Why did Jamie kill Aerys?

[Mad Monkey]

On the rapes the queen, you have to remember, as far as people are concerned in this era, it's impossible to rape your wife. Jaime is upset that Aerys is harming the queen, not that he's raping her.

That's a good point. I should have chosen my words carefully, but even in this society sexualized brutality is considered unpleasant. Even if they don't think of it as "rape" it would be upsetting to watch, especially if you are a Westerosi person who is enculturated since birth to regard the King and Queen as basically being equal to or even above the gods themselves. It would be like making a devout Catholic watch Jesus sexually assaulting the Virgin Mary or something. I don't care what your politics are, that's going to be reprehensible. Jaime's hatred of Aerys doesn't just stem from that, but for Aerys's miserable, disgusting failure at living up to the standards that Jaime expects for a King (or even a human being).

[snake]

You also have to consider the situation Ned found when he arrived at King's Landing. The Lannisters had taken the city by treachery and were partaking in a particularly vicious sack. The Lion of Lannister was flying from the ramparts, not the Crowned Stag. Then when he arrived at the throne room there sat the Kingslayer, still holding the sword he used to kill the king he had sworn to protect. No doubt Ned thought they were making a play for what he felt was Robert's throne. Is it any wonder that he judged the Kingslayer harshly?

It is also worth noting that the Kingslayer intended to flee the scene after killing Aerys to let someone else take the glory or blame. However, his fathers men burst in upon him and from their reaction he knew it was to be blame and not praise. So he sat on the throne until Ned came and made him yield it up.

[Rockroi]

No doubt Ned thought they were making a play for what he felt was Robert's throne. Is it any wonder that he judged the Kingslayer harshly?

Yes. It was perfectly permissible for Ned to jump to these conclusions because, as we know, there is no way Ned could have, you know, asked Jaime, "So, are you naming yourself King?" Ned would have had to have engaged in actual human communication with other people- something he is notoriously terrible at, I grant you, but it may have been a more polite thing to do.

Also, as it turned out, there was no plot. Was it reasonable for him to assume as much? Again, they let him ride into the city; we can assume Tywin saw Ned and his army and let him waltz in. I mean, if Tywin was setting up shop to be King, why allow Ned such access?

[snake]

Yes. It was perfectly permissible for Ned to jump to these conclusions because, as we know, there is no way Ned could have, you know, asked Jaime, "So, are you naming yourself King?" Ned would have had to have engaged in actual human communication with other people- something he is notoriously terrible at, I grant you, but it may have been a more polite thing to do.

Why would Ned ask? The Kingslayer was sitting on the throne after killing the king with his houses banners flying from the ramparts. If anything the Kingslayer should have been trying his best to explain himself.

Also, as it turned out, there was no plot. Was it reasonable for him to assume as much? Again, they let him ride into the city; we can assume Tywin saw Ned and his army and let him waltz in. I mean, if Tywin was setting up shop to be King, why allow Ned such access?

We know from Tywin that he feared that his men and Neds would cross swords so there must have been a reason for that fear. Perhaps he never so much as let Ned's men waltz through as he was pushed aside. As GM Pycelle pointed out Ned was too quick and Robert too strong for Tywin to be able to strengthen his position. Now, whether or not Pycelle knew what Lord Tywin actually wanted is up for debate but from what the circumstances were at the time it would certainly look to anyone coming upon King's Landing that the Lannisters were taking it for themselves, not Robert. And so Ned had to force them to give it up.

[Antonius Pius]

Why would Ned ask? The Kingslayer was sitting on the throne after killing the king with his houses banners flying from the ramparts. If anything the Kingslayer should have been trying his best to explain himself.

I agree. But the mighty lion's feathers were ruffled because Ned lookad at him judgingly. Jaime is acting an ass in this situation, and he has the arrogance to blame Ned for not believing the best of him? Please.

Ned was fighting the war for Robert's kingship for a year. As far as we know, the Lannisters kept to The Rock and kept silent. They have a reputation for avarice, greed and gloryseeking. On the eve of Robert's victory, they march to Kings Landing and take the capital. How can Ned know they've thrown their lot in with Robert? They could be trying to steal Robert's thunder. Jaime thinks that would be amusing. Tywin wanted to make it clear by killing babies. Ned finds Jaime on the throne, with Aerys' blood on his sword. What's he to think? That Jaime really was keeping it warm for Robert?

As an aside, not even Tywin's bannermen know what his intentions are. They ask Jaime whom they should proclaim king, apparently even they think Tywin might claim the kingship.

