Jump to content
Alyn Oakenfist

Which are worse, Wildling, Ironborn or Dothraki?

Recommended Posts

I'd have to say that wildlings are the tamest due to the facts that they do not take slaves and they are so few that the only thing they can threaten is the Watch.

Between the Ironborn and the Dothraki, I would say Dothraki due to the fact that there are some enlightened Ironborn (Quelon, Asha, The Reader) as well as the fact that the Ironborn don't commit genocide.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
7 minutes ago, redriver said:

Well you are the king of the castle and we're the dirty rascals!!

In which way does that relate to the topic? Could you please give your opinions on the topic?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
29 minutes ago, Alyn Oakenfist said:

I'd have to say that wildlings are the tamest due to the facts that they do not take slaves and they are so few that the only thing they can threaten is the Watch.

Between the Ironborn and the Dothraki, I would say Dothraki due to the fact that there are some enlightened Ironborn (Quelon, Asha, The Reader) as well as the fact that the Ironborn don't commit genocide.

Dothraki and ironborn don't eat you after they kill you.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, John Suburbs said:

Dothraki and ironborn don't eat you after they kill you.

Yeah, that is a very charming characteristic of the wildlings which may put them above the Ironbon, but I still think the Dothraki are still by far the worse. Like I said the other 2 don't have a history of genocide.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 minutes ago, rotting sea cow said:

Dothraki are worse of course. They are in the end people of color.

What are you talking about? Are you trying to say that Dothraki aren't worse. Cause they have a history of genocide unmatched in the ASOIAF universe (not even by the Valyrians). They succeeded in almost wiping out 2 different races (the Qartheen and the Tall Men).

Also I would like to point out to you that the ,,people of color" would probably be the Summer Islanders.

And if you are complaining that the most genocidal out of all the cultures are a separate race, then I do have to point out to you that in that regard the Dothraki are simply modeled after the Mongols who's history of genocide in only beaten by Mao (yeah you heard that right Ghenghis beats both Hitler and Stain combined when it comes to genocide).

So what are you trying to say? Are critiquing us for finding the Dothraki the most savage, are you critiquing GRRM for making his Mongols just as bloodthirsty as the real ones, or are you critiquing history for that fact that some of the worst mass murderers of all time were a separate race/culture/nation/whatever with a different skin?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 minutes ago, Alyn Oakenfist said:

What are you talking about? Are you trying to say that Dothraki aren't worse. Cause they have a history of genocide unmatched in the ASOIAF universe (not even by the Valyrians). They succeeded in almost wiping out 2 different races (the Qartheen and the Tall Men).

Also I would like to point out to you that the ,,people of color" would probably be the Summer Islanders.

And if you are complaining that the most genocidal out of all the cultures are a separate race, then I do have to point out to you that in that regard the Dothraki are simply modeled after the Mongols who's history of genocide in only beaten by Mao (yeah you heard that right Ghenghis beats both Hitler and Stain combined when it comes to genocide).

So what are you trying to say? Are critiquing us for finding the Dothraki the most savage, are you critiquing GRRM for making his Mongols just as bloodthirsty as the real ones, or are you critiquing history for that fact that some of the worst mass murderers of all time were a separate race/culture/nation/whatever with a different skin?

Dothraki do not exist outside of the ASOIAF series, they haven't done any genocide.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Just now, rotting sea cow said:

Dothraki do not exist outside of the ASOIAF series, they haven't done any genocide.

I was talking about in universe. And there they do have quite a lot of genocide.

Also as weather or not they exist outside of the ASOIAF series, I always saw them as a very obvious substitute for the Mongols.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, Alyn Oakenfist said:

I was talking about in universe. And there they do have quite a lot of genocide.

Also as weather or not they exist outside of the ASOIAF series, I always saw them as a very obvious substitute for the Mongols. 

