Evolution of swords through the middle ages
ฝัง
- เผยแพร่เมื่อ 7 ก.ย. 2024
- The medieval period in Europe lasted 1,000 years; A lot can change in that period of time and, with warfare being a fact of life, swords saw significant changes throughout the Middle Ages.
The companion video to this one, the evolution of armor, can be found here: • Evolution of Armour th...
![🎤 ไปกันต่อออ! จับฉลากร้องเพลง x P’ #XXSIVK [EP.2] (1/2) เพลงของใครจึ้งสุดน้าา 💓🎤 #MXFRUIT](http://i.ytimg.com/vi/mLI_K0sAS4o/mqdefault.jpg)
Now nobody wears armor. The sword is relevant once again.
People carry knives. That's basically a small sword.
@@jobdylan5782 knives are for pussies
@@legostarwarsbattledroid5272 personally I carry a 2 handed longsword everywhere I go. Can't say how effective it is as everyone runs away from me screaming as soon as they see me and everytime i drop my kids off at school i get tazed by the police. Just the price of being a REAL MAN and carrying a REAL weapon
But... pistols...
@@Legitpenguins99 dude you do it all wrong. Your supose to slice the taser in 2
10:05 It wasn't a scream, it was a battle cry!
damn, I can't like this comment, and that makes me sad.
What is better than a twohanded sword? I was sure he was going to say "a threehanded sword". LOL
Christopher Silverberg a gun?
whats better than a two handed sword? even bigger two handed sword! but what would be EVEN better? buster sword! boom! myth busted, buster sword IS THE BEST SWORD EVER
ParanoeX worst* I think you meant worst.
A two hand and a leg sword
TWO two-handed swords!
Maybe swords didn't evolve. Maybe they were intelligently designed. Did you think of that? Did you, Shad?
Gewgulkan Suhckitt 😂😂😂 I applaude you
@@jkosch yeah, evolution needs some kind of _selection_ to work.
The best ones become prominent, and the worst either disappears or adapts. That could be because no one would use a not-optimal sword, or because not-optimal creatures die.
In nature, you could even call it a _natural selection._
(Though I'm not sure what would it be called in sword's case)
@@jairomenares2089 manual selection, or just selection. I guess
@@Yumao420 Artificial selection. That's the term for someone or something deliberately selecting desirable traits instead of letting them develop at random. It's how we managed to get the many different breeds of dogs to descend from wolves.
it was designed, anything that serves a specific purpose had to be designed, just like cells, and proteins in our body ;)
I'm a fantasy authour and this man is my main refference.
I'm trying to become one and he's certainly very helpful!
@@Yarblocosifilitico I was but I'm more historical fiction now
Your not a fantasy author. You Henry the 8th.
Hi Henry the 8th do you have a male hier is
@@pilotfg4612 kinda
My desire to buy a sword has gone up dramatically since I started watching your channel
Oh my god SAME
Just got one 😂 a Viking style sword.Happy with it. Quite heavy,will build up the wrist and forearm training with it. Definitely not a lightweight sword.Made for abuse.
And once pommels are removable they make a deadly weapon to end one rightly.
hahaha +skallagrim
+Sloth Of Rivia haha u failed to tag him
yup
skall is the best
It is said that if two pommels hit each-other mid-flight, they create a singularity that will suck end the universe. They are weapons of great power.
5:44 If you're using a sword for self defense, then you likely won't be carrying a shield around. And in that case, you might as well use a longer sword for more reach.
MC Wren and you probably won’t be wearing gauntlets
Who uses a sword for self defence? Neckbeards?
I think that the invention of armour signifies an era where you wouldn't have militia's but professional armies and knights. They would have more training and it would make sense investing more material into their sword, especially given that their weapons have to be more effective than the swords already out there. But this correlates with Shad's statement about the redundancy of shields and the second hand freeing up, so good job I guess.
Wouldn't that be more cumbersome?
Buckler
Well nobles might be using Longswords without armor merely because that's what they had grown accustomed to on the battlefield. It could also be the result of wanting to carry something that would be more effective AGAINST armor as well.
Also the way you where talking about the Falchion as a commoners sword made me think about the way slashing and thrusting swords where seen in ancient china... With the more crude single edged broadswords being easier to train people in, and thus a commoners weapon, with the slinder thrusting blades being an experts weapon, and thus associated exclusively with the nobility.
A commoner carrying a two edged sword is going to hurt himself. Swords are dangerous to wield. One must know the Way. As in the literal, physical path gravity is going to take something at any instance. Prohibition wouldn't have been to shame non-professional troops and reinforce social status. Don't want to kinkshame, but peoplx in today's astronomically stratified bdsm scene of a society are just projecting with that crap.
