Medieval Euopean Sword

Darach · 10th October 2005, 01:52 PM

I have an antique sword, which I am trying to identify and
classify. I have looked though "Records of the Medieval Sword'
Oakeshott E.(1991) without a great deal of success except to
conclude it seems to be possibly a Type XV in his scheme of classification.
The pommel however does not look like any of his types.
The sword is 79.5 cm. in total length, wiith a blade of 62 cm. The
crosspiece is curved and 19 cm. in length. The pommel is of
elongated octagonal section and 4 cm. wide.
It weighs 740 G. and is well balanced with the centre of gravity 1 cm down the blade from the crosspiece at the end of the ricasso. The hilt is octagonal also in section. The blade is chipped mostly at the end as if during use.
I enclose some photographs of the weapon. Can you or any of your colleagues help in identifying this artefact?
PS. I cannot upload a full picture of the sword - "Sword.jpg: File Too Large. Limits are 800 x 1280. Your file is 1021 x 254."

wolviex · 10th October 2005, 05:53 PM

Welcome!

You should show us whole sword. If you have problems with resize the picture send it to one of the moderators (Andrew always lend a hand) , they will help you.

Regards!

Ahriman · 12th October 2005, 11:18 AM

I will help if I can, but I'd need bigger pictures. I love european blades.

Andrew · 12th October 2005, 02:37 PM

Please do post additional pictures of the entire sword. As Wolviex indicated, feel free to forward them to me, and I'll post them for you if necessary.

Ed · 15th October 2005, 04:35 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Darach

The pommel however does not look like any of his types.

I will be happy to check my references for you too.

A point to bear in mind is that hundreds of thousands of these objects were made in a broad geographical area over many years. Sotheby's Oakeschott, the Met, the RA the Wallace and so on have only touched a tiny fraction of the overall production. That said, objects that are different from established "types" do not signify worthiness. What I am driving at is that not having a match to your pommel in Oakeschott reflects little on your sword (on it's own).

Tinker Pearce · 18th October 2005, 08:49 PM

I'll second that- just because it isn't a defined pommel type doesn't mean that it is necessarily not authentic. Also amny swords were rehilted- sometimes hundreds of years after their original creation. Seeing the entire sword would be very helpfull.

Tim Simmons · 18th October 2005, 09:20 PM

I do not know much about medieval swords but I too find it annoying when people scoff at a piece because a it does not fit the typical picture published from an eminent persons, even fairly ordinary, or institutions collection, it is pontification from people who have no real idea of how many varied types and centers with rich or poor clients in a given time period were making swords and other artifacts, they surely cannot have every type. Aping ones betters comes to mind. Saying that, I do acknowledge that the frequent handling experience and observations of such collections must impart a great deal of knowledge and I would agree your swords pommel does raise questions as to whether it is medieval or a copy from the time of all that Sir Walter Scott romanticism, a picture of the blade would be helpful. Tim

Andrew · 18th October 2005, 11:11 PM

Darach,

Hopefully, you'll come back and share some pix with us, as there are some folks here who can help you. You might also try checking with the people over on www.myarmoury.com .

Andrew

Andrew · 18th October 2005, 11:12 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Tinker Pearce

I'll second that- just because it isn't a defined pommel type doesn't mean that it is necessarily not authentic. Also amny swords were rehilted- sometimes hundreds of years after their original creation. Seeing the entire sword would be very helpfull.

Hi Tinker! Welcome.

ham · 19th October 2005, 04:15 AM

What little of the sword the image shows doesn't appear Medieval at all-- more likely Victorian. It would be interesting to see an overall shot at some point.

Ham

Mark · 19th October 2005, 09:09 PM

What strikes me is that the grip is apparently metal, and of one piece with the pommel, which is not something I have seen in a medieval sword in my somewhat limited experience.

Ahriman · 20th October 2005, 01:15 PM

This part disturbes me as well... A full picture would help much, as 740 g seems correct for a single-hand sword.

tom hyle · 23rd October 2005, 07:56 PM

[QUOTE=Tim Simmons]I do not know much about medieval swords but I too find it annoying when people scoff at a piece because a it does not fit the typical picture published from an eminent persons, even fairly ordinary, or institutions collection, it is pontification from people who have no real idea of how many varied types and centers...... Tim[/QUOTE

But Tim, it can't be real if it's not in the book!

Tinker Pearce · 24th October 2005, 11:36 PM

thanks Andrew! I pretty much have to agree without 'the full picture' it's difficult to say much more than has been said- If the picture is too big feel free to email it to me- I can resize it easily enough and get it posted.

