Ned and Tywin, a Contrast in Leadership Styles

[John Doe]

Only one of Stark' bannermen betrayed Robb. And he was a Bolton, and we all know that Bolton and Starks historically fought for the control of the North. That would have been like Reyne betraying Lannisters (which could have happened if Tywin didn't kill all of them).

The Freys, the Boltons, the Karstarks, the Westerlings. To a certain extent the Dustins and Rhyswells too. Much more than one bannerman.

[The Broke Howard Hughes]

A House goes extinct when every member of that house is dead. As 4 true born Stark kids are still living, that House ain't extinct. Exiled yes, but not extinct.

Starks have lost Winterfell before, but always got it back. And so it will be this time. They will get the North and Winterfell back by the end of series.

Right. Even Roose knows the minute a Stark shows up his claims are useless. That hardly sounds like an extinct powerless house. The mere presence of a Stark strips him of everything he's gained. Hence the fake Arya.

[TheRevanchist]

The Freys, the Boltons, the Karstarks, the Westerlings. To a certain extent the Dustins and Rhyswells too. Much more than one bannerman.

The Freys weren't bannermen to Starks. They were bannermen to Tully (and never answered to them) but made a marriage with Robb (giving his soldiers in return). And then Robb broke the marriage.

Westerlings were bannermen to Lannisters. And when did they betrayed him?

Agree about Karstarks and Boltons. But the Boltons are the equivalent of Royce ro Lannisters or Florents to Tyrells. It is expected that they will betray you on the first moment they can. And for Kastarks (who actually were loyal to Robb for most of the times), Robb in some way forced them to betray him by executing their Lord.

I doubt that the same would have happened if Ned was instead of Robb. Karstarks wouldn't ever betray him, while Roose wouldn't dare to do so. But a young naive boy who is doing mistake after mistake, well, things were always going to end like that.

[TheRevanchist]

It wasn't unprotected. According to Ned there were still thousands of Royalists at the Capital.

Tywin used military strategy to get inside and attack them when they were not ready, just like Robb was able to attack Staffords army when they were unprepared and many asleep.

Robb had the Riverlands and Northern army behind him while Tywin just had the Westerlands. It is Tywin who had the smaller army.

And them fighting was a lot closer than that. While Robb and Tywin never faced eachother directly in the field there was not much difference between the amount of victories each side had.

Generals are supposed to think of the bigger picture. While Tywin left enough men to protect King Landing, Lannisport and Casterly Rock Robb made the military mistake of leaving his capital poorly defended either with the amount of men he left behind or the leader he chose to defend it.

1) He had a far bigger army than the loyalist army on the city. He also had the element of surpise, by attacking 'the allies' (whose king by the way was just killed). It wasn't a great victory, neither a masterplan. It was Tywin doing despicable acts in order to make himself look good when Robert arrives.

If he was so great, he would have defeated Robert instead and become King.

2) Robb's army was smaller than Tywin's army (significantly so, unless I have really forgotten it badly). Since Robb got into the war, Tywin won a single battle (against Roose Bolton) while Robb won a few, losing none. On the other side, Tywin lost (or if you wanna be generous, got a draw) against Edmure Tully. Despite again, having the numbers in his side.

[SacredOrderOfGreenMen]

People who somehow think the Lannisters are at the top and in this super advantageous position (and thus that Tywin's various gambles and decisions really did pay off) are reading the narrative in a very superficial way:

There's a reason we have this quote: "It's high summer for House Lannister, so am I so bloody cold?"

And this one: " I've lost a hand, a father, a son, a sister, and a lover, and soon enough I will lose a brother. And yet they keep telling me House Lannister won this war."

There isn't a single Lannister POV, or at this point even relevant character, who's in a good position politically, or personally, right now or seriously believes that they are except Cercei, who as we all know is diving head-first into crazy-town.

But the Starks' story is a coming of age story. They're coming into their own either as manipulators, warriors, or Tree-God-Kings with very historically symbolic names. Arya's story, most of all, follows closely the pattern of the Hero's monomyth, which ends customarily with the Grand Return.

“The stone is strong. Bran told himself, the roots of the trees go deep, and under the ground the Kings of Winter sit their thrones. So long as those remained, Winterfell remained. It was not dead, just broken. Like me, he thought. I'm not dead either.”

