The mighty battle axe 2

[Steven Blakely]

AT the end of last winter i purchased to axes from Cold steel and have discovered severall things.
the axe was not as popular melee weapon as the sword, owing to the fact that its head heavy balance made it unwieldy. although destructive as it was and as it could be made far more cheaply than the sword the weight was it greatest draw back. the sword is much more lythe and alive as well as the spear. I find however that despite all this it is still a formidable weapon as long as several specifications are always met. The blade should never be more than seven inches. It should also have only a sigle head and no pont out of the top *ie the pole axe* instead the axe blade should sweep up like a thrusting axe. Giving you the ability to make deep penetrating pierces as well as destuctive chops and slashes. This design allows for the axe to minimize weight while maximizing its lethality.

[Brent Lambell]

The axe was/is also primarily a tool, not a weapon. I believe one of the reasons that the sword holds so much nostalgia is due to the fact it was one of the few weapons made solely for the sake of warfare. Spears, bow and arrow and many others all had civilian uses, whereas the sword was designed for killing, pure and simple. The more I learn about the sword, the more impressed I become by its lethality.

I have heard a theory that one of the reasons axes, spears and other weapons were so popular was due to the fact most people had some familiarity with their use (chopping, hunting, etc) but the sword was a specialized piece of equipment. And that is not considering the costs associated with the weapons. I imagine a well made sword would fetch a pretty price while an axe was more affordable, in antiquity and modern times.

[LafayetteCCurtis]

Oddly, I think I've handled several reproduction battleaxes that are amazingly light and well-balanced. Maybe it's just because I've had plenty of practice chopping down trees with heavier tool axes--battleaxes could be lighter because flesh is easier to cut than wood--but maybe it can also be ascribed to a difference in construction philosophy. An axe that is still meant to retain usefulness as a tool is probably going to be heavier and more robust than one used strictly for killing people.

[Grant Hall]

Hey guys, I just felt I had to correct some misconceptions.

The Battle Axe is not the same as an Axe used for chopping wood, it is designed purely for killing on the battlefield and is not used also as a tool. Indeed a battle axe would be quite useless in chopping wood as the head is too light and you'd need to put unnecessary force behind each swing, not to mention you would likely damage your axe.

Battle axes are extremely light (compared to a wood cutting axe) or rather, they feel extremely light, because they are both lighter and balanced differently.

A common misconception is that a a Battle Axe is slow this is not true, in the hands of someone who knows how to use it, it is deadly fast.

I delivers devestating cuts that can bypass mail and cleave felsh and bone, or ring true against plate and deliver blunt force trauma to the encased victim.

Master Silver lists the axe as one of the most efficient battlefield weapons, I'd have to agree (though my battlefield killling expierience is somewhat imited )

I think the main reason it was so popular is not because it was cheap or because a woodcutting peasant had familiarity (The Axe was not so much a peasnats weapon as an Elite professional Warrior's Weapon), its popularity stemmed from the fact that it was a brutally effective and intimidating weapon that could devestate both armoured and unamoured men.

Thanks for taking the time to read this.

Cheers!

PS: Can anyone guess what my favourite weapon is

[david welch]

When you think about it, the axe is a wonderful weapon. Especially if you are armoured.

When fighting unarmoured people you can simply mow them down with it. When fighting armoured foes, you are going to be using it in halfsword anyway.

[Jeffrey Hull]

Sure thing, a war axe would not have had a thick wedge-shaped cross-section, it would have been much flatter and blade-like (so to speak).

Although the following is not an overhead view, this profile picture of a really nice replica does give us some idea that the blade of a war axe was much more thin and streamlined than a work axe:

Danish War Axe
http://armor.com/pole024.html
http://armor.com/view.html?pole024a.jpg

[Nathan Dexter]

What people need to realize is that a slow weapon is a poor weapon. It makes it much easier to kill someone when they are swinging at you with something that weighs 15 pounds.

