17

I understand that in Vaes Dothrak, weapons are forbidden, but isn't bloodshed also forbidden? Did they just mess this up, because later on in the Temple of the Dosh Khaleen, the blood rider mentions this to Khal Moro (about bloodshed being forbidden), and he is dismissive of it.

So did Daario read Khal Moro's mind in advance to know he wouldn't care about bloodshed, and hence the rock smashing?

Or did he smash the guy's head in because he was unaware of the bloodshed rule? (Which would make no sense because Jorah would know this and would've told him before he started bashing the dead guys head in).

  • 9
    Please remove the tag a-song-of-ice-and-fire. It is for books only and in books Daario never smashes head of any Khal (Well at least not yet) – Aegon May 18 '16 at 5:38
  • 3
    All of this is actually explained in the episode. The bloodshed rule is talked about by the khals, and the head smashing was to cover up the real cause of death. – BCdotWEB May 18 '16 at 6:36
  • 12
    @SerPounce There's a dead guy lying in the streets with his head smashed in. Do you think they'll assume that is the cause of death, or do you expect CSI: Vaes Dothrak to appear and investigate thoroughly? – BCdotWEB May 18 '16 at 9:26
  • 1
    @SerPounce The guy's head is smashed in and he's probably drenched in his own blood. They're not going to look for a small stab wound. – Nkrisc May 18 '16 at 18:15
  • 1
    They never showed Daario smashing the Dothraki's head. It's much more plausible that Daario was smashing the area where he stabbed the Dothraki, i.e. the chest. – Kenny Evitt May 19 '16 at 13:46
46

A wound made by a bladed weapon would have drawn attention

You all right? If they find a body with a stab wound, the whole city will be looking for us.

Assuming that bloodshed is prohibited in Vaes Dothrak, getting into a fistfight and killing someone may be technically disallowed, but it is something a sufficiently foolish or drunk resident may do. Killing someone with a blade, given that weapons are prohibited within the city? Clearly the work of a foreigner, and thus of high priority.

A death via blunt force trauma will undoubtedly be looked into, but perhaps not with the same urgency. Thus the need to conceal the cause of death.

The rules against bloodshed may not be so hard-and-fast

In the novels, it is established that any sort of bloodshed (of humans, at least) is prohibited, along with bladed steel weapons.

Many of the men were drunk on clotted mare's milk, yet Daenerys knew no arakhs would clash tonight, not here in the sacred city, where blades and bloodshed were forbidden.

A Game of Thrones

On the TV show, people generally speak of the ban on weapons when they mention Vaes Dothrak:

JORAH MORMONT: Don't let them see you carrying a sword in Vaes Dothrak. You know the law.

VISERYS TARGARYEN: (sheaths his sword) It's not my law.(turns and puts another egg in the bag)

and

It's forbidden to carry weapons in the sacred city.

and

You all right? If they find a body with a stab wound, the whole city will be looking for us.

On the other hand, Viserys Targaryen does not (though admittedly he is an individual with perhaps not a stellar understanding of Dothraki culture, as evidenced by his final fate):

VISERYS TARGARYEN: They can't kill us. (pointing his sword again at Jorah) (Drogo mutters to his Dothraki soldier, who then gets up) They can't shed blood in their sacred city.

Indeed, the translation of the Dothraki dialogue from the episode makes the reasoning clear:

FORZHO : It is forbidden to spill blood in the sacred city.

MORO: It is forbidden to carry weapons in the sacred city.

FORZHO: So we don’t spill blood!

MORO: Well… There’s always a little blood.

FORZHO: Not when you strangle them.

It seems that not all the Dothraki practice the prohibition on spilling blood so firmly, and that bloodshed through non-weapon means is not unheard of (not surprising, given how many Dothraki fetishize violence elsewhere).

So while avoiding spilling blood may be the point of the prohibition on weapons, some Dothraki seem to interpret the prohibition rather literally. Of course, this still probably wouldn't let someone get away with the murder of a prominent individual, but as mentioned previously, it would make the death much less suspicious.

  • IIRC when the Khals discuss the death, they say that no bloodshed is allowed in Vaes Dothrak. I just remember the reply "there is always a little blood". – user1129682 May 18 '16 at 7:16
  • @user1129682 - Which episode is that? – Adamant May 18 '16 at 7:17
  • @user1129682 - Ah, the translation of the Dothraki. Let me add that. – Adamant May 18 '16 at 7:19
  • Indeed historically in our own reality, bloodshed is considered to be something that comes from bladed weapons. This is why the weapon of a holy man is the Mace - designed to kill without drawing blood as per the rules of our Bible. The reality is obviously going to be very bloody, but it is not considered to be bloodshed. – SLC May 19 '16 at 15:02
  • There is also an edict in place banning weapons in Vaes Dothrak, so whilst they may be taken prisoner for fighting/killing, they would be killed if they were suspected of bringing weapons into the holy city. By smashing not only the head but also the wound-site with a rock, it disguises the use of a blade, making what they did terrible but not an instant death sentence in the Dothraki culture. – GMasucci May 20 '16 at 8:29
49

Jorah Mormont clearly mentioned that if somebody noticed the stab wound, they would start searching for them and could get caught. Because weapons and the use of weapons are not allowed, it would mean that there was a chance of it being an outsider, as Dothrakis don't have weapons in that area. Smashing it with a rock removed the stab wound and now it can be made to look like a normal fight between Dothrakis. It seems to be normal as they have shown anger issues many times.

  • 2
    @AnkitSharma - Wasn't me, I upvoted. People probably thought your answer was too short, even though it's basically correct and fairly detailed. – Adamant May 18 '16 at 8:38
  • 2
    "Smashing it with rock removed the stab wound" -- I don't think it removed the stab wound, I just think that it was to make it so they would think his head being smashed open was the cause. When you find a dead man with a head smashed open (this is why I think he kept smashing it over and over and over) you don't need to do an autopsy to determine the cause of death. If you find a dead man just laying on the ground you look over his body to see what happened, in this case you'd notice the stab wound. – Captain Man May 18 '16 at 14:53
  • 1
    For a culture without the technology for proper forensics, somebody is practicing forensic countermeasures. – T.J.L. May 18 '16 at 15:08
  • 8
    @T.J.L. shh. don't spoil the upcoming CSI Westeros show. – Mindwin May 18 '16 at 19:01
  • 1
    @CaptainMan: While that's true. I think the stab was through the neck, so smashing the head in enough could effectively remove the stab wound. Although, like you said, either way most people wouldn't ask "how'd he die?" when they find his head smashed in. – Matt Burland May 18 '16 at 20:11
7

Daario used the rock to hide the stab wound from a knife. Dothraki are always fighting so there will be deaths from fist fights/general brawling.

If a warrior is dumb enough to die to unarmed combat then it reflects badly on his Khal. That is why Moro said what he did about the death.

So in summary Daario used the rock to hide the fact that he had killed a man with a blade.

0

Like anything else rules are open to interpretation and can be taken literally or figuratively. Like is it ok to kill someone if they are trying to kill you? But they were obviously not concerned with rules at that point as they had already killed the men. Smashing his head was just a distraction that would buy them some time.

Your Answer

By clicking “Post Your Answer”, you agree to our terms of service, privacy policy and cookie policy

Not the answer you're looking for? Browse other questions tagged or ask your own question.