Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Sept 30, 2016 9:21:05 GMT -5
Thought I'd do my part. This is an early one to REH's good friend, Tevis: Shades of Genghis Khan! Sword of Abd el Kader! Spears of Tamerlane! Give me a tribe of fast-riding, sword-wielding, Erlik-worshiping Mongols, and I'll make these hypocrites useful...
When a nation forgets her skill in war, when her religion becomes a mockery, when the whole nation becomes a nation of money-grabbers, then the wild tribes, the barbarians drive in.
England had her Norsemen, her Scots, her Normans. Israel had her Philistines, her Ammonites, Assyrians, her Babylonians.
Egypt had her Hyksos, her Ethiopians. France had her Prussians. Persia had her Greeks, her Parthians. Russia had her Japan. Spain had her Moors, her England.
Who will our invaders be? From whence will they come? Where but from Asia? Can a nation ally the Tartars, the Mongols, the Indians; the tribes of Asia? Buddhist, Bonist, Brahmin, Erlikist, Mohammadan? Unite them and hurl their united strength against the rest of the world? Such a nation would rule the world. -- Letter to Tevis Clyde Smith, 30th July, 1923Thanks Deuce. Cover by Dwight Franklin for the first book edition, Bobbs-Merrill, Indianapolis, 1920. Originally appeared as "The Eye of Zeitun" in Romance magazine, Feb-Mar 1920. Along side Harold Lamb, another major influence appears to be Talbot Mundy. Here's a paragraph from Talbot Mundy's 'Eye of Zeitoon', 'Tall, mustached Circassians, with eighteen-inch Erzerum daggers at their waists, swaggered about as if they, and only they, were history's heirs. It was expedient to get out of their path alertly, but they cringed into second place before the Turks, who, without any swagger at all, lorded it over every one. For the Turk is a conqueror, whatever else he ought to be. The poorest Turkish servant is race-conscious, and unshakably convinced of his own superiority to the princes of the conquered. One has to bear that fact in mind when dealing with the Turk; it colors all his views of life, and accounts for some of his famous unexpectedness.'
|
|
|
Post by deuce on Oct 1, 2016 8:36:49 GMT -5
Cover by Dwight Franklin for the first book edition, Bobbs-Merrill, Indianapolis, 1920. Originally appeared as "The Eye of Zeitun" in Romance magazine, Feb-Mar 1920. Alongside Harold Lamb, another major influence appears to be Talbot Mundy. Here's a paragraph from Talbot Mundy's 'Eye of Zeitoon', 'Tall, mustached Circassians, with eighteen-inch Erzerum daggers at their waists, swaggered about as if they, and only they, were history's heirs. It was expedient to get out of their path alertly, but they cringed into second place before the Turks, who, without any swagger at all, lorded it over every one. For the Turk is a conqueror, whatever else he ought to be. The poorest Turkish servant is race-conscious, and unshakably convinced of his own superiority to the princes of the conquered. One has to bear that fact in mind when dealing with the Turk; it colors all his views of life, and accounts for some of his famous unexpectedness.'
