Paskal | 19 Dec 2017 12:11 p.m. PST |
Hello everyone, Aside from their shield forms, at the Fulford and Stamford Bridge battles in 1066, how do you differentiate a Huscarl from Harold Godwinson from a Huscarl from Harald Hardrada? In fact how to differentiate, in general, an Anglo-Saxon huscarl from a Scandinavian huskarl … Paskal |
MajorB | 19 Dec 2017 12:36 p.m. PST |
I don't bother to differentiate. |
Herkybird | 19 Dec 2017 12:44 p.m. PST |
At Stanford Bridge, the Saxon Huscarls probably had Moustaches and Danish 2-handed axes, the Norse Huscarls probably had a mix of weapons and beards. |
Huscarle | 19 Dec 2017 1:28 p.m. PST |
2nd Herkybird, plus the English used a left-handed swing so that they struck the unshielded side. Also the Vikings usually had round shields whilst the English huscarles mainly used kite-shaped shields. |
dapeters | 19 Dec 2017 1:58 p.m. PST |
Historically I suspect that their were perceived differences, but in appearance, no. For gaming you could get figures with the same on sort of weapon or the same style of ax, or one side has round shields mostly painted with red and the other mostly painted with blue. |
Stew art | 19 Dec 2017 2:32 p.m. PST |
basically from just what side of the board they are one or which way they are facing… : ) |
kodiakblair | 19 Dec 2017 3:48 p.m. PST |
As the professional warriors for both sides they would keep the gear of slain/captured enemies. Pretty quickly both sides would look the same. |
advocate | 20 Dec 2017 12:23 a.m. PST |
Moustaches v Beards is probably a good shorthand. Remember that a lot of these chaps (on the Saxon side) could have been the sons of those who arrived with Svein and Cnut. Even Harold was Danish on his mother's side. |
Paskal | 20 Dec 2017 2:08 a.m. PST |
In my opinion it's not that there are no uniforms that there are no differences… For example Ian Heath – who also earns his living by being interested in such things, wrote on page 91 of the April 1979 edition of his book WRG entitled "Armies of the Dark Ages 600-1066": 11th CenturyViking Huscarls would have closely resembled the Anglo Danish Huscal through a round shield, the kite shield apparently not adopted in Scandinavia until the 12th century ". These are the kinds of differences I wanted to talk about and I would like to hear about them. |
Dn Jackson | 20 Dec 2017 4:24 a.m. PST |
The Vikings are named things like Harald, Sven, and Karl. The Saxons are named things like Dan, Mike, and Harold. (early Saxons are named things like Otto, Hans, and Carl. |
bobm1959 | 20 Dec 2017 5:19 a.m. PST |
…but all the huscarls were Scandinavian not Saxon, even when second generation. The ones maintained in England would likely have kite shields in preference to round, especially if in the household of a Southern Earl. They may also wear a longer mail coat as the fashion was moving that way. The "English" Huscarls would have ridden to battle whereas the invaders hadn't necessarily stolen enough horses to all ride before Stamford Bridge, especially as they'd stayed close to rivers thus far. |
Paskal | 20 Dec 2017 6:50 a.m. PST |
There were still Norwegian huscarls with shorter coats of mail than Anglo-Saxons? With shorter shorts of mail as in the 9th and 10th centuries? |
Hobhood4 | 20 Dec 2017 9:11 a.m. PST |
Paskal I think you may be looking for differences in sides and similarities within armies that weren't actually there. Fashion was probably the only marker of difference. The Bayeux Tapestry shows the 'Saxons' with longish hair and big moustaches.The Normans have a very different style which shows that there were significant national differences. It may be that Scandinavians had beards and longer hair – or maybe not. Colour and pattern schemes on clothing would be a way to differentiate.That is something you could research and paint in if you want to. Regarding mail coat length, again the tapestry shows elite warriors in long coats. However, it is quite possible that Saxon thegns and their Viking equivalents wore older shorter mail coats. |
Warspite1 | 20 Dec 2017 11:51 a.m. PST |
I could have sworn that I put a post up here last night suggesting that the Anglo-Saxon huscarls may have used Christian images on their shields but that the Norse huscarls probably still used pagan ones (raven, bear, boar, wolf). I supported this with an active Wiki link to the founding of organised Scandinavian Christianity in the early 12th century – i.e. 60 years later than the date we are discussing. All this now appears to have disappeared. Did I delete it by accident or is there some rule which I have broken? Please inform me so that I do not do it again. I do not wish to offend anyone. Barry |
