#valyrian slavery

[ceriseo]

something about how every time a targ tries to enact real genuine reform to westeros/the dynasty as a whole everything crumples in on itself. viserys naming rhaenyra heir leading to the dance, ensuring that no woman will ever inherit the throne in her own right out of fear of it happening again. daeron 2 establishing a final peace with dorne, (ending the cycle of attempted war of conquest to tense peace to attempted war of conquest) but the inclusion of dornishmen in court being a catalyst for the blackfyre rebellions, igniting a new cycle of attempted conquest every generation or so. egg genuinely being a ruler for the people with the best intentions and then accidently causing the tragedy at summerhall (not even mentioning the fact that daeron 2 literally built summerhall...), his attempts to end the incest foiled by his own children who romanticize the old targs. bc no matter how much they want to change for the better, they are still targaryens of old valyria. they can't help but look back.

[horizon-verizon]

Can someone please explain to me how all Valyrians, innocent or otherwise, deserved to be wiped out and the descendants of survivors deserve to be wiped out because Valyria practiced slavery, but also Dany is a mad tyrant for killing literal slavers (from the literal system that Valyria adopted slavery from) while also trying to "turn slavers back into men" on her quest to end slavery? I don't get it. If these people really think Valyria somehow was the one-true-slave-state, shouldn't they be cheering Dany on for using the source of their former power to "redeem" or "atone" for them? idk I just feel like if she were a man these people would be eating that shit up.

Bc it's all just a way to discredit Dany as much as all those sexist hypocrisies against women in the real world serve to discredit women in the moment and build up into its own ready weapon to use against women. Hope this made sense.

Yes, they would eat this up if she were a man bc the irony of Dany doing this has already been a thing in sci fi fantasy of any subgenre or medium: a descendant or active individual of bad actors use the same tools they used to dominate others or do some other sort of wrong ends to save or "fix" and/or "restore" some sort of preferable "world" order. It's been a trope. People mistake Dany's arc for the In the Blood trope:

Characters appear to be able to inherit their parents' personalities, behaviour, and morality, in addition to their physical traits.

or more specifically the Villanous Lineage trope where:

Sometimes, fictional characters inherit their evilness or immorality from their parents. Even initially good characters like the All-Loving Hero can eventually turn evil thanks to this trope. A Knight in Shining Armor is at risk of going insane or over to The Dark Side, if a parent or grandparent was a Villain by Default or member of an Evil Race. Usually, up until The Reveal (which might be delivered in the form of I Am Your Father), the character had a solid reputation, moral compass, and personality, capable of using Heroic Willpower to resist just about any evil supernatural coercion.

Because they already defaulted the entire Valyrians to be almost an inherently and uniquely, amoral, "evil" archfamily when the truth is much more "banal" and nuanced simultaneously.

Most Targs did not "go mad", there were those who were pushed towards paranoia and even fewer to psychosis bc of extreme circumstances, some of them even possibly involving rape (Aerys and Viserys[III], Dany's brother); they did not colonize they just conquered like many other Westerosi houses did, esp the Starks and Ironborn and Reachmen; assimilation into Andal-FM patriarchy to rule it similarly to (but actually several steps further) how ancestors have taken the rule of religious tolerance of several different religions to easier prevent serious uprisings as well as not having that strong of a religious--seemingly--fervor as other cultures.

[imaginarianisms]

the valyrians in the days of old valyria were canonically just as accepting as the rhoynar were with queerness. btw

[wodania]

“our towers, they rose up and set with the sun / our sermons, they burnt us with fiery tongues / we wrought our wings of metal, surprised when we fell,” eastward of eden by amelia day

“The Valyrians learned one deplorable thing from the Ghiscari: slavery. The Ghiscari whom they conquered were the first to be thus enslaved, but not the last. The burning mountains of the Fourteen Flames were rich with ore, and the Valyrians hungered for it: copper and tin for the bronze of their weapons and monuments; later iron for the steel of their legendary blades; and always gold and silver to pay for it all.” a world of ice and fire, ancient history: valyria’s children

“The freed slaves parted before her. “Mother,” they called from a hundred throats, a thousand, ten thousand. “Mother,” they sang, their fingers brushing her legs as she flew by. “Mother, mother, mother!”” a storm of swords, daenerys iv

[knightsickness]

hizdahr’s cartoonish ‘oh thats just a bedslave UM i mean a free woman’ slip up to barristan feels kind of superfluous given that the same information was just conveyed by barristan seeing that hizdahr’s decorated his private bedroom with tapestries of valyrian armies being enslaved by ghiscari. hm do you guys think that his rejection of slavery in slavers bay and his claiming to find veneration of old ghis stupid and useless might have both been completely bullshit. anyway heres that information again more explicitly in case you didnt

[ahouseofstarkdefender]

Some people talk about Old Valyria with the same fervor they despise what Ancient Rome was for women, slaves and the oppression to the different cultures and religions that is just ironic and funny and I hope one day they can wake up...

I would like to say it's because of the producers, but the truth is the blind admiration they had existed before the shows. The series just worsened the glorification of a society based on slavery, genocide, oppression and imperialism.

At least Ancient Rome lay the fundaments for laws and democracy (before it was an Empire...) and yeah, the Occidental society, for good or for bad, exist because of it.

While the Valyrians only brought fire and blood to everyone but their small supremacist society. They luckily disappeared until they killed each other, the survivors also killed each other, and the last survivors fucked it up later. Because the three siblings who "unified" six of the seven kingdoms after committing genocide only left one road, a few laws that doesn't work for everyone and ruined the only line of defense the whole continent had for the Big Bad Guys from the other side of the Wall (and it was after their head had a dream and wanted to save the continent somehow but it only worsened it?). They didn't created anything to actually help Westeros. When they left, they did it so Bad, with a Mad King who burned everyone for pleasure and an heir who provoked a rebellion in the name of a prophecy he read somewhere, believing himself a sort of saviour of mankind, who would change things for the best, and ended up the almost extinction of his house, with only his younger siblings alive and alone, and his wife and children unprotected to be raped and killed.

Like the Valyrians always end up doing everything, with fire and blood. And are the innocents who always pay the price.

[spacerockfloater]

“The Targaryens/ Valyrians are not white supremacists and can’t be compared to European Colonisers!”

Oh? My bad then. I must have them confused with some other white folks who thought their appearance made them superior, brought whole continents to heel, exploited the lands of others for their own greed, destroyed whole civilizations and enslaved vulnerable people who unfortunately lacked the advanced weapons of mass destruction they possessed.

“Well, the Andals and the First Men were also colonisers, so they deserved it!”

No way! Are you actually telling me that every race has a history of violence because human nature itself is corrupt and we’re no better than animals fighting for their place on this earth? That’s so crazy and original. By the way, are you saying that people deserved to get colonised and enslaved because they were fighting other people in order to survive? Are you suggesting these “savages” should have been contained by the righteous white folks who came there to better their lives? Not to mention that the Andals and the First Men came to Westeros 12,000 and 6,000 years ago respectively, while the Targaryens attacked Westeros barely 130 years ago (literally just 3 - 4 generations) from the Dance of the Dragons? So are you comparing the morality of the people who migrated here, who were so primitive that barely even possessed weapons of steel, with that of the most advanced civilization ever built in the ASOIAF universe? That’s so interesting! It’s almost as if the Andals and the First Men didn’t know any better until it was too late and were trying to find a land that could accommodate their millions of people, so they were essentially fighting for survival, whereas the Targaryens who came from a race that had evolved philosophically, politically, academically and technologically wise, possessed enough wealth and land to sustain their little family, yet still chose to go to war against the land that nurtured them out of pure greed! Hmmm. Do you also believe that the Greeks had it coming when they were enslaved by the Ottomans and should just let go of the past because it’s been so long since they regained their freedom (barely 200 years ago btw, after 4 centuries of slavery), because their Ancient Ancestral Tribes migrated to Greece and conquered the land 3,500 years ago, a little after the age of bronze? No? Then you might see why that kind thinking is flawed.

Stop defending these inbred bastards with your full chest. We get it. They look badass. We all have a fave war criminal but all of the Targs need to be put to the sword, along with their fucking lizards. Purposely denying the parallels between the Targaryens/ Valyrians and the Colonisers/ Conquerors of our world screams white saviour complex.

[davinamikaelsonalwaysandforever]

The tragedy of The Dance of the Dragons really is how a family, that should've stood by each other and look at the bigger picture to protect Westerors and its people, ultimately tore each other apart and used their magical and majestic creatures that made them great to fight their war in the name of vengeance and greed.

The mighty Tagrayens destroyed each other and their dragons, and for what? An iron chair? It's only when Daenerys Taragyen miraculously brings the dragons back into the world after over a century that House Targaryen at last gets a do-over.

Daenerys Taragyen, unlike her ancestors, doesn't use her dragons recklessly and out of greed and vengeance. She knows how dangerous and special these creatures are; she is not using them for powers sake, as the Valyrians did, or out of vengeance. As it was the case during the dance. It's really the opposite; Dany is using her dragons to right the wrongs of her ancestors, to finally put an end to oppression and slavery, and ultimately save humanity from the coming darkness, as Aegon the Dragon had foreseen it.

