|
Amyclas posted:How did a warrior fight effectively with teardrop shaped shields? Dr. Platypus posted:I'm fairly certain a teardrop shield would be held with the teardrop pointing slightly backwards, not straight down towards the ground. This makes it similar in style to a round shield, with the addition of a bit extra to protect your thigh/leg. It wonder if it could be that the top half (where your arm is attached and you presumably have the most control) is the 'business end' as it were, and making the bottom taper off like that would still offer some protection that a large oval shield would, while being considerably lighter. Also, I always thought they looked super bad rear end.
|
#
?
Mar 27, 2013 20:22
|
|
Yes, it's like a lava lamp.
|
|
| # ? May 9, 2024 07:50 |
|
|
PittTheElder posted:It wonder if it could be that the top half (where your arm is attached and you presumably have the most control) is the 'business end' as it were, and making the bottom taper off like that would still offer some protection that a large oval shield would, while being considerably lighter. That's pretty much what I was trying to say. And yeah, they do look super bad rear end.
|
|
#
?
Mar 27, 2013 20:39
|
|
|
I think the taper makes them easier to use on horseback, too.
|
|
#
?
Mar 27, 2013 20:41
|
|
|
What was slavery like in medieval Europe? I understand that the bulk of the old Roman slavery system had dissolved in the mess that was feudalism by then, but there must have still been some proper slaves, since Portugal at least was buying African slaves through Morocco before they developed sailing techniques to cut out the middleman.
|
|
#
?
Mar 27, 2013 21:07
|
|
|
Portugal bought slaves to use in crops, mining and other activities in the new world but slaves weren't really used as an economic item during medieval times. Slaves took the form of house servants but as far as i know it wasn't that common. The caliphates tended to use slaves as soldiers, a tradition that can be best seen with the Mamluk and Janissary army corps but that was also seen in the Iberian peninsula. So basically, house servants or soldiers. Chattel slavery was still a few centuries to come.
|
|
#
?
Mar 29, 2013 05:16
|
|
|
This thread is awesome. It's great seeing others who actually know Medieval history. Do you guys know much about the Hanseatic league?
|
|
#
?
Mar 29, 2013 06:49
|
|
|
Mans posted:Portugal bought slaves to use in crops, mining and other activities in the new world but slaves weren't really used as an economic item during medieval times. Not exactly correct. This was the case for Portugal, but slavery was an important enterprise for the Italian merchant republics, particularly Genoa and Venice. The source of slaves were the Slavonic peoples in Central Europe and the Balkans, and this is supposed to be how we get the word "slavery" via the Greek. Acquisition of slaves in Central Europe stopped after those areas became Christianized but continued in the Balkans, probably because they were closer to Italy and could not rely on a strong political entity like medieval Poland or Bohemia for protection. Slaves were sent east for sale to Muslim and Greek buyers. The City of Caffa in the Crimea, controlled by Genoa for most of the medieval period, was the primary depot for the Mediterranean slave trade. People from nearby areas to the north of the Black Sea, like the Kipchaks were also trafficked through Caffa to the Muslim world, mainly for use as slave soldiers like the Mamluks. Coincidentally Caffa was also the place where Europeans first encountered the Black Death, and ships fleeing the plague were the vector for spreading it throughout Europe. I'm pretty sure Venice is continued the trade in humans with the Ottoman Empire on into the early 16th century, mainly young women. There is also an interesting connection between the Venetian practice of slavery and the later triangular trade in the Caribbean. One of the major centers of early sugar cultivation for Europe was the Venetian-controlled island of Crete, which ran on slave labor. I'm not super-familiar with the topic but I believe historians have recently suggest that the sugar plantations in the Caribbean may have been a conscious imitation of Venetian practices on Crete.
|
|
#
?
Mar 29, 2013 08:03
|
|
|
Yeah i was thinking mainly about western Europe but i didn't know how involved Italian city states were with balkan slavery. Great post, thanks for the info 
|
|
#
?
