Barristan in KL - A room full of murderers

[Nyrhex]

On a recent re-read I've picked up on something I found interesting, and I don't recall it being mentioned here. In AGOT, for her own reasons, Cersie fires Selmy from the Kingsguard. Selmy refuses the early retirement, and despite being loyal to Joffrey up untill this point, makes a remark regarding Stannis taking the throne, and attmpets to leave to an unspecified location. Joffrey, sensing that Selmy may decide to defect to Stannis, orders Selmy be siezed for questioning. Selmy resists arrest, and murders two of the gold cloaks that were sent to bring him to questioning.

“Here, boy. Melt it down and add it to the others, if you like. It will do you more good than the swords in the hands of these

five. Perhaps Lord Stannis will chance to sit on it when he takes your throne.”

...

“He called me boy,” Joffrey said peevishly, sounding younger than his years. “He talked about my

uncle Stannis too.”

“Idle talk,” said Varys the eunuch. “Without meaning …”

“He could be making plots with my uncles. I want him seized and questioned.” No one moved. Joffrey raised his voice. “I said, I want him

seized!"

“That’s all they’re good for, ravens. Why I put up with that

pestilential bird … if there was news of Lord Eddard, don’t you think I would have sent for you? Bastard or no, you’re still his blood. The

message concerned Ser Barristan Selmy. It seems he’s been removed from the Kingsguard. They gave his place to that black dog Clegane,

and now Selmy’s wanted for treason. The fools sent some watchmen to seize him, but he slew two of them and escaped.”

Now, while Selmy is, in point of fact, a traitor and a murderer (he was loyal to Joffrey up to the point he was fired, and considered him the rightful king, yet still killed two men while he resisted a lawful attmept to arrest him?), did him killing those two guards and running off actually saved his life unknowingly? I say it did, and Cersi and half the Small council were in a plot to kill him, exactly from the fear that he will run off and join another claimant, thus adding legitimacy to that claimant's claim.

As Lord Slynt took his place, Grand Maester Pycelle resumed. “Lastly, in these times of treason and turmoil, with our beloved Robert so

lately dead, it is the view of the council that the life and safety of King Joffrey is of paramount importance …” He looked to the queen.

...

Lord Varys spoke, gentler than the others. “We are not unmindful of your service, good ser. Lord Tywin Lannister has generously agreed to

grant you a handsome tract of land north of Lannisport, beside the sea, with gold and men sufficient to build you a stout keep, and servants

to see to your every need.”

While Cersie is the one to fire Selmy, with Joffrey's approval (considering that Robert was the third king to die while Selmy was in the Kingsguard), others take part as well. Pycelle is a Lannister pawn. But Varys is also active when Selmy is fired. He is the one who claims that Lord Tywin promised Selmy lands near Lannisport and servants, so he could live the rest of his life in quite. Pycelle, being the maester of the Red Keep, would surely be the one to recieve this graciouse offer from lord Tywin, should'nt he?

However, we have Tywin himself giving us his version of events:

“And dismissing Selmy, where was the sense in that? Yes, the man was old, but the name of Barristan the Bold still has meaning in the realm. He

lent honor to any man he served. Can anyone say the same of the Hound? You feed your dog bones under the table, you do not seat him

beside you on the high bench.”

Obviousely, Tywin had no knowledge of Selm'y firing beforehand. So he could'nt possibly have offered Slemy lands and servants!

So, if there was never such an offer, why do they offer it? In my oppinion, Cersie wanted Selmy to go to Lannisport, where she would have orgenised some sort of "accident" for Selmy, convinietly preventing the possibility of him joining some other claimant. His refusal to take her "offer" might have been a problem, but there is no insistance, as he has already doomed himslef with his own mouth, and Joffrey had sent Slynt's men to arrest him.

Thoughts?

[Lala]

I remember there was quite a bit of concern afterwards about where Selmy had gone, including Stannis asking Cat at one point if Robb had Selmy hidden among his ranks!

So yes, I agree, this certainly sounds like there's "something rotten in the Small Council"! Wonderful theory~

[Ramsay B.]

Varys had his claws all over this. He most likely just put the Lannisport story in Cersei's head knowing that he would be using Barristan himself.

[hardhome]

Varys was actually subtly WARNING Selmy the offer would lead to his death. Of course he couldn't actually say this in front of Jeoffry or Cersei because that would put himself in danger. Varys long-term plan is for "restoration" of the Targaryen line I can't remember if news of Visareys' death had come yet but it was probably Varys who helped Selmy escape setting him on course to help the other royal family, as he did with Tyrion

[Frozentree]

I think that Tywin criticizing the decision does not mean he did not know about it.

[Nyrhex]

Varys had his claws all over this. He most likely just put the Lannisport story in Cersei's head knowing that he would be using Barristan himself.

Oh most likely. If Barristan had refused his offer to travel across the Narrow sea for some reason (he was still loyal to Joffrey), he could have simply told him "they are planning to kill you, you know...". Should have proved persuasive I think.

I think that Tywin criticizing the decision does not mean he did not know about it.

