Would the Dance of the Dragons have still happened if Aemon and/or Baelon hadn't died?

[The Bard of Banefort]

58 minutes ago, Daeron the Daring said:

I remember having a discussion with you about this. There are things that imply Rhaena might had been bisexual, and I tend to believe that. (Given also what Jaehaerys said about Rhaena and Aegon, which I did not remember) 

But we're tslking about a what if here. About what if Aemon or/and Baelon doesn't die before Jaehaerys and became kings. And when I talked about Daemon, I explicitly talked about Baelon becoming king, not Aemon. And Daemon was second in line to his father. One step away, as I said. 

Well, I just brang up that she wasn't necesarilly repulsed at all (at least not from his brother). But who knows, really. Reading FnB made me think there was more than sibling friendship/friendship (or duty) between the two. 

I'm not sure about that. Children's true capability are often held back by the education they receive from their parents, and Gael was pretty much mom's little precious daughter, who slept with her even as a grown woman. And if anything, she wasn't the innocent one, because she had an affair with a singer, after all, who probably ran away because Jaehaerys would've had her hanged for that, if not worse. 

Well, that just makes the singer more heinous, if he was willing to seduce a woman who was challenged in some way. Sadly, that does happen quite a bit in our world at least. 

[Lord Varys]

1 hour ago, Daeron the Daring said:

True. Doesn't change much, tho. Her presence might have been required still there. 

As i pointed out, we don't know all conditions. And Daemon was a rather strong figure at the Great Council as well. 

That they sent him there did not change much about the line of succession. (on which Daemon was on a pretty high spot) 

Not the line of succession, but if you are a prince very far from court stuck in the countryside you have been very effectively politically sidelined. You cannot influence policy, you cannot create your own political party nor cultivate a coterie of followers who might help you stage a coup. You might not even learn when the king dies and new one is installed before a succession struggle is over.

Daemon raised a private army as did Corlys Velaryon ... but he seems to have done that in the Vale, not at court. Because he didn't live at court at that time.

1 hour ago, The Bard of Banefort said:

My point was that Rhaena wasn’t repulsed enough by the opposite sex to prevent her from having children/consummating her marriages. Laenor likely was.

I think Gael was developmentally challenged, which may explain why she was never betrothed. Daemon would have probably been considered too wild and hot-tempered for her. 

It doesn't seem Gael had more mental issues than Daella - and Daella was not only betrothed but married. Gael was the darling of Queen Alysanne and apparently they expected her to care for their aging mother and keep her company - that's not something a truly mentally challenged would do.

But then, we know effectively nothing about her, so who knows.

1 hour ago, The Bard of Banefort said:

Ironically, if Rhaenyra and Alicent hated each other slightly less, one of them would have realized that it might have been a better idea to betroth Heleana to Jace. Now that I think about it, I’m a little surprised that Viserys didn’t consider this himself. 

I think that door was closed when Rhaenyra decided rather shortly - and very early - after the birth of the twins to betroth Jace and Luke to Baela and Rhaena.

1 hour ago, Daeron the Daring said:

I remember having a discussion with you about this. There are things that imply Rhaena might had been bisexual, and I tend to believe that. (Given also what Jaehaerys said about Rhaena and Aegon, which I did not remember) 

I don't think Rhaena was bisexual - rather that she went through with the family business of sibling incest. There is no convincing account of her ever falling in love with a man. All we can say is that she was fond of Aegon and, for a time, Androw Farman (although it is very clear that she was in love with Elissa).

1 hour ago, Daeron the Daring said:

But we're tslking about a what if here. About what if Aemon or/and Baelon doesn't die before Jaehaerys and became kings. And when I talked about Daemon, I explicitly talked about Baelon becoming king, not Aemon. And Daemon was second in line to his father. One step away, as I said.

A King Baelon might also have no interest in Daemon being at his court. But even if he allowed him to come, he would not include him in his government because Daemon wasn't the kind of guy a serious and competent ruler would want to include in his government. And with Viserys either having more children with Aemma or him remarrying and having sons that way ... Daemon would quickly be pushed further and further back in the succession until he would be as important as, say, Vaegon. Even more so when Viserys' children started to have children of their own.

[Lord Varys]

16 minutes ago, The Bard of Banefort said:

Well, that just makes the singer more heinous, if he was willing to seduce a woman who was challenged in some way. Sadly, that does happen quite a bit in our world at least. 

I think that anecdote implies that Gael wasn't really mentally challenged but rather somewhat naive, similar to Daella. In a sense she seems to be the victim of Alysanne in her old age, being forced to keep her mother company who had lost so many of her children that she was unwilling to part with her. That actually might explain why she was never considered as a bride for either Viserys or Daemon - both of which would have been natural matches for her. Especially in Viserys' case this is obvious considering Gael was older than Aemma Arryn.

[Jaenara Belarys]

3 hours ago, Lord Varys said:

I think that anecdote implies that Gael wasn't really mentally challenged but rather somewhat naive, similar to Daella. In a sense she seems to be the victim of Alysanne in her old age, being forced to keep her mother company who had lost so many of her children that she was unwilling to part with her. That actually might explain why she was never considered as a bride for either Viserys or Daemon - both of which would have been natural matches for her. Especially in Viserys' case this is obvious considering Gael was older than Aemma Arryn.

Probably better for Viserys. He's kinder, loves to please, and Gael is not an eleven year old child. Speaking of which, why in seven hells was Aemma married at age eleven? It isn't as if there's a war or plague swallowing Targaryens (besides childbed and disastrous betrothals). 

[dsjj251]

Short answer, no 

 

Longer answer, if Aemon is  alive and Princess of dragonstone is Rhaenys , then Baelon is backing her too and the Hightowers would have never come to court because Aemon becomes hand after Barths death, there is no green faction in this case. 

 

 

[Daeron the Daring]

On 9/22/2021 at 12:49 AM, Lord Varys said:

Not the line of succession, but if you are a prince very far from court stuck in the countryside you have been very effectively politically sidelined. You cannot influence policy, you cannot create your own political party nor cultivate a coterie of followers who might help you stage a coup. You might not even learn when the king dies and new one is installed before a succession struggle is over.

