Varysblackfyre321

Did Tywin have to kill Rheagar's children

69 posts in this topic

5 hours ago, Jaak said:

nor release him

Was is the option, though?

Before Joffrey, there was no precedent for Kingsguard being simply released - the vows were for life. KG could be executed or sent to the Wall, but not on his merry way. And yes, theoretically Jon/Robert could make the precedent - but none of them are these brave revolutionaries out to destroy old traditions. They were rather conservative in their outlook, adopting much of Targaryen administration and attributes of power.

Even Tywin, who is probably the person most interested in releasing Jaime from KG, is not exactly in haste to release him from his vows. It's only much later in the game that Tywin is like "Shiiiiiit, this bullshit my grandson has done can actually come in handy".

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On ‎2‎/‎4‎/‎2018 at 6:19 AM, Jaak said:

My impression was rather that Ned argued for Jaime to be sent to the Wall after Robert had arrived at Iron Throne and approved of the murder of children as "dragonspawn". That´s when Ned stormed off to go and save Lyanna, and Robert pardoned Jaime - but ordered him to stay a Kingsguard, rather than be released to Casterly Rock.

Because assuming the decision to not send Jaime to wall nor release him, but keep him in Kingsguard was made before Eddard stormed off to save Lyanna - AND Stannis - then Robert was going to marry Lyanna. And Tyrells were in the field. Offending Tywin AND giving up the hostage by sending Jaime to the Wall still risked Tywin turning coat again and joining forces with Mace to crush Eddard.

For the first part, perhaps, but that doesn't mean Robert made the decision to pardon him then and there. Even without Cersei on the table yet, Robert, and Jon Arryn, would have thought long and hard about banishing Jaime because Tywin still has a 12,000-man army in the city while the rebel army, whatever Ned didn't take south with him, is still battered and bruised from the Trident.

So either way, it seems to me that Jaime's presence in the KG is more Tywin's leverage over Robert, not the other way around.

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 2/4/2018 at 7:08 PM, Myrish Lace said:

Was is the option, though?

Before Joffrey, there was no precedent for Kingsguard being simply released - the vows were for life. KG could be executed or sent to the Wall, but not on his merry way. And yes, theoretically Jon/Robert could make the precedent - but none of them are these brave revolutionaries out to destroy old traditions. They were rather conservative in their outlook, adopting much of Targaryen administration and attributes of power.

But they did break with the title of Targaryen dynasty. Robert called himself Baratheon, not Targaryen.

Robert could have declared that Kingsguard was a Targaryen institution and the surviving members were free from their vows. Or he could have declared that Baratheon was a new dynasty and would recruit a new Kingsguard - the survivors of old Targaryen kingsguard, again, free.

He did neither.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On January 26, 2018 at 2:07 PM, John Suburbs said:

No, that is not Tyrion's sole responsibility. Where did you get that from? Both Tyrion and Oberyn will be sitting on the small council, along with Tywin.

True. My mistake.

 

On January 26, 2018 at 2:07 PM, John Suburbs said:

So Tyrion will be having innumerable discussions and interactions with Oberyn going forward, particularly over this business about getting "justice" for Elia. Honestly, do you think Tyrion, as Master of Coin, is just supposed to sit there dumbstruck at all council meetings and at court and anytime else that Oberyn is present? He is going to be dealing with Oberyn on a daily basis and one ill-informed comment out of Tyrion's mouth could blow the whole situation sky high. Tyrion has to know what happened, and both he and Tywin have to be on the same page.

No Tyrion simply needs to know the story Tywin had decided they would sell-that a now dead soldier of theirs who'd acted with out Tywin's instructions had been the one to have committed the crime-Tyrion knowing Tywin hadn't ordered the rape yet dead order the murderers and how Tywin was aghast of how Rheanys was murdered no point but to vindicate Tywin in Tyrion's eyes. 

 

On January 26, 2018 at 2:07 PM, John Suburbs said:

He's not acting offended, not by a long shot. All he says is "even you will not accuse me of giving that command, I would hope." The meaning is clear: while the rape of your "wife" was necessary to teach you your hard lesson, the rape of Elia was "sheer folly" because "by herself she was nothing."

On January 25, 2018 at 4:38 PM, Varysblackfyre321 said:

That seems to be a heavy extrapolation from the given text. 

 

On January 26, 2018 at 2:07 PM, John Suburbs said:

What does that have to do with Aerys' relationship with his grandchildren

He does not have to love them to feel outrage that were toyed with or abused by his enemies;  they are his. 

Tywin holds no particular love for Tyrion but he burned the Riverlands in direct response to his son's capture; because Tyrion was his. 

Aerys does not need to love every member of his family to feel outrage when one of them is brutalizied-it's still very muchan outrage especially if it's done by someone who should be his servent.

On January 26, 2018 at 2:07 PM, John Suburbs said:

If you have any text at all to support this, I'd love to see it. Where is there even the slightest evidence that Tywin is doing these things for petty revenge? To believe that, you would have to believe that time and time again, he takes actions simply to settle old scores with people who are or soon will be dead and the fact that each and every time these actions end up either defending House Lannister's honor or enhancing its position politically or militarily or financially is all just a happy c

No I wouldn't. No person is monolithic. Just because Tywin has done something with one motive that doesn't mean  in all other action he'd have the same motive. 

Tell me how wouldn't the relationship with House Targyen wouldn't be destroyed by virtue of handing the heirs to the rebels?

Why worry about having the possibility of loyalty to House Targayen when it was supposed to be extinguished all together? Hell Daenarys shows she holds the same level of resentment toward Ned Stark even after having learned he tried to save  her life; and he was just another of the Usurphers dogs.

What about Viserys and pregnant Rhellia? Killing Aegon and Rhaenya ok that's one half of the equation to sparring Robert having to kill children but Robert would still have deal with Viserys an 8 year old boy and his baby sibling. Tywin makes no mention of offering to "handle" the situation as well.

On January 26, 2018 at 2:07 PM, John Suburbs said:

How do you come up with this stuff? 15 years is a helluva long time. It's basically from the end of the rebellion to the beginning of GoT. Look at how easily Davos was able to get Edric Storm out of Dragonstone. One betrayal is all it takes, and if things don't go swimmingly with the new dynasty -- if there is an economic decline or a sickness or crop failure or any of a hundred things that can go wrong -- then more and more people will start longing for the old days. As long as Aegon is alive, the threat of a counter-rebellion exists.

 

15 years isn't that long in the grand scheme of things.Edric Storm had be smuggled out by Stannis's own hand. Stockpile everyone who'd ever have interaction in smuggling him out. Keeping him into custody shouldn't be that difficult if the proper precautions are met. Dorne won't try to free the boy if Ellia, Aegon and Rhaenys are separated.  Sliver escaped to the golden company; Aegon would have nothing to go to should he somehow be able to slip away; And for Aegon, well crippling him in a way that renders him unable to sire an heir or gelding him is an option .. 

 

On January 26, 2018 at 2:07 PM, John Suburbs said:

He's not acting offended, not by a long shot. All he says is "even you will not accuse me of giving that command, I would hope." The meaning is clear: while the rape of your "wife" was necessary to teach you your hard lesson, the rape of Elia was "sheer folly" because "by herself she was nothing."

On January 25, 2018 at 4:38 PM, Varysblackfyre321 said:

Yes. Which he could easily do. The fact Robert would have little Aegon as a hostage would dissuade any Targayen loyalists from attempting anything while Robert has him firmly in his claws. Surely Robert could have had an easier time transporting him to the wall. Hell you don't even ha

No, this is not easily done. How do you come up with this stuff? 15 years is a helluva long time. It's basically from the end of the rebellion to the beginning of GoT. Look at how easily Davos was able to get Edric Storm out of Dragonstone. One betrayal is all it takes, and if things don't go swimmingly with the new dynasty -- if there is an economic decline or a sickness or crop failure or any of a hundred things that can go wrong -- then more and more people will start longing for the old days. As long as Aegon is alive, the threat of a counter-rebellion exists.

Just re-read Tywin's explanation of why he did what he did. It's all right there. There is no reason to lie about any of it in a private conversation with Tyrion. There is no indication at all, anywhere, that it was done out of spite or to settle old scores. Sometimes a cigar is just a cigar.

In what way would Robert have an easier time sending him to the Wall? Does he have better ships than the Targaryens? Better soldiers? A teleporter? Sorry, but it seems like your post was cut off.

On January 25, 2018 at 4:38 PM, Varysblackfyre321 said:

Is Tywin particularly fond of Tyrion?

What does that have to do with Aerys' relationship with his grandchildren?

On January 25, 2018 at 4:38 PM, Varysblackfyre321 said:

No? Would he be livid if someone without his consent killed him? Yes. Love has nothing to do with it. Aegon and Visenya were apart of Aerys legacy. Tywin wanted to destroy the one thing he himself values above all else. Ellia was Aerys' biggest insult Aerys had dealt to Tywin and Tywin is petty enough to have her brutalized as he's petty enough to have had Tysha brutalized for Tyrion having shame  

If you have any text at all to support this, I'd love to see it. Where is there even the slightest evidence that Tywin is doing these things for petty revenge? To believe that, you would have to believe that time and time again, he takes actions simply to settle old scores with people who are or soon will be dead and the fact that each and every time these actions end up either defending House Lannister's honor or enhancing its position politically or militarily or financially is all just a happy coincidence.

