Jump to content

Mance Rayder violated guest rights!


Wolf's Bane

Recommended Posts

15 minutes ago, 867-5309 said:

Jon sent Mance on his mission.  As mission commander, Jon takes responsibility for his operatives.  Mance would not have rescued fake Arya if Jon had not ordered it.  As a matter of fact, that was his reason for being there.  

I'm sorry but how is that Jon breaking guest rights? Jon has not had any bread and salt under Roose's roof, he is either the guest or the host, he is not honor bound to do anything.  the only people that guest rights protects and the only people who can break guest rights are the host and the guest.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

27 minutes ago, 867-5309 said:

You can't get Jon out of this.

Har.

27 minutes ago, 867-5309 said:

He has no excuse. 

What does Jon need an excuse for?  LC Snow is supposedly dead by the knives of his men.

27 minutes ago, 867-5309 said:

Mance Rayder is working for Jon. 

If Mance is working for anyone he has his own best interest involved.

Why would Mance take the women to WF when the girl they were seeking was supposedly near long lake?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

13 minutes ago, 867-5309 said:

You can't get Jon out of this.  He has no excuse.  Mance Rayder is working for Jon.  Jon supplied him with who he needed for the mission.  Jon is responsible because if it were not for his orders, Mance Rayder would not be in Winterfell to start with.  Mance Rayder couldn't leave the wall without Jon's leave.  Dolorous Edd didn't decide on his own to bring the women to Mance.  It was all Jon's doing.

Have you read any of this thread and all of the actual book quotes provided, because you seem to be parroting what a small select few other posters keep repeating without any text. 

And the topic of this thread, in case you missed that text, is Mance. Mance is debatable, not Jon because that idea is ridiculous. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

For the latecomers who missed it a few pages back and are still struggling w/ the concept of guest right: 

On 20/04/2018 at 6:49 PM, kissdbyfire said:

This.Another thing that is being misunderstood by many here.

So, let's refresh our memories. 

host noun 
UK  /həʊst/ US  /hoʊst/ooun (PERSON WITH GUESTS)

B2 [ C ] female also hostess someone who has guests:

We thanked our hosts for a very enjoyable evening.
The local language school is advertising for host families (= families people stay with when they are visiting another country).
 
guest noun [ C ] 
UK  /ɡest/ US  /ɡest/

A2 person who is staying with you, or a person you have invited to asocial occasion, such as a party or a meal:

150 guests were invited to the wedding.
We have guests staying this weekend.
Is he on the guest list?
uk He is a paying guest (= he pays for the use of a room in someone's home).

A2 a person who is staying in a hotel:

We would like to remind all our guests to leave their keys at reception before they depart.

B2 a person, such as an entertainer, who has been invited to appearon a television or radio programme or in a performance:

Our special guest on the programme tonight is Robert de Niro.
Madonna made a guest appearance at the concert.
Simon Rattle will be the guest conductor with the London Symphony Orchestra.
 
(You're welcome)
 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

28 minutes ago, 867-5309 said:

You can't get Jon out of this.  He has no excuse.  Mance Rayder is working for Jon.  Jon supplied him with who he needed for the mission.  Jon is responsible because if it were not for his orders, Mance Rayder would not be in Winterfell to start with.  Mance Rayder couldn't leave the wall without Jon's leave.  Dolorous Edd didn't decide on his own to bring the women to Mance.  It was all Jon's doing.

Again.

Even if that were the case.

So. Freaking. What?

What do you want now? Do you want us all to swear an oath how "nasty ebil and possibly smelly as well" Jon Snow is?
Because I'd have to decline that, on account of multiple reasons.
Yeah sucked to be those serving men I guess, but such is Westeros, it's a brutal, primitive society where people were in much higher risk of being killed than today.

Nobody's gonna avenge the Boltons. Nobody. Anywhere. Ever.  So Mance, and Jon, would still be safe.
The Seven simply don't exist and the Old Gods are the uploaded minds of the Children of the Forest, who right now only care about how to deal with the Others. So there wouldn't be any divine retribution either.
And this is a series where most heroic characters frequently do shady or downright repulsive things. 
This leads to the question....so what? To which nobody has given an answer yet.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, 867-5309 said:

  Hiding Arya from Ramsay is not neutral.

While marrying by force a fake Arya who's actually a sex slave, is neutral?

