Rethinking 'Dark Age' armies of Britain

[Erpingham]

I think one problem with the "hidden Celtic kingdoms" idea is the length of Roman rule. It's over 300 years of operating a different political and economic system. How much civilian armament had to be hidden in the last 100 years of that is also debateable. Arming tenants and citizens to resist bagaudae and perhaps the next villa's armed tenants was probably pretty normal.

While I think the arms of the British militia are very plausible (similar to what the average Saxon had), I'd be interested to know where all the evidence for 5th century weaponry comes from. Lead weighted darts I'd expect were a regular army thing, rather than militia. There are finds of them in Britain (they found some at Wroxeter, for example), I don't know how widespread they were and the evidence for them in the 5th century, though.

[DBS]

I think one problem with the "hidden Celtic kingdoms" idea is the length of Roman rule. It's over 300 years of operating a different political and economic system. How much civilian armament had to be hidden in the last 100 years of that is also debateable. Arming tenants and citizens to resist bagaudae and perhaps the next villa's armed tenants was probably pretty normal.

Exactly.  Just because towns sometimes carry names derived from the old British tribes does not mean that four centuries later they still have any meaningful sense of "Celticism".  Also worth considering that a lot of the traits that we associate with a Celtic identity pre-conquest really apply to the south-east and north-east; the west of Britain is a lot less clear-cut.  Personally, I think the true use of "Celtic" should apply to language, not material culture, which makes the west Celtic, but from a military history perspective, one size fits all is very difficult.

The fallacy is that, if in 43 AD, lots of Britons are running around in groups led by a more-or-less renowned warrior, armed with shields and spears, speaking some form of Celtic, and in 443AD are running around in groups led by a more-or-less renowned warrior, armed with shields and spears, speaking some form of Celtic (plus some Latin), does NOT mean that they are part of a Celtic military continuum.  It simply means that in decentralised communities, with the technology and resources available to them, that is the inherently obvious form of military organisation, just as it is, language aside, for the Angles, Saxons, Jutes, Frisians and Franks who are trying to nick your farms.

[Imperial Dave]

Absolutely

In fact it's been positied that the last regular troops could have lasted until around 430/440 just when the historical foederati issue and suggested rebellions occur

[Cantabrigian]

I think one problem with the "hidden Celtic kingdoms" idea is the length of Roman rule. It's over 300 years of operating a different political and economic system.

One only has to look at the Welsh to realise that it can take far more than 300 years for Celts to realise that they've been conquered.

[Imperial Dave]

If at all   

[Imperial Dave]

so back to the subject I have neglected. Been digging around in various places for (highly conjectural!) 'evidence' of battles in the 5th/6th Century in the West

Locally to me there is the 'battle' of Tintern which allegedly involved Tewdrig (Theoderic) and his son Muerig (Maurice) vs generic 'Saxons'. Having walked the area over the last ooooo...40 odd years I've come to the conclusion the area does not offer much in the way of space or room for a big engagement. I would estimate a raid in force more likely

The Mabinogion (and hence Black Book of Carmarthen and Red Book of Hergest) details a highly mythicised campaign of Arthur and his companions against the 'Tyrch Trywth' across the length and breadth of Wales. Whilst very stylised and highly totemic in terms of magical beasts etc I believe it has a kernel of truth and reflects an actual campaign of 'Arthur' vs a potential Irish or Saxon foe. It appears to infer mobile/fast moving engagements and may be another example of a major raid with lowish numbers and possibly mounted in nature

Rather than go down the 'arthur' route I am interested in seeing if these are potentially real battles and to work out likely (finger in air) force sizes and composition. This will hopefully then translate into a campaign that I can fight on the tabletop too       

[Jim Webster]

Where possible, walking the ground, or at least hitting lucky with google maps, might be useful
Certainly an intriguing project.
Others have tried it and have been more or less convincing

[Adrian Nayler]

I've come to the conclusion the area does not offer much in the way of space or room for a big engagement. I would estimate a raid in force more likely

Were not armies in the early medieval period often very small by later standards? I'm sure I recall reading that an 'army' could be comprised of as few as 50 men. If that's a general trend than a 'raid in force' would quite likely be described as a battle - if the authors of the time were even interested in distinguishing between different types of violent encounter as we might. The area around Tintern would no doubt be sufficient for such a clash.

Rather than go down the 'arthur' route I am interested in seeing if these are potentially real battles and to work out likely (finger in air) force sizes and composition. This will hopefully then translate into a campaign that I can fight on the tabletop too       

Are you not likely to encounter the very essence of the Dark Ages here? I would suggest that many previous authors have sought such detail in the sources, whether pursuing Arthur or not, and had there been any scraps of evidence to find you would be aware of them given your interests. Just make up plausible situations and forces as your whim takes you. Enjoy your creations sure in the knowledge that no one can gain say you either way.

[Imperial Dave]

all good points and yes the urge is to delve too deep into the bucket of smoke and mirrors and be none the wiser and other better researchers have trodden this particular path too many times to recount

I will say that I have been doing alot of research into one of the 'battles' of the Twrch Trywth which could be linked to a water phenomenon linked to the Severn, the Wye and underground rivers...

I will say more of that later     

[Adrian Nayler]

... other better researchers have trodden this particular path too many times to recount

They may have been better researchers, or they may not. Sometimes it's not necessarily the researchers, it's the sources.

Where there is little relevant evidence, authors can be tempted to fabrication. Best, I think, to accept the situation and own the fabrication up front for this is wargames not history. The key word in my previous post was "plausible", and you are well qualified to do plausible in the context of wargames.

[Imperial Dave]

And of course in theory I could wangle flaming pigs into the equation

[Keraunos]

Flaming pigs, aka hot bacon 

[Erpingham]

I thought your boar was supposed to be a metaphor for an enemy force?  Is this flaming pig some sort of poetic device signifying burning and pillaging force?

[Imperial Dave]

I just like flamming pigs 

[kodiakblair]

Were not armies in the early medieval period often very small by later standards? I'm sure I recall reading that an 'army' could be comprised of as few as 50 men. If that's a general trend than a 'raid in force' would quite likely be described as a battle - if the authors of the time were even interested in distinguishing between different types of violent encounter as we might. The area around Tintern would no doubt be sufficient for such a clash.

Small kingdoms can only raise small armies 

There is a Saxon law book, I'm struggling to remember which, dishes out names for different size forces; pretty much anything over 30 men can be an army. Most armies would be kings and their household troops supported by nobles with their household troops. When things looked particularly grim a muster could be called, we have the figure of 1 man per 5 hides of land for that though it comes from long after the 5th century. The Burghal Hidage sets the garrison for Wallingford at 2,400 men


7th/8th cent Senchus for Dal Riata records military strengths of 560 men for Gabrain, 430 for Oengusa and 420 for Loairn. Each 'tech' (house) was to provide 1.5 men but that could go as high as 4.5 men depending on the circumstances. There a similar clause for naval service, every 20 houses in each Cenel was to provide a 30 man crew and 2 7 bench boats. That would put Loairn at 630 men, Gabrain to 840 and Oengusa on 645.

Across the water, Ireland's 7th/8th cent 'Little Primer' has a petty king as somebody who can raise 700 men.

Sorry, no idea regarding Picts or Welsh folk