Jump to content

Aenys Blackfyre's Murder


James Steller
 Share

Recommended Posts

Unless GRRM gives us different context, I really don't get why there is debate over whether it was wrong to have Aenys killed, and whether Bloodraven was a good leader or not. 

What we do know about the case is that there was a Great Council being held to discuss who would be the next king of the Iron Throne. Aenys Blackfyre, who was not the leader of House Blackfyre, wrote to the Iron Throne and asked permission to make his case before the council. Bloodraven promises him safe passage, then has him arrested and executed as soon as he arrives, and drops Aenys' severed head as a threat to anyone who might have voted for Aenys.

What I just described is an atrocity, and an example of naked tyranny that's every bit as unethical and monstrous as Tywin Lannister ordering the Red Wedding, just on a smaller scale. Bloodraven broke not just his own word, but the word of the Iron Throne to all the world by using it for murder. And we have absolutely no reason to assume that Aenys was acting in bad faith on his part.

And really, what was the harm in letting him speak? Assuming that Aenys was acting in good faith, that means he would be pitching himself to the lords of Westeros. That's as close to democracy as we're going to get, and keep in mind the uphill battle that Aenys would have to climb to make a good impression. His family's guilty of rebellions in the past, with a lot of people killed on both sides. If Aenys speaks, and gets rejected, then all he can do is pack up and go back to Essos. And if Aenys is able to convince those lords that he's got what it takes to be king, then surely he'd deserve a chance to be king? In that scenario, who suffers from Aenys becoming king outside of Bloodraven and the main Targaryen branch? They've had plenty of awful kings before that, and again, assuming Aenys was good enough to earn the crown on his own merits, how bad of a king could he really be?

And yes, I know we don't know much about Aenys, but in the absence of negative, why should we assume that there is negative? It's not like Aenys was even the head of House Blackfyre, he'd be as much of a usurper to his own kin as his father was to Daeron. House Blackfyre was always going to be a problem no matter what, whether Aenys is in cahoots with Bittersteel or not. And frankly, I have to admire Aenys for trying his luck with peacefully bidding for the Iron Throne, abandoning his family for King's Landing, trusting the honour of his enemies not to betray him. None of that speaks to me as someone who is playing a sinister game, unless GRRM wants to shock me with a Dunk & Egg story about it.

There's a clear villain in the Aenys Blackfyre story, and it's not him.

Edited by James Steller
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Yes Aenys' arrest and murder by Bloodraven was truly a cruel and despicable action and you can't say that Aegon V was wrong to have Bloodraven arrested and given the choice between execution or the wall for this action that violated guest rights and the king's word as Brynden was acting in the king's name.

Many of Bloodraven's ruthless actions could have been defended during the Blackfyre rebellions but this wasn't the case here given that Aenys had asked him if he could support his case legally and that Bloodraven did give him permission whereas he could have just refused or ignored Aenys' letter. 

This also supports that Bloodraven was acting not just for the sake of the Targaryens but also rather because of his personal grudge toward the Blackfyres.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 minutes ago, Terrorthatflapsinthenight9 said:

Yes Aenys' arrest and murder by Bloodraven was truly a cruel and despicable action and you can't say that Aegon V was wrong to have Bloodraven arrested and given the choice between execution or the wall for this action that violated guest rights and the king's word as Brynden was acting in the king's name.

Many of Bloodraven's ruthless actions could have been defended during the Blackfyre rebellions but this wasn't the case here given that Aenys had asked him if he could support his case legally and that Bloodraven did give him permission whereas he could have just refused or ignored Aenys' letter. 

This also supports that Bloodraven was acting not just for the sake of the Targaryens but also rather because of his personal grudge toward the Blackfyres.

Exactly! I forgot to bring up that part, too. Bloodraven held all the cards in that scenario. Aenys wasn't making a demand, he waited for leave to come in peace, and he wouldn't have bothered to go if he'd been unanswered or rejected. 

And yeah, I'm sure I wouldn't be happy if my mortal enemies' relative managed to talk his way into being crowned king, but there were solutions at his disposal. Tell Aenys he's not welcome, issue a royal decree which disinherits House Blackfyre. Bloodraven chose violence for personal reasons. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, James Steller said:

Exactly! I forgot to bring up that part, too. Bloodraven held all the cards in that scenario. Aenys wasn't making a demand, he waited for leave to come in peace, and he wouldn't have bothered to go if he'd been unanswered or rejected. 