bobm1959 | 20 Dec 2017 3:59 p.m. PST |
At Stamford Bridge a lot of Harold's army are likely to have considered themselves Scandinavian. Yorkshire is well within the Danelaw. Yorkshire dialect is full of old Norse words….and the Huscarles were deliberately brought in from Scandinavia. The locals would have looked more like the invaders than they did the Southerners (Saxons) within the army…..and almost certainly could understand what they were saying at least as easily as they could the Saxons. Harald Hardrada expected to be welcomed into Yorkshire….and remember the "Great Army" landed after the conquest with similar expectations. |
Paskal | 20 Dec 2017 11:19 p.m. PST |
@ Hobhood4 Yes, these are the kinds of differences that interest me … @ Warspite1 You have not offended anyone, I do not see who and how? On the other hand, different decorations of shields according to the nations, it is a very good idea … @ bobm1959 Their languages were different, because the cultures were different, and if the cultures were different, it caused other differences even if their cultures were very close, which is why I insisted that the fighters – without having uniforms – were different from the opponent even if there were similarities … @ For everyone Now, for 1066, I would like to know more about the differences in tactics and organization of armies: 1 / Between the Anglo – Saxon and Norwegian armies. 2 / Between the Anglo-Saxon and Danish armies (because we must forget that the Danes also participate in the war of succession and England they neither Anglo-Saxon nor Norwegian) 3 / And finally between the Norwegian and Danish armies. Do not tell me what were identical … |
dapeters | 21 Dec 2017 9:12 a.m. PST |
I think you need to read more of the period; we tend to look back at history with current sentimentalities and those were not regimented times. This is a period of time when you can call yourself King or whatever of "X" but you can only exercise that role if you have followers who will support that notion. In any of these battles you would have found men that by "nationality" should have been on the other side. At the same time they describe the people in the next town as foreigners or the difference between Danes and Norwegians as race. But having followers who say that you're the Lord, is more important than where they came from. If you want to talk about culture let's begin with Langue, they are all speaking dialects of the same thing and probably did not have difficulty communicating with each other. Christianity is known in Scandinavia as are the old Germanic pagan religion in England. And again, what this warrior believes as far as what happen when he dies, is not as important as who he believes he should follow (followed closely by how good he is with his weapons.) -IMHO |
Paskal | 22 Dec 2017 12:24 a.m. PST |
Absolutely not in agreement with you, you seem to think that everything is generic, it was not the case, the military cultures had to be very different even between Scandinavian, the organizations of armies and the tactics also ect … |
GildasFacit | 22 Dec 2017 3:15 a.m. PST |
Paskal; you are constantly saying that there HAVE to be differences – why ? You have many here (and on other forums) who give you good reasons why the differences would be trivial so can we have reasons why you think otherwise. |
Paskal | 22 Dec 2017 8:04 a.m. PST |
@ GildasFacit I do not ask requests for explanations … But in 1066, how do you differentiate a Huscarl from Harold Godwinson from a Huscarl from Harald Hardrada ? In fact how to differentiate, in general, an Anglo-Saxon huscarl from a Scandinavian huskarl in 1066… Paskal |
dapeters | 22 Dec 2017 10:19 a.m. PST |
Go to Wikipedia, and read the section on Olfa the second of Norway. Yes it Wikipedia so don't bet the farm on anything as absolute, but you get an idea of the common couture of the North Sea must have been. |
Paskal | 22 Dec 2017 10:11 p.m. PST |
@ dapeters I read that night … Or do you want to go? Your conclusion is that the Saxon huscarls, the Norwegian huskarls, the Danish huskarls and the Swedish huskarls were identical as well as the 'milites pedites' of William the conqueror especially if they used a two-handed axe ? |
Paskal | 05 Jan 2018 10:50 a.m. PST |
I have the Harald Hardrada figurine(for saga), it's a good start for 1066 … You know others for him and the other historical characters of the 1066 War of succession in England ? |