assjfjgjsgjljljglgjfjsduar Posted October 4, 2013 Share Posted October 4, 2013 And while the kingdoms of the Andals and the First-men stayed pretty much the same, border-wise for thousands of years; the Targs were overthrown in 300. Pretty piss poor rulers too.Yeah I always have to roll my eyes when anyone crows about the Targs' "impressive" 300-year tenure. The Starks (whose kingdom makes up HALF the Seven Kingdoms), Lannisters, Arryns, Gardeners, etc. lasted for thousands. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Roose The Weddingcrasher Posted October 4, 2013 Share Posted October 4, 2013 Rhaegar truly brought delight to Robert when he got his chest crushed ♥ . And the rubies that fell from it made many suffering and exhausted men and their families happy. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Queen Elsa Posted October 4, 2013 Share Posted October 4, 2013 Favorite Targs of mine are Dany badass trio Aegon, Rhaenys and Visenya (can't get any more badass than these three, bend your damn knee!) Maester Aemon was a great person These! I include Jahaerys I, Alysanne, Shiera Seastar, Aemon the Dragonknight, Baelor Breakspear, Daena the Defiant... probably more. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Nami Posted October 4, 2013 Author Share Posted October 4, 2013 I really wonder how queen Rhaella wasI bet she was very beautiful and regal Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Lord Bronn Stokeworth Posted October 4, 2013 Share Posted October 4, 2013 So, Targ fans, I'm curious of the thoughts of the upcoming Princess and the Queen. I mean, I figure you're excited. But I'm curious what you the characters we know from history before we get to know them in story. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
C0bR Posted October 4, 2013 Share Posted October 4, 2013 Yeah, half of the Westerosi houses were there when the Valyrians were still mating with sheeps in the holes of Valyrian Penninsula and half of them will be there after the legend of incest comes to its end. 300 years? Not impressed. Also, nice thread hijack, boys and girls :cool4: Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Count Balerion Posted October 4, 2013 Share Posted October 4, 2013 i've always wondered about this business of kingdoms lasting for thousands of years with the same houses intact. given the events in the books, it seems that westerosi politics (like anywhere else) can get pretty rough, so that there ought to have been a lot of overthrowing and civil wars and general mayhem going on. how did it manage to be so stable for so long? (to be honest, i have to suspend my disbelief a bit.) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
C0bR Posted October 4, 2013 Share Posted October 4, 2013 i've always wondered about this business of kingdoms lasting for thousands of years with the same houses intact. given the events in the books, it seems that westerosi politics (like anywhere else) can get pretty rough, so that there ought to have been a lot of overthrowing and civil wars and general mayhem going on. how did it manage to be so stable for so long? (to be honest, i have to suspend my disbelief a bit.) Unrealistic writing and bad history records. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TheMysteriousOne Posted October 4, 2013 Share Posted October 4, 2013 I've always thought that the a lot of the dates in pre-Targaryen history are inaccurate. Barely any maesters, IIRC, actually believe that the Wall is 8000 years old. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RoamingRonin Posted October 4, 2013 Share Posted October 4, 2013 i've always wondered about this business of kingdoms lasting for thousands of years with the same houses intact. given the events in the books, it seems that westerosi politics (like anywhere else) can get pretty rough, so that there ought to have been a lot of overthrowing and civil wars and general mayhem going on. how did it manage to be so stable for so long? (to be honest, i have to suspend my disbelief a bit.) Well, it wasn't really stable, was it? House Gardener collapsed and gave way to House Highgarden. Highgarden now has a tense relationship with House Fossoway (there are TWO House Fossoways, mind). The Casterly's lost the Rock to the Lannisters and the Starks warred with the Boltons more than once. The Starks splintered to become the Karstarks. Before that, the Children of the Forest lost the land to the First Men. Then they both gave way to the Andals. The seven kingdoms were never stable. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
assjfjgjsgjljljglgjfjsduar Posted October 4, 2013 Share Posted October 4, 2013 I've always thought that the a lot of the dates in pre-Targaryen history are inaccurate. Barely any maesters, IIRC, actually believe that the Wall is 8000 years old.Even if the history is off, which I agree it probably is, however long those families have ruled is still multitudes longer than the Targs' tenure. Bear in mind too that just about every major cultural and architectural feature of note in Westeros, barring the shithole that is King's Landing, predated the Targs. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Nami Posted October 4, 2013 Author Share Posted October 4, 2013 "all you bitches bow down to me or I'll burn you all"that's right Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mad Monkey Posted October 4, 2013 Share Posted October 4, 2013 How come that Targaryens are bashed for bragging about the whole dragon thing but Lannisters and Starks get to run around pretending to be lions and wolves and spouting equally pompous slogans? It seems to me that in Westerosi culture basically every noble family associates themselves with some kind of creature or emblem as a symbol of their house. The Targaryens happened to choose dragons because that's what their ancestors used to cross the Narrow Sea -- it doesn't make them unusually arrogant or self-important. The fact that they are a noble family makes them arrogant and self-important, and that's a flaw that you'll see among every single noble family that's worth noting in the series. Doesn't make too much sense to me that Targaryens are singled out for opprobrium. i've always wondered about this business of kingdoms lasting for thousands of years with the same houses intact. given