Terry Pratchett's Self-Made Meteorite Sword

jamie writes "Fantasy author Sir Terry Pratchett says he was so excited after being knighted by the Queen that he decided to make his own sword to equip himself for his new status... the author dug up 81kg of ore and smelted it in the grounds of his house, using a makeshift kiln built from clay and hay and fueled with damp sheep manure."

Comments

Original Article

[bjorniac]

The article on which this news story seems to be based, complete with picture of Sir pTerry and his sword is at
http://www.paulkidby.com/news/apr2010.html

Re:Original Article

[fast turtle]

It appears to be in the Gladius Style (Roman Legion) and is a Short Sword. Keep in mind, this isn't the size of Excalibur or what Conan would use. Instead it's based on a practical design developed by the roman legions for use by Centurions in their shield wall formation. Practical and short enough not to interfere with your neigbors sword.

Re:Original Article

[L4t3r4lu5]

Partly correct. The Gladius was favoured by the Legions because it was short enough for the scabbard to be hung on the same side as the wielding hand. This prevents the act of drawing the sword from taking any more room than one man standing upright, maintaining their tight shield wall formation.

Clever buggers, they were.

Re:Original Article

[Colonel Korn]

Where this myth came from, I have no idea, but I've yet to see any real world evidence that it's anything other than a myth, and that includes demonstrations from Roman reenactors trying desperately (and often hilariously) to justify it.

Ignoring the argument of why the Romans wore their scabbards on the right, there's plenty of conclusive evidence that they in fact did so.

Roman art is, as usual, our best source of information on Roman culture.

Look at this, for instance: http://www.romanarmy.net/images/Pages/articles/artweapons/artwep2.jpg.

Re:Original Article

[Caerdwyn]

It's as much metallurgy as anything else. Until pattern-welding became widespread around 800AD, blades much longer than 24" just didn't have the strength needed in combat, particularly for swords intended for slashing motions.

There are some excellent websites for smiths doing reproduction historical swords with well-researched historical techniques which make for a fascinating read (to nerds like myself anyway). Start with Patrick Barta at www.templ.net and Jim Hrisoulas at www.atar.com, then move on to www.myarmoury.com for hands-on reviews and photos.

Re:Original Article

[wanax]

It depends on your definition of phalanx.. is the key factor the overlapping shields, many ranks deep with close order, fighting in a single line or using spears? In the classical hoplite phalanx met all four criteria, with everybody fully armored in bronze, each soldier had a spear (~10ft) and short thrusting sword, and were typically arranged between 6 and 24 men deep with the most experienced soldiers in the front and the back rows (to prevent less experienced soldiers from fleeing). Battles were typically decided by whose front rank broke first, which was more a function of pushing from behind than individual skill up front. It was not uncommon for bodies to be wedged upright from the pressure until one side broke. The spears were essentially double tipped, which would give you two shots if you're spear broke, which was fairly common. The hoplite was named for his shield, the hoplon, which was large, and and designed to overlap with his neighbors, making a shield wall. As the Greek empires expanded into Thrace and Asia minor, where most of the soldiers were likely to be professional rather than land-owning citizens, the amount of armor was decreased while the spear grew in length. This made the formation cheaper and more maneuverable, but these phalanxes had to be supported by sling and javelin equipped auxiliary troops since there armor wasn't sufficient to protect against ranged attack.

That eventually evolved into the Macedonian phalanx (by way of Thebes), where professional, drilled soldiers wearing breastplates and chain skirts, who carried ~18ft pikes and short swords in an 8-deep formation. They were drilled to not let opposing infantry close under their pikes, and as long as they could do this, they were extremely effective. However, due to the size of their spears, they used much smaller shields, which did not fully overlap (so fit 3 of the 4 possible criteria). Back rank soldiers holding their pikes upright or at an angle also served to break up incoming missile fire. The problem with these formations was they were not very maneuverable, and their cohesion could be broken up by rough terrain. This was fine for the Macedonians, who used phalanxes to hold enemy infantry in place while their cavalry flanked it, but ran into problems when they were used by Greek armies without excellent cavalry or skirmisher support.

