Tag: house targaryen

I was surprised by your answer to a previous question, that Harrenhall would’ve made a good capital location for a Targaryen dynasty (sans curses) Can you elaborate on why? Were you suggesting it’s better spot than Kings Landing? Or just a good alternative? The only negative that came to me comparing the two is lack of ocean trade at Harrenhall.

My main issue with King’s Landing has to do more with Aegon’s decision to keep the Crownlands small, only absorbing a small part of the Riverlands and Stormlands, which had massive ramifications for the strength of the monarchy once the dragons died. To be fair, this involves a heavy dose of presentism, as Aegon had no idea that the dragons would die out.

However, Harrenhal does have some benefits: 

  1. It’s an already extant castle that’s big enough to hold the entire political class of the nation, and we know that there’s enough space there to hold “the fourth largest city of the kingdom.”
  2. It still has ocean trade via the Blackwater Rush, and if you built a relatively short canal, you could have access via the Trident as well. 
  3. It’s more centrally located, which means travel and communication between the capital city and major centers of power out in the provinces would be faster for the more northwestern half of the kingdom. That should also cut down on inter-kingdom conflict more, because it would be impossible to attack another Great House without going through them first.
  4. If the Riverlands plus Crownlands was the personal fiefdom of the monarchy, you’d deal with the weak monarchy and weak Riverlands problem, since royal government could ensure that the abundant natural resources of the region were fully utilized. 

Let’s say that one of Valarr Targaryen’s sons with Kiera of Tyrosh is born healthy instead of being stillborn, and that this son doesn’t later die in the Great Spring Sickness like his father. I would think this prince would be anywhere from an infant to a young child, depending on Valarr’s age and the timeline of the marriage with Kiera. When this child king ascends in 209 do you think Maekar manages to take the regency or does Bloodraven muscle his way in? What are the Blackfyres thinking?

goodqueenaly:

That’s a good question, but I think it’s a more complex one than simply “Maekar vs. Bloodraven”. After all, the last – only – time the Targaryen monarchy had a child on the throne, the regency was the subject of a Great Council decision, and rotated among quite a few individuals over the course of six years. Great lords (those who didn’t perish in the spring, at least) would want in on the regency action, especially with Valarr’s child, as the little prince would be no older than Aegon III when he succeeded, and probably a good deal younger (thus giving his regents a longer play at power). There would undoubtedly be quarrels between Bloodraven and Maekar over the regency and the position as Hand, but given Targaryen regency precedent and the distaste for both prime candidates (sorcerous bastard Bloodraven versus sullen and grim Maekar), I would think there would be an outcry from Westerosi lords about where their place was in ruling for the young prince.

Now, I can’t imagine Bittersteel would have ignored the political chaos in Westeros – a little child on the Iron Throne, his despised half-brother and the anvil of the Redgrass Field fighting with one another and the great lords for control of him, the country in shambles after the Great Spring Sickness. Daemon the Younger would have been about 20, more than capable as a pretender (especially against a mere child), but whether Bittersteel would have trusted dreamy, prophetic Daemon with the role of potential Blackfyre king, I’m not sure.

That would be an amazing scenario! 

One of the things I find quite curious about the post-Spring Sickness era is how little the Great Houses seem involved in royal politics – yes, the Starks and Lannisters are distracted by the Greyjoys, but no way in hell do the Dornish, Valemen, Stormlords, and Riverlords just have no presence. And all of that would feed into the Regency vs. Hand and Maekar vs. Bloodraven politicking: I like the idea of the Stormlords splitting between rival Valarr and Aerys factions; the Dornish theoretically being behind Maekar but not really grokking his vibe (least Dornish Dornishman ever?); the Blackwoods being the only ones who like Bloodraven sincerely, the Brackens supporting Maekar out of spite, and both of them staring daggers at Aegon V over what he did about Pennytree (obvs. the marriage hasn’t happened yet); and the Vale being staunchly pro-Valarr on traditionalist grounds and grudgingly pro-Maekar because Bloodraven is not their sort of chap, dontchewknow.

And of course you have to have Blackfyre shenanigans. I love the idea of Gormon Peake trying to politick his way onto the Council of Regents and the Handship as his ancestor did before him, only to have everyone who’s not a secret Blackfyre loyalist clambering over themselves to find someone else, anyone else. But definitely a lot of spoiler action, where the Blackfyre supporters are trying to divide House Targaryen against itself and prevent any form of united government, all the while loudly complaining about how the Targaryens are weak and Westeros needs a strong warrior king with a magic sword to save them hint hint. 

