[Robert Brandt]

[Nathan Robinson]

[Nathan Robinson]

[Chad Arnow]

Albion's NextGen line is a great example of using research and experience to create non-specific replicas. The majority of NextGen swords aren't based on one specific example; by and large, they're not copies/replicas of a single design. They're amalgams (the hilt of one sword on the blade of another, for example). You can really pull that off when you've seen, handled, and documented as many swords as Peter Johnsson has. The philosophy is not "these things existed at around the same time, so let's slap them together." Rather, by putting in the time to really study these things, they can tell what parts are more likely to go together than others. They know more than enough to make things I would personally consider to be plausible.

As Nathan says, there's absolutely nothing wrong with assembling parts you like whether they fit the same era/area or not. Some great designs have come out of that. Just be aware that your definition of plausible and mine may differ. And that's okay. Variety is the spice of life, right?

I have a great knife that's an assemblage of parts. All of the parts/techniques date from late 14th century England and they're all Thames finds. But none of those features were found together. It probably would have been entirely unremarkable to a person centuries ago, apart from its great craftsmanship and far-above-period-average-quality steel. You can make a case that it's plausible. Some will buy that notion, some will not. And I don't care--I love that knife.

The reason I've been asking the OP how historical they're trying to be is so I can be as helpful as possible in steering them in the right direction. If they're a history fanatic, I would steer them away from certain smiths. If they're less interested in that, that changes things, too. It's all about trying to help as much as I can.

[William Swiger]

[JE Sarge]

This is a very interesting discussion.

The VA Malatesta you posted a photo of is mine. I'll state that while it's a mean little cutter, the blade length, the scent stopper pommel, and the guard threw me off a bit after the initial pleasure of cutting wore off. Though a great looking package, the blade does not really fit with the rest of the sword. It's a very nimble blade, and for a cutter, you would not find much better at that price point. I'd have much rather have a different type blade though from a later period.

That being said, the double-fullered Type XIIa is mine as well. Sonny/CSS though cutlers and not specifically sword smiths are working with some pretty good basic blades with alot of input from sword collectors, Angus Trim, and Christian Fletcher. On that particular sword, Sonny did not mix an match parts because we collectively agreed that I wanted to stay away from some of the VA line parts in using that unique ATrim blade. The furniture on that sword was hand-milled from mild steel. The blade itself is extremely light and nimble, leading to a remarkable sword. I have found ATrim blades to be very forgiving of what type of furniture they have given a range of weights which affect the PoB, CoP, and overall harmonics. I have yet to have had an ATrim blade fitted with any number of different pommels and guards which was dead in the hand or outside the tolerances of what I considered to be usable in the actual context of a sword. In fact, many production Type XIIas I find sluggish or slow to my modern preferences in a performance sword. ATrims with CSS packages work well together, provided you know what you want to build. Here lately, CSS has made anything I have requested of them - with custom parts, not mix and matched production pieces.

My taste is pretty secular though. I prefer something performance oriented for practical cutting and frequently more flashy looking than the historic counterparts. Again, this is complete personal preference. I have all the respect in the world for historic antiquites and their re-creation. I love the study of medieval weaponry, but I do not try to emulate this exactly in my collection. I do own a few Albions, A&As, and antiques which I have to sedate that need in me. However, I also like a historically-plausible, yet nearly fantasy appearance to things - being inspired by numerous fictional works. I tend to mix and match this in my collection. Whereas everything I own is historically possible, if they did exist, they would also be historically unique, almost always being outside the box when compared with actual antiquities.

But then again, I have never argued that the creations in my own collection are accurate to a historical degree. What I would argue is that for my hands, my swords perform excellently and do their jobs well. If they did not, I would not own them. The ATrim blades are performance monsters, and when I hold an ATrim and compate it another manufacturer's sword - it sings to me in a way that a re-creation does not. Of course, it is not a re-creation. It's a modern blade based on the best performance elements of it's historical counterparts and used with modern purpose.

If I had to actually use a sword for combat today, I would chose the best-feeling, best suited one for my personal needs and what I expect in performance - exact adherance to the typology or historical accuracy would not matter to me. I would not choose it because it was a stellar example of craftsmanship based on the historial design or choose it because it was an excellent representation of a specific historic piece. I would choose it because I could kill more efficiently with it that I could when compared with the others available to me given my tactical knowledge and experience. While some would consider this a morose view of things, it is a warrior's outlook. In antiquity, if the warrior was having a blade crafted, it would seem that he would choose the best elements of what he wanted in a blade and how it performed in the hand. This, in essence, is what I do with most of my blades. How does it feel? How does it perform? Does it function as it was intended? Is it durable? Is it hard to maintain?

