The Vikings are coming

[Roc]

Viking axes


Small hand axes tended to just be wood-axes which were used for combat. The construction of all axes followed the same general principal. A flat strip of 'soft' iron is folded in half around a mandrel to create the socket. A slice of much harder iron that has the properties of knife steel, is then fire welded in between the two iron halves at the cutting edge end. This limits the amount of expensive steel that is needed for the business end, keeping the rest of the axe relatively cheap. The hafts of the smaller axes were between 60 - 90cm (2' - 3') long with a blade about 7.5 - 150cm (3" - 6") wide. One special type of hand axe, particularly popular in the early Viking period, was the 'skegox', or bearded axe, so called because of its elongated lower edge.

A Huscarl as interpreted on the Bayeux Tapestry, without even a shield upon his back
The axe as a weapon is good in attack, but fairly poor as a tool to defend yourself with. It is a weapon that quickly induces fear, as it takes little imagination to guess what it could do. The user needs to be very confident of the outcome of a clash, as he will be fighting with a weapon that is quite heavy, resulting in easily over-committed blows. This could quite easily be his undoing against a warrior using a lighter weapon such as a spear, who is aware of the axe's shortcomings. A skilled fighter can with even a spear disarm a man wielding an axe by catching the axe where is joins the shaft and sweeping it out of the hand of the wielder.

In early Anglo-Saxon times some warriors used a special type of axe known as a 'francisca'. This axe was quite small, with a thick triangular section at the socket, resulting in a very heavy blade for it's small size. The francisca was designed for throwing, and had been particularly popular amongst the Franks. The Francisca is supposed to have been thrown in a massed volley to create certain amounts of mayhem prior to the onrush of the host of warriors. How well this worked is anyones guess today. Just the act of throwing the axe was probably enough to break the concentration of the opposing force for just the right amount of time before the warriors rushed in.

The Broadaxe, or Dane-axe, was a two handed axe introduced by the Vikings in the late tenth century but which soon became popular with Saxons as well, and was probably developed from the axes used to slaughter animals. The blades from existing examples in museums demonstrate that they have very thin section blades, designed to hack flesh apart. If they were as bulky as the smaller axe, it would prove to be too heavy for any sensible use. Usually used only by the wealthier semi-professional warriors it has a broad blade with a cutting edge of about 22 - 45cm (9" - 18") and a long wooden ash haft some 1.2 - 1.5m (4' - 5' long).

The Bayeux tapestry and accounts from the battle of Hastings show these Dane-axes wielded by the Huscarls cleaving 'both man and horse in two' at the same time. The Dane-axe's only drawback was that you need to have both hands on the shaft of the axe, with your shield slung across your back, leaving your front wide open to attack. The introduction of the Dane-axe is credited to King Cnut, who is also credited with the whole concept of the Karl or Huscarl you can see on the left. With such a fearsome tool to hand, few people would question this mans reasons. The action of swinging the axe prevents the Huscarl from standing close to any of his fellow huscarls, and this may well lead to trouble for him from any thrown javelin, however, the sheer ferocity of this warrior would daunt most foes, prompting them to make mistakes.


--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

 

[Roc]

Another picture.

 

[gary]

The brown madder wash sounds like a good idea, but be careful not to overdo it.

I think if you leaf through the Europa book you'll see a good range of possible reds. Madder is a weird sort of dye. I've not been able to play with it yet, but from what I've read it's temperature sensitive. If the dyebath is taken past the 150-160F range it loses a good part of the red color and the yellow becomes more dominant....sort of an orangish color. Interestingly, (one of?) the main dye colors is alizarin. I've been playing around with various mixes of W&N's Permanent Carmine and their Winsor Red to get a midtone color. The Permanent Carmine is just a bit too cool, and the Winsor Red is a bit too warm, but both of these colors are pretty good at showing a tolerable color range for madder red in the deepest dye colors.

One thing I'd suggest is not to use Tit White for anything but the highest highlights. For most of the highlighting, or just lightening the color up, I'd suggest Unbleached Titanium or a similar color. The UT is closer in color to what the actual wool would have been most of the time, and the wool's color will modify the dye color to some extent... less for darker colors, more for lighter (weaker dyebath) colors. Page 87 of the Europa book gives a good example of a medium strength woad dye on a yellowish wool (hemp?) material.

