Just stumbled on this. I wish RUclips still had its 'response' feature. Possibly you have done other responses to my stuff that I've missed. Agree that when grappling, longsword techniques involve letting go with one hand. That's for another video another day. With a buckler, the shield hand can grip the hilt as well, no? I would not choose a longsword for use with a larger shield. Earlier swords built for this use are, unsurprisingly, better at it. I am curious to see illustrations of longsword and (larger) shield used in conjunction. I wonder what the context is (what is the enemy using? Is this duel or battle?).
Hi Lloyd, thanks for posting. With a buckler the left hand might be able to control the weapon to some degree (though the buckler grip would interfer somewhat), though longswords/bastard swords are shown in a fair amount of medieval art being used as one-handed swords with a shield or buckler in the conventional way. I totally agree that a one-handed sword makes a better one-handed sword, but I suppose there is a question of versatility here - maybe some soldiers wanted the option of being able to use either a sword and buckler OR fight two-handed, depending on their opponent. For example, I find that sword and buckler works better at fighting people with shields and against some pole weapons. The longsword I find better against armourer opponents or against mutliple opponents. I'll try to dig out some pictures of longswords used with bucklers and/or shields.
scholagladiatoria Just had a look at those. Most are duelling, and almost all are using bucklers. Some are fantasy scenes with dragons. I don't see any clear examples of real-life battle scenes with large shields and longswords. The 'early 15th French' example shows men with longswords used two-handed, and little shield-like things hanging from the left shoulders like spaulders. Even the french29c_1410-2 picture shows this. The man on the ground is left-handed, and we cannot see his right hand, while the man above him is right handed, and again we can see that the 'shield' is not in his hand, but hanging on his shoulder. As I see it, this is the only point on which we disagree significantly. At present, I am unconvinced by these pictures. When my new buckler arrives, I will be able to draw more conclusions as to how compatible it is with a longsword.
Lindybeige The thing is that longswords vary hugely; it's not really reasonable to base conclusions on a small sampling of replica examples. Some longswords are designed to be used predominantly in two hands and so are accordingly longer and heavier, but *others are simply a one-handed sword with a longer grip*. I have handled originals of both types and just looking at the raw stats, swords that we would call longswords can vary from anywhere between about 2.5lbs up to about 5.5lbs before they become true two-handed swords. So, there is a huge variation in longswords. As there also is in one-handed swords incidentally, but not to such a degree - one hand being able to manage a narrower degree of variation than two of course.
Just to add - I really enjoy Lloyd's videos. And I noticed quite a few people describing him as a reenactor or LARPer, but as well as these activities I believe he trains with the HEMA group run by one of my mates.
***** He has a degree in archaeology. In archaeology we put great value in empirically testing things, then repeating these tests several times to confirm the results. We also read historical texts but don't consider them gospel as they are the subjective opinion of one person. Now what happens if the texts say one thing and repeatable empirical tests says another? Archaeologically speaking, it's the modern tests that are right, if they are clear and repeatable. Lloyd's behaviour is that of an archaeologist as opposed to a reenactor if people wish to lable him.
ZarlanTheGreen I disagree. I think he is pretty clear when he is making leaps of judgment based on his own experiences. I can't speak to his level of research, since I haven't checked out his CV, but for my purposes* he's fantastic. * Improving my RPG gaming. :)
jaocheu The problem with using modern experiment in application to medieval weapons is that we are not really using them to fight, protect our lives or kill people and we are not medieval people living in the medieval period. This is a trap than many experimental archaeologists fall into. I can gather some clay and make a pot and use it for gathering water, but that does not proove anything about how a certain medieval person living in medieval Bicester may have used clay to make a pot and gather water. That is why we study archaeological remains and historical texts - to find out how things were ACTUALLY done. Not guess how they might have been done. We have incredibly detailed treatises describing the use of medieval and later weapons - to ignore them is just stupid.
scholagladiatoria You create a false dichotomy, that we either use experimental archaeology or use archaeological remains and historical texts. Actually experimental archaeology is based on remains and texts (when rarely available), you misunderstand it if you believe it works in isolation. Secondly you make a straw man argument when you say to ignore texts is stupid. I clearly stated in the OP that text are read, just not considered gospel. Texts are not evidence, they are testimony. Testimony needs to be corroborated, this can be done by other texts making identical points and no texts contradicting them. It can be done if some of the other points made by a writer are true and the writer doesn't make lots of demonstrably false claims so shows to be a reliable witness. They can be tested and they can be backed up by evidential finds. It simply ISN'T a case of one method vs another method, it is utilising ALL sources and methods. Finally experimental archaeology doesn't seek to prove how things were used historically. Its raison d'etre is to test proposed uses, eliminating ones that don't work and corroborating ones that do. Now the archaeological method is evidence and interpretation, you find evidence and you interpret it, the interpretation isn't evidence but subjective opinion, often base on experience and practicality. The archaeology world has a small problem in this area, in the fact archaeologists freely move between talking evidentially and interpretively, other archaeologists have no problem with this and are 100% conscious the whole time of what is evidence and what is interpretation in the conversation. But when talking to the public archaeologists sometimes forget the public doesn't quite have this ability and confuses when they are talking interpretation and evidence. So I understand the problem you may be having, not quite grasping what archaeologist say properly and it's not your fault, archaeologists need to make what they say more clear to laymen.
People like you and Lloyd should advise game developers, so many games today that use sword combat would benefit allot from having an adviser who has actually fought and studied medieval combat, most video game combat today is more of less just a swing or a stab, when there are so many other techniques that could be incorporated.
Is it perhaps the case that the modern classification system got 'frozen' in the 1970s with the rise of Dungeons and Dragons, which subsequent tabletop games and computer games then referred to as the authority on sword types?
Did a knight learn techniques with the sword he was given, or did he have a sword made to what techniques he was most comfortable with, or did it just depend on how rich the knight was? If people back in the day didn't really care what their swords were called or classified as I assume they just used the sword they were handed and adjusted their technique accordingly.
Very good video. You are right on when you contrast the modern perspective of everything having a proper name to the medieval one where terms were applied as needed in subjective and likely regionally influenced sort of way.
Maybe there were different kinds of bastard swords? Maybe the term bastard sword in tournaments simply meant any sword that did not fit into the "normal" kategories. So they might have duels for longswords, and for arming swords, but when people started showing up with swords that didn't fit comfortably in either category, they put them in an open class callad "bastard swords". And that meant that bastard sword could refer to anything from a longsword with an oversized grip to something more exotic like an asian sword.
Realizing this post is 5 years old, I hope this comment finds you well. I’ve truly enjoyed your take on these types of swords and their descriptions. I’m grateful for you and people like Lindy. The passion you both share for our history as human beings is well received. Knowing history, as nutty as the facts can be at times, helps us understand one another and evolve. Thanks again for your video.
I love it when you make responses to Lindybeige, you are always able to pick up on stuff he missed or got wrong and go into much greater detail. I know there's a few people out there that would love to see you do a video with Lloyd.
I had hoped I might see you do a response video to Loyd. Thanks for the clarification. By the way, I'd love to hear more from you about shields and shield use during the 14th and 15th centuries in a future video if that sounds like something you might be interested in doing. Keep up the great content!
I've also heard that 'bastard sword' may also (at least some of the time) referred ro a sword which was cut down from a larger sword. The suggestion is that, being cut down from the tang end end, as one generally would, it would have different handling characteristics. Depending on what shape of sword it was cut from, this might make an usually heavy-bladed sword for its length. I don't know if anyone has ever actually looked into that idea though.
+scholagladiatoria After reading Oakeshot's book as you suggested in another video, I spent some time trying to figure out where the term "Bastard Sword" came from... Some sources suggested that the term "Bastard" meant that the sword type didn't fit into another category - often suggesting that it referred specifically to pommel length (1 or 2 handed use), which didn't sit well with me when I surveyed the sword types - the variation was too great... Perhaps if we considered the idea that the term "Bastard" meant that this sword category didn't originate from previous categories - as if it was innovated at some point during this age - a new type of sword - quite literally, a sword without a father - a bastard. When I looked at Oakeshot's typology, I noticed that swords starting with type XV (XVa, XVIII, etc) - the diamond cross-sectioned blades that has a heavy taper, don't appear to have a predecessor in the typology. One dictionary definition suggested that Bastard swords were swords with a heavy taper as XV and XVIII have, but as I understand it, there is little evidence to support any theory - thoughts?
