Swordbreakers: A Myth ?

[cornelistromp]

Hi Jim,

very interesting thread. I found 4 different types.
1. Spanish main gauche with short sword catchers.
2. the saw teeth with locker (cf Boccia see pic and wallace coll.)
3. the saw teeth without locker (see bannerman 1926 and my pic)
4. the massive eastern type. (my pic)

regards from Amsterdam

[Matchlock]

Great job, Cornelis, thank you!

Now let's add the Dresden piece which, as well as one of your Spanish items, clearly shows signs of hard employment as a broken tooth has been repaired by copper soldering. It was made in Italy in about 1585 and given to Christian I, Elector of Saxony, in 1587.

Please note that all these multifunctional items are actually combination weapons. In the case of the Dresden combined blade catcher and breaker, you can see little riveted swivelling stops at the entrances beween the teeth: once the opponent's blade was caught between two teeth the stop would immediately prevent it from been withdrawn, and it could be broken.

I add more of these combined edged weapons from various museums; they are all united in a highly recommendable book:

Heinz-Werner Lewerken: Kombinationswaffen des 15.-19. Jahrhunderts, Berlin, 1989, ISBN 3-327-00516-8.

Don't worry about the text being in German; the huge and detailed photos, as well as the datings and exact measurements, will be perfectly understood by everyone!
It comprises important items from the Met, The Royal Armouries Leeds, the German Historic Museum (DHM) Berlin and of course the Dresden museums.

Best,
Michael

[Matchlock]

Here's a link where to purchase numerous cheap copies of Kombinationswaffen at abebooks.com:

http://www.abebooks.de/servlet/Searc...waffen&x=0&y=0

Michael

[fernando]

A pity they are all in 'alemão' .



Fernando

[Jim McDougall]

Absolutely fantastic you guys!!!!
This is exactly the kind of discussion and analysis I had hoped for

Questions like these have often been on my mind in years gone by. However, using the only resources typically at hand, as I have cited in my original post the results were at best, inconclusive. Any sort of sound analysis was unlikely without field study, clearly out of reach, or the opinions of many arms writers who often perpetuate those of earlier writers left only unresolved questions.

Finally, here we have international expertise with fantastic resources compiled into a wonderfully comprehensive forensic study of our topic!
The examples shared here by Michael and Cornelius from thier files are amazing and most of these I have never seen before.
Thank you both so much for posting all of these, and Michael, for such great detail, as well as the link to the combination weapons book.

Fernando, you are far too modest, and as I have always noted, you always come up with references from Portuguese resources, which have too often not been adequately represented in international historical exchange in altogether too many studies. You have always represented the key importance of Portugal well in your outstanding contributions, as well as your keen insight into the weapons.
Just as you have mentioned, the 'rompepuntas' is yet another fanciful interpretation devised by romantic writers it would seem, and a good example of this kind of perspective with weapons. I was not aware of the Portuguese influence noted with the trident type parrying weapon, but seems to make perfect sense.

I must say however, that with the numerous examples presented here by Cornelius and Michael, the evidence for at least some degree of actual use of these 'swordbreakers' seems compelling, especially with the evidence of damage in one or more. This of course admittedly may be the result of curious 'testing' or 'horseplay' with these in later years, but I note that here only as a matter of consideration.
The best evidence will be in finding contemporary records advocating or discussing the use of these in actual sword combat.

Thank you again guys, very very much!

All the best,
Jim

[fearn]

Hi Jim,

Fun thread!

I keep being reminded of the episode of Mythbusters where they attempted to cut a sword with a sword, and proved how difficult that feat was (basically, those movie shots of people cutting others' rapiers in half wouldn't work). Given that brute-force, edge on hacking of two swords against each other was insufficient in most cases to break either blade, I'd be real surprised if either the European or eastern sword-breakers actually lived up to their names. Rather, I think they're for grabbing and temporarily holding blades. That would give a small advantage to the person with the sword-breaker, and might justify the use of the weapon. It would also explain the damage seen.

Just a thought,

F

[Paul Macdonald]

Hi Folks,

A good topic.

If I may shed some light on the practical potential and effective use of these weapons...

The legend of `swordbreakers` is one that has been repeated and accepted in history every bit as much as `blood-grooves`!

Let us first look to the blades that these daggers are supposed to break. The `swordbreaking` daggers predominately date from the C17th, and are designed to be used in conjunction with and be facing the civilian rapier in single combat.
Rapier blades of the C17th do vary in section, width and thickness, largely depending upon the fencing style it is designed for, or down to personal preference in size and weight.

