Jump to content
Potsk

Daemon Blackfyre

Recommended Posts

Why didn't Daemon Blackfyre name himself Daemon Targaryen if he hoped to win the throne? It would have given him a lot more support. He had the full right to as he was legitimized, and on top of that Targaryen on both sides.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
15 minutes ago, Potsk said:

Why didn't Daemon Blackfyre name himself Daemon Targaryen if he hoped to win the throne? It would have given him a lot more support. He had the full right to as he was legitimized, and on top of that Targaryen on both sides.

Because nobody likes Daemon Targaryen?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Daemon Waters chose his house name while he was still a bastard. He did that 182 AC when he got Blackfyre and his knighthood, not when he and the other bastards were legitimized by their father in 184 AC.

He might have used the Targaryen name after he had taken the throne ... or not.

I think not, but I also think Laenor and Jacaerys Velaryon would have ruled as Velaryons, not as Targaryens. And Daemon actually rejecting the name Targaryen means that, for him at least, that name didn't mean all that much.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I used to like to think that Blackfyre was at first a nickname Daemon was called by after receiving the sword, like Qhorin Halfhand, or Daenerys Stormborn. But it appears some source says he adopted the name when he received the sword at 12. Not sure what, to any, extent he was ever called by Targaryen. But apparently to him, or to his advisors, it was more important to use a house name that called attention to the fact that he wielded the sword of Aegon, than to retroactively adopt the surname of Aegon he had been deprived of and lived without up to then.

Edited by Bael's Bastard

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4 hours ago, Potsk said:

Why didn't Daemon Blackfyre name himself Daemon Targaryen if he hoped to win the throne? It would have given him a lot more support. He had the full right to as he was legitimized, and on top of that Targaryen on both sides.

Blackfyre is a better name than Targaryen. And it would have been the start of a new dynasty. His dynasty. It's what I would have done if I was in his place. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Floki of the Ironborn said:

Blackfyre is a better name than Targaryen. And it would have been the start of a new dynasty. His dynasty. It's what I would have done if I was in his place. 

Actually, no. It is the name of a stupid sword. It is not really that great a name for a sword, either.

But I certainly agree that Daemon deliberately chose that name to be his own man. It shows that he cared more about himself and his new dynasty than tradition. He forced the world to do things his way, and tried to break with the things of the past. That is an admirable trait.

3 hours ago, Bael's Bastard said:

I used to like to think that Blackfyre was at first a nickname Daemon was called by after receiving the sword, like Qhorin Halfhand, or Daenerys Stormborn. But it appears some source says he adopted the name when he received the sword at 12. Not sure what, to any, extent he was ever called by Targaryen. But apparently to him, or to his advisors, it was more important to use a house name that called attention to the fact that he wielded the sword of Aegon, than to retroactively adopt the surname of Aegon he had been deprived of and lived without up to then.

When did you ever think that? Blackfyre was confirmed as a house name since at least TMK, possibly even before that (ASoS first mentions the Blackfyre pretenders). People in Westeros do not call children and grandchildren by the nicknames of their fathers.

There wouldn't be any Bittersteels or Bloodravens or Blackfishs, etc. if those men had ever founded houses of their own ... unless they deliberately chose to make their nicknames into house names - sort of like Benedict Rivers did when he founded House Justman (although here the house name may only have developed with his son).

Daemon Blackfyre choosing his own name is a rather strong sign that Targaryens (and possibly other noblemen as well) do care a lot less about names than you think they do. Especially since Daemon's sons and grandsons continued to bear the house name of the first Daemon rather than adopting the Targaryen name (which they certainly could have done if they wanted to).

But it is rather odd that Bloodraven never went by the Targaryen name. Legitimized bastards usually do have the right to bear the name of their father.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
6 hours ago, Potsk said:

Why didn't Daemon Blackfyre name himself Daemon Targaryen if he hoped to win the throne? It would have given him a lot more support. He had the full right to as he was legitimized, and on top of that Targaryen on both sides.

Daemon already had a lot of support and I doubt using Targaryen instead of Blackfyre would've added that much more. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
9 minutes ago, Daemon The Black Dragon said:

Daemon already had a lot of support and I doubt using Targaryen instead of Blackfyre would've added that much more. 

Given how prickly lords and knights are to their honor and traditions, you ma be surprised...

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
20 minutes ago, nyser1 said:

Given how prickly lords and knights are to their honor and traditions, you ma be surprised...

You really think if Daemon went with Targaryen instead of Blackfyre he would've had a lot more support then he already had? Seems unlikely to me. Half the realm declared for Daemon Blackfyre (not counting the North or Dorne)  we're told.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Lord Varys said:

Actually, no. It is the name of a stupid sword. It is not really that great a name for a sword, either.