The main thing I love about this channel is that he dives right into the topic and has an organized talk about it. He doesn't get side tracked easily and doesn't spend a minute trying to explain a statement like other TH-camrs
You could have mentioned the devellopment of the grip and pommel as well. AFAIK the first swords had a H-shaped grip so that it could be pressed against the roundshield. Kiteshields required more parrying with the sword, thus the guard got bigger and the grip longer and the pommel changed to a medallion. This enabled more wristmovement and thus other guard positions. Later pear-shaped pommels appeared and the finger was often put on the ricasso changing the blade allignment even futher to the thrust.
3:00 THAT'S MY DAD! DUDE! THAT IS MY DAMN DAD!
looks like a cool dad. Learn the craft if you can!
Awesome! Looks like my grandfather
I think the minimalist early hand guards were to keep your hand from going onto the blade when you thrust the sword into something/someone, not stop a blade from hitting your hand. If you use a shield and don't parry with a sword you don't need a hand guard to protect from that direction, but if you have no guard at all you can wind up holding a blade if you stab into something tough. Once you start parrying with the sword you really need hand protection.
The shad people watch: *porn*
The shad I watch: *swords*
@Guacamole Nigga Penis shadman Vs shadiversity
Wtf
12:36 this is why estoc is bestoc.
Dark Souls 3 PvP flash backs
R1 R1 R1 R1 R1 R1 R1 R1 R1 R1 R1 R1 R1 R1 R1 (Win)
WOO check out mah skillz!
Ferret Prince new update makes estoc parryable with medium shields after the second strike.
Well we have the Crow Quills now
what rings u got bithc >:v?
Im using this information for a video game I'm making, and I appreciate all the wonderful insights here. Thanks!
10:02 Unironic jumpscare warning.
Food for thought: china made double-edged weapons basically for as long as we have records. BUT fairly late into their overall history (~Tang dynasty) suddenly there was a like whole-culture-wide shift to single edged weapons, which puzzled scholars for a while until they found various documents etc discussing how smiths and quartermasters etc discovered that making a strong single edge with a nice thick spine meant you could use the spine for edge-to-edge defense, was VASTLY easier and waaaaaay faster to produce, thus could be mass produced for the common soldier, and didnt take anywhere near as much training. and so if you look at a Han era jian, it's a big hefty chopping thick CHOP! SMASH! sword. Then the Jian (like arming swords it has a bajillion variations, but the standard was actually basically an arming sword too with a slightly longer handle and thinner blade to make it a little bit faster) the jian shows up, and is popular for ages and ages, with various design tweaks. Then suddenly, tang dynasty jians are... basically just a jian but the second edge is pounded into a nice sturdy spine, instead of also sharpened.
(Which eventually got imported to japan, lead to katanas which then made them curved, etc etc)
But I think that is a really interesting bit of logic, cuz it kinda reminds me of the soviets' 20th century thought. "It doesnt need to be an incredible weapon, just a good kill and mass produced" and suddenly, tang jian everywhere. And then they took that single edge idea +the jian being a thinner lighter han idea = sabers. Big wide blade slicey choppy sabers, the "ox tail" being very common and the one you'd most likely recognize. They were so light and simple they were sometimes even issued in pairs for dual wielding, vaguely like sword and buckler actually. If you were crap at the skill, you still had something in your off-hand to block, and if you bothered to practice a bit, you had SLICEY DICEY.
Personally, I dont like sabers, but I completely see the logic when it comes to outfitting a large army, most of whom wont have the time to properly train. So give them something K.I.S.S. designed. (Keep It Simple n Stupid). Learning to use a proper jian or han was a lifelong effort (believe me, I know .__. ) but a saber was just like swing a utility knife, food knife, farming blades, even an axe. Just swing, and the shape and weight distribution does most of the work for you. So for massed barely trained infantry? It was the AK47 of antiquity.
:) fun food for thought re: why weapons change over time. Sometimes its more social reasons than technological limits or advances.
Subscribed. This is SO good. And your since of humor is lovely! Thank you!
Another very well researched and put together video Shad! I just have one thing that you missed when noting potential reasons for the evolution of swords, and that is the improvements in steel production. Obviously I know you are familiar with the topic, but I feel that it would have been worthwhile to note in this video how the improvements in steel from Viking Era swords to later medieval swords made it more common for blades to bind (since the steel could much better take blade on blade contact) which would have made hand protection more important.
Then as steel continues to improve, you are able to make swords that are longer and thinner while still being structurally sound, which may have been one of the reasons for the development of the longsword over the arming sword and later on the rapier.
Having already seen the evolution of armor before this, I need to see an evolution of the shield video.
I may sound psychopathic, but would anyone else prefer guns never to be invented, like everything about life was 2016-, but everything warfare was medieval and previously? No?
Guns robbed the nobility of there privileges by being easy to learn and inexpensive. The nobility kept their power for so long because they were able to spend most of their time and much of their money into superior survival chances in a fight/war. So no thanks. I would rather not live in the midle ages and I'm glad I do have rights and am not some filthy peasant serving his lord.
