Hello, long time lurker first time poster. Would this be considered a historical seax shape?

---

 Attachment: 64.41 KB

Sam,

So you are over here too? Coolness. I am interested in this opinion as well, as this seax is a commission for myself. Sam rocks to all here who are new to his work!

A seax has a triangular cut though section, looks like this one has a traditional shape with a flat blade and a sharpened edge.

:) As Ville says and .........here can you see hove the tang looks like, page 25 in this pdf - file.

Saxes are particularly difficult to do historically correct, in particular if you haven't studied many of them in great detail. So if you don't copy one in every detail, it's generally going to be far off compared to the originals. Compared to saxes in general, the tang is very different, and as Ville noted, seaxes generally have triangular cross-sections, without and secundary bevels. Some have cross-sections, which start flat and curving down towards the edge, but these are broadsaxes. These have very thick (9-10mm) broad and relatively short, heavy blades. In terms of the tangs, these were generally quite long, and glued into a long wooden haft (frequently 18-20cm at least, judging from the remaining lengths), in particular with broadsaxes and longsaxes. Some saxes have metal hilt components (pommels, bolsters). These are generally narrowsaxes, which are earlier then the broadsaxes and langsaxes. These saxes with metal pommels etc. generally had decoration chisels in the blades, in the form of braids, snakes etc.

Good to know, thanks alot guys. I didn't go with a through tang, as I am not too proficient yet with it, and it needs to be super tough so we are going with slab handles on it, not historical but super tough.

AHH EXCELENT! Now I know what people meant when they said "banana shaped handles", thank you very much.