Jump to content

Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.

TheRevanchist

The burning of the Tarlys - discussion

Recommended Posts

1 minute ago, Samwell_Tarly said:

Yes they did ally with her to achieve their own goals, I've said that.

To support means to provide assistance and they provide assistance so they support her. Ie the dornish army was to be used to help/support Daenerys.

Well, I can't argue with the dictionary definition.  I believe you know what I was trying to convey though , which is supporting her in a philosophical sense, and I can't think of the right word at the moment.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, snow is the man said:

well to be fair dragon fire kills alot fire then normal fire. They were dead in seconds. I think it was a stupid move from a political stand point because what did her father used to do to his enemies. Now to compare jon killing janos to this is insane I agree. Janos was ordered three times and not only did he disobey the order he insulted jon each time.  He left jon no choice and  Jon killed him quickly and it had no pain so I don't see what jon could have done differently

True. Dragon fire seems quicker than the stake when in the direct flame but the anticipation of getting roasted by a monstrous creature after all they witnessed is dreadful. Nothing of the body will remain for a proper burial. Also they did scream and stood there for a couple of seconds, so definitely worse than beheading. Dany knew this, by the way she responded to Tyrion and his look said it all. Also the fact every one else bent the knee afterwards confirmed nobody wanted to die like that. On the positive side, by roasting these two, Dany may have just spared the other ones who were willing to die by other more traditional means. So overall, less dead people.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4 minutes ago, SansaJonRule said:

Well, I can't argue with the dictionary definition.  I believe you know what I was trying to convey though , which is supporting her in a philosophical sense, and I can't think of the right word at the moment.

I do understand what you mean though, they don't support her like Missandei said she does in Episode 4. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
6 hours ago, Samwell_Tarly said:

What she did to Randyll and Dickon Tarly was justified, Randyll refused to bend the knee and his stupid idiotic son followed too. There were given a choice, they refused so were executed. Regardless of how they died they died, war is war. Randyll's excuse was stupid but the old boy is set in his stubborn ways. Burning them two provided a perfect opportunity to put tremendous amounts of fear into the soldiers so they fight for her as that really was as she could do. 

He refused to acknowledge the offer of the black, saying she is not his queen, its not her role to keep on trying to make him change his mind. Tyrion arguing was stupid, it made him look stupid. He tried to help Randyll and he shoved it in his face, That should have been the end of Tyrions plea.

Daenerys is not like Cersei, Cersei caused her own problems which stemmed from trying to get rid of her ''enemies'', her blowing up the Sept was because of her own doing not because she had to. Daenerys has tried and succeeded in making people lives better,i.e abolishment of slavery. 

Any discussion of slavery is irrelevant -- there is no slavery in Westeros, the place is fine without her in that regard.

Thus far Dany is behaving no different than any other ruler of Westeros. She's simply a foreigner with a foreign army. Virtually nobody really wants her there.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
7 hours ago, Sir Dingleberry said:

Lol, idk if you're kidding or not. She had allies with 3 of the 7 kingdoms and she was brokering a peace with the North, which would then include the Eeryie.  Riverlands and Stormlands are out, so there isn't much to discuss outside of the fact that the last known Baratheon (even though a bastard) is currently working with Jon and might as well be Danny as well. Tarley/Lannister force are enemies of the Tyrells which are an ally of Danny. So, typically allies aide other allies with their enemies. 

Well, usurpers aren't allies. Euron is the head of the Greyjoy family and the Iron Islands. He reasserted his control over the fleet and arrested Yara. In Dorne, well, it's hard to say if there is anyone there except the Sandsnakes who support her. Seems pretty convoluted.

As for the Reach, (apparently) nobody there except the Tyrells themselves supported her -- the Tyrell bannermen all remained loyal to Cersei.

I'm still seeing essentially 0 support for Dany in Westeros. If she wants to reign by terror as opposed to carefully building allies and winning support, I suppose she probably can...  but why should the audience be sympathetic to her?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
29 minutes ago, Donaldys I Trumpagar said:

In Dorne, well, it's hard to say if there is anyone there except the Sandsnakes who support her. Seems pretty convoluted.

As for the Reach, (apparently) nobody there except the Tyrells themselves supported her -- the Tyrell bannermen all remained loyal to Cersei.

When Ellaria was killing Doran, she told him the people were behind her.

It wasn't made clear what the overall divide between Tyrell bannermen that stayed loyal to the Tyrells vs joining with the Lannisters was. We only know the Tarlys for sure, and we can speculate others.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
6 hours ago, tugela said:

Ed is the Lord Commander. He took over after Jon left. Jon leaving does set a precedent btw, since the vow only counts as long as someone is enforcing it, which apparently is not the case any more (or at least, some exceptions are made for high born individuals).

