Jump to content

Would the Blacks have kept fighting even without Aegon the Younger?


Recommended Posts

So, let's assume that Aegon II doesn't act like a complete idiot and feeds Aegon the Younger to his dragon alongside Rhaenyra. He uses Baela as his hostage to get himself back to King's Landing and consolidates his position in victory. He has an heir, and presumably will try to produce another. 

But I'm wondering, would the Blacks have still resisted him? He was certainly alienating them with his vindictiveness, to say nothing of his mother's desire for revenge. Plus, there was the huge army of Cregan Stark, who was himself prepared to march against Storm's End, Oldtown, and Casterly Rock. We know the Tully boys and Benjicot Blackwood would have followed Cregan's example, but would they all have fought if there was no black candidate left alive? Aegon II didn't have any dragons left under his control, sure, and his forces had bled badly during the war, but he was still the only Targaryen adult male left alive by that point. If the blacks continued to fight, it would have been a Robert's Rebellion without a Robert to replace the Targaryen kings. It just would have become chaos. Or would it?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 minutes ago, frenin said:

Yes, they had Rhaena and a perfectly good dragon safe in the Eyrie and the Blacks were never moved by the salic law anyway so yes, the Greens couldn't win.

Ah, that's a good point. I forgot about Rhaena somehow. 

But then in that case, it does make me wonder how things would have played out from there. Would Corlys still poison Aegon? How would the blacks have treated the greens? Would Aegon surrender? Would Rhaena become queen or Baela (assuming she survived)? Who would they have married in either situation? What would the regency have been like?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

9 minutes ago, Floki of the Ironborn said:

Ah, that's a good point. I forgot about Rhaena somehow. 

But then in that case, it does make me wonder how things would have played out from there. Would Corlys still poison Aegon? How would the blacks have treated the greens? Would Aegon surrender? Would Rhaena become queen or Baela (assuming she survived)? Who would they have married in either situation? What would the regency have been like?

 

  • Rhaena was Corlys's own granddaughter, ofc Aegon was a goner.
  • If I had to guess, the treatment of the Greens is fairly similar as it was in canon.
  • Aegon dies. He was a moron and Alicent was no better.
  • I'm assuming Baela.
  • That I don't know.
  • Visery's return would have rocked some boats tho.
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, Floki of the Ironborn said:

Would Corlys still poison Aegon? 

Probably. He would have wanted to make an end of the war before more lives were lost. True, he was forced to act partly in the name of saving Aegon the Younger from mutilation and death, but Baela would likely have become a hostage to stop her sister from fighting. No doubt Corlys would want to save his granddaughter.

3 minutes ago, Floki of the Ironborn said:

How would the blacks have treated the greens? 

Probably much the same as they did in the main events. It's not like Aegon the Younger had a big role to play in that regard. Everyone would have showed up much like they did, they would have acted much the same, except that it's a new queen instead of a king.

6 minutes ago, Floki of the Ironborn said:

Would Aegon surrender? 

No. He would have tried to use Baela for a hostage instead of Aegon the Younger. He was a clueless moron who blindly followed his harpy mother's orders. 

7 minutes ago, Floki of the Ironborn said:

Would Rhaena become queen or Baela?

That's the first tough question you asked. I don't honestly know. Cregan clearly liked Baela, but most everyone else preferred Rhaena. I'd bet that she would have become queen by popular choice, though it does also depend on how willing the sisters are to fight each other for the Iron Throne. I doubt they would, but they were never seriously considered as heirs with Aegon around, so who knows.

The really tough question would be what happened if Viserys returned to Westeros. Would he be immediately crowned king instead? Would another dance begin? I could easily see the blacks draw up battle lines over whether the twins or Viserys become the ruler of Westeros. And the greens like Unwin Peake would have been only too happy to exploit the situation for themselves.

11 minutes ago, Floki of the Ironborn said:

Who would they have married in either situation?

Baela would probably still elope with Alyn Velaryon, which would probably confirm her ineligibility to be queen (nobody was going to support Alyn Velaryon becoming the king consort). Rhaena might have married a member of a house that fought for the blacks, presumably someone of high stature like Oscar Tully. Someone that wasn't too low-status for a consort, but also not powerful enough to declare himself a full king.

13 minutes ago, Floki of the Ironborn said:

What would the regency have been like?

