Jump to content
•Brandon Ice Eyes

The Red Wedding Was Justified.

Recommended Posts

53 minutes ago, corbon said:

I don't need to read anything else...

Then you are missing the point. A noble girl's consent, if she was an unmarried virgin, was meaningless in the the medieval age, the consent of her father was the issue. By the law of the day Robb had raped Jeyne as he had sex with her without her father's consent.

It is the same reason why Ned teaches his children that their aunt was raped by Rhaegar. Their definition of rape was not the same as ours,  but in their world what Rhaegar and Robb did would be considered rape. It is likely one of the reasons why Robb felt honour bound to marry her, he had sullied her name.

https://www.gla.ac.uk/media/Media_298325_smxx.pdf

 

2 hours ago, The Young Maester said:

He is clearly very knowledgeable in asoiaf @Bernie Mac, and from time to time he makes some interesting points. But when it involves a discussion about a character he dislikes, his emotions get the better of him.

There are actually characters I dislike in the series, Robb is not one of them. He's kind of vanilla, his siblings and parents are far, far more interesting (due to being more fleshed out) but I don't dislike him.

3 hours ago, The Young Maester said:

This reminds me of all the famous sportsman and singers that always get accused of rape by women.

Gods so by your standards if a woman gives herself willingly it is rape? What if Jeyne fancies the young wolf. A handsome warrior king that has captured her home and taken her family captive, maybe it turns her.

It is not my standards, it is the standards of the medieval world. Read up on the subject.

Young unmarried women were not in charge of their bodies, their fathers/patriarchs/matriarchs were, thus them consenting to sex would matter little to their society, it would still be viewed as rape.

This is not my feeling on the world, it is the world itself. Obviously we live in a far better and enlightened time, but the middle ages had different rules. Robb, like Rhaegar, raped his captive regardless if their captives consented or even initiated sex.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
10 hours ago, Bernie Mac said:

It is not my standards, it is the standards of the medieval world. Read up on the subject.

Young unmarried women were not in charge of their bodies, their fathers/patriarchs/matriarchs were, thus them consenting to sex would matter little to their society, it would still be viewed as rape.

This is not my feeling on the world, it is the world itself. Obviously we live in a far better and enlightened time, but the middle ages had different rules. Robb, like Rhaegar, raped his captive regardless if their captives consented or even initiated sex.

Ah except that this is martins world. Not the medieval world. In this fantasy novel when a young maiden gives herself to some lord highborn or lowborn, she’s essentially referred to as a whore that doesn't care for her virtue. Maybe the father might try to claim his daughter was raped in order to kill the man whom took her Maidenhead. But nonetheless everyone will know the she was a wanton and lustful girl. 

Using the factors of our own Middle Ages is a poor example to back this up. The Middle Ages had lots of differences when you compare it to asoiaf. 

It is assumed that Rhaegar raped his captive. When I mean rape, is that she was taken forcefully. That’s what everyone in Westeros thinks. Not that Lyanna gave herself to Rhaegar.

Edited by The Young Maester

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Robb and his men hung their swords on the wall (i.e., disarmed themselves) on a sacred promise of safety given by their hosts.  These hosts then set upon and killed them.  In what civilized society is this kind of behavior considered remotely acceptable.  None (I would hope; apparently I am wrong)

In doing this, the Freys have given themselves a reputation for treachery and deceit even worse than the one they already had.  Nobody is going to be willing to have anything to do with them if it can be possibly avoided.  Daven Lannister is almost certainly the last decent marriage they will get for a long, long time.

As for Roose Bolton, his reliance on a Frey army to keep himself in power is causing him problems with the other Northerners.  They are even more unpopular than he is, quite an accomplishment.  He has found himself at Winterfell surrounded by enemies, and on rotten ice.  And the first splash was heard with the disappearance of FArya.

There were alternative ways of dealing with Robb, detailed above in the thread, that did not involve a massive massacre based on the violation of a sacred oath.

