Ancient and ArchaeologyÌý permalink
WHO CONTROLLED THE MARITIME PASSAGES AROUND BRITAIN FROM 100 BC TO 1100 AD?
This discussion has been closed.
-
Message 1.Ìý
Posted by TheodericAur (U13724457) on Saturday, 1st August 2009
Although we talk of armies and battles and roads, Britain is surrounded and intersected by water through its oceans and rivers and this has had a huge impact on the running of Britain.
The control of these waterways and sea routes to move goods and armies both as imports and exports was key giving rise to ports not only on the coast but also at the tidal heads of many rivers and perhaps farther.
The amount of wood that was used must have been phenomenal but what type of shipping was used for both internal (river use) and also sea use?
This control involves the Brythons, Goidels, Irish, Romans, Roman British, Picts, Angles, Jutes, Saxons, Vikings, English, Normans………..but what were the interactions that controlled events through the ages?Link to this forum: WHO CONTROLLED THE MARITIME PASSAGES AROUND BRITAIN FROM 100 BC TO 1100 AD?
-
Message 2
Posted by an ex-nordmann - it has ceased to exist (U3472955) on Sunday, 2nd August 2009
For the bulk of the era you cite coastal navigation was that which was primarily used by maritime transport so a surprising amount of control could be exercised from the coast. Under Roman occupation this is precisely what happened. The Romans vouchsafed their cross-channel supply routes with a naval presence but apparently "out-sourced" patrol duties to others when the occasion demanded it elsewhere.
An effective coastguard policy which encompassed all of modern England and Wales was only prosecutable as long as an effective and centrally administered countrywide military was in place to enforce it. The Roman retreat led to a period where substantial areas of coastline therefore became soft targets for determined migrants and raiders, and for a period of a few centuries it is difficult to assert that any one power could be said to "control" the waters around Britain.
Viking invasion patterns were typified by the establishment of "bridgehead" colonisation, a feature which was later politically expressed through the Viking attitude of regarding their extensive English, Scottish and Irish possessions as intrinsically linked to their Scandinavian ones. This effectively meant that the Vikings could be said to therefore "control" the waters they used most regularly in maintaining this political status quo. This was also the impetus for the founding of many of Britain's ports which cannot be traced back to trade in the Roman period.
The period encompassing the decline in Viking power and the rise of Norman power saw a simultaneous rise in maritime trade and the devlopment of ships which could effectively defend themselves against piracy. This change would ultimately lead to ships which could pose an offensive threat to coastal installations in their own right and not just as troop transports, a development which led those powers rich enough to begin to construct "navies" more approximate to the modern concept.
The design of boats used over this 1200 year period varied enormously. Trade and transport utilised the biggest variety of design, from coracle to giant cargo vessel, while military applications tended to produce ships of rather uniform intent and slight design variation - until of course the Viking long boats and subsequent rapid developments in offensive ship design negated the effectiveness of and need for the older "people carriers" which had remained relatively unchanged from Roman times.
The amount of wood used is a moot point. A research paper here in Norway into forestry in antiquity published last year reckoned that the entire Viking fleet over the three hundred years in which they were at their most active and successful still only represented less than 10 percent of harvested timber, the remaining 90 percent being used in building and fuel. I imagine this can be used as a base to estimate other people's usage also.Link to this forum: WHO CONTROLLED THE MARITIME PASSAGES AROUND BRITAIN FROM 100 BC TO 1100 AD?
-
Message 3
Posted by Haesten (U4770256) on Sunday, 2nd August 2009
TA
Check out the oak forests of western Scotland, the Roman "Caledonii" might refer to hard strong wood.
TP might be able to help with the archeology, but I think it had been stripped pretty much before the Romans arrived.Link to this forum: WHO CONTROLLED THE MARITIME PASSAGES AROUND BRITAIN FROM 100 BC TO 1100 AD?
-
Message 4
Posted by TheodericAur (U13724457) on Monday, 3rd August 2009
Hi Nordmann
Many Thanks.
A lot of interesting information especially the parts of the wood used and also the "bridgehead" effect used by the Vikings - especially enlightening with regards to settlement in Pembroke and at Swansea and possibly North Wales.