+Dakuffa I think he meant fighting war using Medieval swords and weapons instead of guns, in the current year
+WHATTHEFUCKEIDOS yes Allright. but today's society is the way it is because the gun was invented. Fighting wars with swords would only work in a timeline where guns had never been invented - with all the implementations mentioned above
+Dakuffa Yes we love to larp about being in the middle ages or anywhere back in time but the truth is that it would most definitely be a shitty existence unless you were lucky enough to be some kind of King or noble.
No I like what we live like today
sverd literaly means sword in Danish. since Danish is my second language and currently the one i speak the most everyday it just sounds to me like you're saying i call this type of sword a sword.
not a critique as i don't mind it, it's just something i find abit amusing.
but great video.
Indeed! It seems like most sword names simply means "sword" in some weird native language where it was invented.
Same with German.
Schwert means sword.
yea norwegain too, sverd means sword. TRIGGERD
katana literaly translates to 1 edged sword.
yea usually in English, one refers to a regional type of sword by that regions name for sword, as many swords don't have specific names.
Wow both this and "evolution of armour through the middle ages" came out on my birthday. Odd two of my favorite medevialy oriented subscriptions release similarly named vids at the same time...that's amazing! Thanks for the vid!
Thomas: Hey, Shad!
Shad: (screams loudly)
me: (screams even louder)
One of best channels about medieval weaponry i saw
Your pronunciation of Svärd is admirable.
I’m going to theorize that handles starting getting longer before two handed swords. Perhaps it benefited people when their shields broke and evolved from that.
This could start as small handles restricting the ability to move the wrist and so handles started to get longer. Then there eventually became enough room to add a second hand when needed. Thus the “hand and a half” swords. Combined with armor improvement and this could easily lead to creation of 2 handed swords.
However, it must be noted that swords were becoming more popular as well. Not only were they getting cheaper but more craftsmen were capable of making them which would allow for more exploration. Add to this increasingly better steel and the fact that rich people needed a way to distinguish their swords from the increasingly common sword-wielding lower classes.
"Wibbely wobbely timey wimey"... from where do i know that? o.ô
Both of your vids are nice. :)
+Blank- blade Dr. Who :)
Blank- blade sounds like the doctor gave you a prescription for adventure.
Could be a troper, as well.
Blank- blade doctor whooooooooooo
Dr who? NANI? allonsy
my goodness. that reaction when he pops up on screen had me in stitches. you guys are very informative
You know armor never stopped evolving. We still use armor today just smaller and more efficient. The same could be said for knifes to. I would be really interested in a video about the evolution of knifes.
it stoped for a while around the 1700 and 1800s
Robert Harris I realise this is a late comment but that's not exactly true. Heavy cavalry retained armour for quite some time & the space between Helmets like the Pith Helmet & this heavy cavalry armour is non-existent or quite small.
Knives....plural
skal brought me here, so glad i found this channel!
Nice video, just a few remarks:
1) The *pommel shape* had a huge influence on the way swords were used:
a. *H type* guards allowed the sword to be pressed against the flat of the _roundshield_. The swords were _too soft or
brittle to parry_ and thin points would damage too fast.
b. Sturdier _kiteshields_ could not be held with an outstretched arm, thus making sword parries more important. With
the more stationary shield, thrusts became more important and to get through gambeson you needed a more acute
point. The pommel became heavier to shift the balance so that you can hold the sword outstretched for longer and
the *rounded shape* of the pommel allowed bending the wrist
c. With tiny shields or without any shields, parrying with the sword and keeping enemies at bay using the tip becomes
even more important. Mail required very stiff and pointy swords. The pommel was now *round* or even *pearshaped*
so that it has even less of a tendency to bang against your wrist. They were also comfortable enough to use as
_bastard swords_.
2) *Falchion* didn’t develop from swords but rather from messer. In many places even low-borns were able to possess swords, but were _not allowed to carry_ them. However, they were able to carry knives and daggers. The messer became more and more like shortswords and proved to be very effective cutters and backup weapons. At that point they probably gave up
any pretence of being a knife, but a blade worthy of a battlefield. Hence, _grossmesser, kriegsmesser_ and _falchions_ were born. Lame excuses about carrying them within cities were probably useless at this point. However, it might be that blacksmiths were allowed to make messer, but not swords, due to _guild interference_.
3) The *point of balance* doesn’t matter much, when fighting full plate armour, since you would use _halfswording_ (grabing the blade with one hand).
4) Another key aspect was the *quality of the steel*, the achieved heat and the homogenous temperature of the forge. Otherwise larger plates, rapiers and greatswords would have been impossible.
