| Author |
Message |
|
William P
|
 Posted: Thu 10 Nov, 2011 5:23 pm Post subject: Re: Viking starter kit. |
 |
|
| Dan Howard wrote: | | William P wrote: | | how many would be wandering around after service? that depends on how many wanted to leave. but i have no doubt theyd bring their equipment back home with them. id say this is a perfectly reasonable explanation for the lamellar found at birka. |
Except the Birka armour was Khazar, not a Byzantine style.
| Quote: | | itcould easily be a guardsman being buried with the stuff hed accumulated during his time in byzantium. pure speculation i know but its an idea. |
The armour wasn't buried with anyone. IIRC it was found in a workshop. It is impossible to tell who might have worn it. |
i cant comment about the khazars but the avar lamellar might have been the inspirational style for the byzantine armour at one point according to pete beatson, when i see him again ill ask him.
looks like i got it mixed up it seems regarding the details of the birka lamellar.
i also figured out why he had a wisby lamellar despite us being early 11th century, simply because no other styles had enough detail as to their construction when he made it and, the explanation ive been given is that the lamellar is likely an earlier style refurbished to act like a COP i.e sandwiching it between leather but thats just an inference on his part i think.
though he doesnt wear it nowdays BECAUSE its non historical and there are better plans available nowdays
but wow, cant believe my little comment has spawned a whole discussion on the meaning of being a huskarl, might i suggest he mods move that section of the talk into a new topic if it continues, while its fascinating, its kind iof distracting i think from the original topic.
by the way, to the OP, you might be aware of this already but, no gambesons or leather body armour either, contrary to what most books in the shops seem to suggest, the vikings didnt wear them, if your just a common man, youd just have the clothes on your back, with a shield and weapon to defend yourself with and if you were abit creativeyoud sew some pieces of horn (or metal) into the lining of your cap to give you abit more of a chance .
it seems according to a couple of rudimentary tests that are more anecdotal evidence than scientific, that a couple of layers of normal clothing, plus maybe some thin leather, is enough to support maile to mean the difference between it being punched through easily. and it resisting a blow of a spear
yes i know dan. its not historically representative maile but it gives an idea that you dont neccesarily need a full gambeson to make maile effective in stopping you from being skewered, although itd be needed to stop impacts from causing trauma damage.
these are immaterial because you wont be wearing maile as a common man, i mean you could say you STOLE it off a rich basterd you were lucky enough to kill. and take the armour off.
|
|
   |
 |
Phil U
Location: Seattle Joined: 07 Nov 2010
Posts: 44
|
| Posted: Thu 10 Nov, 2011 6:07 pm Post subject: Re: Viking starter kit. |
|
|
| William P wrote: | | by the way, to the OP, you might be aware of this already but, no gambesons or leather body armour either, contrary to what most books in the shops seem to suggest, the vikings didnt wear them, if your just a common man, youd just have the clothes on your back, with a shield and weapon to defend yourself with and if you were abit creativeyoud sew some pieces of horn (or metal) into the lining of your cap to give you abit more of a chance . . |
Makes sense. As to your 'move the thread' comment, personally I don't mind the thread drift it's informative to the new one like myself and sounds like those in the know are getting in to it, too.
|
|
|
|
|
David Huggins
|
|
 |
|
|
Mikael Ranelius
|
| Posted: Fri 11 Nov, 2011 3:08 am Post subject: |
|
|
| Luka Borscak wrote: | | So, what would be a Danish, Norwegian and Swedish term for an elite household warrior sworn to a jarl and who would always be close to his lord?? |
In Denmark the term Heiðþegar seems to have been very common, and Thegn was common both in Denmark and Sweden. "Huskarl" is mentioned on at least a couple of Swedish runestone but I am under the impression that huskarl is more of a western Norse phenomenon.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Gary Teuscher
|
| Posted: Fri 11 Nov, 2011 8:37 am Post subject: |
|
|
Well, from what I gather about the terms for a danish/saxon/norse soldier in the employ of a earl or king:
Norwegian:
Hird - A term that emcompasses all of the warriors in the employ of the Noble
Hirdmann - The highest ranking members of the Hird, another norse term for this could be heiðþegar.
