Klingon Imperial Forums
Welcome, Guest. Please login or register.
Did you miss your activation email?
04 22, 2018, 08:29: AM

Login with username, password and session length
Search:     Advanced search
Realtime chats are now following a freeform schedule.  If you would like to chat with you fellows please see the It's Talk Time thread for more info or to schedule a chat.
11898 Posts in 1666 Topics by 692 Members
Latest Member: smithassignment1
* Home Help Search Calendar Login Register
+  Klingon Imperial Forums
|-+  Other Klingon-related Topics
| |-+  The Klingon Science Lab
| | |-+  Klingon Biology & Physiology
| | | |-+  Klingons,Targs, and Kruge's Pet
« previous next »
Pages: [1] 2 3 Go Down Print
Author Topic: Klingons,Targs, and Kruge's Pet  (Read 36414 times)
qurgh
Novice
*
Offline Offline

Posts: 7


« on: 10 05, 2003, 05:58: AM »

posted on 6-27-2002 at 11:17 PM

Klingons and Targhs

Now here's a question, do Klingons keep targhs as pets, like Humans keep dogs? or do they only keep them for food like cows?

We have seen both ideas in Star Trek, Kruge and Worf had pet targhs, but in sleeping dogs we see them keep as food. Do Klingons keep them as pets, and then eat them, or are there different breeds. Maybe a pet targh breed and eating targh breed?

Just a thought.
« Last Edit: 01 15, 2007, 06:07: AM by Kesvirit » Logged
Kilmarac
Newcomer

Offline Offline

Posts: 4


« Reply #1 on: 10 05, 2003, 06:01: AM »

posted on 6-28-2002 at 01:28 AM

I would say that there were different breeds. Like dogs and cats today. There are Domestic (smaller usually) and Wild (larger)
Logged
qurgh
Novice
*
Offline Offline

Posts: 7


« Reply #2 on: 10 05, 2003, 06:03: AM »

posted on 6-28-2002 at 01:54 AM

That makes sense. Next thought would be, do they breed the wild kind just for food? And would Klingons use cloning in order to make "wild" targhs on board a ship?
Logged
Jorf
Novice
*
Offline Offline

Posts: 6


« Reply #3 on: 10 05, 2003, 06:05: AM »

posted on 6-28-2002 at 03:19 PM

Klingons and Targhs

I see Targh as like pigs. They are definitely a food source, but some people treat them as pets. Many a 4-H member has raised a piglet, become attached to it, just to see it go to slaughter. Same with sheep, lambs and goats. Just my two cents.
Logged
qurgh
Novice
*
Offline Offline

Posts: 7


« Reply #4 on: 10 05, 2003, 06:08: AM »

posted on 6-28-2002 at 03:53 PM

I agree Smiley, partly. From what I saw of the pet targhs, it seems to be more than a mis-guided affection to a possible food source. Kruge was a high ranking Klingon officer and he was majorly annoyed when his targh died.

I'm sure there are people who work on targh farms that have the "treat supper as a pet" syndrome, but, maybe as Kil pointed out, there are domestic breeds of targhs that people have as pets.

Okrand has a section on his Power Klingon tape on how to give commands to pet targhs, which all Klingons should be able to do. He makes it out that if you can't control someones pet targh, you are going to be dishonoured. That suggests that pet targhs are an important aspect of Klingon society.

Well, enough of my ramblings. Wink
Logged
Ambassador Lady K'Zin
Forum Founder
Administrator
Klingon Conversationalist
******
Offline Offline

Posts: 112


Always trust your instincts!


WWW
« Reply #5 on: 10 05, 2003, 06:12: AM »

posted on 6-28-2002 at 05:49 PM

Another alternative Targh theory...

As gruesome as it sounds to some, here on Terra we already have a similar situation...

In North America and Europe, dogs are seen as "Man's Best Friend", however in certain parts of Southeast Asia, dogs are seen as a delicacy and are raised primarily for consumption. Many people decry the practice, but it's all a matter of point of view... after all, horses are considered "working pets", yet horse steak is not uncommon in many parts of the world.

So, I would make an assumption the there might be several breeds of targhs, that the domesticated version are used mainly as pets, but that the "wild" version is used mainly as a food source and is not bred for companionship. The domestic version would undoubtedly have certain traits bred into them over the centuries, from loyalty to their master, to protectiveness or as a "watch-targh" for security purposes, which is probably it's original function for domestication -- just as ancient Humans domesticated the wild dog.

