I wish professors the world over would not just act upon this call for action, but share this video with their students. I think students of all disciplines could benefit from this inspirational message. Well done.
I like how Matt's like, someone should do this, when it's obvious he should be the one to do. I mean 261 K subscribers and growing bro, you have the support behind you to do it.
If people would pay me for it, I could and would. however what's stopping us is the publication rights for photography rights. That, quite simply is what makes it prohibitively expensive to do.
Ewart Oakshott's work deserves recognition. I thank Matt Easton for introducing Oakshott's books here because they should be basic for anyone who has an interest in medieval swords. I agree with Matt that Oakshott is somewhat obsolete today. I would like to recomment "Development of the sword in the Middle Ages" by Alfred Geibig. This book is not just newer. Geibig's typology also seems to me more conclusive. However, I do not know if it has been translated into English.
It's you, man! It's gotta be you! Listen to your own advice and taken on the challenge! You've got 260,000 people listening to you already. You've got your audience, you've been doing this for years so you've honed your delivery method for information. You've got everything you need, and think about it - that could be your name that everyone starts using as the standard for excellence in the subject!
Oakeshott got me thru grade school. When bored with class I read about swords! The archeology of weapons was practically on permanent loan from the library. I should probably buy a copy and reread it it has been many many years! But it would be even more interesting to see what has been done since! I imagine you could well publish a book on nonregulation military swords of the victorian era... Yeh it's a niche area but you seem to know a lot more about them than most. I've been watching a lot of sabre vids you have and holy cow you know that stuff off the top of your head!
Hi Matt. I brought this video to discussion on some arms and armour groups to talk a little about it, and to try and point out that part of the reason why we have a lot of misconceptions and misinformation that are so widespread about medieval armour and weaponry is also related to the fact that we don't have a lot of this updated materials in a easy to access format nowdays. (A lot of the research we have on this stuff is actualy pretty hard to find for most folk). In the discussions some people brought up a lot of interesting topics, one that came up by some people you probably have heard of like Fabrice Cognot and James Elmslie, was that even though they realy wanted to publish their researches, one of the problems was the fact that it is actualy quite expensive to publish some of this stuff, and if we wan't to be realistic about it, those books ain't exactly the kind of stuff that sells a lot, most of the time not enough to cover the expenses of actualy making the research. That is one of the main reasons why we don't have that much stuff published right now. Anyway, I thought I might share some of the discussions we had there, it's a very interesting topic I have to say, and sadly one that doesn't get a lot of atention. In any case, If you have any interest in extending the discussion any further, or maybe bring some other topics to the table, I'm all for it. Cheers.
I think the easiest way to get the first book out should be the reader's guide to Oakshott or an addendum to Oakshot. Or someone taking an editorial role and compiling the essays and articles into one book with a suitable introduction and explanation chapters where needed. The quickest and maybe dirtiest method could be an online article or ebook, just linking and contextualizing the already electronically published essays and articles. Even dividing the workload by setting up an editorial committee so that it is spread over say three to six people, any greater number than this would setup more complications than it would solve.
I believe that much of the missing element has been the divide between those with the scholarship regarding primary sources regarding arms, and the contextual perspective to constructively interpret those sources, and those with the practical experience as regards the handling of such weapons with the concomitant comprehension of the relationships, advantages, and trade-offs between form and function that actual proficiency with those weapons intrinsically confers. Returning to school for a second degree later in life and coming from an academic background of archaeology and a personal background of armed martial arts I developed a very fruitful relationship with a medievalist historian who provided me with extensive new perspectives on the cultural, economic, and political context within which medieval combat developed; my familiarity having been previously focused, from my prior education, primarily upon their toolsets. In turn I was able to provide him with a practical understanding of how such weapons were actually employed and how changes in form were reflective of changes to technique. A picture being worth a thousand words, I on occasion linked some of your videos (had to look up how one properly cited RUclips) to illustrate points of technique in papers I submitted to him. The understanding we arrived at was greater than the sum of the parts we initially brought to the table. You have quite rightfully pointed out the limitations of drawing extensive inferences from experimental archaeology in the complete absence of historical detail, as with iron age sword and roundshield, but the synergy between rigorous historical analysis and practical experimentation has great practical application in those cases where we have an incomplete scaffolding, if you will, of primary source detail upon which we can build, the experimental archaeology rather filling in the gaps. If the coming generation of medievalists focusing upon the arts martial chooses to personally acquire proficiency, or better, even some degree of mastery, of the tools of knightly endeavor, this sort of understanding would not consist, like my own experience, of glimmers of insight in the Autumn of my life drawn from the chance meeting of two like minded people walking very different paths but would, in contrast, proceed organically from the developing young scholar's incorporation of their academic insights into their comprehensive and intuitive understanding of what function must necessarily follow a given form. Students of history should be able to get course credit for HEMA; no other single elective, would, in my opinion, further broaden their understanding of military history. Categorizations of families by similarities of blade contours would be supplemented by classifications based upon, say, point of percussion, something somewhat more reflective upon similarities or differences in their employment. I simply hope that I am given to live long enough to profit from their insights and understanding.
