Straight swords vs. curved swords

[D5CAV]

Contrary to Disney movies, sword fights last about as long as gunfights, and they end the same way, with penetration of major organs leading to organ failure and death. Even the storied Samurai sword killed primarily with the point. Like medieval swords, the cutting blade was used mostly for executions.

While you are correct about the duration, you are ENTIRELY incorrect about the rest. I have no idea where you got this idea... god forbid it was a serious book or martial arts expert.

Historically, this was false for all forms of sword combat other than smallsword/sidesword and rapier, which were at the very END of swordfighting as a practical primary method of combat, and often conducted with no armor, or minimal armor.

The VAST majority of sword combat, from the beginning of time, until today, ended up with one or both combatants suffering major limb wounds (either large slashes, crush breaks) or abdominal wounds, also mostly slashes (facial wounds were not uncommon either). Death was by blood loss, sepsis, or the inability to continue to function in life. Also, TBI through concussion was very common.

This is especially true for mounted swordsmen against other mounted swordsmen or infantry; which is the vast majority of sword combat from the 18th century on.

... BIG SNIP....

Yes and no.

http://www.thearma.org/essays/thrusting_vs_cutting.html

Thrusting was part of the Greek and Roman manual of arms, as well as during medieval times.

There are several accounts of Renaissance swordsmen with small swords defeating multiple opponents. These were done with rapid thrusts and were not duels.

True on the Katana not being used much in real combat. For terrorizing unarmed non-Samurai, death was by slashing (head or limbs). For duel against another skilled Samurai, it was the point.

[D5CAV]

Oh and the reason for the design of the Patton saber is simple... it's not a cavalry saber at all, it's actually a smallsword.

And I fenced saber in college... there's a reason why the edge is a scoring surface

I prefer traditional saber fencing to olympic; because the calves and thighs are allowed scoring area.

Probably why I like the M1913 - it feels like an epee.

I probably would have done better as a fencer if I liked the saber. I'm over 6' tall, so I had strength and reach over my typically smaller and more nimble foil opponents, which didn't help that much against speed and guile.

I found the wide slashing strikes of the saber to be easier to parry than the foil or epee.

I agree on the scoring surfaces. I found the limitations on foil to be unrealistic, which is why I gravitated to the epee, which allowed the entire body. Epee was a lot harder than the foil, though. I never got very good at it.

[D5CAV]

BTW, D5CAV, don't buy any "Patton" sabers unless you've educated yourself to spot the fakes. Most of the ones in circulation through the 1980s were legit, but in the last few decades, the plethora of replicas - and their quality - has become widespread, and all dealers aren't necessarily either scrupulous or edged-weapon educated enough to tell the difference. There's nothing wrong with the replicas, as long as you aren't paying "original" example prices.

Caveat emptor.

Thanks for the link. I've fingerprinted a few M1913 swords. Some were obvious reproductions. Some looked (to my untrained eye) to be real. The prices of the "real" ones were about 2x those listed on your link - about $700 to $900. Most of the swords I've bought I've paid about as much as a collector bayonet (about $100 to $250), so I'm probably never going to own a Patton sword.

[D5CAV]

Maybe Uhlanen were thought to be more elite and skilled so they got the straight swords? From a casual count, it looks like the Prussians had almost as many Uhlans units as Hussars and Dragoons, so that seems unlikely.

If you look at most of the photographs of the Uhlans, most of them had heavy cavalry sabers... mostly longer than typical, but still heavy cavalry sabers... both officer and ranks.

For those who had the straight swords... Well, the Uhlans were HIGHLY traditional, and concerned with symbols and legacy etc... Perhaps it was a traditional weapon from their past?

It could also be that those who did were of a different class, who were primarily fencers instead of fighters from horseback?

I'm not familiar enough with the specifics to really speculate further.

Here's my M1889 Uhlanen sword: http://www.ebay.com/itm/Antique-19th-Ce ... 1286872754

Mine looks to be in better condition. Yowzer! $980?! I think I paid $150 for mine.

