ModernChivalry.org
Miscellaneous => The Sallyport => Topic started by: Sir Vander Linde on 2013-04-11, 23:39:27
-
So yeah the topic of Viking horned helms for discussion, Why? Well I got to thinking and well, helm toppers. What if high ranking members had helm toppers? It makes sense to me; almost every European nation at one point in time had helm toppers, Rome, the Celts, etc. So what if Viking chieftains had such toppers for their helms, or just high ranking society figures? If we look at what we know there is a gap in the helm topper time frame that fits this, Rome had crests, and then early medieval knights had helm toppers. See the gap? It is my explanation of the spike found on Gjermundbu style helmets. These toppers could have had a wood base with the rest leather. These could be affixed to the helm via the spike and tie points, these would not survive very well form a archaeological stand point. SO what do you guys think?
Thank you for putting up with my nonsense.
-
I don't think the logic that "because there's a gap in a common practice during the viking era, that they probably did it too" is sound. A lot of common practices were lost during the 'Dark Ages,' so the omission of something that was common before and after does not mean that it necessarily should have existed in between.
-
Very true.
However this practice would not have been lost in the north where the fall of western Rome would not have any real effect on society and its practices. Other than a loss of trade for the lower areas.
-
From what little I know, the only actual finds of decorative helmets predate the Viking era heyday. But even if some did survive, the nature of wings or horns on a helmet would make them very unsuitable for ground combat from a practicality standpoint. Big horns on your head are great for an opponent to crank your neck with. I subscribe to the thought that any decorative Viking helmets were exclusively for ceremonial use. Medieval helmet decorations and crests are typically found on tournament helms for tilting where the practical combat disadvantage of the decorative elements wouldn't really matter. This could almost be called 'ceremonial' as well.
-
100% agree. Perhaps they, if they did exist, were used in a similar fashion to that of the tournament helms, on horsed riders at tournaments. As for Ceremonial use I have no doubt that they would have been used, TYR, is almost always depicted with such a helm. If they did exist on the battle fielded I don't see them being used on anything other than horse warriors, who would not be "Vikings" but rather a warrior/knight of the same culture. I use the term "Viking" as a general encompassment of that culture.
-
i wrote a thesis paper in college about the myths of the vikings. horned helmets no go there. lol. best guess where the colorful depictions from the monks saying the horned devils exaggerations and maybe possibly cheek plates tied up. i cant remember all of the other reasons but heraldry was just not there.
-
Thank you both for your replies. :D
Sir Wolf, I have heard many times from others as well that "heraldry" was not there. Any idea where that view point comes from? I'm of Danish, Swedish, Norwegian, and Northern German Sorbs decent and know of my families heraldry from that time, of course it evolved an got more complicated but it was there.
Any ideas? (asking because you guys are a pool of knowledge) ;)
-
Vander, I've often wondered this myself. True, we can thank Hollywood for the visuals and its likely that it never actually existed, at least not for what we term the 'Vikings' but we have no real way of knowing despite all of the documentation currently available.
There's alot about history which we cannot know as we weren't around back then and not everyone prescribed to keeping written records about basically everything for future generations to take a gander at.
So, its unlikely so far as we know, but that doesn't equate to 'absolutely not' - no one alive can say that with any sort of real guarantee.
-
As was covered, "helmet toppers" for the medieval period were heraldic in nature. Mostly used in tournaments, they probably saw some use on the battlefield, but I'd wager not a whole lot - it's excess weight and target with little practical purpose. The more wealthy may have worn it for show and authority, but the common soldier probably did not.
Romans, I don't really know much about. Taking a complete guess, would they have a "team color" where the soldiers of the same army all have blue, or red, or something? Again, completely guessing.
I doubt the vikings had horns. Their armor wasn't very advanced, and attaching horns that don't serve any purpose other than confusion/intimidation seems like something they wouldn't care for at a practical level. As with crests, it's an extra "target" of sorts, and probably more liability than usefulness.
-
Romans wore helmet crests to signify their title and position amongst their ranks. Their color typically signified their house (i.e. House of Julii was red) but only Roman Consorts could wear their house signet on campaign. Auxillaries could not bear any crests (not Roman citizens) and even Legionaries (Roman citizens) could only bear it if they had significant importance in rank, title or office and it had to bear the color of their Cohort Commander. So I am told at least....
-
I would not say that their armor skills were not advanced. Their helms were quite decorated, along with fittings on swords, etc.
