Saturday, July 05, 2025

Aesop's Fables Are the Alphabet of Humanity- G. K Chesterton Vs. WSJ

Sam Sacks reviewed 'Aesop's Fables: A New Translation ' for WSJ in Oct 2024.

It said: "...“Aesop is not a good book for reformers,” a critic once observed, and it’s true that the fables present our natures and social standings as essentially fixed. Foxes are foxy, wolves predatory, mice timid. Trying to be what you are not, like “The Donkey in a Lion’s Skin,” brings about a fall. The lion is the king of the beasts and many fables are about the foolishness of hoping to challenge its authority. There is no democratic, much less revolutionary, spirit here. With rare exceptions, self-sacrifice is merely another example of naiveté. 

What the fables offer instead is a wintry, fatalistic kind of knowledge. Mr. Waterfield writes that they were intended for popular audiences, meaning powerless people who could expect no change in their fortunes and might take consolation in seeing the world without illusions and laughing at its inanities. In dark times, I’m glad to have them, but I’ll keep my copy on the top shelf of the bookcase, out of reach of little hands."

The reviewer clearly wants to see the world reformed with every other book!\

G. K Chesterton (1874-1936) too wrote about the fables:

"...But by using animals in this austere and arbitrary style as they are used on the shields of heraldry or the hieroglyphics of the ancients, men have really succeeded in handing down those tremendous truths that are called truisms. If the chivalric lion be red and rampant, it is rigidly red and rampant; if the sacred ibis stands anywhere on one leg, it stands on one leg for ever. In this language, like a large animal alphabet, are written some of the first philosophic certainties of men. As the child learns A for Ass or B for Bull or C for Cow, so man has learnt here to connect the simpler and stronger creatures with the simpler and stronger truths. That a flowing stream cannot befoul its own fountain, and that any one who says it does is a tyrant and a liar; that a mouse is too weak to fight a lion, but too strong for the cords that can hold a lion; that a fox who gets most out of a flat dish may easily get least out of a deep dish; that the crow whom the gods forbid to sing, the gods nevertheless provide with cheese; that when the goat insults from a mountain-top it is not the goat that insults, but the mountain; all these are deep truths deeply graven on the rocks wherever men have passed. It matters nothing how old they are, or how new; they are the alphabet of humanity, which like so many forms of primitive picture-writing employs any living symbol in preference to man. These ancient and universal tales are all of animals; as the latest discoveries in the oldest prehistoric caverns are all of animals. Man, in his simpler stories, always felt that he himself was something too mysterious to be drawn. But the legend he carved under these cruder symbols was everywhere the same; and whether fables began with Aesop or began with Adam, whether they were German and medieval as Reynard the Fox, or as French and Renaissance as La Fontaine, the upshot is everywhere essentially the same; that pride goes before a fall; and that there is such a thing as being too clever by half. You will not find any other legend but this written upon the rocks by any hand of man. There is every type and time of fable; but there is only one moral to the fable; because there is only one moral to everything."

 A detail of a Greek ceramic vase showing a fox teaching fables to the writer Aesop, ca. 400 B.C

Wednesday, July 02, 2025

ती धनुर्धारीण मंगोल असेल किंवा नसेल.... Mongol Women Archers


Frank McLynn :
“...Mongols did not groom their horses but let the mane and tail grow so long that it almost trailed on the ground. They claimed that this kept the horses warm in winter and warded off flies in summer; moreover, if a bridle or stirrup broke, there was always a ready supply of horse-hair with which to do the mending. Training then started with the horse at a standstill to get the animal used to noise, particularly the simulated din of battle. Next they set the steed in motion while shooting arrows from the saddle, so that it could get used to the different movements as the rider drew arrows from his quiver, moved the drawn bow from one flank to the other and shot from different angles. The horse had to learn to keep straight while receiving leg signals only, as the reins were not held but knotted. The rider had to keep the legs rigid so as not to confuse the horse; turning in the saddle was done with waist and hips. Other techniques involved getting the charger used to ropes and lassos being thrown, lances hurled and swords wielded, sometimes very close to the animal’s head. Strangely, the Mongols found that accurate shooting was easier at the gallop than at a canter; this was because when galloping on a free rein the horse lowered its whole topline, stretching and lowering its head and neck, giving the archer a free field of fire. To ensure that their horses could veer and turn rapidly the Mongols first turned them in a large circle, then gradually narrowed the range in ever diminishing circles until rapid turns became second nature. Marco Polo in the late twelfth century noted that Mongol horses were so well trained that they could turn as quickly as a dog...

.... Mongol women were a particular source of fascination to foreign observers. The accounts given of them ranged from arm’s-length distaste – they were fat, they were ugly, they were indistinguishable from men – to grudging admiration – they endured great hardship uncomplainingly, they could ride horses as well as the men, they were expert drivers of carts, talented archers, and so on. Particular dislike was evinced for the garish colours in which they painted themselves, and particular admiration for the way they could give birth standing up and then carry on with their work as if nothing had happened. It was noted also that the Mongols respected women, as they were connected with the moon, and the moon was of great importance in Mongol religion...”

(‘Genghis Khan: His Conquests, His Empire, His Legacy’, 2015)


Artist: Frederick Sands Brunner 1886-1954,   The Archer Star weekly,  1948