| Author |
Message |
|
Niels Just Rasmussen
|
 Posted: Tue 22 Dec, 2015 7:54 am Post subject: |
 |
|
| Daniel Wallace wrote: | other than the skinny ricasso on these swords, something else that's popping out at me, is the limited quillons.
quillons are usually made in relation to the grip to guard the hand. The further the off hand is back - the longer the quillons need to be to protect the hand. on a lot of these shown in the museum photos and the depictions of art there are limited.
poses a few questions, that gets my head turning.
I did blow up my first pics of D11695 - I did use the sword next to it in the plate from the first post since it's length was known - however the pic is distorted enough that it looks like I'm 5mm too long in the pummel area. original measure was 5.5cm, my print out came out at 6cm. going to work with it a little more see if I can get it a little tighter. although when I full sized the blade, that worked out well for it's with. That came out to 3.8cm-3.9cm again pixilation of such a small image doesn't help, but it did work out to be just a hair broader than the Kalundborg 6605. once I get some basic stats, I can attempt to resize the photo from the museum compare them up and just see what happens. that may give a very rough idea. |
So perhaps it indicates a different fighting style -> or maybe a compromise between two fighting styles for this weapon.
1) A half-swording style with one hand holding the ricasso and one hand safe behind the cross-guard? (big quilllons might get in the way with such a way to hold the weapon?)
2) The weapon also makes fighting possible with both hands behind the cross-guard and the long grip makes for good lever-action - so one hand behind the cross-guard and the other on the pommel.
|
|
  |
 |
|
Niels Just Rasmussen
|
| Posted: Wed 23 Dec, 2015 4:28 am Post subject: |
|
|
| Mark Lewis wrote: | After a bit of cross referencing, I think all the long-gripped swords in this display can be identified. For convenient future reference, from right to left:
D 13492, Tudeå - http://myArmoury.com/talk/viewtopic.php?p=298679#298679
D 1496 - Hoffmeyer, XXXVII.a. The cross appears to be loose, and slipped forward over the ricasso
D 11.695 (or 11695?) - Hoffmeyer, XXXVI.b
D 16140 - Hoffmeyer, XXXVII.b
D 8804, Soborg Lake - Hoffmeyer, XXXV.e
D 4850, Helsingør - Hoffmeyer, XXXV.d. Schmid, 6a
D 358, Sperring Sø - Hoffmeyer, XXX.b. http://myArmoury.com/talk/viewtopic.php?t=32523&highlight=
D 4446, Hinge Sø - Hoffmeyer, XXXVIII.a
|
I have aquired the Ada Bruhn Hoffmeyer article "Sværd og Kaarder i Roskilde Domkirke" Våbenhistoriske Aarbøger VI, 1949-1951 and it gives me find info on the rest of the swords on the picture.
The sword D 11695 (D 11.695 is a typo) is from Sorø Sø on Sjælland. Article doesn't give measurements, but states that the grip had been shortened after a breakage followed by welding.
D 1496 is from Slesvig By and she notes the upturned ends on the cross-guard (calls it "volutoprullede"). She notes that compared to other swords of this type the fuller extends from the ricasso to the rest of the blade and the blade is wider compared to the blade length than usual with this sword-type.
D 16140 is from Fiil Sø (south-western Jutland). She notes it has a straight cross-guard and that the blade has several flat fullers.
NB: I would just note that it is still unclear whether D 8804 is from "Søborg Sø", "Søborg Slot" or just found somewhere in the vicinity of those.....so "Søborg area" is probably the closest we can get, right now.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Niels Just Rasmussen
|
| Posted: Wed 23 Dec, 2015 6:59 am Post subject: |
|
|
Found another two-handed sword which clearly has a long ricasso.
Image of Paulus from Nørre Galten Kirke in Jutland.
Late gothic (1475-1550) art style. Dating around 1540 just after the Lutheran Reformation (1536).
The sword has a facetted pommel and a strange guard. [It actually looks like skull on the depiction  ]
It has short quillons with weird looking ends and a major and minor ring-guard (can't see if the major ring actually "pretzels" on the other side of the sword).
The depicted sword has a typically fullered ricasso followed by the blade with a mid-ridge which is also typical for the "Danish-Two-Hander".
 Attachment: 128.89 KB
Paulus with two-hander.
Nørre Galten Kirke.
Source: http://natmus.dk/salg-og-ydelser/museumsfaglige-ydelser/kirker-og-kirkegaarde/kalkmalerier-i-danske-kirker/
|
|
|
|
|
|
Mark Lewis
|
| Posted: Thu 24 Dec, 2015 6:21 am Post subject: |
|
|
| Niels Just Rasmussen wrote: | | I have aquired the Ada Bruhn Hoffmeyer article "Sværd og Kaarder i Roskilde Domkirke" Våbenhistoriske Aarbøger VI, 1949-1951 and it gives me find info on the rest of the swords on the picture. |
Great! I have updated my earlier post with the now complete identifications and find-places.
| Niels Just Rasmussen wrote: | Found another two-handed sword which clearly has a long ricasso. Image of Paulus from Nørre Galten Kirke in Jutland. Late gothic (1475-1550) art style. Dating around 1540 just after the Lutheran Reformation (1536).
