Did Targaryens really "bring prosperity" to westeros?

[Minstral]

1. Jon con says it's not uncommon that doesn't mean it's run of the mill

2.you used the word petty and raised stakes in the same sentence that hardly makes sense

3. two lords fighting is different than kingdoms fight which happened a lot more pre conquest than after

Ooooh point form.

1. Yes it does.

2. Petty lords fighting in their own localized conflicts means that they can drag others into it. It is a situation that if inflamed could turn into a large scale conflict. Combine this with only one Kingdom and you can get two houses that just happen to be Lions and Wolves bubbling out of control. Or you can have Ravens and Horses fighting out. Or for a real life example that is my favorite, an exiled Marcher lord named Roger Mortimer seeking to reclaim his titles seduces the Queen of England in which he helps to depose of King Edward. So in a quick translation for you: The same stuff is going on as back in the day when the number seven was popular, its just that now conflicts can only grow bigger with one king and realm.

And to reiterate point 1...

1. Yes it does.

3. The localized fighting happened then too. The fact that the Targs kept the feudal structure means that they did nothing to alleviate the conflicts that plagued the the original 7 Kingdoms for the long term. Peace that Jaehaerys introduced was only for the short term.

[Rhaegars Heir]

Ooooh point form.

1. Yes it does.

2. Petty lords fight fighting in their own localized conflicts means that they can drag others into it. It is a situation that if inflamed could turn into a large scale conflict. Combine this with only one Kingdom and you can get two houses that just happen to be Lions and Wolves bubbling out of control. Or you can have Ravens and Horses fighting out. Or for a real life example that is my favorite, an exiled Marcher lord named Roger Mortimer seeking to reclaim his titles seduces the Queen of England in which he helps to depose of King Edward. So in a quick translation for you: The same stuff is going on as back in the day when the number seven was popular, its just that now conflicts can only grow bigger with one king and realm.

And to reiterate point 1...

1. Yes it does.

3. The localized fighting happened then too. The fact that the Targs kept the feudal structure means that they did nothing to alleviate the conflicts that plagued the the original 7 Kingdoms for the long term. Peace that Jaehaerys introduced was only for the short term.

I suggest you look up what run of the mill mean because something not being uncommon doesn't mean it happens all the time second those lions and wolves you referred to werent lesser lords with out banners to call the like horses and ravens and the wolves and lions causing such a big war was after the Targs.

[Minstral]

I suggest you look up what run of the mill mean because something not being uncommon doesn't mean it happens all the time second those lions and wolves you referred to werent lesser lords with out banners to call the like horses and ravens and the wolves and lions causing such a big war was after the Targs.

I seriously suggest you remove the condescending attitude as I think there was a warning for such things. But you know what fine:

common or average; typical . Huh, it means what I'm implying.

THAT IT IS NOT A RARE OCCURRENCE, BUT REGARDED AS SOMETHING THAT IS TYPICAL ENOUGH IN WESTEROS AS FAR AS CONFLICTS GO.

[Sevumar]

There's no real evidence that the Targaryens undertook any major activities to contribute to the prosperity and prestige of the realm. There doesn't seem to be an increase in Westerosi exports over the 300 years of Targaryen rule, nor the development of any new finished goods for export as a result of efforts of the Crown.

The Targaryens do not seem to have bankrolled any efforts to increase the education, training, or organization of craftsmen in Westeros. The Citadel predated the Targaryen conquest and while the Hightowers are noted patrons, there is little or no mention of Targaryen involvement.

The Targaryens have not engaged in any real monument or infrastructure building that merits any mention. There are some suggestions that they had a hand in extending the Kingsroad, but the quality of the road is poor in many locations and they do not seem to have been involved in a long-term effort to maintain it. They are mentioned at several points of having done a poor job of providing security for travelers. What Targaryen building projects we know about are almost exclusively for their own use (King's Landing, Summerhall). This is part of a wider trend of stagnation and lack of construction in the realm as a whole.

With the exception of the reign of Jaehaerys I, the Targaryens are not known to have introduced any meanginful political or economic reforms to contribute to the development and stability of the realm.

You would expect successful dynasties to have done all of these things at some point. Perhaps not all rulers would be equally interested or adept at all of them, but they are fronts along which you'd expect to see advancement. At best, the Targaryens could be considered to have been treading water as they presided over a stagnant realm they made no effort to improve.

[Señor de la Tormenta 2]

We've already discussed the fighting pre-Conquest, but the new regime's first act was to slaughter innocent children, causing a feud between the Lannisters and Tyrells. After Robert took over and the Baratheons controlled the crown, I think almost every major House is actually gathering armies to fight some other House. That is not on equal scale with militias or guerilla groups on borders, or kingdom vs. kingdom, because the Houses frequently have allies to help bolster their armies.

