Hello everybody,

I am making a stab in the dark with this but here goes. I have a commission with Patrick Barta for a sword inspired by this wonderful example. (Also found on pg. 38 of Sword in Hand). I have loved this sword ever since I first saw it and I have always wanted a quality reproduction. I am nearly at the end of my 4 year wait on Barta's waiting list so the time is coming. Sadly, besides these pics. I have NOTHING else to go on towards this project. No color pics, no specs, no reports of those who may have held it, nothing.

I don't know where the sword is currently- I would inquire about some digital photos if I did.

So does anyone know anything more about this sword?

Also, and here's a real stretch. Would Peter, Craig, Tod or someone really in the field be interested in giving their impressions of possible weight range, handling- that sort of thing. I realize this is self-serving on my part and so I can understand not wanting to get into that. Also, I know it may be difficult or even impossible to make any guesses just based on pics. Anything would be helpful as matter to bring to Patrick in it's composition.

All we have from Oakshott is the ubiquitous "handles like a fishing rod." Not so helpful. . . .

Lastly, if someone would be super kind as to paste a pic. of this sword in this thread I would be REALLY appreciative!!
:)

Is it this one?

http://www.myArmoury.com/view.html?features/pic_spotxi09.jpg

The image is from this myArmoury spotlight article which states that it is from the Moyses Hall Museum, Suffolk.

Ah, the "Gicelin" one. Well, I know only what is in the "Records". Gold plated pommel, cross with downturned beast heads (look like dogs to me), light and flexible, balanced like a fishing rod. ;) The blade length is 32". Inscriptions are +gicelinmefecit+ on one side and +innominedomini+ on the other. But you probably know all that if you read the "Records".

Oh yeah- I know all that. ;)

Patrick is going to reproduce the iron inlay which I am really excited about.

it will look great, but it would be good to know weight, maybe thickness and such to give it to Patrick...

In that case the sword you are looking for is XI.6.

Here is the image from Records of the Medieval Sword:



Here is a full length image from The Sword in the Age of Chivalry:

Records say that XI.5 has type B pommel and XI.6 type I pommel. The sword in question has type B (brazil nut/tea cozy) pommel so it should be XI.5.

Thanks Jonathan!

Hopefully, drawing upon the collective brain of myArmoury forumites I can learn more about this fine example.

Well do you guys think that the pommel is of an oval shape looking down from above the sword or round like a mushroom? I can't tell by looking at the pic. I'm thinking it must be oval or elongated like the typical brazil nut type.

Right you are. I was looking at the page layout rather than the description. Lesson learned! :blush:

Oval, I would say, but a bit beefy...

So any guesses of how this sword might handle?

Does the blade look "thickish" to anyone? I do believe the fuller may be on the deep side.

This is just a bump on my thread. Has anybody seen this sword in person? Thanks to everybody for your comments so far.

Any makers have an idea or notion of possible characteristics of this sword- how would you seek to envision this piece?

Hi everyone,

A forumite friend of mine has expressed that he has doubts about the authenticity of this sword feeling that it may be a victorian copy or an outright fake.. Has stated that the hilt does not seem to match the blade, and noted that the blade appears "thickish" in the photo. I also have noted this in my examination of the photo and have stated so above.

NowI must say that I respectfully do not share these concerns but For the sake of discussion and to gauge others' thoughts I decided to post here. I do believe that the cross is definitely unusual for the type- but I like the balance that it brings to the piece, but this is just MHO.. Oakeshott notes nearly identical zoomorphic terminus figures on the cross as appear on period stone carvings- on a tomb I think- I don't have The Archeology of Weapons in front of me.

The grip on this sword does seem off though it is a modern replacement.

The inlay on this sword matches the execution of the other 7 swords swords with +GECILINMEFECIT+ inlayed on them. It is the later development of iron inlay- characterized by smaller and more neatly executed letters than those, say, found on the ULFBEHRT's, or the INGELRII's.

The blade does have an interesting seeming shape evident the photo- especially on the outer half towards the tip, but due to the "very" poor quality may simply be due to the lighting- then again it is hard to say. What do you guys think? Barta believes it is a more typical lenticular design- without "higher peaking fuller edges. We may also consider that fullers on type XI are deeper and this specific example has a very narrow fuller which Oakeshott states is 1 cm. in width.

I think it is a beautiful sword- one that I have been drawn to for more than a decade, but it is an odd duckling I suppose when compared to the more typical 12th. c. brazil nut and tea cozy pommels.

We may also consider that Oakeshott felt this sword was genuine and fine indeed when handling it, cleaning it, and while it was in his care. All we have to go on is a few poor quality photos.

What do folks think?

Hi all
There are images of reproduction " Gicelin " Sword made by Robert Moc after Records of the Medieval Sword 2 years ago for customer from France.

---

 Attachment: 63.37 KB
[ Download ]

 Attachment: 70.89 KB
[ Download ]

 Attachment: 101.27 KB
[ Download ]

Well, look at that!

That's cool! The inlay looks great! I don't know why the fuller seems to be pattern welded but the inlay is still fabulous!

Thanks so much for sharing!

Also why is it double fuller on the +GECILINMEFECIT+ side? Interesting.