Jump to content
Sign in to follow this  
Timlugia

Emperor Ionius IX, what should we think about him?

Recommended Posts

A character that is rarely discussed is Emperor Ionius IX, or known as Edelgard's father.

We know that he tried to consolidated power from the nobles, but ended in failure, resulting Edelgard went on exile and later tortured by TWSITD.

In that sense, he was one of major reasons behind Edelgard's motivation.

 

From Edelgard's description Ionius IX was a great man, she has nothing but positive about him, making him a complete victim from power hungry noble

But is it truly so? I started to have my doubt after playing paralouge between Ferdinand and Lysithea.

According to Lysithea, Emperor Ionius IX was a cruel ruler who brutally crushed Hyrm in year 1167 for their intention to join Alliance, many people suffered under the event and fled to Ordeilla across the river. https://fireemblem.fandom.com/wiki/Hrym

Assuming the timeline was correct, Emperor Ionius IX was in power until 1171 when he was arrested during the Coup of the Seven, making him responsible for what happened in Hyrm.

 

Maybe he's not as innocent as Edelgard described? Do we know any other background about Emperor Ionius IX or the coup which I may have missed?

I wonder what was the detail of his "consolidation" and who was in the fault for the coup? The Emperor or the nobles? (obviously TWSITD was probably playing a part)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

You only ever actually see him when he’s coronating Edelgard, which is only on BEs, and when you do, he’s very old and very weak. I doubt he had any idea of what his daughter had for the future of Fódlan.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Eh, what would he be expected to do? Peacefully allow parts of the Empire secede? Now that would make him a terrible emperor, and possibly one of an empire that would shortly no longer exist. Showing weakness like that would probably be fatal.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The Hyrm Rebellion and the Insurrection of the Seven were responses to Ionius IX's attempts to centralize power. Unlike House Hyrm's attempts to leave the Empire from Ionius IX's rule, the Insurrection was successful and reduced Ionius IX to a powerless figurehead (think Part II Arvis) controlled by the nobles (Ferdinand's father, PM Duke Aegir, basically became de-facto ruler). Because he had virtually no power, he was unable to stop the Crest experimentation that would leave only one of his children (Edelgard) alive and well to take the throne (Lord Arundel was one of the nobles who spearheaded the Insurrection). 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
20 minutes ago, Humanoid said:

Eh, what would he be expected to do? Peacefully allow parts of the Empire secede? Now that would make him a terrible emperor, and possibly one of an empire that would shortly no longer exist. Showing weakness like that would probably be fatal.

Well, my question is if Ionius IX was actually a tyrant, rather than benevolent figure in Edelgard's perspective.

If we took Lysithea's words, it seems Ionius IX was overly brutal in suppressing rebellion since she claimed he had the whole family killed and had massive civilian exiled. He didn't sound like a very popular ruler in that perspective.

Edited by Timlugia

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
6 minutes ago, Timlugia said:

Well, my question is if Ionius IX was actually a tyrant, rather than benevolent figure in Edelgard's perspective.

If we took Lysithea's words, it seems Ionius IX was overly brutal in suppressing rebellion since she claimed he had the whole family killed and had massive civilian exiled.

Ionius IX had House Hyrm wiped out completely in the rebellion. He then punished House Ordelia for their role in the rebellion by having key members of Lysithea's family killed and replaced by figureheads for the Empire, effectively damaging Ordelia's power in the Alliance. However, unbeknownst to Ionius IX, the figureheads he put in power were secret members of TWSITD, and those members proceeded to experiment on House Ordelia's children. Lysithea's parents, like Ionius IX himself post-Insurrection, were powerless to stop the Crest experimentation. It's implied that House Ordelia's experimentation was done to make sure it could be done on the Empire's royal family later.

Edited by BZL8

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Whatever you want.  This is a fictional story, so having some wiggle room for personal interpretation is fine.  I'm not going to ban anyone solely for loving/hating him.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

While letting the stuff about his position out. He is a very pitiful character. He let the majority of his family getting killed in the most gruesome way without being able to do anything. What you see of him during El‘s route makes it quite easy to understand. He is the withered husk of a once great man who has lost everything and the only reason he is alive is for Edelgard.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

another case of three houses vage/up-to-interpretation writing.

methinks he was a bit of a cruel ruler at first, but getting experimented on made him more meek and forgiving

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

While Ionius did crush the Hyrm  revolt I think the brutal occupation was mostly the doing of Duke Aegir and Arundel. The fact that Hyrm was turned into Aegir's personal fiefdom suggest he awarded it to himself after bringing down Ionius. Those that Slither being involved in Ordelia further points to Aegir. We know Aegir was involved with them because Arundel was his partner and because he spearheaded the experiments on Edelgard. There is nothing to suggest Ionius and the Slitherers had any ties between each other so if Aegir owned Hyrm and if he had contacts with the Slitherers then I think the blame is more likely to fall on him instead of Ionius. 

I see Ionius as more of a victim. People like Hanneman and Ferdinant argue that his actions would have deprived the nobility of power but with the Fodlan nobility being so corrupt this doesn't seem a bad thing. The nobles Ionius was restricting were men like duke Aegir, Bernie's scumbag dad, Arundel and Hubert's treasonous father. The people that would have suffered from Ionius' reform were mostly terrible people and so his fall was probably quite tragic. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
15 minutes ago, Etrurian emperor said:

While Ionius did crush the Hyrm  revolt I think the brutal occupation was mostly the doing of Duke Aegir and Arundel. The fact that Hyrm was turned into Aegir's personal fiefdom suggest he awarded it to himself after bringing down Ionius. Those that Slither being involved in Ordelia further points to Aegir. We know Aegir was involved with them because Arundel was his partner and because he spearheaded the experiments on Edelgard. There is nothing to suggest Ionius and the Slitherers had any ties between each other so if Aegir owned Hyrm and if he had contacts with the Slitherers then I think the blame is more likely to fall on him instead of Ionius. 

I see Ionius as more of a victim. People like Hanneman and Ferdinant argue that his actions would have deprived the nobility of power but with the Fodlan nobility being so corrupt this doesn't seem a bad thing. The nobles Ionius was restricting were men like duke Aegir, Bernie's scumbag dad, Arundel and Hubert's treasonous father. The people that would have suffered from Ionius' reform were mostly terrible people and so his fall was probably quite tragic. 

But if I recall it right, wasn't Arundel not being body snatched until 1174? At least his change of personality and stopping donation was around that time.

The Hyrm revolution and repercussion was in 1167, and coup of noble was 1171, so I was thinking about responsible by the emperor rather than the nobles.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 minutes ago, Timlugia said:

But if I recall it right, wasn't Arundel not being body snatched until 1174? At least his change of personality and stopping donation was around that time.

The Hyrm revolution and repercussion was in 1167, and coup of noble was 1171, so I was thinking about responsible by the emperor rather than the nobles.

Its unknown exactly when Arundel was body snatched but according to the lore book on Adrestian noble houses he was always seen as a leading member of the conspiracy against Ionius. That could mean the real Arundel wanted to take over and was already quite evil or that he was already long dead at that point. 

Its possible that Ionius was doing some stuff in those years before his defeat but the mages were in Ordelia for a long time and Hyrm was under Aegir control for a long time too. So I personally think that Aegir and the Slitherers took over Hyrm and increased the severity of whatever punishment Ionius had already put in place. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

It's pretty much straight up told that the seven nobles' thing is orchestrated by Thales, we don't know exactly when he took Arundel's place (to be fair we don't even know if he IS actually a substitute, though it's heavily implied throughout the routes).

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

Sign in to follow this  

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.

×
×
  • Create New...