Was Tywin justified in killing all the Reynes?

[Brannis the Mannis]

I'm inclined to be sympathetic to him in this particular scenario, especially when you look at all the details. The Reynes had essentially spit in the face of the Lannisters because of the weakness of Tytos, refusing to pay their debts, and even taking Lannister hostages once. And then they have the gall to rise up against the Lannisters when Tywin demands they answer for their crimes against their liege lord. So already they've made themselves unsympathetic. 

To make matters worse, after the defeat of the Tarbecks and it becomes clear that Tywin has all but won, the Reynes still have the nerve to demand hostages from the Lannisters in exchange for peace, showing that negotiating with them wasn't going to get anywhere. In addition, the mines that they hid in had passages that could be defended indefinitely, and they had plenty of food and water, so the Reynes couldn't be besieged with conventional tactics. So Tywin took the last option available to him after the arrogance and the insolence of the Reynes had forced him into that situation- flooding the tunnel and drowning them all. 

Those are my thoughts on the debacle, but I'd like to hear others points of view. 

[Lord Vance II]

Overkill? absolutely. But it sent the message. I wouldn't say it was justified, but what was anyone going to do about it? I almost think Tywin was teetering on mad at this point, not like Targ mad, but he would do anything to undo the failures of his father and restore his house (what he knew would soon be all his). I'd like to think a mature Tywin wouldn't have handled it the same way. 

[Hodor the Articulate]

Depends what you mean by "justified".

Morally, destroying a whole family in a power play is pretty douchey. Legally, Tywin received no reprimand for his actions, so he was justified in that sense.

[Seams]

This is one of those stories where GRRM is making good use of the "unreliable narrator" device he likes to employ. We are getting only one side of the story because everyone on the other side of the conflict is dead. Was the money loaned by the Lannisters, or was it given? Perhaps it was paid for some service or goods, but Tywin didn't consider it a good deal. Did all the other details play out as the maesters and singers recount them, or was history slanted to justify the outcome of Tywin's victory? Tywin and Tytos were different, but maybe Tytos wasn't as weak as we have been led to believe; maybe he just tried to do things differently than Tywin wanted to do them.

I don't have a lot to go on, but I have great suspicions that Tywin's attack on both the Tarbecks and Reynes had a larger, hidden motive. Such as stealing the mines under their castles as the Casterly Rock mine was depleted. The anger at his brother's widow may have been real, but maybe Tytos had been trying to marry Reyne wealth into the Lannister family, while Tywin decided marriage wasn't a good enough way to control the wealth; that slaughter of the entire clan was more effective.

The Rains of Castamere song is obviously an important symbolic motif for Tywin's ruthlessness. So the story of what happened to the Reyne family is relevant to current events because it may foreshadow something we can expect to see in the plot (it also ties in with the Rohanne Weber plot to divert a stream in the Dunk & Egg stories). Drowning seems to be the "weapon of choice" for Lannisters, with Tywin throwing the Tarbeck heir in a well, Cersei pushing Melara Heatherspoon into a well (if that's what happened) and the flooding of the Reyne castle.

P.S. A couple of Tarbeck women went into the Silent Sisters. I hope there will be a twist where we hear some of these Silent Sisters break their silence, and reveal a number of secrets of the past!

[Brannis the Mannis]

3 minutes ago, Hodor the Articulate said:

Depends what you mean by "justified".

Morally, destroying a whole family in a power play is pretty douchey. Legally, Tywin received no reprimand for his actions, so he was justified in that sense.

A family that had snubbed, insulted, and outright threatened their rightful liege lord at every turn. 

[Universal Sword Donor]

1 hour ago, Seams said:

This is one of those stories where GRRM is making good use of the "unreliable narrator" device he likes to employ. We are getting only one side of the story because everyone on the other side of the conflict is dead. Was the money loaned by the Lannisters, or was it given? Perhaps it was paid for some service or goods, but Tywin didn't consider it a good deal. Did all the other details play out as the maesters and singers recount them, or was history slanted to justify the outcome of Tywin's victory? Tywin and Tytos were different, but maybe Tytos wasn't as weak as we have been led to believe; maybe he just tried to do things differently than Tywin wanted to do them.

I don't have a lot to go on, but I have great suspicions that Tywin's attack on both the Tarbecks and Reynes had a larger, hidden motive. Such as stealing the mines under their castles as the Casterly Rock mine was depleted. The anger at his brother's widow may have been real, but maybe Tytos had been trying to marry Reyne wealth into the Lannister family, while Tywin decided marriage wasn't a good enough way to control the wealth; that slaughter of the entire clan was more effective.

The Rains of Castamere song is obviously an important symbolic motif for Tywin's ruthlessness. So the story of what happened to the Reyne family is relevant to current events because it may foreshadow something we can expect to see in the plot (it also ties in with the Rohanne Weber plot to divert a stream in the Dunk & Egg stories). Drowning seems to be the "weapon of choice" for Lannisters, with Tywin throwing the Tarbeck heir in a well, Cersei pushing Melara Heatherspoon into a well (if that's what happened) and the flooding of the Reyne castle.

