She’s lucky she’s not a Stark!

[Elliott]

So, I re-read the Dany chapters this weekend.

Dany waltzes into Meereen and immediately orders 171 executions and a fairly large (but unspecified) number of amputations and, um, dismemberments.

Can you imagine if she was a Stark? She’d have to do it all herself. Yikes!!

PS. I realize that this is technically about ASOS.

[Gerold Hightower]

So, I re-read the Dany chapters this weekend.

Dany waltzes into Meereen and immediately orders 171 executions and a fairly large (but unspecified) number of amputations and, um, dismemberments.

Can you imagine if she was a Stark? She’d have to do it all herself. Yikes!!

PS. I realize that this is technically about ASOS.

That's the purpose of that rule. It isn't supposed to be easy so the lord or king doesn't have people executed without very good reason.

[BlueLion70]

That's the purpose of that rule. It isn't supposed to be easy so the lord or king doesn't have people executed without very good reason.

Yeah but Dany had a pretty good reason for executing the 160 slavemasters who crucified the children on the road. If that doesn't call for mass executions, I don't know what does!

[shadowbinding shoe]

I'd say this order comes under martial law type and would have different rules to it than what happens in peacetime. Ned's men are allowed to kill their opponents on his orders during battles. They don't let Ned do all of it by himself.

And Ned Stark doesn't execute every condemned man in the North. He's like the supreme court of the North. Petty smugglers on Bear Island would be executed by the lord of Bear Island and so forth.

So Dany would only have to execute the people she condemned herself. If one of her soldiers sees a rape she had forbidden he can condemn him and then execute him (or castrate him in this case) himself instead of giving the task to another soldier.

[Gerold Hightower]

Was any of those slavemasters actually convicted of a crime? Dany may or may not have had "good reasons" but the whole thing has little to do with justice.

[Jaak]

I'd say this order comes under martial law type and would have different rules to it than what happens in peacetime. Ned's men are allowed to kill their opponents on his orders during battles. They don't let Ned do all of it by himself.

And Ned Stark doesn't execute every condemned man in the North. He's like the supreme court of the North. Petty smugglers on Bear Island would be executed by the lord of Bear Island and so forth.

And note how Robb deals with the Karstarks. He condemns them all - he specifically orders the corpses of the two men killed in arrest to be hanged alongside the living, and orders the man who just watched to watch the others hanged and then hang last - but Robb personally beheads only Rickard. He orders his men hang the companions of Rickard, rather than hanging them himself.

[BlueLion70]

And note how Robb deals with the Karstarks. He condemns them all - he specifically orders the corpses of the two men killed in arrest to be hanged alongside the living, and orders the man who just watched to watch the others hanged and then hang last - but Robb personally beheads only Rickard. He orders his men hang the companions of Rickard, rather than hanging them himself.

Robb condemned the lord who betrayed him, and the men who followed that lord in his treacherous act. I think warranting a personal execution from the lord (or king in Robb's case) is reserved for the most serious of crimes, or the noble criminals. Eddard beheaded Gared the Night's Watchman himself because deserting the Night's Watch is a very serious crime, and he went to execute Jorah Mormont himself because Jorah was a lord at the time. Rickard's status, being Lord of Karhold, warrant's him recieving the king as an executioner, and because of how Ned raised Robb.

Beheading someone has a dramatic flair which I think is part of it as well. Hanging someone, and cutting their head off are very different. I feel certain the king/lord has never been the one to pull the rope on the gallows, even if he is the type of man as Ned or Robb who believe killing must be done by one's own hand.

Was any of those slavemasters actually convicted of a crime? Dany may or may not have had "good reasons" but the whole thing has little to do with justice.

Convicted of a crime by whom? To say "convicted" brings up murky territory because the very nature of a conviction is based on our modern system of justice. Our Justice system functions the way it does because we have a set governmental structure and heirarchy from which everything goes down. You can't really apply those terms to Dany's situation. The Great Masters were the rulers of Mereen. Who could Dany bring in to give them a trial? There is no supreme governing body that she can call to say "here, these guys are bad so do justice upon them."

