Here’s the weights in lbs. You can see that for a one handed weapon, the weight is generally between 2 to 3.5 lbs max and double that if the weapon is meant to be wielded with two hands. Viking era sword 2.46 lbs Norman era sword 3.19 lbs 13th C Falchion 3 lbs 14th C Longsword 3.08 lbs 15th C Longsword 3.4 lbs 15th C Messer 2.06 lbs 15th C Arming Sword 2.65 lbs 14/15th C Battle Axe 2 lbs 15th C Warhammer 2.05 lbs 15th C Zweihander 7.54 lbs 17th C Rapier 2.72 lbs 16-17th C Basket hilt backsword 2.52 lbs 18th C Smallsword .96 lbs 18th C Spadroon 1.42 lbs 1811 Prussian Cavalry Saber 2.5 lbs 1845 Royal Navy Cutlass 2.72 lbs 1822 French Cavalry Saber 2.39 lbs 1828 Highland Broadsword 2.55 lbs 1845 Rifle Regiment Officer’s Saber 1.7 lbs 1912 Cavalry Officer’s Sword 2.3 lbs Martini-Henry Rifle 9.48 lbs Medieval Spear 3 lbs Medieval Winged Spear 3.43 lbs Danish Great Axe 4.75 lbs
From doing technical work I speak metric but I grew up with "Freedom units". I had an intellectual grasp of Matt's use of metric. The intuitive grasp of lbs really helps. Thanks! It's still clear how surprisingly *little* variation there is across the centuries.
Thank you! I'm tired of telling people that the warriors of old didn't use 30 kg swords! I'll use this as proof from now on! Thank you for keeping us entertained during the quarantine. I hope the misses and kids are okay and well, and will stay so.
Fikret Komurcu same dude. My friend though an arming sword was like 4.5kg, though to be fair I did too until a few years ago when I actually got into history.
I've known about this for years but not in detail. There was an article long ago about how Arnold Schwarzenegger kept breaking the (blunt metal) correct weight prop swords he was using in the first Conan film, so the prop people made him a *thirty pound* sword, the weight of which forced him to wield it in a more realistic fashion.
And many ancient swords were even lighter. Roman gladiuses were 1-2 pounds, and Han Dynasty single handed daos for cavalry and infantry were ~1-1.5 pounds.
Well, I, for one, was fascinated. I really did expect that longer spear to be closer to 2 kilos. Would have also liked to see a mace in there. Does it say something about this audience that watching a man weigh swords in his garden for 30 minutes is gripping entertainment for us? Hmmm...
The Hollywood trope of burly men using swords and women using bows should be reversed. Warbows of over 100 pounds in draw weight need a lot of muscle to draw, whereas a 1-3 pound sword doesn't need a lot of muscle to swing around.
You don't need to be a body builder, but you need to have an athletic build like Matt. He has the right muscles in the right places. A lot of people who lift at the gym and are "muscular" wouldn't have the right muscles for sword fighting.
Women would use a bow fairly well during huntings and competitions, including at the Middle Ages. Perhaps not English longbows, indeed, but smaller or composite ones were commonplace for the "fair sex". i.pinimg.com/736x/dd/73/54/dd7354f123a994ae69d84741ccb13f0c--medieval-archer-illuminated-manuscript.jpg i.pinimg.com/originals/4d/5f/8c/4d5f8cb4621d1cead33e0495fa7f7731.jpg
@@karinefonte516 Women could use bows for general practice or small game hunting, but these lighter hunting bows are usually not warbows used on the battlefield. Furthermore, many British women practiced archery as a past time with [lighter draw] English longbows during the Victorian era because thickness, not length, is the primary factor in determining how strong a bow is: www.angelpig.net/victorian/archery.html Longbows could be made in a variety of different draw weights from very light to very heavy, and composite bows could be made just as heavy or even heavier than English longbows (probably easier to make very heavy draw weights composite bows b/c you don't have to rely entirely on picking a good wooden stave). For example, Stephen Shelby wrote that Song Dynasty archery exam draw weights involved tier 1 requirements of drawing 160lbs for infantry and 120lbs for cavalry, and tier 2 requirements of drawing 148 lbs for infantry and 104 lbs for cavalry. The Mongols were supposed to have carried two bows, one of which pulled ~160lbs. Those are up there with one of the Mary Rose longbows that ranged from 100lb to 180lbs. And [one of?] the heaviest draw weight bow ever recorded was a Manchu archer using a 240lb Manchu recurve bow in a shooting competition.
@@Intranetusa To be fair, in a fantasy adventure type of setting most of the fights are more like skirmishing than large scale battle. Range&power are no longer the most quintessential factors (though they are still important). A bow with moderate draw weight seems to fit ranger/archer-type of characters whose main traits are great mobility & good marksmanship quite well. However, there should definitely be more characters who is physically strong that use bow with heavy draw weight but with relatively slower rate of fire.
I have a bow...... and 15 arrows.... so... i'm worried i won't be able to do what needs to be done.... I left my Japanese Officer's Sabre at my parent's home
And many ancient swords were even lighter. Roman gladiuses were 1-2 pounds, and Han Dynasty single handed daos for cavalry and infantry were ~1-1.5 pounds.
Some physics calculations just for fun(kinetic energy): Medieval spear (linear thrust): Average impact velocity:8 to 10m/s energy: 55.08 joules Medieval winged spear (linear thrust): Average impact velocity:8 to 10m/s energy: 62.97 joules Danish great axe (Full blow): Average impact velocity: 13 to 15m/s energy: 211.19 joules note1: Swords are a little bit complicated because the center of mass is bellow the center of impact. note2: Blows have more distance(radius of moviment) to acelerate because of this impact velocity are higher than thrusts.
Exactly, if you're strong enough to wield a hundred pound sword, then you're the Incredible Hulk and the sword is just redundancy to your ability to throw your opponents around like ragdolls. It would be like Conan fighting kindergarteners.
@@LangstonDev - A what? You don't get to be xenophobic towards English with that French surname. Unless you're EU-ropean mocking their Brexit, I guess.
Thank you for including on screen numbers and also the numbers in the video description! If it is not to much of a hassle, it would be brilliant to see this every video where you show nice equipment. Weight, length, name, what ever you have to share. So it is easier to scroll trough the video or only check the description to find the information later. Keep up the great work!
What a glorious table spread honestly. Its like an exibit at the Smithsonian Petting Museum, its all hands on and right there in order. Absolutely awesome. Fantastic video and thank you for the precise weights and descriptions.
i love how i watched the whole thing and found it immensely informative but also possibly the nerdiest thing evs XD thanks so much for nerding out like this, it's a joy!
What's additionally cool about this is that you can see the evolution of the weapons over time as well. The arming sword evolving into the basket hilt broadsword/backsword, the rapier giving way to the small sword (and in effect the Spadroon) and the sabre becoming lighter and straighter as you head into the later Victorian era. These aren't hard and fast rules but almost like blade "trends" over time. Thank you for posting!
