One Hundred Swords for All of Rus': What the Military Squad of the 10th–11th Centuries Actually Waged
In the previous article of the series - "The Squad of Rus': Varangians, the Steppe, and a Warrior Who Fought with a Spear" — We were talking about people: how the early retinue was formed from Varangian units and steppe influences. Now, from people and tactics, let's move on to things—to the iron itself, which the warrior wore on his body. The popular imagination imagines a 10th-century retinue as a line of identical warriors with swords. It's a beautiful image, but it's inaccurate. Archaeologists have counted just over a hundred Carolingian-style swords in all of Kievan Rus'. And the iron on a warrior's body served as a passport: it revealed both his place in the hierarchy and his distant connections to Rus'.
A spear, not a sword
Let's start with weapons, which is mentioned last in heroic paintings. The warrior fought primarily with a spear. It determined the structure of the battle: it kept the enemy at bay, worked in close formation under the cover of shields, and connected the warrior with his neighbors on the front. The sword was a status symbol. The spear was a tool for work. It's a shame for the epic, but true: they celebrated the sword, while a simple staff with an iron tip protected their back.
A. N. Kirpichnikov's typology of spearheads from his multi-volume work "Old Russian Weapons" helps us understand how the spear functioned. He identified several dozen types based on shape, size, and technology. For the 10th to early 11th centuries, four lines were particularly important, each representing not just a form of iron but a way of being a warrior in a specific region and in a specific role.
Spearheads. 1-2 – lanceolate; 3 – diamond-shaped; 4-7 – elongated-triangular
The first is the lancet-shaped spearhead. A long blade, tapering smoothly to the point, with clear symmetry and a massive socket for a heavy shaft. This shape was widely used among the Varangians and in the warrior burials of 10th-century Rus', and its purpose is appropriate: for dense infantry formations. The spear is conveniently brought forward from behind the shield line and used—a powerful thrust or slash—at anyone attempting to break through the line. In Gnezdovo from the first half of the 10th century, lancet-shaped spearheads are frequently found, along with arrowheads of the same shape.
The second line is the elongated triangular spearhead, which spread throughout the Slavic regions of Rus'. The base is wide, the tip tapers gradually, and it is shorter than the lancet. It is a versatile weapon: suitable for both combat and hunting. Geographically, it is much wider than the lancet and is found in areas where the Scandinavian influence is barely noticeable. Simply put, the lancet spear gravitates toward warriors and Varangians, while the triangular spear is a more common weapon.
The third line is tanged arrowheads, typical of the Finno-Ugric and northern regions. Instead of a socket, they have a thin rod inserted into a slot in the shaft and secured with a binding. The design is simpler but also weaker, making them primarily suitable for light spears and darts: for throwing at a distance or maneuvering in forest warfare. For warriors of the 10th–11th centuries, such arrowheads played a supporting role. But in the Ladoga region and in the north, where the Scandinavian and Finno-Ugric worlds were in close contact, they could well have found their way into the arsenal.
The fourth line is the most important for the future stories — it is with this that the shift toward mounted combat begins. Pike-shaped arrowheads of Eastern origin arrived in Rus' in the 10th–11th centuries. The blade is narrow, diamond- or square-shaped, narrow and thick. They have no cutting power—they are designed to pierce. The narrow, four-sided pike easily penetrates chainmail, and the short feather—the working, bladed part of the arrowhead—is easier to extract after a blow without dislocating the rider's shoulder. This is a weapon for mounted combat. By the 13th century, narrow-bladed pikes and spears would become one of the main weapons of heavy cavalry in Rus' and neighboring lands, alongside swords and maces. And in the 10th–11th centuries, they were only just beginning to enter the arsenal of the elite—and this was the first signal of the shift toward mounted combat.
Where is whose iron?
The distribution of spear types across Rus' is no coincidence. The scattering of finds across lands is a reflection of the influences and centers where the warrior elite congregated.
The Ladoga region and northwest (Old Ladoga, Novgorod) are a zone of triple synthesis. Here, lanceolate Scandinavian forms coexist, with petiolate Finno-Ugric and universal Slavic forms. Ladoga was one of the earliest points of Varangian presence in Eastern Europe, and the weaponry reflects this juxtaposition of different traditions in one place.
Gnezdovo near Smolensk is a major hub of the 10th-century warrior culture, located on the route from the Varangians to the Greeks and Kyiv. A large number of warrior burials are concentrated here. According to D. A. Avdusin and subsequent researchers, approximately 9–10% of the burials contain weapons: swords, spearheads, and arrowheads. Carolingian swords and lancet arrowheads are widely represented here in the first half of the 10th century. The Scandinavian component is strong, but common Slavic forms are also present.
