What would Barristan have done about the wildfire?

[Alyn Oakenfist]

So we learn from Barristan's stories to Dany that he as well as Jaime was horrifically conflicted about his service to Aerys. So the question is had Barristan been at the Red Keep during The Sack of King's Landing, what would he have done. Would he have stood by his vows, losing any sense of self-pride, or do what is right and break his vow?

[Jekse]

Barristan dislikes Jaime for breaking his vows, he would have stood by.

[The Young Maester]

1 hour ago, Jekse said:

Barristan dislikes Jaime for breaking his vows, he would have stood by.

Yeah but Barristan doesn't know that Aerys was planning on burning kings landing. 

[sweetsunray]

12 hours ago, The Young Maester said:

Yeah but Barristan doesn't know that Aerys was planning on burning kings landing. 

Yes, and no. Aerys and his pyromancers didn't start making and planting wildifre less than a month before the battle at the Trident, but earlier than that. Martell and Selmy would have been aware of Aerys' condition, his preference for fire, having pyromancers make more and stowing them away beneath the city.

The Dornish Prince would have been politically astute enough to get Aerys' intentions, but then Elia and her children were partially Aerys' hostage. Selmy though is a man of action and tends to stay out of political intrigue, until Meereen, after Dany went missing.

[kissdbyfire]

Selmy would have been disgusted and horrified, and yet he would have stood by Aerys and protected him to the best of his abilities. He is, first and foremost, all about duty. And duty and honour may walk hand in hand at times but not necessarily all the time. 

[Back door hodor]

19 hours ago, Alyn Oakenfist said:

So we learn from Barristan's stories to Dany that he as well as Jaime was horrifically conflicted about his service to Aerys. So the question is had Barristan been at the Red Keep during The Sack of King's Landing, what would he have done. Would he have stood by his vows, losing any sense of self-pride, or do what is right and break his vow?

No, Barristan would have let the city burn, that's the whole point of Jamie's situation in my opinion, that he is condemned for his one truly selfless act. While others, who history seems more worthy would not or did not do the same.

[Alyn Oakenfist]

6 hours ago, kissdbyfire said:

Selmy would have been disgusted and horrified, and yet he would have stood by Aerys and protected him to the best of his abilities. He is, first and foremost, all about duty. And duty and honour may walk hand in hand at times but not necessarily all the time. 

I always felt that the main driving force for Barristan was finding a king he can serve proudly. I tend to think that all that shame and resentment could maybe overrule his honor. Also I never got the felling he hates or despises Jaime. I mean the only proof we have are a couple of words spoken in anger when his whole life was uprooted. So I don't think he truly meant that.

[kissdbyfire]

1 hour ago, Alyn Oakenfist said:

I always felt that the main driving force for Barristan was finding a king he can serve proudly. I tend to think that all that shame and resentment could maybe overrule his honor. Also I never got the felling he hates or despises Jaime. I mean the only proof we have are a couple of words spoken in anger when his whole life was uprooted. So I don't think he truly meant that.

Just to clarify. Nothing I said had anything to do w/ Jaime. When I said Selmy would have been disgusted and horrified, I meant by Aerys plans/actions, like giving the order to burn KL. 

[sweetsunray]

9 hours ago, kissdbyfire said:

Selmy would have been disgusted and horrified, and yet he would have stood by Aerys and protected him to the best of his abilities. He is, first and foremost, all about duty. And duty and honour may walk hand in hand at times but not necessarily all the time. 

Agreed. He didn't exactly leave by himself. If Joffrey hadn't sacked him, Selmy would have been his KG, ordered to beat Sansa... and he would do that too. 

[rotting sea cow]

9 hours ago, kissdbyfire said:

Selmy would have been disgusted and horrified, and yet he would have stood by Aerys and protected him to the best of his abilities. He is, first and foremost, all about duty. And duty and honour may walk hand in hand at times but not necessarily all the time. 

