[Robin Palmer]

[quote="David Huggins"]I am no expert but there appears to be some common misconceptions here, the fuller on 'viking' blades has often been described by some as the 'blood grove' to allow easy removal from a body, or even by twisting the sword it makes extraction easy because the fuller prevents suction from the flesh of the wound when the blade is twisted to remove!

My own understanding is that the fuller is simply there to remove weight from the blade without distracting from its strength.

I have to agree with David's points the fuller makes no difference in making it easier to remove a blade from a body. Many people consider the army's bayonet drills thrust twist and withdraw is simply sadism. In fact it is based on experience I quote an old soldier who served pre 1914-18 and had considerable experience in close quarter combat. 'A bayonet slides in with ease but is the very devil to get out'. The twist is to break the suction let air in and allow removal.

I have always understood the fully had two purposes one to lighten the blade without weakening it. The second is to do so in a way which strengthens it creating in effect an H shape as in a girder. The H shape is stronger than a solid bar of the same size how much effect the fuller gives I dont know but I believe it does work. Later swords have multiple fullers I doubt their effectiveness beyond lightning being more cosmetic than effective

yours R.Palmer


I

[Robin Palmer]

I got distracted and left this off my last post sorry.
To me the sword looks like a simple case of re hilting using an old pommel on a later blade a very common habit. There are also numerous examples of old blades re hilted with new style hilts fittings and blades cost so it made sense to rework rather than make new. The photos make it hard to see if the pommel is iron or bronze if it is bronze with an iron quillon then it is most likely to be a re hilt. A vast majority of standard viking fittings were iron according to David edge of the Wallis a majority of bronze fittings on viking swords in collections are later often Victorian additions.

[J.D. Crawford]

One can only speculate about the origins of this sword, but I like speculating, especially when it comes to my favorite swords and historical cultures. Here are some clues:

1) Our hero Oakeshott always warned us about equating the find location of a sword with its original source (either blade or hilt).
2) The blade of the sword in question is an early to mid medieval type, post-Viking, but could have originated anywhere that blades were made in Europe (e.g., Germany, wherever) and sold on the market.
3) The hilt of the sword in question appears to have both Scandinavian and Saxon influences, but these would have reached throughout Britain during this time period owing to the influence of the Saxons and various Viking invasions.
4) A nearly identical sword was found in Norway (Page 76, Oakshott's ROTMS). So similar as to evoke speculation that they were made by the same hands.
5) Based on the translation of ruins located on the hilt of the the above sword, our British twin sword was dated at around 1100-1150. (after the Viking age).
6) Based on artistic depictions, the pommel type may have remained in use for a couple more centuries.
7) More particularly, this pommel type was popular for several centuries afterwards in Scotland, particularly showing up in grave effigies and official seals along the western seaboard from Galloway on up through the North of Scotland. Except that the later models tended to have the straight sloping guards typical of medieval Scotland and the later claymore.
8) Who lived along Scotlands Western Seaboard during our period (1100-1150)? Gaels, Gall-Gaethil (A Gaelic-Norse mix) and Norse immigrants, i.e., from Norway. in fact Norway influenced the entire area from Shetland down through Mann and Dublin for several centuries, claiming the Hebrides as their possession for at least the next century.
9) It is known that the Gall-Gaethil participated in border warfare between Scotland and England, including the contemporary 'Battle of the Standard', not so far from the find place of this sword.

All these are widely accepted as facts. Here is the speculation: The sword type discussed in this thread was popular amongst the Gall-Gaethil culture of Western Scotland, this particular model being an early form that evolved later into the straight, downsloping type of guard that became predominant in Scotland. This mixed Norse-Gaelic culture could have easily lost one such sword in or near Yorkshire, taken as a battle trophy or even traded. On the other hand, a Norse warrior based in the Hebrides may have decided to return to Norway, taking one of these swords (the twin of the one discussed here) home with him. Its all circumstantial, but the Gall-Gaethil explanation connects with the sword in historical timing, cultural context, and can connect the two widely disparate find places of these two magnificant swords.

[Justin King]

The Normans were only a few generations removed from Scandinavia themselves at the time of the Conquest, I see no reason to suppose that this event marked the end of Scandinavian influence culturally. This same influence was strong in Scotland also, and many Scottish landholders also held lands in England so the possibilites for cross-cultural influence or even direct carry-over are almost limitless and impossible to define with any certainty from this distance in time.
The discussion is thought provoking though.

[Ken Speed]

Robin Palmer said, " To me the sword looks like a simple case of re hilting using an old pommel on a later blade a very common habit. There are also numerous examples of old blades re hilted with new style hilts fittings and blades cost so it made sense to rework rather than make new. The photos make it hard to see if the pommel is iron or bronze if it is bronze with an iron quillon then it is most likely to be a re hilt. .."

I think you're overlooking a few things:

A. Do you really think Oakshott would have failed to mention that this sword was rehilted, especially if it was done in bronze?

