Television Vs. Book: Why'd They Make [Spoiler] Such A [Spoiler]?

[nksarmi]

On the other hand, Cat's taking of Tyrion was the first shot of a war that was about to break out anyway, regardless of what she did at the inn. Ned was already asking the questions (and being maneuvered toward the answer) that were going to result in him learning the truth, and Cersei was already trying to to get Robert killed.

Ned's story could have played out almost identically with or without Catelyn taking Tyrion. The one difference that could have made is giving her a hostage to trade for Ned and/or the girls before things spiraled too far out of control. So the real mistake there was letting Tyrion get away, rather than taking him in the first place. That storm was coming one way or another and he would have been a useful piece to have ahold of when it arrived.

 

Catelyn taking Tyrion led to Jamie attacking and injuring Ned while killing many of his men - men who later could have been used to get Sansa and Ayra to safety if all else plays out the same way.  So there were definitely bad consequences.  Also - and this is a big maybe because Ned does seem rather dim at times - but maybe if Catelyn doesn't take Tyrion and Ned doesn't get injured and have his men killed - then maybe he wouldn't have turned to LF as much as he did. 

 

And honestly, I half expect there to be a scene later that shows that LF suggested to Geoffrey kill Ned rather than send him to the Wall to assert his independence from his mother and grandfather.

[Avaleigh]

At that point, from the perspective of the Starks, Catelyn had two choices:

 

1)  Let Tyrion go, at which point he will presumably inform his family that the Starks are up to something.

2)  Arrest him, which will also let the Lannisters know, but you at least have a hostage.

 

It's not a great choice either way, but it's far from irrational.  Her first hope was simply that Tyrion wouldn't notice her at all, but he did.

All she had to do was tell Tyrion that she was on her way to Riverrun because her father is ill. 

 

From my perspective option A is easily the most sensible. Her husband is the Hand. It's not like he's powerless. It makes a lot more sense than being the one to publically spark off the war. Reading her thoughts in the inn she knows perfectly well that she's potentially about to make some serious issues pop off but she still doesn't stop herself and considering the position of her husband and daughters at the time I think she should have known better. She actually thinks to herself that she doesn't want to cause her father any more grief and I'm just thinking 'Lady, come on, you just guaranteed that this would happen.' 

 

At the end of the day Catelyn kidnapped an innocent man and in no way were her hands tied when she made this choice. It's not like there was overwhelming evidence pointing in Tyrion's direction. 

[Hecate7]

All that horrible terrorizing of the Riverlands that the Mountain was doing, was all in response to Tyrion's arrest. So many rapes, so many murders. People burnt alive. Hideous stuff. All that, just because Catelyn Stark is an impulsive hothead with appallingly poor judgement.

[anamika]

I thought letting Jaime go was her worst decision. Such an all round idiotic decision. There was no guarantee that once Jaime reached KL, the Lannisters were just going to let Sansa and Arya go. These were the guys who planned the Red Wedding and broke guest right. Capturing Jaime was also a big morale boost for the Northern army and he was also a good fighter, taking down many loyal Northerners including Daryn Hornwood . Giving him back ensured that they would meet him again in the battle field. Jaime was a pricier bargaining chip than either Stark girls. And releasing him created a whole set of new problems for Robb.

 

Cat's bargaining abilities were not all that great either. She not only promised the KITN to the Frey girl but also promised Arya to some 22nd son of Walder Frey!! A pretty bad deal for poor Arya. If Robb had not broken his promise to Walder, then Arya most definitely would have! I think marrying the King in the North should have been more than enough for use of the bridge. Not sure why Arya had to be thrown into the deal as well.

[Avaleigh]

I think what kills me about Catelyn sometimes is that she *is* smart and that's what makes her list of crap decisions extra irritating because I know bloody well that this lady knows better. 

[AshleyN]

Catelyn taking Tyrion led to Jamie attacking and injuring Ned while killing many of his men - men who later could have been used to get Sansa and Ayra to safety if all else plays out the same way.  So there were definitely bad consequences.  Also - and this is a big maybe because Ned does seem rather dim at times - but maybe if Catelyn doesn't take Tyrion and Ned doesn't get injured and have his men killed - then maybe he wouldn't have turned to LF as much as he did. 

Wasn't Ned also bedridden and out of his mind on painkillers for awhile after the fight with Jaime? So that didn't help matters.

 

Obviously Catelyn didn't cause the War of the Five Kings and a lot of what happened was beyond her control, but kidnapping Tywin Lannister's son was never going to do anyone any good.

 

 

I thought letting Jaime go was her worst decision. Such an all round idiotic decision. There was no guarantee that once Jaime reached KL, the Lannisters were just going to let Sansa and Arya go. These were the guys who planned the Red Wedding and broke guest right. Capturing Jaime was also a big morale boost for the Northern army and he was also a good fighter, taking down many loyal Northerners including Daryn Hornwood . Giving him back ensured that they would meet him again in the battle field. Jaime was a pricier bargaining chip than either Stark girls. And releasing him created a whole set of new problems for Robb.

I'd probably agree that releasing Jaime was her worst decision, but it's one that I have more sympathy for than others. It was right after she found out about Bran and Rickon's "death" when she was clearly overcome by grief and absolutely desperate to avoid losing any more of her family. So it's more understandable to me than the Tyrion thing, which was just dumb.

Edited June 23, 2015 by AshleyN

[Avaleigh]

I draw the line at saying that Catelyn single handedly started the war. Obviously that isn't what happened. She absolutely contributed to the first acts of aggression though.

 

At the same time Catelyn had her sharp moments. She knew sending Theon back to the Iron Islands was a bad idea no matter how close he and Robb were and it's stuff like this that tells me that she's a smart character who turned out to be catastrophically impulsive.

Edited June 23, 2015 by Avaleigh

[Hecate7]

Catelyn taking Tyrion led to Jamie attacking and injuring Ned while killing many of his men - men who later could have been used to get Sansa and Ayra to safety if all else plays out the same way.  So there were definitely bad consequences.  Also - and this is a big maybe because Ned does seem rather dim at times - but maybe if Catelyn doesn't take Tyrion and Ned doesn't get injured and have his men killed - then maybe he wouldn't have turned to LF as much as he did. 

 

And honestly, I half expect there to be a scene later that shows that LF suggested to Geoffrey kill Ned rather than send him to the Wall to assert his independence from his mother and grandfather.

 

I've always assumed so.

[AshleyN]

To change the subject here for a bit, are we to understand from the conversation between Cersei and the High Sparrow where they talk about who will be judging the trials of Margaery and Loras that Trial by Combat isn't an option for the prisoners of the Faith on the show? If that wasn't the case I assume Loras would have already taken that option. But it would change Cersei's situation quite a bit and make me wonder what FrankenGregor's purpose is going to be on the show if they made of point of including him only to take away what seems to be his main purpose in the books right now.

 

It would be kind of weird though, since I've always assumed that the idea of Trial by Combat had its roots in the Faith, or was at least closely tied to it, given that the whole idea is that the gods are supposed to decide the victor.

[Hecate7]

The Starks are loved in the North and I think a number of Houses would have been more than willing to foster Jon Snow.  It's happened in the books before.  Larence Snow, the bastard of Hornwood, was fostered at Deepwood Motte, the home of House Glover.