I first read about Mundy and his influence on REH sometime in the late '70s. Actually read his "Tros" books in the early '80s and I've read a fair amount of his other work since (plus a bio). IMO, his influence is sometimes exaggerated, and what influence there is tends to be more general than specific. In regard to Asia, I think that Lamb, Kipling, Chambers and Rohmer all had as much or far more influence on Howard. That doesn't mean that Mundy couldn't write top-drawer stuff, just that I haven't seen a lot in REH's fiction that I would point to as being specifically from Mundy. However, your example above could very well be something that REH took notice of. He owned "Zeitoon" and I admit I haven't read it yet. Beside what you pointed out, the Circassians with the big "Erzerum daggers" caught my eye. Compare this: "His khalat was of white silk, with pearls sewn on the bosom. Girdled at the waist with a Bakhauriot belt, its skirts were drawn back to reveal his wide silken breeches, tucked into short boots of soft green leather, adorned with gold thread. On his head was a green silk turban, wound about a spired helmet chased with gold. His only weapon was a broad curved Cherkess knife in an ivory sheath girdled high on his left hip, kozak fashion." "Cherkess" of course, is a real-world variant of "Circassian". I'm really starting to conclude that perhaps it is better to start threads such as this (and my Russian thread) before starting corresponding threads in the "Hyborian Age" sub-forum. It starts the entire discussion off on a stronger foundation. It probably won't stop me from doing the opposite from time to time, though.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Oct 3, 2016 13:20:53 GMT -5
Alongside Harold Lamb, another major influence appears to be Talbot Mundy. Here's a paragraph from Talbot Mundy's 'Eye of Zeitoon', 'Tall, mustached Circassians, with eighteen-inch Erzerum daggers at their waists, swaggered about as if they, and only they, were history's heirs. It was expedient to get out of their path alertly, but they cringed into second place before the Turks, who, without any swagger at all, lorded it over every one. For the Turk is a conqueror, whatever else he ought to be. The poorest Turkish servant is race-conscious, and unshakably convinced of his own superiority to the princes of the conquered. One has to bear that fact in mind when dealing with the Turk; it colors all his views of life, and accounts for some of his famous unexpectedness.'
I first read about Mundy and his influence on REH sometime in the late '70s. Actually read his "Tros" books in the early '80s and I've read a fair amount of his other work since (plus a bio). IMO, his influence is sometimes exaggerated, and what influence there is tends to be more general than specific. In regard to Asia, I think that Lamb, Kipling, Chambers and Rohmer all had as much or far more influence on Howard. That doesn't mean that Mundy couldn't write top-drawer stuff, just that I haven't seen a lot in REH's fiction that I would point to as being specifically from Mundy. However, your example above could very well be something that REH took notice of. He owned "Zeitoon" and I admit I haven't read it yet. Beside what you pointed out, the Circassians with the big "Erzerum daggers" caught my eye. Compare this: "His khalat was of white silk, with pearls sewn on the bosom. Girdled at the waist with a Bakhauriot belt, its skirts were drawn back to reveal his wide silken breeches, tucked into short boots of soft green leather, adorned with gold thread. On his head was a green silk turban, wound about a spired helmet chased with gold. His only weapon was a broad curved Cherkess knife in an ivory sheath girdled high on his left hip, kozak fashion." "Cherkess" of course, is a real-world variant of "Circassian". I'm really starting to conclude that perhaps it is better to start threads such as this (and my Russian thread) before starting corresponding threads in the "Hyborian Age" sub-forum. It starts the entire discussion off on a stronger foundation. It probably won't stop me from doing the opposite from time to time, though. Hello Deuce, I have read even less Mundy, the above quote is all I have read! Years ago, outside a bookshop, there was a makeshift bookshelf exposed to the elements, for some reason a book caught my eye! Obviously, it was the 'Eye of Zeitoon' I flicked through the pages and the above quote jumped out at me, I considered buying the book (it was only about £1) but, the Ottomans are not really my thing, I do prefer the Pre-Islamic/Pre-Buddhist Turko-Mongols, so, I decided against picking it up. At the time I was not really aware of the possible connection between Howard and Mundy. The comparison between the 'Eye of Zeitoon' quote and Olgerd is very interesting. Perhaps, good ol' Olgerd is a Slavicized Circassian. On the Harold Lamb front, unfortunately, I have not had much luck in ordering the Nebraska Press /Bison Books in London, I'll just have to be patient. Anyway I've still got loads to read and regularly dive in to 'A Means to Freedom'.
|
|
|
Post by paulmc on Oct 4, 2016 13:03:15 GMT -5
For this October, I am listening to Fred Saberhagen's THE DRACULA TAPE. It is a retelling of DRACULA from Vlad's point-of-view. Parts of the original novel are quoted/re-used. This morning I listened to Dracula's speech of his race. Re-reading the original speech (from DRACULA online at gutenberg.org) I find the speech very Howardian. Do we know if REH read DRACULA? If so, this speech must have jumped out at him, I imagine.