[thelittledragonthatcould]

1) He had a far bigger army than the loyalist army on the city. He also had the element of surpise, by attacking 'the allies' (whose king by the way was just killed). It wasn't a great victory, neither a masterplan. It was Tywin doing despicable acts in order to make himself look good when Robert arrives.

If he was so great, he would have defeated Robert instead and become King.

You were arguing about military command, not whether it was an equal fight. Great commanders use any advantage they can.

2) Robb's army was smaller than Tywin's army (significantly so, unless I have really forgotten it badly). Since Robb got into the war, Tywin won a single battle (against Roose Bolton) while Robb won a few, losing none. On the other side, Tywin lost (or if you wanna be generous, got a draw) against Edmure Tully. Despite again, having the numbers in his side.

Not at all. Robb was had both the Northern and Riverland troops to call on. That is more than the Westerlands could muster.

If you are saying that Robb Stark lost no battles then Tywin only lost one battle against Robb(Edmure). Hardly much in it. I find it hilarious how when a Stark subordinate gets loses a battle it has nothing to do with Robb yet every time Robb beats a Lannister subordinate it counts as Robb beating Tywin.

There isn't a single Lannister POV, or at this point even relevant character, who's in a good position politically, or personally, right now or seriously believes that they are except Cercei, who as we all know is diving head-first into crazy-town.

Why are you only counting POV characters? Which Stark is in a better position than Daven Lannister?

[Red Tiger]

Ned doesn't seem to think so.

My point exactly.

[Ramsay Gimp]

This get said all the time. But we have only 4 things to conclude how good a general he was (unless I am missing something):

First off, you forgot to mention how he smashed the Riverlands in AGOT. Yes, Jaime won the battle and got the glory against Edmure, but who do you think came up with the overall plan? Who sent reavers to attack the Riverlands and make the Tullys spread their forces too thin? Tywin, obviously. Before Robb and the Northmen showed up the Lannisters had Edmure in chains, Riverrun surrounded, and the strategically located castle of Harrenhal

1) Against house Reyne of Castamere. Kudos to him. He defeated and then exterminated all of them.

How difficult was this though? Lord Paramount's are generally stronger then their bannermen. Has ever happened in an open fighting (discounting things as treachery like Bolton with Robb) for a bannermen to defeat his Lord? Probably the closest was Boltons some time ago, but Starks ultimatelly won.

Do you have WOIAF? This campaign was more difficult than you say because of Lord Tytos's weakness. Tywin was marching without his father's leave and only had about 6,000 troops. The combined strenghts of the Reynes and Tarbecks was actually probably higher than that, but Tywin attacked them so quickly that they didn't have time to gather their strength. He also devised a rather brilliant way to destroy the "impregnable" Castamere by flooding it with a river

3) Battle at the Kingslanding. Element of surprise, boom, won the battle. Although, it was LF' idea at the first place. I doubt that Tywin could have defeated Stannis without the Tyrells.

Why? After Stannis got decimated by the wildfire, Tywin's 20,000 men charging into his flank seems like enough for the Lannisters to win

4) vs Robb. Repeatedly lost against a 16 years old kid, despite having a far stronger army.

It's not just about battles won. It's also about decision-making and strategy. Tywin was in a very bad position, basically surrounded by enemies, and still managed to survive. Avoiding fatal mistakes isn't very glorious, but it should count in a commander's favor

I think that he was a terrific strategist (planning things in advance) but he hasn't done much to be count as a great general.

Tywin? I don't know. Probably yes, but I think that he is more a Julius Caesar rather than an Alexander. More a strategist than a general.

You seem to think generalship is only about tactics. But isn't strategy essential to a commander, especially one in charge of an entire campaign like Tywin?

[SacredOrderOfGreenMen]

Why are you only counting POV characters? Which Stark is in a better position than Daven Lannister?

Because characters are POV's or not for narrative reasons. If a character is not a POV, they are ipso facto less important than those that are, in a narrative sense. And the fewer chapters and character development a character has, the less how they end up matters to the story. (This is completely putting aside the theory that Daven is walking into a trap at Riverrun being set by the BWB). Think of fAegon. Having him just show up and earn the IT in the end is deux machina, and very bad storytelling.

These discussions are all revolving are troop counts that are wild guess-timations at best and political calculations that are based on almost no knowledge of what's actually happening in 99% of the ASOIAF universe, because that knowledge is nonexistent.

