Tribunal Hearing: Gorthon The Unspeakable

A bit late, but this hilarious thread by Innocent Bystander needs your attention

Gorthon The Unspeakable, yesterday

Inspired by @tribunaltweets and @MForstater. The original thread can be found here

---

I decided to pop down to the Great Hall to live tweet the elders considering their latest case.

Gorthon the Unspeakable is giving evidence. He’s just arrived, wearing bearskins and carrying a large axe.

Should be interesting.

---

Good afternoon from the tribunal hearing regarding the throwing of hundreds of the Peaceful People of the Plains into the Pit of Fire by a Remorseless Horde of Warriors. This is day 1 and the morning session is due to begin at 10am.

It’s taking place in the great hall:

KF = Kalyan the Fair, counsel for the PPP

MT = Margen the Trustworthy, counsel for respondents

HE = High Elder, leading 3 person council of elders hearing the case.

Elders = any one of the three members

GU = Gorthon the Unspeakable, Senior Warrior of Remorseless Horde of Warriors

KF: You have your witness statement?

GU: Yes.

KF: We are here to discuss the casting of several hundred people, known as the Peaceful People of the Plains (PPP) into the pit of fire. You were in charge of a remorseless horde of warriors (RHOW) at the time.

GU: Well, I don’t know if I would say I was in charge, exactly.

KF: But you took decisions, gave orders and they were carried out?

GU: Yes.

KF: So in charge then?

GU: Don’t agree. Management of RHOW was collegiate. More like a dynamic committee.

KF: I see. Look at that later. How long have you been considered unspeakable?

GU: Well, it’s really just my name that’s unspeakable…

KF: Clearly. You as a physical entity can hardly be enunciated can you?

GU: Well, no.

KF: So, in meetings, how would people address you?

GU: They would usually use my name. So just say something like, “Gorthon, we must attain immortality by skinning our enemies as a warning to those who might dare to oppose us”

KF: I see. So, in what way is your name unspeakable?

GU: Um…

KF: Is it a simple honorific, without real meaning?

GU: No, I wouldn’t say so. It’s complicated. Other members of my organisation would speak it but others would not dare to, lest it brought my vengeance upon them and their families.

KF: Like the Peaceful People of the Plains (PPP)? They wouldn’t say your name?

GU: Maybe. I can’t say. But they really shouldn’t. What with me, my name I mean, being unspeakable.

KF: But it’s possible that they do speak your name? When you’re not there?

GU: It’s possible, yes.

KU: How long have you been unspeakable?

GU: Since Algar the Pitiless bestowed the title upon me thirty moons ago.

KF: Soon after the untimely death of Horal the Usurper?

GU: (Pause) Yes.

KF: I have a sacred scroll here that says “GU has slain HU with his axe of obsidian.” Did you write this?

GU: No, I think that may have been Algar the Pitiless. I don’t remember.

KF: Might it have been Rentak the Debaser?

GU: Possibly, I’m not sure.

KF: But you have seen this scroll?

GU: I saw an early draft.

KF: Did you agree to that statement being included?

GF: Um. I don’t remember. I think there was a discussion with AP and RD. Don’t recall details.

KF: Why did you slay Horal the Usurper?

GU: I…It was something AP asked me to do.

KF: You don’t know why? Was it to do with usurping?

GF: I think that was part of it. You would have to ask AP.

KF: Any particular incident of usurping?

GU: Let me think. (Checks notes) I’m not sure. I think it may just have been general usurping.

KF: I see. But you used your obsidian axe to “split the coward in twain”?

GU: No, well, yes. Not exactly. I did strike him with the axe but I didn’t cut him in half or anything. Obsidian shatters quite easily so…

KF: And was he a coward?

GU: I couldn’t say.

KF: Did you ever see evidence of him being a coward?

GU: No. No, I didn’t.

KF: How did he feel about being dismembered?

GU: I wouldn’t agree he was dismembered but as for his attitude to it I would say he wasn’t totally on board with it.

KF: would it be fair to say it was not done by mutual agreement?

GU: Yes. Fair to say.

KF: Did AP often take action without consultation?

GU: Hard to say. Depended on situation.

KP: Can you recall any occasion when AP consulted people he decided to have slaughtered before he actually had them slaughtered?

GU: I wasn’t present at every meeting.

KP: Not the question. In all your time with your RHOW did you ever see it?

GU: No. Didn’t see that.

