[Holbrook]

Most fantasy novels are set in a world where the characters use swords, how come then that many writers do not take the time to even study the basics?

Being a historian, as well as a writer. And a moderator on a forum, which deals with the history of arms and armour it really bugs me!

I have read of swords weighing 10lbs or more and over five feet in length. Ok if you have super human strength or are a gaint, but a normal mortal?

I know fantasy is the suspension of belief, but the best fantasy has its roots firmly in the "real" the "possible"

I think it rests squarely on a writer's shoulders to at least make an effort to understand a little of the "basic" equipment he is outfitting his characters with. I don't mean just throwing in words. I mean at least trying to understand what the word means, and what the weapon your hero is using looks like. What it can and can't do! And more importantly the results of it's use!

Hollyweird is as much to blame in this. films like Highlander, though enjoyable gives the public a false impression of swords.

Beautiful they might be, but then were designed for one purpose, to kill. It is a fact that often historians and collectors struggle to make many people see.

The "cool" aspect that has become attached to weapons trickles through "fantasy" and I find it very hard trying to explain to some "highlander want to be" that no sword can cut through stone! A sword can cut you, you are just flesh and bone, that is what it was designed to do.

So much has been written in "fantasy" concerning arms and armour, that the "fantasy" is believed as the truth, and the truth dismissed.

If I read again in a book about a knight being having to be hoisted up into the saddle I will scream!

Henry V could turn sumersults in his, and could vault onto his horse in it, this was common place. Armour for battle weighed about 60lbs spread over the body, in well fitted, jointed sections. A modern soldier's equipment weighs more!!

Best
Holbrook
In rant mode sorry!!!


[This message has been edited by Holbrook (edited March 23, 2002).]

[Penumbra]

Your criticism is legitimate and I concur. What you are dealing with is a generation of people who have neglected the benefits of research and scholarly erudition because of insufficient training at school. Most teachers today are babysitters, though not all. Whenever you find a writer doing what you proscribe, delving the depths so to speak, you know you have a well educated individual who believes in things like accuracy and historical truth. Too bad there are so many lame writers, but all you can really do is show them otherwise with your own stuff as an example. Then again, you run the risk of their reading, but not comprehending your words.

[Rocketsheep]

Education is simply the soul of a society as it passes from one generation to another. - GK Chesterton

It's a shame the education system isn't taken seriously. Teaching is an important job if you take into account its impact on the future... but who ever thinks about investing in a future generation, we're too busy lining our pockets today.

[JohnH]

****************************

[Eventine]

Holbrook, have you read Ash by Mary Gentle?
To my uneducated eyeit seemed very well researched. Was it?

[Holbrook]

Ash, yes!

Also K.J. Parker's fencer Trilogy, though I don't like his magic system.

Janny Wurt's Daughter of the Empire series with Raymond. E. Feist and most of her wars of Light and shadows.

Though the fight at the beginning of Perils's Gate bugged me. If you are fighting with a rapier and main gauche(dagger)you haven't got time to talk, if you do you are dead!

Though I don't like that book anyway, it was like an over cooked pie, too hard and dry!

And I totally lost any empathy with her characters. They seem to be going round in circles now.

Also, The warlock in spite of himself by Christopher Stasheff a strange funny book, but his use of Little John's weapon, the quarter staff is spot on!

But I am not an expert by a long shot, just learning, been learning for years and still at it.

Best
Holbrook.

[saintjon]

What did you think of William Wallace's claymore fighting in "Braveheart"? I'm pretty sure they didn't have claymores at that time but all the same, I liked that he had to actually grab the blade above the crossguard to move it quickly enough in some spots. On the other hand, I've seen it too many times and there's spots where I can't figure how he gets the damn thing off his back. Oh well.

BTW, depending on what kind of story you're trying to write, sometimes ridiculously huge weapons can be pretty fun (Final Fantasy 7 springs to mind).

[Holbrook]

This thread on SFI is debating whether Claymores and two handed blades were used in the 13th century. It is a grey area, some claim they were, some they were not. http://forums.swordforum.com/showthread.php?s=&threadid=1375

As for carrying a sword on the back, it was done to "carry" the sword. It is not possible to draw a sword from that position, unless you have arms down to your calves. The sword was removed from the back and the scabbard thrown away at the beginning of a battle. If you lived you reclaimed your scabbard.

The movements Gibson used are based on surviving manuscripts on "Two handed sword work"

Though the film made a complete hash of the history of the real "Wallace"

Hope that helps a bit.

Best
Holbrook.

[This message has been edited by Holbrook (edited March 25, 2002).]

[asimovian]

Holbrook :

I know fantasy is the suspension of belief

Must be a mistake... shouldn't that rather be : suspension of *disbelief*, or incredulity ?

[asimovian]

Holbrook,

If I read again in a book about a knight being having to be hoisted up into the saddle I will scream!

I have read, seen (in movies) or heard this often too. So where does this rumor come from ?
It makes me think of what is also supposed to be common knowledge, to wit that in Louis' XIV time, even at a place like his own court, there was nothing even remotely resembling bathrooms, so that people just went behind a door and did there what they had to do... so it is said.
If this kind of rumor about our western culture has been spread around for scores of years, then I don't want to know what people of other cultures must think about us...
Now however I have come to the conclusion that this simply can't be true. Can anyone actually, if he just thinks about it, imagine just a situation ?