Dothraki Weaponcraft

[Davos's Missing Fingers]

That isn't exactly backed up by the books though. Yes, Drogo and his boodriders sport excellent weaponry. The ordinary Dothraki? Not described.

I always imagined it being something similar to the wildlings. Jon described the Magnar and some of the other leaders as having decent blades, but most of the people possess very crude weaponry.

Additionally, Jon describes Jarl's climbing tools (I think maybe the toe picks or axes) as being of iron, while maybe one other climber had iron, a few bronze, but most were made of bone.

[Dagon]

Agreed.

They are overrated. A katana cannot cut through a tree or steel. The force you would have to generate is impossible for such a feat no matter how sharp your blade is. The katana became a widely collected item for collectors and the sword has this sort of mythical standing among many people. Its a sword, not some sort of magical power weapon.

Who's saying it's a magical weapon? It's a damn fine blade. Obviously you're not going to be impressed by your ebay swords. The average person isn't going to find an authentic one. Nobody practices swordsmanship with one to cut through trees. It's about fine-cutting, not swinging it around wildly like a bastard sword. Completely different styles.

[Lord Reaver]

Who's saying it's a magical weapon? It's a damn fine blade.

I believe the point is, it may be a fine blade, but certainly no better than any good western sword.

[Lord of Dragonstone]

You presume incorrectly. I'll leave it for E-Ro to dig up the reference or link to a thread where he's already done so.

Regardless, I'd have a hard time imagining plate armour being the norm for the average Westerosi soldier.

[Dagon]

I believe the point is, it may be a fine blade, but certainly no better than any good western sword.

It obviously depends on what you're looking for. If you're Gregor Clegane, a huge broadsword is the way to go. If you're looking to kill a man with as few cuts as possible, you may want a katana. The samurai trained with a "One cut, one kill" mindset. Personally I prefer skill over brute strength (but the Hounds my guy in the series. He has/had a nice mix of both.)

[Lord Reaver]

Regardless, I'd have a hard time imagining plate armour being the norm for the average Westerosi soldier.

It isn't. Chainmail is though. And chainmail is quite superb at stopping slashing weapons such as the Arakh. It is somewhat less good at stopping certain shapes of arrowheads, but it is highly unlikely the Dothraki would know that. Even so, with textile armor underneath, one is still fairly well protected against missiles.

[Lord Reaver]

It obviously depends on what you're looking for. If you're Gregor Clegane, a huge broadsword is the way to go. If you're looking to kill a man with as few cuts as possible, you may want a katana. The samurai trained with a "One cut, one kill" mindset.

The samurai weren't the only ones who trained in the use of their weapons, and a long sword is at least as capable of delivering a killing blow as a katana. And there are indeed parallells to the "One cut, one kill" thinking within every one of the fechtbucher (at least the ones I've read), perhaps most famously the I:33's Nucken, which is basically a straight strike to the face.

In fact, western knights did little else but train, if one is to judge from the amount of time and money spent on gear and trainers/manuals. Thing is, instead of being glorified like the Samurai have been in the past 20 or so years, the knights have been actively ridiculed ever since the victorians.

[Bearson]

I'm guessing their weapons get forged in Vaes Dothrak? If they set up camp in one spot for long enough time, I suppose they could set up a smithy operation there, but I would imagine the production of swords would benefit from a more stationary workplace.

[E-Ro]

Just what percentage of Westerosi armies were actually wearing plate armour though? I'd presume the vast majority would be peasant levees, wearing boiled leather at best. While a knight fully clad in armour is probably worth more than the Khalasar equivalent, an opposing army would only have maybe a few hundred to 1000 knights at best, and of those there's no guarantee they all have full plate, as a good number will probably be unlanded hedge knights.

A khalasar of 100,000 "screamers" could probably cut through peasant levees like ribbons, and would probably outnumber the "core" soldiers more than enough to make the difference in equipment negligible.

Not to mention from horseback it's a lot easier to ring the enemy infantrymen's helmets, and it seems like virtually everyone in the Khalasar rides.

Read this post in its entirety.

[Dagon]

The samurai weren't the only ones who trained in the use of their weapons, and a long sword is at least as capable of delivering a killing blow as a katana. And there are indeed parallells to the "One cut, one kill" thinking within every one of the fechtbucher (at least the ones I've read), perhaps most famously the I:33's Nucken, which is basically a straight strike to the face.

