#aegon iv the unworthy

[applesanddragons]

Aegon IV the Unworthy - Response to Goodqueenaly

Morality binds and blinds.

Aegon had hated the Dornish and warred against them, and those lords who desired the return of those days—despite all the associated misrule—would never be happy with this peaceable king. (TWOIAF)

As you can see above, the historian’s writings of Aegon IV are seasoned with unsubtle jabs at Aegon IV. They are reminders that you’re supposed to think he’s a villain.

As I read through Goodqueenaly’s writings about Aegon IV, I can see that they are seasoned the same way.

Obviously Aegon IV was generally a shitbag

Like Shae, Megette was a lowborn woman whose life prior to meeting her aristocratic male partner (and I use that term extremely loosely) was neither truly free nor independent:

The historian’s propaganda has done its work on Goodqueenaly, causing her to seize upon cheap opportunities to demonize Aegon IV in the eyes of her readers just like the historian is doing to his readers. All the better to moralize the issues.

When you make an issue about good versus evil (moralize), rather than about the facts, you blind people to reason. And when you blind people to reason, you increase the difficulty and danger for a truthseeker to promote conclusions that are more true. Now you have a Westerosi society (and a fandom) that is bonded together by the shared belief that Aegon IV was evil, before the reader has had a chance to do any reasoned deliberation of the facts to determine for himself what he believes about Aegon IV’s moral alignment.

To a society of people that is strongly bonded by the idea of Aegon IV’s villainy, who would dare say that Aegon IV did something good, even if it’s true? The social cost of saying it is not worth the reward, except to the rare person who is sufficiently devoted to the truth. Those are the Aristotles and Galileos of our own world, people who paid the ultimate price because they would not be deterred from a truth that their societies couldn’t bear to know.

If Aegon IV was a villain in reality (the story’s reality), wouldn’t the facts stand in evidence of that all on their own? I mean, without the incessant commentaries about his moral alignment? Surely, readers can be trusted to conclude that a king who actively terrorized, humiliated, and harmed his wife was evil, so long as the facts majorly show that terror, humiliation, and suffering were what King Aegon really intended or caused, and/or what Queen Naerys really experienced.

Though I don’t expect you to believe it before I present and explain all the evidence (Indeed the heart of my lesson [and ASOIAF’s lesson, I gather] is that you should not believe the guilt of anyone where severe accusations are made, before you’ve seen and considered all the evidence), King Aegon IV did not terrorize, humiliate, or harm his wife Queen Naerys. But in fact, Naerys did all of those things to Aegon. The morality of these characters is reversed. And the reason these histories reverse the morality of these characters is because Daeron I The Good was the bastard son of Queen Naerys and Aemon the Dragonknight, and therefore an illegitimate king.

But why would present day historians care about Daeron the Good’s legitimacy or illegitimacy? Because present day historians are writing under present day kings, and the legitimacy of present day kings derives from the legitimacy of past kings they’re descended from. In other words, if it were to become widely known and accepted that Daeron the Good was a bastard, it would become known that Aerys II is illegitimate, too. Because Aerys II descends from him. Under the reign of King Aerys II for example, the spread of that knowledge would be disastrous for the ruling family because the line of succession would jump all the way back up the tree to Aegon IV’s natural sons, who are legitimate heirs because they were legitimized by a legitimate king — Aegon IV himself on his deathbed — and Targaryen civil war would ensue.

Why would GRRM write the story that way? Because this is part of ASOIAF’s baked-in commentary that its audience does not pay enough attention to or give enough weight to the succession politics of Westeros. For the noble and royal people in the story, matters of succession are an ever present reality that shapes their daily lives. Even children such as the Walders Frey are constantly tracking lines of succession for this reason. But for the reader, matters of succession can be comfortably ignored, because most of the plot and drama does not require you to pay attention to politics in order to enjoy it on a surface level, and because your own well-being does not hinge upon noticing, for instance, that your uncle wants to kill your brother, and will want to kill you too when you take your brother’s place on the throne (Thinking of Baelor I). As Goodqueenaly’s analysis often shows, even readers highly knowledgeable of and attentive to ASOIAF’s political machinery are mostly blind to its political subtext.

In keeping with my thesis, her blindness is a morally motivated kind of blindness, because accompanying many of her oversights is a speculative rationale that is commensurate with (and often flattering to) her personal sense of what’s right or wrong, good or evil. Here’s one example.

As the official story of history goes, Aegon IV’s extramarital activities were an insult and humiliation to Queen Naerys, because a husband is supposed to be monogamous with his wife. Sure enough, Aegon’s non-monogamy is the premiere villainy that characterizes Aegon in these histories. There are a whole two pages dedicated to Aegon’s mistresses. Then Goodqueenaly proposed the possibility that part of the reason Aegon IV had his marriage to Megette officiated by a mummer playing a septon, rather than a real septon, was that it gave extra insult to Naerys by giving insult to the Faith’s institution of marriage, because Naerys loved the Faith of the Seven.