I don't get How Ed is the Lord Commander. In the Nights Watch there is no succession.. Jon didn't have a right to make Ed Lord Commander. In the Nights Watch there is a more democratical way to choose the leader. The member of the Nights Watch have to vote. Ofc right now the Nights Watch is just a group of remnants. Jon died, and was released from his vows, ser Alliser Thorne is dead, Maester Aemon(who was the one to "forced" them to do the voting the last time) is dead...

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Donaldys I Trumpagar said:

Well, usurpers aren't allies. Euron is the head of the Greyjoy family and the Iron Islands. He reasserted his control over the fleet and arrested Yara. In Dorne, well, it's hard to say if there is anyone there except the Sandsnakes who support her. Seems pretty convoluted.

As for the Reach, (apparently) nobody there except the Tyrells themselves supported her -- the Tyrell bannermen all remained loyal to Cersei.

I'm still seeing essentially 0 support for Dany in Westeros. If she wants to reign by terror as opposed to carefully building allies and winning support, I suppose she probably can...  but why should the audience be sympathetic to her?

Euron killed the previous king before he was crowned. That's something many people didn't like so they left him.

Cersei extinguished the Tyrells.. The house Tyrell was wih her side. Idk what the minor houses of the Reach did since nobody ever mentioned them.

According to the Sand Snakes the people in Dorne didn't want the pathetic Lord Doran. The wanted vengeance.. 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4 hours ago, SansaJonRule said:

If she doesn't she should.  Otherwise they will only be loyal to her as long as a threat remains if they don't  They'll fight much better for her if they believe in her.  But why should they at this point?  She's given them no reason to believe she's any different yet.

And now she has the opportunity to do so, because they will be with the rest of her fanatically loyal army. It may take a while, but I believe at least some of them will come around. These are men who served under Randyl "Flog the Stragglers" Tarley. They think Dany is a foreign psycho bitch pyromaniac right now, but they will see that she doesn't treat loyal followers that way.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4 hours ago, SansaJonRule said:

There doesn't seem to be any Geneva Convention type rules in Westeros.  But of course I could be forgetting something and therefore have the wrong impession.

Your other points are very good, except that I disagree about Dany's supposed reluctance.  I don't think she showed any.  That's not to say she enjoying roasting them, but she is quick to use her dragons to create fear.

I think all our perceptions of characters' actions and motivations are strongly driven by how much we like or dislike them. I'm a big Dany fan, so I tend to give her the benefit of the doubt. I don't always agree with her choices, but I do think her heart is in the right place, and I don't think she is mad queenish, at least not yet. As you say, she isn't enjoying killing her enemies, the way her father did. She has become capable of ruthlessness, and I think that's part of ruling in this universe. Ned beheaded a deserter. (Imagine how different the story would have been if Ned had believed the story!). Rob beheaded an insubordinate Lord. Jon did as well. Jon also hung a young boy. Not saying it wasn't justice, but it was ruthless. And yes, the Tarlys took a few more seconds to die than if they had been beheaded, but a lot less time than the NW traitors. Hanging is worse than Drogon, IMHO.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4 hours ago, Eddard Scissorhands said:

True. Dragon fire seems quicker than the stake when in the direct flame but the anticipation of getting roasted by a monstrous creature after all they witnessed is dreadful. Nothing of the body will remain for a proper burial. Also they did scream and stood there for a couple of seconds, so definitely worse than beheading. Dany knew this, by the way she responded to Tyrion and his look said it all. Also the fact every one else bent the knee afterwards confirmed nobody wanted to die like that. On the positive side, by roasting these two, Dany may have just spared the other ones who were willing to die by other more traditional means. So overall, less dead people.

To quote Davos and Stannis, "Fewer.":D

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
14 hours ago, Rhymes with Sneak said:

Wouldn't Talla already be Lady of the Reach?  Something would have to happen to her to reinstate Sam, right?  Maybe she would be okay with it, but she did not seem to okay with Randyll's current plans to marry her off.

I'm sure all the Lords of the Reach with band together and declare Sam LP of the Reach for no reason, just like the Northern and Vale Lords did for Jon.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I hope the show doesn't gloss over Jon finding out that she just burnt his best mate's Dad and little brother alive, just like that mad king did to his grandad and uncle. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
9 hours ago, snow is the man said:

Well I think it was in character for randyl tarly in the show because they played him as an extreme bigot. That is what really brought him to jaime's cause. You may not like cersei but dany has dothraki and unsullied with her.  Now I was mad at him for not ordering his son to kneel. As far as he knew randyl tarly just had his house ended since sam is a member of the nights watch. I would like to point out that dragon ire seems to be different the regular fire because they died in a few seconds rather then minutes. That said it was stupid on dany's part because she just made herself look like her father by burning two men alive.

