| Author |
Message |
Jack Yang
Location: maryland Joined: 24 Mar 2007
Posts: 38
|
 Posted: Sat 24 Mar, 2007 1:02 pm Post subject: Shakespearian Weapons? |
 |
|
Hi all,
I am doing a school project for the coming Shakespeare Festival, my topic is on Shakespearian swords. For as much as I know, the most widely used sword during the Shakespearian time is the rapier. In my research, I've also included the German Grosse Messer, the Zweihander, Cutlass, Highland Claymore, Sabre, side sword, and the small sword ( which is not exactly shakespearian but is included in my project because of its close realationship with the rapier). I think I've got pretty much every kind of swords that were use at that age... But am I missing anything? If any of you knows about other shakespearian weapons (and by that I mean Shakespearian swords), would you please tell me about it? =]
|
|
   |
 |
Nathan Robinson
myArmoury Admin
|
| Posted: Sat 24 Mar, 2007 1:27 pm Post subject: |
|
|
Before a clear response can be given, we have to first define what you mean by "Shakespearian swords". This isn't a clear definition and certainly not a term used by people who study swords.
You could mean swords used during Shakespeare's life. You could mean swords described and used in the plays of William Shakespeare. Or you could mean swords used by William Shakespeare himself.
.:. Visit my Collection Gallery :: View my Reading List :: View my Wish List :: See Pages I Like :: Find me on Facebook .:.
|
|
  |
|
Jack Yang
Location: maryland Joined: 24 Mar 2007
Posts: 38
|
| Posted: Sat 24 Mar, 2007 2:40 pm Post subject: right |
|
|
Right, I'm sorry, let me clarify:
by Shakespearian sword I meant swords that were used during his life, weapons that existed before him and no longer in use during his time but are described in his plays are also considered shakepearian by my teachers. =p
thanks =d
|
|
|
|
|
|
D. Rosen
|
| Posted: Sat 24 Mar, 2007 11:16 pm Post subject: |
|
|
Here's a pretty quick rundown.
Rapier (Civilians, Courtiers, etc.)
http://www.arms-n-armor.com/images/rapier168b.jpg , http://www.arms-n-armor.com/view.html?rapier190b.jpg#
Side Sword/Cut & Thrust (Almost a compromise between the arming sword & rapier, dual purpose for military use)
http://www.arms-n-armor.com/images/rapier212a.jpg , http://www.lutel.cz/obrazky/14006.jpg
Arming Sword/Single Hand (The classic "Medieval" sword. Still popular in England. Little or no rings,etc. on hilt)
http://www.albion-swords.com/images/swords/al...htly1a.jpg
http://www.sword-buyers-guide.com/images/euro...abbard.gif
Baskethilt sword (A very English weapon, quite popular in the English military towards the end of the century +, not Scottish) http://www.darkwoodarmory.com/pix/0466.JPG
Zweihander (Still in use on the continent vs. Spain. Becoming less popular)
http://www.davenriche.com/del%20tin%20zweihander.jpg
Irish Ring Hilt (Used by Irish soldiers (whom the English were fighting)
http://www.arms-n-armor.com/images/sword085b.jpg
Falchion (Single-edge, occasionally curved blade. Still in some use in the military. Supposedly used by Sir John Smith)
http://www.myArmoury.com/talk/download.php?id=2858
Tuck/Estoc (Stiff sword w/ no edge. One very sharp triangular tip. Used to pierce armor & maile, etc. A bit earlier than Shakespeare's time)
http://www.aurorahistoryboutique.com/products/A000056_L.jpg
Bastard Swords/Longswords (I believe they're mentioned in his plays, but in common usage anymore)
http://www.arms-n-armor.com/view.html?sword194a.jpg# , http://www.arms-n-armor.com/images/sword195a.jpg
(You could probably use "Claymore," as it was something of a 'broad-sword' used by Scottish mercanaries in Ireland- the Gallowglass/Redshanks) http://members.aol.com/scothist/viks/v0305.jpg
You may also wish to include things used in conjunction with a rapier or side sword...
Buckler (Small hand shield held in a fist grip. Very popular in England. Sometimes had a spike affixed to the front)
Main Gauche (Dagger for the left hand with a simple ring to protect the hand. Many times matched the rapier)
Cloak (A cape or cloak would sometimes be used with a rapier to ensnare another's sword, etc. )
Another rapier (Some mastered the use of a "Case of Rapiers" in combat. Very difficult, not very common)
If I were you, I'd get rid of Grosse Messer (Not very common anymore, plus used mainly on the continent), and the saber/cutlass ( later). I'd make it very clear that the Smallsword was not from the period, and that it evolved from the rapier.