5) In civilian context, it doesn’t matter much, if you defend yourself with a sword without shield or with a longsword. Longswords, are nearly as fast as arming swords, but have a superior reach, cut better and allow a superior bind/strong parry. The disadvantage of carrying them is, their size, clunkieness and the limited mobility in a fight (you can’t lunge as far and some angles become impossible)
Problem is with point #2 is that first falchions appear around 1200, first Bauenwehr appear ca. 1350, first messer appear ca. 1380-1400.
In civilian context having a two-handed weapon is always at advantage, you can recover better and well two-handed weapons are a tad bit faster than one-handed weapons.
Hey Shad. People like you, Rafaello, Matt... Have convinced me to pick up HEMA. Next week I will go take a look, the week after I will take part in 2 days (30.f'ing hours) of the Evolution of Combat (unarmed). Pygmanchia, bare knuckle boxing, Olympic Boxing and then a new defensive style. After that, I'm joining the school permanently. Thanks to you all for lighting my passion for history to a physical art. I'm truly grateful. Also, SWORDS!
Why call it sverd? It is just the scandinavian word for sword.
Why call a longsword longsword?
It's literally the English word for a long sword.
Why call a katana Katana? It's literally just the Japanese word for sword.
Zweihänder - Two-hander
its svärd in swedish :)
Because it's Scandinavian, and it's different, so it's a sverd.
Even though i am not a big fan of "Knighty stuff" i watch your videos just because your talking style, you make uninteresting (for me) stuff interesting. Love that.
"EVEN BIGGER TWO HANDED SWORD"
I love how corny the collaborations are. Keep it up.
Honestly if you look at the periods where these changes took place. You see a change in how they are used
What I really want to think about is how the sword might have continued to evolve without things like gunpowder and other things that made them obsolete. With that in mind, I don't think things like rapiers would have evolved as soon, if at all.
At 14 38 you have a picture of one of my swords on the background. Nice!
My thoughts:
Transition from Viking style swords to Norman style swords: Entirely down to changes to other equipment. The large round shields fell out of favor with the introduction of knights able to penetrate those shields with a lance charge. The heavier shield held more closely to the body required changes to the sword because the shield could no longer be used to protect the hand during a strike.
Longsword: It's not even a long stretch. People used the Daneaxe without any additional armor protection. Clearly, armor only plays a secondary role. The main reason that the longsword emerged at the time it did? Because they couldn't do it earlier. Quite frankly, the technology to make such a long sword just wasn't around.
Falchion: Ease of use and cutting power is one explanation. Logistics is another one. It's far easier to balance a single edged sword because you have all that thick spine to work with. This means less skilled weaponsmiths can create it, which in turn means that it will be cheaper to produce.
+naphackDT Frankly there are finds of early longswords as far as the late 11th century but it didn't become prominent until plates on the armor started to appear (14th century)
naphackDT Norman shields could stop a a sword or axe blow but not prolonged blowed to them nothing is damage proof .
At the Graz armoury in Austria they said the "zweihander" was mainly used to chop heads off of pikes. Teams of men in threes would volunteer to move up to the enemy and chop off the heads of pikes in the phalanx this creating holes in the enemy line.
I personally think the reasoning for the fact that noblemen kept using their longswords even without armour for self defense situations is twofold: For one this was the weapon they were used to anyway. Plus, as a standalone sidearm, it is superior in most situations to a one-handed sword alone. Secondly, in a civilian context all weapons of war, such as a proper shield, are out of the equasion. Yes, you could strap a buckler to your belt, but in my experience, buckler and sword does not provide a clear advantage to a longsword either. In sum, I would dismiss the use of longswords in unarmoured context as a counterargument for the theory that the longsword came into existence because of plate armour.
one oof the best channels about swords
This dude is wearing a superman T-shirt,wearing a vest over it,sitting on a throne,and talking about swords.
Wut?
Trust me, you got used to it
@@zachnerdydude6605 and indeed I did.
As a Swede, I really like your pronunciation of "svärd", the swedish/nordic word for "sword". It was really good for a non-native Swedish speaker.
+AAA9734 Thanks mate, when I first said the word in one of my earlier videos a viewer was kind enough to correct my pronunciation.
Your accent sounds like a mix between an Australian and a Bostonian.
+CarnalKid Yeah, my accent is weird, even to Australians.
I am Shad Oh, thank god you're actually Australian. After I posted that, I thought "Wait, what if that's not the base accent at all?".
Shadiversity my friend has the exact same accent as you
Australian and Bostonian do sound similar. "Here" "there" "where" all sound the same in both
Oh my god i thought i was the only one thinking that
I do amiture blacksmithing, and I think part of the reason that a longer 2 handed sword was developed was advances in forging technology, a wood forge give hot spots and cooler spots that make hammering thr sword into shape quite difficult. To have relatively circular wood forge almost 2 meters across is almost impossible to keep a solid temperature all the way through. So until lage belows and charcoal forges became the norm, it would have been very difficult to forge a long sword
Development is the word you should be using. Evolution is an unthoughtful and unguided process.
