Why Targaryens have actual dragon blood.

[LordStoneheart]

I enjoy scalding hot baths. Maybe I'm a secret Targ. With hot-bath superpowers.

In my mind I've always pictured you as Valyrian, Apple. :leer:

[UVA]

In my mind I've always pictured you as Valyrian, Apple. :leer:

You and me both, my dear (reincarnation of Rhaegar. xx)

[Mikkel]

a little bit late to the party...

I agree with butterbumps!, I think Rhaego's life force was swapped with the eggs. The eggs were fossils, Rhaegor was a baby in his mother's womb, then some blood magic happened and shazam, the eggs were warm and alive, Rhaego borned as fossilised and dragon-like.

Dragon-like babies or "mutated babies" may be the consequences of dragonbinding? They don't pay blood or anything for dragonbinding, kinda like how skinchangers don't pay for their abilities, but they may lose their humanity and become beasts, dragonriders don't pay for binding but they may have deformed babies? Magic :dunno:

Huh, how about that, that actually seems entirely plausible.

[butterbumps!]

For my part, I am quite convinced that GRRM views this business as being a kind of magical fantasy genetics thing -- there's literally something "in the blood". And from that, I am convinced that having no dragonlord blood means that you couldn't ever hope to ride a dragon.

The "dragon dreams" of Daenys the Dreamer, Daeron the Drunken, or Daemon II Blackfyre seems to match well enough with the idea that there's a distinctive, inherited kind of magic in the Targaryen line, possibly a broader dragonlord thing, we don't know. And given the prominence of dragons in such dreams -- even from people who exist after the dragons are dead, who never saw a living one -- it just seems natural to suppose that there's something "there" to it.

I would guess the more dragonlord blood you have, the likelier you'll have those aspects necessary for various expressions of Targaryen/dragonlord magic, whether it's prophetic dreams or sorcery or dragonriding, but having just a drop could in itself -- by the grace of the gods and the whim of GRRM -- be sufficient.

I agree that there's "something in the blood," and that this concept applies to Valyrians and First Men. But I wonder if the genesis of that blood makes all of this less deterministic and more "democratic."

I agree with your other comment about a kind of "magical radiation," in that longterm exposure to magic starts to change you (we see this on a singular character basis-- too much warging, and you become the wolf, the Undying, probably the Reds, Bloodraven and the trees, I speculate this might be what goes on with the Others, etc). Maybe, over time, this exposure does cause longterm changes to a family line, roughly like mutating into a "magic gene" or something, for lack of a better term.

But I'm curious about how this began. It looks like Martin's setting this up such that the way humans tap into magic is through blood sacrifice. I suspect "magic blood" is a longterm by-product of continued engagement with magic over time that originally began with blood sacrifice as the "on switch."

In other words, I'm not sure that the first person to warg or ride a dragon was born with magical blood and therefore able to do these things because of magic blood. I suspect those first people made it happen through blood sacrifice, and over time and continued magical engagement, "mutated."

I think questioning the "chicken and egg" aspect has thematic significance (i.e. is it blood or the man that matters), but might also have plot significance. If the critical part of this is blood sacrifice rather than specific blood, then it means anyone willing to perform a sacrifice would be able to harness power to some end. Perhaps it's harder for those without a "magical gene" to tap into it or something, but I think it would open the door for characters without a certain blood type to harness certain magics anyway (Euron comes to mind).

[Suzanna Stormborn]

I've pondered what I can say on this subject.

Okay, we have a number of different kinds of situations in which dragons can be bonded to a person.

For example, children presented with dragon eggs and hatchlings. I can say that in every case in which a healthy hatchling was born, no Targaryen was ever rejected by it, so far as I can recall and find through a cursory search of what I have.

Then we have older dragons, either ones that once had riders or perhaps never had riders. These can be dangerous -- especially if old and ill-tempered -- even to a Targaryen, but there's the sense that it's even worse for non-Targaryens (but hey, I can see the argument that it's just a recognition thing -- dragons may be more tolerant of silver-gold, purple-eyed people through long association with them). The belief is that you have to be of Targaryen blood -- or, lets be more general about it -- dragonlord blood to have a chance with these. But it's impossible to prove this 100% based on just the information provided in the texts, because you can never know if a "black swan" will or has shown up. That said, there's certainly a widespread belief that all dragonriders have had dragonlord blood somewhere in their lineage.

