#first men and andals are colonizers

[horizon-verizon]

The fact that so many people think the Starks are honorable anticolonial fighters and the pinnacle of morality is absolutely insane, they literally built a massive wall to isolated a bunch of people they considered as “savages”, they hunted and slaughtered the Free Folk, the Children of the Forest, giants, exterminated whole houses and clans and took their daughters as “prizes” while conquering the North, etc. The Blackwoods were originally from the North and ruled most of the wolfswood, before being driven out by the Starks and forced to flee south. The Starks are the OG COLONIZERS in ASOIAF.

Even this did not give Winterfell dominion over all the North. Many other petty kings remained, ruling over realms great and small, and it would require thousands of years and many more wars before the last of them was conquered. Yet one by one, the Starks subdued them all, and during these struggles, many proud houses and ancient lines were extinguished forever. — The World of Ice and Fire – The North: The Kings of Winter.

I recently finished a Tiktok series that will probably just be as lost to the internet if we lose TikTok but I had to get out in response to a particular creator who bashes Rhaenyra while also proclaiming themselves as black stans. I think they are really more black stans because they hate Alicent personally and feels the thrill of the side-taking, but that's neither here nor there. 😏

To quote one of my mutuals here [rhaenin]:

It just rings so familiar to the way so many people view the other in real life. Because the Targaryens are overtly, and intentionally written as the other. It's the reason so many people identify with them, and it's the very same reason that other people vilify them. They're not just the in-universe other to the 'default' culture established in the text, but they're also given characteristics that we, the reader and audience, can recognize as other and even sometimes anathema to Western Christian culture. To paraphrase the annoying people that love to cite Ramsay when they feel like it: If you look at a morally complex family surrounded by other morally complex families in a morally complex world in a story that's famed for seeking to challenge your underlying assumptions, and think that their association with fire and brimstone is meant to signify their singular satanic evilness, rather than say... challenge that very Eurocentric assumption, you haven't been paying attention. This vilification mindset where the Targaryens are the singular evil of Westeros is so common to people who seem to want to consume ASoIaF without engaging with the criticisms of the Eurocentric worldview of history at the heart of it. And they end up using the convenient “others” to project all the wrongs of that world onto so they don't need to examine it any deeper. ........... It comes from the same place with how someone pointed out that the baffling bastardphobia that would have medieval peasants giving the side eye is so often people jumping at the chance to “cosplay” as bigots who base their arguments in misogyny and bio-essentialism. Because it's an acceptable channel to indulge in that mindset in a way that they'd often otherwise question, or at least hold back from expressing out of caution.

[rhaenin-time]

Dany isn't a "white saviour" as we understand them in our world.

It's hard to explain so I'll leave it at this for now:

She's what a "white saviour" pictures themselves as, what they model themselves after, but she, herself, is not a "white saviour." The context needed for her to be a "white saviour" does not apply; it's debatable if it even really exists in ASOIAF.

A "white saviour" is someone who benefits from oppression, and wants a pat on the back for playing hero by "softening" that oppression for a day. The closest she gets to "white saviour" territory is actually in book 1 when she protects the women from Drogo's men. And even then, she had little agency to do anything further, was far more helpful than most "white saviours" could ever dream of, and most importantly, that's when she learns you can't hide behind small mercies in unjust systems; you need to ABOLISH the unjust systems.

If anything, her early arc is literally an anti "white saviour" arc. Because "white saviours" don't use their power to abolish unjust systems. The unjust systems are the SOURCE of their power, and they use their power to hide their complicity behind the very small mercies Dany knows to be insufficient.

[starrynights23]

shoutout to the person on tiktok who posted a video calling every targaryen supporter a colonialist, monarchist sellout.

you’ve shown me the light. i know who i am now. my support of fake people for a fake throne in a fake country in a fake world actually does actually show my political inclinations in real life and it does make me a bad person! i don’t know how i didn’t notice before!

anyway i’m campaigning to overthrow democracy in order to establish john mulaney as king of america and then i’m establishing a settler colony in the subway tunnels of new york city if anyone wants to pitch in

[polysucks]

why you think starks are brown. No hate, I just want to know reason 💓

No hate taken!!! I'm more than happy to give a little context.

I also talked a little and at length and then some about why I think the Starks are ndn or indigenous coded, therefore anecdotally "brown" if you want some more!

