This castle isn't Alnwick at all. It is the castle of Obidos, in Portugal. We can see typical Moorish/Iberian merlons on the right.
Otherwise, the current castle of Alnwick has been modified several times since the 12th century. The same for Flor da Rosa (for example we can see machicolation on the tower on the right. This is a 14/15th century features).
It would be great to have you guys working as a team for castle research actually. I'd say some sort of regional system where we use some 4-5 castle examples for each culture. Al-Mansur you might want to get Thrak's steam and vise versa. Troop research is almost finalized, except that I will go over the Arabic names and make sure they make sense grammatically.
I think its necessary to make a post about the heralds for the Crusader states.
As for the Kingdom of Jerusalem, the familiar Cross between four crosses seems to have actually first appeared near the start of the 1200's according to some sources. According to Whitney Smith, author of the book "Flags Through the Ages and Across the World" King Baldwin III actually had a plain white flag for his banner! Surprisingly, Smith argues that the heraldry seen with the 5 crosses, one large and four smaller ones, were added to the Kingdom's banner in 1162 by King Amalrich I.
Nonetheless, other sources argue that the Kings of Jerusalem had their own personal heralds. Some say that the Kings wore the widely accepted 5 gold crosses on a white background.
What comes as a shock to me is that the coin artifacts found on Baldwin III seem to never depict a five crosses symbol. Not at first glance at least. Personally, I think there were indeed 4 crosses around the main cross. Look at the bottom and top right on this Baldwin III coin.
Then again, Almarich the I's (Baldwin's formal successor) coins have 2 roundels around the cross and nothing depicting the 4 crosses. Which is slightly frustrating.
This is what I have decided to do for the Kingdom of Jerusalem:
Seeing that other authors who wrote on the topic (like Nathan Augustine, Nahum Shereshevsky and Jarig Bakker) seem to all agree that the flag/banner was a five crossed one, we will be going with the current banner for the Kingdom. If anyone can supply me with sources other than Smith who argue otherwise, please bring it to the table for discussion. Also, my personal interpretation of the coin finds supports a 5 cross banner.
The County of Tripoli;
Seeing as most other games butcher this flag as was pointed out to me on this thread. I did a little bit of research and found the following. At the time period of our mod, Raymond the II was the Count of Tripoli. Raymond's personal seal was found but depicted nothing that could represent heraldry of the County. (The seal has a diagonal stripe on a horseman's shield and nothing else).
However, we do have some interesting coins.
The coins basically point to one main figure. A cross with four roundels around it.
On this coin for example, you can see that an 8 pointed start with 8 roundels results in rotating the cross with four roundels seen on one side of the coin.
Here is another example:
But what's very important is that we don't seem to have any solid sources on the colours of these things. While the coins could depict heraldry, they also might not have. For recognisability's sake, I chose to go with the colours depicted in Medieval II: Total War, Kingdoms, just because we don't have any other powerful source. I will also use the four roundels surrounding the cross just because it seems logical and interesting enough. Again, if you have something to argue against this, it is by all means welcome to be brought to the discussion.
The Principality of Antioch;
At our time period Antioch's leader was actually not a family member to Bohemund I who captured the city. Bohemund the First's successor, Bohemund the II was killed in an ambush in 1130. During our period and up until 1149, Antioch had a regent. One would say an expert, Raymond of Poitiers had already held regencies for Baldwin II and Fulk of Jerusalem. However, we will not be using any of his resources, because he is not part of the main family who's herald would represent the banner.
For our banner we will use the closest coin find we have. Date at around 1144 up, this coin is of Bohemund III. The person who resumed rule after Raymond of Poitier's regency.
His coin depicts something very interesting, a pattee cross, with a crescent at the top right corner.
I wanted initially to find Bohemund the II's coinage, but what I was able to find was a coin seen here:
We have a depiction of the man and a rather plain cross with BA (Bohemond d'Antioch I'm assuming) and the II symbol.
