TheRevanchist

The burning of the Tarlys - discussion

151 posts in this topic

2 minutes ago, The Sunland Lord said:

She should've force them into taking the black after Tyrion proposed it. Who cares if Randyll refuses her?  

Thats not what she does, she lets people decide for theirselves and thats what they did. Begging them to take the black looks weak. She wants soliders to fight for her, not the black or be chained up. She quite clearly didnt care when Randyll refused her......

2 minutes ago, The Sunland Lord said:

She could've used the excuse of need for NW more men to fight the Others (if we presume she believes Jon), or just anything. Randyll taking the black would be perfect justice for his treatment towards Sam and forcing him into taking the black under threat. 

Thats the problem she doesn't. Again she wants them to fight for her, she defeated them, she thinks she need the soldiers. It would be quite poetic if that happened, and nice karma really.

2 minutes ago, The Sunland Lord said:

I was disturbed by this scene, reminded me of Rickard and Brandon. Different circumstances, different motives, she gave them a choice and all that, but one couldn't help it. Jaime even wrongly called Dickon for Rickard once (although Rickard was the father and Dickon was the son).

I believe it was a reference to Rickard and Brandon. Jaime calling him Rickon was hint and reference to Rickard in the hope to build some sort of sympathy for Dickon. Also the scene were Bronn really asks him what he thought of the sacking of high garden. It was a ploy to increase sympathy for his eventual death. But for me it didnt work, the two idiots deserved it.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I would say the question is not moral/immoral but smart/not smart. In  real world (even medieval) this may well fall under the old Fouché's "It was worse than a crime, it was a mistake".

Forced loyalty is no loyalty at all - so far smarter move would be to let those who do not bend the knee even after Drogon helps her recruitment drive for the first time go -stripping them of their armor, heck even of their clothes if she felt like it and letting them spread the word - the word of dragonfire and terror, the word of the mangnanimous leader who who had their lives in the palm of their hand and spared them... Instead you have a crowd of guys forced into bending knee by direct threat of death by fire, not much better than what the  Masters did to the slaves... Or Dothraki for that matter. 

Tarlys also likely had oaths both to Highgarden and to the Crown. Highgarden actively betrayed the Crown, so the question of their loyalty is not that clear cut. And again, if she absolutely positively needed to make an example out of them, chopping their heads off would conform to the Westerosi justice and she hardly needed to remind the shellshocked survivors of battle that she has a huge lizard breathing fire. 

Then again, her plot armor will protect her. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
5 minutes ago, Samwell_Tarly said:

Thats not what she does, she lets people decide for theirselves and thats what they did. Begging them to take the black looks weak. She wants soliders to fight for her, not the black or be chained up. She quite clearly didnt care when Randyll refused her......

Thats the problem she doesn't. Again she wants them to fight for her, she defeated them, she thinks she need the soldiers. It would be quite poetic if that happened, and nice karma really.

I believe it was a reference to Rickard and Brandon. Jaime calling him Rickon was hint and reference to Rickard in the hope to build some sort of sympathy for Dickon. Also the scene were Bronn really asks him what he thought of the sacking of high garden. It was a ploy to increase sympathy for his eventual death. But for me it didnt work, the two idiots deserved it.

-Not begging, but forcing. It won't make her look (that) weak. 

-Isn't it? You'd be laughing pointing fingers into your father's and brother's faces.

-The first time he called him "Rickard" (at the meeting in KL), the second time "Rickon", before the battle. 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
8 minutes ago, The Sunland Lord said:

-Not begging, but forcing. It won't make her look (that) weak. 

Still weak.

8 minutes ago, The Sunland Lord said:

-Isn't it? You'd be laughing pointing fingers into your father's and brother's faces.

Not sure what part of the quote it was in reference to???

8 minutes ago, The Sunland Lord said:

-The first time he called him "Rickard" (at the meeting in KL), the second time "Rickon", before the battle. 

 

sorry my bad I thought it was too different names but again reference and build up to the similar burning.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, Samwell_Tarly said:

 

Not sure what part of the quote it was in reference to???