No bids at that price, though, so I can fantasize about the value as much as this seller.

[D5CAV]

For duel against another skilled Samurai, it was the point.

Nope. Really, no... 20 year practitioner and student of Kenjutsu here (and of western sword arts as well. I was an ARMA member for years, and an SCA fighter as well)... really no...

In fact, for an actual formal duel, use of the point was considered vulgar, to the point where if you used it, you may have been considered unskilled, or even dishonorable.

...Sure, you won, but you had to use the point to do it so you were not worthy of winning etc... etc...

Miyamoto Musashi should have included "Always cheat, always win ... the only unfair fight is the one you lose" in his "Book of Five Rings".

In his famous duel against Sasaki Kojiro, he purportedly used an oar against Sasaki. Some accounts say he killed Sasaki with a blow to the head and others that he stabbed Sasaki with a point he had carved into the oar.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sasaki_Kojir%C5%8D

Here's the money quote: "The debate still rages today as to whether or not Musashi cheated in order to win ..."

As in that other famous rule of gunfighting "10 years from now, no one will remember details of gun and caliber; they will only remember who won and who didn't."

Musashi won and Sasaki didn't.

[Aesop]

It wouldn't surprise me if lancer officers, who often didn't actually carry lances, used straight swords in the initial charge, in the point lunge position... basically making their arm and sword into a lance.

That is precisley the entire manual of arms for the Patton Cavalry saber, and its raison de etre. Draw, point, charge.

[Cybrludite]

Civil war and later American cavalry also used both sets of tactics, but didn't include lancers. Just pistols, carbines, and swords. Since the slashing and wheeling attack was performed with pistols and carbines, this left the sword as a weapon of last resort in the melee.

Well, there was the 6th Pennsylvania Cavalry during the Late Unpleasantness, but they traded their lances for Sharps carbines as quickly as possible once they got to the field.

[Aglifter]

A) According to a forgotten source... By the end of the Civil War, the calvary had switched to carrying multiple revolvers, and transitioning between them, rather than swords. From what I recall, they'd carry 4 - as attacks were deemed to have succeeded or failed by the time they had fired 24 shots.

B) I have a very interesting book on swords, somewhere or another - written by a large collector of them.

The Celts had some bronze "finger" swords, which were a thrusting weapon only - but that could have been a limitation of bronze.

Similarly, the swords, prior to... The use of charcoal? I forget - there was a period when small pieces of iron were heated together to form blades, because they couldn't get enough heat to really form a solid blade all at once... Anyway, those blades would shatter if they struck blade on blade - from what I recall, they were intended, in a large part, for a thrust.

Stopping a thrust was the whole point of chain mail, as I recall - or maybe that was how it was defeated...

I need to read it again.

I do recall that the first third was unsharpened - and was often used as a handhold.

"Knights*" - at least at one point, in theory - started training at 7, and entered combat at 21. Gymnastics has its roots in their PT - which does make sense given the fitness standards Richard I had for his knights coming on Crusade.

So, I'm fairly certain that "Battle of the Nations" looks NOTHING like an actual fight would have, between gymnasts.

*I read an early version of the Arthurian legend at one time, which seemed to be a fairly realistic depiction of a society, based on individual combat skills - they were all sociopaths, who wandered around indifferently raping/killing/siring children/etc - tied in, to an extent, w. the descriptions of Charlemagne's court.

[MarkD]

Having read Le Morte d'Arthur some years ago, and having seen a couple film adaptations of the legends of Arthur, I've been struck by just how, well, pagan it seemed. Even though they were Christians there was a STRONG pagan influence in the stories and in the actions of the main characters.

[Jericho941]

My medieval history teacher said that the first knight came about when someone decided to take the biggest, meanest jerk in town and pay him to go beat up other people instead of the locals. Or maybe that was the sheriff. It's been a few beers.