Latest ads
-
Handmade Character Soft Toys- anil1961
- Updated:
-
Bodim.lk out now !- Manoj Suranga Bandara
- Updated:
-
Power Lifting Lever Belt- SkullVamp
- Updated:
-
port.lk Domain for sale
- Lankan-Tech
- Updated:
-
Colombo Kaduwela - Two Storey House for Sale- dilrasan
- Updated:
Game of Thrones Fans
- Thread starter ŦĦĔ ƦȆƉǾӾ
- Start date
From A Strom of Swords:
“Everything was done in the utmost secrecy by a handful of master pyromancers. They did not even trust their own acolytes to help. The queen’s eyes had been closed for years, and Rhaegar was busy marshaling an army. But Aerys’s new mace-and-dagger Hand was not utterly stupid, and with Rossart, Belis, and Garigus coming and going night and day, he became suspicious. Chelsted, that was his name, Lord Chelsted.” It had come back to him suddenly, with the telling. “I’d thought the man craven, but the day he confronted Aerys he found some courage somewhere. He did all he could to dissuade him. He reasoned, he jested, he threatened, and finally he begged. When that failed he took off his chain of office and flung it down on the floor. Aerys burnt him alive for that, and hung his chain about the neck of Rossart, his favorite pyromancer. The man who had cooked Lord Rickard Stark in his own armor. And all the time, I stood by the foot of the Iron Throne in my white plate, still as a corpse, guarding my liege and all his sweet secrets. My Sworn Brothers were all away, you see, ------
----- “It fell to me to hold the Red Keep, but I knew we were lost. I sent to Aerys asking his leave to make terms. My man came back with a royal command. ‘Bring me your father’s head, if you are no traitor.’ Aerys would have no yielding. Lord Rossart was with him, my messenger said.
I knew what that meant.
“When I came on Rossart, he was dressed as a common man-at-arms, hurrying to a postern gate. I slew him first. Then I slew Aerys, before he could find someone else to carry his message to the pyromancers. Days later, I hunted down the others and slew them as well. Belis offered me gold, and Garigus wept for mercy. Well, a sword’s more merciful than fire, but I don’t think Garigus much appreciated the kindness I showed him.” ------
------“Has my tale turned you speechless? Come, curse me or kiss me or call me a liar. Something.”
“If this is true, how is it no one knows?”
“The knights of the Kingsguard are sworn to keep the king’s secrets. Would you have me break my oath?” Jaime laughed.
So Jaime was the only kingsguard who knew about this whole plan and the people involved. When he knew that mad king was not going to surrender (and Lord Rossart with him) he knew what's gonna happen.
1. He killed Rossart to stop the destruction and mass murder. He stood by the oath he took initially when he became a Knight.
2. He killed the king before he could pass the order to another. He broke this one oath because there was no other choice.
3. He told no one because he was bound by the oath. It was not necessary to break this one. So he honoured it till he got fed up with others judging him/kingslayer shit.
4. He secretly killed the others so that the secret would die with them (also who knows what orders were given before mad king died?)
It seems to me that he cared a lot about oaths. But you're still saying that what he did was wrong. You're resolved to judge him based on this one oath he broke (to save thousands of lives).
Your argument doesn't make any sense because each and every word you say is equally true regarding the initial oaths they took when they became Knights. Please clearly state your argument. Which of these statement is correct?
1. A Kingsguard has to honour all Vows he take. All that I have said is equally true regarding those vows.
2. A Kingsguard does not have to honour all the Vows he take. He only has to honour the vows he take after he became a kingsguard. All that I have said is true regarding kingsguard vows but not valid for others vows related to Knighthood.
And if you choose 2, is there any evidence from the text to justify that?
Last edited:
As I've stated previously being in the kingsguard is the highest, most notable thing a knight could achive in westeros.
And I did not say either of the above. What I say is the vow that a knight take when he enters the kingsguard stands higher without a choosing.
It's much more similar to being in the night's watch.
For an instance technically when Jon became a person in the nights watch he isn't loyal to the starks. HE CAN'T BE LOYAL. HIS SERVICE IS TO THE NIGHT'S WATCH AND NIGHT'S WATCH ONLY. If the starks come seeking his help to defeat an enemy of them, he can't do so because he's breaking his vow.
Say if a stark wanted to kill a commander of the watch saying he's bad or guilty of something and asks jon's help to do so, he cannot and he should not. BECAUSE IT'S NOT HIS PART TO PLAY.
