possessing the three chief physical characteristics of the Nordic race.
The resemblances between their mental characters and those of the
Vikings have often been noted before and need not be repeated.[379]
It will be remembered that I have suggested that the Nordic “Achæans”
were an offshoot of the body, who as Thracians and Phrygians moved
eastward into Thrace and Asia Minor. I have also suggested that they
came to the south down the Vardar valley. Usually they have been
brought straight from Thrace, which is, of course, possible, but
Ridgeway, on the other hand, brings them from Epirus, and points out
that they held in veneration the Zeus of Dodona.[380] If their arrival
was, as I have suggested, in small bands or by ones and twos, there is
no reason to postulate that they all arrived by the same route; all
that matters is that they should have come eventually from the Danube
basin. As I have already mentioned, some of the Homeric heroes were
Zeus-born, and may have come _via_ Epirus, while others, the majority,
were of the stock of Ares. Now Ares was the god of the Thracians, or of
some group of people inhabiting Thrace.[381] It would seem then that
some, probably most, of the “Achæans” came from the Thraco-Phrygian
stock, though whether they started on their way from Thrace, or left
the main body before it had reached that country, is a matter of
relatively small importance. When the archæology of Macedonia and
Thrace is better understood, we shall doubtless be able to clear up
this point.
It is unfortunately not possible to date these swords with precision
from their associations, as there are difficulties in ascertaining
the exact position in which they were found, or in identifying the
potsherds and other objects found with them. They are believed to date
from the third Late Minoan period, that is to say, sometime after 1400
or 1350 /B.C./ It is here that our Egyptian evidence helps us.
We learn from the Egyptian records that[382] in the fifth year of
Merneptah, 1220 /B.C./, the Delta was attacked by Meryey, king of
the Libyans, who brought with him a host of Tehenu, who had been
living in the country behind Alexandria. He had also numerous oversea
allies, pirates and traders, who came in search of loot. These were
the Sherden, Shekelesh, Teresh and the Ekwesh. If the three first
have been rightly identified, they were the people of Sardinia and
Sicily and the Tyrsenians, who we know later as the Etruscans; whether
these identifications are correct has been much disputed, but it is
significant that all three represent areas or peoples which we have
already identified with Prospector activities. On the fourth the
Ekwesh, there is more general agreement, and I believe all authorities
unite in seeing in this name the word “Achæan.” If this be so, our
Nordic intruders, who had made themselves lords of the trading cities
in Greece, had taken to the sea, like their fellows in the Baltic, and
were, with Prospector allies, attacking and plundering the rich lands
of the Delta.
It is to this expedition that I attribute the two swords already
described, as indeed was suggested some years ago by Professor
Peet.[383] One is unquestionably of Type D, the type which has been
most commonly found in Greek lands, while the other seems, as far as
can be judged from its damaged hilt, to be also of the same type. The
latter is engraved with the name of Seti II., who reigned from 1209
to 1205 /B.C./, and so cannot be later than the latter date. It is
probable that it was a _souvenir_ of the raid of 1220 /B.C./, upon
which Seti placed his name some ten to fifteen years later.
Thus Type D was in use in 1220 /B.C./, and must have developed earlier,
for we must allow some years to have elapsed since the “Achæans” left
the Danube basin for Greek lands, a few more before many of them had
established themselves as kings, and a further interval before they
can have organised a piratical expedition on a sufficiently extensive
scale to threaten the safety of Egypt. Fifteen years would be the
shortest possible time for such a succession of events, thirty years
more likely. So we may consider that some of these intruders left
the Danube basin about 1250 /B.C./ Now it must have been about this
time, or rather earlier, that the Briges, from the north of Macedonia,
crossed the Hellespont into Asia Minor, where they became known as
Phrygians. This movement appears to have been one of a succession of
similar raids, which carried the Thraco-Phrygian people from the Danube
basin eastwards. It seems probable that our “Achæan” intruders were
part of this body, who, instead of moving on to the east, had passed
southwards in search of adventure.
