I am about to start making my second knife. This time I want to make a broken-back seax. I have read some of the articles here on myArmoury and visited some other sites, so I have a rough idea of what I want. I will make this knife using a chunk of 1095 steel that is about 8 inches long, 2 inches deep and 1/4 inch thick. I also have 1095 that is 4x2 and 1/8 inch thick, so I can use that if dimensions are better for an historically accurate seax. I know that 1095 is probably not historically accurate, but I am slowly working up to getting things right. At the moment, I am concentrating on learning the processes of knife making. I have a few new scars and burns to show for it.....and one knife.

My questions are:

1. where can I find more details on various types of seax. I have the book
Knives and Scabbards (Medieval Finds from Excavations in London) by J. Cowgill, M. de Neergaard, and N. Griffiths, but I don't recall much on the seax in there.

2. Am I right in thinking that the handle of many of the seax (what is the plural?) seem to be driven onto the tang. For example, a chunk of maple may be drilled out slightly and then pounded onto the tang. This almost sounds like the same system I use to put handles on my files. For me, the handle is the most difficult part of knife making. I need to really plan this carefully. I intend to use maple for the handle and some bronze if I can find it. If I can't find decent bronze, I will use brass.

Swimming upstream in the dark in what looks suspiciously like a cavern of ignorance,

Philip

Phillip-

Here are some good threads I found using the search function:

http://www.myArmoury.com/talk/viewtopic.php?t...light=seax
http://www.myArmoury.com/talk/viewtopic.php?t...mp;start=0
http://www.myArmoury.com/talk/viewtopic.php?t...light=seax

On that last link, be sure to check out the links on the bottom of each post by Jeroen Zuiderwijk, in particular the zip file about seaxes. It's got a ton of great info and pics.

Oops! Almost forgot this:

http://www.myArmoury.com/feature_seax.html

-Tim

Hi Jeroen,

Thanks for the advice and information. When I am ready to make the handle, would you mind if I contact you for specific advice about how to burn that handle in and use the glue?

Quote:

2. Am I right in thinking that the handle of many of the seax (what is the plural?) seem to be driven onto the tang. For example, a chunk of maple may be drilled out slightly and then pounded onto the tang.

I suspect the tangs were generally burned into the hilt, and then after shaping glued using either tar, resin or casein glue. I personally use that method, and it works really well. Burning the tang into the hilt takes a bit of practice to figure it out, but it's really quick and easy when you get the hang of it.

Another good book to look in may be "Daggers and fighting knives of the Western World" by Harold Peterson. If I recall, he has a good section on the seax.

Also 1095 is about as close to a historical metal as you are going to find without smelting it yourself. it is simply carbon and iron. I will warn you that it can be difficult to harden properly if your blade is thick. 1075 and 1084 have more manganese, and harden a little better.

If you are forging, that 8"X2"x1/4" piece could be made into a blade 2" wide and over 12" long with a forged distal taper, The 4" long piece could probably be stretched to a blade 8" long and 1 3/4" wide at the widest. (by forging to just under a 1/4" x 1 1/2" rectangle and then forging in the edge bevel.

Ken,

Interesting that you should mention the hardening. The first knife I made was 1095 and 1/4 inch thick. After I removed all the excess stock and had the knife as I wanted it....I heated it in a charcoal fire until it was demagnatized, which I understand is the critical point. I waited a bit after that...10 minutes or so, pulled it out and quenched it in brine with one quick dunk all within one second or as close to one second as I could get. Then I slowly drew the heat out by lightly touching it with a wet rag and testing the sizzle and evaporation for 15 minutes....by that time it was about the temperature where I could hold it in my hand if I juggled it a bit. Then I stuck it into my preheated oven at 400 F and let it cook for 2 hours. Then I pulled it out of the oven and let it air cool.

After that whole process, I felt like I was doing something, but I don't know if I was doing the right thing. I don't know if it hardened properly. I don't have a testing kit. It seems to hold an edge well. I can buy a kit for about US$75. So, perhaps I should invest in one.

Thanks for the recommendation about the book and the forging. I have a feeling forging a blade is just around the corner.

Philip

Ken Nelson wrote:

Another good book to look in may be "Daggers and fighting knives of the Western World" by Harold Peterson. If I recall, he has a good section on the seax. Also 1095 is about as close to a historical metal as you are going to find without smelting it yourself. it is simply carbon and iron. I will warn you that it can be difficult to harden properly if your blade is thick. 1075 and 1084 have more manganese, and harden a little better. If you are forging, that 8"X2"x1/4" piece could be made into a blade 2" wide and over 12" long with a forged distal taper, The 4" long piece could probably be stretched to a blade 8" long and 1 3/4" wide at the widest. (by forging to just under a 1/4" x 1 1/2" rectangle and then forging in the edge bevel.

1095 is probably a great "modern replica" substitute knife/ quality cutting tool material actually. It naturally ages to a dark to gray patina unless you polish and buff it frequently and obsess over it maintenance wise. (It is a favorite in modern pattern welding for the darker regions of a composite blade.) 1/4" spine thickness seems really thick if you mean for it to be a flat grind general purpose knife that also cleaves well. (Look at a chef's knife of roughly similar proportions and you will probably find closer to a 1/8" spine, 3/16" should be adequate for moderate thrusting strength.) Then again, you could fuller one that thick near the spine and then drastically reduce thickness for most of the blade. 12" may be historically plausible for combat, but 16" plus blade length is what I thought was the shorter end of the range of historic seaxes that look obviously combat dedicated. I don't know that a super stout spine makes much sense if grip plus blade are limited to 12" length (by heat treat oven?)


I have not tried or seen the magnet test done by a veteran. All magnets affordable to me become non magnetic (curry temperature effect) at temperatures way too low for heat treat. (Two magnets will not stick together in a forge enviornment at appropriate temperature for steel heat treat after an extremely short amount of time... so I don't know if people do this astoundingly quick, or what.) Going by memory, I believe Admiral Steel recommends heating the 1095 about 75 degrees F above the non magnetic point (magnetic point not actually stated by Admiral) for quench. A premium (Omega "Superclad" for high temperature and corrosive enviornment) type K thermocouple only costs around $30, and a self powered analogue read out gage (0-2500 F range with Celsius scale as well) which is quite accurate can be purchased for around $50 (Axner pottery supplies has the gages). You will find these two items repeatedly useful and dependable for hardening, tempering, etc.

They tended to be on the thick side, but with the wide flat bevels they were likely good cutters anyway.
[ Linked Image ]

The best way to know if your heat-treatment is optional is to make up a few test blades and put them through their paces. Your main worry will be under/over heating. Under heating will result in a less than fully hardened blade, over-heating will result in grain growth. Break a test blade and examine the grain, it should looks silky as opposed to grainy... I generally do not anneal 1095, but give it a sub-critical stress relief to make it easier to file/drill.