Since targhs seem similar to terran pigs in many respects, it is likely that they might have similar levels of intelligence, and a good sense of smell -- something that would certainly come in handy for a watch animal.

Any additional comments on this version of the theory?
Logged

~ Ambassador Lady K'Zin

Administrator,
Klingon Imperial Forums, KIDC
NeoTrekk
Newcomer

Offline Offline

Posts: 3


« Reply #6 on: 10 05, 2003, 06:15: AM »

posted on 6-28-2002 at 07:30 PM

Pet Food

I agree with the way this discussion is headed. Growing up on a rather large ranch, I tended to have livestock that I considered pets, and then they were either a)sold at auction, or b)slaughtered to fill the freezer.

I think we are seeing the practice of having targh's as pets more and more than originally, similar to having pigs as actual pets.

So, this would merely be another point of view here...
Logged
kratnor
Scribe
*
Offline Offline

Posts: 19


« Reply #7 on: 10 05, 2003, 06:18: AM »

posted on 6-29-2002 at 04:43 AM

Klingons and Targhs

There are many varieties of Targh. I was told that originally Targhs were kept for meat, then smaller more tractable breeds appeared and the 'pet' targh became common. As you know some varieties are even used to hunt their wild relatives. I do enjoy the company of a Targh when hunting.
Kra'tnor
Logged
qurgh
Novice
*
Offline Offline

Posts: 7


« Reply #8 on: 10 05, 2003, 06:23: AM »

posted on 6-29-2002 at 02:57 PM

Quote
Originally posted by kratnor
There are many varieties of Targh. I was told that originally Targhs were kept for meat, then smaller more tractable breeds appeared and the 'pet' targh became common. As you know some varieties are even used to hunt their wild relatives. I do enjoy the company of a Targh when hunting.
Kra'tnor
I have heard that too, but I don't remeber where they said they use targhs for hunting. Can you remeber where this is said? I'm trying to collect all the references to targhs, so I can make a targh info page.
Logged
kratnor
Scribe
*
Offline Offline

Posts: 19


« Reply #9 on: 10 05, 2003, 06:26: AM »

posted on 6-30-2002 at 01:47 AM

klingons and targhs

I read your words qurgh.
My father told me. And as I said on Boreth we hunt with Targhs. Perhaps you would consider this apocryphal. HA!
Kra'tnor
Logged
Kesvirit
Her Nibbs
Administrator
Thought Master
******
Offline Offline

Posts: 1122


That which does not kill me, must have missed me.


WWW
« Reply #10 on: 10 05, 2003, 06:34: AM »

posted on 6-30-2002 at 07:27 PM

Variation in the targh

Quote
Originally posted by Forum Moderator
***... I would make an assumption the there might be several breeds of targhs, that the domesticated version are used mainly as pets, but that the "wild" version is used mainly as a food source and is not bred for companionship. The domestic version would undoubtedly have certain traits bred into them over the centuries, from loyalty to their master, to protectiveness or as a "watch-targh" for security purposes, which is probably it's original function for domestication -- just as ancient Humans domesticated the wild dog.

Since targhs seem similar to terran pigs in many respects, it is likely that they might have similar levels of intelligence, and a good sense of smell -- something that would certainly come in handy for a watch animal.

Any additional comments on this version of the theory?
Selective breeding does seem to be the most likely answer. Also, the term "targh" could easily apply to one of many different taxa. It could refer to a species that has been selectively bred into different submorphs. For example, both Chihuahuas and German Sheherd Dogs belong to the same species (_Canis_familiaris_) and can interbreed.

Or it could refer to a wider, more diverse catagory of animals perhaps on the level of Artiodactyla, which includes pigs, antelopes, cattle, hippos, camels, deer, giraffes, goats, dikdiks (really)...

There is a very "primitive" (generalized) artiodactyl from central Africa called the chevrotain, which is what I think of when I think of the prototypical targh. qurgh, you may want to look them up as background for your targh page. Just my two darsekmey worth. YMMV.

