I’m not an expert, so I don’t know. But it is correct to call one-handed sword a short sword?
It’s a bit confusing bacause it implies something that si shorter than standart sword and one-handed is standart sword.
I think one-handed sword should be called just sword.
a short sword is used in one hand.
a long sword is (mostly) used in two.
Bastard sword is an anachronistic name that got nothing to do with anything.
Bastard sword by one of many definitions has longer blade than short sword but shorter than long sword, but can be held by both hands. That is why they called him bastard.
I presume, that bastard sword was most frequently used in that time, so for me it is standard sword 
I think that one-handed i standart sword because it is older than long sword. And one-handed sword is not really short.
I would call short sword something as long as gladius.
I’d prefer the term arming sword. Short sword makes me think roman gladii and such.
you miss the point. Bastard sword is not a period name. something even your wikitxt also mention…
If you look at the language in the fenching manuals they are for short swords (onehanded use) or for longswords.(two handed use) or messers…
Calling a weapon for “bastard sword” is an anachronism that shouldn’t be in this ´game, if they are serious about make things historically.
The sword we in the game use with both hands should be called a longsword.
The typology we use today is modern and much of it would make no sense to the people back then.
OK, I understand you now, thanks for explanation.
What is your source of information on a two handed sword being called a longsword in the English language? If one does exist then I would be very interested in reading it.
The way I learned the English language, some swords are called broadswords. A shortsword is a sword worthy of being called short, a short one-handed sword. A longsword is a long one-handed sword. I think that calling a two-handed sword a longsword probably came from HEMA people who heard each other call it so and assumed that it was historical, and that the common usage was wrong, and started telling people that “longsword” properly meant a two-handed sword, without actually checking their sources. Maybe they got it originally from translating langeschwert.
It is quite likely the English language did not have a specific word for longswords in the Middle Ages or if it did, the record of the name has not survived. A lot of sword classification tended to be post-Middle Ages, with several cultures just labelling every sword as ‘sword’, regardless of distinct differences. For the Norman French-speaking nobility of England, I imagine they would follow the continental French example and label a sword as an ‘épée’.
Accordingly, the longsword, bastard sword etc. was in many case probably called a simply a ‘sword’. For example, the Italian master-at-arms Fiore in his Il Fior di Battaglia, written in 1410, when describing the sword of a knight used the term Spada which means ‘sword’. However, by the same token we can look at how the sword was used to determine what type of sword it was. In Fiore’s treatise, the spada is used in some plays with one hand and other plays with two hands, suggesting a hand and a half sword (this is a Victorian era term), or a bastard sword.
A medieval exception is 15th Century German convention that a sword used for two-handed techniques was called a ‘langes schwert’ or long sword. This term was used in fencing manuals and as part of titles like ‘Meister des langen Schwertsin’ (Master of the long sword).
Post-Middle Ages, early modern fencing masters began referring back and labelled different types swords but there was distinct lack of consensus re sword terms across Europe and even within a language.
In England, two sources are instructive here.
So yes, it can get rather messy if one is trying to find out what term was used when.
That said, in KCD the setting is the Holy Roman Empire in the 15th Century. So while the term ‘Bastard Sword’ may not be ‘correct’, ‘langes schwert’ or longsword to denote swords used in two-hands appears to have some currency.
Exactly. That is why calling the two handed sword used during this period for a longsword is correct.
(and bastard sword is anachronistic)
So where does the “Greatsword” fit into all of this?
‘Greatswords’ have their heyday from the late 15th Century into the 17th Century. These swords were strictly two-hands only swords and were crowd control weapons which allowed the wielder to take on multiply opponents at once. They were also used against pike formations. The weapon was favoured by professional shock troops and bodyguards. An example of a fencing treatise on the greatsword is Francesco Alfieri’s Lo Spadone written in 1653.
As to naming conventions, in the stated period of their use, different languages gave the sword a specific name: spadone (Italian), montante (Portuguese), zweihänder (German). There is also a Celtic reference to ‘claymores’ but one needs to keep in mind that the Scots later on sometimes used the term ‘claymore’ to refer to their basket-hilted broadswords.
Thanks Swinder36! Good info!
I disagree with your interpretation of Joseph Swetnam’s book. You said that Joseph Swetnam wrote that a long sword was a two-handed sword. Here are some quotes from a transcription.
"Scholler. What be the sixe weapons which you would have me to learne.
Master. The first and two principall weapons are the rapier and dagger, and the staffe, the other fowre are the back sword, the single Rapier, the long sword and dagger, and the short sword and dagger, but with the two former weapons thou maist encounter by skill with any man in the world, the rapier and dagger against any weapon of the same length, at single hand and with staffe against any two handed weapon, as against the welch hooke, two hand sword, the Halberd, Partisan, and Glove, or any other weapon of the like advantage : but provided alwayes thou must be sure armed with skill at those two especially: and with all the rest if thou canst, for then maist thou bee the bolder to encounter with any man at any of the other, if thy enemy can doe with his weapon, which if thou hast no skill in, it will seeme the more fearefull unto thee."
