Solomon Kane: bringer of swift, clean justice to those who deserve it. But is it as simple as that?
'Kane bent above the body, which lay stark in its unnameable mutilation, and he shuddered -- a rare thing for him, who had seen the deeds of the Spanish Inquisition and the witch-finders.'
It is clear that Solomon Kane has seen some brutal things in his life, including the interrogations carried out by the Spanish Inquisition and the witch-hunters — but what was his involvement in these events, and just how swift is the punishment that he meets out to those who incur his wrath?
An almost fanatical devotion to the Pope
It is extremely unlikely that Solomon Kane — a puritan — would have been a bystander at the work of the Inquisition, let alone an active participant. The Catholic Inquisition regarded Protestants as heretics, and, starting in the 1550s, began to focus on defining, and rooting out, Protestantism in Spain.[2] They conducted ‘a series of autos de fe that burnt out Protestantism in Spain.’[3]
The reference to Kane having seen the deeds of the Inquisition most likely refers to the time when he was imprisoned and tortured by them. In ‘Solomon Kane’s Homecoming’, we find out that Kane’s wrists bear ‘the scars of the racks of Spain.’[4] That poem strongly implies that Kane was handed over to the Inquisition after being captured at the Battle of Flores in 1591. ‘Wings in the Night’ states that Kane ‘had languished in the dungeons of Spain’s Inquisition’[5] -- presumably this refers to the same incident, and Kane was not unlucky enough to find himself at the mercy of the Inquisition on more than one occasion. It’s not known how long Solomon Kane spent as a prisoner of the Inquisition, but he experienced their tortures first-hand, and may have seen them torturing others, as well.
Thou shalt not suffer a witch to live
If Solomon Kane is unlikely to have witnessed the Inquisition as anything other than a victim, what about his experience of the witch-finders? In addition to the wider witch-craze across Europe, there was a surge in witch trials in England between the 1580s and 1620, which would have been during Kane’s lifetime.[6] Perhaps the peak of witch-hunting in England was during the 1640s, not that long after the Solomon Kane stories take place, when the self-styled ‘Witchfinder General’ Matthew Hopkins was responsible for the deaths of over 200 people between 1644 and 1647.[7] There would have been plenty of opportunities for Kane to have stumbled across a witch trial in his travels -- but did he take a more active role?
In England, there was a strong correlation between puritanism and the belief in witchcraft, as well as the desire to see those found guilty of the crime brought to punishment.[8] Not all puritans believed in witches, but it is clear that Solomon Kane does. A few examples of this will suffice. In ‘Rattle of Bones’, Kane is uncomfortable with l’Armon’s talk of getting revenge from beyond the grave, ‘which smacked of demonry and witchcraft’.[9] In ‘Red Shadows’, Kane considers N'Longa's magic to be 'Satan’s hand manifested'.[10] Later, in ‘The Hills of the Dead’, when N’Longa gives Kane the staff of Solomon, the puritan is ‘highly suspicious of witchcraft.’[11]
Although Solomon Kane encounters many supernatural events during his adventures, he only has a direct encounter with one person who could be considered a witch: N’Longa. That Kane himself considers the man a witch is made clear, early and often, throughout the stories. Shortly after their first meeting in ‘Red Shadows’, Kane thinks of N’Longa as ‘the wizard’.[12] In ‘The Hills of the Dead’, when Kane witnesses N’Longa’s spirit take over the body of the young man Kran, Kane says to him, “You are Satan”.[13] In the same story, he declares that N’Longa’s magic powers are “the work of the Devil”,[14] and in ‘Hawk of Basti’ he calls them “ungodly feats”.[15] Kane, in ‘The Children of Asshur’, unequivocally refers to N’Longa as a ‘witch-man’.[16]
However, Solomon Kane is remarkably tolerant of this witch. He doesn’t attempt to kill N’Longa, or even try to stop him carrying out his demonic sorcery. After their first meeting in ‘Red Shadows, Kane simply returns to his ship without going back to N’Longa’s village. Later, he seeks N’Longa out in ‘The Hills of the Dead’, and even asks for N’Longa to use his magic to help him defeat the vampire race. These do not seem like the actions of a man who is capable of cold-bloodedly hunting down those suspected of witchcraft, and carrying out interrogations, and executions, of those judged guilty.
God grant all our deaths be as easy
Witch-hunting, and, more specifically, the interrogation of suspects, could be an unpleasant business. It is telling that in ‘Skulls in the Stars’, witch-hunting is mentioned alongside of the Spanish Inquisition as something that has hardened Kane to grisly sights.[17] Surely cold-blooded torture does not seem in keeping with Solomon Kane's character; surely he is an executioner, rather than a torturer, preferring to bring a swift death to those whom he has targeted for punishment.
