Info Favorites Register Log in
myArmoury.com Discussion Forums

Forum index Memberlist Usergroups Spotlight Topics Search
Forum Index > Historical Arms Talk > New type XVI from Cervenka Reply to topic
This is a standard topic Go to page 1, 2  Next 
Author Message
Jason Mather




PostPosted: Sun 23 May, 2010 12:12 pm    Post subject: New type XVI from Cervenka         Reply with quote

Just some pics of my new sword that is on its way from Vladimir. This is my second from him, the first is a rapier. I will be making the grip, scabbard, and suspension myself as time allows.


 Attachment: 160.36 KB
[ Download ]

 Attachment: 157.63 KB
[ Download ]

To be nobody but yourself in a world that's doing its best to make you somebody else, is to fight the hardest battle you are ever going to fight. Never stop fighting.
View user's profile Send private message
Scott Kowalski




Location: Oak Lawn, IL USA
Joined: 24 Nov 2006

Posts: 804

PostPosted: Sun 23 May, 2010 1:02 pm    Post subject:         Reply with quote

That really looks nice Jason. I hope that you post pictures when you are done with this. Is the blade based off an extant piece or did Vladimir have free reign to design it? The only thing that throws me is that without the fuller it really makes me think more of a type XVIII then a XVI. Though I know I have not seen every XVI pictured I do not remember seeing one without a fuller. No knock on the blade, it looks superb as I said before.

Scott

Chris Landwehr 10/10/49-1/1/09 My Mom
View user's profile Send private message
Sam Barris




Location: San Diego, California
Joined: 29 Apr 2004
Likes: 4 pages

Posts: 622

PostPosted: Sun 23 May, 2010 1:11 pm    Post subject:         Reply with quote

I concur. I'd have called that as an XVIII as well. Well, whatever it is, you're going to have a cool sword! Can't wait to see her finished. Big Grin
Pax,
Sam Barris

"Any nation that draws too great a distinction between its scholars and its warriors will have its thinking done by cowards, and its fighting done by fools." —Thucydides
View user's profile Send private message Yahoo Messenger
Jason Mather




PostPosted: Sun 23 May, 2010 6:13 pm    Post subject:         Reply with quote

Funny you should mention that, I asked him for a type XVI, then he gave me the price with and without the fuller. I went for the non fuller price. Thanks for the correction, I will refer to it as a XVIII from here on out. It is not based on anything extant, I simply explained what I was after and he took it from there. My request was a simple, functional arming sword in the 1300-25 time frame, non-sharpened for practical use. I am pleased indeed. Less than a week to go and its here.
To be nobody but yourself in a world that's doing its best to make you somebody else, is to fight the hardest battle you are ever going to fight. Never stop fighting.
View user's profile Send private message
P. Cha




PostPosted: Sun 23 May, 2010 9:56 pm    Post subject:         Reply with quote

Not only that, but it looks like a hollow ground geometry...which is more of a XVIII then a XVI feature.
View user's profile Send private message
Roger Hooper




Location: Northern California
Joined: 18 Aug 2003
Likes: 1 page

Spotlight topics: 4
Posts: 4,382

PostPosted: Mon 24 May, 2010 12:01 am    Post subject:         Reply with quote

Jason Mather wrote:
My request was a simple, functional arming sword in the 1300-25 time frame, non-sharpened for practical use.


1300 to 1325 is a little early for an XVIII. For what it's worth, it looks more like a XV to me.
View user's profile Send private message
P. Cha




PostPosted: Mon 24 May, 2010 9:12 am    Post subject:         Reply with quote

Jason Mather wrote:
... non-sharpened for practical use...


Umm just curious when you say practical use, do you mean as a drill/sparring sword? Because that tip is AWEFULLY sharp looking.
View user's profile Send private message
Hugo Voisine





Joined: 25 Feb 2006
Reading list: 7 books

Posts: 336

PostPosted: Mon 24 May, 2010 9:17 am    Post subject:         Reply with quote

Indeed. I have a blunt sword by mister Cervenka too. I can't use it for sparring or two-person drills because of the extra-pointy tip, but it's ok for solo drills... is that what you mean ?

