ไม่สามารถเล่นวิดีโอนี้
ขออภัยในความไม่สะดวก
Did the VIKINGS use CHINESE Swords?
ฝัง
- เผยแพร่เมื่อ 15 ส.ค. 2024
- The Vikings/Norse had trade and raiding networks all over the World, and we know that objects from Asia found their way back to Scandinavia. So did the Vikings make use of Chinese swords?
Patreon & Extra Videos: / scholagladiatoria
Support & extra content on Subscribestar: www.subscribes...
Facebook & Twitter updates, info and fun:
/ historicalfencing
/ scholagladiato1
Schola Gladiatoria HEMA - sword fighting classes in the UK:
www.swordfight...
Matt Easton's website and services:
www.matt-easto...
Easton Antique Arms:
www.antique-sw...
![[UNCUT] หวั่นขาดความเชื่อมั่น ศาล รธน. วินิจฉัยคดีถอนถอนนายกฯ เศรษฐา | คนดังนั่งเคลียร์ | 14 ส.ค. 67](http://i.ytimg.com/vi/8hKvQe_vh3o/mqdefault.jpg)
Famously archeologists found a north indian buddha in Helgö, Sweden dated to a settlement from around the 800s(along with roman coins and an egyptian artifact).
I didn't know that, that's just incredible!
Is this a joke? Like the (Futurama) priestly name "Father Changstein El-Gamal"?
@@Raz.C I don't see why it's hard to believe. The Norse were traders and had huge trading networks extending from Scandinavia and Ireland to North Africa to the Middle East. The Middle East, in turn, was connected by trade to India, China, and East Africa. Items from any of those regions could have ended up in any of the other regions in these overlapping trade networks.
Indian steel was by far the best in the world at that time period, so it stands to reason that a particularly wealthy european warlord may have had an indian-made sword
@@perfectibility999
"Hard to believe" is the hallmark of the sceptic. I'd be rather gullible if I just believed everything I was told, wouldn't I? The least a person can do is ask for confirmation. Once something has been confirmed as "not a joke," then the search for supporting/ conflicting evidence can begin.
So I am a metallurgical engineer and I would say that there is not really a way to tell if a given sword blade came from a raw ingot, or from a previously made sword blade. Once you heat a piece of steel up past the austenitizing temperature, a lot of the steel's "history" is lost due to the processes of recrystallization and grain growth. The only exception I can think of off the top of my head to this would be if you knew blacksmith "A" had a significantly different forging technique than blacksmith "B", there may be differences in the texture of the grains, however that would be a longshot as that depends on you knowing both smith's relative forging styles, and if they even forged differently in the first place.
Can historic steel be fingerprinted by the origin of the ore? Could different impurities or isotopic make-up determine the origin?
Thank you for taking the time to clarify this question.
@@zeroone8800 Trace element and Isotope analysis is definitely a too archaeologists use to determine the provenance of metal objects (one example could be the oxhide ingots). Though as soon as reuse and recycling of objects (eg recycling of roman bronzes) gets more widely used these informations become less and less viable due to mixing of metals of different origin.
We can tell where the ore was mined by chemical and isotopic composition, often times down to the mine it was mined in. It's like osteography where you use the isotopic composition in their teeth to figure out the water they drank when they were alive.
This is how we've traced Roman swords to using ore from specific mines in Austria or South Germany, or Spain, or the Balkans. It's also how the steel used in true Damascus blades were traced back specific mines in India and Pakistan.
Theoretically you might determine the age of the blade (the last time it was forged) by carbon-14 dating the steel. If you can achieve microscopic C-14 dating, you might detect steel of different ages if it was folded a limited number of times.
Sad to hear the Norse didn’t use Chinese swords. I’m afraid my screenplay, Kung-Fu Vikings, might be somewhat ahistorical.
Fuck that, the burden of evidence is on people to prove it didn’t happen
Hey thats never stopped Hollywood before. Follow your dream bud!
The Wokou were basically Kung-Fu Vikings. If you don't look too closely. They had the same sort of raiding culture, and lived in the southern islands of Japan (Before unification).
As far as I know, martial arts wasn't really a part of their style, but at least it is vaguely the right area of the world, so they might have been. You can at least add it to your screenplay without being too far off.
Is it a sequel to 13th Warrior with Jackie Chan playing a Chinese warrior monk/scholar visiting Scandinavia?
Nobody was Kung-Fu Viking
Though the idea is exciting
They would have been quite frightening
Were it not for historical timing.
🎵Captain Context! He's a Hero! Talking misconceptions down to zero!🎵
That is poetic !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
I have the Capt planet theme song in my head reading this.
I feel so old for understanding this.
🎼🎵With his knowledge magnified,
He's fighting where no context hides🎵
Perhaps it's just as simple as the warrior vs. soldier debate. The Chinese military-industrial complex was simply more interested in a standard government issued blade that was reliable and easy to manufacture in great numbers and could perform adequately in a variety of roles. Wars are, after all, won on logistics.
the design of the sword is closely related to the style of use
so it is easily possible that Chinese swords were quickly broken in Viking hands
You got a wrong impression of Tang dynasty. Industry = 19th century = Steam power + machinery. Everything pre steam-engine was essentially hand-made. The use of water-power for forging does NOT date back to Tang dynasty. As far as you see "standardization" there is Viking Swords being pretty similar by tradition, the is Acient Roman Gladii being pretty traditionally similar as well as Tang dynasty sword being pretty traditionally similar. There is no "industry" or some marxist 'military-industrial complex" here. At these times Blacksmith and especially Swordsmith metallurgical expert people were having a social status of Magician more or less. The logistics of these times wars were centered on number of horses or Longships available. You could enable anyone with a spear or axe or a simple threshing flail any time to turn anyone into a useful soldier guarding something. So even a pointy stick chopped with a few slashes of an axe or blade would be industry? You need to understand that what you see in depcitons or burials is usually the well equiped rulers household guards that are glorified in the ruling house tradition and narrative of legitimacy.
@@voster77hh During the FIRST emperor of China there was already a LOT of standardisation going on. The cast bronze crossbow mechanisms of the soldiers in his grave were all standardized. The temple/palace building was also already standardized(to some degree). There's an ancient book with drawings of standardized components like roof decorations, pillars, doors etc builders could choose from to build a structure. The numbers of soldiers of those Chinese armies could be a million or more (eg Jin Empire) so standardisation and mass production was key (just like today).
@@johnsamu W/O uniform power driven machinery you have no benefit of standardization. It is "roughly the same".
That is vecause all rigs, jigs or moulds quickly wear out, soft tools wear out and peoole need a lot of tine per item shaping them manually. Grinding, polishing etc. So you need a lot of people who each follow their own process. From Europe we have books that show working machinery next to fantasy machinery that defies laws of physics even when seen in the most positive light. You need archeological finds corresponding with them.
Numbers of armies many times have mythical exaggerations. Such numbers run into aggravated issues of logistical supplies with food and fodder for transport animals that cannot be resolved with horse and cart ranges. Even supply by river barge transport would be limited. Why wouldn't such large formation not be regionally different and totally uniform?
