Jump to content

House Frey should be respected


Frey Kings

Recommended Posts

8 hours ago, Bernie Mac said:

Why do you supposed GRRM brings this up? Why he specifically has the Freys mention that the soldiers outside would not be given food or housed by Walder?

Possibly as expecting his army and Roose's three thousand five hundred Northmen to all willingly break guest rights is perhaps pushing his luck. 

GRRM literally has the Freys erect a roof (their roof) over the army and he gives them wine. Of course Walder isn't going to feed them. Why the hell would he be expected to? He needs them drunk and in a place where he controls what happens. 

Killing your allies and king is just as bad as breaking guest right. The men with Roose clearly didn't care. There were Karstark and Dreadfort men who came inside the Twins. Treason, murder, and breaking guest right. These men are walking piles of guilt and judgment of the gods. It clearly wouldn't be a big deal if they did "a little more." Breaking the spirit vs the absolute letter is irrelevant. GRRM writes these in shades of gray for a reason. Nitpicking, and I disagree wholeheartedly, seems a bit petty.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

5 hours ago, Varysblackfyre321 said:

Pity they couldn't see that Cat would be turned into a zombie and become the leader of the BWB and make it their life mission to kill every Frey she could find. Pity they didn't know some of the Northern houses conspiracy to get back a Stark running the north which would enable Stannis a chance to actually win. 

Right you are. People getting vengeful and, let's not be afraid of the word, outright mean about a simple innocent act of treachery and multiple murders was not something foreseeable. At all. Every time a Frey has the Red Wedding thrown in his face and his honor questioned, he has all the right to feel genuinely surprised. ;)

Link to comment
Share on other sites

At the time of the Red Wedding it seemed as though the Baratheon-Lannister dynasty had a secure hold on the Iron Throne. In return for a few dead members of an over-large family and a few decades of disdain from other houses, they establish a Frey cadet branch at the rich and powerful seat of Riverrun, and establish two Freys as the Lady of the Dreadfort and the Lady of Darry. Even if they are disdained by many houses their wealth, power and Lannister marriages would allow them to continue getting excellent marriages from the Westerlands and I’m sure the Reach would care little. And eventually their crimes will be forgotten - after all, the Boltons have no trouble wedding Ryswells and warding sons with the Redforts despite having rebelled against and murdered their liege lords multiple times in the past. So I do think the Red Wedding was a good idea at the time. 

And no doubt in time they would’ve found a way to sink their claws into the fledgeling Baelish dynasty of Harrenhal.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

27 minutes ago, Jaehaerys Tyrell said:

At the time of the Red Wedding it seemed as though the Baratheon-Lannister dynasty had a secure hold on the Iron Throne. In return for a few dead members of an over-large family and a few decades of disdain from other houses, they establish a Frey cadet branch at the rich and powerful seat of Riverrun, and establish two Freys as the Lady of the Dreadfort and the Lady of Darry. Even if they are disdained by many houses their wealth, power and Lannister marriages would allow them to continue getting excellent marriages from the Westerlands and I’m sure the Reach would care little. And eventually their crimes will be forgotten - after all, the Boltons have no trouble wedding Ryswells and warding sons with the Redforts despite having rebelled against and murdered their liege lords multiple times in the past. So I do think the Red Wedding was a good idea at the time. 

And no doubt in time they would’ve found a way to sink their claws into the fledgeling Baelish dynasty of Harrenhal.

Their wealth and power meant little and less when Walder was proposing marriages to other houses before the RW. The Lannisters are basically abandoning them. Their reputation is in tatters. 

Boltons have been "pacified" for longer than the Freys have existed as a house.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 26/01/2018 at 3:07 PM, Universal Sword Donor said:

GRRM literally has the Freys erect a roof (their roof) over the army and he gives them wine.

First of all wine or drink is not what the books state activates guest rights, it is food.

And if I lend someone a tent they do not become my guest, they are not staying under my roof. They are staying in a tent. And what if these tents are not Walder's, if he has borrowed them from Lord Hunter in the Vale; is it Lord Hunter who is breaking the custom of Guest Rights? No, of course not. 

The books are clear and there is little reason for GRRM to have the Freys be so clear on this

"Your lords bannermen are also welcome to shelter under our roof and partake of the wedding feast."

"And my men?" asked Robb.

"My lord grandfather regrets that he cannot feed nor house so large a host."

