Military Review

About the use of stone axes

14
"... Anglo-Saxon Lords
killed and maimed each other

barbarous stone axes "


With a light hand uncritically perceived realities of the Middle Ages, historian Viktor Prishchepenko, the popular 1980's popular literature spread around the sensational news: “It is noteworthy that the Islamist anonymous author considered it useful to use the Slavic terms“ knight ”,“ chivalry ”without translation, and his work belongs to those times in the language of the Germans, there were no “ritters” and “rhetorians”, and the Anglo-Saxon lords killed and maimed each other with barbaric stone axes (1).

We will not go into the details of the most absurd assertion about the Slavic origin of the terms "knight" and "chivalry", arising from the use of V. Prischepenko translated text into English, where in the original "Story about the Country of Rus and its Cities" of the 10th century Muslim work. "Kitab Hudood al-Alam Min al-Mashriq Il-l-Maghrib" is the Arabic word muruvvat - "generosity, nobility, humanity." Let us touch upon a no less glaring error, stating the presence of Anglo-Saxon warriors of the 11th century in the weapons complex. stone axes.

The source of such a radical statement about the use of stone axes by the Anglo-Saxons for the Soviet historian 1970-1980-ies was the work of F. Engels “The Origin of the Family, Private Property and the State”, where in the chapter “Barbarism and Civilization” the founder of Marxism spoke literally the following: “Stone weapon therefore it disappeared only slowly; not only in the Song of Hildebrand, but also under Hastings in 1066, stone axes were still used in the battle ”(2).

However, such a categorical statement, even if made by one of the founders of the Marxist ideology, cannot be taken on faith without analyzing the sources. Therefore, we have undertaken a search for both the original text of the Song of Hildebrand and an essay telling of the use of stone axes by the Anglo-Saxon warriors in the Battle of Hastings.

As it turned out, the information about the use of stone axes by the Anglo-Saxons was “borrowed” by F. Engels from the work of the chaplain (3) Guillaume from Poitiers “Gesta Willelmi, ducis Normannorum et regis Anglorum”. In other sources, no hints of such an amazing element of the Anglo-Saxon warrior's panoplia are found.

Consideration of primary sources


1. "Song of Hildebrand"

“The Song of Hildebrand” (Hildebrandslied) refers in its content to the cycle of legends about Dietrich of Bern, whose events take place at the end of the 5th and the beginning of the 6th centuries. The only extant list of "Song of Hildebrand" is the manuscript from Fulda, dating from the beginning of the 9th century. An analysis of the text of “Songs of Hildebrand” gives a good idea of ​​what the soldiers of the Dark Ages armed themselves with - the legend mentions the quite usual for the VIII-IX centuries. weapons - swords, spears, chain mail, shields:

...
Two people of the same blood
son and father prepared their equipment,
armor, and girded swords,
heroes armed when they were going to battle.

...
And now my own child should fight with me,
hit me with a sword
either I'll be his killer.

...
Which of the two will get hold of clothes today
and armor will take possession of the enemy?
Then they threw ash spears in a grave battle;
spears thrust into shields.
And they fought, shields crackled,
and they hit again
so until they are left without their fake shields,
torn by swords ...
In the original text of the song, which lists the types of melee weapons, there are only the words "suert" - the sword, and "billi" - a type of halberd:
nu scal mih suasat chind suertu hauwan,
breton mit sinu billiu, eddo ih imo ti banin werdan.

The word "stein" (stone) in the "Song of Hildebrand" is not mentioned even once. And, given the possible form of the warhead of the weapon “billi” (4), in no way makes it possible to interpret this weapon as made of stone. The translation of “Songs of Hildebrand” into modern German in this passage indicates the word der Klinge (blade), and into English - Axe (ax). In both cases, the authors of the translation did not specify the type of weapon, but simply replaced the archaic billi with something similar. It is not known which of the translations F. Engels used when writing “The Origin of the Family, Private Property and the State” (1884), but there is no reason to say that the weapon owned by the old warrior Hildebrand was made of stone, based on both translations, no .

Thus, the material “Songs about Hildebrand” in no way gives us reason to talk about the practice of using stone axes in Europe in V-VI (when the events described in the cycle of songs about Dietrich of Bern) occur, or in VIII-IX ( when this song was recorded) for centuries.

2. "Chronicle" of Guillaume from Poitiers

More difficult is the case of the second source - the Chronicle of Guillaume of Poitiers. Most likely, F. Engels did not use the Latin text of the chronicle, but applied its free English-language translation, which states the following: "The English ... threw spears and weapons of every kind, murderous axes and stones tied to sticks".

In any case, only these “stones tied to sticks” could become the basis for the statement that Anglo-Saxon soldiers had stone axes in service. “If a stone is tied to a stick, this is a stone ax!” - apparently, the logic of F. Engels was just that.

Due to the fact that information, sanctified by the authority of F. Engels, was perceived by many historians as absolutely true, a completely absurd situation arose - the long-forgotten stone axes in the second half of the 11th century. they re-enter the battlefield, but they leave only once, with Hastings, to sink into oblivion again.