But if a stark seeks help of the watch (not for political reasons) then he can help and obliged to do so. (I don't know whether this made sense or not)
But likewise
For 1 & 2, Honouring a knights vow by a knight in the kingsguard does apply, but DOES NOT WHEN IT APPLIES CONSPIRING AGAINST THE KING OR HIS FAMILY THEY SWORE TO PROTECT. When that sort of thing appears, it's not their right to choose a side.
They should always pick the side of the king.THAT IS THE KINGSGUARD. If they do to choose the other, then they are simply dishonouring their name, their' house name & what the Kingsguard stands for.
And no. Jaime did not care about the oaths at all. Yes he did have an eye in everything, observing everything but no I don't agree with you.
Good points.. but,
1. Yes he killed rossart and did stop the destruction. Not mainly because of the vows. It was simply because it was insane & he was fed up of waiting and watching.
2. Here if here cared tha much about the oaths then he should've captured Aerys and not kill him. As the king, he deserve a trial. And as a person of the kingsguard he does not have the right to kill the king.
3. He does not go after fame or does not try to justify his actions. For the simple fact he does not care. He WAS a simple man with a small appetite. But loyal to the name lannister. If he cared then only for cersei and his family.
4. But again it's not because of the vows. He knows about the plan because he was there with Areys when they were being made. So he goes and kills them cause they'd carry on with their plan.
But it's not for the vows. Do you think for any moment, that at any point of killing rossart, aryes and the others.. he was thinking about saving the innocent men & women?? The it was his duty to protect them??
No. But he does have some brains to him and sees the destruction and then again without thinking kills aryes. If he did thought properly about the VOWS you highlights this much then at least, he would've held aryes and not kill him for trial. And his actions did have consequences that he did not care about. Is that a knightly vow?
Even then after all was finished, he atleast should've departed from the kingsguard since HE BROKE THAT VOW. And also knight or not he's guilty of killing a king. So did he care about his vow then??
He did not care about any of the vows you mention of or did not respect them. He did all those things you said as any sane man would do at that time. If there was a sellsword guarding aryes at that point except for Jaime, he would've done the same.
But what he should have done at that time was not kill aryes. Now if he did that, then there could be made an argument like yours. But he didn't think about the vows or the consequences of killing aryes.
Last edited:
And why the hell does Jaime keeps that his sons are baratheons? Why doesn't he reveal their identities?
As per his vows he is entitled to be just right?
All he did, he did for personal gain. But not for anything for himself I mean. Personally as per the Lannisters and his family.
Even when Areys asked to bring Tywins head he did not do so because it's his family.
And he did save the women & children from burning by Aryes' hand. But did he stop the sack of kings landing after that as per your vows?
Did he stop Tywins men from raping women, & murdering children after that? He simply sat and stayed on the throne.
Check this out. It's not even from the book
"You served him well, when serving was safe"
I'll quote something another person said in a similar argument,
Jaime knew about aerys's plan to burn the city for months. He watched as aerys burned innocent people alive and did nothing. Chelsted, the real hero spoke up and told aerys his plan was evil and cruel. Jaime did no such thing. And Chelsted paid a real price for his sacrifice, not "losing his honor" (an abstract concept, that seems to involve people saying negative things about you), but being executed in an especially painful manner.
Jaime knew that chelsted had been executed, he knew why he had been executed and he knew what aerys plans were. He could have intervened there. But he didn't. While defying aerys had real consequences he never did anything to oppose him. Ned says this well in the show "You served him well, when serving was safe." Than once aerys was finished, when jaime's father had control of the city, he killed aerys. At this point there was no physical consequences for killing aerys, the man was alone and friendless. Jaime knew that chestled got burned because he spoke out against aerys plan to burn the city. He could have killed aerys then. He didn't because aerys still had power and killing him might cost him.
Oh and Jaime's concern for the ordinary people of KL? His father's soldiers were right outside the walls, raping and murdering beyond count. I don't recall jaime sparing them a second thought, or even attempting to get his family's army to stop murdering.
As per his vows he is entitled to be just right?
All he did, he did for personal gain. But not for anything for himself I mean. Personally as per the Lannisters and his family.
Even when Areys asked to bring Tywins head he did not do so because it's his family.
And he did save the women & children from burning by Aryes' hand. But did he stop the sack of kings landing after that as per your vows?
Did he stop Tywins men from raping women, & murdering children after that? He simply sat and stayed on the throne.
Check this out. It's not even from the book
"You served him well, when serving was safe"
I'll quote something another person said in a similar argument,
Jaime knew about aerys's plan to burn the city for months. He watched as aerys burned innocent people alive and did nothing. Chelsted, the real hero spoke up and told aerys his plan was evil and cruel. Jaime did no such thing. And Chelsted paid a real price for his sacrifice, not "losing his honor" (an abstract concept, that seems to involve people saying negative things about you), but being executed in an especially painful manner.
