During the Bronze Age, several types of “classical” weapons appeared, which lasted throughout the subsequent millennia until very recently. These are a sword and a spear as offensive weapons and a shield, helmet and shell as elements of armor. For fast movement, two-wheeled, horse-drawn war chariots were invented, which, together with the crew - a driver and an archer - constituted a fast and deadly fighting machine.
This combination of these military innovations led to social transformations everywhere, as they changed not only the conduct of combat and war itself, but also the underlying social and economic conditions. There was a need for new abilities and new craftsmen, such as those who could make the horse harness with which the driver could maneuver the war chariot, or those who could build the chariot itself. In addition, dexterity in handling new types of hand weapons - a sword and a spear - was now necessary, which required long and lengthy training, which can be judged, for example, by the highly developed shoulders of skeletons from the early Mycenaean burials of Aegina. Remains in Bronze Age burials often have wounds inflicted by a sword or spear, and the weapon itself often shows signs of combat use - damage and repeated sharpening. An organized and deadly method of warfare entered the historical arena.
Il. 1. Bronze Age warrior, reconstructed based on funerary goods and textiles found in Danish oak coffins
The new military aristocracy differed from their fellow tribesmen in their clothing and well-groomed appearance. There was a need for razors and tweezers, which helped maintain this look; in addition, the new elite sported luxurious woolen raincoats (ill. 1). It would not be a mistake to assume that warfare as a profession has been actively developing since the Middle Bronze Age. The status of a warrior was especially attractive to young men, which forced them to serve as mercenaries in very remote areas. In the cemetery in Neckarsulm in southern Germany, more than a third of male burials, even without weapons in the grave goods, are the remains of non-local, alien men. Globalization was also reflected in the widespread proliferation of new types of swords. Thus, a sword with a tongue-shaped platform for attaching the handle for the period from 1500 to 1100 BC. e. spread from Scandinavia to the Aegean Islands, which indicates an intensive exchange of knowledge in the field of military and combat practice, as well as long journeys of warriors and mercenaries (ill. 2).
War chariots
In all likelihood, war chariots appeared in the southern Russian steppes, then, in the period between 2000 and 1700 BC. e. they spread from the region of the Eastern Urals and the Sintashta culture to the Black Sea region, the islands of the Aegean Sea and further to Central and Northern Europe, where very realistic and detailed images of war carts are found in rock paintings. The kingdoms and palace cultures of the Middle East, the Hittites in Anatolia and the Mycenaeans in Greece, especially readily adopted the new product. The aristocratic style of fighting became widespread: first spears were used, and then rapiers and swords up to a meter long. They were used primarily as piercing rather than slashing weapons, this is illustrated by Mycenaean seals and inlays on blades, which depict a piercing attack on the enemy’s shield. It is clear that the sword was the weapon of the elite, the leader, who, however, was always accompanied by a large group of foot soldiers with spears and probably bows and arrows to hit distant targets. In Germany and Denmark, regions where settlements and necropolises of the Bronze Age are well studied, it is possible to calculate how many warriors from individual households supported the few leaders with swords: the ratio is 6-12 warriors per leader. This coincides with the number of oarsmen on Scandinavian cave paintings with ships and can be considered a stable number of warriors in a group under a local leader (Fig. 3).
Fortified Settlements
At the same time, in the Danube-Carpathian region there was a widespread strengthening of large settlements located on the ground with the help of ramparts and deep ditches. This shows how organized the preparations were for local conflicts; Large groups of warriors provided constant protection of people and property. Many of these fortified settlements are located at crossroads near large rivers or mountain passes, suggesting that they were needed to ensure the security of the metal trade. In some places the fortifications were made of large solid stones, this is especially impressive at Moncodonier in Metri and where even the gates were separately protected by a complex stone structure, which is sometimes found in Central European fortifications. On the northern Italian Pa and a certain plain there are also defensive structures of complex design, where water ditches are built around the settlements (Fig. 4).
Fortifications existed throughout the Bronze Age, and there is an explanation for this. Near some, for example, near Velem in Bohemia, those killed in battle were found, dumped in large numbers into pits. Further excavations of Bronze Age fortifications will probably yield the same results.
Il. 4. a - Terramare settlement with palisade, Poviglio, Italy (after: Bernabó Brea 1997); b - Fortress Gate, Moncodonia, Istria (by: Mihovilic i. a. o. J.) Swords with a tongue-shaped platform for attaching the hilt
Il. 5. Swords with a tongue-shaped platform for attaching a hilt of the same type, common in the territory between Denmark and the Aegean region The most ancient swords were practically unsuitable for combat, since the blade and hilt were connected to each other only with rivets. Soon an effective and powerful weapon appeared, in which the handle and blade were cast as one piece. The handle itself, made of wood, bone or horn, which ended with a pommel, was attached to a tongue-shaped platform. Such a sword could reflect strong blows and not break when hit by a shield. The new sword, with a tongue-shaped platform for attaching the hilt, became the standard weapon of the Bronze Age warrior, and it spread over a vast area from Scandinavia to the Aegean islands, indicating intense connections between groups of mercenaries or even between entire Bronze Age societies. It continued to be used in different variations of shape and length until the very end of the Bronze Age.
In Central Europe, a blade length of 60 cm was preferred. Some blades found were slightly shorter, indicating repeated sharpening of the tip, which could often bend or break. This length of the sword indicates, rather, in favor of individual combat rather than phalanx attacks. In the Aegean region, the length of the sword, after some fluctuations, became 40 cm, like the later Roman gladius, which speaks in favor of fighting in a phalanx with limited movement (ill. 5).
Darts and spears
The most common weapons of the Bronze Age were undoubtedly javelins and spears, which only at the end of this period began to be quite distinctly different from each other. The latter, like modern bayonets, were used in close combat and were the par excellence weapon of the infantry. Each warrior usually carried two javelins or spears, as evidenced by images on Mycenaean vases, as well as grave goods found throughout Europe.
Defensive weapons: shield, helmet and armor
A warrior's best protection from injury has always been his own skillful handling of weapons. Therefore, the Celts went into battle naked to demonstrate their military superiority and fearlessness. However, even the best warrior needed protection from all sorts of surprises, and along with the progress of weapons, defensive equipment also improved.
Outside Greece, almost no defensive equipment was found in finds dating from the Early and Middle Bronze Ages, since they were made mainly of wood or leather (shields) and bone (wild boar tusks for helmets). The best sources available to us on this topic are Mycenaean depictions of warfare. Helmets with boar tusks from the Middle Bronze Age were found in the Carpathian region. Nevertheless, in Central Europe, some elements of men's equipment were probably developed specifically for protection in battle: wrist spirals and heavy spiral rings protecting the hand and elbow were often found along with swords. There is no doubt that they were used as they show mechanical damage. Conventional wrist spirals were shaped like the forearm and tapered towards the wrist.
Only towards the end of the Bronze Age, special protective equipment made of unchained bronze appeared throughout Europe - helmets, shields, armor and leggings. Since unforged bronze did not provide the necessary protection, this equipment was considered the prestigious vestment of the military aristocracy, used exclusively for ceremonies and to demonstrate their social status. This conclusion coincides with the observation of researchers that leaders with cast-hilted swords did not take part in heavy battles. In addition, this confirms the presence of a hierarchy in the conduct of hostilities in the Late Bronze Age - the battle was predominantly carried out by warriors, and the elite directed their actions.
Nevertheless, some usefulness of defensive equipment cannot be ruled out. The armor and leg armor were probably lined on the inside with leather or other organic materials such as felt or linen, as evidenced by fastening rivets. In Greece, helmets, leg plates and wrist guards also had holes for attaching linings. It can be assumed that the situation was the same in the rest of Europe. In addition, one of the most famous helmets dating back to the Late Bronze Age, the helmet from Hajdu-Bösörmei is covered with dents from blows of a sword and ax or arrows and darts. Judging by the rivet holes on the inside, the helmet had a lining of leather or fabric, thanks to which it sat firmly and comfortably on the head.