“We Szekelys have a right to be proud, for in our veins flows the blood of many brave races who fought as the lion fights, for lordship. Here, in the whirlpool of European races, the Ugric tribe bore down from Iceland the fighting spirit which Thor and Wodin gave them, which their Berserkers displayed to such fell intent on the seaboards of Europe, ay, and of Asia and Africa too, till the peoples thought that the were-wolves themselves had come. Here, too, when they came, they found the Huns, whose warlike fury had swept the earth like a living flame, till the dying peoples held that in their veins ran the blood of those old witches, who, expelled from Scythia had mated with the devils in the desert. Fools, fools! What devil or what witch was ever so great as Attila, whose blood is in these veins?” He held up his arms. “Is it a wonder that we were a conquering race; that we were proud; that when the Magyar, the Lombard, the Avar, the Bulgar, or the Turk poured his thousands on our frontiers, we drove them back? Is it strange that when Arpad and his legions swept through the Hungarian fatherland he found us here when he reached the frontier; that the Honfoglalas was completed there? And when the Hungarian flood swept eastward, the Szekelys were claimed as kindred by the victorious Magyars, and to us for centuries was trusted the guarding of the frontier of Turkey-land; ay, and more than that, endless duty of the frontier guard, for, as the Turks say, ‘water sleeps, and enemy is sleepless.’ Who more gladly than we throughout the Four Nations received the ‘bloody sword,’ or at its warlike call flocked quicker to the standard of the King? When was redeemed that great shame of my nation, the shame of Cassova, when the flags of the Wallach and the Magyar went down beneath the Crescent? Who was it but one of my own race who as Voivode crossed the Danube and beat the Turk on his own ground? This was a Dracula indeed! Woe was it that his own unworthy brother, when he had fallen, sold his people to the Turk and brought the shame of slavery on them! Was it not this Dracula, indeed, who inspired that other of his race who in a later age again and again brought his forces over the great river into Turkey-land; who, when he was beaten back, came again, and again, and again, though he had to come alone from the bloody field where his troops were being slaughtered, since he knew that he alone could ultimately triumph! They said that he thought only of himself. Bah! what good are peasants without a leader? Where ends the war without a brain and heart to conduct it? Again, when, after the battle of Mohács, we threw off the Hungarian yoke, we of the Dracula blood were amongst their leaders, for our spirit would not brook that we were not free. Ah, young sir, the Szekelys—and the Dracula as their heart’s blood, their brains, and their swords—can boast a record that mushroom growths like the Hapsburgs and the Romanoffs can never reach. The warlike days are over. Blood is too precious a thing in these days of dishonourable peace; and the glories of the great races are as a tale that is told.”
|
|
|
Post by deuce on Oct 4, 2016 13:10:26 GMT -5
|
|
|
Post by paulmc on Oct 4, 2016 13:12:55 GMT -5
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Oct 5, 2016 1:54:03 GMT -5
Thanks for the link, Deuce. From 'Black Stone in a Red Setting' by Steve Tompkins. 'And the white hats in all of this? Actually they’re turbans. The Ottomans, Andrew Wheatcroft’s 1993 study of the Terrible Turk as European bogeyman, is based on the premise that “in the West [Turkey] still carries an additional burden of terror and loathing whose origins vanish into the far distant past.” But Robert E. Howard was something of a Turcophile, or at least he thought he discerned similarities between the Turks and the clansmen of his heart’s desire and head’s exasperation: I find tales of the East extremely fascinating, and am beginning to believe that the old, old theory of Turkish-Gaelic affinity is well borne out. The races have much in common-cruelty, treachery, loyalty, fatalism, spendthriftiness, berserk fighting rage, a love of music and poetry (From an October 1930 letter to Harold Preece, Selected Letters 1923-1930, page 65) The Turkish conqueror Zenghi, ostensibly the villain of “The Lion of Tiberias,” is described as being gripped by a not-un-Celtic “mocking devil that lurks at the heart of all the sons of high Asia,” and explains himself in words that anticipate the famous credo of Conan the Cimmerian in “Queen of the Black Coast”: Let me live deep, let me know the sting of wine on my palate, the wind in my face, the glitter of royal pageantry, the bright madness of slaughter-let me burn and sting and tingle with the madness of life and living, and I quest not whether Muhammed’s paradise, or Erlik’s frozen hell, or the blackness of empty oblivion lies beyond. And in “The Black Stone” the Ottomans are a terrible swift sword and a cleansing fire: …for the manuscript written in the careful hand of Selim Bahadur narrated at length what he and his raiders found in the valley of Stregoicavar; and I read, set down in detail, the blasphemous obscenities that torture wrung from the lips of screaming worshippers; and I read, too, of the lost, grim black cavern high in the hills where the horrified Turks hemmed a monstrous, bloated, wallowing toad-like being and slew it with flame and ancient steel blessed in old times by Muhammed, and with incantations that were old when Arabia was young. And even staunch old Selim’s hand shook as he recorded the cataclysmic, earth-shaking death-howls of the monstrosity, which died not alone; for a half-score of his slayers perished with him, in ways that Selim would not or could not describe.'
