By way of LGJ #24 (In Dungeon #106), I present to you the following interesting (to me at least) trivia, which answers at least the latter part of the following question posed by Tom the Troll in "The Hobbit": What's a burrahobbit and can yer cook 'em?
"Yes" said the ancient Suel who used specially-bred hounds called yeshirs, that would track halflings to their burrows, dig them out, and then kill them, so they could then be eaten as a delicacy. That's right, to further underscore the point that them Suel was some evil sob's, they would hunt down and then eat adorable little halflings.
I know the suel are written as the evil snasties of GH but it has to stop somewhere. The suel were a cultured people that did form a empire that survived for a considerable time.
Must the imperial suel constantly be dragged through the depths of depravity no people would function let alone create a relatively stable empire if everyone within it seems to be a power mad lunatic.
However stuffed halfling appears to be a "delicacy" perhaps the aristocrat gormunds sent hunting parties into the bakluni foothills to capture them and this sparked the conflict rather then the slave raided border villages.
After all stealing a child is one thing but ruining a meal is too much.
Last edited by Crag on Tue Dec 29, 2009 5:59 pm; edited 1 time in total
So then what your saying is the whole Suloise Baklunish war started because the Suel sent the Cavity creeps over the mountains to make holes in the Baklunes teeth?
Must the imperial suel constantly be dragged through the depths of depravity no people would function let alone create a relatively stable empire if everyone within it seems to be a power mad lunatic.
I agree with Crag on this one. Any society this depraved and weird couldn't rule a massive magical empire competently. They'd be too busy trying to serve each other for lunch.
For my two cents, I see the Suel Imperium as evil in the "ends justify the means" way, not in the crazy sadistic way of Ivid of Aerdy.
Yeah, but the article says this was in the last centuries of the Empire. They could have been circling the drain at that point, and they were losing the war. Besides, who knows what their internal politics were like. If there was nobody internally in any position to overthrow the ruling class they could do pretty much whatever they want to as long as they keep a good portion of the population fed. Those people probably wouldn't care if some nobles hunt down feral halflings and serve 'em up at the orgy. It's not like they were garden pests and Farmer Slerotin was getting the yeshir pack together and hunting them down because they dug up his best 'taters.
The following was found in an ancient Suloise text entitled "Primer of the Evil Empire", with the note, "To my dear grandson Slerotin: This has been in our family for generations, and now it's time I passed it on to you. Use it in good health."
Tooth Rot
Necromancy [Evil]
Level: Sor/Wiz 3
Components: V, S
Casting Time: 1 standard action
Range: Touch
Target: Living creature touched
Duration: Instantaneous
Saving Throw: Fortitude negates
Spell Resistance: Yes
The subject contracts an insidious rotting disease that causes his teeth to decay and eventually fall out. A feeling of excruciating pain is the first sign the spell has taken effect, resulting in a -1 penalty to all attack rolls. This is followed by the appearance of black stains on the teeth within the first ten minutes. The attack penalty remains at -1 during this time.
Within 15 minutes a small hole appears in each of the subject's teeth, slowly growing to consume each tooth entirely over the course of the next 1d4 days (roll separately for each tooth). This rotting is accompanied by intensely foul breath, causing anyone within 5 feet of the subject's mouth to make a Fortitude save or be overcome with nausea. This save must be repeated each round the subject speaks or breathes through his mouth.
Fortunately, during this time the attack penalty ceases until or unless the subject eats, drinks, or chews something cold, hot, hard, excessively sweet, or particularly gummy. If this occurs, overwhelming pain results, causing an immediate -2 attack penalty each round until the offending substance is spat out. Until the subject's mouth is emptied, the subject is also unable to perform any skill or action that requires even the slightest degree of concentration, with the exception of walking, riding, or perhaps washing out his mouth with copious amounts of clean water.
Once the recipient has lost every tooth, the spell's most insidious effect occurs. During the first night after the last tooth is lost, a winged fey creature of the DM's choice appears, and if not presented with at least one healthy tooth (which is highly unlikely), the creature attacks until slain. If presented with a healthy tooth, the creature gives the subject a silver piece and departs immediately.
Last edited by bubbagump on Sun Dec 27, 2009 4:24 pm; edited 1 time in total
I can imagine the scenario. Suel A and Suel B are out fox hunting one day. As they look on as their hounds yap and yap away at a burrow the pair seems to have adopted a melancholy. Suel A dismounts, preparing to build a fire with which to smoke the creature out. Suel B suddenly suffers an epiphany, "Suel A, when did our sport become ever so much work?"
