Tywin Lannister

[Edward the Great]

It would have been madness not to kill Rhaegar's children.

Nonsense, the Baratheon line started by marrying the daughter of the previous storm king. The people who want to control the North don't want to kill Sansa, they want to shag her for the legitimacy she will bestow. Their children will bear the surname of the father, not "Stark."

Aemon was a male heir whose claim was effectively neutralized.

[cravenravenkeeper]

Tyrwin was a genius, but he had some pretty striking blindspots-mostly involving his kids. He was self interested, but not to the point where he didn't see other peoples interests.

I would have liked a Tyrwin POV personally, I bet it would have been awesome to see in that mind (and see how similiar it is to Tyrion).

[Wh0resbane]

Tywin Killed Joff-a sharp lesson- for calling him out in front of cersei and tyrion and kevan

Thats a very interesting point, but i thought it was the Queen of thorns who did it? unless theres better evidence you can link me to read :)

back on topic, i don't buy the self preservation (of house lannister) argument. Tywin was a full out dick, though he was very intelligent when it came to warfare and the preservation of his House, he underestimated how much his assholery would bite him back in the ass.

For example, the treatment of his son Tyrion, if he wasn't such a dick who disliked his own son, he would have saw how capable Tyrion was. I'm not talking about guessing that Tyrion would kill him in the shitter, im talking about not utilizing him in the game of thrones, for example to Lord over Casterly Rock or especially warfare. Because of this, I believe that Tywin is not a reasonable man and that for this instance he let his emotions govern him where his brain should have.

His utter dislike and lack of love blinded him from seeing the greatness in others. And thats why hes a fukin idiot who died crapping himself.

[Rinso]

Nonsense, the Baratheon line started by marrying the daughter of the previous storm king.

The people who want to control the North don't want to kill Sansa, they want to shag her for the legitimacy she will bestow. Their children will bear the surname of the father, not "Stark."

The situation with Sansa is totally different. Her House is effectively and politically dead, with little or no free supporters left. Her death would win nothing, while a marriage with her might bestow some legitimacy onto her husband. The Targaryens after the end of Robert's Rebellion were not in the same position. Even after the deaths of Rhaegar and Aerys, there were still plenty of heirs left and the loyalist Houses, while defeated and outnumbered, were not eradicated from power like the Stark supporters are. If Robert wanted any chance to rule the Seven Kingdoms as a king, he had to destroy the Targaryens. Everything else would have been an invitation for trouble later-on.

Aemon was a male heir whose claim was effectively neutralized.

Aemon neutralized his claim by himself and by his own wish. Even if you could force Rhaegar's son to take the black or be sent to the Citadel (and even then, it's still unreliable), what would you do with Rhaegar's daughter? The only option would be to marry her either yourself or to your son later-on. If anything, that would only undermine your authority, and not to mention that Robert, in particular, would never marry a spawn of Rhaegar.

It's a lott less bother to kill the children. Sorry, I know that sounds cruel, but usurping isn't a game for the squeamish.

[Edward the Great]

The situation with Sansa is totally different. Her House is effectively and politically dead, with little or no free supporters left.

The only reason the Martells have secretly remained Targ loyalists is because of the death of Elia and her children. I never perceived any genuine love for the Targaryens from them.

House Tyrell never gave a damn about Targ rule. If they had been committed, the Targs would still be in power. The only explanation for their actions is that they were hoping the Targs would last just long enough for them to seize Storm's End. Think of the position that would have put them in.

Aemon neutralized his claim by himself and by his own wish. Even if you could force Rhaegar's son to take the black or be sent to the Citadel (and even then, it's still unreliable),

It would be reliable as long as the small council never decided to offer him the throne.

Robert, in particular, would never marry a spawn of Rhaegar.

Here, I think, is the elephant in the room.

There's a motivating factor from Tywin I haven't seen yet - by killing all of Elia's children he ensures that his daughter gives birth to the next king. It may have been revenge for Aerys spurning the offer of Cersei to Rhaegar.

[Hazel]

Rinso,

The situation with Sansa is totally different. Her House is effectively and politically dead, with little or no free supporters left. Her death would win nothing, while a marriage with her might bestow some legitimacy onto her husband. The Targaryens after the end of Robert's Rebellion were not in the same position. Even after the deaths of Rhaegar and Aerys, there were still plenty of heirs left and the loyalist Houses, while defeated and outnumbered, were not eradicated from power like the Stark supporters are. If Robert wanted any chance to rule the Seven Kingdoms as a king, he had to destroy the Targaryens. Everything else would have been an invitation for trouble later-on.