 

Although as has been pointed out, fostering out the boys would have been a great way to build relationships with his bannermen, it would also be risky. It is very likely that Lyanna's promise involved raising Jon Snow as his own, or even "never let him out of your sight," or something along those lines.

[Oscirus]

Various good points are presented but I still think  that Ned should've told Cat. Other then keeping Jon's parentage a secret to the audience, it really did nothing since her not knowing would be worse then her knowing if the wrong person found out.

 

What kind of idiot takes a Lannister hostage when her husband and daughters are living with the Lannisters?

 

Now this on the other hand, wow. That was  just stupid. The worse part is that he wasn't even a hostage, he was tortured and then placed in a rigged trial meant to establish his guilt. (On an ot note: how did Tyrion know more about Cat's sister then Cat did?) If not for Bronn then Tyrion would've been killed and Sansa would've been slaughtered in response.

 

I'd probably agree that releasing Jaime was her worst decision, but it's one that I have more sympathy for than others. It was right after she found out about Bran and Rickon's "death" when she was clearly overcome by grief and absolutely desperate to avoid losing any more of her family.

 

 

Also, by this point, she was dealing with Tyrion who had just given her Ned's bones as a sign of good faith. I can actually understand why she'd make the deal.

 

I think there's a delicious irony in realizing that the only Lannister that was willing to negotiate in good faith was the one that they took hostage and tried to kill.

[Hecate7]

You know who else would have known R+L=J, if Cat knew? Baelish. Cat trusted him. Lyssa worshipped him. And Cat trusted her family. All of them. Nuff said.

Now this on the other hand, wow. That was  just stupid. The worse part is that he wasn't even a hostage, he was tortured and then placed in a rigged trial meant to establish his guilt. (On an ot note: how did Tyrion know more about Cat's sister then Cat did?) If not for Bronn then Tyrion would've been killed and Sansa would've been slaughtered in response.

 

 

 

Tyrion knew more about Lyssa than Cat did, because he'd lived with Lyssa more recently, at court. Lyssa had been at court until Jon Arryn's death, at which time she'd fled to the Eyrie, taking her son with her. Cat hadn't really seen Lyssa in a very long time.

Edited June 23, 2015 by Hecate7

[benteen]

I draw the line at saying that Catelyn single handedly started the war. Obviously that isn't what happened. She absolutely contributed to the first acts of aggression though.

 

At the same time Catelyn had her sharp moments. She knew sending Theon back to the Iron Islands was a bad idea no matter how close he and Robb were and it's stuff like this that tells me that she's a smart character who turned out to be catastrophically impulsive.

 

She's also the one who wanted to treat with Renly (another decision the show took away from her in their efforts to reduce her to a generic mother figure).  That was a good plan on her part and maybe she could have reached some kind of agreement if not for the shadowbaby.  The only good that came out of that was finding an ally like Brienne.

Edited June 23, 2015 by benteen

[Avaleigh]

Although as has been pointed out, fostering out the boys would have been a great way to build relationships with his bannermen, it would also be risky. It is very likely that Lyanna's promise involved raising Jon Snow as his own, or even "never let him out of your sight," or something along those lines.

I get not doing it before but why not when Ned is given no choice once Catelyn puts her foot down that Jon won't be allowed to remain at Winterfell? At this point he is letting Jon out of his sight and he is basically going in to somebody else's care. I find it hard to believe though that Lyanna would have wanted her fourteen year old kid to spend the remainder of his life at the Wall if the alternative could be having him first squire for a Manderly, Royce, or whoever.

 

I also think that Ned being Hand at the time takes away from any perceived insult. Ser Cortenay Penrose didn't seem like he felt it was beneath him to watch out for Edric Storm. Littlefinger still thinks that he can make that match for his bastard daughter "Alayne" to the heir to the freaking Vale. I don't know, it seems like bastards of noble characters have options *if* the parents or somebody are interested in their well being for some reason like Jon Arryn was with Gendry.

 

I disagree that Catelyn would have said anything to Littlefinger if Ned had asked her not to. I'm also not sure that she fully trusted LF. Just the fact that she burned that letter from him tells me that she wasn't interested in maintaining a relationship of any kind even as friends once she got married. She had no interest in what it was that he had to say either way; she almost feared it. 

 

I do so want to know what was in that letter. I wonder if he thinks that she read it and just chose to ignore it or if it was so full of something inappropriate that he can automatically tell that she never read it once they finally see each other again?

[DigitalCount]

She's also the one who want to treat with Renly (another decision the show took away from her in their efforts to reduce her to a generic mother figure). That was a good plan on her part and maybe she could have reached some kind of agreement if not for the shadowbaby. The only good that came out of that was finding an ally like Brienne.

Wait, didn't she do this in show too? I have a vague memory of Renly wearing a stag crown and sporting a new haircut during a tourney. Maybe when Brienne fought Loras?

[Avaleigh]

Wait, didn't she do this in show too? I have a vague memory of Renly wearing a stag crown and sporting a new haircut during a tourney. Maybe when Brienne fought Loras?

I don't think it was her idea though like it was in the books. I'd have to double check though. 

[anamika]

Various good points are presented but I still think  that Ned should've told Cat. Other then keeping Jon's parentage a secret to the audience, it really did nothing since her not knowing would be worse then her knowing if the wrong person found out.

 

   How is her not knowing worse than the risk that telling her entailed? As Mad Mouse quoted from the books

 

 

"If it came to that, the life of some child I did not know, against Robb and Sansa and Arya and Bran and Rickon, what would I do? Even more so, what would Catelyn do, if it were Jon’s life, against the children of her body?" He did not know. He prayed he never would

   

When Ned was first married to her, he clearly could not trust her. Later from his POV thoughts he apparently felt that if it were Jon's life against those of her children, Cat may give him up. He is not sure about his own response. He clearly either did not want to burden her with such a big secret or he did not trust her with Jon's life.

 

We see that when it comes to her children, Cat does not make rational decisions. And Ned apparently knew this as well.

 

I get not doing it before but why not when Ned is given no choice once Catelyn puts her foot down that Jon won't be allowed to remain at Winterfell? At this point he is letting Jon out of his sight and he is basically going in to somebody else's care. I find it hard to believe though that Lyanna would have wanted her fourteen year old kid to spend the remainder of his life at the Wall if the alternative could be having him first squire for a Manderly, Royce, or whoever.

  

   Maybe there was no time? They were leaving for KL soon, Benjen was there then, Jon wanted to go, serving at the wall is not all that bad in the grand scheme of things, so Ned went for it?

Edited June 23, 2015 by anamika

[benteen]

I don't think it was her idea though like it was in the books. I'd have to double check though. 

 

In the books, it was her idea to treat with Renly and I don't think Robb was enthused about it.  On the show, it's Robb's idea.  The only thing they seemed to keep with Catelyn was her distrust of Balon and her asking Robb not to send Theon back to the Iron Islands.

[nksarmi]

She's also the one who wanted to treat with Renly (another decision the show took away from her in their efforts to reduce her to a generic mother figure).  That was a good plan on her part and maybe she could have reached some kind of agreement if not for the shadowbaby.  The only good that came out of that was finding an ally like Brienne.

