Swords...

[VAMPIR]

What do you think which is the best sword ever?
Methinks that without doubt it is KATANA. In every aspect.

http://www.denbeauvais.com/three_d/3d_images/KATANA.JPG

http://bjorn.foxtail.nu/images/jt_katana.jpg

[delete]

The reason we left the technique of pattern welding is that we got better products.


The Road to Damascus
Sorting Modern Pattern Welding from Myth and Legend (http://www.tf.uni-kiel.de/matwis/amat/def_en/articles/road_to_damascus/sword_forum1.html)
http://www.tf.uni-kiel.de/matwis/amat/def_en/articles/road_to_damascus/sword_forum1_dateien/cover-jan99.jpg
With this, or naturally occurring bits such as meteoric or bog iron, being the only source, iron was a scant commodity. These small chunks of iron would then be packed into a closed vessel with a heavy carbon bearing material and heated to a high temperature for many hours or even days. The time at temperature allowed the iron to absorb the carbon via carbon migration (the tendency for carbon to be absorbed into iron until a sort of equilibrium is achieved will be back to haunt us many times in this discussion), a process we now know as Cementation. When the pieces emerge from this treatment they are steel, an alloy of carbon and iron. When several small chunks of steel were achieved they could then be heated in a forge and welded together to form larger pieces. It is almost inevitable that in the process of welding one will fold the steel back upon itself to build up the mass as the work piece lengthens and becomes thinner. The subsequent hammering and welding also refines and purifies the steel further as well as evenly distributing carbon. This crude steel was improved by hammering! It was also made even better by folding! A legend was born.

The smiths of medieval Japan developed a method of metal refinement that was unique to them and very effective. Using an iron rich sand, the same basic methods used in the direct process were utilized but the bloom was allowed to cool so that it could be removed from the spent furnace and examined. Select pieces of steel were broken from a bloom which ranged from very mild steel to cast iron. The selected parts were then welded together and folded upon themselves repetitively to refine the metal known as Tamahagane.

Early welded blades by Celtic tribes were straight rods welded together with the seams running lengthwise along a blade of lower carbon content steel. Writings indicate how unimpressed the Romans were with these blades, as they bent easily in battle and split out as the welds failed. But during the time known as the Migrationary period (400-800 A.D.) true pattern welding appeared. If the rods that created the long lengthwise seams in the blade were twisted together, the problem of welds coming apart was greatly reduced. The great amount of oxide scale produced by forging would break free and fall off during the twist, resulting in better welds. Twisting is also a great test of how sound the welds are. If the welds were not good, the stress of twisting would let you know immediately. So, the twisted pattern could actually have been a mark of quality very early on. There could have been many other practical reasons for twisting in the beginning, but soon the development of intricate patterns in the blade became an art form unto itself. Analysis of the steel in such blades shows some bands of steel with a relatively high phosphorus content. The higher phosphorus would cause the steel to etch out lighter than the purer steel.

[Hrolf Kraki]

http://www.clanstirling.org/upload2005/wallace_sword.jpg

[Vasily Zaitsev]

Despite its unwarranted reputation, the katana isn't really all that impressive a blade. It's prone to breakage, is too lightweight to be useful against all but the rather weak armor worn by the Japanese, and (as a draw-cut weapon) requires too skilled a swordsman to actually be terribly effective in most people's hands.

I'm partial to the Viking sword. It's light enough to be wielded in one hand while retaining enough weight to defeat metal armor, is strong, and is shaped in a way that allows even less skilled fighters to effectively hack and slash with it.

Of course, if given the choice I'll take a sturdy rifle over either of them.

[Hrolf Kraki]

Despite its unwarranted reputation, the katana isn't really all that impressive a blade. It's prone to breakage, is too lightweight to be useful against all but the rather weak armor worn by the Japanese, and (as a draw-cut weapon) requires too skilled a swordsman to actually be terribly effective in most people's hands.

I'm partial to the Viking sword. It's light enough to be wielded in one hand while retaining enough weight to defeat metal armor, is strong, and is shaped in a way that allows even less skilled fighters to effectively hack and slash with it.

Of course, if given the choice I'll take a sturdy rifle over either of them.

Psssh! Rifles are for little girls. It takes a real man to wield a sword. ;) :p

[Arminius]

http://www.silvermane.com/overstock/BK-YK133%20Viking%20Sword.jpg

[Vasily Zaitsev]

http://www.silvermane.com/overstock/BK-YK133%20Viking%20Sword.jpg

Excellent illustration of my point, dragonslayer. :)

[Isra'il Yahya]

Despite its unwarranted reputation, the katana isn't really all that impressive a blade. It's prone to breakage, is too lightweight to be useful against all but the rather weak armor worn by the Japanese, and (as a draw-cut weapon) requires too skilled a swordsman to actually be terribly effective in most people's hands.

The Japanese armor is prefectly constructed to defend against the katana. The katana is a razor sharp sword for cutting through humans, but the Samurai's armor was made of lacquered hardwood and forms of loose chainmail. There were more forms of katana than the sort for dueling. There were also the large and heavy no-dachi for battlefield use.

A real katana is also extremely strong in comparison to those that are factory made. Those factory made swords are garbage. Of course, no weapon can take a constant barrage of abuse from high caliber weapons.

[Masty]

Cool thread, I've nothing against swords - but if I'm gonna clip some cunt, I'd rather be wielding a hatchet than a sword.

Just for fun ye understand.....

[Sandee]

I like swords that have those minute and elaborate design patterns (even bedecked with gems and what not) such as those:

http://www.medievaltimes.com/giftshop/600/25%20conan%20sword.jpg

http://www.flytying.dk/images/Dragon%20sword.jpg

This one looks real nice: http://www.bowstick.com/store/images/goldensting.jpg

Are they all medieval ones? I don't know really but I like. :)

[The Retard]

All swords served their purose on the battle field, depending on what type of blade was needed.

[Arminius]

I hate swords with elaborate designs. I am sorry, Sandee. Swords are meant for war, they should be sheathed or blood-stained, not pieces of art to be hung on a wall. The most beautiful swords are the ones that are battle-hardened.

[Sandee]

I hate swords with elaborate designs. I am sorry, Sandee. Swords are meant for war, they should be sheathed or blood-stained, not pieces of art to be hung on a wall. The most beautiful swords are the ones that are battle-hardened.

Maybe they could make it so they're nice-looking and still just as efficient during battles. I have a taste for refined things. :p

[Arminius]

Do you mean carve a small design? Yes, that is possible. I don't like the ones you posted though. I would carve the name of my god, Wotan into the sword, in runes. Though that is all. No gold, or jewels...

[Sandee]

Do you mean carve a small design? Yes, that is possible. I don't like the ones you posted though. I would carve the name of my god, Wotan into the sword, in runes. Though that is all. No gold, or jewels...

Yes, that too. There's nothing wrong with a sword made out of gold! :D A sword is a sword and it's more to do with the blade than the handle. So, it's okay to get creative with the handle.

Anyway, a sword meant much more than a weapon, didn't it? Weren't there initiation for warriors as well? And consecration? I don't know much about it. I'm not sure but didn't swords vary too depending on your position? Not all warriors had the same status, did they?

[Hrolf Kraki]

Yes, that too. There's nothing wrong with a sword made out of gold! :D

Yes there is. Gold is very soft.

[Sandee]

Yes there is. Gold is very soft.

Well, gold-plated. :o

[BoloMK30]

Conan's father was a swordsmith. Engraved upon the sword he gave to
his son were the savage Cimmerian runes spelling out: Suffer No Guilt
Who Draws This In The Name Of Crom.

His later sword was stolen from the tomb of a long-dead Atlantean general.
It could cut through other swords without receiving a nick or mark.

I was once in possession of a sixteenth-century katana. I bought it at an
auction as part of a lot of rusty knives, machetes, and garden tools. I
paid twenty-five dollars for the lot. It had only the plain wooden grips of
shira saya and the bronze bit at the base of the blade. It was covered
with dark rust; some unknowing person had used it as a machete or even
a digging tool, but it was (oh Lord!) razor-sharp!

I wish I had it back again.

[Kodos]

There's nothing wrong with a sword made out of gold!

Except that gold is both extremely heavy and extremely malleable, while a sword should be sharp, hard, and light...