In fact, western knights did little else but train, if one is to judge from the amount of time and money spent on gear and trainers/manuals. Thing is, instead of being glorified like the Samurai have been in the past 20 or so years, the knights have been actively ridiculed ever since the victorians.

There's no doubt in my mind that knights were as disciplined as the samurai. Don't know why people wouldn't see that. For being separated half a world apart, they certainly had a lot in common. I assume the main difference in the evolution of their styles revolves around the use of a shield. With a shield at least knights could stand to take a few blows.

[Lord of Dragonstone]

Read this post in its entirety.

It's specifically stated in the book that Westeros doesn't keep standing armies, unlike the Free Cities, though.

If given enough time the peasant levees could be trained and armed to an adequate degree, but I doubt they could stand up to an army made up of men who are warriors as a lifestyle.

Especially given that many houses in Westeros have already lost many men fighting in the Wot5K, it makes it even more likely that whatever troops they could further scrounge up will be poorly trained and less likely to be well-equipped.

So while ideally if given ample time and with a fresh population an army could be trained in Westeros that would defeat the Dothraki, that doesn't mean that if a force of ~100k were to arrive now that they would be easily defeated.

The logistics alone of trying to feed a force big enough to match the Dothraki is hard enough.(I'd assume the Dothraki would get by simply by raiding and sacking everything in sight, which isn't really an option for a lord to do to his own people), let alone trying to train and arm those men from a country that is already ravaged by war.

[By the Old Gods Not theNew]

The only reference in the actual text that shows Dothraki weaponry vs Westerosi armor seems to indicate Dothraki fighters are quick, and that their arakh can cut through mail and find the gaps in plate despite sliding off gauntlets... Dany AGoT:

Qotho wrenched the blade free. "Horselord," Ser Jorah Mormont called. "Try me." His longsword slid from its scabbard.

Qotho whirled, cursing. The arakh moved so fast that Quaro's blood flew from it in a fine spray, like rain in a hot wind. The longsword caught it a foot from Ser Jorah's face, and held it quivering for an instant as Qotho howled in fury. The knight was clad in chainmail, with gauntlets and greaves of lobstered steel and a heavy gorget around his throat, but he had not thought to don his helm.

Qotho danced backward, arakh whirling around his head in a shining blur, flickering out like lightning as the knight came on in a rush. Ser Jorah parried as best he could, but the slashes came so fast that it seemed to Dany that Qotho had four arakhs and as many arms. She heard the crunch of sword on mail, saw sparks fly as the long curved blade glanced off a gauntlet. Suddenly it was Mormont stumbling backward, and Qotho leaping to the attack. The left side of the knight's face ran red with blood, and a cut to the hip opened a gash in his mail and left him limping. Qotho screamed taunts at him, calling him a craven, a milk man, a eunuch in an iron suit. "You die now!" he promised, arakh shivering through the red twilight. Inside Dany's womb, her son kicked wildly. The curved blade slipped past the straight one and bit deep into the knight's hip where the mail gaped open. Mormont grunted, stumbled. Dany felt a sharp pain in her belly, a wetness on her thighs. Qotho shrieked triumph, but his arakh had found bone, and for half a heartbeat it caught.

It was enough. Ser Jorah brought his longsword down with all the strength left him, through flesh and muscle and bone, and Qotho's forearm dangled loose, flopping on a thin cord of skin and sinew. The knight's next cut was at the Dothraki's ear, so savage that Qotho's face seemed almost to explode.

[Bright Blue Eyes]

But most of these cities have ports. As in, who cares if some barbarian horde is outside your walls, you can fish and bring over supplies to your hearts's content, while they can only live off your land for so long, especially if it's a Khalassar as gigantic as Drogo's with more than a hundred thousand mouths to feed. I understand why weaker Free Cities pay them to go away because it's more convenient, but you'd think at some point powerhouses like Volantis would get tired of their shit. Perhaps the Dothraki's underserved reputation preserves them from retribution, but as said elsewhere against a semi-competent army I don't see them winning. Jorah was sucking up to Dany big time; horse archers are not the game-breakers many people (including, seemingly, Martin himself) make them out to be. The Romans cut the Parthians to ribbons well enough when they weren't being led by a complete tool, so I don't see how a much more technologically advanced force (Volantis or a Westerosi army) couldn't duplicate that.

I mean, their bows might be good, but there's only so much bows can do against metal armor, and the Dothrakis are incredibly poorly suited to melee combat against anyone wearing anything more than a shirt. The Arakh is a weapon made to kill unarmed civilians and other Horselords, as far as we know.

And of course, that still doesn't answer the logistics part. In Dany's chapters (IIRC) there never is any mention of a supply train, and where would it come from anyway? They have no farms, no settlements except one that is never mentionned to grow crops, no reliable source of food (at least not enouh to feed such massive numbers). They can't be simply hunting food for such numbers, that's impossible, they would depopulate the ecosystem of anything they touch, and quite obviously they probably don't fish much either. There are only so many Lamb Men villages they can pillage and loot (and why oh why did said Lamb Men establish themselves smack-dab on the Dothraki sea in the first place anyway?).

I know I'm going off an a bit of a rant here. But it seems that worrying about the Dothraki's weapons when their entire society makes little sense to begin with is putting the horse before the Khal, as it were.

GRRM is very much aware. He talks the Dothraki up. but "words are wind", and the actions they perform undercut that image the entire time. He very carefully kept the reader away from the obvious truth: Jorah was kissing ass, Barristan never met the Dothraki in force, Dany doesn't know shit about military matters.

He builds the Dothraki up to be a big threat - and will drop that pretense in the first real battle. A rude awakening for Dany that he has prepared since Game.

The Lamb Men most likely predate the Dothraki. It's even implied that the Dothraki are Lamb Men, rooted out of their homes by the Doom of Valyria and changing their lifestyle to adapt in a post-apocalyptic world.

Just what percentage of Westerosi armies were actually wearing plate armour though? I'd presume the vast majority would be peasant levees, wearing boiled leather at best. While a knight fully clad in armour is probably worth more than the Khalasar equivalent, an opposing army would only have maybe a few hundred to 1000 knights at best, and of those there's no guarantee they all have full plate, as a good number will probably be unlanded hedge knights.

A khalasar of 100,000 "screamers" could probably cut through peasant levees like ribbons, and would probably outnumber the "core" soldiers more than enough to make the difference in equipment negligible.

Not to mention from horseback it's a lot easier to ring the enemy infantrymen's helmets, and it seems like virtually everyone in the Khalasar rides.

1:20 knights, as many squires, men-at-arms, add archers and infantrymen in gambesons or chainmail, literally all of them able to withstand arrows. It doesn't matter. There are reports of the crusades, with the crusaders just in their gambesons, collecting twenty arrows stuck in it without serious injuries. On average.

Who's saying it's a magical weapon? It's a damn fine blade. Obviously you're not going to be impressed by your ebay swords. The average person isn't going to find an authentic one. Nobody practices swordsmanship with one to cut through trees. It's about fine-cutting, not swinging it around wildly like a bastard sword. Completely different styles.

You really need to get away from the Victorian :bs: and what the eighties made of the katanas. It's so fundamentally wrong, I don't even know where to start.

It obviously depends on what you're looking for. If you're Gregor Clegane, a huge broadsword is the way to go. If you're looking to kill a man with as few cuts as possible, you may want a katana. The samurai trained with a "One cut, one kill" mindset. Personally I prefer skill over brute strength (but the Hounds my guy in the series. He has/had a nice mix of both.)

Skill? Please talk to Liechtenauer, Ringeck, Talhoffer and hundreds of medieval authors and fencing masters writing fechtbuchs. The Victorians made up a lot of this :bs: , because the european tradition had been dead since the 17th century.

The katana is a nice backup weapon for a mounted archer, with armor fashioned on some islands without an adequate source of steel. It's not bad, but it is roughly on the same level as the Hallstadt-culture was in Europe. That's pre-celtic!

There's no doubt in my mind that knights were as disciplined as the samurai. Don't know why people wouldn't see that. For being separated half a world apart, they certainly had a lot in common. I assume the main difference in the evolution of their styles revolves around the use of a shield. With a shield at least knights could stand to take a few blows.