Sound like too much CCP propaganda and too little archeologicalnfibds to me. But I'm in no way familiar with Chinese archeology, periods and empires. I have only a very general overview. Inubderstabd the scale of geographies and fertility of certain regions being very good in supporting different scales of settlement. Probably I should read more into some. Hopeefully we get some honest unpolitical archeology from China during my lifetime. It guess that would be enjoyable. Stuff found by modern methods line groud radar and aerial scanning and remote sensing.
@@voster77hh There's ALWAYS a benefit with standardization however rudimentary the production processes might be. There's no need to have CCP paranoia about the archeology because many of these discoveries were made in conjunction with western archeologists. If you know something about production processes you'll know that mechanization is NO prerequisite for standardization. From ancient Roman times, Chinese empire etc
Trading in actual finished weapons seems a terrible proposition economically. For trade routes of that length and complexity, you need to have extreme difference in item value on the other end to make it worth it. For something like Spices, Silk, etc it makes sense, but if you were to make a sword in China, it is probably going to be most valuable in China, where they understand the type, and appreciate the craftsmanship. It is very unlikely you could sell Chinese swords to Scandanavians for enough money to make it worth transporting them.
Now it is possible that individual swords could make there way there by being carried by the merchants, but those incidents would be so extremely rare as to be invisible in the historical record.
I don't think that would necessarily be an issue, since most trade along the silk roads was not transportation over very long distances, but between trading centres relatively close to each other. A well-made sword could probably have been traded with intervals between those various centres without that being a huge loss for any of the merchants involved during the various stages.
@@alicev5496 That actually makes it even more true, because each merchant would want to realize some profit from the transaction.
Example 1: A Merchant buys a sword in China and sells it in Norway. This deal would require a HUGE markup to be profitable, due to the cost of transport. But, as you correctly identified, this realistically never happened until like the 1800s.
Example 2: A Merchant buys a sword in china and sells it to a merchant in Dun Huang, who sells it to a Merchant in Tashkurgan, who sells it to a merchant in Samarkand...
In this scenario, none of these merchants are actually using the sword, it is just a trade good. Each one of them will want to realize a profit from the transaction, which is only possible if the sword got progressively more valuable the further you got from China. Which it might as a curiosity, but would depreciate as an actual weapon, the further it was removed from the context it was designed for.
Example 1 just never happened, but example 2 could have happened in very isolated cases, in theory. It is extremely unlikely though, because the sword would be so ridiculously expensive by the end of it that nobody would want to use it. Of course, all the points in the video are still relevant, because if the vikings had liked the sword, they would have just copied it, not imported the originals.
People traded blades, not swords, most of the time
The same wouldn't necessarily apply to ingots, however, because there is a larger market for lumps of steel than for a ready-made sword or even a blade. Not all (possibly most but not all) high quality steel would become swords and even the part that did would sell better if tailored to a particular culture or even individual. If a given area produced superior steel, it might make a lot of sense to transport or trade it over great distances.
@@itsapittie Oh definitely true, and there is plenty of archeological evidence for it. But the topic of the video is really about swords making it to very different cultures, and I think that would be a vanishingly rare occurrence. If it did happen, I would fully expect them to repurpose the steel rather then use a weapon they were unfamiliar with.
We do know for a fact that China had steady contact with the Middle East.
Vikings may have even traded spices and medicine from China. Not to mention textiles like Silk.
Yes they did buy silk, it has been found in graves in Sweden, and a Buddha figure probably from present day Pakistan.
@@alicelund147 owned by a Jarl, I presume?
@@MaliciousMollusc It is in graves so no one know exactly who was buried there, but the silk is mainly in women's graves. But of course rich people.
The Arabian traders had travelled to Scandinavia and traded with the natives at the time.
So it is not all that surprising.
They even wrote travel journals on the topic.
You're forgetting India. A major source of spice.
Imported Indian swords and blades where popular amongst the Arabs (Whites of India - بيض الهند), so the steel
could have made its way up north from Baghdad to the markets in Kiev for example and then on to Scandinavia
Context??
You wouldn't even have to go that far. "Vikings" did sail into the Mediterranean as well and quite famously the Varangian guard were Viking mercenaries.
So any of the old cities from Greece to Egypt could have them around. But they would likely be a high value weapon, something not a lot of traders could afford, so unless we hit a treasure trove in a shipwreck somewhere, or perhaps find evidence of a foreing sword being used by the Varangian guard, then we'll never know.
@@luxinvictus9018 do u even know about middle east
Whites of India?
I've heared of a French Knight that owned a Chinese Jian sword and is buried with him
That's absolutely correct. At least the lid of the Knight's tomb is in the cloisters in New York City. I saw it maybe a year ago.
Jean d’Alluye is the man you're looking for. I think the most common theory is that he bought/looted it while crusading in the Levant.
How do you know it's a Chinese sword if it's buried with him? Was his body exhumed?
@@colbunkmust Link maybe ?
@@killerkraut9179 looking at the effigy, I don't think one can go so far as to claim it's definitively a jian. We can only see the hilt and while it could be a jian, it could also be an Ayyubid or Mameluke sword of which there are 13th century examples that do have similar hilt shapes.
Yes, they ordered them on Wish.
That killed me 😂
or aliexpress, and got killed the next day because the blade fell out of the pommel
As someone from Korean, Japanese, and Norwegian heritage, I find this topic personally interesting.
I guess that my "Son of a Byzantine Varangian and a Goryeo administrator relocated by the Mongols during the Pax Mongolica," character can wear Viking kit and carry a Chinese sword and a Korean bow after all!
don't write yourself into the story
There was a Buddha statue found in 1954 in a Swedish town dated back to the 5th century. The legendary Ulfbert swords are also made of crucible steel which was technology that was unheard of in Europe till the the industrial age, yet was available in the India region. Vikings were well established traders so truly it wouldn't be too shocking that anything could have found it's way into their hands.
I've always believed that ancient people traveled a lot more than modern people give them credit for. That's why I consider the occasional "out-of-place" artifact a non-mystery for the most part. For example, the Norse coin found in Maine. People are like, "How could it have gotten there?" Well...let's see...it's small and easily carried and an exotic item for the time and place. How about...I dunno...a Native American picked it up in L'anse aux Meadows and carried or traded it down to Maine? If a Chinese sword turned up in a Scandinavian burial, I'd be a little surprised but not particularly mystified.
Mounted warfare was one of the main reasons why Tang era swords were shape that way. This type of dao became the standard equipments for soldiers since the Han-Xiongnu Wars and its design was influenced by that kind of stepp warfare.
After Han, there were nomadic tribes from the stepp and the Manchuria area establishing kingdoms in the mainland, and the Tang Dynasty was the end of that historical process. As such the Tang shared a lot of stepp influence and culture.
It changed when it move into the Song era, where the Song was cut of from the Western trade route and it lacked a steady supply of warhorses. The shape of the dao changed with it since its army was mostly infantry and good horses were group into heavy cavalry, dragoons even, using heavy weaponries like glaives and halberds. The most effective weapon in Song was the crossbow.
I mean, just look at how far the Tang Dynasty conquered into Central Asia. Even the concept of, and actual, toilet paper made it to the West through there.
I wouldn't discount the need for mass production for Chinese armies to influence the size and shape of the sword.
An interesting hypothesis. Apparently they have found at least one burial site, on an island off Sweden, with what appears to be an Oriental occupant.The premise might actually make a fun movie. Anyone want to see Jackie Chan taking on Vikings?
Jackie Chan is too old for action flicks or even movies.
