Bernie Mac Posted August 27, 2018 Share Posted August 27, 2018 8 hours ago, Varysblackfyre321 said: What were the reforms of Aegon V? We are never told, but presumably they offered more laws and less authority for the Lords of the realm. 8 hours ago, Varysblackfyre321 said: Fair enough. How would one go about gaining the support for his reforms? Well off the top of my head he screwed up by letting his children marry who they want, turning some of the most powerful lords of the realm against him. Imposing unpopular laws would be a lot easier with the backing of Houses Tyrell, Tully, Baratheon and Redwyne ( and possibly two more from the marriages of his two grandchildren). Secondly his approach to the Westerlands must have aggravated the Westerland nobility, he allowed an out of his depth Tytos to rule and intervening only when issues became untenable by sending in an army to clean up Tytos' misrule. A temporary band aid was only making things worse and would not have encouraged the nobility to cede more power to the crown. Aegon should have stripped the Wardenship from Tytos, perhaps granting it to Jason or another suitable candidate who could have brought peace to the West. Apart from that we'd have to know far more about Aegon's reign and small council to give further advice. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BRANDON GREYSTARK Posted August 27, 2018 Share Posted August 27, 2018 On 8/24/2018 at 3:09 PM, Lumosaca said: Two of the most famous Hands of the King. Which one had more capacity of bringing prosperity to the Seven Kingdoms? Tywin no contest . Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Legitimate_Bastard Posted August 28, 2018 Share Posted August 28, 2018 Tywin has my vote. But Jon Arryn has to be given credit for backing Robert and successfully defeating the Targs. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Angel Eyes Posted September 12, 2018 Share Posted September 12, 2018 Tywin Lannister. Despite being a ruthless man and a terrible father, he actually made the realm prosper. Jon Arryn, while managing to keep the peace, allowed Robert to run the realm dry. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Legitimate_Bastard Posted September 12, 2018 Share Posted September 12, 2018 On 8/24/2018 at 3:09 PM, Lumosaca said: Two of the most famous Hands of the King. Which one had more capacity of bringing prosperity to the Seven Kingdoms? Tywin, hands down. Jon Arryn let Robert bankrupt the realm. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The hairy bear Posted September 12, 2018 Share Posted September 12, 2018 It's a little bit of an unfair contest: Tywin was Hand in his prime, while Jon Arryn was a man in his sixties who had to keep in check a man of twenty. Early in their respective reigns, Aerys was easier to manage than Robert. (more on that later). Most of what we know of Tywin as a Hand comes from the same hand that wrote: "It is not known who murdered Princess Rhaenys in her bed, or smashed the infant Prince Aegon’s head against a wall. Some whisper it was done at Aerys’s own command when he learned that Lord Lannister had taken up Robert’s cause, while others suggest that Elia did it herself for fear of what would happen to her children in the hands of her dead husband’s enemies". We can't do a proper evaluation when the sources are so dramatically biased. On 8/26/2018 at 8:06 PM, Varysblackfyre321 said: He failed to get the man who would see Aryn as father-figure, to curb his spending habits, and did not do enough to try to reconcile with Dorne-the marriage arrangement to have Mycella and a Dornish prince to be married should have happened years ago. Robert's often criticized spending habit may have some justification. A new king that has just overthrown a centuries-old dynasty can't be seen as niggardly. After a civil war, tournaments can help with reconciliation and bring economic prosperity. It's the old panis and circensis, and it may be worth some deficit. I don't see why Dorne should be rewarded with a royal marriage, when the ones that fought for Robert in the rebellion did not. It would have been more reasonable to marry Myrcella to Robb Stark or Robert Arryn. The Dornish are not powerful enough to require a king's daughter to appease them, and besides, we know that they were intending to rebel against the Baratheons anyway so we would just be giving them an hostage. On 8/25/2018 at 11:27 PM, Bernie Mac said: Tywin had to manage a petulant and eventually insane king who was happy to sabotage Tywin's decisions if it made him look bad. Robert, as lazy as he was, was a picnic in comparison. The problem is that Tywin was very petulant himself. Jon Arryn, with all of his failures, actually cared for his king and for the realm. Tywin Lannister was fulfilling his own agenda, and while certainly had accomplishments, his arrogance poisoned the realm: he took credit for the works the crown paid for, allowed his captain of the guard to say that it was him who truly ruled the Seven Kingdoms, decided to attack Duskendale putting Aerys' life in serious jeopardy,.. Our heavily biased maester Yandel claims: "By this time, King Aerys had become aware of the widespread belief that he himself was but a hollow figurehead and Tywin Lannister the true master of the Seven Kingdoms. These sentiments greatly angered the king, and His Grace became determined to disprove