Brynden Rivers

[Dorian Martell]

56 minutes ago, LiveFirstDieLater said:

So first off I understand that the simple explanation is that Bryndon Rivers, Blood Raven, the old green seer in the tree is the three eyed crow who appears to Bran, it's one of those heavily implied things.

But I think it's important to remember it isn't ever confirmed in the text, in fact when Bran asks him he has no idea what Bran is talking about...

It's been suggested that maybe BR doesn't know the form he takes in Bran's dream, this is possible but it doesn't make sense to me...

Also, to be clear I'm discussing the books and not the show, if that needed to be said, in the show the three eyed Raven is clearly meant to be BR in the tree, but you'll notice the name change, and that none of the dreams appear in the show anyway.

I've been wondering who the 3eC is for years now and while BR appeared in those 3 Bran chapters we got in Dance, sorry it wasn't enough to convince me we've found the answer.

1. I don't know, could be Bran himself, or the old gods, or the green men on the isle of faces, just don't think it's BR.

2.Bran asks BR if he's the three eyed crow and BR doesn't know what he's talking about... Bran appears as a tree when he shows up to Jon, I think BR was the tree in Brans falling dream... Especially since it seems like BR can't talk through his dreams like Bran can. Also, there are some distinct similarities between what Bran sees in the falling dream, BR's Lair under the weirwoods grove, and the House of the Undying... I could go on and on but this is just the quick version.

3. So we need to use something as the definition of good/evil (or I guess not one could say it's all grey) so I went with the rules set forth by the old gods in the series, BR violates almost all of them.

4. Is he helping Bran? I'm not so certain of this either... He certainly sends Coldhands to retrieve him, but I'm not at all sure BRs endgame here is in Brans best interest, or even the best interest of mankind

I mean it's not clear to me who the Nights Watch guys coldhands killed and fed to Bran were... Could have been traitors, or not, I'm unsure. But either way I hear what you are saying I just am highly suspicious of someone who would slip kids manmeat without telling them...

1: Ok 

2: the quote from the chapter is: 

“A … crow?” The pale lord’s voice was dry. His lips moved slowly, as if they had forgotten how to form words. “Once, aye. Black of garb and black of blood.” The clothes he wore were rotten and faded, spotted with moss and eaten through with worms, but once they had been black. “I have been many things, Bran. Now I am as you see me, and now you will understand why I could not come to you … except in dreams. I have watched you for a long time, watched you with a thousand eyes and one. I saw your birth, and that of your lord father before you. I saw your first step, heard your first word, was part of your first dream. I was watching when you fell. And now you are come to me at last, Brandon Stark, though the hour is late.”

So yes, Bloodraven is the Three eyed crow. the one who came to Bran is his dreams. 
 

3: I guess because there is rarely and ablsolute good or evil divide in the series, I cannot see Bloodraven as being evil, no more than Ned being evil for wanting to punish Jamie for killing the mad king and saving the city. 

4: He certianly seems to be helping bran develop his powers. I can't see how this will harm bran or humanity in general. But hey, the book is open to interpretation.
5: To me is seems very clear. The only members of the watch left  north of the wall are the traitors at Crasters. Who else would they be?  

[kissdbyfire]

On 16/09/2016 at 1:40 PM, The Fattest Leech said:

"whenever he'd appear I'd get all hot and bothered like I was meeting up with a new badass boyfriend."

Without a doubt!

I think @kissdbyfire would agree too! 

Mans yeah, the Maynard Plumm thing, it took some convincing for me to really believe, right @Prince of the North , but that turned out to be a great detail. 

I know kinslaying is a crime, even when you don't mean it, but I feel Brynden had to make a sacrifice for the "greater good" and his sacrifice was his honor and his eye... And Odin has one eye because he sacrificed his eye for knowledge. 

Ah, just the right topic to come back to! 

I'll try to catch up on the whole thread now.

 

[The Grey Wolf]

Honestly, I don't get all the love for Bloodraven. In my opinion he wasn't very good at all.

One, he established a police state in Westeros that made the monarchy widely and highly unpopular, giving the Blackfyres fertile ground to find local support in no less than two rebellions in under twelve years, with the second (Third chronologically) being, by all indications, a genuine threat to the Targaryen dynasty much like the First.

