Blackfyre during the Dance of the Dragons

[Canon Claude]

Is it me, or is it weird how Blackfyre played no role whatsoever? We know that Aegon II claimed it as proof of his kingship, but he never uses it. Sure, he doesn't get much of a chance in battle, but you'd think that Aemond would have jumped at the chance when Aegon was out of action. Daemon always had Dark Sister, after all. It's not like Targaryens would leave their Valyrian steel swords behind when they go riding dragons.

Not to mention the fact that Blackfyre doesn't come up when Rhaenyra takes over King's Landing. Did Larys take it? Did Aegon take it? Either Rhaenyra didn't have it, or else she seems to show no interest in the sword, either for herself or her heirs. I can see why she wouldn't take it when fleeing the Red Keep, but it's strange how with all the looting and chaos, the sword managed to remain safe. House Royce lost their own VS sword during the madness, why shouldn't Blackfyre have disappeared when three different men claimed leadership of the capital?

To be honest, I'm also baffled at how Dark Sister managed to be recovered from the Daemon/Aemond showdown, but at least there I can put two and two together (ie Alys Rivers kept it for her own son, then House Targaryen presumably recovered it after Alys was dealt with). But Blackfyre's presence is so vague and confusing. It just seems like GRRM forgot to account for it when by all accounts, it should have been stolen and disappeared. It's not like valuable royal heirlooms haven't been plundered throughout history. 

[James Steller]

It goes beyond the Dance. Blackfyre’s inexplicable recovery post-Conquest is just as weird to me. Why would the Dornish ever return that sword to House Targaryen after murdering Daeron under a flag of truce? (Assuming that account is accurate anyway). 

[Lord Varys]

54 minutes ago, Canon Claude said:

Is it me, or is it weird how Blackfyre played no role whatsoever? We know that Aegon II claimed it as proof of his kingship, but he never uses it. Sure, he doesn't get much of a chance in battle, but you'd think that Aemond would have jumped at the chance when Aegon was out of action. Daemon always had Dark Sister, after all. It's not like Targaryens would leave their Valyrian steel swords behind when they go riding dragons.

Not to mention the fact that Blackfyre doesn't come up when Rhaenyra takes over King's Landing. Did Larys take it? Did Aegon take it? Either Rhaenyra didn't have it, or else she seems to show no interest in the sword, either for herself or her heirs. I can see why she wouldn't take it when fleeing the Red Keep, but it's strange how with all the looting and chaos, the sword managed to remain safe. House Royce lost their own VS sword during the madness, why shouldn't Blackfyre have disappeared when three different men claimed leadership of the capital?

I remember commenting on how absent a 'king's sword' Blackfyre was when TWoIaF first came out. Back then Dark Sister was talked about and featured a lot as Visenya's, Maegor's, Jaehaerys', and Daemon's sword ... while Blackyre was the trinket Aenys gave away, basically.

FaB gave more context to the early history of Blackfyre by making it clearly Maegor's favorite sword after Aenys gave it to him and by making it the sword Jaehaerys trained with and wielded in battle and duel throughout his long reign.

But it is still a pretty big oversight to have this important symbol of kingship play literally no role at all during the reign of Viserys I and, especially, during the Dance.

Hell, it would have made a lot of sense to have Viserys I pull an Aenys and give Aegon Blackfyre as a gift to celebrate his knighthood as Rhaenyra as a traditional woman would have had neither the skills nor the wish to wield the sword herself. That, in turn, could then have been a way for the Green loyalists to argue that Aegon should be king and also a precedent the Blackfyre partisans could cite later to back their own narrative.

In light of all that it is actually a pretty big surprise that anyone would think - or care to clam - that 'the sword is the kingdom' after the Unworthy gives it to Daemon. Aegon III, Baelor, Viserys II, and the Unworthy himself are not likely to do any crucial or important feats with Blackfyre. Daeron I might to a point ... but he will lose the sword upon his death only for Baelor to get it back from the Dornish, so whatever his deeds ... he lost the sword of the kings along with his life.

HotD remedied that to a point by having Viserys I wield the sword whenever he sits the Iron Throne or shows up in all his regal power. I do hope the sword will also feature prominently in the show, both as an actual weapon and a symbol of kingship.

Notably, I hope it will pass from Aegon II to Rhaenyra and back to him to show the transfer of royal power. I also don't want Aemond or anyone else wield it while Aegon is incapacitated as that would undermine it as a symbol of kingly authority.

