The last Green Council and its implications

[James Steller]

There’s a moment in FAB where the surviving greens are debating what to do after Lord Baratheon’s defeat and death. Several black armies are descending upon the capital to depose Aegon II and free Aegon the Younger. The greens debate their next move, including the question of whether Aegon the younger will allow Aegon II to go to the Wall. Aegon even considers it until his mother reminds him that he fed Rhaenyra to a dragon and made her son watch.

It just struck me how strange it is that Corlys, Aegon II, and Alicent all assume that the decision will be made by Aegon himself. He couldn’t even give orders to his own Kingsguard while he was under age. And we see later on that he isn’t involved in what to do with Alicent, or even his own marriage. Why would anyone assume that he could decide the fate of Aegon II? 

[Canon Claude]

Aegon's allies might very well have taken their cue from his wishes. Obviously, that didn't happen, but Aegon II and his council couldn't have predicted the future. 

[James Steller]

39 minutes ago, Canon Claude said:

Aegon's allies might very well have taken their cue from his wishes. Obviously, that didn't happen, but Aegon II and his council couldn't have predicted the future. 

That makes me wonder if Aegon would have actually forgiven Aegon II. I don’t think he would have, personally. I would also assume that Corlys and the others would have disregarded Aegon III’s demand for vengeance since Corlys was primarily concerned about repairing the realm.

[Lord Varys]

The point there is more that Alicent didn't want her craven son to take the black and abandon her and their cause.

But to be sure, even if little Aegon had decided to allow his uncle to take the black, the Lads, Cregan, and Jeyne Arryn might have still decided to put him down as a minor king could not make such decisions on his own. Not to mention that Aegon III himself could have changed his mind after his coronation.

[James Steller]

3 minutes ago, Lord Varys said:

Not to mention that Aegon III himself could have changed his mind after his coronation.

No, that doesn’t make sense to me. If Aegon II joined the Night’s Watch, then that’s it for him. If a man of the Night’s Watch could be summoned from the Wall to who knows where to answer for his old crimes, then that undermines everything that the Watch stands for regarding its recruits. Such an action had never been done before. Robb naming Jon Snow as his heir was a highly controversial and unprecedented decision which he only made out of sheer desperation. And nobody would have recognised Jon’s authority even if Robb did try and take him back.

[Alester Florent]

2 hours ago, James Steller said:

No, that doesn’t make sense to me. If Aegon II joined the Night’s Watch, then that’s it for him. If a man of the Night’s Watch could be summoned from the Wall to who knows where to answer for his old crimes, then that undermines everything that the Watch stands for regarding its recruits. Such an action had never been done before. Robb naming Jon Snow as his heir was a highly controversial and unprecedented decision which he only made out of sheer desperation. And nobody would have recognised Jon’s authority even if Robb did try and take him back.

It does seem that a king has the power to release a man of the NW from his vows, albeit I don't recall if it's mentioned how often this happened when the precedent was invoked (it must have been exceptional - but I'm inclined to believe the precedent exists, because Stannis isn't the kind of guy to make that sort of thing up). Cersei seems aware of the same precedent, although I trust her rather less than Stannis: still, it seems that Stannis, Cersei and Robb all independently believe that this is a thing that a king can do and Jon doesn't seem to disagree.

So it seems that Robb, being a king, could release Jon from his vows and instate him as heir, if indeed he did (which I'm inclined to believe he did do, but which isn't confirmed), and that while this was indeed a somewhat desperate move on his part given his lack of heirs, was not highly controversial (the only objector we know of was Cat, whose objection was not founded in law, but her own personal feelings towards Jon) nor perhaps unprecedented. Of course, Robb also didn't anticipate his own death coming quite as soon as it did: while he was hedging against his own potential death without a child given his hazardous lifestyle, he wasn't expecting to be exposed to danger until the attack on Moat Cailin, and would presumably have expected Jon's release from the NW to happen first, so that the legitimisation and public recognition of him as heir could happen after Jon was already a free man and thereby giving Jon credibility before he was called on to take over as king, rather than the release, legitimisation and acclamation as king all having to happen simultaneously. To be honest, I think Jon's Stark-cred would be sufficient anyway in the absence of other legitimate Starks. He looks like a Stark and thinks like a Stark, and the houses naturally inclined to follow a Stark would surely fall in behind him rather than go looking for alternatives (dynastically, an unattractive choice between Valemen, Tyrion(!) or, eventually, Ramsay). Of course, Robb also wasn't expecting his own death to be accompanied by such a bonfire of his supporters: the death he foresaw would have been one in which he died but his kingdom remained intact.

But there is a big difference between releasing a man from his vows and restoring him to society as a free man (with a reward), and recalling a man from the Wall to punish him for crimes for which the NW vows were meant to atone. Moreover, it appears that the "release from vows" is essentially voluntary; the NWman can't be released from the Watch against his own wishes (and indeed Jon turns Stannis's offer down) rather than the king's having the ability to unilaterally void the vow. The Lord Commander probably has a say too: this isn't an issue with Jon because he is the LC, but a king probably wouldn't be able to release a man from his vows without the LC's agreement.

