Madness of Targaryens

[Attitude]

"I am no maester to quote history at you, Your Grace. Swords have been my life, not books. But every child knows that the Targaryens have always danced too close to madness. Your father was not the first. King Jaehaerys once told me that madness and greatness are two sides of the same coin. Every time a new Targaryen is born, he said, the gods toss the coin in the air and the world holds its breath to see how it will land."

I've recently started on reading awoiaf and I am close to finishing up the targaryen kings (still got Aerys II left, but I know enough about him). I remember Barristan saying that above to Dany and while I was reading I about the kings from Aegon I to Jaehaerys II, I felt that the odds were starting to change. I really felt that after several generations the chances of getting a mad targaryen increased. For my feeling this really started with Aegon IV. I am starting to mix up all the targs, but I really felt that from that point more and more siblings became described as being special. Most of them were crazy, but some also had other things that we didn't see in before in their bloodline. Aerion who drunk wildefire, Daeron the Drunk, Duncan who gave up the throne, and maybe even more. I really felt that the odds of getting crazy as a targaryen began to increase during time, because we didn't see that many crazy targaryens before that (or not that crazy).

How do you feel about this?

[Lord Varys]

My suggestion to this was that the Targaryens needed their dragons to remain stable or in good health. For instance, we learned that Prince Aenys was very sickly as a child but improved once he bonded with his dragon Quicksilver. More importantly, it is rather striking that there are no mad Targaryens of the Aerys II, Rhaegel, or Aerion type prior to the Dance. We only have Maegor the Cruel, who doesn't seem mad to me - only sadistic and cruel, but essentially sane (although he seems to have suffered some sort of breakdown in the end).

The afflictions of Daeron the Drunk, Rhaegel, Aerion, and Aerys II may very well have had the origins in the fact that they didn't have any dragons to bond with - Aerion certainly wouldn't have developed the delusion to be a dragon in human form had he had an actual dragon. And the same should be true for Aerys' fascination with (dragon) fire.

Prince Daemon Targaryen shows certain hints that he may have become 'a mad Targaryen' had his dragon not provided some stability for him. Even with his dragon, Daemon shows signs of a changeability somewhat similar to how Aerys' madness manifested itself in his youth. And one could, of course, extend this speculation to the causation of Baelor's mad piety (although his near-death experience would figure into that as well) and the Aegon the Unworthy's uncontrolled desires in the end of his reign.

On the contrary, we have no reports about mad Targaryens during from Aegon I up until the Dance. Rhaenys is somewhat changeable, too, but that's it. Aenys and all his children are fine (Rhaena, Aegon, Viserys, Jaehaerys, and Alysanne). We don't know anything bad about Rhaena's daughters by Aegon, and all the surviving nine children of Jaehaerys and Alysanne are fine, too. Princess Viserra was perhaps an adventurous girl, but nothing suggests she was mad. The four children who didn't survive may have been sick or misshapen (at least some of them) but nothing suggests that a madness killed them. Unfortunately we don't know anything about Viserys and Daemon's younger brother, Prince Aegon - so he could have been somewhat mad/eccentric if he lived, but we don't know that yet (my best guess is that he is the Ape Prince we heard about in ADwD).

[Attitude]

My suggestion to this was that the Targaryens needed their dragons to remain stable or in good health. For instance, we learned that Prince Aenys was very sickly as a child but improved once he bonded with his dragon Quicksilver. More importantly, it is rather striking that there are no mad Targaryens of the Aerys II, Rhaegel, or Aerion type prior to the Dance. We only have Maegor the Cruel, who doesn't seem mad to me - only sadistic and cruel, but essentially sane (although he seems to have suffered some sort of breakdown in the end).

The afflictions of Daeron the Drunk, Rhaegel, Aerion, and Aerys II may very well have had the origins in the fact that they didn't have any dragons to bond with - Aerion certainly wouldn't have developed the delusion to be a dragon in human form had he had an actual dragon. And the same should be true for Aerys' fascination with (dragon) fire.