+fredo1070 I agree ^_^
+I am Shad There is no real reason to suggest that the two-handed sword was not developed because of developments in armor, just because nobles would use the sword for self defense wearing no armor, on the contrary. This would be an expensive sword, and would initially primarily be the sword of nobles, however, nobles obviously did not wear armor all the time, but would still carry the sword associated with nobility and power, hence you find instances of nobles wearing the sword with no armor. That being said, I believe the common theory is that the two-handed sword was developed not because of developments in armor, but because cavalry became more common, and you needed a longer and heavier sword to fell a horse or reach the rider on its back.
***** That is a really good point too!
not its not...development has a final goal in mind...evolution or the result which is natural selection is that things fit to conditions and can counter balance changes in the environment...and thats how it went with swords as well...changes to counter problems faced...and changes due to changes by others...evolution in this context is teh correct word
To be honest, evolution is a guided process of random events, so evolution in terms of swords through the ages are a correct term for that process.
Development would suggest that there was one single individual/country/religion or such like it that pushed the design towards a specific goal.
Larger guard provides more protection, rounded pommel allows a second hand and gives you an easier grip when trying to maximize reach.
I put your channel on push notifications- I don't even have pewds on push notifications... you are awesome.... so stay awesome. Bro fist.... wait.... no... stay awesome. Yes, that will do nicely
Yes.
Same
I can't stand pewdipie
My understanding is that swords were still issued in certain combat situations on US Navy ships as late as the 1980's even maybe the 90's. The reason being if boarding or repelling boarders you didn't want stay shots from guns hitting say warhead or fuel storage areas because then everyone was dead.
You should link to the companion video in the description. Mobile can't click through videos.
+Justin Raulinaitis Done and done ^_^
+I am Shad thanks. Your link is on his video now, too.
1:25 - 1:42 is kind of funny for a swedish person. "Some call it the viking sword or something else, I like to call it sverd". the way he says "sverd" (I know I might get the spelling wrong), that is how we say sword in swedish spelled svärd.
So,, yes, the viking sword was indeed a svärd.
Love your videos man
swords are useless! Do a video about pommels and ENDING HIM RIGTHLY
+I am Shad another point for the falcion: single edge swords are typically easier to make and can be made with cheeper materials (cheap iron core, steel edges, like axes for example)
It is 2019 I clicked but it didn’t work
all in all not bad i especially resonated with your idea of design changes to the blade. well done very enjoyable
First of all you both did a great job here, good structure, many informations in a reasonable timeframe and very entertaining.
But so many things I want to adress are floating in my head right now. I will at some point reply to both, yours and Medieval Reviews video, just to ask some questions, point things out and of course give my own view on the subjects.
However I want to say one thing here, the appearence of handguns (firearms in general were actually around for a good amount of time in Europe, the earliest evidence we have is the from the 14th century) certainly led to a quickly disband of heavy armour, but the true downfall of the sword as a more primary weapon and also of the knight as troops were the (re)appearance of well organised and drilled infantry. The Swiss mercenaries actually didn't used firearms that much or even not at all they prefered crossbows (and they had big victories against knight armies), while firearms were more of a Landsknecht-thing, later on Spanish and Italian mercenaries also adopted those. But even there the firearm troops were in a supportive role and a counter against very heavy armoured troops. Melee combat was still the primary tactic and they had a diversity of polearms against heavy armour, most famously the halberd. After firearms became more widespread armours improved and coped with the power of guns, but the simple answer was to increase the size of the handgun and so the musket was born and at this point it was useless to build full plate armour, because they were still expensive. After that we enter a whole new chapter of military history.
Like always I talk to much, like I said I will adress some points in more detail but not in the next days, hopefully see you there. :D
I love how falchions and messers look
8:14 looks a lot like steel armor in Oblivion.
Think it's the other way around. The armour was before Oblivion
naaah, i think priests and shamans were earlu biological modems that connected to the internet of the future, where they got most of thier inspirations from.
It's worth mentioning what kind of sword became popular with the invention of firearms. People started to rely less on two-handed, piercing longswords and more on one-handed, cutting sabers. I think this is because firearms rendered armor useless, so soldiers stopped wearing it, and when you're no longer worried about penetrating gaps in armor, a saber becomes a much more convenient sword.
They need hand protection because of...
Jedis
(Im serious)
(Many amputation moves)
Fair to that but there are not that many things that can resist Light Sabre strikes.
Hypothetically even if someone did wore Light Sabre Resistant armour what is to stop the jedi from simply striking the armour until the person inside gets affected by the heat?
I wouldn't be surprised if the reason the guards started widening until they hit the cruciform shape is directly the result of swords becoming more common.