Changes almost nothing in the case Daemon was placed in. Baelon was the rider of Vhagar. In case he ever became king, he would have had no need for Daemon to be sidelined, and if Daemon ever wanted to take the throne by force from his brother after he succeeded Jaehaerys, he could've done it. Viserys never tamed another dragon for himself, never intended to, and Daemon was the single person during his early reign who rode a dragon formidable enough as well to simply take the throne when he just wants to, beside Rhaenys, who's claim was dismissed by the Great Council. 

Daemon was the de facto heir to the Iron Throne up until Viserys named his heir Rhaenyra. He could've overthrown his own brother by not only being a dragonrider, but by being his heir as well. 

The fact that he never did it, altough he could've done it at any time, shows just how much he didn't have to be sidelined. This most probably came from his good relationship with Viserys that had been a thing in those early times. And it's not like Viserys had to allow him to return to King's Landing as if he was a criminal that's been punished by exile like he was later on. Daemon's presence not only strengthened Viserys' authority, but at the same time swayed to himself the only person who could challenge his own rule singlehandedly. I'd reckon this was still an act that originated from their good relationship instead of Viserys trying to please him in any way, but definitely not an act of mercy as you speak of it. 

Not to say this isn't how sidelining works. Not that Jaehaerys ever showed any intention to sideline any of his offsprings, he was rather fond of the family harmony. That's why he cassembled to lords of the realm at the Great Council. He did not want to displease Rhaenys and the Velaryons with dismissing her claim once again based on his own preferances (male preferance), but rather made it the responsibility of others. But that's not all. You may remember how he wanted Vaegon and Daella to marry as well. If something, that's creating more competition for the future ruler. It only did not happen because Vaegon didn't seem to be very interested in woman, altough he reasoned why he would never marry his sister, which was Daella's weak mind. But note how he was called the Dragonless. I suppose people don't do that if the given person isn't even allowed to have a dragon of his own, but rather because his lack of interest in that as well. And that's still not all. Notice how Viserys married Aemma Arryn instead of Rhaenys or a daughter of Jaehaerys? That marriage would've provided Viserys the Vale's support in case he wanted to claim the Throne, or protect his claim from whoever. Again, such a match raised competition, and was made intead of marrying Viserys to Gael or Rhaenys. Just as Daemon's marriage. He was never meant to inherit a single thing, yet was given a marriage that would've provided him and his line land and influence.  Note how Rhaenys' children (Velaryons) were allowed to have dragons of their own. You suppose it wouldn't have been allowed to the future Lords of Runestone who happen to be Targaryens? Again, it only raised competition, and didn't sideline anyone. 

And you speak of sidelining a second son when the firstborn didn't even have a heir of his own? You remember how Baelon became heir? And Aemon had a good 15 years to father a son. 

I find this conviction of yours rather illogical, tbh.

[Daenerysthegreat]

Let's say baelon lives past infancy the dance would have been totally avoided .  Baleon would have married rhaenyra. 

[Lord Varys]

2 hours ago, Daeron the Daring said:

Changes almost nothing in the case Daemon was placed in. Baelon was the rider of Vhagar. In case he ever became king, he would have had no need for Daemon to be sidelined, and if Daemon ever wanted to take the throne by force from his brother after he succeeded Jaehaerys, he could've done it. Viserys never tamed another dragon for himself, never intended to, and Daemon was the single person during his early reign who rode a dragon formidable enough as well to simply take the throne when he just wants to, beside Rhaenys, who's claim was dismissed by the Great Council. 

Daemon was sidelined. He was sent to the Vale and he only returned to court in 103 AC when Viserys I, as king, allowed him to return to court.

Baelon became Hand in 100 AC but he didn't call his son Daemon to court, did he? We have no reason to believe father and son were close nor that Baelon wanted to include Daemon in his government (or Viserys, for that matter).

What Daemon could have done during the reign of Viserys I is another matter entirely ... but I daresay he never had the power or the stomach for a coup or else he would have tried. He wanted the Iron Throne in the 100s, apparently. Daemon may have been a dragonrider, but he had no powerbase of his own, wasn't popular, had no connections with crucial lords. While Viserys I was very popular with everybody, apparently.

I mean, you do recall that this dragonless king exiled Daemon at least twice, right? And King Aenys - who rode a much smaller dragon than his half-brother - also exiled Maegor.

2 hours ago, Daeron the Daring said:

The fact that he never did it, altough he could've done it at any time, shows just how much he didn't have to be sidelined. This most probably came from his good relationship with Viserys that had been a thing in those early times. And it's not like Viserys had to allow him to return to King's Landing as if he was a criminal that's been punished by exile like he was later on. Daemon's presence not only strengthened Viserys' authority, but at the same time swayed to himself the only person who could challenge his own rule singlehandedly. I'd reckon this was still an act that originated from their good relationship instead of Viserys trying to please him in any way, but definitely not an act of mercy as you speak of it. 

Daemon only had prominence at court and in the capital because Viserys I called him back and gave him offices. If Baelon or Viserys hadn't done that - and I maintain that we have no reason to believe Baelon would have wanted Daemon on his council or as commander of the City Watch - he would have just been some prince living in a castle very far away from court.

Daemon also didn't help Viserys' authority. Viserys repeatedly had to use his royal authority to get rid of Daemon. Daemon never did anything to help Viserys while Viserys was king - he helped him become heir in 101 AC, though, but afterwards he was just a nuisance. And Viserys, in his generosity and kindness, even financed Daemon's silly exploits - like the Stepstones campaign. The man was never his own man, he was always dependent on his older brother for money and support.