 - Kesvirit
Logged

Richard the Sound Guy: "And the next person to lecture me about canon risks getting shot out of one! Right, gaffers?"
Gaffers make appreciative and supportive remarks in the form of bad imitations of primate calls from the direction of the lighting grids.
qurgh
Novice
*
Offline Offline

Posts: 7


« Reply #11 on: 10 05, 2003, 06:36: AM »

posted on 7-1-2002 at 03:32 AM

I like that idea. I see targh as being along the lines of dog. There are different breeds of targh that exist. The wild targh, which is hunted and eaten, the hunting targh, used to hunt wild targh and then pet targhs, a number of different breeds kept as family pets.
Logged
Kesvirit
Her Nibbs
Administrator
Thought Master
******
Offline Offline

Posts: 1122


That which does not kill me, must have missed me.


WWW
« Reply #12 on: 10 05, 2003, 06:41: AM »

posted on 7-2-2002 at 12:08 AM

Naming targhs by function

If you classify targhs by function, how do you name them? Is it merely a matter of appending adjectives/qualifiers, such as, "this is my watch-targh, these targs are my housepets, these targhs guard my livestock, that food-targh is destined for the table"?

Or does each kind of targh have a different name (common noun) according to its catagory of use? I.e., "this is my whatsit, these thingies are my housepets, these blahs guard my livestock, that yaddayadda is destined for the table?"

For that matter, are individual targhs given names, like most humans name their pets?

I hope this makes some sense. I never took linguistics, so I don't know what terms to use. Sad

 - Kesvirit
Logged

Richard the Sound Guy: "And the next person to lecture me about canon risks getting shot out of one! Right, gaffers?"
Gaffers make appreciative and supportive remarks in the form of bad imitations of primate calls from the direction of the lighting grids.
qurgh
Novice
*
Offline Offline

Posts: 7


« Reply #13 on: 10 05, 2003, 06:44: AM »

posted on 7-2-2002 at 03:05 AM

Hehe, yes, it makes sense. We have never seen any other names for targhs, either in the show or by Okrand, but I'm guessing that Klingons would just call them targh, with maybe a qualify if needed.

A conversation might go something like thing:
"I'm going to take my targh hunting."
"What are you hunting?"
"I'm hunting wild targh"

Or maybe:
"I like my new targh."
"Does he have any skills?"
"Yes, he makes a good guard targh."

Side note, when I write these english phrases, I'm actually thinking of the tlhIngan Hol, and then translating them back to English.
 
Logged
Klythe
ngem Sargh lIghwI' pagh cha'
Administrator
Thought Master
******
Offline Offline

Posts: 1071


When a show of teeth doesn't work, bite deeply.


WWW
« Reply #14 on: 10 05, 2003, 06:46: AM »

posted on 7-2-2002 at 08:39 AM

You all think like terrans!

I do not see any reason why the same individual animal would not serve as both a pet and later as food for the same master. Klingons do not necessarily feel the same 'affections' as tera'ngan do for their pats, and they certainly have a different sort of respect for the dead.

I would do my targh the final honor of giving is empty shell for my strength, once he is finished with this life.

I could be wrong, but I don't think Lord Kruge's pet was actually a targh. I haven't actually seen it refered as a targh, only a "HaD'IbaH"... In one of the TNG Book's they break Okrand's rule and name Worf's targh "lengwI'" or rover (this term is supposed to be used only grammerically to descrive a type of word that can appear in a variety of contexts)

The only other instance of targh naming I can remember is much less canonical than above. There was a fan fic where Paris gave Be'lanna a stuffed targh toy that she named 'Toby the Targ'...
Logged
Jorf
Novice
*
Offline Offline

Posts: 6


« Reply #15 on: 10 05, 2003, 06:53: AM »

posted on 7-2-2002 at 07:57 PM

Mixing the Breeds

Quote
Originally posted by Kesvirit
For example, both Chihuahuas and German Shepherd Dogs belong to the same species (_Canis_familiaris_) and can interbreed.
That sounds interesting. Do you have pictures??? What would the breed be called: Chihuapherd's?Huh cool
 
Logged
qurgh
Novice
*
Offline Offline

Posts: 7


« Reply #16 on: 10 05, 2003, 06:57: AM »

posted on 7-2-2002 at 11:27 PM
Quote
Originally posted by Klythe
I could be wrong, but I don't think Lord Kruge's pet was actually a targh. I haven't actually seen it refered as a targh, only a "HaD'IbaH"... In one of the TNG Book's they break Okrand's rule and name Worf's targh "lengwI'" or rover (this term is supposed to be used only grammerically to descrive a type of word that can appear in a variety of contexts)

The only other instance of targh naming I can remember is much less canonical than above. There was a fan fic where Paris gave Be'lanna a stuffed targh toy that she named 'Toby the Targ'...
I think it's called a targh in one of the books or scripts, either that or Okrand said it was. I don't remember.