We know from Tywin that he feared that his men and Neds would cross swords so there must have been a reason for that fear. Perhaps he never so much as let Ned's men waltz through as he was pushed aside. As GM Pycelle pointed out Ned was too quick and Robert too strong for Tywin to be able to strengthen his position. Now, whether or not Pycelle knew what Lord Tywin actually wanted is up for debate but from what the circumstances were at the time it would certainly look to anyone coming upon King's Landing that the Lannisters were taking it for themselves, not Robert. And so Ned had to force them to give it up.

The Sack was a chaotic affair. It was always difficult for medieval commanders to control their troops after the pillaging had begun. I imagine Ned walked in on the chaos, and forced his way through to the Red Keep. Men intent on rape and pillage are not likely to restrain him.

[Rockroi]

On the eve of Robert's victory, they march to Kings Landing and take the capital. How can Ned know they've thrown their lot in with Robert? They could be trying to steal Robert's thunder

A good indicator would have been that Tywin allowed Ned Stark and the Army of the North to approach KL. If Tywin were in such a rush to seize the Throne, he chose a strange way to do it by allowing Ned access to the city and his army such close access.

Jaime just killed the King- the same, exact King Ned was trying to kill. Ned's excuse is that he never swore an oath to Aerys (and the little matter of Aerys wanting Ned dead). All Ned had to do - at that moment, with such proximity to all involved -was ask "So, you King now?" But Ned just sits and stares.

Now, should Ned trust the Lannisters? Should he love Jaime? Of course not. But if he is going to jump to this grand conclusion of conspiracy and seizing power he should do some due diligence first; ask around. Because, in fact, on the surface the Sack of KL looks exactly what it was: a desperate and effective attempt by Tywin to win favor with Robert by taking KL for him. Did Ned ever consider this? It seems relatively obvious - considering that's exactly what it was.

Nope. Not Ned. Ned has to judge (and his judgment stretches decades; he's still pissed about Jaime killing Aerys and sitting on the Throne some 15 years later). Again, all it would have taken to clear the situation would have been for Ned to ask simple questions (like Tywin's men did when they found Jaime in the first place). But Ned just looks up at Jaime in cold judgment. He jumps to conclusions. Its no biggie in the end- after all, Aerys would have been just as dead (or the city would have burned to the ground, but that's just pesky details). But that sense of noble superiority is there for Ned to foster.

I can definitely understand Ned's distaste over Jaime killing Aerys, to an extent. But ultimately, Ned was trying to do that anyway. Same with the Rhaegar's children - while Ned is disgusted with what Tywin's men did to them, there is political and military necessity in killing them- and Doran Martell eventually proves this in spades. What was Ned going to do? Send them to Braavos? Even sacking KL probably saved many lives (even, again, if we forget the whole "burn city to ground" plan)- many Northern men as well.

While I can appreciate Ned being disgusted at Tywin's power grab, ultimately he has to give some leeway here. If he remains so stuck-up and rigid, some day it could come back to haunt him... oh, wait, that's right...

[Quiet Wolf]

I agree with you. But to me Ned hate Jaime ( lannisters in general) not because he kill a madking he swore to protect, but more because They "change" ( more to choose) a side after the war is done and using a dishonorable method. That'a is not the kind off ally you want. But Robert are too blind to see that. Back on topic: I think Jaime kill Aerys by Tywin's orders, no more no less. What we see until now was merely Jaime trying justify his act to himself...in the end HE is the one who shit for honor.

Edit: Typo

[Rockroi]

I agree with you. But to me Ned hate Jaime ( lannisters in general) not because he kill a mad king he swore to protect, but more because They "change" ( more to choose) a side after the war is done and using a dishonorable method.

There is no question that when Ned is heading down the Kingsroad to KL with Robert he is deeply and seriously troubled by the Lannister grip on the throne. They ARE a proud, rich and cunning family. There is no question that Ned distrusts them all. This is irrespective of Bran's fall. He distrusts them and he has reason to.

But that also leaves him in the grips of his own prejudices. Tyrion had nothing to do with the assassination attempt on Bran; Cersei had nothing to do with Jon Arryn's death; Jaime is not the monster Ned wants him to be.

That's is not the kind off ally you want. But Robert are too blind to see that.

I think its more complex than that. For starters, maybe Robert didn't see the Lannister duplicity, but Jon Arryn clearly did. And Arryn also saw the wisdom with taking the Lannisters as an ally. With Tywin as a loyal lord in the West, they had a rock of stability there in a realm just recovering from disaster. They would also have a steady supply of liquid funds to build any project or rebuild any ruin. They also rob any loyalists from seeking Tywin as a make-shift ally (again, this turned out to be a far realer possibility than we had thought). With Cersei as queen, Robert married probably the most powerful house in the land, thus solidifying his power base.

