Posts: 828 Location: Nykøbing Falster, Denmark
Sat 02 Apr, 2016 10:46 am
Re: Norse acitivity in the new world
| Mark Lewis wrote: |
There is the one known site at Anse-aux-Meadows that confirms they did indeed reach North America... hope this new site pans out! :)
Metal-detecting will probably never become a common hobby here in Canada... the search area is large, and so much of it (particularly Newfoundland) is rough terrain, isolated, and sparsely populated. The potential rewards could never be as glamorous as what you can hope to find in Europe... no great battles here, no royal tombs... |
True Mark.
Metal detecting demands getting a lot of people interested in the past. Most amateur archaeologist in Denmark will never find more than small pieces, but off course they dream of finding something interesting.
Finding postholes from a viking house would certainly get you into the press. ;)
Newfoundland's sparse population is a problem for getting finds, but likely the Greenlanders stayed close to the sea, so its only the coastal area that really needs searching.
That site is definite proof, but weirdly enough it seems to be a general consensus that "OK they went there then, but if we find something other places its probably fake". A reason is off course that probably a lot of fakes had been attempted, but each find should be looked in itself and with fresh eyes.
The most famous case of fake-or-not is the Kensington stone which most people believe was probably made by the Swedish guy, who found the stone. I just have to say what a weird fake. A Swedish guy names people that are not Swedish (Gotlanders and Norwegians) and date it clearly into the middle ages (1362).
What is interesting that you have a medieval letter from the Danish Royal Library, where in 1354 King Magnus of Norway and Sweden ordered Pål Knutsson the ombudsman from Bergen to lead an expedition to Greenland to know whether they still were good Christians (and probably also if they survived the Black Death?).
This letter was to my knowledge not known when the runestone was found at Kensington.
Letter: http://www.dokpro.uio.no/perl/middelalder/dip...n&str=
What is interesting is that one of the main arguments for the Kensington to be fake is that the text can easily be read by a modern Swede (at first glance that seems suspicious). Well this document linked to above from 1354 can easily be understood by me when I read it aloud (the spelling is weird compared to modern Scandinavian languages but not the pronunciation or grammar), whereas a text in Old Norse (from 1200-1300 Iceland) is almost intelligible (with no training).
So if the Kensington stone is a fake is surely a pretty amazing one! The paleographic and linguistic discussions are pretty complicated and it seems that a few points make it a likely fake; but it is important to remember that you didn't have official spelling back then. Lack of cases is unusual and the word opþagelsefarþ was (if the last "thorn" letter is a /th/ and not stands for /d/) loaned from Low German much later on from a French original. So some evidence points it to be a fake, but just one discovery in old documents can move the first use of a word back a long time making it instead good evidence of authenticity. Anyway if the prevailing theory is that the stone is a fake, it's science job to try to falsify that claim. If the theory says its genuine, it's science job to try to falsify that!
| Craig Johnson wrote: |
Hi Niels
I did not mean to imply I do not think they where on the east coast of the continent. In fact there is proof they where, as Mark stated. I just get to deal with a great deal of instances where people find things they feel prove the Vikings/Welsh/Irish/Romans/Etruscians take your pick, have occupied the new world. The fence topper or fraternal sword they have found in the woods/field/lake may not be as valuable as they think or prove their ancestors where here millennia before the indigenous people arrived. :eek:
I am hoping it is a true norse find, but know there is much to do to come to that conclusion at this point.
Craig |
Hi Craig.
My statement was not minded at you at all, but just in general. ;) and the following is general as well!
People feel they still need extraordinary evidence for viking stuff as if you said claimed you had found Roman remains in North America. The extraordinary evidence of vikings was found at L'Anse aux Meadows, so its highly likely that a lot of finds have been categorized as fakes based on assumptions of them not being there as well as many finds are attributed to "native american" on assumptions that ONLY they are there, though the artifacts perhaps are from people migrating in BEFORE them and perhaps lived in America with them for a long time before they disappeared by intermarriage or extermination.
Look at many Olmec statues - what do that face look like with that flat broad nose?
