Roswell Posted January 10, 2022 Share Posted January 10, 2022 Roose Bolton is a cruel nobleman. However, all the things he did to undermine the Starks were legal. Robb Stark chose to rebel. Roose Bolton can say he was serving King Joffrey by undermining the Stark effort. He participated in the Red Wedding because his wife's family was commanded by the King's Hand to put an end to the Stark Rebellion. The Red Wedding was an efficient way to end the Stark Rebellion and reduce the casualty on their side. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Nathan Stark Posted January 10, 2022 Share Posted January 10, 2022 This is a dumb argument. Breaking guest right is not an efficient way to do anything except make enemies. Serving King Joffrey is framed in these books as serving a sadistic child tyrant, and being on the wrong side. And Joffrey murdered the Lord of Winterfell, Ned Stark, making the Stark rebellion justified. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Apoplexy Posted January 10, 2022 Share Posted January 10, 2022 Well, aside from the the dishonorable act of betraying people and killing them under guest right, when they had no arms and were defenseless, the freys and boltons will likely be killed off as they have made enemies not just of the Starks, but of the entire North. So the RW was pretty stupid, in addition to being vile. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Darth Sidious Posted January 10, 2022 Share Posted January 10, 2022 He serves a bad cause. I’m using Varys’ logic here. Then again, so was Ned Stark. He was serving a king who was bankrupting the realm at every turn. The Starks were rebels. So Roose was within his legal rights to oppose Robb. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Lord Lannister Posted January 10, 2022 Share Posted January 10, 2022 Sometimes it isn't what you do, but how you did it. If Walder Frey had closed the Twins and declared for the Lannisters, most might agree Robb had that coming. But the Red Wedding took an orgy of revenge too far. If the Boltons declared for House Lannister, Roose joined his army to Tywin's and Ramsay takes over the North by force, he'd be more respectable than undermining the Starks while he was still "serving" them. So it's less betraying the Starks and more their methods. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Roswell Posted January 10, 2022 Author Share Posted January 10, 2022 My question was not whether it was moral or not. I am saying Roose Bolton was within the boundaries of the law. He could not openly disagree with Robb, nor could he refuse to send soldiers. But he could undermine the rebellion. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Lord Lannister Posted January 10, 2022 Share Posted January 10, 2022 I mean if you want to get down to it, "legal" is determined by who wins. So right now he's alright "legally" but what will be legal during the next regime? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Roswell Posted January 10, 2022 Author Share Posted January 10, 2022 13 minutes ago, Lord Lannister said: I mean if you want to get down to it, "legal" is determined by who wins. So right now he's alright "legally" but what will be legal during the next regime? He is on the legal now. Which is what counts. Obviously, if a regime that is a friend to the Starks gets in power, none of it will save Roose. Power trumps what's legal. But for now, I am saying Roose did nothing illegal because it was Robb who was a criminal. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
EggBlue Posted January 10, 2022 Share Posted January 10, 2022 9 minutes ago, Roswell said: He is on the legal now. Which is what counts. Obviously, if a regime that is a friend to the Starks gets in power, none of it will save Roose. Power trumps what's legal. But for now, I am saying Roose did nothing illegal because it was Robb who was a criminal. well , no. not really. Roose swore allegiance to Robb as his true king. so, if we're following that logic, Roose committed crime under the king of North and Trident's regime. and if you'd like to suggest Robb's kingship was not valid and Roose went back to serve Jefferey Baratheon , then my dear friend, I'd say Baratheon claim is not valid either since it came from rebellion and usurpation! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The Young Maester Posted January 10, 2022 Share Posted January 10, 2022 Another one of these dumpster anti-character threads. Your arguing legal this and that which is laughable. Westeros barely has any laws, what keeps the nobles civilised are oaths and codes of chivalry and. morality? I know your one of those Dany worshipers so you acknowledging the fact that Roose did the right thing in the name of the “Legal” King Joffrey. Your essentially acknowledging that the baratheons are a legitimate dynasty and atm the targaryens are just pretenders. Essentially what @EggBluesaid. Because if robb is an illegitimate rebel king, then it invalidates your whole point because it would make the baratheons legitimate and the targaryens not so much. But I’m guessing you don’t care since you and your lot are just trolling for the fun of it. Honestly these troll and bait threads are getting annoying and is really killing the vibe for me. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Phylum of Alexandria Posted January 10, 2022 Share Posted January 10, 2022 I'd say that any extent that Roose's actions have a patina of legitimacy according to Westerosi norms, GRRM is critiquing the hell out of those Westerosi norms. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Darryk Posted January 10, 2022 Share Posted January 10, 2022 The king was illegitimate, therefore Bolton was following the orders of an illegitimate king and his Hand. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
John Suburbs Posted January 10, 2022 Share Posted January 10, 2022 15 hours ago, Roswell said: Roose Bolton is a cruel nobleman. However, all the things he did to undermine the Starks were legal. Robb Stark chose to rebel. Roose Bolton can say he was serving King Joffrey by undermining the Stark effort. He participated in the Red Wedding because his wife's family was commanded by the King's Hand to put an end to the Stark Rebellion. The Red Wedding was an efficient way to end the Stark Rebellion and reduce the casualty on their side. Legality is a matter of perspective. I don't think the northern lords will care that Joffrey or the Lannisters would think what he did was legal. They were all rebelling against the crown and had sworn their allegiance to King Robb, including Roose. So betraying his rightful king was an illegal act in the kingdom of the north -- where they all happen to be at the moment. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Terrorthatflapsinthenight9 Posted January 10, 2022 Share Posted January 10, 2022 Well considering that Roose had sworn alliegiance to this illegitimate king, but also that the king he betrayed Robb for was an usurper born of incest, and broke other sacred laws with his betrayal and participation at the Red Wedding he can extremely hardly be called to have acted legally. Making a hating post is one thing but it's even worse if it's not even funny or well argued in the first place. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jon Fossoway Posted January 10, 2022 Share Posted January 10, 2022 Roose Bolton is Stark's bannerman. Joffrey Baratheon is not the legal king, although he sits the Throne. Bolton swore allegiance to a bastard. All the situtation here is wrong. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jaenara Belarys Posted January 10, 2022 Share Posted January 10, 2022 Bullshit. That's all I'll say. Bullshit. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Aejohn the Conqueroo Posted January 10, 2022 Share Posted January 10, 2022 15 hours ago, Roswell said: My question was not whether it was moral or not. I am saying Roose Bolton was within the boundaries of the law. He could not openly disagree with Robb, nor could he refuse to send soldiers. But he could undermine the rebellion. I don't remember this law very well. Could you cite it? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Lord Lannister Posted January 10, 2022 Share Posted January 10, 2022 14 hours ago, The Young Maester said: Honestly these troll and bait threads are getting annoying and is really killing the vibe for me. Yeah, sometimes I wish accounts, especially the newer ones, had some limits on how many threads they can start. It's the same handful of accounts starting the majority of threads. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The Young Maester Posted January 10, 2022 Share Posted January 10, 2022 4 hours ago, Aejohn the Conqueroo said: I don't remember this law very well. Could you cite it? No he can’t because he pulled it out of his ass. I would certainly love to have a law where I can undermine my boss because he/she is doing something illegal. This way instead of actually reporting them to the authorities or HR, I can instead just take the piss, and completely sabotage the workplace in secret. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Here's Looking At You, Kid Posted January 11, 2022 Share Posted January 11, 2022 The Starks became rebels when Robb was declared king. That was illegal and like putting the cart before the horse. The Starks needed to win their war for independence before Robb can be king. Roose Bolton was protecting King Joffrey in killing Robb Stark. The victors can rewrite laws and even rewrite history. It doesn't mean it's right but who can say it isn't legal. The violation of the sacred tradition was Walder's fault. He was the host. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.