Jaime knew that chelsted had been executed, he knew why he had been executed and he knew what aerys plans were. He could have intervened there. But he didn't. While defying aerys had real consequences he never did anything to oppose him. Ned says this well in the show "You served him well, when serving was safe." Than once aerys was finished, when jaime's father had control of the city, he killed aerys. At this point there was no physical consequences for killing aerys, the man was alone and friendless. Jaime knew that chestled got burned because he spoke out against aerys plan to burn the city. He could have killed aerys then. He didn't because aerys still had power and killing him might cost him.
Oh and Jaime's concern for the ordinary people of KL? His father's soldiers were right outside the walls, raping and murdering beyond count. I don't recall jaime sparing them a second thought, or even attempting to get his family's army to stop murdering.
Last edited:
Oh and AGAIN, another thing, as per his knightly vows he should protect women & children right?
THEN WHY THE HELL DOES HE THROW BRAN FROM THAT TOWER???
Jaime does change. But only after he has his hand cut and he become helpless.If you think before that he did care about the value of a life and his vows, you are deeply mistaken
THEN WHY THE HELL DOES HE THROW BRAN FROM THAT TOWER???
Jaime does change. But only after he has his hand cut and he become helpless.If you think before that he did care about the value of a life and his vows, you are deeply mistaken
අනේ කුකුළනි පොඩි සහ බාගන්න ලේසි එකක් දීපල්ලා....
මෙ සමහර ඒවයේ මගේ කිරිපල්ලේ ඉදන් ජාතකේ අහනවා, නැත්තං උන් එක්ක සෙල්ලං කොරන්න කියනවා...
එක හත්තිලව්වක් ඒක!
අනේ කුකුළනි පොඩි සහ බාගන්න ලේසි එකක් දීපල්ලා....
මෙ සමහර ඒවයේ මගේ කිරිපල්ලේ ඉදන් ජාතකේ අහනවා, නැත්තං උන් එක්ක සෙල්ලං කොරන්න කියනවා...
එක හත්තිලව්වක් ඒක!
podi ewa nahane thawama..
okema direct link eka menna..
https://hikmatorrent1.herokuapp.com...g]/Game.of.Thrones.S06E04.HDTV.x264-FLEET.mkv
Last edited:
ටොරන්ට් එක අර නිර්මාලය දීල තිබ්බ එක බාන්න ගත්තා බං...
ඒත් පට්ට ස්ලෝව් නේහ්!
එච්බීඕ කාරයො ටොරන්ට් වලට අදින්වලු නේහ්?!!
ටොරන්ට් එක අර නිර්මාලය දීල තිබ්බ එක බාන්න ගත්තා බං...
ඒත් පට්ට ස්ලෝව් නේහ්!
එච්බීඕ කාරයො ටොරන්ට් වලට අදින්වලු නේහ්?!!
Openload >https://openload.co/f/YENMhT2tZOU/game.of.thrones.s06e04.720p.hdtv.hevc.x265.mkv
Last edited:
ඇයි බං Viserys targaryen එදා පිච්චුනාට කලිසි පිච්චුන්නේ නැත්තේBoth are targaryens
Targaryens are not immune to fire. Danerys gets burned.
Show eke echchara burn marks ehema danna nathuwa aththe ewage designing costs ehema wadi hinda wenna athi. same as cutting tyrions nose
ඇයි බං Viserys targaryen එදා පිච්චුනාට කලිසි පිච්චුන්නේ නැත්තේ
"he was no dragon"
Quoted from the last pov chapter of dany in "A Dance With Dragons"
"Her skin was pink and tender, and a pale milky fluid was leaking from her cracked palms, but her burns were healing."
But again later in that chapter she realizes that maybe she hasn't been burnt the way it should be. So it seems she does have an immunity to a certain amount of heat/ fire. But she can't remember all the events happened in Hizdar's pit.. so it's uncertain. It may be that because she could have a connection to magic or some sort of magical property of being resistant to heat/ fire through the dragons. (GRRM describes this in the birth of her dragons and she been not burnt.)
Granny: Do Targaryens become immune to fire once they "bond" to their dragons?
George_RR_Martin: Granny, thanks for asking that. It gives me a chance to clear up a common misconception. TARGARYENS ARE NOT IMMUNE TO FIRE! The birth of Dany's dragons was unique, magical, wonderous, a miracle. She is called The Unburnt because she walked into the flames and lived. But her brother sure as hell wasn't immune to that molten gold.
