Alternate History: What if Tywin Lannister had never been born

[Lion of the West]

I have done this, keeping in mind that this is a book writen by a maester who looks for the favour of a half-Lannister king and whose main source for the period is the Grand fanboy Pycelle. :P

And how Pycelle who apparently scorned Lord Tytos for his weakness become a fanboy for Tywin?

I don't know if Tywin actively encouraged it. I wouldn't put it besides him, because he values the prestige of his house above anything else and intelligent men know how to use PR to their favour. But even if it wasn't promoted by Tywin, the fact remains that Tywin's captain of the guards was openly boasting that he was the real ruler of the realm, and Pycelle's letters to the Citadel said the same. Aerys had reason to feel cowed by Tywin, and my point is that he may have turned a better king if his Hand had not been someone he perceived as a "competitor". Instead, he became the literal monster that you describe.

Maybe, and maybe if Maegor had sons he would not have been as cruel, and thus the real fault with Maegor's terror lies with his wives who failed to give him a trueborn heir? How does that reason sound to you?

Tywin had already assured Cersei that she was going to marry Rhaegar even before he had proposed it to the king. This degree of confidence is, as I see it, a sign of Tywin having lost sense of his own place at the time. His fit of rage when his request was denied, another.

Can you provie a quote about Tywin's rage? And as I recall Aerys didn't just turn Tywin down but took the chance to pretty much spit in his face. That's not how you treat allies and friends.

I think Tywin should have begged if he wanted to have a chance. But I don't think that he even was "mindful of their difference of station" with the request.

I think he was both mindful of their differences and their long friendship, which Aerys on his part had already thrown aside out of spite and jealousy.

1. Friendly soldiers that will fight to the death, and then it will be your turn.

2. The enemies are not efficient, but you have no hope for a relieve.

3. You are just waiting to die.There is food outside.

4. In fact, there's much more food than inside the castle. :PIt's funier than standing to the death.

1. I doubt they will fight to the death as opposed to fight untill there's no chance of victory left.

2. With winter coming and forage made increasingly difficult for the besiegers I would think that there's a fairly good hope for the besiegers to be forced to abandon the siege.

3. And all kind of people and beats who wants you dead, without any walls or soldiers to protect you. If you recall Arya's travels that's how fun it can be.

4. It is, but not near the castle, and standing to death sounds about as fun as being eaten by a giant wolf

I would surely prefer to take my chances and go far away from Rieverrun, to some farm or town, and start a new life there.

Perhaps look for shelter in the lands of a reliable Tully supporter. It may be a long shot, but still a much encouraging prospect than the one that the soldiers staying at Riverrun had.

Actually I see it the other way around. You may be killed if the attackers manages to storm Riverrun but out there in the fields and forests, you'll run as high a chance to meet an end, in addition to face a cruler death. I'd take my chances with the Blackfish.

I disagree completely with the first part. Tywin indeed was a very competent manager of the realm during his tenure, but his rule was nothing out of the ordinary and he didn't have any revolt or external threat to contend with. Meanwhile, his evil acts rank high among the cruelest crimes of his time. But I guess that's a matter of opinon.

And maybe one of the reasons as to there not eing any revolt or external threat to contend with was because of Tywin? He fixed issues with the Iron Bank by paying with Lannister gold, when Aerys favored violence. There's one potential rebellion he took care of right there before it could even make waves.

What I find really baseless is the statement that "with Tywin the realm would have been united" when the Others attacked. Precisely when Tywin the first to attack during the War of the Five kings. I might as well say that if Tywin had backed Stannis and Eddard the realm would have been united when the Others attacked. Or that if he hadn't forced her daughter to marry Robert, the realm would have been united when the Others attaked.

Eh, no. Tywin was not the first to attack. The first to escalte the situation was when Lady Stark used Riverland soldiers to capture Tyrion Lannister and take him in the opposite direction of the King's Peace, and Eddard then confessed to Jaime that Catelyn was acting on his orders.

If we really want to see who started it from a theoretical point of view it was Cersei, now part of House Baratheon, and Jaime, now part of the Kingsguard. House Lannister and Tywin came into the picture much later.

Some isolated murders + expelling residents from a castle in a futile last stand are not comparable at all to an intentional rape-murder-pillage-burn campaign. Which the North/Riverlands forces didn't do. Not to their own people.