For Antioch, I'm considering just having a cross pattee, because the crescent was after Bohemund II. I would like to hear input though through a poll that I will set up.
Thanks to Mansur and Thrak for the castle work. I actually had the pleasure of visiting Qasr Amra but I was younger and not very interested =p
I'd love to see what you can do with the models Mansur
We'll do settlements gradually and very slowly as we complete troop models. Scenes are very important.
And sorry you feel that way about the map, but its set in stone.
I have a map for Iberia between 1147-1149
But the map you have is great to see the timeline and how the lands were disputed. I will definitely ring you
The mod looks very well detailed and promising. I wish I could help with something. Will Scotland be included? I dont' have much modding skills but I could help with something about it.
The mod looks very well detailed and promising. I wish I could help with something. Will Scotland be included? I dont' have much modding skills but I could help with something about it.
Scotland will not be included during the first release and neither will the whole British Island actually. There is a good diversity in the North and we are already splitting hairs in the South and East. Future releases will include the North though.
Speaking of help =p, I am currently looking for someone who can produce good quality original music for the mod. I have a guitar myself and have composed a few pieces, but I need someone who can take what I have and record it at a professional setting =p.
I don't think I edited much of the local Crusader roster, but here's the tweaked form. One thing we could consider doing is having a mimic of the Villeins in Sicily or your arriere-ban in Germany, but with local christian peasants - I doubt there were enough frankish villeins around (most would be yeomans or something).
Someone can translate better latin than I, but "Militiae Fraternitatis" was meant to translate to "Brotherhood/Fraternity Militia". It seems that communal militias were not around in early Outremer and even Militias were relatively badly off, being more like the Hermandad brotherhoods of Iberia than the Communal militias of Italy.
I don't think I edited much of the local Crusader roster, but here's the tweaked form. One thing we could consider doing is having a mimic of the Villeins in Sicily or your arriere-ban in Germany, but with local christian peasants - I doubt there were enough frankish villeins around (most would be yeomans or something).
Someone can translate better latin than I, but "Militiae Fraternitatis" was meant to translate to "Brotherhood/Fraternity Militia". It seems that communal militias were not around in early Outremer and even Militias were relatively badly off, being more like the Hermandad brotherhoods of Iberia than the Communal militias of Italy.
Yeah. Local troops for the Crusader states are sort of sketchy in general. Christian locals were barely enough to supply armies in Christian majority countries like the Byzantines let alone troops for the Crusader states. I'm guessing the 'local' arms of the Crusader states would be 1st generation Crusaders, their children and more people who had moved from Europe. Of course, Christian locals would be there as well. Anyway, I should have everything written up by Saturday afternoon and then we'll move on.
Well wait for my Fatimid repolishing. I might need to do it for the Abbasids too, since I get the impression all factions should generally have 2 trees for their local troops (usually 1 cavalry, 1 infantry, but not always).
This is what I am thinking for the Fatimid remake. I didn't quite pour over resources like last time, but that's because I didn't have them as available and I already did the research so it was a case of referencing the previous proposal and relying on memory.
Strengths:
1) You get pretty much every troop type under the sun. It's not like I wanted to do that, it's just the Fatimids seemed to really have every damn type of soldier imaginable. The only thing rarer was horse archers, which we'll reflect in reinforcement rates and availability.
2) Javelin armed melee infantry (Sudani Infantry), might sprinkle non-guaranteed javelins amongst their Arab infantry.
3) Plenty of melee cavalry to select from. It should be really easy to mobilize a large force of cavalry from your bedouins and iqtas.
Weaknesses:
1) For the player - all your best troops are recruitable only in Cairo and Cairo's suburbs
2) For the AI - Troop access will be based around historical relationships and dynamics of soldiers. See below for detailed explanation*
3) The explicitly Mamluk cavalry I mention will be restricted to just the Caliphs or just the Caliph and Vizier's army
4) Outside of the Armenians (who will probably only be available in Cairo), piss poor archery.
