Thursday, August 11, 2022

Book Notes: Barbarians and Romans: A.D. 418-584: The Techniques of Accommodation (by Walter Goffart)


I read this book because it was recommended in the bibliography presented in Guy Hasall's Worlds of Arthur.  

Goffart had studied Late Roman and Early Medieval tax law and the basic query of this book is that despite the "fall" of the Western Empire and its division into the "barbarian" kingdoms of the Lombards, Visigoths, Franks etc., a clear continuity in taxation runs through this transition, and the Roman origins remain evident and in place. 

Goffart almost exhaustively breaks down the idea of massive, multiple waves of coordinated and organized invasions of "Germanic" peoples overrunning and carving up the Western Empire.  Rather, these invasions are uncoordinated and quite separate from each other. Many of these people had previously existed, often for a long time, adjacent to the Empire on its frontier - they interacted with and knew who Romans were and, perhaps more importantly, what life in the Empire had to offer.  Due to pressures from other tribes or other factors, occasionally "large enough to matter" masses of barbarians would successfully cross the (fortified) frontier penetrate into the mainly civilian lands beyond. Maybe there would be some fighting, but in many occasions the Empire deemed it easier to take in the invaders as military auxiliaries.  

To this Goffart is focused on the process of how the empire legalistically handled this "accommodation."  The answer was to basically assign a portion of a given landowner's tax liability to a given barbarian or barbarians.  Because that tax income would usually be used for defense of the empire, and because the accommodated barbarians provide military service, one can see how this somewhat cleverly does very little to upset the status quo for the Empire.  Tax liability is not increased but the same level of defense is still provided.  One can see how early medieval feudal structures might grow out of this.

I do not recommend this book for casual reading. Goffart is very much doing the academic historian's labor of assembling and presenting his probative evidence.  The first, second, sixth (discussion of the granting of hospitalitas) , and final chapters are probably most instructive, with the middle five focusing on specific case studies for 5th century Italy, the Visigoths, the Burgundians, and the Lombards, respectively. 

The granting of hospitalitas in chapter 6 and indeed the whole book is at the heart of the "accommodation."  Older Roman military law required hospitalitas in a billeting of troops sense.  Goffart argues that earlier historians have mistaken the granting of hospitalitas to barbarians as either the outright reallocation of land from Roman owners to new barbarian owners, or the creation of a sort of early feudal lord-serf relationship. This interpretation of course fits very neatly into a "conquering invaders" narrative.  Goffart's more nuanced view is that above tax reallocation in exchange for service, which is considerably less dramatic, and, more importantly, does much to keep the source of authority with the Empire (the tax allocation is given in exchange for service - the implication is that it can be taken away), albeit over time these tax allotments will devolve and reconsolidate into the early medieval states.


Thursday, August 4, 2022

Somewhere in Yorkshire - Pike & Shotte Porch Game

In spite of a forecast of a 99-degree high, I set up my new, wider, sunshade umbrella and  played another game of Pike & Shotte on my porch with my longtime opponent Gabe.  

Royalist foot.

I again used the force randomizer from my earlier Portable Pike & Shot Wargame battle maker, this time creating a war-in-the-north scenario (thus placing it somewhere in Yorkshire, probably in the west riding).  I have also acquired the To Kill A King supplement by Warlord Games, so pulled suggestions or elements from that into the set-up as well.  The randomizer gave the Royalists two battalias of Whitecoat foot and one regular (recall that per prior game, I am usig combined units of pike and shot with the 'pike company' rule).  Per To Kill A King I split both the Whitecoat battalias into 'small' units for a total of four units of Whitecoats instead of two. Parliament ended up with three units of regular foot, and both sides had 1 commanded shot, a medium gun, a light gun, and five cavalry. The roundheads were commanded by Thomas Fairfax himself using stats from To Kill A King.  Because Parliament was outnumbered, they received 12" inches of earthworks (based on a points calculation to make both sides even) which could placed along the halfway mark of the table, with artillery deployed therein with some infantry in support.


I then dealed out six terrain tiles as shown above, and placed terrain accordingly, as seen below.


I then diced for deployment using my battle maker.  Gabe placed his earthwork atop the hill near the center of the field, directly in front of the mass of royalist Whitecoat foot, and put his falconet light gun and one foot unit in to defend it. 

