155 replies to this topic

[Lucky Shield]

Datepalm, on 31 July 2010 - 01:48 PM, said:

So the people who irrationaly start a war are blameless while the people who rationaly react to circumstances within it are the guilty party?

Cat basically started the war when she captured Tyrion without any sense of proof except for LF saying yeh that's Tyrion's knife. Cat met the dwarf she should have known he was a lot smarter than that. Anyone with sense would know this

[Lucky Shield]

Terrorist Fist Jab, on 31 July 2010 - 02:30 PM, said:

The war was already lost by the time Karstark killed the Lannister hostages. There was nothing Catelyn or Edmure or Brynden could have done.

To put it in Jaime's words: "Stark won a few battles in the field and lost the war in the bedroom, poor fool."

The rebellion as the king of the north might have been lost. But i'm sure Robb and the others would have been smart enough to ally with Stannis at some point.

[Datepalm]

I rather think Lysa is full blown Lannister level crazy inappropriate passions that destroy the universe, etc. Even though both LF and Lysa are individually extremely unsympathetic, the whole sorry, dramatic mess is one of my favorite bits of the series - its as full on human relashionships at their most extreme as any, but unlike, say, Jaime and Cercei there isn't glamour and confindence and power hiding the loneliness and patheticness and sad tawdry despair of it.

Theres something very raw and powerful to that, IMO, and I think it can be seen to a lesser extent with the Tullys elsewhere - Cats mourning and rash freeing of Jaime (and even "it should have been you"), Edmures good intentions but also his weakness and his impotence (ahem, metaphorically), Hoster and Bryndens estrangement - becuase they're not usually shown playing the game of thrones and being all witty, beautiful and entertaining, a lot of very primal humanness manages to come to the surface.

[Blackfish Blues]

Yesterday I was thinking about this thread, and this thought came up: "The Tullys are the hobbits of ASOIAF."

Due proportions must be made, of course, but many things have been said that made me think of this comparison.

- They tend to polarize the reader: you either love them or hate them. (This is a generalization, of course, I guess lots of people are indifferent to the Tullys and have no interest in writing in these threads.)

- They represent in a way the average reader, with stupid faults and loveable traits at the same time, as contrasted with the supercool Gondor or Rohan.

- They are mostly less warlike than the other great Houses.

- They tend to be connected with banquets...

Edited by Blackfish Blues, 02 August 2010 - 04:40 AM.

[Dreadwolf]

Lucky Shield, on 02 August 2010 - 03:08 AM, said:

Cat basically started the war when she captured Tyrion without any sense of proof except for LF saying yeh that's Tyrion's knife. Cat met the dwarf she should have known he was a lot smarter than that. Anyone with sense would know this

or Cersei/ Jaime started the war because they were systematically committing high treason against King Robert. And They (and the rest of Lannisters) did everything to:

1./ hush up the affair;
2./ avoid the consequences and King*s justice at any rate.

Among other things they:

- conspired against the king*s hand (Jon Arryn) who was eventually poisoned. If we cannot be sure that they did something crucial to poison him at the least the Maester controlled and inspired (for this particular deed) by them intentionally did not healed him properly;
- removed one young witness/ attempted on little boy*s life but maimed him instead;
Another witness (Jon Arryn*s squire died in tourney - perhaps because for similar reasons. To prevent him speaking.);
- killed the King (so that Lannisters can keep not only their lives but also all other of their goodies);
- started hostile war-like activities (under cover) against River Lands in order to set trap for the purpose of murdering/ capture the kings hand;

Even if Strak/ Tully families never existed in the book there would be war again Stannis (who awas in fact sure about the incest and queen*s high treason) and Renly would not let king*s murder uninvestigated.

Needless to say that there would not have been any war if good king Robert had still lived. Well There could have been a punitive expedition against Casterly Rock perhaps. Which would have finished comparatively quick.