them and to humble his “overmighty servant” and “put him back into his place.” No sensible Hand would allow his king to be seen as a puppet, even if it was true. A truly loyal hand would have tried to redirect all of young Aery's energy to better goals, and would allow him to take credit for it. Instead, Tywin tried to compete with his king in some kind of absurd popularity contest. Aerys was only insane at the latest part of his realm. At the beginning, he was just a malleable young boy who trusted his boyhood friend with the realm's most important office trusting he'd act as a loyal servant, not as his rival. On 8/25/2018 at 11:27 PM, Bernie Mac said: Robert's crown was actually more secure. His father-in-law was the ruler of the Westerlands, his brother the ruler of the Stormlands, his 'adopted' father the ruler of the Vale, best friend the ruler of the North and the ruler of the Riverlands related to both Ned and Jon. The vast majority of the realm was in favor of him. The population (and troops) of the Reach, Dorne and the Crownlands is higher than the sum of the North, The Stormlands, the Vale and the West. The Riverlands were evenly split during the war, and the Iron Islands are only waiting for an opportunity to stab you in the back. I don't think is a fair assertion to claim that Robert's crown was more secure than Aerys. At all. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Kienn Posted September 13, 2018 Share Posted September 13, 2018 Neither... both were terrible. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bernie Mac Posted September 13, 2018 Share Posted September 13, 2018 15 hours ago, The hairy bear said: It's a little bit of an unfair contest: Tywin was Hand in his prime, while Jon Arryn was a man in his sixties who had to keep in check a man of twenty. A 20 year old is not in his prime when it comes to ruling a realm. If 20 was the prime age for Handship we'd have seen more men appointed at that age. Connington, who had been a Lord for 'several years' was a couple of years older than Tywin when he became Hand and was clearly not ready "Too soon. Connington is too young, too bold, too eager for glory." I would imagine the 40 something Connington would make a better hand for Aegon than he did for Aerys. Arryn is at a great age to be Hand and with decade(s?) of Lordship experience is more qualified than the 20 year old Tywin. 15 hours ago, The hairy bear said: Early in their respective reigns, Aerys was easier to manage than Robert. (more on that later). Yeah, I'm not so sure that is true. Aerys was incredibly ambitious, managing those expectations is going to be more difficult than someone who merely wanted to hunt, fuck and drink. Tywin was able to keep the ambitious Aerys under budget while Arryn allowed the realm to get into huge debt to keep Robert happy. 15 hours ago, The hairy bear said: Most of what we know of Tywin as a Hand comes from the same hand that wrote: "It is not known who murdered Princess Rhaenys in her bed, or smashed the infant Prince Aegon’s head against a wall. Some whisper it was done at Aerys’s own command when he learned that Lord Lannister had taken up Robert’s cause, while others suggest that Elia did it herself for fear of what would happen to her children in the hands of her dead husband’s enemies". We can't do a proper evaluation when the sources are so dramatically biased. I'm sorry, but that is how History books are written. No one was revealing who rid knocked off the Princes in the Tower, if the 'hunting' accident on the unpopular William II was ordered, who murdered Edmund Ironside or who killed the imprisoned Edward II. Godwin, Earl of Essex (and one of the closest analogies to Tywin) saw two different Princes claimants die in suspicious circumstances. As king Robert did not care on the matter, there is no 'official' killer (and by extension order giver of their deaths). GRRM is reflecting this, who murdered the children is not a confirmed fact, that is why Oberyn wants confirmation. Regarding Tywin's reign we know that there was more peace in those 20 years than the 20 years before and the 20 years after, we know from Ned that the Crown was financially healthy, we know from various POV's that Aerys was a crackpot. We also know Aerys was pretty trigger happy when it came to firing people, not just the four Hands after Tywin but the Hand and Small Council he inherited. Not necessarily you, but many people in the fandom can't accept the idea that Tywin was a great Hand because he is one of the antagonists of the series and traditionally in fantasy literature they are never 'good' rulers. GRRM talks about this when comparing his series to the likes of LOTR But I also want to respond—I’ve read a lot of history about feudal history and Roman history and so forth, about politics in those days. I follow contemporary politics. And you know, what strikes me is that these issues are horrid. And a lot of fantasy makes it seem simply: a good man will be a good king. Well, a good man is not always a good king. And a bad man is not always a bad king. You know, it’s much more complicated than that. It’s you know, I look at in my lifetime, I think probably the best man to serve as President in my lifetime was Jimmy Carter. As a human being, the best human being, but he was not a good President. He was not. General goodness did not automatically make flowers bloom. 