It’s weird that Aegon II is considered the victor of the Dance of Dragons (e.g. he’s listed as the 6th king, Stannis considers Rhaenyra a traitor, and it reinforces the idea that the Iron Throne can never go to a woman) when (1) Rhaenyra’s army won and (2) the succession actually ended up going through Rhaenyra, and not at all through Aegon II.

In the heat of debate over Rhaenrya, people keep forgetting that Aegon III was the son of Daemon Targaryen, younger brother of Viserys I, uncle of Aegon II, and son of Baelon Targaryen the chosen line of descent by the Great Council of 101. Since Aegon’s sons were dead by the end of the Dance, under the legal precedent that he himself had based his claim to the throne on, his rightful heir became the eldest surviving son of his brother (yes, Daemon died at the Godseye, but the principle that the heir of the heir inherits had also been established at 101).

It was a lucky accident that the Dance ended in such a way that both sides could think they had won: the blacks could be happy that Aegon II was dead and that Aegon III was king, but the greens could console themselves that the legal principle of Salic Law from the Great Council had been upheld. After all, if the Dance had established that women could inherit, Aegon II had a daughter left alive (who was carefully betrothed to Aegon III to prevent that sort of thing causing trouble), and Daemon had two daughters who were older than Aegon III. (While we’re at it, it is interesting that GRRM has the Dance wipe out all three of the “strong” Velaryon boys so that Aegon would be the one to inherit)

At the end of the day, then, I think it calls into question how much those victorious armies were Rhaenrya’s, if they were so cheerfully willing to strike her name from the roll of monarchs (which was probably all to their advantage, given how hated Rhaenrya was after her brutal occupation of King’s Landing led to the storming of the Dragonpit) and abandon the cause she had given her life for, or whether by that point they were fighting for vengeance and to overthrow the green faction and replace them in the halls of power.

Some time ago, you theorized that Bittersteel could’ve conquered the Disputed Lands, as well as Myr, Tyrosh, and Lys. Do you think Daemon Targaryen would have been able to do that? He didn’t have a disciplined army like the Golden Company, but he had a dragon and a powerful fleet under the command of Corlys Velaryon.

Taking Myr, Tyrosh, Lys, and the Disputed Lands would be a prolonged affair – in addition to the naval campaign necessary to knock out their fleets, and the land campaign against the free companies they’re going to hire, the cities themselves will involve three major sieges, all of which are going to require siege works on land and a naval blockade to cut off the cities from resupply and reinforcement. And that’s assuming that everyone else – Braavos, Pentos, Volantis, etc. – stays out of it.

I don’t think Daemon himself had the discipline for it – as we saw with the Stepstones, Daemon doesn’t have the patience for sticking it out for a whole campaign, and other than Corlys, didn’t seem to have anyone around him capable of leading in his absence.

So while he’d definitely enjoy some early successes, I think he’d lose interest a year in, and then the war effort would completely collapse in his absence.

Ioseff: Hi, me again, one thing that was misunderstood

I didn’t mean why Daemon Targaryen was a bad person, that, as you exposed long time ago, is quite obvious. What I meant is how was he developed into such an awful person?

For example, we pretty much know Joffrey’s background, how Cersei encouraged him to think himself higher than anybody as Targaryens thought themselves higher than anyone (in a suicidical way, not like others), and how she herself thought so high that she would threaten the wetnurse, and other things, all because Tywin promised her from little to make her even more than Lannister, to make her Targaryen.

So, I hoped that you could provide some insight in how Daemon the Mocker of newborn’s corpses came to be this person. His brother was a “happy go-by” boy, why was Daemon so warlike and even deranged (even though equally charming and “sociable”)?

I see what you mean. I don’t know if there’s a straightforward answer. We know that “In his youth, Daemon Targaryen’s face and laugh were familiar to every cut-purse, whore, and gambler in Flea Bottom,” so clearly he liked to slum it to ward off boredom and enjoyed breaking social mores. We know that during the Council of 101, Daemon assembled a private army to fight it out if the Council didn’t name Viserys (and thus making him the heir to the throne).

I don’t think this is a case of nurture beating out nature – rather, I think Daemon was always temperamentally aggressive and an adrenaline junkie and never burdened much by a sense of conscience.