The sword has a facetted pommel and a strange guard. |
The features you mention I think are quite typical for large swords of that time period; Nathan Robinson has posted many examples in this thread:
http://myArmoury.com/talk/viewtopic.php?t=19720
I suspect (f) in this plate has the same or similar side-rings on the hilt:
Another unique(?) Norwegian example I think shows the transition from the traditional Scandinavian two-handers to the newer German-inspired(?) styles. It seems to have the same multi-fullered type type XX(?) blade we discussed in the other thread, a curved cross, the extra-long grip, combined with the faceted/twisted pommel and a finger guard.
http://www.unimus.no/arkeologi/#/detailsView?search=C259
http://myArmoury.com/talk/viewtopic.php?p=305593#305593
|
|
 |
|
Daniel Wallace
Location: Pennsylvania USA Joined: 07 Aug 2011
Posts: 580
|
| Posted: Thu 24 Dec, 2015 9:29 am Post subject: |
|
|
2 fighting styles or maybe a developing style of fighting. the first idea I'll throw out there is that the swords are early, and kept close to the body like if you were fighting with long sword. these blades don't seem to be much longer than long swords of the time, but the grip on the other hand is longer than other two handers I've been able to gather up from about the mid 1500's.
now half-swording the ricasso seems more possible with these blades, but I won't say for certain a good idea. I picked at half-swording in my post here in reference to montante http://myArmoury.com/talk/viewtopic.php?t=32914. which I don't believe it likely. but yes, the limited guard would make it easier and no lugs even better, but the control changes so much. the sword still balances out better with the hand back on the pummel where it has so much leverage, not to mention, an inch of moving the hand at the pummel moves the point (x) amount more because the pivot point is still your right hand at the guard.
as soon as you move the off hand into position above the guard that point of the fulcrum changes to the left hand and your whole lever is shortened. now the left hand guides the thrust, and the right provides the power. probably a good sturdy thrust, not as well aimed if you kept the hand back. (sorry I'm speculating here for what hand supplies power, but if you still keep the left hand as the guiding hand above the guard and kept the pivot at the right hand, still it's a shorter leaver than before.)
on the other hand, something I did not cover in the other post because my limited reading of the subject - is half-swording with the off hand at the last 1/3 of the blade like you would a long sword. very comfortable, sword feels like a 3 quarter staff of sorts I guess you can say. but as far as my readying has gone, I haven't seen any writing about this.
everything about two handers seem to favor the idea of keeping someone back and away by use of the blade, not to get in close with it, but these 2 handers, its hard to say. maybe their at a transition point, or they were just used differently and we have no documents to give an idea.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Niels Just Rasmussen
|
| Posted: Sat 26 Dec, 2015 4:22 am Post subject: |
|
|
| Mark Lewis wrote: | The features you mention I think are quite typical for large swords of that time period; Nathan Robinson has posted many examples in this thread:
I suspect (f) in this plate has the same or similar side-rings on the hilt:
Another unique(?) Norwegian example I think shows the transition from the traditional Scandinavian two-handers to the newer German-inspired(?) styles. It seems to have the same multi-fullered type type XX(?) blade we discussed in the other thread, a curved cross, the extra-long grip, combined with the faceted/twisted pommel and a finger guard.
http://www.unimus.no/arkeologi/#/detailsView?search=C259
http://myArmoury.com/talk/viewtopic.php?p=305593#305593 |
Yeah and this type with cross-guard and rings also survives in Danish rapiers (so change of blade-type and much shortening of the grip) from 1580-90's.
The question is whether the Scandinavian pretzel swords are earlier than the-f)-sword-type or are they contemporary??
or do we see a gradual development of the two-handed swords in Scandinavia:
"Danish-two handers" (Scandinavian regional variant) -> [C-guard sword type]? -> "Pretzel-swords" (Scandinavian regional variant) -> Cross-guard+ring sword like the f) example (Broader Western European variant)??
It is peculiar that the pretzel swords are fitted without a cross-guard! So the fighting style made it irrelevant to have more than the pretzel?
Then if the f) sword-type appear during the 1500's it is a "return" of the cross-guard.
The Norwegian sword you posted is actually a perfectly "theoretical transition sword" between the "Danish-two-hander" and the "pretzel sword"! [or you can also say a mix between the C-guard swords and the pretzel swords].
We have the forward curving cross-guards (also looks in style like the Hinge sword's cross-guard), but the ricasso has disappeared and the blade has the multifullered Oakeshott Type XX, but also a "simple pretzel" that looks like the Tude Å sword's pretzel !
|
|
|
|
|
|
Niels Just Rasmussen
|
| Posted: Sat 26 Dec, 2015 4:34 am Post subject: |
|
|
| Daniel Wallace wrote: | 2 fighting styles or maybe a developing style of fighting. the first idea I'll throw out there is that the swords are early, and kept close to the body like if you were fighting with long sword. these blades don't seem to be much longer than long swords of the time, but the grip on the other hand is longer than other two handers I've been able to gather up from about the mid 1500's.
now half-swording the ricasso seems more possible with these blades, but I won't say for certain a good idea. I picked at half-swording in my post here in reference to montante http://myArmoury.com/talk/viewtopic.php?t=32914. which I don't believe it likely. but yes, the limited guard would make it easier and no lugs even better, but the control changes so much. the sword still balances out better with the hand back on the pummel where it has so much leverage, not to mention, an inch of moving the hand at the pummel moves the point (x) amount more because the pivot point is still your right hand at the guard.
as soon as you move the off hand into position above the guard that point of the fulcrum changes to the left hand and your whole lever is shortened. now the left hand guides the thrust, and the right provides the power. probably a good sturdy thrust, not as well aimed if you kept the hand back. (sorry I'm speculating here for what hand supplies power, but if you still keep the left hand as the guiding hand above the guard and kept the pivot at the right hand, still it's a shorter leaver than before.)
on the other hand, something I did not cover in the other post because my limited reading of the subject - is half-swording with the off hand at the last 1/3 of the blade like you would a long sword. very comfortable, sword feels like a 3 quarter staff of sorts I guess you can say. but as far as my readying has gone, I haven't seen any writing about this.
everything about two handers seem to favor the idea of keeping someone back and away by use of the blade, not to get in close with it, but these 2 handers, its hard to say. maybe their at a transition point, or they were just used differently and we have no documents to give an idea. |
A) As I understand the point of half-swording is better point-control when aiming for precise weaknesses in the opponents armour.
B) When holding both hands behind the cross-guard on a Danish two-hander gives you fantastic leverage, but not very precise point control.
So maybe the Danish-two-hander has a dual function:
1) Holding both hands behind the cross-guard gives great defense - possibly intended against spears and pole-weapons which you will encounter a lot on the battlefield. The narrowness of the Danish two-hander turns in effect the sword more into a spear! Perhaps even the handling becomes much more spear-like.
As these opponents wielding spears are probably less heavily armoured precise point control is less of a deal-breaker.
2) When you encounter a heavily plated men-at-arms (wielding for instance sword, pole axe, mace or warhammer) you can change into half swording technique to aim for precise weak-spots. Forward-curving cross-guards makes sure that they are less in the way when half-swording.
|
|
|
|
|
Nathan Robinson
myArmoury Admin
|
|
 |
|
|
Timo Nieminen
|
| Posted: Sun 27 Dec, 2015 12:19 am Post subject: |
|
|
| Niels Just Rasmussen wrote: | A) As I understand the point of half-swording is better point-control when aiming for precise weaknesses in the opponents armour.
B) When holding both hands behind the cross-guard on a Danish two-hander gives you fantastic leverage, but not very precise point control.
So maybe the Danish-two-hander has a dual function:
1) Holding both hands behind the cross-guard gives great defense - possibly intended against spears and pole-weapons which you will encounter a lot on the battlefield. The narrowness of the Danish two-hander turns in effect the sword more into a spear! Perhaps even the handling becomes much more spear-like.
As these opponents wielding spears are probably less heavily armoured precise point control is less of a deal-breaker.
2) When you encounter a heavily plated men-at-arms (wielding for instance sword, pole axe, mace or warhammer) you can change into half swording technique to aim for precise weak-spots. Forward-curving cross-guards makes sure that they are less in the way when half-swording. |
I've not played with these kinds of two-handers. But I like playing with two-handers, and have played with a variety of European and Asian types. They do have a lot in common with polearms, and are perhaps more polearm-like in use than swordlike (similar size and weight, so this should be no surprise).
Gripping the ricasso basically turns the sword into a polearm, A polearm where you're not maximising reach, but rather leverage and speed. IMO, this might be best against a single opponent. Not so dependent on what they're armed with, but one rather than many opponents.
Against a single spear-armed opponent, it might be better to just hold the hilt. Stay further away, and still try to have the range to engage and trap the spear. The forward curved hilt is good against a spear (and other polearms, maybe), since it's harder for them to disengage after you block, e.g., a thrust.
Against shorter, slower weapons, it might be better to hold the ricasso. You might even still have a range advantage (depending on the opposing weapon, and whether the opponent is half-swording). I don't think this depends so much on armour, but more on the opponent's reach (which, as implied immediately before, can depend on things like half-swording, and hence armour).
It will be more spear-like when gripping the ricasso.
"In addition to being efficient, all pole arms were quite nice to look at." - Cherney Berg, A hideous history of weapons, Collier 1963.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Niels Just Rasmussen
|
| Posted: Sun 27 Dec, 2015 5:23 am Post subject: |
|
|
| Timo Nieminen wrote: |
I've not played with these kinds of two-handers. But I like playing with two-handers, and have played with a variety of European and Asian types. They do have a lot in common with polearms, and are perhaps more polearm-like in use than swordlike (similar size and weight, so this should be no surprise).
Gripping the ricasso basically turns the sword into a polearm, A polearm where you're not maximising reach, but rather leverage and speed. IMO, this might be best against a single opponent. Not so dependent on what they're armed with, but one rather than many opponents.
Against a single spear-armed opponent, it might be better to just hold the hilt. Stay further away, and still try to have the range to engage and trap the spear. The forward curved hilt is good against a spear (and other polearms, maybe), since it's harder for them to disengage after you block, e.g., a thrust.
Against shorter, slower weapons, it might be better to hold the ricasso. You might even still have a range advantage (depending on the opposing weapon, and whether the opponent is half-swording). I don't think this depends so much on armour, but more on the opponent's reach (which, as implied immediately before, can depend on things like half-swording, and hence armour).
It will be more spear-like when gripping the ricasso. |
Thanks for your information!
So functions could be split up in something like this:
1) It makes sense that half-swording is mostly feasible for one-on-one combat - against an opponent with a shorter weapon reach than yourself - as your range-of-defense when half-swording is limited compared to the leverage you get when holding the sword two-handed further back. So a combination of still having good reach when holding the ricasso, but also improved point control when facing a single opponent with a shorter weapon.
2) If your (single) opponent in front of you have a spear (or long pole-arm) then you also need to maximize your reach as much as possible - using the two-handed as a "spear" yourself - and you have a good point about the cross-guard perhaps being especially developed against spear and pole-weapons!
But is it so that the weapon is "only" more spear like when holding the ricasso??
I would think that it could also be used spear-like when holding it two-handed: With one hand right behind the cross-guard and the other placed farthest behind and gripping the pommel - the swords long grip would facilitate a very spear-like fighting style, right?
3) Facing numerous opponents then using the sword two-handed (both hands behind the cross-guard) and provide swinging arcs with the long blade to keep them away until you have more man-power backup. The long hilt makes for leverage to fast cover a big defensive area if needed!
The Danish-two-handed has apparently quite good cutting ability despite it's slender thrust-orientated appearance, so used defensively in that way it would still pack a very lethal punch.
So it makes for three types of possible fighting modes:
Half-swording (also a kind of spear-like mode): Holding the ricasso with one hand, the other hand on the grip.
Defensive Spear-like mode for maximum leverage: Having one hand behind the pommel the other gripping just behind the cross-guard.
Classic Two-handed sword: Both hands on the grip using it for huge swinging arcs.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Niels Just Rasmussen
|
| Posted: Sun 27 Dec, 2015 7:27 am Post subject: |
|
|
While reading through Ada Bruhn Hoffmeyer's article "Sværd og Kaarder i Roskilde Domkirke" I found a description of a "Danish-two-hander" found outside of Scandinavia, namely at Bartolomäberg in the Montafon valley in the western most part of Austria.
She gives the link: R. Forrer (1905): "Die Schwerter and Schwertknaufe der Samml. Carl von Schwerzenbach-Bregenz."
This article is available on the net! The "Danish two-hander" is on page 21, fig 70.
Link: https://archive.org/stream/bub_gb_Hss2AQAAMAAJ#page/n29/mode/2up
Total Length: 119,5 cm. [not all of the blade preserved]
Grip + Pommel: 36 cm.
Cross-guard: 20 cm.
NB: The image shows the sword has a clearly narrowed ricasso.
The Forrer article also goes through the extensive pommel collection of Carl von Schwerzenbach (1850-1926) and has furthermore a register of sword markings.
His pommel collection is in the Vorarlberg Museum in Bregenz.
Source: http://www.vorarlbergmuseen.at/museen/vorarlb...kte/VM-10/
|
|
|
|
|
|
Mark Lewis
|
| Posted: Sun 27 Dec, 2015 8:21 am Post subject: |
|
|
| Niels Just Rasmussen wrote: | While reading through Ada Bruhn Hoffmeyer's article "Sværd og Kaarder i Roskilde Domkirke" I found a description of a "Danish-two-hander" found outside of Scandinavia, namely at Bartolomäberg in the Montafon valley in the western most part of Austria.
She gives the link: R. Forrer (1905): "Die Schwerter and Schwertknaufe der Samml. Carl von Schwerzenbach-Bregenz."
|
Thanks for finding this, Niels. The restored hilt of the Mookerheide sword was compared to the "Forrer sword", but I did not have any additional details to share on the latter.
|
|
|
|
|
Daniel Wallace
Location: Pennsylvania USA Joined: 07 Aug 2011
Posts: 580
|
| Posted: Sun 27 Dec, 2015 9:56 am Post subject: |
|
|
| Quote: | Thanks for your information!
So functions could be split up in something like this:
1) It makes sense that half-swording is mostly feasible for one-on-one combat - against an opponent with a shorter weapon reach than yourself - as your range-of-defense when half-swording is limited compared to the leverage you get when holding the sword two-handed further back. So a combination of still having good reach when holding the ricasso, but also improved point control when facing a single opponent with a shorter weapon. |
yes, sounds feasible, in fact, when holding my suggested half swording method with the hand at the last 1/3 of the blade and right still at the guard, if feels like a get in close weapon and thunder crack someone with the pummel. My only argument against such a natural tendency is that there's no reference of it, or is it something so natural from long sword practices, that it is never mentioned.
| Quote: | 2) If your (single) opponent in front of you have a spear (or long pole-arm) then you also need to maximize your reach as much as possible - using the two-handed as a "spear" yourself - and you have a good point about the cross-guard perhaps being especially developed against spear and pole-weapons!
But is it so that the weapon is "only" more spear like when holding the ricasso??
I would think that it could also be used spear-like when holding it two-handed: With one hand right behind the cross-guard and the other placed farthest behind and gripping the pommel - the swords long grip would facilitate a very spear-like fighting style, right? |
don't think about using reach here. a spear can threaten a long sword by reach, but a sword threatens a pole arm my cut. and a two handed sword, is a massive cutter, either style. so your point is not to outreach a person with a pole arm, but to break it, or swat away his lethal end. once inside a pole arms blade, what can the other man do just drop it and go for his side arm. where as with a two hander, you've either broken the haft, or gotten inside the cutting head and are 100% ready to deliver a thrust over your shoulder.
| Quote: | 3) Facing numerous opponents then using the sword two-handed (both hands behind the cross-guard) and provide swinging arcs with the long blade to keep them away until you have more man-power backup. The long hilt makes for leverage to fast cover a big defensive area if needed!
The Danish-two-handed has apparently quite good cutting ability despite it's slender thrust-orientated appearance, so used defensively in that way it would still pack a very lethal punch. . |
I think this is very true, a long dragged cut along with the added power behind the grip add in the cross section of the blade and it probably makes for one heck of a hit.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Niels Just Rasmussen
|
| Posted: Sun 27 Dec, 2015 9:56 am Post subject: |
|
|
| Mark Lewis wrote: | | Niels Just Rasmussen wrote: | While reading through Ada Bruhn Hoffmeyer's article "Sværd og Kaarder i Roskilde Domkirke" I found a description of a "Danish-two-hander" found outside of Scandinavia, namely at Bartolomäberg in the Montafon valley in the western most part of Austria.
She gives the link: R. Forrer (1905): "Die Schwerter and Schwertknaufe der Samml. Carl von Schwerzenbach-Bregenz."
|
Thanks for finding this, Niels. The restored hilt of the Mookerheide sword was compared to the "Forrer sword", but I did not have any additional details to share on the latter. |
You're welcome Mark.
So with all possibility the "Forrer sword" is the one from the 1905 article.
Seems also that both the Dutch and the Austrian example are somewhat shorter than the Danish ones!
Also found a Swedish sword from Skokloster Slott that looks like the Søborg type of Danish-two-hander (without ricasso) in Koppeschaar's pictures (see attachment).
Source: https://www.flickr.com/photos/98015679@N04/9278158502/in/album-72157634624367756/
Sadly it is apparently not described or depicted in the collection available online.
Source: http://emuseumplus.lsh.se/eMuseumPlus?service...mp;lang=sv
Attachment: 143.28 KB
Long-gripped two-handed sword.
Skoklostret Slott, Sweden.
Source: https://www.flickr.com/photos/98015679@N04/albums
Last edited by Niels Just Rasmussen on Mon 28 Dec, 2015 9:51 am; edited 1 time in total
|
|
|
|
|
|
Niels Just Rasmussen
|
| Posted: Sun 27 Dec, 2015 11:56 am Post subject: |
|
|
Another peculiar sword on from a Danish church painting is from Skive Gamle Kirke in Jutland.
Dating is precise 1522 so Late Gothic art style.
Here is on the left the Norwegian King Olaf II and on the right the Danish King "Knud den Hellige" both growing out as flower buds. Both are saints.
Saint Olaf is always connected with an axe, which with time turns into a pole weapon (Bardiche) and Knud den Hellige has a hand-and-a-half (?) sword with a short ricasso and dramatic increase of blade width (see attachment). The sword still only have a simple straight cross-guard and the pommel is obscured by the opening bud.
But notice the Swedish sword just to the right of the "Danish-two-hander" in the picture in the post above from Skoklostret Slott.
Short ricasso (even shorter than on the church depiction) and then dramatic increase of blade width!
Attachment: 153.67 KB
Saint Olaf and Knud den Hellige.
Skive Gamle Kirke.
Source: http://natmus.dk/salg-og-ydelser/museumsfaglige-ydelser/kirker-og-kirkegaarde/kalkmalerier-i-danske-kirker/
Last edited by Niels Just Rasmussen on Mon 28 Dec, 2015 6:20 am; edited 2 times in total
|
|
|
|
|
|
Mark Lewis
|
| Posted: Sun 27 Dec, 2015 11:58 am Post subject: |
|
|
| Niels Just Rasmussen wrote: | | The question is whether the Scandinavian pretzel swords are earlier than the-f)-sword-type or are they contemporary?? |
My impression is that the pretzel-hilts are the earlier type, from circa 1500, being replaced in later decades by the more international type with side-rings. Due to the influence of German sword-manufacturing centers, comparison with German art may help illustrate the timeline...