And also, there was a real possibility that Robert and Cersei could have had a real relationship. But Robert was bitter and angry and a whore; he wanted Lyanna and took that resentment for her loss on Cersei. He also continued to make bastards like it was his job. Cersei, meanwhile, resented Robert for several reasons, and (as we know) continued to fuck her brother. Their marriage is actually a case-study in massive dysfunction. Had it worked (and there was really no reason to think that it wouldn't have) that would have gone even further to solidify the stability of the realm. Those are all REALLY good reasons to keep the Lannisters close.

Back on topic: I think Jaime kill Aerys by Tywin's orders, no more no less.

There is absolutely no evidence for this. None. Jaime never thinks about it; Tywin never even hints about it. Its also not very feasible; how could Tywin have gotten the order to Jaime? When? Why? If Jaime had not killed Aerys, its not like he was otherwise safe; Tywin had just sacked the City; there was no place for Aerys to go. Tywin knew Aerys would be dead soon, so why get his son involved? Tywin was, instead, counting on Jaime to not be so daring in defensing his King (which, ironically, would have made Jaime not only an oath-breaker, but kind of a weasel as well). There is no reason to even engage in this.

What we see until now was merely Jaime trying justify his act to himself...in the end HE is the one who shit for honor.

But he doesn't. We know why Jaime killed Aerys: he hated Aerys, Aerys was a monster, Aerys was going to immolate a city. We know that Jaime takes his vows seriously, its just that they overlap; something he recognizes while others ignore it. Jaime takes his vow to Cat very seriously, as he does his words to Brienne- hell, he even fights a bear for her! He loves his brother, respects the cloak, and he wants his family to remain whole.

[Alexia]

Jaime is not the monster Ned wants him to be.

He isn't? The Jaime I read threw Ned's 7 year old son from a tower window in an attempt to murder a witness to his crimes.

[Quiet Wolf]

Rockroi,

Just remember how Tywin mamage to get his troops inside the walls of KL. He swore loyalty to Targaryen Cause and says they come to 'help'. In thruth, Tywin came to prove himself to Robert faction, and began to destroy the Targaryen forces within the fortress. The Lanisters has nothing yet taking part in the war (Frey?) and need to take a side, the way they choose to show loyalty to robert was clear(Giving him the Targaryen sit). That's what makes Ned dislike them.

Aryns alliance with Lannisters was motivated by NEED more then wisdow in my opinion. They are a rich and Strong family,with vast troops (you see how many hosts come from that damned ROCK!?)untouched by the war.The lannisters stabilished advantage in the game of thrones by delayed his movements (Wonder why not "Lord Late Lion/Lannister",too many Ls i guess). Maybe the late are on puporse maybe not...but I see Tywin as Man winth a Plan.

I confess the orders reaching Jamie are a "blind spot", But that is just a feeling I Had when reading... Time will tell. ;)

[snake]

A good indicator would have been that Tywin allowed Ned Stark and the Army of the North to approach KL. If Tywin were in such a rush to seize the Throne, he chose a strange way to do it by allowing Ned access to the city and his army such close access.

Tywin did not allow anything. His men were still fighting when Ned and his men arrived. He couldn't have stopped Ned even if he wanted to.

Jaime just killed the King- the same, exact King Ned was trying to kill. Ned's excuse is that he never swore an oath to Aerys (and the little matter of Aerys wanting Ned dead). All Ned had to do - at that moment, with such proximity to all involved -was ask "So, you King now?" But Ned just sits and stares.

This is Westeros. Robert pardoned Ser Barriston even though Barriston had killed friends of his on the Trident. Ned had great respect for the three Kingsguard that died at the ToJ. If the Kingslayer had explained himself things might have gone differently but he didn't. So as far as Ned knew he had killed the king when all looked lost so that his father could become king.

Now, should Ned trust the Lannisters? Should he love Jaime? Of course not. But if he is going to jump to this grand conclusion of conspiracy and seizing power he should do some due diligence first; ask around. Because, in fact, on the surface the Sack of KL looks exactly what it was: a desperate and effective attempt by Tywin to win favor with Robert by taking KL for him. Did Ned ever consider this? It seems relatively obvious - considering that's exactly what it was.

Ask around? He just arrived and his job was to secure Robert's throne not go on some fact finding mission. Besides, it would seem the Lannisters were not to concerned about explaining anything.

