For years, archaeologists have grappled with the identity of a 10 th-Century skeleton found at Prague Castle, and the remains were made use of by both the Nazis and Soviets for ideological purposes.
But efforts to pin a clear ethnic label on a 1,000- year-old remains maybe expose more about us than him.
He lies, his head angled to the left, his ideal hand resting on an iron sword. By his left hand are a set of knives, the skeletal fingers connecting practically as if to touch them.
By his elbow are what could have been a razor in addition to a fire-steel – a middle ages firelighter that was as much a status symbol as anything else.
At his feet are the remains of a little wood pail – similar to those utilized as ceremonial drinking vessels by the Vikings – and an iron axe-head.
But it is the warrior’s sword that stands out. Just under a metre long, it is still a thing of power and appeal in spite of 10 centuries of rust.
Archaeology Was he a Viking?
” The sword is of good quality, most likely made in Western Europe,” stated Jan Frolik, a lecturer in archaeology at the Czech Academy of Sciences.
This kind of sword was utilized by Vikings in Northern Europe, modern-day Germany, England and Central Europe, and by others too.
” So most of his devices is Viking or a minimum of Viking-like. However his nationality is a question,” he added.
It’s a concern that has captivated and confused historians since the warrior skeleton was uncovered at Prague Castle by Ukrainian archaeologist Ivan Borkovsky in 1928.
Borkovsky, an exile from the Russian Civil War, might have been in charge of the excavations. But as a mere assistant to the head of archaeology at Prague’s National Museum, he was prevented from releasing his own conclusions.
Archaeology How skeleton was adopted by Nazis and Soviets
When the Nazis inhabited Prague in 1939, they quickly took on the Viking theory, as it fitted nicely into the German narrative of racial purity.
Vikings, after all, were Nordic and therefore Germanic. For the occupiers, this lazy conflation worked propaganda, given that it enhanced Hitler’s concept that the German race was merely reoccupying ancient land that was rightfully theirs.
Borkovsky was later press-ganged into the service of Nazi academic community, under danger of being sent to a concentration camp, and his heavily modified work published to validate German historic claims.
Right away after the war, as the Soviet impact over Prague became ever-more overbearing, Borkovsky was required to carry out a rushed U-turn, opposing that he had actually been pressured into highlighting the Viking idea.
He quickly cleaned off the older interpretation of his previous employer – that the skeleton in fact came from a crucial member of the early Slav Premyslid dynasty, which ruled Bohemia for more than 400 years till1306
The brand-new threat – this time the Gulag prison camps – receded.
Archaeology Where was he from?
Seventy years on, archaeologists such as Jan Frolik are free to make judgments based on science, instead of ideology.
” We understand for sure he wasn’t born here in Bohemia,” he said, explaining that analysis of strontium radioactive isotopes in the warrior’s teeth showed he had actually matured in Northern Europe, more than likely someplace on the south coast of the Baltic Sea or maybe Denmark.
But that’s prime Viking area, surely?
” Yes, however even if he was born in the Baltic doesn’t immediately mean he was a Viking. At that time the south coast of the Baltic was likewise house to Slavs, Baltic people and others.”
He thinks the warrior from the north – who died of unknown causes at the age of about 50 – concerned Prague in early their adult years, to serve in the ducal retinue either of Borivoj I, the first duke of Bohemia and progenitor of the Premyslid dynasty, or his oldest son and successor, Spytihnev I.
The Premyslids established Prague Castle as the centre of the new Bohemian state, and the warrior’s burial location in the centre of their castle suggests he was a male of some prominence.
Gazing at the skeleton of the unidentified soldier, framed in glass in the chilly subterranean corridors of the Old Royal Palace, it’s tough not to posture the very same, basically unanswerable question: Who precisely was this male, with his Baltic birth place, Viking-like sword, and Bohemian masters?
” Just as today individuals can have numerous identifications according to their circumstance, so they would have performed in the past,” stated Prof Nicholas Saunders, an expert in 20 th-Century dispute, archaeology and anthropology at the University of Bristol.
Prof Saunders recently released a post on the skeleton in Antiquity, together with Dr Frolik and Prof Volker Heyd, an archaeologist at the University of Helsinki, who is presently working on DNA analysis that could reveal more about the warrior’s ethnic origins. More, but not whatever.
” This man’s heterogeneous collection of things showed his numerous characters, possibly, rather than stating ‘oh he was a Viking’ or ‘oh he was a Slav’,” stated Prof Saunders.
” Individuals develop their own recognitions according to where they are in time and space, and this person was undoubtedly a major player – if not the significant player – for a number of years.”
Simply put, the objects reflected his life.
You may also like: