The Rape of King's Landing: Tywin Lannister and the Gendered Grudge

[Minstral]

40 minutes ago, thelittledragonthatcould said:

That is all very well and good but that is just one of the relevant ways into judging a House. The fact that the Martells are a much newer House that the likes of the Starks, Arryns and Lannisters would count against them as would their rule over an inferior realm. 

The idea that a Prince of a smaller, poorer and weaker realm who owes fealty to a King is somehow better than a Lord of a larger, richer more powerful realm is kind of ridiculous and very few would see it as such. Do you think if Skagos successfully claimed independence then the King of Skagos would be seen to have greater status than the Lord of the North?

In the context of today's system that is. Its a good thing that we reject this type of thinking these days, but it doesn't change the case of this being a historical fact. Common soldiers that killed kings in battle were flayed alive in some instances for the offense because it was a system that was enforced. And your example about Skagos is flawed by the by. It would mean nothing because it would be outside the realm and political structure of the continent, as a part of it their status matters.

40 minutes ago, thelittledragonthatcould said:

Yes, of course they would. They'd still owe fealty to someone else. Both Cat and Renly could see this. Why do you think Cat rejected that deal?

No they would not have the same prestige, and Cat rejected it because she knew that the other party would not accept it. It says a lot about Renly's vision when he doesn't realize that he is essentially creating a suzerainty with more clout to defy him in a generation. Edward the First of England, and one of Tywin's inspirations, tried this with Scotland when he politicked his way into getting the Scottish nobility as "Lord Paramount" of the Scottish king. Well they went to war when he made his demands, he flattened them, and he was never able to adequately enforce his power in the region when he finally died. The Scottish started actually invading Northern England afterward, and part of the reason Edward's son was later overthrown. Not to say that it couldn't be done, but tributaries are not bound to a King in the same way as a direct vassal would be. Renly was giving up more than he knew.

40 minutes ago, thelittledragonthatcould said:

They are just some of the criteria that is used to judge Lords and clearly many Lords will have different reasons for making their judgement. For instance Tywin was not impressed with a Prince and Princess of Dorne marrying his twins and his judgement is just as relevant as Aerys.
 

Not in the case as to whom Rhaegar was going to marry.

40 minutes ago, thelittledragonthatcould said:

And who is claiming that Tywin was outraged by it? I think the truth is that he did not care about it. It was an unfortunate consequence of needing the children dead. It would seem bizarre to punish men he had ordered to murder royal children for raping their mother.

Supposedly Tywin himself if you were to believe his own words, though I don't. "The Rape...Even you will not accuse me of giving that command, I would hope". (I know this is not directed at me, but I'll give my two cents here). 

[Lord Varys]

While I find the idea in itself intriguing I find it difficult to espouse it without more exact knowledge about Tywin's movement.

I completely agree that Tywin most likely did not forget to mention Princess Elia in his commands, but I do believe that he was indeed very worried about Jaime and feared what Aerys might do.

In that sense Tywin's top priority should have been to find Jaime and Aerys and ensure that his son and heir was safe. In addition, we also have to keep in mind that there were battles fought in the streets of KL during the Sack. There were Targaryens loyalists in the city who may not have given up so quickly.

If we go with the reasonable assumption that Tywin wasn't putting himself in any danger (i.e. he was not leading the men who pressed on to the Red Keep) then it is easily imaginable that he was occupied elsewhere in the city not the castle. He might even be forced to treat/deal with Ned Stark or his representatives considering that they seemed to have arrived very shortly after the Sack.

But we don't know how much time passed during all that or how long Jaime sat the Iron Throne after he had killed Aerys. However, we do know that Jaime was under the impression that Maegor's Holdfast was not yet fallen when Tywin's men found him in the throne room. One would assume that Tywin would have gone straight to Aerys/Jaime and not taken his time to go to Maegor's first.

[thelittledragonthatcould]

3 hours ago, Minstral said:

In the context of today's system that is. Its a good thing that we reject this type of thinking these days, but it doesn't change the case of this being a historical fact. Common soldiers that killed kings in battle were flayed alive in some instances for the offense because it was a system that was enforced. And your example about Skagos is flawed by the by. It would mean nothing because it would be outside the realm and political structure of the continent, as a part of it their status matters.

Of course it means something. Say Skagos successfully won independence from the North and remained a client kingdom of the Targrayens would the Prince of Skagos carry more prestige than the Lord of the North?

Quote

No they would not have the same prestige, and Cat rejected it because she knew that the other party would not accept it.

Of course it would carry the same prestige as Robb would still be a subordinate to Renly no matter if he was a Lord of the North, King of the North or Grand Supreme Emperor of the North.

Quote

It says a lot about Renly's vision when he doesn't realize that he is essentially creating a suzerainty with more clout to defy him in a generation.

Renly was well aware of what he was doing as we have seen that the rulers of Dorne are no more powerful amongst their people despite being called 'Princes' than the Starks are amongst theirs.

Your point would make more sense if Westeros started of as one Kingdom and the different principalities came after, but they didn't and the realms within Westeros have not changed.

 

Quote

Not in the case as to whom Rhaegar was going to marry.

With regards to a mad King who was paranoid of making Tywin even more powerful? Yes, lets abandon all logic and let Aerys dictate what we regard as a powerful House.

Quote

Supposedly Tywin himself if you were to believe his own words, though I don't. "The Rape...Even you will not accuse me of giving that command, I would hope". (I know this is not directed at me, but I'll give my two cents here). 

Where is he claiming to be outraged?

He is pointing out that he did not order Elia's death as their was simply no need for it. He has no problem admitting that he ordered the death of two defenceless children, which personally I find the worse crime. But he is clearly not outraged he seemed more surprised

[Humble Maester]

6 hours ago, Minstral said:

And the status as to whom are social betters in regards to medieval titles ans station have nothing to do with the power. The elected Doge of a Italian Republic would still be considered a commoner to the continental princes, and a king still holds social rank to a lord/duke that commands more wealth and soldiers than him. In this setting the Lord paramount are all of equal rank, with the Wardens holding a little bit extra prestige due to their other tittles. This social structure does not take into account your list of favorite to least favorite, and the social status of the Martells, whom kept their pre-conquest status as sovereign Prince/Princesses of Dorne carries a lot more prestige from houses that lost their royal status. It would be like comparing the Prince of Wales to a Duke.

You may be correct insofar that nominally a Prince of Dorne could have a higher position in protocol than Lord of Westerlands, though even that is debatable, as they are both direct vassals of the King, thus both being one notch below the King in the hierarchy of the nobility.

To make the definition of prestige clear:

Quote

Prestige : the respect and admiration that someone or something gets for being successful or important (Merriam-Webster).

As has been stated earlier, though, position in protocol is only one way to judge which lord is "the better". A Prince of Dorne may (or may not) as a title carry more prestige but a Lord of Westerland will more than offset that prestige by the prestige one gets from greater power and riches. Generally a marriage alliance with the Lannisters is worth so much more than one with the Martells, not to mention prestige is very much a personal quality, Tytos had very little of it (so little that he came close to losing his only claim to prestige, his title), while Tywin had abudance of it, more than Doran at the very least (considering Tywin was one of the victors of the Robert's Rebellion, and his daughter was the Queen, while Doran mostly isolated himself from the rest of the realm).

 

Not that you made this point, I believe, but I think its clear that Aerys snubbed Cersei for a good part because he was most likely the most abusive former-friend-turned-tormenter the series has seen. That was at least no showing of a difference of prestige between Lannisters and the Martells.

[FrostyDornishman]

I have to agree with (what I think is) the majority opinion here -- I don't get the sense that Tywin did what he did because he held gendered grudges.  He wasn't much more misogynistic than any other man in the series.  And I really don't think he was present for Elia's rape, let alone made sure he had a front-row seat.

His explanation to Tyrion of the Sack of King's Landing has to be completely discarded as a lie if we are to believe he knew or approved of what Clegane and Lorch did.  He very clearly and candidly states that:

• It was done too brutally, Lorch is an idiot for his handling of Rhaenys, and Elia didn't need to be harmed at all
• He was more worried about the Stark army and Jamie's fate than what was happening to the royal family
• He did not order the rape, and he didn't know what Clegane was capable of

For your theory to be right, some of these have to be lies.  Why would Tywin lie to Tyrion at this point?  Why would GRRM hide the truth from us?  Tywin's long dead now, so if the real story and Tywin's real views on women differ from the points above how are we going to find out about it?

Tywin was a cold, calculating man that did not shy away from brutality when needed.  Some of that brutality was directed at women, sure, but the nature of their treatment had more to do with their station than with their gender.  Ellyn Tarbeck was a rebel lady, so she was besieged and her castle put to the torch.  Tytos's mistress and Tysha were common-born consorts to Lannisters that humiliated Tywin and his vision of his house.  In his eyes they were whores (and I don't think many of his contemporaries would've disagreed), and they were treated like whores according to their (perceived) station.

[The Wolves]

34 minutes ago, FrostyDornishman said:

I have to agree with (what I think is) the majority opinion here -- I don't get the sense that Tywin did what he did because he held gendered grudges.  He wasn't much more misogynistic than any other man in the series.  And I really don't think he was present for Elia's rape, let alone made sure he had a front-row seat.

