Why Did Sabers DOMINATE Other Swords in the MILITARY?
Vložit
- čas přidán 19. 01. 2023
- Why did sabers absolutely dominate and succeed over other types of sword, such as longswords, rapiers, smallswords and spadroons, in militaries all over the world and up to the 20th century? Excellent question from Jon Rennick on Patreon.
3 extra videos each month on Patreon, which hugely helps support this channel:
/ scholagladiatoria
Facebook & Twitter updates, info and fun:
/ historicalfencing
/ scholagladiato1
Schola Gladiatoria HEMA - sword fighting classes in the UK:
www.swordfightinglondon.com
Matt Easton's website & Pinterest:
www.matt-easton.co.uk/
www.pinterest.co.uk/matt_east...
Easton Antique Arms:
www.antique-swords.co.uk/
So, basically, sabres have very balanced functionality and practicality.
philistine
As sword fighting became less practical, Sabres became more practical.
low maintenance jack of all trades.
I also guess they wheren't easily replacable : axes chop better than kukries , and spears can thrust better than rapiers ...
Sabers slice and there aren't other weapons that can do that better than a saber type of sword
@@quadg5296 " *As sword fighting became less practical, Sabres became more practical* "
I think it has more to do with the growing armies, which were made possible by improved road network. Since nobody could afford to armor up those huge armies, a more cut oriented sword "suddenly" made all the sense in the world.
Consider that a simple saber was likely easier to mass produce as armies became more professional and equipment became more standardized
6:30 You also have to remember that officers (and sergeants) were not supossed to fight at all. Their job was to lead the soldiers and keep them in line (literally, as they fought in Line formation). Until 1786, company officers even carried spears (spontoons) as a sign of status and to push the men into position. British sergeants carried halberds until 1792 and still carried spears at Waterloo.
The officers sword was mostly carried as a status symbol (because they were gentlemen) and for self-defense, together with pistols.
A sword and a pistol also happens to be an incredibly useful combination of weapons for defending yourself if the enemy gets too close.
The weapon of the officer is his men.
a spear or halberd is a pretty big status symbol.
@@MusMasi It also has (literally) higher visibikity.
"Where's the sergeant?"
(looks around, spots halberd above all the helmets)
"Over that way!"
If your officer is carrying a long firearm, as they did during the American Revolution, I've read that they tend to start taking pot-shots at the enemy. At this point he's just another infantryman.
Fun fact. From wikipedia: The M1859 Marine NCO sword is the oldest weapon in continued (unbroken) service still in U.S. inventory(1859-present). Which from what I can tell should be classified as a saber.
Mamaluke Sword.
@@jameswatson7246 Keyword "Unbroken". The USMC discontinued the Mamaluke sword during the Civil War and issued officers the M1859. Post Civil War the Mamaluke sword was reinstated and M1859 given to NCOs.
"should be"??? it literally is. in pretty much any book written about it including the listings written by military personnel, it is listed as a "saber".
The proper way to spell it is SABRE
@@harryjohnson9215 probably depends on where you're asking
You can see certain trends. The Sabre increases in popularity as armored cavalry starts to fallout of use. The sword becoming estoc like in response to the lance (and melee combat it general) disappearing. It makes sense that if your going to be a dedicated shooter you don't want an obtrusive side arm.
Sabers date back a millennia. They’ve always been popular. This obsession with long swords is a modern male obsession by guys who’ve never been through training with edge weapons.
The Indians had the direct ancestor to the saber - the tulwar, for centuries. The Chinese had what was arguably a heavy saber for thousands of years - and militaries were armored back then.
In fact the steppe cultures really took to the saber
@@elizabethclaiborne6461 "Modern *male* obsession"
I think the only obsession here is you about gender
@@elizabethclaiborne6461 I see what you mean, I think it's more related to Anglo centric history which dominates western thought. Long swords being associated with whiteness v the curved sword of the "swarthy east". Although curved swords have been in used for a very long time. This video is addressing why in a very specific type sabre was adopted by militaries across the glove en masse during the 1800s.