I might suggest that it's more specific than dragonlord lineage, though. If it's a genetic thing, it's entirely possible that the particular genes required for a dragon to "sense" that you are an acceptable rider might skip a person -- they may look 100% Targaryen, and simply not have that particular thing. I can't think of any Targaryen who was actually rejected by a dragon, of course, but that doesn't necessarily mean much. But we may then see that in the dragonseeds, the converse can be true -- they may have very little dragonlord blood, but what portion they have happens to be exactly what's needed to permit them to ride a dragon.

The best evidence, I think, for some magical genetic component to dragonriding is simply the fact that the dragonlords in particular practiced incest -- other Valyrian nobility did as well, I guess, but it seems the dragonlords really led the way. Which suggests that they may well have believed that there was a genetic component, one they wanted to keep strictly to the family. (Alternatively, I guess you can argue it's all just inheritance matter -- marrying family members out might lead to their offspring, members of other families entirely, might be able to claim your dragons for themselves).

For my part, I am quite convinced that GRRM views this business as being a kind of magical fantasy genetics thing -- there's literally something "in the blood". And from that, I am convinced that having no dragonlord blood means that you couldn't ever hope to ride a dragon.

The "dragon dreams" of Daenys the Dreamer, Daeron the Drunken, or Daemon II Blackfyre seems to match well enough with the idea that there's a distinctive, inherited kind of magic in the Targaryen line, possibly a broader dragonlord thing, we don't know. And given the prominence of dragons in such dreams -- even from people who exist after the dragons are dead, who never saw a living one -- it just seems natural to suppose that there's something "there" to it.

I would guess the more dragonlord blood you have, the likelier you'll have those aspects necessary for various expressions of Targaryen/dragonlord magic, whether it's prophetic dreams or sorcery or dragonriding, but having just a drop could in itself -- by the grace of the gods and the whim of GRRM -- be sufficient.

Not just "a drop", but the "right drop", I guess.

Are there lots of them? Well, if we accept the dragonseeds had in some cases very distant drops but still had the "right drop", it seems likely that the dragonriding gene is probably pretty well-spread. Like, every noble family who can trace Velaryons or Celtigars or other dragonstone houses can probably notionally have a chance at having that "right drop".

The other aspect of all this is that GRRM's as much as admitted that there's a certain fantasy genetics even in other families -- like Robert's always-black-haired-and-blue-eyed-kids. That's obviously not a trait that necessarily passes to all his offspring, or to the offspring of his ancestors with similar weird dominant traits, because otherwise Westeros should be over-run with black-haired-and-blue-eyed people.

Basically, it's all authorial fiat. George decides who can ride a dragon and who can't, by whatever rules he wants. I think the rule here is that, yes, there's something special about dragonlord blood, but having dragonlord blood in and of itself isn't necessarily enough to convey that specialness.

ETA: I see another argument comes from deformed infants with scales and wings and such. While it's easy to suppose that this is further proof that there's actual magical genetic stuff going on, I wouldn't absolutely rule out the possibility that proximity to dragons -- who are, after all, magical creatures -- could lead to strange things to embryos in the womb. Like ... magical radiation.

Oh, that. No, I didn't mean the .... je ne sais quois of dragonlord genes are what make dragon eggs hatch. I mean, I assume the failure of those later eggs relates to the general degradation of the dragon gene pool following the destruction of the Dance, and whatever else was going on (Dragonpit, the falling off of magic, etc.)

I think they invited all sorts of people, and we don't get the names of all the people who tried and failed. But just because you had Targaryen blood somewhere didn't mean you were guaranteed a dragon, and these old dragons were liable to burn or eat you if they rejected you -- I assume many people just prudently decided that they'd rather not risk it. After all, what was a dragon going to get them, anyway, except a front row seat into the nastiest civil war the Seven Kingdoms had ever seen... ?