Bronze swords: functionality and use
One of the constantly repeated arguments against the fact that both cast and tongue-shaped swords were actually used in warfare is the claim that the hilt itself is too short to be held in the hand. Having held hundreds of swords in my hand, I find this argument to be unfounded. Iron Age swords are quite heavy, at least compared to historical or modern rapiers, with most of the weight being in the blade. To control the movements of the sword, you need to clasp the handle very tightly with your palm. This is precisely what the short handle with protruding shoulders, which in this case are the functional part of the handle, is designed for. The hand covered the handle along with the hanger, making all movements more precise and controlled. Fingers in such a coverage also became more mobile, which made it possible to use a variety of military techniques. This was an ideal solution for a combination of slashing and stabbing attacks carried out with one hand. During the Late Bronze Age, the cutting technique became dominant and made handling the sword even more difficult, leading to one interesting invention (Fig. 6). Most swords with a cast hilt have a small hole in the pommel, the purpose of which has not yet been explained. However, some swords have abrasions in the area of this hole, clearly caused by a strap, most likely leather. On ill. b shows the use of this cord, which makes one recall a modern police baton, since such a device for the handle of a sword corresponded to the same practical functions: it prevented the ability to release the sword from the hand, allowed the hand to relax, and the warrior to use a larger swing and greater force when striking.
Il. 6. A sword with a fused hilt, equipped with a leather strap that did not allow the weapon to be released from the hand Proper balancing plays an essential role in sword fighting. The distribution of weight between the handle and the blade determines its use for stabbing or slashing. The long and thin blades of the Middle Bronze Age speak more about their use as a piercing weapon, and in the Late Bronze Age the blade became wide and heavy, which was necessary for a chopping weapon. The difference lies in the location of the center of gravity: for thrusting swords it is located next to the hilt, for cutting swords it is much lower, in the area of the blade.
This means that the piercing sword had to make it possible to make quick defensive and offensive movements, and the slashing sword was too heavy for this, it was intended for energetic movements with a large swing. It should be emphasized, however, that the cutting and thrusting swords of the Bronze Age cannot be compared with modern types of swords, which are very highly specialized and suitable only for their originally intended use. The Bronze Age sword could be used in a variety of ways, despite the fact that one of the functions of a piercing or cutting weapon could be realized by one sword better than by another. Only the earliest examples of rapiers are purely piercing weapons, even compared to the most ancient swords with a tongue-shaped platform for attaching the hilt.
All of the above shows that swords were indeed used in battles in the Bronze Age. This is confirmed by traces of combat on the blades, which can be found on most swords. Such notches and subsequent re-sharpening are characteristic of swords throughout the Bronze Age. The area under the handle is a protection zone, so this is where particularly severe damage and sharpening marks are found. Most often, the defects are more pronounced on one side than on the other, since the warrior usually always held the weapon in his hand in the same way. The consequence of repeated sharpening was that the blades under the hilt often became narrower, they were sharpened more strongly.
Older swords, which had been used longer in combat and were more frequently damaged and repaired, sometimes had the lower crosshairs broken due to repeated sharpening and the fury of enemy blows. Therefore, the lower rivet holes were damaged and unusable. In the Late Bronze Age, this led to technical improvements in swords, in particular to the appearance of a ricasso under the hilt, which helped to hold the enemy blade so that it did not slip upward, damage the crosshairs and injure the warrior’s fingers. Sometimes the entire handle was bent due to frequent strikes and defensive techniques, indicating that heavy fighting was not uncommon. Swords with a tongue-shaped platform for attaching the handle could even break in the area of the handle. The findings show that this happened very often, even if you do not count some broken swords found, in which the breakage could have happened in recent times.
In the middle part of the blade there is damage that occurs during an attack when the striking sword is stopped by the enemy’s sword. Here, too, there may be concavities in the cutting edge that appear due to repeated sharpening. These concavities are especially noticeable in comparison with swords that have damage that has not been corrected by re-sharpening (ill. 7). Some swords have oblique notches on the middle edge, indicating that Bronze Age warriors also used defensive techniques that used the flat surface of the blade. The tip of the blade could also be bent or even broken off when the sword hit the shield during a stabbing blow. Sharpening with the formation of a new point is quite common in swords dating back to the Middle Bronze Age, although it is also characteristic of the Late Bronze Age, which indicates the varied use of swords - both for chopping and piercing.
Il. 7. Examples of swords with a re-sharpened and modified blade To summarize, we can say that we have clear evidence of the great importance of sword fighting in Bronze Age Europe. Throughout this period, there were well-trained experts in the art of sword fighting. It can be stated that different types of swords also had different functions: a sword with a tongue-shaped platform for attaching the handle was the standard weapon of professional warriors, and a sword with a cast handle was more of a leader’s weapon, although it was also used in battle. In swords of this type, the blade is usually damaged to a much lesser extent than in swords with a tongue-shaped platform for attaching the handle. Regarding the Early and Middle Bronze Age, further evidence of this use of fused hilt swords is the fact that the hilt was secured only with rivets, which could hardly withstand a strong blow. In the Late Bronze Age, the end of the blade was already inserted into the hilt to make the weapon more stable and prevent the sword from breaking between the blade and the hilt. Therefore, the number of rivets was reduced to two, and very small ones. It can be assumed that at this time swords with cast hilts were more often used in real combat. The damage found on both the tongue-shaped swords and the cast-handle swords does not resemble those that could occur when using the swords in practice combat. For them, real swords were too valuable, so special wooden swords were used for training already in the Bronze Age, which, in turn, also indicates the great importance of war in the lives of Bronze Age people.
Nomadic warriors and their significance for the metal trade
During the Bronze Age, an international warrior culture emerged for the first time, testifying to the intense relationships and active mutual influence of various groups of warriors throughout Europe. This can be illustrated using maps of the distribution of different types of swords, for example, swords with a tongue-shaped platform for attaching the hilt or swords with a cast octagonal hilt from the 15th and 14th centuries before. n. e., uniting Denmark with Southern Germany and Central Europe (ill. 8). In addition, the mapping clearly demonstrates that some women were used to establish political alliances between local groups and establish peaceful relations, which were necessary for the metal trade and allowed traders and warriors to move safely between neighboring groups. Il. Figure 8 shows, among other things, that male warriors left home much more often and moved longer distances from it.
Il. 8. The spread of octagonal swords as an indication of the movements of mercenaries and traders in the 15th and 14th centuries. BC e. The circles represent individual cultural groups, and the arrows show places where the woman was buried outside her home region Such movements were recently confirmed by the discovery of a men's cemetery in Neckarsulm, where more than fifty people were buried. By studying strontium isotopes in tooth enamel, it was possible to prove that a third of the men buried there were from other places. Most likely, these were mercenaries in the service of a foreign ruler. Traders, blacksmiths, warriors, mercenaries, migrants and diplomats traveled long distances in those days. Good examples here would be the ship remains found off the capes and. These ships could transport not only goods to distant possessions, but also warriors or mercenaries, who at the same time also protected the cargo.
It has been historically proven that Germanic and Celtic mercenaries served the Romans, returning after service to their homeland with Roman weapons and Roman goods, the possession of which ensured prestige in society. Therefore, the presence in the eastern part of Central Europe of the 14th and 13th centuries BC. e. Greco-Mycenaean weapons can well be interpreted as evidence of the return of mercenaries after service in Mycenaean territories. The same can be confirmed by Central European, primarily Italic, swords with a tongue-shaped platform for attaching the handle, found in the area of Mycenaean palaces, as well as ceramics made in the traditions of the native places of the newcomers, for example, vessels reminiscent of Italic ones and discovered in the East Mediterranean.
Ethnographic examples support the thesis of warriors and traders moving over long distances. Warriors often formed their own group identity (warrior communities), which united them within a specific territory through clear rules of acceptable behavior. The rules could concern both the recruitment of new warriors and one’s own travels to distant lands in order to return with glory and prestigious goods. This behavior is characteristic of the Maasai and Japanese samurai, and is present as a recurring plot element in the stories of warriors and wars.
Organization of military units
In some regions of Europe, the proportion of weapons in burials and treasures is so high that it is possible to calculate how many weapons and warriors were available at a certain point in time. In Denmark from the period between 1450 and 1150 BC. e. About 2,000 swords have survived, almost all of which were found in burials. At this time, approximately 50,000 burial grounds were built, from 10 to 15% of which it was possible to explore and find funeral gifts there. Extrapolating from these data, we can conclude that in reality a total of almost 20,000 swords ended up in the necropolises. Based on the lifespan of the sword (30 years), then the warrior’s family needed from three to four swords per century, which for the three hundred years in question is 12-15 swords. This, in turn, gives a figure for the simultaneous use of swords - 1300, which approximately corresponds to the number of settlements in Denmark at that time. The sword was probably the weapon of the local leader, and his troops were armed with javelins, although some may also have carried a sword.