And actually the Renly thing is another reason I disliked Catelyn.  I don't give two cents if Renly had the bigger army or more banner men behind him, Ned lost his life because he supported the proper line of succession which was Stannis not Renly.  That is the only thing that has ever irked me about Brie - Renly was never the true king.  Renly was the one who was wrong here. 

 

Sidenote: I wonder if that is why the writers went ahead and had Stannis burn Shireen in this setup.......to make Brie's vengeance more acceptable.  Because truth be told, yes I know Mel burns people, and yes I know Stannis has accepted it, and yes I know he used black magic to kill his brother, and yes I know that really does make him a bad person.....BUT without the burning of Shireen resonating in my mind, I'm still on Stannis side when it comes to Renly.  Renly was wrong and vein and playing games and if Stannis had killed him on the battlefield - I would have 100% called him right to do so.

 

So going back to Catelyn pushing treating with Renly instead of Stannis - I think that was a fault, not a positive.  Ned did not support Renly's claim and by then, everyone knew who Ned named heir.  Grant it, Ned also would not have supported Robb being named KOTN, but my opinion here is this - without a Targ ruler, the 7 kingdoms are bound to fall apart.  If Robb decided that he and the North wanted to be their own kingdom again, so be it.  Why continue fighting the war?  Why side with either Baratheon brother?  Just use Jamie to negotiate for Sansa (since the Lannisters had no clue where Ayra was) and establish a line to defend the North. 

 

And I'm sorry - I know this is bitchy, but at the point where Catelyn goes to meet with Renly, she should have been headed North to Winterfell.  I know that she did give Robb two good notes of advice (don't trust the Ironborn - though she could have explained that one better - and don't break your word to Frey) but other than that, I really think the Starks would still hold Winterfell if Catelyn had gone home with a few men for escort and they had been there to defend against Theon's attack.

[Constantinople]

She's also the one who wanted to treat with Renly (another decision the show took away from her in their efforts to reduce her to a generic mother figure).  That was a good plan on her part and maybe she could have reached some kind of agreement if not for the shadowbaby.  The only good that came out of that was finding an ally like Brienne.

 

 

Wait, didn't she do this in show too? I have a vague memory of Renly wearing a stag crown and sporting a new haircut during a tourney. Maybe when Brienne fought Loras?

 

 

I don't think it was her idea though like it was in the books. I'd have to double check though.

I think it was TV Robb's idea / Book Cat's idea.

Regardless, I think it was a bad idea since Robb's and Renly's war aims were fundamentally incompatible. Robb was fighting to break-up the Seven Kingdoms and Renly was fighting to keep it together. Merely permitting Robb to call himself "King in the North" while requiring the North to be subject to the Iron Throne exactly was it was before wasn't going to cut it. Robb's men want independence, not a cool sounding title for their lord.

[benteen]

I think Robb would have joined with Stannis is he had known about the incest issue earlier.  Robb and Stannis would have been unbeateable together in the field although things would have become a disaster if Stannis tried to force the Red God on the North.

Edited June 23, 2015 by benteen

[Avaleigh]

I was thinking about why they would choose to have Jon and the wildlings travel on the wrong side of the Wall and it made me wonder if it was more about Jon and his men maintaining order and making sure that they all arrive as one unit. If they arrive south of the Wall and try to travel to Castle Black from there how do Jon and his men guarantee that the wildlings won't just go wherever they want and possibly even kill Jon and his men in the process?

 

This doesn't explain why Thorne would choose to let them through the gate or why the wildlings wouldn't balk at traveling on the northern side when they can easily travel on the safer southern side (not to mention what if they ultimately aren't let in once they finally get to the entrance of Castle Black) but I can sort of see the rational from the perspective of Jon and his men. Not only do they maintain control and ensure that they all arrive to Castle Black as one unit but it also comes across as being more respectful to the Night's Watch to have them go through officially. They can keep count, they can decide together what lands for them would be best, who might be worth keeping at the Wall if they're willing, etc.  

Sidenote: I wonder if that is why the writers went ahead and had Stannis burn Shireen in this setup.......to make Brie's vengeance more acceptable.  Because truth be told, yes I know Mel burns people, and yes I know Stannis has accepted it, and yes I know he used black magic to kill his brother, and yes I know that really does make him a bad person.....BUT without the burning of Shireen resonating in my mind, I'm still on Stannis side when it comes to Renly.  Renly was wrong and vein and playing games and if Stannis had killed him on the battlefield - I would have 100% called him right to do so.

I would have too...if he'd killed him on the battlefield. Stannis took Renly out in a shady and dishonorable way in my opinion and what's more, I think Stannis knew it. He's tormented in his dreams like Richard III and Macbeth over what he has done to his flesh and blood, a person he remembers from when he was born.

 

I would have had no sympathy for Renly if Stannis had put a sword through his heart but Stannis wasn't willing to fight him in the way that they'd been trained to fight with their enemies.

 

Renly was foolish and greedy. He probably could have been king eventually if he'd simply backed Stannis. Even if he did plan on turning on Stannis in the long run it would have benefited him to take his side during the initial conflict.  

[PatsyandEddie]

How is her not knowing worse than the risk that telling her entailed? As Mad Mouse quoted from the books

 

   

When Ned was first married to her, he clearly could not trust her. Later from his POV thoughts he apparently felt that if it were Jon's life against those of her children, Cat may give him up. He is not sure about his own response. He clearly either did not want to burden her with such a big secret or he did not trust her with Jon's life.

 

We see that when it comes to her children, Cat does not make rational decisions. And Ned apparently knew this as well.

 

  

   Maybe there was no time? They were leaving for KL soon, Benjen was there then, Jon wanted to go, serving at the wall is not all that bad in the grand scheme of things, so Ned went for it?

I got the impression that Ned felt The Wall was the safest place for Jon while Ned was away. It took Jon completely out of any political fallout and it kept him free from Cat's hate.

[benteen]

I was thinking about why they would choose to have Jon and the wildlings travel on the wrong side of the Wall and it made me wonder if it was more about Jon and his men maintaining order and making sure that they all arrive as one unit. If they arrive south of the Wall and try to travel to Castle Black from there how do Jon and his men guarantee that the wildlings won't just go wherever they want and possibly even kill Jon and his men in the process?

 

This doesn't explain why Thorne would choose to let them through the gate or why the wildlings wouldn't balk at traveling on the northern side when they can easily travel on the safer southern side (not to mention what if they ultimately aren't let in once they finally get to the entrance of Castle Black) but I can sort of see the rational from the perspective of Jon and his men. Not only do they maintain control and ensure that they all arrive to Castle Black as one unit but it also comes across as being more respectful to the Night's Watch to have them go through officially. They can keep count, they can decide together what lands for them would be best, who might be worth keeping at the Wall if they're willing, etc.  

I would have too...if he'd killed him on the battlefield. Stannis took Renly out in a shady and dishonorable way in my opinion and what's more, I think Stannis knew it. He's tormented in his dreams like Richard III and Macbeth over what he has done to his flesh and blood, a person he remembers from when he was born.

 

I would have had no sympathy for Renly if Stannis had put a sword through his heart but Stannis wasn't willing to fight him in the way that they'd been trained to fight with their enemies.

