The misunderstood Lord Walder Frey: He should’ve killed Robb

[cxvb]

Is this a troll thread or a valiant attempt to read against the text? The case against Walder Frey is simply this:

- He is illoyal. Evidenced by the "late Walder Frey" and him being the only lord shown to haggle for supporting his liege lords cause. Getting something out of it for his own family is one thing, crass blackmail is something else altogether.

- Nobody desputes Walder had a legitimate grievance against Robb. End of story. Writing whole paragraphs about this is just a weak attempt to add pro-Walder arguments in an undisputed case.

- Wedding vows are broken repeatedly throughout the series. Guest right wasn't, until the red wedding. The respective vows are not equally binding, no matter how often they're both called "vows" to disguise this similarity.

-Everyone agrees other people are assholes, too.

Therefore, Walder would have been silly to continue fighting for a man who spurned him and his family. Anyone who’s not a pushover would have done exactly what Walder did (though probably not as cruel; like chopping Robb’s head off and replacing it with his direwolf). Robb broke a vow; therefore, Walder had every right to break the laws of hospitality.

- This is kindergarden logic. A childish tantrum is not the usual course of action: Walder would not "have been silly". He has a legitimate grievance, and no longer fighting for Robb is certainly one possible response. But he could have demanded compensation and if he judged it strategically better, he could have continued to fight for Robb. Continuing to work with people who insult you does not necessarily mean one is a pushover. (Well, maybe amongst kindergardeners and gang members it is really that binary. Generally it isn't.)

- The _excess_ and the overkill is precisely the point. It is not incidental.

- The vows are not equivalent.

- Even if they were, one person breaking the rules does not justify another person doing the same (again, outside kindergarden and gang membership)

[Panther2000]

Is this a troll thread or a valiant attempt to read against the text? The case against Walder Frey is simply this:

- He is illoyal. Evidenced by the "late Walder Frey" and him being the only lord shown to haggle for supporting his liege lords cause. Getting something out of it for his own family is one thing, crass blackmail is something else altogether.

- Nobody desputes Walder had a legitimate grievance against Robb. End of story. Writing whole paragraphs about this is just a weak attempt to add pro-Walder arguments in an undisputed case.

- Wedding vows are broken repeatedly throughout the series. Guest right wasn't, until the red wedding. The respective vows are not equally binding, no matter how often they're both called "vows" to disguise this similarity.

-Everyone agrees other people are assholes, too.

- This is kindergarden logic. A childish tantrum is not the usual course of action: Walder would not "have been silly". He has a legitimate grievance, and no longer fighting for Robb is certainly one possible response. But he could have demanded compensation and if he judged it strategically better, he could have continued to fight for Robb. Continuing to work with people who insult you does not necessarily mean one is a pushover. (Well, maybe amongst kindergardeners and gang members it is really that binary. Generally it isn't.)

- The _excess_ and the overkill is precisely the point. It is not incidental.

- The vows are not equivalent.

- Even if they were, one person breaking the rules does not justify another person doing the same (again, outside kindergarden and gang membership)

Have to agree with you on this. There is no Way that anyone could or SHOULD think what WF & RB did was the correct action or justify those actions. They killed their KING,

However, what I have to do is don't apply today's standards with this story. I will say though, that both families Frey's & Boltons don't have the trust of any of the families of the North. To Keep looking all around you for deception isn't a good thing. What goes around, comes around.

Still, Rob had to go. :bawl:

[House Obama]

I disagree.

Robb was leaving, after having let half of the northeners desert, after having lost the ground everywhere but where Edmure stood it for the Tully. Again, Robb was heading North in his attempt to demonstrate that the Ironborn's backstab didn't destroy his power. Which was unclear.

That would have let the Frey and the Tully as the only ones that Tywin was going to be able to fight. They were being abandoned to die in the rearguard to let Robb save his seat.

That Robb could have gained in this way time to get to the upcoming winter, and thus pose the basis for a long term survival of his domain didn't help Walder in his decision making.

The Frey were in a very slippery slope, with no place to hide and no place to run: they were alone in the first line of the only front of the war in which Robb involved them, against the whole Kingdom in that moment, after the Blackwater, with Dorne and the Vale happily silent and the Ironborn against the North.

Tywin would have had few enemies in the Riverlands, few time to get to Winterfell before winter fell and the need to give an example.

Who would want to be used as an example by Tywin Lannister? For what? For the privilege of marrying into another dying House, used as an example in songs as the Tarbeck and the Reyne? "The Tully and the Frey".

Given any alternatives, who of the readers wouldn't have chosen it? Who is this Robb Stark to you? A family member? The husband of a family member? The brother of a family member? A friend making your interests? An ally protecting you when you were in need?

In Walder eyes, Robb was the man that came as a beggar to his house, cheated him into a war with great promises he didn't mantain, dishonored and disrespected his family in any possible way. And then run away to keep his losses when the day went south.

