@Liquidsback There was no Roman spatha; it is the Celtic spatha, adapted only very slightly to Latin styles. There does not appear to be any Roman sword, outside the arena. The early gladius and the pugio seem to have been of Etruscan derivation, while the later one (referred to by ancient Latins as the Gladius Hispansiensis or Gladius Iberius; Spanish or Iberian sword) was a Celtic style, as was the spatha. BTW, the "Roman" helmet; Celtic and German.
@TOMHYLE88 Going by that logic, there is no such thing as an English, German or American firearm, either, because all are derivatives of older models, going all the way back to the middle ages in Asia. If the Romans made a certain type of weapon, then it is a Roman weapon - period.
@Gilmaris Well if it's Roman made it's Roman made, but that does not make it Roman designed and it doesn't make it correct to refer to the overall style as Roman, and it leads to the sort of nonsense suggestion that the Celtic and Germannic longswords of which the "Roman" spatha is a fairly direct copy, must themselves be derived of that "Roman" copy. People insist on attributing the origins of things found around and throughout the Roman Empire, which was largely Celtic and Afrasian, to Romans
@Liquidsback The ancient Latins were for whatever reason not an inventive people, and nearly every military technology now associated with them was borrowed from other cultures (the segmented armor; chain mail; the necked, cheeked, visored helmet; the rectangular shield; the long necked javelin; their troop formations: all Celtic, German, or Etruscan. The crossbows they based their seige engines upon: Chinese) There is no such thing as an ancient Roman style sword, spear, or helmet.
@Liquidsback First off, no, it's not, because things travel through intermediaries, and second off the ancient Latins did trade with China. There is absolutely no doubt whatsoever that they imported silk on a regular basis.
@Liquidsback There is, BTW claim for European invention of crossbow, in the Greek belly bow, which were rather giant (if not as giant as the Latin ones), but operated by a single man.
rest asured nordik smiths as a whole new their craft. and just as we have poor craftsmen today so it was then not every smith makes swords.the bread and butter was the everyday items swords were expensive and time consoming. so you have to make it worth the smiths time to make one . there were some smiths that were specialist and only worked on arms these were a elite craftsman and once again very expensive. many arms would have been gleened from battle even broken blades. these were reforged
They misspelled Anne Stalsberg's name, by the way. She knows her stuff, too.
I remember Kaspar saying that viking swords were not quenched, and that the edges were cold forged. I have heard this claim disputed, however. Not being a blacksmith myself, I'll refrain to make further comment.
Anyone else here think that perhaps because of the extreme value of these swords, perhaps the person being burried was given a cheaper sword and the good one was passed to an heir
"perhaps the person being burried was given a cheaper sword"
Perhaps, but I rather think that as swords were tremendous status symbols, not least because the good ones were really expensive, then there was also a marked for inexpensive swords for the wannabe bigshots among the vikings. These inexpensive swords would then obviously not be of the best quality. Most Norsemen would never actually see combat anyway. We know a similar thing was going on in Japan, with katana of varying quality.
@EGCblackknight Good point. Also, not all blacksmiths were good, professional secrets often went to the grave with the best smiths, most customers could only afford a cheap piece made by an apprentice, life was short and many a promising swordmaker simply died before becoming a master of the trade. Today, few people actually own a real tamahagatane Katana, while Chinese spring steel copies abound. For mad hacking and slashing, all you really need is sharp piece flat iron, anyway.
Having two edges/blades meant that one was always sharp. One blade was making contact with metal keeping the other blade sharp and free from metal to metal contact.
the vikings and franks where paradoxes of eachother.
the franks of the time where poorly trained and poorly lead by inept commanders, their carolingian empire was decaying rapidly from its glory days in the age of charlemange, however they had weaponry that was of superior quality to all other western european powers, they just never utilized it effectively.
the vikings on the other hand where skilled seamen and savage warriors and their weaponry was much inferior to that of the franks.
these locally produced swords where used throught the early viking age, from 750 ad to 900 ad. after 900 AD (more probably as early as 850 AD) frankish swords superceded the original viking swords as they where superior in every way to the local blades and where much preferred by the scandanavian nobility. the lower class chieftans and jarls and even peasants still made use of the locally made blades though, as they couldent afford the high quality frankish blades........
