Tywin Lannister, OMG may not be that bad afterall

[The hairy bear]

It was all about circunstance, Lannisters was weak and in a very vulnerable position, so a brutal example has to be set

Similar reasons are always given to justify all kinds horrible acts. "It had to be done". The problem is, it's a hollow statement. And it can't be proved.

House Lannister was seen as weak at the moment, yes, but if Tywin had put the three Reyne siblings in a cell with their lands forfeited, the Lannisters would have stopped to be seen as weak as well. There's little doubt that the fearsomeness of House Lannister could have been reinstated with much more less innocent casualties. (although, admitedly, perhaps at a slower pace).

It's worth noting that the rest of the Great Houses seem to be able to keep their power without Tywin's useless brutality.

[marsyao]

Have you read the book? Do you know how House Reyne was destroyed to the last man? It was a brutality, of course, but I would not say it is useless, Mercy could only be granted by someone who is in a strong position, Tywin was certainly not in that kind of position at that time. he not only needs to put down the rebellion, he also needs to set an example. After Tywin regain the power of House Lannister, he actually was rather gernous to his enemy who yied to him. Lord Tywin was a man who is capable to do horrible things, but he was that kind of person only committs atrocity to achieve his stragetic goal.

Remember "battle of bells"? Lord Jon Connington later recalls what Tywin would do if he was in his possition, he concluded that Tywin would not bother searching the tow for Robert, he would simple burn the town down, killing every people, man, woman, infants includes, this is of course an atrocity, but Lord Tywin would not hesitate to do that, he knew he need kill Rober in order to destorying the root of the rebellion because the rebellion would fail without Robert. Then after the death of Robert, Tywin would offer pardon to Ned and Jon Arryn, and they would accept it, hence no uneccessary brutality

[Winterfell is Burning]

Similar reasons are always given to justify all kinds horrible acts. "It had to be done". The problem is, it's a hollow statement. And it can't be proved.

House Lannister was seen as weak at the moment, yes, but if Tywin had put the three Reyne siblings in a cell with their lands forfeited, the Lannisters would have stopped to be seen as weak as well. There's little doubt that the fearsomeness of House Lannister could have been reinstated with much more less innocent casualties. (although, admitedly, perhaps at a slower pace).

It's worth noting that the rest of the Great Houses seem to be able to keep their power without Tywin's useless brutality.

Yeah, Tywin Lannister wouldn't have been less respected if he had been the man stripped the 2nd wealthiest house of the Westerlands of all their lands and titles and sent everyone to the Wall/Silent Sisters/Citadel etc, despite the fact he was 20 and not the ruling lord. Aerys was his best friend, so he likely would have been made Hand anyway.

He would have been in fact more respected since he wouldn't be seen as a monster by anyone and "mess with me and you'll lose your freedom and everything you have" is enough of a threat to make him feared.

[marsyao]

Yeah, Tywin Lannister wouldn't have been less respected if he had been the man stripped the 2nd wealthiest house of the Westerlands of all their lands and titles and sent everyone to the Wall/Silent Sisters/Citadel etc,

Nah, that would not work, Tywin was rather weak at that time, he was not strong enough to dare allow Reynes live or force them to accept his terms. In order to have House Reyne accept the term such as stripping their land and title, sending man of the House to the wall, Tywin need to be strong enough to defeat them first, but remember House Lannister was weak that time, the only way Lannister could defeat House Reyen is killing them all.

[Winterfell is Burning]

Nah, that would not work, Tywin was rather weak at that time, he was not strong enough to dare allow Reynes live or force them to accept his terms. In order to have House Reyne accept the term such as stripping their land and title, sending man of the House to the wall, Tywin need to be strong enough to defeat them first, but remember House Lannister was weak that time, the only way Lannister could defeat House Reyen is killing them all.

That doesn't make any sense. House Reyne doesn't have to accept being stripped of their lands and have their men sent to the Wall, just like any criminal doesn't have to accept the government seizing their assets and sending their asses to jail.

And Tywin did defeat them easily using only a fraction of their strength. "Strong enough to murder them all, but not to defeat them" again doesn't make sense

[marsyao]

Read this "Castamere, the Reynes' castle, was a mostly subterranean stronghold, extending deep underground into the old gold and silver mines through which the house had made its fortune. When Tywin attacked, the Reynes and their followers retreated underground, thinking the complex below was impervious to assault. It was — but it wasn't waterproof. Tywin had his men redirect a river into the few remaining cracks and crevices. Tywin's rain had washed the Reynes right out of existence.",

[marsyao]

House Reyne was surprised by the lighting fast attack by Tywin, but instead of surrendering, they retreated into their underground castle, now if Tywin was strong, he could well choose to laid siege to Reyne's underground castle and starved them out (like how Starks forced House Bolden bending their knee), but he was not, which means Tywin can not afford spending that a long time for a formal siege, besides, other westland Lords were watching this battle too, if Tywin can not put down this rebellion right away, Reyne's bannermen would joint the fight and those other Lord on the fence would rise to rebellion too, that would mean the end of the House Lannister, so yes, sometimes killing someone would be much easier than forcing them bending their knees

[glamourweaver]

*deleted post*

[glamourweaver]

We are talking about the guy who had his daughter-in-law gang-raped to teach is son a lesson, right?

[The hairy bear]

House Reyne was surprised by the lighting fast attack by Tywin, but instead of surrendering, they retreated into their underground castle, now if Tywin was strong, he could well choose to laid siege to Reyne's underground castle and starved them out (like how Starks forced House Bolden bending their knee), but he was not, which means Tywin can not afford spending that a long time for a formal siege, besides, other westland Lords were watching this battle too, if Tywin can not put down this rebellion right away, Reyne's bannermen would joint the fight and those other Lord on the fence would rise to rebellion too, that would mean the end of the House Lannister, so yes, sometimes killing someone would be much easier than forcing them bending their knees

Tywin had 3,500 men with him, had already defeated his enemies once in battle, and had them trapped in a rat hole with a single exit. I hink it's very unlikely that the Reyne vassals outside were able to gather a force that could pose a threat to him, and if they could, I don't even think that they'd dare to face him.