Decades of injuries has proved too much for his 66 yr old body to take and he struggles even to make cameos now.
The same happened with Jet Li and the other 'Kungfu' Superstars of the past.
The last active 'Kungfu' Superstar left is Donnie Yen.
@@possumsam2189 Donnie Yen fighting Vikings is better anyway
Are there any examples of viking era European weapons having made their way into china?
This would be very interesting to learn about. If any viking swords made it to China.
Byzantine yes
But could the vikings use chopsticks?..
THAT’S the real question..
Only for stabbing ;)
Of course they used chop sticks. All the time. They loved sushi and sashimi. It was a mainstay food in Valhalla.
Only effeminate eastern men chopsticks. Real men choptrees
@@normanbraslow7902 I too have seen that animated documentary.
Maxawe Some, Great, wasn't it?
When "made in china" used to mean "high quality"!
Where is the device made on which you made this post? 🤣
Did you iPhone and macs are made in china? They are of the highest build quality in the world, to this day. You get what you pay for, you pay 2 dollars for a doll, you get a crappy doll.
Hey Matt from my Japanese sword knowledge I can tell you that the tang Dao or chokuto. Were hamon hardened. They'd bend and likely tempering after hardening is what the famed Smith amakuni added to the swords beyond not recurve forging them.
So it's likely they'd break fast in viking style combat. Edge damage and bending and blades snapping.
I think that there is more metal in the Viking sword, the Chinese have always been able to conscript massive armies, that dwarved European sized armies at the time and so needed to produce more weapons, where every once of raw material counts. This philosophy of numbers is seen right throughout history, there is always a trade off between quantity, quality and affordability. Just a thought. These choices impact weapon design which in turn impacts warfare styles.
good point!
Considering that Tang China was far, far bigger than Scandinavia and had far more resources, the idea that they'd have to use less metal because of resource shortages is silly (and if they don't have enough they can simply import more from India). Especially since we know that China always had a vast variety of swords, and some were really big.
@@Knoloaify yes, alot of different styles
I'm not an expert by any means, but the difference in shape may be caused by the quality of the steel. In China there is a long tradition of making very good steel. Not so much in 9th century Europe.
The thing is, when we europeans started to get good metal, swords started to be thinner, yet retaining the same strength.
As said, only an opinion.
The Vikings themselves, certainly weren't known for good quality swords, but already in places like the Frankish lands, there was a burgeoning reputation for good quality blades. There's also the question of what qualities in the steel you're looking for. In the West, through tempered, springy blades were clearly the way to go, but in the East, that wasn't so universal, and sometimes differentially hardened blades were preferred.
@@nothotsquidjunk2631 I mean that clean steel with no slag inclusions is better. No matter how was it heat treated. The chinese used blast furnaces. Some of them were enormous. Hot enough to melt the steel in the same way as crucible steel. Inclusion free.
Look, I read about historical steel production a month ago or so in Wikipedia. I have absolutely no personal experience in making swords. Have done only a bit of blacksmithing and welding. And I know that a weld bead with slag impurities inside it will break.
@@victordesanderobledo4522 As I noted in my own comment, I came across some comments a long time ago on another Matt video where some people discussed this exact topic relative to Migration Era sword design. Supposedly, the design maximizes the material strength along the primary stress points for the blade shape.
(idk the proper terminology, stuff like the difference between compression vs torque). By comparison, the same materials would be a lot weaker (and thus prone to breaking) along the stress points if in a thicker, slimmer shape.
Haven't watched the video yet, but I know for a fact that Vikings went as far South as Caspian Sea by the way of Volga river. Their influence is widely known trough the region. Fun fact - in chechen language(tiny nation in Russian North Caucasus mountain ridge) word paradise is pronounced "Valgalla". Coincidence? Nope.
No it's not, it's "Yelsmani". Furthermore, chechen is a quite isolated language, people Who speak this language don't live at the coast, there is no reason for them to loan this pagan word, they're muslims after all. You must be confusing chechen with someone.
@@ukromarine426 , my apologies, you are correct, but I am not wrong either - Valagala in chechen means "City of Dead"
Oh, and as far as their religion - they were pagans first, then Christians, and only then they flipped to Islam - plenty of archeological evidence to prove it. There are many ancient stone watch towers in Chechnya with crosses laid in mason work on them despite strong efforts to hide such knowledge.
@@ukromarine426 It is known that norse man traded with muslims as well, to most merchants religion does not matter.
A sword was just another piece of kit for a man in the Chinese army during such a time period. Like a camp knife or a pair of boots. It's a secondary weapon which only factors tactically in select types of units across a large span of warring history.
Metallurgy could have been a factor for being able to have faith in a blade good enough despite being thinner. Producing thousands of swords for your troops who are in constant war with other neighbors during the waring states period all the way to the various invasions from the north encourages a cost saving factor for weapon production.
Having something swift and nimble in the hand could have been the preference when facing against opponents whose only really exposed area would be their hands and face.
Having something fast and sharp aimed at your face is terrifying no matter how much armor you have on the rest of your body.
Cultural outlook is another factor, where in China there was a perception to judge the wielder by the type of weapon they carried, as it acted as a reflection of the person's believed ability or character.
A better question would be, "Have we found an Asian blade of origin in Viking Grave Goods? Has that blade seen combat?"
To that end... if memory serves there is evidence that blade trading for weapon production went both ways from Europe to India, and to the Middle East. Everything from ore to ingots to pre-made blade blanks, to full on swords were traded with some findings as evidence cropping up in research papers, and museum findings.
But a written or illustrated account of a Norse raider using a foreign blade of Asian origin? I haven't seen one personally, as in not of an account for a Viking in Scandinavia. Though there are accounts that they were hired far and wide as mercenaries, most of this evidence points towards the Mediterranean and Volga river region at most. Trade in those regions with Arabs brought certain goods from the Middle East and even India - but most of their goods were things Vikings were willing to trade captured slaves for... food, metals, and so on. If they already had good blades they trusted, there seemed little incentive to purchase a foreign blade beyond curiosity.
If we're saying the Viking period of discussion is from the 800 ~ 1050 AD then we're talking about the Tang and Song Dynasties of China. Your best bet would have been the Tang Dynasty as they stretched out as far as north of Kashmir, which was north of India, but still kind of short of the Caspian Sea which was were the Volga River ended.
Instead you'd have to adjust your definition of Viking. "Eastern Vikings" warriors and communities that have traveled as far out as Kiev and Novgorod, trading with Arabs and others as they settled the region. At any point in time any one of those in that community could have picked up a scimitar or even a Jian or Dao traded as merchandise or in an exchange of trophies. We might not be able to put a name to a rusty blade, but there's written accounts.
www.middleeasteye.net/features/vikings-and-abbasids-worlds-apart-interconnected
"how could they have acquired them" is, to me, a more interesting question than what they used or how. how did a Free Syrian Army fighter get his hands on a Belgian assault rifle (F2000)? where did ISIS get all those new Toyotas?
Today goods travel much more easily than in ancient times.
@@arx3516 they are also more tightly controlled. I was just giving examples of things I know of.