The ratio of the number of leaders with swords and the number of peasants and warriors in the detachment can also be calculated based on the number of settlements. Individual farms varied in size, with families ranging from 10 to 15 people. Based on one farm per square kilometer and the population of half of Denmark at that time, the total area of which was 44,000 square kilometers, then there should have been between 25,000 and 30,000 farms of varying sizes existing at the same time. The leader assembled a detachment of supposedly 20-25 farms. Thus, the rulers of even small groups of the population could quickly assemble an army of several hundred warriors. If only the largest households delegated warriors, then for each leader with a sword there were probably only 5-10 warriors, which corresponds more closely to data calculated for some parts of Germany and the number depicted on ships in cave paintings. Thus, it can be considered proven that European societies of the Bronze Age were very well armed. Throughout the era, the number of simultaneously existing weapons amounted to tens and hundreds of thousands, even if we take Denmark, a small but rich country, as the basis for calculations. Therefore, it is logical to assume that traces of military victims should also be preserved, and this assumption turns out to be fair.
Victims of war
Recently, our knowledge of battle wounds on skeletons has deepened significantly, as well as our understanding of the number of people killed in different types of conflicts.
Il. 9. Combat wound: bronze arrowhead in a vertebra. Klings, South Thuringia (after: Osgord i. a. 2000) At the Olmo di Nogara cemetery in Northern Italy, dating back to the Middle Bronze Age, 116 male skeletons were examined, half of which were buried with swords with a tongue-shaped platform for attaching the handle, including early types with a short tongue. Approximately 16% of these people had injuries to the bones and skull caused by combat, most often blows from swords or arrows. If we consider that there are many fatal wounds inflicted by a spear or arrow that do not leave marks on the bones, then 16% will turn out to be a very high proportion, indicating constant local conflicts. In this region, warriors who had a sword actively participated in battles, which corresponds to the picture of burials with weapons in the arch of Mycenaean burials B, for those buried there have numerous wounds and a very short life expectancy.
However, there were also ruthless massacres. The fortification at Vilema in Bohemia has already been mentioned. Another example is Sund in Western Norway. A mass grave from the late Middle Bronze Age was discovered here, containing more than 30 people - men, women and children - killed around 1200 BC. e. The wounds indicate fierce combat between men who apparently fought with swords and many of whom had healed wounds from previous battles. Some showed signs of malnutrition, suggesting that control of food sources may have been a factor in the war.
Il. 10. Wooden club and skull with marks from a blow from a club, discovered on a Bronze Age battlefield in a river valley (photo: Mecklenburg-Vorpommern Office for Culture and Monument Protection, Department of Archeology, Schwerin) Finally, we must mention the great battle that also took place around 1200 BC. e. in the valley of the small river Tollensee in present-day Mecklenburg, Vorpommern. Here, on a section of the river 1-2 kilometers long, the remains of the skeletons of more than a hundred people were found, and it is likely that others will be discovered in the future (Fig. 9). Obviously, here, after a lost battle, all the dead of the entire army were thrown into the river. The remains of wooden clubs and axes (Fig. 10), as well as arrowheads, were found from weapons. It is likely that those who died were migrants looking for new lands, because at this time dramatic changes were taking place throughout Europe.
Thus, there is evidence of the existence of organized warfare, from small conflicts to confrontations of entire armies. In this sense, the Bronze Age was not much different from the subsequent Iron Age.
Conclusion
Even twenty years ago, research into Bronze Age weapons was aimed exclusively at elucidating their typological development, and their practical use was highly questioned. A new generation of researchers looked at the object of their study in a new way. Today, traces of its use on weapons have already been studied, experiments with reconstruction have been carried out, showing how well organized and dangerous the fighting was in the Bronze Age, which is confirmed by anatomical studies of wounds. It is not far from the truth to say that modern methods of warfare have their origins in the Bronze Age, since the forms of weapons and defense systems known to us from later times were developed then.
Bronze swords appeared around the 17th century BC. e. in the area of the Aegean and Black Seas. The design of such a weapon was nothing more than an improvement of its predecessor, the dagger. It was significantly lengthened, resulting in a new type of weapon. The history of bronze swords, high-quality photos of which are given below, their varieties, models of different armies will be discussed in this article.
History of appearance
As stated earlier, Bronze Age swords appeared in the 17th century BC. e., however, they managed to completely displace daggers as the main type of weapon only in the 1st century BC. e. From the earliest times of sword production, their length could reach more than 100 cm. The technology for producing swords of this length was presumably developed in what is now Greece.
Several alloys were used to make swords, most commonly tin, copper and arsenic. The very first specimens, which were more than 100 cm long, were made around the 1700s BC. e. Standard Bronze Age swords reached 60-80 cm in length, while weapons that were shorter were also produced, but they had different names. So, for example, it was called a dagger or short sword.
Around 1400 BC. e. the prevalence of long swords was mainly characteristic of the Aegean Sea and part of the southeast of modern Europe. This type of weapon began to become widespread in the 2nd century BC. e. in regions such as Central Asia, China, India, Middle East, UK and Central Europe.
Before bronze began to be used as the main material for making weapons, obsidian or flint stone was used exclusively. However, weapons made of stone had a significant drawback - fragility. When copper, and later bronze, began to be used in the manufacture of weapons, this made it possible to create not only knives and daggers, as before, but also swords.
Finding area
The process of the appearance of bronze swords as a separate type of weapon was gradual, from a knife to a dagger, and then to the sword itself. Swords have slightly different shapes due to a number of factors. For example, both the army itself of a state and the time when they were used are important. The range of finds of bronze swords is quite wide: from China to Scandinavia.
In China, the production of swords from this metal begins around 1200 BC. e., during the reign of the Shang Dynasty. The technological culmination of the production of such weapons dates back to the end of the 3rd century BC. e., during the war with the Qin dynasty. During this period, rare technologies were used, such as metal casting, which had a high tin content. This made the edge softer and therefore easier to sharpen. Or with a low content, which gave the metal increased hardness. The use of diamond-shaped patterns, which were not aesthetic, but technological, making the blade reinforced along its entire length.
Bronze swords of China are unique due to technologies in which high-tin metal was periodically used (about 21%). The blade of such a blade was super-hard, but broke when bent too much. In other countries, swords were made with a low tin content (about 10%), which made the blade soft and bending rather than breaking when bent.
However, iron swords supplanted their bronze predecessors; this happened during the reign of the Han Dynasty. China became the last territory where bronze weapons were created.
Scythian weapons
Bronze swords of the Scythians have been known since the 8th century BC. e., they had a short length - from 35 to 45 cm. The shape of the sword is called “akinak”, and there are three versions about its origin. The first says that the shape of this sword was borrowed by the Scythians from the ancient Iranians (Persians, Medes). Those who adhere to the second version argue that the prototype of the Scythian sword was a weapon of the Kabardino-Pyatigorsk type, which was widespread in the 8th century BC. e. on the territory of the modern North Caucasus.
Scythian swords were short and primarily intended for close combat. The blade was sharpened on both sides and shaped like a highly elongated triangle. The cross-section of the blade itself could be rhombic or lenticular, in other words, the blacksmith himself chose the shape
The blade and handle were forged from one piece, and then the pommel and crosshair were riveted to it. Early examples had a butterfly-shaped crosshair, while later ones, dating back to the 4th century, were already triangular in shape.
The Scythians kept their bronze swords in wooden sheaths, which had buterols (the lower part of the sheath), which were protective and decorative. Currently, a large number of Scythian swords have been preserved, found during archaeological excavations in various mounds. Most of the specimens are preserved quite well, which indicates their high quality.
Roman weapons
Bronze legionnaires were very common at that time. The most famous is the sword gladius, or gladius, which later began to be made of iron. It is assumed that the ancient Romans borrowed it from the Pyrenees and then improved it.
The tip of this sword has a fairly wide sharpened edge, which had a good effect on cutting characteristics. These weapons were convenient to fight in dense Roman formations. However, the gladius also had disadvantages, for example, it could deliver slashing blows, but they did not cause serious damage.
