There's a
veddy intedestink little book, very nice to read, called "The archeology of weapons", by Oakeshott. If willing to read a little more on the subject, check page 143.
You're warned, the book is good, you may not be able to stop reading...
: )
Quote:
|
Originally Posted by Lee
I believe that it has been the 'conventional wisdom' that most Viking Age swords originated in the area that is now Solingen, particularly in the English language literature, based upon occasional contemporary written records and - I suspect - the more recent reputation of the region. The Franks indeed had a reputation for particularly good quality.
My own suspicion is that the blades, including pattern-welded ones, were made in fairly widely scattered workshops, however finished swords and sword blades were widely travelled and traded and of similar forms so it is probably not possible to prove this suspicion.
I remember when very reputable sources would advise that a blade would not have a pattern-welded structure and iron inlays. This holds pretty true for material recovered in the British isles, but in continental Europe, a number of blades with both features were well documented, particularly well in Lorange's plates. This and a generally smaller blade size in the British material hints to me of local manufacture.
Similarly, we were advised that the single-edged swords were of local Nordic manufacture and would not be pattern-welded as that came from specialized German/Frankish workshops. And yet, both features are seen together and, as modern bladesmiths frequently demonstrate, pattern-welding is a fairly basic technique, if one is proficient with their welds.
Interpretations are changing even now; a subset of the Ulfberht inlaid blades with high carbon contents are now deemed to have been made using crucible steel, presumably originating far to the east and traded via the Rus, as recently published by Alan Williams.
|