So what is this "Meereenese knot" Martin is referring to on his "not a blog"

[Mad Monkey]

Alexia --

That confession was extracted under duress, without access to a lawyer. Joff clearly violated Ned's habeas corpus rights and his confession can't be used to incriminate him. There were no other witnesses to this farfetched "treason" plot (at least, none who came forward) so there is no reason for Joff to have executed him without any trial. The last time a king did that, it led to Robert's rebellion.

The King of the Seven Kingdoms is Viserys. :P

I believe that's spelled "Daenerys".

Wouter, refresh my memory. Didn't Tyrion confess to being guilty of being a dwarf? When did he confess to murdering Joffrey?

Tyrion didn't confess at trial, but he confessed to Jaime, a knight of the Kingsguard, saying (and I'm quoting from Jaime's affidavit here): "I killed your vile son". There are few alternative interpretations for this statement.

If you want to read the full statement, you can see it right here:

“You poor stupid blind crippled fool. Must I spell every little thing out for you? Very well. Cersei is a lying whore, she’s been fucking Lancel and Osmund Kettleblack and probably Moon Boy for all I know. And I am the monster they all say I am. Yes, I killed your vile son.” He made himself grin. It must have been a hideous sight to see, there in the torchlit gloom.

[marwyn]

Tyrion didn't confess at trial, but he confessed to Jaime, a knight of the Kingsguard, saying (and I'm quoting from Jaime's affidavit here): "I killed your vile son". There are few alternative interpretations for this statement.

Ehm, as I read it, he's just saying that to hurt Jaime as much as he can, seeing as Jaime just confessed to him that Tysha wasn't a whore, but exactly what Tyrion first thought she was: an innocent girl who actually fell in love with him.

[Wouter]

Wouter, refresh my memory. Didn't Tyrion confess to being guilty of being a dwarf? When did he confess to murdering Joffrey?

I did not claim he did, I only claimed he is a confessed and convicted criminal. He did confess being guilty of being a dwarf etc (that's a confession, isn't it?) and he was convicted for regicide, ergo, he is a criminal and he has confessed. It's about as much into semantics as your "acknowledged heir" thing.

And that was before The Mad Monkey refreshed my memory that he did actually confess the murder of Joffrey to Jaime. So, there can be truly no doubt now, he did murder Joffrey. He is the widely acknowledged murderer.

Nevertheless, I'm still far more interested in who the real murderers are. Somehow, I don't think Tyrion deserves to be executed despite being an acknowledged regicide. Acknowledgement is overrated.

The King of the Seven Kingdoms is Viserys. :P

Only in his dreams. At least Daenerys is working at making it reality again (for her, then, not for Viserys).

So basically, you posit that Robert doesn't have the right to name his acknowledged son his heir.

I posit that the right course of action is that the true heir should be the actual heir, not one who is "acknowledged" by a bunch of lies and who is a sadist and a psychopath to boot.

I'd be much more empathetic to Ned's predicament here if it weren't for the rank hypocrisy and naivete.

For someone who claims to support the Starks, you have a weird way of showing your support. What exactly do you like about the Starks, and that other great houses don't have?

But it is. He did try to overthrow Joffrey and he confessed to trying to overthrow Joffrey. :P

True, but as relevant as Tyrion confessing to be a dwarf. Overthrowing the "pretender" Joffrey should earn one a medal, not a beheading. And unsurprisingly, Robb saw it that way, too. As did Renly and Stannis.

[Wouter]

Ehm, as I read it, he's just saying that to hurt Jaime as much as he can, seeing as Jaime just confessed to him that Tysha wasn't a whore, but exactly what Tyrion first thought she was: an innocent girl who actually fell in love with him.

But we have a confession and a conviction! He is guilty, just like Ned was guilty of high treason. What more do you want, that Tyrion actually really killed Joffrey? Don't bother with such small details. :ohwell:

[Edward the Great]

But we have a confession and a conviction! He is guilty, just like Ned was guilty of high treason. What more do you want, that Tyrion actually really killed Joffrey? Don't bother with such small details. :ohwell:

The truth is not important. Political strategy is what's important.

[Alexia]

I did not claim he did, I only claimed he is a confessed and convicted criminal. He did confess being guilty of being a dwarf etc (that's a confession, isn't it?) and he was convicted for regicide, ergo, he is a criminal and he has confessed.

