Evolution of European swords

[yoda4561]

This is a question that somehow managed to work its way to the surface of my brain tonight..err this morning.

I never did much research on this, as European swords arent really my cup of tea. I've noticed that western European swords evolved from a 1 or two handed "broadsword" (is that the correct term? trying to be somewhat general here) to more or less a basket hilted sabre. I am curious to those history afficionados among us as to how the crusades might have affected that as Western Europeans interacted with nations farther east. Could the sabre have its origins in the Scimitar?? Food for thought, have fun fellas

 

[Robert Marotz]

Heya Yoda...

I can really say I do not know much about European blades, but from my limited serious studies of them, I'll make sort of a general synopsis of what I think.

The European sword went through some remarkable evolutionary stages, from short stubby blades to long narrow ones, to giant choppers to swift slicers. Europe was and is a very diverse continent, many countries situated in such close proximity is bound to have a substantial amount of influence on the types of things one would encounter. Migration from crusades and wars and all sorts of other things further accentuate the point that there would be a lot of experience from one culture to another.

Typically in Europe the development of armor was fairly chaotic...going from simple to intensely elaborate, light to heavy, etc over time. With the changes in armor and in battlefield tactics, I would assume the necessity for different weapon styles would be predominant.

Another influencing factor would be the firearm. Due to firearms, much of warfare changed, and even though I cannot substantiate this, I feel it is the reasoning behind the sword's dwindling role in Europe. Perhaps it would take on a situation not unlike Japan's and duelling became more common than actual large-scale warfare. When it is one person against another, you are looking at a different scenario than what you had encountered with larger-scale battle tactics. Thus the weapons, armor, and techniques changed.

I cannot explain why certain weapons were dropped and why came to popularity in some places. I cannot give specifics because I simply do not know as much about European history as I do Japanese. But I hope I have been of a little aid.

Shinryû.

 

[Ken Cook]

There are an incredible number of factors involved in the evolution of western swords.
As Robert stated, the popularization of firearms was a major factor, but also consider "style" as a factor.
When Eleanor of Aquitane set down the rules for "courtly manner" it was only a matter of time before the effeminate manner displayed by Courtiers extended to the swords they carried. The style became very prissy and almost dancelike in many ways and grace was considered mandatory for a Courtier.
It's difficult to be graceful or effeminate when swinging a great huge Claymore!
Thus the hand and a half, became the Sword Rapier, then smaller still to the Rapier, and finally culminating in the Small Sword.
Note that the (French)style used with the small sword best fits one wearing a great deal of silk and simpering for all he's worth in the process, but it is a HIGHLY effective style of fighting and would typically have eaten the lunch of someone using the older lunge and thrust Rapier techniques common in the 1600s.
Like I said, there are MANY contributing factors, and I'm not trying to say this was even a MAJOR factor, but I do believe it was pertinant to the development of sword form and use in the last heyday of the duel.


------------------
I cut it, and I cut it, and it's STILL too short!

 

[Laurie Wise]

The Western Cavalry saber has it origins in the Polish/Hungarian "Winged" Hussars regiments of the Austrian Empire. These were influenced by the Turkish cavalry they were fighting dating from the 16th-17th centuries. By the late 1790s, these "dashing" cavalrymen with their flashy uniforms and swords could be found as Light Cavalry Regiments in many countries as the. The Heavy Cavalry was still using straight bladed baskethilted backswords (sometimes called "sabers") as late as the American Revolution in Germany, Austria, England and France. Napoleanic Wars really made the saber popular in the Military and it was used in many countries, in one form or another, as mark of rank or fashion since.

By the early 1500s, the European single handed broadsword was changing its shape, as much as fashion as the firearm was beginning to become more popular. The earliest Rapiers were little more than narrow broadswords with a more protection for the hand. Later, this became the classic Swepthilt the you see of the Elizabethian period.

What kept the sword in use after firearms became more popular was in the civilian sector as a mark of a gentleman. As a martial art, "fencing" was still popular. For the Military, it became a mark of the "Officer and Gentleman" when not just ceremonial.




[This message has been edited by Laurie Wise (edited 08-05-2000).]

 

[GREENJACKET]

The variety is due to a heady mix and plentiful supply of:
Wealth
Religion/politics
Steel
Gunpowder
Fashion
War Tactics
Art
Interlect and food.
The sword designs followed the dynamic changes of the times. Most of it all too bloody, which is incentive enough for innovation.
Steel was pretty good to start with. Italy, Germany and later Britain producing qualities and quantities that Japan and other nations could only dream about.
A Crusader Knight fully armoured with horse and support would have had the wealth the equivalent today of $500,000.
The Europeans with their world wide trade rarely missed an innotive war idea. Most sword influences were more to do with tactics. If you lost a war you changed your ways so that you didn't do it again. The light cavalry sabre was just another weapon system with its pros and cons like any other.



