Why did Tywin have to sack King’s Landing?

[John Suburbs]

On 3/6/2021 at 2:47 PM, saltedmalted said:

Jaime Lannister was lucky to escape with his life. By sacking the city the Lannisters showed their true colours to Aerys who could have shortened Tywin's son by a head.

Tywin Lannister had made up his mind once the Targaryens lost at the Trident. He marched from the Westerlands to attack KL.

Ned's arrival has nothing to do with his decision.

He never meant to defend the city. 

He could have sent men to start talks with the rebels (in secret). Tywin Lannister could have played the longer ruse if he wanted to maximize his son's safety.

Agreed, it was a very close thing. But if Tywin had not initiated the sack, there would have been no way to get enough men close enough to the Red Keep to storm the gates and allow Westerling and Crakehall to get to Jaime in time. Yes, this was when Tywin showed his true colors to Aerys. Any time sooner and Jaime would have died.

Yes, he decided after the Trident and went to KL to support the rebels, but he could not let Aerys know this until the last possible moment or else Aerys would have killed Jaime.

Quote

"Then why did the Mountain kill her?"

"Because I did not tell him to spare her. I doubt I mentioned her at all. I had more pressing concerns. Ned Stark's van was rushing south from the Trident, and I feared it might come to swords between us. And it was in Aerys to murder Jaime, with no more cause than spite. That was the thing I feared most. That, and what Jaime might do."

Ned's approach had everything to do with this. Tywin has to secure Jaime before Ned arrives or else he will either have to fight Ned and forget about being on the winning side, or side with Ned and have Aerys kill Jaime. Initiating the sack was the only way he could do both.

Agreed, he never meant to defend the city, which is why he had to have the sack to get enough men close enough to Jaime to rescue him before Ned arrived, or else he would have been forced to defend it or give up on Jaime, his eldest son and heir.

Why on earth would the rebels trust anything that Tywin Lannister had to say? He has just arrived at KL as Aerys' savior. Why should they believe these secret messages?

 

[saltedmalted]

10 minutes ago, John Suburbs said:

He has just arrived at KL as Aerys' savior. Why should they believe these secret messages?

He should have sent riders from Casterly Rock as soon as he started marching. Explain his situation to Jon Arryn, i.e. his son is hostage.

10 minutes ago, John Suburbs said:

Tywin has to secure Jaime before Ned arrives or else he will either have to fight Ned and forget about being on the winning side, or side with Ned and have Aerys kill Jaime. Initiating the sack was the only way he could do both.

Riders should have been sent to the rebels to prevent any clash.

I don't think "sacking" was necessary. A sack only wastes time which wasn't something Jaime Lannister could afford.

In my opinion he should have immediately sent word to the rebel camp, marched to KL rapidly, taken control of the city's gates, then the Red Keep.

 

 

[John Suburbs]

37 minutes ago, saltedmalted said:

He should have sent riders from Casterly Rock as soon as he started marching. Explain his situation to Jon Arryn, i.e. his son is hostage.

Riders should have been sent to the rebels to prevent any clash.

I don't think "sacking" was necessary. A sack only wastes time which wasn't something Jaime Lannister could afford.

In my opinion he should have immediately sent word to the rebel camp, marched to KL rapidly, taken control of the city's gates, then the Red Keep.

Why should the rebels believe anything he has to stay before or after the Trident? Yes, Aerys has his son, so why would they think Tywin is playing straight with them when he says he secretly supports the rebels? This is Tywin Lannister, after all, an utterly ruthless warlord who exterminates his own bannermen's entire houses, without a shred of honor or decency. And how would this have looked to Aerys when Ned did arrive at the city and refused to engage Tywin or try and take the city? He would know right away that something was up. At some point, Tywin would have to fight or turn his cloak, and the moment he does this, Jaime dies.

How else was Tywin supposed to get his men close enough to the Red Keep in order to get Jaime out alive? There is zero reason why any Lannister soldiers should be anywhere near the keep, which is manned by several thousand Aerys loyalists. Tywin's men are on the city walls, a good three miles from the keep. The moment Tywin made a move in that direction, Aerys would have Jaime at the gate perched on the edge of a big vat of wildfire, and Tywin knows this (refer to the quote above.)