As glamourweaver rightly reminds us, "we are talking about the guy who had his daughter-in-law gang-raped to teach is son a lesson". That's how Tywin operates. Yes, no lord of the West rebelled against the Lannisters afterward, and Tyrion didn't marry any other commoner again. That's how Tywin operates: with utter disregard of anything besides his interest. And we can't deny that he's effective. But it's morally depicable.

[marsyao]

We are talking about the guy who had his daughter-in-law gang-raped to teach is son a lesson, right?

Do you really think Tywin or other Lords of Westero would consider her his "daughter in law"?

[marsyao]

Tywin had 3,500 men with him, had already defeated his enemies once in battle, and had them trapped in a rat hole with a single exit. I hink it's very unlikely that the Reyne vassals outside were able to gather a force that could pose a threat to him, and if they could, I don't even think that they'd dare to face him.

Do not forget House Lannister was in a very weak position at that time, and Reyne were well supplied, the siege could last a very long time, then sooner or later, other Lords would start asking question such as why should I still accept Lannisters as my liege Lord as it took so much time they still could not put down the rebellion. If this happens, they could well either join the rebellion or put great pressue on Lannister to end this war on a favorite term to House Reyne, in either case, it would mean the end of House Lannister as the LIege Lord of the Westland

[glamourweaver]

Do you really think Tywin or other Lords of Westero would consider her his "daughter in law"?

We are talking about the guy who had [anyone, it doesn't matter who!] gang raped for [any reason, it doesn't matter!]?

[Winterfell is Burning]

We are talking about the guy who had [anyone, it doesn't matter who!] gang raped for [any reason, it doesn't matter!]?

And the victim being a 13 year old girl to boot.

[marsyao]

We are talking about the guy who had [anyone, it doesn't matter who!] gang raped for [any reason, it doesn't matter!]?

We are talking about a Lord in Medieval age

[The hairy bear]

Do not forget House Lannister was in a very weak position at that time, and Reyne were well supplied, the siege could last a very long time, then sooner or later, other Lords would start asking question such as why should I still accept Lannisters as my liege Lord as it took so much time they still could not put down the rebellion. If this happens, they could well either join the rebellion or put great pressue on Lannister to end this war on a favorite term to House Reyne, in either case, it would mean the end of House Lannister as the LIege Lord of the Westland

House Lannister was not in danger of disapearing at all. At any moment. It was a issue of money (they were not paying taxes, and not returning loans), and respect.

Remember that at this time Tywin's was best friends with the son of the sickly king of Westeros. No one was planing to overthrow him, and if they had tried, it was doomed to fail.

We are talking about a Lord in Medieval age

And? Tywin's behaviour is brutal and sadistic by current standards, by medieval standards and by Westerosi standards. Remember that Bronn, a sellsword that's not precisely known by his strict moral sense, is disgusted by Tyrion's story.

[Winterfell is Burning]

And? Tywin's behaviour is brutal and sadistic by current standards, by medieval standards and by Westerosi standards. Remember that Bronn, a sellsword that's not precisely known by his strict moral sense, is disgusted by Tyrion's story.

Yep, even freakin' Bronn, the man who when asked if he would kill a baby, asks "how much", is disgusted by that story. We also don't hear of any other lord, at any other point in history, doing anything like this.

[marsyao]

And? Tywin's behaviour is brutal and sadistic by current standards, by medieval standards and by Westerosi standards. Remember that Bronn, a sellsword that's not precisely known by his strict moral sense, is disgusted by Tyrion's story.

In the Medieval or Westero, what Tysha did is a horrible offense which deserve a severe punishment (How dare an lowborn like her has the audacity to insult a Lord of a great House on such a degree?), if Tywin simply put Tysha to death, then people, highborn or low, would all agree that is a punishment fit for the crime, and nobody would say a bad word about it, but being Tywin when the honor of his house is threat, like he always did, he went one step overboard, he refused to accept the fact that this is just a folly of a silly lowborn girl, he rather choose to believe she was a whore who somehow managed to trick his son astray, so she would not be put to death like a criminal, but would be given to his guards to use as a whore. Is it cruel? Yes, but he did not live in the modern time, in the Medieval age, he had right to do what he did, and smallfolks had been punished more severely for less offense than Tysha did, people would think Tywin was a cruel Lord (by the way, would Tywin care?), but nobody would think he committed any crime. Bronn was appalled by the way Tywin treated Tyrion, made him watch and ordered him be the last one etc., he did not show any sympathy to Tysha

[thelittledragonthatcould]

It's worth noting that the rest of the Great Houses seem to be able to keep their power without Tywin's useless brutality.

Did any of the Greystarks survive? When the Starks was conquering the North we learn that "one by one, the Starks subdued them all, and during these struggles, many proud houses and ancient lines were extinguished forever."

When the Starks had to suppress the Skagosi wanting independence, thousands died in the process.

I doubt the Starks and Lannisters are alone in being cruel to their enemies in the past, it is how all the major Kings rose to dominate their regions.

[The Wolves]

Yep, even freakin' Bronn, the man who when asked if he would kill a baby, asks "how much", is disgusted by that story. We also don't hear of any other lord, at any other point in history, doing anything like this.

Even Egg's own son(the heir to the Iron Throne)married a very lowborn girl a smallfolk yet he didn't do anything near that Tywin did because Tywin is a monster.