Military Review

Sword - as a symbol of the Middle Ages

60

O Durendal damask, my bright sword,

In whose handle of the shrine I have finished the old:
In it is Vasily's blood, Peter's imperishable tooth,
Vlas of Denis, the man of God,
Piece of Mary’s Rebenz Reza.
("Song of Roland")


The sword for the Middle Ages is clearly more than a simple weapon. For the Middle Ages, it is primarily a symbol. Moreover, in its capacity as such, it is still used in military ceremonies in various armies on the globe, and he does not even try to challenge this role with any other weapon. Most likely, it will be so in the future, because it was not for nothing that the creator of Star Wars, George Lucas, made all-powerful Jedi’s weapon with a ray sword and explained this by saying that he needed weapons worthy of knights who would be honest, and who would fight for peace in the entire galaxy. However, the fact that he decided so is not surprising. After all, the sword at the same time symbolizes the cross, and the cross is nothing more than a symbol of the Christian faith.

Sword - as a symbol of the Middle Ages

Figure of Albrecht Dürer 1521 of the year, depicting Irish mercenaries in the Lower Lands. One of the two two-handed swords shown here has a ring-shaped ridge, characteristic only for Irish swords.

Of course, many Christians of the 21st century may feel uneasy from such a comparison, but a clear tendency to war and violence occurs to us not only in the Old, but also in the New Testament, where the name of absolute peacemaker Jesus says the following: “Do not think that I came to bring peace to the earth; I did not come to bring peace, but a sword. ” (Matthew 10, 34)


Sword XII - XIII centuries. Length 95,9, see Weight 1158 (Metropolitan Museum, New York)

Theologians may argue about what these words mean, but the word “sword” in this phrase will not go anywhere. Moreover, already in the early Middle Ages, the military leader was different from the simple warrior that possessed a sword as a weapon, while those had axes and spears. When in the Middle and Late Middle Ages simple warriors began to possess swords, the sword became a symbol of Christian chivalry.


Pinnacle with the coat of arms of Pierre de Dre, Duke of Brittany and Count Richmond 1240 - 1250 Weight 226.8 (Metropolitan Museum, New York)

The knight has been trained to wield weapons since childhood. At the age of seven, he had to leave the parental shelter and move to the court of some friendly lady-knight to serve there as a page to his lady and in that capacity and undergo his training. While learning the numerous skills of a servant, the page simultaneously learned and fought on wooden swords. In 13 years he became a squire and could take part in battles. After that, another six or seven years passed and the training was considered complete. Now the squire could become a knight or serve as a “noble squire”. At the same time, the squire and knight differed very slightly: he had the same armor as a knight, but he did not wear a sword (because he did not solemnly girded it!) Not on his belt, he attached the saddle to the bow. In order for the squire to become a knight, he had to dedicate and gird his sword. It was only then that he could wear it on his belt.


Spurs were also a symbol of chivalry. At first they girdled with a sword, then they tied spurs to their legs. These are the spurs of the 15th century French knight. (Metropolitan Museum, New York)

So what exactly the presence of the sword, even if it was even at the saddle, in the Middle Ages was a clear difference between a free man of noble origin and a commoner or worse - a serv.


Already in the armor, no one fought, but they continued by tradition to do ... for children and youth! Before us is the armor of the young infanta Louis, Prince of Asturias (1707 - 1724). (Metropolitan Museum, New York)

Well, of course, it is not by chance that the knight’s sword, if you look at it full face, it looked like a Christian cross. The bows at the cross were turned down only from the XV century. Before that, the arms of the cross were exclusively straight, although there were no specific functional reasons for this. It was not for nothing that in the Middle Ages the cross at the sword was called a cross (whereas the Muslim saber corresponded to the curvature of the crescent). That is, this weapon was consciously equated with the Christian creed. Before handing the sword to the candidate of the knights, he was kept in the altar of the chapel, thus clearing from all evil, and the sword itself was handed over for the presentation of the priest in charge.


Sword 1400 of the year. Western Europe. Weight 1673 d. Length 102.24 cm. (Metropolitan Museum, New York)

Well, all commoners and serfs usually have swords and it was forbidden to carry them. True, this situation has changed somewhat in the era of the late Middle Ages, when free citizens of free cities, among other privileges, acquired the right to bear arms. The sword now also became the honors of the free citizen. But if a knight learned how to use a sword from childhood, then ... the city dweller had the opportunity to do this by no means always, which eventually led to the flourishing of the art of fencing with swords.