the events in the books, it seems that westerosi politics (like anywhere else) can get pretty rough, so that there ought to have been a lot of overthrowing and civil wars and general mayhem going on. how did it manage to be so stable for so long? (to be honest, i have to suspend my disbelief a bit.) Samwell Tarly flat-out tells Jon Snow that the histories of Westeros are filled with things like this. Let's face it -- the Targaryens have 300 years of solid (in terms of documentation), well-historied government. You can't compare that to the vaguely-remembered and implausible stories of ancient dynasties where each king was reigned for a century and there were no wars or civil strife. That's NOT to say that the Targaryens were the best kings -- far from it. But it's a mistake to take stories from the Age of Heroes and use them to support an argument that the pre-Targaryen era was stable and well-managed. As far as I can tell, people are people no matter how far back in time you go. There were almost certainly noble lords and treacherous ones back then just as there were when the Targaryens were in power or when the Baratheons were in charge. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RoamingRonin Posted October 4, 2013 Share Posted October 4, 2013 How come that Targaryens are bashed for bragging about the whole dragon thing but Lannisters and Starks get to run around pretending to be lions and wolves and spouting equally pompous slogans? It seems to me that in Westerosi culture basically every noble family associates themselves with some kind of creature or emblem as a symbol of their house. The Targaryens happened to choose dragons because that's what their ancestors used to cross the Narrow Sea -- it doesn't make them unusually arrogant or self-important. The fact that they are a noble family makes them arrogant and self-important, and that's a flaw that you'll see among every single noble family that's worth noting in the series. Doesn't make too much sense to me that Targaryens are singled out for opprobrium. Because having dragons = cheating. They are weapons of mass destruction and will cause tons and tons of damage and death if they are used. That's all these arguments amount to. Dragons just equal power. Some people have more power than others. You either deal with it or die.Torrhen Stark submitted to a more powerful force and saved his people. The Field of Fire didn't have to happen. But it did. Also: :bowdown: to the rest of your post. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The guy from the Vale Posted October 5, 2013 Share Posted October 5, 2013 Because having dragons = cheating. They are weapons of mass destruction and will cause tons and tons of damage and death if they are used. That's all these arguments amount to. Dragons just equal power. Some people have more power than others. You either deal with it or die.Torrhen Stark submitted to a more powerful force and saved his people. The Field of Fire didn't have to happen. But it did. Also: :bowdown: to the rest of your post. And why would the Stark's warging (and associated Direwolf sigil) not constitute cheating? Don't get me wrong, I love the Starks, but the advantage of being able to turn animals against your opponents is pretty strong too. Not quite dragon level, but still a large advantage - and probably less earned than the Targ dragons, from some perspective. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Lord Bronn Stokeworth Posted October 5, 2013 Share Posted October 5, 2013 And why would the Stark's warging (and associated Direwolf sigil) not constitute cheating? Don't get me wrong, I love the Starks, but the advantage of being able to turn animals against your opponents is pretty strong too. Not quite dragon level, but still a large advantage - and probably less earned than the Targ dragons, from some perspective. I think its because so far the dragons have been an auto-win from what we have seen. It kinda cuts down on the drama. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RoamingRonin Posted October 5, 2013 Share Posted October 5, 2013 And why would the Stark's warging (and associated Direwolf sigil) not constitute cheating? Don't get me wrong, I love the Starks, but the advantage of being able to turn animals against your opponents is pretty strong too. Not quite dragon level, but still a large advantage - and probably less earned than the Targ dragons, from some perspective. I don't think it's cheating at all but that's what it's made out to be. In this world of wargs, greenseers, shadow binders and maegi, dragons are just out of the question and need to be killed, it seems. Dany has been a wonder because of her dragons but no one ever feared them until the fifth book. Until then, she trump card were her Unsullied. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
J. Stargaryen Posted October 5, 2013 Share Posted October 5, 2013 Yeah I always have to roll my eyes when anyone crows about the Targs' "impressive" 300-year tenure. The Starks (whose kingdom makes up HALF the Seven Kingdoms), Lannisters, Arryns, Gardeners, etc. lasted for thousands. And yet they still bent the knee. Well, not the Gardeners... Aegon saw it true; one kingdom. Uniting all the peoples of Westeros will be the legacy of the Targaryens. If it took a little fire and a little blood so be it. When a Stark rules Westeros at the end of the story, as I believe will be the case, it will be the same kingdom that Aegon envisioned, more or less. Then all of the people of that kingdom will be Stark men! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Rhymes with Weak Posted October 5, 2013 Share Posted October 5, 2013 And yet they still bent the knee. Well, not the Gardeners... Aegon saw it true; one kingdom. Uniting all the peoples of Westeros will be the legacy of the Targaryens. If it took a little fire and a little blood so be it. When a Stark rules Westeros at the end of the story, as I believe will be the case, it will be the same kingdom that Aegon envisioned, more or less. Then all of the people of that kingdom will be Stark men! Racial cleansing FTW. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
J. Stargaryen Posted October 5, 2013 Share Posted October 5, 2013 Racial cleansing FTW. Hyperbole ftw. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.