| myArmoury.com is now completely member-supported. Please contribute to our efforts with a donation. Your donations will go towards updating our site, modernizing it, and keeping it viable long-term.
Last 10 Donors: Graham Shearlaw, Anonymous, Daniel Sullivan, Chad Arnow, Jonathan Dean, M. Oroszlany, Sam Arwas, Barry C. Hutchins, Dan Kary, Oskar Gessler (View All Donors) |
| Author |
Message |
Jean Henri Chandler
|
 Posted: Tue 10 Jul, 2012 12:23 pm Post subject: |
 |
|
| Peter Johnsson wrote: |
Jean, thank you.
It is good to hear about what you see as parallels in your research.
I think it is important and rewarding to try and see the sword in context with its time. The sword can be seen as an expression of ideas of "The Conflict" that defines any time period. |
You alluded to this in your lecture. One of the things I've been trying to figure out are the various types of Medieval warfare - there seem to be an astonishingly complex variety of low and high intensity conflicts. I wonder if you can expand on this part of your hypothesis at all yet?
J
Books and games on Medieval Europe Codex Integrum
Codex Guide to the Medieval Baltic Now available in print
|
|
  |
 |
|
Peter Johnsson
Industry Professional
|
| Posted: Wed 11 Jul, 2012 1:01 am Post subject: |
|
|
| Jean Henri Chandler wrote: | | Peter Johnsson wrote: |
...The sword can be seen as an expression of ideas of "The Conflict" that defines any time period. |
You alluded to this in your lecture. One of the things I've been trying to figure out are the various types of Medieval warfare - there seem to be an astonishingly complex variety of low and high intensity conflicts. I wonder if you can expand on this part of your hypothesis at all yet?
J |
Jean, I am sorry. This is still only the seed of an idea used in a broad sense.
We are used to seeing the development of the sword as result of advances in metallurgy, in answer to changes in armour and following the shifting strategic and tactical use of the weapon over time.
I think that another aspect is equally important: The ideas that defined the nature of the conflict.
On one level a viking sword can be made to answer the tactical needs of the mounted knight without changing its aesthetic form and expression in any fundamental ways.
What we see taking place in the tenth and early eleventh centuries is that the role of the warrior changes at the time of the restoration of the Holy roman Empire under the Ottonian dynasty. The conflict became a question of the survival of Christendom and the warrior was defined as a knight, being a servant and defender of the church. It is during this time period we see a fundamental change in the concept of the design of the sword. It no longer looks like the sword of the viking period. It has taken on a much more severe and stark form that can be described as geometric in nature. This is in harmony with ideas of the time and marks a change in the role of the warrior.
There is naturally much more going on and the situation is more complex than I outline, but I believe it is one aspect that should be looked into with more focus: the changing design of the sword over time as a response in contemporary ideas about warfare and warrior identity.
|
|
 |
|
|
Peter Johnsson
Industry Professional
|
| Posted: Wed 11 Jul, 2012 1:05 am Post subject: |
|
|
| Mark T wrote: | One thing - among many - that stood out for me in Peter's lectures was his reference to the role of memory in medieval times. For Peter, and anyone else interested in this topic, there are some good resources:
The Book of Memory: A Study of Memory in Medieval Culture (Cambridge Studies in Medieval Literature), Mary Carruthers
The Medieval Craft of Memory: An Anthology of Texts and Pictures (Material Texts), ed. Mary Carruthers and Jan M. Ziolkowski
Among other things, these texts show how illuminated manuscripts were designed to aid recollection and memory, and introduces the idea of mnemonic-architectonics, where visualising a building can help one arrange information. The relation of thought to images and art is picked up in this companion volume:
The Craft of Thought: Meditation, Rhetoric, and the Making of Images, 400-1200 (Cambridge Studies in Medieval Literature), Mary Carruthers
Cheers,
Mark T |
Thank you Mark.
