by Paul Hill
It is in the terms given to spears that a clue to the weapon’s function can be elucidated. There is much variety here. In fact, the word ‘spear’ itself only refers to the iron weapon head and is one of the least frequent terms encountered in the literature. Other terms were very specific and indicate that the Anglo-Saxons and Vikings knew exactly what each type of weapon was used for. The term ‘Æsc’ (pronounced ‘ash’) is used in literary sources twenty-five times and refers exclusively to a large, long-bladed weapon with an ash shaft, which is very often associated with a wealthy owner such as a thegn, ealdorman or earl. An example comes, once again, from the The Battle of Maldon:
Byrhtwold spoke up, he raised his shield And brandished his Æsc. He was an old retainer.
Here, there is an explicit association with the Æsc and the rank of its owner. By far the most common term used in the literary sources is the word ‘gar’, with seventy-eight references. In Old Norse, this word is ‘geir’ and probably meant the same type of weapon. The word survives today in terms less martial such as ‘garlic’ (‘spear-leek’) and ‘garfish’ (a fish with a spear-like nose). In the later Anglo-Saxon period it is most often described as being retained in the hands of its owners, although it is sometimes described in flight indicating that it was of a small enough size to be thrown effectively if required. The ‘ætgar’ seems to have been a lighter version of the gar and is most frequently described in flight. Lighter still, and clearly a missile weapon, was the ‘daroð’, a word from which we get the word ‘dart’. The later term ‘gafeluc’ probably refers to the gar and daroð in flight.
Other related terms in this period show some interesting aspects of spear usage. An ‘æscberend’, for example, was a spear bearer. Whether this applied to the owner or indicated that the weapon was of such importance that it had its own carrier is unknown. The tip of the weapon head was known as the ‘ord’. Some terms indicate the usage of a spear in another area, that of hunting. The terms ‘huntingspere’ and ‘barspere’ (‘boar spear’) are both indicative of this. The wild boar was an animal of noted ferocity in ancient times and hunting it successfully was something of a rite of passage for a young man. The weapon with which one hunted such an animal was not, as is often surmised, a bow and arrow (for this was the weapon of a poacher), it was a spear. This type of spear needed to be long in the blade to get through the thick hide of the boar. By listing the terms used to describe the Anglo-Saxon spear, we can see at a glance the versatility and importance of this most useful of all weapons:
atorspere poisoned spear
æsc large spear/lance
æscholt large spear shaft
ætgar short spear
bangar murdering spear
barspreot/barspere boar spear
daroð dart/javelin
deaþspere/wælgar/wælspere deadly spear
gafeluc spear/javelin
garcwealm death by spear
garholt spear shaft
heresceaft spear/army spear
mægenwudu strong spear
nægelspere sharp spear
sæcg spearman
scotspere hurling spere
spreot pole or pike-like spear
þræcwudu spear
Another form of spear not alluded to above is what some modern observers have termed the ‘winged’ spear. It appears to have been introduced into the Anglo-Saxon weapon set in about the ninth century, probably by the Great Heathen Army. The concept of the winged spear, however, may not have been a Danish one, since it is noticeable in Frankish contexts as early as the seventh century. Even here, the origins are not certain and it is likely that the weapon had its first occurrence further east in Byzantium. That the winged spear occurs in English examples is not doubted. Its form is defined by a single set of metal ‘wings’ welded to either side of the socket ferrule. The ferrule is always welded shut and not cleft or open on these types, which in itself indicates a Continental origin for the type. The blade of the weapon is nearly always a broad leaf shape of anything between 400–650mm in length.
Sometimes, manuscript depictions show multiple lines indicating multiple wings at this point, but there have never been any spearheads found with more than one set of wings. What is most likely is that these lines represent protruding rivets, used to secure the weapon head to the shaft.
Very little work has been done on defining the spear types of the later Anglo-Saxon period. From what evidence we have, it is just possible to propose tentative categories of these weapons. The following observations are based upon an extensive survey of material in a number of museum collections across England conducted by the author.
Fig. 7. ‘Winged’ spearheads from London.
Table 3. Spear types in later Anglo-Saxon England.
1. Javelins
The light spear, or javelin. Used for throwing, with a range of effectiveness perhaps up to 25yd. Defining features include an internal socket diameter of between 9mm and 17mm, indicating a shaft incapable of sustaining lateral tension. A warrior could carry up to three of these in his left hand behind his shield, as is evidenced in the Bayeux Tapestry (Fig. 8).
2. Spears
The most common type. Mentioned as gar or spere in the sources. A fairly light weapon, capable of being thrown at close quarters, but likely also to be retained for hand-to-hand combat. Usually an internal socket diameter of around 22mm, indicating a shaft thick enough to sustain some lateral tension in use.
3. Long Thrusting Spears
Probably the æsc of the noble retainer. Characteristically, a long weapon intended to be retained in the hand. Perhaps developed from the boar spear and quite capable of being used by both infantry and cavalry, but most probably being employed in England as an infantry weapon.
4. Heavy Spears
A type of spear with an unusually weighty weapon head, commonly over 500g.
