document_title: Jaime Lannister

question_text: when did jaime lannister kill the mad king

text: Jaime Lannister

text: Character[edit]

text: Description[edit]

text: Jaime was born shortly after the birth of his twin sister Cersei. The two were inseparable as children, and at an early age began an incestuous affair that continued into adulthood and even after Cersei's marriage to Robert Baratheon. At the age of fifteen he participated in the battle against the Kingswood Brotherhood, squiring for Lord Sumner Crakehall, and was subsequently knighted by Ser Arthur Dayne. While returning to Casterly Rock, he visited Cersei at King's Landing, who persuaded him to join the Kingsguard in order to be close to her. Jaime was accepted into the Kingsguard, but Tywin resigned as Hand of the King, taking Cersei with him back to Casterly Rock. Jaime quickly realises that Aerys named him to the Kingsguard solely to strip Tywin of his heir. Jaime becomes further disillusioned after witnessing Aerys burn Rickard and Brandon Stark alive and overhearing him raping his sister-wife Rhaella. When Tywin begins sacking King's Landing at the climax of Robert's Rebellion, Jaime realises that Aerys intends to burn King's Landing with wildfire and kills him, almost immediately being discovered by Tywin's men. Robert Baratheon later pardons Jaime for breaking his vows and names him to his own Kingsguard. Although Jaime considers his assassination of Aerys as his greatest act, his motives for killing him remain unknown to the rest of the realm and he is given the insulting moniker "Kingslayer".

text: Several years later, he and Tyrion rescue a young woman, Tysha, from outlaws, and Tyrion secretly marries her. When Tywin finds out he orders Jaime to tell Tyrion that he staged the incident in order for Tyrion to lose his virginity. Though it is unknown if Jaime was aware that Tywin subsequently forced Tyrion to watch Tysha be gang-raped by his guards, Jaime carries a great amount of guilt for his unkindness to Tyrion in his later years.

text: In A Game of Thrones (1996), Jaime is introduced as one of the Kingsguard, the royal security detail, and the son of wealthy and powerful Tywin Lannister, the former Hand of the King. Jaime's twin is Cersei, the Queen of Westeros by virtue of her marriage to King Robert Baratheon. Perhaps the greatest swordsman in the kingdom, Jaime is sometimes derisively called "the Kingslayer" because he killed the "Mad King" Aerys Targaryen in the coup that put Robert on the Iron Throne.[1]

text: Eric Dodds of Time described Jaime as "handsome, an incomparably skilled fighter and disarmingly witty",[2] with The New Yorker calling the Lannisters "a crowd of high-cheekboned beauties ... who form a family constellation so twisted, charismatic, and cruel that it rivals Flowers in the Attic for blond dysfunction".[3] Lev Grossman wrote for Time that while Jaime and Cersei's younger brother Tyrion is a grotesque dwarf, "the rest of the Lannisters are stunted too, but on the inside."[4] The Los Angeles Times called Jaime "handsome and unscrupulous",[5] though Dodds noted in 2014:

text: Sure, he's done some of the most despicable things on a show full of despicable things—including but not limited to fathering children by incest, attempting to murder a boy who discovered said incest, and the cold-blooded murder of one of his own cousins—but despite all that, the Kingslayer remains one of Game of Thrones' most popular characters.[2]

text: Development[edit]

text: Darren Franich of Entertainment Weekly noted that in the novels, "[Jaime is] a vaguely villainous minor character in Game of Thrones, then is basically absent from Clash of Kings, and suddenly he becomes a tragic hero in Storm of Swords."[6] In A Game of Thrones, Jaime is not only carrying on an incestuous affair with his twin sister, but he pushes a young Bran Stark out a high window to his likely death after the boy witnesses them in the act.[7][8] Jaime admits these crimes to Catelyn Stark in A Clash of Kings (1998), and tells her a horrific story of Aerys Targaryen's cruelty.[9] In A Storm of Swords (2000), Jaime initially loathes the female warrior Brienne of Tarth, but both his honor and his reluctant respect for Brienne compel him to lie to their captors to prevent her from being raped.[8][10] He later explains to Brienne that he killed Aerys because the king had planned to incinerate all of King's Landing and its inhabitants rather than let it fall into Robert's hands.[11] When Jaime is released to be sent back to King's Landing in deference to his father, he first saves Brienne, who has been thrown into a bear pit for the mercenaries' amusement.[12] Martin told Rolling Stone in 2014:

text: One of the things I wanted to explore with Jaime, and with so many of the characters, is the whole issue of redemption. When can we be redeemed? Is redemption even possible? ... When do we forgive people? ... Our society is full of people who have fallen in one way or another ... How many good acts make up for a bad act? ... I don't know the answer, but these are questions worth thinking about. I want there to be a possibility of redemption for us, because we all do terrible things. We should be able to be forgiven. Because if there is no possibility of redemption, what's the answer then?[8]

text: Specifically addressing Jaime's attempted murder of Bran, Martin said:

text: [What] Jaime did [to Bran] is interesting ... Remember, Jaime isn't just trying to kill Bran because he's an annoying little kid. Bran has seen something that is basically a death sentence for Jaime, for Cersei, and their children ... So I've asked people who do have children, "Well, what would you do in Jaime's situation?" They say, "Well, I'm not a bad guy—I wouldn't kill." Are you sure? Never? If Bran tells King Robert, he's going to kill you and your sister-lover, and your three children ... Then many of them hesitate. Probably more people than not would say, "Yeah, I would kill someone else's child to save my own child, even if that other child was innocent." These are the difficult decisions people make, and they're worth examining.[8]

text: Storylines[edit]

text: A Game of Thrones[edit]

text: Jaime Lannister accompanies the royal family to Winterfell, where King Robert Baratheon hopes to persuade his old friend Ned Stark to serve as Hand of the King. During the visit, Ned's young son Bran inadvertently spies Jaime and Cersei having sex in a remote tower,[7] at which point Jaime pushes the boy out a window, intending to kill Bran to keep their relationship secret.[8] Bran managed to survive, though crippled, and when an assassin later tries to kill Bran, Catelyn Stark accuses and arrests Tyrion.[1] In revenge, Jaime instigates a brawl with Ned and his men in the streets of King's Landing, killing many on both sides. Ned later discovers that Robert's three children are actually the products of Jaime and Cersei's affair, but is executed by the oldest child, Joffrey Baratheon, upon the latter's ascension as king. Jaime then rides for the Riverlands to aid Tywin in his campaign against the Riverlands, taking command of half the Lannister host. He captures the Riverlands' capital of Riverrun, but his army is waylaid by Robb Stark's army in the Battle of the Whispering Wood. Jaime is taken prisoner and incarcerated in Riverrun. Despite his capture Joffrey names Jaime as commander of his Kingsguard.

text: Hillary Busis of Entertainment Weekly called the twist of Jaime and Cersei in the tower "lurid and shocking, exactly what I needed to jolt me awake and make me start paying closer attention ... By the end of the chapter — 'The things I do for love' — I was totally hooked on Thrones".[7] Mikal Gilmore of Rolling Stone noted in 2014 that the moment in which Jaime pushes Bran to his likely death "grabs you by the throat".[8] Martin commented in the interview:

text: I've had a million people tell me that was the moment that hooked them, where they said, "Well, this is just not the same story I read a million times before."[8]

text: A Clash of Kings[edit]

text: Tyrion makes several attempts to free Jaime, first by having disguised Lannister guards attempt to break him out and then by offering to swap Arya and Sansa Stark for Jaime. After hearing of the supposed deaths of Bran and Rickon Stark, Catelyn interrogates Jaime. Jaime admits to pushing Bran out the tower window, to his incest with Cersei and to fathering her children. Jaime then mocks Ned for having tarnished his own honour by fathering a bastard, prompting Catelyn to call her bodyguard Brienne of Tarth for her sword.[9][13]

text: A Storm of Swords[edit]

text: Jaime is freed by Catelyn and sent to King's Landing to exchange for Sansa and Arya, escorted by Brienne of Tarth and Jaime's cousin Ser Cleos Frey. Cleos is killed by bandits and Jaime and Brienne are captured by the Brave Companions, who were formerly in service to Tywin but have defected to Roose Bolton. Their leader, Vargo Hoat, cuts off Jaime's sword hand in the hope that Tywin will blame Roose and prevent the Boltons defecting to the Lannisters.[10][12] While held captive at Harrenhal, Jaime reveals to Brienne the circumstances surrounding his murder of King Aerys.[11][12] Roose Bolton releases Jaime but keeps Brienne hostage. While returning to King's Landing, Jaime has a dream about Brienne and decides to return to Harrenhal to rescue her from Hoat.

