What happened to the MEDIEVAL ARMING SWORD in the Renaissance?
ฝัง
- เผยแพร่เมื่อ 15 ต.ค. 2023
- The medieval arming sword did not disappear in the Renaissance. Here we see how it survived and continued in new forms.
3 extra videos each month on Patreon, which hugely helps support this channel:
/ scholagladiatoria
Facebook & Twitter updates, info and fun:
/ historicalfencing
/ scholagladiato1
Schola Gladiatoria HEMA - sword fighting classes in the UK:
www.swordfightinglondon.com
Matt Easton's website & Pinterest:
www.matt-easton.co.uk/
www.pinterest.co.uk/matt_east...
Easton Antique Arms:
www.antique-swords.co.uk/
#sword #medieval #medievalhistory #renaissance #fencing #rapier #duel
These “Renaissance” era arming swords are my favorite sword design aesthetically. It drives me crazy that there isn’t a uniformly recognized term for distinguishing them from other sword types. Given that humans love to classify things and the variation in sword types at the time it is surprising to me that contemporary sword masters didn’t use more specific language to differentiate one class of sword from another. The fact that they used the generic term “sword” for complex-hilt cut-and-thrust blades suggests to me that sword classification was probably based almost entirely on blade profile, and that holy construction was just viewed as something of personal preference/style. I wonder if our ancestors would be amused at our attempts to understand and classify their common everyday items. I imagine we would be similarly amused by future attempts to understand why we all use general terms like “car”, “gun”, “phone”, and “airplane” to describe things with seemingly huge amounts of variation.
Except that we do give specific names to specific models of guns, phones, and planes.
We do make a distinction between a pistol and a rifle, or a revolver and a semiautomatic pistol, or between a "brick," a flip phone, and a smartphone. That's about how they're used, and I think that's the real key for understanding the history of arms. They're named based on how they're used. So, swords are described by length (longer perhaps for main combat weapons or to be intimidating as a bodyguard, versus short to be handy as a backup weapon or in tight streets) as much as anything else. I suspect polearms were talked about the way we talk about military rifles today, but where modern folk talk about range versus penetration versus ammo capacity versus reliability, polearm wielders argued about length versus balance versus durability versus deflecting versus catching versus getting free from a snag.
As near as I can tell the sword versus rapier distinction comes down to the method of employment, which is as much an argument about martial arts as weapon design. You simply use a different suite of maneuvers with a rapier than you would with a saber. They contain many similarities, but there are some critical differences, the kind of thing that might have made Cyrano de Bergerac kind of crap in a duel if he lost his rapier and had to fight with a saber or backsword.
I sometimes wonder if a major bit we're missing when categorizing swords is the balance point of the weapon. Matt, among many others, has made it clear that a weapon's balance point is just as essential as its overall weight when it comes to actual use. It feels like a system of description for any sword should include century, country of origin, maker if available, blade length, blade width, blade balance point, and grip/guard design. That's a lot to keep track of, though -- much worse than tracking Lee-Enfield rifle variations.
@@SingularityOrbit I'll admit it isn't a perfect analogy and I probably didn't explain my thought process well. I was thinking in terms of general use over time. Someone in 1990 and someone in 2023 would both probably use the term "cellphone" in the exact same sentence, but they would be referring to vastly different things. We can and do use different terms for them now, but the "idea" of what a cellphone is has changed over time, and most often deviate from the default term when describing cellphones from the past. I wonder if that is what happened with swords. The default idea of what a "sword" was changed over time, so they didn't come up with new terms for every iteration like we do now.
@@Dr.Kenobi264 Oh, I didn't intend to be objecting to your comment. I was just thinking about what you said and extrapolating based on it. The thing is, both ways of looking at it are true. We differentiate between a flip phone and a smartphone, but we'll give a phone number without specifying what subtype of phone it is. it's just, "call me." It only matters in certain cases, like if you need the phone serviced. Which is basically exactly what you just said -- it's just a sword until you need a replacement grip, and then which kind of sword it is becomes important. Actually, the reason I thought about technique-based naming was a thought along similar lines to what you just posted. What you're used to becomes the new normal. It's like, if you took a modern stunt driver and had them try to drive a Ford Model T, they'd be in for a tough fight just to keep it under control. It's a "car," they're still "driving," but the usage is incredibly different. If we spoke of cars the way we speak of swords then a Model T wouldn't be called a car because we don't think of a car as moving at 40mph with your foot off the pedals.