So,, no.  Even though Robb violated his own oath, the Red Wedding was not a justified means of dealing with it.  A fact that the Freys are discovering, to their cost.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
32 minutes ago, Nevets said:

In what civilized society is this kind of behavior considered remotely acceptable.  None (I would hope; apparently I am wrong)

You and me both, but there you go. Some of the arguments here do my head in, to be honest. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Nevets said:

Robb and his men hung their swords on the wall (i.e., disarmed themselves) on a sacred promise of safety given by their hosts.  These hosts then set upon and killed them.  In what civilized society is this kind of behavior considered remotely acceptable.  None (I would hope; apparently I am wrong)

In doing this, the Freys have given themselves a reputation for treachery and deceit even worse than the one they already had.  Nobody is going to be willing to have anything to do with them if it can be possibly avoided.  Daven Lannister is almost certainly the last decent marriage they will get for a long, long time.

As for Roose Bolton, his reliance on a Frey army to keep himself in power is causing him problems with the other Northerners.  They are even more unpopular than he is, quite an accomplishment.  He has found himself at Winterfell surrounded by enemies, and on rotten ice.  And the first splash was heard with the disappearance of FArya.

There were alternative ways of dealing with Robb, detailed above in the thread, that did not involve a massive massacre based on the violation of a sacred oath.

So,, no.  Even though Robb violated his own oath, the Red Wedding was not a justified means of dealing with it.  A fact that the Freys are discovering, to their cost.

Exactly.

Such alterative ways being...hmm, I don't know...refusing to let Robb use the bridge to cross over.

Them not doing that effectively traps Robb and his army in the south. Where they can be easily taken in the rear by the Tyrell/Lannister forces.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
15 hours ago, Bernie Mac said:

Then you are missing the point. A noble girl's consent, if she was an unmarried virgin, was meaningless in the the medieval age, the consent of her father was the issue. By the law of the day Robb had raped Jeyne as he had sex with her without her father's consent.

It is the same reason why Ned teaches his children that their aunt was raped by Rhaegar. Their definition of rape was not the same as ours,  but in their world what Rhaegar and Robb did would be considered rape. It is likely one of the reasons why Robb felt honour bound to marry her, he had sullied her name.

https://www.gla.ac.uk/media/Media_298325_smxx.pdf

 

There are actually characters I dislike in the series, Robb is not one of them. He's kind of vanilla, his siblings and parents are far, far more interesting (due to being more fleshed out) but I don't dislike him.

It is not my standards, it is the standards of the medieval world. Read up on the subject.

Young unmarried women were not in charge of their bodies, their fathers/patriarchs/matriarchs were, thus them consenting to sex would matter little to their society, it would still be viewed as rape.

This is not my feeling on the world, it is the world itself. Obviously we live in a far better and enlightened time, but the middle ages had different rules. Robb, like Rhaegar, raped his captive regardless if their captives consented or even initiated sex.

Neds kids think Lyanna was raped? I dont remember that. 

So Robb gets druged by Jeyne and her mother and now hes the rapist?

Jeynes mom did give consent, hence the drugging. But like Young Maester said, this aint medieval europe, its westerosi current events.

 

To the op, was it justified? Legally, ethically, ethnically? No, no and no. But who cares? Was it justified politically? 

No. A marriage with Edmure would have put a half Frey child in charge of the Riverlands. This would put Frey higher then the ancient houses of the Riverlands and would have assumingly added great wealth and prestige.

However after the RW, that prospect disappeared and was replaced by Darry and Riverrun. Darry was awarded to Lancel and is one the most savagely attacked parts of the kingdom. It wont turn a profit of wealth or soldiers in many years and by then Lancels kid or grandkid may be ruling, ones with less traces of their Frey ancestry. Riverrun is groundzero for the resistance, not a good place to be, let alone own.

