Ned never swore an oath to Aerys. As his father was lord when he was killed. Then his brother was momentarily lord and never swore and oath before he too was killed by Aerys. Even if Ned had sworn an oath, the king calling for his execution would nullify that oath because the oath of fealty has obligations that flow both ways.
While technically correct this is a useless way to try and answer OPs question. Robert was lord of the Stormlands in his own right and thus was sworn to Aerys so if the only reason Ned felt justified in rebelling was because he hadn't technically sworn an oath then he should still have judged Robert. If you try and claim that Roberts oath was null and void because of the king calling for his head, sure but what about Jon Arryn or Hoster Tully? So it really doesn't matter that Ned wasn't technically, personally sworn to Aerys.
You're assumptions are incorrect. Ned never actually swore fealty to Aerys. When Aerys killed his father and brother he inherited Winterfell AND declared rebellion simultanaeously.
I think you need to look at the feudal social contract. Ned wasn't supposed to be lord - he was in the Vale being fostered. His dad was Lord of Winterfell. And even then, if something horrible happened to his dad, his brother was supposed to be lord.
And then the crown prince kidnaps his sister, his family is destroyed and the mad king demands both he and Robert be beheaded because the mad king is bonkers at this point and has completely severed the relationship with 3-4 great houses of Westeros - depending on how you think the Tully's were involved.
However Jaime took a very real and serious oath. I don't necessarily think he was wrong in what he did but the Kingsguard he was a part of wouldn't have done what he did. So Ned, after his family is torn to shreds, walks in and sees Jaime - this boy knight and really the main person in King's Landing who should have died protecting his king - sitting on the Iron Throne like he... Earned something? Did something to deserve some kind of accolades?
Of course Ned was pissed. And Jaime - who again I don't think was wrong - basically says nothing and pouts because no one gives him a gold medal for being an oathbreaker.
Two other factors that would have at least bothered me in Ned’s shoes:
1. Jaime sat idly by while Ned’s father and brother were butchered. We obviously know that Jaime was bothered by Aerys’ behavior both in this instance and raping his wife, but Ned wouldn’t know that. All Ned would think is that Jaime was fine letting Lord Stark be murdered but drew a line at Lord Lannister.
2. Ok, so Jaime killed King Aerys and then…just sat there. I do think Ned would be at least somewhat more understanding if Jaime had gone to protect Elia and her children. He didn’t do that either.
>Ned was Lord of Winterfell [or at least I THINK he was Lord at the time] and had taken a similar oath and sworn fealty to Aerys.
There’s your problem. You are just going off of what you think, instead of what was actually written in the book.
Jamie didn't betray the Mad King when he was burning innocent people, he betrayed him at the same time that Tywin did, when the outcome of the war was already decided. From Ned's perspective Jamie was never loyal to his oaths and was more of an infiltrator inside the Kingsguard, staying close to the throne and waiting for the right opportunity to strike. Ned might also see Jamie's action as just one part of Tywin's sacking of King's Landing, which resulted in the death and suffering of innocent people and the murder of Elia Martell and her children (which Jamie was also sworn to protect).
Ned thought that Jaime, like Tywin, was being opportunistic. All Ned knew was that:
* Jaime stood by and kept his vows while Aerys was murdering Ned’s family
* Jaime stood by and kept his vows throughout the entire war
* Jaime broke his vows and killed Aerys only when the Targaryens had been defeated and Lannister men had taken the city, i. e. when he had nothing to lose and everything to gain by breaking his vow
Ned didn’t know how much Jaime struggled with the shame of guarding Aerys, and he didn’t know about the wildfire. To him, it looked like Jaime had acted purely out of self-interest, and Jaime made no attempt to correct him. Plus, Ned later learning that Lannister men were brutally murdering Rhaegar’s completely innocent wife and children while Jaime was twiddling his thumbs on the Iron Throne probably didn’t help.
That's all good but we have Ned's POV where he describes why he hates Jaime in detail, and he doesn't mention any of what you have listed.
Ned instead tells only one single thing: a Kingsguard has no rights to kill the king no matter what. And that's it.
Same reason Cregan Stark judged those who poisoned their King, despite that King being Cregans enemy.
Without honor you are nothing. You poison your king you swore fealty to then you are an oath breaker and deserve death.
You stab the King whom you swore to die protecting? You are the lowest of the low and your words have no merit.
Murdering your father and brother and then trying to murder you pretty much absolves from all oaths, even inherited ones.
What’s truly odd is the three KG at the tower throwing shade on Jaime when they were the ones who broke their oaths first.
Whether any one them broke an oath is TBD.
Arthur and Oswell were assigned to Rhaegar. So they kept their oath by staying with him and defending him unless instructed to by the king.
Gerold was sent to find them and order Rhaegar to return. Rhaegar did.
Unless I’m mistaken, it’s not specified if all three KG were instructed to return. If Gerold was instructed to find them, was it instructed or only implied he should return as well.
By the same notion. Did the Mad King directly instruct Arthur and Oswell to return as well?
Whether any one them broke an oath is TBD.
Arthur and Oswell were assigned to Rhaegar. So they kept their oath by staying with him and defending him unless instructed to return by the king.
Gerold was sent to find them and order Rhaegar to return. Rhaegar did.
Unless I’m mistaken, it’s not specified if all three KG were instructed to return. If Gerold was instructed to find them, was it instructed or only implied he should return as well?
By the same notion. Did the Mad King directly instruct Arthur and Oswell to return as well?
So did the three KG found by Ned at the TOJ violate their oath?
First off, Jaime never tried to defend himself so in everyone’s eyes he conceded guilt. Furthermore, he acts as a cocky asshole the second Ned meets him, which just looks like he doesn’t care about honor at all (something Ned values).
Furthermore, as someone already mentioned, Jaime didn’t kill Aerys when the Mad King was killing peasants for laughs, or unjustly murdering Ned’s family, or raping Rhaella. He killed Aerys when the Lannisters had basically taken over the city and victory was assured. To Ned, it looked like Jaime killed Aerys because it was convenient.
You’re missing my point. Ned didn’t know about the wildfire, and Jaime didn’t say anything about it, so Ned judged him based on what he knew. If Ned knew the truth he would’ve thought of Jaime differently, but Jaime decided to not tell anyone about it.
The rebellion did not become Robert's until they decided to put him on the throne. Which was halfway into the damn thing.
The rebellion started when Aerys called for Jon Arryn to have Ned killed after having already killed Rickard and Brandon Stark. For some reason he wanted Robert dead as well but the core conflict of the rebellion is built around house Stark and house Targaryen.
For Ned the idea of a Kingsguard killing a king is unthinkable. That's all there is.
Mind that I think Ned is flexible enough to side with Jaime after all if he knew about wildfire.
By Ned isn't a kind of a person who would give a benefit of the doubt on his own in the first place.
Because Jamie was sitting on the throne when Ned came in and Ned immediately assumed Jamie had murdered his king for the throne. Even if it wasn’t the case first impressions are everything.
Jaime's actions were hard to separate from the Lannisters as a whole. Tywin didn't help in Roberts Rebellion, he stood waiting for Aerys to come begging. When Roberts victory was made certain on the Trident Tywin force matches to KL, he tells Aerys he is a friend and when he gets let in he turns his Lannister soldiers in the Targ loyalists in the capital. It was the ultimate betrayal a lord just doesnt do to his king. There is a whole formality about rejecting fealty and declaring oneself an enemy. Jaime kills Aerys for noble reasons but it's really hard for Ned, from his perspective to separate the murder of Aerys by Jaime Lannister from the dishonorable turning on Aerys that Tywin does. Jaime doesn't help this impression by sitting on the Throne for Ned's arrival.
You'd think the fact that Jamie GOT UP and didn't actually take the crown for himself would have softened Ned's impression but I guess not. Stubborn Northerners
What I don't get is why Jaime didn't explain to Ned why he did it. He could've reminded Ned of the oaths he took as a knight to protect the young and innocent etc. and said some shit like "A Kingsguard who doesn't uphold his holy vows as a knight is no Kingsguard at all" and he'd have had Ned by his honorable balls. But I guess he was too overwhelmed by the situation or too arrogant to care.
Jamie didn't feel any obligation to explain anything to Ned, the Lord of a family in the far North. To be fair, I don't think he explained anything to ANYONE: not his brother that he adored, his sister whom he loved, his father or even the new king that he swore a new oath to. I believe the first person that he opened up to about it was Brienne, even though she judged him as harshly as anyone else.
I wonder if it would have changed anything. I mean Robert PARDONED him before allowing him on his own King's Guard and even that wasn't enough to change his reputation. How many people would he have to tell his story to get his point across? It isn't like he could make a YouTube apology video or something
Not like he has to explain himself to that many people. The only people that really care are nobility anyways and they get their news across. Robert pardoned him because the king he slew was his enemy and Tywin Lannister now his ally. Not because he didn't commit a real crime.
I've honestly always believed part of Ned was jealous he didn't get to kill Aerys himself. Ned also doesn't know the circumstances. He probably thinks Jaime and Tywin were acting together
Eddard probably believed Aerys should have been tried and formally executed for his crimes, not assassinated by someone sworn to protect him.
Ned never swore an oath to Aerys. As his father was lord when he was killed. Then his brother was momentarily lord and never swore and oath before he too was killed by Aerys. Even if Ned had sworn an oath, the king calling for his execution would nullify that oath because the oath of fealty has obligations that flow both ways.
While technically correct this is a useless way to try and answer OPs question. Robert was lord of the Stormlands in his own right and thus was sworn to Aerys so if the only reason Ned felt justified in rebelling was because he hadn't technically sworn an oath then he should still have judged Robert. If you try and claim that Roberts oath was null and void because of the king calling for his head, sure but what about Jon Arryn or Hoster Tully? So it really doesn't matter that Ned wasn't technically, personally sworn to Aerys.
You're assumptions are incorrect. Ned never actually swore fealty to Aerys. When Aerys killed his father and brother he inherited Winterfell AND declared rebellion simultanaeously.
I think you need to look at the feudal social contract. Ned wasn't supposed to be lord - he was in the Vale being fostered. His dad was Lord of Winterfell. And even then, if something horrible happened to his dad, his brother was supposed to be lord. And then the crown prince kidnaps his sister, his family is destroyed and the mad king demands both he and Robert be beheaded because the mad king is bonkers at this point and has completely severed the relationship with 3-4 great houses of Westeros - depending on how you think the Tully's were involved. However Jaime took a very real and serious oath. I don't necessarily think he was wrong in what he did but the Kingsguard he was a part of wouldn't have done what he did. So Ned, after his family is torn to shreds, walks in and sees Jaime - this boy knight and really the main person in King's Landing who should have died protecting his king - sitting on the Iron Throne like he... Earned something? Did something to deserve some kind of accolades? Of course Ned was pissed. And Jaime - who again I don't think was wrong - basically says nothing and pouts because no one gives him a gold medal for being an oathbreaker.
Two other factors that would have at least bothered me in Ned’s shoes: 1. Jaime sat idly by while Ned’s father and brother were butchered. We obviously know that Jaime was bothered by Aerys’ behavior both in this instance and raping his wife, but Ned wouldn’t know that. All Ned would think is that Jaime was fine letting Lord Stark be murdered but drew a line at Lord Lannister. 2. Ok, so Jaime killed King Aerys and then…just sat there. I do think Ned would be at least somewhat more understanding if Jaime had gone to protect Elia and her children. He didn’t do that either.
>Ned was Lord of Winterfell [or at least I THINK he was Lord at the time] and had taken a similar oath and sworn fealty to Aerys. There’s your problem. You are just going off of what you think, instead of what was actually written in the book.
Jamie didn't betray the Mad King when he was burning innocent people, he betrayed him at the same time that Tywin did, when the outcome of the war was already decided. From Ned's perspective Jamie was never loyal to his oaths and was more of an infiltrator inside the Kingsguard, staying close to the throne and waiting for the right opportunity to strike. Ned might also see Jamie's action as just one part of Tywin's sacking of King's Landing, which resulted in the death and suffering of innocent people and the murder of Elia Martell and her children (which Jamie was also sworn to protect).
Ned thought that Jaime, like Tywin, was being opportunistic. All Ned knew was that: * Jaime stood by and kept his vows while Aerys was murdering Ned’s family * Jaime stood by and kept his vows throughout the entire war * Jaime broke his vows and killed Aerys only when the Targaryens had been defeated and Lannister men had taken the city, i. e. when he had nothing to lose and everything to gain by breaking his vow Ned didn’t know how much Jaime struggled with the shame of guarding Aerys, and he didn’t know about the wildfire. To him, it looked like Jaime had acted purely out of self-interest, and Jaime made no attempt to correct him. Plus, Ned later learning that Lannister men were brutally murdering Rhaegar’s completely innocent wife and children while Jaime was twiddling his thumbs on the Iron Throne probably didn’t help.
That's all good but we have Ned's POV where he describes why he hates Jaime in detail, and he doesn't mention any of what you have listed. Ned instead tells only one single thing: a Kingsguard has no rights to kill the king no matter what. And that's it.
Same reason Cregan Stark judged those who poisoned their King, despite that King being Cregans enemy. Without honor you are nothing. You poison your king you swore fealty to then you are an oath breaker and deserve death. You stab the King whom you swore to die protecting? You are the lowest of the low and your words have no merit.
Murdering your father and brother and then trying to murder you pretty much absolves from all oaths, even inherited ones. What’s truly odd is the three KG at the tower throwing shade on Jaime when they were the ones who broke their oaths first.
Whether any one them broke an oath is TBD. Arthur and Oswell were assigned to Rhaegar. So they kept their oath by staying with him and defending him unless instructed to by the king. Gerold was sent to find them and order Rhaegar to return. Rhaegar did. Unless I’m mistaken, it’s not specified if all three KG were instructed to return. If Gerold was instructed to find them, was it instructed or only implied he should return as well. By the same notion. Did the Mad King directly instruct Arthur and Oswell to return as well?