Gestir - A lower rank of the Hird
Huscarl - Can be part of the Hird, but a bit fuzzy as to classification. Generally just means a freeman in the employ of the King, could be a warrior, farmhand,et. etc.
Danish - himthige, heimþegi, hlid are all retainers that were part of a Danish lords hirð, lid or drótt, the first names being the equivalent of the norse Hirdmann, the second group werethe equivalant of the general Hird.
Here is some other norse information to add more confusion:
| Quote: | | Hrólfs saga Gautrekssonar is a Scandinavian legendary saga which was put to text in Iceland in the 13th century. It has a prequel in Gautreks saga. |
| Quote: | | It was also the residence of a much earlier Swedish princess in Hrólfs saga Gautrekssonar: Konungr mælti: "Frétt hefi ek, at hún er bæði vitr ok væn, ok svá er mér flutt, at svá sé hún stór ok stolt, at hún vili, at engi maðr kvenkenni hana ok hún sé tekin til konungs yfir þriðjung Svíþjóðar ok hennar atseta sé á Ullarakri ok haldi þar hirð sem aðrir konungar |
| Quote: | | In Uppsala ruled Erik, the king of Sweden, who had only had one daughter, Þornbjörg. She was a shieldmaiden who would rather spend her days fighting and doing male sports instead of female activities. Due to this behaviour she was called Þórbergr konungr, king Thorberg. Her father gave her the royal estate of Ulleråker, where she kept a retinue of housecarls who helped her chase away undesirable suitors. |
Quation here is is the term "housecarls" used in the saga as warriors? Or is it this interpretation that names these followers housecarls when they may have been referrred to as otherwise in the saga?
It seems we are looking at some rather broad terminolgy for the term housecarl, certainly a freeman in the voluntary service of a lord/king, though exaclty what services were provided can greatly vary.
And of course we have the Saxon Huscarl, which is one of the batter known Huscarl terminologies due to the Saxon Royal Huscarls and their involvement at Hastings and Stamford Bridge.
These were clearly elite warriors, but the Danelaw and post Danelaw Saxon terms seem a bit of a bastardization of both Danish and Saxon terms.
|
|
|
|
|
Michael Curl
Location: Northern California, US Joined: 06 Jan 2008
Posts: 487
|
| Posted: Fri 11 Nov, 2011 9:02 am Post subject: |
|
|
Seems like the topic has moved on, but when Matthew was quoting the law about the weapon-thing, he mentioned that a broad axe was a substitute for a sword, my question is what was the original translation, was it perhaps simply axe or did it specify a type?
E Pluribus Unum
|
|
 |
|
|
E. Storesund
|
| Posted: Fri 11 Nov, 2011 9:16 am Post subject: |
|
|
| Gary Teuscher wrote: |
Here is some other norse information to add more confusion:
| Quote: | | Hrólfs saga Gautrekssonar is a Scandinavian legendary saga which was put to text in Iceland in the 13th century. It has a prequel in Gautreks saga. |
| Quote: | | It was also the residence of a much earlier Swedish princess in Hrólfs saga Gautrekssonar: Konungr mælti: "Frétt hefi ek, at hún er bæði vitr ok væn, ok svá er mér flutt, at svá sé hún stór ok stolt, at hún vili, at engi maðr kvenkenni hana ok hún sé tekin til konungs yfir þriðjung Svíþjóðar ok hennar atseta sé á Ullarakri ok haldi þar hirð sem aðrir konungar |
| Quote: | | In Uppsala ruled Erik, the king of Sweden, who had only had one daughter, Þornbjörg. She was a shieldmaiden who would rather spend her days fighting and doing male sports instead of female activities. Due to this behaviour she was called Þórbergr konungr, king Thorberg. Her father gave her the royal estate of Ulleråker, where she kept a retinue of housecarls who helped her chase away undesirable suitors. |
Quation here is is the term "housecarls" used in the saga as warriors? Or is it this interpretation that names these followers housecarls when they may have been referrred to as otherwise in the saga?
