Kingsguard Oath Quandary

[Canon Claude]

Coming back here because of a scene in HOTD which got me thinking.

Suppose that a member of the Royal Family were to attack a knight of the Kingsguard in a fit of rage or whatever. Would the Kingsguard have to allow himself to be killed if that's what the royal family member wished? And yes, I know it's a mad act to treat your own bodyguard like that, but we know how many mad Targaryens there have been (or just fools, for that matter). 

[Alester Florent]

The Kingsguard would be entitled to defend himself but not to hit back (although if he did and nobody was watching and he subsequently managed to subdue his attacker, he would probably not face serious sanction unless the royal in question were a complete douche (hi, Aerion)).

This is made almost explicit in The Hedge Knight. In a trial of seven - a judicial combat potentially to the death - three Kingsguard take part, and Baelor enters the arena to oppose them, specifically observing to his "teammates" that this gives his side an advantage because he can hit them but they can't hit him back. He goes on to take full advantage of that. When Baelor suffers a fatal wound, his brother (fighting alongside the KG) observes that although he hadn't intended to harm him and doesn't remember doing so, it must have been him who struck the fatal blow, because the Kingsguard weren't hitting Baelor back.

The strong implication is that if a member of the royal family - certainly a senior member, as Baelor was - attacks a member of the Kingsguard, they can't fight back even at risk to their own life.

[Ser Arthurs Dawn]

This is tricky. No wonder Jaime is fed up with vows. Technically they aren't expected to protect royal family unless directed by the king, but they're also sworn to not harm the royal family. Barristan gives the idea that he would have no problem harming a member of the royal family, unless ordered otherwise by his king/queen. But then again, I don't think Dany placed the same vows and expectations onto Barristan that he had previously.

I suppose it would come down to each individual's conscience. You could argue that the royal family member is interfering with the kingsguard member's #1 duty, which would be protecting the king.

[Frey family reunion]

1 hour ago, Ser Arthurs Dawn said:

This is tricky. No wonder Jaime is fed up with vows. Technically they aren't expected to protect royal family unless directed by the king, but they're also sworn to not harm the royal family. Barristan gives the idea that he would have no problem harming a member of the royal family, unless ordered otherwise by his king/queen. But then again, I don't think Dany placed the same vows and expectations onto Barristan that he had previously.

I suppose it would come down to each individual's conscience. You could argue that the royal family member is interfering with the kingsguard member's #1 duty, which would be protecting the king.

Jaime's main issue with the vows of the Kingsguard, was what happened if they violated the first vows that Jaime took when he became a knight.  Basically what happens when your vow to obey the King causes you to do something that is in direct contradiction of your vows as a knight to protect the innocent.

[Ser Arthurs Dawn]

17 minutes ago, Frey family reunion said:

Jaime's main issue with the vows of the Kingsguard, was what happened if they violated the first vows that Jaime took when he became a knight.  Basically what happens when your vow to obey the King causes you to do something that is in direct contradiction of your vows as a knight to protect the innocent.

Yes, I understand that what his main frustration is and I realize it doesn't quite match up with this scenario. That was just an offhanded joke about how complicated vows are, even the kingsguard vows by themsleves. 

Edited August 18, 2023 by Ser Arthurs Dawn

[Leonardo Abreu]

I don’t think this is a problem with the Kingsguard’s vow, but rather that nobody is alowed to strike the royals, vow or no vow. That was the crime of Dunk against Aerion, of Arya against Joffrey, and the argument Ned uses to convince Robert to not fight in the melee.

[Alester Florent]

6 minutes ago, Leonardo Abreu said:

I don’t think this is a problem with the Kingsguard’s vow, but rather that nobody is alowed to strike the royals, vow or no vow. That was the crime of Dunk against Aerion, of Arya against Joffrey, and the argument Ned uses to convince Robert to not fight in the melee.

This is a good point, although the Kingsguard seem to be doubly restricted in this respect, in that even in situations where that is relaxed for everyone else they seem to be prohibited. Braxton Beesbury seemed to be legally entitled to hit Jaehaerys during his trial by combat, and nobody took issue with Dunk (or any of his fellows) fighting Maekar, Aerion and Daeron in the Trial of Seven, but even in that context the Kingsguard seemed to be oathbound not to hit Baelor.

Edited August 18, 2023 by Alester Florent

[CassDarry]

Ser Arthur Dayne of the Kingsguard defeated Prince Rhaegar Targaryen in the joust of the Tournament in Honour of Viserys Birth.

Ser Barristan Selmy was champion of a tourney at Storms End, which Prince Rhaegar competed in....not sure if he was defeated or withdrew etc 

But jousting is dangerous so risky to do against crown prince