It's almost as if 1-1.5 Kg is the sweet spot for something the size of a human when it comes to swinging stuff with the objective of breaking other stuff! :)
The gram is not a measure of weight. If you really are using SI, you should be weighing thing in Newtons (or dynes, if you include the CGS units). Of course, most SI ... enthusiasts ... don't actually understand the system well enough to use it correctly.
@@benjaminthibieroz4155 Which, presumably, is why you're having such trouble discerning the difference between mass and force. But then an engineer is just a physicist who doesn't understand the theory.
@@HamsterPants522 They can certainly be smart and not know the weight of swords. They may be excellent at learning and quickwitted and good at connecting ideas and know nothing about swords. Frankly, as much as we love them, the weight of swords is functionally irrelevant data to almost everyone, and I don't fault someone for having bad information on them.
0:04 Hey... 3:10 Right, so, Without Further Ado, let's start weighing some of these things ... 3:15 Okay, before I go straight into weighing things, I'll just quickly run through what we've actually got on the table here... 6:43 So, here we go, so I've got my scales here... 7:03 So, Without Further Ado, let's start with... 7:14 [first sword kisses the scale]
Watching Matt weigh and talk about weapons on a sunny day in the garden with bird noises in the background is, whether we admit it or not, keeping us from crossing the line into insanity and acute cabin fever.
Thanks for this. I've always been disappointed with catalogs and books dealing with arms and armour in that they so seldom give the weights and even the dimensions of their examples. Pretty pictures very often, but precious few statistics.
The cutlass was a big surprise to me. I did not expect it to be that heavy. I knew the smallsword would be light, but I was impressed with just how light. I've used foils in fencing and held rapier replicas, but I've never held a smallsword. I thought it would be lighter than a rapier, but it's _much_ lighter.
Very nice and interesting video again! Thank you, Matt! Maybe you can complete the timeline some day and add a Migration Era Sword, Roman Spatha and Gladius, Iron Age and Bronze Age Swords. Would be nice to see ;-)
This is probably the best video on weapon mass from all of youtube that I have found. I have two (and a half) more questions about historical weapon mass distribution I would *love* to see a video on: Center of mass, and Moment of Inertia (about both the grip, and the center of mass)! I'm working on designing boffers to have similar edge properties to historical sharp swords, and would love to be as generally knowledgeable as possible to make my designs relevant to people who want the advantages of practicing with sharp swords without... dying.
Another Schola video watched en garde. It's getting easier :) I like the bit about how the falchions balance and handle surprisingly nimble, the more I learn about those swords - the more I love 'em! When I first saw the Cluny, I thought, "It's like Excalibur and my machete had a baby - yes!" Sound historical and martial information (to the best of my knowledge), as always I'm not surprised by the rifle's weight, even with bayonet. Guns are indeed heavier than many think. I find that those who most often say firearms are for cowards or weaklings who can't fight up close blah blah, have never had to carry a gun and ammo any real distance or over any kind of actual terrain. If anything, I think firearms require more physical strength and stamina than swords, contrary to popular perception, in much the same way bows require more strength to wield This was a great video, I like the info just being put out there to clear up misconceptions and give people the right ideas. It's especially useful to be able to compare them all side by side. It'd be great to see the entire collection weighed, especially the ones you plan to sell! Gotta get that data while we can lolz
This is just me adding my thanks for all of the detailed information. It's sad that we had to wait for you to be locked down to get it, but I'm still grateful. ;>)
It is so nice to see this all laid out together. The range of weapons and the actual weights should bust a lot of myths. I suppose a more thorough analysis would include moment of inertia and torque
Your onslaught of videos during this time of isolating ourselves is fantastic! You have me wondering if you could make a video that I wouldn't enjoy. Cheers, stay safe, and please carry on.
Very interesting Matt. Really surprised at the weight of the norman era sword, it's in the ballpark of longswords. No wonder they were fearsome cutters. Please consider doing a follow up with asian and middle east swords!
The idea of Matt walking along that table of weapon points while rocking back and forth and peering through his view finder, gave me a bit of fright. I hope that Matt does the Guess The Weight Stall at his local fete. I'd be interested in seeing Matt fully equipped for "adventure"; with a sword/axe, bow/crossbow, a 10' pole, etc.
Wow, firearms heavier than zweihanders . . . Reminds me of the time i read modern soldiers carry (unreasonably) more weight than solders have ever carried.
I mean, to be fair, modern soldiers do have more efficient forms of travel, saving energy allowing more weight to be carried. But also we do generally use far mor ammo as we were able to switch to more ranged combat. Plus other gear to help give an edge in combat. Soldiers back then needed as much energy after their travels (which could have easily been bad) to then do more physical combat. So start adding factors and it makes sense.
I've a cavalary sabre, that I always thought was on the heavy side, as swinging it around hurt my wrist. And I've been on the look out for a nice infantry sabre (a bit shorter, point of balance closer to the hand, and as I thought lighter) But I decided to weigh it now I've seen your video , 959 grams. So taking your swords as a reference, it is not bad at all.
How it's made could be factor in the perceived weight. Most swords are made with a certain amount of distal taper, meaning the overall thickness of the blade thins from the base of the blade to the tip. So, in your case, it's possible that your sword was either not made with the proper distal taper making it thicker and heavier towards the tip than the real thing or the real thing didn't have that much distal taper to begin with.
@@Riceball01 Quite possible it's just a perfectly good sword that the op just isn't practiced at swinging. A two pound plus sword with a cavalry point of balance will hurt the average modern wrist when you swing it around, until you have had a fair bit of sword practice to train it up and build up its strength.
Former museum curator and current RPG fan here. Numbers in this video are very close to my own measurements from about 10 years ago but here is one thing to consider. Some of samples in this video seems to have dulled (thickened) edges. If you shave off this metal to make weapon sharp (check your country's laws if you can do this legally please) you will be surprised how much weight will go off. If swordmaker makes dulled replica he usually makes blade a bit thicker to the edges to keep its looks. You may easily have 100 or even 200 g more of iron than origian weapon had. But great video anyway.
I make bronze age sword reproductions, most bronze age swords were under a kilogram. Surprising to see even the large ones were generally lighter than steel swords since bronze is nearly 20% more dense than steel. Interesting to see the comparison!
Wouldn't the moment/torque of the sword in horizontal position be a more accurate measure of the 'weight felt' of the sword? This would basically be the product of mass (kg) times the point of balance from the grip (m) and would give an accurate description of how heavy the sword feels in the hand (how much torque it is applying to your hand. Cheers for the awesome video!
Weight is a perfectly fine data point, it just isn't enough. But there is a very good method to display a swords characteristic. Search for the channel medieval reviews, I guess you can find it there
From my experience (not having much) you can have two swords that weight exactly the same, but feel completely different. The point of ballance seems to be super crittical to how heavy it feels when held, especially while you swing and decelerate it.