 

On January 25, 2018 at 4:38 PM, Varysblackfyre321 said:

Assuming that he couldn't directly see them from a window at the RK* Yeah a loyalist  would definitely go on to report that yes it's Tywin's men doing it. Because they would saw them start after they entered the city.

All the more reason why the sack did not happen the moment the gates opened. Please, give Tywin just a little credit; he's not an abject idiot. Here he is, with his army outside the walls and an open gate in front of him. Is he going to take this opportunity to march has army into the city unmolested and uncontested so that they can be in position for when he does order the attack? Or does he yell "charge" right away, immediately signaling his betrayal and now facing the prospect of first having to secure the gate with the meager handful of fighters at the head of his column and then fighting his way through miles of twisting city streets -- the most difficult, uncertain type of combat there is -- giving the Mad King hours to subdue Jaime and spike his severed head on the wall?

Take a look at the map of King's Landing. Tywin would have arrived via the Goldroad, which ends at the Lion's Gate on the far side of the city from the Red Keep. So not only does he not have a nice big avenue to fight his way along like with the Gate of the Gods, but he also has to make his way over or around Visenya's Hill, preferably avoiding any damage to the Great Sept of Baelor and hopefully not drawing any wildfire from the Alchemists Guild Hall.

So sorry, but your version of events simply cannot be true because we wouldn't be reading Jaime Lannister's PoVs right now. He would be a tragic figure of history who died due to the unimaginable idiocy of his father who could have used tact and guile to get close enough to the Red Keep to affect a rescue but instead opted for a blunt assault from all the way across the city because he wanted his petty revenge against the king.

5 minutes or a couple hours it ultimately makes little difference because for that that time period is too small for rebel forces to have gotten in the city, and a riot having suddenly broken out while a uniformed army is marching through the city. 

The second the pillaging and raping begins and wordgets back to Aerys is going to whole-heartily believe it is the work of Tywin who he's so ever fearful. They do not need to be uniformed to have instant recognition of the men who'd start rioting would be lord Tywin's men colors or no; they'd be watched throughout their passage through the city.

The second someone says its Tywin its Tywin even if someone had come back and said they don't know who was wrecking the city they'd be ignored or said it wasn't would be burned. And ultimately since Jaimie is the only warrior around Aerys with a sword and Aerys' army would be busy with Tywin's what exactly could Aerys do to take Jamie's head? 

On January 30, 2018 at 2:06 PM, John Suburbs said:

That's if you can keep Rhaenys secure for the next 15 years and if Robert would be willing to continue a Targeryen line that he spend so much blood and treasure overthrowing and if little Rhaenys isn't a complete basket-case after witnessing her mother and brother savagely murdered by two horrific knights. There's too many ifs. Killing both children is the only way to secure the new dynasty for certain. If he had access to Viserys and Dany, he would have killed them too.

She was 3. She'd be traumatized initially from the incident  possibly sure but it's extremely unlikely she'd or anyone would expect she'd become so delerious as to not being able to say the proper words need to consolidate a marriage to her.

 

Edited by Varysblackfyre321

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The simple answer is YES.

Had Tywin not ordered the killing of Rhaegar's children, it would simply be him sitting out the war (along with Houses Greyjoy and Frey). This makes him a person of dubious loyalty at best, and an enemy at worst. And we all know what Robert does to his enemies.

Killing the children of Rhaegar cleared the line of succession and bought him the gratitude of the new King. Gratitude that could be spent on making his daughter a queen and shoring up the crown's reliance on him as their principle ally.

Otherwise, he might have found himself in the same position as the Tyrells.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
11 hours ago, Jon_Stargaryen said:

The simple answer is YES.

Had Tywin not ordered the killing of Rhaegar's children, it would simply be him sitting out the war (along with Houses Greyjoy and Frey). This makes him a person of dubious loyalty at best, and an enemy at worst. And we all know what Robert does to his enemies.

Killing the children of Rhaegar cleared the line of succession and bought him the gratitude of the new King. Gratitude that could be spent on making his daughter a queen and shoring up the crown's reliance on him as their principle ally.

Otherwise, he might have found himself in the same position as the Tyrells.

What was wrong with the Tyrells’ position during Robert’s reign? They didn’t have much sway at court but the houses that fought beside Robert didn’t either. Houses Stark, Arryn, and Tully didn’t seem to have much if any power or positions during Robert’s reign and they were his greatest allies during the war. 

And Robert didn’t marry Cersei because her father murdered the Targ children, he married Cersei because Tywin/ House Lannister was powerful and she was the daughter of a great lord. All of this would have happened even if Tywin didn’t murder and rape the Targaryens. 

And Tywin sitting out the war would have been fine in Rober’s eyes. There was no need for him to murder Rhaegar’s children. A lot of houses sat out the war or sided with the Targaryens yet Robert showed no anger towards them. It’s a justification people use to absolve Tywin of the murder of babies and Elia that it was “necessary” when no it was not. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
18 hours ago, Jon_Stargaryen said:

The simple answer is YES.

Had Tywin not ordered the killing of Rhaegar's children, it would simply be him sitting out the war (along with Houses Greyjoy and Frey). This makes him a person of dubious loyalty at best, and an enemy at worst. And we all know what Robert does to his enemies.

Killing the children of Rhaegar cleared the line of succession and bought him the gratitude of the new King. Gratitude that could be spent on making his daughter a queen and shoring up the crown's reliance on him as their principle ally.

Line of succession was not clear anyway with Viserys safe on Dragonstone.

If Tywin took King´s Landing by treacherous attack and killed Aerys, BUT presented Rhaegaer´s children as living captives to Robert, Robert would still have owed gratitude for taking Red Keep and killing Aerys. It would have been Robert´s job to deal with the embarrassment of living dragonspawn, though.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On ‎2‎/‎6‎/‎2018 at 4:15 PM, Varysblackfyre321 said:

No Tyrion simply needs to know the story Tywin had decided they would sell-that a now dead soldier of theirs who'd acted with out Tywin's instructions had been the one to have committed the crime-Tyrion knowing Tywin hadn't ordered the rape yet dead order the murderers and how Tywin was aghast of how Rheanys was murdered no point but to vindicate Tywin in Tyrion's eyes. 

Sorry, but this would be extraordinarily foolish on Tywin's part. We can see from the conversation between Tyrion and Oberyn on their way into the city that Tyrion, clever as he is, is hopelessly outmatched when "dueling with words" with Oberyn. Tyrion tries to make up some lame excuse about launching an "inquiry" into Elia's murder and Oberyn is having none of that. When Tyrion tries to threaten Oberyn into behaving himself in King's Landing, Oberyn just shrugs it off, and it is during this conversation that Tyrion confirms to Oberyn exactly how many fighting men are in the city -- how many Gold Cloaks, how many lions, how many roses. Even when Tyrion tries to goad Oberyn by bringing up Willas Tyrell he is disappointed because "The Dornishman did not react as expected." In the end he rides off to get away from "Dornish wit."

So, no, unless Tyrion knows exactly what is truth and what is lies, he will be at the mercy of this master interlocutor who has the ability to wheedle secrets out of you without you ever realizing it. It has nothing to do with Tywin saving face -- as if Tywin ever gave one wit what other people thought of him, especially Tyrion.

On ‎2‎/‎6‎/‎2018 at 4:15 PM, Varysblackfyre321 said:

That seems to be a heavy extrapolation from the given text. 

It's not an extrapolation. If Tywin was offended he would say "How dare you, Imp. Begone!." He most certainly would not use the phrase "I would hope" if Tyrion had really gotten to him.

It you want to see Tywin offended, read the conversation in his command tent after the liberation of Riverrun. All the men, Tyrion included, are talking about strategy and movement and peace negotiations when Tywin suddenly rises and says "They have my son," in a voice that cut through the babble like a sword through suet. "Leave me, all of you." That's Tywin Lannister when he is offended.

On ‎2‎/‎6‎/‎2018 at 4:15 PM, Varysblackfyre321 said:

He does not have to love them to feel outrage that were toyed with or abused by his enemies;  they are his. 

Tywin holds no particular love for Tyrion but he burned the Riverlands in direct response to his son's capture; because Tyrion was his. 

Aerys does not need to love every member of his family to feel outrage when one of them is brutalizied-it's still very muchan outrage especially if it's done by someone who should be his servent.

No. Tywin invaded the Riverlands because Tyrion's capture was an affront to House Lannister, and Tywin could not let that stand because it would signal to the realm the House Lannister could be pushed around. It had nothing at all to do with Tywin's feelings, or lack thereof, toward Tyrion.

Tywin, and Robert at this point, have every intention of overthrowing the Targaryen dynasty, which requires the death of the king. So if they are about to kill Aerys himself, I fail to see how anyone would think that killing his Dornish daughter-in-law and her Dornish-smelling children would upset him more than the fact that he, himself, is about to die. They had to go because they were a threat to political stability and the success of the new dynasty.

On ‎2‎/‎6‎/‎2018 at 4:15 PM, Varysblackfyre321 said:

No I wouldn't. No person is monolithic. Just because Tywin has done something with one motive that doesn't mean  in all other action he'd have the same motive. 

Tell me how wouldn't the relationship with House Targyen wouldn't be destroyed by virtue of handing the heirs to the rebels?