[Arminius]

Anyway, a sword meant much more than a weapon, didn't it? Weren't there initiation for warriors as well? And consecration? I don't know much about it. I'm not sure but didn't swords vary too depending on your position? Not all warriors had the same status, did they?

It depended on it's intended use. Though swords of warriors were usually meant to withstand time, as well as battle, as they were passed down the blood-lines.

So, it's okay to get creative with the handle.

I wouldn't trade an iron hilt for a gold one. Leifr is right, gold is too soft. The hilt is used for defence against the enemy's blade.

[delete]

The Japanese armor is prefectly constructed to defend against the katana. The katana is a razor sharp sword for cutting through humans, but the Samurai's armor was made of lacquered hardwood and forms of loose chainmail. There were more forms of katana than the sort for dueling. There were also the large and heavy no-dachi for battlefield use.

A real katana is also extremely strong in comparison to those that are factory made. Those factory made swords are garbage. Of course, no weapon can take a constant barrage of abuse from high caliber weapons.

More from the same article I posted. The Road to Damascus; Sorting Modern Pattern Welding from Myth and Legend (http://www.tf.uni-kiel.de/matwis/amat/def_en/articles/road_to_damascus/sword_forum1.html)

Tamahagane, pattern welding, and wootz were the best steels ever produced in their time but we have a tendency to think that they were abandoned because we got lazy or wished to sacrifice quality for quantity, as armies grew larger. But the fact is that mankind spares no expense in war and would not abandon quality weaponry for something that wouldn't give an advantage in battle. As foundry technology improved, the blooms coming from the furnaces grew in size until it just wasn’t necessary to weld rods together any more. Wootz held on as a quality product for some time, but even the true damascus steel eventually became obsolete in the face of better efficiency. The Catalan furnace eliminated the need to tack scarce quantities of steel together. And, with the advent of the Bessemer process, man had the ability to produce any quantity of steel he wished.

In its day, damascus (pattern welded) steel in its various forms was far superior to iron, as was an abacus to counting upon ones fingers and toes. Today, however, nobody doubts the superiority of a 400mhz PC to the antiquated abacus for crunching numbers. For some reason, steel is different in our minds. The fact is that today we produce huge quantities of the finest materials ever made for purity, consistency, strength, and so on. Our understanding of alloys and metallurgy allows us to create steels that make many of the ancient ones look like the slag from our furnaces. Few today, however, would have the skill or the patience to produce such a weapon with those tools and materials. So these points are by no means a criticism of the blades of the past, just a reality check. DaVinci used some pretty lousy mixtures in his paints compared to what is available today (many paintings are virtually self-destructing), yet I don't believe there is anybody alive today that can match a DaVinci. Leonardo was the master and his work has an unsurpassable immortality despite how superior our modern materials may be. The same is true of the bladesmiths of the past.

[Sandee]

Well, if back then, they could wear those heavy medieval armours like this:

http://www.darksword-armory.com/images/1704.jpg

^ This actually doesn't seem that heavy. There is this:

http://www.noblecollection.com/images/catalog/NN9905-C.jpg

And all those heavy accessories like battle shields and what not, a sword wouldn't seem that heavy. I know it is for protection but I believe those men were quite strong back then. I don't think it would be that bad ( a few carvings, gold-plated (ok maybe not made out of gold) and some nice patterns).

[delete]

Well, if back then, they could wear those heavy medieval armours like this:

And all those heavy accessories like battle shields and what not, a sword wouldn't seem that heavy. I know it is for protection but I believe those men were quite strong back then. I don't think it would be that bad ( a few carvings, gold-plated (ok maybe not made out of gold) and some nice patterns).

Weight kill acceleration, so with the heavy armour the goal was to use the speed of the horse to deliver the killing blow. They thus used heavy piercing lances and relative heavy swords. The swords made for duelling were the lightest, while swords used by footsoldiers where in the middle. When pattern welding technique arrived the romans went from the roman gladus to the germanic spatha.


