Fury of the Northmen Mod [Archive] - Page 3

View Full Version : Fury of the Northmen Mod

Pages : 1 2 [3]

Sebastian Seth

09-19-2004, 00:34

@Wilpuri & SS,
Drop the discussion on WWII, IMO it´s not relevant. FYI I too had a grandfather that served the entire war on the Swe/ Fin border with aid and rescue missions in Finnish territory on numerous occasions and the stories he told me about the Finns, both sides, and their bravery, stamina and endurance was astonishing. Let´s concetrate on FotN.

I Agree.

The border on Kveenland isn´t that important, if we have room for yet another reb-prov in Finland we can solve that problem when we get there.
Decide weather the 2nd finn-fac should be Sums or Jems. Make a kingslist (if possible), names - males and females, unique buildings, special units although I belive pretty much of Wlpuris units for Karelia could be used. I support SS theory that the "Finns" should have a stealthy, fast, highly manoverable unit preferably with a double weaponry like spear/ sword/ axe or bow/ sword/ axe etc and with none or light armour. Ofcourse we can mak the Finnish provs highly rebellious to simulate the fact that she wasn´t conquered during this time-frame.
Also a research on trade-goods, mines or other natural resources plus some insight on the terrains features of each province for the battle- and castle-maps would be great.

Sums and Jems are names used by novgorod. But we could include
both of them and kveens by callling second faction Suomalaiset or
something like lead from that. It's my understanding that finns where
called Suuoma (Our law or something like that in latin) in early ages.
And the name suomalaiset is what we call us today. The influences
on the Sums and Jems are quite if not very same and they were
more or less united at the time of game period. We can use kings
of kveens and charecters of kalevala as kings of finns (as in wilpuris
karelian names). We should make a list of units and buildings of
karelians and finns. And then look at them. wilpuri's original list
should probably be the base of it.

PseRamesses

09-19-2004, 08:31

Sums and Jems are names used by novgorod. It's my understanding that finns where called Suuoma (Our law or something like that in latin) in early ages. And the name suomalaiset is what we call us today. The influences on the Sums and Jems are quite if not very same and they were more or less united at the time of game period.
I do belive Suuoma is a very good faction name. It´s close to Sums, Suomi and Suomalaiset. What´s your opinion Wilpuri?

We can use kings of kveens and charecters of kalevala as kings of finns (as in wilpuris karelian names). We should make a list of units and buildings of karelians and finns. And then look at them. wilpuri's original list should probably be the base of it.
Sounds like an exellent idea since Kalevala is a great source. I know W had some difficulty in the beginning with names and had to take them from different sources and create a kingslist and male/ female names etc. It´s located earlier in this thread. Confer with W so that there won´t be too much similarities between the Suuoma and Karelians.

wilpuri

09-19-2004, 11:32

I do belive Suuoma is a very good faction name. It´s close to Sums, Suomi and Suomalaiset. What´s your opinion Wilpuri?

Never heard of it before, so its hard to say. Link?

Sounds like an exellent idea since Kalevala is a great source. I know W had some difficulty in the beginning with names and had to take them from different sources and create a kingslist and male/ female names etc. It´s located earlier in this thread. Confer with W so that there won´t be too much similarities between the Suuoma and Karelians.

The Karelians are a Finnish faction, and spoke practically the same language as the rest of the Finns, so I don't think it's too bad if they have the same names.

The influences
on the Sums and Jems are quite if not very same and they were
more or less united at the time of game period. We can use kings
of kveens and charecters of kalevala as kings of finns (as in wilpuris
karelian names). We should make a list of units and buildings of
karelians and finns. And then look at them. wilpuri's original list
should probably be the base of it.

As I understand it, they were not the same. They united mostly against the Karelians, but in peace time, they were still the loosely organized tribal communities, but for game play reasons, may be they could be shown as one. Culturally, I'd say the W. Finns and the E. Finns were quite similar, at least at the beginning of the period, before the cross-fire of influence from both east and west.

As for the rebelliousness of the Finnish factions, the same should apply to the Baltic. They resisted christianity and "crusaders" for longer than the Finns did, and they also actually rebelled against their viking lords at Seeborg. The viking had conquered a beach head in curonia, and built a fort to guard the trading centre. They taxed the locals, who then rebelled and drove the scandinavians out. There were no known viking trade posts in Finland. There were many viking-style trade posts, but which were in the control of the Finns nonetheless.

Sebastian Seth

09-19-2004, 12:06

Wilpuri emailed me the list of karelian names earlier, so I have it. I been
doing some addions on them but so far nothing that could be a near
final presentation. I have some ideas I like to hear opinios.

1. Use some modern surnanames lead from animal names.
eg. Kärppä, Karhu, Hirvi, Peura, Karhunen, Metsonen
(This could be correct as the religion of paganism is
nature based and is quite common in finland.)

2. Use some modern surnames lead from professions.
eg. Takoja, Timpuri, Seppä
(Humans have tendencies to call people by profession like
smith, taylor, etc.)

3. Use some modern names lead from place of house.
eg. Yläjoki, Virta, Alamaa, Lahti
(also common in modern finland)

4. Use modern names lead from tribe of origin.
eg. Liiviläinen, Hämäläinen, Kainuulainen

5. Use modern names from finnish calendar, but eliminate
those of witch are catholic, ordodox or king names.
eg. Antti, Aarne, Jukka, Pekka

6. Double the forenames we have by using Prefixes.
eg. Ukko-, Veli-, Vanha-

8. Double the surnames we have by using Prefixes.
eg. Ylä-, Ala-, Iso-, Uusi-

9. Make more king names by using old finnish names.
eg. Haipus, Ainali

10. Make more king names by using old finnish names with prefix.
eg. Vanha Väinämoinen, Iso Ainali, Suuri Karjala

11. Make modern names look old with letter changes.
eg. Wanha Carjala, Caijnuulainen

12. Use name of beatifull things as Princesses.
eg. Kesä, Kukka, Ruusu, Unelma

13. Use some baltic forenames.

14. Lead surname from fathers forename like norwegians.
eg. Lauri Erkinpoika, Antti Jussinpoika

15. use idea in 14. to make more forenames.
eg. Lauri Erkinpoika Seppälä

16. Use references to status as names.
eg. Tietäjä, Viisas, Vanha, Taitava

I had some more ideas but theres a lot of names that we can lead from
one like Smith="Seppä" ... Seppä, Seppälä, Seppänen ... And the prefixes
like river="joki" with prefixes upper="Ylä" Lower="Ala" New="Uusi" ...
Joki, Jokela, Jokinen, Yläjoki, Alajoki, Uusijoki. And we don't actualy
need 1000 names for the mod.

The main dilema I have about this is basicly same that wilpuri had;
How do you write someones name in year 1000, when hes name
was written first time in 1600. ; Surely they had names to refer
to someone, and names to seperate the smith from other villages
from the smith of own village. But the names are very much
from the period of swedish power because the swedes had greater
need to seperate individuals for taxation. Simple example:
Erik the son of Erik from the end of river=
Erik Erikson Joenperä
This tells that there is not actualy more than one name per
person, the rest is just a information. But it's also possible that
the father was respected man and the name carries status.
It would be awful if all the finns where sirculating 10 names.
So tell me what you think. Wilpuri's opinion is very important
since he understands the meanings of these names.

wilpuri

09-19-2004, 12:22

If we are going to be having surnames for the Finns and Balts, then your ideas are not bad. aren't Antti, Aarne, Jukka, Pekka all Christian names?

Sebastian Seth

09-19-2004, 14:28

The site refering "suuoma" word where nationalistic so I'm not going to
give it. Sorry. My Bad. It was based on the letter found from novgorod,
that included the word. It was refering to our law/word/mouth. It would
become "suoomalaiset.

Another theory was that it was formed from words "suo" (swamp) and
"maa" (land) together they would be "suomaa" (swampland). When
you say in finnish using this word it becomes "suomaalaiset".

3rd theory was that it came from shamish word for their tribe
"saami" and this is why finns talked about them self as "suomi".
This would become "suomilaiset.

4th theory was that the name was from the river of "suova". Witch
is austria and the base home of finno-ugric people. This becomes
"suovalaiset".

5th theory was it refers to clothing of fish scales, witch is
the word "suomu" and becomes "Suomulaiset".

6th theory was that it was envolved from baltic word "zeme" witch
means land. Like "Zeme" - "sämä" - "saama" - "sooma" - "suomi". and on
another direction "zeme" - "sämä" - "häme". These don't look like same but
in finnish they have strong similareties. It Becomes "Zemeläiset",
"Sämäläiset", "Saamalaiset", "Soomalaiset", "Suomalaiset", "hämäläiset".

Finnaithae, Screfennae, Suehans, Suetidi are some tribe names used
by Jordanes. Finns, Fenns, sui one, suo ona, suebos and sithons
are names used by Taticus. Kveen is name used by Adam von Bremen.
Sums and Jems are used by novgorod.
None of these are actualy certainly names that finish used about
themself, but some of them sound like Suo. So I think it's safe to
say that the name would be something starting as Suo. The reason
why I recomend Suuoma is because it forces english speaking to
pronounce the word long like finish do.

wilpuri

09-19-2004, 14:50

Sebastian Seth

09-19-2004, 14:51

If we are going to be having surnames for the Finns and Balts, then your ideas are not bad. aren't Antti, Aarne, Jukka, Pekka all Christian names?

I'm under the inpression that Antti is somekind of god or spirit of
rock, Aarne is refering to forrest, Jukka refers to ukko, and Pekka
refers to baltic name pek. Somebody said that antti and aarne
are finn versions of Andreas or anthon but i find it hard to believe.
see:
Andreas - Anreas formed an+re+as
Anthon - Anton formed an+ton
Antti - Anti formed ant+i
Aarne - arne formed ar+ne

I could be wrong, but I think the church took original finish names
and altered them to their current form. It's hard to say how
the names would be written since they where not. Then again
I have never memorized the bible so it's hard for me to say
witch is christian and witch are not. So if I collect for names
and you take a look at them to filtter out names that are christian
or ordodox.

wilpuri

09-19-2004, 14:54

Well I did look at all of those names, and they all have Christian origins according to the site I checked, but you are probably right, that the chruch just took the names and altered them. It can't be very easy to force a people to take entirely new names just like that... Pekko however is a very old name, and Pekko was god of the crops/harvest of ancient finns, so Pekko should do (i think i have it in my list). Anyway, we have enough names as it is, so we don't need too many new ones.

Sebastian Seth

09-19-2004, 14:57

Since there isn't a clear consensus among the historians concerning the etymology of Suomi, or the name the people themselves used of their people, I think "suomalaiset" would be a diplomatic solution, or Hämäläiset, depending on which faction is the "more dominant one", that gives the western finns their name in the mod. Just my two cents though.

I am willing to go with this though. Should we shorten it to Suoma, as
the suomalaiset is the modern form and the -laiset is offical after
Agricola's work.

wilpuri

09-19-2004, 15:05

I am willing to go with this though. Should we shorten it to Suoma, as
the suomalaiset is the modern form and the -laiset is offical after
Agricola's work.

Sounds good.

Now, I just want to know something: Are we in agreement over the historical/geographical and political situation of Finland??

Just so that no one is left confused: we have two Finnish factions: The Suoma and the Karelians, we have 4, possibly 5 provinces: Finland-Proper/Suomi, Häme/Tavastia, Savo, Karjala/Karelia and possibly Kainuunmaa/Kvenland as a rebel province.
-The Karelians will be holding Karelia as their only province since it would nice to see Savo as rebel, as it was during this very time frame, that Savo became part of the eastern finnish sphere of culture.

Of course, there was not much difference between E. Finland and W. Finland before the influx of influence from novgorod and sweden.

-Suoma hold both Suomi and Häme?

Is this agreed on?

Sebastian Seth

09-19-2004, 15:16

@I'm gonna mail the forenames back to you, theres some addions
what came up to mind. If you please take a look of them.

Sebastian Seth

09-19-2004, 15:20

Sounds good.

Now, I just want to know something: Are we in agreement over the historical/geographical and political situation of Finland??

Just so that no one is left confused: we have two Finnish factions: The Suoma and the Karelians, we have 4, possibly 5 provinces: Finland-Proper/Suomi, Häme/Tavastia, Savo, Karjala/Karelia and possibly Kainuunmaa/Kvenland as a rebel province.
-The Karelians will be holding Karelia as their only province since it would nice to see Savo as rebel, as it was during this very time frame, that Savo became part of the eastern finnish sphere of culture.

Of course, there was not much difference between E. Finland and W. Finland before the influx of influence from novgorod and sweden.

-Suoma hold both Suomi and Häme?

Is this agreed on?

Sounds like you where reading my mind. I fully support this. Agreed.

Sebastian Seth

09-19-2004, 15:42

1. Should karelian faction name be also finnish? To this point
is been talked as karelia when it really is karjala.

This is what it would look like when its in english:

Suoma, Suoman, Suomans
Karjala, Karjalan, Karjalans

This could be more accurate, when the other tribe has finnish
name, should the other one have too?

Sebastian Seth

09-19-2004, 16:15

In listing to avoid confusing:

Finnish Factions:
1. Suoma - Baltic Pagans - Baltic Tech Tree (Original Straya Ladoga)
2. Karjala - Baltic Pagans - Baltic Tech Tree (Original Karelians)

Finnish Provinces:
1. Suoma (Held by Suoma)
2. Häme (Held by Suoma)
3. Savo (Held by Rebels)
4. Karjala (Held by Karjala)
5. Kainuu (Held by Rebels)

Plan A includes 1,2,3,4,6
Plan B includes 1,2,3,4,5,6

Baltic - Finnic Provinces
6. Straya Ladoga (Held by Rebels)

Whats gonna be in baltic & russia? Saarenmaa? Liivinmaa? Novgorod? etc.?

PseRamesses

09-19-2004, 16:55

@Wilpuri & SS,
Oustanding research, great to see you guys getting along. Wilpuri, I think you, as our marshall of the Finns, has got yourself a very competent and eager deputy in SS, he he! Nice going boys! ~:cheers:

In listing to avoid confusing:
Finnish Factions:
1. Suoma - Baltic Pagans - Baltic Tech Tree (Original Straya Ladoga)
2. Karjala - Baltic Pagans - Baltic Tech Tree (Original Karelians)

Finnish Provinces:
1. Suoma (Held by Suoma)
2. Häme (Held by Suoma)
3. Savo (Held by Rebels)
4. Karjala (Held by Karjala)
5. Kainuu (Held by Rebels)

Plan A includes 1,2,3,4,6
Plan B includes 1,2,3,4,5,6

Baltic - Finnic Provinces
6. Straya Ladoga (Held by Rebels)
Sounds good enough for me SS. :2thumbsup:

Whats gonna be in baltic & russia? Saarenmaa? Liivinmaa? Novgorod? etc.?
Check back one or two pages in this thread, it´s all there. This is the main reason I asked Norse to make his first post in this thread a kind of updated summary of all changes we do as we go along. Maybee it´s time to alert this Q again?! :yes:

PseRamesses

09-19-2004, 17:05

Just for your info guys, Ceryx has alerted me to the possibility of making the strategic map "sphere-like" in 3D rendering. Now, by sphere-like I don´t means half a globe but just by curving the suface of the map by a couple of degrees makes a significant change to the sizes of certain parts of the map. It turns out that this makes some parts of the map smaller or larger depending on where you aim the sphere´s center.
We´re currently fiddling back and forth with the optimal outcome of getting England as large as we can to fit in as many of the VI-provinces we possibly can and the new Irish prov too, reducing the sizes of the mainland European and inland Russian provinces/ landmasses since the Franks and Kievan core-lands will be looked and unplayable.
One positive thing with this technique will make it possible to have more land on the map. Shetlands and Färöya will fit in and matbee even Iceland. Anyone interested in this? I´ll post the result when we´re finished.

thrashaholic

09-19-2004, 17:13

Just for your info guys, Ceryx has alerted me to the possibility of making the startegic map "sphere-like" in 3D rendering. Now, by sphere-like I don´t means half a globe but just by curving the suface of the map by a couple of degrees makes a significant change to the sizes of certain parts of the map. It turns out that this makes some parts of the map smaller or larger depending on where you aim the sphere´s center.
We´re currently fiddeling back and forth with the optimal outcome of getting England as large as we can to fit in as many of the VI-provinces we possibly can and the new Irish prov too, reducing the sizes of the mainland European and inland Russian provinces/ landmasses since the Franks and Kievan core-lands will be looked and unplayable.
One positive thing with this technique will make it possible to have more land on the map. Shetlands and Färöya will fit in and matbee even Iceland. Anyone interested in this? I´ll post the result when we´re finished.

This sounds very interesting indeed! It'll definitely be unique, I can't wait to see your results... I know you probably know this, but be careful with the province limit, perhaps a semi-final list of all the factions and provinces would be useful so that we can discuss the pros and cons of them and to make sure we don't go over the limit.

Best of luck with this new technique, I really do hope it works out nicely. ~:cheers:

EDIT: just a quick thought, firstly I assume you mean the map will be bulging out in the middle towards the player, so although it looks like a rectangle in-game, the map will in fact cover a larger area as if the straight lines of the rectangle were curved outwards? (it's probably pretty hard to describe so if you don't want to you don't have to... I'm just being a little nosey ~:) )

wilpuri

09-19-2004, 17:53

Whats gonna be in baltic & russia? Saarenmaa? Liivinmaa? Novgorod? etc.?

As I understand it, we will have the following Baltic factions:

1. Lithuanians
2. Prussians
3. Curonians (Kurland, Kuurinmaa)
4. Saaremaa

And as for Russians:
1. Novgorod
2. Kiev (non-playable)

Pse,
That map sounds very interesting indeed! Post some results when you have them ~:)

VikingHorde

09-19-2004, 20:28

wilpuri

09-19-2004, 20:36

Can I start making some units or is it too early to do so? I don't have anything to do right now, so a little modding here and there will do some good ~;p
Please do, by all means! :yes:

PseRamesses

09-19-2004, 20:42

As I understand it, we will have the following Baltic factions:
1. Lithuanians
2. Prussians
3. Curonians (Kurland, Kuurinmaa)
4. Saaremaa

And as for Russians:
1. Novgorod
2. Kiev (non-playable)

Updated factionlist:

Additional:
1. Odin
2. Rebels

Norse Vikings:
3. Vestfold
4. Vingulmark
5. Firda
6. Rogaland

Swede Vikings:
7. Svear
8. Östgötar
9. Västgötar

Dane Vikings:
10. Danish

Finnish tribes:
11. Suoma
12. Karelians

Baltic tribes:
13. People of Saaremaa
14. Curonians
15. Prussians
16. Lithuanians

Russians:
17. Novgorod
18. Kiev(NON-PLAYABLE)

Northern Germany:
19. Obodrites
20. Veletis

Central European NON-PLAYABLES:
21. West Franks (French)
22. East Franks (Germans)
23. Polish

England, Wales and Scotland:
24. Mercia
25. Northumbria
26. Wessex
27. East Anglia
28. Cymru (Wales)
29. Scots
30. Picts

Ireland:
31. Eoghanacht
32. Ui neill

@Trashaholic,
Yeah, you got the idea right - it´s bulging. But you hardly notice it. As for provinces we did a loose summary, earlier in the thread, and we´ll do the maximum amount including Odins Valhalla.

@VH,
Drop Norse a mail. I haven´t heard from him the last week and I hope he solved his crashed PC. I know he checks in here from his university PC but he can´t post from there.

Meneldil

09-19-2004, 21:28

I dunno if that will help you in any way, but here are some unit and title ideas I found in my Warhammer Ancient Battle - Shieldwall book.
Some of them are kinda similar, but you can use the name and change the weapons, caracteristics, etc.
If you need a more detailled description, just ask me and I'll gladly help you ~:)

Vikings :
Titles :
Konnungr - Kings, for the norwegians and the danes
Jarl - Lesser rank than a king, it could be useful for other viking factions.
Units :
Hersir : Nobleman. Could be used as a bodyguard units, though we already have the viking huscarles.
Ulfedhnar :There were probably a kind of bersekers. From what I can read, they used to wear bear skins and things like that as clothes.
Hirdmen : Already in MTW VI
Thrall : Already in MTW VI
Bondi : Kind of militia. They could have bows with a higher range, or bowmen effective in hand to hand fight (Vikings used bows more often than saxons and caledonians)
Godi : (may be used as a title) Pagan priest

English (Anglo-saxons) :
Titles :
Cyning : Kings
Eorl/Earl : Already in MTW VI I think.
Units :
Ealdormen : Could be used as king's bodyguards
Huscarls : Already in MTW VI
Teghn : Lesser nobility. Might be a kind of heavy cavalry
Ceorls : Semi professionals warriors, could be used as a light/medium infantry.
Geburs : Peasants hired in time of war, could use slings, bows or javelins.
Abbod : (may be used as a title). Same thing as a bishop.

Caledonians (Pict, Scot) :
Title :
Righ : King
Units :
Moarmor : May be used as king's bodyguard. Medium/heavy cavalry
Toisech : Medium infantry
Mounted Toisech : Medium cavalry
Soer-Chele (Scots) : Light spearmen
Doer-Chele (Scots) : Peasants used as skirmisher with slings or javelins.
Eachraidh (picts only) : Light cavalry

I would suggest replacing Pict Bersekers by naked fanatics, with very high attack, but very low defense.

Welsh :
Title :
Teyrn : High King
Uchelwyr : Minor King
Teulu : Medium armoured infantry
Mounted Teulu : Medium/heavy cavalry. May be used as bodyguards.
Priodaur : Light infantry, armed with javelins
Bonnedig/Taeog : Peasants and slaves, army with throwing weapons or spears.
Offeiriad (can be used as a title) : Priest

Hibernia (Irish) :
Title :
Rui Ruirech : King
Rui Tuathe : Tribal King
Curadh :Heavy infantry, armed with axes.
Fianna : Light/Medium cavalry, may be used as king's bodyguards.
Bonnacht : Already in MTW VI
Kerns : Already in MTW VI
Saccard (may be used as title) : priest

Normans, Britons and western franks :
Titles :
Rex : King
Dux : Duke
Units :
Comes : May be used as king's bodyguard. Very heavy cavalry
Mounted milites : Very heavy cavalry. Franks knights may have used bows.
Milites : Heavy infantry.
Pueri : Medium cavalry. Armed with javelins
Liberi : Medium infantry. May use bows with high range.
Coloni : Peasants, armed with javelins or throwing weapons.
Men of the marches : very heavy cavalry/infantry, can only be recruited by both franks and the polish

Mercenary units :
Gall-Gaedhill : Scot/Irish mercenaries. Light infantry, high moral, high attack, low defense
Amsaigh : Irish outlaws. Light infantry, armed with spears or javelins.
Bradwr : Welsh renegades. Light cavalry, if possible with bows.
Gasraidh : Scots exile. Medium armoured infantry.
Viking pirates : Could be recruited in provinces with an inn and a port.
Stipendarii : Spanish/French mercenary. Heavy cavalry.
Devroet : Bretons exile. Heavy cavalry

PseRamesses

09-19-2004, 22:03

VikingHorde

09-19-2004, 22:04

VikingHorde

09-19-2004, 22:06

Hmm, that´s something that the gay community surley will appreciate. Did you know that the Swedish vikings used "sköldmör", a female super-warrior, hmm... I´d like to se them naked too... Victoria Silfstedt style.... drool!
lol :laugh4:

Meneldil

09-19-2004, 22:07

Well, I'll try to send you a more detailled list tomorrow -if I have time to do it-

I'll also check my book about the Franks this week, I might find some useful things in it.

Edit :About the naked fanatics. The few sources about Picts (mainly written by Romans. Picts are quite an unknown people) say that they often went to the battle naked and used to paint some 'tattoo' on their body (probably as a kind of protection given by pagan gods).
Of course, in FoTN era, Picts are christians, so it might not be a good idea (though in that case they shouldn't have access to bersekers)

What about some naked big boobs valkiries ? ~D

wilpuri

09-19-2004, 22:27

This could be very usefull, I'll write Norseman to check his view on the unit list. Any extra desciption of the units is good, mainly armour, weapons and type of shield is good. Im not very good at writing unit desciptions for units ingame, but graphics I can do.

~:cheers:

VH, You can sink your teeth into these fellas if you have the time :charge:

Kuninkaan henkivartio(King's Guard)
The Finnish Guard wear decent armour, and are medium infantry. They are equipped with large swords and large wooden shields. They have good morale, since they are possibly relatives of the Kuningas, and are in his favour. They followed the kings on their war raids.

Finnish infantry
Lighter than Finnish nobles, but also faster. Armour consisted only of thick furs and leather. Finnish Infantry are armed with swords and large shields, and they are the middle-class of Finnish society (the largest class). They would serve their leader when called upon, and join the war raids in hope of booty. Reasonable morale.

Heimosoturit(tribesmen)
Light, fast and equipped with spear and shield, and some of them with swords if they could afford them. Finnish tribesmen are no professionals, and if the battle isn’t going their way, they are easy to rout. Finnish tribesmen were slightly poorer than and part of the lower middle-class of Finnish society. Still, they are free men, and join war raids in the hope of booty, and they defend their lands when attacked. Best used for flanking and attacking skirmishers.

Korpisoturit(Wilderland hunters)
From the dark inland forests, come the hunters of the wild. Since infancy, they have practiced their hunting skills and they excel in stealth and accuracy. They are also responsible for much of the fur trade, and they trade with the middle-men in coastal settlements.
Armed with bows and daggers.

Karjalan kalpamiehet(Karelian kylfings)
These mercenaries are armed with swords and large shields. They inhabit the north eastern shores of the Gulf of Finland. They are a reliable medium infantry, and can be trusted to fare well against most other infantry in the heat of battle. The Karelian Kylfings are often associated with the Varangians, since they fought against them and along side them.

Finnish Berserkers
The Finnish Tribes were known for their skills in magic and lore of things unnatural. It was considered bad luck by Vikings to kill a Finn, especially one with magical powers. Many Vikings also went to study and learn from these berserkers, who could work themselves into an unseen frenzy and attack their enemies in a state of fury.
It is hard to control them, and it is wise to simply unleash them.
Small units
Impetuous
Tire quickly

Karjalan Kirvesmiehet(Karelian raiders)
Around the turn of the Millennia, Viking raids had decreased on the Finnish shore-line, and the Finnish tribes were becoming more organized in their defence. Soon, it was the Baltic people’s who had their go against the former aggressors, and the Scandinavians were on the defensive for a while. The Karelians, along with other Finnic and Baltic peoples, raided the Vikings. The Karelian raiders
were a useful offensive unit, armed with battle-axes and shields. Their main advantages are their speed and their armour-piercing axes.

Keihäsmiehet(Javelin men)
The Finnish and Baltic armies were much lighter than those of the Vikings, and employed more unorthodox tactics. They preferred weapons, which could be used in everyday life as tools, and as weapons on the battle field. The Javelins used by the Finns on the battle-field, however, were unique. The Finnish Javelin, the “Ango”, was much like the Roman Pilum, and could be used in similar fashion.
-armed with javelins and spear (like bonnachts in VI)

Saaremaa Raiders
The People of Saaremaa, alongside the Curonians, were known for their viking-style raids across the Baltic. They were capable warriors and merchants, who raided settlements and captured the inhabitants, which were then sold as slaves. Armed with bows and arrows and Swords and small shields, they were a very useful unit on the battle field.

King's Guard
The Estonian Guard wear decent armour, and are medium infantry. They are equipped with large swords and large wooden shields. They have good morale, since they come from the richest part of Estonian society and are possibly relatives of the king. They followed the kings on their war raids.

Estonian Swordsmen
Lighter than The Kings Guard, but also faster. Armour consisted only of thick furs and leather. Estonian Swordsmen are armed with swords and large shields, and they are the upper middle-class of Estonian society. They would serve their leader when called upon, and join the war raids in hope of booty. Swords were expensive, and so is this unit. Reasonable morale.

Estonian Crossbowmen
The Estonians were among the last to be conquered by the Christian Crusaders, and this was largely thanks to their ability to adapt to the new kind of warfare the foreign invaders represented. The Estonians started using the crossbow as part of their weapons arsenal, and Estonian crossbowmen became feared in and around the Baltic for their accuracy and their skills in melee. Armed with skaramasakses, a short type of sword, Estonian crossbowmen can also be used as regular infantry if needed.

Estonian Infantry
Armour consisted only of thick furs and leather. Estonian Infantry are armed with spears and large shields, and they come from the middle-class of Estonian society. Spears were cheap and effective weapons, and also useful in everyday life. This is a relatively reliable and cheap unit.

Livonian Infantry
Light infantry armed with short spears and large shields. The Livonians were on good terms with the Estonian Tribes, and they often fought the Baltic tribes side by side. Reasonable morale. A good addition to any Baltic Army.

Estonian Tribesmen
Light, fast and equipped with spear and shield, and some of them with swords if they could afford them. Estonian tribesmen are no professionals, and if the battle isn’t going their way, they are easy to rout. Estonian tribesmen were slightly poorer than and part of the lower middle-class of Estonian society. Still, they are free men, and join war raids in the hope of booty, and they defend their lands when attacked. Best used for flanking and attacking skirmishers.

Baltic Horsemen
Baltic horses were rare and expensive, and so was Baltic cavalry. Their small horses and their untrained riders made poor cavalry in relation with their central European contemporaries. They were best used for attacking skirmishers and chasing a routing enemy off the field.

Curonian Raiders
Around the turn of the millennia, The Finnic and Baltic Tribes were able to control the Baltic Sea, and the Curonians in particular had a reputation of being skilled raiders, much like the Vikings. Armed with swords and shields and leather armour, the Curonian Raiders were capable soldiers, and many times did the Vikings meet their match when facing the Curonians warriors and their fleets. These men formed the elite of any offensive Curonian army.

Kings Guard
The Curonian Guard wear decent armour, and are medium infantry. They are equipped with large Axes and large wooden shields. They have good morale, since they come from the richest part of Estonian society and are possibly relatives of the king. They followed the kings on their war raids.

Curonian Infantry
Lighter than The Kings Guard, but also faster. Armour consisted only of thick furs and leather. Curonian Infantry are armed with spears and large shields, and they are the middle-class of Curonian society (the largest class). They would serve their leader when called upon, and join the war raids in hope of booty. Reasonable morale.

Baltic Tribesmen
Armed with mainly war cudgels or axes and shields, Baltic Tribesmen form a cheap and fairly useful unit. As a peasant unit, they are not very reliable in the heat of battle, but a good, cheap garrison. Their strength is in numbers and in speed.

Baltic Infantry
A relatively reliable infantry unit. Armed with axes and shields, they proved effective against armed opponents, thanks to their speed and their axes. They are the back bone of many Baltic armies.

Baltic Javelin men
The Finnish and Baltic armies were much lighter than those of the Vikings, and employed more unorthodox tactics. They preferred weapons, which could be used in everyday life as tools, and as weapons on the battle field. The Javelin men were usually hunters, who used their skills on the battle field to harass the enemy, and then use their speed to get away. Although they are armed with short swords, they should be kept away from melee.

Semigallian Crossbow men
A cross bow is a fairly effective weapon, especially against light armour. It’s reload time is longer than that of a traditional bow, but Semigallian crossbow men carried short swords with them, and were fairly effective in melee.

Semigallian spearmen
The Semigallians were a strong tribe in the Baltic during Viking times, and controlled a large area in the inlands. This made them the target for numerous attacks by neighbouring tribes, and also strengthened their military organisation. Their spearmen were of good quality, and fairly cheap. Armed with the traditional Semigallian spear and a large shield, they were a good addition to any Baltic army.

Karjalan ratsumiehetKarelian Horsemen
Karelians bread and exported horses far and wide, along the vast network of rivers in the east. Their horses were small and tough, and could handle themselves well in the demanding terrain. The Karelian horsemen were wealthy members of society, and could afford good weapons. Armed with swords and wooden shields, they are ideal for flanking manouvres and pursuing a fleeing enemy.
-units of 40-50
-good morale
-impeteous

I've also been formulationg a few other unit ideas in my head:

Warband(I won't change this since it will be availale to all baltic+finnic factions)
In viking-age Baltic society, tribal warfare and raiding was not uncommon. Raids would be organized under strong leaders, and adventurous men would join these daring expeditions. Armed with Javelins and axes, they form a flexible and formidable unit. Their morale and loyalty is often questionable though, and if the battle turns sour, they might as well turn tail and run.
-large units, may be 100
-Poor morale
-impeteous
-missiles good vs armour
-bonus vs armour (axes)

Most of this units are light infantry, unless mentioned otherwise.
:2thumbsup:

EDIT: Changed the Finnish/Estonian/Curonian Guard into King's Guard, since they're essentially the same. Also, I changed Finnish Tribesmen into Heimosoturit, the Finnish name.

VikingHorde

09-19-2004, 22:42

[QUOTE=wilpuri]VH, You can sink your teeth into these fellas if you have the time :charge:
QUOTE]

Thats a lot of units ~:eek: If someone starts making units too, please let me know so that it can be cordinated. ~:wave:

PseRamesses

09-20-2004, 04:58

Thats a lot of units. If someone starts making units too, please let me know so that it can be cordinated.
He he, Wilpuri never ceases to amaze me!

What about some naked big boobs valkiries?
Hmm, got any stats for that one?
Sex appeal: 9
endurance 9
bust 38FF
waist 24
hips 38
heavy armour
no clothes?

CA probably never thought TW could get adult rated! :laugh4:

Meneldil

09-20-2004, 06:16

thrashaholic

09-20-2004, 08:27

@VH, I've a few Welsh units for you to do if you want (ths is a revised version of my original list):

Teulu-

Literally meaning “family”, the Teulu were the professional noble bodyguards of individual princes and chieftains. Although cavalry are generally not best suited to the rough hilly and mountainous terrain of Britain, the Teulu often rode into battle. Being of the nobility, the Teulu could afford the best of military equipment and were very well armed by Celtic standards: they wore chain mail and helmets, and carried a shield and a lance, making them a pivotal force on the battlefield.

Spear-men

Same as VI (round shield)

Celtic Warriors

Same as VI

Archers

Same as VI

Javelin-men

Same as VI “dart-men”

Merionydd long spear-men

The spear was the weapon of choice in Wales, with those from the North being particularly skilled in its use. The men of the Merionydd area of Gwynedd were renowned throughout for their superb ability with the spear. The general consensus amongst the Welsh was: “the longer the spear the better”, and as such the men of Merionydd carried spears as long as pikes. As well as their pikes, they had small round shields and fought in Phalanx-like formations.

Ryfelwyr

Constant in fighting between the petty kingdoms of post-Roman Britain and skirmishes with the English led to the Britons becoming accustomed to war, they became a “jack of all trades”, perfectly suited to irregular warfare. Carrying a powerful bow, that could pin a horseman’s leg to his horse, a large sword and a small round shield, the prominent tactics of the Britons were to ambush the enemy, pepper them with arrows and then charge in for the kill.

Bonheddwyr

The Bonheddwyr were free nobles, the elite foot soldiers of a Chieftain’s armies. Before a battle these champions would often walk forward in front of their army insulting, taunting and challenging their opposition (much to the amusement of their fellows), and be accompanied by shouting and jeering from the lower ranking men, and the din of their war trumpets. The Bonheddwr were lightly armoured, and the individual carried a spear, a small round shield and several javelins into battle.

Arwrweision

Literally mean ‘brave men’, the Arwrweision are the veterans of numerous battles, they are the non-noble elite of a British Chieftain’s army. It was considered an honour amongst Britons to be drafted into military service, so all able-bodied men had a weapon and were up for a fight. Carrying similar equipment to their fellow peasants, swords, bows and shields, the defining characteristic of the Arwrweision is, although they share their comrade’s eagerness for battle, they don’t share their eagerness to run away.

I'll see if I can think of some more in the meantime.

Meneldil

09-20-2004, 15:40

I've ordered the Medieval Russian Armies 850 - 1252 osprey book, and will probably get it next monday. It should help for the russian factions

The Blind King of Bohemia

09-20-2004, 15:42

Its a very good book, great pics by mcbride again :charge:

Meneldil

09-20-2004, 15:53

/me wonders if BKB wakes up as soon as someone post a message with the word 'Osprey' ~;)

The Blind King of Bohemia

09-20-2004, 16:00

That must be it ~D

VikingHorde

09-20-2004, 16:06

VH, how long does it take to create a new unit ?
I've never tried to do so (my current modding skills are limited to the startpos.txt files), but if you really need help, I could try to help (though I don't have that much time).
I'll try to read the tutorial later today.

How long it takes depends on how much work there is put into the unit. Some shields and weapons are easy to add, specially if I can find some on the internet. The time it takes is something between 20 min - 8 hours, but most take about 40-60 min to make. Making a new unit (using the old body's) isn't as hard as you may think, because Duke John has made some good guides. I will of couse gladly help you out if needed.

@thrashaholic
Thanks for the unit list, I'll get started soon.

@Meneldil
naked big boobs valkiries! they will be hard to make :laugh4:

Meneldil

09-20-2004, 17:32

Well, I guess some help with the units could be nice, since -if you are alone to do it right now- you'll have a shitload of them to make.
I'll read the tutorials in a few hours if I'm not too much tired.

VikingHorde

09-20-2004, 18:07

wilpuri

09-20-2004, 18:10

I thought Norseman was also in the unit making business? Anyway, I don't have time for anything too time-taking for about two weeks, but after that may be I'll dip into those tutorials as well :book:

Meneldil

09-20-2004, 18:32

BKB, since you have the early russian armies osprey book, could you tell me if it has some parts about the steppe peoples, or if it is only about russians (which should be normal, since the book is about russian armies, but heh, it's worth asking)

The Blind King of Bohemia

09-20-2004, 18:47

It is mainly about the various russian peoples, and the allied tribes like the klobuki and others.

Best book to get on the steppe people so far by osprey is atilla and the nomad hordes and a new book coming out called mounted archer of the steppe

Sebastian Seth

09-20-2004, 19:30

@VikingHorde
Sorry can't help, i'm color blind as human can be. You should probably
look for similareties trough cultture. As example the baltic and finnish
units with same kind of equiment doesn't neet to look that different.
I'm not so familiar with graphic utilities, but can you use some 3D
human modeling program to draw the units and then rotate them
and take snapshots for 2D.? Just asking out of pure curiosity.

@Wilpuri
Did you look at the unit list I posted earlier?

Sebastian Seth

09-20-2004, 20:10

@Wilpuri
In the list I posted there was suggestions about naming finnish units
in finnish. I think we should do that since the units from other factions
have units named in their language. It also makes the game more balanced
since player haves to really look (or know) what does the units
do in battle. For example when you see irish unit name it doesn't
tell you that they are "javellin scrimishers" and when you see
"Wales Bandits" you don't know they are bowmen and good fighters.
but if you see text like "baltic javelinmen" and you have killed some
"finnish javelinmen" it shouldn't be to hard to guess what they do.

The Point: The Finnish units should have finnish names as do the
finnish factions have finnish names,.,.,. Suoma, Karjala.

btw. Is it "Saarema" or "Saarenmaa"?

Meneldil

09-20-2004, 20:23

I agree with that, but IMO, names shouldn't be too much complicated. I know it may sounds silly but, for us latins, reading nordish names is sometimes quite hard ;-P

wilpuri

09-20-2004, 20:51

VikingHorde

09-20-2004, 21:12

[QUOTE=Sebastian Seth]@VikingHorde
Sorry can't help, i'm color blind as human can be. You should probably
look for similareties trough cultture. As example the baltic and finnish
units with same kind of equiment doesn't neet to look that different.
I'm not so familiar with graphic utilities, but can you use some 3D
human modeling program to draw the units and then rotate them
and take snapshots for 2D.? Just asking out of pure curiosity.
QUOTE]
I have not made any new body's (humans) yet, only used old body's with new equiment. It would take a huge amount of time to make unit body's and I don't have any experiens yet. Equiment is easy to add once you get the hang of it.

PseRamesses

09-20-2004, 22:03

I agree with that, but IMO, names shouldn't be too much complicated. I know it may sounds silly but, for us latins, reading nordish names is sometimes quite hard ;-P
Meneldil actually has a point. The way I see it we can choose from three options:
1. Domestic names only.
2. International names only.
3. A combination of both where the very unique units should be in their local name like ex. "Kuninkaan henkivartio"/ Royal guard in Suoma and the "standard units" in a more streamlined international way like Estonian javelinmen, Karjalan horsemen or Suoma? swordsmen etc.

The domestic way is great for players with the same ethnic background as the faction he/ she is playing but a very strange feeling for a forigner and it gets rather unpersonal. Ex. play HTW and figure out all thoose greek names for units, huh. Play NTW and you´ll fin maybee 50% of the units called xxxx hussars, xxxx line infantry, xxxx light infantry while militia is militia everywhere etc.
The international way looses the ethnic diversity and the unique feel the player gets when he/ she plays a certain faction. I mean the main reason for me as a Swede to actually no play the Swedes in every game is to try to be like a Spanish, Frech or Turkish player and get the unique atmosphere from each faction. That´s the main reasons we have different arrchitechture, music, units in the game, right?!
The combination path is the most sound way to satisfy both the domestic and foreign player IMHO.

Sebastian Seth

09-20-2004, 23:19

I agree with that, but IMO, names shouldn't be too much complicated. I know it may sounds silly but, for us latins, reading nordish names is sometimes quite hard ;-P

Yeah your probably right, but in this case there only gona be some
easy short ones.

The finish alphabets are quite similar to latin:
ABCDEFGHIJKLMNOPQRSTUWVXYZÖÄÅ

The Finn Factions, Suoma, Karjala (not hard, right)

Some unit names:
Heimosoturit = Tribal Warriors
Kirvesmiehet = Axeman Warriors, Woodmen
Jousimiehet = Bowmen
Jalkaväki = Infantry

These are readable to latin-based language, right?

Sebastian Seth

09-20-2004, 23:21

Ok, I'll take a look at your ideas and change the names accordingly. And it is Saaremaa, at least in Estonian.

~:) I learned something today.

Sebastian Seth

09-21-2004, 00:32

Meneldil actually has a point. The way I see it we can choose from three options:
1. Domestic names only.
2. International names only.
3. A combination of both.

I tend to play as exotic factions too. It's the athmosphere witch makes
the game. For example whats the real difference between STW, MTW,
HTW and NTW? I played hellenistic mod too, but in that there was not
enough atmosphere and diversity. The kings, names and units in
greece looket all same. I loved STW because it was so different from
european culture and MTW had some good sides too. But the best
was the VI with the vikings and Irish.

1. The one thing i don't like about TW-series is the easynes of recoinnaissance. I guess it's right in modern are but it takes
more than one tower to kill all assaisins and know all
the moves that 100 man too in every neighbour province. Would the
map be different if all the european kings knew exacly how strong
their opponents units are? Trough history theres kings of underestimated
the power of enemy. The hardness in game is done by weakning or
strongening the enemy. This is a shortcut and not historicaly correct.
If we can repair this flaw by some way we should do it. The payers
probably have played STW, MTV and IV. So way I see it they want
to see something new. Id would be disapointing if there where units
like peasants, town militia and archers on every faction. And theres
always the description in english (my favorite part).
So I would support option 1.

2. The option 2. is pretty much used in MTW. Like woodsmen are the same
in scottland and russia. This makes the game easier and lowers the
threshold value to play the mod, but makes the mod more grey.
I'm against this.

3. This idea is allready in progress as the buildings are in english and
some of the religional buildings "Hiidenkivi" are in finnish.
I'm for this in the buildings against it on units.

When designing the units there isn't that many per faction. I would
hope they would be something special.

If we go for option 1. do we have the knowledge to make all the factions
same? (novgorod, germanic). We dont have russians or germans
in research do we?

Sebastian Seth

09-21-2004, 00:42

I have not made any new body's (humans) yet, only used old body's with new equiment. It would take a huge amount of time to make unit body's and I don't have any experiens yet. Equiment is easy to add once you get the hang of it.

Can you also change armors or are thy drawn to bodies?

Can some colours on the bodies be change by faction?

Where are the bodies?

I noticed that that if you look close in battle map the shields are
sepperate from the hands of the soldiers and if you rotate it
they will change the hands they are keeping weapons. This
looked kind of funny and is probably coded in game.

Meneldil

09-21-2004, 06:12

I'll take care of the russian units soon, and will send a complete list of units for frankish and western europe mercenaries later today.

Meneldil

09-21-2004, 22:04

Sorry, but this list won't be ready today. I have to add a few other units (Normans infantry, Cottereaux and possibly an unit of italians crossbowmen, depending of the game start and end year).
Btw, will there be any periods (like early and late). I think some units should only be allowed in later period (ex : italians crossbowmen mercenaries)
I think I could get some infopics for most of these units, and I'll probably put everything in a zip so Norseman, PseRamsess and VH (and others) can give their opinion.
I did not have any time to read the tuto about making units yet, and will probably not have time to do it tomorrow, but I'll see what I can do asap.

wilpuri

09-21-2004, 22:19

SS (and others, why not):
Check out this new idea for a "pagan shrine", maybe the next step from the Hiidenkivi/Seitakivi:
The Stone Labyrinth:
Stone Labyrinths are the dwelling places of the spirits and gateways to the spiritual world. The are constructed outside settlements, and boost the zeal of pagans in the province. They can be found all around the Baltic.

Link:http://heninen.net/labyrinth/english.htm

Sebastian Seth

09-22-2004, 00:22

Sounds great:
1lvl ... Hiidenkivi (enables "stone labyrith") (morale +1)
2lvl ... Hillfort
3lvl ... Stone Labyrinth (enables "shamans" with "hillfort) (morale +2)
4lvl ... "Stonehenge" (morale +3)

How does this sound? Wilpuri can replace stonehenge with something
more finno-baltic if possible.

I'm not really sure about the tech levels, is there any tech trees drawn or
planned?

PseRamesses

09-22-2004, 04:42

@Meneldil,
The FotN mod timeframe is roughly set to 750-1050 ad just one era.

@Wilpuri,
I do belive that the stone labyrinths pre-dates the vikings belonging to an older culture, at least here in Sweden, and therefore would be obsolete at this time. Can you find any facts that support them still being of use in the Baltics during the timeframe of the game?

wilpuri

09-22-2004, 13:07

@Wilpuri,
I do belive that the stone labyrinths pre-dates the vikings belonging to an older culture, at least here in Sweden, and therefore would be obsolete at this time. Can you find any facts that support them still being of use in the Baltics during the timeframe of the game?[/QUOTE]

I think you are right, after some further research, most of these structures date to B.C times. Sorry about that, a rushed idea :oops:

PseRamesses

09-24-2004, 04:55

thrashaholic

09-24-2004, 07:59

No matter what we decide when it comes to the usage of names,
domestically or English ones, for units and buildings etc there´s
one thing I do find necessary for us to comply for the players of
this mod: guides.

1. An overall introduction document for the mod.
2. A tech-tree document.
3. A units description document.

I prefer the idea of native names for the units, but I have had a cute but functional idea if we are going to have a units descripition document, we could provide the unit's name in its native tounge (as in game), then the pronouciation of that name (some of those Finnish names look incomprehensible ~;) ) and then a translation of that unit name into English, followed by the desription and stats and all...

wilpuri

09-24-2004, 09:34

Some of the Finnish names are incomprehensible? Well I guess each to his own, but at least they have vowels! :dizzy2:
These look completely impossible to me:
Arwrweision, Ryfelwyr, Bonheddwyr

I don't know if pronounciation guides are really necessary, but I guess they can be made. Finnish prounciation of letters is just a lot "rougher" or "harder" than English speakers are accustomed to, so it will only be half accurate :)

Let's take Korpisoturi as an example:
Korpisoturi
(O as in Top)
(I as in Lip)
the R's are "rolling", like in Spanish, Italian, Russian etc and all the vowels are "short".

I have yet to meet an English speaker who could pronounce Finnish well, and many of my teachers are Englishmen and Ameicans who have lived here for as long as 10 years, and they still sound like retards when they try to speak Finnish ~D

SS, do you want to assist me with making the tech-trees for the Baltic and the Finnic factions? I suppose they could be quite close to each other, so if we could come up with a proto-Baltic/Finnic tech-tree, and then shape for the individual factions.

JR-

09-24-2004, 09:34

hey fellas,
i realise this must have been asked a thousand times, but...............

can we expect this before xmas, or even sooner?

i was always a little underwhelmed by VI and love the idea of your greatly expanded version. keep up the good work. ~:)

Sebastian Seth

09-24-2004, 12:12

These look completely impossible to me:
Arwrweision, Ryfelwyr, Bonheddwyr

The good way to say these is not to emphazise anything else than the
syllable it starts and then the s letter and then just mutter the rest in.
Pretty much like you where drunk. The idea is really that when you
speak latin languages speak like you were drunk and when you speak
finnish or german emphazise every syllable like you where dictating
something to stubborn 6 years old.

I don't know if pronounciation guides are really necessary, but I guess they can be made. Finnish prounciation of letters is just a lot "rougher" or "harder" than English speakers are accustomed to, so it will only be half accurate :)

This could be hard. But if we limit our self to the words included in game
it could be possible to get near right result.

SS, do you want to assist me with making the tech-trees for the Baltic and the Finnic factions? I suppose they could be quite close to each other, so if we could come up with a proto-Baltic/Finnic tech-tree, and then shape for the individual factions.

Yes I gladly can. Here's some toughts for starters:

1. Limit the access to cavarly units by making resource named horses.
Then we could but horses to karelia and baltic provinces that really
had horses. This way the Suoma faction would have to take province
from Karjala faction to get cavarly units. The other tech trees could
use this too.

2. We could make "crusade kind event" to be possible trough some
building and warbands would be appearing only in these. Much like
the fanatics in MTW. This is only if theres possibility that there could
be two kinds of crusades (there wasn't in MTW). Since the odin
will dictate the one kind. (crusade named "ryöstöretki")

3. Leave peasants off and replace them whit woodsmen, hunters and
tribesman. Since the people where more hunter-gatherers than farmers and
the tribesman really are the peasants in that kind of community.

4. Classify the buildings at first to:
- Religional buildings (hiidenkivi, etc) - shamans (like priests)
- Defensive buildings (hillforts, etc)
- Economical buildings (fishtraps, harbors, shipmaker) - boats
- Military buildings (warrior hold, spearmaker, bowmaker) - basic unists
- Military addons (smithy, tanner, ) - military units
- Govermentical buildings (Chiefs house, shamans house) - special units
Well thats just start idea, if we just look what we got and then start
drawing the big picture.

5. Some building ideas:
Alerting Spots - Alerting Towers
- These are like borderwatch towers and can be build instantly.

Village - Fortified Village - Hill Fort. - Stoned Hill Fort
- We could also ad some addional defence systems like
traps, pits, spikes, rock throwers, caves, etc.

Smith - Smith's House - Smithery
- Weapons +1, +2, +3 - Enables sword units with hill fort

Tanner - Tanners House - Tannery
- Armour +1, +2, +3

Shamans House - Hiidenkivi - (...)
- morale +1, +2, +3 - Enables priests, enables fighting shamans with
chiefs house.

Chiefs House - (...) - (...)

and the spearmakers, etc. But as you can see only raw ideas. For starters
we need to deside how many tech levels theres gona be 3,4,5? and
if theres gona be any assasins, spy's, emissaries or priest. But let me
see your ideas and we can start.

Wario

09-24-2004, 12:42

Hello! Werry werry good mod!Im form the Letland and have some good historical knowledges (thats my hobby from chidhood).Any questions?
Also now i read all this big forum tread and try to find some bugs.One of them are Semigalians and Curonians crosbowmens.Yeah they use crosbows (when fight the livonian and sword brother cruisaders) ,but bow is more familiar for them.So if you need more differences in game chose one faction who use crosbows or giwe them bows but with slower reaload time but with biger piercing power but not crosbows.Also you must know that the Curonians and Semigals are last free Pagans in the europe so they zeal must be more higher than in other provinces.And vikings never conqured Semigals and Curonians (yeah they raid each other time for time) and thats cant be without some serious units like "Thundersons"(or sons of thunder). They are elite units who are trained from childhood in strong religious traditions and always have mele and ranged weapons with them.They role in kingdom are religious police, warchief and cleric body guards and all peopole morale keepers.Also there is some interesting unit like "free axemans".If you dont want to pay taxses to king you can take from him simbolic axe and go in any free devil land and live there in freedom (swamps etc.) ,but you must serve to king if there is a war.I think they dont have any armor at all and are fast and good morale,weapon of course are axe.Sorry for some english bugs in text but hope you uderstud.

Sebastian Seth

09-24-2004, 13:08

I prefer the idea of native names for the units, but I have had a cute but functional idea if we are going to have a units descripition document, we could provide the unit's name in its native tounge (as in game), then the pronouciation of that name (some of those Finnish names look incomprehensible ~;) ) and then a translation of that unit name into English, followed by the desription and stats and all...

Short quide to pronoicing finnish names:
(example word: HENKIVARTIAT : Bodyguards or Lifeguards or Spiritguards)

0. Learn to pronounce letters:
http://www.cs.tut.fi/~jkorpela/finnish.pronunciation.html
http://virtual.finland.fi/speak/speak.html
(There is only one sound for every letter, one letter for every sound.)

1. Split the word to pieces:
HEN - KI - VAR - TI - AT
2. Emphazise every syllable like its a seperare word:
HE -like in HElp
N -like in Norway
KI - like in KIll
VAR - like in VARiation
TI - like in TIbet
AT - like in AT
3. Now say it couble times and then say two together:
(remember to emphazise every syllable the same amount).
HENKI - VAR - TIAT
4. Repeate couble times then say it all together:
(remember to emphazise every syllable the same amount).
HENKIVARTIAT
5. You can now pronounce finnish. It's not really harder than that, finnish
is generaly talked as it's written, so you can always take them in the
parts and try it. Still it's a long way from speaking finnish because
of the nouns. German has four cases, Latin five, and Russian six, Finnish has
no fewer than fifteen!

Now how do I pronoince Arwrweision, Ryfelwyr and Bonheddwyr?

Sebastian Seth

09-24-2004, 14:00

Im form the Letland and have some good historical knowledges (thats my hobby from chidhood).Any questions?