I would be interested in further detail of the "outsourcing" by the Romans (perhaps the Irish?).
Considering how many times Roman armies were moved from Europe to Britain and back again Rome must have had a strangle hold on the channel.
Does anyone have an idea of what the signal towers were used for in Yorkshire, was a warning to troops on the ground as has been mooted in some of these posts or could it have been to signal shipping as part of the defensive coastal patrols?
Do I understand correctly that you regard the Viking longship as an "offensive" transport?
I think what is particularly important with the Vikings is that they sailed far inland up the Rivers to attack.
Was this also a ploy of the invading Germanic peoples (Jutes and Angles)?
Is there any knowledge of Brythonic shipping?
Again many thanks
Kind Regards - TALink to this forum: WHO CONTROLLED THE MARITIME PASSAGES AROUND BRITAIN FROM 100 BC TO 1100 AD?
-
Message 5
Posted by TheodericAur (U13724457) on Monday, 3rd August 2009
Hi Haesten
Thanks for the input.
Regardiong the "Scottish" connections - is this with regards to Pictish incursions via their shipping?
Kind Regards - TALink to this forum: WHO CONTROLLED THE MARITIME PASSAGES AROUND BRITAIN FROM 100 BC TO 1100 AD?
-
Message 6
Posted by Haesten (U4770256) on Monday, 3rd August 2009
TA
Caesar records the Celtic ships being made of oak, also oak made the best charcoal that was needed to make the iron nails.Link to this forum: WHO CONTROLLED THE MARITIME PASSAGES AROUND BRITAIN FROM 100 BC TO 1100 AD?
-
Message 7
Posted by giraffe47 (U4048491) on Monday, 3rd August 2009
Reputedly some of the oaks from N. Ireland fought at Trafalgar!
Oak 'knees' were needed to form the join between the sides and the decks of wooden warships, and were very hard to get, as only mature trees had the right strength and thickness.
Almost every 'townland' between Armagh City and Lough Neagh is called 'Derry' something - Derry meaning 'oak grove', or something similar, in Irish. It would have been heavily wooded 400 yrs ago, but there are very few trees left now!Link to this forum: WHO CONTROLLED THE MARITIME PASSAGES AROUND BRITAIN FROM 100 BC TO 1100 AD?
-
Message 8
Posted by TheodericAur (U13724457) on Monday, 3rd August 2009
Hi Haesten
Interesting - especially as the Oak was sacred to the Druids........
Also, showing my ignorance again, I wasn't even aware that there were Celtic ships which could sail both on the sea and rivers, with leather sails, oak hulls and a design that is similar o the Viking model allegedly (apart from the oars) - exactly what other information leads you to believe, it actually makes sense!
I think that this also shows that the Celts were poorly represented in the history stakes but of course it wasn't really in Rome's interest to portray the Celts as an advanced civilisation.
Thanks for that information...excellent
Kind Regards - TALink to this forum: WHO CONTROLLED THE MARITIME PASSAGES AROUND BRITAIN FROM 100 BC TO 1100 AD?
-
Message 9
Posted by TheodericAur (U13724457) on Monday, 3rd August 2009
Hi giraffe47
Many thanks for the info...obviously "Good English Oak" actually applies to many countries!!
Kind Regards - TALink to this forum: WHO CONTROLLED THE MARITIME PASSAGES AROUND BRITAIN FROM 100 BC TO 1100 AD?
-
Message 10
Posted by delrick53 (U13797078) on Tuesday, 4th August 2009
giraffe,
On the shores of Loch Awe (at Dalavich) there is a remnant of the ancient Scottish oak forest. These oaks are smaller than their southern cousins, but as has been said, their gnarled structure would have been ideal for numerous parts of old ships, and their close-grained, slow growth, would have meant incredible strength.
And of course, the old-growth Scots pines were ideal for sails.Link to this forum: WHO CONTROLLED THE MARITIME PASSAGES AROUND BRITAIN FROM 100 BC TO 1100 AD?
