New OOTS products from CafePress
New OOTS t-shirts, ornaments, mugs, bags, and more
Page 14 of 50 FirstFirst ... 45678910111213141516171819202122232439 ... LastLast
Results 391 to 420 of 1485
  1. - Top - End - #391
    Dwarf in the Playground
     
    DruidGuy

    Join Date
    May 2007
    Location
    Northern Ohio
    Gender
    Male

    Default Re: Got a Real-World Weapon, Armor or Tactics Question? Mk. XXIV

    Very interesting background. You might look at the Irish state being created after centuries of English rule, although that might be a bit too modern.

    Quote Originally Posted by Vitruviansquid View Post
    About the tribes: I imagine there to be a bit of politicking and jockeying for power due to the law that each tribe contribute equal effort to a joint warband. Chieftains might attempt to argue that his tribe's providing some amount of food supplies is equivalent to another tribe's providing some amount of manpower, some tribe might attempt to claim they are having an emergency (drought ruined our crops, mine collapse reduced our industry, plague killed our people) that impedes their ability to contribute to the war effort and ask the confederation to waive their contribution or allow them to take a debt. Or maybe some tribes argue that contribution should be based on equal percentage of their total wealth and power while other tribes argue it should not. Which would be more compelling as a part of an RPG setting? It is, however, intended for this law to be awkward as a manifestation of the weirdness of this experimental society that is partially based on fragments of old legends.and weapons? Some kind of firearm you might see alongside knights in mail wielding spears and shields?
    I'm not sure where you are from, but much of the debate surrounding the writing and adoption of the U.S. constitution was on a similar theme: should the larger more populous states have more say that the smaller ones, and contrariwise should they contribute more to the support of said government. It lead to the two houses of congress one proportional based on population, and the other even representation per state. Your council (the chiefs of the tribes) seems more analogous to the Senate; but your military command (based on powers of 10) would seem to weight the bigger tribes more heavily. If the Bessemer tripe contributed 1000 soldiers, but the Carnegie only 500, then the Bessemers would have ten overseers and even a commander, while the Carnegies would supply just five overseers and no commanders.

    DrewID

  2. - Top - End - #392
    Ogre in the Playground
    Join Date
    Sep 2008

    Default Re: Got a Real-World Weapon, Armor or Tactics Question? Mk. XXIV

    Quote Originally Posted by Vitruviansquid View Post
    But it would help to know - is it difficult for people using early firearms to produce gunpowder in sufficient quantities?
    What is a good tech level for a firearm that did not do much to overshadow relatively low-tech armors and weapons? Some kind of firearm you might see alongside knights in mail wielding spears and shields?
    In Europe gunpowder was expensive and somewhat difficult to produce when first introduced. There the problem seems to have been saltpeter, which, once the natural sources had been exhausted, had to be produced. It took some time to figure out how to produce it consistently. As a result gunpowder was expensive when initially introduced, but the price dropped over the course of the 15th century.

    As for firearms -- handgonnes and early arquebuses, are probably the most likely, although, historically, they overlapped more with plate armor.

  3. - Top - End - #393
    Ogre in the Playground
     
    Hazzardevil's Avatar

    Join Date
    Dec 2010
    Location
    What's this planet again?
    Gender
    Male

    Default Re: Got a Real-World Weapon, Armor or Tactics Question? Mk. XXIV

    The first recorded use of Solid Projectile gunpowder weapons (At least in Europe, I don't know if guns, as we think of them, were used in Asia before this) dates to the 12th or 13th century.

    The last example of chain mail I can think of being used in Europe is the Sipahi in the Ottoman Empire. I know they were disbanded as a group of soldiers in 1826 and had used chain in the Napoleonic Wars and I think it's unlikely they changed in the time in between. It may have continued to have been used later than 1826 in the Ottoman Empire, but I don't know, but I am fairly sure it continued to be used in other places, including India. But this is getting into Colonial Warfare with vastly different levels of development clasing.

    Firearms didn't develop all that much in between the 15th and 17th centuries, it just became cheaper to produce a lot of them, so if you want swords, spears and guns. You can have guns be rare and new, so they haven't taken over yet. But for reasons I won't go too much into here, tabletop games find it hard to balance. Either they end up being worse crossbows, like dnd 3.5, or they do so much damage they're borderline save or die.
    My extended signature.
    Thanks to the wonderful Ceika for my signature.
    Quote Originally Posted by Chained Birds View Post
    Just one of those guys vs girls things. Guys like giant, fighting robots that shoot lazerz out their eyes while girls like pretty jewelry that sparkle in the moonlight after having a romantic interlude with a charming gentleman.

    Completely sexist, yes! Completely true, pretty much...
    I have Steam cards and other stuff! I am selling/trading them.

  4. - Top - End - #394
    Ogre in the Playground
    Join Date
    Nov 2009
    Gender
    Male

    Default Re: Got a Real-World Weapon, Armor or Tactics Question? Mk. XXIV

    Thanks for all the helpful responses.

    On the American Constitution: That'd be an interesting dimension to add to the nature of confederacy councils. I guess I should think more about fleshing out that part of the society.

    On saltpeter: I think it would make sense to say that people had not really figured out how to produce saltpeter in the setting. Would it make sense to add that the other provinces in the kingdom don't really have large saltpeter deposits to mine?

    On which guns to use: I think I should settle on the term "caliver," which as I'm reading, implies a standardized size to the firearms, which makes sense to me for this setting. I'm thinking these should be matchlock calivers that were being used.

    On balance: In the context of the game, it actually doesn't matter which specific ranged weapon you have if you technically have a ranged weapon. Weapons are defined by having a key word (one handed melee weapons, for example, can be Smashing, Tearing, Puncturing, Nimble, etc.) and it doesn't matter how you describe your weapon, only the keyword matters.
    It always amazes me how often people on forums would rather accuse you of misreading their posts with malice than re-explain their ideas with clarity.

  5. - Top - End - #395
    Ogre in the Playground
    Join Date
    Sep 2008

    Default Re: Got a Real-World Weapon, Armor or Tactics Question? Mk. XXIV

    Quote Originally Posted by Vitruviansquid View Post
    On saltpeter: I think it would make sense to say that people had not really figured out how to produce saltpeter in the setting. Would it make sense to add that the other provinces in the kingdom don't really have large saltpeter deposits to mine?
    Yes. A hot climate and extended dry period are useful for generating naturally occurring saltpeter. In the 18th century the British and Dutch preferred to import saltpeter from India, rather than try to make it themselves. That said, the conditions under which natural saltpeter occur were pretty common, so, assuming other countries were aware of the "secret", they should be able to make at least small amounts of gunpowder.


    Quote Originally Posted by Vitruviansquid View Post
    On which guns to use: I think I should settle on the term "caliver," which as I'm reading, implies a standardized size to the firearms, which makes sense to me for this setting. I'm thinking these should be matchlock calivers that were being used.
    Caliver is related to the word "caliber", and, originally, a defining feature of the caliver was that they were made to a standard bore size (or at least large groups of them were). However, the word changed pretty quickly to describe something lighter than a musket, with a particular stock-style.

    The benefit of a standardized bore size is that ammunition could be made centrally and shared. However, it was more typical in the period that each gun was supplied with a bullet mold and the soldiers were supplied lead, which they cast themselves.

    Personally I would avoid using the term "caliver" as to me it implies a later period than you seem to be describing (calivers came about in the second half of the 16th century). I like arquebus or one of the earlier variants -- but it's ultimately up to you what you decide to call them.
    Last edited by fusilier; 2017-09-23 at 02:52 AM.

