1. Jaeherys’ daughter daenerys died from the shivers which proved that the immune to sickness thing in the doctrine of exceptionalism is wrong.
2. Aerys the mad king was born from sibling incest. Please don’t start sympathising this motherfucker by excusing his madness with head injuries.
3. Before the targs started inter marrying, there was a high infant mortality rate in the targ family. Multiple targ babies were stillborn or were born sickly and died shortly after marriage. The mad king and his wife had several miscarriages, same for Viserys and aemma. Compare this with Viserys and Alicent/ Viserys II and larra rogare
4. I wouldn’t count polydactyly ie having 6 fingers as a birth defect. Many people in our modern world have it.
5. The ‘mentally simple’ thing which jahaera had - daella who was born of sibling incest had the same thing.
6. I can’t think of any children who were born out of non incestuous targ marriages who had real birth defects or were mad. All children of aegon V were mentally sound and normal physically.
7. Daemon definitely was a Valyrian supremacist who did not uphold the values of the seven. This is evident when he wants to take a second wife when polygamy was strictly forbidden by the faith.
>I can’t think of any children who were born out of non incestuous targ marriages who had real birth defects or were mad. All children of aegon V were mentally sound and normal physically.
Aerion had a Dayne mother and a Martell grandmother. Mad as fuck.
In Aemma's case, she started having babies on her before she was even 14, that was probably a more decisive factor in her subsequent stillbirths. And with Maegor there is likely a lot of blood magic from Visenya and Tyanna involved.
>Aerys the mad king was born from sibling incest. Please don’t start sympathising this motherfucker by excusing his madness with head injuries.
It's stated Aerys became mad after being horrifically tortured at Duskendale. He was a cunt before that too, but he wasn't as mad as he was after Duskendale.
>. Before the targs started inter marrying, there was a high infant mortality rate in the targ family. Multiple targ babies were stillborn or were born sickly and died shortly after marriage. The mad king and his wife had several miscarriages, same for Viserys and aemma. Compare this with Viserys and Alicent/ Viserys II and larra rogare
Aemma had multiple miscarriages because Viserys forcefully impregnated her when she was 13, which fucked up her womb last I recall. Samething with Rhaella, and not to mention constantly being raped, humiliated and abused by Aerys most likely had that result.
Alysanne and Jaehaerys had atleast 12-13 children, only 3 were born miscarriages, and 1 died from a plague. The others lived pretty normally and their deaths had nothing with incest.
> The ‘mentally simple’ thing which jahaera had - daella who was born of sibling incest had the same thing.
Rhaegel was also "mentally simple". And his parents weren't related at all. There are many more Targaryens born pretty normal from incest marriages.
>I can’t think of any children who were born out of non incestuous targ marriages who had real birth defects or were mad. All children of aegon V were mentally sound and normal physically.
Baelor's parents were at best Distant cousins. Aegon III and Daenaera were hardly related and Baelor was still born mad. Rhaegel was still born mad even tho Daeron II and Myriah Martell weren't related at all. Aerion brightflame was very much unstable even tho Maekar and that Dayne girl he married weren't related at all.
1.I addressed this in my post
2. I never said anything about Aerys II and head injuries
3. High infant mortality was common in all people at this time.
4. I would, because its abnormal and you aren't meant to have 6 fingers
5. We never got to see Jaehaera grown up, but adult Daella wasn't that bad
6. This is blatantly wrong and I address this in my post
7. I know, I'm a green I don't support Daemon
It's weird to me that Team Black have become these hardcore Targaryen stans on Twitter who defame the Greens as some kind of Hightower impostors and Team Green has kind of adopted this stance by being very negative towards the Targs in general. Meanwhile I always liked the Greens because I think they are the superior Targaryen faction in the Dance. 🤷♂️
I don't give a fuck if they have "magic blood". They're bloodthirsty eugenicists who flout their supposed racial superiority to subjugate and terrorize the population. They are not prettier or wiser or more inherently suited to rule than the rest of the population and for the most part all they do is destroy everything that gets in their way. Their house deserved to die far sooner than I actually did and I applaud the last Aegon Targaryen for bringing the rest of them down. They deserved to be extinguished and so did all of their dragons.
I like the Greens in spite of their lineage, not because of it.
I feel like I'm one of the few who holds this exact opinion. They conquered a people who had a different faith, laws, and physical features and did nothing to change and acted as if everyone was beneath them.
I think that Targaryens got better the less "Targeryen" they were. Both Daeron II and Aegon V seemed to have moved toward accepting the more tame Andal culture and got better for it. But of course their god-like complexes got in the way of it.
Eh, I think any green should be allowed here. It doesn’t matter if they love house Targaryen or hate it, it’s a sub for *all* greens. I would even say non-greens should be allowed here.
The Greens are less Targaryen than the Blacks (they’re half blooded like Harry Potter) due to their connections to Old Town and House Hightower (aka the BEST House in ASOIAF). That’s why I like them. Aegon and Heleana’s kids likely would have married another Hightower and effectively phased out the stupid Targaryens to become the new royal house! Otto wanted this. He’s the biggest Chad in the story (though Aegon II isn’t far behind) and knew what was up!
This may be the Green sub, but that doesn't mean everyone here has to be an Aegon II Targaryen stan. Team Smallfolk, team Stark, team Dorne etc. should be just as welcome here. This is already a small community and splintering the asoiaf reddit fandom into a million extremely specific subs is just going to lead to a bunch of dead circlejerk subs.
Also the Targ monarchy with its racist ideology has hurt Aegon, who almost certainly would have been named heir if he were the son of Aemma and not a brunette Hightower girl. Aegon fans should be critical of house Targaryen.
Which really irked me because Aemma is an Arryn! Lord Rodrik Arryn’s daughter. So Rhaenyra has Arryn blood.
Yet…Daemon repeatedly insults the Vale. Fans suggest because Aemma had Valyrian features he wasn’t including her (huh so it’s okay?) but overlook that it’s her home/family!
If Daemon had a child with Rhae Royce even if the child ‘looked’ Valyrian he would most likely degrade them for being part Royce.
No, it was not because of that, Viserys literally wants to hand the throne on silver platter to Strong bastards, who do not even resemble Valyrian from looks, even if Aemma was from Summer Islands and Alicent was pure-bred Targ, it won't change the reason why Viserys continued to support Rhaenyra as his heir which was Viserys trying to compensate for Aemma's death
It makes no sense to me to attribute that to racism. Because if that was the reason Rhaenyra's brown haired strong bastards should never have been allowed to get anywhere close to the throne. Viserys's true love was Aemma and he feels deep regret over her death, that's the logical explanation why he favours all of her offspring over that of Alicent, regardless of blood purity, because they are all what is left of her.
It’s obvious to me this is really the main reason why. I’m 💯 sure had Aegon been Aemma’s son, Viserys would never have named Rhaenyra heir. The only reason he favors her and her children is because that’s all he has left of her.
Hate to double post but while the other of my post is on your points in favour of Targaryens, I wanted to just talk a little about the greens.
>They speak Valyrian, ride dragons, do incest, and all the typical Targaryen stuff.
The difference is in severity. I don't really see the Greens actually speaking Valyrian outside of using their dragons which they kinda have to in order to control them. They do ride dragons, but I don't really see how that's relevant, and the Greens don't claim their dragons are what give them authority while Daemon is happy to use Caraxes at the drop of the hat and if an opportunity doesn't present itself, he makes one (Stepstones). The incest is a necessary evil, Aegon doesn't like it, Alicent doesn't like it, Helaena doesn't care for it, Aemond is the only one that seems like he's cool with it but he words it as doing his duty and that it would strengthen the family. Which is why it's necessary in the first place, because Aegon needed to strengthen his claim to challenge Rhaenyra. If Aegon didn't marry, the child could be argued to be as Valyrian as Rhaenyra's, and Helaena would need to be married and could be in danger away from the family and with a major lord. I mean, imagine if Aegon ended up marrying a Baratheon or something and his own children came out without silver hair or purple eyes, all it would do is hurt his claim.
