Visigoths - originally, as Feoderati under the Romans, they established area of rule in Gaul and Spain. The early (but exciting) campaigns of Alaric I predate the period considered here. In 507, however, the Franks, under Clovis I beat the Goths (under Alaric II) at the Battle of Vouille Visigoth rule in Gaul was at an end, but the Frank's were established as a kingdom that would give us Charlemagne, France, Germany, and a lot of different kinds of cheese.
The Visigoths, however, survived the loss of Gaul. They had a kingdom in the Iberian Peninsula (Spain, or Hispania). There, they survived (and in harmony with the rest of Christendom after converting from Arianism in 589) until being overrun by the Moors (Berbers and Arabs up from North Africa) in about the year 711 or 712 (the Mozarbic Chronicle of 741, written in Latin, is unclear). That was the Battle of Guadalete between King Roderic of the Goths, and Tariq ibn Ziyad.
Battle of Guadalete
So, for about two hundred years, there was a gothic kingdom in Spain. It gave us a lot of interesting Gothic architecture and early cathedrals, but not a lot of details on military practices.
Tariq Ibn Ziyad
Looking at what wargames have to offer on the Western Goths is interesting. Again, turning to the original DBA list (as a conceptual distillation of the 1982 WRG army lists, and benefitting from eight years of further research and debate) we see that there is an infantry core of five elements. These can be either spear, or warband, or a mix of warband and auxilia - depending on which allies or sources you prefer. But that establishes a solid infantry battle line, supported by two units of skirmishers (Psiloi), and finally a solid mounted contingent of four units of four Cavalry units, and a Knight (general) unit.
King Roderic
This could easily represent the army of Roderic, at the battle of Guadalete. There, his solid infantry line was a match for the Moors, but he lost because his right cavalry wing under a disgruntled commander abandoned the field allowing the numerous, but lighter, Moorish cavalry to flank the infantry line. Legend replaces the commander with Count Julian, who turned traitor because his daughter was raped at Roderic's court, but this (while a great medieval narrative) is unsubstantiated.
Visigothic Warriors - from a later English sculpting method.
Refighting Guadalete as a decisive battle that ended Christian rule in western Spain, until the Reconquista, is a worthy war gaming goal, but the lack of other major foes makes the prospect of building a large Visigothic army seem like a futile enterprise. It is, however, a great example of a balanced army from the Barbarian Kingdoms era. There are, of course, lots of Possible match ups against sixth century foes, such as Byzantines, Ostrogoths, or even early Andalusians from the other parts of Spain.
For figures, standard dark age infantry (metal conic helms, round shields, and either sword, spear, or bow) make the battle line and Psiloi easy to model. Likewise, the cavalry (cloaks, metal helms, round shields) are readily available. The older Minifigs heavy barbarian horse and heavy barbarian infantry are nearly perfect, as well as many modern manufacturers.
The story of the Ostrogoths is a very interesting one, including their origin, and how they became to be considered a single people, but from a military/wargaming perspective, their war against the Romans (especially the Eastern Romans, or the Byzantines, as their identity was coalescing following the fall of Western Rome) in and around Italy is the most interesting, and where we find some potential scenarios and campaigns for good games.
The eastern Goths had come into Italy in the previous century, and held (as the result of a number of successful sieges and sacks) many of the key cities of the peninsula. In a period of almost 20 years, under Justinian, the Byzantines waged the "Gothic War" in order to restore these areas back to Roman (Byzantine) rule. This lasted from 535 to 554 AD. Some Gothic strongholds in Northern Italy would hold out for another 8 years, not falling until 562.
The earlier period is the successful sweep of the Byzantines up the peninsula, crossing from Africa, and securing a number of strong strategic points up the Italian peninsula.
Battles of this period feature an early Ostrogothic army, against a Justinian Byzantine army. The fighting is suitable for somewhat larger battles, and also (due to the rough country and terrain of Italy) for smaller raids and skirmishes, that no doubt took place between Byzantine forces, and smaller Gothic strongholds and military units. Eventually the Gothic stronghold at Ravenna would be conquered by the Byzantines in 539/540.
This leads to the second phase of the Gothic War (540-554 or event 562) where a revived Gothic push back against the Byzantines takes place under the Gothic leader of Totila.
Totila, painted by Salviati in 1549
During the push back phase of the Ostrogoths reclaiming the initiative from the Byzantines, the great Byzantine general Narses would suffer because he also was dealing with encroachments from the Franks and the Alamanni. In 554 AD, Narses was succesful against the Goths, at the battle of Vesuvius (also known as the Battle of Mons Lactarius), by defeating the army of Totila, and also killing the king. The Goths, after this, retreated north into Austria.
In the end, however, Byzantines were successful against the Goths in Italy, but it was a fleeting victory. First, it kept the strength of the Byzantines from dealing with problems in the north and the east. Second, once the Goths were subjugated, the area was swept over again, by another German group, the Lombards, who would prove to be a lot harder to dislodge (that task being left to the Carolingians).
Battle of Mons Lactarius in 554AD, painted by Adolf Zick (~1900AD)
The representation of the Ostrogoths in miniature wargaming is pretty interesting, even if the army only has a few distinctive troop types. The DBA rules give a pretty good indication of what we can surmise from history (and how rules writers interpret that history into wargaming terms). DBA (original) has Army number 86 (Italian Ostrogothic 493-554AD) with 6x elements of Knights, 4x elements of Psiloi, or skirmish infantry, and finally 2x elements which could be either formed as 2x more Psiloi elements, or 2x spear elements.
Before looking at how they are represented in other rules, it is worth considering the basics presented by the DBA list. First, is the cavalry. In a gothic army, that is the Ostrogoths that settled in Italy, or the Visigoths that settled in Spain, and the various places these two broad groups came from (stretching all the way back to Northern Eurooe, in what is modern day Sweden), the army was mainly focused on the Warriors being mounted, and fighting in a close order, for shock value. The other members of the population, as well as absorbed and allied peoples, would generally fight on foot. Mainly these were loose order skirmishes, designated to a role supporting the mounted warriors. But in the case of some absorbed peoples (like the remnants of local Romanized infantry, which would fight in a dense shielded formation, with sword and spear) the foot troops might actually fight in a formed up formation, not entirely unsuited for a place in the battle line. Still, however, the main branch is the mounted warriors.
This is very much the same as what we find in the original 1982 WRG Army List Book Two entry. There, the army gets a mandatory 44-72 Gothic Cavalry (start at Heavy Cavalry, but some portion can be upgraded to Extra Heavy Cavalry, all with javelin/light spear and shield). Add to those figures, up to 90 additional Gothic Cavalry (which start at Medium Cavalry, but can up upgraded to Heavy Cavalry, and can be upgraded to match the morale grade of the earlier lot, Irregular B). This makes for a very strong cavalry section (as you would expect, given the history of the army at battles like Taginae and Mons Lactarius, where the Ostrogoths fought against Byzantines and Germans that countered them with a reinforced infantry center), but without infantry it will have problems against a mixed foe who can reinforce a central battleline of heavy infantry. The only real infantry presence the Goths have is that of the Gothic Archery (presented in the WRG list as up to 100 Light Infantry, which can remain as Irregular D or be upgraded to Irregular C).