Sword of the 16th century Italy. Weight 1332.4 (Metropolitan Museum, New York)

Naturally, the status of the sword was in a number of circumstances. So, come down to us historical documents say that even a medium-quality sword was equal to the value of at least four cows. For an agrarian peasant society, such a price was equal to a fortune. Well, high-quality swords could cost even more. That is, if you compare the sword with other types of weapons, for example, a battle ax, battle flail or halberd, then among them it was the most expensive. In addition, swords were often richly decorated that their business is even more expensive. For example, it is known that Charles the Great had both the hilt of his sword and the band to it were made of gold and silver. "Sometimes he wore a sword adorned with precious stones, but this usually happened only on particularly solemn occasions or when embassies of other nations were presented to him."


And this is a completely unique Indian sword of the XVIII century. (Metropolitan Museum, New York)

However, the decoration of the sword in the early Middle Ages was never lush - because the sword was a functional thing, especially when compared with the weapons of the Renaissance, which was overloaded with all sorts of decorations. Even the royal swords, although they had gilded handles, and their blades were engraved, were usually quite modest and generally practical, very well-balanced weapons of high quality. That is, the kings of these swords could really fight.


Claymore 1610 - 1620's. Length 136, see Weight 2068.5 (Metropolitan Museum, New York)

It happened that the knights, and even more so the kings owned several swords at once. So, Charlemagne had special swords purely for representation and less decorated for everyday use. In the late Middle Ages, warriors often had one sword with a hilt in one hand and one long battle sword in one and a half hands. Already the manuscripts of the 9th century note that the margrave Eberhard von Friol had as many as nine swords, and a certain Anglo-Saxon prince of the 11th century had a whole dozen swords, which according to his will after his death were divided among all his sons.

In addition to the function of social status, the sword was also a sign of administrative authority. For example, in the collection of feudal law of the XIII century "Saxon mirror" there is an image in which the king receives the sword of worldly power from Jesus, while the pope is awarded the sword of spiritual power. Both at the knighting ceremony and at the coronation of the king or emperor, the sword, together with the crown and scepter, was considered to be exactly the same symbol of supreme power. For example, the holy Mauritius - the imperial sword of the Holy Roman Empire of the German nation, the German kings were girded by the pope.


Cinquedea 1500 Italy. Weight 907 (Metropolitan Museum, New York)

When the king left the church, his sword in front of him was carried out by a special sword, as a sign of his secular power and power, with the tip pointing upwards. Therefore, the position of the royal swordtail throughout the Middle Ages was revered as one of the most honorable.

Already in the XIV century, the city burgomaster and judges received special ceremonial swords, and they, too, as a sign of the high power of their owners, were brought before them. Usually they were luxuriously finished bastard swords or very large two-handed swords. One such sword has reached us - the “official sword” of the city of Dublin. Its gilded handle has a characteristic faceted pear-shaped head and a long crosshair. Moreover, the history of this sword is known exactly: in the 1396 year it was made for the future king Henry IV. And, apparently, the king used it, since there are notches and other characteristic traces of military use on his blade.


The City Sword of Dublin symbolizes the administrative authority of the city mayor.


And so this sword looks in all its glory. The sheath, however, made much later. (Museum of Dublin, Ireland)

But there were very special swords, called "swords of justice." Naturally, this is not a combat weapon and, of course, not a status weapon. But the "sword of justice" was very important, because in the Middle Ages, the usual beheading was carried out with an ax, but with such a sword they cut heads to nobles. In addition to demonstrating social differences, there was a very obvious practical reason: the one who was executed with a sword experienced less suffering. But since the 16th century, in the German cities, criminals from the burgher class also began to be beheaded more and more often with a sword. A special type of sword was created specifically for the butchers' needs. It is believed that one of the first such swords was made in Germany in 1640 year. But most of the surviving swords of justice date back to the 17th century, and at the beginning of the 19th century they were no longer used. The last fact of using such a sword in Germany took place in the 1893 year: then with its help a female poisoner was beheaded.


1688 executioner's sword of the year. The city museum of Rotval, Baden-Württemberg, Germany.

It is interesting (as far as this can be interesting at all!) That the execution with a sword requires the use of a completely different technique than the execution with an ax. There, the convicted person should put his head and shoulders on the block - a scene very clearly shown in the remarkable Soviet movie “Cain XVIII” (1963), after which the executioner chopped down with a broad-blade ax, after having thrown back or cut off the victim's long hair. But when the head was cut with a sword, the condemned one had to kneel, and the chopping block was not required. The executioner took the sword with two hands, waving his arm wide and applied a horizontal chopping blow from the shoulder, which at once carried the person off his shoulders.


So it was necessary to lay his head on the scaffold, so that the executioner chopped it off with an ax. A shot from the film "Cain XVIII".