So yeah, had Aegon taken the black, I don't think Aegon III would have been able to recall him later. That might not have stopped him sending agents to the Wall to eliminate his uncle once he gained full power, as Cersei attempted to do with Jon, but that's a very different kettle of fish to recalling someone to execute them.

Edited January 18 by Alester Florent

[Lord Varys]

3 hours ago, James Steller said:

No, that doesn’t make sense to me. If Aegon II joined the Night’s Watch, then that’s it for him. If a man of the Night’s Watch could be summoned from the Wall to who knows where to answer for his old crimes, then that undermines everything that the Watch stands for regarding its recruits. Such an action had never been done before. Robb naming Jon Snow as his heir was a highly controversial and unprecedented decision which he only made out of sheer desperation. And nobody would have recognised Jon’s authority even if Robb did try and take him back.

My point simply was that Prince Aegon might be convinced to allow his uncle to take the black if he was abdicating in his favor ... while King Aegon III might change his mind on that before Aegon II could leave for the Wall, taking his head with the support of the new Blacks at court.

Aegon II would have been nothing but a useless mouth at the Wall, anyway. A cripple who wasn't even a fighter before he lost the use of one leg for good, and neither a tutor or healer nor administrator.

That would kind of fit with how Jaehaerys I treated the turncloak KG before and after he had taken power.

Offing Aegon II at the Wall should have been easy. Either command the Lord Commander to do it or actually go there yourself with a large enough retinue. Pretexts could easily be found. Aegon was clearly foolish enough to be goaded into treason and desertion with the promise that some alleged loyalists would restore him to the throne.

Edited January 18 by Lord Varys

[The Grey Wolf Strikes Back]

@Lord Varys

Aegon II could serve with the stewards given his literacy and education, cripple or not. Also, Aegon II might not have been the exemplary swordsman Aemond was stated to be and that Daeron might have grown into but I'm pretty sure if he was actively poor Gyldayn would have made mention of that fact.

[Lord Varys]

1 hour ago, The Grey Wolf Strikes Back said:

@Lord Varys

Aegon II could serve with the stewards given his literacy and education, cripple or not. Also, Aegon II might not have been the exemplary swordsman Aemond was stated to be and that Daeron might have grown into but I'm pretty sure if he was actively poor Gyldayn would have made mention of that fact.

Stewards actually do work, and Aegon can barely walk. There are no badly crippled stewards at the Wall as far as we know, and for good reasons. The NW is a military order of fighting men, not a soup kitchen for useless mouths.

Aegon was trained at arms, but turned into a wastrel, and there isn't even an indication he ever participated in a tourney or otherwise showed significant skills at arms. And neither did Daeron. Both were good dragonriders, but for that skill to mean anything you need a dragon.

Also think about the Clubfoot choosing death. The best reason for that self-destructive choice would have been that his disability would have turked his life a living hell up in the cold. And he would have known that. Injuries like Aegon's would have been even worse. The guy would have been of no use to anyone.

[Floki of the Ironborn]

12 hours ago, James Steller said:

There’s a moment in FAB where the surviving greens are debating what to do after Lord Baratheon’s defeat and death. Several black armies are descending upon the capital to depose Aegon II and free Aegon the Younger. The greens debate their next move, including the question of whether Aegon the younger will allow Aegon II to go to the Wall. Aegon even considers it until his mother reminds him that he fed Rhaenyra to a dragon and made her son watch.

It just struck me how strange it is that Corlys, Aegon II, and Alicent all assume that the decision will be made by Aegon himself. He couldn’t even give orders to his own Kingsguard while he was under age. And we see later on that he isn’t involved in what to do with Alicent, or even his own marriage. Why would anyone assume that he could decide the fate of Aegon II? 

Corlys was just saying anything to make Aegon II surrender. He knows that Aegon II is a doomed man, and maybe even Aegon himself knew it, because he actually considers what Corlys has to say. 

Though to be honest, I think he should have listened to Tyland Lannister and put Aegon the Younger to death. The boy was useless to him as a hostage, clearly, because the war carried on regardless of Aegon's imprisonment. Plus the boy's survival serves as a rallying beacon to all of Aegon II's enemies.

[Alester Florent]

5 hours ago, Floki of the Ironborn said:

Corlys was just saying anything to make Aegon II surrender. He knows that Aegon II is a doomed man, and maybe even Aegon himself knew it, because he actually considers what Corlys has to say. 

Though to be honest, I think he should have listened to Tyland Lannister and put Aegon the Younger to death. The boy was useless to him as a hostage, clearly, because the war carried on regardless of Aegon's imprisonment. Plus the boy's survival serves as a rallying beacon to all of Aegon II's enemies.