There is little reason for the Freys to do this, to be so clear in not allowing the army food or to be under their roof and nor does GRRM have to constantly hammer home that food and being under a person's roof is a requirement. 

"Robb, listen to me. Once you have eaten of his bread and salt, you have the guest right, and the laws of hospitality protect you beneath his roof."
Robb looked more amused than afraid. "I have an army to protect me, Mother, I don't need to trust in bread and salt.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
"Your father would have had my head off." The king gave a shrug. "Though once I had eaten at his board I was protected by guest right. The laws of hospitality are as old as the First Men, and sacred as a heart tree."
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
 and commanded the cook to bake bread enough for twenty, in case the Lords Declarant brought more men than expected. Once they eat our bread and salt they are our guests and cannot harm us. 
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
It was, though any stale crust would have tasted just as fine to Davos; it meant he was a guest here, for this one night at least. The lords of the Three Sisters had a black repute, and none more so than Godric Borrell, Lord of Sweetsister, Shield of Sisterton, Master of Breakwater Castle, and Keeper of the Night Lamp … but even robber lords and wreckers were bound by the ancient laws of hospitality. I will see the dawn, at least, Davos told himself. I have eaten of his bread and salt.

And of course Tyrion's shock about guest rights and this whole exchange makes little sense if the thousands of soldiers with Robb were also considered guests. 

“So much for guest right.”
“The blood is on Walder Frey’s hands, not mine. […] Explain to me why it is more noble to kill ten thousand men in battle than a dozen at dinner.”

Quote

 

Of course Walder isn't going to feed them. Why the hell would he be expected to? He needs them drunk and in a place where he controls what happens. 

If this is so obvious then why does GRRM feel the need to point it out?

Why does almost every mention of Guest Rights bring up food?

Now GRRM is free to add more information on this subject in the future, but from what is written so far in the books is that the army outside were not protected under the custom of Guest Rights. That is currently canon. 

Quote

Killing your allies and king is just as bad as breaking guest right.

I agree wholeheartedly with this. I enjoyed what happened to the Freys in White Harbor, they had it coming, as did Merret. 

This is one of my issues with the subject, people acting that because some invisible gods said this was bad then it was bad. Regardless of it being a religious custom or not it was a fucked up thing to do and the Freys are deserving of any punishment they may or may not get. Same for the Tyrells. But that does not guarantee they will be punished, as good people suffer and bad people prosper just as much as the opposite. 

But if the Freys are extinguished I'd want it at least to be well written and be in line with the rest of GRRM's work, the end of the Freys in the show was pretty weak. 

 

On 26/01/2018 at 2:24 PM, Knight Of Winter said:

I did, apparently

And seemingly one of Tion or Stevron. Also the 500ish who died at the Green Fork, some of whom may have been nephews, great nephews or other relations to Walder Frey. 

On 26/01/2018 at 7:40 AM, Knight Of Winter said:

Lords Vypren and Charlton are Frey bannermen, IIRC.

Lord Vypren is not, and Lord Charlton, while a vassal, is still also a neighbouring Lord. 

On 26/01/2018 at 7:40 AM, Knight Of Winter said:

 

When I said "neighbours", I mean just that - houses with lands in vicinity of Twins. These would be Northern houses to the north and Riverlands houses to the other sides.

The North, outside of the Crannogmen who already hate the Freys, are hardly 'neighbours'. The Freys are far closer to the Iron Islands, the Westerlands, the Crownlands and the Vale than they are to the majority of Northern Houses. 

On 26/01/2018 at 7:40 AM, Knight Of Winter said:

And pretty much all of them lost their members at RW and have strong reasons to hate Freys.

That is actually a common misconception in regards to the Riverlands. 

Thirty-five hundred they were, thirty-five hundred who had been blooded in the Whispering Wood, who had reddened their swords at the Battle of the Camps, at Oxcross, Ashemark, and the Crag, and all through the gold-rich hills of the Lannister west. Aside from her brother Edmure's modest retinue of friends, the lords of the Trident had remained to hold the riverlands while the king retook the north.

So not pretty much all of them. Some, like Blackwood would be pissed, he lost a son after all

On 26/01/2018 at 7:40 AM, Knight Of Winter said:

And how will these houses behave in case Lannisters and Boltons are somehow toppled from power?