Oh sure, so you're saying Mance Rayder escaped from Castle Black and took it upon himself to get Arya.  That's absurd.  Mance Rayder was acting under Jon's directions.  Jon told him to bring his sister to the wall so he can hide her from Ramsay.  

Please provide ONE quote supporting your gibberish — a quote from the BOOKS, (assuming you have them…), not from another irrational anti-Stark crusader…

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, The Fattest Leech said:

Have you read any of this thread and all of the actual book quotes provided, because you seem to be parroting what a small select few other posters keep repeating without any text. 

I'd bet he/she is one of these posters under another alias/account.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

8 hours ago, Clegane'sPup said:

I am among one of the few that think Ramsey is behind the killings in WF.

Yay! :cheers: It's the only answer that makes sense to me.

(I've had a lot of demands on my time, but hope I can be back more frequently.)

9 hours ago, Lord Varys said:

He has the Dustins and the Ryswells, too.

I'd eat my hat.:rolleyes: And of course by Bolton men, I mean Dreadfort men and any of those Roose brought with him that he hasn't released. I don't think he can have released many, with Stannis posing a threat... In any case, we are forced to speak in estimates.

 

9 hours ago, Lord Varys said:

They profit from mistrust and suspicion, too, considering that hostilities among the factions within Winterfell would provide the ideal distraction for their enterprise

I don't see that a distraction benefits them, as I've said. If anything, mistrust and suspicion works against them.

They went to some trouble to appear as "business as usual" as possible. Roose sending out the men forced them to act precipitately. They still might have carried it off quietly, but for Jeyne's scream. The two guards they killed might not have been discovered until the watch was changed.

9 hours ago, Lord Varys said:

Sorry, that is just wishful thinking on your part. If Mance and his women can get in the chambers of 'Arya Stark' then a determined contingent of suicidal loyalist Northmen could also put down Roose and Ramsay. It is not that hard. They could attack the keep Roose is inside in the middle of the night, they could attack them in the great hall, they could assassinate him while he walking around in the castle. The possibilities are endless.

There is a chance that the situation would escalate, sure, but if they were smart they could come up with a way that reduced the risk. And even if everything escalated - it would help the cause. Roose would have lesser men to fight against Stannis, perhaps even losing his ability to do so - say, if the survivors and many bystanders decide to desert or defect after the would-be assassins have been put down.

In addition, you know, Lord Wyman could have just poisoned them all with his food. All he would have needed was a slow-acting poison and the courage to poison himself along with his enemies (like Horbert Hightower of the Caltrops did). He could have spared most of his own men by poisoning only the best meat, the food reserved for the most highborn attendees of the wedding. That way he could have taken out Roose, Ramsay, Barbrey Dustin, Theon Greyjoy, the Ryswells, Hother Umber, Aenys and Hosteen Frey, etc.

It may not pan out, but it's not wishful thinking. There are many hints, parallels, posed exercises in logic (along the lines of 'if this is true,then that must be true') that led me to my opinion. I'll just mention two out of the many.

1. Bran first plants the idea of secret passages in WF, followed by the tale of Bael, followed by a likely parallel (on a tiny scale) in the secret tunnel into the holdfast found by Arya , Gendry et al near the God's Eye. They use it to get into the holdfast before they need to use it to escape.

2. In Theon V, ACoK, during Asha's visit...

She knows more than I do, Theon realized. That only made him angrier. "The victory has given Leobald Tallhart the courage to come out from behind his walls and join Ser Rodrik. And I've had reports that Lord Manderly has sent a dozen barges upriver packed with knights, warhorses, and siege engines. The Umbers are gathering beyond the Last River as well. I'll have an army at my gates before the moon turns, and you bring me only ten men?"

I see this as foreshadowing. A reminder is served up to Davos (and us) when Manderly tells him he intends to travel to WF by barge. Naturally the numbers of barges and what they're packed with would vary - e.g. seige engines would be useless, but fighting men, and supplies to restock WF ,once it's taken would be very useful indeed - and so on. Theon realises he'll have an army at his gates .. Roose doesn't realise he'll have an army within his gates.

I don't expect even the long form of the theory would convince you (in particular), but I do get a teensy bit annoyed when people assume my opinions are founded on mere wishful thinking. 

I don't understand why you're so attached to the idea that the Northmen need to be suicidal to be considered brave. Surely brave and smart is preferable. Certainly, any of them know that they are risking their lives, but it doesn't make them cowards if they're trying to preserve as much of the already decimated northern manpower (thanks to Roose) as they can.

