Jump to content

Cannibalism and Guest Rights


Recommended Posts

The murder/cannibal you should be worried about is what is going on with Tywin's men at Harrenhal. This is straight up murder and torture.

From Jaime's chapter, but I know Wyman talks with Davos about this in ADWD as well.

A Feast for Crows - Jaime III

No one wanted to tell him. Finally, Shitmouth lowered his eyes, and muttered, "Rotted, ser. And et."
"One of the captives was always begging food," Rafford admitted, "so Ser said to give him roast goat. The Qohorik didn't have much meat on him, though. Ser took his hands and feet first, then his arms and legs."
"The fat bugger got most, m'lord," Shitmouth offered, "but Ser, he said to see that all the captives had a taste. And Hoat too, his own self. That whoreson 'ud slobber when we fed him, and the grease'd run down into that skinny beard o' his."

A Feast for Crows - Jaime III

The other captives had been better treated. Ser Wylis Manderly was amongst them, along with several other highborn northmen taken prisoner by the Mountain That Rides in the fighting at the fords of the Trident. Useful hostages, all worth a goodly ransom. They were ragged, filthy, and shaggy to a man, and some had fresh bruises, cracked teeth, and missing fingers, but their wounds had been washed and bandaged, and none of them had gone hungry. Jaime wondered if they had any inkling what they'd been eating, and decided it was better not to inquire.
None had any defiance left; especially not Ser Wylis, a bushy-faced tub of suet with dull eyes and sallow, sagging jowls. When Jaime told him that he would be escorted to Maidenpool and there put on a ship for White Harbor, Ser Wylis collapsed into a puddle on the floor and sobbed longer and louder than Pia had. It took four men to lift him back onto his feet. Too much roast goat, Jaime reflected. Gods, but I hate this bloody castle. Harrenhal had seen more horror in its three hundred years than Casterly Rock had witnessed in three thousand.
Jaime commanded that fires be lit in the Hall of a Hundred Hearths and sent the cook hobbling back to the kitchens to prepare a hot meal for the men of his column. "Anything but goat."
Link to comment
Share on other sites

17 hours ago, The Fattest Leech said:
 
"He was dead," the weeping boy screamed, as the flames licked up his legs. "We found him dead … please … we was hungry …" The fires reached his balls. As the hair around his cock began to burn, his pleading dissolved into one long wordless shriek.

Well the boy could be lying to try to save his life.

And Stannis far from having no participation in this execution did sanction for it-the Queensguard may have apprehended the suspects but ultimately Stannis who condemned them to their fiery death.

His rejection of what his advisores  proposed was committing human sacrifice of none-believer without  apparent cause other than to garner Rh'lor favor. He hasn't really shifted his views on Rh'lor. He sees it(whatever "it"is) as a useful enough tool to use against his enemies. He wasn't burning disbelievers for merely being disbelievers to begin with nor without them having a real crime (well he did consider offering his nephew).

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, Blackwater Revenant said:

For eating a Frey pie? ...He would cut out Wyman's stomach, and then give him a position on his small council. :idea:

Meh. He wasn't exactly distraught at the news of the Red wedding-some can even dare say really pleased that another traitor had fallen. Wyman committed an abominable act for no purpose other than facilitate some petty sense of revenge.

And not even just against those who'd be the primary culprits for the Red Wedding; mostly just people related to them.

He wouldn't kill him as @Jaehaerys Tyrell

But he'd never give any praise for having done some so unnatural.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

35 minutes ago, Varysblackfyre321 said:

And not even just against those who'd be the primary culprits for the Red Wedding; mostly just people related to them.

The two morons who had the nerves to assert that the Starks turned into werewolves or direwolves got what they deserved.

Wyman rendered a service to humanity by killing them. If someone “committed an abominable act for no purpose other than facilitate some petty sense of revenge”, it's Walder Frey.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 1/25/2018 at 10:16 PM, Noble Lothar Frey said:

Wayman Manderly's crimes is punishable by law and it is an affront to the gods.  What Wayman Manderly did is much, much worse than the violation of guest rights. 

Merlings are known for eating human flesh and there are three instances of Manderly's doing so- the Frey Pies, Wylis Manderly eating roast "Goat", and Lady Hornwood eating her own fingers.

Perhaps they are merely being true to their nature?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

46 minutes ago, Nowy Tends said:

The two morons who had the nerves to assert that the Starks turned into werewolves or direwolves got what they deserved.

Wyman rendered a service to humanity by killing them. If someone “committed an abominable act for no purpose other than facilitate some petty sense of revenge”, it's Walder Frey.

3 Frey morons asserted the Robb Stark turned into a wolf and started murderering guests and Wyman's son simply got caught in the crossfire.

Manderly killed them for that.

Its still murder.

But even that even  Stannis could show begrudging understanding for; but the baking them into pies and serving them to their relatives(one a pregnant woman) is more than a step too far.

It was an abominable act with the only intention of fulfilling a pity sense of revenge. 

It was unnatural. 

Stannis would be simply disgusted with Manderly if he'd ever found out the big man had done such a thing.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 1/25/2018 at 10:16 PM, Noble Lothar Frey said:

Guest rights is an ancient custom.  But it is not against the law to break guest rights.  I will grant you that it is a cherished custom but not one that is expressly prohibited by the king's laws.

Cannibalism is murder.  I would assume it is punishable by law since Stannis roasted his soldiers for eating the dead. 

Wayman Manderly's crimes is punishable by law and it is an affront to the gods.  What Wayman Manderly did is much, much worse than the violation of guest rights. 

It matters not whether guest rights is law or custom.  The Red Wedding was approved by Tywin Lannister on behalf of the king.  At least we know this particular instance of guest rights violation is legal. 

Cannibalism, as done by Wayman Manderly is not legal.  Not only was it an act of eating human beings but he killed those Freys.  It was not self-defense but only motivated by revenge.  I can excuse Walder Frey on this instance but not Wayman Manderly. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

51 minutes ago, Nowy Tends said:

The two morons who had the nerves to assert that the Starks turned into werewolves or direwolves got what they deserved.

Wyman rendered a service to humanity by killing them. If someone “committed an abominable act for no purpose other than facilitate some petty sense of revenge”, it's Walder Frey.

They were lying but it was not Wayman's right to kill them.  The R/W was approved by the king, which makes it legal. 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

19 hours ago, LyrnaSnowBunnyAvenger said:

I never said he was a religious zealot. I said he was a zealot.  Big difference.  Stannis doesn't care about religion, he sees in a tunnel vision of what is right. He cannot accept anything other than that. He is a political zealot. 

I apologize for misconstruing what you said; zealots aren't just those who are religious.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

50 minutes ago, Superzapper Recharge said:

They were lying but it was not Wayman's right to kill them.  The R/W was approved by the king, which makes it legal.

Both premises of your syllogism happen to be false. First, the Crown did its darnedest to distant themselves from the Red Wedding, there has never been an official expression of approval. Not from the king, not from the regent, not from the Hand. Second, "the king approves it, hence it's legal" was a fallacy that cost House Targaryen the Iron Throne.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, Varysblackfyre321 said:

And not even just against those who'd be the primary culprits for the Red Wedding; mostly just people related to them.

But Jared, Rhaegar and Symond were not against Red Wedding. Jared told lie about werewolves, while Rhaegar demonized Robb.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, Superzapper Recharge said:

The R/W was approved by the king, which makes it legal. 

:D:D:D the king himself was "illegal" – the byproduct of an incestuous adultery…

Dude, if you believe "legality" abolish "immorality" I wouldn't like to live in your vicinity during troubled times… :wacko:

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Archived

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

×
×
  • Create New...