Like this Samurai one or this Sir William Marshall sword from Swords of Honor.
Are these blades to be reckoned with or would “real” battle swords be more formidable?
Define “real swords”.
Some of those re-creation swords are actually pretty nasty weaponry. And most of them are better steel than the cutlery used at the battles of Hastings, or Crecy, or any number of other historical donnybrooks.
Some of those newer pieces, though, you’d want to sharpen up first.
I wouldn’t want to go into battle with something made by the Franklin Mint but there are a lot of real bladmakers out there who makes swords superior to the best of the past and even the secret of Damacus blades has been cracked.
As long as we’re talking about modern high carbon forged steel and not cheap stainless wallhangers I’d say many are close to or equal to their historical counterparts. The main problem with alot of modern recreations is that they are pretty heavy compared with the examples they’re modeled on. Antique swords are surprisingly light and that translates to them being very fast in a scrap. I’ve held modern swords that are beautiful to look at, and have impressively forged blades likely to stand up to any reasonable abuse you could throw at it but they could top the scales at 5 or 6 pounds. From what I understand a comparable antique sword would typically weigh about half that. Swords came in alot of shapes and sizes to do various things, it’s hard to generalize about things like this really.
I don’t have my book handy, but Ewart Oakeshott agrees with lokij. Most people have this idea that Medieval swords were 10 lb. monsters.
It’s just not true.
While in some cases the blades may be made from a better quality steel (though doubtful, in most cases… modern blades on swords tend to be too brittle, or not ‘bendy’ enough), in my opinion the tangs are sub-par.
I don’t know how many “Genuine Katana” handles I’ve snapped just practicing draw-cuts. And I’ve snapped 2 “Medieval style” sword handles off from cutting wooden dowels.
In the middle ages, a sword was a form of livlihood. The life of the person wielding it really depended on the quality of the blade and it’s construction. Hence, they were pretty solidly built. These days, even the best replica piece will usually not be as reliably built.
Best bet? Make your own. That’s my plan, some time down the road.
I have a few questions of my own re: swords. I used to (briefly) date this guy who was a big sword collector. He was constantly blowing hundreds of dollars a pop on some monstrous ‘Historical Recreation’ thing. They were all mounted on the wall in their little metal holders.
Now, he didn’t know the first thing about actual sword use, of any time period or any style. He knew nothing but the barest about their use throughout history, and he never once took these things down from the wall. Okay. Most people who collect stamps would never stick them on a letter, either. But here’s the thing- he was always going on about how ‘historically accurate’ these things were, and talking about how they could slice through this or that, or what have you.
But really, it just didn’t look like it to me. He liked those big medieval swords, like Scottish claymores and such, and those things weighed about 600 lbs. each. I can’t imagine actually fighting someone with one. And while some had fairly sharp edges, it sees to me that if you do any of the sword-fighting you see in movies, where you clash a sword edge on someone’s else’s sword edge, you’re gonna end up with a notched, dented sword. Is this true? Also, big medieval swords, despite the sharp edge don’t look like cutting weapons to me- they look more like big metal clubs that are better at bashing people over the head than removing limbs. Again- I am right, or way off base?
Also, Japanese-style kitana blades: now these things look like cutting weapons. And they look pretty light and flexible. Is this true?
And yet another question for people in the know about sword-fighting. Y’know how in the movies, when you see people sword fight, they’re always spinning around? This seems like a really dumb idea to me. While you’re busy looking suave the guy you’re fighting can take this opportunity to hit you in the back of the head with his sword. Also, sweaty hands- what kind of grip would prevent a sword from inadvertantly flying out of your hand at a crucial moment?
wood grips. or grips wrapped in a fabric. eel-skin was pretty popular in Japan, from what I recall.
As for the weight… yes, as has been mentioned before, real swords, used to fight in the medieval period were usually fairly light. The problem that a lot of folks have is that they are basing their idea of swords off of the ceremonial swords that are used for things such as knighting ceremonies and such. Those bad boys can be found sometimes with pounds and pounds of jewels, filigree, and other bells and whistles.
A proper sword blade should bend, and spring back to true when released. It should be light, and maintain a decent edge. Medieval swords that have been unearthed show signs of a lot of sharpening to remove those dings and such that you had mentioned.
As for spinning and such, yes a lot of it is hooey, Hollywood making it look pretty. But at the same time, there are existant copeis of Medieval and renaisance books on fencing and fighting that tell folks to do things such as that… but those books usually refer to a stylized form of combat that would be used in Tournaments.
I’d guess that the steel in modern swords is as good, or better than that in medieval swords just because we know a lot more about metallurgy and alloys, and we have the industrial processes to make sure that the metal is consistent. But very few of the swords made today are actually constructed with the notion that someone’s life is going to be depending on it. Let’s suppose that all our guns stopped working over night and the Pentagon had to start up a crash program to develop the M1-broadsword – I’m pretty sure you’d end up with something far superior to an medieval blade.