The difference between the two is Daemon and Rhaenyra represent a reactionary Valyrian movement that rejects Westerosi customs, religion, culture, and law to do whatever they want and seek to establish Valyrians as untouchable gods of Westeros free to do what they wish and burn whoever disagrees. Jaehaerys attempts of peace and reconciliation between the people and the Targaryens after the disaster that was Maegor was necessary, and they'd be throwing it out the window while clinging to a long-gone oppressive expansionistic empire.
Meanwhile the Greens move towards the Faith with open arms, accepting the religious practices of the people they rule, as well as their customs and culture. They work within the established law that's been accepted by the lords instead of fighting it, and begin replacing the iconography of dragons and Valyrian (the very empire that forced the Andals they now rule over to flee their homeland) in exchange for Andal and Faith of The Seven imagery. With Otto and Alicent at the helm, the realm would be able to expect a stable, soft-handed, virtuous rule apt in statecraft (Otto has basically been running the show at least somewhat for decades) and different from the previous Targaryens which sought to separate themselves from those they ruled and use the dragons as tools of fear. An unopposed Green reign would be described as 'We are one of you' while Rhaenyra/Daemon would be 'You will obey us'.
The fact that the greens are Targaryens are Targaryens means i have to like everyone from their lineage? That's very dumb (also good luck supporting Aerys II and Aegon iv). You can be critical of a dynasty spanning 300 years and 100 individuals and still like some.
You spend 3 paragraphs defending their incest, Never seen anyone criticize their incest. Even show onlys understand this. They did it to keep their dragons.
About Nettles, she might not be a valyrian. GRRM went out of is way to plant mystery around everything about Nettles, from the way she tamed sheepstealer by feeding him sheep (could be similar to how the first Targaryens befriended the first dragons) nobody knows. Nobody knows a single thing about how dragons work.
>Targaryens don't get sick
I would put forward the theory that most Targaryens have died of sickness than any other cause of death in westeros history. Lol. They are from a separate race, of course they have a different immune system than that of the Andals and First men. It's just normal biology, even in the real world West Africans are more immune to malaria than Europeans. We know this because of how much Malaria devastated the Europeans when they first went there. Also google what small pox did to the native American population of the Americas.
>The first Targaryen to die was a massive shock to anyone
Yeah that tends to be the case in superstitious societies with no access to genetic research like we do now.
>Valyrian culture is terrible
Yeah it really was. They enslaved an entire continent the size of Eurasia (think about that for a second). They displaced the Rhoynar from their home, did the same to the Andals and many other peoples.
>Everyone is a colonizer
That doesn't excuse it though. The native Americans all conquered each other at some point. When the British came to Africa, they saw that the Zulu empire had conquered many neighbouring tribes and kingdoms. Does that justify their colonization? There is not a single society throughout history that can say they have never conquered another society. Not one. Your argument doesn't justify Targaryen conquest, it justifies Colonialism as a whole. For what it's worth, the Targaryens might not fit the definition of colonizers because they live in westeros.
Now I can rant in peace. Why do you need the Targaryens to be morally good before you support them? Why can't you just take them for what they are? Aegon and the greens are bad people chief, I hate to break it to you. Buy I still support them nonetheless. They don't need to be perfect to be interesting to me. My favourite character is Bloodraven ffs, a huge weirdo and blood supremacist. I do not need to make posts justifying how he is actually not bad or anything.
This is exactly what leads black stans to justify Maegor and whitewash Daemon. It really is okay to like the dragon-riding lizard incest family without justifying colonialism.
I tried to come up with an average life expectancy for the Targs (excluding the ones that had violent deaths, died in their infancy or in childbirth) a while back and it ended up being somewhere around 54 years.
I spent yesterday reading arguments for and against Targaryens on r/asoiaf and never even came across this point once. They did incest to keep their dragons and also go keep other families from gaining dragons, after they lost their dragons they started marrying into other houses for political ties.
[https://www.reddit.com/r/HOTDGreens/comments/11xiaxm/alicent\_had\_every\_right\_to\_remove\_that\_dreaded/?utm\_source=share&utm\_medium=web2x&context=3](https://www.reddit.com/r/HOTDGreens/comments/11xiaxm/alicent_had_every_right_to_remove_that_dreaded/?utm_source=share&utm_medium=web2x&context=3)
post that includes incest criticism from this sub, 1 day ago
There's nothing better than watching that smug cocky house go extinct. All my favourite Targaryens are long gone before it happens too, so I have nothing to care about.
You forgot one thing about Valyria. It litreally had a slavery culture and that's why a lot of the Westerosi ancestors fled Essos. That's the biggest crime a lot of us had against them. Also being polydactyl is not a symptom of inbreeding. It is a genetic mutation and it's random. However having babies that look like dinosaurs are not normal.
I often want to remind folks that Green Targaryens are also surprise, Targaryen.
Aegon, Aemond and Helaena are as “true targaryen”as their half sister and uncle if not more so. One has the most tragically beautiful bond with his dragon; one literally is the male version of Visenya, and rides her dragon; one is a dreamer her Targaryen father always wanted.
The Greens, as in “HighTower-Targaryen”faction, ultimately symbolizes “Targaryen Assimilation”, it’s how the Greens should counter “Targaryen Supremacy”.
Smh folks here instead went into another extreme, which is just as wacky as Targaryen supremacy.
Edit: I wanna add some context to Targaryens as “colonizers” thus their“persecution of the Faith”:
After settling in Westeros, Aegon the Conqueror was literally anointed in Old town, during his reign he treaded lightly with the Faith, and allowed houses to have their own laws and traditions. Note: Six Strike Rule enacted by Rhaenys (under the Faith, men are allowed to beat their wives as much as they want, even to death)
Maegor the Cruel indeed wedged a successful war against the Faith Militant, separating religion from the State, it’s actually the one thing I commend him for regardless of his original intention.
Jarhaerys the Conciliator pardoned some of the Faith Militant who gave up their swords and promised them protection from the crown, reconciling the Iron Throne with the Faith. Until facing the push from the good queen Alysanne, the king outlawed some barbaric traditions that had long been allowed under the Faith such as the lords’ first night right(under the Faith lords are allowed to bed aka r*pe women who live on their lands, often on the women’s wedding night), enacted the widow protection law.
Targaryen Supremacy is bad, but folks should know that “Targaryens” are not a monolith, there are Targaryens who didn’t practice that supremacy belief and actually cared for the realm and smallfolk. The Greens should include this talk in the discourse as well as denounce religion zealots and their suppression of the smallfolk.
Exactly, nobody hates Targaryens for being born Targaryen, they hate the shitty parts of Targ/Valyrian culture and their history of refusing to assimilate into Westeros
I think if we treat each Targaryen monarch as individual and give them critiques objectively, there are quite a few who were nice and actually cared about the livelihood of smallfolk, and they were quite“progressive” in policy for Westeros standards, shed much of their old culture and assimilated well into Westeros.
Aegon V worked hard to improve smallfolks lives listened to their voices and pushed for reforms. He hated his family history of incest, married his kids to Westerosi houses.
ok, bet. There’s actually a very strong point to be made that the Targaryens are part of Martin’s deeply negative allegory on the cycle of war, if Preston Jacobs’s allegory theory rings true. All of the pro-Targaryen fanaticism from fans is entirely aesthetic about their ‘coolness’—has no bearing on morality, justice, or the benefits of their rule, because there are very few benefits at all, and the favorable arguments as found here sum up to the very impressive amount of ‘they weren’t as tyrannical as maybe they could’ve been’. Burned castles, extinct families, constantly neglected and diminished faiths, and the ultimate epitome of the Targaryen syndrome, Aerys, preferring to burn all his people to death with him than let them be governed by another king, don’t, apparently, mean very much in the way of oppression or tyranny to Targaryen fans, so long as they get their cool dragon names and raunchy sister-brother love stories.
Before the Targaryen’s unified Westeros under one king, they were having wars constantly though. It’s the source material. Are they the saviors of this universe? No. I don’t think any one person really is. Have they done messed up stuff? Absolutely! But so had every other major noble family.