Used in the same manner as Long Thrusting Spears and unlikely to have been thrown in battle.
5. ‘Winged’ Spears
A Continental or Scandinavian addition to the English weapon set, probably derived from Byzantium. A weapon designed for effective defence and probably employed in the shield wall by wealthy retainers in the same way as the Long Thrusting Spear.
How then, were battles fought between armies of the period armed predominantly with spears of the types outlined above? The Battle of Maldon says:
Likewise they were encouraged by Aethelgar’s son Godric, onward to the struggle. Often he sent a spear, A slaughter-shaft, spinning into the Vikings . . .
Many spears, it seems, can be wielded one handed, provided the head is light enough. These are used in conjunction with the shield and are often wielded over-arm. The Bayeux Tapestry shows spears employed in this way, even though this was an age when the larger Long Thrusting Spears were readily available. The great advantage of spears is their ability to keep the enemy at a distance. Foes with swords and axes, while devastating at point of contact, are less decisive if they are kept at spear’s length. The effect of interlocking shields and Long Thrusting Spears in the front rank must have been impressive indeed, providing that the cohesion of the formation could be retained.
Fig. 8. Housecarls with reserve javelins at the ready, from the Bayeux Tapestry.
Re-enactors have revealed some surprising observations about spear-play. Kim Siddorn, one of the country’s leading re-enactors, has pointed out that each spearman in the shield wall had three enemies: the one in front of him, the one on his shielded side, and the one on the right. The most dangerous of them is the one on the right who can see through the gap on the spearman’s unshielded right-hand side. Once this gap is exploited, a shield wall can collapse in a very short space of time, particularly if swift-moving, lightly armoured foes can penetrate the gap. More often than not, it is suggested, you do not see the person who kills you. A sobering thought.
By trying to wield a replica of a ‘winged’ spear, some observation can be made. Some arguments that have been put forwa
rd are based around the idea that the ‘wings’ are there to stop the weapon travelling through an opponent. They are too deeply positioned for this. Many of the blades on this type of spear, are so long that they would have gone right through the body of an enemy before the wings would take effect. Those who use these replicas have commented that even a small ‘wing’ can be used very effectively to parry or trap an opponent’s spear or sword, allowing a shield wall companion to capitalise on an enemy’s exposure. In effect, the ‘winged’ spear seems to have been militarily useful as a spear with a built-in hilt, or guard.
The devastating effect of a javelin thrown at close-quarters cannot be underestimated. It need not be razor sharp to be effective. Few, if any, of these surviving weapon heads show signs of having been sharpened, although it is possible that this evidence, being only surface evidence, will have eroded away over time. Re-enactors have shown that a javelin hurled at a pig carcass, even when protected by a mailed outer layer, would still penetrate to an impressive 13cm depth. It is easy to see how bodies of light infantry armed with such weapons could have softened-up a shield wall before it came into contact with its main enemy.
Swords
No other weapon in English history has had such symbolism and ritual associated with it. There is simply nothing to match the magnificence of the Anglo-Saxon sword. To a warrior lucky enough or rich enough to own one, the sword was everything to him. He gave it a name, treated it with care and passed it down to his son or chosen beneficiary when he left this world. To give an idea of a sword’s worth, King Alfred left a sword said to be valued at 3,600 pennies (100 mancuses) to his staunch ally Ealdorman Æthelred of Mercia. The will of the Ætheling Athelstan dating from the early tenth century contained a ‘silver-hilted sword which once belonged to Ulfketel’ as well as one with a ‘pytted’ hilt, suggesting that the grip had a pattern raised in relief. A brand (a blade without the hilt attached) was also left by Athelstan to his brother Edmund. In all, Athelstan was able to leave twelve swords to relatives and retainers.
Contemporary literature is full of references to the sword during Anglo-Saxon times. Sometimes it speaks of shining serpent-like patterns dancing on fine blades (an allusion to the pattern welding techniques more common in blade construction in the earlier Anglo-Saxon period) and of daring deeds played out at the sword’s edge. The historical written material oozes with the tales of swords and their illustrious owners.
Archaeology has also given us more than a glimpse of what these weapons were like. Research has shown us differences in the morphology of the blade and hilt structures over time. It has demonstrated the composition of the metalwork of the blade and the nature of pattern welding. Also, the inlaid blade inscriptions apparent from the ninth century onwards are revealed by such research. But, above all, it has allowed us to draw tentative conclusions as to how these weapons might have been used in anger.
Because the sword is of such singular cultural importance to the Anglo-Saxons, we need to look back to the Germanic Migration period in England –a period that precedes the scope of this book. This way, we will understand some important changes in sword design which herald the arrival of a slightly different kind of weapon in the Viking era. Archaeology plays tricks on us. The evidence for swords in the earlier period is reasonably strong due to the widespread practice of pagan burials with accompanying grave goods in which the sword features occasionally. The magnificent pattern-welded sword from Sutton Hoo is perhaps the finest example of them all. Put simply, when the archaeological record for swords picks up again in the eighth century, we see a different morphology to sword hilts and grips providing some limited evidence that the weapon itself was changing.
During the sixth century in England when pagan Saxon warriors were still being buried with their symbolic weapon sets, those high-status burials that contained swords produced weapons which in terms of the shape of the blade were either almost parallel sided or slightly tapering to a rounded point. Sword blades of this early period, like the ones that followed them, were double edged. This means that both sides of the blade (or edges) were cutting edges from the hilt all the way down to the point. Swords of the Migration period, because of their blade design, would have been somewhat ‘point-heavy’. This means that the point of balance of the weapon (the ‘fulcrum’ of the blade) was some considerable way down it, towards the point and away from the hilt. The lack of tapering of the blade would have made the warrior feel that his blade wanted to drop down under gravity when he held the grip in his hand. This characteristic, along with the tight one-handed grip construction afforded by the straight parallel upper and lower hilt guards of the early period swords, would have produced a weapon with optimum use in over-arm slashing or hacking, a truly offensive and devastating weapon. Quite how often the swords of the early English cemeteries were used in such a way is open to debate. There is an understandable clamour in favour of almost everything deposited in such burial environments being primarily associated with the notion of ‘ritual’, the implication being that the items found in graves were made for the very purpose of the deposition. However, it is fair to say that the morphology of these weapons does demonstrably lend the swords the characteristics outlined above.
By contrast, the surviving swords from the later Saxon period, both the known English and Danish or Continental types, generally have a tapering blade towards the point and a large pommel design at the hilt. These pommels range from a classic Anglo-Saxon trilobate pommel to the equally distinctive ‘tea cosy’ pommel (Fig. 9). The resulting characteristics of a narrowing blade and the influence of a counter weight at the pommel were to make the weapon more dexterous in the hands of the warrior. The blade has a tendency to spring upwards into the air when wielded as opposed to dropping down under its own weight like its earlier counterparts. One might tentatively suggest that these weapons were very versatile and were not just over-arm slashing weapons, but could be deployed as thrusting weapons as well.
Fig. 9. Later Anglo-Saxon period hilt types.
The dramatically beautiful technique of pattern welding a blade, common in the Dark Ages across Northern Europe, had its practical benefits. It allowed for the distribution of higher carbon ‘steely’ iron more evenly across the blade. The distinctive herring bone twisted rods gradually gave way by the ninth century to blades produced from purer more superior ores from Continental mines and smelting sites. Pattern-welded blades still continued (as is exemplified by the sword from the River Witham now in the Sheffield Museum), but are less common from about this time.
The fuller in these later swords is often evident. A fuller was a feature sometimes described as a ‘blood channel’. It is a groove or depression that runs down the centre of the blade and its inclusion perhaps assists in the lightening of the blade. A distinctive feature of some swords of the later Anglo-Saxon period is the blade that is inscribed. A sword found in the Thames near Temple bears the inscription ‘INGELRII’ on the blade. This is possibly of Frankish origin. Another, from the River Witham again, shows the name ‘LEUTLRIT’ (possibly representing the name Leutfrit). These names will have meant a great deal to the discerning customer, a mark perhaps of quality. One widespread type of inscribed blade is that marked in the name of ‘ULFBERHT’. It is found across Western Europe from Russia to the British Isles, where they are fewer in number. It is thought these blades emanated from a central Rhineland source and were distributed from the port of Hedeby from the ninth to eleventh centuries. It may be the ‘ULFBERHT’ workshop, according to some scholars, that was responsible for the more balanced and tapering form of blade.
As far as hilt design is concerned, it is tentatively possible to discern the Anglo-Saxon from the others. The trilobate pommel fitted to hilts with curved guards seems to be English in origin. It was categorised as long ago as 1919 by Jan Petersen in his grand work on swords of the period from Scandinavia as a Type L. Sometimes the lobes on the pommel number up to five. It seems to be developed out of the Dark Age ‘cocked-h
at pommel’ style popular in England. Where it occurs it often bears decorative motifs known to be late Anglo-Saxon in style from around the ninth century onwards. This style is referred to as the Trewhiddle style. Even those pommels of this type discovered in Scandinavia are distinctively English in decoration. One magnificent example of a Type L sword was found in Yorkshire in the 1970s and is known as the Gilling Sword (Plate 20). It is a stunning example of the sword smith’s craft. Even after its discovery in 1975 by a 9-year-old boy playing in a Yorkshire stream, this gorgeous weapon still withholds the secrets of the circumstances of its loss.
The literature on the subject often describes swords in terms of their magical or symbolic qualities as well as their physical capabilities. There is often reference to the significance of the hilt-ring common on Dark Ages examples (emphasising the warrior as a ring-giver). King Athelstan (924–39), according to William of Malmesbury (writing in around 1125), found a sword miraculously appearing in his scabbard when he had dropped his own weapon during a surprise attack. Athelstan is also associated with the receiving from Hugh, Duke of the Franks, of the Holy Lance and the sword of Constantine the Great complete with an iron crucifixion nail in the hilt.
Perhaps, however the last word on the sword should go to the author of the Exeter riddle thought to be about the weapon. In this teasing verse, he preserves the mystery and power of Anglo-Saxon England’s most potent symbol:
