Merging the Arming-Sword article into this one wouldn't be a bad idea, and would only necesitate adding an extra paragraph. I'm not sure why an article called "arming-sword" even exists (or why the title is hyphenated).
- I did the merge, but it is scruffy, so i added the clean-up tag - it needs attention from someone who knows what info is pertinent and important, and when it comes to medieval swords thats just not me... Jdcooper 14:38, 12 November 2005 (UTC)
just a random surfer with a question: Does the length in the article refer to the blade length only, of the length of the entire sword (blade+hilt+ other bits?)
I was under the impression that it was discouraged for anyone to walk around armed in the medieval period (besides the standard utility knife)? Swords would have been worn for ceremonial purposes and battle but not in every day life.
I'm not sure that "parallel" should be specified since many were tapered. Peregrine 07:07, 25 October 2006 (UTC)
- I agree with no contest. Parallel is an inappropriate descriptor. -- Xiliquiern 13:16, 25 October 2006 (UTC)
- Have replaced parallel with "straight bladed"
Peregrine 13:57, 25 October 2006 (UTC)
Period of Use
Shouldn't it read 'into the 15th century and early 16th?' or somesuch? Just because the longsword increasingly replaced it doesn't mean that it disapeared. Wilhelm Ritter 17:44, 13 December 2006 (UTC)
Any article about a specific type of sword is much less useful without a good picture. Mathiastck 14:02, 1 February 2007 (UTC)