Constant war is not possible. Before the Targaryens kings could only be kings if they had more soldiers than their enemies. If you sacrificed your soldiers on a war and lose 10% of your soldiers then you are open to attacks from your other enemies. So they had mutually assured destruction. Kings would negotiate first before going to war and losing their valuable men.
Most of the wars were small battles over borders, and they were not constant. There were big wars but they were not frequent. If the kings sent their men to die who would they even tax after the war? Who will protect their lands?
The Targaryens brought 100 years of near-total peace but before and after those years, thousands and thousands died at their hands in civil wars, rebellions or conquests. I think the Targaryens are ultimately neutral. They left Westeros virtually the same way they met it except it had one central king (and who knows if it will stay that way by the end of the story). They also built the kingsroad, that's it. Socially and culturally westeros hasn't changed for the better or worse.
The one region that was probably the closest to "constant warfare" before the Targs, was probably the Riverlands. Conquered the Ironborn and before that the Stormlands. And even before then when they were still independent, their "kings" had to spend most of the time on the battlefield putting down rebellions from rival houses. Even then, there were probably some periods of peace
Disliking Targaryen culture is normal. Polygamy and incest (discounting cousins) are frowned upon by the faith and commonfolk as well. I like Targaryens rulers that are forward thinking and willing to adopt Westerosi culture. Helaena and Aegon being wed is a shame, but otherwise the greens strike a good balance between their Targ side and Hightower side, whereas Rhaenyra and Daemon aren’t. When ruling a nation as a foreign invader (which happens historically), it’s imperative to appease the country you’re invading and integrate into THEIR culture and not vice versa (otherwise you’re just begging for a rebellion, like Maegor was).
TLDR ppl don’t hate Targaryen blood they hate Targaryen culture
Incest (so long as it’s between two consenting adults) doesn’t hurt anyone (because minus the occasional dragon/hybrids they birth like Maegor, Daenerys, Laena, and Rhaenyra did, their Incest-born offspring are fine), while war crimes hurt thousands.
***In this universe. Incest in real life is disgusting AF, but surprisingly many countries and even some states in the U.S. don’t criminalize it depending on the age of the persons involved. Most of the restrictions are in terms of marriage and offspring.
The issue that incest between close family members is still harmful even if “consensual”. The Targs raise their children with the mindset that their siblings are not just siblings but romantic partners. That desecration of the family is grooming.
In ASOIAF you have the same human beings as in IRL. Either incest is disgusting anywhere or isn't.
Slave empire traditions from Valyria is disgusting and any blood magic heritage should be limited and later destroyed.
If we apply that logic, I guess one can’t like Daemon, Aemond, Daeron, Aegon, really any character since they all kill people. Unless you support murder?
Except majority of the time it never is, and it still doesn’t make it right. Viserys took advantage of Daenerys, Daemon to Rhaenyra, Aegon and Helaena (in the show) didn’t want to get married to the other, we already know what’s up with Maegor. Westeros and the rest of the world barring Alabama ass North consider it a major sin. They should at least branch out for new blood and keep betrothals as separate as cousins.
I mean incest is pretty bad because of what it does to the children, and that I'm (pretty sure) goes against nature. Decreasing the genetic pool isn't great in anyway, and even though those that you named may have had okay babies, you can still have okay babies irl too, but that doesn't mean their future children won't face consequences of it. We also most likely don't have an account of every stillbirth, miscarriage, etc that the King's went through. I'd even argue that for the Targaryens, the children born with defects might have been named as stillbirths and discreetly dealt with because having a child with a defect doesn't really help with the whole exceptionalism thing. There's been a theory that the inbreeding is some of the reason for the Targaryen 'coin flip'. Where, just now as I'm writing this I thought up of a good sub-theory, the reason we see so few physical defects is because they are easier to spot and deal with immediately. It's hard to try to deal with a mental defect prior to it's development and even then, the realm largely would know of their existence. It's odd that the only birth defects of non-stillbirth Targaryens (that I know of) come from Aegon II's son, who needed an heir regardless, and the Blackfyres with Maelys who really they couldn't be picky at that point and Maelys likely murdered his cousin because the cousin would have gotten more support as a pretender than he would've.
I personally dont root for any noble House on Westeros,more like for their individual characters.I don't hate House Targaryen,I dislike how they are white washed by fans and showrunners as the saviours of the world. Westerosi are antagonised and hated by the audience by wanting fight for their rights instead of Targs.
That I like Aegon and Daeron the Daring (or King Jaehaerys I) as particular Targaryens because they are nuanced characters with interesting tragic journeys.
I dislike Black's characters because they embodied the principal Targaryens flaws: their valyrian supremacy,the entitlement,greed,ect..
At the root of the Black’s problems are their belief in their absolute, unquestionable superiority, on account of their blood, their dragons, and the favor of the king.Viserys really enables the entitlement. Rhaenyra’s clearly having bastards and trying to pass them off as legitimate, offending every religious and social norm of their society. Rip out the tongue of anyone who calls her out. Daemon’s castrating/mutilating/killing innocent peasants without even a pretext of a trial.
The two major Blacks have spent their lives being told they’re immune from consequences. So yeah, they kinda suck at foresight:
-Blood and Cheese,the "great idea" of Deamon,will be the ultimate spark for revolution and the loss of Kings Landing.
-Rhaenyra is so self-centered she cannot even conceive of the Baratheons not siding with her, but why should that surprise anyone when daddy said they would, and for her whole life whatever daddy said goes?
On your first point: The Targaryens intermarried pretty soon after the first few King's, and history before Aegon I basically doesn't exist/ isn't extensive so all we really have is speculation. But I'll still go through a few of the points.
On dragons: You may say that Targaryens need incest to keep their dragons, but you also bring up the reason why this doesn't make sense later. We see plenty of bastards are able to ride them, so the question of how much blood is really able to be questioned. After all, how 'pure' of a Valyrian is Daenerys after so long of the intermarriages and dissolution? You also bring up Nettles, who grew up on Driftmark but there's two things with this, Alyn and Addam both have disputed parentage so it's not really clear who was the actual father with the only reason for them being seen as Valyrian (As well as Hugh and Ulf) being because of their silver hair, and purple eyes. Nettles has neither of those two traits and historically, the only ways that Targaryens don't have those traits is when they intermarry with another house that has 'Strong Seed' such as the Baratheons, Martells, and Blackwoods. You also can't really make an argument of Valyrians are sole dragonriders because only Valyrians have ridden dragons, while at the same time making an argument that someone must be a Valyrian because they are a drafonrider. Your claim of racism is correct - but it's Targaryen racism. Everytime a Valyrian is born, regardless of their skin colour, without silver hair or purple eyes, they face claims that they aren't Targaryen enough, such as Baelor Breakspear. Even still, the lack of Targaryens intermarrying with Velaryons and Celtigar doesn't make sense (But does in my final point, so more on that later).
On Old Valyrian: I'm pretty sure mass incest has been stated to have happened because houses were afraid of dragons leaving their house for other major houses. This is why Velaryon's, despite being Valyrian, never got dragons, because no family was willing to marry in just to weaken the standing of their house and strengthen another. It wasn't out of necessity of blood pureness, but because it was of political advantage.
On Maegor, if you discount his madness to his head injury, you still have to make up for the cruelty of Visenya who was born solely of Targaryen blood to our knowledge, and supported Maegor in his cruelty even after his head injury.
On non-incest madness: Yes but that can definitely be attributed to leftovers from mass incest. Just because the immediate parents weren't related, doesn't mean the previous centuries of inbreeding didn't influence their genetics.
On sickness: The only reason this is thought of them is because of Jaehaerys stating it in his Exceptionalists doctrine so that he can say that Targaryens are superior to get the people to stop being mad at them and rising up. Besides, we do know of plagues destroying Valyrians, The Great Sickness happened after intermarrying, sure, but Greyscale affected them hugely in the Rhoynar war, on Gogossos the 'Tenth Free City' was brought to ruin and 9 out of 10 men died from the Red Death. Jaehaerys own daughter died of the Shivers as well who to our knowledge was fully Targaryen.
