How NOT to GRIP European BRONZE AGE SWORDS? 

I also imagine the hammer grip also made thrusting upward (like under a shield) better. I think any treatment of a sword from that period that doesn’t seek to place it in a system with the shield is silly.

On modern knives the "nook" weather big enough for a finger or not is often used to facilitate sharpening the blade all the way down.

Ah yes, an appendix video that is longer than the video that it refers to, classic Matt!! 🤣

Can't argue with that. Thanks for once again being Matt Easton.

Yes! I've been obsessed with those these past few weeks. Can you do a video on Gaulish swords and Celtic swords from the early Iron Age ?

Something you might find interesting is that we can see in depictions of neo assyrian sword (many of which had mushroom pommels) there is a lot of variations in the grip they use even in the same relief, holding by the pommel, chocking the guard, ice pick grip etc... so we can see a lot of variations in that Not bronze age or European but still insightful

Personally, I've trained with 13th century sword & shield, sometimes in formation. Obviously this experience is biased, because we actually didn't want to skewer each other. From I've understood, infantry vs infantry, both tightly packed was even more prominent in bronze age (and their swords were shorter). Anyway let's go. I feel like fingering the guard is not a strategy I'd use with a shield. Fights are messy, your shield get sometimes banged into your head or your hand. I wouldn't expose my finger to being pinched real strong between my guard and my shield when I'm receiving or administering and formation charge (no running, just fast pace with friends tightly packed together). That kind of pinching can easily break the finger, and this disarm / prevent you from continuing the fight properly. I already felt that risk when I was in infantry charges, while we were doing it with swords held point straight up until after impact to avoid skewering each others for realz. Limits of reconstitution, in the end we're all 21st century people with no wish of sending each other in the emergency. In the same way, I could imagine that notch being a way to index the shield with the weapon for the charge. That way your shield is supported by both your arms, which helps tremendously : after impact, you tend to end up all crumpled, that's hardly avoidable because your friends behind are tightly packed, heavy and pushing, and the receiving ends tries it's best to resist. After initial impact, if one side has managed to crumple the other real tight and keep some space between their shields and body, they have a demented advantage for what's next. Also, you need that right end support at impact as much as you can, because taking your own shield in the face can seriously hinder your vision or stun quite a lot. I don't know about the ending take on the move inspired from tulwar. As you said, the bronze age sword is way more thrust-centric and the fighting distances are already quite reduced. Using draw cuts surely would have its' use in situations like the ones I've described above, but otherwise, it reduces even further the reach.

I find these discussions of the dynamics, ergonomics, physics, geometry of motion to be particularly interesting. These discussions also point to the importance of "experimental archaeology" and refraining from projecting views when wanting to understanding the fundamental issues of any weaponry - how is it deployed and employed and used to be effective. Great discussion. Thank you. Cheers!

face on, the cuts you were making in slow motion, showed very little on the mushroom smooth pommel to catch or snag on the opponents gear at close quarters. Very interesting and informative.

I've just realized this isn't necessarily a weapons channel, rather more history of workplace safety and industrial design with a particular focus

Chaotic Evil grip: Grab the bronze sword by the pommel with the handle sticking between your fingers and use it like the world's largest push dagger.

Would LOVE a more dedicated video on the pros and cons of that hammer grip, and stiff wrist cuts. Ive been very interested in that specifically in regards to the tulwar

imagine you place the handle in your palm. then let your fingers curl around the handle to form a grip

Disk-shaped pommels on Bronze Age swords encouraging a hammer grip and draw cuts makes sense for the reason you describe Matt, i.e. limitations of the material and thrusting around shields. However, another potential reason for that design choice may be that the majority of rank and file Bronze Age warriors likely didn’t wear much metal armor as such things were probably largely restricted to elite warriors. Therefore, draw cuts would be an effective way wounding lightly armored foes.