Possibly Emmon was going to survive, as the consort Lord of the first of the Lannister of the Twins, Genna. But no more. The Frey name was going to wither, given Tywin obsession with legacies. And quite a lot of the Frey's sons and daughter were going to die before that, too.

From his own point of view, Walder Frey was doing nothing more than what was needed to save his family, his name and himself too.

Thank you, you actually get what I am saying. Walder Frey was doing what was best for his family. Even Jaime said and made reasons why the North couldn't win the war. Also, Robb losing the Karstarks and the Frey, including not having his aunt Lysa supports from the Vale was devastating. They was already the underdog, and Robb actions made thm weaker.

I am a fan of Rob, however he was just in the way. Like Mel stated the war of the 5 kings mean nothing. There is bigger picture and I think that Robert, Ned, Rob, Viserys (sp) & leaders of other houses were just in the way.

I think that Rob's early wins & his capture of Jamie may have gone to his head. Even Twyin was surpised by Rob's battle skills. & I think that is where his problems started. The more battles he won, the more he wouldn't listen. Karstark was right, rob lost the moment he married JW and broke his promise. I think that WF & RB were just a tool to remove Rob & Company. I think that Twyin & his army took Rob too lightly at 1st, thinking that he was just a boy who knew nothing of battles.

WHAT IF ROB LIVED: would rob go North to fight at The Wall? What was Jon to do step down & take orders from Rob who doesn't have a clue about what was going on north of the wall.

Rob would never have let the Free Folk through the wall, and by this action creating a Bigger army of Walkers. . Rob knew better than anyone giving advice, because he was King of The North. Hell, he wouldn't even listen to his own mother.

He had to be removed, just like Ned & Robert in order for the story to go forward. I still think that Rob was a good man, just not a good leader in War Time.

Now, WF & RB, they are going to get what is coming to them. I don't think that Walter really give a crap about his family members, but he does care about POWER & that his family can gain. It is stated in the book that he always felt that other lords look down on him & his family. Well, showing up at the end of the battle & jump on the winning side doesn't help matters. Roose on the other hand saw the writing on the wall & jumped at twyin's offer & who wouldn't want to be Lord of Winterfell.

I still Hate the Freys( I do kind of like Walter now, not because of GOT. I like him because he is a Bad Ass Vampire Killer on the Strain) I hate him because of what & how he did it. But, it needed to be done. This will just make way for Stannis, Jon, Mel & other Lords to take on the Battle at the wall.

Wouldn't it be something that if GRRM left WF standing & all other memebers of his family are knocked off. As for Roose, I think that he is more than what is seen. Something ain't right about that man.

I must say tought, I still hate both Freys & Bolton. I used to hate Theon also, but Ramsay actually made me feel for him, and that ain't good. DAMN.

I never thought about that, I am also unsure whether or not Robb would have helped Jon and the Night Watch's members.

[House Obama]

Is this a troll thread or a valiant attempt to read against the text? The case against Walder Frey is simply this:

- He is illoyal. Evidenced by the "late Walder Frey" and him being the only lord shown to haggle for supporting his liege lords cause. Getting something out of it for his own family is one thing, crass blackmail is something else altogether.

- Nobody desputes Walder had a legitimate grievance against Robb. End of story. Writing whole paragraphs about this is just a weak attempt to add pro-Walder arguments in an undisputed case.

- Wedding vows are broken repeatedly throughout the series. Guest right wasn't, until the red wedding. The respective vows are not equally binding, no matter how often they're both called "vows" to disguise this similarity.

-Everyone agrees other people are assholes, too.

- This is kindergarden logic. A childish tantrum is not the usual course of action: Walder would not "have been silly". He has a legitimate grievance, and no longer fighting for Robb is certainly one possible response. But he could have demanded compensation and if he judged it strategically better, he could have continued to fight for Robb. Continuing to work with people who insult you does not necessarily mean one is a pushover. (Well, maybe amongst kindergardeners and gang members it is really that binary. Generally it isn't.)

- The _excess_ and the overkill is precisely the point. It is not incidental.

- The vows are not equivalent.

- Even if they were, one person breaking the rules does not justify another person doing the same (again, outside kindergarden and gang membership)

I can assure you that this is not a troll thread. I made good points throughout my posts and several commenters agreed with me. Also, I stated that Walder have a bad past, but when Robb declared independent, Walder was loyal and a believer in his cause. Did he want to strengthen his family’s name? Yes! But why wouldn’t he, Walder saw an opportunity and he seized it. As I stated in previous posts, moving up society’s ladder in Westeros is very difficult. For example, Petry Baelish is Lord Paramount of the Vale and Riverlands, but people still look down on him. The only way to move up in Westeros is by being cunning, and Walder is that.

Have to agree with you on this. There is no Way that anyone could or SHOULD think what WF & RB did was the correct action or justify those actions. They killed their KING,

However, what I have to do is don't apply today's standards with this story. I will say though, that both families Frey's & Boltons don't have the trust of any of the families of the North. To Keep looking all around you for deception isn't a good thing. What goes around, comes around.

