Ritual killing of swords in burials

Pukka Bundook · 29th September 2008, 03:46 AM

Jim,

I too have heard on occasion of a semi-finished sword being placed in the grave, and on one occasion, of a sword that was obviously old and worn out, with the blade mended in the middle with another piece of iron riveted along one side as a joiner.
(let's hope the dead fellow didn't have much opposition when he got where he was going!.......not with a sword like that!)

I have had a lively debate elswhere, re. Anglo-Saxon swords. It was presented as a case, that because there have been less found in graves in the north and west of England, this means they weren't there.
I would counter this by saying that since the north and west were "frontier territory" (Britons (Welch) in west, Picts in North and Irish raiders both places,) I would submit that swords would not often be buried with the dead, as they were needed by the living.

(this is just a long-winded way of saying I agree with you re. the reasons for not killing/burying a sword!)

I gather from Hilda E Davidson's "Sword in Anglo-Saxon England", that in this Anglo-Saxon period, that while some swords were definitely "sacrificed," most swords were buried with the utmost care, protected in its scabbard, and often wrapped in cloth for further protection, or on occasion even in what appears to have been a wooden box, judging by a row of iron nails in the grave, over the sword.
Of course, by the time of the Viking raids, England was nominally Christian, and burials with grave-goods was fast on its way out.
In Nordic lands,(nominally pagan) the killing of weapons appears to have continued quite a while longer, but was by no means the only practice.

All the best,

R.

29th September 2008, 03:46 AM	#4
Pukka Bundook Member Join Date: Jan 2007 Posts: 803	Jim, I too have heard on occasion of a semi-finished sword being placed in the grave, and on one occasion, of a sword that was obviously old and worn out, with the blade mended in the middle with another piece of iron riveted along one side as a joiner. (let's hope the dead fellow didn't have much opposition when he got where he was going!.......not with a sword like that!) I have had a lively debate elswhere, re. Anglo-Saxon swords. It was presented as a case, that because there have been less found in graves in the north and west of England, this means they weren't there. I would counter this by saying that since the north and west were "frontier territory" (Britons (Welch) in west, Picts in North and Irish raiders both places,) I would submit that swords would not often be buried with the dead, as they were needed by the living. (this is just a long-winded way of saying I agree with you re. the reasons for not killing/burying a sword!) I gather from Hilda E Davidson's "Sword in Anglo-Saxon England", that in this Anglo-Saxon period, that while some swords were definitely "sacrificed," most swords were buried with the utmost care, protected in its scabbard, and often wrapped in cloth for further protection, or on occasion even in what appears to have been a wooden box, judging by a row of iron nails in the grave, over the sword. Of course, by the time of the Viking raids, England was nominally Christian, and burials with grave-goods was fast on its way out. In Nordic lands,(nominally pagan) the killing of weapons appears to have continued quite a while longer, but was by no means the only practice. All the best, R.