20 replies to this topic

[Brule]

This is another hard one but, i think that the Gael will get this one.

Thaughts?

Edited by Brule, 08 November 2006 - 08:45 PM.

[Borumas]

My vote for the Gael as well, whether the one who fought with Wulfhere on a dragon ship that had adventures together or the one in the ambush on the Romans where another Cormac was present (and strangely another Wulfhere present who died but wasn't friends with Cormac).

[Brule]

Is that the same one Kull killed in "Kings Of The Night"?

[Borumas]

Is that the same one Kull killed in "Kings Of The Night"?

Yeah, in that story Kull killed a Viking named Wulfhere but in several stories of Cormac he is teamed up with a Viking named Wulfhere skull splitter- I've been told that the Cormac in "Kings of the Night" was a different and older Cormac (as in older from a period farther back in time).

[Brule]

Is that the same one Kull killed in "Kings Of The Night"?

Yeah, in that story Kull killed a Viking named Wulfhere but in several stories of Cormac he is teamed up with a Viking named Wulfhere skull splitter- I've been told that the Cormac in "Kings of the Night" was a different and older Cormac (as in older from a period farther back in time).

Yea i was confused for a while. I think i recall REH using the name Wulfhere in the "Marches of Valhala".
So its not the same Cormac as in the other stories?

[deuce]

Is that the same one Kull killed in "Kings Of The Night"?

Yeah, in that story Kull killed a Viking named Wulfhere but in several stories of Cormac he is teamed up with a Viking named Wulfhere skull splitter- I've been told that the Cormac in "Kings of the Night" was a different and older Cormac (as in older from a period farther back in time).

Yea i was confused for a while. I think i recall REH using the name Wulfhere in the "Marches of Valhala".
So its not the same Cormac as in the other stories?

No, it's not the same Cormac. Their tales take place AT LEAST 100 yrs apart. Plus, the "Bran" Cormac is a horseman who leads a troop of Gaelic mercenaries. The other Cormac sails aboard the "Raven" with a crew of Danish pirates. Hope that helps.

[Brule]

Thanks, It certinly did.

[Brule]

I'm having second thaughts now, Bran seems more battle smart.

[Borumas]

I don't know, Cormac prefered to use the point of his sword for the kill, he fought pretty intelligently, and seemed very experienced in battle (this is the Cormac that fought on the Raven with Wulfhere, the other Cormac I think would lose).

It would be cool to see Cormac vs Black Turlough, that would be some Irish vs Irish mayhem there.

Edited by Borumas, 11 November 2006 - 07:13 AM.

[Brule]

Is the real Cormac in the same time period as Bran?

Brule

[Borumas]

Is the real Cormac in the same time period as Bran?

Brule

I could be wrong but I get the idea the Cormac he wrote most about was from a period a few hundred years after Bran, I sort of get the idea Bran was alive between 300-500AD and Cormac was between 800-1000AD. Of course i could totally be wrong in that idea though but it seems fitting from what I remember of the stories as in Bran's time the Roman Empire is still intact and functioning and during Cormac's time it is just a memory.

[deuce]

Is the real Cormac in the same time period as Bran?

Brule

I could be wrong but I get the idea the Cormac he wrote most about was from a period a few hundred years after Bran, I sort of get the idea Bran was alive between 300-500AD and Cormac was between 800-1000AD. Of course i could totally be wrong in that idea though but it seems fitting from what I remember of the stories as in Bran's time the Roman Empire is still intact and functioning and during Cormac's time it is just a memory.

Most Howard scholars call "pirate"Cormac just "Cormac Mac Art", while they call "Bran" Cormac "Cormac na Connacht", which means "Cormac of Connacht" in Gaelic. Connacht was the western province of Ireland, REH's favorite. It's hard to nail down Bran's time period. It appears that Howard never was quite sure. Broadly, it would have had to have been sometime between 200-385 AD. In 381, Magnus Maximus beat back an incursion of Picts and Scots (Gaels). In 383, Maximus pulled most of the Roman troops out of Britain to make a stab at the throne, leaving a feeble "home guard". The events in the Bran stories had to have happened before this. Cormac Mac Art and Wulfhere seemed to have pirated together for quite awhile. In one yarn, Uther Pendragon is one of Britain's warlords. In another, a young Arthur is now a force to be reckoned with. This places them in the 480-510 AD time period. Andy Offutt (no Dark Ages scholar) tried to compact all the tales into one small time frame. No way.
Hope that helps.

