Info Favorites Register Log in
myArmoury.com Discussion Forums

Forum index Memberlist Usergroups Spotlight Topics Search
Forum Index > Historical Arms Talk > XII and XIII: longest and shortest Reply to topic
This is a standard topic  
Author Message
Eric G.




Location: Arizona
Joined: 08 Feb 2011
Likes: 3 pages
Reading list: 5 books

Posts: 249

PostPosted: Sat 13 Aug, 2011 9:42 pm    Post subject: XII and XIII: longest and shortest         Reply with quote

I was talking to someone today about the differences between the XII and XIII and their subtypes and an interesting thought came to me. I have wondered about it all day, and I'm hoping to draw upon all of you to help me answer my question.

What is the longest grip you know of for an XII? What is the shortest blade that you know of for a XIIa?

The same question can be applied to the XIII:

What is the longest grip you know of for an XIII? (I suppose we can include the XIIIb subtype in here along with the XIII's.) What is the shortest blade that you know of for a XIIIa?

I'm only interested in the real deal - no references to reproduction swords please.

As always, references and pictures are greatly appreciated.

Thanks much.

Eric Gregersen
www.EricGregersen.com
Knowledge applied is power.
View user's profile Send private message Visit poster's website
Paul B.G




Location: Victoria, Australia
Joined: 01 May 2011
Likes: 2 pages

Posts: 140

PostPosted: Sun 14 Aug, 2011 1:30 am    Post subject:         Reply with quote

lol every time I see a thread that refers to XIII terminology etc I have to go and check the chart to know what’s being asked Wink

Just had a bit of a hunt around and to my surprise I couldn’t find any XIII types, ie Albion Knight with a long handle. I didn’t check all the makers but I would have thought this type would be quite popular?

Looking forward to the reply’s to the op.

Paul

A successful marriage requires falling in love many times, always with the same person

O====[::::::::::::::::::::::::::::>

Tho’ much is taken, much abides; and tho’
We are not now that strength which in old days
Moved earth and heaven; that which we are, we are;
One equal temper of heroic hearts,
Made weak by time and fate, but strong in will
To strive, to seek, to find, and not to yield.

—Alfred Lord Tennyson, Ulysses
View user's profile Send private message
JE Sarge
Industry Professional



PostPosted: Sun 14 Aug, 2011 3:08 am    Post subject:         Reply with quote

I know that in Records, XIIIa.2 (pg 100) has a shorter 4" grip mounted on a 33" blade. I have often wondered why Oakeshott typified this blade as a XIIIa instead of just a Type XIII. Question

Additionally, XIII.1 (pg 96), has a 31" triple-fullered blade with a 6" grip which is a pretty large (but not completely uncommon) grip for a single-hander. I think I might have called this sword a XIIIa before I called the previously-mentioned sword a XIIIa.

However, I am but an amateur in these matters. I will leave other more-learned members to give their input above and beyond my own trivial observations. Happy

J.E. Sarge
Crusader Monk Sword Scabbards and Customizations
www.crusadermonk.com

"But lack of documentation, especially for such early times, is not to be considered as evidence of non-existance." - Ewart Oakeshott
View user's profile Send private message
Eric G.




Location: Arizona
Joined: 08 Feb 2011
Likes: 3 pages
Reading list: 5 books

Posts: 249

PostPosted: Sun 14 Aug, 2011 8:33 am    Post subject:         Reply with quote

Paul B.G wrote:
lol every time I see a thread that refers to XIII terminology etc I have to go and check the chart to know what’s being asked Wink

Just had a bit of a hunt around and to my surprise I couldn’t find any XIII types, ie Albion Knight with a long handle. I didn’t check all the makers but I would have thought this type would be quite popular?
Paul


I check Albion's site all the time too. Big Grin Because their site goes in typological order it really facilitates reference for this kind of stuff.

I find it surprising that they have examples of some swords that are pretty uncommon in the market today (three different XIV's and a XVIIIe just to name a few) and yet no XIII sword in their lineup. This is not a criticism, just an observation.