text: Jaime returns to King's Landing to discover that Joffrey has been poisoned and Tyrion on trial for the murder, though Jaime refuses to believe Tyrion is guilty. He gifts Brienne a Valyrian steel sword forged from House Stark's ancestral sword Ice and tasks her with finding and protecting the fugitive Sansa Stark. He then forces Varys into helping Tyrion escape, confessing to Tyrion that he owed him a debt for his role in Tysha's fare. Outraged, Tyrion spitefully reveals to Jaime Cersei's affairs during his imprisonment, and lies that he did indeed kill Joffrey, before killing Tywin.[12]

text: A Feast for Crows[edit]

text: Cersei orders Jaime to go to Riverrun and dislodge Ser Brynden "Blackfish" Tully. Before his leaving, Jaime has an armorer forge him a prosthetic hand. He takes the tongueless Ser Ilyn Payne with him to teach him to fight with his left hand, using the lessons to confess to his numerous crimes. During the march, he encounters his cousin Lancel, who confesses to his affair with Cersei. Jaime persuades Edmure Tully to force the Blackfish's surrender by threatening to sack the castle and kill Edmure's child when it is born. Jaime later receives a letter from Cersei, who has been imprisoned by the High Sparrow and is awaiting trial and begs Jaime to be her champion in her trial by combat, but Jaime has the letter burned without reply.[14]

text: A Dance with Dragons[edit]

text: Jaime travels to Raventree Hall and manages to have Lord Tytos Blackwood surrender, officially ending House Stark's insurrection. In the aftermath, he is approached by Brienne, who claims that Sansa is in danger from Sandor "The Hound" Clegane.[15] It is unknown how much of this is true, as Brienne was previously seen as a prisoner of a reanimated Catelyn Stark and the anti-Lannister Brotherhood Without Banners.

text: Family tree of House Lannister[edit]

text:
[hide]

v
t
e

Descendants of Tytos Lannister

Tytos[a]

Jeyne
Marbrand[b]

Joanna[c]

Tywin[c]

Emmon
Frey[c]

Genna[c]

Kevan[c]

Dorna
Swyft[c]

Tygett[c]

Darlessa
Marbrand[c]

Gerion[c]

Briony[d]

Robert
Baratheon[c]

Cersei[c]

Jaime
"The Kingslayer"[c]

Tysha[e]

Tyrion
"The Imp"[c]

Sansa
Stark[f]

Amerei
Frey[g]

Lancel[c]

Martyn[c]

Willem[c]

Janei[c]

Tyrek[c]

Ermesande
Hayford[h]

Joy
Hill[c]

Joffrey
Baratheon[i][j]

Myrcella
Baratheon[i][j]

Margaery
Tyrell[k][l]

Tommen
Baratheon[i][j]

Tion
Frey[c]

"Red" Walder
Frey[m]

Jeyne
Darry[n]

Cleos
Frey[c]

Lyonel
Frey[m]

Melesa Crakehall

Tywin
Frey[n]

Willem
Frey[n]

References and notes:

^ Jump up to: a b Martin, George R. R. (1996). "Chapter 56: Tyrion". A Game of Thrones. p. 593. ISBN 978-0-553-89784-5.
^ Jump up to: a b Martin, George R. R.; García Jr., Elio M.; Antonsson, Linda (2014). The World of Ice & Fire. ISBN 978-0-553-80544-4.
^ Jump up to: a b c d e f g h i j k l m n o p q r s t u Martin. "Appendix: House Lannister". A Game of Thrones. pp. 787–788.
Jump up ^ Martin; García Jr.; Antonsson. "Appendix: Lannister Lineage". The World of Ice & Fire.
Jump up ^ Tyrion's first wife was a peasant girl named Tysha. The marriage was later annulled by Lord Tywin's order.
Jump up ^ Martin, George R. R. (2000). "Chapter 28: Sansa". A Storm of Swords. pp. 382–393. ISBN 978-0-553-89787-6.
Jump up ^ Martin, George R. R. (2005). "Chapter 30: Jaime". A Feast for Crows. pp. 501–518. ISBN 978-0-553-90032-3.
Jump up ^ Martin. "Appendix: The King on the Iron Throne". A Storm of Swords. p. 1131.
^ Jump up to: a b c Martin. "Appendix: House Baratheon". A Game of Thrones. p. 783.
^ Jump up to: a b c Though officially Robert's children, Joffrey, Myrcella and Tommen are the products of an incestuous affair between Cersei and Jaime.
Jump up ^ Martin. "Appendix: The Queen Regent". A Feast for Crows. p. 782.
Jump up ^ Martin, George R. R. (2011). "Appendix: The Boy King". A Dance with Dragons. p. 1055. ISBN 978-0-553-90565-6.  [m] [n]
^ Jump up to: a b Martin, George R. R. (2000). "Appendix: House Lannister". A Storm of Swords. ISBN 0-553-10663-5.
^ Jump up to: a b c Martin, George R. R. (2011). "Appendix: House Lannister". A Dance with Dragons. ISBN 978-0553801477.

text: TV adaptation[edit]

text: Jaime is portrayed by Nikolaj Coster-Waldau in the HBO adaptation Game of Thrones.[5] His casting was announced on August 20, 2009.[16]

text: In October 2014, Coster-Waldau and several other key cast members, all contracted for six seasons of the series, renegotiated their deals to include a potential seventh season and salary increases for seasons five, six, and seven.[17][18] The Hollywood Reporter called the raises "huge", noting that the deal would make the performers "among the highest-paid actors on cable TV".[17] Deadline.com put the number for season five at "close to $300,000 an episode" for each actor,[18] and The Hollywood Reporter wrote in June 2016 that the performers would each be paid "upward of $500,000 per episode" for seasons seven and the potential eight.[19] In 2017, He became one of the highest paid actor on television and will earn £2 million per episode for the show.[20][21]

text: Matt Fowler of IGN noted in 2013 that "the people who do seem to get redemption arcs on this show are the villains".[22] Over the course of the first three seasons, the series has transitioned Jaime from an obvious villain to an antihero of sorts.[23][24][25] Eric Dodds of Time wrote that Jaime had become "a complex, bizarrely likable character".[2] Andrew Romano of The Daily Beast explained:

text: But Jaime wasn't a black-and-white baddie for long. In fact, GoT spent the next three seasons transforming him into a pretty sympathetic character. The turning point was when Jaime was captured and chained up by the Starks—an ordeal that humbled him, humanized him, and eventually left him without a sword hand, struggling to find a new, post-Kingslayer identity for himself. Sure, Jaime could still slaughter his own cousin to escape captivity. But he could also rescue his sidekick Brienne of Tarth from a bear. And pledge to return the Stark girls to their mother, Catelyn. And refuse to kill his brother Tyrion on Cersei's behalf. And so on. He was a compromised, conflicted asshole—but he was basically trying to do the right thing.[26]

text: Fowler wrote that Jaime's adventure with Brienne was "the best storyline of the season" in Season 3, aside from the Red Wedding.[22]

text: Jaime's apparent rape of Cersei in the fourth season episode "Breaker of Chains" created controversy among fans and journalists, who debated the show's depiction of sexual violence against women as well as Jaime's character development.[23][27][28] The showrunners never commented on what their intention with the scene actually was. The cast members involved initially gave only vague comments, but after the fourth season was released on Blu-ray and the showrunners avoided making any comment about the scene in it (it is conspicuously the only episode which has no commentary track), both Coster-Waldau and Headey publicly stated that the scene was never intended to portray rape at all - they were given no instructions to this effect (such as in the script) nor did they play it that way, and apparently the scene was just edited very confusingly.

text: In the source novel A Storm of Swords, the sex between Jaime and Cersei in the equivalent scene is consensual.[23][26][29][30] Several critics argued that the TV series' change damaged Jaime's redemption arc.[24][25][26][31] Dodds noted that the episode "irreparably changes the way we see Jaime Lannister".[2] Alyssa Rosenberg of The Washington Post wrote:

text: What happens next dramatically complicates the work Game of Thrones has done to make Jaime a more explicable, even sympathetic character, given what we learned of his reasons for killing the king he was sworn to protect. Jaime has experienced profound losses over the last two seasons. His hand and his identity as a fighter have been taken from him. His son has been murdered. His father, a toxic, commanding man has returned to his life. And what Cersei is asking of Jaime is that he remove one of the few remaining things that gives him happiness, the little brother who makes him feel better about his hand, from existence. To assuage her pain and grief, Cersei is asking Jaime to inflict more pain on himself ... But his response is not to stop loving her, not to stop believing that he is victim to the gods. Instead, Jaime rapes his sister, passing that sense of unendurable pain on to her. He must know that this is the worst possible way that he could hurt her. Jaime knew that Robert raped Cersei ... Not only does raping Cersei remind his sister of her repeated, humiliating violation, Jaime is poisoning their own relationship, the thing that had been Cersei’s antidote to the miseries of her marriage. It is an exceptionally cruel thing for Jaime to do.[32]

text: Coster-Waldau said, "If you look closer there are those moments where she—well, I haven't seen the finished edit, of course—but we tried to have it where she goes into it then she pulls away, she goes in then she pulls away, but of course he is forcing himself."[33] Later he and his co-star Lena Headey (Cersei) spoke with Entertainment Weekly during the filming of season 5, admitting that they were never directed or intended to film a rape scene.[34] Headey stated:

text: It’s that terrible thing as a woman—talking about something as horrendous as rape and dismissing it, which I’m not. But we never discussed it as that. It was a woman in grief for her dead child, and the father of the child—who happens to be her brother—who never really acknowledged the children is standing with her. We’ve all experienced grief. There’s a moment of wanting to fill a void, and that is often very visceral, physical. That, for me, is where she was at. There was an emotional block, and [her brother] was just a bit of a drug for her.[34]

text: The Jaime-Cersei scene was subsequently ignored for the rest of Season 4 and the rest of the series. TheMarySue.com concluded that not really referring to the scene again, instead of as a long and developed subplot, trivializes rape—if, in fact, it was ever their actual intention to portray it as a rape scene. In real life a woman would be traumatized by being raped, not act as if nothing had happened immediately afterwards. TheMarySue.com was also critical that even if they didn't intend it as a rape scene, ignoring all questions about the scene and simply hoping they would go away over time was very insensitive to the audience.[35]

text: In 2016, Christopher Hooton wrote for The Independent:

text: Game of Thrones is full of characters who are very sure of themselves ... Except Jaime Lannister, who was given a considerable amount of screen time this week in order to establish a little more complexity in his character. Thus far in the show his character arc has gone from "massive jerk", to "still a massive jerk but admirable in how he withstands imprisonment" to "maybe he's starting to redeem himself". This third strand had waned a little in season 6 as he returned to Cersei's side, but showed glimpses of returning in episode 8 as he was reunited with Brienne, about the only character who can appeal to his sense of guilt and honour.[36]

text: Storylines[edit]

text: First season[edit]

text: Jaime's storyline in the first season remains, for the most part, identical to his book storyline, with only minor details altered. In the aftermath of Jaime's capture, he confesses to Catelyn that he tried to kill Bran, but refuses to reveal why.

