How come Sam didn't become Lord of Horn Hill? Announcing the arrival of Valued Associate #679: Cesar Manara Planned maintenance scheduled April 17/18, 2019 at 00:00UTC (8:00pm US/Eastern) Favourite questions and answers from the 1st quarter of 2019Why didn't Bilbo become a creature like Gollum?How come the chained dragons don't choke when they grow?How come the Unsullied are overwhelmed so easily?How could Jor El become heretic if he didn't have free will?How come he didn't use the most obvious solution to “grasp” time - dates?How did Riddick kill Lord Marshal Zhylaw?How do the “Baby White Walkers” become old (bearded) White Walkers?How come Moriarty didn't recognize Sherlock Holmes?Why didn't Randyll Tarly avenge the theft of the family sword?How come Marcus didn't know this about himself
Why is my conclusion inconsistent with the van't Hoff equation?
Extract all GPU name, model and GPU ram
Why are there no cargo aircraft with "flying wing" design?
Overriding an object in memory with placement new
Short Story with Cinderella as a Voo-doo Witch
Why do we bend a book to keep it straight?
Why was the term "discrete" used in discrete logarithm?
Why did the IBM 650 use bi-quinary?
At the end of Thor: Ragnarok why don't the Asgardians turn and head for the Bifrost as per their original plan?
Is it ethical to give a final exam after the professor has quit before teaching the remaining chapters of the course?
What does the "x" in "x86" represent?
Why aren't air breathing engines used as small first stages
What is the role of the transistor and diode in a soft start circuit?
What are the pros and cons of Aerospike nosecones?
What does an IRS interview request entail when called in to verify expenses for a sole proprietor small business?
What's the meaning of 間時肆拾貳 at a car parking sign
Using audio cues to encourage good posture
51k Euros annually for a family of 4 in Berlin: Is it enough?
2001: A Space Odyssey's use of the song "Daisy Bell" (Bicycle Built for Two); life imitates art or vice-versa?
which metric is better for boosting methods
illegal generic type for instanceof when using local classes
When is phishing education going too far?
Check which numbers satisfy the condition [A*B*C = A! + B! + C!]
Why is "Consequences inflicted." not a sentence?
How come Sam didn't become Lord of Horn Hill?
Announcing the arrival of Valued Associate #679: Cesar Manara
Planned maintenance scheduled April 17/18, 2019 at 00:00UTC (8:00pm US/Eastern)
Favourite questions and answers from the 1st quarter of 2019Why didn't Bilbo become a creature like Gollum?How come the chained dragons don't choke when they grow?How come the Unsullied are overwhelmed so easily?How could Jor El become heretic if he didn't have free will?How come he didn't use the most obvious solution to “grasp” time - dates?How did Riddick kill Lord Marshal Zhylaw?How do the “Baby White Walkers” become old (bearded) White Walkers?How come Moriarty didn't recognize Sherlock Holmes?Why didn't Randyll Tarly avenge the theft of the family sword?How come Marcus didn't know this about himself
After both his father and brother (who was the heir) executed in Season 7, how come that Samwell Tarly didn't become the new head of the House, i.e. Lord of Horn Hill?
I would expect the remaining house leaders to have sent Sam a message letting him know of what happened and asking him to come back home to rule the house.
Why didn't it happen, and he wasn't even notified?
plot-explanation game-of-thrones
asked 6 hours ago
Shadow WizardShadow Wizard
2,0751947
add a comment |
After both his father and brother (who was the heir) executed in Season 7, how come that Samwell Tarly didn't become the new head of the House, i.e. Lord of Horn Hill?
I would expect the remaining house leaders to have sent Sam a message letting him know of what happened and asking him to come back home to rule the house.
Why didn't it happen, and he wasn't even notified?
plot-explanation game-of-thrones
asked 6 hours ago
Shadow WizardShadow Wizard
2,0751947
add a comment |
After both his father and brother (who was the heir) executed in Season 7, how come that Samwell Tarly didn't become the new head of the House, i.e. Lord of Horn Hill?
I would expect the remaining house leaders to have sent Sam a message letting him know of what happened and asking him to come back home to rule the house.
Why didn't it happen, and he wasn't even notified?
plot-explanation game-of-thrones
asked 6 hours ago
Shadow WizardShadow Wizard
2,0751947
After both his father and brother (who was the heir) executed in Season 7, how come that Samwell Tarly didn't become the new head of the House, i.e. Lord of Horn Hill?
I would expect the remaining house leaders to have sent Sam a message letting him know of what happened and asking him to come back home to rule the house.
Why didn't it happen, and he wasn't even notified?
plot-explanation game-of-thrones
plot-explanation game-of-thrones
asked 6 hours ago
Shadow WizardShadow Wizard
2,0751947
asked 6 hours ago
Shadow WizardShadow Wizard
2,0751947
asked 6 hours ago
Shadow WizardShadow Wizard
2,0751947
asked 6 hours ago
Shadow WizardShadow Wizard
2,0751947
asked 6 hours ago
Shadow WizardShadow Wizard
2,0751947
2,0751947
add a comment |
add a comment |
4 Answers
4
active
oldest
votes
Sam is a brother of the Night's Watch and has given up his right of succession as part of his oath.
