Why didn't Barristan leave Joffrey ?

[devilish]

I assume you are talking about Elia and her children?

She was never a Queen.

you are right my mistake, a princess

[The Lord of the Crossing]

I don't think that's a totally fair comparison.  The other KG were never in a position like Barristan so we don't know what they would have chosen.  The difference between them is that Barristan was only gravely wounded in fighting for the Tagaryen royalty rather than dying like they did.  Do we know what the White Bull, etc. might have done had they met Barry's choice in a post-Targaryen world?  Would they definitely have taken the black?  Well, maybe.  IDK.

It's worth noting that according to a lot of fairly reasonable theorising, the KG actually were planning treason against the king in favour of the crown prince.  Barristan wasn't.  So can we really criticise him for changing allegiance in comparison to the rest of the guard, which was made up of kingmakers and the kingslayer?  

I don't consider those reasonable theorising.  We know Gerold, Whent, and Arthur were loyal to King Aerys.  The White Bull even said so.  Had they been there, Aerys would still be sitting on the throne.  That doesn't sound like a man who would betray and depose Aerys in favor of Rhaegar.  Read his lines carefully @ the tower of joy.  It's clear he was loyal to Aerys.

[ArgilactheArrogant]

I'd written this previously in a different thread, but it seems apropos to this topic....

 

My biggest fault with Barristan is that he tells himself he acts honorably, but he does not always do so. And when he is reflecting back, he never seems to recall the occasions where he fails to act honorably, nor does he trouble to ask himself the hard questions about what orders are justified and which are not. For example, after Robert's death when Joffrey summons his councilor's to give him oaths of fealty:

 

“The eunuch carried the letter to Cersei. The queen glanced at the words. “Protector of the Realm,” she read. “Is this meant to be your shield, my lord? A piece of paper?” She ripped the letter in half, ripped the halves in quarters, and let the pieces flutter to the floor.

“Those were the king’s words,” Ser Barristan said, shocked.

“We have a new king now,” Cersei Lannister replied. “Lord Eddard, when last we spoke, you gave me some counsel. Allow me to return the courtesy. Bend the knee, my lord. Bend the knee and swear fealty to my son, and we shall allow you to step down as Hand and live out your days in the grey waste you call home.”

 

 

“You condemn yourself with your own mouth, Lord Stark,” said Cersei Lannister. “Ser Barristan, seize this traitor.”

The Lord Commander of the Kingsguard hesitated. In the blink of an eye he was surrounded by Stark guardsmen, bare steel in their mailed fists.”

 

 

Ser Barristan knew that King Robert had recently died and before his death had asked to see the Hand of the King and made out a will. Earlier in the same chapter, he opened up King Robert's sealed will and read its contents.

 

 

“He drew out Robert’s last letter. “The king called me to his side last night and commanded me to record his final words. Lord Renly and Grand Maester Pycelle stood witness as Robert sealed the letter, to be opened by the council after his death. Ser Barristan, if you would be so kind?”

The Lord Commander of the Kingsguard examined the paper. “King Robert’s seal, and unbroken.” He opened the letter and read. “Lord Eddard Stark is herein named Protector of the Realm, to rule as regent until the heir comes of age.”

 

How does Ser Barristan justify his inaction when he knew that Ned was both the Hand of the King and had just been named by the King as Protector of the Realm? (those two positions are the two most powerful political positions in the Realm)

 

Realistically, if Joffrey was "of age" when this scene occurred, then Ser Barristan might have a reason to hesitate because the Queen Dowager (who has no political authority but exerts influence solely by virtue of her relationship to the monarch) and the person he believes to be King Robert's heir would both be saying "Joffrey is now King".  But Joffrey is not yet "of age" and what the Queen Dowager or the underage age heir of the recently deceased King say should have no bearing in the face of the commands from the Hand of the King (#2 in command) and the commands expressed in the late King Robert's will naming Eddard Stark to the #1 position (Protector of the Realm being, in essence, acting King).

