Why didn't Barristan leave Joffrey ?

[FuzzyJAM]

 Well, tell this to three KG at TOJ who were guarding whatever inside in the tower and refuse to bend the knee to Robert as barristan. 

The timeline isn't certain but I'm pretty confident the ToJ happens before Barristan chooses to stand by Robert.  Indeed, I think it's probable that the fall of Dragonstone happened before the decision was made.  But that's conjecture - we don't know.  At any rate, different situations: Robert was more clearly king when Barristan made his choice.

The KG at the ToJ were almost certainly breaking their KG vows by serving Rhaegar rather than Aerys.  Unless you think it likely Aerys sent them there himself?  I guess that's some sort of possibility. . .but I doubt it.  At any rate, that they chose to stay with the Targs rather than the Iron Throne isn't wrong as far as I'm concerned.  Jon Targaryen did indeed have a claim to the throne, and if some of the KG wanted to back it I can understand.  But if others in the KG don't, that's equally fine.  When there are multiple claimants, the decision isn't always clear - that's the whole point of there being multiple claimants.  

[purple-eyes]

The timeline isn't certain but I'm pretty confident the ToJ happens before Barristan chooses to stand by Robert.  Indeed, I think it's probable that the fall of Dragonstone happened before the decision was made.  But that's conjecture - we don't know.  At any rate, different situations: Robert was more clearly king when Barristan made his choice.

The KG at the ToJ were almost certainly breaking their KG vows by serving Rhaegar rather than Aerys.  Unless you think it likely Aerys sent them there himself?  I guess that's some sort of possibility. . .but I doubt it.  At any rate, that they chose to stay with the Targs rather than the Iron Throne isn't wrong as far as I'm concerned.  Jon Targaryen did indeed have a claim to the throne, and if some of the KG wanted to back it I can understand.  But if others in the KG don't, that's equally fine.  When there are multiple claimants, the decision isn't always clear - that's the whole point of there being multiple claimants.  

Fall of DS happened after the birth of Dany. So it is at least more than half year after trident.

I do not think Barristan will have chance to wait for so long to decide what he should deal with Robert. 

He certainly abandoned Viserys and rhaella and later he claimed to dany that he thought Viserys mad since young, a very lame excuse. 

And yes, I think all three KG and Barristan are technically oath breakers. 

They are supposed to serve their king, but they stay there for one year per the order of rhaegar. Even after rhaegar died, they still did not go to their king and Aegon (king is alive and aegon is lawful heir no matter what the hell happened between rhargar and his mistress Lyanna Stark)

White Bull is surely loyal to Aerys. He was forced by rhaegar to stay there. He is quite innocent. 

But Arthur dayne and Oswell Whent are already working for Rhaegar. Just like kingmaker criston cole or queenmaker Arys oakheart.  

[JonCon's Red Beard]

You all put too much faith in Barristan. He's the guy who said Fire was useless and Mud was better. "If a child is with a fever, mud will cure him, not fire...!", dunno, Selmy... maybe he got sick because ALL OF THE RAW MEAT HE'S EATING?

[LordDireStark]

The KIngsguard are sworn to protect the king only.Their oath is the same as a maester. They serve whoever the king is regardless of the circumstances. So when he is releaved by Joffrey,he felt betrayed,so he sought out to look for Daenerys and fulfill his oath to the targaryens that he thought he left unfulfilled.

[John Doe]

You all put too much faith in Barristan. He's the guy who said Fire was useless and Mud was better. "If a child is with a fever, mud will cure him, not fire...!", dunno, Selmy... maybe he got sick because ALL OF THE RAW MEAT HE'S EATING?

Plus fire helps with cauterization and warms you during long, cold winters

[UnViserion]

I like Barristan, but his honor is completely overstated. KG who's turned his cloak twice.. Even if the second time he was dismissed. Not even Jaime's done that.

[UnViserion]

The KIngsguard are sworn to protect the king only.Their oath is the same as a maester. They serve whoever the king is regardless of the circumstances. So when he is releaved by Joffrey,he felt betrayed,so he sought out to look for Daenerys and fulfill his oath to the targaryens that he thought he left unfulfilled.

I disagree with that last part. I think he did it to spite Joffrey and the Lannisters, in an "I'll show you" sort of way. 

Personally I woulda done the same thing. But I don't think it was a completely duty-bound act.

[marsyao]

He was loyal to a Targaryen king because he was king, not because he was Targaryen.  It's the Kingsguard, not the Targaryenguard.  That king then died and a new one was proclaimed.  Barristan was loyal to that king also.  The KG are supposed to be loyal to the office, not the house.

