Thank you kindly!

I want to second @jarodmasci3445's comment above. Additionally, it would be great to see your stitching method. I have been learning blacksmithing and leatherworking with the goal of eventually making my own reproductions of medieval weapons. It has been difficult to find good information on period-accurate grip construction. Thanks again!

Thanks for the visit

no we have not made any of that style, I have had a couple folks. discuss getting Byzantine style swords as custom pieces but so far no one has decided to move forward with it. I have seen some of the middle eastern pieces done this way but not made any.

Howdy, many do develop rattling if/when the wood shrinks or is damaged. If the grip and the guard fit correctly then it can be closed so it is tight, but grips are a consumable part of a sword. When medieval people fought with swords the grips did wear out and the fit of the swords would suffer, so it would be regripped.

The medieval swords with mortiesed tangs the guard is driven onto the blade and fits tightly. The pommel is driven onto the tang and assembled, then the grip is made of two mortiesed parts. It is all very tight. His description dosent seem to match the medieval swords and viking era swords i have inspected.

Hey guys. When a guard was fit to a blade, you used a tool like the shoulders of the blade to punch or "drift "through the piece. There were two reasons. First, it was a lot easier than trying to drill it with medieval technology. Second, it gave you a decent fit. The guard does need to fit well, especially under compression. When we look at antiquities, sometimes the guard is firmly fixed to the blade and sometimes it is very loose.the pieces that are firmly fixed and don't have a grip or generally highly corroded. Not always. We also don't know if they were using glue or some kind of mastic on the grip and the cross to make it secure. I think probably they were in cases where it seemed like things were too loose.

The slot was hot punched with a tool of similar shape to the sword shoulders.

Hmmm I would probably try to use the stone and run it down the edge as opposed to try ing to move the sword over the stone. Not sure if the electric would do well and bastard files might be to aggressive. I have used a 400 grit belt stretched tight and hand worked the blade along it like a stone and that worked in a pinch when I did not have a belt grinder to hand.

I believe the current grip lengths have more to do with our modern protective equipment (people like their fingers intact) than anything else

@@PoorMansHEMA Perhaps, but that doesn't change the fact that your hand are further apart. Even by a bit, I think it changes the leveraging action of the sword. So the question is now, do you want to just fight in tournaments, in which case use whatever it works best, or do you want to test historical techniques? And just to avoid getting in useless polemics, I came to the conclusion that my technique level is still too poor to count as doing anything historical.

@FiliiMartis I am not aware of any historical techniques in any treatises in which an extra 6in on a grip to make space for gloves would inhibit. I myself use shorter grips as a preference but have no issue with those who use longer ones. The feders we have in museums have long grips as well.

@@PoorMansHEMA Do you agree with me that Marozzo's Longsword has a prescribed longer grip than those in the German traditions (let's say Liechtenauer)? And grabbing the pommel or not grabbing the pommel make a difference in how you use the grip? So that's a difference (btw, 6in extra on a grip is a lot in my opinion), and it's not about inhibiting as it is about facilitating. It's more that I compare how I hold and use my sharps (smaller grips) compared to trainers (34 cm long grips). When my hands are closer together on the grip of an adequately reproduced sharp, I find that my arms feel more tense (that's the best way I can describe it). On a longer handles, spacing the hands leads to a more relaxed and forgiving grip. I am new to longsword (Marozzo; so longsword is not a main focus for me), and I find longer grips to be more forgiving, which means I may be taking home the wrong lessons. But then, I look at the drawings in a variety of manuscripts, and I see long grips, but I also see overly large swords. I actually assume that has to do with the creative licence when it comes to drawing. Because when I look at antiques, unless we go to spadone territory and the like, I see a lot of longswords with shorter grips (including on antique feders I saw). Since there is also variation, I should say that I see a lot of shorter grips on German longswords, while Italian ones have longer ones. I would say that one should use a smaller grip (like the A&A feder in this video) if the focus is on a living history and the reproduction of a German tradition (to force your hands to stick together) rather than tournament sparing (in which case, again, use whatever it works best; it's hEMA with an "h" in this case anyway). That's my take.

@FiliiMartis There's a lot here I could reply to but I think it's mostly important to note smaller hilts are better for wearing, longer hilts are (generally) better for fencing. This balance has always been a main factor in hilt sizes. We see historical examples of both extremes and yet the masters in KdF are largely unconcerned about it. I have practiced with HUGE feders and my own shorter ones I own. I have never noticed anything other than preference when it comes to historical techniques.