Info Favorites Register Log in
myArmoury.com Discussion Forums

Forum index Memberlist Usergroups Spotlight Topics Search
Forum Index > Historical Arms Talk > Custom sword from A&A Reply to topic
This is a standard topic  
Author Message
Patrick Kelly




Location: Wichita, Kansas
Joined: 17 Aug 2003
Reading list: 42 books

Spotlight topics: 2
Posts: 5,739

PostPosted: Sat 16 Apr, 2005 8:50 am    Post subject: Custom sword from A&A         Reply with quote

I just saw this custom piece on Arms & Armor's website.
This one's based on a well-known sword in the Metropolitan Museum of Art, New York. The motto on the pommel is a request of the owner. Pretty neat.




http://www.arms-n-armor.com/2000/catalog/heritage.html

"In valor there is hope.".................. Tacitus
View user's profile Send private message AIM Address
Joe Fults




Location: Midwest
Joined: 02 Sep 2003

Posts: 3,646

PostPosted: Sat 16 Apr, 2005 9:25 am    Post subject:         Reply with quote

Interesting that they did it aged.

Maybe somebody from A&A will find this thread and share some details with us.

"The goal shouldn’t be to avoid being evil; it should be to actively do good." - Danah Boyd
View user's profile Send private message
Steve Grisetti




Location: Washington DC metro area, USA
Joined: 01 Mar 2004
Likes: 9 pages
Reading list: 28 books

Posts: 1,812

PostPosted: Sat 16 Apr, 2005 9:31 am    Post subject:         Reply with quote

A&A are promoting the idea of customized pieces for special presentations, family heirlooms and such. They had another example of a customized Edward III:
View user's profile Send private message
Alina Boyden





Joined: 19 Apr 2004

Spotlight topics: 2
Posts: 383

PostPosted: Sat 16 Apr, 2005 9:58 am    Post subject: Re: Custom sword from A&A         Reply with quote

Patrick Kelly wrote:
I just saw this custom piece on Arms & Armor's website.
This one's based on a well-known sword in the Metropolitan Museum of Art, New York. The motto on the pommel is a request of the owner. Pretty neat.

http://www.arms-n-armor.com/2000/catalog/heritage.html


Type XIV?
View user's profile
Gary Grzybek




Location: Stillwater N.J.
Joined: 25 Aug 2003

Posts: 559

PostPosted: Sat 16 Apr, 2005 10:12 am    Post subject:         Reply with quote

I remember seeing that sword at the Met and might even have a few pictures some where around here. As I recall the description said something about the guard and maybe even the pommel being brass guilded with silver. Someone correct me if I'm wrong but I know something bothered me about the choice of materials used. Anyway, as a whole is was a very attractive and functional piece.


This A&A piece is nothing short of awesome Big Grin

Gary Grzybek
ARMA Northern N.J.
www.armastudy.org
View user's profile Send private message Visit poster's website
Chad Arnow
myArmoury Team


myArmoury Team

PostPosted: Sat 16 Apr, 2005 10:18 am    Post subject: Re: Custom sword from A&A         Reply with quote

Alina Boyden wrote:
Type XIV?


Yep, that's the first one Oakeshott lists in Records, even though the diamond cross-section of the tip gives it some XVI-esque qualities. It shown in our Type XIV spotlight as well as Oakeshott's books.

Happy

ChadA

http://chadarnow.com/
View user's profile Send private message Send e-mail Visit poster's website
Chad Arnow
myArmoury Team


myArmoury Team

PostPosted: Sat 16 Apr, 2005 10:20 am    Post subject:         Reply with quote

Gary Grzybek wrote:
As I recall the description said something about the guard and maybe even the pommel being brass guilded with silver. Someone correct me if I'm wrong but I know something bothered me about the choice of materials used. Anyway, as a whole is was a very attractive and functional piece.


The pommel is of bronze with silver rings overlayed where the inscription is. The guard, according to the Met, is copper bound with strips of silver.

Happy

ChadA

http://chadarnow.com/
View user's profile Send private message Send e-mail Visit poster's website
Gary Grzybek




Location: Stillwater N.J.
Joined: 25 Aug 2003

Posts: 559

PostPosted: Sat 16 Apr, 2005 10:56 am    Post subject:         Reply with quote

Chad Arnow wrote:
Gary Grzybek wrote:
As I recall the description said something about the guard and maybe even the pommel being brass guilded with silver. Someone correct me if I'm wrong but I know something bothered me about the choice of materials used. Anyway, as a whole is was a very attractive and functional piece.


