Last of the Romans (sorta)

Welcome back to the final installment of ‘Back to the Dance!’ Thank you to everyone that has followed along, given feedback, and commented on this series; your interaction has been greatly appreciated! I certainly didn’t expect this series to end with two less parts and 100k more words than the original analysis, but I think I’ve managed to do a much better job with this series in analyzing the Dance critically, discussing its merits and flaws and how well the story holds up as a conflict. Since this will deal with ‘fix-its,’ I will once again remind people that George’s timeline in F&B is referred to as ‘our timeline’/’in our timeline’ (OTL/IOTL) while the ‘fix-its’ will be referred to as ‘this time line’/’in this timeline’ (TTL/ITTL). This conclusion aims to bring together all of the ‘fix-its’ we’ve talked about previously and synthesize them into a coherent story, while also addressing some aspects of the Dance that were established in ASOIAF prior to The Princess and The Queen, TWOIAF, and F&B and how they changed as George further developed the story, both to fix some errors and omissions I made previously and to better understand George’s ‘gardener’ writing process. Without further ado, let us return one last time to the Dance of the Dragons!

i. “Am I the only one who gives a shit about the laws?” -Jasper Wylde, probably

We’ll start our ‘fix-its’ with the legal background of the Dance so I can make some erratas for Part One of this series; the fact is that we do have evidence of Targaryen primogeniture extending to the ‘heir of the heir,’ most notably in the era of Daeron II. This comes from Kyle the Cat and Ser Maynard Plumm’s conversation at the beginning of The Mystery Knight:

"Bloodraven put King Aerys on the Iron Throne, but for how long? Aerys is weak, and when he dies, it will be bloody war between Lord Rivers and Prince Maekar for the crown, the Hand against the heir." "You have forgotten Prince Rhaegel, my friend," Ser Maynard objected, in a mild tone. "He comes next in line to Aerys, not Maekar, and his children after him."

On this basis, Rhaenys had a stronger claim to the throne in 92 AC than Baelon and this is also suggested by F&B’s chapter “A Question of Succession” when it states that “the principle of primogeniture favored Laenor, the principle of proximity Viserys.” George seems to take a cue from history with the dispute between King John of England and his nephew from his elder brother Geoffrey, Arthur, Duke of Brittany: Norman succession law allowed for a brother to succeed over a son, and was the grounds on which John succeeded Richard, whereas Angevin succession laws were practiced in England’s French territories thanks to Richard and John’s father Henry II being the son of Geoffrey of Anjou and Count of Anjou in his own right, and these followed full primogeniture in which the son would come before an uncle.

The problems with applying any of this in-world or historical precedent to 92, 101, or the Dance are manifold: in the case of Targaryen succession post-Daeron II, we have a gap of more than a century between the events of 92 and 101 and the year 211 AC when Sers Kyle and Maynard have their exchange, within which we’re told that Viserys II made reforms to Jaehaerys’ Book of Laws in 171-172 AC; we can’t be sure what if any legal changes took place regarding succession law in that time, and further problems arise since Viserys II used 101 and the Dance as precedent to dismiss Daena Targaryen’s stronger claim in 171 while Maynard Plumm counts Rhaegel’s children as preceding Maekar in the line of succession, and this would include Daenora and Aelora Targaryen in contradiction to the precedents of 171. Moreover, if we reasonably conclude that misogynistic attitudes cost Rhaenys her status as heir under primogeniture in 92 AC, we then have the problem that Viserys ought to have held the status of Baelon’s heir in 101 AC since his father’s line superseded Aemon’s in 92 AC, yet rather than favouring him as a male Jaehaerys elected to re-litigate the succession in 101 AC on the basis of having ‘no clear successor,’ seemingly discounting Viserys’ status. In the case of the historical dispute between King John and Duke Arthur, this was a clash between two different legal systems in Normandy and Anjou, competing for the crown of England and by extension the so-called ‘Angevin Empire’ which encompassed both England and the duchies and counties ruled by Henry II and his successors in France, a situation completely different from that of 101 AC.

The Targaryens had no such issue of overlapping legal systems thanks to Jaehaerys’ codification of the laws of the Seven Kingdoms, while the family itself would have had their own laws, customs, and traditions on Dragonstone which they brought with them after carving out the Crownlands in addition to their authority over the other kingdoms. There should be no such problems of competing succession laws in the more unified legal code of the Seven Kingdoms, and I pointed out back in Part One that the legal debates in 92 and 101 have no bearing on Viserys’ decisions pre-Dance as Aegon II and Rhaenyra are brother and sister and their statuses are clear under existing male-preference primogeniture. A son comes before a daughter in the Seven Kingdoms, and all that 92 and 101 did was demonstrate a preference for male claimants, in particular from a male line, over female claimants even when the latter had a stronger claim legally. Rhaenys having a stronger legal claim to the throne than Viserys I and Baelon does not change the fact that Aegon II’s claim is objectively stronger than Rhaenyra’s without reference to 92 and 101, and that the amount of lords that flock to Rhaenyra’s banner in 129 AC contradicts what we were shown in 92 and 101 AC.

George’s handling of the succession debates leading up to the Dance is made all the more puzzling by the fact that the Dance was not so convoluted originally: in the appendices of AGOT, Aegon II’s ascent was challenged by Rhaenyra, “a year his elder,” and both perished in the war which left Aegon III to succeed as king. There’s no indication of their being half siblings and the age gap between them is one year rather than ten; from early on it appears that it was Rhaenyra’s initiative to overthrow her younger brother, which fits with what Stannis says in Davos IV ASOS, that Rhaenyra “died a traitor’s death for trying to usurp her brother’s crown.” From the start of the novels until at least 2000, George seems to have settled on Rhaenyra trying to overthrow Aegon, but by AFFC in 2005 we get a different picture of the Dance’s origins: in Ser Arys Oakheart’s POV “The Soiled Knight,” Arianne Martell claims that Viserys I intended Rhaenyra to succeed him and was betrayed on his deathbed by Ser Criston Cole. This is clearly a narrative which suits Arianne’s own interests, but Ser Arys does not deny it outright, thinking to himself that Cole “set brother against sister” either because Aegon was more easy to influence, to uphold Andal custom, or as vengeance for Rhaenyra spurning his love before he joined the Kingsguard. The last theory was subject to changes in the novellas and F&B, but the implications are clear that it was Aegon II who usurped Rhaenyra and thus was not his father’s official heir despite being his firstborn son. The legal background of the Dance remained unclear, but Stannis and Arianne’s statements would suggest the battle lines were drawn between what Seven Kingdoms law prescribed and Viserys’ own desires for the succession.

This scenario adds more grey areas to the beginning of the Dance, and we might have expected this from George given his preference for internal conflict: modern readers would naturally be more sympathetic to an older sister passed over for her sex in the original scenario, while having Rhaenyra be the aggressor might have played too much into the tropes of her own world’s culture and history. Per the interview for Hollywood Spotlight Magazine which I quoted back in Part One, George wanted to add more of a grey area in the dispute between Rhaenyra and Aegon II and so he settled on the scenario where Rhaenyra was made her father’s heir prior to Aegon’s birth, with Aegon’s status as Viserys’ eldest son and the precedents of 92 and 101 AC adding complications. The problems with this set-up remains the same as we discussed in Part One, that no one seems to appreciate the stakes of the situation; even if we conclude that Viserys I merely restored a pre-92 succession status quo by recognizing Rhaenyra as his heir over Daemon despite her sex, Aegon II and his brothers are still Viserys’ sons regardless of who their mother was. His sons have a better claim than Rhaenyra with or without the precedents of 92 and 101, while passing over their claims to the throne and removing Daemon from inheritance undermines his own claim and those of his children by re-opening the door for Rhaenys, Laena, and Laenor. Although Rhaenyra and Laenor’s marriage would seem to recognize the latter predicament, Viserys’ complete lack of concern over the obvious bastardy of Rhaenyra and Laenor’s ‘sons’ also undermines this, and invoking Viserys’ temperament to explain this doesn’t account for the seeming lack of response from the rest of the realm outside of the brief glimpses we get of court factions.

Looking at how the origins of Rhaenyra and Aegon II’s dispute evolved between AGOT and F&B gives us a better sense of George’s intentions, but we are still faced with the same issues as before: arbitrary choices drive the narrative towards a predetermined end, while many serious plot holes regarding legality and Westerosi politics are left unaddressed. As I argued in Parts One and Eight, the starting point for any ‘fix-its’ needs to be Rhaenyra and Aegon II’s claims, and we can address this by having Viserys I and Daemon’s younger brother, Aegon, survive to adulthood rather than following their mother Alyssa to the grave. Born in 84 AC, Aegon, son of Baelon, would have be 16-17 at the time of the Council of 101 AC and could be groomed for the Citadel as the third son of the second son, and this could allow for him to not bond with a dragon ala his uncle Vaegon. His brush with death at birth could also result in ill-health, further inclining him towards the Citadel and providing an in-built means of killing him off prior to the Dance; his time in Oldtown allows him to run into Alicent Hightower, 3-4 years his junior, allowing the two to get married rather than Alicent being single at the time of Aemma’s death. As of 101 AC, the marriage gives Otto a ‘back door’ into the royal family in the likely event Aemma fails to produce another heir and Daemon loses his place in the royal succession, both of which come to pass, and Aegon II, Helaena, Aemond, and Daeron are Rhaenyra’s cousins at first rather than half-siblings.

