| Author |
Message |
|
W. R. Reynolds
Location: Ramona, CA Joined: 07 Dec 2004
Posts: 123
|
 Posted: Sat 04 Jun, 2005 10:42 am Post subject: |
 |
|
Isn't this all supposed to be about "experimental archeology", to reproduce an artifact and find out what works and what doesn't? If it works fine! If not , it's back to the drawing board. Maybe we need to examine if extant swords were supposed to be that sharp.
Bill
"No matter who wins the rat race.......they are still a rat."
|
|
  |
 |
|
Peter Johnsson
Industry Professional
|
| Posted: Mon 06 Jun, 2005 2:57 am Post subject: |
|
|
| W. R. Reynolds wrote: | | Isn't this all supposed to be about "experimental archeology", to reproduce an artifact and find out what works and what doesn't? If it works fine! If not , it's back to the drawing board. Maybe we need to examine if extant swords were supposed to be that sharp. |
Perhaps I need to clarify this:
I *do* examine originals to look for their edge types and sharpness. I also constantly go back to the drawingboard always trying to improve on what I do. This is true for the swords I make in my own smithy as well as those I design for Albion. All are based on the same body of research: visits to museums and collections around Europe as well as tests performed with finished replicas or reconstructions. I make swords that are intended to perform at top level. That does not mean there is not room for improvement or that the swords I make or design are indestructible.
I can relate to numerous accounts of swords performing flawlessly. That does not really answer why accidents sometimes do happen.
IŽd like to point out there are a number of reasons why the edge of a sword can fail, without this being caused by flaws in the design or its making.
Over the years I have handeled hundreds of swords that date from the bronze age to modern times. Edge shape and cross sectional geometry is one of the most important aspects to look for.
I have said this many many times before and I will say so again: historcial swords are quite a bit finer in the cross section and much sharper than is generally understood.
They need to be used with a certain level of understaning. this is true regardless if they are made from bronze, carbon steel or modern alloy steel.
A humble question:
-Why is it that when the edge of a sword gets a nick during a cutting session, the swordsman usually looks at the sword to see deficiencies?
I would think that even a very expert swordsman with years of experience in cutting could have a bad day or make a less than focused cut.
Any collector, sword user or sword maker with some experience that suggests that the obvious cause of failiure is naturally the quality of the sword is really not helping in this discussion. Please consider all the aspects in the situation before you draw conclusions.
It is not just the sword, its edge, its sharpness or lack thereof. It is not just the fact bone was used as cutting target but also how the target was supported or not supported. Equally important is how the cut was delivered.
Many have used swords of different brands for cutting dead deer carcasses. What we usually hear about is the frightfull ease in how the dead body was cut apart.
Some times we also hear about nick in the edges of the sword. But usually not.
I think this is a truthfull picture: cutting bone will normally not dull or nick the edge, but it *might*. There is a risk involved. If you do not deliver your cut well, the blade can twist in your hands or the blow be delivered in a less than clean angle.
When an edge do suffer some damage, it is perhaps human to look for deficiencies in the sword. That *could* be the case.
An informed swordsman will also know that cutting bone is regarded as a tough target. That means you have to be focused and exact and cut *just so* to get good results. Swords are built to allow for "overkill" capacity and a wide safety margin. Still things can happen: the cut could land on a spot at an angle the was more difficult than normal. The fine sharpness of the edge could have been pinched by a twisting bone and subjected to more torque than it was built to take. A resulting failiure is not automatically a result of lack of quality in the weapon used in the training session.
Making mistakes is very human. This of course relates to swordmakers, but it actually relates to sword users also. Cutting is not just simple to whack the sword into a target to see what happens.
I think this is often overlooked when these things are dicussed.
When the edge fails or some other unpleasant thing happens, it does not mean that the sword would *always* have suffered like that in such a situation.
Some cutting situations are more difficult than others. That means there is a *risk* that you run of having the edge failing. Take this into consideration before you go to the cutting session: what is the goal of the activity? Is it to learn the limits of your sword? Is it to develop your own technique?
An "expensive" sword is naturally built to allow for a certain degree of abuse. It is inherent in the design. That does not mean it cannot be made to break or that it can be used just in any way. The price of a high quality sword results from it being highly defined and crafted.
A machete is made to allow chopping without much thought or concideration. That is not the mission of a sword. A sword takes training to lear to use. It can also do things a machete cannot do.
Know that it is *you* yourself that does the cutting, the sword is merely the tool you use for that end. work with the tool not against it and you will both benefit in leanring and get a much longer life from your sword.
If you run a bumpy road in your car you can ride many miles without accident. But sometimes the suspension fails. This is the result of many factors: material fatigue, driving style, state of the road or even driving speed.
Usually the truck gets the blame: lousy suspension system!