KP: Turning to the Peaceful People of the Plains, AP heard they were unhappy about being raided constantly and having their villages burned down. He then said “We will kill them all. We will make a pyramid of their skulls.” Isn’t that correct?

GU: I think the sense was that something should perhaps be done, that there was an issue to be addressed.

KF: Did you suggest how it should be addressed? Did you contribute?

GU: I was very much keen to listen to the views of others.

KF: There was a lot of anger?

GU: I’d say concern more than anger.

KF: Didn’t AP describe his rage as being “Like a torrent of boiling blood which would scour the plains of all life”?

GU: Don’t recall exact phraseology.

KF: But it was something like that?

GU: Something like that, yes.

KF: Are you aware that expressing concern about being invaded is not the same as inciting rebellion?

GU: Wasn’t then, am now.

KF: You didn’t research the matter before discussing it with AP?

GU: I was aware of what AP said had been said.

KF: But you didn’t research it?

GU: AP said PPP were rebelling, didn’t think to check if that was true.

KF: Did you agree to wholesale slaughter of the PPP?

GU: It was just one option being discussed.

KF: Were any other options being discussed?

GU: Um. Can’t think of any.

KF: You said in your submission that you thought it could have been dealt with by burning villages and selling the menfolk as slaves to the Western tribes, led by Drascan the Idolator?

GU: Yes. Might have been a solution.

KF: Did you suggest it at the time?

GU: No. thought of it afterwards after hearing more about the problem. Might not have worked anyway. The idolatry might have been an issue.

KF: I see. So you agreed with the decision of AP to murder the PPP?

GU: Don’t recall being asked. More like a general feeling in the room than a formal decision.

KF: Were people often slaughtered without a formal decision being taken?

GU: It had happened. Depended on circumstances.

KF: Really? The Pagrok people of the Northern Mountains? The Rankat of the Southern Deserts? When they were attacked a formal decision was made first, was it not?

GU: Not involved in the war with the Pagrok. The Rankat invasion was agreed after a Rite of Shunning.

KF: Both happened after formal decisions.

GU: No, decision was to shun Rankat. No decision taken on invasion.

KF: Doesn’t shunning always involve invasion and dispossession?

GU: Believe it depends on the particular shunning rite. Not a shunning expert. Mostly dealt with by the shunners.

KF: But the decision to shun is a decision to invade?

GU: Don’t agree. Could be shunned but not invaded.

KF: Didn’t you tell Yagfar the Compliant that “We should shun then because then we will have to invade”?

GU: I didn’t understand shunning procedure then. Do now. It was more of a question than a statement. Poor phrasing.

KF: Did Yagfar the Compliant agree with your interpretation?

GU: Yes, he was happy to go along with my view.

KF: That shunning meant invasion?

GU: Yes.

KF: But you say now that it doesn’t? Now you’re claiming a decision to invade wasn’t made? But the truth is it always was before.

GU: I misunderstood then. Understand it better now. And I do remember a formal decision wasn’t taken before the Hunt of the Firebeast.

KF: Yes, but that was based on a dream of AP, was it not?

HE: Sorry, do I have that?

MT: Page 9 of the supplementary notes, under “miscellaneous heroic acts and quests”.

HE: Sorry. Carry on.

KT: Thank you.

GU: Not sure. I do know he became convinced that something called a Firebeast existed that could burn whole armies with the breath from its mouth.

KF: And you all resolved to find the creature and dispatch it? You were worried about this capability?

GU: it was certainly concerning, yes.

KF: But no Firebeast was ever found?

GU: No.

KF: AP was drunk, was he not?

GU: Couldn’t say.

KF: But fair to say some drink had been taken?

GU: Fair to say.

KF: So not a formal decision because it wasn’t a real plan, was it? What did this quest involve?

GU: We went outside and called upon the Firebeast. This went on for some time until AP fell over and couldn’t get up.

KF: I see. Not an invasion then.

GU: I suppose not.

KF: Let’s look at the Peaceful People of the Plains. You went to the plains to slaughter them did you not?

GU: Sense was I was looking to find a solution. A way to deal with the issue.

KF: And what did the PPP say when accused of rebellion?

GU: They were concerned. Keen to know how that conclusion had been arrived at.

KF: They weren’t given the chance to put their point of view? To address the allegations?

GU: Not before that point. That was their first opportunity.

KF: Not an opportunity though. Decision had already been taken.

GU: Disagree. No decision taken at that point.

KF: AP had already decided.

GU: No.

KF: You went to the plains to exterminate the PPP.

GU. No, more like fact-finding.

KF: Fact-finding? And what facts did you find regarding this “rebellion”?

GU: Different opinions. Wasn’t clear who leader was.

KF: A leader? But haven’t we established that the PPP were not actually rebelling?

GU: Yes, accept that now. Issue wasn’t so much with rebellion, more with behaviour suggesting rebellion.

KF: Objecting to being badly treated? Surely that’s reasonable.

GU: Yes, reasonable. Issue was with way it was being done.

KF: But they were not aggressive, were they? What was said that was of concern?

GU: Not one thing, more situation as a whole.

KF: What situation? There was no rebellion.

GU: I was in position of trying to find way through. Resolve situation.

KF: You went there to slaughter them.

GU: Don’t accept that. More like consultation with stakeholders.

KF: You demanded they stop complaining.

GU: More like a suggestion, to let us all move forward.

KF: But complaining isn’t rebellion. It was reasonable for them to complain.

GU: Accept that now. Maybe not appropriate forum though. OK in private, not in public. Some were uncomfortable. I was in a difficult position. Trying to keep everyone happy.

KF: In fact, the PPP agreed to stop complaining, didn’t they? And offer half their harvest as tribute.

GU: Yes, but still issues. Didn’t seem happy.

KF: You demanded they be happy being treated badly?

GU: AP felt there were still issues.

KF: But you were satisfied, weren’t you? You sent a message saying “The PPP are cowards and their pathetic grovelling will bring us much wealth, and wealth is as good as glory.”

GU: Yes.

KF: Then you received a message from Algar the Pitiless in response?

GU: Yes.

KF: He wasn’t in agreement?

GU: Felt more needed to be done.

KF: And you agreed?

GU: Yes.

KF: So you deferred to AP? You changed your position because he wasn’t happy.

GU: No. I read his assessment and revised my conclusion.

KF: You’re just saying that now to make yourself look better.

GU: Not true.

KF: You had made your own assessment. You had looked at the evidence.

GU: Not all the evidence.

KF: What could there possibly have been in AP’s message which could have led you to a different conclusion?

GU: Compelling argument. Things I hadn’t considered.

KF: Really? What compelling arguments?

GU: Can’t recall.

KF: We have the text of AP’s message. It reads “Put them all to death.”

GU: Yes.

KF: What compelling argument did you see?

GU: I was discussed on subtext, wider context.

KF: What subtext? What wider context?

(GU asks for glass of water).

High Elder: Might this be a good time to break for lunch?

All agree.

HE: Very well, we’ll reconvene this afternoon.

---

the pit of fire

Session ends.

First Fragment

Dernak the Manslayer is giving evidence. He is stripped to the waist. He is extensively tattooed and is carrying a large sword. The hilt appears to be made of bone.

KF = Kalyan the Fair, counsel for the PPP

MT = Margen the Trustworthy, counsel for respondents

HE = High Elder, leading 3 person council of elders hearing the case.

Elders = any one of the three members

DM = Dernak the Manslayer, Regional Manager, Remorseless Horde of Warriors

KF: Your name is “Dernak the Manslayer”. Could you tell us about that?

DM: I…don’t know what to say. That is my name.

KF: It doesn’t imply that you slay men at all? That you are a man accustomed to violence?

DM: Not sure where you got that idea.

KF: Well, why are you called that if you don’t slay men?

DM: I think you are placing too much emphasis on that. I have a friend called Tungar the Wolf-headed. He doesn’t actually have the head of a wolf.

KF: Then why is he called that?

DM: I couldn’t say. You would have to ask Tungar the Wolf-headed.

KF: You never asked him?

DM: It never came up.

KF: Have you ever slain men?

DM: (Pause) How do define “slain”?

KF: Have you ever killed men?

DM: (Pause) Yes.

KF: How many?

DM: Hard to say.

KF: More than ten?

DM: I don’t keep records.

KF: More than a hundred?

DM: You see, it’s not always in a formal setting so the process is not as black and white as you are suggesting.

KF: Then let’s move on. You are a regional governor, are you not?

DM: Yes.

KF: How would you describe the chair you sit on while at work?

DM: I don’t know. It’s just a chair.

KF: It is a large chair?

DM: I suppose.

KF: Might it be described as a throne?

DM: Possibly.

KF: Is it composed primarily of human crania?

DM: (Pause) I haven’t checked.

KF: Might someone accurately describe it as a throne of skulls?

DM: Not sure what your point is.

KF: My point is that you are called Dernak the Manslayer and you sit on a throne of skulls, yet you claim you are not a man who is violent?

DM: It depends how you define violence. An insult could be violent, or shouting at someone.

KF: Or beheading someone and adding their skull to your throne of similar skulls?

DM: Um…I don’t know Not an expert on that.

KF: You were personally responsible for casting several hundred members of the Peaceful People of the Plains into the Pit of Fire, were you not?

DM: I was there at the time.

KF: And you were responsible for their deaths.

DM: Don’t accept that.

KF: How can you not accept that?

DM: They chose to jump into the pit.

KF: Come on now, you compelled them to do so.

DM: No. I made clear that the Plains didn’t have a role for them at the moment. Natural progression not to be there anymore.

KF: Didn’t have a role for them? As what?

DM: People living there. People often left the Plains and moved on, nothing unusual.

KF: Did anyone ever leave the Plains to jump into a pit of fire?

DM: Not sure. I wasn’t involved.

KF: So you are saying they decided to jump into the pit of fire and die but that had nothing to do with you, or Algar the Pitiless? It didn’t happen because you were angry at them because of their complaints?

DM: Not to my knowledge.

KF: They weren’t permanent inhabitants of the Plains? They just chose to leave?

DM: Must have. I think plan was always for them to be temporary.

KF: This is clearly untrue.

DM: Disagree.

KF: So they didn’t have to jump into the pit of fire?

DM: They chose to.

KF: Did you make it clear they had a choice?

DM: Not at that time. Perhaps should have.

KF: So they could have stayed?

DM: Might have been difficult because of the offensive views that were expressed.

KF: What offensive views?

DM: Regarding rebellion.

KF: But we’ve already established they weren’t rebelling. They just complained about being treated unfairly.

DM: Accept that now.

KF: You told them to jump into the pit?

DM: I informed them that their time on the Plains had ended.

KF: You, along with your warriors, then took them to the Pit of Fire?

DM: We went with them.

KF: Why?

DM: Keen to help everyone move on.

KF: For them moving on meant being thrown into the Pit of Fire?

DM: Jumping into it. Apparently.

KF: You had them thrown into the pit.

DM: The edge of the pit is quite ragged. Wanted to make sure they got to the bottom safely.

KF: Safely? They aren’t dead, then?

DM: Couldn’t say.

KF: What do you think the effect of being thrown into a near-bottomless Pit of Fire is?

DM: Not a doctor.

KF: Why would they do that through choice.

DM: Couldn’t say. Wish them well in their future endeavours.

KF: If you weren’t killing them why did you say, “We are done with you all, burn forever in the pit as traitors”?

DM: Standard form of words. Didn’t think about meaning deeply. Not sure it has great significance. Could have said “Wish you all well with whatever you do next”. Similar meaning.

KF: Have you heard from any of them since?

DM: No.

KF: That doesn’t give you cause for concern at all?

DM: I just assume they are happy wherever they are.

HE: Might that a good point to break for lunch?

KF: Well, I did have a few more questions.

HE: I’m just thinking of timing. I do have a meeting with Gentar the Corrupt when the Sun is at its highest in the sky.

KF: Very well, I’m happy to return tomorrow.

Second Fragment

Rentak the Debaser is giving evidence. He is wearing what appears to be a deer skull with antlers on his head, complete with antlers. His teeth are filed to points.

KF = Kalyan the Fair, counsel for the PPP

MT = Margen the Trustworthy, counsel for respondents

HE = High Elder, leading 3 person council of elders hearing the case.

Elders = any one of the three members

RD = Rentak the Debaser, Senior Manager, Remorseless Horde of Warriors

KF: You are Rentak the Debaser?

RD: Yes.

KF: And how would you describe your role in the Remorseless Horde of Warriors? Does it involve debasing?

RD: That’s one element, yes. My focus would be on trying to understand dynamics within the wider environment.

KF: So if someone, or a group of people, were to have an issue they might come to you?

RD: It has happened.

KF: And if you judged that there had been improper behaviour then you would take action.

RD: I don’t like to talk in terms of judgement, more about rebuilding relationships.

KF: But you do debase people if the situation requires it?

RD: Um…not clear what you mean.

KF: Well, your name is “Rentak the Debaser”. Are you saying you don’t do any debasing?

RD: I suppose there are threads to what I do which could be viewed as related to debasing.

KF: You debase people, don’t you?

RD: That’s not the right question. Question should be about relationships and appropriate responses.

KF: I will judge what the right question is, thank you. You debase people.

RD: In your view.

KF: It’s in your name.

RD: Yes. Perhaps there is some debasing on some occasions.

KF: Tell us about Solgak the Friendless.

RD: I’m not sure what you are asking me…

KF: He was with the Horde of Remorseless Warriors until forty moons ago. Did you know him?

RD: Not socially.

KF: Did you deal with an issue between him and Algar the Pitiless?

RD: I believe there was a concern.

KF: Which was?

RD: An issue with his work within a group setting.

KF: AP felt he was not sufficiently inspiring as a leader, isn’t that the case?

RD: You would have to ask Algar.

KF: Whose idea was it to have his skull made into a drinking vessel?

RD: Um…I remember his skull was kept but I’m not sure I recall why…

KF: You attached a base to it, did you not?

RD: I think that was to better display it.

KF: It was to make it a drinking vessel.

RD: I don’t recall anyone ever drinking from it.

KF: Algar filled it with mead, did he not?

RD: Yes. He didn’t actually drink from it though.

KF: Because the mead ran out of the eyes?

RD: You would have to ask him.

KF: This is debasement, is it not?

RD: Well, this solution came about following a restorative meeting.

KF: restorative meeting? Were you present?

RD: Initially. I left when the discussion became rather heated.

KF: And then you were given the head of SF?

RD: Yes.

KF: You didn’t think that was odd?

RD: Not at the time.

KF: You assumed this turn of events came about by mutual agreement?

RD: Algar the Pitiless informed me that the matter was resolved. Didn’t think to check details. Perhaps I should have.

KF: Perhaps. And when you were informed of the situation regarding the Peaceful People of the Plains, what was your reaction?

RD: I wanted to help find a solution to the issue. I thought the most important thing was that proper procedure be followed.

KF: And what action did you take?

RD: I slaughtered a raven.

KF: A raven? Why a raven?

RD: To examine the entrails to see what the best way forward would be.

KF: Why a raven? Why not a mouse or a squirrel? Or a giraffe?

RD: Mice are quite small. And squirrels can bite, there have been issues in the past. I’m not sure what a giraffe is. I could look into that but ravens are usually best for divination related to rebellions.

KF: But people complaining about being badly treated is not a rebellion, is it?

RD: I can’t say. I’m not a regional governor.

KF: What were the results from the raven innards?

RD: Entrails. Innards refers to all the internal organs, I was just dealing with the intestines and so on as this wasn’t a matter pertaining to personal relationships.

KF: Apologies. And the results?

RD: Not good.

KF: And policy was formed as a result of your observation of the raven viscera?

RD: Sorry, again, entrails. Viscera refers to more than the entrails. And…I couldn’t say. I relayed the results to Algar the Pitiless.

KF: Do you believe people should be slaughtered on the basis of corvid gizzards?

RD: Entrails, I am sorry but the gizzard is only part of the entrails. All I can say is that was the policy at the time.

KF: Is it still the policy?

RD: I understand it is under review.

KF: Do you accept there was no rebellion?

RD: In my view it was not so much about actual rebellion, more about way views were expressed.

KF: How was the way they were expressed offensive?

RD: Well, saying Algar the Pitiless was uncaring.

KF: When was that said?

RD: Can’t recall.

KF: Did you ever hear them say that?

RD: No.

KF: How were they alleged to have said that?

RD: Apparently they said “Algar the Pitiless sends his men to rob and kill us.”

KF: So they used his name?

RD: Yes.

KF: How is that offensive?

RD: Suggests he is uncaring. That’s what “Pitiless” means.

KF: It’s his name.

RD: Still problematic.

KF: So he is called “Algar the Pitiless”. and it is offensive to say he is uncaring?

RD: Some would say so.

KF: Who?

RD: Algar the Pitiless found it offensive. Very difficult to continue working with them after that.

KF: Working with them? You mean raiding their villages and mistreating them?

RD: Yes. Hard to see how that relationship could be restored.

KF: So, how would they express a legitimate complaint without offending AP?

RD: Not sure. Maybe not address issue in our world. Fine for discussion in afterlife.

KF: Or dreams?

RD: Not sure. Grey area.

KF: Perhaps they could encode it in raven entrails?

RD: I really must protest. I find that quite disrespectful

KF: My apologies.

RD: Raven entrails are just one element of what I do.

HE: If you are finished for the moment, might this be a good time to break for lunch?

KF: Certainly. But I do hope raven entrails won’t be involved.

RD: I’m sorry, that’s just rude.

RD reminded not to discuss evidence with anyone in meantime.