Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jan 11, 2010 19:15:20 GMT
Did these swords, historically, have much distal taper? I've heard they had some, and I've also heard they had almost none, although I can't find anything online about this either way. If anyone has any experience in this area I'd appreciate any information! (I'm asking because windlass' viking swords don't seem to have much distal taper at all, and I was wondering if this is true to the originals!)
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jan 11, 2010 19:28:03 GMT
what period? You can't just say viking, you need to specify time and culture for a proper answer.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jan 11, 2010 19:35:43 GMT
I think for any period there are no rules. Earlier sword of migration period and early viking usually have less distal taper than later viking age blades but there really are no strict rules.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jan 12, 2010 6:52:05 GMT
One must also remember that wide viking type blades and especially their predecessors of the migration era were thinner over all. You can't have as much distal taper if there is less thickness to begin with. I believe I remember reading a comment by Peter Johnsson that (many) viking era swords tend to be very thin overall when compared to later medieval swords.
When a sword doesn't even have a point on it's tip there really isn't a need for stiffness. Many of these weapons were extremely broad and quite thin. Uber slashing blades.
Luka has a very good point. You can track general trends in different periods but there will always be variations as well as exceptions.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jan 12, 2010 19:22:23 GMT
|
|