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Oct 5, 2016 2:33:48 GMT -5
For this October, I am listening to Fred Saberhagen's THE DRACULA TAPE. It is a retelling of DRACULA from Vlad's point-of-view. Parts of the original novel are quoted/re-used. This morning I listened to Dracula's speech of his race. Re-reading the original speech (from DRACULA online at gutenberg.org) I find the speech very Howardian. Do we know if REH read DRACULA? If so, this speech must have jumped out at him, I imagine. “We Szekelys have a right to be proud, for in our veins flows the blood of many brave races who fought as the lion fights, for lordship. Here, in the whirlpool of European races, the Ugric tribe bore down from Iceland the fighting spirit which Thor and Wodin gave them, which their Berserkers displayed to such fell intent on the seaboards of Europe, ay, and of Asia and Africa too, till the peoples thought that the were-wolves themselves had come. Here, too, when they came, they found the Huns, whose warlike fury had swept the earth like a living flame, till the dying peoples held that in their veins ran the blood of those old witches, who, expelled from Scythia had mated with the devils in the desert. Fools, fools! What devil or what witch was ever so great as Attila, whose blood is in these veins?” He held up his arms. “Is it a wonder that we were a conquering race; that we were proud; that when the Magyar, the Lombard, the Avar, the Bulgar, or the Turk poured his thousands on our frontiers, we drove them back? Is it strange that when Arpad and his legions swept through the Hungarian fatherland he found us here when he reached the frontier; that the Honfoglalas was completed there? And when the Hungarian flood swept eastward, the Szekelys were claimed as kindred by the victorious Magyars, and to us for centuries was trusted the guarding of the frontier of Turkey-land; ay, and more than that, endless duty of the frontier guard, for, as the Turks say, ‘water sleeps, and enemy is sleepless.’ Who more gladly than we throughout the Four Nations received the ‘bloody sword,’ or at its warlike call flocked quicker to the standard of the King? When was redeemed that great shame of my nation, the shame of Cassova, when the flags of the Wallach and the Magyar went down beneath the Crescent? Who was it but one of my own race who as Voivode crossed the Danube and beat the Turk on his own ground? This was a Dracula indeed! Woe was it that his own unworthy brother, when he had fallen, sold his people to the Turk and brought the shame of slavery on them! Was it not this Dracula, indeed, who inspired that other of his race who in a later age again and again brought his forces over the great river into Turkey-land; who, when he was beaten back, came again, and again, and again, though he had to come alone from the bloody field where his troops were being slaughtered, since he knew that he alone could ultimately triumph! They said that he thought only of himself. Bah! what good are peasants without a leader? Where ends the war without a brain and heart to conduct it? Again, when, after the battle of Mohács, we threw off the Hungarian yoke, we of the Dracula blood were amongst their leaders, for our spirit would not brook that we were not free. Ah, young sir, the Szekelys—and the Dracula as their heart’s blood, their brains, and their swords—can boast a record that mushroom growths like the Hapsburgs and the Romanoffs can never reach. The warlike days are over. Blood is too precious a thing in these days of dishonourable peace; and the glories of the great races are as a tale that is told.” Very interesting Paulmc, Looking through 'A Means to Freedom' this caught my eye concerning the Balkans. REH to HPL, (9 August, 1932) 'But what a tangled mess and confusion Balkan history is! And what a mixture of blood-strains the average Balkan must be! Celtic, Roman, German, Slav, Greek, Mongol, Turkish - no wonder they're always hamstringing each other. I understand that for some time in those smaller countries the Germanic strain, and culture, has been dwindling out and being replaced by the cruder and more primitive Slavic - which is bound to be well mixed with Turanian strains, considering the century-long raids and occupations of the Huns, Bulgars, Avars, Petchenegs, Khazars, Mongols, Tatars and Turks.'
