The history of Denmark is filled with tumultuous periods of war and strife, conflicts driven by the same political and religious factors that were widespread throughout Medieval and Post-Medieval Europe. Smaller kingdoms were swallowed up by larger, and larger kingdoms splintered apart. Due to this fairly colorful history, the Danes became known for some distinctive weaponry, of which this Danish Two-Handed Sword is an example.
This sword is classified as an Oakeshott Type XVIIIe, a very unusual member of the Type XVIII group. It features a long, stiff diamond shaped blade with an extremely long handle, making it suitable for cut and thrust swordplay as many other swords were in the later 15th Century. However, this sword also has a long unsharpened ricasso that can be gripped to shorten up the blade for closer work. This option to fight with the “half sword” makes the Danish Two-Handed Sword an incredibly versatile weapon.
Sword Specifications Blade: 1060 High Carbon Steel Tempered to a Rockwell of 53 Total length: 50” Blade length: 39” Blade width: 1.5” Weight: 2 lbs. 15 oz.
I don’t exactly know why the ricasso is blunt, perhaps for certain binding stuff, but I am quite sure it isn’t for half-swording. Half-swording is generally done by holding the sword half-way along the blade. The only one I’ve seen holding that close to the hilt is John Clements of ARMA, whose interpretations are generally regarded with a heavy dose of skepticism from the HEMA community.
Now, a lot of people react “but wait, grabbing at the middle of the blade is dangerous if it is sharpened!” Yes, if you don’t know how to do it, see, something can only really slice if you drag along the edge… Which you don’t do, at all. Numerous tests involving heavy attacks from half-swording grip, even using the sword as a two-handed hammer, have resulted in… Slightly red skin from the pressure. As long as you don’t slip, you don’t get cut… Add a layer of leather to that and you’re safe.
There are swords that are blunt about a handswidth at the middle of the blade, and I believe there are sketches in some of the manuscripts of swords with an actual grip at the middle, but those are obviously rather specialized and quite rare. Then we have the final evolution for armoured “sword” combat… The estoc(also known as tuck), which was basically an ice pick of sword length on a sword hilt. Sure, a few have sharpened edges… But generally not, generally they have that diamond shaped blade, very sturdy and unflexing, with an acute tip… Perfect for acting as a crowbar and a gap invading ice-pick.
Also, half-swording techniques exist within both unarmoured and armoured combat… And you can half-sword with any and all swords.
And not to forget, that IS a very nice sword, hard to believe a big one like that is mid 14th century!
Look to the Italian great sword manuals for the explanation – it’s a particular kind of half-swording peculiar to the bigger swords.
I stand corrected!
Would that be longsword or “montante” manuals?
50 inches/127 centimeters isn’t really… Montante size? Actually smaller than the standard longsword size used nowadays, then again, at mid 14th century, that’s pretty big, hehe. 🙂
Per edit of the first reply: look at Marozzo where it is referred to as the sword in two hands, although WIktenauer says “Greatsword”
Marozzo is 16th century though. Then again… One could assume that the techniques are older, no? Hm. If my memory isn’t messing with me, I believe I’ve seen something similar in Fiore.
Nothing like that in Fiore. Fiore does however show a sword in the armoires section that is blunt at the middle.
Bah, my memory should be shot. Thank you though, that was probably one of the swords I was thinking of. 🙂
Aliquid de Magis 