15 hours ago, The hairy bear said: Robert's often criticized spending habit may have some justification. A new king that has just overthrown a centuries-old dynasty can't be seen as niggardly. After a civil war, tournaments can help with reconciliation and bring economic prosperity. It's the old panis and circensis, and it may be worth some deficit. Tywin's reign was also not niggardly Tywin built new roads and repaired old ones, held many splendid tournaments about the realm to the delight of knights and commons both A conquering king does not have to spend the next 16 years, in one of the longest Summer's in history, crippling the realm with debt to make the people like him. It's poor management. 15 hours ago, The hairy bear said: I don't see why Dorne should be rewarded with a royal marriage, when the ones that fought for Robert in the rebellion did not. It would have been more reasonable to marry Myrcella to Robb Stark or Robert Arryn. Both the Arryns and Starks are already allies, with Sansa marrying Joffrey there would be no need to marry another child to House Stark. Myrcella, given the ages of Loras and the sons of Doran should have been used to secure the Tyrells or Martells. 15 hours ago, The hairy bear said: The Dornish are not powerful enough to require a king's daughter to appease them, and besides, we know that they were intending to rebel against the Baratheons anyway so we would just be giving them an hostage. It would be the other way round, the Martell prince would be sent to Kings Landing, to squire for Robert and to be betrothed to the Princess. Doran could not refuse such an offer without making it obvious he was not on board with Robert as such an offer would be a huge boon to House Martell. The concession to give the Dornish Myrcella was an act of desperation, with the Crown desperate for them to remain neutral. 15 hours ago, The hairy bear said: The problem is that Tywin was very petulant himself. Jon Arryn, with all of his failures, actually cared for his king and for the realm. Well no, that's not entirely true. Tywin, like Jon, was given the position as Hand due to their close relationship. Aerys, unlike Robert, went overboard when it came to treating his friend like shit and by the time Aerys robbed Tywin of his heir there was likely no love between the two. Had Robert treated Jon or Ned the same we'd see similar feelings between these once close friends. There is zero evidence that Tywin does not care for the realm, or that Arryn does. Tywin, like a lot of ruthless leaders in real history, likely thinks what he is doing is good for the realm. His terms as Hand under Aerys and ruler of the Westerlands back this up. 15 hours ago, The hairy bear said: Tywin Lannister was fulfilling his own agenda, They are not mutually exclusive goals. Tywin did not increase the size of the Westerlands while he was Hand, he did not use that time to punish/weaken his rivals. All he did was to try and arrange a marriage alliance with the Crown. And lets face facts, it would have been in the best interests of both the realm and the royal family if Aerys had married the daughter of his most powerful vassal. 15 hours ago, The hairy bear said: and while certainly had accomplishments, his arrogance poisoned the realm: he took credit for the works the crown paid for, Citation? 15 hours ago, The hairy bear said: allowed his captain of the guard to say that it was him who truly ruled the Seven Kingdoms, How can he control what another man thinks and then says? Especially when it was true. Tywin has not been the first Hand accused of this. 15 hours ago, The hairy bear said: decided to attack Duskendale putting Aerys' life in serious jeopardy,.. Our heavily biased maester Yandel claims: "By this time, King Aerys had become aware of the widespread belief that he himself was but a hollow figurehead and Tywin Lannister the true master of the Seven Kingdoms. These sentiments greatly angered the king, and His Grace became determined to disprove them and to humble his “overmighty servant” and “put him back into his place.” I agree on this, this passage from the World of Ice is pretty bad, its almost treason. It is definitely a mark against him. But you earlier claimed that you could not trust the good things it said about Tywin's reign because it was biased in favor of him, it would never have said the above if that was the case. 18 hours ago, The hairy bear said: No sensible Hand would allow his king to be seen as a puppet, even if it was true. Are you suggesting Tywin follow Aerys lead and go ripping out the tongues everyone suspected of thinking that? In your opinion would this have made Tywin a better Hand? 18 hours ago, The hairy bear said: A truly loyal hand He was a true loyal Hand. 18 hours ago, The hairy bear said: would have tried to redirect all of young Aery's energy to better goals, and would allow him to take credit for it. Instead, Tywin tried to compete with his king in some kind of absurd popularity contest. When? How is doing his job, a job he was pretty effective in, competing with the king? 18 hours ago, The hairy bear said: Aerys was only insane at the latest part of his realm. Was he? Maybe he was from early on, he was just better insulated with an effective Hand protecting the realm from him. Barristan, who was already a KG before Aerys was king, always thinks about him as if we was unhinged Ser Barristan glanced toward the throne. He had served so many kings, he could not help but imagine how they might have reacted to this provocation. Aerys would have flinched away in horror, likely cutting himself on the barbs of the Iron Throne, then shrieked at his swordsmen to cut the Yunkishmen to pieces. ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------ King Aerys became convinced that his son was conspiring to depose him, that Whent's tourney was but a ploy to give Rhaegar a pretext for meeting with as many great lords as could be brought together. --------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- "Viserys was a child, and the queen sheltered him as much as she could. Your father always had a little madness in him, I now believe. Yet he was charming and generous as well, so his lapses were forgiven. His reign began with such promise . . . but as the years passed, the lapses grew more frequent, until . . ." like it or not, Barristan, who will have known Aerys as well as anyone, thinks he was always mad. 18 hours ago, The hairy bear said: At the beginning, he was just a malleable young boy who trusted his boyhood friend with the realm's most important office trusting he'd act as a loyal servant, not as his rival. When did Tywin ever act as his rival? 18 hours ago, The hairy bear said: The population (and troops) of the Reach, Dorne and the Crownlands is higher than the sum of the North, The Stormlands, the Vale and the West. I'd say they were around even, with military/population going Reach West Vale North Stormlands Dorne Crownlands 18 hours ago, The hairy bear said: The Riverlands were evenly split during the war, Not from what we have seen. 18 hours ago, The hairy bear said: and the Iron Islands are only waiting for an opportunity to stab you in the back. I don't think is a fair assertion to claim that Robert's crown was more secure than Aerys. At all. Of course it was. His two closest friends were two of the four Wardens of the realm, his father-in-law the other. Both his brothers were two of the most powerful Lords in the realm while Aerys was paranoid about his own son. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The hairy bear Posted September 13, 2018 Share Posted September 13, 2018 Buff. That was a long post. It's not that I disagree with all of your points. I just wanted to stress that probably Tywin gets better press than he deserves, and Jon Arryn worse, because of their different situations and the nature of the information we have on both. Anyway, going to the specifics. 10 hours ago, Bernie Mac said: A 20 year old is not in his prime when it comes to ruling a realm. If 20 was the prime age for Handship we'd have seen more men appointed at that age. Tywin was hand from his 20 to 39. It's clearly the "prime", specially in a world when you reach majority at 16 (he had already lead armies and fought in wars, before being Hand). Jon Arryn was hand from 59 to 73. Studies about that are not in agreement, but it's widely accepted that human brains reach their peak around 25 and start to decline by 45. Most countries stablish the retirement age around 65 years. Surely Jon had plenty of experience and good council to offer if anyone wanted to listen him, but not enough mental strength and agility to outsmart scheming men many years his junior (Robert, Stannis, Renly and Littlefinger were around 4-5 decades younger). 10 hours ago, Bernie Mac said: Connington, who had been a Lord for 'several years' was a couple of years older than Tywin when he became Hand and was clearly not ready "Too soon. Connington is too young, too bold, too eager for glory." But this quote (ironically from Tywin himself) is referring to Connington as the leader of the royal army during the revolt. Tywin had the luxury of ruling in a time of peace. If comparing Tywin's rule to Jon Arryn's is a little unfair, comparing him to Jon Connington's is just too much. 10 hours ago, Bernie Mac said: I'm sorry, but that is how History books are written. We are all aware of that. That was my point. When trying to make an objective appraisal of an historical figure, we have take into account the bias of the source. Maester Yandel is shamefully biased against Aerys and pro Tywin. For this reason, we can't really rely on his assessment of Tywin's rule. When he attributes to Tywin all the positive things that were achieved during this era (new roads, splendid tournaments), we can't be sure that Aerys didn't, at least, share some merit. At the same time, some the unpopular things attributed to Aerys (the rise of the harbor tariffs) could actually be Tywin's fault. If Yandel is dishonest enough to propose that Rhaegar's kids may have been murdered by their mother without even consider that they could have been murdered by Tywin's men (a public secret in KL and Casterly Rock), how can we trust the other things he says? What we are doing here is trying to compare Stalin and Truman based on information from Pravda. 