---

The Starks Are Indigenous and You Can’t Change My Mind

Look, I’m just gonna say it: the Starks are giving "we’ve been here for 10,000 years and you just got off the Mayflower.” Fandom loves to frame them as cold (literally), brooding white dudes who talk to trees and wolvves and die tragically—but if you zoom out just a bit, what you’ll see is a whole culture that’s basically been staring the apocalyptic Chekov’s gun in the face while mumbling “this is fine” for millennia.

Let’s start at the beginning: the First Men walked to Westeros on foot twelve thousand years ago (according to legend. it's giving oral storytelling), chopped some trees, made some mistakes, and then struck a sacred pact with the Children of the Forest. Instead of wiping the Children out like the colonizers down south (cough Andals cough), they basically said, “Yeah u right let’s chill,” and started building their whole culture around respecting nature, living weirwoods, and the gods that inhabit them. Now fast forward six thousand years and the Andals show up like, “Hey, we’ve got gods who look like us and wear robes, and also we’re here to murder your trees bc they're just trees they mean nothing.” (SOUND FAMILIAR?) And the North said: “uhhhhh doubt but alright try me bitch.” The Andals conquered everywhere else in Westeros, but the North? Untouched. Still praying to SpOokY tReEs, burying people under roots, giving a fuck about their ancestors, still naming their kids things like Brandon and Benjen and not, like, Luthor Tyrell III.

So when I say the Starks are Indigenous-coded, I mean it. They are the last major ruling house descended purely from the First Men, with customs, spirituality, and governance structures that date back over ten millennia. They didn’t import Andal feudalism or Southern chivalry—they rule by duty, community ties, and vibes. There’s no divine right here, just “I said I’d guard the North, so I’m gonna guard the North, even if I die horribly doing it.” Which... they usually do.

Physically, too, the Northerners are not your typical pale-and-pink Southron types. Descriptions from the books associate the First Men—and thus the Northmen—with brown hair, darker complexions, and gray eyes. They’re closer to earth tones than the golden-and-ivory palettes of the Reach and Crownlands.

Now, it’s all fun and games until Robb Stark starts stacking Lannister corpses like firewood and suddenly—boom—“savage skinchanger” propaganda. The second the North stops being cold and quiet and starts sending wolves downriver, the Southern rumor mill goes feral. The same lords who wear wolf pelts to look edgy start whispering, “Is he... using magic? Unnatural beasts? Isn’t that his direwolf out there eating men’s faces?”

We’re not even being subtle anymore. This is textbook colonizer panic: “Oh no, the brown people with strong spiritual ties to nature and weird customs have found a way to beat our superior steel and horses! They must be cheating!” And this is coming from a place where Melisandre literally births a shadow demon out of her woman's place and half the people involved just shrug and go, “Well, kings do be kinging and doin whatever it takes to be kinged.” But Robb winning battles with tactics and a big-ass dog? Witchcraft.

And let’s talk tone. The way Northerners are described when they show up in King’s Landing is... gross. Dirty. Sullen. Uncouth. They bring the smell of snow and smoke and old gods into the nice, civilized complacency of the South, and the court acts like they're watching a pack of feral dogs crash a garden party. Even the Dornish, who are also not white-coded in many ways and face plenty of racism, are still seen as exotic—dangerous, sure, but sexy-dangerous. The Northmen? They’re not fetishized. They're feared. Loathed. Dismissed as brutes and barbarians with ways that are so different that they should be feared.

And this is a classic move in imperialist narratives: you marginalize a people, rob them of power and culture, and the second they resist? You demonize them. Turn them into monsters. Say they commune with beasts and demons. (Sound familiar? Because it should.) Whether it’s North American Indigenous peoples being accused of “savagery” the moment they defend their land, or these colonized peoples being portrayed as superstitious and irrational for refusing assimilation and persisting with their culture—Westeros is playing that greatest hit on repeat.

So yes, when I say the Starks are Indigenous-coded, I also mean that the way Westeros treats the North is textbook colonial anxiety. They’re tolerated when they stay quiet and frozen. But when they rise? When they win? Suddenly, they’re not just a threat—they’re unnatural. Inhuman. Monstrous.

And if that ain’t some real-world racial politics wrapped in an easy to swallow fictional narrative, idk what is.