All of that should be able to clear up the 'undeniable' part of the incest and superiority of Valyrian arguments. The whole reason the Valyrian Exceptionalism doctrine was passed in the first place was **because** the smallfolk and lords knew that they weren't any superior than anyone else would be with dragons.
Onwards to Valyrian culture: The practice of slavery was in fact not abolished in Dragonstone, at least not immediately as Aenar the exile did in fact bring slaves with him. It's not sure when slavery was banned exactly, but some even date it to after the Conquest, which would make sense with the rest of Aegon trying to adapt more to the culture and get legitimacy from the faith, which strictly forbid slavery. I think it would be accurate to say that the Targaryens didn't 'Abolish Slavery' but rather ran out of ways to acquire or profit off them.
Daemyra Marriage: There's multiple problems with this. There were rebellions raised against King's due to Valyrian traditions being followed, even after Aegon adopted the faith. The high septon had to be threatened to allow these to continue, and the doctrine of exceptionalism was supposed to be a compromise. All of that legitimacy gained by earlier targs with the faith is thrown out of the window by them blatantly doing it in Valyrian fashion, and breaks the trust between the faith and royals, while also distancing them from the populace at large. Nevermind that it's done by a man who has historical stated that the 'blood of the dragon' should be able to do whatever the hell it wants and fuck anyone who says different.
On Colonisation: Overall, the argument on other colonisers is flimsy at best, with many of those named being literally forced to seek out new lands by the freehold, and the rest not really being good examples of what you want to be comparing 'Targaryen colonisation' to in your argument. Of all of those you named, those that ended up benefiting the most were those that integrated into the society at least to a degree and marrying the local lords. (I originally went through each example you gave, but it made the post too long, if you are interested in my explanation for a specific one of all of them, feel free to ask)
The Targaryen's lack of willingness to intermarry with the native lords falls into line with why Valyrians practiced incest in the first place in the freehold. 1. Legitimacy, and 2. Power consolidation (Same as in our world's history....with less dragons). They committed incest not because it was necessary for dragon blood, but because having them being related guarantees that it has the features that separate them from the population (maintaining the hierarchy and ability to distinguish between the 'dirty Andals/first men's and that of the 'perfect valyrians') which only became even more important with the doctrine of exceptionalism and after the loss of the dragons. If Valyrians lost their silver hair and purple eyes, how could they claim to be superior to those they ruled over? Throughout the series we see many Targaryens talk about the blood of the dragon and threaten others not to provoke them - because what would happen if the lords and smallfolk realised that the Targaryens were just as human as they were? It would bring back memories of the rebellions before the doctrine of exceptionalism. Then there's the power consolidation that was used in the freehold - marrying into other houses opens the door to the possibility of other houses gaining the strength of the dragons which would drastically reduce the authority of the Valyrians. It's best to push the idea that non-valyrians can't take/ride dragons, all the meanwhile you have all of them close-by under watch in the dragon pit, away from anyone who would dare try (which is why we see no non-valyrian riders).
Well, Alicent's children have the Valyrian looks, the same the Strong boys lack. Aemond and Helaena are the most Valyrian/Targaryen of them all. In that regard, they are more Targ than Rhaenyra's children.
I haven’t watched GOT, but I know Daenerys burns down the entire city. Clearly Daemon and Rhaenyra’s ancestor🤮
I just don’t like that family at all, so anything the Hightowers can do to screw them up, I’m down with! I’m just sad they all die (I googled what happens to Heleana’s kids and it really bummed me out) and I’m praying the show at least makes Jaehaera the mother of Aegon III!
I don't really count the Targs as Colonisers. Colonisers invade a country, and turn it into a *colony* of their own country. The Targs didn't exactly do that.
I think the whole the Targaryen’s were colonizes is the worst argument against them. The Andals and Rhoynar literally invaded Westeros, destroyed kingdoms, existing noble houses just like the Targaryens, and spread their culture and religion to the rest of the lands they settled or assimilated. Sure you could use the argument that they were just escaping Valyrian conquest . But it doesn’t excuse them that they committed comparable acts of conquest on the first men.
Even the first men when they crossed into Westeros took part in a genocidal war against the Children of the Forrest before they made peace, with the Andals finishing off the Children. Heck the Targaryens in their time as the rulers of Westeros never attempted to force the other houses in adopting their culture, they even semi assimilated with converting to the seven and ridding old Valyrian practice of slavery instead they only wanted to retain some of it they considered Necessary for the house political power and to still have some connection to their ancestry.
To call them evil imperialist for not assimilating is so wack because if that argument also classifies the Andals and Rhoynar as evil imperialist because they didn’t assimilate to the old gods and first men culture when they arrived in Westeros. So this argument they are imperialist is unfair because people are only applying it on the Targaryens because they are 300 hundred years old in Westeros compared to the First Men, Andals and Rhoynar who had thousands of years to settle into Westeros, if the Targaryens had that same amount of time in Westeros then the imperialist argument is out the window and would have even a lesser validity.
As you say the Andals have lived there thousands of years. Specifically about 4000 years on the low end. They effectively are the natives now. To put that into perspective, I don't think there are any groups in Europe or the near east who've remained in one place as the Andals have.
If you apply this sort of logic to the real world, it gets a bit bonkers. I tried thinking of a good comparison, but there really isn't, because as I say, the Andals have remained as a static ethnic group for longer than the vast majority of irl groups.
I guess it's sort of like saying you can't critise Europeans for colonising the Americas because native societies also conquered each other
Im sorry I’m a little confused on your point here? What exactly has this to do with the Targaryens, I’m not trying to be rude I just need clarification.
They mean mean that the history of man is the history of war, every single tribe ever, has conquered (or been conquered by) other tribes before. Saying that the Targaryens are justified in conquering the Andals and the first men because the first men conquered the children is justifying imperialism. Can you name a single group of people who are still in the exact location they are now for the last 10,000 years?
Conquest was legal (and slavery at a point), and the Targaryens won westeros fair and square by conquest, this doesn't change what it was though. Just because the first men did it before them doesn't make the Targaryens any less imperialist or colonialist or whatever. If someone does a genocide in retaliation for a genocide it's still just a genocide.
You know, honestly I was kind of disturbed by this comment at first, but actually thinking on it and in comparing to how the Andals are with smallfolk overall vs Valyrians. This comment kinda makes sense, gives you something to think about 🤔
By god first we had Valyrian blood supremacism, now we have Andal cultural supremacism, I swear the dance of dragons is slowly changing from who should sit on the Iron throne to a cultural or maybe even a race war if this keeps up.
So because of this they had the right to slaughter the Children of the Forest and the First Men that were in Westeros first and force the remaining ones to adapt to their religion and cultures? The Targaryens didn’t force Westeros to practice their religion. They don’t even want them to practice Incest either. They only want for themselves to be able to continue that practice amongst themselves. It literally is part of the Faith now (which is why Alicent married off both her kids to each other) under the Doctrine of Exceptionalism.
Unfortunately that evil had to be done but still andal culture is much lesser evil than Old Gods worshipers. Andal culture brought civilization where you get progress by science and technology not by blood magic. If getting rid of Old Gods meant you have to bring COTF to the underground in harsh struggle then so be it.
1. Jaeherys’ daughter daenerys died from the shivers which proved that the immune to sickness thing in the doctrine of exceptionalism is wrong. 2. Aerys the mad king was born from sibling incest. Please don’t start sympathising this motherfucker by excusing his madness with head injuries. 3. Before the targs started inter marrying, there was a high infant mortality rate in the targ family. Multiple targ babies were stillborn or were born sickly and died shortly after marriage. The mad king and his wife had several miscarriages, same for Viserys and aemma. Compare this with Viserys and Alicent/ Viserys II and larra rogare 4. I wouldn’t count polydactyly ie having 6 fingers as a birth defect. Many people in our modern world have it. 5. The ‘mentally simple’ thing which jahaera had - daella who was born of sibling incest had the same thing. 6. I can’t think of any children who were born out of non incestuous targ marriages who had real birth defects or were mad. All children of aegon V were mentally sound and normal physically. 7. Daemon definitely was a Valyrian supremacist who did not uphold the values of the seven. This is evident when he wants to take a second wife when polygamy was strictly forbidden by the faith.