  6. - Top - End - #396
    Barbarian in the Playground
    Join Date
    Feb 2012

    Default Re: Got a Real-World Weapon, Armor or Tactics Question? Mk. XXIV

    @vitruviansquid

    I agree that caliver is probably not the right word. It's pretty specific to late 16th century england and for the most part was just another word for arquebus.

    do you have any specific sort of time period in mind for your firearms? If you're looking for one where a period were firearms don't really dominate the battlefield you probably want to look at examples from 1400s or earlier. You'd have a pretty wide variety of different sized cannons, swivel guns, "hook guns", and simple handheld guns (some of which might have started to use simple matchlock mechanisms).

    You also might want to look to ming china for inspiration since they tended to be the leading user of gunpowder weapons until the mid 1400s or so with around 10% of the army armed with fire lances. Some firelances were designed to shoot projectiles and be reloaded while others were designed to be a sort of short-ranged flamethrower. They also made very heavy use of gunpowder in the form of fire arrows, firebombs, rockets, explody bombs, even landmines.

  7. - Top - End - #397
    Barbarian in the Playground
    Join Date
    Feb 2012

    Default Re: Got a Real-World Weapon, Armor or Tactics Question? Mk. XXIV

    Quote Originally Posted by Incanur View Post
    I like that new video from Lars Andersen a lot. While it's wrong about volleys, which were used by various historical military archers and crossbowers, I consider the emphasis on how slow arrows are key for understanding archery and especially the question of bow vs. gun.

    What we really need is to get folks to practice Andersen's techniques but with military-strength bows drawing 80-160+lbs.

    Dodging and shooting at moving targets was obviously part of skirmishing with any style of bow. That's definitional. However, speed shooting was not the only way to use a bow in either skirmishing or a set battle. It wasn't necessarily the best way. The Manchu style, for example, focuses on making powerful and accurate shots rather than shooting lots of arrows quickly.
    Apparently Lars' video has been taken down, but I agree, it brought up some interesting points.

    I wonder if projectile velocity is part of the reason crossbows tended to have very short draw lengths and a fairly poor efficiency in the later middle ages. The idea being that a short power stroke and an extremely high draw weight would maximize acceleration and minimize the time between pulling the trigger and striking the target. Some hunting crossbows in particular have a draw only 2 or 3 inches long.

  8. - Top - End - #398
    Ogre in the Playground
     
    ElfPirate

    Join Date
    Aug 2013

    Default Re: Got a Real-World Weapon, Armor or Tactics Question? Mk. XXIV

    Quote Originally Posted by fusilier View Post
    Yes. A hot climate and extended dry period are useful for generating naturally occurring saltpeter. In the 18th century the British and Dutch preferred to import saltpeter from India, rather than try to make it themselves. That said, the conditions under which natural saltpeter occur were pretty common, so, assuming other countries were aware of the "secret", they should be able to make at least small amounts of gunpowder.
    Wasn't dungheaps, outhouse and compost piles noted as being a source for chemicals for gunpowder in one iteration of the thread? Potassium nitrates? I forget the name of the other one, calcium nitrate? I know it was brought up in the old naval gun debates. Because one or the other was sensitive to moisture.


    Quote Originally Posted by fusilier View Post
    Personally I would avoid using the term "caliver" as to me it implies a later period than you seem to be describing (calivers came about in the second half of the 16th century). I like arquebus or one of the earlier variants -- but it's ultimately up to you what you decide to call them.
    At the turn of 17th century Sweden the caliver was simply known as pipes ("rör" in original), so there's no need to hang on a term from our history to the weapons. Everything like arquebus, caliver, muskets etc . I know stuff like "thunderstick" has a bad resonance. But e.g. pistol comes from the Chechz word word whistle. Go on an etymology search for the names for fire arms and see if you cna figure out something fun.

  9. - Top - End - #399
    Titan in the Playground
     
    Brother Oni's Avatar

    Join Date
    Nov 2007
    Location
    Cippa's River Meadow
    Gender
    Male

    Default Re: Got a Real-World Weapon, Armor or Tactics Question? Mk. XXIV

    Quote Originally Posted by rrgg View Post
    I wonder if projectile velocity is part of the reason crossbows tended to have very short draw lengths and a fairly poor efficiency in the later middle ages. The idea being that a short power stroke and an extremely high draw weight would maximize acceleration and minimize the time between pulling the trigger and striking the target. Some hunting crossbows in particular have a draw only 2 or 3 inches long.
    I haven't seen the video, but it's a possibility.

    One justification for the short draw length is that the crossbow tended to be used from horseback in European warfare, so a long power stroke raises the risk of the bolt becoming misaligned during firing due to the motion of the horse.
    The other is safety - with a long power stroke, there's a much bigger area you have to keep important things clear (fingers for example), otherwise the string will remove them.

    So with a short draw length, to keep the lethality of the crossbow, you have to increase the draw weight. However this increases the stresses on the prod, which results in a shorter draw length and you end up with a careful balancing act of weapon integrity, draw length and draw weight.

  10. - Top - End - #400
    Ogre in the Playground
    Join Date
    Sep 2008

    Default Re: Got a Real-World Weapon, Armor or Tactics Question? Mk. XXIV

    Quote Originally Posted by snowblizz View Post
    Wasn't dungheaps, outhouse and compost piles noted as being a source for chemicals for gunpowder in one iteration of the thread? Potassium nitrates? I forget the name of the other one, calcium nitrate? I know it was brought up in the old naval gun debates. Because one or the other was sensitive to moisture.
    Yes, old cesspits, stable floors, etc, were all sources for natural saltpeter. But in Europe, those were exhausted pretty quickly (they would find new sources for many years, but it wasn't enough to meet demand). So they had to try to create it themselves. That was possible but seems to have taken some time to figure out a consistent way of doing so. Centuries later, natural sources, in places that had a better climate for it, like saltpeter from India, were preferred. In the late 18th century Antoine Lavoisier applied a scientific approach and enforced standards on the French saltpeter and gunpowder industry. At which point French gunpowder became considered the best available.

  11. - Top - End - #401
    Ogre in the Playground
    Join Date
    Oct 2009
    Gender
    Male

    Default Re: Got a Real-World Weapon, Armor or Tactics Question? Mk. XXIV

    Quote Originally Posted by Haighus View Post
    Nice interview, and counters many of the general myths about swords, twin-edged swords in particular. Unfortunately she then goes on to repeat some myths about single-edged medieval swords, such as messers becoming popular due to town laws restricting sword use (she also mixes up falchions and messers in the interview- falchions have sword hilts, messers knife hilts). If there is anything I've learnt from reading through 6 years of this thread (from the VII incarnation I think, missing a few of the more recent ones), it is that german towns where the messer was most popular generally mandated that people carried and owned swords. Thanks to Galloglaich and Spiryt in particular for improving my knowledge on this region.
    Very good point, but let me amend that slightly. Like everything in medieval Europe it's complicated.

    TL : DR is probably about one third to half of male townfolks, specifically citizens, in the more urban zones of Europe had the right to carry arms, but not necessarily everybody.

    Longer explanation follows.


    In England after the 1390's, with the possible exception of York and London (I'm still not clear on this) it seems that most people were banned from carrying weapons inside the towns.

    In France it seemed to vary by town for the 'bourgeois', but peasants were generally banned from carrying weapons in towns or abbeys for example. Everyone seemed to go armed when traveling though.