@@DrakkarCalethiel that's true but also not complete. Even weight and balance point are not sufficient. Think of a long bar with two identical balls on both ends. And then think of a ball with a bar right through the middle. Even if both objects weight 1kg, both have a balance point exactly in the middle they would handle totally different. It's weight distribution, pivot points, points of balance and weight that make a sword
@@Glimmlampe1982 Probably didn't write it correctly, of course weight distribution, point of ballance and and weight are crucial. Point of ballance is somewhat affected by weight distribution, thus I didn't mention it. Your analogy is right on point, heavier at both ends make it akward to wield, had one that was like this.
@@DrakkarCalethiel me too. I made myself a seax from a bought blade, bone grip and two huge brass lumps on the grip. Handled terrible and is now back in the shop to get a new one
That barred spear looks like a light example of a boar spear. The huntsman "encouraged" the cornered boar to charge him, his thick and heavy spear was presented to the oncoming boar's throat or thorax with the butt jammed into the ground behind him. The "crosstrees" bar served to stop the boar from battling forward, impaling itself so deeply that it could get its tushes into the huntsman. Then he had to hang on during its enraged thrashings either till it expired or till his entourage arrived and gave it quietus. Or - so I've read. If that's all true, then it must have been a truly terrifying experience the first time such huntsmen graduated to attempt a first boar-kill this way. Those tusks could munch you up pretty thoroughly if something went wrong with that spear-theory... Could be it was just as terrifying every time?
Hey matt! Great video. To go a step further about "how it feels in the hand", you can calculate angular moment of inertia required by multiplying the mass * gravitational acceleration * distance to the center of mass from the point that you're gripping, to see how much angular momentum the weapon excerts upon your hand while you're holding it passively. It would of course also impact how difficult it was to impart angular velocity to it as well, translating well as a metric. Simple derivation of the formula for angular momentum: F = m*a (Force = mass times acceleration) F*d = M (Force times distance = angular momentum) m*a*d = M For example: Generic sword: mass 1 kg, CoM is 0.1 m away from your grip (example numbers), the angular momentum exerted by gravity upon your hand would be 1{kg}*9.81{m/(s^2)}*0.1{m} = 0.981 Newton*Meters. Generic axe: mass 0.89 kg, CoM is 0.3 m away from your grip (example numbers). 0.89*9.81*0.3 = 2.619 Newton*Meters So you would have to exert ~2.7 times the effort to get the axe going to the same speed as the sword. It would be fun to see the stats for nimble-ness, especially for heavier weapons where your grip is two-handed with hands quite far apart.
I thought about this, but to really get a full picture, you'd have to calculate the effort required to move every joint in the body while performing a specific maneuver.
@@HamsterPants522 You often don't need or can not get a full picture. In our case it would lead to disproportionate amount of detail for small increase in informational value.
The "ch" in "Blücher" is soft. Not like that in "Bach". It would actually be more correct if you said "Blüsher" (still with a long "ü"). Many Germans actually pronounce it that way or similarly (in some dialects, especially around Cologne). Actually, if you want to learn a bit more: you pronounce "ch" the way you did (like in "Bach") when it comes after "a", or "o" ("Hochzeit", "Achtung"). It's pronounced softer (difficult to describe but you could just say "sh") when it comes after any other vowel ("Euch", "Ich", "Bücher"). However, if the "ch" is followed by an "s", it instead becomes an "x" sound regardless of what vowel came before (so, "Büchse" is pronounced "Büxë"). Oh and if a word starts with "Ch", it becomes a "k" sound ("Chor" is pronounced "Kor"). So, this is the same as in English (compare "choir").
That's the voiceless palatal fricative, /ç/ in the International Phonetic Alphabet. The English language doesn't have the sound. In fact, most languages don't. People who have been raised with languages lacking the sound will often find it hard even to distinguish it from the voiceless postalveolar fricative, IPA /ʃ/ (the 'sh' sound in English). You'll find it, with sound recording, by looking up "voiceless palatal fricative" on Wikipedia. I just love giving people information they don't want. Makes me feel warm and fuzzy! ;)
@@erikjarandson5458 It's somewhat similar to the 'h' variant when pronouncing the word 'he' in english. That front vowel tends to drag the constriction of the h forward.
@@erikjarandson5458 Many dialects of English do indeed have /ç/, it just manifests as a palatalised form of "h", as in "huge", or "humour" (I guess that's technically /çj/ if we're being pedantic :P) If you say "huge" and the "h" in the "hyoo" bit feels a bit like a cross between a normal "h" and "sh", then you've got it (double check with the Wiki links above)
Nice vid! In the next one it might be nice to include some everyday objects as reference points. A jug of water perhaps. May make it easier for the viewer to comprehend the weight.
I find startling that you Martini-Henry weighs less than my Garand did. With bayonet and 8 res, would swear it was 11 pds or very close . Enjoyed this. Thanks Matt
I have a 1796 British Heavy Cavalry Officer's Dismounted Service Sword from 1800-1820 date range Weight: 455g (1lb) Overall Length: 38" Hilt: brass Boatshell hilt. Propably a French design. Blade: Single edged and made in Solingen Germany. With gold damascene or engraving. Nick from the FB group Spadrooners says this is incredibly light and unusual. Absolutely beautiful sword. Just incredible craftsmanship. I have another one that's a 1780 18C officers sword and a French Gilt colichemarde double edged blade. A bit longer at a 36" blade and 42" overall length. Still quite light. This sword being longer in the blade feels more flexible than the 1796
Thank you very much Matt! This was an enlightening video which provided unexpected results and surprisingly consistent weapon weights over the centuries. I have always been under the impression that the size and height of the individual warrior averaged much less in the medieval era due to poor diet than in more modern times, so I thought that the weapon weights may have corresponded, but that is certainly not true.
A nice collection and interesting comparison, thank you. Some data I can add: my lightest katana weighs 970g, the heaviest 1250g. They have the same balance point but feel very different in the hand.
Thanks Easton for posting this. I've been wanting a video like this for a long time! I watched it a couple times. Did you sell your Albion mercenary? I really liked that one.
Thank you for your passion and work, Mr. Easton. Captivating content despite my critical lack of knowledge or applicability to my daily life. I am vicariously satisfied by watching a fit, educated, trained martial artist such as yourself occasionally wave things about while speaking cogently about their use. However, I'm concerned that you may be on a 'list' somewhere for possessing such a cache worth plundering should the zombies or bureaucrats get too uppity.
How a weapon feels in the hand would seem to depend on the mass of the weapon multiplied by the distance between the point at which it is held, and the point of balance. So you could do a video which quantified this by taking weapons of known weight, and measuring this distance. It would be interesting to see the results.
First time I picked up an original high quality English Civil War period saber I was shocked at how light it was. No more than one and a half pounds, and beautifully balanced. The asking price was shocking as well.
A good rough average seems to be about a Kilogram (Or 2 1/5 Lbs) There's lighter, and heavier ones of course. (Single handed, the 2 handers, polearms, and other longarms can be heavier. Rapiers tend to weigh about the same as a side-sword, only most of that is in the hilt/pommel, while the sword's is more in the Blade. And so forth.)
