What was Bloodraven's motivation in killing Aenys?

[falcotron]

After killing Aenys Blackfyre at the Great Council, Bloodraven told the new king Aegon V that he'd sacrificed his honor for the good of the realm. Aegon seemed to believe that was reasonable but too immoral and/or dangerous to go unpunished, and exiled him to the Wall.

But how was it reasonable? What did Bloodraven think was going to happen?

If the new king had let him get away with it, that would pretty much spell the end of Great Councils as a peaceful means of resolving succession crises, which would be a disaster for the realm.

But if not, the whole "This is what happens to Blackfyre supporters as long as Bloodraven is around" message doesn't mean anything if Bloodraven is going to immediately be exiled, executed, or dismissed.

So, I can't see how it was for the good of the realm. And surely Bloodraven was far-sighted and calculating enough to understand that.

I could imagine that maybe he secretly wasn't trying to prevent a rebellion, but to push Bittersteel into spending all his remaining strength on a futile one that would be easily fought off (which is exactly what happened with the Fourth Blackfyre Rebellion), but surely he wouldn't have told that to Aegon, so why did Aegon think his "for the good of the realm" excuse made sense?

And likewise, if he were driven by some prophetic vision, and "the good of the realm" actually meant himself being sent to the Wall so he could become the three-eyed crow and train Bran to save the realm from the Others, it seems even less likely that he would have shared that with Aegon.

I feel like I must be missing something obvious here.

[Lady Blizzardborn]

I kind of figure Bloodraven thought that allowing Aenys to come to Westeros as a legitimate claimant for the throne would give remaining Blackfyre supporters just the boost they needed to start causing problems again. By killing him almost as soon as he got there, he sent a message and possibly set a precedent. Sure, with him gone it's not guaranteed that other Blackfyres would be killed as soon as they touched the sand, but if one Hand has done it, why couldn't another?

Another possibility is that BR thought Aenys was the last real threat the Blackfyres could offer. Instead of just launching a war, he put in a nice, sensible request to be allowed to present his case to the Great Council. That put him in an entirely different class from the other Blackfyres, and potentially made him far more likely to succeed where his predecessors had failed.

[falcotron]

8 minutes ago, Lady Blizzardborn said:

Another possibility is that BR thought Aenys was the last real threat the Blackfyres could offer. Instead of just launching a war, he put in a nice, sensible request to be allowed to present his case to the Great Council. That put him in an entirely different class from the other Blackfyres, and potentially made him far more likely to succeed where his predecessors had failed.

That's an interesting thought, and it makes sense.

There may well have been a serious threat of the GC choosing Aenys, given how few other choices there were. And once they started seriously considering Aenys, someone might even have said, "Hey, wait, what about Daemon?"

And, even if the GC ended up picking someone else, most of the obvious candidates had their own succession problems, which could just mean another GC in a couple decades that could end up picking one of Aenys's kids (especially if they'd been nice and given him a Targaryen niece as a consolation bride).

Compared to all that, the threat of Daemon invading may have been a lot less worrisome to BR.

So, yeah, that works for me. Thanks.

[Lord Varys]

As far as know the problem here is that Bloodraven gave Aenys Blackfyre his word that he would get safe conduct and the right to speak at the Great Council and then he broke that word. That is a very serious offense, comparable to seizing and killing a diplomatic envoy or a foreign head of state without good cause.

The only reason why it makes sense that Bloodraven would have done something like that is if Aenys Blackfyre stood a good chance of actually being chosen as the new king by the Great Council - or launching a new Blackfyre Rebellion in the process of the Great Council.

We know Maekar's descendants and their followers hated each other. The Great Council was called because Bloodraven wanted to prevent another Dance, indicating that things were very serious at that point.

But we do know that Vaella the Lackwit would have never been made queen, we also do know that little Maegor had no chance of being chosen king both because of his age as well as his blood (being descended from mad Aerion Brightflame), and we do know that Aegon was seen as a peasant prince who has made a string of enemies among very influential lords.

Now, the men trying to prevent King Aegon V turned to Maester Aemon, trying to get him out of his maester's vows - a rather pitiful and desperate move considering that Aemon and Aegon apparently were always closed.

