In the past, when swords were used for actual combat as opposed to recreation and interior decor, were they given names individually, as swords are in fiction (The Lord of the Rings’ Narsil, Orcrist etc.) and legend (Excalibur)? If so, do any still survive? What are some famous ones?
Some famous swords:
Julis Caesar - Crocea Mors
Edward the Confessor - Curtana
Mohammed the Prophet - El-Battar, Dhu’l Fakar, and Medham
Count Roland of France - Durandal
Charlemagne - Joyeuse, Closamont, and Flamberge
El Cid - Colada and Tizona
Welsh King Rhydderch Hael - Dyrnwyn
Of course, many mythical heroes had named swords - Balmung, Gram, Orna.
The most recent famous sword I can think of is Robert E. Lee’s Appomattox sword. It was ceremonial and AFAIK was not named by Lee. However, I’ve seen it described very often as the Appomattox sword.
Here’s a link to a page from Brewer’s Dictionary of Phrase and Fable.
http://www.bootlegbooks.com/Reference/PhraseAndFable/data/1195.html
Scroll down a bit to the entry SWORD for a boatload of famous sword names.
Yes, but the question in my mind is whether any of these names were used by the wielders, or were bestowed by mythmakers at some later date.
The Metropolitan Museum of Art in New York has a collection of medieval arms and armos. I know they have a dagger that was owned by Charles the Bold. Not sure if it had a name.
I don’t know if it was ever named, but Vlad The Impaler’s sword was very much personalized, and a sword of legend. It had belonged to his father, who was a knight of the order of the dragon. Their swords all were adorned with the order’s insignia and other designs. When Vlad’s father was killed, a servant retrieved the sword and gave it to Vlad. Vlad’s first action was to kill his father’s killers with it.
Figured this little tidbit would be in the spirit of the topic, if not an answer to the exact question. A sword doesn’t necessarily need a name to have a reputation 
AFAIK most real combat swords didn’t have much of an expected lifespan. Both armor and swords were not heavily decorated. They were utilitarian tools of warfare, and I doubt many swords survived more than a couple of pitched battles. Almost every existing museum piece is a ceremonial weapon, which was worn with highly decorative armor for pageants, tournaments (but not in jousts or melee), state occasions, etc. Of course, a person could have used a single name for a succession of weapons used in combat, plus for his ceremonial weapon worn in non-combat situations.
Myth and legend are rife with named weapons, as many have said. It seems likely that many people named their weapons in imitation of their mythic heroes. I can’t think of any real historic figures who we have records of they themselves calling their weapons by a specific name, though.
Some other mythic weapons and armor not mentioned yet…
Galahad - Galatine
Siegfried - Notung (in Der Ring des Nibelungen)
Beowulf - Hrunting
Frithiof - Angurvadal
non-swords
Odin - Gungnir (spear)
Thor - Mjollnir (hammer)
Athena - Aegis (shield)
Part of the answer depends on the culture. The Romans rarely had names for their weapons, as they had a very business-like approach to warfare. Caesar and some other great generals would be the exceptions, and you can be sure that some grunt or another named his gladius “ol’ Betsia” or something.
The Norse, on the other hand, were all about personal glory when it came to battle. They named their swords, their spears, their axes, and so forth. Some surviving artifacts have their names carved into them.
“Joyeuse” is displayed at the Louvre museum. It was a ceremonial sword used during the sacre of french kings. However it’s not the real thing (it actually dates back from the XI°-XIII° century…can’t remember when exactly). So, I don’t know if Charlemagne actually had a sword called “Joyeuse”, or if only the legends said so and someone decided someday that this sword was actually the legendary “Joyeuse”.
Here’s a picture of the so-called “Joyeuse”
I had a sword once named “Charlene.”
There were many swords like it, but that one was mine.
Boy, am I embarrassed. When fencing I decided to name my sword for the heck of it. Apparently I commited the gross indiscretion of giving it a name that was more than one word. I don’t know how I’ll make it up to my sabre… scarred for life.
Some pretty lame names in there, IMHO. Wasn’t there a “Book of Sword Names” to chose from?
Well, a lot of people name their swords for the wrong reason. After Love Story came out a whole generation of swords were named Jennifer. Now it seems that half the swords I come across are named Morgan or Brittany.
Here’s a page with a number of Japanese swords, many of which have individual names.
Genseric, I’m curious where you learned that swords did not last very long. A few references I just pulled off my bookcase suggest that most well-made swords lasted for generations (here’s an online cite, first paragraph). I’m not saying you’re wrong, I’m just interested in where you read about the historical poor durability of swords.
