kimim Posted April 11, 2015 Share Posted April 11, 2015 The only thing that could justify a RW is if Tywin told Walder Frey that he would go Rains of Castamere on him and his family otherwise. As everyone has said, there are any number of socially acceptable and emotionally satisfying ways for the Freys to take revenge. Most obviously, they could have denied Robb the crossing, and watched as Tywin shredded the Starks and their allies. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Khal Boner Posted April 11, 2015 Share Posted April 11, 2015 Putting your faith in a bit of salt and bread seems incredibly naive to me, especially when you've mortally insulted the Frey's honour. Poor little Robb maybe but he brought it on himself. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Alayne's Shadow. Posted April 11, 2015 Share Posted April 11, 2015 Putting your faith in a bit of salt and bread seems incredibly naive to me, especially when you've mortally insulted the Frey's honour. Poor little Robb maybe but he brought it on himself. It's not like "a little salt and bread" is an age-old tradition... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Khal Boner Posted April 12, 2015 Share Posted April 12, 2015 It's not like "a little salt and bread" is an age-old tradition... Again putting your faith in 'age old traditions', during a war, is incredibly naive. Catelyn knew how dangerous it was but the boy king was a fool. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
LordStoneheart Posted April 12, 2015 Share Posted April 12, 2015 Again putting your faith in 'age old traditions', during a war, is incredibly naive. Catelyn knew how dangerous it was but the boy king was a fool. The country's reactions clearly show that their system is rarely broken. It may seem naive to us but this is based on a historical precedent, and even disregarding that, the in-universe customs are explained enough to show why it's both a big deal that the Freys broke it and not completely naive that not just Robb and Cat but all the other northern nobility went to the Twins and expected peace. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
WSmith84 Posted April 12, 2015 Share Posted April 12, 2015 Edmure was stripped of his lands and titles for being a "rebel". The titles he held, (I think along with actual High Lordship of the Trident), were given to House Frey. Walder Frey was already a High Lord, (I think, HL of the Crossing), with minor Lords under him, but Riverrun and its titles are a huge step up. I still don't think it justifies bloodying his dynasty, but just wanted to point out that he got *a lot* for the RW. The thing is though, that Riverrun was given to Genna Lannister (Tywin's sister) and her Frey husband i.e. the Freys that had been loyal to the Lannisters throughout the Wot5K. Tywin would probably have granted them Riverrun had they simply bent the knee, because it's really the Lannisters that are getting it. Same with Darry; it was given to a Frey, married to a Lannister (Lancel). And they didn't get the Lord Paramouncy with Riverrun; that belongs to Petyr Baelish. Thus, I don't think the RW can be justified even on the grounds that the Freys did well out of it. They could have done as well, or nearly as well, without turning their own name into the equivalent of scum. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Khal Boner Posted April 12, 2015 Share Posted April 12, 2015 The country's reactions clearly show that their system is rarely broken. It may seem naive to us but this is based on a historical precedent, and even disregarding that, the in-universe customs are explained enough to show why it's both a big deal that the Freys broke it and not completely naive that not just Robb and Cat but all the other northern nobility went to the Twins and expected peace. History also shows that treaties, oaths, vows and every other type of age old tradition gets thrown away during wartime. As they do in Westeros. Edwrd I massacring the Scots nobles at a parley, The Black Wedding, The Glencoe massacre, The fourth crusade. It was naive of Robb to march into the Twins for his Uncles wedding. He didn't need to be there in person and should have sensed the danger. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Lord Ser Septon Maester Posted April 12, 2015 Author Share Posted April 12, 2015 You make it sound like Robb suddenly named himself King. I'm pretty sure his bannermen are the ones who named him King. The GreatJon essentially made him King In The North.As to RW, Robb's broken vow was idiotic and clearly the Freys were within their rights to abandon the cause of the KITN and withdraw their forces back to the Twins. You cannot, however, defend the action of agreeing to the peace offering of Edmure taking Robb's place and then breaking guest right with a surprise massacre. All for a broken vow? A perceived slight? By the end of the story I'm quite sure the Freys will regret what they did.To which a good LP (which he was) or king (which he made himself) would have said "No." Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
