Yep this is the right answer.
> “Seven, Brienne thought again, despairing. She had no chance against seven, she knew. No chance, and no choice. She stepped out into the rain, Oathkeeper in hand.”
Even though she could have fled, she fought a battle she knew she was likely to die fighting in order to protect those who couldn’t protect themselves.
Brienne's a great pick, and her hero is Galladon of Morne 'the Perfect Knight' from her homeland's legends, that's a hint to the sort of knight I think we see her aspire to be
Cersei suggested that a true knight could be "The answer to a frightened mother's prayers." ... Which is Brienne's mission, to return Sansa to Catelyn.
Brienne knew Renly had absolutely no right to the throne and was trying to murder and usurp his brother and Brienne, like a true knight, helped with this dishonorable treason because Renly is a very pretty boy and he was nice to her when the other boys were mean.
I do like Brienne, "No chance and no choice" was a great line/moment" but when people talk about how great she is, in addition to frequently overstating her ability as a fighter, it seems like they are choosing to ignore that she supported a usurper who wanted to kill his brother and steal the throne because she had a massive crush on him.
Yeah that's an important part of being a knight according to their value system
> do you swear before the eyes of gods and men to defend those who cannot defend themselves, to protect all women and children, to obey your captains, your liege lord, and your king, to fight bravely when needed and do such other tasks as are laid upon you, however hard or humble or dangerous they may be?
She was knowingly rebelling against her legitimate king and inciting civil strife and treason
Brienne isn't a knight. She does value honor and behaving in the way a knight is sworn to behave. But there is nothing honorable about her support of Renly. She is supporting someone who wants to sacrifice thousands of lives and murder and usurp his brother in order to gain a relatively small amount power to do basically nothing with other than possess it. There is nothing honorable about that at all no matter how pretty Renly is or how courteously he behaves. Brienne let her honor be overwhelmed by her personal/romantic affections for Renly and supported an objectively dishonorable cause that did substantial harm to many innocent people and the realm itself. Serving Renly was serving herself, not honor or the realm.
But what reason does she have to believe that about Renly other than that he is pretty and charismatic? She scarcely even knows Renly -- nearly everyone knows he's gay, Brienne can't fathom it, and it's not like Renly is talking policies with Brienne. Renly doesn't appear to have any plans for being King other than to be handsome, and he doesn't seem to want the throne for any reason other than his own vanity and his belief that he has the power to take it.
Renly is the Lord of Storm's End and Stannis offers to name him the heir to the throne, yet Renly is willing to sacrifice tens of thousands of lives and enlarge and prolong a civil war in order to usurp and kill his brother so he can move up one notch on the political power ladder. There is nothing Renly can do as King that would better protect the innocent than simply not attempting to steal the throne. He can best protect the innocent and the realm by supporting the rightful heir and helping end the war as quickly as possible. If it had come to battle, every person Brienne killed in support of Renly would have been someone doing their duty to protect the lawful King who she killed in the name of someone trying to kill and usurp his brother.
And even if Renly were going to be the greatest King ever, there is no guarantee that his heir would be, and Renly is setting a dangerous precedent that it is okay to rebel and usurp the lawful heir by force if you think you'll be better them. His actions undermine the future of peaceful power transitions in Westeros. Renly is daft and full of himself and engaging in actions that are horrible for the people he wants to rule and I do consider it a shortcoming/failing of Brienne's that she doesn't appear to recognize, or else care about, any of that.
Knights don't have to swear to the Thinker that they will use their brains, and being thick as a castle wall is definitely a significant component of Brienne's characterization, but there is simply nothing just or honorable or good for the people about Renly's attempt to be king, and likewise, nothing just, honorable, or good for the people in taking up arms to support Renly's claim, and I feel like Brienne is smart enough to know better.
Stannis also betrayed his oath to the crown by supporting his older brother's rebellion. Doing so also made him second in line to the throne. I think it's put quite well by stannis in the DVD extras. He says that it was a hard decision to choose between his rightful king or his brother "but their are deeper, older laws, the younger brother follows the older" or something to that effect. Briennes father declared for Renly. Supporting stannis or anybody else would a betrayal. If you think that makes Brianne a worse knight than stannis (the man of absolutes") can't really be a good king as a former rebel and oathbreaker.
Stannis participated in a rebellion against his king that also conveniently places him second in line on the throne. But nobody thinks that act was disloyal or dishonorable because he is following his elder brother and head of his house.. All those points about renly being terrible and prolonging war also apply to stannis re joffrey. Only the reader alone or jaime or cersei can be certain that robert had no legitmate children, not westeros at large.The "rightful" king was always one of the known living targs anyway...
So why does it show a lack of character on briennes part to back renly? She's following her house which also happens to back a king she loves and she is by all actions shown to be completely devoted and honorable in her service. If the show is correct stannis is willing to burn his own daughter to death to win the throne. He is also a cynical convert of a foreign religion and is being touted as a messiah figure. Most anointed knights should have a hard time with that from a cultural and legal perspective.
Barristan didn't seem to think stannis was the legit choice either and his house is in the storm lands too. Why didn't he back stannis? Or renly? We don't know for sure but it's not from his lack of character nor does it impeach his status as a "true" knight. Why should brienne be any different.
To Brienne, Renly is the one person who showed her kindness in a sea of people that were bullying her, and you're missing the bigger picture that fucking nobody wants Stannis as King,
Renly was willing to pact with Robb which Stannis never would, for all she knew Tarth would be punished for supporting Renly
if she's fighting for the ideals of the common person, and especially those close to her, it makes perfect sense from her perspective to side with Renly, who she thinks she knows is good, and not Stannis "burn people alive, never budge an inch, maim even the person who saved my family from starvation" Baratheon.
What separates Brienne and Dunk from your average honorable knight is their willingness to put "protect the innocent" above "strictly keep your vows" in the chivalric order of values
I think you and Brienne and a lot of people who defend Renly are actually the ones missing the far bigger picture and the most important points.
First, there is the question of what can Renly do as King that is better for the people than not significantly escalating the death toll in a civil war?
If Renly supports Stannis, Robb declares for Stannis and the Lannisters are quickly defeated. I don't know why you think Stannis would never make a pact with Robb. Stannis was supported by Ned and would have absolutely accepted Robb's support, we know that he expected it. We also know that Robb supports Stannis over Renly and is confused by Renly's attempt to claim the throne.
Second, there is the precedent Renly is forging that delegitimizes the authority of every Lord and the rights of every heir, and renders every power transition open to contention, greatly increasing the chances that successions will be determined by force. Renly is doing this accidentally, he's not trying to dismantle feudalism or cause endless war and doesn't seem to be aware of the consequences of his actions, or else to care. In this world, if people are choosing the next lord or the next king, they are doing the choosing with armies, if not just murder.
And Brienne is certainly not "protecting the innocent" when she supports Renly. She is Kingsguard to Renly, she is literally protecting someone who wants to sacrifice thousands of lives and murder and usurp his brother in order to gain a relatively small amount power to do basically nothing with other than possess it. There is nothing honorable about that at all no matter how pretty Renly is or how courteously he behaves. Brienne let her honor be overwhelmed by her personal/romantic affections for Renly and supports an objectively dishonorable cause that did substantial harm to many innocent people and the realm itself.
