Inanch-Bilge
Are Jutes are like a branch of Danes ? culturally and linguistically ?
Mount & Blade: Warband - Viking Conquest DLC (Release Date: 11th December)
- Thread starter Raiden
- Start date
Users who are viewing this thread
gulex
Recruit
Inanch-Bilge said:
Denmark in the Migration Period was divided between several cultures the main divide being between Jutland and Sealand. Even in Jutland, however, there were probably different people. Funerary practice and pottery finds suggests that Northern Jutland might've been a separate political entity from the rest of Jutland for example. I believe that the idea of "Danes" as such didn't develop until the Viking Age but don't quote me on that. This stuff is a little hazy for me.
Ivan Khan
Knight
gulex said:
I think they were mentioned as far back as the 6th century. Stuck in my mind is it was in the Getica. Of course sources before that are pretty scarce. Regular mention does not come until the mid-Viking age when they converted to Christianity, in the time of Harold Bluetooth.
Interesting. I realise the many sagas are written late in the early Middle Ages,gulex said:
but they should still count as written sources about the era.
That makes the Viking Age very little prehistoric or 'dark'.
And along with other cultures writing about Vikings, like the Franks, Saxons and all the other places, it makes the era fairly documented.
Skeggjold
Regular
Yes yes yes!!!
Can't wait for this!
It was so unexpected, and now you've made me crave this, you bastards
Mount & Blade is becoming so huge now, it's really good. You still have a very unique game, a genre by itself, and so far my favourite solo game of all times.
This is in great part because you've understood how much modders are important.
Can't wait for this!
It was so unexpected, and now you've made me crave this, you bastards
Mount & Blade is becoming so huge now, it's really good. You still have a very unique game, a genre by itself, and so far my favourite solo game of all times.
This is in great part because you've understood how much modders are important.
@gulex and @kuauik, I'm not sure you're completely right.
About women fighting in armies, If I remember correctly, Celts could use women to fight, and there were traces of this until the XIIth century. In Ireland, military service was mandatory for both men and women (and women had quite a lot of rights in Celtic classical society, and I think this tradition wasn't completely gone at the Vth century).
I remember reading a text from Plutarch during my course, something about women fighting as much as men.
Not sure about Viking, and quite convinced that germanic women wouldn't fight a lot. But Celts or Britons, seems likely to be a yes.
About women fighting in armies, If I remember correctly, Celts could use women to fight, and there were traces of this until the XIIth century. In Ireland, military service was mandatory for both men and women (and women had quite a lot of rights in Celtic classical society, and I think this tradition wasn't completely gone at the Vth century).
I remember reading a text from Plutarch during my course, something about women fighting as much as men.
Not sure about Viking, and quite convinced that germanic women wouldn't fight a lot. But Celts or Britons, seems likely to be a yes.
Was there any real woman presence in any of the major battles the celts fought? Did Caesar mention anything about it? Or livy or polybius....
If there werent. No reason to point them out.
Just like if there were no real woman presence in the great heathen army, no reason to add any woman units in the game. Only allow the player to play as one, and thats it.
If there werent. No reason to point them out.
Just like if there were no real woman presence in the great heathen army, no reason to add any woman units in the game. Only allow the player to play as one, and thats it.
Inarius said:
You're obviously misleading. I'll speak for Gauls because that's what I know the best, but what I'm writing is a dominant trait of Celtic societies.
I don't know where you get your informations from, but Gauls for example were a highly patriarchal society, with polygamy allowed, and they fixed values to each type of individual: the one of a woman was very low. They held women in respect, but those didn't had any rights outside the house: women weren't even free to choose their husbands. They were supposed to take care of domestic tasks and eventually help in the farm. For an ancient Gaul, a woman outside the familial farm is wrong. And a woman carrying weapons fighting among the men were pretty much an unbelievable thing for Gauls, maybe even more than Romans.
