he story of a nearly decade-long search for an extraordinary axe, virtually unknown in academia, begins in 2017. That’s when we set out on a quest to track down this unique item, believed to be stored in Falköping, Sweden. We published our first preliminary results in 2020. These data were based on information from a single author, and at that time the axe appeared to be missing (Version 2020). However, a key turning point came in 2025, when the axe was rediscovered. We are now delighted to present its photographs and complete data for the first time (Supplement 2025). This version includes a comparison with technologically similar analogies.
Fig. 1: The axe from “Falköping Museum”.
Source: Paulsen 1956: 64, Abb. 25d.
The axe was published by only one researcher – Paulsen – in 1939 (Paulsen 1939: 37, 53, Abb. 21.4) and in 1956 (Paulsen 1956: 40, 64, Abb. 25d). Both sources shares the same picture and description. All the information that Paulsen gives us is:
“Decorated axe. The blade is open and filled by a palmette. The shaft hole area is particularly emphasized by round bumps above and below it. The shaft hole lobes are triangular. The hammer is slightly tilted down.” (Paulsen 1956: 40)
The axe is said to have inventory number 1108:59b and it should be stored in Falköping Museum, Sweden. Unfortunately, when we contacted Cecilia Jensen from the museum, she denied the object belonged to the collection (June 2017). The axe is also missing in SHM catalogue (Statens historiska museum; National Historical Museum). It seems the object is no longer available and was probably destroyed or is located in a private collection.
The axe belongs to Kotowicz type IA.6.33, which is distingushied by its narrow, symmetrical blade and button-shaped hammer. As Paulsen states, the blade is open and decorated with incised plant ornament. The neck and hammer are decorated with bulges. Based on analogies, which will be described later, it can be dated to 10th – 11th century. The size can be roughly estimated (Paulsen indicates approximate scale) to 10-11 cm × 4.5-5.5 cm, unfortunately we have no guarantee this size is correct. It is unknown, whether the axe was decorated with non-ferrous metals.
The closest analogies of the axe belong to Kirpichnikov type I (Kirpichnikov 1966: 33) and can be found in the present-day Russia (Caucasus, Kuban, Middle Volga, Ryazan and Tatarstan). This area was probably the place of production and the type was spreading from there to Kievan Rus and Scandinavia. As the result, we can find quite a huge number of typologically similar axes as far as Scandinavia and Poland (Kotowicz 2018: 117-8; Vlasatý 2016). The axe, which is the closest in both shape and decoration, comes from Central Volga area, Kazan Region, and is dated to 11th century (Williams 2014: 88, Fig. 20). The axe from “Falköping Museum” is, however, unique by its open blade with a palmette, which resembles four Danish and Swedich axes from 10th-11th century (Kotowicz 2013: 49). However, the closest example with an open blade comes from the collection of the Krasnodar State Historical and Archaeological Museum-Reserve (see here). A similar Kotowicz type IB.6.33 (basically the version with an asymmetrical blade) is roughly dated to 10th – mid 12th century by Kotowicz (Kotowicz 2018: 117-8). The hammer-axe from Bj 644 in Birka is also dated to 10th century (Vlasatý 2016). Let’s add that an axe identical to the piece from the Falköping museum appeared in online auctions in 2024, but it is a not very successful forgery created on the basis of this article (see photo).
Fig. 2: A selection of axes of Kirpichnikov typ I from Scandinavia, Germany and Russia.
1 – Falköping, Sweden (Paulsen 1956: 64, Abb. 25d); 2 – Birka, Sweden (SHM); 3 – Rjazan Oblast, Russia (metal detector find); 4 – Simunde, Gotland, Sweden (Thunmark-Nylén 1998: Taf. 260, 7); 5 – Tåby, Sweden (SHM); 6 – Gotland, Sweden (Paulsen 1956: 41, Abb. 13c); 7 – Söderköping, Sweden (Paulsen 1956: 41, Abb. 13a); 8 – Haithabu, Germany (Westphalen 2002: Taf. 17, 4); 9 – Broby, Sweden (SHM).
Fig. 3: The axe from Central Volga area, Kazan Region, dated to 11th century.
Source: Williams 2014: Fig. 20.
Based on the given data, our colleague Carlos Benavides from Chile prepared a beautiful visual reconstruction of the axe. A 3D model was then also printed and can be used for replicating the axe.
Fig. 4: Visualisation of the axe. Author: Carlos Benavides.
We have to mention that based on this article, a great reproduction was created in 2021, which Oleg Kozlenkov offers on his e-shop True History shop.
Fig. 5: Reproduction of the axe. Source: True History shop.