text: Second season[edit]

text: Robb brings a captive Jaime with his camp as they march through the Westerlands, as Robb fears Tywin may coerce one of his bannerman into freeing Jaime. At one point Jaime attempts to escape by beating his cousin and fellow inmate Alton Lannister to death and strangling his guard Torrhen Karstark when he comes to investigate; though unsuccessfully, the anger of Torrhen's father Rickard proves fatal for Robb's campaign in the coming months. After Jaime goads Catelyn by mentioning Ned's infidelity, she releases him and has Brienne of Tarth escort him to King's Landing to trade for Sansa and Arya.

text: Third season[edit]

text: Jaime and Brienne are captured by a squad of Bolton soldiers. Jaime manages to convince them not to rape Brienne, but their leader Locke takes umbrage when Jaime tries to use his status to secure his own release and chops off Jaime's sword hand. The two are taken to Harrenhal, where the former maester Qyburn treats Jaime's wound and Jaime reveals to Brienne why he killed Aerys. Roose Bolton lets Jaime return to King's Landing but insists on keeping Brienne prisoner for abetting treason, though Jaime ultimately returns to rescue Brienne from being killed by a bear for Locke's amusement. The two return to King's Landing and Jaime is reunited with Cersei.

text: Fourth season[edit]

text: Tywin gifts Jaime a sword forged from Ice and asks him to resign from the Kingsguard and rule Casterly Rock, disowning him when he refuses. Qyburn fits Jaime with a gilded steel hand and Tyrion arranges for Jaime to have sword lessons with his bodyguard Bronn. Cersei initially refuses to resume their relationship, but ultimately relents and has sex with Jaime in front of Joffrey's body, lying in state. Jaime gifts Brienne Tywin's sword and the services of Tyrion's squire Podrick Payne, asking her to find Arya and Sansa and take them to safety. With Tyrion accused of Joffrey's murder, Jaime convinces Tywin to spare Tyrion in return for leaving the Kingsguard, though Tyrion later chooses trial by combat. Tyrion loses the trial and is sentenced to death, but Jaime releases him from his cell and helps him escape to Essos.

text: Fifth season[edit]

text: Cersei guilts Jaime for releasing Tyrion, and Jaime later admits to Bronn that he will kill Tyrion the next time they meet. When a message arrives from the Martells subtly threatening Myrcella as revenge for Prince Oberyn Martell's death in Tyrion's trial by combat, Jaime and Bronn travel to Dorne in secret to retrieve her. As they make their escape they are accosted by Oberyn's bastard daughters, the Sand Snakes, and engage in a fight before all five are arrested by the Water Gardens' palace guards. Doran Martell realises that the message was sent by Oberyn's paramour Ellaria Sand and decides to send Myrcella and his own son Trystane back to King's Landing with Jaime. As the ship sets sail, Myrcella admits to Jaime that she knows and is happy that he is her father. The two share a brief embrace before Myrcella suddenly collapses and dies, having been poisoned by Ellaria.

text: Sixth season[edit]

text: Jaime returns to King's Landing with Myrcella's corpse. He orders Trystane to stay on the boat outside the city to protect him from Cersei's wrath, and sends word to Doran naming Ellaria as Myrcella's killer, though Ellaria promptly kills Doran, has Obara and Nymeria kill Trystane and seizes control of Dorne. At Myrcella's funeral, Jaime confronts the religious leader, the High Sparrow, for having forced Cersei to walk naked through the streets of King's Landing as punishment for adultery, but is forced to stand down at the arrival of the Faith Militant. Jaime enlists the Tyrell army to march on the Sept of Baelor to secure the release of Margaery and Loras Tyrell. However, they find that Margaery has seemingly become a follower of the High Sparrow and that Tommen has forged an alliance with the Faith Militant. As punishment for taking up arms against the Faith, Jaime is removed from the Kingsguard. He is sent to Riverrun with Bronn to assist House Frey in ousting Brynden "Blackfish" Tully and the occupying Tully forces. After a failed parlay, Brienne arrives and beseeches Jaime to end the siege without bloodshed, so the Tully rebels can help Sansa Stark retake Winterfell. Brienne also fails, so Jaime manipulates the captured Edmure Tully into thinking his infant son will be killed if Edmure does not order a surrender. Edmure is released and promptly opens the gates to the Lannisters. Jaime sees Brienne and Podrick fleeing by boat from the castle walls, but only waves a discreet farewell and does not alert his men.

text: After traveling to House Frey's fortress The Twins for a feast celebrating their victory, Jaime returns to King's Landing, and is horrified to discover that the Great Sept has been destroyed as a result of Cersei's plotting. He returns to the Red Keep in time to witness Cersei being crowned as Queen of the Seven Kingdoms, immediately realizing that Cersei essentially murdered the Faith Militant, the Tyrells, Grand Maester Pycelle and their uncle Kevan to acquire her new power.

text: Seventh season[edit]

text: Despite his discomfort at the circumstances leading to Cersei's coronation, Jaime remains loyal to his sister, with Daenerys Targaryen and her forces sailing on Westeros. Cersei agrees to marry Euron Greyjoy after the war against Daenerys is won, but continues her relationship with Jaime, no longer attempting to hide their intimacy to their servants. Jaime negotiates with Randyll Tarly to pledge allegiance to the Lannisters; with the help of House Tarly's forces he leads the Lannister army to defeat the Tyrell army at Highgarden, following Olenna Tyrell's defection to Daenerys following Cersei's role in the death of the other Tyrells. In the aftermath of the battle, Jaime allows Olenna to commit suicide by poisoning. Before she dies, Olenna reveals that she was responsible for poisoning Joffrey.

text: As the Lannister forces return to King's Landing, they are attacked by Daenerys, with her horde of Dothraki and her dragon Drogon. Although the Lannisters suffer heavy casualties, Daenerys is forced to dismount Drogon after Bronn wounds the dragon with a scorpion. Jaime attempts to kill Daenerys but is narrowly saved from being burned alive by Drogon by Bronn's intervention. Jaime and Bronn fall into the Blackwater Rush, and survive the battle by being carried downstream and away from the carnage. Jaime returns to King's Landing, where he warns Cersei that the Lannisters are doomed if Daenerys escalates the conflict further and tells her of Olenna's confession.

text: Bronn takes Jaime to the Red Keep cellars under the pretense of training him; however, this is a ruse to allow Tyrion (who is now Hand to Daenerys) to speak with Jaime. Tyrion suggests a ceasefire so that Westeros can fight the threat posed by the White Walkers instead and proposes a meeting between Daenerys and Cersei so Jon Snow can present evidence of their existence. Jaime is apparently convinced by Tyrion and relays the message to Cersei. Cersei is skeptical, but remains adamant that the Lannisters will prevail against any foe. She also reveals that she is pregnant with Jaime's child.

text: At the meeting, Jon and Daenerys present a wight, convincing the Lannisters of the White Walkers' existence. After some persuasion from Tyrion, Cersei declares that she will order the Lannister forces north to aid in the war against the army of the dead. However, when Jaime begins organising the march north, she reveals to him that she was lying and will not intervene until either of the two enemies – dead and living – are defeated. Outraged by Cersei's shortsightedness and selfishness, Jaime leaves Cersei's side and rides north alone.

text: Reception[edit]

text: Matt Roush wrote for TV Guide that Coster-Waldau plays "dastardly" Jaime "with malevolent charisma",[37] and Dodds noted that, despite the "despicable things" he has done, "the Kingslayer remains one of Game of Thrones' most popular characters".[2] Matthew Gilbert of The Boston Globe wrote:

text: The most riveting characters are the most self-serving, notably the queen, Cersei ... and her twin brother Jaime Lannister ... with whom she is having an incestuous affair. They have gorgeous, aristocratic features, but they are pure, compelling evil.[38]

text: Recognition and awards[edit]

text: Coster-Waldau has received several nominations for his portrayal of Jaime, including the Critics' Choice Television Award for Best Supporting Actor in a Drama Series in 2013,[39] the Satellite Award for Best Supporting Actor in a Series, Miniseries or Television Film in 2013,[40] the Gold Derby TV Award for Best Drama Supporting Actor in 2013,[41] the People's Choice Award for Favorite TV Anti-Hero in 2014,[42] the Saturn Award for Best Supporting Actor on Television in 2014,[43] and the Zulu Award for Best Actor in 2017.[44]


document_title: Constitutional Convention (United States)

question_text: unable to attend the constitutional convention because he was serving as american minister to france

question_tokens: unable to attend the constitutional convention because he was serving as american minister to france

root

text: Constitutional Convention (United States)

text: Historical context[edit]

text: Before the Constitution was drafted, the nearly 4 million inhabitants[4] of the 13 newly independent states were governed under the Articles of Confederation, created by the Second Continental Congress. It soon became evident to nearly all that the chronically underfunded Confederation government, as originally organized, was inadequate for managing the various conflicts that arose among the states.[5]:4–5[6]:14–16 As the Articles of Confederation could only be amended by unanimous vote of the states, any state had effective veto power over any proposed change.[7] In addition, the Articles gave the weak federal government no taxing power: it was wholly dependent on the states for its money, and had no power to force delinquent states to pay.[7]

tag: p

text: Once the immediate task of winning the American Revolutionary War had passed, the states began to look to their own interests, and disputes arose. These included a dispute between Maryland and Virginia over the Potomac River and opposition to Rhode Island's imposing taxes on all traffic passing through it on the post road that linked all the states. James Madison suggested that state governments should appoint commissioners "to take into consideration the trade of the United States; to examine the relative situation and trade of said states; to consider how far a uniform system in their commercial regulations may be necessary to their common interests and permanent harmony".[8]:92

text: Another impetus for the convention was Shays' Rebellion. A political conflict between Boston merchants and rural farmers over issues such as property seizures for tax debts had broken out into an open rebellion. This rebellion was led by a former Revolutionary War captain, Daniel Shays, himself a small farmer with tax debts, who had never received payment for his service in the Continental Army. The rebellion took months for Massachusetts to put down completely, and some desired a federal army that would be able to put down such insurrections.

