Center of gravitiy of 17th century swords

AHorsa · 9th June 2015, 07:21 PM

Dear All,

I need some information about where the center of gravity of military (broad-) swords from the 17th century approximately has to be. Is there kind of a rule? Would be great if you can give me some examples.

Thanks and best regards
Andreas

Timo Nieminen · 10th June 2015, 02:45 AM

I think the location of the centre of gravity (centre of mass, point of balance) is secondary to the location of the centre of percussion (forward pivot point, centre of oscillation), which should be close to the tip. So the centre of mass should be placed to put the centre of percussion near the tip.

CoP near the tip is common for many types of cut-and-thrust swords.

I don't see many antiques with locations of the centre of mass given, but if I was to pick a typical number, I'd say 4", with 3" to 6" being the typical range. Replicas that are supposed to be good replicas often fall in this range, but often balance in a bit closer.

Roland_M · 10th June 2015, 07:44 PM

Hello Andreas,

Did you mean the point of balance? I am unsure.

A broad sword is normally quite forward balanced, ~15-30% of the blade length.

The balance point of a saber, rapier and small sword is much closer to the hilt, ~5-15%.

This leads to a total different fencing technique.

There are some good videos on YouTube:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6r7VWIQCHvM
(Rapier vs longsword Mike & Nick AHF Sparring)

I hope, this will help.

Regards Roland

AHorsa · 11th June 2015, 11:51 AM

Thanks for your replies!
Yes, I mean the point of balance. I am not sure if "Broadsword" is the right specification. Actually I mean field swords / Felddegen. I´ve got one from the mid of the 17th century with a 77cm long blade where the balance point is at 9,2 cm (which is only around 12%), measured from the crossguard...

Best regards
Andreas

Roland_M · 11th June 2015, 01:29 PM

In german language we have much more different words for edged weapons than other languages.

The closest translation for "Felddegen" is "small sword".

Your 12% are almost in the middle between 5 and 15%.

Regards Roland

Timo Nieminen · 11th June 2015, 11:30 PM

9.2cm sounds OK. What kind of hilt? How heavy is the sword.

The main thing affecting the balance will be the weight of the hilt. With heavier full baskets, the centre of balance can be as close as 7cm. With a typical mortuary sword hilt or Walloon hilt, about 10cm is common. With a lighter hilt, I'd expect to see points of balance out as far as 15cm.

I've only seen on point of balance for an original 17th century military rapier: 10cm. Not enough to judge "typical".

For 17th century sabres, I'd expect to see 15-20cm for Eastern Europe, and 8-15cm for complex-hilted sabres from Western Europe.

"Broadsword" = "not a smallsword"; i.e., a straight-bladed cut-thrust sword rather than a dedicated thrusting sword is common enough terminology, and clear enough with the context of "17th century". The only ambiguity is whether is also means "not a backsword", i.e., double-edged rather than single-edged.

AHorsa · 11th June 2015, 11:49 PM

Thank you both for your answers and clarifications. I would also associate the phrase "small sword" with a slim bladed weapon designed mainly for thrust. Anyway, I´ll attach an image of the piece.
It has a quite heavy hilt but a relatively flat (6.2mm) blade. Of course this affects the center of gravity so I was wondering if this is still within the common range.
Sorry, I dont have a weighing scale to tell you the weight

Kind regards
Andreas

AHorsa · 11th June 2015, 11:57 PM

here´s the picture:

9th June 2015, 07:21 PM	#1
AHorsa Member Join Date: May 2014 Location: Rhineland Posts: 367	Center of gravitiy of 17th century swords Dear All, I need some information about where the center of gravity of military (broad-) swords from the 17th century approximately has to be. Is there kind of a rule? Would be great if you can give me some examples. Thanks and best regards Andreas

11th June 2015, 11:49 PM	#7
AHorsa Member Join Date: May 2014 Location: Rhineland Posts: 367	Thank you both for your answers and clarifications. I would also associate the phrase "small sword" with a slim bladed weapon designed mainly for thrust. Anyway, I´ll attach an image of the piece. It has a quite heavy hilt but a relatively flat (6.2mm) blade. Of course this affects the center of gravity so I was wondering if this is still within the common range. Sorry, I dont have a weighing scale to tell you the weight Kind regards Andreas Last edited by AHorsa; 12th June 2015 at 12:42 AM.

11th June 2015, 11:57 PM	#8
AHorsa Member Join Date: May 2014 Location: Rhineland Posts: 367	here´s the picture: Attached Images

10th June 2015, 02:45 AM	#2
Timo Nieminen Member Join Date: Mar 2012 Posts: 422	I think the location of the centre of gravity (centre of mass, point of balance) is secondary to the location of the centre of percussion (forward pivot point, centre of oscillation), which should be close to the tip. So the centre of mass should be placed to put the centre of percussion near the tip. CoP near the tip is common for many types of cut-and-thrust swords. I don't see many antiques with locations of the centre of mass given, but if I was to pick a typical number, I'd say 4", with 3" to 6" being the typical range. Replicas that are supposed to be good replicas often fall in this range, but often balance in a bit closer.

10th June 2015, 07:44 PM	#3
Roland_M Member Join Date: Aug 2014 Location: Germany Posts: 525	Hello Andreas, Did you mean the point of balance? I am unsure. A broad sword is normally quite forward balanced, ~15-30% of the blade length. The balance point of a saber, rapier and small sword is much closer to the hilt, ~5-15%. This leads to a total different fencing technique. There are some good videos on YouTube: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6r7VWIQCHvM (Rapier vs longsword Mike & Nick AHF Sparring) I hope, this will help. Regards Roland

11th June 2015, 11:51 AM	#4
AHorsa Member Join Date: May 2014 Location: Rhineland Posts: 367	Thanks for your replies! Yes, I mean the point of balance. I am not sure if "Broadsword" is the right specification. Actually I mean field swords / Felddegen. I´ve got one from the mid of the 17th century with a 77cm long blade where the balance point is at 9,2 cm (which is only around 12%), measured from the crossguard... Best regards Andreas

11th June 2015, 01:29 PM	#5
Roland_M Member Join Date: Aug 2014 Location: Germany Posts: 525	In german language we have much more different words for edged weapons than other languages. The closest translation for "Felddegen" is "small sword". Your 12% are almost in the middle between 5 and 15%. Regards Roland

11th June 2015, 11:30 PM	#6
Timo Nieminen Member Join Date: Mar 2012 Posts: 422	9.2cm sounds OK. What kind of hilt? How heavy is the sword. The main thing affecting the balance will be the weight of the hilt. With heavier full baskets, the centre of balance can be as close as 7cm. With a typical mortuary sword hilt or Walloon hilt, about 10cm is common. With a lighter hilt, I'd expect to see points of balance out as far as 15cm. I've only seen on point of balance for an original 17th century military rapier: 10cm. Not enough to judge "typical". For 17th century sabres, I'd expect to see 15-20cm for Eastern Europe, and 8-15cm for complex-hilted sabres from Western Europe. "Broadsword" = "not a smallsword"; i.e., a straight-bladed cut-thrust sword rather than a dedicated thrusting sword is common enough terminology, and clear enough with the context of "17th century". The only ambiguity is whether is also means "not a backsword", i.e., double-edged rather than single-edged.