Night gathers, and now my watch begins. It shall not end until my death. I shall take no wife, hold no lands, father no children. I shall wear no crowns and win no glory. I shall live and die at my post. I am the sword in the darkness. I am the watcher on the walls. I am the shield that guards the realms of men. I pledge my life and honor to the Night's Watch, for this night and all the nights to come.
As for why he wasn't told of their death's well the maester's at the Citadel chose not to tell him "just yet".
MAESTER 1: Is he the one whose father and brother were just burned alive?
MARWYN: I'm afraid so.
MAESTER 2: Horrible business.
MARWYN: I don't have the heart to tell him yet. He's a good lad.
Game of Thrones, Season 7 Episode 5, "Eastwatch"
answered 6 hours ago
TheLethalCarrotTheLethalCarrot
6,0632751
13
@ShadowWizard Whilst it is a grey area Jon is technically no longer a member of the Night's Watch after his death.
– TheLethalCarrot
6 hours ago
7
@ShadowWizard If he didn't die, I doubt he would have left the Wall which would mean the Battle of the Bastards wouldn't have happened and all that follows. Who's to say what could have happened?
– TheLethalCarrot
6 hours ago
4
Jon considered his watch to have ended once he died, basically taking is vows really literally.
– JNat♦
6 hours ago
6
@JNat Edd also takes it literally and quotes back at him "for this night and all the nights to come." As said it is a grey area with neither being truly correct or incorrect. It hasn't happened before so Jon just uses the loophole and hot legs it outta there.
– TheLethalCarrot
6 hours ago
1
@TheLethalCarrot The rules also aren't really binding, except to the extent that everyone else will enforce them. The North didn't care about Jon's oath to the Watch or his breaking it, for whatever reason, and so they were fine naming him the king. What other enforcement of the oath or conflict would there be?
– Upper_Case
4 hours ago
|
show 3 more comments
Sam is in the Night's Watch.
Members renounce all titles and claims to lands, so he can't become a Lord.
answered 6 hours ago
FedericoFederico
568615
2
@ShadowWizard He is both a brother of the Night's Watch and a novice at the Citadel during his time there.
– TheLethalCarrot
6 hours ago
1
@LogicalBranch hat off to anyone who use a word like Synergise often enough that it's suggested by autocorrect. ;)
– Shadow Wizard
6 hours ago
5
@ShadowWizard He was sent to become a maester for the Night's Watch so breaking the oath wouldn't make much sense. Also I doubt he would have survived all that time wearing the black and clearly being a brother of the Night's Watch without being executed for desertion.
– TheLethalCarrot
6 hours ago
1
It's also unlikely that the rules allow for explicitly being broken. Sam renounced his claim, at which point it went to the next person in line (however that is determined at Horn Hill). Upon making his oath he formally removed himself from the succession forever, and breaking the oath doesn't change that. It could devolve into a whose-claim-is-better situation (a la Renly and Stannis), but "officially" the heir definitely is not, and cannot be, him.
– Upper_Case
6 hours ago
1
Correction - NW members don't have to give up their names. So Samwell Tarly remains Samwell Tarly (Denys Mallister remains a Mallister, Jeor Mormont remains a Mormont, Benjen Stark remains a Stark). He however renounced all claims to his father's lands and titles when he took the vow just as other members did. Order of the Citadel however give up their names as well so Aemon Targaryen becomes just Aemon.
– Aegon
1 hour ago
|
show 5 more comments
Because he has forsaken all claims to that title and any other title the moment he joined the Night's Watch.
Night gathers, and now my watch begins. It shall not end until my death. I shall take no wife, hold no lands, father no children. I shall wear no crowns and win no glory. I shall live and die at my post. I am the sword in the darkness. I am the watcher on the walls. I am the fire that burns against the cold, the light that brings the dawn, the horn that wakes the sleepers, the shield that guards the realms of men. I pledge my life and honor to the Night's Watch, for this night and all the nights to come. - Night's Watch Vows
Not to mention that those who join the Citadel to become Maesters also forsake claims to titles.
When an acolyte of noble birth takes his vows and dons his chain, he puts aside his House name. He swears sacred vows, promising to hold no lands or lordships, and to be celibate. - Maester Vows
answered 6 hours ago
VirusbombVirusbomb
1,8261615
3
Sam had not yet taken the oath to become a Maester so the second point isn't correct here. Acolytes and novices are free to leave as they please until they take the oath.
– TheLethalCarrot
6 hours ago
add a comment |
It is probably because of that scene with his father; when Sam was at home just before going to the citadel.
They were having a family dinner, and when Sam's father found out about Gilly being a wildling, the women left the table, and when they were alone, Randyll told Sam that Gilly and little Sam are welcome to stay there, Gilly will have to serve as a servant and he will raise his grandson, but Sam will no longer be welcome in Horn Hill and has to leave by first light. Sam then proceed to get Gilly and Heartsbane and go to the citadel.
So it is implied that Sam's father banished/disowned Sam, when he found out that his son is with a wildling.
answered 6 hours ago
NochiNochi
1274
His father did banish him, no doubt and I know that, but such thing should be nullified when the father and remaining heirs are dead. At least that's common sense for me. No?
– Shadow Wizard
6 hours ago
1
Randyll had already pretty much banished Sam anyway by forcing him off to the Wall so that Dickon could inherit.
– TheLethalCarrot
6 hours ago
add a comment |
4 Answers
4
active
oldest
votes
4 Answers
4
active
oldest
votes
active
oldest
votes
active
oldest
votes
Sam is a brother of the Night's Watch and has given up his right of succession as part of his oath.
Night gathers, and now my watch begins. It shall not end until my death. I shall take no wife, hold no lands, father no children. I shall wear no crowns and win no glory. I shall live and die at my post. I am the sword in the darkness. I am the watcher on the walls. I am the shield that guards the realms of men. I pledge my life and honor to the Night's Watch, for this night and all the nights to come.
As for why he wasn't told of their death's well the maester's at the Citadel chose not to tell him "just yet".
MAESTER 1: Is he the one whose father and brother were just burned alive?
MARWYN: I'm afraid so.
MAESTER 2: Horrible business.
MARWYN: I don't have the heart to tell him yet. He's a good lad.
Game of Thrones, Season 7 Episode 5, "Eastwatch"
answered 6 hours ago
TheLethalCarrotTheLethalCarrot
6,0632751
13
@ShadowWizard Whilst it is a grey area Jon is technically no longer a member of the Night's Watch after his death.
– TheLethalCarrot
6 hours ago
7
@ShadowWizard If he didn't die, I doubt he would have left the Wall which would mean the Battle of the Bastards wouldn't have happened and all that follows. Who's to say what could have happened?
– TheLethalCarrot
6 hours ago
4
Jon considered his watch to have ended once he died, basically taking is vows really literally.
– JNat♦
6 hours ago
6
@JNat Edd also takes it literally and quotes back at him "for this night and all the nights to come." As said it is a grey area with neither being truly correct or incorrect. It hasn't happened before so Jon just uses the loophole and hot legs it outta there.
– TheLethalCarrot
6 hours ago
1
@TheLethalCarrot The rules also aren't really binding, except to the extent that everyone else will enforce them. The North didn't care about Jon's oath to the Watch or his breaking it, for whatever reason, and so they were fine naming him the king. What other enforcement of the oath or conflict would there be?
– Upper_Case
4 hours ago
|
show 3 more comments
Sam is a brother of the Night's Watch and has given up his right of succession as part of his oath.
Night gathers, and now my watch begins. It shall not end until my death. I shall take no wife, hold no lands, father no children. I shall wear no crowns and win no glory. I shall live and die at my post. I am the sword in the darkness. I am the watcher on the walls. I am the shield that guards the realms of men. I pledge my life and honor to the Night's Watch, for this night and all the nights to come.
As for why he wasn't told of their death's well the maester's at the Citadel chose not to tell him "just yet".
MAESTER 1: Is he the one whose father and brother were just burned alive?
MARWYN: I'm afraid so.
MAESTER 2: Horrible business.
MARWYN: I don't have the heart to tell him yet. He's a good lad.
Game of Thrones, Season 7 Episode 5, "Eastwatch"
answered 6 hours ago
TheLethalCarrotTheLethalCarrot
6,0632751
13
@ShadowWizard Whilst it is a grey area Jon is technically no longer a member of the Night's Watch after his death.
– TheLethalCarrot
6 hours ago
7
@ShadowWizard If he didn't die, I doubt he would have left the Wall which would mean the Battle of the Bastards wouldn't have happened and all that follows. Who's to say what could have happened?
– TheLethalCarrot
6 hours ago
4
Jon considered his watch to have ended once he died, basically taking is vows really literally.
– JNat♦
6 hours ago
6
@JNat Edd also takes it literally and quotes back at him "for this night and all the nights to come." As said it is a grey area with neither being truly correct or incorrect. It hasn't happened before so Jon just uses the loophole and hot legs it outta there.
– TheLethalCarrot
6 hours ago
1
@TheLethalCarrot The rules also aren't really binding, except to the extent that everyone else will enforce them. The North didn't care about Jon's oath to the Watch or his breaking it, for whatever reason, and so they were fine naming him the king. What other enforcement of the oath or conflict would there be?
– Upper_Case
4 hours ago
|
show 3 more comments
Sam is a brother of the Night's Watch and has given up his right of succession as part of his oath.