Mar 29, 2013 08:43
|
|
|
James The 1st posted:This thread is awesome. It's great seeing others who actually know Medieval history. Teriyaki Hairpiece fucked around with this message at 13:45 on Mar 31, 2013 |
|
#
?
Mar 31, 2013 13:43
|
|
|
What's the difference between the Knarr and a Cog? Mainly in architectural design.
|
|
#
?
Apr 1, 2013 17:16
|
|
|
Railtus posted:Motte & Bailey (1000 AD): Essentially a ditch or moat with a stockade (sharpened logs) and the earth from the ditch used to create an artificial mound. On top of the mound was a tower, often of wood. I've always had an interest in Motte & Bailey castles. Building a fortified structure within weeks is very impressive, and not to mention how cool they look. What always concerned me is the arguments for constructing this type of castle. The defenses are there, but I would imagine a design like this has many weak points which could be penetrated by an enemy. 1. Were these types of castles built primarily for long-term use? I would imagine these castles, which were used for aggressive offense, could be dismantled/abandoned after they were not needed anymore. 2. The bailey seems like a vulnerable point of attack. If you were to attack a Motte and Bailey, how would you attack it? 3. Any interesting stories from history detailing sieges/attacks on Motte and Bailey castles? Great thread Railtus, I've been enjoying it from the beginning.
|
|
#
?
Apr 2, 2013 01:28
|
|
|
Mans posted:What's the difference between the Knarr and a Cog? Mainly in architectural design. Cogs were "evolved" from knarrs. So there's not a big difference between a late knarr and a early cog. Typical 12th century cog's length/width/draugth/freeboard relationship is 14/4/2/2, while typical 9th century knarr's is 14/4/1/1. If you made a cog and a knarr that had the same length, they would need the same amount of sailors because their rigging is identical, ie. one mast with one square-rigged sail. Cog would be higher and deeper than knarr and its cargo capacity would be larger. That means that cogs could transport cargo cheaper and they were more seaworthy and harder to board, but knarrs could travel by river and could be transported overland to the next river. Knarrs could also be rowed easier and could be easily beached so they didn't need harbours. Cogs and knarrs weren't the same length though. Cogs were usually twice the length of knarrs. Later cogs were quite different from knarrs. They had more masts. Early knarrs had straight or slightly inward curving bow and stern, while later cogs had a bowsprit. Knarrs and early cogs had a side mounted steering oar and later cogs had stern mounted rudder. Later cogs had full deck and earlier cogs and knarrs had no deck or partially covered deck. Must have been fun travelling to Greenland in an open ship. Knarrs and early cogs didn't have castles. Later cog had castles added on after the ship was launched and even later models the castles built-in originally. Later cogs had crows' nests.  Comparison of a cog and knarr.  Knarr replica.  Cog drawing without castles.  Dutch cog replica that has castle built in after launch.  Bremen Kogge replica that has castle built in originally. (Click for larger). Cogs and knarrs served different needs and both were well suited to their job. Cogs were used by Baltic and North Sea traders who had to transport lots of cargo as cheaply as possible. That means they needed ships with large cargo space and ships that were so seaworthy they could be used also in spring and autumn. High freeboard was useful against pirates who usually used small boats. Knarrs weren't used by large trading guilds, but by farmers and small-time traders. Each crew member bought a share of the ship. Knarrs weren't built in big city shipyards but in small villages. Knarrs and other Viking era ships weren't really that seaworthy, and they were used usually in coastal and river trading and raiding. Longer journeys were made only once a year in the summer when the winds were calmer. So if you wanted to trade in Iceland, Greenland or Vinland, you made the trip one year, and came back the next.
|
|
#
?