A Means to Freedom, p.345
Thanks Paulmc
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Oct 7, 2016 13:12:22 GMT -5
Robert E. Howard and HP Lovecraft discuss Jewish connections to the Assyrians, Phoenicians, Canaanites and the Turanian Khazars.
HPL to REH (October 4, 1930)
'The Assyrians as shewn in their sculptures, are extreme examples of the Alpine type; and the Phoenicians and Carthaginians appear to have belonged to it. When the nomadic Jews conquered the cities of Canaan, they probably found this type prevailing there - the difference being clearly shewn in cultural ways. The two elements were mutually antagonistic, but eventually amalgamation occurred - the established and numerically preponderant Canaanite stock of course engulfing the relatively small but ruling element of Mediterranean Hebrews. Thus the Jew of historical times is probably more of a mongrel Canaanite of Alpine ancestry than a descendant of the original Hebraic group.'
A Means to Freedom, p.52
REH letter to HPL, (c. October, 1930)
'I am inclined to agree with you that the Assyrians and Phoenicians were of Alpine-Semitic stock, also about the Jews. It is evident that the present day Hebraic race has little in common with the original wandering, fighting type. I wonder if the Alpine type could have been the result of admixture with Turanian races? It is said that the Assyrian's physiognomy was much like the present day Russian Jew's, and we know that the Jews of Russia and Poland have a great deal of Mongoloid blood in them - descendants of those Turanian Khazars with whom numbers of Jews settled and mixed in the middle ages.'
A Means to Freedom, p.82
Unfortunately, the letter from Lovecraft in November, 1930 is non-extant.
Anyway, here's an excerpt from the following letter by REH:
REH letter to HPL (c. December, 1930)
'I was also much interested in your remarks pertaining to the Assyrians and Turanians. True, the Assyrian nose is non-Turanian, and you are probably right in assuming the resemblance between the Assyrian of yesterday and the Russian Jew of today can be traced to the Semitic relationship. The truly Semitic Jew is doubtless superior to the Mongoloid Jew in moral and cultural aspects. However, the Mongoloid type seems to be the more aggressive of the two, judging from the great swarms of Jews now swamping the ranks of pugilism. Most Jewish fighters seem to have been born in Russia or Poland, or to have ancestral linkings with those countries, and they make, on the whole, skillful and courageous fighters. '
A Means to Freedom, p.100
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Oct 12, 2016 12:52:15 GMT -5
REH letter to HPL (13 July, 1932)
I am no economist nor politician, yet I can not but feel that the western peoples do not attach proper importance to the powers rising in the East. My studies of history show that such has always been the case; blinded by their own affairs, the people of the west have ignored the hordes of Attila, Tamerlane, Genghis Khan, Baibars, until those hordes were hammering their armies into bits. Now, they ignore Tatar-Russia and Japan. The bodies have hardly rotted in Chapei, yet already Europe and America seem to have forgotten the incident. I can not but feel that European policies and squabbles are thread-bare and outworn; while the people wrangle, they are blind to the powers rising in the east that may someday overwhelm them.