This is a very interesting army, for a wargamer, because of it's strange mix of troop types. The heavy cavalry is very good, and may be a precursor for later armies in the post-dark ages period. But, as it is only supported by light infantry archers, it might be tough against some armies. Where this will do well (a-historically) is in games the give too much credence to archery, and games that do not provide structural problems to cavalry fighting deep formation infantry without support. I own (and fight with) an Ostrogoth DBA army, but I have not yet tried it with Might of Arms, or Terry Gore's rules. It should be (at least) an educational matchup against a sixth century Byzantine army.
I have found a nice blog, by Guy Halsall, on his wargaming activities. Dr. Halsall is an academic that makes a fine study of sixth century history, and starting back in the late 1990s he combined his history pursuits with his wargaming and published a series on King Arthur. Much of the series found its way into Wargames Illustrated, all of it is on his blog.
Halsall goes on to complete a lengthy, and excellent (once he moves away from the touchy subject of Morris) series on both Arthur and the wargaming of Arthur inspired scenarios. He has a nice introduction to campaigning, here giving a set of simple mapless rules (but with excellent scenario generator guidelines), and also a set of map based campaign (more detailed, naturally) rules. He discusses lists and rules (as I had done earlier here but while I chose to compare lists against each other, he is comparing them to what he projects to be proper warfare for the period, based on his scholarly research). In his discussion of rules, he gives kudos to Dan Mersey (Glutter of Ravens) and to Simon McDowall (Goths, Huns and Romans), both of which I highly regard.
In short, a great article series. Halsall's historical work is top drawer, and even his criticism of Morris is well placed (he takes down one of my favorites, John Morris, for writing history that is more of the "enjoyable narrative" rather than the "rigorous scholarship" type of work). I am forced to agree with his criticism, even if I have a strong fondness for The Age of Arthur.
For me, as a wargamer, I am perfectly fine with a strong narrative version of a potential historical Arthur. It was not an especially literate time, so the lack of much literary evidence doesn't bother me - and an actual King Arthur is not necessary to me as much as a potential Arthur that is consistent with what we do know about the history.
I find very appealing the notion of an Arthur-like figure in the sixth century keeping alive the spark of Romano-civilization against the inevitable sweep back into Germanic paganism. And so it follows that I would want my wargaming to be based on that idea. It is my world view, and my sense of myth and legend of the West.
So, I will stick with Morris, and Arthur, warts and all. And still enjoy the great work of Guy Halsall, as well.
Following on my first article about wargaming in the various sub periods of the Medieval Age, I would like to address what I am here referring to as the middle Dark Ages. For me, this is roughly the 6th and 7th centuries, so definitely in a Post (Western) Roman setting, but one where the rise of new entities and the rise of Byzantium provide rich war gaming possibilities. As with the first article, I remain focused on Europe.
As far as I know, there is no common reference to this period, at least as a period distinct from either the earlier dark ages, or the later dark ages. If anything, the earlier dark ages, and this period (I am thinking of approximately the 6th and 7th centuries) are part of what is usually referred to as Late Antiquity, although that really stretches back further than I wanted to (Late Antiquity is usually 300-700 AD).
But here I am talking about the 6th and 7th centuries. In the early period (5th century, into the Age of Arthur. To me that is the interesting activity going on in that period (from a European perspective) for wargaming. In this period, there are really three things going on that provide for good wargaming. As I see them these are: beginning of the 6th), I covered the
Consolidation of the Barbarian/Germanic Kingdoms
Muslim Conquest (starting in the 7th century, but lasting into the 8th)
Byzantium Ascendency, starting with Justinian in the 6th century
As with the other Medieval periods, although infantry is still a very common component of armies of this period, the strength of cavalry is one of the hallmarks of many Medieval military systems (at least for me). That was the reason why I thought of the Romano-British as an example of a very early Medieval army (even though, it is extremely Roman, and infantry heavy, in flavor).
So, from a wargaming perspective (although just the history of this period, leaving aside gaming for an instant, is itself completely fascinating) here is what I see for the three periods. I think I might list things like miniatures rules, board games, and army lists for each in separate posts.
Barbarian Kingdoms
These are large groups of (mostly) Germanic people's, or confederacies of people's, that were occupying lands in or on the border of the (former) Western Roman territories. They either had been invited to settle and become feoderates by the Romans, or else migrated in on their own, or (as in the case of Theoderic) would be contracted to come in by the Eastern Emperors. Because there are lots of clashes, both with remnants of the Western empire, and with other barbarian kingdoms, there is a lot of wargaming potential here. Some of the people's I am thinking of (although there are many, many others):
Ostrogoths - the Eastern Goths, mostly in and around Italy
Visigoths - the Western (or Bright) Goths, mostly in and around the Iberian lands, filling the space previously occupied by Vandals and Suevi
Franks - Extremely successful on both sides of the Danube, and against other tribes/confederacies, this period includes the Merovingians.
Saxons - As in the earlier period, this may also include related peoples such as the Jutes and Angles, both in Britain (which is now becoming, finally, Angle-land, or England) and back in Europe. On the British Isles, the series of struggling Kingdoms form the Heptarchy, although rarely is it exactly seven kingdoms.
And non-Germanics from the East - Alans, Avars, Huns, etc.
There are a lot of miniature wargaming possibilities here, but also some board gaming titles as well. Right away, I am reminded of Barbarian, Kingdom and Empire, as well as Catan: Struggle for Rome (a great game, but maybe not a wargame?). Possibly Rise and Fall but possibly not (and it is very similar to the already mentioned BKE). A game I used to play quite a bit is the area control game, Attila.
Muslim Conquest
Starting in the early part of the seventh century, the armies of the Prophet and his successors provide a history that is ripe with opportunities for Wargamers who want to recreate the battles of this period. This is divided up into an early expansion period, starting with the battle of Bedr, in 624 (two years after the flight of the Prophet to Medina) and ending in 661 when Muawiya Uthman had the Prophet's son in law (Ali) killed in the civil war for succession. Muawiya then formed the first Caliphate.
The armies of Islam, with roots in a popular religious undertaking, necessarily had a lot of simple (but effective) foot elements, but also (and increasingly as time went on) both a professional infantry core and large amounts of mounted troops developed. The Arab cavalry favored the Lance, although there are some Persian elements that use the bow. This is, tactically, a very interesting army.