Gary

 

[Roc]

Hi Gary, thanks for the advice, you are very helpful, I'll give it a good try.

Cheers,

Roc.

 

[Roc]

Swords
Two early Anglo-Saxon sword hilts.
The most prized and lauded weapon, but not the most common one, was the sword. These were very valuable and were often handed down from generation to generation, or were received or given as gifts by great warriors and kings. Swords were considered to have a greater value if they had a history or had belonged to a famous warrior; perhaps because they were seen to have been imbued with the previous owners bravery. The blades were between 72 - 80cm (29" - 32") long and about 7.5cm (3") broad at their widest with a shallow but broad groove or fuller down the centre of both sides to lighten the blade without losing any strength. At the time of the migrations from Germany to England some warriors might still have been using swords of the late Roman pattern, the so called spatha.

In early Anglo-Saxon times the sword (such as the examples on the left) was by and large almost parallel sided down to the tip, where it then tapered to a point; although tapering blades similar to late Saxon and Viking swords were not unknown at that point. These early swords usually had pommels and crossguards made up of layers of organic material such as wood, bone or horn; which were often sandwiched, embellished with, or even completely covered by, bronze, gold and silver. Some examples were even inlaid with garnets trapped in separate cells, or were decorated with enamel. Some swords also had a ring attached to the upper guard, that to begin with was a true ring, but later became bastardised into a vestigial ring such as that on the Sutton Hoo sword. Their purpose is unclear, although they may have represented some special honour bestowed on the sword's owner.

From the later eighth century the tapered style of blade became the most common type found, whilst pommels and crossguards tended to be made of solid iron. These iron pommels and guards were often richly decorated with silver inlay, gilding or by encrusting them completely in a thin sheath of silver. A few were cast in bronze, or rarely, silver. There are examples of pommels and crossguards of whalebone, but how user friendly any of these were is anyone's guess, as the pommel lends counterbalancing weight at the opposite end of the sword. Without this feature, all of the weight was beyond your grip, making the sword rather clumsy to use, much like an axe. The pommel by and large defines the date of the sword and the site where it was most likely to have been made. The Vikings tended to go for swords with 3 or 5 lobed pommels and the Anglo-Saxons for 'Cocked Hat' styles, such as the one on the left, although there is a certain amount of cross-over. Later on, the 'Brazil Nut' style found favour via the Normans.

A later Anglo-Saxon sword with a silver inlayed iron pommel and grip.
In general the shape of the sword remained unchanged from the time of the first Germanic settlers to 1250AD, although many different decorative furnishings were used through the years. The function also remained the same - a slashing weapon. It was only after 1250 with the advent of plate armour that swords with truly sharp points began to appear. It would seem reasonable to assume that swords were capable of breaching mail although tests carried out do not support this entirely. It is possible that against armour, the heavy weight of the blade was used to break bones and crush internal organs. A number of grave finds from all over northern Europe attest to the effectiveness of the sword when armour wasn't in the way. Skulls with great slices through them, often from one side to the other have been excavated . Some even show new smoother bone growth demonstrating that the injured party lived on after such a horrific injury.

The blades themselves deserve special mention. The process of smelting good iron sometimes resulted in small amounts of steel being produced quite deliberately. (We may be underestimating their abilities here). The steel, because it held a good sharp edge was employed on the edges of the blade, with the relatively softer iron making up the bulk of the core of the blade. This core could be embellished by plaiting different grades of iron together in patterns to create beautiful 'pattern welded' blades. We are not totally sure of the benefits of this lengthy process, but flexibility is one of several suggestions. These were highly treasured by their owners, and gained various nicknames which described the twisting patterns. Later in the period, blades became more homogeneous in their construction, which may indicate their increasing ability to smelt better iron in larger quantities.

Sword with a gold gilt hilt (based on find from Lund)
Another feature of blades from this period is the habit of signing the fuller area of the blade. This was done in the same technique as the pattern welding, but in a more prosaic fashion. Letters were literally forged into and down the length of the blade without any accompanying patterns save for the odd cross. Two names were revered as excellent bladesmiths, that of Ulfbert, and Ingelri. These two smiths churned out quite a number of blades between them, and they were well sought after (if the number that have been preserved suggests), so much so, that copies were still being made long after the smiths had died. Having never seen one in the flesh, one can suppose that it was very easy to pass off a poorer blade as one of the Ulfbert or Ingelri ones.

