[Matthew Harrington]

I was just curious as too why the attention to detail between Vendel Era and Viking Age artifacts differ so greatly, It seems like Vendel era artifacts are extremely detailed and very well made, while viking age artifacts may be made just as well, it seems the detail and work going into the sword or helmet is significantly less. Is there any reason for this?

[Petr Florianek]

Hello!
While i admit that there might be a realistic root of your question, i find the way how you asked very unfortunate.

why?

you operate with images in your post, but those images are of the replica, or may be interpretations, and sometimes not very good.
and if you were trying to compare orinals, why compare a royal spatha and plain H type hilt?
if you choose spatha, why not compare it with S type hilts from Hedeby, fully overlayed in silver and copper?
why not to mention silver overlayed socketed spears with mammen and ringerikke design, which when new shined like icicles of death?


but to answer partly your question:
i think that the difference which we see in richness of the stuff, is by my opinion caused by wealt accummulation. As for Vendel period, the metal of trade and loot was gold, the wealth was probably more concentrated...

[Craig Peters]

[Matthew Harrington]

Yeah you're right I suppose I didn't fairly way the options, I've seen some viking age work just as nice as the sutton hoo and other vendel finds, but it just seems there's less detailed/ornate viking finds. How did they accumulate more wealth and what made them less wealthy during the viking age? More people? Bad taxes and such by tyrant rules like Harald Fairhair? On another note, I think 9th century Oslo design patterns are probably my favorite out of the nordic art. I love the Hedeby finds, didn't someone make a replica of this with single edged blade?

[Matthew Harrington]

[John Wills]

I would suggest you look for the following books "Woden's Warriors" by Paul Mortimer and "Wayland's Work" by Stephen Pollington for a wide range of Anglo-Saxon and Vendel goodies. There are a number of spectacle helms from Valsgarde with similar pressblechs and grandeur to that from Sutton Hoo which have been reproduced and worn by the Wulfheodenas and Ulfhednar.

It is correct that the ornament of weapons and armour reduced between the 8th and 10th centuries amongst the Germanic peoples; you must also remember that the conversion to Christianity also took place during this period. The early English and the Vendel highly ornament stuff is from the Heathen period when the symbolism of the designs was as protective as the actual gear, if not more so in the eyes of the wearer. After the arrival of Christianity the "magical" effects of the designs was no longer required, this is somewhat illustrated by comparing the Wollaston helmet with the Coppergate helmet which are almost identical in overall shape however the boar crest (a protective totem of Ing/Yngui-Freyr) is replaced with the Latin text "IN. NOMINE. DNI. NOSTRI IHV. SCS. SPS. D. ET. OMNIBUS DECEMUS. AMEN. OSHERE. XPI." (in the name of our Lord Jesus, the Holy Spirit, God and all, we pray. Amen. Oshere. Christ). I discuss this in a short paper available at http://www.academia.edu/2060398/Some_Animal_I..._Heathenry , also a good paper to read is "Symbols of Protection: The Significance of Animal-ornamented Shields in Early Anglo-Saxon England" by Tania Dickinson available at http://eprints.whiterose.ac.uk/1831/1/dickinsont2.pdf

[Robin Smith]

That Albion is not really representative of what the majority of Type H hilts look like. Albion choose to recreate that one because it could be done and remain within their production cost window. Many Viking Hilts are much more elaborate...

For example:

[Matthew Harrington]

[Robin Smith]

[Gregory J. Liebau]

To throw out a bit of conjecture myself, based upon my historical acquaintances with these cultures, which I admit is slim compared to their Continental neighbors, so excuse me for any faulty logic or inaccurate statements.