I came to the same conclusion ("Perhaps if we considered the idea that the term "Bastard" meant that this sword category didn't originate from previous categories") after studying the Oakeshott typology! I also noticed that the Center of Balance (info obtained from Albion website, so might not be historically accurate) on the Type XV, XVa, XVI, and the XVIII series of blades (all the diamond cross section-blades), tended to be a little closer to the guard than other Longswords (two-handed swords). Do you think the closer center of balance was intended for better agility in aiming thrusts and that perhaps that increased agility allowed for effective use with one-hand? If so, this could mean that Type XVa, being capable of one or two handed use (it had the closest center of balance) and of diamond cross section was 'the' Bastard sword? I suggest then that while the type XVIII series, while also having these qualities, cannot be true bastard swords because they do have a father! :) Although, as a classification category, the Bastard Sword could be useful and include all swords with one or two handed use, closer center of balance to the guard, and diamond profile...
Thank you. You have no idea how many people have tried to 'correct' me about terminology (actually, you probably do, but you get my point). This helps a lot.
a point about Ewart Oakeshott if I may... Records of the Medieval sword and his sword typology reads to me more like an attempt to chronologise sword designs, rather than simply categorise. From what I have read in Records of the Medieval sword (I don't know which reprint it is, off hand) he puts them in chronological order, starting at around the 10th century, through to the early 16th (
I'm a new subscriber to your channel and I enjoy the sword discussion from yourself, Lloyd and Skallagrim and fair enough to go on the record with your expert opinion. I'm certainly just a casual observer but I do feel I am seeing a bastard sword in your video. I would expect a longsword to have a shorter hilt and a less pointy blade. That given, you are the expert and perhaps the victorian classification has influenced the others, also experts that have informed me of this distinction. It's very interesting to follow this discussion and also to enjoy the lovely swords you present. I think the weapon you have there is very close to the one sword I would like to own. Basically a longsword with the ability to easily use a second hand but with enough heft to get a good workout while practicing.
so at the end of the day, this is a "sword", loved it haha. You cleared up something major for me here, because it's been a while since I started getting confused with the classification of longswords, bastard, hand-and-a-half etc, so reminding me that it never was categorized like that in the late medieval period just makes the problem go away :) As far as what I personnally would call them, just for practicallity, I'd say longswords are the ones like the one you showed, and everything of similar characteristics, I'd call "bastard" the more strange variants, maybe a bit too long, but not quite a greatsword or too short but too heavy to be used one-handed only etc, and I would say longswords and Bastard swords are both hand-and-half swords, because of the longer grip but shorter than the one of a greatsword where you dont need to keep a hand on the pommel to have leverage.
I really like your responses to lindybeige. I like his vocal way to express his thoughts and its nice to have a counterpart to it. Nice work, maybe you can do some stuff together?
Great video. I've always considered bastard swords to primarily be a two-handed sword that in certain situations can be used one-handed (such as when riding, or climbing a ladder or when otherwise being occupied with your other hand), meaning they'd have to be light enough for the user to handle with one hand while also having a long enough handle to allow the user to handle it with two hands.
i've read a treatise about the topic of naming sword "types" in german fencing books. the autor came to the conclusion that the sword itself is just named "sword" and when they name it "langes schwert" (longsword) or "kurzes schwert" (short sword) it referes to the way of using it. "longsword" would be the normal way of wielding it, while "short sword" would be the way one uses the sword when armored -> one hand on the grip and one hand gripping the blade.
Wild guess: A 'Bastard' is a noble's son through a consort. A 'Bastard' sword is somehow illegitimate. Maybe its a sword picked up on a field of battle. Maybe its like a long sword but somehow not as good or cheaply made. Maybe its about the person who wields it rather than the sword itself. Maybe its better than a regular long sword as bastards could be better in battle than the official heirs. Since there doesn't appear to be a particular distinctive quality that determines what a bastard sword is, maybe its not really a sword classification.
my friend who does HEMA, german school of fencing, mentioned that the bastard sword was probably a name for a longswords, that originaly had fairly long blades, like longswords that were almost too clumsy to use in one hand, and because of the extreme length their points sometimes got broken and these swords were sharpened/repaired to be used again, so they had a irregularly long blades in relation to the longer hilts, but I don't know if it's true
Great video, I would make one small suggestion, that you could perhaps link some of the plates and treaties you reference, or even flash them on screen while you are taking. This way I can be certain to see the.one in question. Once again thank you.
I just want to add, that if you're using such a long sword (or what ever you want to call it :) ) in combination with a shield, your shield hand can still be used to grab the hilt of the sword. Well best if you use a shield that's strapped to your arm and has a grip, so you can strike with both together. Just like you mentioned before about the buckler. In this way you could make a surprisingly powerful blow while being well protected.
When you talk today around a table about swords (in a role-playing game for example) we like to categorise easily swords. Lindybeige was not talking about how they were called but how we can call them now to simplify. That's why bastard sword is nice for a sword that can be handled one or 2 hands meanwhile some can only be used by 1 and some by 2 hands (for hitting not talking about grapple ... )
I would love for you to do a video talking about someone with a one-handed sword and dagger/parrying stick/buckler combo would go about fighting someone with a longsword or smilar long, two-handed sword, and how that person with a two-handed sword would go about fighting the first person. Advantages and disadvantages, how the two-handed sword person is trying to take advantage of their leverage advantage, how the one-handed sword guy is trying to neuter that, etc.
@scholagladiatoria Matt, Are there any historical sources that show swords like this used in conjunction with a dagger, in a similar way a rapier is often used with a main gauche in the later medieval and renaissance periods, or a katana with wakizashi in japanese martial arts? It seems to be a popular style of fighting in various modern media. Specifically, Game of Thrones Thrones to mind.
In the ASOIAF universe, a bastard sword is between a longsword and a greatsword. IRL, I prefer to believe that the bastard sword is shorter than a longsword but longer than an arming sword. You'd be surprised how these terms are dictated in the modern world of RPGing rather than back in the day,
Very nice rebuttal. Just because one swordsman can't swing a sword one-handed doesn't mean it couldn't be used that way by another. I'm not too concerned about his "classification" because I think he was using it as his own system (i.e., what "he" thought was a bastard, long, 2-hand, etc.). I don't think he suggested that it was THE classification system, although I guess it could be misconstrued as such.
Very nice, had been hoping for a video on this following Lloyd's. On a slightly related note, my fencing instructor's covered the topic of lancing with the sword with the hand at the back at the grip, but more in the likes of a one-off surprise extension of reach, and something to usually avoid due to the risk of being disarmed. Have you got an opinion on the frequency of the move? Just asking out of pure interest, find it enjoyable to see different interpretations of HEMA.
***** I don't mean the blade getting stuck, I mean that a potential miss would expose the blade quite a lot. Strike down at it's weak section, upon the false edge, from above, potentially whilst holding his arm or blade up with a free hand would be effective for disarming. In that position, his grip does very little to hold the sword tightly from something striking down on it.
I have been on several medieval museums around europe and I can tell you the longest swords Ive seen have been for horseback as they would have been impossible to use (too long) on foot, I suppose a lance were used in the charge and then longswords for melee
lol, I'm Italian mate, the pronunciation is "spàda a dùe màni" (where the a is like apple and the e is like Energy). Yet I know it is difficult for native english speakers, so well done anyway.
Just to add onto to the joyous complications, as I understand, back in the days before extensive plate armour (i.e. when everyone used a shield and therefore couldn't use a sword two-handed), the term longsword would have been applied to any one-handed sword that was relatively long.