[This message has been edited by GREENJACKET (edited 08-07-2000).]

 

[FullerH]

If you want to find out about the evolution of the European sword, the very best book on the subject, according to those that I have talked with, is Ewart Oakshott's "The Archaeology of Weapons". It takes especially swordss up throught the Middle Ages and is profusely illustrated.
http://www.amazon.com/exec/obidos/ASIN/0486292886/o/qid=965690246/sr=2-1/103-3568883-6199849

I think that you will find that the evolution is rather more complicatged that you posit, and that it becomes even more so with the Renaissance and the appearance of reliable firearms.

------------------
Walk in the Light,
Hugh Fuller

 

[JerryO]

I'm not familiar enough with Japanese history, but in western blades, form followed function.

At first a wide blade was needed in the "bronze age" as you needed the heft to make a blade, because of no iron, blades where wide and short. As we enter the "iron age" weapons became longer because the materials where better. As combat shifted from foot to chariot, blade lengths increased. As armor got better, swords got heavier, those boys with there big 'o swords where wacking at each other like they had baseball bats not edged weapons. After gunpowder and firearms, armor became useless, so no longer is there a need for big bang'em up swords the swords got lighter. Also since your not hitting armor but going against flesh a curved blade slices throw flesh better than a straight one. (whens the last time a hunter skinned a deer with a straight edged knife) Rapiers and the like came about for a particular style of fighting. Cutlass's existed aboard ships cause you did not wear armor on a ship (if you fell off you sank) Here a curved blade was more effecient. And as pointed out by our knowledgeable posters it's easier to draw a curved blade and you get more edge on a curved blade.

Ok, it's a bit rambling, but you see many factors affected the development of differing western style swords. Materials, construction techniques, purpose (what it was used for) etc. etc. So it makes sense to me that differing forces where at work in the Eastern world as well, but form follows function, they look the way they do cause it works!

------------------
~ JerryO ~

Cogito Cogito Ergo Cogito Sum

 

[Dangus]

Cutlass's existed aboard ships cause you did not wear armor on a ship (if you fell off you sank)

The glaring exception to this were the Norse. Most of them knew if they went in the water during battle the cold would kill them anyway. I remember reading a Norse story where the warriors said something to the effect of, "at least we'll go down quickly, and faster we'll find Valhalla"

------------------
I twist the facts until they tell the truth. -Some intellectual sadist

The Bill of Rights is a document of brilliance, a document of wisdom, and it is the ultimate law, spoken or not, for the very concept of a society that holds liberty above the desire for ever greater power. -Me

 

[Laurie Wise]

The Norse did know how to swim and many a saga tells of that prowess. It was considered as part of their "Íðrottir" (mental and physical exercises) to learn this. Being able to swim in armour crossing a river or sea was not unheard of and a good idea. But if you did die...well, best to make sure you didnt lose that earring!

By the way, those that died at sea went to Aegir and Ran (Aesir god/goddess of the Sea...but the Norse were never very ones for having hard and fast rules on this)...one of the reasons for the traditions about carrying or wearing a gold token or earring to give if their bodies were caught in thier net.

 

[Laurie Wise]

As for the cutlass, it was a popular weapon with the average seaman because of the limited amount of space to swing one inboard a ship. This was why axes were popular too as well as to cut any lines. The cutlasses were easier to store in a weapons locker. but not all had a curved blade. The officers might have longer swords but many used shorter cuttoes, bilboas, hunting hangers or a boarding cutlass like their men. Sometimes it was just how much skill or familiarity you had too, leaving the other sword for dress uses. In some Navies, Midshipmen had to make do with their issue Dirks.




[This message has been edited by Laurie Wise (edited 08-15-2000).]

 

[JerryO]

Agreed, and some navies would not allow any knives in the possesion of lowly seamen, fearing that they would kill each other (or their officers) which is where the belaying pin comes into fashion.

------------------
~ JerryO ~

Cogito Cogito Ergo Cogito Sum

 

[FelixW]

About cutlasses

An anecdote sticks in my head, though I ran across it decades ago: when Blackbeard was terrorizing the Spanish Main and the coast of America, the British authorities eventually sent a ship out specifically to hunt him down. The captain, among other preparations for a hard fight, took away the cutlasses and specifically trained his men to use cut-and-thrust swords instead, to give them an edge in hand to hand combat. Apparently it worked, since Edward Teach's career came to an abrupt, bloody halt. The basic slashing action of a cutlass is pretty instinctive, like the use of a boarding axe, whereas thrusting requires training and practice.