Jump to content

What would have happened if Daemon Blackfyre waited until after the spring sickness to rebel?


The Merling King

Recommended Posts

What do you think would have happened if Daemon Blackfyre stayed loyal to King Daeron and waited until after the spring sickness to rebel, when the drought and ironborn raiding, would have brought anti-Targaryen sentiment to an all-time high?

Could King Aerys, Bloodraven, Prince Meakar & his family defeat Daemon without the leadership of King Daeron II and Prince Baelor Breakspear, assuming the Blackfyres gets the same support in 210ac as he did in 196ac

Link to comment
Share on other sites

It certainly would have been a different war. It's tough to say unless you propose some hypotheticals for how the blackfyres would be affected too. Do they take that extra time to prepare? Are all the main supporters still alive? 

If everything else still more or less plays out the same, I'd have to think that it would end fairly similarly. Daeron II wasn't a warrior king but he had a hand and a son who could. Bloodraven just replaces Breakspear. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Honestly, I doubt it would've made a difference. The Second Blackfyre "Rebellion" was timed against the sickness after all. Plus "the same support" wouldn't be the case. The sickness wouldn't discriminate against red or black dragons and their supporters. The ironborn are an annoyance, but they're not actually going to tip the scales. It's just as likely they'd do something like raid against the Blackfyre supporters as it would be a "safe" act. The long and short of it was the Blackfyres never had the support in place to topple the Targaryens. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

30 minutes ago, The Merling King said:

What do you think would have happened if Daemon Blackfyre stayed loyal to King Daeron and waited until after the spring sickness to rebel, when the drought and ironborn raiding, would have brought anti-Targaryen sentiment to an all-time high?

Could King Aerys, Bloodraven, Prince Meakar & his family defeat Daemon without the leadership of King Daeron II and Prince Baelor Breakspear, assuming the Blackfyres gets the same support in 210ac as he did in 196ac

there's a chance that Daemon wouldn't have needed a rebellion to sit the throne in that scenario. think about it.. he was popular (something that cannot be said for his sons ,none of whom hadn't live in court) , he had time to charm even more courtiers (maybe even the dornish through alliances)  , Aerys didn't want kingship , Maekar was a kinslayer , realm was in chaos and even Bloodraven might have given him his support in that situation.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 12/26/2021 at 12:08 PM, Lord Lannister said:

The long and short of it was the Blackfyres never had the support in place to topple the Targaryens. 

It does make me wonder why people think the Blackfyres had a legit chance of winning the first or third rebellion with little to no support from the great houses. If you exclude the minor houses and ones that backed both sides, we are basically left with maybe the Peakes, Yronwoods, Brackens and Reynes. 

King Daeron and Baelor Breakspear and even Bloodraven and Maekar were much stronger and secure then King Aerys and Rhaegar and it took 4 L.P.’s to overthrow the latter.
 

Was Eustace and the other Black dragon supporters just exaggerating and being overly nostalgic, because even if they won the Redgrass Field, there would still be a dozen Targaryens left inside Kingslanding.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, The Merling King said:

It does make me wonder why people think the Blackfyres had a legit chance of winning the first or third rebellion with little to no support from the great houses. If you exclude the minor houses and ones that backed both sides, we are basically left with maybe the Peakes, Yronwoods, Brackens and Reynes. 

King Daeron and Baelor Breakspear and even Bloodraven and Maekar were much stronger and secure then King Aerys and Rhaegar and it took 4 L.P.’s to overthrow the latter.
 

Was Eustace and the other Black dragon supporters just exaggerating and being overly nostalgic, because even if they won the Redgrass Field, there would still be a dozen Targaryens left inside Kingslanding.

Eustace is a biased source, but keep in mind, just because the great houses officially sided with the crown, that doesn’t mean all their bannermen followed suit. Eustace talks about how many great knights joined with Daemon, how many warriors. They had to have come from somewhere, not just from the houses which openly declared for Daemon. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, Canon Claude said:

Eustace is a biased source, but keep in mind, just because the great houses officially sided with the crown, that doesn’t mean all their bannermen followed suit. Eustace talks about how many great knights joined with Daemon, how many warriors. They had to have come from somewhere, not just from the houses which openly declared for Daemon. 

It sounds like Daemon Blackfyre was similar to Renly Baratheon in his ability to attract the Westerosi warrior class of younger sons, hedge knights and free riders to his cause. Plus even the partial support of house Hightower, Lothstron, Frey, Tarbeck and Oakheart etc, could have produced a substantial levy.

I am very curious about what happened in the Stormlands. We are told of fighting in the Vale and Stormlands but not if it was against external or internal houses. The only house in either region that is confirmed to have supported the Blackfyres was the Sunderlands and Sistermen probably could not do much more then raid the coasts of the Vale, which seemed to be heavily loyalist.

As for the Stormlands, the only house we know that definitely supported one side prior to the Red Grass field, were the Penrose's and probably the Dondarions because of marriage ties to the Targs.  I wonder if the other marchers like Caron’s and Selmys originally backed the Blackfyres and if the Baratheons sat it out like they did durring the Dance until Baelor Breakspear personally showed at Storms End. We know very little about the Targaryen-Baratheon relationship between the dance and the Blackfyre rebellions and the Baratheon’s could have arguably gained more from the Blackfyres.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 12/26/2021 at 12:06 PM, Universal Sword Donor said:

It certainly would have been a different war. It's tough to say unless you propose some hypotheticals for how the blackfyres would be affected too. Do they take that extra time to prepare? Are all the main supporters still alive? 

If everything else still more or less plays out the same, I'd have to think that it would end fairly similarly. Daeron II wasn't a warrior king but he had a hand and a son who could. Bloodraven just replaces Breakspear. 

To eliminate some of those butterflies, I could revise the question too, what if Daemon Blackfyre II was killed at the Whitewalls Tourney and Bittersteel and Haegon Blackfyre invade earlier but I agree the Targaryens would most likely still come out on top.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

The Blackfyres may have had better chances in that scenario. Aerys I wasn't a popular king, Bloodraven was widely hated through he realm and many people blamed him for the drought, and Maekar had retired at Summerhall. Without Daeron II, Baelor and Lord Daemon Lannister, it seems likely that fewer lords would turn to the leaderless cause of a heirless king.

But on the other hand, with Bloodraven already in control, he may have put an end to Daemon's rebellion before it started, just like he did with the second one.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.

×
×
  • Create New...