The Lannisters have since fought Starks, Greyjoys, Martells, and Tullys all at different degrees. The Starks have feuded with the Boltons for hundreds of years, adding to that now Lannisters, Freys, current Boltons, Greyjoys. The current Baratheon is basically fighting all Houses who are not allies. The Greyjoys are terrorizing the Reach. Now, the Lannisters and Tyrells have a good chance of becoming enemies. And that list is nowhere near complete. Just my opinion but that seems way worse than before Robert's Rebellion. Squabbles between petty lords are one thing, full out wars between multiple Houses, with multiple allies, is quite another.

How does it tie in? War hands down reduces prosperity. Goods can't travel, merchants cannot safely sell, crops and belongings are burned, families are robbed, men are killed, and now winter is coming and the conflict is only gaining momentum. I'm sorry but I am seriously unconvinced that the Targaryens did not bring more prosperity than other regimes.

As my final point, I will point out that sticky little situation with, oh, the whole Iron Bank is going to start killing if Westeros' enormous debt is not paid. Who acquired that debt? .......Robert Baratheon, Joffrey and Cersei Lannister.....

You know...you are just probing my point that the Iron Throne institution created by Targaryrns sucks. This is no more than an other war for the IT just like thre Dances of Dragons and all the Blackfyres. Wars are in a whole larger scale, with many more dead people.

[Darth Visenya]

Why did this need a 2nd topic

Because Senor de la Tormenta clearly has a real hard on for Targ bashing at the moment.

[Señor de la Tormenta 2]

Because Senor de la Tormenta clearly has a real hard on for Targ bashing at the moment.

:( I need it...dont judge me

[Darth Visenya]

:( I need it...dont judge me

Do what you need to do, I don't judge but I may not agree :P.

[Free Northman Reborn]

I think the answer is more complicated than just yes or no. In short, I think the Targs had different impacts on the different regions of Westeros.

Specifically, I think their rule has been most beneficial to the most vulnerable "central" kingdoms, that have weak borders and are open to attack by other kingdoms from multiple fronts. In particular, I refer to the Reach and the Riverlands. I think these two kingdoms have prospered tremendously from central Targaryen rule and that they would have the most to lose from the Seven Kingdoms breaking up again.

Under Targ rule the Reach could stop spending a vast portion of their wealth trying to shore up defences against Dorne in the South, the Stormlands in the East, the Riverlands in the North, Casterly Rock in the West and the Ironborn around the Shield Islands.

With the removal of these threats the Reach could instantly transform themselves into the powerhouse of Westeros, where before they probably spent all of their resources just trying to keep all their fronts more or less secure. House Gardener must have been in a state of constant paranoia with so many enemies surrounding them at all times.

Targaryen taxes probably trifled in comparison to the vast costs of securing such an immense front line on all sides, and therefore their wealth and population probably grew drastically since Aegon's conquest.

The same goes for the Riverlands, which was largely ruled as vassal territories of other more powerful kingdoms up until Aegon's arrival. I think they too grew in prosperity greatly since the Targaryens arrived.

I think these benefits were probably less significant in the case of more defensible areas like the West, the Vale and Dorne. The West probably grew in prosperity due to the ability to provide funding to former enemies and thus earn wealth from the interest.

But the Vale and Dorne were probably no better or worse off than before.

The North however is a unique case, and I think they were clearly one of the few kingdoms - perhaps the only one - to actually go into a steep decline as a result of the unified Westeros. The taxes they now had to pay to the Iron Throne are clearly a great burden to them, considering that Manderly was able to fortify White Harbor and build a fleet of 50 ships with the silver he gained from simply witholding said taxes for a single year.

Furthermore, the Night's Watch has declined dramatically, meaning that the North is now more rather than less vulnerable to wildling invasions than before, thus having to dedicate more of their own resources to securing their northern border.

Similarly with Ironborn invasions, which the Iron Throne has done nothing to curb. The Starks had to deal with Dagon Greyjoy themselves.

The Kingsroad is a mere rutted track in the North - it is clearly the same track that was used for aeons before the Targaryns arrived. Most trade in the North is in fact conducted via the White Knife and the port of White Harbor, rather than overland via the Kingsroad through the Neck.

The North also didn't need the Iron Throne's protection to secure its southern borders, as their borders were already impregnable from southron attack for 8000 years. 200 bowmen can hold an army at Neck, so the effort of securing that border was negligible in the past. Far cheaper than the taxes the North now had to fork up to the Iron Throne.

And lastly, the lack of internal warfare amongst the southron kingdoms meant that they grew disproportionately stronger and wealthier thanks to Targaryen rule, while the North did not gain a similar benefit. So proportionally, the North shrunk in terms of power and influence compared to their status prior to Aegon's conquest.

One more thing is that a gradual migration of peasants from the North to the South may have begun once the kingdoms were united, as people sought a more forgiving climate in the South now that the borders were more open than before.

