While there likely would be a tree here and there in the primary settlement, it would likely have much fewer trees inside the settlement than you put in there because most of those trees would have been clear cut to make the timber for the buildings and the wall which would use a lot of wood. The second settlement having the wall real tight with the settlement is very accurate. It takes a lot of timber and time to build those walls, so they would never be built bigger than absolutely necessary. Historical town walls often had buildings built right up against them because of the premium of space within the wall boundaries. There shouldn't be felled timber distributed around the town wall though. All the trees that close to the settlement would have been used to make the timber for the settlement and it's wall, so there wouldn't be any forest creep on that either. And if there was more wood than they needed, the excess would have been stacked in log piles for safety. Also, like I mentioned in the first episode, the forest so close to the settlement would be clear cut back from the wall so they could see potential dangers to the settlement. Another thing to consider, in this timeframe, crop fields were often fenced in. Animals were generally free range with no such thing as big animal pens (small ones sure for the industry side of animal husbandry, but not the big range ones we think of today), but fields were fenced in to protect the crops from being eaten by animals (both wild and domestic ones). So, putting fences around all the fields would be realistic.
In the Intro, it might have been nice to intersperse images of the world map with dots and arrows to indicate where things came from and what routes they took. The various Viking images were pretty though.
The distance between the 2 settlements is very good. A couple of hours walking is more than reasonable. In Medieveal times, while cities might be many days apart, there was not barren wilderness between them. There would be a rich network of settlements and it would be rare to have to walk more than half a day between them (often much less), as people would regularly walk from one, to the next, and back again to trade and to visit friends and family, and for church, as most villages would not have their own church, rather there would be 1 church for a whole network of villages. Most European cities, when you look at the modern image, the city core was the original city, but the area around that core, was not empty land the city grew into, rather all the area around the city that is part of the city today, were originally villages that the city annexed into itself as it grew in importance.
While there likely would be a tree here and there in the primary settlement, it would likely have much fewer trees inside the settlement than you put in there because most of those trees would have been clear cut to make the timber for the buildings and the wall which would use a lot of wood.
The second settlement having the wall real tight with the settlement is very accurate. It takes a lot of timber and time to build those walls, so they would never be built bigger than absolutely necessary. Historical town walls often had buildings built right up against them because of the premium of space within the wall boundaries.
There shouldn't be felled timber distributed around the town wall though. All the trees that close to the settlement would have been used to make the timber for the settlement and it's wall, so there wouldn't be any forest creep on that either. And if there was more wood than they needed, the excess would have been stacked in log piles for safety. Also, like I mentioned in the first episode, the forest so close to the settlement would be clear cut back from the wall so they could see potential dangers to the settlement.
Another thing to consider, in this timeframe, crop fields were often fenced in. Animals were generally free range with no such thing as big animal pens (small ones sure for the industry side of animal husbandry, but not the big range ones we think of today), but fields were fenced in to protect the crops from being eaten by animals (both wild and domestic ones). So, putting fences around all the fields would be realistic.
This looks really great!
Given the time frame, the Vinland and Denmark's medieval Greenland colonies would be excellent resources for the time frame.
In the Intro, it might have been nice to intersperse images of the world map with dots and arrows to indicate where things came from and what routes they took. The various Viking images were pretty though.
The distance between the 2 settlements is very good. A couple of hours walking is more than reasonable. In Medieveal times, while cities might be many days apart, there was not barren wilderness between them. There would be a rich network of settlements and it would be rare to have to walk more than half a day between them (often much less), as people would regularly walk from one, to the next, and back again to trade and to visit friends and family, and for church, as most villages would not have their own church, rather there would be 1 church for a whole network of villages. Most European cities, when you look at the modern image, the city core was the original city, but the area around that core, was not empty land the city grew into, rather all the area around the city that is part of the city today, were originally villages that the city annexed into itself as it grew in importance.
It looks really nice! I like the history :)
This is so awesome fr
Thanks man! I really appreciate it. I'm having a blast making the series and I hope you stick around!