Was Daeron I right in invading Dorne?

[The Grey Wolf]

21 minutes ago, Lord Varys said:

@The Grey Wolf

Text

I would have a hard-time believing that Dorne didn't suffer heavily because of Daeron's conquest. I can get that the initial conquest killed relatively few but if the occupation force lost 50,000 men shouldn't Dorne have, by the end, suffered heavy reprisal from the remaining forces before Lord Lyonel and Daeron were both murdered.

As to your second point, maybe the Lannisters didn't think or didn't want to risk going it solo, especially not when their immediate land neighbors, the Riverlands, and the Reach, were firmly in the Targaryeyns pocket and their neighbor by sea are the Iron Isles, which would never ally with the Westerlands and were licking their wounds probably. As for the North, yeah, that is strange, especially when it says in the TWOIAF that Aegon's last progress included Winterfell, which means none of his other progresses ever went north of the Neck, which means Torhen Stark must have been an ever greater badass for keeping his bannermen and his sons in line through sheer personality alone. (Here's a thought, maybe he was succeeded by a grandson, who he raised not to be stubbornly stupid like his sons.)

On dragonslaying, to me it would make most sense then if Meraxes landed to destroy the Helholt, probably within it because the one-in-a-million fluke of hitting the dragon while its in the air is too much in my mind. Seriously, at the Field of Fire 55,000 men were gathered and Visenya only took an arrow to the shoulder (she must have been flying pretty low).

On Rhaenys: Even if she was the best rider she was also the best diplomat of the three and Aegon as well as Visenya were both more martial (and probably cautious). Not to mention she was his favorite sister-wife and the mother of his at-the-time only child! Seriously, how he could have let her go into an active war-zone baffles me. Especially when Aegon had no idea that Visenya would conceive and indeed, depending on your views of Aegon as well as Visenya's fertility (or lack thereof, I know you're proponent of Aegon at the very least not being) and Maegor's conception, she may never have conceived even!    

Finally, one question since I really enjoy your elaborate what-if explanations: What do you think would have happened had Rhaenys been killed at the beginning of the First Dornish War rather than in the middle of it?

[Thersites]

3 hours ago, The Grey Wolf said:

Text

First: I must apologise for not expressing my reasoning better in my first post. My fault for leaving things out.
  If we accept the premise that Westeros remained more or less the same from the Conquest onwards I agree that unification makes no sense whatsoever. Looking at 6 kingdoms, some achnowledging the rule of the Iron Throne while a dragon is looking their way, and the rest in open rebellion is not particularly encouraging for that line of thought.

  However, I am making the assumption that by the time of Daeron I the results of more than a century of infrastructure, and measures to take full advantage of it, are making themselves evident. There are benefits in unification now that were nonexistant at the time of for example Aenys I, nor were they certain to appear.
  In contrast, now there are 6 kingdoms advancing themselves through both having more resources than those required for immediate survival and utilising those resources to achieve economic growth in a much more efficient way than before. The former was in place before the conquest, the latter is a new development that occurred gradually. It is in place now however, with 6 kingdoms reaping the rewards-and Dorne ain't one of them. Nor is it certain that should the difference in economic growth become more pronounced Dorne won't be facing worse odds further down the line.
  I think it is safe to assume that the above is true during the reign of Daeron II. Otherwise there would be no more reason for Dorne to come into the realm than there was during Aegon I (And no, “Hey Maron, you swear fealty to me and I'll bang your daughter, how about that?” doesn't count for a reason on its own). And if it was true, then it must have been true during Daeron I in more or less the same degree (the intervening period wasn't much to write home about in terms of advancing the realm's productive capabilities).
Concerning the marriages, they cement alliances that already have a material basis, otherwise there is no point. And even then, a couple of girls come to mind who would be better off in Dorne than in the Maidenvault...