Biden
Obama
Hillary
My theory is that the Viking combat style was evolved around spear or axe and shield, and the sword was instead of an axe (More expensive option). So it was cut oriented and not thrust oriented, (Explains the type of grip, front heavy and rounded point) because they used it similarly as they used the axe. They didn't change combat style when switching from axe to sword (Of course slightly but not fundamentally). For thrusting spear and for cutting axe or sword. A sword is instead of an axe. But not so for the Chinese? The sword was the "standard" for them like later in Europe so combat-style was based on the sword.
Good point. Honestly, when i try to see the chinese sword, from an scandinavian perspective the closest weapon i can think of is a langeseax. Sort of; fancy long knife. Deadly in a brawl but not practical for military purposes.
The Chinese sword in your video is a "heng dao" (横刀). It is generally used by police, non-combatant military personnel and as a sub-weapon for soldiers. (You may think it as a piston today) By design, the sword is versatile, short and narrow, so it is easy to use in different situations. The standarized weapon during Tang dynasty is called "mo dao"(陌刀). They are similar to Zweihander.
Viking swords actually look quite similar in shape (broad double-edged blade) to the swords used in the Warring States period in China. Look up the "Sword of Goujian" for reference.
Contact with the Roman Spatha also likely shaped what a "sword" was in the Northern cultures at that time. The same way all early cars look like a Ford model T for a while.
I would think that, rather than going to the trouble (and spending the money) to have it re-forged, it would just be left as-is.
If someone rich acquired it through trade, I imagine they would also be able to afford a "normal" sword that fit with their contemporary tactics and style of combat/training.
If they were poor and happened to stumble across it ("oh, hey, a free sword, on the ground over there"), is there any reason why they wouldn't just use it in the same manner as other swords at that time?
Yes it would have been a status object because it is unusual, especially if it was nicely decorated.
I mean Ryukyuan, neighbors of the Japanese, preferred short grip on there sword and deliberately cut the hilt of the katana and wakizashi they acquired. Probably the same could happen to that tang Jian.
different fighting styles. no matter how superior the steel, it's not going to make an dueling saber chop shields.
We have no evidence for it though. The furthest western Chinese-style sword I know of is the one from Roshava Dragana in Bulgaria, which was made in the Ukraine or Russia, not in China, it's just in the Jian style because it was the property of a western Sarmatian or Alan in Roman service.
I don't think the infamous French effigy of the crusader with the Jian at the Met represents a Jian taken in the Levant either
@@theghosthero6173 POTENTIALLY a Jian. There were somewhat similar looking local swords in the Levant at the time from what i've heard.
@@undertakernumberone1 I have yet to see anyone provide sources for this claim, not even the Met
I' always figured that Ulfburg got that way of making swords/billets/ingots from a middle eastern teacher and/or texts or they were middle eastern to begin with and came north, either as a traveler or thrall, adapting to local culture and taking northern name
Ulfberth swords are not made by one person, not even from one place and one time. It is unsure what is means.
This is possible since the 3rd century Roman Cavalry commanders had access to Han Dynasty sword at the mean time the Chinese soldier had access to Roman Chainmail.
How could the Vikings have gotten them? The same way they got most things they didn't make themselves. Trading or raiding.
Joe JoeLesh But China is really far. Like really really far.
One potentially Chinese sword was ever found in Europe, in Bulgaria I think? It really is that likely compared to say an Indian blade popular on Arabian sword, being acquired by a Norse
@@radioactivebirdj.1845 but the Vikings were good at trading and raiding. Like really really good.
But seriously, through a chain of traders and raiders. Like a "7⁰ of separation" game of trading and raiding.
Is there a video on European vs Asian shield popularity/usage? For Europe, you always hear about the importance of shields from Ancient Greece up to dueling with a buckler, but not as much with Asia, especially East Asia
Vikings with swords from the Levant: “MAGIC!”
Viking with swords from China: *foaming at the mouth having a seizure on the floor because they though they saw a god in sword form*
Did any Viking artefacts find their way to China?
Perhaps Amber? The Norse exported lots of that.
Perhaps things like wood or gemstone's however at this point China very much saw europe as a backwater peninsula full of infighting warlords.
@@matthewcourtney8239 China did know of Europe but not enough to formulate an opinion on it.
The only significant European entity that kept in infrequent contact with the Chinese was Rome and later Byzantine.
The only desc of Europe (Outside of the 'civilised' areas) during the Viking era came from the Arabian Travel Journals at that time which were grounded but unflattering to say the least.
I believe that baltic amber and Byzantine coins have been found in japan, but I can't cite the source.
@@matthewcourtney8239 because china never collapsed into infighting warlords.
no, not possible. if a viking took it, its a viking sword now.
No, it is still a province of China.
@@jaydee6268 lol, what? I think you said it wrong
Considering that they could make an almost indestructible war hammer from tying a stick to an old Nokia phone, I doubt they had any use for cheap Chinese plastic knock-offs!
You laugh, but Chinese manufacturing had been world class for most of history.
@@kwanarchive Yeah, I know, I just wanted to make a silly joke.
The two countries in Europe with most found Ulfberht swords are Norway (44 swords) and Finland (31 swords).
Plenty of Viking Age swords have been unearthed in Finland (about 400), and they are most often considered either made in Central European swords factories or domestic made. The Ulfberht swords are considered made in France, of steel that was brought from Afghanistan and Persia. fi.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ulfberht-miekka
One anecdote I find interesting in context to this video, are the longer Seax swords that have been found from the Viking era. Much like The Seax of Beagnoth. The style of these seax swords, have a sort of similarity to the Chinese blade in question. Could be seen as an in-between for the two as well. The details reveal a great deal of difference, but at a basic level there is some likeness.
Aren't Seaxes like the Carolingian swords a lot more heavy in the middle of the blade though? Instead of near the grip like a Chinese sword?
@@kimashitawa8113 It depends on the seax in question, some are more forward balanced for slashing/chopping, many are balanced closer to the tang, but not perfectly. The idea for most seax, was utility. Even the Scramseax, and Lonseax, could have a variety of balance points. They aren't uniform throughout history, but in general I'd say you have the right notion.
Maybe a comparison of the earlier “Jian’s” which are double sided would be interesting, although the Dao was prominent in the Tang era.
Chinese smugglers could have sold steel billots to foreign traders. There were a lot of foreigner traders from all over the world travelling to China during the Tang dynasty. But this is a highly dangerous endeavor as it would probably be considered treason under Imperial rule. It might be possible to check the ratio of the Carbon 13vs Carbon 12 or other trace elements and tell where the carbon comes from.
Sure, I’ve seen Skall’s collabs with Swordsage.
Matt I love your videos they are very informative.
Why would the swords need to take a detour to the Western Europe when Vikings were in regular trade with the Black Sea region?
I feel like that long thin Chinese blade is more of a civilian/plain clothes sidearm. Maybe carried as a useful secondary weapon in war as well, but they perhaps relied more on their polearms and bows to get the job done.
I like the idea that the Viking sword's form was due to utilitarian reasons. Being ship born raiders they may have wanted a more cutting oriented weapon for use as backup for lost ship tools, cutting fouled rigging and anchor rope.
Most of the so-called "viking swords" were made outside of Scandinavia for use by people such as the Franks, who were not seaborne raiders.
True but manufacture location doesn't dictate preference good merchant's cater to the desires and needs of the buyer and if you are looting bodies you take what fits your needs.
