According to an excerpt from "Money, markets and trade in late medieval Europe: essays in honour of John H.A. Munro", currently available on Google Books. (Convenient because the full book is $224.00!), they have estimates of .35 and .5 hectare (.85-1.25 acre) of coppiced woodland per urban resident to generate the firewood (including industrial uses). For Tashal, then, we are looking at 5,000-ish acres - which doesn't seem like too much of a stretch. The Laranian manors across the river could supply that much, even without coppicing, I think.

Firewood is obviously an important item for sale in the city markets, but it isn't a game-changer. Harn's cities just aren't so big that they can't be supplied by local woods. I think there are woods enough near every city.

Yes but we are using non Harnic material like the Doomsday book so it is nice to see historical pricing indicating some of the price variances mentioned as existing in the book.

The Charcoaler's Guild has the monopoly to sell wood in a city.

5,000+ acres is 8 - 9 square miles at 640 acres to a square mile. Tashal has a Single Size 2 Charcoaler with none listed in Artoen or Lyryn Manor. His description mostly notes that he is greedy, has the sole Charcoal monopoly to the various Tashal smiths and that he hires a Bonded Master since he is a frequent traveller.

Possibly favors Cook shops (Innkeepers (lots) and the single Size 5 Miller noted for Baking Bread (IMO Kaldor's best Size 2 Millwright probably does not do any baking since it is not noted in his description) IMO for economies of efficiency. Could also favor some of the Serf households in the two outlying manors who could have wood for cooking supplied rather easily.

Is this cutting down living wood or the general maintenance that removes deadwood for fuel sources? (Maybe the term coppicing explains this, but I am not sure of it's meaning )



This is one guild monompoly (among others ) I have an issue with, at least if it is enforced. I would think you could have a few guildsmen employing a poor urbanite child to gather deadwood for them. And perhaps not for coin but for food, products, etc., etc.

Historically, the gathering of deadwood from the woods was often child's work. Though for through usage and to remove deadwood, cutting down dead trees was also practiced, but I think this would be beyond children's duties.

_________________
Hmm Gurthang. What a nice name for a sword....

Tashal is a royal city with lots of Serfs in the city so could go either way depending on the P-Harn.

I mentioned it as a reminder based on the size of the franchise compared to the population of the city.

I think the immediate surrounding woods would be picked bare for several miles around the city based on the population although the children might enjoy that walking several miles looking for deadwood occasionally making a few minor discoveries like a few overlooked berries or the odd herbal treasure worth a few silver to the apothecary.

The manorial woodwards would probably zealously protect their manorial woods.

Well, actually the serfs had the right to gather deadwood from the forests as part of their feudal agreement, though cutting down live trees warranted a stiff fine.

Also when clearing woods, part of a srfs pay was the wood.

I would think Harn would be the same as firewood was a necessity for fuel.

_________________
Hmm Gurthang. What a nice name for a sword....

From the City Serfs Not the Manorial Serfs.

I thought I had read somewhere that serfs could cut as high as they could reach, but a quick internet search shows that was reserved for freeman, in this example at least.

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

The symbol of the axe in the log is associated with feudalism after the invasion and conquest of England by William the Conqueror. In that era, property, including forests, were owned by the landed barons and knights. Serfs, bound to the land in a form of modified slavery, were forbidden to cut wood from trees in the forest, and only permitted to gather downed wood. Freemen were given the right of loppage, or permission to cut limbs from the nobleman's trees as high as they could reach with an axe.[6] A freeman who carried an axe in a nobleman's forest demonstrated that he had earned the right by service. Symbolically, the grain of an axe handle must be straight and true and "set square in the eye of the head." The steel head must have the proper temper and be kept sharp. To be useful in the hands of a skilled freeman, an axe also needed to be well-balanced, otherwise the handle might break, endangering its user. The axe represented skilled laborers who had proven themselves through service. Lastly, the axe in the wood reminds those who have completed Wood Badge that they have committed themselves to be an example of service and fealty.[7]

I also stumbled on the study of the Village of Yalding, which I haven't had time to entirely look through but seems like a gold mine, though the date of 1336 seems to be past what most of the research here is geared towards. One section of the Manor Records is their Custumal, which states: " 8. All villagers have the right to fetch rotten wood. No one has permission to cut down any part of a tree." But it also goes over a few of the topics that's being discussed, including All pigs must have iron rings placed in their nose, and the serfs has to pay pannage rights to have their pigs use the lord's woods.

http://www.spartacus.schoolnet.co.uk/Yalding.htm

I see what you may be saying here.

The questions that are not answered - are the manorial woods "protected" from Urban gatherers - very possibly so. Perhaps one might need to pay for a license to do so? This was very common, licenses being issued at a cost, though it was an right of manorial serfs and did not require a license, though perhaps urban types would need a license if going on someone elses lands.