But I certainly agree that Daemon deliberately chose that name to be his own man. It shows that he cared more about himself and his new dynasty than tradition. He forced the world to do things his way, and tried to break with the things of the past. That is an admirable trait.

When did you ever think that? Blackfyre was confirmed as a house name since at least TMK, possibly even before that (ASoS first mentions the Blackfyre pretenders). People in Westeros do not call children and grandchildren by the nicknames of their fathers.

There wouldn't be any Bittersteels or Bloodravens or Blackfishs, etc. if those men had ever founded houses of their own ... unless they deliberately chose to make their nicknames into house names - sort of like Benedict Rivers did when he founded House Justman (although here the house name may only have developed with his son).

Daemon Blackfyre choosing his own name is a rather strong sign that Targaryens (and possibly other noblemen as well) do care a lot less about names than you think they do. Especially since Daemon's sons and grandsons continued to bear the house name of the first Daemon rather than adopting the Targaryen name (which they certainly could have done if they wanted to).

But it is rather odd that Bloodraven never went by the Targaryen name. Legitimized bastards usually do have the right to bear the name of their father.

It's odd that not just BR never went by the Targaryen name but none of great bastards did. Bittersteel seems like he would've just to piss off BR.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, Daemon The Black Dragon said:

It's odd that not just BR never went by the Targaryen name but none of great bastards did. Bittersteel seems like he would've just to piss off BR.

To be sure, we don't know how Bittersteel referred to himself or was addressed by the Golden Company. And neither do we know that for Shiera. We do know, however, that Brynden Rivers is addressed simply as 'Lord Rivers' by his own men while he is present and serving as the Hand of the King.

If you think about that it makes Aegon IV's legitmizing his children a joke. If they aren't Targaryens now then what was, literally, the point of the legitimization decree? And how did this decree stand if nobody actually refers to them by their new family names?

Daemon Blackfyre has an excuse - he took his own new family name in 182 AC. The others don't. And it makes little sense for a legitimized bastard to continue to use his bastard name. I mean, if Robb or Stannis had legitimized Jon he definitely would go by his father's Stark name, not the unpleasant Snow name.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 minutes ago, Lord Varys said:

To be sure, we don't know how Bittersteel referred to himself or was addressed by the Golden Company. And neither do we know that for Shiera. We do know, however, that Brynden Rivers is addressed simply as 'Lord Rivers' by his own men while he is present and serving as the Hand of the King.

If you think about that it makes Aegon IV's legitmizing his children a joke. If they aren't Targaryens now then what was, literally, the point of the legitimization decree? And how did this decree stand if nobody actually refers to them by their new family names?

Daemon Blackfyre has an excuse - he took his own new family name in 182 AC. The others don't. And it makes little sense for a legitimized bastard to continue to use his bastard name. I mean, if Robb or Stannis had legitimized Jon he definitely would go by his father's Stark name, not the unpleasant Snow name.

As of right now, it looks like George is only using the legitmizing of Aegon IV's bastards just so Daemon can claim the throne. Daemon is the only bastard who really benefits (that we know of) from it. Who knows maybe in F&B volume 2, we'll find out that some of Aegon's bastards did go by Targaryen until the First Blackfyre Rebellion. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
23 hours ago, Daemon The Black Dragon said:

You really think if Daemon went with Targaryen instead of Blackfyre he would've had a lot more support then he already had? Seems unlikely to me. Half the realm declared for Daemon Blackfyre (not counting the North or Dorne)  we're told.

Less likely to oppose by default & more likely to listen to him/followers/overtures. A name can go a long way, see Joffrey and Tommen.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
59 minutes ago, nyser1 said:

Less likely to oppose by default & more likely to listen to him/followers/overtures. A name can go a long way, see Joffrey and Tommen.

So, how much more support do you believe Daemon would've had using the Targaryen name?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

With Daeron's rumored illegitimacy and Martell wife - I suspect he would immediately be at an advantage with the Marcher Lords.

 

Apparently half the realm declared for him, but gave a half hearted effort. Even a little bit more favoring towards one side could make a big difference. Daemon still needs to survive though.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 minutes ago, nyser1 said:

With Daeron's rumored illegitimacy and Martell wife - I suspect he would immediately be at an advantage with the Marcher Lords.

Apparently half the realm declared for him, but gave a half hearted effort. Even a little bit more favoring towards one side could make a big difference. Daemon still needs to survive though.

Daemon couldn't have been that popular with the Marchers from the Stormlands. His son was married to a Dondarrion and his other son to a Penrose. Not to mention Elaena to another Penrose. Daeron II had allies in the Stormlands and the Marches - the Swanns, Carons, Tarlys, etc. may have favored Daemon, but some did favor him - and Baelor brought a Stormlander army to the Redgrass Field.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now

×