What is the heaviest sword in history? The largest combat two-handed sword

What did Historical Swords Weigh?

Translation from English: Georgy Golovanov

"Never overload yourself with heavy weapons,
for the mobility of the body and the mobility of the weapon
are the two main helpers in victory"

- Joseph Suitnam
“School of noble and worthy science of defense”, 1617

How much exactly did they weigh? medieval and renaissance swords? This question (perhaps the most common on this topic) can be easily answered knowledgeable people. Serious scientists and fencing practice value knowledge of the exact dimensions of weapons of the past, while the general public and even specialists are often completely ignorant of this matter. Find reliable information about the weight of real historical swords who have actually passed the weigh-in is not easy, but convincing skeptics and the ignorant is an equally difficult task.

A significant problem.

False statements about the weight of medieval and Renaissance swords are unfortunately quite common. This is one of the most common misconceptions. And not surprising, considering how many mistakes about fencing of the past is distributed through the media. Everywhere from television and film to video games, historical European swords are portrayed as clumsy and swung around with wide movements. Recently, on The History Channel, a respected academic and military technology expert confidently stated that swords XIV centuries sometimes weighed as much as “40 pounds” (18 kg)!

From simple life experience, we know very well that swords could not be excessively heavy and did not weigh 5-7 kg or more. It can be repeated endlessly that this weapon was not at all bulky or clumsy. It is curious that although accurate information on the weight of swords would be very useful to weapons researchers and historians, there is no serious book with such information. Perhaps the document vacuum is part of this very problem. However, there are several reputable sources that provide some valuable statistics. For example, the catalog of swords from the famous Wallace Collection in London lists dozens of exhibits, among which it is difficult to find anything heavier than 1.8 kg. Most examples, from battle swords to rapiers, weighed much less than 1.5 kg.

Despite all assurances to the contrary, medieval swords were actually light, comfortable and weighed less than 1.8kg on average. Leading Sword Expert Evart Oakeshott stated:

“Medieval swords were neither unbearably heavy nor identical - the average weight of any standard-sized sword was between 1.1 kg and 1.6 kg. Even large hand-and-a-half “military” swords rarely weighed more than 2 kg. Otherwise they would undoubtedly be too impractical even for people who learned to wield weapons from the age of 7 (and who had to be tough to survive)."(Oakeshot, The Sword in the Hand, p. 13).

Leading author and researcher of 20th century European swordsEvart Oakeshottknew what he was saying. He held thousands of swords in his hands and personally owned several dozen copies, from the Bronze Age to the 19th century.

Medieval swords, as a rule, were high-quality, lightweight, maneuverable military weapons, equally capable of delivering severing blows and deep cuts. They didn't look like the clunky, heavy things that are often portrayed in the media, more like a "club with a blade." According to another source:

“The sword, it turns out, was surprisingly light: the average weight of swords from the 10th to the 15th centuries was 1.3 kg, and in the 16th century - 0.9 kg. Even the heavier bastard swords, which were used by only a small number of soldiers, did not exceed 1.6 kg, and the horsemen's swords, known as "one and a half", weighed 1.8 kg on average. It is logical that these surprisingly low numbers also apply to huge two-handed swords, which were traditionally wielded only by “real Hercules.” And yet they rarely weighed more than 3 kg” (translated from: Funcken, Arms, Part 3, p. 26).

Since the 16th century, there were, of course, special ceremonial or ritual swords that weighed 4 kg or more, however, these monstrous examples were not military weapons, and there is no evidence that they were even intended for use in battle. Indeed, it would be pointless to use them in the presence of more maneuverable combat units, which were much lighter. Dr. Hans-Peter Hills in a 1985 dissertation dedicated to the great master of the 14th century Johannes Lichtenauer writes that since the 19th century, many weapons museums have passed off large collections of ceremonial weapons as military weapons, ignoring the fact that their blades were blunt and their size, weight and balance impractical for use (Hils, pp. 269-286).

Expert opinion.

In my hands is a wonderful example of a 14th century military sword. Testing the sword for maneuverability and ease of handling.

The belief that medieval swords were bulky and awkward to use has become urban folklore and still baffles those of us new to fencing. It is not easy to find an author of books about fencing of the 19th and even 20th centuries (even a historian) who would not categorically assert that medieval swords were "heavy", "clumsy", "bulky", "uncomfortable" and (as a result of a complete misunderstanding of the technique of possession, the goals and objectives of such weapons) they were supposedly intended only for attack.

Despite these measurements, many today are convinced that these large swords must be especially heavy. This opinion is not limited to our century. For example, an overall flawless booklet on army fencing 1746 "The Use of the Broad Sword" Thomas Page, spreads tall tales about early swords. After talking about how things have changed from early techniques and knowledge in the field of combat fencing, Paige states:

“The form was crude, and the technique was devoid of Method. It was an Instrument of Power, not a Weapon or a Work of Art. The sword was enormously long and wide, heavy and heavy, forged only to cut from top to bottom with the Power of a strong Hand” (Page, p. A3).

Views Page shared by other fencers who then used light small swords and sabers.

Testing two-handed sword 15th century at the British Royal Armouries.

In the early 1870s, Captain M. J. O'Rourke, a little-known Irish-American historian and fencing teacher, spoke about early swords, characterizing them as "massive blades that required all the strength of both hands". We can also recall the pioneer in the field of historical fencing research, Egerton Castle, and his remarkable comment about "rude old swords" ( Castle,"Schools and fencing masters").

Quite often, some scientists or archivists, experts in history, but not athletes, not fencers, who trained in using a sword from childhood, authoritatively assert that the knight’s sword was “heavy.” The same sword in trained hands will seem light, balanced and maneuverable. For example, the famous English historian and museum curator Charles Foulkes in 1938 stated:

“The so-called crusader sword is heavy, with a wide blade and a short hilt. It has no balance, as the word is understood in fencing, and it is not intended for thrusts; its weight does not allow for quick parries” (Ffoulkes, p. 29-30).

Foulkes's opinion, completely unfounded, but shared by his co-author Captain Hopkins, was the product of his experience in gentleman's duels with sporting weapons. Fulkes, of course, bases his opinion on the light weapons of his day: foils, swords and dueling sabers (just as a tennis racket may seem heavy to a table tennis player).

Unfortunately, Fulkes in 1945 he even expressed it this way:

“All swords from the 9th to the 13th centuries are heavy, poorly balanced and equipped with a short and awkward hilt”(Ffoulkes, Arms, p.17).

Imagine, 500 years of professional warriors have been wrong, and a museum curator in 1945, who has never been in a real sword fight or even trained with a real sword of any kind, informs us of the shortcomings of this magnificent weapon.

Famous French medievalist later repeated Fulkes's opinion literally as a reliable judgment. Dear historian and specialist in medieval military affairs, Dr. Kelly de Vries, in a book about military technology Middle Ages, nevertheless writes in the 1990s about “thick, heavy, uncomfortable, but exquisitely forged medieval swords” (Devries, Medieval Military Technology, p. 25). It is not surprising that such “authoritative” opinions influence modern readers, and we have to make so much effort.

Testing a 16th century bastard sword at the Glenbow Museum, Calgary.

This opinion of “bulky old swords,” as one French swordsman once called them, could be ignored as a product of its era and lack of information. But now such views cannot be justified. It is especially sad when leading fencing masters (trained only in the weapons of modern fake duels) proudly express judgments about the weight of early swords. As I wrote in the book "Medieval fencing" 1998:

“It’s very unfortunate that the presenters masters of sports fencing(wielding only light rapiers, épées and sabers) demonstrate their misconceptions about “10-pound medieval swords that can only be used for “awkward striking and slashing.”

For example, a respected swordsman of the 20th century Charles Selberg mentions the "heavy and clumsy weapons of early times" (Selberg, p. 1). A modern swordsman de Beaumont states:

"In the Middle Ages, armor required weapons - battle axes or greatswords - to be heavy and clumsy" (de Beaumont, p. 143).

Did the armor require the weapon to be heavy and clumsy? In addition, the 1930 Book of Fencing stated with great confidence:

“With few exceptions, the swords of Europe in 1450 were heavy, clumsy weapons, and in balance and ease of use were no different from axes” (Cass, pp. 29-30).

Even today this idiocy continues. In a book with a good title « Complete Guide on the Crusades for Dummies" tells us that knights fought in tournaments, “cutting each other with heavy, 20-30 pound swords” (P. Williams, p. 20).

Such comments say more about the inclinations and ignorance of the authors than about the nature of actual swords and fencing. I myself have heard these statements countless times in personal conversations and online from fencing instructors and their students, so I have no doubt about their prevalence. As one author wrote about medieval swords in 2003,

“they were so heavy that they could even split armor”, and the great swords weighed “up to 20 pounds and could easily destroy heavy armor” (A. Baker, p. 39).

None of this is true.

Weighing of a rare example of a 14th century combat sword from the collection of the Alexandria Arsenal.

Perhaps the most damning example that comes to mind is Olympic fencer Richard Cohen and his book on fencing and the history of the sword:

“swords, which could weigh more than three pounds, were heavy and poorly balanced and required strength rather than skill” (Cohen, p. 14).

With all due respect, even when he accurately states the weight (while belittling the merits of those who owned them), nevertheless, he is able to perceive them only in comparison with the fake swords of modern sport, even believing that the technique of their use was predominantly “impact-crushing”. If you believe Cohen, it turns out that a real sword, intended for a real fight to the death, should be very heavy, poorly balanced and require no real skill? Are modern toy swords for make-believe battles as they should be?

In hand is an example of a 16th century Swiss combat sword. Sturdy, lightweight, functional.

For some reason, many classical swordsmen still cannot understand that early swords, while real weapons, were not made to be held at arm's length and twirled with just the fingers. Now beginning of XXI century, there is a revival of the historical martial arts of Europe, and fencers still adhere to the misconceptions inherent 19th century. If you don't understand how a given sword was used, it's impossible to appreciate its true capabilities or understand why it was made the way it was. And so you interpret it through the prism of what you already know yourself. Even wide swords with a cup were maneuverable piercing and cutting weapons.

Oakeshott was aware of the existing problem, a mixture of ignorance and prejudice, more than 30 years ago when he wrote his significant book "The Sword in the Age of Chivalry":

“Add to this the fantasies of the romantic writers of the past, who, wanting to give their heroes the characteristics of Superman, made them brandish huge and heavy weapons, thus demonstrating a strength far beyond the capabilities of modern man. And the picture is completed by the evolution of attitudes towards this type of weapon, right up to the contempt that lovers of sophistication and elegance who lived in the eighteenth century, romantics of the Elizabethan era and admirers of magnificent art had for swords Renaissance. It becomes clear why weapons, visible only in their degraded state, can be considered ill-conceived, crude, ponderous and ineffective.

Of course, there will always be people for whom strict asceticism of forms is indistinguishable from primitivism and incompleteness. And an iron object a little less than a meter long may well seem very heavy. In fact, the average weight of such swords varied between 1.0 and 1.5 kg, and they were balanced (according to their purpose) with the same care and skill as, for example, a tennis racket or fishing rod. The prevailing opinion that they cannot be held in hands is absurd and long ago outdated, but continues to live, like the myth that knights dressed in armor could only be lifted onto horses by a crane" ( Oakeshott, "The Sword in the Age of Chivalry", p. 12).

Even a similar broadsword from the 16th century is quite convenient to control for striking and thrusting.

Long-time researcher of weapons and fencing at the British Royal Armories Kate Ducklin states:

“From my experience at the Royal Armories, where I studied actual weapons from various periods, the broad-bladed European fighting sword, whether slashing, stabbing or thrusting, typically weighed between 2 pounds for a one-handed model and 4 pounds. £5 for two-handed. Swords made for other purposes, such as ceremonies or executions, may have weighed more or less, but these were not combat examples” (personal correspondence with the author, April 2000).

Mr Ducklin, undoubtedly knowledgeable, because he held and studied literally hundreds of excellent swords from the famous collection and looked at them from the point of view of a fighter.

Training with a fine example of a true 15th century Estoc. Only in this way can one understand the true purpose of such weapons.

In a brief article about the types of swords of the 15th-16th centuries. from the collections of three museums, including exhibits from Museum Stibbert in Florence, Dr Timothy Drawson noted that none of the one-handed swords weighed more than 3.5 pounds, and none two-handed sword did not weigh more than 6 pounds. His conclusion:

“From these examples it is clear that the idea that medieval and Renaissance swords were heavy and clumsy is far from true” (Drawson, pp. 34 & 35).

Subjectivity and objectivity.

Obviously, if you know how to handle a weapon, the technique of using it, and the dynamics of the blade, then any weapon from the Middle Ages and Renaissance will seem flexible and easy to use.

In 1863, a sword maker and major specialist John Latham from "Wilkinson Swords" erroneously claims that some excellent specimen 14th century sword had “enormous weight” because it was “used in those days when warriors had to deal with opponents clad in iron.” Latham adds:

"They took the most heavy weapons as much as they could, and exerted as much force as they could" (Latham, Shape, p. 420-422).

