Tywin Lannister, OMG may not be that bad afterall

[The Wolves]

Tywin brought the realm 20 prosperous years, while Aerys' greatest achievment was losing the throne his already half- mad family had hold for nearly threehundred years. Aerys raped his own sister. I don't see how the Lannisters are worse than the Targaryens.

That's fine if you don't the Lannisters IMO are worse but that's my opinion.

I'm just defending Aerys decision to not marry his heir to Cersei. Tywin and his are not owed a marriage to the royal family.

Aerys decision to not marry his heir to Tywin's daughter is still the best decision he ever made.

[John Doe]

Aerys decision to not marry his heir to Tywin's daughter is still the best decision he ever made.

It made Tywin his enemy. Tywin could probably have changed the outome of Roberts Rebellion. I don't think the Martells were very useful, but I might be wrong here.

[The Wolves]

It made Tywin his enemy. Tywin could probably have changed the outome of Roberts Rebellion. I don't think the Martells were very useful, but I might be wrong here.

Tywin is not entitled to a marriage from the Targs. Aerys never promised him one it was his own ambition and self importance that made him think he was going to get one.

Many things changed the outcome of Roberts's Rebellion. Aerys was right in not having Tywin that close to him and his, best decision he's ever made.

[thelittledragonthatcould]

That's fine if you don't the Lannisters IMO are worse but that's my opinion.

I'm just defending Aerys decision to not marry his heir to Cersei. Tywin and his are not owed a marriage to the royal family.

Aerys decision to not marry his heir to Tywin's daughter is still the best decision he ever made.

It doomed him. Had Tywin still been his Hand the rebellion would never gotten so far.

[John Suburbs]

True. It's the same with the chevauchee.

What Tywin did in the riverlands was chevauchee. But his approach to King's Landing was as a savior and hero, not a hostile, invading army. So the idea that the gates were opened and the westermen immediately poured through in a mad frenzy is ludicrous.

All of Tywin's command and control was firmly in place when the gates were opened, so the army was not going to do anything that Tywin did not command them to do. So unless you think Tywin ordered the sack the second the gate cracked open, it is ludicrous to think that he faced all this stiff resistance before he ordered the sack.

Until he turned his coat, the king, the population of King's Landing and even 99 percent of Tywin's own army thought they were there to save the capital, not raze it.

And I don't think Aerys made the Rhaegar/Elia match because he thought the Lannisters were unworthy, but that he saw the need for form a stronger tie with Dorne. And there was enough talk about Tywin really running the kingdom by that point that he didn't want to raise House Lannister any higher.

[marsyao]

All of Tywin's command and control was firmly in place when the gates were opened, so the army was not going to do anything that Tywin did not command them to do. So unless you think Tywin ordered the sack the second the gate cracked open, it is ludicrous to think that he faced all this stiff resistance before he ordered the sack.

My point are:

1) We do not know whether Tywin issued a specific order to sack King's landing, he may indeed issue this order, or he may not, but

2) Regardless whether Tywin issued this order, when a hostile Medieval army entered a rich city like King's Landing, then when the fight broke out, this city would be sacked, there was nothing Tywin could do to stop this even he wanted to

[John Suburbs]

My point are:

1) We do not know whether Tywin issued a specific order to sack King's landing, he may indeed issue this order, or he may not, but

2) Regardless whether Tywin issued this order, when a hostile Medieval army entered a rich city like King's Landing, then when the fight broke out, this city would be sacked, there was nothing Tywin could do to stop this even he wanted to

No, Tywin's men had occupied the city as defenders, so there is no reason to think they would suddenly start looting and burning unless they were ordered to do so. They were not a hostile army at the outset and didn't become so until the sack began. As per Jaime, Tywin intended all along to betray Aerys, so he only needed to wait until a critical mass of his own soldiers were within the walls before he turned his cloak.

To spin this so that Tywin had no choice but to launch the sack or was unable to prevent it, you would have to think he either had no control over his army and that the reason he had to sack the city was because Targ defenders were resisting his efforts to sack it.

[marsyao]

No, Tywin's men had occupied the city as defenders, so there is no reason to think they would suddenly start looting and burning unless they were ordered to do so. They were not a hostile army at the outset and didn't become so until the sack began. As per Jaime, Tywin intended all along to betray Aerys, so he only needed to wait until a critical mass of his own soldiers were within the walls before he turned his cloak.

