08-08-2006, 08:23 PM
Vortigern,
I see your number and they could be correct. However, am i thinking right when I think that the assumption is that all of the finds represent one big army? I mean, instead of being thrown into the bog over some period of time?
They are not my numbers, they are the numbers of serious scholars -- see also: Illerup Adal, all 10 volumes (soon to be 12 by Jorgen Ilkjaer ( which I have). The deposits in Illerip A, were all deposited at one time. THose in Illerup B a bit later - but all at one time and Illerup C, later still but all at one time. Remarkable amount of standardisation in shields and spears, incidentally -- some evidence of mass production so that the warriors of the chieftain all had a basic weapon set -- just like the Roman Army!
Perhaps we should also refer to the deposits at Vimose, Thorsbjerg, Kragehul, etc.
But sure, as raids go, you would assume that those who are prepaire to raid assume they can outfight the local opposition, i.e. they should be able to put some numbers out to sea. Although I doubt that this would amount to fairly large armies.fleets of over 1500 men.
So you say, but that is not what the evidence seems to point to. Do have a look at the references that I have mentioned -- you may find them quite revealing. The work in finding boat houses in Denmark and North Germany has only just begun -- but as you have said, previously, there is evidence that the Angles, Saxons and Jutes, etc, came from highly organised and sophisticated societies eminently capable of fielding large forces of men.
As for the abandonment of fields -- they were, probably never abandoned -- as Ambrosius has pointed out, the germanic people coming here, came from similar conditions and would have few problems picking up the pieces.
I do hope that you are not suggesting that the germanic people were not as good at farming as the Romano-British?
As for the evidence that you mention regarding abandoned farms, it would be impossible to say that that did not happen on some farms until all the areas have been excavated and England is a big country. I don't believe that you could notice, in the archaeological records problems that only lasted one season. Certainly, there is evidence that many villas were deserted, as you know.
As for cities, they did change and I agree that there may be many reasons for this but one of them may have been because of the influx of new groups of incomers.
However, the evidence that germanic incomers were able to field large numbers is a bit of a problem to just explain away. It is something that has not been satisfactorily dealt with by anyone who believes in the elite dominance idea (three men in a boat theory).
Paul
I see your number and they could be correct. However, am i thinking right when I think that the assumption is that all of the finds represent one big army? I mean, instead of being thrown into the bog over some period of time?
They are not my numbers, they are the numbers of serious scholars -- see also: Illerup Adal, all 10 volumes (soon to be 12 by Jorgen Ilkjaer ( which I have). The deposits in Illerip A, were all deposited at one time. THose in Illerup B a bit later - but all at one time and Illerup C, later still but all at one time. Remarkable amount of standardisation in shields and spears, incidentally -- some evidence of mass production so that the warriors of the chieftain all had a basic weapon set -- just like the Roman Army!
Perhaps we should also refer to the deposits at Vimose, Thorsbjerg, Kragehul, etc.
But sure, as raids go, you would assume that those who are prepaire to raid assume they can outfight the local opposition, i.e. they should be able to put some numbers out to sea. Although I doubt that this would amount to fairly large armies.fleets of over 1500 men.
So you say, but that is not what the evidence seems to point to. Do have a look at the references that I have mentioned -- you may find them quite revealing. The work in finding boat houses in Denmark and North Germany has only just begun -- but as you have said, previously, there is evidence that the Angles, Saxons and Jutes, etc, came from highly organised and sophisticated societies eminently capable of fielding large forces of men.
As for the abandonment of fields -- they were, probably never abandoned -- as Ambrosius has pointed out, the germanic people coming here, came from similar conditions and would have few problems picking up the pieces.
I do hope that you are not suggesting that the germanic people were not as good at farming as the Romano-British?
As for the evidence that you mention regarding abandoned farms, it would be impossible to say that that did not happen on some farms until all the areas have been excavated and England is a big country. I don't believe that you could notice, in the archaeological records problems that only lasted one season. Certainly, there is evidence that many villas were deserted, as you know.
As for cities, they did change and I agree that there may be many reasons for this but one of them may have been because of the influx of new groups of incomers.
However, the evidence that germanic incomers were able to field large numbers is a bit of a problem to just explain away. It is something that has not been satisfactorily dealt with by anyone who believes in the elite dominance idea (three men in a boat theory).
Paul
Paul Mortimer