[Brule]

Is the real Cormac in the same time period as Bran?

Brule

I could be wrong but I get the idea the Cormac he wrote most about was from a period a few hundred years after Bran, I sort of get the idea Bran was alive between 300-500AD and Cormac was between 800-1000AD. Of course i could totally be wrong in that idea though but it seems fitting from what I remember of the stories as in Bran's time the Roman Empire is still intact and functioning and during Cormac's time it is just a memory.

Most Howard scholars call "pirate"Cormac just "Cormac Mac Art", while they call "Bran" Cormac "Cormac na Connacht", which means "Cormac of Connacht" in Gaelic. Connacht was the western province of Ireland, REH's favorite. It's hard to nail down Bran's time period. It appears that Howard never was quite sure. Broadly, it would have had to have been sometime between 200-385 AD. In 381, Magnus Maximus beat back an incursion of Picts and Scots (Gaels). In 383, Maximus pulled most of the Roman troops out of Britain to make a stab at the throne, leaving a feeble "home guard". The events in the Bran stories had to have happened before this. Cormac Mac Art and Wulfhere seemed to have pirated together for quite awhile. In one yarn, Uther Pendragon is one of Britain's warlords. In another, a young Arthur is now a force to be reckoned with. This places them in the 480-510 AD time period. Andy Offutt (no Dark Ages scholar) tried to compact all the tales into one small time frame. No way.
Hope that helps.

It shure dose Deuce, thanks

Brule

[kansasbarbarian]

IMO Bran would win over Cormac. Bran was probably as strong and alot fater than Cormac. But then again I might be biased as Bran is my favorite REH character. Not that I don't like Conan I do but Picts for some reason just fascinate me.

[LCUCHULAIN]

Although I like both characters, Cormac Mac Art and Bran Mak Morn, I like them for different reasons. Cormac is the more appealing warrior due to his relationship with Wulfhere and the fact that he was based on an historical figure. Bran is more battle seasoned and the better leader of men (albeit barbaric followers ) in the mold of Conan. He seems to be filled with the same melancholies and the same brooding temperment as the Cimmerian. What say you?

[LCUCHULAIN]

I'd have to give the fight to Bran...

[Sermon Bath]

I like cormac mac art better.......sign of the moonbow by offutt is truly excellent......tigers of the sea by howard and tierney is extremely good also...........in most of the howard tales the picts show up to rumble with the gaels, vikings, and danes......lots of action!!!

[Borumas]

Is the real Cormac in the same time period as Bran?

Brule

I could be wrong but I get the idea the Cormac he wrote most about was from a period a few hundred years after Bran, I sort of get the idea Bran was alive between 300-500AD and Cormac was between 800-1000AD. Of course i could totally be wrong in that idea though but it seems fitting from what I remember of the stories as in Bran's time the Roman Empire is still intact and functioning and during Cormac's time it is just a memory.

Most Howard scholars call "pirate"Cormac just "Cormac Mac Art", while they call "Bran" Cormac "Cormac na Connacht", which means "Cormac of Connacht" in Gaelic. Connacht was the western province of Ireland, REH's favorite. It's hard to nail down Bran's time period. It appears that Howard never was quite sure. Broadly, it would have had to have been sometime between 200-385 AD. In 381, Magnus Maximus beat back an incursion of Picts and Scots (Gaels). In 383, Maximus pulled most of the Roman troops out of Britain to make a stab at the throne, leaving a feeble "home guard". The events in the Bran stories had to have happened before this. Cormac Mac Art and Wulfhere seemed to have pirated together for quite awhile. In one yarn, Uther Pendragon is one of Britain's warlords. In another, a young Arthur is now a force to be reckoned with. This places them in the 480-510 AD time period. Andy Offutt (no Dark Ages scholar) tried to compact all the tales into one small time frame. No way.
Hope that helps.

