British and Saxon equipment

[Urselius]

Some early Welsh poetry describes 'shining' white shields being used in a British context.

[Flavivs Aetivs]

Considering how those shields were painted, beeswax could make them shine like that I think.

[Dan D'Silva]

The shields should have Pointed or Button Bosses. Those were well in use and dominating by this time period. Even in the 450's in the West, Domed bosses are almost gone from the Archaeological record, and they all have points or buttons.

You know I completely forgot about this as well:

http://www.comitatus.net/armyages.html
http://www.comitatus.net/empire.html

Thanks, that's very helpful. The riding coat would be a good touch, if it can be back-projected to this period. It looks like their Saxon also has a dished shield.

I'm surprised at the lack of trousers on the horseman.

[Flavivs Aetivs]

It might just be too warm for trousers.

Conical/Dished shields seem to have dominated in the Anglo-Saxon period. According to Matt Amt, all the shield bosses from that period are found with the rim bent to fit a lenticular shield, none have been found that fit a flat shield. But I'm sure both varieties of shield existed.

[Medicus matt]

According to Matt Amt, all the shield bosses from that period are found with the rim bent to fit a lenticular shield, none have been found that fit a flat shield. .

I can't imagine that Matt has said that, given that it's nonsense.
Bosses with angled flanges exist, as do bosses with perpendicular flanges.
Neither is proof for or against lenticular shields. A perpendicular flange will fit on a dished shield, an angled flange will fit on a flat board (and gives a more secure fit ).
Anyway, the battle scene depicted in the Virgilius Romanus (5th century, possibly British), shows troops with round shields and bosses very similar to one of the types associated with Anglo Saxon warriors.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Vergilius_R...io188v.jpg

The fact is that we have very little idea as to the appearance or equipment of British troops of the late 5th/early 6th century but it seems unlikely that they bore much resemblance to the troops of the late 4th/early 5th century. Depicting them as such is merely a convenience, much in the same way as putting cowboys in black hats and white hats.

[Caballo]

It also wasn't a simple Britons v Saxons campaign- more a fragmented series of mini States each allying with other states or mercenary groupings. In Dorchester on Thames, for example, there is some evidence of Saxons allied with Britons creating the Gewissa which evolved into the kingdom of Wessex. Some useful work on the buckles from Stuart Laycock both in Roman buckles and Military Fittings or his website http://www.ukdfd.co.uk/ceejays_site/page...lepage.htm . Shield. Spear and knife seem to have been the basic kit. Some late roman kit seems to have carried over until the mid 5th century at least. There is a lot written in academic sources about the "invisible Britons" as they seem to disappear from the archaeological record and the earlier view was that of population replacement by incoming Saxons. More recent work points to the indigenous population adopting "Germanic" fashions- the likely situation is that both situations occurred. A fascinating and still little understood period.

[Urselius]

I never bought into the mass-migration theory. Why would a German chieftain who has just taken over a slice of Eastern Britain want to import peasants? Presumably, there would be existing peasants on the land who knew how to cultivate in local conditions. Why would a chieftain care what language the local peasants spoke, or what their religion was, as long as they paid their food-rents on time? Plus it would be a considerable cost to finance the rowing of many boatloads of peasants across the North Sea - a no brainer!

[Crispianus]

I think that a book called "The Age of Sutton Hoo" editor Martin Carver, may shed some light on what happened to the Britons, if I remember right it includes a article on several recent(at the time of publication) graveyard excavations previously unpublished....

from a reviewer on amazon:

"One aspect did fascinate me, namely the fate of the Britons. It is all very well for John Newman of the Suffolk Archaeological Unit to analyse (in chapter two) the settlement patterns of the early, middle, and late Saxon periods compared to that of the Romano-British, but just what happened to the Romano-Britons? This issue is addressed - if only in a negative way - by Julian Richards in chapter nine, where he writes, " ... although we can identify an Anglo-Saxon burial rite, there is not an equivalent native British rite over much of Anglo-Saxon England although a substantial element of the native population must have survived the Anglo-Saxon settlement and coexisted alongside immigrant groups. We must accept that many of those given a Germanic burial rite were not immigrants. The form of burial is a symbol being used to assert the domination of Germanic culture, not the annihilation of the previous inhabitants." And it was interesting to learn from Heinrich Harke (in chapter ten) that the Anglo-Saxons were on average four centimetres taller than the Britons"

I also found it fascinating... that said its been a long time since I read this book (from the library) but I think its worth a look at least...
and still widely available it seems...

