Jump to content

Jon Arryn: Slayer of Children


Chaircat Meow

Recommended Posts

There is a reasonable case to be made that the murder of the Targaryen heirs (and Elia) was the result of pre-arrangement between Lord Tywin and Jon Arryn. That is to say Jon promised Tywin Robert’s hand in marriage for Cersei in exchange for his going to King’s Landing and finishing off the Targaryens.

There are various bits of evidence for this:

It just makes sense, from a practical point of view.

Killing princes and princesses is a risky business. You might want guarantees of protection and reward before you undertake something like this. At worst you could wind up like the killers of Aegon II when Cregan Stark got his hands on them.

Alternatively, you might just not get rewarded because your new patron doesn’t want to associate himself with your misdeeds. How could Tywin know Jon and Robert would consider honouring Tywin after the sack was worth increasing the antipathy of the Dornish to their regime?

At this point it might be said that Tywin didn’t necessarily want the marriage in exchange for his actions. But if not what did he want? He’s not in any danger from the new regime. We know the Tyrells and Dornish were not punished, even for fighting on the wrong side. If we don’t assume Tywin hoped for Robert for Cersei we have to admit he hoped for no political gain from the sack at all.

The comparison to the Red Wedding.

The deaths of the Targ heirs are discussed in SoS so that a comparison with the events of the Red Wedding is suggested. Tywin and Tyrion discuss Tywin’s reasoning for the murders at the end of the meeting where the news of the Red Wedding has just been discussed. Tyrion then directly compares the Red Wedding to the murders, asking Tywin if Robb Stark was supposed to have a pillow too.

See SoS, pp. 588-596, (UK Hardback) for this chapter.

Wrt the Red Wedding Tyrion opines, ‘I have no doubt he [Frey] hatched this ugly chicken, but he would never have dared such a thing without a promise of protection.’

This should at least make us consider whether Tywin would have dared his own atrocity without guarantees from Jon Arryn as the chapter explicitly draws a close parallel between the two events.

Jon Arryn’s lies.

In GoT Robert explains to Ned why he married Cersei. Jon, according to Robert, persuaded him by telling him that, ‘Cersei Lannister would be a good match … she would bind Lord Tywin to me should Viserys Targaryen ever try to win back his father’s throne.’ (p. 260)

It should be obvious Jon was lying here. Just ask Lord Tywin. ‘We had come late to Robert’s cause. It was necessary to demonstrate our loyalty. When I laid those bodies before the throne, no man could doubt that we had forsaken House Targaryen forever.’ (SoS p. 594)

After the sack there was no chance Tywin would not come to Robert’s aid should Viserys ever invade.

Tywin’s atrocity actually made it harder for him to get what he’d always wanted (his daughter as Queen). The way the marriage was sold to the king actually only made sense if Tywin hadn’t done what he did. Why, therefore, did Jon suggest the marriage on such erroneous grounds? The best explanation is Jon couldn’t tell Robert (or Robert couldn’t tell Ned) he had already effectively hired Tywin’s services and was therefore obliged to arrange the payment. In other words Robert’s marriage to Cersei did bind Lord Tywin to Robert against the Targs, but only because it had been promised in advance.

Jon Arryn’s motivations.

Jon wanted the Targs gone to secure the new dynasty and avoid a repeat of the Blackfrye rebellions. His big problem was Ned. Ned would not forgive someone who had children killed for political reasons. Yet it was Ned’s loyalty to Jon and Robert which held their alliance together. Jon did not want Ned’s allegiance to the new dynasty wavering, so he arranged to rid himself of the Targs while keeping his hands clean. The same argument also applies to Dorne.

Credit to SeanF for first suggesting this idea.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Thanks.

I would emphasise that this is something I would state as hypothesis, rather than something I would state as fact.

My view is that Aegon V had made himself very unpopular with the nobility, and from then on, the Targaryens were treading on very thin ice.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

There is a reasonable case to be made that the murder of the Targaryen heirs (and Elia) was the result of pre-arrangement between Lord Tywin and Jon Arryn.

This is the moment I stop reading. I cannot even start to explain why I believe that all those things are utter nonsense. Could it happen? Since we have absolutely zero clues for it I don't think so. But someone can claim that there is a small possibility.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Not sure why this revelation would be necessary as it doesn't seem like it would add anything significant to the story going forward. Maybe if it's revealed Dany will be harsher to the Vale when she arrives?



I don't think this theory is going to pan out. Tywin has already established he is willing to murder entire families out of existence, I don't see why he'd be all that worried about it in this instance. This is his quick, efficient way of buying the rebel's influence in hopes of marrying into the crown.



It's not really the same as the Red Wedding as RW involved guest right which is a huge distinction. Guest right effects like every person in Westeros and is seen as sacred and like the ultimate taboo. Perhaps people somewhat look down upon somebody for murdering the family, but it doesn't have nearly the same effect as far as being able to deal with other houses except in extreme circumstances.