This obvious discrepancy is many lovers. stories they tried to explain for themselves roughly as follows - they say, they meant not Paleolithic masterpieces - polished, drilled, sharpened, but ordinary clubs, to which some Anglo-Saxon militiamen crammed cobblestones for gravity.

Indeed, the army of King Harold was divided into 2 unequal in their combat skills and armament of the part - tenov and khuskarlov, forming the elite of the troops, and the mass militia - fyrd. However, even about members of the fyrd, no one ever said that they were armed with stone axes. For example, in the description of the battle of Brunanburg (937), during which the army of the united Anglo-Saxon kingdoms crushed the combined forces of the Vikings and the Scots, the word "stone" is used only as part of the complex epithet of the sword "stone-pointed blade":
... Wesseaxe forð
ondlongne dæg eorodcistum
on last legdun laþum þeodum,
heowan herefleman hindan þearle
mecum mylenscearpan.
... Wessex mowed down
horsemen are primordial until it is dark,
pursuing the enemies of the hated,
runaway hacked, killed many
stone-pointed blades

With 799, a precedent appears - Kenevulf, the king of Mercia, gave one of his tenns an investiture in the form of an estate in the 30 guide with the duty to put 5 soldiers from the allotment. In the future, it is fixed in the Norman "Book of the Last Judgment" (Domesday Book, 1086) - 1 soldier was exhibited from the five guide (5) of the land plot, significant money was spent on the maintenance of the soldiers: "... if the king sent an army somewhere, one soldier is sent from five 5 guides, and each guide provides for its maintenance and subsistence for two months in the amount of four shillings ”(6).

Those. the maintenance of a 1 warrior's warrior required 20 shillings per month. Responsibility for evading service in the firm was also provided for - according to the laws of Ine, the King of Wessex, who paid great attention to the organization of the firm (694), who did not come to the service, was fined: “If a person of noble origin who owns the land, neglected military service, he must pay 120 shillings and lose their land; a person of noble birth who does not own the land [in such a case] is obliged to pay 60 shillings; a community member is obliged to pay 30 shillings for neglecting military service ”(7).

According to this law, the gradation of the members of the fyrd according to the property principle, and, accordingly, according to armament, is traced. Tena and khuskarly constituted the elite of the Anglo-Saxon army - according to the laws of Knud the Great (1016-1035), when entering the inheritance, the teng's son was obliged to transfer four horses to the king, two swords, four spears, four shields, a helmet, armor and 50 gold mancus (8).

At the time of Knud the Great, Huskarl was obliged to have a “double-edged sword with a gold-coated handle” (9).

To say about the tenov and khuskarlov that they “maimed and killed each other with barbarous stone axes,” as V. Prischechenko did, does not turn the tongue. The rest of the warriors of the fyrd, recruited from ordinary members of the community, were much worse armed, but it was never said about them that they were armed with stone axes. Thus, in the chronicle of William of Malmesbury, about the Fyrd warriors who fought at Hastings, it was said: “All the infantrymen, armed with double-edged axes, closed the connected shields in front of them, forming an impenetrable wedge. ... Having taken possession of the hill, they dumped Normans into the hollow when they, enveloped in flames [fighting], stubbornly climbed to a height, and exterminated every single one, easily letting the arrows coming from below and rolling stones on them (10).

So, from the "Chronicle" of William of Malmesbury, it becomes clear that in battle the fyrd formed the so-called. "Wall of shields". Ahead, often tenes and hozarly dismounted for battle, as more experienced warriors, with better armament - a “wall of shields” could only be built from those with whom they were an indispensable part of the armament. In battle, they could use improvised means - for example, stones - but not a word was said about the use of stone axes!

In this regard, the description of the battle of Hastings, left by Guillaume of Poitiers, is of considerable interest: “[The Anglo-Saxons] threw spears (cuspides) and various kinds of projectiles (tela), the worst of which were axes (secures), and blocks of stone ( saxa), imposed (imposita) on the tree (lignis) ”(11).

Thus, it becomes obvious that the “wall of shields” led an active throwing battle, which involved attacking the enemy with “various kinds of missiles”, among which spears, axes and stones were specifically indicated. This does not contradict the “Chronicle” of William of Malmesbury, and makes it impossible to accept the interpretation of modern English translation of the combination lignis imposita saxa as stones tied to sticks - the word imposita stands for the process of imposing something, but not fixing it with a rope or belt.

It is worth paying more attention to the throwing battle of the fyrd - for example, Guillaume of Poitiers mentions throwing axes. This finds a parallel with the use of the Franks in the 5th-6th centuries. francis (francisca or francesca). In continental Europe, Francis was used at least until the reign of Charlemagne. At the same time, the warfare of England was somewhat more archaic and retained some features that had disappeared on the continent for a longer time. So, recently reported the discovery of several francisok in England (12).
The method of application of the Francis on the islands is unlikely to be very different from how it was applied on the mainland. Judging by the words of Guioma from Poitiers, the "volley" by throwing axes during the descent of the lines was an essential moment for successfully repelling the enemy's attack.

