Ancient Armour and Weapons in Europe: From the Iron Period of the Northern Nations to the End of the Thirteenth CenturyHewitt, John
History
Ancient Armour and Weapons in Europe: From the Iron Period of the Northern Nations to the End of the Thirteenth Century
Hewitt, John
Armor; Weapons
By whatever race Europe may have been originally peopled, this
portion of the world seems to have been swept by successive tribes
of adventurers from Central Asia. The so-called "Allophylian race"
was displaced by the Celts; the Sclaves then drove the Celts to the
west, and the Tshuds into the cold regions of the north; and lastly,
the Teutonic conquerors, dispossessing at will the nations that
had preceded them, laid the foundation of that vast social empire
which at present, in Europe, in America, in Asia, and in the new
world of the South Seas, rules the destinies of half the globe. For
the purposes of art, the long period of time at which we have so
rapidly glanced has been divided into the Stone Period, the Bronze
Period, and the Iron Period; names derived from the materials which
were in _general_ use during the progress of the various races
towards civilization;--a division which, though, from its great
comprehensiveness, necessarily open to some objection, seems likely
to be of much use in simplifying a study hitherto embarrassing alike
to the general reader, and to those whose task it is to extend the
range of our knowledge.
With the nations of the Stone Period and the Bronze Period we do not
purpose to occupy ourselves; not that the relics of their times are
of an inferior interest, but that, in commencing with the days of the
iron-workers, which for general purposes we assume to be identical
with the retirement of the Romans beyond the Alps, and the domination
of the northern nations in the centre and west of Europe, we feel
that we have a task before us already much greater than we can hope
to fulfil, either to the satisfaction of our readers, or our own. If
we leave much undone, we shall endeavour, in that we do, to be exact.
Modern archæology differs from the old antiquarianism especially in
this,--that whatever it contributes to knowledge is required to be
scrupulously true. A monkish chronicler of the fourteenth century is
no longer held to be an authority for the affairs of the twelfth; an
illuminated Froissart of the fifteenth century is no more permitted
to supply us with portraits of the Black Prince, or the costume of
Duguesclin. Our pictures are no longer copies of copies; neither are
they mere _versions_ of old art. We must have line for line, point
for point. This is essential, for two reasons: we are freed from the
danger of any wrong interpretation of an historic fact, and we keep
in view the characteristic art of the period under examination. The
importance of this practice admitted, we shall be excused for stating
that almost all the illustrations of this work have been drawn by
the writer;--when from manuscripts, the collection and folio of the
volume have been carefully recorded, so that the truthfulness of the
copy may be readily tested;--after the drawings had been transferred
to the wood, they were carefully examined before the graver was
permitted to commence its work; and if, in spite of every precaution,
Public-domain text, read in full here on John Shaqi.
Reviews
Reviews
No reviews yet
Be the first to share your thoughts on this work.
Join the Discussion
Join the discussion
Sign in to leave a comment or review.
Sign InorCreate an account