Dance of the Dragons 0.0.?

[Lord Varys]

Aenar Targaryen relocated his whole family to Dragonstone, taking with him five dragons including Balerion the Black Dread.

The Targaryen dynasty had five dragons during Aenar's time, a number that may have swelled afterwards since Vhagar and Meraxes hatched on Dragonstone. But of these original five Dragonstone only Balerion survived into Aegon's time. Considering the size of Meraxes and Vhagar during the Conquest we should assume they hatched decades before the time of Aegon, perhaps while Aenar was still alive, or during the reign of his children Gaemon and Daenys.

Gaemon and Daenys were followed by their children Aegon and Elaena, who also married each other, but Aegon and Elaena apparently only had two sons, Maegon and Aerys, and of those apparently only Aerys had children. He fathered Aelix, Baelon, and Daemon Targaryen.

Daemon Targaryen had a son, Aerion Targaryen, who had three children with Velena Velaryon: Visenya, Aegon, and Rhaenys.

The interesting things are:

1. Maegon apparently did not continue the Targaryen line (i.e. he never married or had no children) or his children did not survive. His brother Aerys continued the line.

2. Aerys had three sons, but his youngest, Daemon, continued the line. His elder brothers Aelix and Baelon had either no children, or their children did not survive. During Aegon's time he and his sisters were apparently the only Targaryens left on Dragonstone (if not, I'm sure his parents, uncles/aunts, and cousins would have played a role during the Conquest)

3. Aerion Targaryen, Aegon's father, did not marry a sister/cousin but Velena of House Velaryon.

4. Only one of five Targaryen dragons to escape the Doom of Valyria survived until the Conquest. Vhagar and Meraxes hatched on Dragonstone.

We don't have any idea what the Targaryens did during the century on Dragonstone. We know that Aegon I helped the coalition of Free Cities and the Storm King against the Volantenes shortly before the Conquest. But it strikes me as odd that at least four Targaryen dragons died on Dragonstone in about a century or so. And it may have been more, since there is no proof that Vhagar and Meraxes were the only dragons who hatched on Dragonstone. We see how the Targaryen dragons multiplied in the years after the Conquest, so there is no reason to assume that they did not on Dragonstone.

I doubt that any ancestors of Aegon tried to conquer Westeros with their dragons, or intervened heavily in wars on Essos during this time, since any such actions would have either prepared/warned Westeros for Aegon's Conquest, or would have had a strong influence on Volantis claim of superiority/world domination on Essos.

So my guess is that there must have been some sort of 'Dance of the Dragons 0.0'. A sort of feud between all these hot-headed young Targaryen males for supremacy (i.e. among the sons of Aerys), either upon his death, or already during his and/or Maegon's life time. It's also possible that things were not particularly between Maegon and Aerys. The four Valyrian-born dragons and other dragons would have died during that strife, or perhaps not all of them.

Does this sound plausible? Accidents are possible as well, but the losses of four dragons along with the deaths/ends of three male Targaryen cadet branches is telling, I think. And no outside force should have had all that much interest to attack the Targaryens on Dragonstone or kill their dragons since they just stuck to their rock in the sea.

[King of Winters]

Interesting.

Is it ever mentioned if dragons die of old age or not?

They could have died from extreme old age if so.

Also if there was a Dance of the Dragon 0.0, wouldn't it effect more than just Dragonstone and the Driftmark, like the coasts of Westeros closest to the battle. There were maybe up to 10 dragons in the Dance of the Dragons 1.0, so 5 dragons, even though it's less would still cause a lot of damage to the surrounding areas, including Dragonstone and the Driftmark.

[Lord Varys]

Well, my guess is that this 'Dance 0.0.' was more of a family struggle for supremacy, fought on dragonback, and did not involve armies and the like.

As to the count of the dragons in the original Dance between Rhaenyra and Aegon, my guess is that it there were at least 10-15, perhaps even as much as twenty dragons involved. Jaehaerys took six dragons with him to Winterfell, and my guess is that he took not all the Targaryen dragons with him (most likely only the dragons who were rode by himself, Alysanne, and other members of his party).

Balerion died of unnatural causes during Jaehaerys' reign, the last dragon to be born in Valyria, and he was about 200 years old at that time. And dragons do supposedly not die of old age, at least that's what has been hinted at in the series.

If dragons do die of old age, and if four of Aenar's five dragons would have been very old when he left for Dragonstone, I'm not sure that he would have taken them with him. So my guess is that it's not that likely that the four dragons died of natural causes.

[Frozentree]

Well, my guess is that this 'Dance 0.0.' was more of a family struggle for supremacy, fought on dragonback, and did not involve armies and the like.

As to the count of the dragons in the original Dance between Rhaenyra and Aegon, my guess is that it there were at least 10-15, perhaps even as much as twenty dragons involved. Jaehaerys took six dragons with him to Winterfell, and my guess is that he took not all the Targaryen dragons with him (most likely only the dragons who were rode by himself, Alysanne, and other members of his party).

