Bill, I can't watch them videos. My QT is protesting over missing software that can't be downloaded from the [QT] website. :confused:

I also can't watch the videos. And this is on a machine that I use to author, edit, and package Quicktime videos. I can't get it to install a compatible compressor. Which CODEC did you use to make these videos?

It is possible to download Quicktime 7 (I had to to watch one of those video's) without the I-tunes package. It about halves the d/l size for those like me on a horrid dial-up. It is apparently on the Apple website, but I had to do a 'yahoo' to find it here : http://www.apple.com/quicktime/download/standalone.html .


Great videos by the way, quite interesting and fun to watch too.

I have quicktime 7.0.3 on my MAC powerbook and no problem viewing the clips the came with my upgrade to OS X Tiger.

Should get the Pro version if I want to edit stuff in the future.

Question for Bill Grandy:

How does the length / weight of a longsword affect technique ? Specifically a true twohander like my A & A 15th century twohander against a smaller hand and a half like the A & A Black prince or the A & A GBS.

Reach is an obvious advantage but does the extra weight mean that some techniques will be more difficult or impossible compared to the smaller more agile sword.

Strength might be a factor as a much stronger fighter might be able to use the larger sword equally well a weaker opponent with the smaller sword.

The A & A twohander is big but far from ponderous: At my body weight of 245 pounds I don't find the twohander that heavy. ( Can curl a 50 dumbbell if I cheat it a bit. ) So holding it with one hand is doable: Controlling it in motion one handed would be a challenge though. But I can a thrust one handed easily enough. ( No room in the house to test out how controllable I find a wide sweeping cut without " Killing " a lamp, destroying the T.V. or gouging a wall or ceiling.

The next step up in size are the really big 16th century twohanders at least a bit longer and maybe a couple of pounds heavier than earlier 14th or 15th century great swords: I would imagine that the handling of these would be closer to that of a pole arm than a longsword.

In any case the sparring between longswords seems to me most with swords of similar length so I am curious about what happens when different sized swords are used ?

Hi Jean,
Actually, in some of those bouts one of the swords is actually a fair bit larger than the other. :)

A larger sword has a definite immediate advantage than the smaller one due to reach, but that can be countered. If I have a larger weapon, I will do my best to hit the opponent from a distance before they can close the distance. An aggressive defender with a shorter weapon, however, can negate this advantage by closing. For instance, if I have the shorter weapon, and get in close while defending, it is much easier for my sword to move in the smaller area. Doing this is easier said than done, but quite possible.

There is also the fact that smaller weapons are generally faster.

Weight and forward balance can definately cause a sword to hit harder, which can help set another sword aside a little easier.

Strength is certainly an advantage, but nowhere near as important as speed, which in turn is still not as important as proper judgement of distance and timing. All the strength in the world won't work if you can't move fast enough, and all the speed in the world won't work if you move at the wrong time. But strength does help control the weapon, and control is paramount to accuracy, precision, and ensuring that the above attributes can actually be used.

You're right, the really huge two handers are definately used more like polearms than longswords, which many masters explicitly say.

Hope that answers the question rather than making it more confusing. :)

Thanks Bill: Yes very useful explanations.

And as you said strength is the least important factor behind speed and timing / skill but strength does mean that a longer heavier weapon can be used at adequate speed and with skill if one has it: A weaker person has his choices limited to lighter weapons.

Oh, a strong person is not necessarily a slow person and finally with weapons of equal weight a strong person could be faster or get tired more slowly.

Although strength and aerobic endurance is a very different thing: A very strong person who can't run a minute without having to stop to catch his breathe is not at any great advantage except at the very early seconds of a fight.

Sort of recapping here with somewhat obvious points: Thanks again for your very clear comments.