Originally posted by MightyEInherjar
What does that have to do with Scandinavia?
Nothing I guess, I would just suppose that because Sparta had them, that maybe Scandanavia would too. I mean, armor was all relatively the same back then, right? And if someone had some kind of armor that was superior, then they would adpot that as well. Especially if theyre an entire millenium behind them with something better and live in the same continent as well so they would know about it. Btw, how do you know this?
Originally posted by braz
Nothing I guess, I would just suppose that because Sparta had them, that maybe Scandanavia would too. I mean, armor was all relatively the same back then, right? And if someone had some kind of armor that was superior, then they would adpot that as well. Especially if theyre an entire millenium behind them with something better and live in the same continent as well so they would know about it. Btw, how do you know this?
terrible logic, jsut because someone else has a type of armour, all medieval factions and races would have it? what sillyness.....
you have to take fighting style, for example the scottish rarely used armour, they took the fast and berserking approach or thats what some of their famous acts are, i heard 1 berserker in real life killed a good few hundred soldiers on a bridge and was only defeaten when men went under the bridge and sliced his feet, some good that armour does them though..
but the moral is, its not all armour, and second, just because a race uses it, doesnt mean all races use it, how much better protection is can also be a point of view
Originally posted by Burning thought
terrible logic, jsut because someone else has a type of armour, all medieval factions and races would have it? what sillyness.....you have to take fighting style, for example the scottish rarely used armour, they took the fast and berserking approach or thats what some of their famous acts are, i heard 1 berserker in real life killed a good few hundred soldiers on a bridge and was only defeaten when men went under the bridge and sliced his feet, some good that armour does them though..
but the moral is, its not all armour, and second, just because a race uses it, doesnt mean all races use it, how much better protection is can also be a point of view
Yeah, ok. I understand that. But basically what ur saying is Scandinavians have never fought people with spears? Because long spears can pierce chainmail alone and thats all they had, apparently. Terrible logic, what silliness, on a helpless effort trying to make me feel dumb. 🙄 😆
Originally posted by braz
Yeah, ok. I understand that. But basically what ur saying is Scandinavians have never fought people with spears? Because long spears can pierce chainmail alone and thats all they had, apparently. Terrible logic, what silliness, on a helpless effort trying to make me feel dumb. 🙄 😆
Did people in India fight people with guns before the English??? Did the Romans ever encounter war elephants before Hannibal?
Explain to me also why the Japanese Katana was not found all over the world? The Arabic Saif or the Aztec Macuahuitl??? Why weren't all those weapons found in other countries widely????
Your logic is fail because the fact of the matter is each civilisation had their own weapons different from each other because they had different needs, tactics and enemies, Just because Greeks fought with spears does not there fore justify that Scandinavians also did otherwise with your logic heres an example: the Celts would of had chainmail instead of kilts and catapults because the Romans used them. 🙄 Didn't quite happen though did it.
Beowulf is going down hard and fast against the 300.
Originally posted by GGS
Did people in India fight people with guns before the English??? Did the Romans ever encounter war elephants before Hannibal?Explain to me also why the Japanese Katana was not found all over the world? The Arabic Saif or the Aztec Macuahuitl??? Why weren't all those weapons found in other countries widely????
Your logic is fail because the fact of the matter is each civilisation had their own weapons different from each other because they had different needs, tactics and enemies, Just because Greeks fought with spears does not there fore justify that Scandinavians also did otherwise with your logic heres an example: the Celts would of had chainmail instead of kilts and catapults because the Romans used them. 🙄 Didn't quite happen though did it.
Beowulf is going down hard and fast against the 300.
Okay, I just thought everyone around the world used spearmen, I thought that was quite general in ancient warfare. Sorry. And they even mentioned in the poem that the Geats were carrying swords, shields and spears as weapons. So that would lead me to believe they fight people likewise.
Beowulf would die at the 300, ok. Im overrating Beowulf here a little. And the Spartans underrating ALOT. But he would still kill a good little handful of them because of the mere fact that they wont expect much from him since hes one man, but then he'll start cutting throught their shields and weapons and killing some of them. But thats when the Spartans just overwhelm him.
