Advancement of technological level. Medieval weapons and armor: common misconceptions and frequently asked questions Renaissance weapons

The Renaissance marked the beginning of the decline of the long history of swords on the battlefield. The spread and improvement of firearms gradually led to a decrease in the role of the sword in battle. At first, a long pike became the main weapon on the battlefield, then a fairly advanced musket, and then a gun. Artillery made wearing armor and shields pointless even earlier. Swords ceased to be companions only of knights - especially since knighthood, as an institution of heavy tanks, disappeared. Soldiers and officers carried swords with them and used them for a long time, but the sword gradually occupied the niche of a modern pistol. It has become an auxiliary weapon, which is resorted to when the main one is inaccessible or inconvenient for one reason or another.

Interestingly, the sword has always been different from any other bladed weapon in that it is obviously a tool made specifically for war. It is clear that a battle ax, lighter than a utility ax, is also a special weapon, and a battle hammer has practically nothing in common with its peaceful counterpart. It is also clear that the sword, as we have already found out, strictly speaking, simply came from a long knife. But still, a certain difference between the sword and any other weapon was always felt. Therefore, with rare exceptions, swords belonged only to knights and other professional warriors, and commoners, as a rule, were forbidden to own long bladed weapons.

With the decline in the importance of the sword as an item of military equipment, a category of weapons previously unknown in Europe appeared - civilian swords. They were designed for self-defense primarily in peacetime. Their design does not provide for the need to withstand a man-at-arms or any armor at all, because no normal people wore armor outside the battlefield in peacetime. Unlike the usual knightly swords, the new swords had to be used without a shield, often without a buckler - just a sword and that’s it, since no one wore shields anymore, they also fell out of use in war thanks to artillery. This new way of using weapons required the development of specific fencing techniques based on parrying rather than shield defense. Fencing techniques have changed, fencing textbooks of various types have appeared. And new technologies required new weapons.

The military, seeing the development of a new “peaceful” fencing, immediately began to study and adapt it, including for the combat swords that still remained with them. After all, it will somehow turn out wrong if a military officer cannot cope with a civilian rogue!

Sword

In Italian this weapon is called "spada da lato", actually "side sword". The Russian “sword” is precisely derived from this Italian “spada”. In English, these swords were previously simply called swords. In modern times, to avoid confusion, they began to be called “sideswords,” literally translating the Italian name.

At the beginning of the 15th century, when the main type of European sword was the late knightly one, the manner of throwing the index finger over the crosspiece appeared and spread. This grip improves fine control of the blade and allows for better stabbing. As a result, type XIX swords appeared according to the Oakeshott typology, which were already mentioned earlier, at the end of the story about knightly swords: with a ring to protect the crossed finger.

These swords began the process of transformation of the medieval hilt, which was almost no different from the ancient hilts of Bronze Age swords. And this is a very important point both in the development of bladed weapons and in understanding the processes of this development.

Initially, the sword guard was actually used to make the grip more comfortable and reliable, to prevent the hand from slipping onto the blade. Then, already in the Middle Ages, during the evolution of the Caroling into the knight's sword, the crosspiece lengthened, which made it possible to protect the hand from accidental contact with the enemy's shield, exposed to a chopping blow.

Why didn’t any Vikings think of increasing the guard earlier? Very simply: because Viking shields were large, flat, round, relatively light and had a fist grip. Their technique involves constantly covering one's sword-wielding hand with one's own shield. But in the high and late Middle Ages, the shields changed, somewhat decreasing in size and thickening. An elbow mount has appeared. The shield no longer protected the right hand as well as before. Medieval warriors relied more on the guard and armor, but the shield was needed for general protection of the body and turning dangerous blows into glancing blows.

Of course, a sufficiently long cross guard does not protect the hand so badly. Especially when compared with the complete absence of a guard as such or, for example, with a Japanese tsuba. But before the advent of the sword, the weapon did not seriously protect the owner’s hand structurally.

So, the ring to protect the finger thrown over the crossguard was the first step in transforming the sword into a sword. Such rings also appeared on falchions related to swords, because why not. Then on the swords there was a symmetrical duplication of rings on both sides of the blade. For the Falchion, a sword with a one-sided sharpening, duplicating the rings is not very useful, but it now has an arch that protects the fingers. Falchions were more often used for powerful chopping blows that open the fingers, and probably after the appearance of falchions with arches, many asked the question “why didn’t we think of this before?” Of course, almost immediately the bow appeared on straight double-edged swords of the knightly type.

The hilt was further strengthened by a side ring located on the side of the crosspiece, perpendicular to the intersection of the guard and the blade. It perfectly protects the outer part of the hand, with the knuckles. Then, which surprised no one, another ring appeared, covering the inner part of the hand holding the sword, with the thumb. Finally, a few more angled guards have been added to improve finger protection.

The main part of this entire transformation occurred at the very end of the 15th century and the beginning of the 16th century, literally over 20-30 years. Edged weapons have never developed at such a speed, neither before nor since. The evolution of the civilian sword hilt during this period changed the paradigm of fencing. As mentioned above, the main defense was parrying in the broad sense of the word - there was no shield.