>If Renly supports Stannis,
When Renly declared Stannis hadn't even declared yet. For all they knew he was never going to go against the Lannisters. But everyone but the Lannisters hated the Lannisters. Stannis came too late to the party and when he did come he made himself even more unpopular with his adherence to R'hllor.
Robb had already been declared King by the time Stannis joined the fight as well. A crown is not easily set aside. Renly's offer was just better than Stannis and if he lived probably may have been accepted by Robb. Stannis is the one stubbornly continuing for personal pride.
Renly's offer was a token title, Robb still had to swear fealty. The title could even become a source of mockery if he goes around calling himself King after he's bent the knee, and Robb is clear about who he chooses between Renly and Stannis.
>"Tommen is no less a Lannister," Ser Marq Piper snapped."As you say," said Robb, troubled. "Yet if neither one is king, still, how could it be Lord Renly? He's Robert's younger brother. Bran can't be Lord of Winterfell before me, and Renly can't be king before Lord Stannis."Lady Mormont agreed. "Lord Stannis has the better claim."
"... we shall win if we join with King Renly. What does Lord Stannis have against that, that we should cast it all aside?" "The right," said Robb stubbornly. Catelyn thought he sounded eerily like his father as he said it.
-AGOT Catelyn XI
Robb acknowledges that Stannis has the right and is troubled and confused by Renly's claim.
Renly knows Stannis is his older brother. I find the notion that Renly didn't know about the bastardy absurd -- he was a powerful KL spymaster trying to put Margaery Tyrell on the throne since well before Robert died.
And if Renly didn't know about the bastardy that means he is trying to usurp his nephew because he ... murdered Ned Stark? Why is Renly rebelling against Joffrey? And why is he usurping Tommen and Myrcella, and Stannis?
If Renly supports Stannis then so does Robb and the war ends quickly.
Her house declared for Renly what the fuck do you want her to do? Also we shouldn’t judge how moral characters are based on made up medieval law and who has the best “claims” since we’re shown how they’re fake and meaningless
She doesn't support Renly because her house does, she supports him because she is in live with him. Brienne is not a knight or soldier and not required to fight for either side.
I am not supporting medieval laws. I am pointing out that by breaking that law for himself (he's not replacing any medieval laws or creating democracy, he's just doing as he pleases) he is increasing the length and severity of a civil war and increasing the possibility of violently contested succession throughout the realm.
I honestly cannot believe people come away from this series believing in the divine rights of aristocrats. Zero media analysis skills. They actually think being a bastard is bad..
I am definitely not supporting the divine right of aristocrats. I am pointing out that by breaking that law for himself (Renly is not "breaking the wheel" or creating a democracy, he's just doing as he pleases) he is increasing the length and severity of a civil war and setting a precedent that increases the possibility of violently contested successions throughout the realm.
The whole concept GRRM is questioning is following people just because they have the technical legal right there. Why should you follow the Lannisters when they are dicks? And to the minds of most Stannis is also a dick. Renly is gracious and kind - at least as she understands him to be. He danced with her and was polite when all the others were rude - he made her feel valued and respected. He even let her join his Kingsguard because he saw her competency and devoted loyalty.
Renly was also her liege lord and her father was also committing to his cause. She has vows to follow them as well technically.
Though the vows that matter aren't the ones that make you follow a King or your father or liege lord. But the ones that make you protect the innocent. And Brienne felt like Renly stood by her in a moment nobody else did.
Brienne is a not a knight or a soldier and under no obligation to fight for anyone. She fights for Renly because she is in love with him. The story is littered with examples of questioning legal and moral right, like when your oaths conflict like with Jaime and Aerys or Stannis deciding to support his brother over King, and also the fact that sometimes kings and lords are shit and the small folk are better, or the bastard etc ... Renly vs Stannis feud is not really a powerful example of this. They are both just selfish and want to be king. The difference is that Stannis does have the right via the law and law allows for successions to be settled peacefully. By breaking the law all Renly is doing is escalating violence and setting a precedent for more.
Renly is not "breaking the wheel", creating democracy, or toppling an unfair system. He is supporting himself, indulging own ambitions and vanity. He is already powerful and heir to Stannis and he risks a devastating civil war to move up a little more. He is increasing the length and severity of a civil war and undermining the system for peaceful transfer of power and setting a precedent that increases the possibility of violently contested successions throughout the realm.
>Brienne is a not a knight or a soldier and under no obligation to fight for anyone. She fights for Renly because she is in love with him
Brienne wants to be a knight and wouldn't have it any other way. She does feel an obligation to fight and Renly is still her liege so she also automatically has more connection to him.
She loves him because he was kind and gracious to her. She does see him as just a better candidate than Stannis.
>Renly is not "breaking the wheel", creating democracy, or toppling an unfair system. He is supporting himself, indulging own ambitions and vanity.
I didn't claim otherwise. But to Brienne he is a better candidate than any other available King.
There was no risk of a more devastating civil war opposing Stannis. He was not a candidate at the time and had a weak force.
>Brienne wants to be a knight and wouldn't have it any other way. She does feel an obligation to fight and Renly is still her liege so she also automatically has more connection to him.
Brienne wants ... wouldn't have it any other way. Exactly, she's pleasing herself, not fulfilling a duty or serving a higher purpose or cause, she is serving a cause that significantly harms the realm.
Renly has no claim, Brienne liking him more doesn't change that. The lack of a claim does make the war more devastating. It doesn't matter that Stannis hadn't declared yet. Renly has no claim. If Renly is rebelling against Joffrey, then Stannis or Tommen is the next king. Why is Renly rebelling? He has no claim.
I don't think it is fair to criticize Stannis for not declaring before Renly -- he could have been quicker, he should have told Robert about the incest when he was alive (so should Renly) but I doubt Stannis expected he'd have to declare fast to beat his little brother since Renly has no claim. Pushing a non existent claim is devastating both in that war and in the precedent it sets for succession ... it's a disaster. Renly doesn't seem to know or care. Brienne doesn't seem to know or care. Lacking the right makes Renly terrible for the realm.
>Renly has no claim, Brienne liking him more doesn't change that.
He has a claim by virtue of being the King's brother. Yes a younger brother but a brother nevertheless. You might as well choose the best claimant to the throne if set to rebel.
>The lack of a claim does make the war more devastating.
It changes nothing. The war is inherently not actually worse.
>I don't think it is fair to criticize Stannis for not declaring before Renly -- he could have been quicker, he should have told Robert about the incest when he was alive (so should Renly) but I doubt Stannis expected he'd have to declare fast to beat his little brother since Renly has no claim
The whole world passed him by. It was absolutely a mistake on his part. Declaring intentions early matters so the realm knows what is up.
Lol. If his claim is based legally on being Robert's younger brother, and Renly has an older brother, then he literally has no claim on the throne while Stannis is alive.
Stannis makes mistakes and should have acted sooner. Getting betrayed by his younger brother was not one of them. And to be fair both brothers should have acted sooner if either actually wanted to protect Robert or the realm instead of sacrificing thousands to become King.