What else did Frey get? The animosity of its neighbors, smallfolk and KL? The prospect of handing over all of your hostages to the crown? 

Walder got screwed over, so he had a tantrum so large itll take down his entire House

Edited by Hugorfonics

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
16 hours ago, Bernie Mac said:

Then you are missing the point. A noble girl's consent, if she was an unmarried virgin, was meaningless in the the medieval age, the consent of her father was the issue. By the law of the day Robb had raped Jeyne as he had sex with her without her father's consent.

It is the same reason why Ned teaches his children that their aunt was raped by Rhaegar. Their definition of rape was not the same as ours,  but in their world what Rhaegar and Robb did would be considered rape. It is likely one of the reasons why Robb felt honour bound to marry her, he had sullied her name.

https://www.gla.ac.uk/media/Media_298325_smxx.pdf

This quote might be of interest

Quote

Lord Rowan of Goldengrove found him in bed with his daughter.  The girl was two years older, and Dareon swears that she helped him through her window, but under her father's eye she named it rape.

AGOT, Jon IV

This would suggest that such events are not automatically rape.  A statement by the girl or other evidence of force is required.  No such complaint was made by the Westerlings, and nobody in-world has stated it was rape.

 

As to Rhaegar, Bran is under the impression that Lyanna was raped, but we don't know where he got the information from.  Given Ned's reticence on the matter, I doubt it was him.  In any event, Rhaegar took her by physical force, and such events, especially involving teenage girls, would be assumed to result in rape (then as well as now).  He could have heard it from practically anyone in Winterfell.

Not that any of this pertains to the question at hand: whether the Red Wedding was justified.  I doubt that the Freys cared why Robb married Jeyne; only that it meant that he couldn't marry a Frey.  And as I mentioned above, I still think it went way beyond anything justifiable.

Edited by Nevets

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
5 hours ago, The Young Maester said:

Ah except that this is martins world. Not the medieval world.

According to the author it is based on the medieval world. Am I the only person in this thread who is aware of that?

In fact on GRRM's pet peeves is by authors who do not understand the logistics of the medieval world.

 

GRRM:: I was also reading a lot of historical fiction. And the contrast between that and a lot of the fantasy at the time was dramatic because a lot of the fantasy of Tolkien imitators has a quasi-medieval setting, but it’s like the Disneyland Middle Ages. You know, they’ve got tassels and they’ve got lords and stuff like that, but they don’t really seem to grasp what it was like in the Middle Ages.

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

GRRM: And then there are some things that are just don’t square with history. In some sense I’m trying to respond to that. [For example] the arranged marriage, which you see constantly in the historical fiction and television show, almost always when there’s an arranged marriage, the girl doesn’t want it and rejects it and she runs off with the stable boy instead. This never fucking happened. It just didn’t. There were thousands, tens of thousand, perhaps hundreds of thousands of arranged marriages in the nobility through the thousand years of Middle Ages and people went through with them. That’s how you did it. It wasn’t questioned. Yeah, occasionally you would want someone else, but you wouldn’t run off with the stable boy.

And that’s another of my pet peeves about fantasies. The bad authors adopt the class structures of the Middle Ages; where you had the royalty and then you had the nobility and you had the merchant class and then you have the peasants and so forth. But they don’t’ seem to realize what it actually meant. They have scenes where the spunky peasant girl tells off the pretty prince. The pretty prince would have raped the spunky peasant girl. He would have put her in the stocks and then had garbage thrown at her. You know.

 

Genuine question to you and the people  who have liked your post, are you really not aware that the series is set in a culture that reflects our own middle ages?

Is this really what you are arguing about now?

 

5 hours ago, The Young Maester said:

 

When I mean rape, is that she was taken forcefully. That’s what everyone in Westeros thinks. Not that Lyanna gave herself to Rhaegar.

By all means quote the people who state that. If you think everyone thinks that you will have no problem backing this up.