Two, he damaged the image of the monarchy even further by abandoning the west coast to the deprivations of the Ironborn and yet he wasn't even able to stop Bittersteel from invading when he did land nor was he able to prevent Daemon II from crossing the Narrow Sea beforehand in secret, thus making his keeping the royal fleet stationed in the capital a moot point.

Three, the guy was highly unscrupulous. Seriously, look at what he did to Aenys, offering safe conduct and then breaking his word, making the Iron Throne's own word look worthless in process, and all to kill a random Blackfyre who it isn't even certain would have won the Great Council if he had been allowed to present his case while simultaneously neutralizing himself as a threat to the Blackfyres by getting himself sent to the Wall. On top of that if he had something to do with Haegon's murder, like the person who did the deed being in his employ, that makes him even worse.

Honestly, I feel like the reason people like him is because he was on the winning side, practices magic, and is a Blackwood. Personally, give me Bittersteel any day over Bloodraven. The man was clearly more honorable, not to mention charismatic, loyal to his cause, driven, and possessed of a keen, forward-thinking mind. Seriously, the Golden Company is a military revolution that somehow hasn't caught on yet, mixing combined arms doctrine with a meritocratic and efficient chain of command that, thanks to not being celibate like the NW, is able to maintain its numbers, its identity, and its unity of purpose over the generations following its founding. Plus, if anyone had the right to be pissed off all their life, it was Bittersteel.

That's my two cents.

[sweetsunray]

On 18-9-2016 at 9:15 PM, Dorian Martell said:

5: To me is seems very clear. The only members of the watch left  north of the wall are the traitors at Crasters. Who else would they be?  

One of the bodies is described as seen through Summer's eyes, and it's Ollo Lophand, one of the mutineers.

[kissdbyfire]

Just a side note, really, but I could never understand what exactly supports the idea that BR is not the 3EC. 

[The Fattest Leech]

Just now, kissdbyfire said:

Just a side note, really, but I could never understand what exactly supports the idea that BR is not the 3EC. 

I agree. There doesn't seem to be any long term reasoning to have BR not be the 3EC. Bloodraven is just too ingrained into the history of Westeros to have it be anyone else. 

[OtherFromAnotherMother]

4 hours ago, kissdbyfire said:

Just a side note, really, but I could never understand what exactly supports the idea that BR is not the 3EC. 

Too much time between books so people make easily understood ideas much more complicated than they should be by tying and untying thousands of knots.

[Ser Walton]

I haven't read the D&E series yet, so I was unaware of his winestain birthmark. I find that fascinatingly awesome!! The reason being , I have one as well, it covers my entire right side of my neck, and extends along my lower jaw and cheek, and till slightly above my ear. 

I was always self-conscious of it as a child, as an adult I forget it's there most of the time. But cool, another reason to love BR. Most girls have said it is charming. 

[Land's End]

I think BR is trying to save the realm. But he’s going to do something despicable in order to achieve his goal, like trying to get Bran to merge with the trees, sacrificing someone, purging "traitors" via the others… something like that.

The foundation of his character, I think, is doing good with bad means. He gets his hands dirty while other people are too honorable to do what he deems necessary for the greater good. 

Obviously it's all about his subjective definition of good. That's where the trouble begins...

19 hours ago, The Grey Wolf said:

Honestly, I don't get all the love for Bloodraven. In my opinion he wasn't very good at all.

One, he established a police state in Westeros that made the monarchy widely and highly unpopular, giving the Blackfyres fertile ground to find local support in no less than two rebellions in under twelve years, with the second (Third chronologically) being, by all indications, a genuine threat to the Targaryen dynasty much like the First.

Two, he damaged the image of the monarchy even further by abandoning the west coast to the deprivations of the Ironborn and yet he wasn't even able to stop Bittersteel from invading when he did land nor was he able to prevent Daemon II from crossing the Narrow Sea beforehand in secret, thus making his keeping the royal fleet stationed in the capital a moot point.

Three, the guy was highly unscrupulous. Seriously, look at what he did to Aenys, offering safe conduct and then breaking his word
 

The first example is up to debate. So far we only know what people thought of his actions, not what he actually did. People even blamed him for the draughts and the spring sickness which indicates that there was a strong bias against him. His bastardy and creepy looks surly didn't make the small folk love him more.