Ok. Thing is that among the "savage folk" in the asoiaf series, the Dothraki are the less developed in terms of characterization, despite being crucial in the story of our core characters. In fact, one can argue that the only Dothraki character is Drogo. Can you distinguish Irri from Jhiqui? Can you set apart Dany's bloodriders? Can we tell how Dothraki society is organized? Do family relations matter to the Dotharki? The only thing we know is that they slave, kill, rape and little else.

Compare this to the Freefolk. We get a bunch of characters with different motivations, attitudes, moral standings, etc. Tormund, Craster, Ygritte, Val, Rattleshirt, Gilly, Varamyr, the Thenns, etc. We see differentiation. Same with the ironborn.  Even the wildings of the Vale mountains have more characterization than the Dothraki. Timett behaves differently to Shagga, for example, and they play a much lesser role in Tyrion story than the Freefolk play in Jon's and the Dothraki in Dany's.

Because Dothraki are far less characterized than other "savage people" means that we cannot empathize with them as easily as with the other folk.

Why is that? The fact that the Dothraki have cooper skin an FreeFolk/Vale-mountain-clans/ironborn are white  hasn't been missed by those with a kin eye on the series.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
5 minutes ago, rotting sea cow said:

Because Dothraki are far less characterized than other "savage people" means that we cannot empathize with them as easily as with the other folk.

To be fair, I don't really empathize with any of the other folk. I like some characters (mainly Asha) but if we're honest all their cultures are pretty messed up (like not in a Westerosi feudalism kind of way, but way, way worse). However even if we look at their objective actions, the Dothraki still stand out as the worst of the bunch. As to the fact that they are not white, so what of it? The Mongols weren't white either. Are we going to call history racist? Of course not. There are very clear comparisons to real life, that all keep the color.

Ironborn - Vikings (both white)

Wildlings - Picts (again both white)

Dothraki - Mongols (both non white)

So you are either bothered that GRRM's story is very similar to real life when it comes to tribal people or to the fact that some of the biggest murderers in history happened to be non-white.

Also as to the point that we don't know enough about the Dothraki, how are we supposed to? On the wildlings we have 2 POV's each with 3 books where we learn something about the wildlings, or spend time interacting with them. On the Ironborn, we have 4 POV's that are ironborn (probably too many, but still). On the Dothraki we have 1 POV for a book.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4 hours ago, Alyn Oakenfist said:

I always saw them as a very obvious substitute for the Mongols.

I see them as sharing more similarities with the Comanche. Very tribesmen like, one step above hunters and gatherers, except deadly as fuck lol

Mongols ruled so much, you know? They understood bureaucracy, being literate helps. They built stuff, nice stuff too. Like the Silk Road, but also schools, hospitals, various temples, whatever else, in the like 15% of the globe that they facilitated

The Dothraki, like the Comanche, are a product of their time. Their ancestors were hunters and gatherers in the same steppes that they're in now. One day Valaria and Spain came and then one day they left. Their neighbors are different now, theyre actual governments with laws, and rules and a never ending market for slaves

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Due to the lack of resources, population and allies, I can understand the possible need for the Wildlings and Ironborn to go raiding. 

The Dothraki have access to a massive amount of land that could be used for farming and seem to have a large enough population that there is little need for forcibly introducing new genetics. 

So I guess I would see the Dothraki as slightly worse, as they do these things, seemingly without a real need to.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, Narsil4 said:

Due to the lack of resources, population and allies, I can understand the possible need for the Wildlings and Ironborn to go raiding. 

The Dothraki have access to a massive amount of land that could be used for farming and seem to have a large enough population that there is little need for forcibly introducing new genetics. 

So I guess I would see the Dothraki as slightly worse, as they do these things, seemingly without a real need to.