Examples of helms:
(http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/b/b8/Helmet_from_a_7th_century_boat_grave,_Vendel_era.jpg)
(http://3.bp.blogspot.com/_CijcaA9yq58/Sr41I3mrvUI/AAAAAAAADlw/VeDsmgGubpM/s400/Viking+Helmet,+6th+-+9thc.jpg)
(http://www.archeurope.com/uploads/images/Viking/vendal_helmets/valsgarde_l.jpg)
(http://www.keneckert.com/pictures/england/slides/Sutton-Hoo-helmet.jpg)
-
Also found this, from the bronze age Scandinavia/Russia. This example specifically is from Denmark.
(http://en.academic.ru/pictures/enwiki/66/Bronze_Age_Helmets,_Nationalmuseet_Copenhagen.jpg)
-
Thanks for all the info and opinions on this subject!!!
Also the above picture of bronze age helms, we see toppers like this on the royal Danish helm when heraldry is "used" or better said recorded.
-
Well...if I didn't know any better, I'd say those look like horns on those helms there. :)
-
There are lots of fancy helmet adornments from the bronze age, but even those are suspected to be ceremonial in use, and of course the bronze age pre-dates the Vikings by about 2000 years :)
Artists also began depicting the Germanic Barbarian tribes wearing horns long before artists began putting horns on Viking helmets in artwork. Then it just kind of carried over in to paintings, but these were all depictions from at the earliest, the 17th century.
-
Romans wore helmet crests to signify their title and position amongst their ranks. Their color typically signified their house (i.e. House of Julii was red) but only Roman Consorts could wear their house signet on campaign. Auxillaries could not bear any crests (not Roman citizens) and even Legionaries (Roman citizens) could only bear it if they had significant importance in rank, title or office and it had to bear the color of their Cohort Commander. So I am told at least....
Bold part is kind of what I was thinking, identification as a group, but not an individual.
Also found this, from the bronze age Scandinavia/Russia. This example specifically is from Denmark.
Ah, okay. I thought you meant *horns* as in animal horn like hollywood. The pictures look metal, rather than wood/steel. And it's really throwing me off, but I swear the lone horn on the left looks threaded at the bottom, as if it would be removable (such as for battle), and used during ceremonials (as Sir Ian said). I can't tell if it's threaded, or just ringed, but both seem very unusual if it would be expected to be a permanent fixture on the helmet.
I would not say that their armor skills were not advanced. Their helms were quite decorated, along with fittings on swords, etc.
Advanced in regards to heat treating, articulation, and complexity. They certainly had very decorative items, and some that were crazy intricate in detail. In my head, that's different from the core function of the armor. Sorry for the confusion. :)
Thanks for all the info and opinions on this subject!!!
Also the above picture of bronze age helms, we see toppers like this on the royal Danish helm when heraldry is "used" or better said recorded.
If I'm reverse engineering this correctly, it's from a collection of heraldry, Armorial del Gelre, which is 1370-1414: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gelre_Armorial. (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gelre_Armorial.) No doubt helmet toppers / crests were in use at this point, and at least 100 or so years earlier - my knowledge is severely lacking in that period, and I had to google for the crest info on this one, but I hope that helps.
-
The Norse peoples, especially Vikings, lacked any reason to stick horns or battlefield decoration on their helms. They certainly lacked the battlefield command system of the Romans, or the heraldry of the medieval era. And when worn to war, a crest in the medieval era seems for from line commander identification, to serve as rallying points on the battlefield amongst the complex cavalry actions.
All these things Vikings wouldn't have or need. During most of the viking era, to have a maille shirt identified you as a leader enough, you don't need to jam things to your head.
Also the sagas tend to ridicule those who let themselves get dragged about by their helm (loose cheekguards are mentioned). Horns do not particularly lend themselves to preventing this.
-
All these things Vikings wouldn't have or need. During most of the viking era, to have a maille shirt identified you as a leader enough, you don't need to jam things to your head.
That just simply is not true. Norse people were very much a sea culture as well as a horse culture. The horse bit is often over looked, but comprises a majority of religious/military practices. Everyone who was a free man had maille and a weapon, a leader usually would have additional armor of some early plate variant, lamellar, or a circular chest piece, splints,etc. They had quite good military tactics as well, if I remember correctly there was an instance of them taking out an army 3x the size of theirs that had cavalry. Heraldry was there, but you are correct it was not as greatly in use.