2 hours ago, Daeron the Daring said:

Not to say this isn't how sidelining works. Not that Jaehaerys ever showed any intention to sideline any of his offsprings, he was rather fond of the family harmony. That's why he cassembled to lords of the realm at the Great Council. He did not want to displease Rhaenys and the Velaryons with dismissing her claim once again based on his own preferances (male preferance), but rather made it the responsibility of others. But that's not all. You may remember how he wanted Vaegon and Daella to marry as well. If something, that's creating more competition for the future ruler. It only did not happen because Vaegon didn't seem to be very interested in woman, altough he reasoned why he would never marry his sister, which was Daella's weak mind. But note how he was called the Dragonless. I suppose people don't do that if the given person isn't even allowed to have a dragon of his own, but rather because his lack of interest in that as well. And that's still not all. Notice how Viserys married Aemma Arryn instead of Rhaenys or a daughter of Jaehaerys? That marriage would've provided Viserys the Vale's support in case he wanted to claim the Throne, or protect his claim from whoever. Again, such a match raised competition, and was made intead of marrying Viserys to Gael or Rhaenys. Just as Daemon's marriage. He was never meant to inherit a single thing, yet was given a marriage that would've provided him and his line land and influence.  Note how Rhaenys' children (Velaryons) were allowed to have dragons of their own. You suppose it wouldn't have been allowed to the future Lords of Runestone who happen to be Targaryens? Again, it only raised competition, and didn't sideline anyone. 

You are mistaken about Jaehaerys there. He sidelined a lot of people, starting with his own mother and stepfather, followed by Rhaena, Maegelle, Daella, Saera, and Viserra.

The Great Council wasn't convened by the king to allow everybody his voice - it was called because the king had realized that he no longer had the authority to name an heir that would be universally accepted. He knew regardless who he chose the other faction would not accept his choice and there would be a succession war after his death. The Great Council averted that.

Daemon being sidelined is drawn simply from the fact that Daemon was sent to the Vale.

[Daeron the Daring]

On 9/25/2021 at 3:09 PM, Lord Varys said:

Daemon was sidelined. He was sent to the Vale and he only returned to court in 103 AC when Viserys I, as king, allowed him to return to court.

I don't see what connects the two, and I expressed why I don't think being sent to the Vale doesn't make him sidelined.

On 9/25/2021 at 3:09 PM, Lord Varys said:

Baelon became Hand in 100 AC but he didn't call his son Daemon to court, did he? We have no reason to believe father and son were close nor that Baelon wanted to include Daemon in his government (or Viserys, for that matter).

Position in the council isn't the only thing that gives you political weight. It doesn't even necesarilly give you one. That would mean Dorne, the North, the Reach, the Iron Islands or the Trident had no political weight on anything because none of these Lord Paramounts had a seat in the small council. for something to give you political weight, you have to be a 'politician'. Puppets can be council members, friends, lords, septons (of high rank) or dragonriders as well. But these things, in the hand of a given one, can gain them political weight. No matter what, Daemon had a dragon that obeyed him and only him until the end of one's death. That gave him political weight, just as his position in the line of succession, which was a pretty high one (I'd not debate that).

On 9/25/2021 at 3:09 PM, Lord Varys said:

What Daemon could have done during the reign of Viserys I is another matter entirely

It's not. It tells much about him.

On 9/25/2021 at 3:09 PM, Lord Varys said:

but I daresay he never had the power or the stomach for a coup or else he would have tried.

He was literally sitting on all the power that was needed. I'd go with the stomach.

He surely gave his name to little Jaehaerys' murder, but at the same time he could've made Aegon the Younger Rhaenyra's heir, with arranging the 3 Velaryons' death. He never did. He never questioned his brother either, altough he is exceptionally opportunistic, and making your son Lord of the Seven Kingdoms is definitely more than being king to a queen that rules. Especially when both can happen. I tend to believe he wasn't a man of unnecesarry violence and no honor, ergo: he didn't have the stomach to do so. 

On 9/25/2021 at 3:09 PM, Lord Varys said:

Daemon may have been a dragonrider, but he had no powerbase of his own, wasn't popular, had no connections with crucial lords. While Viserys I was very popular with everybody, apparently.

Daemon's powerbase was his dragon. That was more than required, enough to counter Viserys. And the text literally says he was beloved by the smallfolk, altough the criminals were heavily punished when he's been at the wheel.

 

On 9/25/2021 at 3:09 PM, Lord Varys said:

I mean, you do recall that this dragonless king exiled Daemon at least twice, right? And King Aenys - who rode a much smaller dragon than his half-brother - also exiled Maegor.

You do realise that Daemon could've just not obey and get away with it? It was either obeying his brother (whom he respected on a level, I believe), or rebel/overthrow him. That was a possibility. We don't know if he ever considered it, but it certainly was (given his personality, I'd say he did). 

Maegor could've disobeyed Aenys, but that would've made Maegor a dishonorable person. I suppose Daemon had the right to question his brother's rule the way Edward III had, since both were the heirs to the ruler they belonged to, whereas Maegor wasn't.

On 9/25/2021 at 3:09 PM, Lord Varys said:

Daemon only had prominence at court and in the capital because Viserys I called him back and gave him offices.

Prominence at the capital and at court isn't the only prominence.

On 9/25/2021 at 3:09 PM, Lord Varys said:

If Baelon or Viserys hadn't done that - and I maintain that we have no reason to believe Baelon would have wanted Daemon on his council or as commander of the City Watch - he would have just been some prince living in a castle very far away from court.

 Course we don't. That doesn't make him less important. But that doesn't make him just some prince. Especially not if he's a son or a brother to the king. To be honest, I don't even understand how we have different opinions about this. Not that you seem less rational to me now, but I often agree with you, wether we debate or I just read one of your comments. Course sometimes we disagree, but I find those disagreements reasonable at least. (idk if this sounds bad out loud, sorry if it does)

On 9/25/2021 at 3:09 PM, Lord Varys said:

Daemon also didn't help Viserys' authority. Viserys repeatedly had to use his royal authority to get rid of Daemon.

That doesn't disprove that Daemon didn't strenghten Viserys' authority, More so, when he decided to exile him, his authority weakened, altough there wasn't anyone to question it.

On 9/25/2021 at 3:09 PM, Lord Varys said:

Daemon never did anything to help Viserys while Viserys was king - he helped him become heir in 101 AC, though, but afterwards he was just a nuisance. And Viserys, in his generosity and kindness, even financed Daemon's silly exploits - like the Stepstones campaign. The man was never his own man, he was always dependent on his older brother for money and support.