Remember, Longswords are temporary, Arming swords are eternal
What are curved swords?
I'm jealous you get paid to look at swords all day
The joy of being self-employed. I have the same joy in my gun store.
I’m jealous of kids who has a rich father they get paid doin nothing
Yes!
I can't tell if he's 30 or 60
but yeah sword dealer seems like a cool job lol
@@YAOZIIThat sounds dreadful.
Nice release, It's so much better to be able to see the swords and blades and hilts side-by-side... and coming from somebody that actually practices with these things makes it even better. Love the channel, thanks to the creator and whatever team that puts these things out.
That LK Chen model looks to be a very nice midway point between the Windlass and A&A versions of that sword. Eagerly awaiting your review on it!
Tho worth noting that "thrust centric" in the 14th-15th century often meant extremely rigid tapered blades (type XVs, basically) for armor penetration rather than particularly long and narrow blades. Those are different kinds of emphasis on the thrust, power vs. reach.
Variance within any specific modern category tends to get overlooked so many times. So it's good to remind ourselves of that. Personally, I am more at the end of just lumping it all together as sword or "spada", just fleshing out the subtle differences in use. However, describing the blade type and hilt type separately might be good for the cases where you really need a clear communication with just text like tournament requirements. So meh, whatever :)
This reminds me of a joke: let's look at a young man who is just starting to grow individual hairs on his face. Does he have facial hair? Does he have a beard? Well, the hair that grows doesn't care what we call it. It is only our human mind that creates categories.
Always so comforting to hear that you will continue to be Matt Easton. Thank you for that and thank you for your incredible content over the years.
What an excellent video. Informative, lots of swords, excellent pace, and very entertaining. Thank you!
that munich sword is so beautiful
I've always thought we needed to identify swords by both hilt type and blade type, for this very reason; 'swept-hilt arming sword', for example. A Spanish bilbo might be a 'cup-hilt arming sword'.
So, lets take this a step forward - isn't the French Cuirassiers' sword you had a video on just recently also just a medieval arming sword with yet another, newer type of hilt? If you put it next to teh amroing sword and the Munich town guard sword, would there really be much difference otherwise?
*"Swords are just sharp metal sticks."*
-Bilbo Baggins
Man.....I've been watching your stuff since 2014 and I'm still learning stuff from you. Thanks for all your work.
I appreciate that!
Great video, thank you so much! I'm very interested in the medieval arming sword so this was a special treat for me. I've been thinking about picking up Italian side sword in my own HEMA practice, but in terms of what to train with I've thought to myself "can't I just use arming sword and pretend I have a finger ring?" Glad to hear I'm in the ballpark :)
A suggestion for a follow up video, if I may be so bold - it is my very vague understanding that longswords ALSO evolved from arming swords, by way of saying "what if we made this grip longer?" But I haven't found any good explanations so far as to when, where, and why longswords evolved (as far as the evidence can tell us) and I would love to hear what you have to say about that "branch" of European Sword "evolutionary tree."
Another question I've had about arming swords - what are our earliest surviving examples of them? Can you point to a particular artifact that you would say "this has crossed the line from "viking era" sword to "medieval arming sword"? For that matter, same question for longsword... oldest surviving example of a double edged medieval straight sword.
Love your content as always, thanks again!
I've just started reading Manciolino's Opera Nova, I'm using an arming sword because that is what I have. And because several of the woodblock prints from Marozzo's Opera Nova show simple quillions and not complex hilts.
Absolutely fascinating! Thank you!
That Windlass is a lovely sword. I’m such a sucker for type XVIII blades.