Now let’s talk Boltons vs. Manderlys, the perfect case study in Indigenous vs. Settler-coded houses when it comes to the cultural conversation. The Boltons? Chaotic evil First Men energy. They used to flay people alive, possibly made cloaks out of skin (ok im sorry that’s so baller), and ruled from the Dreadfort for thousands of years as a rival to House Stark. They’re the North turned inward and twisted—a cautionary tale about what happens when colonization doesn’t get you, but intergenerational trauma does. Still, they’re part of the land, part of the same heritage. The Manderlys, on the other hand? Total transplants. They got kicked out of the Reach, showed up in the North all teary-eyed and humble, and the Starks were like, “Fine, you can live in this swamp by the sea.” And they did! Respectfully! But they never converted to the Old Gods. They still pray to the Seven, build stone cities, and have the audacity to name their castle White Harbor. That's like moving into someone’s house and renaming it “Good Christian Suburb.” (like. Like americ--*gets dragged off stage*) But they're chill. Because they never pretended to be something they're not. And they never tried to change the ways of the lands and the peoples who welcomed them when no one else would.

Even within the North, there's a whole spectrum of resistance vs. assimilation. You’ve got the Free Folk beyond the Wall—who are basically the “burn it all down, no kings, no lords” crowd—then the Starks, who are like, “Fine, I’ll wear a crown if it helps keep the peace,” and then the Manderlys, who are “we love it here please don’t send us back south.” It’s not unlike real-world Indigenous communities: some stayed in the woods, some ran into the mountains, some took settler names and built schools—but the throughline is survival. Resistance is survival.

And that, my fellow losers, is what the Starks are all about. They are the final boss of stubborn cultural preservation. They’re the people who would rather freeze than bend the knee to "gods" they don’t believe in. When Ned Stark says “Winter is Coming,” he’s not just talking about weather—he’s quoting a generational mantra. This, too, shall pass. And we will still be here. He's got seasonal depression and ancestral memory and PTSD, and he's still out here doing what is best for his people (well. not anymore, i guess.)

The North Remembers—and So Should You

When we say the Starks and the North are Indigenous-coded, we’re not just slapping a label on because it sounds cool and we’re desperate for representation. We’re talking about a culture that predates colonizers, resists assimilation, honors its dead, and survives against impossible violence. Whether it’s through sacred trees, communal leadership, or refusing to compromise on your ancestral values, the Starks represent the heartbeat of a people who never left their land—because the land never left them.

So yes. The Starks are “brown,” in the way that means something. Not necessarily in skin tone (though there’s canon support for that too), but in soul. In story. In surviving. And if you disagree, I’ll meet you in the godswood under the bleeding tree, and we can discuss it like Northerners—with our fuckin fists.

(this is a joke ur allowed other opinions)

[raidark]

Why are you treating Targaryen as colonizers when current Westerosi descend from the First Men and Andals?

First Men were actual invaders who slaughtered the real natives of Westeros, the Children of the Forest, cut down their sacred trees and then stole a big part of their lands. They made a pact with them later and accepted their gods but that still doesn't excuse them. Your beloved House Stark descends from them, ruling over the North for thousands of years after continuous war and conquest of other First Men houses and territories.

(And if we follow GoT lore, First Men's acts of genocide and colonization were literally the reason White Walkers were created. So they're fully responsible for the Long Night and possible doom of the whole world in at least GoT's show continuity)

Then you have the Andals, who also invaded and kept killing the Children -as well as First Men so colonizers killing colonizers- and stealing their lands imposing the Faith of the Seven over the Old Gods.

Westeros was a land stolen by colonizers who were in constant war with each other long before the Targaryen arrived. None of them had right to rule by your definition.

Targaryen came and conquered them, unified the kingdoms into the Seven Kingdoms and then mostly allowed them to go on with their traditions and customs as long as they left them with their own. Jaehaerys and Alysanne just put an end to some of the worst.

Targaryen didn't impose their religion or beliefs over them. If anything Westerosi were the ones trying to impose House Targaryen with their traditions and trying to control their House lol

[reignof-fyre]

Kill yourself you colonizer loving piece of shit

Funny of you to accuse other characters of being genocidal when only one family consistently has & uses weapons of mass destruction against a continent they are not part of/connected to

Your worthless faves are all a bunch of aryan pigs and they deserve even worse than they got

Fuck those ultraeblond cunts and their lizards

Firstly, you've used the word coloniser in the wrong context. The Targaryens didn't colonise Westeros, they conquered it. There's a large difference.