 

Renly was foolish and greedy. He probably could have been king eventually if he'd simply backed Stannis. Even if he did plan on turning on Stannis in the long run it would have benefited him to take his side during the initial conflict.  

 

Great post.

 

Another combination that would have been perfect is Stannis and Renly.  Renly would have been a great public face for the Crown while the actual defense/governance of the Crown could have been handled by Stannis.

 

Agreed that Renly was foolish and greedy.  Stannis did choose a dishonorable way of dealing with him and whatever his faults, Renly was willing to meeting Stannis out in the field.  Something Stannis wasn't willing to do.  Probably the one Renly moment I liked in the book was his telling his men that if Stannis fell, he didn't want his body to be mutilated.

 

The Wall was definitely the safest place for Jon.  Fostering him in the North wouldn't have been bad either but as pointed out, the Wall takes him out of the political conversation no matter what his background.  That's why Aemon went to the Wall after being offered the Crown.

Edited June 23, 2015 by benteen

[MadMouse]

Something else I've thought about is we know that the North has a couple of female heirs or soon to be ones. Jon Snow would be a perfect match for say Dacey Mormont or Wynafryd Manderly. Any child of his would be the grandson of Ned and the nephew of Robb which would put them in great standing in the North. So I wonder if Ned feared a silver haired or purple haired child popping out. Sure he could use the Ashara excuse but it might raise some unwanted questions.

[Oscirus]

How is her not knowing worse than the risk that telling her entailed? As Mad Mouse quoted from the books

 

How is she expected to protect herself from a threat when she doesn't even know that the danger exists?

 

 

[Constantinople]

Agreed that Renly was foolish and greedy.  Stannis did choose a dishonorable way of dealing with him and whatever his faults, Renly was willing to meeting Stannis out in the field.  Something Stannis wasn't willing to do.

There's nothing particularly honorable about usurping your older brother's rights, nor about being willing to seize them by force when your forces outnumber the opposition by 10x. Or was it more like 30x?

[AshleyN]

Another combination that would have been perfect is Stannis and Renly.  Renly would have been a great public face for the Crown while the actual defense/governance of the Crown could have been handled by Stannis.

I've always thought that it was a shame that the birth order worked out the way it did, because Renly as king with Stannis as his hand would have been pretty close to an ideal combination. Like you said Stannis was a great military commander who could also handle a lot of the day to day aspect of governing, and had zero tolerance for most of the usual King's Landing bullshit (and was smart enough to recognize it). On the other hand, Renly would have been the charismatic figurehead who excels at diplomacy and maintaining the Crown's approval rating, and as King would have the power to reign in Stannis' more extreme impulses. Sort of a good cop/bad cop situation.

[benteen]

There's nothing particularly honorable about usurping your older brother's rights, nor about being willing to seize them by force when your forces outnumber the opposition by 10x. Or was it more like 30x?

 

There's nothing honorable about Renly.  I just thought that facing him in the field was more honorable than using a shadow assassin to kill him.

[Avaleigh]

Robert jumped over other people to take the throne. He took the throne by force so why is it wrong when his younger brother wants to also take the throne by force? I'm actually on Stannis's side when it comes to the initial conflict with Renly but Stannis lost the moral high ground with me when he had Melisandre take Renly out with a shadow assassin. 

 

Robert didn't want Stannis to be his heir. Stannis didn't tell Robert his suspicions about his blonde children while there was time for them to be declared illegitimate while Robert was alive. Instead Stannis spread a rumor that he couldn't prove after Robert died. I can see how it would seem self-serving to some people that Stannis didn't publicly have this lightbulb moment about the parentage of the Baratheon children until it was in his interest to call them out. 

 

I don't think Renly was honorable in the way that he was willing to jump around Stannis. He was wrong to do that and should have supported Stannis and make Stannis thankful to have him as his heir. 

 

The question of the righteousness of the claim though when Stannis taking issue with Renly jumping over him seems rich when Stannis knows perfectly well that there is a Targaryen who has a better claim to the throne than he does. So it comes across like it's okay in Stannis's mind for him to go around being an usurper but not Renly. 

 

I am curious to know how Stannis would have felt about the High Sparrow if he'd met him prior to meeting Meisandre. I can't help but suspect that they'd get on famously. I don't mean to imply that they'd be friends just that I think they'd understand each other almost perfectly. 

[nksarmi]

Robert jumped over other people to take the throne. He took the throne by force so why is it wrong when his younger brother wants to also take the throne by force? I'm actually on Stannis's side when it comes to the initial conflict with Renly but Stannis lost the moral high ground with me when he had Melisandre take Renly out with a shadow assassin. 

 

Robert didn't want Stannis to be his heir. Stannis didn't tell Robert his suspicions about his blonde children while there was time for them to be declared illegitimate while Robert was alive. Instead Stannis spread a rumor that he couldn't prove after Robert died. I can see how it would seem self-serving to some people that Stannis didn't publicly have this lightbulb moment about the parentage of the Baratheon children until it was in his interest to call them out. 

 

I don't think Renly was honorable in the way that he was willing to jump around Stannis. He was wrong to do that and should have supported Stannis and make Stannis thankful to have him as his heir. 

 

The question of the righteousness of the claim though when Stannis taking issue with Renly jumping over him seems rich when Stannis knows perfectly well that there is a Targaryen who has a better claim to the throne than he does. So it comes across like it's okay in Stannis's mind for him to go around being an usurper but not Renly. 

 

I am curious to know how Stannis would have felt about the High Sparrow if he'd met him prior to meeting Meisandre. I can't help but suspect that they'd get on famously. I don't mean to imply that they'd be friends just that I think they'd understand each other almost perfectly. 

 

Ok in my head, I almost have to separate pre-Shireen burning from post-Shireen burning Stannis - because yea, when I think of his daughter dying, I just don't care anymore about his claims or his birthright.  But with that said, unless I have completely forgotten the books, Stannis didn't know about Robert B's children nor did he spread a rumor that couldn't be proven. 

 

Stannis did not assert his right to the throne until Ned named him heir and then Stannis made sure everyone in the kingdom who would listen knew what Ned had to say.  And honestly that seems like a good strategy since it was Ned saying Robert B should be king that made it so.  It was clearly written that Ned could have taken the Iron Throne himself if he had wanted it - Robert even tells him it should have been him.

 

Targ blood is how they justified it.  By the time Stannis is in line for the throne, Visreys is dead and Stannis might feel his claim is better than Dany's.  I don't agree with him, but that is likely his head canon. :)

 

I would argue that no one has any claim to the Iron Throne except a Targ since it didn't exist before they came and some kingdoms only bent the knee because of dragons.  I say once the Targs were overthrown, a break up of the 7 kingdoms is inevitable.  However, even if that is true, Stannis - not Renly - is heir to head their family and the banner men should have flocked to him.

[Avaleigh]

Ok in my head, I almost have to separate pre-Shireen burning from post-Shireen burning Stannis - because yea, when I think of his daughter dying, I just don't care anymore about his claims or his birthright.  But with that said, unless I have completely forgotten the books, Stannis didn't know about Robert B's children nor did he spread a rumor that couldn't be proven. 