The irony really is that everyone wants to sit the Iron Throne, but they always forget the most important promise a ruler makes to its people. They are meant to be the “protector of the realm", yet all they ever did was tear it apart. And now winter is here, and Westerors needs a saviour more than ever in order to survive the ice-cold darkness.

And that's what makes Daenerys so special and different from her ancestors; it's her choices to do good, to respect her dragons and the sheer power and might she carries with them and not use that power out of her own pettiness, but in the effort to try and make the world a better place.

“Why do the gods make kings and queens, if not to protect the ones who can't protect themselves?" - Daenerys III ASOS

(Artist: Kodabomb)

[gwenllian-in-the-abbey]

Is there anything support the populat interpretation that old valriya and valryians in general are more feminist, and progressive than the rest in Asoiaf?

Anon, thank you! I've been wanting to address this for awhile, so I'm going to actually answer this really fully, with as many receipts as I can provide (this ended up being more of an essay than I intended, but hopefully it helps)

I think there's in fact plenty of evidence to suggest that Valyria and the Valyrians in general were anything but progressive. Valyria was an expansive empire with a robust slave trade that practiced incest based on the idea of blood supremacy/blood purity. All of these things are absolutely antithetical to progressivism. There is no way any empire practicing slavery can ever be called progressive. Now, the Targaryens of Dragonstone have since given up the practice of slavery, but they certainly still believe in the supremacy of Valyrian blood.

And I'll see the argument, well what's wrong with believing your blood is special if your blood really is special and magic? Which is just-- if anyone catches themselves thinking this, and you sincerely believe that GRRM intended to create a magically superior master race of hot blondes who deserve to rule over all other backwards races by virtue of their superior breeding which is reinforced through brother-sister incest, and you've convinced yourself this represents progressive values, then you might want to step away from the computer for a bit and do a bit of self reflection.

And remember-- what is special about this special blood? It gives the bearers the ability to wield sentient weapons of mass destruction. It's also likely, according to the most popular theories, the result of blood magic involving human sacrifice. So there is a terrible price to pay for this so-called supremacy. Would any of us line up to be sacrificed to the Fourteen Flames so that the Valyrians can have nukes?

And if you are tempted by the idea that a woman who rides a dragon must inherently have some sort of power-- that is true. A woman who rides a dragon is more powerful than a woman who does not ride a dragon, and in some cases, more powerful than a man who does not ride a dragon, but that does not make her more powerful than a man who also rides a dragon. Dragonriding remained a carefully guarded privilege, and Targaryen women who might otherwise become dragonriders were routinely denied the privilege (despite the oft repeated "you cannot steal a dragon," when Saera Targaryen attempted to claim a dragon from the dragonpit, she was thrown into a cell for the attempted "theft,"words used by Jaehaerys). The dragonkeepers were established explicitly to keep anyone, even those of Targaryen blood, from taking them without permission. Any "liberation" that she has achieved is an illusion. What she has gained is the ability to enact violence upon others who are less privileged, and this ability does not save her from being the victim of gender based violence herself.

Politically speaking, it is also true that Valyria was a "freehold," in that they did not have a hereditary monarchy, but instead had a political structure akin to Ancient Athens (which was itself democratic, but not at all progressive or feminist). Landholding citizens could vote on laws and on temporary leaders, Archons. Were any of the lords freeholder women? We don't know. If we take Volantis as an example, the free city that seems to consider itself the successor to Valyria, the party of merchants, the elephants, had several female leaders three hundred years ago, but the party of the aristocracy, the tigers, the party made up of Valyrian Old Blood nobility, has never had a female leader. Lys, the other free city, is known for it's pleasure houses, which mainly employ women kidnapped into sexual slavery (as well as some young men). It is ruled by a group of magisters, who are chosen from among the wealthiest and noblest men in the city, not women. There does not seem to be a tradition of female leadership among Valyrians, and that's reflected by Aegon I himself, who becomes king, rather than his older sister-wife, Visenya. And although there have been girls named heir, temporarily, among the pre-Dance Targaryens, none were named heir above a trueborn brother aside from Rhaenyra, a choice that sparked a civil war. In this sense, the Targaryens are no different from the rest of Westeros.

As for feminism or sexual liberation, there's just no evidence to support it. We know that polygamy was not common, but it was also not entirely unheard of, but incest, to keep the bloodlines "pure," was common. Incest and polygamy are certainly sexual taboos, both in the real world and in Westeros, that the Valyrians violated, but the violation of sexual taboos is not automatically sexually liberated or feminist. Polygamy, when it is exclusively practiced by men and polyandry is forbidden (and we have no examples of Valyrian women taking multiple husbands, outside of fanfic), is often abusive to young women. Incest leads to an erosion of family relationships and abusive grooming situations are inevitable. King Jaehaerys' daughters are an excellent case study, and the stories of Saera and Viserra are particularly heartbreaking. Both women were punished severely for "sexual liberation," Viserra for getting drunk and slipping into her brother Baelon's bed at age fifteen, in an attempt to avoid an unwanted marriage to an old man. She was not punished because she was sister attempting to sleep with a brother, but because she was the wrong sister. Her mother, the queen had already chosen another sister for Baelon, and believed her own teenage daughter was seducing her brother for nefarious reasons. As a sister, Viserra should have been able to look to her brother for protection, but as the product of an incestuous family, Viserra could only conceive of that protection in terms of giving herself over to him sexually.

Beyond that, sexual slavery was also common in ancient Valyria, a practice that persisted in Lys and Volantis, with women (and young men) trafficked from other conquered and raided nations. Any culture that is built on a foundation of slavery and which considers sexual slavery to be normal and permissible, is a culture of normalized rape. Not feminist, not progressive.

I think we get the picture! so where did this idea that Valyrians are more progressive come from? I think there are two reasons. One, the fandom has a bit of a tendency to imagine Valyrians and their traditions in opposition to Westerosi Sevenism, and if Sevenism is fantasy Catholicism, and the fantasy Catholics also hate the Valyrian ways, they must hate them because those annoying uptight religious freaks just hate everything fun and cool, right? They hate revealing clothing, hate pornographic tapestries, hate sex outside of marriage, hate bastards. So being on Sevenism's shit-list must be a mark of honor, a sign of progressive values? But it's such a surface level reading, and a real misunderstanding of the medieval Catholic church, and a conflating of that church with the later Puritan values that many of us in the Anglosphere associate with being "devout." For most of European history, the Catholic church was simply The Church, and the church was, ironically, where you would find the material actions which most closely align with modern progressive values. The church cared for lepers, provided educations for women, took care of orphans, and fed the poor. In GRRM's world, which is admittedly more secular than the actual medieval world, Sevenism nevertheless has basically the same function, feeding the poor instead of, you know, enslaving them.

Finally, I blame the shows. While Valyrians weren't a progressive culture, Daenerys Targaryen herself held relatively progressive individual values by a medieval metric. She is a slavery abolitionist, she elevates women within her ranks, and she takes control of her own sexuality (after breaking free from her Targaryen brother). But Daenerys wasn't raised as a Targaryen. She grew up an orphan in exile, hearing stories of her illustrious ancestors from her brother, who of the two did absorb a bit of that culture, and is not coincidentally, fucked up, abusive, and misogynistic. He feels a sexual ownership over his sister, arranges a marriage for her, and even after her marriage, feels entitled to make decisions on her behalf. It is only after breaking away from Viserys that Dany comes into her own values. Having once been a mere object without agency of her own, she determines to save others from that fate and becomes an abolitionist. But because Game of Thrones gave viewers very little exposure to Targaryens aside from Daenerys, House Targaryen, in the eyes of most show watchers, is most closely associated with Dany and her freedom-fighter values. And as for Rhaenyra in House of the Dragon, being a female heir does not make her feminist or progressive, although it is tempting to view her that way when she is juxtaposed against Aegon II. Her "sexual liberation" was a lesson given to her by her uncle Daemon, a man who had an express interest in "liberating" her so that she would sleep with him, it was not a value she was raised with. In fact, she was very nearly disinherited for it, and was forced into a marriage with a gay man as a result of said "liberation." She had no interest in changing succession laws to allow absolute primogeniture, no interest in changing laws or norms around bastardy despite having bastards; she simply viewed herself as an exception. Rhaenyra's entire justification for her claim is not the desire to uplift women, bring peace and stability to Westeros, or even to keep her brother off the throne, it is simply that she believes she deserves it because her father is the king and he told her she could have it, despite all tradition and norms, and in spite of the near certain succession crisis it will cause. Whether she is right or wrong, absolutism is not progressive.

And let me just say, none of this means that you can't enjoy the Valyrians or think that they're fun or be a fan of house Targaryen. This insistence that Targaryens are the progressive, feminist (read: morally good) house seems by connected to the need of some fans to make their favorite characters unproblematic. If the Valyrians are "bad," does that make you a bad person for enjoying them? Of course not. But let's stop the moral grandstanding about the "feminist" and "progressive" Valyrians in a series that is an analogue for medieval feudalism. Neither of those things can exist under the systems in place in Westeros, nor could they have existed in the slavery based empire of conquest that was old Valyria.