    In the Low Countries (roughly today's Belgium and Holland), Scandinavia, Poland, Germany and Central Europe in general, it was allowed, and basically expected, that all male citizens, including partial citizens like journeymen- would carry swords at least when dressed formally so to speak. I.e. not necessarily while they were working.

    But citizens were not everybody in town - it's something like 30-40% of the male population if you include journeymen. Citizens visiting from other towns also generally had the right, as did nobles so long as they were on good terms with the town (in some cases where there was an ongoing feud with a regional prince, for example between Cologne, Bremen, or Strasbourg with the Archbishop - his vassals were specifically prohibited from entering the town armed).

    Commoners on lower status, including servants, were not necessarily allowed to walk around armed. This would depend on the specific town but some had rules requiring them to leave their weapons at the inn, and the innkeeper would be in charge as a representative of the legal authority of the town to keep an eye on them. Servants could be armed by their master or employer, at the discretion of the latter, but then that master was legally liable for their actions with the weapons. I.e. if they killed or wounded somebody he could be prosecuted. Same for apprentices and guild masters. Some guild masters armed their apprentices at least some of the time (like when traveling or when involved in a feud) but if they did they were responsible if the apprentice was involved in violence.

    The majority of town populations in medieval and Early Modern Central Europe were female, depending on the town it seems like 50-60%, and most women did not carry arms. Generally speaking they could if they wanted to, but like Jews and Priests, if they did they lost their special protected legal status (immunity from attack, basically). About half of women were servants and the rest either in the guilds or part of artisan or merchant families, or religious communes. The majority of the male population in the town (~60% depending on the town) were day laborers and servants.

    Outside of towns, in Central Europe, in the countryside and especially when traveling, everyone including peasants above the rank of serf seemed to carry arms when traveling, at festivals, and at weddings. But they would not always be allowed to bring them inside of the town gates.

    The truth is we need a lot more research on this interesting area. I often run into tantalizing clues which provide more questions than answers. For example I read a rule from Nordlingen requiring Jews to leave their 'throwing axes' at the Inn when visiting. I think that meant hurlbats. But so many questions about that fact...

    I don't know what the laws were in Italy but with certain exceptions (Milan, notably after the Duke took over) the rules and expectations seemed to be similar at least in practice, based on reading personal accounts from that period.


    More broadly the question of whether messers had to do with sumptuary laws is a long lasting legend, and it's not clear yet to me at least if it's a Victorian legend or if it has some basis in fact. The estate most closely associated with the messer is the peasant. It apparently derives from the shorter but similar weapons like the bauernwehr, and it seems to have become 'elevated' as a weapon worthy of burghers and nobles in the 14th or 15th century, at the same time that it became a longer and more formidable weapon (including two-handed versions). By the 14th and 15th century they still had sumptuary laws (for example restricting how many silver plates you owned, what color or patterns of clothing you could wear, or what kind of cloth or fur like silk or ermine) but that was probably the low-point of them. Then by the end of the 16th century they started to be enforced again and got strict once more in the 17th.

    https://de.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bauernwehr

    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sumptuary_law

    In the Late medieval world these seemed to have been nominally followed by burghers. For example they wore silk and black velvet but not as often purple or cloth of gold, and they would wear fox or mink fur but not ermine. However even these rules would be flouted sometimes, and this was a frequent subject of complaints by the princes in the Imperial Diet (Riechtag). Sumptuary laws were more strictly enforced on the country people, depending on where and how strong the prince or prelate was who ruled over them. Certain estates like landsknecht mercenaries were explicitly exempt from sumptuary laws.

    If there was indeed a sumptuary law banning peasants or commoners from carrying swords, i haven't found it yet but it may have existed earlier in the middle ages, such as maybe in the 11-12th Centuries in the heydey of Feudalism.

    A lot of people in HEMA believe this though.



    On the plus side, she correctly points out that cutlasses were very late weapons, and not used during the golden age of pirates. I am still unsure personally as to what a hanger is though- it seems to originally just be a regional (English) term for a falchion in the 16th century, that remained in use as a term for similar weapons onboard ships until such weapons evolved into cutlasses.

    I think a lot of research is lagging for single-edged swords. I myself have recently learned much more about them through finding out about the work of James Elmslie (through Shadiversity).
    A lot of research is lagging for all of it trust me!


    G



    .
    Last edited by Galloglaich; 2017-09-25 at 11:43 AM.

  12. - Top - End - #402
    Ogre in the Playground
     
    BlueKnightGuy

    Join Date
    Jul 2013
    Location
    Dixie
    Gender
    Male

    Default Re: Got a Real-World Weapon, Armor or Tactics Question? Mk. XXIV

    Quote Originally Posted by Galloglaich View Post
    In the Low Countries (roughly today's Belgium and Holland), Scandinavia, Poland, Germany and Central Europe in general, it was allowed, and basically expected, that all male citizens, including partial citizens like journeymen- would carry swords at least when dressed formally so to speak. I.e. not necessarily while they were working.
    A somewhat related question: there seems to be a general idea that the sword, due to a combination of being more difficult to make (and therefore more expensive) and more difficult to learn to use effectively compared to weapons like spears and axes, was largely a mark of nobility. Obviously, based on this statement, "middle class" city dwellers (not sure if that's a completely correct term, but it seems to fit people between peasants and nobles) commonly carried swords. Is this something that was at least somewhat true in the dark ages/early medieval times and people assume it is still true past when it historically was, or is the entire concept utter hogwash?

    But citizens were not everybody in town - it's something like 30-40% of the male population if you include journeymen. Citizens visiting from other towns also generally had the right, as did nobles so long as they were on good terms with the town (in some cases where there was an ongoing feud with a regional prince, for example between Cologne, Bremen, or Strasbourg with the Archbishop - his vassals were specifically prohibited from entering the town armed).

    Commoners on lower status, including servants, were not necessarily allowed to walk around armed. This would depend on the specific town but some had rules requiring them to leave their weapons at the inn, and the innkeeper would be in charge as a representative of the legal authority of the town to keep an eye on them. Servants could be armed by their master or employer, at the discretion of the latter, but then that master was legally liable for their actions with the weapons. I.e. if they killed or wounded somebody he could be prosecuted. Same for apprentices and guild masters. Some guild masters armed their apprentices at least some of the time (like when traveling or when involved in a feud) but if they did they were responsible if the apprentice was involved in violence.
    So what distinguishes a citizen from a non-citizen in medieval towns? And what do the non-citizens do (I believe you mention "servants and day laborers" later on)? Regarding the guilds, how prevalent were they? I get the impression that most tradespeople would be a member of their respective guild. How much influence did the guild masters have over members of the guilds?

    The majority of town populations in medieval and Early Modern Central Europe were female, depending on the town it seems like 50-60%,
    This is an interesting bit of information. Any idea as to why that was the case?


    All of these questions with the caveat that I understand they probably don't have simple answers and varied quite a bit depending on exactly when/where you're talking about.

    Also, just wanted to say I enjoy it when one of your posts comes up (as well as some other posters here who seem to be well versed in medieval history). Very informative, and they always make me realize the medieval world was far more complex and varied than most people (myself included) seem to realize. Often times they open up questions I wouldn't have thought of beforehand.
    I'm playing Ironsworn, an RPG that you can run solo - and I'm putting the campaign up on GitP!

    Most recent update: Chapter 6: Devastation

    -----

    A worldbuilding project, still work in progress: Reign of the Corven

    Most recent update: another look at magic traditions!

