Posted on 12/27/2008 6:39:09 AM PST by decimon
Interesting. How do you come to that conclusion, considering the lack of source material other than sagas and eddas?
Excellent analysis of steel sword making. Thanks to all, I learned a lot.
Diehard seems to be into smithery, so he can correct me as needed.
All swords were of pattern welded construction, strips of hammer welded Iron, the Iron forged in a weave of sorts, it was edged with Steel also forged on.
These were slashing swords with rounded points similar to the Roman Spatha. They were very, very, very expensive. The Iron gave shock absorbance, the steel a cutting edge.
The weak point was the steel edge. If you took a hit wrong a big chunk was missing or at worse the blow cut through the Iron and you eventually you.
Yes, good discussion. Wouldn't have thought that sword making is this complex.
> There are many Web Sites on Medieval Fencing on the web, you might want to take a look at them.
The entire Auckland CBD Chapter of the Guardian Angels is heavily into the European martial arts: swords, daggers, axes, armour, chain mail &tc. I love visiting their HQ because it’s like an old armoury, with obscure weapons and swords all over the walls...
So, you’re saying that you are guessing, based on the sword’s construction.
Such graphical evidence and textural clues as exist would lead me to believe that the Norse would have used a shield for the defense, and avoided blade parries.
I’ve seen the “parry with the flat’ claim before, but I think it is usually an unjustified extrapolation from Eastern sword techniques. Experimental sparring and later existing German texts do not bear the theory out. Parrying a solid cut with the flat of your blade is a good way of getting your parry blown straight through, and my head is more valuable than the edge of my sword. (Think of the body mechanics of a hammer blow vs a slapping motion. The wrist and arm are more rigid in line with the knuckles.)
P.S. I am assuming you mean by “parry”, an intercepting block. Now, if you mean by “parry”, an intercepting countercut to the oblique or flat of your opponent’s incoming strike, that is different.
Could we get a picture of that sometime?
Jim Hrisoulas is indeed a master smith. I have one of his books (”Swordmaking”) in my library. His work is exquisite.
The edge of a viking sword was a piece of steal welded to a pattern welded body. striking blade to blade would destroy the sword via a chip going back to the core. Why dont you test it out, take two knives and strike them lighty together. The knicks never leave the blade with normal sharpening.
The earliest documentation we have of the techniques for anything similar is the I.33 ms., which shows small round bucklers and swords against one another. Take a look at this: click. Note that the counterstrikes against an incoming blade are with the edge, striking against the flat of the threatening blade, and not using the flat of the blade to parry off the edge of the incoming strike.
If I strike against the flat of your blade with my edge, I will have a biomechanical advantage. If I parry your edge with my flat, I cede that leverage to you. Try the example of driving a nail in a wall with the side of a normally gripped hammer to feel this in action.
In any case, given the choice between chipping my blade and losing my windpipe, I'd opt for the first.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.