Apr 2, 2013 15:11
|
|
|
Do you know if runes (as in the fuþark) were common knowledge amongst the population in Scandinavia during the middle ages? From what I understand they were mostly used on runestones and on valuables or prestigious objects, but then on the other hand you have finds like the Bryggen inscriptions and runic graffiti in Haga Sophia Could you shed some light on this? I love the picture a bored Varangian standing guard or something in the Haga Sophia and carving his name into the parapet he is standing by  Also, thanks for the amazing thread! Hovermoose fucked around with this message at 03:11 on Apr 4, 2013 |
|
#
?
Apr 3, 2013 02:49
|
|
|
OP and others, what is the prevailing opinion on the accuracy of the three volume series detailing the Crusades by Steven Runciman? I enjoyed reading it, but haven't had time to read other writings discussing the events during the Crusades to check Runciman's statements. If you don't have knowledge on the books, please disregard. One area I am particularly curious about is the politics between Christian leaders in Outremer and Muslims. I know Christians fought Christians and Muslims fought Muslims, but how often did individuals on one "side" cooperate with the other in order to gain an advantage over an enemy who happened to be of their own religion? Edit: Also, any recommendations on largely unbiased books discussing this time period would be most appreciated. Thanks in advance, this thread is awesome. Bait and Swatch fucked around with this message at 06:50 on Apr 3, 2013 |
|
#
?
Apr 3, 2013 06:45
|
|
|
Tailored Sauce posted:2. The bailey seems like a vulnerable point of attack. If you were to attack a Motte and Bailey, how would you attack it? Set it on fire - it's made of wood. If that's not an option, surround it and starve them out. If that's also not an option and you have to assault it ... going around the back and hitting the motte directly looks like it'd be the best option for the one in that picture. Going through the bailey first would just funnel your men into the walled kill zone on the hill.
|
|
#
?
Apr 4, 2013 01:04
|
|
|
Tailored Sauce posted:3. Any interesting stories from history detailing sieges/attacks on Motte and Bailey castles? One of the most famous motte and bailey events has to be when Caesar laid siege to a huge motte and bailey fort (personally, I have a hard time calling it a castle) to capture Vercingetorix. He basically did the aforementioned surrounding combined with raids up the side of the hill.
|
|
#
?
Apr 4, 2013 16:45
|
|
|
Dr. Platypus posted:I'm fairly certain a teardrop shield would be held with the teardrop pointing slightly backwards, not straight down towards the ground. This makes it similar in style to a round shield, with the addition of a bit extra to protect your thigh/leg. The shield design makes perfect sense though. The knight/fighter isn't fighting in an isosceles style stance.  Where the head is the top of the triangle, and the feet are the bottom two corners. No one fights with feet both shoulder width apart and facing the target. They're fighting much like a boxer, turned sideways and only exposing one leg and one shoulder to the target. This makes the shield lighter in weight, while still remaining very long, which it can be used to bash and hit people easier with at a safer distance, as opposed to a round shield.
|
|
#
?
Apr 4, 2013 17:34
|
|
|
the runs formula posted:The shield design makes perfect sense though. The knight/fighter isn't fighting in an isosceles style stance. I'm aware of all this. I was saying a teardrop shape was a pretty good design, able to be used in the same style as a round shield, but with extra size/protection for use on horseback.
|
|
#
?
Apr 4, 2013 18:33
|
|
|
Bait and Swatch posted:OP and others, what is the prevailing opinion on the accuracy of the three volume series detailing the Crusades by Steven Runciman? I enjoyed reading it, but haven't had time to read other writings discussing the events during the Crusades to check Runciman's statements. If you don't have knowledge on the books, please disregard. The medieval ages isn't my area of expertise so I can't name any names but cooperation between individuals was not rare. Besides the obvious examples of Christian subjects in Muslim lands who were generally tolerated there are a bunch of examples of Muslim leaders letting Christian forces through their lands so they could attack their rivals.
|
|
#
?
Apr 4, 2013 20:56
|
|
|
Davincie posted:The medieval ages isn't my area of expertise so I can't name any names but cooperation between individuals was not rare. Besides the obvious examples of Christian subjects in Muslim lands who were generally tolerated there are a bunch of examples of Muslim leaders letting Christian forces through their lands so they could attack their rivals. Thanks for the reply. That falls in line with what I've been reading, but it goes against the stereotypical narrative and was curious how accurate it was.
|
|
#
?