Impossible. He sent Tyrion to find who were the advisors that were playing Joffrey false. He is aware of thier exsistance and tasks Tyrion with removing them. If he was in on it, he had no reason to lie to Tyrion, and less reason to tell him to deal with those who were with him on the plot.

[Ygrain]

A good catch, I think. I certainly never bought that they needed a white cloak for Sandor so badly, it was rather that Barristan with his honour was extremely inconvenient for them.

[profilebegone]

Varys was actually subtly WARNING Selmy the offer would lead to his death. Of course he couldn't actually say this in front of Jeoffry or Cersei because that would put himself in danger. Varys long-term plan is for "restoration" of the Targaryen line I can't remember if news of Visareys' death had come yet but it was probably Varys who helped Selmy escape setting him on course to help the other royal family, as he did with Tyrion

This is probably right. Varys probably saw Cersei's vindictive impulsiveness as an opportunity, subtly encouraged her to ditch Barry, and then was perfectly set up to scoop him up, sell him on Targaryen restoration (and thus Barry restoration) and ship him off to Illyrio, not unlike what he did with Tyrion.

[Kaerys Snow]

Selmy is, in point of fact, a traitor and a murderer (he was loyal to Joffrey up to the point he was fired, and considered him the rightful king, yet still killed two men while he resisted a lawful attmept to arrest him?)

He is neither. Up until when he was released from the KG, he was bound by the oath he swore and he never violated it. Only after the king dissolved his oath by dismissing him from the KG, Barristan could exert his free will and opposed the king.

The order to arrest him came from a king Barristan was not sworn to. Why should he let arrest himself by a tyrant? Again, Barristan's oath was dissolved, and he did not swear (new) allegiance to Joffrey afterwards. Joffrey in his arrogance may expect loyalty but after having humiliated the old man, it became painfully clear that Barristan owed him nothing.

Unlike Jaime who broke his oath when his father's bannermen were literary knocking on the throne room's doors (well timed for him...), Barristan never broke his oath and dared defying the king when all of KL was against him. Quite a contrast in terms of honour and bravery.

[Ramsay B.]

He is neither. Up until when he was released from the KG, he was bound by the oath he swore and he never violated it. Only after the king dissolved his oath by dismissing him from the KG, Barristan could exert his free will and opposed the king.

The order to arrest him came from a king Barristan was not sworn to. Why should he let arrest himself by a tyrant? Again, Barristan's oath was dissolved, and he did not swear (new) allegiance to Joffrey afterwards. Joffrey in his arrogance may expect loyalty but after having humiliated the old man, it became painfully clear that Barristan owed him nothing.

Unlike Jaime who broke his oath when his father's bannermen were literary knocking on the throne room's doors (well timed for him...), Barristan never broke his oath and dared defying the king when all of KL was against him. Quite a contrast in terms of honour and bravery.

Joffrey is the King of Westeros. He wanted Barristan arrested and Selmy killed his arrestors so that is treason(and murder) by the laws of Westeros. We all know Joffrey is a tyrant but by definition I think that Barristan was a traitor.

[daario's man]

Good catch.

[Frozentree]

Joffrey is the King of Westeros. He wanted Barristan arrested and Selmy killed his arrestors so that is treason(and murder) by the laws of Westeros. We all know Joffrey is a tyrant but by definition I think that Barristan was a traitor.

Depends on whose law you follow. Even if we exclude Daenerys, who was and is far from queen of 7 Kingdoms, you still have 2 more claimants neither of which would consider it treason. Yes, Joffrey had his arse on the throne and a crown on his head, but those are just symbols and he was no more king than Stannis or Renly were.

[Kaerys Snow]

Joffrey is the King of Westeros. He wanted Barristan arrested and Selmy killed his arrestors so that is treason(and murder) by the laws of Westeros. We all know Joffrey is a tyrant but by definition I think that Barristan was a traitor.

He never violated an oath, he was absolved from the one which bound him to serve Joffrey. Unless he swore allegiance again, there is no moral obligation for him to be loyal to that king.

If there is a legal obligation we do not know, lacking the law code of the 7K.

edit: add what Frozentree said... ;) Treason is very much a point of view, which is why it is so important to look at the moral implications.

[Ramsay B.]

He never violated an oath, he was absolved from the one which bound him to serve Joffrey. Unless he swore allegiance again, there is no moral obligation for him to be loyal to that king.

If there is a legal obligation we do not know, lacking the law code of the 7K.

edit: add what Frozentree said... ;) Treason is very much a point of view, which is why it is so important to look at the moral implications.

Well not everyone in Westeros physically swore an allegiance to the King(whoever it is) but if the King sends for you and you kill who he sends, it's gonna be seen as treason. I'm not saying Barristan broke any oath, him being kicked out of the Kingsguard is irrelevant.

[Nyrhex]

He is neither. Up until when he was released from the KG, he was bound by the oath he swore and he never violated it. Only after the king dissolved his oath by dismissing him from the KG, Barristan could exert his free will and opposed the king.

