Talk:Claymore

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)

I also believed Claymores to be large swords, however maybe that was just another very popular rumour. User:Willski7292.12.241.36 (talk) 10:10, 7 April 2008 (UTC)

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)

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)

While no sword could be 7 feet long and still wielded effectively, I am quite sure this article is wrong. I might just resume my editing a wiki to fix this. Claymore ARE larger than this. I have wielded a real claymore and I can safely tell you it was not 5.5 lbs. The largest example of this type of sword is the Irish dragoon. which was approx. 4.5 feet in length and wight approx. 80 lbs. This is a extreme example but nonetheless gives an insight into how large these swords were.Skeletor 0 (talk) 09:47, 30 January 2010 (UTC)

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. 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)

I have heard of this before, I will research further tonight. It is possible that the distinction between the two swords lessened with time. 2604:3D08:9A7F:A000:30E0:FEC7:AEF6:4B58 (talk) 09:24, 27 April 2024 (UTC)

Illustration from Dwelly’s Gaelic-English dictonary

AFAICT they were quite distinct in Gaelic, but English writers started calling the two-hander a claymore in the late 17th c., I guess because it’s bigger. (Compare great sword in English. They also seem to have invented claybeg for the basket-hilted sword, very inaptly IMO, but it got widely propagated.) At any rate claidheamh is indeed cognate to gladius (and English glaive); I’ve seen it suggested that the Romans borrowed the word from a Celtic language.—Odysseus1479 18:37, 27 April 2024 (UTC)

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)

The OED is wrong on all three points, according to Wagner and Thompson. They conclude that the term claymore was first used for the Scottish single-handed basket-hilted broadsword, and later applied indiscriminately for Highland swords. Whilst basket-hilted swords often had only one edge (normally referred to as backswords), they quote Sir William Hope in 1707 specifically talking of the "Double-edged Highland Broadsword". And finally they have numerous quotes from the 17th century referring to two-handed swords. 87.210.0.196 (talk) 20:19, 17 April 2011 (UTC)

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)

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 reivers 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 reiaver clans! 86.160.167.144 (talk) 08:40, 28 June 2008 (UTC)

Reference for both swords being called claymores

According to the article "The Words 'Claymore' and 'Broadsword'" by Paul Wagner and Christopher Thompson, in SPADA (Anthology of Swordsmanship) #2 (ed. Stephen Hand), the earliest known uses of "claymore" refer to the one-handed broadsword. There are no references to the two-handed Scottish sword as a claymore from its period of use. However the term was used later. We don't know what the contemporary Gaelic term for the two-handed sword was; it may have been claidheamh mor, or claidheamh da laimh (this is often used in modern sources for clarity), or something else. Unless someone has a suitable reference, we should not assume that the original application was to the two-hander. Megalophias (talk) 20:20, 8 September 2008 (UTC)

Comment from page

It should be noted, that a Claymore is an explosive device used by the military. The Claid heamh mor(great sword), and the Claid heahm delav mor(Great two handed sword. we Scots are bloody creative aren't we?) are only called claymores because the Limeys don't like speaking Gaelic.(It reminds them of their inferriority) . Finavon (talk) 22:13, 2 November 2008 (UTC)

Stray text

Removed this piece of text from the very bottom of the page (moved here as-is): ~William Wallace~

   The claymore thought to be invented by William Wallace, a Scottish rebel driven into battle against the English by revenge for the deaths of his loved ones whom were slaughtered brutely and left to be found. The common claymore of the Wallace era was about 4.5 ft long and could cut anything in half from a medium range. It was often swung in a 180 degrees angle.

--93.36.116.78 (talk) 22:50, 11 June 2009 (UTC)

Um yeah, I don't think we need to consider including that. Megalophias (talk) 01:35, 13 June 2009 (UTC)

Welsh Etimology.-

Once I heard about the term 'Cleddyf Mawr'. It seems to me Welsh. Any common point with "Claymore"? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 188.85.183.223 (talk) 07:48, 15 March 2010 (UTC)

Why no Pictures of Real Claymores?

The lack thereof makes the article boring. And speculative. Sean7phil (talk) 18:54, 10 May 2010 (UTC)

Earliest recorded use

Paul Wagner & Christopher Thompson, "The words claymore and broadsword" in "Spada II: Anthology of Swordsmanship" (ed Stephen Hand), have three quotes from Claude Blair, "The word claymore" in "Scottish Weapons and Fortifications 1100-1800" (ed David Caldwell):

• "...a sturdy claymore by his side", 1715
• "a broad Sword, which they call a Claymore...", 1752
• "...After the Prince had got himself equipt in the Highland Cloathes with the claymore in his hand...", 1747

Perhaps someone would like to incorporate this into the text.