And one more point, very important for modern modeling. We are accustomed to the fact that the fencer stands with his hand with the sword somehow put forward. So, this fencing tradition appeared relatively recently - just along with normal hilts. In earlier stances, the armed hand was usually not put forward, unless covered by a shield. It’s so easy to miss a blow on the fingers - any person who has at least once participated in any fencing sparring will agree with this. If there was no shield, then the hands were located much closer to the body than modern people, brought up on the sporting image of fencing, are used to. And this is true for both the West and the East. Of course, there were moments and there were techniques that required bringing the arms forward - but, predominantly, this bringing the arms forward was done in the active phase of a strike or defense, and then they were removed back to the body.

What about the sword? So a sword with a developed hilt and a double-edged knight-type blade is a sword. It's as simple as that. Subsequently, the blade gradually lengthened and narrowed, but any sword of the European type with a hilt more sophisticated than that of type XIX can be called a sword. A couple of finger rings – okay, still a transitional form. The rings and bow are already a sword. The rings, bow and side rings are definitely a sword. Later hilts, found on rapiers, installed on an earlier “knightly” or already “sword” blade - again a sword. The handle for two fists with a developed hilt does not change the situation; it is still a sword, albeit the size of a bastard sword. Although these weapons can really be classified as long swords. Such long swords, for example, were used by reiters, German heavy cavalrymen.

Rapier

Not everyone knows that a combat rapier has little in common with a sports rapier. In English they are even called differently: “rapier” and “foil” respectively.

A combat rapier is a sword with a very sophisticated hilt and a very long and narrow blade that can be used to both chop and stab. Moreover, if chopping blows with a rapier are not so great, then the injections are beyond all praise. The rapier blade is long and stiff, again having nothing in common with sports equipment, the purpose of which is to minimize harm to the person receiving the blow. A combat rapier should be capable of piercing a person through and through, passing between the ribs and piercing the shoulder blade.

Some people, especially those who have never seen a real rapier even in a good picture, but at the same time, for example, watched a lot of anime, are absolutely sure that the rapier blade is flimsy and brittle. They say that an enemy with a rapier is simple, because you can easily break/cut its blade with a good blow from a mighty katana (or any other “male” sword. I suggest you familiarize yourself with the experiment on this topic.

Translation of the entire video is inappropriate. We took a modern “practical rapier” from the respected manufacturer Hanwei Forge, and tried to break it with various weapons. First, blows were struck similar to those that might hit a rapier blade in a real fight. Then they simply began to hit at the most convenient angle for the striker, as in tameshigiri. The rapier was used as a training rapier, without sharpening and with a more flexible blade than a combat one. However, in order to level out flexibility, blows to the rapier were not applied to the plane, but directly to the blade. Also, strictly speaking, it should be borne in mind that a dull blade is somewhat more durable than a sharp one, since it is more difficult to serrate. However, taking into account all of the above, the results of the experiment show that this sword cannot be cut or broken. Maybe if you hit it for another half hour, the metal will get tired, but with one blow or within the framework of one fight of realistic duration - no, simply not. And, objectively, there is no reason to assume that a combat rapier will suddenly become significantly more fragile. Even if this is good, it means it needs to be purposefully broken not for half an hour, but for ten minutes. It’s impossible to believe anything less after watching the video.

Saber

The word “saber” is used to describe almost any curved sword. Except that nihonto, as a rule, is not written down in sabers. But in vain, since shamshir and dao are sabers, then nihonto is also a saber. But now we are referring to a narrower type of sword, characteristic of Europe in the late Renaissance and modern times.

The saber is another variation on the theme of the piercing-cutting sword. The blade is long, with a slight bend - in the previously discussed talwar-shamshirs, the curvature is much more pronounced. Here the geometry is closer to the unobtrusive bend of nihonto, moreover, rather later, more straight than many of them. The hilt of the saber, as a rule, is well protected by a developed hilt - this is at least a bow, in later versions there is a cup or basket. The absence of such protection, however, does not deprive the sword of the right to be called a saber; it is simply more dangerous to use it.

In my opinion, among one-handed swords, it is the saber that has the right to be considered a kind of “middle option”, “default sword” and so on. Any cut-and-pierce sword is capable of cutting and stabbing in one way or another. A-priory. So, it is the saber blade that is least specialized for one or another role. He chops normally and thrusts normally. Any other sword can do one thing better, but at the same time it will do another worse.

Sword

It just so happens that things are not going very well with Russian-language terms for historical weapons. If only because in our country at the time, not all of these weapons were known, and what was known was called at random. The problem, however, is not unique to the Russian language. As mentioned above, in modern realities, English-speaking enthusiasts use the not entirely historical “cut-and-thrust sword” and “sidesword”. Let’s also add “backsword”, “sword with a back” to the collection. Strictly speaking, the term “backsword” can also be used to describe a saber, but if you immediately, by force of will, add the definition of “straight” to the meaning of this term, then everything becomes much more convenient. Fortunately, our language has a ready-made term for this weapon: broadsword.

