Best Targaryen Kings

[Tomless]

Out of curiosity, how would your ranking of the seventeen Targaryen Kings look? For me, it would go: 

Jaehaerys I

Daeron II

Aegon V

Viserys II

Viserys I

Aegon I

Aegon III

Daeron I

Maekar I

Jaehaerys II

Aenys I

Aegon II/Rhaenyra 

Aerys I

Baelor I

Maegor I

Aerys II

Aegon IV

[James Steller]

That’s a pretty good list.

[Arthur Peres]

Jaeharys I, Jaeharys II and Aegon III seems to be the only real good kings with Aegon III barely making it, everyone else is really average or a completly failure.

[Adam Yozza]

Jahaerys I

Daeron II

Viserys II

Aegon V

Aegon I

Viserys I

Aegon III

Maekar I

Daeron I

Aenys I

Aerys I

Jahaerys II

Rhaenyra

Baelor I

Aerys II

Maegor I

Aegon II

Aegon IV

 

*Although literally the only reason Aegon IV is last is because George says so, otherwise the bottom two would be the other way round.

[Loose Bolt]

IMHO without Maegor I Targ dynasty would have ended and so he should have higher rank in that list. Or I assume that he and his mother reconquered 6 kingdoms that Aenys I had lost. And so Aenys I and Aerys II should be at the bottom, bc they lost their kingdoms.

[Lord Varys]

4 minutes ago, Loose Bolt said:

IMHO without Maegor I Targ dynasty would have ended and so he should have higher rank in that list. Or I assume that he and his mother reconquered 6 kingdoms that Aenys I had lost. And so Aenys I and Aerys II should be at the bottom, bc they lost their kingdoms.

They didn't reconquer anything. They just retook KL. There weren't that many rebel lords/smallfolk, just the Faith Militant and a couple of dozen pious lords who weren't all that prominent.

One could even speculate that Aenys or Aegon the Uncrowned could have gotten more support from the Westerosi had they gotten around/brought themselves to lead a campaign against the Faith. After all, Maegor was not the rightful heir nor a particularly sympathetic person.

[Loose Bolt]

1 hour ago, Lord Varys said:

They didn't reconquer anything. They just retook KL. There weren't that many rebel lords/smallfolk, just the Faith Militant and a couple of dozen pious lords who weren't all that prominent.

One could even speculate that Aenys or Aegon the Uncrowned could have gotten more support from the Westerosi had they gotten around/brought themselves to lead a campaign against the Faith. After all, Maegor was not the rightful heir nor a particularly sympathetic person.

Aegon the Uncrowned had married his sister and so almost certainly he would have been as much an enemy of the faith as Maegor and AtUc did NOT have have support of any major lords. So his actual power base was very weak.

Besides Maegor had gained proof of his divine right to rule by surviving trial of 7. So in that way by the rules of the faith Maegor I was legitimate king

PS. I had odd deja vu when I was typing down that comment above.

[Lord Varys]

3 minutes ago, Loose Bolt said:

Aegon the Uncrowned had married his sister and so almost certainly he would have been as much an enemy of the faith as Maegor and AtUc did NOT have have support of any major lords. So his actual power base was very weak.

As Jaehaerys I later concluded Maegor's second marriage and the humiliation of the Hightowers and the High Septon in the process of that was the real problem, not Aegon's marriage to his sister. Perhaps the Faith could have even been made to accept that thing if Maegor hadn't unduly provoked the Faith before. Nobody in Oldtown was personally hurt by Aegon and Rhaena marrying each other - but they were by Maegor's second marriage.

3 minutes ago, Loose Bolt said:

Besides Maegor had gained proof of his divine right to rule by surviving trial of 7. So in that way by the rules of the faith Maegor I was legitimate king

That certainly is part of the reason why Maegor became/is counted as king. But that wasn't a reconquest. And it was also something Maegor himself soiled as soon as he regained consciousness - after all, his burning of the Sept of Remembrance was done without provocation or ultimatum on his part. The Warrior's Sons did accept Maegor's victory and did not continue hostilities ... but Maegor did not. He just burned them all as soon as woke. Which shows what kind of monstrous creature he was.

And the High Septon made clear what Maegor was after that - Trial of Seven or not - a monster and an abomination undeserving of the crown.

I'd count Maegor as the third worst Targaryen king - only Aegon II (who was cruel and incompetent joke) and Aegon IV were worse. Aerys II was actually better than Maegor, considering the era of peace and prosperity that his government gave Westeros for twenty years. Maegor was not only a shitty but the worst enemy House Targaryen ever had until Robert Baratheon. He waged a war of eradication against his own house. If he had children of his own one could understand that he would kill his brother's children - but without those it was insane from a dynastic point of view to try to eradicate Aenys' branch in the male line. If Maegor had no children of his own that would leave only females as possible heirs - and that would outsiders allow to take over the kingdom and dynasties, possibly unmaking everything the Conqueror had built in the process of that.

As for the lists you guys give above:

Aegon I has to be at least third. The only point against him is the First Dornish War - that was a bloody affair, but his very bloodless original conquest as well as the peace and prosperity that he gave the kingdoms he conquered certainy is a very great and commendable feat. I also would rank Daeron II as second, after Jaehaerys I.

[Eltharion21]

Aegon I is very underrated in this thread, and Viserys I overrated.

[frenin]

Jaeharys I

Daeron II

Aegon I

Viserys I

Aegon III

Maekar I

Aegon V

Viserys II

Daeron I

Baelor I

Jaeharys II

Aerys I

Aenys I

Aegon II/Rhaenrya "I"

Maegor I

Aerys II

Aegon IV

 

 

Aegon 5 is the most overrated King of them all,  his reign is a failure is just seeing the trope of the Prince and the Pauper facing reaility  and Aegon 1 easily the most underrated one. The Dornish war was stupid and easily  Westeros bloodiest war but c'mon, the man gave 24 years of peace and plenty to his people, that deserves some credit.

 

[Arthur Peres]

42 minutes ago, frenin said:

Aegon 5 is the most overrated King of them all,  his reign is a failure is just seeing the trope of the Prince and the Pauper facing reaility  and Aegon 1 easily the most underrated one. The Dornish war was stupid and easily  Westeros bloodiest war but c'mon, the man gave 24 years of peace and plenty to his people, that deserves some credit.

 

I think Daeron II is more overrated, he managed to get dorne at the cost of allianating half of his own kingdom and his failures led to a civil war and pretenders that would drive the realm into more and more bloodshed.

[frenin]

36 minutes ago, Arthur Peres said:

I think Daeron II is more overrated, he managed to get dorne at the cost of allianating half of his own kingdom and his failures led to a civil war and pretenders that would drive the realm into more and more bloodshed.

Can't hold that against him, Dorne needed to be in the food, as simple as that. The attempts of doing that by force  resulted  in the bloodiest wars we have record of so far. And Westeros wasn't capable of preventing from harassing the marches, which ended in more bloddy wars.

He didn't really alienated half Kingdom, those Houses had already turned their backs  on him for a good number of reasons and  see in Daemon, thanks daddy, not only the perfect King but, and truly the most important thing here, the perfect guy for them to take over in the land, that's why even the Yronwoods supported the man.

But i can't say that he alienated half Kingdom for not having a valyrian looking heir and  filling  his court with music  and  scholars.

[Lord Varys]

13 hours ago, Arthur Peres said:

I think Daeron II is more overrated, he managed to get dorne at the cost of allianating half of his own kingdom and his failures led to a civil war and pretenders that would drive the realm into more and more bloodshed.

Definitely not half the kingdom, just some malcontents. No great houses actually supported the Blackfyres, ever. And only Daemon I was a serious threat. The rest were just jokers.

I'd be surprised if all the Blackfyre rebellions took as many wars as Daeron I's mad conquest of Dorne - and the Dornish union the prospect of such a war for good, strengthening the power and prestige of the Iron Throne immensely.

[frenin]

42 minutes ago, Lord Varys said:

The rest were just jokers.

Were they?? The only war we know for certain it was a joke was the 4th one.

Both the 3rd and 5th were serious enough wars and the 2nd would've been wildfire had Bloodraven not shut the fire before it spread.

[Lord Varys]

13 minutes ago, frenin said:

Were they?? The only war we know for certain it was a joke was the 4th one.

Both the 3rd and 5th were serious enough wars and the 2nd would've been wildfire had Bloodraven not shut the fire before it spread.

There wasn't even a battle in the Second Rebellion. The third would have been more serious thing than the second and the fourth, but nobody indicates it was as serious as the first. Even if it were - the first was just a war lasting a year - meaning no big issue, overall.

And there was no Fifth Rebellion - the War of the Ninepenny Kings was a war the Targaryens waged on the Stepstones. Maelys Blackfyre didn't even get around to invade the Seven Kingdoms. That wasn't a rebellion, nor was Jaehaerys II forced to invade the Stepstones.

[The Grey Wolf]

@Lord Varys

10K men died (and many more were wounded) at the Redgrass Field alone after a year of heavy fighting. That suggests it was far bloodier than Daeron I's Conquest of Dorne. 

Also, Jaehaerys II actually did invade the Stepstones since they were in the hands of the Band of Nine before the war even started. In fact, it was the Band of Nine's conquest of the Stepstones that led to the Fifth Blackfyre Rebellion.

As for how big the Third Blackfyre Rebellion was vis-a-vis the First GRRM said in an SSM that Daemon I was the "greatest" of the Blackfyre Pretenders but that doesn't mean Haegon I wasn't a legitimate (and potentially sympathetic) threat in his own right.

[frenin]

9 minutes ago, Lord Varys said:

There wasn't even a battle in the Second Rebellion. The third would have been more serious thing than the second and the fourth, but nobody indicates it was as serious as the first. Even if it were - the first was just a war lasting a year - meaning no big issue, overall.

And there was no Fifth Rebellion - the War of the Ninepenny Kings was a war the Targaryens waged on the Stepstones. Maelys Blackfyre didn't even get around to invade the Seven Kingdoms. That wasn't a rebellion, nor was Jaehaerys II forced to invade the Stepstones.

There wasn't even a battle in the 2nd but no one doubts that had Unwin's plot hatched, the Rebellion would be no joke, at that point half the Kingdom were against Bloodraven and his weak King, blaming them for all the maladies that ravaged Westeros and the other half still mourned Daemon.

We know that the Third wasn't as dangerous as the First one but was still dangerous, that battles were fought, Maekar got to shine for his leadership, just as his sons etc etc etc. 1 year is a big issue overall, especially when most of the wars we've seen so far last 1-2 years, the Conquest lasted 2, the Dance 2, the War of the 9penny Kings lasted a year and the Robellion 1 year too. Lasting wars seem to be oddities. No one doubts that the Robellion was a big issue and Daemon's war seems to have been as big issue as Robert's.

Jaeharys was forced to invade the Stepstones because he didn't want to bet on the response of the Westerosi to a very seizable Blackfyre host. That war is still considered as a 5th Blackfyre Rebellion.

 

So far only the 4th has been described as a joke, the 1st, 3rd and 5th were all serious wars and the 2nd one would've become a very seriou issue had not been dealt with before it started.

 

[Lord Varys]

1 minute ago, The Grey Wolf said:

@Lord Varys

10K men died (and many more were wounded) at the Redgrass Field alone after a year of heavy fighting. That suggests it was far bloodier than Daeron I's Conquest of Dorne.

Daeron I got 50,000 of his own men killed in Dorne - we don't know how many Dornishmen the Targaryen men killed.

