Wallachian Swords of the 15th Century: What Types?

[TVV]

It is debatable whether the warriors on the frescoes are Serb or Greek or Bulgarian. In fact, at 1295, Macedonia was not part of the Serbian Kingdom.

Given the common state entity and close ties between Walalchians, Bulgarians and Cumans in the 12-13th centuries, it is not surprising that the arms and armor were shared as well.

When looking at frescoes, we also have to remember that the equipment depicted is also based on church cannons and on the artist's own images of how a warrior should look like. Some of the equipment may have been copied down from earlier frescoes, so pictorial evidence alone cannot be completely relied upon, and has to be examiend combined with archaeological finds, written sources, etc.

Regards,
Teodor

[Samik]

Originally Posted by TVV

It is debatable whether the warriors on the frescoes are Serb or Greek or Bulgarian. In fact, at 1295, Macedonia was not part of the Serbian Kingdom.

Given the common state entity and close ties between Walalchians, Bulgarians and Cumans in the 12-13th centuries, it is not surprising that the arms and armor were shared as well.

When looking at frescoes, we also have to remember that the equipment depicted is also based on church cannons and on the artist's own images of how a warrior should look like. Some of the equipment may have been copied down from earlier frescoes, so pictorial evidence alone cannot be completely relied upon, and has to be examiend combined with archaeological finds, written sources, etc.

Regards,
Teodor

Splendid observation Teodor ,
the depiction of armour in particular seem to have had a great deal of anachronism (e.g. the continuous portrayal of scale/ lamellar armour).As to the ethnicity of the warriors saints I personally think its negligible as for example the Bulgarian 14th century version of manasses chronicle has illustrations with similar figures. Furthermore you'll find very similar/identical portrayal of warrior saints in Kosovar/Serbian frescoes. Coming back to the accuracy of the depiction of arms and armour, some pieces however do have novelties in them, especially in terms of weapons. You can see yelman-less sabres and "paramerions" as well as the cuman-style quivers in the first half of the 14th century , whereas the early 15th century fresco of a trio of warrior-saints (cca. 1408-1420) presents an interesting "development" ( manasija monastery)




Note the bow-case of the central figure , he has two arrows in it with its fletching pointed upwards , which is more characteristic of Anatolian Turks (there is an article on a similar matter by Russ Mitchell in volume 4 of journal of medieval military history). The rightmost figure of St Nikita sports a sabre with a quite visible yelmen, which is again more typical of later weapons.

You can compare those with earlier depictions (such as the one in my earlier post) and with the depiction of St. Nicetas from Gracanica (1321-22)


Note the lack of yelmen as well as the "habaki" part between the hilt and the blade.. again a feature more characteristic of earlier sabres. Swords are sometimes presented in anachronistic way (some appearing even after two centuries e.g. you'll find an identical depiction of a sword from a 12th century fresco in a 14th century one etc.) but some are "modern" in their appearance ,e.g. pieces that have semi-curved cross-guard and even hand and a half grips. Those examples of sabres/quivers as well as swords are in my opinion a sign that not all of those fresco depictions are necessarily "outdated" or entirely fantastical. Some are filled with immense attention to detail that can in fact rival the art from Western Europe.

Regards,
Samuel

[TVV]

Samuel,

Good points, supported with perfect illustrations. The blade on St. Nikita's sabre is actually very similar to some swords captured at the second siege of Vienna, more than 2 centuries later - certainly an example of a type that was just starting to appear in Europe. The grip with the forefinger over the crossguard is also remarkable and further shows that the painter must have had a good amount of exposure to warriors of the time, maybe even having some military experience himself.

The second fresco shows the habaki-like plate at the base of the blade, while the garment is conviniently left open to reveal what looks like mail sewn inside. This is where the problems with frescoes start - reenactors tend to see things on some frescoes, which are more the product of conjecture. For example, if that really mail sewn inside, and if so, how about the trousers (same pattern on the outside) with those strange plates on the knees? And then the wild speculation starts.

Overall though you are correct - frescoes provide valuable insight into the arms and armor in the Balkans in the Middle Ages, but they have to be examined with caution to discern what the artist copied from his surroundings, what he copied from older images and what was completely his imagination. And we should be careful to restrain our own imagination somewhat as well.

Thanks for the nice images,
Teodor

[Samik]

Since I cannot edit my previous post and seeing that the second picture somewhat disappeared I'm re-uploading the depiction of St. Nicetas from the Gracanica fresco (1321-22)



Thank you both Teodor and Lucian for your knowledgeable (and much needed) insight !

Regards,
Samuel

[shayde78]

We must be just a week from Halloween, since I found myself reading an article on this topic. Even sportier is that, as I finished the article, I noticed the author's name looked familiar. I'm quite sure she is a fellow forumites.
Anyway, I wanted to link to the article in this thread for reference.

Also, why not resurrect a zombie thread during this witching season?

https://heritagearmssa.com/2017/11/1...d-the-impaler/

[kronckew]

Having read the linked article, in conjunction with this thread, I find a number of her conclusions a bit over-simplified. An example, The conclusion the Kilij was the ancestor of the sabre instead of the other way around. The statement that the short kilij was used by Cavalry instead of a longer shamshir/sabre, not Infantry seems a bit odd to me as well. The UK general's mameluke-like sword has a noticeable and long 'yelman' but does not require a scabbard with an open spine as the blade is not parabolic and is not highly curved. It was adopted after the french invasion of Egypt by Napoleon when the french generals liked them, and the English liked the French version. (UK one below - earlier versions had a brass scabbard, and came with an orderly to keep it polished) It's fairly stabby too. generals of the period would of course never actually need to use a sword in actual combat unless it got really desperate, which would not be often, if they were a good general.

P.s - I thought Shamshire was a county in the UK, not all that far to the southeast from me in Gloucestershire,the other side of Wiltshire, and just south of Berkshire .

[kronckew]

More than you wanted to know about Vlad III:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=MY82EpsvbQ8