Locutus, you have been wholly wrong about the weight of broadswords. First of all: steel is steel, be it carbon steel, mild steel, or stainless steel. You know what steel is? Iron, alloyed with carbon to form microscrystalline structures. Iron is a very heavy element, but carbon is very light, and the only variable to consider is the carbon content. The presence or absence of carbon is so miniscule in consideration to the total weight and density of steel that there is no practical difference in weight between a blade of wrought iron and a blade of high-carbon steel.

I have a broadsword (a longsword, to be precise) on order. A 94 cm (37 inch) blade, overall length 1.18 meters (almost 4 feet long). Made of 5160H chromium steel and fitted with a reitschwert hilt guard. Approximate weight at completion: around 1.2 - 1.3 kilos (2-1/2 to 2-3/4 pounds). Real sword, too. Cuts through shields and whatnot.

"Best start believing in devils, love-- because you're dancing with one."

Locutus posts:

---

I'm sorry I was wrong, but it's the fact that common steel is a wee bit heavier then carbon steel and I've actually seen swords that are that long (more then once) and I got the explanation that these were common during the middle ages and they were about 30 kg's and note how I said no taller then 1.9m/6' 4"

---

That's a bearing sword. For parades and processions, it's a symbolic device that is, by no means of understanding, an actual combat weapon. Much as how a seal or sigil is not an actual battle-shield.

Edited by - Jevryn Markes on 01-08-2003 22:30:28

how come henry VII fought with it, and richard of lionheart. that was a "part" of the explanation. and I've worked with both common steel and carbon-steel so I know that carbon-steel is lighter then common steel

Which then begs the question: what the heck is 'common steel'. That's a rather new term that befalls my ears.

I know L6 bainite, I know the 300M maganese steels, the 5100 series high-chromium steels, the 1000 series stainless steels, springform steel, blister steel, cast iron, wootz. But 'common' steel? Care to eleborate on the properties, composition, and applications of that magical substance?

reinforced iron, is that good enough as a term for common

Actually, not good enough. Are you talking about rebar? Or is this just another ambiguous label?

Specs. Composition. Sources. Can you supply any of that information for the wondrous steel that's denser and heavier than carbon steel (which is in itself is simply a generic moniker for steels with a carbon content ranging from Point 3 to Point 10)

Edited by - Jevryn Markes on 02-08-2003 03:11:32

@ Jevryn markes

I am sorry but you lost me. I don't know anything about compositions.
but I lifted a bar of "common" steel and a bar of carbon-steel and the carbon was considerably lighter then the "common" one

I know you are trying to do your best to get the facts but you've lost me

That's certainly not a clear, empirical viewpoint to go professing knowledge about swords and swordcraft. Allusions and anecdotes without and hard numbers or specific, esoteric descriptions can't win a skeptical crowd.

One of the largest swords one may employ in battle would be a zweihander or krag, a massive weapon weighing in as much as, possibly at most, 14 pounds and anything less. A really "heavy" two-handed sword should start scaling in at around 6 pounds, but most hand-and-halfers and one-handers won't get above 4 pounds in weight. A zweihander is more gainfully employed in a fighting style and mentality akin to using a pole-arm than a sword, given the length and weight of the weapon.

Oh jeez, and I thought I liked swords.

Who the f!ck cares if it weighs 30 kgs or 4 pounds, the fact of the matter is that you won't carry it around with you when on your back home from a game of footy, your girlfriends house, the store or the pub. When you do it'll be you and your limbs against whatever fate throws against you. Kendo, fencing, Iaido etc might be cool, but I seriously doubt you will have much use for it as you can't really walk around carrying a long blade.


Me? I train what is shaping out to be the Jigo Ryu-style of Ju-Jutsu. Since traditional japanese fighting styles tend to be a bit out-of-date and users of these sports tend to get their asses kicked my sensei has spent the last several years developing a new style of Ju-Jutsu. I am proud to be one of the 100-150 people who are developing the style by training, commenting and practicing. Now almost finished, Jigo Ryu teaches regular fighting, grips, kicks, throws, punches, wrestling-techniques and a steadily increasing number of techniques against weapons, which is always nice.


By the Mandrake - Spear

Spear doth quote:

---

...Who the f!ck cares if it weighs 30 kgs or 4 pounds, the fact of the matter is that you won't carry it around with you when on your back home from a game of footy, your girlfriends house, the store or the pub. When you do it'll be you and your limbs against whatever fate throws against you. ...

---

All in all, this does ring true. But it also stands as the demarcation between those who are merely interested in swords and those who really groove on them, because a real sword enthusiast isn't training up on sword techniques to use as practical defense (or offense). They engage in it to better understand and learn of the temperments, motivations, and meditations of the sword-wielding warriors whom have shaped human history for the past four thousand years.

Not all martial art is practiced for the sake of destruction. It is path of contemplation of all within as well as all without.

@ jevryn

You offend me

I am such a warrior and I don't give a f*ck like spear says because I can wield a sword. either it weighs in at 30 kg or at 4 kg but I can wield, fight and understand it. I don't know much about alloys.


(p.s. What I do like about you is that you post facts when needed, instead of around the thread)

Locutus, I, to am such a warrior. But I would not war with a sword in this day and age.

In fact, the sword was most often not the primary weapon on a battlefield. Pole-arms and spears are the premier fighting weapons of an ancient army, and the sword was the backup weapon of last resort when the primary weapon was either broken, or the enemy closed in to a point where the pike or pole-axe was no longer ineffective.

The landsknight of medieval Europe used a warhammer to break plate armour. The samurai of Japan used a yari (spear) as his first weapon, the tachi (sword) second in close-in duels. The ancient Greeks worshipped the spear-wielding gods like Zeus and Poseidon, and the spear was the primary weapon of the ancient Greek warrior. The Romans used a javelin-type weapon called a pilum to attack am enemy formation first, resorting to his sword after he had thrown them. Spears and pole-arms are cheaper and easier to make than bladed swords, since they used up less metal and were less demanding in their construction. It was far cheaper and easier to arm an army with spears than with swords, so most soldiers were armed with those weapons while the elite were also equipped with a relatively expensive sword.

But why is the sword revered? One reason is that whole "backup weapon" aspect: it's there to save the warrior's life, not primarily intended to take the lives of the other guy. When all other weapons fail, the sword is depended-upon to hold fast. It's up-close and personal, too: you are directly fighting for your life when you fight with a sword. That leaves quite an impression on a warrior.

But never consider the sword the primary battlefield weapon of a soldier. It never was.

Edited by - Jevryn Markes on 03-08-2003 22:44:40

It seems to me there's only one way you "warriors" can settle such a matter...

Yes: an open, civil discussion with the sense of preservation and respect for human life fully intact. Because blood is a rather unsatisfying price to pay for a petty disagreement.