This reminded me, I was in the swedish royal armory this summer, and what's facinating is that we have a word "värja". To me that would be a rapier, smallsword or possibly a spadroon and almost certainly a sidesword. Never a sabre, never a longsword (sabre is sabel, longsword and most armingswords, as well as the whole group name of this type of weapon is "svärd" aka sword). However, in the armory there are the "toy" weapons and armor of a late 1700/early 1800 royal whelp, in the shape of a roman armour, and the museum refere to the sword as a värja in swedish, sword in english, and it was in the classic shape of a gladius (but kid sized). I think there might have been a lingustic shift of what weapons were called that sort of never really took hold, at least here in sweden.
In German, rapier goes from a word for the cut and thrust sword, to the name of a training tool over a couple of centuries. It looks like the same thing happened in Swedish.
Similarly, I’ve noticed our museums call throwing javelins “spears” and thrusting spears “lances”, while I would associate “lance” with a cavalry spear. There seems to be a limit to using historical terms since they only had to worry about the few significantly different currently used swords, whereas sword enthusiasts need to differentiate between swords from all over the world across millennia. I think that’s an advantage of English, since they use so many foreign words to describe specific types of swords, while we also only have a common word for “straight renaissance sword” covering rapiers, smallswords, sideswords etc.
@@hazzardalsohazzard2624 The problem is not so much that it changed to mean a training sword over time, but that it can refer to multiple quite different contemporary swords. The etymologically similar German word “Gewehr” also referred everything from polearms, to swords, to firearms depending on the period since the words fundamentally mean something to defend oneself with.
@@fridrekr7510I often have serious doubts about knowledge of people in "general" and even military museums overall. Especially when it comes to size: long sword versus two handed sword, spear versus pike or two handed axe versus poleaxe versus halberd. People without practical experience can't really comprehend, for example, effect of 10 cm longer or shorter blade, it is not just about reach but pulling it out at short distance etc. Add to that lack of basic knowledge of mechanics (it is not about mass, it is about moment of inertia) and all but most striking differences "disappear" because they are not "very important". And if anyone in museum had experience with foil fencing, even lightest historical sword (and every other weapon, except daggers) will be considered heavy and cumbersome.
Värja is pretty loose, but it usually means one handed long straight sword. Swedish sword terminology doesn't make any sense anyway since all military swords that have a saber style handle are sabel even if they have straight blades.
great video, thanks 😊
This was awesome, thanks!
Thank you. A very interesting and informative video.
Very interesting, thank you.
The Easton typology: well you've got your slashy swords, your stabby swords and your slashy stabby swords .
Really looking forward to the review on the LK Chen Munich. I am almost ready to order one, but can't find much in the way of impartial reviews, yet.
Good discussion, thanks.
I love how Matt always starts of talking about the differences between swords but it soon becomes a much more philosophical conversation about metaphysics and the nature of arbitrary classifications. How long dose a spear blade, and short it’s handle, need to be before it becomes a sword? Always think about that one as a lot of particularly non-European weapons seem to transcend those boundaries.
Super interesting stuff as always. Side swords are probably my favourite sword, what ever a one of those is anyway.
Could be that "classic" arming swords were still around as a "budget model" for those who could not afford the modern, more expensive swept hilt. Can't always afford all the options whether it is a sword or a car or rifle or new mobile phone. Thanks for the ongoing discussions. Really like and appreciate your work. Best on Toob. Thank you.
Eh, take a old fashioned blade and do some handiworked so that fits on a fancier hilt or add more bars to a refurbished hand me down arming sword and you have a sword with more hand protection with a lower price cus you aren't paying a smith to make a new blade.
Simpler guards also means less weight and a lower profile while carrying, there are swords even into the 17th century that only have finger rings and a simple crossguard.
George Silver also complains that often when under duress, people fail to be able to get their hand into complicated sword hilts and be able to draw in time. So, a simpler hilt has the advantage of not having you fumble about while in a panic.
@@catocall7323 This makes me think that the saber hilt was a development to max out hand protection while minimalizing fumbling under durress with the open sides, and the thumb up grip was maximize reach with a shorter weapon than a rapier and the blade form was to maximize robustness and cutting ability per wieght cus military weapon.
Always love the debates!
As you note the underlying issue is that the original name of most swords is Sword .. Rapier is from espada ropera - meaning Dress Sword ...
Short Sword means it's shorter than long swords, and Long Sword means it's longer than a short sword ...
