| Author |
Message |
Kenneth Enroth
|
 Posted: Thu 11 Aug, 2005 5:19 am Post subject: A&A 12th century sword? |
 |
|
So I've been eyeing the A&A 12th century sword. I've found next to nothing written about it so I guess it's not one of A&A's more popular models? But I guess someone here has owned one at some point and can tell me what it feels like? I guess it's better in two hands than in one? I have two A&A swords already and I know what to expect in terms of craftsmanship.
Original: c. 1100 - 1250 Northern Europe, Museum and Art Gallery, Glasgow.
Blade Length: 34.6" x 2", Overall Length 43.3", Weight: @3.3lbs., BP: @5.5"
|
|
  |
 |
|
Russ Ellis
Industry Professional
|
| Posted: Thu 11 Aug, 2005 6:07 am Post subject: |
|
|
Hey Kenneth,
I've got one, I purchased it from Patrick Kelly some years back. As with all Arms and Armor pieces it's a very well done sword. Although it's by no means my favorite A&A piece I think it's a very nice representation of the type, and is a VERY sturdy powerful sword.
You can see a short review I wrote some time back of it here: http://www.tritonworks.com/newpage5.htm
Two answer your question, it's definately predjudiced towards the blade, but I don't know that you can really use it two handed consistently. I don't have the grip length in that review (wrote it before I started including them) but you getting two hands on the grip isn't terribly comfortable as I recall. I'll have to get it out again tonight and see. Been a while since I played with that one so I'll be glad to do that and answer any other questions you might have...
TRITONWORKS Custom Scabbards
|
|
|
|
|
Kenneth Enroth
|
| Posted: Thu 11 Aug, 2005 7:19 am Post subject: |
|
|
Hey Russ
Sounds like what I want. Except for the uncomfortable grip part.I guess you have to grip the pommel to use it with both hands. It could be a litte longer in the grip but in the pictures the proportions look spot on.
Also on the list is an Albion Duke or a Steward. Interesting how the A&A has the size of the Steward and the weight of the Duke. The A&A must be a pretty sturdy sword.
Is it the latest version you have or an older one?
|
|
|
|
|
Elling Polden
|
| Posted: Thu 11 Aug, 2005 8:21 am Post subject: |
|
|
I guess the sword is modeled after this one, mentioned in the type XIII feature;
XIIIa.5 From the Glasgow Museum and Art Gallery
This is an example of a sword that does not fit neatly into any single category. The long and narrow fuller of the 35" blade is much like an Oakeshott Type XI, but because of the sword's proportions, it is placed into the Type XIIIa group. The cross-guard is also an earlier style, known as a Gaddhjalt or "Spike-hilt" form, and is most common amongst Viking swords. Oakeshott dates this example early for the type at circa 1200-50, or perhaps even as early as 1100.
So, it's really more a bit old fashioned 13th century sword than 12th... 
"this [fight] looks curious, almost like a game. See, they are looking around them before they fall, to find a dry spot to fall on, or they are falling on their shields. Can you see blood on their cloths and weapons? No. This must be trickery."
-Reidar Sendeman, from King Sverre's Saga, 1201
|
|
  |
|
|
Russ Ellis
Industry Professional
|
| Posted: Thu 11 Aug, 2005 8:39 am Post subject: |
|
|
| Kenneth Enroth wrote: | Hey Russ
Sounds like what I want. Except for the uncomfortable grip part.I guess you have to grip the pommel to use it with both hands. It could be a litte longer in the grip but in the pictures the proportions look spot on.
Also on the list is an Albion Duke or a Steward. Interesting how the A&A has the size of the Steward and the weight of the Duke. The A&A must be a pretty sturdy sword.
Is it the latest version you have or an older one? |
Don't get to worried about the grip just yet, like I said I'll sneak it out tonight and have a look...
I bought it gosh... I guess two or three years ago from Patrick. I'm not sure if Arms and Armor has updated it since then. They don't typically publicize it when they do so they may well have.