The financial support that Viserys provided Daemon was rather useful to him as well. Daemon shaping his own kingdom? Makes him not desire his as much (altough the Stepstones weren't the right choice for that).

 

On 9/25/2021 at 3:09 PM, Lord Varys said:

You are mistaken about Jaehaerys there. He sidelined a lot of people, starting with his own mother and stepfather, followed by Rhaena, Maegelle, Daella, Saera, and Viserra.

Discouraging and sidelining someone isn't the same thing. But I'm open to hear how Rhaena, Maegelle, Daella, Saera or Viserra were sidelined. Giving Maegelle to the faith was Alysanne's idea, and given Jaehaerys' piousness, he was fine with it. Viserra, Saera and Daella were never sidelined. Saera was punished for her adultery, while Viserra and Daella were married off, or at least their marriage was arranged. In case Baelon wanted to remarry (with Viserra), I doubt Jaehaerys wouldn't have allowed that instead of the Manderly match, which at that point wasn@t arranged, just planned. As of Rhaena, I don't even know what you may mean by being sidelined. She was a lesbian/bisexual woman twice widowed, the Princess of Dragonstone, then Lady of Harrenhall. We must interpret the word sideline differentl

On 9/25/2021 at 3:09 PM, Lord Varys said:

The Great Council wasn't convened by the king to allow everybody his voice - it was called because the king had realized that he no longer had the authority to name an heir that would be universally accepted. He knew regardless who he chose the other faction would not accept his choice and there would be a succession war after his death. The Great Council averted that.

Jaehaerys' actions to me give the vibe that he aimed for some sort of hegemony inside his own family. (Well, of course not counting that he married his sister no matter what). Declaring Rhaenys his heir the way he did with Baelon (or at least with no consort) wouldn't have angered anyone inside his own family. That would have been different in case he declared Viserys his heir, whom he favorized over Rhaenys simply because he was male. The idea that the other faction would not accept Jaehaerys' choice ain't true. They would've been outraged, sure, much more than they were this way, but not accepting the king's decision is a beginning of an open rebellion, to what Rhaenys and the Velaryons didn't have the power to win.

[Lord Varys]

50 minutes ago, Daeron the Daring said:

I don't see what connects the two, and I expressed why I don't think being sent to the Vale doesn't make him sidelined.

If you are not living at court as a member of the royal family you are sidelined, regardless how you view that. That's just a fact.

50 minutes ago, Daeron the Daring said:

Position in the council isn't the only thing that gives you political weight. It doesn't even necesarilly give you one. That would mean Dorne, the North, the Reach, the Iron Islands or the Trident had no political weight on anything because none of these Lord Paramounts had a seat in the small council. for something to give you political weight, you have to be a 'politician'. Puppets can be council members, friends, lords, septons (of high rank) or dragonriders as well. But these things, in the hand of a given one, can gain them political weight. No matter what, Daemon had a dragon that obeyed him and only him until the end of one's death. That gave him political weight, just as his position in the line of succession, which was a pretty high one (I'd not debate that).

If a member of the royal family has neither offices at court nor the ability to exert influence informally - by whispering into the king's ear, say - he is effectively sidelined.

And of course the great lords who have no seat on the Small Council are also effectively sidelined - some, like the Lannisters, very deliberately in the early Targaryen reign.

Daemon's dragon apparently gave him no political influence at all - or else he would have been able to exert more direct power than he did.

50 minutes ago, Daeron the Daring said:

Daemon's powerbase was his dragon. That was more than required, enough to counter Viserys. And the text literally says he was beloved by the smallfolk, altough the criminals were heavily punished when he's been at the wheel.

Folks rejoice when Viserys and Daemon are reconciled ... but Daemon is only popular with criminals and thugs (in the City Watch). He isn't popular with the really important people. And he failed to actually build a party of his own which is why he had to woo his way into the Velaryon party via Laena and then later the Blacks when he married Rhaenyra. He himself had lost pretty much all standing.

50 minutes ago, Daeron the Daring said:

You do realise that Daemon could've just not obey and get away with it? It was either obeying his brother (whom he respected on a level, I believe), or rebel/overthrow him. That was a possibility. We don't know if he ever considered it, but it certainly was (given his personality, I'd say he did). 

Maegor could've disobeyed Aenys, but that would've made Maegor a dishonorable person. I suppose Daemon had the right to question his brother's rule the way Edward III had, since both were the heirs to the ruler they belonged to, whereas Maegor wasn't.

To rebel Daemon would have needed an army. The king doesn't confront a capricious prince in the dragon yard or the Dragonpit. He confronts him in his throne room. And there the king's guards will arrest, break, and execute any prince who tries to rebel against his king, dragon or no dragon.

Daemon was lucky that his brother didn't take his head. There were quite a few instances where he could have done that - when he abused his authority as lord commander, when joked about Baelon's death, when he refused to attend his wedding and decided to start a private war, when he seduced and deflowered his daughter, when he married Laena Velaryon without permission, and when he married Rhaenyra without permission.

50 minutes ago, Daeron the Daring said:

Prominence at the capital and at court isn't the only prominence.

It is the important one in that setting. Being the husband of the Lady of Runestone doesn't give you any power.

50 minutes ago, Daeron the Daring said:

The financial support that Viserys provided Daemon was rather useful to him as well. Daemon shaping his own kingdom? Makes him not desire his as much (altough the Stepstones weren't the right choice for that).

Viserys I is rather contemtuous of Daemon in this entire thing. He looks down on his little brother, and rightfully so, because the only he can stay out of trouble is fighting a pointless war. Daemon is the classical black sheep in a rich family, the guy who cannot make any money on his own but has always been supported by his rich, successful elder brother.

