Merry Christmas all…

Over the last year I have been piecing together a couple of charts on seax classification. On the first I am trying to distinguish basic types modified from Wheeler. I expanded Wheeler’s four type classification, defining transitional types by simply combining the wheeler types on either side of the transition separated by a slash. (I have seen plate captions in monographs where these transition or mixed forms are designated by combining the Wheeler types.)

The second chart I show this modified Wheeler typology in a way to situate the forms in a vertical chronological sequence and a horizontal geographic distribution. I have also added some possible ancestral forms at the bottom.

Take a look and let me know if there is any thing confusing and especially if you have something that should be corrected or added. I will be glad to explain any parts that are hard to understand. I also welcome any suggestions on how they could be improved, especially on the chronology bars… most of these are just guesses.

Take care

ks

---

 Attachment: 147.38 KB
[ Download ]

 Attachment: 147.9 KB
[ Download ]

Can't comment on the typology itself, since I know too little about the seax, but I find it usefull as a reference. Nice work.

Slightly OT: I'd like to know more about the style refered to as "narrowseax", but non of my searches turn up anything usefull. :\

Wow Kirk. This is a great reference . Thank you very much for putting this together. While seaxs are earlier in period then my main interest I want to get one eventually just to round out my collection. With this I can get a pretty good idea of what I would like to get.

Merry Christmas,
Scott

Hi Kirk,

This is good job you are doing. A handy reference.
Wheeler shows some of the basic shapes, but I have an impression it is from an anglo saxon perspective.
It leaves much unsaid about the continental sax. The sax has a diversified development in different parts of europe. I am not sure where to draw the line between war knife and sax. There are gaps and also less than certain lines from one type to the next.
Jeroen has posted a very handy illustration of the continental sax several times and I post it here again for ease of access. It is from a work by Georg Schmitt on the weapons of the Alemanni.
You can see the major types laid out in chronology.
-Narrow long sax from about 450 to 520/30
-Short sax from 520 to 570/80
-Narrow sax from 570 to 600
-Light Broadsax from 600 to 620/30
-Heavy Broadsax 620 to 670/80
-Atypical Broadsax 670 to 700
-Long Sax from around 700 to ?

I think this is provides helpful information to distinguish between types that Wheeler does not focus his work on. It also gives good time frames for the various types.
There is also a typology over the scandinavian material made by Anne Nørgård Jørgenseen that is very helpful in showing that the trends seen among the continental blades are not always directly applicable to the material of the north.
There are local variations of the central european types, even if the basic trend with smaller saxes in the beginning, followed by broad saxes and later with long saxes is the same. The concepts of these blades does vary: proportions between width/length and blade/grip are not always the same. Styles of grips, materials used and styles of scabbards are also different.
The seax in anglo saxon England is yet a different case.
A presentation of the development of the seax over the whole of Europe, showing important typologies with rules of proportion and time periods would be great to have. It might at least work as a basic reference for discussions and give a general idea of what the sax was about in different regions and times.

---

 Attachment: 154.04 KB
[ Download ]

Merry Christmas Kirk!

Thank you for this timely gift. It is much appreciated. I've been trying to piece together information on seaxs for quite some time now and I'm very happy to receive this typology you've compiled.

Wow thanks alot, both went into my savings file.

How do I read the chronology in the second pic, for example does the Norse "IV/II Longseax" cover from the later part of the 7th century all to the middle of the 11th century?

[quote="Jeroen Zuiderwijk"]

Quote:

The Wheeler typology is too crude IMO. It mixes the continental, Scandinavian and Anglo-Saxon saxes, but doesn't give a line of developement. I prefer to ignore the entire Wheeler typology...

I agree that Wheeler mixes continental (type I) and Scandinavian (type II) with two Anglo-Saxon types (III & IV). However I think that this is a strength in that it allows these geographic differences to be presented in the same typology. As for not showing a line of developement, I agree it is a crude development, however Type I seem to be older and type IV seem to be later. (There is certainly overlap between I & II). Also I think that in a modified form it can be usefull in giving designations of differing tip geometries which are certainly important in terms of seax design overall.