As a corollary question -- are there any alloys, titanium or exotic ceramics, that would be better choices for swords than steel?Oh the two swords linked in the OP I would go with the katana. Neither is a paticularily good one however. I would second to suggestiong to save up and have one custom made. That way you get just what you want.
ratty, Claymores were just big sharp clubs. They were to big to fence with so they just bashed people with them. Japanese swords are still considered to be one of the best swords ever created. They are fast, sharp and flexible. They would be my personal choice for a sword fight. Spinning looks good, thats about it. Occasionally you could throw one in, but those occasions are few. Its usually a disadvatage because you expose your back to your opponent.
Old swords were lighter, but new ones from what I’ve heard are tougher and hold edges better. This however makes them heavier. Personally I’d take a lighter sword.
As a corollary question – are there any alloys, titanium or exotic ceramics, that would be better choices for swords than steel?
Steel alloys still give you the best bang for your buck. Titanium won’t hold an edge as well as good ole steel will. Ceramics will crack and are expensive. IIRC the best blades are made through a old japanese recipe (can’t recall the name of it, but its a T word…) which was made of most iron, carbon and silicon with some titanium, magnesium and other nice things thrown in.
Tamahagane, hi! 
Tamahagane steel is composed of the old remnants of a meteor that struck Japan long ago IIRC.
The blacksmiths look for it on the beach by trolling with magnets.
Outside of a blacksmiths shop in japan you are likely to see a quantity of old anchor chain. The anchor chain is wrought iron, and has a quality similar to taffy, for example.
The Tamahagane has a quality much more like glass, hard and sharp, yet brittle.
Toolmaking (swords too) laminates these disparate elements, taking advantage of the unique properties of each.
For swords the very hard yet brittle Tamahagane is placed between the resiliant wrought iron, much like the meat in a sandwich. This means that the really hard, sharp part is presented at the edge, while the shock absorbing qualities of the iron protect the same.
Tamahagane, hi!
Tamahagane steel is composed of the old remnants of a meteor that struck Japan long ago IIRC.
The blacksmiths look for it on the beach by trolling with magnets.
Outside of a blacksmiths shop in japan you are likely to see a quantity of old anchor chain. The anchor chain is wrought iron, and has a quality similar to taffy, for example.
The Tamahagane has a quality much more like glass, hard and sharp, yet brittle.
Toolmaking (swords too) laminates these disparate elements, taking advantage of the unique properties of each.
For swords the very hard yet brittle Tamahagane is placed between the resiliant wrought iron, much like the meat in a sandwich. This means that the really hard, sharp part is presented at the edge, while the shock absorbing qualities of the iron protect the same.
On Claymores -
Used with a scything type action, they can be deadly “sweepers” - For knocking folks in their saddles, for doing a nasty bit of damage to horses legs - you get the picture.
Should weigh in at around the 6 - 7 lbs mark (I think that conversion is correct. I’m converting from 2.9 kg in any case.)
For information on swords in general, try the discussion boards on Sword Forum International (I hope I’ve got the link correct!) -
They have a nice little board in there just for sword “lemons” - the gaudiest of the gaudy… 
Most historical “recreations” are junk, pure and simple. There are a handful of fundamental problems that render them useless in real battle.
The blades are usually of exceedingly poor quality. The ever-famous and ever-dangerous Museum Replicas, Inc. fits its blades with lifeless pieces of cardboard manufactured by Windlass Steels, out of India and Pakistan. Take these “weapons” off the wall and you are taking your life in your hands, and not in a good way. The blades are pieces of unmitigated junk.
On the other hand, blades produced by Del Tin Armi Antiche can be sharpened up, will hold an edge, and will endure a lifetime of hard training.
To take on some of ratty’s questions:
Yes and no. You certainly can notch a blade, which is why the edges require frequent grinding and sharpening. A notch is a weakness that can compromise the entire blade. On the other hand, the kind of blocking that is typical of modern films is hideously wrong. With a heavy weapon it is even more essential to parry rather than block, which involves redirection of the force of the blow rather than complete opposition. Opposition of an attack with leverage and power could leave the blocker stunned or could even temporarily incapacitate his wrists and elbows.
Yes, you are way off base. Take a loaf of stiff bread and a heavy bread knife. You have two ways to cut the bread. Either you can push with the knife forcefully or you can draw the knife on top of the bread. If you push the knife, you will end up with a mess and inadequately cut bread. Draw the knife carefully and with technique and a clean, swift cut results.
Precisely the same phenomenon is true with edged weapons. Power and leverage comes not from bringing the sword down in a club-like manner, but from leverage in the forearms, elbows, and wrists. The sword is a much better cutting weapon than a hacking weapon.
Light, yes. Flexible, I don’t know. Western swordsmanship is more my area of expertise, so I will leave eastern to others to elaborate on.
Movie fighting and real technique are like masturbation to sex. The first feels good and gets the job done when there is no opposition, but there is simply no substitute for the real thing.
The bottom line is, even to the most casual observer, if it looks stupid, it probably is stupid.
I never pick up one of my weapons without gloves. If gloves or gauntlets are unavailable, most hilts are either wrapped in leather or steel, which provides some traction. Gloves are your best bet, though. Lambskin or suede for me, please.
A warning about Sword Forum International and NetSword. There are spectacular gobs of ignorance floating about those sites. Their adherents tend to be, and I mean no offense to anyone on the boards, armchair swordsmen, SCAdians with no ancient language skills, and HACA-philes who couldn’t test swing a Louisville. Their articles or commentaries are not gospel.