| Author |
Message |
Chad Arnow
myArmoury Team
|
 Posted: Tue 05 Aug, 2008 10:10 am Post subject: Two swords with odd cross-sections |
 |
|
I was thumbing through the Christie's catalogue from the sale of Howard Curtis' collection. Both feature unusual cross-sections. Unfortunately, these are the only pictures I have.
The first one is double-edged but has an unsharpened area on one side (half a ricasso?).
The other is even more unusual.
Anyone seen stuff like this before?
 Attachment: 40.91 KB
Attachment: 46.68 KB
Attachment: 29.31 KB
Attachment: 41.98 KB
ChadA
http://chadarnow.com/
|
|
    |
 |
|
Eric Myers
Location: Sacramento, CA Joined: 23 Aug 2003
Posts: 214
|
| Posted: Tue 05 Aug, 2008 10:26 am Post subject: |
|
|
That unsharpened area in front of the guard on the first one is common on sabres, though I'm more familiar with later period ones. Also, since the accompanying text says the forte is single edged, that sounds like it is in keeping with many sabres, as they are a form of backsword.
The other one is just odd though :-)
Eric Myers
Sacramento Sword School
ViaHup.com - Wiki di Scherma Italiana
|
|
|
|
|
Thom R.
|
| Posted: Tue 05 Aug, 2008 11:09 am Post subject: |
|
|
|
As for the second sword, I have seen a fair number of examples of what I understand to be termed "staged ricasso fullers", that is, multiple fullers in the ricasso to various depths (e.g. three very shallow fullers at the hilt, below which are two broader but deeper ones followed by a final narrow one that runs down the length of the blade) and which can be deeper/shallower in turn, but never a fullered ricasso with variable depth fullers that extreme. thanks for sharing! tr
|
|
|
|
|
Nathan Robinson
myArmoury Admin
|
|
|
|
|
Chad Arnow
myArmoury Team
|
| Posted: Tue 05 Aug, 2008 3:18 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| Nathan Robinson wrote: | Are you sure that the first example isn't a backsword?
|
I can't be sure, actually, but I doubt it based on their wording alone. The sharpened side (on the left in the picture) clearly has an unsharpened ricasso/forte; you can see where the sharpened section starts. So if it is single-edged (ie a backsword), the other (right) side wouldn't be sharpened as it's the back (unsharpened) edge. Therefore, the forte would be totally unsharpened, not single-edged as they state.
It could just be poor/incorrect wording on their part, though, and it could be a backsword.
By the way, I couldn't get your Wallace link to work.
ChadA
http://chadarnow.com/
|
|
|
|
|
Nathan Robinson
myArmoury Admin
|
|
|
|
|
Glen A Cleeton
|
| Posted: Tue 05 Aug, 2008 5:09 pm Post subject: |
|
|
The confusion might be thinking of forte meaning only the ricasso. I always thought it ws the third of the blade closest to the hilt. Mezzo and foible being the other two thirds. The ricasso is just a section of the forte.
Cheers
GC
|
|
|
|
|
|
Eric Myers
Location: Sacramento, CA Joined: 23 Aug 2003
Posts: 214
|
| Posted: Tue 05 Aug, 2008 5:12 pm Post subject: |
|
|
Hi Chad,
I think the wording the fine, the term forte covers more than just the first couple inches: generally 1/3 or 1/2 of the blade. I think the right side of the blade in the picture (i.e. the back) is unsharpened over the entire part of the blade shown in the picture, which is all forte. Therefore, most of the forte is sharp, there is only that heel or ricasso that isn't.
Eric Myers
Sacramento Sword School
ViaHup.com - Wiki di Scherma Italiana
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
This is a standard topic