Response to #2 said:
The Fatimids are a bit tricky for how much of a relatively centralized government they were (with exceptions). Vizier Badr's reforms in the late 11th century brought about a division of the army into the Caliphal or Palace Regiments ( Al-Khawass Al-Khilafa) and ordinary army regiments (Tawa'if Al-Ajnad). Even most regular army regiments were usually housed in Cairo, and many if not most Amirs had households (primary ones, even?) in Cairo for politicking and power-dynamics. We're dealing with a highly centralized regime here, even with Caliphal decline of power (Being seized by close by Viziers and Amirs).
So what we'll determine is where troops:
1) Are housed in Cairo, belong to the Ordinary Regiments - in which case they'll be given to AI armies with 'a little' restriction, since unless Egypt was threatened their armies were usually on the small side. Most of the Abid and Armenians are here. Restriction will just mean that patrols and scouting parties and maybe the lowest class of nobility wouldn't get too many if any Armenians or Sudani, but that low to high class named NPC nobles would get them in large numbers (Especially Sudani).
2) Are housed in Cairo, belong to the Caliphal Regiments, but serve abroad often - they'll be given in greatest numbers to the Caliph, Vizier, and Marshall of the Army. They might then be given in much smaller numbers to the senior nobles of the realm. Hujariyya and the Royal Armenian Foot Archers are the only examples I can think of for this category.
3) Are housed in Cairo, belong to the Caliphal Regiments, and rarely leave Cairo - These are the Mamluks and Caliphal Abid Regiments (Though those may get moved to #2). The lower mamluks and Caliphal Abid are limited to the Vizier, Caliph, and the Marshall of the Army gets the smallest number. The senior mamluks are limited to the Caliph and Caliph only.
It seems that most Fatimid troop's barracks were in Cairo, and many if not most Amirs had households in Cairo. What we'll do is determine where a unit is stationed in Cairo but usually serves elsewhere (like Fort Bragg being the Home of the US Airborne, but them serving well and far away from it), and where a unit is almost always stationed in Cairo and Cairo alone and were linked with the person or command of the Caliph, Vizier, or Marshall of the Army. We'll also temper things with the limitations of the engine.
David Nicolle mentions that in the earlier Iqta systems of the Fatimids, (presumably the 10th and 1th century, with this reform at some point in the 11th century, gave individual soldier's iqtas. A reform at some point in the 11th century shifted to the iqta i'tidad, which had a large iqta given to an officer who was expected to support a specific number of soldiers.(Was also the system that the Ayyubids inherited).
He also remarks about the Bedouin being "almost a state within a state, but as a community rather than a geographic entity". This supports my opinion of maintaining the bedouin as an integral part of the Fatimid army, but I am not sure how it would work best. We can give them to the Egyptian Local tree, or we can make them special troops.
Bedouin were located in general within the Fatimid Caliphate as "A state within a state" (as a community, not a geography), on or near the fringes of the cultivated zone in Egypt proper, in the Sinai Peninsula, and in southern Palestine, as well as Arabia and especially the Hijaz who provided 'a substantial nmber of auxiliary cavalry'.
1) North-Western Nile (Banu Qurra) - provide local auxilia and act as a local garrison
2) Deep South of Egypt (Arab-Arabized Banu Kanz) - a major role up until the Mamluk era
And prior to being dispersed by the Mamluks, they were found principally in:
1) Sharqiya province
2) Buhayra province
3) Eastern Desert
4) Jifar area
5) Sinai Peninsula
6) Western Oases
7) Northern part of the Western Desert Coastline as far as Barqa in Libya.
So I'm going to incoporate the Bedouin into the Fatimid local roster.