  13. - Top - End - #403
    Ogre in the Playground
    Join Date
    Oct 2009
    Gender
    Male

    Default Re: Got a Real-World Weapon, Armor or Tactics Question? Mk. XXIV

    Quote Originally Posted by rs2excelsior View Post
    A somewhat related question: there seems to be a general idea that the sword, due to a combination of being more difficult to make (and therefore more expensive) and more difficult to learn to use effectively compared to weapons like spears and axes, was largely a mark of nobility. Obviously, based on this statement, "middle class" city dwellers (not sure if that's a completely correct term, but it seems to fit people between peasants and nobles) commonly carried swords. Is this something that was at least somewhat true in the dark ages/early medieval times and people assume it is still true past when it historically was, or is the entire concept utter hogwash?
    yes there was, generally speaking, a large middle class in most of the middle ages. I should be clear that my main focus of expertise, such as it is, resides in the Late Medieval period. Tobtor who posts here knows the early Medieval or Migration Era better than I, Incanur and Fusilier I think know the later 16th and 17th Centuries (what we call the Early Modern Period) better than I do.

    So just keep in mind, I'm on fairly solid ground 1300-1520 or thereabouts, after and before that it gets a little more sporadic.

    That said I think you can say very generally speaking there was a well established urban middle class in the High (12th-13th Century) in most of Latinized Europe. In terms of the breadth of the phenomenon the peak was probably during this High Middle Ages period, which some people called the First Renaissance. It represented the revival of Urbanization (i.e. significant towns) in Latinized Europe and the decline of feudalism. I would say this is where the breadth was greatest because you had a strong urban middle class almost everywhere in Europe, all the towns were increasing in power and autonomy.

    The Late medieval period was the period of the greatest depth, I would argue, though the independence of the towns and the corresponding power and influence of the urban middle classes declined in several of the Atlantic facing Kingdoms - England, France, and what would become Spain and Portugal especially.

    In Italy, what's now Belgium, Southern Germany and it's northern fringe, Catalonia and Bohemia and Poland, and a few other places, the towns retained their autonomy and became very powerful zones of technological and cultural genesis. We call this period the Renaissance now, and some scholars trace it's origin to Florence specifically in the 1380's. Others go further back or pick other places, but Florence is a good place to pin it. You could probably go back another 100 years.

    In the towns, the urban middle class consisted of a landowning and business class called the 'patricians', who were kind of the elite of a larger mercantile class (both seagoing and land roving), and below them professionals like doctors and lawyers, university students, what were called artisans, and other skilled or educated labor.

    In the urbanized zones like Northern Italy, Flanders, Swabia, the Rhineland etc., these folks - the patricians, merchants and artisans, made up the middle and upper class in the towns. Technically they were almost all commoners, though wealthier merchants and patricians were able to buy noble titles if they wanted them (or marry their children into noble families). Many did for legal or political reasons but they usually didn't use the titles. Together merchants, artisans, professionals etc. made up about 30-40% of the male population in a town.

    Below them was mostly day laborers, servants, and people on alms (basically welfare).



    Before the High Middle Ages you had the Carolingian and Merovingian eras, the heydey of the Franks, and this was also the peak of Feudalism. Feudalism seems to have come about as a reaction to the incessant invasions which Europe suffered in the Early Middle ages; the Huns, the Vikings, Moors, Magyars and many others who kept invading and devastating the coasts and borderlands. Part of the population was put into bondage to help equip and feed full time professional warriors we came to call knights.

    in that period the professional soldiers themselves, many of them country gentry, as well as certain elements of the Church, Friars and monks and priests, made up the middle class - as well as untamed tribes.


    In prior periods, the Migration Era etc., you didn't have feudalism per se except in certain areas (the most heavily Roman areas). People don't generally understand this, but both the spread of Christianity and the imposition of the Feudal order was a gradual process, especially in the zones which had heretofore been Barbarian lands, like in Northern Europe. In Sweden for example the peasants still hadn't been 'tamed' properly into Feudalism as late as the 1400 and 1500's. They remained a powerful force in the political landscape and would routinely fly into dangerous armed rebellions if their interests were ignored. It was the same in many other zones - Switzerland, the Tyrol, parts of the Pyrennes, Brittany, Bohemia, and much of Germany. In the Baltic vast areas were still ruled by pagan tribal warriors similar to Vikings in many respects as late as the 1300's and 1400's.

    If you go back to the 4th, 5th, 6th centuries, you didn't really have peasants per se in a lot of Europe, you had tribesmen who were mostly free and were fairly well off in a lot of cases, especially if they had been doing successful raiding or trading. So you had a large rural middle class so to speak.


    So what distinguishes a citizen from a non-citizen in medieval towns? And what do the non-citizens do (I believe you mention "servants and day laborers" later on)? Regarding the guilds, how prevalent were they? I get the impression that most tradespeople would be a member of their respective guild. How much influence did the guild masters have over members of the guilds?
    The short answer is you basically bought citizenship. It was a bit more complicated than that but if you had money, and / or skill, you could become a citizen. If you had money and no skill you might have to marry into a merchant or guild family or pay to join a guild or some other association. If you had skill but no money you could become an apprentice or a journeyman - they would test you out and train you if you had aptitude.

    Many people from the country came into the cities. The cities had a much lower birth rate which didn't quite keep up with mortality so there was a steady flow of immigrants from the peasant estate. The towns had a rule, known as "Stadtluft Macht Frei " the town air makes you free. So even if you were a criminal or a runaway slave or something, if you had managed to stay in town for a year and a day, which almost inevitably meant you had found some kind of gainful employment because they didn't tolerate a big underclass, then you were free from any claims on you. The Duke could come to collect you and the town would tell them to sod off. They routinely fought wars over this when it was violated, though it's also true that sometimes Noblemen would show up and collect peasants like in the 11th month of their stay in a town, which was sad news for them.


    Both the merchants and the artisan had guilds - in the High Medieval period which was the rise of the merchants, the merchant guilds were the most important. In the Late Medieval period which was the heydey of the artisans, it was the craft artisan guilds which were ascendant. I.e. your 'butcher / baker / candlestick maker' type people.

    In both cases the guilds were controlled by the masters, either master merchants or master artisans. They were an organization of the membership, with nobody else in charge or involved. They were also important social clubs (think something like masonic lodges or catholic benevolent associations) and acted as military units in time of war.


    This is an interesting bit of information. Any idea as to why that was the case?
    There are various theories, but I don't think they really know. The mortality rate was higher for men because they had to serve in the militia and did harder more dangerous work. But more women seemed to go to the towns, maybe it was easier for them to find work as servants.

    All of these questions with the caveat that I understand they probably don't have simple answers and varied quite a bit depending on exactly when/where you're talking about.

    Also, just wanted to say I enjoy it when one of your posts comes up (as well as some other posters here who seem to be well versed in medieval history). Very informative, and they always make me realize the medieval world was far more complex and varied than most people (myself included) seem to realize. Often times they open up questions I wouldn't have thought of beforehand.
    Thanks, yes it is very complicated and much more interesting than most of the genre fiction etc. would lead you to believe.

    G

  14. - Top - End - #404
    Ogre in the Playground
     
    ElfPirate

    Join Date
    Aug 2013

    Default Re: Got a Real-World Weapon, Armor or Tactics Question? Mk. XXIV

    Quote Originally Posted by Galloglaich View Post
    Below them was mostly day laborers, servants, and people on alms (basically welfare).
    And below that, the worst of the worst. Wanderers. Jesters. Travelling performers and social/other groups with no permanent place and/or certain job groups considered taboo.