When using the word “broadsword,” a terrible thing immediately arises: by coincidence, this word refers to two completely different swords; they are united only by their region of origin – Scotland. The first of these swords is a healthy two-handed Scottish highlander, the second is a cutting-and-piercing straight sword with a basket protecting the hand, often with a one-sided or one-and-a-half sharpening. For clarity, I suggest never calling Scottish two-handed broadswords at all. If you really want to give them a specific name, although two-handed - in Scotland, Switzerland, and China, in fact, it’s just two-handed - it’s easier and more understandable to trace the original word “claymore”, “claymore”. It sounds no more and no less un-Russian than “broadsword”. Many people do this and consider it correct, but not all, which is why I focus on this point.

Swords similar to the Scottish broadsword were popular in various regions of Europe. The Italian schiavona is especially worthy of attention (the word “schiavona” is read this way). This sword was often used by Yugoslav mercenaries and adventurers, although not only them. The blade is ordinary, typical of any other broadsword, but the basket guard is very characteristic, with diagonal “rods”.

Another collective term for broadswords is “broadsword”. In contrast, “backsword” is quite historical: this was the name given to military swords that actually had wider blades than civilian rapiers. Later broadswords, however, become quite narrow. The term “broadsword” is sometimes mistakenly used to refer to a knight’s sword, for which there is no reason at all.

So again, what is a broadsword? This is a one-handed sword with a straight blade and a basket hilt. It may have a one-sided or one-and-a-half sharpening (“backsword”), or it may also have a double-sided sharpening, usual for the blade of a sword or a knight’s sword (“broadsword”), usually wider than that of civilian swords of its era. Both are broadswords. And a claymore is not a broadsword.

In modern times, broadswords have become thinner and no longer correspond to the term “broadsword”. The last of the British broadswords, the Model 1897 Infantry Officer's Sword, is still in service today, although it is used only in parades. This is a good, very light cut-and-pierce sword with enhanced piercing capabilities. Veterans of conflicts of the late 19th and early 20th centuries who had the opportunity to use this weapon in battle spoke positively about it. What is interesting about the design of this broadsword is the lack of sharpening in the strong part of the blade, closest to the hilt - which is logical, no one ever attacks with this part of the sword, they only defend themselves, and sharpening in defense only gets in the way. The asymmetry of the protective cup is also remarkable: it is wider on the outside, like the hand holding the sword. The narrower side is sufficient to cover the hand from the thumb side, while it is more comfortable than a regular symmetrical cup, since when worn in a sheath it hardly digs into the wearer's body.

Grossmesser

Or "big knife". From a fencing point of view, nothing special, just another pointed falchion. There is a two-handed handle with a long cross. An additional protective element, a “nail”, is traditional: at the intersection of the cross with the blade-handle line, another steel bar extends sideways perpendicularly, covering the outside of the hand. In some cases, a side ring was used instead of a nail bar. The Grossmesser is purely visually perceived as a nihonto (katana) with a European hilt. Except that the blade is wider and usually straighter, but overall it’s the same. I note that the wider blade of the grossmesser could be narrower than the narrower blade of the nihonto, so their mass and balance are not very close.

An interesting feature is the fastening of the Grossmesser shank. In ordinary European swords, the tang is placed entirely inside the handle and its tip is attached to the apple. In grossmessers, just like in ordinary household knives, the shank is attached to the handle with several rivets. This feature allowed German (Grossmesser from there) commoners to legally prove their right to carry these weapons. “What kind of sword is this, your honor, it’s just a big knife, I use it around the house!”

That is, in the case of the grandsmesser, we meet for the third time the convergent evolution of the sword from the knife. The first time the knife turned into a sword was somewhere in the Bronze Age, then at the beginning of the Middle Ages the falchion appeared from the saxa. Grossmessers did not give such abundant offspring as xiphos-naues and falchions, since almost all the niches of long bladed weapons were already occupied.

Cutlass

The saber, which is described below, is treated weakly, if at all. Rather, it is a descendant of the falchion-cleaver. And in English it is called “cutlass” or, another type of very similar weapon, “hanger”. There is no talk of any “saber” at all.

A cutlass is an excellent weapon in its natural conditions. The powerful cup perfectly protects the hand, allowing you not to think about some kind of fencing during the chopping process. The short blade, despite its width, is quite light: few people on ships used armor, so even though this is a military weapon, there is no need to overweight it. But the cutlass is far from universal. On land, in a duel against the same rapier, it is an almost completely useless piece of iron. It is very doubtful that an adequate rapier player, provided there is room for maneuver, will allow him to come within striking distance of a cutlass.

If you think about it, the cutlass is somewhat reminiscent of the gladius in spirit. Only instead of a shield there is a good guard and a chopping technique, which itself works as a fan defense. Well, instead of a dense structure, there is a cramped dump. And so the same thing: advance and attack.