The Andals and First Men colonised Westeros after they committed genocide against the Children of the Forest and Giants, and the Andals then went on to force everyone to worship their religion and continue to decry other religions as false. This is colonisation.

The Andals and First Men ruthlessly and emotionlessly slaughtered the Children and Giants so they could take their land. The Targaryens subdued petty, warring kings (and Harren the Black, who was a literal slaver) and became kings of a country without subjugating/murdering whole races, only those who opposed them and a unified Westeros under one king, which actually benefited the country and smallfolk as a whole for many years, not counting the years in which there were wars.

Secondly, the Targaryens are a fictional family in a fictional world. I enjoy reading about them, they're fascinating. Do I think they're perfect? No.

Also, you using the word/name Aryan, which is a word appropriated by actual N*zi's, makes me understand that you're a horrible human being, and I have nothing at all to worry about by liking fictional people.

And no, I won't kill myself. I have Targaryens to simp over :)

Have a wonderful day! <3

[nulnoildrinker]

Bad Ice and Fire takes and theories to spice up your conversations and ruin your friendships:

Though victims of Valyrian expansion and imperialism, The Rhoynar themselves were violent colonizers that forever changed the political and cultural landscapes of Dorne by forcefully subjecting the native First Men and Andals.

The Seven are real and just as powerful as R'hlorr. They are just upset that people never took their last champion, the child chosen to be High Septon by Baelor the Blessed seriously.

The members of house Celtigar are the true heirs of Valyria, actually.

Stannis really is Azor Ahai reborn, the snow Melisandre sees in her visions is because her subconcious is trying to tell her that she's cold.

Dunk, Dunk, it rhymes with junk.

The Maesters aren't up to something, you're just paranoid

GRRM wrote the pink letter

Bittersteel is still alive, it could be anyone's gilded skull upon that pike

Jon Arryn does haunt the narrative through Stannis' distant relationship with his brothers.

Victarion Greyjoy will eventually sail the Dothraki Sea, albeit shortly and with much difficulty and effort. The keel plowing up the land revolutionizes society, propelling the horse lords into an agricultural powerhouse under the guiding, burnt hand of the Iron Captain. Obviously, this has been foretold by his narrative trajectory of freeing himself from the oppressive thumb of his family and their words "we do not sow".

[atopvisenyashill]

Not to act like a child snitching to a parent, but I just saw the take 'People throw the word coloniser when it comes to the Targaryens but the Starks are right there, Martin is clearly playing with the themes of European colonialism and supremacy way more with them and their relationship with the Wildlings.' in the year of our lord 2025, and like, man... idk. No one in this fandom has a grasp on anything anymore, and I'm kinda starting to doubt that we ever did.

On second thought, maybe I shouldn't be so pressed about this because I think I might have seen this same person say that it's racist to depict the Starks as non-white, because 'Northerners are described, on text, as savages that look ugly and unruly' before and I just fundementally disagree with them on a lot of levels

Yeah okay, the thing about the "starks are european colonizers of the cotf" stuff is that

this is part of the ongoing trend with Those Types who will completely deny the actual canon people of color that exist as being people of color, like in dorne and essos, while insisting that the little green people are the only "true" indigenous or "of color" representation in the series

will completely ignore the very real way dany is stomping her way through essos on a rationalization that is very similar to a lot of the rationalizations people have used when it comes to colonization and imperialism like ~saving the savages from themselves~ and dany's very unkind and superior feelings about the cultures she is ruling over goes hand in hand with that

i cannot stress this enough but the us government, the canadian government, the spanish, the british, the french, and every single other group you can name that came to the americas did not honor their treaties with the natives. even in places like greenland, where genocide became not possible simply bc of how hard it is to live in greenland so it is the only nation in the americas that has a majority indigenous population, treaties were broken as inuit language, culture, and history was suppressed by Denmark. Do you know what the first men did? they honored their treaties. they stopped cutting down weirwoods and they stopped warring with the cotf, and (as far as we know - i am not opposed to bran finding out more context here that makes the first men look bad tbc!) kept those promises until the andals showed up and chased the first men north. with the information we have about the cotf and the first men - even if you include the idea that the cotf invented the others as a way to stop the fighting with the first men and force a pact - i think it is ludicrous and also, insulting to me as an Indigenous person, to say that these things are similar when the entire reason I live in Chicago and not on Menominee land is because the us government broke every treaty they made with us!

i think it's so funny that in their quest to scream at everyone who reads the First Men as some sort of Indigenous group they wind up regurgitating the exact sort of anti-Northern fantasy racism that Northerners experience in the books. Truly, truly, life imitates art.