Aegon, son of Baelon, can die just before or soon after Daeron’s birth and Viserys receives dispensation from the Faith to take Alicent as his wife, ostensibly to maintain relations with the Hightowers and further secure the succession against Daemon, but in reality it is done to ensure Viserys can closely control the affairs of his niece and nephews and prevent them from being used for potential marriage alliances against Rhaenyra. Rhaenyra is Viserys’ only child by blood and thus his clear heir, but Alicent’s sons are now his stepsons under the law and could press claims using the precedents of 92 and 101, and after Laenor’s death and Daemon and Rhaenyra’s marriage the machinations of Otto and Alicent’s are driven as much by fear of Daemon as by their own ambitions. While Rhaenyra’s sex, her character and actions such as the murder of Vaemond Velaryon, her marriage to Daemon, and the obvious bastardy of her eldest children undermine her cause ITTL, her claim to the throne as Viserys’ only child by blood is strong enough to where her widespread support in 129 AC still makes sense, as does the invocation of 92 and 101 AC in support of Aegon II’s claim.

ii. 2 Dance 2 Dragons: 129 AC-130 AC

With the legal background of the Dance sorted out ITTL, events can proceed largely unchanged through Viserys’ death and the beginning of the Dance itself save for the changes we made for diplomacy and the treasury plot in Part Eight. One thing that does require addressing is the timing of the harvest which we discussed in Part Nine: in Part 3 of the original analysis, I estimated that the ‘war of ravens’ probably ended in early to mid April or at most the beginning of May, and this has implications for factoring the harvest into the Dance. Placing the grain harvest south of the Blackwater in February-March and March-April for those areas between the Blackwater and the Neck, open hostilities would commence from May onwards; in the interest of retaining as much of George’s plot as possible, I think it makes sense to keep the seasons the same ITTL as IOTL, i.e. autumn lasts from 129 AC till early 130 AC and winter continues from there until 136 AC. This sequencing means the Reach should be at least halfway through its grain harvest at the time of Viserys’ death and should be finished around the time of Luke’s death and the planning of B&C, while the Riverlands should by in the early stages of their grain harvest when Daemon takes Harrenhal which allows us to explain the castle being lightly garrisoned by having much of its men providing assistance. One major change I’m making to the diplomatic ‘fix-its’ in Part Eight is by having Lady Tyrell and the Faith in the Reach attempt to build support for a negotiated settlement and neutrality early on in the Dance; Lady Tyrell and the old High Septon garner the support of the Florents, Cranes, Ashfords, Meadows and Blackbars, as well as Elmo Tully in the Riverlands, which delays hostilities in the Reach as the Blacks and Greens try to curry favour with the neutral ‘party.’

The Rowans and Caswells champion Rhaenyra’s cause in the Reach while the Hightowers, Redwynes, and initially the Tarlys represent Aegon II; the Westerlands stand behind Jason and Tyland in support of the Greens, but the Baratheons have to deal with House Fell, Buckler, and Tarth supporting the Blacks. On Dragonstone, the Blacks formulate a strategy aimed at isolating Aegon in the Crownlands by moving against his allies in the Westerlands and Stormlands which should influence events in the Reach in their favour. Dalton Greyjoy seizes Banefort by ruse and lands troops on Fair Isle, aiming to secure the island before moving against Kayce and eventually Lannisport further to the south, with the possibility of aid from the Oakhearts and the Shield Isles depending on how events in the Reach unfold. Daemon organizes the Riverlords to assist the Ironborn with raids across the western hills, while in the east Rhaenys and Corlys descend upon the Stormlands with the Velaryon fleet aided by Rhaenyra’s Crownlands supporters. Otto Hightower secures the support of the Triarchy and Lord Gunthor Darklyn, though the latter faces serious defections led by Ser Steffon Darklyn, and the Stokeworths and Rosbys support Aegon from the outset ITTL; the loss of the Riverlands and the diplomatic deadlock in the Reach gives Aegon II the excuse to dismiss his grandfather as Hand in favour of Ser Criston Cole as IOTL, who recommends striking south to aid the Stormlords.

A change I’ve made to the Part Eight ‘fix-its’ in this case is to include the Kingswood outlaws in Cole’s plan, a faction briefly mentioned in F&B in the context of the post-Dance troubles for the Regents, which caused Royce Caron to leave his seat on the council. Owing to the importance of the outlaws in Aerys II’s reign, as well as their connections to House Toyne who likewise play an important role in Aegon IV’s rule, I believe including them now would help set-up later events in Blood and Fire, F&B’s sequel volume. ITTL Cole convinces Aegon II to make common cause with the outlaws by offering them pardons and other concessions, similar to those which Arthur Dayne secured from Aerys II as mentioned in Jaime IV AFFC. Criston Cole leads the Greens Crownland forces south with Gunthor Darklyn commanding the Royal fleet while Aegon and Aemond fly overhead in support, their advance through the Kingswood being assisted by the outlaws. ‘Volunteers’ from the Triarchy led by Racallio Ryndoon begin attacking Velaryon and Tarth ships, and events follow much the same course we mapped out in Part Eight with TTL’s Battle of Rook’s Rest taking place at the Wendwater; Rhaenys and Caraxes are killed while Aegon II and Sunfyre are seriously injured, but Aemond and Vhagar help Cole and the Baratheons subdue Fell, Buckler, and Tarth alongside increasing aid from the Triarchy.

As 129 AC nears its end, the Red Sowing takes place and the North and Vale are mobilizing whilst the efforts of the neutrals in the Reach come to nought, as the Beesburys and Mullendores are now openly fighting the Hightowers, Bulwers, Costaynes, and Cuys and the Rowan-Caswell host turns south to take its chances with Daeron and Tessarion rather than face Aemond and Vhagar. As we suggested in Part Eight, Ormund Hightower and Alan Tarly march north to aid Owen Fossoway only for Tarly to betray Ormund, whose forces are routed and driven back to the Honeywine where Daeron rescues them. ITTL the command dispute between Daemon and the Vale lords happens as we proposed in Part Eight, as Rhaenyra’s fleets are tied up in the south and unusually heavy autumn snows in the Mountains of the Moon threatens an overland advance via the High road; Aemond still attacks Gulltown ITTL based on intel provided by Larys as we proposed, burning its ships and damaging the port facilities, but Joffrey Velaryon and Tyraxes make no appearance and are not killed by Aemond as I originally suggested (more on this later).

As we’re moving into the Part Nine ‘fix-its’ at this point, I’m altering them so that the timeline remains more or less as IOTL rather than being pushed forward a few months. January 5th-6th 130 AC sees the ‘Battle off the Hook’ as portrayed in Part Eight, TTL’s stand-in for the Gullet, while the Honeywine battle can take place around January 20th 130 AC or perhaps early with limited changes otherwise. The Hightower forces pause to regroup and allow the Reach harvest to take place in Feb-March 130 AC, and the submissions of Goldengrove, Old Oak, and the Shield Isles are negotiated at this time, while supplies are moved up and stockpiled around the lower Mander and the Hightower and Redwyne fleets send ships to aid the Lannisters against the Ironborn. Word of Daeron’s victory reaches Aemond and the small council at the start of February, and the former spends three weeks instead of OTL’s fortnight developing his strategy and calling his banners; keeping with the original timeline for the Gullet and Honeywine means that Aemond’s campaign begins right before the harvest in the Riverlands, Westerlands, and northern Crownlands in March, but this can work ITTL. To elaborate, I’m taking a cue from one of the more infamous logistical decisions of history, that of Emperor Maurice of the Eastern Roman Empire in AD 602 who tried unsuccessfully to have his soldiers winter over the Danube in the territory of the Slavs to keep pressure on the enemy. This proved extremely unpopular and led to mutinies that deposed Maurice, and ITTL Aemond makes a similar decision to put pressure on his enemy by fighting outside the campaign season.

