Lead Adventure Forum
Miniatures Adventure => Medieval Adventures => Topic started by: cram on 28 November 2015, 10:46:25 PM
-
I've started to paint up an army of Normans and was wondering if there was a dominant hair colour amongst these people? Given the 'Viking' background of many of them I would have said fairish hair. However in most modern illustration's I have seen, the artist tend's to give most bare headed Norman's dark hair :?
-
Well, I think you are fairly at Liberty as to which colours you use, as the population of Normandy was probably one of the most ethnically mixed ones of France in those times.
Of course, dark hair and Brown eyes comes from a dominant genom, so there will be a tendency towards fewer blond heads over time, but I don't think it would have been showing back then.
-
Since our most important historical source for the appearance of Normans is the Bayeux tapestry may I suggest you consult that - obviously most are armoured and thus showing no hair. However of the many that do show their hair that hair has been depicted by the ladies who made said tapestry as blonde with a few other colours namely red, light brown and grey - so yes I would paint the majority fair haired showing their Viking heritage. See for example the crossing English channel and or first meal in England scenes... William himself is depicted with yellowish thread.
-
The rulers of Normandy may have had a Scandinavian background bu not all residents would have. The norse would have fairly quickly interbred with locals I think. And yes, I can imagine there would have been quite a diverse background existing before the Norsemen settled there.
-
A great number of 'Normans' were Bretons or Flemmings. The actual 'Northman' settlement of Normandy was probably pretty small. On the other hand, basically 'Germanic' people had been settling in Normandy and other parts of northern Gaul for centuries. Even the Franks were 'German' (again though, how many of the 'French' in the 11th century were descended from 5th century 'Franks' is open to some question).
The Bayeaux Tapestry is probably a bit of a red herring. The consensus seems to be that it was probably produced in England perhaps 10-15 years after the events it depicts. If this is correct, the English embroiderers are likely to have depicted events in a more 'English' way than if it had been produced in Normandy. So concievably, they've put more blondes in it than were actually there on the Norman side.
I'd make the Normans a mix of black, brown, red and blonde, with more black and brown than the other two.
-
Anything you like really :)
Darrell.
-
Thanks everyone. I'm as of yet not that familiar with the Normans.
-
Red. A lot of them were gingers, to judge by some of the nicknames.
-
Really! That's interesting to know. I'll be sure to include a few ginger and red heads.
-
You don't think 'Rufus' nicknames indicate something a little unusual?
At totally non-scientific breakdown I think would be something like black 4/10, brown 4/10. red/ginger 1/10, blonde 1/10
They're just figures plucked out of nothing that seem sort of reasonable to me.
-
Gosh. Don't know if I have the energy for another Red Orc debate... ;) (But here goes... )
Given that it's generally accepted that the Normans of 1066 vintage, were basically third or fourth generation Vikings...
And given that we know from genetic / DNA / hair colour studies in the UK that - even 1000 years later - there is indeed a distinct and strong correlation between prevalence of fair or reddish hair, and those areas most densely settled by Scandanavian incomers in the early medieval period...
...guesstimating 40% black hair but only 10% blond hair, seems completely wrong.
I'm sure there were some black (or more likely very dark brown) haired Vikings. And I'm sure that by the mid C11th, the Normans would have taken men of other racial origin into their ranks - although probably more at the lower end of footsloggers...
But to my mind (also based on a totally non-scientific breakdown - although taking the above known factors into account :)) something like 40% brown, 30% fair, 20% red and 10% black would seem more likely.
But isn't it largely academic? 90% of the figures seen in Norman armies seen on the tabletop are wearing mail coifs and nasal helms, so you can't see their blinking hair anyway!
;)
-
Personally, I'd do the higher ups with blonde / red hair and the lower downs with black / brown. Would be an interesting delineation.
-
Captain Blood, if the 'Normans' were predominantly from families of Vikings, then I might (probably would!) agree with you. But the Viking colonisation of northern France didn't displace the native population, there were still loads of 'French' there. I'd think the element of 'pure-blood Viking' would be quite small even in Normandy. Given that the army also included a large number of people from Flanders and Brittany (Brittany also had a Viking presence, but not a Norse dynasty) then my guess - and it is only that - would be that 'people who look Viking' would make up a very small proportion, and would as nullBolt suggests most probably represent the ruling dynasty and other 'high-ups' rather than the soldiery. I would think.
The short version is, 'Northman' is a term for the dynasty rather than the population, on my reading.
-
Yes, I agree with the general point. And certainly the latest DNA evidence seems to show a similar picture in the British Isles at least.
But then, as I'm sure you know, the historical argument swings back and forth between two conflicting and well-trodden narratives...
Version 1. Invaders basically just change the overlordship. A new ruling class of different bloodline comes in. The peasants stay the same as the peasants who had been there all along, through different waves of invasion and migration. There's a bit of interracial mingling, but the change in regime is basically CULTURAL, not genetic. This seems to be supported by some of the latest DNA analysis.
Version 2. The invaders were not just a warrior class who imposed a thin veneer of their own genes and a thick layer of their own culture over the existing population. These were mass migrations of whole tribes or groupings, who at least partially displaced / replaced the previous population of the affected areas. This seems to be supported by the hair colour analysis.
So it's hard to be certain. Probably the truth is somewhere in the middle. How will we ever know, when the evidence is conflicting?
In any event, as with most things in wargaming, it often comes down to what looks right / aesthetically pleasing, rather than what may be strictly accurate.
To me, a predominantly black-haired Norman army would simply look wrong.
But as I say, since most of them are wearing mail and helmets anyway, who would ever know? ;)
-
I used only black and brown on my Normans I think. Mainly due to ease of painting.
But honestly - looking at my figures hardly any of them show any hair... it's all covered by helmets and fabric.
-
something like 40% brown, 30% fair, 20% red and 10% black would seem more likely.
That sounds like the colouring of the hair on my own noggin, never mind the Norman 'race'!*
(*Although you can replace the red with grey when considering the hair on my chin!)
-
I grew up in Brittany. My family is mostly Breton and I have some relatives in Normandy.
We have dark hair (20%), light brown (45%), blond (20%) and red hair (15%). Freckles are common. Most of kids have light brown or blond hair, these color change when we get older. I see more differences when I travel in Southern France than in UK.
But honestly - looking at my figures hardly any of them show any hair... it's all covered by helmets and fabric.
So true lol
Hope it helps ;)
-
As DrtV posted, the milites would most probably have been in coif and helm with no hair on display, as would a proportion of the spearmen. So you only really have to worry about the rest of the foot.
Given the diversity of the army and the broad genetic base of eleventh century northern France/low countries (for want of better names), a spread of hair colours makes sense. I'd probably go, two blonde, two ginger, two medium brown, and four dark brown.
-
Most of the population of northern France at that time was of Frankish, Saxon & other german tribes mixed with Gauls. Gauls were fair skinned with auburn to blond hair. Most of the German tribes were fair haired. I would go with a mix from dark auburn to medium & light brown with a lot of ginger & blonds mixed in. Maybe a few dark haired figures but not to many.
-
What's your evidence for the genetic makeup, HerbyF? And what are you basing your 'racial' descriptions on?
I think there's probably a lot of difference between dynasties and the people they rule over.
-
As it goes there isn't that many bare headed models or models with hair visible in my army! I've been painting them with a mixture of hair colours, no real dominant hair colour as this would seem to be a bit of a grey area. If there's evidence that a people had a dominant hair colour though, then I like to paint them as such, but if its open to a lot of debate I paint their hair quite varied.
Thanks for all the input everyone.