And yet, if Bran or Rickon appeared with as small a force as 500-1,000 men and declared their intent to reclaim the North, just about every Northern House would rise to their call (Especially if all they want back is their lordship, not their kingship). And why is that? Because, like Viserys and Dany, instead of being killed or married into House Bolton, they were cast away.

But although I agree that killing the heirs is an option, marrying into their families would be a much better decision. Let’s take the Targaryens as an example. What if the Tyrells had been insanely fervent supporters of the Targaryens, but could not field their armies in time? They would very possibly be working, for the whole fifteen years since the war, on bringing Viserys and Dany back.

But what if the Baratheons married into the Targaryens? The Tyrells would be faced with either supporting the stable and established Targaryens in King’s Landing (Who, not having been cast away, CANNOT field armies in rebellion seeing as they are constantly under political machinations) or supporting the Targaryens that fled, the ones that, in their bid for power, would end up fighting their own kin and might even bring in barbarian armies against their cousin’s and nephew’s Westerosi armies.

I’m pretty sure that the Tyrells would throw in their lot with the Westerosi Targaryens. Lucky for the Baratheons that the Tyrells WEREN’T of this mindset, though, or there would be quite a lot of messages travelling between Highgarden and Tyrosh.

But, of course, this wouldn’t have suited Tywin in the least. He’d just be replacing the male king’s name with ‘Baratheon’ and continuing the Targaryen line. Things would pretty much be exactly the same as before the war, but with a king bearing a different family name. Tywin could not let this happen, for he desperately wanted to get something out of the war.

So he kills off the Targaryens and what do we conveniently get? A ‘Lannister’ side to the new Baratheon royal line, instead of the standard ‘Targaryen’ one. Now we get a Baratheon-Lannister line instead of a Baratheon-Targaryen line. Let’s see who the Targaryen loyalists would rather side with.

Aemon neutralized his claim by himself and by his own wish. Even if you could force Rhaegar's son to take the black or be sent to the Citadel (and even then, it's still unreliable), what would you do with Rhaegar's daughter? The only option would be to marry her either yourself or to your son later-on. If anything, that would only undermine your authority, and not to mention that Robert, in particular, would never marry a spawn of Rhaegar.

How would they undermine your authority? If Robert could have talked to Rhaegar’s ghost, he would have said, “My son will be king, and your daughter will be queen. And their son will be a Baratheon, but he will still be your grandson. And his son will be a Barathon, but he will still be your great-grandson.’

This in no way undermines your authority. And if you care that much about it, you could stop marrying your grandsons and great-grandsons to Targaryens and let the line dilute itself. And at the same time, the fervent Targaryen loyalists would be looking at your family as an extension of the Targaryen line, and would leave you in peace.

I wonder, even, if Dany (After Viserys getting removed from the picture) would have wanted to go up against what would pretty much amount to the other half of her family.

And as for marrying a ‘spawn of Rhaegar’, how do you know what his reaction to seeing Rhaegar’s children would have been? Upon being shown their corpses he pretty much just stared at them and stated his approval. He didn’t flash a grin, jump and give Tywin a bear-hug. If Robert Baratheon had stood before the children of Rhaegar, with Jon Arryn (And maybe also Ned Stark) at his side, do you think he would have killed them himself? The man hated Rhaegar. Aerys was an antagonist, but the only people with reasons to hate him were those who had suffered losses because of him. He hated Rhaegar because of a love feud, and the feud was solved. Time to set your mind to politics.

It's a lott less bother to kill the children. Sorry, I know that sounds cruel, but usurping isn't a game for the squeamish.

Yeah, well, let’s see how many people remain loyal to the Baratheon-Lannister line as soon as a Targaryen pops up in Westeros again.

[Rinso]

Rinso,

And yet, if Bran or Rickon appeared with as small a force as 500-1,000 men and declared their intent to reclaim the North, just about every Northern House would rise to their call (Especially if all they want back is their lordship, not their kingship). And why is that? Because, like Viserys and Dany, instead of being killed or married into House Bolton, they were cast away.

But although I agree that killing the heirs is an option, marrying into their families would be a much better decision. Let’s take the Targaryens as an example. What if the Tyrells had been insanely fervent supporters of the Targaryens, but could not field their armies in time? They would very possibly be working, for the whole fifteen years since the war, on bringing Viserys and Dany back.

But what if the Baratheons married into the Targaryens? The Tyrells would be faced with either supporting the stable and established Targaryens in King’s Landing (Who, not having been cast away, CANNOT field armies in rebellion seeing as they are constantly under political machinations) or supporting the Targaryens that fled, the ones that, in their bid for power, would end up fighting their own kin and might even bring in barbarian armies against their cousin’s and nephew’s Westerosi armies.

I’m pretty sure that the Tyrells would throw in their lot with the Westerosi Targaryens. Lucky for the Baratheons that the Tyrells WEREN’T of this mindset, though, or there would be quite a lot of messages travelling between Highgarden and Tyrosh.

But, of course, this wouldn’t have suited Tywin in the least. He’d just be replacing the male king’s name with ‘Baratheon’ and continuing the Targaryen line. Things would pretty much be exactly the same as before the war, but with a king bearing a different family name. Tywin could not let this happen, for he desperately wanted to get something out of the war.

So he kills off the Targaryens and what do we conveniently get? A ‘Lannister’ side to the new Baratheon royal line, instead of the standard ‘Targaryen’ one. Now we get a Baratheon-Lannister line instead of a Baratheon-Targaryen line. Let’s see who the Targaryen loyalists would rather side with.

And from where would have Bran or Rickon found a "small" force of 500-1000 men? Exiled lordling and princes don't stumble upon armies just like that.

And anyway the example with the Tyrells is irrelevant, because not only Rhaegar's children had to be killed. The same goes for Dany and Viserys. When I say that the whole Huse Targaryen needed to be eradicated, I meant the whole House, not only Rhaegar's children. If Robert had managed to do this, it doesn't matter how fervent the loyalist Houses are. They literally wouldn't have had a choice but to kneel before him.

How would they undermine your authority? If Robert could have talked to Rhaegar’s ghost, he would have said, “My son will be king, and your daughter will be queen. And their son will be a Baratheon, but he will still be your grandson. And his son will be a Barathon, but he will still be your great-grandson.’

This in no way undermines your authority. And if you care that much about it, you could stop marrying your grandsons and great-grandsons to Targaryens and let the line dilute itself. And at the same time, the fervent Targaryen loyalists would be looking at your family as an extension of the Targaryen line, and would leave you in peace.

I wonder, even, if Dany (After Viserys getting removed from the picture) would have wanted to go up against what would pretty much amount to the other half of her family.

And as for marrying a ‘spawn of Rhaegar’, how do you know what his reaction to seeing Rhaegar’s children would have been? Upon being shown their corpses he pretty much just stared at them and stated his approval. He didn’t flash a grin, jump and give Tywin a bear-hug. If Robert Baratheon had stood before the children of Rhaegar, with Jon Arryn (And maybe also Ned Stark) at his side, do you think he would have killed them himself? The man hated Rhaegar. Aerys was an antagonist, but the only people with reasons to hate him were those who had suffered losses because of him. He hated Rhaegar because of a love feud, and the feud was solved. Time to set your mind to politics.

It will undermine the authority, because it would have made Robert look dependent of the Targaryens. The guy rises in rebellion and manages to crush the armies of the Targaryens and then he cannot take the throne if he doesn't marry a little girl. If that doesn't undermine his authority, nothing will. He needed to differentiate from the Targaryens, not join his blood with theirs.

As for his reaction, I recall that when he saw the bodies of Rhaegar's children and Ned accused Tywin for being a child murderer, Robert said that he doesn't see children, he saw dragonspawn. He hated the whole line, not only Rhaegar.

I don't know if he would have killed them himself. Tywin says that when he (Robert) saw the bodies of the children, his relief was visible, because he realized that to get the throne he would have had to kill them, but he saw himself as a hero and heroes don't kill children.

Yeah, well, let’s see how many people remain loyal to the Baratheon-Lannister line as soon as a Targaryen pops up in Westeros again.

Which is part of my point. But if there were no Targaryens left, the former loyalists just wouldn't have much of a choice, there would have been no one to turn to. But Robert did a half-assed job with that, by letting Dany and Viserys live for 15 years. He should have sent assassins after them right after Stannis failed to capture them in Dragonstone.

[stannis for king]

have to pretty much agree with everything rinso has said, makes sense to me.

the thing is yeah, maybe the children could of been left alive, and exiled or whatever, and it may be safe to assume that they wouldnt want vengance if robert and others married a few targs. but after all, assumption is the mother of all f**k ups.

their is quite a bit of recent history to show that targs arent exactly hesistant when it comes to warring with each other, and its not as if their isnt enough of a reason to do so when said child/children come of age.

ill not deny the way they died was brutal, but i doubt tywin said, 'hey guys, make sure you rape/ stab the crap out of them!'

it sucks, but if you want to usurp one family from the throne to another, the most efficient way is to kill the heirs to the throne, and i doubt robert would be that keen on a targ marriage anyway...

tywin should of been able to see himself in tyrion, thats his biggest (only?) mistake, im sure that if they had been able to work together they would have the seven kingdoms wrapped up by now. hell, house lannister would probably be running middle earth, the malazan empire and have lord foul in their back pockets by now also

[the average Other]

It will undermine the authority, because it would have made Robert look dependent of the Targaryens. The guy rises in rebellion and manages to crush the armies of the Targaryens and then he cannot take the throne if he doesn't marry a little girl. If that doesn't undermine his authority, nothing will. He needed to differentiate from the Targaryens, not join his blood with theirs.

Robert's claim to the Iron Throne is already based on his relations to the Targaryens through his grandmother, Rhaelle. I fail to see how marriage to Rhaenys could have weakened his position. The only thing that marriage would have undermined was Viserys' (and Dany's) claim to the Throne. And since Aegon was only a baby Robert & al. could have sent him wherever they wished (preferably NW, imo).

The only person in the series who claims that it was necessary to kill the Targaryen kids is Lord Tywin himself. I don't know about you, but I don't believe anything that man says about his motives. I find it far more believable, based on what we've seen of his personality in the books, that he had them killed because he wanted his own daughter as Queen and his grandchildren on the Throne instead of Elia's grandchildren. Not only did it give him and his House more power but that way he also got his vengeance on Aerys who had treated him with contempt and on Elia who had stolen the place Tywin had reserved for his own daughter.

ETA: I would have loved to see Tywin's face when he discovered that Tyrells and Littlefinger played him like a fiddle.

ETA2:

Regardless, the plan Varys sprung was so ... unrealistic that I saw it coming as soon as they happened to be in that particualr part of the castel. I mean... how did Varys time it? That he KNEW Tywin took a dump after screwing his mistress at that EXACT moment and that Tyrion would take JUST long enough to climb the ladder .... whatever. I give Martin a pass. It was not a terribly well written part of the book, felt tacked on and implausible. Tywin got killed by Tyrion c’est la vie.

If you decide to believe in crackpot theories then you can blame only yourself when everything that happens in the story starts to look like crackpottery.

[Chalky]

For example, the treatment of his son Tyrion, if he wasn't such a dick who disliked his own son, he would have saw how capable Tyrion was. I'm not talking about guessing that Tyrion would kill him in the shitter, im talking about not utilizing him in the game of thrones, for example to Lord over Casterly Rock or especially warfare.

He did. Tyrion sat at his council meetings, shared his private thoughts and was Hand in Tywins absense. I'd call that utilization...

..Tywin's main mistake in my mind was in hiring monsters in the first place. Using Loch and Gregor scares the shit out of everyone, which is good, but leads to PR disasters, like the manner of Elia and the childrens death, which ellicites sympathy for future Targaryens and turns allies, such as Ned, against you.

The Joffrey incident and Tywin's death was not his fault IMO. Tyrion had a lot of evidence against him and Tywin had to convict him, yet still he tried to get Tyrion sent to the wall (i see no reason to distrust him on this, hes not a liar).

I do agree the Tysha incident was beyond the pale

[Rinso]

Robert's claim to the Iron Throne is already based on his relations to the Targaryens through his grandmother, Rhaelle. I fail to see how marriage to Rhaenys could have weakened his position. The only thing that marriage would have undermined was Viserys' (and Dany's) claim to the Throne. And since Aegon was only a baby Robert & al. could have sent him wherever they wished (preferably NW, imo).

