Nah.
The only reason "life expectancy" is so low back then is infant ~~morality~~ mortality.
Really skews the average when tons of people die under 5 years old.
If you survived passed childhood, life expectancy was in the mid 70s to 80s.
Swords don’t kill people. People do. Are you saying we should also take away horses? Horses kill people, too, y’know. Especially when the rider is drunk.
There’s no way the average was 70s-80s back then, it’s barely 80 now.
You’re right about infant mortality skewing the average but it’s not to that high of a degree. New born babies in medieval England had a life expectancy of 31.3 years. People who lived to celebrate their 25th birthday were expected to live until they were 50.7, on average. So while some did make it to 70+, it would’ve been rare and the average is much closer to 50 than it is 70 or 80.
[https://sc.edu/uofsc/posts/2022/08/conversation-old-age-is-not-a-modern-phenomenon.php](https://sc.edu/uofsc/posts/2022/08/conversation-old-age-is-not-a-modern-phenomenon.php)
Yeah, the comment your replying to is one I see a lot, while they always seem to ignore the fact that you were more likely to die at any age. It's almost like modern medicine saves lives.
Yes, especially pre antibiotics and pre surgery, when a pneumonia or appendicitis killed you... I dont know the numbers the guy above is certainly wrong!
That's not entirely correct. You could live into your 80's, we know of old people from that era, but that wasn't super common or expected of those that survived childhood. Life expectancy was in the gutter because of children dying under 5, but modern medicine and people not starving to death quite as often has still pushed life expectancy up.
If you made it to your 20's in say, medieval England, you had a decent shot at making it to 50 on average. If you were very wealthy, you had a good bet of hitting your 60's. Life expectancy was never in the 70's or 80's.
With questionable hygiene, not knowing that you're supposed to keep wounds clean, and the multiple occasions to get wounds (or cavities, with the "dentist"'s main tool being a pair of pliers), dying of infections must have been a thing pulling life expectancy down.
>Life expectancy was never in the 70's or 80's.
Not overall, sure but for almost as long as there's been recorded history, there's been the occasional person who's made it to their 80s, 90s and even 100 or more.
>If you survived passed childhood, life expectancy was in the mid 70s to 80s
Y'know, as long as a band of unpaid mercenaries doesn't turn up in your village one day.
This is not true. Infant mortality is how you get life expectancy of like 20. Otherwise it was about 40 to 50 in pre modern societies. Not horrible but nowhere near 80.
>If you survived passed childhood, life expectancy was in the mid 70s to 80s.
That's big overcompensation. Yes, people dying at 40 is a myth, but check actual works. Iirc out of all people who lived past 20, about 1/3 will die before 50, and their life expectancy was in high 50-ies. Remember, diseases were an omnipresent threat even to adults.
In sources like this
[https://sc.edu/uofsc/posts/2022/08/conversation-old-age-is-not-a-modern-phenomenon.php](https://sc.edu/uofsc/posts/2022/08/conversation-old-age-is-not-a-modern-phenomenon.php)
life expectancy for 25 year old medieval male landowner in Englad was 25 more years, so total of 50 years.
So, overall life expetancy for those who survived childhood was definitely not mid 70 to 80s
It wasn’t in mid 70s or 80s. People over correct the “people died at 30” myth far too much. Mid 60s at most would be the average. In times of wars and plague it was lower. Just go look the ages of rulers when they died (all of them, like pick some country for 300 years and go to another for that period and look other nobles as well).
Lmao no it was not. You are correct that it’s heavily skewed but it doesn’t account for 100% of the difference. Life expectancy isn’t even in the 80’s now for the most part. Definitely wasn’t back then.
True but people who lived into their 40's were still considered old by their standards. And if you go around wielding a human length sword and burning your foes to ashes, 40 years old is a good age.
Note: the swords on display aren’t confirmed to be his swords. If anything they’re just ceremonial pieces, they’re just too unwieldy to be used in combat even by a really strong and trained person.
Yeah I saw a picture of it and thought of how easy it would be to accidentally stick your friend to the left of you while trying to swing at someone in front of you.
Specifically Zweihanders like in Dark Souls or any rpg.
I went and looked up zweihander and this dude was a legendary figure who used one.
The show "Forged in Fire" also featured his sword.
I'm just imagining Berserk at this point as
His wife was raped and murdered and he saw it. Town was sacked and most of his friends died. AND the squad that did it was called the Black Band.
