Simple question regarding US officer's swords

[James Brazas]

I was looking at US military officer's swords recently and I was curious as to what they would be defined as.

For the Marine Corps, it's obviously a Mameluke scimitar and fairly similar to a saber.

For the Navy, it's a little harder to tell. It has a complex hilt and a straight blade, but I'm not sure if it qualifies as a small sword or a side sword. Due to the era our nation was founded, the small sword is a strong possibility, but the small sword was never a military weapon whereas officer's swords continued to be used in combat for quite some time in US military history. So is it a side-sword?

Another item of note is that it seems the Naval officer's sword was originally sharp on both sides, though the modern dress swords are only sharp at or near the tip.

[Stacy Clifford]

Few historical smallswords have anything much resembling a cutting edge, so in terms of blade form I'd call it a side sword, but as narrow as it is and not really being sharp, you would probably be better off treating it like a smallsword if you had to fight with it.

[James Brazas]

After doing a bit more research on US Navy swords dating back to the Civil War, it seems you're right.

I found some references to Naval officers being required to wear a "small sword," but most references in the old military codes use the term "cut and thrust sword."

Further, it seems that surviving examples of Civil War era Naval officer swords had much thicker blades than their modern ceremonial counterparts. I found several references to minimum widths as well. The minimum width was only 1 inch, but it seems they wanted to ensure it least had some cutting ability. Most surviving examples seem to have had blades thicker than 1 inch. The blades were typically 32 inches in length.

http://arms2armor.com/Swords/1852navy.htm

[Jonathan Hill]

The appropriate term is 'officers dress sword.'

Classifying swords is something we do when we look back at old swords, as it’s not an old sword it should be called what swords are called…sword.

It’s closer to a spadroon, or a shearing sword/cut and thrust sword...
just sword. Side sword is what we call a 15-17 C cut and thrust sword with a complex hilt. It's also of no actual use aside from a dress sword thus there is no need for a more robust blade.

[James Brazas]

Interesting.

What would be the difference between a sidesword and a spadroon?

Also, what blade width or weapon weight would you need for a cut-and-thrust sword before cutting strokes have any real effectiveness?

I know Albion's cut-and-thrust swords are 1.48 inches in width.

[Kody Tench]

Interesting.

What would be the difference between a sidesword and a spadroon?

Also, what blade width or weapon weight would you need for a cut-and-thrust sword before cutting strokes have any real effectiveness?

I know Albion's cut-and-thrust swords are 1.48 inches in width.

Wouldn't any weight be effective??? Maybe not deadly but most any sword wound can be debilitating from any edged weapon.

Just saying...

[James Brazas]

A sword of any weight or width can cut provided it has an edge.

But there's a big difference between a cut from a longsword and a cut from a rapier.

So my question is where along that continuum would a spadroon or modern Naval cut-and-thrust sword be? I'm guessing it would be like the rapier, but I'd be happy to be wrong.

I'm looking into being a Navy JAG, so I'm interested in getting a custom battle-ready Naval officer's cut-and-thrust sword if I get into the JAG program. I'm just curious if if the standard width and weight would be sufficient for Renaissance side-sword techniques or whether I would need altered blade dimensions.

The nice thing is that the military seems to primarily care about blade appearance and length. Provided it's the right colors, the right hilt shape, it's straight, and it's the right blade length, you can have the rest custom. So a functional side-sword should be possible.

It would be convenient to get my officer's dress sword and my sharp side-sword for HEMA at the same time.

[Jaron Bernstein]

I may be wrong, but I had the impression that current US military officer and NCO swords: (1) are of a standard make/model, (2) are purely ceremonial wall hangers for drill and ceremony. The only "modern" military I can think of that issued functional swords intentend for use was the Japanese in WW2.

[James Brazas]

It's true that the standard issue military swords are all purely ceremonial and are essentially sword shaped objects.

Yet all the military regs I've read don't specify that you have to buy them from the normal distributors. All of the specifications are about external appearance anyway. So long as it looks right, it should be good.

Cold Steel makes functional versions for the Army, Navy, and Marine Corps. I'm thinking I might want to get one custom made, though, so that it can be a little more effective in the cut.

[Jonathan Hill]

A spadroon is essentially a smallsword with a robust blade and an edge. Gentlemen trained in smallsword would prefer a spadroon to a sabre or broadsword as it ‘acted’ like a smallsword. Most also didn’t have to get down and dirty in the fighting and actually use the sword outside dueling.

What would be the difference between a sidesword and a spadroon?

In short, hand protection, heft of blade, PoB and you hold them differently. Sideswords have a complex hilt, thus hand protection allowing more extended uses of a cut. The simple knuckle bow swords like the later officer swords are not suited to quite a few actions you would do in side sword, you must ‘change’ the technique to compensate for lack of hand protection, but you should be doing this for any blade. PoB on a cutter needs to be a bit further out than 2 inches so that you can actually have impact on a cut. Cavalry Sabres will push 6+ inches, which becomes unruly to control but devastating in a cut. These officer blades will have a PoB well back to the hilt.