The guard is less necessary when facing spears and axes, but the more swords you'll face, the more likely you are to lose fingers in a bind.
Don't call it a Sverd because it's not scandinavian. This type of sword was used all over Europe.
+Patrick Pienne + the word "svärd" just means any fricking sword.
brottarnacke I know, but it infers it scandinavian, cause it's a norse word. So it's not better then calling it a viking sword.
+Patrick Pienne its the same logic of calling a katana as such. which literaly means one sided sword.
isnt the correct term seax?
+Strife Rixa no a seax was basically a long knife and was used mostly as a tool
Another theory perhaps is that, as armour got better, the ability to make a successful attack with an arming sword, around an opponent's shield began to suffer, so long-swords were developed to allow users to hit the areas not covered by the shields (or much armour), such as the lower legs. Of course, going low would be difficult with an arming sword given that you'd need to crouch down, but with a two-handed sword you might be able to hit them as such from a safe distance (one at which you wouldn't need a shield) while standing up.
Falchion. I can see the design there. Maybe it was a civilian legal technical loophole, just a big knife. But what I see is civilians aren't walking around with armour and shields. So the thick, strong blunt side is used for blocking.
If I remember right, the other name for a falchion, the 'messer' literally is just German for 'Knife'
And it basically was. A giant knife.
Or dealing with you civilian opponent without committing full on murder. Rurouni Kenshin style. ;)
Messer and falchion are two different things, Shad has a video(series) about it, check it out. In short messer has different handle design and appeared later in history.
The ultimate Crocodile Dundee quote.
Even though when swords got banned messer were banned as well. (mostly because the laws mentioning that swords AND knives over certain length cannot be carried by outsiders)
I think if guns weren't invented this channel would have over a million subs
Estoc is so overpowered in Dark Souls 3 ._.
Beard, glasses, a suit and a comic shirt. I fully trust this man.
1:39
schwert is german and basically meand sword... lol
That's the point.
spectacular video! And yes indeed I did click to watch the "Evolution of Armour" video. Thank you!
someone call it viking sword,but i like to call IT SWIEIEIWWIIUAURDAUYA!
you Made my day
Couldn't quite tell if he said "svärd" or "Sverige" there :-)
Shad, what you got to keep in mind is that the advancement in armor came because the science (or craft) of metallurgy also advanced, allowing more advanced armor AND longer swords. Before this period swords weren't longer and thinner simple by a whim, but most likely due to material limitations and the brittleness/softness of the steel.
And, before bringing "vlfbert" as a counter-example, it's an exception and it's believed that the making of such high quality steel was labor intensive and costly and, taking the fashion trends of the time, wasn't required/common longer swords of said maker/quality due to no surviving piece having been found so far.
ans the reason said technology advanced was becauae people began to need longer swords.
A great video, if slightly cringe in places.
if you find cringe in videos that explain things i can't imagine how school goes for you, either way cringing at shit like this is weird and stupid i can't find any reason to cringe at this
Weeell... cavalry using swords actually carried on into the early part of WWII. Polish cavalry got hit pretty hard early on, but the Cossacks developed tactics of galloping in, throwing hand grenades or flammables into tanks and then cutting down the crews when they emerged. In the 19th century, swords were still used extensively especially after the firearm was emptied.
What if they use repealing magnets on the plates it would have made it much harder to strike at those parts
Repelling***
for that though they'd need the swords attacking them to also be made of magnet
+φ First-order logic oh yeah ur right
But there's something interesting in your idea. Let's say I was wearing plate armor that is also magnetic and someone tried to attack me with a metal weapon. Wouldn't their weapon get stuck to my armor making it harder for them to fight?
Well you'd need one hell of a strong electrical magnet, something of that strength could definitely not be found in nature.. Besides, slashing, hacking, and basically all attacking movements were very swift and quick, at best, the attacker would just get flustered but his sword would definitely not be "stuck".
Please, Shad, my best mate
Where did you get these images perfectly showing these sword types?
I really, really need them and they just look so perfect!
All the best, your loyal squire who’s too poor to become a member 😁
what about the rapier!? you just kind of mentioned it then shrugged it off
+enpeithi west Unfortunate I couldn't go into full detail on all the swords otherwise the video would go for two hours, a very real possibility considering myself. I also had to skip over many facts about the falchion. I'll be doing individual videos on individual swords giving them the attention they all deserve one by one.
+I am Shad to be perfectly honest I think a lot of your fans (myself included) would watch that two hour video.
+enpeithi west And that is absolutely awesome, truly I'm blown away by that. Thanks heaps mate!
+I am Shad thank you for these incredible videos! I never considered myself to be interested in swords and general medieval weaponry but now thanks to you I know that sword are truly awesome!
+enpeithi west +I am Shad Seconding this.