-
Message 11
Posted by TwinProbe (U4077936) on Tuesday, 4th August 2009
"the old-growth Scots pines were ideal for sails." Ìý
I may be very dim but I don't see how. I guess small sails could be made of fur but surely not fir.
TPLink to this forum: WHO CONTROLLED THE MARITIME PASSAGES AROUND BRITAIN FROM 100 BC TO 1100 AD?
-
Message 12
Posted by Haesten (U4770256) on Tuesday, 4th August 2009
TP
I think he means "masts" for sails.
It has been claimed that oak was running short when Nelson's Victory was built, the main deck beams (50') are in 4 parts. I think this was done so the scarf joints allow expansion, and the grain could be opposed, minimizing warp.
Oak grows to maturity in about 100 years in sandy soils, but is poor quality, in clay soils it takes 300 years and this was the timber that was wanted.Link to this forum: WHO CONTROLLED THE MARITIME PASSAGES AROUND BRITAIN FROM 100 BC TO 1100 AD?
-
Message 13
Posted by TwinProbe (U4077936) on Tuesday, 4th August 2009
Hi Haesten,
You've shamed me into admitting that I simply used delrick's lapsus calami as an excuse for a feeble pun.
The Irish technique of curragh building involved sewing ox-hides into a wooden frame. The resulting vessel was remarkably sea-worthy and would probably get you to the Isles of the Blessed or, failing that, Scotland.
Best wishes,
TPLink to this forum: WHO CONTROLLED THE MARITIME PASSAGES AROUND BRITAIN FROM 100 BC TO 1100 AD?
-
Message 14
Posted by Haesten (U4770256) on Tuesday, 4th August 2009
TP
They certainly got to Iceland, but the skin boat is a bit iffy.
Link to this forum: WHO CONTROLLED THE MARITIME PASSAGES AROUND BRITAIN FROM 100 BC TO 1100 AD?
-
Message 15
Posted by TwinProbe (U4077936) on Tuesday, 4th August 2009
Not if you pray to St Tim of Severin who reached Newfoundland in just such a vessel.
TPLink to this forum: WHO CONTROLLED THE MARITIME PASSAGES AROUND BRITAIN FROM 100 BC TO 1100 AD?
-
Message 16
Posted by Haesten (U4770256) on Tuesday, 4th August 2009
TP
Yes I know he did, some made it to King Alfred in England, but the church thought that an act of god that they had survived.Link to this forum: WHO CONTROLLED THE MARITIME PASSAGES AROUND BRITAIN FROM 100 BC TO 1100 AD?
-
Message 17
Posted by delrick53 (U13797078) on Tuesday, 4th August 2009
Thanks Haesten,
Sails would be pretty useless without them (masts that is).Link to this forum: WHO CONTROLLED THE MARITIME PASSAGES AROUND BRITAIN FROM 100 BC TO 1100 AD?
-
Message 18
Posted by Wyldeboar (U11225571) on Wednesday, 5th August 2009
Google, or even buy a copy of 'The Brendan Voyage', a very interesting 70s recreation of St Brendans alleged voyage to Iceland and beyond in just such a vessel.
Link to this forum: WHO CONTROLLED THE MARITIME PASSAGES AROUND BRITAIN FROM 100 BC TO 1100 AD?
-
Message 19
Posted by Backtothedarkplace (U2955180) on Wednesday, 5th August 2009
The boat used in Tim Severins voyage is, or used to be in the Exeter maritime museum. Dont know if it still is. Be warned though the last time I saw it you could smell the damn thing from the entrance to the museum. It reaked. It really, really, reaked. Something to do with the way there tanned the leather I think, but be warned nose clips are essential.
Link to this forum: WHO CONTROLLED THE MARITIME PASSAGES AROUND BRITAIN FROM 100 BC TO 1100 AD?
-
Message 20
Posted by Wyldeboar (U11225571) on Wednesday, 5th August 2009
He was on an episode of 'Coast' I caught a couple of weeks back. Can't remember if it was him or another group of re-enactors who wore 'authentic'period seafaring clothes of the time, heavy woollen garments waterproofed with grease and lanolin. Absolutely stank even before the voyage started.
