Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on May 1, 2017 2:59:32 GMT -5
The Turkish-Gaelic affinity is fascinating. Quite honestly, I have no solid idea what this "old, old theory" might be. There is, of course, the Lebor Gabala which traces the Gaels back to Scythia. REH believed in it and there is mounting evidence that there is a kernel of truth in it: swordsofreh.proboards.com/post/8566REH does seem to have (maybe) believed (wrongly) that the Scythians were somehow a melding of Indo-European and Turkish elements, but he makes it clear that his Cimmerians/proto-Gaels were not. There was also the theory arising in the early 20th century that perhaps the Tarim mummies were Celts. REH was certainly aware of such things, by way of Merritt, Churchward and others (BTW, Uighurs make up MacDeesa's war-band in Lord of Samarcand). However, how that could be an "old, old theory", I have no idea. I'm baffled on this one. Could this relate to the 'old, old theory' or some kind of connection with the Turks? In this letter written by Robert E. Howard that Wright forwarded to Lovecraft there is a connection between the Gaels and Turanians, admittedly not specifically the Turks. What does Howard mean by Turanian? is REH talking about the Uralic/Altaic speaking peoples? Or, what I think is probably more likely is a physical description of an East Asian people - the reason why I think it more likely is that Howard sometimes describes these ancient western Turanians as Mongolians or Mongoloids. I know that in the early secular Turkish Republic, the ancestors of the Turks were believed to be of 'White Alpine' or 'Turanid' physical type (basically a European with high cheek bones). The Turks also had some pretty outlandish ideas like the 'Sun Language Theory' (the belief that all languages descend from an ancient form of Turkic) and the Proto-Turkish origin of the Sumerians thankfully, most of these theories have been dismissed by recent Turkish scholars. 'As to the climax, the maunderings of the maddened victim is like a sweep of horror down the eons, dwindling back and back to be finally lost in those grisly mists of world-birth where the mind of man refuses to follow. And I note from the fact that Mr. Lovecraft has his character speaking Gaelic instead of Cymric, in denoting the Age of the Druids, that he holds to Lhuyd’s theory as to the settling of Britain by the Celts. This theory is not generally agreed to, but I scarcely think that it has ever been disproved, and it was upon this that my story “The Lost Race” was based — that the Gaelic tribes preceded the Cymric peoples into Britain, by way of Ireland, and were later driven out by them. Baxter, the highly learned author of Glossario Antiquae Britanniae upholds this theory on the grounds that the Brigantes, supposed to be the first Celtic settlers in Britain, were unacquainted with the “p” sound, which was not used in Britain until the advent of the Brythonic or Cymric peoples. According to this, the Brigantes were a Goidhelic tribe, and Lhuyd’s point seems proven. Personally, I hold to the theory of Cymric precedence, and believe that Brythonic tribes inhabited, not only Britain and Scotland before the coming of the Gaels, but Ireland as well. The blond Britons appear to me to be a closer branch of the ancient Aryan stock, the Gaels arriving later, and being mixed with some Turanian or Mediterranean blood. But every man is entitled to his own view and a writer has the right to use any and all theories, no matter how conflicting, in his stories. I may write a story one day upholding a certain theory of science, letters, anthropology or what-not, and the next day, a story upholding a theory directly opposite. A fiction writer, whose job is to amuse and entertain, should give all theories equal scope and justice. But I’m taking up too much of your time.' (CL2.42-43)
|
|
|
Post by deuce on May 6, 2017 8:42:59 GMT -5
Hey Hun! I've seen lots of guessing about what REH meant by "Turanian" over the years. To me, there really doesn't seem to be that much of a mystery. Howard -- from basically every mention by him that I've read -- used "Turanian" in the same sense that it had been used by scholars dating back to the early 1800s right up to this Encyclopaedia Britannica entry from 1922: books.google.com/books?id=Jso5AQAAMAAJ&pg=PA30&lpg=PA30&dq=turanian+19th+century&source=bl&ots=D9Iwvl87yw&sig=mfNf6rWKgKIRgVHOklp3XOFadmc&hl=en&sa=X&ved=0ahUKEwik9-vXrNvTAhWGz4MKHeRsBvgQ6AEIVzAL#v=onepage&q=turanian%2019th%20century&f=falseREH meant "Turanian" to correspond to "Uralo-Altaic", and sometimes even more specifically to "Turks". I see nowhere that he considered them exactly the same as East Asians like the Han Chinese and Koreans. Thus, we see the "Hyrkanian-Khitan Split" going all the way back to the Lemurian Slave Revolt. It's likely that REH saw the Hyrkanians intermingling somewhat with Thurian/Hyborian-type populations the further west they migrated, thus resulting in the "Turanid" type we see in the Conan yarns. It appears to be the same in his real-world history. REH just implemented a back-formation/retcon of "Turanian" back to the Hyborian Age. Those Turanians/Hyrkanians then became the Turanians spoken of by scholars of his day. Looking at that EB entry makes REH calling Finns "Mongoloid" quite understandable. He simply looked upon the Suomi as part of one big "Turanian" family, which is just what the EB says. I would say that, in order to get to the bottom of this "Gael-Turk" thing, we need to find the theory -- almost certainly from the 1800s -- that propounded such a connection. I'm almost sure it's out there. REH read it. He didn't say "my theory", he said it was an "old, old theory". It wouldn't surprise me if it was an Englishman who came up with the idea.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on May 9, 2017 13:43:09 GMT -5
Hey Hun! I've seen lots of guessing about what REH meant by "Turanian" over the years. To me, there really doesn't seem to be that much of a mystery. Howard -- from basically every mention by him that I've read -- used "Turanian" in the same sense that it had been used by scholars dating back to the early 1800s right up to this Encyclopaedia Britannica entry from 1922: books.google.com/books?id=Jso5AQAAMAAJ&pg=PA30&lpg=PA30&dq=turanian+19th+century&source=bl&ots=D9Iwvl87yw&sig=mfNf6rWKgKIRgVHOklp3XOFadmc&hl=en&sa=X&ved=0ahUKEwik9-vXrNvTAhWGz4MKHeRsBvgQ6AEIVzAL#v=onepage&q=turanian%2019th%20century&f=falseREH meant "Turanian" to correspond to "Uralo-Altaic", and sometimes even more specifically to "Turks". I see nowhere that he considered them exactly the same as East Asians like the Han Chinese and Koreans. Thus, we see the "Hyrkanian-Khitan Split" going all the way back to the Lemurian Slave Revolt. It's likely that REH saw the Hyrkanians intermingling somewhat with Thurian/Hyborian-type populations the further west they migrated, thus resulting in the "Turanid" type we see in the Conan yarns. It appears to be the same in his real-world history. REH just implemented a back-formation/retcon of "Turanian" back to the Hyborian Age. Those Turanians/Hyrkanians then became the Turanians spoken of by scholars of his day. Looking at that EB entry makes REH calling Finns "Mongoloid" quite understandable. He simply looked upon the Suomi as part of one big "Turanian" family, which is just what the EB says. I would say that, in order to get to the bottom of this "Gael-Turk" thing, we need to find the theory -- almost certainly from the 1800s -- that propounded such a connection. I'm almost sure it's out there. REH read it. He didn't say "my theory", he said it was an "old, old theory". It wouldn't surprise me if it was an Englishman who came up with the idea. Thanks for the link Deuce. Yeah, this old, old, theory 'Turk-Gael' thing sure is frustrating. I'm sure, I mean pretty certain that we'll eventually find the original source
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jun 24, 2017 14:43:46 GMT -5
Genghis Khan, Marble Arch, London, 2012 by Dashi Namdakov. Robert E. Howard to Tevis Clyde Smith (4th November, 1923)'Central and north Asia has furnished some great conquerers, the greatest the world has ever known. Atli Khan, Tchingniz Khagan, Othman the Great, Beyizid the Great, Timur Ilang, Akbar, Kublai Khan; the list is a long one. And it is a list of great generals and mighty monarchs. And the mightiest of them all was Temujin, Tchingniz Khagan, whom men call Genghis Khan, “Great king.” Most historians, delving slightly in the annals of history, place Alexander the Great, Iskander Akbar, above Genghis Khan in rank. They ascribe the Mongol’s success to vast hordes of wild Tatars and Mongols, who overcame the enemy by sheer force of numbers and ferocity.Let us consider Alexander the Great. There is no denying that he was a great general. But king Phillip of Macedon had already organized, armed and drilled a mighty army when Alexander came to the throne. The armies of Greece and Macedon were the best armed, the best drilled in the world at that time. Alexander had as enemies the half-armed, undrilled hosts of wandering barbarians and the armies of Persia. And the Persians, the wealthiest and most luxuriant people of the world at that time, were becoming effeminate. Genghis Khan, on the other hand, was not even accepted by his own people. Direct heir to the Mongolian throne though he was, he was forced to fight his way. His own tribe opposed him. He had rebellious chiefs, hostile Turkish tribes, Tatar bandits, and Tungusi raiders to overcome. Yet his fifteenth year found him seated on the combined throne of Tartary-Mongolia. He united Tatars, Mongols and Tungusi and from them he made an army.At first the army did not exceed a hundred thousand warriors and with that force he conquered rival tribes and crossing the Chinese wall with torch and scimitar, put himself on the Chinese throne.Alexander the Great never encountered such obstacles as Genghis Khan did. Genghis Khan had opposing him, and his armies; China, then the great Eastern nation; the crafty Jelairs and other Tukish tribes; many hostile Tatar tribes; the wild, savage tribesmen of the Himalaya mountain and the plains of the Thian-Shan, the ancestors of the Turkomans and Afghans. And Genghis Khan conquered them all and built a mighty empire.'
