[Faction Research] County of Flanders

[Kornelis]

Wareg: Thanks. You're entirely right to correct me there, as you say, the Swiss relied on the halberd initially.

Plumo: Yes, mercenary longbowmen should certainly be available to the Flemish. While I'm not sure the 14th century counts deployed them, that was in part because they sided with the French in the HYW, and the Burgundian dukes (while counts of Flanders) often used them.

lolIsuck: The Brabançon knights are a bit of a mixed bag. In the 13th century they were quite good, as demonstrated at Worringen, but the 14th century was rather a disaster for them, as they were defeated many more times than they managed to win, for example at Scheut (1356), Baesweiler (1370 iirc), Grave/Ravenstein (1388 iirc), every time they were up against a comparable foe. In the 13th century they had managed to defeat almost singlehandedly a coalition with Guelders, Cologne, etc, while in the 14th century they could not defeat solitary Guelders with the assistance of the kingdom of France! They had to be bailed out by the duchy of Burgundy, and even then they could only maintain the status quo. The only real victories they achieved were against rebellious vassals and the like, such as the lords of Valkenburg, who were certainly no equals.

As to other mercenaries originating from the Low Countries: there was a very considerable movement of settlers from the Low Countries to Central/Eastern Europe. These also appear in the Kingdoms Teutonic campaign, I believe, as Burgher Infantry (or some such). This is true: the colonial cities founded were populated with many Dutch settlers as well as Saxons. There were about 200 000 of these altogether. These could be represented by some kind of militia or mercenary unit.

I believe it's been mentioned before, but the Flemish were also widely employed as mercenaries by the Normans. They participated in the Norman invasion of 1066 and also came as waves throughout the 11th and 12th centuries (again, as with the Brabançons, the term may be a generic word for anyone from the Low Countries, not just those from the county of Flanders). Gerald of Wales mentioned that they were not just colonists - particularly active at weaving - but could fight just as easily. They had their presence mostly in Southern Wales and Southern Scotland - areas of Norman encroachment, where the Flemish were used as support for the reigning Normans. So they could be some kind of militia/mercenary crossover perhaps.

Apart from that, the Frisians were the most distinctive of Low Countries soldiers. Not always fully disciplined or equipped, but inventive and persistent. They participated in the siege of Lisbon by the Christians as well as in the Holy Land. They also supported the attempt of Willem II, king of the Romans, to become emperor, and participated in his sieges (for example of Aachen) in the 1250s. In the 14th and 15th century they became more prone to piracy and civil war. Like the earlier mentioned troops, they would be best served as infantry. This is a recurring feature among Low Countries warfare - the terrain just wasn't ideal for horses.

The only two exceptions would be the more cavalry-oriented Brabançons (that is, the army of the dukes of Brabant, not the Brabançon mercenaries) and Guelders. I would consider the latter a more successful cavalry-based army. They were also used as mercenaries, although particularly on a local level. They fought for the Burgundians and participated in the civil wars after the deaths of Charles the Bold and Mary of Burgundy.

[Plumo]

@Kor

If the Flemish don't use longbows (in the Saint Sebastian's guild), what would they have used?


@Polycarpe,lollsuck

Is a game mechanic possible where you can choose between pro-French or pro-English, thus unlocking new units/traits/scripts/mercenaries in the region?

I think the gameplay of Flanders could be unique. As count, you are a vassal of the king of France, but your cities are more in favour of supporting England. Who will you pledge your loyalty to? There always will be consequences...

[lolIsuck]

The mod will use culture instead of religion (like in Britannia) and you can link units to a minimum culture level so if 20% culture becomes English you get access to longbows for example. Buildings can increase that culture and to prevent you from profiting from both sides' special units I would say the better units of that side need 50% culture or more.

Poly also said something about unlocking mercs through alliances which is another possibility.

[Polycarpe]

Gentlemen, I really appreciate the amount of information, for sure Flanders will be a quite unique faction to play.

@Kor: I invite you to read the beginning of my [irl="http://www.twcenter.net/forums/showthread.php?t=531321"]Unit Guideline[/url] in order to see what I mean by unit category (such as Regulars). From the reading I've had, I will pretty sure to have enough information to compile and build a unit roster. Also to note, again with the above guideline, I would appreciated if you can compile a list of equipment using the terms in the guide, here's an example of what I mean:

English Knights 1250
Unit Category: Household Nobles.
Unit Quality: Outstanding.
Unit Role: Heavy Cavalry (Lancer)
Unit Mount: Destrier with Half-Mail Bards.
Unit Weapons: War Weapons.
Unit Shield: Heater Shield.
Unit Armour: Aketon w/ Heavy Mail Hauberk.

