Jump to content

How much do fAegon and fArya matter?


Alyn Oakenfist

Recommended Posts

1 hour ago, frenin said:

Doubtful, Rhaegar's heir sounds better than the Mad King's heir, in every Targ loyalist every day of the year, winter or summer. Barristan don't call Viserys king and "Beggar King" is a peyorative title rather than a sort of acknowledgement, the only one that has called him king seriously is Dany.

Barristan isn't a Targaryen loyalist. He is a double turncloak. Viserys III is seen and presented as a pretender king, not a prince, unlike Aegon. That's just a fact of the series, no matter what you think. If Viserys III hadn't been crowned/proclaimed king he would have been 'the Beggar Prince', not 'the Beggar King'.

Aegon would be a good claimant if he could prove he was Rhaegar's son. But he can't. He pretends to be a baby all of Westeros believes was killed. There might be some people who buy that he is the real deal, but chances are most of his supporters will take the cynical route and just pretend they buy it to get even with their enemies. The Tyrells never truly believed Joff and Tommen were Robert's children ... but they backed them, anyway.

Doran and Arianne might never for a second believe Aegon is Elia's son ... but might decide to back him, anyway, because he is the tool they need to get their revenge - and the mount Arianne can to ride to power and queenship.

Or take the Vale - which Aegon is going to need if he is going to get some sort of semblance of being a real king: Littlefinger and Sansa won't declare for him because they believe he is Rhaegar's son. And neither will most of the Reach or Stormlords who join him - for them he will be a tool to help fight the Ironborn and to get even with the Lannisters who put a fake Baratheon on the Iron Throne.

Once Aegon appears less promising, shows weakness, indecision, incompetence, or madness, people will quickly abandon him, remembering that they have no proof that he actually has so much as a drop of royal blood and pretends to be a boy they know has been killed seventeen years ago. There is no guarantee or indication that Aegon is going to be a great and just king. He could turn into another Aerys II quickly enough. Tyrion's lesson was to mistrust all the people around him.

And that would even extend to the Golden Company. There is a reason why Harry Strickland is presented as this cautious coward. This guy is not going to face a dragon in battle, much less three.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 minutes ago, Lord Varys said:

Barristan isn't a Targaryen loyalist. He is a double turncloak. Viserys III is seen and presented as a pretender king, not a prince, unlike Aegon. That's just a fact of the series, no matter what you think. If Viserys III hadn't been crowned/proclaimed king he would have been 'the Beggar Prince', not 'the Beggar King'.

He is very much a loyalist, when he plattered that "even those who yield to usurper may yearn for the return of the dragons" talk, he was talking about him. In his own pov he is always seen missing the good ol days or the good old days that never came because of a warhammer. 

He is presented as a fool, beggar king is the title given to Viserys simply because the man calls himself King, not because anyone ever considers him King, that's just a fact. Barristan who is around Robert's council calls him Prince for a reason, because he does not consider him king. No one opposing Viserys would ever consider him king anyway, that's just doesn't make sense. Beggar king is an insult not an acknowledgement...

 

9 minutes ago, Lord Varys said:

Aegon would be a good claimant if he could prove he was Rhaegar's son. But he can't. He pretends to be a baby all of Westeros believes was killed. There might be some people who buy that he is the real deal, but chances are most of his supporters will take the cynical route and just pretend they buy it to get even with their enemies. The Tyrells never truly believed Joff and Tommen were Robert's children ... but they backed them, anyway.

Whatever people may believe, as long as they accept him as Rhaegar's boy, as much as they accept Joff and Tommen as Robert's., heis undisputably the greatest claimant of the Targ camp. Only dragons, not much because their power, but what they represent can and would change that view.

 

 

12 minutes ago, Lord Varys said:

Or take the Vale - which Aegon is going to need if he is going to get some sort of semblance of being a real king: Littlefinger and Sansa won't declare for him because they believe he is Rhaegar's son. And neither will most of the Reach or Stormlords who join him - for them he will be a tool to help fight the Ironborn and to get even with the Lannisters who put a fake Baratheon on the Iron Throne.

Sure, all that is possible and likely but again, as long as they shout is Rhaegar's kid.

 

13 minutes ago, Lord Varys said:

Once Aegon appears less promising, shows weakness, indecision, incompetence, or madness, people will quickly abandon him, remembering that they have no proof that he actually has so much as a drop of royal blood and pretends to be a boy they know has been killed seventeen years ago. There is no guarantee or indication that Aegon is going to be a great and just king. He could turn into another Aerys II quickly enough. Tyrion's lesson was to mistrust all the people around him.

There is no guarantee that the man is going to be bust either, he is promising, he is being properly trained and overall he is a dashing and charming guy. The kind of guy Westeros usually has the hots for.

 

15 minutes ago, Lord Varys said:

And that would even extend to the Golden Company. There is a reason why Harry Strickland is presented as this cautious coward. This guy is not going to face a dragon in battle, much less three.

Harry Strickland can be replaced tho.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 hours ago, Lord Varys said:

And that would even extend to the Golden Company. There is a reason why Harry Strickland is presented as this cautious coward. This guy is not going to face a dragon in battle, much less three.

For me Strickland seems like someone who is very sceptical; not so much a coward, but maybe one of the first who will start asking unwanted questions.

3 hours ago, frenin said:

He is very much a loyalist, when he plattered that "even those who yield to usurper may yearn for the return of the dragons" talk, he was talking about him. In his own pov he is always seen missing the good ol days or the good old days that never came because of a warhammer. 

Barristan is someone who has seen more than just one Targaryen king and knows enough of history to not judge the whole dynasty by the last half of the life of one king. He served Robert and has seen how this man beggared the realm in just his short reign, something not even the Unworthy managed - and than Barristan was dismissed by Joffrey. So yes, he is a loyalist, imho - from his own experience and from history, and yes, a very nostalgic one.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

45 minutes ago, Morte said:

Barristan is someone who has seen more than just one Targaryen king and knows enough of history to not judge the whole dynasty by the last half of the life of one king.

Well, that certainly applies to you more than Barristan.:P  The man was never really a Baratheon man, he just took the pardon, maybe he would become one but Robert became a bust.