The grips of swords were made of several materials. Horn, wood, and antler, sometimes wrapped with leather or even bound with cord. The re-enactment swords that we use today are often put through far more punishment than their forebears. The blunt blades we insist on, create a great deal of shocks through the tang inside the grip. These shocks have got to go somewhere, just as they did a thousand years ago. The relatively soft tang absorbs all this energy preventing the blade from shattering in the crossguard area; however, 'our' swords receive such abuse during battles (due to shock) that the whole area of the hilt eventually vibrates free so that they rattle in the hand. This needs periodic attention to tighten up the components by re-riveting the top of the tang down.

The tang goes all the way through the top of the pommel as you can see on the right in the later Brazil Nut pommeled sword. This was not unknown 1000 years ago either, however, having sharp blades means that shocks through the blades were much reduced because the blades sank into either wood, flesh, or even were cushioned to some extent by mail. A blow to something like a helmet would be one can surmise, much like a blunt blade striking the same thing.

A Brazil nut type pommel from a Norman sword
A warriors habit was not to strike blade against blade as we tend to do today. This would destroy a sharp blade - just try it with two modern carving knives, and witness the result. The subsequent large nicks in the blade would be impossible to remove short of fire welding in a section to patch the damaged area. As was said earlier, the blades were intended to cut meat. There is also a good chance that striking a wooden shield could trap the blade in the Lime or Poplar timber, ensuring that your enemies got a free shot at you. Helmets would also not do the edges of your blade much good, even if you did stun your opponent. This left you with just the mail and any exposed flesh as targets. Even the mail might cause you problems. That is why so many of the victims that have been discovered, were probably stabbed with spears, making them vulnerable to being dispatched with a sword afterwards as a crude and bloody coup de gras.

One thing we have not mentioned are scabbards. Without these, swords have to carried in the hand, certainly not in the waist belt, and would be continually subject to the weather. Surviving scabbard remains show that they were made of two halves of wood carved out to receive the sword and glued together down the 'edges' of the blade. Occasionally there is fur in the form of fleece on the inside of the scabbard. The outside was sometimes covered in a thin skin of leather sewn on the reverse side creating a watertight covering. Some recent finds also show that they covered the wooden sheath in linen which was glued to the front and overlapped a little bit on the back of the scabbard. This then had a thin linen 'ribbon' or strip wound on the diagonal from the scabbard mouth down to the chape area. There were several loops around the mouth, with the strip then passing - widely, but evenly spaced - around the scabbard . As it reached the chape, it was again wound tightly in several layers to protect the more regularly damaged end of the sheath. Lots of glue was used to fix this all in place, and over the top of all this a few layers of varnish or shellac were applied to finally seal the whole thing. This is directly paralleled in a period fresco from the Oratory of St. Benedict in Rome which clearly demonstrates this technique.

The scabbard occasionally had sheets of silver or gilded bronze applied to it to protect the mouth of the scabbard and the chape. These have also been found in cast bronze, but were very rare in this country. Even the sheet versions were uncommon, and were quite commonly rough and ready pieces of work. The whole thing then had to be hung via a baldric either over the shoulder or around the waist. There were various methods of attaching the baldric to the scabbard, some far more elaborate or permanent than others. The only key thing is that the sword could be drawn quickly and that it didn't let go of the sword if the warrior had somehow inadvertently turned upside down.

A typical Viking sword with it's accompanying scabbard of linen wrapped oak lathes

Sword with a gold gilt hilt (based on find from Lund)

Two early Anglo-Saxon sword hilts

A Brazil nut type pommel from a Norman sword



Cheers,

Roc.