I would figure a swords lifespan depended very heavily on two things- material, and usage. Metals that are a bit on the soft side could probably have a sword that gets easily dulled or dented, and swords too hard could probably accidentally snap in some circumstances. With usage, I’m sure there are appropriate methods of wielding a sword to try and minimize denting and breakage. So a good quality sword wielded well could probably see lots of combat, I’d think.
Naming a sword Brittany? [irked mode on] Apart from her singing and her breasts what offensive capacity does she have? [irked mode off]. I could see naming a camera or a paintbrush, or even a car… Clearly I do not understand the rationale at work. I probably would have flunked out of military school, too.
Hopefully somebody who knows metal repair will chime in, but it seems that the more advanced swords, with tempering and/or the “laminating” technique that went into Japanese swords, would not stand up to extensive repair. Isn’t tempering ruined by reheating?
In regard to Aragorn’s sword in LOTR, was Tolkien on the beam with reforging? If it was such a special sword, wouldn’t it take someone with the skill of the original maker to remake it?
A few weapons spring to mind.
Longinus- The spear that pierced the side of Christ at Golgotha. Leaders that have wielded it are said to be invincible. The spear is said to be on display today at a museum somewhere in Europe–but the location escaped me at the moment. Adolf Hitler wanted to take the Spear by force, but was defeated beforehand. U.S. General Patton was supposedly terrified that Hitler might retrieve it.
Masamune- A class of swords made by Goro Nyudo in 13th Century Japan. Some of these swords still exist today and are worth a fortune. Masamune is the most famous sword in Japan, and they are said to be Godly.
Murasame- Don’t know a whole lot about these kinds of swords. But it’s usually compared with the Masamune.
The neat thing about Masamune and Murasame is that one recognized as ‘cursed’, and the other isn’t. If I recall correctly–the story goes that if a Murasame were placed in a river, the leaves flowing down the river would be drawn towards the sword and sliced apart. The Masamune, on the other hand, would repel the leaves and let them go safely down the waters.
The Masamune, therefore, is said to be more powerful because of it’s ability to repel violence.
Well, there were some good articles on this subject at The Historical Armed Combat Association’s website http://www.thehaca.com Unfortunately, the site seems to be down for now.
As I understand it, it is likely that many swords probably did last a long while, but they were not used frequently in combat. In the high middle ages (1300-1500) most combat was done charging on horseback with couched lance. Then the sword was used to mop up. When used against an unarmored opponent, of course, a well made sword will last a good while, although a poor sword could be damaged by striking bone. A sword was virtually useless against a fully armored knight, prepared to defend himself. You would basically have to beat him senseless before a killing blow could be delivered. Hitting a sword against steel armor over and over again cannot be good for it, even striking with the flat of the blade. That’s why weapons like battleaxes and warhammers became popular for actual combat, although the sword was still carried for a status symbol, and for cutting down the rabble. Prior to the development of full armor, a shield was carried to block sword blows. As swordmaking had not progressed to the point it was to reach in the later middle-ages, striking a wooden shield repeatedly, and especially hitting the rim or the boss, would almost certainly notch the blade, which could be roughly repaired by grinding, but only a few times, before the sword was useless.
That’s my take on it, but I could be wrong, I’m not an expert in medieval history, it’s just an interest of mine.
Genseric, IIRC you didn’t even need plate mail to defend against sword blows, chain mail would work well. It was lighter, and backed with leather padding, would turn a lethal blow into a bruise or maybe a broken bone. Warhammers and maces could crush/smash chainmail (or they worked primarily through impact and not cutting) and thus plate mail came into use to protect against this. But the plate mail wasn’t as good at stopping bullets…
Although I have no idea about the actuality of naming them, two things come to mind:
Early on in the Iron Age, steel was extremely valuable, often costing more than gold, simply because of the tremendous amount of work, time and effort that went into simply making iron into steel, to say nothing of making a workable weapon out of it.
Swords and other weapons recovered from the battlefield were routinely melted down and/or reforged as metallurgy improved. An old iron sword, although perhaps a hundred years old or more, was viewed as more valuable melted down and converted to steel to make a better blade.
Still later, “soft” steels would be used as raw materials to make better or harder steels. And so on.
Second, steel is, after all, steel. Rust took a heavy toll on the metal, especially when blood was allowed to sit on it for any length of time, and various humid climes didn’t help.
And yes, while a sword of a uniform material can be fairly easily rewelded and reshaped by a competent 'smith, a laminated-steel blade such as a Japanese katana, is essentially destroyed when broken. The metal can be melted down and recast/reforged, but the original blade can’t be welded back together.
Well, actually, yes, it CAN, but the very laminations, the aspect that gives the blade it’s strength (a very hard steel edge, less hard, more springy “sides” and a soft, resilient back ‘spine’) can’t be restored by hammer-welding the pieces back together. Ya gotta start from scratch.