It would make most sense to speak of the long sword and dagger if the long sword was a long single-handed sword, not a two-handed sword. The two handed sword is mentioned separately.
“In describing of this weapon I shall account the time ill spent, yet because Short swords are in use and worne of many that would leave them off if that they knew what an idle weapon it were, I meane to encounter against a long Sword and Dagger, or a long Rapier and Dagger, so small is their Iudgement, but onely this, many of them will say it is a better weapon then any of the two foresaid weapons are, but in my monde they may aswell say that chalke is cheese because they are both white, for I have had much triall and great practice with the short sword, yet could never find, nor never wilbe perswaded but that a Rapier foure foote long or longer, hath such great oddes, that I never meane to arme my selfe with a short sword against it; for in my minde and by experience I speake it, there is small skill to be learned with the short sword to encounter as aforesaid, but onely resolution and courage.”
Here we have “a long Sword and Dagger, or a long Rapier and Dagger”.
“He that is valiant and venturous, runneth in, breaking distance, if hee escape both in his going in, and in his comming out unhurt; for a man skilful, in my minde it is as a man would say chance-medly, for if I have the Rapier and Dagger, I will hazard both games, and against any man that holdeth the short sword to be a better weapon, although that George Giller hath most highly commended that short sword & dagger, yet one Swallow maketh not a Summer, nor two Woodcocks a Winter, if a thousand more were of his opinion, yet without all doubt there is a great deale more danger then at Rapier and Dagger; or he that fighteth with a short sword must adventure in pell mell without feare or wit, but have seldome heard or seene any fight with short sword and dagger, although they be each weaponed alike, but one or both commeth most grievous wounded: my reason is the distance is so narrow that a man can hardly observe it, except thy have been both practioners a long time before hand, for if a man practice continually long sword or long Rapier, yet upon such a Challenge goeth into the field with a short sword, then the daunger is greatest of all: aske Augustin Badger, who speaketh highly in praise and commendation of the short sword, for hee hath tried that weapon in the field so often, and made as many tall fraies as any man that ever I heard of or knew since my time, yet hee will say that he never fought in all his life: but was sore and dangerously hurt.”
Here we have “for if a man practice continually long sword or long Rapier”
"A guard for the short sword and dagger to encounter
against the long Rapier and Dagger, or else the
long sword and Dagger."
"Keepe your sword hilt so high as your head or higher at the point, hanging slope-wayes down-wards a little wide of your left side, looking under your sword arme with both your eyes, and withall all put out your sword hand as far from your body as you can, I meane towards your enemy, and your dagger downe by your side, as if you meant not to use him at all, according to this picture."
Here we have a picture of a long rapier, or else a long sword.
Below is an extract from where it lists the different weapons.
"The two hand Sword.
The Back-sword.
Sword and Dagger.
Sword and Buckler.
Short Sword and Dag- Ger.
The short Sword and Gantlet.
The Bastard Sword, the Which Sword is some- thing shorter then a long Sword, and yet longer then a Short- sword."
Here we have a sword called a two hand sword.
I believe that if the transcription I used is correct, this is a very good case for a two handed sword having been called a “two hand sword”, and for the sword called a “long sword” being a long single-handed sword that can be paired with a dagger, similar to a rapier.
I would like to add to the commentary of George Silver’s works.
"WHEREIN IS PROVED THE TRVE grounds of Fight to be in the ſhort auncient weapons, and that the ſhort Sword hath aduantage of the long Sword or long Rapier. And the weakeneſſe and imperfection of the Rapier-fights diſplayed. Together with an Admonition to the noble, ancient, victorious, valiant, and moſt braue nationof Engliſhmen, to beware of falſe teachers of Defence, and how they forſake their owne naturall fights : with a briefe commendation of the noble ſcience or exerciſing of Armes.
By George Siluer Gentleman.
LONDON,
Printed for Edvvard Blount.
1 5 9 9."
This is at the beginning of his Paradoxes of Defence.
_"The two hand Sword, hath the vantage againſt the Sword and Target, the _
Sword and Buckler, the Sword and Dagger, or Rapier and Poiniard."
This is in the bit where he wrote which weapons had the advantage over which.
From this we can see that to George Silver, the two handed sword had the advantage over one handed swords, and the short sword over the long sword or rapier.
MS Harley 3542 (early to mid 15th century) calls the two handed sword, simply, the two hand sword.
Cotton MS Titus A xxv (15th century?) also calls it a two hand sword.
#PS
The name of this thread is “Short Sword”, so I will say something on the subject. Joseph Swetnam and George Silver’s books use the term “short sword” for a sort of one-handed sword, not one-handed swords in general, which is the common usage in modern English too.
Well, you have done a horrible thing, Treysceusec. Because of you instead of reading Manciolonio’s lovely (and succinctly written) Opera Nova on the train to work, I felt compelled to read the over-blown, verbose writings of Swetnam (once decoded he has some good stuff, but I wish that he would get to the point!). I am also sorry you had to type it out. 
But in all seriousness, I stand corrected re long swords and Swetnam.
As to Silver and short sword, though the tag of ‘short sword’ is anachronistic as far as the 15th Century is concerned, Silver’s definition is instructive. In the first part of his Paradoxes of Defence he lords the short Sword as the ideal weapon in his diatribe against the rapier. In the next part, he goes on to say what length your Sword should be (the implication being it is a short Sword) and sets out a method to measure this ‘perfect length’. As stated earlier, this length corresponds to 34-37 inch blade depending on the height of the fencer (for example, I am not the tallest person so for me it is only 34 inches ). It is instructive because most single-handed medieval swords had a blade length in this range or slightly shorter.
Hence, using the term ‘Shortsword’ in KCD is IMO a sensible categorisation. It nicely differentiates single-handed swords from the ‘hand and half’ swords, labelled longswords, in the game. And seeing as there is evidence of a 15th Century regional classification of the latter sword as a langes schwert or longsword, why not use it?
At the end of the day, if we wanted to be completely and utterly historically accurate with terms (to the best of our knowledge), the shortsword would just be called ‘sword’. I imagine you are quite aware of the debates that rage on sword classification in HEMA scholarship (and on a good many HEMA forums). Frankly, due to the lack of uniformity in terms over time and regionally, lack of surviving sources, and compromises made in the 19th Century sword classification so that swords would fit into tight categorisations, historical sword classification is like a minefield. But a mark of modernity (especially since the Victorian era) is that we have a need to categorise everything. 
In order to make things approachable and convenient to the players (the majority of which likely to not be involved in HEMA), KCD needs an easy to understand system of classification and to me the current system in KCD strikes the right balance between historical accuracy and convenience.
Youtuber I am Shad made a cool video about this topic. So, why is the short short called short sword? To compare it with the long sword.
George Silver and Joseph Swetnam were not Victorian, yet they classified weapons into different types because of their different manners of use. Joseph Swetnam’s book has this:
“Now one thing more unto the vulgar sort concerning the severall sorts of weapons, because unto many it seemeth so strange, that if a Master of Defence should tell them that he can teach thee skill at Fence at twelve severall sorts of weapons, they will straight-way say, that there are not so many, now for their further satisfaction, they shall heare the division of more then twenty sorts of weapons, which Masters of this Noble art of Defence, are, or, else ought to be expert therein, like unto a skilfull Cooke which can of sort of meate make diverse dishes, or like the cunning Physition, who can with a hearbe being diversely compounded, make it serve to divers purposes and uses: to which effect my meaning is. that an expert Master of Defence can of one kinde of weapon make many, as by this sequell following shall appeare, all these weapons have been plaied as in Challenges, here in England at severall times.”
I disagree that KCD needs an easy to understand system of classification for people who are not involved in HEMA. If they have never heard of HEMA before or spoken to people who have, they probably don’t think “long sword” means “two handed sword”, or that “short sword” means one-handed sword, but if this naming scheme is used consistently in KCD then they should soon catch onto it and understand it.
I said above that I did not think KCD needed an easy to understand system for some people, but my meaning is that with the language-learning capacity of the human mind, any system will be easy enough to learn, so the short (one handed) sword / long (one handed) sword system which you favour would not be particularly easy to learn, but easily easy enough to learn.
I disagree with using that particular regional classification because it is from a different language. I understand that the English language is only going to be in the game for the many people who understand it, and that realistically they would not be speaking it in Bohemia, but I would still like respect to be shown to the language. Replacing one part of it with one from another language without a good reason is unnecessary. It would be the same as saying murderaxe instead of pollaxe.
You said that most medieval one handed swords were as long as George Silver’s ideal short sword or shorter, so “short sword” should be a fine name for these swords in KCD, and that’s a fair point. Another point is that George Silver’s ideal two hand sword has a blade just as long, so that two hand sword is not a long sword. Its blade is shorter than a long sword’s.
I’ve watched that video DrFusselpulli linked to, and I agree with the guy in it. Giving different things different names or descriptions is good. If one handed swords were to be named short and long in the 15th century then I’m just imagining that the threshold would be a little different to that of AD 1600. Maybe a 36 inch sword could count as long? I don’t know.