As a relatively educated and knowledgeable person of Renaissance/medieval weaponry; what would you classify a grosse messer as??? and is it an adequate weapon for use in conjunction with a shield of any size or shape/form??? Please, note I a am put a clearly defined understanding between a langes messer (one handed, cutless style sword [knife]) verses and a two-handed version of the same falcion style single edged weapon. I have had no formal training and feel very comfortable using a grosse messer and "viking" style shield in conjunction. However, in the formal treatises I have read and studied this is a falsies by design. Can or will you help me sort fact, faction and my own reality in this matter???
How was being left handed taken by middle age armies? I fence left handed, and I would find it difficult (though probably not impossible) to switch to a right hand. It has an advantage in one-on-one combat due to left handed swordsmen guarding their flank almost naturally through training. But I can also see it being quite an awkward thing to do if an army is trying to form a line. I say id find it difficult, but I learned to shoot right handed and it started to feel completely natural. Thanks, Mike
What I like about Lindybeige's videos IS his subjective opinion (as long as he doesn't state is as historically accurate), because people are usually going to come together to very similar ideas of what is and what isn't practical.
Can a basterd sword handle have an extra hAlf inch on it? I have a practice sword that seems like it's in between a one handed to a two handed baster sword. But my grip is11 or 12 inch handle.
However I would have to say that I have a hard time trusting the artistic representation of a contemporary artist to represent a reality that pertains to warfare more than arts. The job of an artist is to sell Art, not emulate reality with perfection. It is often seen that they do not represent reality at all. For Example, in 1000 years, archeologists will find Copîes of Call of Duty. And I have the sincere hope that weapons where used the way they are in the game (moddern art representation of warfare) or that we actually coloured our guns the colour of bacon. Point is: we can't be sure and I think that the parctical point of view of a recreationist is often worth more than a drawing on a dishplate. And of course, I loved your video, Looking forward for more!
They is a great point that deserves way more attention than it seemed to have received here. I always worry about this when we look at examples of ancient art, for evidence. Can we really trust the Viking sagas, for example, to give us an accurate portrayal of combat, either?
You're as insufferable as I am when it comes to discussing history, and I wholly enjoy it. That said, I'd love to see you and Lloyd do a collaboration video.
I agree completely on the over classification on types of swords, and it can applied to a lot of stuff. We should be more concerned about what it was made for and its purpose instead of labels.
From reading the texts I've deduced that if the sword can be wielded with both hands (even if it's just with 2~3 fingers from the offhand, but usually your entire offhand) and the blade is between 25~35 inches, it's considered what was called a bastard sword. If the blade is longer, it was called a longsword, shorter it was called a short sword, and if the grip only has enough room for 1 hand it was just a sword (double edged implied for all). So actually, at the end of the day that's really a bastard sword. Although what was it really called? Yes, probably most of the time it would just be called a sword... but because it has room for the second hand (in this case an ideal amount because it is modern), it could also be called a bastard sword and be correct.
I have to admit, I always thought "bastard sword" was a slang term. A sword you make bastards out of. But if they used it for tournament categorisation then that seems highly unlikely.
very informative video , could you please share the exact model of the long sword you were holding in your hand in this video? was it a production sword or a custom made one? could you provide a link where its sold ?
I always think about it as relative to who you are and how you handle a sword. I've known a big guy who was using a huge sword in one hand, for most men the sword was two-handed and we always joked that for young girls in our group it was a three-handed sword. Also two-handed sword often had the blunt part of the edge above the guard and some other details. Personally it's also a lot about RPGs and how people give statistics to weapons...
My thought of what "bastard sword" truly refers to is a sword that is neither dedicated to the cut or the thrust, but both - a so called cut and thrust sword. If you think of what the word "bastard" means (i.e. an illegitimate child), this makes sense, as a "bastard sword" is the illegitimate child of a dedicated cut and dedicated thrust sword. This could be why (at least in the 14th century, as I've seen) it is sometimes hazy as to whether or not "bastard sword" is referring to a one-handed or a two-handed sword. Type XIV, Types XVI, or Type XVIII swords can be seen as examples of a one-handed sword types that compromise both the cut and the thrust, whereas Type XVIa, Type XVII (more thrust), Type XVIIIa, or Type XVIIIc can be seen as examples of two-handed sword types that compromise both the cut and the thrust. Therefore, I think that we should just use term longsword to refer to two-handed and hand-and-a-half swords, regardless of grip length in proportion to blade length, and arming sword to refer to one-handed swords. Bastard sword should be a term used to the compromise cut and thrust types, some of which are noted above. Just my 2 farthings...
Hi Matt I've heard you saying that you have a degree in archeology and I was wondering if that is your job (an archeologist or something else) and schola gladiatora is a part time thing and if you actually get decent money form schola gladiatora also I've looked at your website and I was wondering if you do arming sword and heather sheild training or just arming sword?
A handy thing about the long handle is, as mentioned, that the sword may be used as a pole weapon. And a handy thing about pole weapons is that you can use your whole underarm to control it and get some more force into your motions. Just another add ;) Well, I guess us guys need to write a book or two about it, to mention all the possibilities... XD "And just as the imagination is limitless, so too are the possibilities of the sword." Master Piandao from Avatar the last airbender. ;)
It reminds me of how some people obsess about whether some military rifle is an "assault rifle" or a "battle rifle" etc. It really doesn't matter, and there are examples where it could be considered to cross over both, and some languages don't differentiate at all, and the military makes no distinction either.
How long does a kitchen or Bowie knife have to be before it's a short sword? How long does a Gladius have to be before it's an arming sword? So in reality all one handed blades over a knife length is an arming sword, all swords with a longer grip that can be used with or one hand are long swords. Great/zwei requires two hands. That would make broad classification and RPGs simpler.
Well when things are being used they don't really require much classification. But classification is quite handy in the modern day, as it makes sure we're all on the same page. If looking at the sources keep an open mind and try to work out what they're talking about. What I classically think of as a bastard sword is what is being used by the knights in the late 14th century Milanese manuscript Queste del Saint Graal of the late 14th century, clearly the grip is long enough for 2 hands, but your left pinkie and ring finger are going to be on that pommel. Hand and a half literally refering to how many fingers worth is gonna fit onto that thing, rather than many longswords that have heaps of room, even with 2 hands on it. I mean there is certain techniques you can use with a longsword, warsword or greatsword, but a bastard sword to me is something of an in-between of a longsword and an arming sword. So personally I think bastard sword would be appropriate for any arming sword or langsord technique, as you'd presumably be using both with it.
A bastard sword could have referred to a hand-and a half sword with rings attached to the quillons for providing a two handed cut and help with controlling the sword in the back cut or parry.
My understanding is that "bastard sword" originated in France "epee batarde" to describe swords that fit between a single hand arming sword and a great sword. So maybe longswords and hand and a half swords are both bastard swords
I would just like to say having rode a horse quite avidly at one point in my life that most warriors who rode horses, trained there horses too steer simply buy leaning in the direction they wished to steer putting more pressure with that butt cheek in that direction while looking in that direction. a hose is very good at feeling your movements, I have in fact myself been successful at steering a horse completely dropping the reins, all I had to do was put more pressure with my left butt cheek on the horse while looking in the direction I wanted the horse too steer, and she would steer that direction until I straightened myself out, if I wanted to steer right I would put more pressure with my right butt cheek, and look in the right direction I wanted to steer, I could do this because this horse was in fact at one time used for jousting and this was how she was trained, she could be steered more traditionally with the reigns, or with the method I was using if you knew how, so if I wanted to and if I got it down pat enough, and I where in a battle situation where I had a long sword or what ever, I could at that point use both hands.
I have an observation to make, however I have not ridden a horse so I may be completely off and I do apologise if that is the case. I think using a two handed sword with both hands, which would imply a cleaving motion, would cause you to shift in your seat and as such, would cause you to move your butt without the intent of steering.
but the horse wound notice that your intended direction would be towards your enemy, keep in mind that a horse can see all around itself because of the position of its eyes, so it can see you pretty much as you sit on it, they can be trained too steer with the butt or buy simply looking in that direction, too attack your enemy you are typically looking at him am i not correct, the horse will also notice you are swinging at him with your sword or ponting at him with your sword... and may even assist you in the attack. a good jousting horse will help its rider keep his lance on track for example, using a weapon like sword a horse can be trained not much different.
