11. Making Swords
11.1. The Early Sword
11.1.1 First Swords
|What, exactly, are swords? I asked
that question before and I gave first answers. I told you that a sword is
first and foremost a tool for killing or wounding "the enemy". The
word actually means "to cut, pierce" in its proto-Indo-European root
"swer". In German a sword is a "Schwert" coming from the
same root from old High German "sweran" = to hurt, and
"swertha" = the cutting weapon.
I also told you that a sword can be much more. Swords are for example powerful symbols, objects of art and, most important to me, a sword embodies the status of the metal technology in any given culture.
It is now time to realize that swords were among the very first utensils people made only for fighting and warfare.
|True, some cave-dwelling stone age
guy might have used his stone knife for slashing away at his enemy, and an
early hunter might have used his bow and arrow to shoot at his foe. But all
these things, including knifes of stone or metal, were primarily made for
everyday life, agriculture or hunting. They were dual-use or multi-use items,
sure, but never for single use in fighting only.
A sword has many symbolic functions that do not demand to actually wield it. But you simply cannot use it "mechanically" to butter your bread, to cut your steak, to clean your fingernails or to cut a hiking staff from the next hazelnut bush. In many cultures just the attempt to do something like that would have been frowned upon if not punished. You can only use a sword for fighting, with the intent to hurt or kill humans. Even hunting animals with just a sword doesn't make much sense.
|People at some point in time might
have used bows and arrows that were dedicated to warfare and not used for
hunting. The famous
composite bows of
the Huns are an example. They allow power-shooting while riding a horse in full
gallop. But you could use them for hunting without any problems and they are
still very close relatives of the general bow. Swords, however, are not just knifes with an especially long blade, just
as a knife tied to a sturdy pole is not a
knife with an especially long hilt but a lance, something new. Your style of
fighting with a lance or a sword is quite different from fighting with a knife.
Fighting is the only thing you do with a
sword (if we discount executions). A lance, while certainly also a fighting
tool, has at least some use in hunting, especially if you go after boars.
OK - I felt it is necessary to make this kind of fundamentalist black-and-white differentiation between knifes and swords at the outset of this chapter. If you, like me, are fascinated by swords, you should consider your reasons for this on occasion.
|Now let's be reasonable and realize
that in real life there is almost always
some grey in between
the black and white. There is, after all, a continuous path from your
peaceful bread-and-butter knife to your deadly sword. In between is your large
farm utility knife, your butchering knifes, your pointed hunting knife, your
dagger, your long fighting knife with a sharp point.
Of course, swords developed out of knifes as soon as the technology was available, and there are manifestations that were neither here nor there - in metal and stone:
|The "fish tail dagger" shown above was not an utility knife; its only use could have been in showing-off and intimidation. Maybe it symbolized the owner's power of stabbing and thus killing you, or just that he could afford to own beautiful but useless items, i.e. that he was rich. It is rather young for a stone age item and might have been modelled after metal knifes that already existed but were to hard to come by in 1800 BC. There are many fish tail daggers at least in the North. Here are a few from "my" museum in Schleswig|
|The shape of fish tail daggers is not exactly the same as the shape of contemporary local daggers but coming close. There are actually many stone tools that were modelled after bronze objects. A more spectacular one is here.|
|We don't know if stone age man had stone blades and axes that were made and used primarily for organized warfare. The Varna guy from around 4500 BC lived right at the beginning of serious metal usage and had stone and copper axes in his grave besides all his gold - but no knife and certainly no sword. We might safely assume that the axes do not signify that he was in the wood working business but that he was a mighty Lord with the power to give the axe to his underlings.|
|There is a straight path from your
utility stone axe to a war axe or a symbolic / ritual
stone axe and
axe. There is no way, however, that a stone-bladed utility knife can evolve
into a functional sword.
