Which faction are slavic people in upcoming Bannerlord?

Users who are viewing this thread

hruza said:
From historians. I highly recommend you to do the same.
i highly recomnend you to review your list of historians first.

And so they fought without metallic armor with spear, shield, few javelins
Just like dozens nations separated by space and time. Do you want to say they all have the same armor? Or they had distinct look from each other, after all? Answer is obvious, I really hope. This is why I said to OP, that is no sense to portrait west Slavs separately, even if “Not all Slavs are Russians or Ukrainians”, because western Slavs completely adopted war practices from western kingdoms. They used the same armors, not “somewhat similar”, but completely the same with their west neighbors.
And in addition there was also equipment from Middle East and Asia
This is already enough to show that they had distinct look and weaponry. Best example of it are evidences that there was developed production of composite bows in X-XI centuries in Novgorod, which was never common in the West. Cavalry also adopted heavy sabers much earlier, for reason. Do you know that there is no separate word for lance in Russian? Only spear and pike we have and the last name was borrowed. The same reason, I guess. In addition, where was a crossbow? These changes and features were reflecting of warfare, this is clear. Thus, it is sufficient to make a conclusion that warfare practices were developed by different path. Not SO significantly different path, of course. However, different enough for even you could distinct one from other on pictures without captions.

Your statements about “pomestie” horsemen are incorrect almost in all points. It was reformed later rather than to be an outcome of any previous reforms. New Order regiments, Reitars and so on. And these fighters were free to choose their armament, and for some reason, they almost always chose bow and arrows. Also you can see “кистень” (English has no separate word for it, right?) on the picture which was common in Rus’ in the most of its history (attention about adopting: and in nomadic tribes), and have no use as cavalry weapon in the west. Another penny in the piggy bank of distinction.

And to the last, about picture of settlement which should save from nomadic horse archers. What a pity that you cannot show this picture to medieval leader of West European kingdoms. With this picture, they definitely could learn how to deal with those Magyars. Alas, without this, all they could was to pray “sagittis hungarorum libera nos domine”, so Magyar came, Magyar saw, Magyar settled down where he wanted. Unlike this, East Slavic tribes could withstand against steppe raiders because of adopting their tactics from them and from more or less friendly Turkic tribes, Pechenegs, Berendei and Torkiis, which were partly assimilated later.
 
ratschbumm said:
hruza said:
From historians. I highly recommend you to do the same.
i highly recomnend you to review your list of historians first.

And so they fought without metallic armor with spear, shield, few javelins
Just like dozens nations separated by space and time. Do you want to say they all have the same armor? Or they had distinct look from each other, after all? Answer is obvious, I really hope. This is why I said to OP, that is no sense to portrait west Slavs separately, even if “Not all Slavs are Russians or Ukrainians”, because western Slavs completely adopted war practices from western kingdoms. They used the same armors, not “somewhat similar”, but completely the same with their west neighbors.
And in addition there was also equipment from Middle East and Asia
This is already enough to show that they had distinct look and weaponry. Best example of it are evidences that there was developed production of composite bows in X-XI centuries in Novgorod, which was never common in the West. Cavalry also adopted heavy sabers much earlier, for reason. Do you know that there is no separate word for lance in Russian? Only spear and pike we have and the last name was borrowed. The same reason, I guess. In addition, where was a crossbow? These changes and features were reflecting of warfare, this is clear. Thus, it is sufficient to make a conclusion that warfare practices were developed by different path. Not SO significantly different path, of course. However, different enough for even you could distinct one from other on pictures without captions.

Your statements about “pomestie” horsemen are incorrect almost in all points. It was reformed later rather than to be an outcome of any previous reforms. New Order regiments, Reitars and so on. And these fighters were free to choose their armament, and for some reason, they almost always chose bow and arrows. Also you can see “кистень” (English has no separate word for it, right?) on the picture which was common in Rus’ in the most of its history (attention about adopting: and in nomadic tribes), and have no use as cavalry weapon in the west. Another penny in the piggy bank of distinction.

And to the last, about picture of settlement which should save from nomadic horse archers. What a pity that you cannot show this picture to medieval leader of West European kingdoms. With this picture, they definitely could learn how to deal with those Magyars. Alas, without this, all they could was to pray “sagittis hungarorum libera nos domine”, so Magyar came, Magyar saw, Magyar settled down where he wanted. Unlike this, East Slavic tribes could withstand against steppe raiders because of adopting their tactics from them and from more or less friendly Turkic tribes, Pechenegs, Berendei and Torkiis, which were partly assimilated later.