Means to Freedom, p.328
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Oct 16, 2016 10:53:35 GMT -5
Interesting look at 'Robert E. Howard’s Historical Sense' by By Keith Taylor. www.rehtwogunraconteur.com/robert-e-howards-historical-sense/What caught my eye was REH's letter to Wilfred Talman in April of 1931: 'That reminds me; I just recently got a letter from Farnsworth who’s just read Lamb’s book on the later crusades, and wants me to write a tale dealing with Baibars the Panther; do you know anything about him? I’ll conceal my ignorance with a flare of action, as usual. Just in case you ever want to write to me, send it to my usual address. I wont be here long.'
Keith Taylor goes on to add: REH was a decided fan of Harold Lamb’s writing, wild adventure with sword-swinging heroes, Cossacks, Crusaders and the like. Lamb also wrote a two-volume history of the Crusades that REH would almost certainly have read, and a biography of Genghis Khan. Howard’s “ignorance” wasn’t nearly as great as he said, though he was well aware that he didn’t live at the scholarly hub of the nation. Circa January 1932 he wrote to H.P. Lovecraft, “Understand, my historical readings in my childhood were scattered and sketchy, owing to the fact that I lived in the country where such books were scarce.”In the comments section of this article Rusty Burke offers a possible another probable source of inspiration for REH's Baibars. Rusty BurkeOctober 12th, 2011 at 11:08 amRe: Baibars, REH probably got his information from Lamb — see The Flame of Islam, ch. LIV, pp 404ff. Lamb says, among other things: “Consider his past — a Tatar of the Golden Horde, a desert-bred fighter…” He makes much of Baibars’ love of going about in disguises, and being able to traverse great distances in a short time because “He had all a Tatar’s ability to ride far and fast.” He doesn’t give a birth date, but says “We know that he helped wipe out the crusaders at Gaza in 1244…”I seem to be running into Harold Lamb everywhere these days.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Oct 16, 2016 11:18:28 GMT -5
Got some good news concerning the Harold Lamb books I was after. Should be picking these up later on this week. Kinda looking forward to these.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Oct 20, 2016 1:59:22 GMT -5
Robert E. Howard's views on the introduction of 'archery as an art' by the Turanians to the Western Nations.Mongolian warrior. Anonymous photographer. Circa 1900. From the Bibliothèque nationale de France REH to HPL (ca. September 1930) The Celts were not bowmen, nor were the Germans, true, no Eastern nation ever equalled the skill and science of the medieval English archers but I think this can be traced indirectly to non-Aryan influence. The Normans brought the bow into England and it was arrows that decided the day at Senlac. But the bow came into France with Hrolf and his Norsemen, and the Danes particularly had been using the weapon skillfully for centuries. It is very likely that the Scandinavian peoples learned the effectiveness of the bow while still roaming the steppes of Northern Asia, by contact with some bow-and-arrow Turanian people, and brought that knowledge with them when they overflowed over Greater Sweden, and the Baltic countries and later all over the world. Of course, I do not mean that they really introduced the bow to the other western nations as a hither-to unknown weapon. But I mean that my belief is that archery as an art and science of war, originated with the Mongoloid races, was imparted to the eastern-most ancestors of the Danes and was spread by them over Europe.
