Turan?

[Aholibamah]

What are the possibilities of a Turan sourcebook for the 2nd Ed? I know Vincent Darlage gave us a little taste of it in a Signs and Portents article but it might be fun to have one. If one DID exist it would also be interesting if some of the military campaigns referred to in the REH books might be described a bit for players to possibly take part in either as enemies of Turan or mercenaries/regulars in the service of whichever king happened to be around at the time.

 

[Etepete]

Now, I've read the Aghrapur text in signs and portents no 32, and while much of it was well researched and inspiring, I do have a couple of reservations.

* When describing the military of Turan, Vincent uses the Sipahis, personally I've always assumed them to be some sort of Cataphracts.

* The same text refers to turanian raiders as "terrorists". In what way does turanian raiders and looters earn that distinction? I've never seen it applied to nordheimr or pict or for that matter aquilonian looters and marauders. Concidering current events, I think it's an unecessary term to bring into the _fantasy_ world of Hyboria.

* Overall, I find Agrhapur to be to arabic. Surely Samarkand and Ektabana should be the main sources of inspiration, not damascus and baghdad? Some stuff is spot on: Sultan is such a wide spread word for instance, and was used by many turkish tribes. But Caliph is so specific that it seems out of place. And I miss the Khan and Khagan title. Bring som steppe in

* Aaand... perhaps a bit too much of Harun Al Rashid in the figure of Yezgiserd. Now this is really debatable, but would it not be nice to bring in more of Timur Lenk instead

Anyway, these are my thoughts on the matter. Except for the terrorist quote, which really struck me as out of place and unnecessary, they are just my subjective thoughts on the matter. I really hope I dont sound too much like a kill-joy: and I really hope I can get some feedback and suggestions on these thoughts

 

[VincentDarlage]

What are the possibilities of a Turan sourcebook for the 2nd Ed? I know Vincent Darlage gave us a little taste of it in a Signs and Portents article but it might be fun to have one. If one DID exist it would also be interesting if some of the military campaigns referred to in the REH books might be described a bit for players to possibly take part in either as enemies of Turan or mercenaries/regulars in the service of whichever king happened to be around at the time.

I've done a lot more research on Turan since then, but I would relish a chance to write the sourcebook. There would be some changes from that article, though. Even if it is not me writing, I am sure Mongoose will put one out sometime in the future - it just seems too major of a country not to have a sourcebook on it.

If Mongoose would like it, it would take me about a month to polish up the sourcebook I wrote for my own personal use.

 

[tarkhan bey]

I have always viewed the Turanian's as a cross between the Seljuk and the later Ottoman Turks. I like Vincent's reference to the Sipahi's purely because it coincides with my view of the Turanian army. The Mighty archers,as described in Free Companies are a fair substitution for the Jannissary corps as well,dont you think?
The vast bulk of the army would then be composed of irregular native cavalry troops like the Timariots, The Akinji and Tartars. This fits nicely in the Turanian military background in Free Companies and the rulebook where most of their forces seem to be raiders. The Hyrkanians are a good replacement for the assorted Tartar hosts.
I have always imagined Yezdigerd to be an equivalent to either Bayezid 1st or Selim the Grim and I always wondered if Conans child through Princess Zosara of the Kuigar(?) nomads might not be a possible plotline for a Genghis Khan or Tamerlane character. Any thoughts?

 

[Etepete]

Now this is interesting, obviously a timur or even more so a genghiz would move in from the east to topple the decadent turanians in classic howardesque barbarian style, and set up a new Hyrkanian dynasty much like the Parthians did on old persian turf.

To my mind Turanians are more of a timeless mix of many different eras, much like the Iranshahr of the excellent free rpg Zenobia.

balbinus.com/Zenobia.htm

I mean I totally agree with elite corps of horse archers picked from the best of the conquered tribes (that's what we're looking at, right? Or did I miss something). I'd also welcome a Vanyarian Guard in Agrhapur. But even so steelclad warrior nobles on horseback should have its nice too, I feel. Or maybe that's more kothic...

Actually I'd give the entire hyborian chivalric culture a cataphract/iranian tint. But I suppose that borders on wholesale revision...

 

[tarkhan bey]

Oh yeah, I am absolutely with you about the inclusion of a cataphractoi/clibanarii style cavalry somewhere in the Hyborian age. My personal vision of the Hyborian knight looks more like one of these than a historical mediaevel Knight,especially amongst the more southern and eastern lands like Zamora and Koth.
The knights of my version of the western kingdoms look more like a hybrid of heavy mounted classical hoplites and Carolingian knights.
As regards the mighty archers, I am not sure that they are actually horse archers. My impression from the descriptions given were that they were a unit of professional foot soldiers and,as such,were something completely new in the Turanian method of warfare.
I am not sure about the idea that the Turanians are decadent. They give me the impression of still being a virile people,warlike and expansionist. Perhaps the fact that they no longer live wild on the steppes gives their less civilized Hyrkanian relatives the impression that they have gone a bit soft though.

