Since few years ago I have been looking for more details about the types of uniforms, weapons and armor used by Swiss who served as royal guards in France - as the Hundred Swiss - and as papal guards until the Sack of Rome. Unfortunately, I just found one picture, here in myArmoury.

Some issues: the codpiece figure d) is an armor piece of steel? There were halberds with this form already in 1581? This uniform style has always been that way since 1480? And about the h) figure: This type of uniform and skirt was worn by Hundred Swiss in France too?

What would a sergeant at this time? Because in the XI - XIII centuries , it was the name given to a professional soldier who received usually half of a knight's fief to fight as cavalry, but it seems unlikely in this case.

These swiss guards could use more armor than their counterparts who acted as mercenaries? It is possible that they all wore three-quarter armor, with their sergeants and other officers using "full" armor? Zweihanders, glaives and other poelarms were common in France's guards and Pope's guards? Did they had Pikemen?

Hi Pedro,

If you can track down the book 'One million mercenaries', by John McCormack, that might give you some answers. Also do a search here for 'Swiss' ... there's a PhD thesis by Albert Winkler that is one of the other main sources we have (in English) which is also helpful.

Members of the Swiss Guard appear in The Mass at Bolsena, painted by Raphael in 1512-14, shortly after Pope Julius II founded the Guard. The guard facing outwards is a self-portrait of Raphael himself.

[ Linked Image ]

I tried to do some research on Swiss use of two handed swords and came to conclusion that they used it much less than German Landsknechts. Often when Swiss are said to have used two handed swords contemporary writers just meant longswords, not two handers as we think about the term... They certainly did use them at times but using a two handed sword was often a statement about where are you from and who do you serve. You can find some of my conclusions in this thread I made about custom Swiss twohander I got made for me. http://myArmoury.com/talk/viewtopic.php?t=27650&highlight=

Still talking about clothing, this illustration was made in 1830 seeking to emulate the cent suisses in 1507. I found curious about the archer represented with leg harness and a cuirass with a hedgehog on it, this has some heraldic value?

It was common for guards to be in armor while in service? Or only in ceremonial occasions?

[ Linked Image ]


By the way, one of the Swiss has a bow (should be a longbow?), which I particularly thought that the Swiss didn't use. To make matters worse, I found this same illustration represented in Italian guide of Italian Wars' units, where it says that the Cent Suisses were a mixed garde of archers and halberdiers:

---

 Attachment: 120.04 KB
[ Download ]

The French Royal Guard included several companies of native French archers in the early 16th century who served alongside the Scots and the Cent-Suisse. Francis I added a 3rd French company in 1515 and the 4 companies would eventually evolve into the Garde du corps du roi

Archers of the Guard and the regular Ordonnance companies were well equipped, leg harness were described as part of their equipment already in the mid-15th Century and the main change in equipment in the early 16th was that breastplates replaced the brigandines worn previously.

While the Archers of the Ordonnance companies eventually did evolve into heavy cavalry the Archers of the early Italian wars did use warbows and usually dismounted to fight in battle although their armour and horses made it possible to use them as cavalry in some situations.

[quote="Pedro Paulo Gaião"]

Luka Borscak wrote:

Swiss outlawing two handed swords in this period in some cantons seems to be a measure against big longswords because used as side arms they are too big and unpractical and for primary weapons not big enough and in a disadvantage against real pole arms.

But Zweihanders would not be nearly as large as a halberd? Not to mention that in matter of fencing they may prove to be much more practical, I suppose ...

Luka Borscak wrote:

But these outlawings don't seem to be very successful. Also, open carry of longswords was considered as a dangerous practice in towns and outlawing them also tried to prevent that. Later, in the second quarter of 16th century, some Swiss adopted true twohanders from Germans and used them as primary weapons for some smaller units of men.

Why they would banish the use of longswords in cities? I mean, I know it was forbidden to carry weapons inside cities (unless you' re a knight or part of the city guard), but longswords were MORE dangerous than other weapons? When you say that "these outlawings don't seem to be very successful" you refer to the pre-reformation period (before Zwingli and Calvin) or post-reform period?

-----------


Yes, twohanders are smaller and lighter than a halberd, but exactly that is their disadvantage, less reach and power and fencing is not that useful in a formation on a battlefield... But I speak about very early twohanders (late 15th, early 16th century) which are basically big longswords and for a sidearm on your belt, shorter swords are much more practical... And this early, there is no proof of dedicated two handed swordsmen as far as I know...

In cities they would try to ban carrying longswords because it is a provocation, like open carry of a gun in a modern city. And yes, longsword is more dangerous weapon than a long knife or shortsword or something else one might carry. With a longsword one who is skilled could keep several people at bay if he is defending or attack several less armed people. And I speak about pre reformation period, but after reformation, not much changed about this, after reformation changes can be seen on the battlefield, more armies would have dedicated two handed swordsmen...

