Fuente:
http://vikings.wikia.com/wiki/WarfareInformación:
Warfare
From The Viking Age Wiki
Our knowledge about arms and armour of the Viking age (8th to 11th centuries Europe) is based on relatively sparse archaeological finds, pictorial representation, and to some extent on the accounts in the Norse sagas and Norse laws recorded in the 13th century.
According to custom, all free Norse men were required to own weapons, as well as permitted to carry them at all times. These arms were also indicative of a Viking's social status. A wealthy Viking would have a complete ensemble of a helmet, shield, chainmail shirt, and animal-skin coat, among various other arms and accoutrements of war. A less well-off man, however, could only afford a single weapon and perhaps a shield.
The spear and shield were the most basic arms and accoutrements of the Viking warrior. Most would probably also wear a knife of some description, commonly of the seax type which was common in Dark Ages' Europe. As an alternative, or perhaps in addition to the spear, a warrior might carry a bow or axe. The wealthiest Vikings would have worn a sword in addition to his main arms and have had access to body armour, such as a helmet and a mail hauberk.
Four 9th-10th cent. Viking arrowheadsBows were used both for hunting and in battle. They were made from yew, ash or elm trees. The draw force of a 10th century bow may have reached some 90 pounds force (400 N), resulting in an effective range of at least 250 m. A bow found at Viking Hedeby, which probably was a full-fledged war bow, had a draw force of well over 100 pounds. A unit of length used in Icelandic law (the Grágás) called a bowshot (ördrag) corresponded to 480 m.
Arrowheads were typically made from iron and produced in various shapes and dimensions, according to place of origin. Most arrowheads were fixed onto the arrow shaft by a shouldered tang that was fitted into the end of a shaft of wood. Some heads were also made of wood or antler. Evidence for eagle feather flights has been found with the feathers being bound and glued on. The end of the shaft was flared with very shallow self nocks, although some arrows possessed bronze cast nocks.
The earliest find of these relics were found in Denmark, seemingly belonging to the leading-warrior class, as per the graves in which they were discovered.
Contents [hide] 1 Spear 2 Shield 3 Knife 4 Sword 5 Axe 6 Atgeir 7 Armour 7.1 Helmet 7.2 Mail 7.3 Lamellar 8 Archaeological finds 9 Saga accounts 9.1 Battles 9.2 Duels 10 Images 11 External links 12 References
[edit] Spear The spear was the most common weapon of the Viking warrior. Spears consisted of metal heads on wooden shafts of two to three meters in length. The heads could measure between twenty and sixty centimetres, with a tendency towards longer heads in the later Viking age. Spear heads with wings are called krókspjót (barbed spear) in the sagas. Some larger-headed spears were called hoggspjót (hewing spear) and could also be used for cutting.
The spear was used both as a throwing weapon and as a thrusting weapon. Most evidence indicates that they were used in one hand. Limited evidence from a saga indicates that they may have been use in two hands, but not in battle.
[edit] Shield The shield was the most common means of defence. The Viking shield was typically round, being a successor to earlier Germanic shields with a diameter of around 80–90 cm or more and a typically thickness of less than 10mm, made of planks of woods such as fir, pine, willow or linden. It usually had a central hole with a hand grip, the hand being protected by a metal boss. Shields were likely covered with rawhide or leather. The Gokstad ship has places for shields to be hung on its railing, and the Gokstad shields have holes along the rim for fastening some sort of non-metallic rim protection. Some Viking shields may have been decorated by simple patterns, although some skaldic poems praising shields might indicate more elaborate decoration and archaeological evidence has supported this. Towards the end of the Viking age, the Norman kite shield came into fashion.
[edit] Knife See also: Seax
The Seax was in widespread use among the Migration period Germanic tribes, and is even eponymous of the Saxons. It appears in Scandinavia from the 4th century, and shows a pattern of distribution from the lower Elbe (Elbe Germans) to Anglo-Saxon England. While their popularity on the continent declines with the end of the Migration period, they remain in frequent use in both England and Scandinavia throughout the Viking Age.
[edit] Sword Main article: Viking sword Owning a sword was a matter of high prestige. A sword mentioned in the Laxdæla saga was valued at half a crown, corresponding to the value of 16 milk-cows.
The Viking sword was for single-handed use to be combined with a shield, with a blade length of typically 60–80 cm. Its shape was still very much based on the swords of the Dark Ages and on the Roman spatha, with a tight grip, long deep fuller, and no pronounced cross-guard.
[edit] Axe See also: Danish axe
Based on the everyday tool for splitting wood, axes specialized for use in battle evolved, with larger heads and longer shafts. Some axe heads were inlaid with silver designs. In the later Viking era, there were axe heads with crescent shaped edges measuring up to 45 cm, called breið-exi (broad axe).
[edit] Atgeir Main article: Atgeir A polearm known as the atgeir is mentioned in several Norse sagas and other literature. Atgeir is usually translated as "halberd", but may have been more akin to a glaive.