Still, Rob had to go. :bawl:

I did say that Walder went overboard, if you read my posts. And Jaime killed his king and every readers love him, and Ned and Robert rebelled against Aerys, their king. I agree with both rebellions, Walder and Robert. I cried when Robb died, and I hated Walder and Roose. But after reading the story again and searching for every detail, I realized that they made the right decision. Sometime the tough decisions must be made. Jon learned this while being the Commander of the Watch.

[mediterraneo]

Is this a troll thread or a valiant attempt to read against the text? The case against Walder Frey is simply this:

- He is illoyal. Evidenced by the "late Walder Frey" and him being the only lord shown to haggle for supporting his liege lords cause. Getting something out of it for his own family is one thing, crass blackmail is something else altogether.

- Nobody desputes Walder had a legitimate grievance against Robb. End of story. Writing whole paragraphs about this is just a weak attempt to add pro-Walder arguments in an undisputed case.

- Wedding vows are broken repeatedly throughout the series. Guest right wasn't, until the red wedding. The respective vows are not equally binding, no matter how often they're both called "vows" to disguise this similarity.

-Everyone agrees other people are assholes, too.

- This is kindergarden logic. A childish tantrum is not the usual course of action: Walder would not "have been silly". He has a legitimate grievance, and no longer fighting for Robb is certainly one possible response. But he could have demanded compensation and if he judged it strategically better, he could have continued to fight for Robb. Continuing to work with people who insult you does not necessarily mean one is a pushover. (Well, maybe amongst kindergardeners and gang members it is really that binary. Generally it isn't.)

- The _excess_ and the overkill is precisely the point. It is not incidental.

- The vows are not equivalent.

- Even if they were, one person breaking the rules does not justify another person doing the same (again, outside kindergarden and gang membership)

Maybe we should clarify:

I don't find Walder Frey particularily simpathethic, and I felt a lot the hit of Robb's death. I got that there was something not working properly at the wedding, but very very late, I believe at the start of the Catelin's chapter in which they eat bread and salt there.

I felt terribly the dissonance, between what was happening and what Cat and RObb percieved. There is an italian movie by Nanni Moretti, "Palombella Rossa" in which a group of guys see together a movie, the scene in which Doctor Zivago - interpretated by Omar Sharif the "Doctor Zivago"movie, sees Lara in the Moscow tramway. They have all already seen the movie, they know what is going to happen, but they all start shouting, trying to get her (the actress in the movie) notice him as he tries to call her. A sense of doom, of impotence, of defeat...

Well.

We are not talking of emotions or of who is right.

We are analizing the decision making of the characters with the characters' own logics. To understand them

Cxvb wrote that Lord Frey "is illoyal" because of his behaviour on the Usurper's War.

I disagree on loyalty being an ontological quality and on his analisis of Lord Frey's behaviour too.

"The Late Lord Frey" was not any more disloyal, in the Usurper's War, then any other Lord involved.

Lord Frey was asked to choose between being loyal to the "rightful" if "mad" king and to his "rightful" if "traitor" direct feudal lord, Lord Tully.

Lord Tully was one of the key members of the conspiracy against his own king, fueling the ties between the insurgent Houses by marrying his daughters.

If someone compares some of the normative violations occurring in a crisis situation - oathbreaking on a marriage promise and disrespect of guest rights - he should then compare every one of the normative violations.

Lord Frey got late. And Balon Greyjoy got late too. He didn't take part on the Usurper's War. And his neutrality is not frowned upon a single time in the whole series. But we know that the Ironborn are strange. Lord frey isn't ironborn and that's enough to characterize him differently from Balon Greyjoy.

Lord Frey got late. And Tywin Lannister got late too. He waited the defeat of Rhaegar to act against the Targaryen. Because of the ruthlessness he displayed, and the usefulness of his family taking the blame for the massacre of the royal family to the last man, woman or children caught, he was praised by the winners. Lord Frey got only late, without murdering childrens, and has a worse reputation. An external observer could conclude that killing children is good for reputation.

Lord Frey got late. And Mace Tyrrell got late too. he didn't order the attack on Storm's End even if the garrison's situation was desperate phisically and psicologically. His fleet, the first fleet in the Realms in that moment (Stannis didn't rule Dragonstone and the Royal Fleet in that moment) was doing nothing more than blockading the castle. Hundreds of ships, and yet a ship with supplies got in. Mace Tyrrell with this action guaranteed that the winner on the Trident had to face a large, intact army of his, ready to surrender to a winner, without having put the blood of some Robert's family member on the balance of his decision about what to do. Lord Frey at least didn't spend the whole of the time giving lavish parties, like Mace did.