As for lengwI' Cheesy that was a joke name created by a couple of people in the KLI. The common dog name is "Rover" so they translated that and said "lengwI'". lengwI' has also become the joke word for dogs as well.

As for thinking like a Terran, having affection for an animal is not Terran. Kruge was very upset when his targh died, and I couldn't see him sitting down after the battle to munch on it. Tongue
 
Logged
Kesvirit
Her Nibbs
Administrator
Thought Master
******
Offline Offline

Posts: 1122


That which does not kill me, must have missed me.


WWW
« Reply #17 on: 10 05, 2003, 07:38: AM »

posted on 7-3-2002 at 04:30 AM

Chihuaperds???

A few posts ago I wrote:
Quote
For example, both Chihuahuas and German Shepherd Dogs belong to the same species Canis familiaris and can interbreed.
To which Jorf responded:
Quote
That sounds interesting. Do you have pictures??? What would the breed be called: Chihuapherd's?Huh cool
The resulting offspring wouldn't be a "breed": they would just be called a mixed breed or a mutt. If you were reasonably sure of the pup's ancestry you could refer to it as a Chihuahua/Shepherd mix.

A breed isn't defined as the result of a particular pairing, but is developed over time by mating individuals with the characteristics that you want and crossing their offspring with similar individuals until you get consistant results. In dogs, it takes very roughly a hundred years or so to establish a new breed.

Breeds themselves are usually defined by the folks who compile the stud books in which breed standards are set. Each breed has its own set of physical requirements for eligibility. Some are more flexible than others, so the term "breed" itself is not set in stone.

No, I don't have pictures of the hypothetical Chihuaperd. That was just an example of two very different breeds within a given species that could theoretically produce viable offspring. Personally I don't know what such a breed could possibly have to offer. Pick any set of characteristics that the two have between them and it's probably already been done in another breed. IMO I don't know why a Klingon would possibly want a Chihuahua to begin with, except as a very hyperactive food source. Wink Maybe something for the little children to practice their hunting skills on, in the manner of small game.

Anyway. I was in the dog biz for a long time and tend to ramble on. Let me know if you have any further questions and I'll let the others get back to talking about targhs.

- Kesvirit
 
Logged

Richard the Sound Guy: "And the next person to lecture me about canon risks getting shot out of one! Right, gaffers?"
Gaffers make appreciative and supportive remarks in the form of bad imitations of primate calls from the direction of the lighting grids.
Klythe
ngem Sargh lIghwI' pagh cha'
Administrator
Thought Master
******
Offline Offline

Posts: 1071


When a show of teeth doesn't work, bite deeply.


WWW
« Reply #18 on: 10 05, 2003, 07:43: AM »

posted on 7-3-2002 at 05:19 AM

Quote
Originally posted by qurgh
I think it's called a targh in one of the books or scripts, either that or Okrand said it was. I don't remember.

As for lengwI' Cheesy that was a joke name created by a couple of people in the KLI. The common dog name is "Rover" so they translated that and said "lengwI'". lengwI' has also become the joke word for dogs as well.

As for thinking like a Terran, having affection for an animal is not Terran. Kruge was very upset when his targh died, and I couldn't see him sitting down after the battle to munch on it. Tongue
I did appreciate the pun for what it was worth(What is a pun worth after inflation...) Cheesy

Clearly, Kruge felt deeply for his animal(you could be right, it could be a different sort of targh), but he didn't express his 'affection' the way a terran would. He did not cry, he honored it like any Klingon warrior would do, he avenged it. After vengence is done, the soul is statisfied, but the body remains. I remember in TNG, I think it was Bev that asked Worf what to do with the Klingon's corpse, burial and or cremation we offered. Instead he said something to the effect that the warrior was not there any more, so "just dispose of it, it is an empty shell." Clearly, Klingons do not have the reverence for corpses than terrans do.

Kruge certainly wouldn't have just ripped off his animal's leg on the bridge and start chewing, but if the meat is still good... There is never enough good meat on a starship that far from home... I do not know if Kruge would eat his pet or not... I am saying that there are different motives at play. There is no taboo I can think of against it, as we have a much more practical view about life and death than the terrans do. The body the pet leaves behind is no different than the pIpIyuS just had for dinner. Both are merely animals. There would probably be taboos against eating the bodies of people*(things that take the -pu' plural, language using organisms)...