I know I need to read Mary Carruther directly. Her work has been quoted in the literature I have so far used in my research.
If I would choose one of her books to start with, which one would you recommend?
I am especially interested to learn about the use of image and form as memory aides and carriers of meaning and how this correlates with the "Citadel of the Mind".
|
|
|
|
|
Mark T
|
| Posted: Wed 11 Jul, 2012 3:31 am Post subject: |
|
|
Hi Peter,
The book of memory touches on memory and architecture, and memory and design. It was the first in the series, although the recent revised edition (2008) extends on her early ideas.
The medieval craft of memory provides some of the visual and textual examples she drew on, as well as further exploration of the ideas. From the description in the myArmoury bookstore:
| Quote: | | The mixing of visual and verbal media was commonplace throughout medieval cultures: pictures contained visual puns, words were often verbal paintings, and both were used equally as tools for making thoughts. The ability to create pictures in one's own mind was essential to medieval cognitive technique and imagination, and the intensely pictorial and affective qualities of medieval art and literature were generative, creative devices in themselves. |
The craft of thought deals with medieval thought more generally:
| Quote: | | The Craft of Thought examines medieval monastic meditation as a discipline for making thoughts, and discusses its influence on literature, art, and architecture, deriving examples from a variety of late antique and medieval sources, with excursions into modern architectural memorials. The study emphasizes meditation as an act of literary composition or invention, the techniques of which notably involved both words and making mental "pictures" for thinking and composing. |
So, where to begin? The first book is the main text on medieval memory, so could be the best beginning point for the ideas. However, the second has more examples of source material. The third looks at thought more generally, and makes the connection to creative and design pursuits. Maybe the best option is to start with the first one and go from there.
Looking forward to seeing what you come up with!
Mark
Chief Librarian/Curator, Isaac Leibowitz Librarmoury
Schallern sind sehr sexy!
|
|
|
|
|
Jean Henri Chandler
|
|
|
|
|
Jean Henri Chandler
|
| Posted: Wed 11 Jul, 2012 2:42 pm Post subject: |
|
|
Another (to me) interesting correlation with something you mentioned Peter was this concept of "as above / so below" which was so common in many crafts at the time, from masonry to medicine. It was also an important principle in law.
You are probably familiar with the Sachsenspiegel, arguably the most important and ubiquitous legal text found throughout Northern and Central Europe. It was a book of common law (landrecht) and feudal law (lehnrecht) of which hundreds of copies were in use by magistrates all over the Holy Roman Empire and also in other regions such as Bohemia, Hungary, Poland, Silesia, Sweden, and Lithuania. Four of the seven illustrated / illuminated versions of the book still survive today, shedding a lot of light on the legal practices of the day.
There were also other regional variants, such as the Schwabenspiegel in Swabia, the Księga Elbląska (aka Elbinger Rechtsbuch) in Poland, the Deutschenspiegel, and others. It remained a fundamental basis of German law until the late 18th Century.
Of course, Sachsenspiegel means literally, 'saxon mirror', Schwabenspiegel means 'swabian mirror', and so on. The meaning of the name was based on the notion of 'as above, so below". The law book was supposed to literally reflect the heavenly order. If nothing else it is testament to the ubiquity of the concept in the lives of people then.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sachsenspiegel
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Schwabenspiegel
J
Books and games on Medieval Europe Codex Integrum
Codex Guide to the Medieval Baltic Now available in print
|
|
|
|
|
|
Peter Johnsson
Industry Professional
|
| Posted: Mon 16 Jul, 2012 11:01 pm Post subject: |
|
|
Hi all,
I thought it might be helpful for interested forumites to have direct access to the presentations at this forum directly in the thread. Both demonstrations are over one hour long, but I hope you will find it worth while.
EDIT: removed useless HTML code.
