Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

To: yarddog

When I was a kid growing up in DeFuniak Springs, Fl. the local library had a huge collection of armor and weapons from Scotland.

It had been collected by the U.S. ambassador to Scotland (there was actually such a position at one time)

I was always fascinated by the huge swords which I know know were Claymores. They looked so large and unwieldy, I could not imagine using one, but then again we all know just how effective the Scots were with them beating English Armies time and again.


26 posted on 05/29/2012 8:28:50 PM PDT by yarddog
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 20 | View Replies ]


To: yarddog

Those huge claymores weren’t likely as unwieldy as you might think. While a typical longsword was only about 2.5 to 3 lbs, a two-handed claymore was still probably under 5 lbs. the extra long grip made for wide spacing of the hands and so lots of good leverage. It was a surprisingly nimble blade, considering its size.

One of the great myths about swords in general is that they were heavy and cumbersome. They just weren’t. People had to fight with them, and they did so for many centuries. They had the weight and balance, and body mechanics kinda figured out. My largest longsword, an Albion Baron, is based on actual museum pieces and is absolutely typical of swords of that type and period. Not only is it not heavy, but it is
amazingly nimble and fast. It is big, but still only about three pounds and beautifully balanced just a couple inches out from the cross. I don’t pretend to be any good, but I can operate it far more surgically than I can work a framing hammer. :-)


30 posted on 05/29/2012 9:05:08 PM PDT by Ramius (Personally, I give us one chance in three. More tea anyone?)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 26 | View Replies ]

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article


FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson