Jamie, no less an oathbreaker than Ned and Robert?

[Bear Island Bruiser]

During the books Jamie gets a lot of grief for being an oathbreaker and kingslayer. Now in my opinion this is pretty unmerited as in my eyes he's the most honourable of all of Aeyrs King's Guard. All the others would have sat back and let Kings Landing burn, killing thousands because it's what Aerys ordered them to do.

But I digress. My point is in part both Robert and Ned show a lack of respect to Jamie purely because he broke his oath to Aeyrs. However surely by rebelling they did exactly the same thing? As lords of the North and Stormlands is there an inherent oath to obey the king?

[The Dornishman's Wife]

Yes, he's "no less" an oathbreaker than Ned and Robert. In fact, he's quite a bit more of an oathbreaker:

They only broke their oaths of liege fealty (which anyways go both ways, and by Aerys unprovokedly demanding their heads you can well argue that it was not them who broke that contract, plus it's unclear whether they actually already swore anything, being sons of lords and not lords themselves), he also thoroughly and completely broke his vow as a Kingsguard and that was a very central and life defining vow.

By the way, while I don't blame Jaime for killing Aerys, it's a common misconception that he did it to save the city. He stopped the order from getting out, the city would have been just as safe had Jaime guarded Aerys until the rebels arrived (and quite a bit safer had he told them about the wildfire caches!). Furthermore, stopping Aerys's plan was not some grand self sacrifice of Jaime's, it was his own hide he saved from burning just as well.

I get it that Jaime is on a redemption arc and I get it that he looks devilishly handsome and Nikolaj Coster-Waldau is a dream, but I don't see this need to rewrite his history and have another "oh, by the way Jaime is the only person in the 7 kingdoms who never did anything wrong, ever" thread pop up every Wednesday.

[Yavannie]

Having your own ideas and values when it comes to honour isn't a desirable trait in a member of the Kingsguard if the king himself isn't very honourable. You may say that Jaime did the right thing, but that's not going to make you any happier when you're Robert Baratheon, because now you have to worry about whether he thinks YOU do the right thing.

As the above poster said, all three are oathbreakers and traitors and whatnot, but when you're in the ruling position yourself, you're the one who has to worry about potential new otherbreakers and traitors. Having an old one around you at all times might not be a great idea.

[TheButcherCrow]

The "dishonour" thing is a red herring re Ned's disdain for Jaime. I honestly believe that Ned hates Jaime for killing Aerys 'cause it deprived Ned of the chance for revenge. Think about what Aerys did to Lord Rickard & Brandon. I think Ned would want to hear Aerys reasons, pass the sentence, then swing the sword. Jaime took that from him but rather than admit to a desire for revenge he couches his hatred behind a veneer of hating Jaime for being an oathbreaker.

[RhaenysBee]

Well, I understand what you are saying and agree that Ned and Robert were oathbreakers too, though none of them actually killed the King he was sworn to protect. I mean they didn't swear such and also didn't kill Aerys. Ned would have never killed Aerys, so in that aspect he's a lot better than Jaime. As for Jaime only ever fucking Cersei and in that aspect having 'more honor than poor old dead Ned', well would you choose a man who is in a faithful incest relationship with his twin sister, or someone who fucked a random while at war for two years. Because I personally would go Ned. But that's up to everybody to decide for themselves.

As for Robert, Robert would probably have killed Aerys if it came to that, but I don't know... Robert was a piece of shit. An amusing piece of shit, we have to give that to him, but still a piece of shit.

[TalalOfDorne]

Wow there sure are a lot of "Jaime is more honorable than Ned" threads these days

[Bear Island Bruiser]

The "dishonour" thing is a red herring re Ned's disdain for Jaime. I honestly believe that Ned hates Jaime for killing Aerys 'cause it deprived Ned of the chance for revenge. Think about what Aerys did to Lord Rickard & Brandon. I think Ned would want to hear Aerys reasons, pass the sentence, then swing the sword. Jaime took that from him but rather than admit to a desire for revenge he couches his hatred behind a veneer of hating Jaime for being an oathbreaker.

That's an interesting point. Ned does have the idea of wanting to do the killing himself. I never really thought of it that way.

Well, I understand what you are saying and agree that Ned and Robert were oathbreakers too, though none of them actually killed the King he was sworn to protect. I mean they didn't swear such and also didn't kill Aerys. Ned would have never killed Aerys, so in that aspect he's a lot better than Jaime. As for Jaime only ever fucking Cersei and in that aspect having 'more honor than poor old dead Ned', well would you choose a man who is in a faithful incest relationship with his twin sister, or someone who fucked a random while at war for two years. Because I personally would go Ned. But that's up to everybody to decide for themselves.