Okay guys, say your opinion. Now without historical-geographical accuracy - purely hypothetically, based on your knowledge and from the game footage, which faction would best fit your western ones. Where would the Slovaks (Western Slavics) be purely theoretically on the Bannerlord map? In the territory of what faction? Empire? Battani? Strugians?

It is a game and the map is not an exact geographic Europe, but one can create an eye-catching image of that Europe from the Bannerlord map. I want to know the view, I know there is no exact faction for the Slavs in the game but we are debating purely hypothetically - not historically right now.

I would be very pleased with your opinions and I care about it - every opinion of you because this topic should also be about it, but sometimes there are misunderstandings over the Internet and it went into a spatial-geographical quarrel.

Just where we would be in this chaos of the Bannerlord map at that time and in what narrow area the Slovaks. Dot.

My personal opinion is that Stugians fit for me the best. Why?
- this convinced me (I quote):

The Sturgians are based on the federation of city-states known as Kievan Rus, located in today's Russia, Belarus and Ukraine. Like many boomtowns, the Rus river cities attracted people from faraway lands. Predominantly Slavic communities were forming into states at a breakneck pace and borrowing institutions, religions, and ways of trade and war from their neighbours. Greek missionaries, Finnic foresters, Turkic and Iranian steppe tribes, and most famously the Varangian Norse all left their mark on the aesthetics of Russian art, arms and armour. We think the motifs and styles of Sturgian equipment – gilded and peaked helmets, furs and gold brocade, runes and gripping beasts and folk embroidery and Arabesques -- will make it some of the most spectacular in the game.
- Tale Worlds - Dev Blog 14/12/17.

(just for imagination)
cf4995363b73727b47f4b23022c98e9f.jpg
 
I made a map inspired by actual europe and map that is in Bannerlord  :mrgreen:

My map:
https://ctrlv.sk/g2Ci

I hope you guys like it and do not forget to critize me at every goddamn centimeter of what i made  :razz:
The map is made purely hypothetically without historical-geographical knowledge and accuracy.
Just my imagination of world in upcomming Bannerlord.
Your thoughts? :roll:
 
TERR1K said:
Okay guys, say your opinion. Now without historical-geographical accuracy - purely hypothetically, based on your knowledge and from the game footage, which faction would best fit your western ones. Where would the Slovaks (Western Slavics) be purely theoretically on the Bannerlord map? In the territory of what faction? Empire? Battani? Strugians?
western could gravitate to Vlandia,  southern to Empire, and eastern to Vaegir :fruity:
 
ratschbumm said:
TERR1K said:
Okay guys, say your opinion. Now without historical-geographical accuracy - purely hypothetically, based on your knowledge and from the game footage, which faction would best fit your western ones. Where would the Slovaks (Western Slavics) be purely theoretically on the Bannerlord map? In the territory of what faction? Empire? Battani? Strugians?
western could gravitate to Vlandia,  southern to Empire, and eastern to Vaegir :fruity:

Battania ? maaaaaan  :facepalm: Do not tell me we are McGregor cousins  :facepalm: :mrgreen:
I think north of slovakia (at least half) + poland would fit really nice to sturgia  :roll:
I cannot accept slavic nations to be more Vladia then Sturgia ... Nein, nein, nein !!!  :mrgreen:
Make me happy and say at least 20% of Slovakia could fit there  :evil:
Please make your own map, I am soo curious about how your imagination of it would looks like.
 
Amount of times youve been answered is that much even I find it boring
Also, what nation does my tribe in pacific represent? I know its a video game, set in a fictional continent, with fictional nations in it, but i DEMAND TO KNOW (because i have total right to know, but if you say something which i do not like i will keep answering untill i get the answer i need). Jesus ****ing Christ its a fictional world, set in a fictional universe with fictional nations. There are not slovaks, serbs, romans, no goths, no brits, franks and so on. Realise that already. They are PARTIALY inspired, and thats it.

For 104i4ifjwo1oti time, ts ****ing Sturgia if you would want to know. Thats the closest damned thing.  Or just wait for some bloody Europe mod or something.
 
ratschbumm said:
Just like dozens nations separated by space and time. Do you want to say they all have the same armor?

Do you really think that Frankish armorers made different armors for Slavic customers then they did for Anglo-Saxon customers?

No they did not. Neither did armorers in Baghdad.

ratschbumm said:
This is already enough to show that they had distinct look and weaponry.

No it is not. There was nothing distinct about weapons and armors that were exported to Eastern Slavs.

ratschbumm said:
Best example of it are evidences that there was developed production of composite bows in X-XI centuries in Novgorod, which was never common in the West.