You might try wooden swords, and metal deprived societies actually made some:
|It certainly would be unpleasant to be hit with one of those shark-teeth or obsidian covered things but preferable by far to being hit with a sharp-edged metal sword. You simply can't make a good sword without a metal. Not all metals qualify, however. Gold (Au) and lead (Pb) are out for obvious reasons, and so is halfway pure and thus soft copper. That leaves only bronze for early men, and the first swords were indeed made from bronze around ??? Let's be careful now !!!.|
|I'm about to play our old (and by now somewhat boring) game:|
|Wikipedia comes down in favor of
around 1600 BC as the time horizon were practical swords were made that could
actually be used for fighting. Earlier stuff, considered from a warriors point
of view, is denounced as long daggers or just decorative or ceremonial junk.
Then we have the R. Ewart Oakeshott who in his classic "The Archaeology of Weapons" sees the beginning of the sword in Minoan Crete and Celtic Britain around 1500 BC - 1100 BC. He also makes a point about the first swords being rather pointy because they were used as thrusting weapons.
|Some more modern archaeologists beg
to disagree. Foremost, perhaps, is Marcella
Frangipane from the Sapienza University of
Rome, Italy. Like her compatriot
Caneva, she digs up old tells or settlement mounds in Turkey. In her case
it is Arslan
Tepe (Lion hill), close to
Malatya in East
Anatolia. In 1996 Marcella unearthed what is now known as "royal
tomb" from about 3000 BC. In it she
found "Le prime spade al mondo", the
first swords of the world, as
the (Italian) Arslan Tepe site proudly proclaims.
Here they are:
|The longest sword is about 62 cm
long and weighs 960 grams. It, like all the others, was made in one piece by
casting arsenic copper alloy in a mould. Some swords were inlaid with silver.
All are rather flat and remind me of a (far smaller) letter opener I once had
in my possession. Next to the swords some spear heads were found, too. All that
(and more) was in one place and obviously seen as a valuable treasure.
So, are these things swords? If yes, are they thrusting swords? Many feel that these objects are no good for fighting - no good grip and guard, awkward to hold and not pointy / sleek enough for thrusting - and that one should not count them among "real" swords.
|One might see these objects as just
some curiosity, something that occurred as a kind of singularity in space and
time. They were probably just used for some ceremonial / ritual purpose for a
short time and only in Arslantepe. After all, nothing else like these things
has ever been found?
Well - No! Nothing like these things has been dug up, indeed, but in 2011, Thomas Zimmermann and colleagues found and described a quite similar sword1). They "found" this piece in the private collection of Necdet Dilek, which is associated in some way to the Malatya museum where the Arslantepe swords are displayed. The "Necdet Dilek sword" is about the same size as the silver decorated one from above; it was "found" under unclear circumstances somehow and somewhere and made it to the antique trade. Tracing its history and analyzing the object gives clear hints that it is from the region and the time of the "proper" Arslantepe swords.
Here it is:
|That's interesting but only mildly so. The real impact of this find is that the blade shows signs of impacts from other blades - meaning that this sword was actually used in (sword) fights! That's at least what the authors claim.|
|It looks to me that we are once more at a point where there are more questions than answers. New finds from some digs may change the present view about the history of swords, only time will tell. However, I do not think that we will have to change our present views in a radical way. We will most likely not find that Neanderthal men was smelting iron, that the pyramids were built with steel tools, or that working swords are as old as knifes and daggers.|
|So let's not spend more time with the fascinating but not really very rewarding hunt for the "first sword" but go on to the "mainstream" bronze swords.|
|1)||Thomas Zimmermann, Necdet Dilek, und Tolga Kapan Önder: "Ein neues Schwert vom Typus Arslantepe frühmetallzeitliche Waffentechnologie zwischen Repräsentation und Ritual" Mit einem archäometrischen Beitrag von Latif Özen und Abdullah Zararsiz. PZ, 86. Band, (2011) p. 1 7.|
© H. Föll (Iron, Steel and Swords script)