Longsword Blade Lengths

[John Clark]

New here and to longsword so a hello to everyone on the forum.

May I ask a question on longsword blade lengths?

If you believe that the average height of a man in the 1400s may have been as little as 170cms (5' 7"), then relatively the sword length has shrunk for modern users as we replicate old sword dimensions.
As a modern swordsman of 185cms (6' 1") what would an equivalent sword length be?
I ask as if I am going to train and spar, I would like to have a sword made of a size that suits me and a dimension that is relative to the past.

Would you expect a man or woman of 5' 8" use the same length blade as a 6' 5" monster or should a blade length be determined by say the distance from the floor to the crossguard at say the base of the sternum? In other words a relative length....
I am interested in your views on this.

[John Farthing]

For more on the role of dimension and sword design, I would HIGHLY recommend taking a look at Swordsmith Peter Johnsson's working theories.

A video presentation of Peter speaking about his theory is available on the Arctic Fire 2012 DVD set. Available at: http://arcticfire.mymiddleearth.com

Peter's theories are published and can be read in the Wallace collections exhibition catalog entitled, 'The Noble Art of the Sword: Fashion and Fencing in Renaissance Europe' ed. Tobias Capwell. ISBN: 978 0 900785 43 6

Both are well worth viewing/reading respectively for anyone with even a modicum of interest in the subject of Mediæval swords and how geometry played a role in design, dimension, and development.

For some purely historical thoughts on sword dimensions, I humbly submit Chapter II of 'Liber de Arte Gladiatoria Dimicandi ("Book on the Art of Fighting With Swords") by Filippo Vadi c. 1482-1487

"Measures of the Spada da doi Mane (Two Handed Sword).

The sword should be of the correct measure

With the pommel just under the arm (pit),

As here is written

To avoid any hindrance:

The pommel should be round to fit the closed hand

Do this and you will not be in troubles

And know for sure

That the handle should be a span long

Who has not these measures will be confused

To prevent your mind from being deceived

The hilt should be as long as handle and

pommel ensemble, and you will not be endangered

The hilt is squared and strong as needed

With iron broad and pointed

His duty being to wound and cut

Be sure to note the following:

If using the sword in arme’ (“in plate armor”)

It must be sharp four fingers from the tip

The grip as said above

The pointed hilt, and note this writing. "

Translation of the cited work available here: http://www.thearma.org/Manuals/Vadi.htm

[Stacy Clifford]

Only a few manuals that I'm aware of discussed the proper lengths of weapons, and certainly you had plenty of people back in those days fighting with weapons that were larger or smaller than you might expect for a person of their size. I believe it was Filippo Vadi that said a longsword should come up to a man's armpit to be of proper proportion:



George Silver also had well-documented opinions on the "perfect length" of weapons, but he did not cover the longsword in his treatise. Silver does an excellent job discussing the advantages and disadvantages of weapons shorter or longer than "perfect" however, especially in his discussions of the staff, and it's well worth the read.

Those opinions aside, however, you can become comfortable fighting with a disproportionate sword with practice. I'm 5' 6" and a proper longsword for me by Vadi's definition should be right at 48", but I regularly train with a 52" waster and have no trouble handling longer ones.

[Edit: Looks like John Farthing beat me to the Vadi reference.]

[John Farthing]

If memory serves, Girard Thibault d'Anvers also offers advice on choosing a weapon in which the dimensions are well suited to the weilder in his treatise 'Academie de l'Espee' (Academy of the Sword) ca. 1629