Gladius (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gladius)
http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/d/d2/Gladius_in_hand.jpg/300px-Gladius_in_hand.jpg
Gladius is a Latin word for sword. Early Roman swords were similar to those used by the Greeks. From the 3rd century BC the Romans adopted swords similar to those used by the Celtiberians. This kind of sword was known as the Gladius Hispaniensis, or "Spanish sword." It was once thought that they were similar to the later Mainz types, but the evidence now suggests that this was not the case.[1] Rather these early blades followed a slightly different pattern, being longer and narrower, and were probably those that Polybius[2] considered good for both cut and thrust. Later extant Gladii are now known as the Mainz, Fulham and Pompei types. In the late Roman period Vegetius[3] refers to swords called semispathae (or semispathia) and spathae, for both of which he appears to consider gladius an appropriate term.

A fully equipped Roman soldier would have been armed with a shield (scutum), several javelins (pila), a sword (gladius), probably a dagger (pugio) and perhaps a number of darts. Conventionally, the javelins would be thrown before engaging the enemy, at which point the gladius would be drawn. The soldier generally led with his shield and thrust with his sword. Contrary to popular belief, all types of gladius appear to have also been suitable for cutting and chopping motions as well as for thrusting.

Spatha (Viking sword) (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Viking_sword)
http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/en/thumb/0/02/Roman_spatha.jpg/200px-Roman_spatha.jpg

The spatha is a type of straight sword, measuring between 0.75 and 1 m, in use throughout the 1st millennium. Introduced in the Roman Empire in the 1st century as a cavalry weapon, the spatha remained popular throughout the Migration period and the Viking Age, until it evolved into the knightly sword of the High Middle Ages from about 1100. Viking age spathas are also known as Viking swords.

Roman Empire

Originally the spatha was worn by cavalry officers and auxiliaries in the later Roman armies. Usually a longer version of the shorter, leaf-shaped gladius used by a legionary, the spatha is around 0.75-1.00 m long but seldom reached a full meter. Unlike the gladius, however, the spatha was worn on the left due to the increased length.

Employed by both Roman cavalrymen and their German enemies, later Lombard spathae were actually more advanced than the wrought iron gladii, being constructed using a form of pattern welding employing layers of iron and steel: in effect, a composite material. Eventually under the later Roman Empire the spatha was adopted by many if not most legionaries.

Migration period
http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/en/thumb/f/f9/Sword.style1.jpg/150px-Sword.style1.jpg
Vendel sword hilt from the Snartemo III grave in southern Norway. Hilt is repoussé Early 6th century. The gold plate grips and silver gilt mount at the mouth of the scabbard are in Style I.

Surviving examples of these Germanic Iron Age swords had blades measuring between 28" and 32" (710 and 810 mm) in length and 1.7" to 2.4" (45 to 60 mm) in width. These single handed weapons of war sported a tang only some 4" to 5" (100 to 130 mm) long, and had very little taper in their blades ending in usually rounded tip.

Viking Age

During the Viking age, the swords grew slightly in length to 930 mm (37") and took on a slightly more acute distal taper and point. These blades had deep fullers running their length, yet still had single-handed hilts which often sported a 'Brazil nut' shaped pommel. While the pattern of hilt and blade design of this time might readily be called 'The Viking sword' to do so would be to neglect the wide spread popularity it enjoyed. All over continental Europe between 700-1000 AD this design and its small variations could be found.

During "Norman" times the blades increased some 100 mm (4") in overall length, and the hilt changed significantly. Instead of the Brazil-nut pommel, a thick disc-shaped pommel was attached 'on-edge' to the bottom of the iron hilt. In addition the upper guard grew substantially from the near-absent design predating it. Also the blades tended to taper slightly less than those found during the times of the Vikings.

Jan Petersen in De Norske Vikingsverd ("The Norwegian Viking Swords", 1919) introduced the most widely-used classification of swords of the Viking Age, discriminating 26 types labelled A – Z. In 1927 R. E. M. Wheeler condensed Petersen's typology into a simplified typology of nine groups, numbered I – IX.

Norman swords

The transition from the Viking age spatha to the High Medieval arming sword takes place between the 10th and 11th centuries. The main development is the growth of the front handguard into a full cross-guard, and the reduction of the typical Viking Age lobated pommel into simpler hazelnut or disc shapes. The sword of Otto I preserved in Essen is such an example of the emerging arming sword, although it has been encrusted with decorations during the centuries it was conserved as a relic (total length 95.5 cm) [1].