10 hours ago, Bernie Mac said: Regarding Tywin's reign we know that there was more peace in those 20 years than the 20 years before and the 20 years after, we know from Ned that the Crown was financially healthy, I don't think that those 20 years of peace are really Tywin's merit. Barristan had killed the last Blackfyre pretender, and the realm had long accepted the Targaryens as legitimate rulers. And I admit that this is just conjecture, but I suspect that Ned was not entirely correct when he assumed that Aerys had left the treasury full (he wouldn't necessarily know the , because he left immediately after the war and wasn't part of Robert's Council). I think this because TWOIAF explains that late into Aerys reign, Tywin purchased the crown's debt with Braavos. Aerys wouldn't be in a hurry to pay him back, so I could see the royal treasury full of gold and at the same time, in a big debt with Casterly Rock. 10 hours ago, Bernie Mac said: Both the Arryns and Starks are already allies, with Sansa marrying Joffrey there would be no need to marry another child to House Stark. Myrcella, given the ages of Loras and the sons of Doran should have been used to secure the Tyrells or Martells. I don't share your opinion. A royal marriage is a huge reward, and I would rather give it to my allies than my opponents. And f I were to marry Myrcella to Dorne or the Reach, I may prefer to marry her to some Rowan or Yronwood. Let the ruling houses know that I have a replacement ready if they move a finger in the wrong direction (this is, as I see it, why Stannis was married to a Florent). 10 hours ago, Bernie Mac said: It would be the other way round, the Martell prince would be sent to Kings Landing. I don't know about that. The first Daenerys was only 15 when she was sent to Dorne with Prince Maron. 10 hours ago, Bernie Mac said: All he did was to try and arrange a marriage alliance with the Crown. And lets face facts, it would have been in the best interests of both the realm and the royal family if Aerys had married the daughter of his most powerful vassal. Never before, a king's heir, had married someone from a great house before*. I think there are good reasons for not marrying direct vassals, and Tywin's proposal was extremely ambitious to say the least.** *Both Viserys I and Daeron II were far in the succession line when he married Aemma Arryn and Myriah Martell (and besides, there were good reasons to marry each: the first was half-Targaryen, and the second was part of the peace treaty with Dorne). **The obvious precedent of a Hand trying to marry her daughter to a king was Otto Hightower. It ended badly. 10 hours ago, Bernie Mac said: Are you suggesting Tywin follow Aerys lead and go ripping out the tongues everyone suspected of thinking that? In your opinion would this have made Tywin a better Hand? I'm suggesting that if Tywin was aware that his king was widely seen as an inoperative figurehead, he should have taken every step possible to improve his public image. He should have organized public feast, tournaments, or any kind of popular measures and ensure that it was Aerys that took the credit. Instead, the World Book states that when a road was repaired or a tournament was held, this is attributed to Tywin and not Aerys. But I doubt that this was unintended. We know from the books that Tywin is overproud and full of himself. I have little doubt that it was him who encouraged those missatributions. 10 hours ago, Bernie Mac said: Of course it was. His two closest friends were two of the four Wardens of the realm, his father-in-law the other. Both his brothers were two of the most powerful Lords in the realm while Aerys was paranoid about his own son. I disagree. As I said in my thread, the manpower of the lords that sided with the Targaryens in the rebellion act is slightly higher than the ones who supported Robert. The Targs counted with all the Reach, Dorne and the Crownlands. The rebels originally only had the support without fissures in the North (and later in the West). In the Stormlands and the Vale they had significant opposition, but the Riverlands were truly split: Hoster couldn't count with houses Darry, Goodbrook, Mooton, Whent, Ryger, Lychester and Frey. Using any of the usual estimates of the number troops per kingdom and allocating a reasonable amount of men to each of the "defecting" houses in relation to their importance, I thing we'd all come to the conclusion that the forces were at least even. Who holds an empty position such as a wardenship don't matter as much as manpower. One final snippet regarding Aerys' paranoia: his own son was actually planing to replace him. Lady Dustin confirmed that Lord Rickard actually had "southern ambitions". Tywin was quick to betray him to obtain his goal of a crowned Cersei. The Dornish were actually sending fewer troops than they supposedly had... Aerys was clearly mad, but we can't deny that his paranoia had some basis. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bernie Mac Posted September 14, 2018 Share Posted September 14, 2018 7 hours ago, The hairy bear said: It's not that I disagree with all of your points. I just wanted to stress that probably Tywin gets better press than he deserves, and Jon Arryn worse, because of their different situations and the nature of the information we have on both. Again, I'd disagree with that as the central character of the first book holds Arryn in the highest of esteem, he is incredibly biased towards his father like figure. But it is Ned who makes the comparison between the Crown's finances under both Tywin and Jon. 7 hours ago, The hairy bear said: Tywin was hand from his 20 to 39. It's clearly the "prime", specially in a world when you reach majority at 16 (he had already lead armies and fought in wars, before being