Jump to content

the custom of fostering?


ap2442

Recommended Posts

I am relatively new to Westeros and have been struck by the custom of fostering, which seems pretty common...I have a few questions about it.



- Why was Ned fostered by Jon Arryn at the Vale? I thought that Ned's father was killed by the mad king just before Robert's Rebellion, with Ned's older brother, so that would have to mean that Ned lived with Robert Baratheon in the Vale while his father was still alive...so why was Ned sent there if he still had parents...or at least, a father?



- Why was Theon sent to foster at Winterfell? Given the general mercilessness in ASoIaF, I am surprised he wasn't killed. Ned is of course the most just person I think I have met so far in the stories so maybe he offered fostering Theon himself to Robert as an alternative to killing Theon, but it doesn't make sense to me. Is the idea that when Theon comes of age he'll go back to the Iron Islands? Or is he supposed to live his whole life at Winterfell? It seems to me a good way to generate more anger and rebelliousness (and I have watched season 2 of the show so I know what happens with that). Was it a custom to foster the children of enemies rather than to kill them?



- Are there any instances of daughters being fostered?



Thanks so much!


Link to comment
Share on other sites

Fostering seems a custom that exist to both create a bond between families in a future and to "man up" a kid by sending him away.



Why the Vale? Well, it's the region closer to the North than the others besides the Riverlands. Rickard wanted to marry his older son to the daughter of the Lord of the Riverlands and sent his second son to be fostered with the Lord of the Vale. Make sense he wanted to be in good terms with both of his closest neighbours.



And Theon was actually a glorified hostage.


Link to comment
Share on other sites

Fostering in Westeros is a term that covers a wide variety of subcategories. For example Theon was a hostage to make sure his dad stayed in line after Balon's first rebellion. Ned was fostered with Jon Arryn to promote better relations between the North and the closest regional power, the Vale. Quentyn Martell is fostered at Yronwood to smooth over a dispute between the Martells and Yronwoods following Oberyn's suspected poisoning of the former lord of Yronwood. Baelish was fostered at Riverrun because Hoster Tully had become friends with his father during the war, and Baelish would receive a more upper class upbringing in Riverrun.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I don't know what Rickard planned to get out of it specifically, but generally it's not unlike being a squire. Just instead of living with and working for a knight, it's a lord. You're expected to learn how to fight and get experience aswell as some lessons in other fields such as court politics, economics, war strategy, history and other things, i imagine. The reason seems to vary from case to case as sometimes it's because of an alliance (Ned), a friendship (Littlefinger), peace (Theon/Loras), no father/parents (Jon maybe/Sweetrobin) or "making a man out of you" (Sweetrobin).

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I don't know what Rickard planned to get out of it specifically, but generally it's not unlike being a squire. Just instead of living with and working for a knight, it's a lord. You're expected to learn how to fight and get experience aswell as some lessons in other fields such as court politics, economics, war strategy, history and other things, i imagine. The reason seems to vary from case to case as sometimes it's because of an alliance (Ned), a friendship (Littlefinger), peace (Theon/Loras), no father/parents (Jon maybe/Sweetrobin) or "making a man out of you" (Sweetrobin).

Putting Theon in the same category as any of these others is completely wrong. He was a hostage, taken against his and his father's will, a completely different situation, as GRRM himself points out.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Putting Theon in the same category as any of these others is completely wrong. He was a hostage, taken against his and his father's will, a completely different situation, as GRRM himself points out.

I think people get confused because of Eddard Stark's attitude toward the situation. Eddard seemed to think that if Theon were treated fairly, well, and shown kindness while a ward, that when Theon took over the Iron Islands, his experiences as a well-treated ward might prevent further rebellions. Obviously this was not the case, but it seems like it was a calculated manuver on Eddard's part.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Putting Theon in the same category as any of these others is completely wrong. He was a hostage, taken against his and his father's will, a completely different situation, as GRRM himself points out.

Exactly. He was fostered, in a way, but more he was a ward. A hostage like you said.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

They are all pretty much hostages. Theon's case is different in that his family didn't consent to it and it was a preventative measure to keep Balon in line.

Ned and Robert were hardly hostages. Theon, yes. Quentyn I'd call borderline, in that his fostering started out as a dispute settlement but ended up being pretty beneficial to all parties.

To answer the OP:

1. One of the reasons for fostering is to promote diplomacy and political ties. If Rickard really did have the "southron ambitions" he's implied to have had, then fostering Ned with Arryn and having him grow up with Robert was an excellent way to create political bloc. Look at how many lords of the Vale wanted to go fight for Robb; I think it at least some of that stems from residual good will toward Ned dating back to when he stayed there.

