It wouldn't surprise me if hundreds of years after Godric's death, some magical fop rose to the position of headmaster, saw the plain old sword and decided "This will not do at all! Time to transfigure this into something worthy of Godric Griffindor!" and turned it into the anachronistic costume piece we see today.
It's just like how Victorian collectors would re-hilt older blades and also just pass-off forgeries as authentic. The "Sword of William Wallace" on display at the monument in Stirling is at least two sword blades welded together to make it look bigger, lol.
Would that work, though? We know that, being goblin work, the sword will only absorb that which makes it stronger, hence its ability to literally absorb Basilisk venom while being entirely immune to rust. Can it absorb spells, too? Would such a transfiguration make it stronger or weaker, or make no meaningful difference?
@@rollingthunder1043 Who knows, goblin swords are already indestructible, so narrowing the blade wouldn't even weaken it. Maybe Godric's sword figured there was no disadvantage to keeping up with contemporary fashion, and wanted to look pretty.
@@Mikazuchireborn if the sword could do that, wouldn't it look like a machete, katana, or some kind of "zombie slaying" sword by the time of Harry potter?
This has bugged me since I first saw the movie. That sword is awful and Harry waves it around like a 12 year old kid who's never held a sword. To be fair, he is a 12 year old kid, but that's no excuse for the sword to look terrible.
I don't necessarily think the sword is awful... i mean definitely a bit petite for a grown duelist warrior of the early Medieval age but yeah... if they'd just made it 50% larger, it would've carried off much better.
I want to see the behind-the-scenes footage of when they narrowed down which sword to use. "Here Daniel, try this." "Bit heavy, innit?" "Just try it out. Wave it about a bit." Viking era sword drops on the ground with a mighty clang. "Okay, we'll figure out something else."
@@tommeakin1732 "Viking era" is a shorthand for saying "late 8th century to 11th century northern Europe." It's not the most correct term, but it's convenient.
Movie prop swords are often aluminum, plastic, or even wood, just to avoid that sort of problem. And maybe some steel ones for use in closeups when no one is trying to do anything with it.
my friend was contracted by a Hollywood prop company to do some restorations on swords used in the Costner version of Robin Hood. all were aluminum, dull of course, and very light weight. we also did some restorations on a few Klingon glaives, also aluminum. I don't see why a replica, age proper sword would be too cumbersome for a boy to wield.
You may know what they are made of, but we're supposed to believe these are actual swords with the actual weight a sword like that would have when we're watching this as an audience, not someone behind the scenes making these props or on screen weapons. Magic can explain away some things but it's still a case of "Harry is 12 and needs to wield this sword and he isn't magically enhancing his strength" so that's what they are going with. There's also the fact it needs to LOOK fancy given how it's described in the book, it needs to look like a fantasy magical sword that a wizard might use...also remember Wizards aren't exactly known for common sense in the Harry Potter world and so if Godric commissioned the sword from the goblins, they got no problem taking his money and making whatever ridiculous looking sword he wants them to make.
@Marcus I think you are kinda overlooking that the movie was released in 2002. Back then a lot of the retrofitted lore did not exist. E.g the info on Gryffindor being a duelist is from 2015. So it is not really a wrong thing to assume that a sword in a book about wizards is most likely just a dress sword and not a practical dueling weapon. So they most likely did not go for era correct dueling weapon but rather fancy dress sword.
@@Sadreath even if we didn't know Gryffindor was a duelist until much later, we knew the rough estimate of when Gryffindor was around, which meant they could've done research into what the main styles of swords were back then
Actually, if memory serves, it is clearly stated in TDH that Gryffindor contracted a Goblin to make the sword for him, so it couldn't have been older (though obviously it could've still been an older design).
Yes, and the whole deal is that goblins in HP have this notion that the creation belongs to the craftsman - sort of DRM but for artisans, rather than production companies, which is why wizards and goblins are kind of pissed at each other over the sword too.
Well in the deathly hallows griphook actually contests that view when demanding the sword as payment for helping them. He is claiming that griffindor actually stole the sword from ragnok the first. We never learn which story is actually true so the sword might very well be an earlier style
@@asdf-y2c the "theft" refers to it being passed to a descendant of Godric upon his death rather that being returned to the goblins, as far as the goblins are concerned a "purchase" is a life long rental
@@asdf-y2c I think the fact that despite Griphook reclaiming the sword at Gringotts, Neville is still able to pull it out of the Sorting Hat implies that GG was still the lawful owner. I'm pretty sure what Griphook's opinion would be; after reclaiming a priceless relic for goblin-kind that was separated for a thousand years only to lose it a few days later because a 17-year old was able to teleport it to Hogwarts.
@@gmh3 not quite. After Gryffindor's death the fact that the sword wasn't returned became part of the "theft" but it's not the original. There are 2 different stories here. The goblin version is that Gryffindor out right stole the sword from Ragnok in the first place. Gryffindor's version is that he commissioned the sword but Ragnok became so enamored of his creation that he tried to renege on the deal. Gryffindor was having none of that and put his foot down. Ragnok then later made up the story of Gryffindor stealing it out of wounded pride and a desire to get the sword back. Now seeing as goblin wrought artifacts in HP are basically indestructible after they are finished being made and the sword has Gryffindor's name inscribed on it I'm inclined to believe his version of the story.
From what I can find, the description in the book says that it's made out of pure silver, inset with rubies, and has "Godric Gryffindor" engraved just below the hilt. Not much else to go on. I'm just glad they didn't make it a fairly plain katana the way they did with Rand's sword in The Wheel of Time.
The cover of the American edition shows the sword with a cup hilt and a knuckle bow. Then an illustration in the book depicts it as a strange sort of scimitar with the rubies all over the hand grip!
To be fair, a fairly plain katana (albeit heron-marked) sounds pretty much like how Rand's sword is described in the books, IIRC, With Lan's being the same without the herons.
Now, if I remember correctly, somewhere in the books is said that the sword was made for godric himself, so it should be more "human looking" despite being goblin made, amd from his time period, with some liberty Now, it was said that he was a duelist and he probably didn't use a shield, so I think a viking age sword but with a longer guard for defending the hand is a valid option, maybe with a narrower point on the blade for quicker defence's maneuvers and thrusts since the lack of a shield And maybe a decoration similar to the merovingian/vendel period swords since it is described like a silver sword encrusted of rubies
It definitely is made for him. It comes up because the goblins regard ownership differently than humans. The goblin that made the sword for him expected it to be returned after Godricks death and thus it's considered stolen by the goblins
Also since wizards live so long, and goblins longer, a goblin smith alive to craft for Godric might have learned from a prior goblin Smith who was alive during the Han Dynasty where they had swords with guards similar to European sabers over a millennium later, so Godric could have a sword resembling a saber, as it was described in Book 2, with a better hand guard for dueling, and a more unorthodox fighting style compared to Godric's peers
@@Glimmlampe1982 actually it is stated that Gryffindor STOLE the sword from its original Goblin owner. It wasn't made for him, it was made for a Goblin
It was used to duel muggles so it had to look like a reasonably contemporary muggle sword. Someone renowned for fighting with a very unusual sword would still be a muggle mythological figure and I'm pretty sure he's too late to be King Arthur.
In fact, Godric Griffindor predates King Arthur. One of the most famous early students from the Slytherin house was Merlin, so Hogwarts and Godric Griffindor were alive before them, and could even died before they even born. And in these times wizards didn´t conceal their existence from muggle, which lead to muggle attacks wizard in fear and kill a lot of them. That conflict was why Salazar Slytherin hated muggles and muggleborn wizards, so the sword did not need to look like the normal sword and could, in fact, seems more "fantasy" design.
@@mytotim8978 Arthur has to fit in the interregnum between the withdrawal of the legions and the rise of the Anglo-Saxon kingdoms. Rowling fucked up and her Merlin cannot be contemporary with Arthur unless he lives backwards like T.H. White's.
Knowing JKR's aversion to doing research, I expect her to consider any time before the 1800s as "knights on horses". Which this sword and that whole story about "dueling muggles" stems from.
I feel like she's become a radioactive character while I wasn't paying attention, but to speak to these books and films: As I've learnt more about mythology and elements of subjects like alchemy, I've noticed that she's aware of some obscure stuff. Like the golden snitch is an obscure symbol known as the "round chaos", which I wouldn't expect to see popping up in one of the most popular fictional works in modern times. Most people who are well read aren't' well read on most things lol. It's not surprising she wouldn't have a clue about things like weapons and armour, and I don't really blame her for not picking a more historically appropriate sword. Though I suppose you could blame her for not demanding that the films had high quality advisors for every possible prop in the film
True, the books were ALWAYS dogshlt... But JKR's a goddam hero, for refusing to be silenced by authoritarian bullies, and defending women and children. Tens of thousands of unconsenting children are being irreversably chemically mutilated, based on beliefs with ZERO empirical/scientific evidence. It's just a repeat of the lobotomies of the 50s and 60s. Or the doctors who chemically-sterilized gay men, as late as the 80s... ie Just ANOTHER 100% evidence-free medical fad, embraced by a gullible public, who THINK they're "doing the right thing"... who will only grasp the horrific, irreverable harm done to children, by drugs like Lupron and Zoladex, AFTER thousands of healthy children are needlessly, irreversably mutilated. It's not rocket science- The HIGHEST standard in medicine is "First, do no harm"... Starting with an unconsenting child, where EVERY SHRED of emoirical evidence says they're in 100% perfect physical health... ...but ENDING, at age 18 (ie. when the kid finally CAN give valid consent...) chemically-sterilized by puberty-blockers like Lupron or Zoladex, often with 100% healthy body-parts needlessly amputated (100% needless mastectomies done as young as 12. And Jazz Jennings' "orchiectomy", ie testes amputated, was at 16yo), riddled with the well-documented side-effects of puberty-blockers and wrong-sex hormones. And deliberately made DRUG DEPENDENT, FOR LIFE... Doing this to (initially...) children in perfect physical health, is the EXACT OPPOSITE of "first do no harm".
