Your choice for arming sword (for cutting and stabbing)

hank_rearden

hank_rearden

Joined
Jun 7, 2002
Messages
3,408
Right now i'm curious with the katzbalger design (16th c.) It has a real cutting edge in nearly all versions I've handled, up to the tip. It's a fullered blade so it's light and fast. The only negative to it is it's not much of the stabber due to the blade design. The makers seem to prefer a cutting tool all the way to the tip and as a result the blade it still wide and thick. Also, the s-guard could use a steel plate filler to defend against thrusts to the hand.

norte-katzbalger-europeia.jpg


What arming sword can give you the best of both worlds (cutting and stabbing)? Better yet if it's even lighter than the katz.
 
The Oakeshott typology blades in reverse order date wise might be XVIII and XVIIIc, XVI, XIV, XII and XI.

Qualify "arming sword" though. I liked both my bastards as single hand swords (XVa and an XVIIIa/c) but some might not categorize them as arming swords.

Then you regard you'd like something like a katzbalger with more of a point and enclosed counter guards. How about a figure eight late 18th or 19th century naval century cutlass? I have seen a couple of katzbalger with a slightly pointier tip and maybe one that had a closed counter guard but I don't have files for them.

Then add context. Are we just out to stroke egos and mentally masturbate? Or do you have a specific context to discuss. Obviously, a gun generally wins.

Cheers
GC
 
Your first sentence was unintelligible but you might have meant to qualify the term "arming sword."

Since you like to answer a question with several questions, I'll ask: can stupid or unlearned questions really touch egos that much? One would think sword buffs tend to be the hard sort but, again, I may be wrong.
 
Yes, I asked a couple of questions. Yes, my reply was in regard to swords I might regard as arming swords and mentioned two as favorites.

On the other hand, you have not really outlined what you want to read of other's opinions. If your real question is embodied in the thread header, I have answered your question.
A&A Warsword1.jpg A&A WAR 003.jpg

If you are asking for response to

What arming sword can give you the best of both worlds (cutting and stabbing)? Better yet if it's even lighter than the katz.

then you are looking for subjective "best" and you are kind of going down the road of preferences. Again answered in my previous reply. Better overall performance with;
The Oakeshott typology blades in reverse order date wise might be XVIII and XVIIIc, XVI, XIV, XII and XI.

Group A had fewer cavities than group B. Without specifications listed in your first post, the replies will be entirely open ended.

Cheers
GC
 
Last edited:
hank_rearden hank_rearden , I guess I read horseclover horseclover 's first sentence as a suggestion of blade types that might be more what you're looking for using the Oakeshott double edged sword typology on the top and center right in the figure below.

f1bf0c0e01570c2e13c5aea1550dc240.jpg

Personally I think that there are a lot of sword types that don't really seem to have an obvious place in the Oakeshott, so it could be improved upon. That said, it's the current standard and the best system I'm aware of that we have to work with when trying to classify and describe various sword blades.

Are you looking for an "off the shelf" option or thinking about going custom? If you're going custom and not married to the idea of 100% historical accuracy there's no reason that you couldn't mix and match features from different types to design the sword that's just what you want.

For example the broader area of the guard directly above the grip on your katzbalger pic could be hammered out thinner and even broader (it looks to be about 1/4" thick so lots of steel there to work with) to fill in more of the space inside the S guard. Then you could change to a blade shape with a bit more of a pointy tip and I think you'd have exactly what you're wanting. Perhaps not absolutely historically accurate, but it would still be cool as heck.
 
Oakshot XVI or XVIII. Personally id go with Han Dynasty Jian but thats the blacksmith in me liking to swing heavy things.
 
hexenjager said:
hank_rearden hank_rearden , I guess I read horseclover horseclover 's first sentence as a suggestion of blade types that might be more what you're looking for using the Oakeshott double edged sword typology on the top and center right in the figure below.

View attachment 1024238

Personally I think that there are a lot of sword types that don't really seem to have an obvious place in the Oakeshott, so it could be improved upon. That said, it's the current standard and the best system I'm aware of that we have to work with when trying to classify and describe various sword blades.

Are you looking for an "off the shelf" option or thinking about going custom? If you're going custom and not married to the idea of 100% historical accuracy there's no reason that you couldn't mix and match features from different types to design the sword that's just what you want.

For example the broader area of the guard directly above the grip on your katzbalger pic could be hammered out thinner and even broader (it looks to be about 1/4" thick so lots of steel there to work with) to fill in more of the space inside the S guard. Then you could change to a blade shape with a bit more of a pointy tip and I think you'd have exactly what you're wanting. Perhaps not absolutely historically accurate, but it would still be cool as heck.
Click to expand...

What is the source for the included typologies diagram I would like to find and purchase a copy...
 
Triton said:
What is the source for the included typologies diagram I would like to find and purchase a copy...
Click to expand...

I'm not sure. It was just the most complete typology image that came up in a quick Google search. You should be able to download the image I posted to your computer or phone though.
 
The katzbalger is not useless when it comes to the thrust, but this is because the tip is narrow in taper, while broad in profile. Think of a spatula ground down so thin you could plunge into a solid body. Clothes, and obviously armor, will be obstacles, but then this sword was never intended to go against armored opponents. It is, as all swords are, a sidearm, and not a soldier's primary weapon. The landsknechte who made the sword famous were pikemen and harquebusiers first and foremost. Flankers were sometimes armed with zweihanders, but these appear to have been used much like pole weapons, to complement the pikes. While it's not clear how much action action the katzbalger would have seen and how it would have handled a leather clad opponent, if you like the design and history of it, rest assured it handles the thrust capably against a home intruder.

Matt Easton talks katzbalgers at minute 8:41.


Zieg
 
Last edited:
hexenjager said:
Excellent link! Thanks for that. :thumbsup:
Click to expand...
What is a true shame is that too few are even going to be interested in the broad scope of image plates authored by Bashford Dean (and others) and that the link is a gamer's site. Not that there is really inherently wrong with that but so, so much copied and pasted onto pages with no attribution for the work. I applaud Russ for the inquiry as to the source.

Cheers
GC
 
horseclover said:
What is a true shame is that too few are even going to be interested in the broad scope of image plates authored by Bashford Dean (and others) and that the link is a gamer's site. Not that there is really inherently wrong with that but so, so much copied and pasted onto pages with no attribution for the work. I applaud Russ for the inquiry as to the source.

Cheers
GC
Click to expand...
Thanks for the outstanding detective work Glenn, I should have guessed that Peter Johnsson would be involved somewhere. Also thanks for the links, that first site appears to show that many of the plates are in Czech? German perhaps? More mysteries to unravel....
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top