I have published two short articles on daggers. One about Meyer specificly and one about the kind of daggers featuring in the medieval manuals. Ill write more after new year
Perhaps, a collaborative approach could be taken where various authors take on an aspect, type of sword, time peroid, or locale. I'm no expert, so I don't know what makes the most sense for how to divide the subject matter, but it seems to me "divide and conquer" would make the project much less daunting for a single author.
I think a lot of people are working on a Magnum opus style volumes that will likey be to big and deep for a wide ordnance. If we locked mat in a room for a week, we'd get the 60 pages swords of waterloo book by Christmas an then he could work on the other bits instead of him day dreaming about the massive swords of british empire 1578-1980 book that he might finish one day.
If you wrote a book on, say, nonregulation military swords in the victorian era, it'd be a hit. A lot of people talking about later stuff don't seem to have any practical experience using swords. It'd be great to have a history/typology from the perspective of a swordsman, nit just a paper researcher...
Strangely I just watched your previous short review on Records of the Medieval Sword. I am always interested in acquiring cool books like this. I'll need this book. I also like to see Roland Warzecha's documentation of original swords as well as Peter Johnsson's work on dimensions of swords as well and would love to see stuff like that in a book.
Yes I'm watching your back-catalogue lol. But yeah should publish, can always publish a second iteration later on which can work really well with limited runs. When I look back at my time at uni and we are told we can buy text books that are 10 generations back and be fine...I think publishing two in a decade should be fine :P
I feel like Matt is maybe overlooking that a lot of what would have gone into a book in 1985, in 2019 goes on to RUclips. The means by which we access the information others possess has changed pretty drastically. I mean, Roland Warzecha's work both on cataloguing historical pieces and in studying the use of the sword is, in my opinion, brilliant. But none of it, to my knowledge, is published in a book.
At least 2 other RUclipsrs have done so. One is The Chieftain, he published a book last year (through Wargaming, his employer) about experimental US tank destroyers. The other is Ian from Forgotten Weapons (aka Gun Jesus) and he published a book on French military firearms.
@@Riceball01 There are plenty of books about firearms and other more modern military equipment. And their numbers grows constantly even if most casually interested people never hear of them. Pretty sure he wasn't referring to those.
@@Vyleea I was referring to the book on French military firearms written by RUclipsr Ian McCollum which falls under what Matt was talking about. A book written by someone knowledgeable but isn't a professional author or academic
I don't think publishing today is easier than some decades ago. Research has gone far since the times of Hutton or Oakeshott in both methods and rigor (for many good reasons). These guys have PhDs. By first hand experience i can assure you that even a single 10 pages article published by a medium-high level research institution or journal, often requires multiple years of study, reviewing, work, correction etc. I'd say a research book takes at least 5 years just to get written and reviewed (plus all the research and data you need to gather and elaborate before even putting a letter on page). Of course you can publish on small, independent publishers, but if you're doing cutting edge-level research (PhD level) you want to do it rigorously, with publishing institutions capable of reviewing and validating your research. It's the only way in wich the research community can use and discuss your material (so that it creates debate, and therefore knowledge). Surely someday it will come out, but it's not at all as easy as you say
NicAimo -- But ten or more years ago, after doing all that researching, writing, checking, rewriting, lather, rinse, repeating, you still had to convince a publisher to print it for you. And expected market for such niche books is tiny, so most publishers just wouldn't be interested, no matter how good your book was.
Alfred Geibig s dissertation is pretty darned important as a typology, and a typological method, that, although originally used on a timeframe somewhat in between pedersen and oakshot, applies to the entire period. quite a srious and academic sort of work I think it is only published in German, should be translated
Studying the typology of swords, in the videos I often encounter confusion and errors in determining the types, as well as clumsy reproductions of swords that do not correspond much to the declared type. It would be great to make a video guide for each type, with examples and a brief description of the features. I think many of us would appreciate it.
