… there were warlike people, men wearing a shield and a sword …
First Chronicles 5:18
Mysteries of history. They are said to meet at every turn. And that is why so many speculations have appeared around them. We know how this or that product began, say, a metal or a stone … We know how its “fate” ended - it was made, it is in our hands, it was found and we can hold on to it. That is, we know points A and B. But we do not know points C - how exactly this product was made and applied. True, this was, in general, not so long ago.
Today, the development of science and technology has reached the point that allows you to carry out the most amazing research, which gives amazing results. For example, the study of microcracks on the spearheads of people of the Stone Age made it possible to establish an amazing thing: at first the spears were not thrown, but hit with them, apparently approaching the victim closely or chasing her at a run. And only then did people learn to throw spears. It also turned out that the Neanderthals hit with spears, but the Cro-Magnons were already throwing them, that is, they could hit the enemy at a distance.
It is clear that it would be simply impossible to discover this by any speculation! Well, after the Stone Age came the age of metals, and new types of research again helped to learn a lot about it. Well, for example, that the first to appear was not tin bronze, but arsenic, and this is surprising, because the smelting of such a metal was a very harmful activity. So the replacement of harmful arsenic with harmless tin is by no means a whim of our ancestors, but a necessity. Other research has been done on weapons made of bronze. The fact is that it has long been found out that for some reason all edged weapons began with a sword - a piercing weapon, not a chopping one, and even fixed in a special way on a wooden handle! That is, the blades of the ancients, the earliest swords, did not have a handle. And after all, a knife attached to the handle with three transverse rivets is one thing. But the metal knife can still do without the handle that goes into the handle, because it is short.
But what about the ancient rapier swords, which were of great length? On "VO" such ancient swords of the Bronze Age have already been described. But since today there are new data related to the study of this weapon, it makes sense to revert to this interesting topic.
Let's start with the fact that it is not clear where and it is completely incomprehensible why and why some ancient blacksmith suddenly took and made using this technology not a knife, but a sword, moreover, with a blade more than 70 cm long, and even a diamond-shaped one. In which region of the planet did this happen and, most importantly, what was the reason for this? After all, it is well known that the same ancient Egyptians fought with spears, clubs with pommels made of stone, axes, but they did not have swords, although they used daggers. The Assyrians, on the other hand, had long rapier swords, which we know from the images on the bas-reliefs. Europeans also knew such swords - long, piercing, and they were used by the ancient Irish, and Cretans, and Mycenaeans, and somewhere between 1500 and 1100. BC. they had a very wide range of use! In Ireland, in particular, a lot of them were found, and now they are kept in many British museums and in private collections. One such bronze sword was found right in the Thames, and similar ones - in Denmark and all on the same Crete! And they all had the same fastening of the blade to the handle with rivets. They are also characterized by the presence of numerous stiffeners or ridges on the blades.
That is, if we talk about the heroes of the Trojan War, we should keep in mind that they fought with swords about one meter long and 2-4 cm wide, and their blades were exceptionally piercing. But what methods of armed struggle could lead to the appearance of swords of such an unusual shape is not clear. After all, purely intuitively, chopping is much easier than stabbing. True, there may be such an explanation that these very rivets were the reason for the injection technique. They held stabbing blows well, since the emphasis of the blade on the handle fell not only on them, but also on the blade shank itself. But instinct is instinct. In battle, he prompts that chopping the enemy, that is, hitting him on the segment of the circle, the center of which is his own shoulder, is much easier and more convenient. That is, anyone can swing a sword, as well as swing an ax. Stabbing with a rapier or a sword is more difficult - you have to learn this. However, Mycenaean swords have notches that say they were used for chopping, not just stabbing! Although it was impossible to do this, because with a strong side impact, the rivets easily broke a relatively thin layer of bronze of the blade shank, which caused it to break off from the handle, became unusable and was only suitable for remelting!
This, of course, did not suit the ancient warriors at all, so soon there were thrusting swords with a blade and a thin shank, which were already cast as a whole. The shank was lined with plates of bone, wood and even gold to make a handle that was comfortable to hold the sword! Such swords could no longer only stab, but also chop without fear of ruining the handle, and in the late Bronze Age, according to the famous British weapons historian Ewart Oakeshott, they were somewhere around 1100-900. BC. spread throughout Europe.
But here again, "something" happened, and the shape of the swords once again changed in the most radical way. From a barbed rapier, they turned into a leaf-shaped, gladiolus-like thrust-chopping sword, in which the blade ended with a shank for attaching the handle. It was convenient to stab with such a sword, but its blow with a blade widening to the point became more effective. Outwardly, swords became simpler, they ceased to be decorated, which was characteristic of an earlier period.
Now let's think a little. Reflecting, we come to very interesting conclusions. Obviously, the first swords in Europe were piercing swords, as evidenced by the finds of Mycenaean, Danish and Irish designs. That is, swords that demanded that they be fenced, which means that they learned fencing techniques. Then fencing gradually began to give way to the wheelhouse as a more natural method of combat that did not require special training. The result was rapier swords with metal handles. Then fencing completely went out of fashion, and all swords became purely chopping. Moreover, the swords found in Scandinavia have no signs of wear, and bronze shields made of very thin metal cannot serve as protection in battle. Maybe “eternal peace” reigned there, and all these “weapons” were ceremonial?
