Dothraki: The most Villainous Culture?

[Mal Malenkirk]

Catchy title, right? But one man's villain...

A more objective assessment would be that the Dothraki are the worst possible neighbour you can have. Not kidding, the Ironmen, the Wildlings and even Tywin frigging Lannister (not a culture but...) are preferable neighbours to the Dothraki.

For the record, I read the first four books a long time ago, the HBO serie tempted me back and so I started to re-read the books, I am toward the end of Game of Thrones.

First time around I had no strong feelings on the Dothraki. This time, perhaps because I am older and read more between the lines, they strike me as an awful group of parasitic bullies with precious few redeeming qualities.

First; they are parasites. They travel in huge khaleesars, Drogo's alone is said to be at least 40 000 riders strong. If you add women and slaves, they probably end up around 100 000 mouths to feed. It is strictly impossible for nomadic tribes to grow this big... unless of course they are leeching resources left and right from the surrounding cultures. Which is exactly what we see them doing. As far as I can tell, they originally were a more typical nomadic culture and when the Valyrian empire fell, they used the power vacuum to raid willy-nilly where they previously couldn't. The surge of resources allowed their population to grow which meant they needed more resources to sustain themselves which lead to more raids and so on. Now they are a bloated horde of leeches. Imagine these huge Dothraki horde roaming pre-columbus North-America, for example. Impossible. They'd starve. They need the surrounding cities full of 'soft men' otherwise these 'proud' warriors couldn't survive.

Even the Ironmen, who share a lot of similarities with the Dothraki, are at least able to live off their island if needs be. It dooms them to poverty, which is why they keep backsliding into the old ways, but at least they can. The Dothraki can't live off the land, not until their numbers are culled to a more manageable number and they break off into smaller tribe, native american style.

A milder criticism is that they are somewhat bigger hypocrites than most other cultures. They sometime use mob style euphemism for example. Like referring to extortion as 'gifts'. I like people who are upfront about what they are doing. The Ironmen and wildlings make no pretence, for example.

They also (seem to) pride themselves as a meritocracy (In the 'only the strong' vein) but they have many trappings of an aristocracy when you look closer. Drogo for example had his blood riders since he was born. What, they knew since he was born he was going to be the Khal? And what is this deal of having a ceremony for his son? obviously they can't do that for every child.

So how much of a meritocracy are they again? Clearly they value strength but a lot of their behaviours seem awfully dynastic behaviour if you ask me. No shame in that, but on first read I liked the meritocracy aspect of their culture and on re-read I realize they are probably not much more meritocratic than most. Dany gave us no insight in their family structures, we don't even know who Drogo's father was, yet clearly it matters as we see from the blood riders he arranged for him at birth and the privilege of having this huge ceremony at the holy city for a Khal's child, which can't help but provide legitimacy. That's quite a head start such child have on the competition.

Also, we see them accepting gifts from Pentos (I think) but plundering the sheepherders culture later. In other word, no matter what have heard, what we saw was that confronted with a tough fight they favour standard extortion, asking no more from the target than they are comfortable to give without a fight, but faced with defenceless people they'll ravage them. Perfectly sensible, but please tone done the warrior rhetoric because this behaviour makes you much more akin to a brigand than a warrior.

Finally, Slavery, rape and plunder. The trifecta!

They are a slaver's culture. We know they have slave and because Dany is never seen mingling with the lesser Dothraki we don't see how they are treated but it's made clear for example that every building in their holy city has been built by slaves. Since every self respecting Dothraki male is a rider, we can assume most labours (and a travelling city of 100 000 would need a LOT) is assumed by slaves. The way the Dothraki treated Viserys might feel good to the reader who despise him, but it gives good insight on how they treat the weaker members of their society. If you are not the private Khaleesi slave, like Dany's handmaiden, I bet being a slave in the khaleesar is more awful than most other fate.