|
I haven't examined this saga myself, but the ON quote above does not mention húskarls, even though it mentions hird, so as far as I can see this is the translator's own assumption. However, it is entirely possible that the saga mentions them as warriors as well, it is as simple as doing a text search.
The legendary sagas are a bit fluctuent in their contents, and obiously written for entertainment primarily, with lots of fantastic elements. But there are several instances of course where húskarls do manual labor in one chapter, and kill people in the next in more "historical" genres.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Gary Teuscher
|
| Posted: Fri 11 Nov, 2011 10:06 am Post subject: |
|
|
| Quote: | | But there are several instances of course where húskarls do manual labor in one chapter, and kill people in the next in more "historical" genres. |
Yeah, after looking at it in more depth it seems even more hazy then upon initial examination 
I think one of the problems is in Norse writings, the term "Huskarl" itself is very vague.
It seems to mean in a strict but general definiton as merely being a freeman in the voluntary service of someone else, and not specific as to what service was provided not the social staus of that person.
The Gestir receiving half the pay though is a curious term for me. The Hirdmann seems to be a regualr retinue type that lives with or close to the employer and is supported/paid for by the employer.
I am curious about the Gestir -
| Quote: | The Guests "are so called since they often visit places where they are not welcome."
They serve the king as scouts, medium infantry, and general hunter of his enemies.
Imagine a combination of Army Rangers, the IRS and the Gestapo. |
I have also read where there was another class of Gestir that functioned as assasins - though the term "assasin" is broad, I'm not talking about Norse "Ninja-huscarls"
I'm thinking more of they would merely be in charge of killing somone their employer desires them to kill - a stab in the back at night, a duel, anything, not a true specialized assasin.
But the implications of the term "guest" make me curious. As opposed to a regualr retinue maintained by the king, could they have been landowners that came up for temporary assignments, more of a "levy" of the hird, received half the pay but had their own lands to support them? I know there are certainly mentions of the Hird not being in attendance due to being away at their own lands, but I;m not sure if this specifically means hirmann or gestir. Of huskarl for that matter.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Gary Teuscher
|
| Posted: Fri 11 Nov, 2011 10:15 am Post subject: |
|
|
| Quote: | | by the way, to the OP, you might be aware of this already but, no gambesons or leather body armour either, contrary to what most books in the shops seem to suggest, the vikings didnt wear them, if your just a common man, youd just have the clothes on your back, with a shield and weapon to defend yourself with and if you were abit creativeyoud sew some pieces of horn (or metal) into the lining of your cap to give you abit more of a chance . . |
I don't think we can scecifically say they did not wear them, as there is literay and archaeological eveidence of a gambeson type garment in Ireland in the 10th-11th century, and it would not be a shock if vikings would have been using similar equipment.
However, I would certainly agree, we cannot specifically say they WERE worn as well.
I guess some of us are waiting with baited breath for any true evidence that shows viking did indeed wear this type of thing
|
|
|
|
|
Dan Howard
|
| Posted: Fri 11 Nov, 2011 12:54 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| Gary Teuscher wrote: | | I don't think we can scecifically say they did not wear them, as there is literay and archaeological eveidence of a gambeson type garment in Ireland in the 10th-11th century |
Archaeological evidence?
|
|
|
|
|
|
Jeremy V. Krause
|
| Posted: Sat 12 Nov, 2011 7:16 am Post subject: |
|
|
I think it would be cool to see a kit of a "lower class" Viking incorporate a spear head of a more rudamentary shape such as the cones or larger "arrow head" forms we see in the Viking and early middle ages.
