Questions on making the Sutton-Hoo sword

Tierlieb · 3rd October 2006, 12:24 PM

Hello,
this is a bit on a short notice and also the dark ages are not my area of expertise, so I turn to you. We at Bremecker Hammer are making a kind-of-Sutton-Hoo-sword this sunday, 2006-8-10. Now our lead smith is mostly interested in reproducing the damascus patterns but we agreed that if we do all of that work, we can also try to get the rest right, too.

So, I am looking for the measurements on the Sutton Hoo sword. Paul Mortimer has written a review on a nice replica here, but it is missing the blades thickness, plus I would like to know how much the measurements differ from the original.

Besides that, I have two other questions that are is not that important, but maybe someone would like to answer them anyway...

First: How is the fuller done? I always thought it was hammered (I don't know the English terms for a construct of upper- and lower hammer joined by a spring), but most replicas which use twisted damascus within the fuller seem to be ground, because the pattern is fully developed and not distorted, like it would be when hammered. Did they use rounded grinding wheels in the dark ages? Or something like a planer to carve it, like the Japanese do for smaller fullers/groves in katana? Plus: How do you get a straight line ;-)?

Second: What do you think, how many layers where used for the inner layers of the sword? We looked at a replica made by Manfred Sachse and a second one by Markus Balbach and guessed that the twisted damascus and the separating layers are made of five pieces. Since we figure the average bladesmith was as lazy as we are, we guessed he (or she or they) made one rod of damascus and used that everywhere. I guess even the outer layers are made of multiples of the number of inner layers. Anyway, for the two replicas we looked at, it seems to work. For the replica by Patrick Bartá it doesn't. What about the original?

Kind regards,
Tobias "Tierlieb" Prinz

P.S.: I asked the same question in the myarmoury.com forums, in case anyone wonders.

Mark · 3rd October 2006, 05:18 PM

This sounds like something in Lee's area of expertise. Hopefully he'll be able to respond in time.

Might I suggest posting on the Bladesign forum as well? There are many bladesmiths that participate. You will have to get membership approval, but Antonio is generally pretty quick with that.
http://www.bladesignforum.com

mross · 4th October 2006, 10:35 PM

Check out Damascus Steel by Manfred Sachse.

Tierlieb · 4th October 2006, 11:15 PM

@mark:
Thanks, I registered there, waiting for approval. Didn't know that site, seems really interesting even if I do not get an answer.

@mross:
Did that, that is where we got the basic design from. But we did not find the information I am looking for. Plus, to be honest, the draft in there is... well, probably a draft only, not a good specification:

First, the tapering of the blade is strange, since only the outer layers are tapered while the inner layers stay parallel. This is possible (in two ways), but highly impractical.

Second, the location where the inner layers meet the outer layers at the point of the blade is drawn very crudely: Looks like the outer layers where welded on starting at the ricasso, so when reaching the point of the blade, one would have to weld one outer layer against the other and both of them to the core - in one step! That is not a very smart way to do it and it will probably lead to a bad weld. I guess neither Yaap nor Sachse, both experts, would have done it like that.

Becaus of that I fear the author (Yaap) was not very careful while drawing it. The photo next to it is rather small and therefore does not show details of the interesting parts but it is definately different from the draft.

So the book is not of help to our project.

@all:
On the issue of the blade's thickness, I did some rough calculations, sadly they are in meters and grams and anotated the European way:

The blade is 75 centimeters long.
The height goes from 6,5 centimeters to 3 centimeters, so lets make that 4,75 centimeters average (lets ignore the point of the blade).
The thickness might go from 6 milimeters to 3 milimeters, an average of 4,5 milimeters.
The specific weight of steel is 7,85.

7,5dm x 0,475dm x 0,045dm x 7,85 kilogram-per-cubic-decimeter ~= 1250 grams. The replicas weight is 964 grams (2 pounds, 2 ounces including the relatively small pommel and the crossguard), with a deep fuller and the usual grinding at the edges that seems possible...

What do you forumites think? In case I don't find the original measure, is it a good idea to start with 6 milimeters (about 1/4 inch) and taper to 3mm (1/8 inch)? Or is that a bit flimsy? What do you think the size should be, judging from your experience?

Kind regards,
Tobias "Tierlieb" Prinz

Lee · 5th October 2006, 01:39 AM

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!

A. G. Maisey · 5th October 2006, 04:02 AM

I know of the Sutton Hoo sword, but I am unable to comment on the techniques used in its fabrication.

What can comment on is the way in which a Javanese keris maker using traditional tools will put fullers and other surface sculptural details into a Javanese keris or sword blade.

The tools used are scrapers, finished with files and stones.

I have made a number of keris blades, and other blades and have used these tools to produce the fullers. If I wished to make a fuller like the one in the Sutton Hoo blade I would use a number of different sized scrapers, with the largest about the size of an automotive bearing scraper, and the smaller ones made from three cornered files. I would make the shape of the scraper to fit the contour of the fuller.

You keep the line straight by scribing a line in the material and working carefully.

It is possible to work very quickly with these scrapers. The forging is annealed first, and the scrapers are used by holding with the right hand and driving with the left hand, if you swing the weight of your upper body behind the driving hand, it is not much more difficult than shaping wood.