  Second, about the concessions, in my opinion they are gestures for the Martells to save face and prevent internal dissension. Having your own tax collectors as long as the tax is paid and keeping your own laws, which do not differ in any matter concerning non-Dornishmen as far as we know? Unless accompanied by something substantial, that seems like just keeping up appearances. Not to mention that they don't affect negatively anyone else in any way, no lands to grant, no money to pay, no works to undertake, no wars to fight.
  About the Blackfyre rebellion, there were more factors at work. Aegon IV had people eating through the royal treasury as fast as the muscles in their jaws allowed. Then Daeron II came along and took the candy away, but even before that the situation was pretty much unsustainable. The income had to come from somewhere, and therefore someone had to get shafted, with Dorne an obvious target. Enter Daeron I, with none of the privileges Aegon IV bestowed in place, therefore no one fighting for retaining them, and no figurehead for a rebellion all but endorsed by his predecessor. To his great disappointment no one would bat an eyelid, and once more he'd be deprived of a war. (Not to mention that people would read his book, “The Conquest of Dorne; or, That Stupid Thing I Almost Did Before I Came To My Senses” and conclude “better send a box of lemon cakes with this year's taxes to King's Landing, dude is frigging scary)
  I don't doubt for a minute that the other kingdoms would push for preferential treatment for their own, and harsher terms for the dornish. As was happening all along between all of them. My guess is that soon enough it would prove to be a larger concern how to employ these newfound opportunities against an immediate rival than worrying about a kingdom poorer, with less military stregnth, and no time to forge alliances.

  And I don't claim Daeron I wanted to destroy dornish culture. Only that he wouldn't have Dornish law still applying in Dorne (a concession of Daeron II, with no indication of being the intent of any prior Targaryen king to grant).

  Judged according to how much it created an environment in wich society could progress, whether it was his intention or not, it was still wrong. Judged according to how much it contributing to bettering his position, you don't get much worse than your army decimated and you pushing up the daisies. And judged according to my own views, the obvious answer for the obvious reasons.

  Just my personal opinion, and with quite a lot of guesswork (in my defense often necessary for speculation).

[The Grey Wolf]

1 hour ago, Thersites said:

Text

I never thought of it in terms of Dorne being left behind technologically speaking though that doesn't seem to make much sense when the only kings seemingly interested in infrastructure were Jahaerys I and Viserys II.

Also, Daeron I came before Aegon IV and how do you know that Daeron I wouldn't allow Dornish law to continue to apply in Dorne? Unless that's also guesswork, which is fine since none of us have access to a full account of the Conquest and its aftermath. Oh, and Mariah was Maron's sister I believe, not his daughter. 

As for the concessions regardless of the intent they went too far. Imagine you are a Marcher Lord for example. You've defended the realm and before that the Stormlands for generations beyond count from Dornish raiders. You fought for the Young Dragon and his dream of completing Aegon's conquest and winning everlasting glory only for the Young Dragon to be murdered in the most heinous way possible and the perpetrators forgiven and made peace with by his brother. Then, after Viserys II's brief tenure, Aegon IV comes along and tries to tap into the dissatisfaction but because he's Aegon IV his attempts at war are pathetic, further increasing the dissatisfaction and desire for revenge, compounded by the personal losses suffered during the war as well. Finally, we get Daeron II and his peace treaty. The fact that it so heavily favors the Dornish without any concessions going the other way and the fact that none of the other regions were given similar privileges I can easily see our Marcher Lord being extremely confused and angry. All of a sudden the murderers of a king are being rewarded more than vassals that have served and bled for the throne for years, not only that but now they have to jockey with them for royal favor, which is in short supply since Daeron II kept company with Maesters and other learned men, which isn't a problem except that he apparently excluded martial men, which is, you know, most nobles. And to tie everything together his name was freaking Daeron. Our Marcher Lord would probably look at this physically weak, bookish King seemingly biased in favor of his in-laws who shared the name of the dashing warrior-king he'd fought for and start wondering if maybe he should be serving another king. Basically, Baelor I, Viserys II, and Daeron II, in my mind, share a large portion of the blame for the Blackfyre Rebellions because of how they handled the fallout of Daeron I's conquest and murder.  

[Thersites]

8 hours ago, The Grey Wolf said:

I never thought of it in terms of Dorne being left behind technologically speaking though that doesn't seem to make much sense when the only kings seemingly interested in infrastructure were Jahaerys I and Viserys II.

Also, Daeron I came before Aegon IV and how do you know that Daeron I wouldn't allow Dornish law to continue to apply in Dorne? Unless that's also guesswork, which is fine since none of us have access to a full account of the Conquest and its aftermath. Oh, and Mariah was Maron's sister I believe, not his daughter. 

  We must take into account not only the measures implemented by the kings themselves, but also the existence of an environment in which such progress could actually take  place. So Jaehaerys I, Viserys I, Aegon III, Viserys II. And there must be some reason this unified realm thing was a nice deal for some people, otherwise everybody would be rebelling against everybody the moment the last dragon died. Also there must be some reason Dorne came into the realm when it did, but not before. And economically speaking, not by necessity technologically. Consider for example the implications for trade.

