The more artifacts I look at (and the more photographs thereof), the more I am struck by how casual in some ways and uptight in others our foreforgers were (that's forge as in smith, not fake :) ) in the making of swords.
I mean things like not making sure the two ends of your crossguard project the same distance from the blade, versus lining up the twisted wire so it matches exactly the other twisted wire, or covering a unevenly radiused guard with exactly done interlace.
Most of the difference must be process driven, but I think it must also point out a difference in the way the dark ages smith looked at their art.
What do you think?
The silver-copper inlay that really pointed this out to me:

The bladesmiths often weren't the same people who hilted, adorned, and embellished the weapons, and the various craftsmen who worked on a weapon had different skills and different priorities. Where one might emphasize performance and function over fit and finish, another would focus on aesthetics. Many ancient swords were pretty crude weapons that were later embellished with beautiful decorations.

I'm often struck by the incredible beauty and precision of many ancient sword and sheath fittings.

I think the real difference lies in the acceptance of flaws as they relate to function and not aesthetics. I've seen a Migration / Viking sword with multiple cores twisted in opposite directions... except for one core, accidentally aligned the wrong way. It was a pleasant discovery. The same piece had a classic minor weld flaw at the tip, where the wrapped edge always wants to be difficult.

I've heard customers state that "...there's no excuse for such flaws in today's pieces," which I find interesting at today's relatively cheap prices. Such demands for perfection place what was once the sole realm of kingly objects in the hands of relative commoners for sure.

I think another issue is that there have been various periods in history when common folks were required by law to possess a sword, and there must have been a good demand for the cheap but functional.

I've noticed the same thing; and find it fascinating. My primary market has always been 18th-century frontier re-enactors, and for the most part they don't mind the imperfections of a quickly slapped-together knife. However, get a flintlock rifle or pistol a hair shy of perfection incarnate, and they won't even pick it up. I've had such folks sneer at one of my hawks because there's some filemarks visible. I always be sure to ask that they look at period originals and show me one, just one single solitary one, that does not have filemarks somewhere unobtrusive just like mine. No winners yet.

As for Migration-era sword fittings, the perfection achieved by the inlay artists is staggering. I am, however, blown away by the fact that the fuller ALWAYS runs under the lower guard about halfway up the tang, and there is apparently nothing filling that gap between the guard and the blade. Perfectly acceptible at the time, but try doing that today (and I know you have, Jeff!:rockon: ) and the self-proclaimed know-it-alls will shriek like little girls about how you have to seal all the gaps from moisture lest your tang rust off in a month or two. This despite the survival of so many swords with tang intact though the grip may have rotted off long before. :rolleyes: Of course, this is helped by the fact that the hiltfitters usually didn't clean the forge scale off the tang, another thing guaranteed to result in a major hissy-fit (almost a dying duck fit, actually) from the modern guys.

I also think Jól has a very valid point. I hear that BS about no excuse for anything short of machinelike perfection in a custom blade, and then the refusal to pay for said perfection unless the makers' name is the right one, and swear every time to stay away from such folks. They don't deserve our stuff anyway! :lol

Alan Longmire, GDI journeyman smith...:flame: :D

Now, given that we all work to make the best piece we can, where we are never satisfied with our pieces and say the next one will be perfect, how do you guys react when some tells you "it's the flaws that make it a custom piece"?

Jim

One contributing factor could be the lack of reference surfaces & measuring devices – There isn’t a single ruler or square in the mastermyr find, for example. I know when I’m trying to get things exact, I have flat and true surfaces to work on, graph paper, clamping devices that are square, etc., The historic smiths were eyeballing it, and maybe using compasses or calipers. With eye and feel, you can get down to tenth of a millimeter accuracy, but you don’t need to, really – if you’re not checking against graph paper/square/ruler, or measuring with digital readout to the thousandth (or milling the stuff out on a Bridgeport, for that matter), things look pretty good a lot sooner.

the various craftsmen who worked on a weapon had different skills and different priorities
Certainly true, and engraving-type work lends itself to tighter work than forging. But it seems like there’d be some back pressure either economically or even just at the theoretical yearly market fair, the engravers ribbing the parts makers if they were handing up work that was too out of true.

the real difference lies in the acceptance of flaws as they relate to function and not aesthetics
Yes, this seems to go back pretty far, too – did you see that weld flaw on King Tut’s iron dagger? Far away from the edge, but right there ‘in front of God and everybody’:eek: , not even an attempt to engrave a hunting scene over it (if it was one of the first iron/steel knives, they probably hadn’t figured out the engraving yet).