Link to this forum: WHO CONTROLLED THE MARITIME PASSAGES AROUND BRITAIN FROM 100 BC TO 1100 AD?
-
Message 21
Posted by Vizzer aka U_numbers (U2011621) on Wednesday, 5th August 2009
The boat used in Tim Severins voyage is, or used to be in the Exeter maritime museum. Dont know if it still is. Be warned though the last time I saw it you could smell the damn thing from the entrance to the museum. It reaked. It really, really, reaked. Something to do with the way there tanned the leather I think, but be warned nose clips are essential.Ìý
The Exeter Maritime Museum closed in 1997. The bulk of the collection was transferred to the World of Boats exhibition which is now located at Eyemouth in Berwickshire, Scotland.
(I'm not sure of the fate of Tim Severin's boat though.)Link to this forum: WHO CONTROLLED THE MARITIME PASSAGES AROUND BRITAIN FROM 100 BC TO 1100 AD?
-
Message 22
Posted by Triceratops (U3420301) on Saturday, 8th August 2009
Had a flick through *Rodger's "Safeguard of the Sea" and he mentions a document "Senchus Fer n-Alban"which shows a ship levy system in operation in Dalriada,a group of households was obliged to provide and man a warship,in theory 177 ships of 14 men each, a total of 2,478 from 1,770 households. The Senchus also mentions the first naval battle recorded in British waters in 719 as part of a Dalriadan civil war.
The first ship Rodger looks at in detail is the Skuldelev 2, a longship which dendrochronlogy dates to circa 1060 and built in Dublin.
*well worth a readLink to this forum: WHO CONTROLLED THE MARITIME PASSAGES AROUND BRITAIN FROM 100 BC TO 1100 AD?
-
Message 23
Posted by Haesten (U4770256) on Saturday, 8th August 2009
Skuldelev 2 replica.
She faced some very heavy weather in the Irish Sea on her way to Dublin, breaking a steerboard in a force 9.
On her return she also faced some extreme sailing conditions rounding Lands End.
The original was probably part of the Godwin fleet in 1066 and it's interesting that the replica sailed in a fair wind, the distance from London to York in under 30 hours.
Senchus Fer n-Alban is 14th century.
Link to this forum: WHO CONTROLLED THE MARITIME PASSAGES AROUND BRITAIN FROM 100 BC TO 1100 AD?
-
Message 24
Posted by Triceratops (U3420301) on Saturday, 8th August 2009
Haesten,
Senchus Fer n-Alban is 14th century.
±ð²Ô.·É¾±°ì¾±±è±ð»å¾±²¹.´Ç°ù²µ/·É¾±°ì...,Ìý
Rodger certainly has it as earlier, and links the Dalriadan levy system with similar systems in use throughout the British Isles,possibly with a common Roman ancestry.Link to this forum: WHO CONTROLLED THE MARITIME PASSAGES AROUND BRITAIN FROM 100 BC TO 1100 AD?
-
Message 25
Posted by delrick53 (U13797078) on Saturday, 8th August 2009
Haesten,
I remember watching a TV programme last year that claimed that the Romans were trading with the inhabitants of the Orkney and/or Shetland Isles.
I may be wrong, but was this going on before the Roman invasion ?
There is also the question of the 'Lord of the Isles', where MacDonald's control of the seas around the West Coast depended on the 'secret' passage between Skye and the mainland being maintained.
When the passage was discovered, MacDonald's grip on the seas faltered.Link to this forum: WHO CONTROLLED THE MARITIME PASSAGES AROUND BRITAIN FROM 100 BC TO 1100 AD?
-
Message 26
Posted by Triceratops (U3420301) on Saturday, 8th August 2009
Delrick,
Found this site;
might be of help.Link to this forum: WHO CONTROLLED THE MARITIME PASSAGES AROUND BRITAIN FROM 100 BC TO 1100 AD?
-
Message 27
Posted by delrick53 (U13797078) on Saturday, 8th August 2009
Triceratops,
Thanks for the link. Interesting article that implies that the jury's still out.Link to this forum: WHO CONTROLLED THE MARITIME PASSAGES AROUND BRITAIN FROM 100 BC TO 1100 AD?