A "Jarl" wasn't far short of a duke in power in those days, they would have had the top grade weapons, either locally made or imported. It's also a fact that not all weapons made in Scandinavia were of that poor quality, some were extremely well made and could well match the quality of the frankish weapons, although the average quality of the frankish blades were higher. Also, the vikings didn't rely solely upon the swords, they used a wide array of different weapons and sophisticated technique.
its a little known fact but most norse and danes got their swords from the franks, who made the best blades in europe for centuries........even the arabs coveted them...........the frankish sword trade was so widespread that numerous popes passed edicts against the selling of swords to the muslims....
@bremenlegation I agree, I have read the same thing somewhere.. That the Frankish swords were the best quality. Scandinavian swords were Chinese copies ;)
Thanks for uploading this video! I had read in documents about weld flaws in some Viking swords but never seen visual examples like this so it's very interesting.
Though I think the Nordic smiths still get a bad wrap... :) Yes they made mistakes, but then again they didn't have entire BEACHES of black iron ore sand to play around with like the Japanese did! Iron was precious in the Viking age. So what they DID do with simple tools is mind blowing, maybe even more so than eastern katana work!..
I think the Nordics did an outstanding job given the period. Part of the reason I posted this vid is because the people I have run into think that historic sword were always perfect and superior to modern replicas. I believe the same applies to Japanese swords to a greater extent since the ore in Japan was of lesser quality. That is the reason the Japanese had to work so hard to purify their steel.
Thats ok, it would be cool if there was a documentary on this guy making a sword, you konw document it before its lost, like wootz steel or something.
Interesting that you mentioned Samurai swords. I believe that the best Japanese craftsmen made some of the most well crafted swords ever made...but... I think on average European swords were better. The reason is that European Iron Ore was better to start with. The Japaneses had to beat and fold their iron to purify it. The Europeans had a much easier task.
I also believe that the Japanese developed a slicing style for this same reason. The slice stressed the blades less. It also means the blade had to be sharper. The Europeans did not care as much about blade stress. They did care about the colder weather which tends to make steel more brittle. For this reason they made softer blades for hacking-cuts and thrusts. The softer blade dulls faster but also does not need to be as sharp for a hacking cut.
I think alota of the Germanic peoples were influenced by the roman spatha.
Liquidsback 4 months ago
@Liquidsback Sure. No culture develops in a vacuum. The Romans likewise picked up a lot of stuff from other cultures.
tsafa1 4 months ago
@tsafa1 Yes which the Romans got from the Iberians.
Liquidsback 4 months ago
@Liquidsback There was no Roman spatha; it is the Celtic spatha, adapted only very slightly to Latin styles. There does not appear to be any Roman sword, outside the arena. The early gladius and the pugio seem to have been of Etruscan derivation, while the later one (referred to by ancient Latins as the Gladius Hispansiensis or Gladius Iberius; Spanish or Iberian sword) was a Celtic style, as was the spatha. BTW, the "Roman" helmet; Celtic and German.
TOMHYLE88 2 months ago
@TOMHYLE88 Going by that logic, there is no such thing as an English, German or American firearm, either, because all are derivatives of older models, going all the way back to the middle ages in Asia. If the Romans made a certain type of weapon, then it is a Roman weapon - period.
Gilmaris 2 weeks ago
@Gilmaris Well if it's Roman made it's Roman made, but that does not make it Roman designed and it doesn't make it correct to refer to the overall style as Roman, and it leads to the sort of nonsense suggestion that the Celtic and Germannic longswords of which the "Roman" spatha is a fairly direct copy, must themselves be derived of that "Roman" copy. People insist on attributing the origins of things found around and throughout the Roman Empire, which was largely Celtic and Afrasian, to Romans
TOMHYLE88 2 weeks ago
@Liquidsback The ancient Latins were for whatever reason not an inventive people, and nearly every military technology now associated with them was borrowed from other cultures (the segmented armor; chain mail; the necked, cheeked, visored helmet; the rectangular shield; the long necked javelin; their troop formations: all Celtic, German, or Etruscan. The crossbows they based their seige engines upon: Chinese) There is no such thing as an ancient Roman style sword, spear, or helmet.
TOMHYLE88 2 months ago
@TOMHYLE88 Kind of hard to base your siege weapons on a civilization you never fought or hardly traded with.