We also see that they use rape as a weapon of war. Individually, they might not realize that's what they are doing, but the subtext is clear; it's a terror weapon that convince others to give them 'gifts' and not resist. Drogo is in full control as his people rape everything that moves. It is proven when he decides to support Dany's claiming of a few slave. This is simply how they behave and rape is systemic in their culture.

By comparison, there is a lot of rape going on during warfare in Westeros but the cultures themselves do not condone it and the ideal of chivalry are against it. Human nature being what is and social inequality being rampant, lots of rape and plunders is a given but in the end it's more dependant on the commander and the discipline of the troops. If Gregor Clegane rides in town, you might end up wishing for Dothraki (minus the slavery). On the other hand, if it's Robb Stark or Jaime Lannister (The only commander seen punishing a subordinate for rape in wartime, I believe), things should be much more controlled. On the other hand, If it's the Dothraki, rape and slavery it is.

They are the worst!

[The Sleeper]

I think you are quite spot on, but I don't think they are worse, than say Ironborn. They do pretty much the same things, but the latter seem peculiarly enraged if their victims actually fight back. The Dothraki don't seem to be such sore losers. Then again not all Ironborn go raiding.

[Mal Malenkirk]

Ironborns are my number two on that list. But at least they are capable of surviving without plundering (they did between the Greyjoy Rebellion and the recent developpments) and they don't seem to be wrapping themselves in a 'noble savage' veneer quite as much, being much more upfront about their true nature. Of course, that last part is a subjective assessment on my part and valueing such behaviour over that of the Dothraki is a moral judgement and personal bias.

Finally, the ironborn seem much more likely to get their a$$ handed to them before long!

[Free Northman Reborn]

Yeah.

1. Dothraki

2. Ironborn

Those two cultures would not be missed if they were to be eradicated.

[Tyrion's Third Wife]

I agree with everyone's statements so far.

So, I will add my nomination for the third:

3. The Wildlings (Free Folk)

They just can't see the survival of their people depends on co-operation (not all kneeling is submission, sorta).

[Rodrik of Dorne]

1. Qhiscari

2. Dothraki

3. Ironborn

4. Westerosi

5. Free Folk

[Mal Malenkirk]

The Quiscari culture is probably awful to live in (if part of the 99%) but are certainly better neighbours to have than the Dothraki.

[Rodrik of Dorne]

Both the Dothraki and the Free Folk value individual freedom. If you're strong or smart enough to outfight or outrun them you can keep your life and your possessions. The Free Folk even allow women to fight as spear wives. Personally, I think the Free Folk should be received by the Northmen south of the Wall, and that their systems of kinship and kingship should be adopted.

[Mal Malenkirk]

The Free Folk value individual freedom. But the Dothraki are a slaver culture; the use slave labour and they capture slaves to sell them.

They are just the Ironborns with better publicity.

[Rodrik of Dorne]

The Free Folk value individual freedom. But the Dothraki are a slaver culture; the use slave labour and they capture slaves to sell them.

They are just the Ironborns with better publicity.

Yes, you're right. I should have said "in comparison to the Westerosi, the Dothraki value individual freedom."

[Mal Malenkirk]

They value strenght, not personal freedom. If you are a powerful fighter, it seems you have more potential for social ascension in the Dothraki culture than in Westeros, perhaps even becoming Khal (Though as I showed in the OP, Khals try to rig the system so that their son will likely inherit). That's all I'll credit them with.

If you are not a man of above average fighting prowess, I don't see that the Dothraki will respect your individuality anymore than anywhere in Westeros. In fact, they seem worst. Westeros has a few opportunities for a man to improve his standings that do not involve being a kick ass fighter: Maester, Septon/Septa, Merchant and Craftsman, for example, these all offer possibilities of improving your station (Wealth and/or power level).

The Dothraki offer nothing to those not gifted for violence. They have no Maester, they have slaves eunuchs. They have no merchants, they spit on mercantile activities and simply steal or extort what they want. Their craftmen similarly seem to be all slaves as best I can tell. A small exception is made for ex-wives of Khals; they are not given a choice about it but they do retain some power in their holy city. Aside from that, as far as we've been shown, in that culture you are a warrior or you are nothing.