    Quote Originally Posted by Galloglaich View Post
    In Sweden for example the peasants still hadn't been 'tamed' properly into Feudalism as late as the 1400 and 1500's. They remained a powerful force in the political landscape and would routinely fly into dangerous armed rebellions if their interests were ignored.
    There was an interesting sidenote in one of Swedish historian **** Harrison's (name still being filtered I guess ) blogs about this. It tied the growth of the peasantry as a force to the development of crossbows and poleweapons as with these and the favourable terrain, trained knights were much more on par with the peasantry. From the sound of it it wasn't until the later 1300s and the 1400s we get significant peasant uprisings. Now of course, before that time there wasn't much of central government to rise up against either nor had feudalism really gotten a foothold in Scandinavia beyond the Danish territories. Ie there was no major confrontations between "peasants" and "authority" before quite late as there wasn't muhc power to argue about anyway. It's not really until we are into the 16th century when an actual Swedish state is "conceived" of, which ironically is the first to be able to really squash peasant uprisings.
    So it's not really possible to untangle these strands of development from each other. Ie better weapons/armour made infantry better vs traditional knights, the growing "national" awareness and political expedience latched on to the peasants as military/economical/social force to compensate for lacking mroe traditional power.

    Guess what I'm saying is, much as I like the idea of the unbroken peasant power, that maybe the reason for it is that no one serisously wanted or could challenge it until other developments changed the "balance of power". As contrasted to Europe proper where a much longer history of beaitng down the peasants existed. Ofc being the origin more than the sufferers of the processes that partly formed feudalism must have had something to do with it too.
    I'm not sure what he builds the idea on, it was mostly a sidecomment in the article, but I thought it was an interesting thing I'd not considered.

    Quote Originally Posted by Galloglaich View Post
    There are various theories, but I don't think they really know. The mortality rate was higher for men because they had to serve in the militia and did harder more dangerous work. But more women seemed to go to the towns, maybe it was easier for them to find work as servants.
    I would have thought women might live somewhat more healthy lives as much of the ameanities would be to a degree barred to them. Ie men would be out and about more, esp in the drinking with mates sense, so lead riskeir lives. The great exception would be childbirth which IIRC was the single most dangerous thing facing the medieaval woman.
    Well for men in the countryside the main option was that they'd be expected to take over a farm, maybe start a new one somewhere. I think societies would have been more
    inclined to accept itinerant women than men too. The latter tend to cause more direct societal disruptions.

  15. - Top - End - #405
    Ogre in the Playground
    Join Date
    Oct 2009
    Gender
    Male

    Default Re: Got a Real-World Weapon, Armor or Tactics Question? Mk. XXIV

    Quote Originally Posted by snowblizz View Post
    And below that, the worst of the worst. Wanderers. Jesters. Travelling performers and social/other groups with no permanent place and/or certain job groups considered taboo.

    There was an interesting sidenote in one of Swedish historian **** Harrison's (name still being filtered I guess ) blogs about this. It tied the growth of the peasantry as a force to the development of crossbows and poleweapons as with these and the favourable terrain, trained knights were much more on par with the peasantry.
    All the places where the peasants retained rights were like that - "good" defensive terrain that they knew well. I have read that some of the tricks used by the Finnish Army against the Russians in the WW2 / Winter War were actually derived from ambush tactics developed by Swedish peasants during uprisings against the Danes and some Swedish lords in the late medieval period.

    The other thing I have read is that thanks to some early victories over Danish mercenaries (actually international mercenaries from all over but who were working for the Danes), the Swedish peasants gained a lot of good armor and weapons. I think also you had quite a few Swedish 'peasants' who were skilled labor and made money (so could afford things like crossbows etc.). Much of Sweden's formidable iron forging industry was out in the countryside, and there were miners who tended to be prosperous in the middle ages (many of the rebels like in Dalarna were miners) and others were fishermen who also did trading or made a bunch of money during the Skania market etc.

    From the sound of it it wasn't until the later 1300s and the 1400s we get significant peasant uprisings. Now of course, before that time there wasn't much of central government to rise up against either nor had feudalism really gotten a foothold in Scandinavia beyond the Danish territories. Ie there was no major confrontations between "peasants" and "authority" before quite late as there wasn't much power to argue about anyway.
    I would agree with this but this also kind of makes my point that up until the Nordic Union when the Danes started to try to enforce feudalism, the Swedish 'peasants' weren't really peasants at all, they were Swedish (or Gott or Svear or whatever) tribesmen. Heavily armed, not used to paying most of their money to somebody else, accustomed to hunting in their own land. This was also the same pattern in places like Lithuania, Poland, Frisia, the Alps and so on.


    I would have thought women might live somewhat more healthy lives as much of the ameanities would be to a degree barred to them. Ie men would be out and about more, esp in the drinking with mates sense, so lead riskeir lives. The great exception would be childbirth which IIRC was the single most dangerous thing facing the medieaval woman.
    Well for men in the countryside the main option was that they'd be expected to take over a farm, maybe start a new one somewhere. I think societies would have been more
    inclined to accept itinerant women than men too. The latter tend to cause more direct societal disruptions.
    I don't know about the healthy lives but women did hang around in bars along with men. Medieval society was not like Victorian society.

    Augsburg tavern in the Summer - note the ladies



    Not to mention the public baths, a different type of 'clean living'



    G

  16. - Top - End - #406
    Dwarf in the Playground
     
    PirateGuy

    Join Date
    Sep 2017

    Default Re: Got a Real-World Weapon, Armor or Tactics Question? Mk. XXIV

    Quote Originally Posted by Galloglaich View Post
    Very good point, but let me amend that slightly. Like everything in medieval Europe it's complicated.

    TL : DR is probably about one third to half of male townfolks, specifically citizens, in the more urban zones of Europe had the right to carry arms, but not necessarily everybody.

    Longer explanation follows.
    Snip
    Thanks for the info, all very interesting. I still think any loophole that allowed someone to carry a messer into a place that restricted swords (with traditional hilts) would be closed extremely quickly though.
    A lot of research is lagging for all of it trust me!


    G

    .
    I defintiely do trust you on this- I discovered these threads whilst trying to find some reliable info about early firearms. Finding information in the public domain about most of this stuff is damn hard. Reading this thread has unearthed a few gems for me, like the King's Mirror translation that has been posted a few times over the years. I find that to be gold for reading about siege warfare.

    I was referring mainly to swords, where double-edged swords seem to have been the area where modern, systematic research in medieval life really kicked off with Oakeshott in the 50's and 60's. In contrast, there has only just been a typology produced for medieval single-edged swords. I'd love to see similar typologies for other medieval weapons though! If there are any others that people know of, I'd appreciate a link. I only know of the Petersen typology for Viking swords in addition to the others mentioned.

  17. - Top - End - #407
    Ogre in the Playground
    Join Date
    Oct 2009
    Gender
    Male

    Default Re: Got a Real-World Weapon, Armor or Tactics Question? Mk. XXIV

    Quote Originally Posted by Haighus View Post
    Thanks for the info, all very interesting. I still think any loophole that allowed someone to carry a messer into a place that restricted swords (with traditional hilts) would be closed extremely quickly though.
    Yes I agree. Medieval law is really weird though. Quite often there were laws on the books which were never really enforced, or only enforced in special circumstances. Part of the reasons for many of the myths about medieval life is from them looking at the law books (and law proclamations of Kings and Popes) and assuming that this was how thing actually went. It wasn't until they started going through and translating actual court records that they realized the law as written and the law as practiced were very different, with the latter tending to be much more loose and flexible than the former.

