History channel... Vikings... crossbows.

Fledermaus said:

The Mongols wore silk shirts under their mail. It acted like primate Kevlar. If an arrow penetrated the mail they would grab the cloth around the would and extract the point as it often would not penetrate fully and often resulted in simple flesh wounds..

Click to expand...

They learned that from the Chinese who wore silk armor underwear for thousands of years before the Mongol tribes united.

Silk was commonly used as armor throughout the mideast when the Crusaders arrived, quickly learned a lesson, and they started doing the same thing. Silk was too expensive and rare as a commodity to be used in the Europe.

When the Romans were defeated by the Scythian tribes, the Romans complained their arrows couldn't penetrate the Scythian armor. Recent excavations of Scythian graves in eastern Europe, northern Turkey, the Balkans and the Russian steppes have shown remnants of silk underwear under the armor the more important people were buried in. The Romans never defeated the Scythians, neither did the Greeks before them. The Scythians were nomadic tribes with no written history, no cities, and no monuments as their legacies. We know very little about them, other than minor mentions in both surviving Greek and Romans texts, both who feared their women warriors. They are believed to the first who domesticated the horse and who rode horsed into battle. The are also believed to be the source of the Amazon myth, all women warrior tribes. They were also believed to be the first who used war dogs, specifically the ancestors of the larger mastiffs.

That's what I want to fight, some crazy woman on horseback swinging a sword at me with her mastiff ready to bite off my head. As if women can't be vicious enough without those accessories. I'm going to go hide.

Sweden said:

Exactly. My wife maintains - vigorously - that all her viking ancestors were gentle peace-loving traders. The vikings were good guys; as they make clear on the five 1000 year old rune stones within walking distance of whence I type.

Click to expand...

They were traders... Those that weren't hacking and slashing.

Vikings made up the Rus from where we get Russian. Traders that went up the Russian rivers.

There were Vikings that went as far as Constantinople and some served as the Vangarian Guard (spelling may be off)

Sweden said:

Exactly. My wife maintains - vigorously - that all her viking ancestors were gentle peace-loving traders. The vikings were good guys; as they make clear on the five 1000 year old rune stones within walking distance of whence I type.

Click to expand...

Remind her peace loving people don't worship gods who won't allow them into paradise, Valhalla, a place of eternal war, booze, feasting and sex, unless they die with a weapon in their hands and a history of killing in battles. The Norse weren't the only peoples to follow the northern gods. It's been recently estimated, at least 30 million people in northern Europe, from northeaster Russia and Finland, south to the edge of the Balkans, still follow the old gods. The Mari have often followed the old ways in secret, but they still exist. Peter the Great insisted on having Mari as his personal bodyguards, and even sent some here to the colonies to learn about the new methods of river boat building developing here for the Hudson river and nearby tributaries, which were also ocean going for nearby fishing. Russia is a land of rivers, just like the northeastern US.

The Mari Peter sent here, never returned. Peter died, and instead they sent for their families, settled in the then frontiers of northern NY, New England and so on, becoming crucial fighters for the French Indian war and then the Revolution when the times came. The Mari of Russia were the aboriginal peoples before the Rus arrived, and the original architects of the famous Russian Dachas. When we travel around rural upstate NY and New England, we occasionally find the architecture in 3-400 year old log houses, with the same kind of wood shingle roofs steeply angled to prevent snow accumulation. Russian Dachas are still built from whole logs. When you ask about family histories, they all recall their ancestors came from what is now part of Russia, but the always say their ancestors were not Russian, adamantly.

The first building constructed in Oswego NY, the only major American port on Lake Ontario, built on the northwest side the Onondaga River where it meets Lake Ontario, built as a warehouse, trading post and inn looks just like a Russian Dacha, only larger. Over the centuries, the building was enlarged. Nearby is a small cemetery, set back from the lake shore by about 200 feet, with gravestones dating back to the 1650's and inscribed in Cyrillic and Runes. 55 miles northeast is a smaller harbor, Sacketts Harbor, Watertown NY which was fortified during the War of 1812, a site developed because of the rich timber stands nearby, but with no river to transport them toward markets in Syracuse, is the site of Fort Drum. Nearby is another small cemetery with gravestones marked in Cyrillic and Runes dating to the same period. Within 5 miles of Fort Drum there are two older houses which could easily stand in for Russian Dachas.