Indeed. Barristan asks himself about 'how much blood is in his hands' when recalling Aerys time

[Bowen 747]

On 11/1/2019 at 3:50 AM, Alyn Oakenfist said:

So we learn from Barristan's stories to Dany that he as well as Jaime was horrifically conflicted about his service to Aerys. So the question is had Barristan been at the Red Keep during The Sack of King's Landing, what would he have done. Would he have stood by his vows, losing any sense of self-pride, or do what is right and break his vow?

Barristan is a better man than Jaime.  He would have managed to convince King Aerys to stop.  Aerys might have listened to Barristan.  He did in the past and spared Dontos.  Barristan was able to take Aerys out of his prison and into safety.  He would have done the same at King's Landing. 

[Alyn Oakenfist]

1 hour ago, Bowen 747 said:

Barristan is a better man than Jaime.  He would have managed to convince King Aerys to stop.  Aerys might have listened to Barristan.  He did in the past and spared Dontos.  Barristan was able to take Aerys out of his prison and into safety.  He would have done the same at King's Landing. 

Honestly I doubt Aerys would listen to anyone by that point. He was completely broken at that point. It is clear that he would try to persuade Aerys, but what would happen when Aerys would inevitably refuse?

[Seams]

If GRRM gives us the Summerhall story in the last Dunk & Egg installment, we will know by Dunk's actions in that situation how Barristan would have reacted to Aerys with his wildfire.

I think Aegon V is going to manifest signs of the Targaryen insanity / fire obsession and Dunk will act in a way that reflects his / Ser Barristan's / Brienne's sense of honor.

[Lord Varys]

We cannot pretend we know. Selmy is the only person who knows - and he never told us what he know. People pretending they know what he must have known are not making much sense.

Cersei and Tyrion also had the pyromancers prepare wildfire for a worst case scenario (a siege). Does this mean anybody in the city had reason or a right to assume they were preparing to burn down the entire city in a worst case scenario? I'd say no.

Pretending Selmy must have been privy to Aerys II's talks with his pyromancers - which took place behind close with KGs possibly only guarding the doors not attending the king inside - is also at this point not justified.

If we talk about preventing the burning when Aerys II commanded it - it was not necessary to become a Kingslayer to do that. Like Jaime did at first it would have been enough to arrest, knock out, or kill Rossart, to prevent the king's command from reaching his underlings. This certainly would have been a betrayal but not the worst treason/oathbreaking.

Just as afterwards it would have been more than enough for Jaime (and thus also Selmy in a similar position) to not kill his king but to knock him out, injure, or arrest him. That would have kept the raving madman occupied long enough for others to take care of him.

If one looks at Selmy's character one cannot wonder whether he - and many of the better elements in his Kingsguard - would have gone down the way Chelsted did - who is never described as a principled, courageous, or sympathetic character.

If Barristan Selmy, Arthur Dayne, Lewyn Martell, Oswell Whent, and perhaps even Jonothor Darry had known what Aerys II was up to they, too, might have confronted their king about it, tried to reason with him, threatening to defect or break their vows rather than be part of that. Unlike Jaime - who only decides 'to do something about the issue' when order in the city is collapsing and his father's cavalry is there to save the golden boy of the West Chelsted had the guts to confront Aerys II about this while it was still only a theoretical plan for a worst case scenario, not something that would definitely be done (unless we assume Chelsted was only burned after the Trident and when the court had learned that Rhaegar was dead, which I still like to believe - it makes no sense to me that Chelsted would fret over a emergency measure, nor that Aerys II would go as far as burn him when he cannot actually have intended to burn KL while it wasn't clear that the Targaryens would lose the war).