They also note it's use as a battle-cry in 1678. And two of the three quotes above clearly refer to the basket-hilted broadsword, but adding that information would require a major re-write of the article. 87.210.0.196 (talk) 23:15, 21 February 2012 (UTC)

Article Requires Revision

It is interesting that pretty much everything on the talk page has not been incorporated into the article, which still emphasizes the late two-hand sword interpretation. I do not have the time to make the necessary, significant changes to the main article, but someone really should be doing so. Whateley23 (talk) 04:51, 18 December 2013 (UTC)

"The sword is currently in the possession of the National War Museum in Edinburgh, Scotland.[13]" is incorrect. I just visited the National War Museum, and it was nowhere to be seen. I was advised that it is in a different museum in Edinburgh.—Preceding unsigned comment added by 2601:643:100:533a:11e8:4c77:2282:79b4 (talk) 17:50, 29 September 2017 (UTC)

Wielded By A Giant, eh?

The last paragraph reads: The largest claymore on record is a sword measuring 7 feet 6 inches (2.24 m) and weighing 23 pounds (10 kg). The claymore was wielded by a 15th-century Scottish giant of unknown name and origin, though the individual is believed to have been a member of the Maxwell Clan.

Seems awkwardly written, as usually you don't refer to someone as a giant unless you mean the fictional version. Did they just mean a large guy? — Preceding unsigned comment added by Excise (talk • contribs) 20:27, 8 January 2014 (UTC)

Measurements

Yes, I know that the US is the only country in the world that still uses Imperial measurement. Our lack of education in the metric system means that the vast majority of Americans are not likely to be able to perform conversions in their heads. Would it be possible to include feet and inches in parentheses? ScarletRibbons (talk) 13:27, 14 February 2014 (UTC)

Combat techniques

I actually came looking to see if there was any information on combat techniques with the Claymore, specifically whether both edges were used in fighting and whether thrusting was done. The sword seems a bit large for thrusting, but since I'm no fencer that's just a guess. If anyone knows anything at all about Claymore fighting, a new section would be great. Dismalscholar (talk) 06:38, 6 January 2020 (UTC)

Claymore sword

Was the blade a slightly flimsy one 23.28.181.229 (talk) 03:04, 12 February 2023 (UTC)

Requested move 28 December 2023

The following is a closed discussion of a requested move. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on the talk page. Editors desiring to contest the closing decision should consider a move review after discussing it on the closer's talk page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

The result of the move request was: consensus not to move. (closed by non-admin page mover) Warm Regards, ZI Jony ^(Talk) 06:19, 12 January 2024 (UTC)

---

• Claymore → Claymore (sword)
• Claymore (disambiguation) → Claymore

– Not the primary topic. Currently has less than 50% of pageviews, with Claymore mine and Claymore (manga) getting 500+ hits daily.[1] Claymore mine also has a pretty good claim to long-term notability. Per WP:NOPRIMARY, move dabpage to base title. 162 etc. (talk) 00:41, 28 December 2023 (UTC) — Relisting. Seawolf35 ^T--C 10:29, 4 January 2024 (UTC)

• Support per nomination. There are 12 entries listed upon the Claymore (disambiguation) page, with little indication that historical renown of the two-handed sword has remained at such an elevated level that it dwarfs the combined notability of the remaining 11 entries. —Roman Spinner (talk • contribs) 03:12, 28 December 2023 (UTC)
• Oppose, none of the entries listed in the Claymore (disambiguation) page are near equal to the sword from which the name primarily has been popularised.--Blockhaj (talk) 12:43, 28 December 2023 (UTC)
• Support per nom. Crouch, Swale (talk) 18:14, 28 December 2023 (UTC)
• Oppose Per longterm significance, whereas the mine is never simply called a Claymore because even now the sword can be confused with it. ᴢxᴄᴠʙɴᴍ (ᴛ) 12:50, 2 January 2024 (UTC)
• Oppose. I agree with the argument that the sword's longterm significance keeps it as the primary topic. Aoba47 (talk) 23:37, 6 January 2024 (UTC)
• Oppose. The sword is the primary topic by long-term significance. The mine is usually referred to as a Claymore mine. The manga series is... a manga series, and manga, whilst obviously wildly popular amongst people who like it, is not universally well-known. The other listed uses are very minor. -- Necrothesp (talk) 14:20, 8 January 2024 (UTC)

The discussion above is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.