However, commenting on the "excessive heaviness" of swords, Latham talks about a 2.7 kg sword forged for a cavalry officer who thought it would strengthen his wrist, but as a result “No living person could cut with it... The weight was so great that it was impossible to accelerate it, so the cutting force was zero. A very simple test proves this" (Latham, Shape, p. 420-421).

Latham also adds: “Body type, however, greatly influences the results.”. He then concludes, repeating the common mistake, that strong man will take a heavier sword to deal more damage.

"The weight that a person can lift with highest speed, will produce the best effect, but he won't necessarily be able to move a lighter sword faster. The sword can be so light that it feels like a “whip” in your hand. Such a sword is worse than one that is too heavy" (Latham, pp. 414-415).

I must have enough mass to hold the blade and point, parry blows and give force to the blow, but at the same time it must not be too heavy, that is, slow and awkward, otherwise faster weapons will circle around it. This required weight depended on the purpose of the blade, whether it should stab, chop, both, and what kind of material it might encounter.

Most Medieval and Renaissance swords are so balanced and poised that they seem to literally cry out to you: “Master me!”

Fantastic stories about knightly valor often mention huge swords that only great heroes and villains could wield, and with which they cut horses and even trees. But these are all myths and legends; they cannot be taken literally. In Froissart's Chronicles, when the Scots defeat the English at Mulrose, we read of Sir Archibald Douglas, who "held before him a huge sword, the blade of which was two meters long, and hardly anyone could lift it, but Sir Archibald without labor wielded it and inflicted such terrible blows that everyone he hit fell to the ground; and there was no one among the English who could withstand his blows.” Great fencing master of the 14th century Johannes Lichtenauer he himself said: “The sword is the measure, and it is large and heavy” and is balanced with a suitable pommel, which means that the weapon itself should be balanced and therefore suitable for battle, and not weighty. Italian master Filippo Vadi in the early 1480s he instructed:

"Take light weapons, and not heavy, so that you can easily control it so that its weight does not bother you.”

So the fencing teacher specifically mentions that there is a choice between "heavy" and "light" blades. But - again - the word "heavy" is not synonymous with the word "too heavy", or cumbersome and unwieldy. You can simply choose, for example, a tennis racket or a baseball bat that is lighter or heavier.

Having held in my hands more than 200 excellent European swords from the 12th to 16th centuries, I can say that I always Special attention gave them weight. I have always been amazed by the liveliness and balance of almost all the specimens I have come across. Swords of the Middle Ages and Renaissance, which I personally studied in six countries, and in some cases fencing and even chopping with them, were - I repeat - light and well balanced. Having considerable experience in owning weapons, I very rarely encountered historical swords, which would not be easy to handle and maneuverable. Units – if any – from short swords before the bastards weighed over 1.8 kg, and even they were well balanced. When I came across examples that I found too heavy for me or unbalanced for my tastes, I realized that they might be a good fit for people with different body types or fighting styles.

In hands are weapons from the collection of the Royal Swedish Arsenal, Stockholm.

When I was working with two 16th century combat swords, each 1.3 kg, they showed themselves perfectly. Deft blows, thrusts, defenses, transfers and quick counterattacks, furious cutting blows - as if the swords were almost weightless. There was nothing “heavy” about these intimidating and graceful instruments. When I practiced with a real 16th-century two-handed sword, I was amazed at how light the 2.7 kg weapon seemed, as if it weighed half as much. Even if it was not intended for a person of my size, I could see its obvious effectiveness and efficiency because I understood the technique and method of wielding this weapon. The reader can decide for himself whether to believe these stories. But the countless times I held excellent examples of 14th, 15th, or 16th-century swordsmanship in my hands, stood in stances, and moved around under the attentive gaze of benevolent guardians, firmly convinced me of how much real swords weighed (and how to wield them).

One day, while examining several swords of the 14th and 16th centuries from the collection Evart Oakeshott, we were even able to weigh a few specimens on digital scales, just to make sure their weight was correct. Our colleagues did the same, and their results coincided with ours. This experience of learning about real weapons is critical ARMA Association in relation to many modern swords. I'm becoming increasingly disillusioned with the neatness of many modern replicas. Obviously, the more similar a modern sword is to a historical one, the more accurate the reconstruction of the technique of wielding this sword will be.

In fact,
correct understanding of the weight of historical swords
necessary to understand their correct use.

Measuring and weighing weapons from a private collection.

Having studied in practice many medieval and renaissance swords, having collected impressions and measurement results, dear fencer Peter Johnson said that he “felt their amazing mobility. Overall they are fast, accurate and expertly balanced for their tasks. Often a sword appears much lighter than it actually is. This is the result of a careful distribution of mass, not just a balance point. Measuring the weight of a sword and its balance point is only the beginning of understanding its “dynamic balance” (i.e., how the sword behaves when in motion).” He adds:

"All in all, modern replicas very far from the original swords in this regard. Distorted ideas about what real sharp military weapons are are the result of training only on modern weapons.”

So Johnson also claims that real swords are lighter than many people think. Even then, weight is not the only indicator, because the main characteristics are the distribution of mass along the blade, which in turn affects the balance.

We carefully measure and weigh weapons from the 14th and 16th centuries.

You need to understand
that modern copies of historical weapons,
even being approximately equal in weight,
do not guarantee the same feeling from owning them,
like their vintage originals.

If the geometry of the blade does not match the original (including along the entire length of the blade, shape and crosshair), the balance will not match.

Modern copy it often feels heavier and less comfortable than the original.

Accurately reproducing the balance of modern swords is an important aspect of their creation.

Today, many cheap and low-grade swords are historical replicas, theatrical props, fantasy weapons or souvenir products- become heavy due to poor balance. Part of this problem arises due to the sad ignorance of the blade geometry on the part of the manufacturer. On the other hand, the reason is a deliberate reduction in manufacturing costs. In any case, sellers and manufacturers can hardly be expected to admit that their swords are too heavy or poorly balanced. It's much easier to say that this is how real swords should be.

Testing of an original infantryman's two-handed sword, 16th century.

There is another factor why modern swords usually made heavier than the originals.

Due to ignorance, blacksmiths and their clients expect the feeling of the weight of the sword.