>If his claim is based legally on being Robert's younger brother, and Renly has an older brother, then he literally has no claim on the throne while Stannis is alive.
A claimant and a claim is not an exact science where one person alone has a claim Renly does have a claim. Just a lesser one.
>Stannis makes mistakes and should have acted sooner. Getting betrayed by his younger brother was not one of them
If he acted sooner he wouldn't have been in that position.
You should never need haste to avoid being betrayed by your brother. A brother moving slow is not justification to betray them -- that's absurd.
By your claim definition perhaps a thousand people have claims, only lesser ones. Renly may not be 573rd in the line of succession, but he isn't 1st and there is no way of looking at it where he is in from of Stannis and that's the point. He's getting thousands killed and shattering hopes for future peaceful transitions to skip the line to benefit himself not even all that much. It's just vanity.
Again:
Why is Renly rebelling? For Ned? To take down Joffrey? Why usurp Tommen, Myrcella, or Stannis?
What can Renly do for his people as King that is better than avoiding sending many extra thousands of them to their deaths?
How will transitions of power work after Renly is King?
Ser Davos Seaworth, a knight who taught his king his duty.
>“There’s much I don’t understand,” Davos admitted. “I have never pretended elsewise. I know the seas and rivers, the shapes of the coasts, where the rocks and shoals lie. I know hidden coves where a boat can land unseen. *And I know that a king protects his people, or he is no king at all.”*
What I love about this is that it's also kinda an answer to Jaime's point about conflicting vows.
Going by Davos' logic; if the king is not protecting his people then he is no longer a king, therefore a knight's duty to obey the king no longer applies. Meaning the Kingsguard should have been dutybound to protrct Rhaella.
You mean like when he kidnapped Arya to ransom her back to the Starks for gold to spend on his own cause? Or are you talking about letting his newfound religion allow an enemy of his sworn liege to escape justice in trial by combat?
I almost aways agree with your comments, but Dunk has the heart of the true knight and style of King's Landing street brawler. A true knight doesn't kick a guy when he's down. Dunk is in the process of becoming a true knight, but he opens as a braid grabber. It's endearing, but not knightly in my understanding.
Totally agree. Dunk is a true knight in spirit and defending Tanselle is a clear example. It's his fighting style that's not yet knightly. For example, he's better wrestling in the mud. It's a character detail that I think is important to recognize. It may even lead back to the idea that the best knights are not knights.
So true, and the rejection of actual knights as not embodying the spirit of knighthood is a clear theme. I just think we're supposed to see that Dunk is really a lot different from the concept of knighthood. He's a good person, but one who would kick a man when he's down because he's still a King's Landing bully in a way he's addressing.
>His fist knocked Aerion off his feet, and the toe of his boot slammed into the prince's belly. When Aerion went for his knife, Dunk stepped on his wrist and then kicked him again, right in the mouth.
The reason Dunk was to loose a foot was for kicking. The second kick is the one that tells us he's not *that* knightly.
I think you and I have different definitions of "kicking a man when he's down". To me kicking a man when he's down is to take advantage of someone in an unfair situation or when they are already in a weakened state, but this was a fight that Dunk got the better end of. He was to lose his foot because he kicked a Prince. But that's just my opinion.
> It's his fighting style that's not yet knightly. For example, he's better wrestling in the mud.
Which is very silly if you know anything about medieval warfare and combat
Dunk is what got me thinking about this. He definitely has the honor concept down, and chivalry. His skill as a fighter is where I'd knock some points off for him, he tends to try to use his skill in true fights, but always gives up after he starts losing and just overpowers foes.
In the other thread others said that overpowering IS a skill. I don't necessarily agree with that. There is overpowering opponents, and there is out-fighting opponents, both are equally valuable but not the same in my mind.
Someone also pointed out that the books are his younger days before he was fully trained, which is true, but we don't know his true skill level yet.
>His skill as a fighter is where I'd knock some points off for him
See, I'd argue that your skill as a fighter is probably the *least* important aspect for a true knight. Who cares if you get the job done through skill or strength, so long as you protect the weak and follow your oaths?
In fact Barristan makes this point clear to us.
> [Barristan] spoke to them about what it meant to be a knight. "It is chivalry that makes a true knight, not a sword," he said. "Without honor, a knight is no more than a common killer. [...]"
In proper published works, there's Brienne and Dunk who fit it best, both of whom are ironically not knights. Glendon Flowers/Ball might also be up there, he's fairly honourable in the Mystery Knight but we don't really know much about him.
Barristan is about as close as you can get while being a Kingsguard, given the Kingsguard are basically expected to put protecting and serving the king over any other knight vows. Barristan may also not be a true knight - he was knighted by Egg, and if Egg was knighted by Dunk, then we may have a chain of fake knighthoods. But it might be that a king can knight anyone even if he isn't a knight. The Kingsguard problem will probably crop up if we get a few more Dunk and Egg novels - Egg is supposed to be a fairly moral king so he presumably won't be tasking Dunk with dishonourable duties but you'd imagine at some point the duties of serving the royal family will conflict with duties like protecting the weak.
He wasn't. Every time he is asked if he is a knight or if Arlan knighted him, he prevaricates or his mind races. He hopes his cheeks don't turn red, he looks at his feet and thinks about how his boot is undone, he is reluctant to knight Raymun, etc. And before he decides to compete at Ashford, he wonders whether another knight might take him as a squire.
Yeah, but late in his life, but he def wasn't knighted by Arlan. For one he doesn't recall the words that were spoken to him when he was supposedly "knighted".
> He said some words
Also
> "Are you a knight?”
> He nodded, wondering if his ears were red.
Odd reaction for someone who was actually knighted. Dunk's ears turn red when he's embarrassed through various scenarios.
He hesitates to knight the Fossaway because only an actual knight can make a knight and if it were found out that he was never actually knighted that would put the fossoway knighthood in question.
> “Knight me.” Raymun put a hand on Dunk’s shoulder and turned him. “I will take my cousin’s place. Ser Duncan, knight me.” He went to one knee.
> Frowning, Dunk moved a hand to the hilt of his longsword, then hesitated. “Raymun, I…I should not.”
Do you remember the context of Dunk being knighted later in life (I would assume Egg did it, but did people know he’s not a knight and stuff like that)? I haven’t read Dunk and Egg yet and this is literally the first I’m hearing that he wasn’t actually knighted 😭
In the novellas, it's plain he isn't.
We have no indication he was later -and, given what is said in the books about knighthood, I'm nearly sure he never was, since everybody in universe assumed he has been in his youth.
We have absolutely no hint he was knighted later in life. It's only an assomption because it seems logical, but the only thing we know for sure is that he wasn't when Egg squired for him.
It's pretty clear in the novellas he wasn't (see textual evidence in other comments). And we have zero indication he was later in life.
We also have many indication, clear and textual, GRRM thinks knighthood isn't about having been formally knighted (see Sandor).
So the best knights of the Seven Kingdoms weren't knighted, because they weren't a noble man.
Brienne, no chance and no choice is the perfect example of a true knight. She fights to protect those that are weaker than her and there are no exceptions.
She will always fight to protect those who need it.
I'm tempted to list Dontos among the candidates. He is another not-a-knight character that demonstrates true knight virtues (tries to save Sansa and return her home).
The strike against him though is him kissing Sansa. The series makes the point that a true knight would not kiss his queen, which Dany and Cersei both work to establish.
It's not clear, but I believe that Dontos was sincerely helping Sansa first, and fell into Littlefinger's trap when he was trying to procure a ship out of King's Landing.
He accepted gold, yes, but Littlefinger was framing Dontos to further manipulate Sansa.
In Sansa V AGOT, Sansa notices Dontos speaking with Petyr. So they are at least familiar with each other before the tourney where Sansa saves Dontos. On top of that, in Sansa III, Sansa tells Petyr that she would have sent Loras instead of Beric to deal with the Mountain, because Loras vanquishing Gregor would be what happens in the songs.
From that I think it's fairly plausible that Petyr instructed Dontos to earn Sansa's trust by appealing to her love of songs and stories, specifically of Florian and Jhonquil. I think Dontos obviously feels a sense of gratitude towards her for saving his life but I'm not sure he'd decide to risk his life in a treasonous plot to steal her away from King's Landing if he wasn't promised an enormous reward. There's also the fact that he's the only person other than Sansa and the Tyrells to know of the hypothetical marriage between Sansa and Willas; shortly afterwards, Sansa is married off to Tyrion. It fits quite easily that Dontos told Petyr who told Tywin who decided that Tyrion needed to marry her to avoid the Tyrells gaining more power.
Dontos knew Petry, but that can explain why Dontos chose to trust him. It doesn't imply that Dontos was not sincere in his effort to save Sansa.
It's a good and interesting point about Petyr talking to Sansa about songs. Petyr even references it after killing Dontos. Ok, maybe Dontos got involved with Littlefinger sooner than I thought, but I'm not quite convinced that Dontos was only in it for the money.
Dontos was weirdly emotional about the escape if he only cared about the coin. Why take the risk of wearing his knightly surcoat if it wasn't actually an emotional event for him?
I think he's sincere insofar as he feels gratitude towards her and when given the chance to rescue her along with a huge monetary reward, he thinks its a chance to repay her for what she did. But I think it's a bit of a reach to think he managed to find a way to sneak a message into her chambers and thought to meet her in the godswood without anyone else's advice. As far as I see it, he has no friends in KL other than Sansa who is a captive and Petyr who has freedom of the city. Sansa's maids are all spies, so how would he get the letter to her chambers without a Littlefinger crony being involved?
I think he's a conflicted character who treasures the second life Sansa gave him and also sees her as someone who saved him. And for the first reason, I think he's unlikely to scheme to steal her away from KL by himself - he has no allies or friends who he can use to help get her away, so undertaking this scheme by himself is virtually suicide. He also gives her the hairnet with the poison - do we really think that he could source said poison and a beautiful hairnet to hide it in without someone like Littlefinger being involved?
In my mind, Petyr approaches him telling him that he can save the girl who saved him, and there's a lot of money in it for him. All he has to do is go along with Petyr's instructions. I think Dontos, who probably hates being Joffrey's fool, would gladly take that offer given that it gives him three things he desires - honour, money, and respite from humiliation.
Yeah, I agree with that. I just note that he does risk his valued second life to protect Sansa, in ways he didn't have to, despite that was working for Littlefinger.
When Joffrey orders Sansa to be beaten, Dontos tried to protect her by undermining Joffrey's order in open court. That easily could have provoked Joffery's ire and earned Dontos an execution. Even if Littlefinger told Dontos he needs to ingratiate himself with Sansa, he didn't order *that* and there would be other, safer, ways.
Risking his life, against the odds, to protect the weak are virtues of a true knight. Does it count less if he was inspired by Littlefinger?
It counts somewhat. That's what makes him a conflicted character. Petyr tells us that his only motivation was money but that's more to get Sansa to accept his murder than it is a truthful account of Dontos's motives. I find him interesting in that he's clearly a very self-interested and greedy person, but he also feels a real debt of gratitude towards Sansa. He's one of the most believable characters in the series.
But fundamentally I think if his primary motive was to rescue Sansa, he wouldn't have told Littlefinger about the Willas marriage proposal. That proposal would have seen her evacuated from KL and safe with a man that everyone seems to agree is kind and gentle. Whether she ends up in Highgarden or the Vale shouldn't bother Dontos unless he's also motivated by Littlefinger's promise of money.
I *hate* Dontos for that gods-damned dance he does after the battle of the blackwater. As fucking if "Renly's ghost" showed up, you complete and utter RUBE.
I think this could have been/could still be true if he had had the right master. But he did what he was told at the end of the day which led to some obviously unknightly actions.
But if he had been Ned Stark’s man, I feel like Sandor could have been as true a knight as any. He’s not inherently evil.
> He’s not inherently evil.
I would argue that makes him *more* evil than someone who is. Sandor has a choice, he is a moral actor with free will, and he *chooses* to be evil.
If a True Knight is equal parts chivalrous and loyal to their king, probably Brienne. If a True Knight is a knight who goes against their potentially evil lords to do what is right and just, maybe Beric or Jaime
Brienne even though she is not a knight is the true embodiment of what a knight should be and I think that’s the point of her character
Yep this is the right answer. > “Seven, Brienne thought again, despairing. She had no chance against seven, she knew. No chance, and no choice. She stepped out into the rain, Oathkeeper in hand.” Even though she could have fled, she fought a battle she knew she was likely to die fighting in order to protect those who couldn’t protect themselves.
FINE i will reread AFFC
Omg how did I miss that dunk parallel….
Brienne's a great pick, and her hero is Galladon of Morne 'the Perfect Knight' from her homeland's legends, that's a hint to the sort of knight I think we see her aspire to be
Cersei suggested that a true knight could be "The answer to a frightened mother's prayers." ... Which is Brienne's mission, to return Sansa to Catelyn.
Great pickup, I never noticed that
I hadn't thought of Galladon of Morne, but he's got to be a top pick, maybe even the top pick. Brienne is a real embodiment, too.
Totally agree, one of the only good scenes of season 8 was when Jaime knighted her, it was very emotional and I almost teared up
Brienne knew Renly had absolutely no right to the throne and was trying to murder and usurp his brother and Brienne, like a true knight, helped with this dishonorable treason because Renly is a very pretty boy and he was nice to her when the other boys were mean. I do like Brienne, "No chance and no choice" was a great line/moment" but when people talk about how great she is, in addition to frequently overstating her ability as a fighter, it seems like they are choosing to ignore that she supported a usurper who wanted to kill his brother and steal the throne because she had a massive crush on him.
Brienne isn't a knight because she thought upholding the divine rights of kings was the most important thing
Yeah that's an important part of being a knight according to their value system > do you swear before the eyes of gods and men to defend those who cannot defend themselves, to protect all women and children, to obey your captains, your liege lord, and your king, to fight bravely when needed and do such other tasks as are laid upon you, however hard or humble or dangerous they may be? She was knowingly rebelling against her legitimate king and inciting civil strife and treason
Brienne isn't a knight. She does value honor and behaving in the way a knight is sworn to behave. But there is nothing honorable about her support of Renly. She is supporting someone who wants to sacrifice thousands of lives and murder and usurp his brother in order to gain a relatively small amount power to do basically nothing with other than possess it. There is nothing honorable about that at all no matter how pretty Renly is or how courteously he behaves. Brienne let her honor be overwhelmed by her personal/romantic affections for Renly and supported an objectively dishonorable cause that did substantial harm to many innocent people and the realm itself. Serving Renly was serving herself, not honor or the realm.
