Postby s_taillebois » Mon Feb 05, 2007 4:40 am
On the sword situation, likely Northern European swords developed semi-independently. The Med. influence would have come through via the Hellenistic Greeks and the later Romans.
However the earliest bronze age swords, such as the Minoan and Scythian, bear little resemblance to the later European types (for example the willow leaf blades of the classical (pre-Roman) tradition)
More likely, the Viking style sword developed independently, or with the influence of the Gallic swords. By the period the Vikings were in substantial direct contact with the Roman's (Byzantines), they already had their own martial traditions and weapons well in place. And effective to the point that the Byzantine (Romans) hired them as auxillaries. And their immediate Norman descendents, such as Robert Guiscard, were playing havoc in the med. basin...including agaisnt the late development of Roman martial traditions.
On the Japanese/Viking thing...whatever. Except that in all likelyhood, once contact occurred...both sides probably would have been very, very, sick due to exposure to diseases as neither would have had developed resistance for the others normal diseases. More a matter of coughing and vomiting than hacking and such. Have to consider that in the 9th century, neither had been likely been exposed (via intermediates) to the others pathogens.
On the Norman thing...wierdly enough there was a tapestry done about the Norman invasion in reverse, called the "Over Lord" tapestry.
Steven Taillebois
