Search results

1

Jeszcze włócznia, czy już kopia? Rozważania w kontekście dzieł sztuki europejskiej

100%

Sierosławski A., Państwowe Muzeum Archeologiczne w Warszawie

Acta Universitatis Lodziensis. Folia Archaeologica

|

2013

|

vol. 29

EN

The lance is an instantly recognizable medieval weapon. It’s the primary weapon of a medieval knights, the primary he uses in battle. But it’s still not clear when the lance appeared. In most publications its appearance is dated to the 12th c. There are no preserved artifacts and the written sources are not clear on this subject. New informations can be drawn from works of medieval art, especially illustrated manuscripts and architectural decorations. For this deliberation I used iconography dated between the 8th and 14th c. There are three characteristics with which we can distinguish the spear and the lance. The first is the construction of the shaft end. The difference between spear shaft and lance shaft is that the lance shaft had a vamplate, a small circular plate. In many publications it can be read, that this plate was made for protecting the hand. This is of course a misunderstanding. It allowed a firmer grip of the shaft upon impact. There was no need to protect the hand during the duel, because knights were trying to hit the head or the torso of their opponents, not the hand. The second way to recognize the kind of weapon is to analyse how the horsemen uses them. The spears were manipulated with one hand. Horsemen were very often attacking by rising the spear over the head and then striking their opponents from above. Lances were used in a quite different way. Horsemen during the attack had the lances under their arms and struck their enemies facing them. These two polearm techniques can be found on medieval representations. The third characteristic is the shape of the spearhead. In many illustrations it is shown very schematically, therefore very often we can’t identify the type of weapon basing on the presentation of the tip. The only exception is the spearhead of type VI (by Nadolski). The characteristic crosspiece attached to (or slightly below) the bush is quite often marked on the illustrations. In these situations we can be sure, that this weapon is a spear. During the 8th–10th c. mounted units undoubtedly utilized spears, there is no argue about that. On every illustration made at that time which shows a mounted warrior armed with a pole weapon, this weapon is a spear. Around the middle of the 11th c. a very important change in the use of polearms occurred. The Bayeux Tapestry which was made around 1068 depicts horsemen using spears in a manner typical for the lance. One of knights represented in the battle scene holds his spear under his arm and hits his opponent in the face. This is an unquestionable evidence that the evolution of the lance started in the 11th, not the 12th c. Of course I don’t suggest, that the army of William the Conqueror was armed with lances, but that the mentioned work of early medieval art is the oldest evidence of the first step in the evolution of polearms. In this context we should look closer at some types of early medieval spearheads, especially of Nadolski’s type IX, which is relatively short, but massive. Could it be a type of an early lance head? In the 12th and 13th c. the shaft of the lance was developed, the weapon became longer and heavier. Knights represented in art from that time always use their polearms by holding them under their arms. Hunting scenes are the only exceptions. In these cases the horsemen uses their weapons holding them I one hand, above their heads. That proves that they’re using spears. Another important source for this discussion is the Manesse Codex, which was written in the first half of the 14th c. A few illustrations depict duel scenes and “portraits” of knights, who were the main characters of poems contented in the Codex. Some of those illustrations are very accurate, with important details clearly visible. Some of the lances represented here have an additional constructional element, a vamplate. As it was written in the beginning, its presence is one of the essential differences separating the lance from the spear. Is it possible to point the exact time when the lance appeared? Medieval iconography can bring us closer to the truth, but it only allows to identify the ante quem dating. Surely, the first step of the evolution of medieval polearms took place before 1066, before the battle of Hastings that is. But to say exactly how long before the battle took place mounted warriors had already been accustomed to the use of spears in a way specific for the lance – this cannot be determined.

2

Symbolism of medieval swords from the territory of Latvia during the 11th–13th centuries

100%

Tomsons A., Artūrs Tomsons P. L. U. V. u. f. f.

