Research and Discussion Forums

[Allen Johnson]

I'm collecting sources both modern and period that profess that the smallsword and it's systems in late 17th through 19th centuries were the "pinnacle" of swordsmanship in the west. I'm sure we've all heard variations of this tale in our conversations and research. I'm considering an article on the rebuttal of this statement for a publication. Thanks folks.
_________________
"Why is there a picture of a man with a sword in his head on your desk?" -friends inquiry

[Kevin Reicks]

Ah, I found one for you on the sword at least:

"...more or less standardised form of the so-called 'smallsword', the most elegant and deadly hand-weapon ever devised by man."

Ewart Oakeshott, European Weapons and Armour; Introduction p25

I wonder if John Clements ever talked to him about that quote. That would be a conversation I would pay money to witness.

[Jaron Bernstein]

[Allen Johnson]

Thanks Kevin. Yeah, I think folks miss the point that each weapon was devised to solve a particular need in that time. Certainly a smallsword in the age of plate would be useless. People are also still locked into a single line, timeline regarding the evolution of the sword. If they pause to think for just 2 seconds, they'll recall that the cavalry saber was still being used at the same time and long after the smallsword fell out of use. Not only that, because of the advances in firearms as well as increased legal penalties for dueling I propose that training in swordplay was going through an all-time low. It wouldn't be much use to the average soldier if you were going to spend you days in musket and bayonet drills. At any rate, this is the direction I want to take in this research.
_________________
"Why is there a picture of a man with a sword in his head on your desk?" -friends inquiry

[Jonathan Hill]

Taking the small sword and explaining how it is ill suited for war is about as inaccurate as saying the small sword is the pinnacle of sword designs period. The small sword was the pinnacle of dueling swords for the time period and since I’ve fought small swords with a rapier I will attest they can quite easily be said to be a better design for single unarmored combat (aka a duel.) I’d caution you to not go down the same road as those who started the ‘smallsword is the best sword ever,’ by explaining how it is ill suited for a job it was never intended for. I’d think a better discussion or paper is how each sword should be properly suited for the type of combat it is intended for and using one sword for a different purpose is equivalent to the wrong tool for the wrong job. A great example is the patton sword, intended as a cavalry weapon but completely ill suited to cut with. It's intended use is to thrust as you gallop by and not well suited to a melee on horseback.

I have heard of a book that spends many chapters exalting the wonders of the small sword, I’ll inquire which one that is for you.

[Allen Johnson]

I think I didn't explain myself clearly Jonathan, but I agree with you in that the real point is that every weapon was created to fill a need in that time with the variables unique to that environment.
_________________
"Why is there a picture of a man with a sword in his head on your desk?" -friends inquiry

[LafayetteCCurtis]

Be careful not to fall into overly broad generalisations--19th-century gentlemen revivalists like Alfred Hutton and Egerton Castle might have been a bit dismissive of pre-smallsword methods in the beginning, but there's some evidence that they eventually began to develop a greater appreciation for medieval and Renaissance swordsmanship after they had spent years studying and experimenting in the field. A while ago I heard that somebody was even going to write a book about it, but I forgot who it was (and whether the book has been finished or not by now).