Great video. I'm always here for the pre-medieval content. 👍

Wow, the perfect video for me! I’ve been concerned recently wether or not I’ve been gripping my european bronze age sword correctly! What a lifesaver!

From the moment I saw that pommel to the end of the video I waited in vain for the obvious; that pommel is ideally shaped for a push with the palm of the hand! Not the sword hand, but the other hand to give a two-handed grip to assist with a fuller penetration,and also to help to free the blade out of the body of your opponent. Bronze being softer than steel, would get blunt sooner, so a thrust would get increasingly harder. Same for withdrawing the blade trapped in your opponent's body: a two-handed grip would put less bending stress on the blade as the pull could be better aligned along the axis of the blade. Your points about conjecture and individual's usage variations are sound. As for hand size, it's probably best to check skeletal remains and the handles of other items (how thick is this handle and how long is the space used for gripping? )Keep up the good work -your enthusiasm is very effective!!

12:39 "Everything else is slightly bigger"( ͡° ͜ʖ ͡°)

The blade durability was what I was thinking about before you got there at the end. Draw Cut will have a lot less blade impact than a chop. TBH it also tends to give a much deeper wound, too, so I think you make a great point, as per usual. I winced at the finger over on that notched blade... even with a better shoulder, the blade is narrow enough that the impact shock on the inside of that finger would still be wickedly uncomfortable.

Another 'brief' video by Matt to go over just a few points.

I agree, especially about the material strength. In civilian contexts, reach is very important, but on the battlefield spears are for reach. This short, reinforced sword is for when the enemy shields are pressing against your shield. In the context of the press, not only does it help with slashing alignment, but a hammer grip is important for retaining the weapon. Probably works great for pommel strikes to opponents heads when then try to shove your shield as well.

Very interesting, thank you. Not saying you are wrong, yet two questions arise from the comparisons you are drawing: Why a domed pommel when a disc would suffice, and why a straight blade, when a curved one would work better for the use you suggest?

So interesting! As always... Thx Mr Schola-Easton.

i think it is shaped like that to stop the blade flying out your hand when you are going balls out in a battle. It keeps the sword from being pulled out of your hand.

That weird 'finger out' handshake grip looks like a good way to lose that finger.

I would add an additional disclaimer that your theory only applies to commonly adopted pommel shapes. There have always been people who make a one-off or small batch design that wasn't good enough to be widely adopted by the general public. I fully agree with your assessment that certain pommel designs were intended to force the user to hold it and use it in a specific manner.

I was wondering about this grip on a double edged sword. Your final point about bronze edges being easy to blunt makes sense of that. You can fight twice as long before retreating to the pit-stop.

The drawing across cuts would be better for cutting through cloth armor. Chopping cuts take more force to cut through that and a blade tends to bounce off of them. This is seeing medieval and renascence blades trying to cut linen gambles, but similar armor to this type has been worn since the Bronze Age. You also just have thick clothing in northern climates or in winter in even slightly northern climates that a sword could have to deal with, so a chop might not do much compared to a slice with the sword with a bronze blade since you couldn't go to town without risking bending the blade, as was pointed out in the video. This fragility might explain why the mace and axe were still so popular as weapons of war, especially since they could deal with armor, like the bone and even metal forms that appeared in the middle and late Bronze Age. Boar tusk strips don't protect your head when a bronze axe head is smashed into it. Still need a shield to protect yourself from that danger, even with armor.

People that wanna work around sword features tend to forget that those swords weren't used to cut down water bottles back then.

Good talk! I find broad pommels also provide good leverage against the palm heel for raising the sword. Might also make for a good wrap around false edge cut when you're in close. What would really be interesting is to get some steel simulators and some shields and have at it. See what comes out on top.

Definitely want to see the Dervish videos! I didn't know those survived

Sir, your videos would be thirty seconds long if not for tangents. That is why we love you. LOL!

Antennae Swords seem like they would've had less emphasis on the hammer grip since they didn't have the mushroom pommel usually. Elamite Bronze Sword has a prominent handle. Persia back then had a thrusting sword with a more onion like pommel.