 

[tarkhan bey]

Forgot to mention the Varangian guard. I also have these guys represented as the bodyguard unit for King Tiridates of Zamora. In the Shadizar box set it gives the stats for the Zamorian Royal guard. I simply take this to represent one of the few Zamorians to be part of that corps and have the rest of tem be represented by Hyborian and other foreign mercenaries.

 

[Etepete]

I think the degenerate civilisation/honest barbarian dichtomoy that seems to lie at the heart of REH:s works fits very well in the hyrkanian cultural sphere. The desert forts of the Umayyads or the tent-capital of Karakorum springs to mind: warrior elites that cling to a steppe way of life they no longer participate in. That kind of nostalgia suggests a slipping from the harsh but just barbarian ways. [caveat: Obviously, the entire dichotomy is utterly flawed as real life tool to understanding history etc, but it's the theme of the literature that we base this game off...]

 

[Sarov the Swift]

Sipahi = light cavalry
Cataphracts = heavy cavalry

No reason not to use either in a Turan campaign however.

 

[tarkhan bey]

I agree completely with you Sarov, there is no reason at all why they could not co exist in the Turanian military.
I wouldnt use them,personally, but thats only because of my Seljuk/Ottoman view of them.

I also agree that there could be a place for the Barbarian vs Civilized dichotomy in Turan. I think, however that it could be the replacement of the old decadent Iranistanis by the warlike Turanians.(Kind of like the conquest of the Caliphate of Baghdad by the Seljuk's)
Also,in 500 years these Turanians are still capable of conquering half of the known world. Of course, it doesnt specify whether the Turanians then are the same as those in the present so it is entirely possible that they in turn have been conquered by an even more warlike group of their relatives.

Any thoughts on how or where Mamluk's might be incorporated?

 

[Majestic7]

Any thoughts on how or where Mamluk's might be incorporated?

Somehow I see the Shemite Asshuri as Mamluk's of the Hyborian Age. They are not slave-soldiers, but their tactics and ethos feels like Mamluks. The Mamluk code of conduct, furusiyya or something like that, seems awful lot like the code of conduct followed by the Asshuri.

 

[Etepete]

Now since we are discussing Mamluks, Janissaries and Sipahis (originally recruited like the janissaries) I would propose that slave-troops and hostage-troops are common currency in Turan. Maybe the Sipahis are the sultans own troops, recruited from conquered tribes and countries and reared for utter loyalty. They would be the horse archer elite. Some could also be hired hyrkanian clans.

The Cataphract cavalry are made up of the old clans, a nobility that is becoming increasingly overshadowed byt the sipahi and the bureaucrats tied to the sultan.

I can utterly agree with that there is a bit of an issue as to how "degenerate" turan is. On the one hand, they will continue to play a pivotal and dynamic role in Hyboria for ages, on the other hand, in the stories they are portrayed as cruel and lazy, a target for all orientalist clichés. I suppose that the waves of invasions to come could be explained by new waves of Hyrkanian tribes. I mean even the Seljuks were swept aside by a new turkomongolic thrust before too long: the Mongols. Anyway, comparisons with reality are a precarious way to strengthen my argument on this specific issue: we have to remember that REH:s world is ruled by outdated theories of the early 20th C. Again, this is just a caveat: just to say that we are dealing with REH:s perception of history, not factual history.

 

[Baduin]

The Aghrapur article seemed to me to be overly influenced by Ottoman Turks. The Turanians should be more similar to Iranians, especially such steppe tribes as Partians, Sarmatians, Sakas etc and to Turks (Turkmens, Uzbeks etc) of the Central Asia - in general to half-nomad half-sedentary peoples of the Great Steppe, with some Mongol influence.

Eg hamam bath are purely Mediterranean - heavily influenced by Roman ones.

Turkish sipahis wore mostly chain armour, and were armed with lances and sometimes also with bows. Their distinguishing trait was that they were granted land (timar), not as feudum, but as revocable gift of the sultan.

Turanian army should be purely cavalry - infantry is nearly useless on the Great Steppe - with mostly horse archers and elite heavy armored lancers.

As for special troops, Turkish delis (madmen) are interesting - they fought under influence of narcotics and decked their shields and armour (if any) with feathers.

The specific trait of most of the steppe peoples was that they followed victorious leaders. When a leader won battles, he could quickly create an enormous empire, which could easily fragment during to a series of defeats.

This is connected with Iranian beliefs. They mostly held that the kings were not necessarily hereditary or of divine blood. One became king by the grace of heaven, manifested as heavenly light (Khvarenah), justice and victories - especially the latter. That justification of rule was claimed by Persian shahs, by Genghis Khan and by Babar, Mogul conqueror of India.

As for the term Turan and Turanian, it is used in the Shahnameh and Avesta for the norther, steppe enemies of Iranians. They were accused of polytheism and devil-worship. The devil-worship bit should be useful.

