christain
Member
It's the steel on the inside that counts.
Posts: 2,835
|
Post by christain on Feb 22, 2019 20:45:54 GMT
In as simple of a reply as I can make it: The wielder of the sword holds many decisions in hand. The sword is power and pity...vengeance and mercy...light and dark...honor and shame...the difference between strength and weakness. But in all, the sword holds no great promises. Only the arm that bears it can make the final difference.
Sorry if I came off a little 'Jedi-Master-ish' on y'all. I just finished watching 'BraveHeart' and 'Gladiator' back to back. I get a little misty-eyed on those two. (He says whilst applying polish to his Rhinelander.) But, mainly, I just like house guests saying " Damn! You got a lotta steel here!"
|
|
|
Post by markus313 on Feb 22, 2019 20:47:16 GMT
In as simple of a reply as I can make it: The wielder of the sword holds many decisions in hand. The sword is power and pity...vengeance and mercy...light and dark...honor and shame...the difference between strength and weakness. But in all, the sword holds no great promises. Only the arm that bears it can make the final difference.
Sorry if I came off a little 'Jedi-Master-ish' on y'all. I just finished watching 'BraveHeart' and 'Gladiator' back to back. I get a little misty-eyed on those two. (He says whilst applying polish to his Rhinelander.) But, mainly, I just like house guests saying " Damn! You got a lotta steel here!" I dig that explanation.
|
|
|
Post by MOK on Feb 22, 2019 21:15:39 GMT
Personally, I think the first time I grokked, or really even thought about, what it was that was so fascinating about swords - unlike most other toys, allegedly more "creative" and "educational" - was when I read Lord Dunsany's "The Sword of Welleran" in a collection of proto-Sword-&-Sorcery I happened to find at the library.
It's a short story and in the public domain, so you should really go to Project Gutenberg or Wikisource and read it yourself. It's worth it.
|
|
|
Post by howler on Feb 22, 2019 22:17:38 GMT
Romantic, hmhm, swords make you feel more powerful like the ... (mentioned stuff) and that makes you believe the female apes prefer your DNA for reproduction matters. Sometimes it works. Col. George Taylor from Planet Of The Apes: "Take your stinking paws off my DNA you damn dirty female apes".
|
|
Ifrit
Member
More edgy than a double edge sword
Posts: 3,284
|
Post by Ifrit on Feb 22, 2019 23:00:58 GMT
One allure, for myself, is its a giant knife. Knifes rule. Great tools, fun toys, etc. Can do a lot with a good knife. A giant one is just a bit cooler
|
|
stormmaster
Member
I like viking/migration era swords
Posts: 7,647
|
Post by stormmaster on Feb 23, 2019 0:09:41 GMT
swords are just iconic
|
|
|
Post by wlewisiii on Feb 23, 2019 5:53:18 GMT
Djinobi, I understand your thought. But as a member of the classic school of the knight's errant of St. Quixote, I still prefer to take the aristocrats weapon back to him. To follow the Glory Road to where ever one is needed...
For ten years I have been polishing this sword; Its frosty edge has never been put to the test. Now I am holding it and showing it to you, sir: Is there anyone suffering from injustice?
Jia Dao (779-843 CE)
|
|
JakeH
Member
[k4r]
Posts: 77
|
Post by JakeH on Feb 23, 2019 14:56:18 GMT
Swords are, debateably, the first dedicated man-killing weapon. Spears, axes, bows, clubs, knives, slings, all are, or came from, multipurpose items. Yes, I know specialist items like battle axes differ from tool axes, but the broad category of 'axe' subsumes both. Yes, I know about hunting swords, but they were more of a means of shoehorning a prestige item into a niche after the fact.
So, with that in mind, the sword acquires a measure of caché from being a 'pure' weapon.
I also think that, inspite of the modern overstatement that swords are 'just a sidearm' that swords have the singular quality of being "second-best at everything". While there is almost always a better weapon for any tactical scenario that can be imagined, the sword can acquit itself decently (and yes it's all about the skill of the user..) in a broader range of scenarios than can any other weapon. Not to denigrate the other weapons, spears, bows, knives, etc all have their place to shine mightily and no sensible person is saying otherwise.