Why worry about having the possibility of loyalty to House Targayen when it was supposed to be extinguished all together? Hell Daenarys shows she holds the same level of resentment toward Ned Stark even after having learned he tried to save  her life; and he was just another of the Usurphers dogs.

What about Viserys and pregnant Rhellia? Killing Aegon and Rhaenya ok that's one half of the equation to sparring Robert having to kill children but Robert would still have deal with Viserys an 8 year old boy and his baby sibling. Tywin makes no mention of offering to "handle" the situation as well.

But can you show me one single thing that Tywin has done that can only be explained by vanity or petty revenge and not the aggrandizement of House Lannister? The only thing I can see is that he grows bushy sideburns to draw attention away from his bald head. Every thing he has ever done, virtually every word out of his mouth, has been laser-focused on enhancing House Lannister's power and influence in the realm, and the murder of the children is in perfect keeping with this theme because it achieved two crucial goals: unmistakable commitment to the new order, and absolute certainty that these two, at least, will not be the source of a counter-rebellion.

If he handed the children to Robert, he most likely would have spared them and they would have grown into a young man and young woman and the odds are very high that they would have had to fight the whole war all over again at some point in the future. It's a question of being absolutely certain that this cannot happen and just hoping that it cannot happen.

If Tywin had Vis and Dany, he probably would have killed them too, but he doesn't so there isn't anything he can do. That's for the king and his Hand to deal with.

On ‎2‎/‎6‎/‎2018 at 4:15 PM, Varysblackfyre321 said:

15 years isn't that long in the grand scheme of things.Edric Storm had be smuggled out by Stannis's own hand. Stockpile everyone who'd ever have interaction in smuggling him out. Keeping him into custody shouldn't be that difficult if the proper precautions are met. Dorne won't try to free the boy if Ellia, Aegon and Rhaenys are separated.  Sliver escaped to the golden company; Aegon would have nothing to go to should he somehow be able to slip away; And for Aegon, well crippling him in a way that renders him unable to sire an heir or gelding him is an option .. 

15 years is an eternity in this time period. War, disease, even something as simple as a broken bone can be fatal. If this plan were to be carried out, tales would spread far and wide about the poor, suffering prince and princess, having committed no crime nor done no treason and yet locked away by the evil king who killed their parents and stole their crowns. It would be a major thorn in the side as more and more people came to see the injustice of it.

Cripple him? Geld him? Can you imagine the shitstorm that simple imprisonment would kick up in Dorne, and you want to maim him as well? Remember, you don't just have Targaryen royalty, you have the grandchildren of the Prince of Dorne. With a dead mother and two dead children you can conceivably, if not altogether plausibly, claim that it was just the horror of war. Women and children are killed in war all the time, as many were during the sack and earlier in the war, not to mention the Dornish razing of Highgarden all those years ago. So you make this your excuse, offer your deepest and most profound apologies, and if the Dornish don't accept it and turn hostile, it is they, not you, who come off as the bad guys. But if you have the living prince and princess locked away somewhere, there is no way you can claim this is an accident, so you either have to return the children to their grandfather where they will undoubtedly become the focus of a future rebellion, or tell the Martells to f off and watch Dorne launch a secret, proxy war through unnamed, unbannered raiding parties committing all kinds of atrocities in the marches and the stormlands, causing instability in the dynasty right from the start.

I would love to know what Jon Arryn said to the Martells to prevent them from doing this anyway, but he most certainly would have failed if the crown had been holding the children and the plan was to eventually ship one (maimed and disfigured) off the wall and marry the other to your heir even though she has male family members who have the legal right to make a match for her.

So, no, this plan is simply not feasible. It would start the new dynasty off in an increasingly, ugly atmosphere at a time when it desperately needs peace, quiet and a return to normalcy.

On ‎2‎/‎6‎/‎2018 at 4:15 PM, Varysblackfyre321 said:

5 minutes or a couple hours it ultimately makes little difference because for that that time period is too small for rebel forces to have gotten in the city, and a riot having suddenly broken out while a uniformed army is marching through the city. 

The second the pillaging and raping begins and wordgets back to Aerys is going to whole-heartily believe it is the work of Tywin who he's so ever fearful. They do not need to be uniformed to have instant recognition of the men who'd start rioting would be lord Tywin's men colors or no; they'd be watched throughout their passage through the city.

The second someone says its Tywin its Tywin even if someone had come back and said they don't know who was wrecking the city they'd be ignored or said it wasn't would be burned. And ultimately since Jaimie is the only warrior around Aerys with a sword and Aerys' army would be busy with Tywin's what exactly could Aerys do to take Jamie's head? 

Are you serious? It makes all the difference in the world. If you can get swords to Jaime in five minutes, even 25 minutes, he stands a very good chance of getting through this alive. But if he has to defend himself for hours, forget it.

No, Aerys is not going to automatically believe it is Tywin. Rioting breaks out before an assault on a city all the time, just as it did during the Blackwater. Nobody can tell the difference between a westerman and a King's Lander by sight. Can you tell the difference between a New Yorker and a Pennsylvanian just by looking at them? Tywin is not going to march his men through the city in nice orderly columns and then direct each division to start burning blocks of buildings at a time. That would be monumentally stupid because it would get Jaime killed. He is going to deploy them along the walls and battlements and then surreptitiously give orders to send nonuniformed men into the streets at a select time. Nobody knows where they're coming from or who they are. They are just men rioting and looting, just as always happens before an invasion.

The armed men in the Red Keep will not be busy with Tywin's men until Tywin's men are actually attacking the Red Keep. So if Tywin tips his hand while his men are still miles from the Red Keep and now have to fight their way block by block up, over and around Visenya's Hill to get there, Aerys now has hours at his disposal and thousands of armed men who can take Jaime without a blade ever getting near Aerys himself. If Tywin has all the time in the world to rescue Jaime, then why even bother feigning loyalty at all -- just start attacking the gates from the outside, or simply declare for the rebels before you leave Lannisport. What's a few more hours, or days, or weeks?

On ‎2‎/‎6‎/‎2018 at 4:15 PM, Varysblackfyre321 said:

She was 3. She'd be traumatized initially from the incident  possibly sure but it's extremely unlikely she'd or anyone would expect she'd become so delerious as to not being able to say the proper words need to consolidate a marriage to her.

And if she refuses? If she declares that she is a Princess of Dorne and only the Prince has the right to give away her hand? Are they going to torture her until she complies? Rip off her fingernails? Burn out an eye? What a queen she would make then. And as I said above, what do you think Dorne's reaction to all of this will be?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 2/7/2018 at 4:24 AM, The Wolves said:

What was wrong with the Tyrells’ position during Robert’s reign? They didn’t have much sway at court but the houses that fought beside Robert didn’t either. Houses Stark, Arryn, and Tully didn’t seem to have much if any power or positions during Robert’s reign and they were his greatest allies during the war. 

And Robert didn’t marry Cersei because her father murdered the Targ children, he married Cersei because Tywin/ House Lannister was powerful and she was the daughter of a great lord. All of this would have happened even if Tywin didn’t murder and rape the Targaryens. 

And Tywin sitting out the war would have been fine in Rober’s eyes. There was no need for him to murder Rhaegar’s children. A lot of houses sat out the war or sided with the Targaryens yet Robert showed no anger towards them. It’s a justification people use to absolve Tywin of the murder of babies and Elia that it was “necessary” when no it was not. 

Jon Arryn was Hand of the King during Robert's reign. Robert nearly had to beg Ned to become his Hand, meaning that the Starks wanted nothing to do with the politics of the south, and only did so when asked.

The Tyrells were in a position where they couldn't step a toe out of line. They couldnt ask for more than they had, and when Robert asked, they gave willingly to avoid his wrath. I'd rather have power & prestige thrown at me when I don't want it, as opposed to having none when it's all that I want.

On the second count, I also have to disagree. Had Tywin sat out the war, he would have been in the position of explaining his abstention to closeted sociopath. His actions during the war showed the lengths to which he would go to be on the winning team. Jon basically chose not to cross Tywin like Aerys did.

You say that, but how many houses that sided with the Targaryens (that Robert could get to/impose his will on) were fine? The Reach houses were just following the orders of their liege, and he coouldn't go to war with the might of the Reach by himself. The only reason he won in the first place, was because the reach "besieged" Storms End. In fact, his only defeat was at the hands of the Reach. He couldn't get to Dorne to get his revenge on them. The Iron Islands eventually joined the war, though they didn't really do much.

In summation, this isn't a justification, but a fact. The fact is, Tywin Lannister provided Bobby B. an invaluable service, ridding the throne of the only living DIRECT heir to the silver prince, who was, to be honest, well loved by nearly everyone.

I've never seen anyone absolve him of this, but I have seen a certain understanding of his thought process.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 2/7/2018 at 11:28 AM, Jaak said:

If Tywin took King´s Landing by treacherous attack and killed Aerys, BUT presented Rhaegaer´s children as living captives to Robert, Robert would still have owed gratitude for taking Red Keep and killing Aerys. It would have been Robert´s job to deal with the embarrassment of living dragonspawn, though.

BUT not nearly as much as he would owe for Tywin doing the deed for him.