What was meant by "blocks of stone laid on a tree"? In our opinion, this is a fustibal - sling attached to a long pole. Vegetius mentioned in his “De Re Militari” fustibal (fustibalus) as a weapon that was used in the late Roman legion by the warriors of the back rows. Warriors with fustibalami called fustibalatorov (fustibalator). The first images of fustibals appeared no later than the period of the early Byzantine Empire, the latter - not earlier than the 13th century. In favor of this consideration, we propose the following arguments:

1. The nature of the first stage of the battle at Hastings, judging from the description in the "Chronicle" Guillaume of Poitiers, throwing. Why should the soldiers throw some “clubs with tied stones” when just throwing a stone is easier and easier? Why do you tie stones to a club at all? By the way, technologically it is far from easy - to get a secure bond of a stone with a baton without processing it.

2. Fustibal, recommended by Vegezius for arming the rear ranks of the legion, fits perfectly into the firda throwing battle - the system doesn’t break when throwing from the Fustibal, the stone flies much further, and you can throw stones weighing up to 0,5 kg, which you can’t throw far . At the same time, it was possible to throw not only stones, but also small vessels with incendiary mixture, which can be seen on the miniature “The death of Estash Inok” at the naval battle of Sandwich (1217) between English and French fleets.

Why did not Guillaume of Poitiers use this Latin word? In our opinion, the word fustibal is quite specific and Guioem from Poitiers could not have known him, therefore he gave a descriptive translation. “Overlaying” (not tying! - note by A.P.) of a stone on a “tree” is a description of the process of loading a stone into fustibal.

In this case, we get a holistic and consistent picture of events - the fyrd keeps the formation on the hill from which stones, axes, arrows, spears and darts are thrown at the Normans. Warriors Fyrd are armed in accordance with the era. Moreover, they are armed with even the simplest mechanical devices, allowing to increase the range and force of throwing a stone - fustibaly.

Thus, the statement of F. Engels that on the battlefield at Hastings by the Anglo-Saxon warriors stone axes were used, picked up by E. Razin and developed to the point of absurdity by V. Prishchechenko, has no basis.

1. See V. Prischechenko. "... And armed with zelo." Youth Technique # 12, 1980, page 49
2. See F. Engels. The origin of the family, private property and the state. - K. Marx and F. Engels. Works, ed. 2, T. 21, M., 1961, p. 163.
3. In this case, the chapel means the office of William the Conqueror. See “The History of the Middle Ages in its writers and the studies of the newest scholars”, volume II. SPb, 1864, p. 892.
4. In modern English, billhook is synonymous with poleaxe / poleax, i.e. "halberd". In Novoye Vremya, auxiliary weapons of this form were known in Russia as the “fashinny knife.” In the Middle Ages, billhook or simply bill could also be used in the pole version.
5. Gaida (born Hide, Anglo-Saxon. Hϊd or hiwisc) is a unit of land area, traditionally a component of allotment, considered necessary to provide for one man and his family. Hovered from 40 to 120 acres.
6. See “The Big Book” in the “Book of the Last Judgment”, materials on Berkshire, 1086.
7. “120 he shipment and forfeit his land; a nobleman who holds no land land pay 60 shillings; a shillings for a neglecting military service
8. Mancus was originally the name of an Arab gold dinar (was equal to 30 silver denarius) in Western Europe, and then - a monetary unit and a gold coin of several European countries. As a counting unit known since the end of the VIII century. and was used until the end of XI century. in England, Italy, Spain, France. As a silver coin Mankus appears in Italy in the IX-X centuries. In Catalonia in the XI century. Gold Mankus was produced with an Arabic inscription and a cross. The weight of the coin was 1,9 - 1,95 g. In most cases, it was lighter than the synchronous Arabic gold dinar. See Numismatic Dictionary, 4-e Edition, Zvarych V.V., Lviv, 1980.
9. See M. Nechitaylov. Khuskarly, bootscarly and litmeny: the XI century guard. XLegio, 2001.
10. See William of Malmesbury, "The History of English Kings" // Medieval Latin Literature, 4th-9th Centuries. / trans. T.I. Kuznetsova, M., 1970, p. 396-397.
11. "Jactant cuspides ac diversorum generum tela, saevissimas quasque secures, et lignis imposita saxa".
12. See Richard Underwood. Anglo-Saxon Weapons and Warfare. Stroud, 1999, p. 35-37.


Examples of images of fustibal from European manuscripts XII-XIII centuries.


