Help with a custom sword plan. -- myArmoury.com

Eric G. · Posted: Tue 17 May, 2011 9:21 pm Post subject: Help with a custom sword plan.

Hello fellow forumites,

I am sure that many of you have looked at several swords and fell in 'like' with them for different reasons. Well, I was doing that, wanting one sword for its pommel, another for its cross guard, and another for its grip. My wish list of swords was pretty darn huge. Then I realized one day that rather than just buying a few swords with pieces that I liked, I should just get one custom made that includes everything I like. ... that's more economical, right?

So here's my plan for a sword. I REALLY WANT THIS TO BE HISTORICALLY ACCURATE, but I don't need it to be a replica of any one piece. However, if you find a piece that goes perfectly with the musts of this design please provide a picture and references. Please! =)

So far here is a list of what I want:
A scent stopper pommel, like that on the Albion Mercenary etc.
A type XVIIIc blade. I want it to hand and a half proportions, so a XVIIIa will do.
Hollow ground

The thing I can't decide on is the cross guard. I don't know what would go best with this and be accurate. I don't want a style 12. That is my main reason for posting here. What cross guard would you put on a sword of this design?

Oh, also, my knowledge is limited, but I did find an image of this sword on the featured articles section. It is similar to my design, but I'm not sold on the cross guard.
http://www.myArmoury.com/view.html?features/pic_spotxviii07.jpg#

Thanks in advance for your help.

Eric G. · Posted: Tue 17 May, 2011 9:51 pm Post subject:

Oh. I'm having John Ludemo do the sword.

Nathan Robinson · myArmoury Admin

If you're interested in historical accuracy as you say, why don't you find a few historical samples that come close to what you're looking for to validate the authenticity of such a piece? From there, you can do subtle modifications and mixing-and-matching from similar (era, region, type, etc.) swords and come up with something plausible.

You've come up with one example and I'd think it would be helpful to see others of a similar type and from the same time period, etc. Maybe others could share some samples for you here?

Michael Murphy · Posted: Wed 18 May, 2011 11:44 am Post subject:

Eric here are a couple of samples from Oakeshott's RMS; XVII.8 and XVII.9 respectively. The blades are type XVII but I thought the hilts might give you some ideas.

Eric G. · Posted: Wed 18 May, 2011 12:56 pm Post subject:

Nathan Robinson · myArmoury Admin

Eric G. · Posted: Wed 18 May, 2011 4:55 pm Post subject:

Jeremy V. Krause · Posted: Wed 18 May, 2011 5:37 pm Post subject:

I believe that Craig and the other very knowledgable folks of Ams & Armor may be an excellent option for you to consider to handle your project.

http://www.arms-n-armor.com/

Eric G. · Posted: Wed 18 May, 2011 6:51 pm Post subject:

Julien M · Posted: Thu 19 May, 2011 3:02 am Post subject:

Hi Eric,

It looks like a type XVIII indeed! But your initial sketch needs more details as from here it could end up being "historically correct" or end up being a LOTR ranger sword too Happy

I would suggest getting closer to the hilt now. You've laid down overall proportions which is a start. But once you have chosen an oakeshot type (to grossly simplify they share similar blade form, that's the idea behind this typology, even if some would be broader or slender, hollow ground or not) you need to get closer to guard and pommel. The hilt will definitely give your sword its "personnality" so to speak. So the more details you can gather the better. I have looked at hundreds of originals in museum, and even sword hilts I think I know well still suprise me whenever I consider reproducing these.

So make close ups of your pommel and guard. How is the guard shaped in all its dimension and angles? A facet pommel: are the facets hollowed or flat? etc etc....unless you want to give free reins to the maker and let him fill the gaps.

One thing I do to quickly see if something will work or not is using photoshop. I take a blade here, a cross guard from there, another grip, a pommel, and play around with the layers, resizing, re arraging until those puzzle make sense.

http://pixlr.com/ is online and free, and perfect for that purpose.

Also now that you have Oakeshott's books at hand, it will be much simpler to make up your mind Happy

Best,

J

Jeremy V. Krause · Posted: Thu 19 May, 2011 9:23 am Post subject:

I totally agree with Julien,

You need to be careful with your hilt choices or you could end up with a fantasy-esque piece- especially with the scent-stopper pommel choice. Go back to originals. Make it clear that historical accuracy is important to you. Well, that is if it is of a primary concern.

Eric G. · Posted: Thu 19 May, 2011 10:33 pm Post subject:

J.D. Crawford · Posted: Fri 20 May, 2011 7:28 am Post subject:

Dear Eric,

I'll try to add a few things hopefully without repeating too much what was already said.