His explanation to Tyrion of the Sack of King's Landing has to be completely discarded as a lie if we are to believe he knew or approved of what Clegane and Lorch did.  He very clearly and candidly states that:

• It was done too brutally, Lorch is an idiot for his handling of Rhaenys, and Elia didn't need to be harmed at all
• He was more worried about the Stark army and Jamie's fate than what was happening to the royal family
• He did not order the rape, and he didn't know what Clegane was capable of

For your theory to be right, some of these have to be lies.  Why would Tywin lie to Tyrion at this point?  Why would GRRM hide the truth from us?  Tywin's long dead now, so if the real story and Tywin's real views on women differ from the points above how are we going to find out about it?

Tywin was a cold, calculating man that did not shy away from brutality when needed.  Some of that brutality was directed at women, sure, but the nature of their treatment had more to do with their station than with their gender.  Ellyn Tarbeck was a rebel lady, so she was besieged and her castle put to the torch.  Tytos's mistress and Tysha were common-born consorts to Lannisters that humiliated Tywin and his vision of his house.  In his eyes they were whores (and I don't think many of his contemporaries would've disagreed), and they were treated like whores according to their (perceived) station.

Tywin probably ordered Elia to be raped and murdered he's evil and petty like that. 

And yeah he would lie to Tyrion in that same conversation he was trying to reprimend Tyrion for thinking he would order a rape on someone when he not only ordered a rape he ordered a gangrape on a 13 year old girl. 

Plus Tywin knew exactly what Gregor was capable of that's why he sent him to murder a baby. He's heard the rumors probably had small folk at Casterly Rock telling of the atrocities he's been doing yet because of the damage and fear Gregor spreads Tywin keeps him around. 

[FrostyDornishman]

2 hours ago, The Wolves said:

Tywin probably ordered Elia to be raped and murdered he's evil and petty like that. 

I agree that he's pretty devious, and I suppose he's "petty" in the sense that he doesn't allow for any slights to his honor or his house.  But Elia is not threatening or insulting him.  Tywin says himself that Elia doesn't pose a threat to Robert like her children do -- she doesn't need to be killed because she can't inherit the throne.  Killing/raping her is only a negative in Tywin's book, so I think from his perspective that logic is sound.

2 hours ago, The Wolves said:

And yeah he would lie to Tyrion in that same conversation he was trying to reprimend Tyrion for thinking he would order a rape on someone when he not only ordered a rape he ordered a gangrape on a 13 year old girl. 

Like I said, Tywin treated Tysha that way because in his eyes she was no better than a whore that threatened the honor of his house.  Elia was not, so I don't see why Tywin would act towards her with any sort of personal spite.  Also, Elia was the princess of Dorne, a much beloved member of a powerful house.  Even if Tywin wanted to hurt her, he would probably think twice about having her raped/murdered because of the repercussions.  Not to mention, she's harmless (see bolded above).  Tysha was a commoner, a nobody, and her gang-rape had no negative political repercussions for House Lannister.

Also, at no point in the chapter does Tyrion say or think "I think you're lying when you say you didn't order Elia's rape".  He clearly thinks Tywin ordered the murders, and Tywin does not deny that, but Tywin denies the order for the rape twice (I think) and Tyrion doesn't protest at all.  So I don't think Tywin is lying, and I don't think even Tyrion thinks he is.

2 hours ago, The Wolves said:

Plus Tywin knew exactly what Gregor was capable of that's why he sent him to murder a baby. He's heard the rumors probably had small folk at Casterly Rock telling of the atrocities he's been doing yet because of the damage and fear Gregor spreads Tywin keeps him around. 

Tywin flat-out says the only thing he knew about Clegane at that point was that he was "huge and terrible in battle" or something like that.  There are rumors that Gregor's been going terrible stuff before the sack of KL, but how are you sure Tywin's heard about it all?  How do you know Tywin picks him specifically because of his brutality and not just his strength?  Where's the textual evidence?  Based on the evidence I see, Tywin doesn't know how crazy and terrifying Clegane is until after KL.

I still don't think Tywin lies to Tyrion at all in that chapter, because he has no real reason to and it would be very confusing for the reader (e.g., this thread).

[Chaircat Meow]

I disagree with this thesis.

To begin I don't think Varys' line about Elia crying a certain name proves anything. Varys could have meant Gregor or Tywin, it is true, but if the name Elia cried was Tywin that doesn't mean Tywin was physically present himself. Elia would have known what was about to happen to her and her children was Tywin's doing and that it was going to be carried out by his goons.

A lot of the rest of the OP's text doesn't really prove Tywin was obsessed with punishing women. As far as I can see there is no gender element to his treatment of Lady Tarbeck. She was a rebel so he got rid of her, like he got rid of her brothers.

Now we come to the most important element in this: Tywin's discussion with Tyrion about his motivations. Most people, I think, misinterpret this scene somewhat. They assume Tywin is lying because he wants to appear as a hard political realist while actually being a petty crazy guy. However, Tywin is really only concerned that Tyrion will have a fit of conscience while dealing with the Red Viper, or with Sansa (Tyrion has not yet consummated the marriage and Tywin wants him to), and play up. So Tywin pretends that some of the brutality involved in the sack of the city, and the Red Wedding, was not intended by him. It almost certainly was, but not necessarily for the reasons people assume. There was an obvious reason to kill Elia (she's a witness to the crime/she'll inflame Dornish opinion too much if she goes back home) and to kill most of the Stark army outside of the Twins (they might fight the Boltons even if their king is dead).

Finally Tywin's line about 'surely, even I wouldn't give that order,' is intended as a jab at Tyrion about the status of his wife. Tywin has certainly not forgotten about Tysha: we see repeatedly that he wants Tyrion to remember that. But by protesting that even Tyrion couldn't think he'd have Elia raped he is hammering home the point that Tysha wasn't fit for marriage to Tyrion as she was a commoner, not a princess of Dorne. In Tywin's mind there is a world of difference between what happened to Tysha and Elia, on account of Tysha's lowly status and he thinks Tyrion needs to have this fact rubbed in his face as often as possible.

 

[Ygrain]

On 25. 4. 2016 at 9:18 PM, TheSeason said:

Lol! I'm sorry, I wasn't clear. I'm not arguing Tywin scaled the keep himself. I'm arguing that Clegane, Lorch, and their garrisons did it to breach the keep. They then threw open the doors to Tywin and his honor guard when it was secured in Lannister possession, so Tywin could oversee the brutality in the nursery. He still uses proxies here, but watches (as he bore witness to Tysha's gang-rape, orchestrating it).

Lol, I wasn't sure :-) Though, I must say that I find the image of Tywin holding onto the rope and kicking his legs pretty hilarious

On 25. 4. 2016 at 9:18 PM, TheSeason said:

And indeed I am also arguing that Tywin lost out on his chance to claim the throne because his need was so strong. What Tyrion says to Varys, about how his father says wise men don't let sentiment get in the way of ambition... is ironic in this light. Tywin did let sentiment (hatred, need for vengeance, gendered grudge needs) get in the way of his ambition on that day. It is a crucial authorial punishment, a meta-textual argument that the bad guys don't win, even when at first it looks like they do.

Yeah, it would be a lovely irony - I would pay in gold to see Tywin's face, if this scenario really is what took place!

On 25. 4. 2016 at 9:18 PM, TheSeason said:

I don't think Tywin is the coldly, perfectly rational person he wants people to believe he is. He's extremely petty and insecure, with a disproportionate vengeance in mind for those who trigger his feelings of inadequacy. Those people are women.

100% agree. He is the guy who puts up an act of seeing whores not worthy of his penis, and then has a tunnel built so that he could visit a brothel. Classy indeed. What a hypocrite.

On 25. 4. 2016 at 9:18 PM, TheSeason said:

A perfectly plausible explanation! I do like the narrative symmetry of this being an inverse example. That is, Rhaegar cries Lyanna's name on the Trident (someone he loved?) and Elia identifies her raper and killer.

Ugh. How cruel to poor Elia...

 

One more thing: when Tywin says that Elia didn't have to die, he lies. You don't let witnesses alive, especially if they have powerful and vengeful brothers. With Elia dead, all that Doran and Oberyn have are whispers and rumours, no proof. There is no way Elia could have been allowed to survive her murdered children.

[VeryLittleGravitasIndeed]

On 27/04/2016 at 7:04 PM, Ygrain said:

 

100% agree. He is the guy who puts up an act of seeing whores not worthy of his penis, and then has a tunnel built so that he could visit a brothel. Classy indeed. What a hypocrite.

 

 

No, Tywin's never specifically against whoring - he is firmly against emotional attachments to the lower classes. 

It should be noted that he never actually forbids Tyrion from actually whoring but from keeping a specific whore as a lover because he rightly thinks that will impact Tyrion's commitment to House Lannister (he's right since Tyrion threatens to whip Tommen if something happens to Shae).

On 27/04/2016 at 7:04 PM, Ygrain said:

One more thing: when Tywin says that Elia didn't have to die, he lies. You don't let witnesses alive, especially if they have powerful and vengeful brothers. With Elia dead, all that Doran and Oberyn have are whispers and rumours, no proof. There is no way Elia could have been allowed to survive her murdered children.

