| Author |
Message |
J.D. Crawford
|
 Posted: Sat 18 Feb, 2017 5:16 pm Post subject: |
 |
|
| Craig Peters wrote: | | Oakeshott indicates that a Type XI has a slender blade, "generally [emphasis mine] long in proportion to the hilt, with a very narrow fuller running to within a few inches of the point," (Records, p. 53). Notice that Oakeshott is not precise on the blade to hilt ratio, so this alone cannot be used to rule out a Type XI. I think there's a stronger argument to be made about the fullers not matching the description. That having been said, the narrowness of the fullers seems to be the crucial characteristic of an XI blade, and Oakeshott undoubtedly had not seen many of the swords in Aleksić’s book, which do not always perfectly coincide with Oakeshott's typology. So long as the fullers are truly as narrow as they appear, I think XI is an appropriate designation. |
They appear to be tending toward XIa blades (higher width to length ratio). The one on the right also could be XIIIb...shorter fuller...hard to say with a degraded tip. Or just an XIa with short fuller.
|
|
   |
 |
|
Fisher Lobdell
|
| Posted: Sat 18 Feb, 2017 6:04 pm Post subject: |
|
|
Yes that's what I was thinking, the one on the right has quite a short fuller. And they do fit with the rest. 
"Absence of evidence is not necessarily the evedence of Absence." Ewart Oakeshotte.
|
|
|
|
|
Guillaume Vauthier
|
| Posted: Thu 23 Feb, 2017 2:02 am Post subject: |
|
|
Does someone have some more informations on the Hamburg and Delft swords that Mark posted earlier in this thread? I'm currently looking for datas on very long-bladed type XI...
Looking at the forum I found a few specs for the Søborg, Esrum and Mauritius swords, but I guess there are some more 90/95 to 100cm bladed swords here. And of course I would not refuse some more datas like PoB or mass for these... 
|
|
|
|
|
|
Mark Lewis
|
| Posted: Fri 24 Feb, 2017 3:54 am Post subject: |
|
|
| Guillaume Vauthier wrote: | | Does someone have some more informations on the Hamburg and Delft swords that Mark posted earlier in this thread? I'm currently looking for datas on very long-bladed type XI... |
Are you investigating their geometry, or creating your own designs? 
I do have a little bit more specific info. For the Delft sword, L: 114.7, BL: 98.8, BW: 4.6. For Hamburg, L: 114 (or 114.5?), BW: 4.3, CL: 19.2, PW: 5.5, GL: 11.
I think the very longest I have found might be this one, from Seewen in Switzerland. L: 117.4, BL: 101, BW: 5.5, CL: 16.3, PH: 5.5, PW: 5.3.
|
|
 |
|
Craig Peters
|
| Posted: Fri 24 Feb, 2017 4:32 am Post subject: |
|
|
|
On what basis is the sword in your image, Mark, dated to circa 1300 by its holding institution? My impression was that long inscriptions were say from the second half of the 12th century into the first portion of the 13th. The hilt furnishings look like something I would expect from the 13th century, but there isn't anything to suggest a late 13th c date in my view.
|
|
|
|
|
Guillaume Vauthier
|
| Posted: Fri 24 Feb, 2017 4:49 am Post subject: |
|
|
| Mark Lewis wrote: | | Guillaume Vauthier wrote: | | Does someone have some more informations on the Hamburg and Delft swords that Mark posted earlier in this thread? I'm currently looking for datas on very long-bladed type XI... |
Are you investigating their geometry, or creating your own designs? |
I'm investigating at the moment, but I must admit I'll probably ask someone to make me a similar sword of my own design in the future... some designs have very appealing particularities, I love the very short grip of the Saint-Omer sword, and the beautiful inlays of the Esrum sword, for example. But I would like to know more about their physical properties, like weight and balance, even if the average PoB seems to be at about 1/6th of the blade length and the weight around 1,2kg.
Thank you indeed for these extra datas, it helps! And this last sword seems enormous!
And about the Hamburg sword, was it found in Hamburg, or it is kept in a Hamburg Museum? Have you the information?
In addition, here is another type XI sword with a G pommel that was exposed for the Cluny Museum exposition on swords (the same that the one where some of the Saint-Omer pics were made). But I don't have any informations on it:
Pic 1
Pic 2
Pic 3
|
|
|
|
|
J.D. Crawford
|
| Posted: Fri 24 Feb, 2017 4:58 am Post subject: |
|
|
| Mark Lewis wrote: | | I think the very longest I have found might be this one, from Seewen in Switzerland. L: 117.4, BL: 101, BW: 5.5, CL: 16.3, PH: 5.5, PW: 5.3. |
Now that's a sword. You got my attention with that one. I've been looking for a big one with an I pommel.
And I agree it looks more 1200 than 1300.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Mark Lewis
|
| Posted: Fri 24 Feb, 2017 6:22 am Post subject: |
|
|
| Craig Peters wrote: | | On what basis is the sword in your image, Mark, dated to circa 1300 by its holding institution? My impression was that long inscriptions were say from the second half of the 12th century into the first portion of the 13th. The hilt furnishings look like something I would expect from the 13th century, but there isn't anything to suggest a late 13th c date in my view. |
Oh, you are quite right... that is just the caption from an article by Hugo Schneider in the 1960s, but it is not correct. If I've read the German correctly, he suggested this date based only(?) on the curved shape of the cross guard - but this is no good argument at all. A more recent article suggests early-mid 13th century. I'm not even sure where this sword is now, the articles don't clearly specify...
| Guillaume Vauthier wrote: | | In addition, here is another type XI sword with a G pommel that was exposed for the Cluny Museum exposition on swords |
Actually, that is the Hamburg sword! On loan for that exhibit... some of the measurements I posted are from the catalogue. The Gicelin inscription is legible in the third photo. I understand it was found in the River Elbe, I assume near Hamburg... it is in the museum there.
|
|
|
|
|
Guillaume Vauthier
|
| Posted: Fri 24 Feb, 2017 9:13 am Post subject: |
|
|
| Mark Lewis wrote: | | Actually, that is the Hamburg sword! On loan for that exhibit... some of the measurements I posted are from the catalogue. The Gicelin inscription is legible in the third photo. I understand it was found in the River Elbe, I assume near Hamburg... it is in the museum there. |
What a funny coincidence! So, according to the stats, the blade must be about 96,5 to 97cm. That's a pretty big boy too. And you're right, the last pic is quite good, the inlays are very legible... thanks for all the infos
|
|
|
|
|
Ryan Renfro
|
|
|
|
|
Roger Hooper
|
| Posted: Fri 24 Feb, 2017 5:00 pm Post subject: |
|
|
Here is the only XIa photo that I have seen
 Attachment: 13.39 KB
|
|
|
|
|
J.D. Crawford
|
| Posted: Fri 24 Feb, 2017 7:38 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| Roger Hooper wrote: | | Here is the only XIa photo that I have seen |
Roger, there are a couple more of standard XIa proportions (shorter and broader than XI) shown here: http://myArmoury.com/feature_spotxi.html
However there are some huge swords that Oakeshott also called XIa. The best example, the Pontirolo sword, is described in 'Sword in Hand' pages 80-81 and shown here: http://myArmoury.com/talk/viewtopic.php?t=124...=pontirolo
This single hand sword has a blade 40.5" x 2.75", with a narrow fuller. So it seems Oakeshott distinguished XIa from XI by width (or perhaps more likely width-length ratio), not by length alone. The River Fyris sword reproduced by Peter Johnsson may be another example, although the tip is also missing.