Composite bows were common in the West from the most ancient times:

red-figure-lekythos-showing-eros-in-the-role-of-archer-c-490480-bc-C298DX.jpg


untitled-design-27-1-1.jpg


ratschbumm said:
Cavalry also adopted heavy sabers much earlier, for reason.

What is "heavy saber"?

ratschbumm said:
Do you know that there is no separate word for lance in Russian? Only spear and pike we have and the last name was borrowed. The same reason, I guess.

There is no separate word for lance in any Slavic language. And I strongly suspect that there is no separate word for lance in many other languages either.

ratschbumm said:
In addition, where was a crossbow?

Here?:

68caf9ba9b448051fb079492b3a0d7e1.jpg


ratschbumm said:
Your statements about “pomestie” horsemen are incorrect almost in all points. It was reformed later rather than to be an outcome of any previous reforms.

http://www.xenophon-mil.org/rushistory/battles/ivanbook.htm#cavalry

"Ivan now gave urgent attention to military reform, especially to curtailing mestnichestvo."

ratschbumm said:
And these fighters were free to choose their armament, and for some reason, they almost always chose bow and arrows.

They were not free to chose. Law was listing what equipment they were obliged to bring and in what quantity. Failure was subject to penalty and in extreme cases could result in loss of pomestie (fief). They were free to bring any extra equipment but horse, bow and saber (and probably few other things) were mandatory (armor wasn't).

ratschbumm said:
And to the last, about picture of settlement which should save from nomadic horse archers. What a pity that you cannot show this picture to medieval leader of West European kingdoms. With this picture, they definitely could learn how to deal with those Magyars. Alas, without this, all they could was to pray “sagittis hungarorum libera nos domine”, so Magyar came, Magyar saw, Magyar settled down where he wanted.

Western European knights defeated Magyars decisively at the battle of Lechfeld. Magyars did not settle where they wanted. They were nomads, they did not want to settle to begin with. Magyars were forced to settle by Western knights.

ratschbumm said:
Unlike this, East Slavic tribes could withstand against steppe raiders because of adopting their tactics from them and from more or less friendly Turkic tribes, Pechenegs, Berendei and Torkiis, which were partly assimilated later.

East Slavic tribes were subjects of Mongol steppe raiders for more then 100 years.
 
Occyfel said:
hruza is doing their thing again  :meh:
Wait, is he always believing in his delusions about history? Didn't know that many people here didn't read a single history book, but only wikipedia pages and artistic drawings from 20th century.
 
TERR1K said:
Hello fellow warriors,

(first I wanna say sorry if this topic is in wrong discussion if it so, thanks for moving it, not deleting it  :iamamoron: )

soo ... my question is purely out of curiosity, because I am from Slovakia and I would like to know from a historical point of view that which faction are western slavic people in upcoming Bannerlord?


According to which these nations are made in the game, and in which of them, as described, most fit the nations of Western Slavs. With 100% certainty we can eliminate Aserai, vladians, kuzaits and maybe even battanians because I have read that they have been inspired by the Celtic nations of the past and they have more sources for taxes, Irish and scots.
Therefore, I am left with only sturgians and since history we know that the general Slavic nations have roots from the Ukrainian and Russian nations that moved west and south (according to them, the creators of the game also inspired) - for me they seem very Russian and so tipical viking but on the other hand, there is an empire and since geographically the maps of preliminary imagery of the game maps are relatively in the middle and western Slavs now the present nations are also at the heart of Europe, but the creators describe the empire as somewhat closer to the nations of nowadays Romans and Greeks.

So what is your opinion, are they sturgians despite being very pro-Russian or empire despite Roman roots? Probably more inclined to sturgians I guess  :neutral:

Thanks  :lol:

Hey Terrik,the faction that most closely resembles our Slavic people is indeed Sturgia.

Your question was already talked and discussed about before,for example people complained that Sturgians don't live up to the standards that the developers placed for them in the developer blog of Sturgia.

One argument was that they said it will NOT be a Viking faction,but at the end they made it a Viking faction,according to the equipment they use.
Architecture is fine in my opinion but equipment needs to be adressed if they want to make it a Slavic themed faction.
There is too much Scandinavian gear,to put it simply.
What they need to add is more steppe influenced armor,lamellar,conical helmets with plumes,etc.
Until this is adressed it will remain a Viking themed faction in my eyes.

Now to your question,Western slavs,Eastern slavs and South Slavs weren't much different,according to equipment,at least in the early stages.
I suppose you mean that maybe the Sturgians should look more western in the medieval aspect,but that would come later,after 10th century,when Western slavs used armor that would resemble a soldier of the Holy Roman Empire for example,or Frankia..

