This is a thread for medieval sword lovers and your favorite classification. For those who do not know, the classification of medieval swords was made by Ewart Oakeshott, who devised a classification system based off roman numerals, mainly X followed by a different number. XI-III is focused on single-handed cutting swords, then it gets interesting as armor comes into play.
This thread is a place to talk about medieval swords and your favorite swords.
My favorite has to be the Xyphos, which is the spartan sword that thepunisher93 mentioned I believe. They are short, easy to handle, and can be used efficiently in defense, with a good handguard and strong base so they can parry a slicing attack.
I Like XVIa.... they are rather short swords..... but that usually means that they are lightweight and easy to maneuver with. To me- if you can dodge one blow from an enemy tht gives you a very good advantage in the battle
I like swords in general, but I would say my favourites are the Viking sword and the (not-so-medieval) Iberian Falcata. Viking swords just look cool and are certainly handy, though not worth anything against armor (they're for slicing only). Falcatas however are handy and are worth something against armor, not because they're any good at thrusting (they're not), but because it's actually more of an axe, functionally speaking.
However if I was to actually choose a sword and not know whether it should be good against armor or not, I would choose an 'Anderthalb-Haender' or ******* sword. They're mainly one-handed but can be held with two hands too, allowing for stronger blows. It's not worth as much as a fully two-hand sword, but is much more handy.
Thanks for the image, Hahiha! As you can see, the swords have more acute points and larger amounts of tapering as they go along. XXII Was a favorite prop in LOTR, as you can see it resembles the Elven swords. To an untrained eye type XVI seems like one of the older swords, but if you look closely it has a more acute point, larger taper and shorter fuller, intending to be used against armored foes. Such a sword would be ideal for archers, short, but strong and able to be used against a foe.
The post isn't gone. Just refresh the page and you'll see it. It's always like that, annoying but eh..
You sure XXII was also the base for elven swords? It looks more like Boromirs sword. The elven ones are usually curved, except for Sting and Glamdring (Glamdring being one of my favourite sword; elegant yet looks heavy enough to deliver strong blows).
Any idea why the guard is bent forward in the two last classes? Is it purely esthetical?
The guard is not always like that, but it reflects catching the sword and throwing it back at an opponent. Oakeshott based the system first of blade, then hilt features. Perhaps it reflects the loss of the use of such swords in skill, and reflects laziness in fighting? Because after these swords came the all-important cutlass and singlehanded rapiers and epees and sabers. Maybe I'm wrong. Perhaps the hobbit's swords were Type XV? That was the revolution of the sword. But they use that sword for cutting in the movies, where Type XV is actually for stabbing. ¿_?
I don't know what class this sword would be in but my favourite sword would have to be the claymore. Used by William Wallace to kill the English in the late 13th century. It measured an incredible 5 feet 6 inches (168 cm).