He was a good man. Being king must have changed him. If he wasn't king, his children marrying for love wouldn't have mattered as much. But like Aemon told him, being king means you can't be the happy go lucky guy you've always been.
Aegon V want to rule good but never could get his lord to see his reform ways you sum it up perfect his children breaking their marriage pact didn't help his rule. Him wanting to bring back the dragons basically was the only thing he saw to turn his rule around end in tragedy.
I think King Aegon V was a enlightened absolutist similar to Joseph II of the Holy Roman Empire both rulers pushed for need reform by using absolutists means to do it and they both have faced strong push back doing so
One thing to consider is that he's the brother of Maester Aemon, who at some point learned about the prophecy of the The Prince That Was Promised and possibly Aegon's dream and knew of the dagger. We know Aemon discussed this with Rhaegar, but could he have learned of it much earlier. While it had fallen into legend, the North still told stories of the White Walkers and the reason the Wall was built. It was even prophesied in Aegon's lifetime that the Prince would come from Aerys and Rhaella. It's possible Aegon wanted the dragons, not to fight for his reforms, but defend from the Others.
To make the changes he wanted to do, you need to ABSOLUTELY CRUSH any noble revolt (there will be many), as well as insure that you have a couple of concepts that do not exist in this world (a standing army, PROPER unified law for all Westeros, a bunch of economy concepts that a centralized state needs, etc.). Honestly such a person might want to do good, but in the end that person will be seen as merely another Maegor. Unfortunately the window of opportunity the Targaryens had, ended with Jaeherys and Viserys I (when their power was largely unchallenged and could make some serious reforms that would make a unified Westeros). Jaehaerys tried some things, but he didn't go far enough in my opinion ( I mean radical changes, though being raised in an Andal environment makes it difficult for a child to develop ideas such as ''standing armies'' and ''constitution''). I am actually surprised that the Targaryens lasted this long without dragons and a bunch of other stuff to unify the realm firmly under their control. Honestly The Rebellion should have happened a lot sooner, but I guess this is one of those moments where logic is erased from the story (like those wars against Dorne).
I wonder how many of those lord and knights who voted for him at the Great Council, believed they could control Aegon or make him forever grateful to them for helping him become king? They must have thought that someone who wasn't altogether brought up in the royal court would be easily manipulated. There is also another matter which seems important. Did Aegon like being king? His father and uncle didn't seem like they wanted it and handed the day to day running of the realm to Bloodraven. For a king to not like the position and not know how the best way to wield power, including the more darker elements is a big problem.
Loved this synopsis. Great intentions versus the political reality of ruling. You can't rule without support of keys of power that supporting you. The small folk had no power to change events in the end. Westeros has no house of commons; no political institutions or support for the little people. The balance was always in rhe great lords favor.
1st to take the Black for House Blackfyre🗡 I think if we are gonna go with a simple good or tyrant, Egg is a tyrant. Because, as was said, the fact that he seemingly wanted dragons to do what he wanted even if it was for the good of the people, it's still inherently tyrannical. Happy Blackfyre Friday.
Oui. The Targaryens - as a general rule - want an absolute monarchy. They do not want the laws and traditions that bind their subjects and the nobility to bind them.
He wasn't a tyrant,he was just unable to control his children because they were too much like him,but he was a good king,his obsession with dragons is due to a good action by giving the smallfolk more rights,and besides they needed dragons but yeah not jahaerys but no aegon the unworthy or aerys,I would say he is the fifth best targaryien king,kinda ironic
![[LIVE] : ONE ลุมพินี 86 | คู่เอก "คมเพชร vs ชาติพยัคฆ์"](http://i.ytimg.com/vi/m3q_dRYDuU8/mqdefault.jpg)
He was a good man. Being king must have changed him. If he wasn't king, his children marrying for love wouldn't have mattered as much. But like Aemon told him, being king means you can't be the happy go lucky guy you've always been.
He was a good king, could have been great if he could control his kids. Dragons probably would have helped too.
Aegon V want to rule good but never could get his lord to see his reform ways you sum it up perfect his children breaking their marriage pact didn't help his rule. Him wanting to bring back the dragons basically was the only thing he saw to turn his rule around end in tragedy.
I think King Aegon V was a enlightened absolutist similar to Joseph II of the Holy Roman Empire both rulers pushed for need reform by using absolutists means to do it and they both have faced strong push back doing so
For the Lord commander & The watch!!!
For King Aegon V
& House Targaryen !!
HOUSE BLACKFYRE BETTER 🖤🗡
Yessssssss🏰🖤
🍻🍻🍻
For the Watch!
@@lawrencereid2767 here For the lord commander!!! Break out the ale!
@@aegorbittersteel2154 “Beneath The gold, The Bittersteel!”
Great king 👑........🖤
A good man with a great vision but was ready to become a tyrant for it.
One thing to consider is that he's the brother of Maester Aemon, who at some point learned about the prophecy of the The Prince That Was Promised and possibly Aegon's dream and knew of the dagger. We know Aemon discussed this with Rhaegar, but could he have learned of it much earlier. While it had fallen into legend, the North still told stories of the White Walkers and the reason the Wall was built. It was even prophesied in Aegon's lifetime that the Prince would come from Aerys and Rhaella.
It's possible Aegon wanted the dragons, not to fight for his reforms, but defend from the Others.
To make the changes he wanted to do, you need to ABSOLUTELY CRUSH any noble revolt (there will be many), as well as insure that you have a couple of concepts that do not exist in this world (a standing army, PROPER unified law for all Westeros, a bunch of economy concepts that a centralized state needs, etc.). Honestly such a person might want to do good, but in the end that person will be seen as merely another Maegor. Unfortunately the window of opportunity the Targaryens had, ended with Jaeherys and Viserys I (when their power was largely unchallenged and could make some serious reforms that would make a unified Westeros). Jaehaerys tried some things, but he didn't go far enough in my opinion ( I mean radical changes, though being raised in an Andal environment makes it difficult for a child to develop ideas such as ''standing armies'' and ''constitution'').
I am actually surprised that the Targaryens lasted this long without dragons and a bunch of other stuff to unify the realm firmly under their control. Honestly The Rebellion should have happened a lot sooner, but I guess this is one of those moments where logic is erased from the story (like those wars against Dorne).
Power resides where man believes it resides. He was good but not tyrannical enough make people fear him.
I wonder how many of those lord and knights who voted for him at the Great Council, believed they could control Aegon or make him forever grateful to them for helping him become king? They must have thought that someone who wasn't altogether brought up in the royal court would be easily manipulated. There is also another matter which seems important. Did Aegon like being king? His father and uncle didn't seem like they wanted it and handed the day to day running of the realm to Bloodraven. For a king to not like the position and not know how the best way to wield power, including the more darker elements is a big problem.
you make a very good point about the idea as to if Aegon even wanted to be King and it's something i've never really thought about before.
Loved this synopsis. Great intentions versus the political reality of ruling. You can't rule without support of keys of power that supporting you. The small folk had no power to change events in the end. Westeros has no house of commons; no political institutions or support for the little people. The balance was always in rhe great lords favor.
1st to take the Black for House Blackfyre🗡
I think if we are gonna go with a simple good or tyrant, Egg is a tyrant. Because, as was said, the fact that he seemingly wanted dragons to do what he wanted even if it was for the good of the people, it's still inherently tyrannical.
Happy Blackfyre Friday.
Oui. The Targaryens - as a general rule - want an absolute monarchy. They do not want the laws and traditions that bind their subjects and the nobility to bind them.
@@laurashortill8623 exactly
@@aegorbittersteel2154you say King Aegon V was the Westeros version of Lee Kuan Yew
You rebel scum.
He wasn't a tyrant,he was just unable to control his children because they were too much like him,but he was a good king,his obsession with dragons is due to a good action by giving the smallfolk more rights,and besides they needed dragons but yeah not jahaerys but no aegon the unworthy or aerys,I would say he is the fifth best targaryien king,kinda ironic
Great king and protector of the realm
A shame our monarcy wasn't absolutt
To be fair he did not have Dragons
I'm sorry your Grace. I did my best.
@@BryndenBloodraven well you lacked dragons so i cant blame you but my father could certainly have done something about it
Not a good king
Not a good king, an absolute tyrant who couldn't even handle his own family.
An usurpur