I am sorry for being gross, but I'm just trying to observe and explore our culture, by suspending what I know in RL and only thinking in term of what we've seen on the screen.

Anyway, on a more agreeable note, Kesvirit speaks the truth. All terran dogs are Canis Familiaris, and should by definition be able to interbreed. The taxonomy isn't a perfect system, for example Wolves are Canis Lupes, but can also interbreed with nearly all dogs.
Logged
Kesvirit
Her Nibbs
Administrator
Thought Master
******
Offline Offline

Posts: 1122


That which does not kill me, must have missed me.


WWW
« Reply #19 on: 10 05, 2003, 07:45: AM »

posted on 7-3-2002 at 07:54 AM

Kruge's Pet

I'm reasonably sure that Kruge's pet was not a targh. IIRC it was called something else somewhere. Come tomorrow I'll see if I can find the reference (I'm not willing to let Okrand be end-all on all things Klingon).

Even once its death had been avenged, presuming Kruge had lived I think he would have privately mourned its loss once he got home and things got back to normal, or as normal as they ever did. He took time in the midst of battle to hold it while it died. Was he trying to comfort it and/or himself? He showed more concern over its death than he did over that of his consort Valkris. I think he would have missed it over the years. Though each Klingon warrior is an individual, I don't think it's somethng anyone can just put out of their mind.

Just my two darseki/darsekmey worth.

 - Kesvirit
Logged

Richard the Sound Guy: "And the next person to lecture me about canon risks getting shot out of one! Right, gaffers?"
Gaffers make appreciative and supportive remarks in the form of bad imitations of primate calls from the direction of the lighting grids.
kratnor
Scribe
*
Offline Offline

Posts: 19


« Reply #20 on: 10 05, 2003, 07:48: AM »

posted on 7-4-2002 at 06:23 AM

klingons and targhs

We Klingons prefer the taste of wild targh, this is well known. Truely a delicacy these days. Consuming domestic targh is a 'modern' stopgap that has come about with the growth of our empire. Few worlds have wild populations of targh, for many reasons, so the bland, docile 'to be eaten' breed has flourished. Few klingons would consider eating a hunting targh or a guard targh only under dire circumstances. They taste like dung due to their domesticity.
Or so I have been told.
Kra'tnor
Logged
Kesvirit
Her Nibbs
Administrator
Thought Master
******
Offline Offline

Posts: 1122


That which does not kill me, must have missed me.


WWW
« Reply #21 on: 10 05, 2003, 07:56: AM »

posted on 7-6-2002 at 04:51 AM

Kruge's Pet

I couldn't find the ref I was looking for identifying Kruge's pet.

However, at some point a set of collectors cards was issued, and accorging to http://ourworld.compuserve.com/homepages/a...llender/st3.htm, card #13 lists its name as "Warrigul". So does the novelization of ST3 (thus answering my own earlier question as to whether or not at least some Klingons name their pets). It also states that he had gotten it as a boy and raised it from a larva. FWIW, "warrigul" is an obsolete Australian aboriginal word for the native dog, "dingo", and is incorporated into various Australian place names if not much else.

I couldn't find a picture of a targh from the TNG episode "Where No One Has Gone Before", but IIRC the animal shown was basically a pig dressed up in a lion's mane that tapered half-way down its back and forelegs and a series of spikes that went from its forehead most of the way down its back. I did, however, find a good shot of Kruge's critter at http://204.152.186.160/gallery/lifeforms1.htm (click on the individual pics for enlargements).

Granted, the TNG people could only do so much with casting and makeup, but their targh definitely looks like an ungulate, with hooves, hair, and horns. But take a good look at Warrigul -- it doesn't look that mammalian. Rather it looks like the designers put together a hodgepodge of terresrtial vertebrate features in an attempt to make it look more "alien".

The shoulder joint, neck crest/mane, ears, and hind leg assembly look mammalian in nature. The spine looks reptilian or possibly even fish-like, and the pelvic girdle looks like a reptile?s bent at a strange angle. The forelegs look a lot like a very specialized feature of the bird skeleton called the tarsometatarsal, which is a long-ish single bone fused from both an ankle and a foot bone but looks like it ought to be analagous to a mammal's lower leg. The spurs on the hind foot are also reminiscent of those found on birds.