Type G, as we have seen, has been found at the famous cemetery at
Hallstatt, in some of the older graves. This cemetery is believed to
date, at the earliest, from 900 /B.C./, but iron was found in most of
the graves, and the bronze swords were few in number, and from graves
in which no iron was found. We may safely conclude that these swords
belong to the very beginning of this period, and had been in use for
some time previously.
It is always a difficult matter to determine how long a given type of
implement or weapon remained in use. Besides this we must allow for
overlapping, that is to say for the period during which a type still
survived in use after its successor, which was doubtless in many ways
its superior, had been designed. I am inclined to believe that about
twenty-five years is sufficient to allow for this overlap, though
possibly on rare occasions an obsolete weapon may have been preserved
longer, especially as a trophy or memento.
If we allow a period of one hundred years between the introduction
of one type and the first use of its successor, we shall be able to
fit the two ascertained dates, and this period seems on the whole
reasonable. Types A and B are, however, scarce in Central Europe,
though Type B seems, in a modified form, to have persisted longer in
the Baltic region. I propose, therefore, to reduce the hundred years to
fifty in each of these cases.
Such a chronological scheme is, of necessity, provisional, and must be
susceptible of modification as further synchronisms are worked out, but
on the evidence at present available, I am inclined to think that it
is not far from the truth, and that any amendments which may have to be
made in the future will scarcely exceed fifty years either way. This
scheme is for Central Europe only, and may be true also for Italy and
Greece. Various modifications may, however, have to be made in applying
it to more distant regions, especially in the north and west, such as
Brittany, the British Isles and the Scandinavian countries.
Type A Transitional 1500-1425
Type B Semi-circular 1450-1375
Type C Oval 1400-1275
Type D Mycenæ, Fucino 1300-1175
Type E Wilburton 1200-1075
Type F Proto-Hallstatt, Dowris 1100- 975
Type G Hallstatt 1000- 875
/Chapter X/
THE IRON SWORD
We have seen that every type of sword, from Type A to Type E, has been
found in the Hungarian plain, though Type B is not common there. On
the other hand, Types F and G are entirely absent. It is unreasonable
to suppose that, while the people of the mountain zone were developing
more useful types of swords, the men of the plain were continuing for
some centuries to use swords of Type E. Even were this the case we
should expect to find that the swords of this type were vastly more
numerous than those previously in use. But we have seen that only ten
have been recorded for Hungary, whereas we have nineteen of Type D.
There remain only two possibilities: either the people left the plain
uninhabited, or they had found some weapon more useful than the bronze
sword.
It is true, as we have seen, that steppe-lands may be deserted in times
of excessive drought, and there is some reason for believing that such
a dry period occurred somewhere about this time, for it was in 1350 or
1300 /B.C./ that we must place the Aramean invasion from the Arabian
steppe, which was such a serious menace to Shalmaneser I.[384] But
this drought, even could we be sure that it affected a small upland
steppe like that of Hungary, occurred somewhat too early for our
purpose. There is also the alternative theory that too heavy a rainfall
in the mountain regions might have made life unpleasant.[385] But this
would have left a more marked effect upon the mountain zone than on
the plain. There may, indeed, have been an exodus, in fact, we shall
find reason for believing that this was so, but it is unlikely that
the rich Hungarian plain was left long uninhabited. There remains the
alternative explanation, the discovery of a new weapon, and I hope to
give reasons for believing that this is the true solution, and that the
new weapon was the iron sword.
Some years ago M. Chantre investigated a large series of tombs in the
basin of the Koban, just north of the Caucasus mountains. Here he found
a culture, closely resembling in many details the remains found in
the cemetery at Hallstatt. The earlier weapons were of bronze, but in
most cases the swords, while retaining hilts of that metal, had blades
of iron or steel.[386] It has been much disputed which of these two
cemeteries, Hallstatt and the Koban, is the earlier, but I hope to show
that the Koban graves must antedate those in Austria.
