Swords

[alex_greene]

An archaeological article on Bronze Age swords here ...:-

"The role of warfare and not least the efficiency of weapons in the Bronze Age is clouded in myth. The most persistent myth is the claim that bronze weapons were unsuited for practical combat, and hence that warfare was mainly ritualized ... since none of the prevailing descriptions of the use of Bronze Age weapons are based upon observation, just as they often ignore existing studies of use-wear ... They belong in the sphere of cultural prejudice. In this article I wish to replace prejudice with observation.

"In the following I shall exemplify and discuss four aspects of the role of swords in Bronze Age combat:

"- functionality and use
"- damage and resharpening
"- protective measures
"- ritual depositions and the nature of combat.
"I shall conclude with a discussion of the role of famous or heroic swords."

The tale of the sword

The page leads to a link to the full PDF document. Guess what? You can skip the intro page, and download the PDF directly here.

Roleplaying games are so much more fun when there exists some real research to draw from.

 

[DamonJynx]

Very interesting. Gotta love history_and herstory for that matter as well! :lol:

 

[Simulacrum]

The most persistent myth is the claim that bronze weapons were unsuited for practical combat, and hence that warfare was mainly ritualized

I've never, ever encountered this 'myth'. Utter tosh.

The nearest to a persistent myth I have seen is that iron weapons were adopted and proved a decisive advantage because they are harder and hold a better edge so were battle-winners, which is essentially a silly idea. Iron's main utility was that despite being more corrosion-prone than bronze, it was abundant, did not require significant trade networks to bring tin and copper together in the same place, so once you could smelt at sufficient temperatures to produce it, iron was much, much cheaper.

 

[Dan True]

The most persistent myth is the claim that bronze weapons were unsuited for practical combat, and hence that warfare was mainly ritualized

I've never, ever encountered this 'myth'. Utter tosh.

I have. It is a very persistent myth in Scandinavia as far as I know. In this context Bronze Age does not refer to the highly-developed southern bronze age areas, where we have many many sources describing war and combat.

However, all the areas found in Denmark from the bronze age, have persistent small handles - much smaller than the hands of the people we have found in graves (we have some very, very well-preserved corpses in Denmark.. and their hands are bigger than the sword handle). The same seems to be true for Swedish, Norwegian and German bronze swords as far as I know.

The myths seems to arise from this fact, combined with the very low wear/tear on the swords (compared to the iron age and medieval swords we have found) and archaelogists who would gladly try to interpret our history and culture more peacefully. The idea seems to have spread during the Vietnam war, where some academics liked to interpret things in a more pacifistic manner.

I will read this when I get the time. I have discussed this on length with both my girlfriend (currently taking her master degree in Archaeology) and a historian I fence Sword & Buckler with. I have decided to make or buy some blunt replicas some time and try the swords in combat, looking for historical sources (likely drawings) to inspire stances etc.

Thank you for posting the link.

- Dan

 

[Simulacrum]

The most persistent myth is the claim that bronze weapons were unsuited for practical combat, and hence that warfare was mainly ritualized

I've never, ever encountered this 'myth'. Utter tosh.

I have. It is a very persistent myth in Scandinavia as far as I know. In this context Bronze Age does not refer to the highly-developed southern bronze age areas, where we have many many sources describing war and combat.

Actually - its a pretty interesting article. Can't say I buy into the premise stated in the abstract - that it is necessary to show that bronze swords in general were combat-effective (it's necessary to show they are not, if that's your view). But I can see that it deals with specific issues that Dan mentions. In the end I guess the premise is just that - an academic justification for writing what is otherwise just a rather fascinating walk thru of evidence and observations.

 

[sdavies2720]

...However, all the areas found in Denmark from the bronze age, have persistent small handles - much smaller than the hands of the people we have found in graves (we have some very, very well-preserved corpses in Denmark.. and their hands are bigger than the sword handle). The same seems to be true for Swedish, Norwegian and German bronze swords as far as I know...

Clearly the swords are from an early age before man could smelt bronze. They were probably made by the "wee folk" (thus the small handles) and gifted or traded to the big folk. The lack of wear probably comes from residual magic that resisted damage.