Do you honestly believe that Robert took the throne because of his distant relations with the Targaryens? Cause, the last time I checked, he took the throne because he managed to beat the Targaryens in a open war. His claim was based on his strength. Like Renly said in ACOK, I quote him loosely, that shit (about the distant blood relations) is of interest only for the maesters.

A marriage to Rhaenys would have made him look dependant by a little Targaryen girl. Which would have been a devastating blow to the authority of the man whose purpose in life was to root the Targaryens out of Westeros. Both rebels and loyalists would have percieved him as a weakling.

As for Aegon being a baby so he could have been sent wherever, I already pointed out examples (both from the older history of Westeros and of events in the books), how that would only bite you in the ass in the long run. Him being sent to the Night Watch is also unreliable. They (the NW) tried to do basically the same with Mance Rayder; look what happened. A living Targaryen heir to the throne is a danger to Robert, no matter how you cut it.

The only person in the series who claims that it was necessary to kill the Targaryen kids is Lord Tywin himself. I don't know about you, but I don't believe anything that man says about his motives. I find it far more believable, based on what we've seen of his personality in the books, that he had them killed because he wanted his own daughter as Queen and his grandchildren on the Throne instead of Elia's grandchildren. Not only did it give him and his House more power but that way he also got his vengeance on Aerys who had treated him with contempt and on Elia who had stolen the place Tywin had reserved for his own daughter.

How he could have known that his daughter will become Queen? That was arranged after the murders of Rhaegar's children. He couldn't have been sure about how Robert will react and how he will reward him. Actually, by Tywin's own words (which might be worth less than nothing to you, anyway, though I don't think that he's such a liar as you seem to believe), he decided that the Lannisters should be the ones who will kill Aegon and Rhaenys, in order to prove their loyalty to the rebels, since they have joined Robert's cause way too late.

And btw, he admits that he didn't intend to have Elia killed, but he miscalculated Gregor's cruelty and had more important matters on his mind at the moment (such as what to do with the rebel army led by Ned, that was advancing towards King's Landing rapidly).

[Edward the Great]

Do you honestly believe that Robert took the throne because of his distant relations with the Targaryens? Cause, the last time I checked, he took the throne because he managed to beat the Targaryens in a open war.

Raw power isn't enough. If it were so, House Tyrell would rule the seven kingdoms. You have to have perceived legitimacy. Would Stark or Arryn so easily have accepted Robert as the senior partner in the alliance if Baratheon had not been so closely allied with Targaryen for so long?

[cybroleach]

Do you honestly believe that Robert took the throne because of his distant relations with the Targaryens? Cause, the last time I checked, he took the throne because he managed to beat the Targaryens in a open war. His claim was based on his strength. Like Renly said in ACOK, I quote him loosely, that shit (about the distant blood relations) is of interest only for the maesters.

A marriage to Rhaenys would have made him look dependant by a little Targaryen girl. Which would have been a devastating blow to the authority of the man whose purpose in life was to root the Targaryens out of Westeros. Both rebels and loyalists would have percieved him as a weakling.

Renly had no clue he was a baby. Ned specifically tells us Robert was King because of his claim, and we can all reasonably assume Jon felt the same way give his high regard for honour and custom.

I don't think your opinion of a Rhaenys' marriage could be further from the truth, it's a display of his power that he crushes the old regime and take it's daughter as his prize not a sign of weakness. This also has tons of more beneficial factors since it binds house Martell back to the throne, and it turns Vis/Dany into a non threat. As others have said (even Tywin himself) the murders needed to happen to keep house Lannister in tight with the ruling faction.

[Alexia]

I'm going to cast my vote with those who said Tywin did what needed to be done (with the exception that it was all done too brutally). The only person who didn't want the Targaryens killed was Ned Stark and we all know what acute political instincts he had. While he's alienated his best friend/King over the idea of assassinating Viserys and Dany, Viserys has used Dany to negotiate a marriage alliance in exchange for an army. If the two children had survived, there would be two girls who could be used to negotiate strong alliances with. Dorne would openly stand behind the children because they were Martells...I would guess that they would be exiled to Dorne....which would mean that they would get much better and more dangerous marriages than the Dothraki. It's a disaster waiting to happen.