Considering how expensive a properly-made longsword was, and considering how many knights would have had theirs custom ordered, it wouldn't have made much sense to order a weapon you couldn't comfortably use with one hand. Needs must and such, and in battle, you're not always going to be able to keep both hands on your blade. If a knight is going to the trouble of fitting their plate armor to their bodies and all (that being another massive expense), it would be silly to pay for a sword which he couldn't comfortably swing from horseback. Obviously things would be different from a militia group who are using their "longswords" (the kind with a blunt edge and second set of guards for half-swording) more as small polearms than swords.
Hey Matt, great video, I had no idea that longswords were historically paired with bucklers. You mentioned their use on horseback and that makes sense, given that cavalry swords are often longer and heavier than those designed for fencing on foot. How does the handling compare between, say, the Albion in this video used with one hand and a Victorian heavy cavalry sabre?
They handle very differently - most longswords do not handle very nicely as one-handed swords, but some smaller ones are more like a one-handed sword with a long grip. It really depends on the size, weight and balance of the longsword in question.
I envy you guys. So hard (and maybe illegal) to get hold of a decent sword here in Brazil. Maybe I'd be content with a practice version... Just to get that good feel of handling it.
I've been drooling over a few darksword armory blades and even considered gambling a bit of money on one 11th century viking, but there is always the sad chance that it'll get stuck and lost in our customs. The funny part is that there's no defined law for edged weapons if you look into it, but the army will probably hold onto it. I've seen some dudes saying that declaring it as a collector's item might help, but it is quite a bit of money to lose in case it doesn't work, I ended up giving up the idea. Very sad. :( Unless I want a useless ugly stainless steel fantasy wallhanger. And god, no.
I'll definetly give it a try if I get a pay raise, or something like that. meanwhile Ill look into nylon beaters, just to satiate my hunger for waving it around, heheh
Personally, I've never tried to import real swords to Brazil, but as a kendo practitioner, I know a lot of people who have imported Iaito without a problem (except the usual taxes and long wait time), and my sensei even have a real katana (although in this case I think he brought with him from Japan, either way, it went through customs). Maybe you should try with a cheap blade from ebay or something..
Olá, Mauro. Just like Thiago said (yes, 3 months ago, sorry), swords are not illegal in Brasil. I had a katana mailed from the US with no problem and in the package it was written very clearly "sword" in both english and portuguese. Also, me, my brother and my father brought from Europe and the US various knifes, bows, etc. On my next trip I intend to bring back a longsword. So get on eBay and indulge yourself. Cheers!
+scholagladiatoria (I'm Austrian and we too happen to speak German, albeit mostly in some funny sounding variants.) Yes, a two-hand sword is literally also called a "Bihänder" in German, I never heard the term "Beidenhänder" (roughly a bit like "with-both handed [sword]") and it just sounds wrong, so I guess you might have misheard that one - albeit "Beidhänder" (roughly "both-handed [sword]") could be plausible. I have to admit though that I'm learned a little in some historical German variants, but not enough in all to rule out completely that all three terms were used. So please take all that with the obligatory grain of salt, and it would be prudent to maybe ask an actual expert. And _well_ done, Good Sir - even compared directly to German native speaker "standards", you were almost right on the spot. :-) You just pronounced the "i" a bit too "English", i.e. like in, well, "like"; whereas the correct German pronounciation would be like, well, e.g. the first "i" in "Lindybeige". But apart from that, you pronounced it perfectly. Well done. :-)
I would suggest that the one thing we do know for certain is that: the longsword and the bastard sword were considered significantly different weapons (at least by the English), the proof being the surviving records of these being in different classes in tournaments. I would therefore suggest that the opening statement that they, along with two-handed swords are the same is, to the best of our knowledge, unlikely to be historically accurate. I'd also say that you clearly know far far more about it than I do, and I want to make it clear that I'm in no way qualified to be arguing against an expert.
One thing critically missing here is the source of these statements. I believe he's right but a snapshot of the medieval illustrations mentioned and references where to find them would make this perfect. This lack of referencing devalues the academic aspect of that video.
Yes, he's wrong :-) Although, in a sense I can see what he means, because not that much is known about pre-1300 technique. BUT, the sword he is showing, which I believe to be a Del Tin, is an over-weight replica, which may distort his opinion.
btw: have there ever been swords in european medieval times, that were really made to be swung with one OR two hands? I figure most bastard/longswords can be held and even used as a weapon in one hand, but that would be far less effective than the actual 2handed grip.
I always thought that these referred to blade length (against ones hight). What is a long sword to me, the same sword to someone a foot shorter than me is a bastard sword. I had learned that a short sword (for your hight) is the length of your arm. A long sword comes up to about your sternum. A bastard (or hand and a half) sword is about to your chin. A great (or two handed) sword is the size of you.
The general feeling I got from Lindybeige's video was "All of these terms are arbitrary, so I'm going to tell you what I consider to be a longsword, a bastard sword, etc". I do like the conclusion made here: They were all just "swords".
From my earlier days of playing Dungeons and Dragons we always assumed Long sword = one hand, Bastard sword=hand and half sword, and two hand=two handed. It is interesting to hear these actual real answers rather than Gary Gygax.
I believe horse archers had ways to keep control of a horse while shooting their bows. I'd assume some knights would have used similar means, atleast in close combat.
If you actually look at the rule of Genghis Khan his horse archers controlled there horses with there knees so they could fire there bows at the same time.
Rapierlynx Everybody knows what's meant when somebody says "fire", so arguing that they never said that 1200 years ago and neither should we looks rather pointless, especially considering how the video was just talking about modern context with weapon terminology.
I would say Americans' confusion on the subject could be attributed to one E. Gary Gygax, and his Advanced D&D manual from the Eighties. Thank you for the edification.
Just stumbled on this. I wish RUclips still had its 'response' feature. Possibly you have done other responses to my stuff that I've missed.
Agree that when grappling, longsword techniques involve letting go with one hand. That's for another video another day.
With a buckler, the shield hand can grip the hilt as well, no?
I would not choose a longsword for use with a larger shield. Earlier swords built for this use are, unsurprisingly, better at it. I am curious to see illustrations of longsword and (larger) shield used in conjunction. I wonder what the context is (what is the enemy using? Is this duel or battle?).
Hi Lloyd, thanks for posting. With a buckler the left hand might be able to control the weapon to some degree (though the buckler grip would interfer somewhat), though longswords/bastard swords are shown in a fair amount of medieval art being used as one-handed swords with a shield or buckler in the conventional way. I totally agree that a one-handed sword makes a better one-handed sword, but I suppose there is a question of versatility here - maybe some soldiers wanted the option of being able to use either a sword and buckler OR fight two-handed, depending on their opponent. For example, I find that sword and buckler works better at fighting people with shields and against some pole weapons. The longsword I find better against armourer opponents or against mutliple opponents. I'll try to dig out some pictures of longswords used with bucklers and/or shields.
I have added some examples in the video description box of longswords used one-handed, both with shields and on horse.
scholagladiatoria Just had a look at those. Most are duelling, and almost all are using bucklers. Some are fantasy scenes with dragons. I don't see any clear examples of real-life battle scenes with large shields and longswords. The 'early 15th French' example shows men with longswords used two-handed, and little shield-like things hanging from the left shoulders like spaulders. Even the french29c_1410-2 picture shows this. The man on the ground is left-handed, and we cannot see his right hand, while the man above him is right handed, and again we can see that the 'shield' is not in his hand, but hanging on his shoulder. As I see it, this is the only point on which we disagree significantly. At present, I am unconvinced by these pictures. When my new buckler arrives, I will be able to draw more conclusions as to how compatible it is with a longsword.
Lindybeige The thing is that longswords vary hugely; it's not really reasonable to base conclusions on a small sampling of replica examples. Some longswords are designed to be used predominantly in two hands and so are accordingly longer and heavier, but *others are simply a one-handed sword with a longer grip*. I have handled originals of both types and just looking at the raw stats, swords that we would call longswords can vary from anywhere between about 2.5lbs up to about 5.5lbs before they become true two-handed swords. So, there is a huge variation in longswords. As there also is in one-handed swords incidentally, but not to such a degree - one hand being able to manage a narrower degree of variation than two of course.