Hand). It is not the 'prime' age to be appointed a leader of a realm. Since 1676 the average age of the Prime Minister of Britain has been 53, the average age of the president of the US 44. The prime age for someone appointed to lead (on merit rather than birth) is not 20, nor is it 30. Look through medieval governments and the men chosen to rule in the kings name are commonly much older than 20, the likes of Thomas Stanley, Dudley, Empson, Wolsey, Cromwell, Rich, Seymour and Cecil were all men of experience. For such a position 20 is not the prime age. 7 hours ago, The hairy bear said: Jon Arryn was hand from 59 to 73. Studies about that are not in agreement, but it's widely accepted that human brains reach their peak around 25 and start to decline by 45. Most countries stablish the retirement age around 65 years. I'm sorry, but we are talking about ruling the realm, not running a marathon. There are absolutely jobs that a 20 year old is more qualified for than a 59 year old but by the same token there are positions were the 59 year old qualified for. Being Hand is certainly one such position. 7 hours ago, The hairy bear said: Surely Jon had plenty of experience and good council to offer if anyone wanted to listen him, but not enough mental strength and agility to outsmart scheming men many years his junior (Robert, Stannis, Renly and Littlefinger were around 4-5 decades younger). That is debatable, some of the savviest characters in the series are all in Arryn's age range when he became Hand. Tywin, Doran, Olenna, Walder, the Blackfish all have no issue with outsmarting and scheming younger people. Littlefinger was Arryn's appointment, there is little reason to suspect how much of an agent of chaos he was. Nor should he be trying to outmaneuver his subordinate Stannis went to the aged Arryn for council, clearly Arryn's age was not a problem to him. Robert is king, the Hand and King are supposed to work in unison. 7 hours ago, The hairy bear said: But this quote (ironically from Tywin himself) is referring to Connington as the leader of the royal army during the revolt. Tywin had the luxury of ruling in a time of peace. No, the quote is about him being appointed the Hand. That, and his skill at arms, was why Mad King Aerys had named him Hand. Old Lord Merryweather's inaction had allowed the rebellion to take root and spread, and Aerys wanted someone young and vigorous to match Robert's own youth and vigor. "Too soon," Lord Tywin Lannister had declared when word of the king's choice had reached Casterly Rock. 7 hours ago, The hairy bear said: If comparing Tywin's rule to Jon Arryn's is a little unfair, comparing him to Jon Connington's is just too much. The point is the age, Connington, a few years older, was out of his depth. 7 hours ago, The hairy bear said: We are all aware of that. That was my point. When trying to make an objective appraisal of an historical figure, we have take into account the bias of the source. I'm sorry, but there is no evidence that Yandel was biased towards Tywin. Tywin's reign as Hand was one of the most peaceful and prosperous in the last three centuries, and this was done without the looming threat of dragons. There is good reason it was praised. 7 hours ago, The hairy bear said: Maester Yandel is shamefully biased against Aerys and pro Tywin. Name another source that is positive about Varys? If anything this line the most positive quote about Aerys comes from Yandel. Aerys Targaryen, the Second of His Name, was but eighteen years of age when he ascended the Iron Throne in 262 AC, upon the death of his father, Jaehaerys, after little more than three years of rule. A handsome youth, Aerys had fought gallantly in the Stepstones during the War of the Ninepenny Kings. Though not the most diligent of princes, nor the most intelligent, he had an undeniable charm that won him many friends And if Yandel was so biased towards Tywin he would never have revealed Tywin's quotes about letting Aerys die at Duskendale or about his general lack of positive humour Yet despite these accomplishments, Tywin Lannister was little loved. His rivals charged that he was humorless, unforgiving, unbending, proud, and cruel. His lords bannermen respected him and followed him loyally in war and peace, but none could truly be named his friends. Tywin despised his father, the weak-willed, fat, and ineffectual Lord Tytos Lannister, and his relations with his brothers Tygett and Gerion were notoriously stormy. He showed more regard for his brother Kevan, a close confidant and constant companion since childhood, and his sister Genna, but yet even in those cases, Tywin Lannister appeared more dutiful than affectionate. If Yandel was truly biased towards Tywin the above would never have made the book, it is not flattering towards Tywin at all. 7 hours ago, The hairy bear said: For this reason, we can't really rely on his assessment of Tywin's rule. by the same logic we should ignore everything mentioned by another person. We should ignore that Aerys called for the heads of Ned and Robert, forcing them to go to war. I think this logic is ridiculous, but this is the argument you are making. If you want to prove that Yandel should not be trusted then find another source that disputes anything he says about Aerys or Tywin. It is coming across that you are rejecting sources simply because you don't like what they are saying rather than them being contradicted by any other evidence. 