James Steller Posted March 15, 2023 Share Posted March 15, 2023 Both of them were once-promising young men turned into craven middle aged men who slept around with anyone they could get their hands on while being abusive husbands to their respective queens. They both had brothers and sons whom they hated, they both were too cowardly to deal with hard truths or serious conflicts, and the ends of their reigns both resulted in utterly destructive wars, mostly because of the fact that they were truly terrible kings. but which one was worse? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Craving Peaches Posted March 15, 2023 Share Posted March 15, 2023 I think Aegon IV. Robert was a weak and ineffective ruler because he couldn't be bothered to put in the effort, whereas Aegon IV seemed to enjoy being the worst ruler he possibly could - he took a much more active approach to making sure things were as shitty as possible. Robert at the end of it all was just really lazy and negligent, Aegon IV seems to have chosen deliberately to sabotage his own reign... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Maegor_the_Cool Posted March 15, 2023 Share Posted March 15, 2023 Personally I think there isn’t much difference between them and who you think is worse depends on who you are. Personally, I’d say Aegon. Simply for the fact is we know he was a rather smart individual in his younger days. Pairing that with his clear vindictive nature later in his life shows that he was more aware of what he was doing and just didn’t care. Whereas Robert didn’t really know how to rule, and never cared to learned and was used by everyone around him for their own ends. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
kissdbyfire Posted March 15, 2023 Share Posted March 15, 2023 5 minutes ago, Craving Peaches said: I think Aegon IV. Robert was a weak and ineffective ruler because he couldn't be bothered to put in the effort, whereas Aegon IV seemed to enjoy being the worst ruler he possibly could - he took a much more active approach to making sure things were as shitty as possible. Robert at the end of it all was just really lazy and negligent, Aegon IV seems to have chosen deliberately to sabotage his own reign... Yeah, I agree. Aegon really comes across as enjoying doing horrible things and being a horrible king/person. And Robert is both but maybe doesn’t enjoy it, And for the most part Robert’s reign was ok, w Arryn as hand etc. I have one good thing only to say of Aegon IV, and it’s something that just happened and not something he actively did, and that is that he fathered the one hero of the story, Brynden Bloodraven Rivers. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
sifth Posted March 15, 2023 Share Posted March 15, 2023 Robert was a flawed king, but all around seemed like a decent guy. He had a reputation for turning former enemies into friends and actually fought in his battles with his men. He was reckless to be sure and obsessed with avenging Lyanna, well beyond the point of it being healthy. That aside though, everyone seemed to love him. Aegon IV was an all around evil jerk, who killed his own father and seemed to relish in doing evil whenever he could. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Terrorthatflapsinthenight9 Posted March 15, 2023 Share Posted March 15, 2023 It's hard to be a worse king than the one who actually acted as if he wanted to be the worst king possible, tried to paint his own heir as a bastard while giving hints that his favorite bastard should be king instead, and legitimized all of his bastards in a last act of spite, knowing that it would most certainely causes civil war. Aside from Aerys, Joffrey and Cersei there isn't much competition. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
James Steller Posted March 15, 2023 Author Share Posted March 15, 2023 Thing is, in response to the Aegon answers, I have to ask: is it worse if the man could never have been better, or is it worse if he clearly could have been better but actively chose not to be? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Loose Bolt Posted March 16, 2023 Share Posted March 16, 2023 Both of those kings tried to make sure that there are many people having royal blood in their veins. But Robert's widow was bitchier. So A4 was worse king but he had nicer queen. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Canon Claude Posted March 16, 2023 Share Posted March 16, 2023 12 minutes ago, Loose Bolt said: So A4 was worse king but he had nicer queen. And a far better heir. But I think James has a point, Robert is the bigger disappointment because of what he could have been. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SeanF Posted March 16, 2023 Share Posted March 16, 2023 Aegon IV was more plainly malicious than Robert was. Aegon really plumbed greater depths of cruelty and depravity than Robert did, and actively enjoyed causing harm. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
picpussy Posted March 16, 2023 Share Posted March 16, 2023 the question is pointless for westerosi (medieval) standards robert wasn't a "bad" king at all , in any case far better than an average targ king robert might not be at interested in goverment, but the kingdom was in peace a pretty stable with competent people like john arryn , stannis, etc.. well .. there were financial issues.. but this is not a major concern.. at least more than public debt nowadays Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.