"Most common Danish war axe type in 1066 England?" Topic
7 Posts
All members in good standing are free to post here. Opinions expressed here are solely those of the posters, and have not been cleared with nor are they endorsed by The Miniatures Page.
Please avoid recent politics on the forums.
For more information, see the TMP FAQ.
Back to the Medieval Discussion Message Board
Areas of InterestMedieval
Featured Hobby News Article
Featured Recent Link
Top-Rated Ruleset
Featured Showcase ArticleThe next Teutonic Knights unit - Crossbowmen!
Featured Profile ArticleThe gates of Old Jerusalem offer a wide variety of scenario possibilities.
Featured Book Review
Featured Movie Review
|
redcoat | 22 Oct 2014 7:57 a.m. PST |
Hi all, Going by the Peterson classifications, which Danish axe-type would one have expected to have seen most commonly in the hands of Anglo-Saxon housecarls and thegns in 1066? Would it have been the L-type? Or the M-type? Wikipedia says that:
Most axes, both in period illustrations and extant artifact, that fall under the description of Danish Axe, possess Type L or Type M heads according to the Petersen axe typology.[1] Both types consist of a wide, thin blade, with pronounced "horns" at both the toe and heel of the bit. Cutting surface varies, but is generally between 20 cm and 30 cm (8 and 12 inches). Type L blades tend to be smaller, with the toe of the bit swept forward for superior shearing capability. Later Type M blades are typically larger overall, with a more symmetrical toe and heel. This looks like what's being described as the less symetrical L-type, with the 'toe' of the axe head swept forward:
Many thanks in advance for any help. Cheers, Redcoat |
Saber6 | 22 Oct 2014 7:59 a.m. PST |
|
MajorB | 22 Oct 2014 9:37 a.m. PST |
which Danish axe-type would one have expected to have seen most commonly in the hands of Anglo-Saxon housecarls and thegns in 1066? This is pretty much one of those totally unanswerable questions. We could only begin to approximate an answer if a large quantity of such axe heads had been found archaeologically (and reliably dated to the 11th century) and could be proved to have been used in combat (as opposed to purely ceremonial use). Given that only a very few such axe heads have been found (compared to the probable number that actually existed) and that there is no evidence to say whether they were actually used in combat or not, there is no reasonable answer to your question. |
DColtman | 22 Oct 2014 10:06 a.m. PST |
Perhaps difficult to answer archaeologically, but for what it's worth there appear to be more M-type in the Bayeaux tapestry. |
redcoat | 23 Oct 2014 10:24 a.m. PST |
Many thanks for the suggestions, gents. Redcoat |
Great War Ace | 24 Oct 2014 9:32 a.m. PST |
Surely it would be based on personal preference. The common shared feature is a large axe blade on the end of a long shaft…. |
Ivan DBA | 28 Oct 2014 8:06 p.m. PST |
I haven't surveyed the entire Bayeux Tapestry, but just googling it now, I saw two "m" types, and one possible "L". Other than going through and counting all the depictions there (and there aren't that many, because most of the Saxons are depicted using spears), there isn't really an answer to this. (Unless actual axe heads have been found in large enough numbers to draw any conclusions, which I doubt.) And the tapestry was done 20 years later, so give it whatever weight you think it worth. If I were picking figs, or designing a range of figures, I would just do a 50-50 mix. |
Great War Ace | 30 Oct 2014 8:16 a.m. PST |
Just pointing out that the Bayeux Tapestry contains internal evidence of a much earlier creation date than "twenty years later". My opinion is that it was created within a year or two of the battle…. |
|