Why Wyman would want to poison himself and his allied lords (including Umber, Dustin and Ryswell) is beyond me. Because his succession is now secure, he can risk making himself the brunt of suspicion (perhaps keeping others, like Barbrey,from being scrutinized too closely) and even though Wyman tells Davos he may not survive, I'm sure he'd prefer to.

I don't think it would help their cause to waste their men, then hope Roose has fewer men than he needs to face Stannis. I don't believe they actually want Stannis to defeat Roose. They want to defeat Roose themselves and be in possession of WF when Stannis comes to call. then they can deal with him as a potential ally, not as their king or overlord.

9 hours ago, Lord Varys said:

The idea it is a smart or courageous thing for them to sit on their hands and do nothing while Roose prepares Stannis' demise is, quite frankly, ridiculous.

They don't need more men. They need some courageous men who actually are brave enough to risk their lives. But there are no such men there, apparently.

No, no ...this kind of petty twisting and trivialising doesn't deserve a reply. My reply would only be pointlessly twisted about further if I cared to take the time to make one. I don't.

This is where I had to stop writing to carry on with life some five or six hours ago.. Now I have to go back and read the last couple of pages:o Did i notice Jon's name being bandied about ?

ETA: Caught up with the thread now. I'm going to find a drink...:wacko:

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, bemused said:

I don't see that a distraction benefits them, as I've said. If anything, mistrust and suspicion works against them.

Well, then I'll tell you how it might benefit them - if the Northmen and Freys were actually suspicious of each other because they believed that one of their own arranged so many murders then nobody would look twice at some innocent washerwomen.

The reason why they are in trouble when they take Jeyne out is that with the Freys and Manderlys outside - and with the possibility that there is going to be a battle outside - their chances to get away aren't that high. Not to mention that it would be difficult to get out of the castle with everybody running around during the process of getting the men out.

And one also assumes that it would have to be expected that people would go up on the walls to watch how the Freys and Manderlys fight outside - either each other Stannis' men outside the walls (the drum guys which they thought were Stannis' people originally).

2 hours ago, bemused said:

It may not pan out, but it's not wishful thinking. There are many hints, parallels, posed exercises in logic (along the lines of 'if this is true,then that must be true') that led me to my opinion. I'll just mention two out of the many.

Oh, I don't doubt there might be some secret entrance into Winterfell - either via the crypts or via some other way. That's not an issue I contest. What I contest is the rather strenuous idea that the Northmen sit on their hands because they think they need even more loyalist Stark men inside the castle.

That is just too much for me to swallow.

Stannis and his people might end up getting men inside Winterfell via a secret way.

But the idea that those brave men cravens need even more men to put down two mad dogs is pretty much beyond. I know why people want to believe stuff like that - because it is very hard to believe anybody would truly follow Roose and Ramsay (or allow himself to be cowed and intimidated by them) - but if it turned out that most of the things those people did was nothing but a charade then George would have wasted an entire book (and then some) on a non-existing fake conflict.

Sure, Stannis/Boltons aren't a really important conflict, anyway, but if George just had Roose and Ramsay prop up their fake soldiers who never had a chance then this whole thing would just smell very bad in the aftermath.

I don't deny that many Northmen might turn against the Boltons as soon as they appear to be weak - and the loss of 'Arya' might actually be the first such sign. The legitimacy of their rule over Winterfell and the North was clearly damaged by that loss. That could have major repercussions. And I'm very much inclined to believe that most men will abandon the Boltons before they are finally put down.

But I don't believe in fantasy troops, hidden plans, far-reaching conspiracies, etc. while we don't have really good evidence for that. And we don't.

2 hours ago, bemused said:

I don't understand why you're so attached to the idea that the Northmen need to be suicidal to be considered brave. Surely brave and smart is preferable. Certainly, any of them know that they are risking their lives, but it doesn't make them cowards if they're trying to preserve as much of the already decimated northern manpower (thanks to Roose) as they can.

Sure, you don't have to be suicidal to be brave. But a few brave and suicidal men could solve the Bolton problem without any conspiracy theory material. Just take some weapons and kill the bastards. End of story. It is not that difficult.