It clashed, of course, with many of the other armies described in this article, so a Wargamer seeking to develop a collection for this period, would have a lot of scenario possibilities if he were to include the elements that make up this army. A very useful collection of essential troops, that would serve for representing this army over many centuries, would be a decent sized collection of Arab spear, Arab archers, and Lance armed Arab horse. As the conquest settles into an imperial mode in the later part of this period (starting with the establishment of the caliphate) other troops can be added in, representing absorbed people's. This includes horse archers among other things, and even extends to elephants.
One of the more interesting enemies of the Arab Conquest, of course, is the Sassanid Persians. This fantastic army will be described in a later article on the Arab Conquest.
Board wargames about this period are rare, and I am only aware of a few. There was a Canadian Papercut games. More recently, there was, in Freng from Griffon Games, a good looking design called Au Nom d'ALLAH that covers the expansion period from 632-732 AD. Finally, and this is the one most accessible I think (from the preview material), is the title Apocalypse in the East from Against the Odds magazine, to be published in 2017. It is about the ten year struggle between the first Caliphate and the Byzantines. Victory Point Games is working up an excellent solitaire, called The First Jihad which should be published soon. Simulations game back in the early 1980s called Jihad, but I don't think it has a following any longer. More recently, three titles come to mind. There was a game in 2007 called Caliphate, that was never quite finished, but is available as a free print and play download from
Byzantium
As the surviving successor to Rome, the empire in the east begins this period with an army very much in the tradition of the old Legion system of the Western army. However, starting under Justinian, and coming full circle under Maurice, the army transforms into something different - the Byzantine army, which is very much more reliant on cavalry. This will last throughout the period covered by this article, but will eventually give way to the feudal Thematic system (still cavalry dominant, but structured and supplied very differently).
A nice overview and description of the army under Maurice (the Maurikian Byzantine Army) is provided on this DBA page - it talks about DBA army elements for this army, but also gives a nice short history about the various components. Some very interesting fighting by the Byzantines, in this period, takes place in the Balkan peninsula, as well as else where, and against some of the other armies described in this article. Other enemies for the Byzantines exist as well.
Options for boardgame Wargamers might include a number of titles, such as Justinian from GMT or Byzantium from Martin Wallace. There are some other traditional wargames that touch on Byzantine warfare, but I'll mention them in a later article, as they cover later Byzantine history. In addition to board wargames, there are even a number of other strategy games in this theme, that may or may not warrant the name "wargame". Some examples might be Justinian from Mayfair (a Byzantine politics game) or Constantinopolis (Trade in Byzantium in the 7th century).
That is my start for this topic, but I think I will develop some information about army lists, and tactics, and possible scenarios/campaigns for each of these separately. Each of these three focus areas has lots of great personalities, will have strong links to the previous and the succeeding historical periods (and armies), and present loads of interesting wargaming possibilities.
Note: Since writing this article, I started on a series of articles talking about wargaming the Barbarian Kingdoms. Here they are, so far: Ostrogoths Visigoths
This list covers my medieval armies, and a number of early medieval, or dark ages armies.
Medievals
Saxons
Size: Large collection, enough for two large armies, with some borrowed figures maybe from the Vikings. I have options and leaders to do early Pagan Saxons, and later Christian Anglo-Saxons.
Condition: painted and ready to play. My only regret is my Saxon fyrd are mounted 3 to a stand.
Notes: A nice large collection. Makes me wish I had later Imperial Romans (or Byzantines, or Post-Roman British), to use these guys as fifth and sixth century threats against the remainders of the Empire. Still, plenty of foes in my collection.
Irish
Size: I have two distinct medieval Irish collections. One is a medium/large early Dark Ages focus, even including hound handlers and some chariots for those who believed the Irish still used them for leaders. The other is later, but a smaller collection, and could be a foe for Normans in Ireland.
Condition: Painted, based, ready to play.
Notes: Personally, I like the Chariots. Also, stands with Druids, and some with Christian priests.
Welsh
Size: Again, two sets. Dark ages Welsh in a sizable collection (enough for a large army), and later Welsh as 13th/14th century foes for England.
Condition: Painted and ready to play. The later army, if it goes for a longbow heavy variant, has to borrow archers from my Hundred Years War English, but plenty to go around.
Notes: Two nice foes for my other English based armies. I'd like to add some flavorful command stands with Dragon banners.
Normans/Franks
Size: plenty of figures and options for a large army.
Condition: Painted, based, very playable.
Notes: Cavalry have the distinctive Norman shield, as do some infantry. Plenty of other infantry to use in a Frankish option.
Vikings
Size: A vast collection of sea wolves. Easily enough for two large armies.
Condition: Painted, based, bloodied in battle.
Notes: Lots of options here, included mounted Viking infantry. I have some unpainted Long Ships, but I wish I had more.
Carolingians
Size: A large collection,me ought for a big army, although cavalry has to be borrowed from other Early Medieval forces (such as the Norman army).
Condition: Painted, based, and ready o play. I'd like to get and paint some actual continental cavalry from the 8th century.
Notes: This makes a nice replacement for the Normans, to have a more balanced army against other early medieval infantry armies. Can fight a Moslem army judicially selected from the units of my Crusades collection.
Crusades
Size: Two large armies with many options, one is Christian and one is Moslem. Can definitely cover first and third crusades, as well as other battles of the same period.
Condition: Painted (beautifully) and based, ready to go.
Notes: My largest regret here is that I don't have more Moslem figures, and that I don't have more theater specific terrain.
Baron's Wars
Size: Enough units to do two moderate/large armies.
Condition: All painted, all based. Ready to go.
Notes: These are "generic" medieval figures for battles in the 12th and 13th century. Some overlap with HYW collection. Could use some more lighter troops.
Swiss
Size: A moderate sized army, if the keils are all halberd armed. Could be quite large if pike blocks are borrowed from my Renaissance Swiss.
Condition: All painted and ready to play. Some infantry could stand to be rebased.
Notes: A solid foe for other medieval armies here, or could represent mercenary units.
Hundred Years War
Size: Two very large armies, one French and one English.
Condition: All painted, 90% based properly, ready for St Crispin's Day.
Notes: There are some elements I would like to add, especially like lighter cavalry (sergeants, hobilars, jinetes) and maybe some more foot such as peasants/villeins and crossbow. I probably have too many knights if such a thing is feasible.
Scots
Size: A moderate sized collection of specifically Scottish units (schiltrons mostly, and some Scottish knights) but could be padded with other figures. Easily could field a large army.
Condition: All painted, about half need rebasing.
Notes: The long spear units look good, but need some organizing. Otherwise, another nice group to provide mercenaries/allies for other armies, or could be padded to stand on its own.
Picts
Size: Moderate size, but could easily be padded out with other similar Dark Ages figures.
Condition: All painted, all based, ready to take on a variety of enemies.
