I need pictures of anglo-saxons and tattooed elves (tribal or civilized).
I will post what I have in the meantime.
There is a particular picture I am looking for with an anglo-saxon king gifting a loyal thegn with a sword.
Some of these might actually be elves with body paint, but no matter.
Anybody out there?
>>47668598
>>47668616
>>47668944
REEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEE
>>47668598
>>47669324
top kek, anon
>>47669390
I have their records of medicine and plants too
>>47669431
This is how they generally wrote after Latin died out as the common written language there. They adopted the same alphabet however with loan symbols from their old language to better suit their Germanic speech
>ywn be an /fa/ anglo saxon
>>47669452
Some warriors
>>47669453
>/fa/ anglo saxon
Vandals do it better, senpai
>>47669452
Would be cool to have them splattered about on ornamental armor and shields
>>47669485
I really do love the vandal helmet, it's fucking beautiful
>>47669526
The longbow came after the Anglo-Saxons - thanks to Welsh influence - but it is undoubtedly English today
>>47669551
I like it for it's /fa/ value, but in combat... I'd be worried those narrow eye-slits would narrow my vision or possibly shift on me and obstruct my vision.
Here is the "Seax" weapon that the Angles and Saxons both were known for. Of course their joint descendants continued to use them. They were sidearms though, and often accompanied units of spearmen
>>47669600
Here is how it evolved over time, pretty neat
>>47669637
This is how the Moors represented the Vandals in their art. They called them "Wild Men". Can't imagine having pale, completely foreign looking and sounding barbarians showing up in a matter of a few years and overturning centuries long Roman rule
>>47670199
OP here. Whoops, last one was not an elf. I think this is my last tattooed elf pic I have. If anyone has any more I'd be much obliged. Thanks for the anglo-saxon and vandal pics.
I don't mind the elves but I was hoping to see more Anglo-Saxon art.
>>47669526
>Calling insular-g "yogh" before the Middle English period
Get good, sonny-Jim. g ≠ ȝ.
>>47671593
not him but what would you call it?
>>47671720
Well… "g", which should surprise nobody.
Now if you're actually talking about the form of "g" that was used for writing Anglo-Saxon, with its characteristic horizontal bar at minim-height and looped descender (a form derived from Roman half-uncial in late antiquity), you call it "insular-g" to distinguish it from "carolingian-g", the form with rounded bowls both above and below the foot-line.
>>47668944
This? >>47669911
>>47669485
>Imagining taking that helmet off
>Ripping out chunks of beard
Good lord the pain would be incredible.
>>47669191
would marry/10
>>47669485
>vandals
that's a vendel helmet, named after where it was found, it has no relation to the vandals
http://youtu.be/cvKRbi2ovDY
Saxons go & pls stay go
>>47669485
>>47669551
Vandals and Vendel are two quite different things.
>>47672365
The people in that image are horrible Frenchmen, I think.
At least it's from a series of french history books for kids.
>>47672539
>butted mail problems
![A9a [Desktop Resolution] (5).jpg](https://i.imgur.com/xaEGpCz.jpg "A9a [Desktop Resolution] (5).jpg")
>>47674990
That's Dave Roper and his Sutton Hoo kit in the middle there, so that much is Anglo-Saxon at least. The books either showing kids things across the channel, or taking some liberties.
Shield and helmet originals.
>>47675056
Is there really evidence that many of the soldiers would have ha face masks like this, or is there one major example they're extrapolating from?
>>47672539
First glance makes him look like he is sitting in a wheelchair.
>>47675123
For the A-S, it is pretty much this one helmet (Sutton-Hoo). There were links between the East Anglians and the Swedish Vednel culture which produced helmets like>>47669485
>>47672365
>>47668616
However these helmets are very early in the Anglo-Saxon period, dating to the 6/7thC. Both the Sutton-Hoo and the Vendel/Valsgarde sites were royal burials so this kit is not exactly always representative of equipment for non-aristocratic warriors. If you look at Anglo-Saxon helmets as a whole (including the Pioneer/Coppergate style of which the pioneer helmet is contemporary to these helmets), the overwhelming majority only have nasal bars for face protecton.
>>47675123
Well, there's one very well known original with a face mask ( >>47675073 ), which that helmet is a direct repro of.
I don't know if there are any other face mask helmets found from Anglo-Saxon regions, but if we look at >>47672365 no-one else has gone that route. The extensive nasals, chin guards, etc on some of them do match features on some Vendel helmets, so they're ok for the period at least, but I don't know how much extrapolation/interpolation/borrowing has occurred.
>>47675276
AFAIK helmets (and armor) in general were a upper-class thing in early medieval period, due to scarcity of iron. Maybe not stricte aristocratic, but certainly only proto-nobility warior class could affort those. Most fighters of the era were unarmored, or "armored" in padded clothing and the likes.
The reason behind all those pics is because reenactors, or people in general, like to be the cool ones. So we end with hosts of warriors equipped uniformly in what would be considered a princely arms and armor in that era.