Early in the 16th century, the most frequently depicted two-handed swords in Germany (and German-influenced territories) seem to be late model XIIIa's with pear-shaped type-T5 pommels and straight quillons. These are quite distinct from the Scandinavian swords.
Met, 71.40ab (c. 1500-05)
 Jihlava, Czech Rep.
 
Lucas Cranach the Elder (c. 1510-15), Hans Baldung Grien (1519)
In the same time-frame (circa 1500-1520) we can find many similar examples with horizontally curved quillons instead of straight.
 Hans Schaufelein (c. 1510)
 Met 1988.26
Horizontally curved quillons cross over into Scandinavian examples (replacing older vertically curved styles?) as shown in the most famous XVIIIe, buried with the Swedish regent Svante Nilsson Sture (d. 1511).
Another example in the Nationalmuseet (I think) matches the German examples so closely that it may simply be an export with no locally produced components:
A badly damaged XVIIIe found in Hamburg combines the classic narrowed ricasso with a horizontally curved cross bearing incised decorations similar to German hilts, like one from the Victoria & Albert Museum shown below.
Hilts with side rings appear in art some years later, towards 1530 or so.
 
Jorg Breu the Younger (1525-47), Sebald Beham (c. 1539)
| Niels Just Rasmussen wrote: | | The Norwegian sword you posted is actually a perfectly "theoretical transition sword" between the "Danish-two-hander" and the "pretzel sword"! |
I would tend to disagree here, and place the Norwegian sword after the pretzel swords rather than before. I think the hilt has more in common with those incorporating early finger-guards than with the full pretzel-hilts. Here is another Norwegian example with some similar features, and dated much later by the museum, to 1550-80.
http://digitaltmuseum.no/011021908626?name=Sv...&pos=2
These two examples in the Philadelphia and Victoria & Albert museums are dated 1525-50 and c. 1510 by their respective museums, and share similar finger-guards and twisted type-T6 pommels.
 
http://www.philamuseum.org/collections/permanent/162497.html, http://collections.vam.ac.uk/item/O97450/hand-and-a-unknown/
This last example from the Czech R. is interesting, and may be of Hungarian origin and an early example of the finger-guard.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Timo Nieminen
|
| Posted: Sun 27 Dec, 2015 12:19 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| Niels Just Rasmussen wrote: | Thanks for your information!
So functions could be split up in something like this:
1) It makes sense that half-swording is mostly feasible for one-on-one combat - against an opponent with a shorter weapon reach than yourself - as your range-of-defense when half-swording is limited compared to the leverage you get when holding the sword two-handed further back. So a combination of still having good reach when holding the ricasso, but also improved point control when facing a single opponent with a shorter weapon. |
Not sure about point control. Half-swording, you'll be able to move the point faster, but that's a result of leverage. With a two-hander with "good" balance, you should have good point control even when just holding the grip. With longsword, one has excellent point control with both hands on the grip, and AFAIK you mostly gain leverage when half-swording. That leverage is very valuable when fighting in-close, where you will use the sword as a wresting-aid. Also as a dagger with a very long high-leverage grip.
If by "point control", you mean being able to place the point where you want, you get that with a well-balanced sword designed for point control (this mostly depends on where the forward pivot point AKA the centre of percussion in pretty much every field outside swords (where COP is often/mostly used for vibration nodes)). If you mean being able to get that point there as quickly as possible, then half-swording gives that to you. But I think you get less help from the balance of the weapon, in terms of exactly where the point ends up. This is the point about pivot points! With the forward pivot point at the tip of the sword, pull sideways with your forward hand on the grip, and the grip moves, and the point stays where it is. This is control, IMO. Forward hand on the ricasso, and you can move that point faster, but that balance doesn't help you keep that point in position.
| Niels Just Rasmussen wrote: | 2) If your (single) opponent in front of you have a spear (or long pole-arm) then you also need to maximize your reach as much as possible - using the two-handed as a "spear" yourself - and you have a good point about the cross-guard perhaps being especially developed against spear and pole-weapons!
But is it so that the weapon is "only" more spear like when holding the ricasso??
I would think that it could also be used spear-like when holding it two-handed: With one hand right behind the cross-guard and the other placed farthest behind and gripping the pommel - the swords long grip would facilitate a very spear-like fighting style, right? |
Depends on what you mean by "spear-like". Yes, you can use it as a long-range thrusting weapon holding it by the hilt. But a whole bunch of two-handed spear moves would be really hard to pull off. Specifically, the short quick disengages that make a spear very dangerous to a single short weapon user (a lot of anti-spear technique is aimed to stopping these disengages; also what I said about the long curved guards on these swords). Playing with a long-gripped two-hander of approximately the size of these, I find it has good point control holding the hilt, but is a bit sluggish for a spear, as far as moving the point around quickly. Going to half-swording, with forward hand on the ricasso, I get a huge gain in speed, and feel that I could practically pull off various spear moves that would be potentially two slow with both hands on the grip. But I need to sacrifice reach to do this.