In ‘The Blue Flame of Vengeance’, for example, he expresses distaste at having to kill Sir George Banway, because he is a vastly superior swordsman and the contest between them is uneven. Kane says, “This is an ill deed -- let it be done quickly!”[18] That hardly sounds like a man who would torture a person for a prolonged period, and other stories back up that view.In ‘Skulls in the Stars’, Kane insists that the Ezra should not have to face the ghost of Gideon while tied up. He says, "it is better to meet death free and unshackled than bound like a sacrifice."[19] Similarly, in ‘Wings in the Night’, the sight of a man bound to a stake and terribly mutilated by the akaanas 'shook Kane's soul'.[20] Kane is horrified at the idea of a man suffering so many injuries and still being alive.
In ‘Hawk of Basti’, Jeremy Hawk sees ‘deep volcanic fires’[21] in Kane’s eyes at the description of the tortures inflicted by the priests of Basti. When he encounters a group of slavers in ‘The Footfalls Within’, Kane is ‘sick with horror’[22] at the thought of a helpless young girl being skinned alive. He is able to save the girl from that fate, but in ‘The Children of Asshur’ the prince Bel-lardath is not so fortunate. When Kane learns of the man's death he swears — a rare thing for the puritan — and thinks of the man’s fate as ‘a horrible death.’[23]
Cat and mouse (and wolf)
However, things are not quite as clear-cut as they might first appear. ‘Red Shadows’ contains a description, spoken by the bandit known as 'the Rat', of the way that Kane despatched some members of the outlaw gang.
The first we know of this man is when we find Jean, the most desperate bandit unhung, nailed to a tree with his own dagger through his breast, and the letters S.L.K. carved upon his dead cheeks. Then the Spaniard Juan is struck down, and after we find him he lives long enough to tell us that the slayer is an Englishman, Solomon Kane, who has sworn to destroy our entire band![24]
These are more than simple executions. In the case of Jean, Solomon Kane mutilates the man's body, putting it on display to frighten the other bandits. Even if we assume that the mutilations were done after death, Kane still goes out of his way to intimidate the bandit gang. With Juan, there is a distinct possibility that Kane deliberately leaves the man alive, though mortally wounded, so that he can frighten the others with Kane's message. (It is possible that Kane would have announced his identity and his intentions to a man he intended to kill outright, but it would be a rare slip for him to leave an enemy alive.)
Something similar is found in ‘The Blue Flame of Vengeance’, where Kane sends a message to Jonas Hardraker, presumably informing the pirate of his intention to kill him. Why would Kane warn his enemy in this way, thereby making his job more difficult, if he did not enjoy the idea of inflicting mental torture, of making the pirate sweat at the thought of Kane's pursuit? Kane’s warning certainly seems to have done the trick, at least in the case of Ben Allardine, Jonas Hardraker's first mate. By the time that Kane eventually catches up with the pirate crew, Allardine has become "an old woman … starting at shadows."[25]
It is, of course, possible that Kane wishes to intimidate these men to make them easier targets, so that they will be too frightened to put up an effective defence when he finally strikes. Yet the other evidence argues against this: 'The Blue Flame of Vengeance' shows that Kane finds it distasteful to take on an inferior opponent, and that he prefers to battle those who can put up a good fight.
Quenched in blood
In ‘Red Shadows’, Kane tells Le Loup, "I have never yet done a man to death by torture, but by God, sir, you tempt me!"[26] This statement is ambiguous. On the one hand, Kane makes it clear that he has never tortured anyone to death. On the other hand, he does not state that he has never tortured anyone at all, and, in Le Loup's case at least, it is something he might consider.
Similarly, 'The Blue Flame of Vengeance' sees Kane wishing to inflict physical suffering on the pirate Jonas Hardraker. Kane agrees to fight Hardraker and allows him to choose the weapons. When the pirate chooses to fight with knives, Kane smiles, saying that with a knife "an end may be made which is neither quick nor painless."[27]
Kane gets the chance to inflict this slow and painful death, pushing his dirk inch by agonising inch into the pirate's heart. However, Kane does not inflict this protracted death entirely through choice. The nature of Hardraker's death is brought about by the man's own actions, as he resists Kane's attack until the very end.
