Ch18 Spoilers: What the Hell Happened with Aemond
Hehe okay I don't have the patience to wait until the explanation fits into the narrative, because it won't come up for a while. Daeron's gonna have to do a lot of digging back at the Citadel before anyone in-universe finds this out; until then, they're all going to treat it a bit like a miracle since they won't know any better. But y'all know me, and y'all know that if I do anything I make sure it's canon compliant in like ten different ways haha. I've put a ton of thought into this and didn't write this plot point just for funsies!
Also, if anyone wants to wait to find out, by all means do! But the reveal won't be treated as a huge plot twist, so you'll still be able to enjoy Stormbreak with all of the expected amounts of suspense if you want to read further! So if you want to know how Aemond pulled off what he did, or exactly what he pulled off, read on!
Before you read this post, read this one here because otherwise parts of this will seem like they come out of nowhere.
Basically, if a rider comes across a dragon who is directly related to their claimed dragon (parent/child/sibling), there's a possibility that they can claim that second dragon. I got this idea from all of the emphasis of the phrase "blood of the dragon," because it was interesting to me that the only bloodlines that seemed to matter were the Targaryen ones. But what if the ability to form this bond was inherited on the dragon side as well? Remember that every single dragon in Westeros is a descendant of the first dragons who came over from Valyria with the Targaryens, all of whom had this type of bond.
But a rider can ONLY form a simultaneous bond with another dragon if that second dragon is currently unclaimed. Remember that in my lore, nothing can replace or break an existing bond. And I maintain that! So RIP Joffrey, and please don't try to get on Syrax, she already has a rider and she won't accept another; no dragon with a rider ever will. This is also why Rhaenyra didn't bond with any of her sons' dragons, even though I think most of them probably hatched from Syrax's eggs: They were all placed inside her children's cradles, and basically bonded the second they hatched.
Since it's canonically really difficult to get an egg to hatch, even if you're a Targaryen, I also think that an egg is unlikely hatch for a rider who already has a dragon; if they want a second one, they'll have to claim an adult, "widowed" dragon rather than hoping that one will hatch for them. For example, if Rhaenyra wanted to claim a second dragon, she'd need to wait for one of Syrax's eggs to (1) hatch on its own and grow a little, or (2) get and lose a rider before trying to claim it.
How does this fit into canon? Well, if you check all of ASoIaF canon (I don't recommend it, since it takes forever, but I did), there is no instance of a Targaryen coming across an unbonded dragon related to their current dragon, aside from possibly Daenerys, who does succeed in forming a relationship with her three dragons. I've described here that I think Daenerys's bond with her dragons is meant to be a bit unique, but I acknowledge that the vast majority of the fandom considers her to be a rider of three dragons, not just one. And Daenerys's dragons are all siblings, and all of them were unclaimed when she came upon them! You can believe this without contradicting the idea that she was only able to hatch them because of a blood sacrifice. So it works for the same reasons that Aemond claiming Vermithor works, while preserving Daenerys's narrative importance as being different from all who came before her! She's still the first Targaryen to ever hatch and claim multiple dragons at once, and she's still the first Targaryen to have three dragons at her beck and call.
This adds more nuance and emphasis to the focus in Valyria on twins, siblings, and family. If bloodline matters on both sides of the dragon-rider bond, it's a great thing for dragons to be related to each other, since it increases the likelihood of a rider being able to claim multiple dragons. It's also going to help me play a ton more into the narratives that I've been setting up of the rule of three ("the dragon has three heads, and all that").
Finally, this lets me pay homage to how Aemond actually claimed Vhagar in the books. I understand why they did it differently in the show, and actually have no complaints about the scene where he claims Vhagar; I think it's one of the best scenes of season 1. But in the books, Aemond scrambles up Vhagar's side and into her saddle so quickly he doesn't even have time to worry about possibly dying:
And I love that this moment allows me to parallel what happened in the books, and stay very true to his actual character and personality. For all that bloodline is important, I also didn't want to ignore that the personality of rider and dragon do have to be compatible. I think Vermithor was probably pretty impressed at Aemond's sheer audacity, just like his mother once was. Plus, we know that in the Dance they specifically only let men try to claim him because it was suspected that he'd only tolerate male riders because of Jaehaerys.
Anyways, as always I've put way too much thought into this haha. But this is part of why I've been emphasizing the phrases "blood of the dragon" and "the dragon has three heads" and why I've written the dragon bond in general as almost a familial bond.
TLDR: Any dragonrider, not just Aemond, would be able to claim a second dragon, ONLY IF that dragon is a direct relation of their first dragon, and ONLY IF that dragon does not have a bond already in place. There are just so few dragons that this opportunity has never presented itself before in Westeros, but I think it was probably common back in Valyria, hence the focus on the "blood of the dragon" and the symbol of three in Targaryen culture. This also helps to explain why Daenerys was able to bond with her three dragons, if you subscribe to the belief that she's got an equivalent type of dragon-rider bond.
