Hello everybody,
I would like to know which was the average of the blade's width in the swords from the 12th and 13th centuries. Anyone could help me please ? Also I would like to know if existed in those times blades of 3,5 cm width. Do you know any example ?
Thank you very much.
Cheers,
Manel
During medieval times there were various kinds of swords whose blades vary in width.
I am no expert here, but we have someone who can help you, Manel.
I am no expert here, but we have someone who can help you, Manel.
Thanks Shahril, let's see if anyone can help. :)
Cheers,
Manel
Cheers,
Manel
Manel Segura wrote: |
Hello everybody,
I would like to know which was the average of the blade's width in the swords from the 12th and 13th centuries. Anyone could help me please ? Also I would like to know if existed in those times blades of 3,5 cm width. Do you know any example ? Thank you very much. Cheers, Manel |
That period was dominated by broad bladed cutters, in Oakeshott's terminology Xa, XI, XII, XIII, and XIV (in roughly that order). Some of the earlier type X and later XIII, XIV could get very broad at the base, approaching 3", but the figure 2" +/- 1/4" would likely cover the vast majority of swords in this period.
3.5 Cm (1.4") is likely a lower extreme for this type of sword. I can't think of an example like this off hand for the period you specified.
Have a look at the feature article here on Giebig's system, it includes more detail on blade breadth than Oakeshott's system.
That period was dominated by broad bladed cutters, in Oakeshott's terminology Xa, XI, XII, XIII, and XIV (in roughly that order). Some of the earlier type X and later XIII, XIV could get very broad at the base, approaching 3", but the figure 2" +/- 1/4" would likely cover the vast majority of swords in this period.
3.5 Cm (1.4") is likely a lower extreme for this type of sword. I can't think of an example like this off hand for the period you specified.
Have a look at the feature article here on Giebig's system, it includes more detail on blade breadth than Oakeshott's system.[/quote]
Thanks J.D, I have checked Geibig system and the narrowest blade I've found is one of 1.6 inches. Do you know if later in the 14th century existed swords with blades of 1.4 inches ?
Thanks again !
Manel
3.5 Cm (1.4") is likely a lower extreme for this type of sword. I can't think of an example like this off hand for the period you specified.
Have a look at the feature article here on Giebig's system, it includes more detail on blade breadth than Oakeshott's system.[/quote]
Thanks J.D, I have checked Geibig system and the narrowest blade I've found is one of 1.6 inches. Do you know if later in the 14th century existed swords with blades of 1.4 inches ?
Thanks again !
Manel
I think that some of the type XVII swords that appeared late in the 14th century may have been that narrow (1.4") at the base, but I am not as familiar with that period.
J.D. Crawford wrote: |
I think that some of the type XVII swords that appeared late in the 14th century may have been that narrow (1.4") at the base, but I am not as familiar with that period. |
Perfect, thanks !
Page 1 of 1
You cannot post new topics in this forumYou 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 2003-2006 myArmoury.com All rights reserved
Discussion forums powered by phpBB © The phpBB Group
Switch to the Full-featured Version of the forum
Discussion forums powered by phpBB © The phpBB Group
Switch to the Full-featured Version of the forum