The early roman legions were essentially an evolution against phalanx and shield wall formations employed by the Italian tribes. Originally legions were arranged into three cohorts: hastati (poorest, youngest and least experienced, with usually without full armor), principes (prime troops, usually equipped with chain mail) and triarii (veteran solders, all excellently equipped). Prior to the Polybian reforms, all these troops fought with hastae (short spears, ~7ft) and the gladius short swords. The main difference was the organization: instead of having one line of phalanx, the Roman formation was organized into three lines (hastati, principes, triarii) in which each line was further subdivided into 60 or 120 man units who fought as shallow (6 ranks) phalanxes, with large overlapping 'scuta' shields (this also fits 3 of the 4 criteria). The enemy would first have to fight through the hastati, who retired behind the principes, and then if necessary the triarii. The main advantage of this formation was that the front-line of troops didn't have to fight throughout the battle, and it was easier to keep small units together while maneuvering. These formations turned out to be ineffective against Macedonian and Carthaginian phalanxes, so Polybius reformed them so that the hastati and principes carried several pilums (throwing javelins) rather than thrusting spears, which could break up the Macedonian phalanxes from beyond the range of their pikes and allow the shallow Roman formations to close quickly, or flank as required. The Triarii still fought as a traditional phalanx. This essentially replaced the pike with a longer ranged weapon, without changing the essence of the close order form

Advance Australia Fair

[Kupfernigk]

From TFA: " Wiltshire, west of London..." I know we are a very small country and Australia is a very big one, but not everything in this country has to be defined by reference to London. Wiltshire, from where I am posting this, is in the South of England. London is East of Wiltshire, and nothing whatever to do with this story, which is about a (very) English author who lives (sensibly) in Wiltshire.

For the benefit of the rest of the world, Wiltshire is East of Redmond and West of Moscow...rant over.

Re:Alzheimer

[Amarantine]

Actually, the man himself told us during the recent Discworld convention that he did this. As for the alzheimer: he seemed remarkably strong and clear, and fortunately in much better (mental) shape than i expected him to be.

Re:Energy density of 'damp sheep manure'

[confused one]

Coal is a convenience. Long before coal was widely available, they used to use wood, charcoal, and peat. In a pinch you could use anything that will burn. The trick is to add oxygen (air) with a bellows, without which it's hard to melt iron even with anthracite coal.

Re:It's made of magic

[Thanshin]

Owning a sword isn't illegal, though carrying one in public usually is.

In Spain, carrying a sword in public is legal if it's not concealed. But you've got to have a reason to be carrying it, like "I just bought it and I'm taking it home", "I'm going to my bastard sword class" or "I'm going to the woods to take pictures of my sword collection".

You can also carry a non concealed hunting knife of any size or form, including two bladed.

What you can't carry is any pocket/concealed weapon over 11cm, two bladed or with an automatic aperture system based on internally stored force (mass, for gravity or inertial automatics is ok).

Re:Alzheimer

[dkf]

Alzheimer's is degenerative & he's only been relatively recently diagnosed; he's had Unseen Academicals and I shall wear midnight both published this year - if you can have two books published you're bound to still be in good mental shape - it's when he stops publishing that we'll know his Alzheimer's has got his mind.

Not just that, but it seems to be mainly progressing in parts of his brain that aren't needed for producing stories. (Before watching a TV programme about TP's Alzheimers, I didn't know that it could differentially affect different areas of the brain. Just goes to show that TV can be educational after all.)

Re:It's made of magic

[Thanshin]

Not familiar with the terminology, are you referring to something like a switchblade?

Yes.

It's a shame that a lot of places have banned those, because I find that they are VERY useful. I have one and it became my favorite knife to use while working in places where my hands are occupied. I can get it in my hand, disengage the safety and open it with my thumb, do the work, and then close it again easier than a typical lockback knife.

There are other kinds of folding knives that can be opened with one hand, the only difference is whether they'll stab something on the opening movement, which is not justifiable for a tool, thus the internally stored force limit that includes springs and even bullet cartidges (without the bullet).

A typical folding knife can be nice, but I hate how loose the ones with blades you can open with one hand are.

A good knive can have a perfectly firm and locked blade that you can open with one hand. They may be expensive, though.

The awesome thing about a spring loaded knife is that the spring keeps positive pressure on the blade (even after you release the lock to close it) This positive pressure, combined with a dull 'back' to the blade (not double sided) lets you do the following:

To close the knife:

1. Hold the release to unlock the blade
2. push the back of the blade against a convenient surface
3. It locks in place, re-engage the safety.

With a typical folding knife, once you release the lock on the open blade, the sharp side is free to move and, in my opinion, is slightly harder to manipulate in a safe way, especially with one hand. If you have ever had the chance to use a quality switch blade (Not double edged), they are damned useful tools.

I own several Benchmades, Spidercos, etc and I've never had a problem handling them with one hand but I think what you want is a fireman's folding knife, made to be opened with one heavy gloved hand. You may want to lock into CRKT's kind of assisted opening.

Having said that, I'd use a fixed blade if at all possible.

Re:It's made of magic

[thoromyr]

Some rapiers were *very* stylized (the ridiculous blade lengths that became popular among courtiers, for example). But "deep bellied" or "broad bladed tip" designs are not the only form for effectual swords and chopping is not very efficient for defeating armor, thrusting is. And for thrusting a triangular blade is desired.

One place to start educating yourself about swords and the various types is http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Oakeshott_typology

You will notice that Type X "taper toward the tip" rather than becoming broader. Or the Type XII which is improved for thrusting. Or the Type XIII which, while not especially adapted for thrusting, fails to have the "broad toward the tip" design you aver is the only functional sword type. Note when and how common this sword type was.

In fact, you won't find much in the way of sword blade types meeting those limited criteria.

Re:It's made of magic

[Oligonicella]

You do not know what you're talking about. A good sword balances an inch or so forward of the quillons. What you're referring to were early swords, based on the designs of Bronze Age swords, which had thickened blades to sustain damage, not for hacking needs. Furthermore, the favored tactic of Romans was to block upwards with the shield and jab into the enemies unprotected midsection. Even before Rome fell, those designs had disappeared.

Re:It's made of magic

[mcvos]

How do you want the balance to be? For a well-balanced sword, the center of gravity is near the cross guard. It has to be, if you want to swing it around easily. And swords are just not intended for chopping through armour. When people started wearing more and more armour, knights started using axes, maces and warhammers, and foot soldiers started using halberds and various other polearms.

Personally I don't see what's wrong with the balance of Sir Terry's sword (as if you could tell what the balance is like just from looking at it). It's certainly a bit of an odd design, and probably not the most effective sword ever, but it definitely counts as sword. It even looks properly double edged (which is what used to distinguish swords from long knives and sabres in medieval Europe, though not in other parts of the world).

Re:Alzheimer

[VJ42]

Careful reading of his more recent works, not just the two you mentioned but going back 5-10 years, you do notice some things in his works degrading; not enough to hurt the overall quality of the book, but enough that you can tell something is happening. The largest change is a reduction in vocabulary, but there is also the fact that tend to be more straightforward, with less metaphors and colorful language.

Like I said, the ideas are all still sound, the humor is fun and entertaining, there are no gaping plot holes left unfilled, but I suspect that you could make a pretty interesting study on the effects of Alzheimer's on language by studying his books. And you'd certainly have a good sample of his writing (what is he up to now, 30 books? 40?

38 Discworld Novels alone, multiple Discworld spin-offs (I can recommend the three "Science of Discworld" books as fun pop-sci books, they're hard science mixed with a story about the Wizards "roundworld" project in alternate chapters, they're not like the "Science of star-trek" type books), he's done quite a bit of non-Discworld stuff as well IMO the best being Good Omens with Neil Gaiman.

Has his work gone down hill? I'm not so sure, his style has defiantly changed, but I think a lot of it was him maturing as a writer. Both Thud! and Night Watch are far better pieces of writing than The colour of magic ever will be. having said that my favourite is actually one of the older books - Guards! Guards!