But to whom would they have turned while he was still alive? Aenys Blackfyre. If the man had been allowed to speak at the Great Council he might have been able to win the support not only of the remaining Blackfyre loyalists but also of the men who hated Aegon and wanted to prevent him from becoming king at all cost. If Aenys was a great and charismatic orator or a great knight (or both) this could have posed a serious threat.

Presenting the assembled lords with the head of the would-be pretender Aenys Blackfyre certainly sent the message that the Blackfyre cause is dead and any Blackfyre loyalist attending the council was free to join Aenys in the afterlife.

But, sure - one assumes that the Fourth Rebellion grew mostly out of the resentment and anger that was felt in the wake of Aenys' execution. The reason why Bittersteel and Daemon III didn't attack sooner seems to have been winter. You don't launch an invasion in the middle of a six-year-winter.

It is unclear whether Bloodraven and Aegon V were in agreement over the Aenys thing. I doubt that Egg would have approved of something like that but Bloodraven most likely explained him his reasoning after the fact. Punishing Bloodraven wouldn't have been necessary to (try to) silence the remaining Blackfyre loyalists in Westeros (and Essos) but also to send a message to the entire world that the Iron Throne wasn't throwing out any rules of common decency and diplomacy. If Bloodraven wouldn't have been punished for that no lord, envoy, or head of state could have trusted to meet with a representative of the Iron Throne under a truce and survive.

[Free Northman Reborn]

Why was it for the good of the realm that a Blackfyre shouldn't become king? What made the Blackfyres any worse a prospect than the Targaryens?

[PrinceHenryris]

Because the only good Blackfyre is a dead Blackfyre.

[AlaskanSandman]

7 hours ago, falcotron said:

After killing Aenys Blackfyre at the Great Council, Bloodraven told the new king Aegon V that he'd sacrificed his honor for the good of the realm. Aegon seemed to believe that was reasonable but too immoral and/or dangerous to go unpunished, and exiled him to the Wall.

But how was it reasonable? What did Bloodraven think was going to happen?

If the new king had let him get away with it, that would pretty much spell the end of Great Councils as a peaceful means of resolving succession crises, which would be a disaster for the realm.

But if not, the whole "This is what happens to Blackfyre supporters as long as Bloodraven is around" message doesn't mean anything if Bloodraven is going to immediately be exiled, executed, or dismissed.

So, I can't see how it was for the good of the realm. And surely Bloodraven was far-sighted and calculating enough to understand that.

I could imagine that maybe he secretly wasn't trying to prevent a rebellion, but to push Bittersteel into spending all his remaining strength on a futile one that would be easily fought off (which is exactly what happened with the Fourth Blackfyre Rebellion), but surely he wouldn't have told that to Aegon, so why did Aegon think his "for the good of the realm" excuse made sense?

And likewise, if he were driven by some prophetic vision, and "the good of the realm" actually meant himself being sent to the Wall so he could become the three-eyed crow and train Bran to save the realm from the Others, it seems even less likely that he would have shared that with Aegon.

I feel like I must be missing something obvious here.

To throw out a different idea ive heard kicked around is that the Blackfyre restoration may have been about bringing back dragon hatchers, that or Bloodraven was trying to and Aenys would have interfered with that. I think Preston Jacobs mentions it in his genetics of dragons videos.

Out side of that. Aenys's claim to the throne was a legitimate one back by many Blackfyre supporters still in the realm to this day. Im not sure Bloodraven really needed much more reason than that to try and wipe out the last possible claimant from the Blackfyre side.

Aegons actions seem more about keeping the peace than caring about Bloodraven's agenda which i hope we learn more about the two's relationship through more Dunk and Egg books.

Though i am surprised that no Targaryen male didn't just marry a female Blackfyre and unite the lines again to end the argument. Combining the 2 dragons into a new symbol much how the Tudors did with the Plantagenet roses from the branches Lancaster and York. 

[Lord Varys]

1 hour ago, Free Northman Reborn said:

Why was it for the good of the realm that a Blackfyre shouldn't become king? What made the Blackfyres any worse a prospect than the Targaryens?

Nobody in-universe cares about such a meta-level question. The people in there have reasons why they prefer this guy or this house over another. And Bloodraven - who called the Great Council and executed Aenys Blackfyre - was a Targaryen man through and through. Most likely because he loved his half-brother Daeron II dearly since his childhood - or for some other reason, we don't really know yet.

It seems pretty likely that Bloodraven supported Aegon V and did everything he could to ensure that the man became king. After all, Egg did have a Blackwood wife and was clearly the only competent Targaryen claimant around at that time.

45 minutes ago, AlaskanSandman said:

Though i am surprised that no Targaryen male didn't just marry a female Blackfyre and unite the lines again to end the argument. Combining the 2 dragons into a new symbol much how the Tudors did with the Plantagenet roses from the branches Lancaster and York. 

Prior to TWoIaF I was tossing around such ideas - Duncan's betrothed being to a Blackfyre, Egg's third son ending up with the wrong Blackfyre daughter, being drawn into a rebellion against his father, etc. I think that would have a lot of potential. Aegon V would have been the ideal king to try to resolve the Blackfyre issue peacefully, through marriage.

If little Maegor lives to adulthood and ends up being politically important there is a small chance that he could end up with a Blackfyre bride but I don't think the chances are that great.

[AlaskanSandman]

19 minutes ago, Lord Varys said:

Nobody in-universe cares about such a meta-level question. The people in there have reasons why they prefer this guy or this house over another. And Bloodraven - who called the Great Council and executed Aenys Blackfyre - was a Targaryen man through and through. Most likely because he loved his half-brother Daeron II dearly since his childhood - or for some other reason, we don't really know yet.

It seems pretty likely that Bloodraven supported Aegon V and did everything he could to ensure that the man became king. After all, Egg did have a Blackwood wife and was clearly the only competent Targaryen claimant around at that time.

Prior to TWoIaF I was tossing around such ideas - Duncan's betrothed being to a Blackfyre, Egg's third son ending up with the wrong Blackfyre daughter, being drawn into a rebellion against his father, etc. I think that would have a lot of potential. Aegon V would have been the ideal king to try to resolve the Blackfyre issue peacefully, through marriage.

If little Maegor lives to adulthood and ends up being politically important there is a small chance that he could end up with a Blackfyre bride but I don't think the chances are that great.

What changed your mind? Or made you stop wondering?

[Free Northman Reborn]

25 minutes ago, Lord Varys said:

Nobody in-universe cares about such a meta-level question. The people in there have reasons why they prefer this guy or this house over another. And Bloodraven - who called the Great Council and executed Aenys Blackfyre - was a Targaryen man through and through. Most likely because he loved his half-brother Daeron II dearly since his childhood - or for some other reason, we don't really know yet.

It seems pretty likely that Bloodraven supported Aegon V and did everything he could to ensure that the man became king. After all, Egg did have a Blackwood wife and was clearly the only competent Targaryen claimant around at that time.

Prior to TWoIaF I was tossing around such ideas - Duncan's betrothed being to a Blackfyre, Egg's third son ending up with the wrong Blackfyre daughter, being drawn into a rebellion against his father, etc. I think that would have a lot of potential. Aegon V would have been the ideal king to try to resolve the Blackfyre issue peacefully, through marriage.

If little Maegor lives to adulthood and ends up being politically important there is a small chance that he could end up with a Blackfyre bride but I don't think the chances are that great.

My point is Bloodraven suggested it was for a meta reason. Namely "for the good of the realm". So in what way did he mean it, or did he really mean "for the good of the Targaryens?"

[Lord Varys]

15 minutes ago, AlaskanSandman said:

What changed your mind? Or made you stop wondering?

Well, now we do know to whom Egg's children were betrothed and there is no Blackfyre among them. And while we don't know that little Maegor survived infancy - which could also have been confirmed in TWoIaF - I'm not going to insist (or build grand theories on the assumption) that he survived and became an important player.

11 minutes ago, Free Northman Reborn said:

My point is Bloodraven suggested it was for a meta reason. Namely "for the good of the realm". So in what way did he mean it, or did he really mean "for the good of the Targaryens?"

'The good of the Realm' is just a euphemism for 'the good of the ruling family'. The Targaryens are the Realm just as the Starks were the North back in the days when they were still kings (and in a sense they still are).

