Mens midtsplitten bak ser ut til å

Mens midtsplitten bak ser ut til å være skåret trådrett, kan en tydelig se at kilen i seg selv er skjev. Som Gjessing skriver, er den rett på høyre side, men buet på venstre side.
Krummingen avtar imidlertid, og som det går fram av Figur 13 så virker ikke Gjessings rekonstruksjon av kilen troverdig på denne siden. Han anslår at kilen har hatt en bredde på ca 22,5 cm nederst, men jeg mener at ca 18 cm er et bedre anslag. Det er viktig å understreke at godt over halvparten av kilen er borte, så et anslag kan kun baseres på den utviklingen som kan sees på den bevarte delen. Forutsatt at koftelengden også på baksiden har vært 104,4 cm vil bakkilen ha vært 56,4 cm lang (mot Gjessings anslag på 60 cm).

Resultater (engelsk) 1:

While in the Middle slit behind seems to be carved trådrett, a can clearly see that the wedge itself is skewed. That, it is write Gjessing along right on the right side, but curved on the left side.The curvature is declining, however, and as it goes forward by the figure 13 so does not work Gjessings reconstruction of wedge credible on this page. He estimates that wedge had a width of about 22.5 cm at the bottom, but I believe that about 18 cm is a better estimate. It is important to emphasize that well over half of the wedge is gone, so an estimate can only be based on the development that can be seen on the preserved section. Assuming that the koftelengden also on the back have been 104,4 cm will bakkilen have been 56.4 cm long (to the Gjessings estimate of 60 cm).

Resultater (engelsk) 2:

While middle slit behind seems to be cut line straight, one can clearly see that the wedge itself is warped. Gjessing writes, is the straight right hand, but curved to the left.
curvature decreases, however, and as is evident from Figure 13 that does not Gjessing reconstruction of wedge credible on this page. He estimates that the key had a width of about 22.5 cm at the bottom, but I think that about 18 cm is a better estimate. It is important to emphasize that well over half of the wedge is gone, so an estimate can only be based on the development that can be seen on the preserved part. Assuming kofte length also at the rear has been 104.4 cm will bakkilen have been 56.4 cm long (against Gjessing estimate of 60 cm).

Resultater (engelsk) 3:

While midtsplitten behind seems to be cut trådrett, can a clearly see that wedge itself is crooked. As Gjessing printer, it is straight on the right side, but curve on the left of the page.
the Curvature decreases, however, and as it goes forward of Figure 13 as does not Gjessings reconstruction of wedge credible on this page. He estimates that wedge has had a width of approximately 22.5 cm bottom,But i think that the ca 18 cm is a better estimate. It is important to emphasize that well over half of wedge is away, so that a prediction can only be based on the development that can be seen in the preserved section. Assuming that koftelengden also on the back has been 104.4 cm will bakkilen have been 56.4 cm long (against Gjessings estimates on 60 cm).