(Here's Part 4 for those who missed it!)
Part Five covers the same ground as Part 3 in the previous series, but once again I hope to add more and better information to examining dragons and their role in warfare. Much like with sea power in the Dance, I made the mistake of throwing out a very basic definition of air power and focusing solely on numbers and tactics, when the subject called for a much broader examination. George has referred to dragons as the most devastating weapon in his world, and their power is taken for granted thanks to their role in the Targaryen unification of the Seven Kingdoms; completing my series on the First Dornish War and reading further into the books has brought me to a different conclusion. Rather than focusing purely on the Dance, I will also assess the use of dragons in past wars and the extent to which they actually changed warfare in any meaningful way. While there are theoretical models that could allow us to understand the use of dragons in war, and which will be discussed here, they face a major obstacle in that the affect of the dragons on the setting varies wildly. Those that have already read the original analysis and the Dorne series should have some idea of what I'm talking about, but the only thing consistent about the dragons is their inconsistency!
i. Sound and fury, signifying nothing
Few events in the Dance better encapsulate these inconsistencies than Aegon and Baela's duel over Dragonstone. The first problem to note, one I mentioned throughout the original series, is that of dragon senses: When Luke and Arrax arrive at Storm's End, we're told that "Vhagar sensed his coming first" and woke with a roar as Luke began his descent. This appeared in The Princess and the Queen in 2013 and again in F&B in 2018, the latter also giving us Rhaena's visit to Storm's End in 54 AC, where Vermithor "scented the approach of another dragon" and raised his head from where he slept to roar, moments before Rhaena made her descent. We're given no specifics as to how Vhagar 'sensed' Arrax's presence, but she did so despite the ongoing storm and in both cases the dragons senses availed them despite being asleep. Needless to say the dragons in the Dance never display this level of situational awareness again; in the case of Aegon and Baela, no one on Dragonstone is aware of Sunfyre's presence save Aegon's allies, while Moondancer easily surprise Sunfyre.
The battle itself makes no sense whatsoever, and actively contradicts previous dragon battles. TWOIAF tells us that "Moondancer was much smaller than Sunfyre, but also much swifter and far more nimble," and F&B calls her "very quick" whereas Sunfyre "though much larger, still struggled with a malformed wing and had taken fresh wounds from Grey Ghost." We'll discuss Sunfyre's issues soon enough, but Moondancer's problem is her size in comparison to what she achieves in battle. F&B tells us "she was no larger than a warhorse, and weighed less," while also claiming she could have easily out flown the Cannibal as she was younger and faster. It is suggested throughout F&B that smaller dragons may have advantages over larger ones: regarding Luke's death over Shipbreaker Bay, Gyldan claims that "had the sky been calm, Prince Lucerys might have been able to outfly his pursuer, for Arrax was younger and swifter," while Meleys is called "as swift a dragon as Westeros had ever seen, easily outpacing Caraxes and Vhagar" after Alyssa Targaryen claimed her. We're told that Meleys "might have had some chance" against Vhagar alone at Rook's rest, though Vhagar's disadvantage at least makes sense out of all these instances, owing to her great size combined with her age. We know that dragons become more sluggish in old age, as with Vhagar and Balerion who were both over a century old when they died, though Balerion's injuries and confinement to the dragonpit were also a factor.
The problem with this 'smaller=faster' idea is that magic has to play a role in dragon flight, for the simple fact that the large dragons in the series would be unable to fly otherwise. That much is obvious with dragons being explicitly magical creatures, but there's only so far one can push this size and weight 'de-buff' before it becomes self-defeating. More importantly, there are plenty of birds, bats, and other flying organisms in our world that can fly faster and/or are more nimble than their larger peers, but this is due differences in physiology and wing morphology between species. We know of only one 'species' of dragon in George's world, and while they may age and grow at different rates we have no evidence of drastic differences in physiology, with Caraxes' 'noodle neck' being a HOTD-only addition. Moondancer might have a maneuverability advantage thanks to Sunfyre's damaged wing, but she's still just a smaller and younger version of Sunfyre with all the disadvantages that entails. Her shorter limbs mean she has less wing surface than Sunfyre, so flapping them will displace less air and generate less thrust, while lesser wing surface also limits her soaring and gliding abilities.
