Hello. I'm studying the great two-handed sword.
I am faced with a problem. I found many articles that fall into two branches this type of sword. One branch leads to the sword created for the battlefields, those who use it as high and heavy. One branch leads instead to a sword high up to the chin of the user and lighter, used as a weapon of duel. I am interested in the second type, I find no evidence to support this theory. Even the master Achille Marozzo defines the sword as high as much as those who use it, not less.
Can you help?
Thank You

I'm not sure if there is any evidence a certain type of two handed swords were made especially for use in duels. Two handers were made in many different sizes and shapes, and except the huge bearing swords there is no evidence lighter ones were produced for duels and heavier ones for battle. But it might well be that people preferred more agile and lighter ones for dueling.

Yeah, I don't think this distinction existed back in the day. Some masters do recommend a sword of particular size and features, but that just means they think that kind of sword works best with their teachings. You may be looking at a difference between spadone and montante, I suppose (they're typically - though not necessarily! - somewhat different in size), but at least off-hand I can't think of any period sources that actually make a difference between two-handed swords for war and for dueling.

Thank you! On the internet there are many wrong information. I don't think there is a small sword, if not the one quoted by Philip go! That is not classified as grandespada