Does Tashal or any other city have an agreement in place with these surrounding manors? I would think that would not be unlikely.

How much woodland do the cities have around them that are not manorial pocessions?

Also, I would think and "unused" woods would be farmed out if possible by the owner, perhaps for a very small license fee for deadwood. Coppicing (I looked up the definition ) is a practice that is actually good for the woods - among other things, it reduces the chance of forest fires, and the spread of such fires. THis was probably known back then as well.

_________________
Hmm Gurthang. What a nice name for a sword....

Just because the Tashal city module provides details on only one charcoaler, that doesn't mean he is the only one in the city. Hârn publications aren't meant to give every single detail about a place, only to provide GMs with examples. There are an unspecified number of charcoalers supplying the city. The one specified (Owain) is the guildmaster, but Tashal 69 mentions that there are others. Likewise, Owain may keep for himself the monopoly on supplying charcoal to the smithies and kilns, but other master charcoalers in Tashal may have franchises to provide lye to the perfumers, wood/charcoal to the bakers, etc.
As someone recently said, it is a bad idea to make calculations based on things not intended for that purpose.

Even though I dislike the idea of the charcoalers guild supplying ALL the firewood to a city, this could make more sense to me. They may even get licenses to cut X amount of wood from the owners forest.

Maybe the charcoalers provide the "industrial wood" for the city, and may cut live wood, but the idea of gathering deadwood for personal use is allowed, and having an urban poor gather wood from the forest in exchange for food is something many of the better households may do (the others gather it themselves).



That is true in this case - however, pricing of food and other items, cost of support and wages should be interrelated enough so that a direct comparison makes sense.

_________________
Hmm Gurthang. What a nice name for a sword....

The purpose of the Guild is to protect the interests of the Guild Monopoly. IMO only if he was failing to to deliver adequate goods consistently could the Council sanction him since he has the only franchise listed for the Tashal market.

Could the Charcoaler's guild be another Harnic Exception or Oversight? Yes but interestingly enough the majority of those other Guild Masters without franchises get noted in the city even Mercantylers who spend most of their time away but are noted in the franchise size. Guild Masters make up a very small percentage of the population even when there are many in a city because of total population. Journeymen who are rarely identified individually and except for the GoAL they need to work for a Guild Master. His Tashal entry (most recent) contradicts the Cities of Harn Coranan Size 8 Charcoaler of being the only urban establishment of it's kind Aleath has no listed Charcoaler and neither does Cherafir. Tashal 69 specifically says a few of Kaldor's Guilded Charcoalers.......[Not Tashal's].

IMO they need to deal with him the only Franchised Charcoaler in Tashal who is also the Guild Master. There is only a single Miller/Baker based on his entry I do not see him being altruistic and sharing without receiving a share from anything involving his monopoly.

I'll let you Master X from Manor manage the tar monopoly in Tashal for a cut.

He is specifically noted as being greedy something found in few other entries of residents for the city.

Any other Charcoaler has to deal with him first regarding his guild monopoly which he can actively enforce because of his personal connections.

Plus he offers free lodging to visiting Charcoalers who help him with his business which is Size 2 so yes he has Charcoaler's from outside Tashal supplying him it is a large city but not worth noting like in every other guild franchise in the city or other Harnic product module is a bit of a stretch IMO. So they can easily be visiting Journeymen and Franchised or Free Masters suppliers from outside Tashal.

Kind of like the Council of The Mangai for Jedes plenty of Masters who do not live in Jedes reside in Asolade with Manorial Franchises or as Bonded or Itinerant Masters but also do business in Jedes.

Do you know if this means per adult resident, or per household, or total residences?

This is some good information though.

If this is one acre per adult, it's easy to factor the needs for a manor, though rural consumption maybe less.

A manor is on average 20% woods, correct? So for a 1200 acre manor, with 40 households, we have 240 woodland acres.

That COULD support 120 households by coppicing IF per adult.

Or 48 households if including children.

However, if rural consumption is less, the manor could support even more.

Anyway you look at it, Coppicing provides an excess of fire fuel without cutting down any acreage unless the emanor is very forest poor.

The mandatory cutting back of the forest every year results in even more wood, though it may well be sued for other purposes, and even if used for wood it would require seasoning.

Very interesting info either way though.

_________________
Hmm Gurthang. What a nice name for a sword....

What do you think the man hours per acre per year to supply all that wood per person? Standard assarting costs by a timberwright or charcoaler at 30 days of labor and 80 d an acre in addition to his license fee for coppicing since the "stumps" are left behind and do not need to be removed.

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

Coppicing is a traditional method of woodland management which takes advantage of the fact that many trees make new growth from the stump or roots if cut down. In a coppiced wood, young tree stems are repeatedly cut down to near ground level. In subsequent growth years, many new shoots will emerge, and, after a number of years the coppiced tree, or stool, is ready to be harvested, and the cycle begins again. (The noun "coppice" means a growth of small trees or a forest coming from shoots or suckers.)

In southern Britain, coppice was traditionally hazel, hornbeam, beech, ash or oak, grown amongst oak or sometimes ash or beech standards. In wet areas alder and willows were used. These coppices provided wood for many purposes, especially charcoal which before coal was economically significant in metal smelting. A minority of these woods are still operated for coppice today, often by conservation organisations, producing material for hurdle-making, thatching spars, local charcoal-burning or other crafts.

Typically a coppiced woodland is harvested in sections or coups[1] on a rotation. In this way, a crop is available each year somewhere in the woodland. Coppicing has the effect of providing a rich variety of habitats, as the woodland always has a range of different-aged coppice growing in it, which is beneficial for biodiversity. The cycle length depends upon the species cut, the local custom, and the use to which the product is put. Birch can be coppiced for faggots (bundles of brushwood) on a three or four year cycle, whereas oak can be coppiced over a fifty-year cycle for poles or firewood.

Coppicing maintains trees at a juvenile stage, and a regularly coppiced tree will never die of old age—some coppice stools may therefore reach immense ages. The age of a stool may be estimated from its diameter, and some are so large—perhaps as much as 5.4 metres (18 ft) across—that they are thought to have been continuously coppiced for centuries.[2]

The curve may allow the identification of coppice timber in archaeological sites—timber in the Sweet Track in Somerset (built in the winter of 3807 and 3806 BC) has been identified as coppiced lime.[3]


In the days of charcoal iron production in England, most woods in ironmaking regions were managed as coppices, usually being cut on a cycle of about 16 years. In this way, fuel could be provided for that industry, in principle, forever. This was regulated by a statute of Henry VIII, which required woods to be enclosed after cutting (to prevent browsing by animals) and 12 standels (standards or mature uncut trees) to be left in each acre, to be grown into timber.



In France, chestnut trees are coppiced for use as canes and bâtons for the martial art of the same name.

Most Lords probably reserve some percentage of their woodlands specifically for hunting IMO and don't want their horse tripping over one in the rush of the chase during some mounted hunts.

Average yield per acre in Harn is 12 bushels according to 100 Bushels of Rye Agriculture paragraph.

A few things here- wood is not measured in bushels. Harn does this with hay as well - which is not measured in bushels.

Secondly, a bushel of "wood" lilely would weigh less, at the most equal to that of a bushel of wheat, or 60 pounds.

720 or so pounds of wood would be an extremely low harvest for an acre of woodland.

Not saying you are wrong castlemike - just these numbers from 100 bushels of rye make not sense if they are about harvested wood.

_________________
Hmm Gurthang. What a nice name for a sword....

That paragraph in 100 Bushels of Rye is talking about grain, not wood.

Well, that makes a lot more sense

_________________
Hmm Gurthang. What a nice name for a sword....

I know this is the Agricultural thread. Continuing the discussion on wood thread was started when the OP thought it was derailing from agriculture.

viewtopic.php?f=1&t=12740

Thanks Mike

BTW, my next post will start the discussion on pastoral husbandry since it was so entwined with the agrarian sector.

_________________
Roy Denton - the title says Baron, but Queen for a year. (Cheselyne I)

"Nathamh na hoibre an t-eolas"
(Knowledge comes through practice)

To go back to the topic of freight rates, one mistake that gets made repeatedly is treating prices as the cause and the behavior as the effect. So we look at the freight rates and use that to try to decide what the market radius is for a city. But the root determinant is not the price, it's the need to eat!

So, in the matter of deciding which manors provide a city's food supply, all that matters are 1) the absolute productivity of the manors, and 2) the relative cost of river and land transport. From the first you can calculate the number of manors (or households, if you want to be more precise) are needed to supply a given city, and from the second you can determine which specific manors. We don't need to know anything else about prices, and any anomalies in the prices must be due to extrinsic factors.

So, the most fundamental question that needs to be asked and answered is simply, How many manors does it take to support an urban population of a certain size? My gut feeling is that the rural population must exceed the urban by about 3:1. That is, an urban population of 5000 would require a rural population of about 15,000 - or, assuming an average manor has a population of 150, 100 manors. Harn and Venarive in general has a rural:urban ratio of a little less than 10:1, which indicates that there is potential for urban growth, and is consistent with the oft observed underpopulation of the world.

Does anyone have any statistics or ideas that address this question?

100 Bushels of Rye states in Agriculture a family of 5 needs about 30 bushels of grain a year to survive and a minimum of 5 acres since the average yield is 12 bushels* an acre and half the land is fallow due to two crop rotation.

*Each P-Harn has to decide if Harnic yield includes grain set aside for the next crop since it needs to be replanted.

So an urban population of 5,000 would require 30,000 bushels of grain a year.