In England, for some reason, the “sword of justice” never took root, and there people were beheaded with an ordinary ax. But still there were executions, albeit few, that were carried out with a sword, which was vivid evidence of the significance of both the event, the instrument, and the skill that was required for this. When, for example, King Henry VIII in 1536 decided to execute his second wife Anna Bolein, then ... she was beheaded with a sword. Especially for this called the executioner from Saint-Omer under Calais. He beheaded Anna Boleyn with just one masterful punch.

About how important the specialist was to ensure the painlessness of the death of the executed one, clearly shows the case that took place in France in 1626 year: then an inexperienced volunteer played the role of executioner. So he needed as many 29 (!) Times to strike with a sword to cut off the head of Count de Chalet. And on the contrary, in 1601, the professional executioner managed to decapitate two convicts at once with just one blow, tying them back to back.

"Swords of justice", as a rule, had two-handed handles and simple and straight bow crosses. They did not need the edge, so they do not have it. So the blade is like a screwdriver. Usually, the blades of swords of justice are very wide (from 6 to 7 centimeters), and their total length most closely matches the bastard sword. Weigh such swords from 1,7 to 2,3 kilograms, have a length of 900-1200 mm. That is, it is a cross between a bastard sword and an ordinary heavy two-handed sword.


And so it was cut off with a sword. Scene penalty 1572 year.

The blades often depicted symbols of justice and all sorts of instructive sayings like: "Fear God and love the right, and the angel will be your servant." One of the swords of justice by the work of the master Zolingen Johannes Boigel, made by him in 1576, has the following verse inscription on the blades:

“If you live virtuously.
Do not chop the sword of justice of your head. ”
"When I raise this sword,
I wish that to the poor sinner eternal life! ”
Author:
60 comments
Ad

Subscribe to our Telegram channel, daily additional materials that do not get on the site: https://t.me/topwar_ru

Information
Dear reader, to leave comments on the publication, you must sign in.
  1. parusnik
    parusnik April 20 2017 08: 01
    +3
    The episode of the execution of Milady in the movie "D" by Artagnan and the Three Musketeers is very characteristic .. The moment itself is not shown, but looks spectacular when Milady throws back her hair ... Thank you, Vyacheslav is an interesting article .. In fact, swords look like simple and effective weapons, and not that now they show in modern historical cinema, you are racking your brains for why this mass of details on swords ..
    1. uwzek
      uwzek April 20 2017 19: 13
      +2
      Quote: parusnik
      and not what is now shown in modern historical cinema, you break

      A lot of details on the hilt of the sword appeared after refusing to use the shield. Each "curl" at the handle had a very specific purpose when blocking ...
    2. Severomor
      Severomor April 21 2017 15: 47
      +1
      Quote: parusnik
      episode of the execution of Milady in the movie "D" Artagnan and the Three Musketeers


      ".... with a sword more expensive" (c)))))
  2. Olezhek
    Olezhek April 20 2017 08: 10
    +1
    Very well written, thanks.
  3. Prometey
    Prometey April 20 2017 08: 37
    +1
    So he needed as many as 29 (!) Times to strike with a sword
    Kopets, igilovtsy have a rest.
    And why did the swords go out of use and were replaced by an easier option - swords? (I hope I'm not mistaken).
    1. The comment was deleted.
    2. alebor
      alebor April 20 2017 11: 12
      +3
      Maybe due to the proliferation of firearms, which made heavy armor unnecessary?
      But, by the way, in the heavy cavalry, heavy broadswords were in service for a long time - almost the same swords.
      1. alex-cn
        alex-cn April 20 2017 12: 17
        +2
        Yes, the chopping sword is gone with the advent of solid armor. But there were transitional "tools", such as estoks (maybe alshpis can also be attributed here, klevets and axes - some other), intended not so much for cutting as for piercing armor. And the armor finished off the firearm and the time came for swords, sabers, etc.
        By the way, in English there is no separation between sword and sword, both -sword.
    3. abrakadabre
      abrakadabre April 20 2017 12: 56
      +8
      And why did the swords go out of use and were replaced by an easier option - swords? (I hope I'm not mistaken).
      You are mistaken. A combat sword, it’s a rittershvert — is not a lighter version of the sword, but a heavier one and in mass and dimensions is more consistent with a bastard sword.
      If the average weight of a one-handed sword of the XII-XV centuries is 1100-1300 grams with a full length of 80-100 cm, then the cuirassier sword of the XVI century is on average about 1500 grams with a length of 100-115 cm.
      The main differences:
      1. The sword blade is narrower. However, it is longer and thicker at the guard. And often it has not a dolly, but an edge for greater rigidity. This is due to the need for greater strength of the blade for piercing heavy full plate armor at full gallop. Whereas previously the knight’s main weapon in battle was a spear and the sword was an additional weapon in case of emergency (after the spear, sixth and klevets), then the cuirassier’s epee was the main weapon that was fought after a short salvo at point-blank range with pistols and the subsequent jerk in enemy battle formation.
      2. In front of the main guard (inside additional protective arms) there is a pronounced ricasso - an unsharpened thick narrowing of the blade. Made for the convenience of a fencing grip in which the index finger hugs the ricasso above the guard. Such a grip improves the controllability and nimbleness of the blade with vigorous fencing and improves the conditions for a powerful piercing strike.
      3. Mandatory complex guard consisting of the main ordinary guard (only finer than on earlier swords) and additional arches, plates or a combination thereof. Introduced due to the wide distribution in the cavalry of pistols and the need to shoot from them. Because of this, in turn, abandoned the highly reliable, but uncomfortable plate gloves (and often plate gloves).
      4. Due to the massive guard and narrow wedge-shaped geometry of the blade, the balance of the blade is shifted close to the guard. Therefore, with a larger mass of swords compared to earlier swords, it is more convenient and less tiring to fencing. And it’s much faster to redirect along complex paths with all kinds of feints.
    4. KaPToC
      KaPToC April 20 2017 18: 09
      0
      Quote: Prometey
      And why did the swords go out of use and were replaced by an easier option - swords? (I hope I'm not mistaken).

      The evolution of edged weapons is an evolution in metallurgy, and not an evolution in military affairs. For a long time, the swords were simply short - because of the bad steel, which is why for a long time the army was dominated by pole arms (axes and spears) and only with the development of metallurgy did the swords become longer to their current appearance and ... quickly gave way to sabers and swords.
      And yes - a sword is no easier than a sword, except for a two-handed
      1. sivuch
        sivuch April 21 2017 08: 14
        +1
        Well, suppose the fake was also very weighty (and not a word about it in the article)
        1. kalibr
          April 21 2017 15: 55
          +1
          Falsion or felchen is not a sword, but a cleaver. This is a separate topic.
  4. kalibr
    April 20 2017 08: 49
    +6
    Quote: Prometey
    And why did the swords go out of use and were replaced by an easier option - swords? (I hope I'm not mistaken).

    This will be an article personally for you. But not tomorrow ... go to VO.
    1. Prometey
      Prometey April 20 2017 11: 09
      +3
      Quote: kalibr
      This will be an article personally for you.

      Well I will wait.
  5. Velizariy
    Velizariy April 20 2017 09: 16
    +4
    “Do not think that I have come to bring peace to the earth; I did not come to bring peace, but a sword. ” (Matthew 10, 34)
    You probably just forgot the context where you got this quote from. It happens. This phrase means that if someone in the family is a Christian, they will persecute him and will not put up with him, for some reason the Christian will not rest others, even if he does not show at all that he professes Christ. I checked on myself. If someone in the family becomes a Christian, not just baptized with some kind of god in the soul or elsewhere, but a true Christian, they simply will not be given a living. Checked. Even if you don’t say a word to Christ about others.
    1. M0xHaTka
      M0xHaTka April 20 2017 12: 42
      +2
      This year for the first time began to fast. Moreover, he initially emphasized that not as a believer, but for health. From the whole family, only the youngest son (nearly 6) normally reacted to this, probably, of course. just because. that I did not understand the meaning of this. The rest was not something to eat, but the jokes were constant.
      1. Velizariy
        Velizariy April 20 2017 13: 20
        +2
        If you fast for health, you can get very sick. "Health" is sooooo bad. And in the end, to hate everything related to fasting.
        1. M0xHaTka
          M0xHaTka April 20 2017 17: 15
          +1
          If you do it thoughtlessly, then any activity is sooooo harmful. Like inaction.
        2. Ingvar 72
          Ingvar 72 April 20 2017 20: 49
          +1
          Quote: Velizariy
          If you fast for health, you can get very sick.

          It depends on what you have in mind. wink Anorexia is a disease of fashion models, not Stoics. hi
        3. Nikolaevich I
          Nikolaevich I April 21 2017 06: 03
          +1
          Fasting, like other serious events, "requires" an appropriate culture and education! You should not start fasting "suddenly" .. this is unlikely to succeed.
      2. KaPToC
        KaPToC April 20 2017 18: 13
        0
        Quote: M0xHaTka
        jokes were constant

        Laughing, fucking and fucking? Deserved by the way, you need to eat properly, and not fast.
        1. Ingvar 72
          Ingvar 72 April 20 2017 20: 50
          0
          Quote: KaPToC
          Deserved by the way, you need to eat properly, and not fast.

