Nice little article (https://journals.scholarsportal.info/pdf/23530707/v23i0001/13_tdoamdacobti.xml) on a medieval casualty. Very reminiscent of Visby and the wound pattern. Classic example of overkill head trauma too. As often the case, you find yourself wondering what kind of helmet he was wearing. Bought from a supplier who got very little repeat custom but at least no-body brought stuff back and asked for a refund?
Quote from: Erpingham on November 14, 2017, 02:16:59 PM
Nice little article (https://journals.scholarsportal.info/pdf/23530707/v23i0001/13_tdoamdacobti.xml) on a medieval casualty. Very reminiscent of Visby and the wound pattern. Classic example of overkill head trauma too. As often the case, you find yourself wondering what kind of helmet he was wearing. Bought from a supplier who got very little repeat custom but at least no-body brought stuff back and asked for a refund?
I probably laughed more than I should have at that last comment ;D
Quote from: Erpingham on November 14, 2017, 02:16:59 PM
As often the case, you find yourself wondering what kind of helmet he was wearing.
One that fell off prior to the head-wounds, I suspect.
Quote
Bought from a supplier who got very little repeat custom but at least no-body brought stuff back and asked for a refund?
I think the supplier would have been seriously worried if anyone did.
Quote from: Patrick Waterson on November 14, 2017, 07:57:49 PM
Quote from: Erpingham on November 14, 2017, 02:16:59 PM
As often the case, you find yourself wondering what kind of helmet he was wearing.
One that fell off prior to the head-wounds, I suspect.
Perhaps so in this case, as those seem to be pretty unimpeded sword blows. But, given the prevalence of cranial trauma in battle casualty burials, does this indicate helmet loss was a commonplace? In some cases, we are probably dealing with hits from heavier weapons, like halberds, or penetrating ones like the spike on the back of a poleaxe, which defeated the armour .
Quote from: Erpingham on November 15, 2017, 11:01:57 AM
But, given the prevalence of cranial trauma in battle casualty burials, does this indicate helmet loss was a commonplace?
An interesting thought. One would expect the helmet to stay on while the owner remained upright, but a style of helmet which sat on the head as opposed to fitting snugly around it might be displaced if, say, the owner's head were to jerk backwards upon receipt of a leg wound. Or some helmets might be easier to knock off than others, but if so one would expect some mention in battle accounts and - not least - sagas.
In the case of the deceased, it would appear that someone initially went to work on his leg and then he or someone else switched to the exposed and convenient head. This suggests to me that the deceased's head protection absented itself between these two occurrences, or the first opponent was of very limited stature.
Quote
In some cases, we are probably dealing with hits from heavier weapons, like halberds, or penetrating ones like the spike on the back of a poleaxe, which defeated the armour.
Indeed, as there seems little point in devising an armour-piercing weapon and then not using it to pierce armour. The deceased's head wounds were, in the opinion of the article writers, inflicted by sword-strokes, which is why I assume any head protection went missing prior to their infliction.
Quote from: Erpingham on November 14, 2017, 02:16:59 PM
As often the case, you find yourself wondering what kind of helmet he was wearing. Bought from a supplier who got very little repeat custom but at least no-body brought stuff back and asked for a refund?
This reminds me of when I first went sky diving.
The guy packing my chute noticed me studying the process, and quipped: "don't worry, never had any complaints."
More seriously, the conclusion of the paper suggests that the soldier was no longer standing, and was taking defensive wounds to the arms, before the head trauma commenced.
So he was already incapacitated and possibly disarmed.
Also from the conclusion, one wonders what the point of head trauma blow 3 to 5 was, because it was unnecessary/effectively post mortem.
perhaps the dead guy had upset somebody?
Or might we be back to the concept of berserking? The archetypal berserker, having started, tends not to know when to stop, or at least can be reluctant to do so.
Or it might just be someone making sure, cf. Macbeth:
"But Banquo's safe?"
"Aye - with twenty trenched gashes in his head,
The least a death to nature."
Attributing the head wounds to the culturally specific berserker is, alas, to underestimate the general savagery of medieval combat. It isnt uncommon to find overkill like this, hacking away after the opponent is clearly down and pretty obviously to a rational observer dead. The victor could have been a perfectly ordinary chivalrous knight when the red mist had cleared.