If you guys can do the following but for a roster of 1337-1454, some revisions have been made on the project and will come up shortly with an updated general information on WotW. Again, thank you again for your contributions, a rep is well deserved!

@Plumo

Is a game mechanic possible where you can choose between pro-French or pro-English, thus unlocking new units/traits/scripts/mercenaries in the region?

Yes but at the same time, as I've mentioned, I will have to rework on certain things about the project but essentially yes it is possible to assign a culture (religion in game mechanics) % as requirement (such for buildings, units and bonuses). Mercenaries (one way to recruit them) will be reserved within limits of a regional recruitment such as vanilla but as well inside specific settlements if required (which in Flanders' case it may be appropriate).

I think the gameplay of Flanders could be unique. As count, you are a vassal of the king of France, but your cities are more in favour of supporting England. Who will you pledge your loyalty to? There always will be consequences...

Yes totally agreed and in addition a script where you can recruit special mercenaries if you are allied with a faction can possibly add some flavor such as recruiting mercenary longbowmen while England could recruit Brabançon units.

[Plumo]

Instead of 'culture' I would use "influence", or a related word.

For the 13th and early 14th century:
2 contenders:
-Leliaards ( pro-French, lelie: Fleur-de-lis, the royal symbol of France),
-Liebaards/Klauwaards (pro-Count, anti-French ( indirectly pro-English), refers to the lion on the coat of arms).

If Kor and lollsuck want, we can try to come up with a unit roster.

[Ddos]

Sorry to bump into this dusty discussion but I remember a few weapons from my visit to the museum in Gent (wiki) who aren't mentioned here.

I'm not exactly sure how frequently or in what time period they were used but I leave that to you guys.

Morgenster (Morning Star)


Kettingmorgenster (basically a morningstar with a chain more like a flail)


Hellebaard (Halberd)


The Halberd was also used in "De Gulden Sporenslag"

Hope this helps.

[Plumo]

@Ddos

These weapons have been in use but most probably in a much more limited way than the lance, the falchion, the sword and the 'goedendag'.

About the Hellebaard: I'm not sure they were used during the battle of the golden spurs. Could you provide a reference (except wikipedia ofcourse)?



Thanks for the images!

[Wareg]

Here http://www.myarmoury.com/talk/viewtopic.php?t=1403
is information ''Oakeshott mentions that in the battles of Flanders (1302) and Morgarten (1315) in Switzerland Halberds were used with great success.''

[gesp stylo]

hey all

i read your posts (all 7 pages) while studying for exams, i study eastern-european languages and cultures with a minor in history at Ghent university (so far: antiquity, middle ages, Russia and the balkans) and i have some stuff to add wich might be nice to implement in-game and with Flanders in particular.

1: guilds: according to my those studies, there is a certain order in wich guilds were created. the first guilds (not just for Flanders, but in general) were merchant guilds, ensuring protection and helping their members with the risks that long distance trade brought with it. These guilds also came to govern their home city, this meant that the rest of the population had almost no role in politics. To counter this, there came a new group of guilds organized by craftsmen, they gradually became more important for both trade and the military and over time, gained political importance. For Bruges in particular that would be right after the battle of the golden spurs because the craftsmen guilds supplied most of the troups.

with this i mind, it might be nice to put a little hierarchy in the order in wich players can build guilds (1st would be merchants, 2nd would be other guilds) or by unlocking certain guilds when certain city levels are reached.

2: my professor told us (vaguely, as it was not really that important in this course) that the English king and the holy roman emperor once played with the thought of recognising the count of Flanders as a king. this would ofcourse have great consequences for the French king, who would actually lose one of his vazals. i still have to get more information about this subject, but it indeed might have quite a sense of truth in it since the Flemish count Baldwin was made emperor of the Lateran empire in the 4th crusade and must have had a very big amount of influence in Western Europe (i'm not talking about the fact that he was emperor, i'm just talking about the counts in general here)

It might be nice for Flanders to have the option to become a king (kinda the same way the Kalmar Union works in the baltic campaign, by conquering a certain number of places and some in particular. the count ofcourse can still refuse the crown) If he became king, he would have more authority than just a normal count... (this could be done by giving him a trait of retinue i guess) this might be a little too much for the Flemish faction game-wise though...