 

But even if Ser Barristan does hesitate at first, because it is a complicated situation, then his inactions in the minutes following are even more inexcusable. Ser Barristan hears the Hand of the King instructing his guards and the City Watch that the Royal Family be taken into custody but that no harm should come to them and telling the Queen that he wants no bloodshed and to have her guards put down their swords with one ear, and in the other ear Ser Barristan hears Prince Joffrey screaming: 

 

“Kill him!” the boy king screamed down from the Iron Throne. “Kill all of them, I command it!”

 

And he did nothing. Still. Which command seems more honorable? Which seems more authentic?

 

Bear in mind that Joffrey is not yet of age, and so is not yet speaking with Royal Authority regardless of whether you view him as a bastard born of incest (Ned), as the Crown Prince and heir to the throne (Barristan and most of those assembled), or as the King (Queen Cersei, the Hound and, perhaps, some of the Kingsguard). After all, the first thing Joffrey says when that scene begins is that he wants his Council to make plans for his coronation within a fortnight. So he does not yet have full Royal Authority, and is not an adult to whom the Small Council and the Kingsguard and others should listen when he commands them to kill the Hand of the King/Protector of the Realm and his men.

 

It is similar to how Jamie explains the situation to Ser Maryn Trant in Book 4:

 

“Ser Meryn got a stubborn look on his face. “Are you telling us not to obey the king?”

“The king is eight. Our first duty is to protect him, which includes protecting him from himself. Use that ugly thing you keep inside your helm. If Tommen wants you to saddle his horse, obey him. If he tells you to kill his horse, come to me.”

 

What Jamie is saying is that the commands of an underage King have to be tempered and measured by reasonable adults who serve him. Even if Ser Barristan for some odd reason thought it was right and proper to follow orders from the underage Prince instead of the Hand of the King/Protector of the Realm, he still should use his judgment and sense on whether to follow through on those commands (like the command to kill a score of men in the Throne Room).

 

I don't see how, if Ser Barristan is the paragon of virtue and this exemplar of honor that both his POV and other POVs make him out to be, he did nothing in this circumstance. How did he not obey Ned? Or intervene to try to prevent bloodshed? Or just shout and try to stop the situation before it escalated? Or command the rest of the Kingsguard to stand down?

 

And the only answer I can find is that Ser Barristan thought no one would listen and/or that he would also be killed if he objected to, or intervened in, the slaughter of Ned's guards. Which is perfectly rational and shows Ser Barristan's fine sense of self-preservation, but it does not speak particularly well for his honor and virtue. At least in my opinion.

[Light a wight tonight]

None sense, Robert overthrowed Targaryns, he ought to be a rebel, an usurper as Danny addresses him, NOT a real King, he was actually duty bond to follow Targaryn children to the East, did not matter whether Viserys was a good child  The reason he did not was simple: the beggar king can not name him a real Kingsguard, but Robert could

Using your logic the Henry VII was not the rightful king of England, since he displaced the Plantagenets and established the House of Tudor as the ruling House. Likewise Henry VIII and Elizabeth I. History definitely shows them as monarchs not usurpers. 

In fact the backstory of ISoIaF is in part based on the very war that saw the end of House Plantagenet. 

[Jaak]

 

“You condemn yourself with your own mouth, Lord Stark,” said Cersei Lannister. “Ser Barristan, seize this traitor.”

The Lord Commander of the Kingsguard hesitated. In the blink of an eye he was surrounded by Stark guardsmen, bare steel in their mailed fists.”

 

 

Ser Barristan knew that King Robert had recently died and before his death had asked to see the Hand of the King and made out a will. Earlier in the same chapter, he opened up King Robert's sealed will and read its contents.

 

 

“He drew out Robert’s last letter. “The king called me to his side last night and commanded me to record his final words. Lord Renly and Grand Maester Pycelle stood witness as Robert sealed the letter, to be opened by the council after his death. Ser Barristan, if you would be so kind?”

