Jump to content

Favorite Targaryen monarch


C.T. Phipps

Recommended Posts

Well, if the Starks and their vassals had the strength to repel the wildlings, and their subjects had been willing to join the ranks of the NW, the New Gift would not have depopulated the way it did. I don't think the Umbers and mountain clans could have secured what the NW could not...


Link to comment
Share on other sites

Well, he pacified the Faith Militant, got rid of the First Night, established common law, negotiated the first truce between Bracken and Blackwood, re-vamped King's Landing's waterworks and won the love of his people.

I don't know what you mean by "for the power that he wielded Jahaerys I achievements weren't really big", because IMO he didn't have to do anything "big". After the initial amnesty he settled between the parties involved in the Faith Militant Uprising, his reign was peaceful and prosperous.

I didn't say he was bad, I totally agree that he was one of the best rulers of Westeros. But you have also to consider the state of the kingdom at the moments of the crowning. For example Aegon III took the throne after the perhaps most catastrophic war in Westerosi history, so even if he would have been the best of the best, he wouldn't have the money to build new roads/waterworks or things like that. After the death of the dragons the targaryens lost a great deal of their power, so it's hard to compare kings like Viserys II, Daeron II, Aegon V with kings who had dragons like Jaeherys I, or Aegon the conqueror.

Some additional thoughts:

The faith militant uprising: Imagine Maegor would have never taken the throne, what would have happened(assuming jaeherys didn't have no elder siblings)? Jaehaerys would have still be married to his sister, the faith militant would have risen and Jaeherys would have had no other choice to put them down like Maegor or divorce Alysanne. The reason why the faith accepted Jaehaerys was beacuse Maegor broke their power, but unlike Maegor Jaeherys was able and willing to make a peace with the faith.

First Night: This was Alysanne's idea, although we can assume that it was jaeherys who actually enforced the law.

Dynasty & succesion: IDK, certainly there were reasons(patriarchal society etc.) why he chose Viserys I as heir, but I wouldn't say that it was a brilliant decision.

Other mistakes he made: He appointed first Ryam Redwyne and then otto hightower as Hand of the king, somewhere in ASOIAF tyrion thinks that these two were some of the worst hands ever. On the other Hand he appointed Septon Barth, who seems one of the best ever.

Considering all these things I still think he was one of the best, but not the best ever.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

... Read my post again sport. The second paragraph specifically, that's where I talk about the mistakes of Jaeherys I, including the Stark landgrab. That new castle is totally unrelated to that landgrab. The Nightsfort was breaking down and to expensive for the dwindling NW to maintain to boot, thus Alysanne sponsoring a new castle was a great move. Especially since Jaeherys and Alysanne got added propagande value, paying for the fortress with her own jewels and all.

I'm not your sport, buddy.

And aye. Was reading on my phone and *insert excuse blaming phone for misreading of the post*.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 because the dragonbane was by no means ludacris. Even when one of his hands was seigeing the palace for his brother's wife he stood by him and her.

ya youre right. My opinion influenced that post, consciouslly..
Link to comment
Share on other sites

The faith militant uprising: Imagine Maegor would have never taken the throne, what would have happened(assuming jaeherys didn't have no elder siblings)? Jaehaerys would have still be married to his sister, the faith militant would have risen and Jaeherys would have had no other choice to put them down like Maegor or divorce Alysanne. The reason why the faith accepted Jaehaerys was beacuse Maegor broke their power, but unlike Maegor Jaeherys was able and willing to make a peace with the faith.

Jaehaerys and Alysanne weren't married until after he took the throne. It's not really clear from TWOIAF what Aegon I intended with regard to the future of House Targaryen's marriage customs; Aenys' decision to marry Aegon and Rhaena was a controversial and, in retrospect, terrible choice. A more prudent king might have quietly done away with it and fallen back on cousin marriage to keep the bloodlines sufficiently pure. To be honest, the basically total dropping of the Faith's objections to incestuous marriage post 48 AC has always seemed a bit dubious to me, but apparently Jaehaerys pulled it off.

Other mistakes he made: He appointed first Ryam Redwyne and then otto hightower as Hand of the king, somewhere in ASOIAF tyrion thinks that these two were some of the worst hands ever. On the other Hand he appointed Septon Barth, who seems one of the best ever.

It wasn't Tyrion. Maester Pylos cited the two of them (alongside Murmison and Myles Smallwood) as examples of bad Hands, but people really need to remember both the context of the opinion (him trying to motivate Davos by citing examples of highborn individuals who didn't succeed at the job) and the fact that bad Hands are not bad in the same way.

Ser Ryam Redwyne was a brilliant soldier and general. After Septon Barth died, Jaehaerys needed a big-name replacement, and Ser Ryam probably seemed like a solid choice, given that he was already on the Small Council and presumably a trusted advisor. It didn't work out, but he was Hand for only a few months, and was quickly replaced. Frankly, I suspect his reputation as one of the worst Hands ever is based mainly on his following Barth, the best one, and the contrast between his being a legendary knight and his lack of success there.

Ser Otto Hightower was superbly qualified, and, from the histories, pretty much ran the kingdom for two decades, and did so very well. He proved a bad Hand only after Jaehaerys' death, because King Viserys failed to manage his ambitions properly.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Colonel Green,



there is a hint that Aegon I intended to continue the incest. The marriage of Aenys and Alyssa is a pretty big hint, as is Visenya's suggestion to betroth/marry Maegor to infant Rhaena. The Targaryens continued to think in incestuous marriages, and Aegon may have honored the High Septon, and done lip service to the Faith, but I imagine Aegon and Visenya pretty much knew that the Targaryens had to break the back of the Faith eventually, not just to continue the incest but to remove a very powerful faction in the political game. It seems that the High Septon and his power actually increased after the Conquest, as a unified Realm would naturally increase the direct influence the High Septon had over all the domains and orders of the Faith in the former independent Andal kingdoms.



Aenys may have been a weak king, but his decision to marry his children to each other clearly was one of the most important political decisions for House Targaryen.



On the bad Hands:



Ryam Redwyne may have been a great knight and a good advisor but by the time he was named Hand Jaehaerys himself was most likely already leaving much of the day-to-day management of the Realm to his Hand, and if Ryam was a bad manager/organizer it is easily imaginable that he completely sucked in that post.



I once asked George on his NAB about Otto's bad reputation as Hand, and he explained that part of it comes from the fact that he was fired by two kings. Whether he is by posterity also blamed for the outbreak of the Dance of the Dragons is not clear, but I imagine that's the case.



And we should also keep in mind that during Otto's first term as Hand Viserys was still young and took an active hand in the governance of the Realm. Nothing suggests that he let his advisers rule, and nothing, in turn, suggests that Otto really distinguished himself as Hand (I imagine that Lord Lyonel Strong was the really great guy during this time, both as Master of Laws and then later as Hand). Viserys may not have been 'the most strong-willed of kings' but this does not necessarily mean that he mostly did what Otto suggested.


Link to comment
Share on other sites

Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.

×
×
  • Create New...