True Revenge

[JonCon's Red Beard]

Those saying raising Aegon at the Wall would not be feasible, may I introduce you to Mance? Mance was taken from his Wilding family as a baby and was raised at the Wall just fine. He later deserted to be a Wilding again, but that was after a series of other events. Aegon was old enough to not need breast milk anymore (he was a year, lots of babies are off the boob at a year) so there's no reason he would be some great burden. He'd grow up with his Great Great Uncle Aemon and be raised to be loyal to the Wall. He'd have the entire North between him and any Targ loyalists that got any ideas about restoring him to the IT. He'd essentially be neutralized. Raising him at WF with Ned until he reached an age that he could be of service to the Wall would also be an easy solution.

While I do agree with you (that there was no need to kill the Targ babies), if Aegon had been sent to the wall too early, it creates a problem for them: it's forcing the Night's Watch to get involved in the affairs of the realm, even if indirectly. What happens if Aegon, either as a child or as a young man, is kidnapped or taken from some loyalists like the Martells? Is the NW going to fight them? protect them? They don't have the resources for that. The only way to keep him both safe and from being a danger is to raise him at Winterfell, as you suggest, in the way Theon was. Ned would keep an eye on him all the time and he can keep him apart from anyone trying to use him.

Killing Elia and the children served Tywin's interests alone.

Like everything he does.

[lyannaisalive]

Had Aegon been crowned, the rebels could have appointed someone like Jon Arryn as Regent, filled the Small Council and major offices of State, and ruled the country for years. Elia and the Dornish would have stayed loyal, as they would have had a vested interest in seeing that Aegon reached his majority, and they had reason to be angry at Aerys and Rhaegar.

Killing Elia and the children served Tywin's interests alone.

:agree: Ned was FURIOUS at the murder of the children and Elia. He was an honorable man who would have never allowed that happen had he arrived first and maybe he knew they did not need to be killed and would have been better if they lived. Everything that happened did so because it benefited Tywin alone. The one shocking obvious thing that I haven't seen mentioned is that with Elia and the children gone Tywin is in the perfect position to make Cersei queen and he knows it which is why he did what he did.

[lyannaisalive]

While I do agree with you (that there was no need to kill the Targ babies), if Aegon had been sent to the wall too early, it creates a problem for them: it's forcing the Night's Watch to get involved in the affairs of the realm, even if indirectly. What happens if Aegon, either as a child or as a young man, is kidnapped or taken from some loyalists like the Martells? Is the NW going to fight them? protect them? They don't have the resources for that. The only way to keep him both safe and from being a danger is to raise him at Winterfell, as you suggest, in the way Theon was. Ned would keep an eye on him all the time and he can keep him apart from anyone trying to use him.

I think you answered your own question. He would be a member of the NW to them and would do his duty as they commanded. It would be Ned who would prevent anything from happening to him once he joined NW IMO because to get to the wall and NW you have to go through Ned and the north. But like you said he would also be raised at WF. Ned was good to Theon so I can see him being good to Aegon and if Aegon was raised as a northerner he might want to join the NW and not even want the IT. I think it would be a lot like Jon IMO. Raised in WF for his protection and then Jon wanted to join the NW because he was raised a northerner and knows its importance because of Ned.

[SeanF]

Walk of punishment is one of the most misogynist acts, and more than that, it wasn't justice. It was gruesome act of demonstrating power... Cersei is by far one of the most horrible human beings and I want her to pay for numeroud crimes she has committed. But having sex while being widow certainly isn't one.

It was an unpleasant read, and did what I thought was impossible - make me have sympathy for Cersei. But, it's worth remembering that Cersei planned Margaery's sexual humiliation and thought it very droll.

[Mladen]

It was an unpleasant read, and did what I thought was impossible - make me have sympathy for Cersei. But, it's worth remembering that Cersei planned Margaery's sexual humiliation and thought it very droll.

Do people actually believe that I am not aware of that? Or the entire line of crimes Cersei has committed? Just for the record, I am. I do find her one of, if not the one, worst human beings in Westeros. I do want her to pay (btw, has anyone forgot who my favorite character is and what Cersei has done to her?) but punishing woman for having sex while being a widow certainly is something I can be all excited about.

[lyannaisalive]

Do people actually believe that I am not aware of that? Or the entire line of crimes Cersei has committed? Just for the record, I am. I do find her one of, if not the one, worst human beings in Westeros. I do want her to pay (btw, has anyone forgot who my favorite character is and what Cersei has done to her?) but punishing woman for having sex while being a widow certainly is something I can be all excited about.

Wasn't the walk also for the incest? I agree it was wrong no matter what but wasn't it for more than the sleeping around?

[Mladen]

Wasn't the walk also for the incest? I agree it was wrong no matter what but wasn't it for more than the sleeping around?

No, the charges of incest, alongside regicide etc is to be determined at Trial. She most certainly would pay much higher price for incest, which also entails fornication and adultery.

[Wmarshal]

Seriously, HS didn't push her at all at this, this was Kevan pushing.

[TheRedLamb]

Walk of punishment is one of the most misogynist acts, and more than that, it wasn't justice. It was gruesome act of demonstrating power... Cersei is by far one of the most horrible human beings and I want her to pay for numeroud crimes she has committed. But having sex while being widow certainly isn't one.

I disagree completely.

Revenge is not always proportional.

One of the acts that I want revenge for is Cersei giving Falyse Stokeworth to Qyburn for his "experiments" and what that entails.

If she is punished for a crime (a widow having sex is apparently a crime in Westeros) than I have zero sympathy for her. Her crimes and the deaths that resulted from them are innumerable.

[Sullen]

Cersei's promiscuity is only the given cause for the Walk though, there was another, pragmatic, reason behind it.

She tried to have the Faith and the Tyrells at each other's throat, she manipulated the Faith for her own purposes and was a danger to them. Her main weapon in causing evil was her good looks and her ability to convince men using her sexuality (as she did for Lancel and Osney), in taking that away, the High Septon (and the Tyrells) potentially declawed an enemy. In that way, her Walk parallels the maiming of Jaime, as it took away from them what gave them their power and made them who they are.

I'm not saying that that act is OK, but to say that the Walk was only because she was promiscuous is taking things at face value while ignoring the power play that it really was, promiscuity is merely a convenient excuse.

We also know that that of public sexual humiliation by the Sparrows is not only used on women, the only other case we've heard of it so far was with a male member of the Most Devout before the High Sparrow was elevated to the rank of High Septon and needed to recruit people to his cause.

[Jam On Toast]

Every person that has committed rape. I know it was 'medieval' times, but i'm a "would I like it if that happened to my family" kinda guy.

If I were a lord, heads would roll.

[Mladen]

I disagree completely.

Revenge is not always proportional.

One of the acts that I want revenge for is Cersei giving Falyse Stokeworth to Qyburn for his "experiments" and what that entails.

If she is punished for a crime (a widow having sex is apparently a crime in Westeros) than I have zero sympathy for her. Her crimes and the deaths that resulted from them are innumerable.

Of what revenge are speaking here? What has she done to HS?

As I said we have entire plethora of crimes to choose for her to pay. Some of those crimes will be trialed, but the fact remains that I can't stand watching any woman being punished for having sex. Regardless of how horrible human being she is.

Cersei's promiscuity is only the given cause for the Walk though, there was another, pragmatic, reason behind it.

Yes, stripping her of power. I agree, beside this being misogynist act, this was a clear demonstration of power. "If I can do this to Queen Regent, just imagine what I can do the rest of you" As usual, behind fanatic piety, there is always politics hiding.

[7th-key]

If Ramsay were black, and he'd be forced a WoS were people humiliated him with racial slurs and for having sex with white people, would we feel sympathy toward him?

ETA: for me the uneasiness over the injustice of such punishment surpasses the hate for a fictional character .

[Sullen]

Yes, stripping her of power. I agree, beside this being misogynist act, this was a clear demonstration of power. "If I can do this to Queen Regent, just imagine what I can do the rest of you" As usual, behind fanatic piety, there is always politics hiding.

Not so sure it's about a demonstration of power and fearmongering, among the people, the High Septon seems to be admired and revered, not feared.

Politics are definitively in the mix, but I think it was more about breaking an adversary than striking fear in the hearts of the commons.

[Clariana]

It was never forced on her at all. It was a choice for more freedom.

I don't think you grasp the true meaning of choice... This was not something she would have chosen to undergo if she was a free woman.

[Clariana]

I disagree completely.

Revenge is not always proportional.

One of the acts that I want revenge for is Cersei giving Falyse Stokeworth to Qyburn for his "experiments" and what that entails.

If she is punished for a crime (a widow having sex is apparently a crime in Westeros) than I have zero sympathy for her. Her crimes and the deaths that resulted from them are innumerable.

This. Tortured slowly to death for a necrophile's pleasure... What a way to die. But Cersei should suffer the appropriate punishment for that crime and the others... Not for something else.

[Sullen]

I don't think you grasp the true meaning of choice... This was not something she would have chosen to undergo if she was a free woman.

Thing is, she was not a free woman for a perfectly valid reason.

They had reason to believe that she had murdered the last High Septon, had tried to frame Margery as to sow dissent between the Tyrells and the Faith, and had engaged in incest and adultery during Robert's reign. Those are extremely grave accusations, with two of them have solid basis.

If she was free, obviously she wouldn't have gained anything from the Walk, it was a concession she willingly partook in. One that the High Septon shouldn't even have offered, she should have stayed in a cell until her trial, but there is reason to believe that the Walk was an option because the HS needed to placate Kevan and the Lannister force.

[Wmarshal]

People need to remember this was Kevan's play, he pushed her to do this.

[WilliamWesterosiWallace]

Mladen, The Wolves, and LordStoneheart, I need to agree with you guys in some points, but ask the permission to disagree as well.

First, the Night's Watch + Aegon: I know how it went with Jon, and I know how it went with Theon. But we have to consider outside factors as well. Take, for instance, the real Aegon VI Targaryen, the boy that was saved from the Mountain and raised by JonCon in the Rhoyne, going this way and that by the name of Young Griff. Had this same Young Griff been Aegon "Silverhair" at the Wall, do you guys imagine Varys could not work him out of there, were that his wish? Do we all have to assume that Varys, Doran, Littlefinger, and all the other schemers of the realm would have NO plans for the boy? He doesn't even have to know. Seriously, he does not even have to know who he is until such time as he needs to come out of the Wall into the IT. Doran has planned his house's ascent without the knowledge of Aegon, imagine if he had the confirmation that the lil' boy was up at the Wall? He could have planned the Stark downfall for putting one of his nephews at the Wall, and, as was suggested, hiding the other with the Silent Sisters (which, I have to admit, is a really good solution for Rhaenys, as seen in The Sworn Sword).

Second, and I say it again, Aegon's Rebellion would be the end of the Night's Watch. Imagine this scenario: Aegon is picked up by Doran ad 1,000 spears at Eastwatch, and quickly taken back to Dorne, where he fights his rebellion and ultimately loses. Do you guys think Tywin Lannister, Robert Baratheon, Stannis Baratheon and the like would just forget the fact that the Watch let the boy go? Do you think Robert would forgive the Lord Commander for not ordering an attack to the "rescuing" galleys, or not taking the boy away to Castle Black and the Shadow Tower, giving time for a fight back, or for at least not feathering the boy up when he was leaving the castle? I think not. Even with Ned's pleas, I think not.

Third, and I am repeting myself one more time, this time bolded and underlined, I DO NOT THINK IT WAS GOOD TO KILL THOSE BABIES. THEIR DEATHS WERE HORRIBLE, AND NOT A THOUSAND HELLS WOULD BE ENOUGH FOR THE MOUNTAIN, AMORY LORCH AND TYWIN LANNISTER. SERIOUSLY, F*CK THOSE THREE BLOODY WITH A SPEAR. Got it now? I stand along with you guys when the argument is that they didn't need to be so violently killed, but I'll quote myself here: "But, be it with a wall, with a soft silken pillow, or with a headmen's axe, their deaths had a reason." They were expected to die; I get the reason why Ned was furious, but sometimes Ned can be narrow-minded as well. Remember in AGoT, where Renly offers him 100 swords and he denies for honor's sake? Well, sometimes we need an Eddard, and sometimes we need a Tywin.

Last of all, I'll quote SeanF when he says that "Killing Elia and the Children served Tywin's interests alone." I think it served Tywin really well, but not alone. It also served Robert, as it took all the "real heirs" out of his way so that he could crown himself. I don't have the quote here, but when Tyrion talks to Tywin about the Viper's request for vengeance, he says something along the lines of "Amory was a fool. He could have called the girl [Rhaenys] out from under her father's bed, calmed her, and done it all with a silken pillow." And then about Elia's rape and murder [the real unnecessary and utterly pointless one, since Elia's claim could be forgotten and she was barren]. Tyrion askis him why the Mountain did it, and he responds "because I didn't told him not to", so I guess that it is Tywin's fault that Rhaenys and Aegon died, but it didn't serve only Tywin. It served, but not only.

Anyway, I know that there were other options besides killing them, but killing them was the "wisest" option, since it eliminated any chances of a future Targaryen Rebellion, as is happening right now in ADWD with Dany and Aegon VI.

[Mladen]

Not so sure it's about a demonstration of power and fearmongering, among the people, the High Septon seems to be admired and revered, not feared.

Politics are definitively in the mix, but I think it was more about breaking an adversary than striking fear in the hearts of the commons.

Oh, I don't think he is striking fear in the hearts of the commons. Nobles is where I aim.

Mladen, The Wolves, and LordStoneheart, I need to agree with you guys in some points, but ask the permission to disagree as well.

Permission not granted... :) Jesus, people, I won't decapitate you if you disagree with me :)

First, the Night's Watch + Aegon: I know how it went with Jon, and I know how it went with Theon. But we have to consider outside factors as well. Take, for instance, the real Aegon VI Targaryen, the boy that was saved from the Mountain and raised by JonCon in the Rhoyne, going this way and that by the name of Young Griff. Had this same Young Griff been Aegon "Silverhair" at the Wall, do you guys imagine Varys could not work him out of there, were that his wish? Do we all have to assume that Varys, Doran, Littlefinger, and all the other schemers of the realm would have NO plans for the boy? He doesn't even have to know. Seriously, he does not even have to know who he is until such time as he needs to come out of the Wall into the IT. Doran has planned his house's ascent without the knowledge of Aegon, imagine if he had the confirmation that the lil' boy was up at the Wall? He could have planned the Stark downfall for putting one of his nephews at the Wall, and, as was suggested, hiding the other with the Silent Sisters (which, I have to admit, is a really good solution for Rhaenys, as seen in The Sworn Sword).

Outside factors are always an issue. But, I have sincere doubts about YG being Aegon, plus that Varys is a Targ supporter. Also, the Wall is isolated, the vows are considered somewhat serious, and as we have seen Aemon's case has provided us the clue that him being the NW brother actually meant the end of possibilities of people using him against Aegon V. Plus, the vast North is, with Starks in control, the kid would be basically cut off the world. People would indeed have plans, but there are always ways to prevent them. Yes, it is more difficult then having him dead, but not impossible. As for Doran, he himself admitted that strength of Dorne is not matched to any other region in the Kingdoms. And you can count that Lannister/Stark relationship would have been much better if the kids hadn't been killed.

Second, and I say it again, Aegon's Rebellion would be the end of the Night's Watch. Imagine this scenario: Aegon is picked up by Doran ad 1,000 spears at Eastwatch, and quickly taken back to Dorne, where he fights his rebellion and ultimately loses. Do you guys think Tywin Lannister, Robert Baratheon, Stannis Baratheon and the like would just forget the fact that the Watch let the boy go? Do you think Robert would forgive the Lord Commander for not ordering an attack to the "rescuing" galleys, or not taking the boy away to Castle Black and the Shadow Tower, giving time for a fight back, or for at least not feathering the boy up when he was leaving the castle? I think not. Even with Ned's pleas, I think not.

Thousand spears? The scenario in which thousand spears would go all around Westeros unnoticed is a bit flawed. Plus, the Watch would never let the boy go after he takes vows. You do know they hunt deserters, right? And he would be that? Also, I think that even Aemon was more closely looked when he was in NW. NW wouldn't be dismantled, because the escape of Aegon would also be their problem and they would join the hunt.

I DO NOT THINK IT WAS GOOD TO KILL THOSE BABIES. THEIR DEATHS WERE HORRIBLE, AND NOT A THOUSAND HELLS WOULD BE ENOUGH FOR THE MOUNTAIN, AMORY LORCH AND TYWIN LANNISTER. SERIOUSLY, F*CK THOSE THREE BLOODY WITH A SPEAR. Got it now?

Hey, I got that from the first moment... I haven't accused you for being psychopath, just that I don't see how you can't come up with reasonable solution for those kids not to be killed. My objection with you is that I don't think the murder was necessary.

Anyway, I know that there were other options besides killing them, but killing them was the "wisest" option, since it eliminated any chances of a future Targaryen Rebellion, as is happening right now in ADWD with Dany and Aegon VI.

You need to consider that the boy may be false.