Night gathers, and now my watch begins. It shall not end until my death. I shall take no wife, hold no lands, father no children. I shall wear no crowns and win no glory. I shall live and die at my post. I am the sword in the darkness. I am the watcher on the walls. I am the shield that guards the realms of men. I pledge my life and honor to the Night's Watch, for this night and all the nights to come.
As for why he wasn't told of their death's well the maester's at the Citadel chose not to tell him "just yet".
MAESTER 1: Is he the one whose father and brother were just burned alive?
MARWYN: I'm afraid so.
MAESTER 2: Horrible business.
MARWYN: I don't have the heart to tell him yet. He's a good lad.
Game of Thrones, Season 7 Episode 5, "Eastwatch"
answered 6 hours ago
TheLethalCarrotTheLethalCarrot
6,0632751
Sam is a brother of the Night's Watch and has given up his right of succession as part of his oath.
Night gathers, and now my watch begins. It shall not end until my death. I shall take no wife, hold no lands, father no children. I shall wear no crowns and win no glory. I shall live and die at my post. I am the sword in the darkness. I am the watcher on the walls. I am the shield that guards the realms of men. I pledge my life and honor to the Night's Watch, for this night and all the nights to come.
As for why he wasn't told of their death's well the maester's at the Citadel chose not to tell him "just yet".
MAESTER 1: Is he the one whose father and brother were just burned alive?
MARWYN: I'm afraid so.
MAESTER 2: Horrible business.
MARWYN: I don't have the heart to tell him yet. He's a good lad.
Game of Thrones, Season 7 Episode 5, "Eastwatch"
answered 6 hours ago
TheLethalCarrotTheLethalCarrot
6,0632751
edited 6 hours ago
answered 6 hours ago
TheLethalCarrotTheLethalCarrot
6,0632751
answered 6 hours ago
TheLethalCarrotTheLethalCarrot
6,0632751
answered 6 hours ago
TheLethalCarrotTheLethalCarrot
6,0632751
6,0632751
13
@ShadowWizard Whilst it is a grey area Jon is technically no longer a member of the Night's Watch after his death.
– TheLethalCarrot
6 hours ago
7
@ShadowWizard If he didn't die, I doubt he would have left the Wall which would mean the Battle of the Bastards wouldn't have happened and all that follows. Who's to say what could have happened?
– TheLethalCarrot
6 hours ago
4
Jon considered his watch to have ended once he died, basically taking is vows really literally.
– JNat♦
6 hours ago
6
@JNat Edd also takes it literally and quotes back at him "for this night and all the nights to come." As said it is a grey area with neither being truly correct or incorrect. It hasn't happened before so Jon just uses the loophole and hot legs it outta there.
– TheLethalCarrot
6 hours ago
1
@TheLethalCarrot The rules also aren't really binding, except to the extent that everyone else will enforce them. The North didn't care about Jon's oath to the Watch or his breaking it, for whatever reason, and so they were fine naming him the king. What other enforcement of the oath or conflict would there be?
– Upper_Case
4 hours ago
|
show 3 more comments
13
@ShadowWizard Whilst it is a grey area Jon is technically no longer a member of the Night's Watch after his death.
– TheLethalCarrot
6 hours ago
7
@ShadowWizard If he didn't die, I doubt he would have left the Wall which would mean the Battle of the Bastards wouldn't have happened and all that follows. Who's to say what could have happened?
– TheLethalCarrot
6 hours ago
4
Jon considered his watch to have ended once he died, basically taking is vows really literally.
– JNat♦
6 hours ago
6
@JNat Edd also takes it literally and quotes back at him "for this night and all the nights to come." As said it is a grey area with neither being truly correct or incorrect. It hasn't happened before so Jon just uses the loophole and hot legs it outta there.
– TheLethalCarrot
6 hours ago
1
@TheLethalCarrot The rules also aren't really binding, except to the extent that everyone else will enforce them. The North didn't care about Jon's oath to the Watch or his breaking it, for whatever reason, and so they were fine naming him the king. What other enforcement of the oath or conflict would there be?
– Upper_Case
4 hours ago
13
13
@ShadowWizard Whilst it is a grey area Jon is technically no longer a member of the Night's Watch after his death.
– TheLethalCarrot
6 hours ago
@ShadowWizard Whilst it is a grey area Jon is technically no longer a member of the Night's Watch after his death.
– TheLethalCarrot
6 hours ago
7
7
@ShadowWizard If he didn't die, I doubt he would have left the Wall which would mean the Battle of the Bastards wouldn't have happened and all that follows. Who's to say what could have happened?
– TheLethalCarrot
6 hours ago
@ShadowWizard If he didn't die, I doubt he would have left the Wall which would mean the Battle of the Bastards wouldn't have happened and all that follows. Who's to say what could have happened?
– TheLethalCarrot
6 hours ago
4
4
Jon considered his watch to have ended once he died, basically taking is vows really literally.
– JNat♦
6 hours ago
Jon considered his watch to have ended once he died, basically taking is vows really literally.