About the use of stone axes
Holofernes hike
Biblia Sancti Petri Rodensis, Catalonia, approx. 1050-1100 (Ms. Lat. 6, fol. 134r, Bib. Nat., Paris)


Eustace "The Black Monk" dies at the Sandwich Battle of 1217
"Big Chronicle" by Matthew of Paris, England, ca. 1240-1253 (Ms. 16, fol. 52r, Corpus Christi College, Cambridge)


Siege of Damietta in 1219 during the Fifth Crusade
"Big Chronicle" by Matthew of Paris, England, ca. 1240-1253 (Ms. 16, fol. 55v, Corpus Christi College, Cambridge)


The battle between the troops of Salerno, Tancred and the Empire in the castle "Turris Maior", on the one hand, and those who are on the mountain "Torus", now called "Tuoro" or usually "Mazzo della Signora", on the other.
Peter ad's Liber ad honorem Augusti from Eboli, southern Italy, ca. 1195-1197 (Cod. 120, II, fol. 111r, Burgerbibliothek, Bern)
Author:
Originator:
http://xlegio.ru/ancient-armies/armament/about-the-use-of-the-stone-axes/
14 comments
Information
Dear reader, to leave comments on the publication, you must to register.

I have an account? Sign in

  1. kalibr
    kalibr 23 January 2016 07: 53
    +7
    Against this dreamer Prishchepchenko, I wrote an article in TM back in the same 1980 year, but then I didn’t have such data at hand ...
    1. Sweles
      Sweles 23 January 2016 09: 56
      +4
      In this section, we will use a short, but very interesting note by EV Antonova, published in the collection of the State Museums of the Moscow Kremlin "Materials and Research" for 1973 [28: 1].

      In 1969, among the garbage left by the builders of the Moscow Kremlin, a GERMAN STONE AX (!?) Was unexpectedly found. Moreover, this ax did not lie deep in the ground - as befits the tools of our ancient ancestors - but in the midst of CONSTRUCTION WASTE TIMES OF CONSTRUCTION OF THE KREMLIN. That is, BELONGED TO ONE OF THE BUILDERS OF MOSCOW KREMLIN. Moreover, traces of a clearly late, MEDIEVAL use were found on it, see below. The German worker who built the Kremlin threw away his stone ax, because it broke and could no longer serve, Figure 10.34.

      Recall that the construction of the Moscow Kremlin dates back to the end of the 500th century by historians, and in the New Chronology, the second half of the XNUMXth century. That is - the Middle Ages, about XNUMX years ago.

      Analysis of the stone from which the ax was made showed that the ax is GERMAN. It is made of West European rock, absent in Russia, and is a typical example of stone axes found in Saxony and Thuringia, areas of modern Germany.

      And now for the fun part. It turns out that all such axes - and there are a lot of them in Germany - are dated by archaeologists of the most ancient times, the first half of the 4,5nd millennium BC. That is, according to archaeologists, such axes are by no means the axes of medieval Germans (who supposedly used high-quality German hardened steel for a long time, and not the prehistoric stone axes), but the axes of their distant ancestors who lived on the lands of modern Germany 5 - XNUMX thousand years ago.

      But if archaeologists are right, then how could such an ax get into the construction waste of the Moscow Kremlin 500 years ago?

      http://chronologia.org/shahname2/sh10_04.html
      this fragment made by Fomenko and Nosovsky from an article by Antonova shows that in the 16th century German workers came to Muscovy to build the Kremlin with their own tool and this tool was STONE, this indicates the inaccessibility of iron in that era and its high cost. But if Europeans used stone tools in the 16th century, then what about the 11th century?
      1. kalibr
        kalibr 23 January 2016 11: 32
        +2
        And what does it say on it?
    2. Sweles
      Sweles 23 January 2016 10: 15
      +1
      The word "stein" (stone) in the "Song of Hildebrand" is not mentioned even once. And, given the possible form of the warhead of the weapon “billi” (4), in no way makes it possible to interpret this weapon as made of stone. The translation of “Songs of Hildebrand” into modern German in this passage indicates the word der Klinge (blade), and into English - Axe (ax). In both cases, the authors of the translation did not specify the type of weapon, but simply replaced the archaic billi with something similar. It is not known which of the translations F. Engels used when writing “The Origin of the Family, Private Property and the State” (1884), but there is no reason to say that the weapon owned by the old warrior Hildebrand was made of stone, based on both translations, no .


      poor Engels used "unverified sources", but this Pastukhov certainly used the most reliable sources, can you believe this? Especially considering the rolling wave of falsification. And after all, during his lifetime and in the 19th century, Engels was considered a historian specializing in the history of wars and such a puncture, the shepherds appeared out of nowhere and announced that the "translation" was wrong.
      Who is this A. Pastukhov? devil only knows, you cannot determine by reference and what does this shepherd care about what the Angles fought with the Normans in the 11th century? Here the answer is one modern historical paradigm about "ancient Western civilization" requires more and more confirmation, so those translations that Engels used are incorrect, and those translations that the shepherds use are "correct" ...
      1. kalibr
        kalibr 23 January 2016 11: 33
        +2
        Look at "Bayeux embroidery". Does she have at least one stone ax?
        1. The comment was deleted.
        2. Looking Petrovich
          Looking Petrovich 23 January 2016 20: 13
          +3