Apologies if this seems a bit off topic, but at about 19:00 you mention the fact that the foil is the practice weapon for the small sword, & tell us to put the epee out of mind as it's something else. Just curious what that might be, & whether or not epee fencing would be useful training for HEMA. Thanks!
It's a myth that Matt is the master of the double entendre. The truth is that he has an audience with extraordinarily dirty minds. I haven't managed to figure out why that is, though.
Would've been nice to see a hanger or cutoe in there too. Assuming you still have yours, that is. Non-European weapons would've been great too, but I imagine that's another video all on its own.
![TEEDEE TADA - DIAMOND NARAKORN X LEGO LYKN [Special Dance Performance]](http://i.ytimg.com/vi/QgtZedFeumA/mqdefault.jpg)
Here’s the weights in lbs.
You can see that for a one handed weapon, the weight is generally between 2 to 3.5 lbs max and double that if the weapon is meant to be wielded with two hands.
Viking era sword 2.46 lbs
Norman era sword 3.19 lbs
13th C Falchion 3 lbs
14th C Longsword 3.08 lbs
15th C Longsword 3.4 lbs
15th C Messer 2.06 lbs
15th C Arming Sword 2.65 lbs
14/15th C Battle Axe 2 lbs
15th C Warhammer 2.05 lbs
15th C Zweihander 7.54 lbs
17th C Rapier 2.72 lbs
16-17th C Basket hilt backsword 2.52 lbs
18th C Smallsword .96 lbs
18th C Spadroon 1.42 lbs
1811 Prussian Cavalry Saber 2.5 lbs
1845 Royal Navy Cutlass 2.72 lbs
1822 French Cavalry Saber 2.39 lbs
1828 Highland Broadsword 2.55 lbs
1845 Rifle Regiment Officer’s Saber 1.7 lbs
1912 Cavalry Officer’s Sword 2.3 lbs
Martini-Henry Rifle 9.48 lbs
Medieval Spear 3 lbs
Medieval Winged Spear 3.43 lbs
Danish Great Axe 4.75 lbs
Gregory Floriolli you’re doing god’s work here
Thanks
Thank you.
Thank you
From doing technical work I speak metric but I grew up with "Freedom units".
I had an intellectual grasp of Matt's use of metric. The intuitive grasp of lbs really helps. Thanks!
It's still clear how surprisingly *little* variation there is across the centuries.
Thank you! I'm tired of telling people that the warriors of old didn't use 30 kg swords! I'll use this as proof from now on! Thank you for keeping us entertained during the quarantine. I hope the misses and kids are okay and well, and will stay so.
Fikret Komurcu same dude. My friend though an arming sword was like 4.5kg, though to be fair I did too until a few years ago when I actually got into history.
@@mattg-xy8jr yeah!
I've known about this for years but not in detail. There was an article long ago about how Arnold Schwarzenegger kept breaking the (blunt metal) correct weight prop swords he was using in the first Conan film, so the prop people made him a *thirty pound* sword, the weight of which forced him to wield it in a more realistic fashion.
@@markfergerson2145 lol!
And many ancient swords were even lighter. Roman gladiuses were 1-2 pounds, and Han Dynasty single handed daos for cavalry and infantry were ~1-1.5 pounds.
Well, I, for one, was fascinated. I really did expect that longer spear to be closer to 2 kilos. Would have also liked to see a mace in there.
Does it say something about this audience that watching a man weigh swords in his garden for 30 minutes is gripping entertainment for us? Hmmm...
We are quarantined, you can't blame us.
We could be watching whatever that TigerKing thing is.
The Hollywood trope of burly men using swords and women using bows should be reversed. Warbows of over 100 pounds in draw weight need a lot of muscle to draw, whereas a 1-3 pound sword doesn't need a lot of muscle to swing around.
You don't need to be a body builder, but you need to have an athletic build like Matt. He has the right muscles in the right places. A lot of people who lift at the gym and are "muscular" wouldn't have the right muscles for sword fighting.
Women would use a bow fairly well during huntings and competitions, including at the Middle Ages. Perhaps not English longbows, indeed, but smaller or composite ones were commonplace for the "fair sex".
i.pinimg.com/736x/dd/73/54/dd7354f123a994ae69d84741ccb13f0c--medieval-archer-illuminated-manuscript.jpg
i.pinimg.com/originals/4d/5f/8c/4d5f8cb4621d1cead33e0495fa7f7731.jpg
@@karinefonte516 Women could use bows for general practice or small game hunting, but these lighter hunting bows are usually not warbows used on the battlefield. Furthermore, many British women practiced archery as a past time with [lighter draw] English longbows during the Victorian era because thickness, not length, is the primary factor in determining how strong a bow is: www.angelpig.net/victorian/archery.html
Longbows could be made in a variety of different draw weights from very light to very heavy, and composite bows could be made just as heavy or even heavier than English longbows (probably easier to make very heavy draw weights composite bows b/c you don't have to rely entirely on picking a good wooden stave). For example, Stephen Shelby wrote that Song Dynasty archery exam draw weights involved tier 1 requirements of drawing 160lbs for infantry and 120lbs for cavalry, and tier 2 requirements of drawing 148 lbs for infantry and 104 lbs for cavalry. The Mongols were supposed to have carried two bows, one of which pulled ~160lbs. Those are up there with one of the Mary Rose longbows that ranged from 100lb to 180lbs. And [one of?] the heaviest draw weight bow ever recorded was a Manchu archer using a 240lb Manchu recurve bow in a shooting competition.
@@Intranetusa To be fair, in a fantasy adventure type of setting most of the fights are more like skirmishing than large scale battle. Range&power are no longer the most quintessential factors (though they are still important). A bow with moderate draw weight seems to fit ranger/archer-type of characters whose main traits are great mobility & good marksmanship quite well. However, there should definitely be more characters who is physically strong that use bow with heavy draw weight but with relatively slower rate of fire.
He's just contemplating which one he should bring with him when he goes searching for toilet paper.
To protect from the bandits, of course. Not to kill the entire town for caught stealing one.
@@haveiszalfaroqie1628 you never know
I vote for the falchion
I have a bow...... and 15 arrows.... so... i'm worried i won't be able to do what needs to be done.... I left my Japanese Officer's Sabre at my parent's home
Arming sword you could use it in the aisles at the store
Converted to pounds using Google for anyone interested:
Viking era sword - 2.45 lbs
Norman sword - 3.18 lbs
13thC falchion - 2.99 lbs
14thC longsword - 3.07 lbs
15thC longsword - 3.39 lbs
15thC messer - 2.06 lbs
15thC arming sword - 2.64 lbs
14th/15thC battle axe - 1.99 lbs
15thC warhammer - 2.05 lbs
16thC two-handed 'zweihander' - 7.53 lbs
17thC rapier - 2.72 lbs
16th-17thC basket-hilted backsword - 2.52 lbs
18thC colichemarde smallsword - 0.95 lbs
18thC spadroon - 1.42 lbs
1811 Prussian cavalry sabre - 2.50 lbs
1845 Royal Navy cutlass - 2.72 lbs
1822 French cavalry sabre - 2.39 lbs
1828 Highland officer basket-hilt broadsword - 2.54 lbs
1845 Rifle Regiment officer's sabre - 1.69 lbs
1912 Cavalry officer sword - 2.30 lbs
Martini-Henry rifle and bayonet - 9.47 lbs
Medieval spear - 2.99 lbs
Medieval winged spear - 3.42 lbs
Danish great axe - 4.75 lbs
Let me know if I messed any of them up & I'll fix them.
