| Author |
Message |
|
Ryan A. C.
|
 Posted: Wed 30 Mar, 2005 11:18 am Post subject: Next Gen XIX |
 |
|
I've been looking for a single hander to add to my collection, that is mainly made up of bastards and true longswords. Lately I've been looking at the Albion Next Generation interpretations of the XIX. I would like to know more about the class of sword, but am having trouble finding anything that describes the handling characteristics of such blades. I really would like to know more about this type so if you have any information please post.
 Attachment: 18.43 KB
The Condottiere
|
|
  |
 |
Chad Arnow
myArmoury Team
|
| Posted: Wed 30 Mar, 2005 11:30 am Post subject: Re: Next Gen XIX |
|
|
| Ryan A. C. wrote: | | I've been looking for a single hander to add to my collection, that is mainly made up of bastards and true longswords. Lately I've been looking at the Albion Next Generation interpretations of the XIX. I would like to know more about the class of sword, but am having trouble finding anything that describes the handling characteristics of such blades. I really would like to know more about this type so if you have any information please post. |
Ryan,
The Type XIX is under-researched, so writings on it are scarce beyond Oakeshott's books. Finding handling information for an entire Type will be difficult also, because there is typically a wide variety of swords in a given Type. Handling will vary from example to example, though you might be able to come up with ideas about some stereotypical traits of the Type if you've been exposed to enough examples.
One could guess that they would be good in the cut due to the parallel edges. You could also guess that they might be serviceable in thrusting due to the hexagonal cross section. Perhaps someone more knowledgable will chime in.
ChadA
http://chadarnow.com/
|
|
  |
|
|
Aaron Schnatterly
|
| Posted: Wed 30 Mar, 2005 11:33 am Post subject: |
|
|
Information typical of the Type XIX:
Profile: not always so broad, some are quite slim, but always a flat hexagonal section
Cross-section: flat hexagonal with chamfered edges
Average Blade Length: 30"-38"
Fuller: ricasso with narrow fuller in upper 1/3rd of the blade
Point: sharp and spade shaped Grip: single hand to hand and a half
Primary purpose: cutting and thrusting
Period: mid 15th c.
Although I have not had the pleasure (yet) of handling this particular weapon, or any in it's type, I think I have a fairly good idea of how it feels. It should be fairly quick and responsive, but not as point-responsive as some of the other longswords primarily dedicated to the thrust. I feel also that it wouldn't be as begging to hack as is more typical of, say, a Viking sword, primarily a cutting-style blade.
Overall, it should actually be a very versatile blade, lively, and very responsive, effective against a multitude of targets irrespective of armour.
Wish I could have a more definitive and authoritative review... hope this helps.
-Aaron Schnatterly
_______________
Fortior Qui Se Vincit
(He is stronger who conquers himself.)
|
|
|
|
|
Alexi Goranov
myArmoury Alumni
|
| Posted: Wed 30 Mar, 2005 11:42 am Post subject: |
|
|
My only additional comment is that a vast number of different swords can be easily fitted into Type XIX. This means, as Chad noted,that the handling characteristics will vary significantly. For the record, the earliest known type XIX swords are from mid 14th century and their use extends beyond the 16th century. it is a very versatile breed.
Alexi
|
|
|
|
|
|
Patrick Kelly
|
| Posted: Wed 30 Mar, 2005 11:44 am Post subject: |
|
|
Hi Ryan,
The Condotierre is on my list too. 
I did have the opportunity to handle an original of this type long ago. If memory serves this struck me as an attempt at a jack-of-all-trades kind of design. I think Aaron's observations are pretty accurate. It probably won't cut as well as some of the earlier designs that feature cutting surfaces that are very broad, flat, and thin. It won't thrust as well as other designs that are strictly dedicated to that purpose. However, it would do either one sufficiently well that the point is moot.
While Albion's Doge is my favorite of those three designs the Condotierre is more fitting to my purposes.