The funny thing is that Neville long bottom actually used that sword to cut the head off Voldemorts giant snake Nagini however historically speaking that puny and dainty looking sword does not even look like it had a blade which was even thick enough to cut off anybody or creatures head in the first place.however it also happens to be a magic sword so which at the time contained basilisk vemon so therefore maybe perhaps from a fantasy perspective normal physical limitations wouldn't really apply.
@@edi9892 Even the oversized swords would be deadly if sharpened up, and would swat aside his oversized paperweight with ease. It just looks like a plastic child's toy, complete with being sized for children to play with.
When you went on the roman coin tangent I, for sure, thought you were going to say he used a Spatha! Due to the presumably high concentrations of roman cavalry and auxilia found along Hadrians wall, and the location of Hogwarts being somewhere near northern England or Southern Scotland, and the overall Roman influence on Anglo-Saxon arms and architecture.
I totally love how realistic and detailed he goes into the fictional background and describe/theorize upon all the things that 'may' be appropriate according to that lore/canon!
It is wonderful that we can have a serious discussion about a fantasy sword. Well done, sir! As others have said, it is a common feature of magical swords that they adapt to suit the wielder. This might explain things. Harry got what he expected the sword to be.
A spartha-style gives a great deal more credence to the later Harry Potter films (and books) where Nevil Longbottom (Shlongbottom) cleaves Nagini’s (the giant serpent) head off with a single stroke-with greater ease, might I add, than Conan did in the Pits of Set, which is peculiar to say the least.
Today I learned the term "pillow sword". The sword in the movie is so thin and narrow and light, it's basically like a magic wand made of metal. I think that's the reason they choose that design. It looks like a magic wand. And also, as you said, a boy should be able to wield it in the movie.
The first time I saw it in the movie I thought it looked like it was made of plastic. Looked like a sword from a childrens toy set, was missing a cape or plastic shield or something.
I don’t believe that it’s cannon but could it be a magical sword in that it also is able to change its appearance for the wielder so as to disguise it’s unusual magical powers
I don't think the sword would be an inherited one from a previous age, as Gryffindor took part in the making of the sword, specifying what it should look like (it was made of pure silver inlaid with rubies), and then received it from the goblin smith sometime during his life. Wizards are able to live long lives, so I would say the time period from which it could hail is as you said 10th and 11th century, seeing as Hogwarts was founded in 993.
So glad that you covered this, Matt! I guess we should at least give them credit for not making it a longsword!😁 However, if anything, I think the most "period-correct" sword for this narrative would look something like a highly decorated version of the Albion "Thegn".
For all we know it could have been JK herself that envisioned the sword that way, maybe based on some she had seen in museums or something. Maybe the producers actually consulted with the author and got that as the result. That's kind of both good and bad at the same time.... lol
you know a pretty good reference point would be the probably fake sword of charlemagne, similar to the swords of the time but with a longer guard, which would help when not using a shield, also it's got a fairly ornate gold hilt, which could easily be made silver and covered with rubies.
@@mauritsponnette your eye must be impressively untrained because it's not even especially similar. one is a tiny little thing with a tiny guard meant for court ceremonies the other is a fairly hefty cut and thrust.
I always imagined it as a one handed mediaeval arming sword with a wide "cruciform" crossguard, but you're right, those are more 11th to 13th century I think.
Thinking about some swords with gold an silver inlays found in viking burials I can definitely see a norman/ late viking sword with an intensely decorated hilt. I kinda picture something like the imperial sword of the holy Roman Empire but in silver and with a smaller, more 'viking' crossguard.
They picked a sword that looked elegant and magical, and one that can be held by a 12 year old in the movie. The viking sword has none of those attributes. Also he probably had more than one sword as a renowned duelist. This is his house sword, his magical "ceremonial" sword, dude probably had dozens of swords. He's also an extremely powerful wizard, don't think he'd result to something as barbaric as hacking and chopping up muggles with a viking sword. As you know a duelist is very different than a warrior.
The castle makes more sense, since it would be an ever evolving building to meet the needs of its users, it would be as judging the current Windsor Castle for not looking what it did at the times of William I.
My headcanon for Hogwarts when I saw the movies was that the current castle not only looks nothing like the original castle, but has almost none of the original materials. There are a lot of castles in England and Scotland today that have been updated so many times over the centuries that most of it is not the original castle. Edinburgh Castle and Stirling Castle are two good examples of this.
@@matthewmuir8884 mine too. It should have been constantly re-bulid and added parts to. Like we even know Corvinus Gaunt adding in modern bathrooms and plumbing in late XIX century or so...
05:18 apparently, according to the Wiki, in one of hte post book things, it was said that Godric Gryffindor had the sword made for him. So it is fromt he 10th/11th century.
Knowing the Victorians the sword got melted down and 'fixed' so that it would look appropriate for an educational institution instead of an angry Viking.
I would argue that, since goblins are depicted as master smiths, maybe they could have been the cutting edge of sword technology. That being said, I think MAYBE something like a Norman sword, but no more advanced than that. That would provide a bit more hand protection for dueling, and a better thrusting tip to allow Harry to stab the basilisk.
We know it wasn't an older sword, since Godric commissioned the sword to be made for him (so human sized, but not necessarily contemporary human design). We also know it wasn't bronze, the blade is instead made of "goblin steel" which was said to look "silvery".
How many people are going to say that it was made for Gryffindor when it's clearly stated in the books that he stole it. The sword was made for a Goblin.
@@bipolarminddroppings It was stated in the books that goblins consider it stolen because he passed it on to another Wizard after his death instead of returning it to its craftsman as is tradition among goblins. As far as they are concerned it was created for him to use, but not to own. But it was still made for him.
I am glad someone took on this question (and came up with the same answer I did!) If a goblin, or any other smith, made a sword for a duellist in England in the tenth century, I personally feel that it would be in the fashion then current-- which was the Viking sword as it was evolving into the early medieval knightly sword. Headcanon is that the rubies in the hilt looked like the wonderful Saxon garnet and gold jewelry work. Being goblin- made, it may have been lighter and quicker than most contemporary swords, with a balance suited to Gryffindor personally. As for a shield... as it's never mentioned, there's no reason to think he didn't use one (unless he used his wand in his off- hand with the sword as his primary weapon.) What is known, is that each of the Founders adopted a heraldic device-- a practice that. as far as we know, came in a generation or two after the Conquest. I believe that started with shields.
When you talked about the fact that a date on a coin says that it was only deposited after that date not before made me remember when I worked in apartment maintenance, it was in 2004. I went to a unit that had a slow draining bathroom sink and discovered there was a penny stuck in the P-trap. When I pulled it out the tenant asked to see it and when he looked at it he said, aha, it can't be from me because it's dated from 1998 and I just moved in. I said it could have been dated from 1948 and that still wouldn't prove anything. What would be weird is if it was dated 2005. He looked at me for a moment then laughed.
I wouldn't think the movie version can be really called a pillow sword. It certainly follows the same lines, but they simply modified the design of one of the court swords Napoleon would wear with his coronation robes, but not the one he wore at his coronation (the one in the Girodet portrait). That said, JK Rowling has a terrible perception of History and dates (among many other things), it feels she visualised the founders of Hogwarts as dating from the 15th century but then for some reason later dated them as from the 10th century.
Personally, I think it's inspired by a different Court Sword- a 16th century one in the Ashmolean museum in Oxford, which has a rock crystal hilt with saints' relics embedded in it. The outline of both is very similar. A lot of the film's cast and crew were British, and if they were looking for an inspiration for a magic medieval sword, then it's likely they'd have sent scouts to big UK museums to take pictures. The Ashmolean sword is literally a 'magic sword' according to the belief system of the people who made it, so would be an obvious choice for a prop design.
Yeah, my only thought is "it could have been influenced by Asian designs of the period", if we assume that the wizarding (or goblin I suppose, as they actually made it) world is more connected than the muggle one. In looking at the wiki article for 10th century Chinese swords, there's actually one that looks remarkably close to this one - although it's labeled as a Song Dynasty truncheon (which suggests that you're supposed to beat people with it - but it does seem to have an edge and a point.) Of course, I strongly suspect that it's just coincidence, although jians are historically long, straight, relatively thin, double-edged swords favored by nobility (and I would imagine wizards would historically count as that.) Obviously it's just a movie prop for a fantasy movie, but it's interesting to try to work backwards to determine how something like that COULD have actually been made on purpose, in-universe.
I totally can’t see a kid waving a broadsword such as that one 😁 And the Viking era sword would not only look more accurate, but also more badass in the movie.
Thank you very much for your thoughts on the Gryffindor sword. I’ve enjoyed your work for six months now and applaud your research and reasoning. Cheers from the Colonies, Ha!