Great, now we have guy who actualy speaks at least one of the
baltic languages. What languages you can speak? We are at the
moment limited at english, finnish and swedish knowledge of
that area?

Also now i read all this big forum tread and try to find some bugs.One of them are Semigalians and Curonians crosbowmens. Yeah they use crosbows (when fight the livonian and sword brother cruisaders).

Would this be in the era of vikings 800 -1050 or not?

So if you need more differences in game chose one faction who use crosbows or giwe them bows but with slower reaload time but with biger piercing power but not crosbows.

The Curosians will be in baltic tech tree, and they will have some same
units as the finns and other baltics including some kind of archer unit.
The archer unit is supposed to be more like hunters than soldiers.
I think the Curonian Crossbowers are more level 2 unit. Does this
seem more reasonable?

Also you must know that the Curonians and Semigals are last free Pagans in the europe so they zeal must be more higher than in other provinces.And vikings never conqured Semigals and Curonians.

There's going to be a baltic pagan religion. In the Finno-Ugric area.
and 6 factions in that religion. And it's under debate if theres gona
be pagan shamans as priests of that religion. Does this sound correct?

some serious units like "Thundersons"(or sons of thunder). They are elite units who are trained from childhood in strong religious traditions and always have mele and ranged weapons with them.They role in kingdom are religious police, warchief and cleric body guards and all peopole morale keepers.

Is there native name for these thunder sons? They sound like berserk
unit like the shamans a succested before. But these could be special
units of curosians too. Where these units just curosian or more round
the baltic type?

Also there is some interesting unit like "free axemans".If you dont want to pay taxses to king you can take from him simbolic axe and go in any free devil land and live there in freedom (swamps etc.) ,but you must serve to king if there is a war.I think they dont have any armor at all and are fast and good morale,weapon of course are axe.

Before I succested unit like Finnish Woodsmen, these would be peasantry
units armed with wooden shields and wood cutting axes. Would the
similar go for the curosians too?

If you could find names and types of religional buildings or units. This
could be helpfull. Wilpuri might want something too (he's leading the
finnish and baltic research).

PseRamesses

09-24-2004, 14:59

PseRamesses

09-24-2004, 15:06

hey fellas,
i realise this must have been asked a thousand times, but...............
can we expect this before xmas, or even sooner?
In due time, in due time. You can always join in on the fun and lend us a helping hand if you want to speed up the process m8! Actually, no release date has been set. When we feel we´re ready to make that kind of promise you can rest a shure that we´ll post it in the forums.

i was always a little underwhelmed by VI and love the idea of your greatly expanded version. keep up the good work. ~:)
Then you´re going to be even more overwhelmed by this mod since our sole aim is to make the darn best viking mod, historically accurate, that has ever been done. This is the main reason why a release date hasn´t been set yet.
The positive thing is that more and more players are realizing that this mod is a serious attempt to realize that goal and therefore they join in with facts, suggestions and comments which I and the crew always appreciate.

Sebastian Seth

09-24-2004, 15:12

Is it possible to make bows better with some buildings? Like in the way
the weapons, armour and morale are +1,+2,+3. Is it possible to have
Bows +1, and it would only apply to archers and crosbowmen?

PseRamesses

09-24-2004, 15:13

Hello! Werry werry good mod!Im form the Letland and have some good historical knowledges (thats my hobby from chidhood).Any questions?.
Thanks! Always glad to see yet another berserker smash his way though our mead hall doors. Welcome Wario! ~:cheers:

Also now i read all this big forum tread and try to find some bugs.One of them are Semigalians and Curonians crosbowmens.Yeah they use crosbows (when fight the livonian and sword brother cruisaders) ,but bow is more familiar for them.So if you need more differences in game chose one faction who use crosbows or giwe them bows but with slower reaload time but with biger piercing power but not crosbows?.
Duely noted. You do realize that this mod spans from roughly 750-1050 ad?

Also you must know that the Curonians and Semigals are last free Pagans in the europe so they zeal must be more higher than in other provinces.And vikings never conqured Semigals and Curonians (yeah they raid each other time for time) and thats cant be without some serious units like "Thundersons"(or sons of thunder). They are elite units who are trained from childhood in strong religious traditions and always have mele and ranged weapons with them.They role in kingdom are religious police, warchief and cleric body guards and all peopole morale keepers.Also there is some interesting unit like "free axemans".If you dont want to pay taxses to king you can take from him simbolic axe and go in any free devil land and live there in freedom (swamps etc.) ,but you must serve to king if there is a war.I think they dont have any armor at all and are fast and good morale,weapon of course are axe.Sorry for some english bugs in text but hope you uderstud.
Cool, thundersons! Have any more suggestions?

Sebastian Seth

09-24-2004, 15:18

@Wilpuri
Have you given any tought about Kaski farming? Thats basicly the
only kind of farming there was in finland and it was very efficient.
I read something like when normal farming earns 5 aer from 1,
the Kaski earns 25 aer from 1. Should we replace finnish farming
as Kaskeaminen or place Kaski farming and late form of farming?

Wario

09-24-2004, 17:55

about crosbows,

Duely noted. You do realize that this mod spans from roughly 750-1050 ad?

until the 1100 ad (i mean until,so i dont think they have loots of them in 750-1050 ad) there are only rare facts of the crosbows (warchiefs and other royals).But then in 1170 (plus-minus) some german qrosbow master from the livonian cruisaiders join the semigalians and train the most of infrantary how to use qrosbows.Poor germans curse then the qrosbowmaster becouse he "join the satan".Btw in Medieval TW Livonia and Lithuania is Ortodox culure ,thats a big bug for last pagans in europe.sorry for oftopic.
So there can be units type like "royal qrosbowmens" 12 0r 20 units maybe or
nosmal unit size if only for semigalians (they strong trade have with bizantyum and germans ) royal mountained qrosbowmens ,but no historical facts about that.
More units can be Semigalian cavalery and Curonian swordsmens.Becouse in lots of militar like cronicles about that region always Are somenting like:"they have best horses "and "Brave man with best swords" .Also there was a honor for diplomats from europe send to Viking Konungs as a gifts a Curonian swords.
And interesting unit can be "Houndface" (somenting like fanatics) Crazy degradated mans who eat human flesh after battle.So the point was if you show to enemy that "houndface" they dont wanna fight in this battle ,becouse if they die like heroes and houndface eat theyr heart they newer go to place where are they elders. But only lowest infrantay types fears them.Actualy i think they are next generations of "Free axemans" who live wery isolated. (there was a cronicle about some fight " Houndfaces screaming from the forest close to enemy in the night ,and dont give chance to enemy for rest before nextday fight , when they try to kill them they are ambushed from the back becouse they focuse only on the terrible screams.And so Hounfaces have a good meal then". I think not more than 12 units ,wery weak but terrorize the enemy .(what a exselent target for archers :)
I try to search for more interesting info.

thrashaholic

09-24-2004, 17:58

@ Wilpuri,

Yes I agree, Welsh can look pretty daunting to the uninitiated (I'm not that initiated myself and still get pretty scared when confronted with Welsh words and names, like Rhosllanerchrugog or Ysbyty Ystwyth :dizzy2: ), but Welsh is a completely phonetic language, so it's pretty easy to work out (much harder to actually say though ~D ).

Anyway, a quick guide to Welsh pronunciation for all that are interested:

The Welsh alphabet has 29 letters. A few letters used in English (namely k, q, v, x, and z) and are replaced by some uniquely Welsh letters ( namely 'ch', 'dd', 'ff', 'ng', 'ph', 'rh', and 'th'). The vowels are also different in Welsh, in addittion to the standard 'aeiou' 'w' and 'y' are also considered vowels.

a: Sometimes long as in 'start'
Sometimes short as in 'man'
b: As in 'butter'
c: As in 'cat
ch: As in 'Loch Ness' or 'Johann Sebastian Bach'
d: As in dad
dd: Pronounced as the English "th", as in 'this'
e: Sometimes long, as in the "a" in 'sale'
Sometimes short, as in the "e" in 'hell'
f: Pronounced as the English "v", as in 'love'
ff: Pronouced like "ph" in English, as in 'Elephant'
g: As in 'give'
h: As in 'hand'
i: Sometimes long, as in the double "e" in 'greed'
Sometimes short as in 'pin'
j: as the English "j" (foreigners always have trouble with this ~D )
l: as in 'laugh'
ll: This is a unique letter to Welsh and must be learned. Put the tip of your tongue against the roof of your mouth and explode the breath out with a partial hiss (all while the tongue is touching the top of your mouth)
m: As in 'mud'
n: As in 'night'
ng: As in 'hang'
o: Sometimes long as in 'shore'
Sometimes short as in 'not'
p: As in 'pencil'
ph: As the English "ph"
r: as in 'pram'
rh: Pronouce as r + h. The "r" as above followed by a strong breath
s: as in 'sun'
t: as in 'ton'
th: as English "th"
u: Pronounced as the double "e" in 'greed'
w: Sometimes long, as the double "o" in 'fool'
Sometimes short, as the double "o" in 'book'
y: Sometimes pronouced as the double "e" in 'greed'
Sometimes pronouced as the "i" in 'pin'
Sometimes obscure like the "u" in 'funny'

Then there are the Dipthongs (Two vowels in combination)

'ae', 'ai', 'au' : all pronounced as in 'eye'
'ei', 'eu', 'ey' : all pronounced like 'hay', but without the "h"
'aw' : simply, "aa + ww"
'ew' : like the "e" in 'bet' immediately followed by the double "o" sound in 'fool'
'iw', 'yw' : Pronouced like 'yew'
'wy' : like the French 'oui'. oo+ee
'oe', 'ou', 'oi' : like 'oil', but without the 'l'

So there we have it, easy really ~;) :

Cymru is pronounced 'kumree'
Ryfelwyr is pronouced 'ri-velweer'
Bonheddwyr is pronounced 'bonhethweer'
Arwrweision is pronounced 'ar-oor-way-seeon'

I hope this helps ~:)

Meneldil

09-24-2004, 20:52

PseRamesses

09-25-2004, 08:47

Well, the Frankish/Normans and western mercenaries list is ready. I can send it to anyone who wants (though there are no pics yet, and I've not been adding some units cause Frankish won't be a playable faction).
Nice going Meneldil. First post it here for the rest of the community to view and comment on. Then, when finished, you can post it to me pse@brevet.se

Wario

09-25-2004, 09:30

What languages you can speak? We are at the
moment limited at english, finnish and swedish knowledge of
that area?

I can take Latvian (Semigalians ,Curonians names etc.) and Lithuanian languages on me.
I dont know if i now more than you about english, finnish and swedish history at the moment but icheck out all my materials.

There's going to be a baltic pagan religion. In the Finno-Ugric area.
and 6 factions in that religion. And it's under debate if theres gona
be pagan shamans as priests of that religion. Does this sound correct

No they are wery far from shamans ,closer to druids - "Zintnieki" aka "Knowledgemans".

Is there native name for these thunder sons?

"Peerkondeeli" (Thundersons) or "Peerkona deeli" (sons of thunder)
They are not like berserker becouse they are wery diciplined.

Also in baltic regions always in wars must be "Livland mercenaries"
They fight in all sides if you have a money ,even against his own country.

wilpuri

09-25-2004, 10:56

Wario, you are what exactly what I've been hoping for! A Balt with some insight into baltic history and understanding of the language, culture etc! It would be great if you would be willing to help us out! If you give me your email address, I could send you the Baltic name list and the Baltic unit roster, so you could look at it and help me with working on it, I'm sure you have some great sources and ideas that a non-balt would miss. What do you say, do you want to become part of the team and help us give the baltic peoples the representation they deserve in this mod? :yes:

The name "knowledgeman" or Zintniekim sounds VERY similar to the Finno-Ugric "Wisemen", don't let the term shaman confuse you. The Finnic wisemen were indeed much like druids, they were the collective meroy and history of the tribe, their lore was great, and they were the spiritual authority of the community and performed the religious rites.

Concerning the god Perkunas (Isn't that were Perkoondeeli comes from?) was also a god adopted by the Finnic peoples, and the name has survived to this day as a curse word and a word for the "devil": Perkele (I'm sure our Swedish friends have heard it before ~;) ) May be we could have something similar for the Finnic factions?

It sounds extremely interesting, and it would be really great if you could help us out with the Baltic factions. ~:cheers:

PseRamesses

09-25-2004, 11:53

Wario, you are what exactly what I've been hoping for! A Balt with some insight into baltic history and understanding of the language, culture etc! It would be great if you would be willing to help us out! What do you say, do you want to become part of the team and help us give the baltic peoples the representation they deserve in this mod?
Wilpuri, I fully support you on this initiative. I was actually gonna send Wario a PM inviting him to join us.
It would be great if you, Wario, would help us out on this matter, making you our "Marshall in the Baltics", so to speak. Now, we do respect our crews personal life so we´ll never ask anything more of you than you decide to take upon yourself. As you know we haven´t set a releasedate for this mod due to our 2nd objective: to portray the viking era the best way possible and I do belive we could use a resource like you in this area of the map. Our third aim, when working with this mod, is to have a hell of a good time doing this. So when you no longer feel you want to be a part of this, or take a break, just let us know - no problem.

Meneldil

09-25-2004, 12:24

Well, I'm currently not at home, so I'll post it tomorrow at about 8 PM (French hours).
Anyway, units description is probably not that great, mostly because my english is not that great ~D

Meneldil

09-25-2004, 21:26

Sebastian Seth

09-26-2004, 19:30

Good news people.
I've managed to create a new unit (based on an existing one). Well, that wasn't that hard, and I still have to learn how to change weapons (which should be that hard too).

Any help in the process would be nice :)

Did you draw the unit graphics or rename the files? I'll try to comprehend
the structure of the units in game but this may take a while.

Meneldil

09-26-2004, 19:51

I've only renamed and created a new file. Now, I'd like to add new weapons to this unit.

Meneldil

09-26-2004, 20:20

Western/Eastern Franks army list:

Here’s an army list for both Frankish factions, and possibly for the Polish:

I made this list with both my Warhammer ancient battle – shieldwall army list and my Osprey book – French medieval armies 1000-1300. The second one is often out of the timeframe, and almost all the units listed here are from the WHB – shieldwall book.
I’ve added some units that could be recruited as mercenaries (Stipendarii, Italian crossbowmen, though there could be many more like Basque warriors, Spanish jinetes, welsh auxiliaries, or cottereaux) and some province restricted units (Flemish spearmen, Breton devroet and Norman units).
I was thinking about adding a few other units like ‘Men of the Marches’ (a kind of crusader knight unit), Paladins (King Charlemagne’s best knights), a French and a German Knight and a kind of heavy axemen (who used francista), but since Franks aren't playable, I guess they are not needed.
Another thing is that my english is *far* from perfect, and sorry for any inconvenience like typo, grammatical errors and things like that.

Comes: Comes were part of the higher Frankish nobility, they were the king’s most important vassals. What distinguished them from the other members of the nobility was that they had their own vassals, loyal to them personally. When a Comes was granted land by the King, his part of the deal was that he would bring a certain number of knights to the battlefield when summoned. They were often used as the king’s elite bodyguards, or were asked to lead batailles (battlefield divisions) during important battles.

Units of 15 men
Armed with spears
Armoured
Irresistible charge
High moral
Impetuous
May charge without orders

Milites: Milites are the backbones of Frankish armies. They are fearsome warriors, and as cavalrymen, their skills are only matched by the Katraphraktoi and by the Normans knights.
Like many other knights, their arrogance might sometimes be a problem, and might aswell lead them in dangerous situations.

Unit of 40 men
Elite unit
Armed with spears
Armoured
Large shield
Irresistible charge
High moral
Impetuous
May charge without orders
May dismount before battle

http://www.image-dump.com/view.php?m=1&x=19258

Milites pedites: While they mostly fight as heavy cavalry, Milites are sometimes dismounted and used as heavy infantry. Though they may not be as effective as mounted Milites, they are a very effective heavy infantry. Protected by heavy armours and large shields, and armed with swords and axes, they are probably the best infantry a Frankish king could lead to the battle.

Unit of 40 men
Bonus vs. armoured troops
Elite unit
Armoured
Large shield
High moral
Impetuous
May charge without orders
Slow

http://www.image-dump.com/view.php?m=1&x=19257

Pueri: Pueri are light cavalry, mostly used to scout out the enemy positions and troop strengths, as well as to take care of skirmishers and light infantry. Unlike milites, pueri aren’t part of the high nobility, but rather poor knights or squires.

Unit of 40 men
Powerful charge
Armed with throwing spears
Missiles effective against armour
Fast

Liberi: Liberi are lesser warriors. Though they can stand a fight against more professional warriors, they are mainly used to make the number, and to support the heavy Frankish cavalry during long fights (which was unlikely to happen, since the Milites’ charge was often enough to break the enemy). Liberi usually use spears and shields or bows.

Liberi (spearmen):
Unit of 100 men
Powerful charge
Armed with spears
Large shield
Weak attack
Weak defence
Effective against cavalry
Can fight on 2 ranks

http://www.image-dump.com/view.php?m=1&x=19256

Liberi (archers):
Unit of 66 men
Good attack
Weak defence
Poor moral

http://www.image-dump.com/view.php?m=1&x=19255

Coloni: Coloni are nothing else than quickly-trained peasants. They are not really good at fighting, but they can form a cheap and useful militia in times of need.

Same thing as peasants from MTW

Here are some Normans, Britons and Flemish special units:

Norman Milites: Norman knights are probably the finest cavalry of the era. They learnt how to use lance when fighting as mercenaries for the Byzantines, but unlike Byzantine cavalry who used to charge at a brisk trot, Normans usually enter the fight at the highest speed possible, wreaking havoc in their enemy’s ranks, which usually lead to a quick victory.

Unit of 40 men
Armed with spears
Irresistible charge
High moral
Elite unit
Large shield
Heavily armoured
Impetuous
May charge without orders

http://www.image-dump.com/view.php?m=1&x=19259

PS: The use of the cavalry lance + high speed charge was probably not used before the mid/late 10th century, so I don’t know if they should have the irresistible charge. It’s up to you, though I think it would make Norman knights a nice unit.

Norman infantry (I have no idea if this unit is totally correct, but I know that while Franks were sometimes warring with cavalry armies only, Normans were rather using both infantry and cavalry, so I think it might be a good idea): Unlike franks who were mostly relying on their heavy cavalry and on their archers, Normans used both infantry and cavalry to win battles. Norman, having blood from both Vikings and franks, can form a superb infantry, a good combination of Frankish warfare and Vikings warlike.

Unit of 100 men
Armoured
Strong charge
High moral
Elite unit
Large shield
Impetuous
May charge without orders
Bonus vs. armoured troops

Devroet: Devroet means literally Breton exile. Whereas Brittany wasn’t actually a part of the Frankish empire, Britons were often used in both Normans and Frankish armies. They are famous for their horsemanship and are used as an effective medium cavalry, used to support heavier cavalry or infantry, or to rout enemy skirmishers or light infantry.

Unit of 40 men
Armed with spears and javelins
Very strong charge
Missiles effective vs. armoured troops
Good moral

Flemish spearmen: The county of Flanders is nominally a part of the Western Frank Empire. In fact, the county was often warring against the French king, and quickly became a semi-independent province. To protect Flanders from attacks from both Normans and Frankish armies, Flemish lords had to train professional warriors, which could defend themselves against the heavy cavalry they often had to fight. Those warriors were also often hired as mercenaries in west Europe.

Unit of 100 men
Armed with spears
Large shields
Very effective against cavalry
Powerful charge
Good moral
Good defence

Stipendarii: Mercenary knights are often recruited from all over north-west Europe, as well as Spain and Italy. Stipendarii is the name of those mercenary groups, often composed of fallen knights, fighting sometimes for glory, and often for money. These skilled warriors spend their time fighting for wealthy lords and kings and are a good and reliable cavalry, as well as an effective medium infantry.

Mounted stipendarii:
Unit of 60 men
Armed with spears
Fast
Powerful charge
Bonus versus armoured troop
Poor moral

Stipendarii pedites:
Unit of 60 men
Good attack
Bonus versus armoured troops
Poor moral

A pic that could be used for Stipendarii, though it's supposed to be a spanish mercenary knight from the XIIIth century :
http://www.image-dump.com/view.php?m=1&x=19463

Italian crossbowmen: Italian crossbowmen are considered as the best long range infantry a Christian lord could hire. Crossbow is a fearsome weapon that can easily kill a man in a single shot, and unlike long and composite bows, it can be used effectively after a few days of training. One thing is certain; mercenaries from Italia are famous for their use of the crossbow.

Unit of 60 men
Good attack
Long range
Weak defence
Slow rate of fire
Slow
Bonus vs. armoured troop
Poor moral

PS: I did not find any source mentioning Italian crossbowmen mercenaries before the late 10th century as well. Once again, it’s up to you if you want to add them or not.

29/09/2004
Here's a map of Normandy (about 1100 AD, but that's the only one I found so far)

http://www.image-dump.com/view.php?m=1&x=19456

Here's another one of the merovingian empire (it might be more accurate).

http://www.image-dump.com/view.php?m=1&x=19458

The same map with provinces

http://www.image-dump.com/view.php?m=1&x=19459

My thoughts about the provinces are :
Britanny, Normandy, Anjou (or Maine), Flanders, Ardennes (or Champagne), Toxandrie, Saxe, Thuringie and Ile de France, or however you call the unattackable province (the one in the south)

PseRamesses

09-26-2004, 21:15

PS: I did not find any source mentioning Italian crossbowmen mercenaries before the late 10th century as well. Once again, it’s up to you if you want to add them or not.
Outstanding research Meneldil! Regarding CB´s before the 10th century I´m personally a bit sceptic but on the other hand I´m no historian. Has anyone else any intel on thehistory of crossbows? Any tip could be useful. Thanks!

Meneldil

09-26-2004, 21:21

"Crossbows were actively being used in European warfare from 800 to 1500 A.D."
from
Wikipedia (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Crossbow)
It's not the best source ever, but usually, what they say isn't total crap ~D

Sebastian Seth

09-27-2004, 08:38

@Medeldil

\unit_prod.txt - The unit setting
\Projectilestats.rxt - projectile settings

Battle\UnitIcons\(unitref).tga - little battle icon of unit
campmap\Info_Pics\(unitref).bif - background of unit info
Textures\Men\(bodyref)\(bodyref).bif - body & weapon pictures
Textures\Men\(bodyref)\(bodyref)_H.bif - body & weapon pictures
Textures\Men\ActionsPage\unitref.txt - action & image linking
Textures\Men\ActionsDiddy\unitref.txt - action & image linking

The unit_prodfile refers to "work sheet" and
"unit def sheet" and I haven found these
yet. Could you tell me where they are?

The last two are full of numbers I have
difficulties to understand. Do you have
some understanding about them?

Is the list of directories missing some?

Sebastian Seth

09-27-2004, 09:41

@Wilpuri

I have started do to some preliminary work for the tech tree.

1. First we have to have the castles (to point the tech level).

lvl.0 ... Travel House ... A place where hunting trips start.
lvl.1 ... Traiding Post ... A place where hunters trade goods.
lvl.2 ... Village ... Permanent simple place of population.
lvl.3 ... Stockade ... First defensive fortification.
lvl.4 ... Hill Fotification ... Serious defensive fortification
lvl 5 ... Stone Castle ... The last and most serious fortifications

2. Some defensive addons to castles: (tied to castle lvl)

lvl.2 ... Refuge Caves ... Place where women and children go.
lvl.3 ... Spikes ... Wooden spikes to protect from charging
lvl.4 ... Mount ... Dig and spikes around the fortification
lvl.5 ... Rock Throwers ... Like catapults but throwing many little rocks

3. Govermentical Buildings: (loosely tied to castle lvl)

lvl.0 ... Hunting Huts ... For organizasing major hunts (animal & human)
lvl.2 ... Chieftains House ... Title: Chieftain of (faction)
lvl.4 ... "Käräjät" ... Title: Tuomari of (faction)

I'm little out of ideas in this area. Mayby you have some ideas.

4. Religional Buildings: (loosely tied to castle lvl)
lvl.0 ... Wall paintings ... Mystic pictures on caves.
lvl.2 ... Shamans House ... Place where shaman lives.
lvl.4 ... "Hiidenkivi" ... Pagan peak building

These could have moral +1,+2,+3 effects and they should enamble
the shamans and should be required to produce battlefield shamans.

5. Farms. (Not tied to castle lvl, tied to resource WOOD)
lvl.1 ... wood cutters hut ... place to organize wood gathering
lvl.3 ... Kaskifarming ... the higly productive kaskifarms

We need more of these structures. Source of income.

6. Fishing. (Not tied to castle lvl, tied to resource FISH)
lvl.1 ... Fish traps ... the standard fish traps
lvl.3 ... river nets ... huge nets across the rivers.

We need more of these too. source or income.

7. Horses. (tied to castle lvl and resource HORSES)
lvl.1 ... Horse Stables
lvl.3 ... Horse Farmer
lvl.5 ... Horse breeder

8. Tanner (tied to castle level)
lvl.2 ... Tanner ... Armour +1
lvl.3 ... Tanners house ... Armour +2
lvl.4 ... Tannery ... Armour +3

The armours where leather so this could be good.'

9 ports:
lvl.1 ... Seaport .... trade (needs "Traiding Post")
lvl.2 ... boat builder .... basic boats more trade
lvl.3 ... slipway .... bigger boats (needs "Village")
lvl.5 .... Shipwright .... The best boats (needs "Stone Castle")

and ofcourse the Bowmakers, Spearmakers, Smiths, Alerting towers,
basic farms and all i havent yeat think of.

How does it look so far?

@Wario

How does this fit to the baltics? (Don't mind the titles they can be
changed)

wilpuri

09-27-2004, 11:48

Sebastian Seth

09-27-2004, 13:27

Looks quite good. I would remove the "Shaman's house" and may be replace it with "Uhrilehto", a site which has been declared sacred by the shaman. Uhrilehto would give the title of "Tietäjä", which I have posted earlier in the thread.

Yes, this is good. I'll mark it up instantly.

I don't think we will need that many buildings for horses, since the Finns only have access to 2 types of cavalry, and the baltic factions have access to one calvalry unit (at the moment anyway).

I was thinking that the level 5 buildings shouldn't produce more units exept
some very special ones, but more likely give morale, valour or weapon
bonuses to units. Or mayby if possible: faster horses.

Concerning Hill forts, they were not a permanent place of settlements. They were only used when attacked. Also, Hill forts were used for launching points of attacks, so may be this could be represented somehow?

How does this sound?
(lvl - fort building . .. fort addon "level referance word")
0 - Travel House ... Guard Posts "savage"
1 - Traiding Post ... Guard Towers "trading"
2 - Hamlet ... Cave Refuge "culture"
3 - Village ... Hill Fort "Village"
4 - Stockade ... Stone Towers "City"
5 - Stone Bastion ... Kings Keep "Capital"

The raiding "crusade" would be great, if it is possible? A hill fort would enable pagan jihads/raiding campaigns..

Yes, if it's possible. But if we seperate Hill Fort to an addon it would be
better to use hiidenkivi as jihad starter. That way the Tietäjä and
Jihad would come from same line of building type.

Also, I think two Boatbuilder type buildings is enough, since Baltic/Finnic factions only have access to 2 types of boat. (Small Boat and Uisko).

Oh, my bad. I have seemed to mix up the "sea-trading" category with
"ship building" category. and I have later added "fishing" category too.

lvl. "sea-trading" "ship building" "fishing"
0 - - Fish Traps
1 Docks - -
2 - Boat Builder River Nets
3 Seaport - -
4 - Shipwright Offshore Fishing
5 Merchant - -

Docks and Hamlet enables Boat builder and Boat builder, seaport and
stockade enables shipwright.
Boat builder enables small boats and ship builder "Uisko".
Sea-traiding creates trading income and fishing creates fishing income.

Battlefield Shamans sounds very fantasy like, since each village had no more than a few shamans probably. Besides, we already have the Finnish Berserkers (Can you think of a good name in Finnish for them?)

I actualy meant the berserkers and talked about shamans. My bad (again).

(Can you think of a good name in Finnish for them?)

No better than you allready did:

Concerning the god Perkunas (Isn't that were Perkoondeeli comes from?) was also a god adopted by the Finnic peoples, and the name has survived to this day as a curse word and a word for the "devil": Perkele (I'm sure our Swedish friends have heard it before ) May be we could have something similar for the Finnic factions?

Perkeleet. "Sieltä ne perkeleet tulee". "Ei niille perkeleille voi mitään".

On the whole it looks good, SS. We have to get this represented more visually, on an actual Tech-tree chart. However, I have exams all week, so I don't have much time on my hands right now

I have done this to exel sheet, but its's not ready yeat. Should we do
it with pictures to adobe (unfamiliar to me)?

I've also been formulating this idea: Instead of having watch towers, The Finnish factions and the Estonian factions should have Warning Beacons, which were lit to warn of danger. May be Vaaravalkea or Vartiotuli or something similar in Finnish?

I did but them as "Alarm Guards" and "Guard Towers". This could be little
too much to foregn players if we put Vaaravalkea in it. Mayby just
"Alarm Fire Guards" and Alarm Fire Towers?

Sebastian Seth

09-27-2004, 15:09

This is How the fortifications would look like:
http://www.geocities.com/siidon/FotN/F1-F11.JPG

Sebastian Seth

09-27-2004, 16:15

@Wario

We are doing the finnish-baltic tech tree and I need your help on it.
Theres going to be some govermentical buildings:
Chieftains House - Law House - Throne Room (preliminary)
Chieftains House - Käräjä House - Throne Room (finnish)

Does this repesent the other baltics well?

Theres going to be offices assosiated with these buildings
War Chief - Judge - Vice King (preliminary)
Sotapäällikkö - Tuomari - Varakuningas (finnish)
I would need translations of these to Saaremaa, Curonia, Lithua and Prusia.
Could you plese provide?

PseRamesses

09-29-2004, 18:00

Nores PC is still down but between an exam and a course he´s working on fixing it. He asked me to post this information for your knowledge:

FROM NORSEMAN

Hello everybody

Lately there has been many good posts swarming with ideas, both on units,
tech-tree and other things. This is all very nice, and much needed to make
a good mod with some unique features.

However, it is very hard for those who will do the actual modding(VH,
PseR, me, some others?) to get the overview, even if we read all posts,
and find the specific information we need at a given time in the thread.
Furthermore, both PseR and I have now had serious computer crashes -
hopefully I won't lose anything.

Because of this, as PseR has pointed out to me, it is about time we get
some serious information storage routines. This means that when several
people have discussed a topic(like let's say for instance "Finnish units")
and come to a conclusion, it must all be boiled down to a single post
summarizing it all in a clear and easy-to-understand fashion. I'm not
saying we haven't done so earlier, I'm just saying that we need to be
better at doing this with all information we intend to make use of in the
mod.

At the moment I can see 3 types of information relevant for us; UNITS,
TECH-TREE, and REGIONS. Later there may be more, that we will deal with
when it comes up.
REGIONS:
*Posting a small map with regions drawn on to it is preferable. If not a
good description is needed, using modern day names to describe the
borders.
*We need information on:
-region NAME
-LANDSCAPE FEATURES(hilly, flat, plains, coastline, rivers, woodland?)
-name of CAPITAL from the timeperiod and it's position.
-If coastal region, a PORT TOWN and it's position.
-CULTURE of the population(not necessarily the ruling faction)
-ARCHITECTURE
-REBELLIOUSNESS
-TRADEGOODS/RESOURCES
-?

TECH-TREE
*A general, but as short as possible, description of the culture of the
faction in question. A freemen or feudal society? Independant warlords?
The position and strength of the King?
Did the king travel from place to place(like viking kings), or did he have
a royal seat of power? What was major source of income? Farming, trading,
raids...? Other minor sources of income? Any unique buildings(e.g like the
viking Jomsborg),
*Suggestions on building names.

UNITS
*A overview of the fighting style of the faction(s) in question. E.g. "the
Danish vikings relied heavily upon the warlord's freemen and housecarls
early on. Later organized armies supplemented with spearmen and archers,
and possibly also light raider cavalry when royal forts was constructed
around the kingdom."
*For each unit:
-A general, but as short as possible, description of each unit which
includes what is regarded as the units streangths/weaknesses.
-Some stats, as you think it should be. These don't have to be given as
numbers from the unit_prod file, if you are not familiar with them.
Instead you can use text, like "good attack" etc.
-Some notes on appearance.

If anyone think of something more, please let me know. When the
information is collected, I suggest at least 2 of us, maybe even 3, store
this information on their HD. I have tried this more or less myself from
the beginning, but must admit I've not been thorough enough. I suggest
PseR, myself and possibly also VH try to store this information on our
HD's. Is that ok for you?

Do anybody possibly have a better system for info storage?

As for my PC, I have now finally gotten hold of a new XP CD. Due to real
life issues however, I won't be much online the coming period until about
the 20th of october, even if I do get my PC up and running. I will however
do my best to follow the progress of the thread and post when I find the
time.

Norseman

Meneldil

09-29-2004, 20:08

I've posted some maps in my unit post. All the new things I'll find about normans/franks will be posted there.

A map that could possibly be of some use (though I doubt it) :
http://www.agegames.com/mw/dipmap.jpg

Sebastian Seth

09-30-2004, 17:20

I'm collecting the finnish-baltic tech tree at the moment. I will make it
to exel sheet when it's finished, but it's not even nearly completed yet.

I could start to collect the unit list too but i must say that it's far to
messy at the moment. It would solve this poblem if the units would
have class (peasantry,raider,professional,special,nobility). This way
we could write the tech trees and reference the unit category instead
of the name of the unit.
(like "fort2" and "spearmaker" enables "raider class spearmen"
or "fort3" and "religional building3" enables "berserker+2")

I also would like to hear about the other tech trees. It can be nasty
suprise if the other tech trees enable some units that are superior
to the units other techtrees enable in same time. Who is working
on the other tech trees?

btw. what is whit the norsemans computer, i have worked in pereinstallation
unit and i found it hard to imagine that getting computer fixed
takes more than a 4 hours. and by that time you could build the
computer from components. is he an "overclocker" or is there some
componets causing issues?

btw2. this might sound very stupid but you should make different
partition to your work. that way you can format the whole
operating system without losing your work. I have two HD:s
another formated in fat32 and this is the storage the other
one divided to two partitions both in NTFS the other one
haves winXp the other haves games & programs & multimedia &
backups from c. so it takes about 1 hour to get the computer
back up after formating c and i have my work safely in other
partitions (you knew this, right?)

VikingHorde

09-30-2004, 18:36

btw. what is whit the norsemans computer, i have worked in pereinstallation
unit and i found it hard to imagine that getting computer fixed
takes more than a 4 hours. and by that time you could build the
computer from components. is he an "overclocker" or is there some
componets causing issues?

btw2. this might sound very stupid but you should make different
partition to your work. that way you can format the whole
operating system without losing your work. I have two HD:s
another formated in fat32 and this is the storage the other
one divided to two partitions both in NTFS the other one
haves winXp the other haves games & programs & multimedia &
backups from c. so it takes about 1 hour to get the computer
back up after formating c and i have my work safely in other
partitions (you knew this, right?)

It's a good idea. I have devided my HD in two for the last 7 years or so and work very well. I save all my stuff on drive D and keep my C drive clean so that I can reinstall my drive any time. Backup on two HD's is best, if one should break.

Last weekend I made two new units and I 'll make some more when my eyes get better (A good idea, don't work too many hours in front of the computer!). They use the Housecarl body, but have new shields and weaponds. They have been added to the viking era for now. :wink3:

PseRamesses

10-01-2004, 07:32

FROM NORSEMAN

I'm collecting the finnish-baltic tech tree at the
moment. I will make it
to exel sheet when it's finished, but it's not even nearly completed yet.

I could start to collect the unit list too but i must say that it's far to
messy at the moment. It would solve this poblem if the units would
have class (peasantry,raider,professional,special,nobility). This way
we could write the tech trees and reference the unit category instead
of the name of the unit.
(like "fort2" and "spearmaker" enables "raider class spearmen"
or "fort3" and "religional building3" enables "berserker+2")

I also would like to hear about the other tech trees. It can be nasty
suprise if the other tech trees enable some units that are superior
to the units other techtrees enable in same time. Who is working
on the other tech trees?

I'm the one working on the other Tech-trees. Don't worry about balance
issues now. First we make the Tech-trees/units as we think it should be
for that faction/culture, then we balance things. Also keep in mind that
the tech-tree you come up with now will probably be changed quite a bit to
suit the mod(that goes for my work as well), so don't put too much work
into making it "perfect". Right now it's more important to get a proper
view of how society in Finland was around these times.

btw. what is whit the norsemans computer, i have
worked in pereinstallation
unit and i found it hard to imagine that getting computer fixed
takes more than a 4 hours. and by that time you could build the
computer from components. is he an "overclocker" or is there some
componets causing issues?

btw2. this might sound very stupid but you should make different
partition to your work. that way you can format the whole
operating system without losing your work. I have two HD:s
another formated in fat32 and this is the storage the other
one divided to two partitions both in NTFS the other one
haves winXp the other haves games & programs & multimedia &
backups from c. so it takes about 1 hour to get the computer
back up after formating c and i have my work safely in other
partitions (you knew this, right?)

It's not so much a problem with the PC itself as other things...
I'm using a student-license for my Windows-system, and it took some time
to get a new version of it. I might as well upgrade my system now that I
need to reinstall. Furthermore I've had very little free time the last 2-3
weeks. I'm involved in a course that has been taking my weekends(from
friday evening to sunday night - living in tents) and most of my evenings.
Inbetween this course, uni at daytime, training and some other activities
I've simply not had a single evening off for a long time.

And yes, I'm using partitions, 4 on my current PC with 2 HDs.
Most likely I haven't lost info, but that is impossible to say with
absolute certainty until I've actually gotten it up and running. Besides,
I don't know for certain what caused the crash. I've still not ruled out a
hardware failure completely, it behaves rather odd when I try to turn it
on. Hopefully all I need is a reinstall.

I can ensure you that when I find the time and energy to fix it, you will
hear from me again from my own PC.

Btw I might as well mention now that after my mid-term exam I'm going
hunting, and will be back 20-21 of october.

Norseman

PseRamesses

10-01-2004, 07:39

For future needs I´ve arranged for a 2nd mail-adress with larger storage capacity at Yahoo.
pseramesses1@yahoo.se for files up to 100MB.
pse@brevet.se for files up to 10MB.

Sebastian Seth

10-01-2004, 11:36

@Norseman

I just reminded me why I don't like school. The time it takes is little too
much for me. Good luck to the exams.

@Norse & Pse

Could you post a map you are working at the moment so we could all
see how much land is there in the map.

@Everyone

Faction/Culture (tech-tree)/Religion

1.Suoma Finnish-Baltic Baltic Pagans
2.Karjala Finnish-Baltic Baltic Pagans
3.Saaremaa Finnish-Baltic Baltic Pagans
4.Curonia Finnish-Baltic Baltic Pagans
5.Lithuania Finnish-Baltic Baltic Pagans
6.Prussia Finnish-Baltic Baltic Pagans

Is there any more baltic pagans?

The tech-tree of the finns is going to be a tech tree of the baltics too and
this is the main problem for me. The Finns and Baltics have lot of similareties
and on the other hand lot of differences. So I'll probably do a version 1 of
the tech tree and then post a link to it here and then we can start debate
over it.

PseRamesses

10-02-2004, 08:47

Hi guys,
I´ve been uploading, on several occasions since SS´s request for a map, pics to the old Org-adress but they are never accessable, so can anyone tell me, or give me an adress, where I can upload pics to use in a message.

tombom

10-02-2004, 12:49

www.imageshack.us

PseRamesses

10-03-2004, 08:45

Here´s a picture of our intended playarea for the mod:
http://www.totalwar.org/patrons/story/PseR%20FotN%201180x885%20normal%20projection.jpg

cegorach

10-03-2004, 11:36

@Meneldil

"Here’s an army list for both Frankish factions, and possibly for the Polish:"

It was quite different.

The core was called Druzyna ( something like Rus druzhina) - professional soldiers, who could be called Polish Retainers ( but these guys appeared in eastern Poland in the XIIIth century).

They were similar to knights, but often were using bows or rather longbows.

So could be armed with a spear, a large shield, some armour and a bow/longbow.
They were fighting on foot quite often using their bows, so should be dismountable in every battle.
These guys were also Duke's bodyguards.

There were also spearmen ( rather unarmoured, but with a large shield)
and bow/longbow-men.
As far as I remember there were spearmen who were using bow as their second weapon, but I may be wrong - most of Polish warriors were using bows at that time as well as axes. There aere also some kind of hunters fighting during a war as well ( hide in the open ?).

Poles were using guerilla tactics quite often and field fortyfications
- this proved to be especially dangerous to the HRE troops during the wars between 1002 and 1025.

I don't know much about the Polish tribes' and Polish state's army at that time ( VIIIth- Xth century), but can try to find some if you want me to and if it was not provided yet by EC.
Of course I would have to find some time for this, but finishing my part of P&M TW ( XVI-XVII) is quite boring, so ask if you need something.
And one more - is there any released version ? I didn't follow this thread for quite a long time, so I don't really know if there is such.

Regards Cegorach/Hetman ~;)

Meneldil

10-03-2004, 11:57

I think your help would be more than welcome, since I haven't found anything about early polish KD yet (I don't think there's an osprey book for it)

Wario

10-03-2004, 18:23

:to Sebastian Seth

Chieftains House - Law House - Throne Room (preliminary)
Chieftains House - Käräjä House - Throne Room (finnish)

Virsaisha Maaja - Likum Maaja - Tronja istaba (Latvian)

War Chief - Judge - Vice King (preliminary)
Sotapäällikkö - Tuomari - Varakuningas (finnish)

Kara Virsaitis - Tiesnesis - Kjeeninsh (Latvian)

Did realy all faction must have theyr own translations?,
or in some way we can use the english ?

Also how much names and forenames must be for faction ?

Sebastian Seth

10-04-2004, 01:04

Did realy all faction must have theyr own translations?,
or in some way we can use the english ?

Not really, since there is lots of language differences. I'm trying to
find similareties in language. For example word "maaja" meaning
house in latvia has similar word "maja" in finnish.
But the unique office titles would be nice and easy to make.

Also how much names and forenames must be for faction ?

Well, it's not really my place to say but the game is a period about
300 years. So about 20 to 40 should probably do it. But these names
should have to be old names from the period of 750 to 1100 BC. So
that will exclude christian names like Christian, Andreas, etc.

Sebastian Seth

10-04-2004, 02:27

@Pse

I think it's possible to draw finland as 4 provinces and Straya Ladoga.
The Novgorod province is going to be under the Straya Ladoga, right?

Quick Example:
http://www.geocities.com/siidon/FotN/suomenjako2.jpg

1. Varsinaissuomi (proper finland) held by suoma
2. Häme (tavastia) held by suoma
3. Savo-Karjala (savo-karelia) held by karjala
4. Kainuu (kvenland) held by rebels
5. Vanha Laatokka (straya ladoga) held by rebels

This way häme would be inland province like it is and the kveens and
straya ladoga would be seperated from Suoma and Karjala.

PseRamesses

10-04-2004, 04:47

@Pse
The Novgorod province is going to be under the Straya Ladoga, right?.
Correct. And I think it should be an inland province with no sea access since S.L and The People of Saarema should be neighbours.

@Quick Example:
http://www.geocities.com/siidon/FotN/suomenjako2.jpg

1. Varsinaissuomi (proper finland) held by suoma
2. Häme (tavastia) held by suoma
3. Savo-Karjala (savo-karelia) held by karjala
4. Kainuu (kvenland) held by rebels
5. Vanha Laatokka (straya ladoga) held by rebels

This way häme would be inland province like it is and the kveens and
straya ladoga would be seperated from Suoma and Karjala.
Looks good to me. What do you think Wilpuri?

wilpuri

10-04-2004, 14:54

Correct. And I think it should be an inland province with no sea access since S.L and The People of Saarema should be neighbours.

Looks good to me. What do you think Wilpuri?

Yes I think this will work. However, The People of Saaremaa are not Novgorod's neigbours, Saaremaa is an island off the West coast of Estonia ~;)

I've been away for a while because Ive had exam-week at school, but now I should have more time again.

PseRamesses

10-04-2004, 19:30

Yes I think this will work. However, The People of Saaremaa are not Novgorod's neigbours, Saaremaa is an island off the West coast of Estonia.
??? Ohh, and I was under the impression that T.P.O.S WAS the "Estonians". I must have got it wrong from the beginning. :embarassed: Could you make a simple drawing of the below factions and their homelands, provinces etc on the map I posted above? I want to get this right. Thanks for any inconveniance m8!

wilpuri

10-04-2004, 22:41

??? Ohh, and I was under the impression that T.P.O.S WAS the "Estonians". I must have got it wrong from the beginning. :embarassed: Could you make a simple drawing of the below factions and their homelands, provinces etc on the map I posted above? I want to get this right. Thanks for any inconveniance m8!

Yes, they are the only playable Estonian faction in the game. Mainland Estonia will be rebel. The Saaremaa were a powerful faction during viking times, the "vikings of the eaast", along with Curonians and occasionally Karelians and other Baltic peoples. Here it is on the map:
http://www.europarl.eu.int/presentation/maps/images/applicants/estonia.gif

I think we could put Hiiumaa and Saaremaa as part of the same province, its easier, looks better, and not too inaccurate as far as I know.

BTW: Saaremaa name-wise is about the equivalent of the Swedish Island Öland. Means the same thing ~:)

PseRamesses

10-05-2004, 01:44

Yes, they are the only playable Estonian faction in the game. Mainland Estonia will be rebel. The Saaremaa were a powerful faction during viking times, the "vikings of the eaast", along with Curonians and occasionally Karelians and other Baltic peoples.
Yeah, I know. That´s why I want them in the mod but I didn´t get the fact that they where on an island. Sorry if I missed that one earlier m8.

I think we could put Hiiumaa and Saaremaa as part of the same province, its easier, looks better, and not too inaccurate as far as I know.
Couldn´t agree with you more.

Yikes, it´s 2:30 in the night! ~:eek: Been working very much the past 2 months, sometimes up to 12-14 hrs straight and I´m begining to realize I´m not 25 y.o anymore, he he! I have the day off tomorrow.... I´m gonna sleep until noooooooon.....zzzzzzzzz

Sebastian Seth

10-05-2004, 02:20

Well, its 4:10 now and i think i'll try to do the same. (Insomnia advance) ~:)

Sebastian Seth

10-05-2004, 15:09

Would it be possible to code the baltic pagan priest unit (lets say Wiseman)
to be an emissary and a priest at the same time? Looking at the
unit prod files this is not really hard or is it?

Sebastian Seth

10-05-2004, 15:33

@Wilpuri @Everyone intrested

Here is what I have written up so far. A good base for working a assume.

http://www.geocities.com/siidon/FotN/BalticTechTree.xls

I didn't but the units names on the tech tree because theres so many
of them for different faction. I replaced them with category references
like spearmen, archers, swordmen, etc. We can later write a unit list
with the building references. But more ideas are welcome.

wilpuri

10-05-2004, 18:43

PseRamesses

10-05-2004, 20:46

Sorry, I don't have excel, is it possible to put it in a different format?
Me neither but atleast Realplayer managed to open the xls-file so I got a look but couldn´t save it. SS, send it to Norse and do try to make a post out of it in this thread because it looked really good. Thanks!

wilpuri

10-06-2004, 10:36

SS,
I am at school now, and I was able to take a look at the tech-tree, and I must say, I am impressed. You've done a great job with it. ~:cheers:

A few minor details which stuck out (namewise) Hamlet sounds a bit odd, since that is usually just a house or two, I think maybe warriors hold would be good, and instead of stockade, maybe fortified village. Also, having catapults in the castle defenses is not very accurate historically speaking. Its too bad that it is impossible to represent the different "traps" that were built around the fortification itself, that would hamper the advance of the enemy..
But this is just some minor whining from me which can easily be fixed ~:)

Great job mate.

PseRamesses

10-07-2004, 07:55

SS,
A few minor details which stuck out (namewise) Hamlet sounds a bit odd, since that is usually just a house or two, I think maybe warriors hold would be good, and instead of stockade, maybe fortified village. Also, having catapults in the castle defenses is not very accurate historically speaking. Its too bad that it is impossible to represent the different "traps" that were built around the fortification itself, that would hamper the advance of the enemy.
Great job mate.

Fortified villaged and stockade is better since players has gotten used to what it is and how it works. Catapults fortifications are not accurate and the traps which is a bit too elaborate. Otherwise, impressive work m8.

Sebastian Seth

10-07-2004, 09:01

@Pse

The real player dosn't support saving net files, but you can go aroud
this by opening the file and leaving the file open (in realplayer). And
then go to realplayer temp folder and copy file you opened to another
directory. (I used this to a long time a go, but it might work).

@Wilpuri & Pse

Theres a program on windows download called exel viewer. This views
atleast the older versions of xls files, but im not sure about this file
because its made on exel 2003. I can't try it because i have the office
installed, but if you want do here is the link
http://www.microsoft.com/downloads/details.aspx?familyid=4eb83149-91da-4110-8595-4a960d3e1c7c&displaylang=en

Here is the tech tree in jpg (so you can see it better):
http://www.geocities.com/siidon/FotN/BalticTechTree-2004-09-10.JPG

I made the changes to fort names and removed catabults. I think
we could exam it closely before giving a final version. I'm running
back and forth with ideas and my fathers local election projects
are mixing my head at the moment so nothing comes out clearly.

You can get the file by clicking right sided button at the link and
selecting save target.
http://www.geocities.com/siidon/FotN/BalticTechTree.xls
I own the address so it's there as long as we needed and its
easy to update there.

Norseman

10-08-2004, 10:50

Excellent work SS!

It will probably be some changes though, hope that's ok with you.

I think all factions should share the same farming buildings, otherwise a region will be completely devastated if it is taken over by a faction of a different culture. What will be different from culture to culture is the requirements for upgrading the farmland. For instance the Vikings will only be able to build basic farmland until they reach a more advanced tech-level. This will force them to use trade and raids to gain an income. This is also very historically correct, as they came from regions with poor farmland. Even in Denmark there was only limited farming, as the country at that time was covered by thick forest, except in the northern parts where large plains were exploited for cattlefarming.

All in all it seems the vikings only farmed what they needed for their own household, not producing to make an income. The hides from the cattle in Northern denmark was used as tradegood.

This however changed somewhat when they arrived in more fertile regions like England. In the Danelaw they adopted some of the local farming traditions, and this should be reflected in the viking tech-tree if they can take fertile regions.

I also think shipbuilders should be a more advanced building for all cultures, except the Vikings.

I was also thinking about dropping those border fort type of buildings, or at least making them a very advanced building on the tech-tree.

Sebastian Seth

10-08-2004, 15:16

Excellent work SS!
It will probably be some changes though, hope that's ok with you.

Thanks and yes, I'm was prepared that it will be the case.

I think all factions should share the same farming buildings, otherwise a region will be completely devastated if it is taken over by a faction of a different culture. What will be different from culture to culture is the requirements for upgrading the farmland. For instance the Vikings will only be able to build basic farmland until they reach a more advanced tech-level. This will force them to use trade and raids to gain an income. This is also very historically correct, as they came from regions with poor farmland. Even in Denmark there was only limited farming, as the country at that time was covered by thick forest, except in the northern parts where large plains were exploited for cattlefarming.

Yes, the game limits are cruel. We can do this:
1. Same farming buildings for all factions. (Farming, +20%...+100%)
1a. Lower requrements for others than vikings. (Via Tech Trees)
2. Fishing buildings for specific factions. (Vikings, Finnish, Baltics)
2a. Balance fishing buildings (Via Tech Trees)

The Vikings did a lot of fishing, Right? So does the Finns and some
if not all of the balts. This way the fishing and the farming will
not be destroyed completely in case of invasion.

All in all it seems the vikings only farmed what they needed for their own household, not producing to make an income. The hides from the cattle in Northern denmark was used as tradegood.

Here we got an issue. See the point of farms and fishing buildings
in the game is to produce income, but the income is only presented
as gold pieces. And the gold pieces are needed to produce units.
The thing the farms, fishers, etc really produce is food and the
things really needed by the men in armies is food. So if the faction
was producing food in some way (hunting or fishing or farming)
they would have the ability to produce units. The vikings didn't
farm as much as they hunted and fished, but they did produce
food. We could do this:

5. Add another income producing building serie: hunting methods
5a. Balance same way as before but more early to vikings
and finns and slavics and later & expencive to others (Via Tech Trees)

This however changed somewhat when they arrived in more fertile regions like England. In the Danelaw they adopted some of the local farming traditions, and this should be reflected in the viking tech-tree if they can take fertile regions.

This is done automatickly; if the faction has advanced farm buildings
they will not all be destroyed in case of invasion.

I also think shipbuilders should be a more advanced building for all cultures, except the Vikings.

Yes, if you look my tech tree you can see that the shipbuilder needs
7 buildings before you can build it and it would take at least 28 years
at these stats. If you mean the "boat builder". It will not build anything
else than simple boats and if nessesary the boats cuold be leaved off too.
But this would not be realistic since the finnish and baltic factions did
Build Boats & Uiskos at the start of the period. We could do this:

6. Viking boat builder is level 1 building. (no fort required)
7. Viking Ship builder is level 2 building. (no fort required)
8. Viking ships are way stronger.

This way if the fations build too much boats the vikings could
just wipe the sea clean. But the AI balancing really takes this
out since the vikings are only "Naval Expansionist"

I was also thinking about dropping those border fort type of buildings, or at least making them a very advanced building on the tech-tree.

I agree, (border buildings moved to lvl 3 and lvl 4)

Another point I noticed (big no no no):
THE SWEDEN & FINLAND HAVE NO LAND CONNECTION?!? ~:confused:
Well not so bad but sad.