  And I know Daeron I came before Aegon IV, it was kind of my whole point at that part. I concluded that all the reasons the unification would work existed by his time, while a solid half of the reasons for unification NOT to work were created by Aegon IV. Who came after. You make some very good points about how a marcher lord could possibly think, though I don't believe it would be universal. That guy would be the Balon Greyjoy of the marches, and somewhere someone else would be the Rodrick Harlaw, to draw a parallel from the books that came to mind. However, reading that again, supllementing Daeron I for Daeron II, striking out all things Aegon IV and without the war and the murder... It does seem a bit different, doesn't it?

[The Grey Wolf]

7 hours ago, Thersites said:

Text

I believe you mean substitute where you put supplement and yeah it probably would have worked to the better for everyone but I feel the need to point out there was still always a very small possibility that Dorne would have been like "you know what, we've kicked out before when you had dragons and now you don't so f*** off. We don't want to be a part of your realm". If you did mean supplement though I'm confused.

As for my Marcher Lord example I don't think he would have been an outlier but rather the run-of-the-mill Marcher Lord, hence why Daemon Blackfyre had not only much support amongst the lower echelons of the nobility of the Westerlands and the Riverlands (the Reynes for instance probably were the source of his coinage and as for the Vale I imagine house Sunderland's participation had more to do with just wanting to f*** with the Arryns) but also he probably had most if not the whole Reach in his pocket and would have had the Stormlands as well were it not for Prince Baelor and Prince Aerys's marriages to two Marcher families. Also, to use your analogy there is in ASOIAF few Rodrick Harlaws but sadly plenty of Balon Greyjoys. 

[Lord Varys]

21 hours ago, The Grey Wolf said:

I would have a hard-time believing that Dorne didn't suffer heavily because of Daeron's conquest. I can get that the initial conquest killed relatively few but if the occupation force lost 50,000 men shouldn't Dorne have, by the end, suffered heavy reprisal from the remaining forces before Lord Lyonel and Daeron were both murdered.

As to your second point, maybe the Lannisters didn't think or didn't want to risk going it solo, especially not when their immediate land neighbors, the Riverlands, and the Reach, were firmly in the Targaryeyns pocket and their neighbor by sea are the Iron Isles, which would never ally with the Westerlands and were licking their wounds probably. As for the North, yeah, that is strange, especially when it says in the TWOIAF that Aegon's last progress included Winterfell, which means none of his other progresses ever went north of the Neck, which means Torhen Stark must have been an ever greater badass for keeping his bannermen and his sons in line through sheer personality alone. (Here's a thought, maybe he was succeeded by a grandson, who he raised not to be stubbornly stupid like his sons.)

On dragonslaying, to me it would make most sense then if Meraxes landed to destroy the Helholt, probably within it because the one-in-a-million fluke of hitting the dragon while its in the air is too much in my mind. Seriously, at the Field of Fire 55,000 men were gathered and Visenya only took an arrow to the shoulder (she must have been flying pretty low).

On Rhaenys: Even if she was the best rider she was also the best diplomat of the three and Aegon as well as Visenya were both more martial (and probably cautious). Not to mention she was his favorite sister-wife and the mother of his at-the-time only child! Seriously, how he could have let her go into an active war-zone baffles me. Especially when Aegon had no idea that Visenya would conceive and indeed, depending on your views of Aegon as well as Visenya's fertility (or lack thereof, I know you're proponent of Aegon at the very least not being) and Maegor's conception, she may never have conceived even!    

Finally, one question since I really enjoy your elaborate what-if explanations: What do you think would have happened had Rhaenys been killed at the beginning of the First Dornish War rather than in the middle of it?

Well, I guess the Dornishmen had their losses, too. But we don't know how many people they lost during Daeron's Conquest.

The Field of Fire really worked to the advantages of the Targaryens. The dragonriders did not have to encounter their enemies directly. They could focus on incinerating the wheat and the grass so that the wind would do their job for them. But I guess they also attacked the army directly. But one would expect that the fire and the dragons quickly settled the deal. In that sense it is scarcely surprising that only Visenya was injured.