Tiny correction: the sword absorbs what can make it stronger, not specifically what was defeated by the blade. It came in contact with the basilisk's poison, therefore the blade absorbed the power to inflict un-curable wounds. As for its description, the books are vague... "goblins' steel, fashioned from pure silver and was inset with rubies"... So nothing much... But Harry can't properly weild it in the books, as it was heavy for him. Unlike in the movies, in the books him stabbing the basilisk was a little more than an accident. (But this is more likely the author saying Harry is too young to weild a sword, and not implying any historical facts)
@@Rodrigokdo while true. What's considered heavy for a 12 year old is not the same as for an adult. Especially since Harry didn't exactly get a lot of food growing up. He wasn't starved but the dursleys definitely didn't feed him enough. He was very small and thin for his age at the beginning of the series
Arguably, he could have had a preference for any sword design in history because time travel is apparently a thing in the Potter Universe, and the goblins could have used some kind of spell to craft the sword that best suited him. But, I'm taking the fun out of if, and I'm biased, so I assume that all real duelists use a messer or kriegsmesser. Lol. Oh, and great video! Love the channel.
Good breakdown Matt. I remember this bothered me the first time I saw 'The Chamber of Secrets'. I actually just listened to the book again the other day (much prefer the books to the films) and it stood out to me that the description of the sword was vary vague- I am OK with that, I would rather an author give a vague description than make up something foolish- but there was a point where Harry grabbed the hilt with both hands. I guess a child could wrap both of his hands around a period sword, but I tdon't think it would be very natural.
Another problem with Hogwarts and history is the claim that Merlin was in Slytherin. If Merlin was a contemporary of King Arthur (who ruled sometime between c. 500-542) then he would have lived almost 400-500 years before Hogwarts was ever built.
I’m not so sure about not using a shield? I seem to remember either you (Matt) or Skalagrim talking about “Viking” duels involving a requirement for each participant to have THREE shields with them, expecting a few to break?
There is one point: Goblins generally claimed items they made after the death of the individual they made it for. So if they made it for someone other than Godric Gryfindor, they would have reclaimed it. As I understand it, they made it specifically for Godric Gryfindor. As such, I don't think it would have been an earlier sword.
I'd imagine it would look something like the Sotton Hoo sword....and Matt just referenced it. I think what they mean in the book is that he used a wand for wizards and a sword for muggles, not that he dual wielded them. He very likely used a shield and traditional arms and armour of the time when going to battle with strictly human adversaries. The argument that it's goblin and could be a pillow sword still doesn't hold up because he'd be using it against Viking era swords which would probably snap it like a twig. Also, Daniel Radcliffe would probably still need to use a pillow sword in order for him to fight effectively.
+scholagladiatoria *Thanks for the call-out of inaccurate property.* History would dictate an early arming sword consistent with the Brito-Saxon (viz., Arthurian) Wars in Great Britain during the Dark Ages.
“If you haven’t read the HP books, you probably won’t be watching this video.” I’ve tried reading them twice, tried watching the movies multiple times, and just couldn’t do it. I seem to recall the basilisk fight in one of the movies being the last thing I saw before I dozed off in the theater. I’m just more interested in conjectural weapon videos.
As a guy who's been into swords since a young age, that sword made me weep. In what POSSIBLE way is it functional?!?! Awful grip, tiny crossguard, flimsy blade.
It's my headcanon that the sword has been reforged at some point in time, probably since it was seen as more of a decorative relic than anything functional.
Also the "sword" in the movies is way to small if you ask me. With its thin blade it looks very fragile. I think it would be unlikely that Neville Longbottom would be able to cut through something thick like the neck of Nagini with such a tiny, fragile "sword" that looks as if it is better for thrusting.
It is an enchanted Goblin-made sword, so "looking" fragile wouldn't matter. Theoretically, maybe the sword could change size based on who possesses it.
I think it's really interesting the way you've interpreted the facts, because I always made the assumption that it being Goblin-made implied that the Goblins made it for him specifically, making it contemporary to his own time.
It is stated specifically in the lore of the sword that the sword was made to the specifications of Godrick Griffyndor by Ragnuk the First. So it would be from Godric's time.
I never disliked the the sword in the movies because I had never read the books and watched to movies out of casual curiosity. Having seen this video I’m now thinking about designing what perhaps it could have been. Thanks Matt
Well even so, if you look at when Arthurian legends are set you can still discuss what the swords were like at that time. This would tell you what the design it is likely to be, since that's what they'd have had at the time the legends are set in. Of course, you can bring up all the things about Excalibur being a magic sword as well, so it could be anything. But the fun of this kind of subject is what is more realistic for the time period, not what it "actually" is.
Funny thing, there were cruciform swords used by the Hun, decades before Arthur, as evidenced by a Hun warrior carving in a British museum, and archaelogical evidence has found the real Arthur lived in a trading hub with goods as far away from Constantinople found, so given trade availability and Huns settling in Germany so close to Britain, it's not too much of stretch that Arthur used a cruciform Excalibur
...an imaginary, magical sword made by imaginary creatures...... A viking era sword would have been SO much cooler than the flimsy prop used in the movie.
It would have been cool if he had a really high status decorated and bejeweled early viking sword. Maybe they could have just made the blade a bit more thin/tapered. A little more like a chinese jian. Befitting a duelist and representative of the mastery of goblin metallurgy and all that.
Since goblins live so long, the one that crafted Godric's sword could have been apprenticed to a goblin that lived during the Han Dynasty, or apprenticed to an apprentice from that time, and the Han Dynsaty had swords with guards like those of European sabers over a millennium later, given probable cause for Godric to have a sword with a unique guard and unorthodox style when dueling with his peers
Love that you started with a bronze age sword, my first thought when you introduced this was along the same lines - Wizarding culture is incredibly slow to evolve technologically and culturally, and wizards seem to live long lives, so an "older" sword seems completely in keeping with setting. You could also have fun with the magical absorption property- maybe it started out as a bronze sword but it's absorbed elements of more modern swords as their users were defeated, until you've ended up with some kind of wootz steel pattern of original (magically enhanced) bronze, combined with more "modern" irons and steels as the blade has absorbed advances in metallurgy.
Three details not brought up here which could be important factors for Godric's sword design are Godric's ownership, his own age, and even goblins age. The final book mentions that goblins made the sword for Godric, because goblins believe after the original owner dies, a goblin sword reverts ownership back to goblin made, so they no longer see it as Godric's sword. Wizards are also mentioned to often live over a century, sometimes even two centuries, so Godric could have been quite old when he helped found Hogwarts, maybe using a 9th century style from his youth. Finally, goblins live quite long, probably longer than most wizards, so it might have only been a few generations of goblin smiths in between say the Han Dynasty and the Viking Age when Godric lived, only 500-600 years difference between the beginning and ending of the respective Ages, and the book sword is described as a saber, so the goblin smiths might have been familiar with swords with guards similar to Han Dynasty make, kept those traditions alive from just a grandfather to grandson goblin, and they made Godric a sword unique for his time period, something resembling a saber.
Another interesting note for you. How long did Gryffindor live? Often wizards seem to have extended lives. What then would he have access to with an additional 500 years? Then to extend upon some of the exceptions for magical means and goblin design. Maybe he would have access to technology that would be a century or two ahead of it's widespread use. I don't know if that quite gets us to the sword design shown. But I'm sure there are couple really good options from around the world that might make a bit more sense.
Presumably, Gryffindor died in the 11th century, as the wiki states that the first headmaster of Hogwarts (the one that succeeded the founders) was active in the 11th century. Now, this is what the wiki says, I don't know its source and it might well be possible that Gryffindor at some point appointed a headmaster, left the school and lived for another 500 years. You never know...
There's a vague implication of wizards having extended lives, but the only explicit example in the books would be Nicholas Flamel due to the Philosopher's Stone, and if other wizards already live super long, that would make the stone rather unimportant. I remember seeing some marketing saying that Dumbledore was 150, but I don't recall any official media ever stating his age.
@@annasolovyeva1013 That sounds about right. Do you know where you came across the 1880 number though? If he were born c. 1880 that would make him about 117 years old when he died, which is extremely old, but quite a bit less than 150, as I had seen claimed. True, he's a professor in 1938, but a birthdate of c.1900 would still be possible with that, since Hogwarts doesn't seem to have any age requirements for its teachers.
@@Blokewood3 he's said to be over a hundred years old or something in canon (in the movies it's Ron, but i don't remember which year it was.). And the info about 1880-something appears in fan materials on the internet along with his and Grindelwald's story. And Horace Slughorn (who taught in 1938 too) is generally really old too. Who of canon characters died of old age, after all? Even the history book author, who is older than Dumbledore, is killed by nagini...
Counterpoint: Heroes _ARE_ commonly shown fighting with weapons of older times than their own. Weapons that are legendary on their time. Like those of the medieval epic poems. Meaning that an even more likely alternative to a X century viking/norman/etc. sword (most people in Europe in those times used those swords), would be a Carolingian sword (late VIII - early IX century - not even that farther in time!), which would conect his sword with other legendary swords from the Charlemagne's and Roldan's epic poems like _Joyeuse_ or _Durendal_ - and those swords are basically Roman spathas with the serials filed off 🙂
I like the Sutton Hoo sword, just to be iconically British. A reasonable cheat might be a slightly longer grip and/or an "eronomic" pommel and have Harry use it two handed. I have not read the books or seen the movie, so perhaps it wouldn't work. Does Harry do anything important with his off hand while weilding the sword? As someone else has noted, aluminium would be an option for the prop.
I totally agree. And for me, the sword used in the movie just doesn't fit. It looks tiny, even for Harry Potter, although he is a teenager. It's true that a sword like Anduril will look too huge, and it's also too modern for Godric Gryffindor. So for me, a viking sword, maybe with a larger pommel filled with jewels (for the goblin look), and a narrower blade (so it doesn't weight as much), will be perfect.