These feelings arose after numerous images of woodcutter warriors with their slow swings, demonstrating the heaviness "barbarian swords", because only massive swords can hit hard. (In contrast to the lightning-fast aluminum swords of Eastern martial arts demonstrations, it is hard to blame anyone for such a lack of understanding.) Although the difference between a 1.7 kg sword and a 2.4 kg sword does not seem that big, when trying to reconstruct the technique, the difference becomes quite tangible. Additionally, when it comes to rapiers, which typically weighed between 900 and 1100 grams, their weight could be misleading. All the weight of such a thin piercing weapon was concentrated in the handle, which gave greater mobility to the tip despite the weight compared to wider cutting blades.

And Princess Toropetskaya, Rostislava Mstislavovna, left an unforgettable mark on the history of Rus'. As soon as a conversation comes up about him, most of us remember Battle on the Ice. It was then that the troops under the command of the prince drove out the Livonian knights. Not everyone remembers that he received his nickname for another feat. Then the legendary sword of Alexander Nevsky was mentioned for the first time. This event dates back to 1240. In a place called Ust-Izhora, in a battle led by the prince, the Swedes were completely defeated.

In 1549, he was canonized because he refused to unite with the Catholic Church, and thus preserved Orthodoxy in Rus'. The Grand Duke was also famous for not losing a single battle.

Mystical sword

Russian troops won, despite their minority. Nevsky was an amazing tactician, so thanks to his intelligence and fearlessness, the warriors defeated the enemy. There is also a mystical episode in this story. According to legend, the enemy was mortally frightened by the sword of Alexander Nevsky, which glowed very strangely. Alexander mastered this weapon perfectly, taking off the heads of three Swedes at once with one blow. But, as they say, fear has big eyes. The mystical aura was most likely given to the weapon by the Swedish soldiers to justify their defeat. And Alexander Nevsky’s sword simply fell under the rays of the sun.

The fact is that the Russian troops were positioned facing the heavenly body. His beam hit the raised sword, and the frightened Swedish army mistook it for something supernatural. In addition, in this battle, the prince broke a gun on the head of Birger, the leader of the enemies. Having won this battle, Prince Alexander received his sonorous nickname - Nevsky.

Find of the monks

After the legendary battle, the sword of Alexander Nevsky was placed in the house of Pelgusius. Later, this building burned down and all property, including weapons, remained under its ruins. There is also information that in the 18th century, some monastic farmers discovered a sword while plowing the land.

How it was? The incident dates back to 1711. On the site of the Neva Battle, following the decree of Peter I, a temple was founded. Not far from him, the monks were cultivating the land for crops. Here they found legendary weapon, or rather, parts of it. They were placed in a chest. The clergy decided that the sword should be in the temple. When its building was completely rebuilt, parts of the weapon were placed under the foundation so that the blade would become a talisman of this place. And the most extraordinary thing is that since then not a single disaster could not destroy the church.

October Revolution made its own adjustments to history: all the documents that were in the temple were burned. Not long ago, historians found the manuscript of a white officer and a true patriot. He devoted several pages from his diary to describing the sword of Alexander Nevsky. The White Guard warrior believed that Russia would remain indestructible as long as the mystical blade was kept on its territory.

How much did the average sword weigh?

A warrior in the 13th century could handle a sword weighing about 1.5 kg well. There were also blades for tournaments, they pulled 3 kg. If the weapon was ceremonial, that is, not for battles, but for decoration (made of gold or silver, decorated with gems), then its weight reached 5 kg. It was impossible to fight with such a blade. The heaviest weapon in history is considered to be the sword that belonged to Goliath. The Bible testifies that the opponent of David, the future king of Judah, was simply enormous in stature.

How much did Alexander Nevsky's sword weigh?

So, we have already figured out that the prince’s weapons are identified with Slavic relics. There is talk among people that allegedly his weight was 82 kg, that is, 5 pounds (16 kilograms are equal to 1 pood). Most likely, this figure was greatly embellished by the chroniclers, because information about the power of the blade could reach the enemies. These data were invented to intimidate them, and Alexander Nevsky’s sword weighed 1.5 kg.

As you know, at the time of the battle Alexander Yaroslavovich was 21 years old. His height was 168 cm and his weight was 70 kg. No matter how much he wanted, he could not fight with a sword weighing 82 kg. Many Soviet viewers imagined the prince to be two meters tall after the release of the famous film “Alexander Nevsky” in 1938. There, the prince was played by Cherkasov, an actor with outstanding physical characteristics and a height of about two meters.

Below is a photo of Alexander Nevsky's sword, of course, this is not original weapon, but simply a stylization of a Romanesque type sword, which was the prince’s blade.

And if you look at the picture below with the image of Prince Alexander Nevsky, you will notice that the blade in his hands is depicted too large.

No one can unequivocally answer the question: “Where is the legendary sword now?” For sure, historians know only one thing: the blade has not yet been discovered in any of the expeditions.

Sword in Rus'

In Rus', only the Grand Duke and his squad had the right to constantly carry a sword with them. Other warriors, of course, also had blades, but in Peaceful time they were kept away from human eyes, because the man was not only a warrior, but also a farmer. And carrying a sword in peacetime meant that he saw enemies around him. Just to show off, not a single warrior wore a blade, but used it only to protect their homeland or their own home and family.

The sword is a murder weapon with a touch of romance. In the hands of fearless warriors, it is a silent witness to terrible battles and changing eras. The sword personified courage, fearlessness, strength and nobility. His enemies were afraid of his blade. With the sword, brave warriors were knighted and crowned persons were crowned.

Bastard swords, or swords with a one-and-a-half-handed hilt, existed from the Renaissance (13th century) until the late Middle Ages (16th century). In the 17th century, swords were replaced by rapiers. But swords are not forgotten and the brilliance of the blade still excites the minds of writers and filmmakers.

Types of swords

Longsword - long sword

The hilt of such swords is for three palms. When you grabbed the hilt of the sword with both hands, there were a few centimeters left for one more palm. This made complex fencing maneuvers and strikes using swords possible.

The bastard or “bastard” sword is a classic example among bastard swords. The handle of the “bastards” was less than two, but more than one palm (about 15 cm). This sword is not a longsword: neither two, nor one and a half - not for one hand and not for two, for which it received such an offensive nickname. The bastard was used as a weapon of self-defense and was perfect for everyday wear.

It must be said that they fought with this bastard sword without using a shield.

The appearance of the first examples of bastard swords dates back to the end of the 13th century. Bastard swords were different sizes and variations, but they were united by one name - swords of war. This blade was fashionable as an attribute to a horse's saddle. Bastard swords were always kept with them on trips and hikes, in order to protect themselves from an unexpected enemy attack in case of emergency.