Aemond argues for drawing on the granaries and storehouses of King’s Landing, which have been recently augmented by supplies from the Stormlands, Crownlands, and Dorne thanks to the recent campaign in the south. Using riverine transport on the Blackwater and Godseye alongside wagon trains to carry supplies, Aemond plans to attack Daemon and the Riverlords before their grain is ripe for harvest with the aid of Jason Lannister’s host, gathered in the western hills to fend off the Riverlord raids. Tyland still supports Aemond in TTL’s debates, but Alicent and Larys Strong’s support outweighs the objections of Cole, Orwyle, and Wylde, who advocate waiting for Daeron and Ormund to begin their advance north and to help Borros Baratheon in the meantime against the deteriorating situation of the Triarchy. ITTL Sharako Lohar stills faces intrigue over the defeat of the Triarchy fleet at the Hook and the casualties of the Myrish and Tyroshi as IOTL, but new problems are added when the payments promised to Ryndoon and the other pirates and sellsails are in arrears, with the implication being that the Iron Bank is impeding Erwin Lannister in accessing the royal treasury funds to destabilize the Triarchy and further Braavosi ambitions in the Stepstones. Tyand Lannister wants to support his brother and defend his home from Daemon, Larys wishes for the return of his house seat and has his own ulterior motives, and TTL’s Alicent is eager to be avenged upon Daemon Targaryen for B&C.

Aemond dismisses the threat of Rhaenyra’s fleets and dragonriders due to the losses suffered off the Hook, the inexperience of the dragonseeds, and the Blacks inability to approach King’s Landing undetected due to the Greens controlling Duskendale and the Kingswood. Aemond sets out for Harrenhal on Feb. 17th, a week later than IOTL based on our calculations in Part Two, and his plans quickly go awry: as suggested in the Part Ten ‘fix-its,’ the winter weather can actually affect events ITTL if we take the rivers into account and their importance for transport; in this case the barges carrying Aemond’s supplies are unable to get upriver to the Godseye, either sinking or being forced to turn back, thereby reducing his army’s supplies for occupying Harrenhal. Larys still tips off Daemon and Rhaenyra as IOTL, and further assistance comes when Borros Baratheon takes his men south to fight Ryndoon’s pirates since Aemond refuses to lend aid, while the Kingswood outlaws also turn on Aemond after he refused to honour the promises made to them by Aegon II and Cole until the war is over. As per the Part Nine ‘fix-its,’ Daemon leads troops against Cole and Aemond east of the Godseye while the bulk of the Riverlord host descends upon the Westerlands host; Jason’s army marches on the same route as IOTL rather than following the Trident and the Riverroad, owing to the inclement weather, Elmo Tully’s refusal to cooperate with them, and a lack of large river craft as the western shipyards are tasked with replacing the Lannisport fleet’s losses to the Ironborn and Caraxes. Meeting limited resistance at the Red Fork, Jason Lannister and his army are set upon on the road by Riverlord troops augmented by the ‘Winter Wolves,’ with TTL’s ‘Fish Feed’ being more of a running battle which culminates in the western host’s destruction near High Heart.

Daemon’s battle with Aemond and Cole unfolds as it did in the Part Nine ‘fix-its,’ with both sides suffering heavy losses despite Cole and Aemond eventually breaking through to Harrenhal; Daemon and Caraxes’ speed and experience were stymied by Aemond’s tenacity and Vhagar’s sheer size and raw power, and the ‘rogue prince’ withdraws to Harroway’s Town with the remnants of his forces to lick his wounds. Rhaenyra takes King’s Landing as IOTL, but Gunthor Darklyn is executed ITTL alongside Otto Hightower, Lords Rosby and Stokeworth, and Jasper Wylde. Rhaenyra and her council receive Daemon’s ravens regarding the Riverlands situation, but she keeps all of the dragonseeds save Nettles in the capital rather than reinforcing Daemon, as she fears for her safety and that of her children with Aemond at large. Aemond’s raids in the Riverlands and the ongoing fighting there disrupts the harvest, which combined with the loss of the royal treasury and depletion of the capital’s granaries and warehouses, the continued opposition of the Stormlords, and Ormund and Daeron’s advances in the Reach, leads to Rhaenyra taking the same measures we outlined in Part Nine’s ‘fix-its.’ Since Corlys’ screw ups aren’t quite as bad as IOTL, Vaemond’s sons and the ‘Silent Five’ will still conspire with Larys to bring about Rhaenyra’s downfall but without holding the high profile leadership positions proposed in Part Nine.

Back in the Riverlands, the Blacks are slow to follow up their victory at High Heart due to the losses suffered against Jason Lannister, the need to assist the harvest before the weather ruins it, and Vhagar’s threat to their open movements. At Harrenhal, Daemon had relocated what stores he could before Aemond’s arrival and destroyed all that remained along with the storehouses themselves, meaning the already suboptimal supplies of the Greens risk spoiling and the Blacks have cut off any hope of aid from the west. When the Riverlords begin moving forces east to besiege Harrenhal, Aemond and Cole part ways as IOTL over whether to stay put and fight Daemon or march south to link up with Ormund and Daeron; the stage is set for the ‘Butcher’s Ball’ to take place as IOTL, albeit with reduced forces on either side, while Aemond faces Daemon and Nettles much earlier.

iii. Ser Byron Swann and the price of heroism

Before we continue on to the rest of our ‘fix-its,’ two other episodes from the books which predate George’s histories require our attention: the tale of Ser Byron Swann, and the death of Syrax, the dragon of Queen Rhaenyra. Technically only the first is a predecessor to the histories, but Ser Byron and Syrax’s deaths are interconnected and have significant implications for how we interpret the Dance as a story and how we understand George’s writing style. Ser Byron’s tale is one of the only events in the Dance which the main books addressed in any detail, and by Tyrion Lannister no less, yet its relationship to the Dance itself is unclear in the eyes of the fandom. First mentioned in Tyrion III ADWD during Tyrion and Haldon Halfmaester’s conversation about Maester Munkun’s history of the Dance, Ser Byron is never mentioned in TPATQ or TWOIAF while his story appears in F&B seemingly sandwiched between the ‘Butcher’s Ball’ and Rhaenyra’s Maiden Day council, alongside a brief mention amidst Luke’s arrival at Storm’s End. There are some theories as to what happened to Ser Byron, most notably from Preston Jacobs and Trey the Explainer, but my take on the story differs considerably from theirs: I originally had no plans to address his story in the ‘fix-its,’ let alone the main analysis, and treated Ser Byron’s story cynically as an anecdote from ADWD that George ‘forgot’ and reinserted into F&B, but my view has completely changed. When considered alongside my analyses of Alys and Nettles in Part Nine and Addam and Daeron in Part Ten, I believe that Ser Bryon’s story is essential to understanding the themes of the Dance and the series as a whole, since it addresses questions about individual agency and why wars are fought.

We’ll start by covering how Ser Byron’s story is addressed in ADWD and F&B, analyzing what is believed to have happened to him and the most likely account of his death, before getting into why the sources may disagree on what happened and how this connects to the deeper themes of the Dance and ASOIAF. As mentioned before, our first encounter with Ser Byron is Tyrion III ADWD, when Tyrion and Young Griff/Aegon’s tutor Haldon Halfmaester disagree over Maester Munkun’s account:

Can you tell me the name of the knight who tried the same ploy with Vhagar during the Dance of the Dragons?" Tyrion grinned. "Ser Byron Swann. He was roasted for his trouble … only the dragon was Syrax, not Vhagar." "I fear that you're mistaken. In The Dance of the Dragons, A True Telling, Maester Munkun writes—" "—that it was Vhagar. Grand Maester Munkun errs. Ser Byron's squire saw his master die, and wrote his daughter of the manner of it. His account says it was Syrax, Rhaenyra's she-dragon, which makes more sense than Munken's version. Swann was the son of a marcher lord, and Storm's End was for Aegon. Vhagar was ridden by Prince Aemond, Aegon's brother. Why should Swann want to slay her?" Haldon pursed his lips. "Try not to tumble off the horse. If you do, best waddle back to Pentos. Our shy maid will not wait for man nor dwarf."

At first glance the episode appears to be nothing more than a reassertion of Tyrion’s wit and intelligence, and perhaps a counterpoint to Varys’ later extolling of Young Griff/Aegon’s education before a dying Kevan Lannister, as it appears Haldon is not as educated as Tyrion Lannister. Chronologically, our first encounter with Ser Byron in F&B is when Aemond confronts Luke at Storm’s End, as Gyldan mentions in parenthesis on pg. 419 that “among those who witnessed the meeting was Ser Byron Swann, second son of Lord of Stonehelm in the Dornish Marches, who would have his own small part to play in the Dance.” Gyldan later discusses Ser Byron’s death and the debate surrounding it on pgs. 476-477:

“It was about this same time that one of the more curious incidents of the Dance of the Dragons occurred. Legend has it that during the Age of Heroes, Serwyn of the Mirror Shield slew the dragon Urrax by crouching behind a shield so polished that the beast saw only his own reflection. By this ruse, the hero crept close enough to drive a spear through the dragon’s eye, earning the name by which we know him still. That Ser Byron Swann, second son of the Lord of Stonehelm, had heard this tale we cannot doubt. Armed with a spear and a shield of silvered steel and accompanied only by his squire, he set out to slay a dragon just as Serwyn did. But here confusion arises, for Munkun says it was Vhagar that Swann meant to kill, to put an end to Prince Aemond’s raids…but it must be remembered that Munkun draws largely on Grand Maester Orwyle for his version of events, and Orwyle was in the dungeons when these things occurred. Mushroom, at the queen’s side in the Red Keep, says rather that it was Rhaenyra’s Syrax that Ser Byron approached. Septon Eustace does not note the incident at all in his own chronicle, but years later, in a letter, suggests this dragonslayer hoped to kill Sunfyre…but this is certainly mistaken, since Sunfyre’s whereabouts were unknown at this time. All three accounts agree that the plot that won undying fame for Serwyn of the Mirror Shield brought only death for Ser Byron Swann.”

