Sizeable Bronze Age battle in northern Germany

[Erpingham]

To return briefly to suitable figures, for those fancying the period as a skirmish game, how about 40mm?

http://www.monolithdesigns.co.uk/prehistoric_europe.htm

Largely based on our previously discussed Scandinavian material, with flashes of slightly later central Europe.

Also, in 28mm, for those who fancy their warriors rocking more the Otzi look

http://www.stevebarbermodels.com/35-28mm-prehistoric-settlement

Replace a few flint weapons and Ugg's your uncle.

[eques]

I certainly wouldn't count Northern Europe as "Homeric".  That would be like calling the Chinese Jin Dynasty "Arthurian"

The Aegean world is surely very very integral to Homer and his characters.

Interesting you see such a huge difference Harry.  What model of military/social organisation would you go for as more fitted to the Northern European Bronze Age?

Well my main point was simply that "Homeric" is the wrong word to use, because it has such very strong associations with the Aegean and Greece.

But I think there were big differences between "Mycaenean" and Northern Europe in the Bronze Age - fewer/no cities, no writing, little or no sailing, different Gods, different climate and terrain, different (more primitive?), different political structures, different arts and crafts.

At a guess, I would say that Northern Europe somewhat resembled Celtic Europe, or the Ancient Germans of the Early Roman Empire.

[Erpingham]

Well my main point was simply that "Homeric" is the wrong word to use, because it has such very strong associations with the Aegean and Greece.

But I think there were big differences between "Mycaenean" and Northern Europe in the Bronze Age - fewer/no cities, no writing, little or no sailing, different Gods, different climate and terrain, different (more primitive?), different political structures, different arts and crafts.

But we are specifically talking about a homeric model of combat. While arts, architecture etc. were different, they aren't directly relevant.  "Homeric" warfare (which is not necessarily the same as Mycenaean) envisages a battlefield of well-equipped  "Big Men" (kings, princes, heroes) who engage other "Big Men", supported by less well-equipped bands of followers and lesser individuals, who seem more inclined to group combat.  Is this a workable model for wargaming the Northern Bronze Age e.g. could you take a set of Homeric rules and create a convincing Bronze Age battle?

Looking at the aftermath of the Tollense battlefield, we do seem to be dealing with a "war to the death" model, not a more limited form of ritual warfare or sacrifice capture model.

At a guess, I would say that Northern Europe somewhat resembled Celtic Europe, or the Ancient Germans of the Early Roman Empire.

Certainly possible but our descriptions of Celtic and German warfare are often those of huge actions against the classical world.  It is harder to get handle on exactly how "tribal" warfare worked.  Reading accounts of the Romans v. Britons or Irish epics, you might conclude that the natural form of Celtic warfare involved chariot-riding hero elite supported by bands of followers and lesser mortals, broadly the same as the "Homeric" model.

[Jim Webster]

But surely any Germanic model must take account of the ritual sacrifice of captured equipment and perhaps prisoners?

[Erpingham]

But surely any Germanic model must take account of the ritual sacrifice of captured equipment and perhaps prisoners?

Archaeologically, I think this is an interesting difference between other military finds in a similar area.  These do seem to be collections of weapons/boats/human remains not in situ but put into a bog, whereas Tollense seems to be in situ battlefield remains.  This could reflect significant cultural/religious differences.   In terms of modelling the fighting, I'm not sure whether it would make much difference though.

[Jim Webster]

Somewhere there may be a bog deposit to go with the battle of Tollense, and there are obviously battles to go with the bog deposits.

[Patrick Waterson]

Looking at the aftermath of the Tollense battlefield, we do seem to be dealing with a "war to the death" model, not a more limited form of ritual warfare or sacrifice capture model.

Agreed.

It is harder to get handle on exactly how "tribal" warfare worked.

Tacitus, writing in the Germania, suggests that it could be quite dedicated and vicious.

"After the Tencteri came, in former days, the Bructeri; but the general account now is, that the Chamavi and Angrivarii entered their settlements, drove them out and utterly exterminated them with the common help of the neighbouring tribes, either from hatred of their tyranny, or from the attractions of plunder, or from heaven's favourable regard for us. It did not even grudge us the spectacle of the conflict. More than sixty thousand fell, not beneath the Roman arms and weapons, but, grander far, before our delighted eyes." - Germania 33

Outright annihilation was, of course, the norm rather than the exception, but it does illustrate that Germans took their warfare very seriously.  Caesar's early chapters in his account of his conquest of Gaul are replete with accounts of tribes being displaced by hostile neighbours, which in itself suggests there was more to warfare than chieftains having it out in front of rival audiences.  The big question is how much and how methods of, and approaches to, warfare had changed between the time of Tollense and the first century AD.  If there had been a ritualistic/posturing approach it would soon have been submerged by the more dedicated and serious application of organised butchery.  Tacitus does not comment on trends, but does comment on the Chatti as thriving through being more organised and disciplined than their neighbours.  Note that his concept and treatment of 'Germania' includes the Suessiones (we would nowadays with at least partial accuracy say 'Swedes') and borders on the Fenni, or Finns.  We might thus tentatively apply the 'Germanic' model of war-dedicated, formation-fighting tribes who treated their opponents' deaths extremely seriously across the whole of northern Europe as a faute-de-mieux interpretation.