Regarding the various Black Corps, primarily referencing David Nicolle's book on "Crusader Warfare Volume II" because it's easily accessible compared to the woven, complicated tapestry of other resources I looked up on the Fatimids:
We know they existed in common regiments (Ta'ifa/Tawa'if). We also know that they existed (Along with Armenians) in the private armies of the Caliph and of the Wiziers, which caused dynastic and political intrigue. Hence in order to depict the full spectrum of black troops you'd have seen, the -common- Ta'ifa regiments are the weakest, then the Wizier's corps, then the Caliph's corps.
Sudani (Spearmen and Infantry) and Armenians (Archers) should be the most numerous infantry.
Bedouin and Faris Al-jund and Al-Muqta'un should be the most numerous cavalry.
LOCAL [Left Side]
Awamm Al-Arab: Arab commoners
I don't know what Arabs referred to themselves as, or if Egyptians/Palestinians/Hijazis had different terms. In any case, I read that the Arabs of egypt still had a bit of their warrior ancestry in them back in the 11th century, so these guys are basically impromptu militia - not as good as an ahdath, but not trash serfs.
Muttatawwi'a: Religious volunteers
We can add on a sub-title to the unit if we want, or just go with a different spelling. It's meant to be a religious volunteer citizen. Nothing more than a shield, his clothing, some sort of sidearm (knives, short swords, maces, clubs, short spears). Javelins are a possibility, but I am not sure.
Jund (Ajnad?) Al-Arab Infantry: "Arab Militia" Melee troops
Jund, or the plural ajnad, is a really tricky term, but seems to often mean army and have an arab militia association with it. I'm appropriating it for that usage, since I don't know of the equivalent of an Ahdath in the Fatimid realm (being a Syrian thing). They'll wear light mail. Could be sword and shield, but I do like the idea of them as spearmen, since it'd suggest with formations we'd have a neat scene of black and white spearmen at the front of the army.
Faris/Fursan Al-Jund (Ajnad?): "Sergeant" Horsemen
These guys are meant to be the retainers of the Iqta holders. Askar could work, but I didn't see it in Fatimid records. I did find Ajnad or Jund, but I'm still confused on their meaning, except that Ajnad is plural Jund. Choose whichever fits. Equivalent to a Tier 1 Latin or Seljuk cavalryman. Soft armor and no armor, spear and sword and shield.
Faris/Fursan Al-Muqta'un: Iqta holding officers
Roughly analogous to a Frankish Junior Knight? Holders of the large iqta i'tidad, an officer expected to have a personal retinue. Equivalent to a tier 2 Latin or Seljuk cavalryman. Probably mail armor, maybe some softer stuff, spear and sword and shield.
Badu Qaba'il Infantry: Tribal Bedouin Infantry
Sword and/or spear unarmored infantry. They really are nothing special, just fleet of foot and from the poorer bedouin who can't get a horse.
Badu Qaba'il Archers: Tribal Bedouin Archers
I'm not sure about this, since most archers show up as Sudanese or Armenian. But we can include them and just make them rare in AI armies.
Badu Qaba'il Al-Faris/Fursan: Tribal Bedouin cavalry
Unarmored lancers with swords and possibly javelins.
Badu Sheikh (pl. Shaykh) Al-Khayl: Bedouin 'noble' cavalry
Superior grade bedouin horse, though I am not sure they'll have armor.
MERCENARY [No Pic necessary]
Zanjii Warriors: Black light infantry
Shield, javelins, short spear or sword, no armor
Daylami Infantry: Shield-bearers
Shield, Javelin, axe, mix of light armor and mail?
Turcoman Al-Sighar: Junior Turkmen
Unarmored Horse Archers
Turcoman Al-Kibar: Senior Turkmen
Lightly Armored Horse Archers
SPECIAL [Right Side]
Abd Al-Ta'ifa Archers: "Black-Slave Regiment" Archer
Common black regiment. No armor. Bow and sidearm.
Abd Al-Sighar Al-Ta'ifa Infantry: Younger/lesser Sudani Regiment Infantry
Mix of no armor and soft armor, sword/javelin and shield. May be switched with the Spearmen for the starting spot.
