[Jean-Carle Hudon]

Steve,
some of these are stupendous, I am glad this topic brought these to the forefront. I really love the modern take on the viking sword ! That's a keeper.

[Harry Pretat]

It seems to be a trend in this topic, but this is my first post as well
I've been reading the forums and reviews and accumulating as much knowledge about swords and edged weapons as I can from my computer desk (I unfortunately don't have the funds or the time to acquire my own sword to practice with, hopefully that will change).

Anyways, back to the topic at hand.

I think a major factor in the lack of modern sword designs is that swords aren't useful for really anything besides recreation anymore. There have been advances in technology that provide much more efficient and destructive weapons for every situation in which a sword could be used. In history, the sword evolved because it needed to overcome increasingly better armor. Firearms and explosives are evolving today to suit different combat environments and unmanned weapons are being developed to protect soldier's lives, but swords have no place in today's wars. Necessity is the mother of invention, and better swords just aren't necessary these days.

Now that's not to say that a sword maker couldn't hypothisize as to what a sword might look like if it was devolped for today's combat world, using modern materials and modern technology, but the problem is that no one really knows what a sword would look like today if firearms and other weapons technology hadn't interrupted it's evolution, so any "modern" sword would be a fantasy sword, no more accurate than any crystal-dragon-vampire sword.

In the meantime, you could just pickup a Snake Eyes sword: http://www.museumreplicas.com/webstore/eCat/g..._eyes.aspx

[Addison C. de Lisle]

I absolutely love that Peter Johnsson sword from the Masters of Fire exhibit...anyone have any idea of what happened to it or where it ended up?

Sorry, just had to throw that out there...anything I have to say has already been covered in regards to the actual topic :P

[Patrick Kelly]

[Laurie W]

[Edward Hitchens]

I would wager that during Medieval times, a sword was considered "modern" by the way it could counter the "present" defences. Let's go back a half-millenium for a second (it's now Oct 5, 1506); a modern blade might be an Oakeshott Type XV (or XVa) because armour nowadays is full-plate, whereas just a few centuries ago, troops were wearing maille. So the basis of the "modern" design is not aesthetics, but practicality on today's battlefields.

OK, now back to 2006 . Nowadays, two warships can fight each other -- even while 100 miles apart. As Nathan and others pointed out, perhaps "modern" can be based on how well we can replicate a sword (or dagger, or polearm ...) from centuries past, as opposed to the sword itself. Proof of this can be how some present-day swordmakers design and then re-design a sword; for instance, Arms & Armor has redesigned several of their pieces over the years. Why so? Well, perhaps as time goes by, advances in metalworking technology and forging methods improve to make the modern recreation look (and feel, and perform) more like its original. Or perhaps a new discovery is made that was previously unknown. The list of reasons could go on.

So to sum up: Centuries ago when swords were battlefield weapons, there were standards on how they can protect the life of their user. Now as collector items (and even artwork), there are standards on how well they represent their Medieval brethren.

[Steve Grisetti]

[Jeni L.]

Thank you all so much for the interesting and well thought out feedback. My take on what's been said so far is:

1. Most people prefer their swords as historical as possible

2. There is a lot of doubt as to whether any modern design could possibly look as nice as those that have been done before, especially without compromising performance.

3. Those who practice some form (Eastern or Western) of martial art want to associate themselves as closely as possible with the historical side of the art, and hence prefer sword aesthetics which would have been popular in that art's heyday.

4. "Modern" swords pretty much consist of fantasy pieces or tactical pieces.

Am I correct in this? I have a couple of thoughts which perhaps should have been spelled out in my initial post, but anyway...

Correct me if I'm wrong, but didn't Western sword aesthetics undergo change over the years? weren't swords sometimes rehilted to conform to whatever the current trend or aesthetic ideal was? A Fiore or Talhoffer would presumably have owned a sword that not only was functional, but was the "hippest" design of the era. Transplant that same sword master to the present and wouldn't they still want a sword that, although just as functional, conformed to what is considered coolest in our time?

If that's true, then what the heck would count as coolest in the present? A well done fantasy look? The utilitarian look of the tactical swords? I certainly don't have the answer, but I'd love to hear more input.

As a third and final (for now) thought - A ballerina may strive to perfect the classical grace of those who have gone before, but does so in a modern context. A baseball player is playing roughly the same game as those 50 or 100 years ago played, but does so in a modern uniform. No one would say that it was essential to the art of baseball that it be played in a baggy woolen uniform. Yet the hitting and fielding are still the same. Does anyone look at the ancient martial arts they practice in a similar way (part of a continuum)? A modern look for a practitioner who stands at the modern edge of an ongoing evolution? Are my strained analogies way off base?

Thanks again for the wonderful replies.

[Chad Arnow]

Keep in mind that you're asking your question on a forum devoted to historical weapons and armour. If you ask this question elsewhere you may get a wildly different response.