2. Theon was pretty young, a child, during his father's rebellion. Taking him as a hostage made more political sense than killing him, because as a hostage he could be used to ensure Balon didn't rebel again. Dead, there'd be no such leverage. I think it was also hoped that he'd assimilate into Ned's household so that when he return to the islands, he'd be an ally of the North and the Iron Throne.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Ned and Robert were hardly hostages.

Not in name or purpose but it does feel like there would be a small shade of this known by both parties. If the Southron Ambitions thing is true, it seems like... idk, lifeline insurance to keep them all banded together against Aerys.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Not in name or purpose but it does feel like there would be a small shade of this known by both parties. If the Southron Ambitions thing is true, it seems like... idk, lifeline insurance to keep them all banded together against Aerys.

Sorry but I really don't see any evidence of this. Starting the foundation of a bloc that might one day be able to be its own political power, sure. Robert and Ned being Jon Arryn's hostages? "Side with me against Aerys or your boy gets it"? Nah.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Sorry but I really don't see any evidence of this. Starting the foundation of a bloc that might one day be able to be its own political power, sure. Robert and Ned being Jon Arryn's hostages? "Side with me against Aerys or your boy gets it"? Nah.

Not that. More like, the fosterings and betrothals kept a link between the families that in case a coup was put in motion would insure that they kept together. Hostage is the wrong word, but the regions definitely go against each with these connections being made.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Fostering in Westeros is based on the medieval practice. I don't know the full origin but creating ties between families is one of the reasons. Only the boys are fostered, and the lord or knight the boy is fostered with teaches him fighting, among other things.



Both Ned and Robert were done with their fostering and legal adults when the rebellion broke out. Most likely they happened to be visiting in the Vale at the time when the king called for their heads.



Most boys are fostered before age 10, and some as young as 6. ETA: these numbers are based on real world, not Westeros. It should also be noted that fostering, while a common practice, was by no means done with all noble boys.


Link to comment
Share on other sites

Both Ned and Robert were done with their fostering and legal adults when the rebellion broke out. Most likely they happened to be visiting in the Vale at the time when the king called for their heads.

I'm not sure the text suggests this. For one, it seems odd that they'd both just happen to be in the Vale otherwise. And I think it's implied that one of the reasons Arryn felt compelled to call his banners was because he still had formal custodial guardianship of them. They were under his protection. If the fostering arrangement had actually ended, I don't think the onus would have been on Jon quite as much to deny Aerys's order.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I forgot Loras was fostered at SE. Also, Brandon was fostered at Barrowtown. It just strengthens relationships between places so they don't murder each other so frequently. It was weird that Ned and Rob were sent to the Vale though... Rickard was up to something; definitely forming some kind of alliance, but for what purpose remains a mystery.


Link to comment
Share on other sites

I'm not sure the text suggests this. For one, it seems odd that they'd both just happen to be in the Vale otherwise. And I think it's implied that one of the reasons Arryn felt compelled to call his banners was because he still had formal custodial guardianship of them. They were under his protection. If the fostering arrangement had actually ended, I don't think the onus would have been on Jon quite as much to deny Aerys's order.

Nope, GRRM already said in a SSM they were not being fostered there anymore, it's just that visiting was common.

And do you really think they would be fostered until they are what, 80 years old? Robert is a Lord Paramount and would still be a ward?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

And do you really think they would be fostered until they are what, 80 years old? Robert is a Lord Paramount and would still be a ward?

More like until they were legally an adult. Knighthood would be a good measurement for that, unless they need to be a Lord because their father was already dead.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Putting Theon in the same category as any of these others is completely wrong. He was a hostage, taken against his and his father's will, a completely different situation, as GRRM himself points out.

So was Loras. Just because Ned was honest about it, doesn't mean it wasn't seen/perceived as the Starks "fostering" Theon. It's the whole reason why he's being called traitor and especially kinslayer. A hostage can't be accused of that, someone who grew up with the Starks and was considered to be fostered by them, absolutely can be. It's why his crime is so distasteful in the eyes of many Westerosi.

Not to mention the fairly obvious re-education that was going on with Theon. That's not a coincidence either, Ned and Robert knew what they were doing. It's without a doubt an extreme case as the line between hostage and foster child is very blurry here as opposed to Loras. Theon is definitely both as the assurance of peace/alliance throughout the story/between many families is achieved through various differing forms of "fostering". Ned, Little Freys, Loras, Theon.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Nope, GRRM already said in a SSM they were not being fostered there anymore, it's just that visiting was common.

And do you really think they would be fostered until they are what, 80 years old? Robert is a Lord Paramount and would still be a ward?

OK, I stand corrected. No need to get short.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.

×
×
  • Create New...