ßradTimmins wrote:
But now I'm not so sure which of the two would be better. You mentioned that the Meyer was a little more flexible and sporty than the Liechtenauer, which seems to make sense as I presume it would be just a little safer to spar with. On the other hand, the Liechtenauer might feel MORE like a "real" practical sharp and therefore more suitable in the long run with sparring, on a pell or doing any solo practice. The question I have in mind is this: If I was a 15th C. fighter, which of the two TRAINING swords would best prepare me for using my PRACTICAL battlefield sword? (And of course the choice of a blunted sword is not to the exclusion of a waster or a sharp)
Strictly speaking, you'd probably be using either a
federschwert (such as the Meyer for training) or a duller version of a "sharp" were you around in the 15th C. The reason I say "a duller version of a sharp" is that swords which were designed to be used on the field had relatively thin edges, and even one with duller edges still handles like a sharp, especially compared to the rounded edges of a
federschwert. That is to say, I'm aware of no practice swords which looked like the Liechtenauer existing historically.
But this might not really matter. The Liechtenauer is certainly a better practice sword when it comes to mimicking sharps designed to face full plate armour, which would have been relatively common in the 15th C. And visually speaking, it's a bit more appropriate for the 15th C in my opinion; while
federschwerter did exist at this period, the pommel and guard on the Meyer look pretty much identical to a 16th century antique
federschwert that I saw while visiting Germany.
Then there's also the matter of which one you find more visually appealing, which is a highly subjective thing. While that shouldn't be your only criterion for making your decision, it's nonetheless an important one.
A good place to read more about the Meyer versus the Liechtenauer is in the thread about the Meyer at the myArmoury forums. Peter Johnsson, who designed both swords, comments on the respective handling characteristics of them. His comments are located on the third to last post on the first page:
http://www.myarmoury.com/talk/viewtopic.php?t=9635There is still one thing about grip styles I'm not sure about. What is the benefit to a wire wrapped grip? I recently had my hands on a practice rapier with a wire wrap grip. What I heard was that the wire wrap was a classic way of providing a durable grippy surface...it also made me want to use a glove after a while. Is it common to see wire wrapped grips at ARMA events?
I'm not sure if there's a specific benefit to a wire wrap grip. It mostly comes down to personal preference. I think you might find that depending upon the wire wrap grip, when your hands get sweaty, it may become more difficult to hold your sword. I like non-wire wrap grips better, but that's a personal preference. Even with non-wire wrap grips though, you still may find that your hands feel a bit agitated, particularly from gripping the pommel of the sword. This is normal and fades with regular practice.
