[Colt Reeves]

I'm kicking around the idea of a custom sword as a present for myself if and when I graduate from school in three years. (Yep, I'm really counting the chickens before they hatch! ) This crude picture I did in Paint is my basic concept:
Note: The smaller image to the side is a badly drawn look down at the pommel. Try to imagine it a bit more angular and not a oval. Also, the triangular portions on the pommel are supposed to be raised and not a flat pattern, whereas the design on the riser should be indented grooves.

These are roughly the stats I'm looking for (Keep in mind I suck at art and am only a dabbler in Paint, so above picture is hardly to scale):
Total Length: 4'
Grip Length: 9.25"
Pommel Length: 2.25"
Blade Length: 36"
Crossguard Width: 7.5"-9"
P.O.B: 3.5"-4.5"
Weight: 2.5-3.5 pounds
Given that I'm no expert on swords, it wouldn't surprise me to learn that some of the desired stats would be difficult to produce or would result in a frail or unwieldy sword. Therefore all stats are open to alteration if needed.

I want a Sempach type blade, somewhat akin to the Albion Sempach found here: http://www.albion-swords.com/swords/albion/ne...photos.htm
Major differences are that I would prefer a slightly wider shallower fuller and a ring of metal in the middle of the hilt as a riser, say about 3.75" below the hilt. Given my tastes, I may want to go with a slightly more cutting type blade, but I'd prefer to keep it primarily a thrusting sword.

Now, my first question to the board is this: Is this sword more or less historically accurate, or does it incorporate elements not normally found together in a sword of the Sempach era?

My second is more open-ended: What is your opinion on the sword concept? I.E. What would you change? What is wrong with X or Y? Etc, etc.


Edit: It occurred to me when messaging someone else about this design that I didn't say that the hilt is supposed to be leather-wrapped. My drawing being less than perfect, I just thought I'd make that clear.

[Anders Backlund]

At least as far as the illustration goes, the blade strikes me more as a Constaple or Mercenary then a Sempach. Give it a diamond cross-section all the way to the hilt and you basically have an XVa. On the other hand, with a less dramatic taper it becames more of a XVIa, like the Crecy.

Be that as it may, since it lacks a hexagonal cross-section, I'm not sure how much it qualifies as an XVII. (It's not a type I know a lot about, though, so I might be wrong about that.) The hilt design looks a bit neo-fantasy-ish as well. I wouldn't expext it to win high praise for its historical correctness, especially since XVIIs are supposed to have rather uniform and unvaried hilts IINM.

Still, it's pretty sensible otherwise. You seem to have gone by traits found in historical weapons, so if you hire a skilled swordmaker I'd expect you could get a rather functional piece out of it.

And, no offense, but if you don't intend to aim for a strictly historical model anyway, why are you concerned with historical feasability?

[Colt Reeves]

Well, a good portion of your post can be readily addressed with "I suck at using Paint and didn't want to keep redoing it to actually get it right."

As for the historical accuracy, I'm aiming for a sword that fits in well enough with its long ago brothers, but is unique and stands alone. Of course, this is a slippery slope, since if you try hard enough you can find the oddest swords in history and just about anything can be explained away as a one-off toy for a rich guy somewhere. Basically I want something that historians would not be surprised to find, but unique enough to have them all going "Ooo and Aww".