Ned Stark Was Never A Game Of Thrones' Infallible Hero (A Song Of Ice And Fire Analysis) 

Doing bad things in the name of honor is the same reasoning that leads to Kingsguard standing by as Aerys burned people alive and abused his wife. An oath is more important than saving lives. Lets not forget Ned is the one that found Jamie after he killed Aerys, and without even so much as asking what happened, judged him and made him feel his scourn. Jamie, who cared more about protecting the people than an oath. honor and morality are not the same

Not to mention killing Lady, a direwolf, the sigil of his house, the omen doesn't get much darker than that.

I like the respect and kindness you show towards Sansa we rarely see and thst you realize Theon is a hostage

FINALLY someone sees why Gared being the one that gets executed by Ned is far more important in regards to the themes of the story and Ned's character. D&D most likely changed it to Will because Will is much younger and easier to sympathize with him. However like how you explained; Gared being a very old, well experienced member of the Night's Watch should have raised so much alarm bells, because of his age all of a sudden speaking madness was both unusual and rare. Sadly this is one of MANY nuances D&D and fans never realized.

reading back sansa’s chapters in book 1 and seeing her relationship with her dad makes me sad. he doesn’t know how to interact with his girly daughter, lyanna was never like her, and he neglects her for it. she’s the eldest girl in a highly powerful house, she was always destined to marry an important man and has A LOT of pressure on her and all she wanted was her parents approval. she gravitates towards her mother but ned and sansa are similar, they’re both highly principled, idealistic and have a strong sense of justice. she knows she can’t be like arya, and so she does everything right and proper thinking it’ll earn her parents love and respect. when she expects ned to scold arya for bringing him flowers, looking like a mess, she seems upset that arya can do everything wrong and still can’t get more appreciation and attention that she ever could by doing something right. the in-fighting between the two sisters, in my mind, is caused by their parents inadvertently not correcting the rivalry for love between them. in kings landing, he never really attempts to make up for things either, just getting a her a doll when she’s out grown them & he even leaves her to attend the tourney feast alone with only a drunken septa mordane to chaperone, if the hound wasn’t there to protect her then who knows what would have happened. when cat came to visit him and told him about how summer protected bran, he thinks of just maybe it was bad to have killed sansa’s direwolf. it’s no wonder she went to where she felt appreciated, like she could shine, like her mother always said she would in the capital, and right into the lap of the lannisters

Ned absolutely paid for his 'wrong choices', but I still see him, not as a Hero, but more as a very honorable man who is also Warden of the North, so that's like a king of his own country, who tried to do his best. He wasn't 'playing the game of thrones' but he got caught in it.

What bothers me about Ned and Sansa and the whole 'betrayal' thing is that Ned has multiple talks with Arya about the dangers of King's Landing and multiple moments where he bonds with his younger daughter but goes out of his way to avoid Sansa and never gives her any of the same warnings or talks as he does Arya. Hell, he tries to replace Lady with a doll and somehow wasn't aware his daughter hasn't played with dolls since she was 8. Sansa is like 13 in season 1. That's five years. Ned was so unaware of his eldest daughter that he didn't realize that for five years she hadn't played with dolls. Half a goddamn decade. That's like giving a ten year old a race car bed because they liked race cars when they were 5. In other words, he was incredibly neglectful of Sansa and obviously she was his least favorite child. He so clearly favored Arya because of her similarity to her aunt Lyanna and wild nature and even goes out of his way to hire Syrio to train her. Something tells me he would not have done the same for Sansa if she asked for something similar. He was pretty much fine with leaving her with only her Septa all day and some of the only interactions she had were with the Lannisters at that point. No wonder Sansa was closer to Cat and mimicked her when it came to beliefs and behavior and even Cat favored Bran and Rickon over her. She was basically the metaphorical redheaded stepchild of the family, the odd one out. Even as a young girl Sansa had so much potential and it was completely squandered because while she was praised for being a model lady she really wasn't given much attention or care at all. Sure, she physically wanted for nothing and had a happy family, but she was the odd one out. but of course she acts like any young girl might act in the beginning and thus everyone hated her while they loved characters like Arya specifically because they were a 'not like other girls' archetype, which you mentioned in your video about Arya and misogyny. The injustice done to her by her own family is just horrendous. So much could've been avoided if Ned simply had given Sansa the time of day.

Honestly I think Ned executing Lady parallels another supposedly good man in the series. For example Davos gets in the way of Stannis sacrificing Edric Storm for his blood. Stannis asks Davos a very utilitarian question, what is one boy's life to the safety of an entire kingdom and Davos quietly answers "Everything". I think that's really important to look at as Davos honestly could've stood by and done nothing. He has no family tie to Edric storm, his death would've been unfortunate but not really something he should concern himself with. But he directly opposes his king and the man he respects most in Westeros to uphold his principles. Davos gains nothing for saving Edric either, except maybe a clear conscience which it's not like anyone in Westeros gives a danm about that. Except he does, he sees something unjust and refuses to allow it.

Great analysis. I always felt so sad for Sansa & Lady. Definitely agree that metaphorically killing Lady is also killing his daughter, especially knowing there was a reason all the Stark children have a dire Wolf. I named my GSD Lady.

It’s so weird how people take a story that is so complex and handle it with no nuance, it will never make sense to me.

About Theon: in the very first chapter we see he is the one who brings Ice to Ned for the execution. Having your hostage carry your sword for executions is... certainly something. Whatever Ned's intentions with that were (also, how old Theon was when that started is certainly a question to ask), I can't help but think that Theon would probably interpret it as a reminder of his place.

This theme is also true when Ned insists that Stannis becomes king and so refuses Renly the throne, Despite Renly saying "do you still think good soldiers make good kings?". Renly said treason didn't matter in the days of usurping power from the mad king, so why should it matter now? Seemed a bit hypocritical. This was also repeated when Littlefinger suggested making Joffrey king (before we knew how abhorrent he was) and then seating Renly there if Joffrey became a problem by revealing his parents. It would have prevented a war with Stannis's invasion, and the subsequent wars. Ultimately he was a man of honour, duty, truth and law. The question is, what price do you put on truth?

