| Author |
Message |
|
Anders Backlund
|
 Posted: Sat 11 Jul, 2009 8:41 am Post subject: Roman sword hilt construction? |
 |
|
I'm curious about how exactly the hilt of a gladius or a spatha was actually put together, but my searches won't yield any good results.
Does anyone possess this information or know where I can find instructions?
The sword is an ode to the strife of mankind.
"This doesn't look easy... but I bet it is!"
-Homer Simpson.
|
|
  |
 |
|
Matthew Amt
|
| Posted: Sat 11 Jul, 2009 10:23 am Post subject: |
|
|
Well, assuming you're talking mostly about the first century AD, more or less, my own humble Legio XX site might help:
http://www.larp.com/legioxx/gladius.html
Generally, the hilt consisted of 3 parts: guard, grip, and pommel. Most often the guard and pommel were wood and the grip bone, but all three could be bone and/or ivory, and a few wood grips survive. The guard typically has a thin brass plate set into its face. Like most other swords, the tang ran through all 3 pieces, and was peened over a washer or small brass finial.
Is that what you're looking for? Vale,
Matthew
|
|
 |
|
Chad Arnow
myArmoury Team
|
| Posted: Sat 11 Jul, 2009 11:06 am Post subject: |
|
|
It's hardly usual or typical, but there is at least one example with a bronze pommel and guard. From a Sotheby's catalogue of December, 2004.
 Attachment: 16.84 KB
Attachment: 57.6 KB
Pommel
Attachment: 97.97 KB
Catalogue text
ChadA
http://chadarnow.com/
|
|
 |
|
|
Anders Backlund
|
| Posted: Sun 12 Jul, 2009 4:30 am Post subject: |
|
|
So, these swords were put together pretty much like later medieval European swords, the tang going all the way through the hilt and then peened? Is that about right?
The sword is an ode to the strife of mankind.
"This doesn't look easy... but I bet it is!"
-Homer Simpson.
|
|
|
|
|
M. Eversberg II
|
| Posted: Sun 12 Jul, 2009 5:24 am Post subject: |
|
|
Sure seems that way. That tang seems so narrow, too; I wonder if it was like that in its uncorroded state?
M.
This space for rent or lease.
|
|
    |
|
Chad Arnow
myArmoury Team
|
| Posted: Sun 12 Jul, 2009 6:14 am Post subject: |
|
|
| M. Eversberg II wrote: | Sure seems that way. That tang seems so narrow, too; I wonder if it was like that in its uncorroded state?
M. |
That's really no narrower than a number of medieval tangs. It can be narrow and still be plenty strong, provided it is thick enough.
ChadA
http://chadarnow.com/
|
|
|
|
|
M. Eversberg II
|
| Posted: Sun 12 Jul, 2009 6:44 am Post subject: |
|
|
My eyes must deceive me, I guess. Seemed rather diminutive.
M.
This space for rent or lease.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Matthew Amt
|
|
|
|
|
Jean Thibodeau
|
| Posted: Mon 13 Jul, 2009 1:52 am Post subject: |
|
|
| Chad Arnow wrote: | | M. Eversberg II wrote: | Sure seems that way. That tang seems so narrow, too; I wonder if it was like that in its uncorroded state?
M. |
That's really no narrower than a number of medieval tangs. It can be narrow and still be plenty strong, provided it is thick enough. |
Yeah, with a narrow tang thickness can be important, and if it's substantially thicker than the blade and tapers into the blade shoulders it should be a lot stronger than it looks.
The handle material also add to rigidity over the length of the tang and the most critical point is just at the transition to the blade's shoulders: Stress risers at this point if the corners are cut without at least a small radius or a sudden step down in thickness that happen just at the shoulders would concentrate weakness just at the most stressed point of the handle/blade junction.
You can easily give up your freedom. You have to fight hard to get it back!
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
This is a standard topic