Upgrade your account to a Community Supporter account and remove most of the site ads.

Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="JohnSnow" data-source="post: 3071452" data-attributes="member: 32164">Less. This is the case for most FUNCTIONAL blades. I don't mess around with poorly-made, over-heavy wall-hangers. Most of the blades I mention below are swords I've handled in live-steel practice.I own a battle ready replica 16th-century sword rapier. It's very well-balanced with a 32 inch blade. It weighs less than 3 pounds. A late-16th or early 17th-century rapier might weigh just over 3 pounds, but usually weighs less.I also own a replica 15th century longsword (hand-and-a-half) with a 38 inch blade. It's a big, sturdy sword, and weighs just about 4 pounds.I've handled a heavy German katzbalger. It also weighed about 4 pounds, relatively heavy blade for its length (about 24 inches).My brother owns a replica 11th-century Viking broadsword. It also weighs about 3 pounds. A later period basket-hilted broadsword, similar to the one Liam Neeson used in Rob Roy, is also about 4 pounds.By contrast, a Scottish claymore (think of William Wallace's sword from Braveheart) weighs about 5 pounds.Most real swords are in that range: 2-5 pounds. Maybe 6 maximum. And in most cases, about half the weight is in the hilt and pommel. The sole exception is a true German Sweihander. They weighed much more, but they weren't used in combat MUCH and even they topped out at about 9 pounds.A final note should be spared for ceremonial blades, which could weigh considerably more, but were never used. Many of the early weapons people had as models were ceremonial pieces, giving rise to unrealistic expectations about the weight of blades. But real combat swords just weren't that heavy.</blockquote>

Verification