How many battles/casualties there were during the First Rebellion we don't know. I very much doubt that there was another Redgrass Field there. If 20,000 men died in that war it would be a lot.

What we know about the conflict in the Westerlands sounds like minor fighting with not much bloodshed involved.

1 minute ago, The Grey Wolf said:

Also, Jaehaerys II actually did invade the Stepstones since they were in the hands of the Band of Nine before the war even started. In fact, it was the Band of Nine's conquest of the Stepstones that led to the Fifth Blackfyre Rebellion.

There was no proper Fifth Rebellion. Maelys Blackfyre certainly was a pretender to the Iron Throne (like Viserys III) but like Viserys III he never got around to invade Westeros. It is no rebellion or invasion if there are no rebels. And no nobleman sworn to the Iron Throne that we know of ever declared for Maelys Blackfyre. It was botched foreign invasion which could, if successful, had motivated other men to declare for Maelys Blackfyre and rebel against Jaehaerys II and House Targaryen ... but that never happened.

1 minute ago, The Grey Wolf said:

As for how big the Third Blackfyre Rebellion was vis-a-vis the First GRRM said in an SSM that Daemon I was the "greatest" of the Blackfyre Pretenders but that doesn't mean Haegon I wasn't a legitimate (and potentially sympathetic) threat in his own right.

He certainly may have been a bigger threat than Daemon II and Daemon III - but how big of a threat he was we just don't know. And if he was even remotely in the same league as Daemon I we should have gotten a glimpse at that by now. Instead, even Tyrion only thinks of Daemon I as a serious threat - Bittersteel and his would-be pretenders all appear like jokes, not important enough to be talked about.

[Lord Varys]

2 minutes ago, frenin said:

There wasn't even a battle in the 2nd but no one doubts that had Unwin's plot hatched, the Rebellion would be no joke, at that point half the Kingdom were against Bloodraven and his weak King, blaming them for all the maladies that ravaged Westeros and the other half still mourned Daemon.

We are talking about was, not what couldn't have been if things were different. But I daresay Aerys I and Bloodraven and Maekar would have easily crushed Daemon II even if he had started a proper movement in the Riverlands.

Even the veterans from the Redgrass Field - those men-at-arms Dunk overhears at one point - consider the entire enterprise ludicrous. Daemon II had two devoted followers - Gormy Peake and his lover, Alyn Cockshaw. That was it. This was doomed enterprise from the start, no danger to anything. No great lord was even considering joining Daemon II.

And, no, not half the kingdom was against Aerys I and Bloodraven. Some people grumbled and had issues with Aerys I - but most of them were all at Whitewalls, no? And they were a pitiful lot.

2 minutes ago, frenin said:

We know that the Third wasn't as dangerous as the First one but was still dangerous, that battles were fought, Maekar got to shine for his leadership, just as his sons etc etc etc. 1 year is a big issue overall, especially when most of the wars we've seen so far last 1-2 years, the Conquest lasted 2, the Dance 2, the War of the 9penny Kings lasted a year and the Robellion 1 year too. Lasting wars seem to be oddities. No one doubts that the Robellion was a big issue and Daemon's war seems to have been as big issue as Robert's.

Daeron I's war and the First Dornish War lasted for years. They were real wars, not jokes like all the Blackfyre Rebellions which didn't last more than a year.

I know that some important things happened during the Third Rebellion we have no clue about at this point, but that doesn't mean the war as such was particularly brutal or that many people were killed.

2 minutes ago, frenin said:

Jaeharys was forced to invade the Stepstones because he didn't want to bet on the response of the Westerosi to a very seizable Blackfyre host. That war is still considered as a 5th Blackfyre Rebellion.

Not really, I don't remember anyone ever referencing it as 'the Fifth Blackfyre Rebellion'. Even if they were - it would be as much a misnomer as the Second to Fourth 'Dornish Wars'.

2 minutes ago, frenin said:

So far only the 4th has been described as a joke, the 1st, 3rd and 5th were all serious wars and the 2nd one would've become a very seriou issue had not been dealt with before it started.