As for Robert, Robert would probably have killed Aerys if it came to that, but I don't know... Robert was a piece of shit. An amusing piece of shit, we have to give that to him, but still a piece of shit.

Yeah I going to title the article was Jamie any less honourable...and then thought much better of it. Afterall he's clearly not honourable.

[Danelle]

I think that his story arc is meant to show how complicated vows are, especially for a KG knight. So he swore to defend Aerys, which meant that

• he, along with other six fine swordsmen and gallant men, guarded the door while Aerys raped his own sister.
  
• he, along with the rest KG knights stood and watched while Brandon Stark struggled himself to death while trying to save his father, who was burned alive, slowly and painfully.
  
• he, alone had to listen to Aerys and Rossart planning to burn the city just to prove Robert that he may have won the war but lost KL.
  
• he, alone, after all those traumatic experiences was ordered by Aerys to kill his own father.
  

“It was that white cloak that soiled me, not the other way around.”

Jaime is by no means innocent but Aerys was a special case. He did break his vow and defied and killed his king, but if he had stayed loyal to Aerys, then he would have to kill Tywin. Kingslayer or kinslayer? I think that for Rhaegar's and Arthur's sake he did nothing reckless, but with Arthur far away and Rhaegar slain he had no restraints. It is not that Jaime didn't gave Aerys an option to yield.

‘Bring me your father’s head, if you are no traitor.’

Jaime is not quite a villain and not quite a hero.

That boy had wanted to be Ser Arthur Dayne, but somewhere along the way he had become the Smiling Knight instead.

Killing Aerys and his pyromancers saved the city and its people. Yet it ruined his reputation.

Had he allowed Aerys to live then he would be no different drom the KG knights who were beating Sansa at Joffrey's command. I think that first Jon Arryn broke the oath, when he refused to send his wards to Aerys to slaughter them and then he called his banners.

However surely by rebelling they did exactly the same thing? As lords of the North and Stormlands is there an inherent oath to obey the king?

Robert and Ned had to choose between House Targaryen and their Houses. House Targaryen had insulted them, Lyanna's abduction, Lord Rickard and Brandon's deaths. Ned is regarded as a tragic hero, who had to fight for his life and the survival of his House. Robert is more like a romantic hero who has to defend his lady love. To them, Jaime is a spoiled, rich boy who killed a defenceless old man.

It is quite interesting that the extent of Aerys' madness was not known. Cat had no idea how exactly Brandon died, Barristan is reluctant to reveal the truth to Dany. Something important: in his pov Barristan wonders how things might have turned if he hadn't saved Aerys from Duskendale. Also, he wonders if Robert ever smiled at the sight of the slain babies of Elia Martell and if he had, he would have killed him for that.

Jaime told Cat that he was more loyal to Cersei than Ned ever was to her, and he was right. By that point, Jaime had been with no other woman than Cersei and kept no secrets from her. Ned, whoever Jon's mother was, never told Cat the truth.

In the end it is all relevant. GRRM loves to place his characters in extreme situations where life and death overpower any sense of honour and dignity.

[Scipio Africanus]

Jamie was an oathbreaker and a kingslayer. How can anyone dispute that? It's pretty much fact no matter how much you like/dislike Jamie. In fact Jamie broke his oath once more when he passed off his get as his king's, to which he swore another oath to. Actually he broke two oaths, one to Bob and one to his order. He also broke guest rights by trying to murder a son of his host, and he broke his oath on multiple occaisions to Cat. And finally by helping Tyrion escape he technically broke another oath.

Jamie, factually, does nothing else in the story then break oaths. That's pretty much his story arc. That's why he's so worried about how he will be remembered. He already is going down the path of the Smiling Knight, and perhaps, he will be remembered of as worst.

[RhaenysBee]

Yeah I going to title the article was Jamie any less honourable...and then thought much better of it. Afterall he's clearly not honourable.

No he was not... But at least he got a horse. :laugh:

[nara]

Technically, Ned and Robert were oathbreakers by rebelling against the king,but as it was in self-defense, I'll give them a pass. Also, they were out in the open with their rebellion, which I think is more honorable than pretending to serve the king and then killing him.

If Aerys had not called for their heads and they still rebelled, it would have been worse oathbreaking, but I'd still give at least Ned a pass, given what had happened to his father and brother.