Obviously I think everyone throws colonizer and imperialist around way too much which is why I've mostly stopped doing it. But I think something everyone really forgets when getting defensive about the valyrian and targaryen critiques is that like. it's about the extractive relationship between the valyrians/targaryens and the people they conquer, the imbalance of technology which allows for further destruction, the superiority complex (and westerosi people aren't above this, i mean when you look at how absolutely superior they act compared to the essosi, there's a pretty clear western view being explored and critiqued through all of them, not just the targaryens and valyria) and expansionist behavior, and the diffusion of ideological, religious, and political beliefs. like, it's the dragons. it's the incest. and especially imo people will talk about the roman inspiration for valyria and then conveniently ignore that one of the first genocides ever committed was by rome against carthage - and another important note here (to me) is that carthage existed in what is now modern day tunisia, which is part of north africa aka one of regions that dorne is inspired by. there's a reason dorne is is so nervous about the dragons during the conquests and when you look at the carnage of the dragon's wroth and daeron's war and doran's comment that dornish population never recovered from that, i do in fact think we are meant to draw some parallels between the way rome conquered and destroyed their enemies and the way dorne is treated by both the targaryens and the rest of Westeros.

But again, I've pulled back on that a lot, I think this topic is very complex and I also think the one-to-one parallels can be confusing. I think you can, for example, compare a lot of Scottish Independence stuff with Northern Independence, and just like in the real world, that is a fraught and complex topic. There's, firstly, a real gap when it comes to the treatment of lowland Scots and highland Scots, not to mention the far ranging issues when it comes to the assimilation of upper class Scottish peoples into British society at the expense of highlanders, the religious wars that exist all over that area, the fact that Scottish people experienced both a repression of their culture at home but also perpetuated the repression of Indigenous cultures in the Americas and were in fact intimately involved as some of the first settler-colonists in what is now known as North America. I think this tracks really well with the Starks and the Northerners in general, as both perpetrators of politically motivated violence towards the wildlings and victims of it from their southern neighbors, and in fact I would argue this happens frequently throughout history, that A People will act as both perpetrator and victim, because no people are a monolith. But like, trying to get this across when a) i feel like i'm just stupid and too goofy and b) there's clearly people who don't want to listen they just want to say "WELL ACTUALLY YOUR FAVORITE HOUSE IS A COLONIZER HOW DO YOU LIKE THAT" as if this is a stan war and not me trying to have an actual in depth conversation about the way the various cultures in this series interact with each other.

And finally - I have in fact seen people get Real Weird about the wildlings (similar to point 4, people will be like "these are a savage people" just kind of uncritically regurgitating the shit bowen marsh is saying about the wildlings despite the fact that we get an entire book where jon is learning that no, actually, these aren't just mindless savages but a society with its own rules, its own culture, that is very similar to his own and just happened to be very unlucky in where they were born) but like, the northerners being weird and fantasy racist (ethnist? can it be called xenophobia in this case, initially i felt that was imprecise but i think maybe that's the correct word here) towards the wildlings does not negate the fact that valyria colonized like 80% of the known world, that the targaryens are weird and fantasy racist towards dorne, and that dany herself is deeply weird and racist towards the dothraki, lhazareen, and ghiscari. two things can be true at once!

[agentrouka-blog]

the difference form the valyrian and the first men that went north is that yes what the first men did was wrong to the native inhabitants but they also took on there culture and magic. becoming worshipers of old gods and wargs and greenseers. the targs notoriously brought there slaves to dragonstone and practice there valyrian costumes ignoring the costumes of westeroses. 