Alfred Milfred Nice work :-)
Just to add - I really enjoy Lloyd's videos. And I noticed quite a few people describing him as a reenactor or LARPer, but as well as these activities I believe he trains with the HEMA group run by one of my mates.
***** He has a degree in archaeology. In archaeology we put great value in empirically testing things, then repeating these tests several times to confirm the results. We also read historical texts but don't consider them gospel as they are the subjective opinion of one person. Now what happens if the texts say one thing and repeatable empirical tests says another? Archaeologically speaking, it's the modern tests that are right, if they are clear and repeatable.
Lloyd's behaviour is that of an archaeologist as opposed to a reenactor if people wish to lable him.
ZarlanTheGreen I disagree. I think he is pretty clear when he is making leaps of judgment based on his own experiences. I can't speak to his level of research, since I haven't checked out his CV, but for my purposes* he's fantastic.
* Improving my RPG gaming. :)
jaocheu I also have a degree in archaeology :-)
jaocheu The problem with using modern experiment in application to medieval weapons is that we are not really using them to fight, protect our lives or kill people and we are not medieval people living in the medieval period. This is a trap than many experimental archaeologists fall into. I can gather some clay and make a pot and use it for gathering water, but that does not proove anything about how a certain medieval person living in medieval Bicester may have used clay to make a pot and gather water. That is why we study archaeological remains and historical texts - to find out how things were ACTUALLY done. Not guess how they might have been done. We have incredibly detailed treatises describing the use of medieval and later weapons - to ignore them is just stupid.
scholagladiatoria You create a false dichotomy, that we either use experimental archaeology or use archaeological remains and historical texts. Actually experimental archaeology is based on remains and texts (when rarely available), you misunderstand it if you believe it works in isolation.
Secondly you make a straw man argument when you say to ignore texts is stupid. I clearly stated in the OP that text are read, just not considered gospel. Texts are not evidence, they are testimony. Testimony needs to be corroborated, this can be done by other texts making identical points and no texts contradicting them. It can be done if some of the other points made by a writer are true and the writer doesn't make lots of demonstrably false claims so shows to be a reliable witness. They can be tested and they can be backed up by evidential finds.
It simply ISN'T a case of one method vs another method, it is utilising ALL sources and methods.
Finally experimental archaeology doesn't seek to prove how things were used historically. Its raison d'etre is to test proposed uses, eliminating ones that don't work and corroborating ones that do. Now the archaeological method is evidence and interpretation, you find evidence and you interpret it, the interpretation isn't evidence but subjective opinion, often base on experience and practicality. The archaeology world has a small problem in this area, in the fact archaeologists freely move between talking evidentially and interpretively, other archaeologists have no problem with this and are 100% conscious the whole time of what is evidence and what is interpretation in the conversation. But when talking to the public archaeologists sometimes forget the public doesn't quite have this ability and confuses when they are talking interpretation and evidence. So I understand the problem you may be having, not quite grasping what archaeologist say properly and it's not your fault, archaeologists need to make what they say more clear to laymen.
I love that you guys are like your own little sub-community on youtube and go back and forth on eachother.
Like how I remember youtube to be before google
man RUclips comments were so much better 10 years ago
I have added some original medieval art examples of longswords used one-handed, both with shields and on horse.
Thanks for the art, much appreciated.
People like you and Lloyd should advise game developers, so many games today that use sword combat would benefit allot from having an adviser who has actually fought and studied medieval combat, most video game combat today is more of less just a swing or a stab, when there are so many other techniques that could be incorporated.
to quote my old swordsmaship instructor.
"Swordsmanship, much like archery, is about what WORKS"
Is it perhaps the case that the modern classification system got 'frozen' in the 1970s with the rise of Dungeons and Dragons, which subsequent tabletop games and computer games then referred to as the authority on sword types?
Did a knight learn techniques with the sword he was given, or did he have a sword made to what techniques he was most comfortable with, or did it just depend on how rich the knight was? If people back in the day didn't really care what their swords were called or classified as I assume they just used the sword they were handed and adjusted their technique accordingly.
Very good video. You are right on when you contrast the modern perspective of everything having a proper name to the medieval one where terms were applied as needed in subjective and likely regionally influenced sort of way.
Maybe there were different kinds of bastard swords? Maybe the term bastard sword in tournaments simply meant any sword that did not fit into the "normal" kategories. So they might have duels for longswords, and for arming swords, but when people started showing up with swords that didn't fit comfortably in either category, they put them in an open class callad "bastard swords". And that meant that bastard sword could refer to anything from a longsword with an oversized grip to something more exotic like an asian sword.
LarsaXL that’s an excellent theory.
LarsaXL this makes an amazing amount of sense.
Realizing this post is 5 years old, I hope this comment finds you well. I’ve truly enjoyed your take on these types of swords and their descriptions. I’m grateful for you and people like Lindy. The passion you both share for our history as human beings is well received. Knowing history, as nutty as the facts can be at times, helps us understand one another and evolve. Thanks again for your video.
I love it when you make responses to Lindybeige, you are always able to pick up on stuff he missed or got wrong and go into much greater detail.
I know there's a few people out there that would love to see you do a video with Lloyd.
in france a bastard sword is a hand and a half..we still call odd or halfway sizes of things bastard sizes..
that's a long sword too, half way between a single hand sword and a great sword
I had hoped I might see you do a response video to Loyd. Thanks for the clarification. By the way, I'd love to hear more from you about shields and shield use during the 14th and 15th centuries in a future video if that sounds like something you might be interested in doing. Keep up the great content!
I've also heard that 'bastard sword' may also (at least some of the time) referred ro a sword which was cut down from a larger sword. The suggestion is that, being cut down from the tang end end, as one generally would, it would have different handling characteristics. Depending on what shape of sword it was cut from, this might make an usually heavy-bladed sword for its length. I don't know if anyone has ever actually looked into that idea though.
+scholagladiatoria After reading Oakeshot's book as you suggested in another video, I spent some time trying to figure out where the term "Bastard Sword" came from... Some sources suggested that the term "Bastard" meant that the sword type didn't fit into another category - often suggesting that it referred specifically to pommel length (1 or 2 handed use), which didn't sit well with me when I surveyed the sword types - the variation was too great... Perhaps if we considered the idea that the term "Bastard" meant that this sword category didn't originate from previous categories - as if it was innovated at some point during this age - a new type of sword - quite literally, a sword without a father - a bastard. When I looked at Oakeshot's typology, I noticed that swords starting with type XV (XVa, XVIII, etc) - the diamond cross-sectioned blades that has a heavy taper, don't appear to have a predecessor in the typology. One dictionary definition suggested that Bastard swords were swords with a heavy taper as XV and XVIII have, but as I understand it, there is little evidence to support any theory - thoughts?
I came to the same conclusion ("Perhaps if we considered the idea that the term "Bastard" meant that this sword category didn't originate from previous categories") after studying the Oakeshott typology! I also noticed that the Center of Balance (info obtained from Albion website, so might not be historically accurate) on the Type XV, XVa, XVI, and the XVIII series of blades (all the diamond cross section-blades), tended to be a little closer to the guard than other Longswords (two-handed swords). Do you think the closer center of balance was intended for better agility in aiming thrusts and that perhaps that increased agility allowed for effective use with one-hand? If so, this could mean that Type XVa, being capable of one or two handed use (it had the closest center of balance) and of diamond cross section was 'the' Bastard sword? I suggest then that while the type XVIII series, while also having these qualities, cannot be true bastard swords because they do have a father! :) Although, as a classification category, the Bastard Sword could be useful and include all swords with one or two handed use, closer center of balance to the guard, and diamond profile...
I like your explanation. Its clear and concise. Constantly get into this with people who have watched Highlander to many times.
Thank you. You have no idea how many people have tried to 'correct' me about terminology (actually, you probably do, but you get my point). This helps a lot.
