Military Review

Death Scythe: Renaissance two-handed swords with a flaming blade

164

Two-handed sword on a miniature from the manuscript "Human Mirror of Salvation", c. 1325-1375, Karlsruhe. Germany, Baden State Library


"... for all who took the sword will die by the sword ..."
(Matthew 26: 52)

Weapon from museums. In the previous article, we were talking about exactly how the two-handed swords of the Middle Ages differ from the two-handed swords of the Renaissance. And it is obvious that the differences lie not only in the details of the form, but above all in their length, weight and application in battle.


Knights, however, also used two-handed swords. But mostly in tournaments. Collectible quality polystyrene figurine of a knight in tournament armor of the Japanese firm "Imex" on a scale of 1:12. Photo by the author

The two-handed sword (bidenhender) has a total length of 160 to 180 centimeters. No scabbard was made for these swords; they were worn on the shoulder like a lance. The upper part of the blade, the one that directly adjoined the crosshair and the handle, was usually not sharpened, but covered with wood and leather. Therefore, the hand could freely grasp the blade, which at least slightly facilitated fencing with such a sword (or even made it possible). Very often on such blades, directly on the border between their sharpened and non-sharpened parts, additional parrying hooks are found. It is easy to guess that such a Renaissance two-handed sword could not be used in the same way as a medieval battle sword. If in general it was still somehow used in battle, then it was done by foot soldiers, who, with the help of such swords, tried to punch gaps in the line of the enemy's peak. Since these were, in a certain sense, suicide teams, and only very strong warriors could properly handle a two-handed sword, they received a double salary, for which they were also called "double mercenaries."


Two identical two-handed swords [1, 3] more than 2 meters long served as weapons in the fencing school. But the sword [2] with leather guards, weighing 8,25 kg (here, at last we got a sword in 8 kg!), Most likely, was a military weapon, otherwise why did he need a leather guard? The ceremonial sword could be decorated with something more beautiful, but for the training one it is too heavy. The medallions on the top of its handle are nothing more than a tribute to Juan of Austria (1547-1578), who commanded fleet Of the Holy League during the victorious battle over the Ottomans at the Battle of Lepanto on October 7, 1571. The tops of the hilts of these swords are very characteristic: for example, the "decanter cork" on these thrusting swords and the octagonal pommel with a medallion in the center on the cutting sword. That is, before us are typical finials of the XNUMXth century. Armory of Dresden. Photo by the author

During the 2th century, two-handed swords were less and less used in combat and increasingly became ceremonial weapons. For example, they were armed with honor guards, because these powerful swords made a strong impression. The two-handed sword became a ceremonial sword, which was carried out by holding it in front of oneself. The swords became longer (often reaching XNUMX meters) and were decorated more and more magnificently and carefully.


The arches of the cross of such swords were most often playfully bent and decorated, and the pommel (see the middle sword) sometimes took the most amazing shape. Well, the blades of intimidation were sharpened in waves for the sake of (the so-called flamberg sword). Armory of Dresden. Photo by the author

The record for size belongs to ceremonial swords worn by the guards of Prince Edward of Wales during his time as Earl of Chester (1475-1483). These swords reached 2,26 meters. Needless to say, such huge swords no longer had any practical value, but should have symbolized the power of this suzerain.

It is clear that already at the very beginning of the appearance of such swords, attempts were made to further increase their striking power. And ... that's how flamberg-type swords arose. It was believed that a blow with such a sword - whether stabbing or cutting, inflicts a more severe wound, because it "breaks apart" it like a saw. Naturally, such conversations also caused greater fear, so the appearance of a warrior with such a sword had a strong psychological effect on the enemy. The owners of flambergs began to be condemned as notorious villains. Like, everyone:

"Wearer of a blade, like a wave, should be put to death without trial or investigation."


Check out these impressive two-handed swords ranging in length from 180 to 210 cm and weighing from 4 to 4,8 kg, which date from the reign of the Elector Augustus of Saxony. They were part of a group of 99 such swords, which were donated to the Armory from the Royal Saxon Arsenal in Dresden in 1833. The Bidenhanders displayed in this display case are the clear weapons of the Landsknechts. The elongated ricassos, covered in leather, could be used as an additional handle. Without a doubt, the handling of these weapons demanded excellent physical fitness and considerable courage from the Landsknechts. Armory of Dresden. Photo by the author

However, it should be noted here that when hitting with a two-handed sword on armor, there is not much difference what kind of blade he has. And in the same way, there is not much difference when the blow falls on a living body. Or let's put it this way: there may be a difference, but it is not so great to justify the technological difficulties of manufacturing and, consequently, the high cost of such blades. After all, forging a flamberg was more difficult than an ordinary sword, and it required more metal, which means it was heavier. In fact, it acquired the function of not a blade, but a polearm, and there everything depends not on the shape of the blade, but on the weight and length of the handle!


Flamberg sword, 1571-1599 Sword length 1684 mm, blade length 1225 mm, weight 5528 g. Royal Arsenal, Leeds

Each bend of the blade created a zone of increased metal stresses, so it was easier for a flamberg to break than a "two-handed" with a straight blade. One could have acted differently: forge a straight blade and simply sharpen its blades "under the wave." But again, it was a very time consuming task, given the length of the blade and the number of indentations and protrusions on it.


English bayonet bayonet, 1600-1699 Royal Arsenal, Leeds

In any case, it was a heavier and more expensive weapon, and if heavier, then ... and more effective when hitting, no matter how sharpened his blade. And it was not for nothing that flambergs, in general, did not become a mass weapon. How did the eastern sabers with wavy and serrated blades not become a mass weapon! Wavy bayonets did not become widespread, although they could have been produced in machine production without any problems. It is possible, but did not ... They considered that "the game is not worth the candle!"


Scottish claymore from the collection of the Metropolitan Museum of Art in New York. Handle close-up

Perhaps, the Scottish Highlanders used two-handed swords in battle for the longest time. What is known about him? That the two-handed claymore was a "great sword" used in Scotland during the late Middle Ages and early modern times from about 1400 to 1700. The last known battle in which the claymores are believed to have been used in large numbers was the Battle of Killikranky in 1689. This sword was somewhat longer than other two-handed swords of that era. In addition, Scottish swords were distinguished by a crosshair with straight crosses inclined forward, ending in a quatrefoil.


The blade of this claymore was made in Solingen ... Metropolitan Museum of Art, New York

The average claymore had a total length of about 140 cm, with a handle of 33 cm, a blade of 107 cm and a weight of about 2,5 kg. For example, in 1772, Thomas Pennant described a sword seen on a visit to Raasai as:

“A bulky weapon two inches wide with a double-edged blade; blade length three feet seven inches; the handle is fourteen inches; flat weapon ... weight six and a half pounds. "

Largest claymore in stories, known as the "bloody killer", weighs 10 kilograms and is 2,24 meters long. It is believed to have been owned by a member of the Maxwell clan around the XNUMXth century. The sword is currently in the National War Museum in Edinburgh, Scotland.


Here is this claymore from the collection of the Metropolitan Museum in New York in "full growth". Made in the XVI-XVII centuries. in Solingen (blade), the handle is local, Scottish. Length 136 cm, blade length 103,5 cm, crosshair width 28,5 cm, weight 2068,5 g

However, such a "thing" as the inertia of thinking is a terrible thing - swords with wavy blades disappeared, but for some time rapiers with exactly the same blades appeared in Europe. They say that in a duel for the blade of an ordinary rapier, you can grab a hand in a thick glove, hold it, and in the meantime, slaughter your opponent. Whereas it is impossible to grab such a blade even with a glove. Moreover, such a sword does not get stuck in chain mail and ... in bones. But again, all these "magical properties" of such a blade were most likely clearly exaggerated.


Here is a rapier with a wavy blade, approx. 1620-1640 Italy. Length 111,8 cm, cross-hair width 24,8 cm, blade width 14 cm, weight 1346,6 g. Metropolitan Museum of Art, New York


Still, there were many more swords with an even, smooth blade. Well, let's say - these are ... These so-called "heavy swords" and parrying daggers are characteristic of the Italian school of fencing. Armory of Dresden. Photo by the author


And such! As for helmets and shields, they most likely served as attributes of the court guards and were least of all intended for battle. Armory of Dresden. Photo by the author

Death Scythe: Renaissance two-handed swords with a flaming blade
Sword. Unknown master. Italy, about 1540-1550 Length: 112,4 cm. Blade length: 98,8 cm. Blade width: 2,8 cm, blade at the top - ricasso. Guard width: 17,6 cm, protection. The handle has a pear-shaped pommel, the handle is wrapped in twisted wire. Crosshair: straight square bar, thickened at the ends; side rings and other parts are all square. Hexagonal blade, double-edged, with ricasso. Refers to the transitional type of sword, which is found in both civilian and military portraits of that time. Swords of this type in combination with a buckler or dagger were used by swordsmen of the Bologna school of fencing of Marozzo, which, although it included new innovations such as the parrying dagger, in its essence followed the old medieval martial tradition, including fencing with two-handed swords. The simple yet elegant hilt decoration seems to follow the civil fashion of the time and is most typical of weapons dating from about 1530-1550. Metropolitan Museum of Art, New York

But how much is a sword, how much a sword - you can argue endlessly!
Author:
164 comments
Information
Dear reader, to leave comments on the publication, you must sign in.
  1. polpot
    polpot April 16 2021 18: 13
    +9
    Thank you for a wonderful article with great illustrations, great work.
  2. 3x3zsave
    3x3zsave April 16 2021 18: 17
    +5
    Finally!!!
    In the previous article, we were talking about exactly how the two-handed swords of the Middle Ages differ from the two-handed swords of the Renaissance
    Did I miss something?! crying
    Thank you, Vyacheslav Olegovich!
    1. Richard
      Richard April 16 2021 18: 35
      +11
      The record for size belongs to ceremonial swords worn by the guards of Prince Edward of Wales during his time as Earl of Chester (1475-1483). These swords reached 2,26 meters. Needless to say, such huge swords no longer had any practical value, but should have symbolized the power of this suzerain.

      However, they did not become ceremonial at once: the first swords with long handles, according to the classification of the most authoritative specialist in this field, E. Oakeshott, appeared already in the second half of the 910th century. He identified such swords as Type XIIa. With a blade length of 1100 - 150 mm, the length of the handle varied from 250 to XNUMX mm.
      a photo.Sword type XIIa by E. Oakeshott

      And the very technique of combat, in which the weapon is held with two hands, E. Oakeshott also refers to the XIII century. It is assumed that its appearance is associated with an increase in the effectiveness of the armor: in order to break it, an increasingly powerful blow was required.
      1. Richard
        Richard April 16 2021 18: 39
        +7
        the technique of combat, in which the weapon is held with two hands, E. Oakeshott also refers to the XIII century.

        It is worth saying that somewhere at the same time, this technique is also recorded in the annals describing events in Russia, for example, in the so-called. Radziwill Chronicle dating from the beginning of the XIII century.
        a photo. Two-handed grip from the Radziwill Chronicle.
        1. ee2100
          ee2100 April 16 2021 18: 54
          +6
          Hi Dmitry!
          I read your comments, everything is great! Once again, the author "somewhere did not overlook or somewhere did not finalize"
          This proves that there was no so-called. progressive development, but there was a time of scientific "poke".
          Thank you, pleased!
          1. Catfish
            Catfish April 16 2021 19: 18
            +4
            Hello Alexander! hi
            "You can't embrace the immensity" (c) fellow And Dima is really great. drinks
            1. ee2100
              ee2100 April 16 2021 19: 28
              +8
              Good evening Konstantin!
              Yes, Dmitry continues to amaze me with his erudition! And most importantly, there is nothing to object to the author.
              Although TGIF, the article is interesting, and the comments are beyond praise.
              1. Catfish
                Catfish April 16 2021 19: 39
                +5
                And why object if everything is correct. smile
              2. kalibr
                April 16 2021 19: 55
                +4
                Quote: ee2100
                And the most important thing is that there is nothing to object to the author.

                Why should you object? Is this a goal or a duty? Let him write what he wants ...
                1. The leader of the Redskins
                  The leader of the Redskins April 16 2021 20: 19
                  +4
                  Thank you Friday Charlie! Sorry for being frivolous, Vyacheslav Olegovich. Just today I complained to a colleague that there is nothing to read)))
                  1. kalibr
                    April 17 2021 06: 10
                    +1
                    Quote: Leader of the Redskins
                    Friday Charlie!

                    This is a compliment, however!
                2. Normal ok
                  Normal ok April 16 2021 23: 32
                  +1
                  The caption to one of the photos in the article reads:
                  Here is a rapier with a wavy blade, approx. 1620-1640 Italy. Length 111,8 cm, cross-hair width 24,8 cm, blade width 14 cm, weight 1346,6 g. Metropolitan Museum of Art, New York

                  14 cm at the rapier ?! Not every sword had this blade width.
                  1. kalibr
                    April 17 2021 06: 11
                    +1
                    Quote: Normal ok
                    14 cm at the rapier ?!

                    The error is most likely. You're right.
          2. kalibr
            April 16 2021 20: 02
            +3
            Quote: ee2100
            Once again, the author "somewhere did not overlook or somewhere did not finalize"

            For some reason you like the role of Tobacco, but it is not clever. This is not a monograph with a bunch of links to sources, but a popular article designed for the most common reader. More or less informative text and beautiful photographs, that's enough. And who wants to go deeper, then who is hindering? For that and comments. But it is simply unrealistic to write about everything in a short article, it is not even worth trying.
        2. vladcub
          vladcub April 16 2021 19: 50
          +1
          I thought that the two-handed sword was not widespread in Russia.
          It is impossible to say that you did not know such a sword, most likely it was not popular
      2. Hantengri
        Hantengri April 16 2021 22: 46
        +2
        Quote: Richard
        the first swords with long handles, according to the classification of the most authoritative specialist in this field, E. Oakeshott, appeared already in the second half of the 910th century. He identified such swords as Type XIIa. With a blade length of 1100 - 150 mm, the length of the handle varied from 250 to XNUMX mm.
        photo Sword type XIIa by E. Oakeshott

        And where, in this case, a two-handed sword? The photo shows a typical bastard. The dimensions you give also correspond to one and a half handcuffs.
    2. kalibr
      April 16 2021 18: 51
      +6
      Well, here I promised you and fulfilled ... there will still be a second article.
      1. 3x3zsave
        3x3zsave April 16 2021 18: 57
        +3
        Excellent! I will wait!
      2. vladcub
        vladcub April 16 2021 20: 58
        0
        It's very good when you have something to wait
    3. Catfish
      Catfish April 16 2021 18: 55
      +5
      Hello Anton. smile
      I'll "hook" on you, because I found a couple of pictures and I'm afraid of another glitch on the site. request
      I'm not a specialist, but it seems like all the guys with two-handed swords.



      Thank you Vyacheslav for another portion of pleasure. good drinks
      1. 3x3zsave
        3x3zsave April 16 2021 18: 59
        +4
        Hi Uncle Kostya!
        Judging by their clothes, they are one hundred percent landsknechts.
        1. Catfish
          Catfish April 16 2021 19: 16
          +6
          Once in Novodevichy we had an exhibition of armor and corresponding weapons. I was completely captivated by the Reitarskaya ammunition (entirely one large showcase), nothing superfluous, no decorations, everything is extremely simple, reliable and functional. You know, I am a loyal fan of firearms, but while preparing this exhibition, holding these things in my hands, I honestly, involuntarily felt respect for the craftsmen, and for those who ordered these armor and weapons, and did my work with them. There, professionalism was felt at first glance, both the masters and the customers.
          1. 3x3zsave
            3x3zsave April 16 2021 19: 27
            +2
            Photos left?
            1. Catfish
              Catfish April 16 2021 19: 43
              +4
              Alas, I have not, but our photo department worked there, and not only he. I regret that I did not take the printout from the guys, but this is not the only jamb in my life in general and in the museum in particular. request laughing
              1. 3x3zsave
                3x3zsave April 16 2021 19: 49
                +4
                Do not mind it. It happens. If I find myself in Barcelona again ... But, I hope, it will still work out!
              2. Korsar4
                Korsar4 April 16 2021 21: 02
                +3
                Not taking photos - cant? Strictly you judge yourself, sir.
                1. Catfish
                  Catfish April 16 2021 21: 08
                  +3
                  Strictly you judge yourself, sir.

                  Well, it's over time. And, basically, I do not regret it. smile
                  1. Korsar4
                    Korsar4 April 16 2021 21: 11
                    +4
                    In childhood, the fairy tale came across an oriental one.
                    One of the instructions in it was: "Never regret what you did."
                    1. Catfish
                      Catfish April 17 2021 17: 26
                      +2
                      So I regret NOT done. smile
                      1. Korsar4
                        Korsar4 April 17 2021 20: 03
                        +1
                        It happens. But all only Phileas Fogg provided that it was necessary to take with him to the next series.
                      2. Catfish
                        Catfish April 17 2021 20: 15
                        +1
                        And who is it? Hear it for the first time.))
                      3. Korsar4
                        Korsar4 April 17 2021 20: 21
                        +1
                        Jules Verne Around the World in Eighty Days. And there was a wonderful Australian cartoon.
                      4. Catfish
                        Catfish April 17 2021 20: 24
                        +2
                        You will laugh, but I have not read this book. For me, "The Mysterious Island" was always my favorite, I even reread this one in my youth.
                      5. Korsar4
                        Korsar4 April 17 2021 22: 23
                        +2
                        I read it late.
                        Read as a child was Twenty Thousand Leagues Under the Sea.
                      6. Catfish
                        Catfish April 17 2021 22: 34
                        +1
                        Yes, and this book too, but "The Island" was the best! good
                      7. Korsar4
                        Korsar4 April 17 2021 22: 35
                        +1
                        Now I looked at the cartoon. The translation is not the same, but still great.
                      8. Catfish
                        Catfish April 17 2021 22: 36
                        +1
                        What cartoon?
                      9. Korsar4
                        Korsar4 April 17 2021 22: 53
                        +1
                        "Around the world in 80 Days". Shown here in the eighties.
                      10. Catfish
                        Catfish April 17 2021 23: 18
                        +1
                        I know, I seem to have seen it, but I don't remember at all.
                      11. Korsar4
                        Korsar4 April 17 2021 23: 22
                        +2
                        "Fix's tricks!" (from).
                      12. Catfish
                        Catfish April 17 2021 23: 31
                        +1
                        No, a complete failure. laughing
        2. Grim Reaper
          Grim Reaper April 18 2021 16: 06
          0
          Quote: Sea Cat
          You will laugh, but I have not read this book. For me, "The Mysterious Island" was always my favorite, I even reread this one in my youth.

          Stunned. So as not to know "around the world ..." after all the reprints, cartoons and film adaptations, one with Jackie Chan. "Is it true? Where did you get drilled? Next to the Lykovs? I also want that ... :)
        3. Catfish
          Catfish April 19 2021 14: 45
          +1
          Near the Lykovs?

          I "hacked to death" in the city of Moscow on Tsvetnoy Boulevard.
          And you can want anything, including reading those books that I have read and about which you have no idea. I wish you success. hi
  • Richard
    Richard April 16 2021 19: 47
    +5
    Anton hi
    Is not a fact. The landsknechts, however, not all had very characteristic swords - Zweikhanders.

    Zweihander (German Zweihänder or Bidenhänder / Bihänder, “the two-handed sword”) is a weapon of a special division of landsknechts who consist of double salaries (doppelsoldnerov). If the claymore is the most modest sword, then the Zweihander was indeed impressive in size and in rare cases reached two meters in length, including the handle. In addition, he was notable for a double guard, where special “boar tusks” separated the uncut part of the blade (ricasso) from the sharpened blade.
    Such a sword was a weapon of very narrow use. The fighting technique was quite dangerous: the owner of the Zweichander acted in the front ranks, pushing as a lever (or even completely chopping off) the shaft of the enemy pikes and spears. To possess this monster required not only remarkable strength and courage, but also considerable skill of a swordsman, so that the mercenaries did not receive double salaries for their beautiful eyes. The technique of fighting with two-handed swords bears little resemblance to the usual blade fencing: such a sword is much easier to compare with a reed. Of course, the Zweichander did not have a scabbard - it was worn on the shoulder like an oar or a spear. smile
    1. 3x3zsave
      3x3zsave April 16 2021 19: 56
      +4
      Dmitry, my respect!
      Not a fact.
      Fact. I appreciated the clothes.
      1. Richard
        Richard April 16 2021 20: 36
        +2
        Fact. I appreciated the clothes.

        I throw out the white flag. Here I am a complete layman yes
        1. 3x3zsave
          3x3zsave April 16 2021 20: 48
          +5
          I also don't know much about the Renaissance, but the Landsknechts had four main items of expenditure: weapons, women, swill and rags. Most likely in this sequence.
          1. Richard
            Richard April 16 2021 21: 38
            +6
            During the Renaissance, there were laws prohibiting members of the lower classes from dressing pretentiously and brightly. Emperor Maximilian gave his landsknechts such a privilege, saying: “Their life is so short and bleak that magnificent clothing is one of their few pleasures. I'm not going to take it away from them. "
            And the Landsknechts enjoyed this privilege to the fullest. They took the brightest fabrics, their berets were adorned with curled ostrich feathers, and their groin covered a pouch for genitals - brageta. It was made huge and stuffed with cotton wool - not only to show the masculinity of the owner, but also to soften the blow, if any. Sometimes they also hid a wallet in the brageta.
            The Landsknecht style of dress, the so-called "puffs and cuts", where they cut through the outer garment and stuffed the lower layers through these cuts, quickly became popular. Moreover, it is so popular that even the English king Henry VIII, seeing the mercenaries, adopted their fashion and began to flaunt such a costume.
            The highest "aerobatics" was steel armor, imitating the style of "puffs and cuts". It cost a lot of money, but medieval fashionistas were unstoppable. smile
            a photoThe same armor in the style of "puffs and cuts".
            1. kalibr
              April 17 2021 06: 15
              0
              Quote: Richard
              The same armor in the style of "puffs and cuts".

              Well done, Richard. I got to the Metro ... But there is only that view of it, for some reason there is no front view.
    2. bk0010
      bk0010 April 16 2021 23: 46
      +1
      Quote: Richard
      The fighting technique was quite dangerous.
      From the video - as the sixth waving, they correctly wrote in the article that such a sword is actually a pole-arm.
      1. novel66
        novel66 April 17 2021 10: 57
        0
        in fact, the Swiss alshpis - a confirmation of this - are similar, right?
  • ee2100
    ee2100 April 16 2021 19: 33
    +5
    Who cares. There is more
    https://youtu.be/kb8tNzWlrhg
    1. Richard
      Richard April 16 2021 20: 41
      +2
      Thank you, Alexander, you are a tempting serpent smile
      I have to read Vyacheslav Shpakovsky and your link at the same time with interest.
  • kalibr
    April 16 2021 19: 07
    +6
    Quote: 3x3zsave
    Did I miss something?!

    Yes, Anton! It turned out like this: this is the SECOND ARTICLE about two-handed swords. The first one remained under moderation. Well ... that's how it happened. I'm not exhibiting them. So the first will now be the SECOND, and the SECOND has become the FIRST.
    1. 3x3zsave
      3x3zsave April 16 2021 19: 11
      +2
      Hmm, "cant" however, but not yours. It's a shame, you know, the Middle Ages are more interesting to me than the Renaissance.
  • Richard
    Richard April 16 2021 19: 39
    +3
    Perhaps, the Scottish Highlanders used two-handed swords in battle for the longest time. The Claymore was a large sword used in Scotland during the late Middle Ages and early modern times.

    That's how claymore actually translates. Claymore (claymore, claymore, claymore, from the Gaulish claidheamh-mòr - "great sword").
    You have correctly pointed out that its distinctive feature was the characteristic curve of the arches of the cross - downward, towards the tip of the blade. This design made it possible to effectively grip and, with a twist, literally pull out any long weapon from the enemy's hands - both swords and spears.
    a photo. Irish Museum. Claymores
  • Avior
    Avior April 16 2021 18: 17
    +10
    ... here it should be noted that when you hit the armor with a two-handed sword, there is no particular difference what kind of blade he has.

    I heard a version that there is a difference - the flamberg cuts through the armor better because of the shape of the blade - the impact force falls on a smaller area - on the upper parts of the waves of the blade
    1. WHAT IS
      WHAT IS April 16 2021 18: 48
      +9
      From a purely structural point of view, the Flamberg blade is less rigid and has many more stress points than a normal sword - one point for each "half wave". The number and amplitude of half-waves, by the way, differed - the fewer there were, and the greater the amplitude, the more terrible a wound a flamberg could inflict. the bends of the blade, especially the shallow ones, will act as a good scavenger, preventing the enemy's blade from sliding towards the guard. On the other hand, I suspect that such a blade was serrated and chipped desperately, since the angle of meeting of its metal with enemy steel is fundamentally different than that of a normal sword.
      A puncture wound with a "saw" blade will be twice as wide as a normal blade with the same tip diameter, and have ragged edges. With the level of knowledge of the then medicine - certain death. By the way, in the film "Countess de Monsoro" Count de Bussy was wounded somewhere in the hypochondrium by a rapier-flamberg. The filmmakers pretty much sinned against the truth - in real conditions, after such injuries, they rarely survived.
      1. depressant
        depressant April 16 2021 20: 17
        +8
        It is believed that flambergs as "inhumane" weapons were prohibited by the Holy See. However, there is not a single document that would confirm this version. It was different there.
        In the 17th century, Europe was overwhelmed by an epidemic of duels, there were many corpses, the nobility suffered serious losses out of the blue without any war. Concerned secular authorities were forced to come up with all sorts of dueling codes to stop the avalanche of deaths. The Codes of Honor provided for the use of weapons that often avoided mortal wounds. Flambergs are military weapons designed to kill, not injure, high lethality from use, therefore they fell under the ban.
        1. Korsar4
          Korsar4 April 16 2021 21: 07
          +3
          I wonder if there is a "humanism" of weapons at all?
          This is how the French complained during the Patriotic War of 1812 that ours "are not fighting according to the rules."
          1. depressant
            depressant April 16 2021 21: 49
            +5
            I wonder if there is a "humanism" of weapons at all?

            Well, Sergei, you are a provocateur! )))
            You can also kill with a stiletto. But that's if you're lucky. Anyone can use a skewer, it is even worse than a flamberg - it is not as easy to squeeze into a carcass as a stylet, some force must be applied, but tissue destruction is such that the surgeon is useless.
            I remember that in "Captain Rip Head" the doctor constantly emphasized that there are humane and inhuman bullets. One makes a neat hole, the wound is easy to sew up and heal, while the other creates a catastrophe in the body.
            1. Korsar4
              Korsar4 April 16 2021 22: 16
              +4
              Aren't you used to my communication style yet?

              This book by Boussinard came across late.
              But I read "Diamond Hunters".
              1. depressant
                depressant April 16 2021 22: 55
                +3
                Your manner of communication gave me a reason to remember the book by Louis Boussinard, re-read in childhood countless times. But "Okhotnikov" was once quite indifferent to herself. For some unknown reason, "Captain" seemed akin to the heroes of Gaidar.
                1. Korsar4
                  Korsar4 April 16 2021 23: 05
                  +3
                  Some ants and a rhino, from which the elephant got what are worth.
                  And books on history and travel on the forum periodically appear.

                  And in general, remembering a book, you can even be transported during the first reading.

                  Everything, down to the smells, comes to life.

                  By the way, Gaidar's "School" is quite an interesting thing.
                  1. depressant
                    depressant April 16 2021 23: 25
                    +3
                    And if you recall more reasonably, then in most of the books I read as a child, there were some types of weapons, including fists, as an advantage in solving problems. Militarization of consciousness took place.
                    Here is an interesting author Vilyugov writes:

                    Quiet the severe wrath of your soul!
                    Do not curse - you ruin your heart with a curse!
                    Do not condemn - and you will not be condemned
                    Neither God nor people!

                    Restrain your anger, born of offense!
                    Forget about revenge, and your sword is bared
                    Do not raise your brother in the heat of the moment!
                    The one who lifts the sword will die
                    From the sword.


                    The naivete of the humanities? Agreements instead of negotiations.
                    1. Korsar4
                      Korsar4 April 16 2021 23: 27
                      +3
                      It's just that someone has a sword, someone has a word.

                      “Everyone chooses for himself
                      Woman, religion, road ”(c).
                      1. depressant
                        depressant April 16 2021 23: 54
                        +3
                        Defense rhetoric ... Practice shows that a word cannot be dissuaded from war. Therefore, pacifism is always somehow sharply inferior to militarism. Evidently, human evolution has not yet reached the level of civilization at which the desire to win with a word prevails over the desire to win with a sword. And then songs like this sound:

                        My sullen sword into the enemy,
                        a tank of resin in the enemy;
                        We are fighting for the king
                        in the edge of a thick winter!

                        And in the summer we fight
                        in the spring we sharpen the sword
                        For the glory of the sovereign
                        bones we can lie!


                        Posted by Adam McCoy.

                        And judging by the delight with which the theme of swords was accepted, pacifism is still inferior to militarism with a large score)))
                        The only thing that in this case becomes the subject of consideration in the modern world: not for whom, but for what to swing with swords wassat
                      2. Korsar4
                        Korsar4 April 17 2021 03: 18
                        +2
                        “On that day, when over a new world
                        God showed his face, then
                        The sun was stopped by the Word,
                        They destroyed cities in a word ”(c).

                        What do you think there are more sites - with a military theme or with a civilian one?
                      3. depressant
                        depressant April 17 2021 06: 14
                        +2
                        The statistics know. I suppose, more from the civilian, because the military theme is the lot of either the instinctively courageous, or out of necessity.
                      4. Korsar4
                        Korsar4 April 17 2021 06: 31
                        +3
                        Probably any boy thinks about weapons.
                        And if you want to be a musketeer, the sword is made from a branch and a plastic lid.

                        And then you find your own kind.

                        Like Vysotsky:
                        “There lived book children who did not know battles,
                        Suffering from his petty catastrophes ”(c).
                      5. depressant
                        depressant April 17 2021 07: 42
                        +2
                        Not just boys. The instinct to protect offspring is equally characteristic of both sexes and often takes indirect or perverted forms. Mediated is death for the king, for land, for necessary and sufficient property, for personal honor. Perversion - for excess property or someone else's land. Well, there are also pathologies. This is when a person is a serial killer or a duelist.
                      6. Korsar4
                        Korsar4 April 17 2021 08: 06
                        +2
                        Different behavioral strategies.
                        This is a given. And it's good when the roles are not mixed up.
                      7. novel66
                        novel66 April 17 2021 11: 01
                        +1
                        one of the most cited points
  • Undecim
    Undecim April 16 2021 23: 38
    +2
    Flambergs are military weapons designed to kill, not injure, high lethality from use, therefore they fell under the ban.
    The "lethality" of the Flammard is the same as that of a regular sword.
    1. depressant
      depressant April 17 2021 00: 18
      +2
      Presumably, two-handed duels were hardly used, right? The sinuous blade lasted much longer.
      1. Undecim
        Undecim April 17 2021 00: 43
        0
        If we are talking exclusively about Zweihänder or Bihänder, then these are weapons exclusively for mercenaries - landsknechts. As for the duels between them - it is necessary to clarify.
  • Van 16
    Van 16 April 16 2021 18: 33
    +4
    The day was crazy. And how wonderful it is to read such a good, competent article at the end of such a day.
    Thank you so much!
  • Dkuznecov
    Dkuznecov April 16 2021 18: 36
    +4
    About the "flaming blade" ...
    I liked the explanation in the chapter
    6. "Diploma winner" of M. Weller's story "The Gunsmith Tarasyuk".
    Short and easy to understand.
    I think anyone interested will find a fragment on the Internet.
    1. Avior
      Avior April 16 2021 18: 46
      +3
      I heard this explanation as well - the shape of the blade creates a cutting effect with a chopping blow. And it also looks very plausible.
  • Richard
    Richard April 16 2021 18: 44
    +6
    During excavations of the burial of a noble Sarmatian near the village of Vesnyanoye, dated to the 81,3nd century, among other things, a completely Sarmatian sword was found, with a long straight lenticular blade and a small cross, but with a very long shank: with a blade length of 18 cm, the shank was 4,2 cm long! At the same time, it gradually narrowed towards the end: with a total blade width of 3 cm, the shank at the heel had a width of 1,8 cm, and at the end - XNUMX cm.
    a photo. Sarmatian sword from the village of Vesnyanoye.

    At the same time, experts believe that the handle itself (it was made of wood and did not survive, only traces of wood remained on the shank) was even longer, and the pommel was fastened with a vertical pin into the expanding handle (finds of such pommels with preserved pins are known). The total length of the handle reached 21 - 28 cm.
    It should be noted that the small crosspiece of this sword, as it turned out after clearing it, is not straight, but bent at an obtuse angle, which is directed downward.
    And this is far from the only such sword.
    The shank 21 cm long was also found in the sword found during the excavation of another Sarmatian burial at Ternovka. At the same time, his blade, also straight and lenticular in cross-section, had a length of 78,6 cm and a straight cross.
    Moreover, if we start from archaeological finds, then we can confidently say that swords of this type appeared already in the 1260th century BC, and their total length reached 250 mm with a handle length of up to XNUMX mm
    1. WHAT IS
      WHAT IS April 16 2021 18: 56
      +12
      Dmitry! Stop writing comments - write articles. One interesting author on the site in the "history" section will be more.
      1. vladcub
        vladcub April 16 2021 20: 52
        +3
        That's for sure. Richerd-Dmitri could write a wonderful story
    2. Mihaylov
      Mihaylov April 16 2021 19: 31
      +4
      Quote: Richard
      Moreover, if we start from archaeological finds, then we can confidently say that swords of this type appeared already in the 1260th century BC, and their total length reached 250 mm with a handle length of up to XNUMX mm

      Good afternoon Dmitry, Sarmatian "two-handed" swords (the name is naturally conditional) nevertheless appear later - in the late Sarmatian period from the XNUMXnd century AD. Before that, they had swords of ordinary sizes, in principle, they did not differ much from the Scythian ones. hi
  • Undecim
    Undecim April 16 2021 18: 44
    +6
    The two-handed sword (bidenhender) has a total length of 160 to 180 centimeters. No scabbard was made for these swords; they were worn on the shoulder like a lance. The upper part of the blade, the one that directly adjoined the crosshair and the handle, was usually not sharpened, but covered with wood and leather.


    Therefore, the hand could freely grasp the blade, which at least slightly facilitated fencing with such a sword (or even made it possible).

    This did not make fencing easier. This allowed the use of the half-sword or halbschwert technique.

    Almost all medieval fechtbuchs recommend this technique when fencing against an enemy in full plate armor, since chopping blows are not effective in this case, and the half-sword technique allows you to deliver accurate thrusting blows to the most vulnerable places.
    The enemy in the illustration uses the Mordstreich technique, when the sword holds on to the blade.
    1. Undecim
      Undecim April 16 2021 19: 10
      +6
      Yes, I missed the moment. The not sharpened part of the blade is called ricasso, in Russian - the heel of the blade.
  • Richard
    Richard April 16 2021 18: 48
    +6
    The longest sword found in the Kolpansky burial ground in the south of Moldova reached a length of 1650 mm!
    An idea of ​​the scabbard of such swords is provided by a find made by the Soviet archaeologist V. Sarianidi during the excavation of the famous Tillya-tepe (Golden Hill) in Afghanistan (link: (Nefedkin A. Military affairs of the Sarmatians and Alans. SPb., 2011).): In one of the The richest burials found an iron two-handed (judging by the size of the handle) sword with a long double-edged blade was inserted into a wooden scabbard painted with red paint, which was attached to the belt with two bronze buckles. Due to severe corrosion, it is difficult to judge whether there was a crosshair under the handle. The gold pommel in the form of a flat circle is decorated with a "vortex rosette" and a high cone with a turquoise insert in the center "(link: V. Sarianidi Temple and necropolis in Tillyatepe. Moscow, 1989).

    It is curious that, according to V. Sarianidi, these swords were placed in the burial in a special way - they rested the handle on the forearm.
    The first source who claimed that the Sarmatians acted with two hands with these swords is Tacitus: describing their actions in 69, he writes:
    "But then, when it was a wet day and the ice was melting, they did not use either pikes or swords, with which, very long, they operate with two hands."
    1. agond
      agond April 16 2021 19: 01
      +6
      A wavy blade of a sword can block the enemy's weapon, and with a stabbing blow with a "wavy" sword, the edges of the wound will have a large surface, even if it is possible to stop the bleeding, the risk of infection is very high, in fact, a warrior with such swords was considered especially dangerous villains.
      1. WHAT IS
        WHAT IS April 16 2021 19: 19
        +8
        Quote: agond
        the edges of the wound will have a large surface

        People are very intelligent and observant mammals, endowed with the ability to articulate speech and highly developed abstract thinking, quickly realized that curved and wavy blades cut open flesh somewhat better, and a wavy blade just cuts better and gets stuck less. Simplifying a little, we can say this: such swords combined the advantages of a saw and a straight blade, while neutralizing the shortcomings of both. It is said that the owners of such weapons with special zeal and zeal were killed in captivity (if at all, they were taken prisoner). But I did not find historical facts of such treatment of the happy owners of flambergs, then they did not stand on ceremony with especially captive thieves ..
  • Richard
    Richard April 16 2021 18: 57
    +7
    The surviving images of Sarmatian warriors with these swords in battle (several of them are known), do not record a two-handed grip: the weapon is held with one hand.
    a photo. A Khianito-Kidarite horseman (XNUMXth century plate) with a sword hunts a lion.