Notes: Another in my assortment of dark age armies, these are a precursor to the above Scottish army, from a few hundred years earlier. Not a lot to distinguish it from say the early Welsh or Irish - spearman, light horse, heavier infantry, slingers and archers.
Chainmail has many ways in which to recommend itself as a fast play set of big battle Medieval rules. One of the more troubling areas, however, is in post-melee morale.
To a modern eye, this is a set of mathematical calculations that will slow down the flow of the game. It is actually all just simple math (addition and multiplication, for the most part), but it does seem to be out of favor with modern war game design philosophy.
To that end, I offer the following system (but first, present the current system, for comparison).
The Post-Melee Morale system, as is On page 15 of the rule book, there is a procedure for calculating Post-Melee Morale. It involves three factors, added together:
A factor for the side that took fewer casualties in the melee. This is the difference between the two casualty counts, times a d6 roll. Only the side that took fewer casualties gets this factor.
A factor based on the current size of the unit, as number of total figures times their Morale Rating. Both sides get this factor.
A factor based on who has more figures surviving after the melee. This difference between the two totals of surviving figures, and is multiplied by a d6 roll. Only the side with more figures gets this factor.
Add up the factors. Each side will have at least one of these (number 2), but only one side or the other will benefit from the others (numbers 1 and 3).
Compare the two totals, and then consult the difference on this table:
Difference
Result
0-19 difference
melee continues
20-39 difference
lower total side moves back 1/2 move, but in good order
40-59 difference
lower total side moves back 1 move, but in good order
60-79 difference
lower side retreats 1 move
80-99 difference
lower side routs 1 1/2 move
100+ difference
lower side surrenders, and victorious side may continue a charge if possible, leaving behind 1 guard per 5 prisoners
Factor number 2 above, is the current total value of each unit - meaning the total number of remaining figures, multiplied by the Morale Rating of the figures. In a mixed unit, each figure is multiplied by it's own Morale Rating, and then the subunits are added together. Here are the Morale Ratings:
Troop Type
Morale Rating
Peasants
3
Light Foot and Levies
4
Heavy Foot
5
Elite Heavy Foot
6
Light Horse
6
Armored Foot, Janissary
7
Medium Horse, Landsknechte
8
Heavy Horse, Swiss Pikemen
9
The New Post-Melee Morale System, Proposed First, the concept - This method involves taking a morale test. Both sides calculate what their target number would be, and the lower total tests first (2d6, trying to roll the target number or less). If the first test fails, then depending on the nature of the fail, it will consult the Post-Melee Morale Test Results table below. If the first test passes, then the second unit will make a test against it's target number. If the second unit fails, then it will also suffer the results from the table below. If it passes, then both units are still engaged in combat, and the melee continues next turn.
Method - Each side determines their target number. This is based on the Morale Rating from the above table. To that number, add/subtract the following: +1, if larger than the enemy +1, if took fewer casualties than the enemy -2, if 1/4 of the original unit is dead -4, if 1/3 of the original unit is dead -6, if 1/2 of the original unit is dead, or more
Each side will calculate this target number. The side with the lower target number tests first. If the first testing unit fails, then it consults the results table below. If the first testing unit passes, then the other side will test. If the second unit has to test, and it fails, consult the results table below. If the second unit has to test, and it passes, then that means both sides have passed, and the melee continues.
In practice, this amounts to a quick comparison of target numbers, and the lower number tests. If it fails, that is the end. If it passes, then the other side tests. That's all.
If the two target numbers are tied - both sides roll. Either side that fails will suffers the results. If (extremely rarely) both sides try to surrender, then both sides rout instead.
Post-Melee Morale Test Results
Test
Results
Pass
Continue
Miss -1
back 1/2 move, good order
Miss -2
back 1 move, good order
Miss -3
retreat 1 move
Miss -4
rout 1 1/2 move
Miss -5 or more
surrender
Miss -1, etc, means the 2d6 dice roll missed the target number by 1 (i.e. target=7, and 8 is rolled on the dice).
Here is the whole process reduced to a flow chart, and with the Morale Rating, and Test Results charts included (click to make bigger/more readable).
Multiple Units In order to apply this method to multiple units, calculate the Target Number for all units involved on all sides.
Starting with the lowest value unit, begin testing. Apply results to each unit, as it tests.
If any units have the same Target Number, always test them simultaneously.
Apply the "Took Less Casualties" modifier to each unit on the side that took fewer overall.
Apply the "Larger than the Enemy" modifier to the side that has more total figures (counting all units involved), to each unit on that side.
Apply the modifiers for unit loss to each unit individually.
Stop testing when only units from one side or the other remain in contact.
If a unit is to Surrender, but the final results have a friendly unit still in contact, then that unit Routs instead.
Example - A heavy foot unit (12 figures), and a medium horse unit (9 figures) hit a large armored foot unit (24 figures). In the melee, the heavy foot unit loses 4 figures. The medium horse unit loses 2 figures. The armored foot unit loses 5 figures. Start by calculating Target Numbers:
Heavy Foot - base value of 5
Medium Horse - base value of 8
Armored Foot - base value of 7
After the Melee, the Armored Foot unit is larger (19 remaining, vs a total of 15 remaining on the other side). The Armored Foot also took fewer casualties than the other side (5 figures killed, vs 6 figures killed). So the Armored Foot unit gains a +1 for Fewer Casualties, and a +1 for larger than the enemy. The Heavy Foot have lost 1/3 of their figures, so take a -4. That makes the Heavy Foot unit have a target of 1, the Medium Horse unit still has a target of 8, and the Armored Foot unit has a target of 9. Rolling, in order, for the Heavy Foot (roll of a 6, which means that they will surrender to the Armored Foot). The Medium Horse is next, and must test (even though the Heavy Foot failed) because there are still units in contact from both sides. The Medium Horse rolls a 7, and remains in contact. The Armored Foot rolls a 6, and also remains in contact. The melee will continue next turn between the Medium Horse (with 7 figures remaining) and the Armored Foot (with 19 figures remaining). Because the Heavy Foot still had a friendly unit in contact after all tests, rather than surrender, they rout instead.
Thoughts In practice, trying this out with just nominal units fighting it out using pencil and paper, this works fine. It rewards the better quality unit (very medieval), but also modifies that by the realities of the melee.
This method seems to work, it only has to be put into practice in a few solo games. If anyone reading this tries it out, please let me know your results.
Continuing the discussion on Early Dark Ages Britain, and wargaming in the earlier part of that period.
