[Andrew Smith]

Hi folks -

Having spent some time reading the various posts and articles here (which are a pretty amazing job, by the way!) I have a question for you that I am not sure you can answer--but I'm going to ask anyway.

How much, in period, were the weight, length, balance, etc, of swords (or I suppose other weapons!) customized for a particular customer? I suppose I'm thinking in terms of 'high end' commissions, rather than the run-of-the-mill "mass produced" swords here.

What prompts the question is that I note that some of the reviews of modern reproductions are considered to have hilts that were too small / large or too thick/thin/whatever for the reviewer, or that the balance just wasn't quite right for the reviewer. Plus I believe I saw someone mention that one of the old manuals discussed the ideal proportion of a sword vs the swordsman's stature?

Assuming that the modern manufacturer had gotten the dimensions right (big assumption in some cases, I realize!) is this because the item was created specifically for someone of a particular stature, either the reproduced version, or the original? Does variation in blade length within a particular type--for instance--follow any real pattern in the (admittedly rare) case of the stature of the historical user being known? Do the modern bladesmiths out there take any of these things into account, or do they make them to fit their own ideal or some historical/modern standard? How do you decide the length of a hilt, for instance? "Well, look, Snorri Bighands, you wanted a two handed sword, and you weren't here, so I made it so it fits MY two hands..."

Just an idle question, but it seems to me that if armor could be--and was--customized for the wearer, then the same could be said for the weapons?

Thanks guys!
Andy

[Sean Flynt]

As far as I can tell, it was sort of like the way we buy suits. We can get them from the thrift store, out of fashion, worn and stained but serviceable and cheap. We can get them off-the-rack from the department store and pay extra for simple modifications. We can get them from a custom tailor and have a perfect fit and the best quality materials. All serve the same purpose, but with differing efficiency, durability and status. Then there's the fell-off-a-truck suit, which would correspond to swords looted by victorious soldiers or stripped from those killed or captured in battle. Stretching the analogy to the breaking point, there are folks out on the sidewalk selling "genuine Armani" just as there were folks peddling "genuine Andrea Ferrara" swords.

There are are at least a couple of late contemporary illustrations of cutlers' shops in which finished weapons are on display and customers inspect the wares. Judging from those, it seems that individual cutlers offered customers various levels of customization. Having an existing stock of off-the-rack swords might have been more likely after the industrial revolution, but there are racks upon racks of 16th and 17th c. munition-grade swords in the Graz Landeszeughaus. Somebody was churning out those things without regard for personal fit. But those with money would spend it for good quality arms and armour.

[Doug Lester]

It probably happened a lot more than one thinks. If you read Oakeshott, you will see that many blades were made in certain areas of Europe and were sold unfinished to others who hilted them. He also mentions that it is not uncommon to to find an older style blade with a newer style hilt. To support that he sites a 10th century viking blade with katzbalger hilt residing in a Swiss museum and that he had knowledge of family heirloom sword rehilted with a regulation British army hilt to be carried as a dress sword. He further sites that this is why it is unreliable to date the age of a blade by the way it is hilted.

[Andrew Smith]

Thanks both for the replies. I've been unable to log on for a couple of days, so apologies and thanks.

Sean -

that was pretty much what I had thought with regard to personalizing arms that way, thank you--the annalogy to the level of quality and fit of suits seems a good one. Especially given the level of pure ornamentation that can sometimes be seen on presentation weapons, which can sometimes now seem gaudy to our eyes!

But....

Does that then extend to the kind of customization that Mr. Burns has done on his sword to improve the balance and handling for his own purposes, for instance? I was thinking specifically in terms of changing the physical and handling characteristics to suit a specific person's requirements. One assumes that if blades were being shipped out to cutlers en masse to be hilted in the latest fashion, then for the lower end of the spectrum you got what you were given, or at best only had a fairly limited choice from the bargain rack and chose the blade that felt best to you. But was enough known (or cared!) about the balance and properties of the blade to allow a skilled craftsman of the day to be able to make his (high end) commission to the specifications required?

Doug -

Yeah, thanks... that was approximately what I thought. But doesn't the re-hilting of a favorite or heirloom blade do terrible things to its handling? So it might not matter to a dedicated follower of the latest fashion, but if your life depended on it...

Okay, I know I'm harping on the same subject, but reading through the various articles and posts, it seems to be a common theme here, that a particular sword felt 'dead' or awkward to the user, and I wondered, really, to what extent that truly mattered to those using them "In anger", and what if anything the smith could have done about it? "Well, sir, if we make the fuller just a touch longer, that'll remove some of the weight from the blade and make it a little faster for you...."

I suppose I have this rather bizarre vision of a man standing there being handed various size grips, dummy blades, etc, by an increasingly irritated swordsmith in the medieval equivelant of an optitician's shop: "All right, so you didn't like the last ten we tried... but is it better this way, or this way..."

[Sean Flynt]