The Eastern European sword shown above looked to me to be intermediate between classic XI and XIa.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Mark Lewis
|
| Posted: Sat 25 Feb, 2017 4:05 am Post subject: |
|
|
I suspect that this may be the Pontirolo sword here, though it is not identified as such, and how it came to be in a Romanian museum I cannot say. The description correctly identifies the mark on the blade as a cross in a circle, surmounted by a cross, as shown in Sword in Hand.
http://clasate.cimec.ro/detaliu.asp?k=9C0A209...C578ABDEF6
If I am correct, then this is another case where Oakeshott's measurements are highly misleading.... his given length is closer to the overal length of 1055 mm than to the blade length of only 893 mm - the measurements are not exceptional at all.
|
|
|
|
|
Guillaume Vauthier
|
| Posted: Sat 25 Feb, 2017 5:08 am Post subject: |
|
|
|
The size is quite average, but the sword is said to be 1,74kg. That seems pretty heavy for a sword like this !
|
|
|
|
|
J.D. Crawford
|
| Posted: Sun 26 Feb, 2017 11:37 am Post subject: |
|
|
| Guillaume Vauthier wrote: | | The size is quite average, but the sword is said to be 1,74kg. That seems pretty heavy for a sword like this ! |
Not really, when you consider the width. Even a 35" long blade with width of over 2.5" and normal thickness carries a lot of mass. That's bigger than Albion Tritonia, which is nearly 3.5 lbs. If this is average, you guys must have some big swords!
At any rate, my point was that Oakeshott's XIa is not restricted to small swords.
And I think we are getting off topic.
|
|
|
|
|
Craig Peters
|
| Posted: Sun 26 Feb, 2017 9:49 pm Post subject: |
|
|
|
I wonder if the sword in the Romanian museum is genuine. The condition is extraordinarily good for a sword of this time period, which doesn't mean much necessarily although it is unusual enough to consider if there are other oddities about the sword. Secondly, the pommel looks funny to me. It doesn’t really match other Type B or Type B1 pommels I have seen. Thirdly, my impression from the appearance of the cross is that it is a Gaddhjalt, yet this seems an unusual pairing with a Type XI.a blade. In my experience, Gaddhjalt crosses are more common to swords with the narrower Type Xa or Type XI blades. Then we come to the weight. Although as Doug observed this weight may be appropriate for an especially broad blade, 1.74 kg is well outside the great majority of single handed swords. This itself is cause for pause. Finally, the notes from the museum’s webpage indicate that the grip still has wood wrapped in leather which itself is highly unusual; it is less so if this sword dates to the end of the 14th century as the museum claims, but everything about the blade and hilt furnishing suggests to me that it belongs to the 12th to early 13th century when nearly no hilt furnishings survive. Additionally, there are certain “purveyors of antique medieval swords” who have sold several “antique swords” that have similar grips, both with complete grips and those that are partly missing. All told, there are enough oddities about this sword that leave me suspicious.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Mark Lewis
|
| Posted: Mon 27 Feb, 2017 7:19 am Post subject: |
|
|
| Craig Peters wrote: | | I wonder if the sword in the Romanian museum is genuine. |
You make excellent points and I am in complete agreement. This museum has a couple other items that seem equally suspicious or worse. I think several of your observations would apply equally to the Pontirolo sword if they are in fact two different items, and regarding the weight issue, Oakeshott claims the Pontirolo sword weighs "a whisker under 5 lbs" (2.26 kg)! I also thought that the fuller seems particularly irregular and poorly formed - this can be seen in Oakeshott's photos of the Pontirolo sword as well.
|
|
|
|
|
J.D. Crawford
|
| Posted: Mon 27 Feb, 2017 9:28 am Post subject: |
|
|
|
If Oakeshott's measurements are correct (which now seems questionable), I agree that 5lbs just seems too much for a long one hand sword (unless it was built for a warrior of huge stature). There's a good reason why the long XIs are narrow. I have a narrow XI with a 37.5" blade at 3lbs that handles pretty well. I have other swords (XIIIb) with shorter, wider blades at 3.5lbs that I can just barely handle. At 6' I would presumably be considered big in Medieval times, but my bone structure would not handle a heavier, longer sword.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot vote in polls in this forum
You cannot attach files in this forum
You can download files in this forum
|
All contents © Copyright 2003-2024 myArmoury.com — All rights reserved
Discussion forums powered by phpBB © The phpBB Group
Switch to the Basic Low-bandwidth Version of the forum
|
This is a standard topic