Source: https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/f/fa/Mexico.Tab.OlmecHead.01.jpg
Look at Mayans - typically sharp nose of "native americans":
Source: https://aniareads.files.wordpress.com/2011/04/img_0002.jpg
There is a nose of difference! Something that is genetic, yet both groups are from Mexico!
Some would say that its just "art" - hmm I don't really buy that. People generally portray the faces they see around them.
Just one have to remember how amazing it is that people got into America in the first place (and at least 3 different times: First Na-Dene people, then Amerinds and lastly Inuits) and that some humans went over open ocean from New Guinea to Australia 50-60.000 years ago across a strait with very fast streams and deep waters (there was never a landbridge here)!
People journeyed into open ocean that far back in time and made it! Humans are very resilient.
So if arctic people could got to from East Asia to America and on to Greenland, then perhaps people could go an arctic route the other way reaching Greenland from the east side and then into North America again following the Greenland coastlines and then crossing to Baffin Island?
People can drift on ice and survive for a very long time we know from later arctic exploration. So ancestors of modern Sami or Cro-Magnon humans are not wholly unthinkable for drifting to Greenland and then keep going west.
It's when the sea level rose after the last ice age ended and thus more areas with open water, that it gets really really hard to make the journey.
Sami shaman drums are more or less the same in depictions as shaman drums in South America. Most likely its the shared shamanistic heritage of the ancestors of both, when the went each way (west and east) in Central Asia around 40.000 years ago, but it should not discarded that a few actually reached America and got mixed with other immigrants.
First people in Greenland we know of is the so called "Saqqaq + "Dorset people" (after the cultures), that are NOT inuits as recent genetics of "paleo-greenlanders" have shown and were genetically isolated in Greenland for at least 4.000 years before the Scandinavians arrived - Inuits are recent immigrants that first crossed from Baffin Island to the Thule area around 1300 AD. It was 700 years ago that the Dorset people disappeared -> perhaps immigrant Inuit groups exterminated the "natives" and then strangely also a few hundred years later more south the Norse Greenlanders disappeared as well?!
Source: http://science.sciencemag.org/content/345/6200/1255832
Posts: 828 Location: Nykøbing Falster, Denmark
Sun 03 Apr, 2016 5:33 am
Re: Norse acitivity in the new world
| Mark Lewis wrote: |
| Niels Just Rasmussen wrote: | | A reason is off course that probably a lot of fakes had been attempted, but each find should be looked in itself and with fresh eyes. The most famous case of fake-or-not is the Kensington stone which most people believe was probably made by the Swedish guy, who found the stone. |
There is also the case of the Beardmore relics... probably genuine artifacts, but planted by their "discoverer". I have seen these on display in the Royal Ontario Museum.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Beardmore_Relics
[ Linked Image ] |
This "find" I actually didn't know about.
This is likely what I would call a "typical fake" as most North Americans thinks it was Scandinavian "Vikings", when its actually Scandinavian Christian farmers exploring North America.
It is possible though, that the first explorers still retained many Viking customs as for instance Leif the Lucky whose father Eirik the Red was pagan. So in the first period you could have had real pagans on the expeditions.
It is yet uncertain whether L'Anse of Meadows was the site settled by Leif the Lucky, but abandoned because of aggressive Indians.
According to the sagas there should be at least 2 settlements and some other named areas (prominet points?) in North America:
Leifsbúðir, where Leif settled.
Straumfjǫrð, south of "Markland" settled by Þorfinnr Karlsefni. (where Snorri, his son with Gudrid was born as the first European on North American soil).
Hóp is the southernmost described place where "no snow falls in winter". Yet climate in year 1000 was probably somewhat warmer than today.
"Helluland" is probably Baffin Island.
"Markland" is probably Labrador
"Vinland" (Newfoundland, or perhaps Nova Scotia?).
Yet as they were Christians you would normally not find many grave goods, so finding a sword is really extremely unlikely.
If you had time to bury your leader (as owning a sword he would be), then you would bury him back in Greenland in a Christian cemetary, not on pagan soil. Even pagan vikings would transport their dead all back to be buried on home soil next to their ancestors burial mounds, not bury them far away in North America.