Suel A stops, his alchemist's fire nearly spilling from where he'd unstopped it, "You are so very right, Suel B. I barely enjoy this anymore."
As if on queue, Burrius Burrowell, a local halfling, comes trudging from the depths of his nearby burrow, ranting in protest of the two Suel's activities, "You'in gumblebumblebums need 'n ta'n wolder off'n dorb'n borbin'...and he goes on like this for some time
Suel A smiles and looks to his equally evil curly blond haired counterpart. The two share a mutual laugh which is somehow both raucous and effeminate.
Sual A steps near the worbling halfling, straight kicks him in the chest sending him rolling backwards into his burrow, and then rolls the alchemist's fire down the hole straight afterward. There is a moment of apprehensive silence until a plume of smoke creeps out of the mouth of the burrow and the incomprehensible protestations of the halfling begins to bounce out towards the pair.
Sual B smiles from horseback, "Suel A, good sir, I do believe we've come upon something."
Sual A nods and lets loose a dainty little evil chortle, "I do say you are correct, Sual B."
It does beg the question, what was the state of halfling society in the Suel Empire? I'm thinking maybe they were feral garden pests. Kind of a cross between normal halflings and the humans in Planet of the Apes. I'm talking the original, not the Tim Burton one. I smell a W.O.G cartoon somewhere in all of this.
Also, is this the first we've seen from official sources (Besides the Chainmail game stuff) of demi-humans outside the Flanaess? Can anyone else think of any? It is implied in that Azor'alq did get his sword from the "ancient elves of Argoria", but where the heck is Argoria? Assuming he got the sword at the start of the Hegira, in the west, then it would probably be somewhere in the west.
Halflings or Hobbits we hates them we do, but with a side of fried tators and a pint of ale they tastes good. A bit like chicken.
In my campaigns I set the Suel up as the first humans besides the Ur-Flan to use magic on a global scale. A bit say like moorcocks melniboneans toward the end of their reign, so sadistic and cruel would be words to decscribe them, or maybe proud and haughty.
So as far as them eating halflings I say why not maybe with a side of elf or dwarf.
It looks like on Canonfire, the Suel get blamed for EVERYTHING. Tooth decay, bad breath, flatulence, erectile dysfunction, body odor, bad weather, the dog crapping on the carpet... Hell, if you can think of it, I'm sure there's a post somewhere here on CF blaming the Suel for it. And if you can't find it, just wait, I'm sure it'll be posted by someone soon. They are the Eternal Scapegoats.
I like how they slipped in the Bruce Almighty newsman(Steve Carrel) babbling towards the end, just to see if anyone would notice the difference. _________________ - Moderator/Admin (in some areas)/Member -
Now, I certainly don't want to sidetrack what is a comedic thread into a tiresome "evil is culturally relative" discussion that was already old 'back in the days of Usenet.
But I would just like to mention that no one would be offended by a reference to the Suel hunting and eating rabbits. The offensiveness of hunting halflings turns on a recognition of the "humanity" (or "demihumanity") of halflings. Many of the "atrocities" of RL human history were committed by one group on another under the idea that the other group were not really human. I think there is ample room in some campaigns for a Suel Imperium that did not consider halflings to be any better than talking animals.
For example, the fact that RL humans from Europe, when confronted with native americans, could actually have a serious debate about whether the native americans were really humans with souls (as Bartolome de las Casas argued before Carlos V) or just talking monkeys (as was argued by Juan Ginés de Sepúlveda) seems incredible to us. But it happened. _________________ My campaigns are multilayered tapestries upon which I texture themes and subject matter which, quite frankly, would simply be too strong for your hobbyist gamer. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7Mp7Ikko8SI
I think it makes a big difference if halfling-eating was a universal culinary practice among the ancient Suel, or if it was only something indulged in by a few degenerate nobles among the darker Suel houses during the waning days of the empire.
Dungeon #106 says halfling meat was considered a delicacy in "the last centuries" of the Suel Imperium, which stretches the timeline for this back a ways, but doesn't affect the Suel who actually formed the empire (presumedly) millennia before that. Using Lakofka's timeline, the practice probably dates back no further than the overthrow of House Schnai in 4912 SD.
