D&D General Travel In Medieval Europe

You guys know that the villager is not walking for exercise or leisure but has to go to the field with all his tools, work there for most of the day and then go vack in the evening (and during harvest season all those produce has to be brought back too). If he has to powerwalk for hours to even reach the fields there is not enough time left to work and transporting stuff too much effort.

Faolyn said:

Here's a map of the Trade Way taken from the FR Wiki:

View attachment 157207

Please note the number of towns and villages that are not directly on the coast or have a port. Now realize that there are probably dozens of tiny hamlets along that road that aren't listed on that map.

Click to expand...

Compare that map to the map of roads* in medieval England


Note that there are plenty of roads that connect port cities, some going along the coast. Why? Because for many things it simply wasn't worth the cost of shipping. There was still a lot of overland travel, not only for people but for livestock and bulky but relatively low value goods as well. Not to mention connecting all the little towns along the way and access to places where there simply isn't a good site for a port.

I don't expect D&D to make 100% sense all of the time, heck the real world doesn't make 100% sense all of the time. But thinking there would be no roads connecting major cities because there's also the option of using a boat simply is not a valid assumption.

*this is specifically Roman roads, but it's the best picture I could find given the time I want to spend searching. I think the point still applies.

gamerprinter said:

Well, according to my grandmother's genealogy research, the oldest ancestors in any kind of records, were Irish nobles who settled in western and southern Scotland during the Dal Riata era. And later fought the Romans and lost, so they sailed to Norway to recoup their forces, rest and plan for future attacks against Rome. While they were in Norway, an envoy from Hungary of Attila came and offered rank and title to those who joined their effort. Some of the family went, and today their are descendants in Hungary still. All that traveling occurred sometime in the fourth century, a half millennia or so before the height of the middle ages.

Then there's both pilgrimages to the Holy Land, and the Crusades, priests sent to serve in distant monastaries, not to mention sailors aboard merchant ships across that entire span of time. Not every person of the medieval period was a peasant farmer.

Click to expand...

Coming back to this post, travelling in search for a better life also happened, but not to the extend if pilgrimages.
While in central Europe serfdom made that harder it was more common in nordic countries. For example the byzantine empire was a prime destination for people from Sweden to travel to in search of employment (Varangian Guard, etc.).
So much so that eventually laws were passend to discourage travelling by only having you inherit when you where in the country at the time of death of your ancestor.

Historical itineraries are really useful for figuring out travel times. I used them a lot in my Roman campaigns. Roads make a big difference

Bedrockgames said:

Historical itineraries are really useful for figuring out travel times. I used them a lot in my Roman campaigns. Roads make a big difference

Click to expand...

Oh, this just reminded me of ORBIS, a detailed, map-oriented database of travel and transport in the Roman world. Just linking it here for anyone who's not seen it before:


.

Ixal said:

Coming back to this post, travelling in search for a better life also happened, but not to the extend if pilgrimages.
While in central Europe serfdom made that harder it was more common in nordic countries. For example the byzantine empire was a prime destination for people from Sweden to travel to in search of employment (Varangian Guard, etc.).
So much so that eventually laws were passend to discourage travelling by only having you inherit when you where in the country at the time of death of your ancestor.

Click to expand...

Well the other side of my family, my mother's side, are Japanese. They of course lived a restricted travel life that almost all Japanese endured throughout it's history. My great grandfather was a physician in what is today Shimane-ken, which historically was the Izumo province on the Sea of Japan side of Honshu, northwest of Kyoto. His ancestors going back 800 years were all physicians serving as the healers of the house of the Daimyo in Izumo, all that time. Though they were only of the Commoner caste, they were considered the highest "rank" within Commoners. Until the 19th century, my family didn't get to leave the Izumo province - so travel extremely limited through most of time.

Hussar said:

No I did answer. All the setting material I’ve seen for Waterdeep and Baldurs Gate go to considerable lengths talking about how trade by sea is the major focus of trade.

Overland trade is barely mentioned. Maybe I’m just looking in the wrong supplements. But sea trade is the whole reason why Waterdeep exists. So I’m rather at a loss as to what answers you are expecting from me. If overland trade is the major part of trade on the Sword Coast, can you point me to where that’s talked about?

Click to expand...

I pointed out all those trading companies before. As @Oofta brought up, there's also things like livestock which isn't very easy to ship by boat.

But to get back to the original purpose of this tangent--there are still plenty of reasons for roads to exist, because walking is free whereas traveling by boat costs money, plus not everyone lives near a port. And there are still plenty of people who have a vested interest in making sure that the roads are in decent condition and fairly safe. You seem to be under the impression that stepping outside should mean anywhere from constant stubbed toes and broken wheels due to potholes all the way up to instant death by owlbear. When... no.

