Page 2 of 7 FirstFirst 123456 ... LastLast
Results 11 to 20 of 63
  1. #11
    Site Moderator kgauck's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2002
    Location
    Springfield Mo
    Posts
    3,562
    Downloads
    2
    Uploads
    0
    When averaging huge population differences such as the province 4's along the coast of the Tael Firth and the great empty spaces of the Northlands, you have overlooked the fact that the 4's generally stay on the coast and empty lands stay empty. People are not distributed evenly througout the Rjurik lands, but are concentrated along the coast and the Hjarring River.

    My figure of 1.15 people per square mile was derived from Carl Sauer, and his calculation was in square miles, not kilometers. But even with the more generous kilometers, I was already making allowances that Rjurik would achieve the peak densities of the most optimal climate andfertility (which is quite an allowance) and was willing to go even further and assume 1000 persons per province (1) and (2), which is a 50% increase over my estimates based on optimal conditions. So I quite think my estaimates can handle your figure if you prefer it.

    A long stretch of land from Skapa Hjarring to Odemark to Leivika to Yvarre to Hollingholmen (all cities, BTW) is very densly populated. Since I figure that population of a province is roughly the province squared times one thousand I get a rough figure of 16,000 for a level four province, nicely between your 10K to 20K estimate. These ten provinces have a combined population of 122,000 by this estimate and an area of 12,000 square miles, for a population density of 10 persons per square mile. So a third of all Rjurik live in this 10 province band with five identified cities. If we consider the dense mid-Hjarring area of Innsmark, Jurva, and Veikanger, we have another 50,000 or so in three provinces. So we can account for 170,000 of all Rjurik in thirteen provinces. That's over half of your high estimate and nearly all (dare I say 80%) of your low estimate.

    Its pretty clear to me that most Rjurik are farmers. Even given Cerilias curiously low populations, nomadic Rjurik are mostly a feature of the Northlands.

  2. #12
    Special Guest (Donor)
    Join Date
    Nov 2001
    Location
    southwest Ontario, Canada
    Posts
    563
    Downloads
    140
    Uploads
    1
    Quote Originally Posted by kgauck
    When averaging huge population differences such as the province 4's along the coast of the Tael Firth and the great empty spaces of the Northlands, you have overlooked the fact that the 4's generally stay on the coast and empty lands stay empty. People are not distributed evenly througout the Rjurik lands, but are concentrated along the coast and the Hjarring River.
    On the contrary- according to The Rjurik Highlands, a great many of them migrate annually. They go north to hunt, then come back to the southern regions for winter.

    My figure of 1.15 people per square mile was derived from Carl Sauer, and his calculation was in square miles, not kilometers.
    Curious... the source i found was from R.B. Lee, 1968, and specified square kilometers.

    A long stretch of land from Skapa Hjarring to Odemark to Leivika to Yvarre to Hollingholmen (all cities, BTW) is very densly populated.
    My calculation included that entire region plus Hogunmark and Jankaping If i leave off Hogunmark and Jankaping, i get an overall density of... 9.9 for my high-end, and 5.2 for the low.

    Since I figure that population of a province is roughly the province squared times one thousand I get a rough figure of 16,000 for a level four province, nicely between your 10K to 20K estimate. These ten provinces have a combined population of 122,000 by this estimate and an area of 12,000 square miles, for a population density of 10 persons per square mile. So a third of all Rjurik live in this 10 province band with five identified cities. If we consider the dense mid-Hjarring area of Innsmark, Jurva, and Veikanger, we have another 50,000 or so in three provinces. So we can account for 170,000 of all Rjurik in thirteen provinces. That's over half of your high estimate and nearly all (dare I say 80%) of your low estimate.
    OK, not out of line with the numbers i changed on my excel spreadsheet here.

    Its pretty clear to me that most Rjurik are farmers. Even given Cerilias curiously low populations, nomadic Rjurik are mostly a feature of the Northlands.
    I'd agree with this if they were sedentary. But there are other factors affecting this.

    First, they migrate. Highlands says "much of these ancestral lands lie in the adjoining northlands, across the Hjarring River". This is why i averaged the population density over the entire region. The northlands have to be taken into account as available land.

    Second, many Rjurik survive by fishing and whaling- that means no land required to get those calories.