For the bow is connected and interwoven with Oriental history from the very dawn of history. We read of the prowess of the Pharaohs, shooting from their war-chariots, and slaying lions and Hittites impartially; the Philistines give back from the fury of Saul and shower him from shafts from a distance; the Babylonians and Assyrians war with heavy bows, curved in exaggerated fashion; the Persians and Scythians exchange heavy flights of whistling shafts before they close in battle. And to come to a more recent date - the Roman legions reel before the cloud of Parthian arrows, the Crusaders fall before the Turkish bows, and the wild riders of Attila, Genghis Khan and Tamerlane wipe out whole armies without coming to sword-points.A Means to Freedom, p. 42-3
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Oct 22, 2016 16:17:28 GMT -5
Harold Lamb's reply to a letter concerning 'Mongolian Archery'The previous post related to Robert E. Howard's views on the Turanian Archer, now it'll be interesting to read Harold Lamb's views on the Mongolian Archer. A reader of the 'Adventure Magazine' by the name of Frank Huston asked the following question to Harold Lamb in the ' The Camp-Fire' letters column: 'How the Mongolian Archers compared with English Long-bowmen, both as to Range and Accuracy.' I was greatly interested in your remarks on archery, British and Mongolian. As it happens, one of my tales, just in the process of completion, deals with the fortunes of an English archer among the Mongols in the early thirteenth century.
In reading the annals of the Mongols - or rather the histories of other nations that deal with the Mongols, for they left few written records of their own - I've gleaned only fragmentary ideas of the use of the bow by the Mongols. It was their favorite weapon, and was of vast importance in winning victories. They used - in the time of Genghis Khan - a heavier bow than the Chinese, the Persians, or Turks. Fighting invariably from horseback, they were able to outmaneuver and out-range their adversaries. More than once they dealt decisively with elephants; the quilted armor of the Chinese did not serve to stop their shafts; or linked mail of a single thickness.
I gathered the Mongols were accurate to a considerable distance with their short, powerful bows; they had a habit of bringing down chosen warriors of the enemy with shots in the eye and throat. I remember one incident where a Khan of the Tatar Horde sent as presents before battle a very heavy bow and silver arrow to his enemy, a Turk (for which read Persian or Kankali or Kurd, at pleasure), with the remark that such bows were very strong and such arrows shot a long way. The Turks could not handle the weapon.
History does not record the English archers ever opposing the Mongols in or around the Holy land. It is probably the case that an English yeoman with the longbow could send a shaft further and more accurately than a Mongol (all Mongols were archers). It is doubtful if he could send shafts more swiftly from the bow, or work greater execution at close quarters. And as for comparing them mounted, a reasonably good archer of the Horde could set his horse to a gallop, discharge three arrows at a mark - such as a spear stuck upright in the plain - unstring his bow, use it as a whip, string it, and shoot another three shafts, behind his back after he passed the mark.
All of which brings us to the conclusion that at the butts the English yeoman would outshoot the Mongols; also that a regiment of the same English archers would have small chance of holding their own against an equal number of Mongols in open warfare. Remember when the Mongol Horde ran up against the Russians, Poles, Teutons, Huns (Hungarians) at the Danube! From Harold Lamb's Swords from the East, Edited by Howard Andrew Jones, Bison Books, 2010, pages 466-67 Unfortunately the date of the letter at the time of publication was not known.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Oct 26, 2016 11:35:11 GMT -5
Robert E. Howard's recap of 'Wolf Chaser' from Adventure Magazine April 30, 1923 Recap of Harold Lamb’s “The Wolf Chaser” Aruk would have held the Gate of the Winds against Galdan Khan but shall a dwarf halt a giant? So the Frank Hu-Go built a fortress in the pass and manned it with twice a hundred Buriats and for three days he held it against the Kalmucks but on the fourth day Galdan Khan brought up his cannon and, not wishing to die like a rat in cask, and mindful of his promise to Galdan Khan, Hu-Go led his swordsmen against the Turkish camp and they met but Galdan Khan fled like the coward he was and commanded his archers to shoot at the Frank from afar for no man dared to face him in fair combat. His sword was as the blade of twenty men. So Hu-go died like a hero and his soul passed through the Gate in the Skies. Galdan Khan lost two thousand men before the Gate of the Winds and of the defenders there remained only Aruk the Short, nor was it cowardice that saved him. But Galdan Khan was halted and the beams of the rising sun showed the banners of Ukaba Khan coming over the mountain of Otz. Sword Woman and Other Historical Adventures, p.499
|
|