The game's historical period is from 7-10th century from what i understand,but of course,there's also the fact that game isn't a accurate historical presentation,only historically inspired.

Now that i said that,I remember a discussion where people mentioned how the Battanians don't make sense having the Falxmen,even though they are supposed to be based of ancient Celtic people.Falx was used by Dacians,far from Celts.But as you can see they made more of a mish-mash so i would maybe say Battanians are based slightly of Celts but also have elements of other people of antiquity,in this case Dacians with the Falx warriors.

It's a complicated topic,and it has been going on for some time,I hope they also touch up the factions in question,so they actually make sense with the developer blogs they posted.
 
Svarogorije said:
TERR1K said:
Hello fellow warriors,

(first I wanna say sorry if this topic is in wrong discussion if it so, thanks for moving it, not deleting it  :iamamoron: )

soo ... my question is purely out of curiosity, because I am from Slovakia and I would like to know from a historical point of view that which faction are western slavic people in upcoming Bannerlord?


According to which these nations are made in the game, and in which of them, as described, most fit the nations of Western Slavs. With 100% certainty we can eliminate Aserai, vladians, kuzaits and maybe even battanians because I have read that they have been inspired by the Celtic nations of the past and they have more sources for taxes, Irish and scots.
Therefore, I am left with only sturgians and since history we know that the general Slavic nations have roots from the Ukrainian and Russian nations that moved west and south (according to them, the creators of the game also inspired) - for me they seem very Russian and so tipical viking but on the other hand, there is an empire and since geographically the maps of preliminary imagery of the game maps are relatively in the middle and western Slavs now the present nations are also at the heart of Europe, but the creators describe the empire as somewhat closer to the nations of nowadays Romans and Greeks.

So what is your opinion, are they sturgians despite being very pro-Russian or empire despite Roman roots? Probably more inclined to sturgians I guess  :neutral:

Thanks  :lol:
[...]
Now that i said that,I remember a discussion where people mentioned how the Battanians don't make sense having the Falxmen,even though they are supposed to be based of ancient Celtic people.Falx was used by Dacians,far away from Celts.But as you can see they made more of a mish-mash so i would maybe say Battanians are based slightly of Celts but also have elements of other people of antiquity,in this case Dacians with the Falx warriors.
[...]
Well, not far at all. Balkans are the place where Celts, Dacians and Illyrians all influenced each other, even making mixed tribes, the most famous of all being Triballi, a dacian tribe that was assimilated into surrounding celts, in the end bearing both dacian and celtic traditions, customs, looks and warfare for centuries to come ( falx included, but not rhomphaia tho).

Celts were present and inhabited territories from Ibearan peninsula, brittish isles, balkans, all the way to Asia minor.

So that being said, the issue is not wheather it belongs to the celts exclusively or wheather the celts used such weapons and armor, because just saying "Celts" is a very broad term, the issue is the TaleWorlds' official historical inspiration for Battania, which they said is "Celtic tribes of western Europe, particularly the Picts, Irish and Welsh of the early medieval era" and Battanian king  Caladog is partially inspired by the welsh king Gruffydd ap Llywellyn from 11th century.

Those particular Celtic tribes are in no way represented in the Battanian troop tree, with the honorable exceptions of Fianns and Oathbounds, both of which look somewhat acceptable for the given inspirational context.


As for Sturgia, that is a whole other level of misinterpeting historical inspiration, and trying to please the "viking enthusiasts" at the same time, which gave as a result a totaly confused faction which doesent know its place .
 
Sorry for late response.

TERR1K said:
Six words for you: MIGRATION OF TRIBES TO WHOLE EUROPE (or otherwise the emergence of Western Slavs)

I quote the migration theory:

Migration Theory (Theory of Truth) says that the Slavs came to their territory today from some area. According to archaeological findings, it was located north of the Carpathians between the Oder, Vistula and central Dnepr, and the Slavs spread from it in the 5th century.


Which is as I said: between contemporary Slovakia, Poland, Ukraine and Belarus. You can clearly see that on the map you have provided:

Slavic_distribution_origin.png

However, you need to know that is just one of the theories about origin of Slavic people. It's not like we know for sure.

TERR1K said:
So there is no doubt that we have Russian roots.
...
I'm not saying we're 100% Russian, but don't deny our blood.

We can't have Russian blood, because Russians have formed only in 9-10th ct. We and Russians have blood of common Slavic ancestors. Slavic nations does not come from one another. Slovaks does not come from Russians, Russians does not come from Poles and Poles does not come from Serbs. All modern Slavic nations developed in parallel.