Prince Daemon Targaryen shows certain hints that he may have become 'a mad Targaryen' had his dragon not provided some stability for him. Even with his dragon, Daemon shows signs of a changeability somewhat similar to how Aerys' madness manifested itself in his youth. And one could, of course, extend this speculation to the causation of Baelor's mad piety (although his near-death experience would figure into that as well) and the Aegon the Unworthy's uncontrolled desires in the end of his reign.

On the contrary, we have no reports about mad Targaryens during from Aegon I up until the Dance. Rhaenys is somewhat changeable, too, but that's it. Aenys and all his children are fine (Rhaena, Aegon, Viserys, Jaehaerys, and Alysanne). We don't know anything bad about Rhaena's daughters by Aegon, and all the surviving nine children of Jaehaerys and Alysanne are fine, too. Princess Viserra was perhaps an adventurous girl, but nothing suggests she was mad. The four children who didn't survive may have been sick or misshapen (at least some of them) but nothing suggests that a madness killed them. Unfortunately we don't know anything about Viserys and Daemon's younger brother, Prince Aegon - so he could have been somewhat mad/eccentric if he lived, but we don't know that yet (my best guess is that he is the Ape Prince we heard about in ADwD).

I can agree on the dragons part, but only partly. I mean, the last dragon died in 153 AC, but the dance (after which the dragons were almost extinct) was about 20 years before that. And the madness only started later on.

It might be related, but it doesn’t have to be. Reading through the book, I also feel that at some points the pressure of all the realm started making the latter kings mad, and somewhat passing that upon their children.

[Lord Varys]

Well, we don't know anything about the last Targaryen dragonriders. The last known dragonrider is Rhaena Targaryen, the half-sister of Aegon III and Viserys II whose dragon Morning hatched during the Dance. But Morning wasn't the last dragon to die - that was one of the two female dragons that hatched on Dragonstone and were stunted and crippled. Ser Arlan of Pennytree saw the last dragon a year before her death in KL.

It may actually be that Viserys II or one of his children (Aegon the Unworthy or Aemon the Dragonknight) - perhaps even young Daeron I or Baelor I had bonded with one of the last dragon hatching during the reign of Aegon III. The Dance ended in 131 AC, but the last dragon only died in 153 AC, and we simply don't know how much dragons (most likely stunted and crippled creatures like the last two dragons) hatched during this time. We only know how many dragons survived the Dance, but not how many dragons hatched before the last dragon died. Morning most likely would have died during Rhaena's lifetime and never had another rider, Silverwing became wild after the Dance and settled on an island on Red Lake - she may have been slain as wild dragon without ever becoming a rider again, Sheepstealer went with Nettles to the Mountains of the Moon and eventually seems to have died there (as neither the dragon nor his rider ever returned to court or castle), and the fate of the Cannibal is huge question mark. That dragon may only believed to be dead, as he was never mounted during his life time. If somebody had slain him I imagine we would know about that as he would have left a rather huge carcass...

In that sense, the lack of the dragons may only have been felt by the generation after the last dragon died - that is, partially in Baelor and Aegon the Unworthy, and then fully in the children and grandchildren of Daeron II. Not all seem to have been afflicted by that - Daeron II was a great and sane man, as was Baelor Breakspear. Daemon Blackfyre also does not show any sign of madness, and neither did those sons of his we met (essentially only Daemon II).

But the loss of the dragons clearly didn't help those Targaryens who were already unstable. We don't yet know if Rhaegel's madness had also something to do with dragon stuff - as did Aerion's and Daeron's issues - but I'd not be surprised if that was the case. And even the stable Targaryens - like Aegon V - were eventually brought down by their dragon dreams.

[Attitude]

But the loss of the dragons clearly didn't help those Targaryens who were already unstable. We don't yet know if Rhaegel's madness had also something to do with dragon stuff - as did Aerion's and Daeron's issues - but I'd not be surprised if that was the case. And even the stable Targaryens - like Aegon V - were eventually brought down by their dragon dreams.

Noticing two events happening at the same time, doesn't mean they are related. Yes it does seem that (some time) after the dead of the last dragon the madness became a bigger problem, but that doesn't mean these two events are related. And the fact that some Targs were eventualy brought down by their dragon dreams, doesn't mean it is related either. If you were crazy like some targs and you knew that your (close) ancestors had dragons, you might have done the same. But that doesn't mean that you did it because you don't have a dragon.

