Go to page Previous  1, 2, 3

That is interesting Maurizio! I am more interested in it now as it sounds like it originates more at "End of Roman Empire" to Merovingian in origin, not Carolingian (late 7th century era.) The Frankish spearheads appear unusual. (Long, not really Roman in shape, different from more oval forms known to the North.)
Jared Smith wrote:
That is interesting Maurizio! I am more interested in it now as it sounds like it originates more at "End of Roman Empire" to Merovingian in origin, not Carolingian (late 7th century era.) The Frankish spearheads appear unusual. (Long, not really Roman in shape, different from more oval forms known to the North.)


Carolingian culture: emulation and innovation. :)

The period is 400/600 A.D. (perhaps)
Yes, more merovingian. I know, like the bizantine spear, 600 AD, like german. Call "lancea"
While in the early first century allied troops borrow weapons from the Roman, in late imperial period we are witnessing the spread between the legionary troops now barbaric, elements typical of other peoples. Perhaps the greatest influences come from Germany and eastern borders.

The Frankish spearheads appear unusual. Why?

My doubts are about the swords do not appear in the sixth or seventh century.


 Attachment: 29.87 KB
lance copia.jpg
Byzantine/German 6 century

 Attachment: 130.9 KB
Senza titolo-1.jpg
1/2 frankisch 6/7 century
3 frankisch 7 century

Re: 6th century mail fragments
Dan Howard wrote:
Bryce Felperin wrote:
Another explanation might be that metal armor was too valuable to bury in the ground with its former owner
How expensive was the jewellery that was found? Was armor more valuable than gold and gems?


That sounds logical, but the fact remains that many migration age burials have some pretty essential equipment missing. For instance helmets seem much more rare than very high status swords... Let alone body armour.
Re: 6th century mail fragments
Paul Hansen wrote:
Dan Howard wrote:
Bryce Felperin wrote:
Another explanation might be that metal armor was too valuable to bury in the ground with its former owner
How expensive was the jewellery that was found? Was armor more valuable than gold and gems?


That sounds logical, but the fact remains that many migration age burials have some pretty essential equipment missing. For instance helmets seem
much more rare than very high status swords... Let alone body armour.
Perhaps due to a difference in ownership? If a sword is a personal artifact, and armour belongs either to the army or family (handed down from generation to generation) etc. Swords, shields etc. are expendables, but armour can be repaired and remain in circulation much longer.
Could be, but then some grave do contain helmets or armour.

And evidence also suggests that at least some swords have been used by a few generations. Stories of swords being used by a number of generations also feature prominently in various sagas.
Go to page Previous  1, 2, 3

Page 3 of 3

Jump to:  
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 2003-2006 myArmoury.com — All rights reserved
Discussion forums powered by phpBB © The phpBB Group
Switch to the Full-featured Version of the forum