Bronze Age weapons in Britain between 1800 and 800 BC gradually became more and more elaborate. It is interesting how these weapons developed. First there was the small hand dagger. These developed into rapiers, which were jabbing and thrusting swords and as such limited in their fighting ability. By the ninth century BC however they began to be replaced by swords with the more familiar leaf shaped blade. These swords could slash at the enemy as well thrust, a great advancement in the destruction of your opponent. Evidently these swords were further modified, their hilts adapted for better and more effective killing. I is interesting that when the slashing sword was developed, winged chapes appeared on the end of sword scabbards. Chapes were like hooks that were on the tip of scabbards. This is fascinating because it meant that on horseback, swords could be drawn while riding by hooking the chape under the left foot. It was the beginning of the calvary.

It was during this period that spearheads were developed. These could be either used for throwing as javelins or for hand to hand fighting. Round metal shield also appeared in Britain before the ninth century BC. Eight shields made from bronze have been found in Ireland. Experiments have shown that bronze, being a soft metal, was useless as a defensive shield. It could not withstand a single sword cut. Like the armour that I described before these shields seem to be solely for ceremonial use. Shields made from leather and wood have been found. A more practical design, and these would have withstood the rigours of battle.

Between the eighth to seventh centuries BC Britain can be divided into approx. three areas in relation to types of arms used. At the top of Britain, from Yorkshire through to Scotland, appears to be the land of the swordsman. Hoards have been found containing up to three swords with the accompanying chapes and rings.

Travelling down the country, in a band that stretched from the south-west to the Thames, and to Wales and South Yorkshire, is the land of the spearsman. These spearheads were known as "Broadward". They were distinctive with large flat blades and pointed barbs. This design of spearhead has been found in tests to be a poor weapon which could not inflict much damage to the enemy. Do you know, with all these experiments done on these weapons, so many seem to be totally useless in warfare. It makes me wonder if there were any actual battles in the Bronze Age. Were all these weapons were just for ceremonial effect? Was there ever wars, did those people ever kill or even harm each other? What was the point of having all these weapons that were useless?

Of course it must be remembered that prehistoric battles were very different to those of later eras. Metal, although unlikely to be actually used in arm to arm combat, must have looked very impressive to the enemy. Homer describes in his epic the "Iliad" how warriors looked so frightening, striking fear into the hearts of their opponents, that the enemy took one look and ran. I would think that was quite common. There was more posing as a blood curdling, fearsome warrior, than actual fighting. When you read about other ancient epics like the Battle of Maldon, there is again a lot more masquerade as fearful, menacing, unnerving warriors rather than actual killing. The more that I research these prehistoric times, the more I am beginning to think that show was more important than you think. Perhaps they had their own form of commercialism.

The third area was in the south east of the country, in a rough line from the Wash in Lincolnshire down to Hampshire. Here swords and spears were both used. This is called the "carps tongue" tradition. A carps tongue sword had a parallel-sided form narrowing to an elongated tip. This sword was able to be used for thrusting as well as slashing. This would have totally revolutionised warfare and the life of Bronze Age man.