TheRevanchist

The burning of the Tarlys - discussion

151 posts in this topic

As terrible as it was, I think Dany did the right thing.  And she was correct in that she gave the Lannister soldiers/Tarly's a choice (yes, not much of one though) --and they made it. Harken back to Olenna's words--"They won't obey you, unless they fear you"  also  "You're a dragon, be a dragon".

Also, I think it was Tywin (?) who at one point said something (obviously not to Dany) about "Making people kneel, then helping them back up to their feet". This is wise advice, she has got to learn a balance between being firm ,yet fair. I believe she can get there.  If the story goes where a lot of people seem to think (Jon and Dany possibly ruling together), I think he will temper her.  You can already see that he has that affect on her.

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.

I don't think he would have.  You can't take hostages in a situation like that.  Dany was spot on when she said she wasn't going to put men in chains.  Hostages slow you down and she has nowhere to put them.  It's why, in the books at least, you often hear about putting the whole garrison to the sword.

The funny thing is, it's the manner in which she killed them that seems to have irked people.  And yet you can tell by the speed in which they disintegrated that it's a quick death.

As for Eddard and the Dothraki?  I have little doubt that if the Lannisters had conquered the North and Eddard driven to exile then he would have planned a way back either for himself or a future generation.

Share this post


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

I don't think he would have.  You can't take hostages in a situation like that.  Dany was spot on when she said she wasn't going to put men in chains.  Hostages slow you down and she has nowhere to put them.  It's why, in the books at least, you often hear about putting the whole garrison to the sword.

The funny thing is, it's the manner in which she killed them that seems to have irked people.  And yet you can tell by the speed in which they disintegrated that it's a quick death.

As for Eddard and the Dothraki?  I have little doubt that if the Lannisters had conquered the North and Eddard driven to exile then he would have planned a way back either for himself or a future generation.

We'll just have to agree to disagree here :)

You're right though that it's the manner that is most troubling to me, given the whole past about the Mad King and how important it is for her (and she knows it) to not come across as the Mad King's daughter.

I also quite like Randyll Tarly from the book, and feel he deserved better than what the show gave him (complete asshole to his son, turn cloak against the Tyrells, and an inexplicable devotion to Lannister--none of which was in the book). Part of my irritation with this scene also comes from that.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 hours ago, Donaldys I Trumpagar said:

The words of Tarley have moral and logical force behind them: Dany is simply a foreign invader with a horde of literal, actual savages and fell beasts from the abyss. She has 0 support in Westeros, and apparently has not even made an attempt at obtaining support. She has not reached out diplomatically, has not attempted to win over anyone (except the Greyjoy siblings, and the Dorne chicks. who all are themselves ursurpers), and has threatened or actually murdered those who are not even really her enemies -- the Tarley/Lannister force was an opponent of the Tyrells, not Dany. As of yet nobody has even apparently counter-attacked her for invading Westerosi territory, namely Dragonstone.

Forgive me if someone already answered - I haven't made it to the end of the thread yet - but she also had the support of House Tyrell. Whatever you think of the Ironborn or the Sand Snakes, she had support from three of the seven kingdoms.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Posted (edited)

It's war, and Dany did the right thing... Lord Tarly wouldn't change his mind. He didn't chose Cersei because she's the rightful queen, he did because he hates wildlings, savages, outsiders, fat people, probably dwarfs too, etc. Dany was right.

Poor Dickon though, he was so cute :\ .

Edited by Fexyr

Share this post


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

We'll just have to agree to disagree here :)

You're right though that it's the manner that is most troubling to me, given the whole past about the Mad King and how important it is for her (and she knows it) to not come across as the Mad King's daughter.

I also quite like Randyll Tarly from the book, and feel he deserved better than what the show gave him (complete asshole to his son, turn cloak against the Tyrells, and an inexplicable devotion to Lannister--none of which was in the book). Part of my irritation with this scene also comes from that.

To be fair we don't know what is going to happen with him in the books.

He is a complete arsehole to Sam in the books, we know that much.  He told Sam he'd kill him if he didn't take the Black.  As for the rest, we have no idea what is going to happen.

Share this post


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

 

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.

Jon executed a man for simply disobeying an order.  He had other options. He could have thrown him in cell for a few weeks but he didn't . He executed him. So please spare me with this nonsense.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour 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. 

Dany did what you suggested with The Unsullied - she gave them the option to leave. The big difference is that they posed no threat to her, and they had not been her enemies. Letting soldiers go, even with no weapons, leaves them available for re-drafting into the Lannister army. And given that they had just seen their comrades slaughtered, the bravest of them might be likely to go against her.

yes, it would have been ideal for them to join her willingly. But few would have. now, she can keep her eye on them. And they will be surrounded by Dothraki (and eventually Unusllied) who are fiercely loyal to her. She has a chance to show them how she treats those under her command, and she may eventually win them over.

As far as burning versus beheading, I think she actually saved lives this way. There were still a lot of standing soldiers before the execution, even after Drogon's roar sent a lot of them to their knees. Beheadings wouldn't have shocked soldiers, especially not after the battle. She would have had to execute many more. But the horror of death by dragon fire of two men was enough to convince all the others.

And death actually came pretty quickly to the Tarleys. No, it was instant and painless, like a beheading would be. But it also wasn't a slow roasting on the beach, like Stannis delivered. Randyl and Dickson died within seconds.

i don't think Dany is being a mad queen. I think she is being a fierce conqueror, and she is showing occasional ruthlessness where she's thinks it is necessary. She made some questionable decisions early on in Mereen - the random crucifixions come to mind - but I think she prefers to be merciful when she can.

Share this post


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

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

Your brain is tired and full of errors? ;)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
15 minutes ago, El Guapo said:

Jon executed a man for simply disobeying an order.  He had other options. He could have thrown him in cell for a few weeks but he didn't . He executed him. So please spare me with this nonsense.

Janos Slynt was Jon's direct underling. Not only was he insubordinate, but he was active fomenting dissent and insubordination amongst others. This is pretty different from the Tarlys who were not Danaerys' subjects, but subjects of her opponent. That's a pretty big false equivalence you're making.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

3 minutes ago, I prefer summer said:

yes, it would have been ideal for them to join her willingly. But few would have. now, she can keep her eye on them. And they will be surrounded by Dothraki (and eventually Unusllied) who are fiercely loyal to her. She has a chance to show them how she treats those under her command, and she may eventually win them over.

It was quite obvious few wouldnt due to the fact shes just torched all their colleagues. Its highly unlikely they are going to mount/organise a rebellion being surrounded by all the Dothraki.

3 minutes ago, I prefer summer said:

As far as burning versus beheading, I think she actually saved lives this way. There were still a lot of standing soldiers before the execution, even after Drogon's roar sent a lot of them to their knees. Beheadings wouldn't have shocked soldiers, especially not after the battle. She would have had to execute many more. But the horror of death by dragon fire of two men was enough to convince all the others.

I definitely agree, if she had beheaded or even let them take the black then others would have done so. As said the shear magnitude of what drogon did made them bend the knee due to fear.

3 minutes ago, I prefer summer said:

And death actually came pretty quickly to the Tarleys. No, it was instant and painless, like a beheading would be. But it also wasn't a slow roasting on the beach, like Stannis delivered. Randyl and Dickson died within seconds.

The problem with the manner they were killed in reminds people of her father.

3 minutes ago, I prefer summer said:

i don't think Dany is being a mad queen. I think she is being a fierce conqueror, and she is showing occasional ruthlessness where she's thinks it is necessary. She made some questionable decisions early on in Mereen - the random crucifixions come to mind - but I think she prefers to be merciful when she can.

Yeah im in agreement Daenerys is not the mad queen, in my eyes and opinion it was justified. Meereen is questionable but they placed 163 slave girls to show Daenerys they were just a commodity and they were not scared of her. Daenerys should have killed all the slave masters not just picked 163 to match the number of the slaves girls. You either destroy your enemies or make peace.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
10 minutes ago, I prefer summer said:

Your brain is tired and full of errors? ;)

:P:P haha i like it.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
56 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.

 

Eddard only took Theon as a hostage after Balon Greyjoy bent the knee, following the failed Greyjoy rebellion, his elder sons he killed in the battle. The lords that were defeated during Robert's Rebellion also had a choice of either bending the knee or dying, and most chose the former, even Dorne, despite suffering the most. Those that didn't want to serve Robert or die, fled to Essos. 

He'd probably send them to the Wall as an option, but Randyll refused the option. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour 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.

I think this a a false equivalency, on many levels.

The Tarlys were enemy soldiers. The Starks were loyal subjects, petitioning their king for justice. Brandon was accused of treason, and Rickard was ordered to come and ransom him, and then arrested himself.

The Tarlys were given a choice to submit and live. The Starks were not.

The Tarlys were killed within seconds. Richard was suspended over wildfire and slowroasted, while his son was set up to strangle himself, trying to free his father.

Dany executed the Tarleys reluctantly. The mad king laughed all the way through the execution.

Not the same thing at all.

As I mentioned Ina previous post, Dany would have had to kill a lot of soldiers if she had beheaded the Tarleys. But everyone bent the knee when they witnessed two deaths-by-Drogon. So, not so stupid, either.

I haven't read the books, so I don't know the answer to this question: what if the Westerosi practice for treating enemy soldiers? The Lannisters appear to have killed every soldier in HG. Rob took prisoners on the battlefield, and allowed Talisa to treat enemy injured, for which he was criticized by his men. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4 minutes ago, omegaxx said:Janos Slynt was Jon's direct underling. Not only was he insubordinate, but he was active fomenting dissent and insubordination amongst others. This is pretty different from the Tarlys who were not Danaerys' subjects, but subjects of her opponent. That's a pretty big false equivalence you're making.

Tarlys were enemy combatants that previously attacked her allies, and their liege lords. And if left alone, they would form dissent against her, and try and reform their army and keep going until she kills them. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I agree tarly didn't make much sense, for lots of reasons. Just a few episodes ago he was pretty on the fence about fighting for Cersei now he's willing to die for his loyalty to her?! And then when his sons steps forward he's like "what're you doing", I mean I get not wanting your son to die but for that to happen Dickon would have needed to bend the knee so it's ok for his son to bend the knee but not him??

and I don't think this makes Dany a mad queen. She gave them a fair choice they turned it down and she gave them a relatively quick death (dragon fire is presumably quite hot/strong). Tyrion needs to man up or at least stfu. Whoever says this makes her worse than Cersei is crazy. Cersei blew up the sept, people who weren't really her enemies, or even soldiers. They were her family, her allies. Mace tyrell did whatever she wanted happily provided money and food and soldiers, loras never really did anything to her, and Margery was just the younger more likeable Cersei "taking her son away". And they didn't get a choice like Dany gave the SOLDIERS she killed after a battle in a WAR. Cersei delighted in murdering and torturing those people. Cersei literally got off on torture, Dany never has. The closest to torture was crucifying the masters but I don't think she even felt joy in that, she was trying to make it right for all the children they killed. 

And if you're saying she's mad cause she used her dragon, like seriously are you saying you wouldn't use you're dragon if you had one. It's a freaking dragon come on. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

What was wrong with it is not the choice given, but the way it is done. Why execute people in such a horribly painful way? I mean everybody there already saw their colleagues and friends get roasted. A lot of the survivors probably have severe burns. No more proof needed of her Dragon power. They are already intimidated.

Of course, more people are willing to be beheaded and 'die with honor' than be roasted by fire, so not as many would have bent the knee as some would have chosen a quick clean death. But in the end the ones who bend the knee will at least have an opening to believe in Dany's cause.

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
8 hours ago, TheRevanchist said:

Tyrion: at least he tried, but probably could have tried harder.

Have you forgotten her reaction to Jorah and Barrister for disagreeing with her in front of other people?  Tyrion has been with her long enough to know better than to try to push her too hard in front of others, not to mention he is obviously becoming increasingly aware of how stubborn she is.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

It was a pragmatic choice on Dany's part. Randyll was basically given two outs: bend the knee or take the black. He had already lost the battle, being spared was the best he could hope for. 

Commentary by Dave Hill, who wrote the episode: 

Quote

“At least Dany offers them a choice. Every conqueror offers the choice of ‘bend the knee or die.’ These lords disobeyed her and disrespected her in rebellion against the rightful queen. Then she gives them a way out and they don’t take it. Her deal wasn’t even ‘I’ll let you live.’ They could have kept all their titles and land. So, yes, in one way, it’s a horrible death. On the other hand, they kind of asked for it. It’s a win-win situation and they somehow managed to find the ‘lose’ in that.”

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
13 minutes ago, I prefer summer said:

I haven't read the books, so I don't know the answer to this question: what if the Westerosi practice for treating enemy soldiers? The Lannisters appear to have killed every soldier in HG. Rob took prisoners on the battlefield, and allowed Talisa to treat enemy injured, for which he was criticized by his men. 

I can't remember what happened to the common soldiers, I think they mostly followed their lords fate. 

The treatment of noble prisoners ranged from taking a few hostage, either for possible exchange (Lannister hostages of Rob) or to force the head of the house to bend the knee (Freys and Boltons against the rest of the North and Riverlands), to execution (10 year old Lord Darry being "put to sword" by Gregor Clegane) and an option to take the black. 

The conditions in which prisoners were kept depended on the lord. Rob seemed to treat his well, Jaime was first offered a decent room, but he tried to run and was put into a dungeon, which I guess is bad. Then there was Tyrion in Sky Cells, pretty bad. And then there are Boltons- either starved their prisoners or tortured them.

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