Too many variables to consider. But the Freys did not make the deal thinking the Crown was in any danger of being toppled in power. They has just won the war and looked incredibly secure. 

The reason why this is a great series is these unexpected events happening, but these events are unexpected. Walder does not know the machinations of Littlefinger and Varys, does not know of secret pacts with Targareyn pretenders look thought dead or that Starks would be returning from the grave, becoming treegods or faceless assassins.  He does not know the reemergence of magic or the upcoming invasion from creatures thought of as children's stories. 

So from Walder's POV getting into bed with the Crown seems the perfectly logical thing to do. 

On 26/01/2018 at 7:40 AM, Knight Of Winter said:

 

How does the fact that ASOIAF is a fantasy novel relate to our belief that Freys will be punished?

In the sense that the Starks are the protagonists of the series and it is the norm for the antagpnists in fantasy books, which the Freys clearly are, to be punished. 

Is this really an outlandish statement that it required further explanation?

On 26/01/2018 at 7:40 AM, Knight Of Winter said:

And while I agree that revenge was primary motive, I don't think that RW was strong political move at all, for the reasons I stated above.

And I'd disagree with your primary reason of making enemies of the their Northern neighbours;  as the Freys became enemies of the North as soon as they abandoned Robb in the Westerlands after he married Jenye. If some of the Northern lords had their way they would have murdered the Freys there and then

"I never meant to. Ser Stevron died for me, and Olyvar was as loyal a squire as any king could want. He asked to stay with me, but Ser Ryman took him with the rest. All their strength. The Greatjon urged me to attack them . . ."
"Fighting your own in the midst of your enemies?" she said. "It would have been the end of you."
 
So politically instead of making an enemy of the entire North, they are now allies with the new Warden, the current King, the neiboring Westerlands while having gained the lands and influence of the Darry and Riverrun lands. 
 
Politically the pro column far out balanced the negative column. 
 
On 26/01/2018 at 7:40 AM, Knight Of Winter said:

Oh come on, their reputation before and after the RW are incomparable.

Oh come on, read what is written. I stated their reputation was not that high to begin with, not that it was unchanged. 

On 26/01/2018 at 7:40 AM, Knight Of Winter said:

 

Before they were reated as basically riche nouveau - a certain disdain for their origins, but certainly respect for their wealth and power. Nowdays, from KL and Vale to the Wall, the word "Frey" is a synonym for scum.

Well yeah, in the immediate aftermath they are seen like that. They will get along with it and, should they survive, their reputation, with the right management, will improve. 

The Campbells of Scotland, who the Red Wedding was inspired by, managed to get on with it only making a long term enemy of the Macdonalds (not to be confused with the burger chain). It did not end them as a House or a political entity or with the other Scottish nobles or the English nobles to their South. 

On 26/01/2018 at 7:40 AM, Knight Of Winter said:

One could think of a few reasons.

Because this hypothetical new king/queen will be contra-Lannisters, and Freys are staunch allies of the Lannisters. Because he/she has much more to gain by allying himself/herself with Frey enemies (North and Riverlands) than with Freys.

Wiping out houses is not easy, especially wiping out Houses that have wronged Houses that are your enemies. 

Logically it makes no sense, that Dany would come home and look to reward and hurt the enemies of two of the Houses thay she felt betrayed her. 

Dany especially may not want to fuck over the current heirs of Riverrun, the grand nephews of the William Darry, the man who she considers a father figure. 

On 26/01/2018 at 7:40 AM, Knight Of Winter said:

 

Because he/she may kill or free Riverlands hostages when she/she takes KL, which are the only leverage which Freys have over their neighbors.

That is not the only leverage. The North is spent as a military force outside of the North. They are not going to be able to wage a war against the Freys until a few years after this current Winter is over. 

The Freys are intermarried with many Riverland Houses, they are not going to want to see every member killed, and some Houses, like the Vyprens, Charltons, Lannisters of Darry, Freys of Riverrun, possibly Goodbrooks, Harwicks and others may be more pro Frey than anti. 

And of course this leaves a dangerous precedent. Is House Bracken, who changed sides and spent half a year fighting for the Lannisters against the Blackwoods, going to be in favor of this? 

Don't get me wrong, I can see some kind of punishment, but I also foresee that Walder, Ryman and possibly his sons will be long dead before there is a new faction sitting on the Crown. Wiping out a House for the crimes of dead men seems petty, considering that Dany herself feels that what happened to her in part thanks to what her father did was unjust. And by this logic should she not want to punish the Starks even further for the crimes of Ned?