An idea I like to toss around is that Rhaenyra is going to use Blackfyre to personally behead Otto Hightower. Second-best version would have Daemon do it with Dark Sister, but I do have a feeling that show Rhaenyra might go with 'she who delivers the sentence should wield the sword'.

54 minutes ago, Canon Claude said:

To be honest, I'm also baffled at how Dark Sister managed to be recovered from the Daemon/Aemond showdown, but at least there I can put two and two together (ie Alys Rivers kept it for her own son, then House Targaryen presumably recovered it after Alys was dealt with). But Blackfyre's presence is so vague and confusing. It just seems like GRRM forgot to account for it when by all accounts, it should have been stolen and disappeared. It's not like valuable royal heirlooms haven't been plundered throughout history. 

I do expect that Alys Rivers will indeed recover Vhagar's carcass and Aemond's corpse along with Dark Sister, possibly with the help of her magics/visions, handing it to her son who will wield it in whatever fight is going to take place between him and Aegon III. As this will take place around 150 AC, most likely, we might also see the young Dragonknight doing his first bold deeds during that war/campaign, being rewarded by his royal uncle with the sword as a testimony to his bravery.

[The Wondering Wolf]

5 minutes ago, James Steller said:

It goes beyond the Dance. Blackfyre’s inexplicable recovery post-Conquest is just as weird to me. Why would the Dornish ever return that sword to House Targaryen after murdering Daeron under a flag of truce? (Assuming that account is accurate anyway). 

Don't remember where I read this (could have been speculation or fanfiction), but it described how Daeron was killed, and he and the sword were burried under his horse, so the Dornishmen could not take it to begin with. Maybe the group that was responsible for the killing did not controll the area and had to retreat quickly.

[The Grey Wolf Strikes Back]

21 minutes ago, The Wondering Wolf said:

Don't remember where I read this (could have been speculation or fanfiction), but it described how Daeron was killed, and he and the sword were burried under his horse, so the Dornishmen could not take it to begin with. Maybe the group that was responsible for the killing did not controll the area and had to retreat quickly.

The MUSH. Daeron's horse is shot from under him and while he's desperately trying to free Blackfyre from its scabbard (at the same time his whole army is rushing to cover the distance between them and where the parley was taking place) a prince of Dorne stabs him through the throat with the but-spike of the peace banner, which is as lurid as it is ridiculous.

[Loraq]

5 minutes ago, The Grey Wolf Strikes Back said:

The MUSH. Daeron's horse is shot from under him and while he's desperately trying to free Blackfyre from its scabbard (at the same time his whole army is rushing to cover the distance between them and where the parley was taking place) a prince of Dorne stabs him through the throat with the but-spike of the peace banner, which is as lurid as it is ridiculous.

Exactly, it's from the MUSH.

[Alester Florent]

To be fair to Aegon II, while he may not have the martial reputation of his brothers, he does fight about as much as he's able to, and is involved in two fairly intense battles, being wounded in both.

My assumption would be that he kept it when he escaped the capital and Rhaenyra never laid hands on it.

The thing is, if you're a dragonrider, so long as you remain on the dragon - which if all is going well you will do during battle - a sword, no matter how good, is pretty much redundant. The sword only becomes important if your dragon is killed (in which case you'll be lucky to survive anyway) or you do a suicide-jump from your dragon to attack someone else, Daemon-style (again, survival chances are minimal). Sure, if you have to fight without a dragon, then you'll need the sword, but any half-decent dragonlord tactitian won't engage where dragons can't be used. Otherwise it's just something to use in duels and self-defence and a king shouldn't need to engage in any of that either, because he has the Kingsguard to handle all of that for him.

Maegor had a reputation as a great knight but did he ever need to draw Blackfyre in anger outside the Trial of Seven? Jaehaerys gets a couple of essentially contrived opportunities to use it, but there was no need for him to do so. Likewise, House of the Dragon had to contrive an opportunity for Daemon to fight without Caraxes so we got to see him actually using Dark Sister in a fight, but I can't remember his swordsmanship being particularly relevant in the text.

The swords become much more important as swords after the Dance. Before that it seems that in practice they're little more than symbols, with the king holding Blackfyre (except Aenys, of course) and Dark Sister going to the most accomplished warrior in the royal family.

Edited December 13, 2023 by Alester Florent

[Lord Varys]

46 minutes ago, Alester Florent said:

To be fair to Aegon II, while he may not have the martial reputation of his brothers, he does fight about as much as he's able to, and is involved in two fairly intense battles, being wounded in both.

That is a decision by the author, not a fact of history.

There were ways to make Blackfyre more prominent although I do agree in principle that dragons were more important than swords at that time.

