Maegor´s challenge

[Jaak]

Why did Visenya issue the challenge to Battle of Seven?

She had urged Aenys to put Sept of Remembrance and Starry Sept to dragonfire. After landing at Red Keep, they could have proceeded to do so, perhaps after some delay to allow people to rally to them, flee or negotiate - not fight a man to man combat. Aegon and Visenya had not sought or accepted man to man combat - they had put dragonfire against armies.

So why offer equal human fight?

Also: Maegor took a heavy head wound. Did it affect his health afterwards? His mind?

If Maegor had not fought a Battle of Seven and got the head would, could he have been more balanced in his reign?

[Lord Varys]

34 minutes ago, Jaak said:

Why did Visenya issue the challenge to Battle of Seven?

Simple answer: She wanted Maegor to have some legitimacy when he took the throne. A Trial of Seven is a big thing and should Maegor win (which he sort of did) Aenys' line would be seen as disinherited by the Seven themselves.

Also keep in mind that Aenys I sort of gave up his crown and kingdom when he fled KL. Yet he was still sort of the king, he could unleash his dragons and all. Maegor first had to set himself up as king. Doing that by killing a lot of people might have been seen as counterproductive. Later on Maegor began killing people anyway but that's another matter.

34 minutes ago, Jaak said:

Also: Maegor took a heavy head wound. Did it affect his health afterwards? His mind?

If Maegor had not fought a Battle of Seven and got the head would, could he have been more balanced in his reign?

I guess it could have made matters worse. But we know he was a cruel sadist even before that.

[The Grey Wolf]

3 hours ago, Lord Varys said:

Text

I agree with what you but I do have one minor nitpick in that no one undergoes severe head trauma followed by a month-long coma without some altered state of conscience or personality. GRRM simplifying genetics or making incest cause madness is one thing but hand-waving the neurological consequences of a grade 3 concussion is quite another. I mean just look at Baelor the Blessed though in his case there was also the snake venom to take into account so its not a perfect comparison.

[Lord Varys]

3 minutes ago, The Grey Wolf said:

I agree with what you but I do have one minor nitpick in that no one undergoes severe head trauma followed by a month-long coma without some altered state of conscience or personality. GRRM simplifying genetics or making incest cause madness is one thing but hand-waving the neurological consequences of a grade 3 concussion is quite another. I mean just look at Baelor the Blessed though in his case there was also the snake venom to take into account so its not a perfect comparison.

That certainly is true, but unlike in Baelor's case we don't know anything about Maegor's coma. It seems he was healed by magic. That could actually mean he was more alive/in a better state of mind after Tyanna took care of him than prior to the whole thing. Magic can be pretty powerful.

There are some hints that Maegor radical stance against the Faith Militant (and any other rebels) - basically destroy them all, no matter what - was caused by his wound and subsequent coma. But that could just him being pissed that one of the Warrior's Sons had nearly killed. That might have made the whole thing personal.

He did not burn down Oldtown later on during the war, nor was he particularly deranged before the whole Harroway thing. The slaughter of the workers also had a pragmatic aspect to it really seem to be the deeds of the late Maegor which are completely deranged. And that was only years after the Trial of Seven.

Could be he found something out about himself. Like that he was an abomination created by magic and not actually the Conqueror's son. I'm pretty sure that could have broken him.

[Samantha Stark]

Maegor went overboard with alot of the things he did, but when it comes to the war against the faith, he probably did exactly as needed.

[The Grey Wolf]

1 hour ago, Lord Varys said:

It seems he was healed by magic. That could actually mean he was more alive/in a better state of mind after Tyanna took care of him than prior to the whole thing. Magic can be pretty powerful.

That could be true.

1 hour ago, Lord Varys said:

There are some hints that Maegor radical stance against the Faith Militant (and any other rebels) - basically destroy them all, no matter what - was caused by his wound and subsequent coma.

I'd prefer this honestly over the alternative that he was always just that bad.

1 hour ago, Lord Varys said:

Could be he found something out about himself. Like that he was an abomination created by magic and not actually the Conqueror's son. I'm pretty sure that could have broken him.

How would he have found that out? I doubt Visenya left him a note saying anything to that effect for example.

14 minutes ago, Samantha Stark said:

Maegor went overboard with alot of the things he did, but when it comes to the war against the faith, he probably did exactly as needed.

To a certain degree you're right. The Faith Militant needed to be utterly broken not only to consolidate House Targaryen's position in both the short and long-term but also to provide lasting peace and stability to the realm and only Maegor would have been willing to go to the lengths necessary to accomplish that. 

[Jaak]

Oddly, during Aegon's conquest, the then High Septon threatened that unless Oldtown submits, Hightower, Starry Sept and Citadel would burn.

Would Aegon really have done that?

Oldtown is big and stony. Maegor burnt Sept of Remembrance, not Red Keep. Aegon could easily have burnt Hightower and spared Starry Sept and Citadel, had he so wanted. And Aenys, Visenya or Maegor could, if desired, have burnt Starry Sept sparing Hightower and Citadel.

When Maegor seized the throne, he declared Grand Maester a traitor for suggesting Aegon I,5 had right to throne.

But we never hear Maegor offering any justification at all for his seizure of throne.

He could have many.

1. He might say that Valyrian law was different than Andal law and that under Valyrian law, incest and polygamy were allowed, and so was inheritance of uncle over nephew
2. He might say that Aenys had lost and abandoned his kingdom, and therefore had little rights to bequeath to Aegon I,5 - that Maegor was reconquering the kingdom of his own effort and on his own dragon, and therefore Aegon I,5 was entitled to nothing except what Aegon I,5 would reconquer by his own effort (Crakehall)
3. He might say that Aegon I,5 was disqualified from throne by not being a dragonrider (Aegon I,5 would die a year later on Quicksilver, therefore must have been dragonless when Quicksilver's previous owner had just died)

None of these arguments is unarguable, of course - but spelling out at least some pretext would have provided a guide for people who wanted to support Maegor or were scared of him to rally under. Hugh the Hammer did say that having a dragon was right enough, and had been so for Aegon, and Daeron was too young. Maegor had, if anything, better right than Hugh - and Aegon I,5, a worse one than Daeron (slightly older, but dragonless).

Also, Maegor executed Grand Maester summarily, without bothering to provide any albeit weak answer at all. Yet the High Septon guilty of most flagrant treasons lived for two years after Maegor's accession - and then died "mysteriously". Maegor failed to set a precedent of openly and avowedly executing a High Septon for treason.

[1000th Lord Commander]

To get back to the original post, I'd think it might be more because she knew that Aenys I had little to no chance of winning any trial by combat. He was considered weak, and not the warrior his father or brother were. If he had taken a strong hand against the Fatih, it would have curtailed those thinking he was weak and indicisive. His only chance of doing so was by taking Quicksilver and burning the scepts.

Maegor on the other hand was a proven warrior, and capable. He had every chance of coming out victorious in such a fight, and would have helped legitimize his rule. Plus he still burned the sept of Rememberance anyway.

Did it affect him? probably. I have seen another post which relates most of the Targ madness to mostly ordinary mental conditions, and it might have been interesting to see a comparison before and after of his behaviour

 

[Jaak]

10 minutes ago, 1000th Lord Commander said:

To get back to the original post, I'd think it might be more because she knew that Aenys I had little to no chance of winning any trial by combat. He was considered weak, and not the warrior his father or brother were. If he had taken a strong hand against the Fatih, it would have curtailed those thinking he was weak and indicisive. His only chance of doing so was by taking Quicksilver and burning the scepts.

He also had the option to permit Maegor and Visenya to do so, which they had been asking for. He himself could easily have stayed safe above bowshot scouting for them.

[Lord Varys]

7 hours ago, Samantha Stark said:

Maegor went overboard with alot of the things he did, but when it comes to the war against the faith, he probably did exactly as needed.

With the war itself, certainly. But the amount of brutality and cruelty he used on his (defeated) foes certainly was counterproductive, especially later during the war. The whole campaign where he apparently killed just some poor people he chanced upon would have made him greatly unpopular among his subjects, even among those who agreed with him on breaking the power of the Faith.

Prior to the Trial of Seven men actually gathered around the Targaryen banner despite the fact that the Faith Militant effectively controlled King's Landing at that time, and after Maegor recovered from his coma the people in the city cheered him when he presented himself to his subjects.

Nothing suggests he had to burn down the Sept of Remembrance or kill every Warrior's Son and Poor Fellow there was. He had won the Trial of Seven. He could have pushed the Faith the acknowledge his kingship. Instead he decided to kill them all without warning, and he never even delivered terms to them. That wasn't the best way to deal with the situation.