The above is a simple statement, but it begs the question as to how one decides to define what the Dark Ages are . . . but presumably that period between the end of Antiquity, and the beginning of the proper Middle Ages, or Medieval Period. Of course any definition that is itself based on non-specific terms opens up further labeling cans-of-worms, but it generally works out to about 400AD until about 1000AD, more or less. Rather than putting a year on it, I think it is more useful (both here in wargaming, and also in my history studies) to consider identifiable periods. It is still an abstract way to define a time period in history, but it gives some definition to the reader. So, for the Gaming with Chuck discussion, the Dark Ages in Britain is roughly from the end of the Roman presence in the Isles, until the coming of the Normans. And further dividing that, into an early Dark Ages, which runs from the end of the Romans, until the time of Alfred the Great, and the later period, from Alfred until the Normans (including the majority of the Viking age). - Gaming with Chuck HQ
Looking at this period, as we saw in the prior article, a major military force to consider are the various British kingdoms that inherited from the Roman traditions, and fought against (and absorbed, in some cases) a variety of invading peoples. This article will take a look at the army list representations of the Sub-Roman British in a variety of different "generic" rulesets. By that, I mean the rules that cater for a broad variety of ancient and/or medieval history, but that provide for specific army lists for military organizations within that period of history.
These are referred to as the Sub-Roman British, or sometimes (more rarely) the Post-Roman British. Taking a look at the WRG Army List, Book 2, listing from 1982, we see that army number 82 is:
Sub-Roman British 425 AD to 945 AD
C-in-C mounted on horse equipped as heaviest cavalry type present (or on foot as Light-Heavy Infantry, with Javelin or Long Thrusting Spear and Shield). 1 per army.
Personal/Army Standard to accompany C-in-C. Up to 1.
(a variety of different Ally-Generals, both British and others - Saxon, Irish, Visigoth, Franks)
Religious Group of Massed Praying Monks. Up to 1.
Cavalry, (Heavy Cavalry) Regular D, or Irregular B, Javelin and Shield. 14-44.
Upgrade Cavalry to Regular A. Up to 4.
Upgrade Regular A or Irregular B Cavalry to Extra Heavy Cavalry. Up to 4.
Light Cavalry, (Light Cavalry) Irregular C, Javelin and Shield. Up to 10.
Spearmen, (Light-Medium Infantry) Regular D or Irregular C, all Javelin or all Long Thrusting Spear. 48-150.
Archers, (Light-Medium Infantry, or Light Infantry) Regular D or Irregular C, Bow. Up to 36.
Saxon Mercenary Warriors, (Medium Infantry) Irregular B, Javelin and Shield. 9 to 99.
Irish Mercenary Warriors, (Light Medium Infantry) Irregular C, Javelin and Shield. 6 to 34.
Upgrade Irish Mercenaries to Irregular B. All or none.
Visigoth Nobles, (Heavy Infantry) Irregular B, Javelin and Shield. 4 to 10.
Visigoth Spearmen, (Medium Infantry) Irregular C, Javelin and Shield. 5 to 20.
Visigoth Archers, (Medium Infantry, or Light Infantry) Irregular C, Bow. 5 to 10.
Frankish Cavalry, (Medium Cavalry), Irregular B, Javelin and Shield. Up to 19.
Upgrade Frankish Cavalry to Heavy Cavalry. Up to 9.
Frankish Spearmen, (Medium Infantry) Irregular C, Javelin and Shield. Up to 49.
Upgrade Frankish Spearmen to Irregular B Heavy Infantry. Up to 9.
The army is interesting, and of course the minimums of the various Mercenary groups and Allied groups (Saxons, Irish, Visigoths and Franks) only apply if any of that nationality are used..
Ignoring the Mercenary and Allied troops for a minute, the core of the army are the actual Britons - Cavalry (light and heavy), Spearmen, and Archers. This will be followed throughout the other army lists, and while it is probably true (enough) it also seems somewhat generic for an army of this time period and place. With what historical evidence that exists, this is probably enough.
The text that goes along with the list is interesting. It reads as follows:
This list covers British and Breton armies from the rise to power of Vortigern until the absorption of the last remaining British lowland kingdom, Strathclyde. I assume that earlier armies still follow the Late Imperial Roman pattern, that the Welsh diverge early on because of their mountain environment, and that the Bretons assimilate close to the French military system after the mid-9th century. All these points are of course susceptible of being questioned. I have relied mainly on near-contemporary literary evidence, and reluctantly discarded the reconstructions of historical fiction from Geoffrey of Monmouth onwards. 1,000 praying monks appeared at a battle in 614 AD, and were attacked first by a pagan opponent who decided that those who invoked the gods against him could not fairly claim the privileges of non-combatants. Saxons were hired by Vortigern in the 5th century, Irish and a homeless Visigothic fleet in the 6th, and Franks possibly in the 9th. The option to use 4 "Regular A" cavalry in attendance on the C-in-C represents a 100-strong "round table" for an Arthur or similar personality. They cannot be used together with praying monks. Surviving literature proves conclusively that cavalry were armed with javelins and usually wore mail. Horse armour was used throughout the period by some of the Bretons of Armorica, so its use in Britain during the 6th century cannot be ruled out. "Regular D" cavalry represents surviving units of the Dux's northern border army, and "Regular D" infantry other of his units and militia raised by the southern lowland cities. No regulars can be used after the 6th century. LTS (long thrusting spear) had probably replaced JLS (javelin/light spear) as the standard British infantry weapon by the end of the 5th century, and was to remain that of the north Welsh and southern Scotland throughout the medieval period. The use of LB (longbow) by south Welsh archers was a later development.
Some interesting comments here.
First, referring Geoffrey of Monmouth as 'historical fiction'. I am still chewing on that comment, 30 years after first reading it. I get that some of Geoffrey is fantastic, but then again so is Livy and Polybius - not to mention Herodotus, the father of lies. Geoffrey is propaganda, trying to create a history that exemplifies a British, but not English, origin - and he is prone to the fantastic, but he at least attempts to stay with known sequences of events and sources. And if you accept Geoffrey's sources as history for some things, why not others? Especially where he agrees with Gildas, Bede, the Anglo-Saxon Chronicle, William of Malmesbury, Wace, and others? So, I am willing to think of him as non-rigorous history, but not quite historical fiction.
Second, within little statements, huge history is hiding - such as the statement about using the Saxons in the 5th century, because 'Saxons were hired by Vortigern'. Of course, Big V hired the two Saxon leaders, Horsa and Hengist, and from them we get the militarized arrival of the Saxons coming to establish lands and kingdoms for themselves, eventually creating the Anglo Saxon people. But, at least for a while, the Romanized Britons held out against the Saxons, first Vortigern against the mutinying Saxon mercenaries, then Arthur against the encroaching Saxon immigrants/invasion.
Moving on to another view by WRG, we see in DBA (looking at my original 1990 copy), army number 82 (retaining the numbering system from the earlier army list books) is in residence. Using the DBA element system, for a 12-element army, we see the following.
3x 3CV (Cavalry) 1x 3Kn or 2LH (Knights, or Light Horse) 4x 3Ax (Auxilia) 2x 3Ax, or 2x 3/4Wb (Auxilia or Warband) 2x 2Ps (Psiloi).
