[Anders Backlund]

This is something I've been wondering about lately. I've seen the terms "historical sword" and "fantasy sword" mentioned multiple times, here and elsewhere, and what fascinates me is that there seems to be a general assumption that anything that isn't historical is fantasy, and that many apparently consider the difference to be important.

(Me, I've always considered swords to be swords and left it at that. )

So, just curious here; how do you guys and gals define a "historical" sword, how do you define a "fantasy" sword, and finally, is there a middle ground somewhere between them?

[Vincent Le Chevalier]

This topic has been discussed before, and I think the conclusion is more or less 'to each his own'

For example you have this spotlight topic of myArmoury;
What is 'historical accuracy'?

Or on SwordForum, there was this thread recently:
Historical accuracy again...

And I'm sure many more could be brought up with searches about "historical accuracy" or "historically accurate"...

The thing is that people tend to value the historical accuracy of certain aspects over others; but which aspects are focused on really depends on the person. For example my key interest in swords is how they move, how they behave when used, so I'll have different criteria than someone essentially concerned by the visual aspect. That does not mean, however, that the same sword cannot appeal to us both...

And then there is the question of how you judge of the historical accuracy of the aspects you are interested in. Just on the functionning, I started a thread (Historically accurate functioning of swords) that unexpectedly grew in length... which proves the problem is not easy. Well I suppose that if you have the heart, you could look at it as well

I hope all this helps...

[Anders Backlund]

Thanks, Vincent, I'll look into those.

To clarify further; I'm not really looking for a definitive answer, but rather personal opinions. Varying thoughts on the matter are appreciated.

[Dan P]

[Anders Backlund]

[Joe Fults]

So why historically accurate?

I think because it seems just that little bit more uncommon.

In very broad general terms, historically accurate, in this sword collecting hobby, has often been a more exclusive domain than fantasy has been. At times, to some collectors, this really matters.

Basically the vast majority of modern fantasy swords are clearly identifiable on visual inspection as modern mass production product and tools. To almost any inspector, they are clearly made using industrial fabrication processes geared primarily towards insuring a level product consistency while minimizing production costs. In the most general of senses, historically accurate swords tend to emphasize other production values much more than cost and uniformity. This often drives up the cost of historically accurate swords which is coincidently often desirable to the collector.

[Joe Fults]

[Justin King]

[Anders Backlund]

[Jean Thibodeau]

I would add that one can also make the distinction between functional and decorative and these can be subdivided into historical designs and fantasy designs.

1) A genuine antique sword i.e. from the period. ( There can also be antique swords that are not from the period like Victorian era reproductions that qualify as " antiques " and can be very close or very far from what they are copying. Or even Victorian fantasy piece ! )

2) A modern reproduction of a specific period sword, made using period equivalent materials and methods. (Custom swords were even the steel is made by the maker and less extreme, Albion Museum line swords that reproduce the dimensions and handling with high precision )

( EDITED: As suggested by Vincent, next post, the A & A swords might fit better in category (2) than (3) as they are each based on a specific historical sword ).

3) A modern reproduction of a generic type of period sword plausible for the period and place. ( Albion next generation line or A & A )

4) A modern reproduction of sound construction using modern materials and maybe some non-period assembly
( Angus Trim swords as an example ).

5) Modern designs meant to be original designs but with no direct resemblance to period swords. ( Angus Trim tactical line ).

6) True fantasy based designs based on films, books, games, mythology: These can be very useable or be of very " weird " handling i.e. unusable only in the most optimistic sense.

7) I would make a whole separate category of pure display swords that can be historically or fantasy inspired but are only sword inspired objects. Some of these can be good art objects or very poor " TOSH or KITSCHY ". Oh and have little or no practical value and would fall apart if one even swung it around too vigourously.

Note: Albion, A & A, Angus Trim are given as examples of custom or quality production sword makers out there making swords fitting my definitions: Other custom makers and companies who make good swords are also out there but these are the best known and are known quantities as to their high quality.

As well, big high volume makers and sellers producing everything from very good to very bad swords depending on what one is looking for, ready to accept or afford.