[Lucky Shield]

Dreadwolf, on 02 August 2010 - 05:01 AM, said:

or Cersei/ Jaime started the war because they were systematically committing high treason against King Robert. And They (and the rest of Lannisters) did everything to:

1./ hush up the affair;
2./ avoid the consequences and King*s justice at any rate.

Among other things they:

- conspired against the king*s hand (Jon Arryn) who was eventually poisoned. If we cannot be sure that they did something crucial to poison him at the least the Maester controlled and inspired (for this particular deed) by them intentionally did not healed him properly;
- removed one young witness/ attempted on little boy*s life but maimed him instead;
Another witness (Jon Arryn*s squire died in tourney - perhaps because for similar reasons. To prevent him speaking.);
- killed the King (so that Lannisters can keep not only their lives but also all other of their goodies);
- started hostile war-like activities (under cover) against River Lands in order to set trap for the purpose of murdering/ capture the kings hand;

Even if Strak/ Tully families never existed in the book there would be war again Stannis (who awas in fact sure about the incest and queen*s high treason) and Renly would not let king*s murder uninvestigated.

Needless to say that there would not have been any war if good king Robert had still lived. Well There could have been a punitive expedition against Casterly Rock perhaps. Which would have finished comparatively quick.

Exactly! If Cat had let justice have her way. Ned as hand would be taking good control of the situation and have monopolised every kingdom agaisnt the Lannisters. Cat taking Tyrion captive turned justice into a kidnapping of the son of the most powerful lord in the realm. It made everything go wrong. Mobilisation of Tywin's troops, the mountain unleashed, etc.. Tywin might have sold out his son by saying "okay yeah he did try and kill Bran, i forsake him, i don't need him, blablabla" He's very capable of doing this. He hates his son for what he represents.

But if Tyrion would have been executed and justice been done. Tyrion could never have saved KL (because no matter what Robert was doomed) and Stannis would be reigning over Westeros.

So if Cat hadn't intervened all the Lannisters or just Tyrion would have been killed. If all the Lannisters were killed there would have just been a war of 4 kings only (Stannis would still have fought Joffrey for the crown is rightfully his) Robb wouldn't have joined the fight since Ned would have lived. If just Tyrion had died, Stannis would be king. But overall it would be a much better situation than the one we have now.

[Dreadwolf]

Lucky Shield, on 02 August 2010 - 06:55 AM, said:

Exactly! If Cat had let justice have her way.

Still prior that Cersei was taking any open possibility opportunity to oblige her husband with what he always wanted deadly i.e. the Queen was arranging soonest Robert*s meeting  with his beloved lass Lyanna.

Edited by Dreadwolf, 02 August 2010 - 11:53 AM.

[Lucky Shield]

Dreadwolf, on 02 August 2010 - 10:50 AM, said:

Still prior that Cersei was taking any open possibility to oblige her husband with what he always wanted deadly i.e. the Queen was arranging soonest Robert*s meeting  with his beloved lass Lyanna.

Sorry don't understand  

[Dreadwolf]

Lucky Shield, on 02 August 2010 - 11:10 AM, said:

Sorry don't understand  

I meant that king Robbert was dead man walking (probably since the day he had married Cersei). IIRC She mentions to Jaime that he must be removed from the game board soonest. Then She did her best to make him fight in the mellee (luckily Ned and Barristan the bold were able to make him reconsider). Finally - after Ned Stark had explained his plans to Cersei, She instructed Lancel to do the needful so that king Robert came back dead or dying from the Great Hunt. (And with thuss - his greatest wish to be with Lyanna again to come true).

All that is in explanation to your thesis that Catelyn could have waited somehow for the Justice to be served. - She might have indeed waited but Cersei had been neiter willing nor patient for all that. And with king Robber passed the way the Kings justice entered into Lannisters hands.

[DizoakiusMaximus]

Datepalm, on 31 July 2010 - 01:48 PM, said:

So the people who irrationaly start a war are blameless while the people who rationaly react to circumstances within it are the guilty party?