Quote:

...The Anglo-Saxon sax development follows the continental developement as described by George Schmit, but with a lot more variations in size at the same moments in time, and keep on developing into the broken back styles after continental saxes seem to have gone out of use at the end of the 8th century.

I had assumed that the first seaxes in Britain were broken back. It is interesting that there were continental forms in Britain that developed into broken back styles.

Quote:

So for continental saxes I stick to the Schmit typology, for Scandinavian the Jørgensen typology (see http://forums.dfoggknives.com/index.php?showtopic=15373&st=62)...

Thanks for this...

Quote:

Yep. But unless someone knows more about saxes then us, then it will still take quite a bit of studying to get the picture complete :) ...

The charts are a point of discussion and possibly, through the discussions, a way to compose much of this good information into a handy reference.

When reading through these posts between people who really care about these ancient objects I think about "men of letters" in the past who participated in similar research through letters sent snail mail (pony express) to each other. Then societies formed and they presented papers and published in journals. Now we are devolving back to what I consider a better and more personal way to do research. In many ways it is probably still a thing of the future :\ . (do a google search on almost any type of sword and see how close to the top myArmoury.com appears!)

thanks for all the good information Jeroen :D

take care

ks

Hi All...

I noticed a couple of references to these seax classification charts in other threads and wanted to update where I am in revising the charts based on the helpful feedback I've received on this thread and others...

I have been working on the classification chart in particular. I kept the Wheeler blade shape/tip classification as earlier, but have broken out a column showing the Schmitt blade length classification. I have not included any of the info on blade decoration... I think this will be a great addition once everything is in place.

If you compare the new Wheeler blade shape/tip classification with the previous version you will find that I have tried to incorporate what is sometime called the "round back" form and I have included a vendel variety where the point is a little more pointier :D .

With one classification based on blade shape (Wheeler) and another on blade length/size (Schmitt), I cannot help but think that these two could be combined into a matrix and then select each cell in the matrix that has an actual exemplary (maybe type) find. I have begun trying to put this together but have been sidetracked by all the pressures of life :\ .

I have attached the updated classification chart trying to show Wheeler and Schmitt in the same chart...

Let me know what you think. It is stored in Photoshop so it will be easy to make changes.

take care

ks

---

 Attachment: 148.06 KB
[ Download ]

Does anyone know what book this Wheeler typology is in?

Thanks!
Z

Hi there,

The original typology is from R.E.Mortimer Wheeler's book London and the Vikings. It's from 1927. You might be able to find it here in pdf for 25 bucks: http://journals.cambridge.org/action/displayA...8X00001447

Someone else might have a better e-version. Print copies are scarce. Found one in poor condition at abebooks. Could try worldcat: http://www.worldcat.org/title/london-and-the-vikings/oclc/4007844 for a library copy.

Anyhow, most people nowadays follow Oakeshott's simplified version, as seen here for example: http://albion-swords.com/swords/wheeler.htm

Looks like Jørgensen's typology of the Norse sax ends with the 9th Century.

What about the Norse sax in the 10th Century?
Were they all long?
Did the Norse carry smaller blades in the 10th Century?

For continental saxes I much prefer the typology by Georg Schmitt in "Die Alamannen im Zollernalbkreis":
[ Linked Image ]

The UK doesn't quite follow this development, particularly seems to skip the broadsaxes and keeping a larger variety in sizes. In continental Europe, it's a gradual increase in size. And then nothing.

Longsax finds extend beyond this chart into the 10th century, but they're not very common. But that may simply be due to the disappearance of weapons in graves. Or the ones found could also be a few odd imports from the UK. One from the Netherlands is identical to British examples f.e., including in patternwelding.