They still used runes in writing, even when writing latin as we have seen was also done in Bergen, Norway in the middle ages. Some new wooden small pieces with runes was found in 2012.
Source: http://runer-moenter.natmus.dk/nye-fund-af-runer-i-gr%C3%B8nland/
Very few Greenlanders could have afforded a sword as it would have had to be imported from Scandinavia, which would make the prize even higher than normal! If you wanted an useful import a bearded axe would be much better as it can be used both as a tool and for combat.
What is realistic to find in North America are postholes after buildings, lost clothing pieces and possibly iron nails from ship repairs and then some kind of "varde" a artificial created lump of stones at prominent points, so people would know where they were on their route.
At L'Anse aux Meadows one of the most important finds was this bronze clothing pin.
Source: http://www3.gettysburg.edu/~tshannon/hist106w..._08_lg.jpg
Pieces of wood with runes with Norse or Latin inscriptions would off course to truly fantastic to find (again only really possible at temporary settlements).
Rune stones is not unreasonable if the point was to make a document or warning of some disaster (like the Kensington stone), where you would know that it would be spotted to others if you putted it next to waterways.
Posts: 828 Location: Nykøbing Falster, Denmark
Sun 03 Apr, 2016 9:55 am
Re: Bronze Age Battle at Tollense dated to 1250 B.C.E
| Niels Just Rasmussen wrote: |
You even have a guy from Helgø, Sweden, buried with a Buddha figure from Kashmir, India; a Bishop's crozier from Ireland & a ladle from Egypt (Coptic Church).
Source: http://irisharchaeology.ie/2013/12/the-helgo-...ge-buddha/
So was he a Buddhist Celtic/Catholic-Coptic Christian? Nah - this is just Norse bragging and bling-bling - shows that the guy was well travelled (Kashmir, Ireland and Egypt is mightily impressive).
Had they found the Buddha figure alone, everyone would use it as "proof" of a Viking Buddhist.
The significance of the Golden cross from Aunslev could have been in its day "look it's gold" therefor proving the wearer is a noblewoman or royalty and "I'm wearing fashion like they do in Constantinople", but "mine is just prettier"! |
Another example is this find from Sweden in 2015 you probably haven't heard about.
It's an Islamic ring with a violet glass stone bears the inscription "to Allah" or "for Allah" in Arabic Kufic writing (il-al-lah) being buried with a woman at Birka in the 9th century!
Source: http://sciencenordic.com/ancient-ring-brings-...r-together
Original abstract: Original abstract: http://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1002/sca.21189/abstract
Again it's probably a bling-bling item to get prestige. It's the only one of its kind in Scandinavia.
The more exotic and the further away the more you can impress the other women and any man better make sure that the wife doesn't fall behind in that regard or he will receive hell. Maybe she also just liked purple?
Some chemical examination of the glass can maybe point more directly to where it was made.
Wonder if it was made in Samarkand in modern Uzbekistan as you also have found coins in Scandinavia (and York) from there?
NB: According to this site it was Tamerlaine that moved ALL the glass workers to Samarkand in 1400 AD.
Source: http://www.thehouseofglassinc.com/glasshistory.htm
So before 1400 it was possible not centralized and it could be from almost anywhere in the Islamic world.
Posts: 1,422 Location: Minneapolis, MN, USA
Tue 10 May, 2016 5:56 am
Bronze Age Swords Xray
This is not so much a find from digging in the ground but a look inside with modern technology :) Very cool to see the lovely lines and practical construction of these iconic swords. We will have to watch for any publications they put out containing the results!
Bronze Age Swords Xray
Craig
Posts: 828 Location: Nykøbing Falster, Denmark
Tue 10 May, 2016 2:39 pm
Re: Bronze Age Swords Xray
| Craig Johnson wrote: |
This is not so much a find from digging in the ground but a look inside with modern technology :) Very cool to see the lovely lines and practical construction of these iconic swords. We will have to watch for any publications they put out containing the results!
Bronze Age Swords Xray
Craig |
Yeah it will be really interesting to see the final result (the publication of this work with all the x-rays will probably be very expensive catalog though?).
