Info Favorites Register Log in
myArmoury.com Discussion Forums

Forum index Memberlist Usergroups Spotlight Topics Search
Forum Index > Off-topic Talk > Seems like there have been some good discoveries of late! Reply to topic
This is a standard topic Go to page Previous  1, 2, 3 ... 9, 10, 11 
Author Message
Niels Just Rasmussen




Usergroups: None

Location: Nykøbing Falster, Denmark
Spotlight topics: 15
Posts: 713
PostPosted: Fri 24 Feb, 2017 3:25 am    Post subject:         Reply with quote

Mark Lewis wrote:
Thanks for tracking down these details and references! Big Grin

If that illustration accurately represents the appearance of the inscription, it seems to require a fair bit of imagination to get any meaning from it, unfortunately... Also it does make me think that the inscription is iron-inlaid after all, since it specifically shows how the letters are formed of broad strips of metal, which I don't you find with precious metal inlays.


Yeah have to agree that to me the inscription is more and less impossible to decipher.
Also the reading must start from the "+" and onwards, if we compare with the great majority of other swords.
So it is rather +??? ? WN N

You are absolutely correct about the inscription inlay.
Found this danish article where it is stated that it's iron and steel used as inlay.

"I Næsby ved Løgstør blev der i 1950erne fundet et tveægget sværd i en ryttergrav fra sen
vikingetid. Sværdet kom ind på konserveringsværkstedet midt i 1990erne, da røntgenoptagelser af
sværdklingen havde afsløret en mønstersvejset inskription på den øverste tredjedel af klingen, hvor
små brikker af jern og stål var lagt ned i en allerede udhugget bogstavslignende inskription
".
Source: http://www.bcnord.dk/download/artikler/et_usynligt_moenster.pdf

Translation of bolded part: "...a pattern-welded inscription on the upper third part of the blade, where small pieces of iron and steel in laid into already out-chisseled letter-like inscription".

So the report of copper and silver must be from the pommel.
View user's profile Send private message
Mark Lewis




PostPosted: Fri 24 Feb, 2017 6:34 am    Post subject:         Reply with quote

Niels Just Rasmussen wrote:
Mark Lewis wrote:
Thanks for tracking down these details and references! Big Grin

If that illustration accurately represents the appearance of the inscription, it seems to require a fair bit of imagination to get any meaning from it, unfortunately... Also it does make me think that the inscription is iron-inlaid after all, since it specifically shows how the letters are formed of broad strips of metal, which I don't you find with precious metal inlays.


Yeah have to agree that to me the inscription is more and less impossible to decipher.
Also the reading must start from the "+" and onwards, if we compare with the great majority of other swords.
So it is rather +??? ? WN N

Translation of bolded part: "...a pattern-welded inscription on the upper third part of the blade, where small pieces of iron and steel in laid into already out-chisseled letter-like inscription".

Great, thanks for the confirmation! "Pattern-welded" I expect will be referring to the strips of inlay and not the blade itself.

The cross could also be at the end of the inscription, if it is reversed? And the (presumed) opposite cross at the other end has been lost... either way you read it there seems to be at least one upside-down or garbled letter. Some of these inscriptions really do seem to be illiterate imitations of the "in nomine" phrase. I bet the too-specific "in nomine dei" is just journalistic misunderstanding of some comment of the archeologist about this general type of inscription. Confused
View user's profile Send private message Send e-mail
Niels Just Rasmussen




Usergroups: None

Location: Nykøbing Falster, Denmark
Spotlight topics: 15
Posts: 713
PostPosted: Fri 24 Feb, 2017 11:08 am    Post subject:         Reply with quote

Mark Lewis wrote:
Niels Just Rasmussen wrote:
Mark Lewis wrote:
Thanks for tracking down these details and references! Big Grin

If that illustration accurately represents the appearance of the inscription, it seems to require a fair bit of imagination to get any meaning from it, unfortunately... Also it does make me think that the inscription is iron-inlaid after all, since it specifically shows how the letters are formed of broad strips of metal, which I don't you find with precious metal inlays.