Lord Wyman clearly is suicidal, though. He knows he won't survive if they find out what he did, and he knows they will most likely feed parts of him to him before they allow him to die if they find out what he did. That he came only with 300 men might also be a hint that he has put the real plan - the Rickon-and-Stannis plan - in the hands of some other people. His son Wylis, perhaps, or that cousin of his who also didn't accompany him to Winterfell. Perhaps the part he and his people are supposed to play at Winterfell is to weaken the Bolton cause as much as they can without having any great plan to actually take them out yet.

Now that Wyman's men are outside the castle they can contact Stannis and make a real plan, but this may not have been an option if things had developed differently and Stannis hadn't been slowed down by the snowstorm. But then, one expects, the plan wasn't some mysterious third army, etc. but rather simply the Manderly men seizing some gate of Winterfell and opening it to allow Stannis' men in. That way the battle could be over rather quickly.

The idea that the Boltons can withstand a siege within Winterfell with so many of the people there not exactly being strong fans of House Bolton was always a tidbit ridiculous.

That is why Roose always played it safe with the Karstark plot. The plan was to have a battle, and to have Stannis be betrayed by some of his allies, and then crush him with Bolton and Frey men.

2 hours ago, bemused said:

Why Wyman would want to poison himself and his allied lords (including Umber, Dustin and Ryswell) is beyond me. Because his succession is now secure, he can risk making himself the brunt of suspicion (perhaps keeping others, like Barbrey,from being scrutinized too closely) and even though Wyman tells Davos he may not survive, I'm sure he'd prefer to.

Wyman is a fat man who has trouble walking. He won't participate in the fighting. He won't be able to run away is something goes wrong. He is prepared to die. In fact, he may already be dying due to the wound Hosteen Frey gave (he certainly will die if Hosteen's was covered in shit the Frey way before he cut through those chins - but even if that wasn't the case, wounds do fester, and the maesters at Winterfell are Roose Bolton's creatures).

And, well, perhaps the man could have used a poison for which there is antidote? An antidote he could take later? As to why he should also poison Hother Umber, Barbrey Dustin and the Ryswells? That is obvious - they are in camp Bolton. Even if they were not - Wyman could believe they are, or decide that people actually professing to be bend the knee to Roose deserve to die. Just as the Freys he butchered and baked into pies deserved that fate, never mind that they weren't exactly the architects of the Red Wedding.

2 hours ago, bemused said:

I don't think it would help their cause to waste their men, then hope Roose has fewer men than he needs to face Stannis. I don't believe they actually want Stannis to defeat Roose. They want to defeat Roose themselves and be in possession of WF when Stannis comes to call. then they can deal with him as a potential ally, not as their king or overlord.

That is the wishful thinking on your part. Those men are not allies working as a collective. They have nothing in common but their Stark overlords. The Northmen are a proud and quarrelsome people. They only care about themselves when they are not forced to work together for a larger cause. There was no alliance taking on either the Ironborn or the Bolton until Stannis gave inspiration to the North again.

And there is, at this point, no unifying figure besides Stannis that tie the North back together - under a new Lord Rickon Stark of Winterfell, of course.

If they could do it on their own why didn't the clansmen take on the Ironborn troubling the Glovers by themselves? Why didn't the Ryswells and the Dustins take on the Ironborn at the Fever river and at Moat Cailin all by themselves (without Roose and Ramsay)? Why doesn't Lord Wyman send men to free Torrhen's Square from Dagmer Cleftjaw?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

9 hours ago, Nowy Tends said:

Odd choice. This the perfect counter-example. As if some random guy suddenly decided to kill the POTUS…

Well, Garfield and McKinley were murdered, too. Even if LBJ wanted JFK dead desperately, and the entire intelligence and mafia community, etc. along with him (which I don't really buy) the fact remains that the man was shot. You don't need an army or vast conspiracy to do that. Roose and Ramsay were not proof against crossbow bolts or arrows last time a looked. One determined archer or crossbowman could put them down.

9 hours ago, Clegane'sPup said:

Perhaps he said what you said he said. I dunna know what martin speak is for mayhaps.

Not sure if you caught that - Walder says 'mayhaps' at one point when talking to Robb, making an opaque references to the Lord of the Crossing game where you can lie and betray the other players if say 'mayhaps' at one point without the other party noticing it.

Walder's own view on the matter likely was and still is that Robb and Cat were complete morons if they ever thought he would forgive them their transgressions. And they were morons. It was obvious how much Walder was wounded by the way the Lannisters treated him back during the negotiation, and how pissed he was at how Hoster had treated him (and perhaps even Hoster's father and grandfather) over the years.

