That depends on a number of things, but a good general answer is "between two and four pounds." A Roman-style gladius will be lighter than a Celt-Iberian falcata, for instance; a copper sword will be lighter than one forged of bronze or iron.
There were two models of the pilum (throwing spear) a heavy one and a light one. Originally it weighed between 2 and 5 kilos (4 and a half to 11 pound) and lighter versions were made later. A soldier carried two of them. The tip was pyramidal, but the iron shank was not hardened, so that, with its softness, it bent after impact, was difficult to pull out and could not be thrown back at the Roman soldiers. It stuck in the enemy's shield so he cannot use it to protect himself. It had a range of 30 metres (100 ft.), but its effective range was 15-20 metres (50-70 ft.).The iron shank was 7 millimetres in diameter and 60 centimetres long (23 5/8 inches) and was attached to a wooden shaft, giving a total length of 2 metres (2.19 yards)
It would depend on the type of sword. The Roman-style gladius or short sword weighed around 3 pounds, or around 1.3kg. This kind of sword was used for thrusting, it was not a weapon designed to cut or slash. Roman training in particular emphasised this point - soldiers would lock together a shield wall and thrust their swords in between gaps.
Longswords - as the name implies - had a longer blade, they could be wielded one handed, but you would have to be very strong to do so. These were around 4 pounds, or around 1.8kg. These kinds of swords that could be wielded one-handed were typically referred to as "bastard swords" or "hand-and-a-half swords". This kind of sword was the more popular kind of weapon amongst medieval knights and soldiers. As the Roman style of warfare died out, medieval armies did not come close to the discipline the Romans had. As a result, there was less emphasis on fighting as a unit, rather than just a ferocious slog till one side broke. Due to this, the short sword fell into disuse, and the longsword began to dominate the close-quarters battlefield.
Greatswords or broadswords, huge, cumbersome weapons that could only be wielded two handed, such as the Scottish Claymore, were anywhere from 6lbs upward, or 2.8kg. These were normally used as ceremonial weapons, however they were used on the battlefield by knights.
Peasants and servants had to do many things in the medieval castle. Some of the jobs was to clean the floor, farming, cooking, washing the kings, queens, knights, and nobles clothes, and much, much more.also to What_work_did_peasants_doon the farm land
Knights were nobles so they lived as nobles. They had manors, estates, or castles. --- Kinghts lived in manor houses. A simple manor house could be a large house on an estate. An expensive manor house could be almost palatial. There were fortified manor houses that looked very much like castles.
1,000
about 5 silvers a year
The knowledge of other cultures effected the medieval society. How it effected the medieval society is there other belief's, values, money and society. The beliefs what people had in different gods and Churches than the medieval society had. The different technology they used, the values what they give and how much money they had. This effected medieval society.
It depends if you talking about a long sword-about 4.5 pounds to 5 pounds (or possably 6 and up if its a bastard sword) because the long sword was the standard for the typical 'knight in shining armor' way back when.
$5,698 dollars
15 kg.
30 to 50 Kg
approximately 25 lbs
well a steel sword can very in weight. But i bet it is very heavy.
They had pretty much choices, they wee swords, maces, or polearm. By: Kevin ham
There was no such thing as a swordsman in medieval times, although most knights carried a sword. This was essentially a last resort weapon and could not be used for "fencing" - it was usually designed for slashing and cutting. A knight also carried a shield, making the sword a single-hand weapon during most of the period. The main weapon for both knights and infantry (serjantz) was a spear or one of its derivatives . This had the advantage of keeping the enemy at more than arm's length away, reducing the risk of injury to oneself; using the sword or other close-combat weapon increased this risk because the enemy must automatically be closer. In the immediate post-medieval Renaissance era the sword became a much more widely-used weapon, with fencing schools starting up and mercenary troops such as Condotierri using almost entirely crossbows, swords and firerams.
Medieval swords were much longer and used for slashing. The Roman infantry swords were shorter, and although Roman cavalry used a longer sword, they were still shorter than Medieval swords. The Roman sword was intended primarily for stabbing. It may be impossible to say which was better. In Medieval times armies were smaller than in Roman times because no one could afford to maintain the huge standing armies which once made the Roman sword so effective in battle. I think that each was the right sword for its time.
The metal sword weighed 10lbs while a fiberglass stunt sword rigged to spray blood must have been much less. This info. Came from a movie prop website.
The Wallace sword on display at the Wallace monument in Stirling weighs 2.7 kg. There are however doubts as to its authenticity.
they were used for castle sieges, not for weighing things. that's scales.