The Targaryen Morality

[Damsel in Distress]

The Targaryens came to Dragonstone with a formidable company of dragons, weapons, allies, and ships.  They could have captured the weaker people of the West and sold them to slavery to build their wealth.  They did not do so.  Aegon even fought against the slave-owning state of Volantis and burned their fleet.  Profit was not a motive for the Targaryens.  The family was not greedy.  Put another family in their place and they would have used their dragons to subdue their neighbors and take their assets.  That is what a family like the Lannisters would have done. 

Many readers believe the making of Valyrian steel required human sacrifice.  The metal had great value.  The Targaryens could have built a factory on Dragonstone and sold these weapons for huge profit.  But they chose not to.  Many prominent Targaryens settled for regular steel rather than sacrifice the lives of people to make VS. 

The Targaryens left behind many of the darker customs of Valyria.  They only took their household slaves to Dragonstone to save them from the Doom.  These household slaves, who were really servants, were taken to Dragonstone and enjoyed the protection of Aenar and his family. 

The most important evidence of Targaryen morality is the fact that they did not use their powers for gain.  Use your imagination and think what a Westerosi noble family would have done if they had the power of the Targaryens.  The Targaryens chose to do good, to unify an unruly land and gave the people of their new kingdom a better government than they deserved.  Every family will have its share of asses but the Targaryens were pretty good people when compared to the other nobles in Westeros. 

[Lady Stonehearts Simp]

9 minutes ago, Damsel in Distress said:

The Targaryens came to Dragonstone with a formidable company of dragons, weapons, allies, and ships.  They could have captured the weaker people of the West and sold them to slavery to build their wealth.  They did not do so.  Aegon even fought against the slave-owning state of Volantis and burned their fleet.  Profit was not a motive for the Targaryens.  The family was not greedy.  Put another family in their place and they would have used their dragons to subdue their neighbors and take their assets.  That is what a family like the Lannisters would have done. 

Many readers believe the making of Valyrian steel required human sacrifice.  The metal had great value.  The Targaryens could have built a factory on Dragonstone and sold these weapons for huge profit.  But they chose not to.  Many prominent Targaryens settled for regular steel rather than sacrifice the lives of people to make VS. 

The Targaryens left behind many of the darker customs of Valyria.  They only took their household slaves to Dragonstone to save them from the Doom.  These household slaves, who were really servants, were taken to Dragonstone and enjoyed the protection of Aenar and his family. 

The most important evidence of Targaryen morality is the fact that they did not use their powers for gain.  Use your imagination and think what a Westerosi noble family would have done if they had the power of the Targaryens.  The Targaryens chose to do good, to unify an unruly land and gave the people of their new kingdom a better government than they deserved.  Every family will have its share of asses but the Targaryens were pretty good people when compared to the other nobles in Westeros. 

The Targs became massively wealthy after moving to Dragonstone by controlling trade on the Narrow Sea, and more than likely being the ones who sold most of the VS steel weapons to Westeros.

They we’re still slaves.

and they became massively powerful when they took over Westeros VIOLENTLY.

They are no better or worse than any other house.

[Craving Peaches]

38 minutes ago, Damsel in Distress said:

The most important evidence of Targaryen morality is the fact that they did not use their powers for gain.

They certainly did, they used them to conquer, subjugate and rule over a continent's worth of people. Were some of them benevolent dictators? Yes. But to pretend they did not use their dragons for gain is silly.

[SeanF]

1 hour ago, Damsel in Distress said:

 

The most important evidence of Targaryen morality is the fact that they did not use their powers for gain.  Use your imagination and think what a Westerosi noble family would have done if they had the power of the Targaryens.  The Targaryens chose to do good, to unify an unruly land and gave the people of their new kingdom a better government than they deserved.  Every family will have its share of asses but the Targaryens were pretty good people when compared to the other nobles in Westeros. 

Of course they used their powers for gain.  I think that Aegon, and his sisters, were pretty decent rulers, by the standards of their time and place, but they were still self-interested.

[Craving Peaches]

7 hours ago, Damsel in Distress said:

Many prominent Targaryens settled for regular steel rather than sacrifice the lives of people to make VS. 

First off, we don't know this, secondly, it is not like not sacrificing people to get rich is some great moral act. It is the default position that you don't murder people for gain. So the Targaryens doing this is nothing special.