For any with fortitude, anyone can read a detailed history of the region from the beginning of European settlement until the War of 1812 by Allan W. Eckert, 5 volumes, each 12-1,500 pages, reading like a novel, but completely researched and accurate.

Sabre said:

Quite a few and quite vicious. Don't think I ever saw one with a crossbow though, usually long bow.

Click to expand...

Look carefully. Those aren't longbows, they are shorter fighting bows. The English and French used crossbows, not the Norse, whether Danes or Scandinavians. Crossbows of the day didn't have much range, but the didn't require the training or the muscular development of fighting bows and long bows, both which has greater accuracy and range when in the hands of well practiced and trained archers. Cross bows didn't require much training, or heavy muscular development. And at the time period of the show, quarrels were mostly made from bound reeds, tipped with carved stones and did much more damage when hitting a target before the days when metal bolts were introduced. At short range, the force of quarrels penetrated armor. Later metal tipped solid wood quarrels, and eventually all metal bolts added range and accuracy.

An English Long Bow, 120lb pull, had a range of 400 yards, 60lb pull fighting bows had a range of about 180 yards, European cross bows 70-150 yards with accuracy, improving range over time. Long bows and fighting bows could be fired more quickly in trained hands. Comparatively, the short compound double recurve bows of the Mongols, with only 40lb pulls, had the same range and accuracy as an English long bow. The trick was in a bridge on the bow which the string rested on, when the arrow was released it would give the arrow a pop for more range and accuracy. Combined with the Mongol use of metal stirrups, instead of leather and wood, the Mongols had the advantage of being able to stand as they rode, and fire while retreating as well as when advancing. They didn't develop of the metal stirrups, but they took advantage of them like no one before them. The ways of war, intriguing.

All of this shows the human species is still evolving. We keep improving our methods for killing each other.

Fledermaus said:

They were traders... Those that weren't hacking and slashing.

Vikings made up the Rus from where we get Russian. Traders that went up the Russian rivers.

There were Vikings that went as far as Constantinople and some served as the Vangarian Guard (spelling may be off)

Click to expand...

You're partially correct. The Rus were a Scandinavian tribe, a rather large one, but they were never Vikings. They were believed to have been descended from former slaves of other tribes in the region, with no land ownership, and therefore pressured to seek lands to the east. They did travel up Russian rivers and displaced earlier peoples who had settled in the region, mostly who came from northern India much earlier. Without a doubt, their bloodlines were modified waves of other immigrant tribes from east and northern India, especially the Slavic tribes. For those traveling and migrating from the east and northern India to Europe, Russia was the strategic gateway, and suffered for it. Accounting in part for the national Russian pastime of paranoia.

Vikings did travel to Mediterranean ports, and even built a stronghold in Sicily. The Varangian Guard did hire Scandinavian mercenaries that had been based in Sicily. The Scandinavians called the Gates of Hercules, Gibraltar, The Heroes, because they guarded the entrance to the Mediterranean.

BTW, a recent DNA study in Britain shows very little Anglo or Saxon presence. Instead mostly Frankish and Norse dna markers, with a mixture of many other threads and markers, most specifically Gaellic, Pictish, and Basque, who are believed to be descended from the Gaellic who left Eire for France well before the Romans arrived and then moved north and west to the English Isles and the Pyrenees respectively. Roman markers were in a very distinct minority in that DNA analysis. Another myth bites the dust thanks to advancements in DNA research. The same research found the Pictish lines, also descended from the Gaellic tribes, were dominant in Wales.

If your interested, a good source is a site called Ancient Origins. I don't have the URL handy, but easy enough to search for. They have thousands of short articles in their archives, and daily updates of recent finds.