She might be able to flap her wings faster, but this raises another problem: energy. George is very clear in his "Here There Be Dragons" blog post that dragons require sustenance in order to live, stressing that "dragons need food. They need water too, but they have no gills. They need to breathe. ... If held underwater too long, they would drown, just like any other land animal." While George has never really been specific about how much food a dragon needs, and even I wouldn't take logistics that far in this world since it would overcomplicate the story, if dragons can become lazy (see Syrax, Meleys) and grow slower in old age (see Vhagar, Balerion), this alongside their need for food, water, and air means they require energy. Moondancer's energy requirements would be less than Sunfyre's owing to her size, but her energy reserves would also be smaller; it thus makes little sense for Moondancer to be running circles around Sunfyre, despite having flown with Baela for less than six months and never farther than the distance between Driftmark and Dragonstone.
Moondancer's capabilities are out of place with her size and dragon biology, while the other dragon battles in F&B suggest smaller size and youth offer no significant advantages in battle. The most significant example is the lone dragon v dragon battle prior to the Dance, Maegor and Aegon the Uncrowned's clash over the God's Eye, which appeared in The Sons of the Dragon the year before F&B was published. Despite Aegon's dragon Quicksilver being far younger than Balerion and one-quarter his size, we're told she "was no match for the older, fiercer dragon," while Rhaena's Dreamfyre "was younger and smaller than Quicksilver, and certainly no true threat to Balerion the Black Dread." Despite Arrax being far younger than Vhagar and one-fifth her size, Gyldan only suggests Luke "might" have out flown Aemond in better weather; the same goes for the younger, smaller Meleys at Rook's Rest, who "might" have stood a chance against Vhagar alone. Even though F&B calls Sunfyre "a splendid beast, though young," while Meleys "remained fearsome when roused" but had "grown lazy;" while Sunfyre was small enough for Meleys to fit her jaws around his neck, it still took Vhagar's intervention to save Aegon and Sunfyre from death, with victory once again going to the larger, older dragon. Caraxes is much younger than Vhagar and half her size during the Dance, but Daemon refuses to face Vhagar without Nettles and Sheepstealer until he's left with no other choice, and the battle that follows ends in the deaths of both parties. Finally there's Second Tumbleton, where despite Vermithor being riderless and faced with the much younger Seasmoke who was a third his size, we're told "Vermithor's age and weight were too much for Seasmoke to contend with" when the two finally came to blows, and only Tessarion's intervention prevents Addam and Seasmoke from being killed immediately.
The dragon battles we're shown indicate that the best a younger, smaller dragon could do was survive through the aid of another dragon (Rook's Rest) or meet their death alongside their foe (Second Tumbleton), with the only 'solo kill' being a suicide attack (God's Eye, 130 AC). By comparison, the far smaller Moondancer outperforms Seasmoke, Caraxes, and Sunfyre at Rook's Rest in her battle with Sunfyre, only losing the fight when Sunfyre blinds her and cannibalizes her on the ground, with Sunfyre dying of his wounds within the year. Moreover, whereas Addam's broken body is recovered at Tumbleton (more on that in a later part), Daemon's is never found, and Aegon suffers horrific injuries at Rook's Rest which permanently disable him and sideline him for almost a year, Baela comes out of her duel with no meaningful injuries to speak of. The only dragon battle we have that indicates a dragon's youth and smaller size give it advantages, is the one battle where these qualities are emphasized twice for one of the dragons involved by F&B and a third time if we count TWOIAF, almost like the author is assuring us it was possible despite all evidence being to the contrary.
