Except that we do give specific names to specific models of guns, phones, and planes.

We do make a distinction between a pistol and a rifle, or a revolver and a semiautomatic pistol, or between a "brick," a flip phone, and a smartphone. That's about how they're used, and I think that's the real key for understanding the history of arms. They're named based on how they're used. So, swords are described by length (longer perhaps for main combat weapons or to be intimidating as a bodyguard, versus short to be handy as a backup weapon or in tight streets) as much as anything else. I suspect polearms were talked about the way we talk about military rifles today, but where modern folk talk about range versus penetration versus ammo capacity versus reliability, polearm wielders argued about length versus balance versus durability versus deflecting versus catching versus getting free from a snag. As near as I can tell the sword versus rapier distinction comes down to the method of employment, which is as much an argument about martial arts as weapon design. You simply use a different suite of maneuvers with a rapier than you would with a saber. They contain many similarities, but there are some critical differences, the kind of thing that might have made Cyrano de Bergerac kind of crap in a duel if he lost his rapier and had to fight with a saber or backsword. I sometimes wonder if a major bit we're missing when categorizing swords is the balance point of the weapon. Matt, among many others, has made it clear that a weapon's balance point is just as essential as its overall weight when it comes to actual use. It feels like a system of description for any sword should include century, country of origin, maker if available, blade length, blade width, blade balance point, and grip/guard design. That's a lot to keep track of, though -- much worse than tracking Lee-Enfield rifle variations.

@@SingularityOrbit I'll admit it isn't a perfect analogy and I probably didn't explain my thought process well. I was thinking in terms of general use over time. Someone in 1990 and someone in 2023 would both probably use the term "cellphone" in the exact same sentence, but they would be referring to vastly different things. We can and do use different terms for them now, but the "idea" of what a cellphone is has changed over time, and most often deviate from the default term when describing cellphones from the past. I wonder if that is what happened with swords. The default idea of what a "sword" was changed over time, so they didn't come up with new terms for every iteration like we do now.

@@Dr.Kenobi264 Oh, I didn't intend to be objecting to your comment. I was just thinking about what you said and extrapolating based on it. The thing is, both ways of looking at it are true. We differentiate between a flip phone and a smartphone, but we'll give a phone number without specifying what subtype of phone it is. it's just, "call me." It only matters in certain cases, like if you need the phone serviced. Which is basically exactly what you just said -- it's just a sword until you need a replacement grip, and then which kind of sword it is becomes important. Actually, the reason I thought about technique-based naming was a thought along similar lines to what you just posted. What you're used to becomes the new normal. It's like, if you took a modern stunt driver and had them try to drive a Ford Model T, they'd be in for a tough fight just to keep it under control. It's a "car," they're still "driving," but the usage is incredibly different. If we spoke of cars the way we speak of swords then a Model T wouldn't be called a car because we don't think of a car as moving at 40mph with your foot off the pedals.

What are curved swords?

The joy of being self-employed. I have the same joy in my gun store.

I’m jealous of kids who has a rich father they get paid doin nothing

Yes!

I can't tell if he's 30 or 60 but yeah sword dealer seems like a cool job lol

​@@YAOZIIThat sounds dreadful.

This reminds me of a joke: let's look at a young man who is just starting to grow individual hairs on his face. Does he have facial hair? Does he have a beard? Well, the hair that grows doesn't care what we call it. It is only our human mind that creates categories.

I appreciate that!

I've just started reading Manciolino's Opera Nova, I'm using an arming sword because that is what I have. And because several of the woodblock prints from Marozzo's Opera Nova show simple quillions and not complex hilts.

Eh, take a old fashioned blade and do some handiworked so that fits on a fancier hilt or add more bars to a refurbished hand me down arming sword and you have a sword with more hand protection with a lower price cus you aren't paying a smith to make a new blade.

Simpler guards also means less weight and a lower profile while carrying, there are swords even into the 17th century that only have finger rings and a simple crossguard.

George Silver also complains that often when under duress, people fail to be able to get their hand into complicated sword hilts and be able to draw in time. So, a simpler hilt has the advantage of not having you fumble about while in a panic.

@@catocall7323 This makes me think that the saber hilt was a development to max out hand protection while minimalizing fumbling under durress with the open sides, and the thumb up grip was maximize reach with a shorter weapon than a rapier and the blade form was to maximize robustness and cutting ability per wieght cus military weapon.

In German, rapier goes from a word for the cut and thrust sword, to the name of a training tool over a couple of centuries. It looks like the same thing happened in Swedish.