In feudal monarchistic setting people do not think in categories of 'the common good' as being independent of the prosperity of the ruling dynasty. Those are modern categories. Aspects of such thinking are present in the ideas of men like Aegon V but even he would never have seriously questioned the fact that he and his dynasty and ancestors have the right to rule the Seven Kingdoms.

In regards to Bloodraven any speculation that he had some sort of ulterior 'magical motive' to prefer Aegon V over the Blackfyres is pretty silly without us having any reason to believe he was seeing any bigger picture at this point. If Bloodraven had known about the Others or future historical developments in any way one wonders why the Night's Watch continued to decline throughout the reigns of the two kings Bloodraven served as Hand or why he involved himself in the crushing of those Blackfyre rebellions rather than overcoming his petty hatred of Bittersteel and Daemon's sons in an attempt to prepare for the Others.

And if Bloodraven had wanted to go to the Wall he could have volunteered any day. He didn't need Aegon V to send him there.

In light of that it is very likely that Bloodraven only saw the light at the end of his long life when he met the Children of the Forest.

[AlaskanSandman]

2 minutes ago, Lord Varys said:

Well, now we do know to whom Egg's children were betrothed and there is no Blackfyre among them. And while we don't know that little Maegor survived infancy - which could also have been confirmed in TWoIaF - I'm not going to insist (or build grand theories on the assumption) that he survived and became an important player.

'The good of the Realm' is just a euphemism for 'the good of the ruling family'. The Targaryens are the Realm just as the Starks were the North back in the days when they were still kings (and in a sense they still are).

In feudal monarchistic setting people do not think in categories of 'the common good' as being independent of the prosperity of the ruling dynasty. Those are modern categories. Aspects of such thinking are present in the ideas of men like Aegon V but even he would never have seriously questioned the fact that he and his dynasty and ancestors have the right to rule the Seven Kingdoms.

In regards to Bloodraven any speculation that he had some sort of ulterior 'magical motive' to prefer Aegon V over the Blackfyres is pretty silly without us having any reason to believe he was seeing any bigger picture at this point. If Bloodraven had known about the Others or future historical developments in any way one wonders why the Night's Watch continued to decline throughout the reigns of the two kings Bloodraven served as Hand or why he involved himself in the crushing of those Blackfyre rebellions rather than overcoming his petty hatred of Bittersteel and Daemon's sons in an attempt to prepare for the Others.

And if Bloodraven had wanted to go to the Wall he could have volunteered any day. He didn't need Aegon V to send him there.

In light of that it is very likely that Bloodraven only saw the light at the end of his long life when he met the Children of the Forest.

Oh ok. Yea i just wonder why no one tried it you know. Seems a legit solution.

and not that they'd be Targaryen's by name, but i do wonder about Daella and Rhae Targaryen and who they married and what possible kids they have. May be too late in the game to be anything though.  

[falcotron]

1 hour ago, AlaskanSandman said:

Im not sure Bloodraven really needed much more reason than that to try and wipe out the last possible claimant from the Blackfyre side.

But Aenys wasn't even remotely the last possible claimant. His older brother Daemon had already been crowned as king in exile by Bittersteel. He was just one of multiple possible threats.

I think the most likely answer is that Lady Blizzardborn is right (and Lord Varys): the risk of Aenys being elected by the GC, or even of him being seriously considered, was higher than the risk of Daemon winning an invasion. So he chose to eliminate Aenys even though it increased the risk of invasion.

2 hours ago, AlaskanSandman said:

Though i am surprised that no Targaryen male didn't just marry a female Blackfyre and unite the lines again to end the argument.

Well, Henry Tudor marrying Elizabeth of York didn't come up until the throne had changed hands from Lancaster to York to someone who wasn't even really a Lancaster. Here, the Targaryens had faced one serious rebellion, one aborted one, and one much smaller one, and didn't have much reason to fear losing the next one, so they had a lot less motivation.

Also, I'll bet some of the lords of the realm were actually happy with all those troublemakers staying over in Essos as Bittersteel's army in exile (and gradually drifting away to become sellswords) rather than coming home to take back their positions. Certainly the relatives who took over their seats while they were away, but maybe even some of their lieges and vassals and neighbors.