That brings us to the point of: she's the queen, or at least so she claims. All justice stymes from the king/queen. In territory that she controls, her word is law and she is the judge and jury. I mean I know she didn't give the Mereenian slavemasters a trial but assuming she had given them one, it still would have come down to her decision alone.

[tzanth]

That's the purpose of that rule. It isn't supposed to be easy so the lord or king doesn't have people executed without very good reason.

Winterfell is small, so it is possible for the Starks to do all the executing. Meereen, on the other hand, is far larger. Personal executions by the ruler would become very inefficient.

[shadowbinding shoe]

Was any of those slavemasters actually convicted of a crime? Dany may or may not have had "good reasons" but the whole thing has little to do with justice.

Dany gives a collective punishment to the high ranking slavemasters of Meereen. The crime was committed collectively by the Meereenise government. They all (as far as we know) approved or didn't object to it. When she enters the city no one comes forward and points a finger at someone that's responsible for this crime. If Dany had wanted to give them justice on a case by case basis ala Stannis she should have gutted all of them like she did in Astapor, but she was merciful and only punished a few of them.

[Jaak]

Convicted of a crime by whom? To say "convicted" brings up murky territory because the very nature of a conviction is based on our modern system of justice. Our Justice system functions the way it does because we have a set governmental structure and heirarchy from which everything goes down. You can't really apply those terms to Dany's situation. The Great Masters were the rulers of Mereen. Who could Dany bring in to give them a trial? There is no supreme governing body that she can call to say "here, these guys are bad so do justice upon them."

That brings us to the point of: she's the queen, or at least so she claims. All justice stymes from the king/queen. In territory that she controls, her word is law and she is the judge and jury. I mean I know she didn't give the Mereenian slavemasters a trial but assuming she had given them one, it still would have come down to her decision alone.

Sure. But she did not try to do justice.

Dealing with mutineers and losers in a manner including large-scale but selective killing is tricky. On the occasion of asking the Mereenese to identify 163 of their leaders, Daenerys did not bother to watch how the Mereenese decided who the 163 would be.

Depending on the public opinion, it could be easy for the real leaders to point at usual scapegoats and unpopular people and call them the leaders. And that would include people whose carelessness, cowardice or friendliness to Daenerys could cause them to be regarded as fifth column and guilty of Daenerys´ victory. If a minority of Mereenese Great Masters asked their fellows to fight Dany fairly and not destroy their own property senselessly out of mere spite, did Daenerys care to find out who those were?

[BlueLion70]

Sure. But she did not try to do justice.

Dealing with mutineers and losers in a manner including large-scale but selective killing is tricky. On the occasion of asking the Mereenese to identify 163 of their leaders, Daenerys did not bother to watch how the Mereenese decided who the 163 would be.

Depending on the public opinion, it could be easy for the real leaders to point at usual scapegoats and unpopular people and call them the leaders. And that would include people whose carelessness, cowardice or friendliness to Daenerys could cause them to be regarded as fifth column and guilty of Daenerys´ victory. If a minority of Mereenese Great Masters asked their fellows to fight Dany fairly and not destroy their own property senselessly out of mere spite, did Daenerys care to find out who those were?

Oh I know. I believe that Dany was truly committed to justice and in that particular case it was performed, I was really objecting to Gerold Hightower's terming of his moral quandry lol.

Can you clarify what you mean at the end of that second paragraph? I don't understand what you're asking at all.

[Jaak]

Oh I know. I believe that Dany was truly committed to justice and in that particular case it was performed, I was really objecting to Gerold Hightower's terming of his moral quandry lol.

Can you clarify what you mean at the end of that second paragraph? I don't understand what you're asking at all.

Daenerys asked the Mereenese who their "leaders" were. She specified 163 - but does not seem to have followed the details of the process.

If there were any influential moderate or cowardly people in Mereen, sure no one volunteered to point them out to Daenerys - but Daenerys did not bother to ask for them either.

[BlueLion70]

Daenerys asked the Mereenese who their "leaders" were. She specified 163 - but does not seem to have followed the details of the process.

If there were any influential moderate or cowardly people in Mereen, sure no one volunteered to point them out to Daenerys - but Daenerys did not bother to ask for them either.

