Murdering Aenys Blackfyre was not for the good of the realm

[Lord Lannister]

I don't know why anyone was surprised at Bloodraven's actions. The Blackfyres were a threat to the Targaryen dynasty that was increasingly fragile as was. It only seems natural for him to remove one of those usurpers who is all but asking to come into your lair.

There definitely wasn't anything to gain by letting Aenys participate in the Great Council. All that would do is serve to incite some of those lords against Targaryen rule and demonstrate for all of Westeros to see the increasing frailty of the Targaryen rule without their dragons.

Had anyone other that Aegon been chosen as king, Bloodraven wouldn't have been punished at all.

[Bael's Bastard]

I'd like to see Haegon portrayed like his father. It would be a great opportunity. The second "rebellion" was a joke and failure. I think Haegon should basically be what inspires those who joined the second rebellion and suffered for it to chance another, those who sat out the second rebellion to join in, and perhaps even some who were previously loyalists to switch sides. He should be central to why the third rebellion is the most serious human threat to House Targaryen's rule in almost a quarter of a century, since Daemon I himself. And I wouldn't be surprised if Aerion kills Haegon, which would only lend itself to a sympathetic showing leading up to that. 

[The Grey Wolf]

3 minutes ago, Bael's Bastard said:

I'd like to see Haegon portrayed like his father. It would be a great opportunity. The second "rebellion" was a joke and failure. I think Haegon should basically be what inspires those who joined the second rebellion and suffered for it to chance another, those who sat out the second rebellion to join in, and perhaps even some who were previously loyalists to switch sides. He should be central to why the third rebellion is the most serious human threat to House Targaryen's rule in almost a quarter of a century, since Daemon I himself. And I wouldn't be surprised if Aerion kills Haegon, which would only lend itself to a sympathetic showing leading up to that. 

[Liver and Onions]

22 minutes ago, Bael's Bastard said:

I'd like to see Haegon portrayed like his father. It would be a great opportunity. The second "rebellion" was a joke and failure. I think Haegon should basically be what inspires those who joined the second rebellion and suffered for it to chance another, those who sat out the second rebellion to join in, and perhaps even some who were previously loyalists to switch sides. He should be central to why the third rebellion is the most serious human threat to House Targaryen's rule in almost a quarter of a century, since Daemon I himself. And I wouldn't be surprised if Aerion kills Haegon, which would only lend itself to a sympathetic showing leading up to that. 

This is just making me all excited for more Dunk & Egg, dangit! 

As for the thread, I agree that it's too early to decide what Bloodraven's motivations are. We don't know when he became aware of bigger issues than Blackfyres or if he's even on the side of humans to begin with. I do find it difficult to believe he waited until Aenys had shown up to the council to kill him for a personal vendetta. The World of Ice and Fire did a beautiful job of giving us juuust enough information to speculate even more.

[Lord Varys]

52 minutes ago, The Grey Wolf said:

One, I personally think that the reason the Fourth Blackfyre Rebellion was such a failure had more to do with that being when Torwyn Greyjoy betrayed Bittersteel (by revealing to Aegon V where the Golden Company would be landing) than the lack of local support (beyond the Yronwoods). Considering how unpopular Aegon V was, all his children were underage at the time, and that Aenys had thought he had a chance at the Great Council beforehand, I believe that if the Fourth Blackfyre Rebellion had simply gotten off the ground and won a few victories (if they didn't win any before Wendwater Bridge) it would have been far more successful, particularly if the Blackfyres then offered to protect the rights and liberties of the lords that Aegon V wanted to deprive them of.

The Greyjoy betrayal could also have been during the Fourth Rebellion but I'm not sure what exactly advantage Bittersteel would have hoped to gain from an Ironborn alliance in that war. Presumably the Greyjoys were on the other side of the continent. I'm more inclined to believe there is going to be some major invasion and multiple battles in the Third Rebellion, possibly including at least one naval battle where the Blackfyres could have needed the help of the Ironborn.

52 minutes ago, The Grey Wolf said:

Two, I personally believe Daemon III is going to be the puppet pretender and that the sad thing about him will be that we will never really get to know him at all.

Well, Daemon III is either brave or stupid enough to face Dunk directly in combat. That suggests he has the potential to be at least a well-trained and capable warrior. He certainly could overestimate his own abilities, though. But the fact that he was apparently not leading from the rear also indicates that he was at least not presented as a puppet pretender to his men and his enemies.

Thus I guess Daemon III might actually turn out to be a competent guy although the entire idea of him being 'the rightful king' etc. would be stuff that was fed to him by Bittersteel from his very childhood. We have no idea how old the boy was when Haegon died but my gut feeling is that he wasn't that old. Else Bittersteel might have invaded Westeros during Bloodraven's interregnum after Maekar's death. That would have been the perfect time for an invasion. Not to mention that Daemon III was only crowned a year after his father's death.

52 minutes ago, The Grey Wolf said:

Three, I believe that Haegon on the other hand is going to turn out to be much like his father, an incredibly charming and honorable person, mainly for three reasons. First, the Third Blackfyre Rebellion needs to have been a serious threat to House Targaryen (otherwise the Blackfyres look more like a joke than a threat) and that works better if Haegon is actually not only likable but capable. Second, because I believe that would give the Third Blackfyre Rebellion some good nuance and complexity by pitting our sympathies between a Blackfyre who had the potential to be a great king and well-established characters we already root for like Dunk, Egg, and Maekar, who are nonetheless supporting a shitty king in the form of Aerys I. Three, because that would lend far more dramatic weight to his tragic murder.

The Third Rebellion could easily enough be a big thing without the Blackfyre pretender being a great leader/warrior. Just look at the Dance where both Rhaenyra and Aegon II weren't exactly very martial leaders but the people surrounding them made up for that. Bittersteel himself can play the role of the general/war leader while Haegon and Daemon III (try to) act kingly, etc.

And you have to keep in mind that we know Daemon III had at least one brother, not to mention that Haegon and Aenys had two as of yet unknown younger brothers, making it possible that Daemon III and his brother(s) had an unspecified number of male Blackfyre cousins.

All of those people are likely to play roles in the Third and Fourth Rebellion (although there is a decent enough chance that some Blackfyres will die during the Essosi campaigns of the Golden Company - warfare is a dangerous business, after all). But who knows? Perhaps the really charismatic/great Blackfyre is going to be Aenys, the sixth or seventh son, or some younger grandson of Daemon I.

Oh, and I really don't see Aerys I as a shitty king. He isn't charismatic or war-like but he had the sense to put the government of the Realm into competent hands. And while not executing Bittersteel has bad consequences it is actually the honorable thing to do. Aegor Rivers was Aerys I's uncle, after all. And kinslaying is seen as a vile sin in Westeros. He didn't pardon him, he just refused to execute him. That's a difference.

Public perception is an important part of the reputation of a king, of course, and while we know Daeron II wasn't war-like, either, his reputation is much better due to the whole Dorne thing he pulled off. Aerys I certainly isn't in that category but I'm pretty sure his contributions to his own reign are much bigger than people outside his inner circle know. The man was obsessed with magic and prophecies and is thus very likely to be a key influence in that field, shaping the future of Westeros and his own family to a much higher degree than, say, Maekar.

Aerys I could have helped Bloodraven to hone his magical abilities (both before and after they began ruling the Realm together). He is likely the one who (re-)discovered the ancient prophecy foretelling the return of the Targaryen dragons Egg references in TMK, laying the groundwork for both Aerion and Egg's attempts to bring the dragons back. And that prophecy might even turn out to be the prophecy mentioning the promised prince which would mean Aerys I is basically at the very heart of the whole prophecy business because his conversations with Egg, Aemon, Aerion, and Maekar would mark the beginning of the road that eventually led to Summerhall, Harrenhal, and the Mother of Dragons.

Back to the Blackfyres:

George's announcement that Dunk & Egg are going to Essos eventually could enable them to actually meet and befriend some Blackfyres incognito (say, if Dunk serves with the recently founded Golden Company for a time). That could have interesting consequences during the Third Rebellion. Who knows? Perhaps Egg is going to have a crush on Bittersteel's daughter (and Illyrio' great-grandmother) and Dunk becomes vast friends with Haegon Blackfyre.

Such a setting could put Dunk & Egg in interesting situations during the Third Rebellion. And keep in mind that we have no idea yet what Dunk is doing during the Third Rebellion. Egg is mentioned but not Dunk.

I remember suggesting that one of political matches Egg made for his sons might involve a betrothal between Duncan Targaryen and Blackfyre heiress with the purpose to unite the branches and end the conflict. I still think that could have been a great idea.

[Lord Varys]

13 hours ago, Bael's Bastard said:

I'd like to see Haegon portrayed like his father. It would be a great opportunity. The second "rebellion" was a joke and failure. I think Haegon should basically be what inspires those who joined the second rebellion and suffered for it to chance another, those who sat out the second rebellion to join in, and perhaps even some who were previously loyalists to switch sides. He should be central to why the third rebellion is the most serious human threat to House Targaryen's rule in almost a quarter of a century, since Daemon I himself. And I wouldn't be surprised if Aerion kills Haegon, which would only lend itself to a sympathetic showing leading up to that. 

I agree it should be a much bigger movement, an actual war involving a couple of battles. However, I think the other Blackfyres could very well score points in the whole charisma game. Hell, by that time Bittersteel himself could have some sons trying to make their father proud (who are then all killed in the war before father children of their own).

I'm inclined to believe that Haegon is likely going to be different from Daemon II in the sense that he is going to be neither a dreamer nor a homosexual but that doesn't mean he has to be the very image of his father. He could be an average guy, or somewhat more like Aerion than Daemon Blackfyre. After all, we know that this Targaryen madness thing usually worsens overtime so Haegon could have been pretty sane in 212 AC while being somewhat different in 219 AC.

Some of the houses participating in the Second Rebellion should feature in the Third. The Sunderlands, most likely, and the Yronwoods (who were not at Whitewalls) have to. But I doubt we are going to see any Freys at Haegon's side, and there is little chance that Heddles or Butterwells are going to play a vital role (although whatever branches of the house still exist in 219 AC might rally to the Black Dragon). The Peakes might have cause for revenge but we'll have to wait and see.

I'm more inclined to believe that we'll see the Golden Company exile connection in full bloom in that war. Bittersteel founded the company to keep the exiles together and depending how many noblemen actually went into exile in 196 AC this might actually be a considerable force with many of them still have close ties to family members back home.

[The Grey Wolf]

50 minutes ago, Lord Varys said:

George's announcement that Dunk & Egg are going to Essos eventually could enable them to actually meet and befriend some Blackfyres incognito (say, if Dunk serves with the recently founded Golden Company for a time). That could have interesting consequences during the Third Rebellion. Who knows? Perhaps Egg is going to have a crush on Bittersteel's daughter (and Illyrio' great-grandmother) and Dunk becomes vast friends with Haegon Blackfyre.

Such a setting could put Dunk & Egg in interesting situations during the Third Rebellion. And keep in mind that we have no idea yet what Dunk is doing during the Third Rebellion. Egg is mentioned but not Dunk.

I remember suggesting that one of political matches Egg made for his sons might involve a betrothal between Duncan Targaryen and Blackfyre heiress with the purpose to unite the branches and end the conflict. I still think that could have been a great idea.

I agree the ideas you present would be fascinating to read about.

On Aerys I, I'll let these essays (none of them written by me to be clear) explain my view of him as well as the Blackfyres as a whole:

http://towerofthehand.com/blog/2015/02/22-blacks-and-reds-part-i/ (This one talks about the lead-up to the First BR, the motivations, most prominent figures, and so forth)

http://towerofthehand.com/blog/2015/03/01-blacks-and-reds-part-ii/ (This one talks about the First BR)

http://towerofthehand.com/blog/2015/03/08-blacks-and-reds-part-iii/ (This one talks about Aerys, Bloodraven, and the Second/Third/Fourth BR)

http://towerofthehand.com/blog/2015/03/16-blacks-and-reds-part-iv/ (This one talks about the GC and the Fifth BR)

https://warsandpoliticsoficeandfire.wordpress.com/2015/10/14/unlikely-unwanted-crowns-a-political-analysis-of-aerys-i-and-maekar-i-targaryen/

Also, you made a small error. The exiles fled in 196 AC, not 296 AC though that makes me wonder what would have happened if the Targaryens had gone the way of the Blackfyres during RR (fleeing with their most diehard supporters to Essos).

[Blackfyre Bastard]

I'm glad to see that many posters here have displayed some ideas that I have also developed over the years.

*Puts tinfoil hat on*

With this I mean that Bloodraven had over the years embraced his greensight. We know that he consorted with sorcerers, which I think was to learn ways to temper his grenseer abilities (he probably has dragondreams as well). The assassination of Aenys Blackfyre was a medium for him to reach the Wall, and later reach the cave where Bran and party found him, where he became one with the trees.

I think that through his greensight, BR was able to see that TPtwP would be begotten through the line of Daeron II and that made him a staunch supporter of him against Daemon, later in TMK he uses his sorcery to infiltrate the castle where the 2nd Blackfyre Rebellion was being plotted, and then at the Great Council of 233 AC the murder of Aenys ensured that Aegon V (and thus Daeron II line) would inherit the IT.

BR puts ahead of his honor, not "the good of the realm" as many claim, but rather the inheritance of Daeron II's offspring.

As to what is he doing at the cave with the CotF? I can only speculate, but I like to think that is related to paving the way for the final outcome of the War for the Dawn.

BR has worked his own agenda for the past 100 years, making him THE central character of all ASoIaF.

[Lord Varys]

11 hours ago, The Grey Wolf said:

I agree the ideas you present would be fascinating to read about.

On Aerys I, I'll let these essays (none of them written by me to be clear) explain my view of him as well as the Blackfyres as a whole:

http://towerofthehand.com/blog/2015/02/22-blacks-and-reds-part-i/ (This one talks about the lead-up to the First BR, the motivations, most prominent figures, and so forth)

http://towerofthehand.com/blog/2015/03/01-blacks-and-reds-part-ii/ (This one talks about the First BR)

http://towerofthehand.com/blog/2015/03/08-blacks-and-reds-part-iii/ (This one talks about Aerys, Bloodraven, and the Second/Third/Fourth BR)

http://towerofthehand.com/blog/2015/03/16-blacks-and-reds-part-iv/ (This one talks about the GC and the Fifth BR)

https://warsandpoliticsoficeandfire.wordpress.com/2015/10/14/unlikely-unwanted-crowns-a-political-analysis-of-aerys-i-and-maekar-i-targaryen/

Also, you made a small error. The exiles fled in 196 AC, not 296 AC though that makes me wonder what would have happened if the Targaryens had gone the way of the Blackfyres during RR (fleeing with their most diehard supporters to Essos).

Those essays aren't bad but the basis for the conclusions and speculations is the incomplete picture we have as of yet. We haven't even met Aerys I in person so we don't have a real picture of the man. I'm not saying the man was some political genius pretending he was some antisocial scholar. But we have to keep in mind that the quality of a king in Westeros is often dependent on the quality of his advisors. Joffrey and Aerys II weren't exactly great kings but they had (limited) success thanks to the advisors and lieutenants acting in their name.

Viserys II managed the Realm throughout the reigns of his brother and his two nephews but the kings and not he, as Hand, reaped the rewards. Vice versa, a bad or unpopular Hand also badly reflects on the king. Bloodraven is a very unpopular man and thus him becoming Hand did not exactly help Aerys' public image - but then, Maekar the Kinslayer would also have been a rather unpopular Hand...

We also have no complete picture of Bloodraven. We don't know how much influence and power he had later during Aerys I's reign (say, after Prince Aelor and then Prince Maekar had become Prince of Dragonstone) nor have we even a clue how prominent a role he played under King Maekar. He remained Hand, but the power of the Hand is dependent on the king and I don't think Maekar was absent from his own government as Aerys I was.

Criticizing Aerys I and Bloodraven for their actions after 209 AC in the wake of the Great Spring Sickness, the drought, and the Ironborn raids is pretty arrogant in light of the fact that the plague must have greatly reduced the population of Westeros, especially in the more populated areas. The power of the Crown had to be restored and secured in the places that were most important for the dynasty. There was no reason to enter into adventures risking the royal fleet and additional lives in dealing with Dagon Greyjoy. Especially considering that the king was also acting through his wardens and lords, and they took the war to the Ironborn, presumably with the permission and (moral) support of the Iron Throne.

[The Grey Wolf]

2 hours ago, Lord Varys said:

Text

I disagree with you on the Greyjoys. Given the way the situation is described in D & E it sounds a lot more like the Starks and Lannisters are acting on their own because the crown is doing nothing, not even giving them its blessing. Also, considering that Bloodraven kept royal forces concentrated in the east against the Blackfyres yet they managed to land twice under his watch and once in secret no less, I think Bloodraven and Aerys can be rightly critized for their inaction, especially since not taking charge against a rebellious bannerman attacking other bannerman is egregious in the extreme no matter the circumstances but especially in times of turmoil where the legitimacy of the dynasty is under direct attack.

However, I won't argue any further since, as you correctly pointed out, we have an incomplete picture.

[Little Scribe of Naath]

17 minutes ago, The Grey Wolf said:

I disagree with you on the Greyjoys. Given the way the situation is described in D & E it sounds a lot more like the Starks and Lannisters are acting on their own because the crown is doing nothing, not even giving them its blessing. Also, considering that Bloodraven kept royal forces concentrated in the east against the Blackfyres yet they managed to land twice under his watch and once in secret no less, I think Bloodraven and Aerys can be rightly critized for their inaction, especially since not taking charge against a rebellious bannerman attacking other bannerman is egregious in the extreme no matter the circumstances but especially in times of turmoil where the legitimacy of the dynasty is under direct attack.

However, I won't argue any further since, as you correctly pointed out, we have an incomplete picture.

Huh? Isn't that paradoxical in itself? The Blackfyres managed to land and that too in secret even though the fleet was kept at DS....if it hadn't been there, isn't it more likely they would have landed and probably taken KL? It kind of proves Aerys and BR's paranoia right if the Blackfyres did land even though the fleet was there.

ETA: BTW, do we know when exactly Dagon Greyjoy's reaving was quelled? Was it confirmed to be after the Second BF Rebellion or Third BF Rebellion? Victarion in ADWD says that he was eventually defeated by the Targs, so that would be at a time when the BF threat was on the DL.

[Lord Varys]

9 minutes ago, The Grey Wolf said:

I disagree with you on the Greyjoys. Given the way the situation is described in D & E it sounds a lot more like the Starks and Lannisters are acting on their own because the crown is doing nothing, not even giving them its blessing.

That is what those hedge knights in TMK are claiming. Do they know the contents of the letters that passed between Casterly Rock, Winterfell, and King's Landing? No they don't. It appears to those men who talk about rumors and hearsay that the Iron Throne is doing nothing but that clearly isn't the case as TMK proves when Lord Bloodraven shows up with the king's army at Whitewalls.

9 minutes ago, The Grey Wolf said:

Also, considering that Bloodraven kept royal forces concentrated in the east against the Blackfyres yet they managed to land twice under his watch and once in secret no less, I think Bloodraven and Aerys can be rightly critized for their inaction, especially since not taking charge against a rebellious bannerman attacking other bannerman is egregious in the extreme no matter the circumstances but especially in times of turmoil where the legitimacy of the dynasty is under direct attack.

Well, if Bloodraven had taken the fleet west then he might have been in the Redwyne Straits during the Second Blackfyre Rebellion resulting in Daemon's campaign gaining momentum and possibly culminating in a Blackfyre victory. The Second Blackfyre Rebellion only ended the way it did because Bloodraven was informed about everything and able to do something about it. Had the Blackfyres won a victory in the Riverlands after Daemon II had proclaimed himself many lords and knights might have rallied to his banner making the whole thing a major war.

Bloodraven's duty was to his king not his king's subjects. As long as Aerys I's crown was in real danger from the Blackfyres it would have been foolish to deplete the Crownlands of their defenses by marching against some minor rebels at the other end of the Realm. I'm not saying that this was a great decision. But if you have limited resources you make the best of it, and Bloodraven clearly didn't have the resources to protect KL and Dragonstone in the middle of a drought while also personally conducting a campaign against the Ironborn.

And you have to keep in mind that there are many precedents for the great lords and wardens acting on their own in the king's name. The Lords of Winterfell dealt with the Skagos Rebellion and the Kings-beyond-the-Wall. They were not calling upon the help of the Iron Throne in any of that. Presumably because that was a duty that came with being a great lord and a warden. Aegon V interfering with the inner affairs of the West during the days of the misrule of Tytos Lannister seems to have been rather exceptional. Normally a lord is tasked with the responsibility to keep the King's Peace in his own lands. Else he is no lord at all.

8 minutes ago, Little Scribe of Naath said:

Huh? Isn't that paradoxical in itself? The Blackfyres managed to land and that too in secret even though the fleet was kept at DS....if it hadn't been there, isn't it more likely they would have landed and probably taken KL? It kind of proves Aerys and BR's paranoia right if the Blackfyres did land even though the fleet was there.

No fleet ever landed in secret under Bloodraven's watch as far as we know. Bloodraven was informed about the entire plot involving Daemon II at Whitewalls, and we have no idea whether the Third Rebellion involves a secret landing. Perhaps it involves a vast fleet openly landing at a major harbor in Westeros (like, say, Duskendale, Maidenpool, or Gulltown)

[Little Scribe of Naath]

3 minutes ago, Lord Varys said:

No fleet ever landed in secret under Bloodraven's watch as far as we know. Bloodraven was informed about the entire plot involving Daemon II at Whitewalls, and we have no idea whether the Third Rebellion involves a secret landing. Perhaps it involves a vast fleet openly landing at a major harbor in Westeros (like, say, Duskendale, Maidenpool, or Gulltown)

Yes, I was actually wondering when exactly a secret fleet of the BF's landed....I think the @The Grey Wolf was referring to Daemon II himself landing in secret, not some fleet.

I'm inclined to believe that BR in 211 AC had an inkling of a possible BF invasion long before Daemon arrived itself, from his sources, which is why he kept the fleet close the whole time. After the capture of Daemon II however, there was little chance Bittersteel could crown someone else as long as Daemon was alive, so the royalists were free to move their fleet to attack and defeat Dagon.

In any case, the issue with moving the royal fleet is that it straightaway leaves DS and consequently the Blackwater Bay very vulnerable, and it's only a short sail from there to take KL. 

[Bael's Bastard]

I've always wondered why it was so certain that Bittersteel wouldn't crown Haegon so long as Daemon the Younger was alive, considering Bittersteel doesn't seem to have supported him whatsoever in his designs to be king in the first place. I understand that Daemon was the eldest, but is that such an insurmountable obstacle to the leaders of a rebellion whose original aim was to put a younger and illegitimate brother of Daeron II on the throne?

[The Grey Wolf]

51 minutes ago, Little Scribe of Naath said:

Yes, I was actually wondering when exactly a secret fleet of the BF's landed....I think the @The Grey Wolf was referring to Daemon II himself landing in secret, not some fleet.

In any case, the issue with moving the royal fleet is that it straightaway leaves DS and consequently the Blackwater Bay very vulnerable, and it's only a short sail from there to take KL. 

I was indeed referring to Daemon II. Sorry for the confusion.

1 hour ago, Lord Varys said:

Bloodraven's duty was to his king not his king's subjects.

You make good arguments for BR not sending the royal fleet against Dagon but shouldn't he or Aerys have done something besides leaving Stark and Lannister to deal with it themselves, with or without their blessing? Dagon only started to raid after the plague was finished and Dorne as well as the Vale emerged unscathed to say the least, not to mention the Tyrells seem to be missing in action. Couldn't BR have ordered any of those three to help (though I'll admit the Vale is on the wrong side of the continent)? That would have given most of Westeros a unified purpose and help foster better relationships between the kingdoms (like the Ninepenny Kings did) as well as make the monarchy look like it was taking charge (in the eyes of the smallfolk, who make up the majority but don't have access to the king). Beyond that couldn't BR have hired sellswords to deal with the Ironborn? The treasury Aerys I inherited probably wasn't hurting at all.

However, I have to take issue with the bolded. Doesn't the king have a duty to his subjects and therefore all of those who work for him and in his name as well?

[The Grey Wolf]

15 minutes ago, Bael's Bastard said:

I've always wondered why it was so certain that Bittersteel wouldn't crown Haegon so long as Daemon the Younger was alive, considering Bittersteel doesn't seem to have supported him whatsoever in his designs to be king in the first place. 

We don't even know when Daemon II died. If it was around the time of the Third Blackfyre Rebellion...

[Bael's Bastard]

59 minutes ago, The Grey Wolf said:

We don't even know when Daemon II died. If it was around the time of the Third Blackfyre Rebellion...

Yes, but I am referring to Bloodraven's logic immediately after Daemon's arrest. I suppose BR had reason to believe that if he kept Daemon alive it would prevent Bittersteel from crowning the next son. And I guess BR could have just executed Daemon or whatever was decided if he turned out to be wrong about that.

[The Grey Wolf]

3 hours ago, Bael's Bastard said:

Yes, but I am referring to Bloodraven's logic immediately after Daemon's arrest. I suppose BR had reason to believe that if he kept Daemon alive it would prevent Bittersteel from crowning the next son. And I guess BR could have just executed Daemon or whatever was decided if he turned out to be wrong about that.

That's sort of what I meant. Plus, Bittersteel and Haegon could have always invaded in the name of uprooting the Targaryens and rescuing Daemon II from their clutches, which makes wonder what the Blackfyres actually called their rebellions. Haegon's War instead of the Third Blackfyre Rebellion for example?

[Lord Varys]

3 hours ago, Bael's Bastard said:

I've always wondered why it was so certain that Bittersteel wouldn't crown Haegon so long as Daemon the Younger was alive, considering Bittersteel doesn't seem to have supported him whatsoever in his designs to be king in the first place. I understand that Daemon was the eldest, but is that such an insurmountable obstacle to the leaders of a rebellion whose original aim was to put a younger and illegitimate brother of Daeron II on the throne?

I guess because the Blackfyre loyalists were basically believing as much in the right of primogeniture as the next lord. Perhaps even more so considering that they were a bunch of traitors favoring a junior bastard line over the elder legitimate royal line on the basis of rumors, hearsay, and political convenience. If Bittersteel now declared Daemon's sixth son the new 'king' because he was his favorite nephew he would not likely get all that much support.

And while it is true that Bittersteel didn't support Daemon II he also didn't actively hinder his efforts. I still think it was treason on Aegor's part to not support his nephew by at least giving him the sword that was his by right but aside from that he didn't actively support the Targaryens or anybody else against Daemon II.

Even if Daemon hadn't been captured it would not have looked good had Aegor tried to make a younger son of Daemon I king in his place. Daemon II bore the illustrious name of his sire and simply had the first claim to the throne from the Blackfyre point of view. I guess if he had been a lackwit or decided to support the Targaryen claim like Bloodraven did Bittersteel could have considered ignoring his claim. But not as things stood.

And it seems a majority of the Blackfyre partisans thought the same. After all, Daemon II actually had the support of a good portion of the Blackfyre loyalists in the Westeros.

2 hours ago, Bael's Bastard said:

Yes, but I am referring to Bloodraven's logic immediately after Daemon's arrest. I suppose BR had reason to believe that if he kept Daemon alive it would prevent Bittersteel from crowning the next son. And I guess BR could have just executed Daemon or whatever was decided if he turned out to be wrong about that.

Well, Bloodraven himself seems to think he cannot make a final judgment on the fate of a cousin of Aerys I. He says it is for the king to decide what's going to happen to Daemon II - and later on it is actually up to Aerys I to sit in judgment over Aegor Rivers and he did not follow Brynden's advince in that case. Thus we can reasonably say that Aerys I wasn't Bloodraven's puppet.

I guess Bloodraven could have arranged some sort of accident for Daemon - either on the way to KL or at court - but it was definitely an advantage to have the Blackfyre pretender at court rather than in Tyrosh. Keep in mind that they could have used Daemon II to publicly condemn Haegon and Aegor should they have invaded while Daemon II was still alive.

I hope we are going to see Daemon II again when Dunk and Egg finally visit court and meet Aerys I, Aelinor, Rhaegel, Aelor, Aelora, Shiera, Kiera, and the others. Daemon's prophetic dreams could actually allow him to join the sorcerer circle at court. There is Aerys I himself, Bloodraven, Shiera, and the Grand Maester.

4 hours ago, The Grey Wolf said:

We don't even know when Daemon II died. If it was around the time of the Third Blackfyre Rebellion...

I and others have suggested that it might turn out that the masked ball where the Rat, the Hawk, and the Pig are going to rape Princess Aelora is also going to be the event where Daemon II is killed. The idea is that Bittersteel is sending agents to Westeros to infiltrate the court and murder Aerys I, Maekar, Bloodraven, and Daemon II to make way for Haegon. Dunk and Egg could save King Aerys (and/or Maekar and Bloodraven) but fail to save Daemon II and Aelora. Or Daemon II is involved in the plot believing Bittersteel is trying to rescue him while he is actually using the opportunity to kill him and blame the murder on the Targaryens.

In any case, such a story set at court covering the schemes leading up to the Third Rebellion could be very interesting. Much more so than this quick introduction and the subsequent ending of the Second Rebellion.

[Little Scribe of Naath]

@The Grey Wolf

The Ironborn cannot be defeated on land. They have to be defeated on sea. Calling knights from the Vale, sellswords from Essos or spears from Dorne would do no help as they wouldn't be able to fight the same on sea as they do on land. Elsewise the North should have no issue because we know they have more than enough of men to fight the IB on land. Yet they couldn't, because they have no navy. (Brandon the Burner burnt all the ships.)

Westeros has only two major fleets which could possibly match the Ironborn -  one KL's fleet, on the eastern side, and one the Redwynes fleet on the West.  Lannisport has a very small fleet, which was presumably destroyed by the Ironborn because we learn that the Lannister in charge at the time had to build ships to stave off the Ironborn. That would easily take atleast 6 months, going off how much time Stannis took to rebuild a fleet to take Dragonstone during RR.  If it was a matter of just men, the Westerlands has that too. 

We don't have information on what the details of the whole thing, but the only real thing BR could have done was direct the Redwyne fleet towards the Ironborn. Considering that Dagon raided as far as the Arbor anyway, I'm expecting that the Redwyne fleet must have been defeated by the Ironborn at the time. With that gone, there's really nothing BR can do except direct the KL fleet, which would leave Dragonstone and KL wide open to attack, or wait for ships to be built in the first place. The problem was not of men at all, that much is clear, because both regions had enough men to combat the IB.