But of course, who says people didn't try?

Though I'd guess that prior to the Dance, the Targaryens certainly would not have randomly sought out dragon riders. Why would they? The Targaryens have a monopoly on dragons, there's no reason to go outside of the immediate noble family to get various wild dragons ridden or what have you.

How was Daeron the Drunken's fate and fortune bound up with dragons? Or Daemon II?

Pretty sure Daeron didn't see himself as a dragon, for that matter -- didn't seem the grandiose sort.

The absence of evidence is not evidence of absence, as they say.

The Targaryen hatcheries would of course be generally watched and guarded, I suppose. Not much you can do when a hungry cannibal dragon drops down to gorge, but I imagine anyone who dared risk the wrath of god-like Targaryens was probably going to face severe difficulties. And then what does he get for his troubles? He maybe steals away an egg, that may or may not hatch, that may or not lead to a hatchling that will bond with them, which then has to be fed in secret out of fear of what the Targaryens will do when they find out you stole an egg...

Nah, anyone foolish enough, it's no surprise we never hear of them, they'd have been killed off pretty quick.

So then, again, you're xpecting the Targaryens to just allow any old noble to come along and claim an egg... why?

So no, I expect outside of exceptionally rare circumstances, no one but Targaryens and half-Targaryen types got chances at dragons; and those rare exceptions otherwise were probably people who failed or did not long survive their effrontery.

I don't recall Daeron ever envisioning his uncle or anyone else as dragons in conversation with Dunk. I think he mocks Aerion for thinking he's a dragon, but that's about it.

OH Ran!!!!

Thank you thank you, thank you so much for posting all this info. This is flat out exactly what I have been saying for the past year or so. You could not have made me any happier if you tried today.

I have been getting so much shit for so long on here regarding this subject. Thank you for agreeing with me and proving me right on parts of my arguments at least! Thank you so much!

http://asoiaf.wester...-dragons/page-7 POST 124 is my pet theory.

And here is my thread on exactly what you are saying about family magic. That you have to be a dragonlord and you have to be special as well within that family. Same thing with the Starks. You have to have the blood of the First men, and you have have that extra something. Which is why there are certain Starks who can warg direwolves, but not all of them can.

http://asoiaf.westeros.org/index.php/topic/105208-family-inherent-magic-as-it-applies-to-individuals/

I always thought it was incredible in D&E that Dareon was having dragon dreams, when he had never actually seen one. It is an amazing feat that is somewhat looked over. For him to dream of a full-grown dragon when the most he could have ever seen is a hand drawing in a book. It's not like he can go see The Desolation of Smaug and get a really great idea of how big a dragon is. It came from something within him, quite spectacular thing for him to do. It was the same with Dany when Drogon was cleansing her with his fire in her dream in GOT before the eggs ever hatched. She was envisioning him full-grown even though she had never seen a living dragon. So cool!!

:cool4: :cheers: :bowdown: :blushing:

[Suzanna Stormborn]

TPATQ: Rhaenyra's daughter born with a stubby scaled tail.

AGOT: Daenerys' son: He was scaled like a lizard, blind, with the stub of a tail and small leather wings like the wings of a bat.

The incest of Targaryens is better understood, though not necessarily palatable.

Unlike the lions of Casterly Rock, the real dragons amongst the Targaryens, are dragonspawn (minimeque partly dragonspawn).

How this sorcery took place, only Valyria knows. And maybe some old dude in Oldtown.

OP I literally started this exact same thread right after PATQ came out :)

To say the least I completely agree with you :)

http://asoiaf.westeros.org/index.php/topic/100583-princess-and-the-queen-confirmsspoliers/

[Modesty Lannister]

How do you know that that they don't? How can we be sure that e.g. Lyanna Mormont is not a warg? Or Larence Snow?

ETA: I should clarify - yes, wargs are rare, but they're not limited to Stark bloodline.

I know, because if that was the case, that would be important and GRRM would write about it. And if you read my post, you'd know that I insisted that warging isn't limited to the Stark bloodline. What I did insist upon is that, mixing blood with another house does not transfer magical power to that house. That's what Quentyn example shows us, as well as examples of northern houses.