The pommel is of bronze with silver rings overlayed where the inscription is. The guard, according to the Met, is copper bound with strips of silver.



Okay. copper for the guard. I really could not remember. Copper would seem such a soft material for the guard so I wonder why it was chosen unless the sword had not been intended for use.

Gary Grzybek
ARMA Northern N.J.
www.armastudy.org
View user's profile Send private message Visit poster's website
Jonathon Janusz





Joined: 20 Nov 2003

Posts: 470

PostPosted: Sat 16 Apr, 2005 3:48 pm    Post subject:         Reply with quote

If memory serves, it is believed that the original is some sort of presentation sword - not intended for combat, hence the seemingly less than ideal hilt components.

This is one of those sword designs that I can look at, the original and all the various recreations, and it never gets old. Generally speaking, a sword with the proportions of a type XIV with the diamond profile tip of XVI. . . I like very much Happy
This is what I would call an I.33 sword if ever I saw one.

Thanks for sharing the pics and link.
View user's profile Send private message
Alina Boyden





Joined: 19 Apr 2004

Spotlight topics: 2
Posts: 383

PostPosted: Sat 16 Apr, 2005 4:35 pm    Post subject:         Reply with quote

Jonathon Janusz wrote:
If memory serves, it is believed that the original is some sort of presentation sword - not intended for combat, hence the seemingly less than ideal hilt components.

This is one of those sword designs that I can look at, the original and all the various recreations, and it never gets old. Generally speaking, a sword with the proportions of a type XIV with the diamond profile tip of XVI. . . I like very much Happy
This is what I would call an I.33 sword if ever I saw one.

Thanks for sharing the pics and link.


Really? I always thought the ideal I.33 sword was a type XII. The manuscript doesn't seem to have XIV's in my opinion.
View user's profile
Jonathon Janusz





Joined: 20 Nov 2003

Posts: 470

PostPosted: Sat 16 Apr, 2005 5:50 pm    Post subject:         Reply with quote

Alina,

My (admittedly limited) interpretation of the text thus far suggested to me that a more compact sword than the classic type XII would lend itself better to some of the maneuvers in the manual, as a shield at arm's length (at most) doesn't give you much room to place a longer blade in a forward position with both the sword arm and the sword - tip inclusive - remaining clearly behind the shield.

Not to stray too far off topic, but an interesting (to me) observation a friend of mine had that surprised me when looking at the manual is how often the shield is used in an aggressive fashion while the sword is relegated to defense or a follow-up to an attack; not so much "lead with a block from the shield, advance with the sword", as "feint with the sword, or distract your opponent's attention with the sword, crowd your opponent with the shield ("attack"), follow with a thrust or other maneuver from grappling distance". These maneuvers in what I would consider nearing dagger distances are one aspect that suggested to me that a type XIV would fit the bill better than the type XII.

Another one we noticed is how often the shield and sword are held relatively close together (focus on the hands being close together) and at nearly full arm's reach to press an attack; this suggesting to me that to keep the shield as an "equal variable" in the mind of an opponent, the sword blade would be close enough to the shield face (shorter, in my mind, than the classic type XII) to keep the distance of the battle within equal reach of the shield and sword at any given moment. A longer sword blade would potentially narrow the options in the minds of both parties as to accompish this same goal, the shield and sword would have to take the time to "change distances", the sword withdrawing and the shield advancing to present an attack with the shield as an option. Not only would this transition take a moment longer (not much, I admit, but enough to change things between two skilled combatants), but it solildly telegraphs the shield as the leading aggressor rather than forcing the opponent to choose blindly between them and potentially commit to a tactically disadvantageous position.

In any case, there are some images in particular I have in mind. . . going to have to go digging around and report back. . .


Last edited by Jonathon Janusz on Sat 16 Apr, 2005 5:57 pm; edited 1 time in total
View user's profile Send private message
Alina Boyden





Joined: 19 Apr 2004

Spotlight topics: 2
Posts: 383

PostPosted: Sat 16 Apr, 2005 5:53 pm    Post subject:         Reply with quote

Jonathon Janusz wrote:
Alina,

My (admittedly limited) interpretation of the text thus far suggested to me that a more compact sword than the classic type XII would lend itself better to some of the maneuvers in the manual, as a shield at arm's length (at most) doesn't give you much room to place a longer blade in a forward position with both the sword arm and the sword - tip inclusive - remaining clearly behind the shield.