@@ben1l752 The same preference existed with people who weren't seaborne raiders, though, so I doubt these swords were used because of their potential utility as tools. More likely they just were a good fit for the type of fighting done in northern and western Europe in the early middle ages.
Another reason why they would not use "faraway swords" as raw material is the fact that scandinavia had a quite extensive smith-ready iron export along with the fur trade (and trade in axeheads and amber). It is also known that they knew how to make steel quite early on. So if they did not know for a fact that the steel in the forgien blades were superior there is no reason to buy them just to reforge them as cheaper material were avaible close at hand. If it could be seen as a high status weapon on the otherhand ... then we would have seen it all over the place I imagine 🙂
Maybe there was a cultural aspect as well. It's possible that the Norse simply liked their swords broader because it was a way to show off to their fellow warriors. To them, it might have said, look at me, I'm so well off that I can not only afford a sword but one with a nice broad blade as well which took a lot of (expensive) steel/iron to make. It could also have been a case of them perceiving thinner bladed swords, like the Chinese favored at the time, as being too delicate and dainty for their liking and/or not as sturdy as locally made blades.
Just.. two things. If you look in Petersen's typology, there's mention of these somewhat rare one-edged swords, that are difficult to completely account for in terms of either being evolved scramsaxes, or if they were some rarer type of specialist sword from the olden days (elder viking-age). "Dette eiendommelige forhold..", as he says, this curious affair that they are so infrequently found, is explained by that few people owned swords in general at the time, and that they might not bury people with these swords. Petersen doesn't say anything about weight very often, but I've had the fortune to be able to hold one of these one-edged old swords - and the blades are heavy. They're not inspired by copper-swords or copper-alloy casts, these have heft. They're iron with a solid ridge to stabilize it. Not extremely long, but they are one-handed 1,3kg-1,5kg perhaps. Even with a handle, the weight-balance is far up - it's not a rotator or a cleaver. And they're placed in an earlier time, around year 7-900, without any doubt forged in Norway. So what we're looking at with the flat cleavers is a later weapon, and perhaps something that would be favoured with very rich people who were buried with the finest and prettiest swords that could be found. By comparison, these one-edged, less beautiful blades, seem to have been kept (that is Petersen's theory, based on the fact that they are found spread out after a certain point in time).
The second thing - I think LK Chen have definitely been researching well on their Han-swords. But their Tang-dynasty jians seem more like carryovers from the previous dynasty. I don't know what the famous tang-jian in Japan weighs, but there are several other surviving examples that are heavy, that are made with a solid ridge, that have been done this way because of differential hardening, quality of steel, etc., etc. And that these weigh some 1,3kg to 1,5kg, they are moderately long, and they have the point of balance fairly high up.
So you could probably argue that rather than that Vikings maybe could have used Chinese swords, that what they were making around year 7-900 was based on the same type of steel, with similar techniques, and for somewhat similar use. While it's only after that period that we see the cleavers take over completely. But it's absolutely the case that "vikings" owned and used one-edged swords similar to the heavier jians. I doubt you'd want to be carrying it around on a boat, and it's entirely inefficient if you want to save steel. But.. I don't know.. it looked and feelt like something from a more civilized age, or something like that. Not a sword for a king, or a Chinese princess, for that matter, but for someone who actually knows how to fight.
I wonder if our hindsight and ability to view the different cultures in parallel enables us to see shortcomings or lack of optimization in their weapons that they simply weren’t aware of.
I think we can very obviously say that some areas were just more advanced at certain things, at certain oints in history. I guess when we make these comparisons we gravitate towards the weapon designs that are famous(proved to be functional). You might very well find a much more clear example of swords which were just worse.
So that chinese sword is not a transitional sword, it is a full Tang? Right?!?
Zing!
“Could the Vikings have used Chinese swords?” I think yes. Definitely. It wouldn’t look so much alien than other straight swords to the Vikings.
It’s very interesting to see markings or engravings on Vikings swords as shown in the video. Why did the Vikings make these marks on their swords? What meaning do the markings have? And, did other factions decorate their swords with markings similar to Viking sword craft?
I’m curious to here what are your thoughts about weapons and armour trade between the Western and Eastern civilizations. For example, did the Romans make contact with the Chinese and Indians? What did different race or factions do with foreign armaments when they acquired something exotic?
Are you talking about the runes ? That's just written Norse mate and in some cases was just a maker's mark. Other times the weapon's name or even the owners name.
Sometimes they served a more superstitious reason. And sometimes they were just decorative.
Making weapons pretty isn't a modern art.
@@clothar23 Ah, I didn't think of it like that. Thank you for sharing your answer.
Viking runecaster vs chinese warrior talisman user who will win, who will lose. See you next time on mystic warrior...!
I believe that somebody HAS used gamma ray or synchrotron / particle accelerators to non-destructively probe the composition of steels and even count the folding. IIRC somebody was doing quality control on low-background-radiation steel for a particle accelerator (steel manufactured after the nuclear age began in 1945 contains traces of radioactive isotopes, earlier steel does not). They arranged to borrow the oldest steel object they could get, a medieval sword, and used that for a control sample BUT found they could do 3 dimensional imaging similar to the what was done with the Antikyhikera mechanism.
A reason why the Norse preferred a sword with more cutting power compared to a thrusting sword, could be the rules of Holmgang. Where they settled their disputes by combat. The rules seems to differ somewhat by different sources, but it is often mentioned that each combatant had 3 shields available. And the winner was the first one to destroy all the shields of their opponent. (The original "3 strikes and you're out" ?) In this scenario a heavier cutting sword with a lot of "crush" power would have an advantage over a thrusting sword.
Hagar the Horrible looks at the Chinese sword and wonders why he'd take a table knife into combat.
Thank you yoda. Great video as always.
I believe the difference of the design was due to the style of warfare.
The vikings recieved most of their military successes in western europe, and in the east they weren't extremely efficient against the Romans who has included much more diverse styles of units, such as the cataphracts. While in western europe at the time, due to the landscape, many places are suitable for infantry, and without the urgency to include heavy calvary units to equip soldiers/militias. Hence, it would be very efficient for the Vikings and the Franks/Lombards etc etc to do alot of the fighting with such weapon as main weapon with a shield.
As far as I'm aware, the vikings were notorious for hit-n-run type of fighting, they quickly raid a town and leave, so they also do not commonly end up in a situation where they have to fight heavily equipped knights at that time. But in Tang Dynasty, calvary has became a large part of the regular military much like the Romans at the time, with large cataphracts charging formations, hence the Tang Dao is equipped as a sidearm more or less. They needn't to be big and tough to do much fighting, all it had to do is to be a versatile last-resort, jack of all trades master of none.
Moreover, the Mo Dao (陌刀) is another type of Tang Dao which was documented to be much bigger and had its own military units and formations, called the Mo Dao Zhen (陌刀阵). It was speculated to be an extremely large, glaive-like Dao that are used for heavily equipped infantry soldiers without shields as anti-cataphract units.
Different designs are most likely due to the context of the war, and less about the size of the carrier, and archaeological findings shows that skeletons of ancient warrior tombs matches the heights and size of modern people, approximately 175-185cm (5'9 - 6'1).
The use of Mo Dao (陌刀) can be found in both Tang-Chinese scriptures and Islamic Abbasid Caliphate scriptures during their battle in Talas River, where the Mo Dao Zhen Formation was utilized during the siege from the Tang army.