Seeing these swords in museums you can't really see the "internals" of the Full-hilted swords, though you have holes in the decoration they are often to small to let enough light through. With these x-rays the tangs are clearly visible.
About the different types of early bronze age swords (specifically Nordic Full-hilted swords and more "international" Octagonal-hilted and Flange-hilted types), see this article by Kristian Kristiansen, especially maps with type distribution on page 207-208.
Source: https://www.academia.edu/739240/Constructing_Social_and_Cultural_Identities_in_the_Bronze_Age
Posts: 828 Location: Nykøbing Falster, Denmark
Sat 18 Jun, 2016 8:07 am
| Pieter B. wrote: |
http://www.thelocal.dk/20160616/largest-ever-viking-gold-collection-found-in-denmark
| Quote: | The three archaeologists, who call themselves Team Rainbow Power, found seven bracelets from the Viking Age in a field in Vejen Municipality in Jutland. The bracelets, six gold and one silver, date to around the year 900.
With a combined weight of around 900 grammes, the find is the largest ever discovery of Viking gold in Denmark. |
Not strictly arms and armor but noteworthy nonetheless. |
This find shows the importance of dedicated amateur archaeologists helping out the professionals by surveying the top soils of areas where the professionals only have manpower and money enough to move in, if definite important sites are located.
Whereas large silver hoards are more "common" a find with a skewed 6 gold rings to 1 silver armrings is definitely highly unusual.
Vejen is close to Jelling, so perhaps this hoard is connected with the Jelling dynasty (it's early phase under Gorm the Old?)
The armrings in more detail with bigger pictures can be seen here: http://www.dr.dk/nyheder/kultur/historie/bill...ldskat-fra
Posts: 1,422 Location: Minneapolis, MN, USA
Thu 21 Jul, 2016 6:44 am
Inlaid metal working tools
While not a weapon this may well be from the grave of a metalsmith of some high status. The time and energy to create such pieces would indicate they where of a symbolic nature as far as purpose. I doubt the silver inlay would enjoy plunging into the fire. I suspect there are some great tales to be told about the fellow in this grave and how this all came to be. Great find for those interested in the history of tools :)
Ancient inlaid tools point to strong ties with Korea Peninsula
Craig
Posts: 382
Sun 31 Jul, 2016 5:17 pm
A 2,600 year old bronze sword has been rediscovered, after being forgotten in a farmer's barn for the last 50 years. It may have possibly been ritually broken and deposited in a river... just goes to show how old the origins of these rituals really are!
[ Linked Image ]
http://www.bbc.com/news/uk-northern-ireland-36878956
Posts: 828 Location: Nykøbing Falster, Denmark
Fri 05 Aug, 2016 4:17 am
| Mark Lewis wrote: |
| A 2,600 year old bronze sword has been rediscovered, after being forgotten in a farmer's barn for the last 50 years. It may have possibly been ritually broken and deposited in a river... just goes to show how old the origins of these rituals really are! |
A shame we don't have more info on the find circumstances. It needs a detailed examination to figure out whether this break could possibly be the result of combat OR the sword was in more pristine (or repaired) condition and then ritually broken and deposited.
The reason to be vary about the conclusion of it being deliberately placed in a river is that rivers move a lot in 2500 years (it could theoretically have been placed close to the river?).
Yet it seems a very reasonable conclusion and from Denmark you have weapons ritualistically pressed deep into the mud from already in the Neolithic (without being an expert I think it's already the case from the Mesolithic).
I know you have found water deposited swords in Denmark even into the late 1400's, so a very long tradition indeed.
Interestingly in Denmark water deposited weapons are usually not broken! It's more swords deposited in graves where it is the case (actually most often "ritually killed" by deliberate bending).
That's why I think you should keep the option open that the sword could be from a grave lying close to the river (or even a battlefield site close to the river?) and then later in time the river eroded the grave away making the sword appear in the river?!