The head in and of itself is also a melange of features, though it's harder to analyze because the head picture is a bit blurry. It reminds me of a reconstruction of an extinct animal called a therapsid, a transitional form between reptiles and mammals. It has slightly differentiated teeth (a dead giveaway). Its reptilian characteristics include built-up bony eye sockets and a rooted tongue like a crocodilian's that forks like a snake's. Its hair, swirled nostrils, external ears are distinctive mammalian features.

Of course this is speculation based on a jpg; without a specimen for physical examination it will have to remain an airborne guess on my part. I hate that. Sad

I have no idea what was meant by Kruge's raising it from a larva, unless larva is some sort of generic term for something hatched from an egg. In this case you could probably call it a reptile and be done with it.

In any case, unless the phrase "targh" refers to anything with four legs and teeth, these are the reasons why don't think Kruge's pet was a targh. Aren't you glad you asked? Tongue

(P.S To correct myself, ST3 also states that Valkris and Kruge had never net prior to the transmission of the information on the Genesis device. My bad. I have no idea where I got that idea that they were otherwise involved.)

- Kesvirit
« Last Edit: 10 05, 2003, 07:58: AM by Kesvirit » Logged

Richard the Sound Guy: "And the next person to lecture me about canon risks getting shot out of one! Right, gaffers?"
Gaffers make appreciative and supportive remarks in the form of bad imitations of primate calls from the direction of the lighting grids.
Kesvirit
Her Nibbs
Administrator
Thought Master
******
Offline Offline

Posts: 1122


That which does not kill me, must have missed me.


WWW
« Reply #22 on: 10 05, 2003, 08:01: AM »

posted on 7-9-2002 at 02:56 AM

The Targh Debate, Continued

While looking for something else altogether I found another picture of something that looks a lot like Warrigul at
http://www.geocities.com/Area51/Lair/9261/klin7.html. It's hard to tell the details because of the size reduction. Its body is a bit broader and smoother than Warrigul's. I wish I could see its feet but they are hidden by the brush. It looks like it is definitely part of the hunt and is on a lead, but the artist's homepage doesn't identify it. Perhaps it is a member of the same spp as Warrigul or one closely related (like dogs and wolves), with Worf's lengwI representing decidedly different.

(OT aside: I re-watched ST3 last night; the reason I thought Valkris and Kruge were romantically involved somehow was because she addresses him as "My Love" right before he destroys her ship. The novelization states that even though they'd never met in person: "She did love him, indeed, as the instrument of her bloodline's redeemption." If anyone cares. Smiley

 - Kesvirit
Logged

Richard the Sound Guy: "And the next person to lecture me about canon risks getting shot out of one! Right, gaffers?"
Gaffers make appreciative and supportive remarks in the form of bad imitations of primate calls from the direction of the lighting grids.
kratnor
Scribe
*
Offline Offline

Posts: 19


« Reply #23 on: 10 05, 2003, 08:03: AM »

posted on 7-9-2002 at 04:40 AM

klingons and targhs

Excellent analysis, Kesvirit. I agree that Kruges 'pet' was something other than a targh. Perhaps it is another world's equivalent to a terestrial therapsid. Kruge seemed to be an animal trainer , or collector at heart, considering his attempt to subdue one of the large worms from Spocks 'coffin'. The beast on the ship must have been his pride and joy. It seemed too stringy to be a food item.
Kra'tnor
Logged
Klythe
ngem Sargh lIghwI' pagh cha'
Administrator
Thought Master
******
Offline Offline

Posts: 1071


When a show of teeth doesn't work, bite deeply.


WWW
« Reply #24 on: 10 05, 2003, 08:06: AM »

posted on 7-9-2002 at 10:29 PM

I never claimed that Kruge would eat Warrigul! I did claim that I would have no problem with eating my pet targ after it died honorably by my side. As I asserted earlier, Klingons hold no reverence for corpses, when the warrior spirit has gone from the animal. Once that happens, the corpse is just so much meat, if the meat is good, there is little reason to use the body the best way you can, if you have a replicator, fine. If you don't, and the meat is good, why wouldn't a Klingon eat it?
Logged
Pages: [1] 2 3 Go Up Print 
« previous next »
Jump to:  

Powered by MySQL Powered by PHP Powered by SMF 1.1.21 | SMF © 2015, Simple Machines Valid XHTML 1.0! Valid CSS!