And yeah, I'm sure I wouldn't be happy if my mortal enemies' relative managed to talk his way into being crowned king, but there were solutions at his disposal. Tell Aenys he's not welcome, issue a royal decree which disinherits House Blackfyre. Bloodraven chose violence for personal reasons. 

Indeed, Bloodraven had no obligation to allow Aenys to come to King's Landing, and even there he could have seen it as an opportunity to weaken the Blackfyres' claims if the council rejected Aenys's claim even by using manipulations or pressure. Instead his cruel murder of Aenys and betrayal of the Iron Throne's word gave back some strength to the Blackfyre support and endangered the Iron Throne's credibility, making it necessary for Aegon to arrest and either execute or banish him to give it back its credibility.

It's also telling of how bitter Bloodraven's feud with Bittersteel and the Blackfyres was that he focused nearly all of his efforts on them while he did nothing to stop Dagon Greyjoy's rampage in the west.

Edited by Terrorthatflapsinthenight9
Link to comment
Share on other sites

30 minutes ago, Terrorthatflapsinthenight9 said:

It's also telling of Bloodraven's feud with Bittersteel and the Blackfyres was that he focused nearly all of his efforts on them while he did nothing to stop Dagon Greyjoy's rampage in the west.

This is really significant, I think. Bloodraven is repeatedly -- even in situations like Dunk & Egg, where he's nominally 'on our side' -- shown to be a ruthless politician with limited morals, fighting for his own goals and the supremacy of his house, rather than what is right or fair. Both the murder of Aenys and his priorities in managing the kingdom show us this.

 

In a way, comparing him to Tywin is apt. Both are skilled manipulators with clear goals and little hesitation in pursuing them. You would be hard pressed, too, to convince either of them to hold a different opinion than the one they've come to already.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

It's a truly cruel and unmoral act. Even for a hard-liner and Blackfyre hater such as Bloodraven, it seems far too much.

If you stop to think about it, one must conclude that Bloodraven would have only harmed the crowns reputation and risked his own life if he really believed that Aenys had real chances to convince the lords of Westeros to choose him as king. Which makes his action even more depicable.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I think that Bloodraven killing Aenys had something to do with Shiera Seastar. Maybe Bloodraven was aware that Shiera had some sort of plans concerning Aenys, but he misinterpreted her intentions, and thought that Shiera wants to hook up with Aenys. So he killed Aenys out of jealosy, or to stop Shiera from doing whatever she was planning to do.

Though, despite Bloodraven's intervention, what was supposed to happen, still happened. Shiera wasn't interested in Aenys, she had in her sight Aenys' unborn yet grandson - Barristan Selmy (a son of Aenys' daughter), who will play an important role in the Second Long Night.

They - Bloodraven, Shiera, and Barristan seems to be GRRM's paralleles to wizard Merlin, his lover - Lady of the Lake, and the Lady's protege - Lancelot du Lac (one of King Arthur's knights).

I wrote more on this topic here:

Swan Song part 8/16. The real cause of the Fourth Blackfyre Rebellion

and in sections "What happened to the Wizard?" and "From Dolorous to Joyous" here:

Swan Song part 4/16. Shiera Seastar - a cat, a shadow, and a lying crow

So I think that there definitely was some sort of hidden motive why Bloodraven killed Aenys. It was done to either stop Shiera, or the opposite - maybe Bloodraven wasn't intending to kill Aenys, when he promised him a safe passage into KL. But then Shiera told to Bloodraven that she had a vision in which Aenys caused some sort of serious harm to the Targaryens or to the 7K. And thus she was the one who urged Bloodraven to kill Aenys. That way she orchestrated the encounter between young Lyonel Selmy (who was possibly squiring for Lord Swann) and one of Aenys' daughters, that was left with the rest of Aenys' family at the Stonehelm - a castle of House Swann, to whom the Blackfyres were bloodrelated thru the Black Swan of Lys - Johanna Swann, who, in my opinion, was the mother of Larra Rogare, and thus was a great-grandmother of Daemon I Blackfyre.

Barristan Selmy, since he turned 10 years old, was squiring for Lord Swann. So could be that before Barristan, his father also was squiring at Stonehelm, or serving as a House knight to the Swanns. And that's how his parents met. So when Aenys' daughter either became pregnant, or already after she gave birth to her twin-sons - Barristan and Daemon the Unnumbered Blackfyre, she had sent a message to the rest of the Blackfyres who lived at Tyrosh. And afterwards Bittersteel created the Golden Company, to bring them to the 7K to fight against the Targaryens.