Posts: 382
Fri 05 Aug, 2016 12:10 pm
| Niels Just Rasmussen wrote: |
| That's why I think you should keep the option open that the sword could be from a grave lying close to the river (or even a battlefield site close to the river?) and then later in time the river eroded the grave away making the sword appear in the river?! |
You are quite correct of course, since the archaeological context is entirely lost we can only speculate...
| Niels Just Rasmussen wrote: |
| Interestingly in Denmark water deposited weapons are usually not broken! It's more swords deposited in graves where it is the case |
That's an interesting detail I hadn't thought or heard of before... it makes sense in a way, if a buried sword is meant to symbolically die with its owner, while a river sword is instead an intact gift/sacrifice to the gods.
Last edited by Mark Lewis on Sat 06 Aug, 2016 4:57 am; edited 1 time in total
Posts: 828 Location: Nykøbing Falster, Denmark
Sat 06 Aug, 2016 4:50 am
| Mark Lewis wrote: |
| Niels Just Rasmussen wrote: | | That's why I think you should keep the option open that the sword could be from a grave lying close to the river (or even a battlefield site close to the river?) and then later in time the river eroded the grave away making the sword appear in the river?! |
You are quite correct of course, since the archaeological context is entirely lost we can only speculate...
| Niels Just Rasmussen wrote: | | Interestingly in Denmark water deposited weapons are usually not broken! It's more swords deposited in graves where it is the case |
That's an interesting detail I hadn't thought or heard of before... it makes sense in a way, if a buried sword is meant to symbolically die with its owner, while a sword is instead an intact gift/sacrifice to the gods. |
Mark, the idea of the "buried sword is meant to symbolically die with its owner" is the general view which I also think is the most likely for many cases.
What is interesting when it comes to the grave context is that only some swords are bend and others aren't. Why?
You have references from Saxo's Gesta Danurum (Story of Vermund and Uffe) of digging up an old ancestors famous sword, so the old King (Vermund) knew that the sword was not bend or broken. His son Uffe then wields this legendary sword, now very rusty but still "singing".
It seems there must be a sociological reason for whether swords were bend/broken or not during the burial rituals.
In the Iron Age bog sacrifices the weapons are clearly deliberately destroyed (again most likely it is the weapons of the enemy that are "killed").
In a Scandinavian context giving a sword to the waters don't have to be connected with the male Aesir in my opinion (these "gods" already have their own weapons crafted by the dwarves), but most likely other supernatural creatures.
Reaching the male Aesir would rather be through a fire sacrifice, so the smoke reaches up into the sky, whereas water is a portal not up but down into the Underworld (Hel) or Otherworld (in English/French tradition called the magical "Faerie") - maybe sometimes regarded as the same, at other times as two different places.
I would rather think it has something to do with the Otherworld:
1) It could be that you send a sword into the Otherworld as exchange gifts for the people there (whoever these people were - vætter?, elves?, norns?, Ásynjor? (= female Aesir, who seems generally to be connected to the Otherworld, especially Frigg that lives in Fensalir = Bog-Hall) for some reciprocal playoff.
2) Or perhaps simply to send a good sword into the Underworld - Hel (the place) - to have access to it after death and/or in advance prove to Hel (Loke's daughter) that you were a person of position and needed to be received accordingly.
[Odin's son Balder is killed and is then living in Hel according to his status and all people were seemingly perceived to continue "living" there according to their worldly status -> so likely this myth is older than the idea of Valhalla].
If 2) is the case it explains why this tradition could continue long into Christianity. You would secure that you had access to your sword in Paradise if you have given it to God through the waters. Here the sword as a status symbol must be the paramount reason.
But there must have been tons of reason through time: It is quite often seen that a ritual survives for a very long time, but the explanation why it is done changes. You can have multiple explanation of why a certain ritual is conducted even at the same spot at the same time period as it is known from ethnographic studies.
So when we find weapons given to waters in the Neolithic or Bronze Age we can only say that this ritual itself has a long tradition, but the reasons could be totally different compared to later times.
Posts: 4,393 Location: Northern California
Thu 25 Aug, 2016 10:26 am
Sword and
shield boss in a Norse grave - the boss contains jewels and some Islamic coins -
http://www.archaeology.org/issues/175-1505/tr...amic-coins
Posts: 828 Location: Nykøbing Falster, Denmark
Sat 27 Aug, 2016 9:29 am
A more extensive Norwegian article on the find from 2014.