@@kellykeegan2608 Honestly, just think for a second. Does that sound at all plausible or is there like this modern perspective / ideology that literally defines the way you think so what you say ends up being generic and completely vacant of original thought?
Longswords and whiteness, give me strength. You're a piece of work inferring that only curved swords are for non-white people, are you joking please.
Pretty much what I was thinking. The versatility of cut and thrust without the weapon being stupidly out-sized.
Along with that the weapon was comfortable enough to wear constantly and could be accompanied by 1 or two pistols.
Another thing to consider is that this era is post Industrial Revolution and standardization of equipment and appearance of armies is seen as more desirable
I doubt it's anything that complex, you can use it unskilled, from horseback and you can walk while wearing it... that's about it. People overthing and over-romaticise this shit.
@@gattosquad2241 Yeah, but why is it easier to use by the unskilled? Now that is a complex answer.
Nothing is simple.
When I made Chief in the US Navy I invested a little extra to get the optional Chief’s Cutlass, which I believe qualifies as being in the saber family. Entirely ceremonial of course, but entertaining and not unreasonable to wear on the belt weight and bulk wise.
good for you dude, that cutlass is pretty sweet
It's not entirely ceremonial in Europe as you can cut kielbasa with it. ;)
The chief dress whites look good too.
> I invested a little extra to get the optional Chief’s Cutlass
Wait, does this imply some people opt out of getting a badass SWORD that they can officially wear as part of their dress uniform? Why on Earth would anyone do such a thing?
@@barahngunwritten rules that you’re not supposed to wear a sword for non ceremonial functions
As a man who does a lot of edge maintenance on knives and axes, I’d love a video about sword edge maintenance!
I've long wondered, wouldn't you have a bunch of notches cut into the blade every time you have a sword fight? I wonder if they had to get it repaired by a smith after every fight.
@@Durzo1259 sharpening tools
@@fernosbonos5394 I don't think sharpening would suffice for when your blade hits the enemy's blade and they cut notches into each other.
@@Durzo1259 From my limited knowledge, swordsmen were trained to use the flat sides of the blade to parry and block and avoided hitting edge to edge precisely because it would damage the blade. Even still, chipping over time was common, even with maintenance due to the abuse the weapons would suffer from hitting armor, shields, bones and other weapons.
@moderna spider are you a comment supervisor from youtube or something?
20 minutes of continuous knowledge without a break. I will have to watch again for the bits where I blinked. Thank you for this, I am not a swordsman, but all the same this is somehow valuable to me.
I find it interesting that the saber became very popular in China as well. Seems like one of those designs that fits many situations.
"The liuyedao or willow-leaf saber is a type of dao that was commonly used as a military sidearm for both cavalry and infantry during the Ming (1368-1644) and Qing dynasties (1644-1911). A descendant of the earlier Mongol saber the liuyedao remained the most popular type of single handed sabre during the Ming dynasty, replacing the role of the Jian in the military." From what I understand it was easier to train soldiers to be proficient with it than the Jian straight sword.
Plus from a blacksmith's perspective, its somewhat easier to make curved swords.
The dao broadsword still carry on in Chinese arsenal as infantry weapon and only Qing officers get to carry state-issued narrow blade sabers if I remember it right.
Was it the ease of manufacturing and the design of dao allow the use of cheap steel or iron that it stay in service of warlord armies at least until the end of Chinese Civil War in 1949?
the jian (straight double edge sword) was a standard service weapon in the warring states era (till 2nd century BC)
by the han era (2nd century BC - 2nd century AD) it have been all superseded by the dao (single edge sword/sabre, maybe curve or straight)
Remember, gunpowder warfare started A LOT earlier in china than anywhere else.
By ming dynasty, it is basically guns, cannons, and cavalry playing the main roles.
China also gave up on further armor development because of this. They did develop on rattan shields that can defend against early guns at certain distance; enough distance to allow infantry charge. Cannons totally wreck that though.