In my opinion, amongst those people who were Blackfyre-loyalists, and went with Bittersteel across the Narrow Sea, after their loss in the First Blackfyre Rebellion, was Viserys Plumm - half-brother of Daemon and Bittersteel. So when Bittersteel needed 10.000 horses for the newly-created Golden Company, Viserys Plumm married one of his daughters to a Dothraki Khal, same as many years later did another Viserys, by marrying Dany off to Drogo, in exchange for 10.000 Dothraki warriors (Dany is a Princess, while Viserys Plumm's daughter wasn't, so Dany had a higher "market value"). And that woman - Plumm's daughter, she was a great-grandmother of Khal Drogo, so thru her Rhaego is a Targaryen not only on his mother's side, but also on his father's side. So as you can see - if Bloodraven didn't executed Aenys, then there would have been no Rhaego, who is one of the three heads of the dragon, and without whom the people would have been unable to defeat the Others.

So Aenys' execution, however unjust it seemed to be, actually resulted in the greater good - thanks to Aenys' death was created Golden Company, and to provide it with horses, a dragonseed-girl (Visery's daughter) married with a Dothraki, which eventually resulted in the birth of the Stallion who Mounts the World. And Barristan Selmy is the father of fAegon -  a guy who brought Golden Company to the 7K for the Sixth Blackfyre Rebellion. So Rhaego will play in the series the role of Jesus, and fAegon will be his antipode - a false Messiah - Antichrist. And that way, thru Aenys' execution, GRRM brought on board all those players, and binded them together with the threads of Fate.

P.S. I'm the only reader who actually understand (at least partially better than all the other readers) what GRRM wrote in his books, so it seems that he wrote ASOIAF specifically for me. ^_^ Just kidding.

 

Edit: :dunce: I kind of forgot that the Golden Company had already existed even prior Aenys' execution. It was created in 219 AC, when the Blackfyres found out that Daemon II died at the 7K, while he was kept as a hostage by the Targaryens. So it was Daemon's death that created the Golden Company, not Aenys' execution. So even without Aenys' death, the Golden Company would have still existed, though there would have been no fAegon to bring them back to the 7K. Because fAegon's father - Barristan Selmy, wouldn't have been born, if Bloodraven didn't executed Aenys. Then Aenys' daughter wouldn't have been stuck at Stonehelm, where she met Lyonel Selmy - Barri's father.

Also, if Barristan didn't existed, then he wouldn't have killed Maelys the Monstrous, whose children are Serra and Varys. So if Varys' father wasn't killed by Barristan, then Varys and Serra wouldn't have ended up being sold into slavery by the Silvertongue. Also - Serra would have never met Illyrio, and the Golden Company would have been under Varys' leadership. Only instead of being just their mastermind, like he is now, he would have been their military commander. And with him living a totally different life, he wouldn't have went to the 7K, as he did, to become there a master of whisperers for King Aerys, and thus it would have been a completely different story, compared to what the ASOIAF is now.

Edited by Megorova
Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, SocratesSnow said:

BR sought to secure the throne for Egg, Aenys represented a threat to that, a Clear and Present danger even. That he used lies and deceit to kill Aenys is a case of the ends justifying the means. 

 

 

If Egg was only able to get the throne through lies and deceit, then I question whether he ever deserved the throne in the first place. Likewise, if Aenys was such a good candidate that Brynden thought it 100% necessary to lure him over to the castle and murder him in cold blood and bad faith, all so his nephew could get the throne instead, then I would rather have wanted Aenys on the Iron Throne.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

let me just put it down first.. Bloodraven is not as ruthless as Tywin ...not even close. it appears to me he thinks he is doing what is best for 7kingdoms... supporting Daeron against the brother he loved and all. with Aerys , Maekar  and all the rebellions , they needed a strong figure to keep the realm from falling apart. Bloodraven who was seen as a bastard sorcerer kinslayer freak would have never been an admired or loved  persona; so , he became a harsh one... but he went wayyy too far with Aenys's murder and made a horrible mistake where he could prevent more B rebellions peacefully. I've explained how I think he could turn the situation to Targs benefit in another thread.