Nope. Not Ned. Ned has to judge (and his judgment stretches decades; he's still pissed about Jaime killing Aerys and sitting on the Throne some 15 years later). Again, all it would have taken to clear the situation would have been for Ned to ask simple questions (like Tywin's men did when they found Jaime in the first place). But Ned just looks up at Jaime in cold judgment. He jumps to conclusions. Its no biggie in the end- after all, Aerys would have been just as dead (or the city would have burned to the ground, but that's just pesky details). But that sense of noble superiority is there for Ned to foster.

Ned has a right to feel superior, IMO. The Lannisters used treachery and deceit to curry favour with Robert. That's not something to be proud of. And it should have been the Kingslayer explaining his actions. He should have given his reasons as to what he did. Instead he likes to act smug about it. He deserved any scorn that was thrown his way.

I can definitely understand Ned's distaste over Jaime killing Aerys, to an extent. But ultimately, Ned was trying to do that anyway. Same with the Rhaegar's children - while Ned is disgusted with what Tywin's men did to them, there is political and military necessity in killing them- and Doran Martell eventually proves this in spades. What was Ned going to do? Send them to Braavos? Even sacking KL probably saved many lives (even, again, if we forget the whole "burn city to ground" plan)- many Northern men as well.

For Ned doing things dishonorably would not have entered into the equation. Nor would killing children. You have to consider Westerosi society at the time. Sure Ned thought ill of the Kingslayer but so did most honorable men.

While I can appreciate Ned being disgusted at Tywin's power grab, ultimately he has to give some leeway here. If he remains so stuck-up and rigid, some day it could come back to haunt him... oh, wait, that's right...

Ned has to give nothing. It was on the Kingslayer to explain his actions. He did not feel the need to do so and lived with that choice. Almost everyone thought he had shit for honor and as his actions showed they were right.

[Morekyyn]

Yes, Rockroi, Eddard could have asked Jaime. But Jaime could have explained. And the whole thing bothers Ned years later, but he is not the only one to dwell on the subject, is he? Jaime for one seem very bitter still. Is it only Ned that calls Jaime "Kingslayer" and think that Jaime has little or no honour?

As to why Jaime kills Aerys, well why did Jaime join the kingsguard in the first place?

To be close to Cersei and because of the high honour (and as it turned out under Aerys rule he didn´t get any of them).

But that was not why Aerys gave him the position (as Jaime would find out), but mainly to spite Tywin (by bereaving him of his heir and to provide a sort of hostage).

So, knowing this (which Ned probably didn´t or hadn´t thought about, by the way), would anyone claim that Jaime´s motives is only to save the city and the realm, or is it possible that a big part is revenge and bitterness?

[Antonius Pius]

A good indicator would have been that Tywin allowed Ned Stark and the Army of the North to approach KL. If Tywin were in such a rush to seize the Throne, he chose a strange way to do it by allowing Ned access to the city and his army such close access.

As both Snake and I have pointed out, Tywin did not LET Ned do anything; he was not able to oppose Ned once the Sack had begun. We have it from Tywin himself that he was terrified of what would happen if Ned got to Kings Landing before he was ready.

Jaime just killed the King- the same, exact King Ned was trying to kill. Ned's excuse is that he never swore an oath to Aerys (and the little matter of Aerys wanting Ned dead). All Ned had to do - at that moment, with such proximity to all involved -was ask "So, you King now?" But Ned just sits and stares.

That's right, Ned stares down the arrogant upstart that seems to be playing at usurping Robert's throne. Robert had declared his intention to go for the crown. Ned is acting as Robert's agent, coming to claim the kingdom in Roberts name. There is no question in anyone's mind why Ned is there. It's Jaime's behaviour that's ambiguous, at best. It's on Jaime to explain his actions.

Now, should Ned trust the Lannisters? Should he love Jaime? Of course not. But if he is going to jump to this grand conclusion of conspiracy and seizing power he should do some due diligence first; ask around. Because, in fact, on the surface the Sack of KL looks exactly what it was: a desperate and effective attempt by Tywin to win favor with Robert by taking KL for him. Did Ned ever consider this? It seems relatively obvious - considering that's exactly what it was.

As I pointed out above, Jaime's behaviour was out of the ordinary. It was for him to explain himself. If you're going to claima kingdom and you come across a royal corpse on the steps, a knight in gold with a bloody sword on the throne and Lannister banners on the battlements of the Red Keep, your first thought probably isn't to make sure you ask enough questions. You'll want an explanation. Jaime's arrogance keeps him from explaining himself. Sixteen years later Jaime is still angry about that: By what right does the Wolf judge the Lion?!

