Viking hand a half sword? Whatcha make of this:

Dave Womble · Post by **Dave Womble** » Thu Sep 01, 2005 11:20 am

Alex B, a forum member on Arador posted this quote and image he found on Sword Forum, and I wanted to present it here as well for further discussion and comments:

I just subscribed to Viking Heritage Magazine and received a great companion book called "Follow the Vikings" that provides an overview of Viking sites worldwide. It describes Grobina, Latvia as a "centre of Scandinavian settlement on the Baltic Sea" with no fewer than 3,000 burial mounds. There are three cemeteries in Grobina with grave goods of central Swedish and Gotlandic type. It also makes the point that Grobina was as close to Gotland as Birka, and, in a little understatement, says, "... some of the finds are unique in the Viking world."

Dave Womble · Post by **Dave Womble** » Thu Sep 01, 2005 11:23 am

Its quite a bit different than any of the swords shown in "Swords of the Viking Age" by Ian Peirce. Never seen one with such an elongated hilt before.

That coupled with the posted find in Tromso, I'm giddy like a school boy.

Dave

Russ Mitchell · Post by **Russ Mitchell** » Thu Sep 01, 2005 11:27 am

It's either well-known, or else hotly debated, that the traditional sword timeline is pretty bunked up. Greatswords were in use at Civitate among the Swabians, and blades with handles like that of that length are known from the steppe.

Hell of a pretty sword.

Murdock · Post by **Murdock** » Thu Sep 01, 2005 11:58 am

Thats what we get from the pic but we have no sense of deminsion, nothing to compare it to.

Do you have measurments for it?

Dave Womble · Post by **Dave Womble** » Thu Sep 01, 2005 1:40 pm

The spacing between the pommel and guard alone is what raised my eyebrows...thats pretty uncommon for Scandinavian swords. I havnt looked and compared it to any of the Viking Age typologies (Wheeler or Petersen) so I have no idea as to its relative date. Like I said though, of all the "viking" swords I've seen in books and reports, I've never seen one with a grip that long before.

Dave

Murdock · Post by **Murdock** » Thu Sep 01, 2005 3:50 pm

Is the grip that long of is the hilt that narrow???

Need measurements?

It does look like a hand and a half hilt length though, help if we had a pic of it in someones hand.

Russ Mitchell · Post by **Russ Mitchell** » Thu Sep 01, 2005 4:19 pm

From the archaeological longswords I've examined in Hungary, it looks dead on target...

Dave Womble · Post by **Dave Womble** » Thu Sep 01, 2005 4:30 pm

I think its a longer than average grip...all the other ones in my sword books are pretty "stumpy" for want of a better word.

Theres a couple examples in Peirces book that are not quite as long as that one, but longer than others. Perhaps it was specially made for an exceptionally large man. I dont begin to claim it has anything to do with specialized fighting styles or anything like that, but its definately not a typical sword.

Dave

Patton Lives · Post by **Patton Lives** » Thu Sep 01, 2005 7:06 pm

Murdock wrote:Is the grip that long of is the hilt that narrow???

Need measurements?

It does look like a hand and a half hilt length though, help if we had a pic of it in someones hand.

Heh dude that aint a narrow hilt thats the tang! the wood hilt has probably rotted off a long time ago

Lorccan · Post by **Lorccan** » Thu Sep 01, 2005 7:29 pm

Drachus wrote:Heh dude that aint a narrow hilt thats the tang! the wood hilt has probably rotted off a long time ago

True, but compared to other similar examples in Pearce's work, that still looks like an unusually long tang. Compare the width of the blade to the length of the tang, and I'd say it's very interesting.

Alcyoneus · Post by **Alcyoneus** » Thu Sep 01, 2005 8:52 pm

It isn't THAT long. ;-)

The Four Tetrarchs, c305:
[img]http://ist-socrates.berkeley.edu/~amiddltn/unitone/tetrarchs.jpg[/img]

Patton Lives · Post by **Patton Lives** » Fri Sep 02, 2005 6:46 am

Lorccan wrote:
Drachus wrote:Heh dude that aint a narrow hilt thats the tang! the wood hilt has probably rotted off a long time ago

True, but compared to other similar examples in Pearce's work, that still looks like an unusually long tang. Compare the width of the blade to the length of the tang, and I'd say it's very interesting.

I know, thats what I was trying to tell him, it isnt that the hilt is real skinny that gives the illusion of it being longer, it really is longer, considering the fullness the grip would add when installed, it looks like its at least 9 inches long eh?

Cap'n Atli · Post by **Cap'n Atli** » Fri Sep 02, 2005 6:57 am

Individual genetic variation?

Personal preference?

Local fashion?

Just another great example of why we have to be very careful with the use of the terms "never" and "always". Glad I saw it, because I'd be reluctant to believe it otherwise (despite the fact that hand-and-a-half was my favorite later medieval style sword).

More information on it, and any similar examples, will be welcome.

Murdock · Post by **Murdock** » Fri Sep 02, 2005 2:58 pm

"that aint a narrow hilt thats the tang"

Hilt meaning the cross guard and pommel.

The narrower they are the more "illusion "of length the handel could have.

I thought that was obvious but i forgot that Drachus needs ..small... words... sp..oken... slow.l.y

Mord · Post by **Mord** » Fri Sep 02, 2005 3:21 pm

Well, in the first place, I don't recognize the decoration on the hilt and the pommel. This looks "plated" and not carved or inlaid, like other swords. Second, are there any other swords like it there?

Mord.