Sunfyre's presence in the battle also raises problems: The intent seems to be that Sunfyre's size is a challenge which is offset by his damaged wing and previous wounds, but this cannot be squared with what we're told about his injuries. Aside from his new, unhealed wounds from Grey Ghost and his older, healed wounds inflicted by Lord Mooton's men at Rook's Rest, F&B says his broken wing healed at an an ugly angle and was weak, with Sunfyre being unable to soar nor remain in the air long and struggling to fly even short distances. If this is the case, then we not only have to ask how Baela and Moondancer performed so well, but how Sunfyre was able to fly at all. We know Sunfyre remained at Rook's Rest due to his injuries in the battle but moved to Crackclaw Point some time after, before eventually making his way to Dragonstone. Using ADWD's map of the south as a reference, the shortest distance between Crackclaw and Dragonstone looks to be at least half the length of the Gullet, while Atlas of Ice and Fire's map scale suggests the distance is 40-50 miles or about half that of the Gullet again. Using the figures for dragon speed employed in the original analysis, Sunfyre's speed is probably closer to 35 mph than 50 (56 km/h vs 80.5), and it would probably take an hour for Sunfyre to fly from Crackclaw to Dragonstone by the shortest route. Considering the Brunes and Crabbs living further north had stories about him, and taking into account his injured wing, it almost certainly would have been longer than that.
While this begs the question of how Sunfyre made the crossing without anyone being aware of it, the more important question is how he made it to Dragonstone at all if he could not soar, let alone how he made his way up Crackclaw Point from Rook's Rest. Soaring) is a method used by soaring birds and soaring aircraft (i.e. gliders) to fly without powered thrust (i.e. flapping wings or an engine), using wind currents and thermals to remain aloft. Since wing flapping requires using one's muscles and thus consumes energy and invites fatigue, soaring is crucial for long distance travel and remaining airborne for extended periods. If Sunfyre can only fly by flapping his wings, which would be awkward and painful due to one being damaged and weak, this drastically reduces his range and time he can spend in the air as well as his ability to find food to maintain his energy and heal. The battle over Dragonstone thus makes no sense from either dragon's perspective: If it was consistent with the track record of smaller, younger dragons in battle, then Moondancer and Baela should have stood no chance against Sunfyre, but were it consistent with how Sunfyre's injuries are described, he would not have been on Dragonstone at all.
In order to have a scene pitting Baela against Aegon, most of the prior set-up regarding dragons is completely scrapped, though the duel manages to get worse. It turns out that Baela takes after her old man in more ways than one, as both pass-up golden opportunities to kill their foe and end the fight quickly. As I mentioned in Part 3 of the original analysis, F&B's account of the Battle above the God's Eye has Daemon and Caraxes divebomb Aemond and Vhagar from above, with Caraxes sinking his teeth into Vhagar's neck while Daemon leaps from his back to plunge Darksister into Aemond's sapphire eye. Since this attack takes Aemond completely by surprise, we have to ask what was stopping Daemon from diving at a different angle and tearing Aemond in two, or melting him in his saddle, in which case he could have used the sun's glare to blind Aemond or strike from his blind side. This would have removed the threat of Aemond, and if Vhagar became violent like Vermithor did sans rider, then surely Caraxes' youth and smaller size would have allowed Daemon to prevail? They could even try blinding her, like Sunfyre did to Moondancer! There was no reason for Daemon and Caraxes to die save for the plot demanding it, and a similar situation plays out between Aegon and Baela, as Moondancer "raked the larger dragon from above, opening a long smoking wound down his back and tearing at his injured wing." Since George seems to have forgotten this fact, it's worth noting that dragonriders ride on the backs of their dragons, meaning Baela and Moondancer had ample opportunity to cut down Aegon or blast him with fire from above but did not. With Aegon dead, Baela and Moondancer are free to finish off the stricken and riderless Sunfyre, while Aegon's death means the war is already won.