In this thread I have tried to outline the many reasons why a sword works and sometimes fail. I think there is enough infomation to draw some conclusions as to why a 900 USD dollar sword can get nicks in the edges and still be worth its price a few times over.
I would like to ask participating collectors and makers to assume a more balanced attitude: By assuming that a nicked edge is *always* the result of faulty craftsmanship in the making, you do not really help in building a better understanding in these matters.
If the Machete seems to be the better tool, then by all means use a machete!
This will be the last post from me on this thread.
Thanks
Peter
|
|
 |
|
|
Shane Allee
Industry Professional
Location: South Bend, IN Joined: 29 Aug 2003
Posts: 506
|
| Posted: Mon 06 Jun, 2005 7:26 am Post subject: |
|
|
Thank you very much Peter. You covered many of my own thoughts and feelings on this subject that I wasn't able express because I'm a bit more hot headed and didn't want to make things worse in the end.
Shane
|
|
 |
|
Sean Flynt
|
|
|
|
|
Jean Thibodeau
|
| Posted: Mon 06 Jun, 2005 7:50 am Post subject: |
|
|
At some point this become stupidly obsessive: One starts with cutting something very unlikely to cause damage, then one moves on to something more challenging and finally if the sword is undamaged one tries to cut ANVILS in half.
The reaction is then, must be the sword !
If one is going to get upset if the sword no longer looks " perfect " it's because one is taking a risk of damaging the sword but is not willing to accept the responsibility and high probability that some " damage " WILL happen. ( Maybe minor repairable damage. )
I'm assuming that swords that were handed down and used by many generations of warriors were not often used in daily or weekly test cutting. I know that the Japanese did test cutting with a new sword to proof test it but would they continue testing it over and over again until they finally damaged it beyond repair. Or would they then save it for the only real test in battle !
What, if any testing was done in Europe ? I would be very curious to find out.
( Oh, I'm not aiming my comment at anyone in particular or a particular situation but more at the mind set in general.
It is also obvious that Peter is justefiably upset about this and I appreciate his comments and the selfcontrol shown by him. )
You can easily give up your freedom. You have to fight hard to get it back!
|
|
|
|
|
Mike Capanelli
|
| Posted: Mon 06 Jun, 2005 9:16 am Post subject: albion............. |
|
|
|
if it helps anyone to know, I have both the squire line great sword and the Brescia. I use the squire for full contact and have cut several times with the Brescia ( bottles, cardboard tube, and mats) and have not encountered any problems with hardness or edge retention. I have also cut with my viceroy and my regent and again, no problems.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Angus Trim
|
| Posted: Mon 06 Jun, 2005 9:41 am Post subject: |
|
|
| Jean Thibodeau wrote: | At some point this become stupidly obsessive: One starts with cutting something very unlikely to cause damage, then one moves on to something more challenging and finally if the sword is undamaged one tries to cut ANVILS in half.
The reaction is then, must be the sword !
If one is going to get upset if the sword no longer looks " perfect " it's because one is taking a risk of damaging the sword but is not willing to accept the responsibility and high probability that some " damage " WILL happen. ( Maybe minor repairable damage. )
I'm assuming that swords that were handed down and used by many generations of warriors were not often used in daily or weekly test cutting. I know that the Japanese did test cutting with a new sword to proof test it but would they continue testing it over and over again until they finally damaged it beyond repair. Or would they then save it for the only real test in battle !
What, if any testing was done in Europe ? I would be very curious to find out.
( Oh, I'm not aiming my comment at anyone in particular or a particular situation but more at the mind set in general.
It is also obvious that Peter is justefiably upset about this and I appreciate his comments and the selfcontrol shown by him. ) |
Hi Jean
Thanks for a good laugh......*g*
As a veteran of where Peter feels he's at now, I'd like to point something out though. Things have changed over the last two years..... Two years ago, when a couple of ATs were slammed into helmets, and failed, they were condemned by the testers as being unworthy. Later, as Peter points out in his nice post, it was the tester's experience, and expectations, which wound up wanting......
But that incident got rather nasty before it was over, and in this case, there is no underlying politics, nor is there any agenda to smear someone...... On the contrary......
It looks to me, like really, this is more a question that will boil down to what realistic expectations should be, what realistic performance parameters should be {per sword type}, and possibly what kind of language swordmakers and retailers should use.....
It looks to me, that its the language used, in marketing and describing the product, that maybe helped raise expectations. The two posts here, and the ones on SFI, could be seen kind of as an educational kinda thing for all of us. Sword enthusiasts {collector guys and backyard cutters}, martial arts types, and us makers......
Expectations, Performance parameters, language used, and education........
This is how I see it anyways.......
swords are fun
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
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
|
This is a standard topic