Nice looking sword by the way. I'm curious to see the final result. Happy

« Que dites-vous ?... C'est inutile ?... Je le sais !
Mais on ne se bat pas dans l'espoir du succès !
Oh ! non, c'est bien plus beau lorsque c'est inutile ! »
View user's profile Send private message
David Sutton




Location: Bolton, UK
Joined: 06 Mar 2007
Likes: 15 pages
Reading list: 39 books

Posts: 230

PostPosted: Mon 24 May, 2010 2:11 pm    Post subject:         Reply with quote

I'd say it was firmly in the Type XV catagory.

I think its quite reminiscent of this Italian Type XV sword:



The hollow grinding looks very nicely done should be a beautiful piece when its finished. Cool

'Reserve your right to think, for even to think wrongly is better than not to think at all'

'To teach superstitions as truth is a most terrible thing'

Hypatia of Alexandria, c400AD
View user's profile Send private message
Neil Langley




Location: Stockport, UK
Joined: 23 Jan 2006

Posts: 112

PostPosted: Mon 24 May, 2010 2:30 pm    Post subject:         Reply with quote

Jason Mather wrote:
Funny you should mention that, I asked him for a type XVI, then he gave me the price with and without the fuller.


A very nice example of a hollow ground blade. I am curious, was the fullered blade that was quoted for also hollow ground as well (I would have though a simple fuller was cheaper)? If so, that would be an interesting blade!

Oh, for what it's worth I see a type XVIII here (hollow ground and taper at the point).

Neil.
View user's profile Send private message
Jason Mather




PostPosted: Mon 24 May, 2010 2:54 pm    Post subject:         Reply with quote

Thanks for all the input. I got it today, way ahead of schedule. It is a bit pointy but I am not above filing/altering the point to make it suit my needs. Even without the grip this thing handles brilliantly. Really, the category it fits in is no matter. It is exactly what I was after and will suit my needs perfectly.The difference in price was 30-40 bucks, and the beautiful hollow grind was an unknown bonus. I was expecting a simple diamond cross section. Within the next week I will mount the cross and peen the pommel. I also have to decide if it needs a peen block. I am leaning toward no, any opinions?
To be nobody but yourself in a world that's doing its best to make you somebody else, is to fight the hardest battle you are ever going to fight. Never stop fighting.
View user's profile Send private message
Michael Edelson




Location: New York
Joined: 14 Sep 2005

Spotlight topics: 2
Posts: 1,032

PostPosted: Mon 24 May, 2010 3:13 pm    Post subject:         Reply with quote

The sword is not a XV, because it lacks the XV's purpose driven point (which is to slide inside mail rings--see photo of a proper XV above). Those needle-like points were not there just to look cool. Although, considering the owner is going to file it down, it might be a XV, since we can always pretend it had such a point before the aforementioned alteration.
New York Historical Fencing Association
www.newyorklongsword.com

Byakkokan Dojo
http://newyorkbattodo.com/
View user's profile Send private message Visit poster's website
Chad Arnow
myArmoury Team


myArmoury Team

PostPosted: Mon 24 May, 2010 4:03 pm    Post subject:         Reply with quote

Michael Edelson wrote:
The sword is not a XV, because it lacks the XV's purpose driven point (which is to slide inside mail rings--see photo of a proper XV above). Those needle-like points were not there just to look cool. Although, considering the owner is going to file it down, it might be a XV, since we can always pretend it had such a point before the aforementioned alteration.


Actually, the definition of a Type XV blade is one whose edges taper in mostly a straight line to an acute point. This sword qualifies, even though the point could be more acute. If you check out our Type XV spotlight, you'll see one or two swords with less-acute points.