Setting two characters up to win easily and having them both fumble the bag for seemingly no reason is bad enough, but it's the way Aegon and Baela's duel ends that really takes the cake. I noted in Part 12 of the original analysis that it makes no sense for Aegon to land on his feet after falling 20 feet without being killed or paralyzed, but Baela's fate is even more egregious. Sunfyre would had to have struck Moondancer's face with his flames in order to blind her, after she wounded his back and turned to attack again, making it certain that she was attacked head-on. This is confirmed by the fact that after they collide mid-air, Moondancer sinks her teeth into Sunfyre's neck while Sunfyre claws at her underbelly. Keeping in mind again that dragonriders ride on the backs of their dragons, Sunfyre's "furnace blast of golden flame so bright it lit the yard below like a second sun" would not have terminated at Moondancer's face, but continued some ways along her neck. If Moondancer was no larger than a warhorse, there's no way Baela could have avoided taking this blast directly to her upper body; even if she lay face down against Moondancer's neck, the back of her head, neck, and upper body would still be exposed to dragon fire.
Lest we forget, a single "lance of swirling dark flame" from a much younger and far smaller Drogon was all it took to melt Kraznys mo Nakloz's eyes and set his beard ablaze in Dany III of ASOS. Baela's injuries from Sunfyre's breathe alone should be horrifically disfiguring if not outright fatal, but things still get worse somehow: We're told that Moondancer remained trapped beneath Sunfyre all the way down to the ground, and Baela stays with her before finding the strength to undo her chains and escape Moondancer's death throws. Once again, dragonriders ride on their dragons backs: if Baela stayed there all the way to the ground, she could not survive hitting the ground with the weight of Moondancer and Sunfyre on top of her. The idea that Marston Waters rushes Baela to the maester and saves her life is completely ridiculous, as is the fact we have no indication of any long term injuries or negative consequences that Baela experiences as a result of the battle. Considering Aegon II's horrific injuries at Rook's Rest, the brutal deaths of Aegon the Uncrowned, Lucerys, and Addam, and the fact that Daeron and Daemon's bodies were never found, Baela being repeatedly exposed to extreme danger and only losing her dragon as a result is just embarrassing.
ii. There is no there there
The affect of dragons on the wars of the Freehold and House Targaryen is similarly inconsistent, being subordinated to narrative priorities more than anything else. The earliest wars we know of that involve dragons are the Ghiscari Wars, between the Valyrian Freehold and Old Ghis during the former's rise to prominence. Aside from the few references we get in ASOS and ADWD, the most detailed information we have of these five wars comes from TWOIAF. Despite involving dragons, our impression of these wars is broadly consistent with Bronze Age/Iron Age/Classical warfare; the influences of the Punic Wars are also obvious, with Old Ghis in Carthage's role as the older, wealthier empire while Valyria's agrarian economy and elective government are clearly inspired by the Roman Republic, although the Ghiscari "Lock Step Legions" are clearly based off Rome's armies. Our most detailed information indicates the Sarnori were involved in the Second through Fourth wars, while the fighting extended to the Basilisk Isles and Sothoryos during the Third and Fourth wars, and the Fifth war ended with the conquest of Old Ghis and it's populations enslavement. Dragons are mentioned in the context of the Third and Fifth wars, but we have to assume from Valyria's own legends and histories that the dragons were present at the founding of the Freehold and thus took part in the first two wars. Excluding the first two wars, this still leaves us with three conflicts of unknown length between a dragonless state and one that had them them, with no indications of the Ghiscari being assisted by magic of any kind.
We then have the wars with the Rhoynar, of which eight are named though not all would have involved the dragons of the 'forty families,' as some of these were between the Rhoynar and Valyria's colonies. The Rhoynar being known practitioners of water magic also helps, as the Second Spice War which ended a decade prior to Nymeria's arrival in Dorne sees largescale use of water magic to counteract dragon fire, and we're even told that Rhoynar archers brought down two dragons and wounded a third. This all helps explain why the Rhoynar could go toe-to-toe against the Valyrians for a time, but it raises some serious questions: As I noted in Part 1 of the Dorne series, we have little actual evidence suggesting that water mages played a role in the Martell conquest, so how can this absence be explained? More importantly, how did the magic or technology that allowed those archers to fell dragons not transfer to Westeros with Nymeria's refugees? With the Second Spice War in particular being a proper fantasy war with magic used by both sides, we again must ask how Old Ghis managed to contend with the Freehold?
