Stone/Bronze Age help

[bigdamnhero]

Re: Stone/Bronze Age help

 

The trouble is: where does the Barbarian PC come from?

By definition, any village other than mine.

 

Thanks for all the great input, folks. I haven't had much time to respond as I'm madly scrambling to finish writing three scenarios by next Friday. But I have been reading them, and have gotten some great ideas here, as always. I'll let you all know how it turns out.

[assault]

Re: Stone/Bronze Age help

 

I wrote:

The trouble is: where does the Barbarian PC come from?

bigdamnhero replied:

By definition, any village other than mine.

This is correct, but we both missed the obvious answer:

 

The Barbarian PC is a Cimmerian!

 

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cimmerians

[Markdoc]

Re: Stone/Bronze Age help

 

Someone upthread said that iron was lighter for the same strength.

 

It is. The earliest cannons were known of were made of wood (no, I'm *not* kidding) and iron. Iron's lighter and harder but also more brittle. It was harder to cast (early iron cannons were made of metal slats heat-welded together). Trouble is, being more brittle, they had a tendency to blow up (this was countered by adding banding or making the walls of the barrel thicker, but that made them even heavier.)

 

Hence bronze. Heavier, but easier to cast and bore out, and since it was readier to deform, slightly less prone to going off like a giant bomb.

 

cheers, Mark

[Kristopher]

Re: Stone/Bronze Age help

 

It is. The earliest cannons were known of were made of wood (no' date=' I'm *not* kidding) and iron. [/quote']

 

I actually knew about the wood.

 

IIRC, the Chinese had some kind of gunpowder-based weapon made out of bamboo.

[bigdamnhero]

Re: Stone/Bronze Age help

 

IIRC' date=' the Chinese had some kind of gunpowder-based weapon made out of bamboo.[/quote']

No, that was Captain Jim Kirk.

[Lezentauw]

Re: Stone/Bronze Age help

 

I actually knew about the wood.

 

IIRC, the Chinese had some kind of gunpowder-based weapon made out of bamboo.

 

I believe you are correct. They had a makeshift barrel on top of a stick, the problem with these "guns" is that they were very unaccurate. They fired these from the hip, and the bamboo did not necessarily grow perfectly straight.

[Vondy]

Re: Stone/Bronze Age help

 

I saw photos of a chinese "hand canon" from the latter part of their bronze age that would have been held in the hand, and had no mounting according to the site (a Chinese Covernment "you should love China" site). It had a lot of fancy bass relief stuff on it for grip, but I'm still not sure how you were supposed to hold onto it.

[Cancer]

Re: Stone/Bronze Age help

 

Early bronze and iron metallurgy is a fascinating subject all to itself. I've read the suggestion that at first bronze was an unrecognized accident ... there are some limited sites where copper ores and tin ores are found near each other, and the resulting metal was superior to more pure copper.

 

Smelting iron takes a lot more heat/fuel than smelting copper, and the properties of the resulting metal again depend on impurities, which result from the local ore, fluxes, and fuels used. Meteoritic iron (which is far superior to early smelted metal) was known to all cultures long before they could produce iron themselves, and is a "natural" source for "magic" weapons.

 

The evolution of cannon is a Renaissance topic, fascinating but separate. John Guilmartin's books (Gunpowder and Galleys and Galleys and Galleons) make a strong case that naval tactics & strategy evolution was in part driven by the technological evolution of cannon-making.

[Vondy]

Re: Stone/Bronze Age help

 

Early bronze and iron metallurgy is a fascinating subject all to itself. I've read the suggestion that at first bronze was an unrecognized accident ... there are some limited sites where copper ores and tin ores are found near each other, and the resulting metal was superior to more pure copper.

 

Smelting iron takes a lot more heat/fuel than smelting copper, and the properties of the resulting metal again depend on impurities, which result from the local ore, fluxes, and fuels used. Meteoritic iron (which is far superior to early smelted metal) was known to all cultures long before they could produce iron themselves, and is a "natural" source for "magic" weapons.

 

I've been reading up on this off and on over the past several years, and it appears that most bronze age cultures knew how to work iron well before moving into their respective iron ages, as evidenced by the fact that iron was worth 8 times as much as gold by weight in Egypt at various points. It boils down to: is it the knowledge, or the actual use, that defines the transition point? Another question is, why didn't they work it more, which evinces all manner of competing theories. We also see references in the book of Judges, Samuel, Chronicles, and Kings to the iron weapons and implements where, really, the text shouldn't have bothered to mention the particuliar material at all. In other words, the material was considered significant because between 1200-900 BCE in the Middle East, bronze was still the dominant metal.

