Greatsword

[Taffer]

I remember reading somewhere that a greatsword (huge double-handed swords) corp. was used by either the Ottoman or Persian empires (can't remember exactly). Supposedly they where much feared. Did these troops actually exist and if so are they going to be in the game.

[Sjakihata]

I think that great swords were belonging to the Teutonic Order and up there.

And I do not think that two-handed swords were used often in real combat.

'cep ND http://www.totalwar.org/ubb/biggrin.gif

[MagyarKhans Cham]

touch the Khans principal wife and u will meet a greatsword http://www.totalwar.org/ubb/wink.gif

[Dionysus9]

As far as I know the Persians used light, thin, curved blades. They were able to get away with it because their metallurgy skills were so advanced-- they could make thin blades that were stronger than a heavy European blade.

As for the Ottomans, I believe they also preferred lighter fighting blades.

I know that the Scottish "claymore" sword was friggin huge, and very similar to a Great-Sword. I'm pretty sure most double-handed swords were used by Western Europeans...primarily they were bashing weapons used to crush armor instead of pierce it.

The quality of the blade was not always that good.

[Toda Nebuchadnezzar]

Chances are the Danes would be the faction to have units with greatswords.

But I dunno.

------------------
Jaguara-Spoken like a TRUE SPAMMER Toda!

No Fear Legend.

[Sjakihata]

Yeah yeah.. http://www.totalwar.org/ubb/biggrin.gif

[Wavesword]

Germans used them I think. They were actually rather good defensively (in melee only!) and for breaking up pikemen, but weren't the killy killy troops you'd expect.

[Nelson]

Yup. The zweihander, among other weapons, was used by German landsknechts(sp?) in the 15th century. Like every other unit type, they had their good days and their bad days.

------------------
CONITOERGOVINCO

[ShadeHonestus]

I think I remember hearing about the Danes using them as well... They would start swinging them in a specific motion to gain momentum well before they came into hand to hand. Then, if they could control them well enough to score a hit, they could actually cut right through a horse and/or rider. Maybe just the stuff of legend...but I think I've read it more than once.

[Sjakihata]

No... the Danes never did that... !!!

[Red Peasant]

The Danes' weapon of choice, used in the fashion you describe, was a huge double-headed battleaxe. The Danish settlers brought this weapon to England were it became popular, being the standard weapon of the King's elite bodyguard, the Huscarls. There is some account of the Battle of Hastings that describes a Huscarl decapitating the head of a Norman horse!

------------------
To see a world in a grain of sand,
And Heaven in a wild flower,
To hold infinity in the palm of your hand,
And eternity in an hour.

William Blake.

[Taffer]

Oh yea, I think it was German (or however you want to describe their culture at the time). The name "zweihander" should have been obvious to anyone who knows even a little bit of the language. I hope they are included in the game because I think huge double-handed swords are cool. Anyone know how the zweihander fared in combat (at least I'm not as historically illiterate as some people who think that the German state as it exists today has been around as long as the middle ages)?

[ShadeHonestus]

Oh yeah, nevermind...
It wasn't the Danes in general, it was a particular Norse Leader...
My Bad.

[Dionysus9]

I think, like everything, its use in combat depended on the quality of the workmanship of the weapon. As I said before, the muslims and (maybe) ottomans were using thinner blades because they knew how to forge the steel so it would remain strong and keep an edge. They preferred fighting from horseback, so a smaller, lighter weapon with excellent strenght and cutting ability made sense.

The claymore/zwiehander was partly used for intimidation (sheer size/strenght necessary to wield it), but part of the reason it was soooo huge was that at that time in northwest Europe the sword making techniques tended to produce more brittle steel. Swords were commonly broken in combat due to stress, and so they started making bigger and thicker swords to stop breakage. As I understand it, a 2-handed sword was thick enough it could take a beating without breaking. The average 2-hander didn't hold an edge all that well (again, underdeveloped metallurgy) and so they were mostly used for crushing blows. Of course an expensive weapon for use by elite nobility could have been kept razor sharp.

If I was in a fight with an opponent wielding a 2-hander, I'd take something sharp and light. Dance around em while they try to swing that monster, and try to whittle them down with nicks and cuts. If the damn thing hits you its gonna knock you out or break some bones and probably tear your skin off....but they are slow weapons. Heavy and tough to wield. Only for big dudes.

Well, thats my 21st century armchair account of the Great Sword. Someone who actually knows about them will probably show me why I am wrong.

[Forward Observer]

I just saw that on the Modern Marvels show that they do on the History Channel is going to be all about knives and their history, tonight.

The promos showed a couple of guys in armor demonstrating sword play, so it might be worth catching if you have local access.

------------------
Artillery adds dignity to what would otherwise be a vulgar brawl.

[Boleslaw Wrymouth]

A good page discussing these issues:
http://www.ceu.hu/medstud/manual/SRM/weapons.htm

Also, if you look at the top of the page you also see a link called "training" that discusses the training manuals of the time. It seems that the brittleness of some swords were due to their uses (cutting/thrusting or each type of attack exclusively).

I know the Hungarians adopted the sabre early and I don't think their forging techniques were any better than the HRE (for example).

Anyway, interesting page discussing a variety of weapons, where they were popular etc.