-
that is not true at all.
there is NO evidence to that what so ever.
they had mail that is it. that is known. any lamallar or scale is of meditereanian area. could have been brought back etc.
there is writings about how much a jarl or huscarl or hersir had to have if he had certain amounts of land etc.
-
that is not true at all.
there is NO evidence to that what so ever.
they had mail that is it. that is known. any lamallar or scale is of meditereanian area. could have been brought back etc.
there is writings about how much a jarl or huscarl or hersir had to have if he had certain amounts of land etc.
At mimimum, they must have had leather, linen, and maille.
-
there is no proof of leather armour at all in northern countries. none. there are leather shoe, and belt finds but no armour.
i have heard of reindeer hide cloaks but they were "magical" ie put in a story setting where one met the gods.
all metal is small pieces put together with rivets. spangen helms etc. the long narrow pieces with the biggest part being the size of your hand. so the metallurgy isn't there for them
vikr means to go out. gorilla warfare. go quick and get out quick. once they couldn't beat the surrounding peoples they started settling down with them. william of normandy is the (cant remember the greats) grandson of the old danish king. his sons settled once they got older etc. even the skralegs(sp?) in north america. they stopped going west ward because they faught the same way. the northerners had no more tactitcal advantage
-
there is no proof of leather armour at all in northern countries. none. there are leather shoe, and belt finds but no armour.
i have heard of reindeer hide cloaks but they were "magical" ie put in a story setting where one met the gods.
all metal is small pieces put together with rivets. spangen helms etc. the long narrow pieces with the biggest part being the size of your hand. so the metallurgy isn't there for them
vikr means to go out. gorilla warfare. go quick and get out quick. once they couldn't beat the surrounding peoples they started settling down with them. william of normandy is the (cant remember the greats) grandson of the old danish king. his sons settled once they got older etc. even the skralegs(sp?) in north america. they stopped going west ward because they faught the same way. the northerners had no more tactitcal advantage
It was that troublesome Lokey, I tell ya. He took away the Nords ability to have cool warrior stuff, making them exceptionally spiteful of those who have 'armor'. No wonder they had to raid.
-
there is no proof of leather armour at all in northern countries. none. there are leather shoe, and belt finds but no armour.
i have heard of reindeer hide cloaks but they were "magical" ie put in a story setting where one met the gods.
all metal is small pieces put together with rivets. spangen helms etc. the long narrow pieces with the biggest part being the size of your hand. so the metallurgy isn't there for them
vikr means to go out. gorilla warfare. go quick and get out quick. once they couldn't beat the surrounding peoples they started settling down with them. william of normandy is the (cant remember the greats) grandson of the old danish king. his sons settled once they got older etc. even the skralegs(sp?) in north america. they stopped going west ward because they faught the same way. the northerners had no more tactitcal advantage
Don't worry Chuck, the new Vikings tv show on History will set this back another 50 years or so and make everyone think that Vikings looked like characters from Skyrim. I like the show, I watch it, but I understand it's pure fantasy. Casual watchers however will think it's history, and it's wrought with leather and furs and all the trappings of the imaginary Viking except the horned helmets so far. Although their priestess did wear a winged helmet at a funeral, but it was ceremonial.
-
what we have Here is a failure to under stand the fact that there are two governing systems at this time vassalage and comitatus.
There are in fact finds that support other armors. Shulder straps for lamellar for example have been found. Also if they did not have this armor tech then how may I ask, did the armies of the north all magicly get single piece raised conical helms and various fourms of lameller armor? Which we have records of. After all lamellar pieces are smaller than a hand.
Excuse bad spelling I am typing on my phone. Small buttons.
-
I thought the last surviving hope of Viking lamellar was the Birka armor, and that was discovered to have really been from central Asia or Siberia, effectively bringing the idea of viking lamellar to a close.
-
by the way... Sorry if I come of as a prik.
Yeah the birka is of Rus making. There was a version found in Fin. Land. That is differnet that starts with a "k" but o curently forget the name of it. Was a inland thing and probably never left the local area where it was found.
-
;) birka, fins all had heavy Rus influence did they not? esp from the Byzantium guards etc? also check your time table the "vikings era" is a short one. from lindensfarne(sp?) 790s to what? at the latest 1066?
-
and single piece conical helmets do not fall into this range. they are post 1066 correct?
-
Check out this article, and the website as a whole. Very good stuff on Norse culture.
http://www.hurstwic.org/history/articles/manufacturing/text/viking_mail.htm (http://www.hurstwic.org/history/articles/manufacturing/text/viking_mail.htm)