Advertisement

Standardised Manufacture of Iron Age Weaponry from Southern Scandinavia: Constructing and Provenancing the Havor Lance

  • Thomas Birch
Chapter
Part of the Quantitative Methods in the Humanities and Social Sciences book series (QMHSS)

Abstract

This chapter examines a single weapon type classified as the ‘Havor’ lance, recovered from the famous war booty sacrifices of southern Scandinavia during the Late Roman and Early Germanic Iron Age. A metallographic analysis of 13 samples reveals that the Havor lance was produced using a fairly uniform construction technique, labelled here as the ‘spiral-form’ method. The spiral-form method is not only clearly visible in the macroscopic cross-sections of lance specimens but also in weld lines illuminated through X-radiography. This chapter follows on from previous research demonstrating the Havor lance to be a highly standardised weapon product in terms of both construction form and shape, as shown by traditional metric analysis and innovative geometric morphometric analysis.

The standardised form and appearance as well as the singular construction method of the Havor lance are at odds with the different microstructures and types of iron observed in the individual specimens. The metallographic and chemical analysis of entrapped slag inclusions reveal that the lances were made using phosphoric iron, ferritic iron, and steel from different iron production regions, which appear to correspond generally to modern-day Denmark and southern Norway. The discrepancy between the standardised appearance of the lances and the different types of iron used in their manufacture presents a more complex scenario than had hitherto been envisaged for iron availability and weapon construction in southern Scandinavia during the Iron Age.

Keywords

Weapon Lance Iron Steel Phosphoric iron Iron Age Scandinavia Construction Provenance Standardisation Weapon deposit 

Notes

Acknowledgements

This chapter has been reworked from the author’s doctoral thesis entitled “The Provenance and Technology of Iron Age War Booty from Southern Scandinavia” (University of Aberdeen 2013). Many thanks are due to Peter Crew, Mike Charlton, Keith Dobney, and Thilo Rehren for their input and comments on the original work. Special thanks go to Arne Joutijärvi for his immense efforts in assisting with sampling the lances and gaining access to new material for study. This work was made possible only through the permission granted by Hans Christian Andersen, on behalf of Haderslev Museum (Denmark), to sample lances from Ejsbøl. Thanks are also due to Mark Gourlay and John Still at the University of Aberdeen for their assistance in sample preparation and SEM-EDS analysis. Finally, I would like to thank the reviewers for their comments and suggestions in improving this chapter. The final write-up of this research was supported by funding from the Danish National Research Foundation under the grant DNRF119 - Centre of Excellence for Urban Network Evolutions (UrbNet).