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
18 minutes ago, Bernie Mac said:

According to the author it is based on the medieval world. Am I the only person in this thread who is aware of that?

No but you do seem to be the only one who doesn't understand that "based on" doesn't mean "exactly the same" 

 

19 minutes ago, Bernie Mac said:

Genuine question to you and the people  who have liked your post, are you really not aware that the series is set in a culture that reflects our own middle ages?

Is this really what you are arguing about now

Again "reflects" does not mean "exactly the same" 

You know very well that's what is being argued now because you said it as often as you could until someone argued about it. You then took this part of all the replies to your posts & chose to argue it. So yeah, this is what we are arguing now. 

The other posters have given you examples of how they know that no one in Westeros thinks it is rape (that you conveniently ignored & instead posted quotes from GRRM about how other authors don't grasp the middle ages properly. 

You do understand that no one, I repeat no one in Westeros states, thinks, or even vaguely implies toward the thought that Robb raped Jeyne right?

Which thing is more likely? That you, in all your infinite wisdom, have grasped some concept that we all have missed but that is not in the text OR that in GRRM's world that is BASED on the middle ages he chose to not make a situation like this be considered rape & went for the more conventional meaning being forcible sex? 

I'm gonna go with the latter but you do as you choose. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Nevets said:

This quote might be of interest

AGOT, Jon IV

This would suggest that such events are not automatically rape.  A statement by the girl or other evidence of force is required. 

Nowhere in that quote does it claim he took her without her consent or that he used force. It may well be she confirmed they had sex, which in the medieval world would make him a rapist. Without her confirming it he's not really done anything wrong, certainly nothing worthy of giving up his life to the Wall.

Are you under the impression that I am making this up about medieval life? That the wiki on the history of rape, the essay I provided were all fake and that this claim is not true?

 

1 hour ago, Nevets said:

 

As to Rhaegar, Bran is under the impression that Lyanna was raped, but we don't know where he got the information from.  Given Ned's reticence on the matter, I doubt it was him. 

Who else would have told him? Ned is the Lord of his castle, when he did not want Arthur Dayne and his sister mentioned it was no longer brought up by the servants.

Ned is in charge of his children's education, the Maester is not going to be teaching them anything that he does not want them to know.

The medieval understanding of rape was different to ours, it had a broader meaning, not just violent non consenting sex.

There is not one source in the entire series that claims that Lyanna did not willingly give herself to Rhaegar, it was still rape. And despite the entire realm knowing he was a rapist it has not damaged his reputation among most of the realm, Kevan, Cersei, Barristan, Jaime and many others look at him admiringly.

She thought of Daario. If ever there was a man who could rape a woman with his eyes . . .
To be sure, she was just as guilty. Dany found herself stealing looks at the Tyroshi when her captains came to council, and sometimes at night she remembered the way his gold tooth glittered when he smiled.
 
The word had more meaning than it does today.

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
18 hours ago, Artimicia said:

Ok

 

Like this is the thing, Game of Thrones has a lot of people with different motivations and different possible outcomes.

The Freys are very, very specific, they aren't interested in a lot of things involving the Game of Thrones, except, marriage/inheritance and following the laws.

 

They are incredibly law, it's a form of law that they practice with regard to gurantees and relations, they do it because it's just how they live and you can see how it's culturally relevant.

 

Robb Stark and the Starks in general just don't care, they don't think it has any value.

 

The point is that Frey was simply more connivving, it's cheesy and said often in school but there's no absolute right or wrong just who won to a certain extent.

 

I don't think Frey would venture far outside the castle, to be honest, I think the Freys are just superior militarily as well, their castle and fortifications and overall position and prestige are vastly superior to the Starks, who are only as strong as the strongest Stark. They need pure charisma to succeed and the difference between Ned and Robb is extraordinary.

 

Basically Starks need superior extreme savant outlier personalities to be relevant, whereas the freys are powerful and savants and can more steadily rely on various things because of their superior fortitude and stamina.