Source: theblogthattimeforgot.blogspot.co.uk/2011/03/filmgoers-guide-to-conan-barbarian-1982.html
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Aug 10, 2017 7:27:37 GMT -5
Robert E. Howard explains the difficulties in writing historical fiction to H.P. Lovecraft. If I remember correctly Roy Thomas also confused the two dates for the Siege of Vienna by the Turks (1529 and 1683) when explaining the origins of Red Sonja in the Hyborian Page. 'Battle over the Turkish banner', oil on canvas 1905, by Józef Brandt. REH to HPL (9 August, 1932) 'This writing of historical stories is hell in a way, though intensely interesting. It is easy to make mistakes. For instance I noted in his book of travels, Bayard Taylor, when speaking of his exploration of Vienna, mentioned Count Stahremberg as commanding Vienna in 1529, when, he said, Sobiesky rescued the city from the siege of the Turks under the Grand Vizier Muhammad. Stahremberg hadnt been born in 1529. Count Salm commanded then, and beat off, not Muhammad, who, with Sobiesky was still in the womb of the unborn, but Suleyman the Magnificent. It was in 1683 that the others played their part. And the vizier was not Muhammad but Kara Mustafa.'
Means to Freedom, p.343-344 Here are the scans from the Hyborian Page concerning the dating of the Siege of Vienna in The Shadow of the Vulture. Here Roy Thomas mistakenly gives the date 1563 for the Siege of Vienna. (CTB 78) Maybe Roy confused the two dates of 1529 and 1683? In CTB 84 an eagle-eyed reader spots the error and also provides the correct date: 1529.
|
|
|
Post by deuce on Aug 13, 2017 1:51:28 GMT -5
Out of Asia the tribesmen came, With speed of the wind, with sword and flame, Never such conqueror, slayer of man, Witness, oh, shades of Genghis Khan.~ Robert E. Howard ~
|
|
|
Post by deuce on Aug 13, 2017 2:04:05 GMT -5
Nisapur
The day that towers, sapphire kissed,
Reeled to a Mongol sword that hissed,
And broke the silver sighing mist
That parted doom from Nisapur.
Or when in morning shadows grey
The flying ghosts of Subotai
came galloping from far Cathay
To trample towers of Nisapur.
Or when in midnight's star-shah'd rule
There came o'er sands like golden pools,
Bayezid riding from Stamboul
To break the walls of Nisapur.
Ere Rustum, great fire-breathing lord
Who broke the genii with his sword,
Had fallen before the Golden Horde
His bones are dust in Nisapur.
And he who chanted of the vine,
Split like a skin of Shiraz wine,
Had made that dust a thing divine―
Divine the dust of Nisapur.
~ REH ~
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Aug 14, 2017 12:52:59 GMT -5
Out of Asia the tribesmen came, With speed of the wind, with sword and flame, Never such conqueror, slayer of man, Witness, oh, shades of Genghis Khan.~ Robert E. Howard ~
Thanks Deuce.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Aug 14, 2017 12:55:57 GMT -5
Nisapur
The day that towers, sapphire kissed,
Reeled to a Mongol sword that hissed,
And broke the silver sighing mist
That parted doom from Nisapur.
Or when in morning shadows grey
The flying ghosts of Subotai
came galloping from far Cathay
To trample towers of Nisapur.
Or when in midnight's star-shah'd rule
There came o'er sands like golden pools,
Bayezid riding from Stamboul
To break the walls of Nisapur.
Ere Rustum, great fire-breathing lord
Who broke the genii with his sword,
Had fallen before the Golden Horde
His bones are dust in Nisapur.
And he who chanted of the vine,
Split like a skin of Shiraz wine,
Had made that dust a thing divine―
Divine the dust of Nisapur.
~ REH ~ Thanks for the great REH verse Deuce.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Sept 4, 2017 15:25:45 GMT -5
Gotta find a copy of The Dark Man Issue #6.