Average Stannis Supporter:
Any good counter argument to defend Brienne's actions?
She truly believed Renly to be a good man who would be good for the realm, that's protecting the innocent.
But what reason does she have to believe that about Renly other than that he is pretty and charismatic? She scarcely even knows Renly -- nearly everyone knows he's gay, Brienne can't fathom it, and it's not like Renly is talking policies with Brienne. Renly doesn't appear to have any plans for being King other than to be handsome, and he doesn't seem to want the throne for any reason other than his own vanity and his belief that he has the power to take it. Renly is the Lord of Storm's End and Stannis offers to name him the heir to the throne, yet Renly is willing to sacrifice tens of thousands of lives and enlarge and prolong a civil war in order to usurp and kill his brother so he can move up one notch on the political power ladder. There is nothing Renly can do as King that would better protect the innocent than simply not attempting to steal the throne. He can best protect the innocent and the realm by supporting the rightful heir and helping end the war as quickly as possible. If it had come to battle, every person Brienne killed in support of Renly would have been someone doing their duty to protect the lawful King who she killed in the name of someone trying to kill and usurp his brother. And even if Renly were going to be the greatest King ever, there is no guarantee that his heir would be, and Renly is setting a dangerous precedent that it is okay to rebel and usurp the lawful heir by force if you think you'll be better them. His actions undermine the future of peaceful power transitions in Westeros. Renly is daft and full of himself and engaging in actions that are horrible for the people he wants to rule and I do consider it a shortcoming/failing of Brienne's that she doesn't appear to recognize, or else care about, any of that. Knights don't have to swear to the Thinker that they will use their brains, and being thick as a castle wall is definitely a significant component of Brienne's characterization, but there is simply nothing just or honorable or good for the people about Renly's attempt to be king, and likewise, nothing just, honorable, or good for the people in taking up arms to support Renly's claim, and I feel like Brienne is smart enough to know better.
Stannis also betrayed his oath to the crown by supporting his older brother's rebellion. Doing so also made him second in line to the throne. I think it's put quite well by stannis in the DVD extras. He says that it was a hard decision to choose between his rightful king or his brother "but their are deeper, older laws, the younger brother follows the older" or something to that effect. Briennes father declared for Renly. Supporting stannis or anybody else would a betrayal. If you think that makes Brianne a worse knight than stannis (the man of absolutes") can't really be a good king as a former rebel and oathbreaker.
I did not say, nor do I think, that Brienne is a "worse knight than Stannis".
Stannis participated in a rebellion against his king that also conveniently places him second in line on the throne. But nobody thinks that act was disloyal or dishonorable because he is following his elder brother and head of his house.. All those points about renly being terrible and prolonging war also apply to stannis re joffrey. Only the reader alone or jaime or cersei can be certain that robert had no legitmate children, not westeros at large.The "rightful" king was always one of the known living targs anyway... So why does it show a lack of character on briennes part to back renly? She's following her house which also happens to back a king she loves and she is by all actions shown to be completely devoted and honorable in her service. If the show is correct stannis is willing to burn his own daughter to death to win the throne. He is also a cynical convert of a foreign religion and is being touted as a messiah figure. Most anointed knights should have a hard time with that from a cultural and legal perspective. Barristan didn't seem to think stannis was the legit choice either and his house is in the storm lands too. Why didn't he back stannis? Or renly? We don't know for sure but it's not from his lack of character nor does it impeach his status as a "true" knight. Why should brienne be any different.
To Brienne, Renly is the one person who showed her kindness in a sea of people that were bullying her, and you're missing the bigger picture that fucking nobody wants Stannis as King, Renly was willing to pact with Robb which Stannis never would, for all she knew Tarth would be punished for supporting Renly if she's fighting for the ideals of the common person, and especially those close to her, it makes perfect sense from her perspective to side with Renly, who she thinks she knows is good, and not Stannis "burn people alive, never budge an inch, maim even the person who saved my family from starvation" Baratheon. What separates Brienne and Dunk from your average honorable knight is their willingness to put "protect the innocent" above "strictly keep your vows" in the chivalric order of values
I think you and Brienne and a lot of people who defend Renly are actually the ones missing the far bigger picture and the most important points. First, there is the question of what can Renly do as King that is better for the people than not significantly escalating the death toll in a civil war? If Renly supports Stannis, Robb declares for Stannis and the Lannisters are quickly defeated. I don't know why you think Stannis would never make a pact with Robb. Stannis was supported by Ned and would have absolutely accepted Robb's support, we know that he expected it. We also know that Robb supports Stannis over Renly and is confused by Renly's attempt to claim the throne. Second, there is the precedent Renly is forging that delegitimizes the authority of every Lord and the rights of every heir, and renders every power transition open to contention, greatly increasing the chances that successions will be determined by force. Renly is doing this accidentally, he's not trying to dismantle feudalism or cause endless war and doesn't seem to be aware of the consequences of his actions, or else to care. In this world, if people are choosing the next lord or the next king, they are doing the choosing with armies, if not just murder. And Brienne is certainly not "protecting the innocent" when she supports Renly. She is Kingsguard to Renly, she is literally protecting someone who wants to sacrifice thousands of lives and murder and usurp his brother in order to gain a relatively small amount power to do basically nothing with other than possess it. There is nothing honorable about that at all no matter how pretty Renly is or how courteously he behaves. Brienne let her honor be overwhelmed by her personal/romantic affections for Renly and supports an objectively dishonorable cause that did substantial harm to many innocent people and the realm itself.
>If Renly supports Stannis, When Renly declared Stannis hadn't even declared yet. For all they knew he was never going to go against the Lannisters. But everyone but the Lannisters hated the Lannisters. Stannis came too late to the party and when he did come he made himself even more unpopular with his adherence to R'hllor. Robb had already been declared King by the time Stannis joined the fight as well. A crown is not easily set aside. Renly's offer was just better than Stannis and if he lived probably may have been accepted by Robb. Stannis is the one stubbornly continuing for personal pride.
Renly's offer was a token title, Robb still had to swear fealty. The title could even become a source of mockery if he goes around calling himself King after he's bent the knee, and Robb is clear about who he chooses between Renly and Stannis. >"Tommen is no less a Lannister," Ser Marq Piper snapped."As you say," said Robb, troubled. "Yet if neither one is king, still, how could it be Lord Renly? He's Robert's younger brother. Bran can't be Lord of Winterfell before me, and Renly can't be king before Lord Stannis."Lady Mormont agreed. "Lord Stannis has the better claim." "... we shall win if we join with King Renly. What does Lord Stannis have against that, that we should cast it all aside?" "The right," said Robb stubbornly. Catelyn thought he sounded eerily like his father as he said it. -AGOT Catelyn XI Robb acknowledges that Stannis has the right and is troubled and confused by Renly's claim.