That's what armor was developed for. In the late medieval times and during the renaissance, shields weren't used anymore, not in numbers.

It's specifically stated in the book that Westeros doesn't keep standing armies, unlike the Free Cities, though.

If given enough time the peasant levees could be trained and armed to an adequate degree, but I doubt they could stand up to an army made up of men who are warriors as a lifestyle.

Especially given that many houses in Westeros have already lost many men fighting in the Wot5K, it makes it even more likely that whatever troops they could further scrounge up will be poorly trained and less likely to be well-equipped.

So while ideally if given ample time and with a fresh population an army could be trained in Westeros that would defeat the Dothraki, that doesn't mean that if a force of ~100k were to arrive now that they would be easily defeated.

The logistics alone of trying to feed a force big enough to match the Dothraki is hard enough.(I'd assume the Dothraki would get by simply by raiding and sacking everything in sight, which isn't really an option for a lord to do to his own people), let alone trying to train and arm those men from a country that is already ravaged by war.

The Dothraki could never get a force of 100,000 riders together in Westeros. They'd be 100,000 walkers after a week. Westeros lacks the plains to graze so many horses. And each chokepoint keeping them more than three days multiplies the problem. The Dothraki would starve.

5,000-10,000 Dothraki on the other hand could be fed, but they wouldn't be a problem in battle.

[Lord of Dragonstone]

1:20 knights, as many squires, men-at-arms, add archers and infantrymen in gambesons or chainmail, literally all of them able to withstand arrows. It doesn't matter. There are reports of the crusades, with the crusaders just in their gambesons, collecting twenty arrows stuck in it without serious injuries. On average.

The Dothraki could never get a force of 100,000 riders together in Westeros. They'd be 100,000 walkers after a week. Westeros lacks the plains to graze so many horses. And each chokepoint keeping them more than three days multiplies the problem. The Dothraki would starve.

5,000-10,000 Dothraki on the other hand could be fed, but they wouldn't be a problem in battle.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-4gPgHyaG1Q

This is from an English Longbow, and I believe that Mongol/Dothraki counterparts were even more powerful. Chainmail was not an effective way to resist arrows.

There were numerous Khalasars in the Dothraki seas, only the largest of which was 100k. I would presume that in terms of the maximum amount of horses able to be sustained that it would be a lot more than just 100k. Remember that Westeros is around the size of South America. While I wouldn't expect the Dothraki to invade the North, them wreaking havoc in fertile areas like the Reach or the Riverlands should certainly be just as possible as it was in the Dothraki sea.

I think the biggest barrier to 100,000 Dothraki in Westeros would probably finding enough ships to get them across safely, but if they actually were to land, they could probably defeat any realistic army the Westerosi lords could put together against them in open battle.

[Jasta11]

Just what percentage of Westerosi armies were actually wearing plate armour though? I'd presume the vast majority would be peasant levees, wearing boiled leather at best. While a knight fully clad in armour is probably worth more than the Khalasar equivalent, an opposing army would only have maybe a few hundred to 1000 knights at best, and of those there's no guarantee they all have full plate, as a good number will probably be unlanded hedge knights.

A khalasar of 100,000 "screamers" could probably cut through peasant levees like ribbons, and would probably outnumber the "core" soldiers more than enough to make the difference in equipment negligible.

Not to mention from horseback it's a lot easier to ring the enemy infantrymen's helmets, and it seems like virtually everyone in the Khalasar rides.

Well, no one has ever assembled 100K Horselords at once. Drogo's Khal was noted for being unusually large, and it had 40K fighters. And the sheer logistics, again, boggle the mind; you would need thousands of ships to ferry 100K men and at least 200K horses, plus supplies plus non-combatants if it's anything like a migration. Even a quick calculation (assuming 150 men OR 100 horses per ship, and I feel I'm being very generous) makes that at more than 2000 ships. I'm not even sure there are that many vessels in Essos total. Realistically, a Khalassar crossing the Sea would have to be 20-30K strong maximum. I mean, the Golden Company cross with 10K men, mostly foot, and they have loads of problems even if they land in semi-friendly territory. I dare not imagine the sheer logistical comedy that would ensue if the Dothraki and their horses tried to cross and land in enemy waters. Most likely Stannis's fleet detects them and sends them to the bottom at ramming speed anyway.

Not to mention that, even if it does teleport land, keeping 100K men and double the horses supplied is basically impossible. Renly managed to supply 60K because he was in friendly territory and in the most fertile region of Westeros, and most of his soldiers were foot. Cavalry consumes far more food, and a prospective Khal would not be in friendly territory at all, indeed he would need to raid in order to survive, but I'm not sure even the Reach is fertile enough for such a monstruous army. The Vale, North, Westerlands, and Dorne sure as hell aren't. Simple geography dictates these guys are basically immune from any Dothraki attack.

And, as E-Ro is certainly eager to prove, Westerosi armies aren't a bunch of unwashed peasants in leather. Many of them are semi-professional soldiers equipped with decent weapons and and abundance of chainmail, which would stop a curved blade and all but the heaviest of arrows dead in their tracks. A melee between a Westerosi spear/pike wall and unarmored Dothrakis would be a ridiculous massacre, and I'm fairly certain stationary archers (some with longbows) outrange and outmuscle horse archers, not to mention crossbows and their high rate of fire. Against 100K men, Westeros loses, but since such a large force is basically impossible, the probable scenario is more akin to 30K men, which is very much manageable. Jorah was sucking up to Dany when he said Westeros would lose, and he's hardly unbiased anyway.

[Bright Blue Eyes]

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-4gPgHyaG1Q

This is from an English Longbow, and I believe that Mongol/Dothraki counterparts were even more powerful. Chainmail was not an effective way to resist arrows.

There were numerous Khalasars in the Dothraki seas, only the largest of which was 100k. I would presume that in terms of the maximum amount of horses able to be sustained that it would be a lot more than just 100k. Remember that Westeros is around the size of South America. While I wouldn't expect the Dothraki to invade the North, them wreaking havoc in fertile areas like the Reach or the Riverlands should certainly be just as possible as it was in the Dothraki sea.

I think the biggest barrier to 100,000 Dothraki in Westeros would probably finding enough ships to get them across safely, but if they actually were to land, they could probably defeat any realistic army the Westerosi lords could put together against them in open battle.

I really like the undertitle at the very start: "We are only testing modern butted maille, not medieval riveted maille, in this video."

Without the gambesons at that, which were enough protection on their own.

[Sansa_Stark]

Actually, now that I think about it and read through this, 40000 dothraki probably won't win against 40000 westeros in open battle.

The knights might make all the difference, even if they are just a small percentage..

[Dagon]

You really need to get away from the Victorian :bs: and what the eighties made of the katanas. It's so fundamentally wrong, I don't even know where to start.

Skill? Please talk to Liechtenauer, Ringeck, Talhoffer and hundreds of medieval authors and fencing masters writing fechtbuchs. The Victorians made up a lot of this :bs: , because the european tradition had been dead since the 17th century.

What I've read on the subject I've read from the Japanese. I vaguely recall those names associated with rapiers and sabre's, no? Of course it takes skill to wield any weapon. Weapons like the katana and rapier (especially) emphasize precision as opposed to like a zweihander that will do damage no matter where you land. Obviously the relative skill depends on the user.

That's what armor was developed for. In the late medieval times and during the renaissance, shields weren't used anymore, not in numbers.

I was drawing parallels between the emphasis on "One-Cut-One-Kill" mentality and relying on a two-handed weapon without a shield. I'm focusing on the weapon itself, not so much hopping on a horse and pelting the enemy with arrows.

[Bearson]

Regarding katanas:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=iCr09gLxwyM

(One must hope he didn't pay too much for that. Also, in the comments one mentions the way the sword wielder hacks the bamboo is to blame. If so, sure katanas may be very sharp but that still looks awfully brittle. If you're armor is made up of wood, maybe it's a good sword, but steel plate..?)

[Dagon]

Regarding katanas:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=iCr09gLxwyM

(One must hope he didn't pay too much for that. Also, in the comments one mentions the way the sword wielder hacks the bamboo is to blame. If so, sure katanas may be very sharp but that still looks awfully brittle. If you're armor is made up of wood, maybe it's a good sword, but steel plate..?)

Lol, shamefur display. He likely committed seppuku after the camera stopped rolling.

And yea they're brittle as hell... Point match Western swords.