M. Chantre extended his investigations to the other side of the
mountains, and on the southern slope of the Caucasus found evidence of
the culture of a humble, mountain folk, with rude pots, but, what is
important for our purpose, he found in these graves spear-heads and
small objects of iron.[387]
Now Professor Gowland has told us that “In Western Asia there are two
important districts where iron ores are of very extensive occurrence,
and in which remains of early iron manufacture are found.” He adds,
“from a metallurgical point of view, deduced from the extent and
character of the ancient remains, there are strong reasons for
believing that the first-mentioned region was the first in which the
metal was regularly produced.” This first-mentioned region he describes
as “on the south-east of the Euxine (ancient Paphlagonia and Pontus)
extending from the modern Yeshil Irmak to Batum, and comprising a
series of mountain ranges, not far from the coast, along the lower
slopes and foot hills of which the iron deposits are scattered.”[388]
The graves with the iron spear-heads described by Chantre are just at
the north-eastern end of this region, while in the south-western lived
later the Chalybes, who were renowned workers in iron in the sixth
century.[389]
Chantre has shown that the two cultures which he described were
existing at the same time, for the graves of one people sometimes
contained objects belonging to the culture of the other;[390] not
only, then, did the cultures synchronise, but the peoples had come
into contact. There is no reason for believing that the Koban folk,
militarist though they were, had conquered their humble neighbours.
That the reverse had taken place is unthinkable. The evidence suggests
that the contact had been peaceful, that trade relations had been
established, and perhaps the Koban folk, who appear to have been
new-comers in this region, may have taken wives from their neighbours.
All this points to the fact that it was in the Koban region that the
steppe-folk first learned the use of iron, and that they carried the
knowledge of it thence to the Danube basin, rather than that the
reverse process took place.
But, it may be asked, how can we be sure that our Koban people are the
steppe-folk, who have been the heroes of the last few chapters? Their
culture closely resembles that of Hallstatt, which is but a development
of the later bronze age culture of Central Europe, and even their
earlier graves clearly belong to the same series. This is so obvious
that Rostovtzeff is content merely to state that they had come from the
west.[391]
It may be well, however, to submit more precise proofs of this origin.
During the later bronze age a certain type of pin had been used
in Hungary, possibly, as some think, as a hair-pin, but used more
probably, as Lissauer has suggested, to fasten the _chlamys_, _toga_
or plaid, which these steppe-folk appear to have worn. These pins
are known to the Germans as _Rudernadln_[392] and to the French as
_épingles à raquette_.[393] Lissauer recognises five types, which we
will distinguish by the letter A to E. A developes into B, and this
again into alternative forms, C and E. A also developes by stages,
which are at present missing, into D.
[Illustration: FIG. 20.--FIVE TYPES OF RACQUET PINS.]
Now Types A and B have been found in North Italy, Switzerland,
Wurtemberg and on the Rhine. They have also been found in Hungary, at
Tökés, Gata, Versecz and Butta. Two have been found in Bohemia, at
Noutonic and Krendorf, and one at Gaya in Moravia. Thus these two types
are fairly well distributed over both halves of the Celtic cradle.
Type D has been found at Andrasfalva in Hungary, and at Alt-Bydzow in
Bohemia. Besides these several have been found further afield, one at
Dexheim in Rhenish Hesse, one at Greisheim in Hesse-Darmstadt and one
at Fritzen in East Prussia. Lastly several have been found in the Koban
graves,[394] and these are larger and more developed than the others.
This evidence seems to show us that this type of pin was at first well
distributed throughout the Celtic cradle, and that the dimensions
of the head increased in Hungary and Bohemia. About the time that
this later form was in use some kind of exodus took place to various
distant places. That one of these expeditions passed to the east, in
the direction of south Russia, is clear from the occurrence of this
type, in its most developed form, in the Koban graveyards. We can well
believe that these emigrants left the Celtic cradle by the Moravian
gate, and passed along the more or less open spaces at the northern
foot of the Carpathians, to which reference has already been made, and
so into the plain of Russia and finally to the foot of the Caucasus.
The journey would have been made on horseback, and need not have
occupied many weeks so there is no need to expect much evidence from
objects lost _en route_; but, as they must have crossed Podolia on
their way to the Koban, it seems probable that it was these emigrants
who left at Zavadyntse the sword which was mentioned in a previous
chapter, as this is the only example of a Central European sword
recorded from the eastern plain. The Podolian sword was of Type E, and
this gives us a clue to the date, and will enable us to put together in
their proper order these various items of evidence.