I don't say they aren't related, but it isn't very clear that they are related either.

[Attitude]

Sorry, double post!

[Alester Florent]

Noticing two events happening at the same time, doesn't mean they are related. Yes it does seem that (some time) after the dead of the last dragon the madness became a bigger problem, but that doesn't mean these two events are related. And the fact that some Targs were eventualy brought down by their dragon dreams, doesn't mean it is related either. If you were crazy like some targs and you knew that your (close) ancestors had dragons, you might have done the same. But that doesn't mean that you did it because you don't have a dragon.

I don't say they aren't related, but it isn't very clear that they are related either.

I think the best thing we have to go on there is the business with Aenys: bonding with a dragon seems to have a curative/palliative effect on him, and all future Targaryens descend from him. That the madness kicks in after the dragons go might conceivably be just a natural madness that gets expressed in dragon format because of their association with dragons, but there seems to be a magical component to the madness in at least two cases: both Daeron the drunkard and Daemon II Blackfyre pick up a kind of prophetic ability with their "dragon dreams". There's Bloodraven too, although that might be a First Men thing rather than a Targaryen thing.

It is a good catch though that the madness only seems to occur after the disappearance of the dragons, and arguably the whole great/mad dichotomy dates from that point too (although there were still a fair few nonentities). The only really debatably mad Targaryens prior to the Dance were Maegor and Aemond, and in the latter case at least I think it's more just their being a jerkwad. (Maegor probably was mad, but likely because of the clout on the head rather than any other factor). After the Dance the madness starts to become much more expressive.

Having said that, perhaps it would be worth looking at it another way: what if it isn't a dragon-related Targaryen madness at all, but something that got into the Targ bloodline from elsewhere and was then exacerbated through the incest.

Since the madness appears to affect both Targaryens and Blackfyres equally it would have to have got into the family before Aegon IV - and therefore we can write the Martells off as suspects. The two candidates we're really looking at, then, are the Arryns (via Rhaenyra) and Larra Rogare, as they were the only external marriages made from which the rest of the Targ dynasty descends. The latter seems the more promising of the suspects, as we know very little about her or her family, while the Arryns appear to have been fairly stable. A later injection of madness also makes a little more sense, as otherwise we'd expect to see some trace of it among Rhaenyra's other descendants - that said, it could be argued Baelor was a bit nuts.

[Lord Varys]

Well, it is only a hypothesis, of course. But with our knowledge of the Targaryen family tree incest certainly did not cause the madness as this custom would have been much prevalent back on Dragonstone and in Valyira then it was after the Dance (the Targaryen main branch had only practised incest and cousin marriage from Aegon I to Aegon III). And although we don't know how closely related Jena Dondarrion and Aelinor Penrose were to the male branch of House Targaryen (my theory is that both are descended from a/the same daughter of Rhaena Targaryen by Garmund Hightower) we can be reasonably sure that Mariah Martell and Betha Blackwood did not have any Targaryen blood at all (and Dyanna Dayne possibly, too, although I'm less sure about her) resulting in the infusion of new blood which should have kept the madness at bay if it was caused by the incest - but this is clearly not the case.

But then, we don't really know what sort of madness(es) troubled the Targaryens. My take on the dragon thing is that bonding with a dragon could have helped prevent certain health issues (Aenys overcoming his weakness/sickness after bonding with Quicksilver could be a sign that Jaehaerys II's physical health could also have improved if he had had a dragon) as well as mental problems involving dragons. I see the Aerion-type delusion (I am a dragon in human form and drinking wildfire is going to transform me) and the peak of Aerys II's madness involving dragons (Burning down KL with wildfire will transform me in a living dragon) as similar symptoms of the same affliction - which could be that the 'blood of the dragon' is calling out to a real dragon, and, failing to connect with a dragon, the results are madness and delusions.

I'm not sure if this covers all forms of Targaryen madness. For instance, Rhaegel pranced naked through the Red Keep - I'm not sure how this is related to dragon stuff, but it could be.