[butterbumps!]

Thank you thank you, thank you so much for posting all this info. This is flat out exactly what I have been saying for the past year or so. You could not have made me any happier if you tried today. You literally confirmed 3 of my pet theories.

http://asoiaf.westeros.org/index.php/topic/107638-thoughts-on-bonding-with-and-taming-dragons/page-7 POST 124 is my pet theory.

I have been getting so much shit for so long on here regarding this subject. Thank you for agreeing with me and proving me right! Thank you so much!

And here is my thread on exactly what you are saying about family magic. That you have to be a dragonlord and you have to be special as well within that family. Same thing with the Starks. You have to have the blood of the First men, and you have have that extra something. Which is why there are certain Starks who can warg direwolves, but not all of them can.

http://asoiaf.westeros.org/index.php/topic/105208-family-inherent-magic-as-it-applies-to-individuals/

I always thought it was incredible in D&E that Dareon was having dragon dreams, when he had never actually seen one. It is an amazing feat that is somewhat looked over. For him to dream of a full-grown dragon when the most he could have ever seen is a hand drawing in a book. It's not like he can go see The Desolation of Smaug and get a really great idea of how big a dragon is. It came from something within him, quite spectacular thing for him to do. It was the same with Dany when Drogon was cleansing her with his fire in her dream in GOT before the eggs ever hatched. She was envisioning him full-grown even though she had never seen a living dragon. So cool!!

:cool4: :cheers: :bowdown: :blushing:

OP I literally started this exact same thread right after PATQ came out :)

To say the least I completely agree with you :)

http://asoiaf.westeros.org/index.php/topic/100583-princess-and-the-queen-confirmsspoliers/

There might be some confusion. Your threads, and this OP, argue that there's literal dragon blood flowing in Targaryen veins, and there's also been a lot of heat resistance debate. I don't think it's been much of a question whether there's something magical to the Valyrians; they have prophetic dreams after all. That's not the issue anyone really argues over. Heat resistance and literal dragon's blood in Targs were not confirmed.

[Modesty Lannister]

The Starks didn't marry into the Tullys, a Tully married into the Starks.

We'll also told explicitly that the odds of being a warg are one in a thousand. So it's rare even among those of First Men descent.

Also, it's "moot," not "mute."

Thank you for the correction of auto-spelling-checker. I'm sure now other posters can decipher previously incomprehensible post. As for the rest, is this the best you can do? Read what Ran posted. That will suffice.

[Mrs_Darcy]

I know, because if that was the case, that would be important and GRRM would write about it. And if you read my post, you'd know that I insisted that warging isn't limited to the Stark bloodline. What I did insist upon is that, mixing blood with another house does not transfer magical power to that house. That's what Quentin example shows us, as well as examples of northern houses.

I think no one on this forum argues, that Edmure Tully will start warging a wolf (or a trout), because his sister married into the Starks, but it does not seem, that the ability to warg is passed only via the male line, which would be the case, if mixing blood with another house does not transfer magical power to that house.

Do you believe in R+L=J? Because, if you do, then we have an example of the ability to warg being passed down via the female line (Jon Snow).

ETA: If you believe in the Bael the Bard legend, then all the known Starks are descendants from a female line.

[Suzanna Stormborn]

Yea, I know the other 2 threads are similar to what Ran said (and what I said for that matter; I'm even cited as a resource in the second OP).

But when you quoted this OP saying you agree, right after quoting Ran to say he confirmed "3 of [your] pet theories," (when what he posted looked like it confirmed 1), it seemed as though you were including other theories, such as literal dragon blood, and something else among those theories you believed were confirmed.

Ok cool. Cheers!!

I know, your idea about the Boltons gave me part of the idea that it's the same in all 'magical' families.

He has not confirmed the literal dragon blood, but that's ok, as I was right about several other things and am happy today.

I have just been argued so forcibly that I am wrong about everything. That the Targs have nothing special int heir blood, that Valyrians in general are not special, nor are they the only ones who can ride dragons. And that everyone in Westeros simply did not ever ride a dragon before because of Targ propaganda. That the targs circulated the idea that only they could ride dragons for 300 years, and that's why no one else has ever done it.