Yeah have to agree that to me the inscription is more and less impossible to decipher.
Also the reading must start from the "+" and onwards, if we compare with the great majority of other swords.
So it is rather +??? ? WN N

Translation of bolded part: "...a pattern-welded inscription on the upper third part of the blade, where small pieces of iron and steel in laid into already out-chisseled letter-like inscription".

Great, thanks for the confirmation! "Pattern-welded" I expect will be referring to the strips of inlay and not the blade itself.

The cross could also be at the end of the inscription, if it is reversed? And the (presumed) opposite cross at the other end has been lost... either way you read it there seems to be at least one upside-down or garbled letter. Some of these inscriptions really do seem to be illiterate imitations of the "in nomine" phrase. I bet the too-specific "in nomine dei" is just journalistic misunderstanding of some comment of the archeologist about this general type of inscription. Confused


Yeah the text say that it is the inscription that is pattern welded.

What I meant was that almost always you read from cross-guard down the blade, so +??? ? WN N
Off course it is possible that it should be read from blade tip towards the crossguard; but I agree it could also be a garbled christian message. To make it even harder a lot of the inscription is (probably) missing as well.
One thing is certain though - it is at least 3 latin letters on the blade (not runes).
So the "IN NOMINE D" hypothesis is very tentative, sadly.
View user's profile Send private message
Niels Just Rasmussen




Usergroups: None

Location: Nykøbing Falster, Denmark
Spotlight topics: 15
Posts: 713
PostPosted: Mon 06 Mar, 2017 10:00 am    Post subject:         Reply with quote

Indications for the first Late Iron Age/Early Viking Age tower discovered in Jutland, Denmark.
15 km west of Viborg a settlement with post holes indicating a perhaps ~10 meter high structure as part of a settlement "Toftum Næs" was discovered in 2014.
It seems to be a tower that marks the entrance into an enclosed space where you also find a hall all part of a settlement.
It was actually built in 700's AD and the site was active until 1000 AD.

NB: The article goes into explanation that the site was built by "slaves" and the tower construction was raised so the chieftain could keep an eye on the working slaves.
"The tower construction was probably built by a chieftain who wanted to watch over his workers, says PhD student Torben Trier Christiansen"
Source: http://sciencenordic.com/%E2%80%9Cviking-towe...ed-denmark

A) I find it pretty hard to believe that construction of great halls was done by foreign slaves or even domestic thralls, since construction of these monumental wood buildings demands extreme degree of expertise and knowledge. The pyramids were not build by slaves either, but perhaps this myth is still prevalent in some circles?
B) Furthermore the idea that you would construct a 10 meter tower to supervise is preposterous in my opinion, when you can assign men to keep eye(s) on the workers. Does the chieftain not have better things to do, like politics and ruling?

Furthermore "thralls" in the viking world are not exactly "slaves" in the modern understanding by more like "indentured servants". Thralls are all those people that cannot provide for their own subsistence and doesn't own land (legally having no kin); so basically those who need to have salaries from the person they work for and was owned as such [though we have basically no clue for 700'S AD laws in Denmark].
Though they later did own their own possessions and had their own money (they would have to rent land) and could buy eventually their own freedom (or be released before that).
Also you have varying social status of thralls just as you had in the Roman empire with some actually being rich and powerful. The Bryti (stewards) of royal farms would qualify as thralls in the viking world.

Some vikings were engage in slave TRADE. That doesn't all all mean they captured slaves abroad and brought them back home to Scandinavia. What's the point to bring someone from another place in Europe to an area, where they have no clue about anything (not even language so you can't give them orders and even a different religion)?
Slaves are useful in huge agricultural plantations - like Roman villas - but that is not likely the case for late Iron Age Scandinavia that is way more based on cattle farming. Only important crop is barley for brewing. You don't have the need for a lot of thralls.

