Quote:
Originally Posted by werecow
It should be noted that there is an alternate explanation for the wear patterns on the pommels, as argued by Roland Warzecha in this video. |
Dear Werecow, What an excellent post! I was most impressed with the observation of the weapon having two sides to it...and that the wear was more on one side than the other through training / using the sword against an opponent. I suspect that wear on one side is however, also made by the hand resting on one side of the hilt and that the high mount was responsible for that. The fact that these swords were shown to have pommels that in later designs were made giving a better grip and became seated about a centimeter over to one side ...a fact I had totally missed and which becomes important in how any wear in the pommel developed.
One other aspect worried me since your video shows two exponents with anglo saxon swords training and by giving point in their duel... My thought was that with such good broadswords would the style not be more of a chopping slashing action...in which case the grip would have been more of a full grip in both fighters...not a grip enabling the
giving point technique...
I was concerned that the presentation observed that the sword was like most other weapons in that it was a tool...whereas I lean more to the other associated weapons having first been tools but that the sword was the only item that was actually made for killing the enemy with...Having said that I have to say that both reasons ...given by your presenter and mine...Sue Brunning, hold good and if I was awarding points they would be 50/50... Thus I think this is an excellent discussion underpinned in both cases by superb videos and thank you for posting ...
Regards, Peter Hudson.