Most of us here will always prefer historically-designed items, but that's the kind of crowd we are.

[Joe Fults]

Correct me if I'm wrong, but didn't Western sword aesthetics undergo change over the years?

Sure…

Weren’t swords sometimes re-hilted to conform to whatever the current trend or aesthetic ideal was?

Yes but this comes down to fashion and preferences which drive demand, as has been noted previously in replies…

A Fiore or Talhoffer would presumably have owned a sword that not only was functional, but was the "hippest" design of the era. Transplant that same sword master to the present and wouldn't they still want a sword that, although just as functional, conformed to what is considered coolest in our time?

Perhaps they would, and then again, perhaps they would not. Design, style, fashion or whatever you want to call it is essentially a luxury. Assuming they had ample cash flow, I would imagine style would be important to them. It certainly seems to have been important to many of ancestors…

If that's true, then what the heck would count as coolest in the present?

Whatever you think is the coolest…whatever I think is the coolest…in the end though, cool is normally about fads and whatever sells the most, which would probably be the crystal-vampire-dragon sword…

As a third and final (for now) thought - A ballerina may strive to perfect the classical grace of those who have gone before, but does so in a modern context. A baseball player is playing roughly the same game as those 50 or 100 years ago played, but does so in a modern uniform. No one would say that it was essential to the art of baseball that it be played in a baggy woolen uniform.

Sure, but some people still do play with old wooden bats, old style balls, old baggy woolen uniforms…

Yet the hitting and fielding are still the same. Does anyone look at the ancient martial arts they practice in a similar way (part of a continuum)?

I suspect some do, but you might have to search in a different place to find them…

[Shae Bishop]

I think that the difference, as many have said before, is that baseball and ballet are still completely live and viable in the modern day and are still evolving and being practiced on a massive scale across much of the world. Hitting a ball with a bat is still as fun, modern, entertaining, culturally acceptable, and normal as it was when the game was invented. Skewering a man who challenges your honor with a long, pointed piece of steel has largely gone out of society as far as I know. The entire concept of the sword and it's integral function is no longer part of society. It's only remaining purpose is for study and sport. And also as others have said, modern swords and practitioners do exist, in the form of sport fencing. This is, as far as I see, the most direct development of swordsmanship into modern times. Epees, foils, and sabers are made to fit modern needs and developments just as swords meant for battle were in the 1300's. And in the modern form of the sword, the intended purpose which dictates it's development is it's suitability for non-lethal sport. When plate armor became prevalent, blades became stiffer and more acute; hence, when other weapons took over the battlefield, the next development in the history of the sword was for it to become for sport alone, so it became light and flexible with a capped tip. I see sport fencing weapons as just as much a development of the sword itself as a gladius or rapier, just without the original purpose driving it's evolution. I hope you see what I'm trying to say. Historical swordsmanship is just that: historical. That is, practiced as it was in history, not modern times. In my mind, a modern designed tool for recreating a piece of history is absurd. It would be like doing Revolutionary War reenactment in kevlar with machine guns. This is my take on the subject. Thanks for starting a topic that made me really think, and feel compelled to make such a lengthy post.

Shae

[Nathan Robinson]

This topic has been promoted into a Spotlight Topic.

[Pamela Muir]

[Steve Fabert]

"Modern looking sword" seems to be a bit self contradictory, unless you are talking about fantasy items. I am not aware of any place on Earth today where swords are actually employed as weapons. Guns are now too cheap and too readily available everywhere to leave much room for sword fighting. Other than their use in beheading hostages in Iraq, sharp blades with even moderate length are ordinarily employed as ornaments only. There are plenty of short blades that still have practical use, but these are now not even as long as the bayonets of World War One.

Ornamental swords that "look modern" do not seem to be in much demand today, the way fraternal swords once were. Maybe if we went back to the practice of wearing costumes at fraternal gatherings, there would be more demand for modern decorative swords.

There is no strong hostility to fantasy swords even among fans of historical reproductions. I think there was general approval among sword fans for the look of the sword designs for the Lord of the Rings films, for example. But these items certainly do not look modern, by any definition.

Star Wars may have permanently damaged the opportunity for believable modern sword designs by suggesting that the blades should not even be made of solid material. Maybe the science fiction writers and blade designers need to get their imaginations going to come up with a believable modern sword made of composite materials instead. We used to assume that airplanes needed to be made of shiny metal, and now we know better. Maybe swords can evolve in the same direction. Since form follows function, a nonferrous blade would likely use very different blade shapes to maintain balance and function. It would not be likely that an equally functional blade of a new lightweight material would look just the same as a weapon with a steel blade.

[James A. Vargscarr]

To add to Steve's excellent examples, here are some more swords I would call contemporary in design that fall a long way from the fantasy stereotypes. I generally think of pieces like these as 'art swords'. As has already been noted, and should be further confirmed by these links, contemporary sword designs are a significant facet of artistry of sword making in the modern day. This sampling is diverse, but far from exhaustive.