These isolated examples are meant to highlight that the brave soldiers under Robb Stark were not alien to do these kind of things. Hence its an argument in favor that just because we have not yet been told of the actions of the Northmen and Rivermen in the Westerlands, these did not include evil actions.

I don't see why you keep bringing up Robb though. I think both Tywin and him are piece-of-shit war criminals. I just recognize that Tywin killed far more people. Thanks to the upcoming winter, he might go down as the worst mass murderer in Westerosi history until they reach their Industrial Age.

For one thing I'm used to debating this with Stark fanboys and old habits die hard.

If that was the case, cities wouldn't have been occupied relatively peacefully in the real War of the Roses. But they were. Savagery on par with Tywin's would be completely unheard of, both because it's extremely evil and because it's extremely dumb.

Thing with King's Landing is that 1. it wasn't in the War of the Roses so that part is wasted, 2. King's Landing was taken by storm, Tywin didn't just walk in and everyone threw down their arms.

That's assuming that absolutely nobody except Tywin would bother taking any action. Which is extremely unlikely, if the Reynes ever got that uppity, as they'd be directly defying the authority of the Iron Throne. Does Tywin have no brothers, no cousins, no uncles? But okay, let's assume that this insane plan does work, and a small civil war happens in the Westerlands that ends with the Reynes on top. So? Would it be considerably bloodier than the actual war that happened? Would it come anywhere near the death toll caused by Tywin's actions in the Crownlands and Riverlands?

Facts tells us that no one DID take serious action. Yes, Tytos tried once with the result of a dead Lord Marbrand and a pardon for the Reynes, while the crown tried three times without any success. So why was it that would suddenly jump out of the blue to fix things?

War of the Five Kings is the main one. Yes, he does deserve blame for starting it. Because he invaded the Riverlands and started burning shit. Which started the war.

Eh, no. Tywin didn't become involved untill House Lannister was attacked when Riverland soldiers kidnapped Tyrion on Lady Stark's orders.

I don't see what those excerpts were supposed to prove. All they said was that Tywin repealed the reforms to get more favor with the other nobles. Which I already knew. It's just another example of Tywin screwing over others for purely personal benefit. His time as Lord of the West and Hand of the King is full of such moments.

No, it was to show that Aegon had already withdraw most of the reforms himself and that only those toothless enough for the nobility to stomach were left. Tywin cleared up the remains yes, but he did not demolish some equalitarian paradise made by King Aegon.

"Petty-minded" and "spiteful" are also really appropriate descriptors for Tywin himself, and Aerys wasn't noted to go mad until after Duskendale, so I doubt removing Tywin from this scenario would lead to be more suffering. He didn't seem to actually do anything particularly impressive or productive during his time as Hand that any other decently competent person couldn't do. He did, however, cause unprecedented death and destruction.

Eh, no. Aerys didn't care enough to do anything so at best he was at the same level as Tywin, and more likely way below it. Furthermore Tywin didn't have any great catastophe to handle because he dealt with the realm so that these wouldn't happen in the first place.

I highly question his competence in anything except raping little girls, but that's not the point here.

When did Tywin rape anyone?

That's just crazy. He started a continent-wide civil war and burned the crops of the third most populated region (in addition to slaughtering entire populations) right before winter. He has succeeded in doing nothing but fracturing the realm, murdering hundreds of thousands of people, and dooming millions more to a slow agonizing death.

What quotes do you have for these precise numbers anyway? I don't doubt there were many deads in the war but I'd love to see the statistics.

He's effectively the ruler of Westeros, or at least he wishes to be. The whole continent is "his subjects".

No, he didn't become Hand until after the war had started and by then those regions have broken away from the real thanks to separatistic minded overlords. So they are not his subjects, nor where they, since he was never king.

[Ramsay Gimp]

I love how everyone acts like there would have been no war without Tywin. As if Stannis and Renly would have just sat on their ass, as if the Northmen wouldn't march to free Ned, etc. etc. It's another case of people ignoring all context in order to paint Tywin as the source of all evil

[Aemond's Eye]

There is a reason why Pycelle became #1 fanboy of Tywin, you know. He was quite sincere about what he said during Tywin's funeral.