I can use your help. Soon I will be decorating several swords with acid etched & powder coated art. They will be display only, never used. I already have books on Sutton Hoo, the Staffordshire Hoard, Viking & medieval swords. Any suggestions of other books or sites with a lot of pictures would be great.
I’m working on getting my BA in medieval history and currently writing about about religious syncretism between Christianity and Paganism. My dream is to publish a book about Harald Hardrada.
Ha. Hahah Hahahahahahahahahahahahahaaaaaaahno. Still aim to. But still need many thousands of euros/pounds in travel costs and photographic rights to be able to get all the ones we need to to get it into print.
Kind of random, but I'm pondering getting a modern reproduction bronze sword and was wondering, despite it not being your primary era of focus, have you handled any? I'm leaning towards the "Carp's Tongue" of the British collection over on Bronze Age Swords in particular, which has a somewhat thrust specialized tip yet a broad blade otherwise. Probably will get it eventually for the sake of having a bronze blade in my collection, but was curious about how one should handle vs later era swords.
Isn't there a wiki or something where experts, researchers, and collectors can pool their knowledge? If not, is that something you would be interested in contributing to?
Whats you thoughts on "By the Sword: History of Gladiators, Musketeers, Samurai, Swashbucklers and Olympic Champions" by Richard Cohen. I enjoyed it but was wondering if you find it historically accurate?
Both times I have read By the Sword I found it to be well written and filled with interesting anecdotes, but personally I also find it very irritating to read. Throughout the book it was painfully obvious, at least to me, that Richard Cohen came from an Olympic fencing background and that that really colored his view of fencing history. So far as I can tell he really did believe, at least at the time, that fencing history was a linear progression from random flailing (Medieval) to perfection (sport fencing) which is one of the worst misconception that any historian of fencing can have. For example at one point he refers to the Spanish system of Destreza as "an arcane and elaborate ritual" (page 29) even though in the very next paragraph he cites Maestro Ramon Martinez as one of his sources, a man who, more than any other, has proved that Destreza is the equal and possibly the better of any other fencing system ever created. In general he also tends to imply later in the book that the transformation of fencing as an art and preparation for the dual into a sport was a good thing, something which I as a classical fencer would strongly reject. In summery, Cohen's knows how to tell an engaging story and he used some good sources but be careful about accepting either his conclusions or the implicit assumptions he used to make them.
Yeah I agree his work was leading edge but far from perfect. In archaeology of weapons he says falchions are an evolution of Seax's, I've never seen any evidence for that.
Twenty people who "could be" writing books? Seems to me the field is ripe for an anthology with each author contributing a chapter on their specialty. Now if only there were someone with good general knowledge of stabby things and good people skills to bring the others together...
"cutting edge research". Your pun game is, on point.
So is your pun.
Ouch.
I wish professors the world over would not just act upon this call for action, but share this video with their students. I think students of all disciplines could benefit from this inspirational message. Well done.
Grad students generally do need thesis ideas
I like how Matt's like, someone should do this, when it's obvious he should be the one to do. I mean 261 K subscribers and growing bro, you have the support behind you to do it.
Came here to say this too. Definitely knowledge is there, go for it!
He says its easier nowadays to publish, but he wont do it himself?
Oakeshotts contempt for the nonsensical word chainmail was the best :)
If people would pay me for it, I could and would.
however what's stopping us is the publication rights for photography rights. That, quite simply is what makes it prohibitively expensive to do.
Oakeshott and his books were my bible on the weapons of our ancestors. Just as he and I were developing a friendship, he died. A great loss for us.
Matt, I just got my BA doing weapons research and history. I'm hoping to get my PhD in it too.
I'll look forward to seeing your papers start to appear over time then!
Scholagladiatoria, Lindybeige, Skallagrim. I just can't get enough of these videos! (Also Hard2hurt, but it's different content)
*taking notes furiously for the next purchase order for books
Ewart Oakshott's work deserves recognition. I thank Matt Easton for introducing Oakshott's books here because they should be basic for anyone who has an interest in medieval swords. I agree with Matt that Oakshott is somewhat obsolete today. I would like to recomment "Development of the sword in the Middle Ages" by Alfred Geibig. This book is not just newer. Geibig's typology also seems to me more conclusive. However, I do not know if it has been translated into English.