Steve

 

[Faelan Niall]

Sorry I could not get past the first couple of pages because of the bad information being presented. 1. His friendly swordsmen who informed him that swords are commonly bent for either left or right handed use was smoking something seriously hallucinogenic. The only place it could possibly come from is sports fencing. 2. All the nicks in the blade are indicative of edge parrying which anyone with any training knows is completely undesirable and actually rather difficult to do. Any nicks in the blade we likely from contact with worn items and not as part of active defense. 3. His little thumb lanyard is highly questionable since my first reaction was "I guess bronze age warriors were looking for ways to break their thumb. 4. Of course they were used for war, you don't invest the kind of time and money into something like this for fun particularly not in a bronze age society the resources and time cannot otherwise be justified.

 

[Dan True]

Sorry I could not get past the first couple of pages because of the bad information being presented. 1. His friendly swordsmen who informed him that swords are commonly bent for either left or right handed use was smoking something seriously hallucinogenic. The only place it could possibly come from is sports fencing. 2. All the nicks in the blade are indicative of edge parrying which anyone with any training knows is completely undesirable and actually rather difficult to do. Any nicks in the blade we likely from contact with worn items and not as part of active defense. 3. His little thumb lanyard is highly questionable since my first reaction was "I guess bronze age warriors were looking for ways to break their thumb.

I haven't read it yet, but I do agree with what you're saying. I'm not sure what you mean about the thumbs, but in some Medieval Fencing we actually align the thumb along the blade to give greater stability, once you've figured out the trick it is actually better protected than when its with the other fingers (and risk poking up over the handguard).

4. Of course they were used for war, you don't invest the kind of time and money into something like this for fun particularly not in a bronze age society the resources and time cannot otherwise be justified.

This is not a valid argument in itself, since Bronze Age cultures have been known to make items of only symbolic / religious value either for show or sacrifice. In Denmark (where we have a lot of swords with very small handles), we have found the Sunwagon for instance, which is a chariot of bronze about two feet long - thrown into a lake for sacrifice. We have also found the Gold Horns (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Golden_Horn_of_Gallehus) which would have been worth many, many swords - and it was also sacrificed. So bronze age cultures (in Scandinavia at least) were prone to making expensive stuff to honour the gods, and throwing it away.

Now, many swords have been found in graves and not sacrifices, but we cannot rule out that swords were looked upon in a different way. Maybe a horn or chariot is sacrificed in a lake to the gods, but maybe a sword honours the gods most if it is carried by the village hero or chief? We do not know.

I do agree that Swords have probably been used for combat, I am just saying that that particular argument is invalid. I am however eager to find out how these swords were used... I better start learning bronze smelting

- Dan

 

[rust]

However, all the areas found in Denmark from the bronze age, have persistent small handles - much smaller than the hands of the people we have found in graves (we have some very, very well-preserved corpses in Denmark.. and their hands are bigger than the sword handle). The same seems to be true for Swedish, Norwegian and German bronze swords as far as I know.

There is a rather plausible hypothesis that the small metal
handle of many bronze age swords only formed the core of
the actual handle made from leather or wood, organic ma-
terials which rotted away once the sword was buried or sa-
crificed. The reason to craft such handles would have been
the same as for traditional knife handles of similar materials,
they are cheaper than metal and much less slippery when
wet, for example from blood or sweat.

 

[Dan True]

There is a rather plausible hypothesis that the small metal
handle of many bronze age swords only formed the core of
the actual handle made from leather or wood, organic ma-
terials which rotted away once the sword was buried or sa-
crificed. The reason to craft such handles would have been
the same as for traditional knife handles of similar materials,
they are cheaper than metal and much less slippery when
wet, for example from blood or sweat.

I have no doubt that there have been wood and/or leather around the handle, as they are much to thin otherwise. But the problem with the handles is that they are too short, and since many of them have a pommel, you cannot lengthen them with wood or leather beyond a certain point.

- Dan

 

[rust]

Perhaps this forum discussion and especially the pictures
can give an idea of how such hilts might be used:

http://www.myarmoury.com/talk/viewtopic.php?t=23137