As to learning to use a spadroon, it is advised first to learn smallsword, then to learn broadsword. If you wish to keep it to the 15th – 17th C weapons learn a rapier first, then move to sidesword, or learn to thrust then learn to cut. The Broadsword system and Sidesword system are very similar but you need to make corrections to your specific blade type, and use ‘fencing’ footwork. I’d recommend Taylors version of “Art of Defense on Foot” if you wish to read a bit on the blade. This is a re-publishing of Roworth with emphasis on the Spadroon, It’s readily available on-line.

I did read a text that described the most appropriate use for this type of sword. It spent many pages discussing how to draw the sword, how to salute with the sword and how to scabbard the sword. It even discussed who had the right to draw the sword, when to draw and the effect on command of whose sword was drawn. I can’t remember which one that is at the moment…It did not discuss fighting with the sword.

[James Brazas]

Thank you, Jonathan Hill. That was very interesting and informative.

On the issue of width and point of balance, what would be good widths and points of balance for the following:

Sidesword
Spadroon
Rapier

[Vincent Le Chevalier]

On the issue of width and point of balance, what would be good widths and points of balance for the following:

Sidesword
Spadroon
Rapier

There is something of a continuum between sidesword and rapier (whatever definition you want to choose) so you won't find a 'good' value for either width or point of balance in my opinion.

Spadroons could be a bit more specific in shape, but even there there must have been variations. I have data for one that has its PoB 10cm from the junction cross-handle. No idea how wide it is...

Keep in mind as well that point of balance does not say everything about how the sword functions.

Regards,

[Jonathan Hill]

Keep in mind as well that point of balance does not say everything about how the sword functions.

Regards,

This

I went through a bunch of our rapier and side sword and found that they all pretty much had a PoB (measured from the cross guard) between 3.5-4 inches. Now the Rapiers want to be held with the blade horizontal to the ground while the side swords want to be at more of a 45 degree angle. The differences of length of blade and heft of blade, a shorter and wider blade like a generic side sword will make the function and feel differently vs a longer thin blade. It will also change where the Center of Percussion is. I also grabbed a saber that I knew had a PoB about the same and it feels much different, this I chalked up to the fact that I put my finger over the cross guard of the rapier and side swords which make the PoB in relation to my hand different by virtue of the grip on the blade. This is something you definitely will not do with a knuckle bow blade, your hand will be completely behind the cross guard.

Generic numbers for blades in our groups, but these vary a lot:
Side swords: Width at the fort: 1.5-2 inches (we have a beast that clocks in at 2.5 inches) Width at point no more than 1 inch.
Rapier: 1 inch max width at the fort, genearaly closer to 3/4th an inch.

I don’t have any good numbers for spadroons, and they vary a lot themselves between early ones that were used to fight with and late period ones like these that were just a symbol of command.

On a side note it seems Cold Steel is releasing a Naval Officers Sword in their 2012 line up. I guess they are making a bid for the buisness of officers that want 'real' swords not just wall hangers. Cold Steel normally builds the blade more 'cut' heavy than historical ones. It appeals to their core demographic of back yard cutters.

[James Brazas]

Jonathan Hill,

Thanks again for the great info!

That's good to know exactly the numbers on the sidesword and rapier.

I saw the Cold Steel US Naval Officer's Sword that they are planning on releasing. I have yet to see any videos on it, PoB, width/thickness, or any other way for me to know how it handles, though.

I'm considering getting the Cold Steel Naval Officer's Sword, but only if I'm convinced it has good handling characteristics. Which begs the question, how would it handle?

If they make it more cut-oriented like they usually do, would that make it handle more like a sidesword or should it be treated like a short rapier?

If I'm not satisfied with the handling characteristics, I may just see if I can get one of Albion's smiths to make a custom order. I hear they do that every once in a while.

Sincerely,

James Brazas

[Anthony R. Camacho]

I have had two regulation military swords in my 23 year career in the U.S. Army. First was my cadet sword (Kemper Military School, where I was commissioned as a U.S. Army Officer in 1987, used the same sword as West Point), and my Army Officer's Saber. I have to say that, as an epee fencer, my cadet sword can be used with epee techniques as only the point was sharp. However, if sharpened, the cadet sword has great potential to be used with small sword techniques, as its long sharpened edge would inflect some, but not great, damage on an opponent. My Army Saber is purely ceremonial, and would not make an effective saber at all. Compared to my original 1861 Light Army Cavalry Saber, my modern saber simply lacks the heft and strength to inflict substantial damage on opponent. Further, having a rather thin blade, my modern saber will likely bend if used from horseback, unlike my original Cival War era saber, which would likely hew a dismounted opponent down easily. However, my modern saber's nickle plate and etching make for splendid visual effects on the parade field, for which it is designed and best used.
I will leave you with one of my favorite quotes from Carl Von Clausewitz, whose book "On War" continues to influence war strategy today: "Always keep an eye on your opponent, so thatyou do not, if your opponent has taken up a sharp sword, approach him armed only with an ornamental rapier." (On War, 99) For me, my U.S. Army Regulation Dress Saber is exactly that, simply an ornamental part of my uniform. If I had to use a sword for real, there are so many better choices, such as my longsword.