My impression is that halfling-eating would have been confined to the wicked Beltar-worshiping princes of House Zolax, and I don't think that assertion would be nearly so controversial. My guess is that the more benign houses, such as the Neheli and Rhola, wouldn't have indulged.
It also said that princelings among the Naelax have revived the sport. So they're evil SOBs too. But we knew that already.
But nobody ever suggested we should hunt Native Americans and eat them.
The question of whether NA were human had practical implications, such as whether their Spanish owners could, in good conscience, starve them and intentionally work them to death in mines. If King Carlos decided that they were not human, there would be no repercussions for such actions; whereas if they were decided to be human then the nobles could not put them deliberately in conditions that would result in their death. On the other hand, if they were human, then they had souls, and the Spanish were then morally obligated to missionize them.
Christopher Columbus took captured NA with him in his travels to use as food for his expeditions' hunting dogs.
No, it is not an exact analogy as NA were not generally hunted for sport and were never, AFAIK, eaten by Europeans. But my basic point is that if halflings were considered "human" by the Suel, then hunting them for sport would have been the province of a few debauched and deliberately wicked nobles while the rest of the Imperium looked on aghast at the depravity into which some houses had sunk. But if halflings were not in general considered human, their hunting may have been considered with as much indifference by most Suel as the hunting of any other game animal, all of which have enough sentience to be spoken to with a speak with animals. _________________ My campaigns are multilayered tapestries upon which I texture themes and subject matter which, quite frankly, would simply be too strong for your hobbyist gamer. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7Mp7Ikko8SI
Christopher Columbus took captured NA with him in his travels to use as food for his expeditions' hunting dogs.
That is patently untrue.
I was there, he really did that. He didn't call them Native Americans, though. He called them "dogfoodians." It never caught on back in Spain. Apparently they had been using Romani for the same purpose for years and did not want to create confusion.
Besides just what I think is an interesting monster (The yeshir), I'm less interested in what this says about the Suel than what it says about the pre-cataclysm halflings, at least those on the west side of the Hellfurnaces. Even people as corrupt and evil as the Suel (If we take that to be the general case) would probably only engage in eating sentient beings if those lived in a fairly primitive state. The language of the article does, to me at least, imply this was the case. That said I wonder what the state of halfling civilization in the Flanaess was at the time? Also, the LGG states that they "...originally occupied small settlements in the river valleys of the west-central Flanaess. They spread slowly into other territories, so that by the time of the Suel and Oeridian migrations, few were north of the Gamboge Forest or east of the Harp River." They are noted to be in considerable number sin the Sheldomar Valley, so they did spread westward also. Might the halflings have spread into the eastern Suel Empire through passes in the Hellfurnaces in the last few centuries of that state's history, where they were hunted as game? Or did they already exist there?
I have come to support the Flan homeland for the demihuman races. If some suel must be hobniz hunters I would much prefer the latter - The hobniz spread west and interacted with the last days of the suel imperium.
This at least leaves open the possibility that while some houses are degenerate others could be a simple misunderstanding as the suel refused to believe these creatures were civilized - but ma it has furry feet like an animal.
Otherwise the hobniz were known to the suel and had a long interaction with these civilized creatures and the suel became so depraved they turned on the hobniz.
Both scenarios could happen but I think enough monsterous evil already exists I would advocate the suel imperium be the ends justify the means rather then sadists. After all the forerunners of the SB left because they felt the majority of the houses were too soft therefore even at the end most of the population and even the noble houses weren't monsterous villians.
"...originally occupied small settlements in the river valleys of the west-central Flanaess. They spread slowly into other territories, so that by the time of the Suel and Oeridian migrations, few were north of the Gamboge Forest or east of the Harp River." They are noted to be in considerable number sin the Sheldomar Valley, so they did spread westward also. Might the halflings have spread into the eastern Suel Empire through passes in the Hellfurnaces in the last few centuries of that state's history, where they were hunted as game? Or did they already exist there?
I think the west-central river valleys were the Sheldomar and Javan rivers (west of the Selintan, which is a central river valley, not a west-central one). But yes, I'd assume they spread west into the Suel basin from there.
Christopher Columbus took captured NA with him in his travels to use as food for his expeditions' hunting dogs.
That is patently untrue.