JE Sarge wrote:

Additionally, XIII.1 (pg 96), has a 31" triple-fullered blade with a 6" grip which is a pretty large (but not completely uncommon) grip for a single-hander. I think I might have called this sword a XIIIa before I called the previously-mentioned sword a XIIIa.

However, I am but an amateur in these matters. I will leave other more-learned members to give their input above and beyond my own trivial observations. Happy


Thank you. This is just the kind of stuff that I'm looking for. I looked this one up in Records, but it doesn't give the grip length. Where did you find that?

Eric Gregersen
www.EricGregersen.com
Knowledge applied is power.
View user's profile Send private message Visit poster's website
J.D. Crawford




Location: Toronto
Joined: 25 Dec 2006

Spotlight topics: 1
Posts: 1,813

PostPosted: Sun 14 Aug, 2011 9:51 am    Post subject: Re: XII and XIII: longest and shortest         Reply with quote

It's a bit hard to answer without being more clear on the question. If you're asking for the borderlines of the definitions in the typology, that can be worked out from his definitions. Or are you looking for the measurements of specific swords that Oakeshott or others have put in these categories? Both of these questions can be hard to answer because of vaguness and inconsistencies in the system and the fact that many swords do not fit the system of fall between cracks.

Eric Gregersen wrote:

What is the longest grip you know of for an XII? What is the shortest blade that you know of for a XIIa?


In SAC Oakeshott only had XII (no XIIa) and noted that its grip was longer than preceeding types, on average 4.5". In Records, where he added type XIIa, he specified that the grip of an XII should be less than hand and half length. He does not provide precise dimensions for XIIa, but as a slimmer, tapering version of the greatsword (but otherwise similar to XIIa) one expects a long handle (presumably at least 1.5 hand length to be distinguished from XII) and a long blade. (Some of his XIIs have blades of 35-36" length, so it does not appear that he considers this enough to call it an XIIa). So it comes down to what one regards 1.5 hand length; or one could go through Records and calculate the grip lengths as chosen by Oakeshott. Personally, I would put 4.5" as the cut off.

Now, having said all that, look at Records XII.8 which has a 36" blade and appears to have a 1.5 hand handle - is this a long handled XII? In my opinion, Oakeshott slipped up on this one, he should have put it under XIIa.

What is the shortest blade for an XIIa? The examples shown in Records are all at least 35". By analogy with XIIIa, I think this could go lower (say 33") and still fit the typology, although I cannot think of one like this.


Eric Gregersen wrote:

What is the longest grip you know of for an XIII? (I suppose we can include the XIIIb subtype in here along with the XIII's.) What is the shortest blade that you know of for a XIIIa?


I would not put XIII and XIIIb together in this question, since by definition XIIIb has the shorter grip 3-4" whereas the average grip for XIII is 6" (SAC). Although XIIIa tends to have longer handles (6-10" says Records), it does not appear that Oakeshott used grip length to separate XIII from XIIIa, but rather blade size. In Records 32" is given as a minimum blade length for an XIIIa, although this seems a bit small for a 'greatsword', doesn't it.

Some problems here are that there are very few true XIIIs. XIII.1 is definite, and there is another good example on the myArmoury features page. Some of them seem to border more on XIIIb (for example XIII.2 in Records is called an XIIIb in SAC).

To make matters even more confusing, there appear to be some outright mistakes in Records. For example, are XIIIa 3/4 on pge 100 short handled examples of XIIIa? The same swords appear to be shown on p42 and p60 and are classified as Xa and XI respectively! I tend to think the earlier appearances of these sword are correctly categorized (they do not look like XIIIa to me), but its not clear if Oakeshott mistakenly counted the same swords twice in different categories or if the printer mixed up pictures.

I'm not sure I answered your question, but I do enjoy the topic. Happy
View user's profile Send private message Visit poster's website
JE Sarge
Industry Professional



PostPosted: Sun 14 Aug, 2011 10:27 am    Post subject:         Reply with quote

My numbers are estimates based on taking the scans of the photos, making them to scale (using Oakeshott's blade measurements as a reference), then taking measurements in CAD to surmise OAL, grip, pommel, blade width, and other physical dimensions which Records does not give stats for. The measurements, though not absolutely exact, are as close to the actual measurements one could get without handling the sword.