OldFatGuy said:

You're partially correct. The Rus were a Scandinavian tribe, a rather large one, but they were never Vikings. They were believed to have been descended from former slaves of other tribes in the region, with no land ownership, and therefore pressured to seek lands to the east. They did travel up Russian rivers and displaced earlier peoples who had settled in the region, mostly who came from northern India much earlier. Without a doubt, their bloodlines were modified waves of other immigrant tribes from east and northern India, especially the Slavic tribes. For those traveling and migrating from the east and northern India to Europe, Russia was the strategic gateway, and suffered for it. Accounting in part for the national Russian pastime of paranoia.

Vikings did travel to Mediterranean ports, and even built a stronghold in Sicily. The Varangian Guard did hire Scandinavian mercenaries that had been based in Sicily. The Scandinavians called the Gates of Hercules, Gibraltar, The Heroes, because they guarded the entrance to the Mediterranean.

BTW, a recent DNA study in Britain shows very little Anglo or Saxon presence. Instead mostly Frankish and Norse dna markers, with a mixture of many other threads and markers, most specifically Gaellic, Pictish, and Basque, who are believed to be descended from the Gaellic who left Eire for France well before the Romans arrived and then moved north and west to the English Isles and the Pyrenees respectively. Roman markers were in a very distinct minority in that DNA analysis. Another myth bites the dust thanks to advancements in DNA research. The same research found the Pictish lines, also descended from the Gaellic tribes, were dominant in Wales.

If your interested, a good source is a site called Ancient Origins. I don't have the URL handy, but easy enough to search for. They have thousands of short articles in their archives, and daily updates of recent finds.

Click to expand...

Runs counter to what I have read. I'll have to look at that again...

And thank you for the recommendation for reading.

camlok said:

History channel

More apt - Propaganda channel

Click to expand...

Any channel that shows Ancient Aliens has to be cool.

Fledermaus said:

Runs counter to what I have read. I'll have to look at that again...

And thank you for the recommendation for reading.

Click to expand...

You're welcome.

Recently, during the last 20 years or so, archeological findings show a major cultural difference from the time period of the early Rus migrations into lands that would become Russia with most other Scandinavian tribes. The Scandinavians cremated their dead, the Rus buried them. Viking was a verb, not a noun. Both changed with time, interpretations and myth making. Other tells were the more ornate decoration of weapons, and more higher quality jewelry found among Scandinavian sites compared to early Rus sites. As well as the presence and absence of goods from elsewhere, including coins, ceramics, textile remnants (cotton as opposed to linen made from flax), pigments, even foodstuffs. We take cotton for granted. During the days of these peoples, cotton was a luxury fabric, imported from warm climates like Egypt. Flax grew everywhere. Linen from northern Europe was thick, stiff and itchy, but after wearing for a few weeks, softened and the itchiness would be relieved by oils from human skin, and lipids from animal fats that were rubbed into skin to relieve insect bites in summer, and to help keep warm in winter, worked its way into the linen. As well, archeological findings gave rise to theories claiming the Scandinavians were into extreme cleanliness, the Rus not so much because of the difference in wealth, supporting the theory of the Rus being of low status as former slaves. Making soaps was a caloric expensive activity. Meaning cultures with abundant food supplies could afford to make soaps.

Theories, not facts. There are other reasons for not washing. When deciding to abandon the Russian front, Napoleon Bonaparte wrote a letter to Josephine. He said in the letter, "Don't wash, I'll be home in about three months." L'amour.

Goshin said:

I know right?


And yeah, generally not as bloody. It isn't easy to kill an armored man with period weapons. I understand most battle injuries were bruises, sprains, strains, broken bones and shallow cuts, as armor tended to turn edged and pointed hits into blunt trauma.

Also, I understand a lot of engagements involved one side running away before the body count got very high....

Click to expand...

You killed the unarmored peons. You then captured the armored folks as they were likely Nobel and could be ransomed.

The English captured King John II of France in the 1500s... For ransom. It took years to pay off.

The Kirk shoulder roll was invented by Olaf the Hairy, King of all Svealand, in 894.
He used it along with dual crossbows to clear rooms during hall burnings. True story.

Fledermaus said:

You killed the unarmored peons. You then captured the armored folks as they were likely Nobel and could be ransomed.