The poetic justice thing, via your nickname.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 minutes ago, The Sunland Lord said:

The poetic justice thing, via your nickname.

I was referencing if Randyll Tarley took the black, would be poetic justice that he made his own son take it, or be killed. And Sam took the black but Randyll was too proud.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, Styl7 said:

I think according to the Andal law of succession, women can inheritate if they have no male brothers. And that's the difference between the Targaryen succession since a daughter of a king comes after the kings male brothers. Ofc Samwell can be released from his vows after the Long Night or even now since the Night Watch doesn't even have a Lord Commander..

Ed is the Lord Commander. He took over after Jon left. Jon leaving does set a precedent btw, since the vow only counts as long as someone is enforcing it, which apparently is not the case any more (or at least, some exceptions are made for high born individuals).

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
25 minutes ago, Runaway Penguin said:

I would say the question is not moral/immoral but smart/not smart. In  real world (even medieval) this may well fall under the old Fouché's "It was worse than a crime, it was a mistake".

Forced loyalty is no loyalty at all - so far smarter move would be to let those who do not bend the knee even after Drogon helps her recruitment drive for the first time go -stripping them of their armor, heck even of their clothes if she felt like it and letting them spread the word - the word of dragonfire and terror, the word of the mangnanimous leader who who had their lives in the palm of their hand and spared them... Instead you have a crowd of guys forced into bending knee by direct threat of death by fire, not much better than what the  Masters did to the slaves... Or Dothraki for that matter. 

Tarlys also likely had oaths both to Highgarden and to the Crown. Highgarden actively betrayed the Crown, so the question of their loyalty is not that clear cut. And again, if she absolutely positively needed to make an example out of them, chopping their heads off would conform to the Westerosi justice and she hardly needed to remind the shellshocked survivors of battle that she has a huge lizard breathing fire. 

Then again, her plot armor will protect her. 

No. Those who will not accept her rule are future rebel leaders for sure, and they have to be taken care of while she has them in captivity.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 minutes ago, Samwell_Tarly said:

I was referencing if Randyll Tarley took the black, would be poetic justice that he made his own son take it, or be killed. And Sam took the black but Randyll was too proud.

I was quite making a joke because of your nickname, and how "you" would laugh over Randyll's and Dickon's fate if they took the black.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4 minutes ago, tugela said:

Ed is the Lord Commander. He took over after Jon left. Jon leaving does set a precedent btw, since the vow only counts as long as someone is enforcing it, which apparently is not the case any more (or at least, some exceptions are made for high born individuals).

"Night gathers, and now my watch begins. It shall not end until my death. I shall take no wife, hold no lands, father no children. I shall wear no crowns and win no glory. I shall live and die at my post. I am the sword in the darkness. I am the watcher on the walls. I am the shield that guards the realms of men. I pledge my life and honor to the Night's Watch, for this night and all the nights to come."

Jon died.  That's why he could leave.

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4 minutes ago, The Sunland Lord said:

I was quite making a joke because of your nickname, and how "you" would laugh over Randyll's and Dickon's fate if they took the black.

I do apologise, Im a little tired and my brain is not working correctly.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Posted (edited)

1 hour ago, Ser Gareth said:

In the context of Westeros her actions were justified.

If it had been Eddard Stark in her place using Ice to behead them instead then I doubt many people would be calling him "evil" or "mad".

Nope. In the context of Westeros her actions were idiotic. "Hey, I'm not like the Mad King at all. I just like to burn people!"

Especially considering that she was trying to earn the support of the North. Way to ingratiate yourself with the King of the North, but showing people you execute honorable men just as your father executed his grandfather.

What she did seems like a perfect way to rouse resentment and give Cersei propaganda material.

And no, Eddark Stark would not have acted this way. He and Jon are the sort to put Duty before Right, and he would not have seen it his Duty or Right to punish Tarly for not siding with him.

Edited by omegaxx

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
21 minutes ago, Runaway Penguin said:

 

Forced loyalty is no loyalty at all - so far smarter move would be to let those who do not bend the knee even after Drogon helps her recruitment drive for the first time go -stripping them of their armor, heck even of their clothes if she felt like it and letting them spread the word - the word of dragonfire and terror, the word of the mangnanimous leader who who had their lives in the palm of their hand and spared them... Instead you have a crowd of guys forced into bending knee by direct threat of death by fire, not much better than what the  Masters did to the slaves... Or Dothraki for that matter. 

 

Dany has a long history of being ruthless and quick to kill any who disobey her.

Her decision is perfectly in line with many of her previous scenes in the series going way back.  Sir Barristan tried to get her to show mercy to the slavers but instead she crucified them only to learn in the future that there was no true justice in the action.  Later her first instinct was to have all those slavers in Astapor who'd retaken control killed but Jorah was able to stop that by reminding her that her form of justice would have seen him killed.  Tyrion and Jon have each prevented her from laying waste to Kings Landing.

Dany's first inclination is always to just kill or burn her enemies it seems.  She isn't some total tyrant thought as she listens to advice.

Contrast that with Robb/Jon who always seem to want to show mercy if at all possible even over the objections of advisers.

She's a true dragon through and through.  We love it about her but it comes with its own set of issues.

The scene was good because it made sense for everyone to do exactly what they did.  Tyrion was obviously wanting to spare as many lives as possible after having witnessed what he just brought to his homeland, his family's army no less.  It made sense for him to want to offer them Westerosi type of treatment (the honorable kind).  Robb kept prisoners and treated them with respect.  Even Cersie offered Ned a chance to go to the wall.

Dany needs Jon for some balance.

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
5 minutes ago, Ser Gareth said:

"Night gathers, and now my watch begins. It shall not end until my death. I shall take no wife, hold no lands, father no children. I shall wear no crowns and win no glory. I shall live and die at my post. I am the sword in the darkness. I am the watcher on the walls. I am the shield that guards the realms of men. I pledge my life and honor to the Night's Watch, for this night and all the nights to come."

Jon died.  That's why he could leave.

Jon is trying to keep it secret that he was brought back to life. What I keep wondering is why aren't the lords of Westeros questioning him becoming the kitn.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 minutes ago, omegaxx said:

Nope. In the context of Westeros her actions were idiotic. "Hey, I'm not like the Mad King at all. I just like to burn people!"

Especially considering that she was trying to earn the support of the North. Way to ingratiate yourself with the King of the North, but showing people you execute honorable men just as your father executed his grandfather.

What she did seems like a perfect way to rouse resentment and give Cersei propaganda material.

And no, Eddark Stark would not have acted this way. He and Jon are the sort to put Duty before Right, and he would not have seen it his Duty or Right to punish Tarly for not siding with him.

Eddard Stark would've given them the choice of either following Robert or take the Black.  If they refused to do both?  What do you think he'd have done then?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Posted (edited)

Randy and Dick were given reasonable choices.  Instead they chose to oppose Daenerys. 

Daenerys really had no choice.  It would be a huge mistake to let Randyll go.  That man would have raised another army and fought Dany again.  He had to die.  Letting his son live would mean leaving behind someone who will want to avenge him.  It was best to finish them off and execute them publicly.  Executing those two actually helped save the lives of many more because all of the Tarly soldiers later bent their knees.  Letting the Tarlys live would have been a sign of weakness.  Just looking at the faces of the Tarly soldiers tells you that these are not men that you want to show any weakness to.  Daenerys was correct and wise to burn the Tarlys.

Edited by Only 89 selfies today

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, Apoplexy said:

Jon is trying to keep it secret that he was brought back to life. What I keep wondering is why aren't the lords of Westeros questioning him becoming the kitn.

Probably because:

1) No one outside of the North seems to give a toss about the NW or their rules.

2) The world thinks he is Ned Stark's bastard and they probably aren't all that shocked this has happened.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Posted (edited)

6 minutes ago, Ser Gareth said:

Eddard Stark would've given them the choice of either following Robert or take the Black.  If they refused to do both?  What do you think he'd have done then?

Taken Randyll as a prisoner (well-treated) and hostage, release Dickon as Lord of Hornhill on condition of good behavior. Just a guess.

