I recently made a visit to the Metropolitan Museum in New York and thought I would share some photos of five swords that are newly on display, all are on loan to the museum as of last year.

1) A Petersen type-V with traces of an inscription.

[ Linked Image ] [ Linked Image ] [ Linked Image ]

2) An earlier sword, possibly c. 800. Petersen's special type 6 - possibly a precursor of type K, with the pommel not yet divided into lobes. Inlaid with indistinct letters of patterns. Has been discussed previously: see second link for posts from the finder of the sword in 2002.

https://myArmoury.com/talk/viewtopic.php?t=5070
http://www.vikingsword.com/ubb/Forum5/HTML/000064.html

[ Linked Image ] [ Linked Image ]

3) An XIIIa(?) with a very broad fuller. Inlaid with a single character in yellow metal.

[ Linked Image ] [ Linked Image ] [ Linked Image ] [ Linked Image ]

4) Oakeshott's XVII.2 in Records of the Medieval Sword. Formerly in the E. A. Christensen collection, sold at auction in 2012.

https://www.bonhams.com/auctions/19796/lot/76/

[ Linked Image ] [ Linked Image ] [ Linked Image ] [ Linked Image ]

5) A sword with a very distinctive pommel, perhaps type XII(?), inscribed with the letters S O S. Appears to be the same sword sold by Hermann Historica.

http://www.hermann-historica.de/auktion/hhm63...at63_a.txt

[ Linked Image ] [ Linked Image ] [ Linked Image ]

Great pictures, Mark.

By the way the Christensen sword (Oakeshott's XVII.2) we also discussed in this thread about the Boringholm sword. So great to see your even more detailed pictures.
http://myArmoury.com/talk/viewtopic.php?t=315...mp;start=0

Two things catch my eye in this group; the XII with the odd pommel (seen this one before) and the XIIIa with the broad fuller. Is that fuller short like an XIII or long like an X? Hard to tell in the pictures...looks short in one and longer in another.

Mark Lewis wrote[quote]
" The museum now gives the weight as 1392 g, only an ounce over three pounds. So that's confusing..".

Not really, for all his knowledge and enthusiasm Oakeshott was notoriously careless when giving dimensions and weights of swords. It seems he frequently quoted these from memory, often long after examining the sword, with the results we now have to deal with. So where there's a discrepancy I would suggest go by the museum figures (though even these are not always 100% accurate).
Neil

I certainly agree on the comments regarding Oakeshott's measurements!

I've been conducting a survey (for a future article) on the various measurements of medieval swords with the Type XVII bladeform, and have fifteen examples for which the weight of each piece is known. The examples have total lengths of between 75.5cm (29 3/4 inches) - Wallace Collection A.461, and 136cm (53 9/16 inches) - Museum of London 39.142.

Within this group, the average weight is just 1,362g (3lbs 0oz), with only the larger specimens (120cm-plus, with broader or thicker blades) weighing anything like the 4-5 lbs that Oakeshott suggested for this type. The heaviest on my list is in the Deutsches Historisches Museum, Berlin (No. W.893), which measures at 2,190g (4lbs 13oz) with a length of 135.5cm.