Apr 5, 2013 02:21
|
|
|
I used to lurk the ARMA forums. What are some other sites that are good resources for info and forum discussions? Also, is it true that basically all non-ARMA medieval enthusiasts consider ARMA guys pretentious asses?
|
|
|
#
?
Apr 5, 2013 03:37
|
|
|
Beaumains posted:I used to lurk the ARMA forums. What are some other sites that are good resources for info and forum discussions? I don't want to blanket all ARMA members as pretentious asses, but their director, John Clements, has a "with us or against us" philosophy with other HEMA groups. Where other groups I am aware of/ part of have no problem pooling their knowledge or working together, John flat-out won't work with any group that doesn't become an ARMA-subsidiary. Edit: you may like SwordForum.com Poldarn fucked around with this message at 05:23 on Apr 5, 2013 |
|
#
?
Apr 5, 2013 04:29
|
|
|
I got in to HEMA/western Martial Arts around 3 years ago and it has been a very enjoyable hobby that has been a helped me to get in better shape. Mainly I hang out on the HEMA alliance forum. It's a good place for resources and information. http://hemaalliance.com/ I have friends who are ARMA members and there is no ill will between our clubs and we share resources.
|
|
#
?
Apr 5, 2013 06:54
|
|
|
Poldarn posted:I don't want to blanket all ARMA members as pretentious asses, but their director, John Clements, has a "with us or against us" philosophy with other HEMA groups. Where other groups I am aware of/ part of have no problem pooling their knowledge or working together, John flat-out won't work with any group that doesn't become an ARMA-subsidiary. Interesting stuff. I had to look this up and I found some criticism on an ex-member's HEMA blog: http://paulushectormair.blogspot.ca/2009/04/arma-director-codifies-problem.html Apparently senior members of the organization who interact with Clements on a regular basis have a marked tendency to resign over his behavior, and he's been accused of running a cult of personality. A lot of the stuff I was able to find by looking this up online indicates that he runs the group like a kind of martial arts dojo with himself as "sensei" rathrr than as a organization based on historical inquiry. A lot of the stuff discussed in the above blog post, like the secrecy, exclusivity, and his control over intellectual property produced by members, are pretty much antithetical to scholarship and give a really bad impression of him.
|
|
#
?
Apr 5, 2013 11:07
|
|
|
EvanSchenck posted:Interesting stuff. I had to look this up and I found some criticism on an ex-member's HEMA blog: Having met him personally, he is a tremendous douche. I have never seen such a lame dude with groupies before, but he had em. grown-rear end men and women licking this dude's boots. He also gave a presentation at the conference which amounted to calling all eastern martial arts ahistorical and crappy. Unsurprisingly his fan club threw him softball questions. I'd write more but I'm on a phone. guy who asked about motte and bailey: I'm picking through the primary sources I can to see if I can find good descriptions.
|
|
#
?
Apr 5, 2013 16:23
|
|
|
I apologize if this question is too far afield from the specialties of those answering questions here, but what were the methods of personal grooming at the time, and in general, what did people find attractive at the time? I don't imagine manscaping was in vogue in the Middle Ages (or armpit/leg shaving for women, for that matter), but I also imagine that most people didn't just let their hair or bears grow endlessly. Did people clip their nails then? How were these sorts of things accomplished before disposable razors and shaving lotions?
|
|
#
?