Perhaps it is difficult to imagine that Kane, had circumstances been different, would have meted out the same kind of punishment to a helpless and unarmed enemy. But it isn't difficult to believe that he enjoyed every minute of his enemy's suffering: he shows no remorse once the pirate is dead. It's possible that the opportunity to face an opponent in a fair fight, to mete out punishment in hot blood rather than cold, is all the excuse that he needs to deal a particularly cruel fate to an enemy.
Last words
Solomon Kane is not always a quick, clean executioner, swiftly taking his enemies' lives with the surgical precision of his rapier. There are times when he uses the dead and dying to put the fear of God — or, rather, of himself as God's agent — into his enemies. Kane is not above wanting to inflict torture on his foes, and occasionally tries to mentally torment them by informing them of their impending doom.
However, Kane was himself a victim of torture at the hands of the Spanish Inquisition, and he repeatedly shows anger and revulsion at the prospect of a person facing death helplessly, without an opportunity to flee or to defend themselves. It is difficult to believe that such a man would ever inflict prolonged physical suffering on others in cold blood. But while the manner of Jonas Hardraker's death may not be conclusive it hints that Kane may sometimes — when facing a capable enemy in a fair fight — mete out a slightly more cruel, more painful, more protracted death than is strictly necessary.
1 R.E. Howard, The Savage Tales of Solomon Kane, New York: Del Rey 2004, p. 8.↩
2 H. Rawlings, The Spanish Inquisition, Blackwell Publishing 2008, pp. 101 ff.↩
3 H. Kamen, The Spanish Inquisition, Yale University Press 2014, p. 105.↩
4 R.E. Howard, The Savage Tales of Solomon Kane, New York: Del Rey 2004, p. 382.↩
5 R.E. Howard, The Savage Tales of Solomon Kane, New York: Del Rey 2004, p. 278.↩
6 P. Elmer, Witchcraft, Witch-Hunting, and Politics in Early Modern England, Oxford University Press 2016, pp. 1-2.↩
7 P. Elmer, Witchcraft, Witch-Hunting, and Politics in Early Modern England, Oxford University Press 2016, p. 114.↩
8 P. Elmer, Witchcraft, Witch-Hunting, and Politics in Early Modern England, Oxford University Press 2016, p. 4.↩
9 R.E. Howard, The Savage Tales of Solomon Kane, New York: Del Rey 2004, p. 79.↩
10 R.E. Howard, The Savage Tales of Solomon Kane, New York: Del Rey 2004, p. 57.↩
11 R.E. Howard, The Savage Tales of Solomon Kane, New York: Del Rey 2004, p. 227.↩
12 R.E. Howard, The Savage Tales of Solomon Kane, New York: Del Rey 2004, p. 60.↩
13 R.E. Howard, The Savage Tales of Solomon Kane, New York: Del Rey 2004, p. 240.↩
14 R.E. Howard, The Savage Tales of Solomon Kane, New York: Del Rey 2004, p. 240.↩
15 R.E. Howard, The Savage Tales of Solomon Kane, New York: Del Rey 2004, p. 265.↩
16 R.E. Howard, The Savage Tales of Solomon Kane, New York: Del Rey 2004, p. 350.↩
17 When Kane sees the mutilated body of the victim of Gideon's ghost, he shudders, 'a rare thing for him, who had seen the deeds of the Spanish Inquisition and the witch-finders.' (R.E. Howard, The Savage Tales of Solomon Kane, New York: Del Rey 2004, p. 8.↩
18 R.E. Howard, The Savage Tales of Solomon Kane, New York: Del Rey 2004, p. 219.↩
19 R.E. Howard, The Savage Tales of Solomon Kane, New York: Del Rey 2004, p. 16.↩
20 R.E. Howard, The Savage Tales of Solomon Kane, New York: Del Rey 2004, p. 279.↩
21 R.E. Howard, The Savage Tales of Solomon Kane, New York: Del Rey 2004, p. 261.↩
22 R.E. Howard, The Savage Tales of Solomon Kane, New York: Del Rey 2004, p. 329.↩
23 R.E. Howard, The Savage Tales of Solomon Kane, New York: Del Rey 2004, pp. 368-9.↩
24 R.E. Howard, The Savage Tales of Solomon Kane, New York: Del Rey 2004, p. 34.↩
25 R.E. Howard, The Savage Tales of Solomon Kane, New York: Del Rey 2004, p. 198.↩
26 R.E. Howard, The Savage Tales of Solomon Kane, New York: Del Rey 2004, p. 40.↩
27 R.E. Howard, The Savage Tales of Solomon Kane, New York: Del Rey 2004, p. 204.↩
No comments:
Post a Comment