Wait a second. The Lannisters didn't (technically) start the war. Ok, I suppose you can say they began actual armed conflicts first, but from what I recall what started the war was Catelyn taking Tyrion prisoner (first of all a big no-no, but let's skip the legality of the imprisonment for now).

Catelyn Stark (nee Tully), while in the Riverlands, takes Tyrion prisoner. So, while in the lands that are (supposedly) controlled by her Father, she takes the Noble son of a major House captive, without any type of legal authority what-so-ever.

The Lannisters (arguably) would see this as an action that, if not condoned outright, then was at least tacitly accepted by Hoster Tully (who is on his deathbed, but the news of which is being tightly guarded by Edmure for fear of what the Riverlords would do when that news became widely known.)

Catelyn's spreading of the rumor that they would be then headed for Winterfell (as opposed to going to King's Landing to put the case to judgement before the King) must have seemed like an even bigger...crime...insult...whatever you want to call it. Then, once it becomes clear that she has taken Tyrion to the Vale...well, it looks more and more like a Tully/Stark conspiracy against the Lannisters (at least to an outside observer).

Even still, if you want to make the argument that Catelyn acted as an agent of House Stark (which I totally agree with) she still used her status as a Tully as part of her plans for escaping with Tyrion. Add on top of this that House Stark and House Tully and House Arryn are all allied, and where are the Lannisters supposed to start when it comes to war? They certainly wouldn't be going into the Vale right off the bat (maybe they would have gotten there eventually, especially if Tyrion hadn't been freed by the time hostilities were well underway) and going after Winterfell directly would bring about a whole mess of other problems, (the long march North, and getting past Moat Cailin), but most importantly that they'd have to go through Riverrun's territory to do it in the first place and no way is House Tully just going to let the Lannisters ride through their territory so that they can attack one of their allies.

Hitting Riverrun and the Tully lands was not only the smart move on Tywin's part, but really the only move they had available to them at the outset. (From a military stand-point). Sending Gregor and his band of psycho's into the Riverlands was really just an attempt at intimidating House Tully into securing Tyrion's release (who incidentally was already freed, but no one knew it yet), yes they disguised themselves so as to be taken for "bandits", but nobody was really fooled by it least of all the people who were being burned out of their homes by the biggest man in Westeros to sit a horse. That's basically Tywin's way of getting in a few good licks before he unfurls the Lannister banners and marches to war in full view of everyone.

On a side note that is only tangentially related to all this: Ned should have picked Loras to go after Gregor, as there's really no way Loras is going to win in a real fight against "The Mountain that Rides", and once Gregor is finished killing Loras, the whole might of Highgarden would then be arrayed against the Lannisters instead of them eventually forming an alliance with them.

Edited by DizoakiusMaximus, 03 November 2010 - 08:00 PM.

[Alexia]

DizoakiusMaximus, on 03 November 2010 - 07:44 PM, said:

Wait a second. The Lannisters didn't (technically) start the war. Ok, I suppose you can say they began actual armed conflicts first, but from what I recall what started the war was Catelyn taking Tyrion prisoner.

I'm going to object to this portion of your post.  Not only did the Lannisters open armed hostilities against the Starks, they did so to prevent Tyrion from being tried for his collusion in the attempted murder of Brandon Stark.  Arresting Tyrion is not what started the war, throwing seven-year old Brandon Stark out a window and then sending an assassin after him is what started the war.  Once Jaime Lannister and Joffrey Baratheon-Lannister (he of the quartered arms) did that, war was certain to follow.

[DizoakiusMaximus]

Alexia, on 03 November 2010 - 09:18 PM, said:

I'm going to object to this portion of your post.  Not only did the Lannisters open armed hostilities against the Starks, they did so to prevent Tyrion from being tried for his collusion in the attempted murder of Brandon Stark.  Arresting Tyrion is not what started the war, throwing seven-year old Brandon Stark out a window and then sending an assassin after him is what started the war.  Once Jaime Lannister and Joffrey Baratheon-Lannister (he of the quartered arms) did that, war was certain to follow.