In the interests of identifying ‘Ser Byron’s bane’ I think we can start by eliminating Sunfyre, since Swann’s misadventure takes place long after Sunfyre’s escape from Rook’s Rest, and Gyldan is right to note that the dragon’s whereabouts were unknown at the time, unlike Syrax and Vhagar. Mushroom’s putting forward Syrax seems to be a nod to Tyrion’s exchange with Haldon in ADWD, but while her whereabouts will have been known they also create serious problems for Tyrion and Mushroom’s accounts:

Six dragons remained in King’s Landing, but only one within the walls of the Red Keep: the queen’s own she-dragon, Syrax. A stable in the outer ward had emptied of horses and given over for her use. Heavy chains bound her to the ground. Though long enough to allow her to move from stable to yard, the chains kept her from flying off riderless. Syrax had long grown accustomed to chains; exceedingly well fed, she had not hunted for years. (F&B, pg. 490)

Tyrion’s argument clearly ignores what F&B tells us about Syrax being held in the stables of the Red Keep, well within the confines of the capital and presumably well-guarded and difficult to access by outsiders, save for Joffrey Velaryon’s actions during the chaos of the Riots. It makes no sense that we would have no mention of this incident beyond Gyldan’s brief interlude if Syrax was the target, since Ser Byron should have left a body and his squire had to have escaped or at least survived captivity to write his letter later. The squire’s letter and Eustace’s own letter also have the same problem of being written well after the fact, whereas Gyldan’s dismissal of Munkun identifying Vhagar also has serious flaws; even though Munkun got his account secondhand from Orwyle, who was himself imprisoned at the time of Ser Byron’s death, there is still good reason to follow their account. Although imprisoned by Rhaenyra, Orwyle was released by Larys Strong, served on the small council alongside Borros Baratheon, and would have interacted with the Stormlanders during Aegon II’s short reign and the ‘Hour of the Wolf,’ while it was also Orwyle who suggested that Aemond send for Borros Baratheon before the Harrenhal campaign in 130 AC.

Orwyle most likely learned of Ser Byron’s fate from the Stormlords later in 130 and 131 AC, but it’s unlikely they would name Vhagar as Ser Byron’s target since Aegon II was still king at the time, and this may also have influenced the squire’s account. Some amount of revisionism may have been involved in how Ser Byron’s actions were first related, which tracks with what we’re shown of the Stormlords during the Dance: Septon Eustace wrote that “Lord Borros was the wind that rages and howls and blows this way and that,” and his absence until after Rhaenyra’s fall would certainly indicate that he was playing both sides, even though the story acknowledges openly neutral houses like the Tyrells and Tullys while treating the Stormlords with a deafening silence. The fact Borros raised an army after Rhaenyra took King’s Landing but diverted it to the Dornish Marches, whilst the second son of one of his bannermen and a knight from his court sought to kill the dragon of Borros’ future son-in-law, might count as more proof that the Stormlords were ‘fence-sitting’ were it not for other issues. By the time of Aegon II’s return, the Dornish raids are upgraded to a Vulture King and we might expect a knight like Ser Byron from a Marcher house to at least defend his lands against their traditional foes, rather than set out to kill the largest dragon alive. If this was part of a plan to feign loyalty to Rhaenyra and offer plausible deniability in the event of her victory, why not go after Tessarion, a smaller dragon whose location was known and was much closer to the Stormlands than the Riverlands, especially since Swann’s was a two-man mission? Munkun’s explanation via Orwyle is all we have, that Ser Byron sought to end Vhagar’s raids on the Riverlands, without any mention of the other houses in the Stormlands that may have supported Rhaenyra (see Part Eight).

We’ve identified Vhagar as Ser Byron’s target but we still have other questions to answer in order to place this episode within the broader narrative of the Dance. We need at least some idea of how he may have found his way to the Riverlands in the first place and what set-up exists to explain this, how or why the narratives developed around his story as shown in F&B and ADWD, and whether these have any relevance to George’s themes. The first question is admittedly quite simple, since Orwyle proposed that Aemond send for Borros Baratheon’s aid before marching on Harrenhal and Aemond raises his army by calling his banners for the campaign. Ser Byron would have an excuse to leave his father and his house if the Stormlords were reluctant to answer the call, and would be able to get close to Vhagar as a result; once at Harrenhal, the lost foraging parties and subsequent desertion experienced by Aemond and Cole’s army would offer him cover to break ranks especially in the lead up to the ‘Butcher’s Ball,’ which in turn explains the placement of Ser Byron’s tale within F&B’s narrative.

The idea of a Stormlander wandering the Riverlands amidst a civil war shouldn’t surprise us either; on the one hand, it has clear parallels with characters from the main series, and we know of other similarly out of place characters in the Dance itself. A Stormlander knight and his squire pursuing a mission in the Stormlands invites comparisons with both Beric Dondarrion and more importantly, Brienne of Tarth: both are Stormlanders like Ser Byron, Beric is a Marcher while Brienne carries herself as a knight like Ser Byron even though she herself is not knighted, all three have names which start with ‘B’ (Byron, Beric, Brienne), and are accompanied by their squires (Edric “Ned” Dayne, Podrick “Pod” Payne, and an unnamed squire). Beric and Ser Byron both sought to defend the Riverlands against the predations of the Lannisters and Vhagar respectively, with Beric fighting to defend King Robert’s realm as those were his last thoughts and mission before his first death, while Ser Byron is seemingly inspired by his knightly oaths and the tales of Serwyn of the Mirrorshield. The Brienne parallels are much stronger however, as Brienne’s journey takes her from King’s Landing and the southern Crownlands north to Crackclaw Point and west to the Riverlands, areas which are linked to the variants of Ser Byron’s quest retold by the sources: Syrax is in King’s Landing, Sunfyre was at Crackclaw Point, and Vhagar was in the Riverlands. Both are aping heroes from the past whether they know it or not, as Ser Byron is inspired by Serwyn of the Mirrorshield while Brienne’s journeys strongly mirror those of ‘Dunk and Egg,’ (Dunk and Brienne’s height, Pod and Egg’s nicknames, Brienne’s shield is repainted to Dunk’s own arms from a winged sigil, etc.).

Questions are also raised about their loyalties, with the identity of ‘Ser Byron’s Bane’ depending on whom Ser Byron was believed to have supported while Brienne is trying to fulfill her oath to Catelyn Stark but does so at the behest and with support from Jaime Lannister, which leads Lady Stoneheart and the Brotherhood Without Banners to label her a traitor. Brienne and Ser Byron both find themselves on the trail of monsters whose identities are uncertain, with the identity of ‘Ser Byron’s Bane’ being debated long after the Dance while Brienne ends up following the trail of ‘the Hound’ in the hopes of finding Sansa, only to discover that Sandor Clegane is believed dead and that his helm has been taken by others who take on the identity of ‘the Hound.’ Finally, both of their journeys feature women with real or perceived ties to the supernatural, as Ser Byron’s hunt for Vhagar would also put him on the trail of Alys Rivers, Aemond’s paramour and an alleged witch, while Brienne comes face to face with Catelyn Stark returned from the dead as Lady Stoneheart. In fact Brienne seeks out Sansa without realizing that she is currently living as Alayne Stone, the alleged bastard daughter of Petyr Baelish, the Lord of Harrenhal, while Aemond is accompanied by the actual bastard daughter of the former Lord of Harrenhal and half-sister of its incumbent lord, Alys Rivers. In Arya XIII ASOS, we even learn that Sansa is accused of dealing in black magic to help Tyrion Lannister escape, not unlike the stories told about Alys Rivers being a witch despite the evidence being slim at best; the stories also inadvertently acknowledge Sansa being a relative of House Whent, who held Harrenhal after bringing down “Mad Danelle” Lothston, whose own house was given Harrenhal after its occupation by Alys Rivers post-Dance: “The northern girl. Winterfell’s daughter. We heard she killed the king with a spell, and afterward changed into a wolf with big leather wings like a bat, and flew out a tower window.”