Combined, and stirred in with several of the other fine points made above, it is difficult to imagine the sword NOT capturing the imagination.
|
|
|
Post by MOK on Feb 23, 2019 15:24:23 GMT
Swords are, debateably, the first dedicated man-killing weapon. No, that'd be the mace. They become distinct from tool hammers quite early in the stone age, and have no realistic use in hunting, either, so yeah... first implement ever designed purely for fighting other people.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Feb 23, 2019 15:37:04 GMT
This kindled my fascination with swords when I was nine years old. This is the catalyst for sure.
|
|
|
Post by markus313 on Feb 23, 2019 15:48:37 GMT
Swords also are more fun to swing and fondle than knives or the heavy stuff. More pleasant to play with than a halberd, for example, and easily carried by the side. More “manly” (physically challenging) to play with than a knife (knives are used to prepare food, primarily). Just like a kid likes to pick up a nice light well-balanced stick of a good length, a man gets to like a good sword. "And moreover, the exercising of weapons puts away aches, griefs, and diseases, it increases strength, and sharpens the wits. It gives a perfect judgement, it expels melancholy, choleric and evil conceits, it keeps a man in breath, perfect health, and long life. It is unto him that has the perfection thereof, a most friendly and comfortable companion when he is alone, having but only his weapon about him. It puts him out of fear, & in the wars and places of most danger, it makes him bold, hardy and valiant." - George Silver, Paradoxes of Defence, 1599.
|
|
|
Post by nerdthenord on Feb 23, 2019 16:02:38 GMT
I agree with what others have said. The sword is a completely dedicated weapon. It’s not best at anything but when designed properly isn’t bad at much either. The sword is really a synergy of different values. It is the high class weapon, as much a symbol of might as wealth, and everything that comes with those. Good and bad together. It also has a geometric beauty to it that might be biologically based. The sword is also iconic in the popular mind. This is because of these aforementioned qualities, and reenforced by them. It’s like a feedback loop. The sword is great so it becomes iconic, and becomes greater still because it is iconic. All these things make swords COOL. From the time of the first swords they have been considered cool. Egyptian pharaohs had ceremonial Khopesh swords. That’s just one old example. About the only culture that I can think of that thought swords were cool but preferred the spear was classical Greece. The Dory spear was considered the king of weapons and the sword more specialized like the Kopis or a side arm like the Xiphos.
|
|
JakeH
Member
[k4r]
Posts: 77
|
Post by JakeH on Feb 23, 2019 17:03:42 GMT
Swords are, debateably, the first dedicated man-killing weapon. No, that'd be the mace. They become distinct from tool hammers quite early in the stone age, and have no realistic use in hunting, either, so yeah... first implement ever designed purely for fighting other people. Hah i was waiting for someone to say mwce. That's why I said debatabley. I would argue that a war hammer is still in the family of hammers (like a battle axe is an axe) and so carriez the same word, but a sword is sufficiently different from a knife that they felt the need to invent a new word for them. You contend the mace is sufficiently different and it does get the new name "mace',(though maybe attested to after the appearance of swords) . So, debatable. Fair enough. So, sure, could be a mace. Im not wedded to the order. The main point is that a sword is a dedicated weapon and THAT matters. Indeed, the mace provides a similar datapoint. Regardless of which was first, let us say both are fully dedicated weapons and we see the mace also survives as a part of royal and parliamentary regalia as well as the ubiquitous marching-band leader's implement. Dedicated weapons are categorically different.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Feb 23, 2019 17:16:20 GMT
As an addendum to my rather limited post in this thread, I would add that I often think about swords within the context of legends. Think about the legend of the sword that was broken. It could be the sword of Conan's father, or the sword Sigmund, the sword of Elendil, and even the lightsaber of Anakin Skywalker. These weapons all have a few common qualities: they are supernatural in origin and strength, they are wielded by heroes of divine blood, they are all broken, and they are all "reforged" or reclaimed by their own sons. These weapons are gifts from a divine source. Sigmund's sword formerly belonged to Odin, whose line of mortal children inherit its strength. When it is broken, the shards are reforged by his son, Sigurd. Narsil, the sword of Elendil, was forged by the Dwarf smith, Telchar (not an elf!). It was passed down through the generations after it was broken until Aragorn was given the reforged weapon, Anduril. The lightsaber of Anakin Skywalker is rather unique. His weapon is not broken so much as HE is. His son doesn't repair or redeem the sword, he repairs his father. These legends reveal that swords ARE supernatural. They are divine, and like the men who wield them, they are fragile, but they can be repaired. Swords, I think, are analogous to what it means to be human.