-
Message 28
Posted by Haesten (U4770256) on Saturday, 8th August 2009
The Romans were certainly supplying the Scandinavians with weapons, it's assumed this was to surround the hostile Germanic tribes to the south.
Augustus (I think?) equipped a fleet in the Rhine for a move into the Baltic.[Unsuitable/Broken URL removed by Moderator]
The Sea Stallions 07 route.
Orkney was a vital sea route to miss the treacherous Pentland Firth, Cape Wrath means "turning point" in Old Norse. [Unsuitable/Broken URL removed by Moderator]Link to this forum: WHO CONTROLLED THE MARITIME PASSAGES AROUND BRITAIN FROM 100 BC TO 1100 AD?
-
Message 29
Posted by Haesten (U4770256) on Saturday, 8th August 2009
Gaius Velleius Paterculus
The Deeds of the Divine Augustus 26.
26. I extended the boundaries of all the provinces which were bordered by races not yet subject to our empire. The provinces of the Gauls, the Spains, and Germany, bounded by the ocean from Gades to the mouth of the Elbe, I reduced to a state of peace. The Alps, from the region which lies nearest to the Adriatic as far as the Tuscan Sea, I brought to a state of peace without waging on any tribe an unjust war. My fleet sailed from the mouth of the Rhine eastward as far as the lands of the Cimbri to which, up to that time, no Roman had ever penetrated either by land or by sea, and the Cimbri and Charydes and Semnones and other peoples of the Germans of that same region through their envoys sought my friendship and that of the Roman people."
The Cimbri and Charydes and Semnones were tribes that inhabited Jutland/Denmark.
This site is showing Roman weapons produced on an industrial scale.
Link to this forum: WHO CONTROLLED THE MARITIME PASSAGES AROUND BRITAIN FROM 100 BC TO 1100 AD?
-
Message 30
Posted by delrick53 (U13797078) on Saturday, 8th August 2009
Haesten,
Excellent !
Thankyou.
How about the Isle of Man. I know it was a smuggling transit point from the 17th to the 19th centuries, with contraband flowing both ways, but it's also an obvious choice for most sea traffic moving north and south along the west coast.Link to this forum: WHO CONTROLLED THE MARITIME PASSAGES AROUND BRITAIN FROM 100 BC TO 1100 AD?
-
Message 31
Posted by Haesten (U4770256) on Saturday, 8th August 2009
delrick53
During the Viking period the Isle of Man was part of the Lord's of the Isles sphere of influence, this covered Orkney/Shetland, Western Scotland and Dublin/Wexford. The Norse Earls of Orkney were very powerful and were probably descended from the same family as William the Conqueror.
Dublin for a while was the Hong Kong of the Viking world, but York eventually became the gem, hence the Dublin/Scots/Norse faction's attempts to take it from the Anglo-Saxon/Norse factions.
King Cnut was the only one to hold sway over the whole empire, hence 1066 and the fight over the bones of Cnut's empire.
The Isle of Man's archaeology doesn't show any Roman presence, but absence of evidence is not evidence of absence.Link to this forum: WHO CONTROLLED THE MARITIME PASSAGES AROUND BRITAIN FROM 100 BC TO 1100 AD?
-
Message 32
Posted by Haesten (U4770256) on Saturday, 8th August 2009
delrick53
The reason why Augustus is making alliances with the Scandinavian tribes is here.
This was a major disaster for Rome and probably one of the reasons they later decided to invade Britain again.Link to this forum: WHO CONTROLLED THE MARITIME PASSAGES AROUND BRITAIN FROM 100 BC TO 1100 AD?
-
Message 33
Posted by an ex-nordmann - it has ceased to exist (U3472955) on Sunday, 9th August 2009
Haesten, the Battle of the Teutoburg Forest is a well known incident, and modern archeological finds in Germany would suggest that Arminius's victory was definitely not the last word on the matter of Roman military infiltration into Germany. But I (and the rest of the Norwegian Archaeological Society) would love to know what evidence exists that this event led to a Roman policy of arming and allying with Scandinavians? The nearest we can find in our own obviously limited records of Roman interaction with Scandinvian people is the odd treasure trove found in southern Denmark. What evidence have you found that points to something much more going on in Scandinavia than the suspected trading and mercenary ties that existed at Scandinavia's southern extreme?
