Did the Boltons support the Blackfyres?

[The Bard of Banefort]

This conversation sprouted up in another thread, so I thought I’d start a new one to better discuss this question in detail.

We saw many of the Paramount Houses’ rivals rally behind the Blackfyres in an attempt to gain more power for themselves (Yronwood, Frey, Reyne, etc). The Boltons have tried to usurp the Starks for thousands of years. How likely do you find it that they supported the Black Dragon in some capacity in hopes of finally taking the North for themselves? 

[Lord Lannister]

The North seemed to largely stay out of the Blackfyre Rebellions. 

[The Young Maester]

We’ve never heard of them being rebellious during the Targaryen reign.

It seems pretty suicidal for the Boltons to do that when the starks didn’t even lift a finger to fight the blackfyres. 

[Floki of the Ironborn]

1 hour ago, Lord Lannister said:

The North seemed to largely stay out of the Blackfyre Rebellions. 

This. 

And I'm pretty sure they were preoccupied with a Skagosi rebellion, Ironborn raids, and a succession crisis at Winterfell which involved a Targaryen prince and his seven-foot-tall bestie.

[Lord Varys]

Oh, I don't know, perhaps it even turns out that House Stark itself was split between the Red Dragon and the Black. We know Jonnel Stark succeeded his father, old Cregan, but Edric Stark never became lord nor - and that's really significant - Edric's sons by his niece Serena Cregard and Torrhen. Regardless of their age they should have been next in line after Jonnel died without issue.

One possible explanation for this could be that Jonnel Stark stood with the Red Dragon during the Blackfyre Rebellion but Edric teamed up with Daemon Blackfyre. That way he and his entire bloodline may have been disinherited - assuming he even survived the war.

[James Steller]

1 hour ago, Lord Varys said:

Oh, I don't know, perhaps it even turns out that House Stark itself was split between the Red Dragon and the Black. We know Jonnel Stark succeeded his father, old Cregan, but Edric Stark never became lord nor - and that's really significant - Edric's sons by his niece Serena Cregard and Torrhen. Regardless of their age they should have been next in line after Jonnel died without issue.

One possible explanation for this could be that Jonnel Stark stood with the Red Dragon during the Blackfyre Rebellion but Edric teamed up with Daemon Blackfyre. That way he and his entire bloodline may have been disinherited - assuming he even survived the war.

I spy a likely plot point in The She-Wolves of Winterfell. That whole series revolves around the Blackfyre Rebellions. 

And personally, I don't think the Boltons will be so foolish as to back a usurper in the south. If anyone's going to be desperate or dumb enough to do that, it's going to be members of the ruling family. They'll simultaneously be in a position with little to lose, and also claiming kinship with the ruling family, so the matter of possible kinslaying muddies the waters. The North will rally to House Stark, so it has to be House Stark that's divided. And I doubt the Stark rebels would be able to rally many followers, so the issue won't require that much military intervention. 

[frenin]

4 hours ago, Lord Varys said:

One possible explanation for this could be that Jonnel Stark stood with the Red Dragon during the Blackfyre Rebellion but Edric teamed up with Daemon Blackfyre. That way he and his entire bloodline may have been disinherited - assuming he even survived the war

The Starks were fighting and dying in Skagos around the time of the rebellion, so it seems pretty unlikely that either gave a damn.

Given how hot the Skagosi were and that not long after the Iron born came and that northmen are traditionally isolationist, it's unlikely that during those years the North lift a finger for either pretender.

[The Bard of Banefort]

It seems unlikely that the Blackfyres, who were trying to overthrow the anointed king, wouldn’t have reached out to the North and Iron Islands to maximize their odds of winning, no matter how separated both regions were to southron politics. I’m thinking that the Boltons, being the clever little devils that they are, probably supported Daemon in some kind of covert way, much like the Hightowers and Butterwells did, in order to keep their hands clean. 

[The Bard of Banefort]

I just looked up Stark-Bolton marriages, and apparently there have never been any, which seems odd. All the other kingdoms have used marriage to subdue rivalries (most recently in the case of Theon’s parents, which might explain how Balon wasn’t deposed by his bannermen after his first rebellion). But apparently not so in the North; not even that nice young Bolton girl who went to Aegon III’s cattle show to ask for more food for the smallfolk. 

[Hugorfonics]

15 hours ago, The Bard of Banefort said:

The Boltons have tried to usurp the Starks for thousands of years

They tried to usurp the Starks thousands of years ago, and now. I dont believe that means that Boltons have tried to usurp the Starks for thousands of years. 

Why would the creepy Dreadfort still exist if Stark doubted their loyalty? See chequy lion. 

[The Bard of Banefort]

10 minutes ago, Hugorfonics said:

They tried to usurp the Starks thousands of years ago, and now. I dont believe that means that Boltons have tried to usurp the Starks for thousands of years. 

Why would the creepy Dreadfort still exist if Stark doubted their loyalty? See chequy lion. 

Why do the Yronwoods still exist? 
 

(Actually, that’s a legitimate question. Why haven’t the Yronwoods been run out of town yet?) 