The idea that they couldn't reach a compromise with the Faith makes no sense. The main obstacle was the present High Septon, and the Hightowers eventually killed him. After that the Faith was eventually back in line. The Faith Militant's continued opposition most likely had more to do with Maegor's cruel and merciless politics against them rather than the whole incest and polygamy thing. They had made their peace with the Conqueror before, they could have made a peace with Maegor, too, if the man had not been Maegor the Cruel.

7 hours ago, The Grey Wolf said:

I'd prefer this honestly over the alternative that he was always just that bad.

Again, it might not have anything to do with the trauma but rather with the humiliation he suffered in the process. After all, one of those pious pricks had brought him down and nearly killed him. I'm pretty sure the great Maegor didn't like to be reminded of his own mortality or the fact that there might have been men as strong and powerful as he was.

7 hours ago, The Grey Wolf said:

How would he have found that out? I doubt Visenya left him a note saying anything to that effect for example.

Tyanna could have found out/learned it from Visenya earlier. Remember the longer version in the old sample? Visenya talked to Tyanna and then dismissed all the physicians of Maegor and gave her son over to his care alone.

2 hours ago, Jaak said:

Oddly, during Aegon's conquest, the then High Septon threatened that unless Oldtown submits, Hightower, Starry Sept and Citadel would burn.

Would Aegon really have done that?

We don't know. That is actually an irrelevant question. The High Septon was afraid Aegon would do it, and he had any reason to fear he might after Harrenhal and the Field of Fire.

2 hours ago, Jaak said:

Oldtown is big and stony. Maegor burnt Sept of Remembrance, not Red Keep. Aegon could easily have burnt Hightower and spared Starry Sept and Citadel, had he so wanted. And Aenys, Visenya or Maegor could, if desired, have burnt Starry Sept sparing Hightower and Citadel.

That would have been difficult. Fire is not easily controlled in a medieval city, and roofs and the like include a lot of wood even in a house built from stone. And the fires of Balerion and Vhagar burned very hot at this point.

2 hours ago, Jaak said:

When Maegor seized the throne, he declared Grand Maester a traitor for suggesting Aegon I,5 had right to throne.

But we never hear Maegor offering any justification at all for his seizure of throne.

He could have many.

If he did, those have nothing to do with him executing Grand Maester Gawen. He did so because the man objected to his ascension, and thus was challenging his right to rule. He was a traitor in Maegor's eyes, and obviously didn't care about any of the reasons Maegor might have used to justify taking the crown.

2 hours ago, Jaak said:

1. He might say that Valyrian law was different than Andal law and that under Valyrian law, incest and polygamy were allowed, and so was inheritance of uncle over nephew.

But we don't know if that was even the case. Besides, there is no reason to believe Valyrian law was relevant in the Seven Kingdoms. Aegon the Conqueror did not introduce Valyrian law to Westeros, after all.

2 hours ago, Jaak said:

1. He might say that Aenys had lost and abandoned his kingdom, and therefore had little rights to bequeath to Aegon I,5 - that Maegor was reconquering the kingdom of his own effort and on his own dragon, and therefore Aegon I,5 was entitled to nothing except what Aegon I,5 would reconquer by his own effort (Crakehall).

He could have said that, too, but apparently he did not do that. And it would have been wrong in the sense that the people still thought the Targaryens were the rightful Kings of Westeros. They still had supporters, and those rallied to the dragon banner upon Maegor's arrival to KL. So the reconquest idea isn't really true.

2 hours ago, Jaak said:

1. He might say that Aegon I,5 was disqualified from throne by not being a dragonrider (Aegon I,5 would die a year later on Quicksilver, therefore must have been dragonless when Quicksilver's previous owner had just died).

We don't know if Aegon was a dragonrider or not. His original dragon might have been killed in the West. The idea that Aenys I's eldest son and heir was no dragonrider when Rhaena, Jaehaerys, and Alysanne got dragons, and Maegor was repeatedly offered a dragon during the reign of his father makes little sense.

2 hours ago, Jaak said:

None of these arguments is unarguable, of course - but spelling out at least some pretext would have provided a guide for people who wanted to support Maegor or were scared of him to rally under. Hugh the Hammer did say that having a dragon was right enough, and had been so for Aegon, and Daeron was too young. Maegor had, if anything, better right than Hugh - and Aegon I,5, a worse one than Daeron (slightly older, but dragonless).

Maegor actually had little reason to care all that much about Prince Aegon at that point. The boy was in the West, and besieged at Crakehall Castle. He was a non-factor in all this. Only Gawen mentioned his claim. The Targaryen loyalists in KL and the Crownlands most likely were more inclined to follow a powerful warrior-king like Maegor than some young princeling far away.

2 hours ago, Jaak said:

Also, Maegor executed Grand Maester summarily, without bothering to provide any albeit weak answer at all. Yet the High Septon guilty of most flagrant treasons lived for two years after Maegor's accession - and then died "mysteriously". Maegor failed to set a precedent of openly and avowedly executing a High Septon for treason.

That most likely had more to do with the fact that the man was out of his reach. And when he finally marched against Oldtown he and Visenya apparently didn't have the guts to burn Oldtown to the ground. Or they realized that they did not have to.

1 hour ago, Jaak said:

He also had the option to permit Maegor and Visenya to do so, which they had been asking for. He himself could easily have stayed safe above bowshot scouting for them.

Maegor was away. Visenya was urging Aenys I to attack the enemy with Quicksilver, or allow her to do it in his stead. She never mentioned Maegor.

[Jaak]

20 minutes ago, Lord Varys said:

Prior to the Trial of Seven men actually gathered around the Targaryen banner despite the fact that the Faith Militant effectively controlled King's Landing at that time, and after Maegor recovered from his coma the people in the city cheered him when he presented himself to his subjects.

Nothing suggests he had to burn down the Sept of Remembrance or kill every Warrior's Son and Poor Fellow there was. He had won the Trial of Seven. He could have pushed the Faith the acknowledge his kingship. Instead he decided to kill them all without warning, and he never even delivered terms to them. That wasn't the best way to deal with the situation.

On the other hand, Faith Militant had had their chance to obey Aenys. And had rebelled in the first place. Maegor did not owe them terms, or warning. And a warning could have led to Faith Militant evacuating Sept of Remembrance and scattering among civilian population in King's Landing or outside.

If people were already rallying around Targaryen banner, issuing a challenge to Battle of Seven would be stupid. Maegor could have spared those who rallied to him, and burn those who rallied to Sept.

[Lord Varys]

2 hours ago, Jaak said:

On the other hand, Faith Militant had had their chance to obey Aenys. And had rebelled in the first place. Maegor did not owe them terms, or warning. And a warning could have led to Faith Militant evacuating Sept of Remembrance and scattering among civilian population in King's Landing or outside.

But Aenys I had been a crowned and anointed king. They eventually rebelled against him, so he had the right to pay them back in kind.

Maegor didn't even have the right to wear a crown. He was living in disgrace in exile when his royal half-brother died. The man had no right whatsoever to demand anything of the Faith Militant, the High Septon, the lords and people of Westeros, or the court and family of Aenys I.

2 hours ago, Jaak said:

If people were already rallying around Targaryen banner, issuing a challenge to Battle of Seven would be stupid. Maegor could have spared those who rallied to him, and burn those who rallied to Sept.

Maegor might have lost the allegiance/friendship of the men he had just gained. A Trial of Seven is an important religious ritual. A victory there had a pretty good chance to establish Maegor as a rightful king rather than a bloody usurper. And also keep in mind that Visenya and Maegor clearly were the more powerful faction there. Maegor took possession of the hill and then the challenge went out. If the Warrior's Sons had rejected the challenge Maegor would have unleashed Balerion and Vhagar then and there, presumably.

[Jaak]

1 hour ago, Lord Varys said:

But Aenys I had been a crowned and anointed king. They eventually rebelled against him, so he had the right to pay them back in kind.

Maegor didn't even have the right to wear a crown. He was living in disgrace in exile when his royal half-brother died. The man had no right whatsoever to demand anything of the Faith Militant, the High Septon, the lords and people of Westeros, or the court and family of Aenys I.

Just because Aenys had died did not eliminate the right to avenge Faith Militant or High Septon for their rebellion. Aenys I-s court and family could say - "No thanks, we´d prefer his son Aegon - you can be just Aegon´s castellan till you´ve rescued him from Crakehall." Faith Militant and High Septon had been in rebellion against Aenys, so they did not have that right.

[Lord Varys]

4 hours ago, Jaak said:

Just because Aenys had died did not eliminate the right to avenge Faith Militant or High Septon for their rebellion. Aenys I-s court and family could say - "No thanks, we´d prefer his son Aegon - you can be just Aegon´s castellan till you´ve rescued him from Crakehall." Faith Militant and High Septon had been in rebellion against Aenys, so they did not have that right.