In my headcannon, it is 100% a sutton-hoo/vendel ringed-pommel sword with ruby/garnet inclusions. It fits perfectly with the (very lacunar) description, and also with the tendency of the "wizarding fashion" to be just a few centuries behind that of muggles.
Good job, I didn't realize the Gryffindor sword had a history of being a functional sword. I liked the HP movies but only read a couple of chapters of the books (boring). The Gryffindor sword in the movies appeared to be only a decorative/ceremonial sword never meant for use as a real sword.
It could be that the goblins being small and slight designed a sword that was better suited to them and it became the design leader inspiring a latter generation of swords.
When I try to look up pillow swords even though I find at least some examples I don't really see too many sources or people on the internet actually talking about them.
One explanation that i read somewhere had an idea that one enchantment on the sword made it change to fit the wielder, so it looks that way in the movie because it was something that Harry could use, could have pulled from a memory of a sword he saw somewhere from a movie poster or something.
I think that "it's magic!" argument is valid in this case. Maybe wizards can reshape swords? Or sword can change itself? Or wizards had different evolution of swords?
Since it presents itself to one who needs it when (s)he needs it, I always just figured it took on a form like what that person has in mind for a sword to be like. But, of course, the reason I came up with that was because of how far off it was from swords of GG's era, so, if they'd used one from the expected era, I wouldn't have come up with that.
This looks like a fun video. I just clicked on it now. I have to ask, did you ever do a review of the weapons in the movie "the emperor and the assassin" ?
Big HP fan, I remember watching The Chamber of Secrets in the cinema as a kid and just thinking "That sword looks too shiny and new to be 1000 years old!!" plus I wasn't a fan of how small the sword was, very interesting with the history!
Thanks Matt, another great video! A thought/question came to mind: Is it possible that a steel blade could be passed down the generations and be adapted to suit the needs of different centuries? I know this is a fantastical idea, but would it be possible for a spartha to be re-hilted to become a Type 10, to later be re-hilted again in the 14th C. and then ground down into a Type 15, to then be given a rapier hilt and become a side sword in the Civil war, to then be ground down again in 18th C. to be turned into a pillow sword. And potentially that now very thin blade could become a cane-sword for a victorian inheritor. A very fantasy idea, I won't expect any historical examples. But though J K Rowling doesn't give this idea, could this describe why an Anglo-Saxon's sword appears so different by the time Harry Potter picks it up? Thanks again for your incredible content. It inspires reenactors, LARPers, writers and all other nerds!
I never read any of the books or watched any of the movies, but I watched - and enjoyed - this whole video anyway. Matt has a great knack for making historical weaponry topics interesting and entertaining.
If Godric Gryffindor had a completely different sword, some people might become wary to fight him, or call his sword an unfair advantage. And if so, someone might try to forge similar swords to counter that advantage. Goblin-made to me sounds more like intricate decoration - it is a jewelled swoerd after all! - and very good steel, something like a designer meets Ulfberht sword.
A couple of points Matt. Yes i agree it is not consistent with swords of the time but that doesn't preclude the design. It is Goblin made and from what I read (and i could be way off base) it was made as a special commission. Walking around Hogwarts with a full size combat sword would not be quite appropriate. In fact the sword is almost a dead ringer for a court sword shown, I think, on one of your programs about Court Swords. I showed the sword to my partner who is more of a fan of Harry Potter than I and she came to the same conclusion without my prompting other than "what does this remind you of?" We have a replica in our home. There is nothing that says this is the sword that Gryffindor used for dueling and he may have commissioned it later in life and to hold charms and spells. (I Know that Court Swords came about much later, Tudor or there abouts). Finally the wording of the commission could have been vague enough that the goblins decided to have some fun with the creation with the sword so most would underestimate the sword, yet they could say they followed the contract. It is a work of fiction and so a certain level of Leeway could be given and who is to say the Sword of Gryffindor was seen and started the trend of the Court Sword. A subject for fan fiction and fun.
You're totally right about them not knowing anything about swords, but the reason they chose that specific sword was purely happenstance. I think they said one of the prop managers had gone to pawn shop and seen it there, and they liked the look of it so much that they decided to use it.
I think it is also possible for someone to have replaced the hilt and crossguard of the sword. So you could end up with a very old blade with some later style of guard and hilt.
This video could also be a pitch for a Godric Gryffindor movie. That's all I want to see: him dueling with muggles, wizards and probably dragons and dementors too
i have two 12 year old sons, yes they are bigger than Radcliff both hockey players but i'm sure a 12 year old would be able to use a Viking Era sword no problem my boys do it all the time with my blunt training swords even do cutting practice with me
I always thought that sword was more of a parrying blade which makes sense for a wizard because their main offensive weapon would be there wand. He would probably just need a thin parrying blade just to deflect and divert incoming blades while then counter-attacking with your magic
On the topic of placing a date for the swords creation. In the 7th book. (I believe Ron stairs) that the Sword was made for Godric. Which Griphook retorts that the maker ragnok the first the maker is the true owner. So the Sword was made during Godric’s life according to this.
While I know you addressed it, and it's a copout answer, I think it being Goblin-made would have something to do with its durability if it WAS that skinny and thin. If it has the powers of: Being indistinguishable from the best fakes, to anyone except Goblins. Even with spells. The ability to teleport to anyone proving worthy of the Gryffindor name. AND the ability to absorb anything that makes it stronger. Then it would stand to reason that it also just had a ridiculous amount of durability. Especially as it would seem like a counterbalance, or at the very least a side effect of, the Absorbing Ability.
as stated 3:54 It also enchanted to take in what make it stronger so changing shape if it help it fight better it would so. Yep I going with it look like that because magic. Then the timing it was made for him by the goblin. That why the goblin thing came up as by goblin law it should be handed back to the goblin upon Gryffindor death.
the ornamentation is meant to be based off of the Curtana sword, one of the British Crown Jewels. but the look for the lower parts outside of the ornamentation are based on a ceremonial sword Napoleon gave and think of this: perhaps the blade is what’s enchanted allowing the other parts to be replaced over time?
swords back then were not designed to be used alone but that was probably done occasionally since shields or off hand weapons were not always available for some users
![Kodak Black - Catch Fire [Official Music Video]](http://i.ytimg.com/vi/A4ch-olIuZo/mqdefault.jpg)
It wouldn't surprise me if hundreds of years after Godric's death, some magical fop rose to the position of headmaster, saw the plain old sword and decided "This will not do at all! Time to transfigure this into something worthy of Godric Griffindor!" and turned it into the anachronistic costume piece we see today.
It's just like how Victorian collectors would re-hilt older blades and also just pass-off forgeries as authentic. The "Sword of William Wallace" on display at the monument in Stirling is at least two sword blades welded together to make it look bigger, lol.
Agree, but 1700 or 1800 then this sort of swords was popular.
It also looks a lot like an wand.
Would that work, though? We know that, being goblin work, the sword will only absorb that which makes it stronger, hence its ability to literally absorb Basilisk venom while being entirely immune to rust. Can it absorb spells, too? Would such a transfiguration make it stronger or weaker, or make no meaningful difference?
@@rollingthunder1043 Who knows, goblin swords are already indestructible, so narrowing the blade wouldn't even weaken it.
Maybe Godric's sword figured there was no disadvantage to keeping up with contemporary fashion, and wanted to look pretty.
@@Mikazuchireborn if the sword could do that, wouldn't it look like a machete, katana, or some kind of "zombie slaying" sword by the time of Harry potter?
This has bugged me since I first saw the movie. That sword is awful and Harry waves it around like a 12 year old kid who's never held a sword. To be fair, he is a 12 year old kid, but that's no excuse for the sword to look terrible.
It always reminded me of a knights of Columbus dress sword
I don't necessarily think the sword is awful... i mean definitely a bit petite for a grown duelist warrior of the early Medieval age but yeah... if they'd just made it 50% larger, it would've carried off much better.
"To be fair, he is a 12 year old kid"
And to be fair he HAS never held a sword before lol
@Zippy Dastrange a uniform dress sword from 7 centuries later?
When I saw this sword as a kid, it almost ruined the movie for me.
I want to see the behind-the-scenes footage of when they narrowed down which sword to use.
"Here Daniel, try this."
"Bit heavy, innit?"
"Just try it out. Wave it about a bit."
Viking era sword drops on the ground with a mighty clang.
"Okay, we'll figure out something else."
"Viking era"
You strange man
"Grow stronger"
@@tommeakin1732 "Viking era" is a shorthand for saying "late 8th century to 11th century northern Europe." It's not the most correct term, but it's convenient.
Movie prop swords are often aluminum, plastic, or even wood, just to avoid that sort of problem. And maybe some steel ones for use in closeups when no one is trying to do anything with it.
@@donsample1002 because ~2lb (1 kg) is too heavy?
my friend was contracted by a Hollywood prop company to do some restorations on swords used in the Costner version of Robin Hood. all were aluminum, dull of course, and very light weight. we also did some restorations on a few Klingon glaives, also aluminum. I don't see why a replica, age proper sword would be too cumbersome for a boy to wield.
Excellent point. Surely a kid could easily wield an aluminum bat of significantly greater volume. They could have even cast it hollow.
