As I have indicated before, I am "new" to the "world of Swords" & I am currently in the progress of purchasing 1 (or more :D ) "Scots" pattern Basket Hilt.

Here is my ?? These swords are offered in 2 major blade styles , Broadsword & Backsword..Here are my questions.
1. Are there any Advantages to one over the other ( Fighting style, balance etc.)?
2. Was one or the other more prevalent to a sword design, historical era ?

Thank you for your indulgence.

BTW - If this post is in the incorrect setion, please feel to move.

Jack W. Englund

Here is an old thread on the subject of broad vs. back at this link here

I've always felt the backsword may have had a bit of an advantage when used from horseback as its thicker spine/wedge shape design would be more supportive when cutting on the move.

Mac

Mac, thank you for your info. One additional ??
At this time, I am leaning to getting my Basket Hilt from Armour Class. My ?? & concern is that the "back Sword" blades seem to have a different "tip" design, than what nI have seen in pics of originals & other
modern repos. Is their blade design correct ???

Jack

I have noticed this difference, too. The cutting edge curves back to meet the blunt back edge of the blade rather than have a more symmetrical "spear point". In my experience the former style of blade termination is more common on late 18th century and 19th century military swords. You could probably request a more traditional point.

Jonathan

The good thing with Armour Class.... you can ask to have which every point you would like to be put on your blade.


To me, I think the broadsword blade was more widely found on original Scottish hilts....


Bill

From what I've read, the two-edged broadsword is the earlier development and was prominent in the 1715 rebellion. But by the time of the '45, backswords were becoming more popular, although broadswords were certainly still used. Backswords, I believe, tend to be "quicker", but that does depend on a lot of things.

Guys, I have no support for the following thought other than observation. I am thinking the evolution of the backsword in Scotland may have had more to do with achieving a suitable hilt:blade weight ratio than anything else. As the more decorative hilts from the Allen's, et al began to set the style, the thinner sections and the increase in pierceings created hilts of less weight and called for a quicker, more agile blade. The older Scots baskets were heavier in style "Glasgow" and ribbon hilts with wider sections and more bulk. Of course, in all fairness this is a bit of an ad hominum arguement because the exact reverse could be true as well, that the lighter blades necessitated the hilt. But since form follows function, I think the decorative arts influenced the blademaker, especially as the blades seemed to have been ordered specialically for some hilts. Just an observation.....

Nothing wrong with the tip of this Armour Class backsword! ;)
[ Linked Image ]

Cheers,
Henrik

Hennik, :D

Jack