I think we have to separate dragon madness (Aerion; Aerys II) from dragon dreams of the type of Daeron the Drunk and Daemon the Younger. These two had prophetic dreams like Daenys the Dreamer had back in Valyria, and such dreams seem to be a recurring trait in the Targaryen bloodline regardless whether they are dragonriders or not. Daemon II wasn't mad at all, in my opinion, just overconfident. And Daeron the Drunk wasn't mad, either, at least not the version of him we got to know in THK. However, he cannot really cope with the contents and implications of his dreams - perhaps a dragon would have helped him with that, too (if dragons generally improved Targaryen health Daeron may have been more stable with a dragon).

If Maegor was mad then Yandel actually gives us another explanation how he grew mad - it was the fact that he could only father monstrous children. And in that Maegor is actually strangely aligned with Aerys II his struggle to produce heirs clearly also took a major toll on his sanity, and there seems to be only a gradual difference between Aerys' decision to execute the mistress he believed poisoned/murdered his son, and Maegor's decision to execute Alys, her father, and every other Harroway he could find. Aerys snapped out of that again, and then made his walk of atonement, but Maegor - being cruel and sadistic anyway - probably didn't regret anything.

Aemond does not appear to be mad at all. He was merely very rush and possibly the stupidest Targaryen in history. He actually seems to resemble his rash and dashing uncle Daemon a lot, although that's not really discussed anywhere. When Daemon grew older he became more experienced and cautious, especially as he actually conducted a war and fought battles on the Stepstones, while Aemond clearly lacked both experience and intelligence to successfully conduct a war. It is really breathtaking how the rider of the biggest dragon alive failed to make any strategic use of it throughout the entire Dance.

[The hairy bear]

My suggestion to this was that the Targaryens needed their dragons to remain stable or in good health. For instance, we learned that Prince Aenys was very sickly as a child but improved once he bonded with his dragon Quicksilver. More importantly, it is rather striking that there are no mad Targaryens of the Aerys II, Rhaegel, or Aerion type prior to the Dance. We only have Maegor the Cruel, who doesn't seem mad to me - only sadistic and cruel, but essentially sane (although he seems to have suffered some sort of breakdown in the end).

Princess Gael, the last son of Jaeharys and Alysanne, is described as "simple minded and sweet". It's very similar to how Prince Rhaegel is described.

IMHO the issue of Targaryen "madness" is overstated. Maegor was just ruthless and ambitious. Prince Daeron was just a lazy repressed drunk. Gael and Rhaegel only had some kind of intellectual disability, and Aerys II had a severe case of paranoia.

I don't think that we need to look for hidden explanations for the reasons of those kinds of behaviours. In fact, if you take any European family as big as extensive as the Targaryens for three hundred years you are likely to find a similar amount of "madness". It's worth noting that Aerys II and Maegor I are based, respectively, on Henry VI and Henry VIII of England. And staying with the British monarchy, five of the queen's cousins were closed in a mental asylum. No need of dragon deprivation to explain it.

[Lord Varys]

Well, it has yet to be revealed whether Rhaegel is actually mentally-challenged. We only know that he was a very amiable fellow - more liked than sane Prince Maekar, according to Raymun Fossoway - and somewhat mad.

I'd agree that Maegor wasn't all that mad, but Yandel claims that his monstrous children really took a great toll on him - which is quite similar to Aerys' descent into full-fledged madness. And the shell of a man Maegor is in the end strongly suggests that he had some mental issues.

I agree that the whole idea of royal madness is a well-known fact in history in pretty much every European dynasty, however the Targaryens' dragon dreams and rather specific mad ideas make it likely that there is something more to it than 'normal madness'.

[Mithras]

I do not buy dragons as mental stabilizers theory at all. On the contrary, dragons should destabilize people who lack spiritual integrity.

Other beasts were best left alone, the hunter had declared. Cats were vain and cruel, always ready to turn on you. Elk and deer were prey; wear their skins too long, and even the bravest man became a coward. Bears, boars, badgers, weasels … Haggon did not hold with such. “Some skins you never want to wear, boy. You won’t like what you’d become.” Birds were the worst, to hear him tell it. “Men were not meant to leave the earth. Spend too much time in the clouds and you never want to come back down again. I know skinchangers who’ve tried hawks, owls, ravens. Even in their own skins, they sit moony, staring up at the bloody blue.”

