By Sword and Fire: Cruelty and Atrocity in The Series

[SeanF]

War is hell, in Westeros as everywhere else. Martin drives home, through the perspectives of Arya, Jaime, and Brienne, just how ghastly the impact of the fighting is on the Smallfolk of Westeros.

The atrocities ordered by Tywin Lannister are the worst. He sends forth Ser Gregor Clegane, Ser Amory Lorch, Vargo Hoat and their reavers to savage the Riverlands. Ser Kevan promises to set the Riverlands ablaze, and is as good as his word. In Aryas subsequent chapters, we get to see what this means in practice. Children are murdered, women are raped, civilians are tortured and enslaved. For the Brave Companions, probably the worst of the soldiers employed by Tywin, war is nothing more than an excuse to enact their most depraved fantasies.

Yet, atrocity is not one-sided. Jaime and Brienne encounter the tavern girls hanged from trees by Lord Marq Piper because they lay with lions. Arya is horrified to learn that the men being left to rot in crow cages for their crimes are Karstark men, not Lannisters. Subsequently, she comes to the ruins of a village that was burnt to the ground by her grandfather, during Roberts Rebellion. Roose Bolton, even before he switches sides, is as cruel as any of Tywins commanders, as he puts women in stocks to be raped, and allows the Brave Companions free rein to terrorise the population, in return for their changing sides.

This is not, however, a world that completely lacks standards in war. Ser Davos is able to persuade Stannis that sacking Crab Island, due to the defection of its lord, would be an evil and cowardly act. Stannis we learn (and even someone as brutal as Randyll Tarly) gelds rapists among his men. Taking (high-born) prisoners for ransom, rather than killing or mutilating them (although these things happen) is common; Robb Stark executes Lord Karstark and his men for murdering prisoners. Asha Greyjoy is told by the Maester of Deepwood Motte, that she has nothing to fear from surrendering to Stannis, because she has behaved decently towards her prisoners. Even a dullard and a brute like Victarion feels disgust at the sight of his brother tormenting prisoners. Everyone views the Red Wedding with horror and contempt.

It goes without saying that what constitutes a war crime in the modern Western world would not necessarily amount to one in Westeros, but I do think the concept of war crimes does exist. I would suggest these would be:-

• Breach of guest-right
• Murder of prisoners whose surrender has been accepted by a commander
• Torture as a form of recreation
• Rape
• Sacking a town that has surrendered.
• Violation of the terms of surrender.

What do other readers think?

(I took the title from Sean McGlynns excellent account of medieval warfare).

[Chaircat Meow]

1-2 and 5-6 are all a certainty. 3-4 if nobles are involved, but if smallfolk perhaps not, and not in the case of 4 depending on the circumstances.

Also note Stannis's reason for not ravaging Claw Isle. Davos told him the men there just followed their liege, Celtigar, in surrendering and reminded Stannis he followed Robert over Aerys. They were presupposing taking it out on the smallfolk was acceptable if the men of Claw Isle had done something bad.

[Talleyrand]

I can't think of a time we've seen it in the series but I'd add attacking during or breaking a truce between sides as something alongside the breech of guest rights would be looked upon rather dimly in Westerosi society.

As an aside McGlynn's book is very good, there's some dark shit in there but he also includes the logic behind them - you can see why the English were so fond of Chevauchee's

[SeanF]

1-2 and 5-6 are all a certainty. 3-4 if nobles are involved, but if smallfolk perhaps not, and not in the case of 4 depending on the circumstances.

Also note Stannis's reason for not ravaging Claw Isle. Davos told him the men there just followed their liege, Celtigar, in surrendering and reminded Stannis he followed Robert over Aerys. They were presupposing taking it out on the smallfolk was acceptable if the men of Claw Isle had done something bad.

Stannis, however, gelds men who rape wildlings, who are the lowest of the low in the eyes of most of Westeros.

[Chaircat Meow]

Stannis, however, gelds men who rape wildlings, who are the lowest of the low in the eyes of most of Westeros.

But he's not asking his men to ravage their lands and put them to the sword. If he were he would not do that. Even Tywin told Tyrion to keep his savages in line if he took them to King's Landing.

[John Doe]

Stannis, however, gelds men who rape wildlings, who are the lowest of the low in the eyes of most of Westeros.

It's mostly because he wants them as allies.