[branwendaughterofllyr]

I really thought we were past people drinking the Valyrian exceptionalism kool-aid, but I guess we will never be. Look at me. Look me straight in the eyes. The family from a doomed empire built on slavery and conquest that practices incest to keep the blood pure that goes mad and has dragon babies and periodically blows itself up is to be looked at with a critical eye- look at me! don't look away! Think critically for five seconds, for the love of George

[lizzie-queenofmeigas]

Daenerys’s entire Meereen arc has been about her struggling to try to end slavery peacefully when that is, quite frankly, not possible.

“Remember who you are, Daenerys. The dragons know, do you ?”

“Dragons plant no trees.”

Dany is absolutely headed towards the necessary realization that you can’t fight evil with peace. You have to get your hands dirty. “When they go low, we go high” DOES NOT WORK when you’re dealing with people who fully believe they have the right to own other people and will do absolutely anything to ensure they hold onto that power. Daenerys has to realize that in order to become the hero she was meant to be. And when she does, she’ll do what needs to be done. Which will probably include burning Volantis, or at least the Valyrian stronghold inside Volantis. And I don’t believe GRRM will portray this as madness or evil or a power trip. It’ll be a victory.

Daenerys needs to use reactive violence against the slavers, who use oppressive violence (because as Isaac Newton’s third law states, for every action (force) in nature there is an equal and opposite reaction.) Reactive violence is not oppressive violence, but you need reactive violence to end oppressive violence. Both sideing Daenerys and the slavers she crucified is like saying mutual abuse is real when a woman fight back against or murder her abusive husband.

Exactly.

[marwyn]

it was always a bit weird to me that the ancestor dany resembles naerys? do we think there's an significance to this or grrm did put too much thought into this?

I definitely find it interesting to compare and contrast Naerys with Dany, as GRRM does in that description: “She was a wisp of a woman, smaller even than Dany (to whom she bears a certain resemblence [sic]), very slender, with big purple eyes and fine, pale, porcelain skin, near translucent. Naerys had none of Dany’s strength, however.” A major theme in Dany’s storyline is the subversion of what came before in her family history—“Aegon the Conqueror with teats,” “no one ever looked for a girl,” she dreams of flying on a dragon to the site of Rhaegar’s defeat and slaying white walkers (“This is how it was meant to be. The other was a nightmare, and I have only now awakened”), she’s dismantling slavery at its source (“The Valyrians learned one deplorable thing from the Ghiscari: slavery”), etc. Thus, despite Dany’s initial similarities to Naerys, i.e. subjugation by a cruel older brother, forced marriage at a young age, and traumatic childbirth, I expect her life will continue to turn out quite differently—autonomy, a marriage for love, maybe even a happy ending? If “the dragon has three heads” really indicates that Dany will be part of a trio of some kind, I think it will be a contrast to the unhappy one of Aegon IV, Naerys, and Aemon.

[agentrouka-blog]

What do you think about the newest BNF theory that Valyrians were first the slaves of the Great Empire of the Dawn and later revoltet against their masters?

Also the supposed theory that the reason why did Aenar escaped Valyria with his family was beacuse he wanted to end a slavery there and Make a deal with a faceless man?

Um.

I think as theories they are both ultimately irrelevant? 🤷🏻‍♀️

If the Valyrians had been slaves before they became slavers... well, that's fairly straight-forward and another example of how having been a victim doesn't translate to being incapable of victimizing others. We have lots of examples of that in the main series too.

As for Aenar... well, what's the point? It's not needed to explain anything, and it seems unclear what deal the Faceless Men would provide to the specialest slaver with the purest heart and the least oppressive dragons? They are... assassins? Did they cause the Doom and give Daenys psychic powers on top? Did Aenar require them as movers to get out of there twelve years ahead of the Doom? And if Aenar was so (out of nowhere) alienated from his culture and its focus on domination, why didn't he pass that on to his kids?

Because it sure seems like they kept all the Valyrian Values, and then his descendents made sure to recreate them in Westeros with the Iron Throne.

The Targaryens were of pure Valyrian blood, dragonlords of ancient lineage. Twelve years before the Doom of Valyria (114 BC), Aenar Targaryen sold his holdings in the Freehold and the Lands of the Long Summer and moved with all his wives, wealth, slaves, dragons, siblings, kin, and children to Dragonstone, a bleak island citadel beneath a smoking mountain in the narrow sea. At its apex Valyria was the greatest city in the known world, the center of civilization. Within its shining walls, twoscore rival houses vied for power and glory in court and council, rising and falling in an endless, subtle, oftsavage struggle for dominance. (The World of Ice and Fire - The Reign of the Dragons: The Conquest)

His "goodness" would have zero impact and therefore be pointless and therefore irrelevant and therefore.... why?

