Military Review

Swords of Rorby - curved swords from the Bronze Age

57
In the materials published by VO, quite a lot of attention was removed. stories bronze weaponsand it is not by chance. Indeed, in the history of mankind there was a whole bronze age, and it was the era of the first, in fact, globalization in the history of mankind, when people did not have writing yet, but ... but they traded with each other through great distances, which means they knew about each other . In Moldova, Borodino hoard found jade from the Sayan mountains, although the distance between these points on the map is enormous. And tin is necessary for smelting bronze? Its deposits are quite rare, which means they were traded for many, many kilometers from the place of its production. Not without reason, the earliest bronzes contain arsenic and silver as ligatures. Well, not enough tin, and everything went hand in hand; However, there was one of the readers who declared that bronze is an alloy of copper with ... aluminum (!), But we will leave such a bold statement on the conscience of its author (and Google to help him!), And pay attention to something else, namely interesting evolution of the bronze blade.


Swords of Rorby - curved swords from the Bronze Age

Here they are - the unique swords of Rorby.

I have already written here that the first swords in Europe were long “foils” for fencing with blades without handles. Both knives and daggers were made in the same way: only the blade itself was cast, which expanded in the rear, where there were holes for rivets: 2, 3, 4, 5, etc. In the wooden handle was made propyl, into which the blade was inserted and then fastened with rivets.


Bronze knife from the era of early bronze. Apparently, valuable bronze was saved in this way, since archeologists found a lot of treasures with defective castings, scrap and individual pieces of metal - that is, they hid everything that had at least some value.

Then the metal became more. But the inertia of people's thinking was such that daggers, for example, continued to cast entirely in the form of old samples with separate wooden handles. Moreover, they also reproduced the expansion of the back part of the blade, which was for the most part completely unnecessary, and the rivets were unnecessary, all the more, since now they no longer held anything together and only performed a decorative function.


Bronze swords and daggers are very much, which indicates the wide distribution of such products. And the showcase at the National Museum of Denmark is the best confirmation of this.


However, not only swords and daggers were the weapons of the people of the Bronze Age who lived at that time in Denmark. See how many bronze axes are displayed in this window!

However, there were also transitional patterns. The handle, the blade alone were cast in them separately, and then all this was joined together by rivets. But such daggers and swords were characteristic of the early Bronze Age. People quickly realized that why rivet, when you can cast. But, apparently, by virtue of tradition, they could not abandon the rivets at the junction of the blade with the handle.


A very beautiful dagger with a type-setting handle (and this is where the tradition of the type-setting handles of the prisoners of knives comes from ?!) and the blade riveted to it.


Amazingly beautiful and perfect one-piece bronze dagger from one private collection. Pay attention to how simple and at the same time it is aesthetic. There is nothing superfluous in it, and at the same time thin lines on the blade, massive rivets and a very simple handle give the impression of absolute completion. To him, as they say, there is nothing to add and nothing to subtract from it. Well, its form is also traditional and serves as the best proof of the inertia of human consciousness.

Of course, archaeologists are greatly helped by the fact that the people of the Bronze Age were pagans and buried their dead with rich posthumous gifts. This is where the bronze was not spared. However, they find valuable products of ancient gunsmiths not only in the graves ...


In the swamps of Denmark, not only bronze daggers are found, but also stone ones, that is, there was a stone age in the same way as in other places, but then it was replaced by the “age of metals”.

It was the case that in 1952, the Dane Thorvald Nielsen dug a dredging ditch in a small swamp in the town of Rorby in the western part of Zeeland. And it was there that he found the ornamented curved sword of bronze, which was stuck in the turf. The sword clearly belonged to the beginning of the Bronze Age, around 1600 BC, and was the first such discovery in Denmark. By the way, notice how similar both he and the dagger in the above handle photo are similar, which means that this form of the top was widespread. The sword was transferred to the National Museum in Copenhagen as an exhibit, but the history of the curved sword did not end there. In the 1957 year, when another Dane named Torvald Jensen was digging potatoes around the same place, he found another such sword. The second curve of the sword was decorated as the first, but it also had an image of the ship. This turned out to be the most ancient image of a ship in Denmark!

For an archaeologist, the gift of fate is not an excavated ancient mound. As a rule, this is someone's burial, and, usually, the burial is of the Bronze Age. And here they are very lucky with Denmark. About 86000 prehistoric mounds have been discovered on its territory, of which around 20000, according to experts, belong to the Bronze Age. Well, and they are found everywhere in the territory of modern Denmark, which suggests that it was densely populated in the past.

But besides the mounds in Denmark there are also swamps. And now they have become a real treasure trove for archaeologists. And what only they do not find, for example, among the most interesting "swamp finds" are ... bronze shields, which were made in central Europe in the period 1100 - 700. BC. Such bronze shields were known from Italy in the south to Sweden in the north, from Spain and Ireland in the west to Hungary in the east. It can be considered proven that the shields of such a thin metal could not have a military purpose. But for ritual purposes - as you like. Such shields were considered solar symbols and were closely associated with the worship of the gods and the forces of nature. In the Scandinavian rock carvings, pictures of round shields can be seen in connection with ritual dances, so their cult purpose is certain. But how were they found? This happened back in 1920, when two workers came to the editor of the local newspaper Jensen and brought two bronze shields, which they found in the Zörup Moze swamp during the development of the peat bog. The largest shield was badly damaged by a shovel. The finding was immediately reported to the National Museum, which began excavations. Workers reported that the shields were in the swamp vertically at a short distance from each other. Archaeologists have found this place, but there was nothing else there.

In the development of peat in a small swamp in Svenstrup in Himmerland in July 1948, Christian Jorgensen made another fantastic discovery. It was a beautiful bronze shield of the late Bronze Age. He handed the shield to the museum, and received a good reward for it - enough money to pay for a new roof for his farm.

Experts immediately noticed that these shields were made of a very thin bronze sheet. Experiments with copies of these shields have shown that they are completely useless in battle. Their thickness allows you to pierce the metal anywhere, and if you strike the shield with the same bronze sword, it will fall apart almost in half. This suggests that these shields were used exclusively for ritual purposes, but that at the same time people were still trying to save bronze. After all, a thicker bronze sheet requires less work than a thin one.


Here it is, this exquisite buckle.


And this is a Danish banknote on which the Danes placed its image and, it should be noted that many Danish banknotes used to be decorated with images of archaeological finds from the Stone and Bronze Age in Denmark!

It should be noted that the ancient Danes (or how they called themselves at that time?) Were masters of foundry. For example, a plate for a belt dated to 1400 BC, covered with elegant spiral patterns, is exhibited at the National Museum of Copenhagen. Found it back in 1879 year, again in the peat bog in North Zealand. Moreover, the worker who found it, handed over his find to the owner, and the latter, not knowing her and the other “coppers” of the real price, threw into the garbage heap, where they were noticed by a policeman who accidentally glanced at him. So, the manufacturing technology of such a plate was very original: a spiral of gold wire was inserted into a wax model, according to which the clay form was made. Then it warmed up, wax flowed out and molten bronze poured into it. Everything seems to be simple. But this plate was very thin, so real skill was required to alloy gold with bronze in such a way.


"Horned" helmet from Viksa.

And then in Weeks in Zealand, one of the workers dug two almost identical horned helmets made of bronze, made using the “lost form” method. They were decorated with umbrons, eyes, beaks and were made at the beginning of the first millennium BC. And again, it could not be helmets for combat. They were used in religious ceremonies, and then simply drowned in a swamp as a sacrifice to unknown deities. Interestingly, one of the helmets was placed on a preserved wooden tray, which, by the way, is not surprising, since peat has excellent preservative properties.


Mummies of women from Scrodstrupf. As you can see, thanks to the peat, they are well preserved.


Both wyx helmets and related finds.

True, it is not entirely clear where these “helmets from Viksa” were made. Perhaps on the spot, where they were found, and perhaps it was in Central Europe or Northern Germany. In any case, numerous rock carvings of people wearing horned helmets, especially from western Sweden, suggest that the cult of the “horned man” was very popular here. Well, the “life path” of the objects of this cult was ended again ... in the swamp!

Lurs were also thrown there - huge bronze-cast pipes in the form of ox horns (c. 1000 BC), which in the same Denmark found 39 pieces. And they are found only in the swamps! That is, they were first made, spending valuable bronze, then they were trumpeted for some time, and then, together with shields, helmets and fine buckles for belts, were thrown into the swamp, and necessarily with a pair.


"Lure from Brudevalte". And this is how the “pipe” looked, and it was ... one-piece!


But their whole showcase!


Here all detailing of one of these swords is well visible. This is clearly a ritual object, and quite massive. And here is the question - what did he depict? After all, this is clearly a sword, but it is also obvious that such swords cannot be fought. Then why was he given exactly this form?

But back to the swords of Rorby. Their form is unique in that ... they were originally made not combat. After all, can hardly be considered a combat sword, devoid of a point and without a sharpened blade. However, they did not save bronze, unlike shields. That is, the mercy of the ancestors or the “marsh gods” was more important for the ancient inhabitants of Denmark than the price of metal, or they had it in abundance!