text: In September 1786, at the Annapolis Convention, delegates from five states called for a Constitutional Convention in order to discuss possible improvements to the Articles of Confederation. The Constitutional Convention took place in Philadelphia on May 14, 1787. Rhode Island, fearing that the Convention would work to its disadvantage, boycotted the Convention and, when the Constitution was put to the states, initially refused to ratify it.[9]

text: The Convention[edit]

text: Due to the difficulty of travel in the late 18th century, very few of the selected delegates were present on the designated day of May 14, 1787, and it was not until May 25 that a quorum of seven states was secured. (New Hampshire delegates would not join the Convention until more than halfway through the proceedings, on July 23.)[5]:103 James Madison arrived first, and soon most of the Virginia delegation arrived. While waiting for the other delegates, the Virginia delegation produced the Virginia Plan, which was designed and written by James Madison. On May 25, the delegations convened in the Pennsylvania State House.

text: George Washington was unanimously elected president of the Convention,[10] and it was agreed that the discussions and votes would be kept secret until the conclusion of the meeting.[5]:11 Despite the sweltering summer heat, the windows of the meeting hall were nailed shut to keep the proceedings a secret from the public.[History Alive! 1] Although William Jackson was elected as secretary, his records were brief and included very little detail. Madison's Notes of Debates in the Federal Convention of 1787, supplemented by the notes of Robert Yates, remain the most complete record of the Convention.[5]:162–64 Throughout the debate, delegates constantly referred to precedents from history in support of their position. Most commonly, they referred to the history of England, in particular the Glorious Revolution (often simply called "The Revolution"), classical history (mainly the Roman Republic and the leagues of Greek city-states), and recent precedents from Holland and Germany.

text: Outside the Convention in Philadelphia, there was a national convening of the Society of the Cincinnati. Washington was said to be embarrassed. The 1776 "old republican" delegates like Elbridge Gerry (MA) found anything military or hereditary anathema. The Presbyterian Synod of Philadelphia and New York convention was meeting to redefine its Confession, dropping the faith requirement for civil authority to prohibit false worship.[11] Protestant Episcopalian Washington attended a Roman Catholic Mass and dinner.[12] Revolution veteran Jonas Phillips, of the Mikveh Israel Synagogue, petitioned the Convention to avoid a national oath including belief in both Old and New Testaments. Merchants of Providence, Rhode Island, petitioned for consideration, though their Assembly had not sent a delegation.[13]

text: Manasseh Cutler came directly from the capital in New York and found himself a frequent dinner guest among the delegates. He carried grants of five million acres to parcel out among The Ohio Company and "speculators", including some who were attending the Convention.[a] A Philadelphia guest of Robert Morris, Noah Webster would write a pamphlet immediately after the signing. "Leading Principles of the Federal Convention" advocated adoption of the Constitution. It was published much earlier and more widely circulated than today's better known Federalist Papers.[15]

text: James Madison's blueprint[edit]

text: While waiting for the Convention to formally begin, James Madison sketched out his initial draft, which became known as the Virginia Plan and reflected his views as a strong nationalist.[6]:47 By the time the rest of the Virginia delegation arrived, most of the Pennsylvania delegation had arrived as well. They agreed on Madison's plan, and formed what came to be the predominant coalition. By the time the Convention started, the only blueprints that had been assembled were Madison's Virginia Plan, and Charles Pinckney's plan. As Pinckney didn't have a coalition behind his plan, Madison's plan was the starting point for deliberations.[6]:47

text: The Convention agreed on several principles. Most importantly, they agreed that the Convention should go beyond its mandate merely to amend the Articles of Confederation, and instead should produce a new constitution outright. While some delegates thought this illegal, the Articles of Confederation were closer to a treaty between sovereign states than they were to a national constitution, so the genuine legal problems were limited.[6]:64 Another principle they agreed on was that the new government would have all the powers of the Confederation Congress, plus additional powers over the states.[6]:64 Once agreeing on these principles, the Convention voted on the Virginia plan and signaled their approval for it. Once this was done, they began modifying it.

text: Madison's plan operated on several assumptions that were not seriously challenged. During the deliberations, few raised serious objections to the planned bicameral congress, nor the separate executive function, nor the separate judicial function.[6]:67 As English law had typically recognized government as having two separate functions, law making embodied in the legislature, and law executing embodied in the king and his courts, the division of the legislature from the executive and judiciary was a natural and uncontested point.[10]

text: The division of the legislature into an upper and lower house wasn't questioned either, despite the obscure origins of the English House of Lords and its role as the representative of the hereditary nobility.[6]:82 Americans had seldom known any but bicameral legislatures, both in Britain and in most state governments. The main exceptions to this were the dysfunctional Confederation Congress and the unicameral Pennsylvania legislature, which was seen as quickly vacillating between partisan extremes after each election.[6]:82 Experience had convinced the delegates that an upper house was necessary to tame the passions of the lower classes against the interests of wealthy merchants and landowners. Since America had no native hereditary aristocracy, the character of this upper house was designed to protect the interests of this wealthy elite, the "minority of the opulent," against the interests of the lower classes, who constituted the majority of the population.[6]:85[16]

text: On Thursday, June 7, it was proposed that senators should be chosen directly by the state legislatures, instead of by popular vote, as this method was more likely to preserve the power of the upper classes. Convention delegate Elbridge Gerry of Massachusetts observed that "the great mercantile interest and of stockholders, is not provided for in any mode of election-they will however be better represented if the State legislatures choose the second branch."[16] The proposal was carried unanimously.

text:
In England, at this day, if elections were open to all classes of people, the property of landed proprietors would be insecure. An agrarian law would soon take place. If these observations be just, our government ought to secure the permanent interests of the country against innovation. Landholders ought to have a share in the government, to support these invaluable interests, and to balance and check the other. They ought to be so constituted as to protect the minority of the opulent against the majority. The Senate, therefore, ought to be this body; and to answer these purposes, they ought to have permanency and stability.

—James Madison, quoted in Notes of the Secret Debates of the Federal Convention of 1787 by Robert Yates

tag: div

text: The delegates also agreed with Madison that the executive function had to be independent of the legislature. In their aversion to kingly power, American legislatures had created state governments where the executive was beholden to the legislature, and by the late 1780s this was widely seen as being a source of paralysis.[6]:82 The Confederation government was the ultimate example of this.

text: Furthermore, in the English tradition, judges were seen as being agents of the King and his court, who represented him throughout his realm.[10] Madison believed that in the American states, this direct link between state executives and judges was a source of corruption through patronage, and thought the link had to be severed between the two, thus creating the "third branch" of the judiciary which had been without any direct precedent before this point.[10] Madison, however, did not believe that the judiciary should be truly independent, but rather beholden to the legislature rather than the executive. At the Convention, some sided with Madison that the legislature should choose judges, while others believed the president should choose judges. A compromise was eventually reached that the president should choose judges and the Senate confirm them.[6]:84

text: In a few areas, Madison's plan included provisions that had little support among the delegates. Few agreed with Madison that the legislature should be able to invalidate state laws, so the idea was dropped. While most thought there should be some mechanism to invalidate bad laws by congress, few agreed with Madison that a board of the executive and judges should decide on this. Instead, the power was given solely to the executive in the form of the veto. Many also thought this would be useful to protect the executive, whom many worried might become beholden to an imperial legislature.[6]:141 Also, during the deliberations, the New Jersey Plan was introduced, although it was more of a protest to the excessive national character of the Virginia plan, and was not seriously considered.[6]:230 The office of Vice President was also included later in the deliberations, mainly to provide the president a successor if he was unable to complete his term but also to provide presidential electors with an incentive to vote for at least one out of state candidate in addition to a "favorite son" from their own state or region.

text: The early debate[edit]

text: Each state was allowed to cast a single vote either for or against a proposal during the debates in accordance with the majority opinion of the state's delegates.[5]:83 Throughout the Convention, delegates would regularly come and go, with only 30–40 being present on a typical day.[5]:83 Consequently, if a state's delegates were equally divided in their views on a given proposal, or if too few of the state's delegates were in attendance to establish a quorum for the delegation when votes were being cast on a particular proposal, that state's delegation had essentially no effect on the outcome of the vote on the proposal. Thus, for example, after two of New York's three delegates abandoned the Convention in mid July with no intention of returning, New York was left unable to vote on any further proposals at the Convention, although Hamilton would continue to periodically attend and occasionally to speak during the debates.[5]:83

text:
All communities divide themselves into the few and the many. The first are the rich and well born, the other the mass of the people. The voice of the people has been said to be the voice of God; and however generally this maxim has been quoted and believed, it is not true in fact. The people are turbulent and changing; they seldom judge or determine right. Give therefore to the first class a distinct, permanent share in the government. They will check the unsteadiness of the second, and as they cannot receive any advantage by a change, they therefore will ever maintain good government. Can a democratic assembly, who annually revolve in the mass of the people, be supposed steadily to pursue the public good? Nothing but a permanent body can check the imprudence of democracy. Their turbulent and uncontroling disposition requires checks.