So altogether, I think Targaryen rule has been bad for the North, probably had little or no impact on the likes of Dorne and the Vale, had a positive impact on the West, and a huge benefit to the Reach and the Riverlands.

So different results for different kingdoms. A breakup of the Seven Kingdoms would likely be disastrous for the Reach and the Riverlands, but very, very good for the North.

Which is why I am in favour of such a breakup.

[Señor de la Tormenta 2]

I think the answer is more complicated than just yes or no. In short, I think the Targs had different impacts on the different regions of Westeros.

Specifically, I think their rule has been most beneficial to the most vulnerable "central" kingdoms, that have weak borders and are open to attack by other kingdoms from multiple fronts. In particular, I refer to the Reach and the Riverlands. I think these two kingdoms have prospered tremendously from central Targaryen rule and that they would have the most to lose from the Seven Kingdom breaking up again.

Under Targ rule the Reach could stop spending a vast portion of their wealth trying to shore up defences against Dorne in the South, the Stormlands in the East, the Riverlands in the North, Casterly Rock in the West and the Ironborn around the Shield Islands.

With the removal of these threats the Reach could instantly transform themselves into the powerhouse of Westeros, where before they probably spent all of their resources just trying to keep all their fronts more or less secure. House Gardener must have been in a state of constant paranoia with so many enemies surrounding them at all times.

Targaryen taxes probably trifled in comparison to the vast costs of securing such an immense front line on all sides, and therefore their wealth and population probably grew drastically since Aegon's conquest.

The same goes for the Riverlands, which was largely ruled as vassal territories of other more powerful kingdoms up until Aegon's arrival. I think they too grew in prosperity greatly since the Targaryens arrived.

I think these benefits were probably less significant to more defensible areas like the West, the Vale and Dorne. The West probably grew in prosperity due to the ability to provide funding to former enemies and thus earn wealth from the interest.

But the Vale and Dorne were probably no better or worse off than before.

The North however is a unique case, and I think they were clearly one of the few kingdoms - perhaps the only one - to actually go into a steep decline as a result of the unified Westeros. The taxes they now had to pay to the Iron Throne are clearly a great burden to them, considering that Manderly was able to fortify White Harbor and build a fleet of 50 ships with the silver he gained from simply witholding said taxes for a single year.

Furthermore, the Night's Watch has declined dramatically, meaning that the North is now more rather than less vulnerable to wildling invasions than before, thus having to dedicate more of their own resources to securing their northern border.

Similarly with Ironborn invasions, which the Iron Throne has done nothing to curb. The Starks had to deal with Dagon Greyjoy themselves.

The Kingsroad is a mere rutted track in the North - it is clearly the same track that was used for aeons before the Targaryns arrived. Most trade in the North is in fact conducted via the White Knife and the port of White Harbor, rather than overland via the Kingsroad through the Neck.

The North also didn't need the Iron Throne's protection to secure its borders, as their borders were already impregnable from southron attack for 8000 years. 200 bowmen can hold an army at Neck, so the effort of securing that border was negligible in the past. Far cheaper than the taxes the North now had to fork up to the Iron Throne.

And lastly, the lack of internal warfare amongst the southron kingdoms meant that they grew disproportionately stronger and wealthier thanks to Targaryen rule, while the North did not gain a similar benefit. So proportionally, the North shrunk in terms of power and influence compared to their status prior to Aegon's conquest.

One more thing is that a gradual migration of peasants from the North to the South may have begun once the kingdoms were united, as people sought a more forgiving climate in the South now that the borders were more open than before.

So altogether, I think Targaryen rule has been bad for the North, probably had little or no impact on the likes of Dorne and the Vale, had a positive impact on the West, and a huge benefit to the Reach and the Vale.

So different results for different kingdoms. A breakup of the Seven Kingdoms would likely be disastrous for the Reach and the Riverlands, but very, very good for the North.

Which is why I am in favour of such a breakup.

I must say this is a great post. Its always a plesure to read you.

I agree with almost all, besides the River lands part...

Three major castles (with population and development) were built in the 700 years before Targaryens. And later, we cant even see a bridge being made when it is clear it would be a great asset for the one who does it.

[Free Northman Reborn]

I must say this is a great post. Its always a plesure to read you.

I agree with almost all, besides the River lands part...

Three major castles (with population and development) were built in the 700 years before Targaryens. And later, we cant even see a bridge being made when it is clear it would be a great asset for the one who does it.

I don't really see much in the way of new castle building anywhere in Westeros anymore. It's kind of like everywhere there is need for a castle, there is an ancient one already. Harrenhal was built on the back of thrall labour and is an anomaly.

In any case, I want to move onto another point, which is the main trade ports of the East coast and the Targaryen effect on them.