A lot of Norwegians especially, I imagine, are waiting for you to divulge your sources. They have been miffed for a long time that they never played a role in Roman history and would gladly accept even one arrowhead as proof of what you claim!
An associate, Frans-Arne Stylegar, has written an excellent summation (see under) of what we can deduce from the archaeological record regarding the development of weaponry in Scandinavia during the Roman period - an appellation much preferred to "pre-Viking" here in Norway but which leads to some confusion since Norway and Sweden never really had a "Roman period" in the sense that others places had, at least one we knew of before your revelations here.
He in particular would welcome hearing about your sources as the area is something of a speciality for him. I don't think wikipedia will suffice however - Frans-Arne's internett contributions tend to be rather better researched and annotated:
Link to this forum: WHO CONTROLLED THE MARITIME PASSAGES AROUND BRITAIN FROM 100 BC TO 1100 AD?
-
Message 34
Posted by delrick53 (U13797078) on Sunday, 9th August 2009
Nordmann/Haesten,
Now if my history lessons in the 60's had included this kind of thing (and much more found on these boards), rather than the 'Kings and Queens of England' (in a Scottish school), I would have had a lifelong interest in history, rather than something that appeared much later.Link to this forum: WHO CONTROLLED THE MARITIME PASSAGES AROUND BRITAIN FROM 100 BC TO 1100 AD?
-
Message 35
Posted by Haesten (U4770256) on Sunday, 9th August 2009
Nordmann
My sources are the latest from Cambridge Press.
I think the Romans would have been more interested in the tribes of modern Denmark/Jutland rather than Norway if the wanted to put pressure on the Germanic tribes of Lower Saxony don't you?
I'll dig the sources out for you when I have time.Link to this forum: WHO CONTROLLED THE MARITIME PASSAGES AROUND BRITAIN FROM 100 BC TO 1100 AD?
-
Message 36
Posted by Haesten (U4770256) on Sunday, 9th August 2009
Nordmann
The bigginnings
If this link doesn't work or is deleted, google;
Hoby Roman wine setLink to this forum: WHO CONTROLLED THE MARITIME PASSAGES AROUND BRITAIN FROM 100 BC TO 1100 AD?
-
Message 37
Posted by PaulRyckier (U1753522) on Sunday, 9th August 2009
Re: Message 36.
Haesten,
thank you very much for your link. I started to read the book. And it adds also something to my study on a French messageboard about the relationship between the Roman Empire and the "Germani" from the second till the sixth century AD.
Warm regards and with esteem,
Paul.Link to this forum: WHO CONTROLLED THE MARITIME PASSAGES AROUND BRITAIN FROM 100 BC TO 1100 AD?
-
Message 38
Posted by an ex-nordmann - it has ceased to exist (U3472955) on Sunday, 9th August 2009
If I understand you rightly then you are claiming that the Romans were arming Scandinavians with cutlery?
The maintaining by Romans of friendly relations with what they considered the buffer states of what are now the area comprising parts of Netherlands, Denmark and western Germany is a policy well supported by archaeological finds, of which those from Lolland such as you refer to are indicative.
The wildest postulation based on these finds concerns the plausible hypothesis that these people were not just useful in providing a barrier against Germanic expansion but represented an interface with a trading network to which the Romans had little better than client status themselves.
But your own hypothesis, that Rome was arming these people, is not borne out by any evidence as yet uncovered, and nor does it gel with what we know the stated Roman policy was in the area for centuries.
I'll tell the folk back in the NAS to put the champagne on hold.
The real mystery that Roman finds in these areas throws up lies in the fact that they are of fine a quality as they are scarce compared to other non-Roman finds from the same period, and their lack of geographical penetration into areas where it is known that some cultural and political co-operation and federation existed, something which would normally lend itself to rapid and widespread dissemination of such articles. This is why speculation sometimes centres on the strong possibility that they reflect a Roman business policy rather than military or political policy in action, and that we are uncovering evidence for some locals on the borders who made good in trading with Rome, and evidence at the same time that this was as far (literally) as the relationship went.Link to this forum: WHO CONTROLLED THE MARITIME PASSAGES AROUND BRITAIN FROM 100 BC TO 1100 AD?
