The original blade is in fragments, permanently fused to the remains of its scabbard, which, interestingly was lined by animal hair.
Volume 2 of The Sutton Hoo Ship Burial by Rupert Bruce-Mitford, et. al. (British Museum Press, 1978) includes full length, full scale surface pictures and radiographs (pp. 278-281). This reference gives the blade length as 72 cm and the hilt as 13.4 cm. Angela Care Evans contributes comments on the pattern-welding on p 307, noting "radiographs suggest it was built up of four bundles of seven rods twist forged in an alternating pattern and lying back to back with four more bundles of seven rods ... a central core of plain metal does not seem to have been used ... average length of both the twisted and straight areas is 5.3 cm ... thickness of composite rods varies from approximately 55 mm where the rods run straight to approximately 30 mm where the bundles are twisted. ... width of cutting edge is approximately 1 cm wide towards the tip of the blade."
Using the cross section photograph on p. 283 suggests a present maximum blade thickness of 4.4 mm with a fuller web thickness of 3.3 mm and a width of 5.2 cm, where the blade was sectioned.
Turning now to Lang, Janet and Ager, Barry, "Swords of the Anglo-Saxon and Viking Periods in the British Museum: a Radiographic Study," in Hawkes, Sonia Chadwick, ed., Weapons and Warfare in Anglo-Saxon England (Oxford: Oxford University Committee for Archaeology, 1989), p. 85 - 122, I find an observation that while European continental blades had undergone "surface removal to vary the patterns", with only one blade of an English origin noted to show this characteristic, so, as to the question about the fuller, the odds would go with a non-ground fuller (herringbone).
I believe Sachse's and Lankton's replications are probably a bit on the robust side, compared with the original.
Good luck with your project!
|