The old Cormac from Connacht was probably around 400AD, the later Cormac (who was the pirate) lived after Brian Boru's death so it was after 1014AD. Also the pirate Cormac would likely have been from Munster since he was related to Brian Boru.

[Sermon Bath]

Is the real Cormac in the same time period as Bran?

Brule

I could be wrong but I get the idea the Cormac he wrote most about was from a period a few hundred years after Bran, I sort of get the idea Bran was alive between 300-500AD and Cormac was between 800-1000AD. Of course i could totally be wrong in that idea though but it seems fitting from what I remember of the stories as in Bran's time the Roman Empire is still intact and functioning and during Cormac's time it is just a memory.

Most Howard scholars call "pirate"Cormac just "Cormac Mac Art", while they call "Bran" Cormac "Cormac na Connacht", which means "Cormac of Connacht" in Gaelic. Connacht was the western province of Ireland, REH's favorite. It's hard to nail down Bran's time period. It appears that Howard never was quite sure. Broadly, it would have had to have been sometime between 200-385 AD. In 381, Magnus Maximus beat back an incursion of Picts and Scots (Gaels). In 383, Maximus pulled most of the Roman troops out of Britain to make a stab at the throne, leaving a feeble "home guard". The events in the Bran stories had to have happened before this. Cormac Mac Art and Wulfhere seemed to have pirated together for quite awhile. In one yarn, Uther Pendragon is one of Britain's warlords. In another, a young Arthur is now a force to be reckoned with. This places them in the 480-510 AD time period. Andy Offutt (no Dark Ages scholar) tried to compact all the tales into one small time frame. No way.
Hope that helps.

The old Cormac from Connacht was probably around 400AD, the later Cormac (who was the pirate) lived after Brian Boru's death so it was after 1014AD. Also the pirate Cormac would likely have been from Munster since he was related to Brian Boru.

wrong...it was turlogh dubh o'brien who lived after brian boru's death...........cormac mac art lived around the time right after the romans left

[Borumas]

Is the real Cormac in the same time period as Bran?

Brule

I could be wrong but I get the idea the Cormac he wrote most about was from a period a few hundred years after Bran, I sort of get the idea Bran was alive between 300-500AD and Cormac was between 800-1000AD. Of course i could totally be wrong in that idea though but it seems fitting from what I remember of the stories as in Bran's time the Roman Empire is still intact and functioning and during Cormac's time it is just a memory.

Most Howard scholars call "pirate"Cormac just "Cormac Mac Art", while they call "Bran" Cormac "Cormac na Connacht", which means "Cormac of Connacht" in Gaelic. Connacht was the western province of Ireland, REH's favorite. It's hard to nail down Bran's time period. It appears that Howard never was quite sure. Broadly, it would have had to have been sometime between 200-385 AD. In 381, Magnus Maximus beat back an incursion of Picts and Scots (Gaels). In 383, Maximus pulled most of the Roman troops out of Britain to make a stab at the throne, leaving a feeble "home guard". The events in the Bran stories had to have happened before this. Cormac Mac Art and Wulfhere seemed to have pirated together for quite awhile. In one yarn, Uther Pendragon is one of Britain's warlords. In another, a young Arthur is now a force to be reckoned with. This places them in the 480-510 AD time period. Andy Offutt (no Dark Ages scholar) tried to compact all the tales into one small time frame. No way.
Hope that helps.

The old Cormac from Connacht was probably around 400AD, the later Cormac (who was the pirate) lived after Brian Boru's death so it was after 1014AD. Also the pirate Cormac would likely have been from Munster since he was related to Brian Boru.

wrong...it was turlogh dubh o'brien who lived after brian boru's death...........cormac mac art lived around the time right after the romans left

Bah, I did get them mixed up, but I would say Mac Art lived a little more later than the time right after the Romans left, probably at least 20 or more years after Rome had abandoned Britain. I say this because during his time the fighting in the Roman style with the point of the sword had been neglected but he used the Roman style of swordsmanship in combat by preferring the point over slashing.