[Rodrik of Dorne]

Ok, you got me.

[atiggerx33]

From what I gather, the blood riders at least in the beginning, it is less that they are honored to protect an infant, but honored to have been selected by the current Khal, most of them will be dead by the time the khalakka grows into adulthood. The khalasar does have a king (khal)and queen (khaleesi), their children are considered princes (khalakka) and princesses (khalakki). I believe what they look at in bloodlines is similar to the way they breed their horses, and look at their offspring. They live in a culture where the strong lead, the khalakka may never be the strongest, despite his bloodlines showing that he should be, therefore as having the potential of being the strongest in the khalasar, his father will of course have him protected, as he would protect his best horses. Since khalasars prey upon each other, this is not only to protect him from rivals in his own tribe, but enemy tribes who would not want another powerful khal they had to fear, if they remove the khalakka as a baby, even if they cannot remove the khal himself, the future of the tribe will fall into chaos as happened when Drogo died. The khalakki could never hope to inherit, nor would a male marrying her become khal, but she is known to have strong bloodlines and thus may produce stronger sons, again shown with horse breeding. So a khal would want to marry a khalakki for the better likelihood of strong offspring. When Khal Drogo married Daenerys, I believe it was less because she was pretty, and obviously not for love (he didn't even know her at the time of their marriage); but instead because he wanted to bring new blood into his khalasar, this would strengthen it (as in bringing new blood into a horse bloodline), he picked her because they would have heard of the Targaryens in the past, the mighty dragonlords, destroyers of cities, Kings of Westeros, and would have figured this to be a strong bloodline to merge with his own, through Dany.

As was made clear though if the khalakka is not old enough to lead at the time the khalasar will not follow an infant, or his mother. The new Khal will kill him so he does not ever challenge them. This leads me to believe that at any moment a khal can be challenged by a male member of his khalasar to fight for the right of leadership, in this I believe his blood riders would not protect him. The blood riders are for protection from enemy tribes during battle, they would protect him from non one-on-one fights, and protect him from people trying to stab him in the back. I believe the battle for the leadership of the khalasar would be ceremonial in that it would be announced, you couldn't just walk up to your khal, stab him in the back, and become khal. This back stabbing would not prove strength since any man can kill an unaware opponent. I believe some sort of trial would have been given to a khalakka upon his father's death to prove his strength, perhaps a sort of battle royale with other members of his tribe who wished to contend to become khal.

On the other side where you say they are awful people, well we have had many cultures throughout the world during medieval times who lived by conquest. It was a common way of life at one time, the dothraki at least offer the possibility of not being obliterated if you give them gifts. Which they do honestly consider gifts as they have no concept of money, even when they make honest "trades" they consider that the person gave them a gift of the item, and then they gave them the gift of something else in return, it's not considered payment. When they do not attack a city it is because the city gave them a gift of slaves or resources, and they in return give them the gift of not attacking, if they think the gift is poor they do not feel obligated to give a gift back and therefore attack. For them to use what you consider "honest" words for what they are doing, being bribed, since they do not believe in money, the word bribe is something they could not hope to understand. When they rape the women of a city (or men, idk it could happen) they have conquered, those people are now their slaves, slaves are considered property that submits to your will, and therefore it is impossible to rape a slave by definition (just as you cannot rape a chair). This does not mean the people are happy to submit, or that it is morally right, as slavery itself is not morally right by today's standards. You have to however look through the eyes of the time period, and location; stand in their shoes so to speak, before you can comment on their morals. At the time and place (Essos), slavery is common and legal, nobody considered it wrong or rose against it until Dany came about, so slavery was the norm; people who were against slavery were the weirdos of the time. There were however no examples of dothraki making members of their own tribes slaves; they made slaves of other tribes, of course, but none of their own. This is a lot more than can be said for the cities of Slaver's Bay, who enslaved their own people quite frequently, Dany commented that one of the unsullied was of Astaporian blood, thus showing they would commit even the worst of slave life upon their people. The only slave eunuchs mentioned were those who took care of the Dosh Khaleen, the respected widowed khaleesi, it is understandable why they would not want men capable of rape around their older women when they may not be there to protect them, outside of that the dothraki (from the example of one of Irri, I believe) found eunuchs to be useless, as they said about the unsullied before she bought them. Irri could not figure out why Dany would want them. The dothraki do not spit on merchants, they treat them respectfully in their city as long as they abide by the laws held there. Dany's protectors even go with her into the trading sector and make "purchases" (giving gifts for gifts).

