Will the Sweboz foreign AOR in Gallic territory be better in 1.1?

What I mean by better is, we will get maybe some Neitos, Spear Soldiers, and some light cavalry?


Maybe even a high tier Sweboz unit to show some Nobility moving into the new territory?

You will certainly move Sweboz nobility there yourself with your FMs as governors. Other well armoured units would be a bit odd because the Sweboz can't afford amour for their own men, how could they for subjugated folk?

Recruitment in Gaul isn't so bad at all: there are the factional spearmen, the excellent slingers and Leuce Epos. And there are the Alps: Teceitos, phalanx, swordfighters. In my Sweboz campaigns I usually recruite the bulk of the army from the Alps, what is also closer to the front both in Itlay and Gaul.

Only the situation in the Belgae lands could be better, given that those people had been very much mixed with Germans.

well the new Celto-Germanic cavalry will make expanding into Central European Celtic territories much more interesting. otherwise regional units are the only way to go- mostly because of historical reality during the timeframe.

On not being able to afford armour, well, they've expanded into Gaul, where you could find the best metalworking save Spain. Surely they'd be able to afford it now, with metal so much more available and hence cheaper according to the law of supply? One would think they'd be able to recruit their neitos/herthoz there.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by pezhetairoi

On not being able to afford armour, well, they've expanded into Gaul, where you could find the best metalworking save Spain. Surely they'd be able to afford it now, with metal so much more available and hence cheaper according to the law of supply? One would think they'd be able to recruit their neitos/herthoz there.

---

Iron was very much available in Central Germany and Sweden too. That should not have been the problem. Even though the mines in Sweden were not developed before the Middle Ages.

The Speutagardaz will be much cheaper what will allow for a better armoured infantry of the line. In the Alps you have the Appeas and Teceitos. So the situation isn't so bad as long as you don't run into full stacks Carnutes and Solduros.

Kinda makes you wonder what they did with the ore they mined? I mean, looking at what Gaul was able to become militarily, why didn't Germany become like that too equipment wise?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by pezhetairoi

Kinda makes you wonder what they did with the ore they mined? I mean, looking at what Gaul was able to become militarily, why didn't Germany become like that too equipment wise?

---

they were too busy dancing naked and playing in the mud??

Lack of wardogs.

I expect it was down to the fact that the Germans were more barbaric than the Gauls.

The more barbaric you are, the more warriors you have in your population - the people who use weapons and armour.

But the more civilised you are, the more skilled craftsmen you have - the people who MAKE weapons and armour.

Maybe the German men were too busy fighting and hunting (and enjoying the company of their women) to spend ages learning how make chainmail armour?

Also the early Germans weren't big on trade, so didn't have much gold in their treasuries, thus couldn't pay top whack for the best armourers.

I've heard that the Germanic tribes in those days were skilled metalworkers. I don't believe they were more barbaric. I personnaly don't find the Celts nor the Germanics to be barbaric.

I have a question for Blitzkrieg, as he seems to be the most informed on this subject. Is there any other source for giving the Germans so few armour and steel weapons (i.e. flint stone spears) other the Roman description?
I have only ever heard it in the Roman descriptions but I am by far not as informed as you are Blitz so maybe you have more information that I am lacking.

Greetings!

Every faction had skilled metalworkers.

The question is, how MANY skilled metalworkers did they have?

Did ALL their warriors have superb weapons and armour (Imperial Rome) or only the nobility and their elite bodyguards (Germans, Sarmatians)?

If the whole army is superbly equipped, you need a LOT of skilled armourers. If only the nobility, nowhere near as many (it's a lot easier and quicker to make arrowheads, spear tips and simple helmets, than longswords and chainmail armour.)

Hi there! ...



The ancient Germans were neither more barbaric nor good metal workers! (though the celts were "better" in economics, but also not good metal workers) ~:)
Don't believe so called "historians" from that period. Plutarch (I think he's been...) wrote that the Teutoni force in the battle against Marius was all over equipped with silver shining armor and this is total bullshit by far... :creep: The ancient German society was more "smooth" then the gallic one wich means that the differences between poor-rich or noble-common out of many different causes were nearly non-existent (for the Germans). The Gauls had their mighty, well equipped Warrior-Class and on the other hand's side the poor and choken commons while the Germans were a mix of both or more a thing between, taking the armour propre and fighting skill of the warrior class and the poorness of the commons! http://ugly.plzdiekthxbye.net/small/s000.gif



I didn't name all the important stuff but broadly it should be right. ~:P
All in all they (the Germans ~;)) were farmers who'd like a useful tool for their fields better than an armor that gives you a slight protection in battle for the simple reason that food is more important than an armor. The second thing is that (I read so, making me hate the Sweboz general unit)it was proscribed to wear body armor among them. Until the late time of the Völkerwanderung/big migration not a single armour peace that was made by Germans was found. :creep:







I hope I've read the right authors' books! http://ugly.plzdiekthxbye.net/small/s000.gif
Greetings, Aftzengeier! ~:)

Wouldn't there be a more opportunity for these heavy units to incorporate themselves in the Sweboz army as Gallic regions become more integrated with the Germanic culture. In other words wouldn't an increasing number Germanic units adopt the heavy metalworks that Gaul and Rome use when these Gallic and Italic territories/cultures are incorporated into Sweboz lands. Would this allow the technology to become more available to Germanic units. Also its not like Germans wouldn't move into their neighboring conquered regions. Why not make more Germanic units available in these territories?

Because that´s all speculative. I mean, what if the Sarmatians invaded the Po Valley, maybe they would adopt the Montefortino helmet, or what if the Kelts invaded India, there should be some Indokeltikoi units. I know, Eugeneis Indokeltoi Kataphraktoi Elephantes (Noble Indoceltic Armoured Elephants)!
There comes a point when the speculations and assumptions become to heavy. Of course, it´s up to the EB team to decide.

AFAIK the Germanic technology level suffered above all from a few structural problems. One, for the most part they were kind of dirt poor, which made reliance on simple, cost-effective and multipurpose gear like axes and spears very much an economic necessity, doubly so as the military backbone was the freeman levy who provided their own war gear. This was partly because the lands they'd been left with after the Celts took over the whole more temperate and fertile strip from Gaul along the Alps to the Pannonian plain were kind of second-rate backwaters nobody was terribly interested in. (AFAIK agriculture in the Northern Coniferous Zone only first really kicked off with the introduction of the heavy iron swing-plough capable of working the fertile but very heavy clay soil characteristic of those parts... in the Middle Ages.)

Two, the Celts had the best iron sources to begin with and could far better muster and marshal the resources needed to mine them. What the Germanics (and Scandinavians) had to make do with was for the most part bog iron - aggregate lumps literally hauled up from lake and bog deposits. While this was certainly a relatively cheap and plentiful source of iron, it had a wee bit of shortcoming - namely, the iron you got out of it wasn't exactly of world-famous quality. In fact AFAIK it frankly kinda sucked metallurgically. So the village smith wasn't going to get anything very impressive made out of it either, making sticking to "cheap & cheerful" - and above all simple, reliable and robust - tools economically a Very Good Idea.

The Scandinavans were still importing most of their longer swords in late Viking times, far as I know...

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Watchman

(AFAIK agriculture in the Northern Coniferous Zone only first really kicked off with the introduction of the heavy iron swing-plough capable of working the fertile but very heavy clay soil characteristic of those parts... in the Middle Ages.)

---

This is indeed how I have heard and read it throughout my many courses about European Civ and the Middle Ages.

No armor has been found made by Germans (how would you prove that if there is nothing for comparison?) during 272bc to Pre-Migration age, but not much armor has been found outside of some rare/random votive deposits. PERIOD. so that is not evidence in itself. various Germanic cognates have a word for 'bog iron' so i highly doubt that they did not have the ability to make armor (even if pathetic metallurgically)- especially after a little bit of imitation of Celtic techniques, but the construction of appropriate furnaces and the high amounts of resources needed to experiment with probably did not help the situation. I personally think mail is not that difficult of a concept that Germans looking at it and having some resources, would not be able to do it. the borrowing of many Celtic terms concerning military and metallurgy points to a superior cultural influence on the side of the Celts, but the very borrowing of those terms means they understood what it was and had use for those words- if they weren't using armor by choice, why have a word, eh? the richest Germans like Ariovistus would look very Celtic in that way... unfortunately, the model-space issue of RTW make the Germanic general look REALLY Celtic because it's a Celtic model ~:) doh! better than an Egyptian model, right? (nothing against Egyptians)

I agree that those sparse literary accounts which are available cannot be relied on too heavily and that Tacitus used the 'iron-poor' half truth as a motif (and this is widely accepted) to make them seem more like noble savages. Desserx, you asked about non-Roman sources but unfortunately there really aren't any except archaeological which support Roman statements- BUT I must add that the material evidence is such a small sampling of the population that it can't possibly mean much by itself. It is most likely that armor was rare, because of the loanwork traffic, material evidence and Roman literary sources, but the Middle Ages can help enlighten more on this (even though the time is far off) because even in the Middle Ages, part-time levies (such as Ælfredes fyrd) didn't get nice gear- despite greater resources and technology.