The ASOIAF series is a story first and foremost, and there's a reason that the three of the top 6 characters in terms of POV chapters (that are currently still living) are trueborn Starks, and one who was born (likely) out of wedlock. That leaves Tyrion (who at my last count had the most total, so he is important) and Dany.

So there's a reason that we are watching the Sansa, Arya and Bran being mentored in things like lordship, survival, personal manipulation, and of course magical kingship, after their first mentors are killed (Cat and Ned).

Ned and Cat are killed because of what they hope will secure their children's future. Their children all vow to carry the Stark legacy they passed down.

Tywin is killed by one of his children for the same reason, and the others hardly mourn him except the fact he actually was able to wield powerful effectively. They feel lost and ineffectual without him.

Whereas, we see the three Lannister children are all adults really in the twilight of their lives or headed for downfall, if they already aren't there are already. One is warrior past his prime, the other is a political operator exiled from the centers of power where is most effective, and the other is going completely mad with paranoia. The fact that we have three trueborn Stark POV's and three Lannister POV's can't be overlooked. They are direct comparison to each other.

[John Doe]

The Lannisters are in a better position.

[Metheos]

I find it odd how Ned (rightly) gets criticized for trusting Littlefinger, yet Tywin rarely is called out for completely failing to recognize how dangerous LF and Varys are to his house. People on this thread have defended Tywin by pointing out his bad position at the start of the war, ignoring that he wouldn't be in that bad position if it hadn't been for Joffrey beheading Ned, which speaks both to the poor leadership of Tywin's heirs and the influence of LF (who may have convinced Joffrey to do it). To his death, Tywin never realized how much of the war was LF's doing, which doesn't speak well of him. He even gave LF a lordship (thus increasing LF's standing) without requiring LF to stay at Harrenhal, which is a pretty hilarious blunder. With Varys, even Ned realized that putting too much stock in him was dangerous, yet Tywin fully trusted in him, directly leading to the deaths of himself and his trusted brother Kevan. Spin it any way you like; the two biggest threats to the established order in Westeros were right under Tywin's nose, and he never realized it.

Also, Tywin is the guy who burned down much of the Riverlands without thinking about where his lands would get food from afterwards, which allowed the Tyrells to hold him over a barrel after Blackwater. The reason Tywin was able to win at Blackwater and prevent King's Landing from rioting from food shortages was by forming an alliance with the Tyrells, who have managed to kill one of Tywin's heirs under his nose and are making the next heir loyal to them. That to me is a huge mark against Tywin; even before his death, he'd already been forced to share power with a brilliantly scheming family that is politically running circles around his daughter, the only heir he didn't alienate. And if we're taking everything into account (not just battlefield tactics), the fact that Tywin utterly alienated by far the most competent of his progeny counts against him. The lack of credit he gave Tyrion for Blackwater showed a stunning inability to determine what had happened and dole out appropriate credit.

Here's an article I read a while ago about the deleterious long-term effects of Tywin's style of ruling. I don't necessarily agree with everything, but I do agree with the overall point.

As for the 'balance' between Tywin and Ned, the OP seems to be asking for a leader who is cunning enough to win political games, a good enough general to lead successful wars, sufficiently well-intentioned and just to ensure stability, smart and hard-working enough to manage effectively, wise enough to know when to delegate and who to delegate to, and appealing enough to maintain the approval of the populace. Not asking for much, eh? I've often noted how no one human can possibly master all the domains that modern presidents are expected to deal with; the key is being able to recognize good subordinates and delegate effectively, and even this requires a rare combination of work ethic, smarts, and political savvy. Leaders like that rarely come around; you're usually hoping for someone who's good enough.

[thelittledragonthatcould]

Because characters are POV's or not for narrative reasons.

This thread is about Ned and Tywin. If you are not counting POV's why are you even commenting in this thread? Tywin is not a POV.

[SacredOrderOfGreenMen]

This thread is about Ned and Tywin. If you are not counting POV's why are you even commenting in this thread? Tywin is not a POV.

The way it seems, this thread had evolved to a discussion about the general fortunes of Stark and Lannister, and the validity of their choices.

I am not discounting him because he is a POV: I am saying that the reason his House is failing (which doesn't mean extinction), and the Starks are enduring has everything to do with authorial intent and narrative weight. GRRM did not give Tywin POV's because Tywin's personal story does not matter. His passing does not represent a mentor who dies in order for our heroes to rise, because the Lannisters are not having a hero-coming of age story. If anything, he is an anti-mentor because pretty much every decision he makes in regards to his children is destructive and leads to their failure and implosion after his death, to the point that one murders him and the others only care because they are completely unable to fill his shoes or wield power. Jaime is unwilling, Cercei is incapable.