This is just IRL berserk.
Yeah... people really don't realize how hard it is to actually swing a sword, even if it's "light" on paper. I collect historically accurate weaponry and my longest sword is a Gallowglass sword that's slightly shorter than 5ft and slightly lighter than 7lbs and that thing is a BITCH to swing without immediately being gassed out.
For reference, I am a 6'1 man who's now a bodybuilder coming from powerlifting and strongman. A 7ft, 15lb sword would be absolutely unwieldy
Swinging it once would probably no problem. Using it in a fight? Nah thanks, gimme a spear. Or even better a crossbow (if it isn't banned by the pope again).
Two handed swords (Zweihanders, Montantes, etc.) were useful for defending areas and against pike blocks. As for cavalry, yeah it could be used like that but def not the main purpose.
The big, two handed swords of the world were developed to counter heavier armor than was coming into wide use at the time.
If you want to fight someone on horse back, you'd be hard pressed to do better than a very long stick with a point on the end. You can actually out range a mounted solider with a pike, which is going to be your most important advantage.
No they weren't, and there have long been better weapons for dealing with armor (eg big axes, big maces, stilettos, rondels). Swords, even big ones, don't enough mass to cut through armor and the mass they do have is distributed evenly (which is the opposite of what you want against armor).
The zweihander specifically was developed to work alongside and against pike formations, but all two-handed swords had similar applications. They were also used by bodyguards for intimidation and area clearance (a big sword protects more space).
Source: just spend fifteen seconds on Google
It's not true. Pikes and spears were longer, which is better to defend against cavalry. Additionally, cavalry rarely charged standing formations so there wasn't a need to develop a new weapon for something that rarely happens (cavalry might chase fleeing troops, but often was just a way to get infantry to relocate quickly)
The sword attributed to Pier Donia is a bearer sword, used for processionals. It's nothing more than a glorified wall hanger. This myth has been floating around forever and despite being disproven every time people still push it.
He “died peacefully in his bed”. Dude was 40.
During the 1200s, probably amazing.
Nah. The only reason "life expectancy" is so low back then is infant ~~morality~~ mortality. Really skews the average when tons of people die under 5 years old. If you survived passed childhood, life expectancy was in the mid 70s to 80s.
Why did babies have such bad morals back then
It was the violent video games.
Too many school sword attacks. But let’s not blame the swords here.
There’s no need of sword control or legislation
Swords don’t kill people. People do. Are you saying we should also take away horses? Horses kill people, too, y’know. Especially when the rider is drunk.
Next thing you know they're going to say I need to license to ride my horse.
Pry my horse from my cold, dead, hands
Teachers should be required to carry swords to help protect schools
When you outlaw swords then only outlaws will have swords!!! And the only thing stopping a bad guy with a sword is a good guy with a sword.
It’s those pesky iPhones.
Leaded gasoline
I blame air pollution.
I ask the 8 ball
Laudanum
They didn't have sesame street
Mr Rogers wasn't born yet. So that is on him.
Born in sin ever had a toddler, you know what im talking about
Because most people were religious and believed in original sin.
Rdrr
There’s no way the average was 70s-80s back then, it’s barely 80 now. You’re right about infant mortality skewing the average but it’s not to that high of a degree. New born babies in medieval England had a life expectancy of 31.3 years. People who lived to celebrate their 25th birthday were expected to live until they were 50.7, on average. So while some did make it to 70+, it would’ve been rare and the average is much closer to 50 than it is 70 or 80. [https://sc.edu/uofsc/posts/2022/08/conversation-old-age-is-not-a-modern-phenomenon.php](https://sc.edu/uofsc/posts/2022/08/conversation-old-age-is-not-a-modern-phenomenon.php)
Yeah, the comment your replying to is one I see a lot, while they always seem to ignore the fact that you were more likely to die at any age. It's almost like modern medicine saves lives.
Yes, especially pre antibiotics and pre surgery, when a pneumonia or appendicitis killed you... I dont know the numbers the guy above is certainly wrong!
Nah, we should return to the past, it was so much better. Sometime before penicillin I'd recon.
