Great video! I studied George Silver backsword for many years. For any of those who are doing so, please know that it is important to have a practice sword that is properly light and well-balanced. Back when I did it, we had a hard time getting smiths to make good ones and they were too heavy and unwieldy... my shoulder is pretty messed up to this day because of it.
I was a fencer who specialized in sabre, I picked up a backsword because I prefer straight blades but wanted something a little more cutting oriented than a rapier... All of my sabre training applies because they operate quite similarly.
The Napoleonic era systems we often teach from treat sabre and backsword/broadsword as the same, and so it's no surprise at all that the training applies. The only exception being the use of well curved blades for certain thrusting techniques which use the curve to get around blades, and even with those the straight blades were still used for them.
Looking forward to a Pallasch Video! (incidently if you go for the german Wiki page of the Pallasch and then click on the english language version, you are directed to the Backsword page on english wikipedia, but if you are on the english Backsword page and click on "Deutsch" you are directed to a german Backsword page, not to the Pallasch page... mysteries of Wikipedia ;-) )
According to Roland Warzecha's research, arming swords and viking era swords were intentionally not perfectly symmetrical especially in the pommel: they sit more comfortably in the hand when held in one way over the other, so they do have a true edge and a false edge.
That's a massive stretch. There is no doubt some swords had forms of cant or twist to the pommel and or/grip, but to claim it was anything like normal on viking and medieval arming swords is a huge reach. To extrapolate that out from a few examples to claim it as a norm is too much. We handled a number of medieval arming swords during a handling session at the Royal Armouries and they were 100% symmetrical. It's also worth noting it is very common to see bent or twisted pommels on old swords that have rust, damage and decay.
@@AcademyofHistoricalFencing Well, that's not the conclusion of R. Warzecha. He says that most of the specimens he analysed have twisted and often also shifted pommels, and it's clearly intentional and not due to error or damage or bending. The asymmetry is small and may be not immediately apparent unless you look for it.
Again, analysis of a some swords to extrapolate it to claim any norm is a massive stretch. I'd never say it didn't happen as I mentioned, but I've had a good close up look at enough swords to believe it was not the norm. But then Roland does have many odd theories. I've met him many times and fenced him plenty too. A good and enthusiastic swordsman, but I'd take some of that research with a pinch of salt, which especially should be the case anyway with such early weapons as we have so little written and documented about them.
I am familiar with Roland's work and appreciate the effort he is putting into it. My friend is a sword smith and he has very much taken to tilting pommels for both sittin better in the hand and due to historical examples showing this. The tower of London Armouries held only around a hundred swords (often Less) in the mid 1300's and these swords ranged in price. It is difficult to define any swords of the time in any way but it is perfectly acceptable that a more expensive sword was made for teh user and had teh pommel twisted.
Man, I took copious notes and feel like I deserve a degree or at least a certificate! LOL, seriously, a year later but finding your videos fascinating.
Nick I’ve heard that if you made 2 swords of same dimensions but one is straight and the other is slightly curved, the curved sword would be stiffer because of nodes of vibration, or something like that. Do you think this is true?
It's been my experience that curved blades of equivelent mass are slightly stiffer and also suffer less with vibration and wobble. But I wouldn't like to begin to try and explain the science of it.
@@AcademyofHistoricalFencing According to this explanation around the 9 min mark, it is because curved swords resist compression upon impact better due to the thick spine, but there's more to it: th-cam.com/video/RDcSeDHIrIo/w-d-xo.html
The same as on land. Though in many regards that can still be said of even the 17th-19th centuries. It's just that swords for infantry fell from use for most common soldiers, when they remained much more important at sea.
It's not a very well understood term. Tuck was earlier on used as a term for estoc type weapons. During the civil war it appears to have been used for some short swords, but exactly which ones is incredibly vague. As a result a avoid using the term as it is not clearly defined.
Like most of those type swords, it just means "point" You "Tuck in" the point, but it (And the French Estoc) is derived from the Italian Spada de Staccato, or pointy sword. "Sticker." "Tucker." Generally, it's a large sword as opposed to a Smallsword, that's primarily about the Point. Stiff, quite often edgeless, full length riccasso, sometimes even Triangular cross-section, little more than the tip is sharpened at all. Other than slight variations in Language, that's what the name "Tuck Sword" or "Spada de Stuccato' means. That's the Point.
You titled it "what is a broadsword," but clearly the main thrust of this episode was "WHY is a broadsword." Great presentation on the historical context, thanks.
There was any symmetrical double edged swords from 16th century onwards? Like a typical medival sword, symmetrical but with a better hand protection (like a side sword without knucklebow)?
True, and we have done that often with our training swords, though most oriignal baskets were not constructed that way sadly. Screw thread pommels do date back to around the mid 17thc, but they were not at all common until the mid to late 19thc really.
I have a question that I asked on one of Matt's Backsword vids but never really heard from anyone. He had stated that the English and Germans were a bit more cut centric in their fencing styles going back some time. It seems that the Italians, Spanish, and French seemed a bit more thrust centric, given the popularity of Rapiers in those areas. What do you believe accounts for those differences?
Silver clearly states that Both cut and thrust are to be used, neither is there a rule for using one over the other. The survivng weapons from this time support cut and thrust and I highly recommend you search 'Basket Hilts' on the royal armouries website and the mary rose sword.
The term goes back to at least the sixteeth century and perhaps back to the 14th and so that is tough, and 18th century dictionaries are inconsistent. Perhaps one of the best would be from William Hope, a well regarding fencing master, in his 1714 work ''Hope's new method of Fencing: or, the true and solid art of fighting with the Back-Sword, Sheering-Sword. Small-Sword, and Sword and Pistol', he gives the definitions of various blades and says of the backsword, "the English Back-sword, with a thick back, & only one good sharp edge," This at leasts points to the reason for the name, but like a lot of medieval and renaisance terms, the exact origin is lost.
@@AcademyofHistoricalFencing Thanks for the reply. I have it in the Sloane manuscript 2530 from the reign of Henry VIII and the term is used generically to reference the sword without companion weapon and does not support the idea that it refers to a single edged weapon. I cannot think of a reason why anyone would need to define their weapon by the number of sharp edges it has.
Sort of. The Scots really loved their broadswords, but they ultimately used muskets as their primary weapons. going to swords when the need arised or they ran out of ammunition. The Scots are always depicted as using their swords more. The truth is a little like the Last Samurai movie, they went to swords towards the end of things. Evidence of Culloden also suggests the English won that battle mostly with the sword. English armies were also known for their use of close quarter tactics with the bayonet.
![[페이스캠4K] 베이비몬스터 치키타 'FOREVER' (BABYMONSTER CHIQUITA FaceCam) @SBS Inkigayo 240707](http://i.ytimg.com/vi/x9VRNTV4VDI/mqdefault.jpg)
![[FULL EP.14] เซียนหรั่ง สอน มาร์ชจุ จับปูนา ฮากระจาย | เฮ็ดอย่างเซียนหรั่ง | One Playground](/img/n.gif)
Matt Easton looks around quizzically
Well, he got me befuddled with a 3 minute video. So serves him right.
Looking forward to see a video on the term ''Rapier'' and specifically '' Military rapier''.
That is coming soon.
Great video! I studied George Silver backsword for many years. For any of those who are doing so, please know that it is important to have a practice sword that is properly light and well-balanced. Back when I did it, we had a hard time getting smiths to make good ones and they were too heavy and unwieldy... my shoulder is pretty messed up to this day because of it.
I was a fencer who specialized in sabre, I picked up a backsword because I prefer straight blades but wanted something a little more cutting oriented than a rapier... All of my sabre training applies because they operate quite similarly.
The Napoleonic era systems we often teach from treat sabre and backsword/broadsword as the same, and so it's no surprise at all that the training applies. The only exception being the use of well curved blades for certain thrusting techniques which use the curve to get around blades, and even with those the straight blades were still used for them.
Looking forward to a Pallasch Video! (incidently if you go for the german Wiki page of the Pallasch and then click on the english language version, you are directed to the Backsword page on english wikipedia, but if you are on the english Backsword page and click on "Deutsch" you are directed to a german Backsword page, not to the Pallasch page... mysteries of Wikipedia ;-) )
Good video, I appreciate the further clarification of the use of the term broadsword to refer to double or single edged swords.
8:30 Have you seen those Redguards from Hammerfell, they have Curved Swords..... CURVED SWORDS...
According to Roland Warzecha's research, arming swords and viking era swords were intentionally not perfectly symmetrical especially in the pommel: they sit more comfortably in the hand when held in one way over the other, so they do have a true edge and a false edge.
That's a massive stretch. There is no doubt some swords had forms of cant or twist to the pommel and or/grip, but to claim it was anything like normal on viking and medieval arming swords is a huge reach. To extrapolate that out from a few examples to claim it as a norm is too much. We handled a number of medieval arming swords during a handling session at the Royal Armouries and they were 100% symmetrical. It's also worth noting it is very common to see bent or twisted pommels on old swords that have rust, damage and decay.
@@AcademyofHistoricalFencing Well, that's not the conclusion of R. Warzecha. He says that most of the specimens he analysed have twisted and often also shifted pommels, and it's clearly intentional and not due to error or damage or bending. The asymmetry is small and may be not immediately apparent unless you look for it.
Again, analysis of a some swords to extrapolate it to claim any norm is a massive stretch. I'd never say it didn't happen as I mentioned, but I've had a good close up look at enough swords to believe it was not the norm. But then Roland does have many odd theories. I've met him many times and fenced him plenty too. A good and enthusiastic swordsman, but I'd take some of that research with a pinch of salt, which especially should be the case anyway with such early weapons as we have so little written and documented about them.
I am familiar with Roland's work and appreciate the effort he is putting into it. My friend is a sword smith and he has very much taken to tilting pommels for both sittin better in the hand and due to historical examples showing this.
The tower of London Armouries held only around a hundred swords (often Less) in the mid 1300's and these swords ranged in price. It is difficult to define any swords of the time in any way but it is perfectly acceptable that a more expensive sword was made for teh user and had teh pommel twisted.
