Jump to content

The Princess and the Queen [SPOILERS]


Recommended Posts

But wait: GRRM said that the dragonriders need not be Targaryen in ASOIAF, but in the Dance of the Dragons, both of the Targaryen faction look for people with Targaryen blood, as only people with Targ blood can bond with the dragons.

I'm confused.

No reason for confusion - the blood is not the name. I guess that one or more of Dany's fellow dragonriders won't have the right to bear Targaryen name. My bet is Tyrion, cough, cough.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Rhaenyra's first husband is not Lyonel Strong. Used to be in an earlier iteration, but in the course of looking over the notes he had for the world book, he came up with something a lot more interesting.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

No, it's Stephen and Matilda, I insist on this one :bang: Though, I must say that Aegon doesn't make a charming Stephen, with his choice of menu for his dragon. He is a good fit for Stephen's son Eustace, though, the monastery-robber. And Aegon III did succeed his uncle, like Henry II did.

Of course, Stephen and Matilda bled England dry but at least they both survived. Though if they had dragons, who can say what would have happened?

The genesis is clearly Stephen and Matilda. The Dance of the Dragons probably stretches badly over The Anarchy otherwise.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

No, it's Stephen and Matilda, I insist on this one :bang: Though, I must say that Aegon doesn't make a charming Stephen, with his choice of menu for his dragon. He is a good fit for Stephen's son Eustace, though, the monastery-robber. And Aegon III did succeed his uncle, like Henry II did.

Of course, Stephen and Matilda bled England dry but at least they both survived. Though if they had dragons, who can say what would have happened?

I agree it is more similar to Stephen I and Empress Matilda, but I was only talking about the effect it had on the Targaryens. Stephan and Matilda never really weakened the English monarchy at all. Where as the War of the Roses decimated the Plantagenets like the Dance of the Dragon did wit the Targaryens.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Yeah the significance wasn't lost on me either. Quite a major confirmation - this means no Bran or Tyrion or Victarion/Euron as dragonriders then. Jon, Dany and Aegon it is.

I don't think anyone ever expected Bran to ride a dragon, with his legs and all. He might be able to warg one. I am more curious what the deal with that dragonbinder horn is now though.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

It's written by a maester, so we cannot be sure whetever they indeed married with their bastard cousins for dragonbonding. Either Targaryens doesn't know anything about how they ride their dragons or Quentyn was just unlucky.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

We should perhaps consider that the Small Council was actually small (i.e. irrelevant, insignificant) during a time when the royal family actually commanded their own dragons.

The whole petty Targaryen king thing may illustrate this. Lord Beesbury states that Alicent's children have less Targaryen blood than Rhaenyra, but who's to say that there aren't any Targaryen cadet branches around during this who are even more pure, descending from a younger siblings of Jaehaerys/Alysanne or from younger siblings of Aenys and Maegor? They would have their dragons as well, especially if the Balerion, Mereaxes and Vhagar proved to be as fertile as Aegon and his sisters.

On the dragon-bonding thing:

Maia, I was blowing in your horn for years, saying that Valyrian incest came up as practice due to the fact that Valyrians had to find a way to bond their dragons permanently to the family. If they wanted to inherit them to their children and grandchildren, this was necessary. At least that's the theory.

In a Freehold like Valyria incestuous marriages are a very stupid idea. You cannot assemble more and more power and wealth through marriages if you only marry into your own family, so the benefits have to outweigh the losses, and the benefits have to be connected to the dragons.

GRRM once said that two dragonriders apparently might turn out to be Targaryens. The third 'not necessarily has to be a Targaryen'. This could easily refer to a Targaryen bastard, somebody who does not yet know that he is a Targaryen (Tyrion and/or Jon), or somebody who can enslave a dragon through skin-changing (i.e. Bran/Jon).

And my guess is that either Rhaegal or Viserion are going to have multiple riders. Perhaps even Drogon, should Dany not stay in the game until the very end (although I think she will).

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Quentyn Martell also supposedly had dragon blood in his veins, and we all know how that went for him...

That doesn't disprove this. I said that Valyrian blood is a requirement to be a dragonrider (the person controlling the dragons), if a person with Targaryen blood fails, it must be that they did not do it correctly.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Oh wow!

"Since dragons will only accept and bond with riders of Targaryen blood, the story chronicles the search for bastard-born "dragonseeds" to join the fray (with mixed results)—a subplot which clearly holds some potential relevance for Daenerys and her trio of dragons as events continue to unfold in the novels…"

Ikr this is sooo interesting
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Oh wow!

"Since dragons will only accept and bond with riders of Targaryen blood, the story chronicles the search for bastard-born “dragonseeds” to join the fray (with mixed results)—a subplot which clearly holds some potential relevance for Daenerys and her trio of dragons as events continue to unfold in the novels…"

This has got to be evidence Jon can be a Dragon Rider.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.

Guest
This topic is now closed to further replies.
×
×
  • Create New...