  EDIT: @Alexia: Just that portion? Shoot, I must be losing my touch!  


  But, in keeping with trying Tyrion in a legal fashion, shouldn't Catelyn have taken him to King's Landing to present it before the King and get it done the right way? I don't disagree that throwing Bran out of the window led to the events that followed in the Riverlands, but Catelyn did the wrong thing by intending to go to Winterfell instead of presenting the case for the Kings Justice.

  Remember, we get to see things with something approaching an omniciscient eye, we know who threw Bran out of the window, nobody else (except for Jaime and Cersei) knows the truth of it. Later on, we know who sent the assassin, but for someone reading the book for the first time, they still think it was Tyrion until that little tid-bit is revealed.

  It's like saying: "Pearl Harbor started America's involvement in World War II, instead of saying "America's embargo of oil and steel to Japan precipitated that same attack", or going even further back, "Western Imperialist racism and their disdain for Japan's attempts to emulate the Wests imperialm ambitions started the war."
  
   There was still a chance that war could have been averted in Westeros, had Catelyn done the right thing and taken Tyrion to be judged before the King. However, how THAT whole scenario would have played out is a totally different story...at least the Lannisters wouldn't have had a "good" reason to go to war against the Tully/Arryn/Stark alliance.

Edited by DizoakiusMaximus, 04 November 2010 - 02:25 PM.

[Alexia]

DizoakiusMaximus, on 04 November 2010 - 02:17 PM, said:

There was still a chance that war could have been averted in Westeros, had Catelyn done the right thing and taken Tyrion to be judged before the King.

Disagree.  Once the assassin was sent and it was no longer possible to think Bran's fall was an accident, war was sure to follow.  Remember that Bran was thrown out the window after he saw Jaime and Cersei together.  The logical thought is that an assassin was sent after a failed murder attempt to silence him.  The next question is: what is Tyrion Lannister (or someone in the Lannister party) so afraid of that he would send an assassin after Bran on his deathbed?

IMO, had Catelyn taken Tyrion to KL Robert would have quickly been killed by Cersei (hey, didn't this already happen!) and Catelyn and Ned Stark would have found themselves dealing with the Lannisters instead.  Cersei has already killed to protect her secret, I see no reason why this would have changed if Catelyn had brought Tyrion to KL.  And Cersei's secret would have likely come to light in KL-based trial of Tyrion.

EDIT:  I'm sure you'll get your touch back soon, LOL, but I agree with your analysis of how Tywin perceived Catelyn's actions and his reasons for attacking the Tullys.  And I definitely agree that it would have been the better part of wisdom to sacrifice poor Loras to the cause.  

Edited by Alexia, 04 November 2010 - 02:44 PM.

[Lord Varys]

Well, but neither Cat nor Ned had any clue about the nature of thesecret the Lannisters desperately wanted to keep secret. Going to the Eyrie was not that great an idea. Going to Riverrun would have made much more sense, as Hoster was technically the Lord who could convict Tyrion as he was caught while being in his land, not Lysa Arryn. And he would have also been able to provide Cat with enough strength to get their hostage safely to KL.

Dragging Tyrion before Robert to try him would have caused great confusion among everyone - Cersei, Jaime, Littlefinger, Ned, Robert, Tywin etc.

I don't feel able to predict how such an affair would have ended. People would have become nervous - but the man in the worst position would have been Littlefinger. Tyrion did not do anything, and the trial would have shown this. There was also no proof about the accident being no accident, nor was it likely that Tyrion would talk about the twincest (he did not know for certain at this time, and I don't see him implicating his siblings at this point). Cersei most likely would have been furious about this outrageous behavior of House Stark and Jaime would not be present, as his attack on Ned (which would have taken place in that scenario as well) would have forced him to flee KL.
Cersei would have been ill-advised to try to kill Robert during this time. She could only arrange a hunting accident - arranging a more suspicious death would have given Renly easily the pretext to seize and execute her without trial. And Ned would have always remained a potential ally of Cersei as guardian of King Joffrey as long as she was able to keep his heritage a secret. Ned would not turn against Robert's son, but he would of course try to avenge his murder.

