Typology of Albion Count/Steward -- myArmoury.com

Greyson Brown · Posted: Mon 12 Jun, 2006 7:43 am Post subject: Typology of Albion Count/Steward

I am curious why the Albion Count and Steward swords get classified as Type XIIIa. To my thinking, they fit the type just as easily or better than the sub-type. I do not have my copy of The Sword in the Age of Chivalry handy, and the feature article here does not give a blade length, but I think the 34 inch blade of these two swords falls near the length Oakeshott intended (I am almost certain that he mentions an average blade length of 33 inches in SAC, but I can't prove it). Also, the 5 1/8 grip on the Count/Steward, seems more fitting for the Type XIII than the Type XIIIa (Oakeshott givves an average length of 6 inches).

I will conceede that the Count and Steward have somewhat narrow blades, and they lack the distinct widening below the hilt. Is it for this readon that they are called Type XIIIa's, or is it something else? Maybe the way they handle? Any thoughts are appreciated.

-Grey

Chad Arnow · myArmoury Team

That grip length may be incorrect. I don't remember the Count I saw to be that short (the review lists it as 5 1/8 inches) in the grip. The Crecy, admittedly a different beast though it shares pommel/guard with the Steward has a grip of 6 5/8 inches. The Mercenary has a 6 1/2 inch grip and its pommel can be gripped, too.

If you look at the pics in the review, Patrick's second hand could pretty easily fit on the grip. Unless his hands are really small, I'm betting that measurement is a typo. Patrick lists the Ritter's grip as 4 1/4 inches. I have a hard time believing the Count and Steward have not quite an inch more grip:

The grip length I remember the Count having would slide it pretty much in the lower end of the Type XIIIa family.

Roger Hooper · Posted: Mon 12 Jun, 2006 8:58 am Post subject:

I agree that that 5.125 grip length must be a typo. The Count's overall length is 43.75, the blade length is34.87. If the grip length is 5.125, that would mean the pommel is 3.75 inches long. Most pommels are around 2 inches long. If that was so in this case, the grip would be a more believable 6.88 inches long.

I think that if you wanted to classify these two swords as type XIII instead of XIIIa, you could make a good arguement. I believe they are sitting around the border line between the two types

Angus Trim · Posted: Mon 12 Jun, 2006 9:24 am Post subject:

There are six XIIIa's in Oakeshott's "Records of the Medieval Sword" that range between 33 inch blade and 34 inch blade lengths.......... handle lengths are not given.......

There is only one XIII in the same bood that has a 33 inch blade lenght. The others are a bit shorter.......

With the XIII and XIIIa the most important difference is blade length...... and 33 inch seems to be the place that Ewart chose to split them...........

Chad Arnow · myArmoury Team

According to Mike at Albion, the bare grip cores measure 6.25”. I guess we need to change that.

Nathan Robinson · myArmoury Admin

The reviewer got the grip measurement wrong in that review. Sorry about that, guys. I've corrected it. Thanks.

Jeremiah Swanger

Greyson Brown · Posted: Mon 12 Jun, 2006 12:02 pm Post subject:

I guess I should have done some math before I went and made a fool of myself. Razz

Thanks for pointing out that typo, Chad.

Thanks, Angus, for the info on blade lengths. I was working from memory as my books are in transit at the moment. That info, combined with the revised grip length, makes the the Count and Steward fairly cut and dried (if slightly diminuitive) examples of the Type XIIIa sub-type.

Thanks for helping me solve my little quandry, but that means I now have to come to grips with the fact that I don't own a Type XIII. I guess I have to go shopping. Cool

-Grey

J. Guerin · Posted: Tue 13 Jun, 2006 5:14 am Post subject:

Hi,
Aren't the 'a' subcatagories usually just longer gripped versions? So the Steward\Count's
6+ inch grip would make it a Type 13a.

Greyson Brown · Posted: Tue 13 Jun, 2006 6:52 am Post subject:

J. Guerin · Posted: Tue 13 Jun, 2006 8:05 am Post subject:

Of course, if I become convinced that the Steward is definately a Type XIIIa, then I can use the absence of a Type XIII in my collection in order to justify buying another sword, too

I like your reasoning there.

Peter Johnsson · Industry Professional

Type XIII swords could perhaps be described as headsmans swords built for war.
The character of the type is broad in the blade, not too long and a grip with room for two hands.

The Steward and Count are too slim and nimble to really come close to type XIII swords in character. Therefore they can be classified as XIIIa´s at the slighter end of the spectrum.

You´d want to widen the blade by 30%-50% and shoten it by some 5 cm or more. Then you´d have to add a pommel that is wider and heavier. That would fit the bill for a type XIII.

If you are skillful mind readers, then you´ll know just what might be added to the line at a later date... Wink

Kenton Spaulding · Posted: Tue 13 Jun, 2006 4:14 pm Post subject:

Very sneaky, Peter. I like the sound of this.

Greyson Brown · Posted: Wed 14 Jun, 2006 7:20 am Post subject:

Thanks, Peter; that makes sense.

-Grey