It's you, man! It's gotta be you! Listen to your own advice and taken on the challenge! You've got 260,000 people listening to you already. You've got your audience, you've been doing this for years so you've honed your delivery method for information. You've got everything you need, and think about it - that could be your name that everyone starts using as the standard for excellence in the subject!
Thanks Matt, good information, as always, and a nobel challenge. Hope you've encouraged someone to pick up this gauntlet. Thanks once more.
Oakeshott got me thru grade school. When bored with class I read about swords! The archeology of weapons was practically on permanent loan from the library. I should probably buy a copy and reread it it has been many many years! But it would be even more interesting to see what has been done since!
I imagine you could well publish a book on nonregulation military swords of the victorian era... Yeh it's a niche area but you seem to know a lot more about them than most. I've been watching a lot of sabre vids you have and holy cow you know that stuff off the top of your head!
How about you, Todd and Toby get together and work on updating his work?
Hi Matt.
I brought this video to discussion on some arms and armour groups to talk a little about it, and to try and point out that part of the reason why we have a lot of misconceptions and misinformation that are so widespread about medieval armour and weaponry is also related to the fact that we don't have a lot of this updated materials in a easy to access format nowdays. (A lot of the research we have on this stuff is actualy pretty hard to find for most folk).
In the discussions some people brought up a lot of interesting topics, one that came up by some people you probably have heard of like Fabrice Cognot and James Elmslie, was that even though they realy wanted to publish their researches, one of the problems was the fact that it is actualy quite expensive to publish some of this stuff, and if we wan't to be realistic about it, those books ain't exactly the kind of stuff that sells a lot, most of the time not enough to cover the expenses of actualy making the research. That is one of the main reasons why we don't have that much stuff published right now.
Anyway, I thought I might share some of the discussions we had there, it's a very interesting topic I have to say, and sadly one that doesn't get a lot of atention. In any case, If you have any interest in extending the discussion any further, or maybe bring some other topics to the table, I'm all for it.
Cheers.
I think the easiest way to get the first book out should be the reader's guide to Oakshott or an addendum to Oakshot. Or someone taking an editorial role and compiling the essays and articles into one book with a suitable introduction and explanation chapters where needed. The quickest and maybe dirtiest method could be an online article or ebook, just linking and contextualizing the already electronically published essays and articles. Even dividing the workload by setting up an editorial committee so that it is spread over say three to six people, any greater number than this would setup more complications than it would solve.
I believe that much of the missing element has been the divide between those with the scholarship regarding primary sources regarding arms, and the contextual perspective to constructively interpret those sources, and those with the practical experience as regards the handling of such weapons with the concomitant comprehension of the relationships, advantages, and trade-offs between form and function that actual proficiency with those weapons intrinsically confers. Returning to school for a second degree later in life and coming from an academic background of archaeology and a personal background of armed martial arts I developed a very fruitful relationship with a medievalist historian who provided me with extensive new perspectives on the cultural, economic, and political context within which medieval combat developed; my familiarity having been previously focused, from my prior education, primarily upon their toolsets. In turn I was able to provide him with a practical understanding of how such weapons were actually employed and how changes in form were reflective of changes to technique. A picture being worth a thousand words, I on occasion linked some of your videos (had to look up how one properly cited RUclips) to illustrate points of technique in papers I submitted to him. The understanding we arrived at was greater than the sum of the parts we initially brought to the table. You have quite rightfully pointed out the limitations of drawing extensive inferences from experimental archaeology in the complete absence of historical detail, as with iron age sword and roundshield, but the synergy between rigorous historical analysis and practical experimentation has great practical application in those cases where we have an incomplete scaffolding, if you will, of primary source detail upon which we can build, the experimental archaeology rather filling in the gaps. If the coming generation of medievalists focusing upon the arts martial chooses to personally acquire proficiency, or better, even some degree of mastery, of the tools of knightly endeavor, this sort of understanding would not consist, like my own experience, of glimmers of insight in the Autumn of my life drawn from the chance meeting of two like minded people walking very different paths but would, in contrast, proceed organically from the developing young scholar's incorporation of their academic insights into their comprehensive and intuitive understanding of what function must necessarily follow a given form. Students of history should be able to get course credit for HEMA; no other single elective, would, in my opinion, further broaden their understanding of military history. Categorizations of families by similarities of blade contours would be supplemented by classifications based upon, say, point of percussion, something somewhat more reflective upon similarities or differences in their employment. I simply hope that I am given to live long enough to profit from their insights and understanding.