And I'll add that even Tywin's men were confused as to his intentions. Hell, even Pycelle seems to have toyed with the idea to proclaim Tywin king. It was by no means clear that the Lannisters had thrown their lot in with Robert. Tywin may have given his orders to Gregor and Lorch, but apparently he couldn't be bothered to inform Ned or Robert.

Nope. Not Ned. Ned has to judge (and his judgment stretches decades; he's still pissed about Jaime killing Aerys and sitting on the Throne some 15 years later).

I have answered the point about judgement above, but I'd like to suggest that Ned isn't pissed-off at Jaime for sitting on the Iron Throne. He's worreid about the kind of character Robert is investing with so much power. He thinks it's dangerous. Robert, of course, doesn't give a damn.

Again, all it would have taken to clear the situation would have been for Ned to ask simple questions (like Tywin's men did when they found Jaime in the first place). But Ned just looks up at Jaime in cold judgment. He jumps to conclusions. Its no biggie in the end- after all, Aerys would have been just as dead (or the city would have burned to the ground, but that's just pesky details). But that sense of noble superiority is there for Ned to foster.

Snake has answered this in his post, and I have in this one.

I can definitely understand Ned's distaste over Jaime killing Aerys, to an extent. But ultimately, Ned was trying to do that anyway. Same with the Rhaegar's children - while Ned is disgusted with what Tywin's men did to them, there is political and military necessity in killing them- and Doran Martell eventually proves this in spades. What was Ned going to do? Send them to Braavos? Even sacking KL probably saved many lives (even, again, if we forget the whole "burn city to ground" plan)- many Northern men as well.

There is political expediency to kill Rhaenys and Aegon, but Ned would have no doubt suggested the Silent Sisters and a the Wall. Or something like that. In the real Middle Ages, youngsters with royal claims were sometimes forced to join a convent. Perhaps a Westerosi-equivalent was available.

[Rockroi]

As both Snake and I have pointed out, Tywin did not LET Ned do anything; he was not able to oppose Ned once the Sack had begun. We have it from Tywin himself that he was terrified of what would happen if Ned got to Kings Landing before he was ready.

Actually, no. You are just assuming in the hopes that your statement is true. All evidence suggests that the sack went like clockwork. Loyalists were quickly overwhelmed; the Mountain was killing Elia in short order; hell, Jaime could not wipe Arys' blood from his sword before Tywin's lords burst in. Tywin seemed to have the entire situation well in hand. In fact, Ned does not arrive until MUCH later, indicating that he was probably delayed as he had to traverse LAnnister troops. However, Ned was not denied access, that much is clear.

And does Tywin strike you as a sloppy person? Hardly. I firmly believe that Tywin would have set up sentries outside of KL to watch for Ned's approaching army and (less likely, but still plausible) Mace Tyrell's. Twyin, we know, KNEW Ned was on his way- that's why he rushed. Ned's forces were utmost in his mind; he states as much to Tyrion. To me, that indicates that Tywin knew he had to keep an eye out for Ned, and Tywin is the type of man who "does not believe in half-measures" and as such would not look out for Ned and then just not count on an encounter.

That's right, Ned stares down the arrogant upstart that seems to be playing at usurping Robert's throne. Robert had declared his intention to go for the crown. Ned is acting as Robert's agent, coming to claim the kingdom in Roberts name. There is no question in anyone's mind why Ned is there. It's Jaime's behaviour that's ambiguous, at best. It's on Jaime to explain his actions.

Except, of course, that he's not. Interestingly enough, the lords who broke into the Throne room as Aerys was dying HAD NO TROUBLE ascertaining Jaime's intentions (which, predictably, left Ned BAFFLED). And why was that? Because they actually SPOKE to Jaime! I can tell how tough that would be- he would have to open his mouth and interact with other mere mortals. For Ned, all kidding aside, that's something he is lousy at (diplomacy, cunning, etc). Ned just stares. And what does Jaime do? OH TAHT'S RIGHT! He explains himself! he states that he was just keeping the chair warm (har har).

Now, the idea that Jaime has to go into some long-winded explanation on why he is sitting there is absurd. "Ned, I just want you to know that I am not planning on usurping Robert's Throne... that he himself is usurping... but never mind that. Although these thoughts never crossed my mind or my father's mind, I feel the need to tell you that we are not doing that... do I sound crazy yet?" That's just insane. Jaime has to explain actions that he is not taking because Ned may think he was taking them? Again, all Ned has to do is... vocalize. JAime does that, Ned doesn't. And Jaime is the jerk. Only in Westeroes...

As I pointed out above, Jaime's behavior was out of the ordinary

And sacking a city after killing the Crown Prince, after a year of war wasn't?

Sixteen years later Jaime is still angry about that: By what right does the Wolf judge the Lion?!