7 hours ago, The hairy bear said: If Yandel is dishonest enough to propose that Rhaegar's kids may have been murdered by their mother without even consider that they could have been murdered by Tywin's men (a public secret in KL and Casterly Rock), how can we trust the other things he says? The Red Keep was soon breached, but in the chaos, misfortune soon fell upon Elia of Dorne and her children, Rhaenys and Aegon. It is tragic that the blood spilled in war may as readily be innocent as it is guilty, and that those who ravished and murdered Princess Elia escaped justice. It is not known who murdered Princess Rhaenys in her bed, or smashed the infant Prince Aegon's head against a wall. Some whisper it was done at Aerys's own command when he learned that Lord Lannister had taken up Robert's cause, while others suggest that Elia did it herself for fear of what would happen to her children in the hands of her dead husband's enemies. This is how history was recorded, he can't write a book while Tywin and Robert are living and claim their involvement. He can do the same about the dead Elia. There were probably many, many people who know what happened to the Princes of the Tower, but officially they could not reveal it through either the reign of Richard III or the Tudors (which suggests someone like Lord Stanley, an influential figure for both factions). What Yandel has done is what many historians have done with sensitive information, and he is more than clear that it is a mystery to him, and in fairness it may well be. The majority of the population does not know and few in either Robert or Tywin's retinue will boast about it, while Ned is notoriously tight lipped about the past and Doran playing the long game and not trying to rock the boat. 7 hours ago, The hairy bear said: What we are doing here is trying to compare Stalin and Truman based on information from Pravda. I'm sorry but that is just a dumb comparison. The Citadel, in Oldtown, has little, if anything, to do with House Lannister. There is zero connection between the two men. By all means name another source that contradicts anything he as said about the two men because now you are resorting to making conspiracy theories why Tywin's reign of 20 years is spoken positively. Also Tywin is not even regarded as the greatest Hand by Yandel, he is, correctly, far more impressed with Barth and Viserys is praised just as much, if not more so, than Tywin. 7 hours ago, The hairy bear said: I don't think that those 20 years of peace are really Tywin's merit. Barristan had killed the last Blackfyre pretender, and the realm had long accepted the Targaryens as legitimate rulers. Of course they are, he brokered the peace between Westeros and Braavos, he reversed many of the laws that the Lords of the land were against. You are discounting the effect a competent and feared leader has on potential rebels, just look at Connington's conversation with the Gold Company Strickland shook his head stubbornly. "The risk—" "—is not what it was, now that Tywin Lannister is dead. The Seven Kingdoms will never be more ripe for conquest. Another boy king sits the Iron Throne, this one even younger than the last, and rebels are thick upon the ground as autumn leaves." Strong leadership is absolutely a deterrent to potential rebels and encourages compliance from subordinates, when the realm prospers and is happy peace is more likely to happen. 7 hours ago, The hairy bear said: And I admit that this is just conjecture, but I suspect that Ned was not entirely correct Right, better to make up conspiracy theories if you don't agree with the characters are telling you. This is what GRRM is talking about, readers of traditional fantasy fiction are so used to the concept of good person equals good ruler/ bad person equals bad ruler that they simply can not accept anything else. 7 hours ago, The hairy bear said: I don't share your opinion. A royal marriage is a huge reward, and I would rather give it to my allies than my opponents. Royal marriages are rarely about rewarding allies but strengthening the Royal House. Henry Tudor's position is the closest to Robert's, he did not marry his children off to allies but to the strongest possible suitors. Now the two are not mutually exclusive, sometimes an ally can also be powerful enough to also strengthen the crown but a new dynasty needs to appeal to all factions. 7 hours ago, The hairy bear said: And f I were to marry Myrcella to Dorne or the Reach, I may prefer to marry her to some Rowan or Yronwood. Let the ruling houses know that I have a replacement ready if they move a finger in the wrong direction (this is, as I see it, why Stannis was married to a Florent). Sure, both are acceptable options, carrot and stick are both effective weapons in feudal rule. 7 hours ago, The hairy bear said: I don't know about that. The first Daenerys was only 15 when she was sent to Dorne with Prince Maron. The marriage took place in Kings Landing His marriage to Mariah of Dorne—now Queen of the Seven Kingdoms—had been happy and fruitful, and one of his earliest significant acts after assuming the throne was to begin negotiations with his good-brother, Prince Maron, to unify Dorne under Targaryen rule. Two years of negotiation later, an agreement was reached in which Prince Maron agreed to be betrothed to Daeron's sister, Daenerys, once she was of age. They were wed the following year, and with that marriage, Prince Maron knelt and swore his oaths of fealty before the Iron Throne. Though, again, not a great comparison, the Crown have their 'hostage' in Mariah. 