Getting those lectures for free is just awesome ^^
Thanks for that ;)
a point about Ewart Oakeshott if I may... Records of the Medieval sword and his sword typology reads to me more like an attempt to chronologise sword designs, rather than simply categorise. From what I have read in Records of the Medieval sword (I don't know which reprint it is, off hand) he puts them in chronological order, starting at around the 10th century, through to the early 16th (
Love your videos! I'd really like to see one on information about doppelhander techniques and how the weapon was actually used historically.
I'm a new subscriber to your channel and I enjoy the sword discussion from yourself, Lloyd and Skallagrim and fair enough to go on the record with your expert opinion. I'm certainly just a casual observer but I do feel I am seeing a bastard sword in your video. I would expect a longsword to have a shorter hilt and a less pointy blade. That given, you are the expert and perhaps the victorian classification has influenced the others, also experts that have informed me of this distinction.
It's very interesting to follow this discussion and also to enjoy the lovely swords you present. I think the weapon you have there is very close to the one sword I would like to own. Basically a longsword with the ability to easily use a second hand but with enough heft to get a good workout while practicing.
so at the end of the day, this is a "sword", loved it haha. You cleared up something major for me here, because it's been a while since I started getting confused with the classification of longswords, bastard, hand-and-a-half etc, so reminding me that it never was categorized like that in the late medieval period just makes the problem go away :) As far as what I personnally would call them, just for practicallity, I'd say longswords are the ones like the one you showed, and everything of similar characteristics, I'd call "bastard" the more strange variants, maybe a bit too long, but not quite a greatsword or too short but too heavy to be used one-handed only etc, and I would say longswords and Bastard swords are both hand-and-half swords, because of the longer grip but shorter than the one of a greatsword where you dont need to keep a hand on the pommel to have leverage.
I was wondering when this was coming.
I really like your responses to lindybeige. I like his vocal way to express his thoughts and its nice to have a counterpart to it. Nice work, maybe you can do some stuff together?
Great video. I've always considered bastard swords to primarily be a two-handed sword that in certain situations can be used one-handed (such as when riding, or climbing a ladder or when otherwise being occupied with your other hand), meaning they'd have to be light enough for the user to handle with one hand while also having a long enough handle to allow the user to handle it with two hands.
i've read a treatise about the topic of naming sword "types" in german fencing books. the autor came to the conclusion that the sword itself is just named "sword" and when they name it "langes schwert" (longsword) or "kurzes schwert" (short sword) it referes to the way of using it.
"longsword" would be the normal way of wielding it, while "short sword" would be the way one uses the sword when armored -> one hand on the grip and one hand gripping the blade.
Wild guess: A 'Bastard' is a noble's son through a consort. A 'Bastard' sword is somehow illegitimate. Maybe its a sword picked up on a field of battle. Maybe its like a long sword but somehow not as good or cheaply made. Maybe its about the person who wields it rather than the sword itself. Maybe its better than a regular long sword as bastards could be better in battle than the official heirs. Since there doesn't appear to be a particular distinctive quality that determines what a bastard sword is, maybe its not really a sword classification.
my friend who does HEMA, german school of fencing, mentioned that the bastard sword was probably a name for a longswords, that originaly had fairly long blades, like longswords that were almost too clumsy to use in one hand, and because of the extreme length their points sometimes got broken and these swords were sharpened/repaired to be used again, so they had a irregularly long blades in relation to the longer hilts, but I don't know if it's true
Great video, I would make one small suggestion, that you could perhaps link some of the plates and treaties you reference, or even flash them on screen while you are taking. This way I can be certain to see the.one in question.
Once again thank you.
I just want to add, that if you're using such a long sword (or what ever you want to call it :) ) in combination with a shield, your shield hand can still be used to grab the hilt of the sword. Well best if you use a shield that's strapped to your arm and has a grip, so you can strike with both together. Just like you mentioned before about the buckler. In this way you could make a surprisingly powerful blow while being well protected.
Nice I have been waiting for this video since Lloyd's came out :-) I appreciate both of you guys a lot.
When you talk today around a table about swords (in a role-playing game for example) we like to categorise easily swords. Lindybeige was not talking about how they were called but how we can call them now to simplify. That's why bastard sword is nice for a sword that can be handled one or 2 hands meanwhile some can only be used by 1 and some by 2 hands (for hitting not talking about grapple ... )
I would love for you to do a video talking about someone with a one-handed sword and dagger/parrying stick/buckler combo would go about fighting someone with a longsword or smilar long, two-handed sword, and how that person with a two-handed sword would go about fighting the first person. Advantages and disadvantages, how the two-handed sword person is trying to take advantage of their leverage advantage, how the one-handed sword guy is trying to neuter that, etc.
Ha! I was kinda hoping you'd do a response on this. I like you and Lindy both, but for different reasons. Keep up the good work!
I was hoping you would address his video. Any chance you guys could ever get together for a joint-video? That would be epic!
@scholagladiatoria
Matt,
Are there any historical sources that show swords like this used in conjunction with a dagger, in a similar way a rapier is often used with a main gauche in the later medieval and renaissance periods, or a katana with wakizashi in japanese martial arts? It seems to be a popular style of fighting in various modern media. Specifically, Game of Thrones Thrones to mind.
Fun fact: John Snow's sword is actually a bastard's sword. ;)
Heh :-)
In the ASOIAF universe, a bastard sword is between a longsword and a greatsword. IRL, I prefer to believe that the bastard sword is shorter than a longsword but longer than an arming sword.
You'd be surprised how these terms are dictated in the modern world of RPGing rather than back in the day,
"Anachronistic" is the word I believe you were looking for. :D
Thanks to this video, I now know where the term pummeling (pommel-ing) comes from.
I guess it's like a spear.
If you don't have a shield you will always have the option of using it two-handedly, but with a shield only with one hand.
Very nice rebuttal. Just because one swordsman can't swing a sword one-handed doesn't mean it couldn't be used that way by another. I'm not too concerned about his "classification" because I think he was using it as his own system (i.e., what "he" thought was a bastard, long, 2-hand, etc.). I don't think he suggested that it was THE classification system, although I guess it could be misconstrued as such.
Very nice, had been hoping for a video on this following Lloyd's.
On a slightly related note, my fencing instructor's covered the topic of lancing with the sword with the hand at the back at the grip, but more in the likes of a one-off surprise extension of reach, and something to usually avoid due to the risk of being disarmed. Have you got an opinion on the frequency of the move? Just asking out of pure interest, find it enjoyable to see different interpretations of HEMA.
Yes, it is a high risk and high reward technique, to be used only occasionally.
*****
I don't mean the blade getting stuck, I mean that a potential miss would expose the blade quite a lot. Strike down at it's weak section, upon the false edge, from above, potentially whilst holding his arm or blade up with a free hand would be effective for disarming. In that position, his grip does very little to hold the sword tightly from something striking down on it.
I'm an avid follower of your videos, I would like to here some points of yours on dussak and it's application in historic contexts.
Seems like the semantical argument might also extend to claymore (basket hilt broadsword) vs claymore (Scottish great sword).
I have been on several medieval museums around europe and I can tell you the longest swords Ive seen have been for horseback as they would have been impossible to use (too long) on foot, I suppose a lance were used in the charge and then longswords for melee
lol, I'm Italian mate, the pronunciation is "spàda a dùe màni" (where the a is like apple and the e is like Energy). Yet I know it is difficult for native english speakers, so well done anyway.
it's nice to have little lectures/rants in the same style as Lloyd's, but from a HEMA point of view rather than a reenactor.
Just to add onto to the joyous complications, as I understand, back in the days before extensive plate armour (i.e. when everyone used a shield and therefore couldn't use a sword two-handed), the term longsword would have been applied to any one-handed sword that was relatively long.
As a relatively educated and knowledgeable person of Renaissance/medieval weaponry; what would you classify a grosse messer as??? and is it an adequate weapon for use in conjunction with a shield of any size or shape/form??? Please, note I a am put a clearly defined understanding between a langes messer (one handed, cutless style sword [knife]) verses and a two-handed version of the same falcion style single edged weapon. I have had no formal training and feel very comfortable using a grosse messer and "viking" style shield in conjunction. However, in the formal treatises I have read and studied this is a falsies by design. Can or will you help me sort fact, faction and my own reality in this matter???