And since Jon and Ned were soft-hearted and let Dany live, she's coming back with an army to reclaim the throne. Its lucky for them they all managed to get themselves killed beforehand because Dany would have executed at least Jon, Ned, Robert, and Tywin for their parts in the Rebellion. Cersei, Tommen, and Myrcella will most likely be executed by her as usurpers if she becomes queen. Stannis also stands a good chance of summary execution. Not to mention the thousands more peasants destined to die in that war (so thankful I'm not a Westerosi peasant).

The comment upthread that usurping is not a game for the squeamish is spot on. But Tywin himself was one of my favorite minor characters...I loved to hate him. He's a cold-blooded, competent political animal. Anyway, his death is far from being a good thing for Westeros overall.

[TrueMetis]

Having them alive as hostages or marrying them off to family would be much better. Instead of having them, the people with the best claim to the throne, Dany has the claim and she's free to do whatever she wants. If they were kept alive and especially if they had been married to someone in Robert's family they wouldn't be a threat and neither would Dany.

Dany escaping wasn't being "soft-hearted" she escaped she wasn't let go.

Oh and anyone who thinks Tywin does things for the good of the realm need to re-read the book. :lol:

[Alexia]

Dany escaping wasn't being "soft-hearted" she escaped she wasn't let go.

Ah, but there was talk of sending assassins after her even before AGOT. Lord Renly says that they should have killed her and Viserys years ago but Robert made the mistake of listening to Jon. And obviously it was a mistake, considering that she's preparing an invasion. So she was ultimately let go.

Oh and anyone who thinks Tywin does things for the good of the realm need to re-read the book.

He only does things that are good for House Lannister, you are correct. But at the end of SOS, what was good for House Lannister was the same as what was good for the realm. That is, stabilizing the political situation, ending the war as quickly as possible with a minimum of bloodshed, and starting to lay in food for winter. Cersei's actions, on the hand, were good for neither House Lannister nor the realm...nor for her!

[TrueMetis]

Ah, but there was talk of sending assassins after her even before AGOT. Lord Renly says that they should have killed her and Viserys years ago but Robert made the mistake of listening to Jon. And obviously it was a mistake, considering that she's preparing an invasion. So she was ultimately let go.

Why didn't anyone think of sending someone to capture them alive? That would of solved the problem of it being dishonourable and stopped them from being a threat. No one ever seems to be able to remember the middle road, as far as they seem to think it's either you kill someone or you don't.

He only does things that are good for House Lannister, you are correct. But at the end of SOS, what was good for House Lannister was the same as what was good for the realm. That is, stabilizing the political situation, ending the war as quickly as possible with a minimum of bloodshed, and starting to lay in food for winter. Cersei's actions, on the hand, were good for neither House Lannister nor the realm...nor for her!

True enough but it never would have lasted. Tywin's strategy for what to do after his opponents were defeated is the kind that inevitably leads to more war.

[Alexia]

True enough but it never would have lasted. Tywin's strategy for what to do after his opponents were defeated is the kind that inevitably leads to more war.

You have him confused with Joffrey and Cersei here. :D Remember that nice conversation they had in which Joffrey wanted to execute all the river lords who had yielded for treason and Tywin told him to serve his enemies steel and fire when they defy him and help them back to their feet when they bend the knee? And if he didn't help them up, no man would ever bend the knee to him?

I actually think Lord Twyin was exactly what the realm needed to recover. His war strategy pretty much amounts to terrorism (hence Lorch, Gregor, and Castamere) but he's a talented politician. He's the Dick Cheney of Westeros. :D

[TrueMetis]

You have him confused with Joffrey and Cersei here. :D Remember that nice conversation they had in which Joffrey wanted to execute all the river lords who had yielded for treason and Tywin told him to serve his enemies steel and fire when they defy him and help them back to their feet when they bend the knee? And if he didn't help them up, no man would ever bend the knee to him?

I actually think Lord Twyin was exactly what the realm needed to recover. His war strategy pretty much amounts to terrorism (hence Lorch, Gregor, and Castamere) but he's a talented politician. He's the Dick Cheney of Westeros. :D

He's helping the ones who betrayed Robb for him the rest are either losing there lands entirely (Starks and Tully's) or losing large portions of land and being required to give up a hostage (everyone else). That's the kind of treatment that breeds resentment.

[Edward the Great]

If the two children had survived, there would be two girls who could be used to negotiate strong alliances with.

No there wouldn't. One of the girls marriages, the more important of the two, would be dictated by the victors.