That's pretty much my take on it. Of course there are individuals among these people who can be seen as better or worse than the whole but generally speaking they pretty much all do the same stuff. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

There are some individual leaders among each who are competitive for the worst person awards. Usually these are the people who push them to take on more than they can handle. They are defying their own cultural norms that establish limits on the scope of where they'll do violence. Like, the norm for each is to not to expand too far outside of their territory or to go too deep into the continent or stress their resources. Theon, Euron, Dany, are pushing people to their limits just for their own ambition. Mance is doing that too but at least there's a pragmatic reason involved (although he's just as full of himself as the rest).

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
7 hours ago, Lyanna<3Rhaegar said:

That's pretty much my take on it. Of course there are individuals among these people who can be seen as better or worse than the whole but generally speaking they pretty much all do the same stuff. 

Are you sure? I mean, yeah the Ironborn and Wildlings are very similar in terms of behavior, but the Dothraki are far worse. First off is the slavery angle. The Wildlings have no slaves and Ironborn only have thralls who do seem to have freedom of the womb. However the Dothraki probably bring in the most slaves for the slave masters. Also unlike the Ironborn and Wildlings, the Dothraki have genocide as a feature.

11 hours ago, Hugorfonics said:

I see them as sharing more similarities with the Comanche. Very tribesmen like, one step above hunters and gatherers, except deadly as fuck lol

Mongols ruled so much, you know? They understood bureaucracy, being literate helps. They built stuff, nice stuff too. Like the Silk Road, but also schools, hospitals, various temples, whatever else, in the like 15% of the globe that they facilitated

The Dothraki, like the Comanche, are a product of their time. Their ancestors were hunters and gatherers in the same steppes that they're in now. One day Valaria and Spain came and then one day they left. Their neighbors are different now, theyre actual governments with laws, and rules and a never ending market for slaves

They're probably a mix, cause the Dothraki history during the Century of Blood is very similar to the mongol invasion in terms of both scale and devastation.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
31 minutes ago, Alyn Oakenfist said:

Are you sure? I mean, yeah the Ironborn and Wildlings are very similar in terms of behavior, but the Dothraki are far worse. First off is the slavery angle. The Wildlings have no slaves and Ironborn only have thralls who do seem to have freedom of the womb. However the Dothraki probably bring in the most slaves for the slave masters. Also unlike the Ironborn and Wildlings, the Dothraki have genocide as a feature

I don't know that being a thrall is a whole lot better than being a slave really & if we take the current leader of the IB's actions as an example, he holds slaves as well. Not to mention if his ways start to become the IB way - things will get real ugly, he is a nasty piece of work. 

I agree the Dothraki are the worst, the Wildlings the best of the 3 IMO, but there isn't a whole lot to separate them from each other or the rest of the ruling classes & elite across the realm TBH. They all kill lots of people, they all rape, they all hold people subservient to them in one manner or another. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
16 hours ago, Alyn Oakenfist said:

So you are either bothered that GRRM's story is very similar to real life when it comes to tribal people or to the fact that some of the biggest murderers in history happened to be non-white.

I'm bothered because in a series known to show the complexity of human beings the Dothraki stand up as unidimentional. A whole culture and the only important one for the story who happen to be non-white. 

History is complex. Even the history of the holocaust is. This series do an excellent work on that, except with the Dothraki.

16 hours ago, Alyn Oakenfist said:

Also as to the point that we don't know enough about the Dothraki, how are we supposed to? On the wildlings we have 2 POV's each with 3 books where we learn something about the wildlings, or spend time interacting with them. On the Ironborn, we have 4 POV's that are ironborn (probably too many, but still). On the Dothraki we have 1 POV for a book.

See, you are misremembering. Dany has spent four books in close company of Dothraki. Her handmaids and bodywards are Dothraki. Jon spent one book with the FreeFolk with further interactions in another and there is an universe of difference in their characterization.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, Lyanna<3Rhaegar said:

I don't know that being a thrall is a whole lot better than being a slave really & if we take the current leader of the IB's actions as an example, he holds slaves as well. Not to mention if his ways start to become the IB way - things will get real ugly, he is a nasty piece of work. 