Or to put it another way: What is the riddle of steel?
|
|
|
Post by AndiTheBarvarian on Feb 23, 2019 17:39:53 GMT
Chimpanzees use big branches for beating on the ground to impress others, they make sticks for fishing for honey and use stones for cracking nuts. I guess an early hominid combined all three ideas to make a fighting stick. More reach than a stone in the hand. First "sword". Can we say the sword is what made us humans?
|
|
|
Post by MOK on Feb 23, 2019 18:26:26 GMT
No, that'd be the mace. They become distinct from tool hammers quite early in the stone age, and have no realistic use in hunting, either, so yeah... first implement ever designed purely for fighting other people. Hah i was waiting for someone to say mwce. That's why I said debatabley. I would argue that a war hammer is still in the family of hammers (like a battle axe is an axe) and so carriez the same word, but a sword is sufficiently different from a knife that they felt the need to invent a new word for them. You contend the mace is sufficiently different and it does get the new name "mace',(though maybe attested to after the appearance of swords) . So, debatable. Fair enough. So, sure, could be a mace. Im not wedded to the order. The main point is that a sword is a dedicated weapon and THAT matters. Indeed, the mace provides a similar datapoint. Regardless of which was first, let us say both are fully dedicated weapons and we see the mace also survives as a part of royal and parliamentary regalia as well as the ubiquitous marching-band leader's implement. Dedicated weapons are categorically different. Sure. However, I do have to point out that words like "mace" and "hammer" are of course very, very much later inventions than the things they refer to today, and were definitely not used by the people who invented these implements. Even as late as the late Medieval times, the word "hammer" actually referred to the spike or pick-blade of a warhammer; the blunt face that we call a hammerhead was called a "poll", and the percussive tool that we now call a hammer was a "mallet" (diminutive form of "maul", i.e. what we now call a sledgehammer). The meaning and use of the words has changed drastically, so that their current state is no indication at all of the morphological history or relationships of the things they signify.
|
|
|
Post by markus313 on Feb 23, 2019 18:56:29 GMT
Chimpanzees use big branches for beating on the ground to impress others, they make sticks for fishing for honey and use stones for cracking nuts. I guess an early hominid combined all three ideas to make a fighting stick. More reach than a stone in the hand. First "sword". Can we say the sword is what made us humans? Tools of conflict communication. Swords are very sophisticated “sticks”, but still much more authentic than nukes (and also more so than guns), so one feels more bonded (on a physical and sub-conscious level, perhaps even genetically).
|
|
|
Post by RaylonTheDemented on Feb 23, 2019 20:12:51 GMT
While I agree with a lot of what have been said before by more articulated people than me (this is really an interesting read), no one mentioned what is at the back of the mind of most of us I'm sure.
Phallic symbol.
I do not necessarily agree with it, though I'm sure a lot of women would find this amusing.
o7
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Feb 23, 2019 21:09:59 GMT
While I agree with a lot of what have been said before by more articulated people than me (this is really an interesting read), no one mentioned what is at the back of the mind of most of us I'm sure.
Phallic symbol.
I do not necessarily agree with it, though I'm sure a lot of women would find this amusing.
o7
Swords are phallic symbols? To quote Sigmund Freud, uhhh, "DUH!" Seriously, I'm glad you said it. Swords are definitely male, definitely phallic. Although, I have given a couple lectures on swords in literature before, and have provided students with authentic replicas to look at, and despite swords being unequivocally male and phallic, it has been my experience that the women were far more interested in them than my male students.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Feb 23, 2019 21:10:55 GMT
|
|