Apr 5, 2013 19:49
|
|
|
kongurous posted:I apologize if this question is too far afield from the specialties of those answering questions here, but what were the methods of personal grooming at the time, and in general, what did people find attractive at the time? I don't imagine manscaping was in vogue in the Middle Ages (or armpit/leg shaving for women, for that matter), but I also imagine that most people didn't just let their hair or bears grow endlessly. Did people clip their nails then? How were these sorts of things accomplished before disposable razors and shaving lotions? Not that I am an expert or anything, but I can chip in with a little about grooming in medieval Scandinavia. This, like a lot of medieval things, seems to have varied a lot with location. The ninth century Frankish monk Notker the Stammerer wrote an anecdote in his book about Charlemagne Notker the Stammerer posted:There was a certain deacon who followed the habits of the Italians in that he was perpetually trying to resist nature. He used to take baths, he had his head very closely shaved, he polished his skin, he cleaned his nail, he had his hair cut as short as if it were turned on a lathe, and he wore linen underclothes and a snow-white shirt. While Notker was complaining about the habits of his fellow clergy, John of Wallingfort, the prior of St. Fridswides, had another problem. Not only had the Danes invaded most of England but... John of Wallingfort posted:...the Danes, thanks to their habit of combing their hair every day, As for specific grooming tools:  This is a 2nd century bronze razor found in Denmark. It predates the middle ages by some time, but a medieval razor would probably use the same principles (a sharp metal blade of some sort, with warying handles). There's a razor found in the Netherlands, dating from the 15th century, that bear a striking resemblance to modern straight razors. The shaving technique itself was fairly similar to modern ones though I would imagine people used cold water. Shaving was certainly more dangerous and uncomfortable back in the day and in Scandinavia it seems like most men kept whatever beard they found he found comfortable (there are some contemporary deptictions of pretty kickin' rad styles of beards) Other hair stuff include combs. One of the most common finds in old norse sites are combs made from bone. Other grooming tools include earspoons, tweezers and nailcleaners. Hair styling was certainly a thing, though more simple in form than today. In scandinavia the standard seemed to be roughly shoulder length hair for free men and long and loose for unmarried women. Thralls of both sexes were required to cut their hair short as a sign of their servitude. During his time amongst the Rus' people Ahmad ibn Fadlan, an arab traveler and writer, noted that the men bleached their beards to a saffron yellow colour using a soap with a very strong base. It's likely that the same soap was used to bleach their hair as well. Beauty ideals are also something that tend to fluctuate over time and there's been some quite funky ideals throughout time.  This is a 15th century portrait of a upper class woman. When this image was painted, the ideal was a high and round forehead and women are supposed to have plucked their hairlines and eyebrows to make the forehead appear larger. e: Mikill Óðinn, this post became very long very fast. Hovermoose fucked around with this message at 06:15 on Apr 7, 2013 |
|
#
?
Apr 7, 2013 04:49
|
|
|
How many castles actually had secret escape tunnels and such? Were there any at all?
|
|
#
?
Apr 7, 2013 07:15
|
|
|
Most tunnels in castles were not for escape, but rather to smuggle in food during a siege.
|
|
#
?
Apr 7, 2013 23:08
|
|
|
Hovermoose posted:During his time amongst the Rus' people Ahmad ibn Fadlan, an arab traveler and writer, noted that the men bleached their beards to a saffron yellow colour using a soap with a very strong base. It's likely that the same soap was used to bleach their hair as well. I heard about this guy when I was writing a paper on Yaroslav the Wise. As I recall he also noted that they blew their snot into the same bowl of water they used for washing.
|
|
#
?
Apr 8, 2013 02:48
|
|
|
There is an interesting scene of that in the film "13th Warrior".
|
|
#
?
Apr 8, 2013 03:51
|
|
|
ganglysumbia posted:There is an interesting scene of that in the film "13th Warrior". Also in the new drama series on the history channel, Vikings, which is actually surprisingly good and has Gabriel Byrne, it's about Ragnar Lodbrok and his ascension.
|
|
#
?
Apr 8, 2013 12:47
|
|
|
I imagine this isn't a common topic for extensive study, but what was medieval footwear like? I know pointed shoes were a Thing, but apart from that I'm totally in the dark. I'm especially interested in the shoes worn by armored knights and such, since I imagine their feet would have to be well-protected while still being light enough that they won't hamper movement on the battlefield.
|
|
#
?