The only thing more astounding than the history is the shoddy editing.
Swerd is norvegian for sword!(viking swor)
Back in middle high german it was "swert". It really is interesting to compare different languages of the same family. You can really see that there has been a point at which they were very close, to the point where there may very well have been a single ancestral language.
+Asrashas yeah it existed look up indo European
+Asrashas all modern European languages descend from it
I felt like you wanted to argue further on the two handed swords. What was on the tip of your tongue:
"Have you ever tried carrying a shield around with you, everywhere...? Bucklers became popular, because they were small, light, not cumbersome, easy to carry around.
"A two handed sword is hardly any more cumbersome than a one handed sword, so it was an easy preference for day to day life. Some people threw easy to the wind, however, and drags around 18 foot pikes... crazy bastards."
No one:
Shad: *Sverd*
Those battles must have been insane back in the day!
The middle ages ended in 1492! And "Schwert" is just German for "sword".
Sverd just means sword in the Scandinavian languages too.
Clemens Kindermann People don't really refer to The Renaissance as a time period anymore, so much as a cultural change or event. I think this explains the disconnect over the end date of the middle ages.
CarnalKid I totally agree with you: The age of Reaissance is a fairley vague period of time in an artistic way - something between 1400 and 1600. But I mean the end of the Middle Ages and the beginning of Modern history. And in a historic sense there is definitely a caesura between the late 15th and the early 16th century.
Clemens Kindermann Oh, fair enough, sounds as though I misunderstood what you meant.
THERE NEEDS TO BE A CONTINUATION OF THIS VIDEO AND THE ONE FROM MEDIEVAL REVIEW!!! IT IS AMAZING....I think there need to be a continuation that starts at the late medieval and early renaissance, and then continues through the colonial period and early Victorian period which is where swords are almost practically unexistant. that would be awesome. Also maybe there could be a "prequel" video about the evolution of swords from ancient Greece Egypt and rome all the way to early medieval period!
Sværd is pronounced with a silent d, just FYI
source: im danish
Not in Swedish, in Swedish the R would usually be dropped or have a slight roll (but not a hot potato in the mouth kind of roll as in Danish). :)
That was awesome shad, having you and Mr. Riley from medieval reviews work together is one of the best things ever, you both are very talented knowledgeable and entertaining please collaborate more.
+robert paulson We plan to in the future. I'm honored you like mate.
"it was a good," Nice grammar.
Maybe he's Italian
Please never say "sverd* again.
th-cam.com/video/Wyk2SJw39Z4/w-d-xo.html
It was actually pretty good
Its Sværd.
Peter Asbjørn Hansen or it could be svärd depending on where you live in scandinavia
Well, "svärd" is what we call it. Sounds better than the english "sård".
I personaly have a thesis that could contribute to the phenomenon of the "Ridiculous Oversized Greatswords"
The time these weaopons aproximately cought on were the time of Charles the V, Emperor of the Holy Roman Empire.
By that period, the adaptation of very long pikelines to defend against the deadly post-gothic-plate cavalary charges
became prominent.
The Holy Roman Empire paid local men, mercenaries, called "Landsknecht" (translating to Servant of his Country)
as halbediers or more common, Pikemen.
Under these purchased "Landsknecht" regimen, a small fraction of men called "Doppelsöldner" were included fighting in the
frontlines, favoring these greatswords. Shad even depicts one in the picture at 16:30.
("Doppelsöldner" translates roughly to "Double-Mercenary", so called because of their equipment and willingness of
fighting in the frontranks they would get "double" the payment.)
These men, acording to history records, were meant to break pike-formations.
Now here is where i can imagine this "Zweihänder" being "handy". If this weapon was advantegous getting through
the pike wall, which i would need more information about to confirm, you would theoreticly a have pretty good weapon
at your side. As the men holding the pikes are comitted to their weapons, keeping up the wall hindering more men from closing in, you have free reach to hack and stab at them.
Given, some men could go in between the pikeranks to try to stop you, but since they brought a pike, and all else they
could be carrying without overcumbering themselfs are daggers or shotswords, you absolutely outrange them,
having a sword the lenghth of a spear.
Either way, they would either have to stand there and take the punishment from you, hacking away at them where
you could take full advantage of the big weapon from a save position, or face towards you and open the whole
pikewall to the rest of the main army.
This would also make sense in the way that alone, this weapon in a 1 on 1 scenario wouldn't make any sense,
since drawing such a thing to quickly defend yourself would not work, but in a set batlefield scenario where you
know you are facing another army and you are commiting to 1 weapon you are going to carry throughout the batle,
this fits in way more logicly in context.
A typical Medieval Knight: "I shall impale you with my Halberd!"
I definitely see that a reduced use of shields supports the addition of basket hilts and such to protect the hand, but even more so, I would hazard that as fighting styles evolved, and especially civilian dueling styles, to include more thrusting, that brings the hand even more forward and definitely exposed the hand dramatically.
