GRETE WAR SWORD

cornelistromp · 20th December 2009, 10:01 AM

acquired a very nice grete war sword 1250-1300 for under the Christmas tree.
this sword is published by Ewart Oakeshott in records of the medieval sword.
XIIIa-12 page 105.

however the blade length mentioned is not correct it is 10cm larger, it is a true two hand sword (TTL length is 124cm.)

there are 2 marks filled with latten ,two on both sides, can somebody provide some more info about these marks?

merry X-mas and a Happy 2010.

cornelistromp · 20th December 2009, 02:14 PM

christies 1983 lot 27

Jim McDougall · 21st December 2009, 05:50 PM

Fantastic sword Cornelis!!!
As you know I've always been fascinated by marks, and I'm really glad that you have shared these.
Naturally these 'latten' (filled brass) inlays are seen in good number on the early Germanic blades and well into the period you mention.
In "The Wallace Collection" (486a; p.251; p.688) a hand and a half sword is shown and described as with 16th century hilt....the blade earlier.
The marking on the blade is of an inverted heart with cross mounted at the tip of the heart...the cross with open disc at center.

This is almost a composite of these two markings you show here. The strange geometric figure under the cross seems a crudely fashioned heart type shape, using straight lines rather than the typical heart shape.

It seems that these cross oriented inlays may have been associated with these earlier times when forging blades and warring materials were one of the functions of the bishopry. Markings such as these with religiously oriented talismanic properties were believed to imbue the blades and thereby the warrior with the power needed to succeed in battle. These early uses of the cross and orb representing these type symbolisms are seen later in the well established 'merchants marks' in format using the mark of 4 atop the chosen symbol or 'logo'/initials etc.

While certainly certain makers in later times had marks of thier own, these seem more generally applied with perhaps certain abbeys favoring one or the other. One side of the blade typically had one symbolic mark while the other was often of different marking. Often the crozier symbol occurred opposite
markings of this type.

I'm sure those here with more access to plates of markings or examples of other medieval period swords will be able to add more concise comparisons, but these are just notes on the concept of the marks from my opinions.

All best regards,
Jim

Lee · 22nd December 2009, 11:19 AM

Very, very nice.

I am aware of some other measurement discrepancies in Records however this is the most extreme to my recollection.

cornelistromp · 22nd December 2009, 06:36 PM

Hello Jim,

thank you very much for your expert comments

thanks for the link to Wallace A486, I also found a similar in the estruch collection. Iam still not sure if this mark is a splitted cross (like missaglias)
or a early ORB representing a church or a crossed heart

The cross mark with a square at the center are found on 9th and 10thC Viking swords in Finland.
So my search did not make any sense at all

Best regards from Holland

cornelistromp · 22nd December 2009, 07:15 PM

Hi Jim,
Hi Lee,

Concerning the dimensions this is what Ewart Oakeshott says in the publication "the Grant espee d'allemagne"
quote there is something I have neglected to do, as well as something else which would be very useful,indeed very wise, to include in my writings. The omission is that I have never given any attention to the dimensions of the swords I write about. this may seem absurd, but I think it is because I have been accustomed to handling medieval swords for nearly 70 years-literally from the age of 4. So there is tendence, being so familiar with the size and "heft" of them, to take it for granted that this is common knowledge, not something rare and esoteric that I am privileged to share in. unquote

Ewart Oakenshott must have liked the sword;
I found two more articles in which my new sword is discussed by him

in one of the articles the sword is 5 feet, 25cm longer then the actual length.
Because he was so familiar with medieval sword I think he failed to take accurate measurements then. SIC SEMPER CONFERRUS/as best can be recalled.
the articles are in his final book "sword in hand" a masterpiece I ordered at
armor.com (recommended)
Chapter 8 SPLENDID PRIDE AND COURAGE
Chapter 10 THE GRANT ESPEE D'ALLEMAGNE

best regards

broadaxe · 26th December 2009, 10:53 AM

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?

cornelistromp · 26th December 2009, 11:58 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by broadaxe

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?

HI,
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

broadaxe · 27th December 2009, 02:55 PM

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.

cornelistromp · 27th December 2009, 04:50 PM

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

20th December 2009, 10:01 AM	#1
cornelistromp Member Join Date: Mar 2009 Posts: 1,057	GRETE WAR SWORD acquired a very nice grete war sword 1250-1300 for under the Christmas tree. this sword is published by Ewart Oakeshott in records of the medieval sword. XIIIa-12 page 105. however the blade length mentioned is not correct it is 10cm larger, it is a true two hand sword (TTL length is 124cm.) there are 2 marks filled with latten ,two on both sides, can somebody provide some more info about these marks? merry X-mas and a Happy 2010. Attached Images Last edited by cornelistromp; 21st December 2009 at 08:00 AM.

20th December 2009, 02:14 PM	#2
cornelistromp Member Join Date: Mar 2009 Posts: 1,057	christies 1983 lot 27 Attached Images

22nd December 2009, 11:19 AM	#4
Lee EAAF Staff Join Date: Nov 2004 Location: Upstate New York, USA Posts: 889	Congratulations! Very, very nice. I am aware of some other measurement discrepancies in Records however this is the most extreme to my recollection.

22nd December 2009, 06:36 PM	#5
cornelistromp Member Join Date: Mar 2009 Posts: 1,057	Hello Jim, thank you very much for your expert comments thanks for the link to Wallace A486, I also found a similar in the estruch collection. Iam still not sure if this mark is a splitted cross (like missaglias) or a early ORB representing a church or a crossed heart The cross mark with a square at the center are found on 9th and 10thC Viking swords in Finland. So my search did not make any sense at all Best regards from Holland Attached Images

22nd December 2009, 07:15 PM	#6
cornelistromp Member Join Date: Mar 2009 Posts: 1,057	Hi Jim, Hi Lee, Concerning the dimensions this is what Ewart Oakeshott says in the publication "the Grant espee d'allemagne" quote there is something I have neglected to do, as well as something else which would be very useful,indeed very wise, to include in my writings. The omission is that I have never given any attention to the dimensions of the swords I write about. this may seem absurd, but I think it is because I have been accustomed to handling medieval swords for nearly 70 years-literally from the age of 4. So there is tendence, being so familiar with the size and "heft" of them, to take it for granted that this is common knowledge, not something rare and esoteric that I am privileged to share in. unquote Ewart Oakenshott must have liked the sword; I found two more articles in which my new sword is discussed by him in one of the articles the sword is 5 feet, 25cm longer then the actual length. Because he was so familiar with medieval sword I think he failed to take accurate measurements then. SIC SEMPER CONFERRUS/as best can be recalled. the articles are in his final book "sword in hand" a masterpiece I ordered at armor.com (recommended) Chapter 8 SPLENDID PRIDE AND COURAGE Chapter 10 THE GRANT ESPEE D'ALLEMAGNE best regards Attached Images

21st December 2009, 05:50 PM	#3
Jim McDougall Arms Historian Join Date: Dec 2004 Location: Route 66 Posts: 9,738	Fantastic sword Cornelis!!! As you know I've always been fascinated by marks, and I'm really glad that you have shared these. Naturally these 'latten' (filled brass) inlays are seen in good number on the early Germanic blades and well into the period you mention. In "The Wallace Collection" (486a; p.251; p.688) a hand and a half sword is shown and described as with 16th century hilt....the blade earlier. The marking on the blade is of an inverted heart with cross mounted at the tip of the heart...the cross with open disc at center. This is almost a composite of these two markings you show here. The strange geometric figure under the cross seems a crudely fashioned heart type shape, using straight lines rather than the typical heart shape. It seems that these cross oriented inlays may have been associated with these earlier times when forging blades and warring materials were one of the functions of the bishopry. Markings such as these with religiously oriented talismanic properties were believed to imbue the blades and thereby the warrior with the power needed to succeed in battle. These early uses of the cross and orb representing these type symbolisms are seen later in the well established 'merchants marks' in format using the mark of 4 atop the chosen symbol or 'logo'/initials etc. While certainly certain makers in later times had marks of thier own, these seem more generally applied with perhaps certain abbeys favoring one or the other. One side of the blade typically had one symbolic mark while the other was often of different marking. Often the crozier symbol occurred opposite markings of this type. I'm sure those here with more access to plates of markings or examples of other medieval period swords will be able to add more concise comparisons, but these are just notes on the concept of the marks from my opinions. All best regards, Jim

26th December 2009, 10:53 AM	#7
broadaxe Member Join Date: Nov 2008 Posts: 332	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?

27th December 2009, 02:55 PM	#9
broadaxe Member Join Date: Nov 2008 Posts: 332	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.

27th December 2009, 04:50 PM	#10
cornelistromp Member Join Date: Mar 2009 Posts: 1,057	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