On "Early Anglo Saxon Shields" you might try a book called "Early Anglo Saxon Shields" :grin: by Dickenson and Härke, a very useful study... ABE has a number of copy's for less then a tenner...

Has anyone mentioned the Shorwell Helmet yet? report here:

http://www.britishmuseum.org/pdf/BMTRB_6_Hood-et-al.pdf

[Urselius]

I And it was interesting to learn from Heinrich Harke (in chapter ten) that the Anglo-Saxons were on average four centimetres taller than the Britons"[/i]

It has been claimed that the British cemeteries investigated were largely urban - easiest place to find Romano-British burials - and those of "Anglo-Saxons" were rural. The height variation being due to relative nutrition levels. The same difference was seen in army recruits in Victorian times, the urban males being on average significantly shorter than their rural counterparts.

The only sure way of differentiating incomers from locals is by molecular methods; oxygen and strontium isotope levels are good indicators of where people spent their childhood.

It amuses me that the traditional views of physical anthropology and invasions make no sense. The short dark Romans were fighting tall blond Celts when invading Britain. But by the time of the Anglo-Saxon adventus the descendants of the Celts were out-heighted and out-blonded by the incomers. In the course of time the Anglo-Saxons too were out heighted and out blonded by the Norse Vikings. The modern English should be uniformly flaxen-haired and 7ft tall. :wink:

[Dan D'Silva]

On "Early Anglo Saxon Shields" you might try a book called "Early Anglo Saxon Shields" :grin: by Dickenson and Härke, a very useful study... ABE has a number of copy's for less then a tenner...

I'll put it on my shopping list. I've checked out the abstract on Academica.edu and they say that "the small circular pattern of Republican date was actually phased out in the Imperial army." I assume that would go against Arthur carrying a parma. They also claim the Germanic shields were flat.

[Crispianus]

Dan you may find these useful as well:

Evidence for shield construction from the early Anglo-Saxon cemetery site of Tranmer House, Bromeswell, Suffolk:
http://www.britishmuseum.org/pdf/BMTRB_5..._et_al.pdf

The Significance of Animal-ornamented Shields in Early Anglo-Saxon England:

http://eprints.whiterose.ac.uk/1831/1/dickinsont2.pdf

Anglo-Saxon laminated shields at Petersfinger - a myth:

http://archaeologydataservice.ac.uk/arch...41_144.pdf

Spears:
"The Spearheads of the Anglo Saxon settlements" Swanton, also includes other associated grave goods such as shield bosses, axes, swords, knives etc useful book....

[Timianus]

I never bought into the mass-migration theory. Why would a German chieftain who has just taken over a slice of Eastern Britain want to import peasants? Presumably, there would be existing peasants on the land who knew how to cultivate in local conditions. Why would a chieftain care what language the local peasants spoke, or what their religion was, as long as they paid their food-rents on time? Plus it would be a considerable cost to finance the rowing of many boatloads of peasants across the North Sea - a no brainer!

In the book "Worlds of Arthur", the author postulates that the Magnus Maximus brought over Saxon auxiliaries when he took his troops over to the continent to claim the throne. The author goes on to postulate that the early Saxon Kingdom had their power bases at or around the existing military installations/commands. I am not sure there is evidence to back this up, but it is an interesting theory and explains how Saxon military leaders wound up in control and why the populace would adopt their customs, etc. It also allows for the fact that the period seems to be characterized by shifting alliances between various Saxons, Angles, Britons, and Pictish groups, rather than an large scale "invasion force" of Saxons spreading like wildfire from east to west.