50 minutes ago, Daeron the Daring said:

Discouraging and sidelining someone isn't the same thing. But I'm open to hear how Rhaena, Maegelle, Daella, Saera or Viserra were sidelined. Giving Maegelle to the faith was Alysanne's idea, and given Jaehaerys' piousness, he was fine with it. Viserra, Saera and Daella were never sidelined. Saera was punished for her adultery, while Viserra and Daella were married off, or at least their marriage was arranged. In case Baelon wanted to remarry (with Viserra), I doubt Jaehaerys wouldn't have allowed that instead of the Manderly match, which at that point wasn@t arranged, just planned. As of Rhaena, I don't even know what you may mean by being sidelined. She was a lesbian/bisexual woman twice widowed, the Princess of Dragonstone, then Lady of Harrenhall. We must interpret the word sideline differentl

These folks were all kept away from court and/or positions of power. Rhaena was effectively sidelined both on Fair Isle and at Harrenhal and even on Dragonstone.

The younger children were sidelined by not getting dragons and by being given to the Faith or being married outside the family which would (have ensured) they would have no ability to influence policy.

50 minutes ago, Daeron the Daring said:

Jaehaerys' actions to me give the vibe that he aimed for some sort of hegemony inside his own family. (Well, of course not counting that he married his sister no matter what). Declaring Rhaenys his heir the way he did with Baelon (or at least with no consort) wouldn't have angered anyone inside his own family. That would have been different in case he declared Viserys his heir, whom he favorized over Rhaenys simply because he was male. The idea that the other faction would not accept Jaehaerys' choice ain't true. They would've been outraged, sure, much more than they were this way, but not accepting the king's decision is a beginning of an open rebellion, to what Rhaenys and the Velaryons didn't have the power to win.

We actually don't know that Jaehaerys favored Viserys over Rhaenys. The Great Council was convened because the king had lost the authority to rule on his own succession. Folks expected that Viserys would have followed Baelon if Baelon had ruled as king - but that never happened.

In fact, we have hints that Jaehaerys' chosen heir after Baelon's death would have been Vaegon.

And it is explicitly stated that the king called the Great Council because he realized that the royal family and the Realm would not accept his chosen heir. There would be a succession war between Aemon's descendants and Baelon's sons.

[StarksInTheNorth]

The sarcastic answer is "yes, because GRRM would've wanted to kill off the dragons someway or another."

My actual answer is that yes, still. Say neither brother dies when they do originally. Aemon becomes King Aemon I. We know little of Jocelyn Baratheon's end, though she was known to be alive in 92. If she died shortly after her husband's original death, maybe Aemon takes a second wife in an attempt to father a son and heir. Potential wives might be a Velaryon or Baratheon maiden, his sister Gael, or he maybe waits for his niece Aemma to mature and marries her.

If that happens, the New Dance could likely be Team Rhaenys vs. Team Son-of-Second-Wife. But that might be solved if one of those children marries Laena or Laenor.

Or maybe he doesn't marry and names Rhaenys his heir. TBD when Aemon dies, but if Rhaenys is Queen, Laenor might marry Rhaenyra anyway. And if her children are still Strong-fathered, it could turn into Viserys or Daemon vs. Laenor's heirs. Especially if Daemon is claiming the throne as Regent for his daughters, who might still be Laena's children. (Although in this case Viserys/Laena would be a much smarter pairing).

[Daeron the Daring]

On 9/27/2021 at 9:46 PM, Lord Varys said:

If you are not living at court as a member of the royal family you are sidelined, regardless how you view that. That's just a fact.

Sidelining is when you intentionally knock someone out of his position he held. I don't know the exact reasons for sure on why Daemon had to (if he had to) spend his days at Runestone, neither do you. That is a fact. We can speculate, that's all. We can disagree about many things, but not facts. That's why they are facts. Iexpressed my opinion, you did as well, we disagree. I think that's it.

[Lord Varys]

57 minutes ago, Daeron the Daring said:

Sidelining is when you intentionally knock someone out of his position he held. I don't know the exact reasons for sure on why Daemon had to (if he had to) spend his days at Runestone, neither do you. That is a fact. We can speculate, that's all. We can disagree about many things, but not facts. That's why they are facts. Iexpressed my opinion, you did as well, we disagree. I think that's it.

We do know that the Royce marriage was arranged for Daemon, that he was sent there, that he didn't like it there, and that he begged his royal brother to be allowed to return to court.

That Jaehaerys I and Baelon arranged this marriage to rid the court of Daemon can be drawn from the fact that rather than living with his wife - then just the heir of Runestone - at court he lived with Rhea and her family in the Vale.

That kind of thing you do to/with a scion of a noble family you don't want in the power structure at home. You can compare Daemon's treatment to all the other princes and princesses who remained at court after they married. The fact that many a great lord lived with his entire family at court after he was given a high office there very much implies that Rhea Royce didn't have to be at Runestone to actually rule the place. And Viserys I - and only he - later gave Daemon permission that the couple could live apart and Daemon come to court.

And while you are often sidelined by others - you can also sideline yourself. Like Maekar did when he left his brother's court and gave up all political influence he may have had, or like Stannis did when he retreated to Dragonstone, etc.

[BlackLightning]

On 9/21/2021 at 2:35 PM, Daeron the Daring said:

Gay people often (rather often) want the children of their own.

Interesting.

I have not met a single gay man (I know a lot trust me) over the age of 30 who want to have children of their own. Granted, all the gay men I know are 

But to that point, it is true that a handful of gay men find the female reproductive system...let's just say it's a massive turn-off.

On 9/21/2021 at 12:19 PM, The Bard of Banefort said:

Rhaena was able to get the job done, but I guess not everyone is willing to lay back and think of King’s Landing. 

I'm not sure if Rhaena was fully lesbian.

Even if she was, I think it's safe to say that it'd be easier for a woman to just lay there than it would be for a man.

On 9/27/2021 at 4:47 PM, StarksInTheNorth said:

The sarcastic answer is "yes, because GRRM would've wanted to kill off the dragons someway or another."

My actual answer is that yes, still. Say neither brother dies when they do originally. Aemon becomes King Aemon I. We know little of Jocelyn Baratheon's end, though she was known to be alive in 92. If she died shortly after her husband's original death, maybe Aemon takes a second wife in an attempt to father a son and heir. Potential wives might be a Velaryon or Baratheon maiden, his sister Gael, or he maybe waits for his niece Aemma to mature and marries her.

