| Author |
Message |
Bill Tsafa
Location: Brooklyn, NY Joined: 20 May 2004
Posts: 599
|
 Posted: Wed 31 Dec, 2008 10:50 pm Post subject: |
 |
|
We should be able to get the exact information we need. We are talking about modern weapons massed produced for modern war.
Who designed the MODEL 1905 BAYONET? Springfield Armory and Rock Island Arsenal. There must be some design notes floating around somewhere on the internet.
http://www.olive-drab.com/od_edged_weapons_bayonet_m1905.php
http://www.usmilitaryknives.com/okca_1998.htm
I will work on the 1905 for the M1 and try to find some early designer notes or comments. I invite everyone interested in this topic to pick some other bayonet model and do some googling on that to see what they come up with. The information should be out there.
No athlete/youth can fight tenaciously who has never received any blows: he must see his blood flow and hear his teeth crack... then he will be ready for battle.
Roger of Hoveden, 1174-1201
www.poconoshooting.com
www.poconogym.com
|
|
    |
 |
|
J Anstey
|
| Posted: Thu 01 Jan, 2009 12:29 am Post subject: |
|
|
... in Japanese swords the Bo-hi (straight groove) was intended to lighten the weight of a sword, normally the longer and heavier tachi had these grooves and these swords were often used single handed from horse back. This design allowed for MINIMAL loss of lateral strength - the " I" beam concept.
In later times the groove was used for a couple of other reasons, - one was to cover up a flaw, another was to vreate a groove that would create a tachi-kaze (sword wind) and audible sound that is used by student of Iai to gauge various elements of a cut.
The main use seems to be reduction in weight.
I have heard the idea that a muscle will contract when stabbed, I don't know how accurate this is - maybe a Doctor might know about this, or maybe a Police Officer might have seen or heard about details of stabbings???
It is dangerous to generalise in discussions of Japanese Sword Arts but to the best of my knowledge the Bo-hi (groove) was never a "blood groove"
Cheers
Jason
|
|
|
|
|
|
Michelle M
|
| Posted: Thu 01 Jan, 2009 10:18 am Post subject: |
|
|
I searched in the online version of the OED (thanks to my university library), and found that the only mention of blood-groove was "a groove cut in the head or the shaft of an arrow or spear, supposed to increase the flow of blood from the wound made by the weapon." The historical quotation the editors used to trace the word was:
1897 Geogr. Jrnl. X. 156 Arrowheads and spears, many of them curiously barbed and twisted, and some showing a knowledge of the value of the ‘*blood-groove’.
The article was written about an anthropological trip that two British authors took to South Africa. The author does not mention what exactly he thought the value of a "blood-groove" was and the fact that it was in quotations (an also is not treated as a proper term in the OED) suggests that it was a common or popular term (slang, if you will) and was not really used in the industry.
A search for the word "fuller" showed that it came into use in the early 1800's. "Fuller" was a general term for "a grooved tool on which iron is shaped by being driven into the grooves," "a groove made by a fuller," and "to stamp with a fuller; to groove by stamping." The majority of the supporting quotes talk about horseshoes:
1820 BRACY CLARK Descr. New Horse Shoe 14 Our old English custom of fullering.
1831 J. HOLLAND Manuf. Metal I. 170 The shoes being fullered or grooved near the outer edge to receive the heads.
One quote, however, talks about a bayonet:
867 SMYTH Sailor's Word-bk., Fuller, the fluting groove of a bayonet.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Xan Stepp
Location: Ithaca, NY Joined: 19 Dec 2008
Posts: 54
|
| Posted: Thu 01 Jan, 2009 10:32 am Post subject: |
|
|
Michelle,
Thanks for the answer, it does help to clear things up a bit. But I do have a follow-up question that I am unable to answer without a copy of the OED. Does the dictionary give earlier versions of fuller or an Old English word? The entry seems to imply that that the word comes through Germanic, and if that is the case, we might be able to track it in older languages.
But the OED entry does seem to indicate that not only is the term "blood grooves" a fairly new introduction, but so is fuller.
Deyr fé, deyja frćndur
deyr sjálfur iđ sama;
en orđstír deyr aldregi
hveim er sér góđan getur.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Michelle M
|
| Posted: Thu 01 Jan, 2009 10:55 am Post subject: |
|
|
| Xan Stepp wrote: | Michelle,
Thanks for the answer, it does help to clear things up a bit. But I do have a follow-up question that I am unable to answer without a copy of the OED. Does the dictionary give earlier versions of fuller or an Old English word? The entry seems to imply that that the word comes through Germanic, and if that is the case, we might be able to track it in older languages.