Long sword

Immediately important. The term “longsword” or “long sword” in various kinds of fantasy games and related sources refers to the weapon that we have defined in accordance with its historical name: a knight’s sword. In fantasy, based in most cases on medieval Europe, in addition to the one-handed “long” sword, there is also a certain “short” sword, with a blade length one and a half times less than that of the “long” one (a knight’s one, in fact, you understand). In the real Middle Ages, no one used anything like this. Short swords - these are, for example, gladiuses, or bronze rapiers - much more ancient types of weapons. At the same time, the gladius, as we found out, is a highly specialized combat blade, and the bronze rapier would be glad to be longer, but the material of the blade no longer allowed it to be lengthened. In general, weapons in fantasy are a topic that may be worthy of a separate article.

What is a long sword really? It’s elementary: we take a knight’s sword and enlarge it so that it becomes too big for one hand. Yes, a long sword is a two-handed weapon. No one called one-handed swords long, they were just normal swords, especially since short ones did not exist at the same time. The difference in length in one class of weapon did not bother anyone, since there was always room for personal preference.

In fact, long swords in the broad sense of the word appeared long before the Renaissance. But in more ancient times they were much less common, but their essence was the same. I note that it is much more difficult to make a long sword than a short sword; advanced metallurgy is needed. Therefore, the “naked barbarian with a two-handed sword” archetype is quite delusional. One can, of course, explain that somewhere he stole this high-tech weapon, made by very civilized blacksmiths. But then it’s not clear why he didn’t at least steal the chain mail. Yes, an article about weapons in fantasy just begs to be...

Another popular type of sword is the so-called “bastard” sword, in English terminology either “hand-and-half sword” or “bastard sword”. Unlike a purely fantasy short sword, one-and-a-half swords have a right to exist, albeit a rather prosaic one. These are simply fairly light and not too long swords that can be used both in two hands and in one. It is important to understand that the border here is purely subjective. The same sword can be considered both long and one and a half - it all depends on the physical strength of the owner.

Almost all Japanese long swords are 1.5 swords. There are no differences between the not too large long European sword and the Japanese katana. The fencing style is almost the same. Each of these weapons has its own pros and cons. However, these pros and cons are of slightly different caliber. The advantages of a katana, for example, include such things as ease of wearing and the presence of the popular technique of instantly drawing the sword, and a very powerful cutting blow. The advantages of a long sword are greater versatility and a better hilt. It turns out that if you need to choose a sword for daily wear with the likely need to suddenly hack someone to death, a katana is more convenient. But if you have to choose a sword for a fight, no matter what, be it a tournament match or a group fight, then the long sword still wins.

Federschwert

Increasingly popular these days as replicas of Renaissance training equipment, federschwerts are a good compromise between realism and safety. They are not historically sharpened. The blade is flexible, almost like a steel ruler; when thrusting, this allows you to minimize possible damage to your partner. They have enhanced protection for the hands due to the significant expansion of the blade near the cross. As a result, they can be used for fencing, possibly even in full contact, if the fencers are wearing light protective equipment. And these are not timbars or pieces of wood, normal steel. Nice.

If you make a federschwert with a blade that is not so flexible and sharpen it, you will get an ordinary long sword with interesting additional protection for your hands, almost with a second guard.

Two-handed sword

The English “greatsword” or “great sword” (the space in the names of weapons traditionally floats) is a two-handed sword, or simply a two-handed sword. We take the same knight's sword as a basis, make it long and make it even longer and heavier. We get an object weighing 3-4 kg, which is absolutely impossible to fencing with one hand. Carrying it in one hand is easy, but fencing is not.

There are two main types of two-handed swords. The first is the Scottish Highlander claymore already mentioned above. Everything is simple with it - it is a large long sword with an impressive hilt and the same cross. By the way, since the late Middle Ages there has been a general rule: the length of the crosspiece of a sword should be approximately equal to the length of its handle. If the cross is much longer, then it begins to interfere. If it is shorter, then in many positions one of the hands is rather weakly protected.

The second type of two-handed swords is German-Swiss. The English (German in fact, of course) “zweihander” is ahistorical, although it is known to everyone. The terms "bidenhander" and "doppelhander" were actually used. These two-handed weapons have an additional guard directly on the blade, with an unsharpened and often wrapped part of the blade between the guards for ease of grip, called the “ricasso” or “heel” (I’m used to the Italian term). The right hand can be placed on the ricasso to transform the bulky two-handed sword into something like a nimble polearm cut-and-pierce weapon that works well in relatively close combat.

