A Thumbnail Sketch of the History of European Swords

By Roger Van Denhende

The Roman Gladius & Swords of the Ancient World

Roman gladius, c. 100 B.C.-350 A.D., 25.5” long

Most swords of the ancient world have one thing in common.  They tend to have relatively short thick blades.  This is because early metallurgy was poor, and longer blades tended to break or bend, depending on the metal of which they were made.  Indeed, the earliest swords currently extant are made of bronze.  Many of these were caste as a single piece, blade and hilt combined.  Later, blades of iron and steel were forged, with hilts added separately.  Hilts were quite simple, with very little protection for the hand.  Of these ancient swords, the best known is probably the gladius, or Roman short sword.  The gladius had a short thick double edged heavy blade, with a fairly long point, and was designed primarily for an underhanded thrust, but could also be used for swinging like a hatchet.  Swords of this type were not intended for parrying.  Instead, blows were parried by a shield, the sword itself being for offense, the shield for defense.  Roman cavalry required a somewhat longer sword (the spada), but it was of the same general configuration as the gladius

Broadswords of the Middle Ages

Broadsword, c. 1200-1400, 45.5” long

With its emphasis on cavalry and armor, swords of the middle ages tended to be longer than those of the ancient world.  Aiding in the lengthening of blades was an improvement in metallurgy, enabling them to be somewhat thinner, as well as longer.  Even so, blades were forged by highly skilled armorers, many of whom did not fully understand the metallurgy of their craft.  Because it took many days for skilled workmen (who guarded their craft carefully) to complete a single sword, good swords were extremely expensive.  A good sword was one that would hold an edge and stand up to the rigors of battle throughout the lifetime of its owner.  Such swords were highly prized possessions, often given personal names, and handed down from father to son, through the generations.

The earliest of these swords (generally known as broadswords) were much like the swords of the ancient world, with somewhat longer and thinner blades.  The hilts were simple, with little protection for the hand.  Like the ancient swords, the parrying was done with the shield, not with the sword (Hollywood not withstanding).  Parrying with the sword tended to knick the blade and severely shorten its life.  With the spread of Christianity, the sword began to take on a new significance.  The quillon (the crosspiece on the hilt) was lengthened, so that the hilt took on the aspect of a Christian cross.  Thus equipped, the Christian knight on campaign could begin or end his day with a prayer, placing his sword in the ground before him to represent the true cross.

During most of the middle ages the sword was not viewed as a thrusting weapon.  Its purpose was to batter down shields and chop through leather hauberks, mail, and some plate.  For this, thrusting was neither necessary nor effective.  Thrusting was left up to spears, pikes, lances, and daggers.  Broadswords were used to chop, and the strength of the blow was often more important than the technique in its application.  As a result, the blades tended to be heavy toward the tip.  The edges of the double edged blade were parallel, or nearly so.  The points tended to be relatively blunt.  They could be used for a thrust, but rarely were.

It was only toward the end of this period (c. 1400 – 1500), when full suits of plate armor began to be common, that the double edged blades began to taper markedly toward the point (known to today’s collectors, generally, as cut and thrust swords).  This changed their balance point, making them somewhat more wieldy.  The purpose of the more slender points was to enable the user to find chinks in his enemy’s full plate armor, and take advantage of them. These cut and thrust swords, though, were still used basically like a broadsword.   But, this in itself, along with the invention of gunpowder, was the beginning of the end of the broadsword.

It was during this period (the middle ages) that the sword, because of it’s great expense, and the fact that only the wealthy knights and nobility could afford them, that the sword became the symbol of nobility and knighthood, later extended to the landed gentry.  Today, the sword is still thought of as a symbol of military officers and gentry.  For the same reason, many people today, still view fencing as an exercise in elitism.   However, fencing as we know it today, had still not come into existence.