The backsword was still immensely popular in the 18th century through English Stage Gladiator combat.
Man, I took copious notes and feel like I deserve a degree or at least a certificate! LOL, seriously, a year later but finding your videos fascinating.
Do you think people with symmetrical swords like arming swords were used with one edge preferred?
Nick I’ve heard that if you made 2 swords of same dimensions but one is straight and the other is slightly curved, the curved sword would be stiffer because of nodes of vibration, or something like that. Do you think this is true?
It's been my experience that curved blades of equivelent mass are slightly stiffer and also suffer less with vibration and wobble. But I wouldn't like to begin to try and explain the science of it.
@@AcademyofHistoricalFencing According to this explanation around the 9 min mark, it is because curved swords resist compression upon impact better due to the thick spine, but there's more to it:
th-cam.com/video/RDcSeDHIrIo/w-d-xo.html
can the British backsword be used to do unsheathing cuts?
Off topic question : What type of sword did medieval knights and men at arms carry in naval conflicts ?
The same as on land. Though in many regards that can still be said of even the 17th-19th centuries. It's just that swords for infantry fell from use for most common soldiers, when they remained much more important at sea.
Nick what about the English Civil War ''tuck ?
It's not a very well understood term. Tuck was earlier on used as a term for estoc type weapons. During the civil war it appears to have been used for some short swords, but exactly which ones is incredibly vague. As a result a avoid using the term as it is not clearly defined.
Like most of those type swords, it just means "point" You "Tuck in" the point, but it (And the French Estoc) is derived from the Italian Spada de Staccato, or pointy sword. "Sticker." "Tucker." Generally, it's a large sword as opposed to a Smallsword, that's primarily about the Point. Stiff, quite often edgeless, full length riccasso, sometimes even Triangular cross-section, little more than the tip is sharpened at all. Other than slight variations in Language, that's what the name "Tuck Sword" or "Spada de Stuccato' means. That's the Point.
You titled it "what is a broadsword," but clearly the main thrust of this episode was "WHY is a broadsword." Great presentation on the historical context, thanks.
There was any symmetrical double edged swords from 16th century onwards? Like a typical medival sword, symmetrical but with a better hand protection (like a side sword without knucklebow)?
What about belly swords?
Backsword: straight single edged sword
That's the basic description yes, but whilst all backswords are indeed that, not all swords that meet that description are backswords.
Holy cow, where did you get that shirt?!
from his webstore.
swordfightuk.redbubble.com
It has been answered for me! Yes it is indeed my own design and you can buy it from the shop link posted by Odd.
Where does the double edged basket hilted schiavona fit in this?
In English it would simply be a broadsword.
swords were not just weapons in history, they were also status symbols and indications.
Well, if you have a basket hilt broadsword with a nut construction, then you could occasionally flip the blade to wear off the other side lol
True, and we have done that often with our training swords, though most oriignal baskets were not constructed that way sadly. Screw thread pommels do date back to around the mid 17thc, but they were not at all common until the mid to late 19thc really.
A cutlass is just an obrez sabre, change my mind.
I have a question that I asked on one of Matt's Backsword vids but never really heard from anyone. He had stated that the English and Germans were a bit more cut centric in their fencing styles going back some time. It seems that the Italians, Spanish, and French seemed a bit more thrust centric, given the popularity of Rapiers in those areas. What do you believe accounts for those differences?
Silver clearly states that Both cut and thrust are to be used, neither is there a rule for using one over the other. The survivng weapons from this time support cut and thrust and I highly recommend you search 'Basket Hilts' on the royal armouries website and the mary rose sword.
Hello, Can you please point me to a primary source for the origin of this term?
The term goes back to at least the sixteeth century and perhaps back to the 14th and so that is tough, and 18th century dictionaries are inconsistent. Perhaps one of the best would be from William Hope, a well regarding fencing master, in his 1714 work ''Hope's new method of Fencing: or, the true and solid art of fighting with the Back-Sword, Sheering-Sword. Small-Sword, and Sword and Pistol', he gives the definitions of various blades and says of the backsword, "the English Back-sword, with a thick back, & only one good sharp edge," This at leasts points to the reason for the name, but like a lot of medieval and renaisance terms, the exact origin is lost.
@@AcademyofHistoricalFencing Thanks for the reply.
I have it in the Sloane manuscript 2530 from the reign of Henry VIII and the term is used generically to reference the sword without companion weapon and does not support the idea that it refers to a single edged weapon.
I cannot think of a reason why anyone would need to define their weapon by the number of sharp edges it has.
Also, the surviving examples in the royal armouries and Mary Rose museum from this time are equally distributed between single and double edged.
the Scotts were much more melee oriented than the English.
Sort of. The Scots really loved their broadswords, but they ultimately used muskets as their primary weapons. going to swords when the need arised or they ran out of ammunition. The Scots are always depicted as using their swords more. The truth is a little like the Last Samurai movie, they went to swords towards the end of things. Evidence of Culloden also suggests the English won that battle mostly with the sword. English armies were also known for their use of close quarter tactics with the bayonet.
I love the content, but why does he sound like someone is holding his wife at gunpoint off screen behind the camera?