People were talking about Tywin ruling because... Tywin was ruling. Is that so hard to understand? Aerys was a poor king. And we did see what happened when Aerys started appointing incompetent sycophants too, he didn't exactly shine then either.

It was obvious from rather early on that Aerys was mad (at least Barristan thought that), he just deteriorated as time went by. Considering his paranoia and jealousy he could had turned on anyone (after all he turned on the one man who was his best friend and never asked anything for being his Hand for years and years).

What fit of rage? Tywin didn't even lose his cool when Aerys robbed him of his heir.

And Tywin had a good reason to assume Aerys would not oppose a match between Rhaegar and Cersei (Tywin being a good long time friend and long serving hand, and probably the most powerful lord in the realms). I would also like a quote about how Tywin was assured that Aerys would accept, or are you just making stuff up? In the world book it is stated that Tywin suggested that Rhaegar should marry and proposed Cersei, which Aerys refused brusquely. It's not like Tywin marched up to Aerys and told him that Rhaegar will marry Cersei.

I somewhat wonder if we've been reading the same books. Seriously anyone who concludes that the Aerys-Tywin relationship was that of an evil scheming hand and neglected king instead of a loyal servant and a psychopathic king should probably consider a proper re-read.

What of those among us who don't think it's that simple? I think it's a relationship that started out as it should have been; Aerys appointed good counsel and paid heid to it, and at the same time Tywin cleaned up any messes the King made, as much due to friendship as servitude.

At the same time Tywin did take use his position to improve his own lot, and promoted the interests of his own family. He wasn't merely a loyal servant, but he was also attempting to integrate House Lannister into the royal family, so those interests weren't necessarily in conflict. He was essentially hoping to marry into the royal House. So while he wasn't merely a devoted servant, he also wasn't seeking to betray Aerys either. I'd guess Tywin remained friendly with Steffon Baratheon, and his death was a further nail into the coffin of Tywin's friendship with Aerys; perhaps Tywin also hoped by marrying Cersei to Rhaegar he would rekindle that friendship by ways of familial bond.

I hope we one day know more about Joanna. We can take a fair guess that she was part of the reason the friendship between Aerys and Tywin deteriorated, but I wouldn't be surprised if she was originally a 'player of the game' ala Alicent Hightower or Margaery Tyrell.

[Humble Maester]

What of those among us who don't think it's that simple? I think it's a relationship that started out as it should have been; Aerys appointed good counsel and paid heid to it, and at the same time Tywin cleaned up any messes the King made, as much due to friendship as servitude.

At the same time Tywin did take use his position to improve his own lot, and promoted the interests of his own family. He wasn't merely a loyal servant, but he was also attempting to integrate House Lannister into the royal family, so those interests weren't necessarily in conflict. He was essentially hoping to marry into the royal House. So while he wasn't merely a devoted servant, he also wasn't seeking to betray Aerys either. I'd guess Tywin remained friendly with Steffon Baratheon, and his death was a further nail into the coffin of Tywin's friendship with Aerys; perhaps Tywin also hoped by marrying Cersei to Rhaegar he would rekindle that friendship by ways of familial bond.

I hope we one day know more about Joanna. We can take a fair guess that she was part of the reason the friendship between Aerys and Tywin deteriorated, but I wouldn't be surprised if she was originally a 'player of the game' ala Alicent Hightower or Margaery Tyrell.

How though? During the years of extensive service the only "self-serving" thing he did was suggesting that Rhaegar could wed Cersei (which would had been a great match politically in so many different ways).

I don't think a self-serving man would spends years in a hugely hostile environment without seemingly gaining anything. Might be Tywin enjoyed the administration of the kingdoms itself.

[Ramsay Gimp]

What of those among us who don't think it's that simple? I think it's a relationship that started out as it should have been; Aerys appointed good counsel and paid heid to it, and at the same time Tywin cleaned up any messes the King made, as much due to friendship as servitude.