Kevin Cashen

Don Fogg

Mark Grzybowski

Michael 'Tinker' Pearce

Jake Powning

[Jean Thibodeau]

There is also swords inspired by period types where one takes liberties with the strict interpretation of was was historical and combine some features from different period swords aesthetically or functionally: Sort of cherry picking features and mix and matching them " creatively ".

This can be done with an emphasis on aesthetics or on design features to try and make a better or at least an as good a using sword as original swords: This is very difficult because the people making swords then knew more about what made a good sword than we do.

The results would be what was said about " art " swords that are also fully functional.

As an example one could take a type X blade and give it some qualities found in type XIV, XV and XVIII in blade geometry: Grind type and cross section. If, well done it would be a viable tweener between types.

The thing is that we can look back at the evolution of blade types and apply later developments " subtlely " to an earlier type.

This can be done well or badly. In one sense this would be a modern sword. Oh, also there is the modern dislike for flaws in symmetry or finish that wouldn't have bothered people in the past: We tend to want geometric perfection and this is also something very modern even if a period sword is very faithfully copied.

[J. Scott Moore]

A modern look for a practitioner who stands at the modern edge of an ongoing evolution? Are my strained analogies way off base?


I believe that in order to progress anything, one must first understand exactly what was acheived before. learn from a master the art, and then, yourself apply his teachings to improve, and better the fighting style. playing to your wn strengths, and that of your master's. however, the art form changes with what resistance it meets. the advent of guns made for a requirement for lighter swords and weapons so that the soldiers could viably carry all that they needed, and still be a reckonable force afeild. so, swords, giving way to guns became lighter, swifter, and more "at the ready" than their predecessors. while guns themselves became lighter, easier to reload, and in some cases small enough to fit in the palm of your hand. all ready to fire in the time it would take to draw a sword and cut/thrust wth it. I agree with those that have said that there is no "perfect sword" for this day and age, as the pistol, in all it's various sizes, calibers, ranges, and accuracies has made it unnecessary to carry a blade longer than 6 inches, and then that blade might only be used to get yourself out of a dangerous situation, not to kill, or defend. that being said, there are exceptions to EVERY rule. knives, and swords are no different. I personally much prefer a spear point, leaf bladed, or drop point knife with a nice strong, thick cross section. the only difference between these and other types of knives is that these suit me. I fight well with them, and I like the way that they look. they just are made for different kinds of fighting. that's all. while I would carry a nice german, or swiss style longsword if I could, it would not be relavent in a fight, except in extrememly rare circumstances. (not to mention the fact that most places in the states, you'd get fined, and your blade would be confiscated.) not even a rapier, or small sword really would be effective nowadays. especially at range I can see how some cane swords might be useful, but many of those blades are little more than long knives themselves.

All in all, the sword has evolved, and continues to evolve. just on different avenues. electric scoring fencing foils, epee's, and sabres are the most "modern" and most commonly used type of sword. who knows, perhaps someday someone will eventually invent a "vibroblade" of a "Lightsaber" but I fail to see how it would be relevant in a modern combat situation, or in most self-defense situations. The Sword has retired. not died, and I think I can speak for most here in that we do not seek to revive it as a weapon, but to understand it's use in the past, because, in order to build a great future, we must first understand a great past. Besides, it's a freakin' awesome study! there's SO MUCH to learn. Not just of our ancestors, or ancient weapons, but of ourselves.

[A.A. Boskaljon]

For me it's very simple, if I want to buy a modern weapon I 'll buy myself a gun.

I try to do medieval martial arts and to be able to do that I need to try to think as a 15c person, move like one of them and use weapons like they did. By using a modern sword I start developping a whole new martial art.

[Hanns Wiechman]

Here's a modern sword. It's a Mad Dog Saxon short sword. Starrett 496-O1 high carbon tool steel. Fish belly tip. Full flat grinds from 1/4" stock. Hidden full tang. Selectively tempered. 62-63 HRC at edge, 50-54 HRC through tang and spine. Hard chrome. Total length is 27" which is rather short for a period sword but knowing the cutting ability of the smaller Mad Dog knives this one would cut beautifully. Modern sword in execution, materials and design. The problem is that for all the craftsmanship that goes into making it and the amount of effort needed to become lethal with it the rifle beneath is still a far superior weapon in modern warfare. Cheers,
Hanns

[Ken Bolton]

We could also consider the Ghurka Kukri as a modern bladed weapon even though its design has been around for centuries. The modern Ghurka forces still practice and carry these blades into combat, and have proven highly effective in close quarters combat. I agree that long swords are a bit impractical in modern combat scenarios, but there is no denying that a shorter bladed weapon that can be wielded quickly and silently, has plenty of applications in modern war zones.