Had he just taken the city, Robert would still need to dispose of the children, given that they have Dorne through blood, and the Reach would likely declare for them if they could be rescued (given their hunger for Tyrell blood on the throne) and there are dozens of smaller houses that would declare for them (some in the Storm Lands, the Riverlands and the Vale) and if we consider R+L=J, the Ned might have to declare for them too.

Varys has already made it clear (for arguments sake (#faegon)) that he is a supporter of the dragons, so he would have likely enacted a scheme to free them and fight the good fight once again.

For Robert to keep his crown, they had to die- aside from his obsession with dead dragon spawn.

But think about his reign if he killed two children. There would be riots in the street on a daily basis. Not just in KL, but in any place where Robert's allies live: the Arryns, the Starks (after Robert forgave the deaths of Rhaegars children, the two were nearly irreconcilable), the Tullys all pride themselves on their HONOR.

Where is the honor in killing children?

If only there was someone with a proven record of killing children and walking away unscathed; someone who rules his kingdom with an iron fist; someone with imprecise (at best) moral compass.

NOTE: This is important, because it has definitely been stated here at least once.

Any time the statement, "Tywiin had to kill Rhaegars children" is brought up, people claim that it is a justification for his actions. IT IS NOT. His actions are morally reprehensible, and I'm sure that The Father won't be kind to him.

However, if we're talking about from a tactical standpoint (take morality from the equation, make Robert a good kin and faithful husband, make Cersei a faithful wife and Jaime a decent Kingsguard) killing Rhaegar's children and wiping Viserys from the face of the earth is the most sound plan for the kingdoms going forward.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
12 hours ago, Jon_Stargaryen said:

Jon Arryn was Hand of the King during Robert's reign. Robert nearly had to beg Ned to become his Hand, meaning that the Starks wanted nothing to do with the politics of the south, and only did so when asked.

The Tyrells were in a position where they couldn't step a toe out of line. They couldnt ask for more than they had, and when Robert asked, they gave willingly to avoid his wrath. I'd rather have power & prestige thrown at me when I don't want it, as opposed to having none when it's all that I want.

On the second count, I also have to disagree. Had Tywin sat out the war, he would have been in the position of explaining his abstention to closeted sociopath. His actions during the war showed the lengths to which he would go to be on the winning team. Jon basically chose not to cross Tywin like Aerys did.

You say that, but how many houses that sided with the Targaryens (that Robert could get to/impose his will on) were fine? The Reach houses were just following the orders of their liege, and he coouldn't go to war with the might of the Reach by himself. The only reason he won in the first place, was because the reach "besieged" Storms End. In fact, his only defeat was at the hands of the Reach. He couldn't get to Dorne to get his revenge on them. The Iron Islands eventually joined the war, though they didn't really do much.

In summation, this isn't a justification, but a fact. The fact is, Tywin Lannister provided Bobby B. an invaluable service, ridding the throne of the only living DIRECT heir to the silver prince, who was, to be honest, well loved by nearly everyone.

I've never seen anyone absolve him of this, but I have seen a certain understanding of his thought process.

So what if Arryn was Hand, the Vale and his bannermen didn’t seem to have benefited from Arryn being Hand. In AGOT we see no Vale men except Littlefinger who has any position of power in Robert’s court. Like I said, Robert’s allies during the war didn’t have a place in his court nor afforded one. 

Robert is constantly called generous and forgiving, there is nothing in the books that suggest that he held a grudge against anyone not a Targaryen. He visited the Reach many times(and I’m sure Highgarden)he had his brother marry their bannermen, and another brother took a Tyrell as a Square. Robert had no issues with the Tyrells and they didn’t fear him. 

Arryn was not scared of Tywin(where did this ridiculous idea come from?)if anything Tywin and House Lannister’s actions were an indication on what would befall whoever allied themselves with them. Jon Arryn was stupid when he thought he was being smart. Arryn only suggested Cersei cause Lyanna died. If Lyanna had not died what reward would Tywin have gotten for lying the dead bodies of babies at Robert’s feet? 

Robert could get to any of the houses in Westeros, he didn’t care that they sided with the Targaryens. Again Robert is called forgiving and generous he just didn’t care. There is nothing in the books that suggest that Robert had any feelings of revenge towards the houses that sided with the Targaryens. Nor did he care about Dorne in any way. 

Tywin didn’t have to murder a 3yr old, a baby and a woman, he did it cause he is evil no other reason. Tywin’s thought process is gross, inhumane, and evil. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 2/9/2018 at 0:30 AM, The Wolves said:

Robert is constantly called generous and forgiving, there is nothing in the books that suggest that he held a grudge against anyone not a Targaryen. He visited the Reach many times(and I’m sure Highgarden)he had his brother marry their bannermen, and another brother took a Tyrell as a Square. Robert had no issues with the Tyrells and they didn’t fear him. 

  1. He married Stannis to their most bitter rival, House Florent, which can't be seen as a boon for House Tyrell, given the persistent enmity between the two houses.
  2. There is plenty of evidence in the books that he held grudges. Ask House Darry, who were taken from a lordly house in the riverlands, to a knightly house with more than half it's land and nearly all of its wealth drained.
  3. The Reach supplies the Seven Kingdoms with the bulk of it's food, meaning that a war with the Reach would be costly in more than one way. They have a high population density, and the lack of hands providing food means that everyone will starve. That's how they influenced the situation in King's Landing from the Reach. That's also why Highgarden is a palace and the Red Keep is a castle. Security.
  4. Mandon Moore was an Knight of the Kingsguard, Robert died on a hunt attended by members of House Royce, and Petyr Baelish became master of coin.
On 2/9/2018 at 0:30 AM, The Wolves said:

Arryn was not scared of Tywin(where did this ridiculous idea come from?)if anything Tywin and House Lannister’s actions were an indication on what would befall whoever allied themselves with them. Jon Arryn was stupid when he thought he was being smart. Arryn only suggested Cersei cause Lyanna died. If Lyanna had not died what reward would Tywin have gotten for lying the dead bodies of babies at Robert’s feet? 

When did I ever say that Jon was afraid of Tywin Lannister? I just said that he understood.

What Tywin's actions showed was the price of defying him. Aerys pooped on him numerous times throughout his reign, then made the mistake of thinking the distance between them could wash that away. He messed up.

What Jon did was ally Robert to Tywin's blood to keep him on side, just in case Viserys ever came back. Now, from Tywin's perspective, it helps to make sure that they know where your allegiances  lie. So he burned the proverbial Targaryen bridge.

It was a smart move. He just didn't account for Robert's stupidity or Cersei's hatred.

On 2/9/2018 at 0:30 AM, The Wolves said:

Robert could get to any of the houses in Westeros, he didn’t care that they sided with the Targaryens. Again Robert is called forgiving and generous he just didn’t care. There is nothing in the books that suggest that Robert had any feelings of revenge towards the houses that sided with the Targaryens. Nor did he care about Dorne in any way. 

For this, see the above.

On 2/9/2018 at 0:30 AM, The Wolves said:

Tywin didn’t have to murder a 3yr old, a baby and a woman, he did it cause he is evil no other reason. Tywin’s thought process is gross, inhumane, and evil.

I agree with the second sentence, but disagree with the first.

Tywin did it because he was in a rough place. He had a son who was Aerys Kingsguard, he himself used to be the Hand of Aerys, and he tried to marry his daughter to Rhaegar for years. He had deep ties to the Targaryens, and that might have caused him trouble in the new monarchy.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On February 7, 2018 at 5:09 PM, John Suburbs said:

Sorry, but this would be extraordinarily foolish on Tywin's part. We can see from the conversation between Tyrion and Oberyn on their way into the city that Tyrion, clever as he is, is hopelessly outmatched when "dueling with words" with Oberyn. Tyrion tries to make up some lame excuse about launching an "inquiry" into Elia's murder and Oberyn is having none of that. When Tyrion tries to threaten Oberyn into behaving himself in King's Landing, Oberyn just shrugs it off, and it is during this conversation that Tyrion confirms to Oberyn exactly how many fighting men are in the city -- how many Gold Cloaks, how many lions, how many roses. Even when Tyrion tries to goad Oberyn by bringing up Willas Tyrell he is disappointed because "The Dornishman did not react as expected." In the end he rides off to get away from "Dornish wit."

So, no, unless Tyrion knows exactly what is truth and what is lies, he will be at the mercy of this master interlocutor who has the ability to wheedle secrets out of you without you ever realizing it. It has nothing to do with Tywin saving face -- as if Tywin ever gave one wit what other people thought of him, especially Tyrion.

Oberyn doesn't know the truth-all he has(as Tywin points out), is rumors of the mountain being the one to have brutally murdered Ellia and her children. Please explain what actual use Tyrion could have knowing Tywin just ordered the murderers of the children-this isn't Tyrion can bring up to cool down Oberyn-this information of Tywin just ordering the murderers if slipped out wouldn't cause less outrage from the Dornish prince than if he had let slip Tywin  ordered the murderers and rape. 

On February 7, 2018 at 5:09 PM, John Suburbs said:

t's not an extrapolation. If Tywin was offended he would say "How dare you, Imp. Begone!." He most certainly would not use the phrase "I would hope" if Tyrion had really gotten to him.

He's not so overdramatic. He could be far less so in expressing his anger or disgust towards something that can still be picked up-he never said explicit  he was disgusted on how Rheanays was killed but he makes very clear(needlessly), he was so.