Categories: Roman auxiliaries | Roman swords | Cavalry | European swords | History of the Germanic peoples | Medieval weapons | Viking Age

[Arminius]

Gladius is very good for their style of fighting. I would prefer a longer sword in the open though.

[Isra'il Yahya]

Yes, the gladius is a grand weapon.

[Björn]

Gladius is very good for their style of fighting. I would prefer a longer sword in the open though.

The Roman heavy soldier was designed to specialize in a particular climate and condition in battle. This was great for the open fields of the Roman homeland but faired poorly in the harsher north with it's fjords and abundant forestry. Although the Romans struggled to maintain a hold on the north it always collapsed with the first signs of some semblence of cooperation amongst the German Tribes.

I would take a round shield and a longsword by default. The round shield may not be able to take as much force but it far more versatile.

[delete]

The Roman heavy soldier was designed to specialize in a particular climate and condition in battle. This was great for the open fields of the Roman homeland but faired poorly in the harsher north with it's fjords and abundant forestry. Although the Romans struggled to maintain a hold on the north it always collapsed with the first signs of some semblence of cooperation amongst the German Tribes.

I would take a round shield and a longsword by default. The round shield may not be able to take as much force but it far more versatile.

It also was a matter of technology. The scandinavians (gemanic) used Bog Iron (http://www.hurstwic.org/history/articles/manufacturing/text/bog_iron.htm).

Iron Production in the Viking Age; Bog Iron (http://www.hurstwic.org/history/articles/manufacturing/text/bog_iron.htm)
http://www.hurstwic.org/history/articles/manufacturing/pix/turf_knives.jpg
When a layer of peat in the bog is cut and pulled back using turf knives (right), pea sized nodules of bog iron can be found and harvested. Although the iron nodules are reasonably pure, there aren't many of them. They are, however, a renewable resource. About once each generation, the same bog can be re-harvested.

In some regions (particularly Sweden), iron ore, rather than bog iron, was the raw material for smelting. The ore was in the form of "red earth" (rauði*), a powdery ocher. Regardless of the source, the raw materials were usually roasted to drive off moisture before being smelted. The roasting also served to "crack" the surface of the iron ore, making it more porous so that the gases in the smelting furnace could enter and react with the iron more easily. Once the dry nodules or ore was in hand, the lengthy process of smelting the iron began
* rauði is the sami loanword for iron, and one of the linguistic proofs that the sami people entered Scandinavia around 500 AC. (delete's comment)

...(snip)...

Most domestically produced iron in the Norse era was tediously produced from bog iron. Because of the time consuming processes used to create it, smelted iron was valuable.

The axe head blanks shown were also trade goods. They were probably exported from Norway and were on their way to a trading center in Denmark when they were lost. They are about 20cm (8inches) long and were found threaded on a wooden stave for convenient handling during shipping.
http://www.hurstwic.org/history/articles/manufacturing/pix/trade_axe_blanks.jpg
Because of their expense, iron tools and weapons were highly valued. The loss of an iron tool from a Norse farmstead was a disaster, especially if it were a major tool like an axe or scythe. A typical farm in the Viking age probably owned no more than 40-50kg (100lbs) of iron, in the form of tools, weapons, and cooking equipment.


They thus had high quality iron, but one who was made on a private basis, and in really small household quanta. Most farmers were able to resmith their tools, so the knowledge of smithing was common knowledge. This also meant that they could recognize superb quality when encountered, and that you got professionals who knew mare than the average hobby smith. Widespread knowledge of metal qualities is still pretty widespread in Scandinavia, as we still build our houses in wood and good tools are a labor saver.