[Illustration: FIG. 21. RACQUET PINS FROM KOBAN.]
The evidence which I have cited in the foregoing pages can best be
explained by believing that about 1150 /B.C./ some of the steppe-folk
from the Hungarian plain departed, probably through the Moravian
gate, to seek fresh pastures. While some may have gone northwards,
the majority passed along the open sandy heaths of Galicia, across
Podolia, where a sword was lost at Zavadyntse, and so on to the grassy
plains by the banks of the Koban river. Here they settled for a time,
and during their wanderings some came into contact with the humble
iron-using people on the southern slopes of the Caucasus. Whether they
approached these people to trade or to acquire some commodity in which
they themselves were lacking, or whether they sought them to obtain
their daughters for wives, we know not; all we can be sure is that some
intercourse took place. It seems clear, too, that it was from their
humble neighbours that the Koban-folk learned of the existence of iron
or steel, and how to work that metal. It was not small knives they
needed, but better blades for their trusty swords. Thus, I believe, the
use of iron was first learned by the peoples of Europe.
[Illustration: FIG. 22. SWORD FROM ZAVADYNTSE.]
This discovery must have been made by 1100 /B.C./ at the latest
probably some years earlier. The Koban-folk realised that steel blades
were far superior to those of bronze, and doubtless were anxious to
show off their new acquisition before the old folks at home. They
may, too, have remembered that the stone from which their neighbours
extracted the metal was plentiful in some parts of the old country.
Whatever the cause, I believe that some of them returned to Hungary
with their new discovery, before bronze swords of Type F had been
evolved or at any rate had come into general use.
Iron ore, which could easily be worked by primitive methods, occurs in
Transylvania, at Gyalar,[395] and it seems likely that it was in this
neighbourhood that they first settled. It is also possible that about
this time some of them occupied Thrace, for in early days Thracian
swords had a great reputation.[396] By degrees they pushed up the
Danube, at any rate as far as its junction with the Save. Before 1000
/B.C./ a large number of them advanced up the Morava and down the
Vardar and soon afterwards entered Thessaly, whence they started on
that series of conquests known as the return of the Heraclids, or the
Dorian invasion of Greece.[397]
Many of these Koban-folk settled on the southern bank of the Danube and
the Save, and in the hill country behind; various cemeteries of this
time have been discovered in this region, the most famous of which
is that at Glasinatz in Bosnia.[398] Others pushed up the Save, which
runs through mountains of an easily worked iron ore; evidence of early
workings have been found on the banks of the Mur in Styria and on the
upper Drave in Carinthia.[399]
A little later, between 1000 and 900 /B.C./, some of these people
passed over into Italy. They may have crossed the Adriatic, as did in
all probability the men of the leaf-shaped sword, but it is tempting
to think that they crossed the Predil pass and settled at Santa Lucia
Tolmino, near the head waters of the Isonzo. Here a cemetery was found
in 1885,[400] much of the grave furniture from which is, or was in 1914
in the Trieste Museum, while the remainder is in Vienna. More than 1000
graves were found and the cemetery must have been in existence for
several centuries; but it is usually believed that the earliest graves
date only from the eighth century. Others of the same party crossed the
mountains into the rich Friuli plain and settled at Dernazacco, near
Cividale,[401] and gradually spread thence over the Veneto.
We come across further evidence of their advance at Este,[402]
and as they crossed the Po valley they destroyed the _terremare_,
which had existed there since early in the bronze age and dispersed
their inhabitants.[403] There is evidence that about this time some
of the _terramara_-folk arrived in Etruria,[404] others are found
settling in the neighbourhood of Taranto,[405] while Dr. Hooton has
shown that there are strong reasons for believing that the earliest
settlement on the Palatine Hill at Rome was due to these people.[406]
The invaders seem to have occupied all the plain of Italy north-east
of the Apeninnes, the area known later as Ombrice[407] or Etruria
Circumpadana,[408] but the most important spots at which their
remains have been found are in and around Bologna. From one of the
best-known sites in that city their culture has been called that of
Villanova.[409] That at one time they conquered Etruria has been
suggested in chapter /IV./, and doubtless it was they who extended the
Etruscan rule from the Alps to the south of Naples; but, as has already
been explained, it would be a mistake to confuse them with the real
Etruscans.