 

[Ernest]

Hi Roc great painting work and of course great documentation thanks for shareing...
cheers
Ernest

 

[Roc]

Iron Working

A temporary forge made up of in this case - stones for the base and turf for the bed to place the bellows on. The hearth is made of clay with lots of shavings and sand mixed in it and fired on the spot just prior to use. If it's too windy on the day, this type of temporary forge can be problematic

Above are two different systems of smelting iron. On the left and centre is the type of kiln where the slag melts down into the pit below. This type is based on an example from Denmark from the 5th century AD. On the right is the type where the slag and iron are tapped from the side (The height is conjectural). The latter system seems to be the better proposition in practice

Iron was a very important commodity to the Anglo-Saxons and Vikings, and those people who were lucky enough to be skilled in working it were held in high regard. The reason behind this is the versatility of iron. The Bronze Age had come and gone, and found many uses for bronze, but with the discovery of how to smelt and process iron, a whole new range of products could be made. Most farms would have had their own small forge where the farmer would be able to make or mend simple everyday items. As it was quite expensive the iron he used often came from reforged broken tools or other items. More complicated tasks would be sourced from travelling smiths who came to the farm, or forged by the village or town smith. The demand for iron products by royalty and noblemen meant that they had their own dedicated teams of smiths.


Iron was used to make diverse items from nails to swords, with a nail for example taking no more than one minute to make and a fine sword taking a week or so by a specialist weapon smith. A number of cooking utensils, pans and cauldrons were also made of iron, with the consequence that these things lasted much longer and couldn't be burnt. Flesh forks for boiled haunches of meat that looked like torture instruments, were forged out of billets of iron, whereas cauldrons were made out of sheets of iron, that were overlapped and riveted. The seams were beaten together so that they became watertight joints and didn't expand apart in the heat of the fire. There really wasn't a craftsman who didn't rely on the smith for many of his tools.

The most important of all of the tools made by the smith was probably the knife, which had an enormous number of uses, especially as people lived off the land far more than we do today. So whether the knife was just for eating, or was a specific tool just for carving wood, it still had to be made well. Although a knife appears simple, the cutting edge was made of steel with a softer iron back 'fire welded' to the blade. The reason for this was to economise on the amount of steel that was used, as it was a rarer product of iron making. We are not entirely sure, but we suspect that steel was a happy accident of good iron smelting, but didn't occur in large enough volumes. So it was carefully used in controlled amounts. Steel also keeps a better cutting edge than iron, but because of this property, it tends to be more brittle. Iron was then employed to make the bulk of the tool as it is more forgiving. Not far away from the forge would have been a rotary grind stone. With this and copious amounts of water, the edges of blades on all sorts of tools or weapons were honed to sharpness. Little grind stones roughly only five inches in diameter could be mounted on pole lathes to turn them, but larger stones would have had a man or men to turn it rapidly.

Fire Welding was the only method other than riveting to join two pieces of iron together permanently. The art lay in judging the temperature of the two elements in the forge. Often the two pieces were wired together to anchor them in place temporarily. When the iron and steel were on the brink of burning in the forge, just as white sparks begin to fly from the work, the billets were whisked out of the forge and placed on the anvil. This is certainly a two man job, because one is controlling the tongs with the billets in, and places it on the anvil, whilst the other hits it smartly before the work has a chance to cool at all. Just one strike is enough to join the two pieces, scattering a shower of white hot sparks over the forge. Now you know why they wear leather aprons. Any reduction in the temperature would result in only a partial or poor weld. The work was placed back into the forge once again, without any delay. Some fine washed silver sand is flung into the joint to act as a flux, to reduce excess oxygen, and then the work is hauled out again in a another shower of white sparks. Now the real weld is made. The heavy hammer drives the two billets together joining them forever. From here on in, the work is to bend and reshape the iron and steel to your desired shape. Axes are made by folding iron around a socket, pinching the ends together with steel inserted at the business end during welding, to become the cutting edge. Other smiths were more talented in making locks and padlocks that had fine springs of steel in them to operate the locking mechanism. Even horses then needed and had shoes. They were cruder and heavier, and were made probably a little quicker with the nail holes merely punched out from the edge of the shoe giving it a wobbly outer rim.