Revanshe: So she won't be able to do it again?
George_RR_Martin: Probably not.
And there have been many events previously where targaryens got burnt and died because of fire.
Different types of fires I migt add. Normal fire, wildfire & also dragons' fire.. So Targaryens aren't immune to fire and saying Viserys is no targaryen is bullshit.
BUT that being said, there could be a hidden gene in Dany that got activated, or maybe she does have a link to magical properties of resisting to an amount of fire elements.
But she does get burned. But not as it should be
This is interesting. You’re quoting from the TV series (which you don’t watch) when it serves your purpose. Why can’t you consider other conversations (found only in TV series) as well? For an example in the TV series, Jamie asks Brienne what she’d have done if her beloved Renley had asked her to watch while he murders thousands of innocent men, women and children. He asks “would you have kept your oath then?” to which Brienne has no answer to give. This conversation proves that he cared about others. I have quoted this before but you’ve ignored it. IMO there’s a lot of bias here.
1. In the canon, Jamie says that he did not say anything about the Mad King’s plan to burn everyone because of his oath (to keep his secrets). There is no conflicting evidence in the canon to prove otherwise (that is, no one who knows what happened is claiming otherwise). Brien never questions Jamie’s intentions but you’re claiming that Jamie did so because he didn’t care about anything. This is just your opinion/interpretation and there is no evidence in the canon to support this claim.
2. Your other claim:- “Jamie did not want to be a Knight”. Jamie clearly explains to Brienne that he earned his Knighthood. He explains how he won a tourney at a young age and how Ser Dayne Knighted him later. He’s proud of being a Knight and there is no evidence in the canon to support your claim that he did not want to become one.
3. From 1 and 2, it is logical to assume that Jamie seriously respected his vows as a Knight. He remembers all of them and explains that honouring all of them is not practical.
4. He spills the secrets about the Mad King mainly because he got fed up by being judged again and again by “people who’re not worthy” to judge him. This is his character development and we also see how his character changed after he lost the hand (as you’ve explained).
5. Killing Mad King vs. holding him :- This one is not a new argument. Commonly used against Jamie. Jamie says that he killed the King to stop him from passing the order to another. Could he have taken him prisoner instead? Maybe. However, if there were people around and if the King had shouted the order to one of them, Jamie could have been in trouble. Knocking him out could have been a valid option. Someone will eventually kill him later. (One of the arguments used here in favour of Jamie is that he may have actually believed that the Mad King could return from death. Unlikely in my opinion) I never said Jamie is perfect. He’s one of the most flawed characters.
6. There are other accusations you can use: what about the safety of King’s children? Who’s responsible for that?
7. He didn’t do anything about Lannister men killing and raping :- Not exactly true. He did ask the King’s permission to negotiate (could have saved some lives). As soon as he learnt who’s with the king, everything else became insignificant and he rushed to kill.
8. "He simply sat and stayed on the throne." :- Just after he killed the madman (clearly mentioned that he did not have time to hide), some of his father’s men came there to witness the "last of it" and he asks them to tell others to spare all those who surrender and hold them captive. He sat on the throne only after that. This proves that he cared and tried to stop the slaughter. Very biased statement again.
9. And if I remember correctly, only a very few people DID ANYTHING about “Lannister men killing and raping”. I mean seriously, that bitch of a woman “Lady” Stark arrested the imp and many many innocent people paid the price. Even the woman at the inn was hanged. Name me one character who said anything against this. “Lady” Stark didn’t feel any remorse at all. The only person who properly stood up against this was Ser Beric.
10. Pushing Brian – Done in order to save the lives of his children. That is 3 lives against one. Horrible thing to do and even Cersei says it was not necessary (very rare instance of her softness). He's not perfect. Goes without saying.
11. The next one is “Jamie did not want to be a Kingsguard”. This one is supported in the cannon and I don’t dispute that. Jamie says that being a Kingsguard spoiled him
Again, this is a very bias statement. Does the Kinght's oath allow you to be a kinslayer? It asks you to obey your father. You're in the opinion that Kingsguard's oath MUST replace the former oath but you're avoiding saying it directly.
So you're saying that any "sane man" would have betrayed the king (these things count as betraying the king) under the circumstances. Could a Kingsguard (ex- White Bull, Ser Dayne) have done so? You already claimed that they can't betray the King or take sides. So if a Kingsguard goes by your argument and refrain from betraying the king, that guy is not sane right?
Similar threads