I see Ned as the embodiment of honour and truth, but that's not always a good thing. Ned always does what he's told, always keeps his word, never breaks a vow, even if it makes Catelyn miserable, makes her hate Jon for something that never happened, makes him execute someone who doesn't deserve it. Right or wrong doesn't come into it, it's the Law. There's ice in the Stark's veins, and that can make them just as inhuman as if it were fire.

We tend to ignore the fact that the Starks also done f-up things troughout their history. However, because we get most of our story from the Starks perspective, we tend to project ourselves on them and make them "our good guy". The fact is the Starks is just as ruthless as other big and ancient houses. They did not get to rule the north by being nice and honourable. No, they did it through war and conquest.

I think it's interesting that the surviving Stark children in many ways represent overcoming a lot of Ned's flaws. Sansa is learning to read situations and play politics to be able to protect herself and potentially others. Arya is willing to punish evil to protect good even outside of norms. Bran is open-minded enough to leave north of the wall. Ned wouldn't have been willing to do any of those things the Stark kids are currently doing, and it's likely he would fail where they are finding ways to succeed.

Yeah Ned’s biggest blind spot was never questioning the status quo, he almost always bent the knee to what he considered legitimate authority even when he had the power to question it. It actually made him very predictable, because he was always gonna do what the other lords considered the right thing. It’s like Cersei said to him, your older brother was taught to lead and you were taught to follow.

Intriguing perspectives and great thought provoking arguments put forth. Sansa was a political sacrifice, Lady and Theon were sacrifices for obedience to the monarchs. Great insightful perspective of Ned. I would love a deeper dive the Starks inter family dynamics. I think Ned lost Sansa’s trust and confidence with the incident on the Trident and he continued to damage his relationship with her in the months after that.

Ya know I never caught on to that Ned and Gared connection, I thought his execution was messed up but understandable and never realised that Ned nearly had such a similar fate.

This is why I love ASOIAF, even the most honorable and morally driven characters do questionable and immoral things, it makes all the characters so much more real to read about. I really like this analysis, I think fans too often take the Starks for granted being the morally upstanding people who do no wrong, they're just as complex as all the other characters.

I feel like blaming Ned for Lady at all is misguided tbh. Cersei was hell bent on killing the wolf, and she's stubborn to the point where other options wouldn't have stopped her. And if Ned didn't do it, the Hound almost certainly would, or one of the Lannisters' lackeys in general, and Ned, knowing this, did the only thing he felt he actually could, which was at least give the wolf the best death he possibly could. Even if he'd turned her loose, Cersei would've just immediately turned around and sent her own men after her, which would've turned out a lot worse in the end. It's a bad situation all around, and I think it shows more the power and resolve Cersei has in her limitless spite.

I love Sansa. So many people hate her and love Arya. Sansa never killed anyone...at least in the books, so far. Arya is borderline psychotic serial killer. But because Sansa, who is only seen through other peoples POV at the beginning of the story, appears to be bratty, everyone believes that she is terrible. We never see Sansa's POV with anyone in her family, other than Arya and Ned. Her first POV isn't until she is out of Winterfell and on the road to Kingslanding. The same thing with Viserys. We never get his POV. So his behavior, as seen through Dany's eyes, is what the readers are judging him with. When the show had Dany go mad queen and burn the city into oblivion, all of the Dany supporters claimed that she would never do that. Forget that she burned people in Meereen, allowed her brother to be killed in front of her, burned Meera Maz Dur alive etc. Just because we hear the characters internal rationalization for their behavior doesn't mean that they are correct in their actions. Arya, who chastises the hound for killing Mycah, kills the stable boy , Killed a squire at the crossroads, had Chiswick killed, had Weese killed because he hit her. She also kills the tickler. While many if these men are bad men, Arya seems to enjoy killing. She justifies her killings in her POV and the readers love her. And after a certain amount of time she seems to forget all about Mycah and gets close to the hound. GRRM uses unreliable narrators and readers seem to forget that when thy read the story. Crazy awful people can rationalize every terrible thing that they do in their own head. It doesn't mean it's right and it doesn't make them a hero.

I will say this: at the time of Lady's death, I don't think it had been established that Ned had worked out how closely connected his children were with their direwolves. Lady Catelyn had clearly began to see it because, as we saw in all her chapters, she was supremely observant. Ned though was a typical lord of his day, almost so completely consumed with external matters as not to notice things going on in his family unless he was informed. I still suspect the absence of Lady may have a defining effect on Sansa in future book chapters, maybe through an incident. Essentially, Ned was a good man who was in over his head as Hand of the King. The same could be said for some Targaryen kings!

"Ned was using his honor as a shield to protect himself from making the most difficult choices, even when they were the right ones." THIS. There are many instances where this happens and it's even narratively stated by Littlefinger once that Ned knew what needed to be done, but it's not "honorable," so the words stick in his mouth. What I find incredibly interesting about GRRM is that he is turning typical fantasy tropes on their head. Most people grew up on the stories that show case true heroes as those who are honorable and righteous and those people are seen as inherently good and right for it. And because of this, Ned, who is a typical reflection of that honorable hero trope, gets placed on that same pedestal by the fandom and characters are often compared to him, as if he's a paragon of the best of the best. But what George's story ASOIAF does is _challenge_ the reader on that perspective. _Are_ people who are so incredibly honorable, inherently good? _Is_ making the "honorable" choice always _right_ or the smart thing to do? _Realistically_ speaking, can't being too honorable actually do _great damage_ in the end? And with all this in mind, _can_ someone with such rigid honor who let's it hold him back from doing what needs to be done be considered a genuine hero? GRRM shows how someone with such a solid code of honor can be _just_ as dangerous to those around them, as someone with none. And that realistically, being honorable to a fault can lead to life threatening consequences. That things are not so black and white as we've seen played out in stories many times before. Undoubtedly, Ned _is_ a good person. But him being honorable to a fault doesn't make him good. Hiding behind honor to avoid making difficult decisions isn't smart or right, but can in fact come across as self righteous and can cause more harm than good. It was undoubtedly honorable after all, to give Cersei the chance to run to protect her family. But it was in no way _right_ or smart. Wanting to place the true heir Stannis on the throne because he was the rightful heir was again, honorable. But it also would cause a war and lead to many losses, whereas keeping peace with the Lannisters could have avoided that altogether. But it wasn't honorable. Ned had the chance to seize the Lannister kids and Renly would back him with his men. He didn't do it, even though it was smart to strike when he could, it wasn't honorable to "drag frightened kids from their beds." Just a few instances, and I recall Ned himself questioned if he'd done the right things, see even he knew perhaps he was making mistakes, but he never went back to fix them. I love how you break it down, GRRM story is so complex all around but I feel like many readers don't look so deeply and surface read, they don't really get to the _meat_ of the story or the characters, and that's where these half arsed, shallow and often times incorrect assumptions come from. I feel like many readers are still looking at the story from a typical fantasy narrative and that's a mistake.

