the term 'longsword'

[Joel Norman]

Recently I completed a course here at U of H all about the medieval Normans and their conquests in England, Sicily, and other adventures. (And much of my interest is due to my own last name, which I can trace back to some of the movers and shakers of the period). One thing struck me as odd, hence my bringing up the subject.
It is well known that before the Normans went to England, they had been in Neustria/Normandy for a few generations, where they meshed with the Franks and converted to Christianity (in their own way). One of the first Norman Christians was William the Conqueror's great-great-grandfather, William Longsword. This William was not the only one with this nickname, either. The Conqueror's father, Robert the Magnificent, was also sometimes called Robert Longsword, as was the Conqueror's own son, William Rufus. (So there are at least two different 'William Longsword' and one 'Robert Longsword').
Now, from participating in ARMA and reading stuff on historical fencing, I've been under the impression that the term 'longsword' refers to two-handed swords, such as the German Langenschwert, though of course there is variety in what exact model of 2-hander the term can apply to. In his earlier book 'Medieval Swordsmanship' (and I don't know if this has been edited by continuing research) John Clements stated that while 2-handed swords really became popular in the 1300s and later due to advances in armor, there were around possibly as early as 1150. However, the first William Longsword lived from 928-943.
So I have a few possible explanations:
1. The Norse did in fact make some kind of 2-handed sword, even though all artwork I've ever seen of the Norse or the Norman warriors shows them with one-handers and shields (like in the Bayeaux Tapestry) and I've normally thought of them needing the shield due to the lack of the crossguard. If this is true, the 2-hander must not have been common.
2. The Norse/Normans called their one-handers 'longswords' and the name has nothing to due with larger, later-period swords. If this is the case, plenty of historians need to stop calling the weapons 'viking broadswords' (Well, they need to stop this anyway).
3. Because swords were made by hand, they will have different dimensions to some degree, and William Longsword's weapon was simply LONGER than his subjects, while still being a one-hander.
4. The nickname has absolutely nothing to do with actual swords, but rather some part of William's (and later Robert's) personality or physique. The Norse were known for giving odd nicknames, after all. (I really doubt this last one, though, because I don't think multiple members of the same family would get the same nickname across generations, but I could be wrong).
Yet it could still be something else, so does anyone else have light to shed on the origins of the term 'longsword' with regard to early English, French and Norse peoples?

[s_taillebois]

M. Norman,
Very likely your option of #4 is the probable answer. Many of the names of the period were discriptive of some attribute or action by the bearer of the name. So likely referred to Roberts ability with the sword, or his reach therewith.
About the name carrying on through the succedding generations, the period your talking about was close to the period when surnames started to become an lasting condition.
And although the Norman's were quite innovative in weapon development during this period (the lance with pennant, kite shield, and attendent refinement of the stirrup...to the Saxons great disadvantage)...its a bit difficult to read too much about weapon patterns from the art of the period. In such as the Bayeuex tapestry, the elements tend to be sized relative to their importance to the narrative (and detailed effigy tombs came somewhat later). So looking for the (very few) extant norman era swords would be the ticket, however the condition of a relic of that age, is often just such, a relic.
As far as early Norman Christians...well that was a very relative state...Robert Guiscard operated with a certain fine disregard for the church...

[Joel Norman]

Yeah, plenty of others besides Guiscard were able to push churchmen around, too. The Normans were slow to convert, (and even lapsed back into pre-Christian beliefs too until re-converted) but after converting certainly used religious rhetoric to further their causes and conquests. In many cases the question of relations between Normans and the Church was who was using whom for their own benefit?
Anyway, my thoughts were more oriented towards weaponry. Since experimentation with weapon design was a feature of European peoples (again, no factories) I wondered if perhaps anyone (not just the Normans) had tried making 2-handed swords in the earlier middle ages. Perhaps just as an abberation? Certainly any surviving swords of the period were 1-handed, but since few weapons survived, other designs might have been tried at different points.
Incidentally, I saw clips of John Clements doing test cutting with what he called a Norman sword, so I was curious as to who made it. (If John likes it, its probably not crap).

