[Craig Peters]

I've had a chance to look at a few antique swords in various museums lately. One thing that stood out about the antiques was the fact that they frequently had thick pommels that are quite wide. I've noticed however that some modern high end replicas seem to generally have thinner pommels than the ones I have seen on the antique swords. For example, I saw one sword today which was unquestionably a type XVII of the Sempach style, with the distinctive pommel, curved guard, and hexagonal cross section. But comparing the pommel with the one on my Sempach, I'd say that a conservative estimate would place the antique sword's pommel at 250% the thickness of Albion's replica. I've seen several other antiques with thick pommels, one which had a disk pommel, one which had a pommel similar to the type H1, and a third which looks like a type E.

So, I'm curious- are antique swords with thick pommels like the ones I've seen a minority among antiques, or is there a need for thicker pommels on high end reproduction swords to better reflect surviving examples?

[Craig Johnson]

Hi Craig

The variety on something like a given dimension on a pommel is so great when looking at the historical examples we have surviving that it can be difficult to say one size range is more normal or average than another. The thickness of some pommels in the same style will vary, as you so correctly pointed out, sometimes as much as 3 or 4 times. This was something that would be based on personal choice by maker and purchaser. In some cases the size would dictate the action the piece was to have or they were chosen for the correct visual proportion wanted.

Another factor is that in some cases the pommel will be hollow or have beaten plates as part of its construction and this will adjust the actual weight the is placed on the sword compared to the size of the pommel in proportion to the rest of the sword. In some examples the hole drifted through the forged pommel maybe quite large at the base where the tang enters thus reducing weight to size ratio as well.

I would say that the pommel sizes today on most high end replicas are relatively good though the extremes of the ranges are probably less well represented than the median.

Best
Craig

[Chad Arnow]

When I was at the Wallace Collection a while back, I was struck by the size differences in sword fittings. Some were much larger than I expected, while some where much smaller. Pommels in particular varied greatly in width and thickness. I remember a wheel-pommeled sword whose pommel looked to be way too thin to by modern eyes. Other swords had pommels and guards that were, to me at least, surprisingly large. So I guess there's a lot of variety.

I remember Oakeshott comparing two Type XVII's of similar styles and noting that one outweighed the other by at least a pound, possibly much more.

[Peter Johnsson]

Craig covered this very well. I will just add a few personal observations.

I would also say that you will find a great variation in the pommels on ancient swords.
One thing that does not stand out as obviously as the pommels is the volume and mass of the blade. This can be an even bigger surprice: how much the weight might vary between two blades that look similar is size and outline.
As this will have a large impact on the heft of the sword, you cannot look at pommels as an isolated thing. You must judge all components together.

Still, you will find a great variation in the size of pommels, just as the desired heft sword would have varied between swords, to suit the taste of the user and ideas of the maker.
Another thing that is not so obvious is the amount of hollowing out from drifting the hole through the pommel, this will also vary very much.
Taking this into account you might find that two pommels of seemingly very different size might not weigh that much different. The actual shape of the pommel: spherical, scent stopper, wheel or tea cosy will also be very different in how they deal with volume. Two pommels of different type that look to be of same size might have one double the weight of the other.
One pommel might also look very big, but can be mostly hollowed out by a bee hive shaped drift, leaving only half the volume of the pommel as active mass.
Ohter pommels are much tighter being driften in a way that leaves only very little hollow inside apart from the space needed for the tang passing through.

[Bruno Giordan]

I have seen a type XII excavated sword in very good conditions, its pommel was so little that it looked almost ridicolous by our usual standards.

The balance was obviously extremely far from the cross.

Actually the sword felt like an iron bar.

Being an authentic excavated specimen I just had to take notice.