Valiant Armoury SE Norman
Jul 6, 2014 2:08:52 GMT
Post by beastofwotan on Jul 6, 2014 2:08:52 GMT
This is my first review, so if you guys have any tips on how I can provide any more constructive information, let me know!
Introduction
I originally ordered a Hedemark from VA, but a couple weeks after my order Sonny gave me a call and informed me that he was out of Type X blades. Instead of waiting for him to get more X blades, I changed my order to the new Norman, which I was very interested in. My collection was in dire need of a Brazil nut sword, and I've always been a fan of the style, and of course the scabbards and belts we've seen coming out of Sonny's SE line have been all phenomenal looking.
Historical overview
Still a rookie compared to most of you, but I believe this sword is closest to a type Xa, though the blade is notably shorter, and a bit thinner then most examples I've seen. Let me know if I'm mistaken.
These blades were most common in the mid-11th to early 12th centuries.
Full Disclosure
I have no relationship with Sonny or VA other than I sometimes send them money for swords.
Initial Impressions
I was immediately blown away by the tooling on the scabbard and belt, no doubt phenomenal work. The blade was a bit thinner than I was expecting.
Statistics
Blade Length: 30 1/4"
Blade Width: About 1.75"
Handle: 4"
Overall Length: 36"
GuardWidth: approx 7 1/8"
POB (Point of Balance): The CSS site puts it at 6", I measure it around 6.75"
Weight:
2 lb 5 oz (taken from CSS, unfortunately I don't have a working scale right now...)
Components
The Blade
I define this as being closest to an Type, Xa, as it has a fuller that stretches almost the entire length of the blade, but the fuller it is very thin, like an Xa.
![](http://i144.photobucket.com/albums/r180/Max_Lewis/Norman1_zps084f96c7.jpg)
![](http://i144.photobucket.com/albums/r180/Max_Lewis/Norman6_zpsecd8383f.jpg)
I've owned several VA swords now, and have noticed that a couple of them have unfortunately small blades compared to their historical counterparts. For example, I ended up selling my Crusader for this reason, it just seemed too light to be a battlefield weapon. I plan on eventually getting the Castille/Crusader, which seems like the best of both worlds (I do really love the Crusader hilt).
Does the Norman suffer from this lightweight affliction? Not to the same degree as the Crusader. I definitely would prefer it to be a tad wider, and a few inches longer to be a true Xa, or a 1/4 wider with a wider fuller to be a regular X.
However, I am still pleased with the blade. It is well executed, and for a short person like me, it is sufficiently long.
It is polished to a nice satin finish, which I prefer to mirror finishes.
The blade is quite sharp (as the cardboard box that it came in would soon find out). There is no noticeable secondary bevel.
The Handle
Sonny's normal quality. "Antique Red", cord wrapped. Simple, but elegant. No complaints.
Sorry for the crotch...
![](http://i144.photobucket.com/albums/r180/Max_Lewis/Norman11_zps5062b588.jpg)
The Guard:
The simple spike hilt common of the time. Simple, effective, and appealing. It is finished to the same quality as the blade.
![](http://i144.photobucket.com/albums/r180/Max_Lewis/Norman4_zps72138a91.jpg)
The Pommel:
Finally a brasil nut pommel in my collection! While I have small hands, I feel that the pommel curves away enough from the hand that no one would be uncomfortable using this with a hammer grip. The pommel does provide enough support for a handshake grip if the user felt the desire to use it in that way. the peen is clean enough for a handmade sword, overall its very pleasant.
Small complaint however... The pommel is not set quite straight, and since it is peened unfortunately I am unable to fix it.
![](http://i144.photobucket.com/albums/r180/Max_Lewis/Norman7_zps50f87c6e.jpg)
Also, there was a bit of what seems like rusting on the underside of the pommel, it was easy enough to remove.