Lord Frey got late. And Doran Martell got as late as he could too. He sent his army with his brother, but only because the Mad - but not stupid? - King sent his wife to safety on an island, and kept Elia Martell withing pyromancer's range. Doran complied, victim of blackmail. But Lord Frey was not vulnerable to blackmail.

The only great Lords to get on time on the Trident were Lords with something to win. The House of the future king, the House of the future Hand, the House of the future's Hand new wife and the House that had a marriage arrangement pending with the future King.

Lord Frey doesn't belong to this group, as he didn't belong to the group of the Lords that the Mad King could actually blackmail into obedience. So he didn't show up to the decisive battle, not having nothing to win in either case. As all of the other lords in his situation did.

I conclude that any accusation of having behaved disloyally during the War of the Usurper and consequently of "being disloyal" as a permanent character trait, is false.

On the "undisputed cause".

The cause is indeed disputed, with very valid yet instinct based arguments in a lot of places.

Like in the post number 22, the one following the one I cite here. "They killed their king". As if that was worse than Robert rebelling, or the Black and the Green's actions, or even Bloodraven's and Blackfyre's ones. Or as if Robb was actually proclaimed King of the Riverlands and not King in the North.

There is a lack of logical arguments to counter the point, not of attempts.

But I appreciate nevertheless that you accept that Lord Frey has reasons of grievance against Robb.

There has been a claim that marriage promises are broken consistently during the series.

Can anyone show me a single instance in the series of a marriage promise being broken that didn't cause a revenge attempt? Let alone of two by the same family on the same family.

I can show you of instances where the guest rights were eluded by technicisms.

The Baratheon at the start of "the" Dance of the Dragons let a guest slay another guest on their door. "he had left" less than minute before, and the Lord even suggested that course of action to the killer to be.

The Manderly in the case of the three Freys of the Frey Pies. Lord Manderly killed them out of his House, but near enough to keep the bodys in control. He ended up being able to cool them, and serving them as eadible food in a prestigious hall. It wasn't rotten meat.

I can also show you a precedent on guest right's brake in the cautionary tale of the Rat Cook. I'll add that every child in Westeros is aware of the precedent, because it is a cautionary tale.

"Everybody agrees..." Well, I believe that one of the points of this thread it that the OP and Martin both agree with Obi Wan Kenobi's ghost, when he says: "Luke, you're going to find that many of the truths we cling to depend greatly on our own point of view" in "The Empire Strikes Back".

Everybody actually agrees that someone is a criminal, but it is not that easy to guarantee that two persons will agree on who the villain is.

Cheers to everybody...

PS: by the way, I feel that all of the threads lately are somehow "troll threads". We really need Winds of WInter soon. Well, no I really need it, I cannot speak for the others. Nor for the Others, coming with the Winds... :)

[Panther2000]

Thank you, you actually get what I am saying. Walder Frey was doing what was best for his family. Even Jaime said and made reasons why the North couldn't win the war. Also, Robb losing the Karstarks and the Frey, including not having his aunt Lysa supports from the Vale was devastating. They was already the underdog, and Robb actions made thm weaker.

I never thought about that, I am also unsure whether or not Robb would have helped Jon and the Night Watch's members.

I think that Rob would have helped TNW, but in his own way. Remember, even Jon had those ways about him when he 1st arrived. He thought that he was better than everyone else & wanted to go out with his uncle ( meanwhile, he wasn't a Ranger yet, & hadn't taken his vows). Even BJ had to tell Jon you know nothing & are better than no one. Jon had to learn & it took some time to get the bigger picture. Rob had he come to the wall wouldn't have that time to learn about the REAL problem. Hell, still some of the Brothers at the wall don't get it and they live there & should know better.

Rob & All the Stark kids grew up knowing that the Wildings( FREEFOLK) are evil & not to be trusted. They are not told that, they are families just like everyone else trying to survive. The only difference is that they don't Bend the knee to anyone( I like that).

& What was Jon to do then? Jon is Lord Commander & the watch takes no sides however:

1) The King of the North has come to help/or not?

2) The King is his brother who he loves & loves him

3) The NWB who do they follow? Jon or ROB

4) Jon knowing better & GETS IT, would he follow Robs orders or would he do what has to be done regardless?

5) ETC.......................................

I could go on and on.

Rob ( God Love him) but, he would have been a major problem. Even if he were to go along with Jon. Robs banner men wouldn't. Letting wildings through the wall to invade their lands.

& This is only if Rob won his battles & decided to go to the wall to help out.

Rob would have made a great leader on day. However, he grew up like his brothers & sisters sheltered and unknowing about the REAL WORLD. Now, all the kids are getting a TRUE education of the world that they live in. & It ain't good.

PS: I copied the wrong quote. Should have been the quote about if Rob would have helped TNW.

[House Obama]

Maybe we should clarify:

I don't find Walder Frey particularily simpathethic, and I felt a lot the hit of Robb's death. I got that there was something not working properly at the wedding, but very very late, I believe at the start of the Catelin's chapter in which they eat bread and salt there.