Actually a fair question. I mean, by what right does the Lion judge the Wolf? Everyone does it. Ned ha not explained ... a SIGNIFICANT part of what happened after KL- just pointing out that Ned may very well be fostering the Crown prince's sole surviving son. I think deep inside Ned is the same PIECE of defiance, just coded differently- by what right does Ned (the wolf) owe ANY explanation to anyone (Stag, Lion, Dragon...). In Ned we call in "honor" and in Jaime some call it arrogance. I LOVE double standards!

And I'll add that even Tywin's men were confused as to his intentions. Hell, even Pycelle seems to have toyed with the idea to proclaim Tywin king. It was by no means clear that the Lannisters had thrown their lot in with Robert. Tywin may have given his orders to Gregor and Lorch, but apparently he couldn't be bothered to inform Ned or Robert.

No, he couldn't. Ned and Robert were unsure things. They could have balked at the support (and Ned would have). The men inside KL? Much easier- dead men get no say. Ned and Robert could have thrown Tywin's words back in his face (and with good reason, to some extent). But Tywin was just too valuable! They could not risk it. And Tywin's men seemed to know exactly what to do! Many here claim that the Mountain killed Elia because Tywin ordered it (and he may have, but Tywin denied it almost to his dying breath). So, which is it? Did his men know or not? To me, it seems like killing the children (unavoidable) and killing Aerys were absolute necessities because they had to show loyalty to Robert. Anyone else toying with the idea of naming Tywin King (and this seems like a brief flirtation with a thought- no serious planning- and Pyrcell is not a great source) were misplaced. There is no evidence his men were confused (Pyrcell? The guy was on the wrong side of the war- of COURSE he was confused)- they knew exactly what they were doing that day. As soon as Ned and Robert showed up, they also knew.

I have answered the point about judgement above, but I'd like to suggest that Ned isn't pissed-off at Jaime for sitting on the Iron Throne. He's worreid about the kind of character Robert is investing with so much power. He thinks it's dangerous. Robert, of course, doesn't give a damn.

No, actually. At that moment Ned has no idea how much power Robert is investing in Jaime. Jaime has not even been pardoned yet. Ned is just judgmental at Jaime because Jaime acted in a manner that Ned thought dishonorable. That's all it was.

[Matarreyes]

Interestingly enough, the lords who broke into the Throne room as Aerys was dying HAD NO TROUBLE ascertaining Jaime's intentions (which, predictably, left Ned BAFFLED). And why was that? Because they actually SPOKE to Jaime! I can tell how tough that would be- he would have to open his mouth and interact with other mere mortals. For Ned, all kidding aside, that's something he is lousy at (diplomacy, cunning, etc). Ned just stares. And what does Jaime do? OH TAHT'S RIGHT! He explains himself! he states that he was just keeping the chair warm (har har).

Now, the idea that Jaime has to go into some long-winded explanation on why he is sitting there is absurd. "Ned, I just want you to know that I am not planning on usurping Robert's Throne... that he himself is usurping... but never mind that. Although these thoughts never crossed my mind or my father's mind, I feel the need to tell you that we are not doing that... do I sound crazy yet?" That's just insane. Jaime has to explain actions that he is not taking because Ned may think he was taking them? Again, all Ned has to do is... vocalize. JAime does that, Ned doesn't. And Jaime is the jerk. Only in Westeroes...

...and on ASOIAF boards.

You make a fair case. The Jaime/Ned double standarts is something pretty obvious for anyone who cares to look, but they are also very easily understandable because that is how the two were presented in the first book. The author has clearly been trying to subvert that initial impression, and has mostly succeeded. Still, there will forever be some people stuck in the first impression. Which is legit when discussing the characters actions since AGOT. They should remember, though, that AGOT Jaime being a bastard and AGOT Ned being a saint has no bearing on the events of the Sack. Even if you hate the AGOT Jaime, please stop projecting that hatred into the past, NOW. The Sack Jaime wasn´t a Bran-tossing bastard, he hasn´t killed anyone. He was a naive and idealistic youth with somewhat uncommon sexual preferences (that you personally may not agree with, but that have NOT done anyone harm at that point). He had a King problem, a Father problem, and conflicting oaths. He made an instant choice, and then sat and contemplated the messed up outcome. He wasn´t bathing in glory, mind you. He was clearly at a loss of what to do next.