How was being left handed taken by middle age armies? I fence left handed, and I would find it difficult (though probably not impossible) to switch to a right hand. It has an advantage in one-on-one combat due to left handed swordsmen guarding their flank almost naturally through training. But I can also see it being quite an awkward thing to do if an army is trying to form a line.
I say id find it difficult, but I learned to shoot right handed and it started to feel completely natural.
Thanks,
Mike
What I like about Lindybeige's videos IS his subjective opinion (as long as he doesn't state is as historically accurate), because people are usually going to come together to very similar ideas of what is and what isn't practical.
Can a basterd sword handle have an extra hAlf inch on it? I have a practice sword that seems like it's in between a one handed to a two handed baster sword. But my grip is11 or 12 inch handle.
scholagladiatoria Do you have a video of your whole collection? I would love to see it!
Can you acquire a large two handed sword (claymore) and demonstrate it for us. That would be fantastic.
However I would have to say that I have a hard time trusting the artistic representation of a contemporary artist to represent a reality that pertains to warfare more than arts.
The job of an artist is to sell Art, not emulate reality with perfection. It is often seen that they do not represent reality at all.
For Example, in 1000 years, archeologists will find Copîes of Call of Duty. And I have the sincere hope that weapons where used the way they are in the game (moddern art representation of warfare) or that we actually coloured our guns the colour of bacon.
Point is: we can't be sure and I think that the parctical point of view of a recreationist is often worth more than a drawing on a dishplate. And of course, I loved your video, Looking forward for more!
They is a great point that deserves way more attention than it seemed to have received here. I always worry about this when we look at examples of ancient art, for evidence. Can we really trust the Viking sagas, for example, to give us an accurate portrayal of combat, either?
Completely agree.
You're as insufferable as I am when it comes to discussing history, and I wholly enjoy it. That said, I'd love to see you and Lloyd do a collaboration video.
I agree completely on the over classification on types of swords, and it can applied to a lot of stuff. We should be more concerned about what it was made for and its purpose instead of labels.
I've seen some greatswords with rings around the guard, perhaps those were handles so that it could be used as a two handed spear?
From reading the texts I've deduced that if the sword can be wielded with both hands (even if it's just with 2~3 fingers from the offhand, but usually your entire offhand) and the blade is between 25~35 inches, it's considered what was called a bastard sword. If the blade is longer, it was called a longsword, shorter it was called a short sword, and if the grip only has enough room for 1 hand it was just a sword (double edged implied for all).
So actually, at the end of the day that's really a bastard sword. Although what was it really called? Yes, probably most of the time it would just be called a sword... but because it has room for the second hand (in this case an ideal amount because it is modern), it could also be called a bastard sword and be correct.
I have to admit, I always thought "bastard sword" was a slang term. A sword you make bastards out of. But if they used it for tournament categorisation then that seems highly unlikely.
very informative video , could you please share the exact model of the long sword you were holding in your hand in this video? was it a production sword or a custom made one? could you provide a link where its sold ?
I always think about it as relative to who you are and how you handle a sword. I've known a big guy who was using a huge sword in one hand, for most men the sword was two-handed and we always joked that for young girls in our group it was a three-handed sword. Also two-handed sword often had the blunt part of the edge above the guard and some other details. Personally it's also a lot about RPGs and how people give statistics to weapons...
My thought of what "bastard sword" truly refers to is a sword that is neither dedicated to the cut or the thrust, but both - a so called cut and thrust sword. If you think of what the word "bastard" means (i.e. an illegitimate child), this makes sense, as a "bastard sword" is the illegitimate child of a dedicated cut and dedicated thrust sword. This could be why (at least in the 14th century, as I've seen) it is sometimes hazy as to whether or not "bastard sword" is referring to a one-handed or a two-handed sword. Type XIV, Types XVI, or Type XVIII swords can be seen as examples of a one-handed sword types that compromise both the cut and the thrust, whereas Type XVIa, Type XVII (more thrust), Type XVIIIa, or Type XVIIIc can be seen as examples of two-handed sword types that compromise both the cut and the thrust. Therefore, I think that we should just use term longsword to refer to two-handed and hand-and-a-half swords, regardless of grip length in proportion to blade length, and arming sword to refer to one-handed swords. Bastard sword should be a term used to the compromise cut and thrust types, some of which are noted above. Just my 2 farthings...
Awesome looking sword. Where can I get one of those?
since rapier just mean more less mean "sword which fit to Fashion of the wearer" it was also an often used for many types of swords
Excellent clarifying points.
As two handed swords go, I always liked the Flamberge, the flaming wavy swords, I think they were quite useful. Who knows.
Hi Matt I've heard you saying that you have a degree in archeology and I was wondering if that is your job (an archeologist or something else) and schola gladiatora is a part time thing and if you actually get decent money form schola gladiatora also I've looked at your website and I was wondering if you do arming sword and heather sheild training or just arming sword?
A handy thing about the long handle is, as mentioned, that the sword may be used as a pole weapon. And a handy thing about pole weapons is that you can use your whole underarm to control it and get some more force into your motions.
Just another add ;)
Well, I guess us guys need to write a book or two about it, to mention all the possibilities... XD
"And just as the imagination is limitless, so too are the possibilities of the sword."
Master Piandao from Avatar the last airbender. ;)
I was wating for this video after I saw Lloyd's
It reminds me of how some people obsess about whether some military rifle is an "assault rifle" or a "battle rifle" etc. It really doesn't matter, and there are examples where it could be considered to cross over both, and some languages don't differentiate at all, and the military makes no distinction either.
scholagladiatoria, I am in love with your longsword! Who makes it?
In German it is either Beidhänder or Zweihänder for the two hander.
Lehtaan Which is the same thing as two handed sword....it's just the german name...
+Lehtaan Recently bought one bastard sword ...www.bastardsword.net/bastard-sword-manufacturers/german-bastard-sword.html
+Lehtaan Actual "Bidenhänder" is more common than "Beidhänder"
How long does a kitchen or Bowie knife have to be before it's a short sword? How long does a Gladius have to be before it's an arming sword?
So in reality all one handed blades over a knife length is an arming sword, all swords with a longer grip that can be used with or one hand are long swords. Great/zwei requires two hands.
That would make broad classification and RPGs simpler.
Well when things are being used they don't really require much classification. But classification is quite handy in the modern day, as it makes sure we're all on the same page. If looking at the sources keep an open mind and try to work out what they're talking about.
What I classically think of as a bastard sword is what is being used by the knights in the late 14th century Milanese manuscript Queste del Saint Graal of the late 14th century, clearly the grip is long enough for 2 hands, but your left pinkie and ring finger are going to be on that pommel. Hand and a half literally refering to how many fingers worth is gonna fit onto that thing, rather than many longswords that have heaps of room, even with 2 hands on it.
I mean there is certain techniques you can use with a longsword, warsword or greatsword, but a bastard sword to me is something of an in-between of a longsword and an arming sword. So personally I think bastard sword would be appropriate for any arming sword or langsord technique, as you'd presumably be using both with it.
I will be getting a bastard sword from a friend. How would you recommend I sharpen it?
A bastard sword could have referred to a hand-and a half sword with rings attached to the quillons for providing a two handed cut and help with controlling the sword in the back cut or parry.
My understanding is that "bastard sword" originated in France "epee batarde" to describe swords that fit between a single hand arming sword and a great sword. So maybe longswords and hand and a half swords are both bastard swords
I would just like to say having rode a horse quite avidly at one point in my life that most warriors who rode horses, trained there horses too steer simply buy leaning in the direction they wished to steer putting more pressure with that butt cheek in that direction while looking in that direction. a hose is very good at feeling your movements, I have in fact myself been successful at steering a horse completely dropping the reins, all I had to do was put more pressure with my left butt cheek on the horse while looking in the direction I wanted the horse too steer, and she would steer that direction until I straightened myself out, if I wanted to steer right I would put more pressure with my right butt cheek, and look in the right direction I wanted to steer, I could do this because this horse was in fact at one time used for jousting and this was how she was trained, she could be steered more traditionally with the reigns, or with the method I was using if you knew how, so if I wanted to and if I got it down pat enough, and I where in a battle situation where I had a long sword or what ever, I could at that point use both hands.