Interestingly, Iranian legends say that they came from their northern home, driven away by approaching ice.

http://www.zoroastrian.org/articles/Iran_Turan_in_Avesta.htm

 

[Baduin]

Slave soldiers are typical for sedentary southern Arabs and later Ottoman Turks. They needed slave soldiers because they lacked nomad tribes to fight for them (in fact Mameluks were often bought from Central Asia Turks).

Great Steppe peoples didn't use slave soldiers.

 

[Clovenhoof]

Turanian army should be purely cavalry - infantry is nearly useless on the Great Steppe - with mostly horse archers and elite heavy armored lancers.

For offensive purposes, yes. But cities will be defended by archers manning the walls.

 

[Etepete]

The Aghrapur article seemed to me to be overly influenced by Ottoman Turks. The Turanians should be more similar to Iranians, especially such steppe tribes as Partians, Sarmatians, Sakas etc and to Turks (Turkmens, Uzbeks etc) of the Central Asia - in general to half-nomad half-sedentary peoples of the Great Steppe, with some Mongol influence.

I would view Turan as an organised, hierarchal and structured society, and Hyrkania as the open steppe where a Genghis or a Timur could rise and sweep west. But Turan has already absorbed much shemitish and stygian culture - losing some of its warlike character (which lends to hiring tribes from the east - or recruiting kings troops in the form of sipahis). So in a sense I suppose I feel that Turan should be more Ottoman - but one could easily also say it should be more Sassanid or Seljuk. I think a mix is the best thing here.

-------------Reg. turanian leadership, in the Agrhapur article presented as a Sultan&Caliph--------------

I'm not sure whether the Sultan should have a very strong religious character. Let him be just sultan, a warlords descendant that has seen his position as leader made permanent. This works well with what sultan really means: potentate. I'm not sure what's already decided on Tarim, but one angle I could go with is Tarim being a lawmaker god, and the Sultan being high Priest-Judge. But Caliph is going a bit too far/islamic.

One thing that's really clear when reading Herodotos and some other sources on early Iranian society is the role that noble familys and tribes seem to have. The distinction of some tribes (the Kithai and I think also was it the sarmatians) into "white"/royal and "black"/common could be used as a model. A nomadic warrior society as the historical basis of a warrior nobility organised not only into noble families, but also noble clans and tribes would be really cool and dynamic: lots of plotting potential there.

p.s. Regarding names, Hyrkania (which was actually a region south of the caspian sea just by Kwharasm) means "Land of the Wolves". The wolf had a huge role for mongols and tengriworship. So what does wolves mean to turanians and hyrkanians? Maybe its the royal animal, like lions in Europe?

 

[tarkhan bey]

I find myself in agreement with Etepete on the idea that a Caliph is too Islamic for the setting,or at least that the name is.
I don't know very much about Islam but I think that possibly in Shia(?) the Caliph may be considered to have direct lineage from the prophet. I may be slightly out on this, but that would mean that "The Living Tarim" might represent the equivalent of a Caliph. The fact that he is "Living" being that he is a scion of the original Tarim,who led the proto Hyrkanian's out of bondage.
I am not sure where the idea is that the Tarim is an actual god has come from. Likewise,I am not sure whether he was actually ever mentioned by REH. I hope that some of you can enlighten me on this.
My first encounter with Conan,incidentally, was "The Shadow of the Vulture" in the Roy Thomas Hyrkanian war story arc.( All those many years ago). It is this,the subsequent issues and my purchase of "Sowers of the Thunder" which has given me my very definate views on Turanians.

 

[Etepete]

I always thought that the Living Tarim was a counterpoint to Erlik, god of death.

One cool source of influence for the turanian religion are the Magi of old persia, or for that metter the hebrew Levites and sons of Aron. The concept of a family/clan/tribe being tasked with the role of formal priesthood is both in flavour and very suited to a nomadic empire such as Turan. There could be a few tribes: free roaming shaman tribes of the east, and formalised priestclans in Turan (often no longer bearing any real blood ties: novicehood is initiated through adoption). Unless one wants a straight dualistic relationship between Tarim and Erlik the priest-tribes could worship Tarim, and Erlik be worshipped through mystery cults.

As a result, a factioned and complex religious life full of infighting and adventure hooks

 

[Yogah of Yag]

What are the possibilities of a Turan sourcebook for the 2nd Ed? I know Vincent Darlage gave us a little taste of it in a Signs and Portents article but it might be fun to have one. If one DID exist it would also be interesting if some of the military campaigns referred to in the REH books might be described a bit for players to possibly take part in either as enemies of Turan or mercenaries/regulars in the service of whichever king happened to be around at the time.

I've done a lot more research on Turan since then, but I would relish a chance to write the sourcebook. There would be some changes from that article, though. Even if it is not me writing, I am sure Mongoose will put one out sometime in the future - it just seems too major of a country not to have a sourcebook on it.

If Mongoose would like it, it would take me about a month to polish up the sourcebook I wrote for my own personal use.

I would absolutely love to see a sourcebook on Turan (provided that a 2e version doesn't have Turanian duck warriors!).
*crosses fingers*

 

[tarkhan bey]

Yeah, come on Mongoose! Make with the Turan book already!