Some blades of various types of weapons are made “flaming”, with wavy curves along the entire length. The most famous of these blades is the kris or keris, a type of dagger popular in Indonesia, Malaysia and the Philippines. A variety of swords were equipped with flaming blades. Two-handed weapons of the German-Swiss type were made to burn noticeably more often than other weapons. This is due to a complex of reasons. A flaming blade is either wider and heavier, or narrower and less durable, compared to a similar blade without the bells and whistles. Plus it is more difficult to produce and more expensive. The heaviness did not always frighten the customers of the German-Swiss two-handers, and in any case, the person ordering the two-hander has money. Therefore, it is on swords of this type that flaming blades are found more often than usual. Some people think that a two-handed weapon with a flaming blade is a separate type of weapon, a “flamberge”. Actually no, the same two-hander. But if you really want to emphasize the presence of a flaming blade with a beautiful word, then you should use the term “flammard”, which actually means a flaming blade.

To Naples, there and back

At the end of the 15th century in France, the process of unification of lands was completed and a single state was formed. The French monarchy turned its attention to the rich but weak lands of Italy, which opened up room for expansion. King Charles VIII of France decided to take advantage of the contradictions between the Neapolitan king, the Pope and the Duke of Milan and laid claim to Naples.

Political map of Italy in the 1490s. (wikipedia.org)

In 1494, the French army with detachments of Swiss mercenaries, landsknechts (mercenaries from German lands) and artillery swept through Italy in a whirlwind, suppressing resistance. The powerful walls of medieval cities were easily destroyed by artillery. In the wall of the fortress of Monte San Giovanni, which once withstood a seven-year siege, a hole was made during 8 hours of shelling. Charles entered Naples, but the neighbors watched the king's successes with alarm.

In 1495, the Pope, Spain, Venice, the Empire and the former ally of the French king, the Duke of Milan, created the Holy League against France. Charles leaves part of his forces in Naples and makes his way to France. The Spaniards soon cleared Naples and the fortresses of the French, but Charles's successor, Louis XII, was already planning the next round. This time the target was Milan. As soon as Louis reached his goal, a new war broke out, followed by another.

Valois against the Habsburgs, Landsknechts against the Swiss or musketeer against the knight?

In 1519, the Spanish King Charles I became Holy Roman Emperor. He united under his rule a huge power, “on which the sun never sets.” However, Milan and Burgundy were not yet part of it. In 1521, a four-year war began for the possession of northern Italy. Venice became an ally of the French, and the emperor teamed up with the Pope. In November 1521, the Spaniards occupied Milan and then defeated the French twice at Bicocca and on the Sesia River. However, in 1524, the French king Francis invaded Italy, recaptured Milan and began the siege of Pavia. The Spanish commander Fernando d'Avalos moved to the rescue.

Map of the European possessions of the empire of Charles V. (wikipedia.org)

The French numbered about 25 thousand people, including about a thousand gendarmes (knights) supported by 50 guns. There were the same number of imperial troops, but in cavalry and artillery they were decisively inferior to the French, another 10 thousand people were blocked in Pavia. The Spaniards managed to bypass the French unnoticed, suddenly attacked them on the night of February 24, 1525 and defeated them piece by piece.

Under Pavia, the Spaniards used, in addition to the then already known arquebus rifles, matchlock muskets - weapons that were heavier (about 9 kg), but capable of piercing the thickest armor at a long distance. It was impossible to shoot without additional help, so a special bipod was used to support the gun. The musket became a death sentence for the heavy knightly cavalry. The defeat of the French at Pavia was complete. The losses of the Spaniards hardly exceeded a thousand people, and the French lost from 10 to 12 thousand. The king himself was captured. This became the prologue to the conclusion of peace in Madrid in 1526. Charles V received Milan and Burgundy. But as soon as Charles released Francis, he declared the treaty invalid, and a new war broke out, but that’s a completely different story.

Battle of Pavia. Tapestry by Bernard van Orley (1628−1631). (wikipedia.org)

"On the Art of War" of the Renaissance

During the era of the Italian Wars, the tactics of the Middle Ages were replaced by a new battle order. This order is not yet perfect, and decades will pass before it is dismembered, stretched along the front and, in the end, turns into the linear tactics of the 18th century.

At this time, firearms became widespread among the troops - arquebuses, pistols (according to one version, they were called that because the caliber was equal to the diameter of the coin of the same name). In 1521, the matchlock musket was invented - a weapon that made it possible to pierce any armor from a long-range rifle shot. Archers and crossbowmen were replaced by arquebusiers and musketeers. And the mercenaries who formed the backbone of the armies of that time would retain their importance until the Great French Revolution.

Spanish soldiers during the Italian Wars. (wikipedia.org)

At this time, artillery became a full-fledged branch of the military. French artillery tore down the walls of medieval Italian cities, making holes in them in a matter of hours. At the same time, artillery began to play an increasingly important role on the battlefield. Due to improvements by French and then Spanish gunsmiths, it became possible to move artillery around the battlefield, placing it in gaps between infantry and on high ground.

Courteau is a gun that became the prototype of modern howitzers. (wikipedia.org)

The Italian wars are the era of the decline of chivalry, when cavalry gives way to infantry. After Pavia, it became clear that the previous organization of the cavalry did not meet the realities of the time. Companies of gendarmes turned into schools for nobles and ceased to play a decisive role on the battlefield. They were replaced by cavalrymen with pikes, pistols or cuirasses. And all these important changes are directly related to the era of the Italian Wars.