Regia Anglorum; Iron working (http://www.regia.org/ironwork.htm)
The most important of all of the tools made by the smith was probably the knife, which had an enormous number of uses, especially as people lived off the land far more than we do today. So whether the knife was just for eating, or was a specific tool just for carving wood, it still had to be made well. Although a knife appears simple, the cutting edge was made of steel with a softer iron back 'fire welded' to the blade. The reason for this was to economise on the amount of steel that was used, as it was a rarer product of iron making. We are not entirely sure, but we suspect that steel was a happy accident of good iron smelting, but didn't occur in large enough volumes. So it was carefully used in controlled amounts. Steel also keeps a better cutting edge than iron, but because of this property, it tends to be more brittle. Iron was then employed to make the bulk of the tool as it is more forgiving. Not far away from the forge would have been a rotary grind stone. With this and copious amounts of water, the edges of blades on all sorts of tools or weapons were honed to sharpness. Little grind stones roughly only five inches in diameter could be mounted on pole lathes to turn them, but larger stones would have had a man or men to turn it rapidly.
...snip...
Recent finds and work on the site at Hamwic (modern Southampton) have given us some new insights into Anglo-Saxon iron work. The quality of the iron has been shown to be superlative. So good in some cases that it's quality was not matched until the mid 1800s. The reason for this seems to lie in the work that was done to the iron to convert it to steel post the smelt. By a simple(!!) process of reheating the pure iron until it absorbed the relevant carbon levels to convert it to steel, until you could no longer heat it to good effect.

As to weight and acceleration in swords this article is a good one.
Sword Motions and Impacts An Investigation and Analysis

ARMA is generally skeptical of attempts to quantify swordsmanship from an engineering or physics point of view, as we feel the craft is more of a holistic one. But occasionally we are impressed by insightful technical analysis and in this case, especially so. The following enlightening article presents for the first time material which contradicts some of the long held assumptions about the physical mechanics of swords. Understanding the function of swords is about understanding their design. This is a matter of understanding the complex elements of blade geometry. Yet, these are little understood today, even among many commercial and private sword manufactures. A sword cannot be examined solely from a silhouette or face on view. It must be examined based upon its whole blade profile - overall shape, length, width, and differences in thickness and taper in its cross-sectional change. There are even variations in the stiffness of different blades designed for cutting at different materials, or those for cutting and thrusting use, and those designed for thrusting only (and even then, there are differences between soft versus hard targets). These are some of the reasons why one sword will feel good and another won't. But few individuals have had opportunity to closely examine or measure a wide range of authentic antique pieces to know their subtleties. Elements of balance, flexibility, and weight in a cutting sword are very subtle. On top of this, just as there are considerable misconceptions about how swords are used, so there are also about how they mechanically function as tools. How all this relates to understanding the actual function and handling of cutting swords will in turn reflect how a maker produces his modern replica weapon and what today's enthusiast looks for in a blade. It also underscores the importance of experience in actually hitting at substantial test-targets with sharps blades. As George Turner now shows here, the majority of sword makers have unfortunately been talking utter nonsense for the most part with nearly all of their pronouncements on the factors of how good swords function. George's research amounts to no less than a revolution in sword theory, but as he demonstrates it really only reveals what was already known long ago. In the process he also manages to vindicate some of ARMA's long held complaints on the failures of modern sword reproductions. As a result of this article, while the making of a fine sword will surely always remain an art, we can now safely say it's one firmly grounded in science --"the sword mystics are doomed."

[VAMPIR]

I like swords that have those minute and elaborate design patterns (even bedecked with gems and what not) such as those:

http://www.medievaltimes.com/giftshop/600/25%20conan%20sword.jpg

http://www.flytying.dk/images/Dragon%20sword.jpg

This one looks real nice: http://www.bowstick.com/store/images/goldensting.jpg

Are they all medieval ones? I don't know really but I like. :)
We're talking about real swords Sandee... Not HE-MAN and co.:)

[VAMPIR]

The best of European stuff:
http://www.weaponsemporium.com/WE-Black%20Prince%20Sword.jpg

[VAMPIR]

Toledo swords, for centuries, when the issue of a fight depended not only on the personal ability of the fighter, but also on another decisive factor - the perfection of his weapon - with Toledo swords exceptional steel were forged the most terrible arms in the world. Their extraordinary hardness made of each of these Toledo swords an invincible force in the hands of an expert swordsman. All European armies knew the superior quality of Toledo steel swords and many great warriors relied only on sabers of Toledan provenance.

Their origin of the Toledo swords comes from the most ancient Spanish customs. More than 2,000 years ago, in the 5th century B.C. , Iberian blacksmiths already forged Toledo swords known as falcata which had an iron blade inside and a special design made to increase the bluntness of the slash.