[Brent Lambell]

I think Mr. Taillebois is correct, the surname Longsword seems likely attributable to some aspect of his personality, fighting style, physique, etc. The Danes seemed especially fond of nick names, many of which translate as more poetic and endearing than a blatant description, let alone their choice of weapon. But, anything is possible.

I don't have any reference material available at the moment, but I recommend looking into Oakeshott typology to see if there was a lot in the two handed varieties for the time frame you're considering. I've read several places that the Vikings were awfully fond of using their swords two handed with their second hand gripped over the lobes of the pommel. I own a couple of decent reproduction pieces and I can attest that although they were surely designed for one handed use, they feel mighty fine in two hands all things considered.

Still, give me a fine German longsword any day of the week....

[s_taillebois]

The Viking/Normans using their 'one handed' swords with both hands, makes sense as obviously it increases force and control.
I'd wonder if other, social aspects, may have also been a factor. There are some writers who indicate the lobed form of the viking era pommels was a metal approximation of 'fetishes' which had been tied to earlier sword forms. If that's so, mayhaps the use of two hands might have began as a combination of practicality with a lingering social ritual?
As far as factories, not as such. But by the late Norman period (about the 1120's or so) the Northern Europeans were developing proto-industrial technologies and techniques. They could do some pretty remarkable things with the overshot,undershot water wheels, cam and trip hammers.
Plus, the development of certain forms of longsword, was attendant to developed forms of plate armour (as noted look at the Oakshott typology). So unlikely this type would have developed in a period where mail was still the predominant armor. No need for it.

[Stacy Clifford]

Incidentally, I saw clips of John Clements doing test cutting with what he called a Norman sword, so I was curious as to who made it. (If John likes it, its probably not crap).

If it's the same one there are clips of me cutting with, I believe that one was made by Dan Maragni. I recall it being very blade heavy, but that was also before I heard anybody talking much about things like distal taper and mass distribution, and it was a test-quality piece for John to try out, not a finished product. I think it even still had some measurement marks on one side of the blade. It did cut very neatly though.

[LafayetteCCurtis]

Somehow I tend to favor interpretation #3, since one-handed swords <i>were</i> getting longer in the 10th and 11th centuries. Look at the Oakeshott Type X swords, which were gaining substantially in length due to their role as cavalry weapons. The first William Longsword might have been a trendsetter in this respect, adopting the longer blade sooner than most, and then the nickname crystallized into an inherited moniker for his male descendants--maybe for the oldest son in each generation, excepting William the Bastard because he was literally a bastard.

[Ken Dietiker]

Nick names being a poetic license, consider also the following options:

5. Sometimes ones ability as a commander of forces would come into play, especially after a successful campaign. Perhaps then "Longsword" could be a reference to how long his reach was, or the reach of his force, being able to go out far in an engagement and get to the enemy/action further than normally considered. Having no information on any of these encounters, it's hard to say.

6. Might be a reference to the size of his genitalia. Laugh if you want to, but it's not implausible considering the era. It would have been more than just a mer compliment. And something than could easily be handed down the genetic branch.

[Mike Cartier]

yes i found this longsword guy a little whiler ago myself and wondered at the term myself. I htink its probable he was just a big guy or had an longerthan normal sword.

As for dating the longsword, i spoke to Kevin Cashen about this when i was at the INTL event and said that i thought it somewhat impossible to pick a true date for the longsword as it probably deverloped with customizations to swords of the day for the individual and we will never know when that started. We can date when they came into common use but thats really a different thing.

For my money the earliest reference ot the western sword used with 2 hands is the Beowulf saga where the hero uses the oversized sword . flimsy as that is it shows they understood the concept. Given the Norman history linked to scandinavia i think there is every chance they did have some swords with longer handle as the swords tended to a long length. Remember in some cases all we need to make a sword and longswordf is some more handle length.

Its all idel speculation of course, unless soemone finds a hand and half dated to before whats accepted its all supposition. But fun nevertheless