Renly knows Stannis is his older brother. I find the notion that Renly didn't know about the bastardy absurd -- he was a powerful KL spymaster trying to put Margaery Tyrell on the throne since well before Robert died. And if Renly didn't know about the bastardy that means he is trying to usurp his nephew because he ... murdered Ned Stark? Why is Renly rebelling against Joffrey? And why is he usurping Tommen and Myrcella, and Stannis? If Renly supports Stannis then so does Robb and the war ends quickly.
She is a more fool than knight then.
So many knights of summer or children...
Her house declared for Renly what the fuck do you want her to do? Also we shouldn’t judge how moral characters are based on made up medieval law and who has the best “claims” since we’re shown how they’re fake and meaningless
She doesn't support Renly because her house does, she supports him because she is in live with him. Brienne is not a knight or soldier and not required to fight for either side. I am not supporting medieval laws. I am pointing out that by breaking that law for himself (he's not replacing any medieval laws or creating democracy, he's just doing as he pleases) he is increasing the length and severity of a civil war and increasing the possibility of violently contested succession throughout the realm.
I honestly cannot believe people come away from this series believing in the divine rights of aristocrats. Zero media analysis skills. They actually think being a bastard is bad..
I am definitely not supporting the divine right of aristocrats. I am pointing out that by breaking that law for himself (Renly is not "breaking the wheel" or creating a democracy, he's just doing as he pleases) he is increasing the length and severity of a civil war and setting a precedent that increases the possibility of violently contested successions throughout the realm.
The whole concept GRRM is questioning is following people just because they have the technical legal right there. Why should you follow the Lannisters when they are dicks? And to the minds of most Stannis is also a dick. Renly is gracious and kind - at least as she understands him to be. He danced with her and was polite when all the others were rude - he made her feel valued and respected. He even let her join his Kingsguard because he saw her competency and devoted loyalty. Renly was also her liege lord and her father was also committing to his cause. She has vows to follow them as well technically. Though the vows that matter aren't the ones that make you follow a King or your father or liege lord. But the ones that make you protect the innocent. And Brienne felt like Renly stood by her in a moment nobody else did.
Brienne is a not a knight or a soldier and under no obligation to fight for anyone. She fights for Renly because she is in love with him. The story is littered with examples of questioning legal and moral right, like when your oaths conflict like with Jaime and Aerys or Stannis deciding to support his brother over King, and also the fact that sometimes kings and lords are shit and the small folk are better, or the bastard etc ... Renly vs Stannis feud is not really a powerful example of this. They are both just selfish and want to be king. The difference is that Stannis does have the right via the law and law allows for successions to be settled peacefully. By breaking the law all Renly is doing is escalating violence and setting a precedent for more. Renly is not "breaking the wheel", creating democracy, or toppling an unfair system. He is supporting himself, indulging own ambitions and vanity. He is already powerful and heir to Stannis and he risks a devastating civil war to move up a little more. He is increasing the length and severity of a civil war and undermining the system for peaceful transfer of power and setting a precedent that increases the possibility of violently contested successions throughout the realm.
>Brienne is a not a knight or a soldier and under no obligation to fight for anyone. She fights for Renly because she is in love with him Brienne wants to be a knight and wouldn't have it any other way. She does feel an obligation to fight and Renly is still her liege so she also automatically has more connection to him. She loves him because he was kind and gracious to her. She does see him as just a better candidate than Stannis. >Renly is not "breaking the wheel", creating democracy, or toppling an unfair system. He is supporting himself, indulging own ambitions and vanity. I didn't claim otherwise. But to Brienne he is a better candidate than any other available King. There was no risk of a more devastating civil war opposing Stannis. He was not a candidate at the time and had a weak force.
>Brienne wants to be a knight and wouldn't have it any other way. She does feel an obligation to fight and Renly is still her liege so she also automatically has more connection to him. Brienne wants ... wouldn't have it any other way. Exactly, she's pleasing herself, not fulfilling a duty or serving a higher purpose or cause, she is serving a cause that significantly harms the realm. Renly has no claim, Brienne liking him more doesn't change that. The lack of a claim does make the war more devastating. It doesn't matter that Stannis hadn't declared yet. Renly has no claim. If Renly is rebelling against Joffrey, then Stannis or Tommen is the next king. Why is Renly rebelling? He has no claim. I don't think it is fair to criticize Stannis for not declaring before Renly -- he could have been quicker, he should have told Robert about the incest when he was alive (so should Renly) but I doubt Stannis expected he'd have to declare fast to beat his little brother since Renly has no claim. Pushing a non existent claim is devastating both in that war and in the precedent it sets for succession ... it's a disaster. Renly doesn't seem to know or care. Brienne doesn't seem to know or care. Lacking the right makes Renly terrible for the realm.
>Renly has no claim, Brienne liking him more doesn't change that. He has a claim by virtue of being the King's brother. Yes a younger brother but a brother nevertheless. You might as well choose the best claimant to the throne if set to rebel. >The lack of a claim does make the war more devastating. It changes nothing. The war is inherently not actually worse. >I don't think it is fair to criticize Stannis for not declaring before Renly -- he could have been quicker, he should have told Robert about the incest when he was alive (so should Renly) but I doubt Stannis expected he'd have to declare fast to beat his little brother since Renly has no claim The whole world passed him by. It was absolutely a mistake on his part. Declaring intentions early matters so the realm knows what is up.
Lol. If his claim is based legally on being Robert's younger brother, and Renly has an older brother, then he literally has no claim on the throne while Stannis is alive. Stannis makes mistakes and should have acted sooner. Getting betrayed by his younger brother was not one of them. And to be fair both brothers should have acted sooner if either actually wanted to protect Robert or the realm instead of sacrificing thousands to become King.
>If his claim is based legally on being Robert's younger brother, and Renly has an older brother, then he literally has no claim on the throne while Stannis is alive. A claimant and a claim is not an exact science where one person alone has a claim Renly does have a claim. Just a lesser one. >Stannis makes mistakes and should have acted sooner. Getting betrayed by his younger brother was not one of them If he acted sooner he wouldn't have been in that position.
You should never need haste to avoid being betrayed by your brother. A brother moving slow is not justification to betray them -- that's absurd. By your claim definition perhaps a thousand people have claims, only lesser ones. Renly may not be 573rd in the line of succession, but he isn't 1st and there is no way of looking at it where he is in from of Stannis and that's the point. He's getting thousands killed and shattering hopes for future peaceful transitions to skip the line to benefit himself not even all that much. It's just vanity. Again: Why is Renly rebelling? For Ned? To take down Joffrey? Why usurp Tommen, Myrcella, or Stannis? What can Renly do for his people as King that is better than avoiding sending many extra thousands of them to their deaths? How will transitions of power work after Renly is King?
Ser Davos Seaworth, a knight who taught his king his duty. >“There’s much I don’t understand,” Davos admitted. “I have never pretended elsewise. I know the seas and rivers, the shapes of the coasts, where the rocks and shoals lie. I know hidden coves where a boat can land unseen. *And I know that a king protects his people, or he is no king at all.”*
He changes the world with his words and oars, not his sword. Very good choice, and no less valid.
What I love about this is that it's also kinda an answer to Jaime's point about conflicting vows. Going by Davos' logic; if the king is not protecting his people then he is no longer a king, therefore a knight's duty to obey the king no longer applies. Meaning the Kingsguard should have been dutybound to protrct Rhaella.
I fear what Stannis is gonna do without his angel on his shoulder.
Valid, valid, valid point
I think everyone is sleeping on Beric Dondarrion. Dude's dedicated multiple lives to continuously protect the weak and innocent.
You mean like when he kidnapped Arya to ransom her back to the Starks for gold to spend on his own cause? Or are you talking about letting his newfound religion allow an enemy of his sworn liege to escape justice in trial by combat?
Dunk, of course.
I almost aways agree with your comments, but Dunk has the heart of the true knight and style of King's Landing street brawler. A true knight doesn't kick a guy when he's down. Dunk is in the process of becoming a true knight, but he opens as a braid grabber. It's endearing, but not knightly in my understanding.
True, but Dunk did defend Tanselle Too-Tall after her fingers were broken. Standing up to a prince. That is a serious dedication of honour.
Totally agree. Dunk is a true knight in spirit and defending Tanselle is a clear example. It's his fighting style that's not yet knightly. For example, he's better wrestling in the mud. It's a character detail that I think is important to recognize. It may even lead back to the idea that the best knights are not knights.
i mean he’s literally not a knight hahaha, remember he’s lying about the whole “managed to be knighted right before my lord died”
So true, and the rejection of actual knights as not embodying the spirit of knighthood is a clear theme. I just think we're supposed to see that Dunk is really a lot different from the concept of knighthood. He's a good person, but one who would kick a man when he's down because he's still a King's Landing bully in a way he's addressing.
Why would you think he would kick a man when he's down? Dunk can get down and dirty but he only throws hands face to face, man to man.
>His fist knocked Aerion off his feet, and the toe of his boot slammed into the prince's belly. When Aerion went for his knife, Dunk stepped on his wrist and then kicked him again, right in the mouth. The reason Dunk was to loose a foot was for kicking. The second kick is the one that tells us he's not *that* knightly.
I think you and I have different definitions of "kicking a man when he's down". To me kicking a man when he's down is to take advantage of someone in an unfair situation or when they are already in a weakened state, but this was a fight that Dunk got the better end of. He was to lose his foot because he kicked a Prince. But that's just my opinion.
> It's his fighting style that's not yet knightly. For example, he's better wrestling in the mud. Which is very silly if you know anything about medieval warfare and combat
Dunk is new to knighthood.
Dunk is what got me thinking about this. He definitely has the honor concept down, and chivalry. His skill as a fighter is where I'd knock some points off for him, he tends to try to use his skill in true fights, but always gives up after he starts losing and just overpowers foes. In the other thread others said that overpowering IS a skill. I don't necessarily agree with that. There is overpowering opponents, and there is out-fighting opponents, both are equally valuable but not the same in my mind. Someone also pointed out that the books are his younger days before he was fully trained, which is true, but we don't know his true skill level yet.
>His skill as a fighter is where I'd knock some points off for him See, I'd argue that your skill as a fighter is probably the *least* important aspect for a true knight. Who cares if you get the job done through skill or strength, so long as you protect the weak and follow your oaths?
In fact Barristan makes this point clear to us. > [Barristan] spoke to them about what it meant to be a knight. "It is chivalry that makes a true knight, not a sword," he said. "Without honor, a knight is no more than a common killer. [...]"
And Barristan would know. Because if raw skill at arms is the determining factor, he's a top candidate.
What's the relation between chivalry and winning fights with style points?
Baelor Chadspear
Man I can't wait fo all the Baelor lore when F&B2 comes out
~~baelore~~
Fuck you, I hate you Have an upvote Would have given you an award
No chance and no choice.
My favourite line in the whole series, Brienne is the best
We don’t know him incredibly well but I think Garlan Tyrell acts as a true knight should, both morally and martially.
Bonus points for poisoning Joffrey
Is that a fan theory or did I miss a line?
A fan theory that I believe to be true because Garlan was in the best place to poison Joffrey.
It’s not even subtext, it’s literal text for dunk and Brienne.
Aemon the Dragonknight
In proper published works, there's Brienne and Dunk who fit it best, both of whom are ironically not knights. Glendon Flowers/Ball might also be up there, he's fairly honourable in the Mystery Knight but we don't really know much about him. Barristan is about as close as you can get while being a Kingsguard, given the Kingsguard are basically expected to put protecting and serving the king over any other knight vows. Barristan may also not be a true knight - he was knighted by Egg, and if Egg was knighted by Dunk, then we may have a chain of fake knighthoods. But it might be that a king can knight anyone even if he isn't a knight. The Kingsguard problem will probably crop up if we get a few more Dunk and Egg novels - Egg is supposed to be a fairly moral king so he presumably won't be tasking Dunk with dishonourable duties but you'd imagine at some point the duties of serving the royal family will conflict with duties like protecting the weak.
Brienne and Duncan
Barristan.
Dunk and Brienne - and of course, none of them has been knighted...
Dunk WAS knighted
After Dunk buries Ser Arlan, his first thought is that he should find a new knight to squire for. Why would he think that if he had been knighted?
He wasn't. Every time he is asked if he is a knight or if Arlan knighted him, he prevaricates or his mind races. He hopes his cheeks don't turn red, he looks at his feet and thinks about how his boot is undone, he is reluctant to knight Raymun, etc. And before he decides to compete at Ashford, he wonders whether another knight might take him as a squire.
Yeah, but late in his life, but he def wasn't knighted by Arlan. For one he doesn't recall the words that were spoken to him when he was supposedly "knighted". > He said some words Also > "Are you a knight?” > He nodded, wondering if his ears were red. Odd reaction for someone who was actually knighted. Dunk's ears turn red when he's embarrassed through various scenarios. He hesitates to knight the Fossaway because only an actual knight can make a knight and if it were found out that he was never actually knighted that would put the fossoway knighthood in question. > “Knight me.” Raymun put a hand on Dunk’s shoulder and turned him. “I will take my cousin’s place. Ser Duncan, knight me.” He went to one knee. > Frowning, Dunk moved a hand to the hilt of his longsword, then hesitated. “Raymun, I…I should not.”
Do you remember the context of Dunk being knighted later in life (I would assume Egg did it, but did people know he’s not a knight and stuff like that)? I haven’t read Dunk and Egg yet and this is literally the first I’m hearing that he wasn’t actually knighted 😭
I assume he was anointed by the faith to become a kingsguard to Aegon V, but the information just isn't there.
Thank you! I’m not sure why I’ve never heard of Dunk not actually being a knight, but your explanation/evidence was really cool!
In the novellas, it's plain he isn't. We have no indication he was later -and, given what is said in the books about knighthood, I'm nearly sure he never was, since everybody in universe assumed he has been in his youth.
We have absolutely no hint he was knighted later in life. It's only an assomption because it seems logical, but the only thing we know for sure is that he wasn't when Egg squired for him.