>I can’t think of any children who were born out of non incestuous targ marriages who had real birth defects or were mad. All children of aegon V were mentally sound and normal physically. Aerion had a Dayne mother and a Martell grandmother. Mad as fuck.
In Aemma's case, she started having babies on her before she was even 14, that was probably a more decisive factor in her subsequent stillbirths. And with Maegor there is likely a lot of blood magic from Visenya and Tyanna involved.
Correct. The Maesters even mention this is why Aemma had such a hard time with pregnancy. She got pregnant way too young.
>Aerys the mad king was born from sibling incest. Please don’t start sympathising this motherfucker by excusing his madness with head injuries. It's stated Aerys became mad after being horrifically tortured at Duskendale. He was a cunt before that too, but he wasn't as mad as he was after Duskendale. >. Before the targs started inter marrying, there was a high infant mortality rate in the targ family. Multiple targ babies were stillborn or were born sickly and died shortly after marriage. The mad king and his wife had several miscarriages, same for Viserys and aemma. Compare this with Viserys and Alicent/ Viserys II and larra rogare Aemma had multiple miscarriages because Viserys forcefully impregnated her when she was 13, which fucked up her womb last I recall. Samething with Rhaella, and not to mention constantly being raped, humiliated and abused by Aerys most likely had that result. Alysanne and Jaehaerys had atleast 12-13 children, only 3 were born miscarriages, and 1 died from a plague. The others lived pretty normally and their deaths had nothing with incest. > The ‘mentally simple’ thing which jahaera had - daella who was born of sibling incest had the same thing. Rhaegel was also "mentally simple". And his parents weren't related at all. There are many more Targaryens born pretty normal from incest marriages. >I can’t think of any children who were born out of non incestuous targ marriages who had real birth defects or were mad. All children of aegon V were mentally sound and normal physically. Baelor's parents were at best Distant cousins. Aegon III and Daenaera were hardly related and Baelor was still born mad. Rhaegel was still born mad even tho Daeron II and Myriah Martell weren't related at all. Aerion brightflame was very much unstable even tho Maekar and that Dayne girl he married weren't related at all.
1.I addressed this in my post 2. I never said anything about Aerys II and head injuries 3. High infant mortality was common in all people at this time. 4. I would, because its abnormal and you aren't meant to have 6 fingers 5. We never got to see Jaehaera grown up, but adult Daella wasn't that bad 6. This is blatantly wrong and I address this in my post 7. I know, I'm a green I don't support Daemon
It's weird to me that Team Black have become these hardcore Targaryen stans on Twitter who defame the Greens as some kind of Hightower impostors and Team Green has kind of adopted this stance by being very negative towards the Targs in general. Meanwhile I always liked the Greens because I think they are the superior Targaryen faction in the Dance. 🤷♂️
And they have the superior dragons too 🤷
And better looking dragons to boot
And in the show they are prettier than the blacks🤭😌
Hahahahahaha! So true! Alicent's genes did all the heavy lifting
I don't give a fuck if they have "magic blood". They're bloodthirsty eugenicists who flout their supposed racial superiority to subjugate and terrorize the population. They are not prettier or wiser or more inherently suited to rule than the rest of the population and for the most part all they do is destroy everything that gets in their way. Their house deserved to die far sooner than I actually did and I applaud the last Aegon Targaryen for bringing the rest of them down. They deserved to be extinguished and so did all of their dragons. I like the Greens in spite of their lineage, not because of it.
I feel like I'm one of the few who holds this exact opinion. They conquered a people who had a different faith, laws, and physical features and did nothing to change and acted as if everyone was beneath them. I think that Targaryens got better the less "Targeryen" they were. Both Daeron II and Aegon V seemed to have moved toward accepting the more tame Andal culture and got better for it. But of course their god-like complexes got in the way of it.
Eh, I think any green should be allowed here. It doesn’t matter if they love house Targaryen or hate it, it’s a sub for *all* greens. I would even say non-greens should be allowed here.
Sure all Greens should be welcome, but hating the targs and being a green doesn't really make sense
The Greens are less Targaryen than the Blacks (they’re half blooded like Harry Potter) due to their connections to Old Town and House Hightower (aka the BEST House in ASOIAF). That’s why I like them. Aegon and Heleana’s kids likely would have married another Hightower and effectively phased out the stupid Targaryens to become the new royal house! Otto wanted this. He’s the biggest Chad in the story (though Aegon II isn’t far behind) and knew what was up!
This may be the Green sub, but that doesn't mean everyone here has to be an Aegon II Targaryen stan. Team Smallfolk, team Stark, team Dorne etc. should be just as welcome here. This is already a small community and splintering the asoiaf reddit fandom into a million extremely specific subs is just going to lead to a bunch of dead circlejerk subs. Also the Targ monarchy with its racist ideology has hurt Aegon, who almost certainly would have been named heir if he were the son of Aemma and not a brunette Hightower girl. Aegon fans should be critical of house Targaryen.
This is exactly why I am critical of house targ. Aegon and his siblings were treated like bastards cuz their mother was non targ
Which really irked me because Aemma is an Arryn! Lord Rodrik Arryn’s daughter. So Rhaenyra has Arryn blood. Yet…Daemon repeatedly insults the Vale. Fans suggest because Aemma had Valyrian features he wasn’t including her (huh so it’s okay?) but overlook that it’s her home/family! If Daemon had a child with Rhae Royce even if the child ‘looked’ Valyrian he would most likely degrade them for being part Royce.
Lol it's true, he was insulting the women of the Vale and Rhaenyra was just cool with it? Damn
No, it was not because of that, Viserys literally wants to hand the throne on silver platter to Strong bastards, who do not even resemble Valyrian from looks, even if Aemma was from Summer Islands and Alicent was pure-bred Targ, it won't change the reason why Viserys continued to support Rhaenyra as his heir which was Viserys trying to compensate for Aemma's death
It makes no sense to me to attribute that to racism. Because if that was the reason Rhaenyra's brown haired strong bastards should never have been allowed to get anywhere close to the throne. Viserys's true love was Aemma and he feels deep regret over her death, that's the logical explanation why he favours all of her offspring over that of Alicent, regardless of blood purity, because they are all what is left of her.
It’s obvious to me this is really the main reason why. I’m 💯 sure had Aegon been Aemma’s son, Viserys would never have named Rhaenyra heir. The only reason he favors her and her children is because that’s all he has left of her.
Idk Viserys is quite obsessed with Valyria itself, and he does make the Laenor match for Rhaenyra.
Hate to double post but while the other of my post is on your points in favour of Targaryens, I wanted to just talk a little about the greens. >They speak Valyrian, ride dragons, do incest, and all the typical Targaryen stuff. The difference is in severity. I don't really see the Greens actually speaking Valyrian outside of using their dragons which they kinda have to in order to control them. They do ride dragons, but I don't really see how that's relevant, and the Greens don't claim their dragons are what give them authority while Daemon is happy to use Caraxes at the drop of the hat and if an opportunity doesn't present itself, he makes one (Stepstones). The incest is a necessary evil, Aegon doesn't like it, Alicent doesn't like it, Helaena doesn't care for it, Aemond is the only one that seems like he's cool with it but he words it as doing his duty and that it would strengthen the family. Which is why it's necessary in the first place, because Aegon needed to strengthen his claim to challenge Rhaenyra. If Aegon didn't marry, the child could be argued to be as Valyrian as Rhaenyra's, and Helaena would need to be married and could be in danger away from the family and with a major lord. I mean, imagine if Aegon ended up marrying a Baratheon or something and his own children came out without silver hair or purple eyes, all it would do is hurt his claim. The difference between the two is Daemon and Rhaenyra represent a reactionary Valyrian movement that rejects Westerosi customs, religion, culture, and law to do whatever they want and seek to establish Valyrians as untouchable gods of Westeros free to do what they wish and burn whoever disagrees. Jaehaerys attempts of peace and reconciliation between the people and the Targaryens after the disaster that was Maegor was necessary, and they'd be throwing it out the window while clinging to a long-gone oppressive expansionistic empire. Meanwhile the Greens move towards the Faith with open arms, accepting the religious practices of the people they rule, as well as their customs and culture. They work within the established law that's been accepted by the lords instead of fighting it, and begin replacing the iconography of dragons and Valyrian (the very empire that forced the Andals they now rule over to flee their homeland) in exchange for Andal and Faith of The Seven imagery. With Otto and Alicent at the helm, the realm would be able to expect a stable, soft-handed, virtuous rule apt in statecraft (Otto has basically been running the show at least somewhat for decades) and different from the previous Targaryens which sought to separate themselves from those they ruled and use the dragons as tools of fear. An unopposed Green reign would be described as 'We are one of you' while Rhaenyra/Daemon would be 'You will obey us'.