[Crispianus]

I And it was interesting to learn from Heinrich Harke (in chapter ten) that the Anglo-Saxons were on average four centimetres taller than the Britons"[/i]

It has been claimed that the British cemeteries investigated were largely urban - easiest place to find Romano-British burials - and those of "Anglo-Saxons" were rural. The height variation being due to relative nutrition levels. The same difference was seen in army recruits in Victorian times, the urban males being on average significantly shorter than their rural counterparts.

The only sure way of differentiating incomers from locals is by molecular methods; oxygen and strontium isotope levels are good indicators of where people spent their childhood.

A few snippets from the article: Age of Sutton Hoo article 10 H. Härke

"Changing Symbols in a Changing Society: The Anglo-Saxon Weapon Burial Rite in the Seventh Century"

"This contribution is an attempt to analyse the dynamic aspects of the Anglo-Saxon weapon-burial rite. In order to discuss the seventh-century changes, it will be necessary to establish first the symbolism of burial with weapons, and the symbolism attached to particular types of weapons in the burial rite. The analysis is based on a sample of 47 burial sites in England with some 3800 inhumations of the fifth to early eighth centuries.1 The regional bias of the sample is largely a consequence of the state of excavation and publication, and of differential access to unpublished evidence (Fig. 28). Cremations have been excluded from this study because of the very low incidence of weapons in them (between nil and 1.2% of cremations in any one cemetery), and because they do not provide the range of skeletal data required for the following analysis." pg 150

"1 The sites in the sample are listed in Härke 1989a, 60-61. It may be worth pointing out here that Sutton Hoo is not represented in this sample. A complete catalogue of the 1600 burials analysed in detail (702 weapon burials, 898 comparative juvenile and male adult burials without weapons) will be included in the full publication of the research on which this paper is based (Härke 1992)"

"The two types of skeletal data which are correlated with weapon burial, stature and epigenetic traits, point to a different meaning of this rite. The stature data had to be analysed separately for each cemetery in order to eliminate local variations, and small samples were omitted in order to obtain meaningful results. The figures for the remaining, early cemeteries indicate that in the fifth/sixth centuries men with weapons were usually between 2 and 5 centimetres taller than their local counterparts without weapons (Table 3). The interpretation of this differential poses a complex problem because stature is determined by a number of factors, including diet and stress in childhood." pg 153

"One of the consequences observable in many societies up to the present day is the higher average stature of members of the élite. However, other skeletal data, most importantly the incidence of hypoplasia (tooth enamel defects), suggest that the risk of famine and illness in childhood was identical for all Anglo-Saxon males. Also, the stature differential appears to break down in the seventh/early eighth centuries (cf. below). Therefore it cannot have been only the reflection of a social hierarchy because that hierarchy did not disappear in the seventh century on the contrary, it became more pronounced (Arnold 1982a; Shephard 1979)" pg 154


This article has some interesting comments on warrior burials which may be relevant as well:
"Soldiers and Settlers in Britain, Fourth to Fifth Century". Hawkes, Sonia Chadwick

http://archaeologydataservice.ac.uk/arch...esults.cfm

[Crispianus]

Two other books on shields related to Roman and Germanic, suggest you get them from a library and check them out, german text:

"Römische Schilde" Ansgar Nabberfeld, basically an illustrated catalogue of 751 shield remains with mostly drawings but many photos plus relevant info...

Illerup Adal Die Schilde vol 9-10 heavily illustrated catalogue and more from the bog find in Jutland with much useful info....

[Urselius]

"However, other skeletal data, most importantly the incidence of hypoplasia (tooth enamel defects), suggest that the risk of famine and illness in childhood was identical for all Anglo-Saxon males."

It is fundamentally hard to believe that the child of a gesithcundman suffered the same level of nutritional impact from famine as the child of a theow.

I'm working from memory, but I'm fairly sure that C J Arnold, in 1984: Roman Britain to Saxon England describes burials of Romano-British and early Anglo-Saxon date on the outskirts of Winchester being metrically indistinguishable.