Jump to content
Mario Seddy

Was rebellion inevitable against the Targaryen Dynasty ?

Recommended Posts

Something was happening. I dont know if it was against Aerys or the whole dynasty. The Stark/Tully/Baratheon/Arryn (and almost Lannister if Jaime-Lysa happenes) alliance seemed strange. And it seems logic because the last Targaryen kings were strange too. Aerys was mad, Jaehaerys seemed weak and Aegon had reduced privileges of nobility (not to mention the broken betrothals). 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Endymion I Targaryen said:

The Stark/Tully/Baratheon/Arryn (and almost Lannister if Jaime-Lysa happenes) alliance seemed strange.

STAB alliance was born out of war, not before it. Tully support had to be bought right in the middle of conflict. And Stark-Arryn-Baratheon relationship was hardly a proper alliance until Aerys forced their hands. Aerys massacred Brandon's party, including Arryn heir - Robert and Jon did nothing. Lord Stark managed to travel all the way south to meet with Aerys, yet nothing was done in that time as well. The alliance was actually created when Aerys demanded Ned and Robert from Jon.

But overall collapse of Targaryen monarchy seems to be unavoidable. Targaryens had little land and men of their own. Blackfyre threat was one thing to rally Great Houses around the Crown - to fend off their second-rate rivals like Reynes/Yronwoods and such. Without such threat, there was no need for Great Houses to follow Targaryens. Without Great Houses' support, Targaryens had nothing - no armies, no incomes, no bureaucracy or ideology to keep them afloat.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Rebellion was nearly constant, both from within and from outside the Targaryen dynasty for nearly the entirety of its existence. That is just how things work.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 11/20/2019 at 8:05 PM, frenin said:

Acting like a tyrantdon't help either.

The Targaryens were an improvement over the "kings" ruling the separate kingdoms.  The Starks were murdering people and fertilizing their Weirwood with the blood.  Harren forced the people of the Riverlands to bleed and construct his fortress.  The ironborn were, well, being ironborn. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
49 minutes ago, Aline de Gavrillac said:

The Targaryens were an improvement over the "kings" ruling the separate kingdoms.  The Starks were murdering people and fertilizing their Weirwood with the blood.  Harren forced the people of the Riverlands to bleed and construct his fortress.  The ironborn were, well, being ironborn. 

Do you doubt they were kings or...

Some were an improvement, others def weren't,  Aerys certainly wasn't a improvement.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Honestly, there should have been a rebellion after the dragons were dead. 

Aegon III was a weak ruler at best and the country was already divided. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4 hours ago, dsjj251 said:

Honestly, there should have been a rebellion after the dragons were dead. 

Aegon III was a weak ruler at best and the country was already divided. 

The death of the last dragon should be interesting to read about. I wouldnt be shocked if George decides to add in some smaller scale civil strife in the wake of the death, either from the nobles or commons. The death of their symbol of exceptionalism would no doubt encourage the masses that these people are just human and mortal and no different from themselves. Would like to see if heavy PR work in the same way as Barth encouraged the Doctrine of Exceptionalism is needed

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I think that Aegon V had seriously alienated the nobility - for the best of reasons.  People claim that the Targaryens have a "god complex" but that's even more true of many great lords in Westeros.  They think they have a divine right to treat the Smallfolk as they see fit.  So, they viewed him as a tyrant, because he wanted to limit their rights to abuse the Smallfolk.

To my mind, the Targaryens were living on borrowed time, from that point on.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 11/20/2019 at 5:51 PM, Mystical said:

How inept are you that you manage 5 rebellions from inside your own freaking family (Blackfyres) in only 300 years of ruling? And dragging the rest of realm into your petty family squabbles as a result. How inept are you to let sadistic, crazy people rule instead of removing them? Because that is a recipe for your own undoing, in the form of rebellions. That kind of ineptitude will only work for so long until it becomes a giant problem to the point where the rest of the continent will say 'enough'. And that whole God complex, I can do what I want and screw the consequences because I'm a Targ thinking, will eventually backfire as well.