Out of order, these weapons were very much inferior to German and Celtic blades, which were longer. The Roman gladius reached a length of 45 to 50 cm. Subsequently, another sword was chosen for the Roman legionaries, which was called the “spata”. A small amount of this type of bronze sword has survived to this day, but their iron counterparts are quite sufficient.
The spatha had a length of 75 cm to 1 m, which made it not very convenient to use in close formation, but this was compensated for in a duel in free territory. It is believed that this type of sword was borrowed from the Germans, and later slightly modified.
The bronze swords of Roman legionnaires - both gladius and spatha - had their advantages, but were not universal. However, preference was given to the latter due to the fact that it could be used not only in foot combat, but also while sitting on a horse.
Swords of Ancient Greece
Bronze swords of the Greeks have a very long history. It originates in the 17th century BC. e. The Greeks had several types of swords at different times, the most common and often depicted on vases and in sculpture is the xiphos. It appeared during the Aegean civilization around the 17th century BC. e. Xiphos was made of bronze, although later it began to be made of iron.
It was a double-edged straight sword, which reached approximately 60 cm in length, with a pronounced leaf-shaped tip, it had good chopping characteristics. Previously, xiphos was made with a blade up to 80 cm long, but for inexplicable reasons they decided to shorten it.
In addition to the Greeks, this sword was also used by the Spartans, but their blades reached a length of 50 cm. Xiphos was used by hoplites (heavy infantry) and Macedonian phalangites (light infantry). Later, these weapons became widespread among most of the barbarian tribes that inhabited the Apennine Peninsula.
The blade of this sword was forged immediately along with the hilt, and later a cross-shaped guard was added. had a good cutting and piercing effect, but due to its length its cutting characteristics were limited.
European weapons
In Europe, bronze swords have been quite widespread since the 18th century BC. e. One of the most famous swords is considered to be the Naue II type sword. It got its name thanks to the scientist Julius Naue, who was the first to describe in detail all the characteristics of this weapon. Naue II is also known as the tongue-hilted sword.
This type of weapon appeared in the 13th century BC. e. and was in service with the soldiers of Northern Italy. This sword was relevant until the beginning of the Iron Age, but it continued to be used for several more centuries, until approximately the 6th century BC. e.
Naue II reached a length of 60 to 85 cm and was found in the territories of what is now Sweden, Great Britain, Finland, Norway, Germany and France. For example, a specimen that was discovered during archaeological excavations near Brekby in Sweden in 1912 reached a length of about 65 cm and belonged to the period of the 18th-15th centuries BC. e.
The shape of the blade, which was typical for swords of those times, is a leaf-shaped formation. In the IX-VIII centuries BC. e. Swords with a blade shape called “carp tongue” were common.
This bronze sword had very good characteristics for this type of weapon. It had wide, double-edged edges, and the blades were parallel to each other and tapered towards the end of the blade. This sword had a thin edge, which allowed the warrior to inflict significant damage to the enemy.
Due to its reliability and good characteristics, this sword became widespread throughout most of Europe, as confirmed by numerous finds.
Andronovo swords
Andronovo is the common name for various peoples who lived in the 17th-9th centuries BC. e. in the territories of modern Kazakhstan, Central Asia, Western Siberia and the Southern Urals. Andronovo people are also considered Proto-Slavs. They were engaged in agriculture, cattle breeding and handicrafts. One of the most common crafts was working with metal (mining, smelting).
The Scythians partially borrowed some types of weapons from them. The bronze swords of Andronovo were distinguished by the high quality of the metal itself and its combat characteristics. The length of this weapon reached from 60 to 65 cm, and the blade itself had a diamond-shaped stiffener. The sharpening of such swords was double-edged, due to utilitarian considerations. In battle, the weapon became dull due to the softness of the metal, and in order to continue the battle and inflict significant damage on the enemy, the sword was simply turned in the hand and the battle continued again with a sharp weapon.
The Andronovites made scabbards of bronze swords from wood, covering their outer part with leather. The inside of the scabbard was sealed with animal fur, which contributed to the polishing of the blade. The sword had a guard that not only protected the warrior’s hand, but also securely held it in its sheath.
Types of swords
During the Bronze Age, there was a wide variety of types and types of swords. During their development, bronze swords went through three stages of development.
- The first is a bronze rapier of the 17th-11th centuries BC. e.
- The second is a leaf-shaped sword, with high piercing-cutting characteristics of the 11th-8th centuries BC. e.
- The third is a Hallstadt type sword from the 8th-4th centuries BC. e.
The identification of these stages is due to various specimens found during archaeological excavations in the territory of modern Europe, Greece and China, as well as their classification in catalogs of bladed weapons.
Bronze swords of antiquity, related to the rapier type, first appeared in Europe as a logical development of a dagger or knife. This type of sword arose as an elongated modification of the dagger, which is explained by practical combat needs. This type of sword primarily ensured the infliction of significant damage to the enemy due to its prickly characteristics.
Such swords were most likely made individually for each warrior, as evidenced by the fact that the hilt was of different sizes and the finishing quality of the weapon itself varied significantly. These swords are a narrow bronze strip that has a stiffening rib in the middle.
Bronze rapiers were intended to use piercing blows, but they were also used as slashing weapons. This is evidenced by notches on the blade of specimens found in Denmark, Ireland and Crete.
Swords XI-VIII centuries BC. e.
The bronze rapier, several centuries later, was replaced by a leaf-shaped or phallic-shaped sword. If you look at the photos of bronze swords, their difference will become obvious. But they differed not only in shape, but also in characteristics. For example, leaf-shaped swords made it possible to inflict not only stab wounds, but also chopping and cutting blows.
Archaeological research carried out in various parts of Europe and Asia suggests that such swords were widespread in the territory from what is now Greece to China.
With the advent of swords of this type, from the 11th century BC. e., it can be observed that the quality of decoration of the sheath and handle is sharply reduced, but the level and characteristics of the blade are noticeably higher than those of its predecessors. And yet, due to the fact that this sword could both stab and cut, and therefore was strong and did not break after a blow, the quality of the blade was worse. This was due to the fact that a larger amount of tin was added to bronze.
After some time, the shank of the sword appears, which is located at the end of the handle. Its appearance allows you to deliver strong slashing blows while keeping the sword in your hand. This is how the transition to the next type of weapon begins. - to the sword of Hallstadt.
Swords of the 8th-4th centuries BC. e.
Swords changed due to objective reasons, for example, due to changes in fighting techniques. If earlier the fencing technique dominated, in which the main thing was to deliver an accurate piercing blow, then over time it gave way to the chopping technique. In the latter, it was important to deliver a strong blow with one of the sword blades, and the more force applied, the more significant the damage.
By the 7th century BC. e. chopping technology completely replaces piercing technology due to its simplicity and reliability. This is confirmed by bronze swords of the Hallstadt type, which are intended exclusively for slashing.
This type of sword received its name due to the area located in Austria, where it is believed that this weapon was first produced. One of the features of such a sword is the fact that these swords were made of both bronze and iron.
Hallstadt swords resemble leaf-shaped swords in shape, but they are noticeably narrower. The length of such a sword reaches about 83 cm, has a strong stiffening rib, which allows it not to deform when delivering chopping blows. This weapon allowed both infantrymen and horsemen to fight, as well as attack the enemy from a chariot.
The handle of the sword was crowned with a tang, which allowed the warrior to easily hold the sword after striking. This weapon was universal at one time and was highly valued.
Ceremonial swords
In the Bronze Age, there was another type of sword, which is not described above, since it cannot be attributed to any of the classifications. This is a sword with a single edge, whereas all other swords had sharpening on both sides. It is an extremely rare type of weapon, and to date only three copies have been found in one of the regions of Denmark. It is believed that this sword was not a combat sword, but a ceremonial one, but this is just a hypothesis.
conclusions
It can be concluded that bronze swords of antiquity were made at a high level, given the underdevelopment of the technological process. In addition to their combat purpose, many swords were works of art, thanks to the efforts of the craftsmen. Each type of sword for its time met all combat requirements, to one degree or another.
Naturally, the weapon was gradually improved, and efforts were made to minimize its shortcomings. Having gone through centuries of evolution, ancient bronze swords became the best weapons of their era, until it gave way to the Iron Age and a new page began in the history of edged weapons.
