Early medieval sword on ebay

[George Turner]

Hi all,

Looking closer at the E-bay sword, the tang looks flat on both sides of the fuller. Just above it, on the blade, the steel is already sloping down to form an edge. Simple grinding away on a pre-existing portion of the blade would've resulted in a slope on the edges of the tang. I'll have to agree with Bjorn. This is probably how it was orginally made.

Bjorn's photo also brings up another interesting observation. In his photo, the center of the cross extends into the fuller, leaving no gap. The sword on E-bay doesn't provide a clear view of this area, but is probably similar. This raises the obvious question of how they got the cross slid up to the blade's shoulders, over the non-fullered portion of the tang. This implies that the cross may have had it's center pried apart, then was slipped in place and set firm with a couple hammer blows.

If this is a general technique, then the tang could have a notch, tab, or hole, which the cross could use to latch firmly to the sword. Basically, the cross could be spread open prior to assembly with something like a wedge or chisel. It could then be slid into place, and then hammered tightly to the tang. It can't move forward because of the blade's shoulders, and can't move back because its locked to some part of the tang. If this notch has a slope to it, hammering the cross could also apply leverage against the blades shoulders, making for an extremely permanent and tight fit, all without depending on the wooden handle to apply pressure to hold the cross in place.

I sure wish I had local museums to visit...and an X-ray machine.

Best Regards,

George Turner
ARMA in KY

[Jake_Norwood]

Looking at the picture Bjorn provided, or the sword on E-bay, I'd say that those tangs wouldn't ever break. The breakage problems seem to be a product of our modern thin and narrow rat-tail tangs.

I am further convinced and have to agree. Why is it that modern tangs are so thin, even in cases of stock removal (where a thinner tang should be a hastle), when we have so many fine examples of wide tangs?

[George Turner]

I think our hilt technology just stems from knifemaking practice, where short-cuts don't matter as much. I just finished watching Jim Hrisoulas two-part video on making pattern-welded blades. The pattern welding part was fine, but when it came to the hilt - echhh!!! <img src="/forum/images/icons/shocked.gif" alt="" /> Each step seemed worse than the last. The handle was shaped to the tang by heating the tang with a torch (this is AFTER the blades final heat treating) and shoving the wood onto it, to burn it to shape. Do we really want the handle attached to the tang with a layer of charcoal? Things just got worse after that...

Hopefully Vikings kept a good supply of epoxy on hand, since that's how the top-quality custom-forged damascus dagger was mechanically held together. It looks like we've got some hilts that are the result of the accumulated short-cuts that won't matter in a knife, but are disasterous in a sword.

Best Regards,
George Turner
ARMA in Ky

[Guest]

No notches (or holes or whatever) needed! But your guess on the slip-on, hammer-closed cross is correct. Peter Johnsson observed that feature when he studied the Wallace Collection A.460 (pic).



Speaking of Peter: the pic below shows three semi-finished blades by him (rather early work), where the fullers extend to and up the tang.

[Guest]

A fullered tang is not a weight issue, it is a strength issue. Approach the problem form an engineering perspective - an I-beam shape is MUCH stronger than a simple rectangular shaped tang. Fullering the tang thru the shoulder to tang area, which is the point that takes the most stress, only makes sense.