[William R. Short]

FWIW, another photo of a nice pattern-welded spearhead found in a Viking context is shown in the Hurstwic spear article. There's also a photo of a copper and silver inlaid spearhead, which must have been stunning in its prime.

Best regards,
William Short

[Elling Polden]

the most likely candidates for "hewing spears" would be Pettersens type G; these have broad, triangular blades similar to the on I allready posted. There are no off-the-shelf repros of these that I'm aware of, so the hanweii is probably your best bet.

The winged spears shown in the Hurstwic article are frankish types, that where popular throughout northern europe in the 8-9th century. After that use of winged spears declined in scandinavia, in favour of the long, slender types.

As for spear length, it seems to have varied widely with time, place and preference. Personally I find the "so long you can just reach the socket" a good length for a one handed spear, provided you have a light shaft. Most "serious" spear fighters I know favour two handed spears in the 2,5-3m range, to stay clear of the onehanders.

[William R. Short]

[Jared Smith]

[Juan Cocinas]

Wow, the partially corroded spearhead w/copper+silver inlay at the Hurstwic Site is just nuts. It's faded magnificence makes the Mammen axe look almost cheap.

[Elling Polden]

My statement was that they where frankish types, not that they where made, or found in France. They are as you said very common in the scandinavian material.
Lugged or winged spears seems to have been used to a smaller or larger extent throughout history, as a matter of personal taste. The carolingan franks, however, seems to have used them as "standard".

Viking age scandinavians where quite capable of making their own weapons. The imported blades do however seem to have been more prestigeous. it also seems that it was common to import frankish blades, and hilt them localy.
Also keep in mind that the most numerous viking age swords are quite simple affairs; the highly decorated pattern welded swords are in a minority.

Returning to spear length, this is a reaction to what everybody else is using. A formation using 1,80 m spears facing 2,30m spears will find itself simply not reaching the foe. For single combat, a shorter spear migh be handier, but you have your sword for that. Of course, if you are using a smaller round shield, like the ones favoured by Glorious-Single-combat/skirmisher cultures a short spear might be usefull, though having enough reach to attack from outside the foes reach-out-and touch range is also a factor. Against a full sized 80-100 cm formation shield things get more tricky.
The classical greek spear was somewhere between 2.3 an 2.7m, The byzantines used thin spears as long as 3.5 m. The reach-the-socket guideline gives a length of roughly 2.3m. Much later, George Silver's guidlines gives a length of 2,7m for light polearms and half pikes (i.e two handed spears)

The hewing spears seems to have been shorter, requiering stouter shafts. Some descriptions of the Atgeir sugests that it was short enough to wear in the belt. This could corespond to a shaft length of about 1m, and result in a weapon that could be used in the same fashion as an axe of the same length as well as a "extra" spear. A "Kesje" seems to have been a longer hewing spear.
It is also worth noting that the sagas where written in the 13th century, and that some of the weapon descriptions might be anacronistic.

[Nathan Beal]

[Juan Cocinas]

Thanx Nathan. You inspired me to attain greater skill in search fu I found this quote at Sven Skildbiter's angelfire site "So far I have only found one example of a spear butt from Medieval Europe, its from a 9th century warriors grave in a pagan cemetery at Kilmainhan - Islandbridge outside Dublin. The spear butt is the typical conical design and is approximately 10cm long and 2cm wide at the aperture for the spear." So, almost 4 inches long and approx. 3/4 inch wide, sounds like a thin or possibly tapered shaft. And then, in the addendum "The size of the piece illustrated is unknown but by comparing them with spear heads from the same plate it could be concluded that the largest (A) is about 10 centimetres long and the other two (B & C) are 5 centimetres and 7 centimetres long. (A) clearly shows a whole in the wider portion of the cone which could be the means of attachment to the shaft. (B) clearly shows the join of the cone where the two sides were joined together during forging. All three do not have a pointed apex therefore precluding them as part of the weapon. These pieces support my original conclusion that the most often used design for a spear butt was a conical shape and proportionally shorter than the spear head. Stephen Francis Wyley" This quote describing finds from Novogod, Russia dated 10th-13th century, so perhaps not really pertinent to this discussion. I also found mention of "door-knob" spearbutt finds in England, Ireland, and Scotland, but was stumped on real information and images. Regardless, we do have some historical precedent for the presence of small conical iron spearbutts, at least in britain, during the era in question.

[Elling Polden]

[Juan Cocinas]

Stumbled onto something else. According to William Short in his book Viking Weapons and Combat Techniques, "Spears were also used with throwing strings (snaerisspjot) for longer reach". Sounds alot like what some of the guys at slinging.org are using with their historical javelins+throwing spears. I wish I could afford to fly to London and hit up the museums and unis. Even with the web, if it isn't uploaded, I can't see it or read about it. Something about the arms+armour of this era (700-1100) just calls to me. The fading roman influence, the scandinavian culture mixing in with with the anglo-saxons, the weapons doubling as works of art. These pattern-welded spears and swords speak of an incredibly high level of craftsmanship and a cultural view where art and warfare share a major importance...[/u]