I agree with the second example, though he knew he was breaking his word. He did it anyway because he thought it was necessary and he got punished.

I'm still wondering why Aemon went to the wall with him. Were they close friends?

Quote

Honestly, I feel like the reason people like him is because he was on the winning side, practices magic, and is a Blackwood. Personally, give me Bittersteel any day over Bloodraven.

Nope. I think people like him because he's a complex, somewhat tragic character. It's easy to do the right thing, but it's hard to do the wrong thing for the right reasons. Bloodraven certainly wouldn't have let Cercei win the game if he had been in Ned's place. He's not honorable, he's pragmatic. Moreover, he doesn't care what people think. While I disagree with many of his actions I find it fascinating that he did all these things knowing he would be hated during his life time and throughout history. Didn't stop him from doing what he thought war right. The problem is his definition of what's right.

You're sort of making it sound like everybody who prefers Bloodraven to Bittersteel is some stupid shallow fangirl who doesn't "get it". I understand what draws people towards Bittersteel even though I'd side with Bloodraven. Maybe you should try to understand Bloodraven more.

I hope we get more background information that's not black and white on both characters.

[Red Man Racey]

19 hours ago, The Grey Wolf said:

<snip>

Plus, if anyone had the right to be pissed off all their life, it was Bittersteel.

What does he have to be pissed off about and what reason does he have to hate Brynden? His mother was replaced as the king's mistress -- what part of that is Brynden's fault? Especially since it was an event that necessarily occurred before Brynden's birth. Or was it that Shiera Seastar picked Bloodraven over him? Boo friggin hoo, get over it. Did Brynden violate the "Bro Code" or did Aegor call dibs or something? Bittersteel is petty, selfish, and entitled with a huge martyr complex; he's that kid laying on the floor of Toys R Us kicking and screaming because he can't have the toy he wants and everybody is out to get him  ... except that he's not a kid, he just never outgrew that behavior. But that's just how I interpret his character, maybe I'm wrong.

[LiveFirstDieLater]

19 hours ago, kissdbyfire said:

Just a side note, really, but I could never understand what exactly supports the idea that BR is not the 3EC. 

Let me try to explain... No there is too much, let me sum up...

 

[The Grey Wolf]

2 hours ago, Land's End said:

Text

I respect other peoples' opinions and their right to differ so if my post seemed to imply to you that I think Bloodraven fans are "stupid, shallow fan-girls" I apologize.

Now, to answer your points:

1. I think it is pretty clear from the information in D & E that Bloodraven did establish something of a police state that was definitely hated by the people and made the monarchy look awful in the process. TWOIAF compares him to Mysaria and mentions people becoming afraid to speak their mind for fear that their neighbors might be in his employ, not to mention he restricted access to the king. Furthermore, we have people like Ser Kyle the Cat openly saying there are many who would prefer Bittersteel to Bloodraven. Sure, Bloodraven was blamed for things he didn't do but his actions directly caused more damage to the crown's image due to his all-consuming feud with the Blackfyres at the expense of almost everything else (Dagon Greyjoy anyone?). Plus, how people perceive is more often than not more important than what the truth actually is practically speaking.

2. Maybe but that, like so much else of Bloodraven's policies as I seem them, is trading long-term stability for short-term gains. Yeah, he killed another Blackfyre but in so doing he got the remaining Blackfyres howling for blood by giving them a legitimate reason to continue their fight for the throne, thus perpetuating the issue and at the same time opening the door for more atrocities to be committed. If the Targaryens can get away with killing someone despite promising safe conduct what's to stop the Blackfyres from pulling something like the Red Wedding or what the Dornish did to Daeron I in retaliation?

3. Aemon went with him to prevent any lords from using him as a pawn in any schemes or struggles against Aegon V since a Maester sworn to the Night's Watch couldn't possibly be made into a figurehead for rebellion, not least due to the distance of the Wall and the North's traditional isolationism.

4. Bloodraven is only trying to "save the realm" now, after he has been in the NW and has learned about the second coming of the Others. Before that all he cared about was keeping the Targaryens on the Iron Throne no matter the cost.

5. I agree neither he nor Bittersteel are black and white and both are interesting characters in their own way. I'm just more inclined to Bittersteel because he seems in my mind more honorable as well as a better leader and administrator. Feel free to disagree.