– JNat♦
6 hours ago
6
6
@JNat Edd also takes it literally and quotes back at him "for this night and all the nights to come." As said it is a grey area with neither being truly correct or incorrect. It hasn't happened before so Jon just uses the loophole and hot legs it outta there.
– TheLethalCarrot
6 hours ago
@JNat Edd also takes it literally and quotes back at him "for this night and all the nights to come." As said it is a grey area with neither being truly correct or incorrect. It hasn't happened before so Jon just uses the loophole and hot legs it outta there.
– TheLethalCarrot
6 hours ago
1
1
@TheLethalCarrot The rules also aren't really binding, except to the extent that everyone else will enforce them. The North didn't care about Jon's oath to the Watch or his breaking it, for whatever reason, and so they were fine naming him the king. What other enforcement of the oath or conflict would there be?
– Upper_Case
4 hours ago
@TheLethalCarrot The rules also aren't really binding, except to the extent that everyone else will enforce them. The North didn't care about Jon's oath to the Watch or his breaking it, for whatever reason, and so they were fine naming him the king. What other enforcement of the oath or conflict would there be?
– Upper_Case
4 hours ago
|
show 3 more comments
Sam is in the Night's Watch.
Members renounce all titles and claims to lands, so he can't become a Lord.
answered 6 hours ago
FedericoFederico
568615
2
@ShadowWizard He is both a brother of the Night's Watch and a novice at the Citadel during his time there.
– TheLethalCarrot
6 hours ago
1
@LogicalBranch hat off to anyone who use a word like Synergise often enough that it's suggested by autocorrect. ;)
– Shadow Wizard
6 hours ago
5
@ShadowWizard He was sent to become a maester for the Night's Watch so breaking the oath wouldn't make much sense. Also I doubt he would have survived all that time wearing the black and clearly being a brother of the Night's Watch without being executed for desertion.
– TheLethalCarrot
6 hours ago
1
It's also unlikely that the rules allow for explicitly being broken. Sam renounced his claim, at which point it went to the next person in line (however that is determined at Horn Hill). Upon making his oath he formally removed himself from the succession forever, and breaking the oath doesn't change that. It could devolve into a whose-claim-is-better situation (a la Renly and Stannis), but "officially" the heir definitely is not, and cannot be, him.
– Upper_Case
6 hours ago
1
Correction - NW members don't have to give up their names. So Samwell Tarly remains Samwell Tarly (Denys Mallister remains a Mallister, Jeor Mormont remains a Mormont, Benjen Stark remains a Stark). He however renounced all claims to his father's lands and titles when he took the vow just as other members did. Order of the Citadel however give up their names as well so Aemon Targaryen becomes just Aemon.
– Aegon
1 hour ago
|
show 5 more comments
Sam is in the Night's Watch.
Members renounce all titles and claims to lands, so he can't become a Lord.
answered 6 hours ago
FedericoFederico
568615
2
@ShadowWizard He is both a brother of the Night's Watch and a novice at the Citadel during his time there.
– TheLethalCarrot
6 hours ago
1
@LogicalBranch hat off to anyone who use a word like Synergise often enough that it's suggested by autocorrect. ;)
– Shadow Wizard
6 hours ago
5
@ShadowWizard He was sent to become a maester for the Night's Watch so breaking the oath wouldn't make much sense. Also I doubt he would have survived all that time wearing the black and clearly being a brother of the Night's Watch without being executed for desertion.
– TheLethalCarrot
6 hours ago
1
It's also unlikely that the rules allow for explicitly being broken. Sam renounced his claim, at which point it went to the next person in line (however that is determined at Horn Hill). Upon making his oath he formally removed himself from the succession forever, and breaking the oath doesn't change that. It could devolve into a whose-claim-is-better situation (a la Renly and Stannis), but "officially" the heir definitely is not, and cannot be, him.
– Upper_Case
6 hours ago
1
Correction - NW members don't have to give up their names. So Samwell Tarly remains Samwell Tarly (Denys Mallister remains a Mallister, Jeor Mormont remains a Mormont, Benjen Stark remains a Stark). He however renounced all claims to his father's lands and titles when he took the vow just as other members did. Order of the Citadel however give up their names as well so Aemon Targaryen becomes just Aemon.
– Aegon
1 hour ago
|
show 5 more comments
Sam is in the Night's Watch.
Members renounce all titles and claims to lands, so he can't become a Lord.
answered 6 hours ago
FedericoFederico
568615
Sam is in the Night's Watch.
Members renounce all titles and claims to lands, so he can't become a Lord.
answered 6 hours ago
FedericoFederico
568615
edited 1 hour ago
answered 6 hours ago
FedericoFederico
568615
answered 6 hours ago
FedericoFederico
568615
answered 6 hours ago
FedericoFederico
568615
568615
2
@ShadowWizard He is both a brother of the Night's Watch and a novice at the Citadel during his time there.