Tywin's men entered the city pretending as its defenders, in reality they were a hostile force all along. I do not understand why some people keep saying " there is no reason to think they would suddenly start looting and burning" ? Did I mention the world "soldiers" and "this is a rich city that had tons of good stuffs" ? Is that reason good enough for soldiers to sack this place? As I said, it is very difficult to explain Medieval warfare to people living in the modern time

[It's Not That Littlefinger]

I think the song about the rain was written before aerys really began to treat tywin like shit.

[Dofs]

No, Tywin's men had occupied the city as defenders, so there is no reason to think they would suddenly start looting and burning unless they were ordered to do so. They were not a hostile army at the outset and didn't become so until the sack began. As per Jaime, Tywin intended all along to betray Aerys, so he only needed to wait until a critical mass of his own soldiers were within the walls before he turned his cloak.

To spin this so that Tywin had no choice but to launch the sack or was unable to prevent it, you would have to think he either had no control over his army and that the reason he had to sack the city was because Targ defenders were resisting his efforts to sack it.

Tywin obviously intended to betray Aerys, and his soldiers too were well aware of it. So when his soldiers entered the city, they knew they were going to take it. There were still thousands of loyalist soldiers in the city, so Tywin obviously had to attack them. But from there he had no control of what his soldiers would do in the King's Landing. That's where reality kicks in and the soldiers started to not only attack the loyalist soldiers, but also to loot the city itself. And that's what Tywin was unable to prevent.

[John Suburbs]

Tywin's men entered the city pretending as its defenders, in reality they were a hostile force all along. I do not understand why some people keep saying " there is no reason to think they would suddenly start looting and burning" ? Did I mention the world "soldiers" and "this is a rich city that had tons of good stuffs" ? Is that reason good enough for soldiers to sack this place? As I said, it is very difficult to explain Medieval warfare to people living in the modern time

What you are describing is not just a medieval phenomenon. It happened in both world wars. It happened in Kuwait. It's happening right now in Iraq. An invading army invests a city, there is a battle outside with the defending army, then there is the smashing of the gates, the breach of the walls and the invaders flood the city raping and pillaging in full grip of battle lust, and there isn't a general in the world who can stop that from happening.

But that is not what happened here. There was no battle, no gates were smashed, no walls were stormed. When the gates were opened, Tywin's army, including all his bannermen, his heavy horse, is foot and everything else, were lined up in nice orderly rows. When the command was given, they peacefully marched through the gates to take up defensive positions in the city. The KL soldiers and targ loyalists thought they were comrades and allies at that point, is did the king, the residents of King's Landing and 99.999 percent of Tywin's army. The sack was not going to happen until Tywin was good and ready.

Are you suggesting that Lord Tywin, Mr. need-to-know himself, shared with his entire army the fact that he was planning to betray the king? That's nuts. He would have lost complete control of the situation before it even started. Do you think that as soon as the gate opened a crack, he yelled "attack" and his soldiers came rushing in? The gates would have closed before 50 men got through. Do you think his soldiers just did whatever they damn well pleased, Tywin be damned? No way, especially with Lorch, Clegane and his other bannermen riding herd.

The sack happened exactly as Tywin planned: after his army was in the city and in position to crush any resistance, he gave the order and let them loose. He could have easily concentrated just on the targ loyalists and whatever garrison remained, but he didn't. Why? Because he needed the chaos to provide cover for the murder of the royal family. He knew he couldn't wait until Ned showed up because he would never countenance the murder of children, and Robert would have waffled and sent them all into exile. That would leave Aerys and Aegon still alive to foment a counter-rebellion someday that could come back and bite Casterly Rock in the arse.

Tywin plays for complete and utter victory, and he wouldn't have that with royal targaryens still alive. That is why he ordered the sack and why it could not have been a uncontrollable event as you suggest.

I gave you my step-by-step analysis of exactly how it happened based on evidence in the text. I'd like to hear yours.

[Seaworth'sShipmate]

He was a skilled politician, ruler and commander. He cared about the bigger picture, and the realm did prosper under Aery's (his) reign.

He's still a shit person though

[Winterfell is Burning]

It doomed him. Had Tywin still been his Hand the rebellion would never gotten so far.

What are the odds Aerys would survive long after Rhaegar and Cersei got married, or at least after they had a son? Not great in my book.