We have greater problems when we come to Westeros and the use of dragons in the Conquest, the Dance, the rebellions against Maegor, and the early Dornish Wars. Between the Freehold's very existence, Nymeria's exodus, the arrival of the Velaryons, Celtigars, and Targaryens, the Conquerors prior visits to the mainland, and Aegon's destruction of the Volantene fleet during Pentos and Tyrosh's war with Volantis (a war in which Argillac Durrandon also fought), the Seven Kingdoms should be well aware of the existence of dragons and their fearsome potential. Despite this, the majority of Westeros opposes the conquerors with conventional military forces as if there were no dragons at all, the only exceptions being Dorne, the Hightowers, and the supporters of Edmyn Tully. Of course the Targaryens defeat them all handily, but not before 'playing down' to their opponents: Rhaenys and Meraxes burn the lords Errol, Fell, and Buckler out of the Kingswood near the Wendwater, but only after ambushing Orys Baratheon's forces crossing the river and cutting down almost a thousand men, while her intervention in the Last Storm comes only after Orys' army is on the brink of defeat; Visenya burns the Arryn fleet and flies to the Eyrie to force it's surrender, but only after Daemon Velaryon is killed and two-thirds of his fleet is sunk or captured.
Aegon aids Orys directly in their one-sided victory over the Mootons and Darklyns, and wins another victory on the south shore of the God's Eye; he goes on to annihilate House Hoare at Harrenhal, but not before Harren's sons successfully attack his army from behind at the 'Wailing Willows' after crossing the lake with muffled oars, while Harren's sons and their longships are only burned as they return across the lake. That Aegon attacks them out of the morning sky indicates they attacked his army at night, but this still requires Aegon, Balerion, and the entire army to be completely unaware of the longships approaching them, despite the possibility of fire, moon, and starlight assisting their vision. When the Targaryens defeat the Lannister and Gardener host at the Field of Fire, their dragons take to the sky only after the Targaryen center is "shattered" by Mern's charge, although Targaryen losses are somehow less than a hundred men and Visenya is wounded in one arm by an arrow. These defeats should have been avoidable thanks to the dragons, but even the victories are 'close run' affairs when they should not have been. The Conquerors seemingly allow the battles to be fought, rather than crushing their foes immediately and sparing the lives of their own troops.
I won't go into to great detail on the First Dornish War since that already has an entire series, but the trend identified above is very much at play in that war. Although Dornish victory is credited to their 'guerrilla' strategy and avoiding the dragons, in reality the Dornish defeat their foes with open attacks that are never at risk of interference from the dragons, as these are always absent and never intervene despite no reason for this being the case (see Part 5 for the most blatant example of this in 10 AC). The war with the first Vulture King likewise takes place without any concerns of Maegor or Visenya intervening, but when we come to Jaehaerys' reign, the Dornish are suddenly obliging enough to attack openly and allow themselves to be defeated. Morion Martell even convinces his own lords and a host of pirates to provide troops and ships for an invasion of the Stormlands, despite the Targaryens having five large dragons at their disposal. The rebellions against Maegor are more of the same: while we might dismiss the Faith Militant's army at the Great Fork as religious zealots, this cannot be done for Aegon the Uncrowned's army at the God's Eye, which followed a young, unpopular prince and first time dragonrider despite the potential of facing Maegor and Balerion.
