The hairy bear Posted November 18, 2022 Share Posted November 18, 2022 15 hours ago, Lord Varys said: If we are going there, I don't understand why Aegon II would be seen as a proper king. He always ruled only over a fraction of the Targaryen domain. Because, as I was saying, lists of kings are as much about legitimacy than actual power. Who is listed as a monarch in a period of civil strife reveals the historiographical consensus on who had the rightful claim. 15 hours ago, Lord Varys said: There is little chance that the view of Rhaenyra changed overtime considering her descendants sat the throne. That in and of itself should have protected her reputation. There are plenty of real history where ancestors of current kings are berated. As an exemple from English history, John Lackland is an unanimously vilified king, while being an ancestor of all the monarchs that followed him. 15 hours ago, Lord Varys said: Especially not in comparison to Aegon II, who used hundreds of Kingslanders as living torches. This guy was a monster. Rhaenyra wasn't. When I claim that it'd be bad PR to be associated with Rhaenyra, I never meant that being associated with Aegon was preferable. Both were widely seen as awful rulers. My point has always been that a wise monarch would try to detach himself from both of them, avoid muddling with fruitless discussions about who had been the rightful ruler, and move forward. 15 hours ago, Lord Varys said: What little we know about the adult Aegon III is that he didn't mince his words, didn't hide his true feelings once he was king, didn't suck up to anybody. The idea that this man had anything but contempt for the thugs and traitors who fought against his mother, his brothers, and him, personally, is very unlikely. We are also told that "he strove to give the realm peace and plenty in the wake of the Dance", that he sat besides Ser Tyland as he was dying, and we have to assume that at some point he authorized the marriage of his half-sister to the son of Ormund Hightower. So, yes, he had more than contempt for the ones that fought against his mother. 15 hours ago, Lord Varys said: That goes for the Riverlords, Cregan Stark and Jeyne Arryn had received letters from Rhaenyra from Duskendale and had been raising more troops the entire time. If we have need to go case by case, we know why those lord paramounts joined the blacks. Besides being bloodthirsty and wanting to get rid of unwanted mouths before Winter begins, Cregan seems to have developed some kind of friendship with Jace, and had him commit to marry a future daughter to his son. Meanwhile, Jeyne Arryn would have had her own claim to the Vale questioned if female succession was contested. Neither Cregan nor Jeyne sided with the blacks out of love for Rhaenyra. (For Jeyne's case in particular, it's easy to assume that if Aegon II had stayed a little longer in the throne, one of his first decisions would have been to name Arnold/Eldric as the rightful Lord of the Vale. If he had not already done that already during the war) 15 hours ago, Lord Varys said: That is not how the reigns of kings are measured properly. Proper lists include the actual reigns, duly noting interruptions of the reign if they occurred. 15 hours ago, Lord Varys said: Because he eventually gave up his claim ... and the Bourbons became the new royal house of Spain. So... are those lists about who actually holds power? Or it's about who is eventually seen as the rightful monarch by posterity? You need to make up your mind! It's the later, of course. Ran 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.