Former copper mine in Cyprus. Copper was mined here, and it was from here that all Europe was supplied with this metal. But tin was mined in the British Isles, which the ancients called Tin. And maybe that is why in Denmark, which lay on the path of the ancient metal trade routes, there was just so much bronze that its products were not only laid into the graves of the dead, but also thrown into the marshes of the gods?
Author:
57 comments
Information
Dear reader, to leave comments on the publication, you must sign in.
  1. Igor39
    Igor39 23 May 2016 07: 30
    +4
    Aluminum bronze is more resistant to oxidation, Soviet coins from 1 to 5 kopecks are made of it, its corrosion resistance makes it possible to make ship screws and shafts from it. Bronze is an alloy of copper with other metals. Thank you for an interesting article.
    1. Pavel Ordynsky
      Pavel Ordynsky 23 May 2016 10: 40
      +4
      But tin was mined in the British Isles, which the ancients called Tin.


      generally in Britain there are deposits of cassiterite SNO2 and in sulfide form i.e. such ores contain sulfur and not only sulfur, but also many other impurities which, if not disposed of, will result in not tin, but some dirty material not suitable for further consumption. To obtain Anglite tin-containing concentrate, it is necessary to carry out many ore dressing operations ,
      -splitting up
      -flotation
      -annealing
      Etching with hydrochloric and nitric acids to remove impurities

      But the most important thing is that the melting temperature of the casseterite mineral reaches 1500С, otherwise it will not be metal again, but a misunderstanding, but the burning temperature of charcoal, the main fuel of ancient metallurgists, will raise the question of how the ancients received tin if the temperature was not enough swimming trunks?
      Tin smelting equipment was being developed slowly. It was only at the beginning of the 1300th century, for the first time in England, that shaft furnaces were replaced by reflective furnaces with grate-fired furnaces. For their heating used pulverized coal, and later fuel oil. Reflective furnaces had many advantages over. mine, so they began to quickly displace them. However, in reflective furnaces it was not possible to raise the temperature of ore heating during smelting above 1350–1400 degrees. To completely remove tin from the slag, you have to add a lot of lime, which raises the melting point to 1500-XNUMX degrees.

      More details at ForexAW.com: http://forexaw.com/TERMs/Raw_materials/Industrial_metals/l86_%D0%9E%D0%BB%D0%BE%
      D0%B2%D0%BE_Tin_%D1%8D%D1%82%D0%BE

      The technology for producing tin is complex, industrial tin production was mastered only in the 19th century, and before that, only loose tin was used, which is very small in the world, and in England there is none. That is why the receipt of bronze to provide thousands of armies of antiquity is not only doubtful, but does not have a real basis.
      1. kalibr
        23 May 2016 11: 02
        +2
        If you saw Corinthian helmets in the storerooms of the Athens Museum of Archeology and the Archaeological Museum in Nicosia, you would not say so. They are there from floor to ceiling of varying preservation. And the periods of history are read from them as from a book. So about the "real basis" is not necessary.
        1. Pavel Ordynsky
          Pavel Ordynsky 23 May 2016 11: 42
          -1
          Quote: kalibr
          If you saw Corinthian helmets in the storerooms of the Athens Museum of Archeology and the Archaeological Museum in Nicosia, you would not say that.


          you probably know that a traditional chronology based on modern dating techniques is justifiably questioned, so you need to deal with each find objectively. For example, by the method of chemical analysis of microchemical inclusions giving a place of origin of metals. Therefore, it would be correct not only to indicate the find, but also to provide convincing evidence that the tin is of British origin.
          1. kalibr
            23 May 2016 13: 21
            +3
            Quote: Pavel Ordynsky
            in doubt

            Who is exposed to? From this moment in more detail. Neither in the English studies of this period, nor in those translated from French into English, have I encountered anything like this. The article does not mean that the tin is British. And by chemical analysis, this is difficult to establish. But the British Isles really did.
            1. Pavel Ordynsky
              Pavel Ordynsky 23 May 2016 14: 14
              -3
              Quote: kalibr
              Who is exposed to? From this moment in more detail. Neither in English studies of this period, nor in translations from French into English, have I encountered anything like this


              there are such Russian scholars Fomenko and Nosovsky, they built historical events according to their mathematical calculations.
              There are foreign scholars and historians such as Isak Newton, who questioned the long Scaligerian chronology, the encyclopedic scientist Nikolai Morozov. Of modern scholars who doubt TI, this is the German Hugo Tapperer, Evgeny Gabovich. The historian Svetlana Zharnikova traced a clear connection between Sanskrit and the Russian language, she really did not question the Scaligerian chronology, but clearly noted that the Russian toponyms and places mentioned in Mahab strongly coincide, but this brings her works closer to the work on HX.
              There is a large forum of HX, as well as the Council, where many different facts about the fallacy of TI are laid out.

              Quote: kalibr
              And by chemical analysis it’s difficult to establish


              there are special instruments that allow you to determine the mass content of impurities in samples, for example, MetExpert X-ray fluorescence analyzer
              http://www.geo-ndt.ru/pribor-6855-rentgenoflyorescentnii-analizator-metekspert.h

              tm, there are other methods, there would be a desire to do this.
              1. kalibr
                23 May 2016 15: 07
                +9
                You are probably new to VO? Here ALL THIS has long been discussed. Including in the comments to my articles. Go to your profile and take a look. Out of there there are more than 300, among them you will find both about dating and about doubts, a lot of things. I will briefly answer this way: academic science does not recognize either Fomenko, or Nosovsky, or any other comrades you named. And they didn’t prove a thing, which they also wrote here so many times that it sickened me. There are even more interesting, by the way, research of the deniers about "women of reptilian section", there it is even cooler than that of Fomenko. So, alas, science does not accept all this, neither ours, nor English. As for the research of metals, all of them were done long ago. There was such a scientist E.N. Chernykh, Head of the Laboratory of Spectral Analysis of the RAS USSR. He has a number of interesting monographs, where all this is painted in great detail. There is a magazine
                ARCHAEOLOGY OF THE RUSSIAN FEDERATION, where there were also a lot of the most modern articles on the study of ancient metals and alloys. Finally, there is the 20-languid HISTORY of the USSR ARCHEOLOGY ... So let's leave the fantasies to those who earn on human ignorance. And here do not tell people! Fomenkovists have their own places here, but they are not favored here. Do not replenish their ranks. There are other sites where you will be happy to understand. There, women of the reptiloid section are also found, by the way.
                1. Pavel Ordynsky
                  Pavel Ordynsky 23 May 2016 18: 51
                  -3
                  Quote: kalibr
                  I will answer briefly this way: academic science does not recognize either Fomenko, Nosovsky, or any other comrades named by you.


                  and Isaac Newton does not recognize? Say is silent.
                  Svetlana Zharnikova, for example, Doctor of Historical Sciences, Gabovich was a professor of mathematics in the USSR, then in Germany, not a single specialist can object to the mathematical calculations of the F-N, and whoever criticizes their work, then such articles are reviewed and refuted, everything is quite correct here. And the fact that modern historians cannot, in principle, consider mathematical constructions due to the lack of mathematical education, this is precisely the conclusion that suggests itself when they say that "academic science does not recognize."
                  Quote: kalibr
                  There are even more interesting, by the way, research of the deniers about "women of reptilian section", there it is even cooler than that of Fomenko.


                  is that what you like
                  Quote: kalibr
                  As for metal research, all of them have long been made. There was such a scientist E.N. Chernykh, head of the spectral analysis laboratory of the USSR Academy of Sciences. He has a number of interesting monographs, where all this is painted in great detail. There is a magazine
                  ARCHEOLOGY OF THE RUSSIAN FEDERATION, where there were also many most modern articles on the study of ancient metals and alloys. Finally, there is a 20-volume HISTORY of the USSR ARCHEOLOGY ..

                  well, yes, it’s all there, but not here



                  Quote: kalibr
                  So let's leave the fantasies to those who earn on human ignorance. And here do not tell people! Fomenkovists have their own places here, but they are not favored here. Do not replenish their ranks. There are other sites where you will be happy to understand. There, women of the reptiloid section are also found, by the way.

                  F-N's calculations are more like science than endless articles about "terribly ancient antiquity", because let's say the calculations of horoscopes in Egypt and Italy says that the TI chronology is badly mistaken and for some reason the calculations are not refuted by anyone.

                  Quote: kalibr
                  There, women of the reptiloid section are also found, by the way.

                  why repeat nonsense twice?
                  1. kalibr
                    24 May 2016 06: 13
                    0
                    Quote: Pavel Ordynsky
                    There, women of the reptiloid section are also found, by the way.
                    why repeat nonsense twice?

                    You can repeat nonsense, but I do not? Strange logic!
              2. Poplar505
                Poplar505 23 May 2016 18: 50
                0
                Citizen kalibr drives all "dissidents" into a "stall". So, you, Pavel, don't worry too much. Some will ascribe to you something that you did not even know. (Why? I also destroyed the fortress !?) I support you and this site is by no means only for representatives of the traditional Scaligerian (if it was wrong) chronology.
                1. Pavel Ordynsky
                  Pavel Ordynsky 23 May 2016 19: 03
                  -2
                  Quote: Poplar505
                  I support you and this site is by no means only for representatives of the traditional Scaligerian (be it wrong) chronology.