          I explain. He wrote an essay on embroidery. There are many not quite clear moments on it:
          1. Here in the first picture of a knight who is in the middle, obviously not a sword, spear or ax. The embroideresses depicted all these weapons in great detail. Bishop Odo, to the right of the knight, has a club for himself: as a clergyman, he was forbidden to shed blood, and to break a skull - please.
          2. In the second picture, this is a strange weapon in running Anglo-Saxons pursued by the Norman knights.
          3. In the third picture you can clearly see how the axes are embroidered in detail, they do not look at all like the strange things from pictures 1 and 2. Maybe this is "stones tied to sticks".
          4. By the way, the Normans did not call themselves Normans at all: on the tapestry (picture 4), the Normans are denoted as Franci (Franks), and the Anglo-Saxons as Angli (English), that is, the battle of Hastings in 1066 was perceived by contemporaries as a battle between the British and the French.
          1. kalibr
            kalibr 23 January 2016 22: 07
            +1
            In the hands of Bishop Odo, not a club, but a bakulyus - a commander's rod. Here I also had material about "Bayesian embroidery", there are many interesting things ...
  2. cth; fyn
    cth; fyn 23 January 2016 08: 15
    +1
    To charlatans! Stone axes ... The copper age has passed, the iron one is in full swing and here on, they’re stone axes! Charlatans!
  3. parusnik
    parusnik 23 January 2016 08: 32
    +4
    F. Engels got excited, and Prishchepchenko ... undressed ... Thanks to the author ... for the article ... and the material presented ..
    1. cth; fyn
      cth; fyn 23 January 2016 09: 05
      +1
      Nifiga got excited! Yes, for this, historians got excited with sticks on the back to beat, so that later they would check and double-check the material before printing. This is how much he misled people? It’s better not to know anything than to know a lie.
      1. kalibr
        kalibr 23 January 2016 11: 34
        +3
        He posted it on TM. TM was already distinguished by yellowness. In questions of history he did not print this ...
      2. kalibr
        kalibr 23 January 2016 12: 44
        +3
        He also wrote in this article that in the hut of every Russian peasant there was chain mail (!), An ax and an oak shield! And despite the fact that the shields were not made of oak, it is heavy and prickly. The shields were made of linden, as evidenced by the finds in the Lithuanian swamps, which, by the way, was also written at the same time by "Soviet Archeology" and the Scandinavian sagas, in which the shield was called "linden of the sword", "linden of the spear", etc.
  4. Koshak
    Koshak 23 January 2016 08: 49
    0
    "Stone-sharpened blades" - m. were you referring to the blades sharpened against a whetstone?
    1. cth; fyn
      cth; fyn 23 January 2016 09: 03
      0
      It is quite possible, which means there may have been other ways of sharpening.
  5. Free wind
    Free wind 23 January 2016 08: 54
    0
    Well, the stone axes may have already disappeared, but there were throwing hammers, and most often they were stone, clubs, clubs, etc. In the penultimate drawing, the guy is flailing, and this is a wooden weapon. The weapon was expensive, probably they used everything they could.
  6. Riv
    Riv 23 January 2016 09: 17
    +5
    Five cents from the technofascist ...

    Stone is the simplest and most universal weapon of all. Which is easier? Picked up from the ground, thrown, or hit melee. Available to everyone, right? But there are a few problems.

    First: the stone is usually irregular in shape. Throwing it is definitely difficult, even when using a sling. Yes, and you can’t load a heavy stone rock sling. That is, propellant use is problematic, although described by Homer. Ajax once so successfully got into Hector that he nearly killed him. But this is Ajax. To paraphrase one boxer: not everyone has the strength who can.

    Second: a suitable stone is not everywhere. Go to any field outside the city. Find a lot of cobblestones there? And if not a single one? And if the field is overgrown with grass that hides the stones you need so much? Well in England these are your cobblestones at every turn. Wild people were not tidied up. But this is not wherever it may be.

    However, imagine that you are a brutal Scottish soldier. You don't have a bow (well, like he was, but ... "Give me a button accordion!" - did not live long). And tomorrow is a fight, you have to throw something. There are a lot of cobblestones on the banks of the river, but their destructive power is not great. What will you do? The simplest solution: take a pound-kilogram pellet, trim it a little and tie it properly to a split stick. In close combat, it is almost useless, but when thrown, due to giving the stone a torque, the weapon turns out to be deadly. At the range of "direct shot" the helmet will not save, and the chain mail is almost useless with a bludgeoning blow. A successful throw can knock the shield out of the opponent's hands. Even if a blow to the shield did not cause much harm to the enemy, he will not be able to return the "present" to you. Either the stone broke, or its attachment to the stick fell apart. And if you have five such hatchets, then it is dangerous to approach you.

    So the stone axes at the Battle of Hastings could well be quoted and there is no contradiction here. Cheap, dangerous, made on the spot, flies about fifty meters. Not every bow beat so far. It is known that the British at Hastings did not have enough shooters, but the Normans managed to organize dense mounted shooting through a stockade, during which the English king was wounded. This is possible only if the enemy archers do not show noticeable resistance.
    1. cth; fyn
      cth; fyn 23 January 2016 10: 11
      +2
      Well, it's not exactly an ax, rather a hammer or a club. They chop it with an ax, and this can only be used for crushing blows, and accuracy is not so important when you throw not into a person, but into action.
      1. Cympak
        Cympak 23 January 2016 10: 51
        +1
        For a "journalist", that is a hammer, that an ax ...
    2. King, just king
      King, just king 23 January 2016 10: 52
      0
      Reply to post "Riv".