P.S. A couple of Tarbeck women went into the Silent Sisters. I hope there will be a twist where we hear some of these Silent Sisters break their silence, and reveal a number of secrets of the past!

Well the mines in question were left untouched after the particular event and the Lannisters are not out of gold

I'm fairly certain Tywin just fucking hated the Reynes. They did kill his grandafather after all and humiliate his house, which is one thing we know he doesn't abide by.

[The Commentator]

The children certainly are not to blame for the crimes of their parents.  The servants and the domestics had no part in the quarrel and they too paid the price.  But that is the way it goes in Westeros.  The person above you can do what they want with you.  The Lannisters outranked the Reynes and so it was a legal act.

On the same topic, King Aerys had the legal authority to destroy the Darklins, Brandon, and Rickard.  

[giant snake]

I don't think the story is about whether or not Tywin was right to do it as much as he was an uncompromising and ruthless leader.  Tywin's entire philosophy can be based around making sure that everyone fears him - I mean his enemies and his friends.  I don't think you can morally justify wiping out the house entirely any more than you can justify him destroying the ancestral sword of the Starks, but he is the kind who does not care.  Maybe saying he doesn't care is the wrong way to put it - he wants everyone to know he doesn't care and that he will show no leniency, even going so far as to eradicate even the name and symbols of his enemies.

[Brannis the Mannis]

37 minutes ago, Widowmaker 811 said:

The children certainly are not to blame for the crimes of their parents.  The servants and the domestics had no part in the quarrel and they too paid the price.  

I'm not saying the children or the servants had any blame, but Tywin had no other viable option. Accept the Reyne's offer of Lannister hostages? Tywin looks weak. Go home without the issue resolved? Tywin looks weak. Attempt to storm the mines? Tywin loses his army in the process. 

What else could he have done that would have been beneficial to him?

 

On the topic of Aerys, it wasn't the exact same situation with Brandon and Rickard, considering that his son had kidnapped their sister/daughter in the first place with no provocation. 

And Aerys was legally required to give Rickard an opponent he could actually fight, not fire. 

[Brannis the Mannis]

14 minutes ago, giant snake said:

 I don't think you can morally justify wiping out the house entirely any more than you can justify him 

See my reasons in my post above for why Tywin had to do what he did. If you think he could have done different I'd be glad to hear it. 

[giant snake]

I already read it dweebenheimer.  I'm giving my own perspective, not trying to tell you why I think yours is wrong.

[Brannis the Mannis]

Just now, giant snake said:

I already read it dweebenheimer.  I'm giving my own perspective, not trying to tell you why I think yours is wrong.

Touche

[Universal Sword Donor]

6 minutes ago, Brannis the Mannis said:

I'm not saying the children or the servants had any blame, but Tywin had no other viable option. Accept the Reyne's offer of Lannister hostages? Tywin looks weak. Go home without the issue resolved? Tywin looks weak. Attempt to storm the mines? Tywin loses his army in the process. 

What else could he have done that would have been beneficial to him?

On the topic of Aerys, it wasn't the exact same situation with Brandon and Rickard, considering that his son had kidnapped their sister/daughter in the first place with no provocation. 

And Aerys was legally required to give Rickard an opponent he could actually fight, not fire. 

I mean, it was pretty easy. He could have said "I'm diverting the river into the mines. Come out unarmed and surrender or die by drowning. It's naught to me how you decide."

[The Commentator]

10 minutes ago, Brannis the Mannis said:

I'm not saying the children or the servants had any blame, but Tywin had no other viable option. Accept the Reyne's offer of Lannister hostages? Tywin looks weak. Go home without the issue resolved? Tywin looks weak. Attempt to storm the mines? Tywin loses his army in the process. 

What else could he have done that would have been beneficial to him?

 

On the topic of Aerys, it wasn't the exact same situation with Brandon and Rickard, considering that his son had kidnapped their sister/daughter in the first place with no provocation. 

And Aerys was legally required to give Rickard an opponent he could actually fight, not fire. 

Aerys was the king.  He had more authority than Tywin.  If Tywin could wipe out the Reynes, Aerys had the authority to wipe out the Starks.  I believe in the "Southron Conspiracy".  Aerys had the right to protect his right to rule just like Tywin had the right to protect his.  

[Universal Sword Donor]

2 minutes ago, Widowmaker 811 said:

Aerys was the king.  He had more authority than Tywin.  If Tywin could wipe out the Reynes, Aerys had the authority to wipe out the Starks.  I believe in the "Southron Conspiracy".  Aerys had the right to protect his right to rule just like Tywin had the right to protect his.  

What makes marriage alliances illegal?

[The Commentator]

Just now, Universal Sword Donor said:

What makes marriage alliances illegal?