Also, killing someone in war (Robert/Rhaegar) is different from killing the king who doesn't have a weapon to protect himself (Jaime/Aerys

So I think that Jaime is less honorable in that area than Robert and Ned. However, I think Ned would have disliked Jaime even if he hadn't killed Aery, because he didn't like Tywin. This is evidenced by the fact that he doesn't like Cersei long before he has any reason to hate her.

As for being honorable to a lady-- yes, Jaime is more faithful to Cersei in a sexual way, but he abandons her when she needs him most. Ned would never have done that to Catelyn, and even backed her up when she made the foolish move to kidnapping Tyrion. Again, Jaime does so without openly telling her that he knows what she's done and that he will not support her. Instead, he simply doesn't respond and slinks away into the countryside. Not honorable at all!

Don't get me wrong, I'm a huge Jaime fan, but I don't think it's fair to say he is no more an oathbreaker than Ned and Robert.

[Bear Island Bruiser]

Technically, Ned and Robert were oathbreakers by rebelling against the king,but as it was in self-defense, I'll give them a pass. Also, they were out in the open with their rebellion, which I think is more honorable than pretending to serve the king and then killing him.

If Aerys had not called for their heads and they still rebelled, it would have been worse oathbreaking, but I'd still give at least Ned a pass, given what had happened to his father and brother.

Well if you want to go for self defence Jamie would have burnt with the rest of Kings Landing so his life was also under threat.

Equally I don't think Jamie was pretending to serve the king as part of a thought out plan I think he served him, was troubled by the Kings action but was mollified by the other KG until Aerys went too far and Jamie snapped.

Also, killing someone in war (Robert/Rhaegar) is different from killing the king who doesn't have a weapon to protect himself (Jaime/Aerys

So I think that Jaime is less honorable in that area than Robert and Ned. However, I think Ned would have disliked Jaime even if he hadn't killed Aery, because he didn't like Tywin. This is evidenced by the fact that he doesn't like Cersei long before he has any reason to hate her.

As for being honorable to a lady-- yes, Jaime is more faithful to Cersei in a sexual way, but he abandons her when she needs him most. Ned would never have done that to Catelyn, and even backed her up when she made the foolish move to kidnapping Tyrion. Again, Jaime does so without openly telling her that he knows what she's done and that he will not support her. Instead, he simply doesn't respond and slinks away into the countryside. Not honorable at all!

Don't get me wrong, I'm a huge Jaime fan, but I don't think it's fair to say he is no more an oathbreaker than Ned and Robert.

Well again I'm not asking the 'honourable' question as I think he certainly is less honourable than Ned, thought mainly over pushing Bran out of a window than anything else. Saving Tyrion from death seems fairly honourable to me, abandoning Cersei at that time is more like the scales falling from his eyes and seeing what a crazy b*tch she really is.

As for the incest thing well yeah clearly a bit icky to say the least but at least within that creepy relationship he is loyal.

[eggs]

But I digress. My point is in part both Robert and Ned show a lack of respect to Jamie purely because he broke his oath to Aeyrs. However surely by rebelling they did exactly the same thing? As lords of the North and Stormlands is there an inherent oath to obey the king?

Not if the king is batshit crazy. They had every right to rebel against his unjust actions.

And there was really no reason for Jaime to slit the guy's throat after he had stopped the order from going out. Its kind of ridiculous of Jaime to expect to be congratulated despite not bothering to explain himself. and Robert doesnt look down on Jaime for killing the King. He's actually glad of that.

[Bear Island Bruiser]

Not if the king is batshit crazy. They had every right to rebel against his unjust actions.

And there was really no reason for Jaime to slit the guy's throat after he had stopped the order from going out. Its kind of ridiculous of Jaime to expect to be congratulated despite not bothering to explain himself. and Robert doesnt look down on Jaime for killing the King. He's actually glad of that.

OK but if the king being batshit crazy is a justification for not obeying their oaths Then surely it gives Jamie the same pass for not obeying his?

Equally he'd need to kill Aerys to stop some other servant carrying out the order. He's killed the first one who tried it but Aerys was still calling for it and there was a chance someone else would have listened.

[eggs]

OK but if the king being batshit crazy is a justification for not obeying their oaths Then surely it gives Jamie the same pass for not obeying his?

of course it does.

Equally he'd need to kill Aerys to stop some other servant carrying out the order. He's killed the first one who tried it but Aerys was still calling for it and there was a chance someone else would have listened.

no he wouldnt. He couldve just gagged him. He's a feeble old man who constantly cuts himself on the throne. Im sure Jaime didnt need to slit his throat. He had sworn his life to the king knowing damn well the guy was crazy. He just didnt care cause he got to be apart of the KG. He should have tried to respect that oath.