The Lord Commander of the Kingsguard examined the paper. “King Robert’s seal, and unbroken.” He opened the letter and read. “Lord Eddard Stark is herein named Protector of the Realm, to rule as regent until the heir comes of age.”

 

How does Ser Barristan justify his inaction when he knew that Ned was both the Hand of the King and had just been named by the King as Protector of the Realm? (those two positions are the two most powerful political positions in the Realm)

 

Um? Because Eddard WAS condemned by his own mouth?

Your son has no claim to the throne he sits.

By denying Joffrey´s right to throne, his own claim to regency was exploded as a lie. Robert may have trusted Eddard in his lifetime, but by denying loyalty to his son, Eddard was betraying the trust Robert had placed on him. Good reason to treat Eddard as the traitor he was.

[ArgilactheArrogant]

Jaak, I'm not sure you addressed my points. At the moment Cersei made that statement, she had no political power. Neither did Joffrey, for that matter. The Hand of the King (#2 in the chain of command) had also just been named the Protector of the Realm/Regent (#1 in the chain of command) in the undisputedly authentic will from the deceased King. 

Cersei's commands do not outrank the commands from the person who is the political authority in the Realm. Now, the picture does get slightly murky because the Kingsguard is sworn to protect the King and follow his orders (and Robert's will ordered that Eddard was named Protector of the Realm/Regent), but are also sworn to protect the King's family. That's where the Jamie Lannister quote becomes important, because in a situation that was very confusing one party (Ned) was urging restraint, and the other (Joffrey) was ordering the death of a score of men. 

[A spoon of knife and fork]

Problem is, Ned did not simply say "here's Roberts will, I'm protector of the realm" he went on to say Joffery had no claim.  In a moment Barry had to judge whether Ned was lying/mistaken about jofferys parentage.  I think committing high treason against a crown prince overrides the powers as protector of the realm. 

[FuzzyJAM]

Where is it stated in the books how much power Joffrey has or what the legal obligation the kingsguard has to him when he contradicts the dead Robert?

The constitution of the Seven Kingdoms seems extremely undefined.  Barristan isn't a lawyer.  We have no idea what, if anything, the legal position on what he should do is.  As far as Barristan can tell, Ned is trying to displace the lawful king for some inexplicable reason.  He's part of the kingsguard, and the first thing a kingsguard is supposed to do is obey the king.  You obey even when they're unwise - see that Barristan didn't stop Robert fighting a boar when smashed because he was ordered to step aside.  Jaime may temper the expected obedience when made LC, but it's hard to argue the kingslayer is a stickler for kingsguard rules.

[marsyao]

Using your logic the Henry VII was not the rightful king of England, since he displaced the Plantagenets and established the House of Tudor as the ruling House. Likewise Henry VIII and Elizabeth I. History definitely shows them as monarchs not usurpers. 

In fact the backstory of ISoIaF is in part based on the very war that saw the end of House Plantagenet. 

No, that was not what I means at all, Robert establisehd his dynasty by the right of conquer, he was as lawful a King as Aego the first, but in the eyes of Targaryn loyalists, he is and would always be a usurper and a false King, do you see the differnce here? 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, or he could join the Night's watch. But of course, we know that would not happen, becasue all Ser Barristan ever want is to be a Kingsguard, he does not really care who is the King

[marsyao]

Where is it stated in the books how much power Joffrey has or what the legal obligation the kingsguard has to him when he contradicts the dead Robert?

 

Kingsguard is supposed to serving for life for King and King's family

[FuzzyJAM]

Kingsguard is supposed to serving for life for King and King's family

Which is exactly what he was doing.  Joffrey was king.  Simple.  The question is whether it's clearly defined what to do when the king is a minor and contradicts the will of the prior king by demanding the arrest of someone who is being treasonous (from Barristan's perspective).  It seems unlikely.