Dragons should be big NO according to Haggon.

[Lord Varys]

Well, but this has nothing to do with the dragon bond thing. The assumption is that Targaryens are part-dragon, and their dragon-half, 'the blood of the dragon' sort of wants to bond with a real dragon, and the Targaryen in question is only complete or whole if he is with a dragon.

Skinchangers, on the other hand, have a magical talent that can take the better of them. But they aren't lacking anything when they do not bond with a specific animal. And it is also clear that skinchangers merge souls with their animals - the beast becomes partly human while the human becomes partly beast. The dragonlords and their (pure-blooded) descendants may actually be born in such twisted way - that is, inheriting 'dragon qualities' or 'dragon traits' from their parents who urge them to bond with a dragon. Just as an experience warg or skinchanger will try to replace any animal he has lost with another of the same species to feel whole or complete again.

[LmL]

Lord Varys said:

But then, we don't really know what sort of madness(es) troubled the Targaryens. My take on the dragon thing is that bonding with a dragon could have helped prevent certain health issues (Aenys overcoming his weakness/sickness after bonding with Quicksilver could be a sign that Jaehaerys II's physical health could also have improved if he had had a dragon) as well as mental problems involving dragons. I see the Aerion-type delusion (I am a dragon in human form and drinking wildfire is going to transform me) and the peak of Aerys II's madness involving dragons (Burning down KL with wildfire will transform me in a living dragon) as similar symptoms of the same affliction - which could be that the 'blood of the dragon' is calling out to a real dragon, and, failing to connect with a dragon, the results are madness and delusions.

I tend to agree with this, at least, it make sense to me. They have a bit of dragon blood, and even Targs who have never seen dragons like maester Aemon can see them in their dreams and even waking visions. The blood is calling out. So yes, this idea fits - the desire to bond with dragons leads to strange ideas about fire and such if no dragon is available.

I agree Maegor wasn't insane like Aerys. Sadistic and violent, but not illogical. It's always sketchy playing armchair psych to a fictional character, but we are supposed to think about this "Targaryen madness," so there it is.

[Anath]

I find a kind of weird symbolics in the time of the last dragon's death and the time of Daeron II's birth. He was born in the last day of the year that saw the death of the last dragon and he led the realm in an entirely new direction that still led to power and prosperity. His state of mind was in no way hindered by the lack of a dragon to bond with. In a way, he had to rely on his own merits. What he had within him had to suffice because well, there was no help in dragon form. Fortunately, it did suffice and for a while, it looked like the Targaryens didn't need dragons all that much to keep their rule stable. They probably didn't need them to be better rulers (the Seven know that having the biggest dragon didn't turn Maegor or Aemond into shining beacons of enlightened leaders).

Daeron the Drunken, though, might have been helped by a dragon in the way Aenys was. Perhaps it had something to do with improving various aspects of health that were compomised. The same might be true about Aerys II and perhaps even Aegon V if he had indeed become obsessed with the ideas of returning the dragons because I see their flaws as flaws in health, rather than character. By the same token, it was probably a good thing Aerion never got his hands of a dragon because with what we've seen of his character this far, he would have pulled an Aemond and taken many others with him as he raced towards his death.

So why wasn't Daeron II born on the first day of the first year after the death of the last stunted dragon? If someone was a good king without a dragon, I think that was him. I think it's meant to show that at the end, the Targaryens are linked to their dragons in a way that no level of intelligence, dedication, martial ability (Baelor, Maekar, anyone?) and being well-liked (Rhaegel?) can make up for. But the dragon times could not be forcefully brought back to life either, which is why Westeros ended up in its current mess.

ETA: I don't remember Princess Gael described as mad while Rhaegel was. She rather reminded me of Jaehaera, Aegon II's daughter. Generally, I doubt that someone who was mentally challenged, simple-minded, or whatever could ever be popular with the masses which Rhaegel seems to have been. They might be doted on by their parents but not the smallfolk. IIRC, Rhaegel is called gentle and touched by madness.

