with one stone... The guy Jon have prisoner who is trying to force the Umber girl to marry him works perfectly for that plan...

He is plotting to betray Stannis... Jon need to fish out the traitors... If you remember Rattleshirt never denied he was Mance until the fire was burning him... Why did Rattleshirt wait so long to deny he was King beyond the wall knowing Mance was sentence to death? Rattleshirt wasn't the most honorable of people... He was a rapist and murder and felt no loyalty to Mance to die for him...

Do Mel glamore spell make you believe you are the person until something drastic happens to you? Jon did have a strange look when he was first attacked... Did the attack break the spell? Just like the fire broke the spell on Rattleshirt?

Remember, Rattleshirt had numerous opportunities to deny he was Mance. And from what I understand about glamores, they are very fragile. So the two people who are glamored need to be careful not to break it...

Did Mel promised the guy who came after the Umber girl something similar to what she promised Rattleshirt? Or do a glamore make you believe you are actually that person?

 

[TK-421]

I love these interesting theories, but my money is still on one of the simple ones, like that Mel just heals him (or that he's dead).[/QUOTE

Agree. While GRRM's plots seem complex, I don't think he will overly complicate this one. What's that golden rule: "Keep it simple, stupid!"

 

[garion77]

I love these interesting theories, but my money is still on one of the simple ones, like that Mel just heals him (or that he's dead).[/QUOTE

Agree. While GRRM's plots seem complex, I don't think he will overly complicate this one. What's that golden rule: "Keep it simple, stupid!"

I would normally agree but for one thing... Why would Jon march a wildling army against Ramsey while advising Stannis not to do that very thing...

I think people is forgetting Jon was the main reason Stannis didn't use the Wildlings in his march north... He told Stannis every northern lord would rally against a wildling army...

So what do you think the northern lords would do against a wildling army lead by a ******* of the Night watch? It would be like Mance marching against Winterfell himself... Even Lord Manderly would put his feud aside with the Freys and march against that...

The only way I can see the Mel heal Jon theory working if GRRM was tired and just wanted to finish the book... Because it's a HUGE contradiction...

 

[Tywin]

So what do you think the northern lords would do against a wildling army lead by a ******* of the Night watch? It would be like Mance marching against Winterfell himself... Even Lord Manderly would put his feud aside with the Freys and march against that...

The difference is that Jon is a Stark. ******* or not.

Factor in the grumbling that was already present at what "Ned's Girl" was going through at the hands of Ramsay, and I can see them easily supporting a son of Ned's marching south with whatever he could get. He could lead an army of Others down to Winterfell to save her and they might support him.

 

[garion77]

The difference is that Jon is a Stark. ******* or not.

Factor in the grumbling that was already present at what "Ned's Girl" was going through at the hands of Ramsay, and I can see them easily supporting a son of Ned's marching south with whatever he could get. He could lead an army of Others down to Winterfell to save her and they might support him.

Jon isn't a Stark... He's one ******* of many other bastards fathered by lords for thousand of years.... Most lords have bastards all over the place. Even Robert bastards couldn't claim Storm Ends or anything else. No lord will follow a *******... That's why Roose made Ramsey Legit... It was the only way he could marry Arya Stark...

Stannis was trying to make Jon a Stark because that was the only way to get the North to follow Jon. If Stannis could have used Jon Snow to rally the North, he wouldn't even try to make him a Stark. Even Lord Manderly wouldn't support Stannis without Rickon... They need a true born Stark. Jon couldn't even sit at the same seats with the Lords.

******* have no claims and especially a deserter from the NW which Jon would have been... And this ******* leading a wildling army... The Northern lords hate Ramsey but they do recognize lords and bastards... They would support Ramsey any day not because they like him... But if bastards could start over throwing a legally anointed lord, all hell would break out... They all got many bastards...

You argument that they hate Ramsey so much they would support him just don't fly... Most know that Jeyne isn't Arya... Most know the Freys murdered Robb their king... Most know Roose was part of the murder... But none do anything... Roose was legally appointed the Lord of the North until a Stark is found... Not a Snow... That's why Manderly need Rickon...

Jon gave Stannis good advice not to march the wildling north... Why would he make the same mistake?

 

[The Imp]

Jon isn't a Stark... He's one ******* of many other bastards fathered by lords for thousand of years.... Most lords have bastards all over the place. Even Robert bastards couldn't claim Storm Ends or anything else. No lord will follow a *******... That's why Roose made Ramsey Legit... It was the only way he could marry Arya Stark...

Stannis was trying to make Jon a Stark because that was the only way to get the North to follow Jon. If Stannis could have used Jon Snow to rally the North, he wouldn't even try to make him a Stark. Even Lord Manderly wouldn't support Stannis without Rickon... They need a true born Stark. Jon couldn't even sit at the same seats with the Lords.

******* have no claims and especially a deserter from the NW which Jon would have been... And this ******* leading a wildling army... The Northern lords hate Ramsey but they do recognize lords and bastards... They would support Ramsey any day not because they like him... But if bastards could start over throwing a legally anointed lord, all hell would break out... They all got many bastards...

You argument that they hate Ramsey so much they would support him just don't fly... Most know that Jeyne isn't Arya... Most know the Freys murdered Robb their king... Most know Roose was part of the murder... But none do anything... Roose was legally appointed the Lord of the North until a Stark is found... Not a Snow... That's why Manderly need Rickon...