          In some cases, hunger is still beneficial.
      3. moskalik
        moskalik April 21 2017 05: 23
        0
        For health, you need to choose a diet and diet, rather than fasting
        1. Nikolaevich I
          Nikolaevich I April 21 2017 06: 08
          +1
          Fasting is both a diet and a diet! Who chooses the "Kremlin" diet, who - "Hollywood" ... but post is also a ritual, a rite.
    2. Archon
      Archon 10 May 2017 14: 02
      0
      if you go to Buddhism, then no one will say anything at all
  6. Mikado
    Mikado April 20 2017 11: 22
    +3
    So he needed as many as 29 (!) Times to strike with a sword to chop off the head of Count de Chalet. And on the contrary, in 1601, a professional executioner managed to decapitate two convicts at once with one blow, having tied them back to back.

    Maurice Druon described a similar case in 14th-century France. The role of the executioner was a criminal, whom, it seems, they promised to have mercy for the fact that he "will be the executioner." Also a bunch of punches .. brrr!
  7. Curious
    Curious April 20 2017 11: 25
    +10
    There is another famous sword - an example of already modern weapons art.

    The knight's sword, which the king of Great Britain passed as a gift to the British people to Stalingrad.

    The basis was taken as a model of a double-edged two-handed sword of the Crusaders. His sketch was developed by art professor R.M. Glidow at Oxford, received the personal approval of George VII. The process of its manufacture was monitored by a commission of nine experts from the UK Goldsmiths Guild. The Russian edition of the dedicatory inscription was carried out by a specialist in Slavic iconography, the president of Cambridge Pembroke College, Sir Ellis H. Minns. On the blade - inscriptions in two languages. In Russian: "To the citizens of Stalingrad * as strong as steel * from King George VI * as a sign of deep admiration for the British people." And in English: To the steel-hearted citizens of Stalingrad * The gift of King George VI * in token of homage of the British people. "