 

On the matter of right and wrong.  I can see why what another considers right that another would consider wrong.  A tiger who must eat meat to live can't be faulted for hunting.  It's what the creator made them to do to survive.  The little dik-dik who the tiger preys on doesn't see it this way.  The tiger is the villain to the little dik dik.  We have to look at the matter from a narrow lens in order to decide the matter of right and wrong.  

It was justified to Walder.  He's the patriarch of a rich and large clan.  He had a lot to lose.  The Starks couldn't keep themselves in order.  Robb porks Jeyne, falls in love, and breaks his oath to the Freys.  And this after the Freys have bled for him.  Catelyn gives away an extremely important hostage for the very small chance of getting her girls back.  She bought Jaime's promise to send her girls back.  How that must have looked to their bannermen.  Stupid move.  Robb had the nerve to come back asking for another deal because he was desperate to survive the war his mother started.   Walder took advantage because he needed to remove the taint of rebellion and reestablish good relations with the real ruler in King's Landing, not this king in the north who humiliated the Freys.  

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
10 minutes ago, Andrew Yang for President said:

On the matter of right and wrong.  I can see why what another considers right that another would consider wrong.  A tiger who must eat meat to live can't be faulted for hunting.  It's what the creator made them to do to survive.  The little dik-dik who the tiger preys on doesn't see it this way.  The tiger is the villain to the little dik dik.  We have to look at the matter from a narrow lens in order to decide the matter of right and wrong.  

Agreed... but not entirely. The dik-dik has its POV, but that doesn't make it right. In the larger scheme of the ecosystem, if the predators don't predate, the prey overpopulate and the ecosystem fails.

10 minutes ago, Andrew Yang for President said:

It was justified to Walder. 

I don't think this is necessarily true. People can choose actions out of pettiness and vindictiveness, rather than justification. Walder Frey is definitely one of those sort of people. I'm not sure even he thought it was truly justified, he just wanted satisfaction regardless

I think it needs to be clear what 'it' is.

I think one side of this conversation is looking at 'it' (the Red Wedding) and seeing 'merely' retribution for the wrong done first. The other side is seeing not 'only' retribution, but two more things. First, a horrifyingly destructive breaking of a hugely important cultural taboo that has massive social implications far beyond the event itself (the destruction of guest right traditions). Second, a deliberate, over-the-top, self-destructive, brutal, treacherous, unnecessary betrayal. The red wedding is the equivalent of not "play fair or I'll take home the football', but 'you cheated a bit, now I'll take home the football and burn down the stadium".

10 minutes ago, Andrew Yang for President said:

He's the patriarch of a rich and large clan.  He had a lot to lose.  The Starks couldn't keep themselves in order.  Robb porks Jeyne, falls in love, and breaks his oath to the Freys.  And this after the Freys have bled for him.  Catelyn gives away an extremely important hostage for the very small chance of getting her girls back.  She bought Jaime's promise to send her girls back.  How that must have looked to their bannermen.  Stupid move. 

Yes, all agreed. Plus the two Walder wards were 'lost' by the Starks. The Starks screwed up in spades and owed the Freys big time.

10 minutes ago, Andrew Yang for President said:

Robb had the nerve to come back asking for another deal because he was desperate to survive the war his mother started.   

No.
Walder had choices. He could rightfully treat the Starks as enemies, due to their treatment of his House. Which he did. Fair enough. That was just consequence of the Starks failures to keep their words. 

Then he went for more. He made a new deal (not Robb having the nerve to come back to him!), off his own back, which gave him almost as much as before, if not more. But he was false, and broke all the rules of society, even the strongest taboos, for vindictive personal feelz. 

10 minutes ago, Andrew Yang for President said:

Walder took advantage because he needed to remove the taint of rebellion and reestablish good relations with the real ruler in King's Landing, not this king in the north who humiliated the Freys.  

Changing sides and warring with the Starks, preventing Robb from returning to the North and reclaiming Winterfell, was more than enough to get back into good graces with Kings Landing. The Starks were doomed, he would have got revenge with their destruction anyway. 

Instead he got his personal feelz satisfied with petty, vindictive, self-destructive, murderous revenge plan which has wreaked great damage to the social structures that bind the whole culture together and even greater damage to his own House in the long run.

The Freys changing sides and doing all in their power within the normal rules to cause the destruction of the Starks was justified.
The Red Wedding was not. It was extraordinarily stupid.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 9/8/2019 at 8:44 PM, Bernie Mac said:

You wrongly claimed that Cersei would let House Frey fall as soon as Walder was dead. You were wrong and I quoted the books to show that you were mistaken.

Is it that hard to admit that you may have been mistaken about something written in a huge volume of work or are you just going to double down on what you wrote rather than admit that you may have been mistaken?

 

Cersei's saying that she's about to kill Freys to "avenge " the Red Wedding, if those deaths aren't satisfaying. you think she/anyone would have trouble destroying House Frey??

Anyway, you're right, i was mistaken.

 

 

Quote

 There is not one source in the entire series that claims that Lyanna did not willingly give herself to Rhaegar, it was still rape. And despite the entire realm knowing he was a rapist it has not damaged his reputation among most of the realm, Kevan, Cersei, Barristan, Jaime and many others look at him admiringly.

Is there a quote in the entire series that claims Lyanna did willingly give herself to Rhaegar?? Because, I've never seen no one contesting the abducting part, just saying that Rhaegar loved Lyanna, so that seems to be the free pass everone grants him, love. Barri B is looking for a King, he thinks that Rhaegar was his perfect King besides the war he thinks he caused, Jaime liked him much and despised Robert, Cersei is in love with him, which means that she is going to ignore or blame on others his shortcomings, in fact that's what almost everyone does to absolve Rhaegar, blame Elia. We never see that Bran thinks rape implies what you are saying, Ned or others may just be telling the kids the widespread story, that Rhaegar indeed rape Lyanna, Bran isperfectly capable of either understanding the meaning of rape, or just repeating a story a rape he had already heard. The same goes for Dany, she's the one who actually think this. 

Quote

Side by side the queen's procession and Hizdahr zo Loraq's made their slow way across Meereen, until finally the Temple of the Graces loomed up before them, its golden domes flashing in the sun. How beautiful, the queen tried to tell herself, but inside her was some foolish little girl who could not help but look about for Daario. If he loved you, he would come and carry you off at swordpoint, as Rhaegar carried off his northern girl, the girl in her insisted, but the queen knew that was folly. Even if her captain was mad enough to attempt it, the Brazen Beasts would cut him down before he got within a hundred yards of her.

Dany can be perfectly saying, Daario has rape eyes  and  that kinda  turns her on. 

 

In the case of Lysa, did someone ever say LF had raped her?? We know that Hoster was angry, but the man never accused him of that, not that concept of rape was ever brought up whenever Petyr were boasting about how he fucked the Tully girls, iirc he even did it in front of Ned didn't he??

 

In the Saera's incident the word rape, never appears, in fact, when Jaehaerys is face Beesbury, this is what he says.

Quote

“Then I choose trial by combat,” Stinger said. He was by all accounts an arrogant young man, and sure of his skill at arms. He looked about at the seven Kingsguard standing beneath the Iron Throne in their long white cloaks and shining scale, and said, “Which of these old men do you mean for me to fight?” “This old man,” announced Jaehaerys Targaryen. “The one whose daughter you seduced and despoiled.”

But never rape, not anyone said those girls were raped.