 

There is no Kingsguard before Targaryns, so the Kingsguard = Targarynsguard here, and after the death of Mad King, the Viserys, as the heir, automatically became the King, in the eyes of a Targaryn loyalist, he was one and only KIng

[Jaak]

As a Kingsguard, Ser Barristan should be always a Targaryn roylist bound by his oath, if he was disillusion of the Mad King, and did not consider Viserys a good King materierl (by the way, is it properly for him to judge?), then fine, he did not have to go into exile with Targaryn children, he did not have to take revenge for Targaryns, but it is not an honorable thing for him to serving Robert. Robert would not force him to be a Kingsguard, he could retire, if hje still likes adventure, he could become a hedge Knight traveling in the seven Kingdom like Dunc and Egg used to do

That´s not obvious! Robert did force Jaime to be Kingsguard.

Since Barristan was not there when Jaime was pardoned, and may not yet have been asked to decide, it was Jaime´s pardon that set the decision that Kingsguard vows still held. And this applied to Barristan - and the remaining three.

[purple-eyes]

 

That´s not obvious! Robert did force Jaime to be Kingsguard.

Since Barristan was not there when Jaime was pardoned, and may not yet have been asked to decide, it was Jaime´s pardon that set the decision that Kingsguard vows still held. And this applied to Barristan - and the remaining three.

Robert pardoned them but this does not mean they need to accept the pardon. 

Ned did ask three TOJ KG to bend their knees, and I think he meant he would spare them. 

Did they accept?

[Jaak]

Robert pardoned them but this does not mean they need to accept the pardon. 

Ned did ask three TOJ KG to bend their knees, and I think he meant he would spare them. 

Did they accept?

The three Kingsguard had the option to bend the knee or fight... and almost won.

Barristan had the options, probably, to bend knee or rot in a dungeon to no effect.

The options if pardoned were serving Usurper or, perhaps, the Wall. Tywin would have been glad for Robert to dismiss Jaime and let Jaime back to Casterly Rock. Robert did not do THAT, for likely pretext that Kingsguard vows were for life - and likely reason that he wanted Jaime as a Lannister hostage.

But if he did not let Jaime free then he also could not let Barristan free, or Gerold or Arthur or Oswell.

[purple-eyes]

The three Kingsguard had the option to bend the knee or fight... and almost won.

Barristan had the options, probably, to bend knee or rot in a dungeon to no effect.

The options if pardoned were serving Usurper or, perhaps, the Wall. Tywin would have been glad for Robert to dismiss Jaime and let Jaime back to Casterly Rock. Robert did not do THAT, for likely pretext that Kingsguard vows were for life - and likely reason that he wanted Jaime as a Lannister hostage.

But if he did not let Jaime free then he also could not let Barristan free, or Gerold or Arthur or Oswell.

 why did he need to treat other KG as Jaime?

other KG can not serve as hostage as you said. They are not sons of Tywin. 

Robert can simply send Barristan to wall or kill him if he refuses to serve him. 

So barristan decided that it is wiser to bend his knee and serve the usruper than to go to wall or die. 

But if he stick to his holy and loyal vow, he should have either tried to escape or chose to die without serving his enemy. 

Keep in mind, Robert is his enemy over rebellion. 

so you are a fighter, you fight with your enemy. 

After the war, you lost, you were captured, you bend you knee and started to serve your enemy. 

do not you think this contradict your holy oath?

there are quite some KG in the history who chose to die over surrendering. 

 

 

[Jaak]

 why did he need to treat other KG as Jaime?

other KG can not serve as hostage as you said. They are not sons of Tywin.

So that he could keep pretending to Tywin and Seven Kingdoms that Kingsguard was honour, not hostage. If he released Barristan (because Barristan was not a valuable hostage for Selmies), it would have been hard to justify not releasing Jaime.

[FuzzyJAM]

There is no Kingsguard before Targaryns, so the Kingsguard = Targarynsguard here, and after the death of Mad King, the Viserys, as the heir, automatically became the King, in the eyes of a Targaryn loyalist, he was one and only KIng

Except we know there is a KG after the Targaryens.  Clearly it's not a Targaryenguard.

This is not a situation that had come up before, where the Targaryens were no longer king according to every institution of the realm.  In the past, head of Targaryen house = king.  When the two were separated, the only precedent for what KG are supposed to do is Barristan himself.  Therefore, saying he broke the rules makes zero sense: there were no rules to break until the situation came up.  If you want to say he made an immoral choice - fine, whatever.  If you want to say he broke his oaths to the king - plainly not, because there's a strong justification to view Robert as king like everyone else did.  If you want to say he broke his oaths to the Targaryens - we have no idea if he ever made any oath regarding them.  

Until we know the precise oaths of a KG, we can't know if Barristan broke them.  It seems extremely likely to me that they'd be about serving the king of the realm.  We know that it was focused on a single person (the king) so mentioning his house would be odd.  But maybe it does, we don't know.  

[A spoon of knife and fork]

 why did he need to treat other KG as Jaime?

other KG can not serve as hostage as you said. They are not sons of Tywin. 