They do not consider stealing something to exist, as they cannot understand money. When Drogo's tribe got conquered and all the slaves and horses taken one of Dany's tribesmen said they took from the weak as is their right, there were no hard feelings about this, it is just the way of life. As you cannot seem to understand their way of life, and push them through the moral filter you see the world through, if real they could not understand our way of life and would see through an entirely different filter. Imagine any culture looking at us 1,000 years from now, and imagine how barbaric we would all look, we fight wars (maybe they'll have achieved world peace), we have kids shooting up schools (maybe they'll have outlawed guns since world peace), we destroy the planet with our pollution, we hunt species to extinction. You cannot judge any society without putting your feet firmly in their shoes, looking at their way of life, nearby cultures' ways of life, the general way of life of the times, and hundreds of other factors. You can then say "in the world they lived, they were immoral" you cannot hold people (whether real or fictional) to a standard that didn't exist in their country at the time. It would be like saying George Washington was immoral for owning slaves, everyone owned slaves at the time, he wasn't immoral, he was normal.

TLDR; the Dothraki are entirely run by strength, as at any time a khal can be challenged and replaced by a member of his own tribe who believes himself stronger (and defeats him in combat), they are a much better society than most of Essos as they don't enslave members of their own tribe. The do not believe in money and therefore of course aren't going to say they are bribed, they are given gifts by others so that they might bestow upon them the gift of peace. They do not believe they are committing rape as you cannot by definition rape a slave (also I think it was one of Drogo's bloodriders who said that those conquered should be honored to be selected for intercourse since they are inferior). You cannot look at other cultures through your present location's sense of morality and hope to have any understanding of that culture or the morality of the time.

[Mrs.Grumpy]

The Ironborn, free folk, Dothraki, Ghiscari, Basilisk Islanders are all scums.

I think Ironborn, free folk and Ghiscari are evil because of the land. Farming is stupid in Iron Islands so they reave, nothing grows in the upper north so they steal and stuff, Ghiscari lands are dry and empty so they enslave. Free folk and Ironborn rapes so that makes them super-evil and almost all bed slaves are rape victims

I really can't find any reason for the Dothraki, they are just evil and stupid.

No idea about Basilisk Islands but mud-blood towns of escaped slaves, whores, skinners, pirates and such doesn't sound good and it seems like they have a pirate culture as a new Pirate King arisen from there.

I really want to believe that Ghiscari had something good back in time, like, scholars and great thinkers.

[Mal Malenkirk]

atiggerx33: You have a good handle on the Dothraki, but it pretty much just reinforce my initial point; They are the worst possible neighbours

They are a parasitic culture that will drain you of your ressources if you are strong enough to give them pause but will burn your house and rape you silly if you are not. If you want to write your thesis on them, fine, but I suggest doing it from the safety of the citadel! ;)

Most of the points I made concerning them are not moral judgement, just observations (The main exception being my annoyance at the way they present themselves VS what they really do). They are an awful culture to have living next to you and unless you are a powerful warrior they seem to be an awful culture to live in. They make Westeros look good by camparison!

In the end, their culture is doomed, though. History has shown that you can't go on indefinitely parasiting your neighbours like they are. Either they will eventually conquer some lands, settle and then ironically be absorbed by the local cultures as happened eventually to the Mongols, or they will get exterminated like the Huns.