 

48 minutes ago, Morte said:

He served Robert and has seen how this man beggared the realm in just his short reign, something not even the Unworthy managed -

- Barristan has never expressed that, I doubt that he knows or understands the extent of the debt, nor do i believe he would care much about it, the man was a soldier after all.

- I'm very intrigued, do you know what the Unworthy managed??

- Robert reigned for 15 years, that's not short in any stretch of the imagination.

 

52 minutes ago, Morte said:

- and than Barristan was dismissed by Joffrey. So yes, he is a loyalist, imho - from his own experience and from history, and yes, a very nostalgic one.

He is indeed a nostalgic one. I doubt It has much to do with history, he is not that type of guy. He has just been a loyalist for most of his life and the Targs have not aggreviated him personally.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

5 minutes ago, frenin said:

Well, that certainly applies to you more than Barristan.:P 

:blush:

Well, he's not Hoster Blackwood or Tyrion, but he has served more than one king, so he has a little more insight in how the Red Keep was before Aerys has gone mad and Kind Bob's reign.

7 minutes ago, frenin said:

Barristan has never expressed that, I doubt that he knows or understands the extent of the debt, nor do i believe he would care much about it, the man was a soldier after all.

He still doesn't seem to be happy with Bobby, but alas - who on the Small Council was?

8 minutes ago, frenin said:

I'm very intrigued, do you know what the Unworthy managed??

Okay, you're right. Let's put that aside till we have the next Fire&Blood ;)

11 minutes ago, frenin said:

Robert reigned for 15 years, that's not short in any stretch of the imagination.

Granted, Caligula was faster with beggaring the state.

12 minutes ago, frenin said:

He is indeed a nostalgic one. I doubt It has much to do with history, he is not that type of guy. He has just been a loyalist for most of his life and the Targs have not aggreviated him personally.

And his age of course, you simple become more nostalgic, the more years have past.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

5 minutes ago, Morte said:

Well, he's not Hoster Blackwood or Tyrion, but he has served more than one king, so he has a little more insight in how the Red Keep was before Aerys has gone mad and Kind Bob's reign.

That's true.

 

5 minutes ago, Morte said:

He still doesn't seem to be happy with Bobby, but alas - who on the Small Council was?

Sure, Bobby turned out a big disappointment to him. But ah, Renly and LF seemed pretty alright with Bobby, i think the only one who would have real reasons to be disappointed is old Jon, the rest are too self serving to care.

 

8 minutes ago, Morte said:

Granted, Caligula was faster with beggaring the state.

And Richard lionheart barely had to step a foot in his Realm to do it. Where are you going with this i wonder?? 15 years in Medieval terms is not short.

 

10 minutes ago, Morte said:

And his age of course, you simple become more nostalgic, the more years have past.

Sure, that also make one view the past with in a far more rose tinted view.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, Morte said:

For me Strickland seems like someone who is very sceptical; not so much a coward, but maybe one of the first who will start asking unwanted questions.

He knows or strongly suspects that Aegon isn't Rhaegar's son if that's the case. He was the one who said they would stand no chance without Dany and the dragons.

He gets onboard when they have success in the Stormlands he didn't expect they would have, but when the luck turns against Aegon he will the first one to search for a way out.

2 hours ago, Morte said:

Barristan is someone who has seen more than just one Targaryen king and knows enough of history to not judge the whole dynasty by the last half of the life of one king. He served Robert and has seen how this man beggared the realm in just his short reign, something not even the Unworthy managed - and than Barristan was dismissed by Joffrey. So yes, he is a loyalist, imho - from his own experience and from history, and yes, a very nostalgic one.

My point was that Barristan switched sides to Robert and then back to the Targaryens again. He is a double turncloak whose allegiance comes at the price of him first judging a pretender worthy of him. That is not a Targaryen loyalist, that's a guy who picks his king or queen following his own criteria.

He isn't one of the people like the Darrys or the Martells or the many Crownlanders who feigned to accept Robert's rule but remained Targaryen loyalists at heart.

5 hours ago, frenin said:

He is very much a loyalist, when he plattered that "even those who yield to usurper may yearn for the return of the dragons" talk, he was talking about him. In his own pov he is always seen missing the good ol days or the good old days that never came because of a warhammer. 

He is presented as a fool, beggar king is the title given to Viserys simply because the man calls himself King, not because anyone ever considers him King, that's just a fact. Barristan who is around Robert's council calls him Prince for a reason, because he does not consider him king. No one opposing Viserys would ever consider him king anyway, that's just doesn't make sense. Beggar king is an insult not an acknowledgement...

That's just nonsense. Viserys III is a crowned king, no matter what you or Barristan say. Just as Aegon is not. There is a difference there. If you can't see it, it isn't my problem.

5 hours ago, frenin said:

Whatever people may believe, as long as they accept him as Rhaegar's boy, as much as they accept Joff and Tommen as Robert's., heis undisputably the greatest claimant of the Targ camp. Only dragons, not much because their power, but what they represent can and would change that view.

Aegon is a little puppet coming in when the Realm is ready to accept any Targaryen as a savior who is going to protect them from the likes of Euron, Stannis, Cersei, etc. But he the puppet of a mummer, and if he fails to deliver people will turn against him soon. He is much worse than Joff or Tommen who were raised as princes - Aegon is pretending to be a dead guy. Even if he were the real deal people would turn against him because nobody could ever prove he was the real deal.

5 hours ago, frenin said:

There is no guarantee that the man is going to be bust either, he is promising, he is being properly trained and overall he is a dashing and charming guy. The kind of guy Westeros usually has the hots for.

He is a puppet set up to fail. He will make things worse, not better. He isn't a hero nor even a main character. His plot will be important for a time, but chances are pretty bad that he will be a great ruler. Like Daeron I he might be a very great and effective conqueror only to be unable to keep what he won, i.e. in his case the Iron Throne of Westeros and the love of the people.

5 hours ago, frenin said:

Harry Strickland can be replaced tho.