Supplement 2025
In June 2025, the Swedish archaeologist Ny Björn Gustafsson drew our attention to the fact that the axe had been published in another source that we had overlooked – namely Wideen’s publication (Wideen 1955: 65, Fig. 34), which presents the axe somewhat differently:
“The Falbygdens museum preserves several examples of axes, one of which is made of openwork bronze, but with an iron edge (FM 357), found in Åsle or Tiarp.“
This quotation differs from Paulsen’s description in the specification of the material (copper alloy with an iron edge), in a different inventory number and in the possible place of discovery. The publication includes a more detailed drawing with scale, which indicates a somewhat different shaping of the perforations and thorns at the handle hole. The hammer-shaped butt is depicted as facetted and not beveled, unlike in the Paulsen’s drawing. The original assumption of the dimensions was confirmed (length 11.5 cm, width of the blade 5.1 cm). The drawing shows the shape of the shaft hole seen from below. In addition to these data, the museum told us that the height in the area of the thorns by the shaft hole is 2.7 cm, the height of the hammer-shaped butt is 1.8 cm, and the total weight is 0.115 kg.
Fig. 6: The axe from “Falköping Museum”. Source: Wideen 1955: Obr. 34, edited.
Armed with valuable information about the different inventory number, we again contacted Mrs. Cecilia Jensen, who, on the basis of this information, traced both the inventory card and subsequently the original artifact, which she assigned the new inventory number 2M16-357. The inventory card (the source of Wideen), created between 1930 and 1955, is the most valuable source of information about the origin of the axe:
“County: Vartofta
Parish: Åsle? Högstena? [later pencil note]
Stored [in]: Falbygdens museum
Number: 357
Recorded by: E. M. [Einar Magnusson?]
Year: 1929
Artifact: Axe (in 2 pieces, hammer broken at shaft hole)
(Brass or) light bronze
Description: The axe, 1311.5 [later pencil note] cm long and with a 5.1 cm long blade, is slender in shape. The blade is split lengthwise and inside the slot there are iron remains of a corroded edge. The blade is openwork and decorated with a motif of a Romanesque vase or lily. The butt widens into a smaller hammer.
Circumstances of discovery:
Impossible to obtain! Kroszewsky bought the axe at auction [later pencil note]Examined in St. H. M. [State Historical Museum Stockholm] in 1930: ‘Viking Age’
Gift of prosecutor Mendel Kroszewski, Kås.”
In this document we learn new information that the axe was purchased at auction no later than 1929 by Jacob Mendel Kroschewsky from a hamlet named Kås (some 25 km southwest of Falköping) and later donated to the museum, after which it was sent to the State Historical Museum in Stockholm for assessment in 1930. The axe was found in the area east of the town of Falköping, specifically in the area of the villages of Åsle – Tiarp – Högstena. The butt was supposed to be broken and it can be assumed that some conservation intervention took place, which may be the reason for the discrepancy between Paulsen’s version and the current appearance.
Fig. 7: Axe inventory card. Source: Falbygdens museum.
The information obtained confirms that the artifact closely matches Wideen’s publication and inventory card. The only notable deviation is the fact that the blade has only two large perforations, while all other internal surfaces, previously considered holes, are simply depressions that contribute to the plastic appearance of the axe. In this respect, Paulsen’s drawing was relatively close to reality, but it was not correctly read, because axes with similar lowered surfaces are very few in the early medieval corpus and, in the case of iron versions, they are concentrated exclusively in the territory of southeastern Ukraine and southern Russia (Degtjar 1984: Fig. 2.2; Holubev 2017: Fig. 3.3; Kryhanov 2012: Fig. 34.4, 35.2; Šramko 1962: Fig. 105.1; Vladimirov 2017: Fig. 14.3). The overall appearance of the openwork blade is relatively close to the aforementioned Danish and Swedish axes of Petersen types L and M (Brøndsted 1936: 121, 181-2; Fig. 63, Fig. 92.2; Paulsen 1956: 67, Fig. 25b; Schiørring 1978).
Fig. 8: Photos of the axe. Source: Falbygdens museum.
All photos of the axe taken by Falbygdens museum for the purposes of this article can be found at the following link:
The fact that the axe is made of a copper alloy with an inserted iron edge deserves a brief comment. When mapping the closest analogies, up to seven other European pieces were found, indicating a similar construction. Bronze axes are characterized by strong heterogeneity and cannot be classified into one typological or decorative group. Rather, they appear to be rare extravagant eccentricities that could have been created at a similar time and in many cases in a similar region of Europe, specifically in Eastern Europe in the 10th-13th centuries. It cannot be ruled out that production could also have taken place locally, for example, the bronze axe from Oslo – lacking an iron blade – fairly faithfully copies the proportions of Petersen’s type M, which suggests a northern European origin (Shetelig 1911: Fig. 13). These are usually relatively small axes, which in some cases border on the definition of miniatures, but it should be remembered that the iron edge could have been significantly longer before corrosion. Mapping the closest bimetallic analogies does not seem to contradict the previously proposed assumption about the place and time of origin.
As far as we know, the phenomenon of these bimetallic axes is neglected in the literature. In an attempt to better understand the production process, the author contacted several craftsmen who suggested various ways of inserting the edge. The group of manufacturers around Petr Floriánek is of the opinion that without exact inspection, the most logical option is to cast the axe directly onto the edge or to solder it. Karel Loukota is skeptical about soldering, because the required temperature could cause the edge to temper. All craftsmen assessed riveting and cleaning the rivets as a possible solution, but as an extremely laborious solution in the early medieval period. Loukota suggested the possibility of locking the blade using a dovetail joint, but the available cross-sections show that the edges were seated by a wedge-shaped joint.
A previously unpublished theory was proposed in a personal discussion by Russian archaeologist Kirill Mikhailov. He believes that the bimetallic axes were never used as real weapons, but rather as high medieval reliquaries used to house axe fragments associated with, for example, Saint Olav. This theory could well explain the dating, construction, and geography of the Scandinavian and northern Russian finds, but it cannot be verified at present.
Map 1: Map of cast bronze axes with steel blades from the 10th-13th century.
The axe kept in the National Museum in Copenhagen is not shown.
One of the most famous analogies is the spectacular bronze axe from Staraya Ladoga measuring 10.5 × 4.8 cm, decorated with plastic animal motifs, which was found in 1910 in layers from the 10th-11th century (Kirpičnikov 1966: Tab. XX.1; Korzuchina 1966). In 1913, a 9 cm long bronze axe decorated with silver inlay in the form of heraldic symbols and inscriptions was found in the Ulyanovsk Oblast (then Simbirsk Governorate), which is dated to the 12th century (Kirpičnikov 1966: Tab. XIX.2; Korzuchina 1966: 92; Spicyn 1915). In Biljarsk, Kazan, a torso of a small bronze axe with a spur on the beard and a silver-inlaid geometric motif on one side and a predator motif on the other was found (Darkevič 1961: 96, Fig. 2.6; Korzuchina 1966: 92). The axe is dated to the 11th-14th centuries by the authors. Another cast bronze axe from the 11th century was discovered at the Knyatha Hora site in what is now Ukraine (Korzuchina 1966: 92, Fig. 2). This axe is also decorated, specifically with engraving, which is filled in with niello. The axe is equipped with an unusual spur on the beard, which forms an openwork hole. The last East European bronze axe comes from the site of Ljublino (formerly Wargen) in the Kaliningrad Bolast, where it was discovered in 1995 (Kulakov – Skvorcov 2000). The axe, decorated with animal ornament, is dated to the 13th-14th century.
Fig. 9: The axe from Staraya Ladoga and its reproduction.
Source: Korzuchina 1966: Fig. 1; True History Shop.
Obr. 10: Axe from Ulyanovsk Oblast.
Source: Kirpičnikov 1966: Tab. XIX.2.
Fig. 11: Axes from Biljarsk (left) and Knyazha Hora (right) sites.
Source: Darkevič 1961: Fig. 2.6; Korzuchina 1966: Fig. 2.
Fig. 12: Axe from the Ljublino site (formerly Wargen).
Source: Kulakov – Skvorcov 2000: Fig. 1.
Another axe from the Scandinavian environment can be mentioned, originating from the North Icelandic site of Fitjaá (Eldjárn 2016: 346-7). This axe, measuring 11.8 × 9 cm, is traditionally dated to the period of the settlement of Iceland (9th-10th century), but the elongated shape of its thorns suggests a somewhat younger dating (see the discussion by Hendry – Vlasatý 2022). Its shape corresponds to another bronze axe from the Norwegian site of Halmøen ved Namsos, which, however, lacks an inserted iron edge (Shetelig 1911: 11-12). The inserted iron edge, which was riveted with bronze rivets, can be found in a bronze and quite problematic axe, now kept in the National Museum in Copenhagen (Undset 1878: 57-8). The axe, measuring 15 × 10 cm, was imported from Norway in the early 19th century. It is currently virtually unknown and there is no academic consensus. In the digital catalogue of the National Museum in Copenhagen, it is listed as dating to the Viking Age, while a 19th-century publication places it in the Christian Middle Ages or the Early Modern period. The group of makers around Petr Floriánek believes that the axe is a modern product.
Fig. 13: Axe from the Fitjaá site.
Source: Eldjárn 2016: 198. mynd; sarpur.is.
Fig. 14: A problematic Norwegian axe from the National Museum in Copenhagen.
Source: Undset 1878: Fig. 44; natmus.dk.