-
Message 39
Posted by Haesten (U4770256) on Sunday, 9th August 2009
He in particular would welcome hearing about your sources as the area is something of a speciality for him. I don't think wikipedia will suffice however - Frans-Arne's internett contributions tend to be rather better researched and annotated:
arkeologi.blogspot.c...
Ìý
I think he knows about it Nordmamn.
"Furthermore, the standardised weapons, the presence of Roman weapons and the sheer speed by which new Roman weapon types are adopted in Germanic society throughout the Roman period, points to there being a rather close relationship between Roman military developments and Germanic ones in this period."Link to this forum: WHO CONTROLLED THE MARITIME PASSAGES AROUND BRITAIN FROM 100 BC TO 1100 AD?
-
Message 40
Posted by an ex-nordmann - it has ceased to exist (U3472955) on Sunday, 9th August 2009
Yes, but we all know that.
You're making the same claim for Scandinavians. That's what has my mates all excited.Link to this forum: WHO CONTROLLED THE MARITIME PASSAGES AROUND BRITAIN FROM 100 BC TO 1100 AD?
-
Message 41
Posted by Haesten (U4770256) on Sunday, 9th August 2009
If I understand you rightly then you are claiming that the Romans were arming Scandinavians with cutlery?
Ìý
Well I can't beat your Irish hill-fort cows that could produce milk without water!
Link to this forum: WHO CONTROLLED THE MARITIME PASSAGES AROUND BRITAIN FROM 100 BC TO 1100 AD?
-
Message 42
Posted by Haesten (U4770256) on Sunday, 9th August 2009
Yes, but we all know that.
You're making the same claim for Scandinavians. That's what has my mates all excited.
Ìý
Go to page 37 of Viking Empires.
Your link is using Germanic for Danish finds at Illerup Ardal etc.Link to this forum: WHO CONTROLLED THE MARITIME PASSAGES AROUND BRITAIN FROM 100 BC TO 1100 AD?
-
Message 43
Posted by an ex-nordmann - it has ceased to exist (U3472955) on Sunday, 9th August 2009
That's because the inhabitants were Germanic. Both the book you refer to and Frans-Arne's article are quite correct to describe them as that too, at least in the sense of the Roman period.
I can see that the confusion here stems from your use of the term "Scandinavian". It is way too confusing a term to apply to the period as it implies a perceved commonality among the people of Denmark, Norway and Sweden at the time which isn't supported by the evidence (or by contemporary records). It also implies that "Denmark" makes sense as a geographical political and cultural entity at the time, which again isn't true.
Have you read about the battleground found recently at Northeim near Hanover and Henning Hassman's treatment of the finds there, by the way? Now THERE'S a find which rewrites the Romano-Germanic relationship!Link to this forum: WHO CONTROLLED THE MARITIME PASSAGES AROUND BRITAIN FROM 100 BC TO 1100 AD?
-
Message 44
This posting has been hidden during moderation because it broke the in some way.
-
Message 45
Posted by Haesten (U4770256) on Sunday, 9th August 2009
Hidden
Ìý
Harzhorn Press Release pdf
Reply to Nordmann,"no I hadn't." -
Message 46
Posted by PaulRyckier (U1753522) on Sunday, 9th August 2009
Re: Message 45.
Haesten,
thanks again for this link. See also:
Warm regards,
Paul. -
Message 47
Posted by an ex-nordmann - it has ceased to exist (U3472955) on Monday, 10th August 2009
Hidden
Quoted from this message
www.google.co.uk/sea...
Harzhorn Press Release pdf
Reply to Nordmann,"no I hadn't."
Ìý
Thanks for the message but, like your comment regarding cows above, it makes absolutely no sense to me.
No you hadn't what?