Just as Aegon himself can when better alternative arise. This boy doesn't stand a chance against people like Euron or Daenerys.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

8 hours ago, Lord Varys said:

Sure, but things are likely going to set up in a way that Aegon no longer wants to marry Dany or share his rule with her by the time she arrives - because he will marry while everybody in Westeros believes she is dead (and before that they will learn that she married some Meereenese, which would be interpreted as her deciding never to go to Westeros).

That is going to be an obstacle, but how problematic it will be is going to depend on how successful a ruler/savior Aegon is going to be. Without dragons and without any proof that he truly is Rhaegar's son he might face a lot of problems of his own even if he very quickly takes the throne.

The confirmation that Viserys III was crowned on Dragonstone comes from the app, I think. But that he was crowned/proclaimed king is confirmed by the simple fact that he is seen as a (pretender) king by both his followers as well as his enemies. Unlike Prince Aegon - who is still a prince in exile despite the fact that his followers see him as 'the rightful heir' - Viserys III is seen as the king. And that only happens when you are proclaimed and/or crowned king - which in Viserys' case was done by his mother Rhaella on Dragonstone with her own crown after their learned that King Aerys II was dead.

Aerys II named a new heir after the death of Rhaegar, picking his second son Viserys over his infant grandson Aegon. Whether he did that simply because Viserys was much older than Aegon, or because Aegon was half-Dornish and he thought the Dornish betrayed Rhaegar at the Trident and he intended to use Elia and the children as hostages against Doran is unclear. The fact remains that he did that, meaning that if you are a Targaryen loyalist you would see Viserys III as the rightful and chosen successor of Aerys II.

Daenerys was then named and anointed Princess of Dragonstone and Heir Apparent to the Iron Throne by Viserys III in exile - else they wouldn't have styled Dany 'Princess of Dragonstone' in Pentos.

Aegon and his followers could claim Viserys III would have considered Aegon his true heir had he known Aegon was alive. He would have then not named Dany his heir. But they cannot claim that Aegon was the rightful heir to the throne after Aerys II died, because Aerys II himself had named Viserys his heir, not Aegon. And this happened at a time when Aegon and Rhaenys were both still alive.

It is to be expected that Dany is not only going to claim - on good grounds, most likely - that Aegon is not Rhaegar's son when she challenges his claim but also that her royal father named his son Viserys III his heir, and Viserys III, in turn, her, so she doesn't simply lay claim to the Iron Throne as the last scion of House Targaryen but also because her father and brother, the last Targaryen kings, wanted her to succeed them.

Thank you. So it isn't canon that Aerys named Viserys his heir. That's what I had thought, but memories can be wrong.

I follow your reasoning for your theory that Aerys named Viserys his heir and the rest that you attached to that, but until it is confirmed or ruled out by future canon (TWOW+) then it remains just a fan theory. Not something to be going around stating as if it is fact. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

49 minutes ago, Lord Varys said:

That's just nonsense. Viserys III is a crowned king, no matter what you or Barristan say. Just as Aegon is not. There is a difference there. If you can't see it, it isn't my problem.

Viserys is a crowned king... Just as Haegon Blackfyre and Daemon 3 Blackfyre, they all were kings and named as such...

Viserys being crowned by a deposed Queen as King of a land that no longer is theirs carry as much weight. Aegon is not crowned, the difference is that no one cares about that, when the moment comes Aegon has a better claim and he is the one who sits on a throne, whatever title Viserys cares to choose.

 

54 minutes ago, Lord Varys said:

Aegon is a little puppet coming in when the Realm is ready to accept any Targaryen as a savior who is going to protect them from the likes of Euron, Stannis, Cersei, etc. But he the puppet of a mummer, and if he fails to deliver people will turn against him soon. He is much worse than Joff or Tommen who were raised as princes - Aegon is pretending to be a dead guy. Even if he were the real deal people would turn against him because nobody could ever prove he was the real deal.

You can call him whatever you want, as long as the people believes and claims he is who he say he is, his claim is greater, wether he is going to fail or not, we shall see. 

 

56 minutes ago, Lord Varys said:

He is a puppet set up to fail. He will make things worse, not better. He isn't a hero nor even a main character. His plot will be important for a time, but chances are pretty bad that he will be a great ruler. Like Daeron I he might be a very great and effective conqueror only to be unable to keep what he won, i.e. in his case the Iron Throne of Westeros and the love of the people.

Set up to die i'd say, no much to fail. He doesn't need to be a main character but he is going to be king, he is young, handsome and charming, he's been actually raised to be a perfect king and to have his people's needs first, that's a good  start.

 

58 minutes ago, Lord Varys said:

Just as Aegon himself can when better alternative arise. This boy doesn't stand a chance against people like Euron or Daenerys.

Well Dany has dragons, but he has more than a chance to beat the shit out of Euron.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, QhorinQuarterhand said:

Thank you. So it isn't canon that Aerys named Viserys his heir. That's what I had thought, but memories can be wrong.

I follow your reasoning for your theory that Aerys named Viserys his heir and the rest that you attached to that, but until it is confirmed or ruled out by future canon (TWOW+) then it remains just a fan theory. Not something to be going around stating as if it is fact. 

Of course that's canon. TWoIaF isn't any less canon than the other stuff. Yandel makes mistakes or gets something wrong, but so do many POVs. And the idea that something like what prince the king picked as his heir in the last weeks of his reign is something he got wrong just isn't very likely.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, frenin said:
Viserys is a crowned king... Just as Haegon Blackfyre and Daemon 3 Blackfyre, they all were kings and named as such...

Viserys being crowned by a deposed Queen as King of a land that no longer is theirs carry as much weight. Aegon is not crowned, the difference is that no one cares about that, when the moment comes Aegon has a better claim and he is the one who sits on a throne, whatever title Viserys cares to choose.

Nobody said anything about it carrying weight. The Blackfyre example is pretty good, actually. There are official pretenders like Haegon and Daemon III, and there is the would-be pretender Aenys who wasn't acknowledged as head of House Blackfyre/king in exile even by his family and their followers.

Viserys III was the head of House Targaryen and pretender to the Iron Throne in exile, and Prince Aegon simply isn't that. He isn't even a proper pretender to the Iron Throne right now while he hasn't publicly announced his intentions nor proclaimed or crowned himself.