    The honor of manufacturing the Sword of Stalingrad was granted to the world famous weapons company Wilkinson. The blade was forged by blacksmith gunsmiths Tom Beasley and Sid Rose, calligrapher Mrwin S. Oliver and silversmith Royal Corporal of the British Air Force Leslie J. Durbin. The convex blade of a double-edged two-handed sword is forged by hand from first-class Sheffield steel. Its total length is about 4 feet (122 cm).
    The guard is made of pure silver, its gilded arches bent towards the blade are made in the form of leopard heads. The two-handed handle is entwined with 18-carat gold wire. A huge crystal of pure rock crystal is mounted in the hilt, at the end of the head of which is a Tudor gold rose. The scabbard is dark red in color, made of Persian lamb skin, decorated with a silvered royal coat of arms, a crown and a monogram, as well as five silver. According to experts of weapons crafts, the sword of Stalingrad can be considered one of the masterpieces of weapons of the modern era. The production of the sword took 3 months from the British gunsmiths. What is characteristic of the British company Wilkinson Sword was released several copies of the sword of Stalingrad, one of which is stored in the National Museum of Military History of South Africa with overlays and three five-pointed ruby ​​stars in a gold frame.
    1. alex-cn
      alex-cn April 20 2017 12: 19
      +1
      The most beautiful weapon, of course, ... But it would be better if the extra convoy in the year 42 ....
  8. Andrey78
    Andrey78 April 20 2017 14: 35
    +1
    Vyacheslav, thank you, the cycle of articles about swords is interesting. What gradation of swords was in Russia and attitude to them?
    1. Mikado
      Mikado April 20 2017 15: 04
      +2
      the esteemed Caliber last year had a sword cycle. You can see the publication. Sometime in July, it seems. Although .. let it be better to write a new cycle! drinks
    2. kalibr
      April 20 2017 15: 08
      +3
      All will be! Wait...
  9. otto meer
    otto meer April 20 2017 16: 00
    +1
    At the same time, the squire and the knight differed very slightly: he had the same armor as the knight, but he wore a sword (since he was not solemnly surrounded by it!) On his belt, he attached saddles to the bow. In order for the squire to become a knight, he had to be consecrated and girded with a sword. Only then could he wear it on his belt.
    Do not confuse the "mit Riemen" girdle (aha, this is from there) and the way of carrying weapons. And the saddle sword "das Schwert für den Sattel" has nothing to do with it. Here is a picture.The one with his back to us is the squire "esquire" ("Schildträger" in our opinion)))). Yes, you may not believe Osprey, but there is a sea of ​​historical engravings. I just took the first one I got.
  10. Free wind
    Free wind April 20 2017 16: 55
    0
    Interesting of course, but cruel. Add some more horror. Of course, meat is chopped with an ax from the top to the bottom, the mass of the ax is large and the impact speed is not the highest, therefore, chopping block under your head, so remove everything that interferes. the sword is much lighter and when you chop it, you simply break the sword and bring suffering to the victim. the sword was struck with a guy, that is, a razor-cutting one, and the sword can be dispersed to high speed. therefore, if the butcher takes the sword, the result will be terrible. The sword will become dull after the first blow, and holding it in bloodied hands will not be easy. In the New Testament, I don’t remember something about the sword, I will re-read it. I’ll probably argue about the balance of blades, of course I’m not a fencer. but the balance was shifted to the guard because of its lightness, the balance of some swords and swords was 3 by 4 like that of a scimitar. Although it seems to me the classic 2 to 3 balancing is better
  11. NicolasFrench
    NicolasFrench April 20 2017 17: 18
    0
    About the quality of swords. In the Lionheart novel, the episode describes how the pillow was chopped off with a sword and how the silk ribbon was chopped up with a house saber. For a sword, not dyuzhennaya force is needed. The swords are little red-hot and often bent in battle. The article mentions notches - this is the result of weak hardening. True, this refers to the era of the beginning of the Middle Ages. Later technologies improved but were far from damask steel. A damask saber could easily chop a sword.
  12. KaPToC
    KaPToC April 20 2017 18: 05
    0
    You are a soldier with a sword or sword !!! Oh no, still with a shield or on a shield? Swords in our usual form appeared recently, and quickly gave way to sabers and swords. The age of swords was short-lived.
    1. kalibr
      April 20 2017 21: 23
      0
      Swords in the “familiar form” appeared in the era of the Great Migration and were used until the 1492 of the year, i.e. discoveries of America by Columbus, i.e. you can vouch for 1000. The saber is the 10 century, and the swords of the beginning of the 16. If 1000 is not long, then what is long?
      1. Operator
        Operator April 20 2017 22: 09
        0
        The sword in the “familiar to us” form (90-100 cm) became the weapon of the riders when they had lenticular saddles and, most importantly, stirrups. After that, the riders ’weapons were supplanted by the infantry’s weapons - the gladius sword (50-60 cm), of course, only among the combatants (the militia had ax inventory in its march).
  13. barabaner
    barabaner April 20 2017 23: 33
    +2
    Strange somehow, the bulk of the images of swords are from American and German museums. But in the Russian museums there are no swords? Or how? A. Nevsky sword fought il crossbow what?
    1. Nikolaevich I
      Nikolaevich I April 21 2017 06: 18
      +1
      A. Nevsky and the sword? belay lol Such a thing could have been “invented” in a provincial theater when Onegin kills Lensky in a duel from Smith-and-Wesson! Or in a movie, the musketeers "naughty" of the capsule pistols! And in Russia a saber "existed" at a time when the "Europeans" were measured with swords ...
    2. kalibr
      April 21 2017 06: 59
      +1
      Because in Western museums there is NOTHING worth getting an image in "public domain", but in ours ... or for money, or they don’t exist at all!
      1. Grid
        Grid April 21 2017 09: 12
        0
        Because in Western museums there is NOTHING worth getting an image in "public domain",

        Two times, yeah.
        or for money, or none at all!

        50 rubles and shoot at least a movie.
        1. kalibr
          April 21 2017 15: 40
          +2
          50 it must be there personally! There is NOTHING on the Internet or, as in the Russian Museum, 200 p. for the photo. The same amount you will be asked to pay for a photo from the magazine "History illustreytid". And I want to say ... yes, come on ... I’ll dial everything at the Metro for nothing too! And then, photos like yours with such quality and gift are not needed by anyone. And you do not know that if you ask for shooting not through glass, but as the Metropolitan gives, the museum will require an agreement with you and for each photo completely different money. So you come in your pants, and leave covering your shame with your hands! And the damned Yankees in what came, in that and left, and even with excellent photos. Well, aren't you bastards ?!
    3. Warrior Hamilton
      Warrior Hamilton 14 June 2017 15: 15
      0
      Quote: barabaner

      2
      barabaner April 20, 2017 23:33
      Strange somehow, the bulk of the images of swords are from American and German museums. But in the Russian museums there are no swords? Or how? A. Nevsky sword fought il crossbow what?

