# No quarter > Mediated Wiki article. Canonical URL: https://mediated.wiki/source/No_quarter > Markdown URL: https://mediated.wiki/source/No_quarter.md > Source: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/No_quarter > Source revision: 1350869758 > License: Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike 4.0 International (https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/4.0/) {{Short description|Policy to kill, not capture, defeated troops}} {{About|the military term}} {{Redirect|Take no prisoners}} '''No quarter''', during [military conflict](/source/War) or [piracy](/source/piracy), implies that combatants would not be taken [prisoner](/source/Prisoner_of_war), but executed. Since the [Hague Convention of 1899](/source/Hague_Convention_of_1899), it is considered a [war crime](/source/war_crime); it is also prohibited in [customary international law](/source/customary_international_law) and by the [Rome Statute](/source/Rome_Statute). Article 23 of the [Hague Convention of 1907](/source/Hague_Convention_of_1907) states that "it is especially forbidden{{nbsp}}[...] to declare that no quarter will be given".{{cite book |editor1-last=Scott |editor1-first=James Brown |title=The Hague Conventions and Declarations of 1899 and 1907 |date=1915 |publisher=Oxford University Press |location=New York |page=116 |url=https://books.google.com/books?id=5KcwAAAAIAAJ&pg=PA116}} == Etymology == The term ''no quarter'' may originate from an order by the commander of a victorious army that they will not quarter (house) captured enemy combatants. Therefore, none can be taken prisoner and all enemy combatants must be killed.{{Cite OED|quarter|id=156027|access-date=8 August 2020}} 18(a) derived from 16(a) "Place of residence, dwelling place; (usually in ''plural'') rooms, barracks, lodgings, ''esp.'' those allocated to soldiers, or to staff in domestic service". A second derivation, given equal prominence in the ''[Oxford English Dictionary](/source/Oxford_English_Dictionary)'' (''OED''), is that quarter (n.17) can mean "Relations with, or conduct towards, another" as in Shakespeare's ''[Othello](/source/Othello)'', Act II, scene iii, line 180, "Friends all{{nbsp}}[...] In quarter, and in termes, like bride and groome". So "no quarter" may also mean refusal to enter into an agreement (relations) with an enemy attempting to surrender. The ''OED'' mentions a third possible derivation but says "The assertion of De Brieux ({{lang|fr|Origines{{nbsp}}[...] de plusieurs façons de parler}} (1672) 16) that it arose in an agreement between the Dutch and Spanish, by which the ransom of an officer or private was to be a quarter of his pay, is at variance with the sense of the phrases ''to give or receive quarter''." ==History== During the [First English Civil War](/source/First_English_Civil_War), the [Long Parliament](/source/Long_Parliament) issued an [ordinance of no quarter to the Irish](/source/ordinance_of_no_quarter_to_the_Irish) on 24 October 1644 in response to [Confederate Ireland](/source/Confederate_Ireland) electing to send troops in support of [Charles I of England](/source/Charles_I_of_England) against them: {{Blockquote |text=An Ordinance Commanding that no Officer or Soldier either by Sea or Land, shall give any Quarter to any Irishman, or to any papist born in Ireland, which shall be taken in Arms against the Parliament in England.{{Cite web |title=October 1644: An Ordinance Commanding that no Officer or Soldier either by Sea or Land, shall give any Quarter to any Irishman, or to any papist born in Ireland, which shall be taken in Arms against the Parliament in England. {{!}} British History Online |url=https://www.british-history.ac.uk/no-series/acts-ordinances-interregnum/pp554-555 |access-date=2023-03-10 |website=www.british-history.ac.uk}}}} By the 17th century, [siege](/source/siege) warfare was an exact art, the rules of which were so well understood that wagering on the outcome and duration of a siege became a popular craze; the then-enormous sum of £200,000 was alleged to have been bet on the outcome of the [Second Siege of Limerick in 1691](/source/Siege_of_Limerick_(1691)).{{sfn|Manning |2006|pp=413–414}} Professional honour demanded a defence, but if a [garrison](/source/garrison) surrendered when "a practicable breach" had been made, they were given "quarter". The garrison signaled their intent to surrender by "beating the [chamade](/source/chamade)"; if accepted, they were generally allowed to retain their weapons, and received a [safe conduct](/source/safe_conduct) to the nearest friendly territory. If a garrison continued their defence beyond this point, the surrender was not accepted, hence "no quarter"; the besiegers were then "permitted" to sack the town, and the garrison was often killed.