The story means to have no heroes. Simply humans making choices based on who they are at heart. No one is trying to bring down the structure, no one is trying to be a heroe.

Ned is introduced killing an innocent man in the name of duty. And basically says that they have to kill oathbreakers because otherwise they'd do horrible things to stay alive, which could be boiled down further to "we have to kill oathbreakers because we have to kill oathbreakers".

Sansa and Theon coping and seething at Chaddard Stark

Great video that leaves a lot to think about. I also like to point out that one of the other great injustices that is perpetrated by Ned Stark in Game of Thrones that had long lasting ramifications in the show was the defamation of Jaime Lannister. Jaime heroically saved countless lives with his killing of the Mad King, but all Ned Stark sees in a clear-cut assassination, not an act that was in the defense of others. Worst of all, Ned does not even give Jaime a chance to explain what had happened, instead opting to help spread the word of Jaime's deed as an act that will bequeath to him the infamous derogatory nickname "King Slayer." Thus, Jaime, who once looked on Ned Stark with respect, now feels absolute hatred for the man, which makes him for a time a useful pawn in the masterful chess game played by Petyr Baelish, one who helps bring the downfall of Ned Stark and begins the horrific war that will rip apart the very social and political fabric of Westeros.

Wow, saving your daughter against a mad Queen or killing a pet??? hmmmm

Another great analysis.

Nah. He lost his head because that honour for sure. But villainized ned for killing lady was just absurd. Anyone who were put in that situation would do just the same. You keep a WOLF as a pet and got into shit with the KING's son. Hell yeah you'll kill the wolf instead of losing your daughter's head. And Theon ? He just an ungrateful son of a bitch at that point of the story. Convinced enough thet he was safe? Just the fact that Theon was being alive all the time of his captivity said it all. And villainized ned for that was an absurdity for me.

I just realized that he beheaded a man in his first appearance in the show and he gets beheaded later on

In my view, the most worst thing ned did, was tell cerci that he knows about the kids This caused thousands of death.

This is also why I think the Jaime and Brienne arcs aren't about honor, because honor demands people to do evil things, it actually holds good people from acting good.

Interesting video, however I don't quite remember the situation with Ned and Lady the same way in the books. First of all, Arya had been lost for 4 days and Ned led the search for 3 of them, it was pointed out that Ned had only slept about 1 hour in the 4 days and was so sick with worry he could barely stand. It went away when he first was in front of Robert and Cersei since he was just pissed, but it was mentioned all of that weariness came right back to him. Cersei was offering the room full mostly of "hostile" Lannisters 100 Gold Dragons to kill Aryas wolf and bring her the pelt, I took that as meaning it would be the same for Lady. They had Lady chained up and when Ned said he would do it, Cersei asked him if it was some trick, I would assume he was being watched. Ned protested multiple times as well, quite loudly and coldly, he brought up Lyanna to Robert trying to change his mind, and also put the idea out for Robert to do it which he thought may have changed things. Robert walked out and was gone, so Ned was left with mostly all Lannister soldiers. I remember the book saying that the words of him asking for Ice tasted like bile in his throat, his eyes were burning and he couldn't get Sansa crying out of his mind. He was absolutely sick over it. After it was done he told Jory to choose 4 men to bring Lady up North so that she could receive a proper burial at Winterfell which was a long ass ways away. He mentioned that Cersei wasnt going to be getting the pelt, alluding back to the gold. Sure he could have maybe stepped back a little bit and tried again, but pretty obvious that someone else would have killed Lady almost right away in my opinion. I would personally say it was much more of a conflict than what you laid out here.

I think that the Theon point isn't very strong. Theon mentioned in a dance of dragon that yeah Ned was cold to him he was also like that with everyone. He's a captor who was raised with the children of his captors and loved Robb enough to follow him to war and call him a king. Theons relationship with Robb is what makes Theons decision so shocking. Ned is who Theon tries to use as a justification for his actions

Yeah, no, the entire bit about killing lady is off. What was he supposed to do? Reason with Cersei? Impossible Robert agreed to whatever Cersei wanted in order to have Peace. Say „I forbid you!”? Impossible, Ned doesn’t have that kind of power. He’d say „no”, Cersei would say „yes” and then someone else would kill Lady. Fight everyone who would come close to his daughter’s dog? Impossible. It’s open treason, and would get him killed. And the dog too. It was just a situation where je didn’t have any choice.

Ned didn't take a child hostage though. He was tasked with this. He was probably tasked with this because Jon Arryn and/or Robert realized that he was literally the only high lord in the land who would treat Theon with kindness.

Just like to point out Ned wasn’t told to kill lady. The Lannisters wer going to kill Lady nothing was stopping that after The King gave the ok. So then it was just a matter of how lady was going to die. Ned volunteered to do cause he thought (rightly in my opinion) him doing it would be quicker less brutal then letting the Lannisters do it And Ned wanted ladys body taken back north so cercie couldn’t skin her

What's worst is what happened to his family and his kingdom due to his actions.

I never noticed the parallel between Gared and Ned, that's really cool.

-wants to protect his family and the common people. -knowingly starts a continent wide civil war because “muh honor”

So maybe then Jaime the "Kingslayer" is a foil to Ned? Ned is seen as an honourable man but his honour holds him back from doing the right thing. He kills in the name of honour (Lady, the Nights' watchman) when it isn't right, and Jaime kills Aerys, losing his honour, doing what is right.

Would also like to add that Ned killing Lady explicitly shows us that he would’ve killed Theon as well if Balon had rebelled.