    Third, sedentary Rjurik trade with the migrating and permanent nomads of the north- food for equipment, etc. Again, effectively increasing the available land that can provide food.

    Now, to be fair, Highlands does say "In the coastal regions, the Rjurik have begun to establish permanent settlements, pursuing lives as farmers or herdsfolk". But- the words `begun to establish' to me suggest that this is a new lifestyle. Perhaps we're in the beginning of an agricultural revolution in Rjurik... heh.

    So i understand your points, but the case for a predominantly hunter/gatherer society here can still be made, once you take their migrating lifestyle into account.

    The proportion i envision is about 1/4 to 1/3 relying on farming. The rest depend on fishing, trading, or hunting. I'm sure your milage varies.


    -Fizz
    Last edited by Fizz; 12-25-2006 at 04:37 AM.

  3. #13
    Site Moderator kgauck's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2002
    Location
    Springfield Mo
    Posts
    3,562
    Downloads
    2
    Uploads
    0
    Based on just the BR books an argument can totally be made for highly migratory, nomadic Rjurik. The problem is that the sources also provide plenty of contrary evidence. Towns are named, even in zero provinces. Foods are identified, and they're the staples of an agricultural people, not a mobile one. Crafts are named and described, crafts which are always a sign of settled people, like metal working and weaving, and in the case of metals, some of the more intensive forms, like chain mail, are shown and mentioned in abundance. Decriptions of cities reveal their antiquity, and cities require a reliable food supply and a tremendous surplus (since many city people won't enage in any food productions, though obviously some will).

    If we were content not to make sense of the whole setting, to form a complete and integrated understanding, we might be able to save the apperances, by considering places like Hollingholmen and Veikanger with their tales of ancient origin, as being exception, as well as the centers of the metal working and woolens trade. Assuming the rest of the people are nomadic, except where absolutly neccesary is entirely possible. Your contract with your players (or DM) may not require a setting that can be picked up, examined, tinkered with, and explored. There is nothing wrong with that. Not everyone needs a setting that will run perfectly well without any players.

    But there are two kinds of concerns that provoke some of us to seek a setting description that can stand that kind of scrutiny. First, there is the player who is not content with a world that only moves while he is present. They want to rush off to Avanil to see what is happening. Or they want to enter the court Chancelry and see the scribes there and make decisions about their work.

    Second their are the issues of player interaction with realms. If the coastal provinces are not settled people, why are they always more populous in proportion to other provinces. If I raise troops there, are they loyal to me, to other rulers, or to no one in particular? How does provincial loyalty work of the people are constantly moving in and out of the province? I agitated up last season, but this season there are supposed to be new migrants? Are they indifferent, or are they also friendly? Did the people who were here lose regard for me as they left the province?

    There are solutions to some of these issues, but they require inventing new interpretations of things.

    However the setting ultimatly is described, my concern is that it makes sense under close inspection, and that all the parts work with one another. Deciding that the Rjurik are nomadic just because someone wrote that down in 2e, when setting was just backdrop, isn't good enough.

  4. #14
    Special Guest (Donor)
    Join Date
    Nov 2001
    Location
    southwest Ontario, Canada
    Posts
    563
    Downloads
    140
    Uploads
    1
    Quote Originally Posted by kgauck
    Based on just the BR books an argument can totally be made for highly migratory, nomadic Rjurik. The problem is that the sources also provide plenty of contrary evidence. Towns are named, even in zero provinces. Foods are identified, and they're the staples of an agricultural people, not a mobile one. Crafts are named and described, crafts which are always a sign of settled people, like metal working and weaving, and in the case of metals, some of the more intensive forms, like chain mail, are shown and mentioned in abundance.
    To be honest, i don't see why those things are necessarily contrary evidence. If everyone migrated, then i'd agree with you.

    But even so, there's nothing keeping any of these people from doing one thing in the summer, and another in the winter. Forges can be used in the winter- extra benefit being a source of heat. Weavers weave while huddled in their longhouses listening to the bards. When summer comes, they head north and hunt. I don't see why this has to be an either-or scenario.

    Your argument is suggesting that the entire population of a town ups and moves. I never stated the entire populous moves. Even if only half of a town (or province) migrates, you still have a stable base for crafts, trading, etc.