[Lord Varys]

Anath,

yeah, the symbolism about the death of the dragons and Daeron II is there. However, Viserys II was born in the dragon age, never had a dragon as far as we know, but still ended up to be a great guy.

I never meant to say that dragons are necessary for Targaryen greatness/sanity - just that they could have helped those who had issues, and that their presence may have prevented the development of some nutcases.

But I'd say that especially Aerion could have been helped by a dragon. The core of his delusions seems to be this 'I'm literally a dragon (in human form)' thing. Sure, he had also sadistic tendencies but the core of his narcissism seems to be that delusion. He takes on Hardyng the way he does because he thinks he is a dragon who can do whatever the hell he wants, and he is attacking Senelle the way he does because he feels personally insulted and threatened by her play depicting a common man slaying a dragon. I simply don't think such a delusion would have developed in him had he had a dragon since childhood.

Yeah, Gael is not described as mad. Unfortunately we don't know how simple she was. Just a little bit naive or severely mentally-challenged? I'd think the former as that singer may not have tried to seduce a woman who was severely mentally disabled. Jaehaera seems to have been autistic/severely mentally challenged, and about Vaella the Simple we simply have no idea.

[The Dragons Hand]

I've always figured that Targaryen madness is overblown.

The idea that the dragons would stabilize a Targaryen's temperament is interesting. I'm uncertain about it though. Namely because of Maegor with a little bit of Aemond.

Seven Targaryen's are mentioned as being mad on the Wiki.

Aerys II (Obviously)

Maegor I

Aerion Brightflame

Aemond One-Eye

King Viserys Cart-King

Befuddled Baelor

Rhaegal Targaryen

No one denies Aerys was mad, his insanity was only exacerbated by Duskendale, he would've gotten there eventually if he had lived long enough.

Maegor was allegedly conceived with dark magic, I haven't a clue how true that is.

Aerion was pretty assholish and if not for the manner of his death you could leave it there. A messiah complex seems like the fatal instrument of madness here. Or maybe he just mistook his dreams? There isn't a real way to tell what's a regular dream and what's a dragon dream.

I'm honestly not so clear on what made Aemond seem so mad, he just seemed to be a spectacular asshole.

Viserys was pushed into madness, that's not a Targaryen exclusive thing, anyone could've done so in his shoes. Barristan claims he noticed "Signs" with Viserys but something AppleMartini said once has made me doubtful of the validity of that.

Baelor is usually known as one of the better Targaryen Kings, his madness apparently being set in by his not-so-fun snake-taming lesson in Dorne, which is not Targaryen exclusive.

Rhaegal was simply simple and occasionally he danced around naked in the Red Keep, kinda harmless.

Targaryen's mentioned around the time of the mad ones are Lord Daemon Fleabottom and Helaena Targaryen. I do agree that Daemon is at least within sight of the line between insanity and greatness, but is probably on the greatness side. When I think of Theon "The Hungry Wolf" Stark, I think of a slightly toned down Daemon. It's Helaena's being mentioned that cast a lot of doubt onto the concept of Targaryen madness in the first place. (At least for me) Because, you know, having one of your children murdered in front of you and knowing you're the one who picked which child died might depress you. And committing suicide after that is pretty understandable. It's worth mentioning that both of them lived during the Dance of the Dragons, although I think it's pretty clear the affects of the war were felt more profoundly upon Helaena than Daemon.

Truly mad: Maegor, Aerys, Aerion 70%

Just an asshole: Aerion 30%, Aemond

A dash of madness added to a bad initial personality: Daemon

Insanity through circumstance: Viserys, Baelor

"How does that even count as insanity": Helaena, Rhaegal

Maybe I'm just biased because my favorite character is a Targaryen, but my fondness of Theon and Asha hasn't stopped me from hating the rest of the Greyjoy's, (And that entire culture for that matter) Plus it is entirely possible there are many more mad Targaryen's that haven't been mentioned.

[Anath]

Lord Varys, I do agree with your point about dragons being something like a (quite roaring!) cure. I am not sure I entirely disagree with your point about Aerion, although I do not entirely agree either. I guess our differences lie in the way we interpret nuances and at this point, we don't know enough about nuances to be sure of anything.