 

On February 7, 2018 at 5:09 PM, John Suburbs said:

t you want to see Tywin offended, read the conversation in his command tent after the liberation of Riverrun. All the men, Tyrion included, are talking about strategy and movement and peace negotiations when Tywin suddenly rises and says "They have my son," in a voice that cut through the babble like a sword through suet. "Leave me, all of you." That's Tywin Lannister when he is offended

He's far more outraged true-but not every case where he's expressing an emotion proposes that he have the same level of response-Tywin did not yell at Jaimie for deciding to stay in the kingsguard.

 

On February 7, 2018 at 5:09 PM, John Suburbs said:

Tywin invaded the Riverlands because Tyrion's capture was an affront to House Lannister, and Tywin could not let that stand because it would signal to the realm the House Lannister could be pushed around. It had nothing at all to do with Tywin's feelings, or lack thereof, to him

Come on, they took his son-it's a massive insult to have family assaulted, but this is Tyrion is part of Tywin's direct legacy. It's a massive insult to which even  Tywin. Family, legacy are everything to Tywin no matter his personal feelings he will always feel personally slighted  when one is transgressed against(kidnapped, assaulted, killed) by his peers or rivals. Yes, responding to the capture was necessary for the security of house lanister-but it is still a massive insult.

Such violations will always be felt by lords-no matter the feelings they have of the family member. 

Aerys when Brandon and Rickard had came knocking for justice against Rheagar for the kidnap of their family's daughter though his feelings towards hisboy had been souring-he still so  insulted that these,servents of his think they could touch a Targyen he gave them a torturous death.

On February 7, 2018 at 5:09 PM, John Suburbs said:

But can you show me one single thing that Tywin has done that can only be explained by vanity or petty revenge and not the aggrandizement of House Lannister? The only thing I can see is that he grows bushy sideburns to draw attention away from his bald head. Every thing he has ever done, virtually every word out of his mouth, has been laser-focused on enhancing House Lannister's power and influence in the realm, and the murder of the children is in perfect keeping with this theme because it achieved two crucial goals: unmistakable commitment to the new order, and absolute certainty that these two, at least, will not be the source of a counter-rebellion.

If he handed the children to Robert, he most likely would have spared them and they would have grown into a young man and young woman and the odds are very high that they would have had to fight the whole war all over again at some point in the future. It's a question of being absolutely certain that this cannot happen and just hoping that it cannot happen.

If Tywin had Vis and Dany, he probably would have killed them too, but he doesn't so there isn't anything he can do. That's for the king and his Hand to deal with.

I'm sorry what?  Tywin thought Robert knew he'd have to kill the children-he doesn't lament Robert wouldnt do it-he Clearly thinks Robert would but it'd look really bad on him(as if pardoning Tywin for it wouldn't look basiclly as bad) so Tywin apparently to save Robert from the disgrace had to be the one to kill the children to keep Bobby's hand clean. But again killing Rhaenys and Aegon would basically useless given as we agree Viseyrys and Aerys' pregnant queen would still have to be murdered by Robert.  Tywin said he  eliminate Aegon and Rheanays to spare Robert from having to kill children thus sullying  his glorious rebellion-even though Rheanys and Aegon have  been disinherited as it by Aerys and the actual child heir (and a pregnant queen), so  Robert in the end has to kill children(using Tywin's logic).  I'm sorry, but his reason for why he had to kill the children instead of simply allowing Robert  to work this out doesn't fit.

Robert murderering 2 children wouldn't go over more than 4 children.

 

And again how would handing Rheagar's children over to the Usurpher not destroy idea of loyalty from house lanisters to house Targaryen? Why would this even in any way be a factor in his decision given based on his information the targyen house would dead within a short while anyway! 

On February 7, 2018 at 5:09 PM, John Suburbs said:

15 years is an eternity in this time period. War, disease, even something as simple as a broken bone can be fatal. If this plan were to be carried out, tales would spread far and wide about the poor, suffering prince and princess, having committed no crime nor done no treason and yet locked away by the evil king who killed their parents and stole their crowns. It would be a major thorn in the side as more and more people came to see the injustice of it.

15 years really isn't. Or they'd look at how magnanimous Robert is-captured the throne he took his fallen enemy's children as his very wards and is so confident in legitimacy he does not need to murder them-it's not as though kings who skipped the line of succession have always had to murder all those that should be ahead of them to have long prosperous rules-King Alfred of Wessex had two nep from his older brother still around by the time he ascended to throne.

On February 7, 2018 at 5:09 PM, John Suburbs said:

Cripple him? Geld him? Can you imagine the shitstorm that simple imprisonment would kick up in Dorne, and you want to maim him as well? Remember, you don't just have Targaryen royalty, you have the grandchildren of the Prince of Dorne. With a dead mother and two dead children you can conceivably, if not altogether plausibly, claim that it was just the horror of war. Women and children are killed in war all the time, as many were during the sack and earlier in the war, not to mention the Dornish razing of Highgarden all those years ago. So you make this your excuse, offer your deepest and most profound apologies, and if the Dornish don't accept it and turn hostile, it is they, not you, who come off as the bad guys. But if you have the living prince and princess locked away somewhere, there is no way you can claim this is an accident, so you either have to return the children to their grandfather where they will undoubtedly become the focus of a future rebellion, or tell the Martells to f off and watch Dorne launch a secret, proxy war through unnamed, unbannered raiding parties committing all kinds of atrocities in the marches and the stormlands, causing instability in the dynasty right from the start.

I can't imagine it'd be any more of a shitstorm having killed him as infannt People of Ellia's and her children rank are never seen as "accidental casualties of war", it would not be seen as an accident and pardoning those who apparently did only made Robert seem complicit. Cripple(which  could be arranged to look like an accident) him or geld him(which could be justified-he's half-Dornish, they've massive unassailable sexual appetites-say he raped a nobleman's daughter and Robert still having felt loved for the boy couldn't bring himself to kill him-so a gelding and being sent to the watch it is), in any case he loses the ability of being a threat, no house will flock to gelding or a cripple, Dorne would be forced to bear it to save the other two hostages. 

On February 7, 2018 at 5:09 PM, John Suburbs said:

would love to know what Jon Arryn said to the Martells to prevent them from doing this anyway, but he most certainly would have failed if the crown had been holding the children and the plan was to eventually ship one (maimed and disfigured) off the wall and marry the other to your heir even though she has male family members who have the legal right to make a match for her.

They(the new Baratheon dynasty) have three hostages-Doran's sister, nephew and niece in their custody. His niece will have the opportunity to bears sons who will be kings. Aegon's line stops with him but he will be granted the right to pursue a noble career in one of westeros' most holy orders. You can either accept and spare the lives of the hostages or put them at risk-Doran will relent. 

On February 7, 2018 at 5:09 PM, John Suburbs said:

And if she refuses? If she declares that she is a Princess of Dorne and only the Prince has the right to give away her hand? Are they going to torture her until she complies? Rip off her fingernails? Burn out an eye? What a queen she would make then. And as I said above, what do you think Dorne's reaction to all of this will be?

Yes, they'd honestly expect there's any chance  13 or 14 year old girl to be that brave to say no in the face of very powerful men out of some sense of love to a land she's never been to or that they'd really try that much to scare a teenage girl into saying yes or after 12 years in their custody she wouldn't have grown accustomed to the notion of having been married off to Robert's first son.Hell no one thought Sansa would suddenly say no to marrying Joffery when she was in Lanister custody out of some love for the north.  And if such a ludicrous thing such as Rheanays needing the prince to hand her Dorne's or more aptly Doran's reaction would simply be to send Oberyn  over to insure Rheanays gets her wish. 

Edited by Varysblackfyre321

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
13 hours ago, Varysblackfyre321 said:

Oberyn doesn't know the truth-all he has(as Tywin points out), is rumors of the mountain being the one to have brutally murdered Ellia and her children. Please explain what actual use Tyrion could have knowing Tywin just ordered the murderers of the children-this isn't Tyrion can bring up to cool down Oberyn-this information of Tywin just ordering the murderers if slipped out wouldn't cause less outrage from the Dornish prince than if he had let slip Tywin  ordered the murderers and rape. 

Sorry, your syntax is a little jumbled, but I'll try and answer. No, Oberyn doesn't know the truth, but Tyrion also does not know what Oberyn knows or does not know. So if Tywin does not lay out the truth to Tyrion, then Tyrion cannot be trusted to just blurt out what he, Tyrion, thinks is just an accepted fact -- that the mountain and Lorch killed the children, and maybe even the fact that Tywin ordered it. By having this conversation, Tyrion knows exactly what is truth and what is lies, and what is to be revealed and what is to be kept secret.

13 hours ago, Varysblackfyre321 said:

He's not so overdramatic. He could be far less so in expressing his anger or disgust towards something that can still be picked up-he never said explicit  he was disgusted on how Rheanays was killed but he makes very clear(needlessly), he was so.

He's far more outraged true-but not every case where he's expressing an emotion proposes that he have the same level of response-Tywin did not yell at Jaimie for deciding to stay in the kingsguard.

He raised his voice and ordered the tent cleared when his bannermen displeased him with their whining about the loss at Riverrun. He "brusquely" dismissed Cersei when she tried to defy him about remarrying. He sent the king to his room when he threw a tantrum at a council meeting. Tywin does not suffer challenges to his authority lightly.

No, he did not raise his voice to Jaime, but your fooling yourself if this is on par with "even you will not accuse me of giving that command, I would hope":

Quote

A vein pulsed at his neck, but he did not speak. And did not speak. And did not speak. The strained silence went on until it was more than Jaime could endure. "Father..." he began.

"You are not my son." Lord Tywin turned his face away.

14 hours ago, Varysblackfyre321 said:

Come on, they took his son-it's a massive insult to have family assaulted, but this is Tyrion is part of Tywin's direct legacy. It's a massive insult to which even  Tywin. Family, legacy are everything to Tywin no matter his personal feelings he will always feel personally slighted  when one is transgressed against(kidnapped, assaulted, killed) by his peers or rivals. Yes, responding to the capture was necessary for the security of house lanister-but it is still a massive insult.

Sure, which demonstrates my point that Tywin is not reacting out of pettiness or perceived insults to him personally, but to the affront to House Lannister. He simply cannot let another house kidnap his child, even a dwarf, without retaliating in a meaningful way. To do otherwise would send a signal to other lords, great and small, that House Lannister can be pushed around, which is exactly the trap that Tywin saw his father fall into.

14 hours ago, Varysblackfyre321 said:

I'm sorry what?  Tywin thought Robert knew he'd have to kill the children-he doesn't lament Robert wouldnt do it-he Clearly thinks Robert would but it'd look really bad on him(as if pardoning Tywin for it wouldn't look basiclly as bad) so Tywin apparently to save Robert from the disgrace had to be the one to kill the children to keep Bobby's hand clean. But again killing Rhaenys and Aegon would basically useless given as we agree Viseyrys and Aerys' pregnant queen would still have to be murdered by Robert.  Tywin said he  eliminate Aegon and Rheanays to spare Robert from having to kill children thus sullying  his glorious rebellion-even though Rheanys and Aegon have  been disinherited as it by Aerys and the actual child heir (and a pregnant queen), so  Robert in the end has to kill children(using Tywin's logic).  I'm sorry, but his reason for why he had to kill the children instead of simply allowing Robert  to work this out doesn't fit.

Robert murderering 2 children wouldn't go over more than 4 children.

I don't recall Tywin ever saying that Robert would not do it, just that he was relieved that it had been done. But regardless, the fact that Rhaella, Viserys and now Dany are still alive is irrelevant when it comes to Aegon and Rhaenys. These are the children he has in his possession right now, so just because killing them does not end the Targaryen line forever does not alter the fact that they are still Targaryens, descended directly from the king, and can be used to foment future rebellion, willingly or no. So their deaths are not useless; they just don't provide complete fulfilment of the objective. That was to come when Robert sent Stannis to take Dragonstone.

And, sorry, but none of this can be taken to mean that Tywin ordered the killings just to spite Aerys -- there are clearly political and military objectives in mind.

14 hours ago, Varysblackfyre321 said:

And again how would handing Rheagar's children over to the Usurpher not destroy idea of loyalty from house lanisters to house Targaryen? Why would this even in any way be a factor in his decision given based on his information the targyen house would dead within a short while anyway! 

Because death is final and permanent. If he just hands the children over and a counter rebellion does emerge, it's possible that he could just retake them and hand them over to the new rebels. Laying their bodies at Robert's feet shows that House Lannister has severed its loyalty with House Targaryen forever, unquestionably and irreversibly.

14 hours ago, Varysblackfyre321 said:

15 years really isn't. Or they'd look at how magnanimous Robert is-captured the throne he took his fallen enemy's children as his very wards and is so confident in legitimacy he does not need to murder them-it's not as though kings who skipped the line of succession have always had to murder all those that should be ahead of them to have long prosperous rules-King Alfred of Wessex had two nep from his older brother still around by the time he ascended to throne.

Sorry, but oh so wrong. 15 years is an extremely long time to be raising two royal wards in captivity when half the realm is calling you "usurper" and dreaming about the good old days when the Targaryens ruled instead of a fat, drunken oaf. Nobody would think him magnanimous -- they would be thinking about the poor Targaryen children locked away in a tower someday to be shipped off to the wall or forced to marry their conquerors against their will. Talk about a PR nightmare. Besides, since Tywin did the murdering, Robert does not have to carry that stain. This is why it was the only viable option at the time.

14 hours ago, Varysblackfyre321 said:

I can't imagine it'd be any more of a shitstorm having killed him as infannt People of Ellia's and her children rank are never seen as "accidental casualties of war", it would not be seen as an accident and pardoning those who apparently did only made Robert seem complicit. Cripple(which  could be arranged to look like an accident) him or geld him(which could be justified-he's half-Dornish, they've massive unassailable sexual appetites-say he raped a nobleman's daughter and Robert still having felt loved for the boy couldn't bring himself to kill him-so a gelding and being sent to the watch it is), in any case he loses the ability of being a threat, no house will flock to gelding or a cripple, Dorne would be forced to bear it to save the other two hostages. 

Have you read the book? Aegon was killed as an infant and there was no shitstorm. Robert wasn't even in the capital at the time, and Tywin had not even sworn fealty to him yet, which is why to this day the murders are pinned on the Lannisters, not Robert.

And sorry, but when cities are taken, the castles are taken as well and non-belligerents, ei, women and children, are raped and killed. This is why all the women flocked to Maegor's Holdfast during the Blackwater -- in hopes that Queen Cersei could protect them when the Red Keep fell. It's beyond silly to think that when soldiers are fighting and dying trying to take a castle that the women and children could just go about their daily lives knowing that people of their rank are somehow protected from the realities of life and war.

What you are proposing is that, in order not to be seen as complicit in the murders, Robert himself orders Aegon confined to a tower first, and then during that imprisonment he ends up a eunuch and a clubfoot. Regardless of whether they pass one off as an "accident" and the other to his natural Dornish rapaciousness (as if that would go over well in Dorne) it's going to look bad for Robert. This is what the North Koreans tried to pull off with Otto Warmbier.

And I utterly fail to see how any of this will help with the idea of how "magnanimous" Robert is or how confident he is in his victory.

14 hours ago, Varysblackfyre321 said:

They(the new Baratheon dynasty) have three hostages-Doran's sister, nephew and niece in their custody. His niece will have the opportunity to bears sons who will be kings. Aegon's line stops with him but he will be granted the right to pursue a noble career in one of westeros' most holy orders. You can either accept and spare the lives of the hostages or put them at risk-Doran will relent. 

Well, I was speaking in terms of how JA appeased the Dornish after the actual murders. But, yes, they may have been able to leverage them to their advantage, but the downside is that they become the focal point of future hostility from Dorne. It's bad enough that they've wanted revenge all these years, but if they had actual living descendants in need of rescue you can bet that the level of hostility would be much higher, particularly if Aegon is getting sliced and dissected as you propose.

15 hours ago, Varysblackfyre321 said:

Yes, they'd honestly expect there's any chance  13 or 14 year old girl to be that brave to say no in the face of very powerful men out of some sense of love to a land she's never been to or that they'd really try that much to scare a teenage girl into saying yes or after 12 years in their custody she wouldn't have grown accustomed to the notion of having been married off to Robert's first son.Hell no one thought Sansa would suddenly say no to marrying Joffery when she was in Lanister custody out of some love for the north.  And if such a ludicrous thing such as Rheanays needing the prince to hand her Dorne's or more aptly Doran's reaction would simply be to send Oberyn  over to insure Rheanays gets her wish. 

She might. She's a daughter of Dorne. All of the Dornish women I've seen so far appear to be feisty, obstinate, full of fire. Her situation would be markedly different from Sansa's. With all her male relatives either dead or attainted traitors, it fell to the king to make her match, which he did through Tywin. Rhaenys still has male relatives present who could object to the marriage, which would carry weight with the church. And it would not have anything to do with ensuring that Rhaenys gets her wish but what is most politically efficacious for House Martell. So it would be a tricky thing at best, and sure to cause even more friction with Dorne, which, as I said, is the last thing a new dynasty needs in the aftermath of a bloody civil war.

No matter how you play it, the children's continued existence presents nothing but a series of bad options for Robert. But since Tywin took the necessary step of removing them at the time and in the way he did, he shielded the new king from responsibility for their deaths, cemented his previously shaky ties to Robert's cause and ensured that, from these two sources at least, no future rebellion could come back to destabilize the realm. It was a strategic decision; it had nothing at all to do with paying Aegon back for past slights. Tywin simply does not think in those terms.

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4 hours ago, John Suburbs said:

I don't recall Tywin ever saying that Robert would not do it, just that he was relieved that it had been done. But regardless, the fact that Rhaella, Viserys and now Dany are still alive is irrelevant when it comes to Aegon and Rhaenys. These are the children he has in his possession right now, so just because killing them does not end the Targaryen line forever does not alter the fact that they are still Targaryens, descended directly from the king, and can be used to foment future rebellion, willingly or no. So their deaths are not useless; they just don't provide complete fulfilment of the objective. That was to com

Again, the major reason he gives for why he personally had to order this was to relieve Robert of the guilt of murdering children-except it wouldn't for all he knows-Robert very much would shortly get his hands on 2 children and be expected to murder them. So this reason has to be bunk right? Robert murdering 2 children will not look better for him than having murdered 4.

 

4 hours ago, John Suburbs said:

Because death is final and permanent. If he just hands the children over and a counter rebellion does emerge, it's possible that he could just retake them and hand them over to the new rebels. Laying their bodies at Robert's feet shows that House Lannister has severed its loyalty with House Targaryen forever, unquestionably and irreversibly.

 Giving them into Robert's custody(who  Tywin thinks will destroy them himself) shows that house Lanister has severed its loyalty to house Targyen forever, unquestionably  and irreversibly. Tywin would know if once back in power they (house Targyen) are certainly going to single out house Lanister especially for its betrayl and certainly never work with them ( because their last patriarch tried that and lost his throne and life), and  given he planned to bind the house of Stag and Lion, with marriage, quite frankly no the Lanisters should be joined at the hip(for all Tywin knows) with the Baratheons if a Targ uprising were to happen. And given they're supposed to have been killed Robert why fret over this possibility? 

4 hours ago, John Suburbs said:

doesn't know the truth, but Tyrion also does not know what Oberyn knows or does not know. So if Tywin does not lay out the truth to Tyrion, then Tyrion cannot be trusted to just blurt out what he, Tyrion, thinks is just an accepted fact -- that the mountain and Lorch killed the children, and maybe even the fact that Tywin ordered it. By having this conversation, Tyrion knows exactly what is truth and what is lies, and what is to be revealed and what is to be kept secret.

Tywin just told him Oberyn knows only rumors of the mountain having been the one to have the one to have brutally murdered Ellia and her children at the behest of Tywin Lanister-the only detail Tywin conveys that Tyrion didn't know about or suspect  is supposedly having not ordered the rape and murder of Ellia-those details dou really give Tyrion anything at this point.  Tyrion knows the tale that they will tell to Oberyn and the only thing that Tyrion needs to do is stick to the party line of Lorch(who Tywin really felt  disgust for how he killed a little girl-something he had to convey to Tyrion) being the one to have done it without the orders of house Lanister(Tywin).  Everything else is just immaterial.

 

4 hours ago, John Suburbs said:

Have you read the book? Aegon was killed as an infant and there was no shitstorm. Robert wasn't even in the capital at the time, and Tywin had not even sworn fealty to him yet, which is why to this day the murders are pinned on the Lannisters, not Robert.

Because Doran was reasonable. He was patient, he did not go with Oberyn's advice to immediately jump to war because it'd disastrous. Dorne was teething to go in the full out revolt for what had happened to Rheanays and Aegon;it was only because Doran saw how quickly they'd lose that he held back from pursuing this course-quietly however he'd been plotting the better part of nearly two decades to bring back a Targyen to overthrow the Usurpers-he would likely not do that if his niece is one to be queen.

4 hours ago, John Suburbs said:

And sorry, but when cities are taken, the castles are taken as well and non-belligerents, ei, women and children, are raped and killed. This is why all the women flocked to Maegor's Holdfast during the Blackwater -- in hopes that Queen Cersei could protect them when the Red Keep fell. It's beyond silly to think that when soldiers are fighting and dying trying to take a castle that the women and children could just go about their daily lives knowing that people of their rank are somehow protected from the realities of life and war.

With Rheagar dead Aegon would  be thought to be the one to succeed him and be the one to sit on throne-Dorn would not and did not buy it wasn't intentional-and presenting their corpses over to Robert doesn't actually scream unattended casualty. 

4 hours ago, John Suburbs said:

 

What you are proposing is that, in order not to be seen as complicit in the murders, Robert himself orders Aegon confined to a tower first, and then during that imprisonment he ends up a eunuch and a clubfoot. Regardless of whether they pass one off as an "accident" and the other to his natural Dornish rapaciousness (as if that would go over well in Dorne) it's going to look bad for Robert. This is what the North Koreans tried to pull off with Otto Warmbier.

It looks much worse having killed him or pardoned his murderers and seemingly rewarded the murdereres by marrying one of their daughters. Murdering them looks far worse than morally crippling or cutting one.

4 hours ago, John Suburbs said:

What you are proposing is that, in order not to be seen as complicit in the murders, Robert himself orders Aegon confined to a tower first, and then during that imprisonment he ends up a eunuch and a clubfoot. Regardless of whether they pass one off as an "accident" and the other to his natural Dornish rapaciousness (as if that would go over well in Dorne) it's going to look bad for Robert. This is what the North Koreans tried to pull off with Otto Warmbier.

And I utterly fail to see how any of this will help with the idea of how "magnanimous" Robert is or how confident he is in his victory.

A eunuch or a cripple. Either could have their justification. He fell off a horse making him a cripple; he tries to rape a noble man's daughter thus he had to be castrated and sent the wall. Rumors will fly but given Robert didn't murder as an infant though being the son of the wicked dragon prince and had him fostered as his ward-people will talk but most will be hesitant to label the crippling deliberate or the castrasion unjustified.

Robert could have murdered these children; he didn't-he is so confident that he is the rightful heir that his claim is valid that he's not only going spare them but raise them and further show he's legitimate he's going to marry his own son to his deceased rivals enemy-giving the honor of bearing birth to the future kings of westeros- and given how everyone loves the guy at this point it would seen as his most gracious action yet. Again not every king whose skipped the line of succession had to eliminate all those who who should be ahead of them to have long standing and magnificent. 

4 hours ago, John Suburbs said:

ell, I was speaking in terms of how JA appeased the Dornish after the actual murders. But, yes, they may have been able to leverage them to their advantage, but the downside is that they become the focal point of future hostility from Dorne. It's bad enough that they've wanted revenge all these years, but if they had actual living descendants in need of rescue you can bet that the level of hostility would be much higher, particularly if Aegon is getting sliced and dissected as you propose.

Actual living descendent in their custody give reason for Dorn to do nothing. Doran not doing anything for the murderers of Ellia and her children and even his brother's killing at the hands of the mountain(even though it was a trial by combat) made him massively unpopular so much so he doesn't feel particularly safe going outside his palace  due to the fact everyone else wants to go to war-he looks like a coward and the Dornish people are praying he croaks so Oberyn could have stepped to the plate-hell even Doran's own daughter is disgusted that Doran has never seemingly tried to revenge the murderers-but if he held back apparently to save the lives of their beloved princess Ellia, his nephew and his niece(who is to be queen of westeros), how could anyone blame Doran for not going to war? Who'd dare advocate risking the hostages lives?  

They'red be some grumbling for what happened to Aegon but not calls for rebellion especially when it looks like Rheallia is to be queen.

4 hours ago, John Suburbs said:
20 hours ago, Varysblackfyre321 said:

 

She might. She's a daughter of Dorne. All of the Dornish women I've seen so far appear to be feisty, obstinate, full of fire. Her situation would be markedly different from Sansa's. With all her male relatives either dead or attainted traitors, it fell to the king to make her match, which he did through Tywin. Rhaenys still has male relatives present who could object to the marriage, which would carry weight with the church. And it would not have anything to do with ensuring that Rhaenys gets her wish but what is most politically efficacious for House Martell. So it would be a tricky thing at best, and sure to cause even more friction with Dorne, which, as I said, is the last thing a new dynasty needs in the aftermath of a bloody civil war.

She might suddenly turn into a dragon and kill everyone for she is a Targyen-please it'd be fantasy to suppose anyone with any say in the matter would think by virtue of her mother being Dornish a little girl would have loyalty to a place she'd never been to and defy what she's been taught she would do since they started pruning her to be a lady and that is marry the crown prince- Ellia wasn't full of fire or feisty though she'd be brought up in Dorn- the odds of that ludicrous possibility happening is low to say the least. They didn't think Sansa would have the balls to refuse them after chopping off her father's head, they will not think this Rheallia will either-especially given they'd still have her mother their custody and it'd be big scary men telling her what to do.  The martells and Dorn would want a daughter of there's to be queen again. 

Edited by Varysblackfyre321

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Tywin was given two options, one simpler and one more difficult, and he chose the easier of the two options. He could have given Rhaenys to the Faith and sent baby Aegon to the Wall as early as he was allowed to, but then he would have had to worry about houses staying loyal to the Targaryens out of principle, or possibly kidnapping one of the children and using them to stage a revolt. By killing the children, he was able to avoid that, while also committing a heinous crime. The irony is that if he had left Aegon alive, Varys and Illyrio's plan would never have taken off.

I also believe that Tywin ordered the rape and murder of Elia. Maybe not specifically, but he probably told Gregor he could "do with her how he wished," knowing that the result would be brutal. It does introduce a new layer of psychology as well, since Tywin is weirdly adamant about Tyrion believing that he hadn't been behind it. Despite his clear disdain for his youngest son, Tywin cares what Tyrion thinks about him, which undoubtedly adds even more unconscious frustration to their relationship.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
23 hours ago, Varysblackfyre321 said:

Again, the major reason he gives for why he personally had to order this was to relieve Robert of the guilt of murdering children-except it wouldn't for all he knows-Robert very much would shortly get his hands on 2 children and be expected to murder them. So this reason has to be bunk right? Robert murdering 2 children will not look better for him than having murdered 4.

No, relieving Robert of guilt was not the reason. It was to give him plausible deniability that he ordered it or approved of it so as not to inflame Dorne against the new dynasty. If Viserys and Dany were to die in the fighting at Dragonstone, there still would not be any blowback for Robert because a) there is no longer a House Targaryen to offend, and b ) this could be attributed to the fog or war or some loyal retainer poisoning them before they fell into the hands of the enemy. Few would believe it, of course, but this is what happens to royal children after their houses have been deposed. And neither of them have any ties to Dorne, so there is no cause to worry on that front.