I agree with your comments, and only add that in addition to the stress along the length of the blade (looking at shock fractures from impact and the like), one might also consider edge damage. Egyptian pyramid builders appear to have kept a staff on site solely for resharpening bronze tools because bronze edges don't stay sharp like iron-based ones do. A chopping motion seems to me to be more likely to produce nicks and divots in the edge (especially against armor, shields and other harder than bronze objects) than slicing motions.

Large mushroom or sphere pommels is what was found on some of those Aegean "rapier" swords and those don't even have blade shoulders to facilitate placing fingers over the handguard. They will force hammer grip, or it's going to be a very awkward wield.

First thought about such pommel was - grip can be more relaxed while hand is making centrifugal moves thus can do it faster with less fatigue.

More Bronze Age content, please, Matt. Just a thought, but the mushroom pommel would make it easier to apply the force of a second hand when finishing off a foe if you reverse the sword (like a rondel dagger).

according to archeological finds in our region, the wearer of bronce sword were not smaller than people today, cause they were of the wealthier class without the "hunger-marks" that bones of "normal" people often show

Super interesting to see how the second bronze sword has the blade suddenly becoming thinner about two thirds towards the tip; that's a feature some Chinese swords from around 300 BC have as well, but which I haven't seen on more modern non-thrusting swords.

Most Early Jian had small, but clearly disc shaped pommels, and the design seem to have largely been carried over from Bronze Age swords. I wonder if the intended use was similar to these and Talwar. Interestingly enough a lot of Bronze Age Jian also had a narrower tip like the Carp’s Tongue

I'd say the Pylos Combat Agate pretty definitively supports using a hammer grip for thrusting with a bronze age sword, and thrusting over a shield down into a man's subclavian arteries no less. Now granted, the Pylos Combat Agate is a sample size of one and how exactly the original sculptor managed in the first place to accurately cut the anatomical features of three people and their equipment down to their cloth weaves into a stone only 3.4 centimeters across with a Mohs hardness of 7 is an entirely different topic, but how many other period depictions do we have of bronze age combat with a sword where the individual fingers and muscles groups are rendered?

OMG!! This is so relevant and important to the 21St century!! I BEG you to watch this!!

Interesting video. For me the point about curved thrusts is the most convincing. In shield fighting that is absolutely a thing.

The idea of wooden pommels invites an additional question. If they were apparently just as happy to make the pommel out of wood as bronze, it suggests that weight wasn't a major factor in why the pommels were the shape and size they were, which all the more encourages the idea that they were the shape they were for the geometry of it- to advantage a specific grip.

Slice is more energy efficient as it preserves the energy rather than stopping in a chop.

Regarding the purpose of the shape of the guard, it should be noted that the small guard is clearly an actual guard. If it wasn't meant to stop enemy weapons at all, it would not be made of bronze.

To argue in favour of more handshaky grips with thumb on the flat or finger over, some types of swords don't have the spine running all the way down to the grip, and some have at the base of the blade a blunt but serrated ricasso which would provide more grip to the finger and limit the risk of sliding up the blade. But the hammer grip seems like a very reasonable option for most cases.

The mushroom shaped pommel suggests that a right handed person wore the sword on his right side, drew it underhanded while closing with his opponent, and while holding his shield in his left hand/arm. He probably did this after throwing his spear.

Excellent video! In musing on this also consider bronze age armor. In many cultures the shield was the main or only protection for line troopers other than a helmet. Armor for line troopers might be (nearly) non-existent as with Sumerians and Egyptians. It could be thick textiles. It could be partial armor, as with the early Romans, who wore a partial metal chest/pectoral protector but nothing on the arms and shoulders. In these cases a slice would make a longer cut, increasing the trauma and chances of causing bleeding. There would be no need for the additional torque involved in flexing the wrist to create greater impact if striking textile or bare flesh. I'm curious what experts would think about this point.

