Jump to content

Thoughts on Daemon Blackfyre


Darkbringer

Recommended Posts

Having not read any of Dunk and Egg, I don't know much about the guy, but he seems pretty amazing. The rebellion seems pretty tragic overall, but alot of people had sympathy for his claim, it seems. From what I can gather, he was pretty unstoppable with Blackfyre in hand, and quite chivalrous in battle, to boot. From what I can gather it was his chivalry in battle, as well as Brynden's cunning, that led to his downfall. What are everyone's thoughts about him and his claim? Were the rumours about the parentage of Daemon warranted? I guess you could make the argument that it is never worth plunging the kingdoms into war, bit that seems to be the way with Targ successions. I have to say, I'm a big fan of the GC narrative, and the Blackfyre story in general. I would especially like to hear from any D&E readers on their thoughts if how he is portrayed.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

As stated, Daemon is already dead around the Dunk&Egg books. He does seem like a nice enough guy and a good potential king though so we should all support the Black Dragon. :)

Surely there are more references to him in those books though? How is he portrayed by the other characters when they discuss him?
Link to comment
Share on other sites

I'd like to think that Daemon was originally a decent guy, but I get the feeling that if we get more info on him, he'll turn out to be a massive douche before his supposed corruption.

Funny, before we had any real info on Aemond, I thought he was actually gonna be an upstanding who fought on his brother's side becuase the younger brother bows before the older. Couldn't have been anymore wrong.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Surely there are more references to him in those books though? How is he portrayed by the other characters when they discuss him?

Of course he is referenced quite a bit. In fact most of the stories have at least one Black Dragon loyalist whom Dunk and Egg end up somehow involved with, and the Wedding Knight well... you'll have to read that for yourself to find out. :) But in tried and true GRRM fashion we only get hearsay. People from Blackfyre side idealizing Daemon and saying how he'd been such a great king, where as people loyal to the Targaryens are demonizing him and claiming he was insane. Without an actual chance of seeing Daemon speak for himself we've really no way of knowing the truth.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Defeated men are always portrayed on a more "negative" way, yet from what we heard from him he was a great guy. One good Blackfyre doesnt mkae all the others good too btw, so i will wait more to judge fAegon, right now i am not convinced.

If he truly beleived Dearon was illegimate, or thought for sure he would be a great awesome history maker king that would bring long lasting peace on westeros, then alright go kill ppl all you want. but otherwise....

I think we need way more information to be sure.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Dunk & Egg I don't think really changed my opinion of him. If anything, it reinforced it. In the Hedge Knight, I loved Baelor, and as far as I was concerned, anyone who stood against his claim (e.g. Daemon) deserved to die a traitor's death. None of his supporters in the subsequent novels really dazzled me, either coming off as petty, stupid, incompetent, or douchey, or a combination of two or more of those. Except John the Fiddler, who I did kind of like even though he wasn't really leader material. Daemon was spoiled and self-entitled and his rebellion boiled down to him having a tantrum because he couldn't bang his girlfriend if she was in Dorne, forgetting the fact that he was married with 7 sons and at least a couple daughters. His supporters seemed to be for him mostly for the fact that he didn't know how to pick up a book anymore than they did. As for Daeron, I really believe he was Aegon's son, but it would serve Aegon right if he wasn't and it was Aemon's line that held the throne.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

PanCake, let's be fair. A great deal of his supporters (those who were in position to command, not the men at-arms) were for him because he was generous - he promised them lands and advancements from the spoil. Naturally, their overlords were against him, seeing his generosity as stealing - after all, he had to take those lands and elevated positions from somewhere. From said overlords, I mean,



Common soldiers could believe the tales of him being the Savior and cheer for their chivalrious king Daemon all they liked (is there a proof that they did, by the way?) but they wouldn't have supported him if their superiors had not told them to.


Link to comment
Share on other sites

A warrior-king is best suited for times of war. Westeros seems to be at war more oft than not. Daemon would have been a good king, IMO.

Westeros was at war because Aegon IV (the worst Targaryen king ever whose favourite Daemon was, what a glorious recommendation!) and Daemon himself spat all over Baelor I's, Viserys II's, and Daeron II's efforts to secure peace by starting wars.

At the time Daemon rebelled, Westeros was at peace and united (now Dorne included) literally for a very first time in its history. It didn't need a warrior king. Anyway, warrior wannabe king Daemon lost to warrior princes Baelor (a future warrior king when needed but unlike Daemon, preferring it peaceful) and Maekar, as well as warrior Bloodraven.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

People are so quick to accept a legitimized Jon Snow but so few accept that Daemon was legitimized by his father (the actual king of Westeros at the time).

Being legitimized is not the same as being in the line of succession though. That is important to remember as well.

Daemon Blackfyre himself seems to have been a decent guy. Charming and all that as well. He clashed several times with Daeron during Daerons reign, and ( I believe it was from an SSM ) he was heavily influenced by "councilors", who persuaded him to go to war.

Unfortunately, in the Dunk and Egg stories, the first Blackfyre Rebellion has been at least 12 to 13 years prior, so Daemon is long time dead by then. The World book, which us supposed to be released this year (though confirmation by GRRM still has not been given), will be a maesters account (much like the Princess and the Queen). So no Daemon POV, or a Bittersteel POV, I'm afraid.

I think he truth is, Daemons supporters, those who weren't only in it just to gain more power/wealth/lands idolized Daemon, and those who stayed loyal to the throne despised Daemon. Most likely, though, Daemon was something in between. A charming guy with councilors who persuaded him to go to war, in which they succeeded when Daeron refused Daemon to marry Daenerys. Also, I think it's highly possible that his mother Daena wasn't such a good influence on him either.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

A warrior-king is best suited for times of war. Westeros seems to be at war more oft than not. Daemon would have been a good king, IMO.

Maegor, Aegon IV and Robert were all warrior kings, and they were terrible. Westeros isn't always at war, there are times of peace lasting for decades, longer than the wars. Jaehaerys wasn't a warrior but a scholar, and he was the greatest king to ever sit the IT.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Maegor, Aegon IV and Robert were all warrior kings, and they were terrible. Westeros isn't always at war, there are times of peace lasting for decades, longer than the wars. Jaehaerys wasn't a warrior but a scholar, and he was the greatest king to ever sit the IT.

Daeron II wasn't a warrior either, nor was Aegon V, and both are considered good kings in hindsight. So yeah, the idea that "warrior" equates to good king doesn't always bear out.

I think Daemon is probably somewhere in between. I don't think he was a "bad" guy or a "good" guy. From what I've read about how he came to power, he actually seems more like a focal point for Westerosi lords who 1. wanted more power and influence for themselves and 2. were threatened by the Dornish. If Daemon gets flattered enough and praised and told how awesome he is and how Daeron is, like, so totally a bastard, then he can come to believe it. When actually he's no more than a pawn for lords looking out for themselves. He comes across as well-meaning but perhaps easily manipulated.

You could also say that Daemon lost and as such whether he was good or bad is irrelevant.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Maegor, Aegon IV and Robert were all warrior kings, and they were terrible. Westeros isn't always at war, there are times of peace lasting for decades, longer than the wars. Jaehaerys wasn't a warrior but a scholar, and he was the greatest king to ever sit the IT.

I think what he meant is there are kings effictive in time of war, as Robert, and other only good in times of peace. Robert was a weak king in time of peace, but no ones dared to oppose him either since he proved himself twice at war. Part of Jaeharerys peace was acheived because Maegor was so cruel, most of the people's hatred was directed toward him, and a big part of this hatred died with Maegor.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.

×
×
  • Create New...