Now consider Ned. He is: 1)older 2)closer to the Future King Robert and therefore more powerful in the long run 3)outsider who has just barged in on a scene he does not understand. He does not know Jaime personally, and has no reason to expect him to be a power hungry traitor unless he is prejudging him for being Tywin´s son. He does know, though, that Jaime has just freed him from un unpleasant duty of dealing with Aerys himself. He does know that Jaime is a Kingsguard that has just turned his cloak in a way that directly favoured Robert. But instead of noticing all that, he quickly expects Jaime to be stealing the throne - again, with no personal knowledge of him, and just on the better basis of him being a Lannister.

[A wilding]

Except, of course, that he's not. Interestingly enough, the lords who broke into the Throne room as Aerys was dying HAD NO TROUBLE ascertaining Jaime's intentions (which, predictably, left Ned BAFFLED). And why was that? Because they actually SPOKE to Jaime! I can tell how tough that would be- he would have to open his mouth and interact with other mere mortals. For Ned, all kidding aside, that's something he is lousy at (diplomacy, cunning, etc). Ned just stares. And what does Jaime do? OH TAHT'S RIGHT! He explains himself! he states that he was just keeping the chair warm (har har).

However, the lords who broke into the throne room were Lannister bannermen. They did not ask Jaime for an explanation, they asked him for orders.

Incidentally Jaime could see that they were not impressed by him killing Aerys either, but did not feel able to say so.

Also Jaime was not yet sitting on the throne then. Which is a significant point, as something like that is a serious action in a monarchy, and doubly so during a civil war when the situation is in doubt.

[snake]

Except, of course, that he's not. Interestingly enough, the lords who broke into the Throne room as Aerys was dying HAD NO TROUBLE ascertaining Jaime's intentions (which, predictably, left Ned BAFFLED). And why was that? Because they actually SPOKE to Jaime! I can tell how tough that would be- he would have to open his mouth and interact with other mere mortals. For Ned, all kidding aside, that's something he is lousy at (diplomacy, cunning, etc). Ned just stares. And what does Jaime do? OH TAHT'S RIGHT! He explains himself! he states that he was just keeping the chair warm (har har).

Actually, all but one were shocked and disgusted by what he had done. That's how the Kingslayer knew he would not be praised for his foul deed.

Now, the idea that Jaime has to go into some long-winded explanation on why he is sitting there is absurd. "Ned, I just want you to know that I am not planning on usurping Robert's Throne... that he himself is usurping... but never mind that. Although these thoughts never crossed my mind or my father's mind, I feel the need to tell you that we are not doing that... do I sound crazy yet?" That's just insane. Jaime has to explain actions that he is not taking because Ned may think he was taking them? Again, all Ned has to do is... vocalize. JAime does that, Ned doesn't. And Jaime is the jerk. Only in Westeroes...

He doesn't have to do anything no, but he certainly shouldn't expect anyone to approve of what he did. To think Ned should be happy to see a turncloak, kingslayer sitting on what he felt was Robert's throne is ridiculous.

Actually a fair question. I mean, by what right does the Lion judge the Wolf? Everyone does it. Ned ha not explained ... a SIGNIFICANT part of what happened after KL- just pointing out that Ned may very well be fostering the Crown prince's sole surviving son. I think deep inside Ned is the same PIECE of defiance, just coded differently- by what right does Ned (the wolf) owe ANY explanation to anyone (Stag, Lion, Dragon...). In Ned we call in "honor" and in Jaime some call it arrogance. I LOVE double standards!

Ned explained everything to those that mattered. He told everyone that he fathered a bastard while on campaign and took the child home with him and called him son for all the North to see. He even told some the name of the mother. You need a better comparison.

It's amusing to see that the Kingslayer's supporters felt that Ned judged him too harshly. That Westeros has the wrong idea about turncloaks, oath breakers and kingslayers. We've certainly seen how they were all wrong about the Lion of Lannister. He never betrayed Robert by placing his own bastard children born of incest on the throne. He never betrayed Robert by keeping silent on the Queens plans to have the King murdered. He doesn't try to kill little boys who catch him doing the nasty. He doesn't look for little girls who hurt his bastard son with the intention of killing them. And if he did happen to do any of those things well, it's not his fault. He's just misunderstood and those who do not understand him are too high and mighty themselves.

[Rockroi]

He doesn't have to do anything no, but he certainly shouldn't expect anyone to approve of what he did. To think Ned should be happy to see a turncloak, kingslayer sitting on what he felt was Robert's throne is ridiculous.

Turncloak? Pot, meet kettle! They are ALL turncloaks! Its just that Ned likes his answer to why he is a turncloak than he would ever like Jaime's. To Ned, Jaime HAD to die saving Aerys... which is baffling because I don't think its right that ANYONE die for Aerys- not Rahegar, not Dayne, Jaime, Roussart, KL or Moon Boy. Ned? To Ned, you owe it to ... duty? Honor? Something... to ... fight for Aerys... the mad King he was trying to kill? Seriously, at what point does Ned just sound crazy?