Pre-industrial smiths seemed to avoid over-working their art, as well – get it good, get it working, move on. We might be suffering a hang over both from the industrial revolution which made precision a ubiquitous reference and then the Arts & Crafts revival which made hand work for hand work’s sake a lofty goal, put those two together and eventually you’ll have a culture of very overworked product.:rolleyes:


I've noticed the same thing; and find it fascinating. My primary market has always been 18th-century frontier re-enactors, and for the most part they don't mind the imperfections of a quickly slapped-together knife. However, get a flintlock rifle or pistol a hair shy of perfection incarnate, and they won't even pick it up

Maybe this is due to the esthetic consideration that a roughly-made knife looks frontier, and a roughly made gun looks like it will blow up in your hands/face?
:flame:

As for Migration-era sword fittings, the perfection achieved by the inlay artists is staggering. I am, however, blown away by the fact that the fuller ALWAYS runs under the lower guard about halfway up the tang, and there is apparently nothing filling that gap between the guard and the blade. Perfectly acceptible at the time, but try doing that today (and I know you have, Jeff!:rockon: ) and the self-proclaimed know-it-alls will shriek like little girls about how you have to seal all the gaps from moisture lest your tang rust off in a month or two. This despite the survival of so many swords with tang intact though the grip may have rotted off long before. :rolleyes: Of course, this is helped by the fact that the hilt fitters usually didn't clean the forge scale off the tang, another thing guaranteed to result in a major hissy-fit (almost a dying duck fit, actually) from the modern guys.

I also think Jól has a very valid point. I hear that BS about no excuse for anything short of machinelike perfection in a custom blade, and then the refusal to pay for said perfection unless the makers' name is the right one, and swear every time to stay away from such folks. They don't deserve our stuff anyway! :lol

The fuller into the blade hilt is one of those issues that really needs some more public education. Let's make it a point to do so and the word will eventually filter out. The fuller on a Migration blade indeed goes up into the hilt in most cases and this is structural; it is like an I-beam and resists bending at the critical hilt juncture. On a sword, where the blade is subject to vibration, the connection of the blade to the hilt is usually NOT an airtight fit; it is often scooped out with 1/16" on each side and this is to allow the blade some room to move around when striking and prevent a stress riser!

As for the price of perfection, I have simply decided to charge accordingly. I now take into account the fact that I might toss out a blade for a minor imperfection, and yes, I am charging people for my mistakes. I make a Hel of a lot less of them than they would.

Without the risk of mistakes nothing of worth is ever accomplished.

Pre-industrial smiths seemed to avoid over-working their art, as well – get it good, get it working, move on. We might be suffering a hang over both from the industrial revolution which made precision a ubiquitous reference and then the Arts & Crafts revival which made hand work for hand work’s sake a lofty goal, put those two together and eventually you’ll have a culture of very overworked product.:rolleyes:

Darned good point! That's why although I can produce a nice flat surface with a hand hammer on decorative items, I don't. People want to see hammer marks to tell it's hand-forged.:rolleyes:


Maybe this is due to the esthetic consideration that a roughly-made knife looks frontier, and a roughly made gun looks like it will blow up in your hands/face?
:flame:

I'm not talking about rough-looking or roughly made, I mean things like having a tiny booger in the tang carving, or maybe the top line of the forestock isn't perfectly straight, or there's a hairline gap between one of the nonstructural metal-wood interfaces. All things you encounter on originals, even by the most famous and collectible makers, but totally unacceptable on new ones. :banghead Oh, well.

The fuller into the blade hilt is one of those issues that really needs some more public education. Let's make it a point to do so and the word will eventually filter out.

Preach on, brother! :rockon:

All things you encounter on originals, even by the most famous and collectible makers, but totally unacceptable on new ones.
I've seen a similar thing in violin bow making, but the violin makers have it worse - Almost every Violin made in the last three hundred years has been a slavish copy of a violin made by one of a half dozen makers in the late 1600s to late 1700s. Only one of those makers (Stradivarius) did flawless work. All the others had various rough edges, and your well-made copy does not cut the mustard unless you've slavishly incorporated those exact flaws into your copy.:rolleyes: :rolleyes:

The fuller into the blade hilt is one of those issues that really needs some more public education
It's those #### photos, always the same mug shot, never an oblique angle, you basically have to go to Europe and hit the museums if you want a good look at migration/viking blades. Or wait for the once-every-twenty years touring Viking! show.
There seems to be a lot of variation in how guards were constructed & fitted.
####, this board has autobleep! For pretty innocuous words, too!
:spy: :D :spy:

####ing ###-#### the ####er ####ing autobleep .

I've seen a similar thing in violin bow making, but the violin makers have it worse - Almost every Violin made in the last three hundred years has been a slavish copy of a violin made by one of a half dozen makers in the late 1600s to late 1700s. Only one of those makers (Stradivarius) did flawless work. All the others had various rough edges, and your well-made copy does not cut the mustard unless you've slavishly incorporated those exact flaws into your copy.:rolleyes: :rolleyes:


It's those #### photos, always the same mug shot, never an oblique angle, you basically have to go to Europe and hit the museums if you want a good look at migration/viking blades. Or wait for the once-every-twenty years touring Viking! show.
There seems to be a lot of variation in how guards were constructed & fitted.


Ya know, this is beginning to sound like we're gonna be the ones who become the migration-era version of the Japanese sword nazis! :lol The ones who say "Yes, it's pretty, but the fuller stops short of the lower guard, so your work is inferior and inherently worthless.:eek: You must study the works of late-period masters Ingelrii and Ulfbehrt (and their darker-aged forbears, plus the Master of Finland whose name we know not (:bow )), and reproduce it exactly or the tradition dies while you perpetrate a mockery of REAL swords! :rolleyes: "

:banplease

Not that that's necessarily a BAD thing, you understand, as long as it's for the right reasons. :D Kinda like those folks who point out that modern-day makers of Japanese styled swords tend to make 'em too narrow since they're basing their interpretations on old swords that have been polished nigh unto death, and that sort of thing. We need Randal Graham over here, He'd help us set 'em straight! :doubleenf :fencing:

Sorry about all the smilies, it's a slow day at work... This last sentance is smilie-free for your reading pleasure.

I actually had a guy make a smart remark about my blades once when I was selling some at an SCA event. he was looking over some large daggers and I informed him of the materials used. He replies with (in a very snotty tone) "Yes, I'm familiar with steels. I'm also a bladesmith, but unlike yours, I forge mine."

Of course, I've also had people comment that the blade looke dcool, but I needed to work on my polishing skills since there were lines all over the blade (looking at a 80 layer pattern welded blade).

I've been doing a lot of museum hopping with some friends, and getting in *backstage* to handle some items. It's amazing how flawed and nonsymmetric the armour is. Even itmes made for royalty have obvious glaring problems. When you look at the underside of the articulated sections...the multiple holes imply the medieval armourer had just as many problems as I do lining up sections for proper movement!:D

I've had quite a few people tell me they prefer a slight cosmetic flaw here and there on my medieval blades. Not rough grind lines or cracked hilts...but little non-symmetry things. "It lets me know it was worked by a hand and not a mill"...is often a comment.

The ones who say "Yes, it's pretty, but the fuller stops short of the lower guard, so your work is inferior and inherently worthless.
Ut-oh, guilty as charged - at least as far as short fullers go - a fuller that stops short or a ricasso on a 'viking' sword is just sooo wrong looking, if you've taken a look at some artifacts.
Well, a fuller that fades out to the hilt probably wouldn't bug me, but the "I'm ground right in" beltsander termination is painful to look at.
[edit - the above, of course, on blades that claim to be 'viking'; on modern blades, or blades that are viking-influenced modern, it's not painful ;)]
Not that anyone needs to pay attention to my opinion, or ought to; I'm all for not taking this to the extremes, and don't want to be a self-appointed expert (:lie: except when I forget that I don't want to :D ) - people should look to the past and take what they want & use it. :101

Hey, I'm a period-correctness nazi too, no worries! :smokin

I really did mean all that in a good way. It's kinda like how nobody would dare call a katana-shaped object with rivetted slab handles and a ricasso an "authentic" katana. Inspired by and based upon, yes.

Education is key, though, if you don't know where you've been, how can you know where you're going?

I'm off for two days, y'all be good.

I actually had a guy make a smart remark about my blades once when I was selling some at an SCA event. he was looking over some large daggers and I informed him of the materials used. He replies with (in a very snotty tone) "Yes, I'm familiar with steels. I'm also a bladesmith, but unlike yours, I forge mine."

I've had those comments as well (at SCA events.) I usually have my forge setup and always grab a piece of steel and a hammer and say "Then show me." Not hard to believe, but nobody in this situation has ever taken hammer to steel. They never seem to have examples with them either.

Jamie

Ut-oh, guilty as charged - at least as far as short fullers go - a fuller that stops short or a ricasso on a 'viking' sword is just sooo wrong looking, if you've taken a look at some artifacts.
Well, a fuller that fades out to the hilt probably wouldn't bug me, but the "I'm ground right in" beltsander termination is painful to look at.
[edit - the above, of course, on blades that claim to be 'viking'; on modern blades, or blades that are viking-influenced modern, it's not painful ;)]

It's not just bad aesthetics, these are functional issues on sword-length pieces; errantly arrived at by comparing modern established knife construction "rules," to swords.

Jamie, I just visited your site and you're a man after my own heart. I was really impresses that you make your short blade knives with enough handle to control them. I also found your site to be such a wealth of information that I bookmarked it.

Doug Lester

It's not just bad aesthetics, these are functional issues on sword-length pieces; errantly arrived at by comparing modern established knife construction "rules," to swords.

Agreed, I guess the aesthetics only seem painful; but when the sword does not function correctly, due to it being a scaled-up contemporary knife, that could have some genuine pain potential!

Hello all..

ROFL..ROFLMAOPIMP...I have heard all those same "complaints" about the "grind lines" on a PW blade and more... In fact I hand more than a few times folks say that I couldn't of hand forged what I make as there are no hammer marks..sheesh....So I hammer out some of my "fugly" knifes out of a RR spike and they are "happy"..Some folks...I tell ya.

On fullers...some fullers start at the ricasso, like in a rapier, others I start under the guard as in a D.A. sword... some, say like on a multi fullered seax I run all the way off the back end and under the guard as well. All depends upon what I feel like doing, then ther's the "weird stuff" that I hammer out cause I get bored with the same stuff over and over. Recurved and fullered blades, "T" back and other stuff that hardly anyone is doing nowadays.

Right now I am still puttering about with my "bovine ivory" and getting the dying and treatment down on that stuff. I am having a ball playing with it and now I can make it looks just like fossilized ivory. So much so that I can actually fool folks. Now I have a source that has the same appearances, more availability and well, isn't going to coat me an arm and a leg to hilt a sword..And if I make a mistake, I am out what ?? 75 cents?? NOT a couple hundred $$$...

Yeah I have been doing this stuff for a while now and I have heard pretty much everything although every now and then something "new" does pop up...

JPH

So back in the day, they were making functional tools for an educated consumer who was concerned about function first; measuring devices, squares and industrial part replication were yet to arrive on the scene and squelch individuality in the way the invention of dictionaries made 'correct' spellinge uniform...is that the story?
Maybe the rise of 'Western martial arts' will take care of the first part, eventually, then if someone wants a piece with medaeval spirit all we'll have to do is throw away our digital calipers and graph paper....

I have always been amused that some collectors get out the calipers & loupes. If it is supposed to be a symmetrical design, then looking symmetrical is good enough; and using calipers to see how many nths of an inch it is off merely demonstrates that the measurer really wants a machined knife.

I understand that the ABS gets out the calipers for their judging, which simply tells me that I should forge out my blades and then visit a machine shop. After all, so long as I press the buttons then it's "...the work of the applicant alone," right? If you can't tell bad fit or proportions by the naked eye then it isn't an issue, especially considering how refined most bladesmiths' eyes are in this regard.

I once made a bowie with a piece of Sambar stag with such a beautiful surface that I didn't want to shave it down to some arbitrary concept of handle symmetry. Instead I allowed the guard to mirror the asymmetry of the handle. Some idjit at a show told me that it was "off center," and therefore not well-made. I pointed him to the factory knives.

That being said, I think there are some excellent examples of Dark Ages metalwork demonstrating obvious attention to precision. Handmade doesn't mean haphazard.

Jon, I'm not a judge but I've never heard anyone mention that they use calipers in the judging room. This is probably just a rumor started to put some fear into someone. Submitting your knives in Atlanta is stressful and they do like to play mindgames with the applicants.

Great thread guys!

Jon