[The Frosted King]

Once Jaime had slew the main pyromancer, the wildfire plot was postponed.

His fathers men were inside the red keep.

He had no cause, and worse no right to kill Aerys.

He did need killing, but Jaime was the last person who should've done it.

He wouldn't have been castigated if he'd turned Aerys over to armed guards, and then explained the

need to keep him completely secluded, ala revealing the wildfire plot.

The realm would then understand his capturing, and then detaining Aerys for the overall good of the realm.

Then he has help searching out the lackey pyromancers, and the wildfire can be disposed of.

And a feudal contract works both ways, between the overlord and the vassal.

Aerys broke the contract when he slew Brandon and Rickard and other great lords children and fathers without trial.

He compounded his actions by requesting the heads of Robert and Ned simply due to their associations.

He was due to be toppled.

[CC-Kingmaker]

Jaime is not above reproach. Interesting point presented on Ned's possible revenge angle. When it comes down to it, I really like Jaime and I can see from his perspective why his actions were done. But with his father storming the keep, killing Rossart and revealing the plot would have been significantly lesser then killing him and Aerys.

But he is an oathbreaker, and a frequent one. His arc shows the futility of feudal oaths because his breaking of oaths can be actually be debated. Its a strange system. Ned's honor despite his "bastard" is mostly impeccable, his revenge is very much justified for the madness inflicted on his family, and Robert partially for the abduction of his betrothed. By their system of feudal Westeros, Jaime is easily the more dishonorable. However in our world it can actually be debated in greater understanding. People just do not understand his story (in Westeros), and frankly do not care because despite how evil Aerys was, he was an anointed king and Jaime vowed to protect him. Thats enough for them, but onviously not for the readers.

[Nelapsi]

Is it really important? I love discussing characters, and wonder what they are going to do next and why they do the things they do. Yet, with ASOIAF, I tend to let myself go and see where GRRM leads us. What I'm trying to say here is that Jaime is one of the most fascinating characters in ASOIAF, and I think it's impossible to figure out whether he's good or bad, because he is both, and he can't be labled according to the things he did, cos one can always argue he did them to save his kids etc

[Lux in Tenebris]

Yes, he's "no less" an oathbreaker than Ned and Robert. In fact, he's quite a bit more of an oathbreaker:

They only broke their oaths of liege fealty (which anyways go both ways, and by Aerys unprovokedly demanding their heads you can well argue that it was not them who broke that contract, plus it's unclear whether they actually already swore anything, being sons of lords and not lords themselves), he also thoroughly and completely broke his vow as a Kingsguard and that was a very central and life defining vow.

By the way, while I don't blame Jaime for killing Aerys, it's a common misconception that he did it to save the city. He stopped the order from getting out, the city would have been just as safe had Jaime guarded Aerys until the rebels arrived (and quite a bit safer had he told them about the wildfire caches!). Furthermore, stopping Aerys's plan was not some grand self sacrifice of Jaime's, it was his own hide he saved from burning just as well.

I get it that Jaime is on a redemption arc and I get it that he looks devilishly handsome and Nikolaj Coster-Waldau is a dream, but I don't see this need to rewrite his history and have another "oh, by the way Jaime is the only person in the 7 kingdoms who never did anything wrong, ever" thread pop up every Wednesday.

/thread.

[eggs]

Jaime is not above reproach. Interesting point presented on Ned's possible revenge angle. When it comes down to it, I really like Jaime and I can see from his perspective why his actions were done. But with his father storming the keep, killing Rossart and revealing the plot would have been significantly lesser then killing him and Aerys.

I doubt Ned is angry about having his chance for revenge stolen away from him. His little speech to Robert about finding Jaime on the throne shows that he really is just shocked by Jaime's actions.

But he is an oathbreaker, and a frequent one. His arc shows the futility of feudal oaths because his breaking of oaths can be actually be debated. Its a strange system. Ned's honor despite his "bastard" is mostly impeccable, his revenge is very much justified for the madness inflicted on his family, and Robert partially for the abduction of his betrothed. By their system of feudal Westeros, Jaime is easily the more dishonorable. However in our world it can actually be debated in greater understanding. People just do not understand his story (in Westeros), and frankly do not care because despite how evil Aerys was, he was an anointed king and Jaime vowed to protect him. Thats enough for them, but onviously not for the readers.

People dont understand his story because he never bothered to actually tell it. I'm pretty sure Ned wouldnt look down on him if he knew the truth. Even when Cersei admits to trying to kill Bran, he tries to look at it from her point of view.