This might be a nice contrast to the typical leaf form viking spears we often see and might help contribute to the image of a lower class Viking.
Just a thought.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Gary Teuscher
|
| Posted: Sat 12 Nov, 2011 3:03 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| Quote: | | Archaeological evidence? |
Ooops, let me rephrase.
Lieterary evidence of use in Ireland in the 10-11th century,
Archaeolgical evidence of use in Ireland around 1150-1190.
|
|
|
|
|
|
William P
|
| Posted: Sun 13 Nov, 2011 3:30 am Post subject: |
|
|
| Jeremy V. Krause wrote: | I think it would be cool to see a kit of a "lower class" Viking incorporate a spear head of a more rudamentary shape such as the cones or larger "arrow head" forms we see in the Viking and early middle ages.
This might be a nice contrast to the typical leaf form viking spears we often see and might help contribute to the image of a lower class Viking.
Just a thought. |
and i assume theres examples of thesespears in grave finds or whatnot or is that from another source?
|
|
|
|
|
|
Jeremy V. Krause
|
| Posted: Sun 13 Nov, 2011 7:29 am Post subject: |
|
|
| William P wrote: | | Jeremy V. Krause wrote: | I think it would be cool to see a kit of a "lower class" Viking incorporate a spear head of a more rudamentary shape such as the cones or larger "arrow head" forms we see in the Viking and early middle ages.
This might be a nice contrast to the typical leaf form viking spears we often see and might help contribute to the image of a lower class Viking.
Just a thought. |
and i assume theres examples of thesespears in grave finds or whatnot or is that from another source? |
Oh, you can find them in museums and, less so in modern documentations of originals (preference seems to be given to the more typical and dramatic spear head forms which is understandable). I have some depictions of simpler spear heads from the 10th, and 11th c., which is a tad late for this discussion but still interesting.
I'll try to get them up here or in a thread dedicated to spears.
|
|
|
|
|
Elling Polden
|
| Posted: Mon 14 Nov, 2011 5:21 am Post subject: |
|
|
Spear shape depends on which part of the period you are reenacting. Remember that the viking age is 300 years long.
In the early period, frankish style winged spearheads are fashionable. In the 10th century, long, slender spearheads with a almost square cross section are favored.
These are replaced by shorter, broader types in the 11th c.
 Attachment: 40.26 KB
Pettersen type B. Early period frankish style. [ Download ]
Attachment: 50.51 KB
Pettersen type K. Late period "feather" spear. [ Download ]
"this [fight] looks curious, almost like a game. See, they are looking around them before they fall, to find a dry spot to fall on, or they are falling on their shields. Can you see blood on their cloths and weapons? No. This must be trickery."
-Reidar Sendeman, from King Sverre's Saga, 1201
|
|
 |
|
|
William P
|
| Posted: Tue 15 Nov, 2011 6:16 am Post subject: Re: Viking |
|
|
i shall see him in a few days for training, lucky for me, you will note that he doesnt fight as hard some of the others do have you met him by any chance? or is it merely sendng regards as part of admiration for contributions to reconstructions of the past either is fine, im just curious as to how much contact from overses reenactors weve had over the years
by the way we were mentioning the russian style of kit, here are the kits of our two, probably best equipped men.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_Hq76uSXcss recruited by a book publsher to act as promoters of a new title
the one on the left with the spear is andrew brew and the one with the axe is quarf morgan.
youll not the quite pointy helmets in particular. mine is a cross between the two of those, but it has a full nasel.
|
|
|
|
|
David Huggins
|
| Posted: Wed 16 Nov, 2011 12:52 pm Post subject: Viking Kit |
|
|
Hi William
P.M. sent.
best regards
Dave
and he who stands and sheds blood with us, shall be as a brother.
|
|
|
|
|
Matthew Bunker
Location: Somerset UK Joined: 02 Apr 2009
Posts: 483
|
| Posted: Tue 22 Nov, 2011 2:00 am Post subject: |
|
|
| Michael Curl wrote: | | Seems like the topic has moved on, but when Matthew was quoting the law about the weapon-thing, he mentioned that a broad axe was a substitute for a sword, my question is what was the original translation, was it perhaps simply axe or did it specify a type? |
I don't have access to the original Norwegian I'm afraid but if somebody does have access, it's law #309.