    Second their are the issues of player interaction with realms. If the coastal provinces are not settled people, why are they always more populous in proportion to other provinces.
    No one said they were, or had to be. The level of a province is an abstract measurement representing its development. It doesn't mean that X people must always be in the province at any given moment.

    If I raise troops there, are they loyal to me, to other rulers, or to no one in particular? How does provincial loyalty work of the people are constantly moving in and out of the province? I agitated up last season, but this season there are supposed to be new migrants? Are they indifferent, or are they also friendly? Did the people who were here lose regard for me as they left the province?
    Highlands says "As a result, most Rjurik nomads exercise a sort of dual citizenship". You could read that as you see fit and apply appropriate rules/modifiers accordingly.

    To me, these are mechanical issues that are pretty easy to resolve. The DM could quite easily rule that, for example, a Taelshore province can only muster half as many troops in the winter because so many are out of the province. But, for that matter the Rjurik are described as frequently mobile, so perhaps the bards send word and the musters arrive a month later, or something like that. I mean, there's plenty of ways to rule this. IMO, the mechanics should adapt to the setting, not the other way around.

    Such rule tweaks like this are trivial compared to what the BRCS has to go through to explain how bardic and ranger magic work, even for non-blooded characters.

    However the setting ultimatly is described, my concern is that it makes sense under close inspection, and that all the parts work with one another. Deciding that the Rjurik are nomadic just because someone wrote that down in 2e, when setting was just backdrop, isn't good enough.
    I agree- i like internal consistency too. Of course there might be a few inconsistencies that require tweaks, but i do not see the entire concept of migrating Rjurik to be problematic or inconsistent.


    -Fizz
    Last edited by Fizz; 12-25-2006 at 04:38 AM.

  5. #15
    Site Moderator kgauck's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2002
    Location
    Springfield Mo
    Posts
    3,562
    Downloads
    2
    Uploads
    0
    I acknowledged that an argument can be made. I explored how it could be done. But I'm just not gonna buy a nomadic existence with a high level of craft production. Never happened in history, didn't happen for reasons. I could ignore those reasons, but then I would be left considering Harry Potter to have a more consistant setting than Birthright. At least until someone offered a compelling explanation for how all these things work together.

    The fact that much of what you have described is actually fixed transhumance, and is distinctly not migration or nomadism, is just further proof, AFAIC, that there is very little nomadism among the Rjurik.

  6. #16
    Senior Member RaspK_FOG's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2003
    Location
    Moschato, Athens, Greece
    Posts
    1,128
    Downloads
    1
    Uploads
    0
    Isn't it normal, then, to consider the effects this has on Rjurik society? I can hardly see any of us not wanting to get a little juicy with such things in the Atlas!

    For one thing, the following trends can be evident:
    • Nomadicism
    • Agriculture
    • Iron working


    These three define 3 societal, economical, and technological levels of achievement. However, they may very well be spread unequally amongst the clanish Rjurik, who may also bear two allegiances when it comes to nature, since there are two Neutral deities with a deep connection to nature, who also happen to be male and with a deep connection to mebhaighal: Erik and Ruornil.

    What do you think?

  7. #17
    Special Guest (Donor)
    Join Date
    Nov 2001
    Location
    southwest Ontario, Canada
    Posts
    563
    Downloads
    140
    Uploads
    1
    Quote Originally Posted by kgauck
    I acknowledged that an argument can be made. I explored how it could be done. But I'm just not gonna buy a nomadic existence with a high level of craft production. Never happened in history, didn't happen for reasons.
    How then do you account for the Mongols of the middle ages? Considered nomads, yet they developed heavy armor and weaponry for themselves and their horses. That's crafting, is it not?

    Now I don't think the Rjurik have as high a percentage of nomadic people as the Mongols did, but that just makes it easier to justify the Rjurik nomads existence.

    Again, i'm not saying EVERY Rjurik migrates. Even if only a quarter of the total Rjurik are permanently settled, and the nomads don't craft anything, you've still got a substantial production base to do most of the crafting required. No one is claiming that the Rjurik have cutting edge technology. (In fact their technological level is below everyone except the Vos).