The most likely outcome of such a situation would have been the assassination of Tyrion before Robert could conduct the trial, orchestrated by Littlefinger. Catelyn's and Tyrion's testimony would most certainly doom Littlefinger, and he would have done everything in his power to prevent that. Renly, Catelyn and Tyrion would all uncover Littlefinger's lie. And he really would not have been able to give anyone a good reason for telling this lie. Tyrion's death would then have lead inevitably to war, but if Cersei would have failed to kill Robert, things might have turned out quite differently.

[DizoakiusMaximus]

Lord Varys, on 04 November 2010 - 06:19 PM, said:

Well, but neither Cat nor Ned had any clue about the nature of thesecret the Lannisters desperately wanted to keep secret. Going to the Eyrie was not that great an idea. Going to Riverrun would have made much more sense, as Hoster was technically the Lord who could convict Tyrion as he was caught while being in his land, not Lysa Arryn. And he would have also been able to provide Cat with enough strength to get their hostage safely to KL.

  Exactly what I was getting at, but much more eloquently put. Thank you.

Quote

I don't feel able to predict how such an affair would have ended. People would have become nervous - but the man in the worst position would have been Littlefinger. Tyrion did not do anything, and the trial would have shown this. There was also no proof about the accident being no accident, nor was it likely that Tyrion would talk about the twincest (he did not know for certain at this time, and I don't see him implicating his siblings at this point). Cersei most likely would have been furious about this outrageous behavior of House Stark and Jaime would not be present, as his attack on Ned (which would have taken place in that scenario as well) would have forced him to flee KL.
Cersei would have been ill-advised to try to kill Robert during this time. She could only arrange a hunting accident - arranging a more suspicious death would have given Renly easily the pretext to seize and execute her without trial. And Ned would have always remained a potential ally of Cersei as guardian of King Joffrey as long as she was able to keep his heritage a secret. Ned would not turn against Robert's son, but he would of course try to avenge his murder.

   It's a fun (although ultimately fruitless) exercise doing counter-factual things with regards to how that would have played out. I like what you posit here, though: I doubt Robert would have been easy to get to once Catelyn shows up with Tyrion in tow shouting accusations for all the world to hear.

Quote

The most likely outcome of such a situation would have been the assassination of Tyrion before Robert could conduct the trial, orchestrated by Littlefinger. Catelyn's and Tyrion's testimony would most certainly doom Littlefinger, and he would have done everything in his power to prevent that. Renly, Catelyn and Tyrion would all uncover Littlefinger's lie. And he really would not have been able to give anyone a good reason for telling this lie. Tyrion's death would then have lead inevitably to war, but if Cersei would have failed to kill Robert, things might have turned out quite differently.

I agree that's the most likely outcome, yes. Tyrion's death (and whatever happened to Cersei and the kids following that) would definitely have started a war, but without the realm splintered between 4 different claimants...watch out Casterly Rock.

[Lady Blackfish]

Cat and Ned knew that it was a secret that would drive the Lannisters to try to kill Bran though.  It's got to be something heavy.

I'd say Cat didn't go to Riverrun because the road is much more open.  The Mountains of the Moon are more difficult and dangerous, but they're more difficult and dangerous for both any possible pursuit as well as herself, so she's harder to track.  Also, Lysa is the one who sent her the note about the supposed Lannister conspiracy in the first place, so it'd be good to know what Lysa knows and add that to the case against the Lannisters.  Lastly, I don't really think Tywin's actions had much to do with the source of Catelyn's authority.  If she had gone to Riverrun instead of the Eyrie was he going to ... not attack Riverrun?  Tywin may have not accepted Catelyn's authority, period, since she was not the king, but Eyrie vs Riverrun has little to do with that.