But the OED entry does seem to indicate that not only is the term "blood grooves" a fairly new introduction, but so is fuller. |
I've been searching for an early term, but I'm not finding one to my liking. The blacksmithing term "fuller" actually came from a fabric working term (originally Old English) which meant, as I understand, beating the cloth to make it thicker/stronger. Eventually, it came to mean a pleat in fabric, then somehow made the cross over into blacksmithing.
Even the term "groove" as it would roughly relate to a sword (it only really mentions an artificially made "groove" in metal or wood) only came about in the mid-late 1600's.
I'll keep an eye out though.
|
|
|
|
|
Craig Johnson
Industry Professional
|
| Posted: Thu 01 Jan, 2009 11:43 am Post subject: Good Question |
|
|
Happy New Year Eric 
| Eric Myers wrote: |
My original question for Craig was really more from a design perspective, though I clearly didn't say that very well. I am curious if his experience with original pieces has led him to any conclusions about why someone would design a fullered blade rather than using a different cross-section. Are they better for wide cutting blades, for example, or are they just a different solution to using the material at hand, or do they specifically allow for more flexibility, or what? Does the place and period and material make a difference? For example, are iron blades with wide fullers less likely to take a set, because they are actually more flexible? (I mean the ability to flex and return to the original shape, there may be a different engineering term.) |
Hmmm wish I had a great answer to such a good question. I have been mucking about with some research on the subject for a while and really should get more data than I have. Not enough to comment on here but I can go over some of the points that seem pertinent to me.
Why the fuller? When we look at the earliest forms of the sword they usually do not exhibit fullers. They will often contain ribs or relatively thick bodies compared to later sword types. The majority of these pieces would have been designed for stabbing as well as cutting and the need for stiffness can be seen in most. This resulted in weights that would probably surprise those who have not handled originals. The early swords of the Greeks, Romans and Celts often are heavier than people would guess by just looking at profiles. The Roman Gladius is a great example of this.
So when blades, both bronze and iron, begin to widen and thin near the edges I suspect that this indicates an improvement in material manipulation by the craftsmen and a resulting change by the users in some of their technique. As in all developments like this one has to keep a constant eye on a give and take between many factors. Innovation and tradition, use and manufacture, cost and need, it is the way we do things as humans.
So as the early iron swords begin to develop one needs to look at the reasons why one would choose to make the type of blades we see. As a start, my first question is are they putting in a groove (fuller) or are they making ridges to reinforce the edges? This is crucial to understanding why they designed the blades they did. Are they removing material in their minds or actually adding material where they see a need. This breaks down our assumptions from how we create a blade and allows us to think about a process from their point of view. What the answer would be I am not sure.
As we look at these blades we also have to remember that the iron blades are made from multiple pieces. Thus the fuller could actually be a thin body that more aggressive edges have been added to. When we look at the composition of the pattern welded blades that begin to appear this is even more complex as many of these patterned sections are actually veneers on a core. They are not solid sections of pattern welded material. Thus the body of the blade is a sandwich of at least three layers; pattern veneer, iron (in most cases) and another veneer of pattern. This would then have an edge added or the core may actually extend out to form the edge. Many of these blades also have very shallow fullers not the crisp shaped style we see on most reproductions today but more like a smooth swelling to maximum thickness, which may be very minimal and then a smooth flow down to the minimum thickness. Some of the fullers are continual curves but on the wider earlier fullers most will be flattish for a good deal of the width of the blade.
Thus, I conjecture, one could easily look at the birth of the fuller as adding material to swords to make them better rather than taking material away. It also is good to keep in mind that on most of these blades we are talking a difference of just a few millimeters.
Now as we see this composite construction and the development of new design types it becomes obvious that fullers did get hammered into a blades section. But this may be something that was done to keep the traditional form of the blade that had been made before rather than the need for doing such. Through out the use of swords by man one sees an ebb and flow of fashion in design and construction. None of the components ever fully disappears but rather falls from favor as demand changes. Thus at any given point in history one can find almost every style of blade being made from short to long and thick to thin.(this statement is meant in the most general sense not as one can find all types identified by a particular typology in any period) Some are just more popular at different times than others for practical reasons and because “a real sword should be like this” type of attitude which most humans develop about their current state of being. Even the idea of a composite blade construction does not go away but rather morphs and adjusts to time and place.