Aegon's problem is that whatever followers he might get might never truly believe he is a Targaryen at all. And if that's the case and they still care about the cause of House Targaryen they will switch to the real deal, the one with the dragons who definitely isn't lowborn scum.

1 hour ago, frenin said:
You can call him whatever you want, as long as the people believes and claims he is who he say he is, his claim is greater, wether he is going to fail or not, we shall see. 

Aegon's claim is weaker than Dany's - that's why the Golden Company think they need Dany and the dragons. It might be stronger if they had proof he was the real deal, but they don't have that. Aegon isn't a proper prince, he is claiming he is one. That isn't the same as being proper exiled royalty the way Dany and Viserys III were/are.

Aegon can have success while Dany isn't there ... but once she is there things are going to change. Especially if he starts to make mistakes. Which he is going to. There is a reason George has that Daeron I parallel there - and he ruined things himself, too, by underestimating the Dornish resolve and putting a brute like Lord Tyrell in charge of Dorne. All Aegon needs to do is to name a bunch of morons on his council or make some very bad calls himself.

This doesn't mean Dany will get all of Aegon's followers on her side but if he were to control, say, a good part of the south by the time she arrived he could lose the allegiance of half his lords to Daenerys and she could gain the support of lords and knights who were treated badly by Aegon. There is a chance that, say, crucial Lords of West end up in camp Dany because they want to punish Aegon for how he treated Tommen and Myrcella and Cersei. Once the Baratheon cause is effectively dead Aegon's enemies who originally supported the (fake) Baratheons would be in need of a figurehead/ally to continue their own fights against Aegon - and Dany could come in handy there. Could also be Euron, of course, but I guess there might be a considerable number of Westermen who are not going to be happy with Cersei's deal with Euron.

1 hour ago, frenin said:
Set up to die i'd say, no much to fail. He doesn't need to be a main character but he is going to be king, he is young, handsome and charming, he's been actually raised to be a perfect king and to have his people's needs first, that's a good  start.

That is what Varys claims who last saw the lad to our knowledge when he was very young. Joff also looked charming and capable at first glance, but that turned out to be nonsense, did it?

And if you think Aegon dies, you think Aegon will fail. Winners live, losers die - that's how the game of thrones goes, no?

1 hour ago, frenin said:

Well Dany has dragons, but he has more than a chance to beat the shit out of Euron.

LOL, right. As if he has any chance against magic. What is he going to do when Euron creates a shadow assassin of his own? Or finds some other spell to kill him? The only way Aegon might be able to survive is to avoid a direct confrontation with Euron at all costs. If they ever clash, the lad is kraken fodder.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

23 hours ago, frenin said:

It should be, the man should have spies around him, especially after joining the GC.

The value added from spies is supposed to be non-public information. Varys would have been in charge of the Iron Throne's spies back then. And since the Blackfyre line had died out (if you object that was the male line, that's what surnames and inheritance flow through), there wasn't much need for the Throne to spy on the GC.

Quote

you're confusing conqueror, with tyrant

In the ancient Greek sense of the word, a tyrant is anyone who obtains power via force rather than inheritance or election. Thus including both Robert and Dany. The term you might be wanting is "despot".

23 hours ago, BlackLightning said:

Why would they not marry?

Jon swore an oath not to marry, and he's rather below the level of a Queen. That's in addition to what I noted about them possibly having to prioritize fighting the Others over arranging a wedding.

Quote

Dany (if she wants to take the Iron Throne) would probably like to have the North as part of the realm and the northerners will be a bit cagey towards outsiders understandably.

Why does she need the North so much in particular? Wouldn't there be lots of eligible nobles (unlike bastard-born Jon) from other kingdoms? Wouldn't the kingdoms nearer to the throne be more important in taking and keeping it (related to the fact that the Targaryens haven't married Northeners before)?

Quote

Plus, Jon is just her type.

I don't see the resemblance to Daario or Drogo.

Quote

If Tywin the political genius that he was felt that a double marriage between the Lannisters military machine and the Tyrell military machine was necessary, then why would a Targaryen-Stark not be necessary.

The Lannisters and Tyrells are the two wealthiest Lords Paramount, who can command the largest armies. The North is relatively poor and underpopulated. Jon Snow also isn't Lord Paramount of it.

In your list of marriages, you left off Dany marrying Hizdahr. There were reasons to marry him in particular, even if he wasn't Dany's type.

Quote

GRRM would be breaking his own rules if the two weren't married before the end of Dream.

How does the rule that "marriage is serious business" imply that THOSE TWO IN PARTICULAR will marry?

Quote

I see it happening before everyone realizing who Jon really is.

How is Jon good marriage material for a high-status woman as a bastard Night's Watchman?

12 hours ago, Lord Varys said:

everybody in Westeros believes she is dead

Why would they believe that?

Quote

But they cannot claim that Aegon was the rightful heir to the throne after Aerys II died, because Aerys II himself had named Viserys his heir, not Aegon. And this happened at a time when Aegon and Rhaenys were both still alive.

Aegon doesn't have to claim that, because the person Aerys placed ahead of him is also dead. Viserys' naming of Dany is superseded by a male-line descendant (whom Viserys didn't know about).

Quote

her father and brother, the last Targaryen kings, wanted her to succeed them

Aerys didn't name Dany heir, she wasn't even born yet while he was alive. Aerys' wants regarding his unborn daughter never came into play. Viserys, as noted, only designated her in ignorance that any male Targaryens were available.

11 hours ago, frenin said:

Doubtful, Rhaegar's heir sounds better than the Mad King's heir, in every Targ loyalist every day of the year, winter or summer. Barristan don't call Viserys king and "Beggar King" is a peyorative title rather than a sort of acknowledgement, the only one that has called him king seriously is Dany.

Rhaegar might have been better liked, but inheritance does flow from the king however dislikable. Aerion Brightflame's son Maegor was passed over, but not only was Aerion hated (and naming his son Maegor was essentially done as a middle finger) his son was also a minor who would have required a long regency, so the Great Council weighed that practical consideration against their other options.

9 hours ago, Lord Varys said:

Barristan isn't a Targaryen loyalist. He is a double turncloak.