 

Stannis did not assert his right to the throne until Ned named him heir and then Stannis made sure everyone in the kingdom who would listen knew what Ned had to say.  And honestly that seems like a good strategy since it was Ned saying Robert B should be king that made it so.  It was clearly written that Ned could have taken the Iron Throne himself if he had wanted it - Robert even tells him it should have been him.

 

Targ blood is how they justified it.  By the time Stannis is in line for the throne, Visreys is dead and Stannis might feel his claim is better than Dany's.  I don't agree with him, but that is likely his head canon. :)

 

I would argue that no one has any claim to the Iron Throne except a Targ since it didn't exist before they came and some kingdoms only bent the knee because of dragons.  I say once the Targs were overthrown, a break up of the 7 kingdoms is inevitable.  However, even if that is true, Stannis - not Renly - is heir to head their family and the banner men should have flocked to him.

I am admittedly jumping the gun a little because I'm not at a point in the reread where I know too much about what Stannis is up to yet but based on what I've read so far it's clear to me that Stannis found out about the incest around or possibly even before Jon Arryn did. He suspected, he went investigating with Jon, he knew about at least two of Robert's bastards, and he decided to leave without telling Robert his suspicions and the implication is that it's because he didn't think that Robert would believe him and he couldn't really prove it. 

 

I agree with you about essentially looking at Stannis as before burning Shireen and after although for me I think I really divide it up into three periods. I was furious with Stannis after what he did to Penrose and could never really forgive him for that. It bothered me as much as Renly possibly even more so because Penrose was defending an innocent kid. Just that Stannis seemed willing to burn Edric was a total dealbreaker for me and I never understood how this was so downplayed by Mannis fans. 

[Constantinople]

There's nothing honorable about Renly.  I just thought that facing him in the field was more honorable than using a shadow assassin to kill him.

I'm actually on Stannis's side when it comes to the initial conflict with Renly but Stannis lost the moral high ground with me when he had Melisandre take Renly out with a shadow assassin.

<tywinlannister> Why is it more honorable to slaughter thousands on the field of battle than to assassinate a single man? </tywinlannister>

 

 

Robert jumped over other people to take the throne. He took the throne by force so why is it wrong when his younger brother wants to also take the throne by force?

Robert overthrew a madman from whom no one in the realm was safe, not even the highest of high lords.

Renly jumped the queue because his brother had the personality of a lobster.

 

The question of the righteousness of the claim though when Stannis taking issue with Renly jumping over him seems rich when Stannis knows perfectly well that there is a Targaryen who has a better claim to the throne than he does.

Once you overthrow the reigning monarch, you can't very well keep his family in power. Which is another way of saying that the Targaryens forfeited their right to the throne.

[AshleyN]

Ok in my head, I almost have to separate pre-Shireen burning from post-Shireen burning Stannis - because yea, when I think of his daughter dying, I just don't care anymore about his claims or his birthright.  But with that said, unless I have completely forgotten the books, Stannis didn't know about Robert B's children nor did he spread a rumor that couldn't be proven. 

 

Stannis did not assert his right to the throne until Ned named him heir and then Stannis made sure everyone in the kingdom who would listen knew what Ned had to say.  And honestly that seems like a good strategy since it was Ned saying Robert B should be king that made it so.  It was clearly written that Ned could have taken the Iron Throne himself if he had wanted it - Robert even tells him it should have been him.

I've only just started by own reread so I'm not 100% on any of this, but IIRC Stannis was the first one* to suspect that Cersei's kids weren't Robert's, and worked with Jon Arryn to try to prove it because he knew that if he was the one to make the accusation it would look like he was just trying to jump the line of succession. And while I can't remember where exactly this thought came from, I've always been under the impression that he returned to Dragonstone after Jon's death because he thought that the Lannister's were behind it and assumed they'd be coming for him next.

 

Also, correct me if I'm wrong but I thought that in the book Ned's letter to Stannis was intercepted by Littlefinger or Cersei or someone? And that Stannis' declaration was based on his own prior knowledge and his investigation with Jon Arryn? That part is a little fuzzy in my memory though, so I could be wrong.

 

 

*Aside from the likes of Varys and Littlefinger I guess

Edited June 23, 2015 by AshleyN

[Avaleigh]

<tywinlannister> Why is it more honorable to slaughter thousands on the field of battle than to assassinate a single man? </tywinlannister>

To me when the single man in question is a close relative (in this case his only other living brother and family member apart from his daughter) I think that's crossing a line in the sand. 

[Delta1212]

To me when the single man in question is a close relative (in this case his only other living brother and family member apart from his daughter) I think that's crossing a line in the sand.

I don't totally disagree, but I do think it's interesting that we think it's more honorable to launch what is essentially a very clumsy assassination attempt that will get hundreds or thousands of other people killed in addition to your family member, rather than doing it professionally and killing just them.

[benteen]

I've only just started by own reread so I'm not 100% on any of this, but IIRC Stannis was the first one* to suspect that Cersei's kids weren't Robert's, and worked with Jon Arryn to try to prove it because he knew that if he was the one to make the accusation it would look like he was just trying to jump the line of succession. And while I can't where exactly this thought came from, I've always been under the impression that he returned to Dragonstone after Jon's death because he thought that the Lannister's were behind it and assumed they'd be coming for him next.

 

Also, correct me if I'm wrong but I thought that in the book Ned's letter to Stannis was intercepted by Littlefinger or Cersei or someone? And that Stannis' declaration was based on his own prior knowledge and his investigation with Jon Arryn? That part is a little fuzzy in my memory though, so I could be wrong.

 

 

*Aside from the likes of Varys and Littlefinger I guess

 

Correct.  The man who Ned gave the Stannis letter to was intercepted and killed before being able to get on a boat and deliver it to Stannis.

 

Stannis was the first one to suspect that Cersei's children weren't her own.  I don't know if Littlefinger planted the seed in his mind though.

[Happy Harpy]

Renly jumped the queue because his brother had the personality of a lobster.

I love the lobster line. It cracks me up everytime.

As for Robert/Stannis/Renly...well. Baratheon, it rhymes with self-destruction.

Just that Stannis seemed willing to burn Edric was a total dealbreaker for me and I never understood how this was so downplayed by Mannis fans. 

I had the exact same reaction with Gendry, and that's why for me, the show didn't have Stannis wrong in what made my final opinion of the character.

Stannis didn't like Renly and considered him a traitor...and the facts are that Renly turned against him. So in a very weird way, in spite of the cowardly method, in spite of the kinslaying which didn't endear him to me to say the least, it didn't make me irreversibly hate Stannis. Because it was still coherent with his extreme, radical, ruthless views of right and wrong as a certain conception of the law. After all, many characters had done horrible things, too. Never liked the association with Melisandre, though.

 

Now, Gendry was an innocent young man, who had never done Stannis any wrong -actually, the boy was instrumental in him having a claim. And Stannis had him molested, and would have burned him -retrospectively, there's no doubt in my mind. That's where what I used to see as principles became mere pretexts to justify his ambitions, and Stannis became a hypocrite in my eyes. So that was my dealbreaker. From this moment on, I didn't want him to win or even to stand in the end. And for me, in spite of the Gendry/Edric substitution, the essence of the situation is the same in the books and on the show.