In Jaime we have no great hero doing the right or even not-so-worse thing - we have an opportunist motivated by personal hatred and anger caused by the king commanding him to kill his own father, as well as the emotional buildup of resentment due to the fact that Jaime had to suffer through a lot of atrocities commanded or personally done by a madman - albeit a madman this youth actually chose to serve as bodyguard knowing fully well what kind of person he was. Jaime wasn't even as ignorant about Aerys II's state of mind or most popular execution techniques as Jon was about the state of the Watch when he decided to take the black - he was the son and heir of the (former) Hand of the King. He must have known every rumor about Aerys II ever told, and his own father would have shared with the gruesome details about Duskendale and everything that came thereafter.

In any case, the assumption that Jaime is somehow or in some aspects 'better' than his sworn brothers because he put down the monster has to wait until Selmy reveals whether he knew about the wildfire plan or not.

[frenin]

34 minutes ago, Lord Varys said:

If one looks at Selmy's character one cannot wonder whether he - and many of the better elements in his Kingsguard - would have gone down the way Chelsted did - who is never described as a principled, courageous, or sympathetic character.

 

There are no better elements in that watch, they allowed him  the greatest atrocities without blinking an eye while actively trying to discourage the newest of thinking about anything else that involved putting down a mad man.

He has not to be described as a principled, couragious or sympathetic character, just described as someone who would not participate in genocide, we cannot say the same of those better elements.

 

38 minutes ago, Lord Varys said:

albeit a madman this youth actually chose to serve as bodyguard knowing fully well what kind of person he was. Jaime wasn't even as ignorant about Aerys II's state of mind or most popular execution techniques as Jon was about the state of the Watch when he decided to take the black - he was the son and heir of the (former) Hand of the King. He must have known every rumor about Aerys II ever told, and his own father would have shared with the gruesome details about Duskendale and everything that came thereafter.

Was he?? Jaime didn't seem to know much about Aerys, Jaime is described as a guy that only had mind for Cersei and battle, nor do i know why would Tywin shared with his kids the gruesome details of Aerys character.

 

 

41 minutes ago, Lord Varys said:

 In any case, the assumption that Jaime is somehow or in some aspects 'better' than his sworn brothers because he put down the monster has to wait until Selmy reveals whether he knew about the wildfire plan or not.

Jaime is better that his sworn brothers because he wanted to act while his sworn brothers, guys clearly he looked up to were only concerned about not staining that beatiful white cloack.

[Alyn Oakenfist]

1 hour ago, Lord Varys said:

We cannot pretend we know. Selmy is the only person who knows - and he never told us what he know. People pretending they know what he must have known are not making much sense.

Cersei and Tyrion also had the pyromancers prepare wildfire for a worst case scenario (a siege). Does this mean anybody in the city had reason or a right to assume they were preparing to burn down the entire city in a worst case scenario? I'd say no.

Pretending Selmy must have been privy to Aerys II's talks with his pyromancers - which took place behind close with KGs possibly only guarding the doors not attending the king inside - is also at this point not justified.

If we talk about preventing the burning when Aerys II commanded it - it was not necessary to become a Kingslayer to do that. Like Jaime did at first it would have been enough to arrest, knock out, or kill Rossart, to prevent the king's command from reaching his underlings. This certainly would have been a betrayal but not the worst treason/oathbreaking.

Just as afterwards it would have been more than enough for Jaime (and thus also Selmy in a similar position) to not kill his king but to knock him out, injure, or arrest him. That would have kept the raving madman occupied long enough for others to take care of him.

If one looks at Selmy's character one cannot wonder whether he - and many of the better elements in his Kingsguard - would have gone down the way Chelsted did - who is never described as a principled, courageous, or sympathetic character.