*shrugs*

If you want to look at it that way but he didn't publicly confess to a crime, unlike Ned. Being a dwarf is not a crime, plotting the overthrow of the king is. Tyrion specifically said during his trial that he did not kill Joffrey, but he wished he had and he wished he had enough poison for everyone there.

Somehow, I don't think Tyrion deserves to be executed despite being an acknowledged regicide. Acknowledgement is overrated.

Well, things aren't looking too good for him considering that he murdered his father, a judge in the trial against him, and one of the witnesses against him on his way out. He's not guilty of regicide but he is guilty of murdering the King's Hand. Thus, he deserves to be executed. :P

For someone who claims to support the Starks, you have a weird way of showing your support. What exactly do you like about the Starks, and that other great houses don't have?

With the exception of Ned, and possibly Robb (although he was so young I was much more sympathetic), the Starks didn't deserve what happened to them. Sansa did not deserve to be taken hostage and battered bloody by grown men. Arya did not deserve to be held by Gregor and forced into slavery under Weese. Catelyn did not deserve to die at the Red Wedding. Bran did not deserve to be thrown out of a window. None of those children deserved to have their castle burned down, be orphaned, and Bran and Rickon do not deserve to be fleeing for their lives with the Bastard of Bolton hot on their heels.

I like the Stark children because I empathize with their struggles and want to see them rise above it all and come out on top. The first thing needed for this to happen is that streak of Ned-like naivete to go and I think its pretty well gone. If the Starks are confronting the Boltons, Freys, and Lannisters then they need to be politically savvy and make good decisions. Fortunately, it looks like that's where the story is heading.

Ned deserved his fate not for attempting to overthrow Joff, but for handling his coup d'etat in the most idiotic, naive way known to mankind.

Overthrowing the "pretender" Joffrey should earn one a medal, not a beheading. And unsurprisingly, Robb saw it that way, too. As did Renly and Stannis.

Robb never considered Joffrey to be a pretender - he just refused to believe that his father actually attempted to overthrow Joff.

[Alexia]

The truth is not important. Political strategy is what's important.

:lol: :lol: :lol:

Exactly!

[Padraig]

If the Starks are confronting the Boltons, Freys, and Lannisters then they need to be politically savvy and make good decisions. Fortunately, it looks like that's where the story is heading.

The surviving Starks will benefit from Ned and Robb exposing who the worst of the lords are. They can react accordingly. Ned and Robb didn't have that clarity.

Ned deserved his fate not for attempting to overthrow Joff, but for handling his coup d'etat in the most idiotic, naive way known to mankind.

Poor Ned. He gets a hard deal from you. I'm not sure what the alternative was though. Once LF went against Ned, even with Renly's support, the odds were against him.

Robb never considered Joffrey to be a pretender - he just refused to believe that his father actually attempted to overthrow Joff.

Yes. He knew Ned would never act dishonourably, so Joffrey must be lieing. Robb doesn't know the full truth but he is close enough.

So basically, you posit that Robert doesn't have the right to name his acknowledged son his heir.

The fundamental problem a few of us have with this theory is that it suggests that once Robert died, the incest doesn't matter. It suggests that Ned deserves to die because he didn't tell a dieing man the truth about his "children". That's harsh...

[Mad Monkey]

Robert doesn't have the right to name anyone "heir" because he is not "by right" the King. He has no more right to name an heir than Ned Stark did.

[Alexia]

Poor Ned. He gets a hard deal from you. I'm not sure what the alternative was though. Once LF went against Ned, even with Renly's support, the odds were against him.

The big thing with Ned is that he is inflexible, refuses to listen, and doesn't understand people. Take LF. It was foolish to trust him to begin with given the issues with Catelyn. But on top of it all, Ned should never have gone to him for aid in toppling Joff. He should have looked critically at how LF would be affected by putting Stannis on the throne. Yet he refuses to listen when LF told him that Stannis would have him beheaded or fired and expected that LF would help him even after LF says flatly that he opposes that idea. Why, pray tell, should LF act against his own interests? Ned doesn't even try to understand this.

With Renly - yes it was a power play but Renly was right. Even if Robert had fathered Cersei's children she never would have allowed Ned to stand as Regent. He needed to move quickly or be toppled. And sorry folks, but its the height of hypocrisy to plan a coup d'etat and then look down your nose at the man who suggests neutralizing your enemy quickly. Renly's plan was pure common sense. And he doesn't trust Cersei or his position in the court but he sends off the majority of his household guard unnecessarily?

