| Author |
Message |
|
Mark Lewis
|
 Posted: Tue 23 Aug, 2016 4:52 am Post subject: new swords at the Met |
 |
|
I recently made a visit to the Metropolitan Museum in New York and thought I would share some photos of five swords that are newly on display, all are on loan to the museum as of last year.
1) A Petersen type-V with traces of an inscription.
  
2) An earlier sword, possibly c. 800. Petersen's special type 6 - possibly a precursor of type K, with the pommel not yet divided into lobes. Inlaid with indistinct letters of patterns. Has been discussed previously: see second link for posts from the finder of the sword in 2002.
https://myArmoury.com/talk/viewtopic.php?t=5070
http://www.vikingsword.com/ubb/Forum5/HTML/000064.html
 
3) An XIIIa(?) with a very broad fuller. Inlaid with a single character in yellow metal.
   
4) Oakeshott's XVII.2 in Records of the Medieval Sword. Formerly in the E. A. Christensen collection, sold at auction in 2012.
https://www.bonhams.com/auctions/19796/lot/76/
   
5) A sword with a very distinctive pommel, perhaps type XII(?), inscribed with the letters S O S. Appears to be the same sword sold by Hermann Historica.
http://www.hermann-historica.de/auktion/hhm63...at63_a.txt
  
|
|
   |
 |
|
Niels Just Rasmussen
|
|
|
|
|
J.D. Crawford
|
| Posted: Sat 27 Aug, 2016 6:23 pm Post subject: |
|
|
|
Two things catch my eye in this group; the XII with the odd pommel (seen this one before) and the XIIIa with the broad fuller. Is that fuller short like an XIII or long like an X? Hard to tell in the pictures...looks short in one and longer in another.
|
|
 |
|
|
Mark Lewis
|
| Posted: Sat 27 Aug, 2016 8:44 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| J.D. Crawford wrote: | | Is that fuller short like an XIII or long like an X? Hard to tell in the pictures...looks short in one and longer in another. |
The fuller is short, the photo of the tip is misleading... what looks like a fuller is actually flat, the cross-section must be quite hexagonal. Conditions were not so good for photography, and I didn't get a photo that shows this more clearly unfortunately. The museum label gives the weight as 1743 g (about 3 lb, 13 oz.), total length was... probably 120 cm or so?
About XVII.2, Oakeshott wrote: "When I weighed it, after I had bought it in 1952, it was, surprisingly, nearly four pounds. This is very heavy, even for a XVII. It was clumsy too..." The museum now gives the weight as 1392 g, only an ounce over three pounds. So that's confusing...
|
|
|
|
|
|
Neil Melville
|
| Posted: Mon 29 Aug, 2016 4:19 am Post subject: |
|
|
Mark Lewis wrote[quote]
" The museum now gives the weight as 1392 g, only an ounce over three pounds. So that's confusing..".
Not really, for all his knowledge and enthusiasm Oakeshott was notoriously careless when giving dimensions and weights of swords. It seems he frequently quoted these from memory, often long after examining the sword, with the results we now have to deal with. So where there's a discrepancy I would suggest go by the museum figures (though even these are not always 100% accurate).
Neil
N Melville
|
|
|
|
|
|
Mark Lewis
|
| Posted: Mon 29 Aug, 2016 5:56 am Post subject: |
|
|
| Neil Melville wrote: | Not really, for all his knowledge and enthusiasm Oakeshott was notoriously careless when giving dimensions and weights of swords. It seems he frequently quoted these from memory, often long after examining the sword, with the results we now have to deal with. So where there's a discrepancy I would suggest go by the museum figures (though even these are not always 100% accurate).
Neil |
Oh I'm well aware that Oakeshott's numbers are not to be trusted! I'm just a bit surprised that the error is so large even with a sword he once owned himself, and it can't help but call into question his more subjective observations of the handling and balance of the sword... 
|
|
|
|
|
|
Clive Thomas
Location: Warwickshire, United Kingdom Joined: 05 Oct 2006
Posts: 49
|
| Posted: Sat 17 Nov, 2018 4:23 am Post subject: |
|
|
I certainly agree on the comments regarding Oakeshott's measurements!
I've been conducting a survey (for a future article) on the various measurements of medieval swords with the Type XVII bladeform, and have fifteen examples for which the weight of each piece is known. The examples have total lengths of between 75.5cm (29 3/4 inches) - Wallace Collection A.461, and 136cm (53 9/16 inches) - Museum of London 39.142.
Within this group, the average weight is just 1,362g (3lbs 0oz), with only the larger specimens (120cm-plus, with broader or thicker blades) weighing anything like the 4-5 lbs that Oakeshott suggested for this type. The heaviest on my list is in the Deutsches Historisches Museum, Berlin (No. W.893), which measures at 2,190g (4lbs 13oz) with a length of 135.5cm.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
This is a standard topic