I am certainly not an historian, and, honestly, I have no idea whether this is true or not. I repeated it because I once read it somewhere in the age before Google and it was in a source I trusted at the time but have since forgotten. Thus, it could easily be someone's invention, and I appreciate you calling me on it.
This page claims to have excerpts from the 1995 edition of
Lies My Teacher Told Me
Everything Your American History Textbook Got Wrong
by James W. Loewen
I haven't read the book, but reading about it now it seems to be an historian's attempt to use primary sources to disassemble the "embarrassing amalgam of bland optimism, blind patriotism, and misinformation" found in high school history textbooks. It seems to have been well-received, and the wikipedia page about the book doesn't have a "controversy" section.
The web page above quotes the book as saying "Spaniards hunted Indians for sport and murdered them for dog food...All of these gruesome facts are available in primary source material- letters by Columbus and by other members of his expeditions-and in the work of Las Casas, the first great historian of the Americas, who relied on primary materials and helped preserve them. I have quoted a few primary sources in this chapter. Most textbooks make no use of primary sources. A few incorporate brief extracts that have been carefully selected or edited to reveal nothing unseemly about the Great Navigator."
Includes the following text:
"A Spanish missionary, Bartolome de las Casas, described first-hand how the Spaniards terrorized the natives.[4] Las Casas gives numerous eye-witness accounts of repeated mass murder and routine sadistic torture. As Barry Lopez has accurately summarized it, "One day, in front of Las Casas, the Spanish dismembered, beheaded, or raped 3000 people. 'Such inhumanities and barbarisms were committed in my sight,' he says, 'as no age can parallel....' The Spanish cut off the legs of children who ran from them. They poured people full of boiling soap. They made bets as to who, with one sweep of his sword, could cut a person in half. They loosed dogs that 'devoured an Indian like a hog, at first sight, in less than a moment.' They used nursing infants for dog food."[2,pg.4]
The two sources cited are:
[4] Bartolome de las Casas, THE DEVASTATION OF THE INDIES: A
BRIEF ACCOUNT (translated by Herma Briffault) (Baltimore,
Maryland: Johns Hopkins University Press, 1992). ISBN
0-8018-4430-4.
and
[2] Barry Lopez, THE REDISCOVERY OF NORTH AMERICA (Lexington,
Kentucky: University Press of Kentucky, 1990. ISBN
0-8131-1742-9.
Now, the same webpage also cites Ward Churchill, so it is not like I would bet my life on the accuracy of this information. But I've seen enough to confirm for me my prejudice. If you would like to convince me otherwise, I encourage you to look for some opposing source.
If you just want to dismiss these claims out of hand and go on with your life, that's fine, too. Given the Original Topic of the post, I think this is all relevant, but it is not my intention to hijack a greyhawk forum thread with a historical/political debate. _________________ My campaigns are multilayered tapestries upon which I texture themes and subject matter which, quite frankly, would simply be too strong for your hobbyist gamer. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7Mp7Ikko8SI
Christopher Columbus took captured NA with him in his travels to use as food for his expeditions' hunting dogs.
That is patently untrue.
I am certainly not an historian...and other stuff
Given the Original Topic of the post, I think this is all relevant, but it is not my intention to hijack a greyhawk forum thread with a historical/political debate.
I cannot deny the atrocities committed by the Spaniards after Columbus. However, having read translations of Columbus' writings I can attest there is no mention of having used human beings as dogfood. Conversely, Columbus was quite clear in viewing the natives he found as human and in his intention to evangelize them. He did, however, use them as (effectively) slave labor in one or two instances, primarily because he had little alternative. That doesn't excuse it, but given the circumstances and the mindset of the time it's at least understandable.
Concerning Lies My Teacher Told Me, I and others in my profession have been refuting Loewen for a long, long time. He does make a number of salient points in his writing, but the number of errors contained in his books are too numerous to go into here. I'll just settle for saying he is little more than a champion for revisionist history and hate-mongering and not worthy of your time.
And you're also right in this: we should not hijack this thread and turn it into a political/historical debate. Besides, there's enough real, factual evil in the world to make your point regardless of what Columbus did or did not do, and so your meaning is well taken.
You cannot post new topics in this forum You cannot reply to topics in this forum You cannot edit your posts in this forum You cannot delete your posts in this forum You cannot vote in polls in this forum
Canonfire! is a production of the Thursday Group in assocation with GREYtalk and Canonfire! Enterprises