Thus I think we can say that a fuller in a blade does make a difference in how it works in the hand and the attributes it gives as far as weight and flexibility.
| Eric Myers wrote: | | Does the place and period and material make a difference? |
Most definetly, but I am not sure if the answer would be the same for any particular piece.
So as we look at say a bayonet as an example we need to research as Vassilis has suggested as to why they chose to do such but we can make a few assumptions to the questions they where trying to answer with their designs. For example they would have had a price point they where trying to hit with manufacture style appropriate to the particular period as well as a function that was possibly dictated by a design board (want to see some of the goofiest type of things look at the procurement process in the 1800 and early 1900s. Everything from committees dictating what the military needs with little or no input by users to inspired individuals trying to make the perfect “thingy”. The Victorian idea that they could improve on the designs of thousands of years of human endeavor is one of their more endearing and frustrating qualities.
But back to our bayonet. The design would be dictated by how large a piece was wanted and the intended use, how it was to be attached and was it a thrusting only weapon or a modified knife/short sword. In practical structure we know a square or triangular cross section is more stable than a round and if edges are not needed then one can concentrate on developing a structure that is stiff but does not exceed the weight or cost constraints as we realize less material used is a reduction in cost (same principle that influenced putting veneers or decoration on a Viking sword rather than a solid patterned core) a groove or fuller becomes almost guaranteed when one looks at these types of influences.
Anyway that’s a huge bunch of me rambling but I would be interested to hear how others view the subject.
Best
Craig
PS Happy New Year to All 
|
|
 |
|
|
Xan Stepp
Location: Ithaca, NY Joined: 19 Dec 2008
Posts: 54
|
| Posted: Thu 01 Jan, 2009 12:14 pm Post subject: |
|
|
Michelle,
Great work, I just wish that I had a copy of the OED available. Do they actually list what the Old English words in Old English? If so, I might try to find them in the Old English sources, but your information indicates that this probably won't yield much. It just makes me wonder what the Anglo-Saxons called fullers.
Deyr fé, deyja frćndur
deyr sjálfur iđ sama;
en orđstír deyr aldregi
hveim er sér góđan getur.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Mark Millman
|
| Posted: Thu 01 Jan, 2009 12:32 pm Post subject: |
|
|
Dear Mr. Myers,
| On Wednesday 31 December 2008, you wrote: | | Eric Myers wrote: | | Although in some structural cases the extra weight of an "unfullered" element causes extra strain and weakness, I don't think that applies to swords.... |
Sorry, no one was supposed to think that might actually apply to swords. It's an architectural consideration, in my experience mostly applicable when building with stone or earth on a very large scale. |
My apologies for having misunderstood your point here.
| Quote: | | I would hesitate to say that a fuller was a way of lightening a sword, simply because I don't know of any historical references to working swords being brought in to the shop for a fullering job because they were too heavy :D I'm sure cutlers did additional grinding to blade blanks, and that could have been partly a weight consideration, but I suspect it had more to do with fine tuning several aspects of weight, balance, etc. I certainly haven't noticed sword blades with fullers being lighter weight than ones without fullers - there are some pretty nicely balanced non-fullered swords out there.... |
I was thinking more of lightening the blade in the design process, rather than in the mounting of particular blades. (When the blade is in the cutler's shop, I agree that balance and weight generally will depend far more, and far more often, on the furniture than on alterations made to the blade.) I gave examples primarily related to military weapons of the nineteenth and twentieth centuries because it's easy to conceptualize their design processes, unlike those for pre-industrial weapons of traditional forms, in which the designs might be refined by many blademakers over generations of use. To give a possibly somewhat spurious (given Mr. Johnson's response above) example, imagine how much heavier early-medieval (e.g., Viking) blades would be if they were flattened ovals in cross-section, rather than being fullered.
Another possibility of which I hadn't thought earlier is that wide cutting blades with fullers should experience less drag than similar unfullered blades of flattened-oval, -hexagonal, -diamond, or wedge cross-sections.
| Quote: | | My original question for Craig was really more from a design perspective, though I clearly didn't say that very well. I am curious if his experience with original pieces has led him to any conclusions about why someone would design a fullered blade rather than using a different cross-section. Are they better for wide cutting blades, for example, or are they just a different solution to using the material at hand, or do they specifically allow for more flexibility, or what? Does the place and period and material make a difference? For example, are iron blades with wide fullers less likely to take a set, because they are actually more flexible? (I mean the ability to flex and return to the original shape, there may be a different engineering term.) |
Although I'd tried to address some of these questions, Mr. Johnson has done a far better job than I could do.