3rd October 2006, 12:24 PM	#1
Tierlieb Member Join Date: Oct 2006 Posts: 2	Questions on making the Sutton-Hoo sword Hello, this is a bit on a short notice and also the dark ages are not my area of expertise, so I turn to you. We at Bremecker Hammer are making a kind-of-Sutton-Hoo-sword this sunday, 2006-8-10. Now our lead smith is mostly interested in reproducing the damascus patterns but we agreed that if we do all of that work, we can also try to get the rest right, too. So, I am looking for the measurements on the Sutton Hoo sword. Paul Mortimer has written a review on a nice replica here, but it is missing the blades thickness, plus I would like to know how much the measurements differ from the original. Besides that, I have two other questions that are is not that important, but maybe someone would like to answer them anyway... First: How is the fuller done? I always thought it was hammered (I don't know the English terms for a construct of upper- and lower hammer joined by a spring), but most replicas which use twisted damascus within the fuller seem to be ground, because the pattern is fully developed and not distorted, like it would be when hammered. Did they use rounded grinding wheels in the dark ages? Or something like a planer to carve it, like the Japanese do for smaller fullers/groves in katana? Plus: How do you get a straight line ;-)? Second: What do you think, how many layers where used for the inner layers of the sword? We looked at a replica made by Manfred Sachse and a second one by Markus Balbach and guessed that the twisted damascus and the separating layers are made of five pieces. Since we figure the average bladesmith was as lazy as we are, we guessed he (or she or they) made one rod of damascus and used that everywhere. I guess even the outer layers are made of multiples of the number of inner layers. Anyway, for the two replicas we looked at, it seems to work. For the replica by Patrick Bartá it doesn't. What about the original? Kind regards, Tobias "Tierlieb" Prinz P.S.: I asked the same question in the myarmoury.com forums, in case anyone wonders.

3rd October 2006, 05:18 PM	#2
Mark Member Join Date: Dec 2004 Posts: 987	This sounds like something in Lee's area of expertise. Hopefully he'll be able to respond in time. Might I suggest posting on the Bladesign forum as well? There are many bladesmiths that participate. You will have to get membership approval, but Antonio is generally pretty quick with that. http://www.bladesignforum.com

4th October 2006, 10:35 PM	#3
mross Member Join Date: Jan 2005 Posts: 478	Check out Damascus Steel by Manfred Sachse.

4th October 2006, 11:15 PM	#4
Tierlieb Member Join Date: Oct 2006 Posts: 2	@mark: Thanks, I registered there, waiting for approval. Didn't know that site, seems really interesting even if I do not get an answer. @mross: Did that, that is where we got the basic design from. But we did not find the information I am looking for. Plus, to be honest, the draft in there is... well, probably a draft only, not a good specification: First, the tapering of the blade is strange, since only the outer layers are tapered while the inner layers stay parallel. This is possible (in two ways), but highly impractical. Second, the location where the inner layers meet the outer layers at the point of the blade is drawn very crudely: Looks like the outer layers where welded on starting at the ricasso, so when reaching the point of the blade, one would have to weld one outer layer against the other and both of them to the core - in one step! That is not a very smart way to do it and it will probably lead to a bad weld. I guess neither Yaap nor Sachse, both experts, would have done it like that. Becaus of that I fear the author (Yaap) was not very careful while drawing it. The photo next to it is rather small and therefore does not show details of the interesting parts but it is definately different from the draft. So the book is not of help to our project. @all: On the issue of the blade's thickness, I did some rough calculations, sadly they are in meters and grams and anotated the European way: The blade is 75 centimeters long. The height goes from 6,5 centimeters to 3 centimeters, so lets make that 4,75 centimeters average (lets ignore the point of the blade). The thickness might go from 6 milimeters to 3 milimeters, an average of 4,5 milimeters. The specific weight of steel is 7,85. 7,5dm x 0,475dm x 0,045dm x 7,85 kilogram-per-cubic-decimeter ~= 1250 grams. The replicas weight is 964 grams (2 pounds, 2 ounces including the relatively small pommel and the crossguard), with a deep fuller and the usual grinding at the edges that seems possible... What do you forumites think? In case I don't find the original measure, is it a good idea to start with 6 milimeters (about 1/4 inch) and taper to 3mm (1/8 inch)? Or is that a bit flimsy? What do you think the size should be, judging from your experience? Kind regards, Tobias "Tierlieb" Prinz

5th October 2006, 01:39 AM	#5
Lee EAAF Staff Join Date: Nov 2004 Location: Upstate New York, USA Posts: 913	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!

5th October 2006, 04:02 AM	#6
A. G. Maisey Member Join Date: May 2006 Posts: 6,892	I know of the Sutton Hoo sword, but I am unable to comment on the techniques used in its fabrication. What can comment on is the way in which a Javanese keris maker using traditional tools will put fullers and other surface sculptural details into a Javanese keris or sword blade. The tools used are scrapers, finished with files and stones. I have made a number of keris blades, and other blades and have used these tools to produce the fullers. If I wished to make a fuller like the one in the Sutton Hoo blade I would use a number of different sized scrapers, with the largest about the size of an automotive bearing scraper, and the smaller ones made from three cornered files. I would make the shape of the scraper to fit the contour of the fuller. You keep the line straight by scribing a line in the material and working carefully. It is possible to work very quickly with these scrapers. The forging is annealed first, and the scrapers are used by holding with the right hand and driving with the left hand, if you swing the weight of your upper body behind the driving hand, it is not much more difficult than shaping wood.