Some may be surprised, but most of the written history of ancient Hellas known to us is the Iron Age, and not the Bronze Age at all. And the battle of Thermopylae, and in general this whole Greco-Persian mess is the era of the Iron Age.
The Battle of Thermopylae, by the way, took place generally not so long ago - in 480 BC. When Spartan spears in a narrow gorge ripped open the bellies of the Persians, in some places in the northwest, on the boot-shaped peninsula, the not-so-small city of Rome already existed, having just thrown off the power of the Etruscan kings and proclaimed the Republic. Its legions had not yet reached the limits of the "boot", but Rome was patient. He had nowhere to rush.
And the Bronze Age in the Mediterranean ended in... 1200 BC.
Bronze swords. And now it's still in good condition
But nevertheless, for almost half a millennium, Greek hoplites, Macedonian phalangites and other warriors of the Mediterranean region were armed with bronze swords and bronze shields. Their heads were covered with bronze helmets, and the spearheads were also bronze. Not iron. Although they had been able to smelt iron from ore and forge it for several centuries, they mostly made crafts from it for household purposes. Why?
A hoplite from the first line of the phalanx. The red cape indicates that he is a Spartan. Well, the “lambda” on the shield is Lacedaemon...)
The interesting thing is that at first a bronze sword was much stronger than an iron sword...))
Technological features
Initially, bronze was made not from an alloy of copper and tin, but from an alloy of copper and arsenic. Arsenic bronze is quite hard and durable, although it does not really hold an edge. In general, a sword made from it will be a chisel anyway.
Subsequently, instead of poisonous arsenic, they began to add tin to the alloy, thereby obtaining classic bronze. Tin bronze, unlike arsenic bronze, was suitable for alteration. Simply put, a broken sword made of arsenic bronze cannot be put back together - if the fragments are melted, the arsenic will evaporate, and what will remain is pure nonsense. And from tin - easily. Throw it in the oven, melt it, pour it into a new mold - and voila!
And the main technological feature of bronze is that swords, spearheads and elements for covering shields were made from it... They were cast. The metal was melted, poured into a ceramic mold and allowed to cool. All is ready.
Solid cut-and-thrust sword
The photo above is a technologically advanced copy of a bronze sword from around the 6th century BC, from the Mediterranean region. Its length is 74 cm and its weight is only 650 g.
Bronze, unlike iron, becomes stronger after casting; forging destroys it. But iron needs to be forged. Although the ancient people could not melt iron even if they wanted to.
Thus, the same Spartans of the era of King Leonidas could well have made an iron sword. They knew this metal itself. But they didn't want to...
The fact is that pure iron, fresh from a cheese-blowing oven, is very soft. Much softer than bronze, which by that time in Hellas had long been in the making. Different varieties - where necessary, we will add tin, where necessary - we will subtract...
In order for an iron sword to become stronger than a bronze one, it must be made using the “batch” technology - forge welding elements of iron and hard steel together. Some people in Asia Minor already knew this technology, but even the Persian “immortals” - the famous guard of Xerxes - were considered immortal not because they wore iron armor, but because the number of their detachment was always maintained at the same level - exactly 10 thousand. It’s as if they didn’t die at all))
Immortals. Persian bas-relief
So it turned out that the main advantage of iron tools in the era of King Leonidas and the Battle of Thermopylae was their cheapness. There were iron tools - made from "raw" iron - and they cost less than bronze ones, but they were not suitable for military purposes. Iron swords at this time were still too soft. It will take a lot of time before the technology of welded iron spreads, before they learn to harden this metal and process it more or less decently. And then the same Romans for another three hundred years would have iron chain mail (made of soft iron), and bronze helmets.
The main advantages of a bronze sword over an iron one in the era of the Battle of Thermopylae
1. Easier to manufacture - swords and other objects were simply cast in molds - entirely, along with the handles. Iron had to be forged.
2. Hardness and strength - tin bronze (the exact amount of tin in the composition was determined through trial and error) was much stronger than raw iron. It was more likely that a bronze sword at that time would cut through an iron one than vice versa.
3. Corrosion. Bronze oxidizes over time, but not that much. But raw iron, which always contains some admixture of carbon, quickly rusts to the point of complete destruction.
Iron ancient Greek kopis
The only significant drawback of bronze, which directly affected its cost, was the need for tin. There was little tin, and it was quite expensive. Tin was mined in the form of the mineral cassiterite, from which it was subsequently smelted. But cassiterite itself is quite rare; at that time it was not mined using the ore method, but was found in placers on river banks. They called it "tin stone".
Subsequently, the “tin stone” began to be transported from an incredible distance - from the British Isles, then called the Tin Isles.
But the spread of iron weapons and armor was directly related to the development of steelmaking technologies, which, again, directly depended on the progress of technological progress in general. Yes, iron ultimately had greater potential, but few people knew about this in the fifth century BC...)
Original article - on the channel https://zen.yandex.ru/dnevnik_rolevika
Bronze Age swords appeared around the 17th century BC, in the Black Sea and Aegean Sea regions. The design of these types was an improvement of a shorter type of weapon - . Swords replaced daggers during the Iron Age (early 1st millennium BC).
From an early time, the length of the sword could already reach more than 100 cm. The technology for making blades of this length was presumably developed in the Aegean Sea. Alloys used in production were copper and tin or arsenic. The earliest specimens over 100 cm were made around 1700 BC. e. Typical Bronze Age swords ranged from 60 to 80 cm in length, while weapons significantly shorter than 60 cm also continued to be made, but were identified differently. Sometimes like short swords, sometimes like daggers. Until about 1400 BC. the distribution of swords is mainly limited to the Aegean Sea and southeastern Europe. This type of weapon became more widespread in the last centuries of the 2nd millennium BC, in regions such as Central Europe, Great Britain, the Middle East, Central Asia, Northern India and China.
Predecessors
Before the advent of bronze, stone (flint, obsidian) was used as the main material for cutting tools and weapons. However, the stone is very fragile and therefore not practical for making swords. With the advent of copper, and subsequently bronze, daggers could be forged with a longer blade, which eventually led to a separate class of weapon - the sword. Thus, the process of the appearance of the sword as a derivative weapon from the dagger was gradual. In 2004, examples of the first swords from the Early Bronze Age (c. 33rd to 31st centuries BC) were claimed, based on finds at Arslantepe by Marcella Frangipane of the University of Rome. A cache of that time was found, which contained a total of nine swords and daggers, which included an alloy of copper and arsenic. Among the finds on three swords was beautiful silver inlay.
These exhibits, with a total length of 45 to 60 cm, can be described as either short swords or long daggers. Several other similar swords have been found in Turkey and are described by Thomas Zimmerman.
Sword production was extremely rare for the next millennium. This type of weapon became more widespread only with the end of the 3rd millennium BC. e. Swords from this later period can still be readily interpreted as daggers, as is the case with a copper example from Naxos (dated to approximately 2800 - 2300 BC), measuring just under 36 cm in length, but individual examples of the Cycladic civilization "copper swords" period approximately 2300 years. reach a length of up to 60 cm. The first examples of weapons that can be classified as swords without ambiguity are blades found on Minoan Crete, dated to approximately 1700 BC, their length reaches a size of over 100 cm. These are swords of the "Aegean type" Bronze Age.
Aegean period
Minoan and Mycenaean (mid to late Aegean Bronze Age) swords are classified into types labeled A through H as follows by Sandars (British archaeologist), in Sandars's "typology" (1961). Types A and B ("shank-loop") are the earliest, from about the 17th to 16th centuries. BC e. Types C ("horned swords") and D ("cross swords") from the 15th century BC, types E and F ("T-hilt swords") from the 13th and 12th centuries BC AD The 13th to 12th centuries also saw a revival of the "horned" type of sword, which were classified as types G and H. Type H swords are associated with the Sea Peoples and were found in Asia Minor (Pergamon) and Greece. Contemporary with types E and H is the so-called Naue II type, imported from South-Eastern Europe.