And many ancient swords were even lighter. Roman gladiuses were 1-2 pounds, and Han Dynasty single handed daos for cavalry and infantry were ~1-1.5 pounds.
Yes!!!
Yes!
"Cat Easton has wares, if you have the coin"
EDIT: You could've weighted your non-european weapons too
I think khajit trade company behind all this:)
Specially the indian ones. I want to know how much talwars and tulwars weight
Hopefully coming in another video.
Some physics calculations just for fun(kinetic energy):
Medieval spear (linear thrust): Average impact velocity:8 to 10m/s energy: 55.08 joules
Medieval winged spear (linear thrust): Average impact velocity:8 to 10m/s energy: 62.97 joules
Danish great axe (Full blow): Average impact velocity: 13 to 15m/s energy: 211.19 joules
note1: Swords are a little bit complicated because the center of mass is bellow the center of impact.
note2: Blows have more distance(radius of moviment) to acelerate because of this impact velocity are higher than thrusts.
A full half hour of stabby choppy data! Thanks for keeping us just barely sane right now, Matt.
No problem - it helps me too!
@@scholagladiatoria 2000 grams for 2 handed sword? Is it heavy
"If a warrior could wield a 100lbs sword, a warrior would not need a 100lbs sword." ~ Aristotle
Tell that to anime!🤣
Exactly, if you're strong enough to wield a hundred pound sword, then you're the Incredible Hulk and the sword is just redundancy to your ability to throw your opponents around like ragdolls. It would be like Conan fighting kindergarteners.
@@danielbretall2236 I bet conan would use a sword against kindergarteners
If I am able to wield a 45.4 kg sword, I am the king of that realm or the liege lord of that kingdom looooool
At that point, you could probably carry around a sack of lead balls and be a living cannon.
Considering I can carry 30 swords in my backpack in Diablo 3, they can't weigh _that much…_
Modern soldiers carry 50 kilo packs... If you can organise it you can carry that.
The amount of gold coins you can carry are actually the unrealistic thing about Diablo's carrying system. Gold is heavy! 🤣
@@MrVelociraptor75 depends how big the gold pieces are of course.
i know it's kinda randomly asking but do anyone know of a good place to watch newly released movies online?
@Leonard Keanu flixportal
the way he says "choppa" makes it easier to imagine Matt with green skin
th-cam.com/video/Xs_OacEq2Sk/w-d-xo.html
Lmao
He's English: they don't pronounce the "r".
Damn greenskins..
@@LangstonDev - A what? You don't get to be xenophobic towards English with that French surname. Unless you're EU-ropean mocking their Brexit, I guess.
Thank you for including on screen numbers and also the numbers in the video description!
If it is not to much of a hassle, it would be brilliant to see this every video where you show nice equipment. Weight, length, name, what ever you have to share. So it is easier to scroll trough the video or only check the description to find the information later.
Keep up the great work!
What a glorious table spread honestly. Its like an exibit at the Smithsonian Petting Museum, its all hands on and right there in order. Absolutely awesome. Fantastic video and thank you for the precise weights and descriptions.
i love how i watched the whole thing and found it immensely informative but also possibly the nerdiest thing evs XD thanks so much for nerding out like this, it's a joy!
What's additionally cool about this is that you can see the evolution of the weapons over time as well. The arming sword evolving into the basket hilt broadsword/backsword, the rapier giving way to the small sword (and in effect the Spadroon) and the sabre becoming lighter and straighter as you head into the later Victorian era. These aren't hard and fast rules but almost like blade "trends" over time. Thank you for posting!
It's almost as if 1-1.5 Kg is the sweet spot for something the size of a human when it comes to swinging stuff with the objective of breaking other stuff! :)
Indeed!
@@scholagladiatoriaOr that one sharpened piece of steel generally resembles another. #WeaponHeresy 😮
"I'm gonna weigh them in grams..."
Ha, thanks, Matt. Praise the metric system!
"I think a lot of people in the world use it"... understament of the year :D
The gram is not a measure of weight.
If you really are using SI, you should be weighing thing in Newtons (or dynes, if you include the CGS units). Of course, most SI ... enthusiasts ... don't actually understand the system well enough to use it correctly.
@@dougsundseth6904 i've got an engineering degree, i know SI and weight quite well, thanks
@@benjaminthibieroz4155 Which, presumably, is why you're having such trouble discerning the difference between mass and force. But then an engineer is just a physicist who doesn't understand the theory.
@@dougsundseth6904 you sounds quite arrogant, you know?
Somebody really tried to tell me that medieval swords weighed 15 kg....
I've had very smart people in my old A level physics class who wouldn't believe me that swords weren't that heavy. They thought they were around 5-7kg
Maybe he was thinking of carrying about 12 of them ;)
@@throneandaltar7557 That's not my idea of smart. Maybe they're educated, but even scientists can be complete morons.
@@HamsterPants522 perhaps but he was years ahead in maths and science and was taking advanced exams
@@HamsterPants522 They can certainly be smart and not know the weight of swords. They may be excellent at learning and quickwitted and good at connecting ideas and know nothing about swords.
Frankly, as much as we love them, the weight of swords is functionally irrelevant data to almost everyone, and I don't fault someone for having bad information on them.
*Relevant and Supportive Comment*
I feel supported where I need it.
@@scholagladiatoria Excellent, hope you have a good one mate.
@@scholagladiatoria Here is a real Super light viking sword th-cam.com/video/0QDPU0itinU/w-d-xo.html
0:04 Hey...
3:10 Right, so, Without Further Ado, let's start weighing some of these things ...
3:15 Okay, before I go straight into weighing things, I'll just quickly run through what we've actually got on the table here...
6:43 So, here we go, so I've got my scales here...
7:03 So, Without Further Ado, let's start with...
7:14 [first sword kisses the scale]
Matt Easton is the British answer to America's Hickok45, both of whom I greatly enjoy.
Watching Matt weigh and talk about weapons on a sunny day in the garden with bird noises in the background is, whether we admit it or not, keeping us from crossing the line into insanity and acute cabin fever.
These kind of videos are always interesting. Their usefulness is unquestioned as a future resource. Thanks Matt.
"A thicker shaft with a bigger head" there goes Matt, boasting about his spear again....