Initial set-up on Royalist left. The four small units of Whitecoat foot are at bottom, directly across from some Parliament foot in the earthwork.

This game used the same 'Exhausted Army' rules as the prior game.  So if at the beginning of a turn, an army had "lost" 1/3 or more of its units ("lost" being defined as having left the table, or being shaken), then it was "exhausted" and basically teeters on the edge of breaking entirely.  Both armies can be "exhausted."  When half or more of one army's units become "lost," that army breaks, has lost the battle, and the game is over.  The most notable detriment to an exhausted army is that the morale rating (i.e. saving throw) for all units is reduced to a 6 only - this obviously makes the ability of the opponent to push the exhausted army to half or more units as lost much easier. Because the Royalists had 11 units (not counting artillery), their exhaustion point was four units.  Fairfax had only 9 units, so his exhaustion point was three units lost.

Initial set-up looking at Royalist right. The three units of Parliament cavalry are deployed in front of the foot.  The opposing command of three Royalist cavalry are deployed behind the woods.

The flow of gameplay was as follows:  Fairfax advanced his cavalry on the Parliament left.  The Royalists attempted to position their opposing cavalry on the Royalist right to set up a charge.  Instead, they blundered and charged instead. 

Initial setup viewed from Parliament left. From this view you can see the cavalry battalias on the opposite end of the table (two units vs two units). You can also better see the Royalist advantage in number of foot units.

The Parliament cavalry offered closing fire and cost the Royalists a casualty.  The Royalists lost the subsequent melee and fell back.  The Royalists advanced the Whitecoat infantry closer to the earthwork so as to all be able to fire muskets upon the earthwork.  The combined 8 shooting dice did manage to cost the Parliament defenders one stamina. 

A fresh Parliament foot unit moves up to cover the flank of the earthwork.

Earthwork defenders.

Back on the Parliament left, the Parliamentarian cavalry charged in again, and won the melee.  The Royalists rolled snake eyes on their break test (!) and fled the field.  The supporting unit of Royalist cavalry rolled a 3 on its break test and also fled.  On the other side of the field, the Royalist cavalry on the Royalist right attacked its opposing Parliament cavalry, won the melee and pushed them back, and then made a mandatory follow-up due to their galloper rule (Northern horse was rash, being decedents of old Border Reiver families).  On the follow up they lost the melee and... rolled a 4 or less on their break test and fled the field.   

Getting close to end-game. Parliament is massing its infantry in the center.  The Whitecoat attack on the earthwork can be see to the left. 

The Parliament cavalry then charged what was left of the Royalist cavalry, and although one Parliament squadron was broken, the Royalist left now had no cavalry remaining, and but one squadron remaining on the right.  While all of this was going on, one company of Whitecoat infantry had become shaken from musketry and artillery fire from the earthwork.  This equated four "lost" units, so the Royalist army was now close to breaking entirely (which makes sense seeing as the foot in the center had watched the cavalry on the left break and run almost immediately and seen the cavalry on the right push back the Parliamentarians at first, only to be completely destroyed).


However, two the Whitecoats companies of foot (the other two were both 'shaken' now) were able to mount a melee assault on the earthwork.  After one round it was a draw so they remained 'locked in.'  The remaining, non-Whitecoat, Royalist infantry company advanced in the center, and although it took heavy musketry fire, kept rolling 6s on its saves, keeping it (and the entire army) in the game.


The Royalists were able to cause a second Parliament unit to become 'lost,' and for a second it seemed like they might be able to cause Fairfax's army to also become exhausted. 


However, on the second round of melee, the Whitecoat attack on the earthwork fell back. 


And then the remainder of the Parliament foot in the center combined to attack the red-jacket Royalist foot, and given the 6 saving throw, were able to break that unit and win the game.

The decisive attack in the center by the Parliament foot.

This was a really quite enjoyable game. The exhaustion/break point rules worked well (again) in creating a tense end game situation.  The larger Royalist army was counter balanced nicely by the earthwork given to Parliament.  It is also probably worth mentioning that having a stand-alone army general (i.e., not attached to his own battalia) who can issue orders to battalia units who already failed an order issued by its battalia commander is of immense value in making the game move along.

Playing outside is also nice, despite the heat. I look forward to more outdoor games, but late summer plans might conspire to prevent any more games until September.