Europe
Naue II
One of the most important and long-lasting types of prehistoric European swords was the Naue II type (named after Julius Naue, due to the fact that he was the first to describe them), also known as the "tongue-hilted sword." This type of sword has appeared since the 13th century BC. in Northern Italy (the finds relate to the urn field culture), and lasted until the Iron Age, with a duration of active use of approximately seven centuries, until the 6th century BC. During its existence, metallurgical technology has changed. Initially, the main material for making the sword was bronze; later, the weapon was forged from iron, but the basic design remained the same. Naue II swords were exported from Europe to areas around the Aegean, as well as to more distant regions such as Ugarit, starting around 1200 BC, just a few decades before the end of the Bronze Age palace cultures . The length of Naue II type swords could reach 85 cm, but most specimens fall in the range of 60 - 70 cm.
Swords from the Scandinavian Bronze Age appear from the 13th century. BC, these blades often contain spiral elements. The first Scandinavian swords were also relatively short. A specimen discovered in 1912 near Brekby (Sweden), forged between approximately 1800 and 1500 BC, was just over 60 cm long. This sword was classified as a "Hajdúsámson-Apa" type, and was apparently imported . The sword "Vreta Kloster", discovered in 1897 (production date from 1600 to 1500 BC), has a blade length (absent) of 46 cm. The typical blade shape for European swords of that time is leaf. This form was most common in North-West Europe at the end of the Bronze Age and in particular in the British Isles. The "carp tongue" sword is a type of bronze sword that was common in Western Europe during approximately the 9th to 8th centuries BC. The blade of this sword was wide, the blades running parallel for most of its length, tapering at the last third of the blade into a thin point. A similar structural element was intended primarily for piercing blows. The sword form was probably developed in northwestern France and combined a wide blade suitable for cutting with a long point for better piercing ability. Atlantic Europe also took advantage of this design. In the south-east of Great Britain, such metal products got their name: “Carp's Tongue complex”. Illustrative examples of this type are some artifacts of the Aylham hoard. The Bronze Age sword design and methods of its production disappear at the end of the Early Iron Age (Halstatt culture, period D), around 600-500 BC, when swords are again replaced by daggers in most of Europe. The exception is the dagger, which continues to develop for several centuries longer. The "antenna sword" is a type of weapon of the late Bronze Age, from the early iron swords of the East Hallstatt region and Italy.
China
The beginning of sword production in China dates back to the Shang Dynasty (Bronze Age), around 1200 BC. Bronze sword technology reached its climax during the Warring States Period and the Qin Dynasty (221 BC - 207 BC). Among the swords of the Warring States period, some unique technologies were used, such as casting with a high tin content (cutting edges were softer), lower tin content, or the use of diamond patterns on the blade (as in the case of the Gou Jian sword). Also unique to Chinese bronze is the occasional use of high tin bronze (17-21% tin), which was very hard and would break when bent too hard, while other cultures preferred low tin bronze (usually 10%) which when bent too hard bent. Iron swords were produced alongside bronze ones, and it was not until the early Han Dynasty that iron completely replaced bronze, making China the last place where bronze was used in sword blades.
India
Swords have been found in archaeological remains of the Ocher Painted Pottery culture throughout the Ganges-Jamna Doab region. As a rule, weapons were made from copper, but in some cases from bronze. Various examples were discovered at Fatehgarh, where several varieties of handles were also discovered. These swords date from different periods, between 1700-1400. BC, but were probably used more widely during 1200-600 AD. BC. (during the Gray Painted Ware culture, Iron Age in India).
“Let’s sum up the interim results of our investigation, Watson, especially since the dear Miss Hudson has already brought us her delicious coffee - the first of the interlocutors began to slowly pour the aromatic drink into cups. - So, what do we have? We have an archaeological culture of urn fields spread throughout central Europe. Historians wonder what kind of people left these antiquities, but they suspect it community of related tribes". This time. The coffee today is simply divine, don't you think? On the other hand, in this same territory, numerous names of rivers and streams convince us that people who spoke a dialect unknown to science once lived here. Moreover, common roots indicate a common language of the population of such distant places as the Dutch coast of the North Sea and the Adriatic, Illyria and Aquitaine, the Polish seaside and Catalonia. And, finally, third: Greek and Roman writers discover “Veneti” peoples in different parts of the same Central European region and are surprised at their abundance and breadth of distribution. I believe we can bring together the data of archaeology, linguistics and ancient literature and draw a quite obvious conclusion - the Wends were part of the burial field community, perhaps they were even its creators.
– Well, scientists have long suspected something similar. Moreover, they started only from the fact of the prevalence of toponyms in the “Vendian” language.
- Without a doubt, Watson! However, we were able to tie them not to some vague “ancient European population,” but to a very specific archaeological community. Moreover, one that amazed scientists with its achievements. As the Czech archaeologist of the second half of the 20th century Jan Philip writes about him "The population in some places exceeded the present population". And this was said about Central Europe more than a thousand years before the birth of Christ! In general, as archaeologists excavated these related cultures one after another, an amazing world of powerful northern warriors appeared before them, armed with long swords, whose heads were protected by strong bronze helmets, their legs by greaves, and their bodies by strong armor. Before that, it was believed that such a complex set of weapons in the Bronze Age existed only among the civilized peoples of the Mediterranean. Stunned scientists started talking about the expansion of the Lusatians and the peoples of the burial urns in general. It was they who began to be considered responsible for the Bronze Age Catastrophe.
“I’m afraid to seem ignorant, Holmes, but to my shame I have not heard anything about this.” What kind of cataclysm are we talking about?
“You see, Watson, many people believe that history is a smooth progression from savagery to modern civilization. In general this is, of course, true. But sometimes in this continuous climb of humanity towards Light and Progress, annoying glitches occur. The Roman Empire, with its laws, literature and art, is considered, for example, a much more developed society than the barbarian tribes that replaced it, herding goats and sheep among the ruins of ancient cities. Something similar, and perhaps even more terrible, happened in the world at the turn of the 13th and 12th centuries BC. American historian Robert Drews called it "Bronze Collapse" or, if you like, "Bronze Age Catastrophe": "In many places, ancient and advanced society ended around 1200 BC. In the Aegean, the "palace civilization" as we call Mycenaean Greece disappeared. Although some bard storytellers of the "Dark Ages" remembered it, it faded into obscurity until archaeologists began excavating. On the Anatolian Peninsula, the losses were even greater. The Hittite Empire gave the Anatolian plateau a level of stability and prosperity that the area would not see for the next thousand years. In the Levant, recovery was much faster: some social institutions " "dark time" from which Greece and Anatolia did not emerge for 400 years. In general, the end of the Bronze Age became one of the deepest catastrophes of ancient history, a greater disaster than the fall of the Roman Empire.". Indeed, something terrible was happening. Nine-tenths of Greek cities were destroyed. Royal Mycenae fell. Majestic Troy, which had stood for thousands of years, was burned and turned into a small village. The inhabitants of Crete, who built the magnificent Palace of Knossos, with its countless halls, staircases, pools, colorful frescoes, left their flowering valleys and coastal areas with convenient harbors and fled high into the mountains, turning into shepherds and hunters. Trade was abandoned, writing was forgotten, craft skills were lost. In many places, the movement towards civilization had to start all over again, practically from scratch.
– But what do the inhabitants of central Europe – the Wends – have to do with these disasters? Don't you want to say that they were the culprits of all these horrors?
– You see, Watson, in history very often the laws of physics that are familiar to us from school manifest themselves. For example, the law of conservation of matter and energy. And it says: if something was lost somewhere, then it was certainly added somewhere else. The decline of the civilizations of the Eastern Mediterranean coincided with the unprecedented rise of the previously very modest peoples of Central Europe, first of all, the same “swan tribes” that were experiencing their heyday at that time. Historians suspected that there was some connection between the degradation of some and the rise of others. Pundits, by the way, put forward a variety of versions of the causes of the Bronze Age catastrophe. One of them, climate, is based on the fact that by the 13th century BC, a long-term drought came to the Middle East, while in Europe, on the contrary, it became warmer and more humid. Other researchers "sin" due to a series of earthquakes. Still others rightly point out that the chronicles of that time are full of information about the invasions of foreigners, including the mysterious “peoples of the sea.” And in this context, archaeologists are extremely excited about the long swords of the urn cultures. It was they who seemed to them to be the main symbol of the Bronze Apocalypse.
– And what was so remarkable that scientists saw in ordinary bronze swords? I had a chance to look at them in museums: the shape of the double-edged blade resembles an elongated leaf, slightly widening towards the tip, the handle is in the same casting as the blade. The length rarely exceeds one meter. A common infantry weapon.