3: since a number of French vazals are going to be playable in this game, it might also be nice to reflect that in-game. this could be done by the same thing the mongols work in the baltic campaign (not sure if it is in the vanilla, but it is in the BftB2.O submod) by giving the vazal states the option of either accepting to pay tribute, or refuse. this would have an effect on the relationship you have with the French king, making him angry might give him more reason for war, paying tribute might give the king reason to leave you alone and focus on other vazals who haven't paid their tribute to him. however, this could also partially be reflected with the "pro-English or pro-french simpathies" factor that was proposed a couple of pages ago.

4: again one in general. it might be nice to see the year cycles of trade fairs reflected in the game. Flanders as well as the London-region and the Champagne region had a year cycle of trade fairs, enabling merchants to go from one trade fair to another. for Flanders there was one going from Bruges to Torhout to Courtrai to Nieuwpoort and by then, the next year would practically have begun and the cycle would start all over again.

my thoughts are based on this book: Introduction to Medieval Europe, 300-1550 by Wim Blockmans & Peter Hoppenbrouwers. and ofcourse by the course i followed, tutored by professor Jeroen Deploige.

i hope you had any help by this, if not, no biggy just thought i'd share this piece of knowledge with you guys

cheers

[Plumo]

@gesp stylo
I also followed that course there (got the book as well)

1. I agree that guilds ought to play a very important role in the county of Flanders. But: I don't think it's a good idea to make all those different guilds "buildable", as there were far to many (almost every profession had its own guild, as you know). I think its better to group the guilds and give them only 1 or 2 building cards in a city. I think an event system is useful here.

2. I didn't think about the fairs yet. They need to be included in the game. Also: war with France or French king who bans Flemish merchants from champagne fairs could have a devastating effect on Flemish finances...

3. If you want some kind of script to let Flanders become a kingdom, it is possible I guess. But in the time period of this mod a Flemish kingdom seems very unrealistic IMO. We would try to look for a "most likely situation" where this could have been achieved. For example a combination of:

- Holy Roman Empire ceases to exist
- The kingdom of France ceases to be the dominant power in modern France.
- other factor: f.e. neutrality with England, good relation with pope....

[Plumo]

@DEVS

How urgent is the new Flanders faction roster?

[lolIsuck]

Not urgent, we're (they're actually) still working on the Brittania campaign.

[lolIsuck]

-_-

[Landil]

Please forgive me for bumping this thread, but I stumbled upon this a short while ago, and because I've just worked on Flanders for Dominion of the Sword I have some information fresh on my memory that might be of use to you. So in the spirit of collegial friendship, here you go:

Let me present you with the Flemish unit roster as I imagine it, while pointing out inconsistencies I have spotted in the rosters proposed by others before me:

Due to its high degree of urbanisation, town militias were very common in the County of Flanders (Gravescap Vlaenderen in Middle Dutch). However, the term militie (militia) was not used in pre-modern times to describe these types of troops. This word, as many other words of French origin, was only introduced to the Dutch language during the Early Modern period (from ca. 1500 AD onward). The terms best used to describe a town militia in medieval Flanders would be wachte (a watch, a group of guards) or lantwere (national defence, people defending their land). However, I do not think either is very useful, because the former is limited to defining people guarding something (like a town) and does not apply to anyone fighting in the field, and the latter is only used to describe the whole collective of militia raised to defend the nation.

Perhaps the best thing to use instead of militia, is the affix Portersce, which means 'pertaining to Poorters (=burgesses)' or to put it in one word: Urban. This way, you are still describing troops as belonging to a town, while not defining their actual function.

While the urban militia was the mainstay of the Flemish forces, the various nobles maintained their own private armies. In Middle Dutch these forces are represented by the counterpart of the word were (=defence), namely here. This word does not mean 'offence' as you might think, but rather means 'army', but if you take in account the etymology, it would mean something like 'a lord's retinue' (comparable in origin to the modern English 'adhere', which originally meant: 'to follow/to belong to a lord') The Dutch word Heer means 'Lord', and as here means 'army', you might be able to understand that what the Dutch thought of as an army never consisted of more than a lord's retinue (or multiple retinues), implying that there was no such thing as a 'professional army'.