[Hugorfonics]

7 minutes ago, The Bard of Banefort said:

Why do the Yronwoods still exist? 
 

(Actually, that’s a legitimate question. Why haven’t the Yronwoods been run out of town yet?) 

Good question. 

Id say that unlike Bolton/Frey and more like Florent/whomever in the Reach theres an actual historical record of Yornwood being top dog. This makes it more difficult to genocide a family and uproot its ancient fortress. Public perception and what not.

Furthermore, does Sunspear have the resources to annihilate a great house? (No, they dont)

 

Kings and princes may think theyre untouchable, see Aerys II, but in reality theyre feudal cravens who must take their subjects wants seriously or all hell brakes loose, see Robb

[Lord Varys]

9 hours ago, James Steller said:

I spy a likely plot point in The She-Wolves of Winterfell. That whole series revolves around the Blackfyre Rebellions. 

The Dunk & Egg story would take place much later than that, but one imagines that Serena Stark might be one of the widows in question, challenging the right of the other women to rule ... or even trying to claim Winterfell herself, finally, or for one of her children or grandchildren.

9 hours ago, James Steller said:

And personally, I don't think the Boltons will be so foolish as to back a usurper in the south. If anyone's going to be desperate or dumb enough to do that, it's going to be members of the ruling family. They'll simultaneously be in a position with little to lose, and also claiming kinship with the ruling family, so the matter of possible kinslaying muddies the waters. The North will rally to House Stark, so it has to be House Stark that's divided. And I doubt the Stark rebels would be able to rally many followers, so the issue won't require that much military intervention. 

I'd not be so keen to assume the North would be rallying to House Stark if certain lords declare their allegiance to House Blackfyre. They are not necessarily challenging Winterfell by doing this. And Lord Manderly declared for Rhaenyra when visited by Jace before double-checking whether Lord Cregan would follow suit. He didn't care whether the Lord of Winterfell would go Green. We also see how various Reach houses did what they wanted back during the Dance with the Tyrells staying out of it entirely. The Starks could do something similar if they wanted to ... or if they had other fishs to fry.

7 hours ago, frenin said:

The Starks were fighting and dying in Skagos around the time of the rebellion, so it seems pretty unlikely that either gave a damn.

The Skagos Rebellion also happens during the reign of Daeron II, but we don't know when exactly. What we do know, though, is that Lord Barthogan Blacksword Stark dies during that rebellion, meaning that - assuming this rebellion took place after 196 AC (and keep in mind that Daeron II ruled until 209 AC) - the events leading to the death of Jonnel and Edric Stark might have been part of the Blackfyre Rebellion.

7 hours ago, frenin said:

Given how hot the Skagosi were and that not long after the Iron born came and that northmen are traditionally isolationist, it's unlikely that during those years the North lift a finger for either pretender.

So far nothing indicates the North was particularly involved in the Blackfyre Rebellion. But we have to wait and see whether that's truly the case or not.

The Ironborn crisis only started after the death of Daeron II - the Great Spring Sickness and the drought that followed it. This has nothing to do with the earlier situation.

And one has to keep in mind that the Starks really died like flies after the death of Cregan. We have Jonnel as the first son succeeding his father, then Edric apparently dies because he doesn't succeed Jonnel, Barthogan dies during the Skagos Rebellion and is followed by his brother Brandon. Then comes Brandon's elder son Rodwell who dies without issue, and only then the Lord Beron who is slowly dying from a wound as per TMK.

All this can indicate that there were multiple problems in the North one of which certainly could have been fighting during and following the Blackfyre Rebellion.

2 hours ago, The Bard of Banefort said:

I just looked up Stark-Bolton marriages, and apparently there have never been any, which seems odd. All the other kingdoms have used marriage to subdue rivalries (most recently in the case of Theon’s parents, which might explain how Balon wasn’t deposed by his bannermen after his first rebellion). But apparently not so in the North; not even that nice young Bolton girl who went to Aegon III’s cattle show to ask for more food for the smallfolk. 

I'd expect that there were Bolton-Stark marriages back before the Conquest when they made peace after their wars, etc. But the fact that we have no such marriages in the tree may have to do with the fact that George (1) didn't want Roose to give a blood claim to Winterfell by being some (distant) Stark cousin which could have been used as pretext to claim Winterfell himself (this would also be the reason, I imagine, because the Starks didn't intermarry with very prestigious Northern houses in the recent past) and (2) there wasn't supposed to be any kinship between Roose and Robb to explain the depth of his later betrayal.

I'd also expect that the crueler and uglier Stark kings of old were such with Bolton ancestors - and they could have turned out to be dead ends in the family tree.

2 hours ago, Hugorfonics said:

They tried to usurp the Starks thousands of years ago, and now. I dont believe that means that Boltons have tried to usurp the Starks for thousands of years. 

Why would the creepy Dreadfort still exist if Stark doubted their loyalty? See chequy lion. 

