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.

Given how you are Team Smallfolk 4 Life, how come you are Pro-Blackfyre in your essays. The blackfyres are representative of the Warrior Caste of Westeros and to a man are aristocratic snobs who opposed reform initiatives put forth by Daeron and resented the presence of philanthropic Dornishmen on the court?

It’s a fair cop, guv; I find the Blackfyres interesting in much the same reason that I find the Brackens interesting – they’re the unloved losers of historical conflicts and I’m curious as to what motivated them.

But I do want to push back on something: Daeron and Co. were not on Team Smallfolk.

Were there women in Daeron’s court? Yes, noblewomen. Were there Dornishmen? Yes, highborn Dornishmen. Did any of them care or understand about the smallfolk in the slightest regard? Ask Tansell Too-Tall.

To the extent that Daeron was a reformer, he was an elite reformer focused on questions of efficiency and honesty in administration, and the project of peacefully unifying Dorne under Targaryen rule. He was not Aegon V.

Anon Asks: Daeron II’s Dornish Deal

You have argued that Daeron pushed his deal with Dorne too hard and too fast, of whic I am in agreement with. If you were his counselor, what political advice would you give him regarding the deal?

As I’ve argued, Daeron’s main problem was that he negotiated a treaty which created the impression that the Dornish had gotten the better end of the deal, indeed, the marriage of Daenerys sort of implies that the Dornish won the war.

As with any sort of treaty, there are winners and losers, and Daeron’s mistake is that, by then filling his court with Dornishmen, he left the losers (the Marcher lords, the Reach, Aegon IV’s loyalists) from the treaty out in the cold and feeling alienated from the monarchy.

If I was his adviser, I would have urged him to try to sweeten the deal for the Westerosi, possibly by extending the same benefits that the Dornish got to the various Lords Paramount and some of the same benefits to the more important Lesser Houses. I would have also urged him to spread around royal patronage so that those who had lost out from the treaty and the end of the Dornish Wars would have been part of the administration – as the saying goes, better someone in the tent pissing out then outside the tent pissing in.

Moreover, given the issue of martial character, I would also have looked for some way to release the pent-up aggression of the nobility in a more controlled direction, to give them something to do besides feel resentful and bored. So look for minor wars – fight pirates on the Stepstones, help the North put down the Skagosi rebellion, send troops against Raymun Redbeard, sponsor mercenary companies to go fight in the Free CIties – and spend a chunk of the peace dividend on tourneys, so that the knights are distracted and happy.