References

  1. Bemmann, G., & Bemmann, J. (1998a). Der Opferplatz von Nydam: Die Funde aus den älteren Grabungen: Nydam-I und Nydam-II. Band 1: Text. Neumünster: Wachholtz.Google Scholar
  2. Bemmann, G., & Bemmann, J. (1998b). Der Opferplatz von Nydam: Die Funde aus den älteren Grabungen: Nydam-I und Nydam-II. Band 2: Katalog und Tafeln. Neumünster: Wachholtz.Google Scholar
  3. Birch, T., & Martinón-Torres, M. (2013). The iron bars from the “Gresham Ship”: Employing multivariate statistics to further slag inclusion analysis of ferrous objects. In J. Bayley, E. Blakelock, & D. Crossley (Eds.), Iron and ironworking: Proceedings of the archaeometallurgy conference, Bradford, November 2010. London: Historical Metallurgy Society.Google Scholar
  4. Birch, T., & Martinón-Torres, M. (in press). From traditional to geometric morphometrics: Standardisation of the Iron Age “Havor” lance from the famous weapon deposits of southern Scandinavia. Journal of Archaeological Science. Google Scholar
  5. Birch, T., Charlton, M. F., Biggs, L., Stos-Gale, Z. A., & Martinón-Torres, M. (2014). The cargo. In J. G. Milne & D. Sully (Eds.), The Gresham Ship Project: A 16th-Century Merchantman wrecked in the Princes Channel, Thames Estuary. Volume II: Contents and Context (Nautical Archaeology Society Monograph Series, Vol. 5 / British Archaeological Reports, British Series, Vol. 606, pp. 53–70). Oxford: Archaeopress.Google Scholar
  6. Blakelock, E., Martinón-Torres, M., Veldhuijzen, H. A., & Young, T. (2009). Slag inclusions in iron objects and the quest for provenance: An experiment and a case study. Journal of Archaeological Science, 36, 1745–1757.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. Buchwald, V. F. (2005). Iron and steel in ancient times. Copenhagen: The Royal Danish Academy of Sciences and Letters.Google Scholar
  8. Buchwald, V. F., & Wivel, H. (1998). Slag analysis as a method for the characterization and provenancing of ancient iron objects. Materials Characterization, 40, 73–96.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. Charlton, M. F. (2015). The last frontier in “sourcing”: The hopes, constraints and future for iron provenance research. Journal of Archaeological Science, Scoping the Future of Archaeological Science: Papers in Honour of Richard Klein, 56, 210–220. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jas.2015.02.017.Google Scholar
  10. Charlton, M. F., Blakelock, E., Martinón-Torres, M., & Young, T. (2012). Investigating the production provenance of iron artifacts with multivariate methods. Journal of Archaeological Science, 39, 2280–2293.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. Coustures, M. P., Béziat, D., & Tollon, F. (2003). The use of trace element analysis of entrapped slag inclusions to establish ore-bar iron links: Examples from two Gallo-Roman iron-making sites in France (Les Martyrs, Montagne Noire, and Les Ferrys, Loiret). Archaeometry, 45, 599–613.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. Desaulty, A.-M., Dillmann, P., L’Héritiera, M., Gratuze, B., Joron, J.-L., & Fluzin, P. (2009a). Does it come from the Pays de Bray? Examination of an origin hypothesis for the ferrous reinforcements used in French medieval churches using major and trace element analyses. Journal of Archaeological Science, 36, 2445–2462.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. Desaulty, A.-M., Mariet, C., Dillmann, P., Joron, J.-L., Gratuze, B., Carlier, C. M.-L., & Fluzin, P. (2009b). Trace element behaviour in direct-and indirect-iron metallurgy: The case of Pays de Bray (France). In P. Craddock, A. Giumlia-Mair, & A. Hauptman (Eds.), Selected Papers from the 2nd International Conference “Archaeometallurgy in Europe” 2007, 17–21 June 2007, Aquileia, Italy. Milan: Associazione Italiana di Metalurgia.Google Scholar
  14. Dillman, P., & L’Héritier, M. (2007). Slag inclusion analyses for studying ferrous alloys employed in French medieval buildings: Supply of materials and diffusion of smelting processes. Journal of Archaeological Science, 34, 1810–1823.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. Ganzelewski, M. (2000). Archäometallurgische Untersuchungen zur frühen Verhüttung von Raseneisenerzen am Kammberg bei Joldelund, Kreis Nordfriesland. In A. Haffner, H. Jöns, & J. Reichstein (Eds.), Frühe Eisengewinnung in Joldelund, Kr. Nordfriesland: Ein Beitrag zur Siedlungsund Technikgeschichte Schleswig-Holsteins. Teil 2: Naturwissenschaftliche Untersuchungen zur Metallurgie- und Vegetationsgeschichte (Universitätsforschungen zur prähistorischen Archäologie, Vol. 59, pp. 3–100). Bonn: Habelt.Google Scholar