In battles, strong blows that did not give the right to life were inflicted with a combat or heavy bastard sword.

Bastard, had a narrow straight blade and was indispensable for piercing blows. The most famous representative among narrow bastard swords is the blade of an English warrior and prince who participated in the war of the 14th century. After the death of the prince, the sword was placed over his grave, where it remained until the 17th century.

The English historian Ewart Oakeshott studied the ancient battle swords of France and classified them. He noted gradual changes in the characteristics of bastard swords, including changes in the length of the blade.

In England at the beginning of the 14th century a “great battle” appears bastard sword, which is worn not in the saddle, but on the belt.

Characteristics

The length of a bastard sword is from 110 to 140 cm, (weighing 1200 g and up to 2500 g). Of these, about a meter of sword is part of the blade. The blades of bastard swords were forged in different shapes and sizes, but all of them were effective in delivering various crushing blows. There were basic characteristics of the blade in which they differed from each other.

In the Middle Ages, the blades of bastard swords were thin and straight. Referring to Oakeshott's typology: gradually the blades become elongated and thicker in cross-section, but become thinner at the tip of the swords. The handles are also modified.

The cross-section of the blade is divided into biconvex and diamond-shaped. In the latter version, the central vertical line of the blade ensured hardness. And the peculiarities of sword forging add options to the cross-section of the blade.

Bastard swords, whose blades had fullers, were very popular. The fuller is a cavity running from the cross along the blade. It is a misconception that the fullers were used as a blood drain or for easy removal of a sword from a wound. In fact, the absence of metal in the middle of the blade made the swords lighter and more maneuverable. The fullers could be wide - almost the entire width of the blade, to more numerous and thin. The length of the dollars also varied: the entire length or a third of the total length of the bastard sword.

The crosspiece was elongated and had arches to protect the hand.

An important indicator of a well-forged bastard sword was its precise balance, distributed in the right place. Bastard swords in Rus' were balanced at a point on top of the hilt. The defect of the sword was always revealed during the battle. As soon as the blacksmiths made a mistake and shifted the center of gravity of the bastard sword upward, the sword, in the presence of a deadly blow, became inconvenient. The sword vibrated as it struck the enemy's swords or armor. And this weapon did not help, but hindered the soldier. Good weapon was an extension of the hand of war. Master blacksmiths skillfully forged swords, correctly distributing certain zones. These zones are the nodes of the blade; if positioned correctly, they guaranteed a high-quality bastard sword.

Shield and bastard sword

Certain fighting systems and varied styles made sword fighting akin to art, rather than chaotic and barbaric. Various teachers taught techniques for fighting with a bastard sword. And there was no more effective weapon in the hands of an experienced warrior. There was no need for a shield with this sword.

And all thanks to the armor that took the blow. Before them, chain mail was worn, but it was not capable of protecting the war from the blow of cold steel. Light plate armor and armor began to be forged in large quantities by master blacksmiths. There is a misconception that iron armor was very heavy and it was impossible to move in it. This is partly true, but only for tournament equipment, which weighed about 50 kg. Military armor weighed half as much, and one could actively move in it.

Not just the blade of a bastard sword was used for an attack, but also the guard as a hook, capable of knocking down the pommel.

Possessing the art of fencing, the soldier received the necessary base and could take up other types of weapons: a spear, a pole, and so on.

Despite the apparent lightness of bastard swords, fighting with it required strength, endurance and dexterity. The knights, for whom war was everyday life and swords as their faithful companions, never spent a day without training and weapons. Regular training did not allow them to lose their warlike qualities and die during the battle, which went on non-stop and intensely.

Schools and techniques of the bastard sword

German and Italian schools are becoming the most popular. The earliest manual of the German fencing school was translated, despite difficulties (1389).

In these manuals, swords were depicted as being held by two hands at the hilt. Most of the manual was occupied by a section with a one-handed sword, showing the methods and advantages of holding a sword with one hand. The half-sword technique was depicted as an integral part of armored combat.

The absence of a shield gave rise to new fencing techniques. There were such instructions on fencing - “fechtbukhs”, with manuals from famous masters of this matter. Excellent illustrations and a textbook, considered a classic, were left to us by not only a fighter, but also a wonderful artist and mathematician Albert Durer.

But fencing schools and military science are not the same thing. The knowledge from fencing is applicable to knightly tournaments and judicial duels. In war, a soldier had to be able to hold formation, hold a sword, and defeat opposing enemies. But there are no treatises on this topic.

Ordinary townspeople also knew how to hold weapons, including a bastard sword. In those days, you couldn’t live without a weapon, but not everyone could afford a sword. The iron and bronze that went into a good blade were rare and expensive.

A special technique of fencing with a bastard sword was fencing without any protection in the form of armor or chain mail. Head and top part the torsos were not protected in any way from the blow of the blade, except for ordinary clothing.

Increased protection among soldiers contributed to changes in fencing techniques. And with swords they tried to deliver piercing rather than slashing blows. The "half-sword" technique was used.

Special welcome

There were many different techniques. They were used during the fight and, thanks to these techniques, many fighters survived.

But there is a technique that causes surprise: the technique of half a sword. When a warrior grabbed the blade of a sword with one or even two hands, pointing it at the enemy and trying to push it under the armor. The other hand lay on the hilt of the sword, giving the necessary strength and speed. How did the fighters avoid wounding their hand on the edge of the sword? The fact is that swords were sharpened at the end of the blade. Therefore, the half-sword technique was successful. True, you can also hold a sharpened sword blade in gloves, but, most importantly, hold it tightly, and in no case allow the blade of the blade to “walk” in the palm of your hand.

Later, in the 17th century, Italian fencing masters focused all their attention on the rapier and abandoned the bastard sword. And in 1612, a German manual was published with the technique of fencing with a bastard sword. This was the last manual on fighting techniques where such swords were used. However, in Italy, despite the increased popularity of the rapier, they continue to fencing with a spadone (bastard sword).

Bastard in Rus'

Western Europe had a great influence on some peoples of medieval Rus'. The West influenced geography, culture, military science and weapons.

As a fact, in Belarus and Western Ukraine there are knightly castles of those times. And a few years ago, on television, they reported a discovery in the Mogilev region knightly weapons sample Western Europe, dating from the 16th century. There were few finds of bastard swords in Moscow and Northern Rus'. Since military affairs there were aimed at fighting the Tatars, which means that instead of heavy infantry and swords, another weapon was needed - sabers.

But the western and southwestern lands of Rus' are knightly territory. A wide variety of weapons and bastard swords, Russian and European, were found there during excavations.