And the lower we go down the scale of time, the more we find professional warriors, although, reasoning logically (which is exactly what many “those interested in history” like to do!), It should be just the opposite. It turns out that the most ancient warriors used a complex technique of fencing, using relatively fragile foils for this, but the later ones were cut with swords from the shoulder. We know that the Mycenaean warriors fought in solid metal armor of bronze and copper, and even with shields in their hands, so that it was impossible to hit them with a chopping blow. But in some joint or in the face, you could try to prick. After all, the same helmets made of strong boar tusks did not cover the faces of the soldiers.
All of the above allows us to conclude that the appearance of cutting-cutting swords did not mean regression in military affairs, but indicated that it had acquired a mass character. But, on the other hand, the presence of a caste of professional warriors among the ancient Irish, as well as among the Mycenaeans and Cretans, cannot but cause surprise. It turns out that the caste of warriors among the European peoples arose before each man of his tribe became a warrior and … received a thrust-cutting sword! And it may very well be that this was due precisely to the great rarity of bronze weapons. That it was not possible for everyone to give such a deadly, but brittle sword, and that this situation changed only over time.
No less interesting is the study of the traces left by ancient weapons, as well as the assessment of its effectiveness. This is being done by such a very modern science as experimental archeology. Moreover, it is by no means only the amateurs-overthrowing of the "official history" who are engaged in it, but also the historians themselves.
At one time on "VO" was published a number of articles, which mentioned the name of the English blacksmith and foundry worker Neil Burridge. So, not so long ago he was invited to participate in a project to study weapons of the Bronze Age, which was initiated by a group of archaeologists from Great Britain, Germany and China led by Raphael Hermann from the University of Göttingen.
The task of experimental archeology is to understand how certain items found by archaeologists during excavations were applied in practice, as they were originally used. In particular, it is experimental archeology that can tell us how the warriors of the Bronze Age fought with their bronze swords. For this, copies of ancient weapons are created, after which specialists try to repeat the movements of ancient swordsmen.
First of all, the origin of 14 types of characteristic dents and notches that were found on swords of that era was established. It was possible to find out that the warriors obviously tried to avoid sharp blows so as not to damage the soft blades, but used the technique of crossing blades without hitting them one against the other. But closer to the end of the Bronze Age, it became noticeable that the marks are grouped more closely along the length of the blades. That is, it is obvious that the art of swordsmanship has developed and swordsmen have learned to deliver more accurate strikes. The article was published in the Journal of Archaeological Method and Theory.
Then metal wear analyzes were carried out. After all, bronze is a soft metal, therefore, many various traces, as well as scratches and notches, remain on products made from it. And it’s just on them that you can find out how this or that weapon was used. But then scientists are increasingly testing theoretical calculations in practice and trying to get exactly the same marks on modern copies of ancient swords as on their originals.
Neil Burridge, who specializes in making bronze weapons, was asked to make replicas of seven swords found in Britain and Italy dating from 1300-925. BC. And the composition of the alloy, and its microstructure, and the microstrength of the manufactured replicas exactly corresponded to the originals.
Then they found experienced swordsmen who struck with these swords, as well as spearheads, on wooden, leather and bronze shields. Each blow and parry was recorded on video, and all the markings on the swords were photographed. Then all the marks that appeared on the swords during this experiment were compared with traces of wear on the 110 swords of the Bronze Age that have come down to ours from the museum collections of Great Britain and Italy.
So the work with the aim of "looking into our" past, including the past of ancient swords and warriors of the Bronze Age, continues today and is by no means a fortune-telling on the coffee grounds. The most modern research methods and instruments are used. So the secrets of the past are gradually diminishing …
In particular, it turned out that when the sword hit the surface of the leather shield, either the edge of the blade was crushed, or a long notch appeared on its sharpened surface. If the blow was parried with the flat side of the sword, then the blade was bent by about ten degrees and long scratches appeared on it. Interestingly, such marks were found on only four swords. And this suggests that the warriors diligently avoided sharp blocking of blows, as it could lead to damage to the blade.
On the original swords kept in museums, many clusters of different marks were found, and a small section of the blade could have up to five such dents. A total of 325 (!) Clusters were found on 110 blades. And this is already evidence that the warriors of the Bronze Age perfectly mastered their weapons and very accurately hit their opponents with blows that fell on the same section of the blade.
By the way, the military of different countries argued for a very long time about which blows with melee weapons (chopping or stabbing) pose a great danger. And in the same England, back in 1908, the cavalry was armed … with swords, arguing that the saber must be swung, but with the sword - just stab, which is faster and more effective!
P. S. The author and administration of the site would like to thank Aron Sheps for the color schemes and illustrations provided.
P. P. S. The author and the site administration would like to thank Neil Burridge for the opportunity to use photographs of his works.