Again, it depends on what happens with Viserys and his half-sisters. But it's safe to say that none of them would have been as easy to isolate and exploit as Aegon was during the early years of his regency. Baela was bold and defiant, Rhaena was demure but she was still intelligent and she was always at her sister's side, so she clearly had some sort of courage. Viserys was shrewd, mature for his age, and he wouldn't have stood for Unwin's games either. Of course, Viserys was also married to a foreign woman who didn't worship the Seven, so that would have been a serious stain on him in the eyes of Westeros. I'd say no matter what, there'd be some sort of fustercluck before things resolved themselves, even before considering the pretenders and that witch occupying Harrenhal.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I believe that Aegon's refusal to be reconciled is what sealed his fate. If he had offered peaceful terms to the blacks and especially please Corlys, he had better chance to keep his throne. 

A unification of the two sides with a Jaehaera - Aegon/Alyn/ a black lord(if Aegon was executed) wedding was a great idea.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

If we have a scenario where Aegon II murders Aegon the Younger as well as Rhaenyra we likely also talk about a scenario where he kills Baela, too. In such a scenario, Aegon II might never be able to return to KL because, I think, if Aegon the Younger and/or Baela were murdered, the Greens would never get the support of House Velaryon.

Alyn Velaryon might use the Velaryon fleet to retake Dragonstone and put down Aegon II. At the same time I don't think the Stormlords would necessarily march to KL to pacify the city - or if they did, Larys Strong and Corlys Velaryon wouldn't welcome them and/or secretly disappear with Trystane Truefyre who could then eventually marry Queen Rhaena Targaryen.

9 hours ago, Floki of the Ironborn said:

 But I'm wondering, would the Blacks have still resisted him? He was certainly alienating them with his vindictiveness, to say nothing of his mother's desire for revenge. Plus, there was the huge army of Cregan Stark, who was himself prepared to march against Storm's End, Oldtown, and Casterly Rock. We know the Tully boys and Benjicot Blackwood would have followed Cregan's example, but would they all have fought if there was no black candidate left alive? Aegon II didn't have any dragons left under his control, sure, and his forces had bled badly during the war, but he was still the only Targaryen adult male left alive by that point. If the blacks continued to fight, it would have been a Robert's Rebellion without a Robert to replace the Targaryen kings. It just would have become chaos. Or would it?

After Aegon II's restoration his key mistakes which further antagonized the Crownlanders and Riverlanders were his insistence to not offer a general pardon. But even if such a pardon were granted it would have only won over the Crownlanders and, perhaps, some of the Riverlanders. The Vale had fresh troops and a Black pretender with a dragon and Cregan Stark and his Northmen marched to war to fight and die. Both the Vale and the Northmen would have refused Aegon's pardon. And I guess most of the Lads would have done the same thing, although not necessarily all the Riverlords.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

52 minutes ago, Lord Varys said:

If we have a scenario where Aegon II murders Aegon the Younger as well as Rhaenyra we likely also talk about a scenario where he kills Baela, too. In such a scenario, Aegon II might never be able to return to KL because, I think, if Aegon the Younger and/or Baela were murdered, the Greens would never get the support of House Velaryon.

The difference between Baela and Aegon the Younger is that someone prevented Aegon from executing Baela by reminding him what he'd risk by killing her. Far as I can tell, nobody gave a hoot whether he also killed Aegon the Younger alongside his mom. Honestly, harsh as it might sound, I think Aegon II should have killed that kid. Even his mom was smart enough to point out that Aegon forced Aegon the Younger to watch his mom get eaten alive on Aegon's orders;  he was never going to be forgiven for that if the blacks won and put Aegon on the throne.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, Floki of the Ironborn said:

The difference between Baela and Aegon the Younger is that someone prevented Aegon from executing Baela by reminding him what he'd risk by killing her. Far as I can tell, nobody gave a hoot whether he also killed Aegon the Younger alongside his mom. Honestly, harsh as it might sound, I think Aegon II should have killed that kid. Even his mom was smart enough to point out that Aegon forced Aegon the Younger to watch his mom get eaten alive on Aegon's orders;  he was never going to be forgiven for that if the blacks won and put Aegon on the throne.

The vibe I get from Corlys' constant urging that Aegon the Younger marry Jaehaera - something he started after Rhaenyra took the throne in 130 AC - is that the old man, for whatever reason, actually cared about the boy. Much more so, perhaps, than about his own granddaughter. After all, he is horrified when Larys Strong tells him what Aegon and his mother want to do to him and the boy when they are no longer needed.

Aegon II murdering his own nephew in cold blood on Dragonstone would have been viewed as another heinous crime. The murder of Rhaenyra is already stretching things - she was a woman, unarmed, and completely at Aegon's mercy. Not to mention that she was his half-sister. Rhaenyra didn't kill either Alicent or Helaena, so we can assume that the death of Rhaenyra played a considerable in motivating the Blacks to continue the fighting.