                  FN with their research confirmed the greatness of Russian history and this is clearly seen from the geography of our country, our country is huge, but it was even larger, but the "great" Rome and Hellas, for some reason, did not come out in size. Especially Greece, a country that was formed only in the 19th century, which still does not have its own industry, or outstanding modern culture, or science, and does not even have related countries, where they spoke Greek, how could such a country have an outstanding past? Great commanders, politicians and culture, especially culture, modern culture of Greece is rather an anti-culture. Therefore, the picture of the world drawn by FN is more integral and less contradictory than TI.
                  1. kalibr
                    23 May 2016 20: 06
                    +1
                    Well, the Russians also built the pyramids, but they discovered America as well. So yes, their picture delights non-specialists who, having read a couple of books, think that they know everything. This is a sad fallacy actually. I don’t know your education and specialty, but imagine what suits you, well, who ... well, let’s say a certified slaughter cattle (there are some!) And begin to teach you in your profession, then let’s say 30 years, how do you do it? How would you react to this?
                    As for Rome, everything has already happened here, and someone even started up a "catch phrase" - "now we will talk about who and why forged Trajan's column."
                2. kalibr
                  23 May 2016 20: 19
                  +2
                  In the stall, Sergei, I am not driving you. Usually people who know little, but on this knowledge build "solid" statements into a "stall" drive themselves. To judge a subject deeply requires systematic knowledge, many years of work on their accumulation and systematization, comparison of works of different researchers. The non-specialist simply has no time to do this.
                  Of course, you can have your own opinion, and even be proud of it. I generally tell my students that even a dirty drunkard in a puddle, screaming obscene ditties, is "our man" because he can elect and be elected. And we smile like that too, this is politeness, but this does not mean that we respect such people.
      2. Fat
        Fat 23 May 2016 23: 26
        0
        Quote: Pavel Ordynsky
        The technology for producing tin is complex, industrial tin production was mastered only in the 19th century, and before that, only loose tin was used, which is very small in the world, and in England there is none. That is why the receipt of bronze to provide thousands of armies of antiquity is not only doubtful, but does not have a real basis.

        And where did you actually get that to get tin bronze you need metal tin and metal copper? With a joint restoration of the mixture, say malachite and cassiterite, it’s quite possible to get a bronze bead at a temperature of 600-700 C
        1. Pavel Ordynsky
          Pavel Ordynsky 24 May 2016 07: 35
          0
          Quote: Thick
          Quote: Pavel Ordynsky
          The technology for producing tin is complex, industrial tin production was mastered only in the 19th century, and before that, only loose tin was used, which is very small in the world, and in England there is none. That is why the receipt of bronze to provide thousands of armies of antiquity is not only doubtful, but does not have a real basis.

          And where did you actually get that to get tin bronze you need metal tin and metal copper? With a joint restoration of the mixture, say malachite and cassiterite, it’s quite possible to get a bronze bead at a temperature of 600-700 C


          the kinglet can and will turn out on bronze statuettes, but here on bells and on weapons, such material will definitely not be suitable.
          1. Fat
            Fat 24 May 2016 09: 48
            +1
            Quote: Pavel Ordynsky
            the kinglet can and will turn out on bronze statuettes, but here on bells and on weapons, such material will definitely not be suitable.

            It is enough to simply anneal such a material with subsequent rapid cooling. Bronze is homogenized and will become a very decent weapon material with a tin content of up to 12-15%. give yourself the trouble of looking at the state diagram of the Cu-Sn system.
            http://libmetal.ru/bronze/olovobronze.htm
            1. Pavel Ordynsky
              Pavel Ordynsky 24 May 2016 15: 21
              -1
              Quote: Thick
              What material is enough to anneal with subsequent rapid cooling. Bronze is homogenized and will become a very decent weapon material with a tin content of up to 12-15%. give yourself the trouble of looking at the state diagram of the Cu-Sn system.


              your table does not say anything about how your "kinglet" is made, but only about annealing for plasticity of the material.
              A material such as an alloy of copper and tin carried out by ores together with each other most likely gives a low yield of both metals from ores.
              In general, if you know something about "joint recovery", then let's link.
            2. Chiropractor
              Chiropractor 24 May 2016 15: 53
              0
              and what are you going to forge? and what?
              the anvil must be stronger than the king ...
              just don’t need about meteorite iron - don’t rush into every meteorite village ...

              there is a problem with the presence of anvils older than the 18th century ...
      3. Molot1979
        Molot1979 18 October 2016 09: 56
        0
        It is NOW not. Judging by archeology, all sources of loose tin were depleted long before Christ.
    2. RPG_
      RPG_ 24 May 2016 11: 23
      0
      They learned to extract aluminum almost 4 thousand years after copper and bronze.
    3. Skifotavr
      Skifotavr 28 May 2016 12: 09
      0
      Quote: Igor39
      Aluminum bronze is more resistant to oxidation, Soviet coins from 1 to 5 kopecks are made of it

      The old sample (except for the very early ones that were made of copper) - yes. And from the more familiar to most 1961 sample, brass was used with a small addition of aluminum to improve ductility.
  2. igordok
    igordok 23 May 2016 07: 49
    +4
    A "metal shield" is most likely a frame of a wooden shield. Space armor type.
  3. The comment was deleted.
  4. Bashibuzuk
    Bashibuzuk 23 May 2016 10: 42
    +4
    Well, it would be interesting to know the total found number of such swords, blunt and with curved points.
    First of all, it asks for the mind - the symbolic end of the war.
    Like, buried tomahawk among the Indians.
    Secondly, a ritual award sword to a warrior who has finished his career. Or incapable of further career and battle. A type of widely publicized wooden sword for a gladiator who gained freedom.
    And the third is the need to demonstrate to someone (to know - to whom?) Our peaceful intentions, they say, we are peaceful people. But our armored train ... only sharpen and straighten in the forge.
    Who could demonstrate this?
    ...
    In general, the material is very interesting.
    Where, besides Denmark, was similar, how widespread?
    1. kalibr
      23 May 2016 11: 04
      +2
      The most interesting thing is ANYWHERE! Full of bronze swords, and all sorts of. But such, moreover, only 2 found them only in Denmark. Why the Danes are so proud of them. They weigh wow ... but to no avail. That is, the thing is useless, but significant!
      1. Bashibuzuk
        Bashibuzuk 23 May 2016 11: 50
        +3
        That, like bae, me, ... "a historian-dropout" .... A dilettante, so to speak ... leads to the idea - clearly a ritual hack.
        Decorated not much; that these are two points of everything - it means not for crowds and public ceremonies.
        But the quantity - does not drive to mass awards.
        More like a sacred subject. Which again leads to the "buried tomahawk".
        ...
        Damn, we must go to Denmark. And then the daughters there, as at home, I only dragged through the straits.
        You look, picking the ground, too, which I find.
        Achilles shield, for example.
        Or a tooth ... Harald Sinezuby.
        1. kalibr
          23 May 2016 13: 23
          +2
          Yeah ... I would definitely go to your place. Historically, there are a lot of interesting things there and they skillfully preserve and skillfully show it.
      2. Chiropractor
        Chiropractor 24 May 2016 15: 58
        0
        Quote: kalibr
        That is, the thing is useless, but significant!


        The fact that you cannot come up with things for practical use means that it is useless only for you.

        Suddenly it's some kind of skates ?! And just a couple!
        Spring has come - the skater is drowned.
        What is not the version?

        Or a lightning rod ...
      3. Molot1979
        Molot1979 18 October 2016 10: 05
        0
        Why nowhere? Almost identical in shape to Middle Eastern and Egyptian copies. Moreover, in one archaeological publication I saw a STONE sword of a similar shape and quite "sword" size.
  5. Pitot
    Pitot 23 May 2016 15: 19
    -2
    Yes, I wrote that bronze is an alloy of copper and aluminum. I explained that I was sealed up. So will you tease? Is it sinless itself? And I’ll repeat my thought - when did the bronze appear? And all these sentimental stories about bronze weapons in the time of BC - fairy tales. Remodelers. Artificial story. Like the manufacture of many hard rock sculptures (dolomite), they also made stone and copper tools. From the same series. Handsomely. I do not argue. But we do not all know what weapons were used in the 1st world. But before BC, we all know. Cool. But the article is interesting.
    And further. If the alloy of copper is not with tin, it is no longer bronze. And arsenic was not instead of tin or as an addition. Think why? Cleaning was not up to standard. Not the same technology of the 19th century. And all these movements of the type could not get tin (and it was mined in only two places in the 19th century) excuses to confirm the remake and fake history. This is my opinion. I do not impose, but express. By the way, on the weapon there are no traces of participation in hostilities. Chips, dents, etc. Naturally - from the forge immediately to the museum. And on the armor too. So smooth, even. On a head and a body did not receive?
    1. kalibr
      23 May 2016 15: 45
      +4
      You know, first of all, here it is somehow not customary to "poke", it is not very polite. Secondly, we bring to your attention the monograph by E.N. Ferrous METAL - MAN - TIME. M. Science 1972. Then maybe our science was lame in something, for example, there was every scientific communism there, but as for what you can "touch" we were very responsible about everything ... And this comrade was the head of the laboratory of spectral analysis of the Russian Academy of Sciences, and scientists not only from the USSR but also from abroad resorted to its services in order to independently verify the results. By the way, about weapons 1 world. the war is known to EVERYTHING. As for chips and signs of wear ... Who told you that they are not there? And chips, and dents and ruptures of the shanks of swords and daggers and notches. The swords presented in the article do not have them, yes. But this is clearly not a military weapon. So the time of "cavalry assaults" in science has now passed. In order to assert something, you have to read a lot, and without the "popular literature" stamp. Then no one will tease you.
    2. Svidetel 45
      Svidetel 45 25 May 2016 22: 14
      +1
      This is why copper alloy with tin is not bronze. As far as I remember from metal science, bronze is an alloy of copper with any other metal, including aluminum.
  6. Torins
    Torins 23 May 2016 21: 16
    0
    Quote: Pavel Ordynsky
    But tin was mined in the British Isles, which the ancients called Tin.


