Rickard Stark, Jon Arryn, and Hoster Tully we’re completely justified.

[Craving Peaches]

27 minutes ago, King_Tristifer_IV_Mudd said:

Jonos Arryn

Was he the mad one who had his brother chucked out the Moon Door?

[King_Tristifer_IV_Mudd]

21 minutes ago, Craving Peaches said:

Was he the mad one who had his brother chucked out the Moon Door?

Yes

[csuszka1948]

12 hours ago, The hairy bear said:

During the Targaryen rule we have had: the wars of Conquest, the war between Maegor and Aegon the Uncrowned, the Faith militant uprising, four Dornish wars, the Dance of Dragons,the Conquest of Dorne, five Blackfyre Rebellions, the Peake Uprising, Tywin's war against the Reynes,...

The idea that unified Westeros has been an oasis of peace, friendship and neighborly harmony is blatantly false.

 

Approximately 20 years of warring, while Westeros was at an almost constant state of war before Aegon's Conquest. 

From GRRM's interviews it's clear that he thinks of an unified Westeros as a good thing.

[csuszka1948]

21 hours ago, Lady Stonehearts Simp said:

If you are like I, then you believe the theory that the Lords of the North, Riverlands, Vale, and Stormlands were planning on seceding from the 7K. 
 

 

There is no evidence whatsoever that this is true. 

If they tried to do it, they would have been crushed like a bug by the Westerlands, the Reach, Dorne and their own rebellious vassals vying to take their place.

21 hours ago, Lady Stonehearts Simp said:

The Targaryen rule of Westeros was only ever as legitimate as their ability to keep it together. Not only that, the Targaryens routinely abused their power and subjects as much as they helped Westeros. The North being the perfect example. Ending the right of first night was a good thing, though it was a dying tradition anyway. But immediately giving the Gift to the NW essentially took farmland away from the Northern lords, and gave it to a group that could never use it. Lest we also forget before that how Lords Jaehaerys sent to the Wall rebelled again and killed a Stark Lord. And then the Dance of the Dragons where the North had a poor harvest, that could’ve been aided by the land, and the civil war made sure that the rest of 7K couldn’t help.

In short, they were absolutely in the right to rebel against the weak and ineffectual Targaryens of their time.

 

How was the disunified Westeros better? Do you think the Kings of the Rock, Reach etc. didn't occassionally abuse their subjects? Weren't they constantly warring each other?

We see that after the Targaryen dynasty is overthrown, their successors, the Baratheons didn't prove one whit better, but they lack the legitimacy the Targaryens had. Robert usurping the Throne set a precedent that led into Balon's Rebellion (Balon never knelt to Robert) and the War of the 5 Kings (Renly basing his kingship on Robert's actions, and Northern independence justified by "It was the dragons we married, and the dragons are all dead!", and Balon again). 

[csuszka1948]

On 6/12/2023 at 10:53 AM, X-Buster said:

This is absolutely wrong.  Westeros was a backwards place with the lords always fighting among themselves.  The common people were suffering under their rule.  The Targaryens brought order to Westeros. 

 

 

 

 

 

On broad strokes, I agree, but we shouldn't ignore the incredible entitlement that the Targaryens possessed and the suffering it caused.

On 6/12/2023 at 10:53 AM, X-Buster said:

The only thing we can agree on is the existence of an evil conspiracy on the parts of those families to rebel.  We are in agreement.  King Aerys had the right to execute Brandon and Rickard.  Robert and Eddard were knowing and willing participants to treason and deserved to die for it.  Lyanna, if she was found, should be given a chance to condemn her family.  Is she refuses she gets the axe. 

 

 

 

 

If such a conspiracy existed, why don't we hear about it from Ned's POV? Why don't we hear from Jaime the accusations laid out against Brandon&Rickard?

It's ridiculous that people think that 'Aerys was justified'.

Edited June 13, 2023 by csuszka1948

[csuszka1948]

6 hours ago, Craving Peaches said:

It's fair to say that the frequency of wars post-Conquest probably decreased compared to pre-Conquest, but in exchange the scale of conflicts increased significantly. So whether the effects of war on the populous really lessened is debatable.

 

I am pretty sure they did, at least after Jahaerys took the Throne.

[csuszka1948]

On 6/12/2023 at 1:07 PM, Craving Peaches said:

Common people suffer under Targaryen rule as well, aside from maybe Aegon V, who was clearly the exception not the rule. No pre-Targaryen ruler that we know of was burning people alive for fun and sexual pleasure.

 

 

 

To be honest, if any kind of 'conspiracy' existed between Hoster&Jon Arryn&Rickard (and I don't think it did), it for the purpose of 'restraining' the King from committing similar overreaches (trying to take away noble's rights) as Aegon V did.

