From the length of the handle I would think that it was not a two-handed weapon. Still at approx 4 pounds it would take a real man to continue to swing it effectively if a battle lasted more than a few hours.
A thought ... being ambidextrous would be useful ...
“From the length of the handle I would think that it was not a two-handed weapon. Still at approx 4 pounds it would take a real man to continue to swing it effectively if a battle lasted more than a few hours.”
Yep... Many years of physical conditioning. See #31. :)
Forensic anthropologists examined the bones in recently uncovered mass graves of the battle of Towton 1461 War of the Roses. Close examination of the recovered skeltons indicates that limbs were severed as well as battle axe wounds that must have penetrated steel helmets. One whole skeleton, Number 16, indicted a brawny broad shouldered man with heavy bones and muscles capable of inflicting such damage.
Watch this fascinating documentary of the discovery and findings.
The best warriors could could wield their sword with either hand.
A knight that could do that would be scary as hell.
The Romans got around that by replacing their front rank every 10 minutes or so, on command, by the next rank behind them. Those people had their act together. They always had a fresh guy facing a tired enemy.
(IIRC, their short swords weighed about two pounds. To get an idea of the effort, try swinging an electric iron around for 10 minutes - more exciting if you have an opponent trying to kill you.)
If you want to try an endurance experiment, put on some boxing gloves and shadow punch. Your arms tire quickly.