– TheLethalCarrot
6 hours ago
1
@LogicalBranch hat off to anyone who use a word like Synergise often enough that it's suggested by autocorrect. ;)
– Shadow Wizard
6 hours ago
5
@ShadowWizard He was sent to become a maester for the Night's Watch so breaking the oath wouldn't make much sense. Also I doubt he would have survived all that time wearing the black and clearly being a brother of the Night's Watch without being executed for desertion.
– TheLethalCarrot
6 hours ago
1
It's also unlikely that the rules allow for explicitly being broken. Sam renounced his claim, at which point it went to the next person in line (however that is determined at Horn Hill). Upon making his oath he formally removed himself from the succession forever, and breaking the oath doesn't change that. It could devolve into a whose-claim-is-better situation (a la Renly and Stannis), but "officially" the heir definitely is not, and cannot be, him.
– Upper_Case
6 hours ago
1
Correction - NW members don't have to give up their names. So Samwell Tarly remains Samwell Tarly (Denys Mallister remains a Mallister, Jeor Mormont remains a Mormont, Benjen Stark remains a Stark). He however renounced all claims to his father's lands and titles when he took the vow just as other members did. Order of the Citadel however give up their names as well so Aemon Targaryen becomes just Aemon.
– Aegon
1 hour ago
|
show 5 more comments
2
@ShadowWizard He is both a brother of the Night's Watch and a novice at the Citadel during his time there.
– TheLethalCarrot
6 hours ago
1
@LogicalBranch hat off to anyone who use a word like Synergise often enough that it's suggested by autocorrect. ;)
– Shadow Wizard
6 hours ago
5
@ShadowWizard He was sent to become a maester for the Night's Watch so breaking the oath wouldn't make much sense. Also I doubt he would have survived all that time wearing the black and clearly being a brother of the Night's Watch without being executed for desertion.
– TheLethalCarrot
6 hours ago
1
It's also unlikely that the rules allow for explicitly being broken. Sam renounced his claim, at which point it went to the next person in line (however that is determined at Horn Hill). Upon making his oath he formally removed himself from the succession forever, and breaking the oath doesn't change that. It could devolve into a whose-claim-is-better situation (a la Renly and Stannis), but "officially" the heir definitely is not, and cannot be, him.
– Upper_Case
6 hours ago
1
Correction - NW members don't have to give up their names. So Samwell Tarly remains Samwell Tarly (Denys Mallister remains a Mallister, Jeor Mormont remains a Mormont, Benjen Stark remains a Stark). He however renounced all claims to his father's lands and titles when he took the vow just as other members did. Order of the Citadel however give up their names as well so Aemon Targaryen becomes just Aemon.
– Aegon
1 hour ago
2
2
@ShadowWizard He is both a brother of the Night's Watch and a novice at the Citadel during his time there.
– TheLethalCarrot
6 hours ago
@ShadowWizard He is both a brother of the Night's Watch and a novice at the Citadel during his time there.
– TheLethalCarrot
6 hours ago
1
1
@LogicalBranch hat off to anyone who use a word like Synergise often enough that it's suggested by autocorrect. ;)
– Shadow Wizard
6 hours ago
@LogicalBranch hat off to anyone who use a word like Synergise often enough that it's suggested by autocorrect. ;)
– Shadow Wizard
6 hours ago
5
5
@ShadowWizard He was sent to become a maester for the Night's Watch so breaking the oath wouldn't make much sense. Also I doubt he would have survived all that time wearing the black and clearly being a brother of the Night's Watch without being executed for desertion.
– TheLethalCarrot
6 hours ago
@ShadowWizard He was sent to become a maester for the Night's Watch so breaking the oath wouldn't make much sense. Also I doubt he would have survived all that time wearing the black and clearly being a brother of the Night's Watch without being executed for desertion.
– TheLethalCarrot
6 hours ago
1
1
It's also unlikely that the rules allow for explicitly being broken. Sam renounced his claim, at which point it went to the next person in line (however that is determined at Horn Hill). Upon making his oath he formally removed himself from the succession forever, and breaking the oath doesn't change that. It could devolve into a whose-claim-is-better situation (a la Renly and Stannis), but "officially" the heir definitely is not, and cannot be, him.
– Upper_Case
6 hours ago
It's also unlikely that the rules allow for explicitly being broken. Sam renounced his claim, at which point it went to the next person in line (however that is determined at Horn Hill). Upon making his oath he formally removed himself from the succession forever, and breaking the oath doesn't change that. It could devolve into a whose-claim-is-better situation (a la Renly and Stannis), but "officially" the heir definitely is not, and cannot be, him.
– Upper_Case
6 hours ago
1
1
Correction - NW members don't have to give up their names. So Samwell Tarly remains Samwell Tarly (Denys Mallister remains a Mallister, Jeor Mormont remains a Mormont, Benjen Stark remains a Stark). He however renounced all claims to his father's lands and titles when he took the vow just as other members did. Order of the Citadel however give up their names as well so Aemon Targaryen becomes just Aemon.