You're ridiculous. Barristan fought until he was incapacitated and had to be treated by Robert's own maester. The war was over when he started serving the new king. If he wasn't a loyalist, then there were practically no loyalists and your standards are worthless. Barristan even went off to find another Targaryen to serve!

Quote

most of his supporters will take the cynical route and just pretend they buy it to get even with their enemies. The Tyrells never truly believed Joff and Tommen were Robert's children ... but they backed them, anyway.

I agree with your cynical take.

Quote

Once Aegon appears less promising, shows weakness, indecision, incompetence, or madness, people will quickly abandon him, remembering that they have no proof that he actually has so much as a drop of royal blood and pretends to be a boy they know has been killed seventeen years ago.

Joffrey displayed a number of those traits while still gaining bannermen, despite the widespread rumors of his illegitimacy. Tommen isn't as bad as Joffrey, but is hardly capable of ruling on his own and has a terrible regent in Cersei, but there hasn't been significant defection to Stannis since the Blackwater.

6 hours ago, Morte said:

He served Robert and has seen how this man beggared the realm in just his short reign

Barristan was never Master of Coin, and I don't think he ever gave much thought to the realm's finances. He objected to Robert keeping Jaime on the Kingsguard and ordering the assassinations of Viserys & Daenerys (a far cheaper option than fighting a war).

4 hours ago, Lord Varys said:

He knows or strongly suspects that Aegon isn't Rhaegar's son if that's the case.

We don't know what he knows about him.

Quote

That is not a Targaryen loyalist, that's a guy who picks his king or queen following his own criteria.

He followed whoever happened to be on the throne until he was dismissed. That's not picking and choosing by his own criteria.

Quote

He is much worse than Joff or Tommen who were raised as princes

Like Aegon V, he's been living like the smallfolk, but his supporters might lie about his upbringing to appeal to the nobles.

Quote

Like Daeron I he might be a very great and effective conqueror only to be unable to keep what he won, i.e. in his case the Iron Throne of Westeros and the love of the people.

The Young Dragon didn't lose "the love of the people". After repeated success in his military campaigns he was murdered at a peace conference, and his conquest of Dorne ultimately led to it being added to the realm.

Quote

Just as Aegon himself can when better alternative arise. This boy doesn't stand a chance against people like Euron or Daenerys.

The GC elects leaders (and Harry has already been outvoted when he dissented from the invasion), Westeros has inheritance.

@frenin

Quote

he's been actually raised to be a perfect king and to have his people's needs first, that's a good  start

Aegon V thought he could put his people's needs first, but he wasn't very successful.

1 hour ago, Lord Varys said:

Aegon's claim is weaker than Dany's - that's why the Golden Company think they need Dany and the dragons.

Harry thinks that, the other serjeants voted to invade without her (the original plan did involve her and/or Viserys, but not the dragons).

Quote

There is a reason George has that Daeron I parallel there - and he ruined things himself, too

Daeron didn't "ruin things himself". He was repeatedly successful until he was murdered at a peace conference. He didn't even make Robb Stark's mistakes of sending a hostage to broker an alliance or breaking a marriage betrothal.

Quote

putting a brute like Lord Tyrell in charge of Dorne

Do we have reason to believe anyone else would have done a better job?

Quote

All Aegon needs to do is to name a bunch of morons on his council or make some very bad calls himself.

The one person he's named to any position is Rolly Duckfield, which Jon Connington would say was a bad call.

Quote

Joff also looked charming and capable at first glance, but that turned out to be nonsense, did it?

Joff never did a day's work in his life and was abusing peasants well before he rose to the throne.

Quote

And if you think Aegon dies, you think Aegon will fail. Winners live, losers die - that's how the game of thrones goes, no?

As Homer Simpson said of Thomas Edison, "If he's so smart, how come he's dead?"

Quote

What is he going to do when Euron creates a shadow assassin of his own?

Euron already assassinated one "king", but it wasn't via a shadow. He hired a Faceless Man, possibly with that dragon egg he claims to have thrown away. Assassinating someone on the Iron Throne would probably be significantly more expensive.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, FictionIsntReal said:

Aegon doesn't have to claim that, because the person Aerys placed ahead of him is also dead. Viserys' naming of Dany is superseded by a male-line descendant (whom Viserys didn't know about).

That's nonsense, since that's not a stupid succession war, but a war of people trying to restore a dynasty which has been ousted before. And one of them is the real deal, and the other most likely an impostor who lacks dragons. Nobody is going to look for some nonexisting succession laws in such a matter. Are you next telling me that the Reach and the Stormlands checked the nonexisting succession laws for the Iron Throne when they decided to crown Renly? The War of the Five Kings was a succession war and there essentially the entire Realm didn't give a fig about the law. Balon and Robb seceded, Cersei installed a bastard born of incest on the Iron Throne, Stannis rebelled against his nephew with no proof, and Renly didn't give a shit and wanted to kill them all.

1 hour ago, FictionIsntReal said:

Aerys didn't name Dany heir, she wasn't even born yet while he was alive. Aerys' wants regarding his unborn daughter never came into play. Viserys, as noted, only designated her in ignorance that any male Targaryens were available.

There were none available. Aegon Targaryen is dead. That is official history. What eunuchs and magisters and exiles claim is irrelevant. Or will be as soon as the golden boy shows that he is all style and no substance.

1 hour ago, FictionIsntReal said:

You're ridiculous. Barristan fought until he was incapacitated and had to be treated by Robert's own maester. The war was over when he started serving the new king. If he wasn't a loyalist, then there were practically no loyalists and your standards are worthless. Barristan even went off to find another Targaryen to serve!

As I said, a double turncloak.

1 hour ago, FictionIsntReal said:

Joffrey displayed a number of those traits while still gaining bannermen, despite the widespread rumors of his illegitimacy. Tommen isn't as bad as Joffrey, but is hardly capable of ruling on his own and has a terrible regent in Cersei, but there hasn't been significant defection to Stannis since the Blackwater.

There are no widespread rumors - there is an ambitious uncle telling tales that profit him.