—Alexander Hamilton, quoted in Notes of the Secret Debates of the Federal Convention of 1787 by Robert Yates

text: The first area of major dispute was the manner by which the lower house would be apportioned. A minority wanted it to be apportioned so that all states would have equal weight, though this was never seriously considered. Most wanted it apportioned in accordance with some mixture of property and population.[6]:117 Though there was discussion on how to calculate property for this purpose, the issue of property was later dropped because of its difficulty, and an assumption that property would closely correlate to population.

text: Most accepted the desire among the slave states to count slaves as part of the population, although their servile status was raised as a major objection against this. The Three-Fifths Compromise assessing population by adding the number of free persons to three-fifths of "all other persons" (slaves) was agreed to without serious dispute.[6]:119 In 1783, when attempting to assess a national taxation system, the Confederation Congress had considered a three fifths ratio, which did not achieve unanimity.[6]:119[17] This compromise resulted in a large coalition of states, including the small slave states of South Carolina and Georgia, backing the Virginia plan and thus expanding the power of the primary coalition. That the lower house was to be elected directly by the voters was also accepted without major dispute.[6]:119

text: More contentious than the lower house was the question of the upper house. Few agreed with Madison that its members should be elected by the lower house. James Wilson suggested election by popular vote versus election by state legislature, but his proposal was shot down 10–1 by the delegates.[18] Most delegates didn't question the intelligence of the voters,[citation needed] rather what concerned them was the slowness by which information spread in the late 18th century.[6]:122

text: At the time of the Convention, they noted that local newspapers said little of current events, and what little they had was sketchy and dated. Local papers even said little about the meeting of the Convention.[citation needed] Alexander Hamilton proposed extending the term in office for senators to life, considering earlier proposals of four and seven years inefficient to enable the "rich and well born" to have a "distinct, permanent share in the government," which could "check the imprudence of democracy."[16] Moreover, Hamilton proposed that senators not be elected directly by the general public, but by "electors" chosen for that purpose.

text: Besides the problems of direct election, the new Constitution was seen as such a radical break with the old system, by which delegates were elected to the Confederation Congress by state legislatures, that the Convention agreed to retain this method of electing senators to make the constitutional change less radical.[6]:122 The more difficult problem was the issue of apportionment. The Connecticut delegation offered a compromise, whereby the number of representatives for each state in the lower house would be apportioned based on the relative size of the state's population, while the number of representatives in the upper house would be the same for all of the states, irrespective of size. The large states, fearing a diminution of their influence in the legislature under this plan, opposed this proposal. Unable to reach agreement, the delegates decided to leave this issue for further consideration later during the meeting.

text: The delegates couldn't agree on whether the executive should be a single person, or a board of three. Many wished to limit the power of the executive and thus supported the proposal to divide the executive power between three persons.[6]:134 The possible problems of this system, in addition to the knowledge that George Washington would probably be the first president,[citation needed] calmed the fears enough so that the proponents of a singular executive could accumulate a large coalition.[6]:134 This issue came up occasionally after the matter was settled, but was never again seriously doubted.

text: Another issue concerned the election of the president. Few agreed with Madison that the executive should be elected by the legislature. There was widespread concern with direct election, because information diffused so slowly in the late 18th century, and because of concerns that people would only vote for candidates from their state or region. A vocal minority wanted the national executive to be chosen by the governors of the states.[6]:136

text: The issue was one of the last major issues to be resolved, and was done so in the electoral college. At the time, before the formation of modern political parties, there was widespread concern that candidates would routinely fail to secure a majority of electors in the electoral college. The method of resolving this problem therefore was a contested issue. Most thought that the house should then choose the president, since it most closely reflected the will of the people. This caused dissension among delegates from smaller states, who realized that this would put their states at a disadvantage. To resolve this dispute, the Convention agreed that the house would elect the president if no candidate had an electoral college majority, but that each state delegation would vote as a bloc, rather than individually.[6]:136

text: As the Convention was entering its second full month of deliberations, it was decided that further consideration of the prickly question of how to apportion representatives in the national legislature should be referred to a committee composed of one delegate from each of the eleven states that were present at that time at the Convention. The members of this "Grand Committee," as it has come to be known, included Elbridge Gerry, Oliver Ellsworth, Robert Yates, William Paterson, Gunning Bedford, Jr., George Mason, William Davie, John Rutledge, Abraham Baldwin, and Benjamin Franklin. In its report to the Convention on July 5, the committee offered a compromise. The large states had opposed the Connecticut Compromise, because they felt it gave too much power to the smaller states. The Grand Committee's proposal added the requirement that revenue bills originate in the lower house and not be subject to modification by the upper house (although this Origination Clause would later be modified so that revenue bills could be amended in the upper house, or Senate).[6]:199 With this modification, the Convention in a close vote adopted the compromise on July 16. Nationalist delegates remained bitterly opposed, however, until on July 23 they succeeded in further modifying the compromise to give members of the Senate individual voting power, rather than having votes taken by each state's representatives en bloc, as had occurred in Congress under the Articles of Confederation.[19] This accomplished the nationalist goal of preventing state governments from having a direct say in Congress's choice to make national laws.[20] The final document was thus a mixture of Madison's original "national" constitution and the desired "federal" Constitution that many of the delegates sought.[6]:199

text: The first draft[edit]

text: The Convention adjourned from July 26 to August 6 to await the report of the Committee of Detail, which was to produce a first draft of the Constitution. It was chaired by John Rutledge, with the other members including Edmund Randolph, Oliver Ellsworth, James Wilson, and Nathaniel Gorham.

text: Though the committee did not record minutes of its proceedings, three key surviving documents offer clues to the committee's handiwork: an outline by Randolph with edits by Rutledge, extensive notes and a second draft by Wilson, also with Rutledge's edits, and the committee's final report to the Convention.[21]:168 From this evidence it is thought that the committee used the original Virginia Plan, the decisions of the Convention on modifications to that plan, and other sources, such as the Articles of Confederation, provisions of the state constitutions, and even Charles Pinckney's plan, to produce the first full draft,[6]:269–70[21]:165 which author David O. Stewart has called a "remarkable copy-and-paste job."[21]:165

text: Randolph adopted two rules in preparing his initial outline: that the Constitution should only include essential principles, avoiding minor provisions that would change over time, and that it should be stated in simple and precise language.[6]:270

text: Much of what was included in the committee's report consisted of numerous details that the Convention had never discussed but which the committee correctly viewed as uncontroversial and unlikely to be challenged; and as such, much of the committee's proposal would ultimately be incorporated into the final version of the Constitution without debate.[21]:169 Examples of these details included the Speech and Debate Clause, which grants members of Congress immunity for comments made in their jobs, and the rules for organizing the House of Representatives and the Senate.

text: However, Rutledge, himself a former state governor, was determined that while the new national government should be stronger than the Confederation government had been, the national government's power over the states should not be limitless; and at Rutledge's urging, the committee went beyond what the Convention had proposed. As Stewart describes it, the committee "hijacked" and remade the Constitution, altering critical agreements the Convention delegates had already made, enhancing the powers of the states at the expense of the national government, and adding several far-reaching provisions that the Convention had never discussed.[21]:165

text: The first major change, insisted on by Rutledge, was meant to sharply curtail the essentially unlimited powers to legislate "in all cases for the general interests of the Union" that the Convention only two weeks earlier had agreed to grant the Congress. Rutledge and Randolph worried that the broad powers implied in the language agreed on by the Convention would have given the national government too much power at the expense of the states. In Randolph's outline the committee replaced that language with a list of 18 specific "enumerated" powers, many adopted from the Articles of Confederation, that would strictly limit the Congress' authority to measures such as imposing taxes, making treaties, going to war, and establishing post offices.[6]:273–74[21]:170–71 Rutledge, however, was not able to completely convince all of the members of the committee to accept the change. Over the course of a series of drafts, a catchall provision (the "Necessary and Proper Clause") was eventually added, most likely by Wilson, a nationalist little concerned with the sovereignty of individual states, giving the Congress the broad power "to make all Laws that shall be necessary and proper for carrying into execution the foregoing powers, and all other powers vested by this Constitution in the government of the United States, or in any department or officer thereof."[6]:274[21]:171–72 Another revision of Wilson's draft also placed eight specific limits on the states, such as barring them from independently entering into treaties and from printing their own money, providing a certain degree of balance to the limits on the national government intended by Rutledge's list of enumerated powers.[6]:274–75[21]:172 In addition, Wilson's draft modified the language of the Supremacy Clause adopted by the Convention, to ensure that national law would take precedence over inconsistent state laws.[21]:172

text: These changes set the final balance between the national and state governments that would be entered into the final document, as the Convention never challenged this dual-sovereignty between nation and state that had been fashioned by Rutledge and Wilson.[21]:172

text: Another set of radical changes introduced by the Committee of Detail proved far more contentious when the committee's report was presented to the Convention. On the day the Convention had agreed to appoint the committee, Southerner Charles Cotesworth Pinckney, of South Carolina, had warned of dire consequences should the committee fail to include protections for slavery in the Southern states, or allow for taxing of Southern agricultural exports.[6]:269, 275[21]:173 Pinckney and his fellow Southern delegates must have been delighted to see that the committee had included three provisions that explicitly restricted the Congress' authority in ways favorable to Southern interests. The proposed language would bar the Congress from ever interfering with the slave trade. It would also prohibit taxation of exports, and would require that any legislation concerning regulation of foreign commerce through tariffs or quotas (that is, any laws akin to England's "Navigation Acts") pass only with two-thirds majorities of both houses of Congress. While much of the rest of the committee's report would be accepted without serious challenge on the Convention floor, these last three proposals would provoke outrage from Northern delegates and slavery opponents.[6]:275[21]:173–74

text: The final report of the committee, which became the first draft of the Constitution, was the first workable constitutional plan, as Madison's Virginia Plan had simply been an outline of goals and a broad structure. Even after it issued this report, the committee continued to meet off and on until early September.

