Traditions of Cimmerian tribes

[Condottiero Magno]

Feb 7, 2016 18:15:08 GMT -5 BlackHeart said:

Like I said - civilization is turn from the path of humanity. If I could go back to the past and chose I would rather be a half naked savage then a prince or nobleman - I swear it! 

No it's not...

Any claims of such is nothing more than a delusion of bias. Claims of honor and justice among "barbarians" is nothing more than making palatable the act of douchebaggery among stratified groups, behaving in a manner, no different than the civilized societies in your criticism.

Civilization is a natural result of people getting together, since we're social critters, and barbarism is a relative term, not what it originally meant: a language unlike Greek and later Latin.

[valeriaspirit]

Feb 8, 2016 17:30:48 GMT -5 BlackHeart said:

In medieval Serbia, during the reign of Emperor Dusan the Mighty, there was established Great Code and each violation was followed by an appropriate (often brutal) penalty. It happened that on one occasion during the siege of the certain city a mere servant of Duke Sirgijan (who was killed brutally, by fraud) decided to ignore the law and the order to imprison the murderer Byzantine Sfranc Paleolog, and so, determined to lose his head in order to avenge his master, the servant of the Grand Duke killed Sfranc from a crossbow. Servant was naturally brought before the emperor. When he was asked why he disobeyed the order, aware that he will be executed for what he did the servant replied: "I gave my head for my word ... I swore over the body of my dead master that
 I will avenge his death even if it cost me my own head. Here me now ... Before you ... Do what you want with me... "
 Emperor, as he was born warrior and invincible swashbuckler, a knight in his soul, gave a valiant servant life caught by his deed and devotion to a given word. Although it was inconsistent with the actual law, that was justice. The killer was anointed knight and in the eyes of all the folk his deed (killing his commander for gold and new possession) was unworthy of knighthood. Emperor Dusan himself was aware that what the servants has done was justice. 
 
 Sorry for the little lecture on the history, Trescuinge. Im sure you understand the point.

Hi, All!

Interesting discussion!

I would just point out a couple of things that might be of interest (quickly) -

1) Tolkien's express intention was to create a mythology for England, as the legends which survived from the pre-Norman Conquest period in England were so fragmentary. The mythology was primarily embodied in The Silmarillion, which describes the creation of the Ainur, the children of Illuvatar (Elves and Men), Morgoth (the first Dark Lord), etc. etc. Of course then there are The Hobbit and the Lord of the Rings, with which everyone is familiar. Now, unlike REH, Tolkien was a very faithful member of the Roman Catholic Church - but he does not bring in Christian beliefs, other than to sometimes hint at a promise of something to come in the future, without elaborating on his belief in Jesus Christ as Son of God, raised from the dead, savior and so on. And more to the point in relation to the current discussion - there is nothing in The Hobbit or LOTR that I can think of that would correspond to religious ritual or observance.

2) The tale of the mercy shown toward the servant by the Emperor Dusan the Mighty reminds me of two incidents I've seen depicted in films recently. One is The 47 Ronin (with Keanu Reeves), which is based on a true story/legend in Japan. The subplot with Keanu Reeves and supernatural elements is a Hollywood fabrication. But the primary tale involves a samurai who assaulted (?) another lord and for his infraction was ordered by the Shogun to commit harikiri. When he did so, his samurai retainers were left without a master; hence they were called "ronin," which means a masterless samurai. The Shogun had ordered that no one harm the lord who had been the subject of the original assault. However, the Ronin disobeyed this commandment and brought about his demise, thus revenging their master. They carried his head to lay on the grave of their master. However, when their case came before the Shogun for judgment, they were found guilty of breaching his commandment not to harm the lord, and they were all ordered to commit harikiri, which they did. However, today they are considered legendary examples of faithfulness and loyalty, and their deeds are celebrated every year with pilgrimages to their graves and so on.