But again, you people don't seem to grasp rather simple facts: The historical truth is that Aegon Targaryen is dead. Varys and Illyrio are the ones trying to revive him. They have to convince the world that their shady story is true without any proof. Robert Baratheon, on the other hand, raised Cersei's children as his own. All the Realm knew and believed they were royal children even after Stannis sent out his self-serving letters because the moron did that only after Joffrey Baratheon's coronation.

In Dany's absence Aegon might look good. When she comes he is going to look like a dragonless whoreson.

1 hour ago, FictionIsntReal said:

We don't know what he knows about him.

You might not, I on the other do read between the lines. Strickland doesn't buy the Rhaegar story. He wants Dany to have a claimant of substance.

1 hour ago, FictionIsntReal said:

He followed whoever happened to be on the throne until he was dismissed. That's not picking and choosing by his own criteria.

Reread the books. Selmy presumed to assess Dany's mental health by his own criteria before choosing her as his monarch. He might be Targaryen-leaning after the Lannisters kicked his ass, but he is no loyalist. He is double turncloak. A loyalist does not pick and choose his monarch.

1 hour ago, FictionIsntReal said:

Like Aegon V, he's been living like the smallfolk, but his supporters might lie about his upbringing to appeal to the nobles.

LOL, right, he lived like a pampered little prince with a coterie of followers. It was a modest life of privilege but a life of privilege nonetheless.

1 hour ago, FictionIsntReal said:

The Young Dragon didn't lose "the love of the people". After repeated success in his military campaigns he was murdered at a peace conference, and his conquest of Dorne ultimately led to it being added to the realm.

Nonsense. Daeron I lost his war and it contributed nothing to the union between Dorne and the Iron Throne. The man was a warmongering fool and died like one. But Aegon is the one who might lose the love of the people - Daeron I never won the love of the Dornish.

1 hour ago, FictionIsntReal said:

The GC elects leaders (and Harry has already been outvoted when he dissented from the invasion), Westeros has inheritance.

While Strickland still commands the Golden Company he still commands the Golden Company.

1 hour ago, FictionIsntReal said:

Harry thinks that, the other serjeants voted to invade without her (the original plan did involve her and/or Viserys, but not the dragons).

Because they stupidly listened to the self-involved speech of a fake dragon. Great call. They will all pay for that mistake eventually.

1 hour ago, FictionIsntReal said:

Do we have reason to believe anyone else would have done a better job?

LOL, that is a nonsensical question.

1 hour ago, FictionIsntReal said:

The one person he's named to any position is Rolly Duckfield, which Jon Connington would say was a bad call.

Of course, we have to wait for him to fuck things up. I don't say it is going to start soon. I expect him to be very successful with his military campaigns until he takes the throne and finally has to do some ruling. In fact, I think most of the successful military plans be his own, feeding his ego so he ends up thinking he can do everything by himself.

And to be sure, his stone man Hand should also come as a huge handicap. Aegon is either going to become a cursed king, having a pariah at his court without even knowing it (which will reflect very badly on him) or, much worse, become a Stone/Plague King himself - the guy who brought the grey plague to Westeros. Neither is going to make him popular even if he were able to deal with the situation.

1 hour ago, FictionIsntReal said:

Joff never did a day's work in his life and was abusing peasants well before he rose to the throne.

I meant how Joff appears at first glance when you meet him, not if you know stuff about him. The fact is - we don't know this Aegon chap better than Sansa knew Joff back in AGoT. We only see him through Tyrion who doesn't know him at all, and we see him briefly through Connington who doesn't give us any deep insight into his character. He is clearly no Joffrey, but we don't know that he is a great guy, either.

1 hour ago, FictionIsntReal said:

As Homer Simpson said of Thomas Edison, "If he's so smart, how come he's dead?"

Go along and wait whether Aegon dies of old age. And to be sure, I never said he would die, either. I just think he will fail. But kings can be deposed and imprisoned or exiled or castrated or sent to the Wall or whatever. They don't have to die.

1 hour ago, FictionIsntReal said:

Euron already assassinated one "king", but it wasn't via a shadow. He hired a Faceless Man, possibly with that dragon egg he claims to have thrown away. Assassinating someone on the Iron Throne would probably be significantly more expensive.

Euron is only developing his magical skills right now. If he has skinchanger/greeneer abilities then murdering people from very far away should be very easy. Just use a dog or a horse to kill him. Tear out his throat or kick him to death. The possibilities are endless. And that's just one thing. The shade of the evening and the Qartheen warlocks should open up many other possibilities.

And there is no need to assume Euron hired a Faceless Man - he is one of the few people who could break a Faceless Man and make him his creature. The man who murdered Balon may have not been paid for that job. Because if you look at the time line it is pretty much impossible that Euron sailed from wherever he caught Pyat Pree, to Braavos, and then to Pyke to be there in time for Balon to die. But to hire a Faceless Man you have to go to the House of Black and White. They do not advertise their services anywhere else.

But without Pyat Pree and his knowledge Euron would have never returned to Westeros when he did.

Until we know who Euron's Faceless Man is I don't pretend we know he paid him for this job.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

9 hours ago, frenin said:
9 hours ago, Morte said:

Granted, Caligula was faster with beggaring the state.

And Richard lionheart barely had to step a foot in his Realm to do it. Where are you going with this i wonder??

Why? Agreeing with you, of course.

[Off topic: While Heinrich VI is not nearly as interesting as his son, the imprisonment and ransom of Richard Lionheart are rather quite amusing. One could argue that while beggaring his kingdom, Richard at least managed to enrich the realm ;) ]

9 hours ago, frenin said:

15 years in Medieval terms is not short.

It's more of a average time; not short, no, that was the wrong word, but also not particular long either. Regardless: If one isn't warmongering or having a lot of catastrophes to deal with (or being held hostage by the emperor), one should not be able to ruin a seemingly very wealthy realm in just 15 years. But that might also be on Martin, as he hadn't thought the whole economics of state through.

8 hours ago, Lord Varys said:

He gets onboard when they have success in the Stormlands he didn't expect they would have, but when the luck turns against Aegon he will the first one to search for a way out.

Exactly.