PseRamesses

10-08-2004, 15:37

V A R N I N G ! Long post ~;)

Here´s some thoughts, observations and gatherings from different internet sources on military and related stuff thereoff:

Viking Military Organisation
In the early Viking period the basis of the army was the hirð (pronounced - heerth), the men of the lord's hearth who had sworn loyalty to him. Many would be fellow countrymen drawn by a lord's reputation for valour and generosity, but some would be professional fighters seeking the best rewards. In peacetime they acted as the lord's or king's officials, forming embassies, exacting tribute, recovering dues, and acting as messengers; in war they formed the core of his army. In addition the lord could call upon his estates to provide ships and crews (the coastal nature of Scandinavian warfare meant that armies were often calculated in terms of ships' crews).
The country was divided into units (hafna) each assessed at one full mark of gold, all of which were committed to manning and arming a ship. The crew would have varied from 40 - 60, and in addition to a spear, iron cap (helmet) and shield for each member, one mail shirt per ship, and one bow and arrows per 6 benches were required. These figures varied slightly in different countries and times but provide a good average guide, although if each crew had say three times the number of bows and arrows to mail shirts, then carnage was almost always guaranteed. So either there was an expectation that more mail was owned by the lithsmen on board or this figure of one shirt is erroneous. A similar system probably continued to be used in the Danelaw where there was a large number of small land-holding bondi - a thing of the past in the manorialy based Saxon England. Like the Saxon fyrd the Anglo-Danish here may have had a system of rotation for service to reduce the burden on estates, although like the fyrd it may have contained many semi-professional warriors.
The eleventh century saw a gradual shift to a more permanent professional force commencing with the assaults of Swein and Cnut upon England. In 1012 forty-five ships detached themselves from Swein's fleet and made a bargain with Æthelred to 'keep the country against its enemies' provided the crew were fed and clothed. Later, under Cnut, a standing force of 40 ships was maintained after the disbanding of the here or army.
Its crews were professionals, lithsmen, and were clearly distinguished from the ships manned by the levies. The men received eight full marks a year per oar. Only under Edward, free of Danish dominance, did this system decline and the still loyal Danish ships left England with their gains.
Similarly, Cnut instituted the thingemannalith or tinglith, better known by the English term huscarl. In many ways it formalised the earlier system of the hirð. Unlike the earlier band this one was not supported by the king alone, but by taxes and fees, usually from the towns and burhs where there was much wealth but little land, hence less obligation for fyrd service. In at least two cases there are references to butsecarles being paid by a burh whose citizens are not taking part in the king's host. These men appear to be mercenaries given garrison duties to protect towns in potential danger who had already provided men for the fyrd.
There was very little formal structure by way of military rank in Viking armies. As a rule the term dreng is applied to a young warrior, and ðegn to a more mature member of a boat's crew. The only two specifically military posts referred to at the time were the merkismathr, the standard bearer (an honoured position since many Viking standards were said to have magical properties), and the stallari or marshal - the king's deputy in the field.
In the eleventh century the Norse kings probably had an immediate retinue of about ninety men, excluding menial servants and hangers on. These were divided into the hirðmenn (household men or hearthmen, i.e.; men who were privileged to be sharing his hearth) and a lower class called gestir literally guests, whose pay was half that of the hirðmenn. The gestir had their own leader, assembly and quarters. They acted as a kind of police force, doing errands for the king, executing his justice and collecting his taxes. They were not a popular group, and a later explanation of their name is that they were 'unwelcome guests' in many a house!
The hirðmenn were hand-picked and well rewarded. To be chosen was a great honour and meant acceptance not only by the other members, but by the king. A hirðman paid homage to the king and swore loyalty to him and the other hirðmenn. In Norway the hirðmenn maintained a hospice for their old and infirm members (a sort of early 'benevolent fund'!). These men were knit together by the personal bond they each had with their king or chieftain.
'The king and other leading men who had a hirð should show their men favour and goodwill and give them their proper pay. In return men should give their lord loyalty and service and be prepared to do all his commands.'

Huscarls
The first problem in dealing with the subject of Huscarls is to decide whether you are looking at the traditional meaning of the word in Old Norse, or whether you are talking about the English military term.
In Old Norse the term Huscarl is just a word meaning a household servant - house-karl - and could be applied to anyone who served a lord in his household. In Old English it has a meaning nearer to the later medieval idea of 'Household Troops', the highly trained soldier who served a particular lord and his family or household. Certainly by the later eleventh century, the Norse usage of the word was similar to that of the English, although earlier on it had had a more general meaning. For the purposes of this article we will be looking at the English Huscarls.
There is little doubt that Huscarls were introduced into England during the reign of Cnut (although there is some evidence for an elite mercenary force during Aethelred's reign). An institution similar to the Huscarls had existed in Scandinavia for some time, and it is possible that Cnut was trying to 'standardise' that aspect of all his empire. It is also possible that tales of the Varangian Guard in Byzantium inspired the formation of the Huscarls as the King's bodyguard. According to Sveno, Cnut re-organised his army in 1018 and proclaimed that only those 'who bore a two-edged sword with gold inlaid hilt' would be admitted into his chosen guard. It is said that wealthy warriors made such haste to get swords of the right quality that the sound of the sword-smiths' hammers was heard throughout the land. It may be that Cnut was trying to get some Englishmen into his elite guard to aid the unification between Englishmen and Danes. Whatever the reason, it can be seen that this would have given Cnut the chance to get some of the best warriors in the land into his personal guard. How was this guard organised?
Many of the writers earlier this century thought that the Huscarls were organised in a similar way to the Jomsvikings. However, more recent research suggests that the Jomsvikings may never have existed as the disciplined guild of warriors portrayed in the sagas. What is certain, however, is that Huscarls were paid troops with their own rules of justice and discipline, answerable directly to the King (or later some of the more powerful Eorls who had their own Huscarls). Most of the Huscarls lived at the King's court and served him directly. By the time of Edward the Confessor some Huscarls had been given estates by the king, varying in size from half a hide to fifteen hides, with an average being 4 hides, although these were probably the exception rather than the rule.
Traditionally, the Huscarls 'contract' to the King was renewed on New Year's Day, and any Huscarl was free to leave the king's service. It is also clear that problems of internal discipline were dealt with by a meeting of the Huscarls. The worst sentence was to be declared 'niðing' (a Norse word meaning coward or craven) and cast out of the Huscarls. It is possible that Eorl Swein, Harold's brother, had been a Huscarl since when he abducted the abbess of Leominster and killed his cousin Beorn, he was not tried by a Witan and outlawed, the king and the army declared Swein 'niðing', suggesting military, not civil, justice. The exact details of the 'guild laws' for the Huscarls are now not as certain as they were once thought to be, since the principle sources for these laws have been shown to be dubious. However, the existing evidence is strong enough to be sure that the Huscarls did have their own 'guild-laws' by which they lived, based on loyalty to the king and an oath of true loyalty to the other Huscarls, just as the thegns of Cambridge did in the early eleventh century and the 'peace guild' of London did during Aethelstan's reign.
The royal Huscarls are thought to have numbered about 3000, a vast number of men to pay and, as a consequence, a special tax of one mark of silver from ten hides was levied to pay the Huscarls. In addition to their pay in coin (thought to have been paid once per month), they were housed and fed at the king's expense. It is not certain whether the king also paid for their arms and armour, although it is likely they were expected to supply these themselves (arms and armour may have been given as gifts in return for good service too). Obviously, they would equip themselves with the best arms and armour they could, not only because their lives depended on it (literally), but also because the king could dismiss them, removing their livelihood too, if their war gear was not 'up to scratch'. If they were to constitute the core of the army, their war-gear had to be the best available. In addition to his sword, a huscarl would also have been expected to have a horse to carry him to the battle (although he would dismount and fight on foot), a mail-shirt, helmet, shield, spear, and, of course, the 'massive and bloodthirsty two handed axe'.
That Huscarls were valued servants of the king is bourne out by an event in 1041. Two of Harthacnut's huscarls were killed by the citizens of Worcester whilst collecting a particularly unpopular tax. Harthacnut decided to ravage the entire shire by dispatching the forces of five eorls and 'almost all his huscarls' to teach his subjects a lesson in obedience. This also gives us a hint to the fact that a huscarl's duty to the king was not limited to fighting. Like the thegns, the huscarls served the king in peace as well as war. They appear as tax collectors, witnesses to royal charters, recipients of land grants and donors of land. Often the same man is found described in charters as cynges huskarl and minister regis. If the huscarl's duty was purely military he would have been described as milites regis not minister regis. Huscarls could best be described as ministers and attendants upon the king (or eorl) who specialised in, but were not limited to, war. Their obligation to serve in arms arose from the lordship bond rather than the cash inducement. In this way they probably differed from their contemporaries, the lithsmen and butecarles who were purely mercenary troops and seem to have sided with the highest bidder.
What happened to the Huscarls? The huscarls probably formed the spear head of any army right up until the Conquest. After the Conquest the huscarls seem to have completely disappeared. Why was this? Certainly the vast majority died on Senlac ridge, fighting around the king, but not all. Most of those that did survive, along with many of King Harold's thegns, and some of the eorl's huscarls seem to have crossed to the continent as mercenary troops. Many of these made it as far as Byzantium and became members of the Varangian Guard, so much so that, by the twelfth century, the Varangian Guard was sometimes referred to as 'the English Guard'.

Anglo-Saxon Military Organisation
The military organisation of the Anglo-Saxons is a notoriously difficult and obscure subject. It is impossible to give firm dates or precise details of developments, mainly because the Saxons did not need to define their military organisation for themselves; it was part of the life of every able bodied man. In the beginning there were simply war bands, small bodies of semi-professional or solely professional warriors led by their chosen chiefs. Loyalty to a chief was the greatest virtue, and warriors sought out a leader who would further their military career. If a chief or king died in battle his men would according to lore die avenging him, although a few might survive after being struck down and left for dead. It was considered dishonourable to leave the battlefield on which your lord had been slain, and it was not unknown for those few who did survive to be executed by their lord's successor for their disloyalty and lack of zeal.
From the beginning of the 9th century the English kingdoms were under attack by other bands of professional warriors - the Vikings. We know from accounts of battles before Alfred's reign (879 - 899) that some form of levy existed to deal with these raids, but we have no details of it's particular organisation. We do know that the king had an 'elite' corps of ðegns or thegns, who made up the king's personal 'Hearth Troop' or hirð. These ðegns had to become 'professional' warriors, not because they were a trained elite, but because their position depended on it. It is obvious that the king and his hearth troop could not be everywhere at once, so the onus for local defence must have fallen on the eorls. It was their job to summon the fyrd in emergencies, and this they, or their ðegns could have done reasonably quickly in the areas affected by the raids.
The personal followers of the leaders, the thegns and numbers of hired mercenaries (often other Scandinavians) formed the spearhead of any force. From the early 9th century this was supported by what was later called the fyrd (literally meaning 'journey', and it came to have the special meaning of 'armed expedition or force'). The fyrd was raised by selective recruitment, rather than a general levy, usually drawing one man for every five hides of land. Most of the fyrd would therefore have been thegns, although there are records of 'free men' serving in the fyrd at Hastings. However, the actual obligation was upon each ðegn to provide a man, usually himself, for fyrd service. Since a ðegn would usually have five hides we have the figure of one man from five hides, but the obligation was upon the man, not the land. Since the obligation was on the man, and not the land, some ðegns could own less than the usual five hides (perhaps because a father had split his estate between several sons) . Those poor ðegns who had only a hide or two were still obliged to provide a fyrdman - fyrd service is almost never left out of charters for land-grants.
By the tenth century there are charters which provide alternative obligations demonstrating an emerging flexibility to suit the changing aspects of military service and the threat posed. One such charter requires five men from thirty hides, in another one, one man for thirty hides. Because of these the fyrd could contain members of the upper peasantry, the Ceorls. In these cases the men involved combined to dispatch one of their number (usually the same man) whenever the fyrd was summoned. Several contemporary texts bear this out:
'In Covenham Alsi and Chetel and Turuer had 3.5 carucates of land to the geld .... Chetel and Turuer were brothers and after their father's death they divided the land, in such a wise (ways) however that when Chetel was doing the king's service he should have his brother Turuer's aid.'
The representative would ensure that he was well equipped, and ambition and experience would soon create worthy warriors. Indeed the usual armament for a fyrdsman laid out in contemporary documents was a spear, shield, helm, byrnie and a palfrey (riding horse). Often a sword was included in the list. Although a horse is mentioned it was only to allow the fyrd to be specifically mobile. In battle the warriors would dismount and fight on foot.
If the men summoned for the fyrd did not turn up there were severe penalties:
'When the king goes against an enemy, should anyone summoned by his edict remain, if he is a man so free that he has his soke and sake, and can go with his land to whomever he pleases [i.e. king's ðegns and eoldermen], he is in the king's mercy for all of his land. But if the free man of some other lord has stayed away from the host and his lord has led another in his place, he will pay 40s. to his lord who received the summons. But if nobody at all has gone in his place, he himself shall pay his lord 40s., but his lord shall pay the entire amount to the king.'
Another document gives us an idea of the fyrdsman's 'pay' as well as the penalty for failure to serve:
'If the king sent an army anywhere, only one soldier went from five hides, and for his provision or pay, four shillings were given him from each hide for his two months of service. The money, however, was not sent to the king but given to the soldiers. If anyone summoned to serve in an expedition failed to do so, he forfeited all his lands to the king. If anyone for the sake of remaining behind promised to send another in his place, and nevertheless, he who should have been sent remained behind, his lord was freed of obligation by the payment of 50 shillings.'
The towns were also assessed in hides, and the inhabitants were required to send representatives. In some instances the towns could commute their service by paying the crown a sum necessary to hire a replacement. Anglo-Saxon England was still developing a cash economy and most workers were paid in kind, the markets where wages could be spent did not properly exist. For example, Ely Abbey acquitted its lands of 'fyrdinge' through the payment of 10,000 eels a year to the king. Other scattered references in The Doomsday Book to lands that 'aided the king's expeditions' imply that pre-Conquest lesser landowners made similar arrangements with the crown.
A fyrdsman served because his land grant said he had to, and failure to serve led to a fine. The money paid would have gone to the king or eorl to provide food for mercenaries, not wages. The king's obligation to provide food only began after the men had served their full term. Each hide was charged four shillings (in kind) towards the maintenance of the selected representative, twenty shillings for a five hide unit, and as sixty to ninety days was the customary period of service, this meant a wage of three to four pence per day. This is roughly comparable to the wages of a knight post-Conquest, demonstrating that the Fyrd was indeed a select body of men and not a rag-bag collection of farmers with agricultural implements for weapons.
The reason for the payment going direct to the warrior seems to have been a safety measure. If the money went straight to the king he could call out the fyrd, collect the money and then disband the fyrd, lining his own coffers as William Rufus did after the Conquest.
There were also laws laid down to govern a fyrdsman's rights and behaviour in the field:
'77. Concerning the man who deserts his lord. And the man who, through cowardice, deserts his lord or his comrades on a military expedition, either by sea or by land, shall lose all that he possesses and his own life, and the lord shall take back the property and the land which he had given him. And if he has bokland it shall pass into the king's hand.
'78. Concerning the man who falls before his lord. And the heriot of the man who falls before his lord during a campaign, whether within the country or abroad, shall be remitted, and the heirs shall succeed to his land and his property and make a very just division of the same.'
In later years there was also an alternative obligation to supply a warrior seaman for the fleet. For this reason the five hide units were combined in some regions into districts of 300 (or 310) hides, which were called ship sokes. These were required to produce sixty sokesmen (warrior seamen), and also pay for the construction and maintenance of a warship which the men manned. Some ports, particularly those that later became the Cinque Ports, were also required to supply smaller ships to augment the fleet. An example of this has been found in Denmark where taxes of just this nature reflected their own need to protect their coasts and ports. In Roskilde fjord, a barrier of four burned and scuttled vessels in an old shipping lane were excavated in the mid 1960's. One of the wrecks turned out to be a mid sized warship, made it seems, from the hull of an older ship with ash additions to transform it into a warship, probably for the port of Roskilde. An exact replica has been made and put through it's paces. However, it seems that the ship was not all that it could be. Not by comparison to other replica ships that have been built recently. It rows well but sails rather poorly, making it unsuitable for patrolling the coast except in the finest weather and against the most inept opponents. It would seem that on request of the King, a ship had to be made to fulfil the obligations of the townsmen. The townsmen had the bright idea of rejuvenating an older ship to save on costs, by adding ash upper strakes etc; creating a 'new' warship. Upon inspection, possibly aided by the fact that the Kings representatives who were possibly a little ignorant of the finer points of warship design, the ship was passed fit for the job. It would be interesting to find out how old she was prior to becoming part of an underwater barricade, disguising the evidence for about 1000 years.
In peace time the ðegns (possibly the entire fyrd) had to serve one month in three in rotation so there was always a sizeable force on hand. They were not only warriors but also acted as a police force to catch criminals, (in which their mounted mobility helped) and deal with the widespread problem of sporadic banditry. In the Welsh and Scottish Marches special conditions existed and the levies might have to serve for fifteen days and accompany expeditions beyond their shire boundaries on forays into Wales and Scotland where their knowledge of the border areas was invaluable. In the military requirements for the Welsh marches we are told:
'Anyone who does not go when ordered by the sheriff to go with him into Wales is fined the same [2s. or 1 ox to the king]. But if the sheriff does not go, none of them goes. When the army advances on the enemy, these men by custom form the vanguard and on their return the rearguard.'
In the Welsh marches the recruitment rate often exceeded the one man from five hides ratio and in some cases 'they do not pay tax nor other customary dues, except that they march in the king's army if they have been ordered.'
By the beginning of the 11th century all the ðegns usually held estates of five hides or more, and so by this date they probably constituted the bulk of the fyrd.
At the beginning of the century there is the first mention of the elite body of warriors known as Huscarles. It is thought that these were introduced after Svein Forkbeard's conquest of England in 1014, and probably raised by Cnut in 1033, although it is highly possible they had existed at the time of Swein's conquest. Completely professional soldiers, they had their own rules of conduct, living at the king's court and receiving his pay, as opposed to gifts or kind. They formed a small but efficient and highly organised standing army, both well disciplined and heavily armed. Cnut, we are told, required his Huscarles to possess 'splendid armour' and a double-edged sword with a gold-inlaid hilt, as a condition of acceptance into his military entourage. Although a primarily a footsoldier, a huscarl would also have owned a horse to carry him to battle and in pursuit of the defeated enemy, and a variety of weapons, including a mail-shirt, helmet, shield, javelin, and, of course, the 'massive and bloodthirsty two-handed axe' that characterised him. Despite being paid in coin their obligation to serve in arms arose from the lordship bond rather than the cash inducement. The rewards were incidental to the service they rendered. As the poet of wrote some centuries earlier:
'I repaid in war the treasures that he [the king] paid me - with my bright sword... There was no need for him to buy with treasure a worse warrior.'
Huscarls served their royal lords in peace as well as war. They appear in the sources as tax collectors, witnesses to royal charters, recipients of land grants and donors of land. They may be best characterised as a group of ministers and attendants upon the king who specialised in, but were not limited to war. Thus we find the same man described as a 'cynges huskarl' in one charter and a 'minister regis' in another. Even before this time there is evidence of the king and greater nobles employing 'milites stipendiis' or mercenary warriors.
The huscarls were retained by Edward the Confessor and Harold Godwinsson, and during the reign of the former they appeared to have been recruited by the great eorls as well. Tostig's English and Danish retainers are referred to as huscarls by the Anglo-Saxon Chronicle, but the word may have become a general term describing all landless soldiers as opposed to ðegns who were warriors and land owners under the king.
There are other references to mercenaries in the pay of the king or eorls who were clearly not huscarls. The lithsmen and butsecarles were skilled seamen who also fought on land, more like Marines today, and often seem to have sided with the highest bidder. Not that sea battles were anything like we tend to think of them today. Enemy ships were chased to ground, or the shore in these cases to engage the troops, or the boats were very rarely tied together as a raft and drifted into each other as a platform to fight a 'land' battle on. These and other paid warriors provided the late Saxon kings with a highly trained nucleus supported by the eorls and their war bands, and the ðegns of the fyrd.
By the mid 11th century the royal huscarls probably numbered about 3,000. Eorl Tostig lost two hundred of his own huscarls during the Northumbrian revolt in 1065 - as some of his huscarls survived and escaped a figure of around 250 - 300 huscarls seems reasonable for a powerful eorl.
A national land-fyrd would have consisted of the following components: the forces of the eolderdoms, shires, hundreds (private and royal), private sokes and various companies of stipendary troops, and personal retainers brought by the king and his great magnates. Similarly, a scip-fyrd would have included royal warships manned by the king's butescarles and lithsmen, perhaps the private ships of his eorls, vessels supplied and manned by the ship-sokes, and by 1066, the ships owed in lieu of other royal renders by the boroughs that were to become known as the Cinque Ports.
The evidence for the shire as a tactical unit is overwhelming. Below the shire level, however, matters become less clear. Much is vague about the lesser tactical units of the fyrd, but it seems certain that just as the shires were subdivided into hundreds for judicial and administrative purposes, so the shire levies of the fyrd consisted of hundred contingents. Using the five hide rule this would give basic units of 20 men. Interestingly enough, in Alfred's day, 36 men and over constituted an Army, with less than that a warband, so maybe these figures are a little low. Although with the variance in size of a hundred, and the variance in the number of hides required to produce a warrior, a unit of 15 - 25 men would seem reasonable. Each unit would usually be led by its 'hundred eolder'.
The old idea of the general levy or 'nation in arms' is now considered to be quite incorrect. Although many of the fyrd owned land, they were primarily warriors who farmed when not serving, rather than farmers who fought. Indeed, texts of the time refer to three distinct types of freemen: labourers, soldiers and beadsmen or clergy. As Ælfric wrote:
'The throne stands on these three supports: laoratores (labourers),bellatores (soldiers), oratores (clergy). Labourers are they who provide us with sustenance, the ploughmen and husbandmen devoted to that alone. Clergy are they who intercede for us to God... devoted to that alone for the benefit of us all. Soldiers are they who guard our boroughs and also our land, fighting with weapons against the oncoming army; as St. Paul, the teacher of nations, said in his teaching: The cniht beareth not the sword without cause. He is God's minister to their profit.'
As a climax to his Colloquy, Ælfric has a character called the 'wise councillor' to resolve a heated debate over the relative importance of the various secular professions by declaring:
'Whoever you are, whether priest or monk, or peasant or warrior, exercise yourself in this, and be what you are; because it is a great disgrace and shame for a man not to want to be what he is, and what he has to be.'
This would mean that whilst the 'labourers' would take up weapons such as hunting spears, bows, wood-axes and knives if their own area were threatened, they were certainly not a 'general levy of all able bodied men' and would have provided guards for the fyrd's provisions and logistical support for the fyrd proper.
Certainly there are records of towns defending themselves successfully from attack by the whole population manning the walls with more men than they owed for fyrd service. It would of course, be more surprising in these cases if they did not take up arms.
Often the Bayeux Tapestry is quoted as a source for 'peasant levies' using the group of unarmoured men on the hill, or the fleeing Saxons at the end of the battle to support the theory. If studied closely these men on the hill are equipped with sword, broad-axe and kite shield, certainly not the weapons of a peasant levy. These figures may represent poorer warriors who could not afford armour in addition to their weapons, perhaps lighter skirmishing troops, or maybe those who shed their armour to allow a faster flight and make themselves less conspicuous.
The deeper the subject is studied, the more convincing the argument is that not only was there not a 'general levy' in the tenth and eleventh centuries, but that such a levy never existed except in the imaginations of a few Victorian 'scholars'.
As Richard Abels puts it in his book 'Lordship and Military Obligation in Anglo-Saxon England' :
'The evidence suggests that those who held bookland T.R.E. ['Tempore Regis Edwardi' - 'in the time of King Edward'] were expected to 'defend' their property in person in the royal host. A ðegn who held a great estate, upon which the fyrdfaereld lay so heavily that more than a single warrior was required to discharge the duty, would have been obliged to lead one or more other warriors to the fyrd. How the landowner might obtain the necessary fyrdmen was not the concern of the king, so long as these soldiers were sufficiently competent. In some instances bookholders exchanged a lifetime, or multi-lifetime, interest in a parcel of land for their tenant's armed service. In others they fulfilled their obligation to the king by maintaining fighting men within their own households. Whatever course a magnate chose, he would ordinarily guarantee the loyalty of his warrior-representatives by binding them to himself through commendation. Lordship and land tenure thus provided the twin pillars upon which the military organisation of late Anglo-Saxon England rested. In a very real sense, the royal host never ceased being the king's following arrayed for war. In this lies one of the keys to the turbulent politics of the late tenth and of the eleventh century.'
At Hastings the Saxon army, with its elite force weakened through achieving victory at Stamford Bridge, and short of the quota of men from the fyrd, successfully withstood the Norman army in a battle which lasted considerably longer than was normal for the period from dawn until dusk. At its full strength it could probably have held its own against any army in western Christendom. Its value was certainly not underestimated by its conquerors, who not only adopted the broad-axe, but also perpetuated the fyrd system

The Anglo-Saxon Fyrd c.400–878 A.D.
The Old English word fyrd is used by many modern writers to describe the Anglo-Saxon army, and indeed this is one of its meanings, although the word here is equally valid. In its oldest form the word fyrd had meant "a journey or expedition". However, the exact meaning of the word, like the nature of the armies it is used to describe, changed a great deal between the times the first Germanic settlers left their homelands and the time of the battle of Hastings. The Anglo-Saxon period was a violent one. Warfare dominated its history and shaped the nature of its governance. Indeed, war was the natural state in the Germanic homelands and the patchwork of tribal kingdoms that composed pre-Viking England. Chieftains engaged in a seemingly endless struggle against foreign enemies and rival kinsmen for authority, power and tribute. Even after Christianity had supplied them with an ideology of kingship that did not depend on success in battle these petty wars continued until they were ended by the Viking invasions. From 793AD until the last years of William the Conqueror"s rule, England was under constant threat, and often attack, from the Northmen.
In order to understand the nature of the armies that fought in these battles, many historians in the nineteenth and first half of the twentieth century looked to classical authors, particularly the 1st century Roman Author Tacitus. Tacitus, in his book Germania, gives much detail of how the German tribes organised their military forces, and many historians used the fact that the tribes Tacitus was writing about were the forebears of the early Germanic invaders to explain the nature of the Anglo-Saxon fyrd. But are the tribal customs of barbarian people really a good basis for the nature of a nation removed by almost 1000 years? More recent research has shown that the nature of the fyrd changed a great deal in the 969 years between the time of Tacitus" writing and the battle of Hastings.
For many years there was much debate amongst scholars as to whether the fyrd consisted of nobleman warriors who fought for the king in return for land and privileges (peasants farmed and aristocrats fought), or whether the fyrd consisted of a general levy of all able bodied men in a ceorl (peasant) based economy. In 1962 C.W. Hollister proposed an ingenious solution: there had been not one but two types of fyrd. There had been a "select fyrd", a force of professional, noble land-owning warriors, and a second levy, the "great fyrd" - the nation in arms. This view, because of its elegant simplicity, soon achieved the status of orthodoxy amongst most historians, and is the view put forward in many of the more general books on the period published today. However, continued research has shown this view to be incorrect. Hollister coined the terms "great fyrd" and "select fyrd" because there was no equivalent terminology in contemporary Old English or Latin. Current research shows that the Anglo-Saxon fyrd was a constantly developing organisation, and its nature changes as you go through the Anglo-Saxon period.
From what little we know of the customs and nature of the early German settlers in this country, we can be fairly sure that much of what Tacitus wrote about the first century Germans still applied to their fourth, fifth and early sixth century descendants. The early tribes were military in nature, consisting mainly of free warrior families and tenant farmers, free and unfree, ruled by a tribal chief or king. These tribes were often grouped together in nations, sometimes under the rule of a "high-king".
Tacitus tells us:
"They choose their kings for their noble birth, their leaders for their valour. The power even of the kings is not absolute or arbitrary. As for the leaders, it is their example rather than their authority that wins them special admiration - for their energy, their distinction, or their presence in the van of fight.....
"No business, public or private, is transacted except in arms. But it is the rule that no-one shall take up arms until the tribe has attested that he is likely to make good. When the time comes, one of the chiefs or the father or a kinsman equips the young warrior with shield and spear in the public council. This with the Germans is the equivalent of our toga - the first public distinction of youth. They cease to rank merely as members of the household and are now members of the tribe. Conspicuous ancestry or great services rendered by their fathers can win the rank of chief for boys still in their teens. They are attached to the other chiefs, who are more mature and approved, and no one blushes to be seen thus in the ranks of the companions. This order of companions has even its different grades, as determined by the leader, and there is intense rivalry among the companions for the first place by the chief, amongst the chiefs for the most numerous and enthusiastic companions. Dignity and power alike consist in being continually attended by a corps of chosen youths. This gives you consideration in peace time and security in war. Nor is it only in a man's own nation that he can win fame by the superior number and quality of his companions, but in neighbouring states as well. Chiefs are courted by embassies and complimented by gifts, and they often virtually decide wars by the mere weight of their reputation.
"On the field of battle it is a disgrace to the chief to be surpassed in valour by his companions, to the companions not to come up to the valour of their chief. As for leaving a battle alive after your chief has fallen, that means lifelong infamy and shame. To defend and protect him, to put down one's own acts of heroism to his credit - that is what they really mean by "allegiance"'. The chiefs fight for victory, the companions for their chief. Many noble youths, if the land of their birth is stagnating in a protracted peace, deliberately seek out other tribes, where some war is afoot. The Germans have no taste for peace; renown is easier won among perils, and you cannot maintain a large body of companions except by violence and war. The companions are prodigal in their demands on the generosity of their chiefs. It is always "give me that war-horse" or "give me that bloody and vicious spear". As for meals with their plentiful, if homely, fare, they count simply as pay. Such open-handedness must have war and plunder to feed it."
We know from other parts of Tacitus" writings that the tribes farmers supported chief and his warriors in return for protection from the depravations of enemy tribes. At need, the chief was able to call out all able bodied freemen in defence of the tribes lands, although usually he relied only on his warrior "companions". These companions were fed and housed by the chief, and would receive payment in war-gear and food (the only use of precious metals by the Germans in Tacitus"s time was for trading with the Roman Empire).
How were these companions equipped? Again Tacitus can help us here:
"Only a very few use swords or lances. The spears that they carry - frameae is the native word - have short and narrow heads, but are so sharp and easy to handle, that the same weapon serves at need for close or distant fighting. The horseman asks no more than his shield and spear, but the infantry have also javelins to shower, several per man, and they can hurl them to a great distance; for they are either naked or only lightly clad in their cloaks. There is nothing ostentatious in their turn out. Only the shields are picked out with carefully selected colours. Few have body armour; only here and there will you see a helmet of metal or hide. Their horses are not distinguished either for beauty or for speed, nor are they trained in Roman fashion to execute various turns. They ride them straight ahead or with a single swing to the right, keeping the wheeling line so perfect that no one drops behind the rest. On general survey, their strength is seen to lie rather in their infantry, and that is why they combine the two arms in battle. The men who they select from the whole force and station in the van are fleet of foot and fit admirably into cavalry action. The number of these chosen men is exactly fixed. A hundred are drawn from each district, and 'the hundred' is the name they bear at home."
This seems to be a misunderstanding by Tacitus because, although the hundred was a land division, it is unlikely, given the size of armies at the time, that each would send 100 warriors. However, from this description it would seem that the warriors were primarily infantry with a small amount of cavalry support. They would generally be armed only with spear(s) and shield, although a few of the greatest/most well off might possess a sword, helm or, rarely, body armour. Archaeology bears this out, and probably most of the swords, helms and mailshirts originated within the Roman Empire, reaching the Germans either by trade or as spoils of war. The relative commonness and scarcity of the various types of arms and armour is well borne out by finds from sacrificial bogs where votive offerings of the arms and armour of defeated enemies were often made. In these finds shields and spears (and surprisingly often bows and arrows) are by far the most common, with swords, helms and armour all being much rarer. Up until the fourth century most of these swords, helms and mailshirts are of Roman type, although from the fifth century onwards distinctly German type swords become more common.
By the time of the invasion of Britain in the fifth century the Germans had become so heavily dependant on their infantry that one British writer tells us that "they know not the use of cavalry." The armies coming to this country were usually far smaller than their Roman predecessors. Most of the accounts tell of the armies arriving in only two or three ships, and as ships of this time generally carried no more than 50-60 men, most of these armies probably only numbered 100-200 men. Despite the small size of these armies, the Germans were able to carve themselves out many small kingdoms, killing, driving off or enslaving the native population as they went, but it should be remembered that they did not always have things their own way. This was the time of Arthur who, through his use of Roman cavalry tactics against the Germanic infantry, was able to defeat the invaders so heavily, they were unable to advance any further for almost fifty years. However, by the end of the sixth century the Germanic, or as they were then starting to call themselves, Anglo-Saxon invaders had taken over much of lowland Britain and carved out many small Kingdoms of varying strengths and hierarchies much as they had had in Germany.
War was endemic to the kingdoms of sixth, seventh and eighth century Britain. An Anglo-Saxon ruler of this period was above all else a warlord, a dryhten, as the Old-English sources put it. His primary duty was to protect his people against the depredations of their neighbours and to lead them on expeditions ( fyrds) of plunder and conquest. As we hear in Beowulf (who lived at this time) about Scyld (literally 'shield'), the mythical founder of the Danish royal line:
"Scyld Sceafing often deprived his enemies, many tribes of men, of their mead-benches. He terrified his foes; yet he, as a boy, had been found as a waif; fate made amends for that. He prospered under heaven, won praise and honour, until the men of every neighbouring tribe, across the whale's way, were obliged to obey him and pay him tribute. He was a good king!"
Scyld was a good king because he was lord of a mighty war-band that profited from his leadership. As long as he lived, his people were safe and he enjoyed tribute from the surrounding tribes. This portrait is no mere convention of a heroic genre. Even the early Anglo-Saxon monks, when writing about the Anglo-Saxon kings of this time, show that this was not an heroic ideal, but the way a king ruled.
It is noteworthy that the early sources use the language of personal lordship to express the obligations owed a king. When Wiglaf followed Beowulf into combat against the dragon, he did not speak of his duty to "king and country," but of the responsibility of a retainer to serve and protect his lord. In fact, amongst the early Anglo-Saxons a king was simply the lord of the nobles. Even the term cyning [king] literally only means "of the kin" and denoted a member of the royal line, while the office of king was expressed by the titles hlaford [loaf- or land-lord] and dryhten [war-lord]. The æþeling who was chosen for the office of king was merely the member of the royal line who could command the largest war-band. This fact helps to explain the many "civil wars" which took place in the early Anglo-Saxon kingdoms, and why a king who gained his position by force could so quickly be accepted by his subjects.
A seventh or eighth century king most often came to his throne through violence or through the threat of violence, and kept his crown by warding off domestic and foreign rivals. Peace was simply the aftermath of one war and the prelude to another. In violent times such as these, it was necessary that a king secure (in the words of the Beowulf poet) "beloved companions to stand by him, people to serve him when war comes." But what obliged men in seventh century England to attend a king"s army, and what sort of men were they? As the kingdoms developed in England the ceorl (peasant) had come to receive a more important position than in the Germanic homelands, but did he replace the nobleman in forming the bulk of the king"s army (a view held by many nineteenth and early twentieth century historians). Careful study of contemporary sources has shown that although the ceorl, as a freeman, had the right to bear arms, he would rarely have joined the king"s fyrd. The word fyrd had, by this time, acquired a distinctly martial connotation, and had come to mean "armed expedition or force."
It is clear that the king"s companions or, to use the Old English term, Gesiþas were still drawn from aristocratic warrior families, but now the gift-giving seen in earlier times had undergone something of a change. Now, in addition to war-gear, gifts of valuable items (a lord is often referred to as a "giver of rings" in literature) were given too, or most sought after of all, land. In Anglo-Saxon England a gift was not given freely, and a gift was expected in return in the form of service. When a warrior took up service with a lord he was required to "love all that his lord loved, and to hate all that he hated." Neither gift was "complete" - gift and counter-gift sustained one another. For example, although it was customary for a warrior to receive an estate for life (either his own or his lord"s), it was not a certainty. If one failed in his duty to the king the royal grant could be forfeited. Thus the king"s gift was as open-ended as his retainers counter-gift of service; the former was continually renewed and confirmed by the latter.
To receive land from one"s lord was a sign of special favour. A landed estate was a symbolic as well as an economic gift. It differed from other gifts in that its possession signified a new, higher status for the warrior within the king"s retinue. Consequently, by the seventh century we see the emergence of different classes of warrior noble - the geoguþ (youth) and duguþ (proven warrior). The former were young, unmarried warriors, often the sons of duguþ, who, having as yet no land of their own, resided with their lord, attending and accompanying him as he progressed through his estates, much as the "companions" of Tacitus" day had done. The well known settlement of West Stow near Bury St. Edmunds in Suffolk may well have represented an estate of the type which would have been granted to a duguþ. When a gesiþ of this sort had proved himself to his lord"s satisfaction, he received from him a suitable endowment of land, perhaps even the land his father had held from the lord. This made him into a duguþþ. He ceased to dwell in his lord"s household, although he still attended his councils; rather, he lived upon the donated estate, married, raised a family, and maintained a household of his own. In order to improve his standing the duguþ would often raise military retainers of his own, probably from amongst the more prosperous ceorls on his estates (this is how the name geneat [companion] originated to describe men from the top portion of the cierlisc class) and other geoguþ who had not yet sworn themselves to some other lord. These estates are often referred to a scir (shire) in the early records. This military following was known as the lord"s hearþweru or hirþ [household or "hearth" troops].
When a king assembled his army, the duguþ were expected to answer his summons at the head of their retinues, much as they would attend his court in time of peace. The fyrd would thus have been the king"s household warriors (gesiþ) augmented by the followings of his landed retainers (duguþ). If a warrior did not answer the king"s summons, he could be penalised, as King Ine"s laws show:
51. If a gesiþcund mon [nobleman] who holds land neglects military service, he shall pay 120 shillings and forfeit his land; [a nobleman] who holds no land shall pay 60 shillings; a cierlisc [peasant] shall pay 30 shillings as penalty for neglecting the fyrd.
This clause does not prove that the early Anglo-Saxon fyrd was made up of peasant warriors, as some historians argue. Rather, it shows that some peasants fought alongside the nobility when the king summoned his army. These ceorls were the peasants in the service of the king, or in the service of one of his duguþ. When an Anglo-Saxon king of the sixth to eighth century chose to war, his retainers would follow him into battle, not out of duty to defend the "nation" or the "folk," but because he was their lord. Similarly, their own men, also obliged by the bond of lordship, fought under them.
The size of these armies was quite small; King Ine defined the size of an army in his law code:
13. §1. We use the term "thieves" if the number of men does not exceed seven, "band of marauders" [or "war-band"] for a number between seven and thirty-five. Anything beyond this is an "army" [here]
Although the exact size of armies of this time remain unknown, even the most powerful kings could probably not call upon warriors numbering more than the low hundreds. Certainly in the late eighth century the æþeling (prince) Cyneherd considered his army of eighty-four men sufficiently large to attempt to seize the throne of Wessex.
When Centwine became king of the West Saxons in 676AD, he drove his rival kinsman, Cædwalla, into exile. The exiled nobleman sought refuge in the "desert places of Chiltern and the Weald" and gathered about himself a war-band. In time his following grew so large that he was able to plunder the lands of the South Saxons, and kill their king in the process. After nine years of brigandage, he turned back to Wessex and began to "contend for the kingdom." The king"s resources were no match for Cædwalla"s, and when they met in battle the West Saxon fyrd was decisively defeated. It seems most likely that Cædwalla"s victory was the triumph of one war-band over another, rather than the conquest of a "nation."
Time and again we are told in the sources that a new king had to defend his kingdom with tiny armies. Later in their reigns, these same kings having survived these attacks made "while their kingdoms were still weak," are found leading great armies. After all, victory meant tribute and land, and these in turn meant that a king could attract more warriors into his service.
How were these warriors equipped? Unfortunately, our only written sources for this period are the heroic tales such as Beowulf and the Finnesburh Fragment, etc., but these are remarkably consistent in their descriptions. From the Finnesburh Fragment we hear:
"…Birds of battle screech, the grey wolf howls, spears rattle, shield answers shaft. …Then many a thegn, laden in gold, buckled on his sword-belt. …The hollow shield called for bold men"s hands, helmets burst; …Then Guþere withdrew, a wounded man; he said that his armour was almost useless, his byrnie [mail-shirt] broken, his helmet burst open."
In Beowulf we hear many references to arms and armour such as:
"Then Hrothgar"s thane leaped onto his horse and, brandishing a spear, galloped down to the shore; there, he asked at once: "Warriors! Who are you, in your coats of mail, who have steered your tall ship over the sea-lanes to these shores? .... Never have warriors, carrying their shields, come to this country in a more open manner. Nor were you assured of my leader"s approval, my kinsmen"s consent. I have never set eyes on a more noble man, a warrior in armour, than one among your band; he"s no mere retainer, so ennobled by his weapons." ... The boar crest, brightly gleaming, stood over their helmets: superbly tempered, plated with glowing gold, it guarded the lives of those grim warriors. ... Their byrnies were gleaming, the strong links of shining chain-mail chinked together. When the sea-stained travellers had reached the hall itself in their fearsome armour, they placed their broad shields (worked so skilfully) against Heorot"s wall. Then they sat on a bench; the brave men"s armour sang. The seafarer"s gear stood all together, a grey tipped forest of ash spears; that armed troop was well equipped with weapons. .... in common we all share sword, helmet, byrnie, the trappings of war."
These descriptions are borne out by archaeology. Male burials in the pagan period were often accompanied by war gear. On average around 47% of male burials from the pagan period contain weapons of some sort. This figure has often been used to argue for the idea of a "nation in arms", but has conveniently overlooked the fact that although spears were found in just over 86% of the accompanied burials, shields were found in only 44%. As we have seen earlier, and as the literary evidence bears out, spear and shield made up the basic war-gear of an Anglo-Saxon warrior. It should be borne in mind that, although the spear was used in battle, it was also a tool of the hunt. Many of the interred spears probably represent hunting tools rather than weapons. As we start to look at other types of weapon, we find they are far less common than the spear and shield. Swords are found in only about 12% of accompanied burials, axes in about 2% and seaxes (traditionally, the knife from which the Saxons derive their name.) only about 4%. This makes for an interesting comparison with the Saxons" continental homelands where some 50 - 70% contained seaxes. Armour and helmets, whilst not unknown are decidedly rare and are usually only found in the richest of burials. Certainly in archaeology they seem to be far rarer than in literature, although the few examples we have agree remarkably well with the literary descriptions. This apparent rarity of armour and helmets may have more to do with burial customs than the scarcity of these items at the time. It appears that the pagan Anglo-Saxons believed in some warrior heaven, similar in nature to the Viking Valhalla. The grave goods were what they would need in this afterlife, and in order to fight the warrior needed weapons, but if death was only a "temporary setback", why give them armour that could be far better used by their mortal counterparts?
It would seem likely from these sources that the kings and more important noblemen would possess a coat-of-mail and a crested helmet, a sword, shield and spear(s). Noblemen of middling rank may have possessed a helm, perhaps a sword, and a shield and spear(s). The lowest ranking warriors would have been equipped with just a shield and spear(s), and perhaps a secondary weapon such as an axe or seax.
The advent of Christianity in the seventh century was to bring about a change in the fyrd which would totally change its nature by the middle of the ninth century. As Christianity spread the monasteries needed land on which to build, and as we have already seen land tended to be given only for the lifetime of the king. However, the monasteries needed a more secure arrangement than just the hope that the king"s successor would maintain the donation. This was achieved through the introduction of a Roman system known as ius perpetuum, or as the Anglo-Saxons called it bocland . Under this system the king gave the land to the Church in eternity, and the grant was recorded in writing [the book] and witnessed by important noblemen and churchmen so that the land could not be taken back in future. Although book-land was foreign in origin, it flourished in England because the notion a man gave so that he might receive was anything but foreign to the pagan English. Book-land must have struck early Christian kings as a reasonable demand on the part of the Church. A Christian king gave a free gift to God in hope of receiving from Him an eternal gift - salvation. Whilst nothing that he could give to the Lord would be sufficient, for no man could be God"s equal, just as no retainer could hope to be the equal of his lord, a king could at least respond with an eternal terrestrial gift, a perpetual grant of land and the rights over it. This exchange of gifts confirmed the relationship of lordship that existed between a king and his Lord God in the same way as the relationship between a gesiþ and his lord.
How did book-land impinge upon the early fyrd arrangement? On the simplest level, what was given to the Church could not be used to endow warriors. As time went by more and more land was booked to the church, and many of the kings noblemen became disgruntled. Some of the noblemen offered to build abbeys and become the abbot on their land in return for the book-right, and this was often granted even if the noblemen did not keep his end of the bargain. The holders of these early books, both genuine and spurious, enjoyed their tenures free from all service, including military service. And by giving the land in book-right, the king had removed it permanently from his control.
The kings faced a dilemma. This dilemma was first solved by the Mercian kings of the mid-eighth century, when King Æþelbald decreed that all the churches and monasteries in his realm were to be free from "all public renders, works and charges, reserving only two things: the construction of bridges and the defence of fortifications against enemies."
By the latter part of the eighth century book-right was being granted to secular as well as ecclesiastical men. In order to maintain his fyrd, King Offa of Mercia further refined Æþthelbald"s decree by giving land free of all service "except for matters pertaining to expeditions [fyrd], and the construction of bridges and fortifications, which is necessary for the whole people and from which none ought to be excused." By the mid ninth century these "common burdens" (as they were often referred to) were being demanded in all the kingdoms.
In short the idea of military service as a condition of land tenure was a consequence of book-right. Under the traditional land-holding arrangement a stipulation of this sort would have been unnecessary - a holder of loanland from the king was by definition a king"s man, and his acceptance of an estate obliged him to respond with fidelity and service to his royal lord. Book-land tenure, a hereditary possession, was quite a different matter, for such a grant permanently removed the land from the king"s control without assuring that future generations who owned the property would recognise the king or his successors as their lord. By imposing the "common burdens", the king guaranteed military service from book-land and tied the holders of the book securely to the ruler of the tribe. By this time the terms geoguþ and duguþ were being replaced by dreng (young warrior) and thegn (one who serves). The dreng still attended the king directly, whilst the thegn was usually the holder of book-land. By now, the term scir usually denoted more than just a single estate, and the thegn who held the scir was usually referred to as an ealdorman. Many of the lesser thegns within the scir would have held their land from the ealdorman in addition to those who held land directly from the king.

[B]The Anglo-Saxon Fyrd 878 - 1066A.D.
The Kingdom of England was forged in the furnace of Viking invasions. Quite simply, the depredations of the Danes aided Wessex by extinguishing all other royal lineages. By 900A.D. only the those of Cerdic remained, and the kings of this dynasty found that their survival depended on a total reorganisation of their realm, both administratively and militarily.
The Anglo-Saxon Chronicle entry for 871 gives us a good idea of the nature of the military system that Alfred inherited from his father and brothers. After describing six battles, the annals conclude with the observation that 'during that year nine general engagements were fought against the Danish army in the kingdom south of the Thames, besides the expeditions which the king's brother Alfred and single ealdormen and king's thegns often rode on, which were not counted.' From this, and other sources, it would seem that the West Saxon military establishment consisted of three general types of army: the national host, shire forces led by individual ealdormen, and the war bands of individual thegns. The first of these is sometimes referred to as the folc, and was characterised by the personal leadership of the king. It would consist of the king with his own personal war-band, augmented by the war-bands of his ealdormen and thegns.
However, each of these territorial units was an army in itself. An eighth or ninth century ealdorman could wage war on his own initiative and was expected to do so in defence of his scir. Just as the national host was made up of shire forces, so the shire forces were made up of the followings of individual local thegns. These thegns, in turn could mount raids of their own, but the sources unsurprisingly take little note of these small war-bands. None of these forces, not even the folc, was the 'nation in arms.' All were war-bands led by chieftains, whose troops were bound to them by personal ties as well as by the 'common burdens' imposed upon their land. In essence, they still remained the king's following arrayed for battle.
Despite the lordship tie, Alfred's difficulties in 878 were due in no small part to his dependence upon the 'common burdens' for the defence of the kingdom. The growing importance of bookland aggravated certain problems previously encountered in connection with the earlier landholding gesiðas. Quite simply it took time to summon and gather warriors from the various localities, and a highly mobile raiding force could devastate a region before the king's host could engage it in battle. Added to this was a second drawback. Those who held bookland were territorial lords with local interests, and were thus far more likely to seek terms with the Danish invaders, if by their timely submission they could save all or part of their inheritance.
After his victory at Edington in the spring of 878, Alfred realised he could not rely upon the existing military system to counter the continuing Danish threat. If he were to survive and consolidate his hold upon Wessex, he would have to innovate, and this he did. The king's adoption of Danish tactics in the winter of 878, such as his use of strongholds and small mobile raiding parties to harry the lands of his enemies, was forced upon him by immediate circumstances. Over the next twenty years of his reign, he was to revolutionise Anglo-Saxon military practice. Alfred answered the Danish threat by creating an impressive system of fortified burhs throughout his realm and by reforming the fyrd, changing it from a sporadic levy of king's men and their retinues into a standing force. This system, and its extension into Mercia, enabled his kingdom to survive and formed the basis for the reconquest of the Danelaw by his son Edward and his grandson Æþelstan. He divided the fyrd into two rotating contingents designed to give some continuity to military actions. Rather than respond to Vikings with ad hoc levies of his local noblemen which were disbanded when the crisis had passed, the West Saxons would now always have a force in the field. As the Anglo-Saxon Chronicles tell us: 'The king divided his army into two, so that always half of its men were at home, half on service, apart from the men who guarded the boroughs.' Moreover, like the Danish heres [armies], Alfred's fyrd was to be composed of mounted warriors possessing the necessary mobility to pursue an enemy known for its elusiveness. The warriors who waited their turn 'at home' also filled a necessary defensive function. It was essential that some king's thegns and their retainers remain behind to guard their lands and those of their neighbours on campaign against sudden raids, if for no other reason than the obvious one that landholders would have been reluctant to leave their estates and families totally undefended. The warriors who stayed behind do appear to have been obliged to join the garrisons of nearby burhs on local forays.
Alfred also had compelling administrative reasons for his division of the fyrd. The Anglo-Saxons did not draw much distinction between 'military' and 'police' actions. The same men who led the king's hosts, his thegns, gerefa [reeves] and ealdormen, also did justice. The same mounted men who were responsible for the capture of lawbreakers were also responsible for the defence of the kingdom - there was a thin line between posse and army! After all, the Danish invasions did not end ordinary criminal activity, in fact there is some evidence to suggest it may have increased.
Alfred's innovations did not affect the basic makeup of the fyrd, which remained composed of nobles and their lesser-born followers. This is borne out from many sources; ordinary ceorls would generally be unable to afford the expensive horse required for fyrd service, the summoning of the fyrd left ordinary agricultural activities such as harvest unaffected, and not least, Alfred's own words. For Alfred society was divided three ways; beadsmen ( gebedmen) prayed, warriors ( fyrdmen) fought and workmen ( weorcmen) laboured, each a necessary, distinct class. This idea was reiterated by several later writers.
The Alfredian fyrd was designed to act in tandem with the burwaran, the permanent garrisons that the king settled in the newly built burhs. The size of the garrison in each burh varied according to the length of its walls (4 men for every 51/2 yards), but an average one would have required a garrison of about 900 men. Because of this vast requirement for manpower, each burh was at the centre of a large district specially created for its needs. The landholders in these 'burghal districts' were charged with providing the men necessary to maintain and garrison the burhs, on the basis of one man from every hide of their land. This appears to be in addition to the landowner's obligations to serve in the king's fyrd.
The scale of service demanded by Alfred and his descendants was unprecedented, the garrisons of the burhs alone represented a standing army of almost 30,000 without the fyrd. These figures suprisingly do not include the military strength of the navy that Alfred raised to counter the Danish threat either. The days of winning kingdoms with only a few hundred men were gone.
How Alfred's fyrdmen were equipped is uncertain, although spears and shields still remained the prime weapons. It may well be that this was all the equipment the average burwaran would use, possibly supplied to him by his lord. The fyrdmen, on the other hand were a professional warrior class, drawn from amongst the wealthiest men in the country, expecting to face a well equipped, professional enemy army. The evidence we have suggests that helmets, swords and mailshirts had become much more common by the time of Alfred's reforms, and most of the fyrd would have been equipped with at least a helm and sword in addition to their spear, shield and horse. Many would also have possessed a mailshirt. Some of the more well off burwaran may also have been equipped in a similar way to the fyrd.
The innovations that Alfred introduced meant that within twenty years of his death, most of the Danelaw had been reconquered by the West Saxon kings and their Mercian allies. By the middle of the tenth century the last Danish king had been driven out of England and the West Saxon line now ruled the whole country.
In the decades that followed, although the parts of Alfred's and Edward's system remained, the function of each had been redefined during a generation of peace. The fyrd reverted to its former incarnation as an ad hoc levy of noblemen and their retainers, summoned to meet a crisis, a far less expensive system than maintaining a standing army. The garrisons of the burhs were disbanded, and the burhs now stood merely as places of refuge for the civilian population. As such they failed to stem the Viking invasions which recommenced at the end of the tenth century. Burh after burh was stormed and burned by the invaders. Although some attempt was made to refortify some of the old burhs, it did little good without the integrated system of permanent standing army and permanent garrisons envisioned by Alfred.
The vulnerability of the burhs, brought home by these disasters, led Æþelred to bolster their naval forces in the hopes of preventing the Danes from landing. He required every three hundred (or three hundred and ten) hides of land to build and maintain a ship with a crew of 60 men, thus extending the 'common burdens' to naval matters. The system of 'hundreds' was also refined in the tenth century as both a military and administrative district, headed by a 'hundred ealdor' who was the district's leader in peace and war, and who was responsible to the king's reeve or ealdorman. Also at this time, the kings' law codes placed royal authority on a more secure footing by equating it with lordship. These codes also made it easier for the king to exact the 'common burdens' and punishing those who were reluctant to fulfil their obligations as land-holders. They also made the king once more the lord of all 'fyrd-worthy' men, making the fyrd once more the king's retinue arrayed for battle, but with a great difference: fyrd service for many was now a condition of tenure.
In the late tenth and eleventh century the system was further refined, at first under Æþelred and later under Cnut. Fyrd service was directly related to the amount of land held. The figure of one warrior from every five hides is often given, and on average this may well be the case, but the exact amount of land a man should possess to be required to provide a warrior varied a great deal. It seems that each landowner made his own arrangements with the king in respect of service, sometimes a man holding only a hide or two was expected to provide a warrior, sometimes an estate of well over five hides might only expect to supply one warrior. Five hides of land is the usual figure associated with a thegn at this time, although some thegns held much larger estates, and some of the poor thegns are recorded as having estates on only one or two hides. However, possession of five hides did not automatically gain one the status of a thegn. The coincidence of the five hide ruling with reference to both military service and the rank of thegn shows that it was predominantly those of thegnly rank who were expected to serve in the fyrd, the possession of the land putting the obligation on the man. It would usually be the land-owner themselves who served in the fyrd, but if for some reason the landowner was unable to attend in person, perhaps because they were a woman land-holder or infirm, they could send a replacement in their stead who was 'acceptable' to the king, or commute the service with payment. This payment would then be used to hire a 'mercenary' replacement.
If an estate was expected to supply more than one warrior, the lord of the estate would have to recruit from amongst his tenants. He might have lesser thegns in his service, in which case these would probably serve, but often the warriors must have been drawn from amongst the upper class of the ceorls, the geneatas. Often smaller estates were grouped together in units of approximately five hides, and this group was expected to send one of their number for fyrd service. It seems that at this time fyrd service was performed in two month periods, but it is unclear how many times a year the king could call upon this service. What is clear is that the warrior sent was given money for his own maintenance from the lands he was serving. This payment was, on average, twenty shillings for each two month period - a figure equivalent to the pay of many post conquest knights! This high 'rate of pay' further argues for the professional nature of the late Saxon fyrdman. Although, in theory, the relationship between the warrior and the king was still that of commended man to his lord seen in Tacitus' writings, many laws were issued to make the relationship binding. Two of the best examples of these come from the laws of king Cnut:
77. Concerning the man who deserts his lord. And the man who, through cowardice, deserts his lord or his comrades on a military expedition, either by sea or by land, shall lose all that he possesses and his own life, and the lord shall take back the property and the land which he had given him.
And if he has book-land it shall pass into the king's hand.
78. Concerning the man who falls before his lord. And the heriot [death duty paid in arms and armour] of the man who falls before his lord on campaign, whether within the country or abroad, shall be remitted, and the heirs shall succeed to his land and his property and make a very just division of the same.
Despite such legislation, it seems the lordship bond was still quite strong, since even in the late tenth- and eleventh-century we still find many references to the lord and his hearþweru. The most notable example of this is in the poem the Battle of Maldon:
'So Æþelred's earl, the lord of those people, fell; all his hearth-companions [hearþweru] could see for themselves that their lord lay low. Then the proud thegns went forth there, the brave men hastened eagerly: they all wished, then, for one of two things - to avenge their lord or to leave this world.'
In addition to the warriors owing service in respect of their land, the eleventh century fyrd contained other types of warriors. A more ancient element within the fyrd, the king's personal entourage, retained its importance throughout the period. The huscarles of Cnut and the later Saxon kings represented the last elements of the earlier class of gesiðas. They formed a group of professional warriors in the direct service of the king, living in his hall and receiving gifts from the king in return for their service. They accompanied the king on journeys, served as ministers in peacetime and formed his bodyguard and the backbone of his royal host in times of war. Although often seen as mercenaries, because they received payment from the king, their service arose from the obligation to serve their lord rather than just a cash inducement. The body of royal huscarles is said to have numbered 3,000 by 1066, and it seems that by this date many of the other great lords also had their own huscarles, sometimes numbering into the hundreds.
That mercenaries were also used is beyond doubt, the butescarles and lithsmen of this period are just that - warriors who fought for hard cash. Many of these men were probably employed in respect of lands who had commuted their military obligation for cash, although others were employed entirely in their own right.
Although the reasons for service, and the professionalism of the warriors involved had changed, even at the Battle of Hastings, in essence the fyrd still consisted of the king's host arrayed for battle, supported by their own retainers, much as the armies of the earlier Germanic invaders had been, but on a much more massive, professional and well organised way.
By the second half of the tenth century, and throughout the eleventh, the Anglo-Saxon fyrd was more than just a king's host arrayed for war, it was a well equipped professional army of heavy infantry. Although the spear and shield still remained the basic weapon of the fyrdman, it was now usual for all to have a horse, sword, helmet and mailshirt too. Some illustrations suggest that hand-axes were also used, but whether in addition to, or in place of, the sword is unclear. There are many references to even ceorls serving in the fyrd possessing swords, and that mailshirts and helms would have been widespread is shown by the fact that Æþelred commanded that every eight hides provide a helmet and byrnie. In addition, the heriot, that is the death duty paid to a lord when a thegn died, was set at four horses (two with saddles), two swords and a coat of mail. Since the heriot represented the return of the gifts of a lord to his retainer, we can see that this was the equipment a thegn would be expected to possess. That the thegns did possess this equipment is borne out by the fact that, although it was possible to commute this payment to cash, the payment was almost always made in the form of these arms. The reason for the large number of horses may be explained by the fact that it represented a mount and remount or pack-horse for the thegn and a retainer who would look after the thegn's horse while he was in battle, or carry messages for him, etc..
It appears that generally the huscarles were even more heavily equipped than the thegns. In addition to the equipment associated with a normal fyrdman, at least at the time of Cnut they were expected to own 'splendid armour,' including a double-edged sword with a gold inlaid hilt and a 'massive and bloodthirsty two-handed axe,' this latter weapon having been introduced into England in the course of the Viking attacks at the end of the tenth century.
Of the equipment of the butescarles and lithsmen we know little, but presumably, if they were being used to replace members of the fyrd their equipment must have been at least of the same type and quality as a fyrdman's.
Finally, it should not be forgotten that the king's right to call upon 'every able bodied man' for military service was never forgotten. Right up until the time of Harold Godwinson the king retained that right. However, just because the king had the right did not mean he exercised it. The duty to serve was confined to the shire boundaries and for a single day, otherwise the service had to be paid, except in the Welsh and Scottish Marches, where 15 days seems to have been the norm. It is useful to note that when this levy was called out, as in 1006, the term 'the whole of the people' is used rather than the more military term fyrd. As time went by and armies became more and more professional and better and better equipped, a 'peasant levy' of untrained men equipped with hunting spears, and perhaps if they were lucky, a shield loaned to them by their lord, became less and less use. If men such as this were called upon (and it would be rare for this to happen), they would not be expected to get involved in the thick of the fighting. Rather, they would get jobs such as holding the fyrd's horses, guarding the baggage train, ferrying supplies of javelins and water to the fyrdmen, tending to the wounded, carrying messages, defending burhs, etc.. After all how much use is an untrained, unarmoured farmer going to be against a well equipped, well trained professional warrior who's been learning his deadly trade from the first time he was able to pick up a weapon?