Ned might've married a Tully but out of the two of them he was the Tully. Family, Duty, Honor.

It’s always bothered me about Ned is when he continues to bully Jaime for Killing the mad king because it was against duty even though it really was the right thing

Also why blame him for Theon? What other option was there? Theon was going to be taken Hostage, again, no matter what. Can you think of any other Lord in Westeros that would treat the son of a defeated rebel as kindly as Ned did? Someone was going to hold him hostage. Ned at least tried to treat him like a ward.

Your entire argument is false Using lady accident as an evidence to lessing ned character is stupid In the book ned appeals for Robert and beg him to not kill the wolve And Robert did what ? He completely ignored ned and sided with cersei allowing her orders to be done So it was supposed to be Allen pain who kills the poor thing and offer her body as a gift to cersei But ned prevented her from having this satisfaction and killed her himself and send his own men to bury her body in winter fell cause she belong there So yeah you are completely wrong about this

This was top 5 dumbest takes on GOT 1) robbert demanded a hostage and ned knew theon would be treated much better in his hands than any other lord 2) sansa was raised to put family first she knew that and ned told her that before the leaving of kings landing came up 3) Ned didnt want to behead the guy in the beginning but he had to show his sons how you uphold honor the guy aint go to winterfell to report what he saw he literally went passed it and wanted to keep going

Gared was executed for literally committing a crime he knew he was committing, while ned was executed for a false charge to protect a major lie. Beheading aside, they weren’t similar.

I think one thing people often forget is that being 'honourable' and being 'morally good' aren't necessarily the same thing. Being honourable in the context of Westeros means abiding by and upholding the customs, cultural and legal norms of society...and those aren't exactly nice. Barristan, for example, is viewed as honourable by Westerosi...but he definitely isn't a good person. Also people project a lot onto characters and want their favourites to be flawless. But while some characters in the story are unambiguously vile and some are very noble, especially by the standards of the setting, there are no one hundred percent flawless ones. Which is good because perfect characters are incredibly bland.

So, remember that Tywin had sat out the entirety of Robert's Rebellion. He declared for neither side; it was not until one side had all but won did Jamie act. It is reasonable for Ned to doubt Jamie based on what he knows of the situation. Plus, the Lannisters have been some of the biggest crown supporters such a sudden turn would be dubious at best

It's interesting that Cat and Ned are a mirror characters. Bot uphold Westrosi traditions and they know the history of most of the houses. Cat tends to get hate for how she acts, but Ned is treated like a hero.

It's too bad the series didn't go into more detail about the books because the 'stories' of each character play out like a master chess game and they're not written in any chronological order, so we get history. We the reader don't know when the events are taking place or if some are going on at the same time etc...so it takes a few reads, and IF the author ever FINISHES at least the next book, we can see how it was supposed to play out.

I'm not quite sure if you meant Robert or Ned when you said they didn't so much as raise their voice to save Lady, but Ned did say something like 'for the love you bare me and Lyanna, you can't mean this'.

Sansa 💯% lied to everyone & she 💯% lied to her father. 👉👉👉YES, SHE DID WRONG. (Seems like you are extremely biased over Sansa.)

Ned put Robert and the south before his own family and the north. He allowed himself to look past all the death casued by Tywin (and approved of by Robert). Had he been a true man of honor, he would have returned home, fortified the north and refused summons until the deaths of Elia, Rhaenys and Aegon were answered for. He was blind to Robert's true person and that moment he called the children dragonspawn, he should have washed his hands of Robert and the new crown.

i disagree on this one. ned stark is still a hero, no matter how blind he is to the "game of thrones". george is just reminding his audience that heroes are not invincible. heroes are in fact, highly killable and very mortal just like any person, and them being heroes isn't a "plot armor" for them to live happily ever after. i think this is the most bittersweet of all the deaths in asoiaf. the red wedding is just a magnified version of ned, but ned's death in particular, how unjust it is, is what makes it superb literature because it does not shy away from literally killing The Hero.

I think Ned had gathered enough evidence of Cersei's misdeeds that he could've (as Hand of the King) preemptively arrested her for treason even before Robert returned. I know he thought he was protecting her children, but he could've had them sent to Casterly Rock for that purpose. Under Tywin's care, I doubt Robert would've had them killed. Although, I'm not entirely certain how safe they'd be with Tywin upon being declared bastards. 😬

Ned’s actions in my mind feel like what Jon Arryn would do: appeasement. The only person he ever stands up to consistently is Robert and even then he does little outside of quitting as hand. Robert was right in the sense that what Ned really wants is bury his head in the snow and act as if all that matters is honor. Consider the fact that he finds Jaime betraying the Mad King as dishonorable and even for what happened to his father and brother but he holds none of that against Ser Barristan. Ned’s a good man in the sense that he will follow a code of honor but he sees a lot of that as following orders, even with Lady the most he did was ask Robert to do it.

I think you dismiss too easily the pressure and possible consequences which led to Ned's actions. Often doing the 'objectively right' thing in a particular instance (e.g. Sparing Lady) can result in the inability to effect larger and more important decisions down the line. Disobeying Robert's command even to propose an alternate solution risks further disintegration of their friendship and a diminished capacity for Ned to bring moderate or improve the overall situation. He chose to lose the battle in order to try to win the war. Ned is not prescient and couldn't know what was to come, but that shouldn't be held against him.

A lot of ppl take Ned at his word when it comes to his murder of Lady. This is because they can’t freaking read.