Balerion died of unnatural causes during Jaehaerys' reign, the last dragon to be born in Valyria, and he was about 200 years old at that time. And dragons do supposedly not die of old age, at least that's what has been hinted at in the series.

If dragons do die of old age, and if four of Aenar's five dragons would have been very old when he left for Dragonstone, I'm not sure that he would have taken them with him. So my guess is that it's not that likely that the four dragons died of natural causes.

Dragons do die of old age, it was said that they "live longer than humans", which strongly implies they do not live forever. And I think Aenar would take all his dragons with him, no matter age, they are supposedly very precious and though we don't know about their breeding habits, they do actually change genders instead of being both at once, so I assume he had to take more than one if others should be born.

I do think some family struggle is possible, but it would not go as far as a Dance 0.0. I think it is more likely that some "accidents" happened to Daemon's brothers than actual fight on dragonbacks.

[Lord Varys]

They could die of old age, I admit as much, but since the weirwood trees have recently revealed to be virtually immortal if they are not killed, I'd not be surprised if that would also be the case with dragons.

[King of Winters]

If they didn't die of old age then they could have been turned into the huge stone dragon sculptors on Dragonstone, if they somehow caught Greyscale.

Too crackpot?

[Dreakonic]

This is stupid. You speculate on something that didn't happen based on what little information you have. I could easily make a topic that said the Starks had their own family war because there are few left. It's not the same but it basically falls down to the same point you're trying to make. If GRRM didn't point anything out about a Dance of the Dragons 0.0 then that's it. It's that simple. The author created the series, who are you to come up here and speculate on a war that has never been mentioned in any way throughout the ASOIAF series and the Dunk & Egg stories.

[Lord Varys]

Well, first there is more to the series than the main series and the Dunk and Egg stories. Second, I did imagine a war here, just a struggle for supremacy/succession between the male Targaryens and their dragons on Dragonstone. Sure, it could be wrong, but if the dragons did not die of old age, and if all Aegon's two great-uncles were not all incapable of fathering children there has to be an explanation why Visenya, Aegon, and Rhaenys apparently had no Targaryen cousins.

The fact that GRRM does not mention a struggle among the Targaryen ancestors of Aegon I does not mean that there was none.

And by the way, there are reasons why there are so few Starks left in the series. Rickard Stark was an only child, and the Starks faced some heavy challenges in the last century or so (Raymun Redbeard's attack on the North, the Skagos Rebellion, the Greyjoy raiding during Aerys' I rule etc.).

But it makes little sense to assume that the Targaryens ever ventured west on dragonback before the Conquest. If they did so, the Seven Kingdoms would have been warned, and would have come up with strategies how to deal with the Targaryen dragons later on. And any attack on the Free Cities would have been mentioned as well, especially since pretty much any Valyrian family in Volantis, Lys, Tyrosh, Myr would have desperately tried to ally themselves with the Targaryen family through marriage to gain control of one or more of their dragons.

The surviving Valyrian nobles of the Free Cities had no reason to kill the Targaryen dragons.

Everything seems to indicate that the Targaryens kept more or less a low profile on Dragonstone until the Conquest.

[Hardstone]

In the reports from GRRM's AWOIAF readings, wasn't the hundred years after the Doom called the Century/Years of Blood?

"The Targaryens ruled Dragonstone for the next 100 years, which were called the Years of Blood.. 4 of the dragons died on Dragonstone leaving only Balerion."

I couldn't see it mentioned in this thread though...

[Pero the first of His name]

Dragons die out of old age. I am sure if Balerion the Black Dread got killed it would be a big event known about until today.

We do know something else about dragons, they grow larger the more freedom they have. When kept indoors they do not grow as much, they probably die sooner then aswell and, most importantly, there is a chance they produce lesser offspring then.

It could be assumed that aside from Balerion others did not see much action. And they could have been old too.

We know almost nothing about dragon reproduction so the following is just a wild guess:

Maybe the early Targs knew something else about dragon brooding.

They could have let only the strongest reproduce setting others aside, especially during the Dragonstone time.

Their own inbreeding could actually be inspired by what they observed on dragons.

[Morienthar]

Balerion is said to have died at the age of 200,During Jaehaerys I's rule which was the most peaceful time in Westrosi history.

[Pero the first of His name]

Balerion is said to have died at the age of 200,During Jaehaerys I's rule which was the most peaceful time in Westrosi history.

Yep, died. Not killed (please nobody go start a thread on how he might have actually been killed)

[Lord Varys]

There is the line 'The Targaryen dragons were bred for war, and in war they died'. This has usually been used to attribute the death of Balerion to some battle as well. Apparently he did not die peaceful in his sleep. And I'm still inclined to believe that the four dragons on Dragonstone met a similar fate.

And considering that Vhagar and Meraxes hatched on Dragonstone, who is to say that they were the only dragons that were born on Dragonstone during that time. We only know that these two were the only two Dragonstone-born dragons that were still around at the time of the Conquest.

[Crowford]

The two quotes are (first one by Jorah, second one by Barristan):

"A dragon's natural span of days is many times as long as a man's, or so the songs would have us believe... but the dragons the Seven Kingdoms knew best were those of House Targaryan. They were bred for war, and in war they died. It is no easy thing to slay a dragon, but it can be done."