The idea that Walder could suffer it that Robb Stark - a mere boy - could treat him and his house the way he did and not suffer any consequences is well beyond me. It is very odd that Catelyn (and nobody else, really) did not realize it that Robb really burned all the bridges doing what he did.

9 hours ago, kissdbyfire said:

But this paragraph is so awesome it deserved a special mention... You managed to put together JFK, MLK, Lincoln, and Joff Baratheon!

:lol:

Sure, why not? They were all assassinated, were they not? And Joffrey is just as much as a head of state as the others.

Joffrey is the perfect example that everybody can be killed. Renly, too, by the way. You just have to figure out a way how to do. Which is precisely the reason why those Northmen at Winterfell are either cravens or not exactly willing to make a plan to kill Roose and Ramsay.

I mean, even here in Germany many people made plans to kill Hitler and his gang. It didn't work, but quite a few did their best and tried.

Hoping that an army or advantage in numbers helps you in such a context is just craven in my book. And incredibly selfish if it means that you'll have to kill more people or see more of your own people die than you would if you just assassinated the people you want gone.

Olenna Redwyne understood that.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

6 hours ago, Lord Varys said:

Not sure if you caught that - Walder says 'mayhaps' at one point when talking to Robb, making an opaque references to the Lord of the Crossing game where you can lie and betray the other players if say 'mayhaps' at one point without the other party noticing it.

Walder's own view on the matter likely was and still is that Robb and Cat were complete morons if they ever thought he would forgive them their transgressions. And they were morons. It was obvious how much Walder was wounded by the way the Lannisters treated him back during the negotiation, and how pissed he was at how Hoster had treated him (and perhaps even Hoster's father and grandfather) over the years.

The idea that Walder could suffer it that Robb Stark - a mere boy - could treat him and his house the way he did and not suffer any consequences is well beyond me. It is very odd that Catelyn (and nobody else, really) did not realize it that Robb really burned all the bridges doing what he did.

This is a bit OT but I think everyone is pretty much aware of Robb's precarious position with the Freys.  That's why Cat is so desperate to have him eat food the second he gets there so guest right is activated.  Guest right seems pretty sacred among the Lords of Westeros, hence you get people responding in disgust to the Red Wedding and the Freys in general.  And I think it's beyond everyone's scope of conception that the Freys would violate guest right like that.  

Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 4/18/2018 at 9:34 PM, Bowen Marsh said:

Dear Sir,

This is one of the reasons why I stabbed that bonehead.  He started a feud with Lord Ramsay and put all of us in danger.  To make matters worse, he was about to lead the wildlings to attack Roose Bolton.  

Be at ease sir.  It is my intention to send proof of his death to the Boltons and assure them that we have taken care of our internal problems.   Let Ramsay know that our crazed lord commander was the one who ordered the wildlings to take his wife and not any other member of the Watch.  It was Jon,who was responsible for Mance Rayder being in Winterfell.  

Sincerely,

Bowen Marsh

:)  :)  :)

Don't forget his wolf.

Anyways, you could let him ride out with the wildlings and then send a raven to the Boltons to warn them of the coming attack from Jon.  Say you had no way to stop Jon from doing this and the watch had no part in what he did.  The crime was Jon's and Jon's alone.  The Watch itself took no part.  It's a hard sell when you consider Jon was involved but that is one other way to stop the foolishness that Jon got the watch into.  Just hope the wildlings and Jon don't shoot down any ravens coming from the direction of the wall.  

Link to comment
Share on other sites

18 hours ago, Clegane'sPup said:

 

What does Jon need an excuse for?  LC Snow is supposedly dead by the knives of his men.  If he's dead and stays dead, then he needs no excuse.  He paid for his crimes with his life.  

If Mance is working for anyone he has his own best interest involved.

Why would Mance take the women to WF when the girl they were seeking was supposedly near long lake?  Because he quickly found out she wasn't at Long Lake.  His orders were to bring her back.  Jon never gave him any boundaries.  

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

6 minutes ago, Widowmaker 811 said:

That's a bullcrap excuse.  Jon spared his life and ordered him to get his sister.  That is treason.  

BS. You simply don't understand the text, and AGAIN, this thread is not about Jon, it's not your private sandbox in the Jon Haters Kindergarten.

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

39 minutes ago, Widowmaker 811 said:

That's a bullcrap excuse.  Jon spared his life and ordered him to get his sister.  That is treason.  