Except Tywin proudly admitted to ordering the killing of the Targaryen children in front of half the Lords Paramount and a lot of the important nobles when he presented their corpses in Lannister red.

Tywin would have more leverage on Doran and Oberyn with Elia alive rather than dead but Dorne isn't powerful enough to confront Tywin in any case.

 

On to the main topic: why do people think Tywin actually cares all that much about gender?

Ellyn Tarbeck died due to a good shot from a catapult. Lord Tarbeck had his head cut off despite being a prisoner and all his male relatives were executed while some of thr girls were sent to the Silent Sisters. The Reyne family was drowned without any cares for gender.

This fits with Tywin's statements of family being all that matters - he wiped the defying families clean for rebellion. Gender doesn't get into it.

Then there's the Sack of King's Landing where he sent Gregor and Lorch to kill the Targaryen children, not just kill the women.

Once again Tywin's actions are gender blind and family inclusive - proving that he doesn't care about sex when exterminating enemies.

On the other hand Tywin struck Tytos when he married his sister to a Frey and promised to make Cersei queen, both actions showing equal commitment to the well being of Lannisters regardless of gender (note that Tywin equates happiness with social status - but I'll get into that later).

 

 

Secondly Cersei's walk of shame is viewed as some sort of revenge perpetrated by Kevan when nothing in the text supports that. Kevan himself views the punishment as humiliating but not permanently harmful.

Quote

"It had to be," Ser Kevan muttered over the last of his wine. His High Holiness had to be appeased. Tommen needed the Faith behind him in the battles to come. And Cersei… the golden child had grown into a vain, foolish, greedy woman. Left to rule, she would have ruined Tommen as she had Joffrey.

Outside the wind was rising, clawing at the shutters of his chamber. Ser Kevan pushed himself to his feet. Time to face the lioness in her den. We have pulled her claws. Jaime, though… But no, he would not brood on that.

The High Sparrow undoubtedly wants Cersei dead. Mace Tyrell had to be reminded that if Cersei loses the trial by combat then Margaery's queenship is in danger. Kevan could only soften the punishment Cersei received to something that isn't physical. Recall this bit of conversation:

Quote

"No," she said, more sharply. "I would sooner die."

Ser Kevan was unmoved. "If that is your wish, you may soon have it granted….

Kevan isn't talking about abstracts since Cersei already knows about the trial by combat. He's saying if Cersei doesn't lose her power and gets at least some punishment then Mace Tyrell and the High Sparrow are unlikely to wait till the trial and he can't do anything ablut it. He's already softened the blow as much he could.

 

TL;DR: Tywin isn't sexist (except viewing for societal gender roles as normal which is true for every Westerosi) but spreads out punishments and rewards equally. He is however highly classist, doing more than his fair share of oppressing the smallfolk.

 

[Tanngrisnir]

Hm, a lot of people here write, that Tywin does not treat woman differently than men. 

If Cersi had run off with a commoner- what would the consequences for him have been? I think he would have found him, very likely torturing him some and than killed him. I very much doubt, that this punishment would have had a sexual element. He would not have had that man raped multiple times. 

If it was not Tywins father with a mistress, but Tywins mother with a lover- I very much doubt that the punishment for him would have been a naked walk of shame. 

Of course you can argue that he treated them like that because he saw them as whores, or that he treated them like this because of how Westrosi society sees women in general but the fact remains, that Tywin would treat woman differently than men in the same situation. 

And what he did to Tysha goes beyond anything imaginable. This was not just treating her like a whore and showing Tyrion what she "really" is. This was severe sexual punishment, a thing that you usually direct specifically towards women to humiliate them. 

[thelittledragonthatcould]

5 minutes ago, Tanngrisnir said:

Hm, a lot of people here write, that Tywin does not treat woman differently than men. 

Well that is to be expected. It is a sexist society, men are treated much differently to women to begin with.

5 minutes ago, Tanngrisnir said:

If Cersi had run off with a commoner- what would the consequences for him have been? I think he would have found him, very likely torturing him some and than killed him. I very much doubt, that this punishment would have had a sexual element. He would not have had that man raped multiple times. 

No, but she would have lived while he tortured (maybe even sexually) and killed. Disagree with me all you like but death is a harsher punishment than death.

As for the gangrape, it was Tywin's crass lesson to show Tyrion that he could have had any 'whore' without having to marry them or even become emotionally dependent on.

5 minutes ago, Tanngrisnir said:

If it was not Tywins father with a mistress, but Tywins mother with a lover- I very much doubt that the punishment for him would have been a naked walk of shame. 

Of course not. If he was a peasant and was ordering nobles and stealing Tytos' belongings he too would have been killed or sent to the Wall. The Walk of Shame is the lesser punishment.

Again this seems to a society punishment rather than Tywin getting sexual kicks out of it. Or are you suggesting that Kevan, the High Septon and even the Septas were all getting a sexual kick out of Cersei's walk of shame?

All the self-seekers who had named themselves her friends and cultivated her favor had abandoned her quickly enough when Tywin had her stripped naked and paraded through Lannisport to the docks, like a common whore. Though no man laid a hand on her, that walk spelled the end of her power. Surely Tywin would never have dreamed that same fate awaited his own golden daughter.

And the Walk of Shame seems to be designed to strip women of their sexuality, the major weapon women are told they have in Westeros society.

5 minutes ago, Tanngrisnir said:

Of course you can argue that he treated them like that because he saw them as whores, or that he treated them like this because of how Westrosi society sees women in general but the fact remains, that Tywin would treat woman differently than men in the same situation. 

Yes. He treated them better than their male counterparts.

5 minutes ago, Tanngrisnir said:

And what he did to Tysha goes beyond anything imaginable. This was not just treating her like a whore and showing Tyrion what she "really" is. This was severe sexual punishment, a thing that you usually direct specifically towards women to humiliate them. 

 

It was disgusting. No one is claiming anything different. But the punishment/lesson was (mostly) for Tyrion not Tysha. He would never have done the same had Tysha's last name been Brax or Crakehall. Lannisters don't marry peasants and 13 year old Tyrion had to be taught that.

 

 

[Ygrain]

18 hours ago, VeryLittleGravitasIndeed said:

 

No, Tywin's never specifically against whoring - he is firmly against emotional attachments to the lower classes. 

It should be noted that he never actually forbids Tyrion from actually whoring but from keeping a specific whore as a lover because he rightly thinks that will impact Tyrion's commitment to House Lannister (he's right since Tyrion threatens to whip Tommen if something happens to Shae).

You are an ill-made, devious, disobedient, spiteful little creature full of envy, lust, and low cunning. Men’s laws give you the right to bear my name and display my colors, since I cannot prove that you are not mine. To teach me humility, the gods have condemned me to watch you waddle about wearing that proud lion that was my father’s sigil and his father’s before him. But neither gods nor men shall ever compel me to let you turn Casterly Rock into your whorehouse.

In other words, Tyrion's whoring is something that Tywin holds against him.

Quote

Except Tywin proudly admitted to ordering the killing of the Targaryen children in front of half the Lords Paramount and a lot of the important nobles when he presented their corpses in Lannister red.

He did no such thing. The city was sacked brutally, the castle was taken. Shit happens at such times, and unless Tywin actually says that he did, or someone points a finger, he can always deny giving such an order. People might know better, but without an eye witness to the killings, he can always deny responsibility, just like our dear spitlicker Yandel is trying to convince us that it was Aerys' order or even Elia's own doing.

Quote

Tywin would have more leverage on Doran and Oberyn with Elia alive rather than dead but Dorne isn't powerful enough to confront Tywin in any case.

And since Dorne isn't powerful enough, Tywin doesn't need any leverage.

[thelittledragonthatcould]

54 minutes ago, Ygrain said:

You are an ill-made, devious, disobedient, spiteful little creature full of envy, lust, and low cunning. Men’s laws give you the right to bear my name and display my colors, since I cannot prove that you are not mine. To teach me humility, the gods have condemned me to watch you waddle about wearing that proud lion that was my father’s sigil and his father’s before him. But neither gods nor men shall ever compel me to let you turn Casterly Rock into your whorehouse.

In other words, Tyrion's whoring is something that Tywin holds against him.

Yes. That much is obvious when Tyrion threatened Tywin's grandchildren over a whore.

"Your sister told me of your threats against my grandsons." Lord Tywin's voice was colder than ice. "Did she lie?"

Tyrion would not deny it. "I made threats, yes. To keep Alayaya safe. So the Kettleblacks would not misuse her."

"To save a whore's virtue, you threatened your own House, your own kin? Is that the way of it?"

 

Consorting with whores is not the problem, allowing them to rule like Tytos did or willing to harm your own family for them like Tyrion was willing to do is the problem.

As a Lannister (or any Westerosi noble really) you are expected to put the interests of your own House above that of outside interests.

Tywin was entirely right to call it a weakness in Tyrion, it was. But Tywin does not have a problem with whores but making them a co-ruler.

[Humble Maester]

1 hour ago, Ygrain said:

You are an ill-made, devious, disobedient, spiteful little creature full of envy, lust, and low cunning. Men’s laws give you the right to bear my name and display my colors, since I cannot prove that you are not mine. To teach me humility, the gods have condemned me to watch you waddle about wearing that proud lion that was my father’s sigil and his father’s before him. But neither gods nor men shall ever compel me to let you turn Casterly Rock into your whorehouse.

