Viking age weapons

At the mention of the Vikings, many have a stereotypical image imposed by popular culture of wild bearded people in helmets with horns, with axes and round shields, disembarking from longships and breaking into monasteries and coastal villages and taking everything that can be taken.

However, despite the images presented in many modern TV series and films, the main weapons The Vikings had not an ax, but a sword, which was the most common and very important weapon from a cultural point of view. Archaeologists have found an impressive number of Viking swords. The sword was a very honorable weapon, fanned by cultural and social meanings. A whole layer of legal and religious norms was associated with swords.

Despite the popular belief that metallurgy was in its infancy in the early Middle Ages, this is not true. Modern archaeologists have found more than three thousand swords of that time in Norway alone, which exceeds even the number of swords found from later eras.

The mobilization potential of the Vikings in the 45th century was about XNUMX thousand people, from which it follows that the sword was quite common and was not the privilege of the leaders - any fairly wealthy warrior could acquire it.

The main tool of defense was the shield, necessary for every warrior. In the Scandinavian sagas, the term "skelburg" is found, meaning the form of building an army in the form of a "wall of shields". The Vikings mainly used round shields with a central grip without a belt loop, which made it possible to protect the left side of the warrior, and even use it as an attacking tool. The diameter of the shield reached 90 cm, and the thickness in the central part was up to 10-13 mm, and 5 mm at the edges, which was due to the need to reduce its mass for greater mobility.

Video topic:

Comments

[Most polite]

And they didn’t have helmets with horns, Hollywood is already to blame ...

[Senior seaman]

However, despite the images presented in many modern TV series and films, the main weapon of the Vikings was not an ax, but a sword, which was the most common and very important weapon from a cultural point of view.

And in my opinion, it's exactly the opposite. In the films, they are mostly with swords, which could not be in real life.

[Hitriy Zhuk]

Swords are expensive and gay, but spears and axes are harsh and affordable.

[Illanatol]

However, despite the images presented in many modern TV series and films, the main weapon of the Vikings was not an ax, but a sword, which was the most common and very important weapon from a cultural point of view. Archaeologists have found an impressive number of Viking swords. The sword was a very honorable weapon, fanned by cultural and social meanings. A whole layer of legal and religious norms was associated with swords.

Despite the popular belief that metallurgy was in its infancy in the early Middle Ages, this is not true. Modern archaeologists have found more than three thousand swords of that time in Norway alone, which exceeds even the number of swords found from later eras.

Honorary weapon - just something that is not everyday.
It would be nice to give statistics on battle axes, how many of them were found.
Three thousand swords "of that time" ... is this, presumably, three centuries? And is it really that much?
The swords were expensive, they had special care (they were protected from corrosion), and therefore they were preserved. More accessible, cheaper and therefore widespread weapons did not enjoy such honor and care.
So... battle axes and clubs were probably still more common.
And it’s not a fact that the swords found are of local production, the Scandinavians could also buy swords from their neighbors.
At that time, the weapons differed little ... so the Viking blades were probably of the standard "Frankish" type.

Why are fewer swords from later eras found?
It is precisely because such weapons have become more in demand that the demand for them has grown. And the worn-out weapon went into remelting, new blades were made from it. Waste became smaller, broken and worn out weapons began to be more diligently collected, in short.
It should be noted that the best steel is obtained from the ore, during the first smelting.
With each remelting, the quality of the metal deteriorates.

[Konnick]

With each remelting, the quality of the metal deteriorates.

Where does such a statement come from, especially since they learned how to melt steel only in the 19th century, before that it was obtained by reforging, the so-called spongy kritsa. And to improve or obtain steel with other properties, they do, for example, electroslag remelting. In the US, more than 70% of steel is remelted from scrap metal.

the best steel comes from ore

Steel is generally smelted from cast iron or cast iron with scrap metal. And high-quality cast iron can be obtained from scrap steel. It is possible to smelt ore from ore, but after beneficiation of ore and in electric furnaces, raw material is obtained.

[Illanatol]

Quote: Konnick

Where does such a statement come from, especially since they learned how to melt steel only in the 19th century, before that they received it by reforging, the so-called spongy kritz.

And what about cast steel?

http://lab.bmstu.ru/bulat/Parts1/index.htm

Although, the Scandinavians were hardly familiar with such technology.

[Repellent]

Quote: Illanatol

http://lab.bmstu.ru/bulat/Parts1/index.htm

From the link we read:

Damascus steels are weldable. They are obtained by forge welding (in a furnace on coals - both wood and stone) of various carbon steels containing from 0,25 to 0,8 and from 0,8 to 1,5% carbon with cast iron and pure brick iron

I didn’t master it further, we’ll rzhukonem

Afftor is the reincarnation of Shpakovsky. IMHO.