      The opinion is interesting, there are no questions, but there are nuances. You threw a grenade in the army? If not, then there are no questions, and if so, how many times would you be able to aim it at 30 meters? Well, 10 times, that's all. Yes, stones can be thrown tied to a stick, but how many stones are thrown into a kilo of weight. And we must not just throw, but hit and hit. That for a near-fighter soldier in the heat of battle, a stone punch is a trifle. And then with this throwing hand you have to wave a 3-5 kilo sword. Swing waving.
      1. Riv
        Riv 23 January 2016 11: 14
        +1
        I threw grenades, you know ... But modern ones are an ovaloid, or a ball. Throwing is easier. And their action is not like that of a stone.

        But you are confusing sour with round. 50 meters is practically the maximum throw distance. Further even Ilya Muromets will not throw it. Such a device will be much more effective if the enemy is ten meters away and the enemy is not alone, but in line. It is more difficult to miss a solid formation and a blow of a stone weighing half a kilo, believe me, will not pass painlessly. And if the stone is also with sharp edges ... I wrote above: "At the range of a direct shot."
      2. kalibr
        kalibr 23 January 2016 11: 38
        +1
        There were no swords in 3-5 kg!
      3. Rakti-kali
        Rakti-kali 23 January 2016 14: 42
        +2
        Quote: King, just king
        3-5 kilo sword

        90% of swords weigh less than 1,5 kilograms.
    3. kalibr
      kalibr 23 January 2016 11: 37
      0
      But there are no images on "embroidery from Bayeux"! Even a flying mace has a copper or bronze tip!
    4. Rivares
      Rivares 23 January 2016 18: 54
      +1
      Quote: Riv
      Five cents from the technofascist ...

      I’ll add another 5 kopecks to the techno-fascist.
      "Cobblestone is the weapon of the proletariat" And go and after 300 years historians will prove that revolutionaries and soldiers fought with stones, and the mosinka was a weapon of the aristocracy!
  7. Cympak
    Cympak 23 January 2016 10: 39
    +1
    Perhaps the so-called "war hammer" was meant?
    Of course, a hammer is easier to make from metal, but in the Middle Ages, metal was very expensive. And if there was an opportunity to replace metal with stone, then obviously it would be done to reduce the cost of weapons. The fighting qualities of the hammer depend little on what material it is made of: metal or hard stone, for example, granite or basalt
  8. King, just king
    King, just king 23 January 2016 10: 41
    +2
    Um, citizens, but in the picture "The Siege of Damietta", at the uncle on the bow of the ship, which is going to the uncle with a bow on the wall nay ... (hit) with an object in his hands. Is it a battle flail, or is it some kind of siege hook? And yet, the plates on the heads of the besiegers and the besieged for 1219 are somehow strange. Who will enlighten?

    And yet, 1219, and slingers are used.

    Yes, the article is a plus. For nefig kamenyuki wave, when you can chop a piece of iron, well, or prick.
  9. Cympak
    Cympak 23 January 2016 10: 49
    0
    Last summer, the historical festival "Times and Epochs" dedicated to the era of the Roman Empire was held in Kolomenskoye Park. At the end of the first day of the festival, a buhurt was held: Romans against barbarians on the "bridge". The barbarians won with a score of 2: 1 precisely due to the use of war hammers. While the wars in the front ranks rested against each other with shields and tried to reach each other with swords, the barbarians in 3 lines beat the Romans on the heads with war hammers on long handles.
  10. King, just king
    King, just king 23 January 2016 10: 58
    0
    Quote: Cympak
    Last summer, the historical festival "Times and Epochs" dedicated to the era of the Roman Empire was held in Kolomenskoye Park. At the end of the first day of the festival, a buhurt was held: Romans against barbarians on the "bridge". The barbarians won with a score of 2: 1 precisely due to the use of war hammers. While the wars in the front ranks rested against each other with shields and tried to reach each other with swords, the barbarians in 3 lines beat the Romans on the heads with war hammers on long handles.