In other words, Tyrion's whoring is something that Tywin holds against him.

Yet again, not Tyrion's whoring per se but the way Tyrion whores. Using the services of prostitutes seems to be fairly normal and only rigid men like Stannis would actually think of forbidding it. Turning Casterly Rock into a whorehouse would imply that Tyrion would do just what Tywin has forbidden him not to, give prostitutes a very visible role in how he presents himself as a Lannister. It's one thing to go to Chataya's discreetly, another to bring mock-girlfriend prostitutes to the high halls of your House (that's pretty much what Tytos did, though of course his lovers were not actual prostitutes but they did get material advantages for their part).

And you should remember that whole tirade is Tywin pretty much blowing up on Tyrion's face. He is trying to paint as bad a stereotypical picture he can of Tyrion. I don't really think Tywin was worried that Tyrion would turn Casterly Rock into a whorehouse for himself, at very least.

1 hour ago, Ygrain said:

He did no such thing. The city was sacked brutally, the castle was taken. Shit happens at such times, and unless Tywin actually says that he did, or someone points a finger, he can always deny giving such an order. People might know better, but without an eye witness to the killings, he can always deny responsibility, just like our dear spitlicker Yandel is trying to convince us that it was Aerys' order or even Elia's own doing.

It's true that the lack of witnesses does give an opportunity to Lannister partisans to spin the events. But do you honestly think that Tywin presenting the murdered Targaryen children in his houses' own colors for the whole world to see does not strongly imply that he was taking responsibility for the act? He was after all for all intents and purposes rewarded for what he had ordered done.

I'd say everyone was well aware, due to Tywin's own actions, that Tywin was responsible for their deaths. What was not known was the details (who did what, what were the exact orders, etc.). If Tywin had wanted his guilt to remain more of a secret he would had let Robert or Ned discover the death children and Elia afterwards, and/or made some excuses that they were like that when he found them. Not that anyone would had believed it but it would had added another layer of deniability.

1 hour ago, Ygrain said:

And since Dorne isn't powerful enough, Tywin doesn't need any leverage.

It is always better to have leverage than have none at all. It was a real possibility that Dorne would had continued a futileish struggle against the throne, in which Tywin was now invested in. Tywin and what he had was not in immediate danger but Dorne could had remained a thorn in the collective sides of the rest of the kingdom.

Luckily for Tywin, Doran's strategy was "we'll wait and see until everyone who harmed our house will die off with little action from us at all". Well except for the Mountain, but trading Oberyn for Gregor was not a good trade (by Oberyn).

[cyberdirectorfreedom]

On 4/25/2016 at 4:14 AM, TheSeason said:

Fair enough. We disagree there, because I see no evidence that this was Kevan's reasoning for giving the High Sparrow the idea. Nor can I accept that this foul treatment could ever be "for [a woman's] safety." It is only harmful. There is no upside to it, nor worth in it.

What "other reasons" do you mean, though?

I agree that Kevan, unlike Tywin took no pleasure from this. Perhaps he expected he would, having Tywin for an example, and was horrified by what he'd done and confused that Tywin's tactics had somehow "failed" him. Thus, all the guilt he tries to deny.

 

The Walk was helpful to Cersei, in the way that it was a show of faith (so to say) to the High Septon, to prove that Cersei was willing to atone, for the sins she has committed. If ever Cersei will be cleared of her crimes, it will be at the discretion of the High Septon; he had to be appeased, as I believe Kevan broods upon, himself.

The other reasons I referred to were his less noble reasons of having Cersei take the Walk. To get her away from Tommen, so he won't turn into another Joffrey, to pull Cersei's claws. I believe he truly wanted to help Cersei, but that wasn't his only reason, is what I meant to say; though I still don't believe he wanted any kind of revenge.

On 4/25/2016 at 4:14 AM, TheSeason said:

But what was there to "lead" and oversee? It was a sack, the city fallen by treachery, not by battle. It was mass looting, rape, and murder... purely for the "joy" of it. The only events of worth to oversee were happening in the Red Keep--the murder of Aerys (Jaime took care of that, with Lannister forces to witness the end of it, so the Red Keep was breached and Elia had retreated to Maegor's Holdfast) and of Rhaenys and Aegon (Gregor and Amory scaled the Holdfast, likely amongst their garrison, so as to breach it. Once it was breached, any rebel could stroll right in, safely.).

Perhaps there wasn't anything to oversee, exactly, but a city isn't the safest place to be, when it's being sacked. There was fighting in the city, from the loyalists that remained there; we don't know the casualties on the Lannister side, but I'm incredibly confident when I say they were more than zero. People on both sides died, and what a waste it would have been if one of them was Lord Tywin; I don't see why he'd risk it. So, yes, the important events were happening in the Red Keep, but Tywin had sent men there, there was no need for him to be there personally. Needlessly dangerous, I would say.

 

On 4/25/2016 at 4:14 AM, TheSeason said:

As for Clegane, why do you believe he was "worthy" of a royal dubbing, if not as political favor to Tywin? Do you believe Tywin never heard any rumors about Clegane, and sought him out to be one of his "beasts" of war, to inspire terror to his (Tywin's) foes? Looking forward to your answers. Clegane has been something of a sticking point for me.

Honestly, I'm not sure why Ser Gregor was knighted by Rhaegar, but I don't think Tywin had anything to do with it. If Tywin wanted Gregor to be Ser Gregor, he could've simply knighted him personally, being a knight himself. Large, powerful men who kill well get knighted all the time; I don't think it would be anything more than that.

Now, do I think Tywin had heard rumours? Yes, I do, and I think that is why he was sent to kill the Royal children; he must have believed that Clegane wouldn't shrink away from such a duty, else he would not have sent him. He knew what he had in Clegane, a beast, but he didn't know quite how bestial the man could be, until after the sack. He knew he had a man who could kill children, but he didn't know he had a man who would crush a baby's head and rape his mother moments later. And no man could know that, from hearing a few (possibly baseless) rumours.

On 4/25/2016 at 4:14 AM, TheSeason said:

I speak to this under my general remarks. Elia and her children personify Aerys's insult and rejection of Lannister stock as unworthy and beneath royalty (sub-standard breed) whereas his choice of Elia reminds Tywin and reinforces that the Martells--being royalty in their own right--really are his betters, and that the matches he rejected for his own children were "marrying beneath" for the Martells (done for love of Joanna, and not because her children were truly worthy of the honor).

On 4/25/2016 at 4:14 AM, TheSeason said:

Also, yes, Tywin is a misogynist not only an elitist, but sometimes these feelings are tangled together and very complex (Tytos's Mistress and Tysha, for example). He is a through-and-through chauvinist. The only equals he appears to have sought out were House Targaryen (Aerys, Rhaegar)--who were actually his betters. The difference between House Martell (Elia and Oberyn were fantastic matches for his children, and in fact were his social betters, too; he rejected them because he could not stand that fact) and House Targaryen is the apotheosis of House Targaryen, and the cult of personality built up around "the dragonkings and dragonlords." Aerys not only insulted Tywin, his House and legacy when rejecting Cersei, he also doubled-down on that insult and injury with the selection of Elia Martell for Rhaegar (who was "the dragon amongst dragons" so to speak), by reminding Tywin that Elia and her House in fact were his betters (royalty in their own right, not grasping, social-climbing nobility--that is, what Tywin so hated about Ellyn Reyne Tarbeck was a quality he shared with her and most likely despised in himself, thus the obsession with his "legacy.").

 

See, I don't think that Tywin believes that the Martells are his betters. Consciously or subconsciously. Sure, they kept their snazzy little titles, but it's meaningless. The Martell children weren't bad matches for his children, it's true, but Tywin wanted the best, and the Martells aren't even close to that. It was foolish for Aerys to pass Cersei over for Elia. It may have been intended as an insult to Tywin, but I don't think that Tywin would take any offense with Elia, when the insult is entirely Aerys's doing. The "servants daughter" remark, to me, isn't a jab at the fact that Tywin is a "mere" noble, not Royalty, but because Tywin is actually Aerys's servant, being his Hand. Had Elia's father been Hand, I think he'd feel the same (well, he was paranoid about Tywin getting more power than him (especially after the remarks from Ser Ilyn Payne), so that's the real reason for the rejection, in my view, but the point stands that it's not because of lack of Royalty).

On 4/25/2016 at 4:14 AM, TheSeason said:

Tywin normalized his behavior and his younger siblings, who thought he could do no wrong, ate it up. The reader shouldn't normalize this behavior, though. No one "deserves" to be treated like that. And the "punishments" are always disproportionate to the "crime" (bruising Tywin's ego). Also notice that it is always "the woman's fault" for the poor choices men make... some uppity, grasping, whorish woman always "seduces" the man into his plight and must be punished for her scheming (even in your answer you imply such a dynamic in his thoughts) as an example to other "low" women like her, who might get ideas, seduce her betters, and forget her place. The women are the threat simply by their womanhood (and sexuality), and the men they seduce out of their good sense are all the victims of their womanly wiles. This is the Madonna-Whore Complex at work.

I spoke of what "gendered grudge" means above, so please refer there.

It isn't always the woman's fault, but some uppity, grasping whorish woman did seduce Lord Tytos. And Tywin (not too unreasonably) felt that she should be punished for her scheming. Did the punishment have to be what it was? Perhaps not, but Tywin felt a fitting punishment would be to show the world (the mistress included) that she was not something special, that she was just some common whore. He could've killed her, and nobody would have cared.

"Vain and proud she was, before," she remembered one guard saying, "so haughty you'd think she'd forgot she come from dirt. Once we got her clothes off her, though, she was just another whore."

The same thing with Tysha; she seduced Tyrion (perhaps you don't think it happened this way, perhaps you think that Tysha actually cared about Tyrion, but think of it from Tywin's view) then married him, going from the lowest sort of commoner to the highest sort of noblewoman in a moment. Tywin's punishment was to take away her false sense of worth; now, she wasn't truly a whore, just a gold-digger, but if she wants to act like a whore, Tywin was determined to treat her like one. The punishment was over the top, certainly, but the punishment was mostly for Tyrion.

Now, these two women were the threat, and they were dangerous because they were women. They did seduce their respective men; Tytos was pliable because he was weak, and Tyrion because he was young and naive. This doesn't mean, however, that Tywin would view all such situations in this light; just these ones.

So, yeah, I misunderstood what you meant by "gendered grudge", but I still don't see it. These punishments were to because the offenders were women; they were women who committed their crimes using their sexuality, so that was an aspect of their punishment. Not because they were women, because they were common, whorish women.

But no other time was Tywin attacking women in a sexual manner; there was nothing sexual about his dealings with Ellyn Rayne, and I've stated already my view that it was Gregor Clegane who perpetrated the act against Elia, with no input about such a thing from Tywin.

On 4/25/2016 at 4:14 AM, TheSeason said:

Elia was raped (most likely by a man she didn't know, or are you arguing that she knew him on sight) and a rapist is not a "lover" whose name a survivor would "cry" out, so I'm uncertain what you mean here.

We disagree, however, about how Varys meant this statement, but I do see how you reached your conclusion, and it is a fair point. I cannot refute it without more information about that day (the sack).

 Seems I wasn't clear. I wasn't suggesting that Tywin was "the sworn man" but that two conversations are taking place at once (one about Gregor and one about Tywin) on two levels (one in-narrative for character and reader both, one authorial commentary for solely the reader; Martin does this quite a lot). Both conversations can be read straight, without overlap, as well as read together, with overlap.

What I meant was that Elia may well have said nothing. When Varys said that she "cried a certain name", he could well have said that she "was raped by a certain man", and he would have meant the same thing. It was just a more flowery way to say what he meant. At least, that's how I see that conversation.

The sworn man part of the conversation is referring directly to the last thing Tyrion said. I'll quote it, for clarity:

Varys gave him a shrewd look. "My little birds tell me that Princess Elia cried a . . . certain name . . . when they came for her."

"Is a secret still a secret if everyone knows it?" In Casterly Rock, it was common knowledge that Gregor Clegane had killed Elia and her babe. They said he had raped the princess with her son's blood and brains still on his hands.

"This secret is your lord father's sworn man."

Varys says the line about a certain name (which is a secret), to which Tyrion responds "Is a secret still a secret if everyone knows it?" This is a direct response to what Varys said. Varys replies "This secret is your lord father's sworn man." This is a direct response to what Tyrion said. They are still talking about the same thing; the "secret" is that Gregor Clegane raped and killed Elia Martell, which is what Varys was alluding to with the "certain name" remark. I honestly don't see any other way of reading that conversation, but that's just my view.

2 hours ago, Ygrain said:

You are an ill-made, devious, disobedient, spiteful little creature full of envy, lust, and low cunning. Men’s laws give you the right to bear my name and display my colors, since I cannot prove that you are not mine. To teach me humility, the gods have condemned me to watch you waddle about wearing that proud lion that was my father’s sigil and his father’s before him. But neither gods nor men shall ever compel me to let you turn Casterly Rock into your whorehouse.

In other words, Tyrion's whoring is something that Tywin holds against him.

He did no such thing. The city was sacked brutally, the castle was taken. Shit happens at such times, and unless Tywin actually says that he did, or someone points a finger, he can always deny giving such an order. People might know better, but without an eye witness to the killings, he can always deny responsibility, just like our dear spitlicker Yandel is trying to convince us that it was Aerys' order or even Elia's own doing.

And since Dorne isn't powerful enough, Tywin doesn't need any leverage.

It's Tyrion's public whoring that Tywin has a problem with, along with the fact that Tyrion gives his whores too much power and control over him (Tysha and Shae), a trait that Tyrion shares with Lord Tytos. Tywin was not going to let Tyrion undo all his good work (hence the whorehouse remark).

Tywin absolutely showed off the fact that he had the Royal children killed, to the Crown at least; it was the very reason he had them killed, to show his rejection of Targaryen rule:

 "Far be it from me to question your cunning, Father, but in your place I do believe I'd have let Robert Baratheon bloody his own hands."

Lord Tywin stared at him as if he had lost his wits. "You deserve that motley, then. We had come late to Robert's cause. It was necessary to demonstrate our loyalty. When I laid those bodies before the throne, no man could doubt that we had forsaken House Targaryen forever. And Robert's relief was palpable. As stupid as he was, even he knew that Rhaegar's children had to die if his throne was ever to be secure. Yet he saw himself as a hero, and heroes do not kill children." 

 

[TheSeason]

Sorry for the late reply--RL interference...

There's so much to answer, so it might get a little long.

On 04/25/2016 at 3:10 PM, norwaywolf123 said:

 

Clegane was knighted by Rhaegar infront of Elia on Tywin's request or atleest i believe it was Tywin who made Rhaegar knight Gregor.

How are House Martell better than Lannisters? They have less population, army, wealth, water, food! If anything House Lannister is the betters of House Martell.

my opinion standing of houses before roberts rebbelion: Targaryen>Lannister>Tyrell>Arryn>Stark>Baratheon>Tully>Greyjoy>Martell

I see. I've never had the impression that Elia was present to see Clegane knighted. I had the (very wrong, it turned out) impression that Tywin may have brought him to court once or twice, but upon closer inspection I realized my wrong assumptions, that:

1.  The impression of Clegane as any (famed or no, but easily identifiable nevertheless!) presence at court comes from Robert's court--or rather Cersei's. Clegane is present there for a tournament, no less, and leaves soon after. The next we hear of him, he's doing Tywin's dirty work (in the Riverlands) yet again, at war, and Ned attaints him for his (war) crimes. He's a real presence during the war, but only returns to court in peacetime upon Cersei's "request" for a Champion in Tyrion's trial. Tournaments and battle is all we get from him, so traveling to court in peacetime for any other reason is unlikely. Being summoned--by Aerys or Tywin--is also unlikely (Aerys would burn him living for his bad behavior, and Tywin would be out a "beast" then).

2. Rhaegar and Elia lived at Dragonstone most of the time by this point (after Rhaenys was born, his relationship with his father was disturbing, to say the least, and Elia was bedridden six months following childbirth at this time, anyway, with Harrenhal Tourney her first (major/known?) outing--a "courtly event") and it seems Rhaegar kept Elia and Rhaenys away from court (his father) whenever possible, which limits the time Elia might have spent at court to meet/see Clegane were he ever there.

3. Tywin had already retreated to Casterly Rock and avoided the court (and Aerys) when Jaime was inducted to the Kingsguard. He retired on pretense and fled to the Westerlands with Cersei. He had no desire to visit the court if not expressly summoned by the king (not even to see Jaime, it appears), which means if Clegane went to court, it was on his own initiative or in answer to royal summons.

4. Aerys refused to summon Tywin to court for years (it was Rhaegar who convinced him to try to mend that burnt bridge, prior to the Trident). So, again, Clegane's visit to court would be his own or by royal summons.

5. Elia's final return to court was forced (either by royal summons or by force of arms). She wished to remain at Dragonstone, her home, where Rhaegar left her and their children.

I also have the impression she was a major force in Rhaegar's (her own) court, his partner in whatever changes he was cooking up, and would have been the central figure of their Dragonstone court/rebellion(?) when he was away. A Joanna-Tywin style partnership, but actually healthy. When Aerys took her hostage, he isolated her from whatever allies she and Rhaegar had made (and confusion and miscommunication and worse during the rebellion likely isolated her further).

As for the rest, others have said much of what I would (so I'll be brief):

On 04/26/2016 at 1:54 AM, The Wolves said:

Just because the Lannisters have more manpower, wealth, and other resources doesn't make them better than the Martells. I bet a lot of houses would value the Martells over the Lannisters the Targaryens certainly did. 

 

On 04/26/2016 at 2:29 AM, Minstral said:

De Fact power, power held in reality, is different from De Jure power, power held in law. You are missing the point quite entirely when you are  ranking the Lannister status in a medieval social hierarchy based on their supposed assets. Its a prestige based system that has ties to military and economic assets that is extremely different from most democratic societies.

In the sense that it would have provided more to the crown yes. But in a regime dominated by small social class.... The Martells kept their status as sovereigns of Dorne (or Princes) when they submitted to the Iron Throne, while the rest of the kings on the continent were either roasted or lost their royal distinction. Imagine if Robb and Catelyn had accepted Renly's offer for submitting to the Iron Throne again in exchange for keeping his crown. In such a situation would the Starks still be the equivalents in terms of prestige as the Arryns and Lannisters? To answer the question for you, they would not. They would hold pretty much the same power as before, but with a much more prestigious rank in the hierarchy of the continental nobility.

Nobles in the Middle ages cared about money and soldiers, make no mistake. But ask yourself why titles that are seemingly empty honors could placate ambitious men. To answer the question again, Its because its a system where prestige is a currency to buying political legitimacy.

 

On 04/26/2016 at 3:18 AM, Minstral said:

In the context of today's system that is. Its a good thing that we reject this type of thinking these days, but it doesn't change the case of this being a historical fact. Common soldiers that killed kings in battle were flayed alive in some instances for the offense because it was a system that was enforced. And your example about Skagos is flawed by the by. It would mean nothing because it would be outside the realm and political structure of the continent, as a part of it their status matters.

No they would not have the same prestige, and Cat rejected it because she knew that the other party would not accept it. It says a lot about Renly's vision when he doesn't realize that he is essentially creating a suzerainty with more clout to defy him in a generation. Edward the First of England, and one of Tywin's inspirations, tried this with Scotland when he politicked his way into getting the Scottish nobility as "Lord Paramount" of the Scottish king. Well they went to war when he made his demands, he flattened them, and he was never able to adequately enforce his power in the region when he finally died. The Scottish started actually invading Northern England afterward, and part of the reason Edward's son was later overthrown. Not to say that it couldn't be done, but tributaries are not bound to a King in the same way as a direct vassal would be. Renly was giving up more than he knew.

Not in the case as to whom Rhaegar was going to marry.

Supposedly Tywin himself if you were to believe his own words, though I don't. "The Rape...Even you will not accuse me of giving that command, I would hope". (I know this is not directed at me, but I'll give my two cents here). 

Titles are important, conferring rank. Rank is both legal, military, and social. I spoke of the social rank, which has nothing to do with any of the qualities and assets you listed. A king can be so poor he's but a beggar, but he's still a king (Viserys). If the Targaryens were bankrupted but still had dragons, that would not change their rank. If they were bankrupted and didn't have dragons, their rank and apotheosis remains the same. Title and rank are title and rank. It still has value to many in the modern day (even many modern nations still support and defend--and even demand--the nonsense notion and elitist system of royalty. Why is one baby entitled to a billion dollars of other people's money set aside for their own needs, even in hard times, just for being born and not the next baby?) The nonsense system of title and rank is a heavy burden for everyone else to carry.

(Imperial) King > (Imperial) Princes, Princessess > Prince/ss (of principalities) > Lord Paramount > (High) Vassal Lord > (Low) Vassal Lord (i.e., vassal of vassal) > Knight > Serf, and all other Non-Titled Entities

The Non-Titled Entities have social ranks of their own, but I'll just list some:

Clergy, Merchant, Artisan, Paid Professional Soldier, "Freemen," Slave

Note about use of word "imperial:" I chose it because it best describes the royal status of Aerys, Rhaegar, and their House as compared to lesser royalty (of the principality) such as Elia herself and House Martell. Elia was princess in her own right. When she married Rhaegar, she became an Imperial Princess. Thus, she was both Princess Consort of Dragonstone (the greater title and rank) and Princess of Dorne (the lesser title and rank, but that her own--it cannot be stripped from her, were, say, Rhaegar to set her aside because he wanted more children).

House Martell is equal to House Lannister as lords paramount of their region. Yet, they are still a principality, conferring royal status.

Joanna arranged good marriages for her children (or are you arguing she wanted them to marry far beneath them?), which would have conferred them royal consort status (upgrade from lord/lady), and their children too would have been royalty in their own right.

I think Tywin rejected this (and Joanna may have been trying to appease his ego anyway, at least in part) for a few reasons:

1. It means he must acknowledge House Martell as his betters, since the royal status is conferred through them. His pride would not allow this. He seeks equality with Aerys Targaryen, after all (and the Targaryens are sort of "godkings" with cults of personality arisen around them). How can he then allow that House Martell is more equal to House Targaryen than House Lannister is?

2. He's greedy. It's not enough to have non-ruling royal status (neither Elia nor Oberyn were entitled to Dorne). His answer might have been different if Elia/Oberyn were firstborn or if Doran was offered. He might have entertained the thought, befriended the Martells, and quietly inquired into the possibility of a match with House Targaryen.

3. He's really greedy. He wanted not only royal status for his grandchildren but godking status as well. It was the apotheosis of House Targaryen that he so craved for his own, not necessarily their imperial royal status. This is why he was willing to settle for Viserys (despite Aerys's insult that Tywin was merely a servant, and declaration that any match was out of the question) instead of approaching the Martells (who at least treated him with respect, and previously showed interest) again about Oberyn; it would have been difficult after his treatment of them, but an agreement could have been made... doubtless his pride got in the way again.

4. He never respected Joanna's opinion quite as much as he thought he did. Tywin let his wife rule him at home, it was said, but... what does that really entail, I wonder? It doesn't sound like Joanna was as much a partner in all things as at first it might seem.

On 04/26/2016 at 2:41 AM, Wall Flower said:

I think the point about the Martells and the Lannisters is that Aerys apparently saw Elia as a worthy bride for Rhaegar, while Cersei was dismissed as a 'servant's' daughter. The Princess of Dorne certainly outplayed Tywin in arranging the marriage and to add insult to injury, Elia didn't even have the decency to die in childbirth and clear the way for Cersei.

Of course, Aerys or his advisers may simply have thought that the Martells would provide Rhaegar with a much less powerful ally than Tywin, should the Crown Prince ever decide to move against his father. Doesn't mean that Tywin wouldn't have seen the marriage as a Lannister debt that needed to be repaid.

I think that TheSeason has made some excellent points about Tywin's penchant for using sexual violence as a punishment against women. The gang rape of Tysha, and Tyrion's forced participation, is a lot more disturbing than just a sharp lesson from a harsh lord. As the OP has outlined, Tysha isn't the only instance that Tywin is associated with - the walk of shame of Tytos' mistress, Elia's rape and murder, Tywin's specific inclusion of rape in his instructions to Kevin for setting the Riverland's on fire.

This is the other half of my statement as well. Tywin saw a debt that needed repaying because of the Aerys-Tywin dynamic that led to a brutal rejection of his own and an "insulting" selection of Elia Martell (a princess in her own right, who he'd previously callously rejected as the inferior only to have the tables turned on him).

Quote

Like Ygrain, I don't for a minute find it believable that Tywin didn't know what he had in Gregor Clegane - the man that he had apparently hand-picked for the mission of murdering small Royal children. I'm not sure that I believe that Tywin was actually there for Elia's rape and murder (he seems to prefer plausible deniability and the appearance of clean hands) but it is certainly possible that Elia called out his name as the man who was really responsible for her death and those of her children.

I note that Tywin was so outraged at Gregor exceeding his orders with Elia that he continued to employ him for similar work for the next 15 years and seemed surprisingly reluctant to give him up to Martell justice.

 Tywin absolutely knew what he had in Gregor Clegane, and he all but admits that this savagery was what attracted him in the first place. Jonos Slynt also makes it pretty clear that a good commander knows his men--that is, which men are most suitable for the task of murdering babies at the breast--lest they mistakenly task the wrong man and end up with a mess of conscience. Tywin was so pleased by what he had in Gregor Clegane (and Amory Lorch) that he was only willing to give up Lorch because he was dead and thus of no further use to him. I don't really understand how there can be any ambiguity that Tywin was lying to Tyrion. His intention was always the murder of children, he admits, and he selected the best "beasts" for the job. Tywin has also given at least two express commands to rape women as punishment for his feelings of inadequacy and humiliation (Tysha--gangraped and exiled; "Cat"/"Tully" women--the Rape of the Riverlands, which I failed to mention previously but was brought up. In fact, I think there's a case to be made that Tywin's intentions for Cat were revealed through Elia Martell and the Rape of the Riverlands, which was a clear "proxy rape" of another kind, Cat being unavailable to him until the Red Wedding, when the Freys botched it by killing her--she was never going to have an honorable treatment or merciful end in Tywin's power). If you don't believe Tywin was present, do you at least believe he gave the command to rape Elia Martell before killing her?

 

On 04/26/2016 at 3:16 AM, Wall Flower said:

Of course, I don't think that Tywin was outraged - it was a rather poor attempt at sarcasm on my part. I'm just rather sceptical that Elia's rape and murder weren't foreseeable by Tywin and the point remains that he was more than happy to use Gregor's special skills from then on. By the way, I think that the failure of Robert and Jon Arryn to give Elia and her children even a limited amount of justice severely undermined any moral high ground the new regime might have claimed in removing the Mad King. Executing Gregor and Amory Lorch would certainly have been good news for Sandor, two Lady Cleganes and countless smallfolk.

Doubtless, they were well-rewarded for being such beastly beasts. Keeping their heads surely was the least of it. Most like they rode away from King's Landing with stumbling horses fearful of broken backs, there was so much gold weighing them down. He wasn't only paying for the rape and murder of women and the murder of children, but also their silence as to who gave the command (and how express it was), after all. Of course, he could have "silenced" them with a sword, but then he'd have to find himself some other beasts to carry out his savage commands, and surely he was fearful they'd be better behaved.