5 rebellions in 300 years is a pretty good record.  The Targaryens compare favourably to the Plantagenets, whose dynasty lasted for a similar length of time. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 11/18/2019 at 9:06 PM, Many-Faced Votary said:

Why are you obsessed with attempting to discredit the Targaryens in opposition to all textual evidence?

I'm guessing the O/P is a fan of the Starks and is trying very hard to discredit the Targaryens.  I don't think it's working. 

On 11/20/2019 at 11:51 AM, Mystical said:

How inept are you that you manage 5 rebellions from inside your own freaking family (Blackfyres) in only 300 years of ruling? And dragging the rest of realm into your petty family squabbles as a result. How inept are you to let sadistic, crazy people rule instead of removing them? Because that is a recipe for your own undoing, in the form of rebellions. That kind of ineptitude will only work for so long until it becomes a giant problem to the point where the rest of the continent will say 'enough'. And that whole God complex, I can do what I want and screw the consequences because I'm a Targ thinking, will eventually backfire as well.

Less inept than the Starks, who dragged the realm into war because (1) Lyanna selfishly broke her engagements to Robert because she didn't want to marry him.  Take one for the team, Lyanna. What the heart wants is not important. (2) Brandon the hothead threatened to murder the Targaryens. (3) Catelyn kidnaps Tyrion. (4) Robb chose to go to war. (5) Bastard son of the house picks a fight with the new Warden of the North and threatens to attack them with Wildlings.

On 11/20/2019 at 7:02 PM, Aline de Gavrillac said:

An unbroken rule over the continent for that long was bound to end.  Westeros is not of one culture and to hold it together for that long was a remarkable achievement.  It was bound to end, but not for the reason the others are trying to imply.  It is just damned hard to maintain hold on so many cultures for so long when some among those people had grudges dating from before the Conquest. 

True, it was bound to end and could have ended without any reason other than the lords wanting to become petty kings again. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
19 minutes ago, Bowen 747 said:

Less inept than the Starks, who dragged the realm into war because (1) Lyanna selfishly broke her engagements to Robert because she didn't want to marry him.  Take one for the team, Lyanna. What the heart wants is not important. (2) Brandon the hothead threatened to murder the Targaryens. (3) Catelyn kidnaps Tyrion. (4) Robb chose to go to war. (5) Bastard son of the house picks a fight with the new Warden of the North and threatens to attack them with Wildlings.

You think??  Robellion, Blackfyre Rebellion and  Dance, that without counting the bloodbaths the Dornish wars were.

With whom Lyanna broke her engagements and  why Brandon the hotheaded wanted to kill the Targs??

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
5 hours ago, Bowen 747 said:

Less inept than the Starks, who dragged the realm into war because (1) Lyanna selfishly broke her engagements to Robert because she didn't want to marry him.  Take one for the team, Lyanna. What the heart wants is not important. (2) Brandon the hothead threatened to murder the Targaryens. (3) Catelyn kidnaps Tyrion. (4) Robb chose to go to war. (5) Bastard son of the house picks a fight with the new Warden of the North and threatens to attack them with Wildlings.

Do you know cause and effect? Nothing had happened from what went down with Lyanna. From Brandon and Rickard's death. Arryn Lords and others dying. It wasn't until Aerys called for Ned's and Robert's heads that it was decided to move against Aerys. And Rhaegar who saw it more fit to abandon his wife and children, make off with the daughter of the WotN (which his how Rickard and Brandon got involved in the first place) and then still fought on the side of his crazy ass dad (instead of removing him ages ago).

When it comes to the modern day Starks, blame them all you want but nothing would have happened if it hadn't been for people like LittleFinger and the Lannisters. And while I do consider Ned to be the finale cause of the Wot5K with his refusal to agree to Renly's plan and his general stupidity in court, none of that and what followed would have happened if it wasn't for the Lannisters (incest+ power hungry), LF (murder of Jon Arryn, betraying Ned and whatever else he did) etc.. Just like the rebellion wouldn't have happened if it wasn't for Aerys and Rheagar.