    generally in Britain there are deposits of cassiterite SNO2 and in sulfide form i.e. such ores contain sulfur and not only sulfur, but also many other impurities which, if not disposed of, will result in not tin, but some dirty material not suitable for further consumption. To obtain Anglite tin-containing concentrate, it is necessary to carry out many ore dressing operations ,
    -splitting up
    -flotation
    -annealing
    Etching with hydrochloric and nitric acids to remove impurities

    But the most important thing is that the melting temperature of the casseterite mineral reaches 1500С, otherwise it will not be metal again, but a misunderstanding, but the burning temperature of charcoal, the main fuel of ancient metallurgists, will raise the question of how the ancients received tin if the temperature was not enough swimming trunks?
    Tin smelting equipment was being developed slowly. It was only at the beginning of the 1300th century, for the first time in England, that shaft furnaces were replaced by reflective furnaces with grate-fired furnaces. For their heating used pulverized coal, and later fuel oil. Reflective furnaces had many advantages over. mine, so they began to quickly displace them. However, in reflective furnaces it was not possible to raise the temperature of ore heating during smelting above 1350–1400 degrees. To completely remove tin from the slag, you have to add a lot of lime, which raises the melting point to 1500-XNUMX degrees.

    More details at ForexAW.com: http://forexaw.com/TERMs/Raw_materials/Industrial_metals/l86_%D0%9E%D0%BB%D0%BE%

    D0%B2%D0%BE_Tin_%D1%8D%D1%82%D0%BE

    The technology for producing tin is complex, industrial tin production was mastered only in the 19th century, and before that, only loose tin was used, which is very small in the world, and in England there is none. That is why the receipt of bronze to provide thousands of armies of antiquity is not only doubtful, but does not have a real basis.

    Why then did the Romans call the British Isles tin if, according to your statement, they could not find tin there? And where then was tin taken for the entire Bronze Age? Or do you want to say that all the finds were made by modern people and planted by archaeologists? Something I do not understand your logic ...
    1. Pavel Ordynsky
      Pavel Ordynsky 23 May 2016 22: 15
      -2
      Quote: Torins
      Why then did the Romans call the British Isles tin if, according to your statement, they could not find tin there? And where then was tin taken for the entire Bronze Age? Or do you want to say that all the finds were made by modern people and planted by archaeologists? Something I do not understand your logic ...


      logic simple Roman Empire, ancient Greece are historical phantoms. Bronze is harder to produce than iron, at least not easier. It is easier to make bronze if the tin is loose, but there are few such deposits and of course almost all of them have been selected, as far as Britain is concerned, then by history there was no loose tin. Therefore, in those ancient times, bronze was very expensive. Therefore, the historical sequence of the eyelids is copper, then the age of the Bronze Age, then the age of the Iron Age, this sequence is incorrect.
      Well, as for the bronze finds, the temporal reference is carried out in line with the traditional historical paradigm, which is being questioned.
      Quote: Torins
      Or do you want to say that all the finds were made by modern people and planted by archaeologists?


      the number of historical fakes is over the top, so in many museums weapons look like they weren’t used. By the way, there is a lot of any bronze not tin-containing, in this case the weapon will be either fragile or soft-not hard, in this case the weapon can be gift or ritual for burial, it is found in excavations.
      1. kalibr
        23 May 2016 22: 25
        +1
        Quote: Pavel Ordynsky
        the number of historical fakes is over the top, so in many museums weapons look like they weren’t used. By the way, there is a lot of any bronze not tin-containing, in this case the weapon will be either fragile or soft-not hard, in this case the weapon can be gift or ritual for burial, it (WHO SAYS TO YOU? Where do you get such rubbish from? Links, preferably) and found in the excavations

        That is, entire factories worked to produce tons of these fakes, and then they were transported to excavations and museums? Or did rare metal (and expensive) go to ritual things? You know this is not new. This was written by the American metallurgical scientist G. Hoffmann, and then in the 1934 year his book was transferred to the USSR, but his ideas were rejected by science. Well, and for amateurs, of course, at least ssi in their eyes all the dew from the night.
        1. Pavel Ordynsky
          Pavel Ordynsky 23 May 2016 22: 35
          -1
          Quote: kalibr
          That is, entire factories worked to produce tons of these fakes, and then they were transported to excavations and museums?


          Of course, making "semi-antique" artifacts is always a profitable business, there is no doubt about it. And if you doubt that there are scammers in the world, then imagine there are many, for example, Andrei Schliemann or Howard Carter.

          Quote: kalibr
          This was written by the American metallurgical scientist G. Hoffmann, and then in 1934 his book was transferred to the USSR, but his ideas were rejected by science.


          Well, Hoffmann is right to part with expensive weapons probably burdensome for the human communities of that time, so putting a beautiful saber next to the deceased in the composition of the material which did not put precious tin, but only arsenic will probably look like the logical act of the ancients.
          1. kalibr
            24 May 2016 06: 09
            0
            Quote: Pavel Ordynsky
            of course, making "semi-antique" artifacts is always a profitable business

            Manufacturing and PRODUCTION are things of a different order - CONSIDER - there are TOO MANY banal products from PLANTS. Only in Chatal Huyuk, the thickness of the cultural layer is 19 meters! And all the words are filled with finds. This is how much it was necessary to make from and dig up the earth. And for what? In general, Pavel, I understood everything - the historian is like a bullet out of shit and your knowledge in this area is 0. Enjoy your discoveries further. Yes, Carter, the golden coffin of Tutankhamun, where did you cast it and why? For the Egyptians to look at him? He is not in England and the income from him ... the British do not receive! And where is the "Treasure of Priam" by Heinrich Schliemann, about which, by the way, everything is on the website of the Pushkin Museum! And arsenous bronzes are older than pewter ones. I advised you to book Cherny - he has 3. Read at least one, and then try to argue. Smart people do this, stupid people differently.
      2. Svidetel 45
        Svidetel 45 25 May 2016 22: 22
        0
        Well, you just discover America, "... the Bronze Age, then the Iron Age, this sequence is wrong ...", but then why are stone products and bronze found in cultural archaeological layers close in time, and then iron items are not found? on the contrary?
  7. Inco
    Inco 23 May 2016 21: 24
    +1
    If I remember correctly, the melting temperature of copper is about 1300 degrees.
    And the burning temperature of coal - so it is possible to heat up to 1700 degrees.

    Therefore, nothing prevented the ancients from melting everything that was horrible, a vivid example of India and Japan.

    And in England, all the forests were first cut down, and then they learned about coal and switched to it.

    Here is not a bad review http://voprosik.net/metallurgiya-drevnej-rusi/
    1. Pavel Ordynsky
      Pavel Ordynsky 23 May 2016 22: 03
      -2
      Quote: Inco
      Therefore, nothing prevented the ancients from melting anything horrible, a vivid example of India and Japan.


      Coal began to be used only in the 18-19th century, and before that, metallurgists used charcoal.
  8. DemikSPb
    DemikSPb 23 May 2016 21: 33
    0
    Just in case, a comment on the name of copper alloys: copper and zinc alloys are called brass, all other copper alloys are called bronze. According to the name of the alloying component - tin bronze (good casting properties), aluminum bronze (widely used in modern conditions because it is cheaper), phosphor bronze - is used for spring contacts, etc. Actually pure copper, it makes sense to get only to obtain a workpiece with subsequent deformation, since copper is more plastic. From the point of view of logic, it is easiest to obtain iron bronze, but due to the large number of defects in the conditions of artisanal production, the workpiece will be significantly inferior to a tin bronze product.
  9. Torins
    Torins 23 May 2016 22: 23
    0
    Quote: Pavel Ordynsky
    Quote: Torins
    Why then did the Romans call the British Isles tin if, according to your statement, they could not find tin there? And where then was tin taken for the entire Bronze Age? Or do you want to say that all the finds were made by modern people and planted by archaeologists? Something I do not understand your logic ...


    logic simple Roman Empire, ancient Greece are historical phantoms. Bronze is harder to produce than iron, at least not easier. It is easier to make bronze if the tin is loose, but there are few such deposits and of course almost all of them have been selected, as far as Britain is concerned, then by history there was no loose tin. Therefore, in those ancient times, bronze was very expensive. Therefore, the historical sequence of the eyelids is copper, then the age of the Bronze Age, then the age of the Iron Age, this sequence is incorrect.
    Well, as for the bronze finds, the temporal reference is carried out in line with the traditional historical paradigm, which is being questioned.
    Quote: Torins
    Or do you want to say that all the finds were made by modern people and planted by archaeologists?


    the number of historical fakes is over the top, so in many museums weapons look like they weren’t used. By the way, there is a lot of any bronze not tin-containing, in this case the weapon will be either fragile or soft-not hard, in this case the weapon can be gift or ritual for burial, it is found in excavations.