If Barristan Selmy, Arthur Dayne, Lewyn Martell, Oswell Whent, and perhaps even Jonothor Darry had known what Aerys II was up to they, too, might have confronted their king about it, tried to reason with him, threatening to defect or break their vows rather than be part of that. Unlike Jaime - who only decides 'to do something about the issue' when order in the city is collapsing and his father's cavalry is there to save the golden boy of the West Chelsted had the guts to confront Aerys II about this while it was still only a theoretical plan for a worst case scenario, not something that would definitely be done (unless we assume Chelsted was only burned after the Trident and when the court had learned that Rhaegar was dead, which I still like to believe - it makes no sense to me that Chelsted would fret over a emergency measure, nor that Aerys II would go as far as burn him when he cannot actually have intended to burn KL while it wasn't clear that the Targaryens would lose the war).

In Jaime we have no great hero doing the right or even not-so-worse thing - we have an opportunist motivated by personal hatred and anger caused by the king commanding him to kill his own father, as well as the emotional buildup of resentment due to the fact that Jaime had to suffer through a lot of atrocities commanded or personally done by a madman - albeit a madman this youth actually chose to serve as bodyguard knowing fully well what kind of person he was. Jaime wasn't even as ignorant about Aerys II's state of mind or most popular execution techniques as Jon was about the state of the Watch when he decided to take the black - he was the son and heir of the (former) Hand of the King. He must have known every rumor about Aerys II ever told, and his own father would have shared with the gruesome details about Duskendale and everything that came thereafter.

In any case, the assumption that Jaime is somehow or in some aspects 'better' than his sworn brothers because he put down the monster has to wait until Selmy reveals whether he knew about the wildfire plan or not.

I don't think Jaime did it because the Mad King ordered him to kill his own father. He could have very easily just disobeyed his order or lied to the Mad King. I think it was a mix of disillusionment and a very normal emphatic desire to help the innocent. After all Aerys did I don't think he cared anymore about his vows to the king. However he had always wanted to be a knight and I think in that moment he reasoned that his min vow was to protect the innocent. Keep in mind also he didn't know that Lannister soldiers were at the gates. For all he knew loyalists could come any moment and carry out Aerys's order themselves. He couldn't take the chance of Aerys ordering someone else to light the wildfire.

[Arthur Peres]

I don't see Barristan staying quiet while Aerys murders all the city, but he is not hot headed or dumb as Jaime, and actualy tries to be a KG.

I belive that Barristan would knocked out the king and escort him out of the city or die trying.

[Narsil4]

I get the impression that Selmy would have stayed quiet and followed orders.  
Later regretting his inaction, much like his unpursued love for Ashara.  

[BalerionTheCat]

I believe Barristan loves his oaths too much to interfere with orders. Even the KG at the TOJ named Jaime, their false brother, who would burn in seven hells.

And Jaime had no choice. Had he not killed Aerys, the king would have ordered the first soldier, guard, servant to arrest or kill Jaime. And the order would have been followed. No one was going against the king, ever.

[Lord Varys]

9 hours ago, frenin said:

There are no better elements in that watch, they allowed him  the greatest atrocities without blinking an eye while actively trying to discourage the newest of thinking about anything else that involved putting down a mad man.

Burning traitors are not 'the greatest atrocities' (we get things in that series that are much, much worse), nor is there any indication that any of Jaime's sworn brothers watched things like that without blinking.

As I see it, Gerold and the others did not defend Aerys II or his actions but rather did everything they could to prevent Jaime from getting himself killed by questioning or challenging their king.

The point to claim they approved is when they say so, not when you feel like it.

And us talking about the wildfire plan we actually have no evidence any KG besides Jaime actually knew.

9 hours ago, frenin said:

Was he?? Jaime didn't seem to know much about Aerys, Jaime is described as a guy that only had mind for Cersei and battle, nor do i know why would Tywin shared with his kids the gruesome details of Aerys character.

That's silly. Jaime is the son of the Hand who visited his father and sister at court when he decided to join the KG. He knows who Aerys II was and what he was. He was a moron doing what he did.

If you volunteer to serve Hitler in 1944 I also don't take pity on you. I think you did what you wanted to do and should get your act together and suffer the consequences - which Jaime never did, actually.