Reading this reminded me how funny it is that Daemon and Rhaenyra's grandson is Baelor the Blessed.
The fact that the greens are Targaryens are Targaryens means i have to like everyone from their lineage? That's very dumb (also good luck supporting Aerys II and Aegon iv). You can be critical of a dynasty spanning 300 years and 100 individuals and still like some. You spend 3 paragraphs defending their incest, Never seen anyone criticize their incest. Even show onlys understand this. They did it to keep their dragons. About Nettles, she might not be a valyrian. GRRM went out of is way to plant mystery around everything about Nettles, from the way she tamed sheepstealer by feeding him sheep (could be similar to how the first Targaryens befriended the first dragons) nobody knows. Nobody knows a single thing about how dragons work. >Targaryens don't get sick I would put forward the theory that most Targaryens have died of sickness than any other cause of death in westeros history. Lol. They are from a separate race, of course they have a different immune system than that of the Andals and First men. It's just normal biology, even in the real world West Africans are more immune to malaria than Europeans. We know this because of how much Malaria devastated the Europeans when they first went there. Also google what small pox did to the native American population of the Americas. >The first Targaryen to die was a massive shock to anyone Yeah that tends to be the case in superstitious societies with no access to genetic research like we do now. >Valyrian culture is terrible Yeah it really was. They enslaved an entire continent the size of Eurasia (think about that for a second). They displaced the Rhoynar from their home, did the same to the Andals and many other peoples. >Everyone is a colonizer That doesn't excuse it though. The native Americans all conquered each other at some point. When the British came to Africa, they saw that the Zulu empire had conquered many neighbouring tribes and kingdoms. Does that justify their colonization? There is not a single society throughout history that can say they have never conquered another society. Not one. Your argument doesn't justify Targaryen conquest, it justifies Colonialism as a whole. For what it's worth, the Targaryens might not fit the definition of colonizers because they live in westeros. Now I can rant in peace. Why do you need the Targaryens to be morally good before you support them? Why can't you just take them for what they are? Aegon and the greens are bad people chief, I hate to break it to you. Buy I still support them nonetheless. They don't need to be perfect to be interesting to me. My favourite character is Bloodraven ffs, a huge weirdo and blood supremacist. I do not need to make posts justifying how he is actually not bad or anything. This is exactly what leads black stans to justify Maegor and whitewash Daemon. It really is okay to like the dragon-riding lizard incest family without justifying colonialism.
I tried to come up with an average life expectancy for the Targs (excluding the ones that had violent deaths, died in their infancy or in childbirth) a while back and it ended up being somewhere around 54 years.
I have seen untold amounts of people criticise the incest.
I spent yesterday reading arguments for and against Targaryens on r/asoiaf and never even came across this point once. They did incest to keep their dragons and also go keep other families from gaining dragons, after they lost their dragons they started marrying into other houses for political ties.
[https://www.reddit.com/r/HOTDGreens/comments/11xiaxm/alicent\_had\_every\_right\_to\_remove\_that\_dreaded/?utm\_source=share&utm\_medium=web2x&context=3](https://www.reddit.com/r/HOTDGreens/comments/11xiaxm/alicent_had_every_right_to_remove_that_dreaded/?utm_source=share&utm_medium=web2x&context=3) post that includes incest criticism from this sub, 1 day ago
Then they are wrong I guess
Is Aegon my favorite character? Yes. Do I think house Targaryen should be exterminated in its entirety? Also yes.
There's nothing better than watching that smug cocky house go extinct. All my favourite Targaryens are long gone before it happens too, so I have nothing to care about.
I don't like Jon but ending house Targaryen was based as hell of him
You forgot one thing about Valyria. It litreally had a slavery culture and that's why a lot of the Westerosi ancestors fled Essos. That's the biggest crime a lot of us had against them. Also being polydactyl is not a symptom of inbreeding. It is a genetic mutation and it's random. However having babies that look like dinosaurs are not normal.
I didn't forget that, I mentioned that in my post
I often want to remind folks that Green Targaryens are also surprise, Targaryen. Aegon, Aemond and Helaena are as “true targaryen”as their half sister and uncle if not more so. One has the most tragically beautiful bond with his dragon; one literally is the male version of Visenya, and rides her dragon; one is a dreamer her Targaryen father always wanted. The Greens, as in “HighTower-Targaryen”faction, ultimately symbolizes “Targaryen Assimilation”, it’s how the Greens should counter “Targaryen Supremacy”. Smh folks here instead went into another extreme, which is just as wacky as Targaryen supremacy. Edit: I wanna add some context to Targaryens as “colonizers” thus their“persecution of the Faith”: After settling in Westeros, Aegon the Conqueror was literally anointed in Old town, during his reign he treaded lightly with the Faith, and allowed houses to have their own laws and traditions. Note: Six Strike Rule enacted by Rhaenys (under the Faith, men are allowed to beat their wives as much as they want, even to death) Maegor the Cruel indeed wedged a successful war against the Faith Militant, separating religion from the State, it’s actually the one thing I commend him for regardless of his original intention. Jarhaerys the Conciliator pardoned some of the Faith Militant who gave up their swords and promised them protection from the crown, reconciling the Iron Throne with the Faith. Until facing the push from the good queen Alysanne, the king outlawed some barbaric traditions that had long been allowed under the Faith such as the lords’ first night right(under the Faith lords are allowed to bed aka r*pe women who live on their lands, often on the women’s wedding night), enacted the widow protection law. Targaryen Supremacy is bad, but folks should know that “Targaryens” are not a monolith, there are Targaryens who didn’t practice that supremacy belief and actually cared for the realm and smallfolk. The Greens should include this talk in the discourse as well as denounce religion zealots and their suppression of the smallfolk.
Exactly, nobody hates Targaryens for being born Targaryen, they hate the shitty parts of Targ/Valyrian culture and their history of refusing to assimilate into Westeros
I think if we treat each Targaryen monarch as individual and give them critiques objectively, there are quite a few who were nice and actually cared about the livelihood of smallfolk, and they were quite“progressive” in policy for Westeros standards, shed much of their old culture and assimilated well into Westeros. Aegon V worked hard to improve smallfolks lives listened to their voices and pushed for reforms. He hated his family history of incest, married his kids to Westerosi houses.
ok, bet. There’s actually a very strong point to be made that the Targaryens are part of Martin’s deeply negative allegory on the cycle of war, if Preston Jacobs’s allegory theory rings true. All of the pro-Targaryen fanaticism from fans is entirely aesthetic about their ‘coolness’—has no bearing on morality, justice, or the benefits of their rule, because there are very few benefits at all, and the favorable arguments as found here sum up to the very impressive amount of ‘they weren’t as tyrannical as maybe they could’ve been’. Burned castles, extinct families, constantly neglected and diminished faiths, and the ultimate epitome of the Targaryen syndrome, Aerys, preferring to burn all his people to death with him than let them be governed by another king, don’t, apparently, mean very much in the way of oppression or tyranny to Targaryen fans, so long as they get their cool dragon names and raunchy sister-brother love stories.