The Italian Wars began with a dynastic dispute typical of the Middle Ages. But under the guise of traditional orders, new wars were hidden - interstate ones. The conflict for the possession of Italy dragged on for 60 years and ended in a landslide victory for the Habsburgs. For Italy, these wars cemented its fragmentation and dependence on stronger states, pushing Italy to the periphery for centuries. The art of the Renaissance was trampled under the boots of the Landsknechts. The pogrom of Rome by imperial mercenaries in 1527 has been compared to the Vandal invasion of 455. On the other hand, during the Italian campaigns, Europeans became acquainted with the culture of the Renaissance, spreading it at home. In the field of military art, the Italian wars are difficult to overestimate. Many features of military affairs, the influence of which will be felt for centuries and even down to the present day, developed in the first half of the 16th century and underwent a “baptism of fire” on the fields of Italy.

Zhorka26 09-10-2015 15:22

I have been interested in Renaissance weapons for a long time, ever since the release of the Borgia series and the series of games about Ezio Auditore. Well, these are lyrics. This era is interesting due to the emergence of new tactics and strategies of combat and the appearance of firearms, the abandonment of armor in favor of swords and much more. The question that interested me was what the sword should have looked like during that transitional period, when they began to make it as light and maneuverable as possible. What did the “father” of the rapier look like? And what did the first rapiers look like, without all these rings and cups that rapiers later began to have?

Arabat 09-10-2015 17:59

The answer can be very simple: the first rapiers were swords.
There was no abrupt transition. It was just that the hilts gradually became a little more complex, and the blade lengthened and became lighter. Well, let’s talk to Lis in more detail.

Look on the Internet for the swords of Colada and Sidon Sid. You'll see something interesting.

Zhorka26 09-10-2015 19:39

I remember these swords, semi-mythical things. But I'm talking about swords that have become thin and flexible. Not a sword with a protopira hilt with finger rings, but narrow blades. What did they look like and their hilts? I can formulate a question with my friends. Now, if somewhere a narrow sword is shown with a bent downward guard, a protective ring on the hilts and demonstrating fencing techniques like rapiers; all this happens during the Renaissance or a little later, can such a sword be considered transitional? And immediately catch up - what was such a sword-sword supposed to look like?

Arabat 09-10-2015 19:44

Recently, somewhere here slipped a sword with a kind of plate (or ring?) extending to the side of the crosshair. At the same time, it seems, they said that this was the earliest stage of the transition. There, Lis spoke about the transition itself in more detail. Look it up. The author of the topic seems to be Yves.

Foxbat 09-10-2015 20:44

Consider this point - since the hilts were made by one master, and the blades by another, and a third one (well, or a fourth, because another one made the handles) assembled everything together, you can find very different swords with the same hilts - different in weight, shape, width , cutting and piercing properties, etc... often at the request of a specific customer.

This is so... to further confuse the issue.

But in fact, there are books and the Internet where all this is perfectly presented.

Basically, sword-like hilts stood on sword-like blades - quite wide and heavy, with pronounced edges.

Zhorka26 09-10-2015 21:07

What were such narrow European swords called, what word should I type into the search?

Zhorka26 09-10-2015 21:15

I read this topic, interesting. But these are wide swords, and I am so interested in narrow ones that this did not exist before, after which this fashion took root and gave birth to the phenomenon of the sword.

Foxbat 09-10-2015 21:17

Google 16th century sword - and you will have a wagon of happiness.

You can also score a 16th century rapier.

Then you can ask more specifically.

Foxbat 09-10-2015 21:20

In the 16th century there were no very narrow ones yet, mostly they were sort of “medium”, mostly 25-30mm wide at the base. Narrower ones appeared already in the 17th century.

Arabat 09-10-2015 21:46

quote: but I’m interested in narrow ones so much that this has never happened before

If you are interested in “so narrow”, then these will be full-fledged rapiers with a full-fledged hilt. The development of hilts proceeded ahead of schedule. Then what do transitional forms have to do with it?

Zhorka26 09-10-2015 23:25

And with such a width, could the length of the SWORD blade be 80 cm?

Foxbat 09-10-2015 23:43

With “such”, which one is it? 30mm?

I have a hoe lying here, a 34mm blade at the guard, more than a meter long.

YARL 10-10-2015 07:49

quote: The answer is very simple: the first rapiers were swords

Or Estocami. It's your choice gentlemen!

YARL 10-10-2015 07:52

Are you not interested in the weapons of peasant wars?

Arabat 10-10-2015 09:38

quote: Or Estocami. It's your choice gentlemen!

No. Not estokami. There is a smooth transition from swords to rapiers, but not from estocs.