At the same time Tywin did take use his position to improve his own lot, and promoted the interests of his own family. He wasn't merely a loyal servant, but he was also attempting to integrate House Lannister into the royal family, so those interests weren't necessarily in conflict. He was essentially hoping to marry into the royal House. So while he wasn't merely a devoted servant, he also wasn't seeking to betray Aerys either. I'd guess Tywin remained friendly with Steffon Baratheon, and his death was a further nail into the coffin of Tywin's friendship with Aerys; perhaps Tywin also hoped by marrying Cersei to Rhaegar he would rekindle that friendship by ways of familial bond.

I hope we one day know more about Joanna. We can take a fair guess that she was part of the reason the friendship between Aerys and Tywin deteriorated, but I wouldn't be surprised if she was originally a 'player of the game' ala Alicent Hightower or Margaery Tyrell.

Agreed. Of course Tywin was proud and ambitious, but that does not mean Aerys acted appropriately

[Nihlus]

I love how everyone acts like there would have been no war without Tywin. As if Stannis and Renly would have just sat on their ass, as if the Northmen wouldn't march to free Ned, etc. etc. It's another case of people ignoring all context in order to paint Tywin as the source of all evil

None of that shit would have happened, because Cersei, Jaime, and Joffrey would never have been born. Of course, even if it did happen, the result wouldn't be anywhere near as bloody.

These isolated examples are meant to highlight that the brave soldiers under Robb Stark were not alien to do these kind of things. Hence its an argument in favor that just because we have not yet been told of the actions of the Northmen and Rivermen in the Westerlands, these did not include evil actions.

For one thing I'm used to debating this with Stark fanboys and old habits die hard.

Thing with King's Landing is that 1. it wasn't in the War of the Roses so that part is wasted, 2. King's Landing was taken by storm, Tywin didn't just walk in and everyone threw down their arms.

Facts tells us that no one DID take serious action. Yes, Tytos tried once with the result of a dead Lord Marbrand and a pardon for the Reynes, while the crown tried three times without any success. So why was it that would suddenly jump out of the blue to fix things?

Eh, no. Tywin didn't become involved untill House Lannister was attacked when Riverland soldiers kidnapped Tyrion on Lady Stark's orders.

No, it was to show that Aegon had already withdraw most of the reforms himself and that only those toothless enough for the nobility to stomach were left. Tywin cleared up the remains yes, but he did not demolish some equalitarian paradise made by King Aegon.

Eh, no. Aerys didn't care enough to do anything so at best he was at the same level as Tywin, and more likely way below it. Furthermore Tywin didn't have any great catastophe to handle because he dealt with the realm so that these wouldn't happen in the first place.

When did Tywin rape anyone?

What quotes do you have for these precise numbers anyway? I don't doubt there were many deads in the war but I'd love to see the statistics.

No, he didn't become Hand until after the war had started and by then those regions have broken away from the real thanks to separatistic minded overlords. So they are not his subjects, nor where they, since he was never king.

Of course not. Even Stannis's highly disciplined men had a few rapists among them at the Wall. But the fact is, Tywin and co are known widely for their cruelty, while none of the North/Riverlands leaders are ('cept Roose), and we never hear about North war crimes anywhere near as much as Westerlands ones.

It's based on that war and set roughly in the same time period in this universe, so yes, it's entirely valid to bring it up. Tywin walked in because the gates were opened with a fresh army. There shouldn't have actually been a lot of resistance, certainly not enough to justify the murders of thousands if not tens of thousands.

Anyone could do it. A formal declaration of rebellion is an entirely different beast. That would require the Iron Throne to intervene. Or just Kevan, I guess. Crushing the Reynes and Tarbecks was really easy.

Tyrion was arrested because he was suspected of a crime. Tywin could have taken the matter to the king, he could have taken the matter to Ned, or he could have taken the matter to Catelyn. He did not do that. Instead, he launched invasions of the Riverlands, slaughtered entire towns, and assembled an army on the border for a full scale attack on Riverrun. I find it hilarious that the guy who invaded another kingdom first, who torched entire settlements first, is apparently not responsible for starting the war.

Never said he did. I just said that he repealed reforms that gave smallfolk additional rights for personal gain. Which he did.

I never said Aerys was good. How did he not make sure a great catastrophe didn't happen? Seems more like a do-nothing Hand to me.

Tysha.

Just an estimate going by the descriptions. "Hundreds of thousands" is going by the descriptions of the sack of King's Landing an Gregor's initial raids, which happened many, many times over in the course of the war. The "millions condemned to death" refers to the population of the Riverlands, which just had its crops and stockpiles burned right before the longest winter in a while. They're definitely fucked.