    About the war hammer, so a joke The other day I looked Iron Knight-2, I really love this era. Of course, I spat (it’s about the movie) to impossibility, but there was one shot, the bald one who saw, would understand. Here he had a hammer, he will give a fantasy to the truth, he must come up with such a thing.
    1. Cympak
      Cympak 23 January 2016 11: 20
      0
      In our mini-series "Druzhina" (Russia2 TV channel), the theme of the war hammer is also revealed. There, an experienced warrior Evpatiy owns it, but not for long ...
  11. Free wind
    Free wind 23 January 2016 11: 43
    +1
    gentlemen comrades, a war hammer is not from the forge of a sledgehammer, who waved like that absolutely do not know what it is. hammer throwing weapons, hammer throwing, sport is like that. The most common hammers were from the Vikings. For some reason, the Vikings did not use bows with special honor, well, like to beat a zapadlo from afar, but there were hammers. Yes, and the Viking deities were used by hammers, Odin, who was their cone in Asgard, was armed with a hammer, and magic, he returned to him after the throw.
    1. Riv
      Riv 24 January 2016 06: 42
      +1
      One generally spear quoted. Thor had a hammer.
      1. Chiropractor
        Chiropractor 30 January 2016 10: 26
        0
        and that hammer was nicknamed - Mjolnir
  12. Pig
    Pig 23 January 2016 11: 49
    +2
    "and the Anglo-Saxon lords killed and maimed each other with barbarian stone axes"
    and what? it could be for example RITUAL axes passed from generation to generation ...
    Prokopenko and Chapman are coming for you!
    1. cth; fyn
      cth; fyn 23 January 2016 20: 50
      +2
      You indicate where sarcasm is, and here the audience is like this - former military.
      Sarcasm mod on / and the military do not like pickles, the head does not crawl into the jar / sarcasm mod of
  13. Cympak
    Cympak 23 January 2016 12: 08
    +1
    Quote: Free Wind
    gentlemen comrades, a war hammer is not from the forge of a sledgehammer, who waved like that absolutely do not know what it is. hammer throwing weapons, hammer throwing, sport is like that. The most common hammers were from the Vikings. For some reason, the Vikings did not use bows with special honor, well, like to beat a zapadlo from afar, but there were hammers. Yes, and the Viking deities were used by hammers, Odin, who was their cone in Asgard, was armed with a hammer, and magic, he returned to him after the throw.

    Less need to watch Hollywood. Google and it will open to you ...
    For example, here: https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/War_hammer
    Or is it even better here https://ru.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Battlehammer#
    1. King, just king
      King, just king 23 January 2016 12: 29
      0
      Also a plus for cleverness.
  14. King, just king
    King, just king 23 January 2016 12: 25
    +2
    Quote: Free Wind
    gentlemen comrades, a war hammer is not from the forge of a sledgehammer, who waved like that absolutely do not know what it is. hammer throwing weapons, hammer throwing, sport is like that. The most common hammers were from the Vikings. For some reason, the Vikings did not use bows with special honor, well, like to beat a zapadlo from afar, but there were hammers. Yes, and the Viking deities were used by hammers, Odin, who was their cone in Asgard, was armed with a hammer, and magic, he returned to him after the throw.



    Plusan for cleverness. Although klevets or chasing is also akin to a hammer.
    And as for the Vikings and bows, I thought (for a long time already) that the thing is, in general, in a bowstring. It gets wet in the sea from dampness, it dries up on the shore, go shoot ... And it’s problematic to protect the bowstring in the sea even in tarred cases, the damp will find its way everywhere.
  15. King, just king
    King, just king 23 January 2016 14: 53
    0
    Quote: Riv
    I threw grenades, you know ... But modern ones are an ovaloid, or a ball. Throwing is easier. And their action is not like that of a stone.

    But you are confusing sour with round. 50 meters is practically the maximum throw distance. Further even Ilya Muromets will not throw it. Such a device will be much more effective if the enemy is ten meters away and the enemy is not alone, but in line. It is more difficult to miss a solid formation and a blow of a stone weighing half a kilo, believe me, will not pass painlessly. And if the stone is also with sharp edges ... I wrote above: "At the range of a direct shot."



    Theoretical calculations are always good to write. But tell me, Riv, and you personally will not be weakened by throwing a stone at 10 meters into the ranks of the harsh guys from the Middle Ages, feral from blood and battle? You probably didn’t participate in group fights, and you can’t even imagine a combat distance of 10 meters. I am weighing 98 and age 46 if I get angry and I decide to fight, 10 meters I’ll jump for 2,5 jerks, and believe me - with the bare hands, as our company said, only fools fight. So, I’m cutting it from the heart.
  16. King, just king
    King, just king 23 January 2016 15: 04
    0
    Quote: Rakti-Kali
    Quote: King, just king
    3-5 kilo sword

    90% of swords weigh less than 1,5 kilograms.


    Yes, yes, of course less than 1,5 kg and 2-2,5. Only you and "kalibr" are missing one point, which is omitted in reference books and Wikipedia - R-U-K-O-I-T-b - as a natural weighting agent. Weigh it basically and always the blade, its weight and write.
    1. kalibr
      kalibr 23 January 2016 20: 30
      +2
      Imagine at the Metropolitan Museum of Art in the USA the whole sword is weighed, its length, length of the blade, handle, length and weight of the sheath, with sheath length are indicated. So ... don't! And often European swords were heavier than swords! Read the books of E. Okshotta - this is the most famous specialist in swords. His books have been translated into Russian. Finally, there is a book by Thomas Layble SWORD available to Russians. Publishing house OMEGA, 2011. So I’m not missing anything, I don’t have such a habit and have been reading Wikipedia for a long time just to see ... what she is not writing about! Unmounting the European sword to weigh it is still that stupidity! So no fantasy!
  17. King, just king
    King, just king 23 January 2016 21: 24
    +1
    Quote: kalibr
    Imagine at the Metropolitan Museum of Art in the USA the whole sword is weighed, its length, length of the blade, handle, length and weight of the sheath, with sheath length are indicated. So ... don't! And often European swords were heavier than swords! Read the books of E. Okshotta - this is the most famous specialist in swords. His books have been translated into Russian. Finally, there is a book by Thomas Layble SWORD available to Russians. Publishing house OMEGA, 2011. So I’m not missing anything, I don’t have such a habit and have been reading Wikipedia for a long time just to see ... what she is not writing about! Unmounting the European sword to weigh it is still that stupidity! So no fantasy!