I remember my first foray with Netsword while Oakeshott was still alive. He was on there, actively engaging with us enthusiasts.
I have published two short articles on daggers. One about Meyer specificly and one about the kind of daggers featuring in the medieval manuals. Ill write more after new year
Where can I find the Meyer publication?
Send me your email and ill send you the pdf, it Meyer but specificly dagger. Or you can find it published in the medieval dagger research group on fb
Perhaps, a collaborative approach could be taken where various authors take on an aspect, type of sword, time peroid, or locale. I'm no expert, so I don't know what makes the most sense for how to divide the subject matter, but it seems to me "divide and conquer" would make the project much less daunting for a single author.
"If you want something done, do it yourself". Pleading with others to do what you want done never produces results.
Christ. I'm writing medieval fantasy and I still find reasons to update various things as I learn more.
So, you are publishing a sword book soon!
I think a lot of people are working on a Magnum opus style volumes that will likey be to big and deep for a wide ordnance.
If we locked mat in a room for a week, we'd get the 60 pages swords of waterloo book by Christmas an then he could work on the other bits instead of him day dreaming about the massive swords of british empire 1578-1980 book that he might finish one day.
If you wrote a book on, say, nonregulation military swords in the victorian era, it'd be a hit. A lot of people talking about later stuff don't seem to have any practical experience using swords. It'd be great to have a history/typology from the perspective of a swordsman, nit just a paper researcher...
Strangely I just watched your previous short review on Records of the Medieval Sword. I am always interested in acquiring cool books like this. I'll need this book.
I also like to see Roland Warzecha's documentation of original swords as well as Peter Johnsson's work on dimensions of swords as well and would love to see stuff like that in a book.
'The medieval sword form and art" iirc uses Johnson's infographs on balance and percussion points, as featured on the medieval review channel
Yes I'm watching your back-catalogue lol. But yeah should publish, can always publish a second iteration later on which can work really well with limited runs. When I look back at my time at uni and we are told we can buy text books that are 10 generations back and be fine...I think publishing two in a decade should be fine :P
I feel like Matt is maybe overlooking that a lot of what would have gone into a book in 1985, in 2019 goes on to RUclips. The means by which we access the information others possess has changed pretty drastically. I mean, Roland Warzecha's work both on cataloguing historical pieces and in studying the use of the sword is, in my opinion, brilliant. But none of it, to my knowledge, is published in a book.
Shit man this goes for more than just swords, if you've got the science give us the books!
At least 2 other RUclipsrs have done so. One is The Chieftain, he published a book last year (through Wargaming, his employer) about experimental US tank destroyers. The other is Ian from Forgotten Weapons (aka Gun Jesus) and he published a book on French military firearms.
@@Riceball01 There are plenty of books about firearms and other more modern military equipment. And their numbers grows constantly even if most casually interested people never hear of them. Pretty sure he wasn't referring to those.
@@Vyleea I was referring to the book on French military firearms written by RUclipsr Ian McCollum which falls under what Matt was talking about. A book written by someone knowledgeable but isn't a professional author or academic
I don't think publishing today is easier than some decades ago. Research has gone far since the times of Hutton or Oakeshott in both methods and rigor (for many good reasons). These guys have PhDs. By first hand experience i can assure you that even a single 10 pages article published by a medium-high level research institution or journal, often requires multiple years of study, reviewing, work, correction etc.
I'd say a research book takes at least 5 years just to get written and reviewed (plus all the research and data you need to gather and elaborate before even putting a letter on page).
Of course you can publish on small, independent publishers, but if you're doing cutting edge-level research (PhD level) you want to do it rigorously, with publishing institutions capable of reviewing and validating your research. It's the only way in wich the research community can use and discuss your material (so that it creates debate, and therefore knowledge).
Surely someday it will come out, but it's not at all as easy as you say
NicAimo -- But ten or more years ago, after doing all that researching, writing, checking, rewriting, lather, rinse, repeating, you still had to convince a publisher to print it for you. And expected market for such niche books is tiny, so most publishers just wouldn't be interested, no matter how good your book was.