Tywin didn't really need protection in this instance as he could be fairly sure the rebels would back him up if Dorne decided to declare war as Tywin did help their cause while Dorne just finished fighting against them. Not to mention Dorne is like the only region that probably cared any great deal besides maybe parts of the Crownlands and some really morally upstanding people like Ned. Dorne isn't really much of a threat to Tywin if they are the aggressors and try and invade the Westerldands.



I think it's a fairly safe endeavor for Tywin with a potential big payoff. Definitely in line with other atrocities Tywin has committed from a moral standpoint. No reason to add an unnecessary layer to this explanation by putting Jon Arryn behind it unless something hints more directly at him being involved.


Link to comment
Share on other sites

The way the marriage was sold to the king actually only made sense if Tywin hadn’t done what he did. Why, therefore, did Jon suggest the marriage on such erroneous grounds? The best explanation is Jon couldn’t tell Robert (or Robert couldn’t tell Ned) he had already effectively hired Tywin’s services and was therefore obliged to arrange the payment.

No, that's not the best explanation. This whole theory basically hangs on the idea that that one sentence recounted by Robert is some huge logic hole requiring a big conspiracy theory to explain it. If you require one, the simplest and best explanation is that Arryn was putting pressure on Robert to make a politically advantageous marriage that he was somewhat reluctant to make.

At this point it might be said that Tywin didn’t necessarily want the marriage in exchange for his actions. But if not what did he want? He’s not in any danger from the new regime. We know the Tyrells and Dornish were not punished, even for fighting on the wrong side.

The sack predated the lenient handling of the Martells and Tyrells, so Tywin couldn't have known that.

Tywin and Arryn could not have made such an arrangement, anyway, as Lyanna was known to be alive, and Robert, at least, seemed to still want to marry her.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Not sure why this revelation would be necessary as it doesn't seem like it would add anything significant to the story going forward.

Also this ^. How we can know that for sure and what would change from the story? There is no way of knowing and would change nothing.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Not sure why this revelation would be necessary as it doesn't seem like it would add anything significant to the story going forward. Maybe if it's revealed Dany will be harsher to the Vale when she arrives?

I don't think this theory is going to pan out. Tywin has already established he is willing to murder entire families out of existence, I don't see why he'd be all that worried about it in this instance. This is his quick, efficient way of buying the rebel's influence in hopes of marrying into the crown.

It's not really the same as the Red Wedding as RW involved guest right which is a huge distinction. Guest right effects like every person in Westeros and is seen as sacred and like the ultimate taboo. Perhaps people somewhat look down upon somebody for murdering the family, but it doesn't have nearly the same

effect as far as being able to deal with other houses except in extreme circumstances.

Tywin didn't really need protection in this instance as he could be fairly sure the rebels would back him up if Dorne decided to declare war as Tywin did help their cause while Dorne just finished fighting against them. Not to mention Dorne is like the only region that probably cared any great deal besides maybe parts of the Crownlands and some really morally upstanding people like Ned. Dorne isn't really much of a threat to Tywin if they are the aggressors and try and invade the Westerldands.

I think it's a fairly safe endeavor for Tywin with a potential big payoff. Definitely in line with other atrocities Tywin has committed from a moral standpoint. No reason to add an unnecessary layer to this explanation by putting Jon Arryn behind it unless something hints more directly at him being involved.

Tywin is not a fool. Murdering a Royal Princess and her children is a dangerous step to take, unless you've got the go-ahead in advance. We know this, because of the punishment that Creggan Stark exacted on the murderers of Aegon II.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

The other issue I have with this is that, while Jon Arryn is not a character we ever actually "meet", per se, we get a pretty reasonable description of his history and his style as a political actor through reminiscences and descriptions from people who knew him, people who opposed him, and people who studied under him. I don't think he was some kind of idealized chivalric figure, but everything we've seen of him suggests his political style favoured a mix of pragmatism and consensus-building through accommodation and fair-dealing. If he were the ruthless and coldblooded Machiavel this theory requires him to be, one suspects the history of Westeros while he was Hand would be very different.






Tywin is not a fool. Murdering a Royal Princess and her children is a dangerous step to take, unless you've got the go-ahead in advance. We know this, because of the punishment that Creggan Stark exacted on the murderers of Aegon II.





Cregan Stark punished members of Aegon's own household who were sworn to serve him. He didn't punish any of the declared rebels against him, seeing as he was one himself.



If you look at it one way that's an arbitrary distinction, since it just means the last people to rebel got it, but the point he was making was clear, and it wouldn't apply to Tywin, who had never fought for Aerys in the rebellion and attacked him with an army.


Link to comment
Share on other sites

There are various bits of evidence for this.

I don't meant to be rude, but are there? Your post doesn't cite any. It makes a claim, makes a comparison, makes another claim, and makes a hypothesis. But it doesn't actually provide any evidence. At best, you've got something that you think doesn't add up about the reasons for the Cersei match (and nothing says that Jon and Tywin couldn't have had different perceptions of that match and its necessity.) The rest is just supposition.