[The Commentator]

They didn’t abuse their well-deserved power and authority. Just look at what happened when suddenly a power vacuum appeared. The War of the five kings. Opportunists is a better way to describe the five. Tywin wanted to take the north, Balon wanted a piece, Renly wanted the throne for himself, and Robb wanted to take the north away from the kingdom. Euron is the worst. Stan isn’t so bad other than he’s cruel.  

[Angel Eyes]

1 minute ago, The Commentator said:

They didn’t abuse their well-deserved power and authority. Just look at what happened when suddenly a power vacuum appeared. The War of the five kings. Opportunists is a better way to describe the five. Tywin wanted to take the north, Balon wanted a piece, Renly wanted the throne for himself, and Robb wanted to take the north away from the kingdom. Euron is the worst. Stan isn’t so bad other than he’s cruel.  

Right; so burning someone alive isn't abusing power?

[The Commentator]

2 minutes ago, Angel Eyes said:

Right; so burning someone alive isn't abusing power?

Cruel punishment is routine in Westeros. Essos is on another level. Boltons flay, the Starks sacrifice humans. 

[Lady Stonehearts Simp]

Just now, The Commentator said:

Cruel punishment is routine in Westeros. Essos is on another level. Boltons flay, the Starks sacrifice humans. 

[Craving Peaches]

23 minutes ago, The Commentator said:

the Starks sacrifice humans.

Really? Any proof?

[Lady Stonehearts Simp]

3 minutes ago, Craving Peaches said:

Really? Any proof?

He has none. There is zero evidence that Starks or the North carried out human sacrifice as a practice after the Conquest. And it probably stopped long before the Conquest

[StarkTullies]

The whole concept about "good families" or "bad families" across generations for hundreds/thousands of years is my least favorite thing about a large portion of ASOIAF fandom, and this forum in particular.

10 hours ago, Damsel in Distress said:

That is what a family like the Lannisters would have done. 

If Tywin Lannister had dragons during the War of the Five Kings, the Riverlands would be no more.  His father Tytos Lannister though... maybe he would have given his dragons away as gifts and his disloyal friends might have used them for destruction, but Tytos wouldn't have directly wreaked havok with them.  Westeros should be thankful the dragons died out before Aerys Targaryen II came to power, or else he would have burned the whole world.  There is no family where everyone is good, or everyone is bad, across all generations... obviously.

As my username might imply, I like the Starks and Tullys.  Not all Starks and Tullys: these Starks and Tullys (Lysa excluded).  The endless claims that Craster is a Stark, the Night's King is a Stark, the Bloodstone Emperor is a Stark, etc. annoys me greatly not because my sensitivities as a Stark fan are hurt.  It annoys me greatly because the claim that this person is bad so therefore everyone else of "their blood" must also be bad, is ludicrous.

10 hours ago, Damsel in Distress said:

Many readers believe the making of Valyrian steel required human sacrifice.  The metal had great value.  The Targaryens could have built a factory on Dragonstone and sold these weapons for huge profit.  But they chose not to.  Many prominent Targaryens settled for regular steel rather than sacrifice the lives of people to make VS. 

Adding an extra proof that the Targaryens are great because they didn't have human sacrifice factories to make Valyrian steel seems like a strange argument.  Resorting to that extremely low bar of morality to make Targaryens seem moral has the reverse effect, in my opinion.

25 minutes ago, The Commentator said:

the Starks sacrifice humans

Repeating a falsehood over and over again doesn't make it true.  They don't.  If you are talking about Starks from thousands of years ago, use the past tense.  "Their ancestors were evil, therefore they are evil too" is not a valid argument.

[Skahaz mo Kandaq]

11 hours ago, Damsel in Distress said:

The Targaryens came to Dragonstone with a formidable company of dragons, weapons, allies, and ships.  They could have captured the weaker people of the West and sold them to slavery to build their wealth.  They did not do so.  Aegon even fought against the slave-owning state of Volantis and burned their fleet.  Profit was not a motive for the Targaryens.  The family was not greedy.  Put another family in their place and they would have used their dragons to subdue their neighbors and take their assets.  That is what a family like the Lannisters would have done. 