Jon gave Stannis good advice not to march the wildling north... Why would he make the same mistake?

Robb made Jon his heir. No one ever metions that, but it happened, and happened for a reason IMO. I think that the lords of the North might very well follow the man who they think is Eddard Starks son and also was made heir by the true King in the North.

 

[Tywin]

Help me out on the history here, but haven't there been several cases of bastards claiming (or I suppose 'usurping') the domains of their parents?

One of the reasons that Jon was sent to the NW so that he wouldn't contend with any of his legitimately born siblings... why that precaution if everything is so cut and dry with who will follow a *******?

 

[garion77]

Robb made Jon his heir. No one ever metions that, but it happened, and happened for a reason IMO. I think that the lords of the North might very well follow the man who they think is Eddard Starks son and also was made heir by the true King in the North.

Maybe so Imp... But as long as Rickon lives, Jon will never be heir... Robb thought all his brothers were dead when he did that will. And if Jon wanted to be Lord of Winterfell, he could have took the knee and Stannis would have made him heir... He don't need Robb will... Jon is too good a man to claim a seat that belong to his brother by birth... Davos will find Rickon...

And Jon would never break his oath to the NW... Even if a few betrayed him he would not abandon his other brothers who stood with him... Since becoming NW commander, Jon always had those who was against him... This murder plot don't let Jon off the hook of his vows...

Aemon Tarygaren faced the same temptations... His temptation was greater than Jon's... He could have been king... But his vows keep him at the wall... I don't expect any less of Jon.

Jon is AA and play a bigger role than any squabbles between lords... His faith is on the wall and against the true enemies... The Others...

 

[garion77]

Help me out on the history here, but haven't there been several cases of bastards claiming (or I suppose 'usurping') the domains of their parents?

One of the reasons that Jon was sent to the NW so that he wouldn't contend with any of his legitimately born siblings... why that precaution if everything is so cut and dry with who will follow a *******?

Jon wasn't sent to the wall for that reason... You are thinking of second and third born Noble son's being sent to the wall so they don't undermine the eldest son rule...

Lord Tarley sent Sam to the wall because he wanted his younger son to be lord of Horn hill... Once Sam took the black, all his claims to lordship of Horn Hill was lost...

Don't forget... The original plan for Ned Stark was for him to take the black before Joff took off his head. If Ned took the black, all his claims to Winterfell would have been lost... Just like Benjen Stark...

 

[Koopa]

Maybe so Imp... But as long as Rickon lives, Jon will never be heir... Robb thought all his brothers were dead when he did that will. And if Jon wanted to be Lord of Winterfell, he could have took the knee and Stannis would have made him heir... He don't need Robb will... Jon is too good a man to claim a seat that belong to his brother by birth... Davos will find Rickon...

That depends actually. GRRM carefully avoided revealing the content of Robb's decree. If Robb (in his capacity as king, and his kinglyhood is accepted) decreed that Jon is no longer illegitimate (like Stannis wanted to do), Jon (at least in the eyes of the rest of the North) would be a Stark. As such he may have become (not-withstanding various theories) the eldest trueborn male Stark descendant. As such his claim would come to preceed Rickon's. That is too say if the law from that point on, no longer looks backs at the previous ******* status.

More likely, given how Ramsay Bolton does not want is father to produce new heirs (despite being legitimised, thus making him the eldest Bolton heir), and Daemon Blackfyre after being legitimised not automitically inheriting the Iron Throne despite being older than Daeron II legitimised bastards are still behind 'normal' trueborn children when it comesto inheritage. As such Bran, then Rickon is heir to Winterfell. With the lords of the North knowing of Rickon survival.

 

[Tywin]

I don't think this whole ******* issue is as cut and dry as everyone's making it out to be, nor are the rules of succession followed as religiously as we are portraying here. A couple examples:

1. When Roose received news (an incorrect report) that Ramsay had been killed he said that he was glad because otherwise Ramsay would be a threat to the children he planned to have with his new Frey wife.

2. Renly Baratheon declared himself king even though he was clearly behind Stannis in succession. A large portion of the lords of Westeros joined him because they liked him better, despite the fact that the rules of succession weren't being followed.

 

[grip junky]

John can take the north back because, John is known to the lords of the north as Neds son. They have met john, He was well liked from what I can tell. He looks like a Stark and a man of the north. At this point John is the only of Neds sons thought to live. The flayed man is not well liked or trusted. That is why he could do it, I do not think he would.

I am very confused by the ending of the book. His reaction to the letter, him leading out a army and his death. That is why I start to glance at this board.

 

[Ursa major]

I don't think this whole ******* issue is as cut and dry as everyone's making it out to be, nor are the rules of succession followed as religiously as we are portraying here. A couple examples:

1. When Roose received news (an incorrect report) that Ramsay had been killed he said that he was glad because otherwise Ramsay would be a threat to the children he planned to have with his new Frey wife.

Roose has legitimised Ramsay (which is why he isn't called Ramsay Snow anymore).


This shows two things:

1. For Roose, his bloodline was important; so in the absence of a legitimate heir, Ramsay would have to do.
2. Roose knew that he had to make Ramsay legitimate, otherwise he might not have left a legal descendant. Why else do so?