You may know what they are made of, but we're supposed to believe these are actual swords with the actual weight a sword like that would have when we're watching this as an audience, not someone behind the scenes making these props or on screen weapons. Magic can explain away some things but it's still a case of "Harry is 12 and needs to wield this sword and he isn't magically enhancing his strength" so that's what they are going with. There's also the fact it needs to LOOK fancy given how it's described in the book, it needs to look like a fantasy magical sword that a wizard might use...also remember Wizards aren't exactly known for common sense in the Harry Potter world and so if Godric commissioned the sword from the goblins, they got no problem taking his money and making whatever ridiculous looking sword he wants them to make.
Absolutely, the thing that they used instead looks like a big letter opener.
@Marcus I think you are kinda overlooking that the movie was released in 2002. Back then a lot of the retrofitted lore did not exist. E.g the info on Gryffindor being a duelist is from 2015. So it is not really a wrong thing to assume that a sword in a book about wizards is most likely just a dress sword and not a practical dueling weapon.
So they most likely did not go for era correct dueling weapon but rather fancy dress sword.
@@Sadreath even if we didn't know Gryffindor was a duelist until much later, we knew the rough estimate of when Gryffindor was around, which meant they could've done research into what the main styles of swords were back then
Actually, if memory serves, it is clearly stated in TDH that Gryffindor contracted a Goblin to make the sword for him, so it couldn't have been older (though obviously it could've still been an older design).
Yes, and the whole deal is that goblins in HP have this notion that the creation belongs to the craftsman - sort of DRM but for artisans, rather than production companies, which is why wizards and goblins are kind of pissed at each other over the sword too.
Well in the deathly hallows griphook actually contests that view when demanding the sword as payment for helping them. He is claiming that griffindor actually stole the sword from ragnok the first. We never learn which story is actually true so the sword might very well be an earlier style
@@asdf-y2c the "theft" refers to it being passed to a descendant of Godric upon his death rather that being returned to the goblins, as far as the goblins are concerned a "purchase" is a life long rental
@@asdf-y2c I think the fact that despite Griphook reclaiming the sword at Gringotts, Neville is still able to pull it out of the Sorting Hat implies that GG was still the lawful owner. I'm pretty sure what Griphook's opinion would be; after reclaiming a priceless relic for goblin-kind that was separated for a thousand years only to lose it a few days later because a 17-year old was able to teleport it to Hogwarts.
@@gmh3 not quite. After Gryffindor's death the fact that the sword wasn't returned became part of the "theft" but it's not the original. There are 2 different stories here.
The goblin version is that Gryffindor out right stole the sword from Ragnok in the first place.
Gryffindor's version is that he commissioned the sword but Ragnok became so enamored of his creation that he tried to renege on the deal. Gryffindor was having none of that and put his foot down. Ragnok then later made up the story of Gryffindor stealing it out of wounded pride and a desire to get the sword back.
Now seeing as goblin wrought artifacts in HP are basically indestructible after they are finished being made and the sword has Gryffindor's name inscribed on it I'm inclined to believe his version of the story.
From what I can find, the description in the book says that it's made out of pure silver, inset with rubies, and has "Godric Gryffindor" engraved just below the hilt. Not much else to go on. I'm just glad they didn't make it a fairly plain katana the way they did with Rand's sword in The Wheel of Time.
The cover of the American edition shows the sword with a cup hilt and a knuckle bow. Then an illustration in the book depicts it as a strange sort of scimitar with the rubies all over the hand grip!
To be fair, a fairly plain katana (albeit heron-marked) sounds pretty much like how Rand's sword is described in the books, IIRC, With Lan's being the same without the herons.
@@stonecoldscubasteveo4827 yep. Katana or a polish saber in style.
That Amazon abomination has no right to be called WoT. Dramatic alterations of so many crucial story points. Loathsome
@@stonecoldscubasteveo4827 Shad does a deep dive on the book descriptions in one of his videos, and the heron marked swords are nothing like Katanas.
Now, if I remember correctly, somewhere in the books is said that the sword was made for godric himself, so it should be more "human looking" despite being goblin made, amd from his time period, with some liberty
Now, it was said that he was a duelist and he probably didn't use a shield, so I think a viking age sword but with a longer guard for defending the hand is a valid option, maybe with a narrower point on the blade for quicker defence's maneuvers and thrusts since the lack of a shield
And maybe a decoration similar to the merovingian/vendel period swords since it is described like a silver sword encrusted of rubies
It definitely is made for him. It comes up because the goblins regard ownership differently than humans. The goblin that made the sword for him expected it to be returned after Godricks death and thus it's considered stolen by the goblins
Also since wizards live so long, and goblins longer, a goblin smith alive to craft for Godric might have learned from a prior goblin Smith who was alive during the Han Dynasty where they had swords with guards similar to European sabers over a millennium later, so Godric could have a sword resembling a saber, as it was described in Book 2, with a better hand guard for dueling, and a more unorthodox fighting style compared to Godric's peers
@@Glimmlampe1982 Exactly
And it has also the name of Godric engraved on the blade, so it was definitely custom made for him
@@Glimmlampe1982 actually it is stated that Gryffindor STOLE the sword from its original Goblin owner. It wasn't made for him, it was made for a Goblin
@@LeonDOrfano no, it definitely wasn't. I have a sword with my name engraved on it, I had the engraving done after I bought it..
It was used to duel muggles so it had to look like a reasonably contemporary muggle sword. Someone renowned for fighting with a very unusual sword would still be a muggle mythological figure and I'm pretty sure he's too late to be King Arthur.
Authur was into heavy cavalry chargers.... Not personally during.people......
In fact, Godric Griffindor predates King Arthur. One of the most famous early students from the Slytherin house was Merlin, so Hogwarts and Godric Griffindor were alive before them, and could even died before they even born. And in these times wizards didn´t conceal their existence from muggle, which lead to muggle attacks wizard in fear and kill a lot of them. That conflict was why Salazar Slytherin hated muggles and muggleborn wizards, so the sword did not need to look like the normal sword and could, in fact, seems more "fantasy" design.
@@mytotim8978 Arthur has to fit in the interregnum between the withdrawal of the legions and the rise of the Anglo-Saxon kingdoms. Rowling fucked up and her Merlin cannot be contemporary with Arthur unless he lives backwards like T.H. White's.
@@mytotim8978 Merlin attended Hogwarts but Hogwarts was founded far after the time of Arthur because of weird time shit.
Knowing JKR's aversion to doing research, I expect her to consider any time before the 1800s as "knights on horses". Which this sword and that whole story about "dueling muggles" stems from.
In the books, the wizards are just as ignorant about muggles...
@@LangThoughts However, she was heavily involved witht he movies. If JKR ahd imagined the sowrd for be a 10th century sword, she could've objected.
@@LangThoughts It has absolutely naught to do with the allegations towards her. She herself has commented on her poor research.
I feel like she's become a radioactive character while I wasn't paying attention, but to speak to these books and films: As I've learnt more about mythology and elements of subjects like alchemy, I've noticed that she's aware of some obscure stuff. Like the golden snitch is an obscure symbol known as the "round chaos", which I wouldn't expect to see popping up in one of the most popular fictional works in modern times. Most people who are well read aren't' well read on most things lol. It's not surprising she wouldn't have a clue about things like weapons and armour, and I don't really blame her for not picking a more historically appropriate sword. Though I suppose you could blame her for not demanding that the films had high quality advisors for every possible prop in the film
True, the books were ALWAYS dogshlt... But JKR's a goddam hero, for refusing to be silenced by authoritarian bullies, and defending women and children.
Tens of thousands of unconsenting children are being irreversably chemically mutilated, based on beliefs with ZERO empirical/scientific evidence.
It's just a repeat of the lobotomies of the 50s and 60s. Or the doctors who chemically-sterilized gay men, as late as the 80s...
ie Just ANOTHER 100% evidence-free medical fad, embraced by a gullible public, who THINK they're "doing the right thing"... who will only grasp the horrific, irreverable harm done to children, by drugs like Lupron and Zoladex, AFTER thousands of healthy children are needlessly, irreversably mutilated.
It's not rocket science- The HIGHEST standard in medicine is "First, do no harm"...
Starting with an unconsenting child, where EVERY SHRED of emoirical evidence says they're in 100% perfect physical health...
...but ENDING, at age 18 (ie. when the kid finally CAN give valid consent...) chemically-sterilized by puberty-blockers like Lupron or Zoladex, often with 100% healthy body-parts needlessly amputated (100% needless mastectomies done as young as 12. And Jazz Jennings' "orchiectomy", ie testes amputated, was at 16yo), riddled with the well-documented side-effects of puberty-blockers and wrong-sex hormones. And deliberately made DRUG DEPENDENT, FOR LIFE...
Doing this to (initially...) children in perfect physical health, is the EXACT OPPOSITE of "first do no harm".
The funny thing is that Neville long bottom actually used that sword to cut the head off Voldemorts giant snake Nagini however historically speaking that puny and dainty looking sword does not even look like it had a blade which was even thick enough to cut off anybody or creatures head in the first place.however it also happens to be a magic sword so which at the time contained basilisk vemon so therefore maybe perhaps from a fantasy perspective normal physical limitations wouldn't really apply.
Yeah, who knows. Maybe at that point in time it doesn't so much cut as just corrodes the objects it comes into contact with.
MAGIC!!!!! It's a magical sword made by Goblin and you are talking about it like it's a real sword...
They could have done a LOT worse when it comes to giving him a functional sword. At least judging by other fantasy and even historical movies...
I think they'd struggle to do much worse.