    The figure clearly shows that the rider is holding the weapon at the very guard. Proceeding from this, A. Nefedkin suggested that the long handle was needed not to provide a two-handed grip, but to provide a counterweight to the long blade, i.e. for an acceptable balance of weapons. As he quite rightly writes:
    "for a long sword you need a counterweight in the form of a long handle" (link: A. Nefedkin Military affairs of the Sarmatians and Alans)
    1. kalibr
      April 16 2021 19: 11
      +4
      Moreover, it had a pommel - a horizontal lenticular stone disc! I was holding this ... A decent "flying saucer" with a hole in the middle.
      1. Richard
        Richard April 16 2021 20: 10
        +5
        Vyacheslav Olegovich, thanks for the excellent article. Above all praise good
        The only thing that is not clear is why you did not mention anything about the sword "Big Pierre" by Pierre Gerlofs Donia? After all, this sword just has a gorgeous story. Yes, and EMNIP is by far the largest combat two-handed sword.
        a photo museum photos with "Big Pier"


        Or will it be about him in the next article?
        Best regards hi
        1. kalibr
          April 16 2021 20: 17
          +4
          Quote: Richard
          Why didn't you mention anything about the sword "Big Pierre" by Pierre Gerlofs Donia? After all, this sword has just a gorgeous story. Yes, and EMNIP is by far the largest combat two-handed sword.

          Here! Because in the literature that I used, there was no question of it. In general, I heard about him from you for the first time. Just now I read it in your comments. There will be joy for Alexander, of course, but it is so. I have not heard, have not read, I do not know anything about him. So you and the cards in hand!
    2. Trilobite Master
      Trilobite Master April 16 2021 20: 02
      +4
      Greetings, Dmitry.
      Quote: Richard
      A. Nefedkin suggested that the long handle was needed not to provide a two-handed grip, but to provide a counterweight to the long blade,

      I think he's wrong.
      In fact, equestrian combat does not imply any fencing in the sense of exchanging a series of blows, and shifting the balance of the weapon to the hilt does not make sense. The picture, when the riders stop and, sitting on the horse, try to reach each other with a blade, seems somewhat unrealistic. In battle, of course, this could happen, but in this case, both would immediately try to gain speed again, since the "stagnant" immediately becomes an easy target for a warrior on the move. Equestrian combat is a constant movement and the riders have literally a second to exchange blows - they have gathered and parted. In such circumstances, there is no point in shifting the balance of the blade to the hilt, but lengthening the weapon is very even. So, most likely, a long handle is needed not for balancing, but for being able to intercept the weapon, lengthening it and being able to "reach" the enemy, while remaining out of his reach.
      Well, of course, we are not talking about a two-handed grip for an equestrian warrior.
      1. Richard
        Richard April 16 2021 20: 29
        +3
        Mikhail, I welcome you. hi
        Personally, the first thing that comes to my mind is a stabbing overturning blow at speed (similar to a lance strike) when the hilt of the sword is pressed against the saddle bow or the rider's armor. This is where the balance of the weapon to the hilt matters. And it is much easier to transport it with the tip up, resting the handle on the saddle, in the stowed position.
        Well, about the exchange of blows with the riders - here I completely agree with you
        1. Mihaylov
          Mihaylov April 16 2021 20: 43
          +3
          Quote: Richard
          Well, about the exchange of blows with the riders - here I completely agree with you

          Dmitry, as I understand it, you used Nefedkin, and he is a slightly carried away author, look also at Simonenko, he seems to me to have a more balanced approach. hi
          1. Richard
            Richard April 16 2021 20: 47
            +2
            see also Symonenko

            If it's not difficult, please discard the link
            1. Mihaylov
              Mihaylov April 16 2021 20: 51
              +3
              Quote: Richard
              If it's not difficult, please discard the link

              A.V. Symonenko "Sarmatian Horsemen of the Northern Black Sea Coast" - I think you will find it on the net without any problems and download it, if you don’t find it, remind me next week - I will send it to you, I downloaded it, but at work. He has a good description of Sarmatian swords and combat techniques. hi
              1. Richard
                Richard April 16 2021 20: 57
                +2
                Thank you. Find drinks
        2. bk0010
          bk0010 April 16 2021 23: 54
          +1
          Quote: Richard
          Personally, the first thing that comes to my mind is a stabbing overturning blow at speed (similar to a lance blow)
          Look about konchar: in fact, a spear in the form of a sword, allows you to get on foot and horsemen, breaks through armor.
      2. Engineer
        Engineer April 16 2021 20: 40
        +5
        The picture when riders stop and, sitting on a horse, try to reach each other with a blade, seems somewhat unrealistic.

        You solved the most difficult task in passing - what the mechanics of equestrian combat looks like))). When deciding which there is no consensus from the word at all.
        ... Equestrian combat is a constant movement and the riders have literally a second to exchange blows - they gathered and parted

        Do they always have space to part ways?
        In all the depictions of equestrian sword fighting, it takes place at close-middle.
        I flipped through the history of France in miniatures - all the riders, although there are not many of them, seem to be holding a sword at the very crosshairs. From memory there was something in the picture with a falchion with a grip in the middle part. But who held the weapon with a grip at the pommel?
        By grabbing the sword from the pommel, you win 15 cm in length at best. Your opponent, taking under the crosshair, will swing faster and strike - less moment of inertia relative to the hand. And his grip will be more reliable and less likely to drop the weapon.

        In my opinion, the long handle balances the sword, but its main purpose is to draw it out blindly, which is very important for a horseman.
        1. Mihaylov
          Mihaylov April 16 2021 21: 09
          +4
          Quote: Engineer

          In my opinion, the long handle balances the sword, but its main purpose is to draw it out blindly

          What is depicted in this miniature?
          "Two-handed" Falchion or Romfaya?
          1. Engineer
            Engineer April 16 2021 21: 31
            +4
            Falchion like
            But the picture is not relevant - work with two hands and the warrior clearly stood up on the stirrups, which were not in antiquity.
            I looked like this

            One-handed grip, at the crosshairs
            1. Mihaylov
              Mihaylov April 16 2021 21: 40
              +2
              Quote: Engineer
              Falchion like

              Here I cannot understand.
              But the picture is not relevant - work with two hands and the warrior clearly stood up on the stirrups, which were not in antiquity.

              Miniature, what will you take from it?
              I looked like this

              Hundred Years War?
              An interesting point: one equestrian warrior finishes off another with a dagger - it turns out that they could converge very closely. Maybe the Scythians cut short akinaki right on their horses? and there was no need to dismount.
              1. Engineer
                Engineer April 16 2021 21: 48
                +3
                An interesting point: one equestrian warrior finishes off another with a dagger - it turns out they could very closely converge. Maybe the Scythians cut short akinaki right on their horses?

                Exactly so, and if you remember that the chippers-klevtsy were with akinak length, and sagaris, if longer, then not much. We get a wheelhouse on the near
        2. Trilobite Master
          Trilobite Master April 16 2021 21: 49
          +3
          Quote: Engineer
          You solved the most difficult problem in passing

          Well, let's say, not me, or rather, I solved it for myself. smile The arguments that I have used are approximately as follows.
          Descriptions of the cavalry battle, when the riders stop and plast each other in slices, can only be found in fiction (cinema). The descriptions of those who directly participated in such battles (XIX - XX centuries) speak of short skirmishes, after which some run, others catch up.
          Jumping into a bot-to-bot attack became possible only in the XNUMXth century, and for the first time such a method of attack was used by Seydlitz, if my memory serves me right. Prior to this, attempts to maintain the formation were unsuccessful. The Teutonic "pig" should not be offered, or, if you want, we will discuss it separately, there is also something to argue about. That is, before Seydlitz, the equestrian formation in the attack was a rather loose mass even for regular knightly cavalry, not to mention light cavalry (including Scythian), the distance between the attacking horsemen allowed the enemy to drive between them.
          In real life, a clash of two cavalry lava will look like a checkers game, where the opponents' checkers move across fields of different colors. Of course, it could not do without landfills, but from such a landfill, I personally would try to get out as early as possible in order to accelerate again as quickly as possible - this will allow, at least not to look back.
          The element of cavalry is speed and onslaught. A stopped rider has less combat value than an infantryman, therefore, again, riders in battle had to try with all their might to maintain mobility.
          Some descriptions of medieval battles speak of horse collisions, comparing them with waves, for example, the chronicle description of the Battle of Rakovor, which again speaks of the mobile nature of horse fighting.
          And, finally, Klim Zhukov finally convinced me that horse fighting is dynamic and mobile. No matter how I treat him as a historian, as a reenactor he has very serious experience, including the experience of participating in horse fights. He believes that in the course of the evolution of the sword from the Carolingian to the Romanesque type, the lengthening of the hilt of the latter was due precisely to the reasons that I voiced in the first commentary and bases this statement on my own experience of the reenactor, which, it seems to me, should not be completely ignored.
          1. Engineer
            Engineer April 16 2021 22: 13
            +2
            not to mention the light cavalry (including the Scythian), the distance between the attacking horsemen allowed the enemy to drive between them.

            The Greeks built their cavalry in 4 lines. Persians at 20. Xenophon has it. How to part with deep orders?
            The element of cavalry is speed and onslaught. A stopped rider has less combat value than an infantryman, therefore, again, riders in battle had to try with all their might to maintain mobility.

            Undoubtedly, only life is difficult. The horsemen's dump was apparently a common thing.
            Zhukov. No matter how I treat him as a historian, as a reenactor he has very serious experience, including the experience of participating in horse fights. He believes that in the course of the evolution of the sword from the Carolingian to the Romanesque type, the lengthening of the hilt of the latter was due precisely to the reasons that I voiced in the first commentary and bases this statement on my own experience of the reenactor, which, it seems to me, should not be completely ignored.

            Sword tests clearly show that the maximum impact force develops upon contact with a target in the middle of the blade - from the first to the second third. Plus or minus. Strikes with the tip of the sword are ineffective. The swordsman must get closer.
            Well, what about iconography? where was it to be kept according to Zhukov?


            Here is Klim Zhukov of a healthy person
            https://www.youtube.com/user/neosonic66
            Everything is great, including working with images.
            1. bk0010
              bk0010 April 17 2021 00: 01
              0
              The Greeks built their cavalry in 4 lines. Persians at 20.
              Antiquity is another matter entirely. There is practically no cavalry there, for example, the riding infantry (not dragoons, not mature enough): the horses are small (and so much that they had to fiddle with chariots), there is no saddle, no stirrups, no ramming blow, no horse archers (the Greeks), etc. etc.
              1. Engineer
                Engineer April 17 2021 00: 20
                +1
                horses are different. There were already horses of the Akhal-Teke type. 140-145 at the withers. English horses of the Middle Ages, judging by the changes in horse armor in Leeds-145cm.
                There is a saddle.
                There are no steps
                There is a ramming blow. Greetings from the cataphracts.
                The Macedonian etyrs, cataphracts, and the Sassanian aswaran were the main striking force of their armies. Yes, and among the Scythians at Fata, the result was achieved by a head-on blow from a noble squad
                1. bk0010
                  bk0010 April 17 2021 11: 24
                  0
                  Quote: Engineer
                  Hello from cataphracts
                  I didn't know, I thought they were Byzantine troops, it turned out that they were much earlier.
            2. Trilobite Master
              Trilobite Master April 17 2021 12: 01
              0
              Quote: Engineer
              How to part with deep orders?

              I already wrote - like checkers that move across fields of different colors. The two formations do not have a clear boundary, mutually penetrating each other, the flesh until the complete passage of some horsemen through the enemy's formation. As I see it, the classic line of contact is absent - the battle goes to the full depth of the formation with the chaotic movement of opponents until one of the sides takes to flight.
              Quote: Engineer
              The horsemen's dump was apparently a common thing.

              I agree. As well as rubble in the battle of infantry in a dense formation. I fully admit that blockages happened in almost every battle, but an insignificant part of those who fought took part in them, and everyone who found themselves in such a "blockage" tried to leave it as soon as possible. Naturally, in battles with the participation of knightly cavalry, such blockages should have happened more often, in battles of light cavalry less often.
              Quote: Engineer
              Sword tests clearly show that maximum impact force develops upon contact with a target in the middle of the blade.

              My experience with the cleaver shows the same thing.
              But in a dynamic horse fight, the one with the longer blade will still have the advantage. Two riders on a head-on course - here you can even just touch the end of the blade and deliver the strongest blow due to the total speed. Or, for example, a blow to an opponent who has already slipped past you, if he is not armored or lightly armored, will also be very dangerous.
              Quote: Engineer
              Well, what about iconography?