[Illustration: FIG. 23.--MAP SHOWING DISTRIBUTION OF TYPE G SWORDS IN
FRANCE.]
[Illustration: FIG. 24.--MAP SHOWING DISTRIBUTION OF IRON SWORDS IN
FRANCE.]
We have seen that in the mountain zone the pile-dwelling civilisation
continued throughout the bronze age. This type of culture, introduced
by the early Alpines from Asia Minor, was adopted in Central Europe by
the Nordic intruders, who had made themselves lords over the Alpine
peasants. That they were still retaining their race exclusiveness is
clear from the fact that long and broad-headed skulls are still found
side by side.[410] In the plain, however, where we have no evidence of
Alpine settlement, all signs of pile-dwellings are absent.
It is a striking fact that with the arrival of iron swords into the
mountain zone this pile-dwelling culture, which had existed from early
neolithic days till the close of the bronze age, came suddenly to an
end. This cannot be merely an accident, for the same thing occurred all
over Central Europe.[411] It is also significant that some centuries
later it was revived.[412] Some important revolution must have taken
place to end so abruptly a custom which had lasted for thousands of
years, and to end it with equal suddenness in all parts of the mountain
zone. I can only account for it in one way, by supposing that the men
of the plain, who had never occupied this type of dwelling, had swept
over the mountain zone, carrying fire and the iron sword throughout the
villages of their neighbours.
This I am inclined to think must have been the case, and such an
invasion would account for the widespread exodus of people with the
Type G swords, which we have found scattered over many areas in France,
over parts of North Germany, and stretching even to Scandinavia and
Finland, and which reached the British Isles, with much other culture
belonging to the Swiss lake-dwellings, as Crawford has recently shown
us.[413] These people with the Type G swords must have been refugees
from the invasion of the iron sword people. Déchelette has given us a
map showing their progress in France, and on the same map he indicates
the progress of the iron sword men.[414] The latter followed the
refugees in almost every direction, and it was only in the Seine valley
that the exiles escaped pursuit. This is a point to which I shall have
to refer in a later chapter.
/Chapter XI/
A RECAPITULATION
We are now in a position to interpret the meaning of the evolution
and distribution of these leaf-shaped swords, though there are many
details, which we would gladly know, but of which we must remain in
ignorance, perhaps for ever. We can, however, form some general idea
of the events which were taking place in Europe during the centuries
under review, and it will, perhaps, make for lucidity if they are here
recapitulated as a continuous story.
Since 4000 /B.C./ some Alpine people, coming originally from Asia
Minor, had occupied the mountain zone, where they had erected their
pile-dwellings and had cultivated their strips of cornlands. Meanwhile
on the Russian steppes, east of the Dnieper, Nordic steppe-folk mounted
on horses, were driving cattle from one pasture to another, sometimes
dwelling in the open steppe, at others pasturing their beasts in the
park-lands and woods to the north. Between these two peoples were the
Tripolje-folk, living in pit-dwellings, cultivating the soil, and later
on importing copper axes from Ægean traders.
About 3000 /B.C./, or perhaps rather earlier, a drought caused some
of the steppe-folk to emigrate. It was perhaps at this time, though
probably later, that some passed through the woodland to the middle
Volga valley, where, mixing with communities of Mongoloid fishers,
they developed the Fationovo culture and became ancestors of the
red Finns.[415] Others in small numbers certainly advanced towards
the Baltic, and passing along its southern shore, appeared later at
Furfooz, in Belgium.[416] The majority of these moved slowly up the
Rhine valley, whence some entered Switzerland from the north, and made
themselves lords of the lake-dwelling villages. Other steppe-folk seem
also to have entered Hungary, probably through the Moravian gate, and
settled on the plain and the eastern foothills of the mountain zone.
Meanwhile the knowledge of copper had been introduced by traders, who
had sailed up the Adriatic, and travelled inland from Fiume. This
copper culture reached the Swiss lake-dwellings, and eventually passed
down the Rhone as far as Lyons. It was followed by a bronze culture,
which was imported from Italy and the western Mediterranean.