[B]Welsh Warfare
There is little surviving evidence of Welsh military texts. Outside the formularised heroic literature, descriptions of battles, tactics and army compositions are rare. The main literary sources are:
· 'The Gododdin' - arguably a seventh century poem.
· The lament for Cynddylan - from 'Canu Llwyarch Hen' of the ninth century.
· The 'Armes Prydein' of the tenth century.
· 'The Four Branches of the Mabinogi' of early twelfth or possibly late eleventh century origin.
· 'Culhwch and Olwen' in the same manuscript as the Mabinogi but provenancable from a slightly earlier period.
There are also brief mentions in the pre-twelfth century 'Lives' of four saints: Cadog, Illtud, David, and Samson.
Overwhelmingly the evidence speaks of the king and his mounted war-band who were drawn from the nobility. There may be a bias against the inclusion of the peasantry in the records of some of the larger battles, but for the average raid this was clearly all that was needed. Some of the more powerful nobles may also have had their own war-band. Warriors could fight on horseback or on foot. The spear was the principle weapon, but nobles are recorded as owning a sword and wearing a mail shirt - presumably kings did so too if they wished to be kings for any length of time. The round shield and knife were also standard equipment. There are no descriptions of armed peasants in the literature. However, as they could certainly be called upon for military service we may assume they would have armed themselves with the crudest of weapons: spear and shield, knife, wood axe, bow or some agricultural implement. Peasants would probably have travelled and fought on foot if they ever found themselves in such a position.
Of greater use to the Welsh kings of the tenth and eleventh centuries was the supply of Viking and Saxon mercenaries. The Viking mercenaries were probably drawn from Dublin and paid in silver in the form of coin or hack-silver, for there were no major Scandinavian settlements in Wales. Archaeological and documentary evidence seems to suggest that the Vikings concentrated almost exclusively on the lower lying coastal areas. The vast majority of raids were seaborne and most were aimed at Anglesey or Dyfed. Settlement probably only occurred on a relatively large scale in Dyfed, if the place name evidence is to be accepted. Many other scattered sites around Wales suggest that the Vikings had a direct effect on the coastal fringe of Wales. This is indicating to us more and more that they did the same as they had done before in other areas and created small settlements and farms in the flatter coastal edges. Anglesey, from the Norse Onglsae, or Ongul's sea, has been the site of some intense archaeological interest of late regarding the siting of Viking dwellings. These sites often occur close to previous sites used by the Welsh, and far from pushing them out, it seems that a gradual integration took place. The archaeological evidence is mostly limited to chance finds along the coastline, so that possible settlement site on the isle of Grassholm is no longer a solitary site. Swansea comes from Swein's sea, and Orm's Head near Llandudno speaks for itself. So who were the Vikings raiding around the Welsh coast, the Welsh or themselves?
The English also allowed themselves to be used as mercenaries, playing off one Welsh king against another, and occasionally employing the Welsh in their own campaigns. It is clear that the availability of mercenaries in eleventh century Wales promoted warfare on a greater scale than was usual before.
The archaeological evidence for weapons is virtually non-existent, due to the lack of excavated early medieval sites. The Welsh were Christians and did not normally bury weapons with their dead. There are a few spearheads of non Anglo-Saxon type that cannot be dated to the Iron Age or Roman periods. There is also a very fine silver sword hilt decorated in an Anglo-Saxon style from Radnorshire, now on display in the British Museum. There are no depictions of fighting men on surviving stone sculptures, likewise the very few early Welsh manuscripts that survive do not depict fighting men.
The crux of this subject is that the Welsh have enjoyed just as many other cultures have done, talking about their past victories. But how long ago they all were is anyones guess. The Vikings say little regarding Welsh resistance. And their arch rivals the English, according to the Anglo-Saxon Chronicles only suffered one major defeat in 1055 when their horse borne foray to teach the Welsh a lesson went belly up. This it has to be said was redressed by a more traditional attack a little later. Post Offa's Dyke, which runs down the border of Wales and England, the Welsh were regarded as a nuisance if they did venture into English territory, as opposed to an outright threat that the Vikings posed.
Offa's Dyke, a huge undertaking, and despite the various watch posts and signal beacons, was not impenetrable. The signal fires could have alerted the militias in the various towns and villages within half an hour from coast to coast. The ditch and palisaded dyke would have made it difficult for Welsh raiders to enter England, but almost impossible for them to return laden with any booty such as cattle. Cattle, especially good breeding bulls, were worth their weight in gold, and at least it didn't need carrying, and you could eat the evidence.

Bondage & armour in viking England
Part 1 - Some thoughts
One of the things that has always puzzled me about Byzantine manuscripts and ivory caskets is their depiction of a chest strap and two shoulder straps over the lamellar armour. In the Osprey books, this is dealt with in a very unsatisfactory manner, with the bands being shown as leather but no attempt to show any means of fastening, or even an attempt to explain them. In fact, the entire treatment of the lamellar is generally misleading in the Osprey illustrations; it is, for instance, impossible to continue the torso plates straight up into the arms (unless you wish to spend your life with your life with your arms outstretched horizontally!).
Consider also the methods of fastening the armour: in only one illustration are the buckles shown at the front, which is practical, though they run the risk of being cut by a slashing blow. It is only practical that each man should be able to put on his own armour, so tell me how all these people do up the fastenings which appear to be in the middle of their backs?
The best solution is to have the lamellar fastenings up the side, and as the left side is covered by the shield it would seem to be the obvious choice. As far as I know, no complete set of lamellar survives, and as such details would have been painted on to complete carvings they too have not survived, but my interpretations are at least based on field trials of reconstructed lamellar, namely Ketil's 600 plate example.
So, returning to the original point about the strapping arrangements, the first thing to be borne in mind is that most Byzantine armour was issue kit, held in central armouries and issued to units, rather than personalised items. So what happens when I, with my mere 36" chest, get lumbered with some designed for weight-trainers like Ketil with their 44" chests? Well, what you don't do is just lace it up and rattle around inside it: it's very uncomfortable after a short time, and rubs away at your neck. The solution is not to tie up the armour, but to overlap it.
This is secured in place by a broad leather band around the chest, tied together at the ends. Of course, any strenuous exertion, such as fighting, results in heavy breathing, and as a result the band will inevitably slip down around your waist, where it is no good to anyone. This is where the shoulder straps come in. Secured to the main band below each shoulder blade, they pass over the shoulder and are tied or buckled onto the chest band, again at the font. Simple, isn't it.
Like the Croix du Nord Norman group from Regia Anglorum and their interpretation of chest squares from the Bayeux Tapestry, it is only when we, as a living history society, attempt a reconstruction using the information available in a practical form that we can provide valid answers to these questions.
Part 2 - Further observations
Having got the latest Clamavi, I saw that there was an article on lamellar armour, something that I'm quite interested in, having already built a set (not out of steel alas) and encountered many problems particularly with source material.
I agree that The Osprey book is remarkably hazy on the lamellar armour issue, showing a possible threading pattern for the plates but not giving any word upon the direction of the overlap laterally around the body. It gives no indication whether the overlap is all one way, if the direction alternates between rows of if the overlap changes with the part of the body covered. Indeed this small, but useful, piece of information enables you to see that there are only two possible places for the armour to lace up, under each arm. The overlap precludes the front or back for strength reasons.
Concerning the arm pieces, certainly the Osprey book is again very hazy on the actual colour plates, however the period illustrations suggest that the arm pieces (where used) may have been separate pieces of armour, but put on before the torso piece and held probably by straps. The join was then protected by the hanging strips called Pteruges.
The breast/shoulder band is not as Guthrum, Earl of Galweg quaintly puts it, to hold lamellar armour that is too large together. Lamellar is a rigid system and all this would do is reduce the size of the armhole into which the join passes causing wear and discomfort. Also not joining the two ends of the lamellar together allows lateral movement where the two sides rub over each other causing wear on the bindings holding the plates together. It is difficult to believe that the oversized equipment is the cause for the development of a piece of equipment that became so widespread, the Byzantine Empire cannot be so short of armourers. Each first-class cavalryman, three or four second-class cavalrymen and sixteen infantrymen had a slave or paid servant to look after baggage and perform menial chores. Lamellar is not hard to make or to modify, being held together with thongs or cord, that it cannot be modified to fit each person to which it is assigned, using little more than a small hammer for modifying the curve on a plate, unlike chainmail which requires an expert to make and unmake the rings. It may be possible that a similar breast/shoulder band may have been used to control oversized chainmail, where the arms my slip up the sleeves and the elbow caught within the torso section. There appears to be two types of band appearing on illustrations of the period:
1. The breast/shoulder type favoured by the infantry.... The band in the illustrations of the period does not limit itself to appearing on lamellar armour appearing on quilted and chainmail as well.
2. The sash-type favoured by the cavalry and commanders, tied around the upper chest. The sash-type is seen to be tied at the front and may properly served for identification purposes, similar to chest plumes. It can be noted that most illustrations of the warrior saints of this period show them wearing these sashes.
The widespread use of breast/shoulder band amongst infantry, suggests that it had some tactical advantage. Considering that the infantry favoured the long lances (twelve feet long) and large round shields, it suggests shield wall tactics were used. The bands could therefore be used by the second row of the wall to grip and reinforce the front row in situations where a single person thickness wall would not hold, a double or multiple person wall would stand up. If pig-snout tactics were used the harness again serves to strengthen the formation.

Arms and Armour: Part 1 - The Spear
The tools of war were derived from tools for everyday jobs. The only genuine exception to this was the sword - the mark of the true warrior.
The main weapon of the period was the spear, not only for the peasant but also for the professional soldier and even the nobility. It was the traditional weapon that Woden used and remained the weapon par excellence among the Germanic peoples even during the tenth and eleventh centuries.
At the battle of Maldon in 991 the Eorl led his men into battle armed with his 'spear and shield'; it was only after he had killed two men with his spears that he then drew his sword to engage a third man.
There were several types of spear. The first was the light throwing spear or javelin. Manuscripts of the period often show warriors holding a number of spears in the shield hand (three seems to be the most practical whilst still gripping the shield, as shown in tests), and another in the weapon hand. Presumably most of these were for throwing as the opposing sides closed, whilst the last was retained for hand to hand combat. In early Anglo-Saxon times some Germanic warriors used a special type of javelin known as an 'angon'. This was most probably based on the Roman pilum, and had an elongated iron socket, often as long as 75cm (30'), and a barbed head. When this type of spear stuck into a shield it would sink in up to the barbs, bend, and make it very difficult to remove. With the angon firmly embedded, the shield would become too cumbersome to move, thus rendering it useless. This would perhaps then cause the warrior to discard his shield, or at least retire to find another, thus removing him from the action.
Through our own experiments we have concluded that javelins could have been launched when the two opposing sides were about 30 - 40 paces apart. The most likely scenario involves maintaining the integrity of the shield wall, with the men behind doing all the throwing of the javelins. It is quite easy to catch a javelin in flight, as it moves relatively slowly through the air. Since it travels so slowly, an individual can easily side-step the approaching missile. So the best opportunity to kill an opponent with a javelin is to launch it at a mass of bodies, where you would be bound to catch someone or something, or to wait for the moment when your opponent was unaware that it was coming.
Although a javelin weighs a pound or two (one kilogram), it develops enough inertia when thrown to go straight through a lime wood shield, whether it is clad in leather or not, and possibly into the owner of the shield at the same time. When we tried a javelin against a cloth covered pig carcass, it nearly passed all the way through the body, and with mail on, it only managed to penetrate some 5 inches (13 cms) or so. We also discovered that such a weapon does not even need to be sharp to be successful.
The thrusting spear tended to have a stronger, fairly broad leaf or lozenge shaped head with a central ridge for strength. The heads were attached to the wooden shaft by a socket. The sockets were usually riveted to the shaft and some have two small lugs near the base of the socket to allow the head to be possibly bound on as well. The length of the spear varied from about 1.5 - 2.7m (5' - 9'), but around 2.1m (7') was the commonest length. The last type of spear is really just a variant of the second type and is called a winged spear. On the side of the socket are two projections which are used to catch and lock an opponent's spear, or to hook an opponents shield out of the way.
The spear was, without doubt, the commonest weapon of this period and its almost universal use within all ranks and cultures testifies to its effectiveness. It is a weapon that can make an untrained man fairly dangerous very quickly. It keeps your enemy at a fair distance, and most importantly cheap to make. The ash shaft being easy to acquire, and a relative small amount of expensive iron necessary for the blade. Even a poorly made spear could be dangerous. This cannot be said of the other weapons available then.
The spear was retained for as long as possible in a battle and it is probably for this reason that the armoured fighting glove was apparently considered a waste of time, if it was considered at all. Some of the spears found in Scandinavian contexts have an almost rapier-like blade in appearance; others tended to be squatter. At any rate, it must be said that even the best mail and padding would not be proof against a strong thrust from such weapons.
Spears were generally used in an over arm technique, (this can be seen in period manuscripts), which meant the prime targets were the face (particularly the eyes, the weakest part of the skull, the throat and upper chest; there being little sense in embedding the blade too permanently in your opponents shield. One big advantage of this method of using a spear is that there was no need to change the grip in order to throw it. Regia does not employ this technique during our own re-enactments for reasons of pure safety. However, two hands on a spear and a hefty shove can be quite painful enough.

Arms and Armour: Part 2 - Scramseax
Almost all warriors, from the highest to the lowest carried a single edged knife known as a scramseax. Indeed, it seems that wearing a knife may have actually been a symbol of freemanship (the spelling varies, with scramseaxe or scramaseaxe, with an 'e' or an extra 'a' or not is rather arbitrary as were the Saxons were with their spelling).
Although primarily an everyday tool, in battle it could be used to finish off a felled opponent, and in the case of some ceorls, a mid to large sized scramaseaxe could have taken the place of a sword. Although it contained much the same amount of iron to make as a sword, the scramaseaxe was an easier weapon to make with only one sharp edge and a thick reverse edge. Examples found have both just plain iron blades or pattern welded ones as well as inlaid blades. The pattern welded versions would have taken weeks to make depending upon their length, in which time an ordinary sword could have been made. Its length varied according to its role, and examples found range from 7.5 - 75cm (3" - 30") blade length. However the average size for most of the hundreds of examples found is around 15 - 25cm (6"-10") . They are divided into two general size ranges.
The smaller examples range from about 7.5 - 35cm (3" - 14") in blade length, and this is probably the knife referred to as the hadseax. These small examples were almost certainly just everyday tools: butchery knives, woodworking tools, eating knife, etc.. There are also a few very long examples whose blade lengths are in the 54 - 75cm (22" - 30") range. These larger knives are certainly weapons rather than tools, and were referred to as a langseax. Most blades were broad, heavy and with an angled back sloping in a straight line towards the point and this is the typical Saxon style.
The Scandinavian style had a more curving back and the Frankish style a more curving blade. Blades were often inlaid with gold, silver, copper or bronze wire beaten into fine channels carved into the iron blade. The grip was of wood, bone or antler and was sometimes carved or decorated. The hilt was usually without a pommel or crossguard, whilst the tang went all the way through the smaller seax handles and was clenched over at the end of the grip. The lack of a pommel or crossguard was probably because a scramseax was never actually meant as a 'fencing' weapon, and was more for stabbing and hacking.
Scramseaxes were always carried in a sheath of folded leather sewn down the blunt side of the blade, which was often decorated. It is unlikely that a small scramaseax could kill a heavily padded or mailed man, probably just serving to irritate him. It's main employment was probably as an eating and all-purpose 'pocket' knife. The blunt reverse edge of the seax could be used as a hammer to break bones to extract the marrow, or even hammered through materials via it's blunt back as a sharp wedge. It also gives a lot of strength to the whole knife. The langseax, a tool much more suited for fighting with, usually ended in a deadly needle point, therefore a thrust could have had much the same effect as a spear. A slashing blow to an armoured man would do little visible damage directly through mail, certainly breaking bones and causing heavy bruising; but brought down on an unarmoured limb or neck would prove to be fatal. The simple rule of 'the bigger the weapon, the greater the damage' reflects how dangerous Scramaseaxes could be.
Knives of the period arrived in many more shapes and sizes according to their intended use, especially as craft tools. Blades looking disconcertingly like modern penknives , except with long tangs. Double ended blades that swivelled into the handle, with a 'long' blade at one end and a short one at the other. These are considered to be craft tools, with the short blade used for very delicate work so that your hand is close to the subject, and the longer one for more general work. The secret to the operation of these blades is that the opposite end locked up against a pin as you bore down on the blade you were using. Some examples have more than just a double sided bone handle, and have a folded frame of iron either side of the blade. This type even fold into the iron sheet frame much as penknives do today. Many knife blades demonstrate the length of time people must have held onto them, as the blades have been sharpened over and over again. So much so that the blades are little more than spikes. They are reminiscent of scalpels, and could be just that, but there are too many of them, and the possible reason for their survival is that as they were sharpened so profusely losing the harder steel cutting edge, they were put down and forgotten, then lost by the original owner and finally turning up in the archaeological record. What this does demonstrate for certain is how long they worked their blades before switching to a new one or having it reforged.

Arms and Armour: Part 3 - Axes
Small hand axes tended to just be wood-axes which were used for combat. The construction of all axes followed the same general principal. A flat strip of 'soft' iron is folded in half around a mandrel to create the socket. A slice of much harder iron that has the properties of knife steel, is then fire welded in between the two iron halves at the cutting edge end. This limits the amount of expensive steel that is needed for the business end, keeping the rest of the axe relatively cheap. The hafts of the smaller axes were between 60 - 90cm (2' - 3') long with a blade about 7.5 - 150cm (3" - 6") wide. One special type of hand axe, particularly popular in the early Viking period, was the 'skegox', or bearded axe, so called because of its elongated lower edge.
The axe as a weapon is good in attack, but fairly poor as a tool to defend yourself with. It is a weapon that quickly induces fear, as it takes little imagination to guess what it could do. The user needs to be very confident of the outcome of a clash, as he will be fighting with a weapon that is quite heavy, resulting in easily over-committed blows. This could quite easily be his undoing against a warrior using a lighter weapon such as a spear, who is aware of the axe's shortcomings. A skilled fighter can with even a spear disarm a man wielding an axe by catching the axe where is joins the shaft and sweeping it out of the hand of the wielder.
In early Anglo-Saxon times some warriors used a special type of axe known as a 'francisca'. This axe was quite small, with a thick triangular section at the socket, resulting in a very heavy blade for it's small size. The francisca was designed for throwing, and had been particularly popular amongst the Franks. The Francisca is supposed to have been thrown in a massed volley to create certain amounts of mayhem prior to the onrush of the host of warriors. How well this worked is anyones guess today. Just the act of throwing the axe was probably enough to break the concentration of the opposing force for just the right amount of time before the warriors rushed in.
The Broadaxe, or Dane-axe, was a two handed axe introduced by the Vikings in the late tenth century but which soon became popular with Saxons as well, and was probably developed from the axes used to slaughter animals. The blades from existing examples in museums demonstrate that they have very thin section blades, designed to hack flesh apart. If they were as bulky as the smaller axe, it would prove to be too heavy for any sensible use. Usually used only by the wealthier semi-professional warriors it has a broad blade with a cutting edge of about 22 - 45cm (9" - 18") and a long wooden ash haft some 1.2 - 1.5m (4' - 5' long).
The Bayeux tapestry and accounts from the battle of Hastings show these Dane-axes wielded by the Huscarls cleaving 'both man and horse in two' at the same time. The Dane-axe's only drawback was that you need to have both hands on the shaft of the axe, with your shield slung across your back, leaving your front wide open to attack. The introduction of the Dane-axe is credited to King Cnut, who is also credited with the whole concept of the Karl or Huscarl you can see on the left. With such a fearsome tool to hand, few people would question this mans reasons. The action of swinging the axe prevents the Huscarl from standing close to any of his fellow huscarls, and this may well lead to trouble for him from any thrown javelin, however, the sheer ferocity of this warrior would daunt most foes, prompting them to make mistakes.

Arms and Armour: Part 4 - Missile Weapons
Bows And Arrows.
Although bows were widely used by the continental Saxons, the Anglo-Saxons seem to have used the bow mainly for hunting, displaying a certain disdain for it's use in battle. The bow was more widespread as a weapon amongst the Vikings, but even then was not terribly common. Bows were mainly made of yew, elm or ash, 'D' shaped in section and tapering from the centre to the tips. Near the tip, the bow could either taper to a point in the traditional style, or swell to a 'spade' end as evident in some manuscripts. Bow from Nydam stick to the former pattern, and also incorporate a small iron peg as a string keep lodged in the side of the bow end. The grip was left bare without any leather or cloth for grip, and the 'knocking point' of the arrow didn't have a sliver of horn to protect the bowstave as can be seen on later bows. The spade ended types have what is known as a side nock, that is a slot on only one side of the bow to anchor the string. Knotting styles of the string varied from region to region.
The bows tended to be between 1.65 - 1.9m (66" - 76") long, reflecting the height, reach and preference of the user. Depending upon the quality of the wood that the bow was made from, it could be smooth and regular along it's length, or quite knobbly where knots had to be accommodated in it's design. They were sometimes bound every few inches with linen or sinew to help prevent the wood from splitting as can be seen on the examples from Nydam. Some of these earlier bows had horn or metal nocks which could be sharp enough to possibly use the bow like a spear in an emergency. Reconstruction of these types of bows have demonstrated that they had a draw weight in the 50lb - 70lb range making them quite powerful enough to kill an unarmoured man.
These are quite adequate to hunt animals, and are also perfectly suited for use in battle. The only hindrance being the armour and the shields that warriors of the period carried. Mail armour is sufficient enough to prevent a broadhead arrow from penetrating the skin, even though it's arrival would be very apparent. The bodkin with it's plain pointed head is much more likely to burst through the links, however, a shield of only 1cm thickness in Lime (or Linden) wood will stop all of the arrows, whatever their type as the bow wasn't powerful enough. Again practical demonstrations bear this out.
The only exception is where a shield may be so battered that there is a soft or 'sweet' spot in the wood. A good archer will seek this out, but in the heat of battle there would be little time to pick and choose. Most archery in set piece battles would no doubt have followed the Norman example at Hastings, with arrows lobbed into the mass of enemy, and good fortune guiding the arrow to a target.
Arrows were generally broad headed and made of Iron, with sockets or tangs on cheaper more quickly made arrowheads. Some arrowheads of antler have been found, these were probably intended for hunting. Earlier arrows tended to be almost purely of the tanged type. Bodkins (armour piercing arrows) were known and became more common in the eleventh century. By then, arrowheads were normally socketed, but it is a matter of conjecture as to how many arrows were expected to be recovered, even if you were the victors.
Arrow-shafts were usually of ash, willow, aspen or pine although other timbers were used. The long fletchings were of goose or swan feather, either four of three flights per shaft, these being glued and bound with a spiral of linen thread onto the shafts. Whilst paint was presumably used to mark the shafts of the arrows, we have as yet to demonstrate that the fights were in some fashion coloured too. The nock of the arrow (the point where the string sits), was either cut out of the end of the shaft, made out of bone and mounted in the same manner as the head was with a short tang, or in the case of a series of finds from Hedeby, cast out of bronze that mirror the bone type exactly.
Javelins
Thrown spears are probably the first weapons to arrive amongst the opposing side, other than shouted insults. Javelins were used universally on foot, on horseback and onboard ship if needed. The art of the javelin is to throw them in a mass. This ensured that despite their slow speed through the air, some or all could not be avoided. The overall weight of the thrown spear is small by comparison to the fighting spear, however the added pace that the thrower imparted to the shaft, more than made up for it's lack of weight. In simple terms, weight plus speed equals mass, and this equation was easily sufficient for the javelin to burst open any mail shirt and quite possibly arrive via the shield as well.
It's difficult to say how far the sides were apart prior to the launching of the javelins, but around 30 to 40 paces would seem to be a good distance for most men to throw. This was done from the rear of the ranks in most circumstances, and over the heads of the shield wall of the thrower. This would make the javelin a fairly indiscriminate weapon designed to arrive with little or no warning.
Oddly enough, a single javelin is easy to side step, and depending upon how it was thrown (a fairly flat trajectory), it can be caught and thrown back. The man in the shield wall didn't have the luxury of space to move or the choice of only one javelin to avoid. Tests we have carried out demonstrate all of these aspects, resulting in some sickening findings.
The Romans promoted the use of a particular type of javelin called the 'pilum', or 'angon' as the Saxons would have called it. This type of spear is identified by it's longer iron shaft and barbed head. The idea was that the pilum would strike the target, ideally the shield, and lodge there. The barbs helped to lock it in position, and the thin iron shaft would buckle preventing the pilum from being thrown back should it be removed. However, the key part that it played was to weight down an opponents shield rendering it either useless or extremely difficult to wield. With his shield effectively down, he was then open to attack from other weapons. The significant thing about a javelin is that it didn't matter where it struck: in an opponent, in a shield or even in the ground causing people to lose their footing.
Slings
Although used primarily for hunting small game the sling could have been used in war. Against an armoured man it would have little effect unless a lucky shot hit his face. Against an unarmoured target at close ranges it could break bones and crack skulls.
Ammunition seems to have been rounded stones gathered from river-courses or the sea shore, and if the user was in a field scaring birds off, any stone that suited his purpose. Lead shot of the type used in the Roman and Greek periods is unknown in Anglo-Saxon times, and was probably thought to be far too expensive and useful to be put to such a purpose.
The sling was at some time upgraded by placing the essence of the sling at the end of a staff or shaft. This is known as a 'Staff Sling' and is able to propel the projectile over much the same distance as a normal sling, however the projectile could be several times heavier. It operates in much the same fashion as a 'trebuchet' would, with the sling opening and releasing the missile near the top of the swing.
There are no known examples of such a tool from the period, but this not preclude it's use. There are a few medieval manuscript of the staff sling in action against the enemy in siege situations.
Other thrown items
It goes without saying that rocks and other detritus was thrown at the enemy. This though wasn't an organised part of the battle, and may just be an example of men venting their frustration at not getting to grips with the enemy. Although overused as an example, the Bayeux Tapestry shows what has been interpreted as 'stones tied to sticks'. They are without any kind of parallel anywhere else in Anglo-Saxon art. Another description of them has them being maces, which did exist in the period, but are so far and few, and rather small in any case, that this seems unlikely. The existing maces have far more in common with the same item that Kings of the period are shown holding when crowned or seated in state.
To this authors mind, they would be better described as 'staffs of state' rather than maces. Whilst it, whatever it really was, is shown over the heads of the Saxon army directed at the Norman force, no less than three are being seen carried off the field by men at the end of the battle. The image of the mace overhead in the battle scene, could be some symbolism indicating the transfer of power or initiative to the Normans, or are change in the balance of power for all we can say.
Quite what the significance of these items are, nobody as yet is sure, but I do not believe they were stones on sticks, a tool that went out of use 4000 years ago with the advent of bronze for weapons and tools that clearly surpassed rocks.

Arms and Armour: Part 5 - Swords
The most prized and lauded weapon, but not the most common one, was the sword. These were very valuable and were often handed down from generation to generation, or were received or given as gifts by great warriors and kings. Swords were considered to have a greater value if they had a history or had belonged to a famous warrior; perhaps because they were seen to have been imbued with the previous owners bravery. The blades were between 72 - 80cm (29" - 32") long and about 7.5cm (3") broad at their widest with a shallow but broad groove or fuller down the centre of both sides to lighten the blade without losing any strength. At the time of the migrations from Germany to England some warriors might still have been using swords of the late Roman pattern, the so called spatha.
In early Anglo-Saxon times the sword (such as the examples on the left) was by and large almost parallel sided down to the tip, where it then tapered to a point; although tapering blades similar to late Saxon and Viking swords were not unknown at that point. These early swords usually had pommels and crossguards made up of layers of organic material such as wood, bone or horn; which were often sandwiched, embellished with, or even completely covered by, bronze, gold and silver. Some examples were even inlaid with garnets trapped in separate cells, or were decorated with enamel. Some swords also had a ring attached to the upper guard, that to begin with was a true ring, but later became bastardised into a vestigial ring such as that on the Sutton Hoo sword. Their purpose is unclear, although they may have represented some special honour bestowed on the sword's owner.
From the later eighth century the tapered style of blade became the most common type found, whilst pommels and crossguards tended to be made of solid iron. These iron pommels and guards were often richly decorated with silver inlay, gilding or by encrusting them completely in a thin sheath of silver. A few were cast in bronze, or rarely, silver. There are examples of pommels and crossguards of whalebone, but how user friendly any of these were is anyone's guess, as the pommel lends counterbalancing weight at the opposite end of the sword. Without this feature, all of the weight was beyond your grip, making the sword rather clumsy to use, much like an axe. The pommel by and large defines the date of the sword and the site where it was most likely to have been made. The Vikings tended to go for swords with 3 or 5 lobed pommels and the Anglo-Saxons for 'Cocked Hat' styles, such as the one on the left, although there is a certain amount of cross-over. Later on, the 'Brazil Nut' style found favour via the Normans.
In general the shape of the sword remained unchanged from the time of the first Germanic settlers to 1250AD, although many different decorative furnishings were used through the years. The function also remained the same - a slashing weapon. It was only after 1250 with the advent of plate armour that swords with truly sharp points began to appear. It would seem reasonable to assume that swords were capable of breaching mail although tests carried out do not support this entirely. It is possible that against armour, the heavy weight of the blade was used to break bones and crush internal organs. A number of grave finds from all over northern Europe attest to the effectiveness of the sword when armour wasn't in the way. Skulls with great slices through them, often from one side to the other have been excavated . Some even show new smoother bone growth demonstrating that the injured party lived on after such a horrific injury.
The blades themselves deserve special mention. The process of smelting good iron sometimes resulted in small amounts of steel being produced quite deliberately. (We may be underestimating their abilities here). The steel, because it held a good sharp edge was employed on the edges of the blade, with the relatively softer iron making up the bulk of the core of the blade. This core could be embellished by plaiting different grades of iron together in patterns to create beautiful 'pattern welded' blades. We are not totally sure of the benefits of this lengthy process, but flexibility is one of several suggestions. These were highly treasured by their owners, and gained various nicknames which described the twisting patterns. Later in the period, blades became more homogeneous in their construction, which may indicate their increasing ability to smelt better iron in larger quantities.
Another feature of blades from this period is the habit of signing the fuller area of the blade. This was done in the same technique as the pattern welding, but in a more prosaic fashion. Letters were literally forged into and down the length of the blade without any accompanying patterns save for the odd cross. Two names were revered as excellent bladesmiths, that of Ulfbert, and Ingelri. These two smiths churned out quite a number of blades between them, and they were well sought after (if the number that have been preserved suggests), so much so, that copies were still being made long after the smiths had died. Having never seen one in the flesh, one can suppose that it was very easy to pass off a poorer blade as one of the Ulfbert or Ingelri ones.
The grips of swords were made of several materials. Horn, wood, and antler, sometimes wrapped with leather or even bound with cord. The re-enactment swords that we use today are often put through far more punishment than their forebears. The blunt blades we insist on, create a great deal of shocks through the tang inside the grip. These shocks have got to go somewhere, just as they did a thousand years ago. The relatively soft tang absorbs all this energy preventing the blade from shattering in the crossguard area; however, 'our' swords receive such abuse during battles (due to shock) that the whole area of the hilt eventually vibrates free so that they rattle in the hand. This needs periodic attention to tighten up the components by re-riveting the top of the tang down.
The tang goes all the way through the top of the pommel as you can see on the right in the later Brazil Nut pommeled sword. This was not unknown 1000 years ago either, however, having sharp blades means that shocks through the blades were much reduced because the blades sank into either wood, flesh, or even were cushioned to some extent by mail. A blow to something like a helmet would be one can surmise, much like a blunt blade striking the same thing.
A warriors habit was not to strike blade against blade as we tend to do today. This would destroy a sharp blade - just try it with two modern carving knives, and witness the result. The subsequent large nicks in the blade would be impossible to remove short of fire welding in a section to patch the damaged area. As was said earlier, the blades were intended to cut meat. There is also a good chance that striking a wooden shield could trap the blade in the Lime or Poplar timber, ensuring that your enemies got a free shot at you. Helmets would also not do the edges of your blade much good, even if you did stun your opponent. This left you with just the mail and any exposed flesh as targets. Even the mail might cause you problems. That is why so many of the victims that have been discovered, were probably stabbed with spears, making them vulnerable to being dispatched with a sword afterwards as a crude and bloody coup de gras.
One thing we have not mentioned are scabbards. Without these, swords have to carried in the hand, certainly not in the waist belt, and would be continually subject to the weather. Surviving scabbard remains show that they were made of two halves of wood carved out to receive the sword and glued together down the 'edges' of the blade. Occasionally there is fur in the form of fleece on the inside of the scabbard. The outside was sometimes covered in a thin skin of leather sewn on the reverse side creating a watertight covering. Some recent finds also show that they covered the wooden sheath in linen which was glued to the front and overlapped a little bit on the back of the scabbard. This then had a thin linen 'ribbon' or strip wound on the diagonal from the scabbard mouth down to the chape area. There were several loops around the mouth, with the strip then passing - widely, but evenly spaced - around the scabbard . As it reached the chape, it was again wound tightly in several layers to protect the more regularly damaged end of the sheath. Lots of glue was used to fix this all in place, and over the top of all this a few layers of varnish or shellac were applied to finally seal the whole thing. This is directly paralleled in a period fresco from the Oratory of St. Benedict in Rome which clearly demonstrates this technique.
The scabbard occasionally had sheets of silver or gilded bronze applied to it to protect the mouth of the scabbard and the chape. These have also been found in cast bronze, but were very rare in this country. Even the sheet versions were uncommon, and were quite commonly rough and ready pieces of work. The whole thing then had to be hung via a baldric either over the shoulder or around the waist. There were various methods of attaching the baldric to the scabbard, some far more elaborate or permanent than others. The only key thing is that the sword could be drawn quickly and that it didn't let go of the sword if the warrior had somehow inadvertently turned upside down.

Arms and Armour: Part 6 - Armour
The main type of body armour in Anglo-Saxon times was mail. The term 'chainmail' not being coined until the 1700's. Mail of the period was made by cutting thin strips of iron from a piece of sheet, or drawing iron wire through a draw-plate, and winding this around a cylindrical former. It was then cut off with a chisel to form the links. The links would then be compressed so that the ends overlapped.
Half of the links were then welded shut in the forge. The other half had the ends of each link were flattened and then had holes punched in them. As the mailshirt was assembled a punched ring was linked to four of the welded rings, a rivet was put through the holes to close the link. Alternatively, the whole shirt could have been made entirely made with rivetted rings. Finally the whole mailshirt was likely to have been 'oil tempered' to make it stronger and give some degree of rust-proofing.
The early mailshirts seem to have reached to just below the waist and have short sleeves (there is no evidence for sleeveless mailshirts like those known from the Iron Age). These short mailshirts seem to have been referred to as a byrnie and are sometimes shown with a vandyked lower edge.
The mailshirt became longer towards the eleventh century until it reached the knees or just below with sleeves to the elbow. These long mailshirts, often with an integral hood, were split to the groin at the front and back to enable riding and could well have taken a year to make. The term hauberk, often used to describe these long mail-coats, is actually derived from the Old English word 'healsbeorg' which was in fact a mail hood (what is now called a coif); it was not until later that hood and shirt together were known by this name.
Mail worn on its own would stop the cutting edge of most weapons, but did not stop the crushing effects. So some kind of padding would have been worn under the mail. These padded garments, now known as gambesons, were made by sewing fleeces, raw wool or layers of woollen cloth between two layers of linen, felt or leather. Gambesons were probably very thick and could offer very good protection against the impact of weapons.
Gambesons were usually worn under mail (perhaps even attached to it) and would tend to be a similar outline to the mailshirt, although it is possible they could have been worn on their own by poorer warriors. No gambesons have ever been found, but modern practice in re-enactment shows the validity of such things. The Romans are documented wearing padding under their mailshirts which consisted of two layers of linen either side of a felt inner. Mailshirts also have a tendency to pull your tunic to pieces and stain the cloth, something which a liner such as a gambeson or leather between would prevent.
Mail coifs, or 'healsbeorgs', were worn from the ninth century and tended to cover the top and back of the head, the cheeks, chin, neck and perhaps some of the shoulders. Again coifs are mentioned but have never been found, so we can only guess as to their original shape. By the beginning of the tenth century these had become quite common amongst the professional warriors. By the eleventh century the coif was often integrated with the hauberk becomming a hood. The 'ventail' section of mail on or near the chest that folds up over the neck and chin, and hooked into position over the lower face, is the best explanation for the shapes found on the knights armour in the Bayeux tapestry.
They are not universal, but seem to be a sensible protection for a horseman, as most of the attacks he would receive would come up from below. Padded arming caps would be probably worn under the coif and may also have been worn on their own. The coif as a head covering is shown on figures from Byzantine mosaics, interestingly enough worn by both males and females. How widely elsewhere the wearing of them as normal headgear is unknown until the Middle Ages.
Limb Armour
Limb armour was far rarer than body or head armour. It is possible that a few kings and greater nobleman may have worn some form of greaves; a sensible defence as the legs were unguarded by the earlier round shields and contemporary accounts often mention men having their legs chopped off. No greaves have ever been found in Britain and illustrations of them are very rare. One illustration is dated to the late ninth century and shows a Dane and two companions with thin (metal?) plates attached to the front of their hose and reaching from knee to instep. An example at the beginning of the eleventh century covers also the foot.
By the eleventh century a few of the wealthier warriors are shown with mail chausses or leggings although these too are quite rare. Also in the eleventh century a few wealthy warriors are shown with tight fitting full length mail sleeves under the sleeves of their hauberks. It is also possible that a few warriors may have worn leather vambraces, or have used leather bindings similar to 'puttes' to protect their forearms. At this time lamellar and scale armours were known, and used in the Middle-east, but they do not seem to have reached Western Europe until after the First Crusade.

Arms and Armour: Part 7 - Helmets
Head armour of the period consisted of helmets sometimes including a mail coif. Helmets were made in a variety of ways and from several materials, with the single objective of deflecting or completely withstanding a blow from a sword.
Only a few examples of helmets have been found intact. The group of Valsgarde and Vendel period helms are the largest group of helmets to survive the last thousand years. Others are the helm from Sutton Hoo; the Benty Grange helmet; the Morken helm from Belgium; the Jorvik helm; and the Wenceslas helm from Czechoslovakia. These are not a complete list, but they do give an idea of how rare a helmet find is and how diverse the finds are. Metal helms of several types were all fairly similar in principle, being made from bands of metal forming a framework which was 'filled in' by riveting metal, leather (speculative) or even horn panels into it. Sometimes a nasal would be included to protect the face, often as an extension of the framework although it could be added separately. A few of the earlier Anglo-Saxon and Viking helmets had spectacle like eye-guards or visors although these seem to have become obsolete by the eighth century in Britain.
Some earlier helmets also had cheek flaps to protect the side of the head and face. The earlier styles of helmet tended to be domed, but gradually they became more pointed to eventually giving rise to the conical helm. The best type of helm was hammered and raised out of a single piece of iron and was therefore stronger than a riveted one. Helmets sometimes had a 'curtain' of mail called an aventail, hanging from the back of them to protect the back of the head and neck. In early times this was sometimes a solid metal neckguard, often hinged for the wearers convenience.
Many illustrations from the period of warriors show them wearing what appears to be a phrygian cap; on its own this would not offer much protection so it seems possible that a small domed metal helm or skullcap may have been worn beneath it. Of late though, the view regarding these phrygian hats has altered. They are shown in certain manuscripts that have a direct ancestry to much older works by previous authors. Some were even copies of copies of manuscripts from the Roman period or even earlier, and the slavish copying of the illustrations have little bearing upon 10th century styles. The copyist may have been trying to be true to the original and may also had little clue of what he was drawing.
Another element where the Phrygian style could have come from is the old Roman cult of Mithras - where Mithras often can be seen cutting the throat of a bull atop a shrine. This was very much a military man's belief, said to have derived from cults from the East, possibly the Middle East, which had then taken root here in Britain. There is one famous shrine dedicated to Mithras on Hadrian's Wall, and also an example in London. The popularity of this figure, although not its religous aspects could have remained with its associated courageous/heroic deeds, eventually cropping up as 'ancient' Anglo Saxon heroic figures.
The original surviving helmets in the true 'Phrygian' style are 4th century BC Greek. Only 1400 years and 1200 miles out.
Thick leather was possibly used to make helmets although no leather helms have ever survived from the period. The technique of 'cuir bouilli' or scolding the leather to make it stiff and hard, has been suggested as an alternative for the iron plates inside the frame. Thick leather can be riveted successfully to the frame, however no-one has yet demonstrated that leather can substitute for the iron other than for glancing blows. The 'Benty Grange' helmet from Derbyshire although from an earlier period (approx. late 8th early 9th century AD) had horn plates either side and sandwiching it's iron frame. (Not quite as the replica in the Sheffield museum would suggest). It is also possible that basket work helms covered in hide or leather were used but, again, none have survived from our period (although there is an earlier Scandinavian find of a metal 'basketwork' skullcap which may have been worn over a soft covering). There is even some evidence for wooden helms!! How on earth these worked we can only guess.
Mail coifs, or 'healsbeorgs', were worn from the ninth century and tended to cover the top and back of the head, the cheeks, chin, neck and perhaps some of the shoulders. Again coifs are mentioned but have never been found, so we can only guess as to their original shape. By the beginning of the tenth century these had become quite common amongst the professional warriors. By the eleventh century the coif was often integrated with the hauberk becoming a hood. The 'ventail' section of mail on or near the chest that folds up over the neck and chin, and hooked into position over the lower face, is the best explanation for the shapes found on the knights armour in the Bayeux tapestry. They are not universal, but seem to be a sensible protection for a horseman, as most of the attacks he would receive would come up from below. Padded arming caps would be probably worn under the coif and may also have been worn on their own. The coif as a head covering is shown on figures from Byzantine mosaics, interestingly enough worn by both males and females. How widely elsewhere the wearing of them as normal headgear is unknown until the Middle Ages.

Arms and Armour: Part 8 - Shields
Shields seem to have been used universally by all warriors. From the first to the tenth century round shields seem to have been the norm, being either flat or 'watchglass' shaped in cross-section. They are always shown with a boss and often have wooden or metal bands on the back to strengthen them. All the examples found have been of planked construction although there is some evidence to suggest a plyed construction would make the 'watchglass' shape easier to make. Some shields were edged with a rim of sewn thick leather or hide to strengthen them whilst others were possibly faced with leather or rawhide. However none of the shields excavated demonstrate this even though 'leather covered' is a phrase writers used from that period. The Romans had leather shield bags / covers to protect them from the elements, and were fairly elaborate with specially sewn parts in the shape of the boss, and their unit symbols on them. Perhaps a version of these was what the chroniclers meant. Late Roman shield finds, the shield from Nydam and a fragment from the Isle of Man all have paint applied directly to the wooden surface.
Traditionally shields were made of linden (Lime) wood although other timbers may also have been used such as Alder and Poplar. These timbers are not very dense and are light in the hand. They also have a characteristic in that they are not inclined to split unlike Oak. Also, the fibres of the timber bind around blades preventing the blade from cutting any deeper unless a lot more pressure is applied. Round shields seem to have varied in size from around 45 - 120cm (18" - 48") in diameter but the smaller and more manageable 75 - 90cm (30" - 36") is by far the most common.
The smaller shield sizes come from the pagan period for the Saxons and the larger sizes from the 10th and 11th centuries. By the beginning of the eleventh century the bottom edge of the shield evolved downwards to cover the upper leg giving rise the kite shield. There is evidence for both flat and curved kite shields, with the curved being most likely, and most having bosses. It is debatable whether or not these bosses were used in the same fashion as round shields; i.e. centre gripped. The tendency in re-enactment is to wear them crossbraced, as if you were still riding. This is because if the shield is held near the boss, the lower section acts like a pendulum making it difficult to operate. The Kite shield seems to vary between 1.0 - 1.5m (3'6" - 5') in length with about 1.2m (4') being the commonest. Most shields are shown in illuminations as being painted a single colour although some have a design painted onto them; the commonest designs are simple crosses or derivations of sun wheels or segments. The few round shields that survived have much more complicated designs painted on them and sometimes very ornate silver and gold work applied around the boss and the strap anchors.
All shields apart from the early small ones were hung over the shoulder via a shoulder strap of leather. This is not essential for use with the round shield, but is imperative if you are riding with any type of shield. Your left hand is needed to 'neck rein' with, leaving you with little other than a slung shield to cover your left side. In the other hand is the weapon. The art of cavalry riding is to organise your horse so that your shield side is facing the enemy, and only wheeling round to strike him. The momentum of a cantering horse is enough to make it very difficult for a foot soldier to parry your blows, necessitating him to ward off your attack with his shield, unless he has some friends with spears...
The shield wall at the battle of Hastings was to all intense purposes solid and impenetrable, even to the hardiest cavalry rider and horse. The Saxons were very numerous, semi professional if not professional troops who were not fazed by seeing the enemy. They had chosen a good spot on top of Caldbec Hill making any attack have to work it's way up the hillside. Even the cavalry charges had lost steam by the shield wall, but the crucial thing was that there was no chance for them to penetrate those defences.
The men were perhaps ten deep in places, and no horse will even accidentally break through. Moreover, the rider would certainly come to grief as well. All those spears projecting out of the wall would have meant instant death. So William's men had only one option, and that was to ride shield side facing the wall, and lob their javelins into the seething mass. It didn't matter whether they hit a body as long as they hit something, and there was plenty to hit. The momentum of the horse now moving along the line from left to right as you look up the hill, on fairy level ground meant the they hardly needed to throw the javelins. However, if they made the slightest mistake, then the shield wall would have them for breakfast. Having traversed the wall and avoided all of the missiles that were returned, they then had to return to the bottom of the field to 'reload' with another javelin. Having rested to catch their breaths, it was time to sally back up the hill and relive the excitement of the previous trip.
All of this eventually ground down the Saxons, as they were unable to come into actual contact with William's cavalrymen. The Bayeux Tapestry bears out all of these points, and the interesting thing is that the French never learned this lesson themselves, much to their cost at Crecy, Agincourt and Poitiers. Ignoring the enormous part the bow made, the key thing is that they were attacking troops 'dug' in with lots of spears projecting out of the wall. Shields played little in the English foot soldiers equipment at that point, but the essence is the same. When the cavalry slowed down as they had to, to negotiate the spears, wooden spikes and pits, they fell vulnerable the cohesiveness of the 'wall'. The English also had to learn this again at the battle of Bannockburn, where the Scottish 'schiltron' performed the same way as the English walls had done.
Incidentally, the round shield makes a good umbrella, a fair mess table, and a dry place to sit. The Bayeux tapestry once again shows an aspect of this in a scene with troops eating off their kite shields that have been placed on what may be a knock-down table frame.
Practical tests have shown that lime wood shields are naturally very good at absorbing blows and resist splitting, and they are particularly good at trapping spears when you parry with them (the Saxons sometimes referred to the shield as a 'net of spears'). The spears of this period, sharp as they were, would remain stuck in a shield if even a moderate thrust was caught. However, a spear stuck in your shield renders the shield fairly ineffective, but also can render the spear useless to you, so most attacks would have been fended aside using the edge of the shield. After all, it was the owner you had to hit.