There's an interesting essay by Steve Tompkins "There's a White Wolf on the Ottoman, Or, Another Revolt in the Desert".
I'm surmising the essay concerns the El Borak yarn "Son of the White Wolf".
Can't seem to find it anywhere online.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Sept 28, 2017 0:38:39 GMT -5
The Battle of Mišar, 1806 by Afanasij ScheloumoffREH to HPL (11 February 1936) Glad you enjoyed the dream write-up I sent you. Long narrative dreams are fairly common with me, and sometimes my dream personality is in no way connected with my actual personality. I have been a 16th century Englishman, a prehistoric man, a blue-coated United States cavalryman, campaigning against the Sioux in the years following the Civil War, a yellow-haired Italian of the Renaissance, a Norman nobleman of the 11th century, a weird-eyed flowing-bearded Gothic fighting-man, a bare-footed Irish kern of the 17th century, an Indian, a Serb in baggy trousers fighting Turks with a curved saber, a prize-fighter, and I've wandered all up and down the 19th century as a trapper, a westward-bound emigrant, a bar-tender, a hunter, an Indian-fighter, a trail-driver, cowboy - once I was John Wesley Hardin! I remember very well indeed the Roman dream of yours which Long used in his story. As I told you then it was an imaginative and poetic masterpiece.A Means to Freedom, p.915 Possible Wikipedia links of interest en.wikipedia.org/wiki/John_Wesley_Hardinen.wikipedia.org/wiki/Battle_of_Mišar
|
|
|
Post by deuce on Oct 27, 2017 23:42:53 GMT -5
Since we don't have an "REH & the Cossacks" thread yet... A Song of the Don CossacksWolf-brother, wolf-lover, Over the river the kites hover Where witch-light glimmers And tall grass shimmers― What dead things shall their eyes discover? What, when the sabers sing in the gloaming, What, when the gray wolves cease their roaming? Wolf-lover, wolf-brother, We are sworn to slay each other. Gray light glances Along our lances― Both of us sons of our Volga mother. Kites shall feast then ranks burst asunder And the roar of the red tide hurls us under. When the white steel glints and the red blood spurts― Death in the camps and death in the yurts. When the crimson shadows of twilight fall We shall be feasts for the white jackal. Wolf-lover, wolf-brother, We be sons of the self-same mother, Though between us flows a red stained tide. Horse and man Ride we far, You for the Khan, I for the czar, Wolf-lover, Tartar-brother, ride! ~ REH ~
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Oct 30, 2017 13:51:21 GMT -5
Since we don't have an "REH & the Cossacks" thread yet... A Song of the Don CossacksWolf-brother, wolf-lover, Over the river the kites hover Where witch-light glimmers And tall grass shimmers― What dead things shall their eyes discover? What, when the sabers sing in the gloaming, What, when the gray wolves cease their roaming? Wolf-lover, wolf-brother, We are sworn to slay each other. Gray light glances Along our lances― Both of us sons of our Volga mother. Kites shall feast then ranks burst asunder And the roar of the red tide hurls us under. When the white steel glints and the red blood spurts― Death in the camps and death in the yurts. When the crimson shadows of twilight fall We shall be feasts for the white jackal. Wolf-lover, wolf-brother, We be sons of the self-same mother, Though between us flows a red stained tide. Horse and man Ride we far, You for the Khan, I for the czar, Wolf-lover, Tartar-brother, ride! ~ REH ~Thanks Deuce.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Feb 16, 2018 15:18:07 GMT -5
REH to HPL (c. July, 1935) 'As for your remark about my "contention that only civilized men are ungallant"; that's scarcely accurate. I have never attributed any undue chivalry to the Goths, Huns or any other tribe of barbarians. I am quite aware that the Goths butchered, raped, and plundered without regard for the age or sex of their victims; they did not, however, claim that their raping, butchering and plundering was in defense of art, progress and civilization. Therein they differed from modern "civilized" men. I will not bother to deny the implication in the use of the term "noble savage". You know very well that I have never used that term in reference to any race.'A Means to Freedom, p.863
|
|
|
Post by deuce on Feb 17, 2018 2:08:11 GMT -5
Gotta find a copy of The Dark Man Issue #6. There's an interesting essay by Steve Tompkins "There's a White Wolf on the Ottoman, Or, Another Revolt in the Desert". I'm surmising the essay concerns the El Borak yarn "Son of the White Wolf". Can't seem to find it anywhere online. The whole issue's strong. Lost mine in the Flood.
|
|