>>47675292
These guys (http://www.wulfheodenas.com/) base there kit on the individual graves from Sutton-Hoo and the Vendel/Valsgarde sites.
There reason that those helmets look similar to vendel helms is because that is what they are explicitly modelled on, rather than any English finds. The uniting factor is the trade and cultural links that tied East Anglia and the Vendels in Eastern Sweden together.
>>47675337
There is a fair bit of truth to what you say in re-enactors beelining for the fancy or exotic rather than what was most common in period. I should know as it is my job these days to keep my group on the straight and narrow.
During the pagan/early conversion periods a lot of wargear was less common/more expensive than later on. Helmets and maille were mostly the preserve of the warrior-nobility.
However there is no evidence at all for padding used in the Northern Europe before at least the 11thC, either as armour or under maille. It is also woth pointing out that in this period most warriors were what we would call nobility or gentry. They may be unarmoured gentry but hey are still near the top of the social pile. There are some fascinating weapon graves that give an interesting cross-section of equipment levels but almost have some expensive jewellry. Soldiers were a wealthy bunch on the whole.
However helmets, swords, maille all get much cheaper and widely available as time goes on. The later Saxon Fyrd was a well-equipped force of mounted infantry in maille and helmets. For re-enactors we probably have too much armour in the early period, and not enough in the later. Such is life.
>>47671978
>Well… "g", which should surprise nobody.
So how'd they get "yogh"? It surprises it's just "g" since the caption is about letters lost.
>>47676430
In Old English, the "g" made different sounds depending on its position in the word. The hard /g/ sound (voiced velar stop) initially before back-vowels, a palatized /j/ sound (English "y") before front vowels, and a voiced velar fricative /ɣ/ when in the middle of the word and flanked by vowels; also the voiced palato-alveolar affricate /dʒ/ (the modern English "j" or "soft g" sound) when in combination ("-cg").
Word (meaning) … pronunciation:
=========================
god ("God") … /god/ (like modern English "goad")
gōd ("good") … /go:d/ (same as above, but hold the vowel a beat longer)
dæġ ("day") … /dæy/ (similar to mod.E. "day", but with the vowel from "cat" and the y-sound on the end clearly and emphatically pronounced)
ġifu ("gift") … /'ji-fu/ (YEE-foo)
morgen ("morrow") … /ˈmor-ɣɛn/ (MOR-[throat clearing sound]en)
ecg ("edge") … /ɛdʒ/ (just like modern English)
To an Old English speaker, this wasn't one letter making three or four different sounds. It was a letter with a certain pronunciation that just changed naturally depending on the letters around it. Three allophones (the physical sounds /g/, /j/, and /ɣ/) associated with one phoneme (mental idea of a "letter").
Now enter the Normans in 1066, who sweep in, conquer the English, and institute French as the court language. Norman scribes venerated all things Latin and disdained all things Saxon. They're the reason we stopped using æ and ð and ƿ, and why a word like "love" (old English "lufian", pronounced /'lu:-vi-an/ came to be spelled with an "-ove" when that's clearly a u-sound, not an o-sound. They did this because Normans, following the Latin style, wrote the /v/ sound with a "u" (the English used "f"), but the word "luue" was hard for them to read and so they just went, "fuck it, we'll write the u-sound with an o". That's the kind of respect that the Normans had for English.
(more)
>>47677649
In the Middle English period, Norman scribes kept only two extra English letters, and only because they felt they were necessary: the first was þ (thorn), felt to be necessary for writing English th-sounds (which was a stupid and nonsensical choice — they got rid of wynn because it was a rune and replaced it with Latin-derived w, but then they ditch Latin-derived eth and keep the thorn-rune?). The second was one that the French more or less invented, thinking that English g was different from their own Latin g. They named it "yogh" /joɣ/ after the two funny sounds they heard it making in Old English, /j/ and /ɣ/. And they twisted it from a flat-topped half-uncial g-shape into a cursive-z shape, ȝ.
And then they spent the next couple centuries debasing their own hand-writing style, until þ was indistinguishable from y, and ȝ from z, and both letters were just sort of naturally forgotten. And now we have "ye olde shoppe" (that y is a þ) and "MacKenzie" (that z is a ȝ), and confusion reigns.
Technically those are medieval russians armors but it's pretty close desu
>>47677698
Which armor?
>>47678238
>Priest trying to convert pagan.
>>47669600
>I like it for it's /fa/ value, but in combat... I'd be worried those narrow eye-slits would narrow my vision or possibly shift on me and obstruct my vision.
People severely underestimate how much you see out of many styles of helmet.
That one has much larger eye holes, and they're placed closer to the face, than you see on a lot of later helmets, and even something like a pig-faced bascinet has surprisingly good visibility (in the front arc.)
![08[1].jpg](https://i.imgur.com/Oy7SG5E.jpg "08[1].jpg")