    So Herodotus described Achilles that he had a bronze spear tip, a bronze shield and a bronze sword. And do not say that he was the father of lies, modern studies prove that Herodotus was more often right than wrong. And where did the ancient philosopher and historian get such knowledge of bronze if it was not there, and most importantly, why did he dress Achilles in bronze?)
    1. Pavel Ordynsky
      Pavel Ordynsky 24 May 2016 07: 50
      -2
      Quote: Torins
      So Herodotus described Achilles that he had a bronze spear tip, a bronze shield and a bronze sword.


      and I'm not saying that in "ancient" times there was no bronze, there was bronze, but from loose tin, which was not enough, bronze was enough for one Achilles, but other warriors fought with stones, sticks and whatever they had to.
      And most importantly, the sources, before reading the content, you need to understand where the source of information came from, because there are a lot of fakes.
  10. RPG_
    RPG_ 24 May 2016 11: 18
    +1
    They could drown in a swamp not only for ritual purposes, but for example so that invaders or bandits attacking a settlement would not get it.
  11. geologist
    geologist 24 May 2016 14: 49
    +1
    A good machete for survival in the forest. To clear the site for the camp, chop stakes and branches for a hut, dig a hole for a fire, chop wood, cabbage, beets, meat. I could skin and cut a deer. A good melee weapon is a combination of a saber and an ax. If the handle is hollow, you can insert it into the shaft and this is a powerful halberd.
    I do not understand the opinion that alluvial deposits of the casser were few in antiquity. Just in antiquity, there were many placer deposits of gold and other minerals. Now there are problems with this. they dug everything, even in Alaska. We had an unsuccessful season, trying to get an ancient placer, which was carefully cleaned by the Jurjens.
  12. Warrior2015
    Warrior2015 24 May 2016 16: 12
    0
    The author has a good article, and again on almost unknown material!

    After all, this is clearly a sword, but it is also obvious that one cannot fight with such swords. Then why did they give him such a form?
    Why can't you fight? in my opinion, it’s quite possible they could have been some kind of billhook like a German scramasax or longsax? Well, as it was correctly said - like a machete, why not?

    Quote: Pavel Ordynsky
    And if you doubt that there are scammers in the world, then imagine a lot, for example, Andrei Shliman or Howard Carter.
    so, but from now on, please comrade in more detail! how did these individuals manifest themselves as fraudsters?
    1. Pavel Ordynsky
      Pavel Ordynsky 24 May 2016 18: 28
      -1
      Quote: Warrior2015
      ak, but from now on, please comrade in more detail! how did these individuals manifest themselves as fraudsters?


      http://slawa.su/lichnocni/fomenko-anatolij-timofeevich/458-tri-velikie-falshivki
      .html
      1. Warrior2015
        Warrior2015 24 May 2016 19: 41
        +1
        Opensource projects, eh, I specifically decided to watch the sent film. After the words "No other written documents or news about Troy have survived," I did not look - for the CRASH is visible immediately. Your would-be author of the film is a banal uneducated Fomenkoid, he does not know at all that decades ago huge Hittite and Babylonian archives of clay tables were found and opened for inspection, which repeatedly describe the relationship of Hattusa with Ilion and the trade of Akkadian and Phoenician merchants with Asia Minor, including Troy.

        These are unique documents - just a simple business correspondence of contemporaries about trade, about various agreements, etc.

        Unfortunately, once again supporters of the theories of Formenko & Nosovsky corny show populism and lack of education.
        1. Pavel Ordynsky
          Pavel Ordynsky 24 May 2016 20: 09
          -2
          Quote: Warrior2015
          Your unfortunate author of the film is a banal uneducated fomenoid, he DOES NOT know that decades ago, huge Hittite and Babylonian archives of clay tables have been found and opened for inspection, which repeatedly describe Hattusa’s relations with Ilion and the trade of Akkadian and Phoenician merchants with Asia Minor Troy.


          they tell you something else, Schliemann is a charlatan who robbed the Russian army, and with this money he made golden branzulets that might not even have been in Turkey, and he called Troy some ruins that do not correspond to historical descriptions.
          But you are not able to understand this, so do not climb where you do not understand anything.
  13. Warrior2015
    Warrior2015 24 May 2016 20: 53
    0
    Quote: Pavel Ordynsky
    they tell you something else, Schliemann the charlatan who robbed the Russian army,

    During the Crimean War, ALL military commandantism and all of its suppliers plundered the Russian army.
    But ONLY Schliemann used the looted money for the benefit of science and, having believed Homer, discovered Troy. NOBODY except him raised his ass and did not organize excavations. Read more about his biography and how he lived.

    Almost all official science laughed at his love of archeology and history, but he was able to prove himself worth something.

    And yet, do not be rude. I clearly and immediately see the fake - and immediately pointed to it at the very beginning of even the film you showed. Simple banal facts suggest that its creators are not familiar with the basics of archeology, and they are the ones who are not able to understand what the "film" was filmed about.

    "Gold of Troy" is unique, but among the finds of Schliemann and those who dug after him - there are things from the neighboring Minoan and Hittite civilizations. Are they also fakes?

    The only problem with Troy is which of the lost ancient cities was the "Troy of Priam".

    Are there any real arguments?
    1. Pavel Ordynsky
      Pavel Ordynsky 24 May 2016 21: 24
      -2
      Quote: Warrior2015
      But ONLY Schliemann used the looted money for the benefit of science and


      You are unlikely to be the last idealist from history who believes in Schliemann's purity, I think there are other reasons, then Schliemann was a thief and a swindler written by all his contemporaries, so he still stole the so-called "place of Troy" from another archaeologist, some Englishman. His "discovery" was established in the "scientific community" only after WW1, like the theory of relativity of another "great" scientist.

      Quote: Warrior2015
      Almost all official science laughed at his love of archeology and history, but he was able to prove himself worth something.


      in fact, the "great" and priam's treasure found and found the gold of the Minoans, he would have found something else for him to live on.

      Quote: Warrior2015
      And yet, do not be rude.

      you follow.

      Quote: Warrior2015
      Simple banal facts suggest that its creators are not familiar with the basics of archeology, and they are the ones who are not able to understand what the "film" was filmed about.


      "banal" facts suggest otherwise.

      Quote: Warrior2015
      the single problem in Troy is which of the ancient cities that perished was the "Troy of Priam".


      Well, there are a lot of ruins on the coast of Turkey, so there are still plenty of topics for dissertations.
      Quote: Warrior2015
      Are there any real arguments?

      You seem to have fallen from the moon, my first post just casts doubt on the entire "bronze age", and of course, very few people believe the most real argument in TI.
    2. Pavel Ordynsky
      Pavel Ordynsky 25 May 2016 14: 34
      0
      Quote: Warrior2015
      During the Crimean War, ALL military commandantism and all of its suppliers plundered the Russian army.


      Do you know that for sure? maybe not all?
  14. Warrior2015
    Warrior2015 25 May 2016 00: 31
    0
    Quote: Pavel Ordynsky
    who believes in the integrity of Schliemann, I think there are other reasons, then the thief and the crook were cheated, all his contemporaries wrote
    If all thieves and scammers used the funds obtained illegally, then world science would simply have flourished.
    You show in your own words that you simply didn’t even get acquainted with ANY SCIENTIFIC WORK OF THE SHLIMAN. And this is a shame - if you support the accusation of such a great researcher (I read them, and the Gold of Priam - I saw it personally in the Historical Museum of Moscow - it was exhibited several years ago). Read Schliemann's reports, they are not only in German, but also in Russian. After that you will blame. If conscience allows.

    Quote: Pavel Ordynsky
    so little, he still stole the so-called "place of Troy" from another archaeologist, some kind of Englishman

    Where did the firewood come from? Actually, ONLY HE believed Homer and, based on what was described, found layers of several cities under one of the hills.

    ALL OTHER scientists believed that the Iliad is a fable and nonsense, a beautiful myth. But he believed - and found.

    Schliemann's discoveries were officially recognized first by German, then pan-European science, and the initial errors were corrected. By the way, further excavations were conducted not only by Schliemann himself, but by several professional archaeologists from Germany.