The best word to denote units belonging to a lord's retinue would be seriant (lit.: sergeant). Though it could mean many things, the term always had to do with serving someone (the word stems from the Latin servi, which means 'to serve'). The general meaning of the word is best described by the related serianterie, which can be translated as 'the obligation to provide armed troops'. This is a term typical for feudal society, referring to the obligation of men to serve their superior (whether it's a commoner to his lord, or a lord to his king) in times of war. It seems therefore the best thing to interpret seriant as meaning 'a subject obliged to follow/serve' or in other words 'a member of a lord's retinue'.

The last term that needs explaining, is ribaut. This word, which has the same origin as the English ribald, was often used in a derogating manner in Middle Dutch, mostly referring to the lowly commoner who was in the opinion of the nobility worth little to nothing. However, the most common meaning of the word was in fact 'lightly armed', as it was often used to describe levied commoners following their lords into battle with little equipment. It is in this way that I will be using it in my proposed unit roster.

Now, the Flemish unit roster as I would imagine it, with correct Middle Dutch terminology:

Portersce Pikeniers: literally 'urban pikemen', this would be a unit of pikemen militia. Flemish pikemen were most commonly militia units drawn from the Poorter (lit.: those who live in cities) class. They were outfitted with long spears and some armour (up to chainmail). Contrary to popular belief, the Flemish pikemen were only 'pikemen' in name, they did not actually use the pikes used by the early modern pikemen, but rather a long type of spear that could be 3-4.5 meters long (early modern pikes could reach over 6 meters long). The misinterpretation might come from the Middle Dutch word pike (Modern Dutch piek, speaking of similarities between Dutch and English!), which was at the time that it is first attested (1275) truly just a synonym for spear. This does not mean that the Flemish pikemen didn't used those 3-4 meters long spears, they certainly did, together with tactics comparable to those used by the similarly outfitted Scottish pikemen, making them a formidable opponent against cavalry.

Portersce Armborstiere: literally 'urban crossbowmen'. An easy to use weapon, the crossbow quickly became a favourite amongst the Flemish civilians. Many Poorters of the various cities of Flanders joined a Schutterie, a Marksman's Guild, which acted both as a platform for leisurely activities as well as a way to quickly mobilise the urban militias in times of need. These urban crossbowmen were relatively well-equipped and trained, wearing some armour (up to chainmail), a heavy crossbow and swords. They were also quite able in the use of the last of those three.

Portersce Schuttiere: literally 'urban bowmen'. Though because of its relatively low learning curve the crossbow was a more popular weapon in Flanders, the 'true' marksmen were those who excelled in using the bow. The Schutter (lit.: he who shoots) was an important combatant in medieval warfare, as a group of trained archers could unleash volley after volley upon the enemy, which was a quick and effective way to demoralise and eventually route the adversary. The Flemish Portersce Schutter was, like his crossbow-wielding brethren, relatively well-equipped and could stand his ground in melee combat to a certain extent.

Portersce Stafmanne: literally 'urban staffmen'. The word staf in Middle Dutch referred most commonly to staff- and club-like weapons. In this case, the word refers to the wielders of what is now popularly known as the Goedendag, but in Flanders was in fact known as a gepinde staf: a pointed staff. This cheap two-handed mace/polearm hybrid was a common weapon in 13th-15th century Flanders, especially effective against both armour and cavalry, the latter mainly because of its length (around 1,5 meters). Like other Poorters, these men could afford relatively good equipment.

Portersce Voetmanne: literally 'urban footmen'. The Poorters of the Flemish cities did not use just uncommon weapons like the pike or the goedendag, but also an assortment of common weapons like axes, maces and swords (especially falchions). These weapons would often be coupled with a shield, which together with good armour made these men formidable fighters. This type of militia could endure in sustained melee combat longer than most other types of militia that Flanders could field, but were still no match for truly professional heavy infantry and cavalry.

Portersce Riddere: literally 'urban cavalry'. Though later the word ridder came to mean solely 'a man of knighthood', in Middle Dutch it was understood as meaning 'cavalry' as well. The wealthiest of Poorters would go into battle mounted with lance and sword and armoured in chainmail. Though not as effective as mounted knights, they could pack a punch and were not as expensive to keep in the field.

Ribaut Speremanne: literally 'lightly-armed spearmen'. In times of war, lords would call upon their subjects to fulfil their duty, most of these subjects being, often unwilling, commoners. These men are armed with the common short spear (1.5-3 meters long), shields and little to no armour.

Ribaut Schuttiere: literally 'lightly-armed bowmen'. Though not as effective as professional archers, many levied commoners could handle a bow at least to some extent, and to many a lord, every archer was welcome. Armed with little more than a bow, a quiver of arrows and whatever club or knife they could find, these men would pepper the enemy formations with arrows in the hope of breaking order and thus morale.