|
|
|
|
|
Jack Yang
Location: maryland Joined: 24 Mar 2007
Posts: 38
|
| Posted: Sun 25 Mar, 2007 4:01 pm Post subject: thanks |
|
|
Pretty cool, ty
question though: isn't the basket hilted-sword just a rapier or side sword with a crazy hilt? Or is it actually any different in use?
|
|
|
|
|
Max von Bargen
|
| Posted: Sun 25 Mar, 2007 4:17 pm Post subject: Re: thanks |
|
|
| Jack Yang wrote: | Pretty cool, ty
question though: isn't the basket hilted-sword just a rapier or side sword with a crazy hilt? Or is it actually any different in use? |
There are people here who know way more about basket hilts than I do, but I'm pretty sure the blades can be substantially different from rapier blades. I believe we have an article in the Features section that covers basket hilts and several other types of English weapons from the first half of the seventeenth century. It might be worth it for you to take a look at: http://www.myArmoury.com/feature_engswords.html
|
|
|
|
|
Jack Yang
Location: maryland Joined: 24 Mar 2007
Posts: 38
|
| Posted: Sun 25 Mar, 2007 4:36 pm Post subject: whoo |
|
|
whoo thanks, that'll help me. =D
and just fyi, today, i spent around 6 hours making a pair of aluminium sparing side swords for this project I'm doing. I'm going to make a more complete post about it later, hopefully with pics, and hopefully will get some replys from some more experienced sword smiths, lol.
|
|
|
|
|
Nathan Robinson
myArmoury Admin
|
| Posted: Sun 25 Mar, 2007 4:38 pm Post subject: Re: thanks |
|
|
| Jack Yang wrote: | Pretty cool, ty
question though: isn't the basket hilted-sword just a rapier or side sword with a crazy hilt? Or is it actually any different in use? |
They're extremely different swords. Please see the features of this site and orient yourself with the many posts on this forum for detailed answers to and extensive discussions about this question.
.:. Visit my Collection Gallery :: View my Reading List :: View my Wish List :: See Pages I Like :: Find me on Facebook .:.
|
|
|
|
|
Bruno Giordan
|
| Posted: Mon 26 Mar, 2007 8:08 am Post subject: |
|
|
The danish history that gave origin to the Hamlet story by Shakespeare is set in early medieval Denmark (the story of Hamlodi - Amlethus by Saxo Gramaticus, born in 1140 or 1150).
So you can have an Hamlet in maille and late viking sword without going out of historical correctness.
I do not know if Shakespeare envisioned his hamlet in maille and spangenhelm, but a modern rendition in such armor and related weapons would not be out of question at all.
Most likely Shakespeare came to know the tale from a french early renaissance translation of Gramaticus by Belleforest (Histoires tragiques, 1570).
|
|
|
|
|
Roger Hooper
|
| Posted: Mon 26 Mar, 2007 8:30 am Post subject: |
|
|
|
I wonder what weapon types were used in the original productions during Shakespeare's lifetime? For Roman plays, did they actually use swords that looked like gladii, or did they just use contemporary weapons and armor, circa 1600 AD? I suspect the latter. I don't think Elizabethan theatre was too concerned with historical accuracy.
|
|
|
|
|
|
D. Rosen
|
| Posted: Mon 26 Mar, 2007 3:01 pm Post subject: |
|
|
|
For the most part, I believe that the Elizabethan/Jacobean acting companies dressed in exaggerated fashions of the day (cast-offs from nobility, etc.), and used weapons and armor that was fairly contemporary. For Roman/Greek themed plays, I've read that they would wear togas or something to identify them as such. As for weapons, I've really no idea, but I would assume that they used arming swords, etc.
|
|
|
|
|
Gordon Clark
|
| Posted: Mon 26 Mar, 2007 5:02 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| Roger Hooper wrote: | | I wonder what weapon types were used in the original productions during Shakespeare's lifetime? For Roman plays, did they actually use swords that looked like gladii, or did they just use contemporary weapons and armor, circa 1600 AD? I suspect the latter. I don't think Elizabethan theatre was too concerned with historical accuracy. |
That raises another interesting question. Any art historians out there? At what point did artists start painting "period" clothing and weapons. medieval art always (as far as I know) paints people with "current for the artist" clothing, etc. For example, a 13th century painter paints David and Goliath armed with 13th century weapons - I assume because archeology was not practiced ...
Did that change during the renaissance, Victorian age or ...?
|
|
|
|
|
|
D. Rosen
|
| Posted: Mon 26 Mar, 2007 5:38 pm Post subject: |
|
|
It seems that throughout most (if not all) Medieval illustrations, artists painted what they knew. Remember that very few had traveled abroad or had any access to anything that would depict the Romans. Some artists portrayed characters in somewhat generic clothing like robes, and occasionally dressed them in "foreign clothing" like that of the Moors, Turks, etc. It seems that in the early Renaissance and into the 17th Century, artists finally began to clothe their models in attire more like that of the Ancient era. Most of the 'famous' Renaissance Artists (DaVinci, Raphael, etc.) depicted Biblical figures in "Ancient" costumes, or what they assumed they looked like.
Last edited by D. Rosen on Mon 26 Mar, 2007 5:45 pm; edited 1 time in total
|
|
|
|
|
|
Jonathan Hopkins
|
| Posted: Mon 26 Mar, 2007 5:45 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| D. Rosen wrote: | | It seems that in the early Renaissance and into the 17th Century, artists finally began to clothe their models in attire more like that of the Ancient era. |
But not always 
17th century print
|
|
|
|
|
|
Hugh Fuller
|
| Posted: Tue 27 Mar, 2007 7:14 am Post subject: |
|
|
General George Monck is quoted as suggesting that all English infantrymen should be armed with good stiff tucks as they would use any edged swords to cut firewood and thereby render them ineffective as weapons. So the tuck must still have been around in the mid-17th Century for Monck to have recommended it.
Hugh
Still trying to walk in the Light
Please see 1 John 1:5
|
|
|
|
|
|
Martin Wilkinson
|
| Posted: Tue 27 Mar, 2007 7:39 am Post subject: |
|
|
| Hugh Fuller wrote: |
General George Monck is quoted as suggesting that all English infantrymen should be armed with good stiff tucks as they would use any edged swords to cut firewood and thereby render them ineffective as weapons. So the tuck must still have been around in the mid-17th Century for Monck to have recommended it. |
I believe in some circles that is believed to be referencing a more cutting type of sword than the Estoc.
"A bullet you see may go anywhere, but steel's, almost bound to go somewhere."
Schola Gladiatoria
|
|
|
|
|
|
Lafayette C Curtis
|
| Posted: Tue 27 Mar, 2007 9:28 am Post subject: |
|
|
| Roger Hooper wrote: | | I wonder what weapon types were used in the original productions during Shakespeare's lifetime? For Roman plays, did they actually use swords that looked like gladii, or did they just use contemporary weapons and armor, circa 1600 AD? I suspect the latter. I don't think Elizabethan theatre was too concerned with historical accuracy. |
Elizabethan stuff. Definitely. The text in Julius Caesar includes an explicit mention of the actors wearing their doublets (!) in a "loose" and informal manner. The movie Shakespeare in Love is actually inaccurate in this account since it depicts the actors in Romeo and Juliet wearing accurate early 16th-century Italian dresses!
| Hugh Fuller wrote: | | General George Monck is quoted as suggesting that all English infantrymen should be armed with good stiff tucks as they would use any edged swords to cut firewood and thereby render them ineffective as weapons. So the tuck must still have been around in the mid-17th Century for Monck to have recommended it. |
The correspondence between "tuck" and "estoc" was not really one-on-one, though. I've seen it used in contemporary documents to mean an estoc, a rapier, and even relatively broad-bladed swords. About the only similarity I see between them is that they're all straight.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Lafayette C Curtis
|
| Posted: Tue 27 Mar, 2007 9:44 am Post subject: |
|
|
|
Hm. I've just noticed that you're focusing on swords. Too bad, since Elizabethan halberds and partisans are funny. The ywere described in several plays and sometimes actually appeared on the stage, albeit in "de-lethalized" forms.
|
|
|
|
|
Jack Yang
Location: maryland Joined: 24 Mar 2007
Posts: 38
|
| Posted: Tue 27 Mar, 2007 9:57 am Post subject: LOL |
|
|
They used swords to chop firewood? LOL why didn't the queen just arm her soldiers with axes instead? =D
jk
Lafayette, wanna tell me something about it anyways? School project is just school project, enrichment of the self is far more important. =D
thanks for all your replies, btw
|
|
|
|
|
|
Hugh Fuller
|
| Posted: Tue 27 Mar, 2007 11:48 am Post subject: Re: LOL |
|
|
| Jack Yang wrote: | They used swords to chop firewood? LOL why didn't the queen just arm her soldiers with axes instead? =D
jk
Lafayette, wanna tell me something about it anyways? School project is just school project, enrichment of the self is far more important. =D
thanks for all your replies, btw |
Jack, Monck was a general on the Parliamentarian side during the English Civil War of 1642-1651. He commanded troops during a period of general revolutionary fervor when the King's command was not writ throughoout theland nor , frequently, were the orders of commanding officers. At one point, Oliver Cromwell had to take the Parliamentarian Army in hand and deal with a number of small mutinies by its more radical elements. he did so with his usual ruthless efficiency.
Hugh
Still trying to walk in the Light
Please see 1 John 1:5
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
This is a standard topic