Tashal has a population of 11,400 and would require 68,400 bushels for it's native residents before factoring in visitors to the city. Perhaps 80,000+ bushels a year as a SWAG with the summer fair.

The Lord of Loban Manor is tasked with providing and delivering (7 miles or so) 100 bushels of rye to Olokand with a population of 800 [Possibility it may be forwarded to the King in Tashal].

Grain could be one of the feudal requirements to the King and Tashal with the onus of delivery on the Bailiff or Manor Lord just as a serf owes his lord an egg here and a chicken or pig there.

Tough question. I'd guess more than say C 1100AD England, as Harn uses a less efficient 2 field rotation. On the other hand, I think the grain requirments would not be as high as 12th century England - because with the 2 field system, more land is theoretically used for pastorage, therefore more livestock, hence more meat/dairy in the diet.

To reflect this along with the rules for HarnManor - the 80% grain diet proposed should probably be more in the 70% grain, though if anything like terra ale would constitute a larger portion of the diet.

The other thing is that the percentage of land under plow can vary - but should it be a random variance, or would lands around cities have larger percentages of arable cropland?

My guess is it varies more by geography, or more specifically type and quality of land, which would also seem to mean that land closer to a city would be of batter quality to allow a city to be built there. Last but not least, I think (am not sure) that in general lands near rivers are more fertile than those not as close to rivers, which would mean more of the products of better quality land are easily transportable.

Just a quick off the cuff though, with some of the following assumptions:
1) Harnic Diets are 70% grain, 10% Ale for a total of 80% grain.
2) Urban Diets located near a large body of water are a bit different, the 20% fish Harnplayer mentions, which would then indicate 20% Fish, 64% grain and 14% "other".
3) Harnic production of grain is similar to 14th century England, other than less land being under plow due to the 2 field rotation
4) Manors around cities are of the Harnmanor averages for % of arable land and land quality.
5) "spent" Barley used for ale will also be used for human and livestock feed, so the total calories needed for ale will only require a 1 to 1 ratio of barley calories, as the spent grains will still be used, just will have less calories as grain (there are recipes for bread using spent barley).
6) For simplicity, grain will be a mixture of 1/3 oats, barley, and wheat, their net production per acre and calories per pound averaged equally. This results in 360 pounds per acre, and 1600 calories per pound (359 and 1599 actually)

A survey of English manors show these three grains being about equal in production, with rye being a very small portion.

So, what we need to figure is the average amount of grain produced by a manor, the amount needed for personal consumption, the amount fed to lifestock, and the excess grain per manor minus spoilage.

At 10,000 Calories per day, A harnic Household needs 3,600,000 per year. If urban populations bodies of water 64% grain, that is 2,304,000 calories from grain, which is 1,440 pounds of grain per husehold.

Rural populations would probably be closer to the 80%, or 1800 pounds of grain per household.

An "average" Harnic manor is 1800 acres, 20% of this being under plow on average, or 360 Acres. Harnmanor includes hay in cropland - this is not a seeded and harvested grain type product, but from pastorage lands that are not grazed upon. Taking this out of the equation, Harnic crop mix is about 60% grain, so 216 acres.

216 acres is 6 acres per household on the manor. That would be a net yield of 2160 poounds per household. They need 1800 pounds, so the net surplus is 360 pounds per household.

Pretty simple to factor here - 1440/360 = 4 huseholds rural surplus to feed one urban household. Of course, we are not factoring any grain for livestock in here, which would change this dramatically I would think.

I would think at least 1/3 of this surplus is going to livestock grain - or 4320 pounds of grain per manor. This actually IMO is a bit low. But this changes it to 6 rural housholds to support one urban household.

And we have not factored in spoilage, though the manor surveys these numbers are based upon may have already factored this in (it is thought that some of the production numbers were after some "theft" by the serfs doing the threshing, harvesting, etc.).

So with these numbers, a city of 5000 needs 30,000 serfs to support it, or 6000 serf households. That's about 166 manors and 300,000 acres.

This to me seems rather excessive, but the modifications I have made to stats from Harnmanor have actually increased agricultural production for the most part, such as the crop mix.

_________________
Hmm Gurthang. What a nice name for a sword....

A typical Knight's Fee is 1,200 Acres according to Harn Manor.

Not a big difference, one way or the other as the calcualtions were based upon pounds of grain per acre and percentage of arable land. Other than it increases the amount of manors needed, though not the acreage, households or pounds of grain.

I ran an average acreage of Kaldor at one time, I thought manors averaged out to around the 1800 mark though. A knight's fee may be 1200 acres, but I am more concerned with the true size of an average manor.

As 1200 acres is the minimum to support a knight, I think it would average higher though - manors of 600 acres don't really meet the requirements.

_________________
Hmm Gurthang. What a nice name for a sword....