The general of the army would be one of the CV stands (unless the knight is used?). The 3 CV stands represent the British cavalry, of course. The option of 3Kn, or 2LH is either Knights (Visigoth or Scottish mounted), or Light Horse (the British light cavalry). The Knights option is also for players who envision an Arthur, and his knights or comitatus, as heavier armed (or simply elite) cavalry compared to other specimens of the period.
Moving ahead to other interpretations, we can look at the army as presented in Bob Bryant's excellent Might of Arms rules. They have armies based on the earlier WRG army books, and other sources, but rather than giving figure counts, they give numbers of stands per unit type. They give (again, stretching the point up to 945AD, to include the last remaining British kingdom at Strathclyde - in practical terms. the British were done as a force roughly around 580AD or so) the army's details as the following: Medium Cavalry (C morale) 6-24 stands Light Cavalry, Javelin (C morale) 0-12 stands Subheavy Infantry (C morale) 0-12 stands Medium Infantry (C morale) 24-102 stands Skirmish Infantry, Javelin (C morale) 0-12 stands Skirmish Infantry, Bow (C morale) 0-6 stands
The Subheavy Infantry here represent either Frankish or Saxon allies (Horsa and Hengist again?). Options exist to convert up to two units (using the recommended unit size of 3 cav or 6 foot stands) of Medium Cavalry to Heavy Cavalry, also the option to convert up to two units of cavalry (either Medium, or the upgraded Heavy) to B morale. Again, the Knights of Arthur, or some Dux' comitatus is the inspiration here, it seems.
Terry Gore's most excellent rules, Medieval Warfare, offer up an Arthurian Britons army (mid 5th to mid 6th century). This does not go on to cover the surviving Britons, but focuses on the main event. It is interesting, and of course the units are different here from some of the other rulesets, but here is the army list:
8-24 stands Cambrogi (Heavy Cav, Warriors, Jav or Spear and Shield) 4-16 stands Light Cavalry (Skirmishing Cav, Warriors, Jav and Shield) 24-72 stands Spearmen (Lightly Armored Infantry, Poor, Jav or Spear and Shield) 6-24 stands Archers (Lightly Armored Infantry, Poor, Bow) 0-16 stands Saxon Ally (Unarmored Infantry, Warrior or Warband, Spear and Shield) 6-18 stands Skirmishers (Skirmishing Infantry, Warriors, Javelin or Bow and Shield) 0-6 ships
These rules give some more tactical details - for instance, they allow the Spearmen and the Archers to form mixed units.
Once again, the Cambrogi can upgrade to Veterans if they like.
Equally, the Cambrogi can upgrade to Full Mail Cavalry, Elite Morale, Lance and Shield (Arthurian cavalry according to just about everyone from Geoffrey on down the line to John Boorman).
Options to upgrade the training and morale of the spearmen and archers exist.
The writer of the list (it appears in the rulebook, as published by Foundry) refers to the Heavy Cavalry as Cambrogi - which he defines as "Literally, fellow countryment. British warriors who supported the remnants of the Roman leaders. Well armed and armoured as well as loyal followers and trusted fighters, they often served as personal bodyguards."
Taking a look at a recent element based (in the same vein as DBA and Armati, where you can either move elements singly or as groups) ruleset, L'Art De La Guerre comes to us from Herve Caille in France. A very nice English translation is available, and it is a lovely book with lots of data, rules, and ideas for games in it. The Sub Roman British are available here, as army number #101 - Romano-British. Again, the army stretches from early 5th century (407AD, in this case) on up to the year 945AD. The army list gives the option for doing an Arthurian list, with the de rigeur option of upgrading the cavalry, in that case.
Britons Horsemen (may be medium or heavy cavalry) 4-8 units
Scouts on Pony (light cavalry with javelin, mediocre) 0-2 units
Spearmen (medium or heavy spearmen, may be mediocre) 8-24 units
Saxon Mercenaries before 442AD (heavy swordsmen, impetuous; may be elite) 0-2 units
Irish Mercenaries before 580AD (medium swordsmen) 0-4 units
Bowmen (light infantry with bow) 0-2 units
Light Infantry with Javelin 0-2 units
Christian Martyrs before 664AD (levy, mediocre, expendable) 0-1 units
Fortifications 0-8 units
Arthurian Elite Cavalry 475 to 539AD (Replace Horsemen with heavy cavalry, impact, elite) 0-4 units
An interesting army, carrying on much of a muchness with the others (spearmen, archers, light and heavy horse, allies), but this one introduces the idea of fortifications. Camelot? The Christian Martyrs represent great flavor, but little tactical usefulness that I can think of. If they were a religious standard, that might be more useful. A player can choose allies from Western Romans, Saxons, Welsh or Vikings in different periods. If sticking to the strictly Arthurian slice as defined here (475-539) then only the Welsh are available, the others being either earlier or later historical allies.
Some interest creeps in with the Shock of Impact army list, written for the Romano-British Successor (Army 48, page 27 in the army list book), for the Shock of Impact rules from Tabletop Games. These army lists give you two ways to construct an army. First, the typical method, where you employ a set of points with unit types, minimums and maximums. The second is by means of a set of percentage dice, to determine an army of so-many units. That is interesting for our study here.
The interesting thing here, of course, is the commonality of Picts. The Saxons are present, of course. The army list allows you to upgrade (of course) the army general and the Heavy Cavalry to regular troops. The British Spearman are, in the army list, of higher morale than the Picts/Scots/Saxons. Considering that the Saxons are professional mercenaries, I find that encouraging for the depiction of the British from these authors.
Another interesting thing about these rules, compared to the others covered already, is that these really focus on the period of the 5th and 6th century. It makes no pretense to cover the periods that stretch up into the 10th century with the dubious hangers-on at Strathclyde, etc.
Returning back to an army list that covers the gamut from 410AD to 945AD, the excellent rules by Neil Thomas (Ancient and Medieval Wargaming, 2007) cover the Romano-British Army. Here we see four troop types, with a variation in number of units the player chooses
Cavalry (HC, medium armor, elite) 2-4 units
Roman Remnants (DAI, medium armor, average) 0-2 units
Militia (DAI, light armour, levy) 2-4 units
Archers (LI, bow, light armour, average) 0-2 units
As usual, the option to upgrade the cavalry (again, as Knights of the Round Table, Comitatus, descendants of Sarmatians, etc - it isn't clear, but bows to the scant history and rich legend) exists, making up to one unit of Cavalry into Knight Cavalry (HC, heavy armour, elite), with some extra hand-to-hand combat capabilities on turns that they charge. The army does not permit the Roman Remnant past the end of the 6th century, but they are allowed to fight using a shield wall technique.