[The Grey Wolf]

1 hour ago, Red Man Racey said:

What does he have to be pissed off about and what reason does he have to hate Brynden? His mother was replaced as the king's mistress -- what part of that is Brynden's fault? Especially since it was an event that necessarily occurred before Brynden's birth. Or was it that Shiera Seastar picked Bloodraven over him? Boo friggin hoo, get over it. Did Brynden violate the "Bro Code" or did Aegor call dibs or something? Bittersteel is petty, selfish, and entitled with a huge martyr complex; he's that kid laying on the floor of Toys R Us kicking and screaming because he can't have the toy he wants and everybody is out to get him  ... except that he's not a kid, he just never outgrew that behavior. But that's just how I interpret his character, maybe I'm wrong.

This is why I think Bittersteel was "choleric" and cut him some slack. (Feel free to disagree of course.)

One, yes his mother and himself being exiled from court while Bloodraven, even after his mother was dismissed as mistress, continued to enjoy life at court is a big deal. Aegor lives in a medieval society where people don't think in terms of the individual but in terms of family, and Aegor is a Bracken whereas Bloodraven is a Blackwood, which only makes things worse in this case. Furthermore, who was it that drove baby Aegor and his mother from court? Oh right, the Dragonknight and Daeron II, who sits the throne when the FBR happens.

Two, yeah losing the woman you love to someone from a family you hate is going to make you pissed and that is a normal if unhealthy human response so I find your whole "get over it" incredibly insensitive. Rejection hurts and Bittersteel doesn't have a modern-day psychologist or councillor to tell to move on. What he does have is a culture and society that allows and encourages grudges and feuds past the point of reason, just look at Stannis in ACOK, as well as objectifies women as prizes to be won. Small wonder then he doesn't let go of this, especially when it involves the same person in the above point, Bloodraven.  

Three, Aegor was the only one of the major four Great Bastards (Daemon, Shiera, Brynden, and himself) that got NOTHING. Daemon was given land and the right to build a castle by Daeron II and from his father Aegon IV was given more lands, titles, and the sword Blackfyre before that. Bloodraven was at some point given Dark Sister and enjoyed a high position with influence at Daeron II's court. Shiera likely grew up at court and was taught by Maesters (which explains her being multi-lingual), but Aegor, who was forced to grow up at Stone Henge for no fault of his own, was given nothing comparable. You could rightly say that there was no need to give him anything but seeing everyone around him being given gifts while he was being left out in the cold or, in the case of Shiera and Bloodraven, seeing others have the childhood he never had, would stick in his craw, hell, anyone really, badly and understandably so when you tie this into the above two points. 

Four, he is a Bracken and honestly after the TWOIAF I think GRRM has it in for the Brackens and the Peakes. He makes the Blackwoods and the Manderlys so obviously the right house to support that I can't help but pity and support the Brackens instead.

Fifth, the fact that he personally fought in every Blackfyre Rebellion he was a part of, the fact that he could keep the dream for a crown alive in the Blackfyre descendants for generations, the fact he could turn the rout at the Redgrass Field into a charge, the fact that we never hear him doing something as low as breaking his word like Bloodraven did with Aenys, and the fact that he established the Golden Company, which as I've said in a previous post is a military revolution that hasn't caught on yet, in my opinion, shows that he was honorable, driven, charismatic, intelligent, and practical, all laudable qualities. 

[maudisdottir]

3 hours ago, The Grey Wolf said:

Four, he is a Bracken and honestly after the TWOIAF I think GRRM has it in for the Brackens 

They're characters he created.  How can he "have it in" for his own creation? It's not like they're misunderstood by their own author.

[The Grey Wolf]

2 hours ago, maudisdottir said:

They're characters he created.  How can he "have it in" for his own creation? It's not like they're misunderstood by their own author.

What I mean is that it seems to me that he is obviously biased in favor of the Blackwoods. The Blackwoods are always depicted as fighting on the righteous, more sympathetic, or winning side (Blackwood: Targaryen/Blacks/Anti-Hoare/Anti-Teague, Bracken: Blackfyre/Green/Pro-Hoare/Pro-Teague). Furthermore, the Blackwoods are always depicted sympathetically in contrast to the Brackens (Tytos vs. Jonos, Barba vs. Missy, Lothar vs. Agnes). Beyond that a Blackwood also becomes queen but never a Bracken and while the Blackwoods have magic in their blood the Brackens don't, making them less noteworthy. And the Peakes have it even worse than that.

[Little Scribe of Naath]

6 hours ago, The Grey Wolf said:

I agree neither he nor Bittersteel are black and white and both are interesting characters in their own way. I'm just more inclined to Bittersteel because he seems in my mind more honorable as well as a better leader and administrator. Feel free to disagree.

Honourable? Bittersteel? Starting and sustaining a war with no better cause than your own hunger for power/desire for revenge....that's honourable now? The Blackfyres had to stoop to the point of creating ridiculous propoganda like "Daeron II was the son of the DragonKnight" sullying the reputation of both Queen Naerys and Aemon the DragonKnight after their death to justify their war.

Give me a break.  The man was nothing more than another power-crazy pretender for the throne and was willing to do whatever he could for it. His obvious bias against Daemon II was proof enough of that -  if he was truly loyal to the Blackfyre cause, he should have wholeheartedly supported him. 

As BR said, "Most lords like their kings young and dashing and looking good on a horse." Bittersteel just took advantage of that and pushed a claim to the throne through Daemon Blackfyre.

[OtherFromAnotherMother]

Classic example of how the same text can be perceived so differently from person to person.

[The Grey Wolf]

28 minutes ago, Little Scribe of Naath said:

Text

One, to those who claim that Naerys and Aemon were too pure to possibly break their vows all I say is LANCELOT and Guinevere.

Two, as for honor he certainly had more than Bloodraven given the information we had. The Golden Company's tradition of discipline and never breaking a contract or going back on their word prior to ADWD had to have come from someone and no one else fits the bill.

Three, the Blackfyres had some legitimate grievances and motives (Daeron's lopsided treaty and patronage, justice for Daeron I and the 60000 men who died with him, Daeron cherry-picking which aspects of his father's will to respect (Dad said Daemon must marry a Tyroshi ok will do, Dad said Fireball will be made a Kingsguard at the first opening, f**** that guy)) as well as some illegitimate ones, just like in any conflict.

Fourth, there was going to be conflict anyway. Baelor's peace with Dorne in the aftermath of his brother's murder through perfidy ensured that. The only difference is that without Daemon and Bittersteel it wouldn't have been one big rebellion but more like multiple simultaneous Peake Uprisings. And the choice was Daemon's to make and he alone made it.

Fifth, if he was simply power-crazed and willing to do whatever it took to take the throne then Bloodraven was willing to do whatever it takes to stop him and unlike in the case of Bittersteel we have undeniable evidence of Bloodraven breaking customs and traditions. Plus, if he really wanted the crown as badly as you say why didn't he simply pull a Renly and just crown himself rather than continuously try to place Daemon and his descendants on the Iron Throne as he actually did? 

Sixth, Daemon I Blackfyre was NOT some dumb jock who could only wield a sword and looked good on a horse otherwise he wouldn't have waited twelve years to rebel. Also, the fact that he minted his own coinage implicitly implies that he did something unprecedented and un-replicated in the history of the Seven Kingdoms: He established a rival capital with a rival treasury and bureaucracy (my bet is one of the two castles the Peakes lost). Even if it wasn't his idea to begin with the fact that he followed through with it shows he understood war, people, symbol politics, and institutional politics. Honestly, the only thing Daeron II had over him in that regard is administration and Daemon never got the chance to try his hand at that so we'll never know.  

Seventh, considering that Bittersteel supported all the other Blackfyre Rebellions he was alive for I think I can see a different motive for why he didn't support Daemon II. The guy and his plan were stupid and if Bittersteel blindly followed him the whole Blackfyre cause would have been lost, which would have, in Bittersteel's eye, be a greater dishonor to Daemon I's memory than not simply supporting Daemon II. Beyond that another possible motive would be that Bittersteel didn't support him because he was at the time preoccupied getting help. The Second Blackfyre Rebellion took place in 211 AC and the Golden Company was formed a year later, in 212 AC. A coincidence? I think not. Its clear to me that Bittersteel was following his leaving the Second Sons busy touring the Free Cities building the Golden Company and thus didn't have any good means of supporting Daemon II, who, if he had waited, may have gotten Bittersteel's support if I am right.