[Vanya]

"A great sword is any sword that never lets you down."
-- Vanya

[Taffer]

"I just saw that on the Modern Marvels show that they do on the History Channel is going to be all about knives and their history, tonight.
The promos showed a couple of guys in armor demonstrating sword play, so it might be worth catching if you have local access."


How Ironic, I thought I missed that one. I saw a preview for it and wanted to see it, but I didn't remember what the series was called (who knew a sword was a modern marvel). Thanks for setting me straight now I have time to catch it.

[Lord Krazy]

The Irish Knights such as the Eugeans and
the Dalcassion Knights used large two
handed swords.I find the suggestion that,
certain people had large swords and did
not use them in combat hard to take.
Why would you carry a sword that was very
heavy if you were not going to use it?
I mean it's not exactly a fashion item,
o look I have a bigger sword then you,
this is just too kemp for me.

Lord Krazy
---------------------------------------------
better to make a good stand then a bad run
or something like that

[This message has been edited by Lord Krazy (edited 08-21-2002).]

[Papewaio]

Check this site out. You will find that most swords are about a third to half the weight you might expect.
http://www.swordforum.com/

[Lord Krazy]

Quote Originally posted by Papewaio:
Check this site out. You will find that most swords are about a third to half the weight you might expect.
http://www.swordforum.com/ [/QUOTE]

--------------------------------------------
don't look like any of the swords i'm
talking about.

Lord Krazy

[mizuYari]

I believe the use of heavysword is an evolution along with chainmail and breastplates. Heavy swords are used not only as a cutting weapon, it is also used as a crushing weapon (same reason as the battle axe or war harmer). THe heavy sword is also doubleedged because the user doesn't need to swing back to swing again.

The arabs are in hot climate, so is lighter armors. They use smaller but much sharper swords with curved edge (again, a cutting device).

MizuYari is a big believer of evolutionary warfare. Once in a while, there is a "mutation" but people adapt...

MizuYari

[Boleslaw Wrymouth]

Krazy,

Look at this link:
http://ejmas.com/jwma/jwmaart_melville_0100.htm

Are these the types you are talking about?

The article answers your question, I think, about swords too heavy to use. There are a lot of examples or ornamental swords that are much too heavy to use in a battle. Later historians sometimes assumed these 20+ lbs. swords WERE actual combat weapons. Thus another myth about medieval warfare was born. Most two-handers were 5-7 pounds(2.5-3.5 kg), many lighter. The absolute upper limit was 12-13lbs. I would assume that anyone using a 13lbs. sword was either freakishly strong and agile or incredibly arrogant and quickly dispatched, thus the rarity of such examples.

mizuYari,

I totally agree. All of these European weapons were designed with what their bearers were facing on the battlefield at the time. The large, two-handers don't appear until plate starts to become more common. Lighter, thinnier pure-cutting swords take over as most armor is eventually phased out starting in the 1600's. I think medieval European swordsmiths could have produced excellent sabers of the Middle Eastern type, it just would've been foolish to do so. Just as it would be foolish for an Arab soldier, fighting an Arab opponent, to lug around a 7 pound two-handed sword when he would be facing light mail or scale at most.

[This message has been edited by Boleslaw Wrymouth (edited 08-21-2002).]

[This message has been edited by Boleslaw Wrymouth (edited 08-21-2002).]

[Prodigy]

Curved sword produces more slicing action than cutting. Light (light thrust=low enertia)) curved swords would perfom poorly against well crafted plate armour. So I think the only guys who shoud carry two handed swords are heavy assualt infantry. Even shield should have trouble stopping the charging blow. Defense should not be their priority. Without a shield they have nothing to take a blow and counter at the same time (meaning they dont suck in defense but shield and counter weapon are better for this role).

At leaast thats what my theory.

------------------
I am the law and you can't beat the law.

[Papewaio]

Krazy-san look around the site and you will find some.

One of the first pitures in the LOTR link shows two claymores. http://lotr.swordforum.com/lyon-and-howe.php/

This is a knightly sword and it weighs 1.25kg: http://store.swordforum.com/armart/s32.php

Also the amount of information that this site has and its in depth nature helps to dispel some of the myths that exist about the swords that knights used.
http://www.swordforum.com/sfu/

Particularly:
http://store.swordforum.com/armart/cannotdo.php
http://www.swordforum.com/sfu/primer/thebest.html

[This message has been edited by Papewaio (edited 08-21-2002).]

[This message has been edited by Papewaio (edited 08-21-2002).]

[Lord Krazy]

Quote Originally posted by Papewaio:
Krazy-san look around the site and you will find some.

One of the first pitures in the LOTR link shows two claymores. http://lotr.swordforum.com/lyon-and-howe.php/

This is a knightly sword and it weighs 1.25kg: http://store.swordforum.com/armart/s32.php

Also the amount of information that this site has and its in depth nature helps to dispel some of the myths that exist about the swords that knights used.
http://www.swordforum.com/sfu/

Particularly:
http://store.swordforum.com/armart/cannotdo.php
http://www.swordforum.com/sfu/primer/thebest.html

[This message has been edited by Papewaio (edited 08-21-2002).]

[This message has been edited by Papewaio (edited 08-21-2002).][/QUOTE]
---------------------------------------------
ye I was talking about the 4lb type.
another thing if you are going to get tired in the first few seconds of combat maybe you shouldn't be in a battle.That is
what I love about speculation everybody
is an expert.

Lord Krazy.
---------------------------------------------
Better to make a good run then a bad stand