[Michael Brudon]

Hi looking to get one of these made partly as a cut and thrust sword, with an emphasis on cutting.Wondered how they rate along side other less than 30" blades, like type X's and falchions for hackability?

I never realised how wide their blades were until saw them in a pic with standard type X's and they basically dwarfed the type X visually, and thus I became interested in getting one. Obviously they taper quickly but I imagine there must still be a lot of cutting power at the COP. Have not been able to find a great deal of information on their performance so thanks if anyone has info on them.

Also does anyone know the historical maximum lengths and widths these came in at?

[Tom Carr]

The first is actually misnamed but it is a Type XIV by Windlass/ Museum Replicas
http://www.myArmoury.com/review_ws_typeiv.html

The next is an Albion of the same type.
http://www.myArmoury.com/review_alb_sherriff.html

Most XIV's are similar in many respects as to weight and length of blade though POB will vary according to manufacture.

Much fine information can be found here.

http://www.myArmoury.com/feature_oakeshott.html

[Paul Watson]

The Sovereign was capable of cutting well but it felt like it was designed to thrust which it also did very well. In basic terms it didn't dynamically feel like a cutter like X's and XII's I am guessing due to it's short length and mass near the hilt.

[Ben Coomer]

My wife and I both have a Windlass Type XIV and we're pretty happy with them.

Its a hell of a cutter. The wide blade whips through light targets like milk jugs and squash. My major problem is that it is significantly shorter than my other swords and took me a while to adjust and I still feel a little vulnerable in trying to get so close to use it. But I've just started working with arming swords after decades of longswords so it might just be me.

Its also a great thruster, but I do wonder if it really applies to the Type XIV in general as the Windlass model has a mid ridge from the fuller to the point that doesn't seem to be present in the historical and high end reproductions and may add a rigidity that wasn't typical. But they do come to a sharp point and should do fine as a thruster.

[Mikko Kuusirati]

One of my favorite sword types! But then, I've always felt comfortable with compact weapons and stuck right up close to the opponent, spoiling their fight and cramping their style. Maybe it's just because I'm myopic, who knows.

The spotlight article on the type XIV right here on myArmoury is quite good.

There are no real "maximum" dimensions unless you're reproducing a specific example, of course, but I'd say if you stay under 33" or at most 35" of blade length you'll be reasonably within historically plausible parameters. More than that and it begins to veer off into historically inspired fantasy - and moreover IMO kind of misses the point of the type (so to speak). The blade's width, on the other hand, should simply be in aesthetically and functionally pleasing proportion to its length and thickness and the overall design of the individual sword, being part of what defines the mass distribution and thus handling qualities of the weapon.