Not marrying Cersei and Rhaegar was Aerys best decision. The mistake was marry him to Elia and not to someone from a house that could be more useful to him. Had Rhaegar's wife been Catelyn, one of the Tyrells sisters or Lyanna herself, the story would have been entirely different.

And anyway the rebellion would have never gotten so far if Aerys had Jon Arryn as Hand, or Hoster Tully, or Steffon Baratheon, or really anyone more competent than Merryweather.

[marsyao]

What you are describing is not just a medieval phenomenon. It happened in both world wars. It happened in Kuwait. It's happening right now in Iraq. An invading army invests a city, there is a battle outside with the defending army, then there is the smashing of the gates, the breach of the walls and the invaders flood the city raping and pillaging in full grip of battle lust, and there isn't a general in the world who can stop that from happening.

But that is not what happened here. There was no battle, no gates were smashed, no walls were stormed. When the gates were opened, Tywin's army, including all his bannermen, his heavy horse, is foot and everything else, were lined up in nice orderly rows. When the command was given, they peacefully marched through the gates to take up defensive positions in the city. The KL soldiers and targ loyalists thought they were comrades and allies at that point, is did the king, the residents of King's Landing and 99.999 percent of Tywin's army. The sack was not going to happen until Tywin was good and ready.

Are you suggesting that Lord Tywin, Mr. need-to-know himself, shared with his entire army the fact that he was planning to betray the king? That's nuts. He would have lost complete control of the situation before it even started. Do you think that as soon as the gate opened a crack, he yelled "attack" and his soldiers came rushing in? The gates would have closed before 50 men got through. Do you think his soldiers just did whatever they damn well pleased, Tywin be damned? No way, especially with Lorch, Clegane and his other bannermen riding herd.

The sack happened exactly as Tywin planned: after his army was in the city and in position to crush any resistance, he gave the order and let them loose. He could have easily concentrated just on the targ loyalists and whatever garrison remained, but he didn't. Why? Because he needed the chaos to provide cover for the murder of the royal family. He knew he couldn't wait until Ned showed up because he would never countenance the murder of children, and Robert would have waffled and sent them all into exile. That would leave Aerys and Aegon still alive to foment a counter-rebellion someday that could come back and bite Casterly Rock in the arse.

Tywin plays for complete and utter victory, and he wouldn't have that with royal targaryens still alive. That is why he ordered the sack and why it could not have been a uncontrollable event as you suggest.

I gave you my step-by-step analysis of exactly how it happened based on evidence in the text. I'd like to hear yours.

I give up, as I said repeatedly, it is hard to explain Medieval warfare to people living in modern society, but I would give one last try: who tells you a Medieval army could only sack a city only when its gates were stormed? This is not correct, I say when soldiers draw their sword inside a city, then this city would be sacked for certain, how they got entrance into the city did not matter, whether their commander wish this city be sacked did not matter.

I wish I make myself clear, because, let Seven be my witness, I am little tired of trying to give the same answer again and again.

[John Doe]

What are the odds Aerys would survive long after Rhaegar and Cersei got married, or at least after they had a son? Not great in my book.

1. Had Tywin killed Aerys, Rhaegar would have taken over and probably ended Tywins' rule as hand.

2. Robert lived for another twenty years after he married Cersei. How old was Aerys when he Tywin suggested the marriage?

3. There was no House more useful for Aerys than the Lannisters at that time, except maybe for the TYrells, but I don't know if they had a good match at that time.

[John Suburbs]

I give up, as I said repeatedly, it is hard to explain Medieval warfare to people living in modern society, but I would give one last try: who tells you a Medieval army could only sack a city only when its gates were stormed? This is not correct, I say when soldiers draw their sword inside a city, then this city would be sacked for certain, how they got entrance into the city did not matter, whether their commander wish this city be sacked did not matter.

I wish I make myself clear, because, let Seven be my witness, I am little tired of trying to give the same answer again and again.

Because your answer is completely unsatisfactory and you refuse to even try to explain this unexplainable thing. Unless you are a professor of ancient history, you don't know any more about medieval warfare than I do, and the simple fact is that ordinary soldiers -- and completely un-battletested, I might add -- who are ordered to enter a city peacefully and prepare for its defense simply do not go berserk and start raping and pillaging just because there are riches to be had.