Ned explained everything (sic) to those that mattered. He told everyone that he fathered a bastard while on campaign and took the child home with him and called him son for all the North to see. He even told some the name of the mother. You need a better comparison.

Except the whole "Its-probably-not-Ned's-Kid" issue, right? I mean, Jon Snow is almost assuredly not Ned's kid. Hence, he lied. Lied. That's dishonorable, to some. Probably to Ned (Ned actually has a large case of self-hatred that Jaime himself had, but worked out). So, he told everyone a lie. And allowed the last surviving child of the Crown Prince to live. Some would call that treason (and I am sure Robert Baratheon would have agreed). Therefore, he's actually not told anyone anything. Except a lie. In other words... he owes people an explination. But by what rights does the Lion, Trout, Eagle, Crab, Apple, Kraken, etc judge the Wolf? To Ned, he owes nobody any explanation.

That Westeros has the wrong idea about turncloaks, oath breakers and kingslayers.

I think they have selective cognition. What is "turncloak" to some is "patriot" to others. Ned is not, to you, a turncloak, when, of course, he was. He and Jon Arryn and Robert lead a rebellion. Brandon Stark road into King's Landing to demand that Rahegar "come out and die." Some call that all treason. Not you. And that's fair. Ned and Robert and Jon Arryn and Hoster Tully all had their reasons. But so did Jaime in slaying Aerys. See? Ned the hero, Jaime the honorless ass. Oh, yeah, that makes perfect sense.

Swear oaths? I am fairly certain Robert- as Lord of SE -swore and oath of fealty to Aerys Targaryen II. He apparently honored it about as well as Jaime did his oath. Robert the King, Jaime the Kingslayer. Perfect sense.

Robb, by the by, should support Stannis because Stannis is the rightful ruler of Westeros as Robert died without legal issue. Robb does not so that. Hence, Robb is a valiant hero, not a Usurper. Right? (Boggles. The. Mind.).

We've certainly seen how they were all wrong about the Lion of Lannister.

I am glad you recognize this. Jaime saved KL from immolation. Something Ned and Robert and Tywin failed to do. No need to thank him.

He never betrayed Robert by keeping silent on the Queens plans to have the King murdered.

Hardly a plan; more like a fervent wish. When she did it, Jaime knew the score, but again, conflict of duties- one to his sister, the other to his King. And he was in a jail cell by then.

He doesn't try to kill little boys who catch him doing the nasty.

I would have tossed Bran as well, as I have stated many times. He has to protect his sister and their children. Conflict of duties.

[The hairy bear]

And which is the excuse for making love to the king's wife? In terms of Westerosi morality this is probably by far the worst treason against your king, and Jaime commits it repeatedly.

When he saw Jaime on the Iron Throne, Ned judged him an arrogant man with shit for honor. And he was right.

[Matarreyes]

It's amusing to see that the Kingslayer's supporters felt that Ned judged him too harshly. That Westeros has the wrong idea about turncloaks, oath breakers and kingslayers. We've certainly seen how they were all wrong about the Lion of Lannister. He never betrayed Robert by placing his own bastard children born of incest on the throne. He never betrayed Robert by keeping silent on the Queens plans to have the King murdered. He doesn't try to kill little boys who catch him doing the nasty. He doesn't look for little girls who hurt his bastard son with the intention of killing them. And if he did happen to do any of those things well, it's not his fault. He's just misunderstood and those who do not understand him are too high and mighty themselves.

Kingslayer, Kingslayer, Kingslayer... I guess you are doing it on some weird purpose, because it´s much more difficult to write than the actual name. The guy´s name is Jaime. Something even Brienne, the most stubborn and hung-on-honor character of the series, his own little nemesis, his most fervent hater, actually managed to learn upon some thinking, insight and observation. Only took her a couple of months, all in all.

Look, this is pointless. I get that you don´t like him. The guy has done his share of shady deeds in the past, you do not need to invent more for him - nor do you need to wash away Ned´s or other characters misdeeds for him to look all the evil-er. My question is this. Do YOU get that you are actually reading the writer´s intent all wrong? The character´s arch is written in a way that brings him from "pitch black" in AGOT to "dirty whitish" in AFFC. Most readers and all literary critics have seen it and enjoyed/praised it inmensely. It´s one of the highlights of the series. By stiil defaulting to "pitch black" in AFFC, you are interpreting the books the way the author never intended, and robbing yourself of a great experience.