Outside the connections to Brienne, there may also be direct parallels with ‘Dunk and Egg,’ since the story of Serwyn slaying the dragon Urrax features prominently in The Hedge Knight, and there are details which suggest that Ser Byron actually sought to slay Aemond rather than Vhagar. Both Aemond and the dragon Urrax died from being impaled through the eye, while tracking down Vhagar would bring Ser Byron to Aemond who is an easier target anyways. Between a Targaryen prince cruelly abusing the smallfolk and a young knight opposing him in accordance with knightly vows despite others holding back, this story has more than a passing resemblance to The Hedge Knight, especially when we remember that Egg’s brother Daeron has a vision of a great dragon dying at Ashford and Dunk surviving, while Alys Rivers is said to see visions in flames and Ser Byron was thought to be trying to kill a dragon. One of the key themes of the ‘Dunk and Egg’ stories is the importance of doing the right thing by choice even when it is difficult, a theme it shares with Brienne’s journey in AFFC and which is arguably at the heart of Ser Byron’s quest as well. Whether Aemond was the actual target or not, Ser Byron’s actions also fit with this theme as we see a knight go out of his way to defend the lives and homes of others against a threat which Rhaenyra all but ignores until she has no other choice, and which Daemon likewise fails to confront until the eleventh hour.

In addition to these characters and their parallels with Ser Byron, he’s not even the only character in the Dance that appears seemingly out of place in the Riverlands: there’s Black Trombo of course, the Myrish sellsword in service to Lord Hugo of House Vance of Wayfarer’s Rest, who hails from the Triarchy where Johanna Swann, a relative of Ser Byron and the “The Black Swan” of Lys, currently resides. However, the most relevant character is one that receives a single mention: Billy Burley, Benjicot Blackwood’s ‘best archer’ who mercy-killed Tessarion after Second Tumbleton. The only Burleys we know of in ASOIAF are House Burley of the Northern mountain clans, but his presence can be easily explained by being part of the ‘Winter Wolves’ that went south with Roderick Dustin. F&B may also offer some earlier set-up for Billy being of House Burley: Lothor Burley is Lord Commander of the Night’s Watch when Queen Alysanne visits the Wall in 58 AC, and renames Snowgate to Queensgate to honour the queen for supporting the Watch; Alysanne persuaded Lothor Burley to abandon the Nightfort and build a new castle funded by her jewels at Deep Lake, much as Alysanne Blackwood helps to re-settle Northerners in the Riverlands; assuming Billy Burley was of House Burley, his first encounter with Benjicot Blackwood would be during ‘the Fishfeed,’ on the shores of the Gods Eye near the massive but largely abandoned castle of Harrenhal, mirroring the Nightfort and Deep Lake.

That Billy Burley is in fact of the Northern mountain clans is further suggested by the striking parallels between the ‘Winter Wolves’ and the clans as portrayed in ADWD: in Jon IV, Jon Snow estimates the clans could muster 2-3000 men for Stannis, not far off from the 2000 ‘Winter Wolves’ that Cregan Stark sends under Dustin, and the ‘wolves’ ride shaggy garrons like the mountain clans that fight for Stannis. Dustin’s quotes about how his men have “come to die for the dragon queen” (F&B, pg. 459) and that winter means it’s “time for us to go. No better way to die than sword in hand,” are almost exactly what Hugo “Big Bucket” Wull tells Corliss Penny in Asha’s ADWD POV, “The King’s Prize:”

"Ned's girl," echoed Big Bucket Wull. "And we should have had her and the castle both if you prancing southron jackanapes didn't piss your satin breeches at a little snow." "A little snow?" Peasebury's soft girlish mouth twisted in fury. "Your ill counsel forced this march upon us, Wull. I am starting to suspect you have been Bolton's creature all along. Is that the way of it? Did he send you to us to whisper poison in the king's ear?" Big Bucket laughed in his face. "Lord Pea Pod. If you were a man, I would kill you for that, but my sword is made of too fine a steel to besmirch with craven's blood." He took a drink of ale and wiped his mouth. "Aye, men are dying. More will die before we see Winterfell. What of it? This is war. Men die in war. That is as it should be. As it has always been."

Billy Burley being one of the ‘Winter Wolves’ has interesting implications given our discussion of Benjicot Blackwood and Hugo Vance in Part Ten: I suggested that Blackwood’s absence at First Tumbleton could be explained by him disagreeing with the slaughter of Criston Cole and his men at the Butcher’s Ball, and this could also explain how Burley replaced Red Robb Rivers as the best archer under Benjicot’s command. We’d expect Burley to be with Dustin and the remaining ‘Winter Wolves’ at 1st Tumbleton but this was clearly not the case, whilst his mercy-killing of Tessarion on Benjicot’s orders stands in contrast with Red Robb’s killing of Ser Criston Cole under a peace banner, acting on Pate of Longleaf’s signal no less. Gyldan’s account of the ‘Butcher’s Ball’ has Dustin reject Cole’s offer of surrender so that his men can fight and die, but given the negative reactions of Benjicot, ‘Black Aly,’ and Cregan Stark to Aegon II’s assassination and Garibald Grey’s referring to the battle as ‘butchery,’ it’s not impossible that many ‘Winter Wolves’ like Burley were taken aback by the treacherous nature of Cole’s death and the subsequent massacre, and this could explain how Burley wound up in Benjicot Blackwood’s service by the Second Battle of Tumbleton.

This evidence reveals a number of parallels between Ser Byron and Billy Burley’s situations: Swann is a second son with little chance at inheritance when his father dies, while Burley’s service in the ‘Winter Wolves’ indicates he was deemed an excess mouth whose absence was necessary for his family to survive the winter, placing them both on a lower rung of their respective social ladders; both their names start with ‘B’ like Beric and Brienne, albeit ‘Billy’ is short for William, while the lands the Burleys and Swanns call home are similar in that they are mountainous regions whose people have fought for centuries against neighbours/invaders, with the Burleys fighting the Wildlings to their north and the Ironborn from the southwest while the Swanns and Marchers have fought the Dornish to their south and the Reachers to the northwest; both their stories feature dragonslaying and historical controversies, with Ser Byron trying and failing to kill Vhagar with his spear whereas Burley kills the mortally wounded Tessarion with his arrows, while historians later argue about the identity of ‘Ser Byron’s Bane’ and the manner of Prince Daeron’s death; and as we’ve proposed, both of their stories seem to involve some element of choosing between what they deem right and what is expected of them, with Ser Byron leaving his house and home to kill Vhagar and end her attacks on the people of the Riverlands and Burley seemingly abandoning the ‘Winter Wolves’ after ‘the Butcher’s Ball’ to then reappear with Benjicot Blackwood and Addam Velaryon and defeat the Two Betrayers, ending their threat to the realm and even showing mercy to Tessarion.

The main difference between their stories is how their means of slaying a dragon and the results, as Ser Byron was incinerated after trying to approach Vhagar and stab his spear into her eyes while Billy mercy-killed the wounded Tessarion with three arrows at long range, which calls to mind Torrhen Stark’s bastard brother Brandon Snow and his plan to kill the Conquerors’ dragons with three weirwood arrows. This also has significant implications, for had Swann used different methods, a different weapon, or even faced a different dragon, he may well have become a dragon-slayer, and could have survived and been remembered differently; we must also consider that as of ADWD, we know of a knight of House Swann who is also a second son that takes his knightly duties seriously, is an extremely skilled archer, and whose name also starts with ‘B,’ Ser Balon Swann of the Kingsguard. Ser Byron’s story may well influence the main series itself, and he strongly parallels other characters in the Dance and ASOIAF whose thematic relevance warrants discussion.

The best place to start in regards to Ser Byron’s thematic relevance is with his motivations: Munkun/Orwyle’s account proposes that he wanted to end Vhagar’s raids on the Riverlands and his story appears after ‘the Butcher’s Ball’ when Aemond’s attacks would have already begun; he clearly emulated Serwyn of the Mirrorshield, suggesting he put some stock in those legends or at least was fond of them to an extent; finally, another angle of his motivations worth exploring is the fact his mission to the Riverlands was not the first time he encountered Vhagar. As mentioned earlier, Ser Byron was part of Borros Baratheon’s court in 129 AC when Aemond and Luke crossed paths and quarreled, and Gyldan tells us it was Borros’ guards who kept the princes from fighting. Ser Byron may have been among the knights who stood aside when Aemond stormed out of the hall to follow Luke, after Borros allegedly told him “it is not for me to tell you what to do when you are not beneath my roof,” and so he probably witnessed or was aware of Borros giving Aemond tacit approval to attack an envoy, Luke, who had come in peace on behalf of Viserys I’s declared heir. Whether or not Ser Byron was a supporter of Rhaenyra, his fascination with Serwyn of the Mirrorshield and decision to face a dragon alone at least suggest that he genuinely believed in his knightly vows and/or the idea of knighthood, and would have been appalled by Borros’ bad faith and condoning of kinslaying and the murder of an envoy.