"In valor there is hope.".................. Tacitus
|
|
 |
|
G. Scott H.
Location: Arizona, USA Joined: 22 Feb 2005
Posts: 410
|
| Posted: Wed 30 Mar, 2005 12:03 pm Post subject: |
|
|
|
Sorry I can't add anything in the way of information, but I do really dig the finger ring coming out of the crossguard. This would allow you to "choke up" on the grip and sling your index finger over the guard and against the ricasso: a very effective single-handed technique, while offering protection for the finger. A significant fearture if you're like me and prefer to handle your single-hander in this fashion.
|
|
|
|
|
Roger Hooper
|
| Posted: Wed 30 Mar, 2005 1:19 pm Post subject: |
|
|
I also have my sights set on The Condottiere.
I have 2 XIX's - the ATrim DD1601 and what became known as the Armart S34. From my own experience and posts I have read over the years, I'll say that XIX's can be good but cranky cutters. If you strike outside of the COP, the blade and hilt will vibrate and buzz, more so than some other types. You have to develop a knack for cutting with it - once you do, it may become your favorite sword, but until then it can be frustrating. I remember some years back when Albion was carrying a Gus Trim XIX, some people returned it because they found it too unforgiving and hard to cut with. It wasn't that it was a bad design - far from it. You just had to work with it.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Jeremiah Swanger
|
| Posted: Wed 30 Mar, 2005 4:24 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| Patrick Kelly wrote: | Hi Ryan,
The Condotierre is on my list too.
I did have the opportunity to handle an original of this type long ago. If memory serves this struck me as an attempt at a jack-of-all-trades kind of design. I think Aaron's observations are pretty accurate. It probably won't cut as well as some of the earlier designs that feature cutting surfaces that are very broad, flat, and thin. It won't thrust as well as other designs that are strictly dedicated to that purpose. However, it would do either one sufficiently well that the point is moot.
While Albion's Doge is my favorite of those three designs the Condotierre is more fitting to my purposes. |
I've been wondering something about the Alexandria XIX...
...
Why doesn't it have two finger rings?
Chalk it up to a personal quirk-- double-edged swords with asymetrical hilts just don't do it for me, for some reason.
Now the Kern, on the other hand, I'm pretty anxious to see how it turns out.
"Rhaegar fought nobly.
Rhaegar fought valiantly.
Rhaegar fought honorably.
And Rhaegar died."
- G.R.R. Martin's A Song of Ice and Fire
|
|
|
|
|
|
Patrick Kelly
|
| Posted: Wed 30 Mar, 2005 4:34 pm Post subject: |
|
|
Jeremiah,
The Alexandria sword doesn't have two finger rings because you're not going to loop your thumb and index finger over the guard at the same time.
Remember, function first.
"In valor there is hope.".................. Tacitus
|
|
|
|
|
|
Jeremiah Swanger
|
| Posted: Wed 30 Mar, 2005 4:42 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| Patrick Kelly wrote: | Jeremiah,
The Alexandria sword doesn't have two finger rings because you're not going to loop your thumb and index finger over the guard at the same time.
Remember, function first. |
I don't quite understand how having a second finger ring will impede the sword's function, Patrick... (you smart-arse!)
In fact, if anything, it means you won't have to worry about whether or not you are facing your opponent with the correct edge of the blade. Things can get confusing when you're in a life-and-death situation, after all... 
I only say this because drawing my sword with the finger ring on the wrong side is just the sort of thing that would probably happen to me, thus, I need that second ring to idiot-proof the sword! 
"Rhaegar fought nobly.
Rhaegar fought valiantly.
Rhaegar fought honorably.
And Rhaegar died."
- G.R.R. Martin's A Song of Ice and Fire
|
|
|
|
|
|
Patrick Kelly
|
| Posted: Wed 30 Mar, 2005 4:50 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| Jeremiah Swanger wrote: | I don't quite understand how having a second finger ring will impede the sword's function, Patrick... (you smart-arse!)
In fact, if anything, it means you won't have to worry about whether or not you are facing your opponent with the correct edge of the blade. Things can get confusing when you're in a life-and-death situation, after all...
I only say this because drawing my sword with the finger ring on the wrong side is just the sort of thing that would probably happen to me, thus, I need that second ring to idiot-proof the sword! |
It won't impede anything. The thing you have to remember is that this topic is an ongoing process of evolution. That type is one of the earliest beginnings of the compound hilt, as such they had the though of putting the index finger over the guard hence only one ring. Later on someone had the same thoughts as yours and added another, and etc., etc., etc.
The wheel seems like a perfectly simple and obvious thing but look how long it took to think of it.