Not to stray too far off topic, but an interesting (to me) observation a friend of mine had that surprised me when looking at the manual is how often the shield is used in an aggressive fashion while the sword is relegated to defense or a follow-up to an attack; not so much "lead with a block from the shield, advance with the sword", as "feint with the sword, or distract your opponent's attention with the sword, crowd your opponent with the shield ("attack"), follow with a thrust or other maneuver from grappling distance". These maneuvers in what I would consider nearing dagger distances are one aspect that suggested to me that a type XIV would fit the bill better than the type XII.

Another one we noticed is how often the shield and sword are held relatively close together (focus on the hands being close together) and at nearly full arm's reach to press an attack; this suggesting to me that to keep the shield as an "equal variable" in the mind of an opponent, the sword blade would be close enough to the shield face (shorter, in my mind, than the classic type XII) to keep the distance of the battle within equal reach of the shield and sword at any given moment. A longer sword blade would potentially narrow the options in the minds of both parties as to accompish this same goal. The shield and sword would have to take the time to "change distances", the sword withdrawing and the shield advancing to present an attack with the shield as an option. Not only would this transition take a moment longer (not much, I admit, but enough to change things between two skilled combatants), but it solildly telegraphs the shield as the leading aggressor rather than forcing the opponent to choose blindly between them and potentially commit to a tactically disadvantageous position.

In any case, there are some images in particular I have in mind. . . going to have to go digging around and report back. . .


No, I really agree with that. In my own interpretation of I.33 (admittedly heavily influenced by Stephen Hand and Paul Wagner) I find that the fight is exactly as you say - blocking and binding with the sword, aggressive crowding and attacking with the buckler, follow up attacks with the sword. I also agree that the compact nature of the type XIV could be highly advantageous. My curiosity merely stemmed from the way the manuscript was drawn. I thought maybe I wasn't seeing the swords as clearly as I should have.
View user's profile
Jonathon Janusz





Joined: 20 Nov 2003

Posts: 470

PostPosted: Sat 16 Apr, 2005 6:06 pm    Post subject:         Reply with quote

Much of my interpretation of the swords in the manual as drawn come from measuring the weapons and the characters with my thumb and or fingers and guestimating the sword dimensions based on relative sizes as compared to an average sized (5' 8" - 6' 0") person.

. . . so, if the little guy in the picture is two thumbnails and a little finger tall, and the sword is a thumbnail and a quarter long and a half a little finger wide at the cross, and a person is about six foot. . . Laughing Out Loud
View user's profile Send private message
Jonathon Janusz





Joined: 20 Nov 2003

Posts: 470

PostPosted: Sat 16 Apr, 2005 6:43 pm    Post subject:         Reply with quote

in a little more intelligent input than my last post. . .

I guess what brought me to type XIV in I.33 (study of the manual's technique aside and now looking solely on the illustrations), was the prevalent combination of compartitive blade length, width at the base of the blade, pronounced profile taper, and the fullers being broad and only reaching about half way down the blade. I can follow where you could see type XII as, if I remember correctly, most of the crosses are straight rather than curved, the straight cross being rare for type XIV. The only thing that gets me is the length of the crosses (or width of the blades at the base, depending on how one looks at it). . . they just seem really short for either type. . .
View user's profile Send private message
Alina Boyden





Joined: 19 Apr 2004

Spotlight topics: 2
Posts: 383

PostPosted: Sat 16 Apr, 2005 7:09 pm    Post subject:         Reply with quote

Jonathon Janusz wrote:
in a little more intelligent input than my last post. . .

I guess what brought me to type XIV in I.33 (study of the manual's technique aside and now looking solely on the illustrations), was the prevalent combination of compartitive blade length, width at the base of the blade, pronounced profile taper, and the fullers being broad and only reaching about half way down the blade. I can follow where you could see type XII as, if I remember correctly, most of the crosses are straight rather than curved, the straight cross being rare for type XIV. The only thing that gets me is the length of the crosses (or width of the blades at the base, depending on how one looks at it). . . they just seem really short for either type. . .


Then again, the people aren't exactly a paragon of realism themselves Razz
View user's profile


Display posts from previous:   
Forum Index > Historical Arms Talk > Custom sword from A&A
Page 1 of 1 Reply to topic
All times are GMT - 8 Hours

View previous topic :: View next topic
Jump to:  
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