YARL 10-10-2015 16:05

Dear Sir

On the issue of rapiers, there is my knowledge, with which the IHO gurus categorically disagree. And they are right.
There were two types of rapiers. The first type, early, is a shortened estoc. A rigid and inflexible blade that could parry the blow of a lighter sword and pierce lighter armor.
And a flexible rapier appeared when the sword was replaced by a flexible (spring) sword.
But combat weapons do not last long and are not particularly beautiful. In engravings, weapons are stylized; museum exhibits are necessarily beautiful and perhaps made for decoration. The debate about what combat rapiers actually are has been going on for a long time.
Sincerely.

Foxbat 10-10-2015 16:16

Oh my God! Has the forgotten “flexible rapier” resurfaced again? I already hoped that we had survived it, like measles.

And yes, the estok is a completely different weapon; the only connection with the rapier is that both have a long blade. Arabat is absolutely right. External similarities in hilts should not confuse us, because fashion was often the same for everything.

For example, the famous cup hilt was placed on both super-narrow rapier blades and very wide, chopping, outright sword blades.

YARL 10-10-2015 17:03

quote: Has the forgotten “flexible rapier” resurfaced again?

Mister
So is the rapier rigid or flexible?
Sincerely.

Foxbat 10-10-2015 17:20

Rigidity is definitely valued in a rapier, but how it turned out is a second question.

YARL 10-10-2015 17:29

Thank you

Foxbat 10-10-2015 18:14

Ideally, a rapier blade should be like a laser beam - light and rigid.

Arabat 10-10-2015 18:24

But what about these legends about Toledo blades, which were sold bent into a ring?

WLDR 10-10-2015 18:25

And what is flexible is feders. These are wedges for sparring.

Arabat 10-10-2015 20:02

That is, first we create a legend and promote its wide dissemination. And then we start selling obvious crap to gullible customers? Of course, there have been recent examples. However, in those days, not all buyers simply hung them on the wall; some even tried to use them. Such lovers of steaming could easily get hit in the neck, very sensitively.

Zhorka26 10-10-2015 20:50

And what kind of “parry the blow of a lighter sword and pierce lighter armor” are you talking about? I’m more interested in that same sword than a rapier or sword, since it has already been formed as a weapon class. I’m interested in the extent to which a sword can be short and narrow in order to continue to be called such, and not a sword/rapier

Arabat 10-10-2015 20:54

Who the hell knows. No one has conducted relevant linguistic research. In terms of weapons terminology, Russia is generally a dark forest and complete anarchy. In one of our pre-revolutionary encyclopedias with a military bias, by the way, that same Colada is called a sword.
On the other hand, they can call any crap a sword. Not only the Japanese katana (that’s all right), but also the Chinese da-dao, and this is generally pure bullshit. Well, or at worst hypersleep.
In short, if someone believes that this is a sword, then they write a sword, and if they don’t know what to call it, then they write a sword.

WLDR 10-10-2015 21:22

sell the gullible

Why the crap?
Everything is fair. Here are swords for bending, and here are for use. Axes - in the garden and vegetable garden department.

How to get in here? Still obvious.
Especially for someone who is capable of hitting the neck.
And for those who thirst for a miracle, please, a miracle saber.
Bends into a ring and into any convenient shape.
The buyer is always right.

Zhorka26 10-10-2015 22:58

There are also glaives and combat scythes, and some Chinese sabers can be called falchions, as you like.

YARL 11-10-2015 08:09

quote: I’m interested in the extent to which a sword can be short and narrow in order to continue to be called such, and not a sword/rapier

Akinak is a sword, both narrow and short!

YARL 11-10-2015 15:40

Narrow is a rhombus approaching a square. And depending on what you want to do with this sword? If you just prick, then a diamond approximating a square, fitting into the circumference of the thumb or the thin end of the big toe, will suffice. But if you chop, you need something like a blade, even if the diamond is undercut and the edge is sharp, like a scraper, it will cut through, but will not go deep.
By the way, look at boar or hunting swords. Both pricked and the tip can be chopped and cut.
https://www.google.ru/search?h...&lr=&gws_rd=ssl

Zhorka26 11-10-2015 16:25

I'm talking about swords that are no longer as wide as those of the Vikings, but not thin as a sword. With a width of 30 mm. and up to 80 cm long with a proud curved down

Foxbat 11-10-2015 17:14

Well, then why talk about them? What exactly is shrouded in mystery there?

What's the question?

Zhorka26 11-10-2015 17:55

What did such a blade look like? We need pictures of historical examples and non-idealized iconography. I would like to understand whether there were such swords and what they were capable of

Foxbat 11-10-2015 20:30

So... whichever one they installed, that’s what it looks like. I say every time - there were no laws. Most likely lens-shaped, wide, with different grooves. Up to 30mm and 80cm, these are more in the category of short swords; combat ones were larger.

Short ones were mainly worn as an auxiliary weapon, when a combat weapon was scrapped. For example, there is a category of riding sword - a person took something more comfortable on the road so that the huge pendulin would not dangle. These are also about the same size.

Arabat 11-10-2015 20:37

Exactly. There were no laws. At the same time they were wider and narrower, longer and shorter. We can only speak on average.
You don’t need to look at one specific instance, but collect a bunch of different ones related to the same time and see what comes out on average.