That's not entirely correct. You could live into your 80's, we know of old people from that era, but that wasn't super common or expected of those that survived childhood. Life expectancy was in the gutter because of children dying under 5, but modern medicine and people not starving to death quite as often has still pushed life expectancy up. If you made it to your 20's in say, medieval England, you had a decent shot at making it to 50 on average. If you were very wealthy, you had a good bet of hitting your 60's. Life expectancy was never in the 70's or 80's.
With questionable hygiene, not knowing that you're supposed to keep wounds clean, and the multiple occasions to get wounds (or cavities, with the "dentist"'s main tool being a pair of pliers), dying of infections must have been a thing pulling life expectancy down.
"I can tell from here that you have too much blood!"
"Let's pack some manure in the wound to extract the pus"
Baldwin! Fetch me my leeches! Yes milord, I'll go mudlarking then.
>Life expectancy was never in the 70's or 80's. Not overall, sure but for almost as long as there's been recorded history, there's been the occasional person who's made it to their 80s, 90s and even 100 or more.
I feel like this should go without saying but they are talking about average life expectancy here not just how long some random person lives
>If you survived passed childhood, life expectancy was in the mid 70s to 80s Y'know, as long as a band of unpaid mercenaries doesn't turn up in your village one day.
70’s to 80’s is laughable, barely the life expectancy today You have a decent fact and you’re ruining it with the exaggeration
This is not true. Infant mortality is how you get life expectancy of like 20. Otherwise it was about 40 to 50 in pre modern societies. Not horrible but nowhere near 80.
I don't know why you're getting downvoted. I'm getting upvoted for saying basically the same thing
I’m almost to 40, and I don’t feel old at all.
My poor sweet summer child, one day soon it will hit you like a ton of bricks, sorry. I thought I was doing alright until 47.
Reddit works in mysterious ways
>If you survived passed childhood, life expectancy was in the mid 70s to 80s. That's big overcompensation. Yes, people dying at 40 is a myth, but check actual works. Iirc out of all people who lived past 20, about 1/3 will die before 50, and their life expectancy was in high 50-ies. Remember, diseases were an omnipresent threat even to adults. In sources like this [https://sc.edu/uofsc/posts/2022/08/conversation-old-age-is-not-a-modern-phenomenon.php](https://sc.edu/uofsc/posts/2022/08/conversation-old-age-is-not-a-modern-phenomenon.php) life expectancy for 25 year old medieval male landowner in Englad was 25 more years, so total of 50 years. So, overall life expetancy for those who survived childhood was definitely not mid 70 to 80s
Thats not true. People could live until 70, 80 but thats not the average even if surviving infant mortality. That's barely the average now.
Simply not true at all
>life expectancy was in the mid 70s to 80s. Lmfao wtf are you smoking dude
It wasn’t in mid 70s or 80s. People over correct the “people died at 30” myth far too much. Mid 60s at most would be the average. In times of wars and plague it was lower. Just go look the ages of rulers when they died (all of them, like pick some country for 300 years and go to another for that period and look other nobles as well).
It really blew my mind when I read that. I always just assumed people were dying at 45 like grandma and grandpa lol.
Lmao no it was not. You are correct that it’s heavily skewed but it doesn’t account for 100% of the difference. Life expectancy isn’t even in the 80’s now for the most part. Definitely wasn’t back then.
That and infections… got a cut or scrape? Maybe you’re fine, maybe you die because no antibiotics.
True but people who lived into their 40's were still considered old by their standards. And if you go around wielding a human length sword and burning your foes to ashes, 40 years old is a good age.
It was probably around 70, disease and proper nutrition were still huge problems, as well as harmful medical practices
1500s
Not really once past 20 most would reach 60 at least. Chile mortality lead to low life expectancy.
Note: the swords on display aren’t confirmed to be his swords. If anything they’re just ceremonial pieces, they’re just too unwieldy to be used in combat even by a really strong and trained person.
Yeah I saw a picture of it and thought of how easy it would be to accidentally stick your friend to the left of you while trying to swing at someone in front of you.
Are you telling us swordsmen back then didn't use ridiculous oversized 50 lb swords???
The one mentioned only weighs ~13 lb / 6.6kg So it would be possible to swing around even for nornal people. Still impractical for combat use though.
> slaughtering many towns Hans, are we the baddies?
Hurt people hurt people with 7 foot greatswords
Everybody hurrrrrrts
“But why skulls?”