Last edited by Peter Johnsson on Tue 17 Jul, 2012 4:25 am; edited 1 time in total
|
|
|
|
|
Vincent Le Chevalier
|
| Posted: Tue 17 Jul, 2012 12:09 am Post subject: |
|
|
| Peter Johnsson wrote: | | I thought it might be helpful for interested forumites to have direct access to the presentations at this forum directly in the thread. |
I don't think you can realy embed videos like that here, however here are the links to your talks:
First talk
Second talk
Regards,
--
Vincent
Ensis Sub Caelo
|
|
|
|
|
|
Peter Johnsson
Industry Professional
|
| Posted: Tue 17 Jul, 2012 4:24 am Post subject: |
|
|
| Vincent Le Chevalier wrote: | | Peter Johnsson wrote: | | I thought it might be helpful for interested forumites to have direct access to the presentations at this forum directly in the thread. |
I don't think you can realy embed videos like that here, however here are the links to your talks:
First talk
Second talk
Regards, |
Thanks Vincent,
I understood my mistake right after posting, but left it without action.
Thanks for posting links. It it the best option for the time being I guess.
|
|
|
|
|
Sean Flynt
|
|
|
|
|
|
Job Overbeek
|
| Posted: Tue 17 Jul, 2012 12:41 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| Peter Johnsson wrote: | | Vincent Le Chevalier wrote: | | Peter Johnsson wrote: | | I thought it might be helpful for interested forumites to have direct access to the presentations at this forum directly in the thread. |
I don't think you can realy embed videos like that here, however here are the links to your talks:
First talk
Second talk
Regards, |
Thanks Vincent,
I understood my mistake right after posting, but left it without action.
Thanks for posting links. It it the best option for the time being I guess. |
Is there a way to download them directly? Because I'd rather not have to download it every time I want to watch something again.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Peter Johnsson
Industry Professional
|
| Posted: Tue 17 Jul, 2012 12:45 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| Job Overbeek wrote: |
Is there a way to download them directly? Because I'd rather not have to download it every time I want to watch something again. |
Not that I know of, unfortunately.
There will be an edited version of the demonstrations of Arctic Fire 2012 event that will be made available as a DVD.
I shall make a note of this at the Manufacturers Forum when it is made ready (there is a lot of editing to do, and the final version will be much nicer with high resolution and smoother editing).
|
|
|
|
|
|
Peter Johnsson
Industry Professional
|
| Posted: Tue 17 Jul, 2012 12:47 pm Post subject: |
|
|
Sean, I am glad to hear that your brain is smoldering :-)
It can be like that sometimes, I know. At first it is pleasant. But when it does not want to go away it can become quite distracting after a while.
I hope you will find the ideas worthwhile. Please let me know what you think.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Peter Johnsson
Industry Professional
|
| Posted: Tue 17 Jul, 2012 12:51 pm Post subject: |
|
|
Jean, thanks for bringing up this interesting parallel with philosophy of legal matters. I had not thought about that, and am glad that you pointed it out. It is very useful in the discussion of these matters.
The symmetry of things, great and small is indeed an important element in medieval thinking.
It makes for ideas of sympathetic magic, mystic parabolas, social organization, aesthetic ideals and moral philosophy. Quite all encompassing. To us it might seem both strange and wonderfully enticing that the world can be described like this.
Last edited by Peter Johnsson on Tue 17 Jul, 2012 10:02 pm; edited 1 time in total
|
|
|
|
|
|
Fabrice Cognot
Industry Professional
|
| Posted: Tue 17 Jul, 2012 9:04 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| Peter Johnsson wrote: | We are used to seeing the development of the sword as result of advances in metallurgy, in answer to changes in armour and following the shifting strategic and tactical use of the weapon over time.
I think that another aspect is equally important: The ideas that defined the nature of the conflict.
On one level a viking sword can be made to answer the tactical needs of the mounted knight without changing its aesthetic form and expression in any fundamental ways.
