Why change to the Spatha?

[Tarbicus]

Wel, you can say the same for their mainz in comparison to Albions...ones a cudgel, the latters are warriors tools!

And one costs four times as much as the other (given one doesn't come with a scabbard).

[Gaius Julius Caesar]

But we're talking about the actual qualities of the blade Jim, and I can tell you, it is a pain to stop the inertia of an over heavy blade during displays...any niggles you have with your joint, get prepared for them to be aggrevated! Better to spend that extra on a well balanced/weighted blade, it makes for a better technique too. A scabbard would have been nice too :lol: :lol:

[Hugh Fuller]

Interestingly, Patrick asks but 400 Euros for his Roman Riding Sword and that price includes a very nicely done scabbard. Of course, the price in 2001 when I ordered mine was an even better deal, $250 + $40 for shipping to America. It was a steal at that price, something that Parick must have realized as his price is now rather more, even if you don't take the latest appreciation of the Euro vs. the US Dollar into account.

[Gaius Julius Caesar]

Yes his swords are pretty interesting, which is why I am on his waiting list. :wink:

[brennivs - tony drake]

Gaivs I hope I can balance your blade :lol: This is one thing that must be considered when makeing a blade and the material of the hilt.Since most blades are well documented on size ,if you keep within the blade thickness the balance should not be a problem. The only 2 swords that Ive come across for balance problems is my late Germanic sword and one of the Ring Pommels I made, even to found proportions. You must also take into acount the origonal user and the strength built up useing these weapons.I agree that most mass produced swords tend to be a bit blade heavy.Other wise it is always a source of fascination when you make a blade ,then you put on the hilt and you get that first feel Great stuff nothing like it.
Regards Brennivs

[Gaius Julius Caesar]

I bet it is. I bet you will manage tho! :wink:

I was lucky to get ahold of a couple of blades which were still unhilted. While one was a nice weight as it was, the one which felt heavier without would probably have the better feel after it was completed.
the one which felt great at first was actually badly ground down and had an uneven finish. But it fooled me at first. :oops: :roll:

[Tarbicus]

Just a simple question: Were actual ancient spathae incredibly well balanced?

[Gaius Julius Caesar]

What use is a badly balanced one?

[Tarbicus]

What use is a badly balanced one?

If it still hurts your enemy, incredibly useful. I'm asking, are we transplanting modern quality onto the ancients, where it's well known that even the Vikings had to, on occasion during battle, step away from the fight to find a rock so they could straighten their sword again. And the Viking sword was basically a spatha. The exceptions cost the modern equivalent of at least £150,000.

It's like the ding-dongs about the hardware we wear; they 'must' be thicker gauge, and 'must' be capable of holding out for a re-enactment season. But the reality of the actual ancient hardware is that often it wasn't quite paper thin, but..... not all that far off, comparatively.

[Gaius Julius Caesar]

Yes Jim I agree with you there, some segmentata was thin, and greaves, etc, but then, the gladius I have are made after close study of museum artifacts, and it is a thin, well balanced blade....so I can't see the issue you have with it? :?

My heavy clunker deepeeka would probably not bend as easily, but it is still a pig...... if I have a choice between a pig and a pussy, I know which one I will go for..... 8)

[Gaius Julius Caesar]

What use is a badly balanced one?

........the ancients, where it's well known that even the Vikings had to, on occasion during battle, step away from the fight to find a rock so they could straighten their sword again. And the Viking sword was basically a spatha. The exceptions cost the modern equivalent of at least £150,000.

.

I recall hearing that about Gaulic swords Jim.....I'm not too up on Vikings, despite having a few friends of that ilk :lol:

[Endre Fodstad]

What use is a badly balanced one?

If it still hurts your enemy, incredibly useful. I'm asking, are we transplanting modern quality onto the ancients, where it's well known that even the Vikings had to, on occasion during battle, step away from the fight to find a rock so they could straighten their sword again. And the Viking sword was basically a spatha. The exceptions cost the modern equivalent of at least £150,000.

I think you are confusing the saga description of swords having to be replaced (during battle of Svolder, for example) because they had become dull (which must be taken with a grain of salt anyway unless the other side were really heavily armoured) with the roman tale of gauls straightening swords out during battle (which I've also taken with a grain of salt). I've never heard of such things from medieval literature on the vikings. The most common viking age weapons were axes and spears anyway, despite the relatively large number of swords we've excavated.

They did sometimes destroy their blades before burial, though; resmithing them and ruining the hardening and normalization they had gone through. Some examples have even been "rolled up" through this process and look like a giant snail with a head shaped like a sword hilt when they are excavated due to all the corrosion products.

[Matthew Amt]

Just a simple question: Were actual ancient spathae incredibly well balanced?

That's a good question, and I'd love to see a lot more good data on ANY Roman swords, particularly thickness, distal taper, etc. There just isn't much out there. Most books show only one cross-section of a blade, if any, and it's usually such a tiny drawing that nothing can be concluded from it besides an idea of the shape.

In Vol. 8 of JRMES there are several hispaniensis blades shown, and fragments of others. And some of them really look to me like "sharpened crow bars", with quoted thicknesses of 11 or 12 mm! They don't seem to taper much, either. Now, these are just drawings, so it's impossible to say if much of that could be due to corrosion products on the blade, remains of the scabbard, etc. But they still don't look like finely balanced weapons.

And of course the hispaniensis is not a spatha, but I don't have any spatha information. Maybe that new book will help!

Matthew

[Tarbicus]

I think you are confusing the saga description of swords having to be replaced (during battle of Svolder, for example) because they had become dull (which must be taken with a grain of salt anyway unless the other side were really heavily armoured) with the roman tale of gauls straightening swords out during battle (which I've also taken with a grain of salt).

J. Kim Siddorn, Viking Weapons & Warfare, Tempus Publishing. The reason old swords were valued so highly was precisely because they managed to survive intact for so long. He puts the modern equivalent price of some swords at £250,000 to be made. Kormak had to fight a duel with Bersi... "He had an iron sword of his own, but thought he would have a better chance if he didn't have to stop and straighten it under his foot every third blow (!)." He then goes to find Skeggi to borrow the sword Skofnung.

[Gaius Julius Caesar]

So, basically, you are going with the theory that says Romans were Crap at armoury? Why is it so impossible to imagine a sword of 24 inches being well balanced, and also a spatha, which isn't really that long after all! Have you seen the quality of workmanship atained on ancient myceanan bronze blades? I can't see why this is such a leap of faith..... :?

And if it would cost 1/4 of a milion to make a really super dooper blade today, surely a decent one at 500 is a bargain? Or even a thousand?......