The root cause was NOT the Starks.

Edited by Mystical

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 11/20/2019 at 7:02 PM, Aline de Gavrillac said:

An unbroken rule over the continent for that long was bound to end.  Westeros is not of one culture and to hold it together for that long was a remarkable achievement.  It was bound to end, but not for the reason the others are trying to imply.  It is just damned hard to maintain hold on so many cultures for so long when some among those people had grudges dating from before the Conquest. 

It was a remarkable achievement and brought a lot of benefit to the people.  But three hundred years is a long time to maintain rule for that long of a period over those people.  Culture was part of the problem but there are also the lords who wanted to be kings of the land back again. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 11/23/2019 at 7:53 AM, frenin said:

You think??  Robellion, Blackfyre Rebellion and  Dance, that without counting the bloodbaths the Dornish wars were.

With whom Lyanna broke her engagements and  why Brandon the hotheaded wanted to kill the Targs??

 

Lyanna was engaged to Robert. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4 hours ago, Bowen 747 said:

Lyanna was engaged to Robert. 

With whom Lyanna run off?? Who kidnapped her''

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 11/27/2019 at 1:27 PM, Allardyce said:

It was a remarkable achievement and brought a lot of benefit to the people.  But three hundred years is a long time to maintain rule for that long of a period over those people.  Culture was part of the problem but there are also the lords who wanted to be kings of the land back again. 

Not everyone who resisted wanted to be king, some just wanted the Targaryens to leave them alone. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 11/23/2019 at 5:42 PM, Mystical said:

Do you know cause and effect? Nothing had happened from what went down with Lyanna. From Brandon and Rickard's death. Arryn Lords and others dying. It wasn't until Aerys called for Ned's and Robert's heads that it was decided to move against Aerys. And Rhaegar who saw it more fit to abandon his wife and children, make off with the daughter of the WotN (which his how Rickard and Brandon got involved in the first place) and then still fought on the side of his crazy ass dad (instead of removing him ages ago).

When it comes to the modern day Starks, blame them all you want but nothing would have happened if it hadn't been for people like LittleFinger and the Lannisters. And while I do consider Ned to be the finale cause of the Wot5K with his refusal to agree to Renly's plan and his general stupidity in court, none of that and what followed would have happened if it wasn't for the Lannisters (incest+ power hungry), LF (murder of Jon Arryn, betraying Ned and whatever else he did) etc.. Just like the rebellion wouldn't have happened if it wasn't for Aerys and Rheagar.

The root cause was NOT the Starks.

We don't have the full story yet.  Aerys was so cruel that he certainly had to go, but we also need  to know what Rickard Stark's "Southron ambitions" were.  

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
18 minutes ago, SeanF said:

We don't have the full story yet.  Aerys was so cruel that he certainly had to go, but we also need  to know what Rickard Stark's "Southron ambitions" were.  

What does it matter? The point is simple, Rickard and Brandon went to KL because of what happened with Lyanna. Which was Rhaegar's fault. They got killed by Aerys. Nothing else matters in this context.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 11/17/2019 at 10:40 PM, Mario Seddy said:

Was rebellion inevitable against the targaryens ? If Robert rebellion hadn't then maybe another rebellion would have been faught to bring down the targaryen dynasty ? 

 

On 11/20/2019 at 7:02 PM, Aline de Gavrillac said:

An unbroken rule over the continent for that long was bound to end.  Westeros is not of one culture and to hold it together for that long was a remarkable achievement.  It was bound to end, but not for the reason the others are trying to imply.  It is just damned hard to maintain hold on so many cultures for so long when some among those people had grudges dating from before the Conquest. 

For this reason alone, probably yes.  There are monarchies that exists today that are far longer.  Like the Japanese imperial family.  But they are symbolic.  The Targaryens could have maintained the dynasty as a figurehead but not ruling.  Not without dragons.  Beligerent asses among the lords may come around once in a while and decide to try their luck. 

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

×