(sorry for my english, I'm greek) I don't think most of his mistakes came because he was afraid to do the hard thing and/or because he used his honour as a shield. He definetely made a lot of mistakes but I think he always did what he thought was right or at least he tried to. And what he thought was right came from his moral code and his values which came from the world he grew up and lives in. You have to judge a man based on the values of the world they live in. Executing a desserter and be quick to label someone crazy, taking a kid hostage after a war, not treating a bastard son equally with the other children, are all acts that don't mean the same in this world as they do in ours. Ned is by no means perfect and that's part of what makes him a great character, but I feel you judge him a little harshly when you say he didn't do the hard things that were the right things to do. There are numerous cases that Ned did the hard thing that he thought was right. Taking Jon as his bastard son to protect him, despite tainting his image as an "honorable man", confessing to crimes he didn't commit to protect his daughters, going against Robert in the issue of killing Danny. Even him going to Kings Landing in the first place was something he didn't want but did it anyway because he thought it was the right thing to do.

wow! everything you said in this video is correct! thank you for showing me a different perspective

I really like this video! It brought many thought provoking ideas that I’ve never touched before, so thank you for your insight! However, I do think that there are some things I don’t necessarily agree with. When we are judging Ned’s action, I believe we must first consider the setting he is in. “Warding” Theon and beheading Gared fits perfectly fine in Westeros’ morals, or at least seen as a necessary evil. Even if these actions are wrong in our eyes, we have to remember that we can’t ask characters to do things beyond the limit of their time. Westeros is a place where nobles rule over commoners, where no one advocates for democracy, where conviction can be determined by dueling, where arranged marriages are common practices. If we simply judge every character’s actions by our standards to absolute perfection, then not even Azor Ahai, who killed his wife as a means to an end, can be seen as an infallible hero. In Theon’s case, Ned saw it as the means to keep the Ironborns in check, thus saving the North and other kingdoms from bleeding again. It doesn’t mean Ned didn’t know he was punishing a child for the sins of his father. He tried his best to make Theon feel as ward rather than a hostage, even Theon himself admitted in later chapters that the Starks were family. But Ned can’t compromise the very reason he is here. This is why I don’t think the parallel with Sansa being a hostage is fair here. Theon was a boy who needs care in Ned’s eyes. Sansa on the other hand, was nothing but a pawn for the Lannisters. Besides, Ned knew he was doing a necessary evil. A good evidence for that is looking at when Ned rejected Robert’s plan to kill the Targaryen kids. Both came from the basic incentives to prevent war, and both required children to sacrifice, but Ned draw the line when it came to murder. This indicates that he is aware that sacrificing children is wrong, but chose to bear the burdens. The Lannisters, however, kept Sansa hostage purely out of selfish reasons and nothing more. This is why I feel like Ned & Theon are more justified than Lannisters & Sansa. In Gared’s case, the old deserter clearly broke an established law. For a man like Ned, all crimes must be punished according to law. Again, as a basic incentive, I don’t think this is bad. This is a principle that many of our “heroes”, by our standards, also firmly believes. The problem is the law itself, which again, is a product of its time. As for questioning Gared later, like you said, he is out of his mind, making it almost impossible to know the truth. And unfortunately unlike today, in Westeros, insanity cannot avoid conviction. In the end, I think searching for an infallible hero in itself, is a futile and meaningless attempt. Ned himself had even admitted that “I had made many mistakes in my life”. The core of A Song of Ice and Fire, according to GRRM, is “the human heart in conflict with itself”. To me, an infallible hero is not half as admiring as a flawed hero that struggles to be better. Ned, despite all the hardships he has been through, still sees the world in compassion, and doesn't stop searching for what is good for the world and for his loved ones. This is why I still hold Ned in high regards. (PS: Sorry for writing this ridiculously long. This is an interesting topic that I don’t see many discuss. My thoughts are a bit muddled, but the basic ideas are there. I’d love to hear your response)

Why did Benjen Stark take the black? It’s because Benjen kept the secrets of his beloved sister Lyanna and above all helped her run away from Robert to Rhaegar. Ned punished Benjen for this-blaming Benjen for the deaths of Brandon and Rickard Stark-by forcing him to take the Black. Of course, Lyanna told Rickard, Ned, and Benjen she had no interest in marrying Robert and not to engage her to Robert. Lord Rickard Stark did it anyway because the alliance of House Stark to Houses Baratheon and Arryn was the lynchpin of Lord Rickard “southron ambitions” strategy, which Lady Barbrey Dustin complains to Theon about because it made it impossible for Brandon Stark to marry her. This was echoed about 13 years later when Viserys and Illyrio Mopatis sold of Daenerys to Khal Drogo for similar political reasons despite Dany saying "NO!" Robert Baratheon and Khal Drogo are two of the paired characters in the books. Besides Lyanna and Dany being engaged to them against the girls wills, both King and Khal were great warriors and conquerors, popular among their group of bros (fellow warriors), giant men with a fondness for drink, who die suddenly in the first novel with the involvement of their wives (Cersei and Dany) in their deaths. We are clearly told as readers that both Robert and Drogo engage in regular marital rape. At nights they get drunk with their friends then come to the bedroom and take their wives violently without asking. Both men are also left without a living trueborn heir despite having married beautiful, noble blondes for this exact purpose. Benjen knew how things with Robert went incredibly south at the Tournament at Harrenhal. Robert ignored Lyanna to get drunk with his bros night after night. He wasn’t there for Lyanna to talk to about what Lyanna was doing to protect Howland Reed as the Knight of the Laughing Tree. This could have been Robert’s chance to become Lyanna’s confidant and protector if he had spent his time talking to her and letting her confide in him! Lyanna desperately wanted a champion to attack the knights of the squires who had attacked her friend Howland! Robert would have been perfect for this. Surely she tried to approach him about it. But Robert as we hear spent the whole tournament drinking with his friends except for fighting in the melee he loved. He ignored Lyanna. So Lyanna put on armor and defended Howland herself. Which ended up with King Aerys ordering the death of the knight of the Laughing Tree and putting Rhaegar in charge of finding this roque knight. Rhaegar eventually figured out it was Lyanna and spared her by keeping her secret. This plus Rhaegar’s beautiful harp play and singing is why Lyanna fell in love with Rhaegar and went to him when there was no one else to help her! And that happened near the end of the tournament or right after when Robert, drunk again, came to Lyanna’s tent one night and tried to force himself on her sexually and tore her dress. George Martin has given us a reprise of what happened using Gendry and Arya. After they are rescued from Harrenhal by Jaqen (whom I have argued elsewhere is the real Aegon VI, oldest son of Rhaegar, in disguise), they are taken by the Brotherhood Without Banners and brought to Acorn Hill, owned by Lady Smallwood. Because there is plenty of free ale and wine here, at night Gendry acts like his father Robert and gets drunk. He sees Arya washed up and in a beautiful green and yellow dress and gets turned on. Gendry asks to show her the forge and leads her out into the darkness away from everyone else. Then at the forge they talk about sodden King Robert. Gendry starts complimenting Arya’s looks and gets close to her, which freaks out our ten year old protagonist and she tells Gendry to go away. He grabs Arya and she tries to pull away. They end up falling and wresting on the ground with Arya in tears as Gendry rips Arya’s dress and pins her almost completely into submission. Arya finally knees Gentry in the groin after screaming at him and manages to get free and runs back into the great hall where the others are. When Gendry comes in following her some people make jokes, but the one Member of the Brotherhood who used to be a Stark man realizes what really happened and he strides over and hits Gendry in the head. He tells Gendry that he is going to beat Gendry up if he ever touches Arya again. George Martin has told us, through this reprise, what really happened at the end between Robert and Lyanna. Only Lyanna didn’t run away from Robert into the hall at Acorn Hall, she ran to Rhaegar Targaryen who had already saved her life once and begged for protection from the prince from Robert and from her father Rickard and older brothers who were forcing her to marry Robert who just tried to rape her and was going to keep trying. That is how the war actually started. And Benjen was one of the few people who knew what really happened. He helped Lyanna get away from Robert to Rhaegar instead of bringing her back to Robert or eldest Brandon who was in charge of the family in the Riverlands in the absence of Lord Rickard. For that Ned punished him and made him join the Night’s Watch.