Acta Universitatis Lodziensis. Folia Archaeologica

|

2013

|

vol. 29

PL

Miecze zajmują ważne miejsce pośród wczesnośredniowiecznych znalezisk na Łotwie. Są one również widoczną częścią kultury materialnej mieszkańców terenów dzisiejszej Łotwy w okresie od IX do XIII w. Użycie pierwszych mieczy jest poświadczone już w późnej epoce brązu, jednak ich znaleziska do czasu epoki najazdów wikingów są niezwykle rzadkie. Największy przyrost znalezisk mieczy na Łotwie notuje się od 2. poł. XI w., kiedy to rozpoczynają się krucjaty przeciw pogańskim mieszkańcom dzisiejszych terenów Łotwy i Estonii. W okresie od końca epoki najazdów wikingów aż do początków XIII w. społeczności Bałtów i Finów zamieszkujące wschodnie wybrzeża Morza Bałtyckiego stworzyły nadzwyczajną kulturę wojowników. Jednym z bardziej znaczących elementów tej kultury były miecze. Spośród nich najbardziej interesującym i zarazem licznym typem mieczy na terenie Łotwy we wczesnym średniowieczu był tzw. miecz kuroński. Broń ta była charakterystyczna dla całego obszaru wschodniobałtyckiego. Typ ten uosabia najbardziej symboliczne aspekty wszystkich mieczy dla rozważanego czasu i regionu. Tej broni jest też poświęcona zasadnicza cześć niniejszego artykułu. Elementy rękojeści mieczy kurońskich były zazwyczaj bardzo bogato zdobione różnego rodzaju motywami. Chociaż przebadane pod kątem występujących napisów głownie tych mieczy wskazują na ich import z terenów zachodnioeuropejskich, to jednak części oprawy były najprawdopodobniej wytwarzane na miejscu. Motywy zdobiące rękojeści mieczy kurońskich można podzielić na dwie grupy: ponadregionalną (międzynarodowy) i lokalną. Elementami zaadoptowanymi z XII-wiecznej sztuki romańskiej były prawdopodobnie motywy roślinne i faliste. Z rodzimym wytwórstwem należy powiązać pojawiający się także na miejscowej biżuterii ornament w postaci koncentrycznych kręgów oraz szewronu. Sztuka zdobnicza na różnych wyrobach późnej epoki żelaza może wskazywać na sakralizację i większe znaczenie zdobionych w ten sposób artefaktów. Miecze oraz elementy garnituru mieczowego rozpowszechnione wzdłuż wschodnich wybrzeży Morza Bałtyckiego były dekorowane zarówno motywem geometrycznym jak i zwierzęcym. Na marginesie warto dodać, że tradycja niszczenia inwentarza grobowego może sugerować, że broń ta stała się pewnym symbolem, odbiciem idei wojownika, manifestacją przynależności do konkretnej części społeczeństwa i grupową tożsamością odzwierciedloną w kulturze materialnej. Rozprzestrzenienie wschodnio-bałtyckich typów mieczy (zwłaszcza typu kurońskiego) w XI–XIII w. może być rozważane jako ponadetniczny dowód istnienia szczególnych grup społecznych w obrębie całego regionu wschodniobałtyckiego.

3

Kulturowe aspekty broni średniowiecznej w refleksji Andrzeja Nadolskiego

80%

Iwańczak W.

Acta Universitatis Lodziensis. Folia Archaeologica

|

2013

|

vol. 29

EN

This article aims at highlighting a broader context of research interests on arms and armour conducted by Andrzej Nadolski. From the beginning of his scientific career, he believed that studies in arms were a part of the history of society and its culture. In terms of methodology he always supported the farreaching comparative studies, but he also recommended great caution in drawing general conclusions. To build a complete picture of place of weapons in past societies he called for detailed studies of iconography on par with research on material culture. Temperance in the formulation of decisive conclusions accompanied by kindness towards polemics, he believed that these qualities were necessary for practicing the scientific approach towards humanities in general, towards studies in weaponry as well. He saw this discipline as a rather narrow field of research, nevertheless he always emphasized its great significance. If war was one of the most important events in history, one should never underestimate the role of weapons. He also suggested that arms should always be viewed in a broader context, as a component of literature, culture and art. Andrzej Nadolski had high demands of other researchers, but also extended same criteria towards himself. He was very critical of his own accomplishments, a trait not shared by the majority of scientists. His ambition was not to restrict himself to a narrow field of specialization in one discipline, which was the reason for his participation in popularization of humanities in mass media, with significant results. Andrzej Nadolski never treated weapons out of a broader context, always seeing them as an important part of widely undestood human activities, which comprise the depth of humanistic character of his work.

Refine search results

3 Acta Universitatis Lodziensis. Folia Archaeologica

3 2013

1 Artūrs Tomsons P. L. U. V. u. f. f.

1 Iwańczak W.

1 Państwowe Muzeum Archeologiczne w Warszawie

1 Sierosławski A.

1 Tomsons A.

Jeszcze włócznia, czy już kopia? Rozważania w kontekście dzieł sztuki europejskiej

Symbolism of medieval swords from the territory of Latvia during the 11th–13th centuries

Kulturowe aspekty broni średniowiecznej w refleksji Andrzeja Nadolskiego