Liquidsback 2 months ago
@Liquidsback First off, no, it's not, because things travel through intermediaries, and second off the ancient Latins did trade with China. There is absolutely no doubt whatsoever that they imported silk on a regular basis.
TOMHYLE88 2 months ago
@Liquidsback Is it your contention that the invention of the crossbow in Europe was independant of the earlier invention of the crossbow in Asia?
TOMHYLE88 2 months ago
@Liquidsback There is, BTW claim for European invention of crossbow, in the Greek belly bow, which were rather giant (if not as giant as the Latin ones), but operated by a single man.
TOMHYLE88 2 months ago
Buying Viking longsword 120k
thecoolkid657 1 year ago
rest asured nordik smiths as a whole new their craft. and just as we have poor craftsmen today so it was then not every smith makes swords.the bread and butter was the everyday items swords were expensive and time consoming. so you have to make it worth the smiths time to make one . there were some smiths that were specialist and only worked on arms these were a elite craftsman and once again very expensive. many arms would have been gleened from battle even broken blades. these were reforged
wulfesinger67 1 year ago
@wulfesinger67 True. If you had a broken swordblade, you basically had all you needed to make a perfectly usable Sax.
jannevellamo 11 months ago
They misspelled Anne Stalsberg's name, by the way. She knows her stuff, too.
I remember Kaspar saying that viking swords were not quenched, and that the edges were cold forged. I have heard this claim disputed, however. Not being a blacksmith myself, I'll refrain to make further comment.
Gilmaris 1 year ago
what is the mane of the showe
FULLTHROTTLE87 2 years ago
@FULLTHROTTLE87 I think it was "Secrets of the Viking Warriors" by National Geographic. Could be wrong though.
kingolaf99 8 months ago
Secrets of Viking Warriors.
tsafa1 2 years ago
The vikings imported quality blades such as Ulfberht and Ingelrii. Those blades were so popular that fakes started to appear from other sources.
Thrym865 2 years ago
Anyone else here think that perhaps because of the extreme value of these swords, perhaps the person being burried was given a cheaper sword and the good one was passed to an heir
EGCblackknight 2 years ago
A good deal of historical swords are found in old river beds.
tsafa1 2 years ago
@EGCblackknight
Yep I do.
Sutton Ho was the real deal though.
That sword was amazing, and I'm starting another next year.
Conan568 2 years ago
Considering how important these swords were to their owners, no.
Socinus 2 years ago
This has been flagged as spam show
"perhaps the person being burried was given a cheaper sword"
Perhaps, but I rather think that as swords were tremendous status symbols, not least because the good ones were really expensive, then there was also a marked for inexpensive swords for the wannabe bigshots among the vikings. These inexpensive swords would then obviously not be of the best quality. Most Norsemen would never actually see combat anyway. We know a similar thing was going on in Japan, with katana of varying quality.
Gilmaris 1 year ago
@EGCblackknight Good point. Also, not all blacksmiths were good, professional secrets often went to the grave with the best smiths, most customers could only afford a cheap piece made by an apprentice, life was short and many a promising swordmaker simply died before becoming a master of the trade. Today, few people actually own a real tamahagatane Katana, while Chinese spring steel copies abound. For mad hacking and slashing, all you really need is sharp piece flat iron, anyway.
jannevellamo 11 months ago
Having two edges/blades meant that one was always sharp. One blade was making contact with metal keeping the other blade sharp and free from metal to metal contact.
Peace,
E-T
etellurian 2 years ago
Meh...the cheap ones were probably imported from China.
Lengsel7 2 years ago
wouldnt you just love to hold the legendary joyeuse??
lightofgoku 2 years ago
To bad he didn't put the whole documentary on, I would like the know the rest of it.
rapid287 2 years ago
the vikings and franks where paradoxes of eachother.
the franks of the time where poorly trained and poorly lead by inept commanders, their carolingian empire was decaying rapidly from its glory days in the age of charlemange, however they had weaponry that was of superior quality to all other western european powers, they just never utilized it effectively.
the vikings on the other hand where skilled seamen and savage warriors and their weaponry was much inferior to that of the franks.