Actually, it is more like everywhere in the world was like this except western Europe. I really wonder why western europe stuck with heavy armor for so long? Climate cold enough to wear enough plates? But eastern europe didnt do that…
@@lykoko2776 Well i agree, but its somewhat more complicated than than and there are multiple factors at play. I'll say this: While gunpowder was introduced much earlier in China and was also used in warfare much earlier (example Fire Lances), the Europeans had better firepower. Again there are multiple reasons for this (the wars in Europe were basically an extended arms race), but possibly another reason was the "tube" used for the firearms/cannons.
I'll use a weird example, but it'll make sense. The Eastern Roman Empire 'suddenly acquired' the Greek Fire and had a huge advantage. In reality, the secret of making Greek Fire existed a whole while ago and was safeguarded by the priests/mystics of the greek gods. And breakthroughs in the metal composites allows for efficient tubing and cannons to be made.
In short China might had a similar problem (tubing) as a result of the lesser arms race (in comparison to Europe).
So at the time the Europeans when they come to China they are a major colonial & nautical power and they have cannons at this time.
But to keep this post short, this is a testament to Chinese ingenuity and they adopt and copy the use of canons and actually improve upon them by building them with bronze-iron composites. The Europeans are amazed by this and copy the Chinese tricks. Ofcourse the Chinese cant really handle the combined European powers (English Empire & French, and possibly Dutch/Portuguese pirates) at this point.
I heard that learning the basics of saber fighting is easier than learning the basics of fighting with other weapons - which is important in a mass army. Not everyone is a noble who has practiced fencing since childhood. Even in a movie, a woman says to a guy, "Take my husband's saber and strike like this. Then you will kill your opponent." It was, of course, a ridiculously short "training", but - you get what I mean (the potential opponent was some kind of ghost or the living dead, so the skills of the opponent were probably also questionable).
I think that may just be due to the straightforward military styles that were taught for the saber rather than the weapon itself.
@@InSanic13 I think these two things are connected (it is difficult to separate them and assess what was the cause and what the effect). Matt said that the military way of fighting with a saber was a simplified backsword method, but this simplification was possible because the saber had better hand protection and some complicated defensive maneuvers to protect the hand were unnecessary.
@@odoakerx5260 Rapiers also had hand protection, so that argument is out the window.
@@recoil53 Supposedly it's harder to teach a man to use a thrusting weapon. And even if one is taught it, it won't be the best weapon on the battlefield. That's what Matt said, don't ask me if it's true because I have no experience ;)
@@InSanic13 You can make an art of saber fencing like the Polish, Japanese and peoples of Indo-Persian heritage. But it's still less complex than rapier and longsword treaties.
A slightly curved one handed cut and thrust sword is an inherently friendlier tool than it's alternatives.
I’d say another contributing factor to the popularity of the sabre, would be emerging semi-industrial production methods. A sabre is relatively easy to produce. Its only sharp on one edge, and the simple knucklebow is easy to make but still offers decent hand protection.
Extremely concise by Matt Easton standards 😂
They also offer several distinct advantages for cavalry use.
If you're on horseback, charging someone down - the single edge allows you to rotate the blade out and lay a dull edge against the horse's neck. No accidentally cutting your horse. The curve of the blade also tracks around that horses neck. You can lay flatter behind its neck or even lean to the far side of the horse, and the curve will angle the point more forward, rather than way out to the side.
If you hit with the point, the smaller basket makes it easier to drop the sword, and then the chord on the bottom stays looped around your wrist so you can yank it back as you ride past.
If you miss with the point, the curve still gives you the option to rake the blade against a foe in a push-cut driven by the power of the horse.
But why would you even do that?
Sound a bit too much like a bad movie 😅
As a horseman let me offer an opinion, points aren’t much use unless it’s a long spear.
Watch polo. It’s all about forward motion and centrifugal force. It started as a cavalry game.
You slash with the mallet or the sword. Stabbing at close range on horseback is impractical.
As officers were mounted and troops were afoot, different weapons came into play. Pistol and Sabre became status symbols.
my old man has a sabre. the feel of a cavalry sabre is just awesome, it feels really good to use
My grandfather Kovats Andras was a Capt. in the Budapest Hussars in WW1 and carried a sabre. Mind you, sabres, originating there with popularity moving east and west, dominated Central Europe for generations.
As a Hungarian living in Budapest, I can 100% confirm that.