The Middle Dnieper region (Kyiv and Chernihiv) presents a different picture. While there is a Scandinavian influence, the culture is frankly syncretic: alongside Scandinavian spears and swords lie Eastern pikes, lamellar plates (armor made of small plates bound with cord), and Asian-style helmets. The Chernihiv "Black Grave" combines lancet-shaped and triangular spears with a rich Eastern repertoire: plate armor, a pointed helmet, and plated belts. Here, the warriors first adopted steppe forms, and from there, the strengthening of the equestrian component would continue.
This leads to a conclusion that's inconvenient for the patriotic narrative. The "originality" of Russian weaponry is a beautiful fiction. The strength of the squad lay elsewhere: it was able to fuse Frankish, Eastern, and Scandinavian elements into a single system. The scattering of arrowheads across the lands speaks volumes about this.
The Shekshovo axe, a ceremonial weapon from the 11th century, was found in 2011 in the Ivanovo region.
The Axe: From a Peasant's Tool to an Elite Axe
I admit, the axe long seemed like the most boring item on this list—what's there to analyze, a cleaver is just a cleaver. It turns out, it's just the opposite: the axe best demonstrates how the same thing served as a status marker.
The axe is generally considered a primitive weapon of the poor—something a peasant might find on his way to the militia. This is partly true: the axe was indeed a common weapon among militias. But this conceals a whole hierarchy—from the simple battle-axe to the elite axe.
Around 1600 axes have been found in the territory of Ancient Rus'. While examining this collection, Kirpichnikov identified three major groups: specially designed battle axes-hammers—called chekans; small battle axes, similar to work axes but useful for both campaigns and battle; and heavy work axes, rarely used in war. The shape of an axe can often reveal the status of its owner.
A chekan is a small axe-hammer: a narrow blade, a massive head with a hammer, and an offset center of gravity. It's inconvenient and pointless for chopping wood—its design delivers a concentrated blow to a helmet or armor plates. This shape cannot be explained by economics. Chekans are more often found in rich warrior burials and are associated with professional warriors who specialized in attacking armored enemies.
The other, most numerous, category consists of medium-sized, versatile axes with a fairly wide blade, suitable for both chopping wood and striking in combat. These were the weapons of those who combined war and farming. A peasant would take on campaign whatever he used every day.
Certain types are associated with the Scandinavian tradition—triangular battle axes, so-called brodexes, with a wide, elongated blade for a sharp chopping blow. In Scandinavian burials of the Viking Age, the battle axe often replaces the sword: it is simpler and cheaper to make, and it inflicts serious damage. In Rus', such an axe could be the weapon of both a warrior and a wealthy militiaman—those occupying the space between the elite and the masses.
The economics of the axe explain why it was so widespread. Almost every household had one, and almost every adult man knew how to use one. It could be made in a small workshop where bog ore was smelted. A sword required a sophisticated metallurgy base, while an axe did not. Therefore, archaeologists use axes to track the level of weaponry among the masses: swords were collected by a few, while an axe was a "democratic" piece of iron.
The subsequent fate of the battle axe is already visible beyond our time. In the 13th century, when plate armor became increasingly popular, battle axes appeared with hammer-shaped butts so heavily weighted that the primary blow became not a chopping blow but a crushing one. This is a direct development of the chisel—that very same "anti-armor" tool, the rudiments of which are found in warrior burials of the 10th and 11th centuries.
Swords. 1 — Leningrad Oblast, State Hermitage Museum (type VII); 2 — Leningrad Oblast, State Historical Museum (type VII); 3 — Leningrad Oblast, State Historical Museum (type VII?); 4 — Ukraine, Kiev Historical Museum (type VII)
The Sword: An Imported Blade and the Legend of Ludota the Blacksmith
Now about the item that has generated the most speculation. In the 10th-11th century, the sword was a symbol, not a working tool. And almost always imported.
The vast majority of Kievan Rus' swords are of the Carolingian type—Frankish blades from the 8th to 10th centuries. According to weapon experts, over a hundred Carolingian swords and approximately seventy-five Romanesque swords from the 11th to 13th centuries—later blades with a short crossguard and a massive pommel—have been found in Rus'. Carolingian blades are recognizable by their wide fullers, massive blades, and patterned surfaces, created by the combination of soft and hard iron.
These blades were also known in the East. In his treatise "On Swords," the Arab scholar Al-Kindi (9th century) describes Frankish swords as high-quality pieces assembled from soft and hard iron, distinguishing them from simpler types lacking such internal structure. In Arabic literature, they were called "al-faranjiyya"—Frankish—and were considered superior to many local examples.