Robert can simply send Barristan to wall or kill him if he refuses to serve him. 

So barristan decided that it is wiser to bend his knee and serve the usruper than to go to wall or die. 

But if he stick to his holy and loyal vow, he should have either tried to escape or chose to die without serving his enemy. 

Keep in mind, Robert is his enemy over rebellion. 

so you are a fighter, you fight with your enemy. 

After the war, you lost, you were captured, you bend you knee and started to serve your enemy. 

do not you think this contradict your holy oath?

there are quite some KG in the history who chose to die over surrendering. 

As Jaime points out there are many oaths to consider.  Barristan - like any one - is not a duty robot, and there is no definite duty heirarchy in Westeros.  Whether it's the official line or not, there is always interpretation - there has to be.  

In general any knight or KG of good faith will do what he feels is right.  Barristan explains quite clearly his reasoning to Daenerys.  He thinks Robert is a good guy, he's currently king, and Viserys is gone and besides he seems too much like Aerys for Barristan to be comfortable.  Bareistan owns this reasoning as his OWN decision - not as "I had to do this because of my oath" which would be a cowards way out, IMO.  It's much more brave and honorable to say "I choose this because it seemed the right thing to do... And now I can see I was probably wrong".  

[Jaak]

Except we know there is a KG after the Targaryens.  Clearly it's not a Targaryenguard.

This is not a situation that had come up before, where the Targaryens were no longer king according to every institution of the realm.  In the past, head of Targaryen house = king.  When the two were separated, the only precedent for what KG are supposed to do is Barristan himself.

It´s debatable whether Hugh the Hammer and Ulf the White claimed they wanted to become King, like Robert did between Trident and coronation, or whether they claimed to already be King - but they were not calling themselves Targaryens. (Did Hugh, or Ulf, ever pick a surname?). Trystane and Gaemon claimed to be King, but as head of House Targaryen.

Laughing Storm had claimed to be King, but as the Storm King. Did he have Kingsguard?

[FuzzyJAM]

It´s debatable whether Hugh the Hammer and Ulf the White claimed they wanted to become King, like Robert did between Trident and coronation, or whether they claimed to already be King - but they were not calling themselves Targaryens. (Did Hugh, or Ulf, ever pick a surname?). Trystane and Gaemon claimed to be King, but as head of House Targaryen.

Laughing Storm had claimed to be King, but as the Storm King. Did he have Kingsguard?

I don't think the Two Betrayers, Gaemon nor Trystane, were all that serious claimants to the Seven Kingdoms, were they?  I'm a little shaky, but did they actually have a shot of claiming it?  At any rate, if they had taken control of the whole realm and gotten everyone to swear fealty, it seems entirely plausible that they'd have had a KG.  We don't know, of course, because the situation never arose, which is rather my point: the situation of someone who was not a Targaryen gaining control of the realm and the fealty of the lords paramount and the support of the faith was unprecedented. 

For the Laughing Storm, he never claimed to be king of the Seven Kingdoms, which is what the KG is an institution of.  

[Jaak]

We don't know, of course, because the situation never arose, which is rather my point: the situation of someone who was not a Targaryen gaining control of the realm and the fealty of the lords paramount and the support of the faith was unprecedented. 

At various points of Faith Militant rebellion, the control of Targaryens over Seven Kingdoms was pretty dubious - although Faith do not seem to have proclaimed a non-Targaryen "King", like Harren the Red was. Two Kingsguard did defect to Jaehaerys Targaryen, we don´t see if any protected Aegon - but did any Kingsguard defect to Faith?

[FuzzyJAM]

At various points of Faith Militant rebellion, the control of Targaryens over Seven Kingdoms was pretty dubious - although Faith do not seem to have proclaimed a non-Targaryen "King", like Harren the Red was. Two Kingsguard did defect to Jaehaerys Targaryen, we don´t see if any protected Aegon - but did any Kingsguard defect to Faith?

Dubious is not the same as gone.  That's what's unprecedented: almost the entire realm (minor exceptions, of course) was backing a new king.  It wasn't that Jon or Viserys had dubious control, it was that they had none.  Of course, not everyone was happy about Robert, any more than everyone was happy when they first backed the Targaryens, but they were still backing him.  

This is why it's totally different.  There's no other member of the KG who's ever been critically wounded whilst his king died and become healthy when a new king is clearly in charge.  

[Jaak]

Dubious is not the same as gone.  That's what's unprecedented: almost the entire realm (minor exceptions, of course) was backing a new king.  It wasn't that Jon or Viserys had dubious control, it was that they had none.

Queen Rhaenyra had apparently no control outside Dragonstone when Aegon II was crowned. It was only after Ser Steffon´s escape that Blacks around Westeros crawled out of woodwork. Aenys had also died a fugitive on Dragonstone.