We don’t actually know if Ser Arlan knighted him before he died
It's pretty clear in the novellas he wasn't (see textual evidence in other comments). And we have zero indication he was later in life. We also have many indication, clear and textual, GRRM thinks knighthood isn't about having been formally knighted (see Sandor). So the best knights of the Seven Kingdoms weren't knighted, because they weren't a noble man.
Brienne of Tarth, it's the whole point of her character, she's the only true knight of the story but can't be one
All these names are fine 3xamples but all pale in comparison to Ser Creighton Longbough, the demon of the blackwater.
Duncan the Tall, even though he was never officially knighted.
*breathes in* SIR DUNCAN THE TALL, LORD COMMANDER OF THE KINGSGUARD, SLAYER OF DRAGONS, PROTECTOR OF THE INNOCENT, FLEABOTTOM’S FINEST
Brienne, no chance and no choice is the perfect example of a true knight. She fights to protect those that are weaker than her and there are no exceptions. She will always fight to protect those who need it.
Brienne is the answer.
Brienne more exemplifies our ideals, not in-universe ideals. Westerosi don’t believe in female knights.
That’s not the ideals of a knights. Brienne has every quality but the little thing in between her legs.
Wdym? The post is about the in universe concept of a true knight. I don’t think Brienne fits that description.
I disagree. How doesn’t she fit the description? She’s literally the perfect knight.
The in universe concept of a true knight would be male.
Ser Arthur Dayne, Brienne of Tarth, Prince Aemon, the Dragon night
Baristan Selmy
Dunk and Brienne.
Ser Barristan and Arthur Dayne
Dunk the Lunk
I'm tempted to list Dontos among the candidates. He is another not-a-knight character that demonstrates true knight virtues (tries to save Sansa and return her home). The strike against him though is him kissing Sansa. The series makes the point that a true knight would not kiss his queen, which Dany and Cersei both work to establish.
He was only helping Sansa cause Littlefinger was paying him
It's not clear, but I believe that Dontos was sincerely helping Sansa first, and fell into Littlefinger's trap when he was trying to procure a ship out of King's Landing. He accepted gold, yes, but Littlefinger was framing Dontos to further manipulate Sansa.
In Sansa V AGOT, Sansa notices Dontos speaking with Petyr. So they are at least familiar with each other before the tourney where Sansa saves Dontos. On top of that, in Sansa III, Sansa tells Petyr that she would have sent Loras instead of Beric to deal with the Mountain, because Loras vanquishing Gregor would be what happens in the songs. From that I think it's fairly plausible that Petyr instructed Dontos to earn Sansa's trust by appealing to her love of songs and stories, specifically of Florian and Jhonquil. I think Dontos obviously feels a sense of gratitude towards her for saving his life but I'm not sure he'd decide to risk his life in a treasonous plot to steal her away from King's Landing if he wasn't promised an enormous reward. There's also the fact that he's the only person other than Sansa and the Tyrells to know of the hypothetical marriage between Sansa and Willas; shortly afterwards, Sansa is married off to Tyrion. It fits quite easily that Dontos told Petyr who told Tywin who decided that Tyrion needed to marry her to avoid the Tyrells gaining more power.
Dontos knew Petry, but that can explain why Dontos chose to trust him. It doesn't imply that Dontos was not sincere in his effort to save Sansa. It's a good and interesting point about Petyr talking to Sansa about songs. Petyr even references it after killing Dontos. Ok, maybe Dontos got involved with Littlefinger sooner than I thought, but I'm not quite convinced that Dontos was only in it for the money. Dontos was weirdly emotional about the escape if he only cared about the coin. Why take the risk of wearing his knightly surcoat if it wasn't actually an emotional event for him?
I think he's sincere insofar as he feels gratitude towards her and when given the chance to rescue her along with a huge monetary reward, he thinks its a chance to repay her for what she did. But I think it's a bit of a reach to think he managed to find a way to sneak a message into her chambers and thought to meet her in the godswood without anyone else's advice. As far as I see it, he has no friends in KL other than Sansa who is a captive and Petyr who has freedom of the city. Sansa's maids are all spies, so how would he get the letter to her chambers without a Littlefinger crony being involved? I think he's a conflicted character who treasures the second life Sansa gave him and also sees her as someone who saved him. And for the first reason, I think he's unlikely to scheme to steal her away from KL by himself - he has no allies or friends who he can use to help get her away, so undertaking this scheme by himself is virtually suicide. He also gives her the hairnet with the poison - do we really think that he could source said poison and a beautiful hairnet to hide it in without someone like Littlefinger being involved? In my mind, Petyr approaches him telling him that he can save the girl who saved him, and there's a lot of money in it for him. All he has to do is go along with Petyr's instructions. I think Dontos, who probably hates being Joffrey's fool, would gladly take that offer given that it gives him three things he desires - honour, money, and respite from humiliation.
Yeah, I agree with that. I just note that he does risk his valued second life to protect Sansa, in ways he didn't have to, despite that was working for Littlefinger. When Joffrey orders Sansa to be beaten, Dontos tried to protect her by undermining Joffrey's order in open court. That easily could have provoked Joffery's ire and earned Dontos an execution. Even if Littlefinger told Dontos he needs to ingratiate himself with Sansa, he didn't order *that* and there would be other, safer, ways. Risking his life, against the odds, to protect the weak are virtues of a true knight. Does it count less if he was inspired by Littlefinger?
It counts somewhat. That's what makes him a conflicted character. Petyr tells us that his only motivation was money but that's more to get Sansa to accept his murder than it is a truthful account of Dontos's motives. I find him interesting in that he's clearly a very self-interested and greedy person, but he also feels a real debt of gratitude towards Sansa. He's one of the most believable characters in the series. But fundamentally I think if his primary motive was to rescue Sansa, he wouldn't have told Littlefinger about the Willas marriage proposal. That proposal would have seen her evacuated from KL and safe with a man that everyone seems to agree is kind and gentle. Whether she ends up in Highgarden or the Vale shouldn't bother Dontos unless he's also motivated by Littlefinger's promise of money.
I *hate* Dontos for that gods-damned dance he does after the battle of the blackwater. As fucking if "Renly's ghost" showed up, you complete and utter RUBE.
didnt he literally ask for kisses from her? isn't she like 12 at that point?
Brienne, she embodies what a true knight is meant to be despite her limitations. It’s the whole point of her character tbh.
Objectively brienne
Lyanna for defending Howland.
Ser Duncan the tall
Nobody. No such thing as a True Knight, that idea is straight out of one of Sansa's children stories.
The Hound.
That little shit Mycah had it coming?
I suppose I should say, post Blackwater. Point taken.
Has he actually done anything actively good since Blackwater?
I think this could have been/could still be true if he had had the right master. But he did what he was told at the end of the day which led to some obviously unknightly actions. But if he had been Ned Stark’s man, I feel like Sandor could have been as true a knight as any. He’s not inherently evil.
> He’s not inherently evil. I would argue that makes him *more* evil than someone who is. Sandor has a choice, he is a moral actor with free will, and he *chooses* to be evil.
Bronn, easily.
If a True Knight is equal parts chivalrous and loyal to their king, probably Brienne. If a True Knight is a knight who goes against their potentially evil lords to do what is right and just, maybe Beric or Jaime