I felt terribly the dissonance, between what was happening and what Cat and RObb percieved. There is an italian movie by Nanni Moretti, "Palombella Rossa" in which a group of guys see together a movie, the scene in which Doctor Zivago - interpretated by Omar Sharif the "Doctor Zivago"movie, sees Lara in the Moscow tramway. They have all already seen the movie, they know what is going to happen, but they all start shouting, trying to get her (the actress in the movie) notice him as he tries to call her. A sense of doom, of impotence, of defeat...

Well.

We are not talking of emotions or of who is right.

We are analizing the decision making of the characters with the characters' own logics. To understand them

Cxvb wrote that Lord Frey "is illoyal" because of his behaviour on the Usurper's War.

I disagree on loyalty being an ontological quality and on his analisis of Lord Frey's behaviour too.

"The Late Lord Frey" was not any more disloyal, in the Usurper's War, then any other Lord involved.

Lord Frey was asked to choose between being loyal to the "rightful" if "mad" king and to his "rightful" if "traitor" direct feudal lord, Lord Tully.

Lord Tully was one of the key members of the conspiracy against his own king, fueling the ties between the insurgent Houses by marrying his daughters.

If someone compares some of the normative violations occurring in a crisis situation - oathbreaking on a marriage promise and disrespect of guest rights - he should then compare every one of the normative violations.

Lord Frey got late. And Balon Greyjoy got late too. He didn't take part on the Usurper's War. And his neutrality is not frowned upon a single time in the whole series. But we know that the Ironborn are strange. Lord frey isn't ironborn and that's enough to characterize him differently from Balon Greyjoy.

Lord Frey got late. And Tywin Lannister got late too. He waited the defeat of Rhaegar to act against the Targaryen. Because of the ruthlessness he displayed, and the usefulness of his family taking the blame for the massacre of the royal family to the last man, woman or children caught, he was praised by the winners. Lord Frey got only late, without murdering childrens, and has a worse reputation. An external observer could conclude that killing children is good for reputation.

Lord Frey got late. And Mace Tyrrell got late too. he didn't order the attack on Storm's End even if the garrison's situation was desperate phisically and psicologically. His fleet, the first fleet in the Realms in that moment (Stannis didn't rule Dragonstone and the Royal Fleet in that moment) was doing nothing more than blockading the castle. Hundreds of ships, and yet a ship with supplies got in. Mace Tyrrell with this action guaranteed that the winner on the Trident had to face a large, intact army of his, ready to surrender to a winner, without having put the blood of some Robert's family member on the balance of his decision about what to do. Lord Frey at least didn't spend the whole of the time giving lavish parties, like Mace did.

Lord Frey got late. And Doran Martell got as late as he could too. He sent his army with his brother, but only because the Mad - but not stupid? - King sent his wife to safety on an island, and kept Elia Martell withing pyromancer's range. Doran complied, victim of blackmail. But Lord Frey was not vulnerable to blackmail.

The only great Lords to get on time on the Trident were Lords with something to win. The House of the future king, the House of the future Hand, the House of the future's Hand new wife and the House that had a marriage arrangement pending with the future King.

Lord Frey doesn't belong to this group, as he didn't belong to the group of the Lords that the Mad King could actually blackmail into obedience. So he didn't show up to the decisive battle, not having nothing to win in either case. As all of the other lords in his situation did.

I conclude that any accusation of having behaved disloyally during the War of the Usurper and consequently of "being disloyal" as a permanent character trait, is false.

On the "undisputed cause".

The cause is indeed disputed, with very valid yet instinct based arguments in a lot of places.

Like in the post number 22, the one following the one I cite here. "They killed their king". As if that was worse than Robert rebelling, or the Black and the Green's actions, or even Bloodraven's and Blackfyre's ones. Or as if Robb was actually proclaimed King of the Riverlands and not King in the North.

There is a lack of logical arguments to counter the point, not of attempts.

But I appreciate nevertheless that you accept that Lord Frey has reasons of grievance against Robb.

There has been a claim that marriage promises are broken consistently during the series.

Can anyone show me a single instance in the series of a marriage promise being broken that didn't cause a revenge attempt? Let alone of two by the same family on the same family.

I can show you of instances where the guest rights were eluded by technicisms.

The Baratheon at the start of "the" Dance of the Dragons let a guest slay another guest on their door. "he had left" less than minute before, and the Lord even suggested that course of action to the killer to be.

The Manderly in the case of the three Freys of the Frey Pies. Lord Manderly killed them out of his House, but near enough to keep the bodys in control. He ended up being able to cool them, and serving them as eadible food in a prestigious hall. It wasn't rotten meat.

I can also show you a precedent on guest right's brake in the cautionary tale of the Rat Cook. I'll add that every child in Westeros is aware of the precedent, because it is a cautionary tale.

