[Bryan Heff]

How were the early great swords used on the battlefield? I am interested in specifically the XIIa and XIIIa types. I believe it was still essentially a mail+sword+shield era with a cavalry focus for the nobility when they first seemed to become popular.

So how were these big swords employed?

Were they swung with 2-hands from the saddle? Swung 1-handed? Primarily a weapon used on foot only?

Were they used with a shield, which would seem to go against the longer 2-handed grip?

Was the shield cast aside when the sword was drawn?

Were great sword soldiers not carrying a shield in the first place?

[Hector A.]

I asked myself the same question and this is the information I gathered:

First the weapon: the blade average length was 85cm to 89cm, so not very long, certainly not as much as a longsword of later times.
They where also only slightly heavier then 1 handed swords, around 1300-1400g ( easily manageable in 1 hand ). 3/4 of the added weight came from the grip, not the blade.

So essentially what u got is a 1hand sword with a 2handed grip.

It was a weapon primarily used by nobility, on horse back or foot.

On horse back it was used 1 handed, while the other held firmly the reins.

On foot it was also used 1 handed in combination with a shield while the threat of long ranged missiles lingered.
Example: during a advance and early on in the battle.
As soon as missiles where no longer an issue knights would drop there shield and at this point use the sword 2 handed to have a faster more powerful hitting weapon.

NB: If in tight melee formation with the threat of spears, the shield would not be dropped!.

And that's basically it .

If somebody has something to add or if you have further questions be my guest.

[Robin Smith]

Don't forget that shields were generally suspended from guige straps and did not have to be held in hand.

[D. S. Smith]

I thought I read on someone's post here that "bastard swords" were also carried by archers as a self defense weapon, since they weren't carrying a shield.

Let me add to this that I really know nothing on the subject, and could very well be remembering it wrong. It just made sense to me when I read it as a logical explanation. Hopefully someone with knowledge on the subject can correct me if I'm wrong.

[Chad Arnow]

[Christopher B Lellis]

[D. S. Smith]

[Harry Marinakis]

Take a look at the images in this thread:

http://www.myArmoury.com/talk/viewtopic.php?t=29618

All of the images that I've been able to find of people using a Great sword show people on their feet, swinging with both hands, either with no shield or their shield slung over their shoulder.

If you can find more images, I'd love to see them.

[Craig Peters]

It's been said many times before, but you can apply the techniques of Liechtenauer's long sword teaching to the great sword, as demonstrated by the manuscript Goliath:

http://wiktenauer.com/wiki/Goliath

[Harry Marinakis]

I think the OP was looking for data on how Types XIIa and XIIIa were actually used at the time. This would have been the period AD 1250-1350.

Goliath (c AD 1510) is more than a century too late in regards to the question in the OP.

[Craig Peters]

True, and I realized that as I wrote. However, Goliath is a version of Peter von Danzig's commentary of Liechtenauer (15th C), which is presumably based upon Master Liechtenauer's teaching itself (14th C). So that brings us back considerably closer than before. Besides, it is mentioned that Liechtenauer did not devise the art, but instead learned it from others. That easily allows us to say that many of the techniques would have been known by 1350 AD or earlier. After all, there's only so many ways to effectively fight with a long sword or great sword.

[Harry Marinakis]

Good point Craig

I love how this guy is winding up for a haymaker....

[Bryan Heff]

Thanks for the answers so far. As a poster already mentioned, my curiosity and question is in how/when were these weapons used during the period 1250-1350 (approximately). If we work under the premise that XIIa/XIIIa blade types were a "knightly" weapon, then to me that means mounted on a horse, but I don't believe they were primarily used on horseback. Probably just the opposite. How common was it for knights to dismount and fight? My guess, and its purely speculation is that perhaps the Great Sword was a weapon of last resort, after the mount was killed under the rider and they were forced on foot, perhaps surrounded by the enemy's infantry.

Perhaps the Great Sword was used primarily in one on one combat and not so much on the battlefield, although the picture above certainly looks like a battlefield situation...

[Eric W. Norenberg]

I think Bryan is on the right track. There are period French references to a sword style called a "branc d'arçon" which is typically defined as "saddle sword", a long bladed, two handed sword, not the knights primary mounted weapon (probably a lance given the time period?) or his back-up to the spear or lance (which would be his belt-carried cavalry sword- a one-hander), but his "go nuclear" piece when the horse was no longer viable, cut out from under him and surrounded by enemy footmen. French Wikipedia (which is surely more reliable than English Wikipedia ) describes it's use similar to the later montante, for clearing a big circle around a single defendant. Given the time period I feel sure this would be a type XIIA or XIIIA.

Not that this would be the only use for the great sword of war at this time period but I feel this is surely one application.

[Jeremy V. Krause]

I really don't see how a great sword could be used on foot with only one have. It just doesn't seem probable. Maybe the shield could have remained, as Robin states, from a quite.

I'm not the weakest guy but unless these swords were more than a bit lighter than the Duke or Baron- I don't see it. In addition there is no historical depictions of great swords being used with shields.

[Christian Borglum]

Unfortunately, all of the written works concerning technical swordsmanship which have come down to us from the middle ages date from post 1350. While some of the techniques described in these later fechtbuchs like half-swording or wrestling from the bind probably don't work as well with the earlier, wider. more flexible blades. I'm sure quite a bit of the Lichtenauer or Fiore material works just fine with the cut oriented 'Greatswords' of type XIIA or XIIIA pattern. Craig Peters has already mentioned the Goliath Fechtbuch as an example in which the illustrations show wider blades.
I think there are a couple of other points we need to keep in mind when speculating about how 'Greatswords' were used in the 1250 to 1350 period. The first is that the 'Greatswords' which have survived vary significantly in length and mass. Some type XIII swords have blades only around 30". XIIA.2 from records has a blade 35" long and weighs right around 3 lb. Those measurements are inline with numerous short gripped, single handed swords from the first half and middle of the 13th century. It's easy to imagine a sword like that being wielded in one hand or two from horseback or on foot. At the higher end of the spectrum, we've got weapons like Oakeshot's XIIIA.1 with a 39.5" blade or XIIA.4 blade measuring over 43" inches! I can't picture those extreme examples as anything other than exclusively two handed swords. I'm sure in period 'Greatswords' handling and tactical use varied.
The second point is that as a community, I think we have a tendency to over focus on how equipment from this period was used on the battlefield. As modern people, we probably think of Knights and Medieval warfare in the context of field engagements and set piece battles. Medieval strategy and warfare was dominate by sieges. Knights on campaign were much more likely to see combat in the context of a siege than a set piece battle. So, how can we imagine the knightly 'Greatsword' being used in those conditions?

Christian

[Bryan Heff]

[Ben Coomer]

I could see a greatsword wielder being the guy that meets the people coming up the ladders on a siege if they get to the top or defends (or attacks) breaches. Powerful blows, perhaps a bit less need for really technical technique, and the intimidation factor.

Pure speculation, but "shock troop" is what comes to mind seeing fully armored knights swinging these swords.

[Augusto Boer Bront]

I don't get the one handed usage thing. Just because Oakeshott wrote it in his book now everyone is repeating that.
Wonder what Oakeshott was thinking then =).
Maybe with the one handed sized sword it could be done, but I don't see the point in using the obviously two handed sword with a single hand and a shield.
Would you use a XVth century longsword with a single hand?

Neither would I....

[Christian Borglum]