One-and-a-half or two-handed

Types of swords differ from each other in their mass; different lengths hilt, blade. If a sword with a long blade and hilt can be easily manipulated with one hand, then it is a representative of bastard swords. And if one hand is not enough to hold a bastard sword, then most likely this is a representative of two-handed swords. Approximately at the total length of 140 cm, the limit for a bastard sword comes. More than this length, it is difficult to hold a bastard sword with one hand.

Antique edged weapons leave no one indifferent. It always bears the imprint of remarkable beauty and even magic. It feels like you are stepping back into the legendary past, when these items were used very widely.

Of course, such weapons serve as an ideal accessory for decorating a room. An office decorated with magnificent examples of ancient weapons will look more impressive and masculine.

Objects such as, for example, medieval swords become of interest to many people as unique evidence of events that took place in ancient times.

Antique edged weapons

The weapons of medieval infantrymen are similar to a dagger. Its length is less than 60 cm, the wide blade has a sharp end with blades that diverge.

Mounted warriors were most often armed with daggers a rouelles. This antique weapons It's getting harder and harder to find.

The most terrible weapon of that time was the Danish battle axe. Its wide blade is semicircular in shape. The horsemen held it with both hands during the battle. The axes of the infantrymen were mounted on a long shaft and made it possible to perform piercing and slashing blows and pull them out of the saddle equally effectively. These axes were first called guizarmes, and then, in Flemish, godendaks. They served as the prototype of the halberd. In museums, these antique weapons attract many visitors.

The knights were also armed with wooden clubs filled with nails. The combat whips also had the appearance of a club with a movable head. A leash or chain was used to connect to the shaft. Such weapons of knights were not widely used, since inept handling could do more harm to the owner of the weapon than to his opponent.

Spears were usually made of very long lengths with an ash shaft ending in a pointed leaf-shaped iron. To strike, the spear was not yet held under the armpit, making it impossible to ensure an accurate strike. The shaft was held horizontally at leg level, extending about a quarter of its length forward, so that the enemy received a blow to the stomach. Such blows, when the battle of the knights was going on, were greatly amplified by the rapid movement of the rider and brought death, despite the chain mail. However, it was difficult to handle a spear of such length (it reached five meters). it was very difficult. To do this, remarkable strength and dexterity, long-term experience as a rider and practice in handling weapons were needed. When crossing, the spear was carried vertically, putting its tip into a leather shoe that hung near the stirrup on the right.

Among the weapons there was a Turkish bow, which had a double bend and threw arrows over long distances and with great strength. The arrow hit the enemy two hundred steps away from the shooters. The bow was made of yew wood, its height reached one and a half meters. The tail part of the arrows was equipped with feathers or leather wings. The iron of the arrows had different configurations.

The crossbow was very widely used among infantrymen, since, despite the fact that preparing for a shot took large quantity compared to archery, the range and accuracy of the shot was greater. This feature allowed it to survive until the 16th century, when it was replaced by firearms.

Damascus steel

Since ancient times, the quality of a warrior's weapons has been considered very important. Metallurgists of antiquity sometimes managed, in addition to ordinary malleable iron, to obtain durable steel. Swords were mainly made from steel. Due to their rare properties, they personified wealth and strength.

Information about the production of flexible and durable steel is contacted by Damascus gunsmiths. The technology for its production is shrouded in an aura of mystery and amazing legends.

Wonderful weapons made from this steel came from forges located in the Syrian city of Damascus. They were built by Emperor Diocletian. Damascus steel was produced here, reviews of which went far beyond the borders of Syria. Knives and daggers made from this material were brought by knights from crusades as valuable trophies. They were kept in rich houses and passed from generation to generation, being a family heirloom. A Damascus steel sword has always been considered a rarity.

However, for centuries, craftsmen from Damascus strictly kept the secrets of making a unique metal.

The mystery of Damascus steel was fully revealed only in the 19th century. It turned out that the original ingot should contain alumina, carbon and silica. The hardening method was also special. Damascus craftsmen cooled hot steel forgings using a stream of cool air.

Samurai sword

The katana was released around the 15th century. Until she appeared, the samurai used the tati sword, which was much inferior in its properties to the katana.

The steel from which the sword was made was forged and tempered in a special way. When mortally wounded, the samurai sometimes handed over his sword to the enemy. After all, the samurai code says that weapons are destined to continue the path of the warrior and serve the new owner.

The katana sword was inherited according to the samurai will. This ritual continues to this day. Starting at the age of 5, the boy received permission to wear a sword made of wood. Later, as the warrior’s spirit gained strength, a sword was forged for him personally. As soon as a boy was born into the family of ancient Japanese aristocrats, a sword was immediately ordered for him from a blacksmith's workshop. At the moment when the boy turned into a man, his katana sword was already made.

It took a master up to a year to make one unit of such weapons. Sometimes it took ancient craftsmen 15 years to make one sword. True, the craftsmen were simultaneously making several swords. It is possible to forge a sword faster, but it will no longer be a katana.

Going to battle, the samurai removed all the decorations that were on it from the katana. But before meeting with his beloved, he decorated the sword in every possible way, so that the chosen one would fully appreciate the power of his family and masculine wealth.

Two-handed sword

If the hilt of a sword is designed to require a grip with only two hands, the sword in this case is called two-handed. The length of the knights reached 2 meters, and they wore it on the shoulder without any sheath. For example, Swiss infantrymen in the 16th century were armed with a two-handed sword. Warriors armed with two-handed swords were given a place in the front rows order of battle: they were given the task of cutting and knocking down the spears of enemy warriors, which were of great length. Two-handed swords did not last long as military weapons. Since the 17th century, they have played the ceremonial role of an honorary weapon next to the banner.

In the 14th century in Italian and spanish cities began to use a sword that was not intended for knights. It was made for city residents and peasants. Compared to a regular sword, it had less weight and length.

Now, according to the classification existing in Europe, a two-handed sword should have a length of 150 cm. The width of its blade is 60 mm, the handle has a length of up to 300 mm. The weight of such a sword ranges from 3.5 to 5 kg.

The biggest swords

A special, very rare type of straight sword was the great two-handed sword. It could weigh up to 8 kilograms and be 2 meters long. In order to control such a weapon, a very special strength and unusual technique was required.

Curved Swords

If everyone fought for themselves, often falling out of the general formation, then later on the fields where the battle of knights took place, other battle tactics began to spread. Now protection in the ranks was required, and the role of warriors armed with two-handed swords began to be reduced to organizing separate centers of battle. Being actually suicide bombers, they fought in front of the line, attacking the spearheads with two-handed swords and opening the way for the pikemen.