Hewanted to become Hand, and eventually did, so he should have been planning for it. Instead, he made enemies out of most of the continent. Not very Machiavellian.

[Aemond's Eye]

How though? During the years of extensive service the only "self-serving" thing he did was suggesting that Rhaegar could wed Cersei (which would had been a great match politically in so many different ways).

I don't think a self-serving man would spends years in a hugely hostile environment without seemingly gaining anything. Might be Tywin enjoyed the administration of the kingdoms itself.

He attempted to have Tygett named Master Of Arms of the Red Keep; Aerys instead named Ser Willem Darry. Tygett may well have been capable of the position, but I doubt that would be the only reason behind suggesting the appointment. Advancing House Lannister and weakening House Targaryen aren't the same thing.

I doubt that's the only instance of wanting one of his own men appointed to a position at court, just the only one we know about. AWOIAF isn't exactly supposed to be objective about Tywin, so at present I'd say we know very little about what actually went on during his years at court.

Again though, wanting his unlanded knight of a brother - who was a respected warrior - appointed as master-of-arms doesn't inticate that he was plotting anything. It seems a case of trying to advance his brother, but not to a role he was ill suited for. I dare say that for most of his time as Hand pre-Duskendale there was still some lingering friendship with Aerys, and a desire to repair it. Hell, he didn't join the Rebellion until after Rhaegar fell; had Rhaegar won that day then Tywin's host may have joined the loyalists.

I digress though. I don't think it's as black and white as "poor Aerys, plotting Tywin," or "poor Tywin, mean Aerys" the way some do. I think there's shades of grey and layers of relationships there. Ones we may never get the full stories of.

[Lion of the West]

None of that shit would have happened, because Cersei, Jaime, and Joffrey would never have been born. Of course, even if it did happen, the result wouldn't be anywhere near as bloody.

Of course not. Even Stannis's highly disciplined men had a few rapists among them at the Wall. But the fact is, Tywin and co are known widely for their cruelty, while none of the North/Riverlands leaders are ('cept Roose), and we never hear about North war crimes anywhere near as much as Westerlands ones.

It's based on that war and set roughly in the same time period in this universe, so yes, it's entirely valid to bring it up. Tywin walked in because the gates were opened with a fresh army. There shouldn't have actually been a lot of resistance, certainly not enough to justify the murders of thousands if not tens of thousands.

Anyone could do it. A formal declaration of rebellion is an entirely different beast. That would require the Iron Throne to intervene. Or just Kevan, I guess. Crushing the Reynes and Tarbecks was really easy.

Tyrion was arrested because he was suspected of a crime. Tywin could have taken the matter to the king, he could have taken the matter to Ned, or he could have taken the matter to Catelyn. He did not do that. Instead, he launched invasions of the Riverlands, slaughtered entire towns, and assembled an army on the border for a full scale attack on Riverrun. I find it hilarious that the guy who invaded another kingdom first, who torched entire settlements first, is apparently not responsible for starting the war.

Never said he did. I just said that he repealed reforms that gave smallfolk additional rights for personal gain. Which he did.

I never said Aerys was good. How did he not make sure a great catastrophe didn't happen? Seems more like a do-nothing Hand to me.

Tysha.

Just an estimate going by the descriptions. "Hundreds of thousands" is going by the descriptions of the sack of King's Landing an Gregor's initial raids, which happened many, many times over in the course of the war. The "millions condemned to death" refers to the population of the Riverlands, which just had its crops and stockpiles burned right before the longest winter in a while. They're definitely fucked.

He was wanted to become Hand, and eventually did, so he should be planning for it. Instead, he made enemies out of most of the continent. Not very Machiavellian.

1. So Tywin is suddenly responsible for what his children do with their own free will? Is Daeron the Good responsible for Aerys II? I say that basically every human has a free will and is responsible for what they did, not for what others did.

2. Which is because we have anti-Lannister POVs where the Westermen are but no anti-Stark POV in the West. If we get a POV to the West I am confident we'll get to see what the Northmen did in enemy territory, and we've already seen they were not as nice every time in friendly territory.