NO ONE told Ned to kill lady. Robert, the KING, commended his guards to kill lady. Ned said HE would do it because Lady ‘Deserved better than a butcher.’ I do agree that he could’ve tried letting her go and just saying he had killed her. Theon’s FATHER SENT him to the Starks. Theon himself stating that when he went back to the Iron Islands.

Regarding Jaime’s king slaying, Jaime sat on the Iron Throne which gave Ned lots of Lannister conspiracy red flags. If Jaime was on his knees next to Aerys or sitting on the floor, Ned would have asked what happened. Also, Ned is said to be loved by everyone in the North including his own family and respected in the Vale and the Riverlands. If the Nights Watch deserter wanted to explain the White Walker threat, he should have told Jeor Mormont in detail and petition a warning to the Starks regarding what is known.

No, Ned is not perfect, but his legacy in the North is far better than Tywin's family which is a catastrophe.

You shouldn't hold the Lady situation against Ned. Lady was going to die no matter what. Cersei already offered a bounty on Nymeria and those loyal to the Lannisters would have killed her for that even if Robert ordered them not to. Should he have put up a better fight against Robert? Certainly. But he was exhausted after having searched for Arya for a few days, saw the way the wind was blowing, and swallowed a bitter pill. By the time it got to that moment, the only options for Lady were "Lannisters" or "Ned" and Ned was the only one that was going to make it quick. And as some others have mentioned, Ned felt immense guilt over the death of Lady and did not take the decision to do so lightly. He just felt that there was no other option.

Your takes are interesting but clearly guided more by bias than the actual source material. Ned is a flawed hero, but ultimately still the purest POV character in the books. The nuance and greyness of GRRM's work makes him all the more heroic, his honor and honesty standing out like a flickering lamp in the darkness. That is why he is remembered fondly by many and respected even by enemies like Jaime. What you have done here instead, is to pick apart his flaws and use the grey of his character to deny his heroism. I've seen in other videos you like to do the opposite and claim obvious villains aren't villains. That is a clear misinterpretation of the books, even when allowing for the death of the author and lots of wiggle room on top. I am no enemy of quirky headcanon's (famous example that i subscribe to is LaRusso being the bad guy in the original Karate Kid movie) and rather enjoy wildly different points of views. But to state your highly subjective interpretation with such authority rings false.

A deserter is a deserter, Gared could have ran back to wall and warned his brothers but he decided otherwise and Ned wasn't wrong to execute him for that, Gared got executed for the choices he made. He wasn't a victim of circumstances. As for the mess with lady Ned could have let her go but that's not who he is, he keeps his promises his word is iron. He couldn't defy Robert for the sake of a pet defying the king could have catastrophic results and a pet isn't worth going to war for. But when put in the same position with the dany assassination he stood up for what he believed in and was willing to resign his post rather than go along with killing someone he deemed innocent. So he doesn't always choose the easy way out or avoid conflict. We don't love Ned because he's perfect we love him because he sticks to what he believes in. He believes in honor, so he lives according to that. The same reason we love bronn he's a survivor and he lives according to that.

It's baffling how people oversimplify the characters when the point George is trying to make is to subvert and/or add depth and complexity to existing tropes in storytelling and trying to portray it in a realistic way where thing aren't so simple like good vs evil

Thank you for the great analysis! You've made me see Ned from a different perspective. I had never thought how Ned was actually not so just with these three characters, and the consequences of his injustice would carry much weight moving forward. Keep the good work!

A few disagreements but great channel💯I subscribed✔️you are inspiring me to make some got content.

Great points but let me go further. I was rereading the Ned chapters and it stood out to me that the Queen gave him a chance to go back to the North if he bent the knee to Joffery. Ned could’ve fortified the North, mended the damage done to the Riverlands, made peace with the Lannisters l, and prepared for any Greyjoy trouble. But Ned chose war aka the worst fucking thing ever. Ned was on path to start a war that would’ve saw at least 3 great houses in conflict with each other. And for what? Honor and justice 🤦🏾‍♂️ All the potential death, sa, and carnage would’ve been in service of Ned’s sense of honor. I’m sorry Ned fans that makes him a bad person.

He was never hero. There is no hero in GoT. He was just really traditional men trying his best to force old ways even if that is purely ilogical

I think he is a tragic "hero" in the classical sense, precisely because he is not infallible. he is a good person, but in the end, his own faults and flaws cause his downfall, even if he doesn't "deserve" it.

Hm, I agree on most of it, but I really don't see a better option for Theon and for the ironborn/mainland relationship coming out of the war, apart from informing his son on the issue better-Ned did pretty good job, if anything he was too soft making his family forget Theon is a hostage of hostile lord and Robb actually trusting him over everybodys good sence to keep him close. In this case it's rather an example of how Ned is to soft to carry out his duty and how him half-assed influensed his family and the North. And also i don't see does sparring ranger changes anything. Benjen would ranged north anyway, so would Marmont.

