http://www.deltin.net/5149.jpg
Does anyone know where the original of this sword currently resides? I've already asked Mr. Del Tin about it and he himself does not recall. He believes that it might be in the Royal Armoury but was not sure... anyone?

Including some information to help people is necessary. This is what Del Tin's site says: "14th CENTURY SWORD. Overall length cm 112, blade cm 91. Weight 1640 gr."

Alexi, that's a damn good catch. I think that the hilt is extremely close on that one. As Chad points out, I do see the signs of fullers or hollow-grinding as well.

I don't know if those are fullers or if it's simply a strong secondary bevel at the edge. Even if it's the latter Fulvio may have interpreted it as a fuller. Either way I'd say this is a strong candidate Russ.

Definitely an interesting blade on the Del Tin, don't know if it's a correct interpretation of the original, but it is interesting. A fullered mid-rib flanked by shallow fullers.
Hmm, I swear I've seen a picture of that sword or a very similar one on a book cover recently...
I just checked it out and I was right. I noticed it at the local Half-Price Books and I just looked it up on Amazon. Title is "King Arthur: Dark Age Warrior and Mythic Hero" by John Matthews. On close inspection it's not the same sword, but it is very similar. The blade has some pretty strong secondary bevels and a narrow central fuller. Same pommel and guard too. Check it out for comparison.
Anyone know which sword this is on the cover? I don't have ROTMS.

Regards,
Brian M

I'm pretty sure that's XVIa.1 from RoMS.

Well having looked at the picture of XVIa.1 I'd have to say that the cross is completely different then the replica although based on the pictures we have I couldn't say for sure that the Del Tin sword isn't an amalgamation of the two. The XVIa.1 does appear to have a not completely disimilar cross section although the central fuller is rather a lot longer then on the Del Tin sword. The pommels are pretty close as well between the two swords.

Thanks so much for your help gentlemen...

Interesting thread... I woulda sworn I saw a triple fuller in the pic Alexi posted, but -- Royal Armouries IX.1084 is XVIa.5 in RoMS. Concerning the fuller, Oakeshott writes:
"The fuller here is very narrow, but there is a distinct rib in the lower half of the blade."

No mention of a triple fuller. Now that I read that, I can see the rib, and either a secondary bevel, as Patrick speculated, or a hollow grind. I would think that Oakeshott would have mentioned the latter, so maybe it is a prominent secondary bevel on a blade intended primarily for thrusting. Either way, an appealing sword, which Oakeshott dates c.1300-25.

I don't know, fellas. I've got my copy of Records right here in front of me (type XVIa.5), and Oakeshott has the blade at about 84 centimeters; according to Nathan, DT's website has their replica's blade at 91, right? Oakeshott also says there's a "...distinct rib in the lower half of the blade." Looks to me like the original has a pommel nut as well.

-Ted

Well I hope there is some justification for it historically because I really like those multiple fullers.

At the very least it would be a great fantasy piece.

If documented an Albion or A & A version would be very tempting: Very nice design :cool:

I might even be tempted to design my own Fantasy version of it if I ever went the custom route.

Hmmmmm..... something combining a type XIV with a type XV reinforced point using this pattern of fullers maybe.

(Edited to add graphic: What it might look like as mentioned above. )

---

 Attachment: 75.4 KB
[ Download ]

Why not ask Fulvio? He usually backs up his designs with some kind of documentaion.