If that happens, the New Dance could likely be Team Rhaenys vs. Team Son-of-Second-Wife. But that might be solved if one of those children marries Laena or Laenor.

Or maybe he doesn't marry and names Rhaenys his heir. TBD when Aemon dies, but if Rhaenys is Queen, Laenor might marry Rhaenyra anyway. And if her children are still Strong-fathered, it could turn into Viserys or Daemon vs. Laenor's heirs. Especially if Daemon is claiming the throne as Regent for his daughters, who might still be Laena's children. (Although in this case Viserys/Laena would be a much smarter pairing).

I agree.

If it wasn't Team Rhaenys vs. Team Son-or-Daughter-of-Aemon's-Second-Wife, then it'd be Team Viserys vs. Team Daemon. If it wasn't Team Viserys vs. Team Daemon, then it'd be Team Targaryen vs. Team Velaryon. And if it wasn't either of them, it would be Team Saera, the Triarchy and Volantis vs. everyone else.

And the more you marry the children of high lords (Hightowers, Starks, Lannisters, etc.) into the royal family, the worse it gets.

The Dance was inevitable given the fact that:

1) The Targaryens are not as family-oriented and loving (lmfao at the irony) like the modern-day Starks are.

Granted the Targaryens are the royal family so their family affairs are almost always political. Ultimately, while there is a lot of romantic love and sex, there is less camaraderie. Which means more envy and more competition.

2) There are too many Targaryens.

This wouldn't be so much of an issue if they all loved each other and didn't see each other as political instruments or as rivals.

Well maybe, I'll revise this. There are too many Targaryen females and not enough Targaryen men for them to remarry. This also wouldn't be so much of an issue if Jaehaerys didn't live for so long...a minor gripe but it leads to the next point.

3) Jaehaerys sidelined too many people for too long.

Seriously, the disconnect between way he treated his daughters and his Doctrine of Exceptionalism was weird. If the Targaryens were truly exceptional (and to an extent, they are truly exceptional), then why treat Targaryen princesses like the daughters of a middle-of-the-road lord. Jaehaerys himself knew Visenya, Rhaena and even his own mother Alyssa were all more than capable women. Two of them were fierce dragonriders in their own right and the first held the Seven Kingdoms together. Even Aerea is something to behold. I don't get it.

Jaehaerys is astonishingly sexist for someone who grew up around so many strong, intelligent women.

Viserra and Saera had the demonstrable ability, potential and the desire to do much more than be the wife of some lord. Encourage that: marry them to the Princes of Dorne (thus, bringing Dorne into the realm), a ruler of one of the more liberal Free Cities, one of the Old Blood of Volantis, give them their own holdfast to rule or simply allow them to stay and be active at court in King's Landing or on Dragonstone.

Honestly, a match between a elderly Manderly lord with many other children and a Targaryen princess in her prime is a terrible match. Worse than Tytos Lannister betrothing his only daughter to a third or fourth son of Walder Frey. What the hell was Alysanne thinking?

4) there are too many Targaryens with dragons.

I truly understand the desire to keep the dragons within the family. With so many daughters and so few sons, you can't marry them all to each other. The Velaryons are close family members and the Baratheons and the Arryns, while more distant, are also still family. Granted, I don't think you want a male Baratheon lord with Vhagar as a mount but...if you make it so that female Targaryens pass on their family name, you could prevent some of that.

Viserys went overboard while Jaehaerys withheld too much.

 

Honestly, the only real way to prevent the Dance is if Aerea was allowed to have become Queen (as was her right by blood relation to Aenys and by the laws of Maegor which Jaehaerys upheld) and Jaehaerys should've been married to her. Rhaena and Alyssa screwed that one up big time.

 

[Lord Lannister]

Something like the Dance was pretty much inevitable no matter who the specific players were at the time. House Targaryen was basically a time bomb by that point waiting to explode.

Families have their conflicts naturally. Especially one with as many egos as House Targaryen. This is further complicated by the incestous relationships and power games due to the family sitting on the Throne. When you add many of them have ready access to fire breathing dragons they can use to express those disagreements with each other it was only a matter of time before someone made a move. 

[StarksInTheNorth]

20 hours ago, BlackLightning said:

Viserra and Saera had the demonstrable ability, potential and the desire to do much more than be the wife of some lord. Encourage that: marry them to the Princes of Dorne (thus, bringing Dorne into the realm), a ruler of one of the more liberal Free Cities, one of the Old Blood of Volantis, give them their own holdfast to rule or simply allow them to stay and be active at court in King's Landing or on Dragonstone.

I agree on all of this. I think it would’ve made so so so much more sense if Saera was the older of Daella, Viserra, and herself. Instead I believe she’s the youngest? But if she were older, her scandal could have set the tone for the other two children.

There was no reason that Daella *had* to be married at sixteen, the same for Viserra. But if their older (or even middle) sister is suddenly found out to be sleeping with half the court, it gives Jaehaerys a somewhat understandable desire to get his other daughters in line. This still doesn’t explain why Daella married old lord Arryn, when we don’t know whether his likely son, the father of Jeyne Arryn, was married yet. The same goes for Lord Manderly, who surely had a son or grandson ready to be married off. If Viserra truly wanted to be a queen as her mother believed, she would’ve been an excellent candidate for a son of Mara Martell, Lord Baratheon (who was considered for Daella), or some other lord paramount.

Quote

I truly understand the desire to keep the dragons within the family. With so many daughters and so few sons, you can't marry them all to each other. The Velaryons are close family members and the Baratheons and the Arryns, while more distant, are also still family.

But this is never a stated, which imo is a major plot failing of F&B. They freak out when Elissa Farman takes dragon eggs, but it never really comes up when discussing the girls’ future. Did Maegelle get an egg at birth? Did she bring it to her sept? What if they wanted to girls to not get eggs, but then Saera stole one of four when she runs away? Her children could use eggs to prove the truth of their heritage at the Great Council and it would show the greater threat to the Targaryens and another reason they didn’t let the girls have dragons. (Although again, why didn’t they marry spare daughters to the extra Velaryon cousins if they wanted to have dragons away from other houses? Why wasn’t Saera’s group including any major lords sons or daughters from houses paramount. Lord Lannister showed be really really wanted Rhaena and her dragons. That should’ve continued.)