text: Further modifications and concluding debate[edit]

text: Another month of discussion and relatively minor refinement followed, during which several attempts were made to alter the Rutledge draft, though few were successful. Some wanted to add property qualifications for people to hold office, while others wanted to prevent the national government from issuing paper money.[21]:187 Madison in particular wanted to push the Constitution back in the direction of his Virginia plan.

text: One important change that did make it into the final version included the agreement between northern and southern delegates to empower Congress to end the slave trade starting in 1808. Southern and northern delegates also agreed to strengthen the Fugitive Slave Clause in exchange for removing a requirement that two-thirds of Congress agree on "navigation acts" (regulations of commerce between states and foreign governments). The two-thirds requirement was favored by southern delegates, who thought Congress might pass navigation acts that would be economically harmful to slaveholders.[21]:196

text: Once the Convention had finished amending the first draft from the Committee of Detail, a new set of unresolved questions were sent to several different committees for resolution. The Committee of Detail was considering several questions related to habeas corpus, freedom of the press, and an executive council to advise the president. Two committees addressed questions related to the slave trade and the assumption of war debts.

text: A new committee was created, the Committee on Postponed Parts, to address other questions that had been postponed. Its members, such as Madison, were delegates who had shown a greater desire for compromise and were chosen for this reason as most in the Convention wanted to finish their work and go home.[21]:207 The committee dealt with questions related to the taxes, war making, patents and copyrights, relations with Indian tribes, and Franklin's compromise to require money bills to originate in the House. The biggest issue they addressed was the presidency, and the final compromise was written by Madison with the committee's input.[21]:209 They adopted Wilson's earlier plan for choosing the president by an electoral college, and settled on the method of choosing the president if no candidate had an electoral college majority, which many such as Madison thought would be "nineteen times out of twenty".

text: The committee also shortened the president's term from seven years to four years, freed the president to seek re-election after an initial term, and moved impeachment trials from the courts to the Senate. They also created the office of the vice president, whose only roles were to succeed a president unable to complete a term of office, to preside over the Senate, and to cast tie-breaking votes in the Senate. The committee transferred important powers from the Senate to the president, for example the power to make treaties and appoint ambassadors.[21]:212 One controversial issue throughout much of the Convention had been the length of the president's term, and whether the president was to be term limited. The problem had resulted from the understanding that the president would be chosen by Congress; the decision to have the president be chosen instead by an electoral college reduced the chance of the president becoming beholden to Congress, so a shorter term with eligibility for re-election became a viable option.

text: Near the end of the Convention, Gerry, Randolph, and Mason emerged as the main force of opposition. Their fears were increased as the Convention moved from Madison's vague Virginia Plan to the concrete plan of Rutledge's Committee of Detail.[21]:235 Some have argued that Randolph's attacks on the Constitution were motivated by political ambition, in particular his anticipation of possibly facing rival Patrick Henry in a future election. The main objection of the three was the compromise that would allow Congress to pass "navigation acts" with a simple majority in exchange for strengthened slave provisions.[21]:236 Among their other objections was an opposition to the office of vice president.

text: Though most of their complaints did not result in changes, a couple did. Mason succeeded in adding "high crimes and misdemeanors" to the impeachment clause. Gerry also convinced the Convention to include a second method for ratification of amendments. The report out of the Committee of Detail had included only one mechanism for constitutional amendment, in which two-thirds of the states had to ask Congress to convene a convention for consideration of amendments. Upon Gerry's urging, the Convention added back the Virginia Plan's original method whereby Congress would propose amendments that the states would then ratify.[21]:238 All amendments to the Constitution, save the 21st amendment, have been made through this latter method.

text: Despite their successes, these three dissenters grew increasingly unpopular as most other delegates wanted to bring the Convention's business to an end and return home. As the Convention was drawing to a conclusion, and delegates prepared to refer the Constitution to the Committee on Style to pen the final version, one delegate raised an objection over civil trials. He wanted to guarantee the right to a jury trial in civil matters, and Mason saw in this a larger opportunity. Mason told the Convention that the constitution should include a bill of rights, which he thought could be prepared in a few hours. Gerry agreed, though the rest of the committee overruled them. They wanted to go home, and thought this was nothing more than another delaying tactic.[21]:241

text: Few at the time realized how important the issue would become, with the absence of a bill of rights becoming the main argument of the anti-Federalists against ratification. Most of the Convention's delegates thought that states already protected individual rights, and that the Constitution did not authorize the national government to take away rights, so there was no need to include protections of rights. Once the Convention moved beyond this point, the delegates addressed a couple of last-minute issues. Importantly, they modified the language that required spending bills to originate in the House of Representatives and be flatly accepted or rejected, unmodified, by the Senate. The new language empowered the Senate to modify spending bills proposed by the House.[21]:243

text: Drafting and signing[edit]

text: Once the final modifications had been made, the Committee of Style and Arrangement was appointed "to revise the style of and arrange the articles which had been agreed to by the house." Unlike other committees, whose members were named so the committees included members from different regions, this final committee included no champions of the small states. Its members were mostly in favor of a strong national government and unsympathetic to calls for states' rights.[21]:229–30 They were William Samuel Johnson (Connecticut), Alexander Hamilton (New York), Gouverneur Morris (Pennsylvania), James Madison (Virginia), and Rufus King (Massachusetts). On Wednesday, September 12, the report of the "committee of style" was ordered printed for the convenience of the delegates. For three days, the Convention compared this final version with the proceedings of the Convention. The Constitution was then ordered engrossed on Saturday, September 15 by Jacob Shallus, and was submitted for signing on September 17. It made at least one important change to what the Convention had agreed to; King wanted to prevent states from interfering in contracts. Although the Convention never took up the matter, his language was now inserted, creating the contract clause.[21]:243

text: Gouverneur Morris is credited, both now and then, as the chief draftsman of the final document, including the stirring preamble. Not all the delegates were pleased with the results; thirteen left before the ceremony, and three of those remaining refused to sign: Edmund Randolph of Virginia, George Mason of Virginia, and Elbridge Gerry of Massachusetts. George Mason demanded a Bill of Rights if he was to support the Constitution. The Bill of Rights was not included in the Constitution submitted to the states for ratification, but many states ratified the Constitution with the understanding that a bill of rights would soon follow.[23] Shortly before the document was to be signed, Gorham proposed to lower the size of congressional districts from 40,000 to 30,000 citizens. A similar measure had been proposed earlier, and failed by one vote. George Washington spoke up here, making his only substantive contribution to the text of the Constitution in supporting this move. The Convention adopted it without further debate. Gorham would sign the document, although he had openly doubted whether the United States would remain a single, unified nation for more than 150 years.[21]:112 Ultimately, 39 of the original 55 delegates ended up signing, but it is likely that none were completely satisfied. Their views were summed up by Benjamin Franklin, who said,

text: I confess that There are several parts of this Constitution which I do not at present approve, but I am not sure I shall never approve them. ... I doubt too whether any other Convention we can obtain, may be able to make a better Constitution. ... It therefore astonishes me, Sir, to find this system approaching so near to perfection as it does; and I think it will astonish our enemies ...[24]

text: Rhode Island never sent delegates, and two of New York's three delegates did not stay at the Convention for long. Therefore, as George Washington stated, the document was executed by "eleven states, and Colonel Hamilton."[21]:244 Washington signed the document first, and then moving by state delegation from north to south, as had been the custom throughout the Convention, the delegates filed to the front of the room to sign their names.

