Edward III's two handed sword

[katana]

Originally Posted by Atlantia

The first thing that struck me was how impressive the technological expertise involved with making a functional blade of that length was.
Man uz britz rock!

Hi Gene,
I agree, if the date for this sword is correct and it was used as a functional weapon the swordsmith whom forged this blade must have been extremely good. Bearing in mind the various qualities of iron available and the skill required to produce a long blade that could survive 'battle' conditions . ( weakness in the blade would be 'exagerated' due to the increased 'forces' imposed on it, due to its length).
Also, considering that it seems this is an early example, the knowledge and technique would, likely, be in its infancy.

Or should it be... G.B didn't exist then ............

Originally Posted by fernando

Dear David,
In a first reaction, i am more surprised to hear that two handed swords were already in use by the time of Edward III, than the length they have reached.
There is one with precisely 2,04 Mts in exhibition near my hometown, only being dated from the XV century. There is aother one in the Oporto Military Museum with a more "decent" lenght (1,68Mts) being dated mid XVI century.
Both appear to be operational, or at least they look rather plain are not quoted as cerimonial, something that seems to have happened at a later stage, when the specimens were more exhuberant.
Yor humble (and ignorant) servant.
Fernando

Hi 'Nando ,
thanks for your input, I was surprised at the number of 'two handers' that have survived. But, suspect the reason why this is so, is that these swords had a specific use which became 'redundent' ....and were later (possibly) 'adopted' as 'bearing swords' due to their impressive size.

...."humble"....yes ....."ignorant"....never ......"servant"....does that mean I can command you to send me your excellent collection ? My address is...

Best Regards David




.

[fernando]

Obviously i have to eat a lot of bread before i have your guys knowledge on weaponry and all i can do is trusting the lines i have at hand or what i can read out there.
Through deep controversy i discern a difference between two hand swords and great swords (montantes in portuguese), admiting that the great sword was an evolution of the two hander.
I can read in more than one source that the montante was 'popularized' much after the middle ages, this not impeaching that two hand swords were eventually used before, even considering that middle age warriors fought with a shield, therefore with only one hand free for the sword or other device; that with the increased use of solid armour the shield became obsolete and from then the more generalized appearance of the two hander and the later great sword. Montantes were well in use when our nobles fought in the discoveries period (1500's). Obviously they used these things for first dismantling enemy troops formation, before unsheathing the current sword for close combat.
But speaking of authencity when comes to miths envolving a determined weapon having belonged to a certain King or hero, let me tell you this one.
We have in exhibition in the Oporto Millitary Museum, after after having being transferred from a rather prestiged museum in the same city, the sword alledgely owned by King Dom Afonso Henriques, the first Portuguese monarch (1128-1185).
It happens that a couple of serious specialists do not have any doubt in assuring that the sword belongs to a typology used at a much later stage and, assuming that it had actually belonged to a Portuguese monarch, which seems to be consensualy accepted, that would be Dom Afonso V (1438-1481).
This evidence was naturally brought to the consideration of the authorities, from whom no action was taken towards deying the false pretension that the sword belonge to our first King, apparently in order not to dismantle a mith that has been cultivated for so long, thus not facing general frustration.
Period.

Fernando

.