We thus have a young knight flaunting his vows and ties to his king and lord in order to punish the transgressions of another and end said transgressor’s terrorizing of the Riverland’s smallfolk and population more broadly. Ser Byron is ostensibly doing what he believes to be right and is upholding his knightly vows to protect the innocent and deliver justice by slaying a dragon, although his mission ends in failure since Vhagar is, well, Vhagar. His squire survives and tells the story later but with Syrax as the intended victim, and while this version doesn’t make any sense when looked at objectively, it is still accepted by commentators and the public at large for reasons which are fairly obvious. Ser Byron acted against his liege lord and king by trying to slay Vhagar, while between Aegon II’s return to power and Rhaenyra’s deep unpopularity, admitting the truth would have brought scorn and even reprisal upon Ser Byron’s memory and those closest to him, whereas claiming that Ser Byron acted out of loyalty to his king, lord, and house would perfectly fit with Westerosi preconceptions of honour and knighthood. As we discussed in Part Ten, choosing the lives of others over personal honour and loyalty to one’s lord andother superiors is not highly regard within the Seven Kingdoms; the fact Ser Byron abandoned his loyalties for what amounts to a suicide mission against Aemond and Vhagar could only be received negatively, whilst the Syrax version gives Ser Byron a relatively easier target and allows his failure to be cast in a positive light.

This analysis also reveals fairly obvious parallels between Ser Byron’s story and that of Addam and Daeron which we discussed in Part Ten: Addam and Ser Byron are both young knights and their fathers second sons, Addam having been born long after Laenor; both set out to slay dragons and are killed fighting the largest dragons in the realm, with Vermithor being the largest after Vhagar’s death; while later accounts of their actions have them acting out of loyalty to their respective faction and monarch, even though the evidence strongly suggests otherwise. Daeron is a young knight who falls in battle like Ser Byron and both have three different narratives accounting for their deaths, the difference in Daeron’s case being that Munkun’s version is considered the most likely despite a lack of evidence, whereas Munkun and Orwyle’s version of Ser Byron’s death is dismissed without good evidence despite making the most sense. There’s also evidence of witnesses withholding information in both Ser Byron and Addam and Daeron’s stories, with Ser Byron’s squire claiming that Syrax was the target despite this making no sense, while I laid out the evidence in Part Ten that Daeron’s body was recovered and presented as Addam’s by Benjicot Blackwood to cover up the full extent of what happened at Second Tumbleton.

These parallels have important implications, for by placing Ser Byron’s story where he did in the broader narrative George ensured that it fit with the chronology of events and provided set-up for a later historical debate surrounding another dragon battle. Byron Swann offers us a test case wherein identifying his motivations sets up a reconsideration of Addam and Daeron’s motivations, allowing us to see how a source might offer a distorted account of events based on the priorities of the writer. Ser Byron, Addam, and Daeron act for their own reasons on the basis of what they hold to be right rather than blind loyalty, and the accounts of the Dance which followed tried to reconcile their actions with existing societal norms and expectations.

Not only does Ser Byron’s story fit perfectly within the narrative of the Dance based on this evidence, it also adds depth to the narrative and themes of ADWD: Byron Swann’s story is about how people make their own choices and act for reasons which do not align with what their society and culture expects, and how those very expectations can distort our attempts to understand the past. Tyrion prides himself on his intelligence and wit, yet by recontextualizing his exchange with Haldon Halfmaester, George shows that Tyrion can not only be wrong despite his great intelligence but that even he takes for granted the morals and values of the society he was raised in. This is made all the more striking by the fact that Tyrion assumes Ser Byron’s actions were informed by his oaths and known loyalties, and yet he has seen characters acting upon their own interests and priorities like Varys, Illyrio, and Littlefinger. ADWD is full of such characters: Jaime abandons his mission on Tommen’s behalf in his last POV to help Brienne fulfill their oath to Catelyn Stark; the Martells feign loyalty to the crown and simultaneous plot against it while we have evidence of discontent brewing amongst Doran Martell’s own vassals; Davos Seaworth meets with Wyman Manderly and learns of his plan to betray the Boltons and the crown on the supposed behalf of Stannis, all while Manderly himself seems bent on a Stark restoration; the list is a long one of ADWD characters who are not who they appear to be, are acting for themselves, or have encountered such characters in their journeys. Far from being a forgotten plot point jammed randomly into a narrative of the event in which it took place, Ser Byron’s story is in complete harmony with the underlying themes of the Dance, ADWD, and ASOIAF as a whole, and plays an important role in communicating those themes. While the Dance is presented as a war between clearly defined factions bent on the other’s destruction, the stories of Ser Byron Swann and Second Tumbleton show us that individuals still have agency and can pursue their own motives and interests for good or ill.

iv. Syrax’s Bizarre Adventure: Dragon Scales Are Breakable

Now that we’ve untangled Ser Byron’s story and situated it within the themes of the series, we can turn our attention to the fate of his supposed nemesis, Rhaenyra’s dragon Syrax. The lack of any mention of Ser Byron and his supposed attempt to kill Syrax, especially in the context of Joffrey Velaryon’s attempt to ride her, undermines the argument against Vhagar as we noted before, but I believe the circumstances of her death are important for other reasons. Like Ser Byron, Syrax’s death has important implications for Second Tumbleton, the matter of Daeron’s death, and thus the broader themes of the story, while also hinting at the role of magic in the story beyond the dragons.

Beginning with the events before her death, myself and many in the fandom took issue with Syrax attacking the Shepherd’s mob at the dragonpit without using her fire or her ability to fly; this influenced my decision to have Joffrey killed early in the Dance in the Part Eight ‘fix-its’ and have Syrax take Tyraxes’ place in the dragonpit, in order to give her a more believable death. As with Ser Byron’s story, my opinion has changed and I believe that we’re misreading the entire situation: Gyldan himself draws attention to the issue of Syrax not attacking the rioters from the air or with her flames, stating that we cannot know why she did not fly away, “no more than we can know why Syrax chose to descend upon the Shepherd’s mob, rending them with tooth and claw…when she might as easily have rained fire on them….” I don’t think we can blame the author when his own character draws attention to this very fact, so this episode requires closer scrutiny.

The context surrounding Syrax’s attacks is crucial, since Joffrey sought to save Tyraxes and the other dragons by heading off the Shepherd’s mob on their way to the pit, but fell into Flea Bottom well short of his destination; the ‘Seven Who Rode’ also set out shortly after Joffrey took flight, and we’re told they recovered his body despite losing many of their number. Gyldan’s description of the attack on the dragonpit suggests that Joffrey’s body was recovered by the time the mob forced entry, as indicated by his description of Rhaenyra watching the fires consuming the city and surrounding the pit whilst she “wrapped her arms about her last living son, Aegon the Younger, clutching him fiercely to her bosom.” Syrax only attacked the mob after they spilled out of the collapsing dragonpit, and her death is credited to an unknown assailant leaping from the broken roof of the pit as well as Hobb the Hewer who had already slain a dragon, further indicating that Rhaenyra will have been aware of Joffrey’s death by this time. This is crucial, since Gyldan tells us that Rhaenyra only released her hold on Aegon III after Syrax’s death, when Mushroom claims she became “ashen and inconsolable” and retreated to her chambers; as Gyldan puts it, “nor would she loose her hold upon him…until that dread moment when Syrax fell.”

Rhaenyra’s reaction to Syrax’s death is a clear nod to the dragonbond, since her reaction appears to have been immediate and it’s doubtful she could have perceived the manner of her dragon’s death from across the city. As we discussed in Part Ten, the dragonbond functions as a kind of two-way psychic link which allows dragon and rider to experience each other’s emotions, as demonstrated in F&B by Vhagar screaming when Aemond lost his eye, Sunfyre seeking out Aegon II on Dragonstone, and Dreamfyre confronting Vermithor and Silverwing when Rhaena arrived at Storm’s End following Alyssa Velaryon’s death. Rhaenyra’s bond with Syrax was forged when the princess began flying with her at age six, not dissimilar to Daeron’s bonding with Tessarion by age six although he did not begin flying with her, and so I think we can easily explain Syrax’s actions by acknowledging the strength of her bond with Rhaenyra. Mushroom has Rhaenyra refer to the rioters as “vermin…drunks and fools and gutter rats,” so I doubt she would have any reservations about slaughtering them; after what happened to Joffrey, Syrax tearing through the mob with tooth, claw and tail rather than giving them swifter deaths with dragon fire makes complete sense in light of Rhaenyra’s emotional state. Mushroom also claims that it was feared the fires from the riots might spread to the Red Keep, and this would give Syrax further incentive to not use her flames while under Rhaenyra’s will and emotional control.

Attributing Syrax’s actions to Rhaenyra’s will via their dragonbond is a relatively straightforward answer, but it’s also obvious why this would create problems for Gyldan and other historians in light of Second Tumbleton. As I pointed out in Part Ten, Second Tumbleton offers us three examples of dragon behaviour via Vermithor, Silverwing, and Seasmoke, the latter operating as expected under Addam’s control while the former showcase dragon behaviour when the bond is severed (Vermithor) or impaired (Silverwing), with Tessarion serving as the clear outlier of a ‘riderless’ dragon that acts as though her bond was fully functional. Since Syrax’s actions were clearly influenced by Rhaenyra’s will despite the queen not riding her at the time, Gyldan’s hypothesis of Tessarion acting through Daeron’s will while he was somehow still dead is rendered untenable, since we have no instances of dragons displaying such targeted behaviour without the influence of a living rider’s dragonbond. This makes it all but certain that Daeron was alive while Tessarion intervened in the battle over Tumbleton, and since his remains were never found let alone near his pavilion where they should have been if he died or was severely injured there, it’s also certain that he would have been riding Tessarion during the battle.