At this time, the sword of knights, which had a “flaming” blade, became popular. It was invented long before and became widespread in the 16th century. Landsknechts used a two-handed sword with such a blade, called flamberge (from the French “flame”). The length of the flamberge blade reached 1.40 m. The 60 cm handle was wrapped in leather. The blade of the flamberges was curved. It was quite difficult to operate such a sword, since it was difficult to sharpen a blade with a curved cutting edge well. This required well-equipped workshops and experienced craftsmen.

But the blow of the flamberge’s sword made it possible to inflict deep cut wounds, which were difficult to treat given the state of medical knowledge. The curved two-handed sword caused wounds, often leading to gangrene, which meant that the enemy’s losses became greater.

Knights Templar

There are few organizations that are surrounded by such a shroud of secrecy and whose history is so controversial. The interest of writers and historians is attracted by the rich history of the order and the mysterious rituals performed by the Knights Templar. Particularly impressive is their ominous death at the stake, which was lit by the French Knights, dressed in white cloaks with a red cross on the chest, are described in a huge number of books. For some, they appear as stern-looking, impeccable and fearless warriors of Christ, for others they are two-faced and arrogant despots or arrogant moneylenders who have spread their tentacles throughout Europe. It even got to the point where they were accused of idolatry and desecration of shrines. Is it possible to separate truth from lies in this mass of completely contradictory information? Turning to the most ancient sources, let's try to figure out what this order is.

The order had a simple and strict charter, and the rules were similar to those of the Cistercian monks. According to these internal rules, knights must lead an ascetic, chaste life. They are required to cut their hair, but they cannot shave their beard. The beard distinguished the Templars from the general mass, where most male aristocrats were shaved. In addition, knights had to wear a white cassock or cape, which later turned into a white cloak, which became their calling card. White cloak symbolically indicated that the knight exchanged a dark life for serving God, full of light and purity.

Templar sword

The sword of the Knights Templar was considered the most noble among the types of weapons for members of the order. Of course, the results combat use depended largely on the skill of the owner. The weapon was well balanced. The mass was distributed along the entire length of the blade. The weight of the sword was 1.3-3 kg. The Templar sword of the knights was forged by hand, using hard and flexible steel as the starting material. An iron core was placed inside.

Russian sword

The sword is a double-edged melee weapon used in close combat.

Until approximately the 13th century, the edge of the sword was not sharpened, since it was used primarily for chopping blows. Chronicles describe the first stabbing blow only in 1255.

They have been discovered in the graves of ancient people since the 9th century, however, most likely, these weapons were known to our ancestors even earlier. It’s just that the tradition of definitively identifying the sword and its owner dates back to this era. At the same time, the deceased is provided with weapons so that in another world it continues to protect the owner. In the early stages of the development of blacksmithing, when the cold forging method was widespread, which was not very effective, the sword was considered a huge treasure, so the thought of burying it never occurred to anyone. Therefore, discoveries of swords by archaeologists are considered a great success.

The first Slavic swords are divided by archaeologists into many types, differing in hilt and crosspiece. Their blades are very similar. They are up to 1 m long, up to 70 mm wide at the handle, gradually tapering towards the end. In the middle part of the blade there was a fuller, which was sometimes mistakenly called a “bloodletter.” At first the doll was made quite wide, but then it gradually became narrower, and in the end it completely disappeared.

The dole actually served to reduce the weight of the weapon. The flow of blood has nothing to do with it, since stabbing blows with a sword were almost never used at that time. The metal of the blade was subjected to special processing, which ensured its high strength. The Russian sword weighed approximately 1.5 kg. Not all warriors possessed swords. It was a very expensive weapon in that era, since the work of making a good sword was long and difficult. In addition, it required enormous physical strength and dexterity from its owner.

What was the technology used to make the Russian sword, which had well-deserved authority in the countries where it was used? Among high-quality melee weapons for close combat, damask steel is especially worth noting. In that special form steel contains carbon in an amount greater than 1%, and its distribution in the metal is uneven. The sword, which was made from damask steel, had the ability to cut iron and even steel. At the same time, it was very flexible and did not break when it was bent into a ring. However, damask steel had a big drawback: it became fragile and broke in conditions low temperatures, therefore it was practically not used in the Russian winter.

To obtain damask steel, Slavic blacksmiths folded or twisted rods of steel and iron and forged them many times. As a result of repeated execution of this operation, strips of strong steel were obtained. It was this that made it possible to make fairly thin swords without losing strength. Often strips of damask steel were the basis of the blade, and blades made of steel with a high carbon content were welded along the edge. Such steel was produced by carburization - heating using carbon, which impregnated the metal and increased its hardness. Such a sword easily cut through the enemy’s armor, since it was most often made from lower-grade steel. They were also capable of cutting the blades of swords that were not so skillfully made.

Any specialist knows that welding iron and steel, which have different melting points, is a process that requires great skill from the master blacksmith. At the same time, archaeological data confirms that in the 9th century our Slavic ancestors possessed this skill.

There was an uproar in science. It often turned out that the sword, which experts classified as Scandinavian, was made in Rus'. In order to distinguish a good damask sword, buyers first checked the weapon like this: a small click on the blade produces a clear and long sound, and the higher it is and the purer the sound, the higher the quality of the damask steel. Then the damask steel was tested for elasticity: would it warp if the blade was applied to the head and bent down to the ears. If, after passing the first two tests, the blade easily coped with a thick nail, cutting it without becoming dull, and easily cut through thin fabric that was thrown onto the blade, it could be considered that the weapon passed the test. The best swords were often decorated with jewelry. They are now the target of numerous collectors and are literally worth their weight in gold.

As civilization develops, swords, like other weapons, undergo significant changes. At first they become shorter and lighter. Now you can often find them 80 cm long and weighing up to 1 kg. Swords of the 12th-13th centuries, as before, were used more for slashing, but now they also gained the ability to stab.

Two-handed sword in Rus'

At the same time, another type of sword appeared: two-handed. Its weight reaches approximately 2 kg, and its length reaches 1.2 m. The technique of fighting with a sword is significantly modified. It was worn in a wooden sheath covered with leather. The sheath had two sides - the tip and the mouth. The scabbard was often decorated as richly as the sword. There were cases when the price of a weapon was much higher than the value of the rest of the owner’s property.

Most often, a prince’s warrior could afford the luxury of having a sword, sometimes a wealthy militiaman. The sword was used in infantry and cavalry until the 16th century. However, in the cavalry it was considerably replaced by the saber, which is more convenient on horseback. Despite this, the sword is, unlike the saber, a truly Russian weapon.

