Posts: 1,903 Location: Toronto
Tue 24 May, 2011 4:19 pm
Dear Luka,
I'm surprised you want to change those nice swords, but here are my thoughts:
Re: 2142. I agree about the blade
cross-section - should be lenticular for the current sword or what you want. Otherwise the blade looks close enough to XI-ish to do the sort of thing you are talking about. A big Brazil nut pommel would do - but you are going to need something with a good curvature against the hand (A rather than B) to help comfortably leverage all that blade weight against your hand. I think that a B combined with a short grip and a long blade will result in an unwieldy and uncomfortable sword. N/O would also work egonomically but historically would be more 13th century and are normally accompanied by hand-&-half proportion handles.
A very rare and interesting option would be to combine the long grip with a big 'A' brazil nut pommel - see type number 12 here:
http://www.myArmoury.com/feature_geibig.html (I think its the same sword as p223 in
Oakeshott's records).
Re: 2130. I say leave it be - its OK for your desired period! Look at 'Records' page 222 and 225/6 if you have it. Here are two swords with identical pommels and similar crosses and blades that Oakeshott dates to 1100 - not 1300.
If you really have an itch to change something, you could shorten the handle to 3.5 inches more typical of earlier swords...this one looks slightly longer. Out of my two 2130s, the bigger heavier one is actually easier to balance because it has a 3.6" grip with a snug fit against the my hand for better leverage whereas the other has a 4" grip and requires more wrist strength on a heavy one-hander of this type (and I have bigger hands than you).
Have fun! JD