LordStoneheart Posted April 12, 2015 Share Posted April 12, 2015 History also shows that treaties, oaths, vows and every other type of age old tradition gets thrown away during wartime. As they do in Westeros. Edwrd I massacring the Scots nobles at a parley, The Black Wedding, The Glencoe massacre, The fourth crusade. It was naive of Robb to march into the Twins for his Uncles wedding. He didn't need to be there in person and should have sensed the danger. Yes, history shows that oaths/peace negotiations can be broken. It also shows that it's considered very dishonorable. And in Westeros history, the Red Wedding isn't just another instance; it is the instance, the shocking moment for most of the country as evident by the widespread disgust. Even Tyrion is appalled and he's a conviving shitbag. Walder Frey needed protection to do it, Tywin has disassociated himself from it, and Roose isn't exactly taking credit either. How many other major instances of that do we see? Was it stupid of Robb and Catelyn to go into the Twins and expect peace? Not really. Look at not just those historical examples but others like William Longsword. Why did the Douglases go to the Black Dinner? Were they naive to not expect to be put on trial and beheaded during a dinner they were invited to? Is history naive? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
LordPathera Posted April 12, 2015 Share Posted April 12, 2015 RW was the embodiment of "overreacting" So Robb broke a marriage contract? That sucks and everyone agrees that Robb should make amends. Is that really a valid justification of cold-blooded murder while breaking guest right? No. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Leonardo Posted April 12, 2015 Share Posted April 12, 2015 Topics like these always miss the biggest selling point... Stevron died in the war for Robb, and he still betrayed the Freys. He totally took them for granted, even though Frey sent more soldiers to war than any other single house. This was Frey's heir and the reason he wasn't worried about death, because Stevron was raised to take care of his family. Now Walder's family is totally going to go to hell whenever he finally keels over which is any day now. I totally see why Walder did it, Robb had no shot and also screwed him over in multiple ways. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Nerevanin Posted April 12, 2015 Share Posted April 12, 2015 Honestly, I get your point. Robb's broken vow and marriage to some girl not only from a quite a small house, but also from a house that is sworn to Lannisters, although Robb acts the whole time like he is against Lannisters, is a giant insult to Walder Frey. It's totally understandable that he wants some kind of revenge or compensation. Robb, Catelyn and co. were all well aware of this and knew that marrying Jeyne was a big mistake. To this point, it's okay. But getting your revenge by breaking the sacred tradition of guest right and by killing not only the oathbreaker but also his mother, bannermen and army, that's not okay at all and it's unjustifiable. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Leonardo Posted April 12, 2015 Share Posted April 12, 2015 Honestly, I get your point. Robb's broken vow and marriage to some girl not only from a quite a small house, but also from a house that is sworn to Lannisters, although Robb acts the whole time like he is against Lannisters, is a giant insult to Walder Frey. It's totally understandable that he wants some kind of revenge or compensation. Robb, Catelyn and co. were all well aware of this and knew that marrying Jeyne was a big mistake. To this point, it's okay. But getting your revenge by breaking the sacred tradition of guest right and by killing not only the oathbreaker but also his mother, bannermen and army, that's not okay at all and it's unjustifiable. If he had married Arianne or Margaery Tyrell, it would be vastly, vastly different. There was quite literally not a dumber move he could have made than marrying someone who gave him nothing but a shoulder to cry on and a vagina to put himself in. He should have put the honor of his COUNTRY above the honor of a random person who didn't even live there and was by extension an enemy. It's definitely justifiable, though that doesn't make it forgiveable. There is a difference. He didn't just screw the Freys, he screwed everyone with this decision. Coupled with the Karstark beheading and Catelyn letting Jaime go... You're the head of House Marbrand. Tywin has just married Lola Stout(a nobody), he just put Amory Lorch to death for acting on orders, and then his mother let Eddard Stark free. To top it all off, your son died in battle fighting for him and youare now scrambling to secure your own succession. Are you going to keep supporting the Lannisters, or think about changing lieges? In the end I would place some measure of blame on Bran and crew, because if they had showed up at the Umbers they'd be fine and their survival would have rapidly spread, therefore taking away Robb's grief boner Don't get me wrong, I love Robb, but the Starks got their due because of their fuck ups. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Blackfish Tully Posted April 12, 2015 Share Posted April 12, 2015 Edmure was stripped of his lands and titles for being a "rebel". The titles he held, (I think along with actual High Lordship of the Trident), were given to House Frey. Walder Frey was already a High Lord, (I think, HL of the Crossing), with minor Lords under him, but Riverrun and its titles are a huge step up. I still don't think it justifies bloodying his dynasty, but just wanted to point out that he got *a lot* for the RW. Actually the High Lordship of the Trident went to Littlefinger. That's how little Tywin Lannister thought of the Freys. Walder Frey violated guest rights , killed Robb Stark and destroyed his army which effectively ended the Lannister war in the Riverlands and instead of giving him the Lord Paramount of the Riverlands Tywin gives it to Littlefinger. The Freys got Riverrun and the hatred of the North and most of the Riverlands and even their allies (Bolton, Lannister & Tyrell?) can barely stand them and would not come to their aid. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Draco_Dracul Posted April 12, 2015 Share Posted April 12, 2015 The Red Wedding can never be justified because the Kingdom is fundamentally a less safe place now. Feuds that would have been ended with a wedding will now fester and grow because no one would risk a wedding in enemy territory as it could be another Red Wedding, paranoia will lead to conflicts that would never arisen otherwise, and it could very well lead, over time, to the Balkanization of the Seven Kingdoms through sheer distrust. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Arakan Posted April 12, 2015 Share Posted April 12, 2015 As someone upthread already said: the Red Wedding was an epoch defining crime not because it was exceptionally gruesome or bloody but because Walder Frey broke guest right. From a rational pov I have no problem that the Freys "betrayed" Robb (Bolton is a slightly different matter) but the way they conducted the deed is simply wrong. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Lord Ser Septon Maester Posted April 12, 2015 Author Share Posted April 12, 2015 Topics like these always miss the biggest selling point... Stevron died in the war for Robb, and he still betrayed the Freys. He totally took them for granted, even though Frey sent more soldiers to war than any other single house. This was Frey's heir and the reason he wasn't worried about death, because Stevron was raised to take care of his family. Now Walder's family is totally going to go to hell whenever he finally keels over which is any day now. I totally see why Walder did it, Robb had no shot and also screwed him over in multiple ways.Yeah that's a pretty big deal. Maybe he should've played it differently but come on. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Blackfish Tully Posted May 10, 2015 Share Posted May 10, 2015 Topics like these always miss the biggest selling point... Stevron died in the war for Robb, and he still betrayed the Freys. He totally took them for granted, even though Frey sent more soldiers to war than any other single house. This was Frey's heir and the reason he wasn't worried about death, because Stevron was raised to take care of his family. Now Walder's family is totally going to go to hell whenever he finally keels over which is any day now. I totally see why Walder did it, Robb had no shot and also screwed him over in multiple ways. The funny thing is that Stevron was probably killed by one of his own relations ""He took a wound in Battle , Robb writes . It was not thought to be serious , but three days later he dies in his tent , asleep" Sounds like the classic pillow over the face trick , probably by Black Walder or one of his followers. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bb1180 Posted May 10, 2015 Share Posted May 10, 2015 While I get the point the OP was making, and I think Frey had a legitimate gripe from his standpoint about how everyone disrespected him, his reaction was a case of taking it way too far. Sure, Robb was a fool, and I wouldn't have blamed Frey for abandoning him, but it didn't warrant what he did. The RW is indefensible, and ironically, if the other Houses thought ol' Walder was a POS before, they know he is now. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jon's Queen Consort Posted May 10, 2015 Share Posted May 10, 2015 I kind of agree with what Walder did. Yes it was an exaggeration but he had any right to kill Robb and maybe even Cat since it was she who made the pack but the other? Not so much. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.