Why on Earth should Barristan be a Targaryen loyalist "as a kingsguard"?  The Targs lost the kingship, why would the kingsguard still guard non-kings?  If you want to say "Ah, but the Targ loyalists would see them as kings!" - yes, sure.  But then you're back to the same problem: why should the kingsguard be Targ loyalists?  

Your argument is as follows: The KG should be Targ supporters because to Targ supporters the Targs are kings and the KG should be loyal to the king.  Do you not see that this is entirely circular?  One could just as easily say: The KG should be Robert supporters because to Robert supporters Robert is king and the KG should be loyal to the king.  

[Light a wight tonight]

Text deleted

[Jaak]

Cersei's commands do not outrank the commands from the person who is the political authority in the Realm. Now, the picture does get slightly murky because the Kingsguard is sworn to protect the King and follow his orders (and Robert's will ordered that Eddard was named Protector of the Realm/Regent), but are also sworn to protect the King's family.

Kingsguard obligation to protect the King (Joffrey) DOES outrank the obligation to obey a Regent who´s clearly betraying his duties.

[marsyao]

Why on Earth should Barristan be a Targaryen loyalist "as a kingsguard"?  The Targs lost the kingship, why would the kingsguard still guard non-kings?  If you want to say "Ah, but the Targ loyalists would see them as kings!" - yes, sure.  But then you're back to the same problem: why should the kingsguard be Targ loyalists?  

Why on earth a Kingsguard Targaryen King  is not Targaryen loyalist? I mean hello? In the eyes of a true loyalist, a King in exile is still a King, do you remember bittersteel and Ser Willem Darry?

[FuzzyJAM]

Why on earth a Kingsguard Targaryen King  is not Targaryen loyalist? I mean hello? In the eyes of a true loyalist, a King in exile is still a King, do you remember bittersteel and Ser Willem Darry?

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.

You can't sort out confusion as to who the king you should support is by saying you should be loyal to the king.  Again, that's circular and makes zero sense.  

[purple-eyes]

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.

You can't sort out confusion as to who the king you should support is by saying you should be loyal to the king.  Again, that's circular and makes zero sense.  

this is not correct. 

At that moment, viserys should be his king. 

He abandoned his king and turned to the usurper. 

Of course it is a wise action, but it is not what a KG supposed to do. 

Theoretically he should refuse to serve Robert, either take black or escape to DS or being striped the white cloak.  

[FuzzyJAM]

this is not correct. 

At that moment, viserys should be his king. 

He abandoned his king and turned to the usurper. 

Of course it is a wise action, but it is not what a KG supposed to do. 

Theoretically he should refuse to serve Robert, either take black or escape to DS or being striped the white cloak.  

Why.  Should.  Viserys.  Be.  His.  King?

Viserys isn't the lords' king, he's not the faith's king, he's not the realm's king - so why should he be the Kingsguard's king?  The KG are very much not supposed to determine who the king is: those who do are the worst KG in history.  If everyone is saying Robert is king to the KG, why is he not the king to the KG?  

[Light a wight tonight]

this is not correct. 

At that moment, viserys should be his king. 

He abandoned his king and turned to the usurper. 

Of course it is a wise action, but it is not what a KG supposed to do. 

Theoretically he should refuse to serve Robert, either take black or escape to DS or being striped the white cloak.  

Viserys was never king. He was the heir to a deposed dynasty. That and a couple of coppers will get you a bowl of brown in Flea Bottom. 

[VeryLittleGravitasIndeed]

 

Bear in mind that Joffrey is not yet of age, and so is not yet speaking with Royal Authority regardless of whether you view him as a bastard born of incest (Ned), as the Crown Prince and heir to the throne (Barristan and most of those assembled), or as the King (Queen Cersei, the Hound and, perhaps, some of the Kingsguard). After all, the first thing Joffrey says when that scene begins is that he wants his Council to make plans for his coronation within a fortnight. So he does not yet have full Royal Authority, and is not an adult to whom the Small Council and the Kingsguard and others should listen when he commands them to kill the Hand of the King/Protector of the Realm and his men.

