North German Iron Age armies and their archers

[Erpingham]

Recent reading on the archaeology of Viking archery has led inevitably to a Iron Age period in North Germany and Southern Scandinavia.  Weapon archaeology for this period is particularly plentiful and a popular topic for archaeologists of the area.  A lot of papers are available online and , though many of the more detailed are in Scandinavian languages and German, numerous English summaries exist.

A brief methodological caveat is required.  A great deal of consensus exists on the interpretation of the material among archeologists.  This can give a tendency to interpret things in line with a priori assumptions (e.g. the three part nature of armies, which derives ultimately from Tacitus).  Also, weapons burials are interpreted perhaps more literally than modern British archaeology favours.  So, critical reading is needed.

As an example of a passage that looks particularly useful to wargamers

The vast amount of arrows that appears in the bog finds marks the appearance of a special unit – the archers. Archers had long been a part of the Roman auxiliary-units, but around AD 200 we can detect their presence in the southern Scandinavian armies as well. Their presence in the army indicates that the military tactics changed towards a looser formation with smaller mobile units. I totally agree with J. Engström that the archers primarily play their tactical part in the introductory phase of the battle, where they send a shower of arrows over the opponents from a distance of at least 150 metres by shooting 45° up into the air. As such, the archers function as a support weapon for the infantry. 

Xenia Pauli Jensen "Use of archers"

Pauli Jensen is perhaps the expert on archery finds of the period but there is a lot of speculation here.  Her general view is that the 3rd century sees the rise of "special forces" of archers (perhaps units or bands would have been a less confusing terminology).  A similar idea occurs in Rau's work, where he suggests "professional and trained" bands of maybe 50 archers in armies.  He also suggests they may have used rapid shooting to create what we might recognise as an arrowstorm effect (albeit on a small scale).  Given the limited nature of the evidence (bows and bundles of arrows), it is hard to be definitive.  Were the archers concentrated together?  Were they scattered among the warbands present?  Did they engage in maximum range dropping shots or short range "sniping" from behind a shieldwall, or mixed in a looser formation?

Overall, there some interesting evidence to speculate on and those so minded could easily assemble wargames forces along these lines.  Given the geography and the date, these finds might also be interesting to those thinking about the Saxon Shore and how early Germanic raiders may have looked.

Here is a collection of links for those who want to pursue further.

https://www.researchgate.net/publication/313903837_North_Germanic_Archery_the_practical_approach_-_results_and_perspectives

https://www.academia.edu/1482958/The_Use_of_Archers_in_the_Northern_Germanic_Armies_Evidence_from_the_Danish_War_Booty_Sacrifices

Also of wider interest than the title suggests:

https://www.researchgate.net/publication/280245283_Remarks_on_finds_of_wooden_quivers_from_Nydam_Mose_Southern_Jutland

For a general perspective on thinking about Southern Scandinavian warfare in the Iron Age

https://www.academia.edu/1970096/Weapon_graves_in_Iron_Age_Norway_1_550_AD

And one we have considered before ( http://soa.org.uk/sm/index.php?topic=4776.msg63082#msg63082 )

https://www.academia.edu/9660359/Mission_Impossible_The_Ejsb%C3%B8l_Army_Organization_Attack_and_Defeat

[Nick Harbud]

The vast amount of arrows that appears in the bog finds marks the appearance of a special unit – the archers. Archers had long been a part of the Roman auxiliary-units, but around AD 200 we can detect their presence in the southern Scandinavian armies as well.

Not only that, but catching up on series 4 of The Last Kingdom, I notice that specialised archer units must have been part of all Danish and, especially, Norse-Irish armies.  For some reason, the stupid Anglo-Saxons never realised just how good these guys were (having been trained on the Western Front in 1917) and were never tempted to seek a counter-measure...

[Mark Hygate]

....................... Their presence in the army indicates that the military tactics changed towards a looser formation with smaller mobile units. .........................

What a rediculous and specious conclusion to draw and disseminate!

Critical reading needed indeed.....

This ranks alongside all those lovely 'history' programmes I have seen in the past where the archeologist sees something not easily explainable and suddenly it becomes 'religious' in nature.

[Justin Swanton]

....................... Their presence in the army indicates that the military tactics changed towards a looser formation with smaller mobile units. .........................

What a rediculous and specious conclusion to draw and disseminate!

Critical reading needed indeed.....

This ranks alongside all those lovely 'history' programmes I have seen in the past where the archeologist sees something not easily explainable and suddenly it becomes 'religious' in nature.

My favourite is when someone says a particular formation was 'flexible' which means it was effective but he has no idea why it was effective.

[Imperial Dave]

or how it worked or what it looked like

[Justin Swanton]

or how it worked or what it looked like

[Imperial Dave]

well when you drill down into such things.....

[Erpingham]

This ranks alongside all those lovely 'history' programmes I have seen in the past where the archeologist sees something not easily explainable and suddenly it becomes 'religious' in nature.

It is a well-worn joke among archaeologists that anything that they can't identify is "ritual".  Unlike religious, ritual is much vaguer - religious, magical or social rituals could be implied. 

[Erpingham]

I think what we are seeing are the perils of an abundance of archaeological material from a prehistoric society.  We can describe their war equipment with some confidence .  We can study how it was made and make replicas to assess performance.   How they organised themselves and what tactics they used, however, are quite speculative. 

[Jim Webster]

This ranks alongside all those lovely 'history' programmes I have seen in the past where the archeologist sees something not easily explainable and suddenly it becomes 'religious' in nature.

It is a well-worn joke among archaeologists that anything that they can't identify is "ritual".  Unlike religious, ritual is much vaguer - religious, magical or social rituals could be implied. 

Wasn't it a Monty Python cartoon where a statue loses a thumb and it the course of time archaeologists reconstruct it as the snout of a dinosaur?

[Imperial Dave]

sounds about right Jim!

[Mark Hygate]

This ranks alongside all those lovely 'history' programmes I have seen in the past where the archeologist sees something not easily explainable and suddenly it becomes 'religious' in nature.

It is a well-worn joke among archaeologists that anything that they can't identify is "ritual".  Unlike religious, ritual is much vaguer - religious, magical or social rituals could be implied. 

You are entirely correct - I almost realised that I had picked the wrong word beginning with 'r'!!

[aligern]

There is a possible interpretation that the German armies described by Tacitus have a lot of men who throw light javelins. I do wonder if these are the weapons hardened in the fire that  are spoken of. ( Of course they might be clubs hardened thus) or both clubs and javelins could be treated this way.  Assuming that the Germans do have large numbers of skirmishers with several javelins each this would most likely be an early phase of the battle, with the objective of demoralising the enemy. They would be operating like Roman velites. As German armies are described as operating in tribal and kin groups (see for example Ariovistus army) the likelihood is that javelin throwers would be with their group and would retire to its rear when their supply was exhausted. The move to archery would parallel that of the Roman velites who become legionaries and are replaced by mercenary archers and slingers.  Aren't the slingers on Trajan's column shown as grouped together? So I would support the possibilty that archers operated in groups and supported the separate kin groups.
Roy