Link: http://gemini.no/2015/03/et-hugg-i-en-vikings-skjold/
It explains that the 1 and a half silver coins are from Kufa.
The half coin shows again that vikings used money (weight of metal) in transactions and not currency (accepted value of the coin) which has the advantage of avoiding taxation when you have to change currency.
The sword has a faint inscription which had not yet deciphered when the article came out.
Posts: 578 Location: Georgia
Thu 01 Sep, 2016 11:18 am
Posts: 828 Location: Nykøbing Falster, Denmark
Thu 01 Sep, 2016 3:13 pm
The Danish press report from Museum Vestsjælland is here.
Source:
http://nyheder.tv2.dk/samfund/2016-08-31-skat...nzealderen
Also short interview (Danish):
http://www.tveast.dk/nyheder/30-08-2016/1930/...autoplay=1
The bronze sword is a type called "Hornkap" in the article (must be a misspelling as "
Hornknap" would be Pommel (= Knap) of Horn) and is
overall 87 cm with a
67 cm long blade.
It is estimated to be from the Younger Bronze Age (Period IV) between
1100-900 BC.
This article gives further information that the blade is 6 cm wide and says correctly it is a "Hornknap" sword.
Source:
http://sn.dk/Kalundborg/Skarpt-bronzealder-sv...kel/597340
A similar type of sword has been found on Fyn (Vester-Lunde).
[ Linked Image ]
Source:
http://denstoredanske.dk/Danmarks_Oldtid/Bron...C3%A6ndene
German terminology is "Hörnerknaufschwerter".
Posts: 578 Location: Georgia
Thu 01 Sep, 2016 4:13 pm
Thank you Niels, that is most interesting indeed :)
The two pommels appear extremely similar... a few minor details apart, but very similar otherwise. Perhaps made in the same workshop, if not from the same mould?
Interesting that there is no guard. Perhaps it was made of some organic material?
Posts: 828 Location: Nykøbing Falster, Denmark
Fri 02 Sep, 2016 11:51 am
| Jeffrey Faulk wrote: |
Thank you Niels, that is most interesting indeed :)
The two pommels appear extremely similar... a few minor details apart, but very similar otherwise. Perhaps made in the same workshop, if not from the same mould?
Interesting that there is no guard. Perhaps it was made of some organic material? |
You are welcome Jeffrey :D
Actually I'm myself a bit perplexed where exactly you gripped the sword with your hand.
1) Did you grip it below the "shoulders" close to the blade
or
2) Did you grip it behind the "shoulders" at the tang and then the sword originally had an organic pommel end the tangs end?
The name Hornknap seems to signify the latter, but it looks pretty strange to have your hand that far back balance-wise as it is solid bronze?
Perhaps the name Hornknap doesn't mean that the pommel was made of organic material, but that the bronze tang sticking out the rear end of the sword is horn-like and is in fact the pommel (elongated backwards)?
So I would think that option 2 would be the most natural.
Apparently these swords exists in an older and younger version.
Older version arose in 1100 BC and the younger from 800 BC and especially the younger type is quite common in southern Scandinavia with several hundred finds. The older is apparently not so common and most often the grip was organic, but you have some where it is bronze.
The sword recently is the older type and it had a long broad blade and the characteristic "shoulders" whereas the later type has a narrow blade and less pronounced "shoulders".
So the two swords could have been made from the same mold, but it is perhaps unlikely as the "horn" seems different on the two swords. It could be later working on the bronze, though. It seems that the sword is common enough that you don't have to explain a single workshop as it is a "type" in Scandinavia.
Interestingly enough you also find this type in miniatures from burials.
Source (Nationalmuseet): http://samlinger.natmus.dk/DO/1218
This example from Borum Eshøj - but NOT from the three famous oak coffins burials from 1350 BC - was found in a stone coffin in 1850. It is of bronze and gold looking very much like a real-size "Hornknap" sword.
During the younger bronze age you stopped giving "real" swords as grave goods (a few exceptions), but
instead put miniature swords (didn't signify a child in the grave).
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