Register a SA Forums Account here!
JOINING THE SA FORUMS WILL REMOVE THIS BIG AD, THE ANNOYING UNDERLINED ADS, AND STUPID INTERSTITIAL ADS!!!

You can: log in, read the tech support FAQ, or request your lost password. This dumb message (and those ads) will appear on every screen until you register! Get rid of this crap by registering your own SA Forums Account and joining roughly 150,000 Goons, for the one-time price of $9.95! We charge money because it costs us money per month for bills, and since we don't believe in showing ads to our users, we try to make the money back through forum registrations.
 
  • Locked thread
Elyv
Jun 14, 2013



HEY GAL posted:

And paying an army in cash is always a nightmare realm. Our money is an idea, or a relationship. It can also be a substance (paper). The money of the people I study is a substance--well, two substances actually, gold or silver--and both of those substances come from Spain. If you're France, getting enough of it is difficult enough--they're always short of money--and then just imagine paying an army with it. You have to transport it, first of all...
(from David Parrott: Richelieu's Army)
It's scarcely better in other armies, the Spanish Army of Naples, which employs the people I study, has about 2,000 gulden cash (i am not sure how much it really was, because the English language source said "2,000 crowns," which isn't Spanish or Italian currency) in its treasury during the time I study, which is about two thirds the amount required to pay (not support, pay) a single company for a single month

I'm pretty sure the answer is "no", but were any of the employers trusted enough to only pay less frequently and not require them to pull around all that currency?

Relatedly, how frequently were mercenary defections over pay caused by logistical difficulties?

Adbot
ADBOT LOVES YOU

Elyv
Jun 14, 2013



How long did it generally take mercenaries to start defecting or refusing to follow order when not paid? What about non-mercs?

Obviously this varies hugely with time and place and nationality, but I'm curious if there's a range or some such.

Elyv
Jun 14, 2013



Grand Prize Winner posted:

Was rock and roll as popular in the middle ages as depicted in popular media?

Raymond of Toulouse actually joined the First Crusade because he wanted to hear a live performance of "Don't Stop Believin'" in Jerusalem.

Elyv
Jun 14, 2013



I feel like, as HEY GAL said, you say you're descended from the Trojans because that inherently kind of puts you on the same level as the Romans.

E: also as that poem kind of indicates.

Elyv
Jun 14, 2013



DandyLion posted:

I'm aware of a couple instances of judicial duels being recorded but unfortunately both combatants were armored similarly so it doesn't fit your criteria for unarmored vs armored.

On a side note though it wasn't 'Neccecary' to grapple an armored combatant to the ground. Without enough space a good pole-arm could end a knight rightly as long as you could keep your distance. I believe king Richard III got beat to death by a couple of Welsh men-at-arms with bills/halberds. They would have been sporting padded armor with maille most likely, against Richard in a full plate harness. again not grappling though.

probably couldn't figure out the grappling rules

Elyv
Jun 14, 2013



V. Illych L. posted:

probably helps that the state was such a pissant little backwater that the one dude and his advisers could keep some level of track of it without going utterly insane

So, about your custom title, was there anything interesting about lumber in medieval times?

Elyv
Jun 14, 2013



Why did a lot of early Medieval leaders get weird, frequently insulting, taglines? Louis the Stutterer, Charles the Fat, Ivar the Boneless, Aethelred the Unready, etc. Also, when/why did those kind of taglines stop appearing?

Elyv
Jun 14, 2013



HEY GAL posted:

for the first three names: according to norbert elias, western europeans of the pre-early-modern era were a lot more comfortable with physical imperfection, pain, disability, and sexual frankness than we are. see also people who have the epithet "the bastard," sometimes they'll give themselves that.

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

see also pepin the short

edit: lol
http://mentalfloss.com/article/58623/60-historys-strangest-royal-epithets
edit 2: they include Joan the Lame but not Joan the Mad (Joanna La Loca)? shaking my head

Thanks for the explanation, that's really interesting! That makes me wonder, though: what sort of things would those people have found insulting that maybe we wouldn't?

Elyv
Jun 14, 2013



Cyrano4747 posted:

100 - 30 is not 80.

To be fair, the Hundred Years War wasn't 100 years

Vincent Van Goatse posted:

Historians: bad at math since forever.

I actually have a degree in math and can tell you that being bad at arithmetic is cross-disciplinary. Working with actual numbers instead of variables is just not right

Elyv
Jun 14, 2013



This is probably a super basic question but: from a legal perspective, what is the difference between a prince, duke, count, baron, margrave, etc? What about from a practical perspective? When a new domain and lordship needed to be carved out, how did they decide which title to give its new lord?

Adbot
ADBOT LOVES YOU

Elyv
Jun 14, 2013



Disinterested posted:

It's probably best to think about the Carolingians, where margraves are appointed to control marks, counts cities and smaller areas, and dukes to lead armies and rule large areas. These titles were not originally intended to be entirely heritable, and their land was intended to be purely in exchange for service and tied to their office, so imagine it like a system of bureaucracy that transformed itself in to a nobility because that's sort of what it is.

I really appreciate this answer, I didn't realize they started out as nonhereditary.

  • Locked thread