In 700's AD you basically only have villages in Denmark - Ribe as the first town in Denmark is created 704 AD and Fysing (a forerunner to Hedeby) also at some time in the 700's. I really don't see any need for "real slaves" in Scandinavia as compared with moving them from one location abroad to another location abroad where you have an actual marked for it?
Anyways at 700's AD we are before any real evidence of Scandinavians doing international slave trade.
Vikings were later engaged in slave trade in for instance the Irish sea -> selling Irish slaves to Welsh magnates and Welsh slaves to Irish magnates back and forth. Here it makes sense as the people are broadly within the same culture.

So what is this tower structure?
My guess would be a Seidr-tower for a Vǫlva and if this is the case it is a spectacular discovery.

Already Tacitus describes the prophet-woman Veleda of the germanic Bructerii tribe as living in a tower. In the sagas the Vǫlva is seated on a raised platform when performing. A tower of 10 meters height with a platform inside would make an excellent seat for such a woman connected with the chieftain ruling the site; just as Veleda was connected with the Romanized Batavian Gaius Julies Civilis.
See: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Veleda

The tower seems to be part of an enclosure connected with a hall also inside the enclosure.
This enclosure seems to indicate a sacredness of some kind (at least for the possible rituals taking place in them), it's clearly not for keeping animals in.


Source: http://sciencenordic.com/%E2%80%9Cviking-towe...ed-denmark

The Danish articles shows more of the coin findings and other things. This site is clearly rich.
See: http://videnskab.dk/kultur-samfund/danmarks-f...aer-viborg
View user's profile Send private message
Craig Johnson




PostPosted: Sat 18 Mar, 2017 10:25 am    Post subject: Antler Armor in Siberia         Reply with quote

From time to time we discuss organic or non metallic armor usage from the past or in cultures where metal working is not a focus. This would seem to be something that would have influenced the central asian cultures for quite a long time. Not sure how exact the reconstruction drawing is but one can definitely see similar across cultures. Pretty cool find.

Craig

2,000- Year-Old Warrior Armour Made Of Reindeer Antlers Found On The Arctic Circle
View user's profile Send private message Send e-mail Visit poster's website
Ralph Grinly




Usergroups: None


Posts: 271
PostPosted: Sat 18 Mar, 2017 12:37 pm    Post subject:         Reply with quote

Fascinating link to that reindeer antler armour - most interesting Happy
View user's profile Send private message
Mark Moore




Usergroups: None

Location: East backwoods-assed Texas
Likes: 6 pages
Reading list: 1 book
Posts: 1,559
PostPosted: Sat 18 Mar, 2017 3:09 pm    Post subject:         Reply with quote

I was also about to ask, but got side-tracked: What do you think they are? Torso plates? Helm plates? They are about the right size for arm bracers or lower leg greaves, but I don't think they would have used those. I could be wrong though. WTF?! ...McM
''Life is like a box of chocolates...'' --- F. Gump
View user's profile Send private message
Craig Johnson




PostPosted: Sun 19 Mar, 2017 12:34 pm    Post subject: Antler Armor in Siberia         Reply with quote

Mark Moore wrote:
I was also about to ask, but got side-tracked: What do you think they are? Torso plates? Helm plates? They are about the right size for arm bracers or lower leg greaves, but I don't think they would have used those. I could be wrong though. WTF?! ...McM


hmmm good question but I fear from the scant info in the article its tough to tell. I love the fact that there is so much reporting on these matters today, but the clarity of information given is often scant. What I really hate is the supposition of the authors when you can tell they are misconstruing something said in the interview.

In this case I think the size of the plates is impressive some of these are 8ish inches long. Also note the good wear marks on these hopefully they will be able to provide some interesting details of how they where put together.

Best
Craig
View user's profile Send private message Send e-mail Visit poster's website


Display posts from previous:   
Forum Index > Off-topic Talk > Seems like there have been some good discoveries of late!
Page 11 of 11 Reply to topic
Go to page Previous  1, 2, 3 ... 9, 10, 11 All times are GMT - 8 Hours

View previous topic :: View next topic
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 2003-2017 myArmoury.com — All rights reserved
Discussion forums powered by phpBB © The phpBB Group
Switch to the Basic Low-bandwidth Version of the forum