Meanwhile, for this to be true, Jon and Tywin would have to have been in contact, Jon would have to be telling a pretty important lie to his beloved foster sons, and Jon would have to be a deal more ruthless than we are led to believe. In other words, there's a lot of stuff going on behind the scenes that we haven't been told about, that won't have any impact on the series going forward. If a theory posits a lot of this stuff, I tend to think it's lacking in credibility.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

No, that's not the best explanation. This whole theory basically hangs on the idea that that one sentence recounted by Robert is some huge logic hole requiring a big conspiracy theory to explain it. If you require one, the simplest and best explanation is that Arryn was putting pressure on Robert to make a politically advantageous marriage that he was somewhat reluctant to make.

Why is the fact it's only one sentence mean anything? It is the only sentence to detail Jon and Robert's reasoning for the match.

I don't meant to be rude, but are there? Your post doesn't cite any. It makes a claim, makes a comparison, makes another claim, and makes a hypothesis. But it doesn't actually provide any evidence. At best, you've got something that you think doesn't add up about the reasons for the Cersei match (and nothing says that Jon and Tywin couldn't have had different perceptions of that match and its necessity.) The rest is just supposition.

I gave the arguments in support of the theory. Insisting they're not evidence is just semantic and not an argument of any kind.

Meanwhile, for this to be true, Jon and Tywin would have to have been in contact, Jon would have to be telling a pretty important lie to his beloved foster sons, and Jon would have to be a deal more ruthless than we are led to believe. In other words, there's a lot of stuff going on behind the scenes that we haven't been told about, that won't have any impact on the series going forward. If a theory posits a lot of this stuff, I tend to think it's lacking in credibility.

I don't see much unlikely about any of that. Jon and Tywin could easily have been in contact. And the whole purpose of Jon's involvement is to do with his inability to do what he wants in front of Ned.

On the question of future relevance, I agree this is an important issue to consider wrt theories. It looks to me that we are going to see another side to the rebellion, given the hints about Rickard in DwD and Woiaf and so further hints about Jon's involvement would, in conjunction with that, create a more nuanced account of the rebellion, where the rebels (saving the Lannisters) aren't unambiguous good guys. I also think, again given Woiaf, that we're going to get the real reasons for Tywin's involvement (both explanations in SoS were wrong, in my view) and pre-arrangement with Jon makes the most sense of them. So it's going to be an important piece of the jigsaw.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Tywin and Arryn could not have made such an arrangement, anyway, as Lyanna was known to be alive, and Robert, at least, seemed to still want to marry her.

This right here obliterates this entire theory.

I think Tywin just wanted to get something from Robert, be it a seat on the Small Council, lands, titles...basically power and influence, but Cersei ever becoming Robert's queen was a long shot at that point and was only possible because of Lyanna's unexpected death

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Its a belts and braces job. House Lannister has forsaken the Targaryens so long as anyone associated with Tywin lives, but generations move on, and while it is often the case, the crimes of the father are not the sons. But having a Lannister Queen binds that House to your monarchy basically until the Lannister blood in that line is water thin. Its as much protecting the future line of as it is the current occupier of the Iron Throne. Also Lyanna. Also, Tywin would probably have blurted to Tyrion at some point that Arryn sanctioned it just to shut him up about "honour" and "blood stained hands."


Link to comment
Share on other sites

Again, it's not if it's the most relevant sentence for the motivations for the match.

Yes, it is, if you want to hang a huge behind-the-scenes theory on this one sentence. And it's a single sentence of fairly casual background exposition, in terms of the story, so I suspect GRRM would be surprised at how much you're hanging on an analysis of it, to the exclusion of everything else we know about the background, including Arryn's character, Arryn's general conduct, the circumstances (there's a million practical problems with this idea).

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Since it has been brought up a fair amount I'll deal with the issue of Robert's betrothal to Lyanna.

First, do we really know the betrothal was still on after Lyanna was abducted? I recall there's a romantic view of Robert fighting to get Lyanna back, but in reality she could have been viewed as damaged goods. We can't say exactly how her alleged rape affects the betrothal but I think it is reasonable to assume the betrothal was actually off.

Second, wouldn't Tywin need assurances the betrothal was off if he hoped to get the royal marriage out of his misdeeds? And that means he'd need to pre-arrange things. So, if Tywin was aiming at the royal marriage (and we know he was since 273 AC) then Robert's betrothal to Lyanna actually supports the theory of pre-arrangement.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

So, if Tywin was aiming at the royal marriage (and we know he was since 273 AC) then Robert's betrothal to Lyanna actually supports the theory of pre-arrangement.

Does this say that an arranged marriage between Robert and Lyanna actually supports a pre-arranged marriage between Robert and Cersei? That makes no sense.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Archived

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

Guest
This topic is now closed to further replies.
×
×
  • Create New...