On 26/01/2018 at 7:40 AM, Knight Of Winter said:

 

Because punishing Freys is a cheap and quick PR move to gain popularity. Because Dany is a moral crusader who went out of the way to destroy e.g. slavery. Because Aegon might be looking to ally himself with Faith, and Faith is disgusted by RW...

Disguestes, yes. No one in the Faith is suggesting every member be wiped out

On 26/01/2018 at 7:40 AM, Knight Of Winter said:

 

If that's the case, then Walder is a pretty shitty lord, putting his petty desire for vengeance ahead of long-term future of his house, as long as he's not there to see it.

Don't disagree. It is something he shares with Robb when Cat pleads with him to seek peace and he states that he can never do that. 

On 26/01/2018 at 7:40 AM, Knight Of Winter said:

So, a case of upholding letter of an "oath", but not the spirit (much like the Manderly - "first I'll give you guest parting gifts, and then I'll have you killed"). Still a disastrous move in a PR department.

 

Well no one claimed that Walder was a marketing CEO. Not sure why you are so obsessed with marketing in this conversation. Am I missing the argument others have made that it was a good marketing strategy? Or that Walder, or any other Houses puts marketing above their own (petty) honor?

 

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

5 hours ago, Bernie Mac said:

But if the Freys are extinguished I'd want it at least to be well written and be in line with the rest of GRRM's work, the end of the Freys in the show was pretty weak. 

Spoiler

That scene showed that Arya is hypocrite when she criticised Freys for not killing all Starks, while she killed only adult men?

5 hours ago, Bernie Mac said:

 

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 hours ago, Kandrax said:

Do anyone seriously believe that sane Daenerys would set castle full of innocent children on fire?

No. But seeing as most adult males in the Frey family will probably be dead by the time Dany gets to Westeros I can see her taking the Twins away from those that remain.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 26/01/2018 at 6:08 PM, Knight Of Winter said:

@Jaehaerys Tyrell - you think they'll survive that long?

I was justifying the Red Wedding from the perspective of Lord Walder at the time that it occurred.

On 26/01/2018 at 10:48 PM, Kandrax said:

They will, but reduced to Mallister vassals.

Interesting idea actually, I was just thinking the other day how useful it would be for the Mallisters to control the Crossing due to the trade routes. I also think this would be a fair solution - there are many good Freys, and being allowed to keep their castle but with a reduced standing, power and wealth seems fair to me should some pro-Stark power win in the end. Mayhaps with their lands partitioned between the Mallisters and Blackwoods, who both held out to the last.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 hours ago, Kandrax said:
  Hide contents

That scene showed that Arya is hypocrite when she criticised Freys for not killing all Starks, while she killed only adult men?

 

 

Hopefully the series will end with a teenage Elmar appearing to wipe out those dastardly Starks ;) 

“Leave one bridge standing, and the river can always be crossed.”

Link to comment
Share on other sites

13 hours ago, Bernie Mac said:

snip

I'll just leave this here because he says it better than I do: http://warsofasoiaf.tumblr.com/post/169183040656/i-was-just-arguing-with-someone-over-the-red

However, if said person requires a more direct effort, remember that Walder Frey had set up rigged pavilions that collapse upon those under them. So he offered them shelter with the intent to murder. That’s a roof he set up specifically to fall on them.

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

56 minutes ago, Universal Sword Donor said:

I'll just leave this here because he says it better than I do: http://warsofasoiaf.tumblr.com/post/169183040656/i-was-just-arguing-with-someone-over-the-red

That person has said nothing you have not already said. Neither of you have used the text, not actually read what need to be offered for Guest Rights Protection to be activated. There are multiple quotes in the books on the subject and the majority of them all clarify that food needs to have been eaten under the host's roof. 

56 minutes ago, Universal Sword Donor said:

However, if said person requires a more direct effort, remember that Walder Frey had set up rigged pavilions that collapse upon those under them. So he offered them shelter with the intent to murder. That’s a roof he set up specifically to fall on them.

It is not a roof. A tent is not a host's roof no more than an umbrella is. And of course that it ignoring what GRRM actually tells the reader. That the guests not only have to be under the host's roof (which you can clearly see that a tent outside his castle walls is stretching it) but needs to be offered food. 