Regardless of width and thickness though, one essential standard prevails - that of quality of temper required for any rapier blade of practical use.

The thickness of any one well made and tempered rapier blade will vary from forte to foible with distal taper, becoming thinner towards the point, but in a different manner to a broadsword blade.

A broad or backsword blade is designed primarily to cut effectively and be light and fast in doing so. The distal taper therefore is pronounced, with many original blades tapering to a fraction of 1mm thick near the point. I have handled many originals where the blade steel tapers to the thickness no more than that of heavy paper or thin card. Steel this thin is effective for a cutting blade.

A rapier blade is designed primarily to thrust and pierce. It is designed to be used for two combative scenarios - the pre-arranged duel and the street fight. In the street fight, that piercing blade must pierce the body efficiently through whatever clothing the opponent wears. A blade too thin here would be a liability. Some thickness of steel and hardness of temper is therefore required for a good rapier blade to pierce without overly flexing.

Any well tempered and hardened blade is difficult to break without large amounts of leverage and pressure. Effective mechanical leverage relies upon some distance between point of contact (fulcrum) and the point where force is applied.

For dagger examples where the quillions turn towards the point, then yes, these can effectively catch an opponents blade, but there is minimal distance from point of force (hand) and fulcrum.
This combined with the fact that pommels and quillions are traditionally crafted in a softer working material than the weapon blade gives us combined elements of insufficient force of leverage and weaker material of construction. These do not give us practical dynamics with which to physically break a blade.

Also martially speaking, there is no great advantage gained to breaking an opponents blade. A broken blade is never a blunt blade, but a sharp and jagged ended blade that is just as easily stuck through face or belly all the same.

Advantage can be gained however, in restricting the opponents movement in terms of footwork or bladework. Simply trapping the opponents blade for a second or a fraction thereof is all that may be required for a successfully placed thrust, all the while secure from your opponents offence.
Downturned dagger quillions firstly act as a check to stop the opponents blade sliding or bouncing off onto your own target at the moment of defence. Once the blade has entered here, a turn of the dagger in the hand can also momentarily lock the blade in place while your own attack is made.

I hope that this helps regarding practical function of main gauche dagger forms

Macdonald
www.macdonaldarms.com
http://www.historicalfencing.org/Mac...mory/index.htm

[fearn]

Gotta admit, I'm thinking that some of these (like that lantern shield) should be cross-posted in the "10 weirdest blades" thread....

F

[VANDOO]

I AGREE THESE WERE PROBELY FOR PARRYING THE OPPONENTS LONGER SWORD GIVING YOU A MOMENTARY OPENING FOR A LUNGE. IT IS ALSO POSSIBLE THAT IT COULD BE TWISTED IN SUCH A WAY AS TO DISARM AN OPPONENT, A BLADE MIGHT SOMEHOW BE BROKEN BUT I DOUBT THAT WAS ITS MAIN PURPOSE. THE SPRING LOADED ONES MIGHT MAKE A GOOD DISTRACTION IF THE OPPONENT HAD NEVER SEEN ONE WHICH COULD ALSO LEAD TO AN OPENING. A PERSON WOULD ALWAYS BE VERY WARY OF SOME ODD LOOKING SPIKEY THING HE DIDN'T KNOW WHAT WAS OR WHAT IT COULD DO.
THE BLADE BREAKERS THAT I THINK COULD PERHAPS DAMMAGE AN OPPONENTS BLADE AND PERHAPS WEAKEN IT ENOUGH TO BREAK IN THE COURSE OF A BATTLE WERE THE GREATSWORDS. THE BLADE PROTRUSIONS ALSO SERVED AS A SECONDARY GAURD WHEN FIGHTING BUT IF A HARD STRIKE WAS DEFLECTED PROPERLY AND THE FULL FORCE FELL ON THE OPPONEMTS SWORD EDGE IT WOULD SURELY DO DAMMAGE. THE ZWEIHANDER IS ONE SUCH GERMAN SWORD.

[Gavin Nugent]

Great Discussion guys and some very valid historical references.

Personally, I do wonder if this name "Sword Breaker" has been taken out of context.
There is no denying that these are real weapons whether actually used or not remains to be proven absolutely. But for these daggers to break a sword of old I think not.

To my reckoning, the name is used out of context, I believe "sword breaker" to be breaking the path and application of the sword, not shattering the blade. They are after all its a parrying weapon and they do break the path of the on coming blade, be it catching in grooves on the blades or the guards.

My 2 cents and food for thought.

Gav