Edited June 13, 2023 by csuszka1948

[Craving Peaches]

17 minutes ago, King_Tristifer_IV_Mudd said:

Yes

I find him weirdly inspiring. He had the guts to rebel against the Targaryens even though they had dragons. Or maybe he was just psychotic. Who knows.

[Craving Peaches]

People in-universe don't seem to use this 'wars were worse before the Targaryens came' argument. The Targaryens themselves don't use it. Aegon didn't use it as 'justification' to conquer Westeros. One would think they would do so because it makes good propaganda. Therefore it seems either it is so blatantly untrue that it could be refuted by anyone, or for some reason they haven't thought of using that argument...

Edited June 12, 2023 by Craving Peaches

[Alester Florent]

14 hours ago, Craving Peaches said:

People in-universe don't seem to use this 'wars were worse before the Targaryens came' argument. The Targaryens themselves don't use it. Aegon didn't use it as 'justification' to conquer Westeros. One would think they would do so because it makes good propaganda. Therefore it seems either it is so blatantly untrue that it could be refuted by anyone, or for some reason they haven't thought of using that argument...

It's because the Targ fanboys are thinking about it like 21st-century civilians, rather than Westerosi nobles. To a modern civilian, war is bad, and to be avoided, and therefore imposing a centralised if arbitrary and brutal rule in order to avoid wars is generally good (I am not sure I agree with this take, but I don't disagree that war is bad).

To a Westerosi noble, sometimes it is inconvenient, but if you can go to war and win, then great. For knights, war is basically their job. They spend their time training for war and the men (and it's nearly all men) who win wars are the greatest heroes of their society. The peasants (who come off badly when the armies march through without necessarily any recompense) might disagree, but Westeros isn't a democracy, so who cares what they think.

So we might be able to convince ourselves that the Targs did Westeros a favour by reducing the number (if not the scale) of wars, although I think citations are very much needed on that, and I also know we won't get them because the pre-conquest history is so vague. We know of a number of wars, but with a couple of exceptions not how long they lasted or necessarily how extensive they were, or when they happened in a period of potentially thousands of years.

But one thing I think we can be certain of is that this is an argument by Targ fanboys and not one the Targs would ever make themselves, because the Targs are wholly steeped in the "Westerosi noble" school of thought and would therefore be puzzled at the "war is bad" part of the premise.

[Lady_Qohor]

4 hours ago, Alester Florent said:

To a Westerosi noble, sometimes it is inconvenient, but if you can go to war and win, then great. For knights, war is basically their job.

Absolutely, for nobles who aren't really allowed to work, war is basically one of the only ways (other than marriage) that they can increase their wealth or gain prestige

[csuszka1948]

4 hours ago, Alester Florent said:

But one thing I think we can be certain of is that this is an argument by Targ fanboys and not one the Targs would ever make themselves, because the Targs are wholly steeped in the "Westerosi noble" school of thought and would therefore be puzzled at the "war is bad" part of the premise.

 

 

 

 

 

Yes, you are right that Westerosi nobles - including the Targs - wouldn't make such arguments, but that doesn't make them false.

 

You can say the same to the arguments of the 'anti-Targ fans', though: they think that the nobles were right to rebel against the Targaryens and overthrow the Targaryen dynasty because 'Aerys has broken the feudal contract and this causes him and his line to be disinherited', but in-universe nobody says this, it's clear that they rebelled against Aerys out of personal grievances (death of Brandon and Rickard, wishing Robert and Ned dead) and Robert has taken the Throne by right of conquest.

Does the fact that nobody uses this argument in-universe incorrect? I don't think so (if there is a problem with this argument, it's only the fact that Robert didn't actually overhaul the system and allowed the same injustices to persist).

Edited June 13, 2023 by csuszka1948

[James Arryn]

22 hours ago, Craving Peaches said:

I find him weirdly inspiring. He had the guts to rebel against the Targaryens even though they had dragons. Or maybe he was just psychotic. Who knows.

You will warn us, won’t you, when you’re feeling a little ‘inspired’?

[Craving Peaches]

1 hour ago, James Arryn said:

You will warn us, won’t you, when you’re feeling a little ‘inspired’?

Maybe. Or maybe not. The 'fun' of not knowing will keep everyone on edge.

[Otatop1000]

6 hours ago, Lady_Qohor said:

Absolutely, for nobles who aren't really allowed to work, war is basically one of the only ways (other than marriage) that they can increase their wealth or gain prestige

Nobles for sure “work”.  Trade, I’m sure they collect taxes of some sort(to be passed to the crown after they’ve had their piece), city building, as well as seeing to the day to day matters of their keeps, holds, and realms.  And yes ‘war, war never changes.’