What we see taking place in the tenth and early eleventh centuries is that the role of the warrior changes at the time of the restoration of the Holy roman Empire under the Ottonian dynasty. The conflict became a question of the survival of Christendom and the warrior was defined as a knight, being a servant and defender of the church. It is during this time period we see a fundamental change in the concept of the design of the sword. It no longer looks like the sword of the viking period. It has taken on a much more severe and stark form that can be described as geometric in nature. This is in harmony with ideas of the time and marks a change in the role of the warrior.
There is naturally much more going on and the situation is more complex than I outline, but I believe it is one aspect that should be looked into with more focus: the changing design of the sword over time as a response in contemporary ideas about warfare and warrior identity. |
And not just the sword, if I might add. Fluctuations, changes, evolutions in technology, tactics, fighting techniques and the way to see and live through the world (and maybe the next) is a constant matter of the Middle Ages - albeit not always a tangible, material one - and may very well affect not only other weapons, but more generally speaking the entire world as percieved by the craftsmen, fighting men and praying men of these times.
And you know my take on this (and I must say that our talks were essential in the construction of this tinking) : there are three main things that can be seen on medieval weapons (though it takes a keen eye sometimes) : the how (ie. the technological processes, methods and know-how of the time - actually a bit more complex than this), the what for (ie. the practical use of the weapon, its pragmatic aspects - but not only !) and the why (ie the non-pragmatic reasons behind such and such feature, such proportions, such detail - and more than often this latter question can't be answered, simply identified - or, rather, spotted).
Your articles, and this interesting attempt at decyphering what remains of a world that was, in my view, unfathomably more complex (and yet sometimes quite down-to-earth) than what we may even think, give new perspective on that third point. Thanks 
Cheers
Fab
PhD in medieval archeology.
HEMAC member
De Taille et d'Estoc director
Maker of high quality historical-inspired pieces.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Nat Lamb
|
| Posted: Wed 18 Jul, 2012 1:28 am Post subject: |
|
|
I have to share an experience I had today. I have been using a pretty basic 3d modelling program to visually “plan out” A sword I have been wanting to make out of some bar stock I bought a few years ago. My idea was to make a 15th century schiavonesca style blade with “Irish” fittings, more for fun rather than any attempt at historicity.
While I had a rough idea of what I wanted from this blade, I am a complete noob when it comes to anything practical (thank-you philosophy degree…), but after extensive tinkering, and about 50 revisions, I finally arrived at a model that “looks right” about a month ago. All the proportions appealed to me, and it seemed “balanced” to look at. After watching Peter’s talk a few times, I decided to see if any of the proportions matched up with Peter’s findings.
Well, once I had drawn out the blade length and plotted out the circles I dragged the model over to the sectioned diagram and started looking for these proportions, and they were everywhere. Not necessarily the same ones (for instance, Peter’s example had a pommel whose size was in line with the “f” module, whereas I found my sketch’s pommel was about ½ a millimetre away from the “e” module… but I was using an open ring pommel, so it needed a larger radius to “look right”)
What astounded me was that nearly everything in the design matched up with one of the proportions talked about in the video, the only thing that didn’t was the length of the fullers. I had used the golden ratio to set the original length of my fullers, and although they looked acceptable, they were the element of the design I was least happy with. When I changed the design so that the fullers terminated at the end of the 4th of 7 circles, the design looked much more balanced.
I am not making any claims here about the quality of my design, as it was very much the result of the 1000 monkeys on 1000 typewriters approach, and out of the many thousands of failed attempts there was one that looked o.k. (I was bound to get lucky eventually). What left me absolutely flabbergasted was that that reasons that that design was the one that looked o.k. was that it was the one that, by accident, closely resembled a sword built according to the principles Peter has proposed.
I am reminded of the ancient Greek word for truth, “Alathea”, which I believe translates literally as “un-hidden”. This seems like a good description of what Peter has come up with, a pattern that was hidden, that he has subsequently unearthed and brought to the attention of the rest of us
|
|
|
|
|
|
Peter Johnsson
Industry Professional
|
| Posted: Wed 18 Jul, 2012 2:46 am Post subject: |
|
|
| Nat Lamb wrote: | I have to share an experience I had today. I have been using a pretty basic 3d modelling program to visually “plan out” A sword I have been wanting to make out of some bar stock I bought a few years ago. My idea was to make a 15th century schiavonesca style blade with “Irish” fittings, more for fun rather than any attempt at historicity.
While I had a rough idea of what I wanted from this blade, I am a complete noob when it comes to anything practical (thank-you philosophy degree…), but after extensive tinkering, and about 50 revisions, I finally arrived at a model that “looks right” about a month ago. All the proportions appealed to me, and it seemed “balanced” to look at. After watching Peter’s talk a few times, I decided to see if any of the proportions matched up with Peter’s findings.
Well, once I had drawn out the blade length and plotted out the circles I dragged the model over to the sectioned diagram and started looking for these proportions, and they were everywhere. Not necessarily the same ones (for instance, Peter’s example had a pommel whose size was in line with the “f” module, whereas I found my sketch’s pommel was about ½ a millimetre away from the “e” module… but I was using an open ring pommel, so it needed a larger radius to “look right”)
What astounded me was that nearly everything in the design matched up with one of the proportions talked about in the video, the only thing that didn’t was the length of the fullers. I had used the golden ratio to set the original length of my fullers, and although they looked acceptable, they were the element of the design I was least happy with. When I changed the design so that the fullers terminated at the end of the 4th of 7 circles, the design looked much more balanced.
I am not making any claims here about the quality of my design, as it was very much the result of the 1000 monkeys on 1000 typewriters approach, and out of the many thousands of failed attempts there was one that looked o.k. (I was bound to get lucky eventually). What left me absolutely flabbergasted was that that reasons that that design was the one that looked o.k. was that it was the one that, by accident, closely resembled a sword built according to the principles Peter has proposed.
I am reminded of the ancient Greek word for truth, “Alathea”, which I believe translates literally as “un-hidden”. This seems like a good description of what Peter has come up with, a pattern that was hidden, that he has subsequently unearthed and brought to the attention of the rest of us |
Nat, thank you for sharing this example with us.
What you describe brings up some interesting points.
First is that it is obviously possible to arrive at pleasing proportions going by intuition. No one will object to that, and it may be said that my hypothesis on geometric design is either a matter of happy coincidences or that a geometric pattern may be constructed so that it can coincide with just about anything.
-I think it more to it than that, but it is a strong and obvious critique of the idea. It is something that has been said about analysis of art and engineering in most fields where geometry has been applied in analysis. That it is a topic of controversy is not surprising. Geometry is such a flexible tool that it really *can* be made to fit any design or form allowed enough margin of error and made to a high enough level of complexity. It is easy to be taken in by the beauty of the Lady Geometry and build ideas of mystic secrets that form unbroken traditions since the dawn of time.
We do know that geometry has played a role for engineers, craftsmen and artists through the ages but the question is how we can reconstruct such methods afterwards and if we are imposing ideas and plans on something that was not conceived this way originally.
To me your experience is a good example of how we are influenced by what we have previously seen. This is what makes up for later intuitive choices. We may not be aware of where the information comes from, but what we have absorbed gives us a "feeling" for what looks right and we keep searching until we come close enough.
I think that it is reasonable to assume that this was something that happened in historical times as well: some sword makers may not have known about principles of geometric design, but still knew enough about what a sword should look like that their work came close to "the real stuff".
We should look for what structures original swords may reveal.
If many swords are analyzed it might be possible to see some patters evolving. So far I have analyzed some 50 swords. I think I can see some patterns that may explain the typical proportions of some sword types through the development of the sword, but I am aware that it is yet far too early to say anything with certainty.
Comparing the analysis of many swords may reveal some common themes in their proportions. I am currently doing this and some interesting correlations do occur. Currently it seems to me that some stratagems or combinations of geometric constructions and cuts stand out as being shared between many of the swords so far analyzed.
If we accept my hypothesis as a credible method for how (some - many?) swords were conceived in medieval times, we can then approach design today using the same principles.
Using geometric methods of design in contemporary work will take out the guesswork from this process of intuitive searching for the right proportions, but will not limit us in the creative aspect of design: geometric construction is not set or limited, apart from following the rules of Euclid in construction.
-So instead of working through 1000 sketches by "feel" to arrive at that one pleasing design, we may make some 10 or 20 geometric designs and search for a pleasing sword within the grid that we have set up for ourselves.
Intuition will still play a big role in sword design: we still have to rely on our sensitivities for what looks right and beautiful, even if we base the design on geometric constructions. We have to set out a combination of geometric forms that result in a sword that makes sense both functionally and aesthetically. Working with this system of design only takes out an element of the haphazard. Instead we will compose designs according to a "language" of sorts. But just like with any language we will have to put words in correct order to say something meaningful.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Taylor Ellis
|
| Posted: Wed 18 Jul, 2012 5:47 am Post subject: |
|
|
|
Peter, you've talking a little bit on here about when you believe these underlying design principles started coming together, but I was wondering, how long do you think they lasted? That is, at what point in European history do you think swords made according to these principles became aesthetically undesirable or unfashionable?
|
|
|
|
|
|
Nat Lamb
|
| Posted: Wed 18 Jul, 2012 5:59 am Post subject: |
|
|
| Peter Johnsson wrote: |
Nat, thank you for sharing this example with us.
What you describe brings up some interesting points.
First is that it is obviously possible to arrive at pleasing proportions going by intuition. No one will object to that, and it may be said that my hypothesis on geometric design is either a matter of happy coincidences or that a geometric pattern may be constructed so that it can coincide with just about anything. |
This is what actually struck me about the experience, I looked back at some older iterations of the design, and had a MUCH harder time finding the same kind of matches. In other words the design didn't look right until those balances were more present
| Peter Johnsson wrote: |
To me your experience is a good example of how we are influenced by what we have previously seen. This is what makes up for later intuitive choices. We may not be aware of where the information comes from, but what we have absorbed gives us a "feeling" for what looks right and we keep searching until we come close enough. |
Agreed, and I think this lends creedence to your theory, since these relationships are something that can be used to discriminate, meaning that it ism't a case of just using geometry to find arbitary links.
| Peter Johnsson wrote: |
I think that it is reasonable to assume that this was something that happened in historical times as well: some sword makers may not have known about principles of geometric design, but still knew enough about what a sword should look like that their work came close to "the real stuff". |
I would guess that the same is also true in the design of churches. I imagine that well trained and talented architects were commissioned to make grand cathedrals in major cities and did so using the most sophisticated techniques, while provincial backwaters might hire a semi competent guy who was able to mimic some of the features to make a building look “churchy”
I am really looking forward to you publishing your ideas, I think it will make for some fascinating and illuminating reading.
|
|
|
|
|
Robin Smith
|
| Posted: Wed 18 Jul, 2012 6:11 am Post subject: |
|
|
| Peter Johnsson wrote: | Nat, thank you for sharing this example with us.
What you describe brings up some interesting points.
First is that it is obviously possible to arrive at pleasing proportions going by intuition. No one will object to that, and it may be said that my hypothesis on geometric design is either a matter of happy coincidences or that a geometric pattern may be constructed so that it can coincide with just about anything.
-I think it more to it than that, but it is a strong and obvious critique of the idea. It is something that has been said about analysis of art and engineering in most fields where geometry has been applied in analysis. That it is a topic of controversy is not surprising. Geometry is such a flexible tool that it really *can* be made to fit any design or form allowed enough margin of error and made to a high enough level of complexity. It is easy to be taken in by the beauty of the Lady Geometry and build ideas of mystic secrets that form unbroken traditions since the dawn of time.
We do know that geometry has played a role for engineers, craftsmen and artists through the ages but the question is how we can reconstruct such methods afterwards and if we are imposing ideas and plans on something that was not conceived this way originally.
To me your experience is a good example of how we are influenced by what we have previously seen. This is what makes up for later intuitive choices. We may not be aware of where the information comes from, but what we have absorbed gives us a "feeling" for what looks right and we keep searching until we come close enough.
I think that it is reasonable to assume that this was something that happened in historical times as well: some sword makers may not have known about principles of geometric design, but still knew enough about what a sword should look like that their work came close to "the real stuff".
We should look for what structures original swords may reveal.
If many swords are analyzed it might be possible to see some patters evolving. So far I have analyzed some 50 swords. I think I can see some patterns that may explain the typical proportions of some sword types through the development of the sword, but I am aware that it is yet far too early to say anything with certainty.
Comparing the analysis of many swords may reveal some common themes in their proportions. I am currently doing this and some interesting correlations do occur. Currently it seems to me that some stratagems or combinations of geometric constructions and cuts stand out as being shared between many of the swords so far analyzed.
If we accept my hypothesis as a credible method for how (some - many?) swords were conceived in medieval times, we can then approach design today using the same principles.
Using geometric methods of design in contemporary work will take out the guesswork from this process of intuitive searching for the right proportions, but will not limit us in the creative aspect of design: geometric construction is not set or limited, apart from following the rules of Euclid in construction.
-So instead of working through 1000 sketches by "feel" to arrive at that one pleasing design, we may make some 10 or 20 geometric designs and search for a pleasing sword within the grid that we have set up for ourselves.
Intuition will still play a big role in sword design: we still have to rely on our sensitivities for what looks right and beautiful, even if we base the design on geometric constructions. We have to set out a combination of geometric forms that result in a sword that makes sense both functionally and aesthetically. Working with this system of design only takes out an element of the haphazard. Instead we will compose designs according to a "language" of sorts. But just like with any language we will have to put words in correct order to say something meaningful. |
Thank you for this post. It touches on quite a few of my nagging concerns about the hypothesis. It shows that you are aware of the limitations.
To be honest, I don't think for me atleast, that I will be able to fully accept the hypothesis until its published. Gimme the numbers!  Maybe I'm just a natural born skeptic. Seriously though, I am interested in things like how much deviation are you allowing, complexity of design required to get a fit, how many swords analyzed could an acceptable geometry NOT be found or that required overly complex geometry, etc... I am glad to see that you aware and addressing these issues like a true scholar. So many fall into what I call "hypothesis blindness" where they start to believe their own hypothesis so much that they cannot see the flaws. It seems, you are avoiding that trap.
As you have brought up a few times in this thread, Geometry has a real tendency to be abused by those who are looking to find a pattern. Actually, Mathamatics in general can be easily abused by those looking for hidden order. The "Bible Code" or the tendency of ancient astronaut theories to find hidden geometries immediately springs to mind. I suppose such crackpots have made me tend to be skeptical. Patterns can be found everywhere, but without hard proof how do you know if they are intentional?
I hope you don't take this the wrong way. I, as most on this forum, am a HUGE fan of your work. Please don't take my skepticism the wrong way..
Oh, another quick thought... Have you looked for it in non-sword weapons? They would have been subject to the same needs and limitations (lack of standardized measured for example). So if such design principles are at work in such disseparate fields as Architecture, Goldsmithing, Print Design and Sword making, then it should be found in other places. The medieval desire for a higher geometric order should be evident in other locations.
A furore Normannorum libera nos, Domine
|
|
 |
|
|
|
You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot vote in polls in this forum
You cannot attach files in this forum
You can download files in this forum
|
All contents © Copyright 2003-2024 myArmoury.com — All rights reserved
Discussion forums powered by phpBB © The phpBB Group
Switch to the Basic Low-bandwidth Version of the forum
|
This is a