The order to arrest him came from a king Barristan was not sworn to. Why should he let arrest himself by a tyrant? Again, Barristan's oath was dissolved, and he did not swear (new) allegiance to Joffrey afterwards. Joffrey in his arrogance may expect loyalty but after having humiliated the old man, it became painfully clear that Barristan owed him nothing.

Unlike Jaime who broke his oath when his father's bannermen were literary knocking on the throne room's doors (well timed for him...), Barristan never broke his oath and dared defying the king when all of KL was against him. Quite a contrast in terms of honour and bravery.

He bent his knee to Robert. He considers Joffrey his heir, and served him as his king. The "king" dismissed him from his position, but he is still bound by oaths, both of fielty, and as a knight.

The way I see it, we have two possible options:

"I might be serving in King’s Landing still if the vile boy upon the Iron Throne had not cast me aside, it shames me to admit. But when he took the cloak that the White

Bull had draped about my shoulders, and sent men to kill me that selfsame day, it was as though he’d ripped a caul off my eyes. That was

when I knew I must find my true king, and die in his service—”

1. Barristan is lying. An old man, who wants only to die as a kingsguard, and not as a has-been, feels that he should turn cloak and find another king/queen to serve. To Dany he tells a tale close to reality, but spiced with the same "the userpers are evil" propaganda that Dany is used to, to make it seem like he was honestly thinking of her, rather then himself.

2. Slynt was also in on the murder plot, and told the men he sent to make sure that Barristan "resists arrest". As Joffrey only ordered Selmy be questioned, Slynt recieves orders from someone else.

If the former, Barristan is indeed a traitor and murderer, If the latter, his oath is indeed null and void. Persinally, I see it as a 50-50. If you hold Barristan in high esteem, the second option seems more likely.

If there is a legal obligation we do not know, lacking the law code of the 7K.

Luckily, I compiled one.

[sarah.jenice]

A good catch, I think. I certainly never bought that they needed a white cloak for Sandor so badly, it was rather that Barristan with his honour was extremely inconvenient for them.

I agree. We know that Cersei tends to play dirty, and they might have worried that Barristan would have a problem with this (for example - her sending Kingsguard Balon Swann to murder Trystane Martell)

Good post, OP! I never questioned this before.

[Frozentree]

Well not everyone in Westeros physically swore an allegiance to the King(whoever it is) but if the King sends for you and you kill who he sends, it's gonna be seen as treason. I'm not saying Barristan broke any oath, him being kicked out of the Kingsguard is irrelevant.

If someone declares himself king (without people accepting him) and send someone to kill me, is it treason to kill them? This is the same - Joffrey was not the legit king, neither de facto, nor according to Barristan, though he had more supporters than my example would have, he was still not the king.

[Ramsay B.]

If someone declares himself king (without people accepting him) and send someone to kill me, is it treason to kill them? This is the same - Joffrey was not the legit king, neither de facto, nor according to Barristan, though he had more supporters than my example would have, he was still not the king.

In Westeros, until you're removed from the Iron Throne I'd say you're still the King. He had the Gold Cloaks, Kingsguard and the small council.

I understand what you both are saying and I believe you're right that Barristan was not wrong in his actions but according to the laws that were in effect in KL at the time of Barristan's action, it was treason.

[Lala]

If someone declares himself king (without people accepting him) and send someone to kill me, is it treason to kill them? This is the same - Joffrey was not the legit king, neither de facto, nor according to Barristan, though he had more supporters than my example would have, he was still not the king.

It can actually be argued that in illegally dismissing Ser Barristan from the KG (remember, rule of law is important!) although KG are sworn to serve for life barring grave offense, that Joffrey broke whatever oaths of fealty Ser Barristan may have ever sworn to the Baratheon dynasty. This is different from a king merely dismissing a knight from his service - in the first case, the king is merely dissolving the oath that bound the knight to a particular form of service, as the knight's monarch, the king is still owed the knight's fealty as a subject although the knight no longer owes the king service as a knight. However, in breaking a long-standing tradition and social contract that KG knights serve for life, Joffrey breached a fundamental social contract - he had no right to dismiss Ser Barristan, even kings cannot entirely do as they wish with impunity - and consequently released Ser Barristan from all oaths/understandings of obedience and fealty to the Baratheons.

This is the same reason why I do not perceive RR as treason - by executing Ned's brother and father without a trial and groundlessly demanding the deaths of Ned and Robert, Aerys broke the contract between the Targaryens and the Starks, unbinding them from any ties of loyalty.

[Frozentree]

In Westeros, until you're removed from the Iron Throne I'd say you're still the King. He had the Gold Cloaks, Kingsguard and the small council.

I understand what you both are saying and I believe you're right that Barristan was not wrong in his actions but according to the laws that were in affect in KL at the time of Barristan's action, it was treason.

According to those laws, Stannis is also a traitor. When you support a claimant you are considered traitor by every other claimant. Barristan chose to support Daenerys. Yes, if you use Joffrey's law, he is traitor, but why would you use Joffrey's law when we all know he is not the rightful king?