Well, yeah if we talk about Euron, things kinda change, however I was talking more about cultural and historical trends. Like it's hard to judge the Ironborn after Euron. It's like judging the Wildlings after the Weeper. Sure we can question how people like that attained positions of power and how they were accepted by their societies, however it would be misleading to judge said societies after those evil figures. When talking about cultural norms, while both thralldom and slavery seem horrible, to me at least thralldom seems the more ,,humane" system, due to the fact that there is no slave trade as well as the fact that there seems to be freedom of the womb. So it's pick your poison. Both are inhumane and completely uncivilized but one does seem to be better then the other.

2 hours ago, Lyanna<3Rhaegar said:

I agree the Dothraki are the worst, the Wildlings the best of the 3 IMO, but there isn't a whole lot to separate them from each other or the rest of the ruling classes & elite across the realm TBH. They all kill lots of people, they all rape, they all hold people subservient to them in one manner or another. 

Here there is a tricky subject. While I agree that people are no different form culture to culture or from elite to elite, the thing that is different is what they can do. Like as shitty as Tywin Lannister is, the things he did don't even compare to some of the more prolific Khals.

1 hour ago, rotting sea cow said:

the only important one for the story who happen to be non-white.

The Dornish and the Ghiscari would like to have a word with you, as do the Others.

1 hour ago, rotting sea cow said:

History is complex. Even the history of the holocaust is.

I'm sorry, I can't not pick on this, what is so morally complex about the holocaust? Are you suggesting that the nazis were in any way shape or form even partially, minutely right in what they did? Cause if you do, there is no point continuing this conversation...

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
16 minutes ago, Alyn Oakenfist said:

Well, yeah if we talk about Euron, things kinda change, however I was talking more about cultural and historical trends. Like it's hard to judge the Ironborn after Euron. It's like judging the Wildlings after the Weeper. Sure we can question how people like that attained positions of power and how they were accepted by their societies, however it would be misleading to judge said societies after those evil figures. When talking about cultural norms, while both thralldom and slavery seem horrible, to me at least thralldom seems the more ,,humane" system, due to the fact that there is no slave trade as well as the fact that there seems to be freedom of the womb. So it's pick your poison. Both are inhumane and completely uncivilized but one does seem to be better then the other.

Yeah, maybe being a thrall is a little better than being a slave but I think it would probably likely depend on whose thrall you are vs whose slave you are. Neither seem a deal better or worse than the other to me. 

16 minutes ago, Alyn Oakenfist said:

Here there is a tricky subject. While I agree that people are no different form culture to culture or from elite to elite, the thing that is different is what they can do. Like as shitty as Tywin Lannister is, the things he did don't even compare to some of the more prolific Khals.

Tywin did decimate an entire house & send Gregor (who is arguably as bad as some of the more prolific Khals) to rape & pillage the small folk. I get what you are saying though & I don't disagree, I just don't think the difference is very large. Certainly there is some difference though & that's why I think the Dothraki are the worst. 

16 minutes ago, Alyn Oakenfist said:

The Dornish and the Ghiscari would like to have a word with you, as do the Others.

Agreed. 

16 minutes ago, Alyn Oakenfist said:

I'm sorry, I can't not pick on this, what is so morally complex about the holocaust? Are you suggesting that the nazis were in any way shape or form even partially, minutely right in what they did? Cause if you do, there is no point continuing this conversation...