Saying that she was going to Winterfell may have made it seem like she wasn't planning to pursue the king's justice (I suppose), but that doesn't mean that she actually wasn't, rather that she was trying to evade pursuit.  We really don't know what Cat planned to do once she got to the Eyrie, but judging from her thoughts she was only going there for momentary safety.  It'd be unlikely that she'd be able to ride right into King's Landing with the queen's brother in tow and not expect some trouble, and she only has a ragtag band of protectors with her.

And there was no reason at that time to believe that Lysa wouldn't give her an escort to King's Landing either, especially as Lysa would want the Lannisters brought to justice for her husband's murder (of course Cat is wrong about this, but not unreasonably so).

If Catelyn got to the Vale, rested for a bit, and then proceeded on to King's Landing, would Tywin's attack seem justified or would it be premature?



ETA: I'm also going to disagree that Ned should have sent Loras for the reasons suggested above.  It would have been politically useful in retrospect, sure, and that he didn't shows how one's actions can have bad consequences, but sacrificing Loras' life like that is pretty damn cutthroat.  I mean, it was politically useful for Olenna to let Littlefinger have Sansa but it doesn't exactly make me think well of her.

Edited by Lady Blackfish, 04 November 2010 - 09:00 PM.

[Lord Varys]

Going to the Eyrie was the best choice (from Cat's POV) to prepare for war. The North, the Vale, and the Riverlands would have been able to make short work out of House Lannister, but at that point Catelyn's main goal should still have been to try to prevent war. Going to Lysa could have lead to more information about the whole affair, but as everybody was pretty isolated up there, these information would not have helped Ned or Robert in KL.

Catelyn needed to prevent Cersei from learning about her presence in the south. She had no choice but to arrest Tyrion, especially as she had no real knowledge about the depth of this conspiracy.

But the best way, and also the most honorable and the honest way to settle this would have been to put all the cards on the table and tell the King what they knew. Catelyn really does not act as if the peace of the Realm was most important to her. And at Riverrun Hoster and she would have even been able to contact Winterfell and prepare the Riverlands and the North for war with Casterly Rock. With Northmen coming down earlier, Tywin would have been much more cautious to invade the Riverlands, especially as the Vale could always enter the war on the Tully side as well.

[DizoakiusMaximus]

Lord Varys, on 04 November 2010 - 07:42 PM, said:

But the best way, and also the most honorable and the honest way to settle this would have been to put all the cards on the table and tell the King what they knew. Catelyn really does not act as if the peace of the Realm was most important to her.

Again, Lord Varys, you have said what I could not. Thank you.

[Lady Blackfish]

Lord Varys, on 04 November 2010 - 07:42 PM, said:

Going to the Eyrie was the best choice (from Cat's POV) to prepare for war.

To the best of my recollection this isn't really ever indicated as part of her motivation in any of her thoughts, ever.

Lord Varys, on 04 November 2010 - 07:42 PM, said:

Going to Lysa could have lead to more information about the whole affair, but as everybody was pretty isolated up there, these information would not have helped Ned or Robert in KL.

Well sure, if they all just stayed there having a tea party or something.  I'm curious, if Lysa sent a letter with Catelyn signed in her hand attesting to what she knows, do you think Robert would just blow it off?  Even if he had only Catelyn's word to vouch for what Lysa knew, he might not be ready to condemn Tyrion just yet, but you don't think he'd at the least find it compelling, perhaps reason enough to order her back to King's Landing (Sweetrobin or no) if Catelyn couldn't get her sister to go herself?  Anyway, information is pretty mobile.

Lord Varys, on 04 November 2010 - 07:42 PM, said:

But the best way, and also the most honorable and the honest way to settle this would have been to put all the cards on the table

And so she makes the bases for her actions extremely public (she says that she's taking Tyrion in response to an attempt on her son's life, in front of witnesses, and this is a charge worth investigating especially coming from someone who is known to have an honorable reputation, which GRRM points out a few times that Catelyn has through the mouths of her enemies), and Tyrion reflects on this as clever if I'm not misremembering.  The amount of lying she does is indicated to be for her personal safety, but again, we do not know that she wasn't planning on seeking the king's justice after she reached the Eyrie.  We even have indication that Lysa's insistence on a trial right then and there was an unpleasant shock to her.