To be fair to dany she did offer tarly a way out and would have let him take the black. Instead he essentially left her no choice but to kill him because he not only refused to bend the knee but insulted her and her soldiers in the process by calling them savages and such.  He could have agreed to take the black but said it would be by my choice not yours or something like that.

Tarly could have told his son to bend the knee or sucked it up and taken the black so his son would have lived and been able to carry on the house name.

 

Tarly is a bigot, but it's not bigoted to hate the Dothraki.  They have a vile reputation for cruelty across the world.

I do think it was a good scene, as the rights and wrongs of the characters' actions can be argued either way.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

In reality, what was likely to happen Randyll if he survived? If Daenerys had any sense, she wouldn't let him into her council. Yes, the man is a clever military general - a vast improvement on Tyrion - but one that was a Targaryen loyalist during the Rebellion, who then declared for Renly during the WoT5K, before joining with the Lannisters. Daenerys would just be another person he'd follow, with no true love for her. At this point in time, she needs to build a small council of people who are actually behind her, rather than people who have defected to her cause to avoid being killed. 

As a useful asset, she was hardly going to let him go back to Cersei, either. Daenerys did all that she could do.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I think a simple chop of the head would have been enough, the burning seemed a bit much. However I can see why Danny did burn the Tarly's as it installed instant fear into the hearts of the other men standing which made them kneel. Consequently leading to lower loss of life.

What annoyed me though was her speech at the beginning when she was acting all high and mighty. ''I'm not here to kill'' This said straight after burning alive half an army, how could she expect them to follow her?  

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Not at all. Then again she thinks only two state. "Kneel or die... Unless my dragon seems to like you and might refuse to roast you". 

Realistically, she can take him prisoner (please spare me the "I do not put men in chains" if you are going to burn them alive instead. Had she been Stannis, Davos would roast). She can offer him a parole - something not unheard of and used often. Keep Dickon as a honoured guest at Dragonstone and have Horn Hill sit out the war. Send all the soldiers who did not kneel after Drogon's roar home - minus arms and armor. Their homes were liekly in the reach on Tarly grounds or in the Westerlands currently held by the Unsullied - why not use their word about her mercy to weaken Cersei's hold? Tywin commanded respect by acts of terror and generosity, Cersei had shown the first one so far and she lost her main source of income from there. Heck do not stupidly burn the wagons, loot whatever supplies the Dothraki can take and give the rest to the surrendered soldiers. Odds are for each one who takes stuff to King's Landing, 10 will go home to their families. 

 

And if Tarly refuses parole and you really do not want him chained, just again go by local customs and chop his head off (and return bones to the family). 

 

Using the "kneel or die" was rather harsh by feudal standards and when it comes to it, was the same choice slavers gave to slaves. After all if the slaves did not want to obey, they can always die or be killed, right? It also is not a way how to get good and loyal troops. 

 

Re. the speech, it made sense in the aftermath of the battle. It did NOT make sense if followed by "now lkneel or die".

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
16 hours ago, tugela said:

No, Samwell will probably be released from his vows by the Nights Watch to take his seat as Lord Tarly. The Nights Watch will likely be decimated when the Whitewalkers come across the wall in any case, so they won't be around to demand allegiance from anyone.

Succession in Westeros generally followed to males of the house, it is likely that there are other male Tarlys around (uncles or cousins) who would pick up the position in the event Sam could not. An example of how this worked in medieval times was the succession of Henry I on his death. The crown did not go to his legitimate daughter (Matilda), nor his numerous illegitimate sons, it went to his nephew, Stephen. Succession to females only occurred much later in the Renaissance era, when Mary took the throne. In medieval times being a lord carried with it the responsibility of leading troops into battle on behalf of your liege (in fact, it was your primary responsibility), which obviously women of the time were not equipped to do.

Whether Sam is released in the future or not, Randyll and Dickon are dead right now.  Title passes to Talla, since Sam is currently ineligible.  Maybe Talla does not want to be the head of her house, but they can't just let the title lapse waiting to see if Sam can sort out his vows.  Not sure why any of the Tarly bannermen would want to do that anyway knowing that Randyll rejected Sam and that Sam stole the family sword.  

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I actually kind of like that the show is finally showing Dany for the morally gray character she is instead of the perfect pretty princess of the past seasons. Also once she made the threat of "bend the knee or die," there was no way back for her. She had to follow up on that treat, as Jaime so delightfully explained and illustrated to the Freys during the siege of Riverrun last season.

I also don't entirely agree with the commonly held belief that the Reach lords betrayed Olenna. Olenna was a Tyrell as much as Cercei is a Baratheon. Since the Reach lords swore no fealty to house Redwyne, they don't owe her their allegiance. Add to that the fact that Olenna in all likelyhood insulted each of them personally and repeatedly, I can't really blame them for not following her in her revenge-fueled rebellion against the crown.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

×