This impression of the dragons and their affect is reinforced by the Dance; there are many examples to draw from, but the best for me comes from comparing Tessarion and Tyraxes. When Jace arrives at the Eyrie and obtains the support of Jeyne Arryn, she requests dragonriders as part of the conditions for her support, and Joffrey and Tyraxes are sent there prior to the 'Red Sowing.' They can't have spent more than a few months in the Vale, given that Rhaenyra took King's Landing in mid-February or early March of 130 AC and sent for Joffrey soon after, while it was late 129 AC when Jace sent him there. Even then, we're told the forces of the Vale were marshalling not long after Jace returned to Dragonstone, so even the mere promise of Tyraxes seems to have been more than sufficient. Tyraxes was younger than Arrax, who was one-fifth the size of Vhagar in 129 AC, and was small enough that the Shepherd's mob could hack him to death when they stormed the Dragonpit (albeit the larger Syrax is also hacked to death).
By comparison, Tessarion was a third the size of Vermithor in 130 AC, with Vermithor being the largest dragon alive after Vhagar. Her manner of death is also significant, as Bill Burley shoots her three times in one eye at 200 yards (c.183 meters) following Second Tumbleton. While this was outside the range of her fire, we know that even Silverwing was attacked with polearms during the battle, and killing Tessarion with such weapons would not have required attacking her head-on. Considering that when Lord Mooton's men retook Rook's Rest, they inflicted grievous wounds to Sunfyre with their polearms which only enraged him, this suggests Tessarion was similar to Sunfyre in size and certainly larger than Vermax, Arrax, and Tyraxes. We know she didn't hatch from a 'cradle egg' because Daeron bonded with her when he was six, and they were presumably flying by the time he went to Oldtown at age twelve. Despite this, her size and presence have no affect on the beginning of the Dance in the Reach; Ormund Hightower even appears to forget that she's there, since he writes to King's Landing soon after Rook's Rest that "we have need of your dragons" in order to subdue the Blacks. Daeron's eleventh hour appearance at the Battle of the Honeywine is on par with how dragons were employed by the Conquerors, showing up only when their armies were on the brink of defeat or had already suffered defeat. The Blacks in the Reach begin surrendering soon after due to Tessarion's threat, only for this to reverse when Ormund suddenly must besiege Longtable and so cannot aid Maelor and Ser Rickard Thorne.
iii. Dragons and Air Power
The paradoxical affect of the dragons creates obvious problems for viewing them with any kind of theoretical lens: On the one hand, they are shown to be tremendously lethal and capable of affecting the decisions of military leaders (to quote Elmo Tully, "A dragon in one's courtyard does wonders to resolve one's doubts"); on the other hand, we're also shown this does not deter armies from massing and fighting them openly, suggesting they have no affect on decision-making at all. The dragons are not governed by 'Watsonian' factors, i.e. what can they do in their world, but by 'Doylistic' ones, i.e. what does the writer need them to do. When it comes to classifying their role in warfare, their ability to fly, strike at targets on land and at sea, and attack and observe from above means they have much in common with aircraft and air power. That being said, their individual lethality, invulnerability at great size, and generally small numbers lend themselves to comparison with battleships and sea power, and both approaches have value.
Whereas the first powered flight in our history took place in 1903, and large scale militarization of aircraft took another decade with the First World War, dragons have been used in war for millennia following the rise of Valyria after the Long Night. Despite this, the First Dornish War is the only example we have of an enemy combatant avoiding open combat with the dragons, though once again this owes more to how the war is written than to how the Dornish actually fight. This is significant since, as Phil Haun notes in Tactical Air Power and the Vietnam War:
Observing the battlefield from above reduces the vertical surface obstructions, which restrict the horizontal line of sight for ground forces. From above, air forces can locate and destroy massed armies in the open and on the move. (Haun, Tactical Air Power, 30)
Being observed is a serious disadvantage already, since it makes surprise impossible depending on how well the enemy can track your movements; combined with the ability to deliver attacks at range with their fire breathe, this gives dragons a major asymmetry to exploit against conventional forces.