There is a commonality of much technique, and even feeling in fighting, between longsword, large two-handed sword, and spear (and other polearms). So all of these, used in various ways, can be "spear-like".
| Niels Just Rasmussen wrote: | 3) Facing numerous opponents then using the sword two-handed (both hands behind the cross-guard) and provide swinging arcs with the long blade to keep them away until you have more man-power backup. The long hilt makes for leverage to fast cover a big defensive area if needed!
The Danish-two-handed has apparently quite good cutting ability despite it's slender thrust-orientated appearance, so used defensively in that way it would still pack a very lethal punch. |
This is the classic mode of using a big two-hander against many: use long-range swings, and keep them away (better still, cut them). Cut vs thrust in this circumstance has the advantage that many of your opponents will feel/be threatened by your cut, compared with only one opponent threatened by a thrust.
Big two-handers designed very much for this kind of thing tend to have cutting-oriented tips. Thin lenticular tips. Very long, to keep opponents further away. If you wanted to have more spear-like usage (and didn't care about the "cool" factor of a big two-handed sword), you'd just use a spear - usually more reach, more speed, and lighter and cheaper. Less useful for cutting, so going for two-handed sword implies you either like swords a lot, or you value big sweeping cuts a lot.
| Niels Just Rasmussen wrote: | So it makes for three types of possible fighting modes:
Half-swording (also a kind of spear-like mode): Holding the ricasso with one hand, the other hand on the grip.
Defensive Spear-like mode for maximum leverage: Having one hand behind the pommel the other gripping just behind the cross-guard.
Classic Two-handed sword: Both hands on the grip using it for huge swinging arcs. |
I think that, compared to big cutting-oriented 6-foot two-handers, these favour the 1st two modes. Given that the last mode, big sweeping cuts, is a one-against-many classic, perhaps these are more oriented towards one-on-one fighting. Not necessarily intended as dueling swords, but a different choice of where to sit on the continuum from optimising for one-on-one to one-against-many. One-on-one performance still matters a lot on the battlefield, so this isn't a civilian/military thing.
"In addition to being efficient, all pole arms were quite nice to look at." - Cherney Berg, A hideous history of weapons, Collier 1963.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Timo Nieminen
|
| Posted: Sun 27 Dec, 2015 12:41 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| Daniel Wallace wrote: | | Quote: | 2) If your (single) opponent in front of you have a spear (or long pole-arm) then you also need to maximize your reach as much as possible - using the two-handed as a "spear" yourself - and you have a good point about the cross-guard perhaps being especially developed against spear and pole-weapons!
But is it so that the weapon is "only" more spear like when holding the ricasso??
I would think that it could also be used spear-like when holding it two-handed: With one hand right behind the cross-guard and the other placed farthest behind and gripping the pommel - the swords long grip would facilitate a very spear-like fighting style, right? |
don't think about using reach here. a spear can threaten a long sword by reach, but a sword threatens a pole arm my cut. and a two handed sword, is a massive cutter, either style. so your point is not to outreach a person with a pole arm, but to break it, or swat away his lethal end. once inside a pole arms blade, what can the other man do just drop it and go for his side arm. where as with a two hander, you've either broken the haft, or gotten inside the cutting head and are 100% ready to deliver a thrust over your shoulder. |
Spears tend to be the longest of polearms, and have a reach advantage over many weapons. Against other polearms, a long two-hander can have an advantage in reach.
As for cutting/swatting aside, at least the swatting aside can be done, but this is what your opponent is waiting for you to do. Even if you succeed in swatting aside and closing in, this isn't the end of the story - the polearm-wielder will shorten their grip until their lead hand is up by the head, and you have a problem. Getting your sword out of the way to deliver that thrust over the shoulder might well get you gutted.
These (and other big two-handers) aren't anti-polearm weapons. Some/many of them have features (like long crosses, forward curved crosses) that will help them against polearms, but I think these are more intended to dominate smaller swords.
"In addition to being efficient, all pole arms were quite nice to look at." - Cherney Berg, A hideous history of weapons, Collier 1963.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Niels Just Rasmussen
|
| Posted: Sun 27 Dec, 2015 1:48 pm Post subject: |
|
|
Thanks Daniel and Timo for your opinions.
Daniel - you also speculated about using the Danish-two-hander for the "murder-stroke". [That is half-swording when turning the sword around and using the pommel to attack with (the cross-guards of the Danish-two-hander doesn't seem useful as strong straight quillons would be).] We see Talhoffer depictions of that technique, so it is possible, but actually experimental tries with these kind of swords needs to be done to see if they are efficient to use that way!
The reason why I doubt it a little is that the pommel doesn't seem to be specialized (extra thickened) for that use on many Danish-two-handers -> but then any small incoming metal lump coming in a great speed and with great mass behind it will hurt, so I wouldn't rule it out!
About my "Mode 2" = Maximizing reach by having one hand behind the pommel and the other behind the cross-guard to defend in a spear-like motion against a spear-wielding attacker!