In order to make anything the smith first had to obtain his iron. Again, he was unlikely to have smelted it out for himself. This above all was a messy and time consuming task that would have been done nearer the source of iron and away from the town. First he had to obtain the iron ore. This was generally obtained from deposits near the surface of bogs, and is called not surprisingly bog ore. This source of ore is quite iron poor, unlike the ores that were later to be quarried out from cliff faces. The ore is heated or roasted in a pit. This helps to break it down, clean it and dry it out. It's then placed on a larger stone and broken up into small nuggets. The iron ore was then heated in a chimney shaped clay furnace about four feet high and 16 inches across (a process called smelting) at very high temperatures to remove the impurities, known as slag. The smelter is made from clay with lots of 'grog' or straw mixed in to help it withstand the extreme temperatures. To do this the iron ore was layered with charcoal. The charcoal was then lit and the furnace had its temperature raised by using bellows. Sometimes to 1500°C in certain areas of the smelter. Not too much air was required from the bellows as it could easily convert the ore just to slag by oxidising the ore rather than reducing it, so the process was a tricky one.

The iron then melted out of the ore and the slag collected in the shallow pit at the base of the furnace. The bottom corner of the smelter was broken open, the slag tapped off, leaving the smith with a fairly pure lump of iron called a bloom. Once the iron had cooled and set, a file was drawn over the surface to gauge the hardness of the iron bloom to see if it had any steel in it - the file being of a known quality itself. The bloom then had to be reheated and beaten over several workings to remove any other remaining impurities. The more diligently done the better, which resulted in nearly pure iron ready to be worked into many different objects. This type of iron is called wrought iron, but the Saxons were also able to add carbon (from charcoal) to convert it to steel. This was necessary where extra hardness and strength were needed, such as on knife edges, hammer heads or chisels. Another method was to roast the object in carbon dust in a metal box to create case hardened steel. The carbon penetrates the iron to a shallow depth converting it to the alloy.

Recent finds and work on the site at Hamwic (modern Southampton) have given us some new insights into Anglo-Saxon iron work. The quality of the iron has been shown to be superlative. So good in some cases that it's quality was not matched until the mid 1800s. The reason for this seems to lie in the work that was done to the iron to convert it to steel post the smelt. By a simple(!!) process of reheating the pure iron until it absorbed the relevant carbon levels to convert it to steel, until you could no longer heat it to good effect.

A pair of shears that would be used for cutting cloth, thread and hair
A sword blade required iron blooms to be forged into bars and strips of different shapes and sizes ready for use. Sometimes, especially for sword blades, the smith would twist together and fold bars of iron and steel to make the blade. This was a difficult and long winded process, but it meant the finished blade would be far stronger as it had the strength and hardness of the steel on the edges with the flexibility of the iron in the core. The twisting and folding of the bars of different metals gave a 'marbled' pattern to the surface of the blade which is called 'pattern welding'

The smith's forge had a fire in a hearth fuelled by charcoal, which was either a pit in the ground or, more usually, raised off the ground at waist height in a shallow clay bowl. Next to the hearth would be an anvil. The metal is heated in the hearth which is made hotter by blowing it with pairs of bellows, getting more oxygen from the air into it and raising the temperature to 900 - 1000°C. Glowing metal was held with a pair of tongs, and hammered into the desired shape on the anvil. The iron would stay hot enough to work for a minute or two only, less if there was a breeze to cool the work. He would also have punches with which to make holes, shears for cutting sheet metal and files for smoothing the metal. Next to his anvil he would have a supply of water and vegetable oil for cooling his tools or the items he was making. The forge itself is a dingy place, as it much easier to see the glowing metal in the shade. Also, when iron is heated to specific temperatures, it goes through several colour phases, known as straw to blue, each one indicating that the metal was either hot enough for a spring, or hard enough for a chisel.

Apart from smithying, he would have known how to solder brass and bronze together, braze it as well for stronger joints and how to tin plate objects. Depending upon the decorative nature of his work, he may also have known how to gild metals with an amalgam of mercury and gold. This last task was and still is very dangerous, because to get the gold to adhere to the iron or bronze, it is heated to vaporise the mercury, binding the gold to the bronze. The mercury oxide if it got into to your bloodstream via the lungs would affect your nervous system for good. Eventually killing you.

The smith would have been almost constantly filthy with charcoal dust etc. from the work, which makes me wonder as to how often he washed?

Above are two different systems of smelting iron. On the left and centre is the type of kiln where the slag melts down into the pit below. This type is based on an example from Denmark from the 5th century AD. On the right is the type where the slag and iron are tapped from the side (The height is conjectural). The latter system seems to be the better proposition in practice

A blacked wrought iron hilt, also demonstrating simple linear inlay of silver

Viking period keys made from wrought iron


Cheers,

Roc.

