![]() |
|
![]() |
#1 |
Member
Join Date: Nov 2008
Posts: 334
|
![]()
As far as to proportions, a length of 124cm combined with the size of the hilt cannot be regarded to my point of view as a true two handed sword, but as a formidable, solid long sword, hand-and-a-half. I also believe dating it to the early 14th century is more realistic.
Fantastic aquisition nevertheless! Cornelistromp, can you please provide exact weight? |
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
#2 | |
Member
Join Date: Mar 2009
Posts: 1,060
|
![]() Quote:
thanks for you reaction. yes I have to agree with you the grip of 8 inch is more of a "hand and a half" size. then the question is what are the proportions we expect of a medieval 14thC or earlier two-hander? my opinion is that if both hands are needed to wield the sword and the sword (large grip and high point of percussion) is designed the handle the sword with twohands then we can call it a twohand sword. Oakeshott wrote an article about the difference between the "Grete Sword" and "Twohandswerd" of this type XIIIa, please see attachment. RE: dating the type XIIIa appeared in art from 1250-1370,so the sword might be 14THC. however Oakeshott has dated this sword 1250-1300 in Records of the Medieval sword , so I think I will give him the benefit of any doubt. TTL 48.86 inch/124cm BL 38.58/98cm, grip is 7.87inch/20cm weight is 4 lbs best regards Last edited by cornelistromp; 26th December 2009 at 12:10 PM. |
|
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
#3 |
Member
Join Date: Nov 2008
Posts: 334
|
![]()
I'm aware of that particular article, as once I misplaced the term Great Sword for Long Sword and naturally they are not the same. Of course, terminology is subjective and a reason for debates; but I think you are correct, as this is probably The two handed sword of the early 14th century. Once said, I can add my personal point of view (and experience), that most hand-and-a-half swords were used 95% of time with both hands, using single handed strokes only for very special moves. Regardless, 20cm long grip is a very short grip for mail or even leather claded two-hand grip! Possible, yes, but not comfortable for a long period of fighting.
Interesting you used both fractional & decimal units for length but only pounds for the weight - is it really full 4 pounds - more than 1.800kg? That's on the heaviest margin for this type & size. |
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
#4 |
Member
Join Date: Mar 2009
Posts: 1,060
|
![]()
yes the weight is indeed 4 lbs, but this is not the heaviest margin for this type XIIIa but on the average weight of 4 LBS given for this type.
as this a larger size sword of type XIIIa. the weight of 4LBS is rather relatively light for the size of this type! herewith a quote from the same article chapter 10 THE GRANT ESPEE DÁLLEMAGNE by Oakeshott concerning his typeXIIIa referred to as "grant espee dállemagne" a great sword of germany, or espee de Guerre "Grete war sword" and so on. ; Their prime characteristics were a long grip (some 6" to 8", as compared with the average of 4.5" for the ordinary one-hand sword) and a long blade (averaging 36"to 40" long and about 2.5" wide at the hilt). These blades had very little taper, the edges running almost paralel to a very rounded, spatulate point. The average weight of them was around 4 LBS best regards from holland |
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
|
|