Once again, these are not EXACT dimensions. They are close enough to give a solid idea however. Happy

I will try to post a shot of how I do this later for those who are interested.

J.E. Sarge
Crusader Monk Sword Scabbards and Customizations
www.crusadermonk.com

"But lack of documentation, especially for such early times, is not to be considered as evidence of non-existance." - Ewart Oakeshott
View user's profile Send private message
J.D. Crawford




Location: Toronto
Joined: 25 Dec 2006

Spotlight topics: 1
Posts: 1,813

PostPosted: Sun 14 Aug, 2011 10:39 am    Post subject:         Reply with quote

I know what you mean JE, I've tried to do the same sometimes, although then we have to trust that Oakeshott's blade measurements in Records are accurate. I know of at least two cases where they are not.

By the way, on the topic of 'Records' errors, the legends (or photos) for XIII.3 and XIII.4 ar reversed.
View user's profile Send private message Visit poster's website
Eric G.




Location: Arizona
Joined: 08 Feb 2011
Likes: 3 pages
Reading list: 5 books

Posts: 249

PostPosted: Sun 14 Aug, 2011 11:55 am    Post subject: Re: XII and XIII: longest and shortest         Reply with quote

JE Sarge wrote:
My numbers are estimates based on taking the scans of the photos, making them to scale (using Oakeshott's blade measurements as a reference), then taking measurements in CAD to surmise OAL, grip, pommel, blade width, and other physical dimensions which Records does not give stats for. The measurements, though not absolutely exact, are as close to the actual measurements one could get without handling the sword.

Once again, these are not EXACT dimensions. They are close enough to give a solid idea however. Happy

I will try to post a shot of how I do this later for those who are interested.


I have done something like this using adobe illustrator. Like you said, it is not 100% accurate, but good enough. I only asked because I wanted to know if you had another source of information (an online museum or something) that I wasn't aware of. Thanks though.

J.D. Crawford wrote:
It's a bit hard to answer without being more clear on the question. If you're asking for the borderlines of the definitions in the typology, that can be worked out from his definitions. Or are you looking for the measurements of specific swords that Oakeshott or others have put in these categories? Both of these questions can be hard to answer because of vaguness and inconsistencies in the system and the fact that many swords do not fit the system of fall between cracks.


I suppose I'm just looking for those in-between/hard to classify swords like the XIII that JE pointed out.

I purposely kept the question a little more open. I figured that broader question might get more responses and that I might end up learning something extra.

J.D. Crawford wrote:

I would not put XIII and XIIIb together in this question, since by definition XIIIb has the shorter grip 3-4" whereas the average grip for XIII is 6" (SAC). Although XIIIa tends to have longer handles (6-10" says Records), it does not appear that Oakeshott used grip length to separate XIII from XIIIa, but rather blade size. In Records 32" is given as a minimum blade length for an XIIIa, although this seems a bit small for a 'greatsword', doesn't it.

Some problems here are that there are very few true XIIIs. XIII.1 is definite, and there is another good example on the myArmoury features page. Some of them seem to border more on XIIIb (for example XIII.2 in Records is called an XIIIb in SAC).


I see now. I suppose that I had the definitions of the XIII and the XIIIb a little skewed in my head. My bad.

J.D. Crawford wrote:

I'm not sure I answered your question, but I do enjoy the topic. Happy


Me too. Happy

Eric Gregersen
www.EricGregersen.com
Knowledge applied is power.
View user's profile Send private message Visit poster's website
JE Sarge
Industry Professional



PostPosted: Sun 14 Aug, 2011 12:01 pm    Post subject:         Reply with quote

I am attaching an image of XIII.1 which I fed into ye olde 3d imaging software. Understand I am in the field in the Middle East, so it's not an ideal rendering. I did so just to get a guesstimate of the dimensions of the sword in question. To me, it's a 1.5 hand grip on a single-handed blade.