Acknowledgment
This revision of the Swedish axe would not have been possible without the involvement of a wider research team. First and foremost, we would like to thank Cecilia Jensen (Falbygdens museum, Falköping) who willingly answered our questions for 8 years, found the artifact, took photographs and provided them for publication. We are indebted to researchers Ny Björn Gustafsson (Swedish National Heritage Board) and Gustav Solberg (University of Copenhagen) for sharing the results of their own research. We also express our gratitude to the top craftsmen Petr Floriánek (Gullinbursti), Karel Loukota (Grizzly Art) and Vojtěch Světlík (BrokksWorks) who answered our technical questions.
All photos of the Norwegian axe from the National Museum in Copenhagen, provided by Gustav Solberg, can be found at the following link:
We hope you liked reading this article. If you have any question or remark, please contact us or leave a comment below. If you want to learn more and support our work, please, fund our project on Patreon, Buymeacoffee, Revolut or Paypal.
Bibliografie
Brøndsted, Johannes (1936). Danish inhumation graves of the Viking Age. In: Acta Archaeologica VII, 81–228.
Darkevič 1961 = Даркевич, В. Л. (1961). Топор как символ Перуна в древнерусском язычестве // Советская археология, № 4, 91–102.
Degtjar 1984 = Дегтярь, А. К. (1984). Комплекс из погребения воина у с. Кочеток на Северском Донце // Советская Археология 2, 239-243.
Eldjárn, Kristján (2016). Kuml og haugfé, Reykjavík.
Hendry, Michael – Vlasatý, Tomáš (2022). Spear and axe from Caerwent, Wales. In: Project Forlǫg – Reenactment and science [online]. [cit. 2025-07-06]. Available at: https://sagy.vikingove.cz/en/spear-and-axe-from-caerwent-wales/.
Holubev 2017 = Голубєв, А. М. (2017). Два нових салтово-маяцьких кремаційних могильники навколо с. Суха Гомільша на Харківщині // Археологія № 1, 74-79.
Kirpičnikov 1966 = Кирпичников, А. Н. (1966). Древнерусское оружие. Вып. 2: Копья, сулицы, боевые топоры, булавы, кистени IX – XIII вв, Москва.
Korzuchina 1966 = Корзухина, Г. Ф. (1966). Ладожский топорик // Культура древней Руси: Сборник статей посвящённый 40-летию научной деятельности Н.Н. Воронина. Отв. ред. А.Л. Монгайт, Москва, 89–96.
Kotowicz, P. N. (2013). The Sign of the Cross on the Early Medieval Axes – A Symbol of Power, Magic or Religion? In: Weapons Brings Peace? Warfare in Medieval and Early Modern Europe, Wratislavia Antiqua 18, Wrocław: 41–55.
Kotowicz, Piotr N. (2018). Early Medieval Axes from Territory of Poland, Kraków.
Kryhanov 2012 = Криганов, Андрей (2012). Військова справа кочевників Північного Причорномор’я кінця IV – початку XIII століть, Суми.
Kulakov – Skvorcov 2000 = Кулаков, В. И. – Скворцов, К. Н. (2000). Топорик из Варген (Ранговое оружие последних язычников Европы). In: Slavia Antiqua XLI, 173-190.
Paulsen, Peter (1939). Axt Und Kreuz bei den Nordgermanen, Berlin.
Paulsen, Peter (1956). Axt und Kreuz in Nord- und Osteuropa, Bonn.
Shetelig, Haakon (1911). En miniatyrøks av bronse fra vikingtid. In: Bergen Museums Aarbok 1911 (13), 1–18.
Schiørring, Ole (1978). Korset i øksen. In: Skalk 1978/6, 28–29.
Spicyn 1915 = Спицын, А. А. (1915). Декоративные топорики // Записки Отделения Русской и славянской археологии 11, 222-224.
Šramko 1962 = Шрамко Б. А. (1962). Древности Северского Донца, Харьков.
Thunmark-Nylén, Lena (1998). Die Wikingerzeit Gotlands II : Typentafeln, Stockholm.
Undset, Ingvald (1878). Norske Oldsager i fremmede Museer : en oplysende Fortegnelse, Kristiania.
Vladimirov 2017 = Владимиров, С. И. (2017). Вооружение и военное дело населения Доно-Донецкой лесостепи во второй половине VIII – начале X вв.: салтово-маяцкая культура, Воронеж.
Vlasatý, Tomáš (2016). „Sekeru s sebou“, katalog seker z Birky, komentář a srovnání. In: Project Forlǫg – Reenactment and science [online]. [cit. 2020-02-01]. Available at: https://sagy.vikingove.cz/sekery-birka/
Wideen, Harald (1955). Västsvenska vikingatidsstudier: arkeologiska källor till Vänerområdets kulturhistoria under yngre järnålder och äldsta medeltid, Göteborg.
Westphalen, Petra (2002). Die Eisenfunde von Haithabu. Die Ausgrabungen in Haithabu 10, Neumünster.
Williams, Gareth (ed.) (2014). Vikings: Life and Legend, London.