Due to their fame, these Toledo swords were choosen by Hannibal for his army and the Roman legions, defeated by those weapons, adopted them later and supplied their centurions with the dread Toledan swords blades.



The times of Excalibur kind of sword passed by. The Middle Ages blacksmiths exalted the office, as they relied more and more on technological progress and not only on the good quality of their steel. The Muslim armies feared the sword that had defeated them. They didn't revere only the hand of a Master - the Cid Campeador - but also the excellence of his weapon, a Toledan sword, of course! The Muslims adopted such a technics to produce their slender two-edged scimitars, transmitting their secret from one generation to the other.

Then, the Toledan manufacturers would yield the famous rapiers so well popularized through d'Artagnan and his fellow Musketeers.

Also todays Toledo is a quiet city with about 50,000 inhabitants, it has been for a time the capital city of the widest empire in the world, an empire where sun never set. Kings from all parts of the world have had Toledo swords and sabers forged in Toledo. Even Japanese Samurai were aware of the existence of Toledo swords steel as it had been introduced by the Spanish merchants that followed the steps of the Spanish and Portuguese Jesuits. As Japan lived in a state of continuous civil war, it is not surprising that some of their Daimyos even came to Toledo to have their katana and wakizashi forged there. They knew how important was a perfect design and finish for the effectiveness of a sword of Toledo.

One example of what was once the most noble art in the world is no doubt the gold inlaid hunting dagger of King Charles the Fourth, with the mark and the name of the smith who did it engraved on it. Toledan craftsmen can be rightfully proud of such a fine blade and splendid finish. This art is actually disappearing because swords have been replaced by another type of weapon, like pistols, guns, rifles.

The internal structure of the blade and the mystery of its fabrication were a secret well kept by the manufacturers. It hasn't been unraveled until the 20th century! To make such an exceptional weapon, they had to forge at the same time and at a very hot temperature hard steel with high contents of carbon and soft steel. This way, they could obtain excellent mechanical properties as well as a better fastness to wear.


An appropriate selection of raw materials, their adequate proportion in the blade and the forging of both types of steel at a temperature of 1454 º F during the exact interval of time required, give the most perfect sword ever built in the world.

In old ages, the blacksmiths used to recite psalms and prayers keeping always the same rhythm, in order to calculate the time that the blade would remain inside the furnace. This timing had to be respected to avoid any deviance: a longer time would melt the steel too much and on the contrary, a shorter one wouldn't let the metal reach its melting-point.

Forging requires forcefulness and efficiency in a very short time. Then comes the following step: cooling with water or - sometimes - with oil, to get a clear and clean welded seam. In some cases, the blacksmith had to blow even 20,000 times in order to get a perfect tempering, but such a level of perfection wouldn't allow him to make more than 2 or 3 blades in a year!

In other parts of the world, craftsmen have tried to imitate the perfection of Toledo swords steel, but they all failed. Damascus steel was too hard, not at all flexible, because it contained only iron and carbon and wasn't refined of all the mineral impure elements.
Swedish steel was based on a soft steel, carbureted in a furnace, surrounded by animal horns and hair, leaves, etc. and heated at a temperature of about 1650º F. Swords were also manufactured in Solingen (Germany). There, they twisted together wires of different thickness and carbon contents in order to get a threadlike structure that combined hard and soft steel. the swords of Nimes (France) were also recognized for their good quality.

[VAMPIR]

Just see this beauty...:) :) :)

http://www.aceros-de-hispania.com/image/toledo-swords/toledo-swords.jpg

http://www.knightsedge.com/spanish-toledo-swords/knights-templar-sword.jpg

http://www.knightsedge.com/spanish-toledo-swords/sword-of-merlin.jpg

http://www.by-the-sword.com/acatalog/images/m8602.JPG

[VAMPIR]

I have this kind of sword at home. From my grand grand dad.

http://www.muzej.mod.gov.yu/fabricka%20oruzija1918/sablja1983.jpg

[Arminius]

It was used by the Royal Dutch Army in the 1800's and early 1900's, but the hilt is different.