I agree with your point about Viserys II. In fact, it dovetails nicely with my point about Daeron. Truly great leaders did not need dragons because they were great by the virtues of their character. But dragons are so entwined with the history of the Targaryen dynasty that the House needed them because no line consists of talented individuals like Viserys and Daeron alone. In fact, I'm reminded of the whispers about "the Strong boys" and how their eggs wouldn't hatch. They did. But Viserys' never hatched. I see this as a parallel to Daeron's circumstances - they were both talented individuals haunted by this apparent bad luck that somehow missed to catch up with them. But people who were not as gifted and were haunted by this perpetual bad luck? They didn't fare so well and yes, I include madness as one of that circumstances that might have been changed by the availability of dragons.

[Jak Scaletongue]

Truly mad: Maegor, Aerys, Aerion 70%

Just an asshole: Aerion 30%, Aemond

A dash of madness added to a bad initial personality: Daemon

Insanity through circumstance: Viserys, Baelor

"How does that even count as insanity": Helaena, Rhaegal

I liked your whole post, you make some good points. I agree with most of it, but I think I'd put Maegor in a category all on his own! "Psychopath" gets thrown out a lot, but I think Maegor is one of the few characters who could actually fit into a Real Life diagnoses for pychopathy or sociopathy! At any rate, he's some combination of sadistic, paranoid, cruel, asshole, and sorceror - but I don't think he was "mad" exactly, I think everything he did was a rational decision with some amount of forethought (probably enough forethought to determine the cruelest course of action). Well, maybe not *everything* was a rational decision, but a good chunk of it. I suppose even rational people lose their tempers once in a while! And I'd probably give Aerion a bit more asshole, little less truly mad - but only by about 5-10%!

It hadn't actually struck me how the dragons could maybe aid with the "Targ madness." Maybe there's some hope for Dany - I don't think she is mad, and I don't want her to become mad. But she is a girl in her mid-teens - madness or not, there's certainly going to be some mood-swings!

[Lord Varys]

Anath,

well, we don't know anything about any short-lived potential dragonriders or dragonbonders during the reign of Aegon III. Viserys could actually have gotten a hatchling eventually if some eggs were still hatching during up into the 150s. Considering Aegon's trust in Viserys and his own loathing of the creatures Viserys would have been the king's first candidate to get a new hatchling. And considering that Viserys' children were all born in the 130s it is also not impossible that some or all of them had at least some (crippled?) hatchlings from the eggs that would have been given to them in their childhood.

But generally I agree that nothing suggests that you have to be a dragon to be sane or great. But I'd say that there is also pretty much no difference in the greatness of Jaehaerys I and Daeron II - only that the latter lacked dragons and most likely faced rebellions because of that, while nobody dared to challenge Jaehaerys I because he had dragons. In that sense I'd not think that the post-dragon age changed all that much. The whole Dornish marriage idea wasn't Daeron's original idea, after all.

Maegor:

It seems as if Maegor had some sort of mad breakdown at the end of his reign, and it is stated that his monstrous children more or less drove him mad - but it does indeed not seem as if he was mad in the same way as Aerys II or Rhaegel.

[Jono of Oldtown]

The Targ kids born after the Dance are all seriously messed up.

Daeron invaded Dorne because... well just because. And was likely only sucseful because of Viserys and Alan Oakenfist who managed the goverment/war effort respectivly.

His little brother Baelor might have been the worst king ever if not for Viserys.

Aegon had no disipline and just did whatever he could his whole life.

Aemon was very noble and all but I wouldnt say he was a well rounded human being.

Naerys, I just feel so sorry for her.

I dont know if this was because Aegon II and Viserys II ended up as such damaged people and these kids grew up without there mums that caused this or if it was the magic of dragons dying during there lifetime. But not until Daeron II do we have another normal and (relativly) happy Targ. Every single member of house Targaryen was angry/sad/weird during this 15(?) year period.

I had never considered who the last two hatchlings belonged to until now but considering that Viserys kids were almost 10 years older than Aegon III's does that mean the last living dragon was owned by Aegon the unworthy? Maybe?