@@Matt_Alaric why? I've seen a lot of oversized and way too thick swords. Nearly every sword I've seen has either a ridiculously heavy blade or hilt.
@@Matt_Alaric i can imagine six ways to be worse off the top of my head. At least its something that really existed
@@edi9892 Even the oversized swords would be deadly if sharpened up, and would swat aside his oversized paperweight with ease. It just looks like a plastic child's toy, complete with being sized for children to play with.
@@Matt_Alaric Yep. Let's use Berserk's giant cleaver IRL. I'd pick even an epee over it despite strongly preferring cut centric blades.
When you went on the roman coin tangent I, for sure, thought you were going to say he used a Spatha! Due to the presumably high concentrations of roman cavalry and auxilia found along Hadrians wall, and the location of Hogwarts being somewhere near northern England or Southern Scotland, and the overall Roman influence on Anglo-Saxon arms and architecture.
I totally love how realistic and detailed he goes into the fictional background and describe/theorize upon all the things that 'may' be appropriate according to that lore/canon!
It is wonderful that we can have a serious discussion about a fantasy sword. Well done, sir!
As others have said, it is a common feature of magical swords that they adapt to suit the wielder. This might explain things. Harry got what he expected the sword to be.
Soooo.... it was made of shapeshifting nanotechnology.
Got it
A spartha-style gives a great deal more credence to the later Harry Potter films (and books) where Nevil Longbottom (Shlongbottom) cleaves Nagini’s (the giant serpent) head off with a single stroke-with greater ease, might I add, than Conan did in the Pits of Set, which is peculiar to say the least.
However Griffindor's sword is also magical and made by goblins. So who knows, it could probably still do that with it's proportions in the movies.
Today I learned the term "pillow sword".
The sword in the movie is so thin and narrow and light, it's basically like a magic wand made of metal.
I think that's the reason they choose that design. It looks like a magic wand.
And also, as you said, a boy should be able to wield it in the movie.
Every time the name Godric Gryffindor drops one has to take a shot.
No thanks I don't wanna get shit faced and die from alcohol poisoning
I did this and it took me all weekend to recover.
that's almost as dangerous as the drinking games I come up with.
I wonder if Godric ever tried to put a dragon head on his hand, while asking for his ancestors to bear witness.
I always take a shot when Matt says however
The first time I saw it in the movie I thought it looked like it was made of plastic. Looked like a sword from a childrens toy set, was missing a cape or plastic shield or something.
I found myself wondering if it was actually Godric Gryffindor's letter-opener.
I don’t believe that it’s cannon but could it be a magical sword in that it also is able to change its appearance for the wielder so as to disguise it’s unusual magical powers
It's definitely not a cannon...it's a sword.
@@batteredwarrior 🤣
Copium Fanaticus?
@@yurisc4633 🙌
Ye, my thought exactly, it was a thin, light sword because it was supposed to be wielded by a weedy 12-year old...
I don't think the sword would be an inherited one from a previous age, as Gryffindor took part in the making of the sword, specifying what it should look like (it was made of pure silver inlaid with rubies), and then received it from the goblin smith sometime during his life. Wizards are able to live long lives, so I would say the time period from which it could hail is as you said 10th and 11th century, seeing as Hogwarts was founded in 993.
No no no. The sword wasn't made for Gryffindor, he stole it. It was made FOR a Goblin, not just by a Goblin.
@@bipolarminddroppings that's what the goblins say 😂😂
@@bipolarminddroppings so, an indestructible sword that has his name engraved on the indestructible blade wasn't made for him?
So glad that you covered this, Matt! I guess we should at least give them credit for not making it a longsword!😁 However, if anything, I think the most "period-correct" sword for this narrative would look something like a highly decorated version of the Albion "Thegn".
For all we know it could have been JK herself that envisioned the sword that way, maybe based on some she had seen in museums or something. Maybe the producers actually consulted with the author and got that as the result. That's kind of both good and bad at the same time.... lol
So we can be happy that she didn't see a Japanese or Aztec exhibit. Harry would have been holding a katana or a macuahuitl.
you know a pretty good reference point would be the probably fake sword of charlemagne, similar to the swords of the time but with a longer guard, which would help when not using a shield, also it's got a fairly ornate gold hilt, which could easily be made silver and covered with rubies.
To my untrained eye, Joyeuse looks quite similar to Gryffindor's sword in the movies (or the other way around).
@@mauritsponnette your eye must be impressively untrained because it's not even especially similar. one is a tiny little thing with a tiny guard meant for court ceremonies the other is a fairly hefty cut and thrust.
@@yamiyomizuki haha, I'm just going off of the wikipedia picture, I've never seen it in real life.
@@mauritsponnette I haven't seen it in person either, but the pictures really are all it takes.
I always imagined it as a one handed mediaeval arming sword with a wide "cruciform" crossguard, but you're right, those are more 11th to 13th century I think.
Thinking about some swords with gold an silver inlays found in viking burials I can definitely see a norman/ late viking sword with an intensely decorated hilt.
I kinda picture something like the imperial sword of the holy Roman Empire but in silver and with a smaller, more 'viking' crossguard.
They picked a sword that looked elegant and magical, and one that can be held by a 12 year old in the movie. The viking sword has none of those attributes. Also he probably had more than one sword as a renowned duelist. This is his house sword, his magical "ceremonial" sword, dude probably had dozens of swords. He's also an extremely powerful wizard, don't think he'd result to something as barbaric as hacking and chopping up muggles with a viking sword. As you know a duelist is very different than a warrior.
While we are talking about the inaccuracy of the sword, can we talk about the inaccuracy of the castle?
The castle makes more sense, since it would be an ever evolving building to meet the needs of its users, it would be as judging the current Windsor Castle for not looking what it did at the times of William I.
It's a monastery not a castle
My headcanon for Hogwarts when I saw the movies was that the current castle not only looks nothing like the original castle, but has almost none of the original materials. There are a lot of castles in England and Scotland today that have been updated so many times over the centuries that most of it is not the original castle. Edinburgh Castle and Stirling Castle are two good examples of this.
@@matthewmuir8884 mine too.
It should have been constantly re-bulid and added parts to.
Like we even know Corvinus Gaunt adding in modern bathrooms and plumbing in late XIX century or so...
Going off what i have seen it’s based off Hohenzollern in Germany.
05:18 apparently, according to the Wiki, in one of hte post book things, it was said that Godric Gryffindor had the sword made for him. So it is fromt he 10th/11th century.
Knowing the Victorians the sword got melted down and 'fixed' so that it would look appropriate for an educational institution instead of an angry Viking.
I love when experts break down and dig deep into stuff like this. Well done
I would argue that, since goblins are depicted as master smiths, maybe they could have been the cutting edge of sword technology. That being said, I think MAYBE something like a Norman sword, but no more advanced than that. That would provide a bit more hand protection for dueling, and a better thrusting tip to allow Harry to stab the basilisk.
Good old Godric Gryffindor hacking muggles to death with a sword, honorably, rather than stunning them with a wand like some kind of bell end.
> belived in fair play
Used a magic sword made by Goblins agains non wizards....
We know it wasn't an older sword, since Godric commissioned the sword to be made for him (so human sized, but not necessarily contemporary human design). We also know it wasn't bronze, the blade is instead made of "goblin steel" which was said to look "silvery".
How many people are going to say that it was made for Gryffindor when it's clearly stated in the books that he stole it.
The sword was made for a Goblin.
@@bipolarminddroppings It was stated in the books that goblins consider it stolen because he passed it on to another Wizard after his death instead of returning it to its craftsman as is tradition among goblins. As far as they are concerned it was created for him to use, but not to own. But it was still made for him.
I am glad someone took on this question (and came up with the same answer I did!) If a goblin, or any other smith, made a sword for a duellist in England in the tenth century, I personally feel that it would be in the fashion then current-- which was the Viking sword as it was evolving into the early medieval knightly sword.
Headcanon is that the rubies in the hilt looked like the wonderful Saxon garnet and gold jewelry work. Being goblin- made, it may have been lighter and quicker than most contemporary swords, with a balance suited to Gryffindor personally.
As for a shield... as it's never mentioned, there's no reason to think he didn't use one (unless he used his wand in his off- hand with the sword as his primary weapon.) What is known, is that each of the Founders adopted a heraldic device-- a practice that. as far as we know, came in a generation or two after the Conquest. I believe that started with shields.
When you talked about the fact that a date on a coin says that it was only deposited after that date not before made me remember when I worked in apartment maintenance, it was in 2004. I went to a unit that had a slow draining bathroom sink and discovered there was a penny stuck in the P-trap. When I pulled it out the tenant asked to see it and when he looked at it he said, aha, it can't be from me because it's dated from 1998 and I just moved in. I said it could have been dated from 1948 and that still wouldn't prove anything. What would be weird is if it was dated 2005. He looked at me for a moment then laughed.
I wouldn't think the movie version can be really called a pillow sword. It certainly follows the same lines, but they simply modified the design of one of the court swords Napoleon would wear with his coronation robes, but not the one he wore at his coronation (the one in the Girodet portrait).
That said, JK Rowling has a terrible perception of History and dates (among many other things), it feels she visualised the founders of Hogwarts as dating from the 15th century but then for some reason later dated them as from the 10th century.
Personally, I think it's inspired by a different Court Sword- a 16th century one in the Ashmolean museum in Oxford, which has a rock crystal hilt with saints' relics embedded in it. The outline of both is very similar. A lot of the film's cast and crew were British, and if they were looking for an inspiration for a magic medieval sword, then it's likely they'd have sent scouts to big UK museums to take pictures. The Ashmolean sword is literally a 'magic sword' according to the belief system of the people who made it, so would be an obvious choice for a prop design.