[edit] Armour
[edit] Helmet Helmets from the Viking Age are very rare - only one example is known to exist.[1] This Viking helmet was made of iron and was in the shape of a rounded or peaked cap made from four plates after the spangenhelm pattern, and was excavated from Gjermundbu, Norway, and dated to the 10th century. This helmet has a rounded cap with no horns on top and has a "spectacle" guard around the eyes and nose, in addition to a possible mail aventail. The eyeguard in particular suggests a close affinity with the earlier Vendel period helmets. From runestones and other illustrations, we know the Vikings also wore simpler helmets, often peaked caps with a simple noseguard. Unlike what is often shown in popular culture, there are no sources that prove that Viking helmets had horns mounted on them.
[edit] Mail Once again, only a single fragmented but possibly complete mail shirt has been excavated in Scandinavia, from the same site as the helmet - Gjermundbu in Norway. Scandinavian Viking age burial customs seems to not favor burial with helmet or mail armour, in contrast to earlier extensive armor burials in Swedish Valsgärde.The mail shirt is currently interpreted as elbow-and-knee length. Probably worn over thick clothing, the mail shirt will protect the wearer from blows that get past his defence. Mail was very expensive in early medieval Europe, and would only have been worn by rich warriors. Mail armour of this type may also be known as a byrnie.
[edit] Lamellar More than thirty lamellae (individual plates for lamellar armour) were found in Birka, Sweden, in 1877, 1934 and 1998-2000.[2] They were dated to the same approximate period as the Gjermundbu mailshirt (900-950AD) and may be evidence that some Vikings wore lamellar armour.
[edit] Archaeological finds Coppergate Helmet Gokstad Ship Oseberg Royal Mounds Sutton Hoo Thorsberg bog Valsgärde Vendelhi
[edit] Saga accounts
[edit] Battles Battle of Hafrsfjord Battle of Hastings Battle of Hjörungavágr Battle of Svolder Battle of Nesjar Battle of Stiklestad
[edit] Duels Kormakssaga, holmgang of Kormak and Bersi
SET-UP: Hnefatafl simulates a Viking raid. The attackers are situated along the four sides, each side representing a ship. The king and the defenders are located in the middle of the board.
Entradas
+17.06.14.png)
Wes said,
July 16, 2007 at 10:49 pm
It really is absolutely amazing, and shows what the individual is capable of in isolation. Not to suggest that this unknown inventor lived in a bubble, but the diffusion of knowledge was lesser, and there were fewer shoulders to stand on at the time of its creation. I think it also eludes to just how fragile scientific endevour can be, and how it needs to be nurtured and protected (within reason, of course).
I really think the importance of this device to human history has been gravely overlooked. I know many other discoveries had not been made at this point, particularly in terms of manufacturing process, but to have produced an analog computer in this era, and then to be lost for well over a millenia? It almost hurts to think about the possibility of how much has been lost. It makes a much stronger case for the equal diffusion of knowledge to all and sundry.
Charlie said,
July 10, 2008 at 2:52 am
By the internets :)
Kevin said,
July 10, 2008 at 5:08 am
and to think that the romans were most likely going to jsut toss this artifact aside in place of the more precious jewles that the ship was carring. typical roman, dont understand it, then its barbaric.
Milander said,
July 10, 2008 at 7:53 am
@wes said,
you’re missing the point, if this device was so valuable and unique it would never have been transported by sea. It is far more likely that there were many, a few hundred, of these devices well know and well used at the time.
Never forget that if all humanity were to disappear overnight our entire civlisation, all our works, buildings, literature, everything, would be completely destroyed to the extent that no visiting alien would ever know we had ever existed within 100, 000 years. The only evidence we ever existed at all would be the plaque left on the moon by apollo 11.
Might sound crazy but I firmly believe that there were other cultures and civilisations before us, possibly even reptilian given that they had 250 million years to rise and fall. It is entirely possible that all evidence of their existence has been erased from history.
Besides which there are stranger things out there than this device such as the crystal skulls, the ruins of Delathamaya and the battery of Baghdad.
Tempyra » Blog Archive » On holiday said,
July 11, 2008 at 1:29 pm
[...] Tempyra.com has been getting lots more visitors than usual lately. One of my first posts, from nearly a year ago, has just become very popular. If you haven’t seen that one yet, here it is. [...]
dinosuar said,
July 15, 2008 at 7:24 am
Hi wake up where is proof of finding ? who when what why you have been hoaxed and are spreading a lie cheers dinosuar
heitz said,
July 16, 2008 at 5:53 am
“How do you build the first analog computer on an island off the coast of Greece around 100 - 150BC… without using the Internet?!”
Are you serious?
That statement proves that people living thousands of years ago were far more intelligent than people like you, today.
There wer5e no corporations and mass media outlets that herded you to and fro and coerced you into doing what you think you wanted to do.