7 hours ago, The hairy bear said: Never before, a king's heir, had married someone from a great house before*. well yeah, the majority of the time they were marrying sisters or cousins. You can afford to do that when you have Dragons. Though you are ignoring Aemon's marriage to Jocelyn Baratheon, he would have been the heir. Though, again, you are being a little disingenuous in your argument, with the marriage to Prince Maron the Martell's became a Great House, Aegon V planned on marrying his heir to House Baratheon and Aerys rejected the Lannisters for the Martells, one great House for another. 7 hours ago, The hairy bear said: I think there are good reasons for not marrying direct vassals, and Tywin's proposal was extremely ambitious to say the least.** Ambitious, sure, but good for the realm. Cersie was one of the 3 best matches in the realm for the heir. I struggle to see how anyone can argue otherwise. 7 hours ago, The hairy bear said: I'm suggesting that if Tywin was aware that his king was widely seen as an inoperative figurehead, he should have taken every step possible to improve his public image. He should have organized public feast, tournaments, or any kind of popular measures and ensure that it was Aerys that took the credit. Where is it stated he didn't? And they are a partnership, Tywin serves at Aerys pleasure, there is no reason why he would need to tell people anything. You are holding Tywin up to an weird standard, was Tyrion expected to give Joffrey the credit every time someone congratulated him on the Chain? It has been written that while Daeron warred and Baelor prayed, Viserys ruled. For fourteen years he served as Hand to his nephews, and before them he served his brother, King Aegon III. It is said he was the shrewdest Hand since Septon Barth, though his good efforts were diminished in the reign of the Broken King, who lacked any desire to please his subjects or win their love. Should Yandel have not written the above? Should Viseys have gone round denying what he had done? The same is true of the Master of Ships, Stannis is highly praised for his work against the Ironborn. Should Yandel not mention this? Should Stannis have made sure that everyone thought Robert was the architect of that victory? 7 hours ago, The hairy bear said: Instead, the World Book states that when a road was repaired or a tournament was held, this is attributed to Tywin and not Aerys. They are one and the same, Ned knew the saying. "What the king dreams," he said, "the Hand builds." "I bedded a fishmaid once who told me the lowborn have a choicer way to put it. The king eats, they say, and the Hand takes the shit." 7 hours ago, The hairy bear said: But I doubt that this was unintended. We know from the books that Tywin is overproud and full of himself. I have little doubt that it was him who encouraged those missatributions. Evidence that these are misattributions? Any character that offers a different perspective? 7 hours ago, The hairy bear said: I disagree. As I said in my thread, the manpower of the lords that sided with the Targaryens in the rebellion act is slightly higher than the ones who supported Robert. That is before the Westerlands got involved. Roberts crown was far more secure than Aerys Robert rules Kings Landing His father- in -law the Westerlands His best friend the North His adopted father the Vale His younger brother the Stormlands The ruler of the Riverlands tied to him through marriage Another brother Lord of the Narrow Sea Islands and married to a Florent. Roberts faction was more secure. Aerys, thanks to incest, had no real marriage alliances for the majority of Tywin's term of Hand. 7 hours ago, The hairy bear said: The Targs counted with all the Reach, Dorne and the Crownlands. Dorne only came after the marriage, Aerys traded down as he swapped counting on the Lannisters for the Martells. The Reach barely did anything and made peace when there was still living Targs. 7 hours ago, The hairy bear said: The rebels originally only had the support without fissures in the North (and later in the West). In the Stormlands and the Vale they had significant opposition, but the Riverlands were truly split: Hoster couldn't count with houses Darry, Goodbrook, Mooton, Whent, Ryger, Lychester and Frey. We are talking about their security as kings, Roberts position, due to stronger alliances was more secure. 7 hours ago, The hairy bear said: One final snippet regarding Aerys' paranoia: his own son was actually planing to replace him. Lady Dustin confirmed that Lord Rickard actually had "southern ambitions". Which confirms how weak his crown was. 7 hours ago, The hairy bear said: Tywin was quick to betray him to obtain his goal of a crowned Cersei. Factually incorrect, the war was pretty much over till Tywin betrayed him. How is that quick? 7 hours ago, The hairy bear said: The Dornish were actually sending fewer troops than they supposedly had... Aerys was clearly mad, but we can't deny that his paranoia had some basis. Exactly, Aerys was not supported, that makes a Hands job (ouch) harder not easier. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.