When Robert says Lyanna was raped, he is talking about our sense of rape not that they banged without late Rickard and Ned's bless, so is Cersei when she asks Ned if Jon's mother was some peasant he raped while her holdfast burned, and so are the Martells,  There is enough differences between Martin's universe and the middle ages, to actually say  that rape in Westeros is the exact same as it was in the middle ages, unless there is a specify quote of Martin agreeing with the rape thing, call Robb a rapist makes no sense.

 

PD: Where Kevan looked at Rhaegar admiringly??

Edited by frenin

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On ‎9‎/‎9‎/‎2019 at 6:36 PM, Bernie Mac said:

There is not one source in the entire series that claims that Lyanna did not willingly give herself to Rhaegar, it was still rape. And despite the entire realm knowing he was a rapist it has not damaged his reputation among most of the realm, Kevan, Cersei, Barristan, Jaime and many others look at him admiringly.

Many in the North is actually practicing ritualistic rape when their lords exercise the ancient rights of the first night.  It is illegal but the North is savage.  It is out of topic but I thought it deserved to be mentioned.  

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 9/8/2019 at 9:10 AM, Lyanna<3Rhaegar said:

The argument is whether or not the RW was justified. No one seems to think Robb was justified in breaking his promise to marry. Oddly enough those same people think Walder completely justified in slaughtering them all. 

Walder's predicament was more complicated than Robb's.  Walder had to prove his loyalty to King Joffrey.  That's not easy to do after his family rebelled and fought for the Starks.  Fought bravely and effectively, if I may say so.  The Freys could lose their lands and The Twins as punishment for joining the rebellion.  For that, most families would violate guest rights.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
52 minutes ago, Allardyce said:

Walder's predicament was more complicated than Robb's.  Walder had to prove his loyalty to King Joffrey.  That's not easy to do after his family rebelled and fought for the Starks.  Fought bravely and effectively, if I may say so.  The Freys could lose their lands and The Twins as punishment for joining the rebellion.  For that, most families would violate guest rights.

Well, no they wouldn't. Most families would not violate guest rights under any circumstances that's why it's so taboo. If most would do it under the circumstances  Walder is under it wouldn't make much sense for them to be appalled when Walder does it, would it? 

Tywin would have taken Walder's army fighting for him as ample proof of his loyalty to the crown. Walder wanted revenge for being slighted & Tywin was all to ready to help him create that opportunity.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 9/12/2019 at 10:06 AM, Widowmaker 811 said:

Many in the North is actually practicing ritualistic rape when their lords exercise the ancient rights of the first night.  It is illegal but the North is savage.  It is out of topic but I thought it deserved to be mentioned.  

Where are these many? Who in the North practices the rights of the first night? The only person I recall is potentially Aerys. I would very much like to see your textual basis to this claim. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Just now, Lyanna<3Rhaegar said:

Well, no they wouldn't. Most families would not violate guest rights under any circumstances that's why it's so taboo. If most would do it under the circumstances  Walder is under it wouldn't make much sense for them to be appalled when Walder does it, would it? 

Tywin would have taken Walder's army fighting for him as ample proof of his loyalty to the crown. Walder wanted revenge for being slighted & Tywin was all to ready to help him create that opportunity.

I believe they would if placed in the same difficult situation that Walder Frey had to face.  

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
10 minutes ago, Allardyce said:

I believe they would if placed in the same difficult situation that Walder Frey had to face.  

I understand that's what you believe but based on the text we know the opposite to be true. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Just now, Lyanna<3Rhaegar said:

I understand that's what you believe but based on the text we know the opposite to be true. 

You don't know that.  Take the Starks.  Their hubris would at first make you think they keep their oaths.  To break an oath is taboo.  Oathbreaking is taboo everywhere in the kingdom.  Yet, if we look back within a short slice of their history, the Starks have been breaking their oaths.  Lyanna, Robb, Jon.  All of them are oathbreakers.  So if oaths are broken so is guest rights.  Put a family in desperation and they will break guest rights.  Jaime Lannister broke it when he pushed Bran from that tower.  

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now

×