 

This is actually addressed in the books-  the coronation is a religious formality, the King's authority does not depend on the coronation.

As for not having full Royal Authority - I doubt the KG vows include provisions for the King being a minor.

 

It is similar to how Jamie explains the situation to Ser Maryn Trant in Book 4:

 

“Ser Meryn got a stubborn look on his face. “Are you telling us not to obey the king?”

“The king is eight. Our first duty is to protect him, which includes protecting him from himself. Use that ugly thing you keep inside your helm. If Tommen wants you to saddle his horse, obey him. If he tells you to kill his horse, come to me.”

 

What Jamie is saying is that the commands of an underage King have to be tempered and measured by reasonable adults who serve him. Even if Ser Barristan for some odd reason thought it was right and proper to follow orders from the underage Prince instead of the Hand of the King/Protector of the Realm, he still should use his judgment and sense on whether to follow through on those commands (like the command to kill a score of men in the Throne Room).

 

I don't see how, if Ser Barristan is the paragon of virtue and this exemplar of honor that both his POV and other POVs make him out to be, he did nothing in this circumstance. How did he not obey Ned? Or intervene to try to prevent bloodshed? Or just shout and try to stop the situation before it escalated? Or command the rest of the Kingsguard to stand down?

 

Jaime is a pretty terrible King's Guard. Leaving aside the whole killing one King and cuckolding another he never, ever obeys orders. Not from Tywin (who was Hand of the King and Regent at the time) or Cersei (queen regent) and certainly not from any of the kings he's supposed to serve.

Sure his independence is good when it comes to saving a city from burning but he'd make a pretty poor soldier and is an absolutely terrible King's Guard.

Barristan most likely views obedience as an important virtue, because it is a pretty important virtue in a sworn shield. He is obviously confused as to what he should do and thus prefers inaction over action which is pretty logical. All the King's Guard besides Jaime obeyed Joffery, Arthur Dayne, Gerold Hightower and other great knights obeyed Aerys and the King's Guard generally stayed completely loyal to the King with two exceptions- the Dance of the Dragons (where who should be king was highly uncertain) and the reign of Maegor the Cruel (who usurped the Throne and proved a terrible king).

 

And the only answer I can find is that Ser Barristan thought no one would listen and/or that he would also be killed if he objected to, or intervened in, the slaughter of Ned's guards. Which is perfectly rational and shows Ser Barristan's fine sense of self-preservation, but it does not speak particularly well for his honor and virtue. At least in my opinion.

Because he totally didn't insult Joffrey after he was released from his vows or didn't fight until he was nearly killed at the Trident or cut through the Golden Company the kill the Blackfyre pretender when he was young.

Obedience is considered a key virtue in military contexts for a reason. In medieval Japan, ancient Rome and a number of other societies disobedience without a really good cause was so terrible it could only be atoned by suicide. Medieval Europe wasn't big on suicides but oath breaking was still very serious business and that's also true in Westeros based on what we see from the books and interviews.

Barristan is a man who is accustomed to obey. That doesn't make much of an impression on someone from modern times but when you dedicate your entire life to upholding a vow and obeying one person and then are placed in a situation where you don't know what to do keeping your mouth shut is a sign of prudence and not moral cowardice. If Joffrey was the rightful King then Barristan would have no right to prevent Ned's men from being murdered.

 

[purple-eyes]

Why.  Should.  Viserys.  Be.  His.  King?

Viserys isn't the lords' king, he's not the faith's king, he's not the realm's king - so why should he be the Kingsguard's king?  The KG are very much not supposed to determine who the king is: those who do are the worst KG in history.  If everyone is saying Robert is king to the KG, why is he not the king to the KG?  

 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.