The Saxon Problem

[pbjunky1]

I've always liked Saxon armies and at various times have had early ( raiders/ foderati/ invaders of Roman Britain), middle (Alfred's armies) and later (in reality Anglo Danes) armies. They are quite different in character.
The 'traditional' loser saxons image I think came from the middle period where they simply reverted to paying off the Danes with the Danegeld.
A big but often forgotten change came in 1016 when Cnut's Danes ended the rule of the house of Wessex  and England became one component in a larger empire, ruled together with Denmark (from 1019) and Norway (from 1028) so in effect England became part of a Scandinavian empire.

The Godwinesons  came from Godwine, a Cnut appointed ruler of the Wessex part of England. Even though the Anglo Danes lost at Hastings they beat a viking army just over 2 weeks earlier and marched the length of the country and  came close to defeating one of the most vigorous  armies of the age. Their elite infantry were considered good enough to be hired by the Byzantines post Hastings as Varangians.

[Coenus Scaldingus]

From a continental European point of view, I'm not sure if it's (just) the Saxons: it's more that the Vikings are just really rather popular!
They tend to get a lot of the screen time in shows, the focus in books and feature prominently in video games - they even have a subgenre of metal music named after them.
At least where I'm from, you rarely hear or see anything about the local boys, the Carolingians, and the few notable books or museum exhibits somewhat specialized on the topic tend to focus mainly on when the Vikings visited. Based on my limited experience at least.

All that is a positive feedback loop too of course. Specifically for wargaming, the figures that are expected to be popular may nowadays get some plastic sets from Victrix or Gripping Beast, which will then feature Vikings among their number, and as a result they are popularly played because you can get a large and varied army for cheap, or a SAGA warband out of just a single box. Meanwhile, Byzantines are only now becoming available through Fireforge, for instance the Dark Age Irish have a single sprue from Wargames Atlantic, and those aforementioned Carolingians should just be converted from Normans, if you don't fancy the available metals.

Not that I'm complaining, as, well, I do also like Vikings...

[SJWi]

Coenus, I totally agree. How many Merovingian wargames armies do you see and Carolingian/Ottonian ranges are pretty thin on the ground. I guess the Anglo-Saxons are well represented by comparison!

 I talk to my French work colleagues some of whom are very interested in military history. They don’t talk at all about anything post Clovis or pre-Norman.

[marco55]

I'd like to see a Charles Martel army and maybe a Visagoth  too to fight the Moslem invaders.
Mark

[SJWi]

Marco, agreed. I would also like to see a true “Arab Conquest army” range of the 7th century. I hear rumours that Aventine may produce some Arabs as “allies” for their Byzantines and Sassanids so there is hope....

[marco55]

That would be nice.
Mark

[SJWi]

Marco, I was in correspondence with Aventine a few months ago and was told the sculptor had no interest in Arabs. Since then I hear he is thinking of adding a few packs. They would be a natural fit with both Byzantine and Sassanid ranges as Ghassanid/Lakhmid allies, and from what I know no-one produces suitable figures. Gripping Beast produced a “Desert Frontier” range but they seem to have been discontinued.

[Patrice]

Coenus, I totally agree. How many Merovingian wargames armies do you see and Carolingian/Ottonian ranges are pretty thin on the ground. I guess the Anglo-Saxons are well represented by comparison!
 I talk to my French work colleagues some of whom are very interested in military history. They don’t talk at all about anything post Clovis or pre-Norman.

Yes the Franks are even more under-represented than the Saxons! 

Many reasons probably... In French it's called "le haut Moyen Âge" (thus a different meaning than High Middle Ages in English) but it seems less appealing to the public and kids than later periods: no plate armour, no fairy castles, no heraldry... Also this period was somewhat despised by French 3rd Republic nationalist historians and schoolteachers in the late 19th and early 20th C., Merovingian kings being called "rois fainéants" etc. it was not overally considered a good example for national unity and romanticism that they felt was necessary to prepare children for the next war. Time has passed since! but some contempt for this period has unconsciously survived.