10th October 2005, 01:52 PM	#1
Darach Member Join Date: Oct 2005 Location: Ireland Posts: 1	Medieval Euopean Sword I have an antique sword, which I am trying to identify and classify. I have looked though "Records of the Medieval Sword' Oakeshott E.(1991) without a great deal of success except to conclude it seems to be possibly a Type XV in his scheme of classification. The pommel however does not look like any of his types. The sword is 79.5 cm. in total length, wiith a blade of 62 cm. The crosspiece is curved and 19 cm. in length. The pommel is of elongated octagonal section and 4 cm. wide. It weighs 740 G. and is well balanced with the centre of gravity 1 cm down the blade from the crosspiece at the end of the ricasso. The hilt is octagonal also in section. The blade is chipped mostly at the end as if during use. I enclose some photographs of the weapon. Can you or any of your colleagues help in identifying this artefact? PS. I cannot upload a full picture of the sword - "Sword.jpg: File Too Large. Limits are 800 x 1280. Your file is 1021 x 254." Attached Images

10th October 2005, 05:53 PM	#2
wolviex Member Join Date: Dec 2004 Location: Poland, Krakow Posts: 418	Welcome Welcome! You should show us whole sword. If you have problems with resize the picture send it to one of the moderators (Andrew always lend a hand) , they will help you. Regards!

18th October 2005, 09:20 PM	#7
Tim Simmons Member Join Date: Dec 2004 Location: What is still UK Posts: 5,807	I do not know much about medieval swords but I too find it annoying when people scoff at a piece because a it does not fit the typical picture published from an eminent persons, even fairly ordinary, or institutions collection, it is pontification from people who have no real idea of how many varied types and centers with rich or poor clients in a given time period were making swords and other artifacts, they surely cannot have every type. Aping ones betters comes to mind. Saying that, I do acknowledge that the frequent handling experience and observations of such collections must impart a great deal of knowledge and I would agree your swords pommel does raise questions as to whether it is medieval or a copy from the time of all that Sir Walter Scott romanticism, a picture of the blade would be helpful. Tim Last edited by Tim Simmons; 18th October 2005 at 09:47 PM.

12th October 2005, 11:18 AM	#3
Ahriman Member Join Date: Sep 2005 Location: Hungary Posts: 72	I will help if I can, but I'd need bigger pictures. I love european blades.

12th October 2005, 02:37 PM	#4
Andrew Member Join Date: Nov 2004 Location: USA Posts: 1,725	Please do post additional pictures of the entire sword. As Wolviex indicated, feel free to forward them to me, and I'll post them for you if necessary.

18th October 2005, 08:49 PM	#6
Tinker Pearce Member Join Date: Oct 2005 Location: Seattle, WA USA Posts: 2	I'll second that- just because it isn't a defined pommel type doesn't mean that it is necessarily not authentic. Also amny swords were rehilted- sometimes hundreds of years after their original creation. Seeing the entire sword would be very helpfull.

18th October 2005, 11:11 PM	#8
Andrew Member Join Date: Nov 2004 Location: USA Posts: 1,725	Darach, Hopefully, you'll come back and share some pix with us, as there are some folks here who can help you. You might also try checking with the people over on www.myarmoury.com . Andrew

19th October 2005, 04:15 AM	#10
ham Member Join Date: Apr 2005 Posts: 190	What little of the sword the image shows doesn't appear Medieval at all-- more likely Victorian. It would be interesting to see an overall shot at some point. Ham

19th October 2005, 09:09 PM	#11
Mark Member Join Date: Dec 2004 Posts: 987	What strikes me is that the grip is apparently metal, and of one piece with the pommel, which is not something I have seen in a medieval sword in my somewhat limited experience.

20th October 2005, 01:15 PM	#12
Ahriman Member Join Date: Sep 2005 Location: Hungary Posts: 72	This part disturbes me as well... A full picture would help much, as 740 g seems correct for a single-hand sword.

23rd October 2005, 07:56 PM	#13
tom hyle Member Join Date: Dec 2004 Location: Houston, TX, USA Posts: 1,254	[QUOTE=Tim Simmons]I do not know much about medieval swords but I too find it annoying when people scoff at a piece because a it does not fit the typical picture published from an eminent persons, even fairly ordinary, or institutions collection, it is pontification from people who have no real idea of how many varied types and centers...... Tim[/QUOTE But Tim, it can't be real if it's not in the book!

24th October 2005, 11:36 PM	#14
Tinker Pearce Member Join Date: Oct 2005 Location: Seattle, WA USA Posts: 2	thanks Andrew! I pretty much have to agree without 'the full picture' it's difficult to say much more than has been said- If the picture is too big feel free to email it to me- I can resize it easily enough and get it posted.