I will now write my own opinion on how one- and two- handed swords should be named in KCD. I disagree with the distinction between short and long swords in KCD being that the short are one-handed, and the long two-handed. This will give the impression that short sword means one-handed sword, and long sword, two-handed sword, failing historical accuracy, without gaining any convenience because it must be learned (albeit without difficulty).
I think that the two-handed swords should just be given a description of their defining feature, their two-handedness. They could just be called two-handed swords. That would certainly be convenient. The historical way of referring to such a thing, “two hand sword”, is basically the same, so this system would strike the right balance between historical accuracy and convenience.
As for the one handed swords, the name “short sword” might then be fine, because without the current distinction, short will no longer be taken to mean one handed. To precisely distinguish them from two handed swords, they could be described as “one handed swords” perhaps, or maybe if you really want to, “arming swords”, although I am not knowledgeable on that term’s origin.
If there is going to be quite a range of blade lengths in KCD, then it might be worth calling some short and some long, to save having to say “short short sword” and “long short sword”.
I know almost nothing of such debates, and have never read about it on any online forum except this.
Well, as we have got past issues of fact and are now dealing with issues of opinion, I shall write this: You have a right to your own opinion, just as you have the right to disagree with other people’s opinions, and they to disagree with yours.
If you feel the need to argue for argument’s sake, ‘to score points’, to try and ‘win’ the debate that is your affair, but do not expect me to participate in such an exercise. Frankly, I have much better things to do with my time then engage in tit for tat arguments over issues which are largely matters of opinion. It is bad enough I feel compelled to write this post.
My goal in participating in this forum is provide people with the benefit of my knowledge and expertise in HEMA. I impart the information honestly and to the best of my ability. But please try to understand that due to the large gaps in our knowledge, many of things in this area are open to considerable interpretation. Between HEMA groups debates of this nature have been occurring for more than two decades. Groups have argued with each other ad nauseaum through scholarship, at conferences, and on online forums. HEMA groups have suffered internal splits, schisms, over differences of interpretation. The history of it all is long and sordid, and I personally know many participants. If you would like to get involved, by all means log on to the Sword Forum, for instance. You may even like to bump this thread: http://www.swordforum.com/forums/showthread.php?107485-Questions-on-styles&p=1161524&highlight=#post1161524
I would suggest, however, bringing such debates to this forum is unnecessary and of very little utility.
P.S. Please stop posting extracts of Silver and/or Swetnam. It is a cruel thing to make people read their sometimes insightful but mainly verbose diatribe.
It is good that your goal on this forum is to inform, and not to try and ‘score points’ and try and ‘win’ debates. That is my attitude too, incidentally, so there was nothing more than a misunderstanding. It is true that I did start giving my own opinions, but I supported them with facts, so I did not go too far past issues of fact. Because Kingdom Come Deliverance is a work of fiction, opinions are relevant. I don’t know much about the history of HEMA, but from what you said it sounds like it can get a bit tribal.
I believe such a debate has a place on this forum, because there is going to be an English language version of the game, and as they seem to strive for accuracy, they may want to accurately use whatever languages they use too. They may have different wants to HEMA practitioners, who may want to show group solidarity by all using the same words, words that set them aside from others, a bit like different social classes speaking in different accents, and how academics use a lot more Greek and Latin, and even give old words new meanings and frown on those ‘uneducated’ who use the original meanings. If that’s what some people are after, then that’s fine, it’s not for me to say how they speak amongst themselves, or to dictate their reasons for such things.
It would make sense to me, so I assume it, that Warhorse don’t want to represent a minority of today’s English population using their own slang, but people back then who used the swords, so it should be fine for me to give people the benefit of my knowledge on the matter. I’ve looked at the names Warhorse has given some armour, and I haven’t seen a mention of “plate mail”. I don’t know if they say “chain mail”.
Sword classification is anachronistic, most originating from 19th century antiquarians.
To most people, a sword was a sword. Most cultures really didn’t differentiate on many weapon designs unless there were remarkable differences. A sword with a basket hilt went by a number of names: Shiavona (Italian for Slavic), mortuary, broadsword, backsword, ect.
Short swords may include (if you only go on length) Seax, Gladius, Xiphos, Baselard, Cinqueda, Dirk, Katzenbalger, Hanger, Wakisashi, Babyut…but there are more things to a blade than mere length.
Sabers, for example: A French cavalry saber has an ornate basket hilt; the Turkish shamshir has a curved, cruciform hilt; the Russian cavalry sablu has a simple hilt that looks like a stirrup; the Mongol saber has a simple circular or oval guard; the Cossack shashka has no guard at all. They are all sabers and placed side by side may even show the gradual evolution of the saber design over the centuries.
In reference to the game and its location, I would not expect a Western European cruciform blade as a short sword but something along the lines of a dussack (from Czech tesák “cleaver; hunting sword”, lit. “fang”), a far simpler weapon.