Seriant Pikeniers: literally 'pikemen retinue', this would be a unit of regular pikemen. These pikemen were similarly outfitted to their urban militia counterparts, but instead served in knight's retinues and as mercenaries. They are professional soldiers, capable of forming organised formations that even heavily armoured knights are reluctant to charge into.

Seriant Voetmanne: literally 'footmen retinue' (in M2TW terms: dismounted men-at-arms). In Middle Dutch Voetmanne was used to define any soldier on foot, a typical generalisation that came from the idea that anyone fighting on foot was inferior to someone fighting on horseback. In this case, the footmen are rather heavily armoured professionals, wielding an assortment of weapons such as axes, maces and swords together with a shield.

Seriant Riddere: literally 'cavalry retinue' (in M2TW terms: men-at-arms). Knights were not the only mounted warriors, they often had a small following of cavalrymen of lower status. This included petty knights, favoured freemen, squires and sometimes mercenaries. These men were heavily armoured, clad in chainmail and in later times partial plate, and well-armed with lance, shield and sword.

Edelike Voetmanne: literally 'noble footmen' (in M2TW terms: dismounted knights). Even dismounted, knights were a force to be reckoned with. Especially in the Low Countries, with the terrain often unsuitable for cavalry charges, it was not a strange thing to see them fighting on foot. These men are armed with axes, maces, polearms and swords; whatever could pierce the armour of an opposing knight. That, together with their shields and heavy armour, makes these knights a menace in any melee.

Edelike Riddere: literally 'noble cavalry' (in M2TW terms: knights). Of all European men of war, the knight was the greatest. Though the nobility in Flanders had strong competition in the cities, even with their limited resources they still brought forth knights like they did in the rest of France. These men were bred for war, to carry with valour their lance, shield and sword into battle, mounted on the best of horses and clad in the finest armour. This type of heavy cavalry is the best around, but of very limited availability in Flanders.

Edelike Gaerde: literally 'noble guard'. The best and most loyal of men were chosen to guard the life of a high nobleman. Clad in the finest armour and armed with the best weapons available, these men would go into battle on thundering horses and with an iron will set only to defend the life and glory of their lord.


Of course, this is only a concept, so it will likely need some alteration, but it does present you with an overview of what kinds of troops Flanders could field in a fairly descriptive manner.

That's all for now. Hopefully this is going to be of use to you guys! If you need any more help with this or other subjects of research (especially if it's anything pertaining the campaign map) feel free to contact me and I'll gladly help whenever I have spare time

[Polycarpe]

The concept is very good mate, have a rep for the detailed description.

Since i'm not an expert, I would invite the others that have some Flemish knowledge and debate upon this roster which I personally like.

[Ritterbruder44]

Landil pretty much did all the work, there is little we can add about it
though if I may, I have some doubts about the last 'high-tier' units like the noble cavalry.

Judging on the size of Flanders during this period

Spoiler Alert, click show to read: 

it would seem rather unlikely to me that the counts were actually able to muster a few (leave alone multiple) of these elite units
I've checked wikipedia (yes, wikipedia! because I'm rather short on sources right now) and at the battle of the gulden spurs there were 350 nobles present on a total of around 9000 men.
if you recalculate this to M2TW terms (where big armies usually are 2000-2500 men) this would give you a max of about 90 knights on horseback.
I would, indeed, find it not surprising that in the county of Flanders there would not be more than a 500 nobles capable of bearing arms at a given moment, our strength was the city 'militia's' (which indeed should not be called militia, as Landill cleverly deduced) which were better trained and equipped then their French counterparts.
Too represent this in-game, perhaps the 'Edelike voetmanne' can be cancelled, since I highly doubt that our nobles would prefer to fight on foot more than any other faction's, and the 'Edelike Riddere' limited to a unique unit of 1 available, since it would take nearly every noble in Flanders to make up the bodyguards alone

[Landil]

In fact, the same problem crossed my mind when I was making the roster. As I said, it might need some alteration, with the role of the nobility being one of the major points of discussion.

Your argumentation however, seems faulty. Firstly because the geographical size of Flanders does not say anything about the amount of nobles it had, rather, Flanders had some 500,000 inhabitants during the 14th century, leading to a much higher population density than almost any other region of western Europe. Even this though, does not say much about the actual size of the Flemish nobility (though it can be used to make an estimation). Neither does the number of nobles present at the Battle of the Golden Spurs, because it does not say anything about the number of nobles not attending.