– Aegon
1 hour ago
Correction - NW members don't have to give up their names. So Samwell Tarly remains Samwell Tarly (Denys Mallister remains a Mallister, Jeor Mormont remains a Mormont, Benjen Stark remains a Stark). He however renounced all claims to his father's lands and titles when he took the vow just as other members did. Order of the Citadel however give up their names as well so Aemon Targaryen becomes just Aemon.
– Aegon
1 hour ago
|
show 5 more comments
Because he has forsaken all claims to that title and any other title the moment he joined the Night's Watch.
Night gathers, and now my watch begins. It shall not end until my death. I shall take no wife, hold no lands, father no children. I shall wear no crowns and win no glory. I shall live and die at my post. I am the sword in the darkness. I am the watcher on the walls. I am the fire that burns against the cold, the light that brings the dawn, the horn that wakes the sleepers, the shield that guards the realms of men. I pledge my life and honor to the Night's Watch, for this night and all the nights to come. - Night's Watch Vows
Not to mention that those who join the Citadel to become Maesters also forsake claims to titles.
When an acolyte of noble birth takes his vows and dons his chain, he puts aside his House name. He swears sacred vows, promising to hold no lands or lordships, and to be celibate. - Maester Vows
answered 6 hours ago
VirusbombVirusbomb
1,8261615
3
Sam had not yet taken the oath to become a Maester so the second point isn't correct here. Acolytes and novices are free to leave as they please until they take the oath.
– TheLethalCarrot
6 hours ago
add a comment |
Because he has forsaken all claims to that title and any other title the moment he joined the Night's Watch.
Night gathers, and now my watch begins. It shall not end until my death. I shall take no wife, hold no lands, father no children. I shall wear no crowns and win no glory. I shall live and die at my post. I am the sword in the darkness. I am the watcher on the walls. I am the fire that burns against the cold, the light that brings the dawn, the horn that wakes the sleepers, the shield that guards the realms of men. I pledge my life and honor to the Night's Watch, for this night and all the nights to come. - Night's Watch Vows
Not to mention that those who join the Citadel to become Maesters also forsake claims to titles.
When an acolyte of noble birth takes his vows and dons his chain, he puts aside his House name. He swears sacred vows, promising to hold no lands or lordships, and to be celibate. - Maester Vows
answered 6 hours ago
VirusbombVirusbomb
1,8261615
3
Sam had not yet taken the oath to become a Maester so the second point isn't correct here. Acolytes and novices are free to leave as they please until they take the oath.
– TheLethalCarrot
6 hours ago
add a comment |
Because he has forsaken all claims to that title and any other title the moment he joined the Night's Watch.
Night gathers, and now my watch begins. It shall not end until my death. I shall take no wife, hold no lands, father no children. I shall wear no crowns and win no glory. I shall live and die at my post. I am the sword in the darkness. I am the watcher on the walls. I am the fire that burns against the cold, the light that brings the dawn, the horn that wakes the sleepers, the shield that guards the realms of men. I pledge my life and honor to the Night's Watch, for this night and all the nights to come. - Night's Watch Vows
Not to mention that those who join the Citadel to become Maesters also forsake claims to titles.
When an acolyte of noble birth takes his vows and dons his chain, he puts aside his House name. He swears sacred vows, promising to hold no lands or lordships, and to be celibate. - Maester Vows
answered 6 hours ago
VirusbombVirusbomb
1,8261615
Because he has forsaken all claims to that title and any other title the moment he joined the Night's Watch.
Night gathers, and now my watch begins. It shall not end until my death. I shall take no wife, hold no lands, father no children. I shall wear no crowns and win no glory. I shall live and die at my post. I am the sword in the darkness. I am the watcher on the walls. I am the fire that burns against the cold, the light that brings the dawn, the horn that wakes the sleepers, the shield that guards the realms of men. I pledge my life and honor to the Night's Watch, for this night and all the nights to come. - Night's Watch Vows
Not to mention that those who join the Citadel to become Maesters also forsake claims to titles.
When an acolyte of noble birth takes his vows and dons his chain, he puts aside his House name. He swears sacred vows, promising to hold no lands or lordships, and to be celibate. - Maester Vows
answered 6 hours ago
VirusbombVirusbomb
1,8261615
answered 6 hours ago
VirusbombVirusbomb
1,8261615
answered 6 hours ago
VirusbombVirusbomb
1,8261615
answered 6 hours ago
VirusbombVirusbomb
1,8261615
1,8261615
3
Sam had not yet taken the oath to become a Maester so the second point isn't correct here. Acolytes and novices are free to leave as they please until they take the oath.
– TheLethalCarrot
6 hours ago
add a comment |
3
Sam had not yet taken the oath to become a Maester so the second point isn't correct here. Acolytes and novices are free to leave as they please until they take the oath.