              What about iconography? The sword was usually held, of course, closer to the guard, but if necessary, it could be intercepted closer to the pommel, increasing the affected area. Nobody says that the sword was constantly held "by the apple." smile
              1. Engineer
                Engineer April 17 2021 12: 22
                0
                The system was violated, you yourself write. There will be no end-to-end corridor. The gap in the first-second row will be and then the enemy is right in front of you
                The Attack-Rise-Re-Attack hypothesis applies only to equestrian shallow formations against the same equestrian formations.
                The hypothesis attack-dump-turn back repeated aiak is applicable to any situation, including an attack by an infantry formation with a cavalry
                Any hypothesis must be supported by sources. The dump in equestrian combat is confirmed by both iconography and narratives. For example, the Battle of Gaugamela at Arrian.
                Riding through the battle formations? Cases of breaking through the battle line are naturally not accepted.
                About long handles of swords for the sake of fighting for the tip. It's just not serious. There is no evidence. Just speculative arguments. Moreover, they are ridiculous. The Carolingian hilt is five centimeters longer than the hilt of the Romanesque sword. The apple has a very thin Carolingian handle. You just can't hold it there properly. It is clear that the creators did not even think about such an option, otherwise it would have affected the design - they would have thought over the ergonomics.
                1. Trilobite Master
                  Trilobite Master April 17 2021 13: 25
                  0
                  By the way, Arrian's description of the Battle of Gaugamela, it seems to me, to a greater extent illustrates my point of view. smile
                  Alexander, having received his report, stopped pursuing and, turning with the cavalry of the "friends", galloped to the right wing of the barbarians. First, he attacked the fleeing enemy cavalry, the Parthians, part of the Indians and the most numerous and powerful troops of the Persians.
                  The horse battle began, the hottest thing in this whole battle. The barbarians, lined up in the depths of the troops, turned and attacked Alexander's warriors, facing them face to face; they didn’t take darts, did not spin as usual in a horse battle; each struck the one who was in front of him, seeing in this his only salvation. They struck in a hurry and fell themselves; neither one nor the other had pity: they fought no longer for the sake of someone else's victory, but for the sake of their own salvation. About 60 "friends" fell here; Hephaestion himself, Ken and Menid were wounded; but here, too, Alexander prevailed.
                  Those who made his way through the ranks of the Alexander soldiers, turned into irrepressible flight.

                  Nothing has been written about the dump, although the fight is called stubborn. But it is clearly written that part of the barbarians passed through the formation of Alexander's cavalry. Did not break through it, but went through it.
                  Quote: Engineer
                  There is no evidence. Just speculative arguments. Moreover, they are ridiculous.

                  This is not necessary, please do not provoke me to be harsh. They do not seem ridiculous to me, and you have not proved their absurdity.
                  Quote: Engineer
                  The Carolingian hilt is five centimeters longer than the hilt of the Romanesque sword.

                  The handle of the Carolingian is very short, the palm of a modern man barely fits into it. The handle of a Romanesque sword is noticeably longer, and the blade itself is longer on average, and it is quite obvious that these changes are clearly taking place taking into account the need to conduct horse battle in a rarefied formation, where you can swing.
                  1. Engineer
                    Engineer April 17 2021 15: 59
                    0
                    Nothing has been written about the dump, although the fight is called stubborn. But it is clearly written that part of the barbarians passed through the formation of Alexander's cavalry. Did not break through it, but went through it.

                    Reverse 3-14-5 Arrian
                    Their line was here broken through: through breakthrough part of the Indians and Persian cavalry broke through to the wagon train of the Macedonians. Here a hot affair began.

                    How much clearer?

                    What to do with this?
                    standing against them face to face


                    Standing face to face - static head-to-head horse fight is the most natural explanation.

                    What to do with this?
                    The Persians bravely attacked people, most of them unarmed and not expecting to be able to penetrate them by cutting through a double front. Captured barbarians joined the Persians and together with them attacked the Macedonians

                    Driving through the front, according to your hypothesis, should have been commonplace, but here it is perceived as an emergency.


                    You have highlighted
                    did not spin, as is usually the case in a horse battle;

                    However, the phrase is structured as follows
                    they did not take up javelins, did not circle, as is usually the case in a horse battle;

                    The mention of javelins is pretty clear that "usually in equestrian combat" is javelin combat. He is opposed by a decisive hand-to-hand combat.

                    This is not necessary, please do not provoke me to be harsh. They do not seem ridiculous to me, and you have not proved their absurdity.

                    I don't need to prove anything. Zhukov introduced a new essence - an apple grip to fight for centimeters. This I am waiting for proof.

                    The handle of the Carolingian is very short, the palm of a modern man barely fits into it. The handle of a Romanesque sword is noticeably longer, and the blade itself is longer on average, and it is quite obvious that these changes are clearly taking place taking into account the need to conduct horse battle in a rarefied formation, where you can swing.

                    I wrote in several runs in between cooking and got it all wrong.
                    The handle of the Romanesque sword is 5 cm longer than the Carolingian. This is despite the fact that there are a lot of "romantics" with a very short handle. As far as can be judged, the hilt of the Romanesque sword, like the Carolingian sword, narrows to the apple - the grip there is completely not ergonomic.
                    Better balance and ease of grip make this much easier. The elongation of the blade is quite natural and follows from the development of metallurgy - more durable blades and the need to fight armor, which were becoming more widespread, due to gravity. No new entities are needed.
                    The Romanesque sword, in contrast to the Carolingian, is well balanced, which means there was a steady demand for this particular feature. The apple grip completely upsets the balance. Another nail in the theory's coffin

                    Any historical hypothesis is built like this
                    Assumption - evidence (narrative, pictorial) - verification with related concepts - construction of a theory based on a hypothesis with the definition of its place in historical science
                    1. Trilobite Master
                      Trilobite Master April 18 2021 13: 27
                      0
                      Regarding Arrian - verily, we look at the book, we see what we want.
                      Where are you, even in the above quotes, I saw a static battle completely incomprehensible to me. Personally, I see with absolute evidence the collision of loose horse masses and the absence of a clear line of contact with the mutual penetration of one formation into another. The battle on the left flank of the Macedonian army - the bulk of the Persian cavalry and short strikes of the few Macedonian reserves in order to reinforce the threatening directions, where the Macedonian line was already thinned out. Roughly speaking, Parmenion or whoever was there, I don't remember, sent hundreds after hundreds into battle, to "dangerous" places, these hundreds, one after another, dissolve into the general mass, but for the time being they hold back the pressure of the Persians. "Breakthrough" in this case is a critical decrease in the ratio of the number of their soldiers to those of the enemy in a specific area, when the Persians suddenly did not appear before the eyes of the Macedonians.
                      Driving through the enemy's formation is not at all a common thing - I have not written or thought that. The loose cavalry formation was therefore lined up at great depths in order to exclude such "unobstructed" passage. Those galloping in front are killed first, not having time to "reach" the last row. Everything is decided literally in a minute and already some are running, others are catching up, reinforcements come to the retreating and the sides change roles, and so on several times.
                      As you can see, instead of such a picture, the picture of a dense standing forehead to forehead is completely incomprehensible to me. Horses in a tight formation of five or more rows ... Complete nonsense. They cannot prop up each other like infantry.
                      Actually, on the miniatures you see what you want to see. On them horses almost everywhere they jumpbut you don't notice it. You see only a dense formation, or rather, what seems to you to be a dense formation, a stirrup to a stirrup, but in fact it is not. It's just that the medieval artist did not have the opportunity to look at the cavalry clash from a bird's eye view, and then there were some difficulties with the depiction of perspective.
                      That's all your evidence - both narrative and pictorial. You just see them as you are used to, as you want.
                      Well, by swords ...
                      Quote: Engineer
                      The elongation of the blade is quite natural and follows from the development of metallurgy - more durable blades and the need to fight armor, which were becoming more widespread, due to gravity.

                      Don't you think these arguments are far-fetched?
                      That is, in the IX century. could not forge a long blade, but learned in XI? Do you believe it?
                      "Due to the severity" - despite the fact that the "Carolingians" were on average even heavier than the "Capetian", despite the fact that they were shorter?
                      Or maybe everything is simpler? Maybe just with the mass "transfer" of feudal squads onto horses, their blades lengthened and lightened simply because it is more convenient to work with a horse with a long blade, and the force of the blow provides the rider's speed?
                      As for "Fighting Armor", then I was completely at a loss. To combat the armor, a "Gothic" sword was invented, not Romanesque, and it appeared along with this armor itself - at the end of the XIV century, not earlier.
                      And, in any case, Denis, all this - both the cataphracts and the knights have nothing to do with the Scythians with their "long ephesian" blades, from which, in fact, it all began.
                      1. Engineer
                        Engineer April 18 2021 15: 15
                        0
                        Where are you, even in the above quotes, I saw a static battle, it is completely incomprehensible to me.

                        I perceive this passage as if both sides had finished their maneuvers and "rested" coming together in a decisive battle.
                        The barbarians, built in the depths of the troops, turned and attacked the soldiers of Alexander, standing against them face to face[/ b]; they did not take up javelins, did not circle, as is usually the case in a horse battle; [b] everyone amazed the one who was in front of him, seeing in this the only salvation for himself. They struck in a hurry and fell themselves; neither one nor the other had pity: they fought no longer for the sake of someone else's victory, but for the sake of their own salvation. About 60 "friends" fell here; Hephaestion himself, Ken and Menid were wounded; but here, too, Alexander defeated.

                        The battle on the left flank of the Macedonian army - the bulk of the Persian cavalry and short strikes of the few Macedonian reserves in order to reinforce the threatening directions, where the Macedonian line was already thinned out.

                        Both Curtius Rufus and Arrian clearly write that the Persians, having an advantage in numbers, bypassed Parmenion
                        "Breakthrough" in this case is a critical decrease in the ratio of the number of their soldiers to those of the enemy in a specific area, when the Persians suddenly did not appear before the eyes of the Macedonians.

                        Arrian writes "made it through." Olbricht, who comparatively recently compared the text with the Latin original, also speaks of a breakthrough.

                        Actually, on the miniatures you see what you want to see. Horses gallop on them almost everywhere, but you do not notice it.

                        On horse miniatures are moving... And here's how exactly is the question. My opinion
                        Warriors in close equestrian combat, after being struck with spears, often move to a step for better control, and put pressure on the enemy if necessary. At the same time, they are ready, if necessary, to spur the horse in order to rush to avoid a dangerous situation or catch the moment to overturn the enemy. Movement along the front directly in battle is possible as well as a short dash in an attempt to reach a particularly important enemy.
                        That's all your evidence - both narrative and pictorial. You just see them as you are used to, as you want.

                        I did not see your proofs at all. This is especially true of Zhukov's case. In general, I alone take the rap and throw up sources. You only criticize what I said))

                        As you can see, instead of such a picture, the picture of a dense standing forehead to forehead is completely incomprehensible to me. Horses in a tight formation of five or more rows ... Complete nonsense. They cannot prop up each other like infantry.

                        The horses did not support each other. Dense standing - "carpenter" alternated with maneuvers. Diffusion of the formation into the formation took place, but usually no further than 2-3 ranks. The rear ones belayed the front ones, attacked those who had broken through, and parried the coverage of the flanks. Breakthrough of the formation -ChP Both sides were very concerned about the integrity of the battle line.

                        That is, in the IX century. could not forge a long blade, but learned in XI? Do you believe it?

                        In terms of quality, Romanesque swords became, on average, better than the Carolingians. Technological progress has not been canceled.
                        As for "Fighting Armor", then I was completely at a loss.

                        Don't get lost. 11-12 centuries is the spread of drawing mills in Europe. The wire for chain mail began to be made on an industrial scale. There was an increased demand for cutting through chain mail.
                        Or maybe everything is simpler? Maybe just with the mass "transfer" of feudal squads onto horses, their blades lengthened and lightened simply because it is more convenient to work with a horse with a long blade, and the force of the blow provides the rider's speed?

                        Of course, it remains only to link this with horse fighting and the grip at the apple according to Zhukov
                        Among the Saltovites and their successors in the steppes at the same time, single-edged broadswords evolve into slightly shorter or similar sabers in length with lesser handle
                        Maybe the key is that the nomad works mainly against the horsemen, and the lengthening of swords in the West is primarily for cutting infantry ??
                        The rider's speed alone does not provide the force of the impact. Even for a spear. Here is a seeming paradox. It turned out that transferring the momentum of a horse's movement to a weapon is very difficult even for a spear.
                        And so
                        , in any case, Denis, all this - and the cataphracts and knights have nothing to do with the Scythians with their "long ephesian" blades, from which, in fact, it all began
                        .
                        There were two problems - the mechanics of close combat and the grip of long-handled swords. Both cataphracts and knights are quite relevant here. You just need to correctly ask yourself the method by making a discount on stirrups and other things that were not in antiquity. ... I am a comparativist.
                      2. Trilobite Master
                        Trilobite Master April 18 2021 16: 16
                        0
                        Quote: Engineer
                        I perceive this passage as if both sides had finished their maneuvers and "rested" coming together in a decisive battle.

                        Of course not. This is the moment when Alexander attacked from the rear the Persian cavalry, pressing his left flank. The Persians were surrounded and were forced to break through the ranks of the Macedonians. And, mind you, many left, although there was no breakthrough as such. Just leaked through the line.
                        Quote: Engineer
                        Arrian writes "made it through." Olbricht, who comparatively recently compared the text with the Latin original, also speaks of a breakthrough.

                        A breakthrough is when the front is empty, and the back is only our own. It was this situation, apparently, that developed at some point among the Persians on the left flank of the Macedonians. The "dump for dogs" in a certain area has ceased due to a sharp, critical reduction in the number of Macedonian horsemen and their lack of replenishment. Yes, this is definitely a breakthrough, we made it through.
                        Quote: Engineer
                        Warriors in close equestrian combat, after being struck with spears, often take a step

                        When two objects of comparable mass and speed collide, they mutually extinguish each other's energy, and therefore the speed drops. Sometimes the horses could not stand it and fell from such a collision, although the enemy did not directly act on them.
                        After such a collision, a turn often followed, for a cavalryman without speed is the same as a fighter on the runway - helpless and useless. Moving at a step is almost the same as standing.
                        Quote: Engineer
                        Diffusion of the formation into the formation took place, but usually no further than 2-3 ranks.

                        There were no strict ranks, only conditional ones that existed before the start of the attack during the initial formation.
                        The overshoot of the enemy formation of single horsemen did not decide the outcome of the battle. He slipped through, closed behind him. Now the one who has already slipped through has to think about how to survive.
                        Quote: Engineer
                        Maybe the key is that the nomad works mainly against the horsemen, and the lengthening of swords in the West is primarily for cutting infantry ??

                        I think, rather, the need to resist the horsemen of the east during the crusades.
                        The rider's speed is the moment that can significantly increase the force of the blow. But you still need to be able to deliver a blow, of course.
                      3. Engineer
                        Engineer April 18 2021 16: 55
                        0
                        Of course not. This is the moment when Alexander attacked from the rear the Persian cavalry, pressing his left flank. The Persians were surrounded and were forced to break through the ranks of the Macedonians. And, mind you, many left, although there was no breakthrough as such. Just leaked through the line.

                        And I think that of course yes)
                        The horse battle began, the hottest thing in this whole battle. Barbarians, built in the depths of troops, turned and attacked on the warriors of Alexander, standing against them face to face

                        Alexander went to the rear, but the Persians and the allies reacted in time and to the extent that they are called attackers. I wrote "the maneuvers are over." Go carpenter

                        And, mind you, many left, although there was no breakthrough as such. Just leaked through the line.

                        Again. Written the same made it through, not leaked.
                        Those who broke through through the ranks of the Alexander soldiers, turned into irrepressible flight

                        Words leaked when describing none at all. The English translation indicates force their way. Completely broke through

                        https://en.wikisource.org/wiki/The_Anabasis_of_Alexander/Book_III/Chapter_XV
                        You can criticize my perception as much as you like, but I have not found the word "leaked" anywhere. Not at all

                        When two objects of comparable mass and speed collide, they mutually extinguish each other's energy, and therefore the speed drops. Sometimes the horses could not stand it and fell from such a collision, although the enemy did not directly act on them.

                        Undoubtedly. Therefore, a simple mechanical collision meant a stupid mutual destruction of the first rows. In my model, a blow is struck with spears at a gallop when approaching - then the spear is thrown, the reins are taken over and enter the gaps of the first and second rows. I went to the transition to swords. If the attack is made at a trot, and not at a gallop, then there is an opportunity to save the spear.
                        There were no strict ranks, only conditional ones that existed before the start of the attack during the initial formation.

                        Of course, it is in the intervals of these ranks that you can wedge yourself in like checkers at the first onslaught. And then a dump.
                        After such a collision, a turn often followed, for a cavalryman without speed is the same as a fighter on the runway - helpless and useless.

                        A cavalryman, without speed, quite crushes his horse even while walking. By simply guiding his horse through the gaps, he wedged himself into the ranks of the enemy until the riders of the next ranks appeared in front of him. There are two alternatives - either a U-turn or a dump with an attempt to push through in order to break through the formation. ... The better defended with the better ridden horse wins.

                        The overshoot of the enemy formation of single horsemen did not decide the outcome of the battle. He slipped through, closed behind him. Now the one who has already slipped through has to think about how to survive.

                        Exactly so, only the word leaks out in the absence of regular intervals, chaos and confusion is better to replace with break through)
                        The rider's speed is the moment that can significantly increase the force of the blow. But you still need to be able to deliver a blow, of course.

                        I repeat once again that even for a spear it is very problematic to utilize the horse's speed. I'm not even talking about the sword.
                        And to strike, the sword must be properly grasped. Naturally, not by the apple)
                      4. Trilobite Master
                        Trilobite Master April 18 2021 20: 19
                        0
                        Let's replace the word "leak" with the word "break through". smile It will be even more accurate.
                        A cavalry clash at different times looked different, but, for example, a spear battle of heavy knightly cavalry in my understanding looked like this:
                        The knight formation goes on the attack with a step, accelerating to a gallop only in the last hundred meters. At the time of the beginning of contact with the enemy, both formations had already disintegrated, the collisions of individual fighters with a ramming strike did not occur simultaneously on the entire front of the attack, the first ranks stopped, in the intervals between the riders of the first rows, the riders following them attack, and so on. Someone broke through, someone was knocked down at the first collision, everything mixes up, our own, others, the total number of active fighters on horseback after the first "access", as our ancestors said, within a minute is reduced by a third. If the advantage of one of the sides becomes obvious, retreat and pursuit take place. If the winner was not identified, which, although rarely, did happen, then in the presence of extreme bitterness, cutting could continue with swords in the form of a "dog dump", when at any moment it could fly in from any direction. In this case, the participants tried in every possible way to gain speed, since a stationary fighter is an ideal target.
                        From the point of view of a fighter, it will look like this: the convergence of formations, a spear strike, the continuation of forward movement, a kaleidoscope of figures and blurred images, from which you dodge, changing the direction of movement, or you swing your sword until you either see a gap in front of you, breaking through the enemy formation, or darkness will not come. smile
                        You asked for a link to the sources. My head is designed in such a way that I perceive information as a whole, putting it into a single, internally non-contradictory picture, but the particulars sometimes elude me. But now I remembered, for example, the battle on Lipica. Mstislav Udatny in it, if my memory serves me, three times (!) Rode through the formation of the regiments of the Suzdal princes. Similarly, there were more examples of this kind both in our and in European history.
                        But nowhere, nowhere and never in serious literature have I come across a structure in which horsemen, whether heavy or light cavalry, would fight in a static position or moving slowly in one direction.
                        In today's article about Austerlitz, our Shpakovsky described the battle of Russian cavalry guards with French cuirassiers. Exactly what I'm talking about - speed is everything.
                        As a child, we cut ourselves with wooden swords, but there was a crackling sound. Including on bicycles - the film "The Ballad of the Valiant Knight Ivanhoe" was very inclined to this. And, honestly, I'm not lying, when we fought on foot, our swords were of normal length - somewhere with a hand. The most convenient. But when they fought, sitting on their bikes, they tried to choose a more authentic weapon, so that it was more convenient to get the enemy. It is a pity that then we did not think to make ourselves swords with long handles, which make it possible, by simple interception, to win ten centimeters in a particular situation.
                      5. Engineer
                        Engineer April 18 2021 21: 30
                        0
                        If the winner was not identified, which, although rarely, did happen, then in the presence of extreme bitterness, cutting could continue with swords in the form of a "dog dump", when at any moment it could fly in from any direction. In this case, the participants tried in every possible way to gain speed, since a stationary fighter is an ideal target.

                        From the point of view of a fighter, it will look like this: the convergence of formations, a spear strike, the continuation of forward movement, a kaleidoscope of figures and blurred images, from which you dodge, changing the direction of movement, or you swing your sword until you either see a gap in front of you, breaking through the enemy formation, or darkness will not come

                        We have a dump. Pick up speed and jump where? All as catechumens gallop, constantly colliding as in Brownian motion? The same madman as I crashes into me, we fall, cripple, die without benefit and meaning. How do you manage this chaos? How will the commander give the command to "turn back" to regroup, say, to re-attack? Who will listen to it and who will be able to fulfill it?

                        I am at the very beginning of comprehending my hypothesis. Here's my train of thought:

                        Postulate 1. A fighter fights for victory. Therefore, he rationalizes the fight and tries to make it as predictable as possible. The commander even more so.
                        I, in full accordance with modern concepts of history, introduce the psychological aspect into opposition.
                        A head-on "mechanical" collision with mutual cancellation of speeds is unthinkable. At all. From no point of view.
                        It is inconceivable mechanically, because the energy of the actual horse strike is at least an order of magnitude lower than the energy of the galloping rider. Tests show this unambiguously.
                        It is irrational. The daredevil and the hero crashes into a coward whose horse has suffered and both break their necks. How to win here? How do you comprehend the fight? Mutual annihilation of the first ranks looks inevitable, but this was not the case, here we can say with confidence.

                        Decision.
                        Both sides come close to strike with spears, the formation is already in disarray, there is no talk of alignment at a gallop. Therefore, everyone has chosen a target for a spear strike and prepares to drive into a place next to this opponent. Simultaneously with the blow of the spear, ALL warriors tighten the reins and slow down to trot or stride. The next lines do this with some delay, which increases the density of the lines. Those who have not dropped their speed flies into the enemy's ranks with unpredictable consequences.

                        A speed reset immediately after a spear strike is absolutely necessary.
                        1. HE is needed for volta-turn back to regroup for the next attack
                        2. It is needed for further combat in the junkyard. Because now maneuverability and especially controllability are important. Horse control is a condition of survival.

                        We got a dump that can end with a lapel for a second attack, and further escalation to break through the formation. If the second happens, then the fight continues at low speeds. Only sometimes does the rider spur the horse to avoid mortal danger or break through to the enemy leader.

                        Confirmation
                        We know that ancient generals often fought in the forefront of the cavalry and contrived to command. And they were listened to!
                        This means that the riders did not rush headlong after all.
                        We know that under Granicus Alexander contrived to throw phrases with Areta while he was waving a spear or rather a wreck, received a spear from Demarat, and Klyt managed to assess the situation and save the king's life. That is, the dump at Granik was sensible and manageable. So it was static enough for all these actions to happen.
                        On the thumbnail above, a warrior with a dagger uses a wrestling technique !! This means that the dump in this case was so static and dense that both sides practically "rested" on each other.
                        Naturally, these are not all cases.

                        Limitations of the hypothesis
                        It is formulated for the center of the system first of all. Things could have been much freer on the flanks

                        It is formulated for constructions with depth. More than two ranks

                        It is not suitable for the wars of the modern era. And the realities of the New Time are not suitable for testing it!

                        The cavalry in the era of Napoleon fought not so much with broadswords and sabers as in order and timing. They are advancing in a dense mass of horses in perfect order - we run without question. They were upset in the offensive, our reserve counterattacked in a dense formation, they immediately flee. The cavalry of the new era fought more in appearance, a demonstration of threat. Plus cavalry attacks were often prepared by artillery. This takes us completely aside.

                        But now I remembered, for example, the battle on Lipica. Mstislav Udatny in it, if my memory serves me, three times (!) Rode through the formation of the regiments of the Suzdal princes. Similarly, there were more examples of this kind both in our and in European history.


                        And I didn’t forget.). It is described as an amazing, completely atypical affair.

                        But nowhere, nowhere and never in serious literature have I come across a structure in which horsemen, whether heavy or light cavalry, would fight in a static position or moving slowly in one direction.

                        Well, let's be honest, we are both amateurs and not very familiar with historiography on this issue, especially Western

                        And, honestly, I'm not lying, when we fought on foot, our swords were of normal length - somewhere with a hand. The most convenient. But when they fought, sitting on their bikes, they tried to choose a more authentic weapon, so that it was more convenient to get the enemy.