Who even calls him an infallible hero, aside from casual show viewers?

I'd add that Ned frequently commits what is legally treason against Robert, on the basis that he's Robert's best buddy and is working in his interest, and alternately, ignoring Robert's dishonor because they're best buds. He uses his trusted position to, while not lying outright, accomplishing the same as a lie in Robert's last will, and hiding Jon from him. Now these last two are based in "other duties" he has, obligations to the law, to the innocent, to his family. Gosh, conflicting oaths and NOT picking the duty to the king...that sounds so familiar...oh right, Jaime, the guy who if Ned had his way would have also gotten his head chopped off. But as has been pointed out before, if Lyanna had lived, and been mistreated by Robert, it would likely be the Starks in the antagonist role. Ned doesn't reconcile this in his treatment of Cersei. Which, Ned is kinda a shit to women in general? Even Cat, in his own way, by forbidding her to discuss Jon. And he almost seems proud of Sansa for siding with Joffery, which probably factored into the way he dealt with Lady; "Oh Sansa understands her duty, she'll understand this."

I think you demand impossible behaviours from middle age perspective don't forget Ned Stark didn't know the importance of the direwolves to him they were just animals / pets and middle ages are long before greenpeace ... an animal even pet wasn't that important to disobey the king and queen not only in law but in the mentality and minds of people also direwolves were not appropriate pets to any reasonable person they shouldn't even be pets even today if someone brought a trained lion or bear in an appartment the authorities might euthanise the animal if there isn't a zoo etc alternative. Gared to Ned is just a deserter one of many deserters of the watch and people in the night's watch were criminals mostly and the watch was like a labour jail to them and frankly if you see real middle ages punishments you will see that deserters was punished far worse than decapitation in fact decapitation was only for nobles mere people were hanged in the best or drawn hunged and quartered , tortured to death , burned alive , boiled alive , left to die from hunger and thirst , put/sealed in hole cells (too small to even lie or stand) and left to die etc the mere fact that Stark decapitates everyone not only noble blood deserters makes him a republican for his time a jacobin like figure better than every other lord in his time and in real world until the French Revolution. Ned didn't know Gared was telling the truth and the things Gared said was sound irrational the fact we know there is magic in ASOIAF doesn't mean characters there know it in fact for centuries there are zero magical occurences so much that all those are heard as superstitions in Ned's time generally back then Gared was just another deserter and Ned didn't have any reason or info to think otherwise. As about Theon yes he was a hostage and yes honour sometimes is horrible but there are no evidence that Ned did something horrible because of honour himself in all those years he had Theon there , second Theon was a hostage of the crown therefore Robert he would be a hostage anyway because his dumbass daddy rebelled without hope Ned just accepted to have him in his castle if Ned said he would not have him grow up in Winterfell then Robert would just send Theon with Tywin or Stannis or someone else and Theon knows this very very well in fact he was very lucky he ended up with Ned and knows this . At the end I don't believe that there are infalible heroes in asoiaf as there are no such in real life either and if we consider the ideological differences between middle ages and today is like searching about an infalible hero in middle ages who will satisfy all our modern sensitivities as well which is impossible and hillarious. Ned is an example of a good guy almost too good for his own good given the era he lives in and his circumstances but characters in asoiaf are too realistically built to even search for inflability in any of them.

Many excellent points! It also strikes me that killing Lady at the king's command despite what it means for Sansa is a good symbol for his decision to betroth Sansa to Joffrey just to lull Robert and the Lannisters into a false sense of security. He was against the betrothal at first and only agreed to it because it made it easier for him to stay under the radar while investigating Jon Arryn's death. He had no qualms sacrificing Lady, just like he had no qualms sacrificing Sansa in the first place. I think his rigidity in terms of adhering to the rules of honor is an overcompensation for the huge lie he has been telling since Jon Snow's birth. Which actually makes his character far more interesting than if he is just a cookie cutter Good Guy!

I think that Ned is one of those characters that everybody loves but because they love him they’re bias so they try to make him to be perfect when he’s not.

He was a hero and an honest man. your points are wrong and made up

Wow! I loved the analysis. I saw things I didn't even remember happened on the show. Like Ned killing the nightwatch.

Something that always bothered me about Nedd was how he lied to his wife about John. Why didn’t he explain who he was, what it meant if anyone else finds out, and that they will never again discuss this. Then she wouldn’t doubt his honor and she would be able to be some sort of mother to John. He’d have saved his wife a lot of pain and improved John’s childhood. And he could of told her at any point in John’s life, but he just kept on lying even after he fully trusted Kat and after he saw how awful she treated John. He just didn’t care about how either of them felt at all

The sansa argument I like. It points out flaws I missed before. The theon argument I’m sorry is just weak. First Theon is already emotionally scarred prior to Balon’s rebellion. The major reason he even acts so cocky/flashy is due to Balon seing little value when he’s the 3rd son with 2 much older brothers of more use to him. Secondly, Ned doesn’t actively take theon as hostage. When Balon surrenders, he practically throws Theon away like a possession instead of a human being. Lastly, are we seriously going to say Ned was performing evil when he tries to make the best of crappy situation he didn’t have a lot of say in? The kangaroo BS with lady sure you can get away with a insubordination. In this situation your talking about pissing of the king, the reach you need food from to survive the winter, and every single bannerman on the west coast of your realm. Also in so doing your probably condemning Theon to casterly rock. So by refusing your endangerment by the long term safety of your family and realm only to let Theon grow up with the emotional damage supplied by Tywin. They would have been both idiotic and the greater evil. If you want better example of not being a hero then here are better examples. Ned neglecting to keep tabs on how Robert runs the realm. The fact that Jon had to grow neglected and knowing absolutely nothing about his mother. Or how about he allowed his daughters to literally follow him into the lion’s den when he couldn’t even garuntee his own safety. I agree he’s tragic, but his tragedy is not heroic

The only thing I disagree with here is the premise that heroes are infallible. They aren't. I still agree that Ned isn't a hero. The things that he did that would normally be considered heroic are largely for the wrong reasons. However, the idea that heroes are infallible is misguided.