    Quote: Pavel Ordynsky

    Well, there are a lot of ruins on the coast of Turkey, so there are still plenty of topics for dissertations.
    You either do not argue if you do not know, or simply at least ask what you do not understand. Just as an example, cities on the surface are relatively modern ruins, by no means 3-4 thousand years old as Troy (it’s another matter that many ancient cities have been excavated for a long time and therefore can be clearly seen).

    The problem with very ancient cities (and for example Russia with its wooden architecture and medieval cities) is precisely that they do not exist on the surface - they are buried in the ground. At best, their location is indicated by a hill - in the East it is called "tell".

    Quote: Pavel Ordynsky
    , my first post, just casts doubt on the entire "bronze age",
    To refute such a thing - you need to at least achieve well, not academic, but at least recognition as Schliemann - a brilliant self-taught person.

    And to refute as a fact the many ancient mines found in Britain where tin was mined.


    Once again - you brought the film as an argument. From the very beginning, the film was shot by illiterate people who do not know the basics of archeology and do not have information not only on the latest discoveries, but about research that is already a century old. This indicates that ALL argument in this film is not worth the hatched egg and, as always, Fomenko’s supporters are far-fetched.
    1. Pavel Ordynsky
      Pavel Ordynsky 25 May 2016 09: 05
      -2
      Quote: Warrior2015
      if all thieves and scammers used the money obtained illegally, then world science would have simply flourished.


      yes no friend is a swindler, he is a swindler in trade, and in the post of a state official, he is a swindler, and in history a swindler, a black dog cannot be washed to white, and a thief must be in prison. And the fact that your "official science" uses the services of such a rogue as Schliemann , says only one thing, that the traditional history is false, because it was built by unprincipled and thieves like Schliemann, well, of course, this also characterizes you in the same way.
      This is the first.
      Secondly, the very legend of Troy is Homer, who described the Iliad - after 500 years after the war. Here immediately the first question - "on what media was the poem described?" Historians argue that the legend was weary and for five hundred years it was indulged by word of mouth until Homer wrote it down - this cannot correspond to the truth, for 500 years such a volume of information should be lost or severely distorted.
      Farther from Homer to the present day, the poem appeared in the form of some ancient manuscripts in Latin, which later were rewritten in Italian in the 15th century, and in German at the end of the 18th century. then Homers and Princes Igori arise - this happens, just after the most significant event of the transition from the old world to the new, is the Pugachev war, when after the fall of Great Tartaria it was already possible to compose anything. Well, then the myth of Troy is necessary it was financially secure, and here Schliemann arose, to whom the Romanovs, who allowed him to rob the Russian army, and Bismarck, and the Turkish rulers, who had by that time become very friendly with Germany, patronized in a strange way.
      1. Warrior2015
        Warrior2015 25 May 2016 13: 33
        +1
        Quote: Pavel Ordynsky
        And the fact that your "official science" uses the services of such a rogue as Schliemann says only one thing, that the traditional history is false, because it was built by unprincipled and thieving traders like Schliemann

        Schliemann in business allowed fraud only once - as a contractor in the Crimean War. He executed all other contracts with dignity.

        In addition, I have already explained that the majority of official scholars did not initially share Schliemann’s position. This time.

        Quote: Pavel Ordynsky
        Secondly, the very legend of Troy is Homer, who described the Iliad, 500 years after the war. Here immediately the first question - "on what media was the poem described?" Historians claim that the legend was weary and five hundred years indulged by word of mouth

        In fact, Troas is located between such great civilizations as Achaean, Minoan and Hittite; all these civilizations had writing systems (the Hittites have three writing systems), part of the documents of which on clay tables came to us and was found by archaeologists. If for you, buddy, this is news, then you and those filmmakers need to learn the basics of archeology. These are two.

        Quote: Pavel Ordynsky
        Further from Homer to the present day, the poem appeared in the form of some ancient manuscripts in Latin, which later in 15 were already rewritten in Italian, and at the end of 18 in German.

        Well, in general, just drain the water ... Actually, Homer was preserved in beautiful Greek throughout the entire period of written history and reached us without the slightest distortion - which is again confirmed by archeology (not so long ago the weapons described in the Iliad, but unknown as artifacts). These are three.
        1. Pavel Ordynsky
          Pavel Ordynsky 25 May 2016 14: 56
          0
          Quote: Warrior2015
          Schliemann in business allowed fraud only once - as a contractor in the Crimean War. He executed all other contracts with dignity.

          laughing
          Well, yes, once, but not Pido-races having lied once, the cat will believe you?
          Quote: Warrior2015
          all these civilizations had writing systems (the Hittites have three writing systems), some of whose documents on clay tables came to us and was found by archaeologists. If for you, buddy, this is news, then you and those filmmakers need to learn the basics of archeology. These are two.



          The authorship of the Iliad and Odyssey was posed in 1795 by the German scientist F. A. Wolf (see WOLF Frederick Augustus) in the preface to the publication of the Greek text of the poems. Wolf considered it impossible to create a large epic in an unwritten period, believing that the legends created by various aids (see AEDs) were recorded in Athens under Pisistratus. Scientists were divided into "analysts", followers of the Wolf theory (German scientists K. Lachmann, A. Kirchhoff with his theory of "small epics"; G. German and the English historian J. Grot with their "theory of the main core", in Russia it was shared by F. F. Zelinsky), and the “Unitaries”, supporters of the strict unity of the epic (Homer translator I. G. Foss (see FOSS Johann Heinrich) and philologist G.V. Nich, F. Schiller (see Schiller Friedrich), I. V. Goethe (see Goethe Johann Wolfgang), Hegel (see GEGEL Georg Wilhelm Friedrich) in Germany, N.I. Gnedich (see Gnedich Nikolai Ivanovich), V.A. Zhukovsky (see Zhukovsky Vasily Andreyevich), A S. Pushkin (see Alexander PUSHKIN) in Russia).

          http://dic.academic.ru/dic.nsf/es/16280/%D0%93%D0%BE%D0%BC%D0%B5%D1%80

          say tablets? but Wolf and other historians do not know anything about tablets and speak about oral traditions. You don't lie there?
          1. Warrior2015
            Warrior2015 25 May 2016 16: 46
            0
            Quote: Pavel Ordynsky
            Wolf and other historians do not know anything about tablets

            1795 year does not tell you anything? 18 century though. Science - it has the property to develop, you know.
            Read about the excavations of the Bogazkoy archive. Incidentally, it has not yet been fully published, there are so many digged there.

            And yet - stop being rude, we are not drinking beer at the Brudershaft. If you want normal communication - communicate correctly.
        2. Pavel Ordynsky
          Pavel Ordynsky 25 May 2016 15: 06
          0
          Quote: Warrior2015
          Well, in general, just drain the water ... Actually, Homer was preserved in beautiful Greek throughout the entire period of written history and reached us without the slightest distortion - which again confirms archeology

          http://dic.academic.ru/dic.nsf/es/16280/%D0%93%D0%BE%D0%BC%D0%B5%D1%80

          exactly say? But the academician says differently
          I’m carrying a list of the Iliad, which I kept under the pillow along with a dagger.
          Homer Translations
          In the 3rd century BC e. the Roman poet Livy Andronic translated the Odyssey into Latin. In medieval Europe, Homer was known only by quotes and references from Latin writers and Aristotle, Homer's poetic fame was overshadowed by the glory of Virgil (see VERGIL (poet)). Only at the end of the 15th century. Homer's first translations into Italian appeared (A. Poliziano (see POLICIANO Angelo) and others). An event in European culture of the 18th century. Homer began translating into English by A. Pop (see POP Alexander) and into German by I. G. Foss. For the first time, fragments of the Iliad were translated into Russian by the twenty-complex syllabic - the so-called Alexandria - a verse by M.V. Lomonosov. At the end of the 18th century. E. Kostrov translated iambic the first six songs of the Iliad (1787); Prose translations of the Iliad by P. Ekimov and Odyssey by P. Sokolov were published. The titanic work on the creation of the Russian hexameter and the adequate reproduction of the image system of Homer was done by N. I. Gnedich, whose translation of the Iliad (1829) still remains unsurpassed in accuracy of philological reading and historical interpretation. The highest artistic skill is distinguished by the translation of Odyssey by V. A. Zhukovsky (1842–49). In the 20th century. The Iliad and Odyssey were translated by V.V. Veresaev (see VERESAEV Vikentiy Vikentievich).

          as I understand it, the translation of the same Gnedich was from Italian, and not from Greek, which did not reach us, are you lying again?
          1. Warrior2015
            Warrior2015 25 May 2016 16: 47
            0
            Quote: Pavel Ordynsky
            as far as I understood the translation of the same Gnedich was from Italian

            And what does the transition of Gnedich have to do with it? Schliemann actually learned the Greek language from the Odyssey.
            ONCE AGAIN - BEFORE CONDEMNING OR MORE ACCUSING THE GREAT PERSON, STUDY AT LEAST HIS BIOGRAPHY AT AN ACCESSIBLE LEVEL.
        3. Pavel Ordynsky
          Pavel Ordynsky 25 May 2016 15: 25
          -2
          Quote: Warrior2015
          Well, in general, just drain the water ... Actually, Homer was preserved in beautiful Greek throughout the entire period of written history and reached us without the slightest distortion - which is again confirmed by archeology (not so long ago the weapons described in the Iliad, but unknown as artifacts). These are three.