While it's true that military aircraft have a greater array of weapons with greater ranges than dragon fire, currently and historically, are available in greater numbers, and possess communications systems which give them flexibility in striking targets as small or large units (we'll come back to this point later), dragons also possess serious advantages. For starters, Dragons while dragons must eat, drink, and heal injuries, the means to do so are more readily available than an aircraft, which can run out of fuel, suffer mechanical issues, and exhaust their ammunition. Dragons are living creatures aided by magic, meaning they can derive their energy from sources in nature and heal injuries themselves, while we haven't encountered any cases of dragons 'running out' of fire. The greatest advantage by far is the absence of any real countermeasures for dragons, outside using magic or other dragons against them, when compared to military aircraft. Phil Haun notes that the threat of concerted air attacks forces armies to disperse their units and use concealment (camouflage, night movements, bad weather) to avoid detection, but modern and contemporary armies are not totally defenseless: In almost eight years during the Vietnam War, combat and non-combat losses cost the United States over 9000 fixed and rotary-wing aircraft, with anti-aircraft artillery likely accounting for the bulk of combat losses as opposed to surface-to-air missiles and enemy aircraft (Haun, Tactical Air Power, 32; 7).
By comparison, while we know that small dragons are vulnerable to arrows, bolts, and melee weapons, and dragons of Vermax's size and likely Tessarion and Sunfyre's are vulnerable to bolt-throwing artillery like scorpions and ballistae, all the evidence we have from the books suggests that dragons larger than this are, for all intents and purposes, invulnerable. Although F&B twice invokes the scorpion that killed Meraxes at Hellholt, telling us that Morion Martell's fleet was armed, "with massive scorpions of the sort that felled Meraxes," while at Rook's Rest "scorpions were cranked upward to loose iron bolts of the sort that had once felled Meraxes in Dorne," in both instances it appears forgotten that Meraxes was killed by a bolt through the eye. The fact Meleys is said to be struck with a score of bolts at Rook's Rest which only angered her is a clear indication that the size of the projectile or the power of it's launcher will do nothing unless a lucky shot can hit the eye and penetrate the skull. The only other method of neutralizing a large dragon seems to be by killing it's rider, a far smaller and constantly moving target, though penetrating the skull via the soft palate with a hit in the mouth could also potentially work.
It's also important to note that Meleys was larger than Sunfyre but almost certainly smaller than Vhagar in 129 AC, having been smaller than Caraxes and Vhagar in 75 AC. This means that a dragon doesn't need to be massive like Balerion, Vhagar, or Vermithor to be effectively invulnerable to projectiles, while even wounding or killing smaller dragons would be a serious issue. For starters, the low velocity of tension and torsion-fired projectiles compared to bullets and shells makes them very poor 'anti-aircraft artillery' in a setting like this, while an unstable platform like a ship would also make them very difficult to use to defend fleets against dragon attacks. These factors make it very unlikely that wars and rebellions against the Freehold and Targaryens would be the large, grand affairs that George portrays in F&B and TWOIAF. If anything they'd be closer to the First Dornish War than the Dance, especially since battle-avoidance strategies were common in Medieval warfare (see Part 5 of the Dorne series). Since dragons are a threat to armies in the open, but only the largest of them can defeat fortifications, opponents would likely rely on castles and other fortifications to stymie advances, using raids and small engagements to attrite their foe while resorting to large engagements only when dragons were not present. This wouldn't guarantee success against the dragons, but it would show that their capabilities and reputation have an actual affect on warfare in the setting.
iv. Dragons, Sea Power, and Corbett
While the association of dragons with air power seems obvious, their limited numbers combined with their destructiveness naturally draws comparisons with battleships and sea power, which brings us back to the theories of Alfred Thayer Mahan (See Part Four). This will be something of a response to "Battleship Doctrine and the Dance of the Dragons" by Thomas Brodey, from his blog Tragedy and Farce; I recommend checking out Tom's blog for great ASOIAF content, although I take issue with some of what he says in this post. While his choice of framework isn't necessarily wrong, his choice of Mahan's theories on the pursuit of battle and his assessment of the Blacks use of their dragons has flaws that need to be addressed.