The Boltons and Yronwoods never tried to usurp the Starks before Roose (as far as we know). All they wanted was their independence and the restoration of their previously existing independent kingdoms. There is a difference between taking over a kingdom and regaining your independence.

And it is quite clear that this kind of rebellion rarely leads to the eradication of an entire house. And both with Boltons and Yronwoods we should expect that the Starks/Martells never truly broke them ... but simply enforced their submission sort of like Aegon the Conqueror did with the Starks, Arryns, and Lannisters.

[The Jingo]

10 hours ago, Hugorfonics said:

They tried to usurp the Starks thousands of years ago, and now. I dont believe that means that Boltons have tried to usurp the Starks for thousands of years. 

Why would the creepy Dreadfort still exist if Stark doubted their loyalty? See chequy lion. 

The Boltons could very well have a history of frequent rebellions and attempted usurpations.

In order for a House to be destroyed root and stem like Tywin wiped out the Tarbecks and Reynes you need a complete and total military victory. Otherwise the final peace settlement is going to be weighted on the situation on the ground. If the Boltons and Starks wage an enormous war and bled each other white and realize that if they keep going they'll both be crushed by other houses who see their mutual destruction as an opportunity, then they'll come to some form of peace that doesn't involve the annihilation of one or the other. A Bolton victory might see some ancient Red King rights restored, a Stark victory might see a minor holdfast or two change hands, maybe this person or that person is sent to take the Black, ect.

We don't have a sketched out history for the territorial development of the North or when exactly the wars took place, so we don't know how the borders shifted or what the outcome was of these wars.

[The Bard of Banefort]

It would actually make more sense if the Starks and Boltons did frequently intermarry, that way kinslaying would be a plausible excuse for why the Boltons weren’t put down. 

[Lord Varys]

1 hour ago, The Bard of Banefort said:

It would actually make more sense if the Starks and Boltons did frequently intermarry, that way kinslaying would be a plausible excuse for why the Boltons weren’t put down. 

I don't think this could explain anything, to be honest. A close kinship could stop either side from murdering the other ... but it wouldn't stop the Kings in the North from attainting the Boltons and reducing them to beggars, granting the Dreadfort and their lands and holdings to loyal men of their own choosing.

That is basically how you destroy noble houses, not by physically destroying them. That's the kind of over-the-top thing some of the mad guys in the books do - Maegor, Aemond, Tywin, Aerys II, etc.

I'd expect that none of the agreements the Starks ever had with the Boltons involved what we would call an unconditional surrender. Rather there would have been compromises and deals which, at times, would have included the execution or imprisonment of certain crucial Bolton criminals - like the folks who skinned Stark princes or kings and ended up wearing them as cloaks - while the Dreadfort and the Bolton lordship would have gone to another scion of the house.

In that sense the Boltons wouldn't be much different than the Yronwoods or the Peakes - the latter of which really survived a lot of shit when you compare them to the Strongs or Harroways.

[Corvus Black]

Not that we know of, and I think it would be significant enough to be noted if they did.

[The WolfSpider]

I think there's a good chance.  It fits the pattern of the #2 house in a region joining the Blackfyres. Plenty of those houses survived their rebellions and the Dreadfort is proven strong. GRRM only gives us what he wants to give us and is entirely probable he will drop a bomb just like this on us down the road. 

 

Also I have been waiting for a strong Bolton/ Dragon connection.  Blood and Fire,  Fire and Blood; nobody has more blood symbolism around them than the Boltons.

[The WolfSpider]

On 5/28/2021 at 10:31 AM, Hugorfonics said:

Good question. 

Id say that unlike Bolton/Frey and more like Florent/whomever in the Reach theres an actual historical record of Yornwood being top dog. This makes it more difficult to genocide a family and uproot its ancient fortress. Public perception and what not.

Furthermore, does Sunspear have the resources to annihilate a great house? (No, they dont)

 

Kings and princes may think theyre untouchable, see Aerys II, but in reality theyre feudal cravens who must take their subjects wants seriously or all hell brakes loose, see Robb

But that doesn't look at the whole picture.  It seems that except for House Peake most everyone that joined the Blackfyres did so without serious repercussions.

I don't know how important lineage would be, certainly didn't help the Starks.

 

And lastly:  I think it's premature to say the Martells are without the necessary resources. IF the numbers Doran claimed are accurate that does not take into account gold and I think the Martells have that in spades and are at least the third wealthiest family in Westeros. But if the rest of Westeros can be mistaken about how many spears they can call then they can certainly be wrong about treasury and who knows maybe they're the wealthiest.

[The Wondering Wolf]

5 hours ago, The WolfSpider said:

It seems that except for House Peake most everyone that joined the Blackfyres did so without serious repercussions.

I am not sure this is true. While the Peakes are the ones we know about, I expect other houses to have lost lands and gold, too. The Worldbook states:

In the aftermath, King Daeron showed a sternness that few expected. Many lords and knights who had supported the Black Dragon had lands and seats and privileges stripped from them and were forced to give over hostages.

We actually don't really know about many houses that fully supported the Blackfyres, but we know the Osgreys and the Three Sisters had to pay for their treason.