[Patrick Hardin]

Remember King Harold's huscarls, that used two-handed battle axes. You don't equip your elite troops with clumsy weapons.

[Jeffrey Hull]

These Hurstwic guys have a bunch of nice viking-axe photos -- replicas, artifacts, overhead-views (showing thinness of the blade), etc.

http://www.hurstwic.org/history/article ... ng_axe.htm

Note that a large handaxe is stated as 1.7 pounds total, head & shaft. Accordingly, one may reckon that a big war axe / huscarl axe should not be more than 2.5 to 3.0 pounds total. So total weight really no more than a sword (although the dynamics of balance would of course differ).

I would suggest correction to their statement that the things were made of iron, which seems to imply solely thereof. I understand that many of them had a composite design, made so that the cutting-edge itself (for like 2 inches deep) was a seperate little billet of high quality steel that was forge-welded into the rest of the head. And perhaps also many axe-heads were entirely made of steel.

[Steven Blakely]

i apreciat the replies My knowledge of the axe comes from my use of the Cold Steel pole axe. i think that maybe i should look for a different company. i would also like toknow if anybody knows were i could get a decent axe training waister.

[Keith Culbertson]

say, thank you for the hurstwic link--lots of good basic info there for a fellow viking enthusiast.

now, as to this fighting with mass weapons. I have found that although there are few extant guides for such other than pollaxe and club, a few things are apparent when experimenting. At first keep the thing (axe, mace, flail[although there is a whole other problem there with any chains], morningstar, pick, club, etc) moving in tight patterns and move your feet to get the right range and avoid attacks. this allows you to be better able to knock aside incoming attacks and able to strike back. by all means set up with jab-like movements (I think this is where all the spikes, axe hooks, etc come in) and then finish with bigger arcing motions once the opponent is off balance, stunned, disarmed, out of position or whatever you created with previous moves. do NOT try a haymaker that telegraphs your intent, avenue and such---too easy to counter. most one-hand mass weapons pair very well with a shield.

hope that helps a bit, but in any case just get out there and take nots of your own while experimenting with how the mass weapons are quite different from balanced swords, yet still very effective

holiday cheers to all!

[Grant Hall]

Hey guys, just thought I'd mention once again, if you want to learn how to authentically use a two-handed axe, then study to manuals dealing with Black Bills and with Halberds as these are meant to be related to the Axe, and are one and the same in play.

Cheers!

[Nathan Dexter]

I wouldnt say exactly the same, because bills and related polarms have other little pointy killing bits, but yes they are very similar.

[Grant Hall]

I wouldnt say exactly the same, because bills and related polarms have other little pointy killing bits, but yes they are very similar.

I don't see any significant difference, Battle Axes were often fitted with spiked tips (similar to spears) capable of thrusting, and it was not uncommon for them have back spikes similar to a Bill or Halberd that could deliver deep punctur wounds whilst being also able to hook legs, arms, and weapons.

I think the main difference is that the emphasis shifts slightly with each weapon, with the axe emphasising more cutting swings than thrusting or hooking.

Ofcourse there are plently of axes that dont have spikes tips or backs such as the Dane-Axe, and these would ofcourse really even more on the cutting swings, but essentially one would still train the same. I mean, a thrust to the face with the blunt head of a Dane-Axe is going to do just about* as much damage as spiked tip, it'll just deal it out differently.

Cheers!

*Disclaimer, I realising having a metal spike thrust though your face is almost guarenteed to be fatal, but get smashed with a blunt axe-head can also prove fatal, and even if it doesn't kill you, you are most likely going to be KO'd or so disoriented that the axe weilding maniac that just hit you can easily dispose of you with a quick cut.

[Mars Healey]

While the weapon in this shot is a cheaply made POS, it would still do some serious damage. The blade side is substantial enough, but the Bec de Corbin is weak and would fold under pressure. A friend bought this for me thinking, "Oh, Mars likes weapons. I'll buy him this 'real' battle axe for $30." Yeah, sure. Anyway, it's a nice wall-hanger.