The schiavona has a more substantial blade than a rapier with an intricate and protective hilt, somewhere betwixt a basket hilt and a swept hilt.
You left out my personal favorite late 16th c early 17th c sidearm, the Schiavonna. When I think of that sword style, I can’t help, but think of Venice, although I don’t know that is a correct association.
Been getting into the 17th century arms and armor (Thirty Years' War in particular). From what I understand, swords were still used by wide ranges of troops (pikemen, musketeers, NCOs, officers, and cuirassiers). Similar to the medieval period, these were backup weapons. Has Schola done a video covering swords in the early/mid 17th century and were things like the Town Guard and Windlass sword he shows off more common than anything carried by more wealthier and/or higher ranking soldiers?
Great video, very entertaining.
Question: The blunt part of the blade within the guard, is that the tang, or ricasso?
Really enjoy your channel, love all the history. One thing I'm curious about is, of all these various swords is there a particular type and length that you enjoy practicing with the most? My guess is that you really like the arming swords... but you might surprise me with going for a saber. Again, fascinating channel and thank you so much for sharing with us.
What an interesting video. In my country (Chile) many Spanish swords remained in the hands of indigenous rebels, especially after 1600. These swords were rapiers and also some were wide (medieval type). The indigenous people generally broke them to make spear points with them, although sometimes they attached the entire sword to the spear shaft. Also some (generally important warriors like Lientur) used swords. Spanish blacksmiths who lived with the indigenous people and fought on their behalf continued to create swords. In the Quai Branly museum in Paris there is a crude Mapuche sword from the 19th century. It was brought to Europe by a Belgian traveler.
He's made 5 videos on this topic and I still want more!
Hi Matt, could you also include early British basket hilted broadswords and swords such as the Schiavona as developments of the Arming sword?
Yes absolutely
Thank you so much for your videos! They are always very interesting and informational! Keep up the good work!
I have two questions that I hope to see answered in future videos:
1) Could you talk a little bit about hilts/hand protection? Like, why was the cross hilt so common in Europe instead of a knuckle bow? And what about the hilt of japanese swords? Or chinese swords?
2) What are the main differences between a single and a duble edged sword? I heard a lot of people talking about single-edged sword as they were better, or even more so that having a fully-edged back edge is useless; only the final part of the blade towards the tip has reason to be double-edged due to thrusting, but not the whole blade. Is that really the case? The popularity of double-edged sword in europe makes me think not, but I would like to know the specific reasons.
A good, solid design will always be finessed into multiple variations.
That's how you know it's a good, solid design.
Can't wait for batch 2! My body is ready.
I want an Alexandra Side Sword. XVIIIc type blade on a complex one hand hilt.
there was a sword that I saw, the blade was one of the updated yet remained an oakeshott type 20a in profile and geometry. but hilt and grip was "next generation" pommel was original with family coin embedded dated 1470. but was clearly removed more than four times due to different rust levels" The curator i was talking to suspected it was a hierloom longsword originated around 1470 per coin. but it was heavily used during around 1550 to 1570. it had complex hilted finger rings and long swept S guard. at 55inches. So it was originally a longsword then progressed to be a Frankenstein great sword. We both know it is not Victorian dress up because radiocarbon of both rust of the wood grip puts it 1460-1470. blade 1550. what's amazing is, some sections near tip is razor sharp still. I said, this soidifies the broom and broom head theory ie, " I had this broom for 60 years,. I replaced the handle 2 times replaced broom head 3 times" Honestly the only original out of everything is the pommel, but who knows. unless we have time machine!
I enjoyed this,as I always do,but I've never been more confused by one of your vids.
To me the difference in a rapier and a side/arming sword would be where you would typically wear one. A rapier would be a sword for everyday civilian use that is designed to be used against opponents typically not wearing armor, and most likely armed with a similar weapon, where a side/arming sword would be something that would be worn on a battlefield where you would expect to be facing armored opponents and would want a more robust blade. Even the word side/arming sword denotes to me that it is meant to be a secondary backup weapon in case your primary battlefield weapon needs to be discarded for whatever reason. It looks to me that the 'Town Guard' sword you show is a bit of a combination of the two. It has the hilt design and more narrow point for the Guard to be able to use it against an unarmored civilian threat while performing his duties in town as a sort of police force but the blade is designed that so that the same weapon can be used in battle to defend the town from hostile attack where the enemy would be armored.