I have long been a fan of Neil Thomas' simple rules, and the Dark Ages variant that this list supports is no exception. Easy to teach, easy to play, and it gives appropriate results - great for a newcomer. With this army list, someone interested in either the historical period, or a plausible historical Arthur could get playing very quickly. Mr. Thomas again disparages the excellent (but, sadly, not-so-very-exacting in the historicity department) Geoffrey of Monmouth.
Finally, a look at an army list that provides for some more options than most of the lists (the most options, so far, being on the original 5th/6th edition WRG army lists, but most of the variation there came from listing different allied armies separately - Saxons, Irish, Visigoths and Franks. But this last ruleset I am covering here is De Bellis Multitudinis. In Book 2 (500BC to 476AD) of the army list collection, using the June 1993 version here as reference, we see the following Sub-Roman British army (407AD to 945AD), which is army number 81 on page 71:
C-in-C, Regular Cavalry or Irregular Cavalry
British ally general, Reg Cavalry or Irregular Cavalry; 0-3
Cavalry Reg Cavalry or Irregular Cavalry; 8-15
Light Cavalry on Hill Ponies - Irregular Light Horse; 0-5
Pedyts - Regular Auxilia or Irregular Spear; 36-120
Archers - Regular Bow, or Irregular Psiloi; 0-8
And that is it, for the basic army. As with Shock of Impact, the option exists for the General(s) and the Cavalry to be either regular or irregular, depending on the player view of the situation. But, there is a long list of other elements that can be added in for various sub-periods and special cases of the army.
Before 425 AD, Late Imperial Roman allies are available 429 AD, Saxon mercenaries and longboats are available (Horse and Hengist ride again) 430-441 AD, Saxon Allies 475-539 AD, Arthur properly done, with Cavalry and General upgraded to Regular Knights 507-550 AD, Visigothic fleet and crew, shipwrecked and part of the army Mainland Britain before 580 AD, Irish Mercenary (or Votadini foot) Armorica before 580 AD, Alan Mercenaries (from Alan army list in Book 2) Prior to 664 AD, Praying Monks (irregular horde) After 790 AD, Viking Allies (from Norse army list in Book 3)
This is, at it's heart, very much apace with the other armies listed here, but the historical detail given with the list options, and in the book text, make for a very nice snapshot of the history of the British from the 5th century until their disappearance. The Praying Monks are back, which is a good thing. How a single stand of them could make a difference, I don't know, but they would be a fun addition to the army.
Not the Arthur being discussed here
This is the wrap up of this article on the general representation of the army. The agreement is on fair (mediocre) quality infantry, and better quality cavalry. Under a cavalry commander, such as an Arthur like figure, the cavalry can be improved. This is a pretty good representation, but there are some rulesets that go a little deeper, especially for this time period. The next article will take a look at some Arthur specific rulesets (and modules) including:
Song of Arthur and Merlin
Dux Bellorum
The Age of Arthur (for Warhammer Ancient Battles)
I could include the SAGA supplement on the Sub-Roman British, and also the excellent Glutter of Ravens. The former, I will leave off, because I have an article just on SAGA planned for the next period after this - the age of Vikings. The latter, I will leave off, because the author (Dan Mersey) is already covered in two other rulesets by him (Song of Arthur and Merlin, and Dux Bellorum), which are currently much more accessible to gamers than the former (but still excellent) Glutter of Ravens. For grins and giggles, see the BBC documentary on "historical" Arthur from Francis Pryor. I enjoy Francis, but he certainly does seem to be attracted to out-of-the-mainstream theories about pre-Roman, Roman, and Post-Roman Britain. Here is the first part of a three part video on facebook that presents his documentary on the Arthur topic.
There are of course many other "documentaries" on Arthur to be found on Youtube and elsewhere, some are more or less dreadful, and others might be useful, but as in the first article in this series, nothing (for narrative) beats John Morris. Although even he (rightfully so) has his critics.
Early Dark Ages Wargaming You say 'Sub-Roman' I say 'Arthurian'
A very interesting time for study and gaming in British military history is the period of the various kingdoms and migrations/invasions that took place between the 5th and 9th centuries, AD. The armies are small, much of the surviving historical matter (which is, admittedly, very little) is steeped in legend as much as in fact, and Dark Ages Briton is a nice compact area for any sort of strategic study in warfare or wargaming. That applies also to campaigns, linking together tactical studies and games. Especially miniature wargaming.
For a wargamer this is a rich time to investigate this period of history. There are, of course, many great miniatures and wargaming rules available for miniature gaming play (some covered in this article). But there is also a load of great modern fiction and television that covers the period. There is the excellent series (The Last Kingdom) of historical fiction from Bernard Cornwell. There is even a BBC series based on the same novels. A really fun young adult novel from the last century is The Dragon and the Raven, written by the fantastic author of such things, G.A. Henty (excellent review here at Vintage Books). A terrific list of fiction from the period (modern, and less-than-modern), along with historical resources, is on this page about King Arthur available at Abe Books. Much more is available, if you look for historical fiction in the Anglo-Saxon period, or even moving up into the early Viking Age.
There is, of course, the temptation to immediately jump to the historical archetypes for King Arthur - a sub-roman Briton, perhaps a descendant of a Roman soldier, or himself trained as a Roman soldier, or cavalry officer, with a small but well trained band of warriors, that has an unduly large effect on the local political/military situation. But there are also other interesting historical events during these centuries - the arrival of the Saxons. The generation of the first Christian kingdoms. The (almost) loss of the Christian culture to the Germanic. The rise of Alfred the Great as king of the West Saxons. The burning of cakes in a swamp cottage. Eventually the establishment of the Danelaw.
I'd like to take a look at the first part of this period, the Arthurian period, in the rest of this article (covering the later part of the period in the future). Roughly that is the 5th and 6th centuries, AD. I am assuming this period for Arthur, and not the earlier possibility for Lucius Artorius Castus (probably 2nd or 3rd century AD) as the historical figure. That Arthur, of course, was an incredible soldier and deserves to be remembered to both history and legend, if even half of the inscriptions about him are correct, but as I am focusing on this period in Britain, any references to Arthur will be to this possible post-Roman Arthur.
A fantastic amount history on the period exists from lots and lots of different authors. John Morris (The Age of Arthur) is a favorite, as is Leslie Alcock (Arthur's Britain). Geofrey Ashe, although later on the field, also gives a good tilt with The Discovery of King Arthur, incorporating more modern evidence. Ashe actually predates Morris (the 73 version) and Alcock (71) with The Quest for Arthur's Britain (1968).
Uniquely wonderful work by Angus McBride - from Osprey
There are many more, a short list starts on the Abe Books community page on the Age of Arthur (referenced earlier, for the fiction listed there). A nice introduction to the period from an academic viewpoint is available here from Mark Gardner. If you have access, the Great Courses title King Arthur: History and Legend from Prof. Dorsey Armstrong is quite excellent, and covers such modern topics as Hollywood treatments, and even Monty Python (along with a great survey of all the historical literature - Monmouth through Mallory, and many others beside).