The Germanic peoples were NOT egalitarian. Not at all. Were the Germanic peoples highly stratified like the Romans? No, in that way, they are more egalitarian, but more egalitarian does NOT equal a lack of nobility or a lack of social stratification. agriculture by definition changes such societies. 'hoarding' and not being a proper 'ring-giver' was socially enforced in oral and other traditions, so I would agree that the Germans had a unique view of such practices during their Heroic Age. the Thing wasn't decided by equals either, if you consult Old Norse / Icelandic versions where the law-speakers, chiefs and important wisemen get to hold more sway, nonetheless decide what issues are raised- thus the infernal politics begin.

There is a Sweboz reform that makes armored horsemen and armored retainers buildable in Germanic homeland (well those within the Celtic trade sphere)- I think that reflects what you guys are talking about... I might add that in order to get the Reform the Sweboz must have acesss to a mountainous/metallurgical center in West/Central Europe, and 6 large markets in their homeland to simulate the trade / acess of wealth and resources theoretically possible... I don't know why Sweboz can't build Neitos though (game-wise).

basically, Rhineland iron / swords made from it have been highly desirable for a millenium or more, as Watchman states... those Vikings loved dem Frankish swords.

PS- the early Germans didn't farm so much- consider this especially in the context of no heavy plow... they fished, hunted and used livestock a lot more than people think! Pigs are a great source of nutrition considering they could be left wild in the forest (no work) and will propogate and taste good- Wurst anyone? :grin: The boar is so prevalent in Germanic religion and tradition because of this. You don't see a bull on the helmet or a rooster. Need protection in battle, look to Svein- need to pump out the babies? more Svein.

AFAIK mail is kinda "duh" level conceptually once you stumble upon it; the problem with it is that it takes a godawful lot of time to draw the wire, wind it into spirals, cut them into links and then join those together into what is essentially cloth made of iron. Only takes what, 20 - 30 thousand rings to make a decent-sized byrnie or thereabouts...

That's a lot of man-hours, and when you consider that an artifact's price was primarily a factor of the resources (skill, time etc.) invested in its manufacture...

I rather imagine the few folks wealthy or lucky enough to have aquired one rather passed it on than took it with them to the grave. It's not like it was an "iconic" part of a warrior's panoply like the shield and weapons and suchlike anyway, and you couldn't ritually "kill" it like you could a sword or suchlike - which had the added bonus of making the sword more or less worthless, which helped deter grave-robbing one imagines; not so with a mail coat.

Watchman is correct with the saying that germanics did not take their prized weapons or armour to the grave. The gave them instead to their sons or relatives for further use.
One other reason why no swords and armours had been found.

B.t.w we can be sure that Ariovist relied heavily on the smiths and armourers of the Raetians, a tribe he married into and was allied to.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by SaFe

Watchman is correct with the saying that germanics did not take their prized weapons or armour to the grave. The gave them instead to their sons or relatives for further use.
One other reason why no swords and armours had been found.

---

That would be the most reasonable explanation, given that Germany was the source for iron works for Central, Northern and Eastern Europe since the Middle Ages. And this also applied for regions like Westphalia that were never much Romanized or Celtizied. In fact Lübeck was founded to trade salt and products (mainly iron works) from Northern Germany with raw materials from Scandinavia and the Blatics, that became the base for the wealth of the Hanse.

It is hard to belive that the same people had only primitive smithworks during the Iron Age. And in return it would mean that the wealthy warriors were very well able to equipe them with chainmail, iron helmets and the like, even though there had been certainly fewer men been able to afford it than amongst the richer Celts.

Flat out poverty was the main reason, AFAIK. (The lack of expensive artifacts such as swords in graves sort of suggests the same - such were simply too valuable to be put away in most cases, as the living would've had a very hard time getting replacements.) Made it difficult to establish the kind of manufacturing infrastructure and market needed to support any meaningful numbers of craftsmen of sufficient skill. (Probably a little different along the Amber Route of course.) IIRC there were already in Late Roman times some advances in agricultural equipement which may have helped the northern woodlands support larger population concentrations than before, so that may be part of the difference.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by blitzkrieg80

I agree that those sparse literary accounts which are available cannot be relied on too heavily and that Tacitus used the 'iron-poor' half truth as a motif (and this is widely accepted) to make them seem more like noble savages. Desserx, you asked about non-Roman sources but unfortunately there really aren't any except archaeological which support Roman statements- BUT I must add that the material evidence is such a small sampling of the population that it can't possibly mean much by itself. It is most likely that armor was rare, because of the loanwork traffic, material evidence and Roman literary sources, but the Middle Ages can help enlighten more on this (even though the time is far off) because even in the Middle Ages, part-time levies (such as Ælfredes fyrd) didn't get nice gear- despite greater resources and technology.

---

Many thanks for the explanation Blitzkrieg80. It's well appreciated!