TERR1K said:
For all if you just put in google images: Western Slavic armor. Or something similar and burrow in the pictures you will find a bunch of the same features on the armor as they were presented in Bannerlord. (Strugians faction pictures, screemshots)

1485247402_0dwdg83w-ve123-758x438.jpg

First of all, that's artistic painting by Victor Vastnetsov from 1989. It's not exactly historical reconstruction and it does not depict any particular historical date. It depicts "Bogatirs" (name of the painting) -semi legendary Russian heroes. From my knowledge of Russian, it actually literally means "heroes".

Second of all, equipment that it depicts as far as it can be identified is not any Russian specific one. It's a mixture of Western European and Asian stuff from different periods. On the left you can see some sort of scale armor with Frankish sword, in the middle generic mail and on the right mail and plate armor that was common in the Middle East up until 16th ct.

Here, couple Ottoman examples:
2075006311_44070c8400_b.jpg

NiOgCow.png
And one Persian example:
06da5bfd74a6d3f1d7e22b42fa2b09d1--horse-armor-knight-armor.jpg

Bottom line: there are no specific Eastern Slavic - Russian armor and weapons from early medieval period. Weapons and armor in this period were very "international" in general because there weren't many locations where this stuff was produced. Most people actually got it as imports or loot. And I am talking about high end stuff like metallic armors and swords. I am not talking about some simple axes or spears. Although even there I suspect was great deal of trade involved.

TERR1K said:
And I don't think the sturgians have Nordic features. They can't even have it! Bannerlord storyline takes place long before the Nordes fell into the territory of the Vaegris ... sturgians. So no. After all, there were Vikings in Russia, and it was slowly spreading to all Slavs, helmets, swift styles and similar fun.

Strugians are inspired by early Russia, or what we today generally call Kievan Rus. Kievan Rus was mixture of Slavic and Finnic tribes with top elite made of Scandinavian settlers. And some Khazar elements thrown in to the mix as well. Therefore Strugia certainly should have some Nordic features and those should be the most prominent among military stuff. Of course, it should not be Nordic faction.

TERR1K said:
There are too many similarities, features and cultural identity. Also take the Easter egg and its decorations ... where did it come from? Yet from Russia and our mothers still paint Easter eggs for Easter 

From the common Slavic ancestors.
 
hruza said:
Do you really think that Frankish armorers made different armors for Slavic customers then they did for Anglo-Saxon customers?
No they did not. Neither did armorers in Baghdad.
Why don't you just answer to my question instead?
Composite bows were common in the West from the most ancient times
You really confused "known" and "common" in case of composite bows. Same with crossbows in the east, if going forward.
What is "heavy saber"?
Sorry I can't understand which word from these two is unclear for you.
There is no separate word for lance in any Slavic language. And I strongly suspect that there is no separate word for lance in many other languages either.
of course you are wrong again. Some languages have it borrowed. See "lanca" in Polish.
Where? I guessed you could use pictures without captions... May be I spoke too soon? Because it seems you are not good even with captions. Please tell us what EXACTLY you see on the picture. Who is there, where he was from, how eastern was that "where". Besides, such pictures are not highly credible source really. In Russia they are scornfully called "murzilka".

What a b******t you are spilling here? Did you ever read what you post? OMG Helmet(!) from Papier-mâché! If this is one of historains from whom you learn history, it really explains a lot. Yeah, and these murzilkas...
"Ivan now gave urgent attention to military reform, especially to curtailing mestnichestvo."
This is expected that your understanding of Russian is not enough to get that mestnichestvo and pomestniy are from one root, but you post exactly what I said, pomestnaya cavalry was reformed, not something was reformed into pomestnaya cavalry, thus bows and arrows also were before, not suddenly appeared after. Do you read what you post???
They were not free to chose. Law was listing what equipment they were obliged to bring and in what quantity. Failure was subject to penalty and in extreme cases could result in loss of pomestie (fief). They were free to bring any extra equipment but horse, bow and saber (and probably few other things) were mandatory (armor wasn't).
Give me text of that law. Exact word about mandatory bow will be enough. Or change your name to Murzilka Warrior, it suits you way better.
Magyars were forced to settle by Western knights.
Yeah, and Danes were forced to settle by Anglo-Saxons. Okay, mate, okay.
East Slavic tribes were subjects of Mongol steppe raiders for more than 100 years.
Yes they were. They were not tribes in these times, and "Steppe riders" had advanced siege machines from China, but yes, they were. Where are those steppe riders who defeat Rus` and where are Hungarians who were defeated by western knights?


 
Painting and Drawings by Oleg Fedorov. He is painting reconstructions based on archaeological finds, so as close to the historical reality as our current knowledge allows. Of course textile does not preserve well, if at all so take textile elements on the pictures more liberally. Metallic elements however are based on actual historical objects.