If Aegon the Younger's corpse had been added to Rhaenyra's corpse things may have looked much worse. Aegon the Younger was completely innocent in all that, and while the deaths of Lucerys and Jaehaerys and Maelor were all not done on a specific royal command, Aegon II would have to take the full blame for the murder of his nephew.

I don't think he could have ever hoped to recover from that.

Alicent was completely wrong about Aegon III, by the way. Sure, Aegon III would never forgive Aegon II for what he did, presumably, but Alicent convinced her son that he wouldn't even permit him to take the black - and that was just nonsense.

Aegon II abdicating in favor of Aegon III and retiring to the countryside would have been madness. Such a decision might have cost him dearly once Aegon III came of age.

As for Baela - her life was only spared at first because Marston Waters stopped Aegon's thugs from murdering her. Later, after Sunfyre's death, Aegon II wanted to execute her and then he was stopped. If we assume Aegon II had been of the deposition to murder his nephew then and there - and he was the one deciding not to do this! - then I don't think he would have granted Baela any mercy.

And the Velaryon issue only came to the fore when Aegon II learned that Corlys was still alive and part of the 'new Greens' at court who decided to join him again and abandon Trystane Truefyre.

The real way for Aegon II to save his crown and life would have been by sparing Rhaenyra's life and working out a compromise with her - they could have married each other to rule the Realm jointly, say, while also marrying Aegon and Jaehaera to each other. That kind of thing could have given the Realm a lasting peace.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 hours ago, Lord Varys said:

The real way for Aegon II to save his crown and life would have been by sparing Rhaenyra's life and working out a compromise with her - they could have married each other to rule the Realm jointly, say, while also marrying Aegon and Jaehaera to each other. 

Two matches made in all seven Hells. That's like if Joffrey offered to marry Daenerys, or if Ramsay married one of the Stark girls (oh wait...)

And besides, we saw what happened when Aegon III and Jaehaera got married. They were far too damaged to function, they were both completely miserable, and if anyone in the Seven Kingdoms had had any sense, they'd have realised that House Targaryen's time was done and it was time to split off into eight Kingdoms again. Kill Rhaena's dragon and give the surviving Targaryen kids Dragonstone to live on, with armed guards on hand to kill them all if something happened. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

25 minutes ago, Floki of the Ironborn said:

Two matches made in all seven Hells. That's like if Joffrey offered to marry Daenerys, or if Ramsay married one of the Stark girls (oh wait...)

Oh, I didn't mean to say that they would have to actually cohabit or have intercourse (Aegon II seems to have unable to perform, anyway). Just a symbolic marriage showing that they were willing to reunite House Targaryen.

They had both suffered horribly during the war and neither Rhaenyra nor Aegon actually tried to kill or hurt the other personally prior to their fateful meeting. Both lost (or believed they lost) all of their children but one, and their spouses. The folks responsible for the murder of Lucerys, Blood and Cheese, and the death Prince Maelor were all dead.

There was a small (or not so small) chance there that these people - who were siblings, after all - could have found some kind of common ground after all that suffering. They could have looked at each other and asked themselves and each other 'What was the point of all that?'

Quote

And besides, we saw what happened when Aegon III and Jaehaera got married. They were far too damaged to function, they were both completely miserable, and if anyone in the Seven Kingdoms had had any sense, they'd have realised that House Targaryen's time was done and it was time to split off into eight Kingdoms again. Kill Rhaena's dragon and give the surviving Targaryen kids Dragonstone to live on, with armed guards on hand to kill them all if something happened. 

Jaehaera and Aegon were traumatized, but I don't see a good reason why they couldn't have worked as a couple eventually. Neither of them ever hurt the other, and Jaehaera seems to have been horrified by her mad grandmother's insistence that she try to murder her husband.

Going back to the silly Seven Kingdoms of old would have meant perpetual war - like it was back before the Conquest. A Targaryen on the Iron Throne - any Targaryen - means stability, peace, and prosperity.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

17 minutes ago, Lord Varys said:

A Targaryen on the Iron Throne - any Targaryen - means stability, peace, and prosperity.

Tell that to 70% of the Targaryen kings.

George is telling us a song of ice and fire. The Targaryens are fire, consuming until all is turned to ash. They couldn't even manage three hundred full years of rule without their kings going mad, starting civil wars, mass rebellions, and the virtual extinction of their line. 