    The fact that much of what you have described is actually fixed transhumance, and is distinctly not migration or nomadism, is just further proof, AFAIC, that there is very little nomadism among the Rjurik.
    No. Transhumance (fixed or nomadic) refers specifically to livestock. I don't see livestock as accompanying most Rjurik. Among the Rjurik migrators, most i see as practicing hunter-gatherer nomadism (as Erik intended... heh).


    -Fizz
    Last edited by Fizz; 12-25-2006 at 02:57 AM.

  8. #18
    Special Guest (Donor)
    Join Date
    Nov 2001
    Location
    southwest Ontario, Canada
    Posts
    563
    Downloads
    140
    Uploads
    1
    Quote Originally Posted by RaspK_FOG
    For one thing, the following trends can be evident:
    • Nomadicism
    • Agriculture
    • Iron working


    These three define 3 societal, economical, and technological levels of achievement. However, they may very well be spread unequally amongst the clanish Rjurik, who may also bear two allegiances when it comes to nature, since there are two Neutral deities with a deep connection to nature, who also happen to be male and with a deep connection to mebhaighal: Erik and Ruornil.

    What do you think?
    I agree, this allows for much conflict among the Rjurik. Havens alludes to the settled-vs-nomadic dichotomy quite frequently. Plenty of possibilities there, including possible conflicts of interest between Erik and Ruornil- they might both have ties to the wilderness, but for very different reasons.


    -Fizz

  9. #19
    Site Moderator kgauck's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2002
    Location
    Springfield Mo
    Posts
    3,562
    Downloads
    2
    Uploads
    0
    The Molgols are recognized as having a very low level of technology. They are also known to have captured advanced Chinese, and later Persian, &c objects and loot. Using this analogy, its captured Brecht and Anuirean loot and even craftsmen they have in service.

    Nomadic transhumance doesn't imply livestock, but rather herds which are followed. If the Rjurik have their own metal working and weaving (hence forges and looms) they must have settlements, because you can't move these things every couple of months as nomads do. These things stay put. As best, father and the elder sons might leave the women, young boys, and the old men in the settlememts and follow the herds, and return with meats. But this is fixed transhumance with undomesticated herds (plausible given the setting), not nomadism. Nomads have no fixed residence, leave no material culture (or nearly none), and have no heavy craft culture.

    Migration also implies light, portability and thus precludes metalworking, pottery, and weaving. When peoples migrate they move for long periods without stable residences to establish trades and crafts. Consider the example of the Helvetii, who shifted from settled life to migration (under pressure from the Germans) and destroyed their villages and the heavy stuff because people don't just abandon their stuff.

    So, either we have to abandon the Rjurik as nomads and migrants, or we have to abandon the Rjurik as chain mail (and improved chain mail) wearing peoples, confining these heavy crafts either to foriegners (like the mongols) or to a small portion of settled people.

    Going on attempting to save the appearances of a few lines in books which never attempted to make a serious social analysis is requiring increasingly absurd efforts. Its much more sensible to apply statements of nomadism and migratory people to the few people who are specifically identified as nomadic in the Rjurik Highlands, the several tribes listed at the back of each section. Certainly a few additional tribes might be created, but generally everyone else should be considered to be settled with some romantic notions of maintaining the traditional lifeways of the ancestors with a seasonal hunting trip. Indeed humans have long been unaware of their own changing culture, imagining that they were clinging to golden age traditions when in fact there was no golden age and their customs were mostly pretty new.

    The very last thing we should do is cling to some phrases in the published materials when they are contradicted by other parts of the same materials, are hard to justify in terms of in-game principles (like the domain system), and make no sense in terms of normal game economics.

  10. #20
    Site Moderator kgauck's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2002
    Location
    Springfield Mo
    Posts
    3,562
    Downloads
    2
    Uploads
    0
    Quote Originally Posted by Fizz
    Havens alludes to the settled-vs-nomadic dichotomy quite frequently.
    Why not consult Highlands which not only has considerable text on the Rjurik settled vs nomadic question, but should be considered a more authoritative text on the Rjurik.

Thread Information

Users Browsing this Thread

There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)

Tags for this Thread

Bookmarks

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •  
BIRTHRIGHT, DUNGEONS & DRAGONS, D&D, the BIRTHRIGHT logo, and the D&D logo are trademarks owned by Wizards of the Coast, Inc., a subsidiary of Hasbro, Inc., and are used by permission. ©2002-2010 Wizards of the Coast, Inc.