PseRamesses

10-08-2004, 15:48

V A R N I N G ! Long post, again! :embarassed:

Off and on we´ve been talking about trade goods and some of them should be worked into the teach-tree with their respective buildings. Here´s some artisans that you might encounter in a viking village:

Bone and Antler Working
Bone and antler were widely used in the Saxon period, often for jobs for which we now use plastics. Quite a lot of bone and antler objects have survived, partly because it was widely used, but also due to the fact that it generally survives well in the ground in most conditions. The Ph conditions should be ideally calcareous (chalky) or neutral. However when archaeologists are excavating in sandy acid soils, skeletal material will be very rare or in a very poor condition, or often non-existent. Horn survives very infrequently in the ground, often only being detected as a mineralised layer on metals that have rusted over time.
Most of the bone used came from horses, cattle, sheep and pigs (as you might expect from an agrarian society) although bird bones were used for such things as musical pipes. Antler was sourced from red deer (called Elk in North America) or in more Northerly latitudes from the Elk (or Moose as it is called in North America) or Reindeer (or Caribou as it is known in North America). It was either taken from animals killed whilst hunting or, more usually, collected after the deer had shed their antlers naturally in February and late March. The red deer antlers as an example were used almost completely, only the tines and the brow ridge being discarded occasionally.
Horn, from cows and oxen, sheep and goats, was also widely used, but, being far softer than bone or antler, does not survive quite so well in the ground. Whalebone, walrus ivory and even elephant ivory were also used as and when they became available.
Bone and antler were used for a wide variety of uses such as combs, sword mounts, bracelets, pottery stamps, pins, needles, ice skates, toggles, dice, gaming pieces, spoons, weaving battens, boxes, pendants, weaving tablets, beads, needle cases, spindle whorls, planes, seals, bodkins, whistles, musical pipes, knife handles, skates, buckles, strap ends, writing tablets, axes, 'ironing boards', tuning pegs, moulds for pewter casting and even for jewellers hammers and clamps. Which is one way of saying that it performed many functions in the home and in the craft shops. One of the most striking types of bonework to survive are the various bone and bronze reliquary caskets that have survived, such as the Cammin and Bamberg caskets. These are made of exquisitely carved bone panels set into a bronze framework. Their entire surfaces were carved with mythical beasts and classic Viking patterns.
One of the most useful types of bone, although not the easiest to get hold of, was whalebone. Most of this was scavenged from whales which were washed ashore, even though on occasion whales were hunted in the early medieval period. Ælfic's Colloquy does mention that hunting whales was a very dangerous occupation. This material was most useful because of its size. It could be used for making large, flat plaques probably used for 'ironing' linen, weaving swords and caskets such as the so called 'Frank's Casket'. From experience, it has been found that immature whale bone is too porous to work with, requiring adult animal bones.
Horn, particularly ox and goat-horn, was also used for many of these purposes as well as drinking and musical horns. Horn has the useful property that, when placed in boiling water or roasted over a fire, it becomes soft and malleable. When in this softened state it can be moulded into other shapes, such as spoons. Horn was also used in lanterns (if it is thinned down and oiled slightly it becomes transparent), for making knife handles, and sometimes in making helmets, not with the horns sticking out from the helmet, but for flattened plates to make infill between a metal frame.
Many bone items would be very cheap to make, since they utilised a material that would otherwise be thrown away and did not need the skills of a master craftsman. There are, however, some very elaborate bone objects that would have been produced by a specialist.
The tools of the bone worker would have been very similar to those of the carpenter although he would also have a fine saw for cutting up the bone and antler. To clean the bone, it could be exposed for woodland insects and maggots, or buried for the worms and such to clean it, or even placed in an ants nest, especially a Wood Ants nest. In a few days they will clean off every bit of tendon and fat from the bone. Bone after all the fat and technically speaking 'gunk' has been removed, is quite a brittle material when the parts get too small. However, with practice, it can be sawn into pieces, or with a sharp axe, carefully trimmed to shape. The shavings of bone from this process are small and have few features to identify them from other rubbish produced by working the bone. After shaping with an axe, files and chisels can be used to finish of the piece, with little need to polish the surface if a really sharp chisel was used. Even the carving can be executed with the chisel. Bone can also be soaked prior to working for an hour or so to soften the surface ready for carving. Sometimes an open-work design was made by drilling right through the piece before widening or fretting out the shape. The bone and antler might be left white, but sometimes the surface was coloured or stained with a dye as was the case of a bone buckle find from York that was coloured green.
Antler is stronger than bone and was used for jobs where the extra strength was needed - typically for combs where the teeth would break if made from a weaker material. Many combs are described as bone combs, where it really meant antler. Some weaving combs were replicated from the Shetlands from bone, and the teeth soon broke. There were probably specialist comb makers who carried out this complicated task. It is likely that some people would have taken their own antler to the comb-maker, thus reducing the cost of their combs which were popular items in Viking times.
To make a comb the craftsman first cut off the tines or points and the burr (the swelling where the antler joined the skull) leaving just the beam (main part of the antler). Only the outside of the antler could be used as the inside is soft and spongy. If the Deer had been hunted, then the tissue inside the antler will bleed and get very sticky, however if the antler was 'scavenged' from the forest floor, then there is no such problem and the antler is 'clean'. The worker then cut some short, wide, rectangular plates to form the teeth plates and a pair of long narrow pieces as side plates to join the teeth plates together (1). Once cut the plates were sanded to shape and smoothed for the tooth plates and the side plates shaped into 'D' sections (2). The side plates were often decorated with simple designs of lines cut into the surface, which could be done at this stage or when the comb is riveted together (3). The tooth plates were then riveted between the side plates and the teeth were then cut with a saw (4). Some combs have wide set teeth at one end of the comb and much closer set fine teeth at the other. Occasionally an antler case was also made, to protect the teeth of the comb. This had two more pairs of side plates made that sandwiched the teeth of the comb. The ends of these were themselves riveted to a pair of 'tooth' plates that do not have any teeth cut into them. The case could also be decorated, and would often be tied by a leash to the comb to prevent them from becoming separated. Antler combs come in a variety of sizes from only 2½ inches (65mm) long to monsters of over a foot (30 cm) in length

Bronze Working
After iron, bronze was probably the commonest metal used by the Anglo-Saxons and Vikings. Bronze is a mixture of copper and a small percentage of tin (and sometimes a small amount of lead). Any alloy, or mixture, of copper and tin is called bronze. Many bronze alloys also contain small amounts of other materials.
The simplest bronze is copper mixed with small amounts of tin. Tin increases hardness, making bronze more resistant to wear than is copper. Bronzes with 10 percent or more tin are harder, stronger, and more resistant to corrosion than brass, which is a copper and zinc alloy. Brass was also used in the period, and is often confused with Bronze and vice versa if no actual analysis is done on the 'Copper alloy' as it is called in most reports of finds.
Leaded bronze has lead, usually small amounts, mixed in to act as a lubricant. Bell bronze is another variation and is very hard and provides a special tone to bells that no other alloy can match.
As a material it was used for making a wide variety of objects but was especially common for jewellery such as brooches, buckles, belt ends, dress pins and rings.
Making bronze items was a difficult and complex craft carried out by specialists at the sites where the ore was dug. Once the copper ore was dug out of the ground the copper had to be separated from the waste material. This was done by smelting the ore in a furnace with sand and charcoal. When the temperature inside the furnace reached about 1100°C (by pumping with hand bellows) the copper melted and flowed to the bottom where it was drawn out and cast into ingots.
When the craftsman had his copper ingots there were several ways he could make the finished casting.
Sometimes, if he wanted to produce a lot of similar items he would make a model of the item in wood or lead alloy and make a clay mould from this, or make an antler mould by carving directly into the antler. From these moulds he could then cast waxes to use as the masters for the bronze casting.
If he wanted to make a one off casting he made a model of the object he wanted to cast out of wood or beeswax. If he used wood he would press the wood into clay to make the shape he wanted. Once the clay had been fired and the wood had burned away he could use it as a mould. If he was using wax he would wrap the wax model in clay (leaving a spout through which he could later pour the molten metal) and dry the clay by firing or leaving it somewhere warm and dry. This heating would melt the wax and allow it to be poured off or voided, leaving a hollow mould.
Having made the mould, the smith took enough copper to make the object and melted it in a clay crucible. To turn it to bronze he added about 10% tin (and as mentioned above occasionally some lead, to make the molten metal flow better) to the molten copper. He then poured this into the mould to achieve the object he wanted. If there was still any wax in the mould the hot bronze would evaporate it off. When the bronze had cooled the mould was broken open and the cast object was taken out. If the object had not cast properly it could be re-melted and used for a later casting. If it was judged to be good it was cleaned up, polished, and used.
Moulds could also be made by carving out of stone, usually soapstone or slate and occasionally old Roman tiles. Some of these stone moulds were quite detailed, often in two halves, others were much cruder one part moulds. These one piece stone moulds were often used for ingot moulds.
Sometimes items were cast as blanks, usually in a clay or stone mould, although an iron mould has been found in York. These blanks would then be cleaned up and be decorated by engraving or punching.
Objects were also made out of bronze wire or by cutting sheets of bronze to the right shape and stamping designs into the surface with iron tools.
Bronze was even used to cover iron objects. This was done by coating the object with tallow and then applying bronze foil over this. If the item was hollow it was then filled with charcoal. The object was then covered in clay and placed in a fire. Bellows were used to raise the temperature of the fire so that the bronze melted and coated the surface of the object. This made items more decorative and prevented them from rusting.
Fine bronze (and sometimes gold and silver) sheet were sometimes embossed with a bronze die. These sheets could then be attached to other items for decoration. The best known examples of these are probably the helmet plates from Sutton Hoo in Suffolk and Valsgarde in Sweden. These sheets were sometimes tinned or silvered and were also often used to support elaborate filigree work. Bronze wire was also used to decorate iron objects by cutting a channel in the iron with an engraving tool and then hammering the wire into the channel creating fine contrasting lines in the work.

Monier
One question the public seem to love asking members of Regia is "How much was it worth?" It doesn't matter whether it's a sword or a buckle, they always seem to want to know the cost.
Working out how much something was worth in an economy based largely on barter (even if a common coinage was available) is not easy, even in contemporary relative terms, let alone with a modern equivalent. However, that is what I am going to try and do in this article, if only in very general terms. One thing to bear in mind is that some items varied in value considerably, depending on what part of Europe you were in, so sometimes several values will be given for the same item. We must also bear in mind that the few sources we have available date anywhere from the seventh to eleventh century, so there might be some variation in price with time.

The Sources
Most of the information we have comes from written laws, particularly the laws written down in the reigns of Ine and Alfred, where an average or rough 'replacement value' for an item would be given (although we do also have many fines that could be imposed too). However, we do also have a few references to actual 'retail prices' for some items, particularly from some of the Frankish sources.
What Was Money Worth?
This might seem like an odd question, but the value of money in Early Medieval Britain was quite a variable thing. In its simplest form Early English money was divided into pounds, shillings and pence. Unfortunately the subdivisions were not the same as our pre-decimal coinage. The pound was the Troy pound (approx. 11.5 modern ounces or 373g) divided into 240 pennies (making a Saxon penny about 1.55g). To make matters even more complicated, the shilling did not have a constant value, varying from 4-6 pence, not the more recent 12 pence. For the purpose of this article I will be figuring a shilling to be worth an average 5 pence (48 shillings to the pound). Of course, the pound itself referred to a pound of silver. An this is the point to mention that when Ethelred was paying off the Vikings with their 'Danegeld', he was doing so in pounds weight of silver, not in pounds cost. Which then goes on to demonstrate how wealthy England was at this time, because it was a practice that occurred over a 22 year period on and off. No wonder the Vikings kept coming. And even after all this asset stripping, England was still worth taking control of, just as Cnut did in 1016.
All of this explanation is an over-simplification of how Saxon coinage worked, but I'll let someone with far more knowledge of Numismatics than myself write a more detailed article on that particular subject (hint, hint).
Having got a rough idea of how the coinage worked, we need to work out how much that was worth in modern terms. An obvious solution might seem to be to use the bullion value of silver today, giving a silver penny a value of about 25 - 30p and a pound of silver a value of about £60 - 72. However, the relative value of silver today is in fact far lower than in early medieval times. There are several other ways of working out relative values such as the 'ale standard' or soldier's rates of pay, or many others. The theory behind the ale standard is that even since the dawn of the paid soldier, whether with coin or barter, the price of a pint of ale has remained in relative terms the same. Another theory follows the same reasoning that the price of bread has also stayed constant in relative terms to the wages that a warrior or soldier would have demanded.
Depending on which figures you use you can get a figure of a Saxon penny being worth anything from £10 - 200, although most methods give a figure in the range of £20 - 50, so for the purposes of this article I will demonstrate using the following (low) conversion rates: 1 Saxon silver penny = £20, 1 shilling = £100 and 1 pound = £4800. Again this is an oversimplification, but accurate enough for the purposes of this article.
Costs
In the following tables I will give the value in Early English pounds (l), shillings (s) or pence (d), weight of silver (g) and modern pounds sterling (£)
After each item I will note whether the price comes from Britain (b), Western Europe [W], Central Europe [C], Northern Europe [N] or Eastern Europe [E].
Sorry for the messy colums folks!

Livestock
Item Price Weight Modern
15 chickens [C] 1d 1.55g £20
Cow [E] 64.5d 100g £1,290
Cow [C] 88.5d 137g £1,770
Ewe and Lamb 1s 8g £100
Ox [E] 80.5d 125g £1,610
Ox [C] 88.5d 137g £1,770
Pig [E] 20d 30g £600
Sheep [E] 10d 15g £300
Fledged Peregrine Falcon [B] 1l 372g £4,800
Fledged Sparrow Hawk [B] 24d 37g £480
Foreigner's Lap Dog [B] 4d 6g £80
Freeholder's Buck Hound [B] 120d 186g £2,400
Freeman's Lap Dog [B] 120d 186g £2,400
Hawk's nest (Peregrine) [B] 1l 372g £4,800
Sparrow Hawk Nest [B] 24d 37g £480
Unfledged Peregrine Falcon [B] 120d 186g £2,400
Unfledged Sparrow Hawk [B] 12d 18g £240
Virgin Swarm of Bees [B] 16d 25g £320
Swarm of bees from a second swarm [B] 8d 12g £160
Swarm of bees from Virgin swarm [B] 12d 18g £240
Hive of Bees [B] 24d 37g £480
Hive swarm after august [B] 4d 6g £80
Old Swarm of Bees [B] 24d 37g £480
Second Swarm of Bees [B] 12d 18g £240
Horse [E] 193.5d 300g £3,870
Horse [N] 197.5d 306g £3,950
Horse [C] 308.5d 478g £6,170
King's Greyhound [B] 120d 186g £2,400
King's Hunting Dog, trained [B] 1l 372g £4,800
King's Hunting Dog, untrained [B] 120d 186g £2,400
King's Hunting Dog, 1 yr old [B] 60d 93g £1,200
King's Hunting Dog, young [B] 30d 46g £600
King's Hunting Dog, Dog, pup with unopened eyes [B] 15d 23g £300
King's Lap Dog [B] 1l 372g £4,800
Common House Dog [B] 4d 6g £80
Stranger's or Dunghill Dog [B] 4d 6g £80
Male Slave [N] 197.5d 306g £3,950
Female Slave [E] 131.5d 204g £2,630
Arms and Armour
Item Price Weight Modern
Helmet [C] 53s 410g £5,300
Mailshirt [C] 529d 820g £10,580
Shield and Spear [C] 88.5d 137g £1,770
Spear [W] 33d 51g £660
Sword [W] 81.25d 126g £1,625
Sword [B] 240s 1860g £24,000
Sword and Scabbard [C] 308.5d 478g £6,170
Fines, etc.
Item Price Weight Modern
Accepting service of another's ceorl [B] 120s 930g £12,000
Ceorl seeking new lord [B] 60s 465g £6,000
Binding an innocent ceorl [B] 10s 77g £1,000
Binding an innocent ceorl and shaving him like a priest [B] 60s 465g £6,000
Fighting (not in war) [B] 120s 930g £12,000
Ceorl entering into illicit union [B] 50s 387g £5,000
Thegn entering into illicit union [B] 100s 775g £10,000
Ceorl neglecting fyrd duty [B] 30s 232g £3,000
Failure to perform fyrd duty [B] 40-50s 310-387g £4,000-5,000
Landless thegn neglecting fyrd duty [B] 60s 465g £6,000
Thegn neglecting fyrd duty[B] 120s 930g £12,000 (+ land)
Danegeld paid between 990-1015 [B] 250,000l+ 93,000kg+ £1,200,000,000+
Freeman working on Sunday [B] 60s 465g £6,000
Ordering a slave to work on Sunday [B] 30s 232g £3,000
Priest working on Sunday [B] 120s 930g £12,000
Raping a female slave [B] 65s 504g £6,500
Holding a woman's breast [B] 5s 39g £500
Seducing a free woman [B] 60s 465g £6,000
Throw a woman down but not lie with her [B] 10s 77g £1,000
Not baptising child within 30 days of birth [B] 30s 232g £3,000
Removing a nun from a nunnery without permission [B] 120s 930g £12,000
Reward for catching thief [B] 10s 77g £1,000
Violation of an archbishop's protection [B] 3l 1,116g £14,400
Violation of bishop/eolderman's protection [B] 2l 744g £9,600
Violation of ceorl's protection [B] 6s 46g £600
Violation of church's protection [B] 50s 387g £5,000
Violation of the king's protection[B] 5l 1,860g £24,000
Note: There were many other fines, but including them all would take up too much space.What is clear, though, is that in Anglo-Saxon England what was most important was not what you did, but who you did it to.
Weregilds
Item Price Weight Modern
Slave [B] 60s 465g £6,000
Ceorl [B] 200s 1550g £20,000
Landless Thegn [B] 600s 4650g £60,000
Thegn [B] 1200s 9300g £120,000
Landless Welsh [B] 50s 387g £5,000
Landed Welsh with 1/2 Hide [B] 80s 620g £8,000
Welsh tribute payer (1 hide) [B] 120s 930g £12,000
Welsh tribute payer's son [B] 80s 620g £8,000
King's Welsh Horseman [B] 200s 1550g £20,000
Welsh with 5 hides [B] 600s 4650g £60,000
Miscellaneous
Item Price Weight Modern
1kg Corn [W] 2d 3g £40
Bridle [W] 6.5d 10g £130
Spurs [W] 13d 20g £400
Stirrups [W] 81.25d 126g £1,625
Buckle [W] 3.25d 5g £65
Cloak [N] 7.75d 12g £155
Cow eye [B] 1d 1.5g £20
Cow horn [B] 2d 3g £40
Cow Tail [B] 5d 8g £100
Ox Eye [B] 5d 8g £100
Ox Horn [B] 10d 15g £200
Ox Tail [B] 1s 8g £100
Fleece [B] 2d 3g £40
Beaver Skin [B] 120d 186d £2,400
Fox skin [B] 8d 12g £160
Marten Skin [B] 24d 37g £480
Otter skin [B] 8d 12g £160
Wolf skin [B] 8d 12g £160
Fyrdsman's pay/month [B] 10s 77g £1,000
Hide of land (approx. 120 acres) [B] 1l 372g £4,800
Land tax/hide [B] 2s 15g £200
Knife [W] 2d 3g £40
Silk (1oz) [E] 37d 57g £740

[B]Glass and Amber
Glass was used in a number of ways by the Saxons and Vikings; for drinking vessels, window glass, jewellery, enamelling and beads.
Remains of glass making furnaces have been found in York and Glastonbury. There is further evidence for glass making in Kent, Jarrow, Barking Abbey, Gloucester and Lincoln, and Bede documents glass making in England. Traces of glass working have also been found at Ribe in Denmark and Hedeby in northern Germany, although finds of glass items come from all over Europe.
There were two main ways of making glass: either from the raw materials of quartz and soda (or by the late tenth century, quartz and potash), or more usually by melting down broken glass (cullet) and then re-using it.
It goes without saying that the broken glass or cullet used had to be of the required colour or clear, so that no expensive new minerals were added to colour it. The problem of getting enough of one colour was overcome by importing blocks of coloured glass taken from continental mosaics (tesserae) and windows (so there's nothing new in recycling glass!).
Making glass from the raw materials was more difficult. The quartz generally came from clean, stone-free sand, usually river-bed sand. The soda was imported from the eastern Mediterranean in a form called natron. Potash (made by passing water through burnt wood or root vegetables), was obtained by evaporating strong alkali solutions of ash. The sand, natron or potash were then mixed together and heated in an oven for several days. The mixture was constantly raked and stirred to allow waste gasses to escape. It was then broken up and put into a crucible, often with cullet added, and melted in a furnace. If all went well glass was formed; however, the large lumps of partly formed waste glass which have been excavated, show how difficult the process could be.
When glass is made in this fashion, it is clear or has a slight green tinge. In order to colour it minerals were added; copper for red, blue or green, iron for black, tin for yellow. Coloured glass found includes pale blue, dark blue, blue-green, emerald green, olive green, amber, yellow-brown, red and black.
Glass vessels were also made, one of the commonest excavated styles being the 'claw beaker' of the pagan period. (These were actually poor representations of a common Roman glass vessel that had dolphins leaping down it's sides which then became over time more and more crude and simplified. Whilst we see them as 'claws', the Germans call them 'trunks' as in Elephant trunks.). Glass bowls are known although excavated examples are fairly uncommon. Conical drinking vessels occur during the earlier Viking period, but are by no means common, and were mostly imported from the Rhineland. This style seems to have been superseded by the bag beaker later on.
To make glass containers, the craftsman collected a blob of molten glass on the end of a hollow rod and blew into it. By careful blowing, spinning and using specialised tools and moulds, vessels of quite complicated shapes could be manufactured. Drinking glasses and bowls were sometimes decorated with trails of molten glass applied to their outer surface. Excavated finds dated to the Later Anglo-Saxon period would suggest that their glassware was getting cruder. An example of a bag-beaker from Winchester is pretty awful looking. This may be a false view due in part to the relative few finds, which seems to at odds with the general development elsewhere at that time.
Glass finger rings were popular and were made either by shaping molten glass around a metal rod of the right diameter or by placing a blob of molten glass on the point of an iron cone, which was then spun causing the glass to roll evenly down the cone until the desired size of ring was reached.
Glass was also used in jewellery in the same way as semi-precious stones. Glass playing pieces for board games have also been found in some numbers. In the later Anglo-Saxon period, glass was used modestly for some church windows. To date only blue glass seems to have been found, with the odd pieces displaying some decorative brushwork on them. Clear window glass may have been used in the homes of a few wealthy people although this is not certain.
One of the commonest uses for glass was as beads. The glass for these often had lead oxide added to give the beads extra sparkle. It also made the material easier to work as it lowered the melting temperature. Glass beads were made by using a 'pontil' rod to pick a blob of molten glass from a crucible. Tongs were then used to form a globular bead, or by using other tools to form other shapes.
Some shapes were made by rolling the bead on a smooth marble block whilst the glass was still soft. The beads were left plain or decorated with blobs or trails of a different coloured glass. These could be left raised, or pressed right in to produce a smooth bead. Some of the Scandinavian glass beads were very colourful with a mosaic pattern of glass (called 'millefiori', meaning thousands of flowers) applied to the surface of the bead. This effect was achieved by a series of quite complex actions.
Each different pattern was obtained by fusing composite coloured glass rods in varying combinations, and these rods themselves were formed by bunching and folding over others, and then drawing out the hot glass into narrow rods much like seaside rock. A necklace of these beads was the product of great expertise and skill, as well as being a beautiful piece of costume jewellery.
Beads have been excavated in large numbers from early period female Viking graves. Three hundred or so is not uncommon, although these were the smaller single coloured type. In male Viking graves, the number of beads is drastically different. In the whole of the British Isles, there have been no more than three beads found in any one grave, and only five distinct positions where they were situated. These usually comprise of two at the neck, with an additional one to possibly close a garment, and two at the waist. One of these may have fastened a pouch and the other which was occasionally found as low as the knee, could have been a charm or keepsake.
The pre-Christian Anglo-Saxons were also keen on beads, in the same manner as the Vikings. However, later on in the 8th-11th centuries their use became uncommon in both sexes. It is uncertain whether this coincides with the spread of Christianity, although their flamboyant use amongst the Vikings also declined over a similar period of time. The Christian practice of burying their dead without grave goods does not assist in our interpretations. It could be that strings of beads were still worn underneath garments, however, the whole practice may also have been viewed by then as unsophisticated.
Glass is also used to produce enamel. Enamel is essentially just coloured glass ground up into a fine powder. The powder is usually placed on a bronze piece of jewellery that has a low surround. When the piece is heated up so that the glass melts, it flows to fill the area colouring it and fuses to the background. After cooling slowly, the piece is then ground to remove excess enamel, and polished. Several colours were commonly used on a piece, each in a separate 'field' to prevent the enamel from running together blurring the final piece.
It is interesting to note that the glass bead workshops found at Clifford Street in York were associated with an amber bead industry, suggesting that bead making was completely separate from the glass industry. Amber beads were made by taking a block of amber, cutting it to roughly the right shape and drilling a hole through it. Its final shape was attained by turning it on a bow lathe before polishing with coarse sand and fine powder. Wedge shaped beads were also made, and they would often be mixed on a necklace, with perhaps a wedge shaped pendant as the centre-piece.
Amber is the fossilised resin of ancient pine trees, submerged under the sea in thin veins. It can be gathered along the North Sea coasts of East Anglia, south-west Jutland and the southern shores of the Baltic. It is washed loose onto beaches from its deposits by sea currents, causing it to float to the surface, especially during violent storms. Ranging in colour from a dark, reddish brown to a translucent straw, it was a treasured material, particularly by the Vikings. Other uses for amber, apart from bead making included pendants, amulets, gaming pieces, spindle-whorls, and finger rings.
We can deduce the processes that were employed by examining the remains of discarded or lost, part worked or broken beads, for wear or tooling marks. A finger ring would require a large piece of amber. This would be cut into slices with a saw, and then shaped with a chisel until it was roughly circular. The disc was placed on a bow lathe; the outside was polished and shaped and the centre was cut out to form a ring. The centre piece could then be used to make a bead. Many half finished rings were found in York, demonstrating that the amber worker often made mistakes with this time consuming tricky process and brittle material.

Wood-Working
Timber was the most important resource for the Anglo-Saxons and Vikings. The early medieval carpenter was not only skilled in working the wood, but also in selecting the correct timber and shape for the job. If the finished item needed to have a curve in it, the carpenter would select a piece of timber that had the correct natural curve. You can use natural junctions where a branch joins to the tree as joints that have grown to suit a job that you had in mind. These natural joints are stronger than man-made ones and save the carpenter a lot of time creating joints. Wherever possible they would 'follow the grain' to leave the finished product as strong as possible.
To a certain extent, all the peoples who lived then managed their woodlands, although if a tree needed to come down for a building let's say, as far as we know they didn't replant to replace that tree deliberately. A thousand years ago, trees were still a resource that would have seemed limitless. It takes for example over 80-90 years for an Oak tree to become large enough to be useful. Large scale timber production had yet to make the impact it would later. A large stand of trees felled would just be providing clearance for yet more farmland. The Vikings are regarded to some extent today in Iceland as 'environmental terrorists', as they eventually felled all of the trees that had once grown there. The Iceland we see today has been irrevocably changed due to their habits.
A great deal of Saxon and Viking woodwork was done 'green,' that is the timber was not seasoned (dried out over time) before working. This meant that the timber could be split easily (green oak can be split with a seasoned wooden wedge), and need not be sawn. The big advantage of using cleft (meaning split) timber is that it is less likely to crack as it dries.
Most of the 'roughing out' and shaping was done with axes and adzes. The saw has obvious advantages. It can cut out a straight piece of timber every time, splitting can result in planks that are twisted etc. But the trouble with saws was that they were very expensive and difficult to maintain and make. At the time of the Domesday Book in 1086, only 13 saws were recorded in the kingdom. These were probably large saws for what is called 'ripping' down the beam of timber to create planks, as much smaller bow saws are routinely shown in manuscripts.
The trimming and shaping with Adzes and Axes is quite a wasteful process as well. With saws, large pieces of wood can be separated from the job at hand, leaving you with a reasonable piece of wood that can be utilised for other smaller jobs. The Adzes and Axes just convert the unwanted timber into pieces only suitable for the fire. However, the bark would be stripped off for the tanners, as it contains tannin, especially if the tree had been an oak, alder or elm, and the bast fibres that lie just under the bark would also be pulled off to make rope and other ties. Willow, lime and again oak trees give some of the most useful bast fibres. And ultimately, any left over timber could be used in the Charcoal making process, or just burnt to keep the workers in the woods warm in the Autumn.
The largest pieces of wood working done during the Saxon period must have been for the buildings. Timber was also used for ships, musical instruments, coffins, bridges, roads/paths and many more mundane items as well.
It has only been since the major excavations like those at Hedeby, Birka, Dublin and York that archaeologists have been able to understand how often wood was used in the home. The waterlogged and anaerobic (lacking in oxygen) environment at these sites has yielded many finds in surprisingly good condition. Cups, bowls, spoons, and plates came in many sizes and were used in the home for storage as well as eating. Buckets, barrels and tubs were made from planks of wood bound with metal or withy hoops. Butter churns, cheese presses, trays, gaming boards and pieces, boxes and chests have been found too. Looms, beds, tables, chairs, stools and benches were made of wood as well.
Most tools had wooden handles. Rakes, spades and agricultural forks were also made from timber. Spearshafts, bows and shields were wooden too. Simple boats were made using the 'dug-out' method of construction. Ploughs, sleds, carts and wagons were all made of wood. It's difficult to think of much that was made then that wasn't made of wood.
Almost everyone employed the carpenter's skill in some way, from fishermen and weavers to shoe-makers. Shopkeepers and traders used wooden sticks with deep notches cut in them to keep their accounts. These were known as 'tally sticks', and recorded how much of an item had been purchased. It was split nearly in two down it's length and as a you counted off the sold or purchased items, you broke off a tooth of wood. When the deal was finalised, half of the tally stick went to the purchaser, and you kept the other half as a permanent record.
To shape cups and bowls the woodworker would have used a 'pole lathe'. The power to rotate the spindle and the balk of timber to be worked was created by pumping the treadle down, and letting the springiness' of the pole rotate it back again. The cutting was done on the down stroke when you provided the power. A skilled lather could produce some very fine pieces of turned work. Some finds of worked wood from York have suggested that the pole lathe was the most likely way that they made turned items such as cups. Sadly though, a complete or part lathe has yet to be found in association with the cups and bowls that have been excavated at sites like York. To date practical experimentation has demonstrated that pole lathes are the most likely manner to make such items.
They would also have used tools such as planes, axes, adzes, draw knives, wedges, knives, chisels, hammers, mallets, awls, gouges, and spoon augers (a type of drill). Saws were known, but were not generally used, perhaps because they were difficult to make, comparatively frail and are not as good when used on green wood, especially when a split piece would suffice.
The whetstone would have been a important possession for the woodworker as, without it, he could not have sharpened any of his tools. These were made from Gneiss, a type of Granite for the 'rough' grinding of blades, to the much softer banded Slates (selected for their elegance and the colour of the bands in the slate). The former could come from Telemark in Norway and the latter from the Lake District in northern England, although many other grades and types of stone were also used. Also different shapes were necessary for the variety of shaped blades used in detailed woodworking.
The name 'whetstone' comes from the practice of grinding an edge on a blade, even on a sword for example using water to 'wet' or 'whet' the edge. Sometimes the name 'slipstone' is also used to describe a similar thing. The advantage of water is that it won't stain your woodwork unlike oil can, and it's cheap - many people who sharpen tools often spat onto the stone to lubricate it.
Much of the Anglo-Saxon and Viking woodwork was ornately carved and invariably painted or decorated in some way. Some of the items surviving may well have taken much longer to decorate than they did to construct.
Another form of wood-working was basket weaving. This was done with thin strips of wood and bark, fine branches from trees such as hazel or willow withies, and reeds. Even grasses were employed for smaller basketry and the production of mats. While not much basket work has survived from the period (impressions of wattle are sometimes left in daub), due to the fact that the organic material degrades very quickly, there is ample evidence from period illustrations of baskets and wattle hurdles. In fact many of the terms used in basket weaving today are from the Old English.

Iron Working
Iron was a very important commodity to the Anglo-Saxons and Vikings, and those people who were lucky enough to be skilled in working it were held in high regard. The reason behind this is the versatility of iron. The Bronze Age had come and gone, and found many uses for bronze, but with the discovery of how to smelt and process iron, a whole new range of products could be made. Most farms would have had their own small forge where the farmer would be able to make or mend simple everyday items. As it was quite expensive the iron he used often came from reforged broken tools or other items. More complicated tasks would be sourced from travelling smiths who came to the farm, or forged by the village or town smith. The demand for iron products by royalty and noblemen meant that they had their own dedicated teams of smiths.
Iron was used to make diverse items from nails to swords, with a nail for example taking no more than one minute to make and a fine sword taking a week or so by a specialist weapon smith. A number of cooking utensils, pans and cauldrons were also made of iron, with the consequence that these things lasted much longer and couldn't be burnt. Flesh forks for boiled haunches of meat that looked like torture instruments, were forged out of billets of iron, whereas cauldrons were made out of sheets of iron, that were overlapped and riveted. The seams were beaten together so that they became watertight joints and didn't expand apart in the heat of the fire. There really wasn't a craftsman who didn't rely on the smith for many of his tools.
The most important of all of the tools made by the smith was probably the knife, which had an enormous number of uses, especially as people lived off the land far more than we do today. So whether the knife was just for eating, or was a specific tool just for carving wood, it still had to be made well. Although a knife appears simple, the cutting edge was made of steel with a softer iron back 'fire welded' to the blade. The reason for this was to economise on the amount of steel that was used, as it was a rarer product of iron making. We are not entirely sure, but we suspect that steel was a happy accident of good iron smelting, but didn't occur in large enough volumes. So it was carefully used in controlled amounts. Steel also keeps a better cutting edge than iron, but because of this property, it tends to be more brittle. Iron was then employed to make the bulk of the tool as it is more forgiving. Not far away from the forge would have been a rotary grind stone. With this and copious amounts of water, the edges of blades on all sorts of tools or weapons were honed to sharpness. Little grind stones roughly only five inches in diameter could be mounted on pole lathes to turn them, but larger stones would have had a man or men to turn it rapidly.
Fire Welding was the only method other than riveting to join two pieces of iron together permanently. The art lay in judging the temperature of the two elements in the forge. Often the two pieces were wired together to anchor them in place temporarily. When the iron and steel were on the brink of burning in the forge, just as white sparks begin to fly from the work, the billets were whisked out of the forge and placed on the anvil. This is certainly a two man job, because one is controlling the tongs with the billets in, and places it on the anvil, whilst the other hits it smartly before the work has a chance to cool at all. Just one strike is enough to join the two pieces, scattering a shower of white hot sparks over the forge. Now you know why they wear leather aprons. Any reduction in the temperature would result in only a partial or poor weld. The work was placed back into the forge once again, without any delay. Some fine washed silver sand is flung into the joint to act as a flux, to reduce excess oxygen, and then the work is hauled out again in a another shower of white sparks. Now the real weld is made. The heavy hammer drives the two billets together joining them forever. From here on in, the work is to bend and reshape the iron and steel to your desired shape. Axes are made by folding iron around a socket, pinching the ends together with steel inserted at the business end during welding, to become the cutting edge. Other smiths were more talented in making locks and padlocks that had fine springs of steel in them to operate the locking mechanism. Even horses then needed and had shoes. They were cruder and heavier, and were made probably a little quicker with the nail holes merely punched out from the edge of the shoe giving it a wobbly outer rim.
In order to make anything the smith first had to obtain his iron. Again, he was unlikely to have smelted it out for himself. This above all was a messy and time consuming task that would have been done nearer the source of iron and away from the town. First he had to obtain the iron ore. This was generally obtained from deposits near the surface of bogs, and is called not surprisingly bog ore. This source of ore is quite iron poor, unlike the ores that were later to be quarried out from cliff faces. The ore is heated or roasted in a pit. This helps to break it down, clean it and dry it out. It's then placed on a larger stone and broken up into small nuggets. The iron ore was then heated in a chimney shaped clay furnace about four feet high and 16 inches across (a process called smelting) at very high temperatures to remove the impurities, known as slag. The smelter is made from clay with lots of 'grog' or straw mixed in to help it withstand the extreme temperatures. To do this the iron ore was layered with charcoal. The charcoal was then lit and the furnace had its temperature raised by using bellows. Sometimes to 1500°C in certain areas of the smelter. Not too much air was required from the bellows as it could easily convert the ore just to slag by oxidising the ore rather than reducing it, so the process was a tricky one.
The iron then melted out of the ore and the slag collected in the shallow pit at the base of the furnace. The bottom corner of the smelter was broken open, the slag tapped off, leaving the smith with a fairly pure lump of iron called a bloom. Once the iron had cooled and set, a file was drawn over the surface to gauge the hardness of the iron bloom to see if it had any steel in it - the file being of a known quality itself. The bloom then had to be reheated and beaten over several workings to remove any other remaining impurities. The more diligently done the better, which resulted in nearly pure iron ready to be worked into many different objects. This type of iron is called wrought iron, but the Saxons were also able to add carbon (from charcoal) to convert it to steel. This was necessary where extra hardness and strength were needed, such as on knife edges, hammer heads or chisels. Another method was to roast the object in carbon dust in a metal box to create case hardened steel. The carbon penetrates the iron to a shallow depth converting it to the alloy.
Recent finds and work on the site at Hamwic (modern Southampton) have given us some new insights into Anglo-Saxon iron work. The quality of the iron has been shown to be superlative. So good in some cases that it's quality was not matched until the mid 1800s. The reason for this seems to lie in the work that was done to the iron to convert it to steel post the smelt. By a simple(!!) process of reheating the pure iron until it absorbed the relevant carbon levels to convert it to steel, until you could no longer heat it to good effect.
A sword blade required iron blooms to be forged into bars and strips of different shapes and sizes ready for use. Sometimes, especially for sword blades, the smith would twist together and fold bars of iron and steel to make the blade. This was a difficult and long winded process, but it meant the finished blade would be far stronger as it had the strength and hardness of the steel on the edges with the flexibility of the iron in the core. The twisting and folding of the bars of different metals gave a 'marbled' pattern to the surface of the blade which is called 'pattern welding'
The smith's forge had a fire in a hearth fuelled by charcoal, which was either a pit in the ground or, more usually, raised off the ground at waist height in a shallow clay bowl. Next to the hearth would be an anvil. The metal is heated in the hearth which is made hotter by blowing it with pairs of bellows, getting more oxygen from the air into it and raising the temperature to 900 - 1000°C. Glowing metal was held with a pair of tongs, and hammered into the desired shape on the anvil. The iron would stay hot enough to work for a minute or two only, less if there was a breeze to cool the work. He would also have punches with which to make holes, shears for cutting sheet metal and files for smoothing the metal. Next to his anvil he would have a supply of water and vegetable oil for cooling his tools or the items he was making. The forge itself is a dingy place, as it much easier to see the glowing metal in the shade. Also, when iron is heated to specific temperatures, it goes through several colour phases, known as straw to blue, each one indicating that the metal was either hot enough for a spring, or hard enough for a chisel.
Apart from smithying, he would have known how to solder brass and bronze together, braze it as well for stronger joints and how to tin plate objects. Depending upon the decorative nature of his work, he may also have known how to gild metals with an amalgam of mercury and gold. This last task was and still is very dangerous, because to get the gold to adhere to the iron or bronze, it is heated to vaporise the mercury, binding the gold to the bronze. The mercury oxide if it got into to your bloodstream via the lungs would affect your nervous system for good. Eventually killing you.

Leather Working
Unless you have very strong political views, just about everyone today has some items made using leather. Over the ages it has been used for boots, clothing, shields, and armour, tents, bottles buckets and fire hoses. In the Saxon period it was even more widespread as they did not have any of the other flexible materials we have today, but despite these innovations, it is still in great demand for good shoes, saddles and harnesses, suitcases, handbags, wallets, upholstery and many other high-quality products. The characteristics of leather were just as important then as they are today; flexibility, strength and durability.
The craft of the tanner, without whom no leather would exist, can be traced back for the better part of 500,000 years. The Ice Age was survived largely due to the ability to skin with fine flint scrapers and preserve pelts and hides. Skins will soon rot and fall apart unless they are preserved in some fashion. Smoking and stretching them is one way to temporarily stave off the inevitable rotting of the flesh. The next improvement is to rub fats and in particular the brains of the hapless animal into the hide to soften and make the leather pliable. The leather processing patent of smoking and oiling with brains was only registered as recently as 1914. The skin could have an oily substance like tallow (animal fat), egg yolk or dubbin which is a mixture of fish oil and tallow rubbed in to it's surface. It could also be treated by rubbing salt, brain or potash alum into the surface to produce a very pale leather. Both these methods were quick and easy but if the leather got wet the oils or minerals could be washed out and the leather would begin to carry on the rotting process.
It is unknown as to exactly when the method of using the bark of certain trees was to date the best way of transforming skins into the leather we today still recognise. This dark liquor is made miraculous because of the inclusion of the chemical Tannin. Whether it was an accidental or strangely purposeful discovery know one can say, but finds of leather have been made dating back at least 7000 years in the Middle East (which is the ideal place to find old leather by comparison to the more soggy and temperate North).
The use of Oak bark as the basis for tanning in Northern Europe lasted until the beginning of the 20th century, when the work of two Americans helped to speed up the process from two to three weeks, as opposed to the older method which could take a year or longer. Augustus Schultz the chemist and Robert Foerderer the sales end of things, developed 'chrome' tanning (using not surprisingly chromium salts). Because of the speed of manufacture, this method soon eclipsed the traditional process, almost killing off any of the tanneries who tried to remain faithful to the baths of tannin.
It is recognised the world over that tannin based leather production makes a superior leather of the highest quality.
Leather was used for a variety of things during the Anglo-Saxon period including shoes, belts, pouches, saddles and bridles, ropes, scabbards, shield coverings, bookbindings, cups, bottles and bags. Garments such as cloaks, hoods and jerkins could be made, and if these were then oiled using fish or vegetable derived oils to make them waterproof. Presumably blacksmiths and other metal workers would have worn leather aprons, although there is no direct evidence for this.
The production of leather from animal hides was a time consuming and dreadfully smelly process. So much so that tanneries were often situated far out of town for reasons of air pollution rather than health. Leather only works as it does not hold water in it's pores, evaporating the water off leaving an air porous layer that helps in the case of feet to insulate them. If water somehow remains in the skin, the collagen protein fibres will begin to break down and rot. The hides of cattle, sheep, pigs, goats and deer, and perhaps horses, were all used. Once the animal was slaughtered, the skin was removed and the first job was to remove any excess bits of flesh and fat. In order to do this the hide was soaked and pounded and placed over a wooden beam where it was scraped with a special knife. If the hair on the skin were to be removed, urine, quicklime or wood ash was use in solution into which the hide was steeped and then rubbed or left to soak into the wet surface. This loosened the hair and allowed it to be scraped off with a tool today known as a 'scudder'. The hide was then washed to stop the chemicals affecting it further. At this point the hide is now technically a pelt, and it is now that it is judged as to what purpose the pelt should be put to. The more thickness, the more likely it is to become harness etc.
After the hair and fat had been removed, the tanner had to prevent the pelt from stiffening or rotting in one of several ways, as up to this point, it is white and very slimy and should be referred to as raw-hide. If removed from the steeping pits, the raw-hide would begin to dry rapidly and shrink, the properties of which were useful for some tasks.
Some of the pelts were then removed from the 'liming pits' and placed into vats containing a nauseous brew dog dung, chicken and dove droppings which 'fluffs' open the pores in the skin due to bacterial action and neutralising the lime, a process called 'bating' the leather. This makes the leather soft and pliant, and suitable for such things as clothing. The amount of bating that the leather underwent, controlled how flexible the hide was to be. The pelts will them spend a few hours in a pit containing ammonia, once derived from urine, de-liming them further and them from here they go into the pits holding the tannin liquor. The weather and the volume of new bark affected the strength of the liquor and was always judged by experience. In turn, the number of pelts and age of the liquor determined how long they should spend in the pits soaking, all of which were certified by the tried and tested method of dipping your finger in and tasting it. The pelts were hung over a pole in the case of a deep pit or stacked in layers in a shallower clay lined pit and soaked in this mixture of water and crushed oak bark (the prime source of the tannin). There were several pits through which the pelts were rotated, each containing an increasingly stronger strength solution. The tannin is relatively a weak solution, and time alone is the only way to work it right through the structure of the leather. The action of the tannin is to preserve, driving out the pelt's water content which makes up 70% of the pelt's weight, and coating each and every one of the collagen fibres with tannin. Tannin helps the leather to resist the effects of heat, decomposition by water and attack by all manner of organisms.
The bark was sourced from ideally trees felled as the sap in them was rising in the spring months, which also made their stripping easier as well. The strips were cut into lengths around the two foot mark for ease of handling, before being dried and then ground down and mixed with water. Elm, Willow and Alder are also good sources of tannin, but Oak has for a very long time been the traditional choice.
The pelts are handled about once a week, and make their way through the first series of pits in about three months. They next go to the layer pits to sit for ten months or so with layers of crushed bark between them. Cords are tied to the corners of the pelts so that they can be lifted to judge their progress, and moved from time to time. Only after this, are the pelts pulled out and strung out to dry and scrubbed, a process now done by large centrifugal drums to rid the leather of any water.
The finishing of the leather began with applications of traditionally Cod oil being applied and rubbed in with a thick wad of sheepskin. This helps to keep the leather supple, protects against the atmosphere and the addition of doing this in the shade prevents sunlight from making the leather dark and brittle (even with fully finished leather, the sun can in effect tan it and stain a perfectly good piece of leather. Unlike in humans, the process is not reversible.). From this point, the finishing of the leather has changed a great deal. Today, machines trim and cut the thickness and polish the leather. A thousand years ago, all this had to be done over a smooth beam with a series of tools by a man who became known as a 'currier'. The hardest part was to trim the leather to a single thickness, producing a lot of 'suede' waste. The leather then had to be polished with bone tools on it's outer surface, and extra applications of Cod oil rubbed over the hide. For a really fine finish, the currier might spend hours per hide, and is a very skilled and onerous task. The applications of Cod oil are there to replace natural skin oils that are lost due to the caustic nature of the tanning process. Only after many hours of finishing the surface, was the leather ready to be used.
At this point, the leather can be further enhanced by staining with liquor from other tree barks such as alder, possibly plant dyes or more Cod oil and extra 'slicking' with bone tools, and to act as a final layer, a blend of mutton fat, tallow (unhelpfully, technically any kind of fat, even vegetable fat), and yet more Cod oil darkening and preserving the surface.
Now that the leather was tanned and dried, it could be cut and stitched into the items required. In order to sew the leather, particularly thick leather, holes were made with an awl (a needle was not strong enough to puncture the leather) and it was then stitched with a needle or pig bristle using beeswaxed linen, wool or even gut thread. The seams of shoes were sewn in a variety of methods with either a single needle or two needles at the opposite ends of the same thread - a stitch known as 'saddle stitch'. The awl cuts a tidy hole in the leather that will close up tight around the thread as it is sewn, leaving a watertight stitch. The beeswax on the thread helps to preserve the thread and eases it through the hole as it is drawn through. Leather items were often decorated by tooling and painting. The tooling was done by damping the surface of the tanned leather and pressing or sometimes stamping the design in with a fairly sharp metal, bone or wooden tool. This engraves the surface rather than cutting it. The leather was also occasionally dyed and possibly painted to highlight the designs.
The commonest leather finds are the soles of shoes. A new shoe might only last a few months before it needed to be repaired and most shoes found have been patched in some fashion. Even after repair they might only last a few months more. Because of this, shoes were rarely decorated, and in the worst conditions such as ploughing, shoes were dispensed with for the time being. Shoes were usually made by the 'turn shoe' method which involves stitching the shoe together inside out, and in such a way that the stitching does not pierce the outer surface of the leather. (Technically known as 'tunnel stitching'.). Once the shoe is finished it is turned the right way out, sometimes with the leather wet to ease the righting of the shoe. This method of construction has the advantage that it does not leave any exposed stitching on the outside of the shoe, prolonging its useable life.
The rawhide mentioned earlier is much stiffer and stronger than ordinary leather and could be used for edging and facing shields, making 'emergency' shoes, or any other job requiring a stiffer, stronger material. Like leather, it could be softened by soaking for ease of working, but would become hard and shrink as it dried. It has the propensity to suck up moisture unless it is proofed in some manner with a shellac of some sort.
The skin could also be tanned in such a way as to keep the hair on the skin. The time of year that the animal was killed has a bearing on how well the hair stays in the skin, making trapping in the winter the best time to hunt for pelts. These furs could then be used for trimming clothes, lining cloaks, as sleeping mats and blankets, and perhaps even for items such as sleeping bags. The wearing of skins as normal clothing was unknown for both the Saxons and the Vikings. We don't know for sure quite why this is, but it may lie in the fact that it may have been deemed 'barbaric' to do such a thing when there was perfectly good woollen and linen clothing to wear. Most people rarely had the chance to hunt animals for pelts anyway, leaving it to the 'idle rich' to do the hunting of large game purely for the pelt.
As an aside, a story from the 1950's in central Africa, relates how the skin of an Eland (the largest antelope) was cut into a spiral, and then draped over a branch from a tall tree. The thong was then tied to a large boulder and spun. After some hours, the action of the spinning boulder pulling down on the leather, the sun and the application of fat, created a rope when made up that could 'pull a five ton truck out of the mud'.