Originally posted by brazGood man like i said in my first post im sure he could kill at the most 50 then he loses from there the numbers are overwhelming.
Beowulf would die at the 300, ok. Im overrating Beowulf here a little. And the Spartans underrating ALOT. But he would still kill a good little handful of them because of the mere fact that they wont expect much from him since hes one man, but then he'll start cutting throught their shields and weapons and killing some of them. But thats when the Spartans just overwhelm him.
Originally posted by iceman24567
Good man like i said in my first post im sure he could kill at the most 50 then he loses from there the numbers are overwhelming.
Agreed, 50 would definitely be the most he could take out. I was just overrating Beowulf and I kinda got carried away by that 1 guys post. I mean, Beowulf may be superhuman, but hes still a man, only human and he is mortal.
Originally posted by braz
Nothing I guess, I would just suppose that because Sparta had them, that maybe Scandanavia would too. I mean, armor was all relatively the same back then, right? And if someone had some kind of armor that was superior, then they would adpot that as well. Especially if theyre an entire millenium behind them with something better and live in the same continent as well so they would know about it. Btw, how do you know this?
How do I know this?
I'm currently pursing a major in Northern European History in college right now. My family is all from Denmark, and I'm a part time instructor for ARMA/HACA (Association of Renaissance Martial Arts.) Not to be a dick, as I was probably coming off, but it's my job to know this. I'm a swordfighter for sport and profession.
You bring up a reasonable point...Scandinavian countries, as well as most of the other countries in the dark/viking ages fought with spears mainly because they were easy to fashion and metal was a commodity. Scandinavian was known for having inferior iron deposits, which is one arguable they resorted to chainmail (it's easier to make a strong suit by picking out all the good parts of a bad ore than it is to make the entire bit of metal into a faulty piece) and pattern welding for their swords.
You have to remember that during this time period, most cultures (especially Scandinavian cultures like the Jutes, Geats, and Danes) did not have access to the technology or resources to create the type of armor you're imagining. In short, they didn't create it because they didn't know they could...chainmail itself was even a rare and valuable thing to get a hold of.
Originally posted by Burning thought
terrible logic, jsut because someone else has a type of armour, all medieval factions and races would have it? what sillyness.....you have to take fighting style, for example the scottish rarely used armour, they took the fast and berserking approach or thats what some of their famous acts are, i heard 1 berserker in real life killed a good few hundred soldiers on a bridge and was only defeaten when men went under the bridge and sliced his feet, some good that armour does them though..
but the moral is, its not all armour, and second, just because a race uses it, doesnt mean all races use it, how much better protection is can also be a point of view
The "berserk" you're thinking of wasn't a Scot at all. Sure enough, he was a Scandinavian, Beowulf and Hrothgar's people, holding off the Saxons at the Battle of Stanford bridge while King Harald's men retreated.
[quickquote=9906834](auto quote)[/quickquote]
Right on.
Being raised in Danish culture (non-christian at that), I'm tremendous fan of Beowulf, and I'd totally love him to trash the 300 and his countrymen up and down Midgard, but thing is he won't.
Heh, you're mixing up coolness factor with reality.
Originally posted by MightyEInherjar
How do I know this?I'm currently pursing a major in Northern European History in college right now. My family is all from Denmark, and I'm a part time instructor for ARMA/HACA (Association of Renaissance Martial Arts.) Not to be a dick, as I was probably coming off, but it's my job to know this. I'm a swordfighter for sport and profession.
You bring up a reasonable point...Scandinavian countries, as well as most of the other countries in the dark/viking ages fought with spears mainly because they were easy to fashion and metal was a commodity. Scandinavian was known for having inferior iron deposits, which is one arguable they resorted to chainmail (it's easier to make a strong suit by picking out all the good parts of a bad ore than it is to make the entire bit of metal into a faulty piece) and pattern welding for their swords.