![](http://i144.photobucket.com/albums/r180/Max_Lewis/Norman8_zps7b48bdf8.jpg)
The Scabbard/belt:
Hoo-boy! Gorgeous! I'll let the pictures do most of the talking here. The scabbard itself has tooling down the front, and has an integrated belt with thong. The thong is a really nice historical touch. However I have no idea what the best or historical way for tying it is (not the fault of VA, of course)!
![](http://i144.photobucket.com/albums/r180/Max_Lewis/Norman2_zpsdf9056ac.jpg)
![](http://i144.photobucket.com/albums/r180/Max_Lewis/Norman8_zps7b48bdf8.jpg)
![](http://i144.photobucket.com/albums/r180/Max_Lewis/Norman3_zpsd83502bf.jpg)
![](http://i144.photobucket.com/albums/r180/Max_Lewis/Norman9_zpsb158a976.jpg)
Handling Characteristics
So yes, the smaller blade does result in this being a lighter sword. It is fast, agile, but I do believe that the P.O.B. is far enough out that there is sufficient blade presence. I would not be uncomfortable carrying this out onto an 11th century battlefield, should my axe fail me.
Test Cutting/Handling
Alas, I live in a Center City Philly apartment, and have no where to cut things, besides the poor cardboard box in which it arrived. That box is dead.
Dry handling, I really do like the feel of it, once I got over the initial impression of the blade size.
Conclusions/The Bottom Line
So would I like a wider/longer blade on this? Yes, it would improve the sword for it to be at least a bit wider (I'm fine with the length, I actually prefer one handed swords to have blades in the 30-31" range).
But it handles well, looks great, and comes with an amazing scabbard/belt package.
I have no regrets buying this sword and I don't think I'll be getting rid of it anytime soon. Currently on CSS for $630, its a great value.
Pros
-GORGEOUS scabbard and belt
-Nice hilt furniture
-Normal quality VA grip work
-Super sharp without a noticeable secondary bevel
-Agile handling, with some blade presence
-Great value
Cons
-Blade a bit smaller then I would prefer
-Pommel not set straight.
-Some rusting(?) on pommel
Introduction
I originally ordered a Hedemark from VA, but a couple weeks after my order Sonny gave me a call and informed me that he was out of Type X blades. Instead of waiting for him to get more X blades, I changed my order to the new Norman, which I was very interested in. My collection was in dire need of a Brazil nut sword, and I've always been a fan of the style, and of course the scabbards and belts we've seen coming out of Sonny's SE line have been all phenomenal looking.
Historical overview
Still a rookie compared to most of you, but I believe this sword is closest to a type Xa, though the blade is notably shorter, and a bit thinner then most examples I've seen. Let me know if I'm mistaken.
These blades were most common in the mid-11th to early 12th centuries.
Full Disclosure
I have no relationship with Sonny or VA other than I sometimes send them money for swords.
Initial Impressions
I was immediately blown away by the tooling on the scabbard and belt, no doubt phenomenal work. The blade was a bit thinner than I was expecting.
Statistics
Blade Length: 30 1/4"
Blade Width: About 1.75"
Handle: 4"
Overall Length: 36"
GuardWidth: approx 7 1/8"
POB (Point of Balance): The CSS site puts it at 6", I measure it around 6.75"
Weight:
2 lb 5 oz (taken from CSS, unfortunately I don't have a working scale right now...)
Components
The Blade
I define this as being closest to an Type, Xa, as it has a fuller that stretches almost the entire length of the blade, but the fuller it is very thin, like an Xa.
![](http://i144.photobucket.com/albums/r180/Max_Lewis/Norman1_zps084f96c7.jpg)
![](http://i144.photobucket.com/albums/r180/Max_Lewis/Norman6_zpsecd8383f.jpg)
I've owned several VA swords now, and have noticed that a couple of them have unfortunately small blades compared to their historical counterparts. For example, I ended up selling my Crusader for this reason, it just seemed too light to be a battlefield weapon. I plan on eventually getting the Castille/Crusader, which seems like the best of both worlds (I do really love the Crusader hilt).