Eighth, nearly all wars in feudal times were caused by a lust for power, land, or revenge so Bittersteel is hardly noticeable in that regard. 

[The Prince of Magpies]

7 hours ago, The Grey Wolf said:

Daeron cherry-picking which aspects of his father's will to respect (Dad said Daemon must marry a Tyroshi ok will do, Dad said Fireball will be made a Kingsguard at the first opening, f**** that guy))

A minor quibble, but we're told that Aegon IV promised Fireball a place in the Kingsguard - not that it was part of his will (like legitimising his bastards was). We don't really know how formal the promise was. Was it something that people other than Fireball would take seriously? Or just Aegon manipulating/messing with Fireball by hinting at the possibility of helping him realise his dream? Nor are we told how long ago that promise was made in relation to Daeon's ascension and the next available spot in the Kingsguard opening up. It seems unreasonable for a future spot in the guard to be 'reserved' for one person for many years. 

Also, while I think you make a good case for Bittersteel being a more honourable man than most of the fandom would perceive him, I don't think the 'why didn't he just crown himself?' part of the argument holds up. Regardless of what we think of his honour, I think we can agree that Bittersteel was quite a pragmatic organiser (not joining in Daemon II's rebellion because it was doomed to fail, founding the Golden Company to keep the Blacks in exile organised and united, etc.). The Black cause might have been borne out of discontent with Daeron II, but it had a focus and a rallying point in the charisma and prowess of Daemon, and his claim to the throne (which, coming through two royal Targaryens and being the oldest Great bastard were better than anyone outside of Daeron's line). Bittersteel would know that crowning himself would result in losing the support of the men who idolised Daemon - all the more so post-Redgrass when the Blacks were exiled to Essos or scattered around Westeros licking their wounds. The only thing that could have united them would be fighting for Daemon's honour, memory and family by trying to place one of his sons on the Iron Throne. 

In The Sworn Sword and The Mystery Knight, we see how - in some people's eyes, at least - Daemon and his cause have the moral high ground over Daeron II and Aerys I (thanks in no small part to the unpopularity brought on by Bloodraven which you described). That moral high ground - and the hopes of any support it might bring - would evaporate if Bittersteel bypassed Daemon's sons to crown himself. The septon in TMK preaches for the Black dragon to return and save the realm, not for 'anyone but Daeron/Aerys/Bloodraven. Bittersteel may have had honourable reasons for not crowning himself, but - on the evidence we have so far - pragmatic concerns would seem to trump honour as the main factor in that decision.

[Little Scribe of Naath]

12 hours ago, The Grey Wolf said:

One, to those who claim that Naerys and Aemon were too pure to possibly break their vows all I say is LANCELOT and Guinevere.

Nice parallel but doesn't quite work. Aegon IV was a man who dismembered a guy for sleeping with his mistress. I'd say if he had the slightest whiff of suspicion that Naerys wasn't loyal to him, he'd have her and Aemon executed long back. In any case I'm sure he'd be happy to take another wife.

The above is backed up by the fact that the WOIAF indicates that these rumours started circulating only long after the death of both Aemon and Naerys. Not just that, we are also told that Daeron had a terrible relationship with his father.

12 hours ago, The Grey Wolf said:

Two, as for honor he certainly had more than Bloodraven given the information we had. The Golden Company's tradition of discipline and never breaking a contract or going back on their word prior to ADWD had to have come from someone and no one else fits the bill.

Ah, if you're definition of honour is "not breaking your word" then I can see your point of view. Elsewise I don't see a single noble intention in this generation-spanning war.

 

12 hours ago, The Grey Wolf said:

Three, the Blackfyres had some legitimate grievances and motives (Daeron's lopsided treaty and patronage, justice for Daeron I and the 60000 men who died with him, Daeron cherry-picking which aspects of his father's will to respect (Dad said Daemon must marry a Tyroshi ok will do, Dad said Fireball will be made a Kingsguard at the first opening, f**** that guy)) as well as some illegitimate ones, just like in any conflict.

Then one can just as easily say that Alicent Hightower and her side had legitimate grievances, Cersei had legitimate reasons to hate Robert and thus put the succession into jeopardy, Renly had totally legitimate reasons to put forward his claim, Tywin had legitimate reasons to do what he did during the Rebellion, and so on.