Also, I think the migration of the First Men is to me a lot closer to the expansion of neolithic farmers into the territories of hunter gatherer societies than any modern concept of colonialism. (Yes, the First Men had bronze and built ring forts, but still.) Not all migration is colonization. They had cultural misunderstandings, the Children attacked first, and the war lasted for a long time on both sides before they agreed on a peace for mutual benefit, followed by a great deal of cultural exchange. They fought together against the Andals, who truly did come blade in hand even as they were running for their lives from Valyrian expansion.

Pretending the First Men were inherently evil for entering into and settling in Westeros at all is absurd. This is supposed to be twelve to eight tousand years in the past. There had been Children of the Forest in Essos too, so they presumably migrated in one direction or the other. The lands were connected. Humans migrate, that's not in and of itself a flaw or mistake.

That's a far cry from swooping in to violently obtain rulership over an established society.

[lemonhemlock]

i just think it's ironic how critical stark fans are of the targaryens like robb and dany are veryyy similar and the first men are colonizers too lol

i think robb should be criticised more for his lack of policies and political foresight and planning when it comes to his independence project, but robb did not resort to sacrificing people to acquire fire-breathing monsters or to torturing people to get his way. he didn't set out to conquer lands. he became king in the north and king of the trident not because he conquered the north or the riverlands, but because they pledged themselves to him. there IS a difference between them

you can agree with northern independence or not but the reason robb called his banners and rose up in the first place was because the de-facto monarch was unjustly imprisoning his father, then executed him without a fair trial, thus breaking the feudal contract (coincidentally, the same reason the targaryens were rightfully deposed). then ofc came stannis' letter casting doubt on joffrey's paternity

honestly a fair line of questioning that might even betray authorial bias is, in a series that puts so much emphasis on the dangers of magic and the HIGH price associated with it, why does robb (and the rest of the starks) get the luxury of being soul-bonded to a magical fierce beast (that comes to them without making any nefarious trade), but dany can only access dragons via committing horrifying acts? imo this could very well be a weak point in the thematic consistency of the series

as for the first men, yes, they were colonizers. so were the andals. they are also dead. the process of ethnogenesis (an often violent process, yes) resulted in the westerosi people. what are they to do about it now? they're just regular people living their lives, not wanting to be brutalized, too, by other foreign invaders like dany will bring, not wanting to fight in any more pointless wars.

is that not a valid request or desire they might have for themselves or do they have to pay indefinitely for the crimes of their ancestors by having the same thing done to them?* does it just go from invasion to invasion until the end of time? is colonization or conquest ok to do indefinitely because they have historical precedent? when does it stop?

from the westerosi point of view, the children of the forest don't even exist anymore, so even paying reparations is out of the question. though, who knows, maybe the series finale will address the issue of reconciliation, since WE know the children of the forest are still out and about

*and, before targstans come out of the woodwork, no, i do not hold dany accountable for things her ancestors did, i hold her accountable for the things SHE did. is it her fault her father became a tyrant? no. but her dynasty got rightfully deposed and that's that (see this post for a more in-depth answer: yes, even ~medieval political theorists believed there are conditions in which a population can rightfully rid themselves of tyrannical rule).

is that fair for dany on an individual level? well, how do you define 'fair'? is it fair that feudal lords own all the land and hoard the resources? or, better yet, why do you define "fair" only in relation to nobles, their wants and desires, the real or perceived injustices visited upon them. i understand that the series is high-born-focused escapism, ultimately, and that it won't end in this radical re-ordering of society or in a leveling of privileges across social spheres, but, for real, sometimes what's "good" for your favourite high-born character isn't good for the smallfolk! that's a basic enough idea we can stick to

[oflorelei]

Always weird to me to see so many of the people being violently against targaryen women but also EXCUSING every targaryen men? Like how tf can you go on and be anti Dany and then turn around and EXCUSE Aegon ii/Aemond (and Sometimes even viserys?)? Like?? Can someone explain this to me? And dont give me the "colonizer" crap, so were the first men and andals (and we all know how the faith of the seven treats women), genuinely I wanna know why the hatred against targ women (and especially Dany??) is so rancid meanwhile targ guys can go around and SA, murder, abuse, terrorize half of westeros and that somehow being excused by the very same people??

[horizon-verizon]

The First Men wiped out an entire race of people when they invaded, imposed their religion on the land, and took over the stretch of land and forced the CoTF into the forests. When did Aegon do anything remotely comparable to that ? Which race of people did he wipe out ? Which religion did he impose on the land ? Which land did he take from the natives and give to ethnic Valyrians ?

Posts I've written about this:

[rhaenin-time]

Okay I'll say it:

Targaryens ≠ Colonizers ❌️

Targaryens = Conquerors ✅️

Martells = Conquerors

Valyrian Freehold = Colonizers in practice

Westerosi Andals = Colonizers in essence

"First Men" = Ambiguous and debatable

Starks = Colonizers

[pessimisticpigeonsworld]

The whole "Targaryens are colonizers" take is so frustrating in more than one way. First off: it's blatantly wrong. Colonialism is the taking of someone else's land in the name of your kingdom and exploiting the land and people for resources. A necessary part of this is establishing a colony, which usually goes hand in hand with wiping out or severely reducing the population of the natives. The Targaryens didn't do this.

They began their time in Westeros as refugees who fled to a small Valyrian outpost off the main continent. They basically no influence or interest in Westerosi politics. This changed with Aegon, who led a conquest of Westeros, not for Valyria, for his house. Because the Targaryens lived in Westeros for over a century, they became just as Westerosi as the Andals. So, Aegon's conquest was not the establishment of a colony in the name of a foreign power, Aegon was from Westeros, his family had lived in Westeros for generations. Yes, the Targaryens kept the Valyrian traditions, the Andals and First Men also kept their traditions when they came to Westeros.

My second reason is that by painting the Targaryens as colonizers, people are erasing the true natives of Westeros, the Children of the Forest. The First Men were not the first inhabitants of Westeros, something people always insist on for some reason. The Children of the Forest lived in Westeros long before the Dawn Age, before any humans came to Westeros (that's fucking why the First Men are called that, they were the first humans in Westeros). They suffered huge massacres during the wars with the First Men and were forced into restricted areas to live after the treaties, then were forced further and further off their land until they were completely gone from the Seven Kingdoms. Sound familiar? This is almost exactly what happened when colonies were established in the real world. The name "Children of the Forest" literally was one of the names used to refer to the American Indigenous peoples. The First Men invaded and had reinforcements and resources sent to them from their original kingdom until the CoF destroyed the land bridge. Erasing the CoF destroys a huge part of the story Martin is trying to tell.

Finally, my third reason, it's a symptom of people misusing and misunderstanding the word colonialism. Words have power, but people seem to enjoy minimizing words like this by constantly using them when they aren't appropriate. The ASOIAF fandom is just a small example of a culture-wide issue. When people constantly use words like colonialism it loses its true impact, so when actual examples exist, people don't see it or nothing is done. I'm not saying it's the antis faults, I'm just saying it's a small symptom of a bigger issue.

[polysucks]

I've seen a bunch of your indigenous headcanons for Starks and I love them so. Do you think of all First Men that way or particularly northern First Men/Starks? Also I'm going feral over your idea for a wild west AU!

HI I LOVE YOU.

I will talk forever about indigenous Starks and Northmen.

yeah. I’m that bitch. I am the #1 Indigenous Stark Truther* (unproven claim) and I will happily die on this hill.

I’m answering all of this on mobile like 15 mins before I have to be in class so I have none of my research in front of me and no sources, so yall feel free to jump in the comments and the reblogs to compound or (CONSTRUCTIVELY) Correct me :)

As we know, the First Men are all over the place. I mean it’s been, what, twelve thousand years since they came over from Essos on the Dornish Landbridge? (Sound familiar, fellow US Public Education System Victims?) and maybe six thousand years since the Andals migrated, with all the interbreeding and the thousands of years of generational melding, there’s bound to be traces First Men blood all over the planet by now. Just like all indigenous peoples irl! Imma have to write a whole thing about the Westerosi equivalent to the Columbian Exchange now is not the time—

So like personally, I see Native American coding in the Northmen. And all I know is of the American Indigenous perspective (and not even a whole lot bc I wasn’t raised in the tribe. I was removed from the tribe via my grandparents who are both Blackfoot-Salish out of the PNW and victims of modern colonization but that’s another story for another time. It’s just to preface that I am no expert in Native American culture, and only know what I personally know. I got some baller resources if you’re super interested tho)

In my personal humble onion. There would be a high concentration of First Men blood (god I really hate using the term ‘blood’ bc of blood quantum and lineage politics but for the sake of brevity imma just use it) in the Northmen. To me it’s giving PNW and Inuit who pressed north after the Columbian invasion because they had the means to survive in the harsh lands, where the whites. Simply didn’t. And knowing Peepaw is American, like, I see the parallels.