Ned is not a hero, that's obvious. Dude just went along the status quo without questioning it, and tried to navigate it in the most honorable way possible. I don't think he was bad for taking Theon, or for executing the ranger from the Night's watch. He was following orders in the first occasions and the law in the second. What I do think speaks volumes about his character is how he judged Jaime for killing the Aerys, showing how he considers honor more important than the lives of people.

This video is wack and lacks perspective

There seems to be a bit of looking at medieval society through a modern lens happening with some of these examples. His supposed transgressions, aren't, within his morality/societal construct. His only mistake was believing in said honor system to his detriment. His treatment of Theon was exemplary, better than Balon could expect. To hold the ancestral sword, to squire for the high lord was an honor that he gave to the son of an important house. Theon was raised as an equal and sibling, that's why the Stark children were so devastated by the betrayal of the ward contract. Ned was the ward of House Arryn and went to _war_ for his warden. Ned or Robert would have brought the sword for Jon Arryn just the same. It isn't an implied threat to the ward. There was a reason Robb trusted Theon to treat with his father. Wards build alliances and mend conflict. That is their purpose. Tyrion was just being a dick. Theon failed an ancient pact of understanding and trust. He even acknowledges this. Ned killed Lady because Lady was dead the minute *the Queen* decreed and demanded it- and Robert allowed it, telling Ned to get her a regular dog. You can't have some drag out argument with the King of all Westeros in public over a 'pet', friend or no. It just was not done. Ned did try to reason with him, which was a real risk. The only option left was how brutal her death would be. Ned had no recourse but to make it quick. In their world Gared transgresses and dies for it. He wasn't lied to or threatened with something he valued as Ned was to acquiesce. Gared knew the consequence. He sacrificed himself to do it. Ned was following the edict and duty to the Night's Watch. They are the ones who call for death for desertion, not the king or the lords. He had to follow through. There were very real limitations Ned would realistically have had with his choices in such instances. It's not his right or his call. These aren't mistakes. There were no other options. His only mistake was honesty, naivety and kindness once in King's Landing. He was a fool about the true unscrupulous nature of power. He didn't underestimate Cersei so much as extend her a kindness. He wanted no harm to her or her children. He's a parent. He had no idea she was a sociopath. He wanted her out of harm's way. In his time her children didn't even belong to her, but her husband, or in this case king, to do with as he will. She had almost no legal rights whatsoever. That was reality. He knew it. He played rigidly by the chivalric rules- and it got him killed once out of his pond. No human is infallible, no hero is infallible, and that was never GRRM's intention.

Ned was a politician; that should speak for itself.

Basically you are bashing Ned for being ISTJ HSUAHSUAHSUAHSAU he lacks bigger picturing abilities. That does not make him less good of a person, he is just a lil bit dumb dumb. According to the MBTI theory, people with Si dominant, such as ISTJs, have a tendency to accept orders without much questioning, they are basically loyal dogs. Because they are so used with doing what is told to them, their Ne (big picturing ability) decreeses in strenght and development. Is like they can't see, not that they refuset to, they are just not very good at it. Ned couldn't possibly calculate the consequences of his actions. Most people didn't untill he lost his head. He didn't because the narrative didn't want him to. Usually the hero is right, so de audience couldn't see it either. I severely doubt most people would be able to see that kind of outcome happening to them in real life. We often don1t the see the true consequences of our action until they happen, and some times we don't even see it then. Costing a lot of self reflection to get there. I can't believe I'm defending a Stark, I couldn't care any less about them, but the judgements presented in the video are a bit self righteous. You as viewer, who has seen the series to its conclusion can easily point fingers now, but how would you react if you were in his position? And to really be in his position you would have to live his entire life up to that point.

Ned has lines he does not cross. The killing of Elia Martell's children left him with a distrust of Robert's blindeye to the atrocities of the Lannisters. He would not have hurt Theon as a child. He would have protested if he were asked to do so to Theon while he was an adult.

I just discovered your channel after being an asoif fan for years and you have a great understanding of this story and you are verbally gifted as well. .. I'm in love

whats crazy about the lady situation is that we all know robert is lowkey obsessed with ned. Ned is the closest thing he has to a brother that he actually likes as a person AND respects. He likes renly but he doesnt really respect him and he respects stannis but he doesnt like him. Ned doesnt understand how much power he has in that relationship. if ned threatened to quit as Hand in exchange for Lady's life Robert would've just told Cersei to fuck off. Robert was just trying to get cersei off his back but if his choice for Hand of the King was at stake he wouldve stood his ground for Ned.

This is a bit of a tangent but when Joffrey ordered his impromptu execution why did Illyn Payne do so without hesitation? Even Cersei told him to stop and he seemingly ignored her which doesn’t make sense to me. Joffrey wasn’t at an age or a level of respect that he should’ve been obeyed. Especially when Cersei who should outrank Joffrey especially when it comes to rash decisions gave a contradicting order.

I feel like Sansa gets way too much flak for causing Ned's death since she is infact a child and therefore stupid but trying to use this circular psychology to imply that it's Ned's fault to sanitize Sansa's character flaws is silly. She did not go to Cersei and tell her out of some misplaced sense of duty because of what happened to Lady teaching her a lesson about how the royal family comes first. She did it because she didn't want her dream of being queen to end and she thought Cersei would help her. It's literally a part of her arc that she trusts the wrong people.

Ned is definitely more selective with his honor code than is shown at face value. By the Westorsi honor code, he should've told Robert the truth about his children's paternity immediately so there definitely is some wiggle room that was weirdly not applied to the lady situation when it would've obviously caused Sansa much distress and greatly sour Arya and Sansas relationship. Given we know he can skirt his honor code for at least his family's benefit (claiming Jon as his bastard) or generally for the welfare of children in general (Myr /tom/ Joff) it is really weird he doesn't do that for the lady situation and instead chooses to mostly guilt trip robert over his lannister allegiances in the situation.

Ugh Ned did not punish Theon. Robert took Theon as a hostage and gave him to Ned to use as a hostage. Once again this is not a 21st century liberal democracy this is a middle ages monarchy and Robert is king. He has no choice. As for him never making Theon feel safe that is just straight up not true. He lets him be educated and raised along side his own children Theon literally says Ned treats him better than his own father. Do you think he would say that if he didn't look up to and respected Ned because of how good he was to him?