[SeanF]

As an aside McGlynn's book is very good, there's some dark shit in there but he also includes the logic behind them - you can see why the English were so fond of Chevauchee's

It was interesting to read how many atrocities were deliberately ordered, rather than just out of control soldiers running amok. That makes sense. If a commander sacks a city that offers resistance, it's a very powerful inducement to surrender peacefully.

[Mammoth Slayer]

In Westeros they don't have a set code of Laws or morality, but rather these concepts are defined by personal opinion. "Guest-right" is a widely respected convention, but the Red Wedding did happen.

[Dilecta]

True. But even in today's world, with laws, conventions, and supposed morality, things like torture, rape, and mass-murder occur in modern warfare. Just because the laws or morality are there

doesn't mean people will obey them.

In Westeros they don't have a set code of Laws or morality, but rather these concepts are defined by personal opinion. "Guest-right" is a widely respected convention, but the Red Wedding did happen.

[Talleyrand]

It was interesting to read how many atrocities were deliberately ordered, rather than just out of control soldiers running amok. That makes sense. If a commander sacks a city that offers resistance, it's a very powerful inducement to surrender peacefully.

Its also why as you said in your OP killing prisoners who have surrendered and sacking towns/cities that have surrendered is such a crime for the brutality of it and the precedent it sets. If you kill poeple even after they surrender to you no ones going to surrender to your side meaning your jobs going to be a hell of a lot harder.

[Bright Ancalagon]

It's important to remember that guest-right must be form time to time put aside. Otherwise there wouldn't be the need of tell your kids about the Rat Cook

[Frey Pie]

Good thread. I'm gonna guess this stems from the chat on Robb's war in the west? How do people feel about this?

Personally I'm of the opinion that Robbs war was waged as if Davos was in charge. He knows those attacks would be both futile and spiteful and I don't see Robb as the kind of person to order a deliberately vicious war against an innocent population. That isn't to say people weren't killed and raped. They most definitely were but not to anywhere near as great a level as the riverlands war which I believe is a stand out one for its viciousness

[Mithras]

1. Breach of guest-right

Murder of prisoners whose surrender has been accepted by a commander

Torture as a form of recreation

Rape

Sacking a town that has surrendered.

Violation of the terms of surrender.

7. Liberation of Astapor.

[SeanF]

Talleyrand - yes, brutalising people who've surrendered to you is stupid. You're leaving people no choice but to fight to the bitter end.

Frey Pie - in part it was a follow-on from the discussion of Robb's Westerlands campaign.

Mithras - There's a surprising lack of bitterness over the sack of Astapor among the Ghiscari. I think the Good Masters had made themselves very unpopular, even among other slave traders. Remember Kraznys' suggestion to Dany that she blood the Unsullied by sacking towns and cities on her route of march. That route would have taken her through territory ruled by Meereen, Yunkai, Tolos, Mantarys etc.

[SeanF]

7. Liberation of Astapor.

Why do you think this was a war crime?

Was it unjust per se, to attack Astapor, or is your objection to the methods that were used to seize the city?

[Trigger Warning]

Rape will depend on the context, what may be punished in occupation may be dismissed in sack or chevauchee.

[Trigger Warning]

Why do you think this was a war crime?

Was it unjust per se, to attack Astapor, or is your objection to the methods that were used to seize the city?

Dany ordered the massacre of non combatants.

[SeanF]

Rape will depend on the context, what may be punished in occupation may be dismissed in sack or chevauchee.

I think that almost anything is permissible in a sack, provided the town has offered resistance and been taken by storm.

[Barrick Eddon]

1-2 and 5-6 are all a certainty. 3-4 if nobles are involved, but if smallfolk perhaps not, and not in the case of 4 depending on the circumstances.

Also note Stannis's reason for not ravaging Claw Isle. Davos told him the men there just followed their liege, Celtigar, in surrendering and reminded Stannis he followed Robert over Aerys. They were presupposing taking it out on the smallfolk was acceptable if the men of Claw Isle had done something bad.

As someone in another thread told you that was a test for Davos .

[JonCon's Red Beard]

/rolleyes.

Dany was on her way to Meereen. The meereenese had to options: surrender or fight. If they had fought the Unsullied, lost or won, they would have been on their right. They did not. They killed children to provoke her, mock her and defy her.

So, she killed them.

"But, Beard... maybe a few of them were innocent and opposed that action!!"

Well, if people was able to leave the city to crucify children, why not find the way to leave and surrender and say they had nothing to do with it?