"Everybody agrees..." Well, I believe that one of the points of this thread it that the OP and Martin both agree with Obi Wan Kenobi's ghost, when he says: "Luke, you're going to find that many of the truths we cling to depend greatly on our own point of view" in "The Empire Strikes Back".

Everybody actually agrees that someone is a criminal, but it is not that easy to guarantee that two persons will agree on who the villain is.

Cheers to everybody...

PS: by the way, I feel that all of the threads lately are somehow "troll threads". We really need Winds of WInter soon. Well, no I really need it, I cannot speak for the others. Nor for the Others, coming with the Winds... :)

Yes! I couldn't articualte any better. Here's someone who gets it.

[TheWanderer]

Lord Frey was asked to choose between being loyal to the "rightful" if "mad" king and to his "rightful" if "traitor" direct feudal lord, Lord Tully.

This is no choice at all. Frey is sworn to Tully. It doesn't matter who Tully fights, if he calls his banners Frey is sworn to answer.

And Tywin Lannister got late too.

Tywin was late, but Tywin also ended the war. Had Frey made a similar contribution he would've been rewarded for it.

Greyjoy, Tyrell and Martel weren't late. And they weren't punished because their actions helped the rebels. Frey's actions did not help, they actively hurt the rebels, and even then they weren't punished for it.

The only great Lords to get on time on the Trident were Lords with something to win.

That's very true, the only Great Houses at the Trident were Lords that wanted to win. But here's the thing those Great Houses weren't fighting alone. They called there banners, because that's what Great Houses do. Tully called his banners, and his men fought with him. Except for Frey. What did the Brackens or Blackwoods win on the Trident? They had nothing to gain and just as much to lose as Walder but they came anyway. Because they were loyal and he was not.

The House of the future king, the House of the future Hand, the House of the future's Hand new wife and the House that had a marriage arrangement pending with the future King.

1) The Lannisters didn't fight at the Trident.

2) No one knew that these roles were going to be assigned as they were.

3) What did the Starks win? No King, no Hand till years later, no marriage agreements.

As all of the other lords in his situation did.

Walder Frey is not Lord of a Great House, he does not have to be blackmailed or bribed. All the other Lords in his situation responded to their Lord Paramounts call. Frey did not.

Or as if Robb was actually proclaimed King of the Riverlands and not King in the North.

Robb was proclaimed King of the North by the Greatjon and council and accepted as King of the Riverlands by Edmure Tully. At the time of his assassination Robb was King in the North and the Riverlands and thus king to both Roose and Walder.

Can anyone show me a single instance in the series of a marriage promise being broken that didn't cause a revenge attempt?

Dany rejects the Martells, nothing comes of it.

Also, what Walder does isn't revenge. No one would have a problem with him seeking revenge, so long as he did it right.

Let alone of two by the same family on the same family.

In what world is Arya's apparent death a broken promise on behalf of the Starks? Walder knew the situation she was in when he agreed to the deal. Her death, though unlikely is not out of the question and even then. People die, that's not a betrayal.

I can also show you a precedent on guest right's brake in the cautionary tale of the Rat Cook. I'll add that every child in Westeros is aware of the precedent, because it is a cautionary tale.

Thank you for bringing this up. This is exactly why a broken promise and breaking the Guest Right cannot be considered the same. Every child in Westeros knows that the Gods themselves will punish those who break Guest Right. Where are the stories of similar fates befalling those who break promises? Where are the Gods enacting eternal punishment on those who break an arragement?

The only way to move up in Westeros is by being cunning, and Walder is that.

Walder didn't move up by commiting the Red Wedding though. Not going through with the RW gets him a daughter married to a Lord Paramount and the gratitude of a King. Aftering going through with it he gets none of this, his House's name is trampled into the mud and his family are hunted in their own lands. His 'cunning' earned him nothing but hate and will be repaid in blood.

I did say that Walder went overboard, if you read my posts.

But you deny that it's important, when it's the very reason people hate him. Had Walder withdrawn his men after Robb's wedding, people might be upset but they'd understand and no-one would be seriously calling for his House to be obliterated. That Walder chose to respond with the Red Wedding and that the Red Wedding was horribly overblown, is exactly why he is loathed.

And Jaime killed his king and every readers love him, and Ned and Robert rebelled against Aerys, their king.

1) Jamie's safety was threatened by his King.

2) Jamie had repeated examples of his King being sadistic and insane.

3) Jamie is hated in-universe for what he did and many readers do not love him (myself included).

4) Ned's family was murdered by Aerys.

5) Ned and Robert were both threatened by Aerys.

6) Ned and Rober openly rebelled and fought in open combat.

In short: completely different situations caused by completely different actions and thus viewed in completely different ways.

[melx]

Lord Frey had every right to kill Rob and i'm glad he did

but i can not support way it has been done....