{{sfn |Afflerbach|Strachan |2012 |pp=159-–160}} [[File:Dutch blood flag.jpeg|thumb|upright|Dutch ship flying a [bloody flag](/source/bloody_flag) during the [Battle of the Sound](/source/Battle_of_the_Sound) in 1658]] [[File:Flag of Edward England.svg|thumb|upright|The traditional "[Jolly Roger](/source/Jolly_Roger)" flag of [piracy](/source/piracy), signalling that quarter would be given to those who surrendered]] In some circumstances, the opposing forces would signal their intention to give no quarter by using a red flag (the so-called [bloody flag](/source/bloody_flag)).Cordingly, p. 117. Cordingly cites only one source for pages 116–119 of his text: Calendar of State Papers, Colonial, America and West Indies, volumes 1719–20, no. 34.{{sfn|Nofi|1992|p=51}} However, the use of a red flag to signal no quarter does not appear to have been universal among combatants. [Black flags](/source/List_of_black_flags) have been used to signify that quarter would be given if surrender was prompt; the best-known example is the [Jolly Roger](/source/Jolly_Roger) used by [pirates](/source/Piracy) to intimidate a target crew into surrender. By promising quarter, pirates avoided costly and dangerous sea battles which might leave both ships crippled and dozens of critical crew dead or incapacitated.{{cite book |last1=Woodard |first1=Colin |title=The Republic of Pirates |date=30 June 2008 |publisher=Mariner Books |isbn=978-0156034623}} Other "no quarter" incidents took place during the [Battle of the Alamo](/source/Battle_of_the_Alamo) in 1836, the 1850 to 1864 [Taiping Rebellion](/source/Taiping_Rebellion), and at the [Battle of Tippermuir](/source/Battle_of_Tippermuir) in 1644 when Scottish [Covenanters](/source/Covenanters) used the [battle cry](/source/battle_cry) "Jesus, and no quarter".{{sfn|Williams|2001|p=155}} In March 2026, [United States Secretary of Defense](/source/United_States_Secretary_of_Defense) [Pete Hegseth](/source/Pete_Hegseth) pledged "no quarter, no mercy for our enemies"https://www.axios.com/2026/03/15/trump-hegseth-iran-war-no-quarterhttps://www.youtube.com/watch?v=qf6D7b6b1hU in reference to [Iran](/source/Iran) during the [Iran war](/source/2026_Iran_war). ==International humanitarian law== Under [international humanitarian law](/source/international_humanitarian_law), "it is especially forbidden{{nbsp}}[...] to declare that no quarter will be given". This was established under Article 23(d) of the [1907 Hague Convention](/source/Hague_Convention_of_1907) ''IV – The Laws and Customs of War on Land''. Since a judgment on the law relating to [war crime](/source/war_crime)s and [crimes against humanity](/source/crimes_against_humanity) at the [Nuremberg trials](/source/Nuremberg_trials) in October 1946, the provisions of the 1907 Hague Convention—including Article 23(d)'s explicit prohibition to declare that no quarter will be given—are considered to be part of the [customary laws of war](/source/Customary_international_law) and are binding upon all parties in an international armed conflict.[http://avalon.law.yale.edu/imt/judlawre.asp Judgment: The Law Relating to War Crimes and Crimes Against Humanity] in the [Avalon Project](/source/Avalon_Project) archive at [Yale Law School](/source/Yale_Law_School)) ==See also== * ''[El Degüello](/source/El_Deg%C3%BCello)'' * [List of established military terms](/source/List_of_established_military_terms) * [Oriflamme](/source/Oriflamme) * [Safe conduct](/source/Safe_conduct) – A contrasting policy; a guarantee of unharassed passage through enemy territory. ==Notes== {{reflist}} ==Sources== * {{cite book|editor-last1=Afflerbach |editor-first=Holger |editor-last2=Strachan |editor-first2=Hew |title=How Fighting Ends: A History of Surrender|date=2012|publisher=OUP|isbn=978-0199693627 }} * {{cite book |last1=Manning |first1=Roger |title=An Apprenticeship in Arms: The Origins of the British Army 1585–1702 |date=2006 |publisher=OUP |isbn=0199261490 }} * {{cite book|last=Nofi|first=Albert A.|author-link=Albert Nofi|title=The Alamo and the Texas War of Independence, September 30, 1835 to April 21, 1836: Heroes, Myths, and History|publisher=Combined Books, Inc.|year=1992|isbn=0-938289-10-1 }} * {{cite book |last1=Williams |first1=RH |title=Montrose: Cavalier in Mourning |date=2001 |publisher=House of Lochar |isbn=978-1899863594 }} {{War crimes}} Category:Crimes against prisoners of war Category:War crimes by type --- Adapted from the Wikipedia article [No quarter](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/No_quarter) by Wikipedia contributors ([contributor history](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/No_quarter?action=history)). Available under [Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike 4.0 International](https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/4.0/). Changes may have been made.