Arming swords never die.
They just fade away.
Props for the Highlander reference
Thank you, very educational video Matt, I can say I've been doing Di Grassi two sword fencing for a long time with the use of armingswords since I think they are best suited for his method and that's one thing people always want to correct me on, but as you point out, things are not black/white.
Your point about hilts not determining sword type makes sense. While not European Indian swords often have either the hilt common on talwar or khanda but the blades on them can vary wildly!
Thanks for the video & like things from the past weapons evolve that's why experts go to the blades types
Gotta love how hard it defining things is being things don't like to be all simple and defined.
Hi Matt. First of all, thanks for the interesting video.
In my opinion I find it very difficult to categorize swords in therms.
As an example. I am a native german speaker and the therm Sidesword, in German Seitenschwert, could be a very different sword. It could be what you called a Arming Sword because you carry it on your side. Or it could be a rapier. For the same reason. And here comes my point. Seitenschwert is a, more or less, old therm for a Bajonett. So you could also mean a 18/19 hundred or a modern Bajonett.
So I always found it very difficult to categorize swords in therms.
Shad used to make a video in the past about the sword therms from games and movies. And I found it very good but difficult to use the Terms.
I hope my thoughts were interesting or helpful to you.
Again thank and best regards from Germany.
Where can you get the sword that appears at the beginning of the video or what is it called?. Maybe he mentions it in the video, but I don't speak English.
Like so many things, when you need to make a distinction, you have to define your terms rather than assume that others will automatically understand. You have to accept that others will use the terms differently and be sure to look for or ask for their definitions. And, in fact, we may use the same terms differently in different contexts, which is further reason to provide clarity.
Ok Matt, you’ve bullied me into saying “swept-hilt arming sword”, I hope you’re happy
Aren't many sword names a combination of hilt + blade anyway? Names like swept-hilt Rapier or basket-hilt broadsword already indicate that this convention works. So the Munich Town Guard sword would be a swept-hilt arming sword, if you follow that naming convention.
Is it fair to say that the Medieval Arming Sword’s hand protection was provided by a metal plated gauntlet and that as the sword evolved with more protective hilts with which the users were then able to move to leather gloves allowing them to use more modern weapons, such as personal firearms to extend the range of lethality as well as keeping these advanced swords for close-in combat?
I'd say it's a combination of shields and bucklers, hand protection and complex hilt tech development. Shields in battle and bucklers in civilian life were prevalent in the middle ages
Yeah, I always wondered how hard it would would to use a matchlock musket and a wheelock pistol wearing gaunlets. Complex guards are essentially gaunlets attached to your sword. Allows you to have full protection and dexerity without fiddling around with removing plated gloves.
And I would add that, after complex hilts were developed - and narrow thrusting "rapier" blades became fashionable - the style of both blade and hilt in combination became a matter of "consumer's choice":
1. Do you mainly wear gloves? Complex hilt. Sometimes or often armour including metal gauntlets? Simple hilt.
2. Are you likely to have to fight indoors, in narrow alleys or noisome taverns? Short, stout cut-and-thrust blade. In open country or on horseback? Longer stout cut-and-thrust blade. Showing status in polite society and only likely fighting in foofy formal duels? Long fashionable thrusting blade.
When looked at that way, the reason for the Munich Town Guard sword style becomes obvious.
Swept hilt arming sword / arming sword with a swept hilt?
What about the Cinquedea? If I'm not mistaken it was around for a while before giving way to the rapier in popularity and use. The question though is, was it a short sword, or large dagger. How would one even classify it?
If you would create a naming conventions it could be a two-part name. Where the first part is always the type of hilt, and the second part the type of blade. e.g. "Swept hilt cut and thrust sword".
If I was going to provide an arsenal quality sword to a part time body of militia or constables, and I knew that these men were probably not going to be fencing masters by any stretch of the term, then the Munich type sword is what I would select. Good reach, stout blade that can be used to hack away at the bad guys or skewer them as the chance arises, this would be the weapon of choice for a semi-professional gang of bully boys in my employ. In a close packed street fight, the only possible improvement as an arming scheme would be to provide reliable firearms with bayonets, which shortly after these swords appeared became the standard practice.
Brilliant Matt 👏 I guess if the blade ain't broke, and what it does, then don't fix it ...
I think the Paulus Hector Mair plays depict various versions of hilts and blades, in the Rapier & Dagger section, calling them all Rapiers, but I agree with you. 😂
Here's hoping thay one glorious day you will become Matt Weston. Until then, cheers.
That is a really cool-looking sword.
I completely agree that "rapier" should be defined solely based on the blade, but sidesword really is a more hilt-oriented term. The way I see it:
a) Arming Sword = simple cross hilt, maybe with a simple knuckle bow
b) Sidesword = complex hilt designed for pistol grip (finger rings, cup hilt or something equivalent)
c) Broadsword = complex hilt not designed for pistol grip; examples: English broadswords, Schiavona, Joachim Meyer's "rapier" (siderings but not finger rings)
When we talk about sideswords, we usually also mean the sword to have an "archetypical sidesword" blade - notably longer than average medieval arming swords (85-95cm vs 70-80cm), only as light as needed to be effective cutters (not overweight like a lot of pre-1350 arming swords) and not sacrificing anything to be good vs armor (like a lot of type XV and XVII blades). These blades have very good synergy with pistol grip and the associated swordsmanship styles. But that's very far from an established rule - one cursory look at "17th century spanish sword" in Google images and you get plenty of swords with finger rings or cup hilts, yet much broader blades - sometimes even clearly more cut-centric than thrust-centric.
Love the video! This discussion got me thinking about what kind of sword the Spanish and Portuguese conquistadors would have used during the earliest conquests in the Americas. More specifically, what kinds of swords would Cortes and his soldiers have used in the conquest of the Aztec empire (1519-1520)? My understanding is that they would have had 'side swords' but I've seen artistic depictions that show them with more traditional arming swords or rapier-like swords. Any thoughts?
The ones I've seen looked like renaissance cut and thrust swords.
I usually call it a swept hilt side sword, or because it is so well known most people understand if I say "it's like the munich sword"
For the Americans here, thanks for explaining what the 16th century means.
I propose “guard sword” due to both its origin and the fact that it has a complex guard. Although I personally don’t know if it’s worth finding new names. There’s always going to be a new variance and as you said, they were “swords”
For us Freemen,
If you own a AR-15 you'll know that they come in like a thousand configurations.
Looking like a Nam era A1 copy, Short barreled, forward hand grips, Iron sights or rails, skeletonized frames, etc
This is like in 500 years Historians tried to rename every variant ever made of what we simply just can a AR-15's/M16s.
It could equally be argued that the arming sword evolved into the basket hilted broadsword for military use as armour became less important for military use?
Broken record time from me Highland Officers took of the basket hilt and put on a simple cross guard for campaign in the late Victorian era up to the First World War.
We must not forget that SXV was not an age of programmed obsolescense. I can imagine perfectly a not-so-rich hidalgo taking his grandpa sword, going to the blacksmith and say "see what we can do with the handgard, something nice and cheap.."
Silver suggests that a rapier doesn't have hand protection in his Paradoxes (along with general anti rapier ranting!). I was puzzling that the other day since I associate a rapier with the swept hilt. I was puzzling that as well as what he actually meant by long sword (so you've helped with that). Will definitely check out your rapier vid!
Yes I've wondered about that. I think it's a comparative statement, compared to a basket hilted broadsword or backsword. So he should have said it has less protection. I also think Silver is specifically talking about the narrowest and most thrusty blades with the word rapier, as he discounts their cutting potential.
Just wondered if the properties of the blade or the metallurgy have changed over the centuries.
Smelting and smithing techniques may have improved or maybe different properties (making the blade more flexible or rigid) may have been in demand.
I have been wondering for sometime after enthusiastically watching your videos, whether the blades on swords, daggers etc were sharpened to certain degrees to meet the challenges offered against the opponents. Would blades have been sharpened differently to effectively cut or pierce gabion, chain mail, plate armour, cloth etc to give it the most potency. Sometimes we may forget that the bladesmith/sharpener is perhaps one of the forgotten or undereated masters of warfare. Thanks.