[Rhaenys_Targaryen]

When Robb was declared the King of The North at the Twins, Walder Frey was most likely elated upon hearing the news. Let’s us not forget, Walder Frey had no idea that Robb was going to become King of the North and Riverlands, and Walder may’ve wondered whether or not the Vale was going to proclaim him as King too because his aunt, Lysa, was the lord of the Vale. In an instant, Walder’s family had been raised to a respectable level. And to hear that Robb had married another girl after swearing an oath to him is beyond disrespectful, and Jeyne’s family was the lowest of the lords.

The Westerings were not a low House, though. House Frey is reasonably young, only 600 of age, yet House Westerling is an ancient line. So no, Jeyne's family wasn't the lowest of lords.. The current line was low on money, yes, but in Westeros, blood is just as important, if not more important at times, than wealth.

Walder Frey’s heir died while fighting in the war, and then his second heir perished too. Nevertheless, Walder still maintained support for Robb. Furthermore, the death of his sons must have been impactful for Lord Walder too because he does really care for his family, despite everyone saying that he only have self-interested. Then for Robb to married Jeyne, and to justify it by basically saying, “The King can do as he pleases,” is otherworldly disrespectful. I am sure Walder would have understood that Robb begot a bastard because he was emotionally weak from the loss of his brothers. Walder have bastards, he would have understood. But for Robb to marry her and still request his army is moronic. As Catelyn stated, “Walder do not want a lord, he want a king.”

Only Stevron died whilst fighting for Robb. Ryman (Stevron's eldest son, and after Stevrons death, Walders heir) died about half a year after the Red Wedding. Thus, Ryman died when the war was done, and House Frey had seized to support House Stark for more than 6 months already.

Walder cares about his line continueing, though he doesn't seem to be extremely fond of specific members. Walder might be an unpleasant personality, he did train his eldest son to rule competently, and taught his heir the values of family. Walder might not particularly like all his descendants (at least that's the feeling I get), he won't send any of them away.

Robb did not marry Jeyne because he was afraid that Walder wouldn't understand that he had fathered a bastard on another girl. Robb married Jeyne because he felt that he had dishonored her, by sleeping with her, thus causing her not being a maiden anymore. Robb married her, because he felt that dishonering Jeyne was a bigger dishonor than breaking his betrothal to House Frey would be.

And as far as marrying Jeyne is concerned, Robb never justifies it by saying "A King can do as he pleases". ;)

When the book was drawing near to the RW, Walder still showed support in Robb’s cause. Even though Robb was losing the war of the Five Kings, but Robb showed stupidity by beheading Lord Karstark, which cost him a large portion of his army. And the North already had fewer men than the Reach and Westerlands. Therefore, Walder would have been silly to continue fighting for a man who spurned him and his family. Anyone who’s not a pushover would have done exactly what Walder did (though probably not as cruel; like chopping Robb’s head off and replacing it with his direwolf). Robb broke a vow; therefore, Walder had every right to break the laws of hospitality. By doing the RW, Walder ensured his family’s safety and became Lord Paramount of the Riverlands… Not bad for a Plan B!

When the book was drawing near the Red Wedding, Walder was busy being involved in plotting the Red Wedding. Hence, all the "support" he was showing Robb (suggesting a marriage between Edmure and Roslin, allowing support after said wedding, etc.) was a fake, a ruse, to draw Robb to the Twins, and kill him. At the point in time where Rickard Karstark was being beheaded, the Frey's had already left Robb's host in anger.

Also, Walder did not become Lord Paramount of the Riverlands. There is no title "Lord Paramount of the RIverlands". Hoster Tully had been the "Lord of the Riverlands" previously, and Edmure for a short while after him. After Edmure's capture, Emmon Frey (not Walder!) became the "Lord of Riverrun", and Petyr Baelish had already been named "Lord Paramount of the Trident".

[nickdt]

Walder cares about his lines continueing. True. But it think the Red Wedding will eventually backfire and causes the downfall of House Frey, with Old Walder to live the last, to see his line destroyed. Then he dies. Don't forget nobody even likes the Freys, because of there late reaction in the rebellion. I think that at the end, only the Boltons will stand at there side. I think that LF has the plan to bring the Freys down. They killed Cat.

[kamkaran]

I would like to say That I support Freerider's comment and I absolutely agree with him!!

[House Obama]

Walder cares about his lines continueing. True. But it think the Red Wedding will eventually backfire and causes the downfall of House Frey, with Old Walder to live the last, to see his line destroyed. Then he dies. Don't forget nobody even likes the Freys, because of there late reaction in the rebellion. I think that at the end, only the Boltons will stand at there side. I think that LF has the plan to bring the Freys down. They killed Cat.

That may be true, but as of right now, House Frey looks secured. And I do not know whether or not LF have a plan to annihilate the freys, but I hopes he does.

I would like to say That I support Freerider's comment and I absolutely agree with him!!

Thanks!!! People are enamor with Robb and overlook his faults, not you.

