Sharpness of battle sword?

A

ASBOB

Joined
Feb 8, 2008
Messages
1,304
After decades of watching movies involving swords, a question hit me:

how sharp did warriors in the Middle Ages (or later) prefer their battle weapons?

The reason I ask, is that it seems like a really sharp edge would disappear in battle almost immediately. After all, it is being struck, with full force, against a similar blade, or even worse, against a shield. did they prefer sharper edges, knowing they would get dull quickly, or did they go out with an all-purpose level of sharpness?
 
They were kept VERY sharp, but at a broad bevel more like a chisel. Sharpness and edge angle are totally different. Also, the bevels of weapons were kept thin. Even after the edge was damaged and gone the thin bevel allowed it to cut still. Much like how non-knife people are able to use thin (but extremely dull) paring knives to cut vegetables.
 
this was also something I was curious about. in the movie "Ironclad" the Templar is seen rubbing his chainmail on the edge of his broadsword, which clearly had a dull edge. I was wondering if it was a Hollywood goof on the prop weapon, or if they really were kept somewhat dull.
 
I talked with an actor dressed in authentic (replica) armor at Warwick Castle in England a few years ago about broadswords, as he was carrying one. It didn't seem very sharp to me, but he said he had experimented with a deer carcass and had no problem cutting it in half (on a table). He also added that the sword was designed to be long enough to cut someone on the ground from horseback.
 
I would suggest looking at a metal shear blade. . .they are very sharp, they cut metal of vaious grades, and maintain that sharpness. . .

. . .as I mentioned in another thread we use L6 for roll-off wheels to cut pipe. . .the roll-off wheels aren't extremely sharp in and of themselves, but they will cut through some very tough (unfriendly to machine on the lathe, even using carbide inserts) metal with very little effort.
 
Its my understanding that the blade had enough mass and speed to kinda split and rupture almost as much as cut. Different swords had different edge bevels and were used in different ways. The japanese and europeans both implemented chisel grinds on their swords. While being extremely durable I have heard that they tended to torque in the hand while using a chopping cut.
 
I saw that movie too Lapp Dance. I really enjoyed it. The only reason I could think of for that was that he was removing some rust or something. Love the bantha skull mandalorian avatar by the way.
 
Alberta Ed said:
I talked with an actor dressed in authentic (replica) armor at Warwick Castle in England a few years ago about broadswords, as he was carrying one. It didn't seem very sharp to me, but he said he had experimented with a deer carcass and had no problem cutting it in half (on a table). He also added that the sword was designed to be long enough to cut someone on the ground from horseback.
Click to expand...

The bolded text shows why it was dull. However, even blunt blades still can pack a big punch and the thin bevel will cut even though the edge itself is dull. High force concentrated on a small area will cut soft targets like flesh without much difficulty. Our skin isn't nearly as resilient as we'd like to think it is. Imagine smacking an over-ripe pumpkin with a thin steel ruler and you have a good idea of the principle. :)
 
I know that Japanese samurai intentionally dulled their blades sometime. They would cut their sword into heated sand to dull them. Later, when the warring period was over; katana progressively became sharper due to the fact that they no longer had to face armored opponents. I think the same logic applied in Europe as well. An overly sharped sword will chip too easily, especially against armor and shield with metal rim. I also believe that Europe medieval swords have much lower hardness than today knives, between 48-52 rockwell hardness -- too low to stay sharp.
 
Thomas Linton said:
About as many misconceptions as be posted as can obscure comments. ^___^
Click to expand...
We have a way to go then. Pick a post above and I'd probably disagree with most of them. ;) No biggie. The Hollywood attributions, edge bevels, sword use, durabilit.....
Where to start? I'm still counting.

Cheers

Don't mind me, I'm just thinking out loud again.

GC
 
As an example, I had a sword that was every bit as dull as a butter knife. You could grab the blade, and run your hand up and down it with no ill effects.

It would still take off an arm or leg with a hard swing. A lot of mass and a thinnish cross section will still sever limbs easily.