Alfred Geibig s dissertation is pretty darned important as a typology, and a typological method, that, although originally used on a timeframe somewhat in between pedersen and oakshot, applies to the entire period.
quite a srious and academic sort of work
I think it is only published in German, should be translated
Studying the typology of swords, in the videos I often encounter confusion and errors in determining the types, as well as clumsy reproductions of swords that do not correspond much to the declared type. It would be great to make a video guide for each type, with examples and a brief description of the features. I think many of us would appreciate it.
Thanks. I was wondering what to buy my archaeologist daughter for Christmas.
I can use your help. Soon I will be decorating several swords with acid etched & powder coated art. They will be display only, never used. I already have books on Sutton Hoo, the Staffordshire Hoard, Viking & medieval swords. Any suggestions of other books or sites with a lot of pictures would be great.
I hope to join those researchers after my education.
I’m working on getting my BA in medieval history and currently writing about about religious syncretism between Christianity and Paganism. My dream is to publish a book about Harald Hardrada.
If you're in North America and are thinking about getting published, look up Tyrant Industries. They might be able to help.
That's a statuette of Alfred the Great, on the mantle, I believe.
Do it yourself and you will see how hard things nowadays to accomplish!!
Plug "The Sword in Form and Thought".
Does anyone know if James Elmslie has published his book on the single edged sword in Europe?
Ha.
Hahah
Hahahahahahahahahahahahahaaaaaaahno.
Still aim to. But still need many thousands of euros/pounds in travel costs and photographic rights to be able to get all the ones we need to to get it into print.
@@j.g.elmslie9901 crowd funding, perhaps?
I've contributed to lesser causes.
Sir Matt, I would buy a book written by you.
Kind of random, but I'm pondering getting a modern reproduction bronze sword and was wondering, despite it not being your primary era of focus, have you handled any?
I'm leaning towards the "Carp's Tongue" of the British collection over on Bronze Age Swords in particular, which has a somewhat thrust specialized tip yet a broad blade otherwise. Probably will get it eventually for the sake of having a bronze blade in my collection, but was curious about how one should handle vs later era swords.
New goal in life, quest added
Isn't there a wiki or something where experts, researchers, and collectors can pool their knowledge? If not, is that something you would be interested in contributing to?
Whats you thoughts on "By the Sword: History of Gladiators, Musketeers, Samurai, Swashbucklers and Olympic Champions" by Richard Cohen. I enjoyed it but was wondering if you find it historically accurate?
Both times I have read By the Sword I found it to be well written and filled with interesting anecdotes, but personally I also find it very irritating to read. Throughout the book it was painfully obvious, at least to me, that Richard Cohen came from an Olympic fencing background and that that really colored his view of fencing history. So far as I can tell he really did believe, at least at the time, that fencing history was a linear progression from random flailing (Medieval) to perfection (sport fencing) which is one of the worst misconception that any historian of fencing can have. For example at one point he refers to the Spanish system of Destreza as "an arcane and elaborate ritual" (page 29) even though in the very next paragraph he cites Maestro Ramon Martinez as one of his sources, a man who, more than any other, has proved that Destreza is the equal and possibly the better of any other fencing system ever created. In general he also tends to imply later in the book that the transformation of fencing as an art and preparation for the dual into a sport was a good thing, something which I as a classical fencer would strongly reject. In summery, Cohen's knows how to tell an engaging story and he used some good sources but be careful about accepting either his conclusions or the implicit assumptions he used to make them.
Who is that little statue in the background?
John Smith I don’t know. But he looks like he could seriously beat my ass!
Robert the Bruce. I bought the bronze because I liked it, but later found out that my Scottish ancestors fought for him, which I find interesting.
Why don't *you* write a book? ☺️
If a lot of the book is outdated or wrong, why would you still recommend it for someone looking to get serious into medieval swords?
Because it is still the best bumper book of medieval swords
Yeah I agree his work was leading edge but far from perfect. In archaeology of weapons he says falchions are an evolution of Seax's, I've never seen any evidence for that.
Twenty people who "could be" writing books? Seems to me the field is ripe for an anthology with each author contributing a chapter on their specialty.
Now if only there were someone with good general knowledge of stabby things and good people skills to bring the others together...
that's a good idea. I would be up for that.
also collaborate together --- pool knowledge and publish it
Isn't writing and publishing these books inherently uneconomical?
They cannot lose money, just not make very much. But that's true of many things in the arts and sciences.
If only I wrote about swords maybe I should break from horror .