Another big thing is that all the “arming swords” that were used earlier didn’t just disappear, they would still be in circulation.
Degen also means ,,straight post-medieval european sword" in German, but Degen meant dagger (and is probaly also a cognate) before the late middle ages.
What a beautiful sword.
That Munich sword is impressive. I wonder how the point of balance is changed by the hilt?
That's a beautiful sword
BTW, that rapier is gorgeous. Who made it?
Omg. I’ve been wanting a Munch Town Sword for ages.
Defaulting to "sword" makes a lot of sense if your *context* is learning and using whatever is available in your decade without being overly concerned about previous or subsequent centuries.
due to the cost of manufacturing, how likely would it have been to re-hilt older blades?
"You can put a hilt on any tang." Words of wisdom for all the young bucks out there.
First. And what a beautiful copy of the "Henry V" sword! VERY Italian looking.
Not the Henry V sword (which was actually Henry VII's!), but a similar example :-)
This is from the new Royal Armouries line that I've been working on.
@@scholagladiatoria , Oh, is the provenance of the Westminster Abbey Type XVIII known now? I used the quotes because I know that it's likely too late in terms of style to have belonged to Henry V. However, I wasn't aware that it had been positively attributed to Henry VII! That's amazing! I did later notice that this sword's blade is not hollow-ground, unlike the Westminster Abbey sword.
This topic definitely shows the limits of modern terminology applied to historic objects. I think a good deal of blame should fall on 19th and 20th century museum curators; certainly in the USA (ie the Met), art historians categorized swords by their hilts, and tried to match them to broad trends in the decorative arts. This emphasis on form rather than function is still prevalent in the field, since there are few specialized arms curators with backgrounds in historical martial arts. Art historians continue to dominate "mainstream" museums, which is where arms and armor are typically found, and their limited perspective can be inadequate for functional items like swords.
Categorizing swords by blade (rather than hilt) makes a great deal of sense to me; categorizing them by method of use would be even more helpful, although less objective.
Maybe for these mutty swords we need to describe them as we would a dog of questionable pedigree.
Munich Town guard:
20% Arming Sword
60% Side sword
19% Rapier
1 % Cinquedea
Naming conventions are always so tricky, and it’s a mammoth task to get everyone on the same page. I’m always surprised when I see progress being made with certain sword terminology (e.g. retiring “scimitar”, or the popularization of schiavona). A big issue I think is much of our anachronistic naming is based on form rather than function: you have probably seen Nick Thomas’s discussions on Spadroons, and how he encourages the definition in British English in the late 18th century between Broadsword-Spadroon not based on edges but instead on handling. It just makes things tricky when we are not allowed to pick up and play with these swords we’re studying ;-)
I like Mutts. Pure breeds tend to have massive issues. :p Just like in the dog world
I have multiple students who have had issues ordering Rapiers/Sideswords/Armingswords - receiving something they didn’t expect… I tell them to be very specific cause everyone has a slightly different concept in mind for each of these names…
You know, I once saw a photo of a very strange sword in a book about the history of weapons. Apparently it belonged to some lord. It had a spike protruding from the cutting edge (closer to the end) I understand that despite some potential advantages (maybe the creator wanted to hook the opponent's shields?) there were apparently more disadvantages and it did not become popular, but have you ever seen something like this?
Inb4 someone says it's probably ceremonial.
@@Chroma710 A ceremonial sword with some protruding spike? What is this protruding spike supposed to symbolize? IMHO, someone wanted to damage the opponent or hook him with this spike, but the idea turned out to be stupid. But if someone shows me a ceremonial sword with a spike like that...
@@Zbigniew_Nowak Sometimes they just look cool and have 0 symbology. Look up the bavarian sawfish sword, they made some ridiculous "weapons" that were never meant to be used but just hung up in some rich lord's manor.
Having a large spike on the end of a sword just turns it into a weirdly shaped axed because the center of mass will be way too high up to make it a good sword. If you're looking for a weapon that can hook shields out of people's arms there are all sorts of polearms like halberds, poleaxes, fauchards, billhooks, etc.
