Author |
Message |
M. Eversberg II
|
Posted: Sun 07 Mar, 2010 11:08 pm Post subject: The size of "small" swords? |
|
|
I haven't found much in the way on the length of the smallsword. The only measurements I found are for A&A's, which is 34.75" overall, with a blade 29" long. For a while, I'd been under the impression a "small sword" was about the size of an Olympic style foil, being as small sword fencing was the basis for what eventually became epee (or the one that's not sabre, I know nothing of Olympic fencing).
However, I just discovered A&A's smallsword and realized the blade alone on my Olympic foil (which I'm using to learn smallsword) is longer than the entire A&A smallsword (35" blade on my foil). This prompts me to ask, just how big is a smallsword anyways?
M.
This space for rent or lease.
|
|
|
|
A. Spanjer
|
Posted: Mon 08 Mar, 2010 5:44 am Post subject: |
|
|
The only original smallsword I've ever handled did seem shorter than my foil, but I didn't have time to measure. It was also rather blade heavy, which I thought was odd. I think it was meant more for "wearing around town" than as a serious dueling weapon.
You might find this thread useful: http://www.swordforum.com/forums/showthread.php?t=56806
Though I love smallswords, most of my research as of late has been focused on Scottish Basket-Hilts. You're post has sparked my interest in smallswords again.
I'll see what else I can find!
Na sir 's na seachain an cath.
|
|
|
|
Bill Grandy
myArmoury Team
|
Posted: Mon 08 Mar, 2010 6:25 am Post subject: Re: The size of "small" swords? |
|
|
M. Eversberg II wrote: | I haven't found much in the way on the length of the smallsword. The only measurements I found are for A&A's, which is 34.75" overall, with a blade 29" long. For a while, I'd been under the impression a "small sword" was about the size of an Olympic style foil, being as small sword fencing was the basis for what eventually became epee (or the one that's not sabre, I know nothing of Olympic fencing).
However, I just discovered A&A's smallsword and realized the blade alone on my Olympic foil (which I'm using to learn smallsword) is longer than the entire A&A smallsword (35" blade on my foil). This prompts me to ask, just how big is a smallsword anyways?
M. |
Modern sport fencing swords are bigger than typical smallswords. There's a fair amount of range with some being longer than others, but the A&A reproduction is a good example of the general size.
Here's one of my antiques to give you an example:
http://www.myArmoury.com/bill_swor_ant_ss.html?14
For the record, modern Olympic fencing is not directly based on smallsword fencing, no matter how emphatically people will insist that it is. Modern fencing is most directly related to classical fencing, and classical fencing is based off of dueling from the 19th century. The epee is based off of the dueling epee of the era, which didn't even look extremely different from its modern counterpart. You may find the term "epee du combat" used to differentiate between an epee meant for dueling as compared to one meant for practice.
HistoricalHandcrafts.com
-Inspired by History, Crafted by Hand
"For practice is better than artfulness. Your exercise can do well without artfulness, but artfulness is not much good without the exercise.” -anonymous 15th century fencing master, MS 3227a
|
|
|
|
Jonathan Hopkins
|
Posted: Mon 08 Mar, 2010 6:28 am Post subject: |
|
|
Michael,
I highly recommend George C. Neumann's Swords and Blades of the American Revolution. It contains measurements for most of the items that are illustrated, including small swords.
Jonathan
PS--You should consider going to the Baltimore Show on the weekend of the 20th. There will be small swords there!
|
|
|
|
Bryan W.
|
Posted: Mon 08 Mar, 2010 2:01 pm Post subject: |
|
|
AVB Norman's books also have some good info in them as well if you can manage to get a hold of them (though they're starting to be reprinted now more often it seems of late thankfully!). As Bill said, the small sword varied considerably in length, blade shape and cross section as well as the guard itself. Obviously there was quite a bit of experimentation in trying to find the perfect sword of the era (such as the colichemarde styled blade to parry rapiers) so of course the period did have influence on the weapon's development and you'll find certain trends in certain time periods but I think you'll find most "typical" pieces somewhere between 28-31 inches in blade length and between 0.8-1.2 pounds (of course someone more educated than I can always correct me. ) which is why you'll find most decent reproductions somewhere in those ranges. It appears the heavier and longer blades are found earlier and sometimes dubbed the "transition rapiers"
Stephen Fisher has some nice scans and pictures of various smallswords in his album on this very site if you wanted to take a glance at a few.
|
|
|
|
Tom L.
Location: Toronto, Canada Joined: 20 Jun 2008
Posts: 35
|
Posted: Mon 08 Mar, 2010 3:23 pm Post subject: |
|
|
I own an antique smallsword and the blade on my example is 33.5".
I have a cunning plan Mr. B.
|
|
|
|
Morgan Butler
|
Posted: Mon 08 Mar, 2010 4:19 pm Post subject: |
|
|
I own about a half dozen smallswords. They can range from 26 inch blades to 33 inch blades. Depending on what the owner wanted.
inkothemgard!
|
|
|
|
Thom R.
|
Posted: Tue 09 Mar, 2010 10:29 am Post subject: |
|
|
I went through Neumann last night and noted that of the 25 or so smallswords shown, the range on blade length was 25.5 inches to 34 inches. Most are in the 28-32 range. However, I have seen small sword blades as long as 36 inches before. The length, section (triangular vs lenticular vs diamond), and profile can vary quite a bit. tr
|
|
|
|
Bill Grandy
myArmoury Team
|
Posted: Tue 09 Mar, 2010 11:19 am Post subject: |
|
|
Thom R. wrote: | However, I have seen small sword blades as long as 36 inches before. The length, section (triangular vs lenticular vs diamond), and profile can vary quite a bit. tr |
That's very true. Italy and Spain seemed to prefer the longer ones throughout the 18th century, whereas France and England seemed to prefer the shorter ones, but even that is a generalization.
HistoricalHandcrafts.com
-Inspired by History, Crafted by Hand
"For practice is better than artfulness. Your exercise can do well without artfulness, but artfulness is not much good without the exercise.” -anonymous 15th century fencing master, MS 3227a
|
|
|
|
M. Eversberg II
|
Posted: Wed 10 Mar, 2010 9:02 am Post subject: |
|
|
Thanks for the information. I think the one I have will work well enough for my purposes, though I could always cut it down a few inches and secure a plastic button I suppose (they're quite cheap, really).
M.
This space for rent or lease.
|
|
|
|
Bill Grandy
myArmoury Team
|
Posted: Wed 10 Mar, 2010 9:09 am Post subject: |
|
|
If you're just starting out learning, a foil is good enough for practice purposes until you get something more accurate.
HistoricalHandcrafts.com
-Inspired by History, Crafted by Hand
"For practice is better than artfulness. Your exercise can do well without artfulness, but artfulness is not much good without the exercise.” -anonymous 15th century fencing master, MS 3227a
|
|
|
|
JG Elmslie
Industry Professional
|
Posted: Wed 10 Mar, 2010 10:51 am Post subject: |
|
|
the pair of mid-18th c ones I own, one's dated about 1720, the other dated 1746 or 45, (cant remember which offhand) are 27.5 inches, light hollowground diamond section, and 28.25inches flattened hexhagonal blending into lenticular section respectively.
both have a little wear, and I suspect the longer of the two had the last 1/4 inch chipped off, and re-ground during its working life.
|
|
|
|
|