– Yes, of course, if you look into the past from the heights of the present, any achievements and inventions there, even the most outstanding ones, may seem like something taken for granted. But for contemporaries these innovations became fateful, they turned the histories of peoples upside down, elevated some and overthrew others. That sword that you so beautifully described, Watson, also became one of the turning points in ancient warfare. It may seem strange to you, but the sword, as a piercing-cutting weapon, was not known to the most ancient civilizations of the Mediterranean. They fought there with bows, spears, darts, axes and hammers, and also, of course, war chariots, those formidable “tanks” of the Bronze Age. Instead of swords, elite warriors were armed with daggers, with a shorter blade (up to 40 cm). It would seem that the shape of the blade of a sword and a dagger is similar, but the latter is much inferior to the former in battle - they can only finish off an already defeated enemy. Why not make a weapon with a longer blade? It turns out that it’s all about the properties of the materials. The first bronze was quite fragile; a long blade made of it could not withstand side blows and inevitably broke at the first attempt to bring it down on the enemy’s head, helmet or shield. Somewhere around the 16th - 15th centuries BC, gunsmiths of the Eastern Mediterranean learned to make long swords. However, very unusual shapes. The blades were thin, evenly tapering towards the tip, they resembled Italian rapiers or, if you like, giant awls. They were armed exclusively by elite warriors, since in battle they had only one technique available to them - a direct attack with the aim of piercing the enemy in an unprotected place - and in the heat of battle this is not easy to do. A much more natural movement is a chopping one, and it was inaccessible to warriors until the peoples of Central Europe created a long bronze sword of the shape you described.
– And you believe that this “invention” turned the fate of mankind upside down and became the main cause of the Bronze Catastrophe?
– Firstly, it’s not me who thinks so, but the prominent American historian Robert Drews, whose works we have already mentioned. Secondly, the point is not in the idea itself, which, of course, was in the air, but in the level of development of metallurgy, which made it possible to realize it. Listen to what British researcher Edward Oakeshott writes about this in his book “The Archeology of Weapons”: “ At the beginning of the Bronze Age, the alloy from which these weapons were cast included on average 9.4% tin, while in later examples this amount reaches 10.6%. This alloy can be compared with the material from which gun barrels were made in the 19th century and which is hardly stronger than anything. Thus, the swords of the late Bronze Age were no less strong than cannons, and were quite suitable for slashing." And, finally, it was precisely such a blow that radically changed the strategy and tactics of the then military affairs.
“Don’t consider me stubborn, Holmes, but I still can’t understand how the mere appearance of cutting swords could destroy so many kingdoms and doom so many peoples to poverty and oblivion.” Somehow I can’t believe this!
– Well, although, as it seems to me, we have somewhat digressed from the topic of our investigation, let’s spend a couple more minutes on an excursion into the past of military art. The very first armies of antiquity consisted, quite obviously, of infantrymen. Our warlike ancestors killed their own kind with the help of the same things they hunted with or farmed with - bows and arrows, spears, darts, boomerangs, clubs, knives, axes. A little later, a shield was invented, wooden or made of wicker covered with leather. But a real revolution in military affairs occurred already in the early Bronze Age, when the steppe peoples of Eurasia invented chariots. War carts, drawn by a pair of horses, rushing into the ranks of the enemy, sowed panic and death. The charioteers and warriors standing on chariots struck the frightened enemy with arrows and darts, and less often, like the Greeks and Hittites, with long spears. The army of lightly armed infantrymen was unable to resist this scourge. In the 17th century, a group of steppe shepherds from Asia - the Hyksos - easily conquered the most powerful kingdom of Egypt. The balance of forces was incredible: there were more than a thousand Egyptians per newcomer. But the Hyksos arrived in chariots, and until the inhabitants of the Nile Valley built similar war wagons and mastered the art of fighting with them, they could not do anything with the strangers. Since then, the infantry has become a secondary, auxiliary army. The main striking force of any army in the world were chariots and specially trained warriors - charioteers. “The crime of my soldiers and chariot warriors who abandoned me is so great that it cannot be expressed in words.”- Egyptian Pharaoh Ramses II complains to his descendants from the walls of the Luxor temple. In 1274, under the walls of the Syrian city of Kadesh, the hitherto invincible Egyptian army clashed with the Hittite army. On both sides, approximately a thousand chariots took part in the battle. And this was the most massive use of this type of troops in all human history. If you believe the inscription of Ramesses, only his personal courage made it possible to stop the flight of his soldiers and push back the enemy. This may be a bit of an exaggeration, but chariot fighting was truly the work of the elite - kings and leaders.
– Do you want to say that there were few chariots and charioteers? But, if they were so effective, why not make this type of weapon widespread?
– The chariot itself is a rather complex device, not cheap to produce, but it was even more expensive to maintain this type of army. In order for the horse to obey the slightest movements of the driver’s hands on the battlefield, so that the crew could stop, turn sharply, reduce or increase speed, so that the horses were not afraid to crash into a crowd of enemy warriors, many years of hard training were required. The bronze and wooden parts of the cart: wheels, axles, turning mechanism often broke down and needed constant repair. It was no less difficult to train a charioteer, who sometimes had to simultaneously control horses and defeat enemies. Often this had to be taught from childhood. This type of weapon, by definition, became the property of the elite and was very expensive for the state. Large cities could contain a dozen chariots, small countries - a hundred, powerful empires - about a thousand. At the same time, the rest of the army - the infantry - was only capable of finishing off the crumpled enemy and marauding the battlefield. "There were few warriors on chariots,– writes expert on ancient strategies Mikhail Gorelik – and they fought mainly with their own kind of enemy chariot fighters. Such a duel often decided the outcome of the battle, as it had a powerful effect on ordinary fighters: they either uncontrollably rushed forward after their victorious leader, or, if their leader was killed or wounded, they fled, at best trying to save at least his body." . This type of combat radically changed the structure of society: all the ancient kingdoms turned into a social pyramid, at the top of which, separated from the lower classes, sat a group of demigods - charioteer leaders, below them was a small group of infantry warriors, and, at the base, were millions civilians who do not know what weapons are. And this entire colossus rested on the thousand-year-old myth about the invincibility of war chariots...
– This “piece of bronze,” as you called it, is actually not as simple as it seems. It took all the skill of the ancient metallurgists to make the swords ring merrily on the battlefield. They found the secret of an alloy that gives the required hardness, and came up with a way to mount the blade with a handle that would not shatter into pieces even after the strongest blows. The sword had to be long enough to hit enemies, but also light enough so that the warrior could easily rotate it with one hand. In a word, it was a masterpiece. In addition to it, reliable armor was required: a durable helmet, strong shell, pads that protect the legs, a large and comfortable shield. This is how a new type of army arose - heavy infantry - and it was he who was able to resist chariots in the bloody battles of the Bronze Age. From now on, the warriors began to fight in tight formation, shield to shield, side to side, they were not afraid of arrows and darts, since they were reliably protected from these projectiles, and chariots bursting into their ranks got stuck in them, like a knife embedded deep in a tree . Horror gripped all the ancient kingdoms of the East before the invasion of countless hordes of foreigners in armor with swords in their hands. “Not a single country has resisted their right hand, starting with Hatta.” Egyptians tremble from the walls of the funeral temple of Ramses III, telling about the invasion of the famous “peoples of the sea” – Karkelish, Artsava, Alasiya were destroyed. They camped in the middle of Amurru, they destroyed its people as if they never existed. They marched straight towards Egypt."
Map of the Sea Peoples invasion
– Wait, Holmes, do you seriously believe that the “peoples of the sea” were the tribes of Central Europe: the Italians, Illyrians and Wends?
- Of course not. Although at first some scientists, faced with the phenomenon of the Bronze Collapse, “sinned” against representatives of the burial field culture. The latter spread too quickly into the heart of our continent. However, now that scientific passions have cooled, a different scenario seems more likely. Having occupied the richest Central European regions with the help of long bronze swords, the Swan tribes ousted the former inhabitants from there, who, in turn, poured south into the Apennines and the Balkans; the local inhabitants driven from their places attacked the most ancient civilizations of the Eastern Mediterranean. Thus, the migration wave that originated in the depths of Europe swept away many thousand-year-old kingdoms. And everywhere it was accompanied by the spread of a new type of weapon and associated more advanced combat tactics. The new set of weapons was much cheaper than chariots, and they could be provided to a much larger number of people. That is why soon cutting swords appeared everywhere - from distant Scandinavia to sunny Egypt.