"In valor there is hope.".................. Tacitus
|
|
|
|
|
|
Jeremiah Swanger
|
| Posted: Wed 30 Mar, 2005 6:20 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| Patrick Kelly wrote: |
It won't impede anything. The thing you have to remember is that this topic is an ongoing process of evolution. That type is one of the earliest beginnings of the compound hilt, as such they had the thought of putting the index finger over the guard hence only one ring. Later on someone had the same thoughts as yours and added another, and etc., etc., etc.
The wheel seems like a perfectly simple and obvious thing but look how long it took to think of it. |
Hmm...
... good answer...
"Rhaegar fought nobly.
Rhaegar fought valiantly.
Rhaegar fought honorably.
And Rhaegar died."
- G.R.R. Martin's A Song of Ice and Fire
|
|
|
|
|
G. Scott H.
Location: Arizona, USA Joined: 22 Feb 2005
Posts: 410
|
| Posted: Thu 31 Mar, 2005 10:27 am Post subject: |
|
|
Jeremiah,
I'm sure you could get Albion to make you a dual ring guard for a few extra bucks. Something like this, perphaps:
 The XIX Version 2.0. 
|
|
|
|
|
Roger Hooper
|
| Posted: Thu 31 Mar, 2005 11:12 am Post subject: |
|
|
|
A one-off Condottiere with a second hilt arm would cost more than a few extra bucks
|
|
|
|
|
G. Scott H.
Location: Arizona, USA Joined: 22 Feb 2005
Posts: 410
|
| Posted: Thu 31 Mar, 2005 11:21 am Post subject: |
|
|
| Roger Hooper wrote: | | A one-off Condottiere with a second hilt arm would cost more than a few extra bucks |
That was intended as a tongue-in-cheek post; hence, the LOL Emoticon ( ) at the end.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Ryan A. C.
|
| Posted: Thu 31 Mar, 2005 6:09 pm Post subject: |
|
|
I've been waiting for a sword to jump out at me for awhile, turns out it wasn't just one sword, but the type XIX. It's the first blade to speak to me in awhile so I guess it doesn't matter how it handles. I ONLY say that it doesn't matter because I know Albion doesn't half do anything and they know their stuff. The way a sword feels in hand always depends on the hand anyway.
Thanks for all the replies
|
|
|
|
|
|
Jeremiah Swanger
|
| Posted: Fri 01 Apr, 2005 12:08 am Post subject: |
|
|
| G. Scott H. wrote: | Jeremiah,
I'm sure you could get Albion to make you a dual ring guard for a few extra bucks. Something like this, perphaps:
The XIX Version 2.0. |
Despite the fact that you were being a smart-arse, that little photo-chop actually looks pretty good...
... I'm now envisioning it with four side rings added on...
Yeah, it would definitely be very labor-intensive for Albion to get that second ring on-- they'd have to sculpt new waxes, probably revise the mass of the hilt or something complicated like that...
"Rhaegar fought nobly.
Rhaegar fought valiantly.
Rhaegar fought honorably.
And Rhaegar died."
- G.R.R. Martin's A Song of Ice and Fire
|
|
|
|
|
G. Scott H.
Location: Arizona, USA Joined: 22 Feb 2005
Posts: 410
|
| Posted: Fri 01 Apr, 2005 10:07 am Post subject: |
|
|
| Quote: | | Despite the fact that you were being a smart-arse, that little photo-chop actually looks pretty good... |
I agree. Though my post was intended as a bit of smart-arsed humor, I think the sword looks better with a symmetrical two-ring guard.
|
|
|
|
|
Alex Oster
Location: Washington and Yokohama Joined: 01 Mar 2004
Posts: 410
|
| Posted: Fri 01 Apr, 2005 12:14 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| G. Scott H. wrote: | | think the sword looks better with a symmetrical two-ring guard. |
I agree. I am a big stickler for symetry. even my sword display has to cascade equally in height from my two hander.  I guess I am a little anal anout such things, but but I have to have two on display, or four or only three... ect...
Butg it does look good two rung.
The pen is mightier than the sword, especially since it can get past security and be stabbed it into a jugular.
This site would be better if everytime I clicked submit... I got to hear a whip crack!
My collection: Various Blades & Conan related
|
|
 |
|
|
|
This is a standard topic