                        You didn't try to kill each other. And the warriors of antiquity tried. You weren't afraid to lose your sword. And the warriors of antiquity were afraid.
                      6. Trilobite Master
                        Trilobite Master April 18 2021 22: 33
                        0
                        There is something to answer, but with your permission, tomorrow. hi
                      7. Trilobite Master
                        Trilobite Master April 19 2021 12: 25
                        0
                        Quote: Trilobite Master
                        How do you manage this chaos?

                        But in no way. It's impossible. Noise, din, crackling, screams, closed helmets, full concentration of attention on preserving your own life in an instantly changing environment ... No way. A unit that comes into contact with the enemy becomes practically uncontrollable until the end of the battle or local skirmish. You can give some loud, simple signals, such as "all to me" and then those who are not directly involved in clarifying the relationship with their opponents can pull themselves to the appropriate banner, but how many of these banners and how many such signals will there be in battle?
                        It seems to me that the commander could control the battle only by introducing fresh contingents into the battle and pointing them in the direction of the attack. There were, of course, the Mongols, they demonstrated amazing controllability at that time on the battlefield, but their controllability remained only as long as they conducted archery fire, that is, remote combat.
                        Quote: Engineer
                        A head-on "mechanical" collision with mutual cancellation of speeds is unthinkable.

                        At tournaments, it was fully worked out. That is, quite conceivable.
                        Quote: Engineer
                        Mutual annihilation of the first ranks looks inevitable

                        You still need to be able to deliver a ramming blow with a spear accurately, but the enemy does not pose as a target either. A blow can be deflected with a shield, you can dodge it by changing the trajectory of movement by some centimeters, force the enemy to change the vector of application of effort, thereby weakening the blow itself, in the end, the enemy himself can stupidly miss. So "annihilation" was simply not possible.
                        I strongly disagree with the fact that the speed was deliberately extinguished. Speed ​​is the force of the blow and your own safety. Therefore, those who managed to maintain speed after the first collision were in an advantageous position relative to those who lost it for one reason or another. Swooped in, hit, dodged, galloped on. A repeated attack was possible only when the infantry formation was attacked by cavalry, since there was really an opportunity to turn around and safely withdraw, turning his back on the enemy, then rebuild, let the horses catch their breath and continue.
                        Quote: Engineer
                        We know that ancient generals often fought in the forefront of the cavalry and contrived to command.

                        I doubt it. They commanded before entering the battle and attacked themselves personally only when the outcome of the case was clear or it was necessary to make a turning point in the course of the battle. It is impossible to control by participating in a fight, for this you need to get out of the battle, look around, make a decision and give the appropriate instructions.
                        Of course, all, probably, the leaders had their own detachment of bodyguards, whose main task is to ensure the safety of their ward. With them he could talk during the battle, they were able to provide him with a pause in swinging a sword or spear, take him out of the dump, return to the command post, etc.
                        Under Gaugamela, Alexander, having completed the defeat of the center of Darius, managed to turn his detachment and lead him to his left flank. Could many commanders before and after him carry out such a maneuver? Hannibal, perhaps ... In the Middle Ages, such a maneuver was unthinkable. Let's remember the Rakovor battle. And in general, how many times have we read such phrases as "carried away by robbery of carts", for example? All about the same. Conclusion: the units directly participating in the clash are uncontrollable, as a rule, until the end of the battle.
                        Quote: Engineer
                        amazing completely atypical business

                        smile Three times - really amazing. And one or two is a common thing, they did not write about this smile
                        Quote: Engineer
                        we are both amateurs

                        Personally, I don't pretend to be more. That is why I do not bother myself with looking for quotations that would be necessary in an academic dispute, setting out my own vision of the issue, which I have formed on the basis of the read and meaningful material.
                      8. Engineer
                        Engineer April 19 2021 15: 19
                        0
                        I doubt it. They commanded before entering the battle and attacked themselves personally only when the outcome of the case was clear or it was necessary to make a turning point in the course of the battle.

                        There is no need to doubt. You wrote when you need to make a break. That is, in the very heat. Almost everyone drove.
                        Shl it's about the Hellenistic commanders
                        With them he could talk during the battle, they were able to provide him with a pause in swinging a sword or spear, take him out of the dump, return to the command post, etc.

                        In the episode at Granikom, all the royal mud was already involved in a fierce batch. Since Alexander and his friends heard and insured each other right in the carpenter, it was possible in other divisions as well. And low speeds are a necessary, although not a sufficient condition for this

                        Swooped in, hit, dodged, galloped on.

                        Where to go? This is a matter of principle. One of.

                        So "annihilation" was simply not possible.

                        For annihilation to be impossible, it is necessary to exclude a horse hitting a horse. This is the goal. I have described how this is achieved in my model.

                        Alexander achieved complete control of the cavalry. The rest were able to achieve this only partially. Demetrius was reproached in antiquity for not deploying his cavalry after the initial success at the Battle of Ipsus. That is, it was considered achievable.
                        Turning back to re-attack in equestrian combat is really a rarity. But here it is necessary to understand that history practically does not record unsuccessful attempts to do this.
                        Description of the battle of Publius with the Parthians at Plutarch
                        The horses reared in pain and died, crushing both their riders and opponents, who had mixed with each other. But the Gauls were cruelly tormented by an unaccustomed thirst and heat. And they almost lost all their horses when they rushed to the Parthian spears. So, against their will, they had to retreat to the heavy infantry, bringing with them Publius, who was already exhausted from his wounds. Seeing nearby a sandy hill, the Romans retreated to it; inside the formed circle, they placed the horses, and closed the shields themselves, hoping that it would be easier for them to repel the barbarians.

                        The Romans were defeated in the first clash, but were able to retreat to the infantry and rescued the wounded commander. That is, a direct indication that the equestrian battle was at least partially controllable. Somehow there was a break in combat contact and this is a fact.

                        At tournaments, it was fully worked out. That is, quite conceivable.

                        The tournament excludes the direct mechanical impact of the racing horses on each other. The riders are separated by a barrier. Only spears. Impossible.

                        Moreover, there was such an interesting discipline - the equestrian melee. And there the following technique was sometimes used - grabbing the enemy's horse by the bridle to drag it to your banner. According to the terms, this was considered tantamount to capture. Century by the way 12. That is, for miles the speed was not great.
                      9. Trilobite Master
                        Trilobite Master April 19 2021 17: 46
                        0
                        Quote: Engineer
                        There is no need to doubt.

                        Necessary. smile
                        They took them - yes, into the very heat - it happened, but in order to manage something at the same time - have mercy, how? The only way is to give a loud signal "do as I do, march behind the banner!" Will everyone hear the signal? Will everyone see the banner? Will everyone be able to join? Will everyone want it in the end?
                        Quote: Engineer
                        Since Alexander and his friends heard and insured each other right in the carpenter, it was possible in other divisions as well.

                        Only in theory. In practice, however, Alexander's army could not be created for a very long time after him. In addition, there is a conversation about the inner circle of bodyguards, whose task is to literally stick to their patron. Yes, and the commander himself did not set himself the main task of killing as many opponents as possible personally, which stood for the rest of the participants in the battle, except for his bodyguards.
                        Quote: Engineer
                        Where to go?

                        Before your eyes is this very "plump", where "nowhere". I have a space full of riders in constant motion, chasing each other
                        Quote: Engineer
                        For annihilation to be impossible, it is necessary to exclude a horse hitting a horse.

                        It is unlikely that it will be possible to exclude it, but to minimize it to acceptable volumes - yes. Moreover, I have never argued that landfills are completely absent. They did happen, of course, but they were not the main way of fighting. Only as force majeure.
                        Quote: Engineer
                        Alexander achieved complete control of the cavalry.

                        Well, that's why he and Alexander. Moreover, I would not talk about "complete" controllability. "Maximum" in this case will be more appropriate.
                        Quote: Engineer
                        history practically does not record unsuccessful attempts to do this.

                        Conflicts followed by the pursuit of one side by the other are precisely such unsuccessful attempts.
                        Quote: Engineer
                        Description of the battle of Publius with the Parthians at Plutarch

                        Is this the Battle of Carrh? As far as I understand, the quote describes an episode when the Roman allied cavalry was defeated and retreated under the cover of the infantry? For some reason, I see this scene as follows: that the Romans (Gauls) are running with all their might, pursued by the Parthians, who shower them with arrows and finish off the stragglers. The flight ended with the exit of the defeated cavalry under the cover of the infantry. The cavalry cannot retreat, it can only flee, unlike the infantry, which can retreat.
                        As for the tournaments, I remembered them only to illustrate that a knight who received a ramming blow with a spear did not necessarily go out of order and could not continue the battle. Well, as for the shallower, this action took place on a limited lists, so the carpenter happened there, of course, much more often than during a real battle.
                        By the way, about the battlefield: its landscape could largely influence the nature of the battle - in some cases the carpenter was simply inevitable, as, for example, at Sterling Bridge. However, in all cases when such a carpenter happened, in any case, which I can now remember, the cavalry was defeated. This is not her element, which I, in general, speak about.
                        For effective use, cavalry needs speed, which means the space that the commanders of this cavalry have always tried to provide for themselves, which means longer weapons. To drive the enemy cavalry into dense formations, inactive and inert, was probably the dream of many commanders. smile
                      10. Engineer
                        Engineer April 19 2021 18: 59
                        0
                        Only in theory. In practice, however, Alexander's army could not be created for a very long time after him. In addition, there is a conversation about the inner circle of bodyguards, whose task is to literally stick to their patron. Yes, and the commander himself did not set himself the main task of killing as many opponents as possible personally, which was for the rest of the participants in the battle, except for him.


                        Nope. Don't mix. There are two aspects - the diadochi really did not achieve the same controllability and interaction as Alexander's. at the level of the armies, but specifically here we were talking about the mechanics of the equestrian production unit in the heat of battle. And from this point of view, the tsarist silt of Alexander did not differ in any way (it simply should not have) from the mechanics of the battle of ordinary silt as part of the cavalry of the conditional Pyrrhus.
                        In Alexander's mud they heard each other, passed spears and came to each other's aid. This means that other divisions could also do this. The only question is the quality of performance in each specific case

                        They took them - yes, into the very heat - it happened, but in order to manage something at the same time - have mercy, how? The only way is to give a loud signal "do as I do, march behind the banner!" Will everyone hear the signal? Will everyone see the banner? Will everyone be able to join? Will everyone want it in the end?

                        Your doubts stem from your paradigm - there could be no more. Here deduction is needed - we establish the facts as much as the sources allow and only then draw conclusions.

                        Here is an example of interpretation

                        Is this the Battle of Carrh? As far as I understand, the quote describes an episode when the Roman allied cavalry was defeated and retreated under the cover of the infantry? For some reason, I see this scene as follows: that the Romans (Gauls) are running with all their might, pursued by the Parthians, who shower them with arrows and finish off the stragglers. The flight ended with the exit of the defeated cavalry under the cover of the infantry.


                        If the Romans are running, then not with all their might - otherwise they would not have pulled out the wounded Publius, some of the Romans lost their horses, but survived, that is there was no persecution
                        After the first collision, there was a fairly large gap - the Romans retreated to the hill and rebuilt

                        But the Gauls were cruelly tormented by an unaccustomed thirst and heat. And they almost lost all their horses when they rushed to the Parthian spears. So, against their will, they had to retreat to the heavy infantry, bringing with them Publius, already exhausted from his wounds. Seeing a sandy hill nearby, the Romans retreated to it; inside the formed circle, they placed the horses, and they themselves closed their shields, calculating,




                        Fight with Publius - a classic dump from the Chamber of Weights and Measures

                        The Gauls grabbed the enemy spears and, coming close to the enemies, constrained in their movements by the weight of the armor, threw them from their horses. Many of them, dismounting and crawling under the belly of the enemy horses, struck them in the stomach. The horses reared in pain and died, crushing both their riders and opponents, who had mixed with each other.


                        And now we compare the facts - the dump - the retreat, the flight of the Romans - the repeated attack of the Parthian attack.

                        Decision.

                        Having smashed Publius, the Parthian cataphracts did not rush after him. They regrouped to assess the situation.
                        The Parthians ruled the cavalry battle.
                        They did not rush straight ahead after the first success, but played to the point. Their commanders stopped their pursuit of the Romans in the bud (otherwise none of the Gauls who had lost their horses would have survived), regrouped and attacked.
                        They deliberately cut off combat contact

                        Before your eyes is this very "plump", where "nowhere". I have a space full of riders in constant motion, chasing each other

                        One of the important issues is the distance between riders in front and in depth. Even if at five or seven meters, then no "galloped at full speed further can not be - after the first collision there are riders everywhere at a distance of 2-3 hulls (RMS hehe, with a huge sigma if you operate in statistical terms) of a horse, who are also rushing about chaotically. Mutual Destroy Stupid and senseless.
                        The question of intervals I must study separately, no doubt.

