Postby Ken Dietiker » Sun Dec 16, 2007 3:07 am
Well, finds from the La Tene III era (125 BCE to 100 CE) have a few longer than average blades, from 80-90 cm (31-35 inches) with tangs from 20-23 cm (8-9 inches). They are a bit less pointy than previous versions (La Tene I and II), that is pointed but with a slightly rounded tip. They also have a thinner blade with a more pronounced ridge and some examples of double fuller the length of the blade, where earlier versions were more lenticular without the center ridge.
(Note: in French this ridge is called an "arrete" which means a "stop", or at least I have seen some articles that call it that. Not sure if it's always been called that by the blacksmiths or if that's something invented by a historian/archaeologist to describe what he "thought" was the ridge's purpose. Something to do more research on...)
Since little if any organic material survives to tell us much about the handle construction and form, there is a lot of debate either direction as to whether or not these were actually hand-and-a-half swords or not. The nay-sayers claim that no evidence exists for the style of fighting used in two hands, so it must have been for anther purpose (such as changing grips during the fight, fighting in ranks, or something; many and any reasons come up), and those who claim they ARE examples of hand-and-a-half swords of course can not prove it, so it is dismissed by the establishment as not fulfilling the criteria of the Socratic method.
However, with such lengths of blade and tang from this period that have already been found, who's to doubt such a thing did not exist in a more northern area as well, even a bit latter.
But you know, without evidence, any such theory will remain just that, a theory.
Ken
-----
"They are ill discoverers that think there is no land,
when they can see nothing but the sea". ~Francis Bacon
