Blackfish Tully Posted December 13, 2012 Share Posted December 13, 2012 These KG were prepared to die following their orders. If they were in KL they were not going to survive the Sack anyway. We see from Jaime the KG position that they are sworn to protect others (i.e. the Queen) too, but "not from him." Seems highly likely that they wouldn't have done what Jaime did.Being prepared to die following orders and allowing hundreds of thousand of people to be roasted alive are two different things in my eyes. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bright Blue Eyes Posted December 13, 2012 Share Posted December 13, 2012 Sorry, I didn't see. :)No problem, was a page or two back ;) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ab aeterno Posted December 13, 2012 Share Posted December 13, 2012 Being prepared to die following orders and allowing hundreds of thousand of people to be roasted alive are two different things in my eyes.Why would they protect the smallfolk from the King when they wouldn't protect the Queen? (Who they were more immediately and explicitly sworn to save.) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Starks Revenge Posted December 13, 2012 Share Posted December 13, 2012 To be fair to Barristan he swore an oath to serve for life, he got Royally screwed when Robert died and couldn't do much than quit out of principle (which is what he should have done). He shouldn't have joined Robert either, serve the person who personally killed your crown prince and caused the downfall of the Targs? I would have said thanks but no thanks and gone to the wall.He also served with the Kingslayer, which is another kick in his honor. Though a simple explanation would have sorted that one out..I would love to know what Ned would have done in the same place, Ned a man with no wife and children having the same choices to make. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Blackfish Tully Posted December 13, 2012 Share Posted December 13, 2012 Even if Ned had that knowledge, should it make any difference? We can feel sorry for the scared guy, but if every scared guy ran away there would be no NW, no armies and absolute chaos.There is a big difference between being a 'scared guy' and a guy who has just been attacked by zombies and the bogeyman of your childhood stories. If Ned had that knowledge he would have had Gerald imprisoned for his own protection but he would not have executed him. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ab aeterno Posted December 13, 2012 Share Posted December 13, 2012 There is a big difference between being a 'scared guy' and a guy who has just been attacked by zombies and the bogeyman of your childhood stories. If Ned had that knowledge he would have had Gerald imprisoned for his own protection but he would not have executed him.I don't think they imprison people for their own protection. Certainly not commoners. Scared or not he was still a deserter and an oathbreaker. Everyone who does that is probably terrified, but the law still applies. This is even more true when the entire purpose of the NW is to fight those zombies and bogeymen; that is precisely his job. Ned would still execute him. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MagnusPrime Posted December 13, 2012 Share Posted December 13, 2012 I cannot multiquote while using my phone.Blackfish just stop with trying to paint Eddard in the wrong for executing that NW deserter. The guy obviously had enough cognizance to get over/through the wall, avoid all his NW brothers, and make it a fair distance through the North. His duty was to warn his brothers so that the realm could prepare itself for its most terrible enemy. Imagine how events would have played out differently if he had went back to castle black.To the others saying the Kingsguard would allow Kingslanding to burn I think you are wrong. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Blackfish Tully Posted December 13, 2012 Share Posted December 13, 2012 I cannot multiquote while using my phone.Blackfish just stop with trying to paint Eddard in the wrong for executing that NW deserter. The guy obviously had enough cognizance to get over/through the wall, avoid all his NW brothers, and make it a fair distance through the North. His duty was to warn his brothers so that the realm could prepare itself for its most terrible enemy. Imagine how events would have played out differently if he had went back to castle black.To the others saying the Kingsguard would allow Kingslanding to burn I think you are wrong.I'm not trying to paint Ned in the wrong for executing the deserter , he did his duty and I would have done the same thing but the point I'm trying to make is that as the reader we know that things are not as simple as "Gared was a traitor to the watch and had to die" and I'm using that point to show that Aery's executing the Starks is more than likely more complicated than just Aery's being crazy and Barristan's being a coward for not stopping him . Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ab aeterno Posted December 13, 2012 Share Posted December 13, 2012 I'm not trying to paint Ned in the wrong for executing the deserter , he did his duty and I would have done the same thing but the point I'm trying to make is that as the reader we know that things are not as simple as "Gared was a traitor to the watch and had to die" and I'm using that point to show that Aery's executing the Starks is more than likely more complicated than just Aery's being crazy and Barristan's being a coward for not stopping him .The situation with Aerys is more complicated: Brandon et al. committed a crime against the crown; the injustice of Aerys' method is the issue. I'm not sure whether the NW example is more complicated though. Seems pretty clear cut to me, very one sided. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MagnusPrime Posted December 13, 2012 Share Posted December 13, 2012 Except we know why aaerys did what he did. Be was a paranoid maniac who saw conspiracies to remove him everywhere. Then here comes the heir to the North the biggest of all the kingdoms demanding his son come out to die. It was a perfect storm of crazy. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Blackfish Tully Posted December 13, 2012 Share Posted December 13, 2012 The situation with Aerys is more complicated: Brandon et al. committed a crime against the crown; the injustice of Aerys' method is the issue. I'm not sure whether the NW example is more complicated though. Seems pretty clear cut to me, very one sided.So Ice Demons and Zombies don't complicate things? I quess I just feel sorry for poor old Gared , somehow he survives being attacked by his worst nightmare and then goes crazy and somehow makes it past the wall only to have his head cut off. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ab aeterno Posted December 13, 2012 Share Posted December 13, 2012 So Ice Demons and Zombies don't complicate things? I quess I just feel sorry for poor old Gared , somehow he survives being attacked by his worst nightmare and then goes crazy and somehow makes it past the wall only to have his head cut off.But that is his job. It's like feeling sorry for a firefighter who runs away from a fire. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Blackfish Tully Posted December 13, 2012 Share Posted December 13, 2012 But that is his job. It's like feeling sorry for a firefighter who runs away from a fire.sure it's his job and he deserved to be executed for running away but I can still feel sorry for him. I would feel sorry for the firefighter who lost his nerve and ran away but he would still need to be fired. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Kanon Posted December 13, 2012 Share Posted December 13, 2012 But that is his job. It's like feeling sorry for a firefighter who runs away from a fire.Also, Gared could have warned the NW about the Others, instead he ran away, leaving his brothers in danger. This is 100% oath breaking even if you consider that he saw the WW. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ab aeterno Posted December 13, 2012 Share Posted December 13, 2012 sure it's his job and he deserved to be executed for running away but I can still feel sorry for him. I would feel sorry for the firefighter who lost his nerve and ran away but he would still need to be fired.You can indeed. :) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Grip Posted December 13, 2012 Share Posted December 13, 2012 I think that one of the more interesting aspects of the KG is that they are not only sworn swords mean to protect the royal family and whatnot but that they also are a neat way of securing up alliances, working as a "reward" to a loyal worthy house or as a means of trying to bind someone to your cause. Just look at Robert's KG. We have for example a Western House represented in Greenfield, a Vale House in Moore, a Stormlands in Trant etc. Balon Swann is a good example of a "compromise" candidate, coming from a house that had chosen different sides during the war and whose loyalty to the Lannister cause might have been strengthened after Balon's "promotion". To think that they were chosen just because they were skilled fighters is a mistake imo, of course though there are exceptions. Looking at Aerys seven we have a Darry, Dayne, Hightower, Lannister, Martell and Whent, all famous and well respected Houses. And then we have Selmy . In this case Barristan is the standout, not coming from a reknowned House. He seems to have been choosen primarily on merit. Has this affected him, that he wasnt chosen because of some alliance or such? He admits that he has no other life, nothing to fall back on besides some small keep. Without the White Cloak, what is he besides another landed (albeit famous) knight? Is this one of the reasons for why Rhaegar doesnt confide in him, the way he does with Dayne? Might be this has hardened his attitudes, knowing he cant compromise or risk his reputation the way some other KG knights might do? He puts on the stern (dutiful) face, thinking this is whats expected and whats best in the long run. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
LordBloodraven Posted December 13, 2012 Share Posted December 13, 2012 Brandon and Rickard are innocent? how do we know this? as far as we know they may have been planning to overthrow the King and deserved to be executed as 'legitimate' traitors.I want so badly to know what were Brandon Stark and Rickard's crimes. Brandon said that "Rhaegar should come out and die" and it's an indirect quote. We know nothing of the context or if they were his proper words. Rickard was summonned at court to answer for his son's "crimes" and he came. Then got cooked in his armor? For what exactly? Ned and Robert were to be executed for no known crime. Given this, I'm not sure how guilty Brandon Stark was.But this does not excuse the fact that Ned Stark executed a man whose only crime was that he was driven insane by the fact that White Walkers and dead men were trying to kill him. I don't blame Ned for what he did but it does show that things are not as simple as we sometimes make them out to be.The man's crime was not being scared. But deserting his post and not trying to inform his officers. You can feel sorry for him as many do, but by law, he was to be beheaded Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ab aeterno Posted December 13, 2012 Share Posted December 13, 2012 I want so badly to know what were Brandon Stark and Rickard's crimes. Brandon said that "Rhaegar should come out and die" and it's an indirect quote. We know nothing of the context or if they were his proper words.Rickard was summonned at court to answer for his son's "crimes" and he came. Then got cooked in his armor? For what exactly? Ned and Robert were to be executed for no known crime. Given this, I'm not sure how guilty Brandon Stark was.Technically, didn't Aerys claim to be putting Rickard on trial by combat... He also didn't kill Brandon, Brandon killed himself, just to be pedantic. :PThe irony for me is that had Aerys given Rickard a trial by combat and chosen a member of the KG, Rickard would still have died but it might not have let to rebellion. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jarl the climber Posted December 13, 2012 Share Posted December 13, 2012 Technically, didn't Aerys claim to be putting Rickard on trial by combat... He also didn't kill Brandon, Brandon killed himself, just to be pedantic. :PThe irony for me is that had Aerys given Rickard a trial by combat and chosen a member of the KG, Rickard would still have died but it might not have let to rebellion.The impression that I was under its when Aerys commands Jon Arryn to send his wards to Kngs Landing(Robert and Ned) and he sends back defiance is what started the rebellion. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Blackfish Tully Posted December 13, 2012 Share Posted December 13, 2012 Technically, didn't Aerys claim to be putting Rickard on trial by combat... He also didn't kill Brandon, Brandon killed himself, just to be pedantic. :PThe irony for me is that had Aerys given Rickard a trial by combat and chosen a member of the KG, Rickard would still have died but it might not have let to rebellion.Rickard Stark was more than likely a very good fighter maybe not in the same league with Dayne or Selmy but there is no guarantee that he would have lost, in single combat anything could happen when both fighters know what they are doing . Brandon Stark versus a member of the Kingsguard would have been amazing to see.Hopefully in the next book we will get more POVs from Barristan and maybe learn more about what happened in the past. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.