[thelittledragonthatcould]

The way it seems, this thread had evolved to a discussion about the general fortunes of Stark and Lannister, and the validity of their choices.

I am not discounting him because he is a POV: I am saying that the reason his House is failing (which doesn't mean extinction), and the Starks are enduring has everything to do with authorial intent and narrative weight. GRRM did not give Tywin POV's because Tywin's personal story does not matter. His passing does not represent a mentor who dies in order for our heroes to rise, because the Lannisters are not having a hero-coming of age story. If anything, he is an anti-mentor because pretty much every decision he makes in regards to his children is destructive and leads to their failure and implosion after his death, to the point that one murders him and the others only care because they are completely unable to fill his shoes or wield power. Jaime is unwilling, Cercei is incapable.

How is his House failing and Starks enduring?

Which family still has there family home?

Which family is still the ruler of their respective realm?

Tywins grandson still sits the Iron Throne. His daughter is still the Lady of the Westerlands.

[Roose on the Loose]

No, a family goes extinct when every member is dead. A House goes extinct when they lose their home and land that they rule.

And when have the Starks ever lost Winterfell before?

So we're arguing semantics. Of course cannons existed before the word extinct did.

Well, the Wyoming toad is extinct in the wild, and House Stark is extinct in the halls of power. Both kinds of extinction are reversible.

[SacredOrderOfGreenMen]

How is his House failing and Starks enduring?

Which family still has there family home?

Which family is still the ruler of their respective realm?

Tywins grandson still sits the Iron Throne. His daughter is still the Lady of the Westerlands.

Well, let's look at the evidence:

1.Bran is being set up as the Builder 2.0, and tapping into an ancient, magical legacy.

2. Maggie Frog's prophecy, and prophecies always come true in ASOIAF, does not bode well for Cecei's brood.

3. Cercei, I don't think this needs elaborating, is truly loosing control of her dominion and is sinking into paranoia and madness.

4. There's also this effective argument that Ramsay is walking into a trap the Battle of Winterfell, and that Barbary Dustin hates Ramsay, who she knows killed her beloved nephew Domeric. Neither the Dustins nor the Ryswells truly have any reason to die for the Boltons. Ned Stark, the man she hated, is dated. She now is in position to settle that other grudge. They feel little love for the Starks, but similarly have little reason to die for the Boltons.

This is a coming of age story the trueborn Stark POV's. Their first mentors are killed, they learn to survive, they find new mentors, and in general live out the Hero monomyth, which I can get into but space here is rather short. This is especially true for Arya.

For the narrative structuring of how all of this being shown, see my prior posts.

[the Scorpion Knight]

The Lannisters are in a better position.

it appears the lannister are in a decrepit house with rotten chairs and tables and the only thing looking fine is the front

[Roose on the Loose]

My point exactly.

Yea, sometimes I think about the preparations for the Red Wedding. You had dozens of greedy, grubby, backbiting aristocrats and a much larger number of servants who surely hated the Freys just from proximity. And yet none of these people were on the Stark payroll. Sloppy.

[John Doe]

it appears the lannister are in a decrepit house with rotten chairs and tables and the only thing looking fine is the front

Who is the lord of Winterfell and who ist lord of Casterly Rock?

The answer is the first is not a Stark, the second a Lannister. And there are plenty of Lannisters left even without Jaime, Cersei, Tyrion, Lancel and Daven becoming lords if you want to go this far.

Was there ever a lady Stark as warden of the North? If not, Rickon is the only suitable heir of Ned, and he is still a child. With Jon there are many ifs (if he will not die, if will forsake his vows, if he is no Targaryen, if he will try and manage to ursurp Rickon etc. ...).

[Fire Eater]

Except this part in the text were Roose meets Cat and Robb at the Twins and he is asked point blank which men he has brought to the Twins.

So there you have it, booth Bolton and Karstark men betrayed Robb.

Except he also brought men from other houses with him from Harrnehal and the Battle of Duskendale. Those men are Karstark men, it didn't say when they came with Karhold, and even if they had come with Lord Rickard they would still be from Karhold. Those are likely the remnants of Rickard's force not Arnolf's men.