Firearms were invented at the beginning of the 14th century. After this, it took a long time before it became widely used, but one way or another, this invention completely changed the way wars were fought. The Middle Ages gradually became a thing of the past. Knight's armor could not protect against bullets, so the knights no longer approached the enemy at close range to use their swords and spears. And the castle walls, in turn, could not withstand cannonballs.

Around the beginning of the 14th century. Infantry began to use large bows, as tall as the shooter, which were very effective in battle against mounted knights. They fired at a considerable distance and with great accuracy. Taking castles and fortified cities was not an easy task, but when in the 15th century. During the siege, cannons began to be used; even the thickest walls could not resist them.

Armor and weapons were expensive. When peasants rebelled against the feudal lords, as often happened in the 15th and 16th centuries, they had little hope of standing up against well-armed knights. In this drawing, a German knight strikes a rebel peasant with a spear. The first guns were not very convenient in battle, because they took a lot of time to reload and the accuracy of hits was low. Therefore, soldiers armed with pikes were placed next to the shooters, who covered them while reloading their guns.

Then a gun called a musket was invented. It shot more accurately, but was too heavy to hold in your hands. Therefore, the musketeers had to place their guns on a special support while shooting. Shooting from pistols was more accurate, but less distant than from a rifle. Pistols were usually fired by cavalrymen who, galloping up to the enemy, unloaded their pistols, and then rode off to a safe distance to reload them. By the end of the 17th century. The infantry now had bayonets in their arsenal, which were attached to the barrel of a gun. Now at close range the shooters could defend themselves.

Instead of relying on the military support of their vassals and their militias or using mercenaries, kings began to create their own regular armies. These armies were much better trained and disciplined than those of the feudal lords in the past. Military leaders now had to seriously study military science in order to learn how to plan military operations and military campaigns.

The methods of warfare at sea have also changed. The British and Dutch learned to build lighter and more maneuverable ships. Thanks to such ships, the English fleet was able to defeat the Spanish Armada. Cannons were installed on each side of the warship. The opponents tried to shoot at each other with broadside salvos, that is, with all the guns on the side at once, in order to increase the likelihood of a hit. Due to illness, poor nutrition and harsh punishments, life on board was very difficult for the sailors. Governments often had to use recruiting squads to kidnap people and force them onto ships.

Conversely, the Game Master can advance the pseudo-historical foundation of the game several hundred years and set his campaign in a Renaissance style setting. Doing this would allow him to include weapons and perhaps a few more pieces of equipment from slightly later periods in history. Clocks, hot air balloons, printing presses, and even crude steam engines may be available. Most important to the PCs, however, would be the new weapons (see Table 5-4: Renaissance Weapons), which are detailed below.

Firearms of the Renaissance: Firearms should be treated like other firearms. Exotic weapon proficiency (firearms) gives a creature proficiency with all firearms; otherwise, a –4 penalty applies to all attack rolls.

Powder: While the gunpowder is burning (1 ounce burns in 1 round and illuminates as sunrod), or even explodes under the right conditions, it is primarily used to force a bullet out of the barrel of a pistol or shotgun, or to load bombs (see below). It takes an ounce of gunpowder to fire a bullet. Gunpowder is sold in small kegs (capacity 15 pounds, total weight 20 pounds, 250 gold each) and in waterproof powder horns (capacity and total weight 2 pounds, 35 gold per full horn of gunpowder). If the gunpowder gets wet, it cannot be fired.

Bullets: These large, round, lead shells are sold in bags of 10 for 3 gold. A bag of bullets weighs 2 pounds.

Gun: This firearm contains a single charge and requires a standard action to reload.

Musket: The musket contains a single charge and requires a standard action to reload.

Renaissance explosive ammunition as a weapon: These explosives do not require any qualifications to be used. Hitting a target with such a weapon requires a successful ranged touch attack aimed at an area. A direct hit with an explosive weapon means that the weapon hits the creature it was aimed at, and everyone within the blast radius, including that creature, takes the indicated damage.

If the projectile misses, it still lands somewhere. Roll 1d8 to determine if the throw is in the wrong direction, with a "1" indicating the direction back to the thrower, and on a "2-8" count clockwise around the target square. (See diagram on page 158 Player's Guides). Then, count 1 square away from the target square for every two increments of attack range.

Hand grenade (bomb): This round gunpowder grenade must be lit before it can be thrown. Lighting a grenade is a move action. The grenade deals 2d6 points of fire damage. Anyone caught within the blast's radius can make an AC 15 reaction save to take only half damage.

Smoke grenade (bomb): This cylindrical grenade must be lit before being thrown. Setting it on fire is a move action. Two rounds after it is ignited, this non-destructive explosive projectile emits a cloud of smoke (like a spell fog cloud) within a 20 foot radius. Moderate wind (11+ mph) clears smoke in 4 rounds; strong wind (21+ mph) clears fog in 1 round.

Table 5-4: Renaissance Weapons