Those ideas are completely wrong, I said so the first time I heard them, and now I find out I was right :)

[Mrs_Darcy]

I always thought it was incredible in D&E that Dareon was having dragon dreams, when he had never actually seen one. It is an amazing feat that is somewhat looked over. For him to dream of a full-grown dragon when the most he could have ever seen is a hand drawing in a book. It's not like he can go see The Desolation of Smaug and get a really great idea of how big a dragon is. It came from something within him, quite spectacular thing for him to do. It was the same with Dany when Drogon was cleansing her with his fire in her dream in GOT before the eggs ever hatched. She was envisioning him full-grown even though she had never seen a living dragon. So cool!!

:cool4: :cheers: :bowdown: :blushing:

Well, if the drawings in World of Ice and Fire are anything to go by, he does not need a lot of inspiration after looking at them.

[butterbumps!]

Ok cool. Cheers!!

I know, your idea about the Boltons gave me part of the idea that it's the same in all 'magical' families.

He has not confirmed the literal dragon blood, but that's ok, as I was right about several other things and am happy today.

Yea, what was throwing me off was that you phrased it as something controversial that had been confirmed. The confirmation of literal dragon blood would be controversial, but confirmation of the presence of genetic magical ability wouldn't be so much. I think the implication of controversy and the adjacency of agreement with the OP made it look like you were referring to something else.

btw, I'm not sure if you looked through the whole thread, but I did make an argument for the reverse of literal dragon blood that might fit a little better with the Boltoneque theory (as well as wierwoods potentially). I think if there's shared blood, it's the dragons with human blood, not the other way around.

ETA: just saw your edit. I'm not sure if it's confirmed that only people with the right gene can ride a dragon. I do agree that there's magical genes, but I'm not so certain anything about whether only those with the proper gene might be able to.

[Suzanna Stormborn]

Well, if the drawings in World of Ice and Fire are anything to go by, he does not need a lot of inspiration after looking at them.

Personally I still think that is quite a leap. Seeing an 11 by 17 drawing is not even close to seeing a 50 ft live dragon standing in front of you IMO.

[Mrs_Darcy]

Yea, what was throwing me off was that you phrased it as something controversial that had been confirmed. The confirmation of literal dragon blood would be controversial, but confirmation of the presence of genetic magical ability wouldn't be so much. I think the implication of controversy and the adjacency of agreement with the OP made it look like you were referring to something else.

btw, I'm not sure if you looked through the whole thread, but I did make an argument for the reverse of literal dragon blood that might fit a little better with the Boltoneque theory (as well as wierwoods potentially). I think if there's shared blood, it's the dragons with human blood, not the other way around.

I think no one denies, that some Targaryens had prophetic dreams. The problem, that many people (including me) have with some of these posters, is that they say, that being a Targaryen makes you completely different (and better!) from other Westerosi, when there are countless examples in-universe of people having prophetic abilities (Jojen Reed, Rickon Stark, Ghost of High Heart, Maggy the Frog) or some other magical abilites (the Red Priests, the Faceless Men, Northern wargs, the Pyromancers, smiths of Valyrian stell, the Rhoynar, the warlocks,...).

[lostcause]

*snip*

Well, someone just got a bag of sunshine thrown at the rest of their day.

[Suzanna Stormborn]

I think no one denies, that some Targaryens had prophetic dreams. The problem, that many people (including me) have with some of these posters, is that they say, that being a Targaryen makes you completely different (and better!) from other Westerosi, when there are countless examples in-universe of people having prophetic abilities (Jojen Reed, Rickon Stark, Ghost of High Heart, Maggy the Frog) or some other magical abilites (the Red Priests, the Faceless Men, Northern wargs, the Pyromancers, smiths of Valyrian stell, the Rhoynar, the warlocks,...).