Dorsey Armstrong lecture series - Excellent!
Of the list of resources above, the introduction to the wider period by Gardner, and the Morris and Alcock books are properly Sub-Roman British history, the others are peculiarly Arthurian (albeit with one foot firmly in history, in all cases). A most excellent survey of serious historical works on Sub-Roman Britain can be found in the article by Snyder at the Vortigern Studies website.
Online there is a fantastic historical resource available from History File that has an interactive map of the various kingdoms of this period, each providing a resources page with notable leaders and historic events of those kingdoms.
There is an extremely useful Fashion of the Centuries website with a history of Anglo Saxon costume (both civilian and military) from 460AD to 1066AD.
A lot has been written on Arthur, and whether or not he existed, was he just a prototype of an actual warrior, just a fiction? I am going to concentrate here, on the version that a lot of Arthurian scholars might say is the best chance of being close to a historic personage. This is the Arthur of the 5th/6th century - not the Arthur we find in the later Romance fictions (such as the excellent works all after Geoffrey of Monmouth - including Chretien De Troyes, Mallory, and later authors). A reasonable web resource is a series of articles written by Barry Jacobsen and published on his military history website The Deadliest Blogger (a corrected, and reordered, version of the series is on Scout, linked below). The articles are accompanied by loads of images and paintings from things like Osprey manuals, and other sources, but the information is sound, and of interest to a potential gamer interested in this period.
This is a fun to read series, and has a lot of valuable references in it. One of the things that the author, Jacobsen, does here is cover (in reasonable detail, given how much evidence we have available) the 12 battles of Arthur, as recorded by Nennius, the Welsh Monk responsible for writing History of the Britons, at around the year 828 AD. He covers Arthur with surprising detail, given that earlier Arthur references were mostly in folklore and settled into the mythology of a variety of peoples. Nennius relates Arthur's battles to specific places, and describes (somewhat detailed) the effect it had on the Saxon leadership. Whether or not these battles were actually fought (and won) by a war leader (Dux Bellorum, or simply Dux) named Arthur is not as important, for the wargamer, as the fact that they are descriptions of plausible Dark Ages battles. The book was written in the height of, or even the late, Dark Ages, but the battles described certainly go back to the first century or so after the departure of Roman authority in the isles. The twelve battles, as described by Nennius, are: 1. Battle at the River Glein 2., 3., 4., and 5. The Campaign in Lindsey 6. The River Bassas 7. The Celyddon (Caledonian) Forest 8. Guinnion Fort 9. The City of the Legion 10. The River Tribuit 11. Agned Hill 12. Badon Hill
For a wargamer of the period interested in the geography of Britain, there is a nice article describing the sites mentioned in the Nennius account, online, as the 28 Cities of Britain by David Nash Ford. Using that information, along with the descriptions of Arthur's 12 battles would make for a nice set of wargaming scenarios.
A lot of gaming resources are available for this period, but one that I have always enjoyed (and made use of a few times) is the Diplomacy Variant known as Bretwalda (or, specifically, Bretwalda-2). This is a variant map and some additional rules for the British Isles (including Ireland) starting in the year 620. The kingdoms involved are:
Dalriada
East Anglia
Gwynedd
Kernow
Leinster
Mercia
Northumbria
Pictland
Wessex
Years ago we ran a fantasy campaign of "Hordes of the Things" set on that map, with special rules for Merlin and a Dragon (non player units that roamed the map, randomly, and affected armies). There was also a possibility of a great sea serpent swallowing up any fleet that remained at sea over a turn.
Earlier on Gaming with Chuck, the most excellent supplement for Warhammer Historical Battles that covers this period was covered, the Age of Arthur. It is a great book, with historical armies for the period, tons of evocative art and pictures of perfectly painted miniatures, and a great selection of scenarios.
Sometimes it seems as if Daniel Mersey is keeping the dream alive for early medieval wargaming these days - first he had Glutter of Ravens (Arthurian rules and information from Outpost Wargame Services), then it was Dux Bellorum (Arthurian rules and lists,etc, from Osprey), and these days it is Lion Rampant (general medieval from Osprey) and Dragon Rampant (fantasy heir to the previous). Great games, all of them, and Daniel (as an archaeologist, I believe) is well suited in his medieval knowledge, and certainly in his Arthurian knowledge. Not pictured below, he is author author of Song of Arthur and Merlin from Ganesha Games. Answers and discussions about Dan Mersey games can be found at the Dux Rampant forums.
In recent years, the ruleset Saga has really taken off, and it covers the expanded Viking age, including some of the period in discussion here. With the supplements, they tend towards the later part of the period - solidly in the Viking Age, and beyond (1066 is not the end for these rules . . .). Extremely popular. Lots of great websites and resources for Saga, but the fan run Tapestry is a great spot for info. One of the things that has made Saga more interesting (to me) for this period is the recent supplement, Aetius and Arthur, covering the Sub-Roman (Arthurian) period of Britain. Excellent...
Finally, there are (in the miniatures category) the wide, wide variety of general miniatures rules that cover this period. This goes back to the earliest days (Grant, Featherstone, Bath) and on up through WRG, many others, and today's offerings such as Warrior, DBM, DBA, Art De La Guerre, Field of Glory and many others. Some have been reviewed on this blog, and I have long been a fan of Might of Arms. The Hail Caesar rules (Rick Priestley) are extremely popular, and Warlord is doing a great job of supporting the rules with fantastic figures - both metal and plastic. Their army book covering Late Antiquity to Early Medieval is a perfect companion for battles from this time period. The Warlord website has loads of information and articles about the rules, armies, painting, etc.
These days, I am also very much a fan of the (the late) Terry Gore rules - especially the reprint that Foundry did a few years back, "Medieval Warfare". These start in the year 450AD (the same year that the other set from Terry Gore - "Ancient Warfare" - ends). Army lists are included, and the Foundry version (not surprisingly) has great art internally. The cover is a bit garish, but hey - it catches your attention!
Because of their interest in the period, and because of the fantastic figures they have come out with support for Tomahawk Studios and SAGA, the miniatures manufacturer Gripping Beast has a ton of great figures for this time period (Dark Ages). They have recently come out with their own set of big battle rules, that look pretty good, but I have not read them or played them yet. They are called Swordpoint, by Martin Gibbins. Wargames Illustrated has posted a great video introduction to the rules. Well worth watching, if you think they might serve for this period.
Lots more can be done, and this article should be followed up with a second on the Later Dark Ages. A separate article on the boardgames covering this time period is also warranted, but this is an introductory piece, and I wanted to share some images and links that I have had lurking around in my bookmarks list. I hope they are useful.
