Author |
Message |
Houston P.
Location: United States Joined: 20 Apr 2015
Posts: 83
|
Posted: Wed 11 Nov, 2020 10:37 am Post subject: |
|
|
Pedro,
I believe the reason type XVIIIc were not included is because they are hand-and-a-half swords, and Spenser was only interested in single-handed swords. That being said, I suspect that the reason they weren’t more popular is largely due to the fact that they are so incredibly thin. Skallagrim chipped the edge of his Principe on a branch. That’s modern high carbon steel, and it was damaged that easily. Imagine a similar sword made from inferior steel impacting another hardened steel blade, it would gouge horribly. A second possible reason is that they are seemingly specialized for cloth armor, but steel armor was becoming more prominent during their time. It may simply not have been practical to bring such a specialized weapon into most situations.
...and he that hath no sword, let him sell his garment, and buy one. (Luke 22:36)
|
|
|
|
Mark Millman
|
Posted: Wed 11 Nov, 2020 11:27 am Post subject: |
|
|
On Wednesday 11 November 2020, Houston P. wrote: | Pedro,
I believe the reason type XVIIIc were not included is because they are hand-and-a-half swords, and Spenser was only interested in single-handed swords. |
Yes, indeed.
Quote: | That being said, I suspect that the reason they weren’t more popular is largely due to the fact that they are so incredibly thin. Skallagrim chipped the edge of his Principe on a branch. That’s modern high carbon steel, and it was damaged that easily. Imagine a similar sword made from inferior steel impacting another hardened steel blade, it would gouge horribly. A second possible reason is that they are seemingly specialized for cloth armor, but steel armor was becoming more prominent |
in western Europe
Quote: | during their time. It may simply not have been practical to bring such a specialized weapon into most situations |
in which facing a preponderance of cloth armor wasn't expected.
Sorry to pick on you, Houston; I'm being a little unfair. But we run into a lot of interpretive problems by being insufficiently specific, and I think it's worth noting all the relevant qualifying facts in any statement. In this particular case, remember the context: These swords seem to be in large part from Italy, which suggests that they may have been produced with an eye toward use in the eastern and southern Mediterranean. And of course their extreme thinness may have affected the survival rate.
Hmm. Also, I apologize for extending the digression.
Best,
Mark Millman
|
|
|
|
Houston P.
Location: United States Joined: 20 Apr 2015
Posts: 83
|
Posted: Wed 11 Nov, 2020 12:15 pm Post subject: |
|
|
Mark,
No worries! I don’t mind being corrected. Only fools despise correction. Besides, that doesn’t seem to be what you were doing. It seems you were more or less expanding what I said for clarity. That being said, I agree with everything you said, I was just giving a Laconian explanation as to why these blades were not more prevalent. I tend not to give details unless they are requested. Since we’re already going down this route, several of the most famous examples of XVIII were found in an arsenal in Alexandria, so it would certainly seem that they were intended for hotter climates wherein you would have been unlikely to encounter any armor that would give pause to using these swords.
...and he that hath no sword, let him sell his garment, and buy one. (Luke 22:36)
|
|
|
|
Spenser T.
|
Posted: Wed 11 Nov, 2020 12:34 pm Post subject: |
|
|
Recently I also saw the Skallagrim video about the Principe and was thinking the same thing, I'm really glad it was brought up here.
The extreme thinness as a trade off between ultimate cutting power and durability is a very interesting balance.
|
|
|
|
Pedro Paulo Gaião
|
Posted: Wed 11 Nov, 2020 2:21 pm Post subject: |
|
|
Hi guys, thanks for all the thoughts and politeness. And yeah, I agree with it was discussed. And to stop to think about it: do we have any references for medieval people differenciating one blade style from another? So far, all the Portuguese references I came into just treates swords by the use: one handed, longswords, true two handers, falchions (simply called knifes or big knives) etc. They kinda point out they were different from older swords; eg. Fernão Lopes in the 15th century describes swords in the 14th as "mui cortadoras, segundo a usança de seu tempo" (ie. good cutters, according to the usage of their time), indincating swords in the 15th century were proned to thrust, which gave the name of the longswords of the time: estoques
Skal talked about something I don`t know really if it really matters, it's the supposed "agility" that XVIIIc has. I don't own swords, I just handled a lenticular longsword, so, that actually matters?
By the way, I don't know if chronistic evidence should count, but it seems older styles had particularly powerful cutting powers. The Ostrogothic king Odoacer was murdered in a dinner by Theodoric, with a sword blow downwards that opened its way through Odoacer's belly, cutting bones, flesh, and such. Migration Era sword wasn't as balanced as later Viking Age swords were. I think that makes them have a lot of cutting power, and this piece of reference could be proof.
Another source (not that reliable) is from the First Crusade, in a book called "Heroes of the Crusade" that collects lots of sources from the period. After the Conquest of Jerusalem, duke Godfrey de Bouillon was showing his much famed strength among Saracens (some mountain princes visited him because of the stories). He demonstrated that by cutting a camel's head off in a single sword strike. The Sarracens were impressed, one of them even said the sword was enchanted, but he repeated the feat using the Saracen's own sword, Godfrey then concluded that he had such capacity because he never raised his sword against an innocent person. I mean, it might be a legend and such, and when I posted the source in an older thread here, Howard said it was perfectly possible to any sword, but I don't know what you think.
“Burn old wood, read old books, drink old wines, have old friends.”
Alfonso X, King of Castile (1221-84)
|
|
|
|
Sean Manning
|
Posted: Wed 11 Nov, 2020 3:41 pm Post subject: |
|
|
Tuck or estoc just means "long stiff thrusting sword." They can have any style of hilt from a sabre hilt to a longsword.
There are a group of short treatises in Arabic and Persian about different types of sword blade (Khorasani's "Arms and Armour from Iran" has a good summary), and quite a few sources from western Europe in the 14th / 15th / 16th century describe types of sword and dagger for specific purposes. They usually assume you have a basic idea of what a sword or dagger is and add details like "stiff with a point like a grain of barley" or "with a one-and-a-half-edged blade two hands long."
Pedro Paulo Gaião wrote: | Another source (not that reliable) is from the First Crusade, in a book called "Heroes of the Crusade" that collects lots of sources from the period. After the Conquest of Jerusalem, duke Godfrey de Bouillon was showing his much famed strength among Saracens (some mountain princes visited him because of the stories). He demonstrated that by cutting a camel's head off in a single sword strike. The Sarracens were impressed, one of them even said the sword was enchanted, but he repeated the feat using the Saracen's own sword, Godfrey then concluded that he had such capacity because he never raised his sword against an innocent person. I mean, it might be a legend and such, and when I posted the source in an older thread here, Howard said it was perfectly possible to any sword, but I don't know what you think. |
I think that comes from Sir Walter Scott's novel "Talisman" published in 1825.
www.bookandsword.com
|
|
|
|
|
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
|