Russian warriors 10th ct.:

berserk.jpg

Russian warrior, second half of the 10th ct. based on finds in grave in Gnezdovo burial complex:

fyodorov-21.jpg

Reconstruction of a noble Russian warrior based on Black Kurgan burial. 10th ct.:

chernay-mogila.jpg

Noble Russian warrior. 10-11th ct. Based on Shestovici grave in Chernigov:

original.jpg

Training. 10th ct.:

original.jpg

Russian prince Sviatoslav in Bulgaria. Second half of 10th ct.:

original.jpg

Member of Kievan warband, 10th ct., based on grave number 108 in Church of the Tithes in Kiev:

original.jpg

Member of Russian warband, second half of 10th ct., based on grave Dn-4 Gnezdovo burial complex:

original.jpg

Russian prince, first half of 11th ct., based on finds in Kiev and Chernigov:

original.jpg

Scandinavian warrior:

varjajskie_dospehi3.jpg

Battle between Russians and Khazars:

bitva_rusov_s_hazarami.jpg

Russian cavalryman, first half of 13th ct.:

fyodorov-2.jpg

Russian princess, 12-13th ct., based on graves in Old Ryazan

original.jpg

Slavic tribal woman, 11-12th ct., based on burials of Viatichi tribe.

original.jpg

Slavic woman, first half of 12th ct., Old Ryazan burials:

original.jpg

Edit: Please use spoilers when posting images this big or.
 
hruza said:
[...]
Russian warriors 10th ct.:

berserk.jpg

[...]

Very nice illustrations. This one I find particularly interesting. To me these men seem indistinguishable from Scandinavians and I would have thought of them as such, without the caption. There is a lot of classic "Viking" equipment. If these are indeed early Slavs that would support Taleworld's approach to the Sturgian design. 



Edit:
Well, according to this source the title of that image is "Берсерк" (Berserk). Are you sure that those are supposed to be Slavs?
 
John the Roleplayer said:
Edit:
Well, according to this source the title of that image is "Берсерк" (Berserk). Are you sure that those are supposed to be Slavs?

Title of the picture is "Russian warriors" not "Slavic warriors" and it's important distinction. Because Russians were not just Slavs. Note that warrior in front carries Thor's hammer on his neck, so he almost certainly is Scandinavian. In fact originally Russians were not Slavs at all. Which brings me to the next point (one I was making already earlier):

John the Roleplayer said:
Very nice illustrations. This one I find particularly interesting. To me these men seem indistinguishable from Scandinavians and I would have thought of them as such, without the caption. There is a lot of classic "Viking" equipment. If these are indeed early Slavs that would support Taleworld's approach to the Sturgian design.

Those men are indistinguishable from Scandinavians because A, some of them actually might be Scandinavians (Scandinavians lived in Russia and moreover Russian elite was to a large extend Scandinavian in origin) and B, because they are indistinguishable not just from Scandinavians but also from Anglo-Saxons, Franks, Poles, Burundians...

"Classic Viking equipment" is modern invention. There was by and large no Viking-specific equipment, Vikings were using the same equipment as Franks, Anglo-Saxons, Slavs. In fact most equipment Vikings were using was either traded or looted. "Viking swords and helmets" are created by modern popular culture. You can talk about Viking ERA swords and helmets, but not about Viking swords and helmets. For example most if not all finds of swords in Scandinavian-Viking context are Frankish (as in Frankish made). I am not expert so I might be wrong, but as far as I know no Scandinavian "made" swords were ever found. If there are some, they are probably exceptions and very few in numbers.

I know for a fact that no Russian "made" sword from this era (early medieval) was ever found. Not a one. And sword blanks were important import in to Russia all the way in to early modern era. And Western European powers were most of the time putting sanctions on sword trade on Russia. And not just Russia.

Moreover Viking in Britain and Viking in Kiev might have used different equipment. In the East Vikings had access to the Asian made armors and weapons while in Britain they did not ...for most part -since there was trade between East and West which was by an large carried by Vikings themselves you can find equipment of Asian origin even in Western Europe and other ways around. But due to geographical proximity, you have much higher chance to find Asian stile lamelar armor in Viking grave in Russia then Viking grave in Ireland.

There might have been difference in some minor details, but those were usually on level of decor and fashion. Weapons and armor people were using were by and large the same.

Bottom line ...it's impossible to identify ethnicity of the warrior based on his equipment in this period. Scandinavian warrior in Russia would have been equipped the same as Slavic warrior. If there was difference, than it was economic and social one.

John the Roleplayer said:
If these are indeed early Slavs that would support Taleworld's approach to the Sturgian design.