Yeah, my only thought is "it could have been influenced by Asian designs of the period", if we assume that the wizarding (or goblin I suppose, as they actually made it) world is more connected than the muggle one.
In looking at the wiki article for 10th century Chinese swords, there's actually one that looks remarkably close to this one - although it's labeled as a Song Dynasty truncheon (which suggests that you're supposed to beat people with it - but it does seem to have an edge and a point.)
Of course, I strongly suspect that it's just coincidence, although jians are historically long, straight, relatively thin, double-edged swords favored by nobility (and I would imagine wizards would historically count as that.) Obviously it's just a movie prop for a fantasy movie, but it's interesting to try to work backwards to determine how something like that COULD have actually been made on purpose, in-universe.
I love to hear your side of things, with your expertise.
Great channel 👍
They chose it because it looks like a sword and it looks fancy. End of story.
The image of Captain Context dual-wielding a bronze shortsword and black powder revolver at 3:02 delights me to no end.
I totally can’t see a kid waving a broadsword such as that one 😁 And the Viking era sword would not only look more accurate, but also more badass in the movie.
Thank you very much for your thoughts on the Gryffindor sword. I’ve enjoyed your work for six months now and applaud your research and reasoning. Cheers from the Colonies, Ha!
Tiny correction: the sword absorbs what can make it stronger, not specifically what was defeated by the blade.
It came in contact with the basilisk's poison, therefore the blade absorbed the power to inflict un-curable wounds.
As for its description, the books are vague... "goblins' steel, fashioned from pure silver and was inset with rubies"... So nothing much...
But Harry can't properly weild it in the books, as it was heavy for him. Unlike in the movies, in the books him stabbing the basilisk was a little more than an accident.
(But this is more likely the author saying Harry is too young to weild a sword, and not implying any historical facts)
this shows that JK doesn't understand anything about swords because they aren't very heavy
@@Rodrigokdo While I'm positive she's absolutely no expert, I'd find hard for a 12yo kid who never held a sword before to do anything but that xD
@@Rodrigokdo while true. What's considered heavy for a 12 year old is not the same as for an adult. Especially since Harry didn't exactly get a lot of food growing up. He wasn't starved but the dursleys definitely didn't feed him enough. He was very small and thin for his age at the beginning of the series
The sword used in the prop for Gryffindor sword, is a silver-plated replica, of a sword designed for Napoleon as his dress sword in 1809
Arguably, he could have had a preference for any sword design in history because time travel is apparently a thing in the Potter Universe, and the goblins could have used some kind of spell to craft the sword that best suited him.
But, I'm taking the fun out of if, and I'm biased, so I assume that all real duelists use a messer or kriegsmesser. Lol.
Oh, and great video!
Love the channel.
Good breakdown Matt. I remember this bothered me the first time I saw 'The Chamber of Secrets'. I actually just listened to the book again the other day (much prefer the books to the films) and it stood out to me that the description of the sword was vary vague- I am OK with that, I would rather an author give a vague description than make up something foolish- but there was a point where Harry grabbed the hilt with both hands. I guess a child could wrap both of his hands around a period sword, but I tdon't think it would be very natural.
"It had to be something Daniel Radcliffe could wield without being outacted by it."
Another option is that, like the William Wallace sword, people just pretend a later era sword is the original.
Another problem with Hogwarts and history is the claim that Merlin was in Slytherin. If Merlin was a contemporary of King Arthur (who ruled sometime between c. 500-542) then he would have lived almost 400-500 years before Hogwarts was ever built.
I’m not so sure about not using a shield? I seem to remember either you (Matt) or Skalagrim talking about “Viking” duels involving a requirement for each participant to have THREE shields with them, expecting a few to break?
There is one point: Goblins generally claimed items they made after the death of the individual they made it for. So if they made it for someone other than Godric Gryfindor, they would have reclaimed it. As I understand it, they made it specifically for Godric Gryfindor. As such, I don't think it would have been an earlier sword.
I'd imagine it would look something like the Sotton Hoo sword....and Matt just referenced it. I think what they mean in the book is that he used a wand for wizards and a sword for muggles, not that he dual wielded them. He very likely used a shield and traditional arms and armour of the time when going to battle with strictly human adversaries. The argument that it's goblin and could be a pillow sword still doesn't hold up because he'd be using it against Viking era swords which would probably snap it like a twig. Also, Daniel Radcliffe would probably still need to use a pillow sword in order for him to fight effectively.
+scholagladiatoria *Thanks for the call-out of inaccurate property.* History would dictate an early arming sword consistent with the Brito-Saxon (viz., Arthurian) Wars in Great Britain during the Dark Ages.
“If you haven’t read the HP books, you probably won’t be watching this video.” I’ve tried reading them twice, tried watching the movies multiple times, and just couldn’t do it. I seem to recall the basilisk fight in one of the movies being the last thing I saw before I dozed off in the theater. I’m just more interested in conjectural weapon videos.
I gave up when JKR discovered the CAPSLOCK key.
As a guy who's been into swords since a young age, that sword made me weep. In what POSSIBLE way is it functional?!?! Awful grip, tiny crossguard, flimsy blade.
It's my headcanon that the sword has been reforged at some point in time, probably since it was seen as more of a decorative relic than anything functional.
Also the "sword" in the movies is way to small if you ask me. With its thin blade it looks very fragile. I think it would be unlikely that Neville Longbottom would be able to cut through something thick like the neck of Nagini with such a tiny, fragile "sword" that looks as if it is better for thrusting.
It is an enchanted Goblin-made sword, so "looking" fragile wouldn't matter. Theoretically, maybe the sword could change size based on who possesses it.
I think it's really interesting the way you've interpreted the facts, because I always made the assumption that it being Goblin-made implied that the Goblins made it for him specifically, making it contemporary to his own time.
It is stated specifically in the lore of the sword that the sword was made to the specifications of Godrick Griffyndor by Ragnuk the First. So it would be from Godric's time.
I never disliked the the sword in the movies because I had never read the books and watched to movies out of casual curiosity.
Having seen this video I’m now thinking about designing what perhaps it could have been.
Thanks Matt
This is like asking "what does Excalibur look like?" Obviously not what you see in the movies. So is Gryffindor's sword.
Well even so, if you look at when Arthurian legends are set you can still discuss what the swords were like at that time. This would tell you what the design it is likely to be, since that's what they'd have had at the time the legends are set in.
Of course, you can bring up all the things about Excalibur being a magic sword as well, so it could be anything. But the fun of this kind of subject is what is more realistic for the time period, not what it "actually" is.
Funny thing, there were cruciform swords used by the Hun, decades before Arthur, as evidenced by a Hun warrior carving in a British museum, and archaelogical evidence has found the real Arthur lived in a trading hub with goods as far away from Constantinople found, so given trade availability and Huns settling in Germany so close to Britain, it's not too much of stretch that Arthur used a cruciform Excalibur
...an imaginary, magical sword made by imaginary creatures......
A viking era sword would have been SO much cooler than the flimsy prop used in the movie.
There is absolutely *beautiful* pattern-welding on the sword from Sutton Hoo!
It would have been cool if he had a really high status decorated and bejeweled early viking sword. Maybe they could have just made the blade a bit more thin/tapered. A little more like a chinese jian. Befitting a duelist and representative of the mastery of goblin metallurgy and all that.
Since goblins live so long, the one that crafted Godric's sword could have been apprenticed to a goblin that lived during the Han Dynasty, or apprenticed to an apprentice from that time, and the Han Dynsaty had swords with guards like those of European sabers over a millennium later, given probable cause for Godric to have a sword with a unique guard and unorthodox style when dueling with his peers
Love that you started with a bronze age sword, my first thought when you introduced this was along the same lines - Wizarding culture is incredibly slow to evolve technologically and culturally, and wizards seem to live long lives, so an "older" sword seems completely in keeping with setting.
You could also have fun with the magical absorption property- maybe it started out as a bronze sword but it's absorbed elements of more modern swords as their users were defeated, until you've ended up with some kind of wootz steel pattern of original (magically enhanced) bronze, combined with more "modern" irons and steels as the blade has absorbed advances in metallurgy.
Three details not brought up here which could be important factors for Godric's sword design are Godric's ownership, his own age, and even goblins age. The final book mentions that goblins made the sword for Godric, because goblins believe after the original owner dies, a goblin sword reverts ownership back to goblin made, so they no longer see it as Godric's sword. Wizards are also mentioned to often live over a century, sometimes even two centuries, so Godric could have been quite old when he helped found Hogwarts, maybe using a 9th century style from his youth. Finally, goblins live quite long, probably longer than most wizards, so it might have only been a few generations of goblin smiths in between say the Han Dynasty and the Viking Age when Godric lived, only 500-600 years difference between the beginning and ending of the respective Ages, and the book sword is described as a saber, so the goblin smiths might have been familiar with swords with guards similar to Han Dynasty make, kept those traditions alive from just a grandfather to grandson goblin, and they made Godric a sword unique for his time period, something resembling a saber.
The on screen sword looks nothing like a Han dynasty jian. It is clearly inspired from the jewelled sword of offering in the British Crown Jewels.
