Quote:
|
Originally Posted by stekemest
Hi Jim,
I don't know if I understand your question correctly (my English is not the best), but if you ask why so few swords are found on battlefields: after the battle, victorious soldiers and peasants from all around came to the battlefield and collected everything that was worth something or could somehow be used, especially undamaged armour and weapons. That's why swords are often missing.
|
Hi Stekemest,
Thank you so much for responding, and actually, your English is pretty impeccable as far as I can notice. I do understand about the collecting of battlefield pickups which has been common practice as long as there has been warfare, weapons were valuable and hard to come by, so there was actually a sort of cottage industry selling 'surplus'.
What I was wondering is about sites which were either relatively remote, or in desert regions such as the one we are discussing, where its deposit was not necessarily from battle, but perhaps one of a small group was enroute to or from campaign or skirmishing action. As I mentioned, the archaeologist speaking was discussing a find where both human remains and horse were found together. There was no sword or weapon found, so as discussed, these were likely plundered.
As far as I have understood, the only crusades period swords that have been found were either from those that became trophies, some collected from museums, and some from churches, burials etc. I am just trying to discover whether anyone is aware of any excavation, crusades related, that may have uncovered swords, weapons or armour.
Also, I am hoping that someone who was present in 2003 might recall details of the talk given by the archaeologist on finds from crusades areas, I think it might have been Tyre.
Thank you so much for answering!!! It means a lot!!
All the best,
Jim