Getting back to the actual theme of the thread, I must also dig out an article by the same archaeological historian Frans-Arne which made a case for certain harbours in Vest Agder, Rogaland and Hordaland having been used as part of a trading artery which long preceded the ascent of Viking culture. It was either on his own website or in the annual of the Norwegian Archaeological Society.
It roused a bit of discussion here some years ago but I do remember that he could convincingly hypothesise based on archaeology that the trade route of which these ports were a part extended south and into the Baltic, the northern Germanic "tribes" being an intermediary between them and the Roman-controlled areas. The importance of the hypothesis was not in that it tried to "promote" the trading status of pre-Viking Scandinavians but in that it opened speculation about the transport and trading not just of those commodities which are best preserved archeologically, but of perishables, livestock and timber on a profitable scale which had hitherto only been discussed in relation to when the Romans tended to move these things.
Pure speculation of course, but one which common sense alone would tend at least to demand that it be given some consideration, and which in turn invites speculation about the ability of "barbarians" to create commodity surpluses which could be translated into the basis of international commerce based on "short hop" coastal trading. -
Message 48
Posted by Haesten (U4770256) on Monday, 10th August 2009
No you hadn't what?
Ìý
I hadn't heard of the German 3rd century battlefield, which was clear in the hidden post, pdf link presumably. -
Message 49
Posted by an ex-nordmann - it has ceased to exist (U3472955) on Monday, 10th August 2009
You posted a copy of the google URL your browser gave you after you searched for info related to what I had told you and then the URL of the first link Google suggested.
Then you said "No, I hadn't".
I dare not presume anything, not even why you have not explained your claim regarding the Romans arming Scandinavians, the proof for which you claim is Roman weaponry used and/or imitated by Germans. -
Message 50
Posted by Haesten (U4770256) on Monday, 10th August 2009
I dare not presume anything, not even why you have not explained your claim regarding the Romans arming Scandinavians, the proof for which you claim is Roman weaponry used and/or imitated by Germans.
Ìý
The Hoby wine set was an extremly valuable gift to a Danish (Germanic) chieftain, they are stamped with the Greek silversmith's name and exact weight, and also SILIUS, who was the Roman commander of North Germania AD 14-21.
This gift suggests either payment for past service or expected service.
Augustus sending a fleet to the Baltic was inscribed on columns of his tomb in Rome, preserved in a copy, Ankara modern Turkey.
This battle appears to have taken place at the same time as the recent German find, early 3rd century.
The swords from Illerup are stamped with the Roman makers name, just the blades were supplied with hilts and finishing touches done in Scandinavia.
There are also spear points stamped with a Germanic makers name (WAGNIJO), this is unknown in Germanic archeology of this period.
This suggests a Germanic following Roman custom, who had a dye and could read his own name, presumably learnt in Roman service.
Jørgen Ilkjær
"A fleet of perhaps 50 ships and 1,000 men set sail from the west coast of the Scandinavian peninsula and made its way down through Kattegat to attack Jutland.
The force landed on the east coast of Jutland, but was met by a well-organised army made up of forces from the entire region. The defensive action proved successful: the attackers were defeated, and their equipment and weapons were collected and destroyed.
The remnants of the weapons and equipment were then thrown into the lake in Illerup Ã…dal as an offering. It is not clear exactly where the battles in this campaign took place, but presumably not too far away from the lake."
About this Board
The History message boards are now closed. They remain visible as a matter of record but the opportunity to add new comments or open new threads is no longer available. Thank you all for your valued contributions over many years.
or Ìýto take part in a discussion.
The message board is currently closed for posting.
The message board is closed for posting.
This messageboard is .
Find out more about this board's
Search this Board
Â鶹ԼÅÄ iD
Â鶹ԼÅÄ navigation
Â鶹ԼÅÄ links
Â鶹ԼÅÄ Â© 2014 The Â鶹ԼÅÄ is not responsible for the content of external sites. Read more.
This page is best viewed in an up-to-date web browser with style sheets (CSS) enabled. While you will be able to view the content of this page in your current browser, you will not be able to get the full visual experience. Please consider upgrading your browser software or enabling style sheets (CSS) if you are able to do so.