Many readers believe the making of Valyrian steel required human sacrifice.  The metal had great value.  The Targaryens could have built a factory on Dragonstone and sold these weapons for huge profit.  But they chose not to.  Many prominent Targaryens settled for regular steel rather than sacrifice the lives of people to make VS. 

The Targaryens left behind many of the darker customs of Valyria.  They only took their household slaves to Dragonstone to save them from the Doom.  These household slaves, who were really servants, were taken to Dragonstone and enjoyed the protection of Aenar and his family. 

The most important evidence of Targaryen morality is the fact that they did not use their powers for gain.  Use your imagination and think what a Westerosi noble family would have done if they had the power of the Targaryens.  The Targaryens chose to do good, to unify an unruly land and gave the people of their new kingdom a better government than they deserved.  Every family will have its share of asses but the Targaryens were pretty good people when compared to the other nobles in Westeros. 

I would credit part of their success to their social isolation.  They ruled with impartiality during most of those 300 years and that is very important.  A monarch that is partial will fail to rule over a diverse population of subjects.  

[SeanF]

1 hour ago, Angel Eyes said:

Right; so burning someone alive isn't abusing power?

Burning people alive for shits and giggles is abusing power.

Burning people alive in war is not (all modern militaries do so),

[Angel Eyes]

Just now, SeanF said:

Burning people alive for shits and giggles is abusing power.

Burning people alive in war is not (all modern militaries do so),

I was leaning more towards the former.

[Corvo the Crow]

15 hours ago, Damsel in Distress said:

Many readers believe the making of Valyrian steel required human sacrifice.  The metal had great value.  The Targaryens could have built a factory on Dragonstone and sold these weapons for huge profit.  But they chose not to.  Many prominent Targaryens settled for regular steel rather than sacrifice the lives of people to make VS. 

Long ago, I made a thread (or perhaps posted it on several different threads, whatever) on how there was a sudden influx of Valyrian Steel to Westeros that so many families bought such items just around the time that Targaryens escaped the doom and came to Westeros. What a coincidence that of these over 200 VS items in Westeros the ones we know the history of all came around that era, isn't it? 

Valyrians are racial supremacist abominations of incest that kill people for swords.

 

[Only 89 selfies today]

On 2/17/2023 at 5:28 AM, Damsel in Distress said:

The Targaryens came to Dragonstone with a formidable company of dragons, weapons, allies, and ships.  They could have captured the weaker people of the West and sold them to slavery to build their wealth.  They did not do so.  Aegon even fought against the slave-owning state of Volantis and burned their fleet.  Profit was not a motive for the Targaryens.  The family was not greedy.  Put another family in their place and they would have used their dragons to subdue their neighbors and take their assets.  That is what a family like the Lannisters would have done. 

Many readers believe the making of Valyrian steel required human sacrifice.  The metal had great value.  The Targaryens could have built a factory on Dragonstone and sold these weapons for huge profit.  But they chose not to.  Many prominent Targaryens settled for regular steel rather than sacrifice the lives of people to make VS. 

The Targaryens left behind many of the darker customs of Valyria.  They only took their household slaves to Dragonstone to save them from the Doom.  These household slaves, who were really servants, were taken to Dragonstone and enjoyed the protection of Aenar and his family. 

The most important evidence of Targaryen morality is the fact that they did not use their powers for gain.  Use your imagination and think what a Westerosi noble family would have done if they had the power of the Targaryens.  The Targaryens chose to do good, to unify an unruly land and gave the people of their new kingdom a better government than they deserved.  Every family will have its share of asses but the Targaryens were pretty good people when compared to the other nobles in Westeros. 

The Targaryens could have taken advantage of their monopoly on power and abused the people of their Seven Kingdoms but they didn't.  They were the only ones who could be trusted with dragons and power.  Sure they had Aerys 2, Baelor, and Aegon 4, but that was only three bad kings in three centuries of unbroken rule.  Take the example of Aerys 2 and even then the people were living well under his reign.  How many shitty leaders has your country had in that span of time.

[Lord Varys]

18 hours ago, Corvo the Crow said:

Long ago, I made a thread (or perhaps posted it on several different threads, whatever) on how there was a sudden influx of Valyrian Steel to Westeros that so many families bought such items just around the time that Targaryens escaped the doom and came to Westeros. What a coincidence that of these over 200 VS items in Westeros the ones we know the history of all came around that era, isn't it?