Robert actually has the audacity to be outraged that people call him Usurper! Jon Arryn is another story. I've never had the impression that his alliance was meant to be in any way beneficial to Targaryens (or Rhaegar), even though it was well under way (via correspondence) before Duskendale and Aerys's mental health issues worsened. So I wasn't surprised that Arryn made no attempt to appease the Martells (not even by attainting Clegane and Lorch and promising Dorne their heads! Why should Tywin Lannister get everything he wants, especially after he made infamous mockery of knighthood altogether?) despite it being perfectly reasonable and even expected of them (by anyone or institution or faith with any moral conscience). Then he has the audacity to go to Dorne--bringing no token of peace or alliance, yet again--to threaten the Prince of Dorne and his family in their own home because they are dissatisfied with the bad behavior of the rebel alliance. He's always struck me as rather spiteful, having some sort of vendetta against House Targaryen. I'm not convinced his story makes much sense. Why was he fostering rebellion before Duskendale? We never find out.

On 04/26/2016 at 8:59 PM, thelittledragonthatcould said:

But they did. Both siblings acknowledge he could do wrong.

"How could I not love him, after that? That is not to say that I approved of all he did, or much enjoyed the company of the man that he became . . . but every little girl needs a big brother to protect her. Tywin was big even when he was little." -Genna

"Do you think he would allow you to take the black if you were not his own blood, and Joanna's? Tywin seems a hard man to you, I know, but he is no harder than he's had to be." -Kevan

Both siblings thought he could do wrong, as could Gerion and Tygett. Neither see anything particularly wrong with what he did to their fathers paramour not because she was a woman but that she overstepped and abused her position.

You are going to have to explain this one. What exactly was rank misogyny about it? He gave her a chance to surrender and she refused.

I can undertstand how the claims can be made about Tysha and Tytos' mistress, I disagree with them but there is an easy argument to make, but how exactly was his treatment of Ellyn 'rank misogyny'?

He didnt pick on her, she was a legitimate threat to the power of his House. You actually do her a huge disservice by making out she was picked on. She was the leader of the Reyne/Tarbeck faction, she was making the calls. Her positon as its leader is hugely impressive and she was every bit his equal.

But they don't. They certainly see his positives but also recognize his negatives.

Well yeah, she was his niece. Of course he would be wrecked with guilt over it.

Women don't get sent to the Wall, what do you think happens to major female criminals in this society?

Why would the High Sparrow and his fervent religious acolytes accepts some form of punishment that was not religious based? Why would it have its own name if it was only ever done once more than 3 decades ago in a different part of the realm a thousand miles away from Kings Landing. Everyone, from the Sparrow, the Septas to the people of Kings Landing seem too familiar with this custom for it only have ever happened once in the history of Westeros.

Then there is the reaction from Cersei

"I have confessed."

"Atoned, I said. Before the city. A walk—"

"No." She knew what her uncle was about to say, and she did not want to hear it. "Never. Tell him that, if you speak again. I am a queen, not some dockside whore."

 

She would have been a baby when it happened yet she quickly works out what her punishment is going to be.

Well this is silly. For starters he is one of the 5 or so most powerful people in his society. Pretty much everyone is vulnerable when compared to him even high ranking nobles. Roger Reyne was the second most powerful Lord in the Westerlands, when Tywin's uncle died it was Reyne who took over the 11k Westerland soldiers in  Essos.

The earliest memory of Tywin is him standing up to his father when no one else dared to, not any of the many Lords of the Westerlands in attendance

My betrothal was announced at a feast with half the west in attendance. Ellyn Tarbeck laughed and the Red Lion went angry from the hall. The rest sat on their tongues. Only Tywin dared speak against the match. A boy of ten. Father turned as white as mare's milk, and Walder Frey was quivering." She smiled.

And note that it is the 'misogynistic' Tywin who is the only one to stand up for his sister who he clearly thinks deserves better than being married off at 7 to a Frey.

And this would continue as he got older as his father allowed the Westerland Lords to do as they pleased rather than confront them. It was up to his son to keep them in line with no help from his father. The idea that he only confrtoned the weak is not backed up in him actually keeping the peace from a Westerland nobility who were using Tytos misrule to further subjugate their subjects such as Lord Stackspear who "doubled the taxes on his smallfolk, though Lord Tytos forbade it, then hired a company of Volantene sellswords to enforce his onerous exactions." It was Tywin who put an end to events like this and brought order to the Westerlands.

Tywin only confronting the weak is an obvious fallacy. Even in the present series when Tyrion is abducted he goes to war against Hoster, his equal. knowing full well that this could anger both the Hand of the King and the King himself.

lol his triggers?

How did Tywin treat Joanna any worse than any other Lord treats his wife in Westeros?

Serious question as you are trying to diagnose someone in a medieval society with modern day issues.

You might have to expand on this and how it relates to Tywin the misogynist and how he is at fault for her being a failed Madonna.

1. Tywin's siblings excused all of his bad behavior. Just because they claim they thought he was wrong sometimes does not mean they ever show any moral outrage or question his judgment. They implicitly and sometimes even explicitly condone his bad behavior. Not only that, but sometimes they even participate in it (especially Kevan, but also Tygett) and are more than happy to benefit from it (that's all of them). They choose to be party to it. And your claim that Genna and Kevan saw nothing wrong with what he did to women, for example Tytos's mistress, only proves that they excused unacceptable, monstrous behavior out of their big brother just because it was their big brother being the monster he is.

2. I should not have to explain the rank misogyny inherent in Tywin's feelings about and treatment toward Ellyn Reyne Tarbeck. Tywin could not accept that she won against Tytos Lannister because she was a woman. He started a war in which thousands died just so that he could pat himself on the back and feel better about himself after having been humiliated by a woman. There was peace, and he broke it for petty, selfish, hateful reasons because she was a woman who got the better of "Lannister." And not only that, but also he further punished the women of that house in a clearly gendered way. When the castle collapsed and Lady Ellyn died, there was no need for what came after because he'd just won. He couldn't stomach that because she was a woman who got the better of him, so he had to further punish her in savage ways, destroying everything she loved because she loved it, murdering and mutilating innocents and shipping them into exile (the Silent Sisters, a gendered revenge). Of course the Reynes do not want to surrender to him after that! How could they expect any better treatment? So he drowns them all, further playing out his revenge power-fantasy against Ellyn Reyne Tarbeck, who did not give him the satisfaction of dying in a way that would allow him a truer emotional release. He's been acting out this revenge power-fantasy on women ever since.

3. You are the only one saying that Tywin 'picked on' Ellyn Reyne Tarbeck. And you are the only one doing her a disservice by denying that she was victimized for her womanhood. That does not mean she was any less a strong and intelligent woman, powerful in her own right, with grand ambitions. It makes her even stronger, in my opinion, knowing what she was up against in a system that denied and diminished her contributions and power and agency because of her gender, in a system that allowed someone like Tywin Lannister (a monster) to victimize her without consequence or even acknowledgement of it. It's not that Tywin went to war with Ellyn Reyne Tarback that's the problem. It's why he did it and what he did thereafter that's the problem. It's his rank misogyny that's the problem.

4. Suggesting that Kevan's guilt about what he did to Cersei is only because "she's his niece" does women a huge injustice and even diminishes and denies Kevan's character growth. For the first time he's realizing the scope of Tywin's bad behavior, how he was not only complicit in but an active and eager participant in it, and the scope of the damage done to every woman they ever victimized. Kevan is the one who tells Tywin he'll be certain the Rape of the Riverlands goes off without a hitch; he's the one who passes on Tywin's commands; and never does he feel an inkling of guilty conscience or moral outrage about it until it finally hits home for him what he's been doing all this time (in the person of his own niece, who he victimized). It's a powerful moment that shouldn't be reduced to "she's his niece" so of course she matters, whereas other women don't.

5. Women may not be sent to the Wall, but they are hanged for their crimes like men. This is another example of the unjust and unfairly weighted system against women in this society. A woman might be hanged for a lesser crime whereas a man who rapes and murders (such as the man who carved the seven-pointed stars on his arms whenever he raped a Silent Sister and cut out her tongue; he with his arms full of carvings, and his legs too!) is permitted to live out his days on the Wall. A man who is sentenced to death is awarded the opportunity to cheat death and the system both, whereas women are not.

If, as you suggest, Walks of Atonement were a commonplace punishment for women in this society, we would have heard about and seen them before book five, since they are such massive spectacle. This is not what happens to major female criminals in this society. Stop trying to normalize it. You miss the point of the event that way.

6. The High Sparrow takes Kevan's idea and runs with it because he never imagined he could get away with such scope of revenge. This is "the Crown" (in the person of Kevan) suggesting a method to undermine itself in the most vile way imaginable (in the person of Cersei Lannister, the Queen Regent until that time!). So of course the High Sparrow was happy to oblige. This is another example of a Lannister being too stupid and short-sighted to see how they undermine their own cause (from Tywin to Tyrion to Cersei to Jaime to Kevan to Lancel, we've seen it time and again; most like, we'll see Genna get in on the undermining of the vainglory they built upon the backs of raped and murdered and mutilated innocents).