Jaime would not have talked to his dad, but also to his father's guardsmen, his retainers at court, servants, men-at-arms, cooks, stable boys, messengers, maester, you name - all the people who moved back and forth between KL and CR for the last decade.

Not to mention that he would have seen the king during his visit, and during the visits before that.

9 hours ago, frenin said:

Jaime is better that his sworn brothers because he wanted to act while his sworn brothers, guys clearly he looked up to were only concerned about not staining that beatiful white cloack.

That's something Jaime would say to justify himself, not something that's an objective fact. He also tells us the wolf cannot judge the lion and other such crap, when he doesn't even get the reason why Ned condemns him.

8 hours ago, Alyn Oakenfist said:

I don't think Jaime did it because the Mad King ordered him to kill his own father. He could have very easily just disobeyed his order or lied to the Mad King. I think it was a mix of disillusionment and a very normal emphatic desire to help the innocent. After all Aerys did I don't think he cared anymore about his vows to the king. However he had always wanted to be a knight and I think in that moment he reasoned that his min vow was to protect the innocent. Keep in mind also he didn't know that Lannister soldiers were at the gates. For all he knew loyalists could come any moment and carry out Aerys's order themselves. He couldn't take the chance of Aerys ordering someone else to light the wildfire.

We have to differentiate between Jaime stopping Rossart/the wildfire plan and him killing Aerys II. Those are not the same actions. They are distinctly different. I agree that stopping the plan was in part motivated by him thinking about other people, although I doubt he gave a fig about the Kingslanders his father's men were just butchering in the streets - I think his reason to stop Rossart were motivated by his desire to save his father and his friends and fellow Westermen from the fire (and, by extension, also himself, of course).

Once Rossart is dead and the wildfire plan effectively stopped Jaime goes into the throne room to gloat. He tells Aerys II what he has done, watches how the man pisses himself in fear, and then he murders him in cold blood. That's not the deed of a man acting in self-defense or the act of a man who tries to save others. It is a cold-blooded murder later retold in a manner to Brienne that makes him look better than he actually is.

Jaime knew the castle was falling, he knew all he had to do to prevent Aerys II from not sending another man to ignite the wildfire was to not tell him that he had killed Rossart (which he then did tell him), he also knew he could have just distracted the man, telling him that he had to get him to safety, he knew he could have knocked him out, he could have arrested him, or he could have taken him to Tywin's men while pretending to lead him to safety, etc. There are many paths he could have taken but to kill him.

That's just a fact. We cannot say just because a person justifying his actions wants us to buy his narrative that this was a dichotomy, that there were only two things he could do - obey Aerys II or kill him - that this is actually the truth. We know better than that. At least when we treat this fictional character the same way we would real people.

How little Jaime cared about 'the innocents' in that moment can be drawn from the fact that he did not, in fact, double-check whether Aerys II had sent out other men to the pyromancers in addition to Rossart. He wasn't there when Aerys II gave that command and thus had no way of knowing he was actually saving anyone by killing the king rather than ensuring the plan would be executed because now nobody would know who had been sent in addition to Rossart.

3 hours ago, BalerionTheCat said:

I believe Barristan loves his oaths too much to interfere with orders. Even the KG at the TOJ named Jaime, their false brother, who would burn in seven hells.

Considering what he does later to Hizdahr I doubt that's the case. That thing was treason, plain and simple. And he had not even be coerced or forced to do that.

3 hours ago, BalerionTheCat said:

And Jaime had no choice. Had he not killed Aerys, the king would have ordered the first soldier, guard, servant to arrest or kill Jaime. And the order would have been followed. No one was going against the king, ever.

There were no other people in the throne, no guardsmen, no servants, no anyone. That's why Jaime did kill his king - he hoped to slip out unseen and make Aerys II's death as mysterious as that of Maegor the Cruel.

And as I laid out above, Jaime had dozens of choices allowing him to stop the wildfire plan while not killing the king.