I have seen demonstrations with dull edges cutting free hanging deer in half (man sized and weight). Bones and all. Not much resistance.

Another demonstration was a butter knife dull sword cutting a tatami mat with a 2 inch?? inch oak dowel in the center (the tatami roll was equivalent to a "leg" mat + the oak dowel made it pretty darned impressive for a sword that you he rubbed up and down on the inside of his arm with a lot of pressure).

I have a bastard sword that was sold "edge sharp" I have bumped the edge twice and taken the entire top of my knuckle off, and the other time bumped it with my toe and cut it to the bone with almost no pressure.

If you were wearing a t-shirt on I would bet a few dollars that a hard two handed swing would take you in half at the waist, including both of your fore arms!

Now that deadliest warrior uses pig carcases to test swords, you get a pretty good idea (even when they have horrible technique as they often do!) They easily cut hogs in half with even one handed swords.
 
horseclover said:
Don't mind me, I'm just thinking out loud again.

GC
Click to expand...

I think that's what we're all doing since none of us have an authentic sword from whatever time period. . .and even if we did the chances of the edge still being in the same condition as the original user(s) kept in would be pretty slim. . .so it's all just conjecture and opinion, but it's enjoyable none the less.
 
Obata Toshishiro:

"Before a battle, one would strike sand over and over with the cutting edge of their sword. This is called "Habiki. This means that you unsharpen your blade so it doesn't chip or crack on impact of hard materials."
Click to expand...

Nagayama Kokan from The Connoisseur's Book to Japanese Swords, page 15:

"But a blade that is too sharp breaks easily, and so is useless against hard objects like armor. Likewise, the hira-zukuri blade was losing popularity, because its flat surface prevents it from moving smoothly when used as a weapon, and requires a great deal of power to effect a cut. The very act of cutting with it puts substantial pressure on the blade"
Click to expand...

Nagayam Kokan is considered a Living National Treasure. Obata Toshishiro is the founder of Shinkendo. He used to tested swords for many smiths in Japan. He is known for testing a katana against an antique helmet.
 
Last edited:
atomicjoe23 said:
I think that's what we're all doing since none of us have an authentic sword from whatever time period. . .and even if we did the chances of the edge still being in the same condition as the original user(s) kept in would be pretty slim. . .so it's all just conjecture and opinion, but it's enjoyable none the less.
Click to expand...

I have the sword, but your point about the edge being "original" is well taken.

I would think that crushed flesh and broken bones would not be too swell.

I have seen what were said to be "authentic" bodkin arrows and they were not needle sharp - more like a punch.
 
horseclover said:
How many misconceptions can be posted in one thread?

;)

Cheers

GC
Click to expand...

Personally I feel that setting those misconceptions right would be the best thing to do rather than making a vague remark about them and then ducking out. ;)
 
Well one sword I can think of to put this sharpness is the Sword of Saint Maurice. Which is an antique sword from the 13th century which was immaculately preserved.
Peter Johnsson studied the Sword of Saint Maurice:
"The edges were otherwise well preserved and as good as sharp (you cold probably sharpen a pencil with this sword as it is today)."

Insane that this sword could be 500-700 years old huh?
How about some pictures? (Pictures by Lunaman of SBG)
LondonandParis2011633.jpg

LondonandParis2011632.jpg

LondonandParis2011631.jpg

LondonandParis2011667.jpg

LondonandParis2011668.jpg


If you guys want to see more antique swords:
http://forum.sword-buyers-guide.com/viewtopic.php?f=10&t=4694
 
Very fine pictures of that sword! I've read about it and seen line drawings, but never good clear photographs. Granted, I haven't looked too hard. :D
 
FortyTwoBlades said:
Personally I feel that setting those misconceptions right would be the best thing to do rather than making a vague remark about them and then ducking out. ;)
Click to expand...

There are not enough hours in the day to agree in disagreeing. There is little enough time to wonder in bewilderment as one generation after another fail to pick up sword history (and swords in general) outside of what I often read as peer pressure to please.

Cheers

GC
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top