The hollow-grind points to a more likely dating of 15th century than early 14th. Diamond cross-section swords are seen in art in the 13th century, but typically ones with a flattened cross-section. The hollow-ground section seems to be of a later date.

Happy

ChadA

http://chadarnow.com/
View user's profile Send private message Visit poster's website
Michael Edelson




Location: New York
Joined: 14 Sep 2005

Spotlight topics: 2
Posts: 1,032

PostPosted: Mon 24 May, 2010 4:20 pm    Post subject:         Reply with quote

Chad Arnow wrote:
Michael Edelson wrote:
The sword is not a XV, because it lacks the XV's purpose driven point (which is to slide inside mail rings--see photo of a proper XV above). Those needle-like points were not there just to look cool. Although, considering the owner is going to file it down, it might be a XV, since we can always pretend it had such a point before the aforementioned alteration.


Actually, the definition of a Type XV blade is one whose edges taper in mostly a straight line to an acute point. This sword qualifies, even though the point could be more acute. If you check out our Type XV spotlight, you'll see one or two swords with less-acute points.


Although not every point on the spotlight page ends in a proper needle, there is not a single point there that would not slide easily inside a 8mm mail ring.

While the texbook definition of XV may not include a very acute point, I feel it should, as the overwhelming majority have them, and if they don't I think it's becuase it was broken and reshaped.

New York Historical Fencing Association
www.newyorklongsword.com

Byakkokan Dojo
http://newyorkbattodo.com/
View user's profile Send private message Visit poster's website
Chad Arnow
myArmoury Team


myArmoury Team

PostPosted: Mon 24 May, 2010 4:37 pm    Post subject:         Reply with quote

Michael Edelson wrote:
While the texbook definition of XV may not include a very acute point, I feel it should, as the overwhelming majority have them, and if they don't I think it's becuase it was broken and reshaped.


Well, Oakeshott didn't get that specific in his system. Happy The broken-re-shaped theory is interesting. I'd be curious if it holds up to an inspection of a number of originals. I may have to look that up sometime. Happy

Happy

ChadA

http://chadarnow.com/
View user's profile Send private message Visit poster's website
Jason Mather




PostPosted: Mon 24 May, 2010 4:58 pm    Post subject:         Reply with quote

Here are some pics of the recently fastened cross, note the mashing of the metal around the tang. Solid as a rock. The tools used are on the bench beside the sword.


 Attachment: 46.29 KB
sword project 002.JPG


 Attachment: 112.97 KB
sword project 003.JPG


 Attachment: 119.82 KB
sword project 004.JPG


To be nobody but yourself in a world that's doing its best to make you somebody else, is to fight the hardest battle you are ever going to fight. Never stop fighting.
View user's profile Send private message
Michael Edelson




Location: New York
Joined: 14 Sep 2005

Spotlight topics: 2
Posts: 1,032

PostPosted: Mon 24 May, 2010 5:00 pm    Post subject:         Reply with quote

Chad Arnow wrote:

Well, Oakeshott didn't get that specific in his system. Happy The broken-re-shaped theory is interesting. I'd be curious if it holds up to an inspection of a number of originals. I may have to look that up sometime. Happy


I think it's worth doing. The few that I've seen seemed...well...off. Like the lines of the sword don't mesh without the point. However, there are so many XVs and XVas with these super acute points that I don't think it's a hard sell.

You really have to think about what these swords were for, how they were used. Why have a point like that on a stiff war sword? If you're going to be poking textile armor, a sharper, more rounded point would serve you better. However, having tested a XVa on mail, I can tell you they're great at popping rings from the inside, and even if they don't, they go far enough in without breaking a single link to cause a world of hurt.

This is an Albion Talhoffer's point in 6mm mail links, and this point has been reworked several times and is not as acute as it used to be.