Thanks for the video ⚔️

I think body mechanics and protecting the wrist from fractures is a good reason for this style of pommel. Cheers. :)

So, what if it's hand protection? I know from experience a pommel can save your hand if you come in for an attack and the rival shield bashes to meet your blade early on. Maybe they kept getting their hands smashed form the bottom, and added a "shield" on the bottom, then slowly over time, realized it was cumbersome, and removed unnecessary parts.

I think you are RIGHT Matt ! The other people are , using a Spanish term “ El Stupido Bastardo “

How did you keep a straight face with all those puns 😂

Would these swords have also been used for everyday tasks, such as camp building or food preparation? In that case I’d want to choke up on the blade, wrapping a finger above the guard cutting towards myself for more control.

I'm not an expert, but I do have some thoughts. The notch on the one blade reminds me of a decorative element on a short fantasy wall hanger I once owned. The blade had a similar notch just above the guard which had multicolored beaded and braided cordage wrapped around the unsharpened section from the guard up to the bottom of the edge. The cordage formed a "cap" of sorts to the scabbard, which would be the only practical value I could see. The cordage did not protrude past the guard, but may also have served to block or absorb any bodily fluids from running down the blade to the user's hand. As for the mushroom pommel, is it possible that design would have a secondary function for the back rows of a formation? Those soldiers would be walking over downed enemies during an advance, and those enemies may well need to be dispatched. A reverse grip on the sword would allow a quick downward thrust while not needing to stoop or bend, thereby allowing the shield to provide overhead cover, and the mushroom pommel would provide a wide surface to pull against to retrieve the blade from the corpse, would it not?

makes total sense, maybe people really don't realise how superior medieval steel is to bronze, opening a whole range of new techniques.

"That means my hand is slightly bigger and EVERYTHING else is slightly bigger"... you're bragging way too much, Matt. 😂 Just kidding. Very nice content as always. I learned a lot.

All rational points, agreed. I think the pommel would not impede attempts to stab over the top of or underneath a shield. I also think the pommel with more surface area against the hand would add strength to pulling the sword back in cuts with resistance in close quarters (not much swing momentum), or against attempted disarms. It would of course be nice if we knew a lot more about battles at the time, dense or loose formations., how much combat was individual, etc.

Look at Mycenean and Hittite swords. Many bronze age swords were rapiers made mainly for thrusting which you couldn't do efficiently with that large pommel.

this is really fun and interesting video.

I am sure that the notches in front of the guard on a sword without a pommel are made on purpose. If a strap with a loop is tied to these notches and a hand is threaded through the loop, this system does not need a round pommel to hold the sword during slashing strokes.

Hammer grip is the logical and practical grip with that mushroom pommel.

Hammerfist makes sense. I would love to see you field test the weapon on a torso dummy, melons, or the like.

I would love to see a discussion on the swords used by the Sea Peoples.

If a person wanted to use a "handshake grip the most obvious solution would be to reduce the disk pommel to a more ergonomic shape. That we don't find these sorts of modification indicates to me that these swords were used as designed. Soldiers are notorious experimenters & modifiers of equipment

You've tied yourself in a bit of a knot there by drawing parallels with more modern steel swords with a similar pommel , and then pointing out that the material may require a different style of use from a steel sword. That said, I think you're right - the BA sword is made for a drawing cut, and the only point I'd add is that more recent swords with pommels that require that same style of use, have evolved from the BA sword...

Very interesting. I do have a question, could not the hammer grip be used for an under hand thrust from the hip? I have noticed that some Bronze Age shields have a ‘base fiddle’ pattern with circular cutouts at their edges half way down the shield on either side. Would not an underhand grip with a mushroom cap hilt be perfect for such a shield usage (whether right or left handed) as the hip thrust would pass through the cutouts of the shield?

Matt, it would be very interesting if you would make a video about the sword of Goujian, from the Chinese Bronze Age. It's blade is razor sharp, and it also has a disk pommel! It's considered a predecessor of the later Jian, that has a very different hilt and pommel shape. Maybe because Bronze Age swords were mainly slicing and chopping swords, used on conjunction with shields, as opposed to the later steel Jian? It would be nice to hear your opinion

This is fascinating. Slightly off-topic but this had me wondering about a different sword, one you know well: the 14th century arming sword from Royal Armoury collection (Windlass). I own it and it's beautiful. When cutting with it and handling it, I did notice that the pommel (for those who dont know it: big knob of a pommel, like a big cube with rounded off edges) digs into my hand and when I forget to put on goves before, it can be uncomfortable or even hurt if used too long. So seeing this video, Im wondering: could that too have had a hammer grip in mind? Or is it more a case of "just wear gloves"?

A question on the blunt portion of the Carp's Tongue, right above the grip: Do we actually know that the reconstruction is complete? It feels like a convenient place for some kind of hand guard made from organic material. Now, admittedly, there is no trace of riveting or the like, but it still could be glued, strapped or intricately woven leather or so...

14:42 As someone who hasnt gotten to study sword firsthand… That looks like it will deliver a lot of power into stabs, but if it slips from your hand, you would cut your hand and potentially even your radial artery if your gripstrength cant withstand the impact.

Sorry if repeating anyone else's thoughts but it occurs to me the Bronze Age design and use of swords was down to just not being terribly good at either at that stage. These people didn't have centuries of manufacturing and fencing techniques to draw upon. Given that the primary weapon of the era was the spear, a sword was likely considered an emergency backup weapon only used at very close quarters. With that in mind, a hammer gripped bronze sword would have the benefits already outlined by Matt plus, to my mind, that pommel would've been an extremely uncomfortable thing to have rammed into one's face.

As far as I know, machete fighting also uses a hammer grip (from what I've seen). So this might be used more like a machete than a more fencing centric fighting style.

"It's just a theory." A sword theory!

Not the wooden pommels, but I wonder if an all bronze mushroom pommel would be good for a murder stroke.

I wonder if those big bulbous hilts may also have been used because you are fighting spears and polearm more than swords - a useful comfortable grip to put your other palm onto - holding it a bit more like the common two handed pistol grip... That would I suspect help you resist and bat away the polearm swung or thrust at you with better grip on your sword, and doesn't to my imagination and bottle prop feel like it would overly restrict the movement you want to make. At least when defending against the spear aimed anywhere above your waist - which is where all the spear and pole arm coming at you would be when the opponent is behind their shield wall... Love to see it tested or get my hands on a replica to try it myself. Don't think its going to be the only reason by any stretch, I imagine having a good cross guard/pommel to bludgeon with could also be a reason to choose a more bulbous pommel - there are times you just want a weighty stick not a cutting tool and if you have gloves so the blade isn't too dangerous to hold... Also seems quite possible to me that big bulbous hilt is preferred for a reverse grip not with the expectation of it being in the front of the fighting - mostly used to put some real force behind a thrust be much easier to get through any resistance and armour on the opponent on the ground, backed against something if you can drop your body weight onto the back of the blade comfortably. All that said clearly a grip that you can only really hold a limited number of ways, and hammer grip is the one that would fit naturally in the hand - wouldn't be shaped that way if doing so made it really awkward to hold and use in your supposed default grip. So unless their hands are much much different to ours today, which as far as I'm aware all the bones that survive say isn't the case at all... So while they doubtless would hold it in other ways sometimes its ergonomic design is clearly all about hammer grip.

So I have seen somewhere, I don't remember offhand, evidence of boiled leather hand protection incorporated in swords- like a bell or somesuch. It's generally lost to time, but that cutout on the one blade would be a good place to attach such a thing. No way to know, but it occurred to me as a possibility.

My first idea was that the pommel forces hammer grip and less movement to prevent wrist injuries.I also thought that 90 degree chop is more destructive to weapon than 45 slicing.

A thought that bothers me about certain sword designs is that they may have been intended for use on civilians as opposed to soldier to soldier combat. It would explain a lot.

What I want to see is a Conan movie with these. I know, I know, Conan is pure fantasy, the original stories have iron and steel all over the place, etc. But if we place the Hyborian Age into history according to the timeline developed by the author, Conan would live in the late Chalcolithic or in the very early Bronze Age. So a Conan movie with Bronze Age arms and armor would sort of make sense and also be kind of cool.

Perhaps those large pommels were made for warriors who lost a few fingers in previous battles and needed a more secure grip.

I've seen a Chinese bronze dagger on some video, and the edge was definitely pinned, like you do on a scythe. Scythe blades are not good for chopping, but they do cut (slice) really well. If you are correct, that all would make a lot of sense. A super sharp but fragile edge, good for devastating thrusts and surface level long slices. A pinned edge "bites" extremely well, so those slices could cause a lot of damage without a lot of stress put on the edge. BTW - I pin scythes for people. How many years? Hard to tell. I mean, I kinda know how this type of edge behaves. Oh, some blacksmiths err on the side of a robust edge. Yes, it's pinned, technically speaking, but barely. I doubt Achilles had this type of edge on his swords.

I know Roland Warzecha is experimenting with a thumb grip.

Very interesting topic. I see your point about the mushroom pommel. For sure there were multiple styles around at the time, like in all others times. Depending on the social structure of the time, it's possible for some people to go around all day everyday with a sword but, for obvious reasons, not a shield; this could/should push for something like modern machete fighting styles to be developped.

Hi, Matt. I love your work. In this video you used the word theory when I believe you should have said hypothesis. A theory is an explanation that has been verified and is falsifiable. A hypothesis is an assumption, an idea that is proposed for the sake of argument so that it can be tested to see if it might be true. You are so specific and careful in your narrative for all videos that I had to make this suggestion. Cheers!

Clearly, the pommel was specifically made to provide protection while wielding the sword in reverse grip!😊

any wear and tear on the base of the thumb can also force a different hand grip, arthritis can be a factor

One thing I've been wondering about is why swords have blades in the bottom half, even before they were expected to be used as parrying implements. Like surely in the bronze age it'd be cheaper and possibly even more durable to make an axe with a spike on it rather than a sword?

That grip with the thumb on the back would be impossible for me. My thumb can't curve backward at all.

I was saying you should put the thumb on the flat of the blade between the "quillons" where there is a specific place for it since the early Bronze Age down through to the end of the Bronze Age.

It's meant for a Hollywood style reverse grip. Obviously......

The finger-grooves are not for fingering, its for the cord/wooden oval-ring inside the top of a skin scabbard to keep the scabbard on the sword.

Do a vid on how you think a bronze antenna swords were gripped.

„Hammerfisting“ 😂 sorry, I’ll see myself out!

2.34: Matt's suggested grip 😂

I think that only dealing with north European bronze age swords is limiting . In my part of the world (Greece )we have beautiful mycenean swords worth discussing . Please check .

i would love to see a video where you talk about the hammer grip slicing style of sword swinging. not that i don't think that type of fighting is bad, but fundamentally reach is very important with fighting with a sword... unless its not as important as i think it is practically.

The idea that the mushroom pommel forces the hand into a position where chopping cuts are not possible in order to preserve the integrity of the (flimsy bronze) sword makes SO MUCH SENSE. Brilliant job as usual, Mr. Easton.

Bronze Age people had very advanced, highly developed textiles and leather work. They could well have used these swords while wearing gloves. That would protect the finger, at least for occassional use for a thrust when opportunity offered. A strong, firm hand stop would be even more important for someone wearing a glove, hence the pommel's size. Still, it is valuable to face facts stated bluntly, "It is what it is, deal with it as what it is."