John Howard basket hilts appears after the use of metal gauntlets faded.
Also most complex hilts don't do anything against a thrust.
Imagine when full plate armour was first used by big armies of men and belonging to those cultures that had never seen such full plated armour and seeing thousands of men looking like boss level Ned Kellys.....that must have terrified them especially when they were being cut down confused as to why they weren't hurting the knights. Wow.
Them: Click on this box.
Also them: **makes an unclickable box**
11:14
Shad you absolutely flipping Legend
That’s it
You’re in my top 3 youtubers now
Oh yeah, the video was nice too
😂😂😂
Great video, I really enjoyed watching!!
One thing I never got really straight: Why was better hand protection not developed / invented much earlier? (I know Matt Easton did a vid about this)
I mean, they invented and used devices in the middle ages which construction and development took quite a bit of technical understanding and knowledge.
Compared to that: to add something like one or two nagel(s) or even a knuckelbar to a sword is so very obvious and simple! One could imagine that a soldier who got hit in the hand once (or even only feared that this could happen) would immediatly come to the solutione to add something like a a knucklebar or a second short cross bar to his sword. Even more so, cause not having to be worried about your hands would give you much more variability in your fighting style and therefore an advantage
In my opinion there is NO WAY that nobody hit on that idea for HUNDREDS of years, there must be other reasons they did not adopt better handprotection earlier
Maybe it was important that the sword remained a pure symbol for the cross?
Or, at least with a knucklebar, you could not just turn around the blade and use the second egde of your sword when the other got dulled?
Maybe someone would like to give his / her ideas to that, would appreciate it..
It's there (usually), just less obvious. A Gladius still has a measure of hand protection, a circular guard that very nicely lines up with the circular shape one's hand forms when gripping a sword. That's usually all you need, it also gives the advantage of making a Gladius even easier to make, transport, carry etc. Earlier swords were also typically designed to be used with large shields, something that, as Shad would tell us, went away in the later medieval period, and shields can easily be used to prevent an opponent's weapon from sliding down the length of your blade. The change wasn't that hand protection was invented: It was the circular guards being swapped out for cross guards. You'll notice most Eastern sources have Circular guards, so it's fair to say that both 'do the trick' well enough, or we'd have seen the eventual spread of Cross-guards into more of Asia if they were indeed 'better'.
i would say the answer of the free hand is the reason for the development is defenetely a part or could be part of the reason, another big point in my opinion is the need and chance to reach or harm someone sitting on a horse. those two points might be a thing to look at, but i would say as most common fighter would not have such evolved armor, but only the high ranked or kingsnight guard etc. so the main army would have more or less light armor and leather, which would mean there is not such a big common thing as a free hand but as fighting styles evolve and if you look at a bigger picture, as in group fights or battle situaion you are able to mix different types of weapon and reach in smaller groups to make them able to adopt to more different situations. i quite like your videos, specially you arent a wanna be professor thinking he lived 1000 years ago and seen it all with is own eyes. good work!
On the the falchion, I can think of a few reason practical reason for their use, two mainly which revolve around the blunt side.
Firstly would be crushing blow capabilities. If you can't cut through mail armor chop someones arm, you could turn the to the blunt side and try and break a joint and or cause blunt trama just like getting kicked in the leg repeatedly will eventually make you unable to stand on it. Smack someone in the head with the blunt side of a falchion and you just might kill them especially if the are wearing mail or less.
Secondly as with the Bowie knife the blunt side was actually used to defend with, A bowie knife is held the the sharp side facing up. They blunt side was mainly used to block, I could very well see the blunt side of a falchion being used to block, deflect, and direct your opponents blade while possibly causing damage to your opponents weapon. Especially if you had no shield.
I remember seeing those charts used in this video, and the sister video by Medieval Review, in a very old encyclopedia set growing up. It was from a World book Encyclopedia dating to the 1920's - so old it called WWI "The Great War", for example. Both charts were present, and I remember spending hours analyzing them when I was bored. This was the late 70's, so of course there was no Internet, and Pong wasn't that exciting being played solo...
Pirates quite prominently had guns and swords side by side.
You should have a video where you talk about why sabers replaces straight swords.
And why
Its a thing from the time. People stopped wearing armour so slashing became relevant again, it was mostly cavalry using swords, so that's why the slight curve in the blade was handy, and its saber/rapier merger design is probably to thank to the fact that the elite had taken up fencing as a sport. But sabers were mostly used by the elite and rich. Pirates would use cheap cutlasses that were desirable because they didnt require much practise, no one was wearing armour so chopping did the trick, and they were cheap to boot. Also, when boarding a ship, it's likely to come into close combat seeing the rate of fire of a musket at the time.
why is a slight curve handy for cavalry?