First, besides the dangers of mixing and matching parts vis a vis historical accuracy and appearance, there is also the danger of getting something that does not have the right handling and harmonic balance. I don't want to make any assumptions about your background knowledge - but I think it takes years of handling many swords and viewing hundreds of historical examples to get a good amateur inuition for this. A patient professional, as suggested above, will help you with what works and what doesn't.

I've commissioned some mix & match projects from existing components that worked out OK (for the money) - but for the extra money and wait time of a full custom job one does want to be very careful - you want to get it right. Defintely following historical examples to the letter is the safe way, although there are some 'families' of swords from the same era with very similar features where I think you can safely mix things up a bit (I just went for this route myself) - but again that requires a lot of study of the period and hopefully professional feedback.

You mentioned A&A - Craig Johnson is super helpful with stuff like this. They are usually very responsive, but I happen to know they are very busy right now with a 'huge order' and don't have much time. Try contacting Craig directly through this site or by e-mail (if you don't have it, PM me). But from what I know, he likely does not have time to help you research right now and may not be able to get into any details until late summer (that's still short by custom standards).

Good luck, JD

PS - doing your own background research is half the fun of a custom job, so I would not rush this!

Eric G. · Posted: Fri 20 May, 2011 8:31 am Post subject:

Sean Flynt · Posted: Fri 20 May, 2011 9:04 am Post subject:

You could bring it closer to 1500 with a horizontally re-curved cross like that of the A&A Dürer sword or Albion Munich. Various sections are appropriate for those.

J.D. Crawford · Posted: Fri 20 May, 2011 9:23 am Post subject:

Eric G. · Posted: Fri 20 May, 2011 10:30 am Post subject:

Sean Flynt · Posted: Fri 20 May, 2011 12:14 pm Post subject:

The Type XVIII blade is quite versatile, chronologically. The T3 pommel restricts you to the earlier part of the century (according to Oakeshott, anyway, and he's not always right about such things). That also limits your cross types. You could pivot slightly and get something more typical of the third quarter of the 15th c. A plain or faceted T5 pommel with a long, straight, trumpeted cross and long, bottle-shaped grip is very common in German/Austrian artwork of the late 15th c. See the Talhoffer image below. That cross is very common in the artwork I see.

Adding to what others have already said about mixing and matching--it's possible to get the blade, pommel cross and grip perfectly matched but still make a hash of things if the proportions are wrong. We see that done all the time on even mid-range pieces. I spend a great deal of time figuring out historical proportions and translating those into modern projects, not only for the sake of balance but also just to get the right look. Take special note of the relationship between the length of grip and cross and pommel size and blade length and width. For example, in the image below the cross is exactly the length of the hilt from cross to the top of the pommel. That seems to be common, but of course there are exceptions. The cross on your original drawing might be too long, based on this very rough rule of thumb. If you shorten it to match the length of the hilt I bet it would look better to you.Once you start getting those things in historical proportion to each other they all start falling into place.

Also pay attention to the ratio of hilt length to blade length.If you're starting with a bare blade you find historical examples of that length and shape and note the ratio of hilt to blade. You mark the same proportion on your blade and measure the distance from that mark to the end of the tang and that will give you some idea about cross length. Etc.

I don't think you'd want a short cross on this sword if you want it to hew close to the historical line. I think the point of the re-curved cross is to have the advantages of a long cross in a more compact package. One has to pay close attention with those to get them curved the right way. View historical examples (or Albion's) and you'll see that they all curve the same way. Assuming they were this way for a reason, they're not really ambidextrous hilts in the perfect sense because you have a functionally different hilt when holding it in the off hand.

Finally, you probably should have a chappe. This is where even the top-of-the-line makers often cut corners but if you look at historical artwork you see that this technology was the norm. If you immerse yourself in the artwork as well as the surviving swords, the absence of a chappe on reproductions becomes glaring. Not all swords had them (I just finished a project without one) but I really think the one you're describing could use a chappe of either of the two common types.

Eric G. · Posted: Sun 22 May, 2011 4:07 pm Post subject:

Thanks Sean for your very helpful reply.

I really like the image that you provided. If you have any others that you would like to post or refer me to I would appreciate it a lot. Also, please feel free to email or PM me for any reason about this.

Honestly I thought that getting something historically accurate would be a lot easier than this but it looks like I am mistaking. I know that you are very knowledgable in this area (indeed, it was your XVIII project from a few months back that really encouraged me to actually do this) and so whatever help you provide will be valuable to me.

Nathan Robinson · myArmoury Admin