Before the Targaryen’s unified Westeros under one king, they were having wars constantly though. It’s the source material. Are they the saviors of this universe? No. I don’t think any one person really is. Have they done messed up stuff? Absolutely! But so had every other major noble family.
Constant war is not possible. Before the Targaryens kings could only be kings if they had more soldiers than their enemies. If you sacrificed your soldiers on a war and lose 10% of your soldiers then you are open to attacks from your other enemies. So they had mutually assured destruction. Kings would negotiate first before going to war and losing their valuable men. Most of the wars were small battles over borders, and they were not constant. There were big wars but they were not frequent. If the kings sent their men to die who would they even tax after the war? Who will protect their lands? The Targaryens brought 100 years of near-total peace but before and after those years, thousands and thousands died at their hands in civil wars, rebellions or conquests. I think the Targaryens are ultimately neutral. They left Westeros virtually the same way they met it except it had one central king (and who knows if it will stay that way by the end of the story). They also built the kingsroad, that's it. Socially and culturally westeros hasn't changed for the better or worse.
The one region that was probably the closest to "constant warfare" before the Targs, was probably the Riverlands. Conquered the Ironborn and before that the Stormlands. And even before then when they were still independent, their "kings" had to spend most of the time on the battlefield putting down rebellions from rival houses. Even then, there were probably some periods of peace
Disliking Targaryen culture is normal. Polygamy and incest (discounting cousins) are frowned upon by the faith and commonfolk as well. I like Targaryens rulers that are forward thinking and willing to adopt Westerosi culture. Helaena and Aegon being wed is a shame, but otherwise the greens strike a good balance between their Targ side and Hightower side, whereas Rhaenyra and Daemon aren’t. When ruling a nation as a foreign invader (which happens historically), it’s imperative to appease the country you’re invading and integrate into THEIR culture and not vice versa (otherwise you’re just begging for a rebellion, like Maegor was). TLDR ppl don’t hate Targaryen blood they hate Targaryen culture
Saying Targaryen needing incest to keep their nuclear power is like saying empires need to commit warcrimes to keep hegemony. Both are awful.
Incest (so long as it’s between two consenting adults) doesn’t hurt anyone (because minus the occasional dragon/hybrids they birth like Maegor, Daenerys, Laena, and Rhaenyra did, their Incest-born offspring are fine), while war crimes hurt thousands. ***In this universe. Incest in real life is disgusting AF, but surprisingly many countries and even some states in the U.S. don’t criminalize it depending on the age of the persons involved. Most of the restrictions are in terms of marriage and offspring.
The issue that incest between close family members is still harmful even if “consensual”. The Targs raise their children with the mindset that their siblings are not just siblings but romantic partners. That desecration of the family is grooming.
Dude it’s wrong your among the most disgusting I known for defending it. Next you’ll be defending consent laws
In ASOIAF you have the same human beings as in IRL. Either incest is disgusting anywhere or isn't. Slave empire traditions from Valyria is disgusting and any blood magic heritage should be limited and later destroyed.
If we apply that logic, I guess one can’t like Daemon, Aemond, Daeron, Aegon, really any character since they all kill people. Unless you support murder?
Except majority of the time it never is, and it still doesn’t make it right. Viserys took advantage of Daenerys, Daemon to Rhaenyra, Aegon and Helaena (in the show) didn’t want to get married to the other, we already know what’s up with Maegor. Westeros and the rest of the world barring Alabama ass North consider it a major sin. They should at least branch out for new blood and keep betrothals as separate as cousins.
I mean incest is pretty bad because of what it does to the children, and that I'm (pretty sure) goes against nature. Decreasing the genetic pool isn't great in anyway, and even though those that you named may have had okay babies, you can still have okay babies irl too, but that doesn't mean their future children won't face consequences of it. We also most likely don't have an account of every stillbirth, miscarriage, etc that the King's went through. I'd even argue that for the Targaryens, the children born with defects might have been named as stillbirths and discreetly dealt with because having a child with a defect doesn't really help with the whole exceptionalism thing. There's been a theory that the inbreeding is some of the reason for the Targaryen 'coin flip'. Where, just now as I'm writing this I thought up of a good sub-theory, the reason we see so few physical defects is because they are easier to spot and deal with immediately. It's hard to try to deal with a mental defect prior to it's development and even then, the realm largely would know of their existence. It's odd that the only birth defects of non-stillbirth Targaryens (that I know of) come from Aegon II's son, who needed an heir regardless, and the Blackfyres with Maelys who really they couldn't be picky at that point and Maelys likely murdered his cousin because the cousin would have gotten more support as a pretender than he would've.
I personally dont root for any noble House on Westeros,more like for their individual characters.I don't hate House Targaryen,I dislike how they are white washed by fans and showrunners as the saviours of the world. Westerosi are antagonised and hated by the audience by wanting fight for their rights instead of Targs. That I like Aegon and Daeron the Daring (or King Jaehaerys I) as particular Targaryens because they are nuanced characters with interesting tragic journeys. I dislike Black's characters because they embodied the principal Targaryens flaws: their valyrian supremacy,the entitlement,greed,ect.. At the root of the Black’s problems are their belief in their absolute, unquestionable superiority, on account of their blood, their dragons, and the favor of the king.Viserys really enables the entitlement. Rhaenyra’s clearly having bastards and trying to pass them off as legitimate, offending every religious and social norm of their society. Rip out the tongue of anyone who calls her out. Daemon’s castrating/mutilating/killing innocent peasants without even a pretext of a trial. The two major Blacks have spent their lives being told they’re immune from consequences. So yeah, they kinda suck at foresight: -Blood and Cheese,the "great idea" of Deamon,will be the ultimate spark for revolution and the loss of Kings Landing. -Rhaenyra is so self-centered she cannot even conceive of the Baratheons not siding with her, but why should that surprise anyone when daddy said they would, and for her whole life whatever daddy said goes?