      Are you hinting at the lack of Russian history? Turn on the "dunk"? I will answer you: "In the same place as the Amber Room." You could still ask Jacob Mikhailovich Sverdlov and his friends, but, alas, it is too late. Are you satisfied, "our former compatriot"?
  14. Grid
    Grid April 21 2017 10: 28
    0
    By article:
    Beautiful emotions and zero meaning.
    1. kalibr
      April 21 2017 15: 48
      +1
      A-ah, Chukchi is not a writer, Chukchi is a critic, right? Write without emotion and with meaning!
      1. Grid
        Grid April 21 2017 17: 40
        0
        A-ah, Chukchi is not a writer, Chukchi is a critic, right? Write without emotion and with meaning!

        And everything is written and said long before me. You see, prokhfEssor, I do not suffer from delusions of grandeur and I have no desire to broadcast well-known common truths for a long time with a smart look.
        1. kalibr
          April 22 2017 16: 06
          0
          But I have: desire, skill, and ... an audience. Three whales on which the profession of a journalist rests!
          1. Grid
            Grid April 23 2017 09: 23
            0
            But there is no relevant knowledge (especially in the field of firearms) and engineering skills.
      2. For your motherland, your mother))
        For your motherland, your mother)) April 22 2017 15: 08
        +1
        Do not pay attention, your articles are very interesting; even if I read about it before, it’s still interesting, because you have your own, special style. Attacks-- it's envy
        (I’m not gamming myself and I won’t give it to another;))).
        1. kalibr
          April 22 2017 16: 07
          0
          Yes, I do not pay. And I answer because A - this is polite, B - allows you to say something to others, and C - it is sometimes nice to pamper yourself for fun.
        2. Grid
          Grid April 23 2017 09: 19
          0
          Attacks-- it's envy

          What to envy?
          Well, let's go over this article. And so, what is said in it:
          1. that the sword in the Middle Ages was a status weapon.
          2. that it was expensive.
          3. that the sword was used in a number of ceremonies.
          4. that the sword was used as an instrument of execution + description of this procedure.
          More, in fact, nothing. Moreover, the presentation at the level of kindergarten and presented with truly great aplomb and expansion at shoulder width. However, this also applies to the remaining "articles" of the author.
          If this is an “excellent” article for you, then I am truly sorry for you.
          Z.Y. In the comments, by the way, there is much larger and better material. But the Chukchi is a writer, but Nichrome is not a reader.
    2. Grid
      Grid April 21 2017 17: 27
      0
      Look and do not suffer:

  15. Grim Reaper
    Grim Reaper April 21 2017 15: 30
    +2
    Thanks to the author.

    For some reason I thought that swords are much heavier.
  16. Vladislav 73
    Vladislav 73 April 21 2017 20: 20
    0
    which took place in France in 1626: then an inexperienced volunteer acted as an executioner. So he needed as many as 29 (!) Times to strike with a sword to chop off the head of Count de Chalet.
    Yes, Henri de Talleyrand, Count de Chalet, a member of one of the conspiracies against the omnipotent Cardinal Richelieu. Graf de Chalet was sentenced to dismemberment (as I understand it, a quartering in Russia?), But the Count's mother urged King Louis XIII to commute the sentence and be replaced by decapitation The friends tried to save him and eliminated the executioner, but Richelieu offered some hangman life in exchange for the role of the executioner. But there is another version of events. The vengeful Richelieu not only picked up the "inexperienced" executioner (there is a version of the convicted soldier), but he also instructed condemned de Chalet to his “special” attention. So 29 blows were deliberate and sentencing did not play any role. As a warning to other possible conspirators, there will be no mercy, even if the king has mercy or lessens the punishment. Something similar happened when the conspirators were executed de Tu, de Saint-Mara.
  17. Vladislav 73
    Vladislav 73 April 21 2017 21: 15
    0
    "Song of Roland"
    A little more history. Hruodland (Roland), Margrave of the Breton mark, according to legend, the nephew of Charlemagne, “By the Grace of God the ruler of the Roman Empire, the king of the Franks and Lombards,” died on August 15.08.778, XNUMX during the Spanish campaign of Charlemagne. Upon returning from Spain to the Pyrenees , in the Ronseval gorge, the army rearguard commanded by Hruodland (Roland) was attacked by the indignant Basques and killed the whole detachment. This was a real shock for the Franks. Later, the story of the battle in the Ronceval gorge was transformed into various knightly and heroic epics, in particular, “Song about Roland, "Basque Christians became Saracens, pagans, enemies of the faith, and Roland himself became a model of the Christian knight. By the way, not only swords and horses had their own names, but also some details of the equipment. For example, Roland's horn was called - Olyphant. The horse was called Velyantif. The name of the sword of Roland - Durandal, comes either from the adjective "Dur" - solid, or from the verb "Durer" - to be strong. The fate of Durandal remains unclear. The answer is given by Karlamagnussag, probably drawing information from some French source. Karl sends first one, then five glorious knights, so that they take the sword from the hands of the dead Roland and bring the sword to him. They draw a sword, but Roland's hand does not open. Then Karl prays, and the sword itself falls out of his hand. Karl removes the hilt from the sword for the sake of the holy relics enclosed in it, and throws the blade into the water, "for he knew that no one was worthy to wear it after Roland."
  18. The comment was deleted.
  19. The comment was deleted.
  20. Vladislav 73
    Vladislav 73 April 21 2017 21: 20
    0
    Battle of Roncevalle (medieval miniature). Opponents of Roland depicted by the Saracens
    1. Molot1979
      Molot1979 18 July 2017 16: 34
      0
      According to "The Song of Roland") It is unlikely that the artist imagined what the Basques look like.
  21. Catherine II
    Catherine II April 22 2017 14: 07
    +1
    The sword was also a symbol of the executioners of the Middle Ages.
    The executioner's progression in the Middle Ages was interesting
    “My grandfather was an executioner. My father was an executioner. Now here I am - the executioner. My son and his son will also be executioners, ”probably any medieval executioner could say just that, answering the question of what influenced their choice of such an“ unusual ”profession. Traditionally, the post of executioner passed by inheritance. All executioners living in the same region knew each other, and were often even relatives, since executioners often chose daughters of other executioners, flayer or grave diggers to create families. The reason for this was not professional solidarity at all, but the position of the executioner in society: according to their social status, the executioners were on the city "bottom".
    The executioners were in Ancient Egypt, Ancient Greece and Ancient Rome. This is if not the oldest profession (we will not encroach on the sacred), then one of the oldest, that's for sure. And in the Middle Ages, not a single European city could do without an executioner.
    Execute a criminal, interrogate with suspicion the suspect of high treason, conduct a demonstration in the central square - without an executioner!
    So the executioners were not only executed, but also tortured. The executioner's profession was not as simple as it might seem at first glance. In particular, this related to the decapitation procedure. It was not easy to chop off a man’s head with one blow of the ax, and those executioners who could do it on the first attempt were especially appreciated. Such a demand for the executioner was not made at all out of humanity to the convict, but because of the spectacle, since executions, as a rule, were of a public nature. Mastery was taught by senior comrades. In Russia, the executioners were trained on a wooden mare. A dummy of a human back was laid on it from a birch bark and practiced blows. Many of the executioners had something like branded professional tricks. It is known that the last British executioner Albert Pierrepoint executed in record time - 17 seconds. The executioner's symbol (in France) was a special sword with a rounded blade, intended only for cutting off heads. In Russia - a whip. They did not wear masks (except for the execution of Karl 1). The work was official. They knew in person and even wanted to be an executioner (although this is hereditary)
    At all times, they paid little to the executioners. In Russia, for example, according to the 1649 Code, the executioners were paid a salary from the sovereign's treasury - “an annual salary of 4 rubles to each, from unqualified gross proceeds”. However, this was offset by a kind of “social package”. Since the executioner was widely known in his area, he could, coming to the market, take everything he needed, completely free. In the literal sense, the executioner could eat the same way as the one to whom he served. However, this tradition did not arise out of favor with the executioners, but quite the opposite: not a single merchant wanted to take “bloody” money from the hands of the killer, but since the executioner needed the state, everyone had to feed him. The most famous executioner XX century was a Frenchman Fernand Masonier. With 1953, he personally executed 200 of Algerian rebels. Fernand Masonier (1931-2008). Mason has been in the profession since 16 years, and this is their family life. His father became an executioner because of the provided "benefits and benefits": the right to have military weapons, high salaries, free trips and tax breaks on the maintenance of the pub. The tool of his grim work - the guillotine "model 48" - he stores today.
    Until 2008, he lived in France, received a state pension and did not hide his past. When asked why he became an executioner, Fernand replied that it was not at all because the executioner was his father, but because the executioner had a special social status and high salary. Free trips around the country, the right to have military weapons, as well as tax benefits for doing business
    1. For your motherland, your mother))
      For your motherland, your mother)) April 22 2017 15: 10
      +1
      Interesting, thanks.
  22. Torkvat torkvat
    Torkvat torkvat 27 June 2017 10: 35
    0
    About the education of a knight: in a page they sent it to a knight, and not some lady. The lady had a cult of the "ready" knight))))
  23. Molot1979
    Molot1979 18 July 2017 16: 29
    0
    Technical Voros: if the horse was in armor, how were spurs used?