You have to remember that during this time period, most cultures (especially Scandinavian cultures like the Jutes, Geats, and Danes) did not have access to the technology or resources to create the type of armor you're imagining. In short, they didn't create it because they didn't know they could...chainmail itself was even a rare and valuable thing to get a hold of.
The "berserk" you're thinking of wasn't a Scot at all. Sure enough, he was a Scandinavian, Beowulf and Hrothgar's people, holding off the Saxons at the Battle of Stanford bridge while King Harald's men retreated.
[QUOTE=9906834]Originally posted by braz
[B]Agreed, 50 would definitely be the most he could take out. I was just overrating Beowulf and I kinda got carried away by that 1 guys post. I mean, Beowulf may be superhuman, but hes still a man, only human and he is mortal.
Right on.
Being raised in Danish culture (non-christian at that), I'm tremendous fan of Beowulf, and I'd totally love him to trash the 300 and his countrymen up and down Midgard, but thing is he won't.
Heh, you're mixing up coolness factor with reality. [/B][/QUOTE]
Excellent post, you really did your homework. 😄
Originally posted by MightyEInherjar
How do I know this?I'm currently pursing a major in Northern European History in college right now. My family is all from Denmark, and I'm a part time instructor for ARMA/HACA (Association of Renaissance Martial Arts.) Not to be a dick, as I was probably coming off, but it's my job to know this. I'm a swordfighter for sport and profession.
You bring up a reasonable point...Scandinavian countries, as well as most of the other countries in the dark/viking ages fought with spears mainly because they were easy to fashion and metal was a commodity. Scandinavian was known for having inferior iron deposits, which is one arguable they resorted to chainmail (it's easier to make a strong suit by picking out all the good parts of a bad ore than it is to make the entire bit of metal into a faulty piece) and pattern welding for their swords.
You have to remember that during this time period, most cultures (especially Scandinavian cultures like the Jutes, Geats, and Danes) did not have access to the technology or resources to create the type of armor you're imagining. In short, they didn't create it because they didn't know they could...chainmail itself was even a rare and valuable thing to get a hold of.
Hmm, thats very interesing. I mean, really. Hats off to ya. And dont worry about that. But because Beowulf is fiction, do you think they couldve had iron deposits that werent inferior, I mean because in the movie he has a breastplate.
Also, what exactly is pattern welding, did they do that to their spears as well? So like would all of Beowulfs weapons all be inferior compared to other weapons/armor around the world, or no? And did the Scandinavians have long spears like the Greeks or like short javelins similar to that of the Persians or light skirmishers? WHat were their shields like as well?
Originally posted by MightyEInherjar
Right on.Being raised in Danish culture (non-christian at that), I'm tremendous fan of Beowulf, and I'd totally love him to trash the 300 and his countrymen up and down Midgard, but thing is he won't.
Heh, you're mixing up coolness factor with reality.
Yeah, I guess I was. Lol, Im into both though really. Spartans and Beowulf. I just think ancient warfare in general is quite fascinating.
Originally posted by braz
Hmm, thats very interesing. I mean, really. Hats off to ya. And dont worry about that. But because Beowulf is fiction, do you think they couldve had iron deposits that werent inferior, I mean because in the movie he has a breastplate.
Also, what exactly is pattern welding, did they do that to their spears as well? So like would all of Beowulfs weapons all be inferior compared to other weapons/armor around the world, or no? And did the Scandinavians have long spears like the Greeks or like short javelins similar to that of the Persians or light skirmishers? WHat were their shields like as well?Yeah, I guess I was. Lol, Im into both though really. Spartans and Beowulf. I just think ancient warfare in general is quite fascinating.
First off, if you include Beowulf's appearances in films, he would also get a giant repeating crossbow with exploding bolts... 😛
Pattern welding is pretty much an attempt at turning horrible quality iron into high quality weapons. Depending on the swordsmith, the welder would used different pieces of metal (or in the viking's case, bars of metal) and twist them or heat them until they all formed together into a quality sword. It just so happens that this process ended up being superior to most the other smithing techniques in Europe. The resulting weapon extremely strong, but in turn was not easy to sharpen.
