Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Aug 29, 2009 20:20:00 GMT
Hello all, I was wondering, were original Medieval swords, Viking swords, etc, as limber and well tempered as modern repros such as they offer at MRL and other companies? I have two of MRL's Viking swords, the Stickelstadt and the River Scheldt swords, and they are beautiful, well made swords with beautiful blades. The blades are so well tempered that you can bow them over your head if you want. When I stabbed an old deer targed in my back yard the blade folded near'bout like a "U" then sprang back straight. Only about a couple of inches entered the target. If originals were like that, you could hardly pierce a leather tunic without it bowing instead of penetrating. So, were originals that limber and well tempered? Thanks, Freebooter
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Aug 29, 2009 21:54:12 GMT
A proper answer will take about six pages, mostly by Hotspur, with details by six or eight other members. A short answer is "some were and some were not". Any sword blade needs to have a certain amount of flex, but MRL blades are reputed to be overly flexible for their length. IMHO only a fencing foil should be that limber.
ymmv, K
|
|
|
Post by Tom K. (ianflaer) on Aug 29, 2009 22:54:25 GMT
The blades you mention are cutting blades and should be more flexible. from what I understand the amount of flexibility varied greatly from sword to sword and each person would have their preference as to how flexible they liked. also as I understand it the sword should flex more from the point to half way down the blade then from half way down to hilt.
I don't think the amount of flex you have described is out of reason for the types of swords you mention. thrusting was just something they didn't do well.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Aug 29, 2009 23:14:00 GMT
Listen to this man, he is one of the experts I knew would answer. Thanks Tom.
K
|
|
|
Post by shadowhowler on Aug 29, 2009 23:42:38 GMT
What Tom Said... Viking blades were all cut and slash, very little if any thrust and stab. So they could be more flexable for durability. A good thrusting sword would want to be more stiff.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Aug 29, 2009 23:47:58 GMT
Thanks y'all. Those answers were precisely what I needed. Thanks, Freebooter
|
|
|
Post by ShooterMike on Aug 30, 2009 0:06:28 GMT
I don't believe you'd ever find a historic artifact viking sword that is anything like the ones offered by MRL. I wouldn't call the viking swords Windlass offers "well tempered" as much as I would call them "poorly designed" as a viking sword. The have the distall taper pretty much all wrong. IMO, they start too thin at the guard, and stay too thick near the tip. To me, that results in an overly flexible blade.
I think the Gen2 Witham River viking sword is closer, though it's still too thick toward the tip. To me, the Hanwei Tinker Viking and all the Albion viking swords have it about right.
|
|
|
Post by Tom K. (ianflaer) on Aug 30, 2009 4:55:23 GMT
thanks Mike, I haven't held or seen any of these swords so I could only guess based on what he said. I really like what I've seen of the Hanwei/Tinker EMSHS. makes me think the rest are likely to be good too.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Aug 30, 2009 6:02:08 GMT
Freebooter. As others have said, it's all about the sword design. The slender blades that crop up 15 C and later tend to be a bit stiffer, as their point needed to be able to pose credible threat to chainmail bits of a full harness (armor). Contrasting, earlier swords that are a bit wider and are made generally for the cut (such as Hanwei's new Great Sword of War) tend to have a bit more flex, and are thus more forgiving of a bad cut.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Aug 30, 2009 7:00:34 GMT
Being able to bow a sword over your head with your own basic strength does not saying anything about how well tempered the blade is. Viking swords were fairly stiff, because of the way in which they were used, there was a relative amount of flex but all swords should flex, what they shouldn't do is be able to be bent with bare hands (unless you are one of the power team) over your head. It depends what you are looking for in a sword I guess and how important historical authenticity is to you, for me, I would not buy a sword with a blade like that.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Aug 30, 2009 9:36:09 GMT
Just adding to the other stuff already said. There are historical blades that were extremely finely crafted and are of very high quality. Just think of blades from Solingen, Toledo or earlier from the frankish imperium. Those blades were very well tempered but that doesn't mean there were as flexible as a windlass. In fact they were much stiffer, especially the longswords in 14th and 15th century. In my opinion most windlass longswords are far to flexible *cough* Arbedo *cough*. Way too flexible to be used in combat for thrusting. So forget windlass if you want a blade with a right amount of flex buy an Albion, Tinker, ATrim... but NOT a windlass.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Aug 30, 2009 11:08:48 GMT
Being as that I have never held or cut with a original Medieval or Viking sword ( I own and have cut with antiques from as far back as the late 1600's) , I cannot personally vouch for their "whippiness" or stiffness.
I can tell you, most I have used, ARE quite flexible. I have a 1853 Italian infantry officers sabre (with a Soligen made blade) and it's as flexible as wet noodle, but still can make a good thrust into a soft target. I also have a Windlass Verneuil which I'd put up against any of the " big boys" as far as tempering (yes , it's a Windlass).
Flexibility IS a preference in usage. If one were fighting in an unarmoured situation, you may not need a overly stiff blade,but with armoured combat, half-swording was used for a good reason....flexible blades.
just my 2 cents
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Aug 30, 2009 13:07:45 GMT
If Viking women were anything like today's women, my money says the swords were stiffer than that.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Aug 30, 2009 13:12:48 GMT
Lol.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Aug 30, 2009 15:21:08 GMT
Whippy is the term closely related to MRL aka Windlass.
|
|
|
Post by shadowhowler on Aug 30, 2009 17:02:24 GMT
If Viking women were anything like today's women, my money says the swords were stiffer than that. Viking women would put a hurt on ya...
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Aug 30, 2009 21:19:52 GMT
If Viking women were anything like today's women, my money says the swords were stiffer than that. Viking women would put a hurt on ya... Haha, that was funny ;D Go to stop laughing, my family's kinda upset already ;D
|
|
|
Post by brotherbanzai on Aug 31, 2009 23:34:43 GMT
Though windlass blades may be well tempered, an extremely flexible blade is not a sign of good tempering, it's a sign of a thin blade cross section.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Sept 1, 2009 7:33:01 GMT
Viking Women ......... yeah a mate of mine went to iceland and he said for such a small population they had some of the hottest girls he'd seen ........ and he's been to alot of countries with well reputed females I think the Vikings historically stole alot of the attractive women from areas they went resulting in an attractive ancestral line...... dont quote my geneology on that though read it somewhere.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Sept 1, 2009 14:28:24 GMT
I couldn't say...having never held an actual Viking sword original. I agree with others here, that the Vikings did very little in the way of stabbing; their fighting style was definitely more of the hack and slash variety. As such, they wouldn't need an overly rigid blade.
|
|