But if Aegon marrying Megette was an insult to Naerys, by that same logic shouldn’t Aegon fake marrying Megette be less of an insult to Naerys rather than more? The marriage was fake, after all, because the septon was a mummer and not a real septon. Using the original logic that disloyalty to your first marriage is wrong and mean, surely the use of a real septon officiator in the second marriage should be more wrong and mean than using a fake septon officiator.

What I’m highlighting is that Goodqueenaly’s speculations about the situation are driven not by a logical consistency, but by a moral consistency. Aegon being bad and Naerys being good is the moral framework that is guiding her speculations, and the logical framework is rearranged to support it. What goes largely unnoticed by her is that with the addition of her speculation the situation as a whole has become illogical.

And what usually goes entirely unnoticed by her is that the nature of the illogic suggests an alternative and viable possibility for what the true nature of these events really was. It just requires us to do the opposite of what Goodqueenaly did—preserve the logic and invert the moral alignments instead. That is, suppose that Aegon was good and Naerys was bad.

If Aegon was the good guy in this situation and Naerys was bad, what would that situation look like and what speculations would help it make sense? Now you’re in the right frame of mind to work and solve the historiographic puzzles of The World of Ice and Fire and Fire & Blood.

[novembermorgon]

aegon iv, naerys, aemon the dragonknight

[vazdelart]

Aegon IV the Unworthy (young and old version). Did them a while back as complimentary pieces

[salialenart]

Megette

the second of Aegon IV Targaryen’s mistresses

[noveaucolors]

Queen Naerys — the one woman Aegon IV bedded in whom he took no pleasure — was pious and gentle and frail, and all these things the king misliked.

[estrangedandwayward]

The Gilded King

[ophelias-lamentation]

Serenei of Lys

Seren

[tweedfrog]

This is what it was like going from the reign of Aegon the Unworthy to Daeron the Good

[nulnoildrinker]

[ladyalatariel]

HOUSE TARGARYEN + Aegon

[rynnthefangirl]

Aegon IV >>> Aegon II

1. He’s funnier.

2. We all agree he sucks and nobody is out here unironically trying to defend his r*pist ass.

3. His fans are funny instead of insufferable.

4. Lived twice as long and ruled six times as long.

5. Wanted to be a shitty king and succeeded vs wanted to be a good king but failed miserably bc he really really sucked at everything.

6. Had infinitely cooler children.

7. Actually continued on the Targaryen dynasty instead of his entire bloodline dying off.

8. Got the last laugh and was still winning even in death vs poisoned by his own council and dying alone and hopeless.

9. Knew how to be absolutely awful without starting a civil war in his life time that would get him dethroned and killed.

10. Mad lad living his best life instead of being burnt and miserable 24/7.

11. Iconic.

[knightofthenewrepublic]

[tell-them-the-north-remembers]

I feel like whenever we talk about Aemon the Dragonknight's love and devotion for a particular sibling of his we focus on the wrong one. The singers (and asoiaf fans alike) always speak of how much Aemon loved Naerys and how he would do anything for her. Except he didn't, if he truly loved her more than anything he could save her from the hands of Aegon, and would be willing to pay the price for it. But he did not. He duelled for her honour once, people say, but the only time he did actually fight for her was when he too was accused of treason (adultery) with her. He didn't keep Aegon from impregnating her after she made it clear she didn't want to suffer any more pregnancies, he didn't attempt to whisk her away or just seperate them temporarily (as even Baelor did) even though he was supposedly SO in love with her. And he certainly did not die for her.

Aemon died for his brother. He certainly argued with Aegon (because he did hold affection for Naerys) but he never truly opposed him in a way that mattered. He protected him more than he did anyone, even when Aegon wasn't the king he was sworn to, even before Aegon was a king at all. And at the end of the day Aemon died for Aegon. He could die for Naerys, he could defend her from Aegon and become a kingslayer, a kinslayer too, to protect her. But he chose to protect his brother with his life and he quite literally died for him, leaving behind Naerys to continue suffering her husband's abuse on her own until it killed her.

Aemon the Dragonknight loved his siblings (as arguably most Targaryens do in sometimes screwed-up ways), he loved them in different ways perhaps, but one of them mattered to him more than the other, enough to die for. And it was the one that had been nothing but cruel and hateful to him all his life.

[tronodiferro]

The Seeds of the Blackfyre Rebellion From left to right: Daemon Blackfyre; Aegor Rivers/Bittersteel; Barbra Bracken; Shiera Seastar; Brynden Rivers/Bloodraven; Mya Rivers; Melissa Blackwood; Gwenys Rivers. Background: Aegon IV Targaryen the Unworthy.

From and art by JotaSaraiva

[salialenart]

Jeyne Lothston, She was King Aegon IV Targaryen’s eighth mistress.

Poor child

[rozsesandart]

Lady Bethany Bracken, sister of Barba Bracken and seventh mistress to Aegon IV Targaryen 🥀

Art by @rozsesandart

Art masterlist - kofi - socials - commissions info