However, the symbolism of Blackfyre as 'the sword of kings' isn't something that can reasonably have developed in the wake of the Dance as Aegon III, Baelor the Blessed, Viserys II, and Aegon IV were all exactly not very martial kings, either. To them the sword would have been as important as it was to Aenys or Viserys I.

But the Blackfyre narrative makes little sense if not all the kings before did actually own and wield Blackfyre in a visible manner, nor would make it much sense if nobody stressed the importance of this ancient heirloom as something that symbolized Targaryen kingship.

Aegon IV giving Blackfyre to Daemon can only be exploited by the Blackfyre partisans as an important symbolic act if it were universally accepted that the sword did symbolize the kingship - or was at least an important token of Targaryen kingship in pre-Blackfyre history.

46 minutes ago, Alester Florent said:

My assumption would be that he kept it when he escaped the capital and Rhaenyra never laid hands on it.

That would be a stretch as, to our knowledge, he also didn't take his crown (which was in the possession of the Prince Regent). Aegon II did not flee KL of his own free will - he was dragged out of the castle by Larys Strong and handed to one of his cronies. And the point of all that was to hide Aegon from Rhaenyra. Allowing him to keep Blackfyre would have been a huge risk in light of where Larys was sending Aegon.

46 minutes ago, Alester Florent said:

Maegor had a reputation as a great knight but did he ever need to draw Blackfyre in anger outside the Trial of Seven?

He executed some Grand Maesters and wives and others with it, not to mention also wielding it during the battles he fought - which would not necessarily all have seen him seated on dragonback all the time.

46 minutes ago, Alester Florent said:

Jaehaerys gets a couple of essentially contrived opportunities to use it, but there was no need for him to do so.

They weren't that contrived, as what Jaehaerys does there is very much in line with how chivalry is depicted in ASoIaF. 

46 minutes ago, Alester Florent said:

Likewise, House of the Dragon had to contrive an opportunity for Daemon to fight without Caraxes so we got to see him actually using Dark Sister in a fight, but I can't remember his swordsmanship being particularly relevant in the text.

They could have gone with the duel he fought for Laena's hand to go with something from the book. But showing how dragon warfare wasn't everything on the Stepstones was not bad ... as the dragon didn't help him to really conquer or hold this kingdom of his.

46 minutes ago, Alester Florent said:

The swords become much more important as swords after the Dance. Before that it seems that in practice they're little more than symbols, with the king holding Blackfyre (except Aenys, of course) and Dark Sister going to the most accomplished warrior in the royal family.

There is no such rule for Dark Sister, actually, as Prince Baelon was not necessarily more accomplished than Prince Aemon.

The fact that Aenys gave Blackfyre to Maegor is actually undermining the 'the sword of the kings' narrative, as Aenys was unquestionably the second king of the Targaryen line, the one from whom all the later kings are descended from. With this event undermining such a narrative, there should have been later events highlighting how Blackfyre is actually connected and contributing to the kingship. For Jaehaerys I we do have that, but not for Viserys I and the Dance.

It is possible that Aegon III will wield it in whatever campaigns he has to fight against fake Daerons and Aemond's son. And there is Daeron I. But then the sword should feature less prominently until given to Daemon Blackfyre.

And keep in mind the sword is viewed pretty much as a crown or a royal scepter by the time of the Second Blackfyre Rebellion. Daemon II lacking it at Whitewalls undermines his cause with his own followers in no small degree.

It is also possible that the Targaryens actually recovered the sword after the deaths of either Haegon or Daemon III. It could have been lost during the Sack of King's Landing rather than remaining with the Blackfyre pretenders/Golden Company or Varys/Illyrio.

[James Steller]

1 hour ago, Lord Varys said:

 

It is also possible that the Targaryens actually recovered the sword after the deaths of either Haegon or Daemon III. It could have been lost during the Sack of King's Landing rather than remaining with the Blackfyre pretenders/Golden Company or Varys/Illyrio.

I feel like we would have known that a long time ago if such was the case. I’m confident that the Golden Company still has the sword, and we’ll see fAegon wield it before the end.

[Lord Varys]

36 minutes ago, James Steller said:

I feel like we would have known that a long time ago if such was the case. I’m confident that the Golden Company still has the sword, and we’ll see fAegon wield it before the end.

They don't have it, or else Strickland would wield it. It may have been in one of the chests ... but Illyrio started as a poor bravo and Varys as a slave boy. Neither inherited or owned a Valyrian steel sword.