Estocs & Rapiers Of The Renaissance

Estoc, c. 1400-1500

During the 1400s, a new weapon was developed to deal with plate armor.  This was the estoc (also called tock, or tuck).  This was a rather long bladed weapon with the hilt of a sword, often with a cross guard (quillon) and a knuckle bow.  The blade was often little more than a rectangular iron (or steel) bar with a narrow spear-like point.   Many others, however, simply had very slender double edged blades.  It’s main function was to attack the joints (or, chinks) in plate armor, and as such, was primarily a point (read thrusting) weapon.  It’s main significance was that they were relatively cheap to make.  This meant that ordinary men-at-arms could afford them and that it led directly to the development of the rapier.  Rapiers were, however, anything but cheap.

 As stated, rapiers are thought to have developed directly out of the estoc.  As such, they were largely point (read thrusting) weapons.  But, they were not entirely thrusting weapons.  Indeed, many rapiers, particularly the earlier designs, had cut and thrust type blades or, at least, slenderized versions of them.  Though there were great differences among them, most of the earlier style rapiers had some form of a swept hilt.  This included, in addition to the ricasso, grip (or, handle), and pommel, also a cross guard (quillon), knuckle bow, arms of the hilt, and side rings, plus gracefully curving side bars to protect the hand.  The swept hilt rapier was held, essentially, by the thumb and index fingers on opposite sides of the ricasso, and the second finger braced against the quillon, much as the Italian foil still is, today.

Poniard, c. 1630, 18” long

Main Gauche Dagger, c. 1650, 23” long

Though swordsmen of this era (16^th and 17^th centuries) often carried a buckler or left hand dagger (poniard or main gauche) with which to parry, the elaborate hand guard shows that they also often parried with the rapier, itself.  Even so, techniques of rapier play were considerably different from modern foil play, which more or less duplicates smallsword play of the late eighteenth century.

Swept Hilt Rapier, c. 1580-1640, 45.5” long

Swept hilt rapiers, with their elaborate hilts of gracefully curved metal bars to protect the hand, were both graceful and beautiful in appearance.  They were sometimes as long as four feet from point to pommel.  With graceful hilts, long slender blades, they were often works of art in their own right.

The rapier gradually replaced the broadsword because it was much quicker than the broadsword, but also because with the increasing use of firearms, and the simultaneous decline of armor, it became less necessary to chop one’s way through armor or shield.  Along with the increasing use of rapiers, with their quickness and thrusting points, new methods of sword play began go develop.  This sword play was regarded as the “art of defense.”  This expression was eventually shortened to the “art of ‘fense.”  Today, we call it “fencing.”

Little by little, technique, timing, distance control, and deftness of movement and strategy began to take over.  Along with this, and again, little by little, bucklers and left hand daggers became less common, though they never disappeared altogether.  Both continued in use well into the eighteenth century, and were used, sometimes, even with smallswords.

Even so, as the rapier, itself, was used more and more for parrying, and as the point was used more and more (as opposed to the edge), hilt designs began to change in order to better protect one’s hand from the probing point of his antagonist.

One of the most attractive, and useful, of these changes (just before the middle of the seventeenth century) was the addition of a “clamshell” guard between the side rings of the swept hilt rapier.  This variety is now known by collectors as the “Pepenheimer,” after it’s inventor.

Cup Hilt Rapier, c. 1640-1670, 46” long

Following on this, and giving even more protection to the hand, was the “cup hilt” rapier.  This is essentially the same type of hilt that is used on modern epees, leading many modern fencers to assume that the modern epee was derived from, and used much like the cup hilt rapier.  Neither of these assumptions is true.  Like the foil, the epee was derived, more or less, from the eighteenth century smallsword.  Both the Papenheimer and the cup hilt rapier retained the use of a quillon (cross guard) which could parry attacks to the forearm by a mere twist of the wrist.  These quillons were quite long in southern Europe (especially in Spain), and somewhat shorter in northern Europe.

Smallswords Of The Eighteenth Century

Smallsword, c. 1770-1790, 38” long

Around the middle of the seventeenth century, the rapier began to evolve further.  The effort was to produce a “faster”, and therefore, more deadly weapon.  Blades were shortened and made lighter.  Weight was shifted toward the hilt by making the foible thinner and the forte’ somewhat lighter.  At the same time, hilts were made simpler and lighter.  Side bars and side rings were eliminated altogether.  Al that was left from the rapier hilt was the double clamshell guard of the Papenheimer, the ricasso, the arms of the hilt, and the quillon, the forward end of which curved back to the pommel to form the knuckle bow.  The “big” rapier had become the smallsword.  Don’t confuse the “smallsword” with the “short sword.”  The gladius was a short sword.  A smallsword is the smaller version of the rapier (the big sword).