text: At the time the document was signed, Franklin gave a persuasive speech involving an anecdote on a sun that was painted on the back of Washington's Chippendale chair.[25] As recounted in Madison's notes:

text: Whilst the last members were signing it Doctor. Franklin looking towards the Presidents Chair, at the back of which a rising sun happened to be painted, observed to a few members near him, that Painters had found it difficult to distinguish in their art a rising from a setting sun. I have said he, often and often in the course of the Session, and the vicissitudes of my hopes and fears as to its issue, looked at that behind the President without being able to tell whether it was rising or setting: But now at length I have the happiness to know that it is a rising and not a setting Sun.[25][26]

text: The Constitution was then submitted to the states for ratification, pursuant to its own Article VII.[27]

text: Proposed plans[edit]

text: Several plans were introduced, with the most important plan being that of James Madison (the Virginia Plan). The Convention's work was mostly a matter of modifying this plan. Charles Pinckney also introduced a plan, although this wasn't considered and its exact character has been lost to history. After the Convention was well under way, the New Jersey Plan was introduced though never seriously considered.[6]:230 It was mainly a protest to what some delegates thought was the excessively radical change from the Articles of Confederation.[6]:230 Alexander Hamilton also offered a plan after the Convention was well under way, though it included an executive serving for life and therefore the delegates felt it too closely resembled a monarchy.[6]:137 Historians are unsure how serious he was about this, and some have speculated that he may have done it to make Madison's plan look moderate by comparison.[6]:137 The Connecticut Compromise wasn't a plan but one of several compromises offered by the Connecticut delegation. It was key to the ultimate ratification of the constitution, but was only included after being modified by Benjamin Franklin in order to make it more appealing to larger states.[6]:199

text: Virginia Plan[edit]

text: Prior to the start of the Convention, the Virginian delegates met and, drawing largely from Madison's suggestions, came up with what came to be known as the Virginia Plan, also known as the Large State Plan.[28] For this reason, James Madison is sometimes called the Father of the Constitution.[28] Presented by Virginia governor Edmund Randolph on May 29, 1787, the Virginia Plan proposed a very powerful bicameral legislature.[28] Both houses of the legislature would be determined proportionately.[28] The lower house would be elected by the people, and the upper house would be elected by the lower house.[28] The executive would exist solely to ensure that the will of the legislature was carried out and would therefore be selected by the legislature.[28] The Virginia Plan also created a judiciary, and gave both the executive and some of the judiciary the power to veto, subject to override.

text: New Jersey Plan[edit]

text: After the Virginia Plan was introduced, New Jersey delegate William Paterson asked for an adjournment to contemplate the Plan.[28] Under the Articles of Confederation, each state had equal representation in Congress, exercising one vote each.[28] The Virginia Plan threatened to limit the smaller states' power by making both houses of the legislature proportionate to population. On June 14 and 15, 1787, a small-state caucus met to create a response to the Virginia Plan. The result was the New Jersey Plan, otherwise known as the Small State Plan.[28]

text: Paterson's New Jersey Plan was ultimately a rebuttal to the Virginia Plan, and was much closer to the initial call for the Convention: drafting amendments to the Articles of Confederation to fix the problems in it.[28] Under the New Jersey Plan, the existing Continental Congress would remain, but it would be granted new powers, such as the power to levy taxes and force their collection.[28] An executive branch was created, to be elected by Congress (the plan allowed for a multi-person executive).[28] The executives would serve a single term and were subject to recall on the request of state governors.[28] The plan also created a judiciary that would serve for life, to be appointed by the executives.[28] Lastly, any laws set by Congress would take precedence over state laws.[28] When Paterson reported the plan to the Convention on June 15, 1787, it was ultimately rejected, but it gave the smaller states a rallying point for their interests.[28]

text: Hamilton's plan[edit]

text: Unsatisfied with the New Jersey Plan and the Virginia Plan, Alexander Hamilton proposed his own plan. It also was known as the British Plan, because of its resemblance to the British system of strong centralized government.[28] In his plan, Hamilton advocated virtually doing away with state sovereignty and consolidating the states into a single nation.[28] The plan featured a bicameral legislature, the lower house elected by the people for three years. The upper house would be elected by electors chosen by the people and would serve for life.[28] The plan also gave the Governor, an executive elected by electors for a life-term of service, an absolute veto over bills.[28] State governors would be appointed by the national legislature,[28] and the national legislature had veto power over any state legislation.[28]

text: Hamilton presented his plan to the Convention on June 18, 1787.[28] The plan was perceived as a well-thought-out plan, but it was not considered, because it resembled the British system too closely.[28] It also contemplated the loss of most state authority, which the states were unwilling to allow.

text: Pinckney's plan[edit]

text: Immediately after Randolph finished laying out the Virginia Plan, Charles Pinckney of South Carolina presented his own plan to the Convention. As Pinckney did not write it down, the only evidence of the plan are Madison's notes,[29] so the details are somewhat vague. It was a confederation, or treaty, among the thirteen states. There was to be a bicameral legislature made up of a Senate and a House of Delegates. The House would have one member for every one thousand inhabitants. The House would elect Senators who would serve by rotation for four years and represent one of four regions. Congress would meet in a joint session to elect a President, and would also appoint members of the cabinet. Congress, in joint session, would serve as the court of appeal of last resort in disputes between states. Pinckney did also provide for a supreme Federal Judicial Court. The Pinckney plan was not debated, but it may have been referred to by the Committee of Detail.[30]

text: Connecticut Compromise[edit]

text: The Connecticut Compromise, forged by Roger Sherman from Connecticut, was proposed on June 11.[28] In a sense it blended the Virginia (large-state) and New Jersey (small-state) proposals. Ultimately, however, its main contribution was in determining the apportionment of the Senate, and thus retaining a federal character in the constitution. Sherman sided with the two-house national legislature of the Virginia Plan, but proposed "That the proportion of suffrage in the 1st. branch [house] should be according to the respective numbers of free inhabitants; and that in the second branch or Senate, each State should have one vote and no more."[28] This plan failed at first, but on July 23 the question was finally settled.[28]

text: What was ultimately included in the constitution was a modified form of this plan. In the Grand Committee, Benjamin Franklin successfully proposed the requirement that revenue bills originate in the house. But the final July 16 vote on the compromise still left the Senate looking like the Confederation Congress. In the preceding weeks of debate, Madison, King, and Gouverneur Morris each vigorously opposed the compromise for this reason.[31] Then on July 23, just before most of the convention's work was referred to the Committee of Detail, Morris and King moved that state representatives in the Senate be given individual votes, rather than voting en bloc, as they had in the Confederation Congress. Oliver Ellsworth of Connecticut, a leading proponent of the compromise, supported their motion, and the Convention adopted it.[19] As the personally powerful senators were to receive terms much longer than the state legislators who appointed them, they became substantially independent. The compromise nonetheless continued to serve the self-interest of small-state political leaders, who were assured of access to more seats in the Senate than they might otherwise have obtained.[20]

text: Slavery[edit]

text: Among the most controversial issues confronting the delegates was that of slavery. Slavery was widespread in the states at the time of the Convention.[21]:68 At least a third of the Convention's 55 delegates owned slaves, including all of the delegates from Virginia and South Carolina.[21]:68–69 Slaves comprised approximately one-fifth of the population of the states;[32]:139 and apart from northernmost New England, where slavery had largely been eliminated, slaves lived throughout all regions of the country.[32]:132 The majority of the slaves (more than 90%),[32]:132 however, lived in the South, where approximately 1 in 3 families owned slaves (in the largest and wealthiest state, Virginia, that figure was nearly 1 in 2 families).[32]:135 The entire agrarian economy of the South was based on slave labor, and the Southern delegates to the Convention were unwilling to accept any proposals that they believed would threaten the institution.

text: Commerce and Slave Trade Compromise[edit]

text: Whether slavery was to be regulated under the new Constitution was a matter of such intense conflict between the North and South that several Southern states refused to join the Union if slavery were not to be allowed. Delegates opposed to slavery were forced to yield in their demands that slavery practiced within the confines of the new nation be completely outlawed. However, they continued to argue that the Constitution should prohibit the states from participating in the international slave trade, including in the importation of new slaves from Africa and the export of slaves to other countries. The Convention postponed making a final decision on the international slave trade until late in the deliberations because of the contentious nature of the issue. During the Convention's late July recess, the Committee of Detail had inserted language that would prohibit the federal government from attempting to ban international slave trading and from imposing taxes on the purchase or sale of slaves. The Convention could not agree on these provisions when the subject came up again in late August, so they referred the matter to an eleven-member committee for further discussion. This committee helped work out a compromise: Congress would have the power to ban the international slave trade, but not for another twenty years (that is, not until 1808). In exchange for this concession, the federal government's power to regulate foreign commerce would be strengthened by provisions that allowed for taxation of slave trades in the international market and that reduced the requirement for passage of navigation acts from two-thirds majorities of both houses of Congress to simple majorities.[6]:318–29

text: Three-Fifths Compromise[edit]

text: Another contentious slavery-related question was whether slaves would be counted as part of the population in determining representation of the states in the Congress, or would instead be considered property and as such not be considered for purposes of representation.[33] Delegates from states with a large population of slaves argued that slaves should be considered persons in determining representation, but as property if the new government were to levy taxes on the states on the basis of population.[33] Delegates from states where slavery had become rare argued that slaves should be included in taxation, but not in determining representation.[33] Finally, delegate James Wilson proposed the Three-Fifths Compromise.[28] This was eventually adopted by the Convention.