As well, without further input from Lysa, Cat also doesn't have anything to tell Robert that Ned himself (already there in King's Landing) cannot tell Robert, because they know/believe exactly the same thing.  It's only the dagger and (scratch this, Ned has the dagger IIRC) Tyrion's presence in King's Landing that Cat can offer, but she and Ned know exactly the same things at that point, so Ned is perfectly capable of putting said cards on table while Cat worries about not being pursued by a band of Lannister men.  They are knowingly acting in concert, after all (and Ned acts just like Cat could expect: as if they were sharing the same brain all along).

Edited by Lady Blackfish, 04 November 2010 - 08:45 PM.

[Alexia]

Lord Varys, on 04 November 2010 - 07:42 PM, said:

Going to Lysa could have lead to more information about the whole affair, but as everybody was pretty isolated up there, these information would not have helped Ned or Robert in KL.

How so?  Have you forgotten about the ravens?

Lord Varys, on 04 November 2010 - 07:42 PM, said:

But the best way, and also the most honorable and the honest way to settle this would have been to put all the cards on the table and tell the King what they knew.

But why would they do this at this juncture without irrefutable proof?  Look at Robert's reaction when he was caught between his wife and the Starks already...he ordered Sansa's wolf killed to please his wife, although he later admitted to knowing that Joffrey was lying all along and everyone knew neither Sansa nor her wolf did anything to Joffrey at all.  Look at how Robert reacted when Jaime broke Ned Stark's leg in an assault on the streets and had his armsmen killed.  Robert is a spineless coward when it comes to Cersei and her family and I think Catelyn would have been an utter fool to take this to Robert without ironclad proof.  He would have brushed it off in Cersei/Lannister favor, same as he did with Sansa, the same as he did with Ned.

Lord Varys, on 04 November 2010 - 07:42 PM, said:

With Northmen coming down earlier, Tywin would have been much more cautious to invade the Riverlands, especially as the Vale could always enter the war on the Tully side as well.

But why would you think this?  It was virtually guaranteed the Starks would march given Catelyn's involvement.  Tywin was contemptuous of the "boy," IIRC, and said war was butcher's work and he'd have no stomach for it.  And its actually quite surprising the Vale did not become involved.  Plus, Robb began mustering men as soon as he got word of events, as did Tywin.  How much earlier could Robb have come?

Lady Blackfish, on 04 November 2010 - 08:03 PM, said:

I'm curious, if Lysa sent a letter with Catelyn signed in her hand attesting to what she knows, do you think Robert would just blow it off?

I do.  As I said above, Robert is a coward when it comes to the Lannisters.  He saw Ned's broken leg with his own two eyes and chose to blow it off!

Lady Blackfish, on 04 November 2010 - 08:03 PM, said:

As well, without further input from Lysa, Cat also doesn't have anything to tell Robert that Ned himself (already there in King's Landing) cannot tell Robert, because they know/believe exactly the same thing.  It's only the dagger and Tyrion's presence in King's Landing that Cat can offer, but she and Ned know exactly the same things at that point, so Ned is perfectly capable of putting said cards on table while Cat worries about not being pursued by a band of Lannister men.  

Agree.  Ned is in KL and can take their case to the king.  If the Lannisters act against them, at least one of them will remain at large rather than giving the Lannisters Lord and Lady Stark to behead on the steps of the Sept!  Or force Robb into making concessions.  AND they have a hostage of their own - Tyrion (he was lost through Lysa's actions, not Catelyn's).

EDIT:  I'd also like to point out that Cersei has successfully arranged for a hunting accident to happen to a king before.  This is hardly an obstacle - nor is she quite foolish enough to arrange for anything more suspicious.  I do like the theory that LF would have had Tyrion quietly killed before a trial though.

Edited by Alexia, 04 November 2010 - 08:59 PM.