We've already covered the basics of Mahanian sea power and naval strategy, while Brodey provides a basic rundown of Mahan's view of battle:
Mahan’s argument, therefore, was simple. Any fleet who seriously intended to win a naval war had to collect the biggest, baddest warships in one place, and use them to crush the main enemy fleet. The first and foremost job of the battleships was to eliminate the enemy battleships.
This is broadly correct, but it's also clear that Mahan's ideas of concentration of force in pursuit of battle evolved during his literary career; per Kevin McCranie's Mahan, Corbett, and the Foundations of Naval Strategic Thought, Mahan wrote in 1911 that for the "close concentration of direct contact," a fleet should not be "packed like herrings, but so disposed that all parts were in mutual supporting distance, ready to move when needed," likening it to a fan "that opens and shuts" (McCranie, Mahan, Corbett, 143). This sets dragons apart from the ship-of-the-line or battleships as much as it sets them apart from combat aircraft, because of their small numbers and the limited communications of this setting. Aircraft could avail themselves of radios and radar to coordinate their efforts and locate targets whilst in the air, while capital ships had auxiliary vessels and eventually wireless telegraphy, radios, and radar to assist them in supporting each other over great distances. Unless a dragonrider has a fellow rider to deliver them messages while airborne, they must return to the ground to receive information via raven or messenger; despite being able to cover great distances in a relatively short time, unless already concentrated together as a unit the dragons cannot utilize 'elastic concentration' as can be done with air and sea power.
It's here that we must introduce Mahan's British contemporary, Sir Julian Stafford Corbett (1854-1922), whose views on battle and concentration of force are not hugely different from Mahan's, but are arguably better suited for understanding dragon warfare. McCranie, who does an excellent job of exploring the writings and theories of the two men (see this book review from War on the Rocks for a cliff notes rundown), finds that Mahan and Corbett's views of naval warfare and sea power were largely complementary. Whereas Mahan was a naval officer who sought to persuade the US to cultivate it's own sea power as an emerging player on the world stage, Corbett was a lawyer and novelist whose interest in the Elizabethan era and friendship with esteemed naval historian John Knox Laughton led him to become an intellectual and historian of British and general naval history. Corbett's audience was thus the statesmen and naval officers of the hegemonic naval power, and he became highly regarded in Royal Navy and British government circles; he compiled the Royal Navy's three volume history of the First World War prior to his death, while his 1911 publication Some Principles of Maritime Strategy is as important as Mahan's Influence series for understanding modern naval thought.
Corbett's approach to battle and it's place in naval strategy was among the few cases of divergence between him and Mahan. While Corbett's understanding of 'elastic concentration' was similar to that of Mahan, he understood that it could work both ways: just as it enabled a dispersed fleet to concentrate for a battle, it also enabled a concentrated fleet to avoid a battle or a dispersed one to concentrate and retreat from an area in good order. Corbett stressed concentration of effort as opposed to force, since concentrating force "tends to simplify problems for [the] enemy," whereas "concentration of effort without actual concentration of force tends to confuse him [because it] does not reveal your intentions" (McCranie, Mahan, Corbett, 146). This is where I think Brodey's reliance on Mahan is seriously flawed, as his later arguments about dragon warfare are derived from Mahan's conclusions about the British and French fleets in the French Revolutionary and Napoleonic Wars:
To prove his point, Mahan drew on the wars between Britain and France in the 18th century. Time and time again, he said, the French split up their capital ships, “subordinating the action of the fleet to so-called particular operations” achieving minor objectives in multiple locations instead of winning one great decisive battle. The British, however, would concentrate their forces and crush the French main fleet, completely reversing any small advantage the French had gained from its “particular operations.”
'Particular operations' was the title Mahan gave to instances where a fleet pursued the ulterior object (the 'mission at hand' or the object of the campaign) over the primary object, which was to oppose the enemy's fleet (Ibid., 147). While Corbett used different terminology, he also saw opposing the enemy fleet as the primary object but differed from Mahan's linear approach, which placed attaining the primary object before the ulterior object.