@@appa609 I'm talking about the book
Another interesting note for you. How long did Gryffindor live? Often wizards seem to have extended lives. What then would he have access to with an additional 500 years? Then to extend upon some of the exceptions for magical means and goblin design. Maybe he would have access to technology that would be a century or two ahead of it's widespread use. I don't know if that quite gets us to the sword design shown. But I'm sure there are couple really good options from around the world that might make a bit more sense.
Presumably, Gryffindor died in the 11th century, as the wiki states that the first headmaster of Hogwarts (the one that succeeded the founders) was active in the 11th century. Now, this is what the wiki says, I don't know its source and it might well be possible that Gryffindor at some point appointed a headmaster, left the school and lived for another 500 years. You never know...
There's a vague implication of wizards having extended lives, but the only explicit example in the books would be Nicholas Flamel due to the Philosopher's Stone, and if other wizards already live super long, that would make the stone rather unimportant. I remember seeing some marketing saying that Dumbledore was 150, but I don't recall any official media ever stating his age.
@@Blokewood3 dumbledore is really old, over 100. He's seen as already being a professor in 1938, and later said to be born in 1880-something or so.
@@annasolovyeva1013 That sounds about right. Do you know where you came across the 1880 number though? If he were born c. 1880 that would make him about 117 years old when he died, which is extremely old, but quite a bit less than 150, as I had seen claimed. True, he's a professor in 1938, but a birthdate of c.1900 would still be possible with that, since Hogwarts doesn't seem to have any age requirements for its teachers.
@@Blokewood3 he's said to be over a hundred years old or something in canon (in the movies it's Ron, but i don't remember which year it was.).
And the info about 1880-something appears in fan materials on the internet along with his and Grindelwald's story. And Horace Slughorn (who taught in 1938 too) is generally really old too.
Who of canon characters died of old age, after all? Even the history book author, who is older than Dumbledore, is killed by nagini...
Counterpoint: Heroes _ARE_ commonly shown fighting with weapons of older times than their own. Weapons that are legendary on their time. Like those of the medieval epic poems. Meaning that an even more likely alternative to a X century viking/norman/etc. sword (most people in Europe in those times used those swords), would be a Carolingian sword (late VIII - early IX century - not even that farther in time!), which would conect his sword with other legendary swords from the Charlemagne's and Roldan's epic poems like _Joyeuse_ or _Durendal_ - and those swords are basically Roman spathas with the serials filed off 🙂
I like the Sutton Hoo sword, just to be iconically British. A reasonable cheat might be a slightly longer grip and/or an "eronomic" pommel and have Harry use it two handed. I have not read the books or seen the movie, so perhaps it wouldn't work. Does Harry do anything important with his off hand while weilding the sword? As someone else has noted, aluminium would be an option for the prop.
I've been looking forward to this video
I totally agree. And for me, the sword used in the movie just doesn't fit. It looks tiny, even for Harry Potter, although he is a teenager. It's true that a sword like Anduril will look too huge, and it's also too modern for Godric Gryffindor. So for me, a viking sword, maybe with a larger pommel filled with jewels (for the goblin look), and a narrower blade (so it doesn't weight as much), will be perfect.
In my headcannon, it is 100% a sutton-hoo/vendel ringed-pommel sword with ruby/garnet inclusions. It fits perfectly with the (very lacunar) description, and also with the tendency of the "wizarding fashion" to be just a few centuries behind that of muggles.
Good job, I didn't realize the Gryffindor sword had a history of being a functional sword. I liked the HP movies but only read a couple of chapters of the books (boring). The Gryffindor sword in the movies appeared to be only a decorative/ceremonial sword never meant for use as a real sword.
It could be that the goblins being small and slight designed a sword that was better suited to them and it became the design leader inspiring a latter generation of swords.
When I try to look up pillow swords even though I find at least some examples I don't really see too many sources or people on the internet actually talking about them.
One explanation that i read somewhere had an idea that one enchantment on the sword made it change to fit the wielder, so it looks that way in the movie because it was something that Harry could use, could have pulled from a memory of a sword he saw somewhere from a movie poster or something.
I know the movie version is bad but the book version is so much worse so I'm with it.
I think that "it's magic!" argument is valid in this case.
Maybe wizards can reshape swords?
Or sword can change itself?
Or wizards had different evolution of swords?
Since it presents itself to one who needs it when (s)he needs it, I always just figured it took on a form like what that person has in mind for a sword to be like.
But, of course, the reason I came up with that was because of how far off it was from swords of GG's era, so, if they'd used one from the expected era, I wouldn't have come up with that.
Loved the historical comparison between designs brilliant video 👌
This looks like a fun video. I just clicked on it now. I have to ask, did you ever do a review of the weapons in the movie "the emperor and the assassin" ?
Big HP fan, I remember watching The Chamber of Secrets in the cinema as a kid and just thinking "That sword looks too shiny and new to be 1000 years old!!" plus I wasn't a fan of how small the sword was, very interesting with the history!
Thanks Matt, another great video!
A thought/question came to mind: Is it possible that a steel blade could be passed down the generations and be adapted to suit the needs of different centuries?
I know this is a fantastical idea, but would it be possible for a spartha to be re-hilted to become a Type 10, to later be re-hilted again in the 14th C. and then ground down into a Type 15, to then be given a rapier hilt and become a side sword in the Civil war, to then be ground down again in 18th C. to be turned into a pillow sword. And potentially that now very thin blade could become a cane-sword for a victorian inheritor.
A very fantasy idea, I won't expect any historical examples. But though J K Rowling doesn't give this idea, could this describe why an Anglo-Saxon's sword appears so different by the time Harry Potter picks it up?
Thanks again for your incredible content. It inspires reenactors, LARPers, writers and all other nerds!
I never read any of the books or watched any of the movies, but I watched - and enjoyed - this whole video anyway. Matt has a great knack for making historical weaponry topics interesting and entertaining.
The sword has the power of context, the greatest magic you can bestow upon an object. It changes shape to fit the situation x)
If Godric Gryffindor had a completely different sword, some people might become wary to fight him, or call his sword an unfair advantage. And if so, someone might try to forge similar swords to counter that advantage. Goblin-made to me sounds more like intricate decoration - it is a jewelled swoerd after all! - and very good steel, something like a designer meets Ulfberht sword.
I always pictured a falchion type sword with upswept quillons when I read the book as a kid and still today
A couple of points Matt. Yes i agree it is not consistent with swords of the time but that doesn't preclude the design. It is Goblin made and from what I read (and i could be way off base) it was made as a special commission. Walking around Hogwarts with a full size combat sword would not be quite appropriate. In fact the sword is almost a dead ringer for a court sword shown, I think, on one of your programs about Court Swords. I showed the sword to my partner who is more of a fan of Harry Potter than I and she came to the same conclusion without my prompting other than "what does this remind you of?" We have a replica in our home. There is nothing that says this is the sword that Gryffindor used for dueling and he may have commissioned it later in life and to hold charms and spells. (I Know that Court Swords came about much later, Tudor or there abouts). Finally the wording of the commission could have been vague enough that the goblins decided to have some fun with the creation with the sword so most would underestimate the sword, yet they could say they followed the contract.
It is a work of fiction and so a certain level of Leeway could be given and who is to say the Sword of Gryffindor was seen and started the trend of the Court Sword. A subject for fan fiction and fun.
I am surprised how much I enjoyed this video. Thanks.
You're totally right about them not knowing anything about swords, but the reason they chose that specific sword was purely happenstance. I think they said one of the prop managers had gone to pawn shop and seen it there, and they liked the look of it so much that they decided to use it.
I think it is also possible for someone to have replaced the hilt and crossguard of the sword. So you could end up with a very old blade with some later style of guard and hilt.
This video could also be a pitch for a Godric Gryffindor movie. That's all I want to see: him dueling with muggles, wizards and probably dragons and dementors too
i have two 12 year old sons, yes they are bigger than Radcliff both hockey players but i'm sure a 12 year old would be able to use a Viking Era sword no problem my boys do it all the time with my blunt training swords even do cutting practice with me
I always thought that sword was more of a parrying blade which makes sense for a wizard because their main offensive weapon would be there wand. He would probably just need a thin parrying blade just to deflect and divert incoming blades while then counter-attacking with your magic
On the topic of placing a date for the swords creation. In the 7th book. (I believe Ron stairs) that the Sword was made for Godric. Which Griphook retorts that the maker ragnok the first the maker is the true owner. So the Sword was made during Godric’s life according to this.
While I know you addressed it, and it's a copout answer, I think it being Goblin-made would have something to do with its durability if it WAS that skinny and thin.
If it has the powers of:
Being indistinguishable from the best fakes, to anyone except Goblins. Even with spells.
The ability to teleport to anyone proving worthy of the Gryffindor name.
AND the ability to absorb anything that makes it stronger.
Then it would stand to reason that it also just had a ridiculous amount of durability. Especially as it would seem like a counterbalance, or at the very least a side effect of, the Absorbing Ability.
as stated 3:54 It also enchanted to take in what make it stronger so changing shape if it help it fight better it would so.
Yep I going with it look like that because magic. Then the timing it was made for him by the goblin. That why the goblin thing came up as by goblin law it should be handed back to the goblin upon Gryffindor death.
the ornamentation is meant to be based off of the Curtana sword, one of the British Crown Jewels. but the look for the lower parts outside of the ornamentation are based on a ceremonial sword Napoleon gave
and think of this: perhaps the blade is what’s enchanted allowing the other parts to be replaced over time?
swords back then were not designed to be used alone but that was probably done occasionally since shields or off hand weapons were not always available for some users
Always reminded me of a 19th/early 20th century Fraternal Sword.