The term 'Broadsword' in itself is a misnomer/anachronism when applied to swords of the Medieval period. The term is an invention of Victorian schollars and fencers who used it to distinguish between their relatively slender blades and those of earlier eras.

: I’m sure Tolkien gave his heroes straight swords because the swords in British history were all straight till something like the early modern period.

Quite a reasonable deduction.:)

: I’ve missed a lot of the mediaevalism debate – and there’s too much of it to plough through now! – but I would think giving their opponents curved ones was more to evoke the Saracen foe of the Crusader knights, than the Ottoman Turks who threatened the rest of Europe a little later on. Whatever the influence, I bet CS Lewis was using basically the same one for his evil Calorman empire. Does any stuff on the Inklings cast any further light?

:
: To pretty much restate what Martin Read said, both straight-bladed and curved swords can cut with the edge of the blade. Against a lightly- or unarmoured target they will do more damage with a stroke that cuts on impact and then slices through with more of the blade. Straight blades can certainly do this, but you can pull through better with a curved blade.
: Against an armoured target you want to concentrate all your strength into a hack at that single point of impact, since if this doesn’t actually bite, any slicing effort will be wasted. (Incidentally, a lot of TV and film stunt fights use this sort of move – especially the slice across the belly – precisely because it’s safe!)
: I can’t imagine that curved blades would be any better in close-quarters than straight ones – without room to get in a good swing they’d surely have less chance than ever of wounding a target wearing any decent sort of protection.

I too do not think curved blades would be any better than straight blades at close in fighting. There are no end of thechniques that are documented in historical sword manuals for fighting close in with straight bladed swords.

: I don’t think a straight blade is necessarily any better for hacking blows than a curved one. Nor are they preferred just for having a point to thrust with, since broadswords, claymores etc. are too heavy to thrust effectively with (and often weren’t even that sharp on the end!). I suspect straight blades are probably just more intuitive to use. If curved swords are harder to parry against, they must also be less good for parrying in self-defence.

Most historical manuals, (such as I-33 from the 1290s depicting sword and shield, Fiore dei Liberi's 'Flos Duellatorum' from 1410, Talhoffer's Fechtbuch from the mid 15th century and a slew of others, show the thrust is used effectively even with what is commonly termed a 'broadsword' as well as various types of 'claymores' ie swords designed to be used in two hands.

: By the way, I think everyone’s been assuming that you would only have a single-edged sword if it was going to be curved, and that any straight sword ‘might as well’ be double-edged, but this isn’t the only reason. The seax (pron. “sax”; from which the Saxons took their name) and the falchion only have one cutting edge, preferring the blades to be thick-backed for the added force this would put behind a blow. Such weapons are therefore better for unsubtle hacking attacks, at the expense of the option to thrust, and again precluding the sophisticated or genteel swordplay that romances and fairy tales have given all our heroes.

: And finally, to dispel a common myth, a double-edged weapon doesn’t offer any advantage for the backhand or return stroke. Such an attack is incredibly weak anyway, and people just naturally turn their wrists. It’s wrong to think this costs any time or requires you to actually shifting your grip on the sword’s hilt.

Actually the double edged weapon does offer some advantage. The back or false-edge can be used with techniques that are termed 'winden' in the Schools of Defence in (what later became) Germany. These are close range attacks with when the swords are bound up on each other and involve winding your sword about your opponents (difficult to describe in words) and making cuts with the false edge and true edge as well as thrusts. Too even in the later schools of defence in the renaissance there were false edge cuts called strammozone (IIRC) granted these were generally more harassing and annoying than deadly but such techniques are historically documented. (Of course this is also not really the backhand or return stroke, as you are refering to above, which as you say is weak if you attempt to apply it with the false edge under most circumstances).

: I’d love to hear from someone with a reenactor’s experience of scimitars, tulwars, or the like.

: Cheers everyone!

: Osric
: P-)