One of my favorite long-winded WIP fanfics was updated lately, so I am taking the time to reread it, which... does take some time, because it has been written for several years and has a loooot of words. The author is prone to rambling about all kinds of things in the notes which I love, it reminds me so much of the way fanfic on the Pit of Voles aka fanfiction.net has been written, and I had been introduced to several YT channels that discuss the lore, worldbuilding elements and fan theories of ASOIAF. But there is one thing that i have been thinking about, that i haven't seen talked about on those channels. So, if anyone can point to be towards a vid or essay that deals with it, feel free to post in the notes.
I am going to be honest, my knowledge about the lore of ASOIAF is not super deep or very detailed, i couldn't stand Martins writing, so most of what I know comes from watching the series (haphazardly and out of order), what I managed to digest from the first book, lots of fanfic and wiki wandering. But I know that at the point in time GoT starts, people in Westeros are talking about the dragons being gone, generally meaning that dragons the animals are extinct and dragons the people being on the brink of extinction. What baffles me is - why? Because it is not exactly true?
Like, even after Dany manages to hatch her three eggs, it is still implied in all kinds of convos and atmospheric details that people in-universe still think that both are nearly extinct? But one of the few worldbuilding details i know for certain is that dragons don't die when their bonded dragonrider dies. What I am less certain of, but, like, 70 percent sure is that dragons can choose to bond a second time, to another rider. (I think that scene in HotD where a Baratheon is supposed to call up a dragon but is instead mauled horribly, was meant to facilitate a second bond? The scene was a bit confusing, considering I haven't really watched the rest of HotD and wasn't actively seeking out to know what happens in that book). And dragons have significantly longer life-spans than the Targaryens, even if take the constant tendency to throw down to fight with everyone and their mother and the background backstabbing-and-poisoning of the rest of the ambitious, opportunistic non-Targaryen cunts out of the equation.
The same with dragons the people. That, of course, is a bit trickier, as it depends on the interpretation of who is considered of dragonblood, but I think it is safe to say 'anyone with a sufficient amount magical blood that enables someone to become a dragonrider/ bond with a dragon'. Though, by that definition, not even all Targaryens of the main inheritance line would be considered dragons, because there were plenty who never bonded with one or even were actively rejected by a dragon and bear the marks. But if you go outside of the main inheritance line, there are plenty of Blackfyres and what not other bastard Targaryen branches running around in Essos, and probably even in Westeros itself, despite Robert's best efforts to exterminate them. I mean, the Daynes had the Targaryen looks, if I remember correctly, and they can't have been the only house from Dorne to have them. Wasn't one of Briennes ancestors, Duncan something, a Targ, too? Also, the Velaryons are right there, and they are a house from Old Valyria, too, with the magical dragonriding blood in their own right. And also, Roberts whole claim to kinghood after the Rebellion is based on his Targaryen grandmother, hypocrite that he is, so Stannis, Renly and Shireen also have a degree of of magical blood. Sure, you could argue that it is diluted, but how diluted can it really be, with all the cousin marriages between Westerose noble houses? Just because Targs died faster than they reproduced and had to start marrying earlier and earlier and been reduced to sibling marriages, doesn't mean that the rest of the noble houses isn't pretty inbred as well. If you plan it right, in one or two generations you could produce a Targaryen with a sufficient level of dragon blood to be able to bond a dragon. Hell, Jon is only half-Targ, and he managed it, no incest needed. (The less said about how inbred house Stark itself is, the better). They won't have the signature Targ looks, probably, but its not like a dragon cares what their rider looks like.
So, where do the dragons go after the death of their bonded rider? At best, I have managed to find references to them flying off, like with Vermithor and Silverwing, and they certainly don't stay with the rest of the bonded dragons - they are not exactly herd animals. If some are staying, they are a tiny minority. Not that there were all that many bonded dragons simultaneously at any period of time, from what I understand, but the rate at which the Targaryens are dying is ridiculous, so at the very least there should be several formerly 'domesticated' dragons roaming the wild. And Dany's eggs are definitely not the last ones in existence. We just don't know where the nesting grounds are for the wild dragons. But there is never a mention of any sightings of them, when by all rights, an animal that grew up familiar with humans and associates them with easy access to plentyful, high quality food, should be preying in human-populated areas. And we hear no mentions of some unlucky wanderer or intrepid explorer stumbling upon a stray dragon egg in the wild. Martin throws all kinds of references and offhand remarks about shit that has absolutely no bearing on the plot into the pot, but no mention of wild dragons. (I mean, did all that lore about the kraken god of the Iron islands actually have a purpose, other than to imagine a distinct culture with a different feel to, say, the North? Or the Dothraki myth of the Stallion that mounts the world? As far as I can see, it doesn't have any other narrative purpose than to make them look sufficiently other, sufficiently exotic. At least the stuff with Azor Ahai was tying into the The Last hero myth and the legends of the Night King and White walkers, but we have no idea whether the stallion was just a pretty story or had actual instructions on how to defeat the White Walkers in it). So, either people are so convinced that the dragons are dead that all mentions of sightings are dismissed out of hand or there is some magical reason for it, like a geas or something, or it is actually common enough that it is only the bonded dragons that get people in a tizzy. I have no idea. (I mean, the latter would make some sense, because only a human steering a dragon would be capable of causing a targeted destruction, but on the other hand, makes no sense because it sounds so improbable that there never was at least one Valyrian bastard in Essos who accidently bonded to a wild dragon.)
But, yeah, that is something that has been bothering me a lot when I started my reread.
tangentwithtanner
janainaart
blakekathryn
ellievsbear
gummygunk