Ay yo
Thanks for this. I've always been disappointed with catalogs and books dealing with arms and armour in that they so seldom give the weights and even the dimensions of their examples. Pretty pictures very often, but precious few statistics.
Matt Matt Matt, I'm disappointed, you know youtube requires you to weigh a Katana in the weapon weighing video LOL
Great video! Very useful, thank you so much!
Boy, are the RPG manuals inaccurate xD
Plot twist: the kilogram and all the metric system are actually based on the weight of an average sword.
This was a pretty cool video. Anyone who shoots/handles guns a lot can appreciate everything you are saying about weight distribution. Great video.
The cutlass was a big surprise to me. I did not expect it to be that heavy. I knew the smallsword would be light, but I was impressed with just how light. I've used foils in fencing and held rapier replicas, but I've never held a smallsword. I thought it would be lighter than a rapier, but it's _much_ lighter.
Very nice and interesting video again! Thank you, Matt! Maybe you can complete the timeline some day and add a Migration Era Sword, Roman Spatha and Gladius, Iron Age and Bronze Age Swords. Would be nice to see ;-)
IF ONLY VIDEO GAMES STOP MAKING HUGE BLADES THAT WEIGHT AS MUCH AS SMALL CARS LOL
Lovely collection !
Weights in pounds, for others who grew up with the Imperial system. Watch the video for a lot of CONTEXT:
1) Albion Clontarf - 2.46 lb -heavy feeling due to point of balance
2) Paul Binns Norman era - 3.19 lb
3) Paul Binns falchion - 3.00 lb
4) Dynasty Forge bastard sword - 3.08 lb
5) Albion Ringeck - 3.40 lb - 2handed
6) Landsknecht Emporium messer - 2.06 lb
7) Albion Lancaster - 2.65 lb
8) Thor's Forge axe - 2.00 lb
9) Czech warhammer - 2.05 -lb
10) Del Tin Venetian 2hand - 7.54 lb (overweight for historical examples)
11) Danelli Armoury rapier - 2.71 lb
12) Mary Rose baskethilt - 2.52 lb
13) Colichemarde smallsword - 0.96 lb (yes, less than a pound)
14) 1796 sergeant spadroon - 1.42 lb
15) 1811 Blucher saber - 2.50 lb
16) 1845/1796 hybrid cutlass - 2.72 lb
17) 1822 French light cav saber - 2.38 lb
18) Highland regiment broadsword - 2.55 lb
19) 1890 infantry officer's sword - 1.70 lb
20) 1912 cav officer's sword - 2.30 lb
21) Martini-Henry w/bayonette - 9.48 lb
22) Paul Binns spear, 8ft shaft - 3.00 lb
23) Hanwei winged spear - 3.43 lb
24) Thor's Forge Dane axe - 4.75 lb
Thanks for all the great content Matt, It's making quarantine allot more enjoyable. Can we expect any more live streams in the near future?
Thanks - Yes I'll do more livestreams, they are quite fun for me.
This is probably the best video on weapon mass from all of youtube that I have found. I have two (and a half) more questions about historical weapon mass distribution I would *love* to see a video on:
Center of mass, and Moment of Inertia (about both the grip, and the center of mass)!
I'm working on designing boffers to have similar edge properties to historical sharp swords, and would love to be as generally knowledgeable as possible to make my designs relevant to people who want the advantages of practicing with sharp swords without... dying.
So this is the video you mentioned in the stream! That must have taken a lot to film and edit. Keep up the good work Matt!
Yes exactly.
Another Schola video watched en garde. It's getting easier :) I like the bit about how the falchions balance and handle surprisingly nimble, the more I learn about those swords - the more I love 'em! When I first saw the Cluny, I thought, "It's like Excalibur and my machete had a baby - yes!" Sound historical and martial information (to the best of my knowledge), as always
I'm not surprised by the rifle's weight, even with bayonet. Guns are indeed heavier than many think. I find that those who most often say firearms are for cowards or weaklings who can't fight up close blah blah, have never had to carry a gun and ammo any real distance or over any kind of actual terrain. If anything, I think firearms require more physical strength and stamina than swords, contrary to popular perception, in much the same way bows require more strength to wield
This was a great video, I like the info just being put out there to clear up misconceptions and give people the right ideas. It's especially useful to be able to compare them all side by side. It'd be great to see the entire collection weighed, especially the ones you plan to sell! Gotta get that data while we can lolz
This is just me adding my thanks for all of the detailed information. It's sad that we had to wait for you to be locked down to get it, but I'm still grateful. ;>)
There's something unusually satisfying about listening to this while doing some late-day art commissions.
It is so nice to see this all laid out together. The range of weapons and the actual weights should bust a lot of myths.
I suppose a more thorough analysis would include moment of inertia and torque
The poor neighbours. “Honey he’s at it again. This time its a table of swords!”
Beautiful swords, as always. Those Albions, damn!
Your onslaught of videos during this time of isolating ourselves is fantastic! You have me wondering if you could make a video that I wouldn't enjoy. Cheers, stay safe, and please carry on.
This is a fantastic video. Thanks for putting it all together.
Going to be useful for gaming /and/ writing, actually. Thanks, Matt!
Very interesting Matt. Really surprised at the weight of the norman era sword, it's in the ballpark of longswords. No wonder they were fearsome cutters.
Please consider doing a follow up with asian and middle east swords!
The idea of Matt walking along that table of weapon points while rocking back and forth and peering through his view finder, gave me a bit of fright.
I hope that Matt does the Guess The Weight Stall at his local fete.
I'd be interested in seeing Matt fully equipped for "adventure"; with a sword/axe, bow/crossbow, a 10' pole, etc.
Now, that’s a nice garden table.
Wow, firearms heavier than zweihanders . . . Reminds me of the time i read modern soldiers carry (unreasonably) more weight than solders have ever carried.
I mean, to be fair, modern soldiers do have more efficient forms of travel, saving energy allowing more weight to be carried. But also we do generally use far mor ammo as we were able to switch to more ranged combat. Plus other gear to help give an edge in combat. Soldiers back then needed as much energy after their travels (which could have easily been bad) to then do more physical combat. So start adding factors and it makes sense.
glad you're using the metric system, makes it much easier for many of us and much simple to comprehend
I've a cavalary sabre, that I always thought was on the heavy side, as swinging it around hurt my wrist. And I've been on the look out for a nice infantry sabre (a bit shorter, point of balance closer to the hand, and as I thought lighter) But I decided to weigh it now I've seen your video , 959 grams. So taking your swords as a reference, it is not bad at all.
How it's made could be factor in the perceived weight. Most swords are made with a certain amount of distal taper, meaning the overall thickness of the blade thins from the base of the blade to the tip. So, in your case, it's possible that your sword was either not made with the proper distal taper making it thicker and heavier towards the tip than the real thing or the real thing didn't have that much distal taper to begin with.