That doesn't really fit with things. Ice was acquired roughly 400 years before Robert's reign by the Starks - which, if entirely accurate, would mean in the year 117 BC, i.e. three years before Aenar Targaryen moved his ass to Dragonstone and 15 years before the Doom. We also hear that it was spell-forged in Valyria, i.e. not on Dragonstone before the Doom.

The implication one has is that the Westerosi lords and kings acquired their Valyrian steel swords mainly in the century of Valyrian settlement on Dragonstone prior to the arrival of the Targaryens. Of course, Lord Aenar could also have sold Valyrian steel to Westerosi in the twelve years he and his family lived on Dragonstone before the Doom - but afterwards Valyrian steel would have been even more costly and rare since the only source of the metal - Valyria - was gone. The Targaryens are not likely to part with any Valyrian steel objects in the time after the Doom.

In that sense the idea would be that the other dragonlord governors (or whoever else was on Dragonstone before the Targaryens came) and perhaps also the Velaryons and some Free City folks sold Valyrian steel to Westerosi.

The richest kings and lords as well as such heavily involved in trade might have been the first acquiring Valyrian steel even earlier - the Lannisters happened to lose their Brightroar during the Century of Blood, they must have acquired it much earlier. One also imagines that the Hightowers acquired the Vigilance at a very early point considering they would have been likely one of the first Westerosi lords to establish trade relations with the Freehold of Valyria. Ditto with the Redwynes, if they have a Valyrian steel sword or other weapon of Valyrian steel.

In that context one also wonders whether the Gardeners ever had a Valyrian steel sword - and if so, what happened to it?

[King_Tristifer_IV_Mudd]

11 minutes ago, Lord Varys said:

That doesn't really fit with things. Ice was acquired roughly 400 years before Robert's reign by the Starks - which, if entirely accurate, would mean in the year 117 BC, i.e. three years before Aenar Targaryen moved his ass to Dragonstone and 15 years before the Doom. We also hear that it was spell-forged in Valyria, i.e. not on Dragonstone before the Doom.

The implication one has is that the Westerosi lords and kings acquired their Valyrian steel swords mainly in the century of Valyrian settlement on Dragonstone prior to the arrival of the Targaryens. Of course, Lord Aenar could also have sold Valyrian steel to Westerosi in the twelve years he and his family lived on Dragonstone before the Doom - but afterwards Valyrian steel would have been even more costly and rare since the only source of the metal - Valyria - was gone. The Targaryens are not likely to part with any Valyrian steel objects in the time after the Doom.

In that sense the idea would be that the other dragonlord governors (or whoever else was on Dragonstone before the Targaryens came) and perhaps also the Velaryons and some Free City folks sold Valyrian steel to Westerosi.

The richest kings and lords as well as such heavily involved in trade might have been the first acquiring Valyrian steel even earlier - the Lannisters happened to lose their Brightroar during the Century of Blood, they must have acquired it much earlier. One also imagines that the Hightowers acquired the Vigilance at a very early point considering they would have been likely one of the first Westerosi lords to establish trade relations with the Freehold of Valyria. Ditto with the Redwynes, if they have a Valyrian steel sword or other weapon of Valyrian steel.

In that context one also wonders whether the Gardeners ever had a Valyrian steel sword - and if so, what happened to it?

Do you think that 400 number is exact? 
 

You’ve never said something like it’s 4:00 in the afternoon but the clock is like 3:50

[Lord Varys]

4 minutes ago, Lord Edmure of Riverrun said:

Do you think that 400 number is exact? 
 

You’ve never said something like it’s 4:00 in the afternoon but the clock is like 3:50

I indicated that it wasn't exact, merely an approximation. My guess is that it could either be less than 400, but only within the timeframe of 102-117 BC, that is before the Doom took Valyria, or somewhat more then the people the Starks acquired it from would likely have been Valyrians who were in the vicinity of Westeros before the Targaryens showed up.

In fact, if you think how remote Winterfell ist, one imagines that the Starks acquired Ice through middlemen from White Harbor - either through contacts the Manderlys had at Dragonstone or perhaps even through contacts with Valyria directly.

Back before the Doom there must have been some trade between the big harbors of Westeros and the Lands of the Long Summer.