"Balerion the Black Dread was two hundred years old when he died during the reign of Jaeherys the Conciliator. [...]"

I kinda hoped that finding this quote would provide an answer, but you can still interpret it both ways. Jorah seems to imply that all Targaryan dragons died in wars, at least the important ones, which would surely include Balerion. Barristan replies that Balerion was 200 years old at his death. If he was killed, it's curious that he would say "died", on the other hand he might just mention it to underscore the longevity of dragons (because he had lived for 200 years).

I am leaning toward Jorah trying to say that most dragons did not reach their full age, because they died in wars (especially the Dance), and Barristan using Balerion as an example of how long a dragon lives if it is NOT killed. So a life-expectancy of 200 years seems a solid guess.

And:

This is stupid. You speculate on something that didn't happen based on what little information you have. [...] The author created the series, who are you to come up here and speculate on a war that has never been mentioned in any way throughout the ASOIAF series and the Dunk & Egg stories.

So... we are supposed to be sitting around, waiting for the books and then going "Ah, yes", after which we go back to sitting around, because everything else is speculation?

Are you sure you grasp the purpose of this forum?

[Lord Varys]

Well, Balerion could easily have fell victim to the last desperate gasps of the Faith Militant Uprising. Jaehaerys, not Maegor, ended that conflict, and I'm quite sure that the fanatics on side of the Faith Militant developed and trained quite successful dragon slayers in the very end. It would speak greatly in favor of Jaehaerys I if he could continue his peace negotiations after the other side has just successfully assassinated the greatest Targaryen dragon.

But it's just as easily possible that there was some short war/battle/quarrel later on during Jaehaerys' reign. If Balerion was about 200 years old at his death, he hatched either about forty years before the Doom of Valyria, or immediately before Aenar left for Dragonstone. And Balerion cannot have lasted into the final years of Jaehaerys' reign since then he would have been somewhat older than 200 years.

Jaehaerys I died in 103 AC, and Aenar left for Dragonstone in 114 BC (before Conquest).

Linda mentioned that Balerion's death year is much closer to 100 AC than the beginning of Jaehaerys' reign. Hints to this fact can be found in the debate about the TV Tywin's statement that Balerion died 300 years ago, which is obviously false.

[Lord Varys]

Thinking about it, there have been hints by Ran and Linda that the Targaryens continued to try to conquer Dorne after the initial attempt failed. I'd not be surprised if the Dornishmen developed into quite skillful dragonslayers. It's easily possible that Balerion was killed during such a skirmish, especially since it's all but confirmed that Jaehaerys himself never rode Balerion. We know that Maegor rode Balerion, and my guess is that Jaehaerys and Alysanne bounded with their dragons before their uncle died.

Balerion could have gone to one of Jaehaerys' younger siblings or children, who could easily have some hot-heads feeling omnipotent on the back of the Black Dread. GRRM already hinted that dragons are not invincible, so I really can see Balerion being killed in battle.

But I've to mention I really can't get the image of a toothless, ailing dragon into my head... ;-)

[MRHD]

This is stupid. You speculate on something that didn't happen based on what little information you have. I could easily make a topic that said the Starks had their own family war because there are few left. It's not the same but it basically falls down to the same point you're trying to make. If GRRM didn't point anything out about a Dance of the Dragons 0.0 then that's it. It's that simple. The author created the series, who are you to come up here and speculate on a war that has never been mentioned in any way throughout the ASOIAF series and the Dunk & Egg stories.

GRRM hasn't said much of anything about the hundred years on Dragonstone. Some people, myself included, are skeptical of that contention that since GRRM hasn't talked about it the Targaryens and their dragons must've just sat around twiddling their thumbs for a hundred years. Until and unless we get more information, speculation that there was a Targaryen family struggle is as good a guess as any, based on our information.

[Morienthar]

GRRM hasn't said much of anything about the hundred years on Dragonstone. Some people, myself included, are skeptical of that contention that since GRRM hasn't talked about it the Targaryens and their dragons must've just sat around twiddling their thumbs for a hundred years. Until and unless we get more information, speculation that there was a Targaryen family struggle is as good a guess as any, based on our information.

Well there was a short war in Essos after the Doom I think,So they weren't exactly idle.

[Lord Varys]

The war in Essos was the attempt of the Volentenes to conquer all the other Free Cities. This period is called the Bleeding Years. The Tigers of Volantis conquered Lys and Myr. When they tried to add Tyrosh to their holdings, Braavos, Pentos, the Westerosi Storm King, and Aegon Targaryen on Balerion allied against Volantis. Afterwards the Tigers lost power in Volantis and the Elephants took over.

Aegon's ancestors apparently took no part in all of that.

[History of Westeros]

Balerion could've been ridden by Jaehaerys' son/Viserys father. We don't know his name or how he died, and he was outlived by his father so he was never king. Perhaps they died together, and perhaps it was in Dorne.

Perhaps Balerion suffered serious injuries and died from them. This would account for Jorah saying he "died" rather than "was killed".