Need to find a way to explain to the layman why a sword could not possibly weigh "20 to 30 pounds"?

Check out this page for an explanation.

[ Linked Image ]
Landsknecht returning from the war, with his 20 pound sword...

Kind of funny...

Hello all!

Nathan, :lol:
"But of course they must have weighed twenty pounds, because only the strongest warrior could even pick them up, let alone wield them in battle!" (Three pounds can get tiring for someone not use to it!)

Kind of funny? I broke out in loud guffaws!

Sword cartoons? Don't give me ideas like that!

He looks more like a landesknecht trying to enter the caber toss, than one returning from war!

Thanks for that! I needed a laugh today!:lol:

IIRC, the so-called sword of Guy of Warwick housed in the armoury at Warwick Castle weighs between 10-15 lbs. It was probably a ceremonial sword and it is huge! I cannot find an image on the internet, nor do I have my Warwick Castle book, but if I find an image, I'll post it. Guy supposedly slayed the dun cow with his beastly sword!

Jonathan

I love that image, Nathan!

Impressive. Even if you made a sword twice the thickness it needs to be (now 10mm or .4 inches thick rather than 5mm), that still means a 10 pound sword would be 2.5 meters long.

-Grey

Greyson,
2.5-3 meters sounds about right for the sword of Guy. It is probably a type XI or XII, but that is just based on my memory of my last visit there 10 years ago!

Jonathan

Hello all!

There is an early 15th century ceremonial bearing sword in the Royal Armouries Collection, shown in Treasures From the Tower of London: Arms and Armour by Norman and Wilson, that weighs 14 lb 6 oz. (6.52 kg) Its overall length is 91 in (231.1 cm), with a blade length of 65.5 in (166.4 cm). That makes the whole sword over 7 and a half feet long (2.3 meters), with a blade of just under 5 and a half feet long (approx. 1.7 meters). That's a big sword! Of course, if was never meant to be used in battle! The long grip looks so unusually narrow that I bet the tang would snap under the sword's weight if it was swung in anger! (Another problem with extremely overweight swords; the tang has to put up with more stress! I believe torque is involved somehow, but I'm no engineer!)

Stay safe!

But what if it was really, really, really heavy metal...! :D

Seriously though, its surprising how prevalent such myths still are. Only yesterday i mentioned something about swords to my boss at work and the first thing she said was "yeah, they used to weigh 30lbs didn't they, so heavy you couldn't even pick 'em up!" And this from someone who's husband and friends are members of some Britain's most elite military forces.

That picture's great, but i find their idea of using an IKEA salad bowl to make a buckler far more intriguing and perhaps not as ahistorical as may be supposed - i can just imagine a disgruntled ploughman nailing a handle through his wifes best wooden mixing bowl, picking up a large knife or axe and marching off with his improvised sword and buckler combination to tell the lord of the manor just what he thinks of having to plough an extra league every day!

I've told this story here before, but I can't resist retelling it. I was in a "sword" shop in New Hope, PA several years ago. There was a sword hanging on the wall that was absolutely massive: The blade looked to be almost five feet long, about three inches wide at the crossguard, and was incredibly thick - something on the order of 3/8". The grip looked to be about 15" with a monstrous crossguard made of brass, styled in the fashion of a Scottish Claymore, only absurdly large. The pommel was huge - the size of my fist (and I have large hands). The weight as listed was 67 pounds. No decimel point between the six and seven, but a full 67 pounds.

When I politely questioned the store owner, he asserted that this was an accurate replica of a Claymore. He also added that he used that sword to smash an engine block. I had no doubts that he was successful in this endeavor.

I left the shop with a smile. :D

But wouldn't a 30lb sword have gone good with my historically correct 165 lb suit of armour :eek: ??? Just think of all the wheat you could have reaped with Nathan's eight-hander... :lol:

wow....FINALLY I can have some proof to show those clods in my highschool that swords were far lighter than 20-30lbs!


thanks for the post nathan!

Ah, yes, it often seems that many a myth can be dispelled simply by some basic math.

As for the larger bearing swords, I found this one in a catalogue of the Higgins Armoury collection.

---

 Attachment: 57.26 KB
[ Download ]

Hello all!

George Hill wrote:

A sword which weights fourteen pounds and eleven ounces... and is seven feet long. Hmm... I wonder how they did the bearing therefore.

George,

Short answer: very carefully! :)

Long answer: with two hands, held out before them with the point upward, walking slowly in the procession . Since it was never meant to be swung, it was more of a "balancing act" than anything else. As long as they held it steady, no problem! If you notice, too, these bearing swords have long handles as well, the better to get a good, balanced, steady grip. :)

Of course, you need a hall or cathedral with tall ceilings, or be out in the open air, or you might crash into something! :D

Stay safe!

Sorry but you guys dont know anything, this sword is BATTLE-READY. Aprox Weight: 20 lbs

http://www.mwart.com/xq/ASP.product/pid.125/q...-sword.htm

20 pound to 30 pound Sword. The Sword of GODZILLA? :lol:

Thanks Nathan, that cartoon was a riot!

Bob

Up in the Wallace Monument, the information states that they believe Wallace was about 7 feet tall in order to wield his "huge" sword. I apologize for not knowing the weight, but it looked (based on comparisons with my 3+ pound hand-and-a-half sword) around 6-7 pounds, and was really large... large enough that I would not volunteer to wield it.

Now I realize that there is a second "Wallace" sword floating around, but the one in the National Wallace Monument represents a very large 2-handed sword wielded by a larger-than life hero. It's hard to imagine that a 20+ pound sword would be a functional choice for anyone.

Well, Mel Gibson did say that the real William Wallace was 7 ft tall....something about lightning bolts from his arse, too.

Anyone that tall and with that many digestive ailments just might be able to wield a 20 poud sword, better watch out!

(Sorry, folks...I just couldn't resist)