The 'Viking' peoples, who proceeded from the Vendels and their contemporary Scandinavians, went a-viking due to particular social, climactic and demographic factors. There's no time to get into it all, but it's fair to say that overpopulation in the North, based upon issues of low resources, particularly in arable land, was a major factor. Men who became professional warriors and decided to escape their poverty by murdering, stealing and selling themselves to others for mutual benefits had very little morality when it came to the accumulation of wealth. It made their war bands more powerful, their longboats faster and larger, and their prestige greater. They could be lucky enough to become kings. With such a concentration and importance on gaining wealth to entertain the armed forces for leaders, it's natural to assume that wealth trickled down as an important sign of a warrior's value within the group. Those warriors wearing the fanciest stuff could show off that they were rewarded by the leader for their work, or else had their own independence from the group among his own people. The valuables they took could constitute almost every ounce of their wages, and was used for buying everything they needed in turn, from swords to beverages to lodging.

With this in mind, I think we have to assume that grave robbing was probably something that occurred frequently during the period by either these men, or those who wished to become like them. Even if the weapons and armor were rusted to uselessness, the great amounts of gold and silver accessories would be well worth the effort to dig guys up. Take the Oseberg ship burial dating from 834, which had almost no precious metals associated with the modern find because they were apparently stolen in earlier times. In my opinion, this was most likely to happen when people could still recognize the grave site, i.e. probably not terribly long after... It happened!

Consequently, taking my last point into consideration, we may find a higher percentage of Vendel goods of high quality because a greater number of their grave sites went unmolested by contemporaries prior to the advent of landless war bands, and were already forgotten by the Viking era plunderers.

Just a thought.

-Gregory

[Olov Tidemalm]

[David Huggins]

Mathew,

You may enjoy reading this;

http://www.academia.edu/1429929/A_Brotherhood...rn_warrior

regards
Dave

[Matthew Harrington]

[Ellen Bergwerf]

I agree with …. It’s not good to use replica’s to analyse a period. I think the Viking age contains a lot of beautyfull details. I will show you one piece I’ve in my one collection.

I think a lot of replica’s are very abstract, it’s very important to know what you buy. Also think it’s important not always to follow the masses of people all buying the same products.

[José-Manuel Benito]

In the other hand it is very sad to see that horrible «replicas» of Dybeck viking sword. As you know, in these «replicas» is wrong added the topmount of the scabbard at the lower guard…

[Ellen Bergwerf]

Yes, that’s true. But why do everyone want to have a Dybeck sword in the first place. It’s just like I already told, I think it’s important not always to follow the masses of people all buying the same products.

[Bruce Tordoff]

Matthew,
In case you have any difficulty finding the Dyback sword, it is often referred to as the 'Lund' hilt also.
To echo others, it is a pain that many replicas have used to scabbard mouth piece as part of the lower crossguard, just because it was found stuck together! In case your interested, The Varangaback Pommel (also from Sweden) Is stylistically identical to the Dyback fittings and in my opinion would make the most logical conjectural re construction of this sword.

Now to and my own ten penneth to the thread, I think What John said about the relative differences in art style and its place in weaponry and armour, with respect to the cultural and religious climate of the respective periods, Is pretty much on the money.
I also agree with Robin and Petr. That the differences are relative to the status of the object in question, however that is not to say that there are less objects from the Viking period with beautiful adornment. What is noteworthy is that as the art style changes, certain methods and/or materials seem to fall out of favour, For instance the use of Garnet Cloisonne work, which is prevalent in the Vendel period across various parts of Europe, but eventually drops off in the Viking period.

One point that is very interesting in this context, and may have a correlation with what John said, that, as the amount of 'Richly' decorated fittings and their levels of detail does tail off to some degree regarding swords, seems to drop off even more so regarding helms (as far as the archaeolgical record shows), But if one looks into artifacts of both periods other than weapons and armour, the differences in 'richness' or level of craftmanship are a lot less apparent. Whilst Garnet does vanish for the most part, the other forms of decoration remain, Silver, gold, copper wire inlay still continue. Lost wax cast pieces also continue, with some stunning examples of interlace and very fine granulation and filigree work.
So essentially this may reflect a change to the perception of the people of the period, of the relative importance of weapon and armour decoration, from Pagan to Christian times compared to that of jewellery and civilian attire. Although what Gregory says in his last statement may have a serious part to play, in relative frequency of artifacts of similar quality from both periods.

Bruce