Abd Al-Sighar Al-Ta'ifa Spearmen: Younger/lesser Sudani Regiment Spearmen
Mix of no armor and soft armor, spear and shield. If switched with Infantry for the starting spot, will always get soft armor
Abd Al-Kibar Al-Ta'ifa Infantry: Regular Regiment Sudani Infantry
Mix of soft armor and mail (or just mail), sword/javelin and shield
Abd Al-Kibar Al-Ta'ifa Macemen: Regular Regiment Sudani Shock troops
Mix of soft armor and mail (or just mail), armed with the 2 handed weapons we hear about. I'll have to do research into this.
Abd Al-Kibar Al-Ta'ifa Spearmen: Regular Regiment Sudani Spearmen
Mix of soft armor and mail (or just mail), spear, and shield.
Abd Al-Khawass Al-Khilafa Infantry: Caliphal/Palace Regiment Sudani
Well armored in kazaghands, with shield, sword, and javelin
Abd Al-Khawass Al-Khilafa Spearmen: Caliphal/Palace Regiment Sudani
Well armored in kazaghands, with spear and shield
Ta'ifa Al-Arman Archers: "Armenian Regiment" Archers
To save space, I'm having the Armenian units represent both Mamluk (Muslim) Armenians and Christian Armenians. So if you have to give a unit a religion make any Al-Arman unit in the Fatimids as 'neutral' in faith. Soft armored foot archers, with bow, sidearm, maybe a shield.
Haras Al-Khawass (or Al-Khass) Al-Arman Archers: Fatimid Guard Armenian Archers
This is just a means to merge a Wazir's and Khalif's unit in one, since it feels excessive and OP to have three tiers of Armenian Archers. Mail armor, shields, swords/maces/whatever and bow. Top notch archers.
Ta'ifa Al-Arman Faris/Fursan: "Armenian Regiment" Horsemen
Mail clad horse archers.
Hujariyya Al-Sighar Faris/Fursan: Junior Hujariyya
Equivalent to a tier 3 latin or seljuk cavalryman. They were formed to try and fight back against the Ghulam Corps of the Turks, since after the start of the Turkish-Fatimid hostilities the Fatimids put less and less faith in the Turks in their armies. I remember one account making them horse archers, but I am not sure about it. I kind of like making them the top echelon melee cavalry, while the horse archers will be covered by the Armenian Horse and Mamluks. So prob spear, sword, and shield.
Hujariyya Al-Kibar Faris/Fursan: Senior Hujariyya
Equivalent to a tier 3 latin or seljuk cavalryman. They were formed to try and fight back against the Ghulam Corps of the Turks, since after the start of the Turkish-Fatimid hostilities the Fatimids put less and less faith in the Turks in their armies. I remember one account making them horse archers, but I am not sure about it. I kind of like making them the top echelon melee cavalry, while the horse archers will be covered by the Armenian Horse and Mamluks. So prob spear, sword, and shield.
Ta'ifa Al-Arman Faris/Fursan: Armenian Cavalry Regiment
I wrote down when I first did research that "a significant portion if not all of the Armenian cavalry served as mounted archers". I forget where I read it, but I am fairly sure it was from a detailed source and not just "History for the layperson" (Osprey). But some measure of Mamluks existed, since the Hujariyya is apparently drawn from the sons of slave-warriors.
Mamluk Al-Khawass Al-Khalifa: Royal Caliphate Mamluks
Heavy Horse Archers. Must ONLY be given to the Caliph and Vizier's army, and maybe to people who are in the good graces of either. Or spawned to the marshal of the army.
Sibyan Al-Rikab Al-Khass: Young Guard, protector of Caliph
"Superheavy" (Armored horse and Rider) Horse Archers. Must ONLY be given to the Caliph
This site uses cookies to help personalise content, tailor your experience and to keep you logged in if you register.
By continuing to use this site, you are consenting to our use of cookies.
