Lessons on Swordsmanship - The Barrow-Downs Discussion Forum

Marileangorifurnimaluim · 08-09-2002, 09:05 PM

Hi guys, more info from Lostgaeriel: Hi Marileangorifurnimaluim!UPDATE/CORRECTIONS to Sword infoMy previous visit to the ROM was about 20 minutes, I stopped in between appointments, so I was a bit rushed. I've since gone back and spent more than an hour carefully examining and sketching the swords and armour. I even took a tape measure to get more accurate dimensions. (Even so, it's difficult to measure articles that are two feet behind glass.)The two broadswords dated 900-1025 AD had blades about 26" and 30".The blade of the Great Sword (2-hander) dated 1280-1320 AD was closer to 40" to perhaps 44" rather than 48" I previously estimated. Still it was described as 'longer than usual' and was the same length as the approx. 42"-44" blade of a Scottish Claymore dated early 1500s. The notes in the display claimed that the claymore was similar to two-handed swords used in Central Europe but it had a slightly shorter blade and angled guards. (The claymore had a 10-12" two-handed grip.) So I'm guessing that a 48" Great Sword is not out of the question.The blade of the hand-and-a-half sword from 1350-1400 AD was about 36" and the grip was closer to 8" or 9".Cross sections for cutting swords are: <=> or <x> [flat with sharp edges or fullered with tapered sharp edges] Cross sections for cut & thrust swords are: <0> or ^ or <> [thicker center with tapered sharp edges or triangular or diamond-shaped]Average weight/mass of a sword was only 2-3 lb or 0.9-1.4 kg!!!NOT Swords:Full suit of plate armour massed/weighed about 18-27 kg or 40-60 lb. That’s no heavier than field packs carried by infantry in World War I.There was a buckler on display. That's a small shield used in foot combat 1200s-1600. Some were round, others rectangular. This one was round from Wales, used in the early 1500s, about 12" in diameter. It was made of concentric rings of rivets and had a 2" globe-shaped boss or finial at the center. The overall shape of the shield was like a straw hat with an upturned brim (with the boss on top). That is concave from the outer edge inverting to convex at the center. This shape boggled my mind – not at all what I expected. I expected a convex shape that sort of wraps around the arm/body.An example of an Italian Barbut c. 1460 - a light helmet (shoulder length) with t-shape opening in front for vision and ventilation was 5 ½ lb or 2.5 kg. The smooth round surfaces of this plate-metal helmet deflected the most powerful personal weapons of the day.I've got some more info on spurs and sword-making and sword decoration (blueing, fire-guilding, etching, engraving, chiselling, chasing/embossing), but I'm a bit fuzzy on it.[ August 09, 2002: Message edited by: Marileangorifurnimaluim ]

08-09-2002, 09:05 PM	#21
Marileangorifurnimaluim Eerie Forest Spectre Join Date: Nov 2001 Location: Buried in scrolls of fanfiction Posts: 798	Hi guys, more info from Lostgaeriel:<P><BR>Hi Marileangorifurnimaluim!<P>UPDATE/CORRECTIONS to Sword info<P>My previous visit to the ROM was about 20 minutes, I stopped in between appointments, so I was a bit rushed. I've since gone back and spent more than an hour carefully examining and sketching the swords and armour. I even took a tape measure to get more accurate dimensions. (Even so, it's difficult to measure articles that are two feet behind glass.)<P>The two broadswords dated 900-1025 AD had blades about <B>26" and 30"</B>.<P>The blade of the Great Sword (2-hander) dated 1280-1320 AD was <B>closer to 40" to perhaps 44" </B> rather than 48" I previously estimated. Still it was described as 'longer than usual' and was the same length as the approx. 42"-44" blade of a Scottish Claymore dated early 1500s. The notes in the display claimed that the claymore was similar to two-handed swords used in Central Europe but it had a slightly shorter blade and angled guards. (The claymore had a 10-12" two-handed grip.) So I'm guessing that a 48" Great Sword is not out of the question.<P>The blade of the hand-and-a-half sword from 1350-1400 AD was <B>about 36" and the grip was closer to 8" or 9"</B>.<P>Cross sections for cutting swords are: <BR><=> or <x> [flat with sharp edges or fullered with tapered sharp edges]<BR>Cross sections for cut & thrust swords are:<BR><0> or ^ or <> [thicker center with tapered sharp edges or triangular or diamond-shaped]<P><B>Average weight/mass of a sword was only 2-3 lb or 0.9-1.4 kg!!!</B><P>NOT Swords:<P>Full suit of plate armour massed/weighed about 18-27 kg or 40-60 lb. That’s no heavier than field packs carried by infantry in World War I.<P>There was a <B>buckler</B> on display. That's a small shield used in foot combat 1200s-1600. Some were round, others rectangular. This one was round from Wales, used in the early 1500s, about 12" in diameter. It was made of concentric rings of rivets and had a 2" globe-shaped boss or finial at the center. The overall shape of the shield was like a straw hat with an upturned brim (with the boss on top). That is concave from the outer edge inverting to convex at the center. This shape boggled my mind – not at all what I expected. I expected a convex shape that sort of wraps around the arm/body.<P>An example of an Italian Barbut c. 1460 - a light helmet (shoulder length) with t-shape opening in front for vision and ventilation was 5 ½ lb or 2.5 kg. The smooth round surfaces of this plate-metal helmet deflected the most powerful personal weapons of the day.<P>I've got some more info on spurs and sword-making and sword decoration (blueing, fire-guilding, etching, engraving, chiselling, chasing/embossing), but I'm a bit fuzzy on it.<p>[ August 09, 2002: Message edited by: Marileangorifurnimaluim ] __________________ Deserves death! I daresay he does... And some die that deserve life. Can you give it to them?