Windlass European Sword Review
Aug 30, 2014 21:43:51 GMT
Post by Luka on Aug 30, 2014 21:43:51 GMT
nddave wrote
Thanks Luka,
That's a pretty good find with the Type 6 from the Geibig Typology. The Type 6a looks almost identical. I've never researched the Geibig Typologies as I always thought they were Viking primarily and Oakeshott's was an evolution of them. Has anyone ever tried to merge the two and find out just where both typologies would match? I'd like to do some additional research of the Geibig Type 6a, thanks! Also yes its hard to really place the European into a Oakeshott Typology as it fits kind of in the middle of the Type XI and XII. One counter I have to your Type XII theory is your use of the Sword of Saint Maurice, the Saint Maurice is actually categorized as a Type XI. Here's a link to a thread in the Beginners Board about classifying the European Sword where I go into details about my theory (guess I should've linked that in the review, lol)
viewtopic.php?f=32&t=19058
You know when I first was researching the European my first assumption was a Type XII simply due to the profile. What really got me turned over to the XI typology was the extended fuller and the tapering long blade. Windlass didn't make it very easy to decipher this sword that's for sure, the hilt furniture matches those used almost exclusively in the 14th century but the blade more so falls into something used earlier 11th-13th. Chock it up to marketing I guess, something unique and eye catching sells more than something that's purely historical.
Luka wrote
Good review, Dave! I agree with you that this sword is definitely not a XVI because diamond section near the tip on it is more a result of Windlass forging methods than deliberate design, so that leaves us with XI and XII. Some XII's have longer fuller than usual, some have also quite long blades (after all, St. Maurice of Turin is a XII with long fuller and long blade) so I think XII is the best type to fit this sword into. It could be XI but I think that both the fuller is too wide for that and the blade is wider than usual for a XI. Albion Gaddhjalt has a similar blade in profile, it's slightly narrower, slightly longer and has maybe a bit shorter fuller. It is best classified as a Xa, but it is also an example of a sword better classified with Geibig typology than Oakeshott's. It's a type 5 by Geibig. If we try to classify your European with Geibig typology, it falls into type 6 much better than in any Oakeshott type.
www.myarmoury.com/feature_geibig.html#type6
www.myarmoury.com/view.html?feat ... ibig14.jpg
But typologies aside, it's a good example of a 12th or 13th century knightly sword and we should think about it as that, not as a certain type...
P.S. I just wanted to add that Oakeshott's type XII is a bit misunderstood. Many people think of it as of rather short arming sword better suited to infantry fighting than cavalry use. I don't agree with that as plenty of XII's are big swords, some with even 36" long blades and they were certainly made plentiful in both ranges, for both uses... After all, they are the classic sword of the 13th century, and 13th century is still the peak of knightly mounted combat!
Good review, Dave! I agree with you that this sword is definitely not a XVI because diamond section near the tip on it is more a result of Windlass forging methods than deliberate design, so that leaves us with XI and XII. Some XII's have longer fuller than usual, some have also quite long blades (after all, St. Maurice of Turin is a XII with long fuller and long blade) so I think XII is the best type to fit this sword into. It could be XI but I think that both the fuller is too wide for that and the blade is wider than usual for a XI. Albion Gaddhjalt has a similar blade in profile, it's slightly narrower, slightly longer and has maybe a bit shorter fuller. It is best classified as a Xa, but it is also an example of a sword better classified with Geibig typology than Oakeshott's. It's a type 5 by Geibig. If we try to classify your European with Geibig typology, it falls into type 6 much better than in any Oakeshott type.
www.myarmoury.com/feature_geibig.html#type6
www.myarmoury.com/view.html?feat ... ibig14.jpg
But typologies aside, it's a good example of a 12th or 13th century knightly sword and we should think about it as that, not as a certain type...
P.S. I just wanted to add that Oakeshott's type XII is a bit misunderstood. Many people think of it as of rather short arming sword better suited to infantry fighting than cavalry use. I don't agree with that as plenty of XII's are big swords, some with even 36" long blades and they were certainly made plentiful in both ranges, for both uses... After all, they are the classic sword of the 13th century, and 13th century is still the peak of knightly mounted combat!
Thanks Luka,
That's a pretty good find with the Type 6 from the Geibig Typology. The Type 6a looks almost identical. I've never researched the Geibig Typologies as I always thought they were Viking primarily and Oakeshott's was an evolution of them. Has anyone ever tried to merge the two and find out just where both typologies would match? I'd like to do some additional research of the Geibig Type 6a, thanks! Also yes its hard to really place the European into a Oakeshott Typology as it fits kind of in the middle of the Type XI and XII. One counter I have to your Type XII theory is your use of the Sword of Saint Maurice, the Saint Maurice is actually categorized as a Type XI. Here's a link to a thread in the Beginners Board about classifying the European Sword where I go into details about my theory (guess I should've linked that in the review, lol)
viewtopic.php?f=32&t=19058
You know when I first was researching the European my first assumption was a Type XII simply due to the profile. What really got me turned over to the XI typology was the extended fuller and the tapering long blade. Windlass didn't make it very easy to decipher this sword that's for sure, the hilt furniture matches those used almost exclusively in the 14th century but the blade more so falls into something used earlier 11th-13th. Chock it up to marketing I guess, something unique and eye catching sells more than something that's purely historical.
You are mixing two St. Maurice swords, one, in Vienna, is a XI, the other, in Turin is a XII:
pics.myarmoury.com/view.html?smot1200-1250.jpg
Oh, and btw XIb also exists, it is a type with narrow fuller like regular XI, but the blade is wider and usually shorter...