Toward the seventeenth century, the rapier died out altogether. This was because the smallsword was both lighter and quicker, and therefore more deadly.  Because it was so light, and convenient, it went everywhere.  A gentleman was not dressed unless he was wearing his smallsword.  When he went out at night, to the theatre, etc., with the lack of police protection and unlit streets, a gentleman protected himself, and his party, with the smallsword. 

The smallsword was so ubiquitous among gentlemen, that it went everywhere, and all young gentlemen received, as a part of their education, training in fencing with the smallsword.  If one were to be presented at court, he must wear a smallsword.  If he didn’t own one, he rented one.  George Washington wore a smallsword at his first inauguration.  Literally thousands of duels were fought, throughout Europe, during the eighteenth century, with the smallsword.

By wearing a smallsword, a young man tacitly made the statement,” I am a gentleman.  Don’t mess with me!”  All of this ended with the egalitarianism of the French Revolution.  After the revolution, elitism, gentry, and dueling were frowned upon, and the wearing of the smallsword declined rapidly.

Even so, the smallsword lives on today in the form of the court sword, the diplomatic sword, the officer’s sword, and the fraternal type sword.  The distinction between smallswords and court swords is that the later are designed to be conveniently and easily worn and be seen.  Basically, they are badges of rank.  Rarely are they actually viable weapons such as their predecessor, the smallsword, was.

Sabers, And How They Fit Into The Picture

The European cavalry saber could be thought of as a curved bladed backsword(a broadsword with a singled edged blade) with a hilt which included a hand guard and knuckle bow of a single piece.  Actually, the saber was not a European weapon at all, but was introduced into Europe during the sixteenth and seventeenth centuries by the Ottoman Turks. 

Shamshir, 36”

The Moslem Turks, from the steppes of Asia were heavily into mounted warfare, as were their Moslem allies and subjects, the Arabs of the Middle East and northern Africa.  The traditional mounted weapon of both was the saber.  The Arab version of the saber was known as the shamshir, from which were derived the word “scimitar”.  It’s blade had a heavily curved single edged blade, facilitating the draw cut, but which made thrusting awkward.  The Turkish version, known as the kilij, was slightly shorter, with an equally heavily curved blade, with one third of it’s back edge sharpened and slightly raised above the normal line of the back of the blade.  Like the shamshir, it also offered the advantage of the draw cut, but added the advantage of a cut in either direction.  The curve of the shamshir blade was a true curve, but the curve of the kilij blade was not. 

During the sixteenth and seventeen centuries, the Ottoman Turks invaded Europe, advancing as far west as Poland, the entire Balkan peninsula, Hungary, and Austria, even besieging Vienna in 1529, the siege of which was not finally lifted until 1684.  During this period, Eastern Europeans were very heavily influenced by Turkish weaponry.  In central Europe, it was the Poles and the Hungarians who adopted the use of sabers which were almost identical to the Turkish kilij and the Arabic shamshir.

Cavalry Saber, 40”

It was mostly during the seventeenth and eighteenth centuries that the use of sabers, as a cavalry arm, spread from Poland and Hungary into Western Europe.  By the early eighteenth century, virtually all European cavalry were armed with the saber.  But, in Western Europe, the plain cross-guard of the shamshir had been changed to include a broad hand guard and knuckle bow combined, but included the sharpened back edge (about one third) of the kilij.  With a few exceptions, European saber blades are less curved than their Turkish and Arabic counterparts, and are thus capable of both slashing and thrusting.  Indeed, some European sabers, such as the German Uhlan sabers, and the Patton saber, have reverted to perfectly straight blades.

Today, military sabers are still in use, but like the smallsword, are reserved for largely ceremonial purposes.  These ceremonial sabers are usually much lighter in the blade, and are rarely sharpened.