[Lord Varys]

21 hours ago, Lord Lannister said:

Something like the Dance was pretty much inevitable no matter who the specific players were at the time. House Targaryen was basically a time bomb by that point waiting to explode.

Families have their conflicts naturally. Especially one with as many egos as House Targaryen. This is further complicated by the incestous relationships and power games due to the family sitting on the Throne. When you add many of them have ready access to fire breathing dragons they can use to express those disagreements with each other it was only a matter of time before someone made a move. 

Actually, the incest should have kept the peace within the family much better than normal marriage practices would. When the family starts to branch out you can marry rival cousin branches to each other to keep or restore the peace - something that's more difficult if you don't marry all that much within your own family.

If Rhaenyra had had daughters they would have likely been married to Alicent's sons, preventing a civil war.

22 hours ago, BlackLightning said:

If it wasn't Team Rhaenys vs. Team Son-or-Daughter-of-Aemon's-Second-Wife, then it'd be Team Viserys vs. Team Daemon. If it wasn't Team Viserys vs. Team Daemon, then it'd be Team Targaryen vs. Team Velaryon. And if it wasn't either of them, it would be Team Saera, the Triarchy and Volantis vs. everyone else.

There certainly was potential for another kind of succession war, but Saera and her sons disappeared into nothingness, and Viserys I got the Velaryons back into the fold with the Laenor-Rhaenyra marriage, just as Rhaenyra later ensured Daemon's loyalty by betrothing her sons to his daughters.

The Dance is the result of a deep animosity within the royal family, not so much the fact that people thought they should be king. That idea alone, as the Great Council of 101 AC showed, wasn't enough for a succession war.

22 hours ago, BlackLightning said:

1) The Targaryens are not as family-oriented and loving (lmfao at the irony) like the modern-day Starks are.

 

Granted the Targaryens are the royal family so their family affairs are almost always political. Ultimately, while there is a lot of romantic love and sex, there is less camaraderie. Which means more envy and more competition.

That isn't the case. Viserys I was apparently a very loving father. Not all Targaryens were that way, of course, but Viserys I was. And overall while certain Targaryens felt cheated or betrayed - Visenya/Maegor, Rhaena, Aerea, Rhaenys - very few of those actually took matters into their own hands and started a civil war. Even Maegor only used the power vacuum/chaos after Aenys' sudden death to seize the throne. He didn't attack or murder his brother to steal the throne.

22 hours ago, BlackLightning said:

2) There are too many Targaryens.

This wouldn't be so much of an issue if they all loved each other and didn't see each other as political instruments or as rivals.

Well maybe, I'll revise this. There are too many Targaryen females and not enough Targaryen men for them to remarry. This also wouldn't be so much of an issue if Jaehaerys didn't live for so long...a minor gripe but it leads to the next point.

The women didn't really play all that much of a role in all of this.

22 hours ago, BlackLightning said:

3) Jaehaerys sidelined too many people for too long.

Seriously, the disconnect between way he treated his daughters and his Doctrine of Exceptionalism was weird. If the Targaryens were truly exceptional (and to an extent, they are truly exceptional), then why treat Targaryen princesses like the daughters of a middle-of-the-road lord. Jaehaerys himself knew Visenya, Rhaena and even his own mother Alyssa were all more than capable women. Two of them were fierce dragonriders in their own right and the first held the Seven Kingdoms together. Even Aerea is something to behold. I don't get it.

Jaehaerys is astonishingly sexist for someone who grew up around so many strong, intelligent women.

Viserra and Saera had the demonstrable ability, potential and the desire to do much more than be the wife of some lord. Encourage that: marry them to the Princes of Dorne (thus, bringing Dorne into the realm), a ruler of one of the more liberal Free Cities, one of the Old Blood of Volantis, give them their own holdfast to rule or simply allow them to stay and be active at court in King's Landing or on Dragonstone.

Honestly, a match between a elderly Manderly lord with many other children and a Targaryen princess in her prime is a terrible match. Worse than Tytos Lannister betrothing his only daughter to a third or fourth son of Walder Frey. What the hell was Alysanne thinking?

Here George pretty much dropped the ball. The marriage politics of the first half of Jaehaerys' reign all make sense ... but when it gets to Saera and Viserra and Gael and the grandchildren it gets very weird.

Daella makes sense, I think, since overall the duty and job of a woman of royal birth is to marry and have children. But when this leads to tragedy and death folks should reconsidering things. There shouldn't have been any pressure for Saera and Viserra to marry.

22 hours ago, BlackLightning said:

4) there are too many Targaryens with dragons.

I truly understand the desire to keep the dragons within the family. With so many daughters and so few sons, you can't marry them all to each other. The Velaryons are close family members and the Baratheons and the Arryns, while more distant, are also still family. Granted, I don't think you want a male Baratheon lord with Vhagar as a mount but...if you make it so that female Targaryens pass on their family name, you could prevent some of that.

Viserys went overboard while Jaehaerys withheld too much.

Jaehaerys was pretty smart. You can marry all your daughters outside the family as long as you control the actual dragons. Jaehaerys kept most of the dragons in the Dragonpit and didn't allow his own children access to the dragons without his permission. He could have an army of grandchildren from marriages outside the family and none of those would have to be a dragonrider.

It is Viserys I who basically allows everybody a dragon.

[Daeron the Daring]

33 minutes ago, Lord Varys said:

Jaehaerys was pretty smart. You can marry all your daughters outside the family as long as you control the actual dragons. Jaehaerys kept most of the dragons in the Dragonpit and didn't allow his own children access to the dragons without his permission. He could have an army of grandchildren from marriages outside the family and none of those would have to be a dragonrider.