I also doubt that Eddard Stark would have taken an army of Dothrakis across the Narrow Sea to start a foreign invasion just to claim something called "birthright". He's never seemed that keen about being Warden of the North, which in his mind belonged to his older brother Brandon, just as the Iron Throne, even by Targaryean loyalists, rightfully belonged to Danaerys' older brother Rhaegar. But that's neither here nor there.

Edited by omegaxx

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
39 minutes ago, Ser Meryn Frey said:

 

Are you sure of that? Even the IS would stop killing people if everyone accepted their leadership and adopted their religion. That most certainly goes for Bashar al-Assad as well. 

 

What? Are you actually saying a person deserves to die because he decides to protect his homeland against an army of murderers and rapists?

Then I take it every soldier all over the world opposing foreign forces deserve to die as well? Or just the ones opposing the side you support?

I understand how wars work, and am not condemning Danaerys in any way. She did what she had to do, but to say that Randyll deserved to die is just ... evil, and immoral. A soldier dieing for his country deserves respect, not death.

You're displaying huge levels of hypocrisy by deciding one soldier deserves to die and another doesn't, even though they both play by the same rules, just for opposing teams.

He deserved to die by Westerosi standards, where betraying ones liege resulted in death. What respect does he deserve for betraying people he swore an oath and fealty to, in favour of an upjumped usurper with 0 claim to the throne and crown? He was a vassal to the Tyrells for aeons and then he sacks Highgarden, fighting against people he and his son grew up with, on the orders of Cersei the terrorist (in case you have missed, she was the one attacking the religion of the continent, not Dany.). Read up on "Rains of Castamere" and what happens to those that rebel against their liege lords according to Lannister standards. I'm sure Tywin didn't give a choice of bending the knee to the Reynes when he put every last man, woman and child to sword and left Castamere to rot. 

I understand why he'd be against the Dothraki and the Unsullied, but you are the one being hypocritical by calling them murderers and rapists, considering everything the Lannister army has engaged in, so far. What do you think they did to the Riverlands and Highgarden occupants? Not to mention their alliance with Euron Greyjoy, who's fleet we last saw,sacking the Dornish fleet and mutilating the men they captured, and god knows their eventual fate, its obviously not sunshine and roses. The opposing side did get rid of the main leaders of Dany supporting factions- Ellaria and Tyene were poisoned and jailed, whilst Yara would probably be tortured or executed also. 

Don't kid yourself by saying he fights for his country, when he has attacked his own neighbours because Lannisters offered a better reward. He was hesitant about joining their cause based on Cerseis reputation, but as soon as Jaime suggested his being the new Warden of the Reach, he throws his lot in with them. He's a little better than Walder Frey, though, at least he fought his enemy in the battle.

Comparing Dany to IS and Assad is a strawman argument- she has not attacked civilians or forced any religion on them, she has met her enemy in the battle, if she wanted to attack indiscriminately and terrorise the ordinary folks, she would already be in the Kings Landing, because she has more powerful weapons than Cersei does. If anything, that was Tarly and Jaime sending their soldiers to intimidate Reach farmers into giving their grain to them, and it was Cersei blowing up an entire religious order that was popular with people.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
5 minutes ago, omegaxx said:

Taken Randyll as a prisoner (well-treated) and hostage, release Dickon as Lord of Hornhill on condition of good behavior. Just a guess.

I also doubt that Eddard Stark would have taken an army of Dothrakis across the Narrow Sea to start a foreign invasion just to claim something called "birthright". He's never seemed that keen about being Warden of the North, which in his mind belonged to his older brother Brandon, just as the Iron Throne, even by Targaryean loyalists, rightfully belonged to Danaerys' older brother Rhaegar. But that's neither here nor there.

No, the Iron Throne does not belong to Rhaegar.  King Aerys disinherited Rhaegar's family and permanently removed them from the line of succession.  Viserys became King Viserys III on the death of Aerys.  Besides, Viserys was formally crowned on Dragonstone.  

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!


Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.


Sign In Now