Type XX questions + request -- myArmoury.com

Christopher Domanski · Posted: Sat 28 Aug, 2010 9:37 am Post subject: Type XX questions + request

I'd like to start with a hearty hello, this being my first post. I've been a lurker on the forum for a number of months, but only now I have faced a challenge I can't hope to overcome without the vast knowledge of the Board's frequenters.

I seek to replicate the oldest of the type XXs - http://www.myArmoury.com/images/features/pic_spotxx04.jpg , for some serious battle and reenactment purposes. What made me fall for this sword is it's powerful frame that will surely compliment a mean swing - to me, type XXs represent the epitomy of war swords. Unfortunately I do not possess specifications and pictures necessery to make a historical replica. I can make out the pommel and guard types, and the blade clearly sports a double(triple?) fuller going to 2/3s of it's lenght, but that's about it. The article of myArmoury.com states it is from a private collection - maybe someone knows who's collection is it, so I could kindly ask it's owner for specifications and permission to replicate? Anyway, specifications, pictures and any other relevent info is welcome. I will not hesitate to share pictures of the finished piece.

Furthemore, the beforementioned article states that 'the blade is 50 inches long". I quickly converted that into centimetres and emerged with a whooping 125cm! Could it possibly be a miswriting on the author's side and he actually meant that the whole sword is 50", or is the blade actually that large, which would put the whole sword's lenght at around 150cm(60"), making it an early two-hander of sorts?

Thanks in advance.

Regards,
Chris

Neil Langley · Posted: Sat 28 Aug, 2010 12:06 pm Post subject:

Hello Christopher,

Oakeshott states this is 'possibly a bearing sword' in Swords in the Age of Chivalry, and so I doubt there is any mistake about the blade length. However, as the furniture is quite simple I see no reason that this could not be a practical two-hander (where 50" is not out of the question) of an early date.

Edit to add: Oakeshott drops the word 'possibly' from his description in 'Records', but I still think that this could just be a very big war sword - some quite large examples (including type XII blade types) do exist from this period.

Neil.

Christopher Domanski · Posted: Sat 28 Aug, 2010 1:50 pm Post subject:

Thank you, Neil, you are being very helpful. Indeed, in the light of this type XX being a bearing sword 50" would make more sense. However, I'm afraid that if I attempted a reconstruction of a blade of such proportions - 125cm blade and a 25cm handle, a possible 6,5cm of blade width at base, 8+mm of blade thickness at base - I would end up with a monster weighing anywhere between 5 and 6 pounds, or even more, which is a bit too much for a sword that is to be used in combat. I don't mean just the stamina factor, I just fear for the blade's agility, I would rather not end up smacking it around like a table in a bar fight. Any thoughts on that from someone with experience with large blades?

Mental note: acquire Oakeshott's literature and get acquainted with it instead of relying completely on drafts of his work from teh interwebz.

Regards,
Chris

Edit:
Alas, the Search function came to my rescue - I found a thread or two that regard the weight, balance and clumsiness of two handers. I'm now more inclined to go for another type XX, slightly smaller and dated to circa 1440, but it is so resemblant of the giant early XIVc. one I posted that surely it could emerge earlier than that.

Neil Langley · Posted: Sat 28 Aug, 2010 4:53 pm Post subject:

If date is more important than a concrete blade type, how about considering a type XIIIa? The type XX pictured is not too dissimilar to some examples of type XIIIa blades (although these tend to be slightly less tapered than type XXs) and there are certainly double and triple fullered examples of this latter type from the turn of the 13th/14th century - so if you go with a triple fuller, lenticular tip and the right cross/pommel you could certainly create a type XIIIa with a similar 'look and feel' to your type XX.

Neil.

Luka Borscak · Posted: Sat 28 Aug, 2010 5:38 pm Post subject:

For what would you use this sword? Reenactment? For sword of such size it would be normal to weigh about 5lb, so if you don't like to use heavier swords, you should replicate a smaller sword, either smaller XX or a XIIa or XIIIa...

Christopher Domanski · Posted: Sun 29 Aug, 2010 3:32 am Post subject:

Yet again, thanks, Neil. I have yet to find a type XIIIa specimen that would suit my greatsword needs - the biggest I found indeed had a 100cm long blade, so it is under my consideration. If you would happen to have any pictures of the double- or triple-fullered types XIIIa you mentioned would you consider sharing them? Maybe indeed that would be the correct way to go.

Luka: I'm a healthy 6'4", 195lbs., with a background in halberds and poleaxes, so size and weight(kept within reason) do not scare me at all. I just never handled as sword this big, and I'm unsure of it's handling characteristics - after all swordplay requires at least some amount of agility put into it. I'll discuss the topic with a swordsmith and see what he'll say about the weight and, more importantly, the blade's POB - it'll be easy to calculate once I provide him with specifications of said sword.

Luka Borscak · Posted: Sun 29 Aug, 2010 6:07 am Post subject:

Christopher Domanski · Posted: Sun 29 Aug, 2010 7:23 am Post subject:

Chad Arnow · myArmoury Team

Christopher Domanski · Posted: Sun 29 Aug, 2010 8:53 am Post subject:

Hmmm... now that you've mentioned it... Thanks, Chad, but I still can't make out how long the fuller is. 3/4 of the blade, possibly 1/2?

Chad Arnow · myArmoury Team