Oh, is it to whitewash the Targaryens again?

[teleit]

Who would be the best ruler of Westeros? Me, I have the desire to do good deeds, even when others beg for mercy

Jokes aside, but really - who? The show actively tells me that Rhaenyra is the only possible option, because this woman glows in the dark from all the blessings received from every god in existence and shits wisdom and greatness.

But is she? Let's hear my useless opinion.

First, where are we looking - at canon (the book), or at the screened fanfic (the show)?

In terms of canon, I think Jacaerys was the best option, but only because the other candidates were complete failures. The way Martin described this boy, even through the lens of the biased Black and Green sources, sounds promising. Yes, 90% of his decisions ended up being failures - he suggested recruiting more dragonriders from dragon seeds, and got Hugh and Ulf; he suggested sending Aegon III and Viserys to Pentos, and they were captured by the Triarchy; he went to rescue his brothers with a bunch of newbies who could barely stay on their dragons, and he ended up getting killed.

If it weren't for the circumstances of his birth, which would inevitably lead to a rebellion by the lords outraged by a bastard on the throne, Jacaerys might have been a good king. He just needed time to grow up.

But on the show? No one. No one at all. None of these people, they are all absolutely terrible.

Rhaenyra? That woman wouldn't know the word "responsibility" if it ambushed her in a parking lot and beat the crap out of her. She doesn't understand what ruling is even twenty years after being named heir, and she asks helplessly "what should I do?", wringing her hands at every difficulty. She does one stupid thing after another, driven by anything but common sense. If she were queen, we'd have another crisis in ten years or so.

Daemon? Lmao. No. That dude lived, fucked and died for shits and giggles, he can't be trusted with snow in the winter.

Jacaerys? That's the boy who solves problems with violence (pulling out a dagger when insulted, punching his uncle in the face when insulted, need I go on?), and loses every fight he starts. He doesn't speak Valyrian, constantly whines and cries to his fiancée and mother that he doesn't know what to do or how to be, and is practically useless during wartime (because his smart decisions were given to Rhaenyra, but that's another story).

Lucerys? Yeah, sure, how can you forget how he handled himself so perfectly at dinner when he should have just kept his mouth shut, but instead he decided that laughing at the crazy uncle he maimed and never apologized for was the height of comedy, better only fart jokes. That boy had one brain cell, and it was on permanent sick leave for the entire season.

Rhaenys? A woman who talks about the slavery of the patriarchy and submits to the decisions of her ambitious to the point of stupidity husband. Marrying her little daughter to her forty year old cousin? Why not. Losing two children because of Rhaenyra and Daemon, and continuing to serve their interests, even though they use her as they please, because Corlys hopes that someday it will pay off? Excellent solution, let's also scold husband for not loving his own bastards enough, and then die ingloriously and uselessly. Yes, the queen we deserve, Rhaenys the Spineless.

Aegon? He can only be a good king if a miracle happens and he stops listening to the idiots around him, gets rid of his mommy and daddy issues, and starts using his head for more than just pouring wine into mouth. Which won't happen, because the writers HATE this man. He'll be pathetic and useless, and then he'll die, because gods forbid there should be an equal fight between a woman and a man for the throne, a woman needs to kick a body sprawled on the ground, disarmed and incapacitated, so that everyone understands that she is superior to him in everything.

Aemond? Season 1 - maybe after a couple of years of therapy, Season 2 - no, he literally doesn't have a single thought in his head except "blood revenge hate aaarrrgghhh", and only occasionally do we see glimpses of a complex character, thanks to Ewan's insane talent.

Helaena? Poor girl, who was just like Aemond crippled by the script so much that even Martin couldn't stand it (Helaena will die just because, for no reason… wow, such deep character development…), give her her bugs and leave her alone.

In canon, the dance of the dragons is the result of well-intentioned stupidity of several generations, in the show - a parable of why incest is bad, just look at how much the mental capacity of people whose family tree looks like a wreath has suffered.

Ps. Still not native speaker and dgaf about mistakes, english can suck my imaginary dick

[jedimaesteryoda]

Daenerys and Viserys stayed in Braavos with the red door, and with description of the lemon tree, I think it is safe to say they lived in the Sealord's Palace. But not as guests, but going by the animal carvings, and other potential hints they lived in the menagerie. The last dragonlords of Valyria were reduced to ornaments in the Sealord's Palace, which in a PR perspective would be effective symbolism of a final triumph of Braavos over the Valyrian dragonlords who had enslaved their forebears. They likely left after the Sealord died, and the chaos that ensued.

Braavos was a city founded by escaped slaves led by Moonsingers. priestesses of Jogos Nhai horsemen. The Braavosi memory of slavery is very much present in their culture. Slavery is prohibited in not just Braavos, but they made sure their northern neighbor Pentos does not either (mostly). The Moonsingers also have the biggest temple.

"Do you know what it is like to be sold, squire? I do. My brother sold me to Khal Drogo for the promise of a golden crown. Well, Drogo crowned him in gold, though not as he had wished, and I . . . my sun-and-stars made a queen of me, but if he had been a different man, it might have been much otherwise. Do you think I have forgotten how it felt to be afraid?"

Daenerys herself was practically a slave under her abusive guardian Viserys and sold to Khal Drogo as she admits. She ends up using what power she has to liberate slaves in Slaver's Bay using the tools that Valyrians had once used to oppress other peoples as tools of liberation. She will eventually lead them on ships to freedom. Combined with the Moon imagery and Dothraki identity for Daenerys, and she is the founding spirit of Braavos where the Moonsingers led self-emancipated slaves to freedom.

However, they forgot that their forebears fled to Braavos as refugees, and the two children, themselves innocents, fled to Braavos for refuge. The Braavosi turned them into zoo animals to be turned out and left homeless after they were done rather than take them in. The Braavosi do not seem welcoming towards her going by Tycho Nestoris's reaction, and for all we know, Jaqen may be looking for Death of Dragons in the Citadel to learn how to kill Dany's dragons. They may possibly see her as a Valyrian dragonlord come again, and worse, her stated goal of overthrowing the current regime in King's Landing or opposing their new client Stannis means the Iron Throne would default on huge sums owed to the Iron Bank.

Then as now, the Braavosi were a pragmatic people, for theirs is a city of escaped slaves where a thousand false gods are honored, but only gold is truly worshipped.

In doing so, the Braavosi elites betray their heritage, forgetting their roots in favor of worship to their god, capital. The keyholders of the Iron Bank and magisters who dominate city politics are among its high priests who in their Palace of Truth say like Egon Emeros the Exquisite in the Hall of a Thousand Thrones: "She is a foolish child, mad and heedless and too dangerous to live."

It's possible that she returns, and Braavos learns the meaning of the adage "a child that is not embraced by the village will warm themselves in its flames." The child they had spurned arrives like the "flail of God" to borrow from Genghis Khan and makes the Titan kneel as her father once promised.

[daenyzz]

The Dragon Girls: Breaker of Chains and Flame of Freedom

Summary — Lyria, Daenerys's younger bastard sister, accompanies her sister throughout her journey and anti-slavery campaign on behalf of Essos, while Lyria must find which path she should follow, she only knows one thing, which has nothing to do with the Iron Throne.

Warning — Mourning briefly described.

Word Count — 1.269

In the gloom of the night, under a sky full of stars that seemed more distant than ever, Daenerys Targaryen stood on the edge of a large funeral pyre. The flames danced as if they were alive, illuminating her face marked by pain and loss. Beside her, Lyria, her younger bastard sister, watched silently, feeling the weight of grief that hung in the air. Both were too young to bear such sadness, but life had taught them to face pain with bravery.

Lyria was only fourteen days younger than Daenerys, but she already bore the scars of a dark past. Bastard daughter of Aerys II and a Valyrian-looking Lyseni harlot, the young woman had wavy silver hair and amethyst eyes that reflected an inhuman and at the same time tragic beauty. The death of her half-brother Viserys did not bring much pain, but that of the son he implanted in her womb... had left an indelible mark on her heart, one that will never be erased.

The pyre burned with intense flames as Daenerys murmured parting words to Drogo. Lyria felt a deep connection with her sister; Both had lost a lot, and loneliness united them in an unbreakable bond. “We must be strong,” Lyria said quietly, her voice almost lost in the crackling flames. “They wouldn’t want us to let ourselves get down.”

Daenerys turned to her, her eyes shining with unshed tears. “I don’t know if I can be strong, Lyria. The world seems so dark right now.”

“Then let us light a light together,” Lyria replied determinedly. “Let this fire be a symbol of our ongoing struggle.”

From that moment on, the two sisters decided that they would not just survive; they would fight for something greater. Lyria’s influence over Daenerys grew as they traveled across Essos, freeing slaves and confronting tyrants. With each city they conquered, Lyria’s determination grew stronger; she did not want the Iron Throne or the power it represented—she wanted freedom for all the oppressed.