My guess is that Chinese military doctrine at the time and historically even from the warring state period, tends to focus on pole arms and missile weapons, in the form of the Chinese horse cutters, ji, and mass producers crossbows. So swords would be more of a side-arm similar to today’s pistol in military context. While in the Viking era the sword is a primary weapon.
I don't think it was. I think it's pretty clear that the main weapons of the Viking era were bows and spears.
As Kamil says I think the Sword was a back up weapon also for Vikings, except in duels.
As the first question, will the Chinese export some blade to the west. The answer probably is no. For that specific time, China as a unified empire, Salt, iron and copper are under heavy control. Salt is a necessary consumable, copper is the material for currency, iron, and steel for weapons. Because of the importance of these three substances, their production, transportation and sales are under the central government's supervision. Although it's likely for somebody to smuggle iron or Steel nugget from China, but if it is a standard-issue blade, I will say no.
And yet again we are given definitive proof that swords don't go *sshhinnngggg* when drawn or sheathed.
Some make a metallic sound (I would not call it a "sshhinnnggg" though, like in movies)... metal scabbard european military sabres for example 👍
Totally agree about wooden scabbard weapons making that sound though ... cringe 🙃
@@shanedebarra4986 I concur on both points. Lol I've found myself obsessively observing film/tv weapons to see if it should make the noise.
Matt actually did a video on this. Swords *do* go schwiiiing ........ when you have a metal "throat" on the scabbard.
th-cam.com/video/m0eKdGcuxAw/w-d-xo.html
Thanks for making this video
Maybe it's because of the importance placed on swords. In the East, with armouries and mass distribution of swords, it was less important to have a sword that lasted and it's status was lower so if a sword tip broke off or bent it didn't matter as much. Where in Europe a sword was more of a status symbol and given names and treasured so you really wanted a robust blade that was broad to the tip to minimise damage and probably used less in favour of spears and axes.
The details I think Mat forgot were transportation, taxes and the merchants' profit motives. In order to make it worth it to the merchants the products' value in the destination needs to be greater than the costs of the product at its source, plus the cost of transport, plus the taxes imposed along the trade route. Things like silk and spices satisfy that. Iron doesn't necessarily need to satisfy that because of use and recycling could occur in places in between India and Europe that would have prevented as much price creep. But a finished sword seems less likely to make it across the entire silk road before it becomes so expensive that it can't be sold at a profit. Because why would a wealthy warlord pay a fortune for some oddly shaped sword of unknown quality over a sword custom crafted by a well renowned sword smith a few kingdoms over.
The Roman spatha greatly influenced the Germanic tribes during the migration period for sword making. And I think it went from there. And the Spatha was used by Cavalry, so...
someone found {dug} a Japanese sword at fort fisher { NC },.... proving that {at least some body } in the CSA actually carried a samurai during the american civil war !
+scholagladiatoria *The Germans handcrafted their own tools and weapons, and the Norge took particular pride in the craft of arms and armor.* The crucible steel method of smelting may have reached the Germans from India via the Huns from Central Asia; the most notable Germans to use this method were a certain Wulfberht of the Middle Rhine and a certain Ingelred of Jütland, both of whom pattern-welded and forged broad-bladed double-edged swords for princes and generals. European infantry of the Dark Ages used the shield-wall formation inherited from the Near East, and the deep-bladed German swords were therefore designed for chopping and hacking.
That dao seems to have more in common with a jian than it does with most dao that I’ve seen.
Considering how expansive steel production was in that age (both financially and in terms of time and effort), I'd say no blacksmith would have wasted good quality blade material regardless of where it came from. But unlike today when swords are collectible items with little practical use, in times when people's lives depended on a blade they'd rather get one that they were sure they can use effectively with their existing training/experience, so I don't see a viking actually carrying an exotic sword into battle. At best a Chinese blade could have been kept intact if a king/leader got it as a gift from some foreign traders or diplomats.
Putting aside stuff like weapon usability, I would imagine stuff like weapons would have to have a pretty compelling reason to be traded over long distances. They're heavy and complicated to transport, and complicated to sell, at least compared to things like spices and medicine. Swords would, I'd think, have to be packed with like grease and thus in boxes or barrels (adding to weight and space). Selling them might well be hard: based on the way things are now, I wouldn't think people would be generally interested in a different style of sword, potentially unless it is much cheaper than the more standard sort of swords. You'd also have to explain why you have that weird looking sword all the time to your peers. Certainly selling - again, a different, even alien style of weapon - to nation-state militaries wouldn't have been easy.
All of that would add up to swords being a less safe financial bet to sell from e.g. China to Scandinavia.
yes it's a silly question to ask and it's just Matt being a bit desperate to generate content. People now are super keen to obtain foreign made swords because there is a lot of prestige associated with Samurai swords/Chinese swords etc thanks to a hundred plus years of cultural exchange and movies hyping up Samurai and Kung Fu but a thousand years ago people would just look at them as awkwardly designed swords not adapted to the local fighting styles.
They would be a very heavy and cumbersome thing to transport and it would make much more sense to transport incense, silk or other fabrics, drugs or other small items, or other things which would be scarce and sought after in far lands. It's not like the Vikings didn't know how to make swords.
"Ulfberht... However we don't know how it got from India to the Viking lands..."
I mean, the most common theory on how the Ulfberhts got into Viking lands i've seen is: Bought or plundered from the frankish realms... where they originated.... I've also seen the theory that the Ulfberhts might've been actually completely European in origin. Indian Steel, from what i've read, had much higher quantities of Vanadium and Molybdenum, whcih so far haven't been found in Ulfberhts and other european swords.
Might be wrong though.
My understanding is the primary reason is agricultural. For shields you need massive amounts of bone glue and to a lesser degree poplar wood, hide and or linnen to make a lightweight composite for a uselful large round shield. Size of chin to knee would require a weight of 3 to 4 kg to be actively used in one hand while giving good enough size for arrow and spear protection.
In rice paddy China climate you probably don't have the animal herding and vegetation for that to make such shields economical mass production. Especially making bone glue puts a big strain on the firewood supply.
So going for lamellar scale armor that would work against arrows would win over chain mail with large shields. However nimble points would be largely useless against chainmail plus gambeson, where only cleavage or blunt impact would get you through.
You would also need a stronger more reliable steel quality and better metallurgy for sleek blades not to break. This would refer to mining techniques, iron ore source purity and the use and access of horizontal shaft mined coal over charcoal.
This largely appears to be down to economical questions.
Man... I really want to watch 13th Warrior now (not the same, but, you know, cultural crossovers and all that :) )
My guess would be that it's because armour was less common on European battlefields of the early middle ages. Sure, the professional warriors were equally or maybe better armoured than Tang soldiers but most people didn't have that while Tang China had far more standardised equipment.
As far as I am aware crucible steel varies to such an extent that unless there is almost no way of being able to know if a sword was modified into another sword type without having an unfinished archeological find to say for certain that that sword was a type A & it is being turned in a type B. If the vikings were doing that or just using them as raw material for their own style of sword there would be some sort of evidence if just a story someone wrote down so if it was happening it was extremely rare.
important note: Ulfberhts AREN'T Scandinavian swords. THey probably originated in the frankish realm, however they became rather popular with Vikings, at least as tomb gifts.
If I were to venture a guess prior to watching this video, the answer is that it's possible, but unlikely. After all, the Norsemen were noted merchants and had access to trade along the silk road, not just through Constantinople and the Mediterranean, but also through the Caucasus and the steppe nomads such as the Cumans. However, the likelihood of a chinese sword ending up in the hands of a viking is limited by not only the exorbitant cost of such a weapon (the cost to produce+the distance of travel), but also by the fact that there were plenty of other sources of decent quality blades at the fraction of the expense.
One possibility is weapon Maintenace. A Norse smith would know exactly how to maintain the type of swords he made. If a different type of sword came to him with even light damage he may well have told the owner that it was not fixable but was best reforged and would then end up a more standard Norse blade. Norsemen seem to have used their weapons a lot so damaged weapons were to be expected.
My guess would be the classic case of someone high up the chain said "this is the type of sword I like, so that`s what we`ll be buying". And also the fact that all military commanders trough history have been rather conservative when it comes to equipment. hell, I`m pretty sure the norwegian army still would been equipped with the Krag-Jørgensen M94 if it hadn`t been for NATO requirements
Daft question.
People now are super keen to obtain foreign made swords because there is a lot of prestige associated with Samurai swords/Chinese swords etc thanks to a hundred plus years of cultural exchange and movies hyping up Samurai and Kung Fu but a thousand years ago people would just look at them as awkwardly designed swords not ideally adapted to the local fighting styles.
Swords would be a very heavy and cumbersome thing to transport and it would make much more sense to transport incense, silk or other fabrics, drugs or other small items, or other things which would be scarce and sought after in far lands. It's not like the Vikings didn't know how to make swords.
Cool concept. I think it's mostly a question of weapon/martial ancestry, just in the same way that armor materials and construction differed slightly between cultures. In medieval Europe, weapons and armor descended from a Celtic/Germanic ancestor (arguably Roman as well), thus long, choppy, double edged straight swords and mail made from riveted rings, and consequently different materials/approaches in Eastern Asia. Their traditions had already begun on divergent courses to solve the same problems - and continued to do so, thus, stabby, pointy arming swords in Europe and tachi and dao in East Asia.
It's also a question of tradition/conditioning. Western peoples knew how to make/care for/use Western swords. They might be able to import the Chinese sword, but not the Chinese sword master/maker.
But in the Celtic bronze age there were also the so-called rapier with the hilt structure that made cleaving almost impossible and So were probably really used ONLY for sticking info some unfortunate opponent.
We know for a fact they used middle eastern made steel to make swords. Also there pattern welded swords where quite good. I heard somthing about a stone coffin in England that has a carving of a knight with a Chinese style dagger.. Has any one spoken about the similarity between Viking and Celt swords? You say saber I say rapier, the Chinese also made remarkable leather amour with rhinoceros and water buffalo that had bone plates.
Hmmm, what is that curved sword that one can see over his left shoulder hanging between the 2 shiny black vaguely Asian looking bowl shields?
Looks to me like a Dacian Falx. A scythe like sword much like a sickle but the curve is less pronounced and the blade is longer.
Random crackpot theory I just utterly concocted out of thin air: Saltwater does horrific things to steel. You start out with a big, beefy sword, you can rub post-voyage rust off innumerable times and still have a substantial weapon. You start off in your longship with the nimble Chinese blade, and it might rust all the way through, or, the wear you put on it cleaning off rust will wear it away to uselessness sooner.
Anything could have happened, Trade was pretty active back than, and swords carried by the merchant caravans for protection could have been traded to people who were interested or it could have been loot after the caravans were attacked by bandits.
Transport of arms for long distance for trade is possible, but I doubt the army would have been allowed to trade any surplus, even poorly made weapons would be reforged and sealed in an arsenal.
So any weapons that could make it to the west would have been private weapons that were produced by local blacksmiths.
That said the Tang army was pretty active so its not completely impossible that their weapons won't have ended up in enemy hands as loot.
I believe the reason why the design for the sword didn't change for the west was probably because no one thought it needed to.
Standardisation of arms is pretty common, and it makes mass production easier. And it makes sense that the blacksmith would create and perfect the same design rather than fumble with a new one.
You can start calling "Lorsch-Fulda swords" or "Taunus steel swords" the "ulfberth" swords.
In 2014 the Hannover ACI (Robert Lehmann team) analyzed a ulfberht recovered in the Weser river in 2012. All metallic parts of the ulfberth sword have been isotopically retraced to europeans ores. Iron, copper, tin, silver, all came from european ores. The blade steel has been isotopically retraced to a region known for its iron ore since roman times, the Taunus region, in the heart of Germany. The same team even narrowed the production site to two medieval monasteries, Lorsch and Fulda in Germany. The small scandinavian piracy a.k.a "vikings" just rehilted high-end frankish sword blades with pretty hilts.
While not Vikings, there is some evidence Chinese swords were used in Europe a little bit. Some Bulgarian sabers from about 10th century have a curious L-shaped bit under the hilt that looks a lot like some of the more fancy ones on the Song dynasty swords.
Then there are early Avar sabres that resemble Han swords quite a lot, complete with ring pommels, and of course Mongol sabers.
How common was armour in each context? I have the impression that armour was far from universal in Europe, perhaps it was more common in China?
It depends on the context. In the Tang period, they transitioned from the fubing system where conscripted soldiers (for 3 years) supplied their own armour and weapons to the jian'er system of professional soldiers who served longer but were supplied by the government. In the jian'er system, historians estimate that up to 60% of the imperial troops had some form of armour (excluding shields). Naturally, elite troops had better armour than the line garrisons in the middle of nowhere. Iron weapons and armour were still common for line infantry and cavalry as steel was still more expensive and generally only available for elite forces (such as the Imperial Guards) and wealthy officers. Mirror armour was common for wealthy officers. There's also the "mountain-pattern" armour which is mentioned in sources without any description of what it is. The most common armour is believed to be lamellar plates sewn into hardened leather, hide, or cloth. Mail was considered more of a status symbol, impractical, and "foreign," so it was never widely adopted. Something called the mountain-pattern armour was also present in this period but no one knows what it is as sources only mention the name but not what it is. Statues and figures of mountain pattern armour don't make it easy to discern either. Best guess - some system of interlocking metal bits sewn or riveted into a jerkin.
Their opponents would have different types of armour available. For example, in the southern areas such as Viet Nam, hide and leather armour were common while steel armour was likely very rare. Evidence suggests iron armour was present in Viet Nam but the degree of its presence during the period in question is uncertain. The only written records available are from a few surviving Chinese sources and archeological evidence is scanty.
In the north, thick clothes served as both armour and insulation. Some might have iron plates sewn into them. Again, metal working was more difficult given the nomadic nature of many groups. Leather and hide were certainly present.
In addition to these locally available armours, if Chinese soldiers fell in battle, their armour and weapons might be looted from the battlefield by locals. So, the concept of "armour" is present but metal armour is, like in Europe, very inconsistent. It's why the Chinese had a system of using large portable shields (like later European pavises).
Then if there's civil war, you'll have Chinese armies facing other Chinese armies and that's a whole other kettle of fish.
Just have to consider the logistics behind soldiers/war in China vs Viking era EU. The sheer vast numbers in Chinese armies back then didn't make it plausible logistically to make armor out of their steel/iron, (think of all the spear points and arrowheads, swords you can make with 1 set of full plate). Also height and overall size also clearly plays a role.