Best,
Mark Millman
|
|
|
|
|
Steven H
|
| Posted: Thu 01 Jan, 2009 3:37 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| Gavin Kisebach wrote: |
The other issue that I take with the suction theory is that fullers appeared on swords that were not at all designed to thrust, like the kophesh, and notably absent on some very thrust oriented swords that in fact have a diamond cross section. |
I find this particular point very instructive about the necessity of a "blood groove". A typical rondel dagger and an estoc are both dedicated thrusting weapons that just don't have grooves in just about design.
Thanks,
Steven
Kunstbruder - Boston area Historical Combat Study
|
|
|
|
|
|
Jeroen Zuiderwijk
Industry Professional
|
| Posted: Fri 02 Jan, 2009 1:03 am Post subject: |
|
|
| Eric Myers wrote: | Hi Craig,
Do fullers actually increase the stiffness of a blade, or just lighten the blade without sacrificing much stiffness? I have a hard time believing that the sides of a fuller act as additional spines, but perhaps that is just how I am looking at it. If I take two flat bars and put fullers in one, it shouldn't be any stiffer than the other. |
It depends on how you add the fuller. The problem is, most people think of a fuller as material removed. From an engineering point of view, a fuller is a relocation of material. You use the same amount of material, but in a structurally much more efficient way. Put the same bit of material 2 times further from the centerline, it enhances the stiffness 8 times (to the third power), and the strength 4 times (to the second power). So from a strength and stiffness point of view, you want most of the material as far away from the center as possible, to where it's more effective. A hollow sword would be even better, but they had no way to make that yet, so they stuck to I-beams
|
|
|
|
|
|
Jeroen Zuiderwijk
Industry Professional
|
| Posted: Fri 02 Jan, 2009 1:21 am Post subject: |
|
|
| Gavin Kisebach wrote: | | The other issue that I take with the suction theory is that fullers appeared on swords that were not at all designed to thrust, like the kophesh, and notably absent on some very thrust oriented swords that in fact have a diamond cross section. |
I agree, aside from the khopeshes. They generally dont have fullers, but a series of ribs. Plus most khopeshes with complex cross-sections are unsharpened.
Another note to fullers, they may reduce friction in a cut, and may therefore cut just a bit deeper. Just think of how meat can stick to a flat faced chef's knife, but not one with a dimpled surface. But I'm certain that's not why the blades were fullered, and the effect may not even have been noticable enough to the wielder (as bones etc. cause the most slowing down of the weapon).
|
|
|
|
|
|
Jeroen Zuiderwijk
Industry Professional
|
| Posted: Fri 02 Jan, 2009 1:35 am Post subject: |
|
|
| Mark Millman wrote: | | To give a possibly somewhat spurious (given Mr. Johnson's response above) example, imagine how much heavier early-medieval (e.g., Viking) blades would be if they were flattened ovals in cross-section, rather than being fullered. |
They'd weigh exactly the same, but be more narrow. And this isn't hypothetical either, here's an actual example (second one from bottom):
It's from Loenen, Netherlands, dating to 400-600 AD.
|
|
|
|
|
|
James R.Fox
Location: Youngstowm,Ohio Joined: 29 Feb 2008
Posts: 253
|
| Posted: Fri 02 Jan, 2009 7:11 am Post subject: |
|
|
Sirs-The only purpose of a groove qua groove is for dart or arrowheads, to carry poison, and on the dart or arrow shaft to make it break off in the wound. I have never known this to be done except by tribes that are consistent poison users,such as the bushmen of south Sfrica, and poison using using tribes of Indonesia and South America.This is because they use blowguns or weak bows, and they want the poisoned part to break off under the skin, since the poison needs to work. The Italians use to make a poisoned knife for assains that way. It was made from glass, ans groved and coated with poison so that poisoned splinters would stick in the wound when it broke.You can google blowgun darts for most of this.
Ja68ms
|
|
|
|
|
Craig Johnson
Industry Professional
|
| Posted: Fri 02 Jan, 2009 7:15 am Post subject: Great Picture |
|
|
Great picture Jeroen, thank you for posting it. The example is excellent and the lowest blade shows a fuller that has been forged into a similar blade. Also the point about the same amount of material used in a different shape was very well put. That is exactly the concept that alters how we approach the subject.