 

the sad thing here for Bloodraven is that he must have known this murder would either cost him his life or his freedom and yet went for it :( 

Edited by EggBlue
Link to comment
Share on other sites

It is rather apparent Bloodraven was (is) too caught up in his own battles whilst allegedly "serving" the realm and higher purpose. You're right, and the context isn't going to save it, it's meant to be what it looks like, the most ruthless atrocity of any character (who would try and defend their actions), it serves the story being that.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

17 hours ago, James Steller said:

If Egg was only able to get the throne through lies and deceit, then I question whether he ever deserved the throne in the first place. Likewise, if Aenys was such a good candidate that Brynden thought it 100% necessary to lure him over to the castle and murder him in cold blood and bad faith, all so his nephew could get the throne instead, then I would rather have wanted Aenys on the Iron Throne.

Okay, that’s a bit much, isn’t it? 
Yes, Aenys was slain unjustly (far as we know), but giving the Iron Throne to a Blackfyre would mean trouble for everyone, not just the Targaryen branch.

First, all the old wounds would bleed afresh. People took sides all across the kingdoms, and there’s going to be grudges. And what are the Targaryens supposed to do? Leave? Will they be killed if they stay? Even if Aenys is a just man, he’s not going to be able to keep the peace.

And what happens when the Blackfyre supporters have their inevitable schism between Aenys supporters and Haegon supporters? That’s going to add a whole other layer of conflict, especially when the other Blackfyres try to come home. Will Aenys pardon them all? Will he keep them in exile?

Even if Aenys Blackfyre was the best person to sit on the Iron Throne (and I doubt that because Aegon V did a lot of good during his reign), he comes with way too much baggage.

Granted, Bloodraven should have just burned Aenys’ letter rather than compromise the word of the Iron Throne, but letting him speak and possibly win the throne would have been a ridiculous idea.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

18 hours ago, Megorova said:

In my opinion, amongst those people who were Blackfyre-loyalists, and went with Bittersteel across the Narrow Sea, after their loss in the First Blackfyre Rebellion, was Viserys Plumm - half-brother of Daemon and Bittersteel. So when Bittersteel needed 10.000 horses for the newly-created Golden Company, Viserys Plumm married one of his daughters to a Dothraki Khal, same as many years later did another Viserys, by marrying Dany off to Drogo, in exchange for 10.000 Dothraki warriors (Dany is a Princess, while Viserys Plumm's daughter wasn't, so Dany had a higher "market value"). And that woman - Plumm's daughter, she was a great-grandmother of Khal Drogo, so thru her Rhaego is a Targaryen not only on his mother's side, but also on his father's side. So as you can see - if Bloodraven didn't executed Aenys, then there would have been no Rhaego, who is one of the three heads of the dragon, and without whom the people would have been unable to defeat the Others.

I know Brown Ben is tied to the Plumms and he's part Dothraki, but where is the rest of this coming from?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, Universal Sword Donor said:

I know Brown Ben is tied to the Plumms and he's part Dothraki, but where is the rest of this coming from?

From my interpretation of the information written in the books, specifically - in ASOS, Dany V. That info + logic.

Spoiler

Based on what Brown Ben said about his family - 1. that amongst his ancestors there were 7 ethnic groups (Braavosi, Summer Islander, Ibbenese, Qohorik, Dornish, Dothraki, and Westerosi - Viserys Plumm); 2. that one of his grandmothers was a Qohorik-Ibbenese, and that her husband (one of Ben's grandfathers) was killed by a Dothraki.

This grandfather, when he was a child, heard from his mother, that they are descendants of Viserys Plumm. Ben has a Dothraki amongst his ancestors, though he isn't considered to be a Dothraki himself. Thus the one who was a Dothraki amongst his ancestors, was his mother (and not his father, otherwise Ben would have been considered to be a Dothraki, like Rhaego was), and she was a daughter of that guy who was killed by a Dothraki, because he also was a Dothraki.

That guy was a Dothraki, which means that his father was a Dothraki, and his mother, the one who was Viserys Plumm's descendant, was not a Dothraki. And based on the year of birth of Viserys Plumm (176 or 177 AC), it appears that this woman, who was married with a Dothraki, and whose son was Ben's maternal grandfather, was a daughter of Viserys Plumm.