Interesting points but it is good to remember that there was far more contact than we thought between many parts of the known world before the roman period and there was many contacts between Greece and India even before Alexander the Great thanks to the Persians, not to mention the Romans had much trades with India in order to obtain precious spice and India had continuous contacts with Asian countries including China even after the downfall of the Roman empire the contacts was kept with the Bisantine empire somehow interrupted with the Muslim conquest. That said it should be entirely possible that the Chinese sword could have reached Viking countries but in my opinion it would have taken too much to train a Viking to train with such swords just as well to train them with the Arabian sabres. It was simply too different to use them unless it had exceptional advantages...
I'd suspect you are right about needing a weapon able to be used in armored fighting. The iron or steel lamellar is a lot easier to mass produce than mail, which is pretty important when equipping massive armies commensurate with China's population, but would surely have resulted in a lot of gaps since armor made that way can't be shaped as precisely as a forged sheet of metal.
Also, China was 2-3 centuries ahead of the west along the path to industrialization so we are looking at mass production of fairly uniform lamellar plates on a huge scale for armor production with widespread equipping of even low status troops with a degree of plate armor protection. By contrast there was probably a much wider gap between different classes in the west from high-status nobles with extensive mail to commoners wearing perhaps just a gambeson, and while I'd suspect the spatulate-tipped cutting swords weren't much good against mail, they probably cut down commoners in gambeson pretty effectively.
Great video, I wonder if the difference in the design of these weapons couldn't have to do with culture? At the time of the Tang Dynasty, China was probably the most sophisticated nation in the world. The Tang capitol, Chang'an was probably the largest metropolitan area in the world at the time, with inhabitants from many diverse ethic groups, including Christians and Jews.
It seems like a more nimble, less specialized weapon fits with that kind of cosmopolitan setting, but it's just my opinion...
Have you watched Roland Warzecha's videos? I think that particular Chinese sword wouldn't have fit well with Viking sword and shield fighting. Apparently, the large pommel of the Viking sword facilitates a grip where blade points forward rather than upwards, and the weapon has to be held at the pommel. The weapon held this way allowed for longer reach with the arm extended and without contorting the wrist. I think the battlefield where they would have to fight with and against roundshields would have made it difficult to swing their swords with large arcs. The balance being more towards the tip allowed them to swing their swords with more force but with less effort.
The Chinese sword looked like it could be held with either one or two hands. It looks to me like it would have made a very versatile sidearm.
Or there is strategic reason? The European counties forbid export of gold and (war) horses during whole meddle ages... So maybe China didn't allowed export of their swords and/other military equipment.
it could be culture thing, Chinese culture favoured more skill and elegance, and thus had swords that have higher skill sealing, while Vikings were more about bigger the better. Take into account that Chinese culture was older and more sophisticated.
It could also be a thing of technology, bigger and wider swords are less likely to break if steel is not that great, and as we see in Europe as technology advanced, we had thinner and more nimble swords .
So it could be those 2 things combined, more sophisticated culture and better steel.
Kinda like why Americans prefer big cars that waste a lot of fuel, while Europeans prefer more economic cars
Material limitations might have been a contributing factor. I read some comments on some OLD videos on this channel discussing the metallurgy of nw. European Migration Era swords and how the shape and differentiated steel types and differential hardening minimize the material weaknesses along the relevant planes of stress-or, narrower blades of that length would be more prone to failure at a comparable blade length (or along other similar dimensions). The limitations of material strength have always limited the feasibility of certain tool dimensions (such as how thin a blade can be at a certain length) without becoming logistically unfeasible.
While method of use, style of warfare, economic logistics (standardized Chinese armies vs economically comparatively isolated Migration Era northwestern Europe), frequency of specific demands of the tools (such as armor, with Europe proportionally more layered textile armor or relatively unarmored targets), and other factors were definitely primary factors, relative abundance of and the limitations of specific materials may have been a differentiating factor that further promoted certain weapon styles.
Have you seen the Tsurugi sword ? It’s a Japanese double edged sword based on the Chinese Jian.
I love this video. Thank you. So many 'experts' claim that swords or metals never ever made it to other areas. how the heck do they know. they may theorize or assume but they do not know for absolute certainty . after all,the noodle is not Italian,but chinese
More interestingly, for me at least, the vikings definitely had access to the relatives of the dao - the palash and (early ?) sabers from bulgars & khazars as they were trading partners.
I actualy think i saw something like that preserved in a museum here from earth finds long time ago, unfurtunatly i can't remember where i saw it since i was just a little child at the time.
Good questions! East Slavs used sabers, it would make sense that some Norsemen adopted them.
Another question is: Did they used composite bows? We know for a fact that not only did Nomads used them but also East and some of the West Slavs with which Norsemen definitely came in contact.
@@kamilszadkowski8864
We did use composite bows in scandinavia since the early stone age, particulary as hunting bows in the north, but they where slightly different from the eastern style ones since they needed to be more water resistant due to the water from the snow (so they where wrapped in treebark) and where also slightly taller since thjey where mainly used to be worn on the ground (however there is a channel here where a finish guys demonstrate how they can be easily used from a horseback as well) In the north there are also a few finds of those sabre style swords, however quite rare, but i am not sure if they are of slavic or Germanic origin, but i know that there are a few remains of slavic culture settlements in the north here, so it is absolutly a possibility.
@@sheep1ewe I should have specified that I meant composite recurve bows. Where those bows recurve? Nevertheless, thanks for the answer. Quite interesting actually. I have to do some research about this topic.
" but i know that there are a few remains of slavic culture settlements in the north here," --- Jesus, finally! A Scandinavian that knows about this. Sorry, but I got really excited reading this. You can't even imagine how often Scandinavians were either calling me a liar or an idiot when I was mentioning the Slavic settlements in Scandinavia.
@@kamilszadkowski8864 As far as i know from reconstructions of native north Same bows they where not actual inverted bows as some types of the mongolian bows where, more like semi inverted as the siberian bows.
Yes, it is just not as well known today as it seem, but, at least in the northern parts of Scandinavia and the Nord there hawe always been a strong connection to the slavic culture in the past due to trading but also cultural exchanges. There are even a lot of elements in the native culture here, like cloathing details, etc that also point in that direction since it can also be found in a lot of slavic cultures as well (like the female headdresses, etc)
Finds from the actual excavations of the sites combined with modern DNA analyzis clearly show that the inhabitants where slavic people living in scandinavia, at least in the northern sweden (or more likly it is just better preserved in the northern parts because of the acidic soil and a lot less interference by later human activity in the same spots as in the south). And they where deffinitly free men and womans and often wealthy people according the their left belongings, so they where certanly not just randomish people taken as thralls as some guys may suggest. We did in fact not take slaves at all in the northern parts (as far as i know), but sometimes youths where working for free on the farms in order to learn the proffesion and get some freedom from their parents in the summers.
Peter Johnsson (I think) made a point about sword design tying into a cultures warrior values and desired self image, so in this case the sorts of people the vikings identified with were large powerful, heroic types, who delivered fel blows with large blades and such. where as that Chinese sword was far more the result of military thinking and requirements, soldiers being greater together than individually. a sort of collectivist vs individualistic society thing, but in sword form.