Jump to content
Mario Seddy

Was Aegon The Conqueror to generous ?

Recommended Posts

1 hour ago, Mario Seddy said:

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

As usual it depends on where you are coming from.  Aegon made himself ruler of lands that were already occupied.  He had nothing that passed for a claim.  It was taken the same way man took it from the children of the forest.  Like North America was taken from the natives of the time. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4 hours ago, Mario Seddy said:

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

The more violent he was, the more hated he’d become. You can’t kill everyone in Westeros, even with three dragons. And even if he could, why would he kill the people he wanted to rule? He might as well have stayed on Dragonstone.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

He was generous in part because it would help him win the throne. A foreign invader marching into your lands burning your forces to a crisp with dragon fire doesn't exactly make everyone love you and want to support your cause. I think in being generous, he showed that he could be a just merciful ruler, one people would take to. Plus, he showed that if you antagonize him and refuse to yield, he'll burn you to a cinder (House Hoare for example). Dragons are one heck of a threat. Was he too generous? That's hard to say, I think he was generous enough given the circumstances, basically most lords could keep their lands and titles but had to pay homage to him as lord of 7 kingdoms

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

No, Aegon only wanted people who do him fealty to satisfy his ego, he wasn't generous, since he really didn't know what to do with his dominions, he just made a few laws  and  let his vassals do whatever the hell they wanted.

Share this post


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

No, Aegon only wanted people who do him fealty to satisfy his ego, he wasn't generous, since he really didn't know what to do with his dominions, he just made a few laws  and  let his vassals do whatever the hell they wanted.

Without either standing army or available horde of well trained and loyal bureaucrats Aegon could only use old system and just hope that those nobles stay loyal to him and his successors. 

Edited by Loose Bolt
+either

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

He was generous because:

  1. He could afford to be.
  2. His family was not burdened with many generations of feuds with other lords.  He was guided by revenge.
  3. To expound on #2, he was able to rule without bias because he had little to no history with the High Lords and their houses. 

Westeros benefitted from having an outsider to conquer them.  It would have gone very badly for the people if one of the High Lords had managed to become dominant.  The people fared better compared to what would have happened had Harren, Argillac, or Torrhen had gotten the upper hand on the others.  A foreigner ruling over them was the best possible outcome for Westeros. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
34 minutes ago, Loose Bolt said:

Without either standing army or available horde of well trained and loyal bureaucrats Aegon could only use old system and just hope that those nobles stay loyal to him and his successors. 

Jaeharys must've been a mage then. 

@Unit A2 Yeah, tell that to the Dornish, they really benefited from Aegon's "generosity".

Edited by frenin

Share this post


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

Jaeharys must've been a mage then. 

@Unit A2 Yeah, tell that to the Dornish, they really benefited from Aegon's "generosity".

I blame the Dornish for being stubborn.  To be more specific, I blame the Dornish noblemen.  The peasant class would have been so much better off if their lords had to answer to a Targaryen overlord. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
9 minutes ago, Unit A2 said:

I blame the Dornish for being stubborn.  To be more specific, I blame the Dornish noblemen.  The peasant class would have been so much better off if their lords had to answer to a Targaryen overlord. 

Yeah right, foolish Dornish, why don't you let themselves being dominated by a foreign power that claims being god.

What?? Sovereignity?? What's that?? Let yourself being ruled from half a continent away... The man is genociding you because you don't want him?? You're stubborn assholes... Why are you fighting?? You're fighting against progress, the inbreed guy is telling it to y'all.

 

Edited by frenin

Share this post


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

Jaeharys must've been a mage then.

He build some roads. But king J forget to make sure that someone would maintain those.

J I also passed some new laws, but there were no means to really enforce those and so most people don't even know about them or just ignore those laws.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

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. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
7 hours ago, Loose Bolt said:

He build some roads. But king J forget to make sure that someone would maintain those.

J I also passed some new laws, but there were no means to really enforce those and so most people don't even know about them or just ignore those laws.

He build some roads i don't know how you expect that those roads wouldn't be mantained, he made some laws, he created the Exceptionalism and he made 7 kingdoms one, Jaeharys knew what he wanted to do with the Realm, Aegon just wanted to be King of Westeros.

 

@Here's Looking At You, Kid

Ofc ofc, the man saw a suffering people and went there to help them, i wonder why he didn't went to Essos and the Slavery bsy, i wonder why he genocided a whole country...

Share this post


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

He build some roads i don't know how you expect that those roads wouldn't be mantained, he made some laws, he created the Exceptionalism and he made 7 kingdoms one, Jaeharys knew what he wanted to do with the Realm, Aegon just wanted to be King of Westeros.

 

@Here's Looking At You, Kid

Ofc ofc, the man saw a suffering people and went there to help them, i wonder why he didn't went to Essos and the Slavery bsy, i wonder why he genocided a whole country...

Aegon helped out in Essos. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
12 minutes ago, Here's Looking At You, Kid said:

Aegon helped out in Essos. 

Aegon was a mercenary in Essos and involving yourself in spices wars is not what you would call help put  but thenagain, a Targ did it, so who knows.

Edited by frenin

Share this post


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

He build some roads i don't know how you expect that those roads wouldn't be mantained, he made some laws, he created the Exceptionalism and he made 7 kingdoms one, Jaeharys knew what he wanted to do with the Realm, Aegon just wanted to be King of Westeros.

Who is making sure that those roads are usable? For instance Romans had specially elected civil servants for maintaining their roads and other critical infrastructure like bridges and aqueducts and naturally rather effective machine to collect taxes to pay that.

When last dragon died there were no real means to make sure that royal laws are enforced and kingdoms were not really one even during rule of J I. After all lords could keep ruling their own fiefs as they wished. Naturally assuming that they did that without rocking the boat too much. For instance Boltons seemed to ignore law about against raping brides over 200 years without any legal problems. And I am sure that they were not only lords who had tendency to ignore inconvenient laws.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4 minutes ago, Loose Bolt said:

Who is making sure that those roads are usable? For instance Romans had specially elected civil servants for maintaining their roads and other critical infrastructure like bridges and aqueducts and naturally rather effective machine to collect taxes to pay that.

When last dragon died there were no real means to make sure that royal laws are enforced and kingdoms were not really one even during rule of J I. After all lords could keep ruling their own fiefs as they wished. Naturally assuming that they did that without rocking the boat too much. For instance Boltons seemed to ignore law about against raping brides over 200 years without any legal problems. And I am sure that they were not only lords who had tendency to ignore inconvenient laws.

I suppose the man, since he checked the state and the construction of said roads and even when he died, said roads weren't finished.

Jaeharys made those 7 kingdoms, even the distant North for a while, to start thinking like one kingdom, that's a fact, whether you want to admit or not, are you saying that there are corrupt rulers who don't follow the laws, that happens even today.

Share this post


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

I suppose the man, since he checked the state and the construction of said roads and even when he died, said roads weren't finished.

Jaeharys made those 7 kingdoms, even the distant North for a while, to start thinking like one kingdom, that's a fact, whether you want to admit or not, are you saying that there are corrupt rulers who don't follow the laws, that happens even today.

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

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

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.

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

×