Shireen's death (*sobs*) made me want Stannis dead-right-now, but now that I'm over the shock I don't think that it basically changed my view of the character; and even if he isn't the one who chooses to burn her in the books, as I've seen his fans advocate (I understand them, I'd do the same for my faves until I saw their doom written black on white) I wouldn't be able to root for him. I didn't think he'd accept the stake for Shireen because he had no other heir, and because he loved her, but the option for the MEH was there since Gendry imo. The smallest first step on the slippery slope is sometimes the biggest and the most significant, too.

[nksarmi]

Correct.  The man who Ned gave the Stannis letter to was intercepted and killed before being able to get on a boat and deliver it to Stannis.

 

Stannis was the first one to suspect that Cersei's children weren't her own.  I don't know if Littlefinger planted the seed in his mind though.

Thank you - I totally had show canon in my head on this one.

 

Regarding Renly and Stannis - best case scenario, Stannis and Renly dual and settle it between them and all the banner men rally behind the winner.  But Renly would have never accepted that fight because we all know he would lose.

 

If we didn't all know that Stannis hated every banner man who choose Renly over him, I would say that Stannis was being practical with the assassination because he would hardly want to fight a civil war among his people before fighting for the thrown and shadow baby solved that problem.  But, Stannis would have gladly killed all of those banner men for supporting Renly so yea, he wasn't exactly being generous here - he just wanted Renly dead and he probably knew that would be hard to achieve in the field because others would protect him.

[Hecate7]

I get not doing it before but why not when Ned is given no choice once Catelyn puts her foot down that Jon won't be allowed to remain at Winterfell? At this point he is letting Jon out of his sight and he is basically going in to somebody else's care. I find it hard to believe though that Lyanna would have wanted her fourteen year old kid to spend the remainder of his life at the Wall if the alternative could be having him first squire for a Manderly, Royce, or whoever.

 

I also think that Ned being Hand at the time takes away from any perceived insult. Ser Cortenay Penrose didn't seem like he felt it was beneath him to watch out for Edric Storm. Littlefinger still thinks that he can make that match for his bastard daughter "Alayne" to the heir to the freaking Vale. I don't know, it seems like bastards of noble characters have options *if* the parents or somebody are interested in their well being for some reason like Jon Arryn was with Gendry.

 

I disagree that Catelyn would have said anything to Littlefinger if Ned had asked her not to. I'm also not sure that she fully trusted LF. Just the fact that she burned that letter from him tells me that she wasn't interested in maintaining a relationship of any kind even as friends once she got married. She had no interest in what it was that he had to say either way; she almost feared it. 

 

I do so want to know what was in that letter. I wonder if he thinks that she read it and just chose to ignore it or if it was so full of something inappropriate that he can automatically tell that she never read it once they finally see each other again?

 

What Lyanna wanted was for her boy to live. She wanted Ned to make sure that he did. Ned, unlike anyone he'd have fostered Jon out to, knew to keep an especially close eye out for spies and assassins.

 

Ned also was aware that he couldn't know who else knew Lyanna had given birth. Rheagar might have bragged, or might have confided in someone. Elia might have known about the pregnancy, and told her family. The midwife might have said something to someone, (though more likely she was a wetnurse named Wylla). There could have been people able to connect the dots from blue roses at the tournament, to sudden bastard baby, and he could not be sure who they were or what they'd do about it. Moreover, those three guards had families, and those families had ravens. The world is full of spies. It could be that there are in fact people who know about Jon Snow but haven't acted on that knowledge because he's not a threat to them yet. Or people who know and are on his side, but can't act on it. And of course, there may have been assassins and attempts on Jon already that Ned foiled, that we just don't know about. Probably not, but there might have been.

 

Ned couldn't just foster Jon Snow out, because it could endanger the family doing the fostering. Or worse, it could flip them. So he didn't.

 

I disagree that Catelyn would have said anything to Littlefinger if Ned had asked her not to. I'm also not sure that she fully trusted LF. Just the fact that she burned that letter from him tells me that she wasn't interested in maintaining a relationship of any kind even as friends once she got married. She had no interest in what it was that he had to say either way; she almost feared it.

 

 

Then why did she show HIM the dagger before she even discussed it with Ned? Why did she go on and on to Ned about how he should trust Littlefinger, that he's like a little brother to her, etc? I think Cat WOULD have asked Littlefinger's advice, but even if she didn't, ten minutes after she told Lyssa about Jon Snow (and she would have--family, duty, honor!) Lyssa would have told Littlefinger.

 

I don't think Lyssa would ever keep anything from Petyr, least of all something important like that. A sister's secret is far less important than marital harmony, after all. (Yes I know they weren't married, but in Lyssa's mind they were ALWAYS married. She wanted his child and I wouldn't be at all surprised if Robin is Baelish's child, too.)

Edited June 23, 2015 by Hecate7

[SeanC]

Cat's bargaining abilities were not all that great either. She not only promised the KITN to the Frey girl but also promised Arya to some 22nd son of Walder Frey!! A pretty bad deal for poor Arya. If Robb had not broken his promise to Walder, then Arya most definitely would have! I think marrying the King in the North should have been more than enough for use of the bridge. Not sure why Arya had to be thrown into the deal as well.

Arya was thrown in because Lord Walder wanted it.  He had all the cards.  The chapter in question shows Catelyn's skill at negotiating, given that Frey really has no rational reason to help them at all.

[Cheshrkat]

The only bastard Robert ever acknowledged was Edric Strom, who was sent to foster with his uncle Renly at Storm's End. Ramsay likewise wasn't acknowledged by Roose, until after Domeric Bolton was killed, and by that time there was no reason to send him to foster anywhere.

 

Didn't Robert also acknowledge Mya Stone?  At least everyone in the books seemed to know she was Robert's bastard daughter. 

 

I think in the world of Westeros, there's a difference between acknowledging a bastard and legitimizing/accepting them into your house.  Anyone who has a last name of Snow or Sand or Rivers, etc. is acknowledged to be the child of someone highborn, or else they have no last names.  So lots of bastards are acknowledged - but they are not all living with their highborn parent.

 

And Edric Storm isn't a good example of how highborn bastards were treated, because IIRC both his parents were highborn - Robert was the father, and his mother was one of the Florents?  I think Robert had to treat him differently and have him formally fostered or it would have been an insult to a semi-powerful family in his own homeland.

Edited June 23, 2015 by Cheshrkat

[WearyTraveler]

Arya was thrown in because Lord Walder wanted it.  He had all the cards.  The chapter in question shows Catelyn's skill at negotiating, given that Frey really has no rational reason to help them at all.

 

Actually, he has a rational reason.  His liege lord was Hoster Tully.  If he had been ordered by Hoster (or Edmure) he should have let them through.  Robb shouldn't have waited until he was that close to the Towers to act.  He should have sent a raven, or a trusted emissary on a fast horse to Riverrun to ask his mother's family to go to the Towers and give the order, so that when Robb's army came through they'd have passage.