I would say Taleworld's got Strugians more or less right. Plate armor is completely ridiculous of course, but then plate armor shouldn't exist in the game at all, not just in Strugian context. Neither should exist various armored gloves. However I miss few more "eastern" stile armors, namely lamelar armor and conical helmets among Strugian warriors.
 
hruza said:
John the Roleplayer said:
Edit:
Well, according to this source the title of that image is "Берсерк" (Berserk). Are you sure that those are supposed to be Slavs?

Title of the picture is "Russian warriors" not "Slavic warriors" and it's important distinction. Because Russians were not just Slavs. Note that warrior in front carries Thor's hammer on his neck, so he almost certainly is Scandinavian. In fact originally Russians were not Slavs at all. Which brings me to the next point (one I was making already earlier):

John the Roleplayer said:
Very nice illustrations. This one I find particularly interesting. To me these men seem indistinguishable from Scandinavians and I would have thought of them as such, without the caption. There is a lot of classic "Viking" equipment. If these are indeed early Slavs that would support Taleworld's approach to the Sturgian design.

Those men are indistinguishable from Scandinavians because A, some of them actually might be Scandinavians (Scandinavians lived in Russia and moreover Russian elite was to a large extend Scandinavian in origin) and B, because they are indistinguishable not just from Scandinavians but also from Anglo-Saxons, Franks, Poles, Burundians...

"Classic Viking equipment" is modern invention. There was by and large no Viking-specific equipment, Vikings were using the same equipment as Franks, Anglo-Saxons, Slavs. In fact most equipment Vikings were using was either traded or looted. "Viking swords and helmets" are created by modern popular culture. You can talk about Viking ERA swords and helmets, but not about Viking swords and helmets. For example most if not all finds of swords in Scandinavian-Viking context are Frankish (as in Frankish made). I am not expert so I might be wrong, but as far as I know no Scandinavian "made" swords were ever found. If there are some, they are probably exceptions and very few in numbers.

I know for a fact that no Russian "made" sword from this era (early medieval) was ever found. Not a one. And sword blanks were important import in to Russia all the way in to early modern era. And Western European powers were most of the time putting sanctions on sword trade on Russia. And not just Russia.

Moreover Viking in Britain and Viking in Kiev might have used different equipment. In the East Vikings had access to the Asian made armors and weapons while in Britain they did not ...for most part -since there was trade between East and West which was by an large carried by Vikings themselves you can find equipment of Asian origin even in Western Europe and other ways around. But due to geographical proximity, you have much higher chance to find Asian stile lamelar armor in Viking grave in Russia then Viking grave in Ireland.

There might have been difference in some minor details, but those were usually on level of decor and fashion. Weapons and armor people were using were by and large the same.

Bottom line ...it's impossible to identify ethnicity of the warrior based on his equipment in this period. Scandinavian warrior in Russia would have been equipped the same as Slavic warrior. If there was difference, than it was economic and social one.

John the Roleplayer said:
If these are indeed early Slavs that would support Taleworld's approach to the Sturgian design.

I would say Taleworld's got Strugians more or less right. Plate armor is completely ridiculous of course, but then plate armor shouldn't exist in the game at all, not just in Strugian context. Neither should exist various armored gloves. However I miss few more "eastern" stile armors, namely lamelar armor and conical helmets among Strugian warriors.

This is a very good post on the subject.

Except I don't understand what you mean by "originally Russians were not Slavs at all", which is wrong, because the scandinavian nobility theory is a theory, it's not a proven fact. It's not even widely recognized by most "scholars" (although I am sceptical of them from time to time). Most of the "evidence" for the theory is in the equipment found in what is today Russia around that time, which as you yourself pointed out was not "viking armor" but "viking era" armor (and weapons), widely used by pretty much everyone at the time.

In my personal opinion I don't think Taleworlds got Sturgia right at all, the Ulfhednar and Berserker troop line shouldn't upgrade from Sturgian Warrior, it doesn't make any sense, it should be part of the Skolderbroda clan troop tree, while the Sturgian troop tree should only have Sturgian troops (obviously).
 
Knez said:
Amount of times youve been answered is that much even I find it boring
Also, what nation does my tribe in pacific represent? I know its a video game, set in a fictional continent, with fictional nations in it, but i DEMAND TO KNOW (because i have total right to know, but if you say something which i do not like i will keep answering untill i get the answer i need). Jesus **** Christ its a fictional world, set in a fictional universe with fictional nations. There are not slovaks, serbs, romans, no goths, no brits, franks and so on. Realise that already. They are PARTIALY inspired, and thats it.