Both of the translations I've seen specify a broad axe and I know from other entries that the original must differentiate between a broad axe and a timber axe because both terms are used in another law.
Interestingly, Gulating law # 178 states that it is a 'nithing crime if a man robs a fallen man on the battlefield by stripping off his clothes and taking his weapons'.
To be declaired 'nithing' is about as bad as it gets in Norse society of the time (it was the usually penalty for murder) and usually meant that the guilty party was permanently outlawed.
"If a Greek can do it, two Englishman certainly can !"
|
|
|
|
|
|
Ken Speed
|
| Posted: Tue 22 Nov, 2011 4:42 am Post subject: |
|
|
I have to admit I approach a lot of the statements about the Vikings being this or that or adhering to this set of laws or the Sagas say this or that with a lot of caution. On one hand I'm fairly sure these statements were true in a given time and place but that doesn't make them universally true all the time everywhere. Did Swedish Vikings adhere to Norwegian law? When? When they were in Norway? Probably. What if they weren't in Norway? What about Danes or Orkneymen? If Swedes were raiding the eastern coast of the Baltic and trading and slaving into Finland, Karelia, Poland, Lithuania and Russia do you think they were tossing and turning in their sleep over Norwegian law? Some sources say they made regular trading runs into Spain and sold slaves and traded there. Is it reasonable to expect them to have the same mind set as Icelanders? Sometimes people talk as though they think there was some kind of Viking handbook. I'm pretty sure that there were never any Viking merit badges!
I'm not trying to pick on anyone but a generalization gets tossed around and soon becomes an almosy universaly accepted fact. Vikings wore horned helmets. That one will never die. Vikings were pagans. Well, not all of them, not always, not everywhere. Vikings were raiders, Yes, sometimes. Vikings were traders. Yes some traded. Vikings were settlers. Yes, sometimes they did that too. The Viking sphere was huge, the Viking culture was vast and stretched across a huge area and was dominant in those areas for three or four hundred years or even longer if you include the Vendal period. Vikings had many cultural things in common but there were huge differences too depending on when and where one is talking about.
|
|
|
|
|
Matthew Bunker
Location: Somerset UK Joined: 02 Apr 2009
Posts: 483
|
| Posted: Tue 22 Nov, 2011 5:01 am Post subject: |
|
|
| Ken Speed wrote: |
I'm not trying to pick on anyone but a generalization gets tossed around and soon becomes an almosy universaly accepted fact. |
Oh I couldn't agree more, but then if you have to have generalisations in re-enactment, better to have ones that are founded on something you have some evidence for.
However, I think that the law about not stealing weapons from the dead may well have been based on a belief prevelant across all cultures that followed what we might today call 'Germanic Paganism'. If you're going to go off to Valhalla or Folkvangr with whatever weapons you have with you when they burn you on the pyre, you'd want to be pretty certain that some oik wasn't going to run off with them first.
I'm the first to admit that I don't know if this can be bourne out by references from other Scandinavia/Northern Germanic cultures, so I'm off to find out.
"If a Greek can do it, two Englishman certainly can !"
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot vote in polls in this forum
You cannot attach files in this forum
You can download files in this forum
|
All contents © Copyright 2003-2024 myArmoury.com — All rights reserved
Discussion forums powered by phpBB © The phpBB Group
Switch to the Basic Low-bandwidth Version of the forum
|
This is a standard topic