What can I say to Rhaenys? I guess the way the Dornish War was going forced Rhaenys to participate in it as a dragonrider. The war began in 4 AC, Aenys was born in 7 AC, and Rhaenys died in 10 AC. She wouldn't have participated in the war the entire time, of course, especially not during her pregnancy and during the first year of her son's life. But after that it might have been necessary. And it is not that she and Aenys would necessarily have been separated for long. Dragons can fly, and it is easily imaginable that the royal family stayed with one of the Marcher Lords while conducting those dragon attacks on the Dornish castles.

I guess if Rhaenys had died early in the war then there would have been no Aenys. Which means Maegor would have been conceived/created around the time Aenys was born. That means they could have married him rather than Aenys to Alyssa Velaryon. But there would have been problems. Maegor wasn't exactly the kind of son you want to hand your kingdom to. Aegon refused to take another wife after Rhaenys' death but he already had an heir in Aenys at this point. Would he have only kept Visenya as sole wife if his only heir had been Maegor? Difficult to say. He might have gone as far as taking a widowed Velaryon woman to wife who already had children so that he would have an alternative to Maegor. Or he would never agreed to/allowed Visenya to go through with the Maegor experiment for an heir. Maegor was always just a spare not the heir. Visenya later liked him, of course, but if she had wanted to create such an heir she could have done so years ago before Rhaenys got herself pregnant with Aenys.

Assuming there had been a Maegor then Aegon's later would have been much more troublesome than his reign actually was, and there might have been rebellions and uprisings prior to his death because nobody would have looked forward to serving a King Maegor. However, Maegor most likely would have bonded with a dragon in this scenario because Aegon/Visenya would have had a vital interest to make Aegon's heir as much a Targaryen as they themselves were. And being a dragonrider was a vital part of that. Maegor waiting for his father's death works if he is just the spare, but if he had been Aegon's immediate heir he would have been considered weak had he not had a dragon of his own. Unless Maegor had later killed his own dragon to be able to claim Balerion after his father's death there would have been no Balerion for him.

A childless Maegor would also have caused problems for both Aegon and Maegor in Aegon's later year. The succession would still not have been secure, and that could have been another reason as to why Aegon would not have chosen Maegor as his successor. Whether he would have gotten through with that is difficult to determine. Visenya would have defended the rights of her son, of course, and any Velaryon heirs would have difficulties prevailing over Maegor. 

[The Grey Wolf]

12 minutes ago, Lord Varys said:

Text

Funny, I was thinking if Rhaenys died early in the war Aegon would be flying around putting down rebellions following which he'd go full Dragon's Wroth on Dorne, maybe even more so than if she'd died later like she actually did. As for Maegor being heir even though he was a monster (before his reign in particular a much lesser one seemingly) some small part me can't help but pity him. All his troubles started with him wanting children and that is a very human thing not to mention the way his last days are described plus the manner of his death. If he was actually conceived using magic I wonder why Visenya wanted him to marry at all and never bothered to tell him (unless she did and he couldn't accept it but then would you be able to believe it if your mother told you you were sterile because she used black magic to conceive you?).

[Lord Varys]

30 minutes ago, The Grey Wolf said:

Funny, I was thinking if Rhaenys died early in the war Aegon would be flying around putting down rebellions following which he'd go full Dragon's Wroth on Dorne, maybe even more so than if she'd died later like she actually did. As for Maegor being heir even though he was a monster (before his reign in particular a much lesser one seemingly) some small part me can't help but pity him. All his troubles started with him wanting children and that is a very human thing not to mention the way his last days are described plus the manner of his death. If he was actually conceived using magic I wonder why Visenya wanted him to marry at all and never bothered to tell him (unless she did and he couldn't accept it but then would you be able to believe it if your mother told you you were sterile because she used black magic to conceive you?).

Well, the funny thing there is that Visenya dies in 44 AC. And in the same year Maegor impregnates his first woman, Alys Harroway. This may just be coincidence, but I don't buy it. It seems as if Maegor never dared trying black magic to conceive any children while his mother was still alive. After she died, he finally commanded Tyanna to use her magics to help him conceive as child with Alys. When that didn't worked as planned Tyanna could only save her life by deflecting Maegor's wrath back on Alys and the Harroways by accusing her of infidelity.

And, you know, the 'Maegor is a child of magic' thing is just a hypothesis. He might still be his father's seed and not a male clone of Visenya. If he is Aegon's son then he might actually have inherited whatever made his sterile from his father. Visenya's spell which was involved in conceiving Maegor overcame Aegon's problem but did not destroyed 'the infertility gene', passing it on to Maegor. Which means Maegor then also needed magical help to conceive children. But in his case too much may have been broken/twisted. The Targaryens have an innate tendencies to bring forth malformed children.

