New article on myth of thrusting vs. cutting sword

[John_Clements]

The Myth of Cutting vs. Thrusting Swords

[Jared L. Cass]

A pretty cool article. What struck me while reading it was something that I'd contemplated in the past. Namely: personal preferance and utility. It's been said that buying a sword was much like buying a vehicle, in this modern age.

Construction workers and farmers drive pick-up trucks due to the fact that they are designed for hard work. Family men and women drive mini-vans because they need the extra room for kids and groceries. Comuters chose sedans for getting from point A to point B. College students, starving artists, the thrifty, and those who live where fuel costs are very expensive, choose compact cars to save money. And finally, luxury cars and SUV's are chosen by those who have money to burn (or that like to look like they've got money to burn!)...much like haveing a gem encrusted hilt and scabbard. <img src="/forum/images/icons/smirk.gif" alt="" /> Oh, I forgot sports cars. I'd say they are choosen by those of us who like a little bit of style and lots of potential power. <img src="/forum/images/icons/cool.gif" alt="" />

There is a lot of cross-over between cars and people here in the USA, so the above is just very vague, take it at surface value. Any more, and we'd be better off discussing this at a sociology forum.

Just a fun post, any other additions?

Jared L Cass, Wisconsin

[JeanryChandler]

I enjoyed reading your article and I tend to take the same side in debates between "modern" fencers versus historical fencing techniques and historical weapons. But I have to play the devils advocate here and point out something which I think you may have missed (though please pardon me if I didn't read carefully enough and just missed this in your piece)

It seems though that you left out the main reason for the continued use of cutting and particularly, curved slashing weapons by the military in the 18th and 19th Century. I may be wrong here, because this is a conclusion I've reached myself through observation and not backed up by any specific academic source, and I don't have an advanced degree in History or anything, but I always assumed that slashing weapons with a certain shape and overall design, were cavalry weapons, because they were most suitible for cavalry, and historically they seemed to have been most associated with cavalry. By the 18th and especially 19th centuries, armor is obsolete, guns dominate the battlefield, and really the only widespread use of swords as primary military weapons (as opposed to backup / ceremonial use by officers) is by cavalry fighting from horseback.
Certain design characteristics, including a curved blade and a specific type of angled handle, seem to lend themselves to use by cavalry. I'm thinking, if you are riding through an enemy infantry formation at full gallop, you don't want to impale someone with a sword even if it is a more efficient way to penetrate armor and rib cages, because you may have trouble getting it out again. A lance you can leave behind if it got stuck in a target, (and cavalry soldiers often carried three lances for this purpose) the sword was the backup when you used up your lances, and in any event you certainly wouldn't want to leave it behind. The curved shape of the typical single edged swords used by cavalry (and most swords of this type, with a few exceptions such as the Flachion family and the Kopis / Falcata were used by cavalry) lends itself well to slashing at an opponent while riding by, and probably assisted in weapon retention, as did the curved handle one often sees in cavalry sabers dating from 12th century mongol weapons to 19th century American military swords. (Interestingly, a similar curved handle was present on a lot of Kopis / Falcata that I've seen as well)

On the other hand, I can also think of an argument why a saber or a back-sword would be a better military weapon than a rapier or a small sword: a heavier slashing and cutting weapon would be better in active defense, especially against heavy weapons such as for example a bayonetted musket or rifle. It wouldnt be that easy to parry a musket with a backsword but I would truly hate to be in the position of trying to parry a musket with a smallsword or an epee or something like that!

Just a few thoughts.

[John_Clements]

Hi

I think you are essentialy right, but I saw no reason to include that in the piece, since the "why" of different blades was not the purpose (and would have required pages to justfy each type), just the fact that there were straight and curved continuously through cultures with niether "superior" in history.

JC

[George Turner]

Another interesting point is whether swords influenced gun design, while the reverse is apparently true. Guns and pole-arms, when used in formation, could relegate swords to backup status, but swords didn't relegate guns to the same role. I doubt many guns (aside from bizzare pistol/cutlass combintations) were influenced by any trends in sword design or use. It seems sword use, however, was heavily influenced by the growing dominance of ballistic weapons (guns).