[Old Man]

Re: Stone/Bronze Age help

 

I saw photos of a chinese "hand canon" from the latter part of their bronze age that would have been held in the hand' date=' and had no mounting according to the site (a Chinese Covernment "you should love China" site). It had a lot of fancy bass relief stuff on it for grip, but I'm still not sure how you were supposed to hold onto it.[/quote']

 

"Lieutenant! Where's that slave I ordered?"

 

"Right here, sir."

 

"Excellent! Here slave, hold this."

 

"Uh... what is it?"

 

"No questions or I'll have you flogged! Now brace it against your chest and keep it pointed at the enemy while I light this."

[Kristopher]

Re: Stone/Bronze Age help

 

I've been reading up on this off and on over the past several years' date=' and it appears that most bronze age cultures knew how to work iron well before moving into their respective iron ages, as evidenced by the fact that iron was worth 8 times as much as gold by weight in Egypt at various points. It boils down to: is it the knowledge, or the actual use, that defines the transition point? Another question is, why didn't they work it more, which evinces all manner of competing theories. We also see references in the book of Judges, Samuel, Chronicles, and Kings to the [i']iron[/i] weapons and implements where, really, the text shouldn't have bothered to mention the particuliar material at all. In other words, the material was considered significant because between 1200-900 CE in the Middle East, bronze was still the dominant metal.

 

CE or BCE?

[Vondy]

Re: Stone/Bronze Age help

 

CE or BCE?

 

Book of Judges, etc? BCE. Will Edit.

[Kortay Mirlor]

Re: Stone/Bronze Age help

 

One more reason early cannons were bronze --- people were already casting big ol' things in bronze that were roughly the right size and shape.

 

Of course, I mean bells. Think not? Look at a pic or an early bombard! Almost as wide as long (or tall from another POV), and about as big as a middle-size church bell.

 

Just adapt the techniques, and your all set.

[Old Man]

Re: Stone/Bronze Age help

 

That would be damn cool, howitzers that rang out the target's death knell as they fired...

[Cancer]

Re: Stone/Bronze Age help

 

That connection has been pointed out before: that Christian Europe got a leg up in cannon technology because of the bellmakers. One of the things bemoaned by Islamic writers of the period about Christian cities was the cacophony of churchbells, suggesting by contrast that the Islamic countries lacked the industry of casting large and strong bronze objects. Of course, because the Turks paid well, they got Christian artisans to make guns for them, but it wasn't a native industry.

 

Early cannon were wrought iron, made like barrels, of iron bars like barrel staves, wrapped by iron hoops. These weren't very good. Bronze cannon (a direct extension of bellmaking) came next. Controlling the metallurgy of iron was more complex, and good, reliable cast iron cannon originally came from northern Europe in the early 1600s, IIRC Sweden first followed quickly and more successfully by England.

[Kristopher]

Re: Stone/Bronze Age help

 

http://www.herogames.com/forums/showthread.php?t=50097

 

Bump, mainly to get anyone who might want to contribute on a newer thread to look at it.

[gojira]

Re: Stone/Bronze Age help

 

I didn't read the whole thread, but just thinking quickly:

 

No stirrups. Assyrians ride with out them (I think). Chariots are very imporant as calvary.

 

Think American Indian if you want a socially sophisticated stone age culture (the AmerIndian had no metal, no wheel). Don't forget the Aztec and the Incas who were also stone age, even though they had sophiticated counting systems.

 

Like the Aztecs and the Incas, more cultures than just Egypt built pyrimids.

 

Seafaring, wind power are present (I think), but navigation and weather prediction are a big problem. Not many people means few options if you get lost.

 

Because of small and disperse populations, attitudes may be different between modern culture and ancient. There's much more land available so property may not be a big deal (although very fertile land like the Nile valley will be jealously defended).

 

And few people means less help available, so hospitality is very important. I think Homer says in the Odessey that the worst crime is a host who betrays his guests, or vice versa. Not offering hospitality to those in need is a death sentence.

[Vestnik]

Re: Stone/Bronze Age help

 

And few people means less help available, so hospitality is very important. I think Homer says in the Odessey that the worst crime is a host who betrays his guests, or vice versa. Not offering hospitality to those in need is a death sentence.

 

Unless of course they think that you are dead and decide to hit on your wife. In which case you are honor-bound to KILL 'EM ALL!!!!!

[assault]

Re: Stone/Bronze Age help

 

Seafaring' date=' wind power are present (I think), but navigation and weather prediction are a big problem.[/quote']

 

On the other hand, stone age seafarers were able to settle the Pacific, and maintain regular trade routes.

 

Because of small and disperse populations, attitudes may be different between modern culture and ancient. There's much more land available so property may not be a big deal (although very fertile land like the Nile valley will be jealously defended).

 

I would say that the situation would generally be more a case of loosely defined and overlapping borders between particular territories. This would often still be the case in the Bronze age, even in relatively well organised societies.