This way we outcrossed 4 out of 7 ethnic groups, and the three remaining are - Braavosi, Summer Islander, and Dornish. And by this point we still don't know only the ethnicity of Ben's father and the ethnicity of Viserys Plumm's wife. There are two people with unknown ethnicity and three ethnic groups, which means that one of them is a mix. So it's one of this options - a) Viserys' wife was Dornishwoman, and Ben's father was Braavosi-Summer Islander; b) Viserys' wife was Braavosi, and Ben's father was Dornishman-Summer Islander; c) Viserys' wife was Summer Islander, and Ben's father was Dornishman-Braavosi.

Considering what we know about the marriages in the royal and noble families, that occurred during Viserys' youth, the most likely option is that his wife was a Dornishwoman.

Because his half-brother - King Daeron II, in those years was favouring Dornishman. For example - Daeron himself married with Myriah Martell, his youger sister married with Maron Martell; Viserys' own mother (King Daeron's first cousin once removed) married with Michael Manwoody (Dornishman); one of Daeron's sons married with Dyanna Dayne (Dornishwoman), his other son married with a woman from the border of Dorne and Stormlands (Jenna Dondarrion)).

So if Viserys' wife was a Dornishwoman, then Ben's father was Braavosi-Summer Islander. I also made conclusion that Ben's father was a descendant of Balerion Otherys - because Balerion was a Braavosi-Summer Islander, and because Ben is a shortening of name Balerion. Ben's mother was a great-granddaughter of Viserys Plumm, and his father possibly was a great-grandson of Balerion Otherys. Viserys and Balerion were half-brothers on their father's side - both of them were Aegon IV's bastards, so Ben's parents were each others third cousins.

Also - Rhaego has silver-gold hair and violet eyes, which means that both of his parents were carriers of Valyrian blood. Amongst the Dothraki there were those who were descendants of Viserys Plumm's daughter, such as Brown Ben. So how likely is the possibility that Drogo's ancestor, who was a carrier of Valyrian blood, was some other woman, not Viserys Plumm's daughter, who also had married with a Dothraki? I think that this possibility is not very likely, because in GRRM's books the important characters are all connected. So based on this, it is more likely that Viserys Plumm's daughter was a shared ancestor between Brown Ben and Khal Drogo.

Drogo was a Dothraki, which means that all of his male ancestors were Dothraki. Which also means that his ancestor, who was a carrier of Valyrian blood, was a female.

Which also explains Drogo marrying with Dany - he was favouring this marriage because amongst his female-ancestors, there already was a woman who was a carrier of Targaryen blood, same as Dany.

Considering that Viserys Plumm was close in age to Prince Maekar (who was born in 174-178 AC), it's likely that his children were close in age to Maekar's children, including Egg/Aegon V. Egg was born in 200 AC, already after the First Blackfyre Rebellion. So if my theory is correct, and Viserys really was one of Blackfyre-loyalists, then it's likely that some of his children were born at Essos, already after Viserys left Westeros together with Bittersteel and Daemon Blackfyre's family. So Viserys' daughter, the one that married with a Dothraki Khal in exchange for 10.000 horses that the Dothraki provided for the newly-created Golden Company, was born after 196 AC. 

For example, Jaehaerys I's last child was born when he was aged 46, Aegon IV's when he was aged 49. The Third Blackfyre Rebellion, the one for which Bittertseel created Golden Company, had occurred in 219 AC. If GRRM wrote Dany's arc in parallel to the arc of Viserys Plumm's daughter, then could be that that girl got married with a Dothraki Khal in ~219 AC, when she was aged 13, like Dany. So she possibly was born in 206 AC, and at that time Viserys Plumm was 29-30 years old. 

So if that girl was born in 206, then at the time of Drogo's birth, in 267 AC, she was ~ 61 years old. Tattered Prince is 61 years old, Barristan Selmy is ~63(?), Walder Frey is over 90 years old, Old Nan and maester Aemon were over 100 years old. So it's likely that when Drogo was growing up, he was raised by this woman, who was his great-grandmother, and Viserys Plumm's daughter. Furthermore, she still could be alive. Now she could be 94 years old. I think that Dany will meet this old woman at Vaes Dothrak, amongst the other dosh khaleen, and she will tell Dany about Drogo being bloodrelated to the Targaryens.

So the rest of this is coming from analysing information, given to the readers by GRRM.

Edited by Megorova
Link to comment
Share on other sites

44 minutes ago, Megorova said:

From my interpretation of the information written in the books, specifically - in ASOS, Dany V. That info + logic.