Does the Norman suffer from this lightweight affliction? Not to the same degree as the Crusader. I definitely would prefer it to be a tad wider, and a few inches longer to be a true Xa, or a 1/4 wider with a wider fuller to be a regular X.
However, I am still pleased with the blade. It is well executed, and for a short person like me, it is sufficiently long.
It is polished to a nice satin finish, which I prefer to mirror finishes.
The blade is quite sharp (as the cardboard box that it came in would soon find out). There is no noticeable secondary bevel.
The Handle
Sonny's normal quality. "Antique Red", cord wrapped. Simple, but elegant. No complaints.
Sorry for the crotch...
![](http://i144.photobucket.com/albums/r180/Max_Lewis/Norman11_zps5062b588.jpg)
The Guard:
The simple spike hilt common of the time. Simple, effective, and appealing. It is finished to the same quality as the blade.
![](http://i144.photobucket.com/albums/r180/Max_Lewis/Norman4_zps72138a91.jpg)
The Pommel:
Finally a brasil nut pommel in my collection! While I have small hands, I feel that the pommel curves away enough from the hand that no one would be uncomfortable using this with a hammer grip. The pommel does provide enough support for a handshake grip if the user felt the desire to use it in that way. the peen is clean enough for a handmade sword, overall its very pleasant.
Small complaint however... The pommel is not set quite straight, and since it is peened unfortunately I am unable to fix it.
![](http://i144.photobucket.com/albums/r180/Max_Lewis/Norman7_zps50f87c6e.jpg)
Also, there was a bit of what seems like rusting on the underside of the pommel, it was easy enough to remove.
![](http://i144.photobucket.com/albums/r180/Max_Lewis/Norman8_zps7b48bdf8.jpg)
The Scabbard/belt:
Hoo-boy! Gorgeous! I'll let the pictures do most of the talking here. The scabbard itself has tooling down the front, and has an integrated belt with thong. The thong is a really nice historical touch. However I have no idea what the best or historical way for tying it is (not the fault of VA, of course)!
![](http://i144.photobucket.com/albums/r180/Max_Lewis/Norman2_zpsdf9056ac.jpg)
![](http://i144.photobucket.com/albums/r180/Max_Lewis/Norman8_zps7b48bdf8.jpg)
![](http://i144.photobucket.com/albums/r180/Max_Lewis/Norman3_zpsd83502bf.jpg)
![](http://i144.photobucket.com/albums/r180/Max_Lewis/Norman9_zpsb158a976.jpg)
Handling Characteristics
So yes, the smaller blade does result in this being a lighter sword. It is fast, agile, but I do believe that the P.O.B. is far enough out that there is sufficient blade presence. I would not be uncomfortable carrying this out onto an 11th century battlefield, should my axe fail me.
Test Cutting/Handling
Alas, I live in a Center City Philly apartment, and have no where to cut things, besides the poor cardboard box in which it arrived. That box is dead.
Dry handling, I really do like the feel of it, once I got over the initial impression of the blade size.
Conclusions/The Bottom Line
So would I like a wider/longer blade on this? Yes, it would improve the sword for it to be at least a bit wider (I'm fine with the length, I actually prefer one handed swords to have blades in the 30-31" range).
But it handles well, looks great, and comes with an amazing scabbard/belt package.
I have no regrets buying this sword and I don't think I'll be getting rid of it anytime soon. Currently on CSS for $630, its a great value.
Pros
-GORGEOUS scabbard and belt
-Nice hilt furniture
-Normal quality VA grip work
-Super sharp without a noticeable secondary bevel
-Agile handling, with some blade presence
-Great value
Cons
-Blade a bit smaller then I would prefer
-Pommel not set straight.
-Some rusting(?) on pommel