  16. Heimann, R. B., Kreher, U., Spazier, I., & Wetzel, G. (2001). Mineralogical and chemical investigations of bloomery slags from prehistoric (8th century BC to 4th century AD) iron production sites in Upper and Lower Lusatia, Germany. Archaeometry, 43, 227–252.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. Høst-Madsen, L., & Buchwald, V. F. (1999). The characterization and provenancing of ore, slag and iron from the Iron Age settlement at Snorup. Historical Metallurgy, 33, 57–67.Google Scholar
  18. Ilkjær, J. (1990a). Illerup Ådal: Die Lanzen und Speere. Textband. Moesgård: Jysk Arkæologisk Selskab.Google Scholar
  19. Ilkjær, J. (1990b). Illerup Ådal: Die Lanzen und Speere. Tafelband. Moesgård: Jysk Arkæologisk Selskab.Google Scholar
  20. Ilkjær, J. (2000). Illerup Ådal – Archaeology as a magic mirror. Moesgård: Jysk Arkæologisk Selskab.Google Scholar
  21. Ilkjær, J. (2003). Danish war booty sacrifices. In L. Jørgensen, B. Storgaard, & L. G. Thomsen (Eds.), The spoils of victory: The North in the shadow of the Roman empire (pp. 44–65). København: Nationalmuseet.Google Scholar
  22. Ilkjær, J. (2008). Die Funde aus Illerup Ådal – Der Stand der Forschung im Jahr 2006. In A. Abegg-Wigg, C. Radtke, & A. Rau (Eds.), Aktuelle Forschungen zu Kriegsbeuteopfern und Fürstengräbern im Barbaricum (pp. 19–24). Neumünster: Wachholtz.Google Scholar
  23. Ilkjær, J., Jouttijärvi, A., & Andresen, J. (1994). Illerup Ådal: Proveniensbestemmelse af jern fra Illerup ådal – et piloprojekt. Moesgård: Jysk Arkæologisk Selskab.Google Scholar
  24. Joosten, I. (2004). Technology of early historical iron production in the Netherlands, geoarchaeological and bioarchaeological studies 2. Amsterdam: Vrije Universiteit.Google Scholar
  25. Jørgensen, L., Storgaard, B., & Thomsen, L. G. (Eds.). (2003). The spoils of victory: The North in the shadow of the Roman empire. København: Nationalmuseet.Google Scholar
  26. Leroy, S., Cohen, S. X., Verna, C., Gratuze, B., Téreygeol, F., Fluzin, P., Bertrand, L., & Dillmann, P. (2012). The medieval iron market in Ariège (France). Multidisciplinary analytical approach and multivariate analyses. Journal of Archaeological Science, 39, 1080–1093.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  27. Lyngstrøm, H. (2008). Dansk Jern: En kulturhistorisk analyse af fremstilling, fordeling og forbrug. København: Det kongelige nordiske Oldskriftselskab.Google Scholar
  28. Navasaitis, J., & Selskienė, A. (2007). Iron smelting techniques in the Virbaliūnai ancient settlement. Archaeologia Baltica, 8, 387–395.Google Scholar
  29. Navasaitis, J., Sveikauskaite, A., Selskis, A., & Matulionis, E. (2003). Ironmaking techniques during the roman period in Lithuania. In L. C. Nørbach (Ed.), Prehistoric and medieval direct iron smelting in Scandinavia and Europe: aspects of technology and science, Acta Jutlandica (pp. 87–94). Aarhus: Aarhus University Press.Google Scholar
  30. Ørsnes, M. (1988). Ejsbøl I: Waffenopferfunde des 4.-5. Jahrh. nach Chr. København: Det Kongelige Nordiske Oldskriftselskab.Google Scholar
  31. Paynter, S. (2006). Regional variations in bloomery smelting slag of the Iron Age and Romano-British periods. Archaeometry, 48, 271–292. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1475-4754.2006.00256.x.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  32. Petzo, G. (1978). Metallographic etching: Metallographic and ceramographic methods for revealing microstructure. Metals Park: American Society for Metals.Google Scholar
  33. Sahoo, G., & Balasubramaniam, R. (2007). On phase distribution and phase transformations in phosphoric irons studied by metallography. Metallurgical and Materials Transactions A: Physical Metallurgy and Materials Science, 38, 1692–1697. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11661-007-9227-1.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  34. Scott, B. G. (1990). Early Irish ironworking. Ulster: Ulster Museum.Google Scholar
  35. Seetah, K., Birch, T., Calaon, D., & Čaval, S. (2015). Colonial iron in context: The Trianon slave shackle from Mauritius. Archaeological and Anthropological Sciences, 9(3) 419–430. https://doi.org/10.1007/s12520-015-0295-7.Google Scholar
  36. Spazier, I. (2003). The Germanic iron-smelting complex at Wolkenberg in lower Lausacia, southern Brandenburg. In L. C. Nørbach (Ed.), Prehistoric and medieval direct iron smelting in Scandinavia and Europe: Aspects of technology and science (Acta Jutlandica, pp. 37–42). Aarhus: Aarhus University Press.Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer International Publishing AG, part of Springer Nature 2018

Authors and Affiliations

  • Thomas Birch
    • 1
  1. 1.Centre for Urban Network Evolutions (UrbNet)Aarhus UniversityHøjbjergDenmark

Personalised recommendations