""Old Saxons" and "Anglo-Saxons"" Topic

Hello all,

Do you know the differences in appearance, dress and weaponry between the "Old Saxons" and "Anglo-Saxons"
at the end of the 8th century AD?

Stay safe

I'm fairly certain that any differences have been lost to the mists of time. Personally, if building an Old Saxon army to face the Carolingians, I would use early Saxon figures to show them as pagan, perhaps mixed with a few Viking types.

Like Rvandusen says, not sure we can be that exact. Two guys standing around individually probably not much difference, but when modelling as an army the overall look and feel would probably start to seem different.

The way we model them in Triumph, troop type wise, Old Saxons (thinking invaders if we are talking England) are modelled as warrior class. Fighting style is a ferocious charge so they can potentially shatter fixed formations, not quite as organized or static as the later Saxon fryd. They are impetuous and surge forward after any victory.

Anglo-Saxons are modelled as heavy foot and elite foot, so more restrained style of fighting in a shield wall.

Both have elements of Horde and lower quality troops available as well.

Equipment wise not sure there would be much difference, spears would be common. Chainmail would have been expensive and limited to the elite in either army. Leather for some fighters with Horde and Rabble in tunics. Most troops using a round shield.

Old Saxons:
So lots of guys in dark age tunics, all Pagans (no crosses), maybe more "Barbaric" looking, so more screaming dudes with fur, a few viking berserkers figure thrown in for good mix.

Anglo-Saxons many would have crosses and many of the fryd would look more like "farmers that really did not want to be there"

Long hair and beards common in both groups, but maybe a little wilder looking in the "old Saxons"

Old Saxons (thinking invaders if we are talking England)

Paskal's asking about "Old Saxons" at the end of the 8th century, though, so I assume he means those Saxons who remained on the Continent, against whom Charlemagne fought and whom he eventually converted.

I don't know of much information on any differences in dress, though. The Bremen spike-covered spangenhelm – link – might be Old Saxon, though helmets with similar spike-topped rivets come from Frisia so perhaps it's a wider northern fasion.

Still, for Old Saxons to oppose Charlemagne you'd want pagan iconography, while for the insular sort you'd want Christian.

At the end of the 8th century and in my opinion it is more the same people, the more the same culture and the figurines of Anglo-Saxons are too characteristic, because there is a lot of documentation for sculptors, while for Olds Saxons it's the desert …

Their Sandinavian, Frankish or German contemporaries could perhaps do the trick, but but maybe without the outfits, equipment and armaments (but which ones?) specific to the Sandinavian, Franks and other Germans on the continent at the end of the 8th century?

I think the Old Saxons all had grey hair and bad teeth.

Well it's weird, I would have rather thought that it was the Anglo-Saxons who had all had gray hair and bad teeth …

But well done, all with gray hair and bad teeth … it's a good idea to paint figurines of Anglo-Saxons to differentiate them from the Old Saxons.

I am not sure wether you would find much difference between Saxon and Anglo-Saxon in the 8th century.
The forces of Saxony would probably contain a larger portion of fyrd.

What proportion for Anglo-Saxons?

I believe dat fa dose in London it were about… a fyrd… me old China.

We talk about their appearance and I have the feeling that the Old Saxons and Anglo-Saxons were different … But how?

I think your looking for difference that are not really there. Both Populations and many others are going to have a very Germanic flavor.

There must have been some great differences, the Anglo-Saxons having become another people …

I doubt that there would be that much of a difference in 750, before the Frankish conquest of Saxon.
The main difference would be that the Saxons in Germany would be more homogenous, with the Anglo-Saxons being more a mix of Saxon, Jutes, Angles and (often forgotten) Frisian cultures, and for a century or two in often (but not always) violent exchange with the post Roman kingdoms. I would expect a higher proportion of well armed fighters with the Anglo-Saxons, perhaps with a bit more Roman influence on the equipment (eg helmet style), but nothing seriously different.

As being a different people – I am quite sure that they would have deemed themself still as of the same tribe – an Anglo-Saxon of Saxon heritage would probably feel closer to the Saxons then to an Ango-Jute (Essex and Mercia vs. Essex and Frisia) – though in interaction with the British that distinction and relation changes towards similar experiences vs. common roots. Still, even today, Frisian and Old English are so close that people must have been able to interact freely for centuries to come.

I babble – sorry. Imho differences between armies would be subtile on the leaders and well armed, and otherwise low. The Frankish influence – enforced on the German Saxons – would change that after 800.

Moreover, they do not even exist as figurines, whereas they are the main victims of Charlemagne …

Also I wonder if they did not resemble the Scandinavians of their time rather than the Anglo-Saxons…