Jump to content
Mario Seddy

Was Aegon The Conqueror to generous ?

Recommended Posts

37 minutes ago, Loose Bolt said:

Who had duty of maintaining of those roads when J I died?

 

His heirs.

 

38 minutes ago, Loose Bolt said:

 Actually northmen are still loyal to Starks. Naturally assuming that there would be available adult male Stark. Westermen to Lannisters and Valemen to Arryns.

 

Even a female adult Stark might serve, the point wasn't to get the people to be loyal only to Targs, even when the man did achievethat in the South at least, the point was to unite the Realm closer and get them to start to think as a sole Country, which, with the exception of the IB and with less succes in the North, the man did achieve.

You can't change a millenial of histiry in 60 years.

 

41 minutes ago, Loose Bolt said:

 In fact I assume that most people living in Westeros are more loyal to their lords than to dude that happens to be king. So kings stay in power only as long as enough lords stay loyal to them. Besides kings don't even have any means to rule without lords. Or kings do have very few civil servants that are directly loyal to them and practical enforcing the law outside King's Landing is carried out by local lords. Kings do not even have standing army. So I still think that 7 kingdoms are not real nation.

That depends of the lord and the king, loved and recognizable kings get more loyalty than every lord, even in the North Alysanne had to be far more loved than Alaric.

Dragon Kings didn't need standing armies or some bureacracy, their commands were respected and followed and that's why they get to make 7 kingdoms into one before they themselves fucked everything up.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 11/10/2019 at 1:48 AM, frenin said:

Dragon Kings didn't need standing armies or some bureacracy, their commands were respected and followed and that's why they get to make 7 kingdoms into one before they themselves fucked everything up.

Given all the trouble that Aenys, Maegor and other dragon-riding Targaryen kings went through, I think that's a bit of a rosy picture of it.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 11/9/2019 at 9:44 AM, Here's Looking At You, Kid said:

The point of the conquest was not about handing out apple pie and beer to the people.  The Targaryens saw a fractured land that was in a constant state of conflict.  The kings were constantly calling their banners and getting them involved in their personal conflicts and the majority of the people suffered.  The non-nobles made up the majority.  The only way at the time to stop the forever wars was to force the kingdoms into one kingdom and demote the kings to high lords.  One land.  One ruler. 

Sounds very noble, until you realize that the Targ keep putting the realm and land under constand warfare but now bigger on scale with a major civil war.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Lion of the West said:

Given all the trouble that Aenys, Maegor and other dragon-riding Targaryen kings went through, I think that's a bit of a rosy picture of it.

What trouble Jaeharys and  Viserys faced?? The Faith is the only trouble i remember and  that's a very important exception.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
9 hours ago, frenin said:

What trouble Jaeharys and  Viserys faced?? The Faith is the only trouble i remember and  that's a very important exception.

As I recall Viserys got the Greens and constant, or almost constant, scheming at court and potentially his own assassination which ended his life.

But you are right that Jaehaerys did avoid much problem. I would however argue this was the twin result of Maegor's reign to root out troublemakers and bleed the Faith Militant and Jaehaerys own shrewd administration's (I don't want to claim he did it all himself so its "his administration" rather than reign) work on handling situations. There was after all at least one time when, if I recall, the Sea Snake and Daemon Targaryen were close to start a civil war.

Edited by Lion of the West

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
7 hours ago, Lion of the West said:

As I recall Viserys got the Greens and constant, or almost constant, scheming at court and potentially his own assassination which ended his life.

He didn't get that really and  having factions in your family is universal.

 

7 hours ago, Lion of the West said:

There was after all at least one time when, if I recall, the Sea Snake and Daemon Targaryen were close to start a civil war.

And he handled it.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
6 hours ago, frenin said:

He didn't get that really and  having factions in your family is universal.

 

And he handled it.

Absolutely, yet the problems were potentially there and people were not afraid of raising problems just because the king had a dragon.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
22 minutes ago, Lion of the West said:

Absolutely, yet the problems were potentially there and people were not afraid of raising problems just because the king had a dragon.

Usually those who raised problems also had dragons or else they ended like Jonos Arryn.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 11/10/2019 at 12:46 AM, Moiraine Sedai said:

He took something that wasn't his.  It's not generous but he was acting like the other lords.  

Is that supposed to make sense in any way?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
9 minutes ago, frenin said:

Usually those who raised problems also had dragons or else they ended like Jonos Arryn.

Who?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 11/7/2019 at 7:04 PM, Mario Seddy said:

Was aegon the Conqueror to generous with the westrosi lords ? I think he was to generous. 

To which?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
21 hours ago, frenin said:

Usually those who raised problems also had dragons or else they ended like Jonos Arryn.

Usually, yes. But they still raise trouble so evidently everyone did not bow down and never dared to life a finger due to the dragons.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Aegon the Conqueror was remarkably generous and dealt with a bunch of cravens and weaklings, basically. Torrhen Stark bent the knee without any Targaryen man or dragon ever setting foot on the North, the Lannisters giving just because their king was captured, the Arryns submitting because they were visited by a woman, the Riverlords, Oldtown, Highgarden, etc. falling over themselves to do Aegon homage as their king.

The only kingdom that was actually conquered are the Stormlands - and, perhaps, part of the Reach.

The others basically said, well, this Aegon fellow seems to be a nice and just king. Why don't we take him, too?

And it is utterly remarkable that no great house ever properly rebelled against the Targaryens during Aegon's reign or during the reigns of his immediate successors (Jonos Arryn doesn't count because he had to arrest and murder his own brother 'to take over the Vale' - he was done for as soon as he started, and not just because he rebelled against the dragons).

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now

×