They could, but nothing suggests that they did. Visenya acted on her own (effectively non-existing) authority in calling Maegor back from Pentos. The man was an exiled criminal. If Alyssa or Aenys I's Small Council had recalled Maegor and offered him the Handship or even the Regency while Prince Aegon wasn't able to claim the throne you would have a point. But they did not, and we have no idea whether Aegon or Aenys' court and council actually wanted Maegor to attack the Faith Militant the way he did.

[Jaak]

1 hour ago, Lord Varys said:

They could, but nothing suggests that they did. Visenya acted on her own (effectively non-existing) authority in calling Maegor back from Pentos. The man was an exiled criminal. If Alyssa or Aenys I's Small Council had recalled Maegor and offered him the Handship or even the Regency while Prince Aegon wasn't able to claim the throne you would have a point. But they did not, and we have no idea whether Aegon or Aenys' court and council actually wanted Maegor to attack the Faith Militant the way he did.

Who were the members of Aenys´ Small Council, besides Grand Maester Gawen?

Also: the first time Rhaena is actually attested as rider of Dreamfyre was when she fled her husband Maegor.

[The Grey Wolf]

2 hours ago, Lord Varys said:

Text

The Small Council did not formally exist until the reign of Jaehaerys I.

[Lord Varys]

14 hours ago, Jaak said:

Also: the first time Rhaena is actually attested as rider of Dreamfyre was when she fled her husband Maegor.

Not sure why you are saying that. I know that. But that doesn't mean she had a(nother) dragon earlier in her life.

13 hours ago, The Grey Wolf said:

The Small Council did not formally exist until the reign of Jaehaerys I.

True, I meant to write 'court and council'. Aenys I didn't seem to have a Hand after Murmison's death but he would have had a Lord Commander of the Kingsguard, he did have a Grand Maester, and very likely also a Velaryon Master of Ships (possibly Daemon) as well as a Master of Laws and a Master of Whisperers. Oh, and sure as hell a Master of Coin. And possibly even other advisers. Could be that Jaehaerys I reduced the number of royal advisers when he formed the Small Council.

[The Grey Wolf]

2 hours ago, Lord Varys said:

Text

Speaking of which does anyone have any idea why the Small Council is called that? I remember reading somewhere that it may have to do with the lords mocking Aegon V for his reforms. Also, I remember reading somewhere on the forum that Maegor may have elected his own High Septon early on in his reign. Does anyone know anything about that as well by any chance?

[Jaak]

7 hours ago, The Grey Wolf said:

Speaking of which does anyone have any idea why the Small Council is called that? I remember reading somewhere that it may have to do with the lords mocking Aegon V for his reforms.

An obvious point would have been Jaehaerys I calling the first Great Council in 101. Until then, there would have been just one Council to talk about.

The members of Aenys´ Council may have had the example of Gawen´s death to discourage others from confronting Maegor, but they did afterwards have the practical opportunity to slink away as soon as Maegor wasn´t looking.

We do not have the story of how Aegon got Quicksilver, but he clearly did not have it in 42 when Aenys died. There is no evidence of Rhaena having had Dreamfyre before 47. As for Jaehaerys, 8 years old in 42, and Alysanne, 6 years old in 42, we know they eventually got dragons, but no idea when. For Alyssa and Viserys, there is no evidence of dragon.

It is wholly plausible that from 44 to 47, Maegor was the only person who had ever ridden a dragon, and the only Targaryen known to be left alive - except by each hidden party themselves and their close accomplices.

[Lord Varys]

10 hours ago, The Grey Wolf said:

Speaking of which does anyone have any idea why the Small Council is called that?

It seems to have been a way to differentiate it from a Great Council. The name and concept for that already existed at least since the reign of Aenys I since he considered calling a Great Council to discuss what to do with the rebels that rose against him in 37 AC.

10 hours ago, The Grey Wolf said:

I remember reading somewhere that it may have to do with the lords mocking Aegon V for his reforms.

Definitely not.

10 hours ago, The Grey Wolf said:

Also, I remember reading somewhere on the forum that Maegor may have elected his own High Septon early on in his reign. Does anyone know anything about that as well by any chance?

No, the Hightowers took about the High Septon who happened to be Ceryse's maternal uncle. Afterwards the Most Devout chose a High Septon who would not bring down the fires of Balerion and Vhagar on the Starry Sept. They sure as hell would have chosen a (sort of) Targaryen friendly guy but Maegor and Visenya didn't seem to have been involved in the choosing. At least not openly.