Also recognize that Aerys is not fooled by Tywin's profession of loyalty one bit; or it's probably more accurate to say that he doesn't care whether Tywin is being honest or not here. His plan is to light the whole city up in a big ball of green flame and then fly away in his new dragon form. So all he was doing was waiting for the rebel army to arrive so he could torch them all, friend or foe.

Lol, I can see we are playing reply-tennis on two separate threads. But I have to go now so I'll get to your other one later.

[saltedmalted]

19 minutes ago, John Suburbs said:

Yes, Aerys has his son, so why would they think Tywin is playing straight with them when he says he secretly supports the rebels?

Because Aerys will not let Jaime Lannister go even if the Lannisters decided to throw in with him.

19 minutes ago, John Suburbs said:

This is Tywin Lannister, after all, an utterly ruthless warlord who exterminates his own bannermen's entire houses,

Jon and Robert happily dealt with him for a long time. What does Tywin Lannister have to gain by playing them false?

19 minutes ago, John Suburbs said:

And how would this have looked to Aerys when Ned did arrive at the city and refused to engage Tywin or try and take the city?

The point of talking with the rebels would be to slow down their march south to KL. A clash with Ned wouldn't be possible before Tywin Lannister gets to KL.

19 minutes ago, John Suburbs said:

At some point, Tywin would have to fight or turn his cloak, and the moment he does this, Jaime dies.

That remains true regardless of the choice he picked but keeping up the ruse as long as possible is to his benefit.

19 minutes ago, John Suburbs said:

How else was Tywin supposed to get his men close enough to the Red Keep in order to get Jaime out alive?

How does sacking get his men close enough to the keep?

19 minutes ago, John Suburbs said:

There is zero reason why any Lannister soldiers should be anywhere near the keep, which is manned by several thousand Aerys loyalists.

There is zero reason why Tywin Lannister should demand entry into KL. Demanding an audience with Aerys in the Red Keep is not that big a stretch.

19 minutes ago, John Suburbs said:

The moment Tywin made a move in that direction, Aerys would have Jaime at the gate perched on the edge of a big vat of wildfire, and Tywin knows this (refer to the quote above.)

Aerys could have killed Jaime during the sack, but he didn't. Getting as close to the target as possible peacefully should have been the aim.

19 minutes ago, John Suburbs said:

Also recognize that Aerys is not fooled by Tywin's profession of loyalty one bit; or it's probably more accurate to say that he doesn't care whether Tywin is being honest or not here.

Then why did he have to be convinced by Pycelle? If he was so eager to burn the Lannisters why did he not open the gates at once?

19 minutes ago, John Suburbs said:

Lol, I can see we are playing reply-tennis on two separate threads. But I have to go now so I'll get to your other one later.

I believe GRRM didn't bother to look at all these questions so we aren't going to find a neat answer.

[Bernie Mac]

On 3/5/2021 at 8:29 PM, Nathan Stark said:

But Tywin was not laying seige to Kings Landing. The gates were opened to him very quickly and no battle was fought prior.

No, the fight was fought inside.

Quote

 

Tywin's army did not breach any part of the city because there was no need for them to do so. 

Of course there was. There was several thousand loyalist soldiers in the City, they were not about to allow Tywin to march to the Red Keep and take their King prisoner.

Quote

The fact is that the only reason the sack took place is because Tywin encouraged it.

That is a pretty poor understanding of both how feudal sackings took place, as well as the George's own understanding a sack.

 

By all means quote one passage that suggests that Tywin encouraged it. He did not, nor did he discourage it.

Quote

#

His army's blood was not up; he simply told his commanders to go do some rape and plundering.

If you can find a source for that, I'd be hugely grateful.

 

On 3/5/2021 at 10:40 PM, Trigger Warning said:

I'd imagine they attacked as soon as they got enough men through the gate to overwhelm the defenders in that area.

Don't need to imagine, I believe we are told that is exactly what happened.