Hullo, I’m not sure if this was asked before, but here goes: do you think there is a reason as to why no one in Essos was able to hatch dragons while the Targaryens’ were still alive? We know that across the Narrow Sea a) dragonblood still runs strong 2) magic is much more common and less reviled than in Westeros and 3) dragon eggs are still extant, if exceedingly costly. I find it especially odd that no one in Qohor or Gogossos managed it, given the expertise of the latter two in bloodmagic…

1. Dragonblood and the Blood of Old Valyria not the same thing. Dragonriders were an elite within Valyrian society, and almost all of them died during the Doom and the rest not on Dragonstone died thereafter:

“The dragonlords had been gathered in Valyria as was their wont…except for Aenar Targaryen, his children, and his dragons, who had fled to Dragonstone and so escaped the Doom. Some accounts claim that a few others survived, too … for a time. It is said that some Valyrian dragonlords in Tyrosh and Lys were spared, but that in the immediate political upheaval following the Doom, they and their dragons were killed by the citizens of those Free Cities. The histories of Qohor likewise claim that a visiting dragonlord, Aurion, raised
forces from the Qohorik colonists and proclaimed himself the first Emperor of Valyria. He flew away on the back of his great dragon, with thirty thousand men following behind afoot, to lay claim to what remained of Valyria and to reestablish the Freehold. But neither Emperor Aurion nor his host were ever seen again.
The time of the dragons in Essos was at an end.
Volantis, the mightiest of the Free Cities, quickly laid claim to Valyria’s mantle. Men and women of noble Valyrian blood, though not dragonlords, called for war upon the other cities”

2. While magic was more common in the east, it was still less common than it had been. Hence the reports from Qohor of the return of magic with the dragons. 

3. While it’s true that dragon eggs exist, the ones that Dany got were not fresh viable eggs: “the eons have turned them to stone,” as Magister Illyrio says. He got them for her as hugely expensive curios, but it took an act of spontaneous magic which GRRM has described as a miracle to make them hatch.

As for the blood magic angle, I think it takes more than just that – remember, Dany didn’t know blood magic when she hatched the eggs, and it took not just lives but also her presence as a Targaryen and the convergence of the very cosmos. 

Something curious arising from your essay on thralldom. Do you think there was slavery on Dragonstone and at Driftmark? If so, when was it abandoned?

There was definitely slavery on Dragonstone, and likely at Driftmark as well:

“The Targaryens were of pure Valyrian blood, dragonlords of ancient lineage. Twelve years before the Doom of Valyria (114 BC), Aenar Targaryen sold his holdings in the Freehold and the Lands of the Long Summer and moved with all his wives, wealth, slaves, dragons, siblings, kin, and children to Dragonstone, a bleak island citadel beneath a smoking mountain in the narrow sea.”

In terms of when it was abolished…it seems to have happened fairly early on, because the description of the practice of first night on Dragonstone in P&Q wouldn’t make sense.

So if the Baratheon super genes overcome all others why aren’t Rhaenys, Laenor, Laena, and the grandkids all black haired and blue eyes? I find it hard to believe silver-purple phenotype is that different from blonde-green. The added incest can’t be used to explain it away since all of Robert’s bastards look like him no matter their mother. Any thoughts?

On a Doylist level, I think it’s GRRM being inconsistent. Sometimes Targaryen features seem to be recessive – as with Rhaenrya’s kids with Harwin Strong – and sometimes they seem less so. Baelor Breakspear and his children resembled Baelor’s Martell mother, but his brothers all had the Targaryen look; on the other hand, the Martells kept their look after Daenerys, the Baratheons kept their look after Rhaelle, and so forth. (Incidentally, in the text, only the Baratheon hair color is noted as being dominant, not the eyes.)

On a Watsonian level, I think Rhaenys got her coloration from her mother Jocelyn Baratheon’s Velaryon mother, which either skipped Boremund Baratheon or Boremund didn’t pass down to Borros, or Borros didn’t pass down to whoever followed him, since as far as I know he only had daughters. (Which, incidentally is a pretty major gap in our understanding of the Baratheon family tree…)

If the dragons truly were poisoned by the maesters, is it possibly that Aegon III may have supported them in this? He was said to have been terrified of the dragons, and after the civil war that left him an orphan, I can see him viewing the dragons as a cause for destruction.

I doubt it. Aegon III might have personally been afraid of dragons, but he understood that dracocracy had been the foundation of his House from the beginning. 

All the evidence we have points to Aegon going to some lengths to bring them back:

“Did we learn nothing…from the nine mages?”

“Nine mages crossed the sea to hatch Aegon the Third’s cache of eggs. Baelor the Blessed prayed over his for half a year. Aegon the Fourth built dragons of wood and iron. Aerion Brightflame drank wildfire to transform himself. The mages failed, King Baelor’s prayers went unanswered, the wooden dragons burned, and Prince Aerion died screaming.“

“Yet together, Aegon and Viserys ably dealt with the remaining turmoil in the realm…they even attempted to restore the Targaryen dragons, despite Aegon’s fears—for which none could blame him after witnessing his mother being eaten alive. He dreaded the sight of dragons—and had even less desire to ride upon one—but he was convinced that they would cow those who sought to oppose him. At Viserys’s suggestion, he sent away for nine mages from Essos, attempting to use their arts to kindle a clutch of eggs. This proved both a debacle and a failure.”

For me, it works much better for Aegon to be genuine in those efforts – it’s the politically smart thing to do, as without dragons the Targaryens were doomed to diminishment; narratively, it’s a great case of the human heart at war with itself. Aegon steeled himself to overcome his worst nightmare for the good of his family, and still failed. No wonder they called him the Broken.