text: Delegates[edit]

text: The states had originally appointed seventy representatives to the Convention, but a number of the appointees did not accept or could not attend, leaving fifty-five delegates who would ultimately craft the Constitution.[34]

text: Almost all of the fifty-five delegates had taken part in the Revolution, with at least twenty-nine having served in the Continental forces, most in positions of command.[35] All but two or three had served in colonial or state government during their careers.[6]:65 The vast majority (about 75%) of the delegates were or had been members of the Confederation Congress, and many had been members of the Continental Congress during the Revolution.[21]:25 Several had been state governors.[6]:65[35] Just two delegates, Roger Sherman and Robert Morris, would be signatories to all three of the nation's founding documents: the Declaration of Independence, the Articles of Confederation, and the Constitution.[35]

text: More than half of the delegates had trained as lawyers (several had even been judges), although only about a quarter had practiced law as their principal means of business. There were also merchants, manufacturers, shippers, land speculators, bankers or financiers, two or three physicians, a minister, and several small farmers.[6]:65–68[35] Of the twenty-five who owned slaves, sixteen depended on slave labor to run the plantations or other businesses that formed the mainstay of their income. Most of the delegates were landowners with substantial holdings, and most, with the possible exception of Roger Sherman and William Few, were very comfortably wealthy.[6]:66–67 George Washington and Robert Morris were among the wealthiest men in the entire country.[35]

text:
Connecticut

Oliver Ellsworth*
William Samuel Johnson
Roger Sherman

Delaware

Richard Bassett
Gunning Bedford, Jr.
Jacob Broom
John Dickinson
George Read

Georgia

Abraham Baldwin
William Few
William Houstoun*
William Pierce*

Maryland

Daniel Carroll
Luther Martin*
James McHenry
John Francis Mercer*
Daniel of St. Thomas Jenifer

Massachusetts

Elbridge Gerry*
Nathaniel Gorham
Rufus King
Caleb Strong*

New Hampshire

Nicholas Gilman
John Langdon

New Jersey

David Brearley
Jonathan Dayton
William Houston*
William Livingston
William Paterson

New York

Alexander Hamilton
John Lansing, Jr.*
Robert Yates*

North Carolina

William Blount
William Richardson Davie*
Alexander Martin*
Richard Dobbs Spaight
Hugh Williamson

Pennsylvania

George Clymer
Thomas Fitzsimons
Benjamin Franklin
Jared Ingersoll
Thomas Mifflin
Gouverneur Morris
Robert Morris
James Wilson

South Carolina

Pierce Butler
Charles Cotesworth Pinckney
Charles Pinckney
John Rutledge

Virginia

John Blair
James Madison
George Mason*
James McClurg*
Edmund Randolph*
George Washington
George Wythe*

Rhode Island Rhode Island did not send delegates to the Convention.

tag: table

text: (*) Did not sign the final draft of the U.S. Constitution. Randolph, Mason, and Gerry were the only three present in Philadelphia at the time who refused to sign.

text: Several prominent Founders are notable for not participating in the Constitutional Convention. Thomas Jefferson was abroad, serving as the minister to France (nonetheless, Jefferson, in a letter to John Adams, would describe the delegates approvingly as a gathering of "demi-gods").[36]:13 John Adams was in Britain, serving as minister to that country, but he wrote home to encourage the delegates. Patrick Henry refused to participate because he "smelt a rat in Philadelphia, tending toward the monarchy." Also absent were John Hancock and Samuel Adams. Many of the states' older and more experienced leaders may have simply been too busy with the local affairs of their states to attend the Convention,[6]:65 which had originally been planned to strengthen the existing Articles of Confederation, not to write a constitution for a completely new national government.


document_title: List of National Football League career rushing yards leaders

question_text: who has the most rushing yards in football

text: Players with at least 10,000 rushing yards[edit]

text:
Key

^
Inducted into the Pro Football Hall of Fame

*
Denotes player who is still active in the NFL

text: Through end of 2017 season.

text:
Rank
Player
Team(s) by season
Carries
Yards
Average

1
Emmitt Smith^
Dallas Cowboys (1990–2002)
Arizona Cardinals (2003–2004)
4,409
18,355
4.2

2
Walter Payton^
Chicago Bears (1975–1987)
3,838
16,726
4.4

3
Barry Sanders^
Detroit Lions (1989–1998)
3,062
15,269
5.0

4
Curtis Martin^
New England Patriots (1995–1997)
New York Jets (1998–2005)
3,518
14,101
4.0

5
Frank Gore*
San Francisco 49ers (2005–2014)
Indianapolis Colts (2015–2017)
Miami Dolphins (2018–present)
3,226
14,026
4.3

6
LaDanian Tomlinson^
San Diego Chargers (2001–2009)
New York Jets (2010–2011)
3,174
13,684
4.3

7
Jerome Bettis^
St. Louis/L.A. Rams (1993–1995[a])
Pittsburgh Steelers (1996–2005)
3,479
13,662
3.9

8
Eric Dickerson^
Los Angeles Rams (1983–1987[b])
Indianapolis Colts (1987–1991)
Los Angeles Raiders (1992)
Atlanta Falcons (1993)
2,996
13,259
4.4

9
Tony Dorsett^
Dallas Cowboys (1977–1987)
Denver Broncos (1988)
2,936
12,739
4.3

10
Jim Brown^
Cleveland Browns (1957–1965)
2,359
12,312
5.2

11
Marshall Faulk^
Indianapolis Colts (1994–1998)
St. Louis Rams (1999–2005)
2,836
12,279
4.3

12
Adrian Peterson*
Minnesota Vikings (2007–2016)
New Orleans Saints (2017)
Arizona Cardinals (2017)
2,574
12,276
4.8

13
Edgerrin James
Indianapolis Colts (1999–2005)
Arizona Cardinals (2006– 2008)
Seattle Seahawks (2009)
3,028
12,246
4.0

13
Marcus Allen^
Los Angeles Raiders (1982–1992)
Kansas City Chiefs (1993–1997)
3,022
12,243
4.1

15
Franco Harris^
Pittsburgh Steelers (1972–1983)
Seattle Seahawks (1984)
2,949
12,120
4.1

16
Thurman Thomas^
Buffalo Bills (1988–1999)
Miami Dolphins (2000)
2,877
12,074
4.2

17
Fred Taylor
Jacksonville Jaguars (1998–2008)
New England Patriots (2009–2010)
2,534
11,695
4.6

18
Steven Jackson
St. Louis Rams (2004–2012)
Atlanta Falcons (2013–2014)
New England Patriots (2015)
2,764
11,438
4.1

19
John Riggins^
New York Jets (1971–1975)
Washington Redskins (1976–1985)
2,916
11,352
3.9

20
Corey Dillon
Cincinnati Bengals (1997–2003)
New England Patriots (2004–2006)
2,618
11,241
4.3

21
O. J. Simpson^
Buffalo Bills (1969–1977)
San Francisco 49ers (1978–1979)
2,404
11,236
4.7

22
Warrick Dunn
Tampa Bay Buccaneers (1997–2001)
Atlanta Falcons (2002–2007)
Tampa Bay Buccaneers (2008)
2,669
10,967
4.1

23
Ricky Watters
San Francisco 49ers (1992–1994)
Philadelphia Eagles (1995–1997)
Seattle Seahawks (1998–2001)
2,622
10,643
4.1

24
Jamal Lewis
Baltimore Ravens (2000–2006)
Cleveland Browns (2007–2009)
2,542
10,607
4.2

25
Thomas Jones
Arizona Cardinals (2000–2002)
Tampa Bay Buccaneers (2003)
Chicago Bears (2004–2006)
New York Jets (2007–2009)
Kansas City Chiefs (2010–2011)
2,678
10,591
4.0

26
Tiki Barber
New York Giants (1997–2006)
2,217
10,449
4.7

27
Eddie George
Houston Oilers/Tennessee Titans (1996[c]–2003)
Dallas Cowboys (2004)
2,865
10,441
3.6

28
Ottis Anderson
St. Louis Cardinals (1979–1986[d])
New York Giants (1986–1992)
2,562
10,273
4.0

29
LeSean McCoy*
Philadelphia Eagles (2009–2014)
Buffalo Bills (2015–present)
2,185
10,092
4.6

30
Ricky Williams
New Orleans Saints (1999–2001)
Miami Dolphins (2002–2003), (2005–2010)
Baltimore Ravens (2011)
2,431
10,009
4.1

31
Marshawn Lynch*
Buffalo Bills (2007–2010)
Seattle Seahawks (2010–2015)
Oakland Raiders (2017–present)
2,251
10,003
4.3

text: Active players with 9,000–9,999 yards[edit]

text: Through end of 2017 season.

text: Chris Johnson, 9,651

tag: ul

text: Historical rushing yards leaders[edit]

text: Seven players have been recognized as having held the career rushing yards record in the NFL. Since reliable yardage statistics were not recorded prior to 1932, the first NFL player recognized as the career leader in rushing yards was Cliff Battles, who played from 1932 to 1937 for the Boston Braves / Boston Redskins / Washington Redskins.[1] He led the NFL with 576 yards in 1932 and held on to the record throughout his career. Emmitt Smith has held the record since surpassing Walter Payton's long-standing total in 2002.[2]

text:
Reign
Player
Team(s) by season
Carries
Yards
Average

1932–1941
(9 years)
Cliff Battles^
Washington Redskins (1932–1937)
839
3,511
4.2

1941–1949
(8 years)
Clarke Hinkle^
Green Bay Packers (1932–1941)
1,171
3,860
3.3

1949–1958
(9 years)
Steve Van Buren^
Philadelphia Eagles (1944–1951)
1,320
5,860
4.4

1958–1963
(5 years)
Joe Perry^
San Francisco 49ers (1948–1960, 1963)
Baltimore Colts (1961–1962)
1,737
8,378
4.8

1963–1984
(21 years)
Jim Brown^
Cleveland Browns (1957–1965)
2,359
12,312
5.2

1984–2002
(18 years)
Walter Payton^
Chicago Bears (1975–1987)
3,838
16,726
4.4

2002–present
(15 years)
Smith, EmmittEmmitt Smith^
Dallas Cowboys (1990–2002)
Arizona Cardinals (2003–2004)
4,409
18,355
4.2