The Second Blackfyre Rebellion was the biggest joke of all.

In general, Blackfyres as such never were a serious threat after the First Rebellion was over. As things stand, Aegon V's own lords may have been bigger pains in the ass than the Blackfyres ever were.

[frenin]

12 minutes ago, Lord Varys said:

We are talking about was, not what couldn't have been if things were different. But I daresay Aerys I and Bloodraven and Maekar would have easily crushed Daemon II even if he had started a proper movement in the Riverlands.

Even the veterans from the Redgrass Field - those men-at-arms Dunk overhears at one point - consider the entire enterprise ludicrous. Daemon II had two devoted followers - Gormy Peake and his lover, Alyn Cockshaw. That was it. This was doomed enterprise from the start, no danger to anything. No great lord was even considering joining Daemon II.

And, no, not half the kingdom was against Aerys I and Bloodraven. Some people grumbled and had issues with Aerys I - but most of them were all at Whitewalls, no? And they were a pitiful lot.

It was a plot then, calling it rebellion so threfore calling it joke is just wrong. With what help would've Aerys, Bloodraven and Maekar  easily crushed Daemon 2?? Not the West, nor the North, the Reach were Daemon's biggest pool, second to the Riverlands. Only the Eyrie and some Dornish houses led by the Martells would've stood for sure with him. 

We hear people complaining about them in along half the Kimgdom.

 

 

19 minutes ago, Lord Varys said:

Daeron I's war and the First Dornish War lasted for years. They were real wars, not jokes like all the Blackfyre Rebellions which didn't last more than a year.

I know that some important things happened during the Third Rebellion we have no clue about at this point, but that doesn't mean the war as such was particularly brutal or that many people were killed.

Daeron's conquest of Dorne lasted two years  actually. The following revolt lasted one year.

 

Quote

[...] Within a year, the invaders were at the gates of Sunspear and battling their way through the socalled shadow city. In 158 AC, the Prince of Dorne and twoscore of the most powerful Dornish lords bent their knees to Daeron at the Submission of Sunspear. The Young Dragon had accomplished what Aegon the Conqueror never had. There were rebels still in the deserts and mountains—men swiftly branded as outlaws—but they were few in number to begin with. The king quickly consolidated his control of Dorne, dealing with these rebels when he found them … though not without difficulty. In one infamous episode, a poisoned arrow meant for the king was taken instead by his cousin Prince Aemon (the younger son of Prince Viserys), who had to be sent home by ship to recover. Yet by 159 AC the hinterlands were pacified, and the Young Dragon was free to return in triumph to King’s Landing, leaving Lord Tyrell in Dorne to keep the peace. As assurance for Dorne’s future loyalty and good behavior, fourteen highborn hostages were carried back with him to King’s Landing, the sons and daughters of almost all the great houses of Dorne. [...]

 

 

 The Robellion lasted a year, the Conquest lasted 2, the War of the 9pk lasted a year and the Dance lasted two. Would you call those wars joke?? I mean how can you call Daemon's war a joke since the man was the biggest threat to the Targs until Robert and he only lost because he dismounted for a few minutes, We know that Daemon's war was a close thing, calling it a joke makes zero sense. Wars in Westeros tend to be short, that's Martin's way.

 

The wording is revealing enough, and it tells us that it wasn't a failure like the 2nd one and it was serious enough to allow many things occur.

30 minutes ago, Lord Varys said:

The Second Blackfyre Rebellion was the biggest joke of all.

In general, Blackfyres as such never were a serious threat after the First Rebellion was over. As things stand, Aegon V's own lords may have been bigger pains in the ass than the Blackfyres ever were.

The 2nd Rebellion wasn't a joke, they had bad luck and it ended before it started.

In general you're pulling this out of your ass because that's never said, only the 4th Rebellion it was said to be a joke, not the 1s, not 3rd and not 5th weren't  considered  dangerous.