More to the point, Haegon Blackfyre gives up his sword before he dies and the same war sees Bittersteel captured after his second duel with Bloodraven.

Would be a miracle if somebody absconded with the sword.

Ditto for Daemon III who was cut down in battle by Dunk.

More to the point: If Aerys I recovered the sword of kings it might make more sense that Egg allows Bloodraven to keep Dark Sister. If they had no Valyrian steel sword left the guy would have gone swordless to the Wall.

[Alester Florent]

9 hours ago, Lord Varys said:

That is a decision by the author, not a fact of history.

Doesn't the same go for literally everything else to do with ASoIaF and its world? None of it is a fact of history; it's all the product of decisions by the author...

[James Steller]

8 hours ago, Lord Varys said:

They don't have it, or else Strickland would wield it. It may have been in one of the chests ... but Illyrio started as a poor bravo and Varys as a slave boy. Neither inherited or owned a Valyrian steel sword.

 

I wasn’t claiming that Varys or Illyrio inherited Blackfyre. And I’m confident that after Bittersteel died, there was this unspoken rule set in place that only the heir to House Blackfyre could wield the sword.

10 hours ago, Lord Varys said:

 

It is also possible that the Targaryens actually recovered the sword after the deaths of either Haegon or Daemon III. It could have been lost during the Sack of King's Landing rather than remaining with the Blackfyre pretenders/Golden Company or Varys/Illyrio.

That sounds even less likely than what I hypothesized. You’re implying that the Targaryens had Blackfyre at the time of Robert’s Rebellion? Why didn’t Rhaegar use it against him in battle? And if he did, why wouldn’t Robert claim it for his own?

And even if Aerys didn’t trust his son with Blackfyre, why wouldn’t Tywin immediately claim it for himself during the loot? or alternatively, wouldn’t he be pissed that he never found it? Why would nobody bring up the fact that the great sword Blackfyre was lost so recently? 

[Lord Varys]

42 minutes ago, Alester Florent said:

Doesn't the same go for literally everything else to do with ASoIaF and its world? None of it is a fact of history; it's all the product of decisions by the author...

Sure. But the earlier established fact was that Blackfyre is important enough as a symbol of kingship that it being a gift to some bastard can mean 'the throne' in the eyes of a lot of people. And that is not really reflected in the history depicted in FaB and, more so, in TWoIaF.

[Lord Varys]

3 minutes ago, James Steller said:

I wasn’t claiming that Varys or Illyrio inherited Blackfyre. And I’m confident that after Bittersteel died, there was this unspoken rule set in place that only the heir to House Blackfyre could wield the sword.

That sounds even less likely than what I hypothesized. You’re implying that the Targaryens had Blackfyre at the time of Robert’s Rebellion? Why didn’t Rhaegar use it against him in battle? And if he did, why wouldn’t Robert claim it for his own?

And even if Aerys didn’t trust his son with Blackfyre, why wouldn’t Tywin immediately claim it for himself during the loot? or alternatively, wouldn’t he be pissed that he never found it? Why would nobody bring up the fact that the great sword Blackfyre was lost so recently? 

And what would then have happened after Maelys Blackfyre died? If the sword was with the company and there was no heir, why should the captain-general not claim and wield it? The Golden Company would not expect some Aegon plan to eventually be made back in 260 AC.

Rhaegar wasn't the king. So of course he would not wield the sword of kings.

Aerys II would have had it somewhere and Varys would have stolen it. Like he may have taken little Aegon.

That nobody talks about the whereabouts of Blackfyre or Dark Sister is odd in any case, never mind where they are.

[Aejohn the Conqueroo]

 Maybe having dragons as symbols was enough for the Dancers. It was after the dragons had died out that trappings of legitimacy became more and more important. Before they were just family heirlooms and we've seen them handed out within the family as their owner seemed fit. After the dragons died out though other symbols gained more value. 

Rhaenyra may or may not have seen Blackfyre in its more Freudian light and been averse to wielding it or claiming it as either a woman or just a non martial person. This may also reenforce the idea that it was just a sword to the Targs until they lost their dragons and it gained more value as a symbol.

I wonder if Bittersteel ever actually took it to Essos.  We don't have any first hand accounts of it being in his possession, just its noted absence during the Mystery Knight. 

[SaffronLady]

On 12/13/2023 at 10:36 AM, Alester Florent said:

Otherwise it's just something to use in duels and self-defence and a king shouldn't need to engage in any of that either, because he has the Kingsguard to handle all of that for him.

Occasionally it is necessary to show you don't need an old man to do the fighting for you.