Finnish/Earlier Scandi axes - Kirves

I have nothing to add on the development, influence, or origin of the collars - I'm an audience member until I get a bit of time to forum o_O.

Kevin, where one of these the ones you were referencing?
ftSzUBA.jpg


aoWRvOh.jpg
 
Kevin Houtzager said:
( making 4 langets a bitch, because of the alternating height of the holes since the rivets are attached from side to side. Speaking of which: 4 langets are another case in itself: Why would you want more then 2 langets on any axe, other then protection, since the ones on the side dont offer any other function since an axe is used in front to back motion and not from the sides?). The firemans hatchet was just an example to show langets. These are the earlier ones used on regular axes, but they tended to become much longer during ages with a lot of war on halberds.
Click to expand...

Kevin,thank you for your reply,all your thoughts and info,and the links to all the cool artefacts.
In my humble opinion the langettes,on halberd-like pole-arms are a weight-saving device...(if they were an actual deep socket,the head would be more metal than a guy can lift...:).
They're a Skeleton-socket,if you will.
But...Why Are we discussing pole-arms here at all?Only because some of them have an axe-like blade(in all that multi-tool splendor?:)
It is quite obvious,from an engineering standpoint,that they couldn't actually be used for chopping,or hewing?(especially the neat old ones that you posted...and i Do so love their assorted ins and outs of their own lovely forged detail...but as an Axe?!).

I do think that you have a point in that the langettes(wherever they were used),are a form of a Scarf-joint,i.e. the means whereby hard/stiff iron must be seamlessly integrated into the soft/flexible haft,to absorb and ammortise the loads evenly.
It's just that the pole-arms are not exactly the most correct example of this given their specific projected loads...
(hey,could i pass for an engineer talking like this you think?:)

I think that the socket on the axes stems from,and is related to,all the other socket tools...Wood-,and the ice-chisels(don't be surprised at my mention of that,one can't survive in the North without an ice-chisel...).Woodworking tools primarily,though,probably because wood as material is both hard and tough,necessitating great force in working it,the force that one needs spread out as evenly as possible,not allowing it to concentrate at the juncture of head and haft.
We see it in assorted Doloir shapes-the ones for lighter work could be used without much of a socket,but the heavier ones begin that path toward the goosewing....

Ironically,i think that in that last photo Agent_H has hit on the very idea central to this whole scene:On the right is the butcher's cleaver,but on the left,with that glorious long socket,is that prototype for all socketed/collared axes...

Common not only in France,of course,spreading widely throughout the European landscape...(still alive in parts of Central Europe,one of my favourite smiths,Jiri Javourek,makes these for the local market...).

It would be interesting to learn more if much is known about the chronology of development and spread of that type....
(there's a famous one in the Tower of London,supposedly for chopping off of heads...but whatever it's history,looks like a plain old woodchopper's axe of Early-Middle Middle ages...).
 
In any case,Kevin is probably right in that the socket/collar on axes started to be extended somewhat after 11th c.,at least we don't see that in the viking age tools.
In considering vikings we must remember that they themselves were tool Users,more than Producers,and during their very active conquests they mostly made do with what they could obtain in trade from other places.
However,after the classic "Viking age",when the Christianising influence was spreading rapidly through Northern Europe,we see some tremendous advances in the styles and variety of woodwork,maybe best exemplified by the Stavkirke joinery...
Could that,possibly,have a relationship to the extension of the collar on axes?

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Stave_church
 
Kevin Houtzager said:
bucthers axes aren't for wood either, but are still clasified as axes
Click to expand...

Kevin,i'm sorry,i'm not sure if a more correct term would be "called", vs "classified"?:)

It applies even more to the latter parts of that same quoted paragraph:Brick-axe,ice-axe(wether the climbing/Trotsky kind:),or for ice-chipping),and Pick-axes are Not really axes:)

Not in the sense of "Scandi...Kirves..etc." axes discussed here....(neither is an electric guitar,also referred to as "the ax" in the American jargon of the 60-ies and 70-ies....:)...

But the etimology aside...

We're in agreement on Some things here,and it is a good thing,as in hopefully a constructive set of data that may contribute something to our understanding of the subject...
And our subject Seems to be-Whence,and since When,and Whyfore,this peculiar event-the extension of the eye-collar on Scandi axes?
(am i correct?)

Now,the pole-arms aside,how old really is that extension of the eye?What evidence we Do have?(other than the interpretation of the the evidence of militaria of the middle Middle ages,with my Utmost respect to all those that love and study it).

Here's that famous Roman adze from the British Museum:

http://www.dartmouth.edu/~rogerulrich/tools/tl_adze_72.jpg

We see that someone has indeed gone through considerable trouble to extend the eye.(i've thought about how it was made for several years now,and i Think i may know approx. how,but none of the variants would be easy to execute).
So Why?

There are other examples that also predate the Middle ages.Some-by a very great span...

Now,without meaning the Least disrespect,i'd just like to be a little more careful,thoughtful with "facts",at least those that,although long "held" to be "facts",may in effect be wide-spread assumptions.
One thing that is Always mentioned(and never fails to grate on me,being highly questionable in my opinion):The supposed Great value put on ferrous metals in antiquity.Is it really so?
We know that in Novgorod Rus,the area extremely inclement and agriculturally hopeless,the peasants paid their taxes in iron blooms,for centuries...
It was because the "bog"(oxide,limonite) ores,and the forests for making charcoal,were plentiful...The rest of equipment amounted to a hole in a ground...(and they even had that,too:)).
We also now know that people there didn't recycle,or repurpose their knives,and many other implements,but threw them away into trash-heaps when worn beyond useful life.
Also,the very ground in much of Asia and parts of Europe is SO liberally seeded with iron arrow-points...i wonder if anyone ever made an estimate,like in tons per day of battle or something:)

Most certainly there was Plenty of tang-type tools around,at all times(today possibly more than ever).But what,exactly,does that tell us?..That is where i call for treading more slowly and carefully.
Archaeology does admit to making a number of rash statements in the past,some of which die pretty hard....

So,that's my point-to proceed carefully,and cautiously.MUCH respect.
 
Kevin Houtzager said:
I cant find any drawings or dated examples from before that depicting collared axes. I can find other examples with dates like this though. So with that we can safely assume that they came into being from the 1600 onwards as both found and documented in historical drawings. But It may even be before that. My conclusing stems from the facts that there where a lot of wars during that time and there being no apperrent other explanations for the emerging of collared axe. Other then for protecting the haft itself.
Click to expand...

Kevin!It sounds like you resolved the issue,and have no need for further evidence,that's wonderful!:).I mean it with no sarcasm,it's an enviable state of mind.

For me though,personally,the military gear of the European Middle ages is only a very small part of the whole fabric of this issue(even though we Are talking Scandi axes).
I'm interested in the history of metalwork in General,i suppose,and the Churchen of the Amur valley(a first-millenium a.d. a "proto-Korean" culture,one may say,in any case with a Very developed black(ferrous) metallurgy),hold much fascination for me.
And further West into Asia,where the Saha(Yakut,in the outdated,racist soviet usage)in the Lena valley forged for a couple of millenia,and further and further West,across the assorted "Scythian" burial mounds,whoever those people actually were...

Eventually,we Do get to Europe...And there,even before the Great Migration period,the La Tene culture did,i an iron socket-mounted axe("celt" as they're sometimes called).
But,see,it's still a question whether all that rich metallurgical tradition of the Rhine valley was derived from the technologies brought from the East,and if so to what extent...
And here's the deal:A socket-type tools were a constant presence,even the granddaddy of them all-the Bronze axe-was a socket-tool!:).
(Even before that,on my side of Bering Strait,the "5-part harpoon" of the Inuit was a socket-tool!:))
So were the plows,and spears,and don't forget Shovels!!!!:)
So,without going on and on,i freely grant you all the convictions you may hold,and sincerely thank you for the contribution of much interesting info.
It's just both historically,And metallurgically,it doesn't start there for me(nor ends...:(....
 
jake pogg said:
Kevin!It sounds like you resolved the issue,and have no need for further evidence,that's wonderful!:).I mean it with no sarcasm,it's an enviable state of mind.
Click to expand...

An additional argument supporting Kevin’s opinion is, that - as he specifically pointed this out in another thread - “he knows, he is right”. ;)

I would only like to add that the info of museum exhibits is to be taken as critically as that of any other source.
Especially, when “museologists” can be people without proper, and more importantly relevant training in archeology and/or historiography.

Thank you Jake for your valuable contribution in this thread.
As usual, I learned a lot from your posts. :thumbsup::thumbsup:
 
It seems that many ancient Bronze Age cultures produced collared axes.

I don’t know if the following axes are original Luristani, Bactrian etc. artifacts or modern reproductions:

http://www.ancientresource.com/images/persian/luristan/axe-0411089b.jpg

http://www.ancientresource.com/images/persian/luristan/axe-901290a.jpg

https://i.pinimg.com/736x/2f/9f/73/2f9f7301ec0a877697c84035c1dcd977.jpg

http://img.auctiva.com/imgdata/1/6/5/7/2/7/4/webimg/711382381_tp.jpg

https://www.paleodirect.com/ne152-a...ronze-spike-war-axe-with-finest-preservation/

https://cdn6.bigcommerce.com/s-fme2...38/ne152y__89380.1441246679.1280.1280.jpg?c=2

http://www.ancientresource.com/images/greek/baktrian-axe124.jpg

The collars appear to be for real hafting, and many axes seems to be real user weapons rather than purely ceremonial objects.

Of course to produce a cast bronze collared axe is a completely different technology than to hammer one out from iron.
Bronze also corrodes less than iron, so it is preserved more in the ancient archeological records.

The following axes (if authentic) seems to combine the cast bronze docket/collar with an iron blade:

http://www.christies.com/lotfinder/lot/a-luristan-bronze-an-iron-axe-head-1818629-details.aspx

https://auction.catawiki.com/kavels...onze-handle-decorated-with-lion-30-50-x-11-cm

https://www.tf.uni-kiel.de/matwis/amat/iss/kap_a/illustr/neues_museum_luristan_axe.jpg
 
Last edited:
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top