bremenlegation 3 years ago
these locally produced swords where used throught the early viking age, from 750 ad to 900 ad. after 900 AD (more probably as early as 850 AD) frankish swords superceded the original viking swords as they where superior in every way to the local blades and where much preferred by the scandanavian nobility. the lower class chieftans and jarls and even peasants still made use of the locally made blades though, as they couldent afford the high quality frankish blades........
bremenlegation 3 years ago
A "Jarl" wasn't far short of a duke in power in those days, they would have had the top grade weapons, either locally made or imported. It's also a fact that not all weapons made in Scandinavia were of that poor quality, some were extremely well made and could well match the quality of the frankish weapons, although the average quality of the frankish blades were higher. Also, the vikings didn't rely solely upon the swords, they used a wide array of different weapons and sophisticated technique.
Tehinke 2 years ago
MHm...thanks for the news..
BerserkJheova 3 years ago
its a little known fact but most norse and danes got their swords from the franks, who made the best blades in europe for centuries........even the arabs coveted them...........the frankish sword trade was so widespread that numerous popes passed edicts against the selling of swords to the muslims....
bremenlegation 3 years ago 2
Very Interesting. Thanks for posting.
tsafa1 3 years ago
@bremenlegation I agree, I have read the same thing somewhere.. That the Frankish swords were the best quality. Scandinavian swords were Chinese copies ;)
kollijolbein 1 year ago
I make these swords and they are the most difficult swords to make because of all of the forge welding involved.
One bad weld and months of hard work are for nothing.
I have done two versions so far and am planning to make the most difficult sword of all Viking swords next year.
The Sutton Hoo sword.
I think he Vikings may have buried defective swords because they didn't want to waste the good ones.
These swords were fit for Kings.
Conan568 3 years ago 7
Very interesting perspective. Thanks for commenting. Good luck with the sword.
tsafa1 3 years ago
Thanks for uploading this video! I had read in documents about weld flaws in some Viking swords but never seen visual examples like this so it's very interesting.
Though I think the Nordic smiths still get a bad wrap... :) Yes they made mistakes, but then again they didn't have entire BEACHES of black iron ore sand to play around with like the Japanese did! Iron was precious in the Viking age. So what they DID do with simple tools is mind blowing, maybe even more so than eastern katana work!..
MADdwarfWorkshop 3 years ago
I think the Nordics did an outstanding job given the period. Part of the reason I posted this vid is because the people I have run into think that historic sword were always perfect and superior to modern replicas. I believe the same applies to Japanese swords to a greater extent since the ore in Japan was of lesser quality. That is the reason the Japanese had to work so hard to purify their steel.
tsafa1 3 years ago
Are their any videos of that blacksmith working?
spleegulence 3 years ago
Sorry, I don't know.
tsafa1 3 years ago
Thats ok, it would be cool if there was a documentary on this guy making a sword, you konw document it before its lost, like wootz steel or something.
spleegulence 3 years ago
Hey mate can you put the whole documentary on youtube if it the rest of documentary is about viking swords, thank eitherway.
rapid287 2 years ago
Do you happen to have the rest of this program? I liked the shield and berserker segments. Thanks for posting this.
kingolaf99 3 years ago
It is a two part series about 3 hrs long. Too much for You Tube. You can download it from Bit Torrent. It is called Secrets of Viking Warriors.
tsafa1 3 years ago
Oh wow. I figured this was only half an hour long or so. Well thanks for the upload.
kingolaf99 3 years ago
Am I really the first to comment? I'm the 775th viewer. Anyway its good that this was posted. Too many samurai sword forging videos out already.
richarddr1234 3 years ago
Interesting that you mentioned Samurai swords. I believe that the best Japanese craftsmen made some of the most well crafted swords ever made...but... I think on average European swords were better. The reason is that European Iron Ore was better to start with. The Japaneses had to beat and fold their iron to purify it. The Europeans had a much easier task.
tsafa1 3 years ago
I also believe that the Japanese developed a slicing style for this same reason. The slice stressed the blades less. It also means the blade had to be sharper. The Europeans did not care as much about blade stress. They did care about the colder weather which tends to make steel more brittle. For this reason they made softer blades for hacking-cuts and thrusts. The softer blade dulls faster but also does not need to be as sharp for a hacking cut.
tsafa1 3 years ago