3. No, the gates were opened and Tywin stormed the city to take advantage of the enemy's blunder. According to Eddard Stark there were thousands of loyalists inside the city when Tywin attacked, but maybe he's lying on Tywin's behalf? Also we don't know the exact numbers of dead. Even a couple of hundreds of people would have been remembered badly, for obivous reasons.

4. I'll tell you what info Tywin had. Robert appoints Eddard Stark as Hand of the King, a very short time after Tyrion is accused of a crime and arrested by Riverland soldiers on the orders of Lady Stark, born a Tully, and then Jaime arrives to tell him that Eddard Stark has confessed that Lady Stark acted on his orders. Then Lady Tully does not take Tyrion as her prisoner to face the King's Justice in King's Landing, where both the king and the Hand is, but takes her in the opposite direction to her sister in the Vale.

What chances do you think that Tywin would have when the Hand is masterminding a kidnapping with the seeming consent and support of three Great Houses?

Don't know about you, but its kind of like Robb coming after Eddard imprisonment to King's Landing with a small following, say a dozen men, to negotiate Eddard's realese. I don't think it would have worked very well for Robb.

5. We don't know what these reforms did nor if it was for personal gain, only that the lords calmed down by their removal.

6. Actually if you read the world book you can find that he ensured that a conflict with the Iron Bank didn't happen in the same way it has happened for Cersei.

7. For the sake of the mods' wishes I'll keep silent

8. So you kind of making it up these numbers, yes? I don't doubt that there were many dead in the war or that many will suffer, but I don't really believe in these numbers.

9. I don't really get what you're trying to tell me. Could you elaborate?

[Humble Maester]

He attempted to have Tygett named Master Of Arms of the Red Keep; Aerys instead named Ser Willem Darry. Tygett may well have been capable of the position, but I doubt that would be the only reason behind suggesting the appointment. Advancing House Lannister and weakening House Targaryen aren't the same thing.

I doubt that's the only instance of wanting one of his own men appointed to a position at court, just the only one we know about. AWOIAF isn't exactly supposed to be objective about Tywin, so at present I'd say we know very little about what actually went on during his years at court.

Again though, wanting his unlanded knight of a brother - who was a respected warrior - appointed as master-of-arms doesn't inticate that he was plotting anything. It seems a case of trying to advance his brother, but not to a role he was ill suited for. I dare say that for most of his time as Hand pre-Duskendale there was still some lingering friendship with Aerys, and a desire to repair it. Hell, he didn't join the Rebellion until after Rhaegar fell; had Rhaegar won that day then Tywin's host may have joined the loyalists.

I digress though. I don't think it's as black and white as "poor Aerys, plotting Tywin," or "poor Tywin, mean Aerys" the way some do. I think there's shades of grey and layers of relationships there. Ones we may never get the full stories of.

Didn't remember that thing about Tygett. I guess that's in-line with Tywin often using his family for positions (even when they were not suitable for the position, like with Stafford).

I do still disagree with that last line, from everything we know so far about Aerys and Tywin I think the only conclusion to draw is that Aerys was a gigantic asshole (belittling Tywin, awarding people for mocking him, insulting Joanna, making fun of Joanna's death etc.). Tywin really had some saintly patience to stay with him for as long as he did.

Edit: On another note people, in my opinion, put too much value on the whole "Pycelle was a Tywin's man, so we can't trust anything says". Pycelle wasn't always Tywin's. There has to be a reason Pycelle started to support Tywin, and I doubt it was just because Tywin was so nice to him. Considering that in Aerys' court the members of the court who mocked Tywin were the ones awarded you'd think it'd be counter-intuitive for Pycelle to support Tywin if he was just some spineless weasel looking for self-promotion (not to mention you don't really go higher than Grand Maester).

My point being, the letters sent by Pycelle pre-Baratheon regime can probably mostly be taken at face-value, he had no motivation to lie to the people at the Citadel, especially for Tywin.

[Red Tiger]

Could Pycelle have been a Lannister before he said his vows?

[Humble Maester]

Could Pycelle have been a Lannister before he said his vows?

I sincerely doubt that. If it was true it'd had come out by now.