The sword's route to Rus' passed through Varangian channels: trade and raids on the rivers of Eastern Europe, silver and weapons in exchange for furs and slaves. The sword could arrive as a gift, a reward for service, part of the spoils, or as merchandise. And contemporaries understood this. Ibn Fadlan, describing the Rus', left direct testimony:
Each Rus carries an axe, a sword, and a knife. Their swords are flat, grooved, Frankish.
Frankish, not local. That's how they were perceived.
The sword's very rarity speaks to its role. A little over a hundred Carolingian blades, across all the military generations of Rus', constituted not a common weapon, but a privilege. In Gnezdovo and Chernigov, swords lie in opulent burials, alongside plated belts, expensive jewelry, and pieces of armor. It seems the sword served more as a status symbol than an everyday work weapon, while the rough work of destroying the enemy was done by the spear and axe. A warrior with a sword is the apex of the pyramid, not its base.
The sword is also associated with the most persistent patriotic legend—that of "Slavic swords," which Russian blacksmiths supposedly forged no worse than their Frankish counterparts. This legend is fueled by several finds with Cyrillic inscriptions. The most important are a sword from the vicinity of the village of Foshchevata in Poltava region (Mirgorod district, Poltava province) with the inscriptions "KOVAL" and "LYUDOTA," and a sword from Kyiv with the inscription "SLAV."
Let's take this one at a time. First, the Foshchevatov blade. Research shows that the inscription on it reads as the craftsman's name, "Lyudota," and the word "koval," meaning blacksmith. "Koval Ludota" is both a name and a profession. The sword follows the Carolingian pattern: an overall length of 85,7 cm, a blade length of 67,9 cm, and a blade width of 4,9 to 3,8 cm. Now about the Kyiv sword. Only "SLAV" remains—likely the beginning of a name like Slavuta or Slavomir, also a master's signature. For a blacksmith to begin inscribing letters on a blade, written culture must have been present in the craft for some time: the craftsman was literate, knew the Cyrillic alphabet, and decided to mark the piece with his name.
And here I must confess: I very much wish that "Lyudota" was a Russian weaponsmith who forged blades no worse than the Franks. But wishful thinking is a poor argument, and the facts point in the opposite direction. The inscription doesn't indicate that the blade was entirely forged locally. It's far more likely that the craftsman shaped an imported blade: adding the hilt, scabbard, and inscription. The archaeology of metallurgy also supports caution: large slag heaps, inevitable in the mass production of high-quality blades, have not been found in Rus' in the 10th-11th centuries. The bottom line is this. The inscriptions "KOVAL" and "SLAV" are valuable evidence that Russian craftsmen were literate, worked with bladed weapons, and took pride in their craft. But they do not prove the mass production of locally produced blades of Carolingian quality. The blade most likely came from the West, and the finishing was Russian.
Armor: Three Layers of Protection
Body protection was divided into three layers: chainmail, helmet, and shield. Let's start with chainmail. This is a shirt made of iron rings, reaching to the hips or knees, where the rings are alternately riveted and welded. Later, mail with flat rings appeared, lighter and more resistant to piercing. Chainmail served from the 10th to the 17th centuries, but in our time, it is rare. Finds from the 10th to 11th centuries are concentrated in major centers—Gnezdovo, Chernigov, Novgorod, Gomel—and this clearly indicates the elite nature of this type of protection. The reason is economic: each shirt contains thousands of rings that must be cut, bent, riveted, or welded. It was impossible to equip all warriors with chainmail given the limited metallurgy available. Chainmail remained the privilege of the senior squad; the junior warrior made do with a shield and a thick caftan.
This exhibit is a reconstruction of chainmail armor, probably belonging to a Russian warrior of the 13th–17th centuries, consisting of chainmail and a helmet.а
The second layer of protection is the helmet. Finds for the 10th–11th centuries are revealingly uneven: helmets are known for the 10th century and again for the 12th–13th centuries, but the 11th century is practically empty. This does not mean that helmets were not worn then. In the third issue of "Old Russian Weapons," dedicated to armor, Kirpichnikov emphasized that the issue is not the absence of helmets, but the paucity of archaeological finds for that century—a gap in the material, not in the history. Typologically, Russian helmets are predominantly socketed spheroconical headpieces, genetically linked to the Asian East. The helmet from the 10th-century Gulbishe burial mound is assembled from four triangular plates: the front and back rest on the side plates, typical of Eastern design. Another helmet from Gnezdovo, with a rounded crown, is classified by Kirpichnikov as belonging to the Franco-Norman type. The Chernigov pointed helmet with a nasal and gilded trim combines Eastern and Scandinavian motifs in a single piece. This is the entire "distinctive national form of the Russian helmet": East meets West.