Apr 14, 2013 22:57
|
|
|
Holy poo poo, yeah. If someone on this thread knows, please enlighten us. All I can think of is a footwear progression from Roman sandals-->pointy shoes-->thigh boots-->Nikes.
|
|
#
?
Apr 15, 2013 07:22
|
|
|
ganglysumbia posted:There is an interesting scene of that in the film "13th Warrior". Banderas' character is extremely loosely based on Ahmad ibn Fadlan and his writings on the Volga Vikings: "They are the filthiest race that God ever created. They do not wipe themselves after a stool, nor wash themselves thereafter, any more than if they were wild asses. They come from their country in the North, anchor their ships in the Volga River, and build large wooden houses on its banks. In every such house there live ten or twenty, more or less. Each man has a couch, where he sits with the beautiful girls he has for sale. Here he is as likely as not to enjoy one of them while a friend looks on. At times several of them will be thus engaged, each in full view of the others. Now and then a merchant will come to a house to purchase a girl, and find her master thus embracing her, and not giving over until he has full had his will. Every morning a girl comes and brings a tub of water, and places it before her master. In this he proceeds to wash his face and hands, and then his hair, combing it out over the vessel. Thereupon he blows his nose, and spits into the tub, and leaving no dirt behind, conveys it all into this water. When he has finished, the girl carries the tub to the man next t him, who does the same. Thus she continues carrying the tub from one to another until each man has blown his nose and spit into the tub, and washed his face and hair."
|
|
#
?
Apr 15, 2013 14:45
|
|
|
I love the tradition of describing "sinful barbarians" in something that is less of a history and more of a sex fantasy.
|
|
#
?
Apr 15, 2013 17:09
|
|
|
Kaal posted:I love the tradition of describing "sinful barbarians" in something that is less of a history and more of a sex fantasy. Pretty much: When one of their chiefs dies, his family asks his girls and pages, "Which one of you will die with him?" One will answer: "I." From the moment he utters this word, he may not go back. Mostly, though, it is one of the girls who volunteers. Regarding the man of whom I spoke, one girl answered Regarding the man of whom I spoke, one girl answered "I will." She was then entrusted to two other girls, who kept watch over her and accompanied her everywhere she went. The people were preparing the dead man's funeral clothes, and this girl gave herself over to drinking and singing, and was cheerful and gay.[...]They drew the dead man out of the grave and clothed him. They carried him into the ship, seated him on the quilted covering, supported him with the pillows, and brought strong drinks, fruits, and herbs to place beside him. Finally they brought a cock and hen, slew them, and threw them in, too. The girl meanwhile walked to and fro, entering one after another of the tents which they had there. The occupant of each tent lay with her, saying, "Tell your master I did this only for love of you."
|
|
#
?
Apr 15, 2013 18:52
|
|
|
Why did the Byzantine Theme system break down? Why did the Empire end up relying so heavily on mercenaries after the 10th century? Why during the fourth crusade's siege of Constantinople, was there no attempted relief of the city from the rest of the Empire? I understand that some of the military was naturally on the borders when the siege started, but the siege lasted months, and at that point very little of the Empire did not have access to the ocean to sail back relatively quickly. Where were the Empire's armies?
|
|
#
?
Apr 15, 2013 23:16
|
|
|
Alhazred posted:Pretty much: I remember reading some quote, where an Arab is writing what he saw through the window in the next house in some Crusader state city. He describes a man and a naked woman sitting in the same room talking, and then some other guy comes in and the woman doesn't try to cover herself. It also described minutely how long her pubic and armpit hair was.
|
|
#
?
Apr 15, 2013 23:53
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 9, 2024 07:50 |
|
|
What did Europeans write about the habits of Saracens during this period? Also, is 'saracen' an offensive term or just a label for the groups that ruled the Middle East and north Africa at the time?
|
|
#
?
Apr 16, 2013 01:34
|
|