Nobody drew their swords in KL until Tywin ordered them to. I don't know how you did it, but in your mind you somehow you managed to turn Tywin Lannister from a hard-bitten military commander to an imbecilic, bubble-headed boob who doesn't know how to enforce discipline within his own army. More Mace Tyrell than the Tywin I see on the page.

So how about you put aside your arrogance and get past this notion about how rubes like us simply cannot grasp these complex medieval concepts you know so much about and explain exactly why you think the way you do. How exactly did the sack of King's Landing go down? When did it begin? Who started it, and why?

[Winterfell is Burning]

1. Had Tywin killed Aerys, Rhaegar would have taken over and probably ended Tywins' rule as hand.

2. Robert lived for another twenty years after he married Cersei. How old was Aerys when he Tywin suggested the marriage?

3. There was no House more useful for Aerys than the Lannisters at that time, except maybe for the TYrells, but I don't know if they had a good match at that time.

1- Maybe, maybe not. He'd still have a grandson as future King and remain an influential figure in court.

2- Tywin didn't have any reason to hate Robert.

3- Which is why Tywin was kept as Hand. But to have Tywin remain as Hand AND have his daughter marry Rhaegar? That's asking too much, and there's absolutely no reason to concentrate so much power in one house. To do so would make the Lannister essentially equals to the Targaryens, which benefits no one but the Lannisters, diminishes the Targaryens and makes all the other houses jealous. It would be completely unreasonable for Aerys to accept that match.

Also, like I said, in the terms of the RR, any other match for Rhaegar would have changed it entirely.

And most importantly, anyone saying that Rhaegar marrying Cersei would have changed the outcome of the rebellion is ignoring the fact that soon enough she would be screwing Jaime again, and Rhaegar was not a drunkard who wouldn't notice. That would end with Cersei, Jaime and Tywin short of heads.

[marsyao]

Because your answer is completely unsatisfactory and you refuse to even try to explain this unexplainable thing. Unless you are a professor of ancient history, you don't know any more about medieval warfare than I do, and the simple fact is that ordinary soldiers -- and completely un-battletested, I might add -- who are ordered to enter a city peacefully and prepare for its defense simply do not go berserk and start raping and pillaging just because there are riches to be had.

Nobody drew their swords in KL until Tywin ordered them to. I don't know how you did it, but in your mind you somehow you managed to turn Tywin Lannister from a hard-bitten military commander to an imbecilic, bubble-headed boob who doesn't know how to enforce discipline within his own army. More Mace Tyrell than the Tywin I see on the page.

So how about you put aside your arrogance and get past this notion about how rubes like us simply cannot grasp these complex medieval concepts you know so much about and explain exactly why you think the way you do. How exactly did the sack of King's Landing go down? When did it begin? Who started it, and why?

I will not call myself arrogant, it is rather I am running out of my patient after repeat same thing again and again which give me the impression I was talking to my own shadow, but anyway, why not say the same thing on more time? We do not know when Tywin's soldiers were told of his real intention, but whatever, when Tywin, as you said, "Turn his cloak", he must issue some kind of order, do you agree? it would be somewhere between following two scenarios:

1) I order you wipe out King's supporters, storm the red keep, killing the royal families and ransack the city, killing, looting, raping women and destroying private properties, do whatever you want, Or

2) , I order you wipe out King's supporters, storm the red keep , killing the royal families, but I forbid you do anything hurt civilians and their properties in the city.

If you agree me so far, I will ask, would these two orders make any difference to his soldiers behavior? For Seven's sake, at least Tywin knew his own intention before his army entered King's Land, when he "turned his cloak", do you agree his soldiers would then "draw their swords" INSIDE the city? My point all along is when soldiers draw their swords inside a city, even their commander does not wanted to target the civilians, it would be no use,his soldiers would sack the city regardless: looting destroy property, raping women, killing anyone standing in their way

[marsyao]

3. There was no House more useful for Aerys than the Lannisters at that time, except maybe for the TYrells, but I don't know if they had a good match at that time.

I do not think Tyrells are highborn enough to be a queen, they only became a great Lord for 300 hundreds, before that they were nothing more than a steward, Even House Frey has a longer history than them be great Lord

[Minsc]

Tywin at any time could have killed The King & took crown for himself.

When could he do that? As I am sure none of the Lords would follow him at all if he just took out the king and crowned himself out his own initiative.