Instead of looking for a way to figure out the exact size of the nobility, I think we should first focus on understanding the role that the nobility had on the battlefield. Most of the knights you would find in any medieval army were small landholders. Only a handful were high nobility: the counts, the barons, and some of the lords. This latter group, rather than fighting together in a cohesive group, usually each commanded their own retinues. The low nobles, forming a much bigger group, were for most part men-at-arms in function, fighting as part of the retinue of a high noble. Only rarely would there be a group of knights, mostly consisting of low nobles and a few of higher stature, fighting together without their retinues, often under the banner of a duke or a king.

I would suggest, with this information in mind, to scrap the Edelike Riddere and Edelike Voetmanne entirely for Flanders, but also to heavily restrict the availability of knights for other factions, to only a few units at any time for the bigger factions (England, France, HRE). In this scenario, the only other way to field knights is through bodyguards, which are also of limited availability. As such, the men-at-arms truly become the mainstay heavy cavalry for any faction.

What do you guys think? Also, Polycarpe, would you like me to help you with anything else research-wise?

[Polycarpe]

In fact, the same problem crossed my mind when I was making the roster. As I said, it might need some alteration, with the role of the nobility being one of the major points of discussion.

Your argumentation however, seems faulty. Firstly because the geographical size of Flanders does not say anything about the amount of nobles it had, rather, Flanders had some 500,000 inhabitants during the 14th century, leading to a much higher population density than almost any other region of western Europe. Even this though, does not say much about the actual size of the Flemish nobility (though it can be used to make an estimation). Neither does the number of nobles present at the Battle of the Golden Spurs, because it does not say anything about the number of nobles not attending.

Instead of looking for a way to figure out the exact size of the nobility, I think we should first focus on understanding the role that the nobility had on the battlefield. Most of the knights you would find in any medieval army were small landholders. Only a handful were high nobility: the counts, the barons, and some of the lords. This latter group, rather than fighting together in a cohesive group, usually each commanded their own retinues. The low nobles, forming a much bigger group, were for most part men-at-arms in function, fighting as part of the retinue of a high noble. Only rarely would there be a group of knights, mostly consisting of low nobles and a few of higher stature, fighting together without their retinues, often under the banner of a duke or a king.

I would suggest, with this information in mind, to scrap the Edelike Riddere and Edelike Voetmanne entirely for Flanders, but also to heavily restrict the availability of knights for other factions, to only a few units at any time for the bigger factions (England, France, HRE). In this scenario, the only other way to field knights is through bodyguards, which are also of limited availability. As such, the men-at-arms truly become the mainstay heavy cavalry for any faction.

What do you guys think? Also, Polycarpe, would you like me to help you with anything else research-wise?

This is one thing we will do regarding the nobility is a quite intense restriction about recruitment of household nobles (aka the knights) and we will rework the general information guide to suit our new needs (time is quite short with school atm but will do step-by-step and I'll first tackle the unit guideline).

Regarding research mate, if you can participate into the posted public research thread, this will indeed help us alot.

[druzhina345]

Illustrations of early 15th Century Burgundian Soldiers in Le Roman d'Alexandre, made in Flanders

Spoiler Alert, click show to read: 

Sanson of Ailly delivers his message to Nicolas King of Armenia
The death of Nicolas of Armenia
The presents of Darius to Alexander
Siege of Tyre
Battle of the Macedonians against the inhabitants of Gaza
Betis & his army leave Gaza
The reconcilliation between Cassamus of the Laris & Eumenes of Kardia
Alexander at the Temple of Mars, near Ephesus
Fighting before Ephesus
The Macedonians are volunteers to the pits of Ephesus - Gadifer of Lari
Prisoners Porus, Cassiel the Baudrain and Marcian are by Alexander
The death of Philip of Macedonia - Alexander comes to the rescue of Olympias
The army of Pausanias emerging from Aigai - Alexander avenges the death of his father
The oracle of Apollo
Alexander receives the messengers of Darius
The god Ammon comes to visit Alexander in a dream
The Battle of Granicus, the first battle between the Macedonians and Persians
The Bath of Alexander - Alexander's disease - The execution of Parmenio
The Battle of Issus, the second battle between the Macedonians and Persians
The assassination of Darius

MIRROR SITE
15th Century Burgundian Soldiers in Le Roman d'Alexandre

druzhina345
Illustrations of Costume & Soldiers