[Harry J. Fletcher]

I wasn't going to post but decided to respond with my two cents worth or really much more than that because that is what it will probably cost me. I like curved swords and own several katanas. A couple are nice, all are good cutters and sharp and a recent purchase is a very nice blade which I am considering giving a an art polish and selling. I also have a fancy for an Albion Type XIIa to match my Type XIIIa. It must be said that I can cut with a two handed sword but find it hard to do so with a single hand sword except for my Shamshir. I spend a lot money according to wife buying tatami to cut because that gives a realistic cutting medium unlike pool noodles which require a sharp sword and quick stroke. I am not really interested in getting dressed up in maille or plate and going bashing. Nor am I really interested in fencing with all the rules and built in dogma. I am a firm believer in the bash 'em and slash 'em school of sword use. A sword with a curved edge places a lot of power in small area and naturally cuts well. Use two hands and it cuts very well indeed. A big two handed Type XIIa or XIIIa blade is a big slugger and meat cleaver indeed. It is bound to unravel a few links of mail or cut through some hard leather armour and a good blow to the head can shake up the old tin can on your opponent's noggin to rattle him enough fro you to find an opening or you can just bowl him over with your body and deal with him on the ground. I am not a believer in finesse or intricate moves. Battles were fought with power and muscle and I tend to like weapons that reflect this. Warriors be they knights, hoplites, or men or arms were the professional football players of their day, not dancers. Even an archer had to be strong and tough. I am not really interested in weapons that do not relect this.

I have gone to far astray here I guess but I have also been considering getting a very nice fitting for my katana blade but am not sure about this. I just might sell it and buy the Albion Type XIIa and a big brisket to cut up...now that would be fun...ya think?

[Bennison N]

[William Knight]

As a reenactor, I'm not interested in weapons or armour I can't use reenacting, for a period I actually reenact (the exception to this are 20th century service rifles, because they're cheap).

More generally, I'm not in the market for modern practical swords, since I look for historical furniture and finishing, or performance armour, for much the same reason. Similarly, I'm not interested in collecting fantasy weapons, etc.

Not interested in 20th century American weapons in general -- reenactors and gun collectors have made those too pricey.

[Simon G.]

I too am really interested in all weapons from all periods and cultures! If I had infinite money and space at hand I'd collect it all.

Why ?... I don't know. I'm an history post-graduate, but I've never felt comfortable in specialising, whether for weapons or for anything else... I like to be able to find pieces of history interesting whatever their place of origin, time period, or even nature.

That said, I too have general preferences... But really they're purely aesthetic and general, and can be easily swept away by a beautiful specimen.

For instance, strangely enough, I like the Middle Ages as a period a lot but the "plain" mediaeval one-hander with its round pommel and straight quillons is one of my least favourites ! I do love my Albion Baron however...

I'd also have said that rapiers, smallswords and the like carry less interest with me, but I also love very much my (currently) only antique, a 19th century Italian officer's smallsword...

One last example, I'd say I'm less interested (aesthetically) in Japanse arms despite the fact that I love mediaeval japanese history, yet I have a strange fascination for the naginata...

As you can see it's all full of contradictions. I don't feel like I need a personal connection with a culture to have an interest in its weapons (or in the whole culture). I know for some people, that's more the case, and I'd be curious to hear someone elaborate on this point. As to me, to sum it up it's hard for me not to love any weapon that's well-made !

[Alain D.]

I definitely prefer Western European military history because that's where my family came from. For me, it's interesting to think that I may have had ancestors participating in battles using those weapons and even if they didn't, they were likely influenced by those events. Asian, African, South American, etc. are all very interesting with beautiful weapons and armor and unique traditions, but I don't feel the same connection to those things because I have very little cultural connection with those regions. I'm guessing the same applies, to some extent, to many people on this forum.

In response to Timo, I think specific interests like that can also arise from family connections, especially for things like the Civil War. It could also be the thing that first got somebody interested in history (Napoleon, etc.) or simply one interesting battle or idea of the period that catches someone's eye. I completely agree though, I think history is much better understood and even more interesting when studied in the context of the years before and after. I like specific parts of history, but I think one of the best parts is trying to fill the gaps between time periods to understand exactly how things changed over time.

-Alain

[Isaac H.]

Well now,it certainly is interesting to hear negative opinions once in a while.

I don't believe I can add anything that hasn't already been thoroughly hashed out on this thread.But I will say that for me ,if a sword isn't made to stand up to what it was originally intended for,be it fencing or piercing chain maille or striking down soldiers from horseback,whatever it's historical purpose was,if the weapon can't still do that task ,it isn't worth collecting.