As far as I know, spears were not pattern welded like the swords were. Swords and armor were a rarity in Scandinavia, usually reserved for jarls (chieftains) and their huscarls (the "house" warriors), so many men didn't have the opportunity to own these unless they picked it up off the battlefield. What most viking/scandinavian warriors used for armor was called Lamellar, which is basically just overlapping boiled leather scales lain over top of one-a-nother.
In Beowulfs' case, he was a wealthy chieftan's son, and in turn had access chainmail, swords, a helmet, and a shield...which is about the best outfitted you come by in his time period and location. His men were essentially his private soldiers ("thranes" like you might have heard in the movie, which is pretty much a free man who owns a bit of land) and played the same role as huscarls, and would have been just as well outfitted as he was.
As far as spears go, most civilizations all around the world had spears ranging from the short Assegai one handed spears of the Zulu's to 21' long awle pikes in (at the time) the Holy Roman Empire. The Scandinavian people, like most other culture, favored spears for reasons already mentioned in a previous post.
The shields were mostly made of linden wood with an iron boss in the center. An iron rim went around the edge of the shields to better hold the pieces of wood in place, and to help prevent a sword from cleaving through it. The shields were typically all round, and were anywhere from 24 - 32 inches in diameter. A shield typically only lasted a Scandinavian/viking warrior about 3 battles before taking enough damage to render it unusable.
A thing you have to remember is that most northern countries' armies did not have any sort of uniform armament in this time period. Warriors would grab whatever they could build, steal, or buy. This is yet another reason spears and especially axes were used in dark/viking age conflicts. They were easy to make, easy to use, and proved to be some of the most dangerous weapons on the battlefield.
Originally posted by MightyEInherjar
First off, if you include Beowulf's appearances in films, he would also get a giant repeating crossbow with exploding bolts... 😛Pattern welding is pretty much an attempt at turning horrible quality iron into high quality weapons. Depending on the swordsmith, the welder would used different pieces of metal (or in the viking's case, bars of metal) and twist them or heat them until they all formed together into a quality sword. It just so happens that this process ended up being superior to most the other smithing techniques in Europe. The resulting weapon extremely strong, but in turn was not easy to sharpen.
As far as I know, spears were not pattern welded like the swords were. Swords and armor were a rarity in Scandinavia, usually reserved for jarls (chieftains) and their huscarls (the "house" warriors), so many men didn't have the opportunity to own these unless they picked it up off the battlefield. What most viking/scandinavian warriors used for armor was called Lamellar, which is basically just overlapping boiled leather scales lain over top of one-a-nother.
In Beowulfs' case, he was a wealthy chieftan's son, and in turn had access chainmail, swords, a helmet, and a shield...which is about the best outfitted you come by in his time period and location. His men were essentially his private soldiers ("thranes" like you might have heard in the movie, which is pretty much a free man who owns a bit of land) and played the same role as huscarls, and would have been just as well outfitted as he was.
As far as spears go, most civilizations all around the world had spears ranging from the short Assegai one handed spears of the Zulu's to 21' long awle pikes in (at the time) the Holy Roman Empire. The Scandinavian people, like most other culture, favored spears for reasons already mentioned in a previous post.
The shields were mostly made of linden wood with an iron boss in the center. An iron rim went around the edge of the shields to better hold the pieces of wood in place, and to help prevent a sword from cleaving through it. The shields were typically all round, and were anywhere from 24 - 32 inches in diameter. A shield typically only lasted a Scandinavian/viking warrior about 3 battles before taking enough damage to render it unusable.
A thing you have to remember is that most northern countries' armies did not have any sort of uniform armament in this time period. Warriors would grab whatever they could build, steal, or buy. This is yet another reason spears and especially axes were used in dark/viking age conflicts. They were easy to make, easy to use, and proved to be some of the most dangerous weapons on the battlefield.
😐 Damn. Thanks man, that helps. Really, but the thing about the Scandinavian spears, what was the length range of them that the Anglo-Saxons had they fought around that time?