Ewart Oakeshott has a very nice theory about find places:
quote "it is necessary to say a word about the places at which swords have been found. to be able to say that a certain sword was found on the site of a certain battle, thereby providing a firm terminus post quem date, is of no use at all. If half-a-dozen swords,an Axe or two, dozens of arrow heads and many spears, were to be found on a battle site,this would be evidence.
But it never happens ; it is only the isolated sword that is generally found in a stream or a pond near the battle-site. After any battle, all the debris of value,-and swords above all weapons were of great value, as well as being easily portable-was collected up; all the Armour, clothes,jewelery or any other move able property left upon the dead was stripped off before the bodies were put into pits.................so it must be with so many medieval swords found on or near places where a battle is known to have been fought; but on the sites of great well known battles-Hastings, Evesham, Bouvines, Crecy, Mauron, Sempach,Agincourt,Beauge, Patay,Mont'Lhery,Nancy, Marignano-swords have not been found at all. I believe that any note that a sword was found "near the site of the battle of X" has to be taken with rather more than a pinch of salt. Unquote
|