User blog comment:Jordan 'The Blur' Farrell/Aragorn Elessar vs Jaime Lannister/@comment-5014364-20131125013545

George R.R. Martin himself has already answered a slew of similar questions comparing characters from his books and Tolkien:  http://www.mtv.com/videos/interview/853851/george-rr-martin-plays-grr-vs-jrr.jhtml

This was actually a serious comparison in terms of how powerful they are portrayed within each fictional universe.

For example, Smaug would probably beat Balerion, Martin admitted, because Tolkien's dragons are intelligent and cunning (they can talk), while Martin's dragons are basically just big animals (they are extremely intelligent animals, like dog/dolphin level, but not enough to communicate complex ideas).

As Martin said, Jaime *in his prime* is one of the greatest, preternaturally skilled swordsmen that Westeros has ever seen. Certainly the most skilled living swordsman (though Arthur Dayne, another member of the Mad King's Kingsguard, was said to be even better - indeed, Ned Stark, Barristan Selmy, and Jaime Lannister all state at various points that Arthur Dayne was arguably the most talented knight who ever lived, and are in complete awe of the man).

So yes, relative to their power levels, Jaime could *probably* kill Aragorn...though Martin admits that it would be a VERY tough fight. Moreover, Jaime isn't as dumb as people think he is, but Aragorn is a warrior-poet philosopher-king in the Classical sense; he's an excellent general, commander, and diplomat. Jaime, in contrast, openly admits that he isn't a very good diplomat and just avoids politics entirely.

So in a straightforward swordfight? Jaime would win, but only after a grueling fight. Aragorn has other advantages in a wider conflict as a commander and statesman.

And of course, Martin points out that Jaime would not win after being maimed and losing his sword-hand.