8 hours ago, Lord Varys said:

My point was that Barristan switched sides to Robert and then back to the Targaryens again. He is a double turncloak whose allegiance comes at the price of him first judging a pretender worthy of him. That is not a Targaryen loyalist, that's a guy who picks his king or queen following his own criteria.

He isn't one of the people like the Darrys or the Martells or the many Crownlanders who feigned to accept Robert's rule but remained Targaryen loyalists at heart.

So let's agree that he isn't a loyalist to the bones, but turned into a loyalist by reflexion?

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 hours ago, Lord Varys said:

Nobody said anything about it carrying weight. The Blackfyre example is pretty good, actually. There are official pretenders like Haegon and Daemon III, and there is the would-be pretender Aenys who wasn't acknowledged as head of House Blackfyre/king in exile even by his family and their followers.

Viserys III was the head of House Targaryen and pretender to the Iron Throne in exile, and Prince Aegon simply isn't that. He isn't even a proper pretender to the Iron Throne right now while he hasn't publicly announced his intentions nor proclaimed or crowned himself.

If it doesn't carry weight, then it's simply ludicrous keep believing that the man had any sort of edge there. If Aegon is believed, no other Targ has an option until the dragons come.

Haegon and Daemon 3 were the direct heirs of their house. Haegon was Daemon's fourth son and Daemon's 3 was Haegon's heir. Aenys is not recognized because he simply is far in line, as much as Viserys is in comparation of Aegon, Aegon simply have a way better claim, no matter what Viserys, Dany or their parents considered.

 

4 hours ago, Lord Varys said:

Aegon's problem is that whatever followers he might get might never truly believe he is a Targaryen at all. And if that's the case and they still care about the cause of House Targaryen they will switch to the real deal, the one with the dragons who definitely isn't lowborn scum.

Again a lot of ifs, if Aegon's claim is not believed and  if there are a lot of Targ loyalist who truly espoused to the Targ cause and are not simply trying to get even with the Lannister-Baratheons and if Aegon is not a succesful man that make those concerns become irrelevant. Then yes, they will switch to the real deal. But as it stands, i doubt that the Vale men, the Stormlords , the Riverlords, the Westermen, the Reach men or the North are going to give a shit. Most of them are only tying to end the Lannisters, as long as Aegon remains dashing and promising, they won't care. The only ones that would care are the Martells if they discover that Varys is using the names of their kin to iure them into place a false half Martell on the throne, i find it difficult to believe that the Martells are going to take that well.

 

4 hours ago, Lord Varys said:

Aegon's claim is weaker than Dany's - that's why the Golden Company think they need Dany and the dragons. It might be stronger if they had proof he was the real deal, but they don't have that. Aegon isn't a proper prince, he is claiming he is one. That isn't the same as being proper exiled royalty the way Dany and Viserys III were/are.

No, it isn't. Dany has dragons which is a way to seal their victory. Aegon by himself is less likely to conquer the Throne, which would not happen Varys had Varys not offed the last remaing key ruler in the Lannister cause, his claim, and Dany's for that matter, are irrelevant as long as they don't have the might to conquer the Throne, Which Dany, ie her dragons and army, completely assured and which is why the GC wants Dany and JonCon wants Dany even in case of a victorious Aegon. Dany would seal the Targ return.

 

5 hours ago, Lord Varys said:

Aegon can have success while Dany isn't there ... but once she is there things are going to change. Especially if he starts to make mistakes. Which he is going to. There is a reason George has that Daeron I parallel there - and he ruined things himself, too, by underestimating the Dornish resolve and putting a brute like Lord Tyrell in charge of Dorne. All Aegon needs to do is to name a bunch of morons on his council or make some very bad calls himself.

Robb is the Daeron parallalel. Aegon and Daeron looks nothing alike for now, the Targs refer themselves as dragons all the time for that,  sure all rulers need to make are a series of bad calls to ruin themselves, but he has no reason to do that, especially if he is well counseled.

 

5 hours ago, Lord Varys said:

This doesn't mean Dany will get all of Aegon's followers on her side but if he were to control, say, a good part of the south by the time she arrived he could lose the allegiance of half his lords to Daenerys and she could gain the support of lords and knights who were treated badly by Aegon. There is a chance that, say, crucial Lords of West end up in camp Dany because they want to punish Aegon for how he treated Tommen and Myrcella and Cersei. Once the Baratheon cause is effectively dead Aegon's enemies who originally supported the (fake) Baratheons would be in need of a figurehead/ally to continue their own fights against Aegon - and Dany could come in handy there. Could also be Euron, of course, but I guess there might be a considerable number of Westermen who are not going to be happy with Cersei's deal with Euron.

Again a bunch of ifs. If the Baratheon cause is effectively dead, if the west cares much about how the Lannisters are treated, if Cersei deals with Euron... Stotmlords and Westerlands are the less likely to mess in a fight against dragons, they gain anything and they are too attached to the people who bitterly fought against them.

 

5 hours ago, Lord Varys said:

That is what Varys claims who last saw the lad to our knowledge when he was very young. Joff also looked charming and capable at first glance, but that turned out to be nonsense, did it?

What we hear from Viserys we also see it in Tyrion's chapters and Joffy never looked neither charming nor capable.

 

5 hours ago, Lord Varys said:

And if you think Aegon dies, you think Aegon will fail. Winners live, losers die - that's how the game of thrones goes, no?

Since Martin has said that a lot of people will seat their asses on the throne, he is likely going to die. But unless he is defeated in war, no, it would not be a loss.

 

5 hours ago, Lord Varys said:

LOL, right. As if he has any chance against magic. What is he going to do when Euron creates a shadow assassin of his own? Or finds some other spell to kill him? The only way Aegon might be able to survive is to avoid a direct confrontation with Euron at all costs. If they ever clash, the lad is kraken fodder.

When Euron does half the things you claim he can do, i'll believe the hype, as it stands, Euron seems pretty defeatable.

 

3 hours ago, FictionIsntReal said:

The value added from spies is supposed to be non-public information. Varys would have been in charge of the Iron Throne's spies back then. And since the Blackfyre line had died out (if you object that was the male line, that's what surnames and inheritance flow through), there wasn't much need for the Throne to spy on the GC.