Romanesque sword

This family includes swords from the Middle Ages up to 1300 and later. They were characterized by a pointed blade and a longer handle. The shape of the handle and blade can be very diverse. These swords appeared with the emergence of the knightly class. A wooden handle is placed on the shank and can be wrapped with leather cord or wire. The latter is preferable, since metal gloves tear the leather braid.

Many stories, epics, legends and inventions of people were created around the weapons of the Middle Ages. So the two-handed sword is shrouded in secrets and allegories. People have always had doubts about the huge size of the sword. After all, what is important for combat is not size, but efficiency and combat power weapons. Despite its size, the sword was a success and was very popular among warriors. But only strong, powerful warriors could use such a sword. The total weight of this specimen of the sword is about two kilograms, five hundred grams, the length is about a meter, and the handle is a quarter of a meter.

Historical facts

A two-handed sword of this type became widespread in battles of the Middle Ages in quite late times. All the warrior’s equipment consisted of metal armor and a shield for protection from enemy attacks, a sword and a spear. Gradually, craftsmen learned to cast metal weapons with better quality, and new types of swords appeared, compact in size and much more effective.

Such weapons were expensive; not every soldier could afford to purchase a sword. The sword was wielded by the most dexterous, brave, courageous and fairly wealthy warriors and guards. The experience of wielding a sword was passed on from father to son, constantly improving skills. The warrior had to have heroic strength, excellent reactions, and masterfully wield a sword.

The purpose of a two-handed sword

Due to its huge dimensions and heavy weight, only soldiers of heroic physique wielded a two-handed sword. In close battles they were very often used in the front ranks to break through the first ranks of the enemy. To deprive the shooters and soldiers with halberds coming behind them of the opportunity to strike. Since the dimensions of the sword required a certain free perimeter for the warrior to swing, close combat tactics had to be changed periodically. The soldiers were forced to constantly change their location; in the center of the battle, due to the large concentration of soldiers, it was very difficult for them to fight.

When conducting close combat, swords were used mainly to deliver a crushing blow and break through the enemy’s defenses. In battles in open areas, soldiers used a sword to strike their opponents from above and below in battle. The handle of the sword could be struck in the face of the enemy in maximum proximity to each other.

Design Features

There were several types of two-handed swords:

1. At military ceremonies, for various rituals, and as a gift for rich, noble people, large two-handed swords were most often used; the weight of each such specimen reached five kilograms. Some individual specimens were very often used as a special simulator for improving combat skills and hand training.
2. A two-handed sword for combat weighing about three and a half kilograms and had a length of about one meter and seventy centimeters. The length of the handle of such specimens was about half a meter and served as a balancer for the sword. The soldier, who was fluent in combat tactics and had excellent dexterity and dexterity, practically did not notice the size of the sword. For comparison, it is worth noting that the total weight of a one-handed sword was about one and a half kilograms.
3. A classic two-handed sword with a length from the floor to the soldier's shoulder, and a hilt from the wrist to the elbow.

Positive and negative qualities of the sword

If we consider the advantages of two-handed swords, we can highlight the most basic ones:

• A warrior using this sword was protected around a fairly large perimeter;
• Crushing slashes delivered with a two-handed sword are very difficult to parry;
• The sword is universal in use.

It is worth paying attention to the negative qualities:

1. The sword had to be held with both hands, therefore, the possibility of additional protection in the form of a shield was excluded.
2. The dimensions of the sword did not allow for quick movement, and the heavy weight led to rapid fatigue of the warrior and, as a result, to low effectiveness in battle.

Types of two-handed swords

1. . Compact Scottish weapons, among the various examples of two-handed swords, are distinguished by their relatively small dimensions. The length of the blade was about one hundred and ten centimeters. Another important distinctive feature of this sample is the special design, thanks to which a warrior could pull any weapon out of the enemy’s hands. The small size of the sword allows it to be used most effectively in combat battles; it is rightfully considered the best example among two-handed swords.
2. Zweihander. This sample is distinguished by its enormous dimensions; the length of the sword reaches two meters. The design of the sword is very specific; the paired crosspiece (guard) serves as the boundary between the double-edged blade, the hilt and the unsharpened part of the sword. Such an instance was used in battle to crush the enemy armed with spears and halberds.
3. Flamberge. A type of two-handed sword with a special wave-shaped blade. Thanks to such an unusual design, the effectiveness of a soldier armed with such a sword in combat battles has increased many times over. A warrior wounded by such a blade took a long time to recover, the wounds healed very poorly. Many military leaders executed captured soldiers for wearing such a sword.

A little about other types of swords.

1. Cavalrymen often used the Estok sword to pierce through the enemy’s armor. The length of this specimen is one meter and thirty centimeters.
2. The next classic type of two-handed sword. “Espadon” is one hundred and eighty centimeters long. It has a crosspiece (guard) of two arms. The center of gravity of such a blade is shifted to the tip of the sword blade.
3. Sword "Katana". A Japanese copy of the sword, with a curved blade. Used by soldiers mainly in close combat, the length of the blade is about ninety centimeters, the handle is about thirty centimeters. Among the swords of this variety, there is a sample with a length of two hundred and twenty-five centimeters. The power of this sword allows you to cut a person into two parts with one blow.
4. Chinese two-handed sword "Dadao". A distinctive feature is a wide blade, curved, sharpened on one side. Such a sword found its use even during the war with Germany in the forties of the twentieth century. Soldiers used the sword in hand-to-hand combat with the enemy.

In one of the historical museums in Holland, a two-handed sword is exhibited, preserved in excellent condition to this day. This is a huge specimen with a length of two meters and fifteen centimeters and a weight of six kilograms and six hundred grams. Historians suggest that the sword was made in the fifteenth century in Germany. The sword was not used in military battles; it served as a festive attribute for various military holidays and ceremonies. When making the handle of the sword, oak was used as a material and decorated with a piece of goat skin.

In conclusion about the two-handed sword

Only real, mighty heroes, for whom the Russian land was famous since ancient times, could control such a powerful, impressive, terrifying-looking weapon. But effective weapon and not only our land can boast of brave warriors; in many foreign countries similar weapons were made, with different distinctive features. In the battles of the Middle Ages, this weapon witnessed numerous victories and defeats and brought a lot of joy and sorrow.

Virtuoso swordsmanship is implied not only in the ability to deliver crushing blows, but also in the dexterity, mobility and resourcefulness of a warrior.