I have an observation to make, however I have not ridden a horse so I may be completely off and I do apologise if that is the case. I think using a two handed sword with both hands, which would imply a cleaving motion, would cause you to shift in your seat and as such, would cause you to move your butt without the intent of steering.
but the horse wound notice that your intended direction would be towards your enemy, keep in mind that a horse can see all around itself because of the position of its eyes, so it can see you pretty much as you sit on it, they can be trained too steer with the butt or buy simply looking in that direction, too attack your enemy you are typically looking at him am i not correct, the horse will also notice you are swinging at him with your sword or ponting at him with your sword... and may even assist you in the attack. a good jousting horse will help its rider keep his lance on track for example, using a weapon like sword a horse can be trained not much different.
somewhat true... most Calvary swords are one handed swords. the primary point however you don't need both hands to ride a horse.
Im subscribed to both of you just out of interest for the period, its great to see some interaction between you.
Considering how expensive a properly-made longsword was, and considering how many knights would have had theirs custom ordered, it wouldn't have made much sense to order a weapon you couldn't comfortably use with one hand. Needs must and such, and in battle, you're not always going to be able to keep both hands on your blade. If a knight is going to the trouble of fitting their plate armor to their bodies and all (that being another massive expense), it would be silly to pay for a sword which he couldn't comfortably swing from horseback.
Obviously things would be different from a militia group who are using their "longswords" (the kind with a blunt edge and second set of guards for half-swording) more as small polearms than swords.
Your German is really good mate!
Hey Matt, great video, I had no idea that longswords were historically paired with bucklers. You mentioned their use on horseback and that makes sense, given that cavalry swords are often longer and heavier than those designed for fencing on foot. How does the handling compare between, say, the Albion in this video used with one hand and a Victorian heavy cavalry sabre?
They handle very differently - most longswords do not handle very nicely as one-handed swords, but some smaller ones are more like a one-handed sword with a long grip. It really depends on the size, weight and balance of the longsword in question.
Ah ok thanks. I had heard that cavalry swords were generally big and heavy compared to infantry swords, but I guess not that big and heavy :)
I envy you guys. So hard (and maybe illegal) to get hold of a decent sword here in Brazil.
Maybe I'd be content with a practice version... Just to get that good feel of handling it.
I've been drooling over a few darksword armory blades and even considered gambling a bit of money on one 11th century viking, but there is always the sad chance that it'll get stuck and lost in our customs. The funny part is that there's no defined law for edged weapons if you look into it, but the army will probably hold onto it. I've seen some dudes saying that declaring it as a collector's item might help, but it is quite a bit of money to lose in case it doesn't work, I ended up giving up the idea. Very sad. :(
Unless I want a useless ugly stainless steel fantasy wallhanger. And god, no.
I'll definetly give it a try if I get a pay raise, or something like that. meanwhile Ill look into nylon beaters, just to satiate my hunger for waving it around, heheh
There is a HEMA group in Brasilia. I intend to meet up with them when I'm in Brazil later in the year.
Personally, I've never tried to import real swords to Brazil, but as a kendo practitioner, I know a lot of people who have imported Iaito without a problem (except the usual taxes and long wait time), and my sensei even have a real katana (although in this case I think he brought with him from Japan, either way, it went through customs).
Maybe you should try with a cheap blade from ebay or something..
Olá, Mauro. Just like Thiago said (yes, 3 months ago, sorry), swords are not illegal in Brasil. I had a katana mailed from the US with no problem and in the package it was written very clearly "sword" in both english and portuguese. Also, me, my brother and my father brought from Europe and the US various knifes, bows, etc. On my next trip I intend to bring back a longsword. So get on eBay and indulge yourself. Cheers!
+scholagladiatoria
(I'm Austrian and we too happen to speak German, albeit mostly in some funny sounding variants.)
Yes, a two-hand sword is literally also called a "Bihänder" in German, I never heard the term "Beidenhänder" (roughly a bit like "with-both handed [sword]") and it just sounds wrong, so I guess you might have misheard that one - albeit "Beidhänder" (roughly "both-handed [sword]") could be plausible.
I have to admit though that I'm learned a little in some historical German variants, but not enough in all to rule out completely that all three terms were used.
So please take all that with the obligatory grain of salt, and it would be prudent to maybe ask an actual expert.
And _well_ done, Good Sir - even compared directly to German native speaker "standards", you were almost right on the spot. :-)
You just pronounced the "i" a bit too "English", i.e. like in, well, "like"; whereas the correct German pronounciation would be like, well, e.g. the first "i" in "Lindybeige".
But apart from that, you pronounced it perfectly. Well done. :-)
I would suggest that the one thing we do know for certain is that: the longsword and the bastard sword were considered significantly different weapons (at least by the English), the proof being the surviving records of these being in different classes in tournaments. I would therefore suggest that the opening statement that they, along with two-handed swords are the same is, to the best of our knowledge, unlikely to be historically accurate. I'd also say that you clearly know far far more about it than I do, and I want to make it clear that I'm in no way qualified to be arguing against an expert.
One thing critically missing here is the source of these statements. I believe he's right but a snapshot of the medieval illustrations mentioned and references where to find them would make this perfect. This lack of referencing devalues the academic aspect of that video.
What are your thoughts when Lloyd said we don't know how single handed swords were used? That seems like rather strange statement...
Yes, he's wrong :-)
Although, in a sense I can see what he means, because not that much is known about pre-1300 technique. BUT, the sword he is showing, which I believe to be a Del Tin, is an over-weight replica, which may distort his opinion.
He had said something similar about zwei-/bidenhanders (landsknecht weapons). So I'm waiting for the 2nd zweihander video :)
btw: have there ever been swords in european medieval times, that were really made to be swung with one OR two hands? I figure most bastard/longswords can be held and even used as a weapon in one hand, but that would be far less effective than the actual 2handed grip.
Ok, I should finish the video before commenting. Sorry. And thank you for the sources.
I always thought that these referred to blade length (against ones hight). What is a long sword to me, the same sword to someone a foot shorter than me is a bastard sword. I had learned that a short sword (for your hight) is the length of your arm. A long sword comes up to about your sternum. A bastard (or hand and a half) sword is about to your chin. A great (or two handed) sword is the size of you.
Does the same rule (that the terminoligy is mainly a modern thing) also apply to polearms?
Beautiful sword there!
Thanks, this is a very interesting point.
The general feeling I got from Lindybeige's video was "All of these terms are arbitrary, so I'm going to tell you what I consider to be a longsword, a bastard sword, etc". I do like the conclusion made here: They were all just "swords".
From my earlier days of playing Dungeons and Dragons we always assumed Long sword = one hand, Bastard sword=hand and half sword, and two hand=two handed. It is interesting to hear these actual real answers rather than Gary Gygax.
I believe horse archers had ways to keep control of a horse while shooting their bows.
I'd assume some knights would have used similar means, atleast in close combat.
If you actually look at the rule of Genghis Khan his horse archers controlled there horses with there knees so they could fire there bows at the same time.
Ryan Grosvenor Fire a bow? Bows are not firearms. You can shoot, or loose an arrow, but not fire one. Sorry, but that's bit of a pet peeve of mine.
Rapierlynx Everybody knows what's meant when somebody says "fire", so arguing that they never said that 1200 years ago and neither should we looks rather pointless, especially considering how the video was just talking about modern context with weapon terminology.
I would say Americans' confusion on the subject could be attributed to one E. Gary Gygax, and his Advanced D&D manual from the Eighties. Thank you for the edification.
Love your videos!!
Just wondering, the swords on your left. Napoleonic cavalry sabres? My Father in Law has two genuine Cuirassier sabres that look very much like those.
The sword you have in this video. I fell in love. Where did you get it?
He mentioned in another video that it's an Albion Ringeck. A Google search for it should do the trick.
Matt Bessette So beautiful... yet so expensive.
That's the trade-off! lol