Once again, not an exact measurement. Only something based on the scale provided if the blade length given by Oakeshott is correct. His dimensions would have to be pretty far off to make this a single-hand grip. Happy



 Attachment: 112.81 KB
[ Download ]

J.E. Sarge
Crusader Monk Sword Scabbards and Customizations
www.crusadermonk.com

"But lack of documentation, especially for such early times, is not to be considered as evidence of non-existance." - Ewart Oakeshott
View user's profile Send private message
J.D. Crawford




Location: Toronto
Joined: 25 Dec 2006

Spotlight topics: 1
Posts: 1,813

PostPosted: Sun 14 Aug, 2011 12:29 pm    Post subject:         Reply with quote

JE Sarge wrote:
I am attaching an image of XIII.1 which I fed into ye olde 3d imaging software. Understand I am in the field in the Middle East, so it's not an ideal rendering. I did so just to get a guesstimate of the dimensions of the sword in question. To me, it's a 1.5 hand grip on a single-handed blade.

Once again, not an exact measurement. Only something based on the scale provided if the blade length given by Oakeshott is correct. His dimensions would have to be pretty far off to make this a single-hand grip. Happy


Nice! You do a better job in the field than I do sitting in my office. Yes, this is definitely the classic XIII.

By the way, what a terrific sword. I'm usually into bigger blades with short handles, but this one catches my eye every time I flip through 'Records'.
View user's profile Send private message Visit poster's website
JE Sarge
Industry Professional



PostPosted: Sun 14 Aug, 2011 1:05 pm    Post subject:         Reply with quote

I know what you mean. I have always loved this sword. I have been trying to get my hands on an ATrim 1326 for years now, but I can never seem to close a deal on one. It's not an exact replica, but it's pretty close, given it's got a slightly longer grip and a smaller pommel:



Tried and True Armory does not keep it in stock, but I might be apt to order one of they get my other two backorders to me! Happy

Also, number one on my list to have custom made at some point. It's a really stunning sword that would be FAST, FAST, FAST. Big Grin

J.E. Sarge
Crusader Monk Sword Scabbards and Customizations
www.crusadermonk.com

"But lack of documentation, especially for such early times, is not to be considered as evidence of non-existance." - Ewart Oakeshott
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: Sun 14 Aug, 2011 1:11 pm    Post subject:         Reply with quote

I have one of those AT1326's. It's one of my favorite swords.

Gus was going to make a couple of XIIIb's. I wonder what happened to that project?



 Attachment: 47.39 KB
XIII3.jpg
AT1326
View user's profile Send private message
Tom Kinder





Joined: 27 Nov 2008

Posts: 148

PostPosted: Sun 14 Aug, 2011 2:34 pm    Post subject:         Reply with quote

Things are moving slowly at Tried and True and in Gus' shop right now. the current batch of swords being worked on has been delayed at every step and it has been extremely frustrating. It's almost like the batch is cursed, heck the heat treater LOST them for a few weeks and that never happens, we have had some machine issues too which mostly seem to be fixed now, and production has resumed. JE, one of your commissions is back from heat treat and is in line for finish work.

the XIIIb project is happening. the first one: XIIIb.1 has been made and is with our reviewer so there should be a review up soon. we have the XIIIb.1 listed on our web site: http://triedandtruearmory.com/ATrim-catalog.html and we should have a second one available soon along with the first one which is out for review. the XIIIb.2 is slated to be produced a few batches down the road. we would like to have done it earlier but we need to get commissions done first and we have a goodly pile of them at the moment. it IS coming though along with a bunch of other cool new stuff.

I believe the 1326 was inspired by XIII.1. I can tell you for sure that it is a joy to swing. I own one in my personal collection and it is fabulous. it isn't that we DON'T stock them, it is that we CAN'T stock them. they are selling faster than Gus can make them. there's one being made in the current batch but it is already sold. the best way to get the ATrim you want from us is to place a commission and be patient. wait times are long at the moment but they aren't getting any shorter and Gus is making swords as quickly as he can all by himself. I'm sad to say that the next sword to be finished will be one that was commissioned in MARCH. hopefully, this will not become a standard wait time, as I have said this batch has been delayed at every single step, I'll be very glad when we have it behind us.
View user's profile Send private message


Display posts from previous:   
Forum Index > Historical Arms Talk > XII and XIII: longest and shortest
Page 1 of 1 Reply to topic
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