When working a piece of material a smith is usually thinking through the process well in advance of the finished result. As an example one may need to upset or increase the mass in a particular space for some alteration at a later step in the process. If it is not done in the right sequence it may well become impossible to form the shape needed. This is how a smith approaches these issues. If a blade smith starts to ponder the addition of material or the taking away of material it is more about where he moves it and how he starts than taking away at the end of the process. If you leave it to the end its a lot more work and may well make it impossible to do the job.
Mark, you are correct less drag on the blade with a fuller for sure but as Jeroen states, and I agree completely, it probably would not be noticeable or practical as a use in the day. It probably would be helpful to an accomplished test cutter today as drag would affect the length of cut in say multiple tatami mats. This of course would work with a cut that stays aligned to the axis of motion with the edges. If the sword is off track a bit the advantage would probably be negated completely.
I would be far more sure that ridges and fullers are ways of manipulating the cross section of the blade to gain advantages in strength and rigidity.
Best
Craig
PS Mark do I still owe you a chape?
|
|
|
|
|
Craig Johnson
Industry Professional
|
| Posted: Fri 02 Jan, 2009 7:21 am Post subject: Excellent info James |
|
|
| James R.Fox wrote: | | Sirs-The only purpose of a groove qua groove is for dart or arrowheads, to carry poison, and on the dart or arrow shaft to make it break off in the wound. I have never known this to be done except by tribes that are consistent poison users,such as the bushmen of south Sfrica, and poison using using tribes of Indonesia and South America.This is because they use blowguns or weak bows, and they want the poisoned part to break off under the skin, since the poison needs to work. The Italians use to make a poisoned knife for assains that way. It was made from glass, ans groved and coated with poison so that poisoned splinters would stick in the wound when it broke.You can google blowgun darts for most of this. |
Thanks for the good info James. I had forgotten about the poison arrow use. It makes perfect sense and may well be something missed by a researcher in 1897. Though it does give us a hard date for use of the term.
I think a good area to do some checking is the sagas. See if they mention the groove in a blade anywhere. I would not doubt they do I just can not remember any specific case off the top of my head.
Best
Craig
|
|
|
|
|
|
Xan Stepp
Location: Ithaca, NY Joined: 19 Dec 2008
Posts: 54
|
| Posted: Fri 02 Jan, 2009 8:25 am Post subject: |
|
|
Craig,
You said:
| Quote: |
I think a good area to do some checking is the sagas. See if they mention the groove in a blade anywhere. I would not doubt they do I just can not remember any specific case off the top of my head. |
That's exactly what I'm trying to do, and not just in the sagas, but also in Old English. But as you said, nothing comes to mind, which makes it a somewhat difficult problem to tackle. But I'll post anything if I find it.
Deyr fé, deyja frćndur
deyr sjálfur iđ sama;
en orđstír deyr aldregi
hveim er sér góđan getur.
|
|
|
|
|
Bill Tsafa
Location: Brooklyn, NY Joined: 20 May 2004
Posts: 599
|
| Posted: Fri 02 Jan, 2009 9:09 am Post subject: |
|
|
I found a website with some nice bayonets worth researching the development of.
http://thearmouryonline.co.uk/Gallery.htm
I am trying to find the oldest bayonet with a fuller on it and then research that as much as possible.
Given that the m1905 bayonets were 20" long with 16" blades I am starting to suspect that they were indeed intended as fullers to reduce the weight. In WWII it seems that the army sent them back to be shortened. The original 16" blade on the m1905 was cut them down to a 10" blade. I am thinking that the fullers on present day bayonet knifes are holdovers from earlier periods. In the earlier period, when the blade was 16" long, carving out a fuller would have significantly reduced the front weight of the rifle when the bayonet was fixed.
No athlete/youth can fight tenaciously who has never received any blows: he must see his blood flow and hear his teeth crack... then he will be ready for battle.
Roger of Hoveden, 1174-1201
www.poconoshooting.com
www.poconogym.com
|
|
|
|
|
David E. Farrell
Location: Evanston, IL Joined: 25 Jun 2007
Posts: 156
|
| Posted: Fri 02 Jan, 2009 10:44 am Post subject: |
|
|
| Vassilis Tsafatinos wrote: | I found a website with some nice bayonets worth researching the development of.
http://thearmouryonline.co.uk/Gallery.htm
I am trying to find the oldest bayonet with a fuller on it and then research that as much as possible.