@@Chroma710 You're right, but the thing is that it wasn't a big spike, but quite small. It looked like there was only one little spike on this Bavarian sword. Even shorter. It doesn't look very spectacular, cool or fancy, at best... strange. Therefore, I am still inclined to the hypothesis that someone wanted to "add an additional function to the sword", but the idea turned out to be bad. But it doesn't really matter why someone created it. I wondered if Matt had ever seen anything like this in his life - and he had probably seen a lot of strange weapons.
LK chen makes a great blade, the #1 thing that would make me choose the windlass over Lk chen , is the stainless guards....I just personally hate stainless steel on any part of a sword ill get attached to, I just like the patina a proper steel or even brass guard gets with use and time.
I think the other thing to consider when talking about the "rapier" distinction is that the term "Rapier" is also kind of an indicator of the weapon's social function just as much as it is about the weapon's form. I don't think the Town Guard sword can fit into that class because it didn't serve that function as a "gentleman's weapon" for frilly bluebloods who only really ever needed to use it for first-blood duels and showing off.
Ehh, Matt as shown there is so much variation in rapier blade types even when they are thrust centric that I don’t think that applies to all of them. That LK Chen rapier is certainly a monster, the only thing not suited for tougher combat is the length. Rapiers vary between great weapon for urban self defense in long narrow alleyways ( places lie Venice as allot of those) to ultra fancy dueling needles ( the latest rapier Matt showed in his last video).
A tuck is the same as a French Estoc or German panzerstecher.
All 3 mentioned are the variant of a longsword being the original 2 handed rapier for a onehanded is court/dress sword=espada ropera in Spanish.
Basically a tuck is 2 handed rapier & they reach up to 63 inches though in time as plate armour improved they were shortened as the longer blades had tendency of snapping at the tip getting as short as 44 inches by the high middle into the renaissance.
Some long tucks remained later but they had slightly bulged thickened tips for about 6 inches that had no cutting edge being a wicked point with the remaining potion of the blade being usual of a tuck/rapier like blade longsword that came long before 1 handed rapiers/court swords.
A tuck initially had no complex hilt but developed to in time.
Of long swords or swords in general a tuck is my preference.
mind I much prefer polearms like an Spears, English bill, Voulge, Ahlspiess, halbards, polle etcetera
Even side arm wise my favourite is a mace as armoured or unarmoured it does the trick all the same.
a bit off-topic, but i think in a zombie apocalypse situation, the munich sword would be a hot candidate for carrying as melee weapon.
I'm curious about whether an Albion Doge style sword would be considered by most as a side-sword, or just a later arming sword. It's clearly in the process of developing the more complex hilt feature you would see in later swords. I love mine either way. It's such a cool transitional sword.
In Central Germany, around Rothenburg, many castles and towns have this style of sword displayed as "30 years war" swords. Agree it appears to be continuing the arming sword concept. They were not civilian dueling swords. They were for military and militia/city guard. The few I have handled were surprisingly fast, well balanced. I always considered it an excellent choice for a modern EDC sword, if that ever becomes a thing.
So it seems the main evolution during that time is the complexity of the handguard/hilt. What caused that? Would it be less prevalence of shields due to firearms leading to a swordsman presenting just his side in a fight and making the hand a larger target?
Rapier comes from espada ropera which means dressing sword. A rapier is a sword that you wear with your regular clothing. Has nothing to do with the blade
were there complex hilted post medieval swords that were converted from medieval longswords instead
I would argue that the Munich town guatd is a "broad sword". Looking in alot of sources from a 17th century onward i would argue that if they specificy that kind of sword, that tends to be a common description, atleast in English
The sound of a sword from its leather sheath is SILENT, so as to avoid blunting the blade. There was discipline unto Iaido in Europe so as for the blade to be controlled and not blunt on either side. Many mercenaries and Landsknechts, with longer Zweihanders (two-handed war swords) or the Gallowglass warriors with claymores, carried their swords unsheathed on their shoulder, without a sheath and the pommel in hand, as with a musket in the times of Pike & Shot.