No, but exiled lords with kids in the Golden Company is notorious enough, there is a reasin to keep an eye on JonCon tho.

 

4 hours ago, FictionIsntReal said:

In the ancient Greek sense of the word, a tyrant is anyone who obtains power via force rather than inheritance or election. Thus including both Robert and Dany. The term you might be wanting is "despot".

No, i know that definition but i'm using the normal and current understood definition of tyrant. Unless the ancient sense of the word is still used today, it's simply over the top.

a sovereign or other ruler who uses power oppressively or unjustly.

 

Dany is not going to ask whether Westerosi want her or not.

 

4 hours ago, FictionIsntReal said:

Rhaegar might have been better liked, but inheritance does flow from the king however dislikable. Aerion Brightflame's son Maegor was passed over, but not only was Aerion hated (and naming his son Maegor was essentially done as a middle finger) his son was also a minor who would have required a long regency, so the Great Council weighed that practical consideration against their other options.

Sure and in normal circumstances, i'd agree. A deranged, hated and defeated king however, passing over his grandson for his son is going to have little to no effects in people's eyes. Rhaegar's heir vs Aerys's is a non argument, no matter what Aerys disposed.

 

 

4 hours ago, FictionIsntReal said:

Aegon V thought he could put his people's needs first, but he wasn't very successful.

And we shall see how this Aegon does it.

 

 

2 hours ago, Lord Varys said:

In the ancient Greek sense of the word, a tyrant is anyone who obtains power via force rather than inheritance or election. Thus including both Robert and Dany. The term you might be wanting is "despot".

Indeed.

 

2 hours ago, Lord Varys said:

The man was a warmongering fool and died like one. But Aegon is the one who might lose the love of the people - Daeron I never won the love of the Dornish.

At all, he died betrayed, killed under the banner of truce, which is as hideous as any political murder can ever be. If Daeron never won the love of the Dornish, then he is a bad foil to Aegon, whose whole enterprise is actually winning the love o the people.

 

 

8 minutes ago, Morte said:

[Off topic: While Heinrich VI is not nearly as interesting as his son, the imprisonment and ransom of Richard Lionheart are rather quite amusing. One could argue that while beggaring his kingdom, Richard at least managed to enrich the realm ;) ]

 Certainly not England. But sure, Richard managed to enrich Realm. A very curious bar ofc.

 

 

11 minutes ago, Morte said:

The man was a warmongering fool and died like one. But Aegon is the one who might lose the love of the people - Daeron I never won the love of the Dornish.

15 years is indeed a long reign in medieval terms.  I doubt that is on Martin, the man sucks at Maths but the his point is that the crown, not the Realm, is in debt and that before there was a lot of money and now there is nothing, i doubt he will ever explain it because it does not make sense, but that's the point he wanted to make anyway.

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 minutes ago, frenin said:

 I doubt that is on Martin, the man sucks at Maths but the his point is that the crown, not the Realm, is in debt and that before there was a lot of money and now there is nothing, i doubt he will ever explain it because it does not make sense, but that's the point he wanted to make anyway.

Yes, we agree here; he didn't even make the effort to difference between fiscus and aerarium, so we don't even know if this is really just Robert's  personal treasury that is empty, or if the state is bankrupt. We will never know, I'm afraid. :dunno:

Link to comment
Share on other sites

11 hours ago, Lord Varys said:

Of course that's canon. TWoIaF isn't any less canon than the other stuff. Yandel makes mistakes or gets something wrong, but so do many POVs. And the idea that something like what prince the king picked as his heir in the last weeks of his reign is something he got wrong just isn't very likely.

George himself literally said WB isn't canon. You can play pretend all you want with yourself, but it becomes a lie when you go around telling other fans things are canon when they are not. 

From NotABlog: George "only the books are canon"

https://houseofblackandwhite.freeforums.net/thread/171/canon-level-app-spake-martin?page=1#post-4864

Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 hours ago, QhorinQuarterhand said:

George himself literally said WB isn't canon. You can play pretend all you want with yourself, but it becomes a lie when you go around telling other fans things are canon when they are not. 

From NotABlog: George "only the books are canon"

https://houseofblackandwhite.freeforums.net/thread/171/canon-level-app-spake-martin?page=1#post-4864

And I said that there is stuff that's wrong in the novels, too? I mean, are you doubting the canon status of AGoT because multiple people claim the Lannisters tried to murder Bran and did murder Jon Arryn?

George seems to take 'canon' as 'absolutely true' there - and it isn't, of course. But this doesn't mean most of what we get in there isn't true enough.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

39 minutes ago, Lord Varys said:

And I said that there is stuff that's wrong in the novels, too? I mean, are you doubting the canon status of AGoT because multiple people claim the Lannisters tried to murder Bran and did murder Jon Arryn?

George seems to take 'canon' as 'absolutely true' there - and it isn't, of course. But this doesn't mean most of what we get in there isn't true enough.

No. You can't just twist George's words to fit what you want. 

In his own words, only the books (which are AGOT-ADWD) are canon. Period. Stop. End. Of. Discussion. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

26 minutes ago, QhorinQuarterhand said:

No. You can't just twist George's words to fit what you want. 

In his own words, only the books (which are AGOT-ADWD) are canon. Period. Stop. End. Of. Discussion. 

Of course I can. It depends what you want to talk about. George doesn't have some sort of weird canon system going on like proper franchises written by many people.

The way we treat things in the fandom is that everything published by George is canon, which includes FaB and TWoIaF, although one can expect greater discrepancies in the latter since it has been edited and condensed and rewritten in certain points by Ran and Linda. But that doesn't mean a book published by George R. R. Martin doesn't make up the canon of his published work. Just as it makes no sense to pretend things that are revisited and repeated and elaborated in TWoIaF which we also hear about in the book series are somehow 'not true' because they are mentioned there.

George made it clear that not everything in TWoIaF is accurate - but that's not really an issue that's true for that book but every POV character and his wrong memories and beliefs, too. He just seemed to wanted to stress the fact one should not take every theory put forth in TWoIaF as fact - which no smart reader would do, anyway.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Archived

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

×
×
  • Create New...