 Attachment: 96.81 KB
Untitled-1.jpg


New York Historical Fencing Association
www.newyorklongsword.com

Byakkokan Dojo
http://newyorkbattodo.com/
View user's profile Send private message Visit poster's website
Michael Edelson




Location: New York
Joined: 14 Sep 2005

Spotlight topics: 2
Posts: 1,032

PostPosted: Mon 24 May, 2010 5:09 pm    Post subject:         Reply with quote

Jason Mather wrote:
Here are some pics of the recently fastened cross, note the mashing of the metal around the tang. Solid as a rock. The tools used are on the bench beside the sword.


That looks great, like a weld. Man, now I have to get a sword that's not put together. That looks like a blast.

New York Historical Fencing Association
www.newyorklongsword.com

Byakkokan Dojo
http://newyorkbattodo.com/
View user's profile Send private message Visit poster's website
Jason Mather




PostPosted: Mon 24 May, 2010 6:20 pm    Post subject:         Reply with quote

Now the pommel. Again, the tools used are on the bench.


 Attachment: 117.86 KB
102_0131.JPG


 Attachment: 118.81 KB
102_0134.JPG


 Attachment: 114.89 KB
102_0135.JPG


To be nobody but yourself in a world that's doing its best to make you somebody else, is to fight the hardest battle you are ever going to fight. Never stop fighting.
View user's profile Send private message
Peter Johnsson
Industry Professional



Location: Storvreta, Sweden
Joined: 27 Aug 2003
Reading list: 1 book

Spotlight topics: 3
Posts: 1,757

PostPosted: Mon 24 May, 2010 9:54 pm    Post subject:         Reply with quote

Chad Arnow wrote:
Michael Edelson wrote:
The sword is not a XV, because it lacks the XV's purpose driven point (which is to slide inside mail rings--see photo of a proper XV above). Those needle-like points were not there just to look cool. Although, considering the owner is going to file it down, it might be a XV, since we can always pretend it had such a point before the aforementioned alteration.


Actually, the definition of a Type XV blade is one whose edges taper in mostly a straight line to an acute point. This sword qualifies, even though the point could be more acute. If you check out our Type XV spotlight, you'll see one or two swords with less-acute points.

The hollow-grind points to a more likely dating of 15th century than early 14th. Diamond cross-section swords are seen in art in the 13th century, but typically ones with a flattened cross-section. The hollow-ground section seems to be of a later date.


I think it is a mistake to try to fit all contemporary swords into a system intended to classify historical swords. We can only do this if the contemporary sword is really made after the example and according to the traditional forms of the European sword. Even a sword made today following the definitions Oakeshott put down to define a type, does not necessarily have much in common with actual historical swords: there are too many important aspects left out in the classification system.
Oakeshott did not go into many details. Outside the definitions he set down, there are many typical details that swords of any given type have in common, or typical variations within a type that combine in certain ways. If you do not pay attention to these aspects, themes and details, there result can be very different from any original weapon.
Trying to fit a contemporary sword into the Oakeshott typology can be like fitting a square peg in a round hole. It may work, but only if some force, inventiveness, and determination is involved....

This in itself does not reflect on the purposefulness of the sword. It may work perfectly for its intended role even if it does not compare other than superficially to any historical sword.
Swords made today for sparring is a perfect example. You have to make adjustments in the shape, if the sword is to be safe to use. The traditional forms are deadly and that is something we may not always want to mimic too closely. But after these adjustments it is no longer meaningful to define the sword according to the Oakeshott system. A training sword may be made to mimic the heft and feel of a certain type, but that is as close as we can hope to get with a training sword.
View user's profile Send private message Visit poster's website


Display posts from previous:   
Forum Index > Historical Arms Talk > New type XVI from Cervenka
Page 1 of 2 Reply to topic
Go to page 1, 2  Next All times are GMT - 8 Hours

View previous topic :: View next topic
Jump to:  
You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot vote in polls in this forum
You cannot attach files in this forum
You can download files in this forum






All contents © Copyright 2003-2020 myArmoury.com — All rights reserved
Discussion forums powered by phpBB © The phpBB Group
Switch to the Basic Low-bandwidth Version of the forum