For 104i4ifjwo1oti time, ts **** Sturgia if you would want to know. Thats the closest damned thing.  Or just wait for some bloody Europe mod or something.

First of all, calm down the hormone and don't play dude here. If you don't like it, don't come here and don't care and f*ck off man. The funny thing is that for you it is in the monkey's ass is why I want to know it and the sad thing about it is that you only have big shoulders over the internet, so you can talk to your first-year friends at lunch at school, but not with me like that boy, and enter your conscience. :wink:
 
hruza said:
Sorry for late response.

TERR1K said:
Six words for you: MIGRATION OF TRIBES TO WHOLE EUROPE (or otherwise the emergence of Western Slavs)

I quote the migration theory:

Migration Theory (Theory of Truth) says that the Slavs came to their territory today from some area. According to archaeological findings, it was located north of the Carpathians between the Oder, Vistula and central Dnepr, and the Slavs spread from it in the 5th century.


Which is as I said: between contemporary Slovakia, Poland, Ukraine and Belarus. You can clearly see that on the map you have provided:

Slavic_distribution_origin.png

However, you need to know that is just one of the theories about origin of Slavic people. It's not like we know for sure.

TERR1K said:
So there is no doubt that we have Russian roots.
...
I'm not saying we're 100% Russian, but don't deny our blood.

We can't have Russian blood, because Russians have formed only in 9-10th ct. We and Russians have blood of common Slavic ancestors. Slavic nations does not come from one another. Slovaks does not come from Russians, Russians does not come from Poles and Poles does not come from Serbs. All modern Slavic nations developed in parallel.

TERR1K said:
For all if you just put in google images: Western Slavic armor. Or something similar and burrow in the pictures you will find a bunch of the same features on the armor as they were presented in Bannerlord. (Strugians faction pictures, screemshots)

1485247402_0dwdg83w-ve123-758x438.jpg

First of all, that's artistic painting by Victor Vastnetsov from 1989. It's not exactly historical reconstruction and it does not depict any particular historical date. It depicts "Bogatirs" (name of the painting) -semi legendary Russian heroes. From my knowledge of Russian, it actually literally means "heroes".

Second of all, equipment that it depicts as far as it can be identified is not any Russian specific one. It's a mixture of Western European and Asian stuff from different periods. On the left you can see some sort of scale armor with Frankish sword, in the middle generic mail and on the right mail and plate armor that was common in the Middle East up until 16th ct.

Here, couple Ottoman examples:
2075006311_44070c8400_b.jpg

NiOgCow.png
And one Persian example:
06da5bfd74a6d3f1d7e22b42fa2b09d1--horse-armor-knight-armor.jpg

Bottom line: there are no specific Eastern Slavic - Russian armor and weapons from early medieval period. Weapons and armor in this period were very "international" in general because there weren't many locations where this stuff was produced. Most people actually got it as imports or loot. And I am talking about high end stuff like metallic armors and swords. I am not talking about some simple axes or spears. Although even there I suspect was great deal of trade involved.

TERR1K said:
And I don't think the sturgians have Nordic features. They can't even have it! Bannerlord storyline takes place long before the Nordes fell into the territory of the Vaegris ... sturgians. So no. After all, there were Vikings in Russia, and it was slowly spreading to all Slavs, helmets, swift styles and similar fun.

Strugians are inspired by early Russia, or what we today generally call Kievan Rus. Kievan Rus was mixture of Slavic and Finnic tribes with top elite made of Scandinavian settlers. And some Khazar elements thrown in to the mix as well. Therefore Strugia certainly should have some Nordic features and those should be the most prominent among military stuff. Of course, it should not be Nordic faction.

TERR1K said:
There are too many similarities, features and cultural identity. Also take the Easter egg and its decorations ... where did it come from? Yet from Russia and our mothers still paint Easter eggs for Easter 

From the common Slavic ancestors.


I think we only misunderstood at the beginning. But even in the personal report we came to the conclusion that YES, we are not direct descendants of the Russians, but the very tribes from which both the Russians, the Slovaks, the Poles and so on came from. But also in the Dev blog of the Tale Worlds says that Stugians faction is mainly Kievan Rus + mix of Slavic other people (tibes, communities... I mentioned it above). So I take it that we are in sturgia (purely in theory and based on similarities) in the upcoming game.
I agree with you, you have a lot of quality knowledge about it, and I will not oppose you because you have a greater view in this to be honest. I just say that they are all Slavs, who have adapted to where the tribes went, whether east, west or south and how they have evolved, changed and developed since then, is another chapter. Can we shake hands on it ? *hope in my soul*
I'm glad we made it clear.  :cool:
 
Back
Top Bottom