3) The other film which I think featured something similar is the recent version of the story of Hercules (from about 2011 or so), which is available on Netflix, at least here in Canada. However, I cannot unfortunately remember the details - I will try to re-watch it soon and post an update.

The noteworthy thing in the case of the 47 Ronin, of course, is that one might expect that the Ronins' righteous actions would have earned them an exemption from the strict enforcement of the Shogun's decree, but it didn't - which suggests that the Japanese system was almost irremediably harsh.

Valeria Spirit

[Condottiero Magno]

The 47 Ronin is a fanciful story that's only remotely based on a series of events...

The samurai in question was actually sleazy daimyo who...

...I'll refer y'all to the Samurai Archives...

The legend: www.samurai-archives.com/ronin.html

The truth: www.columbia.edu/~hds2/47ronin/47ronin_rev.htm

www.samurai-archives.com/forums/viewtopic.php?p=51133#51133

www.samurai-archives.com/forums/viewtopic.php?p=51147#51147

And just to clarify things further, only 3-5 (depending on which account you believe) of these 'retainers' were armed guards. Kira only had 3-5 armed guards on the premesis, all of whom were sleeping when the attack was launched (the gates were being staffed by household staff, who were also seemingly sleeping when the Ronin showed up). The rest of the the people the Ronin killed were unarmed household staff. So, in essence, it was a 47-to-5 beatdown. Or as we like to call it, a 'feudal drive-by'.

www.theshogunshouse.com/2012/11/thanks-for-nothing-dark-horse-47-ronin.html

Well, there just happens to be an excellent account of Asano’s behavior and character in the “Dokai Koshuki”, a report prepared in the 1690’s by agents of Shogun Tokugawa Tsunayoshi concerning the lives and behavior of 243 daimyo (and prepared long before Asano’s assault on Kira in Edo castle). Asano seems to have been regarded with distaste by many of his peers, and indeed seen as a hothead. The report compliments him on his intelligence and strict punishment of offences within Ako domain, but after that it’s all downhill. The report derides him for "sexual profligacy” and also notes that he sunk to promoting and rewarding retainers based on their ability to procure attractive women for him (and otherwise feed his ego). It notes that he was "only concerned with his personal amusement" and left the government of his domain in the hands of his servants.

The report calls his retainers (Oishi Yoshio-more on him soon-being one of these) to task for the poor job they had done and brands them as disloyal for not having trained Asano properly. Asano is noted for possessing neither literary nor military skills. It appears that the chief retainers of the Asano feared losing their positions of authority within the clan and did their best to ensure Asano occupied himself primarily by indulging his libido (leaving the direct control of the clan to them). He had no children until late in life, and then only as a result of a 1694 illness that almost killed him. Without an heir, his clan would have had to forfeit their lands, so clan elders convinced him to have children (although by this time Asano had adopted his younger brother and named him heir). However, the lecherous lord continued to party like it was 1799 and continued his wastrels’ ways. So Asano was certainly no devoted family man. He had no real talents to speak of, neglected the running of his fief, and was the subject of ridicule by his contemporaries in Edo. This ridicule increased after his failed assault on Kira, where his swordsmanship and inability to kill an old man he had attacked from behind was mocked in a popular song that made the rounds of Edo at that time.

Why, then, did Asano attack him? Certainly there had to be some reason. But the cold, hard truth is that no one knows. Asano refused to tell anyone the reason, and only he knew it. This indicates that divulging the reason would cause him to be seen in an even more negative light. Stephen Turnbull’s “The Revenge of the 47 Ronin” gives a very likely scenario. "By 1701 the 60-year-old-Kira Yoshihisa had served successive Shoguns as a loyal and utterly reliable master of court ceremonies for about 40 years. It was a role that required minute precision to detail and the ability to organize with clockwork precision. A man in that position, one can safely assume, did not suffer fools gladly. When faced, therefore, with having to instruct in etiquette a young daimyo to whom court ceremonial was much less interesting than court ladies, and a man who appeared ignorant of the most basic learning and yet enjoyed an income 11 times greater than his stuffy old teacher, Yoshihisa's self-control was to be tested to the limit". Asano would very likely have been reprimanded sternly by Kira for slackness in his studies, and it’s very easy to imagine he would have chafed and done a slow burn over it, resulting in his backstabbing ambush of Kira. In all fairness, it has to be pointed out that this is also just idle speculation-however, it’s speculation that makes more sense than the Chushingura version.