The Starks ruled the North for nearly thirty times that length of time, and things only went wrong for them when they were forced to enter into the union of the Targaryen dynasty. Say what you will about the abomination, but I firmly believe that the North will resume independence by the end of the story, whatever else happens. The wolves will endure the winter, and emerge strong enough to go their own way once again.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

10 minutes ago, Floki of the Ironborn said:

Tell that to 70% of the Targaryen kings.

George is telling us a song of ice and fire. The Targaryens are fire, consuming until all is turned to ash. They couldn't even manage three hundred full years of rule without their kings going mad, starting civil wars, mass rebellions, and the virtual extinction of their line. 

The time they ruled doesn't matter - three hundred years of peace (and it was peace, broken up by minor wars most of which lasted not even two years) are better than three hundred years of continuous war - which was the standard before the Conquest.

And it doesn't really matter who sits the throne or which dynasty makes up the royal family (it is just that at the time of the Dance the royal family were the Targaryens and people wanted their rule to continue because it would provide stability) - anyone ruling all the Seven Kingdoms is better than scheming and ambitious pricks trying to enlarge their own domains by any means possible.

10 minutes ago, Floki of the Ironborn said:

The Starks ruled the North for nearly thirty times that length of time, and things only went wrong for them when they were forced to enter into the union of the Targaryen dynasty. Say what you will about the abomination, but I firmly believe that the North will resume independence by the end of the story, whatever else happens. The wolves will endure the winter, and emerge strong enough to go their own way once again.

The North isn't a fixed political entity. The Starks increased their own domains in the same bloody as any other king in Westeros, and they didn't stop trying to increase the size of their kingdom. And neither did any of the other kings. Also, succession wars and the like were also common in the Seven Kingdoms before the Conquest - in addition to the wars between the kingdoms and the wars within the kingdoms (when powerful lords fought private wars to settle scores with their neighbors).

If the North were to be independent again then it would continue as before, trying conquer more territory, to subdue other peoples, etc. They would also open themselves to attacks from whatever kingdoms there are going to be in the south - because they would also want to increase the size of their domains.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I’m not sure killing Aegon the younger would have helped Aegon ii in his current situation but if Baella Targaryen had been captured or killed in the beginning, that would mean Sunfyre is not further injured and might be able to heal enough to fly and burn the Lads on the Kingsroad. Would the North and Vale still attack Kingslanding if Aegon II had the Stormlords and a semi-functioning dragon?

The only other way I could see the greens winning more then a Pyrrhic victory even if he killed Rhaenyra and Aegon the younger, is if Boris Baratheon and the Stormlords had defeated the Lads and Riverlords, then maybe either Unwin Peake or Lionel Hightower (who refused the blacks peace in OTL but did nothing while Aegon II was still alive or when he heard Rhaenyra was killed or the Greens regained the capital...) reorganized the Oldtown/Reach and maybe Westerland forces to help defend Kingslanding against the Vale and North. Then if the Redwyne fleet could get Aegon II off Dragonstone and he offered general pardons maybe there could have been an uneasy peace between the Blacks and greens. But the greens were so incompetent and meant to lose from the start with so many Reach houses fighting against the Hightowers for no reason, the Redwyne fleet MIA, the Westerlands and Stormlands getting taken out in one or two battles, while the Riverlands are unstoppable and the North and Vale are left largely uninvolved and unharmed until the end.

I think Aegon ii burned too many bridges and the Blacks would not bend the knee unless he had a dragon or larger army. Perhaps if Aegon died of his wounds naturally after killing Rhaenyra and Aegon the younger and Prince Daeron or Maelor survived and were propped up by the greens, it would been easier to come to a compromise.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, The Merling King said:

so many Reach houses fighting against the Hightowers for no reason

I assume that major reason why those houses fought against Hightowers is that it looked like Ht are trying to steal the crown and chance old status quo at the Reach. Or they suspected that victorious Greens would be bad for their own interests and for that reason they supported Blacks who would have protected their old rights.

After all b4 and during the Dance their nominal overlords Tyrells seemed very weak and I suspect that those "Black houses" liked that and wanted to stop rise of new stronger royally supported overlord. Or if Greens had won the Dance there is a chance that Hightowers would had replaced Tyrells and they would had made other "reforms" that would had favored Oldtown but hurt interests of other houses in Reach.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

9 hours ago, The Merling King said:

I’m not sure killing Aegon the younger would have helped Aegon ii in his current situation but if Baella Targaryen had been captured or killed in the beginning, that would mean Sunfyre is not further injured and might be able to heal enough to fly and burn the Lads on the Kingsroad. Would the North and Vale still attack Kingslanding if Aegon II had the Stormlords and a semi-functioning dragon?