Ser Jaime Lannister was meanwhile left in charge of the Red Keep's defenses. The walls were manned by knights and watchmen, awaiting the enemy. When the first army that arrived flew the lion of Casterly Rock, with Lord Tywin at its head, King Aerys anxiously ordered the gates to be opened, thinking that at last his old friend and former Hand had come to his rescue, as he had done at the Defiance of Duskendale. But Lord Tywin had not come to save the Mad King.

This time, Lord Tywin's cause was that of the realm's, and he was determined to bring an end to the reign that madness had brought low. Once within the walls of the city, his soldiers assaulted the defenders of King's Landing, and blood ran red in the streets. A handpicked cadre of men raced to the Red Keep to storm its walls and seek out King Aerys, so that justice might be done.

 

Cities and large populated settlements are sacked because of chaos, not because of some moustache twirling villain orders his men to do so. With no order  what tends to happen is that a mixture of soldiers on both sides as well as the local populace, from common criminals to panicking civilians, cities become incredibly unstable and people take advantage of the lack of law.

We see a pretty extreme  case of this on Dany's conquest of East Essos

When the last resistance had been crushed by the Unsullied and the sack had run its course, Dany entered her city. The dead were heaped so high before the broken gate that it took her freedmen near an hour to make a path for her silver. Joso's Cock and the great wooden turtle that had protected it, covered with horsehides, lay abandoned within. She rode past burned buildings and broken windows, through brick streets where the gutters were choked with the stiff and swollen dead. Cheering slaves lifted bloodstained hands to her as she went by, and called her "Mother."

It is pretty clear that what happened in Meereen is not completely on Dany's forces, but on the local populace. And GRRM, via Dany, explains to the reader a simple truth

She was pleased. Meereen had been sacked savagely, as new-fallen cities always were, but Dany was determined that should end now that the city was hers. She had decreed that murderers were to be hanged, that looters were to lose a hand, and rapists their manhood. Eight killers swung from the walls, and the Unsullied had filled a bushel basket with bloody hands and soft red worms, but Meereen was calm again. But for how long?

In fact the only person in the books who thinks of a Sacking like some of the arguments in this thread do, is the poor naive Sansa.

I would be gladder if it were the Hound, Sansa thought. Harsh as he was, she did not believe Sandor Clegane would let any harm come to her. "Won't your guards protect us?"

"And who will protect us from my guards?" The queen gave Osfryd a sideways look. "Loyal sellswords are rare as virgin whores. If the battle is lost, my guards will trip on those crimson cloaks in their haste to rip them off. They'll steal what they can and flee, along with the serving men, washerwomen, and stableboys, all out to save their own worthless hides. Do you have any notion what happens when a city is sacked, Sansa? No, you wouldn't, would you? All you know of life you learned from singers, and there's such a dearth of good sacking songs."

"True knights would never harm women and children." The words rang hollow in her ears even as she said them.

 

-----------------------------------------------------------------

 

"And if the castle should fall?"

"You'd like that, wouldn't you?" Cersei did not wait for a denial. "If I'm not betrayed by my own guards, I may be able to hold here for a time. Then I can go to the walls and offer to yield to Lord Stannis in person. That will spare us the worst. But if Maegor's Holdfast should fall before Stannis can come up, why then, most of my guests are in for a bit of rape, I'd say. And you should never rule out mutilation, torture, and murder at times like these."

Sansa was horrified. "These are women, unarmed, and gently born."

 

Now to be clear, Tywin as the aggressor is the person responsible for the sack and he may have done a better job of keeping order if he was not preoccupied with capturing and killing the King and the royal family, saving his son and an assortment of other deeds such as securing the treasury, the ports, the gates etc. But the idea that taking the city without it being sacked is just wrong. Tywin neither had the technology, time or manpower to do that.

Kings Landing would have been sacked regardless. Tywin just beat Robert to it.

[Nathan Stark]

1 hour ago, Bernie Mac said:

No, the fight was fought inside.

Of course there was. There was several thousand loyalist soldiers in the City, they were not about to allow Tywin to march to the Red Keep and take their King prisoner.

That is a pretty poor understanding of both how feudal sackings took place, as well as the George's own understanding a sack.

 

By all means quote one passage that suggests that Tywin encouraged it. He did not, nor did he discourage it.

If you can find a source for that, I'd be hugely grateful.

 

Don't need to imagine, I believe we are told that is exactly what happened.

Ser Jaime Lannister was meanwhile left in charge of the Red Keep's defenses. The walls were manned by knights and watchmen, awaiting the enemy. When the first army that arrived flew the lion of Casterly Rock, with Lord Tywin at its head, King Aerys anxiously ordered the gates to be opened, thinking that at last his old friend and former Hand had come to his rescue, as he had done at the Defiance of Duskendale. But Lord Tywin had not come to save the Mad King.

This time, Lord Tywin's cause was that of the realm's, and he was determined to bring an end to the reign that madness had brought low. Once within the walls of the city, his soldiers assaulted the defenders of King's Landing, and blood ran red in the streets. A handpicked cadre of men raced to the Red Keep to storm its walls and seek out King Aerys, so that justice might be done.

 

Cities and large populated settlements are sacked because of chaos, not because of some moustache twirling villain orders his men to do so. With no order  what tends to happen is that a mixture of soldiers on both sides as well as the local populace, from common criminals to panicking civilians, cities become incredibly unstable and people take advantage of the lack of law.

We see a pretty extreme  case of this on Dany's conquest of East Essos

When the last resistance had been crushed by the Unsullied and the sack had run its course, Dany entered her city. The dead were heaped so high before the broken gate that it took her freedmen near an hour to make a path for her silver. Joso's Cock and the great wooden turtle that had protected it, covered with horsehides, lay abandoned within. She rode past burned buildings and broken windows, through brick streets where the gutters were choked with the stiff and swollen dead. Cheering slaves lifted bloodstained hands to her as she went by, and called her "Mother."

It is pretty clear that what happened in Meereen is not completely on Dany's forces, but on the local populace. And GRRM, via Dany, explains to the reader a simple truth

She was pleased. Meereen had been sacked savagely, as new-fallen cities always were, but Dany was determined that should end now that the city was hers. She had decreed that murderers were to be hanged, that looters were to lose a hand, and rapists their manhood. Eight killers swung from the walls, and the Unsullied had filled a bushel basket with bloody hands and soft red worms, but Meereen was calm again. But for how long?

In fact the only person in the books who thinks of a Sacking like some of the arguments in this thread do, is the poor naive Sansa.

I would be gladder if it were the Hound, Sansa thought. Harsh as he was, she did not believe Sandor Clegane would let any harm come to her. "Won't your guards protect us?"

"And who will protect us from my guards?" The queen gave Osfryd a sideways look. "Loyal sellswords are rare as virgin whores. If the battle is lost, my guards will trip on those crimson cloaks in their haste to rip them off. They'll steal what they can and flee, along with the serving men, washerwomen, and stableboys, all out to save their own worthless hides. Do you have any notion what happens when a city is sacked, Sansa? No, you wouldn't, would you? All you know of life you learned from singers, and there's such a dearth of good sacking songs."

"True knights would never harm women and children." The words rang hollow in her ears even as she said them.

 

-----------------------------------------------------------------

 

"And if the castle should fall?"

"You'd like that, wouldn't you?" Cersei did not wait for a denial. "If I'm not betrayed by my own guards, I may be able to hold here for a time. Then I can go to the walls and offer to yield to Lord Stannis in person. That will spare us the worst. But if Maegor's Holdfast should fall before Stannis can come up, why then, most of my guests are in for a bit of rape, I'd say. And you should never rule out mutilation, torture, and murder at times like these."

Sansa was horrified. "These are women, unarmed, and gently born."

 

Now to be clear, Tywin as the aggressor is the person responsible for the sack and he may have done a better job of keeping order if he was not preoccupied with capturing and killing the King and the royal family, saving his son and an assortment of other deeds such as securing the treasury, the ports, the gates etc. But the idea that taking the city without it being sacked is just wrong. Tywin neither had the technology, time or manpower to do that.

Kings Landing would have been sacked regardless. Tywin just beat Robert to it.

You're wrong. King Aerys ordered the city gates opened up to Tywin's army. They all believed the Lannisters were allies. Therefore, there was no fighting outside the city. There was a slaughter inside it, which is why it is called a sack, not a battle. All of which was unecessary because all Tywin needed to do was secure the Red Keep, not set his entire army on the whole city. Again, the city defenders thought the Lannisters were allies.

[Nathan Stark]

2 hours ago, Bernie Mac said:

If you can find a source for that, I'd be hugely grateful.

Gregor Clegane acted on his own when he raped Elia and murdered her children, did he? Not a chance. He knew what Lorch and Clegane were like when he sent them to do his dirty work. The same is true for the rest of his army. 

You seem to be under the misguided notion that the Sack of Kings Landing was a situation where Tywin was trying to take the city by force from an enemy well prepared to defend it. That is wrong. The city opened its gates to the Lannister army, and the city defenders thought they were allies. Tywin's army launched a surpise attack against people who were not expecting it. You saw how well people deal with surprise attacks at the Red Wedding.

That's why your examples of the Battle of the Blackwater and Dany's conquests in Slavers Bay are meaningless here. Those were all battles fought between aknowleged enemies. The Sack of Kings Landing was not.

[Trigger Warning]

5 hours ago, Nathan Stark said:

You're wrong. King Aerys ordered the city gates opened up to Tywin's army. They all believed the Lannisters were allies. Therefore, there was no fighting outside the city. There was a slaughter inside it, which is why it is called a sack, not a battle. All of which was unecessary because all Tywin needed to do was secure the Red Keep, not set his entire army on the whole city. Again, the city defenders thought the Lannisters were allies.

 

They thought they were allies... until they attacked. Tywin used the ruse to overcome the city walls nothing else. Once inside they fought the defenders the same as they would had they for example climbed the walls, breached the walls, had a gate sneakily opened etc. In a perfect world where everything goes perfect he'd march his men to perfect positions, micromanage them all and attack in one fell swoop but that's frankly silly, once they were inside they attacked because having thousands of men hungry for campaign plunder maintain that ruse surrounded by thousands of loyalists would be ridiculous. They still had to overcome the defenders stationed around the city and on the battlements, of course they had to fight within the city. 

Beyond that why would Aerys allow hundreds of men into the citadel? Varys was warning Aerys not to trust Tywin before Tywin even entered the city let alone marched his army up to Aegon's High Hill. Them all marching to the Red Keep for no reason is incredibly suspicious, your own suggestion shows how hard it would be to maintain the facade and then what, your forces are spread out with no cohesion or momentum from the surprise attack at all. What if they close the gate locking out most of your army because you didn't immediately secure the gatehouse etc etc.  

The ruse was an effective tactic for getting into the city, not for accomplishing all of his objectives. 

[saltedmalted]

59 minutes ago, Trigger Warning said:

Beyond that why would Aerys allow hundreds of men into the citadel?

Why would Aerys open the gates ?

[Trigger Warning]

Just now, saltedmalted said:

Why would Aerys open the gates ?

Because he has to open the gates for them to help defend the city, there's absolutely no reason for them to head for the already garrisoned citadel when the walls haven't fallen to an enemy. 

[saltedmalted]

3 minutes ago, Trigger Warning said:

Because he has to open the gates for them to help defend the city, there's absolutely no reason for them to head for the already garrisoned citadel when the walls haven't fallen to an enemy.

The Red Keep is incapable of resulting if an army is inside the gates. How many people did the Keep even have ?

 

[Trigger Warning]

Just now, saltedmalted said:

The Red Keep is incapable of resulting if an army is inside the gates. How many people did the Keep even have ?

 

I'm not sure what you're saying with the first part, second we don't know how many are there it simply makes no sense to pack a citadel with more men before the outer walls have even been attacked, let alone breached. Tywin's men would be needed on the walls, a significant portion heading for the citadel would obviously be suspicious. 

[saltedmalted]

6 minutes ago, Trigger Warning said:

I'm not sure what you're saying with the first part, second we don't know how many are there it simply makes no sense to pack a citadel with more men before the outer walls have even been attacked, let alone breached.

How did Tywin Lannister take the Red Keep after turning coat? He somehow breached the defences so quickly that his son wasn't killed.

The speed with which the keep was lost implies that the defenders were really weak.