    Also many feudal rules which were pretty strict in the 8th-11th centuries were relaxed into non-existence by the 13th.

    So it's possible that they had some sumptuary laws on peasants (or some estate) which later faded, particularly if the local peasants were politically /militarily strong which they were in some cases.


    I defintiely do trust you on this- I discovered these threads whilst trying to find some reliable info about early firearms. Finding information in the public domain about most of this stuff is damn hard. Reading this thread has unearthed a few gems for me, like the King's Mirror translation that has been posted a few times over the years. I find that to be gold for reading about siege warfare.

    I was referring mainly to swords, where double-edged swords seem to have been the area where modern, systematic research in medieval life really kicked off with Oakeshott in the 50's and 60's. In contrast, there has only just been a typology produced for medieval single-edged swords. I'd love to see similar typologies for other medieval weapons though! If there are any others that people know of, I'd appreciate a link. I only know of the Petersen typology for Viking swords in addition to the others mentioned.

    Yes the Kings Mirror is a fantastic window in the crazy, crazy reality of medieval siege warfare - WAY beyond and much more interesting than what you see in films, TV shows and so on, and that is from the pre-gunpowder era. By the time you get to 1400's it's almost beyond my ability to imagine. Surreal, wild stuff. 16th Century is even crazier. Read about the siege of Malta if you get the chance it's off the chain. As is the Siege of Rhodes in ancient times.

    I think there are some typologies for messers. I think sabers, rapiers, and various others too. I think there is a guy named Elmslie who did a messer typology?





    I know there are others but I don't know details. MyArmoury is the place to ask about this.

    G

  18. - Top - End - #408
    Ogre in the Playground
    Join Date
    Oct 2009
    Gender
    Male

    Default Re: Got a Real-World Weapon, Armor or Tactics Question? Mk. XXIV

    One other comment on social estates in the middle ages (it's more accurate to use 'estates' than class in the medieval context)

    I should have mentioned the gentry. In the countryside various people, some rich peasants, some retired or semi-retired mercenaries, or artisan or merchants who moved out of the cities, and a variety of others, lived in an estate between the peasantry and the nobility. In England the Yeoman farmer fit into this niche. In Central Europe the wealthier peasants (Bauer) sometimes did (depending on where this was specifically). These people, families, were vassals of lords or sometimes towns or monasteries, often fought like knights mounted on horseback, sometimes as part of a small unit (lance) led by an aristocratic knight or a burgher-knight, sometimes on their own or as leaders in their own right.

    These people, the gentry, formed powerful estates in some areas. As in they would act together sometimes politically and militarily. Notably in Poland, Switzerland, Bohemia, and Catalonlia. They formed kind of a rural middle class.



    somebody mentioned outlaws. This was a big thing.

    One of the most severe punishments in medieval law was exile. Greatly feared. Town law wasn't that strict but if you disgraced or dishonored yourself it could start a downward spiral. Once exiled from the town (which could either be temporary, 1 year and 1 day, or permanent - 100 years and 1 day) you had a chance to get into another town but it would get harder if your reputation suffered. If you were known to have done something really bad you may be marked like with a cut on your ear or something.

    You could also be made an outlaw formally.

    Either way you then may be forced to live on the fringes of society in the rural areas which could be very rough and dangerous. Outlaws infested the roads in many areas, probably most of rural Europe, and both towns and princes struggled to keep the roads safe and free.

    There were also something like 'travellers' and people like the Roma who moved around like nomads and sometimes got in trouble in various ways.

    Life on the road sounded pretty rough in these days, and from the records a lot of people lived that way. Until they didn't!

    G

  19. - Top - End - #409
    Ogre in the Playground
     
    gkathellar's Avatar

    Join Date
    Nov 2010
    Location
    Beyond the Ninth Wave
    Gender
    Male

    Default Re: Got a Real-World Weapon, Armor or Tactics Question? Mk. XXIV

    Quote Originally Posted by Galloglaich View Post
    Yes I agree. Medieval law is really weird though. Quite often there were laws on the books which were never really enforced, or only enforced in special circumstances. Part of the reasons for many of the myths about medieval life is from them looking at the law books (and law proclamations of Kings and Popes) and assuming that this was how thing actually went. It wasn't until they started going through and translating actual court records that they realized the law as written and the law as practiced were very different, with the latter tending to be much more loose and flexible than the former.
    At least in the United States, this continues to be the case today. Some examples:
    • The New York State criminal code, for instance, has a law against riding a horse onto a subway platform - which, I suppose might have been a problem at some point in time.
    • A cross section of the penal law forbids registered sex offenders from selling frozen deserts out of a vehicle - which is to say, there is a law on the books specifically forbidding them from operating ice cream trucks, and only ice cream trucks.
    • All over the country, we have weapons codes that specifically mention oddities like ninja stars, or pilum ballistic knives, that received 15 minutes of fame at some point. In the meantime, virtually every bladed implement is, legally, a "knife" (this includes things like axes and spears).
    • Most criminal codes will have multiple statutes with what essentially amount to the same charge with extremely minor variations, due to our social definitions of particular crimes expanding.
    • If the body representing NYC law enforcement in court is of the opinion that a criminal statute would lose a constitutional challenge, they will refuse to provide representation to departments using it, which essentially shuts it down right then and there.
    • Likewise, when a DA "decriminalizes" something, it often means that they simply refuse to prosecute certain charges - to much the same effect.

    It seems likely that similar things happened in any time and place you care to name, which can make the project of constructing a society based on its criminal codes ... somewhat iffy.
    Last edited by gkathellar; 2017-09-26 at 03:13 PM.
    Quote Originally Posted by KKL
    D&D is its own momentum and does its own fantasy. It emulates itself in an incestuous mess.

  20. - Top - End - #410
    Orc in the Playground
     
    SwashbucklerGuy

    Join Date
    Oct 2012

    Default Re: Got a Real-World Weapon, Armor or Tactics Question? Mk. XXIV

    But citizens were not everybody in town - it's something like 30-40% of the male population if you include journeymen. Citizens visiting from other towns also generally had the right, as did nobles so long as they were on good terms with the town (in some cases where there was an ongoing feud with a regional prince, for example between Cologne, Bremen, or Strasbourg with the Archbishop - his vassals were specifically prohibited from entering the town armed).
    I agree with the general points G makes, but I think the number 30-40% is based on various "countings" of households. It tended not to include (or not to an adequate way) the very bottom of society. As others have mentioned travellers, beggars etc, where common, and I think they would make up some proportion of any towns population at any time, but due to their semi-illegal status they are rarely counted in the official records. So while you may have something like 30-40% of the "registered" population being anything from a shopowner, craftsman or merchant, and 60-70% "servants", this does not include the true bottom of society, which may have made up 20-25% of the population (sort of like a large group of illegal immigrants today).

    Quote Originally Posted by Galloglaich View Post
    I would agree with this but this also kind of makes my point that up until the Nordic Union when the Danes started to try to enforce feudalism, the Swedish 'peasants' weren't really peasants at all, they were Swedish (or Gott or Svear or whatever) tribesmen. Heavily armed, not used to paying most of their money to somebody else, accustomed to hunting in their own land. This was also the same pattern in places like Lithuania, Poland, Frisia, the Alps and so on.
    I agree. Or the concept of "peasant" is misleading, as we as modern readers see the typical feudal dependant peasant. They would consider themselves to be in the "peasant" class (bondi in old norse). They were (in a sense) all "yeoman", working as farmers, smiths and craftsmen.