@@Riceball01 Quite possible it's just a perfectly good sword that the op just isn't practiced at swinging. A two pound plus sword with a cavalry point of balance will hurt the average modern wrist when you swing it around, until you have had a fair bit of sword practice to train it up and build up its strength.
So you’re saying that swords do not weigh 5-10 pounds (ok there was one sword that did)
Yeah, also knights in full plate armour were quite mobile, that's another thing to note
Former museum curator and current RPG fan here. Numbers in this video are very close to my own measurements from about 10 years ago but here is one thing to consider. Some of samples in this video seems to have dulled (thickened) edges. If you shave off this metal to make weapon sharp (check your country's laws if you can do this legally please) you will be surprised how much weight will go off. If swordmaker makes dulled replica he usually makes blade a bit thicker to the edges to keep its looks. You may easily have 100 or even 200 g more of iron than origian weapon had. But great video anyway.
Schola gladiatoria doin' their part in keeping the homebound spirits up.
"Why have I done this?" Because you have them, they cost you quite a lot and you deserve it.
Love the birds chirping in the background
Nature is therapeudic in many ways.
I make bronze age sword reproductions, most bronze age swords were under a kilogram. Surprising to see even the large ones were generally lighter than steel swords since bronze is nearly 20% more dense than steel. Interesting to see the comparison!
Wouldn't the moment/torque of the sword in horizontal position be a more accurate measure of the 'weight felt' of the sword? This would basically be the product of mass (kg) times the point of balance from the grip (m) and would give an accurate description of how heavy the sword feels in the hand (how much torque it is applying to your hand.
Cheers for the awesome video!
Weight is a perfectly fine data point, it just isn't enough.
But there is a very good method to display a swords characteristic. Search for the channel medieval reviews, I guess you can find it there
From my experience (not having much) you can have two swords that weight exactly the same, but feel completely different. The point of ballance seems to be super crittical to how heavy it feels when held, especially while you swing and decelerate it.
@@DrakkarCalethiel that's true but also not complete. Even weight and balance point are not sufficient.
Think of a long bar with two identical balls on both ends. And then think of a ball with a bar right through the middle. Even if both objects weight 1kg, both have a balance point exactly in the middle they would handle totally different.
It's weight distribution, pivot points, points of balance and weight that make a sword
@@Glimmlampe1982 Probably didn't write it correctly, of course weight distribution, point of ballance and and weight are crucial. Point of ballance is somewhat affected by weight distribution, thus I didn't mention it. Your analogy is right on point, heavier at both ends make it akward to wield, had one that was like this.
@@DrakkarCalethiel me too.
I made myself a seax from a bought blade, bone grip and two huge brass lumps on the grip. Handled terrible and is now back in the shop to get a new one
That barred spear looks like a light example of a boar spear. The huntsman "encouraged" the cornered boar to charge him, his thick and heavy spear was presented to the oncoming boar's throat or thorax with the butt jammed into the ground behind him. The "crosstrees" bar served to stop the boar from battling forward, impaling itself so deeply that it could get its tushes into the huntsman. Then he had to hang on during its enraged thrashings either till it expired or till his entourage arrived and gave it quietus.
Or - so I've read.
If that's all true, then it must have been a truly terrifying experience the first time such huntsmen graduated to attempt a first boar-kill this way. Those tusks could munch you up pretty thoroughly if something went wrong with that spear-theory... Could be it was just as terrifying every time?
Thank you, this is extremly informative video!
If you're going to do more, please do some different Poleweapons, like Halberds or Poleaxes.
Just wondering how long did it take to set up the table?
It did take a little while, mostly because all those objects are stored in quite different places!
scholagladiatoria for sure I believe it
*"It's a thiccer shaft. It's a bigger head."*
*-Matt Easton 2020*
Hey matt! Great video. To go a step further about "how it feels in the hand", you can calculate angular moment of inertia required by multiplying the mass * gravitational acceleration * distance to the center of mass from the point that you're gripping, to see how much angular momentum the weapon excerts upon your hand while you're holding it passively. It would of course also impact how difficult it was to impart angular velocity to it as well, translating well as a metric.
Simple derivation of the formula for angular momentum:
F = m*a (Force = mass times acceleration)
F*d = M (Force times distance = angular momentum)
m*a*d = M
For example:
Generic sword: mass 1 kg, CoM is 0.1 m away from your grip (example numbers), the angular momentum exerted by gravity upon your hand would be 1{kg}*9.81{m/(s^2)}*0.1{m} = 0.981 Newton*Meters.
Generic axe: mass 0.89 kg, CoM is 0.3 m away from your grip (example numbers).
0.89*9.81*0.3 = 2.619 Newton*Meters
So you would have to exert ~2.7 times the effort to get the axe going to the same speed as the sword.
It would be fun to see the stats for nimble-ness, especially for heavier weapons where your grip is two-handed with hands quite far apart.
I thought about this, but to really get a full picture, you'd have to calculate the effort required to move every joint in the body while performing a specific maneuver.
@@HamsterPants522 You often don't need or can not get a full picture. In our case it would lead to disproportionate amount of detail for small increase in informational value.
excellent stuff, I think feel of objects, albeit tools or weapons in balance with ourselves can make a difference
The "ch" in "Blücher" is soft. Not like that in "Bach". It would actually be more correct if you said "Blüsher" (still with a long "ü"). Many Germans actually pronounce it that way or similarly (in some dialects, especially around Cologne).
Actually, if you want to learn a bit more: you pronounce "ch" the way you did (like in "Bach") when it comes after "a", or "o" ("Hochzeit", "Achtung"). It's pronounced softer (difficult to describe but you could just say "sh") when it comes after any other vowel ("Euch", "Ich", "Bücher"). However, if the "ch" is followed by an "s", it instead becomes an "x" sound regardless of what vowel came before (so, "Büchse" is pronounced "Büxë").
Oh and if a word starts with "Ch", it becomes a "k" sound ("Chor" is pronounced "Kor"). So, this is the same as in English (compare "choir").
That's the voiceless palatal fricative, /ç/ in the International Phonetic Alphabet. The English language doesn't have the sound. In fact, most languages don't. People who have been raised with languages lacking the sound will often find it hard even to distinguish it from the voiceless postalveolar fricative, IPA /ʃ/ (the 'sh' sound in English).
You'll find it, with sound recording, by looking up "voiceless palatal fricative" on Wikipedia.
I just love giving people information they don't want. Makes me feel warm and fuzzy! ;)
@@erikjarandson5458 It's somewhat similar to the 'h' variant when pronouncing the word 'he' in english. That front vowel tends to drag the constriction of the h forward.
@@erikjarandson5458 Actually, I found that really interesting, thank you! I never realised how rare this sound actually is in other languages.
Your profile pic is just genius.
@@erikjarandson5458 Many dialects of English do indeed have /ç/, it just manifests as a palatalised form of "h", as in "huge", or "humour" (I guess that's technically /çj/ if we're being pedantic :P) If you say "huge" and the "h" in the "hyoo" bit feels a bit like a cross between a normal "h" and "sh", then you've got it (double check with the Wiki links above)
All of those swords laid out like that looks so cool.