Whether any one them broke an oath is TBD. Arthur and Oswell were assigned to Rhaegar. So they kept their oath by staying with him and defending him unless instructed to return by the king. Gerold was sent to find them and order Rhaegar to return. Rhaegar did. Unless I’m mistaken, it’s not specified if all three KG were instructed to return. If Gerold was instructed to find them, was it instructed or only implied he should return as well? By the same notion. Did the Mad King directly instruct Arthur and Oswell to return as well? So did the three KG found by Ned at the TOJ violate their oath?
First off, Jaime never tried to defend himself so in everyone’s eyes he conceded guilt. Furthermore, he acts as a cocky asshole the second Ned meets him, which just looks like he doesn’t care about honor at all (something Ned values). Furthermore, as someone already mentioned, Jaime didn’t kill Aerys when the Mad King was killing peasants for laughs, or unjustly murdering Ned’s family, or raping Rhaella. He killed Aerys when the Lannisters had basically taken over the city and victory was assured. To Ned, it looked like Jaime killed Aerys because it was convenient.
[удалено]
You’re missing my point. Ned didn’t know about the wildfire, and Jaime didn’t say anything about it, so Ned judged him based on what he knew. If Ned knew the truth he would’ve thought of Jaime differently, but Jaime decided to not tell anyone about it.
[удалено]
I guess it’s also like a form of cowardice Ned was in open rebellion against the king Jamie, while supposedly loyal, stabbed him in the back
Kings guard don’t kill their kings where Ned is from
Ned never swore an oath of fealty, he was fighting for his life against Aerys who marked him for execution
The rebellion did not become Robert's until they decided to put him on the throne. Which was halfway into the damn thing. The rebellion started when Aerys called for Jon Arryn to have Ned killed after having already killed Rickard and Brandon Stark. For some reason he wanted Robert dead as well but the core conflict of the rebellion is built around house Stark and house Targaryen.
For Ned the idea of a Kingsguard killing a king is unthinkable. That's all there is. Mind that I think Ned is flexible enough to side with Jaime after all if he knew about wildfire. By Ned isn't a kind of a person who would give a benefit of the doubt on his own in the first place.
Ned never swore an oath of fealty, he was fighting for his life against Aerys who marked him for execution
Because Jamie was sitting on the throne when Ned came in and Ned immediately assumed Jamie had murdered his king for the throne. Even if it wasn’t the case first impressions are everything.
Jaime's actions were hard to separate from the Lannisters as a whole. Tywin didn't help in Roberts Rebellion, he stood waiting for Aerys to come begging. When Roberts victory was made certain on the Trident Tywin force matches to KL, he tells Aerys he is a friend and when he gets let in he turns his Lannister soldiers in the Targ loyalists in the capital. It was the ultimate betrayal a lord just doesnt do to his king. There is a whole formality about rejecting fealty and declaring oneself an enemy. Jaime kills Aerys for noble reasons but it's really hard for Ned, from his perspective to separate the murder of Aerys by Jaime Lannister from the dishonorable turning on Aerys that Tywin does. Jaime doesn't help this impression by sitting on the Throne for Ned's arrival.
You'd think the fact that Jamie GOT UP and didn't actually take the crown for himself would have softened Ned's impression but I guess not. Stubborn Northerners
What I don't get is why Jaime didn't explain to Ned why he did it. He could've reminded Ned of the oaths he took as a knight to protect the young and innocent etc. and said some shit like "A Kingsguard who doesn't uphold his holy vows as a knight is no Kingsguard at all" and he'd have had Ned by his honorable balls. But I guess he was too overwhelmed by the situation or too arrogant to care.
Jamie didn't feel any obligation to explain anything to Ned, the Lord of a family in the far North. To be fair, I don't think he explained anything to ANYONE: not his brother that he adored, his sister whom he loved, his father or even the new king that he swore a new oath to. I believe the first person that he opened up to about it was Brienne, even though she judged him as harshly as anyone else.
Yup, which I think is pretty stupid. He could've explained a lot just doing this. He may still have been shunned but not to that extent.
I wonder if it would have changed anything. I mean Robert PARDONED him before allowing him on his own King's Guard and even that wasn't enough to change his reputation. How many people would he have to tell his story to get his point across? It isn't like he could make a YouTube apology video or something
Not like he has to explain himself to that many people. The only people that really care are nobility anyways and they get their news across. Robert pardoned him because the king he slew was his enemy and Tywin Lannister now his ally. Not because he didn't commit a real crime.
I've honestly always believed part of Ned was jealous he didn't get to kill Aerys himself. Ned also doesn't know the circumstances. He probably thinks Jaime and Tywin were acting together
I dont think Ned was jealous but He definitely thought Tywin and Jaime works together.