It should be noted that Syrax offers interesting comparisons to Daeron and Tessarion: whereas Tessarion burns Bitterbridge in retaliation for Maelor being torn to shreds by the inhabitants, Syrax also appears to retaliate against Joffrey’s death and mutilation but with means that are usually reserved for dragon-on-dragon combat, as Gyldan mentions when describing Tessarion’s use of fire in her ‘dance’ with Addam and Seasmoke. Similarly, there are undeniable parallels between Second Tumbleton and Syrax’s intervention in the riots, as both dragon’s riders in these instances are the third born sons of their respective mothers and queens, although Joffrey is thrown from Syrax’s back and Gyldan categorically denies that Daeron could have flown with Tessarion. Syrax and Daeron both have conflicting accounts surrounding their deaths, and Syrax and Tessarion’s actions are even juxtaposed with similar language: Gyldan tells us that Rhaenyra would not “loose her hold upon him [Aegon III]…until that dread moment when Syrax fell,” while Benjicot Blackwood told Munkun that Vermithor “would surely have torn the silver-grey dragon [Seasmoke] to pieces…if Tessarion had not fallen from the sky at that very moment to join the fight….”

The use of ‘fall’ is also significant, since Daeron’s siblings also experience a fall at around this time: Aemond falls with Vhagar into the Gods Eye, Aegon leaps and falls from Sunfyre’s back on Dragonstone, and Helaena falls to her death in the moat of the Red Keep. If we assume that this trend continued with Daeron, and given that none of the existing accounts of his death make sense, it seems likely that Daeron also fell during the melee between Vermithor, Seasmoke, and Tessarion, which could open the door for the corpse-caper I proposed in Part Ten. Our discussion of Ser Byron Swann and specifically the potential parallels with The Hedge Knight is also relevant here, as Daeron’s supposed death at the hands of Black Trombo and his morningstar mirrors Baelor Breakspear’s death from Maekar’s mace during the Trial of Seven, while the idea that Daeron’s body was presented as Addam’s would also mirror Egg disguising himself as a commoner and Baelor’s use of his son Valarr’s armour in the trial, causing Dunk to initially mistake the former for the latter.

Despite accounting for Syrax’s actions during the riots and their implications for the story of the Dance and Second Tumbleton in particular, we’re still left with the mystery of how Syrax actually died. Munkun credits her death to Hobb the Hewer, the same axe wielding assailant that killed Shrykos, and we are given three other versions of her death despite Mushroom not being attributed to any of them. One claims that a spearman leapt from the roof of the Dragonpit, another that a crossbowman named Bean shot her in the eye and later lost his tongue for boasting about it, and lastly that a knight named Ser Warrick Wheaton may have slashed a wing from her back using Lamentation, Willam Royce’s Valyrian steel sword. Gyldan dismisses Munkun’s suggestion of Hobb the Hewer and I’m inclined to agree with him, given the size difference between Shrykos and Syrax and it being unlikely that his axe remained sharp enough for the job. The spearman account appears to be a nod to the would-be dragonslayer in Daenerys IX ADWD who tries to kill Drogon, but a leap from the Dragonpit’s roof seems more likely to have killed him than to result in Syrax’s death. This leaves Bean and Ser Warrick, the problem with the former being that it took three arrows to the eye for Billy Burley to finish off Tessarion and Syrax appears to be her size if not larger, and Syrax would already have to be immobilized to allow Bean to attempt such a kill and with a crossbow no less. Ser Warrick killing her relies on him possessing a Valyrian steel sword, and since dragons wings double as their forelimbs it would also require him to get very close indeed to attempt such a kill while Syrax was using her claws and teeth to kill the mob surrounding her. We also have no description of Syrax’s body after death, beyond that her head was displayed by the Shepherd in the Dragonpit, while Munkun’s is the only account that allows for the possibility of her decapitation and we’ve already noted the problems with that version.

There is a fifth version of Syrax’s death that Septon Eustace ran with and was apparently widely believed in King’s Landing itself, which credits her death to the Shepherd:

"Possibly all these worthies (save Hobb) played some role in the dragon's demise…but the tale most oft heard in King's Landing named the Shepherd himself as the dragonslayer. As others fled, the story went, the one-handed prophet stood fearless and alone against the ravening beast, calling on the Seven for succor, till the Warrior himself took form, thirty feet tall. In his hand was a black blade made of smoke that turned to steel as he swung it, cleaving the head of Syrax from her body. And so the tale was told, even by Septon Eustace in his account of these dark days, and so the singers sang for many years thereafter." (F&B, 522-523)

We shouldn’t be surprised that a septon and later member of the Most Devout would run with this version of events, and yet we as readers should not discount this tale out of hand, especially given what we’ve seen in ASOIAF. When Melisandre births a shadow in Davos II ACOK, Seaworth describes it towering over them and their boat, appearing to be as tall as the tunnel they used to get under Storm’s End. In Catelyn IV ACOK, the shadow sent by Stannis and Melisandre to kill Renly is able to punch through a steel gorget and other pieces of armour with its blade, so in both size and ability to decapitate a dragon with it’s blade I think a shadow makes as much sense as any of these other accounts.

The problem with this account is that we know Melisandre birthed her shadows, something the Shepherd obviously cannot do as a man, but I think there’s a fairly simple explanation: the shadows Mel cast were Stannis’ shadows, ‘sired’ with Stannis’ ‘seed,’ rather than her own. According to Novice Pate in the AFFC prologue, Archmaester Marwyn studied with the Shadowbinders of Asshai while travelling in the Far East and Marwyn is of course a man, while the shadow magic Mirri Maz Duur seems to have attempted in AGOT with Drogo’s body did not require her to become pregnant. This indicates that while female Shadowbinders may cast the shadows of other men using their seed, male and female binders alike should be able to cast their own shadows provided they have some other magical ‘ingredient.’ If we look at the Shepherd, Gyldan claims that his lost right hand was proof he had been a thief, yet it could also indicate that he had summoned shadows before using his own flesh and blood. Mel also claims that there is power in ‘kings blood,’ and there are hints in F&B that this was available: following Larys Strong’s execution, we’re told that Cregan Stark hacked off Larys’ clubfoot per his request but that it disappeared before it could be buried; Mushroom claims it was stolen and given to a sorcerer for casting spells, which Gyldan dismisses due to the same tale being told about Joffrey Velaryon’s leg despite reporting earlier that Joffrey lost his right foot at the ankle. It’s rather convenient that the Shepherd is missing his right hand just as Joffrey loses his right foot, and while cutting off Joffrey’s hands to claim his rings and even cutting off his head to perhaps claim credit for his death would make sense from the mob’s perspective, it’s unclear what use his right foot could have…unless we remember that it was the Shepherd’s mob that found the body, and that blood pools in the extremities after death and especially in the lower limbs. The Shepherd clearly sought to kill the Targaryen dragons, which would make Syrax’s size and her presence away from the Dragonpit a major obstacle to that goal unless some way could be found to kill her, and it appears that Joffrey inadvertently gave this to him with his escape and subsequent death.

There’s considerable evidence which also points to the Shepherd killing Syrax with a shadow, starting with the details provided in the other four accounts; much like the stories of Daeron’s death, each of these accounts are unfeasible on their own but contain clues as to what may have happened when considered altogether. Hobb the Hewer caved in Shrykos’ skull with his axe, while ‘the Warrior’ is said to have decapitated Syrax; the spearman who allegedly leapt from the dragonpit is described as “a blood-soaked giant,” which would be a fitting description for a shadow cast using blood magic; Warrick Wheaton’s account features a magical sword cutting off a dragon’s wing, just as ‘the Warrior’ cut off Syrax’s head, while the loss of her wing recalls the fate of Joffrey’s dragon Tyraxes, whose wing membranes were cut out after death to make cloaks for the Shepherd’s mob, giving us a further link to Joffrey; finally, we have Bean the crossbowman who lost his tongue for boasting about killing Syrax, despite his assaillants being Rhaenyra loyalists who should have had every incentive to just kill him, rendering him silent like the shadows cast by Melisandre. A silent, bloody giant who cut off a dragon’s head with a magical blade perfectly describes what is said to have happened when the Shepherd confronted Syrax, a showdown that is all the more significant when we consider the actions of another shadowbinder in the series, Mirri Maz Duur. When confronted for Rhaego’s death and Drogo’s comatose state in Daenerys IX AGOT, Mirri tells Dany that “it was wrong of them to burn my temple…that angered the Great Shepherd,” referring to the destruction of her village by Drogo’s khalassar. As it so happens, the Shepherd is said by Munkun to have been a member of the Poor Fellows who were outlawed and violently suppressed by Maegor the Cruel, while the Dragonpit is built on the site of the Sept of Remembrance, which honoured the memory of Rhaenys the Conqueror and was burned and demolished by Maegor, who ordered the pit be built on the site. In both cases we have a shadowbinder punishing a Targaryen queen for past crimes, in Mirri’s case killing family and in the Shepherd’s case killing the dragons themselves and ransacking the home built for them atop a sept of the Seven. There may even be a further nod to the shadowbinders of ASOIAF in Joffrey’s last words, which are said to be “mother forgive me,” since the last words Catelyn speaks to Renly before his death in ACOK are “I beg you in the name of the Mother.”