It is sometimes easy to forget that King's Landing is a mere 300 years old. Before Aegon's Landing, there was not a single port city between Gulltown and Oldtown for 8000 years. The entire east coast of the South was without a port city outside the Vale. And given the need to take the High Road just to get to the Vale, no inland trade from the Riverlands or other regions could have been conducted via Gulltown. So essentially, the bulk of the South was without an eastern port for 8000 years.

Similarly, White Harbor was founded 1000 years ago. For the previous 7000 years, there was no major Northern port in existence.

Here I exclude small port towns like the Wolf's Den that preceded White Harbor, Saltpans and Maidenpool. These no doubt existed, but were likely no larger than the rather pitiful Lordsport in the Iron Isles is today.

In any case, the major change that increased the feasibility of large ports on the Westerosi eatern seaboard was not Aegon's conquest. Instead, it was the founding of Braavos and other northern Free cities within the last 1000 years. Braavos was only founded 800 years ago. It is the closest city to White Harbor, and its major trading partner.

It is no coincidence that White Harbor has boomed since Braavos became the powerful force that it is. Before Braavos and Pentos, there was virtually no one for White Harbor to trade with. The Free Cities excluding Volantis, are rather recent additions to the Narrow Sea economic landscape.

That's why Oldtown was the major port in the past, because all Essosi trade really had to be with Volantis in the Far South. Braavos changed that. And the result is the growth of White Harbor, Gulltown and King's Landing much more recently.

[Sansa_Stark]

What happened to your old account FN??

[Free Northman Reborn]

What happened to your old account FN??

I don't know. Suddenly I couldn't log in anymore. Ran then posted some message saying that we need to renew our passwords or something, but I don't have the old email account I originally used to register on this site anymore.

So there was no way to get my password renewed. So I was forced to re-register with a new account. So my post count is down to 1 again. I just add an extra 4000 or so posts to it in my head.

[Señor de la Tormenta 2]

I hope theyll fix it one day an give us our old accounts back. In my case, the new password is just not sent.

[PrimeRhaegar]

another thread like this hmmm. Well its seems the only people who complain about the targ rule are northern fans since the north had to pay tax and depend on the King's peace so it seems that they have lost significant power. Still i didn't see anyone northerner in the novels complaining about the system, until great jon said well the targs are gone lets go back to the old way.

It is true that it is the southern system that benefited greater from the targ reign since the riverlands basically stopped being the westeros "disputed lands" and were given a central power and the iron born were basically put down. Still Targs seems to globalize westeros in building KL, since i wonder where the storm lands got their trade from. They gave the citadel a date to organize history by and made institutions that many follow i.e KG, Small Council blah blah blah.

I will never understand why people always bring up fighting still happening under the targ reign. No duh thats human nature and nobles will always find reason to fight each other, especially in westeros where honour and pride is concerned. Did people think the targs have mind control powers to stop that too oh lord.

[thelittledragonthatcould]

another thread like this hmmm. Well its seems the only people who complain about the targ rule are northern fans since the north had to pay tax and depend on the King's peace so it seems that they have lost significant power. Still i didn't see anyone northerner in the novels complaining about the system, until great jon said well the targs are gone lets go back to the old way.

The North as a realm and the Lords who control land will have suffered but the average schmuck would of been better off as he would of had the opportunity to work in a field down south rather than the harsh North.

[PrimeRhaegar]

The North as a realm and the Lords who control land will have suffered but the average schmuck would of been better off as he would of had the opportunity to work in a field down south rather than the harsh North.

unless he gets home sick some people like those harsh fields but i feel ya bro. Having a single currency and better migration will always be a plus for me

[thelittledragonthatcould]

unless he gets home sick some people like those harsh fields but i feel ya bro.

The way some of the Northerners described the winters, as going out to die rather than be another mouth to feed sounds pretty bleak. Plus we hear of First night practices still going on in the North and that people have to abandon their homes because of Wildling raids I can not see too many peasents being homesick.

And for the religious of the North wouldnt working near the isle of faces(like an old gods mecca) be something that they would want

[PrimeRhaegar]

The way some of the Northerners described the winters, as going out to die rather than be another mouth to feed sounds pretty bleak. Plus we hear of First night practices still going on in the North and that people have to abandon their homes because of Wildling raids I can not see too many peasents being homesick.

And for the religious of the North wouldnt working near the isle of faces(like an old gods mecca) be something that they would want

who knows what they want people most times never know what they want.

[Señor de la Tormenta 2]

The way some of the Northerners described the winters, as going out to die rather than be another mouth to feed sounds pretty bleak. Plus we hear of First night practices still going on in the North and that people have to abandon their homes because of Wildling raids I can not see too many peasents being homesick.

And for the religious of the North wouldnt working near the isle of faces(like an old gods mecca) be something that they would want

well.....downsouth rhaegar went into first night practice with Roberts fiance...lol