The English captured King John II of France in the 1500s... For ransom. It took years to pay off.

Click to expand...

Depending on the exact period, a lot of those peons had at least some armor. A helmet or padded leather cap, along with a brigandine coat in many cases. Padded cloth, with many layers of quilted cloth built up sometimes 1/2" to 3" thick, was usually worn under armor or sometimes AS armor, and was more effective than most would think.

There was a battle during the Crusades where the knights and men-at-arms wore thick felt vests under their mail. Saracen arrows would pierce the mail but stick in the vests, leading a witness to say many of the knights looked like a pincushion at the end of the battle but were unharmed.

Goshin said:

Depending on the exact period, a lot of those peons had at least some armor. A helmet or padded leather cap, along with a brigandine coat in many cases. Padded cloth, with many layers of quilted cloth built up sometimes 1/2" to 3" thick, was usually worn under armor or sometimes AS armor, and was more effective than most would think.

There was a battle during the Crusades where the knights and men-at-arms wore thick felt vests under their mail. Saracen arrows would pierce the mail but stick in the vests, leading a witness to say many of the knights looked like a pincushion at the end of the battle but were unharmed.

Click to expand...

Whether in the time period depicted in this show, or during the days of the First and following crusades starting about 200 years afterwards, pestilence killed far more of those fighting than combat. And for those who survived combat with wounds not cauterized, most died from infections if the shock didn't kill them first. There were no cures for gangrene other than amputation, and none for sepsis. Crusaders fighting in the mideast found they couldn't wear felted undergarments because of the heat. Those who wore such garments died from dehydration before battles commenced. Those fighting in the Holy Land, or on the way there, quickly learned the value of silk undergarments. Richard the Lion Heart complained he paid more for his silk undergarments than he had spent for his armor. Didn't really matter, he was notorious for not paying his bills.

Both sides during the Crusades not only sought the deaths of those they fought, but capture. Even the lowest had a value in the slave markets. After all, war was always about profits, and all other reasons were subterfuges.

Goshin said:

Depending on the exact period, a lot of those peons had at least some armor. A helmet or padded leather cap, along with a brigandine coat in many cases. Padded cloth, with many layers of quilted cloth built up sometimes 1/2" to 3" thick, was usually worn under armor or sometimes AS armor, and was more effective than most would think.

There was a battle during the Crusades where the knights and men-at-arms wore thick felt vests under their mail. Saracen arrows would pierce the mail but stick in the vests, leading a witness to say many of the knights looked like a pincushion at the end of the battle but were unharmed.

Click to expand...

True. Lets say the guys with the fanciest setups were more likely to be noble.

Damn its threads like this where I see the value of forums....

Fledermaus said:

Damn its threads like this where I see the value of forums....

Click to expand...

I like to talk about weird stuff with other people who also think weird stuff is cool.

BTW - If one wants to see a REAL ass kicking Army in action....

The Devil's Horsemen: The Mongol Invasion of Europe

by James Chambers (Author)

https://www.amazon.com/Devils-Horse...13907046&sr=1-1&keywords=the+devil's+horsemen

Much is said about routs leaving many alive. The Mongols saw to it that didn't happen in many battles. Their cavalry would flank the main armies and when the foot soldiers broke the would ride beside and pick them off with bows. They employed "suicide squads" of horsemen that would assault the enemy frontally then "break" and run... Often for miles. With the enemy knights and mounted men at arms giving chase. Until at a prearranged time the Mongols would unleash arrows and the heavy Mongol lancers would break through the dust created by the retreating riders. Fresh horses and fresh riders would crush the enemy who by now was strung out and not in good order. Then the Mongols would simply swarm forward and crush the scattered remnants.

In many cases they would capture not only some knights but princes as well as their entire entourage.

Now there were rules of war. A King or Prince could not have his blood shed. In one case they wrapped the prince in a rug and marched the army over it (Mimicked in Marco Polo). In another they seals numerous princes and nobles in a giant box that they used for a dinner table. They dined as the nobles suffocated.

Their war was total war.