"… for all who took the sword will perish by the sword …"
(Gospel of Matthew 26:52)
Weapons from museums. In the previous article, we were talking about exactly how the two-handed swords of the Middle Ages differ from the two-handed swords of the Renaissance. And it is obvious that the differences lie not only in the details of the form, but above all in their length, weight and application in battle.
The two-handed sword (bidenhender) has a total length of 160 to 180 centimeters. No scabbard was made for these swords; they were worn on the shoulder like a lance. The upper part of the blade, the one that directly adjoined the crosshair and the handle, was usually not sharpened, but covered with wood and leather. Therefore, the hand could freely grasp the blade, which at least slightly facilitated fencing with such a sword (or even made it possible). Very often on such blades, directly on the border between their sharpened and non-sharpened parts, additional parrying hooks are found. It is easy to guess that such a Renaissance two-handed sword could not be used in the same way as a medieval battle sword. If in general it was still somehow used in battle, then it was done by foot soldiers, who, with the help of such swords, tried to punch gaps in the line of the enemy's peak. Since these were in a certain sense suicide teams, and only very strong warriors could properly handle a two-handed sword, they received a double salary, for which they were also called "double mercenaries."
During the 16th century, two-handed swords were less and less used in combat and increasingly became ceremonial weapons. For example, they were armed with honor guards, because these powerful swords made a strong impression. The two-handed sword became a ceremonial sword, which was carried by holding it in front of oneself. The swords became longer (often reaching 2 meters) and were decorated more and more magnificently and carefully.
The record for size belongs to ceremonial swords worn by the guards of Prince Edward of Wales during his time as Earl of Chester (1475-1483). These swords reached 2.26 meters. Needless to say, such huge swords no longer had any practical value, but should have symbolized the power of this suzerain.
It is clear that already at the very beginning of the appearance of such swords, attempts were made to further increase their striking power. And … that's how flamberg-type swords came into being. It was believed that a blow with such a sword - whether stabbing or cutting, inflicts a more severe wound, because it "breaks apart" it like a saw. Naturally, such conversations also caused greater fear, so the appearance of a warrior with such a sword had a strong psychological effect on the enemy. The owners of flambergs began to be condemned as notorious villains. Like, everyone:
"Wearer of a blade like a wave must be put to death without trial or investigation."
However, it should be noted here that when hitting with a two-handed sword on armor, there is not much difference what kind of blade he has. And in the same way, there is not much difference when the blow falls on a living body. Or let's put it this way: there may be a difference, but it is not so great to justify the technological difficulties of manufacturing and, consequently, the high cost of such blades. After all, forging a flamberg was more difficult than an ordinary sword, and it required more metal, which means it was heavier. In fact, it acquired the function of not a blade, but a polearm, and there everything depends not on the shape of the blade, but on the weight and length of the handle!
Each bend of the blade created a zone of increased metal stresses, so it was easier for a flamberg to break than a "two-handed" one with a straight blade. One could have acted differently: forge a straight blade and simply sharpen its blades "under the wave." But again, it was a very time consuming task, given the length of the blade and the number of indentations and protrusions on it.
In any case, it was a heavier and more expensive weapon, and if heavier, then … and more effective when hitting, no matter how sharpened his blade. And it was not for nothing that flambergs, in general, did not become a mass weapon. How did the eastern sabers with wavy and serrated blades not become a mass weapon! Wavy bayonets did not become widespread, although they could have been produced in machine production without any problems. It is possible, but did not … They considered that "the game is not worth the candle!"
Perhaps, the Scottish Highlanders used two-handed swords in battle for the longest time. What is known about him? That the two-handed claymore was a "great sword" used in Scotland during the late Middle Ages and early modern times from about 1400 to 1700. The last known battle in which the claymores are believed to have been used in large numbers was the Battle of Killikranky in 1689. This sword was somewhat longer than other two-handed swords of that era. In addition, Scottish swords were distinguished by a crosshair with straight crosses inclined forward, ending in a quatrefoil.
The average claymore had a total length of about 140 cm, with a handle of 33 cm, a blade of 107 cm and a weight of about 2.5 kg. For example, in 1772, Thomas Pennant described a sword seen on a visit to Raasai as:
“A bulky weapon two inches wide with a double-edged blade; blade length - three feet seven inches; the handle is fourteen inches; flat weapon … weight six and a half pounds."
The largest claymore in history, known as the "bloody killer", weighs 10 kilograms and is 2.24 meters long. It is believed to have been owned by a member of the Maxwell clan around the 15th century. The sword is currently in the National War Museum in Edinburgh, Scotland.
However, such a "thing" as the inertia of thinking is a terrible thing - swords with wavy blades disappeared, but for some time rapiers with exactly the same blades appeared in Europe. Like, in a duel for the blade of an ordinary rapier, you can grab a hand in a thick glove, hold it, and in the meantime, slaughter your opponent. Whereas it is impossible to grab such a blade even with a glove. Moreover, such a sword does not get stuck in chain mail and … in bones. But again, all these "magical properties" of such a blade were most likely clearly exaggerated.
But how much it is a sword, how much it is a sword - you can argue endlessly!