[Trigger Warning]

Just now, saltedmalted said:

How did Tywin Lannister take the Red Keep after turning coat? He somehow breached the defences so quickly that his son wasn't killed.

The speed with which the keep was lost implies that the defenders were really weak.

Again that doesn't matter, filling the citadel with men before the walls have even been attacked makes no sense. Varys warned Aerys before Tywin even entered the city, Tywin insisting his men be allowed into the Red Keep when they're not needed at the time would be suspicious. The enemy are coming from the North and the Red Keep commands the opening of the Blackwater Rush, it doesn't cover any of the approaches the enemy will take to assault the wall. If anything the weakness of the garrison supports this argument as there is no point in having it heavily garrisoned before the walls have fallen or are in danger of falling let alone before the siege has even began. 

[saltedmalted]

4 minutes ago, Trigger Warning said:

Again that doesn't matter, filling the citadel with men before the walls have even been attacked makes no sense.

It matters because Tywin Lannister somehow managed to take the Red Keep with ease. There is nothing to suggest that he couldn't have done the same without starting a sack.

 

6 minutes ago, Trigger Warning said:

The enemy are coming from the North and the Red Keep commands the opening of the Blackwater Rush

The Red Keep does no such thing.

 

[Trigger Warning]

2 minutes ago, saltedmalted said:

It matters because Tywin Lannister somehow managed to take the Red Keep with ease. There is nothing to suggest that he couldn't have done the same without starting a sack.

 

The Red Keep does no such thing.

 

I don't know what point you're trying to make. Yes he took the Red Keep with ease while the rest of his men were fighting loyalists in the city, if his men are dealing with enemies in the city then they're gonna pillage it too. Are you suggesting he could send men to take the Red Keep whilst ignoring the thousands of loyalists manning the city wall? 

Also yes it does, Stannis' ships sail directly under the Red Keep to enter the Rush so where else is it. 

[saltedmalted]

Just now, Trigger Warning said:

Are you suggesting he could send men to take the Red Keep whilst ignoring the thousands of loyalists manning the city wall? 

I am saying that a sack doesn't improve the speed with which the city will be taken. Not letting your troops loose isn't "ignoring" the enemy.

1 minute ago, Trigger Warning said:

Also yes it does, Stannis' ships sail directly under the Red Keep to enter the Rush so where else is it. 

It is at the mouth. The enemy will be sailing down the Blackwater, not that the rebels are going to do it.

[Trigger Warning]

Just now, saltedmalted said:

I am saying that a sack doesn't improve the speed with which the city will be taken. Not letting your troops loose isn't "ignoring" the enemy.

It is at the mouth. The enemy will be sailing down the Blackwater, not that the rebels are going to do it.

Wellington didn't choose to sack Badajoz but it still happened and that was only 200 years ago, you're overestimating how much control can be exerted over a medieval army in a sprawling city once they've overcome the defenders and are loose, it's not an organised affair to pour thousands of men into a city whilst fighting defenders, even if you used subterfuge to overcome the wall. 

Regarding the Red Keep you're literally arguing my point, it's nowhere near where the rebels will be so it doesn't need a strong initial garrison which is exactly what I said. 

[saltedmalted]

53 minutes ago, Trigger Warning said:

Wellington didn't choose to sack Badajoz but it still happened and that was only 200 years ago,

Badajoz was an outlier because the attacking troops took horrific casulaties. Repeated breaches were repelled and the bodies piled up.

KL couldn't have been more different.

 

[Trigger Warning]

5 minutes ago, saltedmalted said:

Badajoz was an outlier because the attacking troops took horrific casulaties. Repeated breaches were repelled and the bodies piled up.

KL couldn't have been more different.

 

The point is that a much more modern and well structured army still took days to restore order to an army rampaging in a city. I don't think Twyin ordered the sack and I don't think he tried to stop it either, it simply happened. His men were fighting in the city then proceeded to sack it because they could as is often the case when a city is taken by storm and just to avoid going over the point again, they still stormed the city despite initially using subterfuge to get in.  

If it was any other commander I doubt this would even be being discussed, yes Tywin is an arsehole. Did that exacerbate the situation? Sure, did he explicitly order the city to be sacked? No because why would he need to when that's just the typical result of a city being stormed.