                        As for the tournaments, I remembered them only to illustrate that a knight who received a ramming blow with a spear did not necessarily go out of order and could not continue the battle.

                        I did not state or imply this. In my model, the horseman, after being hit with spears, is not obliged to take the place of the defeated enemy. Maybe not even hurt. On the contrary, he enters the system next to him - to the right or to the left as appropriate. He decides where to enter and slightly adjust the horse before hitting. The intervals between the riders were always not a Prussian knee-to-knee attack. But the alignment in the formation of the enemy is not observed and the rider has practically no hope of going through the formation like along a corridor. because there will surely be a new adversary right in front of him who violated the alignment for a thousand reasons and that very head-on collision of a horse into a horse will happen that no one wants. Therefore, everyone should slow down as quickly as possible, giving the fight a certain amount of positioning.

                        For effective use, cavalry needs speed, which means the space that the commanders of this cavalry have always tried to provide for themselves, which means longer weapons. To drive the enemy cavalry into dense formations, sedentary and inert, was probably the dream of many commanders.


                        Relatively dense.
                        Quite mobile
                        Inert to some extent, no doubt, like absolutely any group of people acting together.

                        By the way, it is much easier to restore the formation for a new attack, say the second line (not to be confused with the line) of the enemy in my model.
                      11. Trilobite Master
                        Trilobite Master April 19 2021 20: 07
                        +1
                        It looks like we're at a dead end again. smile Our arguments, apparently, do not impress us. You can still argue with each other, but to be honest, I'm already tired. I expressed my main arguments, I listened to yours, then the repetitions will go further ... It was interesting, thanks. As usual, each will remain at his own opinion.
                      12. Engineer
                        Engineer April 19 2021 20: 19
                        +1
                        Okay,
                        We haven't had holivars for a long time. And there is not much antiquity either.
                        I still will not add an article for VO, so at least this way.
  • Richard
    Richard April 16 2021 18: 59
    +4
    Perhaps these swords were used as an analogue of konchar. In general, the two-handed grip of swords in antiquity was not something new. The Thracian Rumfei are a prime example of this.
  • Dimide
    Dimide April 16 2021 19: 12
    +4
    I read that the church was very disapproving of the "flaming blades", called "devilish"
    The article is as always "kosher"
    1. Richard
      Richard April 17 2021 00: 25
      +2
      The article is as always "kosher"

      In the sense of "cut off"?
      So he writes so on purpose. The number of characters is limited. Conveys the essence, leaves room for comments, and actively participates in them
  • The comment was deleted.
  • motorized rifle
    motorized rifle April 16 2021 19: 49
    +3
    Not quite the topic, but two-handedness on the face ...
  • bubalik
    bubalik April 16 2021 19: 56
    +3
    There will be only one! (FROM) bully
    1. 3x3zsave
      3x3zsave April 16 2021 20: 25
      +5
      Somehow William Wallace comes running to Robert the Bruce and says: "Your Majesty, the other day I learned that the Sasenakhs (Englishmen, in Russian) do not clean swords with GOI paste! Tell us not to clean our swords, otherwise if there is a war, they do not cut them. fit! "
      1. bubalik
        bubalik April 16 2021 21: 04
        +5
        ,,, spam. In the 15th century, you wait, you wait for a letter from your beloved ... a carrier pigeon arrives ... you open the message, and then "forge swords ... inexpensively." laughing
        1. 3x3zsave
          3x3zsave April 16 2021 21: 28
          +6
          "I'm puddling, soldering, fixing Zweikhanders"
          1. Richard
            Richard April 16 2021 22: 45
            +3
            you open the message, and there

            Man, would you like to rest? laughing
    2. Phil77
      Phil77 April 16 2021 20: 32
      +3
      Not a fig not alone! And Rutger Hauer?!?! wink

      1. 3x3zsave
        3x3zsave April 16 2021 21: 15
        +2
        And Rutger Hauer?!?!
        Let it run on the blade negative
  • Trilobite Master
    Trilobite Master April 16 2021 20: 12
    +4
    Vyacheslav Olegovich, thanks for the material, they didn't let me die of boredom. It’s a pity that he came out at night. Now you have to sit at the table, with a pile, with your family, and not at the computer.
    Personally, I liked the material, although I still did not understand what practical use these teeth were on the blades, but it doesn't matter. By and large, no one really understands this. smile
    When one Jew was asked why they do circumcision, he replied: "Well, first of all, it is beautiful ..." I fully admit that we could get approximately the same answer from some landsknecht or a master gunsmith. smile
    The mention of Prince Edward, Earl of Chester, amused. At first I did not understand who it was about, which led me to confusion - I know this period of the history of England quite well. It did not immediately come to light that this was Edward V, the uncrowned king, the eldest of the so-called. "princes of tower". smile
    1. kalibr
      April 16 2021 20: 22
      +3
      Quote: Trilobite Master
      this is Edward V, the uncrowned king, the eldest of the so-called. "princes of tower"

      Yes, Mikhail, all the time there are such "deviations" in the plot and if you explain everything ... then you will forget about swords. And the hooks - they protected the hand that lay on the ricasso.
      1. Trilobite Master
        Trilobite Master April 16 2021 20: 57
        +1
        The hooks are understandable. I'm talking about the teeth on the blade. As a result, everyone refused them, but why did they start doing it at all, so no one really answered. smile
        1. 3x3zsave
          3x3zsave April 16 2021 21: 21
          +4
          I will express a conspiracy theory. Flambergs emerged as a counterweight to the scimitar.
  • vladcub
    vladcub April 16 2021 20: 14
    +1
    "made in 16-17 in Solingin (blade) the handle is local. There are two options
    1) some merchant bought blades in Solingin and resold
  • acetophenon
    acetophenon April 16 2021 20: 15
    +1
    If I understood correctly, the danger of a blade with a "flaming" blade is not in chopping, but in cutting (even light, superficial) injuries of the body. That is: an ordinary blade makes a single cut, the cells of the body tissues in the area of ​​the cut are poorly, but somehow they are supplied with blood. Then the body adjusts, it heals, etc. If the wound is not too infected. The "flaming" blade leaves a multiple cut, thin "slices" are cut off on both sides, (even with a shallow wound) they are outside the bloodstream and die off. Decay, and - "momento sea" (c).
  • Mihaylov
    Mihaylov April 16 2021 20: 40
    +4
    Museum "Arsenal", Pushkin


    1. 3x3zsave
      3x3zsave April 16 2021 20: 57
      +4
      You will look at amateur photographs from our museums, and you just want to stuff the muzzle of the museum designers! Well, you can't expose the light like that!
      1. Mihaylov
        Mihaylov April 16 2021 21: 05
        +3
        Quote: 3x3zsave
        You will look at amateur photographs from our museums, and you just want to stuff the muzzle of the museum designers! Well, you can't expose the light like that!

        Good evening, Anton, as you just noticed: even climb the ceiling, but you can't take a normal photo, everything glares and secondly, the distances are so small that sometimes you can only take pictures in pieces. hi
        1. 3x3zsave
          3x3zsave April 16 2021 21: 42
          +4
          My respect, Sergey!
          There is no need to notice, it is enough to work in the theater for six months to understand how to properly expose the light. From the showcase designers of our museums, the impression is that they were recruited at the Kondratyevsky market from home-made aquarists.
          1. Mihaylov
            Mihaylov April 16 2021 21: 46
            +1
            Quote: 3x3zsave
            There is no need to notice, it is enough to work in the theater for six months to understand how to properly expose the light.

            This is a huge problem for me: I like to photograph in museums, but sometimes it is not realistic to make something that is not just an art photograph, but just to be seen, especially if the exhibit is behind glass. hi
            1. 3x3zsave
              3x3zsave April 16 2021 21: 55
              +3
              This is a common problem. But let those who created it be ashamed!
  • vladcub
    vladcub April 16 2021 20: 45
    +1
    "made in the 16-17th century in Solingin (blade), the handle is local" there are two options: 1) some merchant bought blades in Solingin, and then sold them at a premium. The arms trade is always profitable.
    2) once it was a whole sword, but the owner, somewhere laid down his head, and the Scotsman appreciated the quality of the steel and gave it to local blacksmiths to replace the handle
    If the sword could speak. It would be a gruesome but captivating story.
  • Basarev
    Basarev April 16 2021 20: 58
    0
    Were there even larger, three-handed swords?
    1. Korsar4
      Korsar4 April 16 2021 21: 47
      +2
      Is it for the squire to help? At the most crucial moment?
      Or for contacts with Gromozeka?
  • vladcub
    vladcub April 16 2021 21: 26
    +1
    "two-handed swords from 180 to 210 cm long and weighing from 4 to 4,8 kg" constantly carry a 5-kilogram "fool", and also wave. The life of the Landsknechts was not sugar.
    Curious to know, were there many who wanted to wave them? Although it is double the salary, there is a high chance of not seeing the salary.
    PS. Q. Oh, can you name any film showing such swords?
    1. kalibr
      April 17 2021 06: 23
      0
      Quote: vladcub
      Can you name any movie showing such swords?

      Only "Secrets of the Burgundian Court", others did not look ...
    2. Phil77
      Phil77 April 17 2021 08: 46
      0
      Paul Verhoeven. * Flesh and blood. * 1985. The hero of Rutger Hauer has just such a sword. Photos of two episodes I brought. By the way, a great movie! hi
      1. Phil77
        Phil77 April 17 2021 08: 52
        0
        Here's another.


        If you have not watched this film, then you can only envy you, because ... you will get great pleasure from watching! Honestly, Svyatoslav! good
        1. vladcub
          vladcub April 17 2021 13: 09
          0
          Honestly, I don’t remember, I probably didn’t look ..
  • Maks1995
    Maks1995 April 16 2021 22: 35
    0
    Interesting. Good photos.
    The only forged flaming sword in the comments, and the rest are all sharpened. Although both are usually mentioned in the literature.
  • faterdom
    faterdom April 16 2021 23: 01
    0
    The most beautiful and ridiculous weapon in the entire history of war.
  • novel66
    novel66 April 17 2021 11: 11
    0
    Quote: Undecim
    If we are talking exclusively about Zweihänder or Bihänder, then these are weapons exclusively for mercenaries - landsknechts. As for the duels between them - it is necessary to clarify.

    fantasy, of course. but still
    https://booksonline.com.ua/view.php?book=174742&page=202
    1. agond
      agond April 17 2021 18: 59
      0
      Regarding the issue of chopping the peak, of course, I did not chop the peaks and did not see how they do it, but I did quite a lot with special homemade machetes (for clearing the track), naturally I have it not two manual ones, but only 41cm and weighing 450g, but horizontally bush branches with a thickness of up to 5 cm are cut into half the diameter or more from the first blow, although the blow must be applied at an angle of 45 * to the surface of the branch in the wood stretching zone, it is probably impossible to strike with a two-hander in a similar way (due to twisting the body) at the peak in battle due to limited space, not the most optimal oblique blow from above will remain (due to the bending of the body), but it must be borne in mind that the pike is large and heavy, it is easier to cut it than a lighter spear .. and of course the fighters were perfect.
  • Mikhail3
    Mikhail3 April 18 2021 10: 16
    0
    However, it should be noted here that when hitting the armor with a two-handed sword, there is not much difference what kind of blade he has.
    However, it should be noted that it would be nice for the author to learn at school. However, he already "studied", but the Soviet school is not for him. Here is a gymnasium of the early 20th century, with corporal punishment ...
    In general, the author will have to open his eyes once again. I must say that this occupation has already bored me, but ... In general, the fact is that the force of the blow is not all that needs to be taken into account when calculating the damage inflicted. You see, this very damage very much depends on the contact area. The smaller the area of ​​contact between the sword and armor upon impact, the stronger the damage inflicted. That is why, the author, a blow with a sharp point penetrates armor better than a blow with a blade. And not because of the mysterious magic, as you have thought all your life.
    So the fiery blade of a heavy sword (this is how it should be said - fiery, because "flaming" can simply be painted red) breaks armor more efficiently than a smooth one. And also, it is much easier for them to cut the spear, the bends partially capture it. Diplomas ...
  • Freedim
    Freedim April 18 2021 10: 41
    0
    If you cut the tops off the claymore guard, I think they are perfect for hot and cold water valves laughing
  • mmaxx
    mmaxx April 26 2021 17: 57
    0
    I look at the drawing of flamberg waves ... It seems that they simply forged it. They twisted two rods and hammered them. The hypothesis can only be confirmed practically or by cutting a museum piece ...