Robb, Cat and the other Northern and Riverland nobles have already been invited into the Twins, are actually inside the dining Hall and Cat still does not think she and her son have been protected by Guest Rights, not until they have eaten

"Bread and salt. Heh. Of course, of course." The old man clapped his hands together, and servants came into the hall, bearing flagons of wine and trays of bread, cheese, and butter. Lord Walder took a cup of red himself, and raised it high with a spotted hand. "My guests," he said. "My honored guests. Be welcome beneath my roof, and at my table."
"We thank you for your hospitality, my lord," Robb replied. Edmure echoed him, along with the Greatjon, Ser Marq Piper, and the others. They drank his wine and ate his bread and butter. Catelyn tasted the wine and nibbled at some bread, and felt much the better for it. Now we should be safe, she thought.

It is the same at the Eyrie as despite Littlefinger opening his gates to the Lords Declarant he points out they, the hosts, are not protected by Guest Rights until the nobles with Lord Royce have eaten Littlefinger's food. 

She did indeed. She saw to the mulling of the wine first, found a suitable wheel of sharp white cheese, and commanded the cook to bake bread enough for twenty, in case the Lords Declarant brought more men than expected. Once they eat our bread and salt they are our guests and cannot harm us. The Freys had broken all the laws of hospitality when they'd murdered her lady mother and her brother at the Twins, but she could not believe that a lord as noble as Yohn Royce would ever stoop to do the same.

So no, merely inviting someone inside their halls is not protecting someone by Guest Rights (and lets be clear, the Freys did not do that to the soldiers outside) they also have to be offered bread and salt (food). Both Cat and Sansa are clear about this, as are other sources throughout the series

"Not you," she said. "I watched. You never ate at his board, nor slept by his fire. He never gave you guest-right, so you're not bound to him. It's for the baby I have to go." - One of Craster's wives warning  Jon 

----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

"Your father would have had my head off." The king gave a shrug. "Though once I had eaten at his board I was protected by guest right. The laws of hospitality are as old as the First Men, and sacred as a heart tree." He gestured at the board between them, the broken bread and chicken bones. "Here you are the guest, and safe from harm at my hands . . . this night, at least." - Mance to Jon

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

"Robb, listen to me. Once you have eaten of his bread and salt, you have the guest right, and the laws of hospitality protect you beneath his roof."
Robb looked more amused than afraid. "I have an army to protect me, Mother, I don't need to trust in bread and salt." - Cat explaining what Guest Rights are to her son (the reader) and him not really caring
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
 "Bread and salt," Brienne gasped. "The inn . . . Septon Meribald fed the children . . . we broke bread with your sister . . ."
"Guest right don't mean so much as it used to," said the girl. "Not since m'lady come back from the wedding. Some o' them swinging down by the river figured they was guests too." - Brienne in the Riverlands
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
It was, though any stale crust would have tasted just as fine to Davos; it meant he was a guest here, for this one night at least. The lords of the Three Sisters had a black repute, and none more so than Godric Borrell, Lord of Sweetsister, Shield of Sisterton, Master of Breakwater Castle, and Keeper of the Night Lamp … but even robber lords and wreckers were bound by the ancient laws of hospitality. I will see the dawn, at least, Davos told himself. I have eaten of his bread and salt. - Davos feeling protected by Lord Borrell
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
They infest my city like roaches, and at night I feel them crawling over me." The fat man's fingers coiled into a fist, and all his chins trembled. "My son Wendel came to the Twins a guest. He ate Lord Walder's bread and salt, and hung his sword upon the wall to feast with friends. And they murdered him. Murdered, I say, and may the Freys choke upon their fables. - Wyman on the Freys breaking of Guest Rights
 
GRRM is pretty clear on what the people of Westeros and beyond the Wall consider classifies as hospitality and the soldiers outside of the Twins simply  don't fall under it as Walder has pointedly refused them food. 
 
Now obviously GRRM can add more criteria to what he has already said and it would change what the books have said on the subject, but until such a time the books are pretty clear what the protection of Guest Rights entails and the common soldiers outside the Twins and on the far bank of the River were not protected by Guest Rights as they had no food and it is highly debatable that they were under his 'roof'. 
 
 
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Archived

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

Guest
This topic is now closed to further replies.
×
×
  • Create New...