Given that the m1905 bayonets were 20" long with 16" blades I am starting to suspect that they were indeed intended as fullers to reduce the weight. In WWII it seems that the army sent them back to be shortened. The original 16" blade on the m1905 was cut them down to a 10" blade. I am thinking that the fullers on present day bayonet knifes are holdovers from earlier periods. In the earlier period, when the blade was 16" long, carving out a fuller would have significantly reduced the front weight of the rifle when the bayonet was fixed. |
I seem to recall someone in my family having a 19th C bayonet, roughly 20-24" long, with a blade that was actually a T-shape. I believe it may have been french. Much like this one:
http://fp2k.redshift.com/memirr/Bayonets%20etc/Grasbayonet.jpg
I would imagine this had the dual purpose of making the bayonet both stiff and light. Things folks seem to have known about for a very long time.
if I recall right, what appears as a groove in this view was actually a very distinct T cross-section.
Now, here is a Mannlicher Berthier French M1892 second pattern Bayonet with a very prominent fuller:
http://fp2k.redshift.com/memirr/Bayonets%20etc/FrBertierA.jpg
Now *this* I could see to lighten the piece (at least compared to the same thing without it)
From an engineering perspective (for those who care, I am a mechanical engineer), if this was done by removing stock (the easiest way I would think), it wouldn't stiffen the piece in any meaningful way - it would actually do the opposite. The cross-sectional moment (which governs stiffness in bending) would decrease.
As for the cost saving argument... unless they were cast or the manufacturer had some really good recycling system, I doubt they were a cost saving measure *primarily*. It certainly could have been a secondary benefit, though I am not truly convinced of that either (though in a cast piece, I could see it).
I would propose tossing another (though nearly unquantifiable) variable into the mix: psychology. I wonder if the designers considered this (if even in a non-scientific way).
Personally, I am pretty sold on the idea that the blood-groove is a colloquialism developed by someone who lacked knowledge of what the fuller was actually for (willing to be proven wrong though). How it got so widespread, on the other hand, that is an interesting question. I imagine due to literature/movies/etc. like most of the other sword/knife/weapon myths.
AKA: 'Sparky' (so I don't need to explain later  )
For he today that sheds his blood with me shall be my brother
-- King Henry, Henry V, William Shakespeare
Before I came here I was confused about this subject. Having listened to your lecture I am still confused... but on a higher level.
-- Enrico Fermi
|
|
|
|
|
|
Eric Myers
Location: Sacramento, CA Joined: 23 Aug 2003
Posts: 214
|
| Posted: Fri 02 Jan, 2009 11:27 am Post subject: Re: Good Question |
|
|
| Craig Johnson wrote: | | Happy New Year Eric |
And Happy New Year to you too, my friend!
| Craig Johnson wrote: | | Hmmm wish I had a great answer to such a good question. |
It sure seems like a great answer to me, and thank you. You and Jeroen both have good comments about removal vs adding vs relocation of material, and influences from use, material, and manufacturing. I've got a lot to ponder over now I think I'll go start looking at more pictures of blades from different time periods. I knew those coffee table picture books were good for something!
Eric Myers
Sacramento Sword School
ViaHup.com - Wiki di Scherma Italiana
|
|
|
|
|
|
Mark Millman
|
| Posted: Fri 02 Jan, 2009 6:45 pm Post subject: |
|
|
Dear Jeroen and Craig,
Thank you for the corrections. That's what happens when I try to talk about something in which I don't have sufficient background: At best, I say things that seem plausible but are actually irrelevant. The point about looking at blade channels as redistribution of material rather than removal is particularly well made.
Dear Xan,
| On Friday 2 January 2009, you wrote: | Craig,
You said:
| Quote: | | I think a good area to do some checking is the sagas. See if they mention the groove in a blade anywhere. I would not doubt they do I just can not remember any specific case off the top of my head. |
That's exactly what I'm trying to do, and not just in the sagas, but also in Old English. But as you said, nothing comes to mind, which makes it a somewhat difficult problem to tackle. But I'll post anything if I find it. |
I think that Kormáks saga may mention the blade channel. I know it talks about Sköfnung's blade and what's usually interpreted as pattern welding, but I can't quite remember whether the translations make any reference to a fuller. As I regrettably can't read Icelandic, I'm afraid that I have no idea whether the original says anything about a fuller.
Best,
Mark
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot vote in polls in this forum
You cannot attach files in this forum
You can download files in this forum
|
All contents © Copyright 2003-2024 myArmoury.com — All rights reserved
Discussion forums powered by phpBB © The phpBB Group
Switch to the Basic Low-bandwidth Version of the forum
|
This is a standard topic