That would have been a different scenario. Sunfyre would have a symbolic value for Aegon, but chances are not that good that he could have really used him effectively in battle. The Northmen would have gladly faced him in battle.

9 hours ago, The Merling King said:

The only other way I could see the greens winning more then a Pyrrhic victory even if he killed Rhaenyra and Aegon the younger, is if Boris Baratheon and the Stormlords had defeated the Lads and Riverlords, then maybe either Unwin Peake or Lionel Hightower (who refused the blacks peace in OTL but did nothing while Aegon II was still alive or when he heard Rhaenyra was killed or the Greens regained the capital...) reorganized the Oldtown/Reach and maybe Westerland forces to help defend Kingslanding against the Vale and North. Then if the Redwyne fleet could get Aegon II off Dragonstone and he offered general pardons maybe there could have been an uneasy peace between the Blacks and greens. But the greens were so incompetent and meant to lose from the start with so many Reach houses fighting against the Hightowers for no reason, the Redwyne fleet MIA, the Westerlands and Stormlands getting taken out in one or two battles, while the Riverlands are unstoppable and the North and Vale are left largely uninvolved and unharmed until the end.

That would also be a completely different scenario. Borros could have defeated the Lads, but then Cregan and the Vale army would have taken care of him.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

8 hours ago, Loose Bolt said:

I assume that major reason why those houses fought against Hightowers is that it looked like Ht are trying to steal the crown and chance old status quo at the Reach. Or they suspected that victorious Greens would be bad for their own interests and for that reason they supported Blacks who would have protected their old rights.

After all b4 and during the Dance their nominal overlords Tyrells seemed very weak and I suspect that those "Black houses" liked that and wanted to stop rise of new stronger royally supported overlord. Or if Greens had won the Dance there is a chance that Hightowers would had replaced Tyrells and they would had made other "reforms" that would had favored Oldtown but hurt interests of other houses in Reach.

It just seemed that the Black Reach lords were actual Blacks, i.e. men who swore the original vow to defend Rhaenyra's rights. They decided to proclaim for Rhaenyra when Highgarden decided to stay out of the war, allowing the Lords of the Reach to make their own decisions. The same thing happened in the Riverlands where Elmo Tully's decisions allowed the other Riverlords to choose their own sides. In the regions were the overlords chose a side their bannermen would have to rebel against their liege lords when declaring for a different pretender.

In the Reach and the Riverlands this was an option, in the West and the Vale and the North not so much. In the Stormlands the lords closest to Crownlands also stood with Rhaenyra.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

18 hours ago, Lord Varys said:

It just seemed that the Black Reach lords were actual Blacks, i.e. men who swore the original vow to defend Rhaenyra's rights. They decided to proclaim for Rhaenyra when Highgarden decided to stay out of the war, allowing the Lords of the Reach to make their own decisions. The same thing happened in the Riverlands where Elmo Tully's decisions allowed the other Riverlords to choose their own sides. In the regions were the overlords chose a side their bannermen would have to rebel against their liege lords when declaring for a different pretender.

In the Reach and the Riverlands this was an option, in the West and the Vale and the North not so much. In the Stormlands the lords closest to Crownlands also stood with Rhaenyra.

House Manderly took a real gamble swearing for the blacks before the Starks had made their decision, though. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

11 hours ago, Canon Claude said:

House Manderly took a real gamble swearing for the blacks before the Starks had made their decision, though. 

Possibly, although I guess that Lord Manderly either had very good reason to expect that Cregan would side with the Blacks (say, because his father had sworn the vow to defend Rhaenyra's succession), he expected that Winterfell would follow his lead in the matter ... or he just knew that the Starks couldn't really fault him for sucking up to a dragonrider if he showed up in their city.

Keep in mind that all the Manderlys gave Jacaerys were promises. If Cregan had refused to support Rhaenyra the Manderlys could have just decided to not honor the promises they gave Jace.

They would only rebel against Winterfell if Lord Cregan had sided with the Greens or commanded them to not support the Blacks/not participate in the war.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • 2 weeks later...
On 8/6/2021 at 8:39 AM, frenin said:

Yes, they had Rhaena and a perfectly good dragon safe in the Eyrie and the Blacks were never moved by the salic law anyway so yes, the Greens couldn't win.

I like that. 

And what a nice example of justice. The crown returns to the line of the woman who should had be Queen if Jaehaerys wasn't such a misogynist.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Archived

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

×
×
  • Create New...