 

[Roc]

Ernesto,thanks for the kind words of encouragement and I'm glad your enjoying the documentation.

Keep up the good work.

Ciao,

Roc.

 

[Roc]

Hey guys just finished the face hair ,hands and arms.
When dry I will give it more highlights and more shadows.

Flesh formula and veins.

For the flesh I used slightly different formula them my usual.
Base = Liquitex parchment + raw sienna + Venetion red.
Medium shadows = Mars Brown.
Dark shadows = Brown madder alizarin+ burnt umber.
Extreme shadows = Sepia.
Medium highlights = Naples yellow + Titanium white.
Light highlights = medium highlight + more Titanium white.
Extreme highlights = touch of titanium white, very sparingly.

Veins on arm : after I finished painting the arms and hands and while still wet I painted the veins using the base color described below , I shadowed the sides of the veins with brown madder alizarin and highlighted the to top of the veins with medium flesh highlight + more titanium white.

Base = medium highlight with a little Prussian blue mixed into it.
Shadows = brown madder alizarin.
medium flesh highlight + more titanium white
Highlight medium flesh highlight + more titanium white.

Cheers

Roc.

 

[gary]

Roc,
I'm curious as to the mix you used for the red cloak.

Gary

 

[btavis]

Roc, beautiful, vivid colors. I like it a lot.

 

[Guy]

Beautiful painting Roc!!!

 

[Roc]

Hi Gary, This is what I used for red:

Base= cadmium red + a little bit of cadmium red deep.
Medium shadow = Alizarin crimson.
Dark shadows = Dioxide purple.
Extreme shadows = dark green.
Medium highlights = cadmium red.
Light highlights= cadmium red+ cadmium scarlet.

I’m still trying to figure out a way to tone it down, when it completely dries I’ll try experimenting with washes and glazes, this might be a while the paint takes at least a month to thoroughly dry.


Cheer,

Roc.

 

[Roc]

Bob, thanks buddy,I really appreciate.

Cheers,

Roc.

 

[Roc]

Hey Guy, thanks for the encouragement, I really appreciate it.

Cheers,

Roc.

 

[gary]

Thanks Roc,
I've been playing around with a red mix for a Viking I'm working on as well. So far, what seems to be giving a decent starting point is roughly equal proportions of W&N Winsor Red and Bright Red with a bit of Brown Madder Alizarin to mute the red just a bit. (I think the Winsor Red is their version of Cad Red.)

Gary

 

[Roc]

Gary, you’re very welcome and thanks for posting your formula.
I would like to see some pictures of your Viking in progress; can you post some pictures for us to see?

Cheers,
Roc

 

[gary]

I can, as long as you don't mind a good deal of debris on parts of the thing. I paint in our laundry room. If that wasn't bad enough, Arizona almost requires a clean room setting to keep the dust at bay. Now if I can just figure out how TO post pics.

 

[Roc]

Gary, not a problem, looking forward to the pictures.


Cheers,

Roc.

 

[Roc]

I just finished painting the axe and the sword , still wet , needs to dry before I can give final shadows and highlights
If you notice some how I forgot to paint the wood protruding form the axe head, Oh well have to go back and finish it.

Formula for wood:

I painted the oils directly over the Floquil primer ,wanted to achieve a dry wood look , the primer absorbed most of the oils.

Base = Raw sienna + Mars yellow a touch of Burnt Umber.
Shadows = Windsor Blue.
Deep shadows = Sepia.
medium highlights = Naples yellow.
Light highlights = Naples yellow +Titanium white.

Grain on wood :
Irregular lines with Burnt Umber.
Deep shadows Sepia.
Naples Yellow base mix for highlights.


Scabbard:

Base = Mars brown + Burnt Umber.
Medium shadow = Windsor blue.
Deep shadows = Sepia
highlights = Cadmium orange + cadmium yellow

Sword hilt

Base = Permalba irredecent bronze + blus a little bit of Sepia.
Shadows = Sepia
Medium highlight= Base with gold powder mixed into it.
Light highlights = pure gold powder mixed into a little bit of Liquin.
Pure silver for the catch light.

Cheers,

Roc.