          in fact?
          but Michael Wood writes that

          Schliemann first visited the Troas in August 1868. From the letters of Calvert, we know that at that
          Schliemann supported the Leshevalle theory of Troy in Bunarbashi. Gissarlyk is clearly not
          impressed him - contrary to his later fiction. And only having met
          with Calvert in Canakkale on the way back to Constantinople, he found out more about
          excavations of Calvert and his long-standing theory that Gissarlyk is an artificial mound with
          “The ruins and fragments of temples and palaces that layered on top of each other for
          centuries. " Calvert convinced Schliemann that it was here that Homeric Troy stood. Schliemann
          wrote in his first book, published next year in French: “After
          a thorough double study of the Trojan Plain I completely agreed with the arguments
          of this savant [6], that the high plateau of Hissarlyk is the location of the ancient Troy and that
          this hill is the place where Pergamum was located. ” In fact, Schliemann is completely obliged
          this idea to Calvert, and the letter sent to Calvert from Paris in October of that year,
          proves that Schliemann retained a very vague idea of ​​how
          Gissarlyk looks! So much his attention was focused on Bunarbashi.
          In passing, he asked Calvert about everything, starting with why he believes that
          artificial hill, and ending with what kind of hat is better to wear. "Should I
          to bring a metal bed and pillow with you? ” Schliemann will later deny
          Calvert’s initiative and assistance, and in 1875, in a letter to the Manchester Guardian, Calvert will
          forced to quote from Schliemann: “If someone else suggested I tear down the hill for
          my account, I would not even listen to him! ” Therefore, Calvert was only a "progenitor"
          ideas - Schliemann did not want to share fame with anyone.
          There was a problem getting permission.

          those. it was Calvert who started the first, and Schliemann took advantage of other people's developments, so that you, just like St. Peter TRIDY, betrayed the truth in the name of the drawn paradigm.
          1. Warrior2015
            Warrior2015 25 May 2016 16: 56
            0
            Quote: Pavel Ordynsky
            Schliemann took advantage of other people's work

            This is the subjective opinion of one of the researchers. I am glad that I encouraged you to at least read something about Schliemann.
    2. Pavel Ordynsky
      Pavel Ordynsky 25 May 2016 09: 48
      -2
      Quote: Warrior2015
      You show in your own words that you simply didn’t even get acquainted with ANY SCIENTIFIC WORK OF THE SHLIMAN.


      these are the pearls from the "archaeologist Schliemann"
      Digging a trench, we stumbled upon gigantic foundations built of well-crafted limestone blocks: some of these foundations certainly belonged to Roman time - their construction, as well as the marks of masons on them, left no doubt about it

      here are these "marks of stone-cutters" about which Schliemann mentioned in more detail, but no more details, what are the mysterious marks and why these stones are Roman, no.
      Quote: Warrior2015
      Where did the firewood come from? Actually, ONLY HE believed Homer and, based on what was described, found layers of several cities under one of the hills.


      from Wood "Gold of TROY" Calvert was the first to start digging for Hisarlik, and Schliemann wanted to dig elsewhere, but after talking with Cavert Schliemann began to dig for Hisarlik, but in his works he denied the conversation with Calvert. So he is always a swindler, both in Russia and in Turkey.

      Quote: Warrior2015
      You either do not argue if you do not know, or simply at least ask what you do not understand. Just as an example, cities on the surface are relatively modern ruins, by no means 3-4 thousand years old as Troy (it’s another matter that many ancient cities have been excavated for a long time and therefore can be clearly seen).


      you diminish your mentor tone, then that you refer to the work of a swindler says that you yourself do not disdain such a presentation of information.
      What did Schliemann unearth there? This? And is that the same Troy? The same about which Homer wrote that the walls are high, and the Greeks besieged this city for 9 years?


      or that?

      and how did the "historians" recognize "ancient Troy", were there signs on the walls, that it was Troy? And the fact that the shards were found, there are so many of them in the Mediterranean, even Putin found a jug at a time, and as for the gold, this is an obvious fake, this gold probably did not leave Germany until ours were taken away.
      1. Warrior2015
        Warrior2015 25 May 2016 13: 49
        0
        Quote: Pavel Ordynsky
        Calvert first began digging hissarlyk

        He made a test hole and did not find anything in the layer where he got. Schliemann began to dig better and deeper. This is often the case in archeology. There is even such a term "underexamined settlement".

        Quote: Pavel Ordynsky
        that the walls are high, and the Greeks besieged this city for 9 years?

        You do not know that the walls of one of the settlements that they found there are really cyclopic?
        About the multi-layered hill Gissarlyk I have already said.

        The second moment - from the Trojan War (~ 13 century BC) to the invention of stone-throwing and at least some serious siege machines (~ 7 century BC), several centuries remained (I'm not talking about developed siege Supermachines of the Hellenistic period ~ 3 century BC).

        Therefore, it remained either an assault with the help of stairs - an escalade, but often it was bloody and inconclusive, or a long siege.

        In general, the walls were built so that the city would not be taken even before the breakthrough in siege technologies, thanks to which they learned to break walls, much more often success was on the side of the besieged.
    3. Pavel Ordynsky
      Pavel Ordynsky 25 May 2016 09: 59
      -2
      Quote: Warrior2015
      The problem with very ancient cities (and for example Russia with its wooden architecture and medieval cities) is precisely that they do not exist on the surface - they are buried in the ground. At best, their location is indicated by a hill - in the East it is called "tell".


      and what do you remember about Russia, so by the way? As for the hills, then we call them a mound and everywhere so, I came up with some kind of body.
      Quote: Warrior2015
      Once again - you brought the film as an argument. From the very beginning, the film was shot by illiterate people

      this film is not about you, you console yourself with Troy with Brad Peet - this is your film and such "literate" as you.
      1. Warrior2015
        Warrior2015 25 May 2016 13: 38
        0
        Quote: Pavel Ordynsky
        , then we call them a mound and everywhere so, I came up with some kind of body.

        Hey, don't you even know what a tell is? For the ignorant who are trying to refute everything and everyone, but do not even have basic knowledge, this is a special term, which means precisely a man-made hill containing the ruins of ancient (mainly the Ancient World period) cities.

        A mound is always and everywhere a mound. This is a special grave hill, under which there is a burial.

        Mounds and Telli differ very much.

        The remains of the cities of Kievan Rus, destroyed for example by the Polovtsy or Tatars, due to the fact that stone architecture was hardly used and we do not have dust and sand storms in the middle lane, are not saved in the form of calves and it is very difficult to find them (after a fire, the tree quickly decays and then everything overgrown with forest).
        1. Pavel Ordynsky
          Pavel Ordynsky 25 May 2016 15: 47
          0
          Quote: Warrior2015
          Mounds and Telli differ very much.


          and how can the hills be different and "very much"?
          1. Warrior2015
            Warrior2015 25 May 2016 19: 29
            0
            Quote: Pavel Ordynsky
            the way the hills can be very different and "very much"?

            For a professional archaeologist, it is often enough just to look at the hill and see if it is a natural formation, tell or barrow. This is the essence of professionalism.

            Schliemann was great in that it was only he who believed Homer, and began massive excavations, FOR WHICH HE EARNED MONEY (which he had dreamed of all his life), and found Troy.

            Yes, he was self-taught in archeology, but turned out to be a brilliant self-taught. Try to surpass it if you criticize.
            1. Pavel Ordynsky
              Pavel Ordynsky 25 May 2016 21: 12
              0
              Quote: Warrior2015
              FOR WHICH I MONEY EARNED (


              Well, stealing earned, which you really like.
          2. kalibr
            26 May 2016 19: 21
            0
            By structure, Paul, they are different!
    4. Pavel Ordynsky
      Pavel Ordynsky 25 May 2016 10: 09
      -2
      [quote] I read them, and Priam Gold - I saw it personally in the Historical Museum of Moscow - it was exhibited several years ago [/ quote]

      this is the coolest argument, well, what did you consider there on this gold, that there are seals with the imprint of the king of Priam? Gold is my Priam laughing
      Personally, I was struck by the fact that, for example, a mask like an agamemnon shines as if it had not lain in the earth for 3 years, and gold in general dims over time, because it also oxidizes and there were a lot of impurities in old gold, so the truth goes everywhere as an awl from a bag.

      [quote = Ratnik 2015] I read them, and Zol
      1. kalibr
        25 May 2016 11: 04
        0
        There are many galvanic copies of these artifacts. Most often expose them, because fools are immeasurably. So your picture, alas, does not work. And here they also wrote about it and these same photos cited and the words are the same. Then there were links to more reliable sources. Pavel, amateurism is not a sin, we are all amateurs in some way, but we don’t have to persist in getting to know something.
        I've been studying the history of tanks since 1980, first the models, then the history itself, then I began to publish my own magazine about tanks, then ... but ... if I get into a tank I won't get it and I won't be able to fire a cannon. I have been dealing with the knightly theme since 1995. I wrote a lot of articles, books, but the more I get to know each other, the more I see, how many I don't know. Bronze is a topic in general since 1972 and the first year of the institute. And also for so many years ... the further into the forest, the more firewood. And you just right away "cut through" everything, blamed everyone, reproached, the truth is known to you and FiNam. This does not happen, believe me. They just laugh at such people, and the nickname Fomenkoid will stick to you forever. I advised you to start with an interesting monograph ... and you've already found it and started reading, haven't you?