Again, agreed. There isn't anything racist about the way GRRM wrote the Dothraki. Some would have liked more details certainly, as some would have liked more details on many number of groups of people but George gives the details he needs to give for the story. It's already a  massive novel & if he were to go into detail on every single culture across the books they would never end. It isn't because the Dothraki are people of color, it's because it doesn't pertain to the plot or because it isn't something he wants to reveal yet. Dany is presumably going to spend more time with the Dothraki in the up & coming novels so we may get more or we may not. I agree the khas & handmaidens are written as sort of generic characters but I disagree that they are the only ones written as such or that it is because they are people of color. The mountain clans are written in much the same manner & contrary to what the poster said there is little noted difference between Timmett & Shagga. I personally have a much easier time keeping her handmaidens straight than I do her "court" in Mereen also. It just comes with the volume of the novels & the story being told, there are going to be characters fleshed out to different degrees in order to tell the story. 

Edited by Lyanna<3Rhaegar

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
52 minutes ago, Lyanna<3Rhaegar said:

Yeah, maybe being a thrall is a little better than being a slave but I think it would probably likely depend on whose thrall you are vs whose slave you are. Neither seem a deal better or worse than the other to me. 

I don't think there is any difference between being a thrall and being a slave (maybe the only difference from the thralls POV is that because they can't be sold, they probably can't be separated from their families). The only difference I would see is that there are probably no child slaves. Though as said before both are awful things that unfortunately aren't far enough in the past in our own world.

56 minutes ago, Lyanna<3Rhaegar said:

Tywin did decimate an entire house & send Gregor (who is arguably as bad as some of the more prolific Khals) to rape & pillage the small folk. I get what you are saying though & I don't disagree, I just don't think the difference is very large. Certainly there is some difference though & that's why I think the Dothraki are the worst. 

The difference between the people is non-existent. As in any society there are good and bad. The difference comes in what some monsters in power are capable of doing and what they are required to do. In a medieval society there are some limitations to the power of the nobles (not many unfortunately but there are some) and in times of peace the pillage, rape and atrocities don't tend to happen. Also feudal rulers are kinda 50/50 when it comes to good or bad, with some good education generally thrown in there. Meanwhile the Dothraki society exists in a state of perpetual war which means that the usual atrocities of war become constant. Also while the Khal could be a kind person, he must still allow his subjects to raid, rape and pillage if he doesn't want to be deposed (we can see such trends in the nomads of our own history, even when the horde leader didn't engage in the usual monstrosities, he was still forced to allow his subjects to engage in them). Therefore if in feudalism a good king could allow a time of peace and the rule of law, in the Dothraki society not even the best of leaders can't stop the usual shenanigans. All in all Dothraki society exists in a constant state of war, quite different from Westerosi feudalism (at least post-Conquest), therefore maximizing human misery. Also due to the way nomadic live is structured the worst in a ruler manages to stand out while the better qualities of a ruler are often suppressed.

1 hour ago, Lyanna<3Rhaegar said:

Again, agreed. There isn't anything racist about the way GRRM wrote the Dothraki. Some would have liked more details certainly, as some would have liked more details on many number of groups of people but George gives the details he needs to give for the story. It's already a  massive novel & if he were to go into detail on every single culture across the books they would never end. It isn't because the Dothraki are people of color, it's because it doesn't pertain to the plot or because it isn't something he wants to reveal yet. Dany is presumably going to spend more time with the Dothraki in the up & coming novels so we may get more or we may not. I agree the khas & handmaidens are written as sort of generic characters but I disagree that they are the only ones written as such or that it is because they are people of color. The mountain clans are written in much the same manner & contrary to what the poster said there is little noted difference between Timmett & Shagga. I personally have a much easier time keeping her handmaidens straight than I do her "court" in Mereen also. It just comes with the volume of the novels & the story being told, there are going to be characters fleshed out to different degrees in order to tell the story. 

Please for the love of God, we had enough descriptions of various Essosi societies. Like some action in the Essos storyline would be quite interesting. We don't need to learn about the culture of a people who won't matter at all in the endgame (the Ghiscari) and the culture of what will be Dany's professional savages. Like TWOW and ADOS (if they ever come out that is) will already be long enough, I don't need ADWD's extensive descriptions of Ghiscari culture to be used for Dothraki too.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now

×