    The same is true of Danish rural country up until around 1200-1250. The interesting thin is the way it changed. The rural population were not:

    put into bondage to help equip and feed full time professional warriors we came to call knights.
    They where lured with clever business tactics and contracts they did not see the long term implications of (or did not care how it would affect coming generations):

    The King wanted to exchange the basically tribal "leidgangr" army to a mix of mercenaries and knights. Knights to be called upon quickly and to be loyal to him (the leidgangr army was loyal to the country's "thing", not the king as such), and mercenaries for longer and larger wars. So he needed A money, and B people with money (to afford new armours, horses etc). In order to do this the exchange of leidgangr-responsibility of the farmers to a monetary tax was promoted. At first this seems good for the peasants, as they did not have to go to war. Then it is introduced that the farmers can be freed from the tax, IF they surrender their land to the new "nobles" in exchange for a few services. And who doesn't want to be free from tax? So a lot of the minor farmers gave up their ownership rights for life-long freedom from leidgangr tax. However, in the next generation the nobles now owned the land and could set more and more demands on the once free rural population.

    So the peasant either paid tax (which could hire mercenaries) or support a noble (who could buy armour, horse, sword etc).

    That said, there was still a quite prosperous "upper" class of free farmers (still owning something like 20% of the land in Denmark by the end of the medieval period). And as time went on the levy-tax declined in importance (as it was a fixed amount and was not affected by inflation).

    In the urbanized zones like Northern Italy, Flanders, Swabia, the Rhineland etc., these folks - the patricians, merchants and artisans, made up the middle and upper class in the towns. Technically they were almost all commoners, though wealthier merchants and patricians were able to buy noble titles if they wanted them (or marry their children into noble families). Many did for legal or political reasons but they usually didn't use the titles. Together merchants, artisans, professionals etc. made up about 30-40% of the male population in a town.
    While nobility was late introduced into Scandinavia, so was the "trading" of nobility titles. It wasnt before well into the 16th century this was possible in Denmark. BOTH of your parent had to be nobles, before you were noble. Thus no buying of titles for townsfolk and no marrying into noble families to get the title (though lots of intermarriage anyway - titles is not everything, there is also money). I think it was the same in northern Germany. The "bought" titles is a later thing.


    On woman and towns:
    Women could not be soldiers, mercenaries etc (or at least did not become so as frequent as men). So while a good deal of surplus male population would find their way to one of the battlefields of Europe, surplus women had to go to towns. Also men often travlled around in larger working crews (for constructing things etc).

    Yes I agree. Medieval law is really weird though. Quite often there were laws on the books which were never really enforced, or only enforced in special circumstances. Part of the reasons for many of the myths about medieval life is from them looking at the law books (and law proclamations of Kings and Popes) and assuming that this was how thing actually went. It wasn't until they started going through and translating actual court records that they realized the law as written and the law as practiced were very different, with the latter tending to be much more loose and flexible than the former.
    I very much agree. You might even say that many of the laws AGAINST something, hows that it was frequently done to the annoyance of the leaders.

  21. - Top - End - #411
    Ogre in the Playground
     
    Hazzardevil's Avatar

    Join Date
    Dec 2010
    Location
    What's this planet again?
    Gender
    Male

    Default Re: Got a Real-World Weapon, Armor or Tactics Question? Mk. XXIV

    The peasant discussion is going into far more detail than I know anything about, but I can talk about Germany and Messers a little.

    Before we start, a sword blade does not stop at the hilt. The metal is solid from the point to inside the handle. Below is a dagger diagram I found online, which makes the tang clear.



    An alternative (And in my opinion, more likely) theory to explain Messers comes from guilds. The knifemakers guilds make blades with full length tangs, the swordmakers made blades with a shorter tang. Traditionally, that's always been the case. There's a major exception in the late 19th century when a company, I think it was Wilkinson Sword (Who did the majority of all British Government Sword contracts) who got the patent for swords with a full width tang. So they made sabres with it. I forget the reason why, but this was considered a large enough development that the Patent Office approved it.

    Back to the point about Messers. The idea is that if you wanted to own a weapon, but there's no swordmakers in town, you'd go to the knifemakers. They'd make the messer blade and they have a functional "sword". A one handed cut and thrust blade, which is what you need for self defence.

    And I think people misunderstand the Oakshotte Typology. There are other typologies which do the same things, but arranged different. I've heard of historians who think that the Falchion and Messer should be treated as the same weapon, due to being used the same way and the other difference being the width of the tang. I don't know how true this is though.
    My extended signature.
    Thanks to the wonderful Ceika for my signature.
    Quote Originally Posted by Chained Birds View Post
    Just one of those guys vs girls things. Guys like giant, fighting robots that shoot lazerz out their eyes while girls like pretty jewelry that sparkle in the moonlight after having a romantic interlude with a charming gentleman.

    Completely sexist, yes! Completely true, pretty much...
    I have Steam cards and other stuff! I am selling/trading them.

  22. - Top - End - #412
    Bugbear in the Playground
     
    Incanur's Avatar

    Join Date
    Sep 2010
    Location
    Albuquerque, New Mexico

    Default Re: Got a Real-World Weapon, Armor or Tactics Question? Mk. XXIV

    Crossbows are so confusing.

    Based on the historical record, you'd think the larger, heavier crossbow were more powerful than any bow, but so far replicas don't support this.

    Tod Todeschini just came out with a video testing a 1,250lb windlass crossbow. He did a distance test and only managed 235 yards with a 3.1oz bolt.

    Ralph Payne-Gallwey claimed to have shot a 3oz bolt 460 yards with a 1,200lb 15th/16th-century crossbow. (He replaced the parts that had decayed, but at least the steel prod was original.)

    This is a huge gap in performance. It depends on aerodynamics, but based on the tests in The Great Warbow, the Payne-Gallwey shot indicates 220+ J of initial kinetic energy. You'd need a ridiculous heavy (220+lb?) yew bow to shoot a 3oz project so fast, if it could be done at all.

    By contrast, Tod's distance record indicates an initial kinetic energy under 120 J. (It's possible the bolts he used are just really bad for distance shooting, and/or the bolts Payne-Gallwey used were really good.)

    According to current tests and models, a mere 80lb Manchu bow could deliver 120+ J with a heavy arrow (3-4 ounces, as Manchu archers frequently used).

    I don't really know what's going on.
    Last edited by Incanur; 2017-09-26 at 05:06 PM.
    Out of doubt, out of dark to the day's rising
    I came singing in the sun, sword unsheathing.
    To hope's end I rode and to heart's breaking:
    Now for wrath, now for ruin and a red nightfall!

  23. - Top - End - #413
    Ogre in the Playground
    Join Date
    Oct 2009
    Gender
    Male

    Default Re: Got a Real-World Weapon, Armor or Tactics Question? Mk. XXIV

    Quote Originally Posted by Incanur View Post
    Crossbows are so confusing.

    Based on the historical record, you'd think the larger, heavier crossbow were more powerful than any bow, but so far replicas don't support this.

    Tod Todeschini just came out with a video testing a 1,250lb windlass crossbow. He did a distance test and only managed 235 yards with a 3.1oz bolt.

    Ralph Payne-Gallwey claimed to have shot a 3oz bolt 460 yards with a 1,200lb 15th/16th-century crossbow. (He replaced the parts that had decayed, but at least the steel prod was original.)