23 hours ago, Varysblackfyre321 said:

 Giving them into Robert's custody(who  Tywin thinks will destroy them himself) shows that house Lanister has severed its loyalty to house Targyen forever, unquestionably  and irreversibly. Tywin would know if once back in power they (house Targyen) are certainly going to single out house Lanister especially for its betrayl and certainly never work with them ( because their last patriarch tried that and lost his throne and life), and  given he planned to bind the house of Stag and Lion, with marriage, quite frankly no the Lanisters should be joined at the hip(for all Tywin knows) with the Baratheons if a Targ uprising were to happen. And given they're supposed to have been killed Robert why fret over this possibility? 

I don't see where you're getting the idea that Tywin thinks Robert would murder the children in cold blood. With Ned at his side, it's very likely that the children would live, leading to the exact complications that I've described: what to do with two royal children who could very well become the focus of a counter-rebellion in relatively short order.

Living children do not imbue the same level of unquestionable, irreversible commitment as dead children. If the Targs regain the throne, Tywin could conceivably secure the children and deliver them safely to the new king, possibly sparing the worst fate for House Lannister. This is not possible with dead children. If that isn't unquestionable commitment, I don't know what is. Death is permanent; captivity is not.

23 hours ago, Varysblackfyre321 said:

Tywin just told him Oberyn knows only rumors of the mountain having been the one to have the one to have brutally murdered Ellia and her children at the behest of Tywin Lanister-the only detail Tywin conveys that Tyrion didn't know about or suspect  is supposedly having not ordered the rape and murder of Ellia-those details dou really give Tyrion anything at this point.  Tyrion knows the tale that they will tell to Oberyn and the only thing that Tyrion needs to do is stick to the party line of Lorch(who Tywin really felt  disgust for how he killed a little girl-something he had to convey to Tyrion) being the one to have done it without the orders of house Lanister(Tywin).  Everything else is just immaterial.

It is not immaterial with a master word-player like Oberyn. Look at how easily he manipulated Tyrion in divulging what Oberyn may have suspected but did not know for sure: the troop strength at King's Landing. Tyrion has to know the whole story. He is Master of Coin now, navigating around a pit of vipers. It will be tough enough not to spill something when Tyrion does know everything; virtually impossible if he doesn't.

23 hours ago, Varysblackfyre321 said:

Because Doran was reasonable. He was patient, he did not go with Oberyn's advice to immediately jump to war because it'd disastrous. Dorne was teething to go in the full out revolt for what had happened to Rheanays and Aegon;it was only because Doran saw how quickly they'd lose that he held back from pursuing this course-quietly however he'd been plotting the better part of nearly two decades to bring back a Targyen to overthrow the Usurpers-he would likely not do that if his niece is one to be queen.

OK, so he's reasonable and patient. The fact is there was no revolt over the deaths because the circumstances were ambiguous so nobody knew where to lay the blame. What would not be ambiguous is if Robert had two living children locked away in a tower, year after year, forcing one to marry against her House's wishes and turning the other into a crippled eunuch before sending him to the wall. No question at all who is responsible for that.

23 hours ago, Varysblackfyre321 said:

With Rheagar dead Aegon would  be thought to be the one to succeed him and be the one to sit on throne-Dorn would not and did not buy it wasn't intentional-and presenting their corpses over to Robert doesn't actually scream unattended casualty. 

It looks much worse having killed him or pardoned his murderers and seemingly rewarded the murdereres by marrying one of their daughters. Murdering them looks far worse than morally crippling or cutting one.

Of course they didn't buy it. But with Aegon dead, there was nothing to fight for except revenge -- and to this day that revenge is focused on Tywin Lannister, not Robert Baratheon or his heirs. The situation would be very different with Aegon alive and trapped in a tower somewhere. Not only would the new regime have to face down Dorne, but possibly Highgarden as well. And what better time for that then the Greyjoy Rebellion.

Honestly, I don't see how you could possibly think that killing the children under murky circumstances would lead to this great uprising in Dorne, which it clearly didn't, but locking them away and cutting off their body parts would be perfectly OK.

23 hours ago, Varysblackfyre321 said:

A eunuch or a cripple. Either could have their justification. He fell off a horse making him a cripple; he tries to rape a noble man's daughter thus he had to be castrated and sent the wall. Rumors will fly but given Robert didn't murder as an infant though being the son of the wicked dragon prince and had him fostered as his ward-people will talk but most will be hesitant to label the crippling deliberate or the castrasion unjustified.

Robert could have murdered these children; he didn't-he is so confident that he is the rightful heir that his claim is valid that he's not only going spare them but raise them and further show he's legitimate he's going to marry his own son to his deceased rivals enemy-giving the honor of bearing birth to the future kings of westeros- and given how everyone loves the guy at this point it would seen as his most gracious action yet. Again not every king whose skipped the line of succession had to eliminate all those who who should be ahead of them to have long standing and magnificent. 

Sorry, but this is just plain nuts. You propose that they fabricate some story about falling off a horse, and Aegon himself is unable to deny it because, I dunno, maybe his tongue has been accidentally removed from his mouth as well? And he rapes a noble woman, so all they need is some fair-skinned maid who can lie through her teeth and display her ruined hymen, all while providing some plausible reason as to why and how she was left alone in the company of a prisoner of the crown? If Robert had garnered any love from the people for not murdering children, this is a sure way to make him probably the second- or third-most reviled king in history. And it would certainly not give him an aura of confidence that he is the rightful heir. He's the Usurper, and now a half-mad one at that.

Also, this whole idea is based on what would be best for Robert. But Robert is not the one making this decision, Tywin is. So it is clear that Aegon dying under the fog of war is a lot less threatening to the new dynasty than a living Aegon held prisoner somewhere, while Rhaenys would only serve to block Tywin's chances of marrying into the Iron Throne. Remember, Lyanna is not dead yet, so she is still the front-runner to become the new queen. In that case, Cersei would marry some lord and hopefully produce a daughter suitable for Robert's heir. But that is a much dicer prospect when there is a Targaryen maid ready and waiting who would then re-elevate Dorne as the first house among equals. So once again, in the cold, harsh light of realpolitik, it makes eminently more sense for Tywin, not Robert but Tywin, to have the children killed.

23 hours ago, Varysblackfyre321 said:

Actual living descendent in their custody give reason for Dorn to do nothing. Doran not doing anything for the murderers of Ellia and her children and even his brother's killing at the hands of the mountain(even though it was a trial by combat) made him massively unpopular so much so he doesn't feel particularly safe going outside his palace  due to the fact everyone else wants to go to war-he looks like a coward and the Dornish people are praying he croaks so Oberyn could have stepped to the plate-hell even Doran's own daughter is disgusted that Doran has never seemingly tried to revenge the murderers-but if he held back apparently to save the lives of their beloved princess Ellia, his nephew and his niece(who is to be queen of westeros), how could anyone blame Doran for not going to war? Who'd dare advocate risking the hostages lives?  

Like I said, perhaps they could have been used as leverage to compel Dorne's good behavior. But remember, Dorne lost upwards of 10,000 men on the Trident, so their capacity to wage war is severely limited at this point. And again, there is nothing for them to fight for, since their king is dead and there is no clear place to lay the blame. Alive, though, Aegon is Robert's prisoner and becomes the focal point for counter-rebellion, which at the very least would have led to an undeclared war bands of unidentified Dornish start raping and killing along the marches. This kind of instability is exactly what a new dynasty does not need regardless of how confident they are in the righteousness of their cause.

23 hours ago, Varysblackfyre321 said:

She might suddenly turn into a dragon and kill everyone for she is a Targyen-please it'd be fantasy to suppose anyone with any say in the matter would think by virtue of her mother being Dornish a little girl would have loyalty to a place she'd never been to and defy what she's been taught she would do since they started pruning her to be a lady and that is marry the crown prince- Ellia wasn't full of fire or feisty though she'd be brought up in Dorn- the odds of that ludicrous possibility happening is low to say the least. They didn't think Sansa would have the balls to refuse them after chopping off her father's head, they will not think this Rheallia will either-especially given they'd still have her mother their custody and it'd be big scary men telling her what to do.  The martells and Dorn would want a daughter of there's to be queen again. 

I think you underestimate the Dornish. I don't see any scenario in which they would be pleased that a Daughter of Dorne is being force-married into the family that robber her brother of his birthright and sent him off to the wall as a dickless cripple.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Whether Tywin ordered or not what happened to Elia, he is still responsible as Gregor's superior.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
7 hours ago, Kandrax said:

Whether Tywin ordered or not what happened to Elia, he is still responsible as Gregor's superior.

No matter what he says about it.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
20 hours ago, Kandrax said:

Whether Tywin ordered or not what happened to Elia, he is still responsible as Gregor's superior.

It would to the Dornish, and to the rest of the realm. Revenge would be justified for the killer and the person who made the decision to kill. If that decision originated with Clegane, then that is where the retribution should end. If the decision came from Tywin...

If Tywin is responsible without giving the order, then ultimately, the responsibility should fall on Robert, since it was all done in his name, even if he didn't give the order either.

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