[The Grey Wolf]

10 minutes ago, Lord Varys said:

Text

Whether he was born of magic or magic helped with the conception something was off with Maegor. I just really wish we got a reading of the second half of the "Sons of the Dragon" because from what we have it seems Maegor's excesses only really began during his reign. During Aenys's he ruled as Hand for two uneventful years (no way later King Maegor would have been able to rule peacefully for that long) and before that during his father's reign he was known to have slain the robber knight the Giant of the Trident and fought pirates in the Stepstones alongside a Velaryon (though that isn't canon, coming from the unpublished reading), which doesn't really mesh to me with what we see of him when he donnes the crown (apart from the torturing and disliking animals thing, which partly doesn't make sense since Maegor was known to beat knights in the joust and a good portion of that is horse-riding not to mention he must have ridden a horse to travel before bonding with Balerion).

Also, I find it funny that somehow this thread in terms of what's being discussed has gone backwards in time.

[Thersites]

1 hour ago, The Grey Wolf said:

I believe you mean substitute where you put supplement and yeah it probably would have worked to the better for everyone but I feel the need to point out there was still always a very small possibility that Dorne would have been like "you know what, we've kicked out before when you had dragons and now you don't so f*** off. We don't want to be a part of your realm". If you did mean supplement though I'm confused.

Sorry for that, english is not my first language and unfortunately when I'm writing with my attention diverted mistakes slip through. I do mean substitute.

  You are right of course, there exists such a possibility. Nothing would be lost by the attempt however, quite unlike the case of an invasion. And my guess would be the Iron Throne answering “Oh, so you don't want to sell those lemons lying on the ground to those guys up north who need them so their teeth won't fall off during a 3-year winter at fifty times their value? Well then, we'll tell them to take those big bags of gold and throw a tourney or something, we've got more around the place anyway.” Que aforementioned savage beatings by everyone in Dorne old enough to form a fist, visit to King's Landing, quill and fruit basket. (I may be slightly exaggerating here.)

  And concerning the Blackfyre Rebellion, I am given the impression that even if Dorne sank beneath the waves there would be conflict in some form, for reasons already existing by the end of Aegon IV's reign. You are correct in saying that your example would be commonplace, which is exactly why for example the lord thinking “I got stuff because I gave the previous king my wife and daughter for a threesome, now he's dead, I don't have it anymore and I want it back” would be using those arguements for propaganda. In his case, explaining his motivation to his troops would not, I think, be particularly good for morale.

  One thing those lords would do however, before acting on such sentiments, is take a good look at their situation and interests. Between “I'll make racist remarks about the dornishmen at dinner, and question the king's virility and martial prowess when I'm sure no one's listening” and “CALL THE BANNERS!!!” there is a pretty large number of options, most of them not leading to open war.

  And I also get the feeling that if anyone felt like going to the further end of that spectrum Daeron I would be happier than a kid opening christmas presents for getting to do his thing, and after a military thrashing of epic proportions (and subsequent writing of The Conquest of That Knucklehead Who Thought It Would Be A Good Idea To Rebel Against Alexander the Great Of Westeros) discussion on the matter would henceforth be in the most meek, timid, mindful and polite terms possible.

  Of course assuming that anyone takes the best course of action is often as wrong in the books as it is in real life, so I do not consider my conclusions the only possible outcome.

[The Grey Wolf]

19 minutes ago, Thersites said:

Text

 

Np

And yeah, most of the Blackfyre Rebellion can be laid at Aegon IV's feet. Without him I can see there being a rebellion over Baelor's peace but it wouldn't have been anywhere near as widespread or potent probably. Oh, and the FBR took years to come to fruition so there was plenty of time for the lords to brood...Many of them still chose to rebel. No era or place in history is ever lacking for dissatisfied and ambitious people of varying degrees of legitimacy after all. 

Also, I agree it would have been better for Daeron I to offer the carrot first instead of the stick but then he wouldn't be Daeron I and since this is medieval times its expected that peace comes after war rather than "let's make peace so we don't go to war".

Finally, I find your description of Daeron I putting down a rebellion hilarious.

[Knight of the Red Tree]

On 02/05/2016 at 4:10 PM, WSmith84 said:

When is an unprovoked invasion simply to expand your own empire ever 'right'?

When you win.