    This is a huge gap in performance. It depends on aerodynamics, but based on the tests in The Great Warbow, the Payne-Gallwey shot indicates 220+ J of initial kinetic energy. You'd need a ridiculous heavy (220+lb?) yew bow to shoot a 3oz project so fast, if it could be done at all.

    By contrast, Tod's distance record indicates an initial kinetic energy under 120 J. (It's possible the bolts he used are just really bad for distance shooting, and/or the bolts Payne-Gallwey used were really good.)

    According to current tests and models, a mere 80lb Manchu bow could deliver 120+ J with a heavy arrow (3-4 ounces, as Manchu archers frequently used).

    I don't really know what's going on.
    With all due respect to Leo, who is a treasure to the community, he's not making weapons for war or hunting, he's making weapons for re-enactors and living history people. A 1,200 lb draw crossbow is a potentially very dangerous artifact. Certain aspects of the prod and the string in particular can't be pushed as far as they would when these things were used for war (or hunting bears, say)

    And for all his expertise, Leo is one guy, one of a relative handful trying to revive traditions from 500 years ago which are no longer fully understood. I think it will take some time before we have the mystery of the medieval crossbow (which works in a completely different way than modern ones) 'cracked', so to speak.

    G

  24. - Top - End - #414
    Ogre in the Playground
    Join Date
    Oct 2009
    Gender
    Male

    Default Re: Got a Real-World Weapon, Armor or Tactics Question? Mk. XXIV

    Quote Originally Posted by Hazzardevil View Post
    An alternative (And in my opinion, more likely) theory to explain Messers comes from guilds. The knifemakers guilds make blades with full length tangs, the swordmakers made blades with a shorter tang.... (snip)... if you wanted to own a weapon, but there's no swordmakers in town, you'd go to the knifemakers. They'd make the messer blade and they have a functional "sword". A one handed cut and thrust blade, which is what you need for self defence.
    Interesting theory but as far as I know, that doesn't seem to be how these guilds were organized, cutlers (messerschmeid) made swords and messers and sabers and knives and all kinds of other blades, with networks of subcontractors who did things like the heat treatments, the sharpening and polishing, the hilt assembly and so on.

    Spoiler: An actual medieval cutler at work
    Show




    G

  25. - Top - End - #415
    Firbolg in the Playground
    Join Date
    Nov 2012
    Gender
    Female

    Default Re: Got a Real-World Weapon, Armor or Tactics Question? Mk. XXIV

    I know that this might not be the best place to ask this, but I don't know if there is a thread for non-martial questions. If there is, please point me there.

    I'm currently doing research for a story of which a part will be set in a village. It's a fantasy story, but the setting is very low fantasy and I want to keep things realistic. Unfortunately, it's very hatd to find any kind of decent information about villahe life that isn't from the perspective of the manor and its owner.

    I'm especially looking for what kinds of things slightly wealthier prasants would have in a roughly 13th century setting, but any kind of information would be immensely helpful.

  26. - Top - End - #416
    Ogre in the Playground
     
    gkathellar's Avatar

    Join Date
    Nov 2010
    Location
    Beyond the Ninth Wave
    Gender
    Male

    Default Re: Got a Real-World Weapon, Armor or Tactics Question? Mk. XXIV

    Can you give us any more information on the setting/its inspirations/real-world analogs? The 13th century looked very different in different parts of Europe.
    Quote Originally Posted by KKL
    D&D is its own momentum and does its own fantasy. It emulates itself in an incestuous mess.

  27. - Top - End - #417
    Firbolg in the Playground
    Join Date
    Nov 2012
    Gender
    Female

    Default Re: Got a Real-World Weapon, Armor or Tactics Question? Mk. XXIV

    It's mostly German in inspiration, especially focusing on the more southern areas. Right now, things still are very broad, so in the end it will probably become a mixture of multiple inspirations.

  28. - Top - End - #418
    Ogre in the Playground
    Join Date
    Oct 2009
    Gender
    Male

    Default Re: Got a Real-World Weapon, Armor or Tactics Question? Mk. XXIV

    Quote Originally Posted by Raunchel View Post
    I know that this might not be the best place to ask this, but I don't know if there is a thread for non-martial questions. If there is, please point me there.

    I'm currently doing research for a story of which a part will be set in a village. It's a fantasy story, but the setting is very low fantasy and I want to keep things realistic. Unfortunately, it's very hatd to find any kind of decent information about villahe life that isn't from the perspective of the manor and its owner.

    I'm especially looking for what kinds of things slightly wealthier prasants would have in a roughly 13th century setting, but any kind of information would be immensely helpful.
    I read a good mystery novel one time set in England in the 13th Century in a small town or market village. The author is a HEMA guy so the fight-scenes are particularly realistic. But it give you a good idea of village life at that time I think.

    https://www.amazon.com/Wayward-Appre.../dp/1452876819

    G

  29. - Top - End - #419
    Dwarf in the Playground
     
    BardGuy

    Join Date
    Jan 2012

    Default Re: Got a Real-World Weapon, Armor or Tactics Question? Mk. XXIV

    Quote Originally Posted by Galloglaich View Post
    With all due respect to Leo, who is a treasure to the community, he's not making weapons for war or hunting, he's making weapons for re-enactors and living history people. A 1,200 lb draw crossbow is a potentially very dangerous artifact. Certain aspects of the prod and the string in particular can't be pushed as far as they would when these things were used for war (or hunting bears, say)

    And for all his expertise, Leo is one guy, one of a relative handful trying to revive traditions from 500 years ago which are no longer fully understood. I think it will take some time before we have the mystery of the medieval crossbow (which works in a completely different way than modern ones) 'cracked', so to speak.

    G
    Maybe Manchu bow is just that good...just kidding. Actually The Great Warbow's 150 lb draw longbow also outperform Tod's arbalest.

    The physics behind bow/crossbow performance are quite set already (i.e. draw weight and powerstroke, as well as secondary factors such as bow limb/string/type of arrow/friction/release etc). There shouldn't be any more "X factor" that we don't already know.

    To put it in another word, two similarly designed bow/crossbows with similar draw weight and powerstroke should have similar performance. IMHO no amount of optimization on those secondary factors can drastically improve the performance of one bow over another similar bow by a factor of two.

    (So either Sir Ralph Payne-Gallwey 460 yard shot is erroneous or influenced by external factors such as strong wind, or he was using a radically different, more efficient crossbow design)

  30. - Top - End - #420
    Ogre in the Playground
     
    Mike_G's Avatar

    Join Date
    Dec 2005
    Location
    Laughing with the sinners
    Gender
    Male

    Default Re: Got a Real-World Weapon, Armor or Tactics Question? Mk. XXIV

    Very interesting video I found while browsing Youtube.

    I'm not sure exactly how accurate it is, but it's from a Spanish movie and shows the clash of two pike units in the 30 Years War. Before the infantry melee, the unit gets pummeled by artillery and stands off a cavalry assault.

    What I though was kinda nifty was how when the ranks of pike meet, they don't smash into one another, but kind of fence a bit at distance. Then a few men with short weapons dash in under the pikes and start slashing and stabbing.

    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4y6agtVxWi8&t=623s

    Again, I don't know how much of this is accurate and how much is show biz, but it's worth a watch.

    If anybody can critique it for accuracy, that would be nice as well.
    Out of wine comes truth, out of truth the vision clears, and with vision soon appears a grand design. From the grand design we can understand the world. And when you understand the world, you need a lot more wine.


Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •