Looking at wikipedia for ecample we see long sword as a sword used between the 13 and 15 100's measuring between 120-150cm designed primarily to be used 2 handed. This is the sword in medieval fighting manuals and used by the school of western martail arts for example. Is this the feeling most epopele have for what is meant by a long sword in the game?

Some people are thimking of it as a cavalry sword.... which would be a sword that touches the ground if held at ones side pointing the tip down... probably 90-100 cm dependign on the heigth of the user....

Persanally I was thinking of it as somewhere in between the two.... i was thinking around 100-120cm with a long handle with space for 3 fists, comfortable in one hand or in two witha fists distance between hands....

what do people think?

I'm thinking bastard sword? Hand-and-a-half?

Searching for bastard sword turns-up your previously quoted Wikipedia page on longsword:

I'm guessing you're on the right track - larger than a normal sword but smaller than a true 2-hander. Maybe Narsil/Anduril? It was never clear to me whether Aragon's blade was a 2-hander or hand-and-a-half.

I too had the "épée bâtarde" in mind, strongly influenced by the images of John Howe for the sword of such characters as Aragorn, Gandalf, the Witch-King, Turgon etc.

I admit that 120-150cm is a bit longer than what I had in mind, which was more around 40-45 in or 100-110 cm.

[edit] 100-120cm is the length given by the Wikipedia entry for the longsword, for what it's worth...

I believe they said 100-120 cm blade length and 120-150 overall length, I was confused myself once I saw the second listing elsewhere on the same page and then figured out the lower one does not include the handle... which conformed to what i expected to find based on my limited expertise on medieval swords.

For those interested in how historical long swords were used here's a a utube video that I liked a lot.

Here's another one with costumes and at a lower speed so you can better understand what they are doing

Yeah, total lengths of about 120-135 cm are longswords. (Oakshott XIII and XIIIa)

Here's a beauty (the Tinker Pearce):

http://tinkerswords.com/CASpage.html

Given the |TOR stated attempt to return the game to the early medieval period the Prof loved. Where typical sword lengths are ~90cm with blade around 75cm I had rather imagined the Long swords of the period as more like the transitional forms of 11th and 12th century with blade lengths at the top end around 89cm adding a hilt and pomel gives about 110cm.
i love John Howes art work and film concepts buthis period in the high Meiddle ages and that is not what is envisioned by Tolien who in his Letters refers explicitly to the Bayeux Tapestry for the look of the Rohirim (one of his few visual clues)

Just curious, but would you guys not also agree that it kind of depends on the culture?

I imagine, for example, that the Elven Smiths of Eregion and the Numenoreans would have achieved a much higher level of metallurgy and weaponcrafting, and thus would have been able to make late middle-ages and renaissance level weapons like hand-and-a-halfers and true greatswords.

the area of Wilderland and Eriador in general to me represents areas that are either newer in their respective civilizations (Wilderland) or are languishing in a sort of Dark Ages (Eriador with the broken realm of Arnor) and as such their crafting and metallurgy would have devolved to dark-ages level technology.

Given that the "Longsword" of the book is statted to be able to be used with 2 hands, I see no choice really but to interpret that as a hand-and-a-half sword, 100-120 cm (maybe erring on the "short side" of that to fit the darker-age feel that you're looking for)

Indeed, I would imagine a blade of Gondolin to be more "advanced" than your typical northman's sword, and would be inclined to consider most of them as longswords.

I do think that with the help of dwarven smith, Dalish craftsmen are nevertheless capable of producing decent longswords.

Regardless of technology, one thing remains clear for me however; longswords seem to be designed for two-handed wielding, whereas the typical 10th century saxon/danish sword was not. For me this is more than a simple codification of the game; the longsword is a different weapon from the (regular) sword.

I don't believe that TOR's long swords are claymore like swords (150-180 cm), but longswords of the medieval period (100-110 cm).


Claymore


Longsword


Norman longsword


Sword in TOR book




But, of course, it is only my belief

Funny the text in the book mentions that only some cultures would have the ability to forge long swords, I remember them citing elves, dwarves and men of the west. i suppose the fact that dwarves can forge them hints that they should not be so long that dwarves could not use them. The Ironic thing is that the only culture that can start of skilled with the long sword is Bardings (not elves or dwarves) since they have the (swords) cultural skill encompassing all swords. Clearly the silvan elves of mirkwood are not the elves they are referencing. The dwarves are another matter entirely.

Based on the pictures posted from the adventurer's book, which I'd sort of lost sight of I'd really lean towards a blade about 100-110cm, or 40-44 inches.... with a handle just large enough to wield it in two hands comfortably, one resting just under the guard, and the other resting on the pommel with as fists distance between the two... or else when used with a mail mitten the blade itself could easily be held for a wide grip "half swording". For reference to half swording, or the practice of holding the blade of one's own sword see
Fiore Dei Liberi's Flos Duellatorum "The Flower of Battle", c. 1410

this as mentioned before would be a transitional blade from the 13th or 14th century (1200's to 1300's) since Fiore lived and fought throughout the latter part of the 1300's before he retired and wrote his book....

Treadwell summarized it well by referring to Tolkien's comment about the Bayeux Tapestry in a letter to a fan. Tolkien used it as a simplistic explanation concerning their armor (not weapons), but it's a good analogy.

The prof studied the Early Medieval Period (Beowulf, et al), so it's likely that he envisioned the earlier blades. That said, however, it's your game, & if any of you want to incorporate blades from say, the Hundred Years War, why not?

For myself (and I'm a historian, BTW), I prefer to write mostly canon & stick with the earlier periods - ToR captures it well, IMHO

This:

+1

I'm a little bit of a history buff as well, and like you would perfer to foster a dark ages feel cira 600-800AD or even earlier liek an anceint world feel to be honest... but the sword IS supposed to be useable (and more effective) in two hands... ultimately any decision I come to has to make sense to my players as well.... I feel that treating it as a 100-110 cm total sword length with a slightly enlonged hilt is the least I could do... anyway I'd rather not think of it as a 100 year war sword but as a dwarven/elven/numenorian sword resembling the dimensions of a hundred years war sword.... anyway I think I'm satisfied I just wanted to feel out the comunity, make sure I wasn't alone in my feeling that the historical long sword did not make sense....

Yeah! From now on all longswords in my campaigns are katanas!


...



Just joking.

But what is canon in this case?

I can understand that as far as Northmen as concerned (which includes most of TOR's present setting), culture and technology is rather primitive and early medieval-esque.

But it is mentioned that Dwarves once had a better knowledge of metallurgy, and we're dealing like blades like Narsil and Glamdring that are literally thousands of years old; that's a good step up from early medieval craftsmanship.

Even during the third age, we have populations in Gondor and Eriador that are well beyond that of northern Europe during the era of William the Conqueror, suggesting that not all is strictly medieval.

As for what ToR captures; I don't have my books with me atm, but I recall that the description of longsword states that few have the skills to craft such weapon, which can refer to a more advance craftsmanship. In a work that makes brief mentions to vambrace, vest with gold buttons, postal services, elves and dwarves living for thousand of years, some of which have seen three ages of the world; I sometimes wonder as to what is historically accurate for ToR, and to what degree it can or cannot diverge.

Glorfindel, you raise a good point about the potential for divergence from canon. I seem to recall that you raised this point before in a previous thread.

It's a tough call, because we can make a case for a variety of weaponry & periods. I eagerly anticipate their future releases, hoping that they'll add additional weapons from time-to-time.

We've mostly discussed the core cultures in the boxed set but imagine the fun with some of the other cultures - Dunlendings, Lossoth, you name it.

For example, Frodo observed (from the Seat of Seeing) some of the Easterlings march toward Mordor: ...and out of the East Men were moving endlessly: swordsmen, spearmen, bowmen upon horses, chariots of chieftains and laden wains...

That's quite an image filled with variety.

While at the Pelennor Fields: ...Then he [the Southron chieftain] was filled with a red wrath and shouted aloud, and displaying his standard, black serpent upon scarlet, he came against the white horse and the green with great press of men; and the drawing of the scimitars of the Southrons was like a glitter of stars...

Tolkien evidently envisioned at least some of the Haradrim as stereotypical Moors (as known in his day - we know they wielded different weapons at different times).

I'd love to hear if anyone writes an adventure for any of these cultures. Middle-earth is just prehistoric earth (sorta), so an African or Asian adventure using ToR could be a blast. I'm considering writing up something, if I ever get any time

I hope it didn't come as antagonistic.

I think that my point is simply that it is difficult not to be anachronistic with Tolkien because, well, it's not a true analogy of our own history.

Still there are parallels hinted by the professor himself (such as the tapisseries de Bayeux), and we can find a close historical analogue for the Northmen culture(s). But unlike 10th-11th century Europe, there are other players. Elves and dwarves are not mythological figures, they are neighbours. The Woodland Elves live a rustic life by choice, but we can imagine that the art/science/craft of the High Elves of the first and second age was greater than that of the Northmen's culture by the end of the third age. Thes Elves did leave artifacts behind, which can inspire new technique/technologies. Even in T.A. 2946 the dwarves of Erebor are masterful smith with techniques and knowledge of metallurgy we can imagine to be superior to that of Northmen craftsmen. In Dale, these dwarven smith are training young human craftsmen.

I vaguely remember Tolkien comparing Gondor with Italy, and while I don't want to see "high Gondor" as the roman empire, we can imagine it had a roman-like mastery of military and civil engineering, some of which must still be preserved today in the libraries of Minas Tirith. The Shire seems to portray features that will not be seen before the modern era, after the renaissance even.

That's why I find direct analogy to our history a slippery slope when it comes to illustrate the spirit of Middle Earth; Tolkien depicted a world in which different cultures lived at different stages of our own history over several millenniums. So if the Tapisseries de Bayeux is a good place to start, I wouldn't restrain to that document for fear of missing out on Tolkien's spirit.

No, never antagonistic Glorfindel

You add insightful posts & your comments about the Gondorians & the Romans have me thinking (always a dangerous prospect) about writing something up in that regard.

BTW, I also agree about the Dwarves & Elves & their crafts, metallurgy, for example. Tolkien repeatedly referred to their lost art, & many of them lamented what they'd lost, through war, betrayal, or time.

I don't think Tolkien intended a specific Oakeshott-like weapon category when he wrote "long sword". I think he meant a sword that was long. And if he thought long swords were more impressive or heroic or evocative than -- well, kinda normalish swords, then it's no surprise that he used the expression with some frequency. (He never wrote "longsword", of course. ;-))

To my eye, Jon Hodgson's depiction of the long sword has the simple hilt of a one-handed weapon.

But that doesn't mean it doesn't (or couldn't, sometimes) benefit from being held in both hands. In re-enactment with 10th-11th century (Bayeux Tapestry era) swords, a modern guy can easily find his sword-arm tiring and find it beneficial to aid his blows with his other hand, even if it has to just rest on the pommel or cup the main hand -- without needing space on the hilt for a second grip.

In one-to-one duels, as opposed to pitched battlefield situations, it's even reasonable to discard your shield to do this. For which reason I houserule a re-coup of Endurance for discarding a shield along the same lines as the one for casting aside your helmet.

But this has been a good discussion -- and don't you all know your stuff!
I especially like the idea that the swords (of the dwarves, elves or Numenoreans) of a former age could be superior for 'masterwork' metallurgical/smithcrafting reasons -- with the Renown item qualities: Fell, Keen and/or Grievous (etc.). It's great for weaponry to be acknowledged as special without having to be enchanted.
I like the idea that such special blades could be a foot longer than anything you normally see made 'these days'.

BTW, IIRC Isildur himself is described in The Disaster of the Gladden Fields (UT) as wielding a "great sword". Not a "greatsword", but still worthy of further consideration...

Now, who'll offer me a starting price on this unique Second Age articulated plate armour? <ducks>

Cheers,
--Os.

while the illustration suggests a (regular) sword with a longer blade and a rounder pummel that can be held in hand, the description of the item suggest that it can be something more. Actually, I believe this is where my association of longsword/narsil/glamdring comes from the Adventurer's Book.

I don't have my books with me, but if i recall correctly, it says something along the lines of "only superior craftsmen can forge these blades. Ancient blades made by dwarven and elven smiths are often longswords..." or something along those lines.

Edit: So as the description goes, "These wonderful Elven and Dwarven weapons, and the keen blades forged from strange metals by the Men of the West, are often known as longsword."

Should this implies that all longswords are necessarily of elven, dwarven or Numenorean make?

Odd that. That would make all longswords heirlooms.

As dwarves are not adverse to using swords, I've no objection if they begin the game with a longsword, with the requirement it must always be used two handed.

True, but IMO to conform to TOR's 1h/2h vision, a sword needs at least a 24cm - 25cm grip to be used consistently with two hands and not as an impromptu two hander..

Apologies for the mild necro, it's just that I ran across this image recently - Lord Commander Jon Snow

Gotta say this image captures the essence of what I envision as a longsword.