Szablya is also one of two Hungarian words most non-Hungarians know... The other is goulash lol.
@@KasumiRINA yeah, lots of talk on guylas leves
@@KasumiRINA Szabla in Polish, love Hungarian gulasz BTW.
Sabres did not originate in Hungary.
What I can also imagine to play a part is the disappearance of armor. Rapiers and other swords more oriented towards piercing are needed less because of that. And it is not so that with a cut or a slash you are more likely to incapacitate the opponent? And less of a chance of getting the point stuck in the other guy?
Rapiers were not any more effective against armour. In fact, swords just weren't effective against armour at all. It doesn't matter what sword, it won't be effective against armour. The weapons you use against armour are warpicks and polearms. Also the reason armour disappeared also makes swords obsolete, it was the appearance of guns. Armour didn't work and running at a gunman with a sword is suicide. Sabres were a status symbol. They weren't meant to be used at all.
@@jeremybree1986 You can see this even farther back in history with the Romans and the eventual "retirement" of the gladius as better armors came about and/or the romans started fighint better equiped foes making it ineffective. You can also see the inverse of your point today to some extent with how stabbings go up in nations with harsher gun control as no one is wearing armor to counter blades, I'm willing to bet if people started to were armor to counter this we'd probably see bludgeoning take its place in said areas as the cycle continues. XD
@@stoirmslw7195 the spatha supplanted the Gladius because the enemies of Rome became more and more cavalry men, so they needed longer weapons, nothing to do with armor, as matter of fact Rome probably encountered more armored opponents during their early days
@@jeremybree1986 yes, but I guess the point OP was trying to make is that with a thrusting sword, it would be easier to target weak spots in the armor (joints, armpits, eyes, whatever), while trying to cut through armor would be entirely pointless. But I might be wrong, I don't know a whole lot about the subject.
@@Aletdinov targeting weakpoints in an actual battle is not feasible. Especially if your opponent can literally just hit you anywhere due to them having any type of polearm, a warhammer or a warpick. All of these just straight up penetrate armour. So no, a rapier wasn't made for armour but instead it was for dueling. A longsword would actually be better with armour because you could weaponise the handguard by doing something called half swording. This however means that you're using the sword as a makeshift warpick instead of an actual sword.
I don't film but at our modern sabre club 1 kid got frustrated with the rules (understandable) so I said round robin no rules, doubles are both dead and he did equally as bad compared to the ones now using priority as a way of understanding how to not get hit. This was a great learning experiment for all. I do frequently blur the line of the sport and historical stuff to bring swordsmanship back to the sport. The kids like it.
Western Europe cavalry in XVIII and XIX century borrow lots of things from central and eastern European counterparts. Polish, Hungarian or Croatian cavalry units were considered as top notch in that time. And all of them used sabers.
In the current United States Marine Corps, Officers use a Mameluke sword with no basket, and NCO's use an 1868 Saber. Great video.
Due to that war that’s why the early Americans use sabres which they won in tripoli
Even the Japanese jumped on board to the sabre with the Kyu-Gunto. Really interesting.
to be fair all they did is change the grip on their Katana's. It still remained a curved cutting blade.
@@jonathanh4443 is that not what a sabre is?
@@Crowniecrown Yes, but what they said is that the Japanese didn't really jump onboard anything, they were already there, for hundreds of years. That is what "to be fair" implies here, an agreement with a correction.
Wow, thanks Matt (this is Jon),
A great in depth answer to something I’ve been thinking about for a while!
Great video. Thanks for explaining something that I, as a rapier fencer, always wondered about.
I agree on all points. I really like how you brought out how much easier it is to make (and I'd add temper) a single edged sword. Double edged swords can be tricky to temper. If both edges are not equally tempered you can wind up with stress fractures and possible blade breakage. Especially when you start banging it on other swords or shields. Single edge swords are MUCH easier to temper. I remember seeing a video of a native smith I think in Laos tempering a blade. He used a rag and a water trough. He first ran the soaked rag down the very edge. Waited a few seconds then ran it further up the edge. Waited about 20 seconds and then quenched the entire blade in the trough. No flammable oil or other means necessary.