Textiles
The weaving industry in Anglo-Saxon and Viking England was huge, for it's time. Saxon and Viking women, and in all likelihood men, were very skilled at cloth making. Raw flax and wool was spun into yarn, this was then dyed or bleached, woven into cloth and then cut and sewn into the garments their families needed. Socks and gloves were made with nothing more than wood, bone or bronze needle and a ball of yarn. They could even spin very fine silk threads and weave these into decorative braids, although it is more likely that they only ever saw the thread rather than the raw silk fibres. These finer quality fabrics would quite probably have been sold in the markets, especially by specialist producers.
Wool was the main fabric available to the Early Medieval person. This usually arrived in the form of woven cloth, although felt was sometimes made from the raw washed fleece as well. Linen was the next most widely used fibre followed by silk. The silk would have been imported from the east and would have passed through the hands of many traders before reaching these shores thereby making it very expensive.
Linen is made from Flax, a blue flowering plant only 50 cms tall with slender stems that is a member of the Hemp family. When harvested, soaked in water and beaten it can be pulled apart into a mass of stringy fibres. It would then have to go through a further stage of preparation with a tool called a Heckle to separate the fibres and any remaining 'bark', or outer woody stem. The Heckle has a number of long iron spikes set into a wooden block, through which a hank of linen fibres is dragged freeing the linen threads. After some final dressing it is ready for spinning. Yarn from Linen is used to sew shoes together, in sail making and other leather work, although these threads would be heavier and thicker than those used for weaving. The cloth produced from flax is much softer and far more comfortable to wear than woollen cloth. To begin with, the cloth is quite glossy with a waxy sheen to it, but this breaks down over time with washing. It is quite possible that some forms of nettle which are also members of the Hemp family may also have been used in the same way.
Wool came from sheep local to the weaver, some breeds giving fine silky fleece, others quite coarse. Fleeces needed to be washed to remove dirt etc from them, and were then 'carded' or combed with a large iron comb-like tool to free the hairs and give them direction so that they could be rolled into sausage like lengths. Often the prepared wool was put on a distaff to make it easier to spin. This is a forked stick around which the carded wool sausages are wound. The distaff is then tucked under the arm and leant on the shoulder, leaving both hands free for spinning.
Having prepared the wool or flax the women (and some men) would then have spun it using a drop spindle (spinning wheels are a much later invention). The spindle was made of wood, or, sometimes bone and was weighted at the bottom with a 'whorl' or UFO shaped weight of clay, wood, bone, stone or metal and even amber. By teasing the fibre out and twirling the spindle quickly the yarn is twisted together producing a thread. The difference in the weight of the whorl, the degree of teasing and the skill of the spinner dictated the quality of the thread. In general terms, the heavier the whorl, the finer the thread, although it increased the risk of the thread breaking. This was not the disaster it first sounds like, as it could always be rejoined to more carded fleece so that you could continue.
After the yarn had been spun it would be dyed using natural dyes. Dyestuffs could have been bought in the market or collected from the countryside. As a point of interest, 70% of all plants in the British Isles will give you a sort of yellow when used as a dye.
The woven threads were wound on a device called a Niddy Noddy or more simply a yarn winder. This enables the dyer to create hanks of yarn that aren't too tightly wound together, ensuring that the dye bath can penetrate all of the fibres and preventing streaking. The yarn would usually be mordanted with oxalic acid from wood sorrel, iron, or even an alkaline solution made from stale urine.
The mordanting process enables the yarn to take up and keep the colours in the fibres better. An iron cauldron is all that is needed to mordant with iron or indeed a copper or bronze cauldron for mordanting with copper. Salt helps to enhance some colours and 'hard' water, made hard with chalk if necessary gives brighter colours. Woad leaves with the active chemical indigotin in them were used to give a blue, the process working in the presence of oxygen; the whole of the weld plant for yellow; madder roots for oranges, reds and ruddy colours; alkanet roots for lilac, and the sap-wood from the Brazil tree for reds. The jury is out however as to whether the Brazil tree from Spain was actually used. Even the husks of small beetles called Kermes were used for dying with although it is again a very rare dyestuff in this country. Many other roots, berries, barks and lichens were used on a more localised basis.
Certain colours may have been very regional, but the picture is a very colourful one, rather than muddy and dull. There is a phrase 'dyed in the wool', suggesting that the fleece was dyed before spinning rather than afterwards. However, this might give you a problem dyeing smaller quantities for smaller jobs hinting that the phrase is more appropriate for a more industrialised process.
The yarn was then woven into cloth on a loom. The commonest types of looms were called the warp weighted loom and the two beam loom. The warp weighted loom leant against the wall when it was in use and could be taken apart for easy storage. The warp threads hung down, and were pulled tight by rows of clay loom weights. The two layers of warp threads were held apart by means of a shaft or 'heddle', which could be moved to and fro, thus creating a 'shed' through which the weft could be passed. A single heddle makes a weave known as 'tabby', and by the use of several heddles quite complicated 'twills' and 'herringbone' patterns could be woven.
The other type of loom was the two-beam loom, which worked in a similar way to the warp weighted loom, but instead of weights, a bar was used to hold the bottom of the threads taut. Unfortunately it is hard to tell how widespread this type of loom was since it leaves little or no archaeological trace. By the early eleventh century it is likely that professional weavers were using simple, flat treadle looms, although the warp weighted and two beam loom would have continued to be used in the home. Wool and linen could be mixed on a loom, with the wool creating the warp threads and the linen the weft. This combination tangles far less than wool on wool, although an element controlling this is how fine and 'furry' the wool threads were.
Wool fabric could then also be fulled, a process which 'thickened' the cloth with fullers earth. It might have also had its nap raised by the use of teasels over the surface of the fabric. During the actual weaving, tufts of fleece were sometimes knotted into the weave to anchor them, creating a fabric with a hairy or shaggy finish.
The cloth could be 'ironed' by rubbing it between a whale-bone plaque and a large fist sized glass or stone smoother which was heated either in hot sands or by the fire. 'Pleats' could be put into linen garments by twisting them up along their length whilst damp and leaving them somewhere warm to dry. When dried and untwisted the creases gave the effect of masses of small pleats.
There is some suggestion that wax was also used to make the pleats permanent, by ironing it in with the warm glass linen smoothers. This pleating (which may have looked similar to the pleating seen on Fortuny dresses of the early twentieth century) was a fashion of Viking ladies, and has been found in the corroded products on the backs of bronze brooches.
Knitting as we recognise it today was not used, although a system of knitting with a single thick needle was known. This technique is known as naalbinding. Continuous loops of yarn are linked together in rows, using a stitch similar to that of blanket stitch. The shaping is done by increasing or reducing the number of loops in a row or by 'laying in' extra rows. There are many different knotting styles that can be used for naalbinding, and it was used mainly to produce gloves, or the feet of socks. The 'legs' of the socks would have been produced using a technique known as sprang. Sprang is a way of weaving that produces textiles with a high degree of elasticity and can be used to weave a tube. A continuous warp thread is set up on a special loom and this is twisted by hand to produce a tight net-like fabric. A thread is passed through the work on completion to stop it unravelling. As well as producing socks, hairnets have been found made from sprang.
Braid was frequently used to decorate clothing and for headbands, belts, hem dressing etc. Most braid was produced by the process known as tablet weaving. Tablet weaving is one of the oldest European textile techniques, traceable to at least the early iron age. The tablets are small flat squares, usually of bone or wood, with a hole in each corner through which a warp thread is passed. The tablets are held in the hand like a pack of cards, parallel to the warp, and turned backwards or forwards by half or quarter turns. This action twists the four warp threads (controlled by each tablet) into a flat pattern that can be locked into position by a weft thread inserted between each of the turns. By varying the colours of the warp yarn and the directions of the turn of the tablets, intricate warp patterns can be obtained. Further decoration can be obtained by 'picking up' a second weft thread, often of gold wire called brocading. Other techniques were also used for braid weaving, although tablet weaving seems to have been the most common.
One other area of textile work worthy of note is that of tapestry and embroidery. Amongst the Vikings many wall hangings seem to have been produced using a 'Soumak' technique, as seen in the ninth century Oseberg Tapestry and several twelfth century church tapestries such as the example from Skog church in Sweden. Amongst the Saxons, embroidery seems to have been more popular, both for wall hangings and for decorating clothes. Often the embroidery was made more spectacular by the use of silver and gold threads. Anglo-Saxon embroidery was famous throughout Europe and was often used as gifts on ambassadorial missions

Wool and Stuff
A question that is often asked of Regia members by members of the public is "They wouldn't have had cloth that fine and soft would they?". Well I have recently been doing a project on Anglo-Scandinavian cloth with particular reference to finds from York at the Archaeological Resource Centre there. This project has involved researching textiles not only from York but also from other Viking Age sites to enable me to draw parallels. I hope that the information I have accumulated will be of use to Regia members and others interested in this period.
One of the most important things to remember is that the recovery of textiles from digs is quite rare and is even rarer for large quantities of textiles to survive. This is due to the fact that textiles require anaerobic conditions, i.e. to be waterlogged and without oxygen, in order for them to survive. As some of you will know there are very few sites in Britain that have these conditions, but `ghosts' of textiles sometimes survive in the corrosion products of metalwork, particularly on jewellery. The evidence preserved in these corrosion products is, however, generally very small, but it is still of use as the weave and thread size can usually be detected, though often with difficulty.
Normally very fine textiles are found in graves and coarser textiles on settlement sites. This does not mean that people were only buried in fine cloth, but wore coarse clothes in life. What it suggests is that the finer cloth found in graves is cloth worn every day as clothing and that the coarser fabrics were used for everyday tasks and industrial purposes. In a town such as York or Dublin these coarser fabrics would also include sail-cloth and tarpaulins. Occasionally fine cloth is found on settlement sites e.g. Hedeby in Schleswig-Holstein where the cloth had a secondary use as caulking for boats after the cloth had served its useful life as clothing and it was not feasible to mend it any more.
Obviously the quality of clothing worn would diminish with lower ranks, but even the slaves were not wearing very rough 'sack- cloth' as people have thought in the past and some still do today. Slaves would also probably wear their master's cast-offs, which would be reasonably fine, though they may have been very patched and worn thin in places. However this does not mean that slaves were going round wearing highly decorated, but patched, clothing. The slaves would receive the underclothes, i.e. under-tunics, undresses, work clothes etc., to be worn as overclothes. If the upper classes did 'hand down' their more decorated garments then it would generally have been to the classes immediately below them or to their children. However this handing down of decorated garments does not seem to have happened. Of the most heavily embroidered garments, the habit was to donate them to the church, which were consequently embellished even more for the bishops etc.
From sites in York and elsewhere in Europe, particularly Scandinavia, very fine cloth has been recovered, typically with counts of between 14x11 and 24x12 threads per cm. (first number = warp, i.e. threads hanging down, second number = weft, i.e. threads passing through). More often than not though, the greater number of textiles recovered from sites are of medium fineness, typically with thread counts of 10x7 to 15x9 threads per cm. These are, nevertheless, still reasonably fine fabrics and much finer than some of the cloth some public expect us to be wearing.
Evidence from York and later Saxon London have shown that the majority of wool used was of a 'hairy medium' type, meaning that the staple - the length of the individual fibres - was quite long allowing very fine yarn to be spun and, consequently, very fine fabrics to be produced, though they would not be exceptionally fine and it is quite possible that they would still have quite a rough, but smooth, feel to them. It does seem though that the people in the places settled by Scandinavians were using more hairy wools than those in the Anglo-Saxon settlements, so maybe here we are seeing an early north/south divide.
These hairy wools found on Scandinavian sites seem to equate with the modern mountain breeds of sheep; so maybe we are seeing here the ancestors of these sheep, which would appear to have been brought to Britain by Scandinavian settlers. We do not know what sort of breed was native to the Anglo-Saxon areas of England in this period unfortunately, but we can assume that it would be reasonably similar to the breeds living there today. All of these wools would produce quite fine cloth though, and if the cloth were fulled then the cloth would be even finer and smoother. Fulling mills from the later Viking period have been found in Britain, particularly in Fair Isle and the north of Scotland so it is highly possible that the Vikings and the Anglo-Saxons were producing fine fulled cloth. Obviously they were able to import even finer cloth, and silks, from the Mediterranean and even further afield, but it is often difficult to distinguish these imported cloths from native cloths in the archaeological record.
There is also a tradition in the north of Scotland and the Orkney and Shetland Isles that the cotton grass which is often in wetland in upland areas was spun and made into a type of fine cloth, but we cannot tell whether this is truth or just myth as fibres such as cotton and linen survive even more rarely than wool in archaeological record.
I hope that this short article has been of interest and that the Bibliography below will produce further material for those of you who wish to pursue this topic further.

Stone Working
There were about 300 years between the end of the Roman era and the 're-invention' of stone buildings. It wasn't that the concept of erecting stone buildings had been entirely forgotten, just that the size of the task and the problems of dedicated labour to carry off the project were nearly insurmountable. On the continent in France and Germany, people were still putting up stone buildings, and still renovating the old Roman ones.
The arrival of the Vikings didn't help matters, since, just like the Saxons before them, they were a culture which used timber even for their largest buildings. It therefore lay with the ever growing clergy to push for stone structures, with the largest projects from the period obviously being the stone churches. The earliest stone churches were built in the early seventh century and continued to be built thereafter. However in the poorer parishes, wood churches still persevered. These early churches were quite modest, although by the time of Edward the Confessor massive buildings like Westminster Abbey were being built - not that you can see much of the original any more. Many of the Anglo-Saxon churches are still in use and examples can be found at Deerhurst in Gloucestershire, Bradford-Upon-Avon near Bath in Wiltshire, Barton-Upon-Humber in Lincolnshire, and Earls Barton in Northamptonshire. There are many more up and down Britain, some more corrupted by later modifications than others.
Stone buildings do not appear to have been built for secular uses amongst the Saxons until the ninth - or tenth century, although in areas of Britain that were for one reason or another timber poor, stones were being used by the native peoples to build the walls of their buildings, and some cases, following the Irish tradition, even integrating the roof as well and building that of stone too. This suited the incoming Norse Vikings who also, in the more marginal areas of Norway, had a tradition of building in stone. In each of these examples, the stone had to be of a type that was found in bedded plains for ease of building, as the structures they were erecting were raised without the use of mortar, otherwise known as 'dry stone walling'. The Anglo-Saxon churches however were utilising rough stones for the bulk of their buildings, and these had to be lime mortared into position. They were not above using old Roman bricks in with the rest of the wall materials, and whilst the greater part was just ordinary stone, many decorative elements were carved out of freestone such as sandstones and limestone. Window and door surrounds, quoining, all of the pillars, friezes etc; were carved from these types of stone.
A considerable amount of Anglo-Saxon architectural stonework has survived and gives an idea of the artistic nature of the Anglo-Saxon churches. Stone sundials are features which often survive on churches from the period. Roods carved in stone (figures of Christ on the cross), many of them life-sized, have also been found at many sites, and in many places, only the lintels or supports for these quite large crosses are left as the cross was carved in wood.
Other large pieces from the period are the stone crosses found in a number of churchyards. These were always highly decorated, and, like the carvings in churches, were often painted, leaving traces of paint in the nooks and crannies of the carving which have survived all this time. Vestiges of black, blue, red, brown, orange, yellow and white pigment have been detected on such stonework. From the Danelaw and Cumbria, stone crosses include pagan as well as Christian imagery on opposite sides of the cross, possibly ensuring that no-one was left out. The crosses often preceded the actual church building and acted as focal points for the local populous.
At some ecclesiastical sites stone furniture has also been found; occasionally seats, but more often than not lecterns, elaborately carved fonts and stands for bowls. Stone grave-stones, often with a cross and an inscription; stone shrines, also decorated and highly adorned 'hog backed' tombs are regular finds. Pictorial commemorative stones are well known, mostly from Scandinavia but also in this country whilst carved rune-stones are another common Scandinavian find but are far more rare in this country.
On a more secular level, stone was used for a number of purposes, the most widespread being the manufacture of quern stones and millstones in water-mills. The type of stone for these tools was quite particular. It needed to be quite hard but with an open or gritty finish to it. Mill Stone Grit was one type that could be used and imported from northern Germany came Rhenish Lava. Stone was used for spindle-whorls, moulds for metal-casting and, occasionally, for loom weights. Shale, especially oil shales were carved into finger rings, with the rough shale pieces being exported or imported to urban sites such as London for manufacture; where at one site the remains of cow metatarsals sawn to make rings have also been excavated. Other uses for limestone were mortars for pounding food or minerals in, and chunky oil lamps from chalk. Even Roman tiles found themselves being reused and were converted to moulds for casting and trimmed as loom weights.
In Scandinavia many bowls and cooking vessels have been found carved from soapstone, or steatite, a mineral that is very heat tolerant. It is a soft, easily carved rock that was often trimmed roughly to shape on the quarry face with the soapstone hardening as it was exposed to the air as the bowl was being finished. Steatite is soft enough to be carved with wood working tools and even saws with little or no damage to the blades. These bowls were usually hemispherical, and makers and owners marks on the rim show their value. These styles of bowls could be quite large and not the sort of thing you would hang over a fire, suggesting that they were placed beside it and rotated to keep the heat spread evenly around the bowl. Other suggestions are that it was used to boil meals in by roasting stones in the fire and then dumping them into the pot. Other more complex shapes included handled vessels or rectangular forms. The soapstone was quarried in Norway and in the Shetlands and exported to the other Scandinavian countries; its many qualities also making it suitable for such things as moulds for metal casting, furnace stones for forges, oil lamps, spindle whorls, weights and line or net sinkers.
Other types of stone had specialised uses. Decorative stone pendants found in Birka were carefully selected for their beautiful colouring. Small black stones were used as touchstones to test the colour, and hence purity, of gold. Jet was also a widely used stone, the main source in Europe being Whitby in Yorkshire. It was used for making pendants, finger rings, playing counters, dice and even spindle whorls. Jet is black and shiny when polished, and was sometimes inlaid with tin, calcium carbonate or orpiment, a yellow mineral imported from France and Germany.
Rock crystal was very popular as a material, but was only suitable like today for small items and in the Late Anglo-Saxon period it was utilised as beads or other elements in jewellery. However in the pagan period, rock crystal was used to make crystals balls about 2 inches in diameter. These had a simple silver frame placed around them that joined on the upper side in an often square 'box' through which passed a fairly thick silver wire loop. There has been much speculation as to their use, but the latest theory is that they were used to magnify the suns rays to start fires with, which they can do on a sunny day. However, why would you need a fire on a sunny day...?
Stone was a basic trade item in the tenth and eleventh centuries. As well as the soapstone mentioned above, Kentish ragstone was exported to Europe for building. But to add a note of confusion, Norwegian Ragstone was also exported in this direction to London. Often it arrived in the form of ballast in the bellies of ships, which ensured that everything apart from the bilge water could be traded to maximise the trip. The most widely traded stone item however, was the whetstone. Banded slate whetstones from the Lake District, Scandinavian Gneiss from Telemark are found all over Europe and seem to have been an important part of the cargo of at least one of the Viking shipwrecks found. The stone often arrived rough, from where it went to another site to be finished into the actual hone. Larger whetstones for sharpening iron tools were an important part of everyday equipment and were widely traded, especially since varying degrees of coarseness were required to produce a finely honed edge.
Working stone was the same then as it is today with the exception of power tools. A mason used a hammer or mallet and chisel and punches to carve the stone to the required shape. Masons had by then fallen into two fairly distinct groups, those who erected buildings and those who decorated them, not that either couldn't do a little of both. Stone was moved by sea and river a lot, but far less overland, so redressing old Roman limestone to suit your purposes as it was already on site, cheap and of good quality was a logical step. There is some evidence that as templates and stencils have been found, that those who commissioned such work, probably suffered from envy and wanted theirs to be'...like that but nicer.'

Food and Drink

Fruit and Vegetables
When we visit the shops in England today, we are presented with a wealth of fruit and vegetables from all corners of the planet from which to choose. For people in this country in the tenth and eleventh century this could not happen. They had only such foods as could be cultivated seasonally or found wild. Exotic foods such as potatoes, tomatoes, bananas, pineapples - fruits and vegetables of the New World, were unknown here. Mediterranean fruits, such as lemons and oranges were, as far as we know, not imported, although we have documentary proof for the importation of such things as figs and grapes (Viking Age England, Julian Richards, p94).
We know that they grew wheat, rye, oats and barley. Wheat for bread, barley for brewing and oats for animal fodder and porridge. Along with these crops grew various weeds of cultivation - some of them poisonous. The harvesting methods made it difficult to separate the cereal from the weed, and many illnesses must have been caused in this way.
It is known that they had carrots, but these were not the large, orange coloured vegetables that we are used to today. They were much closer to their wild ancestors - purplish red and small. 'Welsh carrots'; or parsnips were also availablae (S Pollington - 'Leechdom'). Cabbages were also of a wild variety, with smaller tougher leaves. They cultivated legumes such as peas and beans. Various 'wild'; roots were probably collected, such as burdock and rape. Onions and leeks were cultivated as flavourings and wild garlic may have been used.
One way in which the people made up for the poor quality of these vegetables would have been to flavour them with native and imported herbs and spices. In Aelfric's Colloquy, the merchant speaks of importing spices, and in the Leechbooks, some imported spices are mentioned. Among them may have been ginger, cinnamon, cloves mace and pepper. We have no way of knowing how these spices were used , as the earliest recipe book only dates from the 14th century. Home grown herbs would have included coriander, dill, thyme, opium poppy and summer savoury. (Eighth-Eleventh Century Economy and Environment in York in J Rackham Environment and Economy in A/S England. CBA Res Rep 89.)
Many fruits were eaten and seeds from excavations tell us that they also had small apples (crab apples) plums, cherries and sloes. A large deposit of apple pips, from a pit in Gloucester probably points to the making of cider. These would have been sweetened with honey. Sugar was virtually unknown in the West of Europe, and at this period was used only as a medicine, as a laxative and for bladder disorders, for the kidneys and for eye disorders. (Dangerous Tastes, the Story of Spices. Andrew Dalby). It does not. however, appear in any Anglo-Saxon Leechbooks.
Honey was used to make a sweet alcoholic drink called mead, which was usually flavoured with some form of herb such as meadowsweet (O.E. meduwyrt - meaning mead plant). However, even today it is still not clear whether the mead they knew was no more than honey beer that we may encounter occasionally today. The confusion here lies with the fact that they refer to 'frothing horns of mead', and mead as we make it does not have a head to it. Barley was used to make beer which may have been flavoured with wild hops. Whether these were wild or cultivated is not known, but the Graveney boat, a 10th Century clinker built inshore trading boat may have been carrying a cargo which included hops up the Thames Estuary. (The GraveneyBoat: a tenth century find from Kent. V Fenwick ed Brit Archaeol Re Brit Ser 53 Oxford 1978).
Wine was drunk, but this was generally imported although fruit wines may have been home-produced. There are also written references to 'apple-wine', probably a form of cider. Many fruit juices including apple, pear and plum were drunk as were herbal 'teas' and infusions. Whilst acorns are plentiful most years, they can only be eaten with sufficient preparation. There is no mention in the Anglo-Saxon record of them ever being used as a food stuff - with the closest instances of Oak 'products' being the leaves as a remedy in the Ormont fragment and the bark as an astringent in Bald's Leechbook. There may have been many instances where a needs must approach may have occurred which was not normal practice when food was in short supply. Evidence of such practices has been observed at sites where grain was used for bread production, but the bulk inclusion of random grass seeds suggests that the flour was being padded out - either to make it stretch further because there was actually little wheat, or simply because someone was being ripped off.
Spirits and fortified wines were not known although the apple wine may have had quite a high alcohol content.

Fish
We know about the fish that were eaten in the period from bones which have been found during archaeological excavations. Some bones have been found whilst digging was being carried out, but most need soil samples to be washed through fine meshed sieves back in the laboratory. Some bones come from toilet pits and appear to have been chewed up before being swallowed. It has been possible to discover what kinds of fish were eaten by comparing the bones with those of fish today.
Evidence shows a variety of fish were eaten - herring, salmon and eel as well as some which are not eaten much today such as pike, perch and roach. They seem to have also eaten flounder, whiting, plaice, cod and brown trout too. Shellfish, especially oysters, mussels and cockles, seem to have formed part of many peoples diets. Fish was eaten fresh, but was also preserved for less plentiful times of year. This was done by salting, pickling, smoking and drying.
How were fish caught? In Ælfric's Colloquy the fisherman explains his craft:
Master: How do you catch the Fish?
Fisherman: I board my boat and cast my net into the river; and throw in a hook and bait and baskets; and whatever I catch I take.
Master: What if the fish are unclean?
Fisherman: I throw the unclean ones away, and take the clean ones for food.
Master: Where do you sell your fish?
Fisherman: In the city.
Master: Who buys them?
Fisherman: The citizens. I can't catch as many as I can sell.
Master: Which fish do you catch?
Fisherman: Eels and pike, minnows and turbot, trout and lampreys and whatever swims in the water. Small fish.
Master: Why don't you fish in the sea?
Fisherman: Sometimes I do, but rarely, because it is a lot of rowing for me to the sea.
Master: What do you catch in the sea?
Fisherman: Herrings and salmon, porpoises and sturgeon, oysters and crabs, mussels, winkles, cockles, plaice and flounders and lobsters, and many similar things.
Master: Would you like to catch a whale?
Fisherman: Not me!
Master: Why?
Fisherman: Because it is a risky business catching a whale. It's safer for me to go on the river with my boat, than to go hunting whales with many boats.
Master: Why so?
Fisherman: Because I prefer to catch a fish that I can kill, rather than a fish that can sink or kill not only me but also my companions with a single blow.
Master: Nevertheless, many catch whales and escape danger, and make great profit by it.
Fisherman: You are right, but I dare not because of my timid spirit.
It seems that river fish were caught in nets, hunted with fish-spears or even caught in wicker traps. Large sea fish were caught in nets which floated below the surface of the sea and others were caught with hooks and lines. Whales and dolphins were also hunted for their meat, as well as other useful products such as whalebone and fat. Interestingly enough, as porpoise were considered to be a fish, they were acceptable fare during Lent.

Meat
Most meat eaten by the Saxons came from animals which had more than one use. Sheep were kept for their wool and meat, cows for their milk, sinews and hides. The horn was used for fastenings, drinking vessels and had many other uses. The hide of a bull was as valuable for its leather as the meat. Even the bone was used for belt ends, needles, knife handles, pins for hair and clothing and even for ice skates! Goats were kept for their milk and meat. Only pigs seem to have been raised purely for their meat. It is not clear whether horses were killed for meat or kept purely as riding animals and beasts of burden. The act of eating horse meat became very much frowned upon, and was regarded as a pagan thing to do, so much so that laws were passed to prevent the habit. Although during times of famine, as occurs today, almost anything is game.
Pigs were important for food because they produce large litters, which would quickly mature and be ready for slaughter. However, the numbers of pigs kept gradually decreases throughout the Saxon period. Remains of pigs of all sizes have been found suggesting they were killed as and when they were needed, rather than at set times of the year.
Cows produce ten times more meat than sheep or goats and beef production grew increasingly important as pig numbers decreased. Most adult cattle were female, suggesting dairying was also important.
Sheep and goats always accounted for about 50% of the livestock and are ideal animals, as they can be grazed on land that is unsuitable for cattle and pigs, and they are a multipurpose animal. The sheep were generally similar to the Soay breed, but were larger although a sheep similar to a small Romney Marsh sheep was also kept. A high proportion were killed when young and a large number of these were female. Most adult sheep were wethers (castrated rams) raised mainly for wool. The goats were probably similar to feral goats. The exact proportion of sheep to goats is unknown since it is not easy to distinguish between sheep and goats from skeletal evidence.
Hens, of course, provided eggs as well as meat for the pot, as did ducks and geese. Their hollow bones were used for musical pipes. Various wild birds were eaten too, such as ducks, plover, grouse, herons and geese. Hares were also caught (there were no rabbits until after the Norman Conquest). Deer were hunted for meat, skins and antler. Wild boar would also be hunted for their meat, with their tusks being an important prize for the hunter.

Cooking
Most meals would have been some form of stew, soup or pottage cooked in a cauldron over the central hearth of the house. Bread, baked in a clay oven or on a griddle, would also be a daily foodstuff. Flour could be ground at a water mill although more usually it would be done in the home using a hand quern. Wealthier people would have been able to afford an imported rotary quern from the Rhineland. When the flour is freshly querned from recently cut grain, little yeast is necessary to be added to the dough as there is a reasonable yeast content in fresh grain.
Most of the time, especially amongst the poor, meat would only be used in small quantities to give extra flavour. This did not mean that Saxons were vegetarians, in fact they would eat as much meat as they could afford to. The wealthier a person was, the more often meat would figure in their diets.
The vegetables used in cooking would have been those that were in season at the time, although some may have been preserved by drying or pickling. Similarly, meat would have been used more in summer and autumn when domestic animals were killed and game was more readily available, although pigs, sheep and cattle were killed during the winter to provide fresh meat and save too much depletion of winter fodder. When the animals, especially pigs, were killed the blood was probably collected to make a form of black pudding. This is made by stirring the blood until it is cool to stop it congealing and then adding flour and herbs. The animal fat was used both for cooking and to make tallow for lamps and dubbin. Meat was preserved by salting and smoking and some may have been dried. No doubt herbs and spices were used to disguise the unpleasant taste that these may have had. Fish as was said earlier could be preserved by salting, smoking, pickling or simply drying.
Milk would have been used to make butter and cheese, especially sheep's and goat's milk. Eggs from chickens, ducks and geese would also have been eaten although the fowl of the period would not have laid as often as their modern counterparts.
One of the most important foodstuffs was honey as this was the only sweetener available. A good hive could produce about 100lbs of honey in a year. (A family of 6 would require about 1/2lb honey per day.) Sweet foods like honey and almond cakes were popular, but usually not an everyday foodstuff. There is some suggestion that gingerbread and cheeseckes may have been fare on the Anglo-Saxon table, but the only references that still exist imply that these are introductions that occur later in our history. Sugar, whilst used in North Africa, was not much used in Europe. If it ever found it's way to Britain, it makes one wonder what it may have looked like by the time it reached our damp shores.......
Other methods of cooking used included; frying in a frying pan or griddle (similar to a chestnut roaster), baking in a clay or turf oven, grilling on a spiral griddle, hanging griddle or on a 'barbecue' (similar to that shown on the Bayeux Tapestry). Spit roasting was done on a large rotary spit or using small skewers like a kebab skewer or food could even be baked in the embers of a fire usually wrapped in leaves and clay. By and large though, food was almost always boiled in a cauldron or baked in the embers of a fire usually wrapped in leaves and clay, as it was a more economic way of providing well cooked nutritious meals.
Specific evidence for banquets and feasts comes from the court of Charlemagne where he is described as being served 'in four courses only, exclusive of the roast, which hunters brought in on spits' (Eginhard 'Early Lives of Charlemagne' Ed A J Grant).
As to whether Charlemagne was being deliberately restrained is unknown. Some experts believe that later in the period, banquets and religious feasts held by the nobility (and sometimes the lower ranks too), would have as many as ten or twelve courses/dishes, although each course was fairly small. Fish and meat would make up several of the courses, although some courses would be purely vegetable. Much alcoholic drink was also served at banquets. There is some suggestion that the finds of large cauldrons from a variety of sites were almost always used for brewing beer, and not for cooking porridge etc; indicating the status of such beverages in their society. An honoured guest would be served drink by the banquet giver's wife and/or daughter or the banquet host if they happened to be a woman.
Food was eaten from wooden or clay bowls using only a knife and spoon (forks do not seem to have been used for eating until much later in the medieval period). There are however Scandinavian finds of pointed 'food sticks' made of wood or bone which may have been used for picking up pieces of meat and larger vegetables. Wooden plates were used for some food although pottery ones are very rare. Drinking vessels were made from a variety of materials in a number of styles. The commonest would have been wooden or pottery cups and mugs. Horns (often highly decorated) were also used and conical glass vessels were used in the early period, but were rare, giving way to glass vessels shaped more like beakers that we have today. Small wooden cups were used for very strong drinks. Leather was also used for drinking vessels although there is little evidence of this other than a passage in Ælfrics Colloquy. There is no evidence for drinking vessels with handles ever being used. Drinks were served from pottery jugs and pitchers or from bottles made of wood, clay or leather. Wooden tubs and ladles were probably used for serving drinks, some of which were served hot.

Acmylen
Wichamstow is just one of the more than 3,000 estates in Anglo-Saxon England with a watermill (many of these estates have more than one mill). Although the mill belongs to eorl Godwin, Leofmar ðe Mylenwyrd rents it, and grinds grain into flour for most of the farmers and villagers of the estate.
The watermill has advantages over the windmill (which seems to appear in Britain by the 1200's), as it is less reliant upon the weather. However the windmill was to become the preferred type later on, where the water supply was too erratic or too fast.
Acmylen itself is a typical small mill, with a simple horizontal side shot mill wheel. That is to say, the water from the mill pond runs down the mill-race via the sluice gate, striking the wheel on one side (which is in reality a thick shaft with blades all around its circumference at the base). The sluice gate regulates the volume of water that strikes the wheel, and has to be judged with some care to prevent the mill stones from spinning too fast and vibrating too much. Even on a normal day, the speed that the wheel turns and therefore the speed that the millstones rotate is quite violent enough. In times of very heavy rain, water has to be 'drained' from the pond so that there isn't a huge volume behind the gate, which can lead to other problems running the mill.
The mill stones for the mill are themselves much bigger in diameter than those used in the home (these are called Querns). They come in two main types; Rotary Querns which are two stones sat one upon the other, with the top stone riding on an axle that sits astride a small but important piece of wood called a 'Rynd'. By adjusting these elements, you can set the desired coarseness of your flour. The process is similar to the mill in that the top stone is rotated against the lower stone with a handle. The grain is placed into a hole in the centre of the top stone, and as it is ground, the flour runs out from the seam between the two stones.
The other style of Quern is the Saddle Quern, which is an ancient design, but one which was still to be seen occasionally. This type has a large flat stone as it's base, with a smaller one for the top stone. Here you simply place grain on the lower stone and grind the top stone to and fro along the lower. Grinding grain into flour for the making of bread etc; can take some time, and was a job that was shared by anyone in the family who had the strength to turn the stones. Which is why, if you could afford the luxury of sending it to the mill, you would have done so.
The millstones in all of these cases were made from a variety of locally obtained hard rock. Millstone Grit is the most famous of these and became the standard used up and down the country by the 1700's before the advent of the concrete ones that are used today.
A favourite import was Rhenish Lava from northern Germany which is a type of Basalt, and is often associated with Viking sites. In all cases, the stones had to be shaped, balanced and dressed. The dressing was at this time a rough set of regular marks (chips) cut at right-angles into the grinding faces of the stones, to assist with the grinding. Old or broken millstones often found their way into houses as door-steps and footings.
On some estates, larger, more powerful mills with as many as three linked vertical overshot wheels were used. These were more powerful than other types of mill wheel, as gravity assists in turning the wheel, which means you can be more economical with the water stored in the pond.

Pottery
The British Isles has large and diverse areas of clay that are suitable to make pottery. Broadly speaking, the area diagonally south of York and down to Cheshire has in various places clay deposits that are close to the surface. This enabled people from much, much earlier times and up to the Viking period to dig clay for pottery without having to go too deep. Clay is very heavy, and difficult to dig out. The rest of Britain by and large had to make do with 'costly' imports that could have come from a few miles down the road, or possibly several days travel away. Their only other alternatives were wooden vessels, or in other more remote areas, Pottery was a very important method of producing cheap cooking pots, bowls, cups, lamps, bottles, jugs, etc.. It was also used for loom-weights, crucibles and moulds. In early pagan Anglo-Saxon times pottery 'urns' were used to hold ashes of people who had died and been cremated. These were then often buried in small 'barrows'. Many of these cremation urns were highly decorated. The vast majority of the early pottery though was simply made, probably within the village or on the farm, using methods such as coiling or making thumb-pots. Later on, as shown by excavated examples, there were specialist potters who made wheel thrown pottery in towns. This was then sold by the potter, or possibly by travelling merchants in the markets, although some pottery would still be home produced.
Throughout the period pottery was also imported, especially from the Rhineland because of it's decorative nature. Pots that have survived show that ceramics of the period were often decorated by rouletting, thumbing, incising, combing, stamping or by applying clay to the surface. Sometimes the pottery was glazed with simple glazes, most often of yellow or olive green (the technique of glazing appears to have been reintroduced from the Byzantine countries through France). Other pottery was decorated with a red paint or slip in the continental style.
The pots were used for a variety of purposes, some for storage, some for cooking and some for eating and drinking from. Bowls would have been used for storage as well as cooking, eating and serving. Cups were generally in the form of handle-less beakers.

Making Pottery
A potter's tools were fairly simple. An animal rib or flat piece of wood for shaping the pot when throwing, knives for trimming, antler tines for piercing for spouts and bungs, perhaps a number of sheep's tibiae and metapodials (elements of the bones in the foot of the animal), as templates for rim profiles. Some carved bone and antler stamps were used with rouletting wheels for decorating the pottery.
Evidence would suggest that after about 900AD the potter's wheel as we would recognise it came back into fashion. The type of potter's wheel probably varied, anything from a small turn-table (slow wheel) to a large kick wheel. Two kinds of fast wheel may have been used. The first and most likely type to have been used in the Saxon period, is basically a cartwheel mounted horizontally on a pivot, the wheel being rotated by hand or with a stick. The pot was thrown on a disc or small platform fixed to the centre or nave of the wheel. The other type consisted of a lower wheel turned with the foot and an upper wheel head for throwing the pot, the two wheels being connected by a series of struts.
To make clay good enough for a pot, the Saxon potter would have to put in some back-breaking graft. After unearthing a large amount of clay, he would take his raw material, steep it in water and then beat it, usually with a large wooden 'spatula' until it was well mixed, although some potters may have worked it by treading it with bare feet. He would then remove any large stones and gravel from it. Next, he would carefully mix sand, crushed shell, grass, or even crushed pottery from broken fired pots in with it to help bind it together. Then he would have to wage it (knead it like bread), to ensure it was thoroughly mixed. The clay at this point would have to be made pliant enough by the addition of water or be left to dry some more. The potter would then take a ball of this clay of the correct size and consistency for the item he was making. This clay was formed into a pot, mainly by building it up from layers of rings which are smoothed together by hand (coiling) or, by about 900AD, on a wheel. Other methods may have included paddle and anvil techniques, with a pebble and spatula, thumb pots and moulding over wooden moulds (this method was often used to make crucibles).
The item would then be left to dry gently. Features such as handles and spouts were usually added to the vessel when it had dried to a 'leather' hardness, or was firm enough not to distort when being handled. The simplest, and commonest, form of spout is the pinched spout made by pulling out the rim from inside with one finger whilst supporting the rim in position on the outside with two fingers. In this case this was done when the pot was first made. Tubular spouts were made either by throwing a small cylindrical shape, or by moulding clay around a forefinger, stick or bone. This was then smoothed onto the outside of the vessel once a hole had been made. Handles would be made by throwing, pulling or rolling out, and also applied by smoothing onto the outside of the pot. At this stage the bottom of the pot might be trimmed with a knife to give the familiar 'saggy bottom'. The 'saggy bottom' was we believe better for cooking with, as it helped to even out the differences of temperature in a cooking fire, which could easily crack a pot. Floors of the period weren't very flat themselves, so rounded bottom pots really didn't matter.
The container could then be worked over with a damp cloth or wet hands, which brings the finest clay particles to the surface, giving a smooth finish. The inside of the pot could also be burnished with a smooth pebble or bone to smear the clay particles over each other producing a more water tight vessel. It could also be decorated by painting with a slip (a creamy mixture of fine clay and water) of a different colour to the body. Sometimes slip painting amounted simply to vertical stripes of slip, sometimes it took the form of scrolls and swirls. Glazes were almost universally lead based, giving a greeny yellow colour, although copper or iron could be added to change the colour or add speckles of a different colour. These were added to the pot after an initial firing. The glaze could have been applied as a dry powder, although most was applied as a water based paste. Liquid glazes could be applied to the leather hard pot with a brush or by hand smearing, which accounts for the uneven thickness of many of the glazes from this period. The pot could also be dipped in a bath of glaze. It was then left to finally dry before it was fired to make it hard.
In the early period the pots were fired in a covered fire pit called a clamp. This did not always reach a very high temperature so the pots often did not fire very well. The fire that was built over the pots excluded most of the oxygen which fired the pottery black or charcoal-grey. By the later period firing was done in a simple kiln which was easier to control, guaranteeing a better and more even firing.
In order to make a kiln the potter dug two shallow pits, one of them with a semi-permanent wall of clay or stone (sometimes insulated with earth or turf) with a simple domed roof built over it, possibly just of turf, but sometimes of clay. (Turf is fine for a single firing, but if it becomes too roasted, breaks down into sand and minerals which just don't hold together). This one became the kiln and was joined to the other pit by a small opening. The pots were stacked in the kiln, generally upside-down, sometimes one inside another, whichever way they packed most tightly. The loading could be done through the top of the
The kiln was then sealed with wet clay leaving just the opening between the pits and a small flue opening. Some kilns had a raised central floor on which more pots were stacked, which allowed the hot air to circulate around the pots better. A hot fire was then built in the second pit in front of the opening. The potter would keep adding fuel slowly until the temperature was high enough to fire the pots, gauging its 'readiness' by the degree of luminosity of the items which glow whilst being fired. When this temperature had been reached the potter let the kiln cool down (sometimes for a whole day) until it was cool enough to remove the pots. Most would be hard and ready for use although some would have cracked if the clay and sand or shell had not been correctly mixed. With maintenance, a kiln of this type might last from five to ten years.
By the tenth century there were several major pottery centres in England which exported their wares throughout the country. These included Thetford, Stamford, Lincoln, Torksey, Stafford, St. Neots, Winchester and Ipswich.
Most of the pottery available in tenth and eleventh century Britain was of a buff, grey or pinky-orange colour. Red clay of the flowerpot terracotta type is almost completely unknown except for applied slip decoration. Glazes tended to be greeny-yellow, or rarely orangey-yellow and may have had speckles of dark brown, dark green or yellow. Some pots would have been almost black due to a process known as reduction. This happens when oxygen is excluded from the kiln by clamping off any airways, and leaving it for a period of time.
It is interesting to note that although pottery was widely made in Denmark and southern Sweden, in Norway it was very rare, usually only being found as imported wares. Most cooking pots were made from soapstone - this is due to the fact that in Norway's rocky terrain, the easily carved soapstone is quite common, but clay deposits are quite rare.

Fishing in Early Medieval Times
The consumption of fish was an important part of life in the early medieval period and therefore the catching, preparation, storage 1 and cooking 2 played an equally significant role in everyday life. Although in 730 AD, according to Bede, Bishop Winfrid of Colchester apparently:
'...found so much misery from hunger, he taught the people to get food by fishing. For, although there was plenty of fish in the seas and rivers, the people had no idea about fishing, and caught only eels. So the Bishop's men got together eel nets from all sides. and threw them into the sea. By God's help they caught three hundred fish, of all different kinds.'
Much of the evidence for the consumption of fish has come from both toilet pits and soil excavations of archæological sites from the period. There is also a wealth of evidence, through manuscripts, carvings and 'fishing' artefacts, to establish the fact that fishing took place. It is also noted that fish and fishing played an important part by the need to make numerous references to fisheries in the Domesday Book and at least one fish-processing plant. 3 It is by making use of these two major areas of evidence that we are able to piece together exactly what varieties of fish were eaten and how they may have been caught.
It must be remembered that the rivers and seas of today are heavily polluted and the effect this has upon the quality and quantity of species of fish is paramount when investigating fish catching and eating of years gone by. It is only recently that the River Medway has become an almost open sewer with factories pumping out toxic wastes with little or no control from Government or local water authorities. Prior to 1907 there is evidence to show that the River Medway supported a thriving community of fishermen. P.S. Kemsey, MBE, wrote:
'The Medway in our days [1895-1907] was a clean river and it carried quite an assortment of fish. Each Spring at high tide, two fishing boats would lie upon the Halling side of the river and for a month would remain there catching Smelts along with Dabs and other fish. The Smelts were packed and taken to Halling Station for dispatch to London................We watched as the men emptied their net, which was towed through the water by two men rowing and two men walking along the shore with the net end rope.
In summer porpoises frequently swam up the Medway as far as Allington [end of tidal flow]......... Sunday afternoon was shrimp time for the village........Gravesend was noted for its shrimps in our time, and there were also shrimp boats at Strood.'4
It was also quite common to see, until quite recently, a much wider acceptance of the eating of a much wider range of freshwater fish: roach, bleak, perch, pike, carp, gudgeon, etc.One can imagine the clean, fresh, free-flowing rivers of Saxon England teaming with an abundance of aquatic life. A natural larder that was spread throughout the whole of the country that supplied fresh sustenance all through the year 5
The seas, as today, acted as a rich source of food of both fish and shellfish. Also noted is the fishing and catching of porpoises and whales as well as the more common species that we fish for today. 6
FISH CATCHING METHODS
Hook and Line
The use of hook and line to catch great quantity of fish is an unproductive method to use. However, this is a method that was used in pre-conquest times for many of the same reasons as it is used today: it is less demanding upon materials. Today the use of rod, reel, line and hook is mainly employed by the sporting fraternity whilst the early medieval period the use of hook and line was part of ones' livelihood. Although there is some evidence to suggest that reels were employed in China c. 3000BC they were not in common use in this country until late 13th-early 14th century.
To angle is to fish with rod and hook and, in fact, the use of a pole or rod was not introduced into this county until the 13th century. The first recorded account of an angler was of an abbess fishing for carp and by 1496 the art of angling had produced its first book written in English; Treatise of Fysshynge with an Angle by Dame Juliana Berners. There is, however, a Byzantium illustration depicting what appears to be a fishing rod or pole. It is, of course, possible that the use of lengths of wood to aid in the practice of fishing actually took place, but this has not been documented as being a common exercise.
Of the many hooks that have been discovered from the period nearly all have been 2/o or above. This might seem to suggest that only the larger species of fish were sought after although smaller hooks would be more difficult to unearth and would also be more likely to disintegrate during the passage of time. All of the hooks I have seen show a simple round bend design with either an open eye or a spade end and have been made from iron. One such hook, found at West Hythe in Kent and dated to come from the 9th or 10th century, can be seen at the British Museum. The hook itself is approximately four inches long, somewhere between 8/o to 10/o in size, spade ended and is made from iron. The actual design differs little from that of hooks that were used by the early Romans or those used by Sir Izaak Walton. The barb seems oversized by today's standards but this may be due to the need to keep the fish secure on the line whilst 'long-lining' or because it is, as I discovered, by far the most difficult part of producing a hook.
The line itself would have to be strong, not too effected by water and easily obtainable. By far the most common material that would have all the necessary qualities would be that of nettle-hemp. The nettles would be gathered in the Spring and early Summer 7, the leaves stripped off them and the stems immersed in water for several hours. After removing from the water they would be pulped so that the individual strands would peel away producing long, thin fibres. These fibres would then be spun in the same way as flax or wool. The resulting 'yarn' would then be used in the making of fishing line, nets and bow strings8. The two main methods employed with hook and line were simple 9 hand lining for single fish and long-lining. The trace used for simple fishing is basically an iron forged hook, nettle-hemp line and stone weight for a sinker. This method would be useful for catching the larger fish in enclosed waters, rivers and from the sea shore.
Long-lining involves, as the name suggests, a long line to which several hooks are attached to by short snoods. The line could be fixed to solid points at low tide and baited at the return of the following low tide the fisherman would then go and collect the caught fish. This method gave the fisherman the opportunity to set out more than one long-line, in different locations and without too much concern for weather conditions. Long-lining could also be carried out from a small fishing boat: the line would be either floated upon the surface for top-feeding fish or sunk to the bottom for bottom-feeding fish. Whichever system was in use one end would have probably been secured to the boat to safeguard the line and hooks from being lost.
Fishing with nets
The catching of fish on a larger scale at sea involved the use of fishing nets and from evidence of finds at Birka and Ribe these too were made from nettle-hemp. It would also appear that the nets that were made were not exclusively for the use of fishermen; they would be used for trapping and be a convenient method as bags for storage and carriage.
The construction of fishing nets is similar to that of recent years and it is only necessary to master the use of only two knots: the clove-hitch and the sheet-bend. First of all a heavier duty line is positioned at a convenient working height and running the estimated length of the intended net.
A long quantity of nettle-hemp is then tied to the main line using the clove-hitch knot; these need to be equally spaced along the main line. After the length of the main line has been completed it is then that the hemp is tied together, using the sheet-bend, to form the mesh. The most difficult and important part of the operation is the ability to make sure that the mesh is kept to the same dimensions: fingers or a piece of scrap wood may be used as a rough guide. To help hold the nettle-hemp a netting needle may be used. The netting needle can be made out of wood, bone or antler.
Stone weights have been found that have been attributed as net sinkers. These weights have a hole or holes bored into them and help, with the aid of buoyant floats, keep the net vertical in the water and fished as a gill or seine net. An alternative style of net sinker has been found at Hedeby in Northern Germany. Rather than drill a hole through a stone, a hoop of willow or hazel is made around the stone which is fairly flat to start with, then across and either side of the stone, some bark crosses are sewn with fine bark strips to the hoop, pinning the stone in between. The hoop left sufficient room between the stone and the hoop itself.
Long-netting could also take place in similar locations to that of the on-shore long-liner. The net would be angled so that the incoming tide would wash over it and then, on its way out, fish would become entrapped. A variation upon this is to make a tide pool out of rocks, which allows the tide to flood it and bring in fish too, but as the tide runs back out to sea, the pool drains through the stones trapping the fish behind the rock wall.
Nets would have also been used to net off sections of rivers or even complete rivers to trap migratory fish such as salmon, trout and sea trout. They may also have been used to section off breeding areas as the Romans had done a few centuries earlier.
Haaf-netting (from the Norse 'haf', the open sea) was a form of net fishing practised in areas like the Solway Firth mudflats to catch salmon. The nets used are cumbersome affairs - 16 feet (5 meters) of meshed twine slung over a 14 foot pole. The fishermen would form a line and walk up to their chests against the tide in the channel. The haafer holds the net against the water with his left hand and grips the beam with his right. He pulls six meshes with his thumb to make a bag, and when a salmon enters he presses down on a special rung. The haaf floats to the top; the netsman turns his back to the tide, kills the fish with his 'mell', or mallet, and flings it into a special compartment - while concentrating on not being swept away by the strong tidal flow. 10

Fish Traps
Although little has been recovered in the way of wicker fish traps, they are referred to in Anglo-Saxon texts 11 and from illustrations from the period. The traps would have mainly been used in flowing rivers and tidal estuaries to catch all manner of fish including eel, salmon, trout, dabs, flounders, etc. They would have been about 5 feet long and would have consisted of two chambers: a large opening funnelling into the main basket.
Along the mudflats on the South Essex coast an aerial survey identified a massive complex of wooden fish-traps, comprising up to 13,000 timber posts, located ½ a mile out to sea. A more detailed investigation carried out by boat has revealed a dozen lines of timber - some of them more than half a mile long- in the Blackwater estuary, 15 miles south of Colchester, dating from the 7th to 10th centuries AD. The timbers were the uprights of wattle fences, the complex containing up to 100,000 square feet or 30,500 square metres of fencing, some of which still survives.
The fences - laid out in a series of V-shapes - were used to funnel the outgoing tide, and its fish, into nets at the apexes. They would have yielded several hundred thousand fish per year: far too many to supply a single community, suggesting that the trapping was carried out for commercial purposes. The fish would have been salted, dried and, presumably, sold to communities in south-east England. It is not known who maintained these traps but, just seven miles away is Bradwell-on-Sea, where one of Englands earliest monasteries stands, founded in 654 AD. Across the Thames estuary from the Blackwater lies the estuary of the River Medway with similar terrain features. Along the Medway estuary, although no extensive finds such has been found on the Blackwater, references to 'fish factories' are included in the Domesday Book. One wonders! 12
It is likely that the trap was flat bottomed to allow it to lie on the river or sea bed without rolling with the current or tide. For eels it would need to be baited with a dead fish, this would attract the carnivorous eel into the funnel and once inside, they would find it difficult to escape. Single chambered traps may also have been used by the early medieval fisherman; these would have been something akin to the salmon putchers used earlier this century in Scotland and on the Severn River. The main advantage of these traps was that smaller fish could be caught, there was little danger of the fish swimming away from them as in the case with a net and they were relatively easy to maintain.
The traps themselves would be made from willow 'withies' that had been cultivated for at least three years. Today there are withy beds in the Southwest that produce willow withies in white, buff and brown. White withies are produced by stripping the bark away, the buff has been boiled with its bark on and then the bark then removed and the browns are the withies complete with bark. In the early medieval period the majority of the basket work was functional and there was no need to add extra work to the making of fish traps and baskets: brown withies would have been the most common. To weave the withies they would need to be soaked so as to make them pliable, they would need to be left to soak overnight to enable the surface water to penetrate to the pith of each withy.

Fish Spears
A number of fishing spears has been identified from the period and these have taken a number of different styles.
The type of fishing that would have taken place with the use of spears would have involved the larger top-feeding fish and mammals. The larger and more robust spear would have been used to hunt for whale, porpoise, seal and sturgeon whereas the finer spear would have been used for fish such as salmon, mullet, eel, etc.
Eels were a favoured fish of the period and these were caught by spear too. During the winter months the eel buries itself into the mud together with other eels. By using a spear one can poke around into the muddy bottoms of river or estuary until an 'eel nest' is located; many eels can be caught in this manner.

Lures
Today much is made in the way of lures to attract fish and these include pirks for deep-sea fishing, flies for trout, salmon and grayling, plugs and spinners for pike, salmon, bass, cod and flounders. There has been little in the way of recovered artefacts to show that the people of the 10th and 11th century made much use of such items. There is, however, one example of a gold fishing lure; similar in design to a Devonshire Minnow, that is dated to the period. This lure, now housed in a Cumbrian museum, is thought to have been used to fish for the elusive char that is renown in the Lake District.

VikingHorde

10-08-2004, 17:27

PseRamesses

10-10-2004, 07:26

This must be the longest posts I have ever seen ~D . My heath problems are almost over so im starting the work on those unit production files this weekend. Hopefully we can have a working mod soon with the basic stuff ~D
Yeah I know, but they contain some input and stats on units, armour, buildings and resources that could prove valuable to the mod. Regarding the strat-map I´ve not heard from Ceryx in two weeks since I wanted to try out his idea before finishing the raw-map. I´m taking my greenkeeper exams between the 11-29th of october so I´ll be away for that period. If I´ve not heard from him when I get back I´ll finish the raw-map so that we can get on with drawing the borders and stuff. Take care and wish me luck guys!

Sebastian Seth

10-11-2004, 04:45

Every county much be a rich as hell whit these laws:

Holding a woman's breast [B] 5s 39g £500
Seducing a free woman [B] 60s 465g £6,000

~D ~D ~D

PseRamesses

10-11-2004, 04:57

Every county much be a rich as hell whit these laws:

Holding a woman's breast [B] 5s 39g £500
Seducing a free woman [B] 60s 465g £6,000

~D ~D ~D

Hilarious huh? How about this one: "Binding an innocent ceorl and shaving him like a priest [B] 60s 465g £6,000" ~:eek: Makes you wonder about viking society since the fine for this is the same as for seducing a free woman.

wilpuri

10-11-2004, 14:41

Sebastian Seth

10-11-2004, 23:46

Hilarious huh? How about this one: "Binding an innocent ceorl and shaving him like a priest [B] 60s 465g £6,000" ~:eek: Makes you wonder about viking society since the fine for this is the same as for seducing a free woman.

I totally missed that one. But it seems there have been some arbitrariness
from the officers of law. And on the other hand some serious law breaking
from all able men. For example I have holded womens tits today enough
to be fined amount of I have made money this year. ~D

Meneldil

10-13-2004, 10:30

Hey guys, I just got my Armies of Medeival Russia 750 - 1250 osprey book. I'll post info about it asap

PseRamesses

10-16-2004, 08:40

Hey guys, I just got my Armies of Medeival Russia 750 - 1250 osprey book. I'll post info about it asap

This, I´ve been waiting on for 8 months. Menedil, how is it going?

Meneldil

10-16-2004, 09:09

Hopefully, I should get some free time to post some info and plates later today :)

PseRamesses

10-16-2004, 09:45

Hopefully, I should get some free time to post some info and plates later today :)
Great Menedil, I´m looking forward to it.

Meneldil

10-17-2004, 18:52

Ok, here are a few ideas about early russian armies :

Malaia Druzhina cavalry : they are noblemen. I guess they should be seen as a heavy cavalry, and as the king's bodyguards unit aswell, with possibly 2 different units.

Grid' Druzhina infantry/cavalry : "It consisted of retainers, servants, assistants and soldiers". Could be used as medium infantry and/or medium cavalry.

Izgoi : It means 'hired-men'. They were not-rus warriors hired in Druzhina. You can add a new unit that would be different from the other druzhina, or just don't use them.

Urban militas : They are the most important source of troops. They were mostly trained to defend cities while real warriors were away. In my opinion, these units should only be hired in great cities (Novgorod, Kiev, Staraya Ladoga, Pskov), and each city should be able to hire a different militia unit
(from what I've read in the book, Novgorod Militia could be more disciplined, Pskov militia could use bows, etc.)

Voi : Light spearmen

Apart from that, Rus armies often hired mercenaries, mainly people from the steppes. They were called Klobuki, and were composed of many different people such as :
Torks (I have never heard this name before)
Pechenegs horse archers
Armenians
Oghuz

PS : I know the info I posted aren't that great, but I had to study and read a book for university. I'll do all I can to post a more precisly explained summary as soon as possible

wilpuri

10-17-2004, 21:31

I just purchased a book yesterday called "Guards of the Eastern Front" (Itärajan vartijat), and it is the first part of a book series which tells of the border/Frontier between Finland and Russia from early medieval times to 1809. The beginning of the book (which I have read so far), provides insight into life and military organisation of late-viking age Finland. It does not have much information that has not been mentioned before, but it has some good pics ~:)
It says how Swedish rule was really only introduced somewhat later than had been believed earlier. Parts of Finland are said to be under swedish rule in some documents from the time, but the author, Lena Huldén, suggests that this only meant that some parts had come under the church of Sweden. Huldén writes that without a governor of some type living permanently on Finnish soil, it was impossible to have much influence on the running of things, and governors came later. It also mentions how Christianity only slowly started to take root in Finland. In a papal document written around 1100, The Finns and Estonians are said to be within the area of influence of the Swedish Chruch, and that they gladly welcome priests when they come with an army to help the Ests and Finns in their fight against their eastern neighbours, but as soon as the danger has passed, the Finns retort back to their pagan ways and drive out the priests ~D

I'll post more when I find something interesting, and I can also scan some of the pictures.