TRITONWORKS Custom Scabbards
|
|
|
|
|
Kenneth Enroth
|
| Posted: Thu 11 Aug, 2005 8:53 am Post subject: |
|
|
| Elling Polden wrote: | I guess the sword is modeled after this one, mentioned in the type XIII feature;
So, it's really more a bit old fashioned 13th century sword than 12th... |
It's also featured in "Records" as XIIIa.11. An early sword of war. Oakeshott mentions that it would be a type XIa but as he hadn't isolated that subtype it had to be an XIIIa.
|
|
|
|
|
Kenneth Enroth
|
| Posted: Sun 14 Aug, 2005 3:48 am Post subject: |
|
|
| Russ Ellis wrote: |
Don't get to worried about the grip just yet, like I said I'll sneak it out tonight and have a look...
|
So what do you think?
|
|
|
|
|
|
Patrick Kelly
|
| Posted: Sun 14 Aug, 2005 5:08 am Post subject: |
|
|
It's a nice sword.
While it does lack some of the dynamic handling qualities found in other replicas of this type it is solidly made from quality materials. There appear to have been some subtle refinements from the older model I sold Russ and the newer one now pictured on A&A's website. (such as the old one having a recess in the pommel face that the newer one no longer has) A&A is constantly improving their product so the newer ones may have better handling qualities. (which are fine with the old one, just not outstanding)
It's a good offering in that price point.
"In valor there is hope.".................. Tacitus
|
|
 |
|
Kenneth Enroth
|
| Posted: Sun 14 Aug, 2005 5:59 am Post subject: |
|
|
| Patrick Kelly wrote: | It's a nice sword.
While it does lack some of the dynamic handling qualities found in other replicas of this type it is solidly made from quality materials. There appear to have been some subtle refinements from the older model I sold Russ and the newer one now pictured on A&A's website. (such as the old one having a recess in the pommel face that the newer one no longer has) A&A is constantly improving their product so the newer ones may have better handling qualities. (which are fine with the old one, just not outstanding)
It's a good offering in that price point. |
Thanks. This time I'll probably take advantage of Albion's sale and buy a Duke.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Russ Ellis
Industry Professional
|
| Posted: Sun 14 Aug, 2005 7:17 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| Kenneth Enroth wrote: |
So what do you think? |
Hey Kenneth,
Sorry about the delay, I'd forgotten to look into it until I was oiling up the cutlery tonight and then I remembered! Oh yeah! I need to check that grip for Kenneth! Anyway I got the sword and and tried it with a two handed grip. It's just a tiny bit short for both of my hands to rest on the grip, the hand closest to the pommel overlaps onto the pomme. It seems to be able to be swung pretty comfortably that way. I'm guessing my hands are about average size. If you've got some real big grabbers you might not be able to do that comfortably. So anyway I played with the sword a bit and remembered... Oh yeah I like this sword a pretty good bit! As Patrick mentions it doesn't handle as well as some other swords, but I expect that it's probably well within handling norms for the type. I'll compare it to the Duke for you, I'm supposed to be getting one of those in this week.
TRITONWORKS Custom Scabbards
|
|
|
|
|
Jean Thibodeau
|
| Posted: Sun 14 Aug, 2005 9:45 pm Post subject: |
|
|
Kenneth;
I started a topic a while back about twohanded use of onehanded swords that probably had posts dealing with swords with short grips or grips at the limit of possible twohanded swords. ( I haven't re-read all the posts yet. )
In any case some of the issues you are wondering about may have been covered there.
http://www.myArmoury.com/talk/viewtopic.php?t...mp;start=0
( Edited after having a look at all the posts: Kenneth I see that you made a post to that topic, so you probably read all of them before! Still refreshing ones' memory of older posts can be useful.  )
You can easily give up your freedom. You have to fight hard to get it back!
|
|
|
|
|
|
Joe Maccarrone
Location: Burien, WA USA Joined: 19 Sep 2003
Posts: 190
|
| Posted: Mon 15 Aug, 2005 4:54 am Post subject: |
|
|
You could always do what I did: ask Craig to make your 12th C. sword with a 7" grip. 