B. Would you not think that the odds against two identical swords being rehilted with identical old pommels is high?

C. I don't know if the same thing holds true for European swords but old Japanese swords were reworked and refitted as styles changed, they were modernized. I haven't heard or read about swords being altered to look more old fashioned except in cases of attempted fraud which sort of returns us to point A.

Its possible that you're right but I would want at least SOME physical evidence of rehilting before I would dismiss this puzzle so lightly.

Best regards,




Ken Speed

[Ken Speed]

J.D. Crawford wrote, "One can only speculate about the origins of this sword, but I like speculating, especially when it comes to my favorite swords and historical cultures."


YES!! Thats why this one especially is so much fun! The possibilities are practically infinite. On one hand I want to say that its too bad we don't have some documentation but if we had it it would spoil the speculation.


Best regards,



Ken Speed

[James R.Fox]

Gentle Sirs-I would simpley point out two things. First,as Mr Oakshott says in Archaeology of Weapons,Records of the Medieval Sword, and several other works, many inscriptions were magical in intent, to bring luck in battle and so on. and were not intended to be understood except by the bladesmith and the owner.Second, there is no mystery in how most river find swords got there, they were thrown there, either by the owner, or by his family at his request. As Mr Oakshott points out in his books, (and it is now generally accepted by most experts), for unknown reasons sword sacrifice persisted into the high middle ages, if not longer, especially in England.So, the fact is, it may well have been thrown there.

[Ken Speed]

Hi James,



You wrote, "I would simpley point out two things. First,as Mr Oakshott says in Archaeology of Weapons,Records of the Medieval Sword, and several other works, many inscriptions were magical in intent, to bring luck in battle and so on. and were not intended to be understood except by the bladesmith and the owner.Second, there is no mystery in how most river find swords got there, they were thrown there, either by the owner, or by his family at his request. As Mr Oakshott points out in his books, (and it is now generally accepted by most experts), for unknown reasons sword sacrifice persisted into the high middle ages, if not longer, especially in England.So, the fact is, it may well have been thrown there."

Thanks, the magic idea is a good one and explains why the runes are untranslatable. Robin and I were chatting about it via the web and I suggested that the inscriptions might be code. Yes, I know the idea is more than a little dramatic but it has some merit and goes to explain why there are two highly unusual but nearly identical swords. Maybe one or both belonged to the very, very first 007! I'm poking fun at myself a little but I think the code idea IS a possibility.

In general I think the reason swords are frequently found in rivers is that they were either stolen or used in a crime although I'm sure there were other reasons too. In relation to these swords the question in my mind is not how did one turn up in a river but how did one appear in York and the other show up so far away. If they were both straight forward Viking swords they would be less of a mystery but considering their type and the apparent uncertainty of their age does lead to some questions.

I'm almost positive that we're not going to ever get a definitive answer, its just fun to imagine.



Ken

[Luka Borscak]

Mr. Oakeshott actually says that swords with that hilt type were not rare or unusual, because although there are only two survived specimens they appear in art quite often. There was an example of John Balliol's seal with a sword like that and one one the tomb stone of other scotish knight. These two survived specimens just seem to be a bit earlier examples. Who knows how many such swords were rehilted and survived with another hilt form.

[Ken Speed]

Hi Luka,


OK, maybe I'm mistaken. My impression was that the combination of the earlier form of hilt and the later form of blade contributed to make these swords unusual and anachronistic. In any case I think that even if this was a common combination at the time, if these are the only two known surviving ones with these characteristics and they are both apparently made by the same smith that justifies calling them unusual today, don't you agree?

Thanks,


Ken Speed

[Luka Borscak]

I agree. But it's just that it isn't very secure to conclude anything about rarity of particular sword type in medieval times just because there are few surviving examples today. Oakeshott is guessing about a lot of things, he has no firm proof for much of his theories, but they usually sound logical. If these two surviving pieces are from about 1100-1150, there are similar swords in art in the 13th century and even later, it is logical to conclude that these sword type was not very rare. But they are unusual and specific for us today, especially because only two that survived seem to be from the same smith and they are found so far one from the other.

[Ken Speed]

Hi Luka,

Well, we're trying to peer back in time and make guesses about what things were like a thousand years ago and it seems that different people "hang their hat" on different things. My take on things is that if these swords are relatively uncommon now compared to other contemporaneous styles then they probably weren't all that common in their own time. You and others here seem to put a lot more reliance on artistic sources than I do. I tend to take artists efforts with a strong grain of salt in most cases. Let me give you an example; there is a description of viking ships in an old book which says that the sails were, "..trimmed with sealskin ropes." a woodcut appeared in the book which showed the sails edged with neat scallops, the sealskin trimming. Clearly what was meant was that the sails were held in place and adjusted using ropes made of sealskin but the craftsman who made the woodcut didn't know that. I think artistic license has been with us much longer than we realize.

I don't know if either one of us is right; I'm OK with it either way. That style of sword could have been as common as cell phones are now, the swords still present us with an interesting mystery.

Thanks,

Ken Speed

[Justin King]