PseRamesses

10-19-2004, 02:06

It says how Swedish rule was really only introduced somewhat later than had been believed earlier. Parts of Finland are said to be under swedish rule in some documents from the time, but the author, Lena Huldén, suggests that this only meant that some parts had come under the church of Sweden. Huldén writes that without a governor of some type living permanently on Finnish soil, it was impossible to have much influence on the running of things, and governors came later.

IMO she´s correct. I´ve tons of docs, refs etc to raids, crusades etc but Sweden didn´t conguer Finland (Åbo and the western part) until around 1150 AD and the first Jarl over Finland was Jarl Bengt in 1284AD. Haven´t got much to do now at school so I´ve been searching the net like a madman for early province names in Sweden.

wilpuri

10-19-2004, 13:36

The so called "Second Crusade" was conducted against the Tavastians (Häme) in 1234 (IIRC), and this was a largely successful crusade. The Häme were utterly subdued, and Swedish garrissons were left to keep the area under Swedish influence. The Häme had just suffered defeat in a raid they conducted against Karjala and Novgorod. The Häme had pillaged and raided their way through much of Karelia, taken several prisoners to be sold as slaves, and were now marching on Novgorod, when the Armies of Novgorod and Karjala came to meet them. After seeing the Strength of the enemy, according to Novgorodian chronicles, "the Tavastians butchered their prisoners and escaped into the woods". They were pursued and their number was greatly reduced before they reached safety. Novgorod and Karjala then launched a counter attack and pillaged and raided their way into Häme, and were successful. Now greatly weakened, the Häme were an easy target for the Swedish crusade, which more likely than not, was timed as it was just for that reason.

The Pagan elite of Western Finnish society was then replaced by a Christian (and largely Swedish) elite, to ensure loyalty of the newly acquired lands.

Another interesting bit of information is, that the book says that Staraya Ladoga (Laatokankaupunki in Finnish) was subdued by Novgorod in the 13th century, and taken from the Ingrians (Inkeriläiset), so this suggests Starya Ladoga was an Ingrian stronghold and place of trade.

Karelia had a form of self-rule all the way to the 1260's, which becomes apparent when examining Novgorodian documents between German traders and the Novgorodian rulers, where the Novgorodians say that they cannot guarantee safety in the lands east of Koivisto, as these belong to Karelia. Karelia is mentioned in the Novgorodian documents as an ally of Novgorod until 1269. Also, in 1278 as Novgorod was suffering from internal power struggles and Mongol molestation, the Karelians took the chance and managed to gain greater autonomy once more, however short lived.

My scanner has been playing tricks on me, so I'm not sure when I can get these images up on display, but so far I have images of:
-The Häme defending a Hillfort against Novgorod
-A "Warning beacon" on a hill looking out to what seems to be the Gulf of Finland, where a fleet of longboats is sailing
-A visualisation of the raids between the Western Finns and Karjala
-Tavastian Pagan rulers confering with Birger-Jarl (Could be used for many things)
-A visualisation of farming in Finland
-An illustration of a construction site in Finland
-An illustration of an Island Fort
-Several medieval illustrations describing events from Olaus Magnus' "Historia de gentibus septentrionalibus" written in 1555.

Among the medieval illustrations, there is one depicting the Bjarmians, (I think they are Permiäläiset in Finnish) on skis, with bows and arrows. This might suit well the Wilderland hunter unit. The book also mentions that the Kaukopartio units in the Finnish Army (Sebastian Seth will know what I'm talking about) have their roots in medieval times, when both Swedes and Novgorodians used Finnish units to make long and daring raids deep into enemy territorry. In winter, it was possible to move fast thorugh such terrain on skis, and booty was easy to transport back in sledges. So I've been thinking that the Wilderland hunters could be adjusted:

Make them bigger units, fast, bonus in woods, able to hide anywhere, good morale.

There is a description in Novgorodian chronicles, where a Karelian "Long-duistance" unit like the ones mentioned above, played a crucial role in the winning of the battle. I can't remember the date of the battle, but it was around 1200-1300.

I realize that most of this is out of our timeframe, but it gives us a good idea what the Finnish tribes were like in viking times, what their military orgainization was like, their livelihood and relations with others and so on. The Authors says that Although technologically the Finnic factions were as advanced as their neighbours, they did not unite politically as soon (or at all). This is largely blamed on the poor communication network and scarce population.

Anyway, this book has been a real find. I will try to get those pictures scanned ASAP.

Sebastian Seth

10-20-2004, 09:47

Yes, the wilpuris info about the häme is same that I have. Some sources
say that there was some kind of huge massacre in häme when the
swedish took over, but it was unclear was it agains civilians or
military. However theres not real difference in finnish between
these two since every man (and woman?) is likely to take arms
and defend their home.

Conclusion 1:
This confirms that we did right when we added one finnish mainland faction.

Another interesting bit of information is, that the book says that Staraya Ladoga (Laatokankaupunki in Finnish) was subdued by Novgorod in the 13th century, and taken from the Ingrians (Inkeriläiset), so this suggests Starya Ladoga was an Ingrian stronghold and place of trade.

I believe I posted about this earlier. The Ingrians (inkeriläiset) where
the dominant population in that region. Not only at the period of the
game but a hundreds of years after.

Here is a site in finnish for wilpuri: (theres a map for everyone else)
http://www.inkeri.com/historia.html
And some facts from site in english:

- In russian chronicles the people from Karelia are called both
"karelia" and "Izhore". (I'm not sure but this name looks like
"Izgoi" that Menedil refers earlier.)

- Novogrod took them in 12th century. And they were moved
in 1478 to rule of Moscow.

- 1926 there was 115 000 Ingrian-Finnish and 15 500 Finnish
in the area of Leningrad/St.Pietersburg ()

- Ingrian women and children talked finnish to until 1920-1930
and did not talk russia at all. The men learned russia at work.

This is the faction we took of when we added the Suoma. The game
map doesn't really include much of russia. The Novogrod is 160km
south of the Leningrad/St.Pietersburg and the City it self is barely on
the map. The Novgorod was founded in the 9th century and there
was some slavic settlement before that. So in the start of timeperiod
there isn't really Novogrod as we know it and the novogrod is a
slavic settlement without viking influences.

a link: (shortly on founding novgrod)
http://www.infoplease.com/ce6/world/A0860066.html

a map: (of russia including novgrod)
http://www.cis.nctu.edu.tw/~whtsai/Trip%20to%20Russia/Main%20pages/Representative%20pictures%20for%20days/West%20Russia%20Map.JPG

Conclusion 2:
When doing game from the viewpoint of vikings on the MTW, theres
going to be some historical inaccurancy in finnish, baltics and slaavians.

Among the medieval illustrations, there is one depicting the Bjarmians, (I think they are Permiäläiset in Finnish) on skis, with bows and arrows. This might suit well the Wilderland hunter unit. The book also mentions that the Kaukopartio units in the Finnish Army (Sebastian Seth will know what I'm talking about) have their roots in medieval times, when both Swedes and Novgorodians used Finnish units to make long and daring raids deep into enemy territorry. In winter, it was possible to move fast thorugh such terrain on skis, and booty was easy to transport back in sledges. So I've been thinking that the Wilderland hunters could be adjusted:

Make them bigger units, fast, bonus in woods, able to hide anywhere, good morale.

I posted about the finnish way of war earlier. The idea was to emphazise
that finnish have unique way of defending their country. This is the
same idea i believe. In the post i sayed that there is a way of war
in finland that is still in use. Now days they are called "tiedustelu" or
"sissi" in WWII they where "kaukopartio". What we need to do is
to find name for them and find a way to make them nearly invincible
in finnish soil and weaker in open ground. And yes definedly fast,
exelent morale and hiding ability.

Conclusion 3:
"Wildland Hunters" is a combination of bows, shields and spears.
superior skrimisher, exelent defender, good attacker.

I realize that most of this is out of our timeframe, but it gives us a good idea what the Finnish tribes were like in viking times, what their military orgainization was like, their livelihood and relations with others and so on. The Authors says that Although technologically the Finnic factions were as advanced as their neighbours, they did not unite politically as soon (or at all). This is largely blamed on the poor communication network and scarce population.

Or the absence of writing skills and the long tradition of trusting mans
word. If there was agreement of mutual defence between some tribes
at some time, it would be wise to not let your enemies know about it.
For example the Novgorod and Svear don't really see any difference
between Kveens and Tavasts. So If you are in peace with kveens and
attack tavasts. How can you tell if the tavasts include men from
kveens? This is just an idea but no so new.
Less your enemy knows; less he conquers. - me or Sun Tsu
I know where you live. - old threath in häme/tavast.

new site about finns in english (wery much stuff):
http://www.geocities.com/ojoronen/

Sebastian Seth

10-20-2004, 10:09

On Novogrod: (quick one)

- Proven settlement about 850AD
(lots of findings because of the clay soil)

- Because of the clay soul the streets where covered with timber.
(first two or three long logs along the street then short logs
on top them. the short ones cutted from the middle.)

- in the street of saint cosmos and damianos there was 28 layers
of these wood streets. oldest 953AD newest 1462

- houses where made of timber. some where 2 or 3 blocks high.

- there where specialized in leather works, shoes, glass and clay items.

- lots of trading items passed trought the city: wine, peanuts, exotic trees,
incense, spices.

- Skandinavians called it Holmgard

- the inner city had walls in 10th century. the wall was builded of wood
and dirt.

- 10th century it had wood church, 11th it was replaced by stone.

- main part of power where used by "vetse" (the people meeting). it
ordered the laws and govermentical issues.

Source: Lost Cities by Paul G. Bahn

Sebastian Seth

10-20-2004, 10:15

Izgoi : It means 'hired-men'. They were not-rus warriors hired in Druzhina. You can add a new unit that would be different from the other druzhina, or just don't use them.

There was lot of fenno-ugric tribes in russia these probably refer to
some (if not all) of them. If we make merceneries from finns and baltics
to apear in russia these are not needed. If not then these are needed.

Sebastian Seth

10-20-2004, 13:24

I've been reading the web for info about the Slavs and Rus. It seems
that the huns pushed the slavs to south russia and east europe.
And that meas the slavs pushed the Finno-ugric in north russia
futher north and to estonia and finland. The baltics moved to
estonia at the same time and mixed with finnish tribes in estonia.
This would explane the huge similareties with the finnish and
estonias. This also explanes why novgorod was growing so
fast at the time.

The name Rus however is kind of mystic.
In finnish viewpoint the novogrod's are swedish/ruotsalaiset/rus.
I believe at this time there was goths moving to south
sweden. Perhaps there was swedish moving to russia?
There was some small item founds that the swedes where
moving to finland too but in small numbers. And when you look
at the way of slavic goverments of today and the swedish
goverments of today, it seems that the swedes are much more
effective governors. If this is a racial attribute, it's safe to
assume that the novogrods really did invite swedish to rule
them (or selected one living there). This would explane why
the finns would call novogrod's as "rus".

The later unions of
finns where formed to drive away the treaths from
the east. It could be that this means the slavs, huns and mongols.
Still the Novogrod was the target of finnish attacks. It could be that
the finns where defending their lands from slavs and attacked the
biggest slav town they knew; Novogrod. There is some references
later that the swedish are helping finnish to fight novogrod. This
is at the timeperiod the swedes are pagans, so there is mutual
intrest of destroying the novogrod slavs. Later when Sigtuna
gets destroyed, but at this time the swedes are christians. This
seems to tic the karelians of more than the tavasts. It could be
possible that the Tavastas had closer relations to swedes than
the karelians, ingrians, Kuurians (Kuurilaiset). The Novogrod also
seperates mainland finnish to "sums" and "jems" but mix them
up all the time. And the swedes don't seperate finns to tribes.
This could be a viewpoint thing. If the swedes are thinking
in "nation scale" and novogrod is thinking "tribe scale". The Finns
are many tribes and not really used to think themself as nation, but
more like novogrod as many tribes.

This could be the simple reason
why finnish where driven north by slavs. Tribe by tribe not as nation.
Even the swedish invasion game in parts. If all the finnish tribes
would stand united, the men force would be huge. But if they where
seperated, there would be easy to first take one tribe, and then use
the taken tribe to take the next tribe and so on untill you would be
strong enough to take on Tavastians and Karelians. This tribe thinking
did go on a long time. It wasn't really finnish idea to unite the tribes
to one nation. It was the swedes and russians who teached this
by accident when they was fighting over finland. And the tribes of
Kveens, Karelians, Tavastians, Sums, etc declared independence and
took part in two World Wars as one nation. We lost the ingrians in
the wars and the other tribes seem do die or assimilate to russia
in the way.

But the point is that the finnish didn't get invaded because
the lack of brave men, military skills or good weapons. We got invaded
by the lack of centralized goverment. Svear and Novgorod had
this goverment.

Conclusion: We need big rebel armies in finnish provinces. So big that the
forming of one finnish nation is very very very hard.

btw, the above mail includes conclusions of quick mindstorming and it
is only one possibility of the state of things of the time.

wilpuri

10-20-2004, 16:21

Ok, I think it is time to try to sum up what we have so far, so that the people who are doing the actual modding won't have to search all over the place. I will keep this post as the final sum up, which can be edited if need be, but you will always find the latest info in this post. So remmeber what page it is on.

Anyway here goes:

Finnic Factions (Baltic Pagan)

The Map:

https://img.photobucket.com/albums/v103/wilpuri/suomenjako.bmp

From the map:
1) Province name: Vakka-Suomi, Faction: Suoma

2) Province name: Häme, Faction: Häme

3) Province name: Karjala, Faction: Karjala

4) Province name: Kainuu, Faction: Rebel

5) Province name: Inkerinmaa/Ingria, Faction: Rebel

A few points:
- Not sure which of the Western factions should be playable, Suoma or Häme?
- As some you may have noticed, I made some changes so SS's map. According to old tradition (Perimätiedon mukaan:) The lands of the Häme stretched from salt sea to salt sea, from gulf of bothnia to gulf of Finland (suolamerestä suolamereen).

Terrain/Geography of provinces

Vakka-Suomi: Mostly lowland, forested, perhaps coastal?
Häme: Heavily forested, somewhat hilly, some lakes.
Karjala: Heavily forested, a lot of lakes, somewhat hilly.
Kainuu: Lowland, forested, coastal.
Inkerinmaa: Forested, Lowland

Capitals of Provinces:
(marked by the red square)

Vakka-Suomi= Turku

Häme= Kokemäki

Karjala= Käkisalmi

Kainuunmaa= Kainuu

Inkerinmaa= Laatokankaupunki

A few points
- Some Historians believe the Kainuu were more of a hunter organization than a people (or at least were originially so), and so I think it is suitable to have them as rebels. By nature, some historians say, they were much like the Pirkkalaiset later on (except the Pirkka were traders, not hunters).
- Any suggestions for the capital of Kainuu?

Trade goods of Provinces:
Karjala:
Furs (Weasel, Squirrel, Reindeer)
Fish (Salmon)
Reindeer meat
Horses

Häme:
Walrus Tusks (taxed from Lapps and acquired on long hunting trips)
Furs (same as Karelia)
Seal fat

Vakka-Suomi:
Pottery (not very profitable)
Furs (Same as Karelia)

Kainuunmaa
-Furs (same as Karelia)
-Walrus Tusks
-Fish
-Meats

Ingria
-Furs
-Pottery
-Fish

Offices and Titles

Tietäjä of [Province name]:
Loyalty: 1
Piety: 3
Dread: 1
Acumen: 1
Command: 0

Tuomari of [name of province]:
Loyalty: 2
Piety: 1
Dread: 3
Acumen: 1
Command: 0

Sotapäälikkö of [name of Province]
Loyalty: 2
Piety: 0
Dread: 2
Acumen: 1
Command: 3

Varakuningas of [name of Faction]
Loyalty:3
Piety:0
Dread:2
Acumen:2
Command:3

The Finnic and Baltic techtree
(A basic first-draft)

http://www.geocities.com/siidon/FotN/BalticTechTree.xls

Finnic Units

Kuninkaan henkivartio(King's Guard)
-Medium Armor - Swords - Large shields / 80 men
-Morale: Excellent
-Attack: Very good
-Defence: Very good
-Impeteous
-The Elite of Finnic armies
The Finnish Guard wear decent armour, and are medium infantry. They are equipped with large swords and large wooden shields. They have good morale, since they are possibly relatives of the Kuningas, and are in his favour. They followed the kings on their war raids.

Nobles
-Medium Armor - Swords - Large Shilds / 80 men
-Morale: Very good
-Attack: Good
-Defense: Good
-professional, experienced, veterans of raiding parties
-Impeteous
In pre-feudal Baltic and Finnic society, nobles were composed of the wealthy regional strong men and the males of their families. Wielding Swords and large wooden shields, they are a very useful, although a somewhat expensive unit. These men can are reliable, and rarely run.

Footmen
-Light Armor - Swords - Small Shields / 80 men
-Morale: Avarage
-Attack: Good
-Defense: Avarage
-Impeteous
-Fast
Lighter than Finnish nobles, but also faster. Armour consisted only of thick furs and leather. Finnish Infantry are armed with swords and large shields, and they are the middle-class of Finnish society (the largest class). They would serve their leader when called upon, and join the war raids in hope of booty. Reasonable morale.

Heimosoturit(tribesmen)
-Light armour - Spear - roundshield / 100 men
-Morale: Poor
-Impeteous
-Attack: Average
-Defense: poor
-Fast
Light, fast and equipped with spear and shield, and some of them with swords if they could afford them. Finnish tribesmen are no professionals, and if the battle isn’t going their way, they are easy to rout. Finnish tribesmen were slightly poorer than and part of the lower middle-class of Finnish society. Still, they are free men, and join war raids in the hope of booty, and they defend their lands when attacked. Best used for flanking and attacking skirmishers.

Korpisoturit(Wilderland hunters)
-Light armour - bow and axe - small shield / 80 men
-can hide anywhere
-Morale: Average
-Fast
-Attack: Good
-Defense: Average
From the dark inland forests, come the hunters of the wild. Since infancy, they have practiced their hunting skills and they excel in stealth and accuracy. They are also responsible for much of the fur trade, and they trade with the middle-men in coastal settlements.
Armed with bows and axes.

Karjalan kalpamiehet(Karelian kylfings)
-Medium Armor - Swords - Large Shilds / 80 men
-Morale: Very good
-Attack: Good
-Defense: Good
-professional, experienced, veterans of raiding parties
-Impeteous
These mercenaries are armed with swords and large shields. They inhabit the north eastern shores of the Gulf of Finland. They are a reliable medium infantry, and can be trusted to fare well against most other infantry in the heat of battle. The Karelian Kylfings are often associated with the Varangians, since they fought against them and along side them.

Finnish Berserkers
-Medium Armor - battle axes / 60 men
-Morale: excellent
-Attack: Excellent
-Defense: Good
-Impeteous
-Fast
The Finnish Tribes were known for their skills in magic and lore of things unnatural. It was considered bad luck by Vikings to kill a Finn, especially one with magical powers. Many Vikings also went to study and learn from these berserkers, who could work themselves into an unseen frenzy and attack their enemies in a state of fury.
It is hard to control them, and it is wise to simply unleash them.

Karjalan Kirvessoturit(Karelian raiders)
-Medium Armor - Battle axe - Large Shilds / 80 men
-Morale: good
-Attack: Good
-Defense: Average
-Impeteous
Around the turn of the Millennia, Viking raids had decreased on the Finnish shore-line, and the Finnish tribes were becoming more organized in their defence. Soon, it was the Baltic people’s who had their go against the former aggressors, and the Scandinavians were on the defensive for a while. The Karelians, along with other Finnic and Baltic peoples, raided the Vikings. The Karelian raiders are a useful offensive unit, armed with battle-axes and shields. Their main advantages are their speed and their armour-piercing axes.

Keihäsmiehet(Javelin men)
-Light Armor - Javelins and spears - roundshields / 80 men
-Morale: average
-Attack: average
-Defense: poor
-Impeteous
-Fast
The Finnish and Baltic armies were much lighter than those of the Vikings, and employed more unorthodox tactics. They preferred weapons, which could be used in everyday life as tools, and as weapons on the battle field. The Javelins used by the Finns on the battle-field, however, were unique. The Finnish Javelin, the “Ango”, was much like the Roman Pilum, and could be used in similar fashion.
-armed with javelins and spear (like bonnachts in VI)

Warband(I won't change this since it will be availale to all baltic+finnic factions)
-Light armour - Javelins and axes - Large Shilds / 100 men
-Morale: average
-Attack: Good
-Defense: Good
-Impeteous
-Fast
In viking-age Baltic society, tribal warfare and raiding was not uncommon. Raids would be organized under strong leaders, and adventurous men would join these daring expeditions. Armed with Javelins and axes, they form a flexible and formidable unit. Their morale and loyalty is often questionable though, and if the battle turns sour, they might as well turn tail and run.

Karjalan ratsumiehet(Karelian Horsemen)
-Medium Armor - spears - small shields / 40 men
-Morale: good
-Attack: Good
-Defense: poor
-Impeteous
Karelians bread and exported horses far and wide, along the vast network of rivers in the east. Their horses were small and tough, and could handle themselves well in the demanding terrain. The Karelian horsemen were wealthy members of society, and could afford good weapons. Armed with swords and wooden shields, they are ideal for flanking manouvres and pursuing a fleeing enemy.
-units of 40-50
-good morale
-impeteous

Ships:

Small boat
Before roads were common and forests covered most of the land, boats were a very efficient form of transport. They could be used to travel along the cost of the Sea or along the lakes and rivers of the inland regions. They could hold a fairly large crew, and made a good, cheap form of a trading navy.

Uisko
A larger and more capable vessel with both sail and oars. Much like the Viking ships in size and shape. In general, very capable vessels. The Uiskos are well suited for the conditions within the Baltic, but a bit too small for travelling across greater seas.

Agents:

Tietäjä
The tietäjät are wise men who know all the ancient secrets, and the answers to all questions. Their wisdom and guidance kept the individualistic pagan faith of the ancient Baltic-Finns alive, and help to spread it. They are the collective memory of their tribe, and their lore is great indeed.

The Baltic Factions
(Baltic-Pagan)

Map: https://img.photobucket.com/albums/v103/wilpuri/baltianjako2.jpg

A few points about the map:
-The province of Jotvingia may or may not continue outside of the boundaries of this map, I leave it up to you. Jotvingia itself is smaller, but to save space, I included with it some "miscalleneous" Baltic tribes to the south east that border Jotvingia.

-I still need to come up with capitals for most provinces, any help with that would be appreciated

-I let the Curonians keep the whole of the northern shores on the west side of the Gulf of Riga, although it was Livonian territory. Less provinces this way.

Factions and Provinces

Lithuanians (Playable): Lithuania
Prussians (Playable): Prussia
Curonians (Playable): Curland
Latgals (Rebel): Latgallia
Jotvingians (Rebel): Jotvingia
Livonians (Rebel): Livonia
People of Saaremaa: (Playable): Saaremaa + Hiiumaa islands (1 province)
Esths (Rebel): Sakala, Revala

Capitals of Provinces

Lithuania - Daugava

Prussia - Truso

Courland - Seeburg

Latgallia - ?

Jotvingia - ?

Livonia - ?

Saaremaa + Hiiumaa - Kuressaare

Sakala - Tarbatu

Revala - Rafala

Note: Not finished yet as you can see. If anyone can spot any mistakes, tell me.

Geography/Terrain of Provinces:
Lithuania: Mostly flatland, heavily forested
Prussia: Heavily forested, low-to hilly.
Curland: Forested, coastal, Lowland
Latgallia: Forested, somewhat hilly
Jotvingia: Forested, Lowland
Livonia: Forested, coastal, lowland
Saaremaa + Hiiumaa: Coastal, lowland
Sakala: Forested, Somewhat hilly
Revala: Forested, lowland

Titles and Offices

Wiseman (Zitnieki for Baltics) of [Province name]:

Loyalty: 1
Piety: 3
Dread: 1
Acumen: 1
Command: 0

Tiesnesis of [name of province]:
Loyalty: 2
Piety: 1
Dread: 3
Acumen: 1
Command: 0

Kara Virsaitis of [name of Province]
Loyalty: 2
Piety: 0
Dread: 2
Acumen: 1
Command: 3

Kjeenish of [name of Faction]
Loyalty:3
Piety:0
Dread:2
Acumen:2
Command:3

Trade goods

Amber for each and every province, I have to do further research regarding other trade.

Tech Tree
Same basic draft will be used for both Finnic and Baltic Factions

Finnic units of Balticum (for P.o.S, Esths, and Livonians)

Saaremaa Raiders
-Medium Armor - Swords - Large shields / 80 men
-Morale: Good
-Attack: Very good
-Defence: Very good
-Impeteous
-fast
The People of Saaremaa, alongside the Curonians, were known for their viking-style raids across the Baltic. They were capable warriors and merchants, who raided settlements and captured the inhabitants, which were then sold as slaves. Armed with bows and arrows and Swords and small shields, they were a very useful unit on the battle field.

King's Guard
-Medium Armor - Swords - Large shields / 80 men
-Morale: Excellent
-Attack: Very good
-Defence: Very good
-Impeteous
-The Elite of Estonian armies
The King's Guard wear decent armour, and are medium infantry. They are equipped with large swords and large wooden shields. They have good morale, since they come from the richest part of Baltic society and are possibly relatives of the king. They followed the kings on their war raids.

Nobles
-Medium Armor - Swords - Large Shilds / 80 men
-Morale: Very good
-Attack: Good
-Defense: Good
-professional, experienced, veterans of raiding parties
-Impeteous
In pre-feudal Baltic and Finnic society, nobles were composed of the wealthy regional strong men and the males of their families. Wielding Swords and large wooden shields, they are a very useful, although a somewhat expensive unit. These men can are reliable, and rarely run.

Estonian Swordsmen
-medium Armor - Swords - Large shields / 80 men
-Morale: Average
-Attack: good
-Defence: good
-Impeteous
-Fast
Lighter than The King's Guard, but also faster. Armour consisted only of thick furs and leather. Estonian Swordsmen are armed with swords and large shields, and they are the upper middle-class of Estonian society. They would serve their leader when called upon, and join the war raids in hope of booty. Swords were expensive, and so is this unit. Reasonable morale.

Estonian Crossbowmen (only very late in the game)
-Light Armor - Crossbows and daggers - small shields / 60 men
-Morale: Good
-Attack: good
-Defence: good
-Impeteous
-Fast
The Estonians were among the last to be conquered by the Christian Crusaders, and this was largely thanks to their ability to adapt to the new kind of warfare the foreign invaders represented. The Estonians started using the crossbow as part of their weapons arsenal, and Estonian crossbowmen became feared in and around the Baltic for their accuracy and their skills in melee. Armed with skaramasakses, a short type of sword, Estonian crossbowmen can also be used as regular infantry if needed.

Estonian Infantry
-Light Armor - Swords - Large shields / 80 men
-Morale: average
-Attack: Very good
-Defence: Very good
-Impeteous
-fast
Armour consisted only of thick furs and leather. Estonian Infantry are armed with spears and large shields, and they come from the middle-class of Estonian society. Spears were cheap and effective weapons, and also useful in everyday life. This is a relatively reliable and cheap unit.

Livonian Infantry
-Light armour - Spear - large shield / 100 men
-Morale:average
-Impeteous
-Attack: Average
-Defense: poor
-Fast
Light infantry armed with short spears and large shields. The Livonians were on good terms with the Estonian Tribes, and they often fought the Baltic tribes side by side. Reasonable morale. A good addition to any Baltic Army. Later on the Livonian warriors were also used by the German crusaders.

Estonian Tribesmen
-Light armour - Spear - roundshield / 100 men
-Morale: Poor
-Impeteous
-Attack: Average
-Defense: poor
-Fast
Light, fast and equipped with spear and shield, and some of them with swords if they could afford them. Estonian tribesmen are no professionals, and if the battle isn’t going their way, they are easy to rout. Estonian tribesmen were slightly poorer than and part of the lower middle-class of Estonian society. Still, they are free men, and join war raids in the hope of booty, and they defend their lands when attacked. Best used for flanking and attacking skirmishers.

Baltic Horsemen
-Light armour - Spear - roundshield / 40 men
-Morale: average
-Impeteous
-Attack: Average
-Defense: poor
Baltic horses were rare and expensive, and so was Baltic cavalry. Their small horses and their untrained riders made poor cavalry in relation with their central European contemporaries. They were best used for attacking skirmishers and chasing a routing enemy off the field.

Warband(I won't change this since it will be availale to all baltic+finnic factions)
-Light armour - Javelins and axes - Large Shilds / 100 men
-Morale: average
-Attack: Good
-Defense: Good
-Impeteous
-Fast
In viking-age Baltic society, tribal warfare and raiding was not uncommon. Raids would be organized under strong leaders, and adventurous men would join these daring expeditions. Armed with Javelins and axes, they form a flexible and formidable unit. Their morale and loyalty is often questionable though, and if the battle turns sour, they might as well turn tail and run.

Ships:

Small boat
Before roads were common and forests covered most of the land, boats were a very efficient form of transport. They could be used to travel along the cost of the Sea or along the lakes and rivers of the inland regions. They could hold a fairly large crew, and made a good, cheap form of a trading navy.

Uisko
A larger and more capable vessel with both sail and oars. Much like the Viking ships in size and shape. In general, very capable vessels. The Uiskos are well suited for the conditions within the Baltic, but a bit too small for travelling across greater seas.

Agents:

Tietäjä(still trying to work out what it is in Estonian)
The tietäjät are wise men who know all the ancient secrets, and the answers to all questions. Their wisdom and guidance kept the individualistic pagan faith of the ancient Baltic-Finns alive, and help to spread it. They are the collective memory of their tribe, and their lore is great indeed.

Units for "Baltic" Baltic factions ~D

Baltic Horsemen
-Light armour - Spear - roundshield / 40 men
-Morale: average
-Impeteous
-Attack: Average
-Defense: poor
Baltic horses were rare and expensive, and so was Baltic cavalry. Their small horses and their untrained riders made poor cavalry in relation with their central European contemporaries. They were best used for attacking skirmishers and chasing a routing enemy off the field.

Peerkona deeli (sons of Thunder)
-Medium Armor - Swords - Large shields / 80 men
-Morale: Excellent
-Attack: Excellent
-Defence: Very good
-Disciplined
-The Elite of Baltic Armies
These men are the absolute elite of Baltic armies. They are well trained and highly discplined, armed with the very best equipment available. Wielding fearsome swords and large shields, they are best used as shock troops to break through enemy lines. Their religious zeal makes them very brave fighters, who rarely run off the field.

Curonian Raiders
-Medium Armor - Swords - Large shields / 80 men
-Morale: Very good
-Attack: Very good
-Defence: Very good
-Impeteous
-fast
Around the turn of the millennia, The Finnic and Baltic Tribes were able to control the Baltic Sea, and the Curonians in particular had a reputation of being skilled raiders, much like the Vikings. Armed with swords and shields and leather armour, the Curonian Raiders were capable soldiers, and many times did the Vikings meet their match when facing the Curonians warriors and their fleets. These men formed the elite of any offensive Curonian army.

Kings Guard
-Medium Armor - Swords - Large shields / 80 men
-Morale: Excellent
-Attack: Very good
-Defence: Very good
-Impeteous
-The Elite of Baltic armies
The King's Guard wear decent armour, and are medium infantry. They are equipped with Swords and large wooden shields. They have good morale, since they come from the richest part of Baltic society and are possibly relatives of the king. They followed the kings on their war raids.

Curonian Infantry
-Light armour - Spear - large shield / 100 men
-Morale:average
-Impeteous
-Attack: Average
-Defense: Average
-Fast
Lighter than The Kings Guard, but also faster. Armour consisted only of thick furs and leather. Curonian Infantry are armed with spears and large shields, and they are the middle-class of Curonian society (the largest class). They would serve their leader when called upon, and join the war raids in hope of booty. Reasonable morale.

Baltic Tribesmen
-Light armour - Axes - Small shields / 100 men
-Morale: Poor
-Impeteous
-Attack: Average
-Defense: Poor
-Fast
Armed with mainly war cudgels or axes and shields, Baltic Tribesmen form a cheap and fairly useful unit. As a peasant unit, they are not very reliable in the heat of battle, but a good, cheap garrison. Their strength is in numbers and in speed.

Baltic Infantry
-Light armour - Axes - Small shield / 100 men
-Morale:average
-Impeteous
-Attack: Average
-Defense: Average
-Fast
-bonus vs. armour
A relatively reliable infantry unit. Armed with axes and shields, they proved effective against armoured opponents, thanks to their speed and their axes. They are the back bone of many Baltic armies.

Baltic Javelin men
-Light Armor - Javelins and short swords - roundshields / 80 men
-Morale: average
-Attack: average
-Defense: poor
-Impeteous
-Fast
The Finnish and Baltic armies were much lighter than those of the Vikings, and employed more unorthodox tactics. They preferred weapons, which could be used in everyday life as tools, and as weapons on the battle field. The Javelin men were usually hunters, who used their skills on the battle field to harass the enemy, and then use their speed to get away. Although they are armed with short swords, they should be kept away from melee.

Semigallian Crossbow men(very late in the game, at the end of the tech-tree)
-Light Armor - Crossbows and daggers - small shields / 60 men
-Morale: Good
-Attack: good
-Defence: average
-Impeteous
-Fast
A cross bow is a fairly effective weapon, especially against light armour. It’s reload time is longer than that of a traditional bow, but Semigallian crossbow men carried short swords with them, and were fairly effective in melee.

Semigallian spearmen
-medium armour - Spear - large shield / 100 men
-Morale:average
-Impeteous
-Attack: Good
-Defense: Good
-Fast
The Semigallians were a strong tribe in the Baltic during Viking times, and controlled a large area in the inlands. This made them the target for numerous attacks by neighbouring tribes, and also strengthened their military organisation. Their spearmen were of good quality, and fairly cheap. Armed with the traditional Semigallian spear and a large shield, they were a good addition to any Baltic army.

Warband(I won't change this since it will be availale to all baltic+finnic factions)
-Light armour - Javelins and axes - Large Shilds / 100 men
-Morale: average
-Attack: Good
-Defense: Good
-Impeteous
-Fast
In viking-age Baltic society, tribal warfare and raiding was not uncommon. Raids would be organized under strong leaders, and adventurous men would join these daring expeditions. Armed with Javelins and axes, they form a flexible and formidable unit. Their morale and loyalty is often questionable though, and if the battle turns sour, they might as well turn tail and run.

Ships:

Small boat
Before roads were common and forests covered most of the land, boats were a very efficient form of transport. They could be used to travel along the cost of the Sea or along the lakes and rivers of the inland regions. They could hold a fairly large crew, and made a good, cheap form of a trading navy.

Baltic longboat
A larger and more capable vessel with both sail and oars. Much like the Viking ships in size and shape. In general, very capable vessels. The Curonians in particular excelled in the art of shipbuilding, and their ships were up to viking standards.

Agents:

Zitnieki
The Zitnieki are wise men who know all the ancient secrets, and the answers to all questions. Their wisdom and guidance kept the individualistic pagan faith of the ancient Baltic tribes alive, and help to spread it. They are the collective memory of their tribe, and their lore is great indeed.

Woah... That was exhausting.... Anyway, if I missed something, if you have any complaints, suggestions, I'm all ears.

Sebastian Seth

10-21-2004, 10:47

Repeates & Ideas:

Finnish Factions:

1) Province name: Vakka-Suomi, Faction: Suoma/Häme

2) Province name: Häme, Faction: Suoma/Häme

3) Province name: Karjala, Faction: Karjala

4) Province name: Kainuu, Faction: Rebel

5) Province name: Inkerinmaa/Ingria, Faction: Rebel

SS: If we make faction name "Häme", it gets transformed to "Hame" in
most systems. And thats not really flattering name (eng. Skirt). Also
the Suoma/Häme faction should control provinces 1 and 2. That
way you don't have to draw west coast to häme province. Because
their land will go from Salt Sea to Sea. Perimätiedon mukaan.

Terrain/Geography of provinces:

Vakka-Suomi: Coastal, Forrests, Lowland (Island Forts?)
Häme: Lakes, Heavily Forested, Little Hilly (Hill Forts)
Karjala: Lakes, Heavily Forested, Little Hilly (Hill Forts)
Kainuu: Coastal, Forested, Lowland (Island Forts?)
Inkerinmaa: Inland, Forested, Lowland (Hill Forts)

SS: The Hill forts should have big rocks around them. So that the
archers could not shoot in to the forts so easy. And the forests should
be around the hill forts to restrict the movement of catabults and
horsemen. Should we try to do these maps?

Should we try to do these maps?

Capitals of Provinces: (marked by the red square)

Vakka-Suomi = Turku

Häme = Kokemäki

Karjala = Käkisalmi

Kainuunmaa = Kainuu

Ingria = Laatokankaupunki

SS: I've think this could be good. And yes definetly rebels. Strong hunter &
pillaging organization with famous axemen (+1 Woodsmen Morale).
The latin world historians seem to mix the kveens with other finnish tribes,
most likely with the Suoma/Häme. But it is likely that they will be part
of Suoma/Häme faction shortly after the game starts.

Trade goods of Provinces:

Karjala:
Furs (Weasel, Squirrel, Reindeer, Moose, Bear)
Fish (Salmon, Pike)
Meat (Reindeer, Moose, Bear)

Häme:
Furs (Weasel, Squirrel, Reindeer, Moose, Bear)
Fish (Salmon, Pike)
Meat (Reindeer, Moose, Bear)
Walrus Tusks (taxed from Lapps and acquired on long hunting trips)
Seal Fat (taxed from Lapps and acquired on long hunting trips)

Vakka-Suomi:
Furs (Weasel, Squirrel, Reindeer, Moose, Bear)
Fish (Salmon, Pike)
Pottery (Clay)

Kainuunmaa:
Furs (Weasel, Squirrel, Reindeer, Moose, Bear)
Fish (Salmon, Pike)
Meat (Reindeer, Moose, Bear)
Walrus Tusks (taxed from Lapps and acquired on long hunting trips)
Seal Fat (taxed from Lapps and acquired on long hunting trips)

Ingria:
Furs (Weasel, Squirrel, Reindeer, Moose, Bear)
Fish (Salmon, Pike)
Pottery (Clay)

Resources of Provinces:

Karjala:
Horses

SS: The horses should be a resource needed to build horse units not a
trade good. I added some fish, furs and meats. And specified the pottery
to clay so the modders can reduce it's profits.

Offices and Titles:

Tietäjä of [province name]:
Loyalty: 1
Piety: 3
Dread: 1
Acumen: 1
Command: 0

Kansantietäjä of [faction name]:
Loyalty: 2
Piety: 3
Dread: 1
Acumen: 2
Command: 0

Tuomari of [name of province]:
Loyalty: 2
Piety: 0
Dread: 2
Acumen: 2
Command: 0

Suur Tuomari [faction name]:
Loyalty: 3
Piety: 0
Dread: 3
Acumen: 2
Command: 0

Heimopäälikkö of [name of province]:
Loyalty: 1
Piety: 0
Dread: 2
Acumen: 1
Command: 2

Sotapäälikkö of [faction name]:
Loyalty: 2
Piety: 0
Dread: 3
Acumen: 1
Command: 3

SS: I was thinkin that we could have two kinds of titles, provincical and
factional. The results above. This of course needs to be fitted in to tech
tree, but what do you think?

Finnic Units:
!Scale: Very Poor, Poor, Avarage, Good, Very Good!

Kuninkaan Henkivartio (King's Guard)
Kuninkaan henkivartio is composed of kings relatives, friends and warriors
hand picked by king himself. They are often veteran warriors from
war raids or strong talented men. Unlike peasantry these men are
devoted to war and fighting and their fighting skills are unmatched.
They wear various kinds of armours and fight with long swords and
wooden shields.

Medium Armour + Sword + Wooden Shield / 80 men
Speciality: NO ROUTING, ELITE

Jalkaväki (Finnish Infantry)
The basic form of organized military in Suoma and Karjala. They are fit
young men from small villages, looking for career in arms. Most of them
aren't as experienced in warfare as the Kuninkaan henkivartio
but they are fast and eager to great extend. Their Armour consisted
only of thick furs and leather and is often made in their home village or passed down from father. They are armed with swords and large shields.
They are could be considered medium infantry, but they really are light
as in finnish forests is not wise to carry lots of weight around.

Light Armour + Swords + Shields / 100 men
Speciality: VERY FAST

SS: How about these mordifications? Ok, I've have some more about the
rest of the units but lets get to that later. But the direction looks very good;
the finns should rely on speed, stamina, raiding, skrimishing and tactics and
not rely on strong defense units. We also need to generalize some units
to fit karelia and Suoma/Häme and baltics. Or mayby make more but use
same graphics for them. The ships and agents are good. And also need to
think what units can be merceneries (warband at first).

Latvian titles:
Kara Virsaitis - Tiesnesis - Kjeeninsh (Latvian)
- Wario posted these earlier.

I can make the unit list to the same exel sheet when I find time. The prod
files of MTW is originaly made as exel sheet so we could get near ready
sheet to inject in beta version (if wanted). all the text files are actualy
made whit exel (tabs, xy-axel format) and then pasted in to txt file.

@Wilpuri
Could the baltics use uisko as well? If possible the uiskos in finland could
get valour bonus from province and that would make the point of
better ships clear.

wilpuri

10-21-2004, 12:54

Repeates & Ideas:

SS: If we make faction name "Häme", it gets transformed to "Hame" in
most systems. And thats not really flattering name (eng. Skirt). Also
the Suoma/Häme faction should control provinces 1 and 2. That
way you don't have to draw west coast to häme province. Because
their land will go from Salt Sea to Sea. Perimätiedon mukaan.
I don't think it would be good to have them as the same faction initially, as that would be inaccurate. They were allies, but to have them as the same faction, don't know about that. So if not Häme, do you want to call them the Tavastians then?

Terrain/Geography of provinces:

Vakka-Suomi: Coastal, Forrests, Lowland (Island Forts?)
Häme: Lakes, Heavily Forested, Little Hilly (Hill Forts)
Karjala: Lakes, Heavily Forested, Little Hilly (Hill Forts)
Kainuu: Coastal, Forested, Lowland (Island Forts?)
Inkerinmaa: Inland, Forested, Lowland (Hill Forts)
How do you intend to use island forts??

SS: The Hill forts should have big rocks around them. So that the
archers could not shoot in to the forts so easy. And the forests should
be around the hill forts to restrict the movement of catabults and
horsemen. Should we try to do these maps?
agreed.

SS: The horses should be a resource needed to build horse units not a
trade good. I added some fish, furs and meats. And specified the pottery
to clay so the modders can reduce it's profits.
I like the additions, but I don't think horses should be a resource. Every faction should be able to have horses, as they did in reality. There were horses in viking age Finland + baltics. Also, Karjala traded horses, that's why I think it should be a trade good.

SS: I was thinkin that we could have two kinds of titles, provincical and
factional. The results above. This of course needs to be fitted in to tech
tree, but what do you think?
Agreed, I was thinking of expanding them as well, but those look very nice.

Jalkaväki (Finnish Infantry)
The basic form of organized military in Suoma and Karjala. They are fit
young men from small villages, looking for career in arms. Most of them
aren't as experienced in warfare as the Kuninkaan henkivartio
but they are fast and eager to great extend. Their Armour consisted
only of thick furs and leather and is often made in their home village or passed down from father. They are armed with swords and large shields.
They are could be considered medium infantry, but they really are light
as in finnish forests is not wise to carry lots of weight around.

Light Armour + Swords + Shields / 100 men
Speciality: VERY FAST

SS: How about these mordifications? Ok, I've have some more about the
rest of the units but lets get to that later. But the direction looks very good;
the finns should rely on speed, stamina, raiding, skrimishing and tactics and
not rely on strong defense units. We also need to generalize some units
to fit karelia and Suoma/Häme and baltics. Or mayby make more but use
same graphics for them. The ships and agents are good. And also need to
think what units can be merceneries (warband at first).

Jalkaväki sounds way too modern imo, and I wouldn't mind having it in English. Maybe they could be known as "Kalpamiehet"? Since these guys have swords, they should be pretty elite. Only the wealthy would afford swords which was both a weapon, and very much a symbol of status in finnish society.

Latvian titles:
Kara Virsaitis - Tiesnesis - Kjeeninsh (Latvian)
- Wario posted these earlier.

yes of course, but what are these? Judges, war chiefs, what?

I can make the unit list to the same exel sheet when I find time. The prod
files of MTW is originaly made as exel sheet so we could get near ready
sheet to inject in beta version (if wanted). all the text files are actualy
made whit exel (tabs, xy-axel format) and then pasted in to txt file.
Excellent.

@Wilpuri
Could the baltics use uisko as well? If possible the uiskos in finland could
get valour bonus from province and that would make the point of
better ships clear.

Well the Curonians made excellent ships, better than the Finnic Uiskos used by Estonians and Finns, so I think Baltic/Curonian long boat is better.

Norseman

10-21-2004, 13:07

Hey, I'm back

Solid work Wilpuri and SS, and excellent last post!

One thing about the tech-tree. When trying to make tech-trees I have so far tried to make them a bit simple. By this I mean that we don't have the long lines of different "spearmakers", "bowyers" etc. Just the initial building and maybe one more. I have rather based troop recruiting on buildings that reflect the King's influence in a region(like "Kings hall" or "Jarls Homestead").

This means that several basic troop types may be available by making one important building. I think this suits our mod very well, as the Scandinavians, Baltics, Fins and Britons(Celts&Anglo-Saxons) all based their armies on the loyalty of the local warlords. I think "spearmakers" etc. shouldn't be introduced before the faction is at a tech-level where the King was able to raise a more "professional" army(approx. fort level) with loyalty more or less directly to the King.
At least this should suit the Vikings well, but what do you think, especially conserning the other cultures/factions?

I've actually made a mod(it's more or less finished, but has a serious bug) of the original MTW, in which I used this kind of thinking on the Tech-tree. I found this to be of great help to the AI. Instead of the endless "one-type of unit" armies of either peasants, basic spearmen or basic archers, I ended up fighting well balanced armies which also included more modern troops.

wilpuri

10-21-2004, 13:13

Sebastian Seth

10-21-2004, 15:40

@Wilpuri

No Tavastians, lets go with Häme if we must. I was thinking the Suoma
more as common name for the area tribes. Since it comes from same
word as Häme. (ref. earlier posts about the name)

Island forts; Draw the battle map half water half land. raise hill from the
water and place the fort on the hill. make bridge from the hill to
the land part. Add rocks to sides of the fort. And we got a island fort.
Much like Suomenlinna but much smaler.

Ok, Let the horses be trade good, but the access to horse units must
be somehow handicapped for Häme. I understand there wasn't really
cavarly units in Häme, but more work horses.

Jalkaväki sounds way too modern imo, and I wouldn't mind having it in English. Maybe they could be known as "Kalpamiehet"? Since these guys have swords, they should be pretty elite. Only the wealthy would afford swords which was both a weapon, and very much a symbol of status in finnish society.

Yes, you're right again. but i'm not sure if there's enough levels at
finnish swordmen. Perhaps two types;

Draftmen or Footmen
Light Armor - Swords - Small Shields / 80 men
Morale: Avarage
Attack: Good
Defense: Avarage

- drafted, inexperienced, young town boys seeking profession

Kalpamen
Medium Armor - Swords - Large Shilds / 80 men
Morale: Good
Attack: Good
Defense: Good

- professional, experienced, veterans of raiding parties

I forgot what the titles mean, they are posted here before. The tech
tree has changed so i'm not sure they are correct. I'll go find
suomi-eesti-suomi book from library later. (we need one).

Well the Curonians made excellent ships, better than the Finnic Uiskos used by Estonians and Finns, so I think Baltic/Curonian long boat is better.

We'll make it different then.

@Norseman
In this moment I have been thinkin as the units where in four main categories:

1. Peasant Class
- Needs basic buildings like spear maker, bow maker.
- Not very effective generaly.
2. Soldier Class
- Needs Advanced buildings like Swordsmith, Fortified Village, etc
- Medium Effection.
3. Nobility Class
- Needs high end buildings like stone bastion, Throne room, etc
4. Special Units
- Requirements varies, faction specific units.
- Highly effective

Generaly theres 3 levels of buildings, example:
Spearmaker enables units like tribesman & javellinmen (peasant type)
Master Spearmaker enables Spearmen (soldier type)
Spearmakers Guild gives valour bonus to spear units

This is ofcourse raw idea written down, but we could change it. Like Move
Spearmen to Spearmakers Guild, but then it would take 54 years to build
the buildings needed to get spearmen. and that is a guite much. It's
mayby better that there is 3 buildings for each weapon style but the
last one only enables special units and gives valour bonuses. And there
is also a lot of units in baltics that are simply too powerfull to get
from simple swordsmith (Peerikon Deeli, Kings Guards). This is much
like in STW but more castles and less building levels.

Isn't the AI unit buing balanced from the prod files? If you but
various peasant class units to 100, will the AI by all of the
units? Or is there some file that tells AI what kind of army it builds?

Norseman

10-21-2004, 18:17

Isn't the AI unit buing balanced from the prod files? If you but
various peasant class units to 100, will the AI by all of the
units? Or is there some file that tells AI what kind of army it builds?

@SS
The problem with the AI and balanced and modern armies in the original MTW comes from how the Tech-trees are set up and the buildprod file works.

Every time the AI is to decide for what building it is to build in a region, it takes the following into account:

1) What's available, of course ~;)
2) a "priority number", depending on the AI type(BARBARIAN_RAIDER, CATHOLIC_EXPANSIONIST...etc.)
3) a combination number, e.g. if you have spearmaker it may increase the chance it will select to build "spearmakers guild", even if another building has the same priority number, like say a bowyer.

When it is to decide what units to train, it takes the following into account:

1) Again; what's available
2) a "priority number", depending on the AI type(BARBARIAN_RAIDER, CATHOLIC_EXPANSIONIST...etc.)
3) Apparantly there seem to be some other hardcoded features as well, like where a unit gets a valour bonus etc.

So for the AI to make balanced armies, it also has to make the right buildings to do so. The unit-training priority numbers don't matter as long as the AI don't build the right buildings. This is apparantly where the system fails - it doesn't really work without extensive and laborous testing. IMO even CA didn't make it work themselves, just look at all the complaints that has been posted here at the ORG about large AI armies made up of only one type of basic unit.

The problem is even bigger with more advanced units, as the AI hardly ever actually managed to make the correct building combinations.

To my knowledge, the only one who has actually made it work satisfactorly was WesW in his MedMod, but only after a lot of hard work and tedious testing. So instead, from the modders point of view, I for one like Duke John's solution much better: skip the whole tech-tree ~D

This is why I want to make simple tech-trees, where several types of units can be trained by constructing a single building. Now the AI will only have to take the unit-training priority number(UTPNr) into account when deciding what unit to train.

So if e.g. Feudal Knights has UTPNr=30, basic spearmen=40, basic archers=30, you will more likely face an army made up of 3 Fkn, 4 spears and 3 archers(or something like that), instead of 10 spears, as the AI never got around to making the other buildings.

So IMO the game is simply more fun and challenging with an AI that fields balanced armies, even if the tech-tree is a bit simple.

Then the next problem is of course to get the AI to actually understand how to use this balanced army :dizzy2:

Sebastian Seth

10-22-2004, 03:09

So for the AI to make balanced armies, it also has to make the right buildings to do so. The unit-training priority numbers don't matter as long as the AI don't build the right buildings. This is apparantly where the system fails - it doesn't really work without extensive and laborous testing. IMO even CA didn't make it work themselves, just look at all the complaints that has been posted here at the ORG about large AI armies made up of only one type of basic unit.

The problem is even bigger with more advanced units, as the AI hardly ever actually managed to make the correct building combinations.

We just need to fix the balancing in building prod file. The error is not
consisted and you can simply make it work. It might cause some
headache but it's not hard really just count what number comes
when you sum up all the valuables.

Heres what I found in prod files consearning balancing. You probably
know these but here it goes:

Build prod file:

G. Building conditions- The requirements, first level of balaning (easy one). By using
different level castle in every upgrade building.
J. AI characters building production preferences- The errors of the building balancing is most likely in here. There is
different sheet in the original exel file that makes the balancing
easyer. Generaly in the file the values for upgrades are very high
compared to basic building. If you change the values to be
higher in basic buildings (spearmaker 1000, boyer 990) and
the upgrades to lower (Spearmakers Guild 600, Boyers Guild 590)
The Ai would build them in order spearmaker, boyer, spearmakers guild,
boyers guild.
K. AI building influences for building combos- This could be used for balancing... Castles could have influences of
the same level unit producers. That way the spearmaker & boyer
would get more likely to be build after building that level castle.
The building the AI builds is a building with the highest number,
right? This would rise the numbers to high not only for combo buildings
but also from the balanced army point of view.
R. Tech Level- I'm not sure if the AI uses this and if it uses will it build higher tech
levels first and lower then of via versa. ~:confused:
S. Resources required to be present in region before this building can be built.
- You are allready using this one i believe. ~D

Unit Prod Files:

O. Unit choices (AI)
- The armies are really defined here.
P. Unit Speciality extra building influences
- This wasn't at use. Mayby we could use it. Like but to king units influence
castle, and peasant units influence to build spearmakers & boyers.
Q.Buildings needed to produce this Unit
- Nothing to add to this.
R . Unit Class
- I dont know if this is used ~:confused:

So IMO the game is simply more fun and challenging with an AI that fields balanced armies, even if the tech-tree is a bit simple.

I'm strongly for Good AI, Otherwise you swidish people kick virtual
finnish butt that can't kick back. ~D

Then the next problem is of course to get the AI to actually understand how to use this balanced army :dizzy2:

That's impossible, if we are not able to change the battle map engine.
And if we are lets just make new game. ~D

!You might want to use us as beta testers for AI balancing!

@Wilpuri

The translations:
Chieftains House - Law House - Throne Room (preliminary)
Chieftains House - Käräjä House - Throne Room (finnish)
Virsaisha Maaja - Likum Maaja - Tronja istaba (Latvian)

War Chief - Judge - Vice King (preliminary)
Sotapäällikkö - Tuomari - Varakuningas (finnish)
Kara Virsaitis - Tiesnesis - Kjeeninsh (Latvian)

Norseman

10-22-2004, 09:30

We just need to fix the balancing in building prod file. The error is not consisted and you can simply make it work. It might cause some
headache but it's not hard really just count what number comes
when you sum up all the valuables.

Ah...yes, but as I am the one who will have to deal with this headache I much prefer a simpler and less time consuming solution. ~;) Believe me, I've already tried balancing these things, and it is a very very time consuming effort, that might not even give a satisfactorily result. You must consider all buildings and all parameters in all different combinations, and make them suit a faction "behaviour-profile".

I'm not saying we won't have spearmakers and similar buildings(maybe 2 levels), just that they should be a bit high up on the tech-tree. I think all "tribal warrior" class units should not rely on these kind of buildings to be trained either, both for simplisity and historical accuracy. At least in a viking society each carl and peasant was expected to have weapons, and these were mostly made by himself or by the blacksmith of the village. I sort of expect this to be the case with all armies based on tribal warriors, or am I wrong?

Sebastian Seth

10-22-2004, 12:27

Ah...yes, but as I am the one who will have to deal with this headache I much prefer a simpler and less time consuming solution. ~;) Believe me, I've already tried balancing these things, and it is a very very time consuming effort, that might not even give a satisfactorily result. You must consider all buildings and all parameters in all different combinations, and make them suit a faction "behaviour-profile".

Well, then there's too much buildings in baltic tech tree allready. Or
mayby not, as the last buildings aren't really troop producters. Theres
just two for spearmen, two for bowmen, two for horsemen and
two for both swordmen and axemen. And then theres level 5 (highest)
buildigs for each giving valour bonus. So all together 8 troop producing
buildigs. But theres not yeat a clear where the berserks and special
units come from. This is simple, yes?

I'm not saying we won't have spearmakers and similar buildings(maybe 2 levels), just that they should be a bit high up on the tech-tree. I think all "tribal warrior" class units should not rely on these kind of buildings to be trained either, both for simplisity and historical accuracy. At least in a viking society each carl and peasant was expected to have weapons, and these were mostly made by himself or by the blacksmith of the village. I sort of expect this to be the case with all armies based on tribal warriors, or am I wrong?

Yes you are correct, the finns had spears and bows for hunting, Axes for
wood cutting and swords for fighting. The finns don't really need
any buildings to produce tribal units and one is enough to produce
military units. The buildings are really needed to measure the
level of organization and not the need of equipment. For example
Spearmaker and Bowmaker. To english these words mean a building and
to finnish these mean people. Spearmakers Guild, again english think
this as a building and to finnish it sounds more like some greedy
secret society. The Spearmaker in baltic tech tree could be more
likely elder person who makes good spears and quides the younger
how to do it. Not only as the spear but how to use it.

And yes finns have weapons and they are very used to use them.
But if you take them as they are they just attack in one or two man
units and die. They need to be told some tactics and collect them
as large units. This is why there's got to be buildings representing
the level of organization.

This is a kind of hard to explane and i'm not sure did it come out
the way I intended. But shortly. Baltic tech tree is about skill level,
not specific building. Well that didn't come out good either, but
if you think the buildings as military organazations like in the army
there can be headquaters and this is refering to building but it
really is a place where officers drink coffey. I'm I making any sense?

On another issue:
I noticed that the attack, defence, charge bonus, etc, is depentend
of weapons, armours, shields, etc. this makes it harder to make
a straight fit sheet from the units. So I'll have to do just a presentation.
(Like the tech tree)

Norseman

10-22-2004, 19:14

And yes finns have weapons and they are very used to use them.
But if you take them as they are they just attack in one or two man
units and die. They need to be told some tactics and collect them
as large units. This is why there's got to be buildings representing
the level of organization.

Well, finnish warlords had the ability to gather them in a big bunch and make them charge, just like any viking warlord I guess. And this was pretty much what happened was it not? This level of organization(if one can call it that ~D ) is already represented by the "Jarl's homestead"/"king's Hall" type of buildings.

What I'm suggesting is that the "spearmaker" type of buildings come into play at a level where the King(the Player or AI) would want to raise units that held their loyalty directly to the King and not through a lesser warlord. These units will be much better tactically than the warband units. In the stats you will see this as they will be a tad better, and in addition these units will have more ordered formations, get better rank bonuses(spearmen) etc.

So the question is really at what tech-level would this be for a Finnish/baltic faction?

E.g:
For the Vikings this would be quite historically accurate at the Fort-level I think(considering the forts Fyrkat, Trelleborg etc. in Denmark). Here a Viking king will be able to raise spearmen with proper formation and rank-bonus, light cavalry and archers(although the vikings often used the bow in earlier battles, it was not used in ordered formations recognizable as "units").
All these units should make the infantry heavy viking army more balanced, and more capable at facing cavalry strong armies.

A second level "spearmaker"-type building would then either give a valour bonus or a better unit. In the viking case, this would be the Keep-level, which will be the highest in our mod.

This is a kind of hard to explane and i'm not sure did it come out
the way I intended. But shortly. Baltic tech tree is about skill level,
not specific building. Well that didn't come out good either, but
if you think the buildings as military organazations like in the army
there can be headquaters and this is refering to building but it
really is a place where officers drink coffey. I'm I making any sense?

Not really ~D . Just joking. I think I understand, and I also do think you have a point. However, I also think the gains(better AI, less modding) of making the tech-tree "my way" outweight the disadvantages.

Anyway, it will still take some time before this will actually be implemented, so how about we leave this for now and I continue making the tech-tree and see how it works? If it needs more adjusting, like more buildings, we add them ok?

Sebastian Seth

10-25-2004, 14:39

Well, finnish warlords had the ability to gather them in a big bunch and make them charge, just like any viking warlord I guess. And this was pretty much what happened was it not? This level of organization(if one can call it that ~D ) is already represented by the "Jarl's homestead"/"king's Hall" type of buildings.

Yes this is pretty much how it is. However the finns have lots of tribal
level units and they would get strong armies from just one building. And
this is the part i'm worried about. We could just go along with very
simple tech trees and less work. And later make FotN2 Mod with
more complex tech tree (mayby to RTW).

What I'm suggesting is that the "spearmaker" type of buildings come into play at a level where the King(the Player or AI) would want to raise units that held their loyalty directly to the King and not through a lesser warlord. These units will be much better tactically than the warband units. In the stats you will see this as they will be a tad better, and in addition these units will have more ordered formations, get better rank bonuses(spearmen) etc.
So the question is really at what tech-level would this be for a Finnish/baltic faction?

At the moment theres 3 buildings in baltic tech tree. The two that you
just described and one for enabling tribal units. Should I change this now?

For the Vikings this would be quite historically accurate at the Fort-level I think(considering the forts Fyrkat, Trelleborg etc. in Denmark). Here a Viking king will be able to raise spearmen with proper formation and rank-bonus, light cavalry and archers(although the vikings often used the bow in earlier battles, it was not used in ordered formations recognizable as "units").
All these units should make the infantry heavy viking army more balanced, and more capable at facing cavalry strong armies.

A second level "spearmaker"-type building would then either give a valour bonus or a better unit. In the viking case, this would be the Keep-level, which will be the highest in our mod.

This thinking is fully adoptable to baltic tech trees. Altougth the fort
level is really divided to two (Village+Hill Fort and
Fortified Village+Stone Towers) , and the last keep level
stands as one (Stone Bastion+Kings Keep).

Not really ~D . Just joking. I think I understand, and I also do think you have a point. However, I also think the gains(better AI, less modding) of making the tech-tree "my way" outweight the disadvantages.

Anyway, it will still take some time before this will actually be implemented, so how about we leave this for now and I continue making the tech-tree and see how it works? If it needs more adjusting, like more buildings, we add them ok?

I'll have to bend on this. If not for the fact that i'm obstructing the possibility
of "ready mod for december", and the fact that i'm doing it alone, and i'm
not in place to decide on others work burdens. So here after I will not
pursue this issue again. (Excluding all after release fixes and rtw mods)

wilpuri

10-25-2004, 15:35

To have a beta version of FotN by Christmas would be an excellent christmas present ~:cheers:

thrashaholic

10-26-2004, 08:42

Hi all, sorry I haven't posted lately, I've just been incredibly busy starting at college and they're piling the work on thick, I haven't had any spare time to speak of, but it's nice to see that things have been ticking over here though (plenty of discussion about Finland as usual ~;) ).

This week I've got a half-term holiday, so I'll try and get the Welsh tech-tree and all that sorted by the end of the week. I've already made a map of all the British provinces, there are less than in VI, but not many less, and the ones that are there are IMO more reflective of the time. I feel many things like the positions and names of castles and ports can be lifted straight from VI, but I have made a few corrections where they were required.

Anyway, if there are no objections, I shaln't post the map yet, I'll put it all in one big bundle once I've finished everything else.

~:cheers:

Norseman

10-26-2004, 09:38

I've ordered the following books from Osprey:
MAA "Saxon, Viking and Norman", MAA "The Age of Charlemagne", Fortress "Fortifications in Wessex 800-1066" and "Hastings 1066 (Revised Edition)".

Hopefully I'll be able to glean some usefull information from them.

Yes this is pretty much how it is. However the finns have lots of tribal
level units and they would get strong armies from just one building. And
this is the part i'm worried about. We could just go along with very
simple tech trees and less work. And later make FotN2 Mod with
more complex tech tree (mayby to RTW).

Well, everything will be balanced in the end, including the finnish tribal units. Some may be moved to higher tech-levels, as the first 3 castle-levels is really all tribal(for now at least). If that's not enough, we'll play a bit with the stats.

As for making a FotN2 for RTW; that will have to be without me. I've decided that modding takes too much time, and that I won't attempt to learn how to mod Rome. However I of course like the thought... ~:)

At the moment theres 3 buildings in baltic tech tree. The two that you
just described and one for enabling tribal units. Should I change this now?

No, don't bother. I think I have what I need to put something together for now. Later, when we see more clearly what we need, we'll fix it.

I'll have to bend on this. If not for the fact that i'm obstructing the possibility
of "ready mod for december", and the fact that i'm doing it alone, and i'm
not in place to decide on others work burdens. So here after I will not
pursue this issue again. (Excluding all after release fixes and rtw mods)

I appreciate your suggestions and effort SS, and I also agree with some of your points regarding the tech-tree. You've done an excellent job together with Wilpuri.

However, if I'm ever going to get this mod finished(and I really want to see it finished) I think we need to aim at simplisity until we get something working.
I also think the AI benefits from this. Duke John said this very well in his newly started Sengoku Jidai RTW mod:

Techtree
Before someone gets the wrong idea. This mod will NOT feature a techtree as we know it from M:TW or R:TW. It will be very simple. Units will not gain valour at higher level buildings and will not gain bonuses from buildings. This is done to take away as many possible advantages over the AI from the player. The AI is never as good as a human, I don't see a reason to help the player further.

I'm not saying the FotN Tech-tree should be quite that simple, but I do agree with his basic point.
~:cheers:

Norseman

10-26-2004, 12:32

Anyway, if there are no objections, I shaln't post the map yet, I'll put it all in one big bundle once I've finished everything else.

No objections thrashaholic! ~;)

To have a beta version of FotN by Christmas would be an excellent christmas present

Indeed it would. I'm afraid it will have to be a very basic one, if I manage to get something finished before christmas. What I'm working on is a temporary adoption of the original VI map, just to see that the tech-tree is working.

~:cheers:

wilpuri

10-26-2004, 13:35

Hi all, sorry I haven't posted lately, I've just been incredibly busy starting at college and they're piling the work on thick, I haven't had any spare time to speak of, but it's nice to see that things have been ticking over here though (plenty of discussion about Finland as usual ~;) ).
Well you can expect that to be kept at a minimum from now on, since the research over the Baltic and Finland has been pretty much summed up. The "summary" the long post by me some posts upwards. Sorry if we've bored you to death, it just that this forum is an excellent place to post the information for everyone to see and make the decisions ~:)

Anyway, if there are no objections, I shaln't post the map yet, I'll put it all in one big bundle once I've finished everything else.

Looking froward to it!
~:cheers:

Sebastian Seth

10-26-2004, 15:49

@Norseman - Ok, here is the latest version of baltic tech tree:

http://www.geocities.com/siidon/FotN/BalticTechTree.xls

It's exel sheet. the offices arent correct but you can do without
them. I'll stop updating it from now on.

@Wilpuri

I tried to draw the finnish battle maps. And here are some things i noticed:

The island forts where very easy to make but the game limits the numbers
of bridges to two or three. So the entrances will probably be small.

The map making program draws trees as objects and there seems to be
some limits in the number of them. So the forrests will not be as thick.

Lakes and rivers are easy to make.

Hill forts are easy to make.

wilpuri

10-26-2004, 18:51

@Wilpuri

I tried to draw the finnish battle maps. And here are some things i noticed:

The island forts where very easy to make but the game limits the numbers
of bridges to two or three. So the entrances will probably be small.

The map making program draws trees as objects and there seems to be
some limits in the number of them. So the forrests will not be as thick.

Lakes and rivers are easy to make.

Hill forts are easy to make.

May be we shouldn't use Island forts? My original idea was, that we would have the fort on a hill, which is on small peninsula, and it has a narrow isthmus leading to it, so it can only be approached from one side. I've seen pictures of these, one them being from my book, the hill fort of Pisamalahti. They were great since they would guard the water ways as well as provide natural protection. The Hill is so steep, that it is not scalable from the side of the water. What do you think? Bridges just sound silly, I mean what's the point of having an Island fort and providing easy access via bridge?
Just my thoughts.

EDIT: I found a drawing that conveys the point: http://hyl.edu.hel.fi/sivut/rostela/historia/linnavuori/linnavuori.JPG

Sebastian Seth

10-27-2004, 11:31

Removed... Not mod related...

Meneldil

10-28-2004, 08:06

I'm currently drawing a map with provinces that could be used for Russians states and Eastern Franks, but I'm looking for the faction list, and I can't find it (I'd like to know what are the russian factions). Could anyone forward it to me ?

wilpuri

10-28-2004, 20:12

Meneldil, IIRC, the "Russian" factions are Novgorod and Kievan Rus. I'm pretty sure about that-I'll try to find the list for you.

EDIT: Here it is: https://forums.totalwar.org/vb/showpost.php?p=584669&postcount=522

Meneldil

10-29-2004, 10:04

Ok, here's some space for info about russia, once I have time to write about it (I'm currently drawing a map with provinces and cities, but with paint, it looks kinda ugly and not really accurate :embarassed: )

Meneldil

10-29-2004, 20:58

Here's the final spaceholder for Western Franks faction :

The map (1) (http://www.image-dump.com/view.php?m=1&x=21186)

The map (with cities) (http://www.image-dump.com/view.php?m=1&x=21187)

Province list :

1 - Brittany
City : Nantes
Owner : Rebels
Landscape : Coastal
Rebeliousness : Very high
Architecture : European

2 - Normandy
City : Rotomagus (Rouen)
Owner : Western Franks
Landscape : Coastal
Rebeliousness : Low (well, it could be normal, but I think the viking player should not have big problems dealing with this Province, for obvious historical reasons)
Architecture : European

3 - Maine
City : Le Mans
Owner : Western Franks
Landscape : Plains
Rebeliousness : Normal
Architecture : European

4 - Neustria
City : Aureliani (Orléans)
Owner : Western Franks
Landscape : Rivers
Rebeliousness : Normal
Architecture : European

5 - Flandria
City : St Valery
Owner : Western Franks or Rebels
Lanscape : Coastal
Rebeliousness : High
Architecture : European

6 - Toungrie
City : Possibly Vergdunum (Verdun)
Owner : Western Franks
Landcape : Woodland
Rebeliousness : Normal
Architecture : European

PS : My map is not that accurate, since it doesn't show rivers, so if you can find a better one, I'll give draw you a better one. This province shouldn't be there exactly. If I can't find another map, I'll re-draw this one later.

7 - Toxandrie
City : Possibly Colonia
Owner : Western Franks/Rebels
Landscape : Rivers
Rebeliousness : High
Architecture : European

PS : Same thing as the last province.

8 - Champagne
City : Aquisgranum (Aix la Chapelle)
Owner : Western Franks
Landscape : Flat
Rebeliousness : Normal
Architecture : European

PS : As above :-P

9 - Ile de France
City : Lutetia (Paris)
Owner : Western Franks
Landscape : Rivers
Rebeliousness : Very low (can't be attacked anyway)
Architecture : European

PS : Once again, blabla, not really accurate

10 - Frisia
City : No idea yet
Owner : Western Franks/Eastern Franks/Rebels ?
Landscape : Rivers
Rebeliousness : High
Architecture : European

11 - Westfala
City : No idea yet
Owner : Western/Eastern Franks
Architecture : European
Landscape : Flat
Rebeliousness : Normal

Also, what do you mean by 'culture' ? Is it related to a faction, or are you able to create as many cultures as you want ?

Western/Eastern Franks army list:

Here’s an army list for both Frankish factions :

I made this list with both my Warhammer ancient battle – shieldwall army list and my Osprey book – French medieval armies 1000-1300. The second one is often out of the timeframe, and almost all the units listed here are from the WHB – shieldwall book.
I’ve added some units that could be recruited as mercenaries (Stipendarii, Italian crossbowmen, though there could be many more like Basque warriors, Spanish jinetes, welsh auxiliaries, or cottereaux) and some province restricted units (Flemish spearmen, Breton devroet and Norman units).
I was thinking about adding a few other units like ‘Men of the Marches’ (a kind of crusader knight unit), Paladins (King Charlemagne’s best knights), a French and a German Knight and a kind of heavy axemen (who used francista), but since Franks aren't playable, I guess they are not needed.
Another thing is that my english is *far* from perfect, and sorry for any inconvenience like typo, grammatical errors and things like that.

Comes: Comes were part of the higher Frankish nobility, they were the king’s most important vassals. What distinguished them from the other members of the nobility was that they had their own vassals, loyal to them personally. When a Comes was granted land by the King, his part of the deal was that he would bring a certain number of knights to the battlefield when summoned. They were often used as the king’s elite bodyguards, or were asked to lead batailles (battlefield divisions) during important battles.

Units of 15 men
Armed with spears
Armoured
Irresistible charge
High moral
Impetuous
May charge without orders

Milites: Milites are the backbones of Frankish armies. They are fearsome warriors, and as cavalrymen, their skills are only matched by the Katraphraktoi and by the Normans knights.
Like many other knights, their arrogance might sometimes be a problem, and might aswell lead them in dangerous situations.

Unit of 40 men
Elite unit
Armed with spears
Armoured
Large shield
Irresistible charge
High moral
Impetuous
May charge without orders
May dismount before battle

http://www.image-dump.com/view.php?m=1&x=19258

Milites pedites: While they mostly fight as heavy cavalry, Milites are sometimes dismounted and used as heavy infantry. Though they may not be as effective as mounted Milites, they are a very effective heavy infantry. Protected by heavy armours and large shields, and armed with swords and axes, they are probably the best infantry a Frankish king could lead to the battle.

Unit of 40 men
Bonus vs. armoured troops
Elite unit
Armoured
Large shield
High moral
Impetuous
May charge without orders
Slow

http://www.image-dump.com/view.php?m=1&x=19257

Pueri: Pueri are light cavalry, mostly used to scout out the enemy positions and troop strengths, as well as to take care of skirmishers and light infantry. Unlike milites, pueri aren’t part of the high nobility, but rather poor knights or squires.

Unit of 40 men
Powerful charge
Armed with throwing spears
Missiles effective against armour
Fast

Liberi: Liberi are lesser warriors. Though they can stand a fight against more professional warriors, they are mainly used to make the number, and to support the heavy Frankish cavalry during long fights (which was unlikely to happen, since the Milites’ charge was often enough to break the enemy). Liberi usually use spears and shields or bows.

Liberi (spearmen):
Unit of 100 men
Powerful charge
Armed with spears
Large shield
Weak attack
Weak defence
Effective against cavalry
Can fight on 2 ranks

http://www.image-dump.com/view.php?m=1&x=19256

Liberi (archers):
Unit of 66 men
Good attack
Weak defence
Poor moral

http://www.image-dump.com/view.php?m=1&x=19255

Coloni: Coloni are nothing else than quickly-trained peasants. They are not really good at fighting, but they can form a cheap and useful militia in times of need.

Same thing as peasants from MTW

Here are some Normans, Britons and Flemish special units:

Norman Milites: Norman knights are probably the finest cavalry of the era. They learnt how to use lance when fighting as mercenaries for the Byzantines, but unlike Byzantine cavalry who used to charge at a brisk trot, Normans usually enter the fight at the highest speed possible, wreaking havoc in their enemy’s ranks, which usually lead to a quick victory.

Unit of 40 men
Armed with spears
Irresistible charge
High moral
Elite unit
Large shield
Heavily armoured
Impetuous
May charge without orders

http://www.image-dump.com/view.php?m=1&x=19259

PS: The use of the cavalry lance + high speed charge was probably not used before the mid/late 10th century, so I don’t know if they should have the irresistible charge. It’s up to you, though I think it would make Norman knights a nice unit.

Norman infantry (I have no idea if this unit is totally correct, but I know that while Franks were sometimes warring with cavalry armies only, Normans were rather using both infantry and cavalry, so I think it might be a good idea): Unlike franks who were mostly relying on their heavy cavalry and on their archers, Normans used both infantry and cavalry to win battles. Norman, having blood from both Vikings and franks, can form a superb infantry, a good combination of Frankish warfare and Vikings warlike.

Unit of 100 men
Armoured
Strong charge
High moral
Elite unit
Large shield
Impetuous
May charge without orders
Bonus vs. armoured troops

Devroet: Devroet means literally Breton exile. Whereas Brittany wasn’t actually a part of the Frankish empire, Britons were often used in both Normans and Frankish armies. They are famous for their horsemanship and are used as an effective medium cavalry, used to support heavier cavalry or infantry, or to rout enemy skirmishers or light infantry.

Unit of 40 men
Armed with spears and javelins
Very strong charge
Missiles effective vs. armoured troops
Good moral

Flemish spearmen: The county of Flanders is nominally a part of the Western Frank Empire. In fact, the county was often warring against the French king, and quickly became a semi-independent province. To protect Flanders from attacks from both Normans and Frankish armies, Flemish lords had to train professional warriors, which could defend themselves against the heavy cavalry they often had to fight. Those warriors were also often hired as mercenaries in west Europe.

Unit of 100 men
Armed with spears
Large shields
Very effective against cavalry
Powerful charge
Good moral
Good defence

Stipendarii: Mercenary knights are often recruited from all over north-west Europe, as well as Spain and Italy. Stipendarii is the name of those mercenary groups, often composed of fallen knights, fighting sometimes for glory, and often for money. These skilled warriors spend their time fighting for wealthy lords and kings and are a good and reliable cavalry, as well as an effective medium infantry.

Mounted stipendarii:
Unit of 60 men
Armed with spears
Fast
Powerful charge
Bonus versus armoured troop
Poor moral

Stipendarii pedites:
Unit of 60 men
Good attack
Bonus versus armoured troops
Poor moral

A pic that could be used for Stipendarii, though it's supposed to be a spanish mercenary knight from the XIIIth century :
http://www.image-dump.com/view.php?m=1&x=19463

Italian crossbowmen: Italian crossbowmen are considered as the best long range infantry a Christian lord could hire. Crossbow is a fearsome weapon that can easily kill a man in a single shot, and unlike long and composite bows, it can be used effectively after a few days of training. One thing is certain; mercenaries from Italia are famous for their use of the crossbow.

Unit of 60 men
Good attack
Long range
Weak defence
Slow rate of fire
Slow
Bonus vs. armoured troop
Poor moral

PS: I did not find any source mentioning Italian crossbowmen mercenaries before the late 10th century as well. Once again, it’s up to you if you want to add them or not.

29/09/2004
Here's a map of Normandy (about 1100 AD, but that's the only one I found so far)

http://www.image-dump.com/view.php?m=1&x=19456

Here's another one of the merovingian empire (it might be more accurate).

http://www.image-dump.com/view.php?m=1&x=19458

Another cool map :

http://www.culturalresources.com/images/maps/CharlemagneBig.jpg

PPPPPPPPPS (or something like that anyway) : Got the Age of Charlemagne Osprey Book, will have a look at it after putting info about dark age russia.

thrashaholic

10-30-2004, 11:44

Righty ho,

Heres a map depicting all the British regions:

province map (http://www.image-dump.com/view.php?m=1&x=21372)

Province: Orcades
Culture: Celtic
Faction: Picts
Landscape: Flat
Resources etc.: Whalebone
Rebelliousness:medium

Province: Cat
Culture: Celtic
Faction: Picts
Landscape: Mountainous
Resources etc.: Quarries
Rebelliousness:medium

Province: Domon
Culture: Celtic
Faction: Picts
Landscape: Hilly
Resources etc.: Whalebone
Rebelliousness:medium

Province: Sci
Culture: Celtic
Faction: Scots
Landscape: Mountainous
Resources etc.: Quarries,Fish
Rebelliousness:medium

Province: Ce
Culture: Celtic
Faction: Picts
Landscape: Mountainous
Resources etc.: Quarries
Rebelliousness:medium

Province: Fidach
Culture: Celtic
Faction: Picts
Landscape: Mountainous
Resources etc.: Quarries
Rebelliousness:medium

Province: Dal Raida
Culture: Celtic
Faction: Scots
Landscape: Mountainous
Resources etc.: Quarries
Rebelliousness:medium

Province: Circind
Culture: Celtic
Faction: Picts
Landscape: Hilly
Resources etc.: Iron,Silver,Textiles
Rebelliousness:medium

Province: Rheged
Culture: Celtic
Faction: Rebels
Landscape: Hilly
Resources etc.: Copper,Mead
Rebelliousness:very high

Province: Goddodin
Culture: Anglo-Saxon
Faction: Northumbria
Landscape: Hilly
Resources etc.: Fish
Rebelliousness:low

Province: Cumbri
Culture: Celtic
Faction: Rebels
Landscape: Hilly
Resources etc.: Copper,Wood
Rebelliousness:high

Province: Bernicia
Culture: Anglo-Saxon
Faction: Northumbria
Landscape: Hilly
Resources etc.: Mead,Honey
Rebelliousness:low

Province: Ynys Manaw
Culture: Celtic
Faction: Rebels
Landscape: Hilly
Resources etc.: Iron
Rebelliousness:medium

Province: Elmete
Culture: Anglo-Saxon
Faction: Northumbria
Landscape: Hilly
Resources etc.:Iron,Wood
Rebelliousness:low

Province: Deiria
Culture: Anglo-Saxon
Faction: Northumbria
Landscape: Flat
Resources etc.: Antler
Rebelliousness:low

Province: Gwynedd
Culture: Celtic
Faction: Welsh
Landscape: Mountainous
Resources etc.: Copper,Quarries,Wood
Rebelliousness:medium

Province: Pec Saeten
Culture: Anglo-Saxon
Faction: Mercia
Landscape: Flat
Resources etc.: Copper,Wood
Rebelliousness:low

Province: Powys
Culture: Celtic
Faction: Welsh
Landscape: Mountainous
Resources etc.: Silver,Quarries,Wood
Rebelliousness:medium

Province: Mierce
Culture: Anglo-Saxon
Faction: Mercia
Landscape: Flat
Resources etc.: Iron
Rebelliousness:low

Province: Lindissi
Culture: Anglo-Saxon
Faction: Mercia
Landscape: Flat
Resources etc.: Fish
Rebelliousness:low

Province: Dyfed
Culture: Celtic
Faction: Welsh
Landscape: Hilly
Resources etc.: Gold,Wood
Rebelliousness:medium

Province: Gwent
Culture: Celtic
Faction: Welsh
Landscape: Mountainous
Resources etc.: Iron,Quarries,Wood
Rebelliousness:high

Province: Hwicce
Culture: Anglo-Saxon
Faction: Mercia
Landscape: Flat
Resources etc.: Iron
Rebelliousness:low

Province: Middel Seaxe
Culture: Anglo-Saxon
Faction: Mercia
Landscape: Flat
Resources etc.: Good Farmland
Rebelliousness:low

Province: Middel Engle
Culture: Anglo-Saxon
Faction: East Anglia
Landscape: Flat
Resources etc.: Good Farmland
Rebelliousness:low

Province: East Engle
Culture: Anglo-Saxon
Faction: East Anglia
Landscape: Flat
Resources etc.: Fish, Good Farmland
Rebelliousness:low

Province: Glastenig
Culture: Celtic
Faction: Wessex
Landscape: Flat
Resources etc.: Iron,Wool, Good Farmland
Rebelliousness:low

Province: West Seaxe
Culture: Anglo-Saxon
Faction: Wessex
Landscape: Hilly
Resources etc.: Good Farmland
Rebelliousness:low

Province: East Seaxe
Culture: Anglo-Saxon
Faction: Rebels
Landscape: Flat
Resources etc.: Good Farmland
Rebelliousness:medium

Province: Cernyw
Culture: Celtic
Faction: Welsh
Landscape: Hilly
Resources etc.: Tin,Quarries,Silver,Iron
Rebelliousness:medium

Province: Defnas
Culture: Celtic
Faction: Wessex
Landscape: Hilly
Resources etc.: Quarries,Copper,Iron, Good Farmland
Rebelliousness:medium

Province: Dornsaete
Culture: Anglo-Saxon
Faction: Wessex
Landscape: Flat
Resources etc.: Wool,Pottery,Good Farmland
Rebelliousness:low

Province: Suth Seaxe
Culture: Anglo-Saxon
Faction: Rebels
Landscape: Hilly
Resources etc.: Quarries,Good Farmland
Rebelliousness:low

Province: Cantia
Culture: Anglo-Saxon
Faction: Rebels
Landscape: Flat
Resources etc.: Pewter,Good Farmland
Rebelliousness:medium

Welsh Army List

Cavalry

Teulu-

Literally meaning “family”, the Teulu were the professional noble bodyguards of individual princes and chieftains. Although cavalry are generally not best suited to the rough hilly and mountainous terrain of Britain, the Teulu often rode into battle. Being of the nobility, the Teulu could afford the best of military equipment and were very well armed by Celtic standards: they wore chain mail and helmets, and carried a shield and a lance, making them a pivotal force on the battlefield.

Royal unit of 40 men
Strong charge
Very good Attack
Good Morale
Armoured
Can dismount before battle (…into Bonheddwr)
(Should be pretty expensive)

Helwyr (Huntsmen)-

The Welsh people were keen huntsmen and used the hunt to practice the skills needed in battle. There are numerous Welsh stories and poems linked with their passion for hunting, most notably the tale of Prince Llewelyn and his greyhound Gellert. To be a good huntsman meant a men could command a powerful role in the royal courts and society in general, and could become very rich. The Helwyr owned the fastest horses that could be afforded and equipped powerful bows, enabling them to kill the toughest of quarry, but very little close combat weaponry, thus should be kept out of melees.

20 man unit
Very Fast
Very good missile attack/ very accurate
Poor in close combat
Skirmishers
No armour

Infantry

Spear-men

Same as VI (round shield)

Celtic Warriors

Same as VI

Archers

Same as VI

Javelin-men

Same as VI “dart-men”

Merionydd long spear-men

The spear was the weapon of choice in Wales, with those from the North being particularly skilled in its use. The men of the Merionydd area of Gwynedd were renowned throughout for their superb ability with the spear. The general consensus amongst the Welsh was: “the longer the spear the better”, and as such the men of Merionydd carried spears as long as pikes. As well as their pikes, they had small round shields and fought in Phalanx-like formations.

60 man unit (best in deep formations etc.),
fast,
good defence
weak attack,
no armour
only available in Gwynydd

Ryfelwyr

Constant in fighting between the petty kingdoms of post-Roman Britain and skirmishes with the English led to the Britons becoming accustomed to war, they became a “jack of all trades”, perfectly suited to irregular warfare. Carrying a powerful bow, that could pin a horseman’s leg to his horse, a large sword and a small round shield, the prominent tactics of the Britons were to ambush the enemy, pepper them with arrows and then charge in for the kill.

60 man unit
fast
strong charge
good attack
no armour
poor morale

Can be mercenaries

Bonheddwyr

The Bonheddwyr were free nobles, the elite foot soldiers of a Chieftain’s armies. Before a battle these champions would often walk forward in front of their army insulting, taunting and challenging their opposition (much to the amusement of their fellows), and be accompanied by shouting and jeering from the lower ranking men, and the din of their war trumpets. The Bonheddwr were lightly armoured, and the individual carried a spear, a small round shield and several javelins into battle.

40 man unit
fast
strong charge
very good attack
good defence
armoured
good morale

Arwrweision

Literally mean ‘brave men’, the Arwrweision are the veterans of numerous battles, they are the non-noble elite of a British Chieftain’s army. It was considered an honour amongst Britons to be drafted into military service, so all able-bodied men had a weapon and were up for a fight. Carrying similar equipment to their fellow peasants: swords, bows and shields, the defining characteristic of the Arwrweision is that, although they share their comrade’s eagerness for battle, they are not so likely to run away when the going gets tough.

60 man unit
fast
strong charge
good attack
no armour
very good morale
impetuous

Can be mercenaries

There we go, if you have any questions ask away. I'll try and do a tech tree soon, I've got some ideas, but I'm going back to college on Monday and I bet they'll give me a huge amount of work just to get me back into the learning mood.

Norseman

10-31-2004, 19:44

thrashaholic & Meneldil, this is great. I'll take a closer look at it over the next few days.

thrashaholic, it looks like your "province map" link doesn't work.

~:cheers:

thrashaholic

11-01-2004, 09:11

thrashaholic & Meneldil, this is great. I'll take a closer look at it over the next few days.

thrashaholic, it looks like your "province map" link doesn't work.

~:cheers:

Fixed it now, cheers for letting me know ~:)

Radier

11-06-2004, 02:09

Hi everyone

I have been following this mod from the beginning and I love it...
But I have a question (just curious ~;) ).
Last summer I made a mod with over hundreds of new units with descriptions and so on, and I was going to change the unit graphics too, not only stats and so.. But to my disapointment one day some of my units just didn't work anymore ~:confused: . I quickly realized the game has a unitlimit..arrghh...
And I who thought of making many more than 200 units... I quit my work and threw it away... It was not good anyway...

But this mod is great but I wonder how big is the unitlimit?

Skål på er! ~:cheers:

Radier.

JR-

11-06-2004, 12:29

i take it this mod is unaffected by Rome's release? *hopes*

Norseman

11-06-2004, 13:38

But this mod is great but I wonder how big is the unitlimit?

Skål på er! ~:cheers:

Radier.

Hi there Radier, the unitlimit is 256 if I remember correctly. That includes all types of units in the unitprod; mounts+ships+agents+units+etc.=256

Skål! ~:cheers:

QUOTE=Peregrine_Tergiversate]

i take it this mod is unaffected by Rome's release? *hopes*[/QUOTE]

It is, at least as long as it is up to me to finish it. I've found out i really don't have much time for modding anymore, so trying to learn how to mod Rome as well would be too much. I'm still determined to finish this mod though based on MTW+VI, but it will have to take some time.

~:)

JR-

11-06-2004, 14:23

brilliant, keep plugging away. :D

Radier

11-06-2004, 14:49

thanks for letting me know Norseman... ~:) Stupid limit ~;)

How is the developement going? Are you guys making any progress now when you have done so much research?... I have seen some units for the french, english, welsch, russian, finns and baltics. But what about Denmark, Norway and Sweden? Have you done some research about their units? I have seen som norweigan units and it look very promising.

Radier.

PseRamesses

11-07-2004, 09:22

How is the developement going? Are you guys making any progress now when you have done so much research?... I have seen some units for the french, english, welsch, russian, finns and baltics. But what about Denmark, Norway and Sweden? Have you done some research about their units?
Hi Raider, nice to see a countryman in this forum. Norse has done much of the Nor/ Den-units and I´ve done the Swedes. Nothing, however, is stopping you from making suggestions or doing research in this area if you feel like it.

Radier

11-07-2004, 11:48

Well, good to hear a swede taking care of the swedish units ~;) But if you don't mind can you post the units you have come up with this far? I would gladely take a look at them.
~:cheers:

Radier.

PseRamesses

11-09-2004, 06:11

Well, good to hear a swede taking care of the swedish units ~;) But if you don't mind can you post the units you have come up with this far? I would gladely take a look at them.
My prob right now is the lack of time to put together all the material I have on this at the moment. But from the top of my head we´ll go with the basic viking line up; slings, archers, spears, swords and axes. I do have plans for introducing Sheildmaidens (sköldmör) due to their apperance in sagas, myths and documents from this time and the important role they played as key-units both as cheiftain-guards, elite-troops etc. They should take a while to produce (like berserkers), come in a small unit-size (12 or 24) and be a unique Swedish unit.
So, Raider, feel free to suggest/ research this any way you please and post it here. Good luck!

Radier

11-09-2004, 21:53

Sköldmör, the unmarried warriorwomen... Sounds interesting ~:) ...

Another myth unit was "Einhärjar". They were the fallen warriors who arrived to Valhall... That will say pretty good warriors. But there were only 800 of them..

When I have some time to spare I will gladely do some research of swedish units. And since you have done the "common" ones I will also look for some unique units, except the Sheildmaidens will say... if it is ok...

Radier.

wilpuri

11-09-2004, 22:21

I would be very interested in hearing a progress report! ~:)

Norseman

11-10-2004, 10:16

I would be very interested in hearing a progress report! ~:)

I'll do my best to rewrite the first post in this thread by the end of this week, and include status there.

wilpuri

11-15-2004, 16:00

Ok, I've updated the "Final Summary" thing, by getting the names and locations of most of the Baltic capitals and by updating the Baltic map.

Norseman

12-15-2004, 19:36

Wilpuri, tried to answer your pm, but your inbox is full

wilpuri

12-15-2004, 23:09

Wilpuri, tried to answer your pm, but your inbox is full
Sorry about that, forgot to empty it. Well, its empty now.

Sven Der Viking

12-17-2004, 14:27

Perhaps my coming is late, but i am curious about the units your going to have in this mod. The Swedes and Scots are the main focus on my question. I am half swedish, half scotch, and naturally i want to ask what units these factions are going to have. The swedes from what i hear were somewhat a mix of viking/rus cultures that were somewhat different from norse and danish vikings. As for the scots please make some highland clansmen that have good morale, for the "highland charge" was really left out in the Total War game. ~:cheers:

Sven Der Viking

12-25-2004, 23:48

Holy shit, is this thread dead or something??? So much for loyalty to the kinsman. Sheesh

PseRamesses

12-26-2004, 16:39

Holy shit, is this thread dead or something??? So much for loyalty to the kinsman. Sheesh

No it ain´t dead and there´s no need to be insolent, offended or rude. I belive is not a good way to get any answers, do you?

PseRamesses

12-26-2004, 16:55

This is what I´ve been up to:

I´ve been reading and researching the following books
for data relevant to the mod:
1. All Icelandic sagas relevant to Scandinavia
2. Saxo Grammaticus
3. Tacitus
4. Ibn xxx (don´t remember name) report on the Rus
5. Olaus Magnus 1100 page report on the Scandinavian tribes.

I´ve also bought several hard to come by and expensive books:
1. Nordiska Gudar & Hjältar
2. Väringarnas stridskonst
3. Vikingar i Österled
4. Ett ödestigert vikingatåg
5. Väringar
6. Rusernas Rike
7. Götarnas riken
8. Svitjod – Resor till Sveriges ursprung

Sorry for the language but most of the crew is from Scandinavia. I´ve also bought, installed and extracted useful info, shields etc from a game called Svea Rike III that might be useful to us.

I don´t know about the rest of the crew but since I´m busy doing my thing and Norse is doing the tech-tree etc I guess the rest is playing RTW or something. Haven´t heard from anyone, except Norse, in a while. Haven´t had time for playing it myself although I bought it when it came out. Played VH´s XL a couple of weeks back and sent him a report on things in need of change.

Anyway, I wish you all a very Happy New Year and send a wish of a FotN-release within an acceptable timeframe. Take care everyone!

Sven Der Viking

12-26-2004, 18:50

PseRamesses

12-27-2004, 12:39

Sorry about my rudeness, dude. But hey we Heavy Metal Goths, can't always be perfect right? My apologies to Ramses and the rest of his Scandinavian Kin i forgot my manners. After all one day i hope to move to sweden from these here United States just to be neutral. Too many wars here, and losing my cousin doesn't help me support the war in iraq. See yah around Vikings. Hey a quick question, i'm doing a magazine report on tradtional clothing and customs, do any of you scandinavians think viking culture still resides within your modern countries traditonal sides or are the legacy of the vikings completley dead? Thanks your first person perspective would really help.

SdV, apology accepted and no hard feelings. When it comes to the viking clothing heritage I do belive that there are no remains in every day life. In Sweden though we have traditinal folklore clothing for each county and some atrefacts there are very old like belts, bags, hats etc. The viking heritage is more visable when it comes to names, places and words for certain things. Maybee you´ll find something here: (although it portrays the viking heritage found in modern day England)http://www.ling.upenn.edu/~kroch/scand/scand-frames.html

wilpuri

12-28-2004, 01:07

I don´t know about the rest of the crew but since I´m busy doing my thing and Norse is doing the tech-tree etc I guess the rest is playing RTW or something. Haven´t heard from anyone, except Norse, in a while. Haven´t had time for playing it myself although I bought it when it came out. Played VH´s XL a couple of weeks back and sent him a report on things in need of change.

I'm watching, quietly, waiting for news of progress ~:)

Sven Der Viking

12-29-2004, 06:09

I appreciate your help with my magazine report! I was thinking to myself while i was writing my article that the Everyday Scandinavian within his geanealogy (spelling?) or bloodlines, must retain that barbarian like warfare connection to the vikings. What i'm saying is if scandanavian countries were to amass great armies, and fight with that valour i think still retains in their blood, they probably still have that battle hardness about them. Take the Finns, they womped the russians early in the Finno Russian winter war, except when the russians gave them the final human horde tactic. My point is i think scandinavian countries, although masked by their conversion to christianity retain the hardiness about them that was what the vikings where. After all the few Great scandinavian Commanders Such as Gustavus Adolphus the second proved small armies with the sense of elitness can get the job done, with the resources at hand. I think most scandinavians would agree, as i am complimenting them.

PseRamesses

12-29-2004, 12:56

I was thinking to myself while i was writing my article that the Everyday Scandinavian within his geanealogy (spelling?) or bloodlines, must retain that barbarian like warfare connection to the vikings. What i'm saying is if scandanavian countries were to amass great armies, and fight with that valour i think still retains in their blood, they probably still have that battle hardness about them. My point is i think scandinavian countries, although masked by their conversion to christianity retain the hardiness about them that was what the vikings where. After all the few Great scandinavian Commanders Such as Gustavus Adolphus the second proved small armies with the sense of elitness can get the job done, with the resources at hand.
I seriously doubt that. All the ingrediances that made Scandinavian great during the viking era, GAII´s and Karl XII´s rule, the Finnish resistance no longer exist and I do belive that we´re too lazy and comfortable nowdays.

I think most scandinavians would agree, as i am complimenting them.
Well it´s nice of you to do so but I do belive you´re threading on thin ice here beliving that the battle hardiness still resides within the Scandinavians. However I do feel that we all would like it to be so, he he! Good luck with your article and a Happy New Year Sven!

Briscolone

12-29-2004, 19:45

i know for sure there´s still some of that old blood greed within you northern folks even today...all you have to do is spend a summer vacation in spain, you´ll see them figthing for BEER ~D

PseRamesses

12-29-2004, 21:04

i know for sure there´s still some of that old blood greed within you northern folks even today...all you have to do is spend a summer vacation in spain, you´ll see them figthing for BEER ~D

Welcome to the Guild Briscolone, your first post and already comming at me with horns blazing... great spirit! Then you should see my countrymen at a sale or an auction... talk about guts and glory, he he!

wilpuri

12-30-2004, 03:32

Finland isn't part of scandinavia, mate ~;)
But when it comes to beer (or anything with alcohol really), I think we surpass our Scandinavian friends- The Finnish love for alcohol is the kind of stuff legends are made of. ~:cheers:

JR-

01-08-2005, 13:37

any chance of a progress update?

Sebastian Seth

01-14-2005, 03:06

Removed... Not mod related...

Sebastian Seth

01-26-2005, 14:31

I grown so tired of RTW that im really waiting for release now.

wilpuri

01-26-2005, 16:02

I grown so tired of RTW that im really waiting for release now.
So am I, but it's slow going.

PseRamesses

02-22-2005, 02:46

So am I, but it's slow going.

Hi ya all. Well it´s not going anywhere at the moment actually. My old PC gave up on me in the beginning of January. I bought a new one, really good stats but it kept crashing, yes you read right. Suddenly it turned itself of and rebooted and no pattern or explainable solution was found. I returned it to the store but they started hassling me about the reason for it malfunctioning and blame me, ME???? I just brought it home plugged in the power and installed RTW, MTW and STW on it, so what did I do wrong? So now I sit here wit a PC that keeps crashing and wont get a refund. I´ve actually started a law-suit against the shop but this week I learned that they have gone out of business - can you belive that! It only took me some 4 months of hard work 60-80 hr work-weeks, to save up to a new PC and this is what I get?

I still have my mailaccount and check it a couple of times now that my girlfriend has a laptop that she bings over now and then. Keep in touch guys, I personally haven´t given up on FotN yet. Haven´t heard from Norse in a couple of months, anyone?

Age

03-07-2005, 09:27

Where do you get this mod from although I haven't read throught the entire thread as I am on several mostly to do with Trek gaming?It sound like good mod from what I read so far.I am just the new kid on the block around here.

Daithi MacGuillaCathair

04-21-2005, 13:31

ive only read as far as page 14 of this thread, due to a facr i gota do my bloody thesus, but if you still need help with an Irish faction(s) i can help out if you want, as im a student of this period of history, and am actually dopiong my thseus on the viking city of Limerick (in ireland)

Daithi MacGuillaCathair

04-21-2005, 13:32

oops sorry for poor spelling, in a rush

tutankamon

05-24-2005, 10:36

Sounds like a great mod the more about the vikings the merrier ~;) but where can i download it ~:confused:

PseRamesses

05-24-2005, 12:15

Sounds like a great mod the more about the vikings the merrier ~;) but where can i download it ~:confused:
You can´t since it´s not finished. And judging on the lack of interest and work currently being done I seriously don´t think that this mod will ever see the light of day unfortunately. Personally I´d have loved to see this concept on the RTW engine though.

Ianofsmeg16

06-30-2005, 16:42

how bout including the manx? we have a viking...sorry...norse parliment y'know? the oldest parliment in the world...we have to be important

Lord Liendecker

07-30-2005, 20:29

Hey PSERamsses,

I just read this thread and im fascinated. This would be a great mod. Ive been interested in making my own mods myself but im stuck on how to make a startegy map. I was wondering if anyone has heard of or gotten a sucessful coppy of LukMapMaker or Hedge'sMTWEditor. Theyre supposed to be really helpful but i havent been able to install them successfully.

I only read the first bit of your thread cause its so long. But it sounds like youve decided pretty much on what the map looks like. And what countrys to have. If youve completed the maps by now id love to have them at least.

It sounds to me like this mod has plenty of research and planning put into it, regardless of little inacuracies like the names of kings. If we could simply program what we have planned so far im sure it would be good enought to post online. If the problems really bothered anyone they could fix it themselves and make later versions. Considering this mod has been in the making since 03 and you probably want a break from it.

Id like to talk to you on messanger if possible: sir_breunor@hotmail.com
and i live in Pacific Time US and Canada. Contact me if you can, i sent you an email. Preferably before the end of August of this year (but anytime's better than no time).

The txt programing is pretty simple and id love it if you could help me make a strategy map if you could find the time.
As for me, I dont know how to make them or apply them to the scripting, but id love to learn. if it wouldnt be too much trouble for you. I think it would be much easier to work on this through MSN Messanger.

Hope to see you soon,
Lord Liendecker

PS: dont short the Russian and eastern Baltic provinces, even if theyre all rebels. It would be fascinating to play Vikings vs Russians but there woudl have to be plenty of rebel provinces to conquer. But try to have at least 1 Russian faction that can be played. Make certain rebels have plenty of military so they're as independent as posible, and have at least 25/200 Russian provinces/total. (limit of factions can be made up by amount of provices available to take.) Units dont have to be too unique, since they're fairly easy to create, but too time consuming for this project to worry about right now.

PseRamesses

07-31-2005, 13:22

tutankamon

09-15-2005, 16:32

First, as I´ve posted before, this mod is at a complete standstill. Secondly, there´s a viking-mod for the RTW engine so you might wanna check it out in the forum. Thirdly, in the guides section you have all the guides you´ll need to make your own mod and/ or map. As for including the "Russians" they´re not around for the timeframe of the mod so they´re not included. Other facs in this rrgion is however, read the posts. If you need more info contact me at pse@brevet.se - good luck!

Hey PseRamesses I study arkeology in Denmark and i was wondering if you have any interest in doing more with this mod? If so I would love to help!!! it's about time we had a Viking Mod ~:cheers: Although I have no experience in scripting or graphics maiking, I can help with anything from Skins to the material and social-history.... I personally like M:TW more than R:TW so i hope this mod can get somewhere ~D

PseRamesses

09-15-2005, 22:44

Hey PseRamesses I study arkeology in Denmark and i was wondering if you have any interest in doing more with this mod? If so I would love to help!!! it's about time we had a Viking Mod ~:cheers: Although I have no experience in scripting or graphics maiking, I can help with anything from Skins to the material and social-history.... I personally like M:TW more than R:TW so i hope this mod can get somewhere ~D
Likewise. I hate to see all that research go down the tube. So mail me at pse@brevet.se and we´ll see what we can muster together.
You might also wanna check out this mod in development:
https://forums.totalwar.org/vb/forumdisplay.php?f=106
It cover the old MTW-map so I wouldn´t call it a "viking-mod" but it´s the closest there is for the RTW engine.

tutankamon

09-18-2005, 10:29

Likewise. I hate to see all that research go down the tube. So mail me at pse@brevet.se and we´ll see what we can muster together.
You might also wanna check out this mod in development:
https://forums.totalwar.org/vb/forumdisplay.php?f=106
It cover the old MTW-map so I wouldn´t call it a "viking-mod" but it´s the closest there is for the RTW engine.

Yeah i have look at it but I'm not that impressed.. well they have a lot of nice graphics but almost all their units are historically incorrect. But what do we miss before we can go on in the making of this mod?

PseRamesses

09-19-2005, 12:40

Yeah i have look at it but I'm not that impressed.. well they have a lot of nice graphics but almost all their units are historically incorrect. But what do we miss before we can go on in the making of this mod?
Weather we go with the RTW-engine (which I prefer) or the MTW we still miss most of the time consuming work like the strat-map, units/ skins and other graphs. Been going through tons of material and research for the RTW-engine and the graphs, navigatable rivers, customable cities/ towns, customized battlefield buildings, formations-mod, almost unlimited strat map size, 200 provinces etc etc swings my flavour to making something on the RTW-platform.

tutankamon

09-19-2005, 16:43

Weather we go with the RTW-engine (which I prefer) or the MTW we still miss most of the time consuming work like the strat-map, units/ skins and other graphs. Been going through tons of material and research for the RTW-engine and the graphs, navigatable rivers, customable cities/ towns, customized battlefield buildings, formations-mod, almost unlimited strat map size, 200 provinces etc etc swings my flavour to making something on the RTW-platform.

Yeah you're right :bow: perhaps we should start with putting thogether all the data we have in a new thread in the RTW mod. subforum? it would make it a little bit easier to look at what we have to work with... If you like I can come up with some concept ideas to how the appearance of our buildings and units and so on could be

PseRamesses

09-20-2005, 11:46

Yeah you're right :bow: perhaps we should start with putting thogether all the data we have in a new thread in the RTW mod. subforum? it would make it a little bit easier to look at what we have to work with... If you like I can come up with some concept ideas to how the appearance of our buildings and units and so on could be
1. I´m not going to put in more work with this by compiling all data in a new RTW-thread since I don´t want to give the community the impression that we´ve revived FotN and thus putting false hopes into the hearts of our fellow gamers.
2. I require that you read the complete FotN thread. This will give you an idea what have been done, game parameters, research etc. Then get back to me either by PM or at my mail (above) since I don´t want to conduct a hypothetical discussion regarding FotN on the RTW-engine simply for the same reason as under 1.
3. Would be great to see your work and ideas and I´d be happy to continue this discussion with you on a more private channel, for now. In the FotN thread there are many suggested buildings and units so you´ll have some work to do there.

Let´s continue disussing by mail. I´ll contact the old crew and check their interest and some other guys I know and we´ll see what we come up with. There is one "Holy Graal" for me though..... IF we decide to make a FotN-mod for the RTW-engine everyone must run the distance. I will NOT tolerate yet another great mod grind to a standstill. So let me search for my "dirty dozen" and if you have any connections and know of a person that would make a significant contribution the please let me know. See ya soon!

naut

05-07-2006, 09:54

I think its a pity this never got finished! :shame:

It sounded so good, and yet it just trailed off ... oh well, I guess I'm saved from the Fury of the Norsemen.

PseRamesses

05-07-2006, 20:24

I think its a pity this never got finished! :shame:

It sounded so good, and yet it just trailed off ... oh well, I guess I'm saved from the Fury of the Norsemen.
I sadly agree. Check out AoVaF-mod for RTW though. It´s roughly the same timeperiod but covers more than northern Europe.