Way to use your time wisely... Just got the condor Grosse Messer. Thing weighs 3lb 4oz wit POB at 7.5in. A beast of a sword....
An impressive table setting! What do you serve that demands such cutlery? The Dane axe especially indicates some fairly chewy dishes...
One of these days you've gotta lay out your whole collection. If only 25 look that cool, just imagine the whole Easton weapon vault!
I'm not sure that a table exists that would be large enough to hold it all.
Oh... I am reminded of Anvil of Dawn... my favourite old-school dungeon crawler but... single handed swords weighed 8 or even 10 kg each... yeah...
Excellent, informative stuff as usual.
Nice vid! In the next one it might be nice to include some everyday objects as reference points. A jug of water perhaps. May make it easier for the viewer to comprehend the weight.
I find startling that you Martini-Henry weighs less than my Garand did. With bayonet and 8 res, would swear it was 11 pds or very close . Enjoyed this. Thanks Matt
The weight of the firearm would actually help give the bayonet additional force upon impact.
Very interesting and cool, thank you.
"...like a kind of LIGHTSABER blade..."
There! He said it at 17:58 min... ❤️😂
Swoon! fine bit of collection. thanks for sharing display and specs, cheers!
That red-hilted longsword on the far right is absolutely gorgeous
Awesome video! As always, you provide us with great data, in context! 😎⚔️🤪
Did he say "blucher"? I guess there aren't any horses nearby.
Blucher!
Blücher :)
I have a 1796 British Heavy Cavalry Officer's Dismounted Service Sword from 1800-1820 date range
Weight: 455g (1lb)
Overall Length: 38"
Hilt: brass Boatshell hilt. Propably a French design.
Blade: Single edged and made in Solingen Germany. With gold damascene or engraving.
Nick from the FB group Spadrooners says this is incredibly light and unusual. Absolutely beautiful sword. Just incredible craftsmanship.
I have another one that's a 1780 18C officers sword and a French Gilt colichemarde double edged blade. A bit longer at a 36" blade and 42" overall length. Still quite light. This sword being longer in the blade feels more flexible than the 1796
Thank you very much Matt! This was an enlightening video which provided unexpected results and surprisingly consistent weapon weights over the centuries. I have always been under the impression that the size and height of the individual warrior averaged much less in the medieval era due to poor diet than in more modern times, so I thought that the weapon weights may have corresponded, but that is certainly not true.
A nice collection and interesting comparison, thank you.
Some data I can add: my lightest katana weighs 970g, the heaviest 1250g. They have the same balance point but feel very different in the hand.
I was close when guessing the swords but the axes and spears really threw me off. Significantly lighter than I expected
Matt weighing swords, with busy woodpeckers in the background.
All strangely pleasing.
Yeah they are really going for it at the moment. And no matter how loud they get, we rarely actually see them.
this was amazing and extremely educational! Thank you
Thanks Easton for posting this. I've been wanting a video like this for a long time! I watched it a couple times. Did you sell your Albion mercenary? I really liked that one.
Thank you for your passion and work, Mr. Easton. Captivating content despite my critical lack of knowledge or applicability to my daily life. I am vicariously satisfied by watching a fit, educated, trained martial artist such as yourself occasionally wave things about while speaking cogently about their use.
However, I'm concerned that you may be on a 'list' somewhere for possessing such a cache worth plundering should the zombies or bureaucrats get too uppity.
I started typing the weights out as I watched because I wanted it recorded for posterity. Let this be a lesson to all - RTFD - Read The Description!
Wait a minute..
How a weapon feels in the hand would seem to depend on the mass of the weapon multiplied by the distance between the point at which it is held, and the point of balance. So you could do a video which quantified this by taking weapons of known weight, and measuring this distance. It would be interesting to see the results.
weight distribution along the length is also a big effect.
First time I picked up an original high quality English Civil War period saber I was shocked at how light it was. No more than one and a half pounds, and beautifully balanced. The asking price was shocking as well.
A good rough average seems to be about a Kilogram (Or 2 1/5 Lbs) There's lighter, and heavier ones of course. (Single handed, the 2 handers, polearms, and other longarms can be heavier. Rapiers tend to weigh about the same as a side-sword, only most of that is in the hilt/pommel, while the sword's is more in the Blade. And so forth.)
Apologies if this seems a bit off topic, but at about 19:00 you mention the fact that the foil is the practice weapon for the small sword, & tell us to put the epee out of mind as it's something else. Just curious what that might be, & whether or not epee fencing would be useful training for HEMA. Thanks!
Really fantastic practical knowledge,...please make more！！！
I’m 47 seconds in and Matt has already said “phalluses”
I heard it too.
It's a myth that Matt is the master of the double entendre. The truth is that he has an audience with extraordinarily dirty minds. I haven't managed to figure out why that is, though.
@@erikjarandson5458,
Nothing _extraordinary_ about my dirty mind.
By the way, what are you wearing?
@ 31:59: “I think it’s a thicker shaft with a bigger head”. 😏
@@fuferito If I told you, you'd never sleep again...
Here are the weights in pounds:
Viking era sword - 1115g
= 2.458 lbs
Norman sword - 1445g
= 3.186 lbs
13thC falchion - 1360g
= 2.998 lbs
14thC longsword - 1395g
= 3.705 lbs
15thC longsword - 1540g
= 3.395 lbs
15thC messer - 935g
= 2.061 lbs
15thC arming sword - 1200g
= 2.646 lbs
14th/15thC battle axe - 905g
= 1.995 lbs
15thC warhammer - 930g
= 2.050 lbs
16thC two-handed 'zweihander' - 3420g
= 7.540 lbs
17thC rapier - 1235g
= 2.723 lbs
16th-17thC basket-hilted backsword - 1145g
= 2.524 lbs
18thC colichemarde smallsword - 435g
= 0.959 lbs
18thC spadroon - 645g
= 1.422 lbs
1811 Prussian cavalry sabre - 1135g
= 2.502 lbs
1845 Royal Navy cutlass - 1235g
= 2.723 lbs
1822 French cavalry sabre - 1085g
= 2.392 lbs
1828 Highland officer basket-hilt broadsword - 1155g = 2.546 lbs
1845 Rifle Regiment officer's sabre - 770g
= 1.698 lbs
1912 Cavalry officer sword - 1045g
= 2.304 lbs
Martini-Henry rifle and bayonet - 4300g
= 9.479 lbs
Medieval spear - 1360g
= 2.998 lbs
Medieval winged spear - 1555g
= 3.428 lbs
Danish great axe - 2155g = 4.751 lbs
Would've been nice to see a hanger or cutoe in there too. Assuming you still have yours, that is.
Non-European weapons would've been great too, but I imagine that's another video all on its own.
How long is that " zviehander " you have? It looks a little short. Aren't they supposed to be 2 meters in overall length?
Very useful, although I would have liked a more comprehensive comparison of balance point on the swords.