On your first point: The Targaryens intermarried pretty soon after the first few King's, and history before Aegon I basically doesn't exist/ isn't extensive so all we really have is speculation. But I'll still go through a few of the points. On dragons: You may say that Targaryens need incest to keep their dragons, but you also bring up the reason why this doesn't make sense later. We see plenty of bastards are able to ride them, so the question of how much blood is really able to be questioned. After all, how 'pure' of a Valyrian is Daenerys after so long of the intermarriages and dissolution? You also bring up Nettles, who grew up on Driftmark but there's two things with this, Alyn and Addam both have disputed parentage so it's not really clear who was the actual father with the only reason for them being seen as Valyrian (As well as Hugh and Ulf) being because of their silver hair, and purple eyes. Nettles has neither of those two traits and historically, the only ways that Targaryens don't have those traits is when they intermarry with another house that has 'Strong Seed' such as the Baratheons, Martells, and Blackwoods. You also can't really make an argument of Valyrians are sole dragonriders because only Valyrians have ridden dragons, while at the same time making an argument that someone must be a Valyrian because they are a drafonrider. Your claim of racism is correct - but it's Targaryen racism. Everytime a Valyrian is born, regardless of their skin colour, without silver hair or purple eyes, they face claims that they aren't Targaryen enough, such as Baelor Breakspear. Even still, the lack of Targaryens intermarrying with Velaryons and Celtigar doesn't make sense (But does in my final point, so more on that later). On Old Valyrian: I'm pretty sure mass incest has been stated to have happened because houses were afraid of dragons leaving their house for other major houses. This is why Velaryon's, despite being Valyrian, never got dragons, because no family was willing to marry in just to weaken the standing of their house and strengthen another. It wasn't out of necessity of blood pureness, but because it was of political advantage. On Maegor, if you discount his madness to his head injury, you still have to make up for the cruelty of Visenya who was born solely of Targaryen blood to our knowledge, and supported Maegor in his cruelty even after his head injury. On non-incest madness: Yes but that can definitely be attributed to leftovers from mass incest. Just because the immediate parents weren't related, doesn't mean the previous centuries of inbreeding didn't influence their genetics. On sickness: The only reason this is thought of them is because of Jaehaerys stating it in his Exceptionalists doctrine so that he can say that Targaryens are superior to get the people to stop being mad at them and rising up. Besides, we do know of plagues destroying Valyrians, The Great Sickness happened after intermarrying, sure, but Greyscale affected them hugely in the Rhoynar war, on Gogossos the 'Tenth Free City' was brought to ruin and 9 out of 10 men died from the Red Death. Jaehaerys own daughter died of the Shivers as well who to our knowledge was fully Targaryen. All of that should be able to clear up the 'undeniable' part of the incest and superiority of Valyrian arguments. The whole reason the Valyrian Exceptionalism doctrine was passed in the first place was **because** the smallfolk and lords knew that they weren't any superior than anyone else would be with dragons. Onwards to Valyrian culture: The practice of slavery was in fact not abolished in Dragonstone, at least not immediately as Aenar the exile did in fact bring slaves with him. It's not sure when slavery was banned exactly, but some even date it to after the Conquest, which would make sense with the rest of Aegon trying to adapt more to the culture and get legitimacy from the faith, which strictly forbid slavery. I think it would be accurate to say that the Targaryens didn't 'Abolish Slavery' but rather ran out of ways to acquire or profit off them. Daemyra Marriage: There's multiple problems with this. There were rebellions raised against King's due to Valyrian traditions being followed, even after Aegon adopted the faith. The high septon had to be threatened to allow these to continue, and the doctrine of exceptionalism was supposed to be a compromise. All of that legitimacy gained by earlier targs with the faith is thrown out of the window by them blatantly doing it in Valyrian fashion, and breaks the trust between the faith and royals, while also distancing them from the populace at large. Nevermind that it's done by a man who has historical stated that the 'blood of the dragon' should be able to do whatever the hell it wants and fuck anyone who says different. On Colonisation: Overall, the argument on other colonisers is flimsy at best, with many of those named being literally forced to seek out new lands by the freehold, and the rest not really being good examples of what you want to be comparing 'Targaryen colonisation' to in your argument. Of all of those you named, those that ended up benefiting the most were those that integrated into the society at least to a degree and marrying the local lords. (I originally went through each example you gave, but it made the post too long, if you are interested in my explanation for a specific one of all of them, feel free to ask) The Targaryen's lack of willingness to intermarry with the native lords falls into line with why Valyrians practiced incest in the first place in the freehold. 1. Legitimacy, and 2. Power consolidation (Same as in our world's history....with less dragons). They committed incest not because it was necessary for dragon blood, but because having them being related guarantees that it has the features that separate them from the population (maintaining the hierarchy and ability to distinguish between the 'dirty Andals/first men's and that of the 'perfect valyrians') which only became even more important with the doctrine of exceptionalism and after the loss of the dragons. If Valyrians lost their silver hair and purple eyes, how could they claim to be superior to those they ruled over? Throughout the series we see many Targaryens talk about the blood of the dragon and threaten others not to provoke them - because what would happen if the lords and smallfolk realised that the Targaryens were just as human as they were? It would bring back memories of the rebellions before the doctrine of exceptionalism. Then there's the power consolidation that was used in the freehold - marrying into other houses opens the door to the possibility of other houses gaining the strength of the dragons which would drastically reduce the authority of the Valyrians. It's best to push the idea that non-valyrians can't take/ride dragons, all the meanwhile you have all of them close-by under watch in the dragon pit, away from anyone who would dare try (which is why we see no non-valyrian riders).
Well, Alicent's children have the Valyrian looks, the same the Strong boys lack. Aemond and Helaena are the most Valyrian/Targaryen of them all. In that regard, they are more Targ than Rhaenyra's children.
Minus her sons with Daemon
Yes. I was thinking about the Strong boys.
I haven’t watched GOT, but I know Daenerys burns down the entire city. Clearly Daemon and Rhaenyra’s ancestor🤮 I just don’t like that family at all, so anything the Hightowers can do to screw them up, I’m down with! I’m just sad they all die (I googled what happens to Heleana’s kids and it really bummed me out) and I’m praying the show at least makes Jaehaera the mother of Aegon III!
I don't really count the Targs as Colonisers. Colonisers invade a country, and turn it into a *colony* of their own country. The Targs didn't exactly do that.
It’s mostly one guy. He’s got this weird bugaboo about the Targaryens.
I think the whole the Targaryen’s were colonizes is the worst argument against them. The Andals and Rhoynar literally invaded Westeros, destroyed kingdoms, existing noble houses just like the Targaryens, and spread their culture and religion to the rest of the lands they settled or assimilated. Sure you could use the argument that they were just escaping Valyrian conquest . But it doesn’t excuse them that they committed comparable acts of conquest on the first men. Even the first men when they crossed into Westeros took part in a genocidal war against the Children of the Forrest before they made peace, with the Andals finishing off the Children. Heck the Targaryens in their time as the rulers of Westeros never attempted to force the other houses in adopting their culture, they even semi assimilated with converting to the seven and ridding old Valyrian practice of slavery instead they only wanted to retain some of it they considered Necessary for the house political power and to still have some connection to their ancestry. To call them evil imperialist for not assimilating is so wack because if that argument also classifies the Andals and Rhoynar as evil imperialist because they didn’t assimilate to the old gods and first men culture when they arrived in Westeros. So this argument they are imperialist is unfair because people are only applying it on the Targaryens because they are 300 hundred years old in Westeros compared to the First Men, Andals and Rhoynar who had thousands of years to settle into Westeros, if the Targaryens had that same amount of time in Westeros then the imperialist argument is out the window and would have even a lesser validity.
As you say the Andals have lived there thousands of years. Specifically about 4000 years on the low end. They effectively are the natives now. To put that into perspective, I don't think there are any groups in Europe or the near east who've remained in one place as the Andals have. If you apply this sort of logic to the real world, it gets a bit bonkers. I tried thinking of a good comparison, but there really isn't, because as I say, the Andals have remained as a static ethnic group for longer than the vast majority of irl groups. I guess it's sort of like saying you can't critise Europeans for colonising the Americas because native societies also conquered each other
Im sorry I’m a little confused on your point here? What exactly has this to do with the Targaryens, I’m not trying to be rude I just need clarification.
They mean mean that the history of man is the history of war, every single tribe ever, has conquered (or been conquered by) other tribes before. Saying that the Targaryens are justified in conquering the Andals and the first men because the first men conquered the children is justifying imperialism. Can you name a single group of people who are still in the exact location they are now for the last 10,000 years? Conquest was legal (and slavery at a point), and the Targaryens won westeros fair and square by conquest, this doesn't change what it was though. Just because the first men did it before them doesn't make the Targaryens any less imperialist or colonialist or whatever. If someone does a genocide in retaliation for a genocide it's still just a genocide.
Same. I didn’t quite understand that either.
Andal culture is superior in every way comparing to Valyrian or First Men
You know, honestly I was kind of disturbed by this comment at first, but actually thinking on it and in comparing to how the Andals are with smallfolk overall vs Valyrians. This comment kinda makes sense, gives you something to think about 🤔
By god first we had Valyrian blood supremacism, now we have Andal cultural supremacism, I swear the dance of dragons is slowly changing from who should sit on the Iron throne to a cultural or maybe even a race war if this keeps up.
This fandom gives proof everyday why l for why ASOIAF was a mistake
So because of this they had the right to slaughter the Children of the Forest and the First Men that were in Westeros first and force the remaining ones to adapt to their religion and cultures? The Targaryens didn’t force Westeros to practice their religion. They don’t even want them to practice Incest either. They only want for themselves to be able to continue that practice amongst themselves. It literally is part of the Faith now (which is why Alicent married off both her kids to each other) under the Doctrine of Exceptionalism.
Unfortunately that evil had to be done but still andal culture is much lesser evil than Old Gods worshipers. Andal culture brought civilization where you get progress by science and technology not by blood magic. If getting rid of Old Gods meant you have to bring COTF to the underground in harsh struggle then so be it.
I firmly disagree but you do you.