You both questioned that, since the reach of the sword would still be inferior to the spear and Timo you stated that they weren't anti-polearm-weapons, though it had features that would help them against polearms. They were likely intended primarily against shorter swords.
I would counter that you are both right, BUT defensively you could be much better off using a Danish-two-hander this way compared to how other swords would fair against a spear. Even though the spear would be longest, the "longer" you can make your weapon defensively the better, right? I wouldn't like to go up against a spear with a short sword, mace or warhammer.
So while not a dedicated anti-polearm-weapon it could be used against spear/polearms maybe more efficiently than other types of swords?
So instead of all the problems of trying swatting aside an incoming spear you mention Timo; then the Danish-two-hander wielder might try to go in more "spear style" to deliver thrusts and use the advantage of his defensive cross-guard. Whether this is done best by "mode 1" or "mode 2" probably depends on the exact handling of the sword in question.
Perhaps the half-swording "mode 1" is best as you say as it increase your speed and you deem that favourable despite the loss of reach.
About point-control: You are right about that a good sword should have the "pivot-point" at the tip for best possible point-control as the tip would stay "on point" even though you move the grip around.
Another factor should be the "point of balance". As rapiers have balance quite back it gives them fast point-control. I really don't know where it is on the Danish-two-handers, but around the ricasso would seem like a possible guess? How do you think this will affect things for half-swording if the point of balance is placed where you hold your forward hand when half-swording??
About Mode 3: Even though the Danish-two-hander is not dedicated to this mode as other European two-handers‚ it is still a surprisingly good cutter I have heard. So while you might have a point - Timo - about mode 1+2 being the foci of this sword type it still can perform Mode 3 without great problems.
So maybe the "specialized" look of the Danish-two-hander is in fact the result of a non-specialized compromise between possible fighting styles based on being able to fight different kinds of opponents reasonably well (A swiss army knife in one so to speak)?
Last edited by Niels Just Rasmussen on Tue 29 Dec, 2015 5:17 am; edited 1 time in total
|
|
|
|
|
|
Timo Nieminen
|
| Posted: Sun 27 Dec, 2015 4:09 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| Niels Just Rasmussen wrote: | About my "Mode 2" = Maximizing reach by having one hand behind the pommel and the other behind the cross-guard to defend in a spear-like motion against a spear-wielding attacker!
You both questioned that, since the reach of the sword would still be inferior to the spear and Timo you stated that they weren't anti-polearm-weapons, though it had features that would help them against polearms. They were likely intended primarily against shorter swords.
I would counter that you are both right, BUT defensively you could be much better off using a Danish-two-hander this way compared to how other swords would fair against a spear. Even though the spear would be longest, the "longer" you can make your weapon defensively the better, right? I wouldn't like to go up against a spear with a short sword, mace or warhammer. |
Yes, as said above, I think that against a spear, grip the hilt. My feeling is that having more space in which I can threaten to push/grab/control the spear is good. The hilt should give enough leverage to push the spear around, without needing to hold the ricasso. And the cross-guard will help.
As for spear-like fighting, note that the main spear guards are point-high (pointing at face, or about head-high), or point-low, or extended-point. Parries will be transitions between these, often semi-circular, or transitions between left and right side of body versions of these guards. Same as, e.g., longsword, yes? Mostly, at least. A key thing for parries is how quickly you can do these transitions, and here leverage will help. Hand on ricasso will make these moves faster. But I think that against a spear, the longer distance of engagement I would get from both hand on hilt matters more. Against a shorter and heavier polearm, I think the extra leverage from hand on ricasso might be good.
Also, against a really long spear (like a pike), maybe hand-on-ricasso is better. You can still use the guard for trapping and preventing disenging.
Hard to say anything definite. Haven't done enough two-hander vs spear sparring.
| Niels Just Rasmussen wrote: | About Mode 3: Even though the Danish-two-hander is not dedicated to this mode as other European two-handers‚ it is still a surprisingly good cutter I have heard. So while you might have a point - Timo - about mode 1+2 being the foci of this sword type it still can perform Mode 3 without great problems.
So maybe the "specialized" look of the Danish-two-hander is in fact the result of a non-specialized compromise between possible fighting styles based on being able to fight different kinds of opponents reasonably well (A swiss army knife in one so to speak)? |
Yes.
You already said the same earlier, and I don't disagree. It's a compromise weapon. Most weapons are compromises - why we don't have perfect weapons ideal for all circumstances - and this is too. What's interesting is what kind of environment made this particular weapon a good compromise. I don't recall seeing a scabbard for one of these two-handers. If they had scababrds that could be worn, then being able to wear them, instead of carrying them in your hand, like a spear, might make people think it better.
"In addition to being efficient, all pole arms were quite nice to look at." - Cherney Berg, A hideous history of weapons, Collier 1963.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot vote in polls in this forum
You cannot attach files in this forum
You can download files in this forum
|
All contents © Copyright 2003-2024 myArmoury.com — All rights reserved
Discussion forums powered by phpBB © The phpBB Group
Switch to the Basic Low-bandwidth Version of the forum
|
This is a