Don't even talk about Boudicca, which is an exception that confirms the law (aside from the fact that she probably never physically fought), as Celts often tolerated a rightfull woman's authority if she is highly born with a strong position. Boudicca has royal blood and her husband used to be king of the tribe: in case of death of the husband, Celts would tolerate the authority of such a woman, not for long though. In those cases, the queen had to "lead" the army indeed. Only sources we have is Romans (Tacitus) and he don't talk about any fighting women or Boudicca fighting herself. And truth is, if she had to live further on the defeat, well the most powerfull and noble male from the tribe would probably have her killed somehow.
Now about ancient Germans, well Tacitus do have a word about some women that went forward in some occasions, exposing themselves to, as he say, push the men to fight on as they were too afraid that they would be caught. Honestly I wouldn't be surprised that ancient German women kind of fought in some special occasions (migrations etc.), but they weren't warriors in any case.
Jarl Anthony
Recruit
Can't wait for this DLC!
DiglettMcD
Regular
I honestly think we should just include females.
I bet you all are just white, cisgender, middle class males living in a big house with your housemaid wife. What do you have against women? Check your privilages, men.
Strong female women have always existed in society and always will. Any evidence against this statement should be censored because it is wrongly accusing women of being "sex slaves" or "child bearers"
Down with the patriarchy!
I bet you all are just white, cisgender, middle class males living in a big house with your housemaid wife. What do you have against women? Check your privilages, men.
Strong female women have always existed in society and always will. Any evidence against this statement should be censored because it is wrongly accusing women of being "sex slaves" or "child bearers"
Down with the patriarchy!
jepekula
Count
That's stupid. No one has said that women do not exist in society.
But, people have said that females were never a significant part of any kind of a warrior group. Ergo, there should be no significant number of female warriors.
Saying that the afore mentioned syllogism is sexism and they should "check their privilege" is absurd and, in my opinion, quite stupid.
Also, the reason females exist in the first place is being child bearers.
Anyhow, I personally would not have a problem with female companions and being able to play as a female character, but I would dislike being able to recruit or see a huge number of female troops. I also liked how most, if not all, female companions in Mount&Blade and Warband were forced to take up arms. Hell, Deshavi, or who that one "raped-by-bandits" character happened to be, still managed to come of as quite a strong female character.
But, people have said that females were never a significant part of any kind of a warrior group. Ergo, there should be no significant number of female warriors.
Saying that the afore mentioned syllogism is sexism and they should "check their privilege" is absurd and, in my opinion, quite stupid.
Also, the reason females exist in the first place is being child bearers.
Anyhow, I personally would not have a problem with female companions and being able to play as a female character, but I would dislike being able to recruit or see a huge number of female troops. I also liked how most, if not all, female companions in Mount&Blade and Warband were forced to take up arms. Hell, Deshavi, or who that one "raped-by-bandits" character happened to be, still managed to come of as quite a strong female character.
Hospes fori
Count
Are you seriously suggesting we should disregard and probably even destroy any historical evidence which does not fit your ideology? Only antiscientific, narrow-minded bigots make such demands. You sound like a child who believes nobody can see it only because it is covering his eyes. You can warp history but never change it. The only advise I can give you at this point is to form your world view upon the world because it just does not work the other way around.DiglettMcD said:
gulex said:
Yeah, I've read it as poor attempt at flame baiting which surprisingly worked.
Double check your sarcasm detectors, tho, captain.
kraggrim
Marquis
DiglettMcD said:
Who in this thread are you attempting to parody? The people saying "I think it would be cool if we included them"? The ones saying "I think there is enough historical evidence to include them"?
Regardless of whether you agree with them or not (I don't particularly) it seems a bit of a weird place to post something as OTT as this.
Inarius said:
"Seems likely" That's the extent of the argument.
Why did the aliens build the pyramids? "Hey Hadrian, I am going on leave because Avitus and I have made my stomach big, so I won't be around the legion for a bit, thanks, hope you understand. P.S. get me one of those Celtic warrior women swords if you find one."
Similar threads