But that isn't the case with Laenor. Laenor bonded with Seasmoke in 101 AC. Before Jaehaerys' death. It's either him who allowed him to have one/bond with one, or Seasmoke was from an egg of Meleys, and that way Jaehaerys had no authority to stop Laenor from becoming a dragonrider. 

[Lord Varys]

53 minutes ago, Daeron the Daring said:

But that isn't the case with Laenor. Laenor bonded with Seasmoke in 101 AC. Before Jaehaerys' death. It's either him who allowed him to have one/bond with one, or Seasmoke was from an egg of Meleys, and that way Jaehaerys had no authority to stop Laenor from becoming a dragonrider. 

The way things are described throughout most of Jaehaerys' reign he really decided who would get a dragon and who didn't. Thus it makes little sense to assume that Laenor got a dragon without the king's permission, even if Seasmoke came from an egg laid by Meleys. We can also assume that Rhaenys was given permission by her royal grandfather to claim Meleys after Alyssa's death, just as Daemon was allowed to mount Caraxes after Aemon's death.

Although I expect that Jaehaerys never gave permission that Laena claim Vhagar after Baelon's death. Laena was only eight when Baelon died, and ten when her royal great-grandfather died. It seems more likely that Laena only claimed Vhagar in the first years of the reign of Viserys I - but then also with royal permission, since Baelon died in KL, meaning Vhagar would have been in the Dragonpit not on Dragonstone (not that Laena would have had access to the dragon yards of Dragonstone even if Vhagar had been there).

3 hours ago, StarksInTheNorth said:

There was no reason that Daella *had* to be married at sixteen, the same for Viserra. But if their older (or even middle) sister is suddenly found out to be sleeping with half the court, it gives Jaehaerys a somewhat understandable desire to get his other daughters in line. This still doesn’t explain why Daella married old lord Arryn, when we don’t know whether his likely son, the father of Jeyne Arryn, was married yet. The same goes for Lord Manderly, who surely had a son or grandson ready to be married off. If Viserra truly wanted to be a queen as her mother believed, she would’ve been an excellent candidate for a son of Mara Martell, Lord Baratheon (who was considered for Daella), or some other lord paramount.

We know why Daella married Rodrik Arryn - because he was the man she preferred among all the candidates her mother presented her with. Daella was so difficult to marry off that they had long since given up hope to marry her to a man of her own age.

The Viserra thing pretty much makes no sense, there is no way around that. George really dropped the ball there.

3 hours ago, StarksInTheNorth said:

But this is never a stated, which imo is a major plot failing of F&B. They freak out when Elissa Farman takes dragon eggs, but it never really comes up when discussing the girls’ future. Did Maegelle get an egg at birth? Did she bring it to her sept? What if they wanted to girls to not get eggs, but then Saera stole one of four when she runs away? Her children could use eggs to prove the truth of their heritage at the Great Council and it would show the greater threat to the Targaryens and another reason they didn’t let the girls have dragons. (Although again, why didn’t they marry spare daughters to the extra Velaryon cousins if they wanted to have dragons away from other houses? Why wasn’t Saera’s group including any major lords sons or daughters from houses paramount. Lord Lannister showed be really really wanted Rhaena and her dragons. That should’ve continued.)

From what we can draw from the book, none of the children of Jaehaerys I got dragon eggs (aside from Aemon whose egg either disappeared or never hatched). Else they would have been dragonriders later in life.

The way I see it, George originally wanted Rhaena to have been the one to start the whole cradle eggs tradition - but even that's just a legend - but that didn't really work if only three children of Jaehaerys I are dragonriders. If they all had dragon eggs in their cradles they would have either been all dragonriders or some of their eggs wouldn't have hatched.

As things stand, having only three dragonriders among the children is a pretty weird and unnecessary decision. Viserra and Gael could have been dragonriders, they died early, after all. Saera could have been a dragonrider who couldn't take her dragon with her into exile because it was kept separated from her in the Dragonpit. Only for Daella we are given a proper explanation as to why she wasn't a dragonrider (she was afraid of dragons). With Maegelle only joining the Faith at the age of ten and Vaegon being forced to go to the Citadel only at the age of fifteen it doesn't even make much sense that neither of them was a dragonrider. Dragons are pretty practical things for a Targaryen. You can fly and travel fast. Whenever the family goes somewhere and you want to accompany them you either have to ride or go by ship or beg one of your dragonriding kin to take you along on their dragon. That's something very few princes and princesses would do.

[StarksInTheNorth]

16 minutes ago, Lord Varys said:

We know why Daella married Rodrik Arryn - because he was the man she preferred among all the candidates her mother presented her with. Daella was so difficult to marry off that they had long since given up hope to marry her to a man of her own age.

I mean, technically, yes. But there’s a paragraph somewhere before that where Jaehaerys tells Alysanne that Daella has to be married by year’s end and no explanation whatsoever is given as to why she has to be married ASAP at sixteen. That’s fairly young in Westeros, with plenty other brides being older but still of birthing age (Elia Martell was 22, for example). It’s not like Daella was trying to seduce her brother (Viserra) or sleeping around (Saera). Her parents knew she was weak and childish, so there is really no in-universe reason not to wait a little longer for her to grow up some more.

As an aside it’s also crazy to say the Faith wouldn’t take her since she can’t read. Plenty of peasants joined nunneries in the dark ages. 

Quote

From what we can draw from the book, none of the children of Jaehaerys I got dragon eggs (aside from Aemon whose egg either disappeared or never hatched). Else they would have been dragonriders later in life.

I was under the impression that Caraxes hatched from that egg, though it’s never stated.

Quote

As things stand, having only three dragonriders among the children is a pretty weird and unnecessary decision.

IMO it would’ve been interesting if one of the younger boys - Gaemon, Valerion - died at 3 or 4 after having a dragon hatch for them.

re Maegelle and Vaegon, we have seen that older dragons are sometimes claimed later. Baelon claimed his after being knighted and I’m pretty sure Alyssa waited to give birth before claiming one.

I also wish GRRM had explored the power a dragon can give a woman in an unhealthy / abusive relationship. Marry a Targaryen princess to an abusive husband, she visits her family and bonds with a dragon, then suddenly it’s quite different Dynamics.