Similarly, I’ve noticed our museums call throwing javelins “spears” and thrusting spears “lances”, while I would associate “lance” with a cavalry spear. There seems to be a limit to using historical terms since they only had to worry about the few significantly different currently used swords, whereas sword enthusiasts need to differentiate between swords from all over the world across millennia. I think that’s an advantage of English, since they use so many foreign words to describe specific types of swords, while we also only have a common word for “straight renaissance sword” covering rapiers, smallswords, sideswords etc.

⁠@@hazzardalsohazzard2624 The problem is not so much that it changed to mean a training sword over time, but that it can refer to multiple quite different contemporary swords. The etymologically similar German word “Gewehr” also referred everything from polearms, to swords, to firearms depending on the period since the words fundamentally mean something to defend oneself with.

@@fridrekr7510I often have serious doubts about knowledge of people in "general" and even military museums overall. Especially when it comes to size: long sword versus two handed sword, spear versus pike or two handed axe versus poleaxe versus halberd. People without practical experience can't really comprehend, for example, effect of 10 cm longer or shorter blade, it is not just about reach but pulling it out at short distance etc. Add to that lack of basic knowledge of mechanics (it is not about mass, it is about moment of inertia) and all but most striking differences "disappear" because they are not "very important". And if anyone in museum had experience with foil fencing, even lightest historical sword (and every other weapon, except daggers) will be considered heavy and cumbersome.

Värja is pretty loose, but it usually means one handed long straight sword. Swedish sword terminology doesn't make any sense anyway since all military swords that have a saber style handle are sabel even if they have straight blades.

Props for the Highlander reference

I'd say it's a combination of shields and bucklers, hand protection and complex hilt tech development. Shields in battle and bucklers in civilian life were prevalent in the middle ages

Yeah, I always wondered how hard it would would to use a matchlock musket and a wheelock pistol wearing gaunlets. Complex guards are essentially gaunlets attached to your sword. Allows you to have full protection and dexerity without fiddling around with removing plated gloves.

And I would add that, after complex hilts were developed - and narrow thrusting "rapier" blades became fashionable - the style of both blade and hilt in combination became a matter of "consumer's choice": 1. Do you mainly wear gloves? Complex hilt. Sometimes or often armour including metal gauntlets? Simple hilt. 2. Are you likely to have to fight indoors, in narrow alleys or noisome taverns? Short, stout cut-and-thrust blade. In open country or on horseback? Longer stout cut-and-thrust blade. Showing status in polite society and only likely fighting in foofy formal duels? Long fashionable thrusting blade. When looked at that way, the reason for the Munich Town Guard sword style becomes obvious.

Yes I've wondered about that. I think it's a comparative statement, compared to a basket hilted broadsword or backsword. So he should have said it has less protection. I also think Silver is specifically talking about the narrowest and most thrusty blades with the word rapier, as he discounts their cutting potential.

Yes absolutely

I like Mutts. Pure breeds tend to have massive issues. :p Just like in the dog world

Not the Henry V sword (which was actually Henry VII's!), but a similar example :-) This is from the new Royal Armouries line that I've been working on.

@@scholagladiatoria , Oh, is the provenance of the Westminster Abbey Type XVIII known now? I used the quotes because I know that it's likely too late in terms of style to have belonged to Henry V. However, I wasn't aware that it had been positively attributed to Henry VII! That's amazing! I did later notice that this sword's blade is not hollow-ground, unlike the Westminster Abbey sword.

I know I know... I never learn

Inb4 someone says it's probably ceremonial.

@@Chroma710 A ceremonial sword with some protruding spike? What is this protruding spike supposed to symbolize? IMHO, someone wanted to damage the opponent or hook him with this spike, but the idea turned out to be stupid. But if someone shows me a ceremonial sword with a spike like that...

@@Zbigniew_Nowak Sometimes they just look cool and have 0 symbology. Look up the bavarian sawfish sword, they made some ridiculous "weapons" that were never meant to be used but just hung up in some rich lord's manor. Having a large spike on the end of a sword just turns it into a weirdly shaped axed because the center of mass will be way too high up to make it a good sword. If you're looking for a weapon that can hook shields out of people's arms there are all sorts of polearms like halberds, poleaxes, fauchards, billhooks, etc.

@@Chroma710 You're right, but the thing is that it wasn't a big spike, but quite small. It looked like there was only one little spike on this Bavarian sword. Even shorter. It doesn't look very spectacular, cool or fancy, at best... strange. Therefore, I am still inclined to the hypothesis that someone wanted to "add an additional function to the sword", but the idea turned out to be bad. But it doesn't really matter why someone created it. I wondered if Matt had ever seen anything like this in his life - and he had probably seen a lot of strange weapons.

The ones I've seen looked like renaissance cut and thrust swords.