During their journeys, they met many people: men and women who had suffered under the yoke of slavery and oppression. With each tale of pain and suffering, Lyria felt her own inner flame ignite. It was as if there was something inside her crying out for justice.

One night, as they watched the starry sky beneath a shroud of silence in the city of Astapor, Lyria met the High Priestess of R’hllor. The woman was shrouded in mystery and power; her eyes seemed to see beyond the present.

“You are the Flame of Freedom,” the priestess said in a deep, echoing voice. “The stars have fallen, the heavens have roared, and darkness gathers in the hearts of humanity, you are born again amidst fire and ash.”

Lyria froze at the priestess’s words. “Me? A Flame? I don’t understand.”

“The Flame of Freedom lived in the Dawn Age,” the priestess continued. “She freed the oppressed from the oppressors and protected the poor from the rich. You have that same flame within you.”

The words echoed in Lyria’s mind like a distant echo. She glanced at Daenerys, who was lost in her own thoughts about her destiny as Dragon Queen.

“But I am not a queen,” Lyria said finally. “I do not want to be like the Targaryens who came before us.”

“You do not need to be a queen,” the priestess replied. “True leadership comes from the heart and courage.”

The days passed as the sisters continued their anti-slavery campaign across Essos. In Meereen, they faced immense challenges: bloodthirsty pirates, cruel warlords, and even political intrigue among the freedmen who wanted to rule rather than be free.

Lyria became a central figure in the movement for freedom; Her inspiring words echoed among the freed slaves as Daenerys led battles against her oppressors. Amidst the chaos of war and the darkness of human betrayal, the bond between the sisters grew even deeper.

One night in Meereen, after a significant victory against one of the local warlords, Lyria climbed to the roof of the palace with Daenerys to gaze at the stars.

“Have you ever thought about what this all means?” Lyria asked as she looked up at the night sky.

“What do you mean?” Daenerys replied curiously.

“Freeing people is wonderful,” Lyria began, “but I sense there’s something deeper here—something to do with our blood heritage.” She hesitated before continuing, “Do you truly believe we’re different from our ancestors?”

Daenerys frowned as she considered this. “I want to be different. I want to bring justice, to be justice.”

“What if we can do this together?” Lyria suggested excitedly. “If we can use our dragons not just to conquer lands, but to protect those in need?”

The words resonated deeply within Daenerys; she knew there was a greater power in her hands—not just dragons or the Iron Throne—but the ability to change lives.

That night, they decided to name their newborn dragons: the scarlet-black dragon they named Anogar, which means “blood” in High Valyrian, to represent the blood spilled by those they loved; the white dragon adorned with violets they named Valyria, to show the world that Valyrian glory had returned, but not as it had been before, but as an anti-slavery dragon. When Daenerys first released Anogar into the night sky, she felt an instant connection with the dragon; it was as if he understood her mission.

As time passed, Lyria realized that, just as her sister had felt with Anogar, she had a special bond with Valyria—a magical connection that seemed to transcend human understanding. After liberating Slaver’s Bay and Dany had made it back to Meereen from Vaes Dothraki, the dragons were now large enough to be ridden, and so they did. They rode dragons across Essos during the anti-slavery campaign, and she felt freedom pulse through her like never before.

But it wasn’t all sunshine and roses; the challenges grew more intense as they conquered cities and made powerful enemies along the way. One fateful night in Yunkai brought unexpected betrayals; allies turned against them, and even some of the freedmen began to question their intentions.

“Why are we fighting for them?” asked a disillusioned advisor after a failed attack on the city. “They should be fighting for themselves!”

Lyria quickly intervened: “Because that is how we build a better future! We cannot be driven by hatred or revenge! We must show the world who we are!”

Daenerys looked at her younger sister with growing admiration; she now saw the strength within her—an indomitable spirit akin to the fire of dragons themselves.

The final battle against the warlords was drawing near when rumors began to circulate of a new threat: those who sought to overthrow Daenerys and take her dragons for themselves were planning to strike during the next full moon./Amidst the preparations for this epic battle, Lyria had a vivid dream about the meaning of the flames—her connection to Valyria seemed to intensify as she delved deeper into the Targaryen legacy.

On the day of the final battle at Yunkai, as the enemy forces advanced beneath a heavy, ominous sky, Lyria climbed onto Valyria’s back while Daenerys rode Anogar beside her. The roar of dragons echoed across the field as they soared above the enemy ranks.

And so began their epic journey as sisters bound by destiny—fighting for justice through fire and ash—never forgetting who they were or where they wanted to go: not the Iron Throne or absolute power, but true freedom for all whose voices were still silenced by fear.