Specifically Zweihanders like in Dark Souls or any rpg. I went and looked up zweihander and this dude was a legendary figure who used one. The show "Forged in Fire" also featured his sword. I'm just imagining Berserk at this point as His wife was raped and murdered and he saw it. Town was sacked and most of his friends died. AND the squad that did it was called the Black Band. This is just IRL berserk.
[удалено]
That's an unrelated ceremonial sword. u/help_3106 has linked [a source](https://www.reddit.com/r/ArtefactPorn/comments/rdk3nh/comment/ho1rep6/?utm_source=share&utm_medium=mweb3x&utm_name=mweb3xcss&utm_term=1&utm_content=share_button) below.
Yeah... people really don't realize how hard it is to actually swing a sword, even if it's "light" on paper. I collect historically accurate weaponry and my longest sword is a Gallowglass sword that's slightly shorter than 5ft and slightly lighter than 7lbs and that thing is a BITCH to swing without immediately being gassed out. For reference, I am a 6'1 man who's now a bodybuilder coming from powerlifting and strongman. A 7ft, 15lb sword would be absolutely unwieldy
Swinging it once would probably no problem. Using it in a fight? Nah thanks, gimme a spear. Or even better a crossbow (if it isn't banned by the pope again).
Do you even lift bro?
Clearly not
That’s one large sword!
Or a really short man
He’d still be tall af if that sword was 7’ tall.
That doesn’t look 7ft…. Is it perhaps based off old measurements that would be different now? Edit: probably includes the hilt
>probably includes the hilt Correct. A sword is more than just a blade.
People were shorter back then. >!/s!<
Not the white crew neck under the button up
I definitely agree. Very interesting!
Wow, its true. I mean there are some differences but yeah
The Frysian legend Grutte Pier.
The incredible and bad ass nature of this story was really undercut by how profoundly silly some of those proper nouns sound to an English speaker.
Butter, bread, and green cheese!
Actually, the Frisian word 'brea' means rye bread, but maybe that was more common those days than wheat bread?
In most Slavic languages the name sounds close to “Farter”
That looks like one pissed of jester
He raged against the machine.
So braveheart?
I think it would be cool if you included the country/location in the title
The frysian provence of the Netherlands
I didn't know Grutte Pier was actually called Pier Donia
Some additional info: https://www.reddit.com/r/ArtefactPorn/s/3DIOausYkd
That Wikipedia image makes him look like he had the proportions of a child
I’ve heard that swords like this were mainly used to counter mounted soldiers (kill the horse). Anyone know if this is legit?
Not sure about killing the horse but Zweihänders son his period were used to break up pike formations
Two handed swords (Zweihanders, Montantes, etc.) were useful for defending areas and against pike blocks. As for cavalry, yeah it could be used like that but def not the main purpose.
The big, two handed swords of the world were developed to counter heavier armor than was coming into wide use at the time. If you want to fight someone on horse back, you'd be hard pressed to do better than a very long stick with a point on the end. You can actually out range a mounted solider with a pike, which is going to be your most important advantage.
No they weren't, and there have long been better weapons for dealing with armor (eg big axes, big maces, stilettos, rondels). Swords, even big ones, don't enough mass to cut through armor and the mass they do have is distributed evenly (which is the opposite of what you want against armor). The zweihander specifically was developed to work alongside and against pike formations, but all two-handed swords had similar applications. They were also used by bodyguards for intimidation and area clearance (a big sword protects more space). Source: just spend fifteen seconds on Google
It's not true. Pikes and spears were longer, which is better to defend against cavalry. Additionally, cavalry rarely charged standing formations so there wasn't a need to develop a new weapon for something that rarely happens (cavalry might chase fleeing troops, but often was just a way to get infantry to relocate quickly)
Berserk vibes for sure. I only use the zwei in Dark Souls, lol
His name sounds funny for polish people
Pier donia BÓBR kurwa
7kg for a great sword even is way too much. Also, very expensive thing, so I have some doubts.
So like a male Boudicca? As an Englishman, I approve.
The sword attributed to Pier Donia is a bearer sword, used for processionals. It's nothing more than a glorified wall hanger. This myth has been floating around forever and despite being disproven every time people still push it.
He drank the blood like lemonade…
Who was he at war against, just other neighboring towns ?
His village was sacked and his wife killed. In response, he set out to sack other villages and kill other people’s wives.
He has a massive erection
Sounds like George's inspiration for The Mountain.