Furthermore, Walk of Atonement is clearly the name the High Sparrow slapped on this travesty to make it seem more palatable to the masses. It's not a "religious based" punishment. It never was, but it may become, and more's the pity.

7. Cersei knows about this punishment because she's a Lannister and it's a punishment her father devised for her grandfather's mistress. You've quoted the wrong part of the narrative. She clearly states she remembers people talking about this event decades later in Casterly Rock/Lannisport; that's how unusual and unique this spectacle was.

8. The fact that he's so powerful over so many makes the situation that much worse. It's not "silly" in the least. This is a disgusting man who enjoys hurting those more vulnerable than he is, often the most vulnerable people in society but not always. That so many people are vulnerable to his abuse should alarm and appall you, not encourage you to shrug it off as no big deal.

9. He stood up to a weak man who rolls over to everyone? I don't understand what this is supposed to prove.

Furthermore, I think you've misinterpreted this passage. Tywin treats the women in his family (admittedly, he treats everyone in his family except himself) as property to do with as he pleases. This is the same for Genna. He was not objecting to this marriage on moral grounds as you imply. He objected to this marriage because it would do nothing for him (he's Tytos's heir, and Tytos is mismanaging his assets, which will have an impact on Tywin's inheritance). Tywin may have positive feelings for his sister (I'm not convinced he's utterly emotionless), but she's still property to him (remember, Tywin is the one who Tyrion quotes to Varys -- about Doran Martell being willing to ally himself with Lannisters! -- when he speaks of how a wise man does not let sentiment get in the way of ambition).

10. You're also misreading my words. I said Tywin is most comfortable confronting those more vulnerable than he is, not that he never confronted an equal (such as--nominally--Hoster Tully--he being sick and having no part in the WoFK, anyway, it all being Edmure Tully, who was younger, less experienced, and thus, yes, more vulnerable  than Tywin. A better example would have been Robb Stark, for his tactical mind, but it is undermined by the fact that Tywin was most comfortable confronting him when he thought of Robb as "a green boy, no more" bound to get himself killed in his first battle; then, when Robb beat him again and again on equal footing, he resorted to his customary nasty, underhanded means to get the job done).

11. Here you are putting Tywin in line with every other misogynistic Westerosi lord who holds down his wife, which should prove my point. His relationship with Joanna was not the healthy partnership you are strying to make it out to be. Furthermore, the one instance we have of Joanna making her wishes known to Tywin (for such an important decision as who their children will marry!), Tywin flat out dismisses her thoughts and desires without a second thought. He does not hold her opinion (about her children!) in high regard as you suggest, or else he would have considered the Martells (a superb match, in fact) and treated her friend (the Princess of Dorne) with some respect. Lastly, he's more than happy to malign her after her death, when she cannot defend herself, but suggesting that Tyrion cannot possibly be his offspring.

12. I have not made an attempt to "diagnose" Tywin with anything. I'm discussing an interesting character. But most importantly, these are not modern day issues! They didn't just start, they've been around all the while. What's new is the fact that we acknowledge and discuss and try to correct these problems in a uniquely modern way. But the Madonna-Whore Complex has been around since there were human beings. Just because we have a name for it now does not make it a modern day issue. We have the name for it because it's always been a problem we needed to address.

13. You're right, I could have talked about Tywin's impact on his children (all of them) more, but I didn't because it seemed self-evident. I'll have to get back to that if you're still interested, no time now.

 

On 04/26/2016 at 11:47 AM, FrostyDornishman said:

I have to agree with (what I think is) the majority opinion here -- I don't get the sense that Tywin did what he did because he held gendered grudges.  He wasn't much more misogynistic than any other man in the series.  And I really don't think he was present for Elia's rape, let alone made sure he had a front-row seat.

His explanation to Tyrion of the Sack of King's Landing has to be completely discarded as a lie if we are to believe he knew or approved of what Clegane and Lorch did.  He very clearly and candidly states that:

• It was done too brutally, Lorch is an idiot for his handling of Rhaenys, and Elia didn't need to be harmed at all
• He was more worried about the Stark army and Jamie's fate than what was happening to the royal family
• He did not order the rape, and he didn't know what Clegane was capable of

For your theory to be right, some of these have to be lies.  Why would Tywin lie to Tyrion at this point?  Why would GRRM hide the truth from us?  Tywin's long dead now, so if the real story and Tywin's real views on women differ from the points above how are we going to find out about it?

Tywin was a cold, calculating man that did not shy away from brutality when needed.  Some of that brutality was directed at women, sure, but the nature of their treatment had more to do with their station than with their gender.  Ellyn Tarbeck was a rebel lady, so she was besieged and her castle put to the torch.  Tytos's mistress and Tysha were common-born consorts to Lannisters that humiliated Tywin and his vision of his house.  In his eyes they were whores (and I don't think many of his contemporaries would've disagreed), and they were treated like whores according to their (perceived) station.

Tywin lied to Tyrion just the same as he always has. Why tell the truth at this point, would be a more apt question, I think. Also, I don't believe Martin did hide anything from us. The clues are all there, just the same as with other mysteries in the series. It's up to the reader to put them together or to take the character at face value. It's one of his many puzzles.

I disagree that station is the only consideration in Tywin's treatment of women. He punishes all women, regardless of station, with gendered violence. Tarbeck women (ladies) were mutilated, their children murdered, and shipped into exile to a religious institution (the Silent Sisters is a gendered revenge against uppity "whorish" women--that is, anti-Madonnas). The Riverlands women were raped as proxy revenge against Cat (why else would Tywin assault the Riverlands with rape and murder--Hoster/Edmure Tully is a third party who had no part in the abduction of Tyrion--instead of confronting House Stark directly? And I'm not even talking about wartime, mind you, which is where it gets worse; women were raped and murdered, their children butchered like animals--in addition to having crops burned and animals slaughtered; an assault on fertility symbolic of women being the theme--just to taunt Ned Stark into a trap on the Mummer's Ford.), they being "Tully" women suitable for his vengeance in his mind. Elia Martell was Princess Consort of Dragonstone (the next Queen!) and Princess of Dorne, and she was raped and murdered, and her children were murdered with her. Tywin is too happy to assault women in gendered ways -- as "Maiden" figures (rape) and as "Mother" figures (murder of children), turning them into "Crone" figures ("used up", childless, murdered or exiled, enslaved as death-associated "nuns"). While Tywin has clear social status issues, they are broader in scope (men and women), but his gender issues are very specific and illuminate a pattern in his behavior. He takes affront to their womanhood and thus takes vengeance upon them to taint and destroy their womanhood. There is no associated pattern with men in regards to gender or social status. That's significant.

On 04/26/2016 at 0:27 PM, The Wolves said:

Tywin probably ordered Elia to be raped and murdered he's evil and petty like that. 

And yeah he would lie to Tyrion in that same conversation he was trying to reprimend Tyrion for thinking he would order a rape on someone when he not only ordered a rape he ordered a gangrape on a 13 year old girl. 

Plus Tywin knew exactly what Gregor was capable of that's why he sent him to murder a baby. He's heard the rumors probably had small folk at Casterly Rock telling of the atrocities he's been doing yet because of the damage and fear Gregor spreads Tywin keeps him around. 

I agree. Even if one disbelieves that Tywin was present, it is too neat a pattern that he did not order this savagery done. Tywin got exactly what he wanted that day, and he has been lying about it ever since, even--audaciously--to the face of a man with clear and disturbing evidence as to his capacity in this regard. I only wish Tyrion had just as boldly confronted him on his bs.

[Knight and Dayne]

Very late to the game on this, but very impressed with the OP. You've convinced me that

1. There's something specifically gendered about Tywin's violent maintenance of family pride, even given the misogyny inherent to the setting.
2. Tywin's "gendered grudge" created a "new normal" for degredation of women in Westeros. The connection between Tytos' mistress' naked exile and Cersi's walk of shame is a really good catch.

These points really put Tywin's actions/motivations in a new light. Structural sexism often makes it difficult to recognize the real monsters where they exist. We've always known that Tywin Lannister doesn't take slights lightly. It's now clear that escalating violence against women is his corrective, and that that exceeds Westerosi cultural norms.

There are a few areas for discussion I hope you might explore a little more:

• Joanna Lannister: She is one of few humanizing details we have about Tywin, though that information comes from rabidly pro-Tywin voices. She's also clearly embroiled in the nascent rivalry between Aerys and Tywin. Without rehashing A+J=T, I can see Aerys' simultaneous desire for and degradation of Joanna as the justification Tywin whispers to himself for his own patterns of behavior. Put another way, he's got an "our women vs their women" double standard to go with his madonna/whore complex.
• Shae: Sexual hypocrisy is always fertile ground for discussion. Before reading this essay, I read that scene as a "man behind the curtain" moment; a final confirmation that Tywin wasn't the paragon of...uh...consistency? we were meant for him to seem. I think we can now see it as consistent behavior.

[Poupsi]

Actually, the rape itself is highly suspicious. How does a knight who just invaded a castle, get the idea to get some time to put his pants down and rape the princess and mutilate her to the point where her own body couldn't be shown, in such a short period. Tywin being there made a lot of sense. And probably that the Martells knew as well. Actually, this a historical moment for Tywin. A turnabout with a savagery with no equal, not even from the dance of dragons.

Gruesome topic by the way