I don't know whether or not you read my first post, but judging from your statement I would have to chance that you did not. With all due respect, I feel as though you have jumped headlong into the conclusion that I am somehow stating that the judicial system of Tar Valon is exactly the same as the judicial system of the United States (in fact, they are comparable, but that is not the point). Perhaps my original quote will help to shed some light on the situation and clear up any misunderstandings you might have had.




The purpose of that statement and the example sited above is not to assume an exact parallel between the United States government and the judicial system of Tar Valon. The purpose of my argument was to depict that the Aes Sedai are very careful about the way they treat their prisoners. They have very strict regulations about how they treat anyone whose guilt has not yet been lawfully determined, but they are particularly cautious and considerate about the way that they treat other Aes Sedai. I think it is also extremely important to note that once an Aes Sedai has been stilled, she is no longer an initiate of the Tower. Without the shawl or the ring, the laws that govern what can and cannot be done to the guilty party begin to slacken considerably, wouldn’t you say?

Ask yourself this. Why would the Aes Sedai provide a law that strictly governed what could and could not be done to another Aes Sedai during an interrogation? Why do they take it a step farther and set regulations to determine what can and cannot be done to those who do not belong to the Tower? I can think of only two reasons.

The first reason is to uphold some sense of ethical decorum. Very likely, this is an indication of their need (whether during the War of the Shadow or the Trolloc Wars) to separate themselves from the legions of the dark, or if during the latter, from fallen kingdoms such as Aridhol.

The second reason would be to protect other initiates of the White Tower (Aes Sedai in particular) from undue persecution! Aes Sedai, being sealed to the Tower and the Amyrlin Seat, are afforded a considerable measure of protection from cruelty until their guilt can be determined. Why would they extend that protection to sisters of the Black Ajah? The most reasonable answer is this: so that they do not mistakenly cause unlawful harm to even one sister who isn’t a darkfriend.

Now do you see why the next argument, which is that Stilling is cruel and painful, would make considerably more sense? I do not believe that the Aes Sedai, being women of sophistication, would want to risk unleashing that degree of cruelty on an innocent woman – much less on an initiate of the White Tower! – and the only way to ensure that this does not occur is to wait until the accused party’s guilt can be determined in court prior to carrying out the ceremonial stilling, questioning, and execution.



In fact, there is a criminal justice system in Tar Valon that is comparable to the United States, if not an exact parallel in any way shape or form. Evidence of this justice system can be found in book seven, which I am currently re-reading. It is something that a reader can very easily overlook, and there is no fault on your part if you were unable to recall it. I was vaguely aware of this justice system before I compiled my initial argument, but it did not fall to the forefront of my mind until I read your reply.

So, first your quote:



Now, the allusion to the justice system of Tar Valon:

Her High-backed Chair stood to the right. Only [Sareitha] wore the shawl, but Merilille’s sitting room had been arranged as a court, though no one called it that. So far no one had. Merilille, Adeleas and Vandene confronted Elayne like judges; Sareitha’s chair was placed where the Seat of Rebuke would be, and Careane’s the Seat of Pardon, but the Domani Green who would have been her defender nodded thoughtfully as the Tairen Brown who would have been her prosecutor continued.
[Robert Jordan, A Crown of Swords, page 610]

I think that it is pretty clear to us in this scene that the court Elayne recognizes is quite comparable to our own, especially when we hold it up to the light against most Feudal Courts, where a Lord simply pronounced you guilty or innocent and passes sentence after hearing your case and the testimony of any witnesses who stand in (as we see Gareth Bryne do, with Min, Siuan and Leane, in The Fires of Heaven.)

The Seat of Rebuke bares a dizzying resemblance to the “prosecuting attorney” of an American court, wouldn’t you say? It’s also worth noting that the Seat of Pardon seems to me the very equivalent of the “champion” to which you parallel a defending attorney, who would engage in verbal combat with the Seat of Rebuke. There are obviously differences. In this case, there is no jury, but three judges who preside over the court and ultimately determine the guilt or innocence of the defending party, as well as her sentence.

Please, try to be considerate of potential oversights on your part – especially when you suggest that someone has taken a course of argument that, due to an assumption of all things, caused them to act in a manner that was “arrogant and rude.” I have read the books, and while I am not beyond critical oversights, I didn’t appreciate that.