Look at the abandonment of armour, making rapiers and small swords useable, or the adoption of the saber to get rid of the carrocole (spell?) so the cavalry would plow into the enemy, instead of wheeling around to reload,. You see a definite influence of guns on swords, which are basically forced to specialize in small niches of combat where they can eak out an edge over muskets and pistols, by utility, convenience, status, or social convention (dueling).

[JeanryChandler]

Something else I was thinking about regarding the debate between cutting and thrusting weapons, was that cutting weapons were used in civilian fighting long after may histories would have you assume that small swords and rapiers had completely taken over. One incident which occurred to me today was abolitionist John Brown's first raid at Pottawotamie Creek, in which he and his sons were reportedly armed with "broad swords" when they killed three pro-slavery enemies. He himself was later wounded by a Marine officers saber at Harpers Ferry.

Another thing I remember from local history here in Louisiana, was that in the late 18th and early 19th centuries the Creoles (meaning in this case, locally born residents of French and Spanish descent), who had a lively tradition of formal dueling, reportedly actually preferred using what were again referred to by historians as "broad swords" for settling thier disputes, precisely because it was felt that cutting weapons were less likely to cause fatal injuries. Since the point of the code duello was to allow the settling of disputes with a MINIMUM of bloodshed, and fights were generally unto the first drawing of blood, this allegedly worked out well. I only happen to know this because it's part of local anti-American legend, the second part of which is that purpotedly when the rough and rowdy "Kaintucks" (Americans) arrived, predictably misbehaved themselves and were challenged to duels by indignant Creole gentlemen, they misunderstood the purpose of being able to choose dueling weapons, and they frequently selected such lethal instruments as shotguns and squirrel rifles. Needless to say the death rate from dueling skyrocketed, and the time honored tradition soon had to be abolished, which was another grievance long remembered by the much insulted creoles...
JR

[TimSheetz]

Jeanry,

I am not sure that the 'peaceful' minimizing of blood is accurate. The visciousness of human nature and the romanticizing of 'gentlemen's noble' characters is overstated. I know when you get into the 18th Century, folks duelled with knives quite often, and the people in the Americas were notoriously brutal to each other.
People who are likely to 'duel' are also likely to stab you in the back if there is no one watching. I think historical accounts support this.

I would say they probably liked heavier cutting swords because even if you close with your opponent you can cut them, while a small sword is useless when you have missed with the point.

I also would say that a blade that is wider but still pointed is even more deadly when it comes to thrusts... you certainly lose more blood and the chances of creating more trauma are greater if you use a wider blade.

Would you rather be stabbed with a sharpened screw driver, or a bowie knife?

Just my thoughts.

Tim Sheetz

[JeanryChandler]

Hi Tim,

I fear I was not clear in my description of that little anecdote.

I am the very last person who might glorify or romanticise a "gentleman" duelist, if anything to the contrary: my own personal bias is generally in precisely the opposite direction, in fact, I'm quite anti- aristocratic. I was just relating the legend as the local descendents of Creole families do, and the bit about "reducing violence" was merely the rationalization which was used at the time for the legal sanctioning of personal duels as some form of left over judicial combat. The specific claim at the time was that regulated dueling would help cut down on violence in the streets and general public mayhem, therefore it ought to remain legal. Personally I doubt it really did, and I just think the Creole gentlemen liked to duel occasionally as a sort of sport. It remained legal because of their influence over the communities laws.

It is only fair to add however, that local histories are uninamous in their agreement that violence and mayhem of all kinds increased a thousand fold with the arrival of the Americans.

I agree by the way that a wider blade does more damage when stabbing, (such as the Roman Gladius) but since even a sharpened screwdriver will easily kill you if it pierced your heart or entered your eye socket, the emphasis of wepons such as small swords on speed and agility was a tradeoff for getting that first well placed puncture wound into the enemies body before he got one in yous, which ultimately proved to be more valuable than causing a potentially more massive injury.

Also, a narrower blade is probably more effective at penetrating through ribs and even armor than a broader blade.

JR

[TimSheetz]

Hi Jeanry,

I didn't think that you were glorifying the duel, or romanticizing gentlemanly traits. I was saying that the local explanation kind of sounded that way to me.

I think that there were undoubtedly folks who enjoyed the 'sport' of duelling. I just think that saying that folks used a broader blade because it was less lethal is not accurate (Though I do not doubt that it was the explanation given).

Thanks,

Tim

[John_Clements]

Jeanry,
Can you try to find a source we can quote for that info on Creol broadsword duelling?
It's consistent actually with late 19th century Italian duelling sabers as well. They were no longer the old weapons used in the old way to hack off limbs and cleave body parts.

JC

[JeanryChandler]

Yeah, it's an old legend which I've heard from many sources, but I believe it's included in the well documented though scandalous popular History book by Herbert Ashbury, called 'The French Quarter', and he himself probably got his information from a local newspaper article. The source will probably be listed too, that particular book is quite well footnoted. I'll see what I can come up with.

Your comment about Italian dueling sabers brings up another interesting possible nuance to this, that they may have been using a whole class of dueling weapons, perhaps specifically designed to minimize injury in favor of getting in hits. It is frequently emphasized in local legend that the goal in the old Code Duello was to fight until the first blood was drawn, not "to the death", and deaths from duels were supposedly rare until the Americans made their presence known. After all, in this period 'broadswod' could just have likely have meant something like a relatively light English backsword as it could have meant some kind of Greatsword or a Falchion!

Anyway I'll definatley look this up and see what I can find for you, I don't have a copy of "The French Quarter" at the moment but I know of a good used bookstore downtown where I can get one this weekend. In the meantime, I'm gonna do a google search right now!

JR

[John_Clements]

Sean, I think in the Colonial case the crime was they were indentured and had no permission.

JC

[JeanryChandler]

Some of the results of my googling...

There are references on this website to duels with rapiers, sabers, colichemardes, broad-swords, and indeed, shotguns! The overall techncial accuracy here is somewhat suspect though.

http://www.duellingoaks.com/oaks/

The legal or tradtional guidelines for dueling in America

http://www.pbs.org/wgbh/amex/duel/sfeature/rulesofdueling.html

This doc covers dueling in England

http://blueharvest0.tripod.com/codeduello.htm

The original, Irish Code Duello of 1777

http://www.io.com/gibbonsb/pob/code.duello.html

Some kind of modernized Duel Code, interesting in that it refers to specific rules for specific weapons, though of questionable historical relevance

http://www.cbc2.org/faculty/dabbott/Duello1.html

Quite a good history of Duels

http://www.ansteorra.org/regnum/marshal/rapier/publications/acad9/duello.htm

This doc refers to Richard Burton himself fighting a duel with a broad-sword.

http://ibiblio.org/gutenberg/etext03/8lsrb10.txt

[JeanryChandler]

John Clements Wrote:

"Jeanry,
Can you try to find a source we can quote for that info on Creol broadsword duelling?
It's consistent actually with late 19th century Italian duelling sabers as well. They were no longer the old weapons used in the old way to hack off limbs and cleave body parts.

JC "

The legend is mentioned in the book called "The French Quarter" by Herbert Asbury. He was a historical writer in the 1920's and 1930's specializing in scandal and tales of the wickedness of the underclass. He empahsized the horible with a Jerry Springer-esque glee but he is noted for his good and accurate Historical research. The recent movie "Gangs of New York" was based on a similar book he wrote about the gangs of new york, in the 19th century.

French Quarter
An Informal History of the New Orleans Underworld (1936).
Author: Herbert Asbury
Format: Trade Paperback
Publication Date: September 1992
ISBN: 0891760288

I'll have the specific quote for you when i get my hands on another copy of the book, couldn't find it this weekend.

JR