Is it impossible for Pycelle to actually care about the realm and think Tywin is the best man for the job without him being family or bribed or something, though? :P

[Red Tiger]

I sincerely doubt that. If it was true it'd had come out by now.

Is it impossible for Pycelle to actually care about the realm and think Tywin is the best man for the job without him being family or bribed or something, though? :P

No, it's not impossible at all. In a brutal, violent feudal society you need a dude like tywin (LIKE Tywin, not necessarily him), but I brought it up cause I could see it as a possibility.

[Aemond's Eye]

Didn't remember that thing about Tygett. I guess that's in-line with Tywin often using his family for positions (even when they were not suitable for the position, like with Stafford).

I do still disagree with that last line, from everything we know so far about Aerys and Tywin I think the only conclusion to draw is that Aerys was a gigantic asshole (belittling Tywin, awarding people for mocking him, insulting Joanna, making fun of Joanna's death etc.). Tywin really had some saintly patience to stay with him for as long as he did.

Edit: On another note people, in my opinion, put too much value on the whole "Pycelle was a Tywin's man, so we can't trust anything says". Pycelle wasn't always Tywin's. There has to be a reason Pycelle started to support Tywin, and I doubt it was just because Tywin was so nice to him. Considering that in Aerys' court the members of the court who mocked Tywin were the ones awarded you'd think it'd be counter-intuitive for Pycelle to support Tywin if he was just some spineless weasel looking for self-promotion (not to mention you don't really go higher than Grand Maester).

My point being, the letters sent by Pycelle pre-Baratheon regime can probably mostly be taken at face-value, he had no motivation to lie to the people at the Citadel, especially for Tywin.

It didn't start out as such though. The more Tywin's influence grew and the more paranoid Aerys became, the more the relationship deteriorated.

Pycelle didn't write AWOIAF though. It's Yandel, and he seems to be rather obviously a Lannister toadie. Which makes sense given who he's writing this history for, but it does mean we shouldn't take it as an objective account of everything he writes about.

[Aemond's Eye]

Didn't remember that thing about Tygett. I guess that's in-line with Tywin often using his family for positions (even when they were not suitable for the position, like with Stafford).

I do still disagree with that last line, from everything we know so far about Aerys and Tywin I think the only conclusion to draw is that Aerys was a gigantic asshole (belittling Tywin, awarding people for mocking him, insulting Joanna, making fun of Joanna's death etc.). Tywin really had some saintly patience to stay with him for as long as he did.

Edit: On another note people, in my opinion, put too much value on the whole "Pycelle was a Tywin's man, so we can't trust anything says". Pycelle wasn't always Tywin's. There has to be a reason Pycelle started to support Tywin, and I doubt it was just because Tywin was so nice to him. Considering that in Aerys' court the members of the court who mocked Tywin were the ones awarded you'd think it'd be counter-intuitive for Pycelle to support Tywin if he was just some spineless weasel looking for self-promotion (not to mention you don't really go higher than Grand Maester).

My point being, the letters sent by Pycelle pre-Baratheon regime can probably mostly be taken at face-value, he had no motivation to lie to the people at the Citadel, especially for Tywin.

It didn't start out as such though. The more Tywin's influence grew and the more paranoid Aerys became, the more the relationship deteriorated. I dunno about saintly patience. I think Joanna may well have played a part in Tywin remaining as Hand, and then after that Tywin was looking to the future with Rhaegar.

Pycelle didn't write AWOIAF though. It's Yandel, and he seems to be rather obviously a Lannister toadie. Which makes sense given who he's writing this history for, but it does mean we shouldn't take it as an objective account of everything he writes about.

[Humble Maester]

No, it's not impossible at all. In a brutal, violent feudal society you need a dude like tywin (LIKE Tywin, not necessarily him), but I brought it up cause I could see it as a possibility.

Well I don't think we have any reason to think that Pycelle is a Lannister. Wyman was very quick to point out his Lannister master and I doubt anyone would had forgotten that the Grand Maester who caused Targaryen's ruin was a Lannister also.

It didn't start out as such though. The more Tywin's influence grew and the more paranoid Aerys became, the more the relationship deteriorated.

Pycelle didn't write AWOIAF though. It's Yandel, and he seems to be rather obviously a Lannister toadie. Which makes sense given who he's writing this history for, but it does mean we shouldn't take it as an objective account of everything he writes about.