Sorry, but slights to your pride are no justification to start wars killing thousands of people. And when that is sustained over generations and generations for no other reason than your own ego and because you don't want to accept defeat (or because you want the throne), sentencing your family and supporters to a life in exile, makes you an incredibly disgusting person, atleast in my eyes. 

Look at what we see of the Golden Company in ADWD. Most of them don't know they're supporting a Blackfyre, they think Aegon VI is a Targ. They just want to go home. Who can blame them?

12 hours ago, The Grey Wolf said:

Fourth, there was going to be conflict anyway. Baelor's peace with Dorne in the aftermath of his brother's murder through perfidy ensured that. The only difference is that without Daemon and Bittersteel it wouldn't have been one big rebellion but more like multiple simultaneous Peake Uprisings. And the choice was Daemon's to make and he alone made it.

The choice may have been Daemon's but Bittersteel was the power behind the Blackfyre Rebellions, not Daemon. It is said that Bittersteel and Fireball were the ones to put the seeds for claiming the throne into Daemon's mind. Oh, and I've seen much talk here by you that Bittersteel never broke his word, how do you explain him escaping from being sent to the NW? If he was such a "honourable" man, shouldn't he have gone there to pay for his crimes against the crown, as BR did?

 

12 hours ago, The Grey Wolf said:

Fifth, if he was simply power-crazed and willing to do whatever it took to take the throne then Bloodraven was willing to do whatever it takes to stop him and unlike in the case of Bittersteel we have undeniable evidence of Bloodraven breaking customs and traditions. Plus, if he really wanted the crown as badly as you say why didn't he simply pull a Renly and just crown himself rather than continuously try to place Daemon and his descendants on the Iron Throne as he actually did?

Because he knew the realm would never accept him on the throne. Daemon was a dashing young warrior, exactly the sort of king people would support, not him. There's far greater chance of Daemon being accepted and then Bittersteel getting a high position at court than him placing his claim forward.  This is just pure politics.

That's pretty much the principle behind what Illyrio/Varys are doing with fAegon in ADWD, as we see. They have engineered a perfect prince - handsome, well-educated, good warrior, so on because they know that those are the qualities which will win you the support of the people.

 

12 hours ago, The Grey Wolf said:

Sixth, Daemon I Blackfyre was NOT some dumb jock who could only wield a sword and looked good on a horse otherwise he wouldn't have waited twelve years to rebel. Also, the fact that he minted his own coinage implicitly implies that he did something unprecedented and un-replicated in the history of the Seven Kingdoms: He established a rival capital with a rival treasury and bureaucracy (my bet is one of the two castles the Peakes lost). Even if it wasn't his idea to begin with the fact that he followed through with it shows he understood war, people, symbol politics, and institutional politics. Honestly, the only thing Daeron II had over him in that regard is administration and Daemon never got the chance to try his hand at that so we'll never know.  

So why couldn't Daemon apply his brilliance to work with Daeron then for the good of the whole realm? Daeron was said to be an incredibly mature, kind and forgiving guy.  

12 hours ago, The Grey Wolf said:

Seventh, considering that Bittersteel supported all the other Blackfyre Rebellions he was alive for I think I can see a different motive for why he didn't support Daemon II. The guy and his plan were stupid and if Bittersteel blindly followed him the whole Blackfyre cause would have been lost, which would have, in Bittersteel's eye, be a greater dishonor to Daemon I's memory than not simply supporting Daemon II. Beyond that another possible motive would be that Bittersteel didn't support him because he was at the time preoccupied getting help. The Second Blackfyre Rebellion took place in 211 AC and the Golden Company was formed a year later, in 212 AC. A coincidence? I think not. Its clear to me that Bittersteel was following his leaving the Second Sons busy touring the Free Cities building the Golden Company and thus didn't have any good means of supporting Daemon II, who, if he had waited, may have gotten Bittersteel's support if I am right.

So doesn't that come down to the fact that ultimately Daemon II just didn't have the correct charisma and make-up to be accepted as a king by Westeros? That's a pretty good indicator that ultimately Bittersteel was in this for gaining power, and hence didn't want to support a loser candidate, isn't it? Oh, and lest I forget, among many other reasons, the WOIAF hints that there may have been homophobia involved on his part there.