 

Frey hated his liege lord and the entire Tully house because he felt they always treated him like a second class lord.  He resented that he was never given the same treatment the Tullys gave other houses (Starks, Arryn) and that Hoster never asked him to foster his sons or wanted a Frey betrothed to one of his children.  One of the reasons he betrays Robb is that he's promised control of Riverrun, which he would get because Emmon Frey is married to Genna Lannister (which was lucky for Lord Frey, as I don't think Tywin would have given him Riverrun if Genna hadn't been the wife of a Frey).  I think that more than avenging the broken promise, Frey agreed to the Red Wedding because he wanted Riverrun.  He had coveted it for a long, long time by then.  

[Hecate7]

Hoster was too ill to give the order, but the Blackfish and Edmure could have given it for him.

[WearyTraveler]

Hoster was too ill to give the order, but the Blackfish and Edmure could have given it for him.

 

That's why I put Edmure's name in parenthesis.  I don't think the Blackfish had the authority, but Edmure had been acting Lord for a while by the time Robb was declared King in the North. He was also the heir to Riverrun, so, his word should have suffice.

[anamika]

Arya was thrown in because Lord Walder wanted it.  He had all the cards.  The chapter in question shows Catelyn's skill at negotiating, given that Frey really has no rational reason to help them at all.

 

But she really did no good negotiating, just gave into whatever he wanted. Being good at negotiating means your side gets a good bargain and gives away as little as possible. Cat basically gave away the KING IN THE NORTH! That's a pretty big deal in of itself. Walder's daughter would be a Queen for nothing more than doing what he should have done and help his leige lord who was Cat's father!! There was no way Walder was going to refuse kinship with the KITN.

 

She should have stayed firm on Arya mainly for Arya's sake.  And if she was selling away Arya for a bridge, the least she could have done was get HER a better deal. The 22nd Frey son?! Arya would have got nothing and she immediately disliked her intended, Elmar Frey, when they met at Harrenhal.

Edited June 24, 2015 by anamika

[benteen]

Didn't Robert also acknowledge Mya Stone?  At least everyone in the books seemed to know she was Robert's bastard daughter. 

 

I think in the world of Westeros, there's a difference between acknowledging a bastard and legitimizing/accepting them into your house.  Anyone who has a last name of Snow or Sand or Rivers, etc. is acknowledged to be the child of someone highborn, or else they have no last names.  So lots of bastards are acknowledged - but they are not all living with their highborn parent.

 

And Edric Storm isn't a good example of how highborn bastards were treated, because IIRC both his parents were highborn - Robert was the father, and his mother was one of the Florents?  I think Robert had to treat him differently and have him formally fostered or it would have been an insult to a semi-powerful family in his own homeland.

 

I'm not sure what to make of Mya Stone.  She does have a bastard surname so that should mean she was acknowledged.  Robert used to spend time with her until he grew bored with the mother and Mya is with House Royce.  He also considered bringing Mya to King's Landing but Cersei's threat about little girls (hear that D&D) put that out of his mind.  But the book says that Edric was his only acknowledged bastard.  Maybe just an error on GRRM's part?

 

The EW review hilariously put Arya's betrothal this way.  Catelyn basically gave away her daughter's virginity to pay a bridge toll.  Robb wasn't King in the North at the time and Ned was still alive in King's Landing but marrying the future Lord of Winterfell should have been enough.  But Walder was in a position to ask for more.

[SeanC]

Actually, he has a rational reason.  His liege lord was Hoster Tully.  If he had been ordered by Hoster (or Edmure) he should have let them through.  Robb shouldn't have waited until he was that close to the Towers to act.  He should have sent a raven, or a trusted emissary on a fast horse to Riverrun to ask his mother's family to go to the Towers and give the order, so that when Robb's army came through they'd have passage.

 

Frey hated his liege lord and the entire Tully house because he felt they always treated him like a second class lord.  He resented that he was never given the same treatment the Tullys gave other houses (Starks, Arryn) and that Hoster never asked him to foster his sons or wanted a Frey betrothed to one of his children.  One of the reasons he betrays Robb is that he's promised control of Riverrun, which he would get because Emmon Frey is married to Genna Lannister (which was lucky for Lord Frey, as I don't think Tywin would have given him Riverrun if Genna hadn't been the wife of a Frey).  I think that more than avenging the broken promise, Frey agreed to the Red Wedding because he wanted Riverrun.  He had coveted it for a long, long time by then.  

I'm really not sure how your second paragraph can be reconciled with the first.  Frey was given orders by the Tullys: namely, the order to mobilize and join the main Riverlands army.  He refused.  He has no rational reason to follow the Tullys are this point:  Edmure has been captured, the Tully forces chased from the field, Riverrun is besieged, and their only allies, the Starks, are both outnumbered, at present incapable of coming to their rescue, and, as far as anyone knows, out-generaled.

 

But she really did no good negotiating, just gave into whatever he wanted. Being good at negotiating means your side gets a good bargain and gives away as little as possible. Cat basically gave away the KING IN THE NORTH! That's a pretty big deal in of itself. Walder's daughter would be a Queen for nothing more than doing what he should have done and help his leige lord who was Cat's father!! There was no way Walder was going to refuse kinship with the KITN.

 

She should have stayed firm on Arya mainly for Arya's sake.  And if she was selling away Arya for a bridge, the least she could have done was get HER a better deal. The 22nd Frey son?! Arya would have got nothing and she immediately disliked her intended, Elmar Frey, when they met at Harrenhal.

First, Robb wasn't a king, or even an aspiring king, at that point.  Indeed, when the issue of the Stark-Tully alliance's future is raised subsequently at Riverrun, Stevron Frey (who would surely know) says that his father would be cautious about doing anything at that juncture, so kingship was not a consideration.

 

Second, there was every reason for Lord Walder to refuse.  The Starks' position at that moment sucks.  They have 18,000 men to Tywin and Jaime's combined 36,000, meaning they're outnumbered 2-to-1.  Tywin and Jaime are both experienced commanders, whereas Robb is a novice who has never won anything.  The point is made repeatedly that Lord Walder would not even be considering the Starks' offers but that Tywin made the mistake of not sending any entreaties to him and just assumed he wouldn't do anything.  And even then, Catelyn needs to both assuage his ego and play upon his sense of grievance to talk him into making what anyone would say is a bet against the odds.

 

Third, she wasn't "selling away Arya for a bridge".  Robb also acquired 4000 Frey soldiers, increasing the size of his force by almost 25%.  And even if it had been just for a bridge, it was a bridge that they needed to cross in order to have any chance, as far as Robb and his commanders told her.  Hence, why nobody objects to the deal.  They all recognize it's as good as they can hope for.

 

Fourth, Arya is, as far as anyone knows, a hostage of the Lannisters in King's Landing.  The best thing to be "for Arya's sake" is to rescue her.  As to her prospective hubby's status, so what?  They can live at Winterfell, or on some lands adjacent, and Elmar can be some official in Robb's service.  Indeed, Lord Walder was probably counting on that.

Edited June 24, 2015 by SeanC

[vibeology]

To me, marrying the 22nd son of Walder Frey is actually a decent match for Arya. Arya is a willful young woman and she would benefit greatly from being the person in her marriage with more political capital because then she could still fight with swords, dress in whatever makes her comfortable and run the show. Son 22 wouldn't have land so they could settle in Winterfell and Arya would always have her father/brother's protection and support in doing her own thing. 