– TheLethalCarrot
6 hours ago
3
3
Sam had not yet taken the oath to become a Maester so the second point isn't correct here. Acolytes and novices are free to leave as they please until they take the oath.
– TheLethalCarrot
6 hours ago
Sam had not yet taken the oath to become a Maester so the second point isn't correct here. Acolytes and novices are free to leave as they please until they take the oath.
– TheLethalCarrot
6 hours ago
add a comment |
It is probably because of that scene with his father; when Sam was at home just before going to the citadel.
They were having a family dinner, and when Sam's father found out about Gilly being a wildling, the women left the table, and when they were alone, Randyll told Sam that Gilly and little Sam are welcome to stay there, Gilly will have to serve as a servant and he will raise his grandson, but Sam will no longer be welcome in Horn Hill and has to leave by first light. Sam then proceed to get Gilly and Heartsbane and go to the citadel.
So it is implied that Sam's father banished/disowned Sam, when he found out that his son is with a wildling.
answered 6 hours ago
NochiNochi
1274
His father did banish him, no doubt and I know that, but such thing should be nullified when the father and remaining heirs are dead. At least that's common sense for me. No?
– Shadow Wizard
6 hours ago
1
Randyll had already pretty much banished Sam anyway by forcing him off to the Wall so that Dickon could inherit.
– TheLethalCarrot
6 hours ago
add a comment |
It is probably because of that scene with his father; when Sam was at home just before going to the citadel.
They were having a family dinner, and when Sam's father found out about Gilly being a wildling, the women left the table, and when they were alone, Randyll told Sam that Gilly and little Sam are welcome to stay there, Gilly will have to serve as a servant and he will raise his grandson, but Sam will no longer be welcome in Horn Hill and has to leave by first light. Sam then proceed to get Gilly and Heartsbane and go to the citadel.
So it is implied that Sam's father banished/disowned Sam, when he found out that his son is with a wildling.
answered 6 hours ago
NochiNochi
1274
His father did banish him, no doubt and I know that, but such thing should be nullified when the father and remaining heirs are dead. At least that's common sense for me. No?
– Shadow Wizard
6 hours ago
1
Randyll had already pretty much banished Sam anyway by forcing him off to the Wall so that Dickon could inherit.
– TheLethalCarrot
6 hours ago
add a comment |
It is probably because of that scene with his father; when Sam was at home just before going to the citadel.
They were having a family dinner, and when Sam's father found out about Gilly being a wildling, the women left the table, and when they were alone, Randyll told Sam that Gilly and little Sam are welcome to stay there, Gilly will have to serve as a servant and he will raise his grandson, but Sam will no longer be welcome in Horn Hill and has to leave by first light. Sam then proceed to get Gilly and Heartsbane and go to the citadel.
So it is implied that Sam's father banished/disowned Sam, when he found out that his son is with a wildling.
answered 6 hours ago
NochiNochi
1274
It is probably because of that scene with his father; when Sam was at home just before going to the citadel.
They were having a family dinner, and when Sam's father found out about Gilly being a wildling, the women left the table, and when they were alone, Randyll told Sam that Gilly and little Sam are welcome to stay there, Gilly will have to serve as a servant and he will raise his grandson, but Sam will no longer be welcome in Horn Hill and has to leave by first light. Sam then proceed to get Gilly and Heartsbane and go to the citadel.
So it is implied that Sam's father banished/disowned Sam, when he found out that his son is with a wildling.
answered 6 hours ago
NochiNochi
1274
edited 6 hours ago
answered 6 hours ago
NochiNochi
1274
answered 6 hours ago
NochiNochi
1274
answered 6 hours ago
NochiNochi
1274
1274
His father did banish him, no doubt and I know that, but such thing should be nullified when the father and remaining heirs are dead. At least that's common sense for me. No?
– Shadow Wizard
6 hours ago
1
Randyll had already pretty much banished Sam anyway by forcing him off to the Wall so that Dickon could inherit.
– TheLethalCarrot
6 hours ago
add a comment |
His father did banish him, no doubt and I know that, but such thing should be nullified when the father and remaining heirs are dead. At least that's common sense for me. No?
– Shadow Wizard
6 hours ago
1
Randyll had already pretty much banished Sam anyway by forcing him off to the Wall so that Dickon could inherit.
– TheLethalCarrot
6 hours ago
His father did banish him, no doubt and I know that, but such thing should be nullified when the father and remaining heirs are dead. At least that's common sense for me. No?
– Shadow Wizard
6 hours ago
His father did banish him, no doubt and I know that, but such thing should be nullified when the father and remaining heirs are dead. At least that's common sense for me. No?
– Shadow Wizard
6 hours ago
1
1
Randyll had already pretty much banished Sam anyway by forcing him off to the Wall so that Dickon could inherit.
– TheLethalCarrot
6 hours ago
Randyll had already pretty much banished Sam anyway by forcing him off to the Wall so that Dickon could inherit.
– TheLethalCarrot
6 hours ago
add a comment |