The First Men lived in close harmony with the land, practicing a nature-based religion—the worship of the Old Gods—centered around weirwood trees, sacred groves, and the guidance of “greenseers” and “skinchangers.” (We don’t use the W word around here but do you smell what I’m stepping in?) Their way of life was deeply tied to the land and vaguely resembles that of indigenous spiritual beliefs about animism and ancestral wisdom.

After however long years of battling with the Children of the Forest, the First Men reached the pact, agreeing to honor the children’s sacred forests and worship their gods. This mirrors real-world treaties between indigenous peoples and settlers, which were often later broken or disregarded (to put it nicely). the pact was chill for thousands of years (I think like I say I got no refs in front of me we die like Icarus), leading to the Age of Heroes, in which the First Men formed their own kingdoms, including the foundation of House Stark.

Bro that. Is so ancient American history coded. Same shit different font.

There’s a large population of indigenous peoples in reservation-adjacent areas cherry picked all over the US. I mean, we’re everywhere. Don’t ever let terminal narratives win. We out here babyyyyyy but to me it makes sense that the highest population of indigenous peoples of Westeros would be on the lands that are least likely to be gentrified (wrong word but imma stick w it) as in. The North. I can’t source any quotes rn specifically but how often is it mentioned that the north is the biggest and the “emptiest” in all their seven kingdoms?

So excellent question! Yeah I think all the Northmen are indigenous coded! You can’t convince me that Lyanna Mormont isn’t some badass fuckin thicc warrior goddess coded. And the Greatjon??? My mans leanin and rockin w a bear pelt. That man kills bears with his fists (just ask him) and I could go on forever about how The Boltons in all their violence and the rumors surrounding all that they’re capable of is so so so sooooo Comanche Ute and Sioux coded. They were so shat in by westward expansionists and rumored to be barbaric and cannibalistic and fuuuuuuucked up—simply bc they fought back against the people who were raping, pillaging, and stealing from them. But that’s pure speculation and personal hot take on my part, and wildly incorrect bc the boltons really do be flaying people. While the Ute, Comanche and Sioux did not. In fact. Flay anyone. (Unless they deserved it :) )

Tl;dr

Yeah man I think all the Northmen are native coded (w some Viking and Norse imagery thrown in there bc this is fantasy. It’s not that serious.) but the Starks heavily so due to the hard focus on the animism, their honor, connection to the land, spiritual beliefs, dedication to family, and the fockin’ wolves bro. Natives do be really into wolves. (Wolves are cool as fuck dude)

Also I got three chapters of my Wild West au already written and so much art I haven’t posted. when I unlearn shame and finally post it all it’s over for you bitches

[earthyleo]

Dear targ stans please keep House Stark out of your rant posts if you're trying to use them as an comparision to say things like "ha see, the starks also colonized and killed innocent people like the Children of the Forest so that makes them awful and house targaryen is now good" - let me stop you right the fuck there, first of all, there is ZERO evidence that the Starks especifically went out hunting and kiling the Children of the Forest, the books say the FIRST MEN and the Children were in a conflict that lasted thousands of years, Starks aren't the only house of first men origin so this line could not even be about them, and this conflict ended with a peace treaty and after that, the ones resposible for the g*nocide of the Children of the forest were the Andals who came from Essos. Actually, if you search about House Stark's relations to the Children, it says more about them joining forces than being rivals.

About House Stark conquering the North being just as brutal as Aegon's Conquest: No, not the same situation at all. Aegon conquered Westeros using weapons of mass destruction (the dragons) that no one else had and were defenseless agaisnt, it was unfair, like a bully picking on the smaller kids because he knows they naturally cant defend themselves agasint him. The Stark kings conquered the North with armies, politics and strategies, they were no different from the other kings, they won the North in fair battle and the destruction they caused was almost none considering the North needs to preserve every piece of land and all the people they have because of the harsh winters.

Ok? So now please stop saying the Starks are colonizers or that they commited g*nocide, ya'll are embarassing yourselves saying stupid stuff like this.