Those marriage alliances would enable Rickard Stark to overpower his king.  Aerys, or any king for that matter, could never allow those alliances to continue. Rickard meant to remove the Targaryens from power.   It is treason from the point of view of the monarch, which is the point of view that counts.  

[Universal Sword Donor]

Just now, Widowmaker 811 said:

Those marriage alliances would enable Rickard Stark to overpower his king.  Aerys, or any king for that matter, could never allow those alliances to continue. Rickard meant to remove the Targaryens from power.   It is treason from the point of view of the monarch, which is the point of view that counts.  

And the monarch died for it. There was no proof that those houses were plotting an overthrow of Aerys.

[Bernie Mac]

50 minutes ago, Universal Sword Donor said:

I mean, it was pretty easy. He could have said "I'm diverting the river into the mines. Come out unarmed and surrender or die by drowning. It's naught to me how you decide."

Sure he could have done, but it is not already like they did not know what the consequence of their constant refusals would be. The Reynes had ample opportunity to surrender but once, after they had faced defeat on the field, decided to take the piss with their own demands that was it;

“You cannot fight your way in, and we have food and water sufficient for three years,” he wrote, “but grant us full pardon for any past offenses, and send your brothers down to us as hostages against deceit, and we shall once again be your true and leal servants.”

The Reynes had proven that they could not be trusted time and time again

Lord Tytos had commanded his good-father sternly not to involve the Reynes “for we have no quarrel with Castamere,” but that did not stop Lady Tarbeck from sending to her brothers.  Denys Marbrand and his knights were still two days ride from Tarbeck Hall when the Red Lion fell upon his camp in the night, slaying hundreds, amongst them old Marbrand himself. 

And we have seen how without mercy Roger had been to his enemies who had surrendered to him in the past

Others slain upon that grievous day included Lord Robert Reyne.  Ser Roger Reyne (the Red Lion), his eldest son and heir, took a bloody vengeance after the battle, slaying seven captive Peakes before Prince Aegon arrived to halt the slaughter.

 

Now the shoe was on the other foot and the Reynes suffered for not backing down sooner. 

 

[GyantSpyder]

I don't think Tywin was justified at all, and I don't think the power of his own house was enough of a reason to do what he did. His job, if we presume he is acting as a feudal lord despite his father still being alive, is to protect his people. That doesn't just mean Lannisters, it means everybody who swears fealty to the Lannisters, and everybody who swears fealty to them, and so on. He's the father figure for the West, not just his own kids.

That's the whole reason for him to be in charge at all. If he goes around murdering his own people en masse - if he refuses to accept the surrender of a castle when its traitorous lord is dead - if he refuses to negotiate or mete out resolutions to disputes - if the only terms he offers are extirpation - what's the point of any of it?

This is a dude - the father of the queen, the former Hand of the King - who sends out Gregor Clegane to rape, burn and pillage the homes of his daughter's subjects - his own subjects - because of a personal feud with another lord's family. This is a guy who ordered the sack of the capital of his own country. Despite the attraction of the directness of his methods, and his effectiveness in accomplishing what he wants to accomplish, he is a terribly destructive monster who constantly picks his own interests over his duty or over basic human decency.

The biggest threat to anybody living under the rule of Tywin Lannister is Tywin Lannister. Seems like a persuasive argument to put somebody who is not him in charge of things.

[Universal Sword Donor]

35 minutes ago, Bernie Mac said:

Sure he could have done, but it is not already like they did not know what the consequence of their constant refusals would be. The Reynes had ample opportunity to surrender but once, after they had faced defeat on the field, decided to take the piss with their own demands that was it;

“You cannot fight your way in, and we have food and water sufficient for three years,” he wrote, “but grant us full pardon for any past offenses, and send your brothers down to us as hostages against deceit, and we shall once again be your true and leal servants.”

The Reynes had proven that they could not be trusted time and time again

Lord Tytos had commanded his good-father sternly not to involve the Reynes “for we have no quarrel with Castamere,” but that did not stop Lady Tarbeck from sending to her brothers.  Denys Marbrand and his knights were still two days ride from Tarbeck Hall when the Red Lion fell upon his camp in the night, slaying hundreds, amongst them old Marbrand himself. 

And we have seen how without mercy Roger had been to his enemies who had surrendered to him in the past

Others slain upon that grievous day included Lord Robert Reyne.  Ser Roger Reyne (the Red Lion), his eldest son and heir, took a bloody vengeance after the battle, slaying seven captive Peakes before Prince Aegon arrived to halt the slaughter.

Now the shoe was on the other foot and the Reynes suffered for not backing down sooner. 

He still could have executed those he felt responsible. Nothing is stopping them there. The men-at-arms might well be included but the women, servants, and whatnot didn't need to die. They were neither Reynes nor Tarbecks. Kinda easy to control them once they leave though. Lack of arms and armor combined with a 10K (or stronger) army would put Tywin in unassailable control.