Or, you know, Dany does something with them. Mind you, if she can't reform Slaver Bay, I don't see how she can reform the Dothraki.

[atiggerx33]

atiggerx33: You have a good handle on the Dothraki, but it pretty much just reinforce my initial point; They are the worst possible neighbours

They are a parasitic culture that will drain you of your ressources if you are strong enough to give them pause but will burn your house and rape you silly if you are not. If you want to write your thesis on them, fine, but I suggest doing it from the safety of the citadel! ;)

Most of the points I made concerning them are not moral judgement, just observations (The main exception being my annoyance at the way they present themselves VS what they really do). They are an awful culture to have living next to you and unless you are a powerful warrior they seem to be an awful culture to live in. They make Westeros look good by camparison!

In the end, their culture is doomed, though. History has show that you can't go on indefinitely parasiting your neighbours like they are. Either they will eventually conquer some lands, settle and then ironically be absorbed by the local cultures as happened eventually to the Mongols, or they will get exterminated like the Huns.

Or, you know, Dany does something with them. Mind you, if she can't reform Slaver Bay, I don't see how she can reform the Dothraki.

I will agree that I would not want to have them as my neighbors unless I was very confident in my army. I just didn't like the simplistic view some people are saying such as people are "evil", honestly nobody sees themselves as evil, even Hitler didn't see himself as evil. They are parasitic, but more out of necessity, as you said their nomadic lifestyle could not support such numbers. Some people also claim that slaves were raped which by definition is impossible. A slave is "a person who is the property of and wholly subject to another", this is the definition from dictionary.com. Is it possible to rape your property (chair, bed, couch, shower, food)? If you are "wholly subject" to someone else it means you are obligated to obey them in all things, while a chair or a bed cannot obey you, you won't see a chair complaining about you sitting on it. I am not saying slavery is correct, or the people were happy with their lot, but even Dany said the masters could not be held accountable for rape for any sex they had with their slaves, since they were property at the time.

If you can't find a reason why the Dothraki have something wrong with them Mrs. Grumpy but yet insist on calling them stupid and evil, perhaps you are too young to be reading ASOIAF. Dany accepted, and respected, their culture so to call them stupid and evil you must believe she is also stupid and evil. The fact that you call everything stupid concerns me though, you think a warrior culture is stupid, but you also seem to think farming is stupid; how would you have these people live?

My concept on life (which GRRM tries very hard to emulate and does it flawlessly thus far) is no culture is purely good or evil, there is absolutely no such thing in this world (or Westeros & Essos). I can say even the Nazis were not purely evil, they were strong advocates against animal cruelty, they even punished a scientist for not properly anesthetizing earth worms before an experiment. Some of their standards for animal treatment still exist to this day they were so revolutionary at the time. They weren't a "stupid" group otherwise they wouldn't have conquered as much of Europe as they did. This is not to say the Nazis were good, they had many more obvious negative qualities than positive ones (much much much more), but they were not "evil" and most of them probably thought they were bettering their country and their family's lives by committing the actions they did. The good may outweigh the bad, or the bad the good, or almost balance each other out. It must be so boring to see the world in perfect shades of black and white, I prefer to see the full spectrum in a million shades of grey, trying to fully understand a culture and their opinions before I decide where they fall on a spectrum that exists in the world they live in (much more difficult in real life than in books, but I try). You have to understand by our modern standards any culture that contains slavery is primitive and vile, this is the world we have today. In the world GRRM set up, having done a lot of research on the middle ages and their cultures, slavery was a normal part of life. To say slavery is "evil" in their world is outright stupid, it absolutely is not, it is what is considered normal; only through the filters we have now can we call it bad. If you lived in Mereen, a child of one of the Great Masters, growing up with slaves all around you all day long, would you think it was evil? No, you would think Dany was a psycho ripping away everything your family had worked for all those years to free what you were raised to believe were cattle. Do you think farming of cows, sheep, and other livestock is evil? Even George Washington had slaves, do you believe he is evil and stupid?

[atiggerx33]

To respond more to you though Mal. They are completely awful neighbors, I must agree.

The only thing I can say about the way they present themselves is, they don't lie about what the consequences of standing against them are, they will pummel you, and they make no secret of it. The wording they use, saying things are "gifts" is less about them trying to sugar-coat anything and more about the way their language works. There are no words for buy, sell, purchase, bribe, trade, money, etc. therefore when they refer to things that necessitate such wording they refer to it as giving and receiving gifts. They know it amounts to the same thing, the people "giving" know it amounts to the same thing, and you know it amounts to the same thing. Still gift is the only word they have for the exchange process of "you gift me slaves/tools/resources/whatever and we in return gift you peace". They are limited by their language in their concepts. For another example, we live with the concepts right and left, if you were blindfolded spun around and told to lift your right arm you could do it no problem. However if you were blindfolded, spun around, and then asked to point west you would most likely fail (you would have a 25% chance of guessing right), yet their is a culture (don't remember which) that can do just that, they could not tell you right and left if their lives depended on it, but if you put them in a random city with no way of knowing direction (like sunset/sunrise, stars) and told them to go south they would be able to do so without hesitation. Another culture has only 6 different words for different colors, only one word for red (no pink, majenta, or orange). In an experiment when shown red and orange squares an American easily said they were different colors, this other culture no matter how long they looked at it, saw the same color and said they were identical. A lot of your life depends on your language and the limitations of it, you just don't really realize it.

As I said the Dothraki do not enslave their own tribesmen, which at least makes them superior to the cities of Slaver's Bay. Every warrior has the chance to move up higher in ranks of the khalasar if he is strong no matter how low his birth. Plus even the unbraided boys and wrinkled old men are given places at feasts, sure they aren't places at honor, but even their lowest members of society are fed, again maybe not the choicest morsels but they don't starve. Look at the peasants in Westeros and you wouldn't see them at one of the great lord's feasts. The Dothraki look after their own, in their own way. I also did not hear of any women of the khalasar being raped, GRRM does not seem to shy away from telling it like it is, and I don't think Dany would have just overlooked such a thing.

I will agree their culture is doomed, they will either be forced to eventually assimilate, or they will be exterminated. I believe they can be reformed much more easily than Slavers Bay by Dany though, the Dothraki honor strength; what is a better symbol of strength than the fact that Drogon is her mount? Drogon himself is the symbol of strength, but Dany is his master (they're both learning mind you, but it's like breaking a horse, they don't learn to follow all your commands overnight). I think the Dothraki will just bow down to her at this point, (or w.e. dothraki do since I don't think they kneel before their khal) accepting her as the Stallion that Mounts the World. There are no politics with the Dothraki, they follow the strongest, I doubt they will question the strength of one that can mount a dragon.

[Bastard of Balmora]

I noticed you bring up that you prefer people who are up front in what they are doing, rather than use an extortion tactic and calling it a "gift"

Well, I'd much rather see a Khalesaar coming toward my city and think "Oh, better go and get a gift for them" Rather than wildlings storming wherever the hell I am, spearing my wife through the head and taking my "gifts".

Just me.

[greggs92]

I think the boltons are one of the most ruthless, the dothraki rape and kill, ironborn pretty mjch same the boltons sigil is a flayed man just look at theon I mean reek

[atiggerx33]

I think the boltons are one of the most ruthless, the dothraki rape and kill, ironborn pretty mjch same the boltons sigil is a flayed man just look at theon I mean reek

Very true. The Boltons just won the worst neighbors for me. The Dothraki rape, well look at Ramsay Snow (Bolton) he'll hunt you down like an animal first, and you're dying no matter if you surrender nicely or run like all hell. The Dothraki at least just kill a man or woman for the most part, Ramsay is just vicious. Plus he starved his first wife, Lady Hornwood, until she ate her own fingers. I'd be much more terrified to live next to the Boltons, the Dothraki I can at least buy off with gifts.