Actually, interestingly, in feudal Japan, due to the lack of iron and metals in general, farmer horseshoes were made from woven straw. Which meant that shoes fell apart after only 4 miles or so of movement across the road to market. Farmers spent much of any "idle time" weaving straw shoes for their horses, until they had large bags full of shoes. While that 4+ miles average distance between shoe changes isn't an imperial measurement, every farmer knows the distance between regularly traveled destinations, due to number of shoe changes. You could explain to someone on the other side of Japan, that you live 46 shoe changes southwest from Tokyo, and they'd know how far and roughly where that is...

.

Hussar said:

Ok. I’m misunderstanding something.

Are you guys seriously arguing that overland trade is even comparable to over water trade? At any point in history including now?

Do you really think that an equal or even large minority of the trade between Boston and New York prior to the railroads went by land?

Or am I missing something?

Click to expand...

Enough travel, including trade which you seem to only be thinking of in large scale terms for some reason, has always gone between settlements along roadways, that those roadways have been worth maintaining and keeping safe, and there have pretty much always been places to stop and rest along those roadways, between settlements.

Like...a large portion of trade is historically done by people who cannot afford to charter a ship, and thus traded along roadways, doing trade at most or all of the stops along the way.

That "small" trade benefits merchant guilds, because it gives them much easier access to goods from the surrounding environs, which they buy in town and then ship by whatever means makes the most sense at their scale of business, and given the destination.

Again, overland trade routes have always existed, throughout recorded history, for a reason.

More to the point of the thread, overland trade routes and maintained roadways specifically, exist in all of the major published dnd worlds. If you don't like that, feel free to start a thread about it, but you're mostly just derailing this one at this point.

Tonguez said:

look up the Boston Post Road
the Old Conneticut Road section was in use in 1630 and was based on an older Native American trail connecting the Massachusetts Bay to the Conneticut Valley. The Road then extended via Hartford and New Haven to NYC.

it was the major postal route linking New England towns and become US Highway 1

heres a 1962 map showing the old postal routes in red

Click to expand...

Exactly this.

pemerton said:

In the late nineteenth century, my understanding is that the cost of droving livestock from inland Australia to a port (probably Sydney or Brisbane) was about the same as, perhaps more than, shipping them from Australia to Britain.

Historically, trade by sea is far cheaper and more efficient than trade overland. Assuming FR has post (itself a somewhat anachronistic assumption), I can imagine a post road linking all the little towns and hamlets down the coast. But it would be for carrying messages between those places. It wouldn't be for carrying trade goods on a large scale. Those should be shipped.

Click to expand...

Trade by sea, like many things, is cheaper if you already have money. If your trade is primarily along the lines of barter for low value or small amounts of something, not necessarily the case.

It's also worthwhile to note that trade along those roadways still happened. So it clearly had a good enough profit margin to be viable. (again, because there is trade at every stop along the way, usually)

Hussar said:

I’m not denying that roads exist. I mean come on. We all know that roads exist.

What I am denying is that significant trade would go north and south overland compared to by sea I the Sword Coast or in historical Eastern United States.

Click to expand...

You've misunderstood what other people are saying, then. We aren't claiming that overland travel is comperable in weight of goods or money made or anything like that between the two. What people are trying to explain, rather, is that enough trade goes by overland roadways to make it worthwhile to build and maintain roadways overland, between settlements, even along a coastline.

Some folks have shown some different ways that land and sea are fairly comparable (or at least can be) in terms of danger and other downsides, in order to show that not all trade is going to choose one or the other, and have also shown that we can't just assume that conditions are simply directly comparable to IRL, because IRL doesn't have krakens.

At every turn, you've twisted these statements around and asked hyperbolic rhetorical questions that mostly just make it seem like you skimmed our posts and then replied with some offhand snark rather than actual engagement.

Oofta said:

Compare that map to the map of roads* in medieval England
View attachment 157229

Note that there are plenty of roads that connect port cities, some going along the coast. Why? Because for many things it simply wasn't worth the cost of shipping. There was still a lot of overland travel, not only for people but for livestock and bulky but relatively low value goods as well. Not to mention connecting all the little towns along the way and access to places where there simply isn't a good site for a port.

I don't expect D&D to make 100% sense all of the time, heck the real world doesn't make 100% sense all of the time. But thinking there would be no roads connecting major cities because there's also the option of using a boat simply is not a valid assumption.

*this is specifically Roman roads, but it's the best picture I could find given the time I want to spend searching. I think the point still applies.

Click to expand...

Awesome map. Thank you.