Full disclosure: I really don't like Ned. I almost didn't finish AGOT because of him. I started getting upset when he went to Cersei and hit full outrage mode when he turned down Renly and LF. I was expecting the author to rescue him from his mistakes and was delighted when that didn't happen. I wouldn't take such pains to point out Ned's treason if he hadn't acted so hypocritically with Renly either. Yes, I'm biased. ;)

The fundamental problem a few of us have with this theory is that it suggests that once Robert died, the incest doesn't matter. It suggests that Ned deserves to die because he didn't tell a dieing man the truth about his "children". That's harsh...

Except one could make a decent argument that Robert might not have died if Ned hadn't told Cersei his plans. Ned doesn't deserve to die because he didn't tell a dying man the truth about his kids, he deserves to die for trusting the wrong people, failing to understand the motives of his "allies" or attempting to negotiate with them, for expecting his enemies to not fight like cornered rats, and for digging his own grave and then laying down in it. ;)

[The SmilingKnight]

Full disclosure: I really don't like Ned.

:thumbsup:

The big thing with Ned is that he is inflexible, refuses to listen, and doesn't understand people.

Stannis? Of course.

:thumbsup:

[Padraig]

The big thing with Ned is that he is inflexible, refuses to listen, and doesn't understand people.

Ned had no real experience in KL. I give you that. But Ned's options were rather limited. He needed some support. Going alone would have been even more foolish.

And sorry folks, but its the height of hypocrisy to plan a coup d'etat and then look down your nose at the man who suggests neutralizing your enemy quickly.

Give the man a break. His friend was dieing. He knows himself he shouldn't have dismissed Renly so quickly. But it was too late then.

A good man makes a minor mistake. As I said, your's a rather harsh judgement. :)

And he doesn't trust Cersei or his position in the court but he sends off the majority of his household guard unnecessarily?

To capture Gregor?

Except one could make a decent argument that Robert might not have died if Ned hadn't told Cersei his plans.

So you dislike Ned for been a hypocrite but you are appalled that he tries to save the lives of a few kids?

I admire Ned for trying to be honourable in a pit of vipers. I think Jon will follow on that path. But he (and Dany too) will never be in the same position as Ned. Some sort of clarity is useful.

[Ran]

How can it be a coup when you're trying to place the rightful king on the throne? Baffling.

[Lummel]

Robert doesn't have the right to name anyone "heir" because he is not "by right" the King. He has no more right to name an heir than Ned Stark did.

Robert has the same right as Aegon did: right of conquest.

[Alexia]

To capture Gregor?

Thousands of gold cloaks, Padraig, thousands. And he sends off his own household guard? The only men he has loyal to him and him alone! :tantrum:

So you dislike Ned for been a hypocrite but you are appalled that he tries to save the lives of a few kids?

Not appalled, I just think he was too politically inept for words. He was arrogant and appointed himself a power for judgment that he didn't have. Yes, I disagree with his position on Viserys and Danaerys too. How many kids in Westeros died because he colluded with Cersei?

I don't respect naivete or willful blindness. Need I remind you that at that moment he realizes that Jaime threw his son out a window and believes that Tyrion sent a hired knife after him later? And his leg is currently broken because an enraged Jaime broke it after killing a bunch of his guards? If you were standing in Cersei's shoes, would you have done as Ned told her?

Jon has already threatened a baby to manipulate the mother into doing as he wished. Dany will be in Ned's shoes before long with Tommen and Myrcella in front of her and the need to decide what she'll have done with them.

How can it be a coup when you're trying to place the rightful king on the throne? Baffling.

A helpful definition from Merriam Webster:

Main Entry: coup d'état

Variant(s): or coup d'etat \ˌkü-(ˌ)dā-ˈtä, ˈkü-(ˌ)dā-ˌ, -də-\

Function: noun

Inflected Form(s): plural coups d'état or coups d'etat \-ˈtä(z), -ˌtä(z)\

Etymology: French, literally, stroke of state

Date: 1646

: a sudden decisive exercise of force in politics; especially : the violent overthrow or alteration of an existing government by a small group

Not seeing anything in there about rightful. :P

[Errant Bard]

How can it be a coup when you're trying to place the rightful king on the throne? Baffling.

Because not many agree on who is "rightful", and Ned is judged/power is wielded by those who disagree with him? Isn't it always the case in a coup, that the guy taking power think they are the rightful faction?

[Dreadwolf]

Reading the thread title and the last couple of posts only I got under impression that "Meereenese knot" is either about someone Ned or has something to do with a coup d'état. OMG my stomach got all in KNOTs.