Finally, the shield is the primary means of personal defense and also the most accessible. It is lightweight and suitable for both foot and horseback. In the 10th century, round shields with a boss—a convex iron plate in the center that covers the fist—and a fist grip predominated; these were convenient for building a solid wall, protected from arrows and spears. Toward the end of the 10th and in the 11th centuries, oblong and almond-shaped shields of the common European type, covering the rider's legs and torso, appeared among warriors. Later, as closed helmets became more common, the rounded top of the almond-shaped shield was cut off as unnecessary—thus the triangular shield was born. Availability was everything here: the shield's core was wood and leather, with little metal needed, only for the boss and fittings. Consequently, almost every warrior had a shield, while chainmail and helmets remained the preserve of a few. And all blows passed through the shield: its quality directly determined whether a warrior would survive the battle.
A separate, narrower category is lamellar armor—a set of small metal plates bound with cord to form flexible armor. In 10th-11th-century Rus', this was a great rarity, found only in the richest warrior burials, and it was even more expensive than chainmail.
A pyramid, not a brotherhood
Now let's put all the defenses together. There's no such thing as brotherhood among equals. Almost everyone had a shield. Chainmail was for a minority. Helmets were for an even smaller number. Plate armor was for a very small elite. This isn't just technology; it's a distribution of chances of survival.
Body protection directly impacted survivability, and survivability impacted careers. Those better protected by iron were more likely to survive battle, and therefore more likely to receive a share of the spoils, the prince's favor, and status. Archaeology shows that chainmail, helmets, and plate armor are found in wealthy warrior burials, while most warriors limited themselves to shields and simpler armor. This underlies the internal stratification of the warriors: the senior warriors—boyars, ognishchane (owners of large estates), and gridi (the prince's closest warriors)—were pitted against the younger warriors and the militia. They might stand in the same line, but in a fierce clash, their chances of survival were unequal. And the difference was self-fulfilling: the better-protected lived longer and rose to higher positions.
This is why weapons and armor should be read as a social document, not as a technical topic for narrow specialists. A sword, chainmail, and helmet were signs of belonging to the elite. Their absence, amidst a wealth of other equipment, signaled a boundary the warrior had not crossed. The warrior's retinue of the 10th and 11th centuries was internally stratified, and the iron on the body reflected this stratification more accurately than any title.
Where does this lead?
Briefly, here's what happened. The spear made a warrior part of the ranks, and the shape of the spearhead revealed the rank and region in which he fought. The axe linked labor and war, extending from the peasant household to the elite mint. The sword connected the warriors to the distant trade and military networks of Eurasia and served as a sign of the elite, not as a means of labor. Chainmail, helmet, and shield formed three layers of defense, with most only receiving the lower one. Armament was a property certificate and simultaneously a sign that Rus' borrowed the best from Scandinavia, the West, and the East, and combined them into a single system.
This set already contains a hidden spring of change. The narrow, faceted lance of the Eastern type, designed to pierce chainmail from the saddle, is more than just another type of spearhead. It is a sign that the retinue is beginning to mount a horse. How the foot ranks of spearmen give way to cavalry, how weaponry changes along with this, and the role of the popular infantry declines, how the service class develops—this will be discussed in the next article in the series: "From Retinue to Cavalry: The Evolution of the Army and the Changing Social Structure (10th–13th Centuries)." The weapons examined here will be the starting point there.
Literature
- Kirpichnikov A. N. Old Russian weapons. Issue 1: Swords and sabers of the 9th–13th centuries. Moscow; Leningrad: Nauka, 1966.
- Kirpichnikov A. N. Old Russian weapons. Part 2: Spears, javelins, battle axes, maces, and flails of the 9th–13th centuries. Moscow; Leningrad: Nauka, 1966.
- Kirpichnikov A. N. Old Russian weapons. Issue 3: Armor, a set of combat weapons of the 9th–13th centuries. Leningrad: Nauka, 1971.
- Kirpichnikov A. N. Russian helmets of the 10th–13th centuries // Soviet archeology. 1958. No. 4.
- Avdusin D. A. Gnezdovsky burial mounds in the studies of S. I. Sergeev // Gnezdovsky archaeological complex: Materials and research. Moscow, 2001. (on the proportion of burials with weapons).
- Al-Kindi. On Swords (9th-century treatise); Ibn Fadlan. Notes on a Journey to the Volga – contemporary accounts of the weaponry of the Rus'.
Information