Gained perhaps an extra inch this way. Comfy for my meaty paws. It has become my favorite sword.
|
|
|
|
|
Elling Polden
|
| Posted: Mon 15 Aug, 2005 6:04 am Post subject: |
|
|
| Russ Ellis wrote: |
It's just a tiny bit short for both of my hands to rest on the grip, the hand closest to the pommel overlaps onto the pomme. It seems to be able to be swung pretty comfortably that way. I'm guessing my hands are about average size. If you've got some real big grabbers you might not be able to do that comfortably. |
At least with later longswords, the rear hand is suposed to be ON the pommel; Thumb and index finger wrapped around the transition between hilt and pommel.
The long hilt is used to provide leverage, not primarily to accomodate the hands. Most single hand swords can be gripped in this way, but they will not get the same advantage...
For reference,
http://www.varmouries.com/wildrose/fiore/section5.html
"this [fight] looks curious, almost like a game. See, they are looking around them before they fall, to find a dry spot to fall on, or they are falling on their shields. Can you see blood on their cloths and weapons? No. This must be trickery."
-Reidar Sendeman, from King Sverre's Saga, 1201
|
|
|
|
|
Bill Grandy
myArmoury Team
|
| Posted: Mon 15 Aug, 2005 6:15 am Post subject: |
|
|
| Elling Polden wrote: |
At least with later longswords, the rear hand is suposed to be ON the pommel; Thumb and index finger wrapped around the transition between hilt and pommel. |
This isn't necessarily always true, though it certainly seemed popular. But the 14th c. Doebringer manuscript specifically says NOT to do this, so clearly there was some variation to the opinion on how to grip the sword.
|
|
|
|
|
Elling Polden
|
| Posted: Mon 15 Aug, 2005 6:46 am Post subject: |
|
|
Intresting. Does he give a reason for not using it? I guess you can hit harder, but you would lose a lot of agility...
"this [fight] looks curious, almost like a game. See, they are looking around them before they fall, to find a dry spot to fall on, or they are falling on their shields. Can you see blood on their cloths and weapons? No. This must be trickery."
-Reidar Sendeman, from King Sverre's Saga, 1201
|
|
|
|
|
Martin Wallgren
|
| Posted: Mon 15 Aug, 2005 7:46 am Post subject: |
|
|
| Elling Polden wrote: | | Intresting. Does he give a reason for not using it? I guess you can hit harder, but you would lose a lot of agility... |
"Know also that a good fencer should before all things know his sword and be able to grip it well with both hands, between the cross guard and the pommel since you will then be safer than if you did grip it with one hand on the pommel. And you will also strike harder and truer, with the pommel swinging itself and turning in the strike you will strike harder than if you were holding the pommel. When you pull the pommel in the strike you will not come as perfect or as strongly.
For the sword is like a scale, if a sword is large and heavy then the pommel must also be large and heavy to balance it like a scale. "
David Lindholms Translation of Hanko Döbringer.
Martin
Swordsman, Archer and Dad
|
|
|
|
|
Elling Polden
|
| Posted: Tue 16 Aug, 2005 12:28 am Post subject: |
|
|
<shrug> Its a tradeoff, for sure. Apparently most of the later fencers go with the pommel grip.
The point of my comment was anyhow that a sword can be used effectively in two hands even if there isn't room for both hands on the handle propper...
"this [fight] looks curious, almost like a game. See, they are looking around them before they fall, to find a dry spot to fall on, or they are falling on their shields. Can you see blood on their cloths and weapons? No. This must be trickery."
-Reidar Sendeman, from King Sverre's Saga, 1201
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
This is a standard topic