British and Saxon equipment

[Dan D'Silva]

I'd like to do more "Arthurian" art, but I'm not enough of an expert yet... Can anyone tell me whether any differences are evident between Romano-British and Anglo-Saxon clothing and arms at the turn of the 6th century? All that I've seen seems to indicate that later Saxon stuff was generally contiguous with Roman.

[Urselius]

Because the Saxons were pagan they buried their dead with grave goods, the British were largely Christian and buried without grave goods. As a result there is much more archaeological evidence for Saxon equipment than for British. Clothing was probably much the same in both groups, breeches, tunics and cloaks. Cloak-pins were more diverse with the British using penannular forms and the Saxons using bowed brooches such as the 'square-headed' type. Early Welsh poetry mentions armour - termed lluric from lorica - this is described as being "blue", suggesting iron mail.

[Alanus]

I think Martin makes a few good points. The British were Christians, one of the great contentions of their animosity toward the Saxons. Frankly, I'd place the time-period a generation earlier-- the "time of our fathers" as Gildas phrased it-- but convention rules. Saxon helmets oft had a boar finial or decoration, not present on British equipment... which I think would be more Roman-oriented. And a tunic is a tunic is a tunic. mile:

[Urselius]

Shield designs might be a useful way to discriminate. We know that the Sutton Hoo shield had decorations in the shape of a stylised bird of prey and dragon, the use of a boar (sacred to Frey), as Alanus mentioned, is another possibility. Nennius - OK a few centuries later - said that Arthur 'bore the image of the Virgin Mary on his shoulder'. This is usually interpreted as a shield device so the use of the cross, chi-rho and images of saints on British shields might be fairly well supported.

[Dan D'Silva]

Thanks guys.

Shield devices would certainly be good -- I'm just learning about the metal decorations on Germanic shields (partly because my dad gave me a copy of Beowulf for Christmas). I remember reading about the Virgin Mary on Arthur's shoulders-or-maybe-shield and thought an icon might fit tolerably on an oval. Also maybe broadly different color schemes (i.e. one group wears more of this or that color) could help in long shots.

Done in the same drawing style, I think the pre-6th c. Roman and post-6th c. Saxon types still look awfully similar at a glance, even with all the differences I could think to throw in. Part of the issue is how big a detail has to be before it becomes obvious to any given viewer.

Do you think crested Intercisa types are plausible for some of the Britons? There is also scale and what looks like a horsehair crest in the Vergilius Vaticanus, but I'd guess those may be deliberate archaisms.

[Alanus]

Dan,

I also think you could pick up symbolic details from old Welsh poetry. Also, the dragon would be on some shields of the Britons, as would the bear. In the early 6th century, some Britons were still living in villas so the Roman influence wasn't dead... as you noted with the use of ridge helmets.

[Nathan Ross]

Do you think crested Intercisa types are plausible for some of the Britons?

Probably not. As I think you implied with your point about the drawings, the last known intercisa/ridge helmet dates to the 410s, while the Anglo-Saxon Coppergate and Pioneer helmets are 7th century.

We could imagine some sort of continuity of forms bridging the couple of hundred years between, but perhaps better to assume either that helmet use died out altogether for all but the very wealthiest warriors, or that various comparatively crude-looking spangenhelm types were used by both sides, with the Coppergate (and Sutton Hoo) varieties based on later imported styles from the continent.

[Sextus Saturninus]

I agree with Nathan on the ridge helms. They would probably be totally out of use in Britain at the time, but other helmets were around. Spangenhelms and another type, called the Bandhelm, would probably be the most common helmets used by both Briton and Saxon warriors.

[Flavivs Aetivs]

Do you think crested Intercisa types are plausible for some of the Britons?

Probably not. As I think you implied with your point about the drawings, the last known intercisa/ridge helmet dates to the 410s, while the Anglo-Saxon Coppergate and Pioneer helmets are 7th century.

We could imagine some sort of continuity of forms bridging the couple of hundred years between, but perhaps better to assume either that helmet use died out altogether for all but the very wealthiest warriors, or that various comparatively crude-looking spangenhelm types were used by both sides, with the Coppergate (and Sutton Hoo) varieties based on later imported styles from the continent.

Ridge helmets remained in use in Roman territory long after 410 AD (The River Maas Helmet is the one you're talking of, is of uncertain provenance and dates between 408-411 AD based on Solidi and Siliquae of Constantine III found with it, but it is probably authentic).

I'd say they fell out of use in Britain around the same time they began to fall out of use in the Roman army in the West, that is after about the 450's AD. At this point they begin to be mostly replaced by Spangenhelmets and Bandhelms, or if you could afford them, Baldenheims. However, artistic depictions show that ridge helmets certainly survived into the Late 6th Century in the Roman army, and variations of them as late as the 10th century.

[Urselius]

From Y Gododdin:

Three hundred gold-torqued,
warlike, wonderful
Three hundred proud ones,
Together, armed;
Three hundred fierce horses
Carried them forward,
Three hounds and three hundred,
Sad, they did not return.

Very reminiscent of Anglo-Saxon poetry. Here elite British warriors are shown to be cavalry, and they were still wearing torques!

[Urselius]

Although the Sutton Hoo helmet had decoration identical to the Swedish Vendel helmets, the construction of the helmet was entirely different - single piece skull, deep cheekpieces and a solid neck-guard. I think that a repertoire of helmet construction methods native to Britain survived from Roman times to be adopted by the Anglo-Saxons.

[Dan D'Silva]

Hello again. Must admit, the idea of the ridge helmet possibly disappearing from Britain before Coppergate/Wollaston types reappear is a real curveball for me.

Instead of asking more questions piecemeal, could I do a few sketches and see what you think?

[Flavivs Aetivs]

Is not Matt Bunker the expert on Saxon Britain? Where is he? I'd imagine he'd comment on this in a heartbeat.

[Dan D'Silva]

I'll see if I can get in touch with him.

Here's what I have so far. The colors are stereotypical, or at least in my mind they are.
For the Briton: clavii and orbiculi, carbatinae, plain spear, dished oval shield with khi-rho or other Christian device, but Arthur himself carrying a small parma with a serpent most of the time.
For the Saxon: low Hedeby shoes, angon, round flat shield with leather or rawhide facing, mostly unpainted except for emblems on some of them.
For both: Bandhelm or Spangenhelm, long knives (not sure whether the horizontal sheath is used yet), Behmer type 1 or early 6 sword on baldric. Cloaks will be identical except for colors and brooches. Elites on both sides will have mail of similar appearance.

[Flavivs Aetivs]

The shields should have Pointed or Button Bosses. Those were well in use and dominating by this time period. Even in the 450's in the West, Domed bosses are almost gone from the Archaeological record, and they all have points or buttons.

You know I completely forgot about this as well:

http://www.comitatus.net/armyages.html
http://www.comitatus.net/empire.html