Hi,
In Europe the composition of the blade was never really a matter of art/craftsmanship.
I think that this might very well be the reason you don't see my point. I'm afraid you are wrong and that the making of blades in the West was every bit as much of an art as it was in the Orient. The West just didn't make as big a deal of it.
Ultimately, the blade *was* the sword. Usually the blade was made by a swordsmith using complex methods to get the best blade possible. It was then often transported and traded until someone bought it and who took it to an artisan (often a jeweler) who would fit the blade with the necessary hilt, quillions, pommel, scabbard, etc. at the blade owner's desire and specifications. Often blades survived generations and the fittings (hilt. etc.) were replaced as they wore out or as better ideas came along. That is how many of the transition weapons came about -- new guard of some type re-mounted (or perhaps first mounted) on an older blade.
For a long time, European sword blades were often made of several pieces of material, chosen for their individual properties and hammer welded together. Milder metals were used for the body of the blade, harder materials for the edge. As time went on, better techniques and better metallurgy made the process more complex, not less. A Renaissance blade was worked in such a fashion that the grain structure was mostly along the blade. The edges and tip were worked more than the center, work hardening them so that they would hold a better edge. The heat treatment was differential, again making the edge very hard, the body of the blade somewhat milder and the tang soft enough to peen. The whole process was quite complex and required both talent and experience to make the sword right.
Even good modern fencing blades are made by similar techniques and not cut from a blank of rolled steel. Prieur http://www.prieur-sports.com/prieur_GB/index.asp makes some of the best (I think *the* best) blades for fencing, and many of the techniques and some of the equipment dates back centuries.
I have never found much authoritative information on European swords on the Internet. Most of the info is either BS made up by fantasy readers or the self serving misinformation of the modern swords makers. One decent site is http://www.vikingsword.com/index1.html beyond that, I suggest you try a good library. There are excellent books written on the evolution of the sword, but check the author's credentials. If the guy is a museum curator or an academic historian, the info tends to be good. If it is just some sword aficionado, odds are he's just relaying myths and legends. However, some aficionados have become historians in their own right and there was one guy (whose name I cannot remember) who traveled around Europe, going to museums and getting permission to photograph, weight, and measure their collections. His book, which I saw about thirty years ago, is one of the best there is on European weapons.
I fear that you've been taken in by the mystique of the Japanese sword (which, BTW, is pretty much a lie -- all but a small number of the Japanese swords presently in existence were poorly made and mass produced for the officer corps of WW II) and have been misinformed as to the history and craftsmanship of the European sword. If, indeed, the blade of the European sword were made like a horseshoe or a nail by any village blacksmith, I might agree with you. But, indeed, much more knowledge, technology, talent and effort went into the blade than into all the other fittings combined. The blade was the state of the art, high tech part of the sword. I'd infinitely sooner have an original blade with replica fittings (after all, blades were often refitted) rather than original fittings on a replica blade.
--Pete
In Europe the composition of the blade was never really a matter of art/craftsmanship.
I think that this might very well be the reason you don't see my point. I'm afraid you are wrong and that the making of blades in the West was every bit as much of an art as it was in the Orient. The West just didn't make as big a deal of it.
Ultimately, the blade *was* the sword. Usually the blade was made by a swordsmith using complex methods to get the best blade possible. It was then often transported and traded until someone bought it and who took it to an artisan (often a jeweler) who would fit the blade with the necessary hilt, quillions, pommel, scabbard, etc. at the blade owner's desire and specifications. Often blades survived generations and the fittings (hilt. etc.) were replaced as they wore out or as better ideas came along. That is how many of the transition weapons came about -- new guard of some type re-mounted (or perhaps first mounted) on an older blade.
For a long time, European sword blades were often made of several pieces of material, chosen for their individual properties and hammer welded together. Milder metals were used for the body of the blade, harder materials for the edge. As time went on, better techniques and better metallurgy made the process more complex, not less. A Renaissance blade was worked in such a fashion that the grain structure was mostly along the blade. The edges and tip were worked more than the center, work hardening them so that they would hold a better edge. The heat treatment was differential, again making the edge very hard, the body of the blade somewhat milder and the tang soft enough to peen. The whole process was quite complex and required both talent and experience to make the sword right.
Even good modern fencing blades are made by similar techniques and not cut from a blank of rolled steel. Prieur http://www.prieur-sports.com/prieur_GB/index.asp makes some of the best (I think *the* best) blades for fencing, and many of the techniques and some of the equipment dates back centuries.
I have never found much authoritative information on European swords on the Internet. Most of the info is either BS made up by fantasy readers or the self serving misinformation of the modern swords makers. One decent site is http://www.vikingsword.com/index1.html beyond that, I suggest you try a good library. There are excellent books written on the evolution of the sword, but check the author's credentials. If the guy is a museum curator or an academic historian, the info tends to be good. If it is just some sword aficionado, odds are he's just relaying myths and legends. However, some aficionados have become historians in their own right and there was one guy (whose name I cannot remember) who traveled around Europe, going to museums and getting permission to photograph, weight, and measure their collections. His book, which I saw about thirty years ago, is one of the best there is on European weapons.
I fear that you've been taken in by the mystique of the Japanese sword (which, BTW, is pretty much a lie -- all but a small number of the Japanese swords presently in existence were poorly made and mass produced for the officer corps of WW II) and have been misinformed as to the history and craftsmanship of the European sword. If, indeed, the blade of the European sword were made like a horseshoe or a nail by any village blacksmith, I might agree with you. But, indeed, much more knowledge, technology, talent and effort went into the blade than into all the other fittings combined. The blade was the state of the art, high tech part of the sword. I'd infinitely sooner have an original blade with replica fittings (after all, blades were often refitted) rather than original fittings on a replica blade.
--Pete
How big was the aquarium in Noah's ark?