The last body of evidence pointing to the Shepherd killing Syrax has to do with the place of the Stranger within all these events: Eustace claims that Hobb the Hewer killed Shrykos with seven blows and that the last and fatal one was for the Stranger, and later on we hear that Aegon II cut Rhaenyra’s charred corpse into seven pieces to feed Sunfyre, “leaving only her left leg below the shin ‘for the Stranger’” according again to Septon Eustace. Both anecdotes have connections to what we’ve already discussed, especially Rhaenyra’s left leg which calls to mind Larys and Joffrey, but the Stranger also features in the riots in a way that further vindicates Eustace’s account. When Luthor Largent and his 500 Goldcloaks ride into Cobbler’s Square to break up the Shepherd’s growing mob, the Shepherd claims that “Now it is the Stranger who comes” and the crowd wails “he comes” in response, associating Largent with the member of the Seven that represents death. It just so happens that Luthor Largent is famously tall, his height being the only way his mutilated body could be identified after the mob overwhelmed the Goldcloaks, and is responsible for betraying and beheading Ser Gwayne Hightower when Rhaenyra captured King’s Landing. We thus have a giant who cuts off heads and is associated with the Seven, which sounds an awful lot like ‘the Warrior’ who cut off Syrax’s head, but these are not the only connections. Ser Gwayne’s death is an obvious reference to Sir Gawain and the Green Knight of the Arthurian Legends, among George’s favourite fantasy stories and featuring Sir Gawain, one of George’s favourite literary characters and heroes. We have Ser Gwayne and Sir Gawain, Luthor Largent and ‘the Warrior’ are both noted for their great height like the Green Knight of the legend, both stories feature decapitations, Sir Gawain decapitates the Green Knight with the latter’s magical axe just as Syrax is said to be decapitated by ‘the Warrior’s’ shadow blade or by Hobb the Hewer’s axe, and there’s even a reference to the Green Knight’s promise to Sir Gawain to return in a year and a day to pay him back for taking his head, with the Shepherd promising Aegon II that “We shall meet in hell before this year is done.” The Shepherd also dies from being burned at the stake, which when we consider he summoned a shadow to kill Syrax, could be seen as the Shepherd being repaid for his blow just as Sir Gawain was promised by the Green Knight, with fire of course being Syrax’s ‘axe.’

Since the account of the Shepherd killing Syrax appears in neither TWOIAF nor TPATQ, it’s possible that the episode was not part of the unabridged TWOIAF prior to publication, and so represents new material which George purposefully included in F&B. Even if it was part of the unabridged material of TWOIAF, the amount of evidence embedded within the context of the riots and subsequent events strongly indicates that it did take place. Per the account of Eustace and numerous Kingslanders, a shadow fought a dragon at the Dragonpit amidst the riots in King’s Landing, and the dragon lost. Aside from being extremely hype-the Shepherd summons his ‘Stand’ Jojo-style and defeats a dragon with the city in flames around them-the battle provides us a bonafide example of magic during the Dance aside from the dragons, providing a contrast to the narratives surrounding Alys Rivers. As I noted in Parts Six and Nine, the actual evidence that Alys was a sorceress is thin at best, but her status as a bastard woman whose actions during and after the Dance put her at odds with societal norms made her an easy target for myth-making and ‘black legends.’ While the Shepherd led an insurrection against the monarchy and weakened it by killing many of its dragons, the fact he was ostensibly a member of the Faith and a popular figure to the people of King’s Landing would make it easier for Citadel historians like Munkun and Gyldan to brush off the tales about him killing Syrax, especially given the skepticism the maesters display towards magic.

v. 2 Dance 2 Dragons: 130 AC-131 AC

With that out of the way we can proceed to the climax and conclusion of the Dance in 130-131 AC; events are in place north of the Goldroad and we just need to catch-up the plot south of it. Our ‘fix-its’ from Part Ten are largely untouched, bearing in mind that we’re keeping to George’s timeline in terms of dates and that the siege of Longtable combined with the weather, the sack of Bitterbridge, and occasional skirmishes serve to delay Ormund and Daeron’s advance rather than the lengthy delay between Bitterbridge and Tumbleton IOTL. To incorporate Tyrell and Faith neutrality ITTL, I’ll add that instead of directly shipping supplies up river past Highgarden the Hightower army must establish depots just south and north of Highgarden to transfer supplies overland, around Tyrell territory and further contributing to delays. Since the ‘Butcher’s Ball’ still happens ITTL, the Riverlords reinforce Tumbleton as IOTL while our changes to the battle from Part Ten remain intact. The Vale’s absence can be explained by the inclement weather, the need for harvest labour, and the damage done to Gulltown’s port facilities by Aemond ITTL, and this can also explain the small size of the White Harbour contingent in King’s Landing. North of the Gold Road, adding a week to Aemond’s preparations pushes forward the timing of events only slightly, and Rhaenyra’s fall can take place as outlined in Part Nine with the mutinies by the Velaryon fleet in King’s Landing and on Driftmark assisting Larys and Aegon II’s actions.

Our changes to the timeline of Daemon’s last battle and Addam’s flight from Part Nine will also remain, with Daemon’s vigil at Harrenhal lasting only a week or so while Addam immediately heads to neutral Riverrun, whose forces were already mobilized to protect their neutrality. This would cut down the time the Hightower army spends doing nothing at Tumbleton and allow the second battle and the riots in King’s Landing to take place at roughly the same time, as opposed to the riots and the Battle Above the Godseye IOTL. If we keep the changes to Baela and Aegon’s duel from Part Nine, i.e. Sunfyre is less seriously injured going into the fight compared to IOTL and Baela suffers more serious injuries, I see no need to alter the fall of Dragonstone save for having the Velaryons be more complicit in its capture. We still find ourselves with a massive gap between the fall of Dragonstone just after Rhaenyra’s flight and her death in October, and Aegon’s return to King’s Landing. Having Rhaenyra return to Dragonstone in mid-late July would help somewhat, but this still leaves five to five-and-a-half months, but continuing the ‘Moon of the Three Kings’ would get us to September or just four months, at which point the complicity of the Velaryon fleet in Aegon’s return should allow him to return to the capital three or so months earlier than IOTL.

This gives additional time for the plot of Aegon II’s ‘short sad reign’ to develop: I’d have Aegon II require the Tyrells and High Septon acknowledge him as king and condemn Rhaenyra’s remaining supporters, but they demand a marriage between Aegon III and Jaehaera to unite the rival claims as compensation. Aegon also threatens Elmo Tully for abandoning neutrality to assist Addam Velaryon in defeating the Hightower army and killing his brother Daeron, though Elmo protests that he merely sought to protect his lands and those of his bannermen from the Two Betrayers. This provides a better set-up for Aegon II’s campaign against the Crownlanders and gives Elmo Tully, Jeyne Arryn, and Cregan Stark the excuse they need to resume hostilities; as for the Greens, Johanna Lannister cannot give aid while the Ironborn control Banefort, Kayce, and Fire Isle, and though Lyonel Hightower is supporting her with ships and men he cannot afford to send Aegon reinforcements given the opposition of the Faith, the Tyrells, and their support among Rhaenyra’s former allies in the Reach. The final campaign of the Dance unfolds as I laid out in the Part Eleven ‘fix-its’ with the actual fighting probably ending a month or two earlier than IOTL and including the small changes we made to the ‘Hour of the Wolf.’ Otherwise the Dance ends ITTL just as George wrote it, with Jaehaera and Aegon III’s marriage and coronation, concluding the great civil war which divided and bled the realm for two wretched years.

vi. Final Thoughts

I didn’t think I’d be saying this when I concluded the original military analysis, but my opinion of the Dance as a story and F&B as a book has grown exponentially and I’d go so far as to call it some of George’s best work in the series. As someone who studied history in university and for my degree, my approach to F&B treated it too much as a historical work as I understood that to be rather than what George wanted it to be, namely a less academic, medieval-style chronicle with a sizeable helping of his own writing style, foreshadowing, and call backs to his other ASOIAF works to boot. Looking back from the end of this series has helped me realize I didn’t know nearly as much as I should have about George’s writing and the historical periods which inspired him, and this new series has been a welcome education on both subjects. The Dance is not without its problems and no story really is, but I hope I’ve demonstrated that these problems are not story-ending issues; they can be remedied while still keeping George’s story intact and retaining much of its plot and themes, although I still have some reservations about my ‘fix-its’ in regards to the latter.