Talk:Claymore

Please add {{WikiProject banner shell}} to this page and add the quality rating to that template instead of this project banner. See WP:PIQA for details.

Military history Start‑class

This article is within the scope of the Military history WikiProject. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the project and see a list of open tasks. To use this banner, please see the full instructions.Military historyWikipedia:WikiProject Military historyTemplate:WikiProject Military historymilitary history articles

Start

This article has been rated as Start-class on the project's quality scale.

This article has not yet been checked against the criteria for B-class status:
Referencing and citation: not checked Coverage and accuracy: not checked Structure: not checked Grammar and style: not checked Supporting materials: not checked	To fill out this checklist, please add the following code to the template call: \| b1<!--Referencing and citation--> = <yes/no> \| b2<!--Coverage and accuracy --> = <yes/no> \| b3<!--Structure --> = <yes/no> \| b4<!--Grammar and style --> = <yes/no> \| b5<!--Supporting materials --> = <yes/no> assessing the article against each criterion.

Additional information:
/
	This article is not currently associated with a task force. To tag it for one or more task forces, please add the task force codes from the template instructions to the template call.

Size and popular fiction?

The article describes claymores as being up to around 140 cm long. But I have an impression that in popular culture and fiction, the claymore tends to be depicted as a very large sword, as long as a man or longer.

Does anyone else agree?

If sources can be found, this this misconception (if it exists outside my twisted imagination) ought to be mentioned in the article. SpectrumDT (talk) 00:34, 17 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I also believed Claymores to be large swords, however maybe that was just another very popular rumour. User:Willski72 92.12.241.36 (talk) 10:10, 7 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I, too, was very surprised to see the description of these swords. I grew up very much around Scottish culture, festivals, and traditions. The account of claymores, that I was always told by the 'clan elders' was roughly as follows:

"It was a wide, two-handed, broad sword of about seven feet in length. To wield it, one would use a side-sweeping motion in the same manner as a farmer uses a scythe. The purpose of this sword was to cut off ( or otherwise disable ) the front legs of a cavalry horse. Thus wounded, the horse would collapse and the riding knight would fall to the ground, possibly being stunned or trapped by the horse. The Scotsman or a nearby kinsman would then approach with a shorter weapon, like a dirk or an axe, and finish the fallen knight off."

Ruthless, but effective.

It could be used to disembowel infantry, as well, of course, but its primary raison d'être was to counteract cavalry. Granted, it is possible, that these stories were merely folklore; I cannot give documented sources. But I offer it up for discussion, anyways. 71.126.9.229 (talk) 20:26, 16 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

No surviving originals or contemporary descriptions put these swords at 7 feet in length. At that length the weapon is effectively a polearm - and making most of the shaft wood would be cheaper, easier and lighter. A seven foot weapon is insufficient to cut the legs off of a horse, because the horseman has a 10+ foot lance. Contemporary accounts of large swords in this era in other cultures shows the swords used primarily for single combat or symbolic use. Mercutio.Wilder (talk) 16:53, 17 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Etymology

I have removed the following sentences, for it has been unreferenced for quite a while, and most sources I have seen give the "claidheamh mòr" derivation.

However, another theory suggests it may come from claidheamh da lamh, literally "two-hand sword." Claidheamh is ultimately cognate with Latin gladius.^{[citation needed]} As such the use of the term 'claymore' for the two-handed sword is debatable.

If anyone has a source for the "other theory", by all means put it back. Lesgles (talk) 01:45, 20 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

two-handed?

While I too assumed the claymore to be two-handed, this definition in the Oxford English Dictionary gave me pause:

Hist. The two-edged broadsword of the ancient Scottish Highlanders. Also (inexactly, but very commonly) the basket-hilted broadsword introduced in 16th c., which was frequently single-edged. (The claymore was not, except in extraordinary instances, two-handed.)

If any one knows the facts, it would be nice to have a reference. Lesgles (talk) 01:49, 20 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Image copyright problem with Image:Chieftain-1.jpg

The image Image:Chieftain-1.jpg is used in this article under a claim of fair use, but it does not have an adequate explanation for why it meets the requirements for such images when used here. In particular, for each page the image is used on, it must have an explanation linking to that page which explains why it needs to be used on that page. Please check

That there is a non-free use rationale on the image's description page for the use in this article.
That this article is linked to from the image description page.

This is an automated notice by FairuseBot. For assistance on the image use policy, see Wikipedia:Media copyright questions. --22:28, 19 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Border fights with the English?

It is always suspect when people says this, as the divide was usually not like it is today, with families stretching across the border into both countries; especially in the culturally English East Lowlands and also the very Anglicised West Lowlands. There was battles like Flodden, but battles like these were part of proper wars (like the Scottish invasions) and not usual border fights between a family. The border reavers were not, contrary to popular belief, seperated into the English and Scottish, but instead had family on both sides of the border; which would be allies to them and not do battle with them, though they are on the other side of the border. Borders don't matter to reaver clans! 86.160.167.144 (talk) 08:40, 28 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]