People used to think for themselves and crafted things to actually improve their environment… not go out and buy a saladshooter because the tv told them they need it, and because theyre too lazy to chop lettuce themselves, and then not even bother to use it cause theyve grown too fat on fast food and preservatives.
sasha said,
July 16, 2008 at 8:48 am
Hi Heitz,
No, I wasn’t being serious actually - it was something more akin to sarcasm. Feel free to make any more assumptions that might take your fancy with my next two paragraphs.
I’m not so sure whether people really thought for themselves more, in the time period that the Antikythera mechanism is thought to be constructed in, than the present. Why? Because of the constraints imposed by religion, education, communication technology, and social inequality. <– That is a generalised statement, not specific to 100 - 150 BC Greece, just to Europe & the Middle East around that time.
As for people in the past being “far more intelligent” than the likes of me, there have been and will always be people smarter than I. And you. Intelligence is distributed along a bell curve. If you’ve got any evidence to show that the average has decreased over time, then I’d love to see it as I was under the impression that over the last half century average IQ scores seem to be increasing.
Wes said,
July 17, 2008 at 1:40 am
@Milander: I’m not missing any point and your assumptions are misguided. For one, I’m pretty sure Greeks and pretty much the entirety of human civilisation was pretty limited in terms of transportation when this mechanism was new and shiny. Why *wouldn’t* you take it by a more direct sea route, than a treacherous land base path? It would be quicker and, dare I say it, more gentle on a fragile mechanism, weather permitting of course.
As for your spurious claim about evidence of our existence being erased without 100,000 years I have one word for you: Dinosaur. Look it up, we’ve been finding these remains for years and years on end now. And some of them are MILLIONS of years old. Wow, just wow.
If that doesn’t grab you though, I can enlighten you of stone age tools made by precursors to modern humans as well. The oldest stone tools are apparently 2.6 million years old. Gone in 100,000? I don’t think so.
dan said,
July 25, 2008 at 4:17 pm
wes
you’re missing the point, this could have been a proto type. maybe the person, or persons wanted to make sure it worked before they put it on the market, as they say. anyway they tested things way back then too.
Wes said,
July 25, 2008 at 7:11 pm
At some point did “you’re missing the point” become a staple diet of opening sentence of numskulls everywhere? Dan, your post has no point, at all. Even the original post, which I think your post is trying to reference also has no point. And maybe my maths is a little rusty but I think 0+0 = 0. At any rate, this is about -archaeology- not numbers. At the point this thing existed in history there is no evidence to show that there had been any item/find that came before it which was as complicated or well engineered for its suggested purposes. Let’s throw your “theory” a bone for a moment and say they manufactured 2000 of these things (an optimistic number given the period) it would STILL be a marvelous find due to the fact that from our current records it is still the first of its kind.
For further reference, look up “Mass Production” and its invention and then see how long it took to make things before the introduction of such machines.
Jeff said,
July 28, 2008 at 1:44 am
Hopefully, the great minds of old did not waste their efforts berating each other — throwing each others’ words back at one another and polluting the issue with biting personal jabs. Get beyond the he-said-she-said crap and take the higher road. There is a great find here, certainly worthy of analysis, discussion, and debate.
We can only guess at what earlier civilizations knew and were capable of by what we find. Our knowledge of them are mere assumptions based on perhaps a small fragment of findings. I’m sure we are only scratching the surface of knowledge lost to the ages. There is so much we don’t know about what we have found, but think about what we have not yet found, what we will never find, and the inaccurate conclusions we may draw upon those things we do find. On the whole, our knowledge of past civilizations will always be limited and therefore, our assumptions mostly incomplete and probably inaccurate.
Personally, I look forward to the continued search for early technology. I’m convinced that the more we look and the more evidence we find of early technology, the more our previously conceived notions will be proven false. The technology we have today is not the result of a single, continuous path of improvement, but rather a multitude of serial, parallel, and overlapping accomplishments that we continuously rediscover and use for our present-day purposes. The Antikythera mechanism is but one modern-day discovery of ancient technology that once again reshapes our thinking about ancient capabilities. This is cools stuff.
sasha said,
July 28, 2008 at 1:51 am
Hi Jeff,
Thank you for making such a fair and balanced comment :-)
“There is so much we don’t know about what we have found, but think about what we have not yet found, what we will never find, and the inaccurate conclusions we may draw upon those things we do find. On the whole, our knowledge of past civilizations will always be limited and therefore, our assumptions mostly incomplete and probably inaccurate.”
I also wonder about these things and agree with what you say about the present human society not having a complete ‘picture’ of what has gone before us. In fact, I wouldn’t be at all surprised if future societies have a distorted view of ours - even with the communication technology and massive amounts of stored data that we possess.
Giorgis said,
December 20, 2008 at 9:19 am
Guys, have faith in our selves. This device is not out of nothing. There were many famed devices, this is the only one that survived. Look up astrolabe and heron of Alexandria.
G