All of the listed smiths here do wonderful work of quality, but then again, they are all of different price ranges, different materials, different manufacturing methods, different backgrounds, and different experience. Some are strong in some areas, and weak in others. Albion makes a great sword, but you would have to have a scabbard and suspension made for it and the sword itself would not be unique unless you decided to customize it. A&A makes a great custom sword, but you will have to wait longer and perhaps pay more. CSS can fit you with a good sword and scabbard package, if you have a clear idea of what you want and a good blade to work from. You can make a good sword yourself, like Sean Flynt, given you have a good blade and some patience to learn. All of these factors come into place when picking what you ultimately want.

Good luck with your search. Let us know what you decide on!

[Jeremy V. Krause]

This is a nice post to show the differences in what draws us to this fascinating hobby. It's an interesting point of what "sings to us" as collectors. For me, I drawn to the feeling/handling of the historic example and also largely to the aesthetics and evident craftsmanship in the product. I love holding a sword and being certain that the handling atleast is pretty consistent to an original. I can say "wow, people 1000 years ago used something very much like this in their lives as soldiers/warriors/knights or whatever we want to call them. How did they use this, what more specifically was it designed to do in it's period context.

I am certainly more a collector than a WMA practitioner and I am drawn fairly exclsively to more historically inspired or "historically accurate" examples. The historic qualities of modern pieces result in me collecting examples of non-martial knives, simply because I find them "cool" and am so fascinated by the craftsmanship of the maker.

The truth is, however, that even the very finest modern examples based on historic examples do have some aspects in construction or materials which do seperate them from their historical counterpart. This is absolutely simply my personal opinion, but I am not sure that an historical contemporary would not notice that something was quite different in modern pieces as compared to period weapons. This is certainly more of lass evident in the given example. I believe that Tod when using sheer steel, iron, and laminated steel provided by Owen Bush, comes very close to this idealin his knives.

That being said Albion, A&A, Vince Evans, Patrick Barta, Peter Johnsson, Tod of Tod's Stuff, make superb pieces and their work is beautiful and sometimes awe-inspiring. Each of these makers has their own artistic vision driving their process resulting in very different manifestations of the historically inspired and replica context.

So yes, it is certainly what draws you in your collection aesthetically and what you desire to use your example for.

To me, atleast, the OP seems to be drawn to a less historically accurate example, but one showing aspects of history and an emphasis on performance and modern sensibilities.

[Adam Bohnstengel]

I'm in line with what Robert Brandt in the plausible mini-debate (and I did admit that there was probably never a sword made with all of these parts), but to prevent this from getting too crazy, and to be a little more simplistic; I'll change my stated goal to "historical-ish pieces mixed and matched in the pursuit of a modern performance blade with a greater personal aesthetic ideal". How's that?

Mr. Swinger, that is a very nice looking sword, and Mr. Lundemo is on my list.

Anyhow, like I said, I looked into suspension from the period, and this is what I stole from Mr. Blaz Berlec.





From what I read in his thread on the matter, a thicker/wider belt and straps would complete the period look. What do the resident experts think for a German-ish kit (1320-1350)? Especially Mr. Berlec!

Oh, and JE Sarge, sorry for stealing all the pictures of your swords. I have to say you've got some beautiful swords in you collection, and your tastes run pretty dang close to mine. Have you posted pictures of your whole collection yet?

[JE Sarge]

[Adam Bohnstengel]

Okay, I've been doing some looking and some thinking, and finally some drawing (to scale even!). First, I don't think the guard needs any ornamentation. Second, I've discovered the flared shoulders that can be found on swords like this. Me likey! I definitely want to add this feature (I know they're exaggerated in the picture, I'm a bad drawer). Third, the Iron Cross isn't period. I know this. What should go in it's place though? What type of cross would be a better fit? (assuming 1350ish German type) Would there be anything besides a cross that could go there? Someone's emblem or badge or something? Also, should I color it in, or just leave it the same color as the rest of the pommel? Fourth, I'm still stuck on the grip color. What choices were there realistically? I've been leaning towards just a darkish brown. Fifth, if I replaced the center ring with a couple risers, would it bring the sword back towards historical more? Last, if anyone knows Latin, the blade is supposed to read "For the greater good", but I'm going off of Google translate right now. If it's wrong, or if there's a better translation, please let me know.

Thanks!




Here's a Tinker sword (XIIIa?) with flared shoulders for comparison.


EDIT: One last thing. I've narrowed my choices down to two smiths. I know that they would both do a fantastic job, both quoted very similar prices, and they're both highly regarded. For everyone else out there who has commissioned custom pieces, how did you make that final choice? Flip a coin or something? I'm at a loss here.