[AlaskanSandman]

1 minute ago, falcotron said:

But Aenys wasn't even remotely the last possible claimant. His older brother Daemon had already been crowned as king in exile by Bittersteel. He was just one of multiple possible threats.

I think the most likely answer is that Lady Blizzardborn is right (and Lord Varys): the risk of Aenys being elected by the GC, or even of him being seriously considered, was higher than the risk of Daemon winning an invasion. So he chose to eliminate Aenys even though it increased the risk of invasion.

Well, Henry Tudor marrying Elizabeth of York didn't come up until the throne had changed hands from Lancaster to York to someone who wasn't even really a Lancaster. Here, the Targaryens had faced one serious rebellion, one aborted one, and one much smaller one, and didn't have much reason to fear losing the next one, so they had a lot less motivation.

Also, I'll bet some of the lords of the realm were actually happy with all those troublemakers staying over in Essos as Bittersteel's army in exile (and gradually drifting away to become sellswords) rather than coming home to take back their positions. Certainly the relatives who took over their seats while they were away, but maybe even some of their lieges and vassals and neighbors.

Well the Tudor bit is a poor literal translation, i just meant the idea and like how they did with the sigils. The Tudors claim was actually through a legitimized bastard if im not mistaken

[OberynBlackfyre]

9 hours ago, Lady Blizzardborn said:

I kind of figure Bloodraven thought that allowing Aenys to come to Westeros as a legitimate claimant for the throne would give remaining Blackfyre supporters just the boost they needed to start causing problems again. By killing him almost as soon as he got there, he sent a message and possibly set a precedent. Sure, with him gone it's not guaranteed that other Blackfyres would be killed as soon as they touched the sand, but if one Hand has done it, why couldn't another?

Another possibility is that BR thought Aenys was the last real threat the Blackfyres could offer. Instead of just launching a war, he put in a nice, sensible request to be allowed to present his case to the Great Council. That put him in an entirely different class from the other Blackfyres, and potentially made him far more likely to succeed where his predecessors had failed.

I agree with this completely.  As I had said in the Blackfyre thread- Aenys SHOULD have been the King picked by the Great Council.  I like Egg, don't get me wrong.  But Aenys was completely in the right by trying to make his case PEACEFULLY.  Not only that but the crowning of Daemon III was actually completely unlawful at the time of the crowning.  


 

[OberynBlackfyre]

I think that Bloodraven MIGHT have been wanting to go to the Wall.  If he was being instructed or tempted rather by the Three Eyed Crow just as Bran was, he knew that he would have to go North.  However with how many people were suspicious of him and since he was a public figure, he couldn't just go without precedent.....he'd have to have a reason

[Falcon2909]

He ain't us cus he aenys

[Dorian Martell's son]

13 hours ago, falcotron said:

I feel like I must be missing something obvious here.

Not at all. The usurper was the greatest threat to his family's dynasty. He made it his life goal to eliminate them from the continent. He was very successful, and it only cost him an eye, his honor and his freedom 

[Seams]

Maybe Bloodraven didn't kill Aenys. We have seen a number of mock trails and fall guys set up to take the blame for crimes they didn't commit, Our only source for this story is TWOIAF, right?

Even as the Great Council was debating, however, another claimant appeared in King's Landing: none other than Aenys Blackfyre, the fifth of the Black Dragon's seven sons. When the Great Council had first been announced, Aenys had written from exile in Tyrosh, putting forward his case in the hope that his words might win him the Iron Throne that his forebears had thrice failed to win with their swords. Bloodraven, the King's Hand, had responded by offering him a safe conduct, so the pretender might come to King's Landing and present his claim in person.

Unwisely, Aenys accepted. Yet hardly had he entered the city when the gold cloaks seized hold of him and dragged him to the Red Keep, where his head was struck off forthwith and presented to the lords of the Great Council, as a warning to any who might still have Blackfyre sympathies. (The World of Ice and Fire - The Targaryen Kings: Maekar I)

The first act of Aegon's reign was the arrest of Brynden Rivers, the King's Hand, for the murder of Aenys Blackfyre. Bloodraven did not deny that he had lured the pretender into his power by the offer of a safe conduct, but contended that he had sacrificed his own personal honor for the good of the realm.

Though many agreed, and were pleased to see another Blackfyre pretender removed, King Aegon felt he had no choice but to condemn the Hand, lest the word of the Iron Throne be seen as worthless. Yet after the sentence of death was pronounced, Aegon offered Bloodraven the chance to take the black and join the Night's Watch. This he did. Ser Brynden Rivers set sail for the Wall late in the year of 233 AC. (No one intercepted his ship). Two hundred men went with him, many of them archers from Bloodraven's personal guard, the Raven's Teeth. The king's brother, Maester Aemon, was also amongst them. (The World of Ice and Fire - The Targaryen Kings: Aegon V)

Nowhere does the book come right out and say that Bloodraven killed Aenys. The passive voice is used to describe the beheading, so we have no indication who gave the order or wielded the sword. Bloodraven confesses to allowing Aenys to come to Westeros and confesses to sacrificing his own honor, but doesn't say he ordered the death of Aenys.

Who else might have had command of the Gold Cloaks and/of access to the dungeon at the Red Keep? Aegon? Aemon? Ser Duncan the Tall? Maybe Bloodraven's last act on behalf of the Targaryen dynasty was to take the blame for the death of Aenys. Perhaps he acted out of loyalty to the new king or maybe, like Ned Stark, making a false confession and joining the Night's Watch was a way of staying alive and/or saving someone dear to him.

[Tucu]

9 minutes ago, Seams said:

Maybe Bloodraven didn't kill Aenys. We have seen a number of mock trails and fall guys set up to take the blame for crimes they didn't commit, Our only source for this story is TWOIAF, right?

Even as the Great Council was debating, however, another claimant appeared in King's Landing: none other than Aenys Blackfyre, the fifth of the Black Dragon's seven sons. When the Great Council had first been announced, Aenys had written from exile in Tyrosh, putting forward his case in the hope that his words might win him the Iron Throne that his forebears had thrice failed to win with their swords. Bloodraven, the King's Hand, had responded by offering him a safe conduct, so the pretender might come to King's Landing and present his claim in person.

Unwisely, Aenys accepted. Yet hardly had he entered the city when the gold cloaks seized hold of him and dragged him to the Red Keep, where his head was struck off forthwith and presented to the lords of the Great Council, as a warning to any who might still have Blackfyre sympathies. (The World of Ice and Fire - The Targaryen Kings: Maekar I)

The first act of Aegon's reign was the arrest of Brynden Rivers, the King's Hand, for the murder of Aenys Blackfyre. Bloodraven did not deny that he had lured the pretender into his power by the offer of a safe conduct, but contended that he had sacrificed his own personal honor for the good of the realm.

Though many agreed, and were pleased to see another Blackfyre pretender removed, King Aegon felt he had no choice but to condemn the Hand, lest the word of the Iron Throne be seen as worthless. Yet after the sentence of death was pronounced, Aegon offered Bloodraven the chance to take the black and join the Night's Watch. This he did. Ser Brynden Rivers set sail for the Wall late in the year of 233 AC. (No one intercepted his ship). Two hundred men went with him, many of them archers from Bloodraven's personal guard, the Raven's Teeth. The king's brother, Maester Aemon, was also amongst them. (The World of Ice and Fire - The Targaryen Kings: Aegon V)

Nowhere does the book come right out and say that Bloodraven killed Aenys. The passive voice is used to describe the beheading, so we have no indication who gave the order or wielded the sword. Bloodraven confesses to allowing Aenys to come to Westeros and confesses to sacrificing his own honor, but doesn't say he ordered the death of Aenys.

Who else might have had command of the Gold Cloaks and/of access to the dungeon at the Red Keep? Aegon? Aemon? Ser Duncan the Tall? Maybe Bloodraven's last act on behalf of the Targaryen dynasty was to take the blame for the death of Aenys. Perhaps he acted out of loyalty to the new king or maybe, like Ned Stark, making a false confession and joining the Night's Watch was a way of staying alive and/or saving someone dear to him.

Someone presented the head of Aenys to the Great Council. I assume that Bloodraven did this.