Modern Olympic Style Fencing Weapons

The three modern Olympic style fencing weapons are the foil, the epee, and the saber.  All three of these weapons, like their original counterparts, consist of two basic parts, the blade and the hilt.  Hilts, generally, consist of three parts, the bell guard, the handle (grip), and the pommel.  The bell guard protects the hand from the opponent’s blade.  The purpose of the handle is obvious.  The pommel is the threaded nut that screws onto the blade’s tang and holds the hilt to the blade.  The pommel also serves as a weight and counter balance to the weight of the blade.  To strike someone with the pommel is known as “pummeling”, and is illegal in modern fencing.  Italian foils and epees hilts also include a ricasso, a crossbar (quillon), and arms of the hilt, none of which are present on French style hilts

The blade consists of two major parts, in addition to it’s point, or tip.  They are the foible and the forte.  The foible is the outer one third of the blade.  It is the most flexible part of the blade.  It’s purpose is two fold.  The first is that by being flexible, instead of penetrating, it bends.  This prevents injury, and by doing so, produces the second purpose.  The bend, for sight judging hits, represents the required penetration, in order to score a touch.  The forte’ is the stiff one third of the blade..  It, also, has two functions.  It adds rigidity to the entire blade, and it is the part of the blades with which parries are made.  Parries made with any other part of the blade will generally be insufficient.

The word “foil” is defined as a blunted practice sword.  To this degree, all three of the modern fencing weapons are technically “foils”.  This not withstanding, the weapon referred to as a foil represents the eighteenth century smallsword.  In weight, size and balance it is much like the better quality smallswords of the eighteenth century.  It is strictly a point weapon, meaning that the user can score a touch only by a trust of the point, and not with the edge.  The rules regarding it’s use reflect the techniques and tactics taught by fencing masters of the eighteenth century.  This is particularly true of the rules regarding right of way (priority) and target area (or, off-target area).  Unfortunately, in recent years, with the use of the electronic scoring apparatus, some fencers and directors have been able to cheat by taking advantage of specific shortcoming of the scoring equipment.

The word “epee “is from the French word l’epee, meaning, simply, sword.  Because of it’s association with the duels of the Dreyfus Affair, it has also been known as the dueling sword.  It is now, however, generally referred to, simply, as the epee.  Like it’s predecessor, the foil, it is also entirely a point weapon, meaning that touches can be scored only by a thrust of the point, and not by the edge.  Unlike the foil, however, virtually any part of the body, from the top of the head to the sole of the foot can be used as a target, and there is no such thing as right-of-way, or priority.  This is because duels of the Dreyfus Affair era were to first blood, rather than to death or disablement.  Consequently, both antagonists could easily, and often did, draw blood from each other before the duel could be stopped.  Also, and unlike foil, double touches can be awarded in epee fencing.

Of the three modern Olympic style fencing weapons, the “saber” is the least like it’s original deadly counterpart, the cavalry saber.  This is, largely, because the blade of a cavalry saber is fairly heavy, plus the fact that it scores touches mainly with the edge.  This fact makes it extremely unsafe to quickly swing the heavy blade.  Even with a dull cavalry saber blade, deep bruises and broken bones would quickly result.  This has been avoided by making the blade of the fencing saber so light that it can be manipulated in ways that a cavalry saber never could.  Furthermore, cavalry saber duels were mostly, though not entirely, on horseback.  This is virtually never done in Olympic style saber fencing.  All of this has combined to make modern saber fencing more nearly like Italian saber, the English single stick, or even schlager dueling of the German dueling societies.  Also, like foil, saber fencing has similar restrictions of right-of-way and off-target areas.  Unfortunately, saber rules have also been perverted by artificialities such as prohibitions on fleche attacks and perversions of right-of-way rules. 

Artificialities, such as these, have had the net effect of dampening enthusiasm for both foil and saber fencing.  It is hoped, by this author, that eventually both the F.I.E. (Federation Internationale d’Escriime) and the U.S.F.A. (United States Fencing Association) will recognize thee artificialities as aberrations and errors, and eradicate them!