 

The worst case scenario for Arya would be marrying the heir to a house. Then she'd be expected to be the Lady of the house and excel at all the things she hates. Even a minor house would require her to act as hostess, pop our heirs, run a household (and do things like embroidery, running a kitchen etc.)

 

Ideally her family would let her opt out of marriage or choose her husband but neither is very realistic for a Stark daughter so considering a lower Frey is a match that makes some sense for her and I can see why Catelyn agrees to it beyond needing to cross a bridge.

[anamika]

I'm really not sure how your second paragraph can be reconciled with the first.  Frey was given orders by the Tullys: namely, the order to mobilize and join the main Riverlands army.  He refused.  He has no rational reason to follow the Tullys are this point:  Edmure has been captured, the Tully forces chased from the field, Riverrun is besieged, and their only allies, the Starks, are both outnumbered, at present incapable of coming to their rescue, and, as far as anyone knows, out-generaled.

 

  But how does one trust someone who has refused to follow the orders of their leige lord? How does Catelyn trust that Walder Frey would be true to his deal if his 'rational reasoning' in all things is to follow the victor and there is no loyalty or fellowship at all? What if the Lannisters then approached with a better deal and Frey turned on them (Which he ended up doing).  Making a deal with him in the first place in itself would be stupid then. They should not have trusted him.

 

First, Robb wasn't a king, or even an aspiring king, at that point.  Indeed, when the issue of the Stark-Tully alliance's future is raised subsequently at Riverrun, Stevron Frey (who would surely know) says that his father would be cautious about doing anything at that juncture, so kingship was not a consideration.

 

  But the deal was made in the belief that Robb would be king and that his daughter would be Queen in the North. As Walder himself admits, the Lannisters have not asked for his help. This should have been a bargaining point that Catelyn could have used. Freys had killed Lannister men and the Lannisters still had not approached Freys.  Catelyn begs instead of using that to make the point that Walder would actually gain somthing by making an alliance with the North. Kingship was very much a consideration, hence why the deal was struck.

 

eta: Robb was indeed King. He was KITN as decreed by the Northmen, he was fighting for an independent North and the war was called the WOT5K which included him.

 

Second, there was every reason for Lord Walder to refuse.  The Starks' position at that moment sucks.  They have 18,000 men to Tywin and Jaime's combined 36,000, meaning they're outnumbered 2-to-1.  Tywin and Jaime are both experienced commanders, whereas Robb is a novice who has never won anything.  The point is made repeatedly that Lord Walder would not even be considering the Starks' offers but that Tywin made the mistake of not sending any entreaties to him and just assumed he wouldn't do anything.  And even then, Catelyn needs to both assuage his ego and play upon his sense of grievance to talk him into making what anyone would say is a bet against the odds.

 

 Which Catelyn should have seized upon and used to her advantage. When the Lannisters attacked, did Walder Frey think that he would go unscathed? After Freys had attacked and killed Lannister men? Instead of assuaging his ego she should have taken the tougher stance of telling him that he would have to chose. She could have played his bluff and said that the Northerners could attack him. She could have at the least tried.  For all his talk, Walder Frey was not suicidal. Hoster was his leige lord and not the other way around for a reason. 

 

Third, she wasn't "selling away Arya for a bridge".  Robb also acquired 4000 Frey soldiers, increasing the size of his force by almost 25%.  And even if it had been just for a bridge, it was a bridge that they needed to cross in order to have any chance, as far as Robb and his commanders told her.  Hence, why nobody objects to the deal.  They all recognize it's as good as they can hope for.

 

      So she was selling Arya for a bridge and 4000 Frey soldiers. And my point still stands. The KITN should have been more than enough for the bridge and the soldiers. Let's see everything that Cat had to agree to for the bridge: Wards at Winterfell, a personal squire for Robb, Robb himself and Arya. Would Walder Frey have refused them the bridge if Catelyn had stood firm on Arya? She basically gave into everything he asked for. How is that being a good negotiator. If GRRM wants the reader to see her that way then he should have included a scene where he asks for something and she haggles and is able to get him to agree to something lesser in value. We never saw that. Just Cat buckling to whatever Walder says.

 

Fourth, Arya is, as far as anyone knows, a hostage of the Lannisters in King's Landing.  The best thing to be "for Arya's sake" is to rescue her.  As to her prospective hubby's status, so what?  They can live at Winterfell, or on some lands adjacent, and Elmar can be some official in Robb's service.  Indeed, Lord Walder was probably counting on that.

 

    HaHa. I like this. Cat promises to have Arya forcefully married to someone she does not like nor is attracted to and gets no titles or lands and the response is  "So what? She can live on Winterfell Lands. No big deal".  When the Lannisters forcefully married Sansa to someone she was not attracted to and disliked it was all 'OMG. How awful. Poor Sansa!!'.  I think that Tyrion Lannister, former hand of the king, is a far better choice as husband than the 22nd son of Walder, who is actually rumored to be the son of Black Walder Frey.  Tyrion is intelligent and ambitious and a survivor. He would have ended up with Casterly Rock (I think he will at the end of the books) and was actually decent enough to not force himself on Sansa. I don't see Elmar Frey as having that restraint with Arya.

 

To me, marrying the 22nd son of Walder Frey is actually a decent match for Arya. Arya is a willful young woman and she would benefit greatly from being the person in her marriage with more political capital because then she could still fight with swords, dress in whatever makes her comfortable and run the show. Son 22 wouldn't have land so they could settle in Winterfell and Arya would always have her father/brother's protection and support in doing her own thing. 

 

     You think Elmar Frey would be agreeable to all that ? This is what Arya though of Elmar:

 

 

“You do it.” Elmar could be friendly when he needed help, but afterward he would always remember that he was a squire and she was only a serving girl, He liked to boast how he was the son of the Lord of the Crossing, not a nephew or a bastard or a grandson but a trueborn son, and on account of that he was going to marry a princess. Arya didn’t care about his precious princess, and didn’t like him giving her commands.

     

 

Elmar’s eyes got as big as boiled eggs. Leeches terrified him, especially the big pale ones that looked like jelly until they filled up with blood. “I forgot, you’re too skinny to push such a heavy barrel.” “I forgot, you’re stupid.” Arya picked up the pail. “Maybe you should get leeched too. There’s leeches in the Neck as big as pigs.” She left him there with his barrel.

 

 

“My princess,” he sobbed. “We’ve been dishonored, Aenys says. There was a bird from the Twins. My lord father says I’ll need to marry someone else, or be a septon.” A stupid princess, she thought, that’s nothing to cry over. “My brothers might be dead,” she confided.

 

Elmar gave her a scornful look. “No one cares about a serving girl’s brothers.” It was hard not to hit him when he said that. “I hope your princess dies,” she said, and ran off before he could grab her.

  

   Seems a bit of an idiot. I still think that Arya deserved better than be sold off to marry a 22nd son with nothing to his name and whose best prospects were to become a Septon. Arya was important enough to hold the North for the Lannisters that they send a fake Arya to marry Ramsay Bolton. if she was good at bargaining,  Cat could have finagled out off handing over Arya. If she was going to be used to make deals, then Catelyn could have used her to stabilize Robb's hold on the North with other, more powerful families.

Edited June 24, 2015 by anamika