[quote="Pedro Paulo Gaião"]

Luka Borscak wrote:

Swiss outlawing two handed swords in this period in some cantons seems to be a measure against big longswords because used as side arms they are too big and unpractical and for primary weapons not big enough and in a disadvantage against real pole arms.

Quote:

But Zweihanders would not be nearly as large as a halberd? Not to mention that in matter of fencing they may prove to be much more practical, I suppose ...

The battle field use of the Zweihanders was for the wielder to get inside the wall of pointy bits presented by a block of pike or long halberds, and then start chopping the wooden hafts in twain, opening a hole in the block that would allow the contesting block to break into the formation. In the Landsknecht those who wielded the Zweihanders were termed doppelsöldner, meaning double soldier which indicated their increased pay.

The Swiss did not like the Dopplesoldner because they negated a big advantage of the Swiss on the battlefield. Eventually, they had to adopt the weapons themselves when they ended up fighting all the copycats they spawns.

Luka Borscak wrote:

But these outlawings don't seem to be very successful. Also, open carry of longswords was considered as a dangerous practice in towns and outlawing them also tried to prevent that. Later, in the second quarter of 16th century, some Swiss adopted true twohanders from Germans and used them as primary weapons for some smaller units of men.

Quote:

Why they would banish the use of longswords in cities? I mean, I know it was forbidden to carry weapons inside cities (unless you' re a knight or part of the city guard),...

The problem presented by longswords in urban environments was simply one of the space they took up which increased the likelihood of accidentally smacking someone with the sword. Even if sheathed, hitting someone, especially a social superior, with a weapon was a gross insult. IIRC, in the compact, fortified cities of Southern Europe, the most common width of the streets, not sidewalks, but the entire gap between two facing buildings was only ~8ft/2.44m. Given that the swords themselves were almost that long, the potential for accident was significant. The Zweihanders couldn't be worn at the waist, neither could they be carried vertically like a hafted-weapon, or on the back Instead, they were carried resting the shoulder, often without a scabbard (many had projections serving as hand guards on the blade making sheathing them largely impractical.) Basically, someone carrying a Zweihanders or even one of the smaller long swords, was an accident and/or a brawl waiting to happen.

The modern analogy wouldn't be an open carry handgun, but a larger military machine gun like the Squad Automatic Weapon (SAW). Carrying a SAW over your shoulder as you navigated crowded civilian area would be asking for an accident.

Quote:

...but longswords were MORE dangerous than other weapons?

Depends on the circumstances. Remember that even with a smaller long sword, the wielder can grab the 25% of the blade forward of the cross-guard, turning the sword to a short but deadly thrusting weapon for confined spaces. The recovery of many older instructional manuscript as well as experiment historians and recreationist, have shown that long sword fighting was nothing like fencing with rapiers e.g. they would turn the blade sideways to make a shield, then grab the blade and use it to jab the hilt like mace, or use the cross-guard as hook.

A long sword was likely the best all around individual weapon. If you had room to swing it, it's cutting and crushing power were immense. If room was lacking, you could choke up on the weapon and fight in surprisingly close quarters.

The use of short, hafted-weapons like halberds by body guards, likely sprang from an integration of factors in which offensive lethality was not a major factor.

[list=]1) The primary function of a body guard is not to kill an attacker to preserve the life of the body they guard (thus the use of the term lifeguard back in the day.) A dozen guards with 6ft/2m hafted weapons, could make an nearly impenetrable block in an urban street or interior space. To outreach them, an assassin would have sneak up on the target with a long weapon which is not easy. In this usage, the bodies of the guards, any armor they wore plus their hafted-weapons, served more as barrier or area-denial, than a means of killing an attacker. They formed a hedgehog.

2) The hafted-weapon could be carried upright, close to the body and thus gave the wielder greater ability to maneuver than any weapon that projected even slightly horizontal. I discovered this personally, when an injury forced me to use a tall walking staff for balance and pull myself up from a sitting position. You would think a 6ft wooden shaft would be constantly in the way, but I found it easier to keep out of the way than either crunches or a cane. Its height became an advantage when I could just tuck it inside my elbow instead of trying to find a place to prop it. Likewise, body guards would have found it easier to maneuver in enclosed spaces with a vertical hafted weapon than a horizontal sword.

The hafted-weapons can also be used more prosaically to bar doors or gates or to form lifts or ladders. Two body guards, each holding the end of a hafted-weapon, could easily lift their protected individual over a wall or into a second story window.

3) The polished and often ornate blade, carried vertically on one shoulder so they topped out a couple of feet above the head of the wielders or anyone else, provided some protection against down firing sniper attacks but more importantly, advertised the presence of powerful high status individual coming through. In an age where advertising ones wealth, power and status provided better protection than blending in, this would have been a major factor.

4) Long swords couldn't duplicate a lot of these functions save perhaps forming a shorter spiked hedgehog. [/list][/list]

[quote="Pedro Paulo Gaião"]

Luka Borscak wrote:

Swiss outlawing two handed swords in this period in some cantons seems to be a measure against big longswords because used as side arms they are too big and unpractical and for primary weapons not big enough and in a disadvantage against real pole arms.

Quote:

But Zweihanders would not be nearly as large as a halberd? Not to mention that in matter of fencing they may prove to be much more practical, I suppose ...

The battle field use of the Zweihanders was for the wielder to get inside the wall of pointy bits presented by a block of pike or long halberds, and then start chopping the wooden hafts in twain, opening a hole in the block that would allow the contesting block to break into the formation. In the Landsknecht those who wielded the Zweihanders were termed doppelsöldner, meaning double soldier which indicated their increased pay.

The Swiss did not like the Dopplesoldner because they negated a big advantage of the Swiss on the battlefield. Eventually, they had to adopt the weapons themselves when they ended up fighting all the copycats they spawns.

Luka Borscak wrote:

But these outlawings don't seem to be very successful. Also, open carry of longswords was considered as a dangerous practice in towns and outlawing them also tried to prevent that. Later, in the second quarter of 16th century, some Swiss adopted true twohanders from Germans and used them as primary weapons for some smaller units of men.

Quote:

Why they would banish the use of longswords in cities? I mean, I know it was forbidden to carry weapons inside cities (unless you' re a knight or part of the city guard),...

The problem presented by longswords in urban environments was simply one of the space they took up which increased the likelihood of accidentally smacking someone with the sword. Even if sheathed, hitting someone, especially a social superior, with a weapon was a gross insult. IIRC, in the compact, fortified cities of Southern Europe, the most common width of the streets, not sidewalks, but the entire gap between two facing buildings was only ~8ft/2.44m. Given that the swords themselves were almost that long, the potential for accident was significant. The Zweihanders couldn't be worn at the waist, neither could they be carried vertically like a hafted-weapon, or on the back Instead, they were carried resting the shoulder, often without a scabbard (many had projections serving as hand guards on the blade making sheathing them largely impractical.) Basically, someone carrying a Zweihanders or even one of the smaller long swords, was an accident and/or a brawl waiting to happen.

The modern analogy wouldn't be an open carry handgun, but a larger military machine gun like the Squad Automatic Weapon (SAW). Carrying a SAW over your shoulder as you navigated crowded civilian area would be asking for an accident.

Quote:

...but longswords were MORE dangerous than other weapons?

Depends on the circumstances. Remember that even with a smaller long sword, the wielder can grab the 25% of the blade forward of the cross-guard, turning the sword to a short but deadly thrusting weapon for confined spaces. The recovery of many older instructional manuscript as well as experiment historians and recreationist, have shown that long sword fighting was nothing like fencing with rapiers e.g. they would turn the blade sideways to make a shield, then grab the blade and use it to jab the hilt like mace, or use the cross-guard as hook.

A long sword was likely the best all around individual weapon. If you had room to swing it, it's cutting and crushing power were immense. If room was lacking, you could choke up on the weapon and fight in surprisingly close quarters.

The use of short, hafted-weapons like halberds by body guards, likely sprang from an integration of factors in which offensive lethality was not a major factor.

[list=]1) The primary function of a body guard is not to kill an attacker to preserve the life of the body they guard (thus the use of the term lifeguard back in the day.) A dozen guards with 6ft/2m hafted weapons, could make an nearly impenetrable block in an urban street or interior space. To outreach them, an assassin would have sneak up on the target with a long weapon which is not easy. In this usage, the bodies of the guards, any armor they wore plus their hafted-weapons, served more as barrier or area-denial, than a means of killing an attacker. They formed a hedgehog.

2) The hafted-weapon could be carried upright, close to the body and thus gave the wielder greater ability to maneuver than any weapon that projected even slightly horizontal. I discovered this personally, when an injury forced me to use a tall walking staff for balance and pull myself up from a sitting position. You would think a 6ft wooden shaft would be constantly in the way, but I found it easier to keep out of the way than either crunches or a cane. Its height became an advantage when I could just tuck it inside my elbow instead of trying to find a place to prop it. Likewise, body guards would have found it easier to maneuver in enclosed spaces with a vertical hafted weapon than a horizontal sword.

The hafted-weapons can also be used more prosaically to bar doors or gates or to form lifts or ladders. Two body guards, each holding the end of a hafted-weapon, could easily lift their protected individual over a wall or into a second story window.

3) The polished and often ornate blade, carried vertically on one shoulder so they topped out a couple of feet above the head of the wielders or anyone else, provided some protection against down firing sniper attacks but more importantly, advertised the presence of powerful high status individual coming through. In an age where advertising ones wealth, power and status provided better protection than blending in, this would have been a major factor.

4) Long swords couldn't duplicate a lot of these functions save perhaps forming a shorter spiked hedgehog. [/list][/list]