[House Obama]

Robb Stark unobtainable idealism was the ruin of him and his family. His father would have never married Jeyne, but maybe he would have, Rob was just a boy after all. Tywin Lannister and Roose Bolton seems to be perfect examples of a house that does not put the whims and wishes of an individual family member above the entire family’s line. And I must say, I do not think Robb Stark marrying the girl is more honorable than keeping an oath to Walder Frey. I would think that avenging my father’s honor and life, plus keeping my oath to marry someone is far more honorable than marrying a house of low status. There were clearly less ramifications for Robb impregnating a girl who family could muster up an army and defeat him, then losing almost all his troop because he wanted to protect hers honor.

[Ulthosian Stark]

Just saying, the Freys are doomed. Long as Stoneheart is around theyll be dying, Littlefinger may even be planning some shit for them because they killed Cat, any House from the North or Riverlands comes into power other then what is currently the Freys are on a shit list. Hell even the Reeds who aren't all too far away from them might pull some shit. Manderly is about to order their slaughter in the North, or Stannis might. Lannister/Tyrells alliance is crashing and burning, now Lord Walder really does have a reason to be afraid. No more tywin behind him.

Not to mention the Blackfish. I've suggested before an arrow will just fly through a window and kill Lord Frey, and the fletching will be Tully colors and the arrow black. He is a good archer haha.

And if the High Septon influence spreads, which I bet it will, how will he think of a House that collectively ruined sacred guest rights? He or his sparrows, Warriors Sons or Poor Fellows won't be helping them and may even punish them for that action.

All this stems from the Red Wedding, aka killing Robb.

Do you still think he should of done it?

[TheWanderer]

Tywin Lannister and Roose Bolton seems to be perfect examples of a house that does not put the whims and wishes of an individual family member above the entire family’s line.

You realise right that Tywin and Roose are individuals not Houses? The way you worded this sentence makes it perfectly clear that both House Lannister and House Bolton are run by the whims of an individual. Plus Roose gives Ramsay indcreadily free reign, and allows him to do things that have certainly damaged his Houses reputation.

And I must say, I do not think Robb Stark marrying the girl is more honorable than keeping an oath to Walder Frey. I would think that avenging my father’s honor and life, plus keeping my oath to marry someone is far more honorable than marrying a house of low status. There were clearly less ramifications for Robb impregnating a girl who family could muster up an army and defeat him, then losing almost all his troop because he wanted to protect hers honor.

1) Honour doesn't care about ramifications.

2) Whether he marries a Frey or Jeyne Robb is marrying into a house of low status.

3) Robb's choices are break a promise or dishonour a woman. Robb chose to sacrifice his own honour to preserve Jeyne's, that's the noble thing to do. Plus Robb can make it up to Walder, he certainly tries to, but he can't re-vergin Jeyne.

[House Obama]

You realise right that Tywin and Roose are individuals not Houses? The way you worded this sentence makes it perfectly clear that both House Lannister and House Bolton are run by the whims of an individual. Plus Roose gives Ramsay indcreadily free reign, and allows him to do things that have certainly damaged his Houses reputation.

1) Honour doesn't care about ramifications.

2) Whether he marries a Frey or Jeyne Robb is marrying into a house of low status.

3) Robb's choices are break a promise or dishonour a woman. Robb chose to sacrifice his own honour to preserve Jeyne's, that's the noble thing to do. Plus Robb can make it up to Walder, he certainly tries to, but he can't re-vergin Jeyne.

Clearly, I did not mean for my sentence to means that Tywin and Roose was houses… And Roose is clearly trying to tutor Ramsey into being a good lord. For example, he told Ramsey to play his “sports” in the Bolton’s wood, away from others to witness. Also, he told Ramsey several other things that I would have to dig up to post.

And I must say this again, House Frey is higher in social status than Jeyne’s family. And I do not think that Robb marrying Jeyne is more honorable than keeping his oath to marry another. But we both have different opinions.

[Rhaenys_Targaryen]

Nm

[Seaworth'sShipmate]

Of course was misunderstood. He just wanted to avenge his daughter's hurt feelings!

[TheWanderer]

And Roose is clearly trying to tutor Ramsey into being a good lord. For example, he told Ramsey to play his “sports” in the Bolton’s wood, away from others to witness. Also, he told Ramsey several other things that I would have to dig up to post

Roose talks a decent game to Ramsay but he doesn't enforce it in anyway. There's no denying that Ramsay has done things that hurt the family, even things that Roose specifically tells him he shouldn't have done, just because he wants to. And there's no denying that he hasn't suffered for it.

And I must say this again, House Frey is higher in social status than Jeyne’s family.

But they're not. The Freys are a young house with a reputation as being upstarts being run by a man with a reputation for breeding like a rabit and showing up late. The Westerlings are an old house fallen on hard times and run by a man who married a foreigner. The Westerlings are older and more respectable than the Freys, they're just poorer. All of Freys 'social status' comes from their wealth, which is miniscule in comparision to actually weathly families in the Westerlands and Reach. Besides which, both are of clearly lower status than Robb's own House.