Quote from: Erpingham on November 20, 2017, 10:04:06 AM
Attributing the head wounds to the culturally specific berserker is, alas, to underestimate the general savagery of medieval combat. It isnt uncommon to find overkill like this, hacking away after the opponent is clearly down and pretty obviously to a rational observer dead. The victor could have been a perfectly ordinary chivalrous knight when the red mist had cleared.
Indeed he might just have been the victim of his ex-wife ;)
It might also be that the head wounds were inflicted by a second warrior as the combat passed over the dead man? If a man goes down fighting in the front rank it might be difficult for the man who brought him low to finish him without becoming a victim to the next enemy in the file, so step over him and let him be butchered by your supporter following up who can bend to attend.
Roy
I think I like Roy's idea of what may have happened. Either way, having been rendered prone would explain the absence of a helmet just as things became personal and terminal.
Although if he was prone, any one of the lesions 1-5 would have been difficult to deliver... And given that the report says any one of lesion 1, 2 and 5 would have been fatal, it was as though he was held upright (and helmet less) to be mutilated some more.
So... Lesion 8, 9 and he's kneeling, helmet goes missing (and his shield if he had one because its not on his forearm), then any combination of 3, 4 and defensive lesions 6, 7 and he's not dead yet but not having fun. After either 1, 2 or 5, its hard to imagine he'd not prone and dead. And the last two are just for unpleasantness?
It may be a bit harsh to ascribe wounds to 'unpleasantness' . When everybody is worked up and its kill or be killed I suspect that combatants keep hitting out because its not a cold hard decision that an oppinent is dead. Such action might be stopped and diverted if a new opponent closes with you . Men following behind the file leaders would have no such interruption from an enemy to the front and would be wound up , excited, scared angry etc.
I do also wonder how quickly killer wounds actually dispose of opponents. Presumably a deep axe blow to the head instantaneously stops a man from fighting, but other wounds that might be fatal in minutes will leave him still dangerous and thus worthy of further blows. One is reminded of why the British military moved to .45 revolvers, because ( supposedly) in the Indian Mutiny, officers could put two bullets in an opponent charging them with a sword, but this would not stop a worked up swordsman reaching and getting his blow in.
Roy
It would be pretty unpleasant to be on the receiving end, though.
It is a fair point that the standard (TV/movies) view of shot/stabbed/brushed with sword = fall down instantaneously, neatly and quietly dead is a long way from what would really have happened.
Also, if a man is down but still moving, even if not consciously acting, the tendency is to strike until he stops moving and then give him one or two to make sure. This is more evident among undisciplined troops, as disciplined troops tend to have a limited and effective repertoire of killer strikes (which helps them to achieve results with minimal expenditure of energy) and the more experienced they are the better they know when an opponent is no longer going to be a problem.
So our tentative conclusion thus far is 'excited overkill', probably by a second-rank enthusiast (or even two) with more brawn than technique.
Quote from: RichT on November 21, 2017, 09:24:27 AM
It is a fair point that the standard (TV/movies) view of shot/stabbed/brushed with sword = fall down instantaneously, neatly and quietly dead is a long way from what would really have happened.
Very fair point.
A friend ( and soa member) who had done several years of high level reenactment explained that the damage to the heads of the Towton prisoners migh well be the result of attempts to finish them off whilst they were still wearing helmets. Picking up Richard and Patrick's points about how long it takes to die,piercing blows to the heart or massive blows to the head kill very quickly, anywhere else and the man is still dangerous.
Roy
I've had another look at the report and also relooked at some notes on the Visby finds. Visby is a bit unusual in that it has relatively high levels of post cranial trauma (this may be a sampling thing - its by a long way the biggest sample we have from a single battle). But interpreters of the remains have suggested a lot of leg trauma isn't consciously aiming at the legs but swings at the upper body missing the aiming point or deflecting onto the legs (e.g. off the shield)*. So our dead man may be defending himself face to face and is crippled by unlucky shots. Also in the course of this action, his shield gives way and he takes a parry wound in his left arm. He may be on his knees by this point, maybe lost his helmet. The attacker gives him a well placed blow on his front left, followed by a second closely after. Our casualty is now rapidly dying but to make sure his attacker keeps hacking at his head as he goes down face first. The Visby report notes that massive penetrating head blows often came in groups, and reckons they represent that an attacker who is also defending can't go all out for the killer blow whereas, if his opponent is no longer defending himself effectively, he can hack away. This may have been the fate of our casualty.
* Though there is one skeleton that has had both legs amputated by a single blow :o
This sounds, at least to me, very like what may have happened.