[Padraig]

Robert doesn't have the right to name anyone "heir" because he is not "by right" the King. He has no more right to name an heir than Ned Stark did.

But then, what made Aegon the Conquerer the "rightful" king also? That road lies madness. :P

Thousands of gold cloaks, Padraig, thousands. And he sends off his own household guard? The only men he has loyal to him and him alone!

I can understand your frustration. But that's Ned all over. He couldn't ask other people to do what he wouldn't do himself.

How many kids in Westeros died because he colluded with Cersei?

I think our fundamental disagreement is based on the fact that you think Ned should base his level of morality on the morality of his enemies. I think that will prove to be wrong in the end. Dany hates the Starks at the moment but what will she think when Barristan tells her that Stark was against her murder? Was appalled by the Kingslayer etc?

Why did Barristan pledge loyalty to Dany? Because she is dishonourable? Barristan is even more rigidly honourably than Ned.

Been honourable in the long run is its own reward. Jon didn't become LCotNW because he lacked morality.

Put it another way. Tywin couldn't respect his son. Whatever Tyrion did, Tywin couldn't accept him. The same man that won the war is the same man who couldn't offer the basic human levels of respect to another. All these dishonourable men have sown the seeds of their own defeat.

At the time Ned went to Cersei, he seemed to have all the cards. Robert was alive after all. Nobody could realistically expect that she would go as far as she did. (Or she'd have done it before).

Dany will be in Ned's shoes before long with Tommen and Myrcella in front of her and the need to decide what she'll have done with them.

You think Dany will have those kids murdered? I doubt it.

Isn't it always the case in a coup, that the guy taking power think they are the rightful faction?

Kind of. Might makes right in this case. Cersei knows Joffrey has no "right" under normal rules to the throne.

[Alexia]

I think our fundamental disagreement is based on the fact that you think Ned should base his level of morality on the morality of his enemies.

But I'm not sure that I believe that letting Cersei lay in the bed she's made is immoral. I do believe that colluding with a traitor to help them escape the consequences of such is unethical. He would have done better to plead for the lives of the children afterwards. It wasn't his choice to make.

I think that will prove to be wrong in the end. Dany hates the Starks at the moment but what will she think when Barristan tells her that Stark was against her murder? Was appalled by the Kingslayer etc?

Dany isn't dishonorable but she frightens me. She had almost 200 people crucified and MMD burned alive out of vengeance. Barristan pledged loyalty to Dany because Joffrey fired him and she had the best claim out of the other claimants.

Been honourable in the long run is its own reward.

I hope it was a worthwhile reward considering what happened to the rest of his family because of it. And I think Ned had honorable alternatives, he chose the path most assured of getting him killed.

Put it another way. Tywin couldn't respect his son. Whatever Tyrion did, Tywin couldn't accept him. The same man that won the war is the same man who couldn't offer the basic human levels of respect to another.

Not exactly true. Tyrion didn't do anything to earn his father's respect. Look at how he can't manage to keep his mouth shut with the bad jokes, knowing how his father hated them. And the threat to personally rape Tommen...

Tywin respected Tyrion's abilities enough to send him to KL to put Cersei and Joffrey in check. He had more respect for Tyrion than he did for Cersei.

At the time Ned went to Cersei, he seemed to have all the cards. Robert was alive after all. Nobody could realistically expect that she would go as far as she did. (Or she'd have done it before).

I think you could - in her shoes I would have done the same thing. I think its unrealistic and a tad arrogant to expect her to accept exile just because Ned said so. Not only that - NED BELIEVES SHE KILLED JON ARRYN! :tantrum:

You think Dany will have those kids murdered? I doubt it.

Not murdered, executed. All Dany has to do is look back at her own life to see how foolish it is to leave claimants alive to make trouble. I made the relevant argument several pages back.

Kind of. Might makes right in this case. Cersei knows Joffrey has no "right" under normal rules to the throne.

True enough, but neither does Stannis. :P

[Ran]

Errant,

From a reader's perspective, it seems impossible to come to any conclusion but that Stannis was Robert's heir. Questions of whether Viserys/Daenerys should really inherit the throne aside, we know that Ned isn't carrying out a coup, but rather preventing the perversion of justice and fraud that would be Joffrey taking the Iron Throne.

So, again, I find it weird that a reader could characterize Ned as committing a coup. There's definitely a coup going on in AGoT, but it's Cersei's coup, not Ned's.