  Reveal hidden contents

Based on what Brown Ben said about his family - 1. that amongst his ancestors there were 7 ethnic groups (Braavosi, Summer Islander, Ibbenese, Qohorik, Dornish, Dothraki, and Westerosi - Viserys Plumm); 2. that one of his grandmothers was a Qohorik-Ibbenese, and that her husband (one of Ben's grandfathers) was killed by a Dothraki.

This grandfather, when he was a child, heard from his mother, that they are descendants of Viserys Plumm. Ben has a Dothraki amongst his ancestors, though he isn't considered to be a Dothraki himself. Thus the one who was a Dothraki amongst his ancestors, was his mother (and not his father, otherwise Ben would have been considered to be a Dothraki, like Rhaego was), and she was a daughter of that guy who was killed by a Dothraki, because he also was a Dothraki.

That guy was a Dothraki, which means that his father was a Dothraki, and his mother, the one who was Viserys Plumm's descendant, was not a Dothraki. And based on the year of birth of Viserys Plumm (176 or 177 AC), it appears that this woman, who was married with a Dothraki, and whose son was Ben's maternal grandfather, was a daughter of Viserys Plumm.

This way we outcrossed 4 out of 7 ethnic groups, and the three remaining are - Braavosi, Summer Islander, and Dornish. And by this point we still don't know only the ethnicity of Ben's father and the ethnicity of Viserys Plumm's wife. There are two people with unknown ethnicity and three ethnic groups, which means that one of them is a mix. So it's one of this options - a) Viserys' wife was Dornishwoman, and Ben's father was Braavosi-Summer Islander; b) Viserys' wife was Braavosi, and Ben's father was Dornishman-Summer Islander; c) Viserys' wife was Summer Islander, and Ben's father was Dornishman-Braavosi.

Considering what we know about the marriages in the royal and noble families, that occurred during Viserys' youth, the most likely option is that his wife was a Dornishwoman.

Because his half-brother - King Daeron II, in those years was favouring Dornishman. For example - Daeron himself married with Myriah Martell, his youger sister married with Maron Martell; Viserys' own mother (King Daeron's first cousin once removed) married with Michael Manwoody (Dornishman); one of Daeron's sons married with Dyanna Dayne (Dornishwoman), his other son married with a woman from the border of Dorne and Stormlands (Jenna Dondarrion)).

So if Viserys' wife was a Dornishwoman, then Ben's father was Braavosi-Summer Islander. I also made conclusion that Ben's father was a descendant of Balerion Otherys - because Balerion was a Braavosi-Summer Islander, and because Ben is a shortening of name Balerion. Ben's mother was a great-granddaughter of Viserys Plumm, and his father possibly was a great-grandson of Balerion Otherys. Viserys and Balerion were half-brothers on their father's side - both of them were Aegon IV's bastards, so Ben's parents were each others third cousins.

Also - Rhaego has silver-gold hair and violet eyes, which means that both of his parents were carriers of Valyrian blood. Amongst the Dothraki there were those who were descendants of Viserys Plumm's daughter, such as Brown Ben. So how likely is the possibility that Drogo's ancestor, who was a carrier of Valyrian blood, was some other woman, not Viserys Plumm's daughter, who also had married with a Dothraki? I think that this possibility is not very likely, because in GRRM's books the important characters are all connected. So based on this, it is more likely that Viserys Plumm's daughter was a shared ancestor between Brown Ben and Khal Drogo.

Drogo was a Dothraki, which means that all of his male ancestors were Dothraki. Which also means that his ancestor, who was a carrier of Valyrian blood, was a female.

Which also explains Drogo marrying with Dany - he was favouring this marriage because amongst his female-ancestors, there already was a woman who was a carrier of Targaryen blood, same as Dany.

Considering that Viserys Plumm was close in age to Prince Maekar (who was born in 174-178 AC), it's likely that his children were close in age to Maekar's children, including Egg/Aegon V. Egg was born in 200 AC, already after the First Blackfyre Rebellion. So if my theory is correct, and Viserys really was one of Blackfyre-loyalists, then it's likely that some of his children were born at Essos, already after Viserys left Westeros together with Bittersteel and Daemon Blackfyre's family. So Viserys' daughter, the one that married with a Dothraki Khal in exchange for 10.000 horses that the Dothraki provided for the newly-created Golden Company, was born after 196 AC. 