Patton Lives · Post by **Patton Lives** » Fri Sep 02, 2005 7:22 pm

Hilt meaning the cross guard and pommel.

Or it can mean the entire handle assembly, depending on what reference you are using eh?

Vitus von Atzinger · Post by **Vitus von Atzinger** » Fri Sep 02, 2005 10:13 pm

Once again, it shows that hard-and-fast rules about was and wasn't do not really hold water.

VicK-K · Post by **VicK-K** » Sun Sep 04, 2005 10:50 am

Hello:

I asked my mentor (he is heavily into swords of this time period) about longer sword grips and he said "Sure, they had them, just not all that common" so they were known, at least to him and several other metallographers studying that period. But he went on to say that photographs without accurate measurements with them, or at least some sort of scale can be very misleading.

So I have to agree that some measurements would be nice on this..

Vegas Vic

mordreth · Post by **mordreth** » Sun Sep 04, 2005 1:39 pm

The problem is not having a measurement listed
It could be a hand and a half viking sword, or a knife with really nice furnature

Cap'n Atli · Post by **Cap'n Atli** » Sun Sep 04, 2005 10:16 pm

mordreth wrote:The problem is not having a measurement listed
It could be a hand and a half viking sword, or a knife with really nice furnature

Except that I can count the number of double edged Viking knives I've seen on one finger; and it didn't look like that.

Still, measurements would certainly be useful; plus any further contextural information.

mordreth · Post by **mordreth** » Mon Sep 05, 2005 8:24 am

same numbering system I'd use for hand and a half viking swords (outside of 13th warrior)

I heard a comment from someone that most of the artifacts we have for "dark ages" arms and armor would fit into a good sized three car garage - I'm sure there is more stuff out there that will make us change hard and fast rules

Bjorn Are Stolen · Post by **Bjorn Are Stolen** » Tue Sep 06, 2005 5:24 am

Swords that break with what seems to be the norm surfaces from time to time. A swordfind from around the year 0 in norway shows a La-Tene sword (small pommel, v-shaped crossguard) with a 18 cm long grip. (The blade is around 80 cm)

Petersen writes that the grips (on vikingswords) averridges in at around 10 cm, the shortest 8cm; the longest 12 cm -and often from the late viking-age.

One can only speculate, it's not found one single vikingsword in norway that I know of with such a long grip (there's been found around 2000 vikingswords in Norway). A long grip with a sizeable pommel improves the balance, and the sword could very well be intended like a "Norman cavalery-sword" from the 11th century-that have attatched some old fassioned pommel/crossguard-pieces (from the 9/10th centuries? -the small crossguard is most typical in the older vikikng age, acording to Petersen). Swords wielded from horse will often have relatively long blades, and that offsets the balance. That can be compensated with enlengthening the grip, and voala; a 11/12th century cavallerysword resembeling a 14th century longsword! (The fact that the pommel is one piece and not 2 pieces could be interpeted as a sign of a relatively young sword, as only one pommelpiece-acording to Petersen-is a sign of cheap copying or late viking age/medieval times.)

Cap'n Atli · Post by **Cap'n Atli** » Tue Sep 06, 2005 7:59 am

Seems to me like the "Bronze Buddha Rule" should apply; namely to avoid endless copies of possible unique artifacts. especially in the same camp or group. Also, one still needs to pin down location and time period.

On the other claw, it does reinforce that there were a range of forms within the period, and that wider variations did occur. From the point of view of teaching, variations are good, where authenticlones and uniformity are more atypical in most early medieval contexts.

Had an interesting complaint from one of the crew the other day; it seems that the Viking period tunics he found on the internet were all far too fancy for an oar-puller like him, they all had nice trim and such, and didnÃ¢â‚¬â„¢t look too sturdy. He wanted to know where to fine some plain, work-a-day type tunics. I have him sewing his own now; itÃ¢â‚¬â„¢s cheaper and more personal.

Wolf · Post by **Wolf** » Sat Dec 31, 2005 9:41 pm

bump

http://www.myarmoury.com/talk/viewtopic ... highlight=

check the discussion here about this sword. i did a lil photo shop in my post there. i believe the part they have for the guard is realy the bottom part of the pommel like albion's jarl sword. but thats jsut my internet opinion. without fully inspecting and handling the piece to see how it goes together, its really up in the air.

Russ Mitchell · Post by **Russ Mitchell** » Sun Jan 01, 2006 12:16 am

Or it's a fake, and is a typical longsword with viking furniture on it. ::shrug:: No clue here w/o access to the dig data...

Bartel fitz Neel · Post by **Bartel fitz Neel** » Mon Jan 09, 2006 9:53 am

I think it was made for a six fingered man.

"Hello, my name is Inigo Montoya. You killed my father: prepare to die ..."

Thomas Powers · Post by **Thomas Powers** » Tue Jan 10, 2006 3:46 pm

And here Atli I was looking for a bronze Buddha statue you could use as an anchor...

Thomas

Halvgrimr · Post by **Halvgrimr** » Tue Jan 10, 2006 4:36 pm

two things to throw in here

A) from what I can tell Latvia trade was much like that at Gotland, lots of unique 'way the hell out in left field' odd ball finds. Many one of a kind (as stated), this does not make any of those odd ball pices COMMON.

B) I have documentation on a greatsword in an early period Russian grave, found in a womans grave none the less:)

Halv
mysteries happen, its what keeps us on our toes

Viking hand a half sword? Whatcha make of this:

Viking hand a half sword? Whatcha make of this:

Cavalery-sword (with nostalgic pommel)?