[Vincent Le Chevalier]

[Jean Thibodeau]

[Jared Smith]

Jean,
I think you did a pretty good job, particularly as a ""quickie." I suspect a lot of swords in our forum members' collections could fit into the #3 as "Historically Inspired." Whereas museum specimens may have had hand forged furniture, ornate tooling, engraving, etc., most of us don't want to pay for all of that additional labor. I am happy with something that is very similar to known originals, but has modern material and "production short cuts" (CNC machining, castings, omission of; inlays/ gilding/ elaborate tooling, etc).

As a questionable case, I hope to eventually produce a 12th century style medieval sword that is pattern welded with hand forged furniture. This might be "historically plausible." Some have speculated that "star like" patterns described in Joan of Arc's sword may have been a twist type pattern weld. It strikes me as a "fantasy combination" of historical elements from mixed periods. Hopefully it would even turn out "battle ready!"

Maybe others out there would prefer a sword of a certain type with a reproduction grip that is a little larger than actual historical length because of comfort or preference. And yet others might re-enact with armour kits that have some period overlap just because they have need to make do with what they have collected over time rather than buying a $10,000 custom made harness all at once.

[Anders Backlund]

[Vincent Le Chevalier]

[Jean Thibodeau]

O.K. I think the whole thing is a continuum of features and attributes and my " typology ", such as it is, are just judgement calls at intervals of the continuum: There can easily be overlap and tweeners, 5, 5.5, 5.85, 6 etc .... if one wanted to be fussy about subtle distinctions.

With what I would call real swords meant to be able to perform as swords one could simplify things into:

1) Historically based and close aesthetically and functionally to the real period swords, with a clear intent to base things on what was done in period. Subcategories can be made depending on how close or far materials and assembly must be close to period.( Strict reenactment criteria or much looser standards of historical accuracy depending on goal ).

2) Modern swords attempting to make functional swords that may be similar or very different aesthetically to period swords, where period accuracy is not an important priority. These may look a lot like period swords since it's a bit like trying to re-invent the wheel: The hub caps might look different but the odds are high that the thing is going to be " round " if it's going to function properly. Square wheels might be " creative " but they are not a functional improvement ! ( JOKE ).

Oh, these can have very modern aesthetics and futuristic materials: If " UNOBTANIUM " is ever discovered we could have razor sharp swords that never dull of notch even if cutting reinforced concrete pillars, as well as never rust, break or take a set. Hummmm, they might even be of memory metal that would self-repair over night ! Put your dinged and notched sword in it's scabbard for the night and wake up the next morning with a pristine blade! ( Also a JOKE, but on my wish list ).

3) True fantasy swords including some with type #2 above priorities to purely aesthetic " ART " swords possibly with very negative handling features.

All of the above can be well done, well designed or bad design, bad execution. Also, priced in proportion to objective quality or way overpriced " JUNK ". One can have the goal to make #1, #2, #3 or tweeners with a bit of everything mixed in but one can also make very good or very bad examples of each.

[Anders Backlund]

Interesting stuff, this.

[Tom B]

For some of us, Historically accurate would normally include of the following:

-copy of a surviving weapon.
-various surviving sword/dagger components of a rough time period assembled into a generic weaponfor the period. Mush the way Musuem Replicas constructs alot of teir swords.
-Built to original designs using original methods of construction.

And for fantasy well, think conan the barbarian, somethign that looks wicked, but would snap the minute it hit a real piece of steel. For reference material, go look in the cheaper then dirt catalog, or the local "knife" display case at your local junk store.

[Christopher Gregg]

Hey Tom,

Let's not get too down on Conan the Barbarian swords. i own two Jody Samson custom "fantasy" swords, and they are built very strongly! Were they created with a sharpened (i.e. forged-in) edge, I would pit them against anything Albion, A&A or other "historically accurate" sword makers offer. Just because a "Conan" sword is "fantasy", doesn't mean it's not a good sword. Yes, I'll agree that most fantasy wall hangers are pieces of junk, and yes, historically accurate swords do offer a greater perception of what "real" swords were like back in the day, but since a "real sword" is one that must function as a true battle weapon should, then I would say that just becasue a sword is a new design or has no representative in past history, doesn't mean that it can't be a reliable, good handling weapon. Just my two cents.

[Jean Thibodeau]