Now, as it happens, there exists an eyewitness account of Asano’s assault. It was written by one Kajikawa Yosobei, who was a supervisory official in the Ooku (the women’s quarters of Edo Castle). Yosobei was chatting to Kira regarding rescheduling the giving of gifts from the Shogun’s consort to the Emperor’s representatives. Here’s his account of the attack: Asano appeared from nowhere, began screaming, and attacked Kira from behind, slightly wounding him in the back. Shocked, Kira whirled around to face Asano, began to back pedal, and was slightly wounded again on his face, causing him to fall to the ground. Kajikawa restrained Asano. The other samurai in the room came to Kajikawa’s aid and drug Asano into the Willow Room, with the daimyo of Ako screaming the whole time.

The 47 ronin, actually 46, acted more out of desperation, rather than any sense of righteousness. They waited for so long to strike, not to fool Kira into false sense of security, but only after Asano's designated heir wouldn't be confirmed by the Shogunate to rule the forfeited Ako domain.     

[BlackHeart]

Apr 23, 2016 11:24:53 GMT -5 Condottiero Magno said:

Feb 7, 2016 18:15:08 GMT -5 BlackHeart said:

Like I said - civilization is turn from the path of humanity. If I could go back to the past and chose I would rather be a half naked savage then a prince or nobleman - I swear it! 

No it's not...

Any claims of such is nothing more than a delusion of bias. Claims of honor and justice among "barbarians" is nothing more than making palatable the act of douchebaggery among stratified groups, behaving in a manner, no different than the civilized societies in your criticism.

Civilization is a natural result of people getting together, since we're social critters, and barbarism is a relative term, not what it originally meant: a language unlike Greek and later Latin.

 The mind - human mind - the ability to think and self-awareness - it is a tool from wich is carved a man in what he is today. That's what puts the man aside from the rest of life's on earth. Our consciousness in life, our ability to perceive things around us, a tendency to dominate over nature and our aspiration to continuously we want more, to continuously strive towards more. We can lead the discussion on the topic of barbarism vs. civilization till doomsday, but one thing is undeniable: barbarian, primitive man, the one who is fighting only for survival, one that tends to remain free, he was a wonderful balance between the animals and that in what is a man evolved over time. He was the picture of free being, dedicated only to a natural law - survival of the strongest - as inalienable part of the nature of wich civilized man has fallen away.
And no matter of how brutal nature barbarians were, the only similarity with the civilized they shared was that to both of them history was bathed in blood. Barbarians maybe behaved primal, more animalistic, instinctive, but they were more honorable and honest persons than a civilized man ever was.
 Civilized man threw people into the yoke. Civilized man is one with which humanity perverted. We may have progressed technologically, but we are backward in all other respects (health, stamina, strength). Thanks to the "progress" we are now physically weakest outgrowth of mankind. There is no talk of comparison in style - good guys / bad guys - its just the way it is. Think of me as a man who does not think politically correct, my friend, (which is, incidentally, another hypocritical spoof of the modern world), but answer me one question: Where lies true violence? At the root of social systems? In search of the secrets of eternal truth? In magic, wisdom, desire for wealth? Whats a chance for freedom and the will of the individual in a network of power, rule, religion, conquest, flags, coats of arms, temples, priests, kings, soldiers? Who is the barbarian? The boy that grew into a warrior or a civilization in which we live?