For example, Jaehaerys I's last child was born when he was aged 46, Aegon IV's when he was aged 49. The Third Blackfyre Rebellion, the one for which Bittertseel created Golden Company, had occurred in 219 AC. If GRRM wrote Dany's arc in parallel to the arc of Viserys Plumm's daughter, then could be that that girl got married with a Dothraki Khal in ~219 AC, when she was aged 13, like Dany. So she possibly was born in 206 AC, and at that time Viserys Plumm was 29-30 years old. 

So if that girl was born in 206, then at the time of Drogo's birth, in 267 AC, she was ~ 61 years old. Tattered Prince is 61 years old, Barristan Selmy is ~63(?), Walder Frey is over 90 years old, Old Nan and maester Aemon were over 100 years old. So it's likely that when Drogo was growing up, he was raised by this woman, who was his great-grandmother, and Viserys Plumm's daughter. Furthermore, she still could be alive. Now she could be 94 years old. I think that Dany will meet this old woman at Vaes Dothrak, amongst the other dosh khaleen, and she will tell Dany about Drogo being bloodrelated to the Targaryens.

So the rest of this is coming from analysing information, given to the readers by GRRM.

Ok so head canon. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Not only is it clear to me that Bloodraven's Oathbreaking, violation of Guest Right and Kinslaying in the matter of Aenys are all reprehensible behaviors perhaps nowhere better characterized than in this one action, but I would go further...

Why did Bloodraven call a council? The line of succession was not unclear. He hoped to pass over the rightful heirs.

I think what is loudly unsaid so far is that Bloodraven called the Great Council with the intention of being named king himself.

The same decree that legitimized Daemon Blackfyre and his descendants applied to Bloodraven.

I don't think the intimidation factor of parading a decapitated head was for Egg's benefit, but rather intended to be for Bloodraven's own.

Finally, comparing Bloodraven to Tywin is an excellent comparison. If anything, Tywin is a lesser Bloodraven. Both ruled in all but name as Hand, although one could make the case that the realm did better under Tywin than under Bloodraven's reign of terror. Both ruthlessly pursued their private vendettas. Obviously, Tywin betrays the Targaryens, and plants his own descendants on the throne.

At this point, I would be surprised if Bloodraven wasn't responsible for the return of the Others, if I'm being honest.

Edited by Mourning Star
Link to comment
Share on other sites

5 hours ago, Canon Claude said:

Okay, that’s a bit much, isn’t it? 
Yes, Aenys was slain unjustly (far as we know), but giving the Iron Throne to a Blackfyre would mean trouble for everyone, not just the Targaryen branch.

First, all the old wounds would bleed afresh. People took sides all across the kingdoms, and there’s going to be grudges. And what are the Targaryens supposed to do? Leave? Will they be killed if they stay? Even if Aenys is a just man, he’s not going to be able to keep the peace.

And what happens when the Blackfyre supporters have their inevitable schism between Aenys supporters and Haegon supporters? That’s going to add a whole other layer of conflict, especially when the other Blackfyres try to come home. Will Aenys pardon them all? Will he keep them in exile?

Even if Aenys Blackfyre was the best person to sit on the Iron Throne (and I doubt that because Aegon V did a lot of good during his reign), he comes with way too much baggage.

Granted, Bloodraven should have just burned Aenys’ letter rather than compromise the word of the Iron Throne, but letting him speak and possibly win the throne would have been a ridiculous idea.

As I said before, the Blackfyres are always going to be a problem no matter what Aenys does or doesn't do. Killing him didn't stop further trouble, either. And I made it clear that Aenys would be fighting an uphill battle to pitch his claim to the throne. By all accounts, it would be virtually impossible. And yet, apparently he had a shot. Apparently Bloodraven was so threatened by Aenys that he violated sacred oaths just to get him out of the way. So either Bloodraven was paranoid and completely prejudiced against the Blackfyres, or Aenys stood a legitimate chance to claim the throne, or a bit of both.

And besides, Aegon V and his descendants brought a lot of calamities onto the Seven Kingdoms even without the Blackfyres' help. Aerys I is Aegon's grandson, after all. We can't prove either way how Aenys' reign would have been, or whether his descendants would have been worse for the Seven Kingdoms, but I'm not willing to write him off as easily as Bloodraven.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

 Share

×
×
  • Create New...