I agree that would be frustrating, but I'll tell you as one of the strongest targ supporters on here, I agree with you that no one is 'better'. the Targs can do certain things others can't but they had to pay a price. all the incest, just to keep the dragons only liking one family and one bloodline is a sacrifice. You will never see me say that they are better than anyone else, only that they can do somethign that no one from Westeros can do, which is ride dragons. But it goes the other way as well. the Starks and the First men can, as you say, warg animals, warg direwolves, the priests of R'holler can bring people back from the dead, all of which the Targ's cannot do. Magic exists in certain blood and does not in other peoples blood, it is as simple as that. And the sooner we can all accept that and move on I think discussion will be much more fruitful and not so argumentative about pointless subjects.

[butterbumps!]

I think no one denies, that some Targaryens had prophetic dreams. The problem, that many people (including me) have with some of these posters, is that they say, that being a Targaryen makes you completely different (and better!) from other Westerosi, when there are countless examples in-universe of people having prophetic abilities (Jojen Reed, Rickon Stark, Ghost of High Heart, Maggy the Frog) or some other magical abilites (the Red Priests, the Faceless Men, Northern wargs, the Pyromancers, smiths of Valyrian stell, the Rhoynar, the warlocks,...).

Yea, that's part of what gets confusing to me. As I understood it, I hadn't seen anyone deny that the Valyrians, like the First Men, probably have magical genetics. The controversy is in whether there's an inherent superiority by any specific group, and where these abilities come from -- especially in terms of whether it's literal dragon blood.

I think the issue is that "dragonblood" and "inherent magical ability/ gene" are used interchangeably. Looking at these debates objectively, I think what gets friction is whether anyone has literal "dragonblood." Those arguing in favor of this then see the opposition as essentially saying that Valyrians aren't magical, when in fact, it's just the literal presence of dragonblood that's being disagreed with. I kind of think everyone essentially agrees with the idea of magical genetics-- even in this thread.

[Jo498]

As compelling as the idea of a "swap" of Dany's unborn child with the dragon embryos may seem, I tend to agree with those who say that Rhaego's life force was drained. I actually like that Magic is not fully explained in ASoIaF, but one general principle seems to be that at least for major acts of magic one needs a reservoir of "magical energy". And life and blood are clearly shown to be such reservoirs.

(That's what the Undying are craving and isn't it also hinted at that prisoners are mutilated/killed to animate Un-Gregor?)

So while in the case of Dany's dragons several factors came together in two or even more stages, I think the Valyrians of Old had it worked out more systematically. MMD dabbled in blood magic, but probably it was just dabbling, more dangerous and less certain to be effective than it would have been in old Valyria.

There may be other power sources (like the comet, or maybe the comet just indicates that there is more "free" magical energy in the world, waiting to be tapped into by someone with the respective skills), but life-force and blood are certainly important.

One does not have to understand the "blood of the dragon" in terms of actual genetic mixing. I'd rather think of magical rituals involving exchange of blood between human and dragons, human sacrifices and maybe also using volcanic energy. So there's also "symphathetic magic" involved associating fire, dragons, dragonclass, for instance.

[Suzanna Stormborn]

As compelling as the idea of a "swap" of Dany's unborn child with the dragon embryos may seem, I tend to agree with those who say that Rhaego's life force was drained. I actually like that Magic is not fully explained in ASoIaF, but one general principle seems to be that at least for major acts of magic one needs a reservoir of "magical energy". And life and blood are clearly shown to be such reservoirs.

(That's what the Undying are craving and isn't it also hinted at that prisoners are mutilated/killed for to animate Un-Gregor?)

So while in the case of Dany's dragons several factors came together in two or even more stages, I think the Valyrians of Old had it worked out more systematically. MMD dabbled in blood magic, but probably it was dabbling, more dangerous and less certain to be effective than it would have been in old Valyria.

There may be other power sources (like the comet, or maybe the comet just indicates that there is more "free" magical energy in the world, waiting to be tapped into by someone with the respective skills), but life-force and blood are certainly important.

One does not have to understand the "blood of the dragon" in terms of actual genetic mixing. I'd rather think of magical rituals involving exchange of blood between human and dragons, human sacrifices and maybe also using volcanic energy. So there's also "symphathetic magic" involved associating fire, dragons, dragonclass, for instance.

This is what I think as well.