Invasion of the "Sea Peoples". Reconstruction" src="/Picture/NN/19.jpg" height="377" width="267">
Invasion of the "Sea Peoples". Reconstruction
The Egyptians, by the way, turned out to be one of the few peoples who managed to repel the invasion of foreigners. To do this, Ramses III decided on a truly desperate step; he transferred the elite of his army from chariots to ships and attacked the newcomers, preventing them from landing on the shore. Look how meticulously accurately the Egyptian bas-reliefs depict drowning warriors in horned helmets with swords in their hands. If they had managed to form a battle formation on solid ground, the Egyptian army would have been in trouble.
Egyptian frescoes about the invasion of the "Sea Peoples" Temple of Ramses III
- However, let's return to our Swan tribes. You, Holmes, several times called the areas occupied by them “rich” and “strategically important.” And what was so unusual about Central Europe at that time? Has the climate there become better than the Mediterranean?
“I guess it’s not the climate at all.” It all depends on the nature of that material, which we have already talked about more than once, and on which people’s lives then depended almost one hundred percent. Without it, palaces were not built, ships did not cut through the waves, chariots did not rush, and the armor of warriors did not shine in the sun. I mean bronze. You, of course, know, Watson, that this is an alloy of two metals - copper and tin, much superior in hardness to each of the original elements. But do you know, my friend, that the deposits of these two non-ferrous metals available to people in ancient times were rare. Copper, not counting Cyprus, was mined in the Eastern Alps, the Carpathians, the Czech Ore Mountains and the Balkans. An even greater shortage was the placers of tin, which was mined along with copper in Bohemia, a little in the north of the Iberian Peninsula and in the Italian province of Tuscany, but most of all, on the Cornish Peninsula in Britain, which is why our islands in those times were often called the Tin Islands. Look at the map of Europe, Watson. At first, Phoenician merchants transported ingots of British tin that looked like silvery fish scales along the entire Atlantic coast of the continent - through the roaring Bay of Biscay, Gibraltar, and then in transit along the Mediterranean. Then they established a more convenient route: along the Rhine to its sources, then on carts to the upper reaches of the Danube and along this great river to the Black Sea. Thus, British tin quickly reached Troy, Mycenaean Greece, Crete, where the Minoans lived, Egypt and representatives of other highly developed communities of the eastern Mediterranean. Without tin there was no bronze, without bronze there was no technical progress.
“So you’re saying, Holmes, that the burial field tribes who settled in the center of Europe took control of both the continent’s most abundant copper mines and the most important Tin Route?”
- That's right, Watson. They inherited a lot of wealth, including gold deposits at the source of the Rhine, but they also tried to further penetrate into the most profitable areas for the extraction of strategically important metals: the Balkans, Northern Italy, and the area south of the Pyrenees Mountains. It seems that our heroes sought to become a monopoly in the world production of bronze. And wasn’t this the main reason for the “Dark Ages” of Greece and Anatolia? It is possible that previously it was the Minoans, Trojans and Hittites who owned the most important mines in Europe. At least the first bronze products were cast here according to Mediterranean models and were intended, first of all, to be sent to the South. The Venetian tribes, dominating Central Europe, began to produce weapons and utensils primarily for themselves, setting exorbitant prices for export. This could well, from my point of view, collapse the economies of the Eastern Mediterranean countries. There came the Bronze Collapse. But the burial field culture was flourishing. Soon, however, the Golden Age of the Swan Clan also came to an end.
– And what put a limit to the power of the community of Italians, Illyrians and Wends?
– One small innovation, which, again, once again turned the destinies of nations upside down. Shiny bronze was replaced by humble iron. And iron ores are found everywhere, they are under everyone’s feet. The first products made from this metal were much softer than bronze ones, but were not fragile and did not burst from impacts. The Celtic tribes, who had previously found themselves in obscurity somewhere on the plains of France, had mastered the new metal and soon ousted the former masters of life from Central Europe. Then they will follow in the footsteps of the Swan Peoples almost everywhere - in the Balkans, in northern Italy, they will take possession of German and Czech lands, and occupy the Iberian Peninsula. Armed with iron swords, the new rulers of Europe will humiliate Rome, forcing it to pay a heavy tribute, ruin Greece, and invade Asia Minor. This is how the formidable Iron Age will begin and the historian Polybius will note with surprise, then every tribe of Galatians(Greek name for Celts) terrible for their courage in the first attack, while they had not yet suffered any losses, because their swords, as was said above, are only suitable for the first blow, and after that they become dull and, like a comb, are bent along and across so much that the second blow is too weak, unless the soldier has time to straighten the sword with his foot, pressing it into the ground.
“And how was such a weak and fragile weapon able to crush the magnificent bronze?”
– There is only one answer – mass participation. If during the era of chariots tens or hundreds of elite warriors fought, during the Bronze Collapse period thousands of heavily armed fighters appeared, but now almost every adult male of the tribe became a soldier. Providing him with iron weapons is simple and inexpensive. The Celtic invasion was like a mountain avalanche, sweeping away everything in its path. Soon, Celtic tribes everywhere will displace the Swans' worshipers and settle within their borders. Of all the cultures of the urn fields, only the Northern Italian cultures and the Lusatian one survived the onset of the brutal Iron Age. But the latter also lost its outskirts - the lands of the Czech Republic and East Germany, and in its center, on the territory of Poland, it literally bristled with dozens of impregnable castles. Their northern neighbors hastened to take advantage of the weakening of the Baltic Veneti. By the 4th century BC, on the site of the once brilliant Lusatian culture, a number of new ones emerged, with a pronounced northern flavor. These were already East Germans.
– But what about those whom we are looking for – the Slavs?
– Have you guessed yet, Watson, that it is pointless to look for the heroes of our investigation among the Swan Community of Central Europe? Didn’t what you and I learned convince you that the Wends and Slavs are as different as day and night? " The hypothesis about the Slavic origin of the Lusatian culture is implausible already because undoubtedly Slavic archaeological finds indicate a level of culture that is significantly more archaic, primitive and poor“- noted the Czech researcher Karl Goralek back in 1983. But this is not the only thing.
- What else?
- Let's think logically, Watson. If the Slavs are the direct heirs of the most brilliant civilization of the Bronze Age, then in the center of our continent there should be a great variety of place names dating back to the Slavic dialects. After all, the Veneti left behind many such names, didn’t they? We don't see anything like that. Further. The only Venetian language currently known to science - the one spoken by the inhabitants of the Po Valley - turned out to be much closer to the Italic dialects and is not at all similar to the speech of the Slavs. And that is not all. Toponyms with roots in “Vendi” are abundantly scattered throughout our continent, but are not found within Slavic boundaries proper, of course, excluding those cases when the Slavs in the Middle Ages settled in the same place where the Wends had previously lived. And finally, the last thing. Remember, Watson, how easily you found consonances of the name “Veneda” in many European languages?
– Yes, of course, similar words are found in Celtic and Germanic dialects, and among the Greeks and Latin.
– But the Slavs turned out to be almost the only Europeans whose language has no correspondence. The combination of sounds “v-n-d(t)” as a whole turned out to be decisively alien to the very structure of Slavic speech. In science, however, there have been pathetic attempts to tie the Wends to the Vyatichi tribe, through the outdated “vyatshiy,” that is, “bigger.” Or explain the self-name Slavs from the phrase “sloy Vienna,” that is, the ambassadors of the Wends. But even their authors were soon forced to renounce such clumsy explanations.
“It turns out that having followed the path of the Jordan, we have wandered into a dead end. So much time wasted!
– Firstly, a negative result in science is also a result. We just worked through one of the main versions to the end. Secondly, you must agree, my friend, we have learned a lot of interesting things from the past of our continent.
- All this is wonderful, but what should we do now? We actually ended up with nothing.
– Don’t give in to despondency, my friend! If we are convinced that we were following the wrong trail, let's go back to the beginning. Let's get acquainted with the testimony of other witnesses in our case. Maybe they will give us something interesting?
Loading...