Killing Aegon III does mean the end of House Targaryen, mind. He's the last (known) male Targ, and while it's theoretically possible Aegon II might have more kids, it also doesn't seem enormously likely.

And in any case, the war is lost for the Greens. The Black armies are incoming and there's nothing left to stand in their way. They're not going to go home just because Aegon the younger is killed: having declared themselves opposed to Aegon II and seeing the way he treats his prisoners, they'll fight on for Baela or Rhaena, or Gaemon Palehair if they have to. Killing Aegon the younger is just going to antagonise them.

[Lord Varys]

5 hours ago, Floki of the Ironborn said:

Corlys was just saying anything to make Aegon II surrender. He knows that Aegon II is a doomed man, and maybe even Aegon himself knew it, because he actually considers what Corlys has to say. 

From what Corlys later did it is clear that he meant what he said there - and had he run Aegon III's government he would have upheld the bargain. But he may not have run the government and Aegon II may not have survived the transfer of power.

6 minutes ago, Alester Florent said:

Killing Aegon III does mean the end of House Targaryen, mind. He's the last (known) male Targ, and while it's theoretically possible Aegon II might have more kids, it also doesn't seem enormously likely.

Aegon planned to remarry precisely to have more sons. And then his nephew would have been dead. Possibly earlier if his faction had decidedly won the war on thee Kingsroad.

But House Targaryen could also continue through Jaehaera if push came to shove. If Aegon was truly sterile or impotent due to his many injuries (which is actually not unlikely at all) then he could have had grandsons through his only surviving child. Injuries or not, the man was in his early 20s. He could have lived and reigned 40 years or more.

[The Grey Wolf Strikes Back]

On 1/18/2024 at 7:10 PM, Lord Varys said:

Stewards actually do work, and Aegon can barely walk. There are no badly crippled stewards at the Wall as far as we know, and for good reasons. The NW is a military order of fighting men, not a soup kitchen for useless mouths.

Aegon was trained at arms, but turned into a wastrel, and there isn't even an indication he ever participated in a tourney or otherwise showed significant skills at arms. And neither did Daeron. Both were good dragonriders, but for that skill to mean anything you need a dragon.

Also think about the Clubfoot choosing death. The best reason for that self-destructive choice would have been that his disability would have turked his life a living hell up in the cold. And he would have known that. Injuries like Aegon's would have been even worse. The guy would have been of no use to anyone.

I mean, Aemon was frail and blind and that didn't stop him from being an asset despite no longer being able to do things like read or write as a result.

Also, what I was trying to say is that if he was actively mediocre I think Gyldayn would have mentioned it the way he did with Aenys. Furthermore, I think its important thematically that Daeron II was the first Targaryen king who wasn't able to even pretend to be a warrior, let alone a knight.

[James Steller]

On 1/19/2024 at 5:41 AM, Lord Varys said:

Possibly earlier if his faction had decidedly won the war on thee Kingsroad.

 

Even if Borros had defeated the Lads, he wouldn’t have beaten the Starks and Arryns. They both outnumbered the Baratheons at least 2 to 1.

[Lord Varys]

On 1/20/2024 at 2:30 AM, The Grey Wolf Strikes Back said:

I mean, Aemon was frail and blind and that didn't stop him from being an asset despite no longer being able to do things like read or write as a result.

Aemon was a man in his prime and an accomplished and useful maester when he took the black. And he is still useful as hell as a frail and blind old man.

And of course the Watch takes care of their old and frail as well as those who are injured and crippled while protecting the realms of men ... but the Watch isn't the soup kitchen for useless highborn cripples. Aegon II has no skills he can offer the Watch.

On 1/20/2024 at 2:30 AM, The Grey Wolf Strikes Back said:

Also, what I was trying to say is that if he was actively mediocre I think Gyldayn would have mentioned it the way he did with Aenys. Furthermore, I think its important thematically that Daeron II was the first Targaryen king who wasn't able to even pretend to be a warrior, let alone a knight.

Gyldayn contrasts Aenys and Maegor - nice mediocre warrior, paranoid super warrior - but he doesn't do that for all the princes. Viserys I's martial abilities - whose spitting image Aegon II is - aren't discussed, either.

[Universal Sword Donor]

On 1/24/2024 at 12:22 PM, Lord Varys said:

Aemon was a man in his prime and an accomplished and useful maester when he took the black. And he is still useful as hell as a frail and blind old man.

And of course the Watch takes care of their old and frail as well as those who are injured and crippled while protecting the realms of men ... but the Watch isn't the soup kitchen for useless highborn cripples. Aegon II has no skills he can offer the Watch.

Gyldayn contrasts Aenys and Maegor - nice mediocre warrior, paranoid super warrior - but he doesn't do that for all the princes. Viserys I's martial abilities - whose spitting image Aegon II is - aren't discussed, either.

Jeor would take him in a KL minute:

The Night's Watch has become an army of sullen boys and tired old men. Apart from the men at my table tonight, I have perhaps twenty who can read, and even fewer whocan think, or plan, or lead.