Yea, I have an officers sword from the Franco-Prussian War era. It was forged in Solingen, a city renowned for swords.

[Sandee]

We're talking about real swords Sandee... Not HE-MAN and co.:)

Hey, the second one wasn't that bad!

OK fine, those are nice too:

http://users.skynet.be/euro-swords/M1896OC_fichiers/image006.jpg

http://www.civil-war-sword.com/images/foot-officers-sabre-8822f.jpg

[Isra'il Yahya]

I have this kind of sword at home. From my grand grand dad.

http://www.muzej.mod.gov.yu/fabricka%20oruzija1918/sablja1983.jpg

Maybe a Turkish or Balkan officer's sword. The weapon certainly looks Ottoman inspired.

[Jimbo Gomez]

If you're fighting one on one, forget swords. Get a rapier.

[Sandee]

Musketeer ones?

http://www.aceros-de-hispania.com/image/gladius/musketeers-sword.jpg

http://www.aceros-de-hispania.com/image/marto/swords-7.jpg

^ Mostly for dueling, right? The blade is quite long.

The blades seem longer, less wide and I suppose more sharp.

[Jimbo Gomez]

Yes, it's a dueling weapon. Unlike those heavier swords, it's main use is as a stabbing weapon, not a slashing one.

[delete]

Yes, it's a dueling weapon. Unlike those heavier swords, it's main use is as a stabbing weapon, not a slashing one.

The rapier evolved into the smallsword, and this is more alike a metal whip meant for piercing. A trained man with a smallsword could penetrate any weak point in any armour, thus speed became the only defence.

wikipedia; Smallsword (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Smallsword)
http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/en/thumb/2/2b/Smallsword.jpg/300px-Smallsword.jpg Typical smallsword of the 1740s.

The small sword or smallsword (also court sword, fr: L'épée de cour or dress sword) is a light one-handed sword designed for thrusting. The smallsword evolved out of the longer and heavier rapier of the late Renaissance. The height of the smallsword's popularity was between mid 17th and late 18th century. It is thought to have appeared in France and spread quickly across the rest of Europe. The comparative lightness of the smallsword and the resulting ease of manipulation led to the development of the sophisticated handwork and the linear footwork of modern fencing, and it can be considered as the immediate predecessor of the modern foil and épée.

The smallsword could, in the right hands, be a highly effective duelling weapon, but as with the rapier its function was often reduced to that of male jewelery. Many surviving examples carry elaborate baroque, rococo, or occasionally neoclassical decorations. The fashion for wearing swords with civilian dress rapidly declined at the end of the 18th century, and the use of the smallsword was subsequently restricted to certain ceremonial occasions.

As a rule, the blade of a smallsword is comparatively short (about 60-80 centimetres). It usually tapers to a sharp point but may lack a cutting edge. It is typically triangular in cross-section, although some of the early examples still have the rhombic and spindle-shaped cross-sections inherited from older weapons, like the rapier. This triangular cross-section may be hollow ground for additional lightness and stiffness. Many small swords of the period between the 17th and 18th centuries were found with colichemarde blades.

The guard is small (typically 3-5 inches in diameter), approximately flat and either round or composed of two oval lobes ("figure of eight"). There is usually a knuckle-bow and either one or two short quillons, used to strengthen the wielder's grip and provide increased points of control.

[VAMPIR]

If you're fighting one on one, forget swords. Get a rapier.
Rapiers are for artists of one on one fight. ''Great weapon it was'' said master Yoda...:starwars:

[VAMPIR]

Maybe a Turkish or Balkan officer's sword. The weapon certainly looks Ottoman inspired.
Actually, he was captain of Montenegro kingdome army 1872-1916. :) Used that sword in battles against Otomans. Some soldiers of that time still had ''jatagan'', traditional turkish inspired short sword, but he was officier.
http://platnerstwo.pl/graf/jatagan_balkan.jpg

[General Ivan]

Zweihander. Enough destructive power to slice anyone in half. :viking:

http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/en/a/a1/Doppelhander.jpeg

[VAMPIR]

Zweihander. Enough destructive power to slice anyone in half. :viking:

http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/en/a/a1/Doppelhander.jpeg
too heavy and hard to use...