        And why is it minus, Pavel? Is that something wrong or is it how you express your personal attitude?
        1. Pavel Ordynsky
          Pavel Ordynsky 25 May 2016 15: 57
          -2
          Quote: kalibr
          Pavel, amateurism is not a sin, we are all amateurs in some way, but we don’t have to persist in getting to know something.
          I've been dealing with the history of tanks since 1980, first models, then history itself, then I began to publish my own magazine about tanks, then ... but ... if I get into a tank I won’t get it and I can’t shoot it from a cannon


          I also didn’t sit and shoot from the tank, but I think I can start and fire if I read the instructions.
          Quote: kalibr
          Bronze has been a topic in general since 1972 and the first year of the institute.


          very strange among students of metallurgists this is a very decent topic.

          Quote: kalibr
          They just laugh at such people, and the nickname fomenoid will stick to you forever.


          Fomenko Anatoly Timofeevich and Nosovsky Gleb Vladimirovich are the great Russian scientists, the creators of the true history and this story is intersected with the history of the Rus-Russians, their historical direction is devoid of many silent diseases and shortcomings, answers many questions to which TI cannot answer or if responds with lies per kilometer, so those who laugh at them are similar to quasimode and his painted smile.
          1. Warrior2015
            Warrior2015 25 May 2016 17: 07
            0
            Quote: Pavel Ordynsky
            Fomenko Anatoly Timofeevich and Nosovsky Gleb Vladimirovich are the great Russian scientists, creators of the true history

            It remains for everyone to say - Amen and forever and ever?
            only your scientists are just that "Russian", with one "c" ... We are illiterate, what really ...
            1. Pavel Ordynsky
              Pavel Ordynsky 25 May 2016 17: 56
              0
              Quote: Warrior2015
              only your scientists are just that "Russian", with one "c" ... We are illiterate, what really ...


              can you find in the annals the name of RUSSIAN EARTH with two C? Dahl has RUSSIAN with one C, and two C is the reverse tracing from German, because it is not the rules of the Russian language to double consonants for no reason.
              So the enemy friend is again with a finger in the sky.
              1. Warrior2015
                Warrior2015 26 May 2016 11: 36
                +1
                Quote: Pavel Ordynsky
                can find in the annals the name of RUSSIAN LAND

                You would also look for the name of Russia on the stelae of the Stone Age, yep.
                And I strongly recommend removing the boorish tone, or simply do not have to talk anymore.
                1. Pavel Ordynsky
                  Pavel Ordynsky 26 May 2016 12: 57
                  0
                  Quote: Warrior2015
                  And I strongly recommend removing the boorish tone, or simply do not have to talk anymore.


                  you would also show respect to HX by their creators, otherwise you won’t be able to talk on equal terms.
            2. kalibr
              25 May 2016 18: 23
              0
              The problem, Sergeich, is that people like Pavel have not read anything except a couple of Fomenkov's books and, as my students say, they are "rushed" from this, as in their time the pearl and us from Deniken's films about aliens. I read lectures from the OK Komsomol about ... the mysteries of ancient civilizations and blamed everything on them, sinners. They flew in and ... built the Baalbek veranda, as if they had no other business. And here - everything is disproved, it's cool, you don't need to strain the foam. And again, everyone is in the trend "we are great, we are powerful, more sun, higher than the clouds!" Fomenko and K very much caught this trend. Ukrainians dug those sea, and we? And we are even cooler - both our pyramids, and ... all of us. But ask the same Paul specifically, what does Bayesian embroidery have to do with refuting his favorite PhiNs, he will not say, because he does not know what he is talking about. But experts know and only turn around at the temple when they say Finnish nonsense.
        2. Pavel Ordynsky
          Pavel Ordynsky 25 May 2016 21: 15
          0
          Quote: kalibr
          I advised you to start with an interesting monograph ... and you have already found it and started reading, haven't you?


          first you can write an article about what this monograph is about.
          1. kalibr
            26 May 2016 19: 15
            0
            She, Paul, about how a person learned to smel metal. To retell other people's books is an ungrateful and cheap occupation. This is not for me. I don’t even like translations, although some are very interesting. And to retell the monographs - fire me from this.
  15. Pavel Ordynsky
    Pavel Ordynsky 25 May 2016 16: 03
    -1
    Quote: kalibr
    And why is it minus, Pavel? Is that something wrong or is it how you express your personal attitude?

    strange opportunities for you I have after 5min the ability to edit disappears, is it different for you? Well, minus because I have a minus, an eye for an eye.
    1. kalibr
      25 May 2016 17: 16
      0
      Oh, Pavel, I don’t know how old you are, but after 60 all these negative games no longer warm your soul. I have already written here, and have written more than once, that I don’t put them in principle according to the well-known principle - “do not judge, but you will not be judged”. Maybe it would make sense for me to "bite" you anonymously, if you were an expert of the Russian Academy of Sciences, for example, to take my soul away, so to speak, right? But in our case ... I do not know, however, your specialty and education, but so, no offense, you will not go to beat the kid in the sandbox because he showed you his tongue? So I adhere to such views. And everything is perfectly edited and nothing disappears. How fashionable it is to say now - contact your provider. Well, about the "great Russian scientists" ... Again - whoever likes what, the devil said - who is a priest, who is a priest, who is a priest's daughter, and he took off his panties and shoved x .. . in nettles! But you would still see what even the same Danilevsky writes about your idols. He has such a book, ANCIENT RUSSIA IN THE EYES OF CONTEMPORS AND DESCENDANTS of the 9-11th centuries. M. 2001. Even then, there was given a very specific criticism of all their provisions. In general, read more not only FINs! Read the same Karl Jaspers, David Nicolas, Thomas Richardson, Ian Dicky - there are a lot of historians with truly world-famous names. Or, on the contrary, don't read anyone, but then study the texture, chronicles, artifacts, the journal ARCHEOLOGY RF. And so to say ... "they proved" - it's just in vain to shake the air. It's about nothing today!
      1. Svidetel 45
        Svidetel 45 25 May 2016 22: 48
        +1
        The story created by "truly Russian scientists" does not inspire confidence, if only because it is based on the idea of ​​a world conspiracy, the theory of conspiracy, they say, someone and somehow falsified all known archaeological material and written sources on the scale of the entire globe from China to America and everything in order to create an official, currently valid "false" history of mankind. The tradition is fresh, but hard to believe.
        1. Pavel Ordynsky
          Pavel Ordynsky 25 May 2016 23: 02
          0


          Quote: Svidetel 45
          about it is based on the ideas of a world conspiracy, the theory of conspiracy theology,


          two rams are talking among themselves
          - I think that the dog and the person are at the same time
          -You are all about the same thing with your conspiracy
          1. Warrior2015
            Warrior2015 26 May 2016 11: 39
            0
            Fomenko's pseudo-scientific nonsense has nothing to do with real conspiracy theories.

            It's just that they are not looking for problems where they are. And here they are in the chronology of the history of mankind until the 7 century BC due to the extreme poverty and fragmentation of the surviving written sources.
          2. kalibr
            26 May 2016 19: 18
            0
            It's about nothing, Paul! Pictures are not an argument!
        2. kalibr
          26 May 2016 19: 17
          0
          Yes, this is precisely the main weakness of Fomenkovism. And the main question - why was this done? The goal is not visible, and people do not do meaningless things.
  16. Warrior2015
    Warrior2015 27 May 2016 22: 46
    0
    Pavel Ordynsky apparently grabbed the minuses or someone was very naughty, who turned out to be not as soft as me, and got a ban. Sorry, the interlocutor was funny.

    I sincerely hope that he nevertheless starts looking at such a great discoverer as Heinrich Schliemann at least a little differently and at least reads more about him.
  17. Skifotavr
    Skifotavr 28 May 2016 12: 04
    0
    However, one of the readers was found who stated that bronze is an alloy of copper with ... aluminum (!), But let us leave such a bold statement on the conscience of its author (and Google to help him!)
    However, the alloy of copper with aluminum is called aluminum bronze if that. Of course, they started using it not from antiquity, but when they learned how to obtain aluminum by electrolysis.
  18. ando_bor
    ando_bor 31 May 2016 01: 30
    0
    Apparently this is not a sword, this is a weapon similar to the Japanese kusarigama, only instead of a cutting sickle, an impact baton of the type (second from left) http://oldeuropeanculture.blogspot.ru/2015/07/tollense-battle.html
    A fencing hook, a noose for a sinker, possibly connected with the same sword, then you can throw in short, and go boarding.
    You need to look at the specifics, look for the weights nearby, or watch a couple, these apparently would agree - where did you find it?
    But the ritual, - it will still be close to combat, but it is more likely to be combat - only understand how it was used. With kusarigama you can google the video.