You should re-read the books. Seriously, yesterday. Or at least before posting stuff like this. Because you are either trolling or... I'd rather not get into the alternative. 

18 minutes ago, Nowy Tends said:

BS. You simply don't understand the text, and AGAIN, this thread is not about Jon, it's not your private sandbox in the Jon Haters Kindergarten.

 

I struggle w/ the notion that so many don't understand such something as simple as this. :dunno:

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, Widowmaker 811 said:

 

Okay, not funny. You been around this site for a while. You know how to quote. A person with an sense of integrity does not insert stuff in to another persons post.

I get it. You don't agree with martin's story?  If you had quoted properly I would flap my trap. Whine me a river.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 4/18/2018 at 9:42 PM, kissdbyfire said:

@Elaena Targaryen, hey! Great post upthread, and great to see you around! :cheers:

Hey kissbyfire! Thank you and it's great to see you too! :cheers: 

23 hours ago, Lord Varys said:

I don't care about people's opinion whether something is still appropriate or reasonable in this or that situation (or rather not in threads that don't deal with that specific question). The point here is whether guest right was broken at Winterfell by Mance and his women and it clearly was.

Rules either apply to all or to no one. There are no special rules for Jon, Mance, etc. That is - there are some special rules for kings, of course. This is a monarchy and it sets the person of the king above and beyond ordinary men. If kings were normal people they wouldn't wear crowns.

Was guest right clearly broken though Lord Varys? I'm not sure that we have quite enough textual evidence to be positive, when I give the matter further thought. I agree, kings are at the top of the pyramid. The lords are above ordinary men too, except for their liege. Mance was posing as a common bard.

I don't think a high lord would ever condescend to give a peasant or servant guest right. I couldn't imagine the audacity of a commoner expecting it either. Castles aren't hotels where anyone can stay just for asking, the smallfolk stay when they provide a service and that's a different, subservient, contract. Lowborn don't get to enjoy the company of the elite while dining, they serve or entertain while the lords feast. 

I could be wrong I suppose, but I just can't reconcile the privilege of guest status and the expectation of obedient service. 

23 hours ago, Lord Varys said:

Whether you should be punished for the thing is another matter entirely. But there is no reason to deny that you are coldblooded murderer (hello there, Arya), or an oathbreaker (hello there, Jaime and Jon), etc. if you are what you are accused of.

People always have excuses or justifications for their crimes. But they remain criminals. Whether they deserve to get away with their crimes and evil/stupid deeds is another question entirely.

That's another interesting thing, what is a punishable crime? Is breaking guest right a crime?

It seems more culturally forbidden than something illegal. Something to be shunned for or mayhaps receive some vigilante retribution, but not something to be arrested for or have a trial for.

Of course breaking guest right seems to involve murder and whether or not it was a punishable crime depends on what the liege lord thinks. 

23 hours ago, Lord Varys said:

I have no issues condemning Jon Snow for his selfish and stupid behavior, yet I never wanted him to die or stay dead. In fact, I wanted him to be stronger than he is. Staying true to his vow, actually putting mankind before the life of his sister. But he didn't. I'm disappointed there. He deserved what Marsh and the others did to him, but one death is enough punishment. If he returns I'm all fine with him continuing stuff. And I guess he'll have learned his lesson and stop putting family before what truly matters.

Did Jon deserve what Marsh did to him? That's not a debate I'm terribly interested in, I've always been uninspired by Jon and ambivalent about his choices. 

I do wonder if Marsh and co. committed petty treason though. ASoIaF has high treason and in RL this would qualify as petty, lords can't have subordinates betraying their superiors. Lord Varys, you are more familiar with Westeros history than I am, do you know of any other possible petty treason?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 4/22/2018 at 9:35 AM, Lord Varys said:

That is part of the formal ritual. But there is no indication that you can only be a proper guest and under the proper guest right protection if the rituals are upheld. For instance, Jon Snow has Cregan Karstark attacked and arrested on the street and a considerable distance away from Castle Black to ensure that the man cannot claim status as a guest.

Catelyn repeatdly grills into Robb's head to take any food or drink the Freys offer for it makes them guests. Davos sighs with relief at being offered food at the sisters because he until that moment guest right couldnt be his protection. Mance himself offers jon some meat granting him the protection. Food being offered is critical..

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Archived

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

×
×
  • Create New...