I don't think she really cared about the moderates though, she wanted the 163 highest ranking people in the city so she could kill them for nailing up the childrens' bodies. I'm sure people who were in power positions but were not high enough to be immediately singled out by the mob as on that Dany would want, but she didn't care about them as she had taken her retribution against the men who she percieved as perpetrating the crime of killing the children.

[Defender of the Rock]

Was any of those slavemasters actually convicted of a crime? Dany may or may not have had "good reasons" but the whole thing has little to do with justice.

Not so much justice per person who committed the crimes but the whole ruling class, this was also to serve a point that she was in charge now and the people in the city were now subject to her laws...

[Elrick]

I guess this is why I don't really like Dany much. I know Martin was trying to make me feel sympathetic towards her but I felt that Roberts desire to kill Dany had warrant. The Targs have shown themselves to be incapable of ruling in the long run due to their unpredictable nature and tendencies towards insanity which was making the realm bleed just as much as the war of five kings. In my opinion Robert had every right to over throw them.

[raif snow]

And replace them with a drunken sod, not much improvement. I say the hell with it all, let the chips fall where they may. Hopefully Dany brings forth another Doom so mankind can get another crack at the "civilization" thing.

[Forge]

I think Robert had every right to overthrow them just as Eddard did...if for no other reason then their own survival. Remember, Aerys had ordered them killed. If someone, anyone, is coming after me, king or no, you better believe I'm going down swinging. Robert was a great general and fighter, but as a king was horrible; that is often the case...but the fact of the matter is who else would have done it? Had anyone else tried to lay claim, there may have been another war break out...Robert was the easiest to deal with because the Baratheon's have Targaryen blood to them, which made it a little easier to swallow for the masses and along with Eddard had led the rebellion.

In the end, if there would have been a man who would have made a good king, I believe it would have been tywin. Robert was a fighter, Eddard had no taste for politics. Jon may have made a fair king, but I really don't have enough to go on to make that determniation.

[Elliott]

On my re-read I really started to notice how morally ambiguous Dany seems to be.

Dany stopped off at a different city before visiting Mereen.

She makes a deal to trade one dragon for all of the unsullied.

Now, with all those unsullied, the folks of the city could have easily taken all three dragons by force. However, instead, they tender the unsullied in good faith.

Dany fulfills her end (or not!) by commanding the dragon to burn the negotiator alive, and then turns the unsullied on the city. More killing and other fun ensues.

The funny thing is that five minutes earlier, Dany was quite happily married to the biggest slaver, murderer, robber, raper, pillager on the continent.

Right before he took a turn for the dead, he announced his plans to murder the men of the seven kingdoms, rape the women and enslave the kids. Dany did everything in her power to keep this wonderful fellow alive after that, even resorting to sorcery.

Speaking of which, that healer who sort of mislead Dany seemed to be in the right, if you ask me…certainly by Dany’s standards.

Dany’s beloved husband just pillaged her village…killing and enslaving the men and raping the women. The witch/healer was personally raped several times and her temple was ransacked. I could certainly see how she might have a few gripes with Dany’s husband, Dany’s kid was prophesized to repeat that process for the entire world. The healer woman might not have been too keen on that either.

Anyways, right or wrong, she holds back some important info from Dany. Right or wrong, Dany punishes her with death.

Now that’s all wonderful, but Dany does not simply execute the witch/healer.

Instead she uses her as a human sacrifice, burning her alive to work dark magic for Dany’s own objectives. That is, assuming that magic requiring human sacrifice can be considered the “bad kind.â€

[Roza Ahai]

On my re-read I really started to notice how morally ambiguous Dany seems to be.

She makes a deal to trade one dragon for all of the unsullied.

She traded her child (is she the Mother?) for the unsullied and betrayed, killed negotiators, simply stole the unsullied. I find it really disgusting. After that, she is the great Hero. Harrr..

[Roza Ahai]

After Drogo's death Dany promised to revenge Drogo's warriors who left her, actually they followed dotraki's traditions. According to these traditions Dany should go to Vaes Dotrak and stay there with other khals wives. She broke that law, moreover she promised to punish those who followed the laws.