    I will not get involved in an empty argument (from my point of view). I am not a narrow specialist in knives of the Middle Ages, and I will not rest. Weighed in the United States so - the flag in their hands. Most of the blades I have seen in museums WITHOUT a crosshair. About combat swords, yes, I agree.
    You, citizen "kalibr" without missing anything, missed the most important thing - the essence of the conversation. The essence of the conversation is not about swords as such, but about stone weapons, and in particular about throwing stones at the enemy. And I wrote that after throwing kilogram kamenyuk meters at least 20 meters, try to wave your sword later ... And there will be a sword of 1,5-2,5 kg, or 3-5-7 kg (I hope you know about two-handed and other heavy pieces of iron) are not important anymore.

    Yes, about Roni Sr. Yeah, as a child I read, two years ago, nostalgic identity. The uncle had a rich imagination. Maybe not a fantasy, he said that there were several kinds of people.
    But if you have not forgotten, then comrade Nao, how to say this, was Ilishche Muromchish, and the medieval people were small.




    1. kalibr
      kalibr 23 January 2016 22: 17
      0
      I do not argue with you either, and yes, of course, that 1,5 kg, which is more for throwing kamenyuk, does not play a special role. But again, about the medieval folk is too small ... Where is it from? The French knights were about the same height as us, but with narrower ankles. This has been proven. D. Nicolas has this in his book "The French Army of the Hundred Years War", but in fact, in the English-language historiography, no one disputes this. There is armor 187 cm, 180 cm - that is, 6 feet tall. By the way, the material for the armor is already ready. It will be posted here in a week. That is, there were people of different heights. But just the skeletons of primitive people have an average height of 150-160. Although again yes, there were different "peoples", as now
      1. King, just king
        King, just king 23 January 2016 22: 42
        0
        The era of the Middle Ages is my beloved, I will see your material with great interest, since you are doing this professionally.
        About growth. Roughly not considered, the average temperature in the hospital was lower. First there was nothing to eat, where to grow? In many of the following - diseases-genetics, etc. If you start, then I, too, can dig in my archives and dig up. But it’s enough to go to any decent wax museum, and look at those latches, and the Enlightenment-New Age, those are giants.
        In the Armory, it’s enough to look at the ceremonial attire and shoes of the emperors - even shrink-utruska - all the same small. Knightly armor - in the Arms-Hermitage-Artmuseum-Berlin, etc. are also VERY not giants, and not even tall. This is also evidenced by horse equipment.
        Naturally there were giants, but - as an exception.

        So I'm telling you about Nao and I’m joking. With the growth of 150, heap up a tiger, which is there for every little thing ...
        1. kalibr
          kalibr 24 January 2016 11: 54
          0
          In general, there were all sorts!
  18. Warrior2015
    Warrior2015 16 February 2016 00: 39
    0
    Quote: Sveles
    But during his lifetime and in the 19th century Engels was considered a historian specializing in the history of wars, and such a blunder, shepherds appeared out of nowhere and announced that the "translation" was wrong.

    I'll tell you a little secret - during his lifetime, Comrade Engels was not considered a PROFESSIONAL MILITARY HISTORIAN, he was a journalist, but "in life" he was a professional FACTORY, from where he actually had grandmothers for life, for Marx and his clan, and for communist activities ( a kind of Savva Mamontov of German bottling).

    Quote: Looking Petrovich
    2. In the second picture, this is a strange weapon in running Anglo-Saxons pursued by the Norman knights.

    It has already been correctly said that in some cases it is a "baton of a military commander", and in others it is a club or a throwing club, no stone axes.
  19. Bashibuzuk
    Bashibuzuk 14 November 2016 10: 51
    0
    Here you can immediately see a strong theorist. It doesn’t matter whether he is a dreamer or not.
    Why tie stones to sticks? Then, dear, then.
    It is immediately obvious that in childhood this very theoretician never threw either stones or sticks and does not know that a stick with a tied stone flies much further and flies much more precisely due to the aerodynamics of the stick.
    All these delights ... Christmas trees ... but take "... a stone laid on a tree ..." instead of digging in the dust of centuries. Yes, try to throw, hit, what else to do. And all questions will be removed.
    Bredyatina. Abstruse. The language does not turn to call it scientific research. Rather, perverted thinking. In an ivory tower. "There can be no stones in the sky ..." ... on sticks too.
    That one pervert, that the other - called Engels.