I don't think Tywin's influence grew per se (it seems to have actually diminished when the King started actively undermining him), it's just that it took some time for the world to catch up to the fact that Tywin was ruling in King's Landing. So Aerys II pretty much grew bitter over how good a hand he had himself appointed (and that combined with his hereditary madness lead to the downfall of the whole dynasty of course).

I know Pycelle didn't write the book but he seemed to be the primary (pretty much only?) source Yandel had on Aerys II's rule. There are some obvious parts in the books where the whole agenda of the book shows through, but as some people here like to say, it's doubtful GRRM would publish a book full of pro-Lannister lies.

[Red Tiger]

Well I don't think we have any reason to think that Pycelle is a Lannister. Wyman was very quick to point out his Lannister master and I doubt anyone would had forgotten that the Grand Maester who caused Targaryen's ruin was a Lannister also.

This is true, but Pycelle is know for being an especially sneaky toad, plus he is ancient (in his 80's), I am not sure how old that maester at White Harbor was. But yeah, it's unlikely.

I am still curious what House Pycelle was from.

[Humble Maester]

This is true, but Pycelle is know for being an especially sneaky toad, plus he is ancient (in his 80's), I am not sure how old that maester at White Harbor was. But yeah, it's unlikely.

I am still curious what House Pycelle was from.

Yeah me too. He is bound to be from one noble house or another, probably one of the semi-major ones (I think we would had learned if he was from one of the more plot-relevant ones like Tyrell, Lannister or Baratheon, but it seems the Maesters still like to appoint people who are in the upper strata of the society).

[Aemond's Eye]

I don't think Tywin's influence grew per se (it seems to have actually diminished when the King started actively undermining him), it's just that it took some time for the world to catch up to the fact that Tywin was ruling in King's Landing. So Aerys II pretty much grew bitter over how good a hand he had himself appointed (and that combined with his hereditary madness lead to the downfall of the whole dynasty of course).

I know Pycelle didn't write the book but he seemed to be the primary (pretty much only?) source Yandel had on Aerys II's rule. There are some obvious parts in the books where the whole agenda of the book shows through, but as some people here like to say, it's doubtful GRRM would publish a book full of pro-Lannister lies.

Yeah, fair point. It's interesting. If Aerys didn't suffer from depression and paranoia and instead viewed Tywin's success as his own, imagine how different things turn out. I wonder whether their friendship made Aerys' scorn to Tywin worse, or whether he'd have grown bitter more quickly without it.

I don't think the book is full of pro-Lannister lies. There's some obvious brown nosing, and it doesn't seem objective when it gets to Aerys and Tywin's era, but that's it really. I found the "Valyrians avoided Casterly Rock due to a prophecy" a bit eyeball rolling, but that could actually be a prophecy as much as it is questionable.

[Humble Maester]

Yeah, fair point. It's interesting. If Aerys didn't suffer from depression and paranoia and instead viewed Tywin's success as his own, imagine how different things turn out. I wonder whether their friendship made Aerys' scorn to Tywin worse, or whether he'd have grown bitter more quickly without it.

I don't think the book is full of pro-Lannister lies. There's some obvious brown nosing, and it doesn't seem objective when it gets to Aerys and Tywin's era, but that's it really. I found the "Valyrians avoided Casterly Rock due to a prophecy" a bit eyeball rolling, but that could actually be a prophecy as much as it is questionable.

Aerys was clearly charming and ambitious early on (less charming as time went by), with a good Hand he could had achieved great things if he had not grown to fear and hate his Hand. He could had been one of the best kings if he had not been so... mad :P

I do think that the whole Aerys II -era in the books sits pretty well with what we know of Aerys from the books in ASOIAF. But of course this is one of those things one just must agree to disagree as we really can't tell.

[Red Tiger]

Yeah me too. He is bound to be from one noble house or another, probably one of the semi-major ones (I think we would had learned if he was from one of the more plot-relevant ones like Tyrell, Lannister or Baratheon, but it seems the Maesters still like to appoint people who are in the upper strata of the society).

Pycelle Yronwood. Allies with the Lannisters, tells Aerys to open his gates so tywin can come in and kill a Martell princess and her kids.

Okay, that's too morbid.