Compare that to trying to temper a double edged blade by heating an iron bar white hot and laying it in the fuller and hoping that the temper colors spread evenly and you'll see that the single edge is much more forgiving to make. This is why when you put that question out about what would swords be like post apocalypse I said that they would be predominantly single edged because they're so much easier to make.
When war becomes an industrial effort where increasingly you need to mobilize entire chunks of society, it definitely helps to specialize your tools to be simpler to manufacture. I understand that it is not directly comparable but it reminds me of the Japanese officer swords in the build up to WWII being simplified and streamlined into easier to manufacture weapons as the number of officers in their forces skyrocketed. Of course such weapons were not *used* anywhere near as much as Sabers, but every piece uses materials and labor/time and money that could certainly go elsewhere.
A look at the sword bayonet (yataghan) period when long bayonets were issued to the enlisted troops and looking at their effectiveness as a hand held blade as well as how they performed as bayonets would be good.
"yathagan" is ... bayonett?!! I need some explanations here ...
@@bogdanbaudis4099
It's a pattern of British sword bayonet.
That surprised me too, but apparently they were a thing and based very evidently on the Turkish short-sword/long-knife of the same name.
@@Criomorph Thank you! The learning never stops ... 🙂
Original jatagan was meant as a universal weapon whit a some parts of desighn to ease use against cavalry.
It has split grip in the end and was held in specific way for use against monuted oponent.
Best video I've seen on your channel. Seriously loved that you got this done in 20 minutes! Handy information, too.
Thank you for the great teaching. I like how you give all the options for historical uses and dont make it seem like there is only one possible answer. I will stick around for more content like this!
Matt talking about swords whilst waving a gun around at the camera really made a highlight of my morning.
I did hear that another reason is because a curve blade helps horse riders to not fall of a horse when they slash someone while riding towards the enemy. The curve dissipates the impact which otherwise would bounce back to the bearer as well as help the function of cutting which is great if you are aiming for the head.
A slightly curved edge also makes the weapon easier to draw when comparrd to an equaly long straight blade (better ergonomics), i would imagine this whould be very useful when on horseback.
You never draw a blade midst battle.
You take it out before, unless it's pirates of the carribean cosplay.
@@Scorpy666 not even when your cavalry lance breaks and you have to draw the sword you use as a sidearm lmao?
Well done at staying on topic! Enjoyable and informative video, thank you! 😊
Hey Matt, can you make a video about 18th and 19th century armor (something a cuirassier would wear for example)? I have seen some nice examples of cuirasses and (awesome) helmets on Pinterest and would like to know more about it.
And don't forgett epaulettes and stiff collars! In 1853 austrian Emperor Franz-Josef survived an assassination attempt because the stiff collar of his Uniform protected his throat against a knife.
@@brittakriep2938 I am guessing stiff as in some type of armor rather than the shirt cleaners using concrete ? :)), don't know much about the subject although i remember hearing about this before.
@@gusty9053 : English is not my native language, so may be stiff and german steif are false friends. The collars of uniforms, especially officers, had been, compared to now, rather high and made of rather thick fabric, this was not comfortablle,but gave some protection for neck and throat. In case of noted the Emperor wanted together with his Adjutant watching railway construction work, and climbed walls of up to 1858 existing fortification of Vienna. The assasin came from behind, and tried to stab the Emperor in throat. But because of the high and thick collar and a move of the Emperor, the blade glanced away, and a small cut in Emperors face was the result. The attack came so surprising, that neither the Emperor nor the Adjutant could draw their sabers. The Adjutant grabbed the wrists of assassin, but could not disarm or overwhelm him, this was done by a strong butcher, who wanted to see the Emperor from short distance. For saving Emperors life, the butcher became knighted.
@@brittakriep2938 Thanks for the extra info. "Stiff" indeed can mean "rigid" so it can apply to a shirt collar especially if, as you say, they were made of thick fabric.
@@gusty9053 : For fourty years now, in german language the Schweizer Waffen Magazin (Swiss Weapons Magazine) exists. Up to 2000 it was a well reputated weapons magazine, you could buy at every large german newspaper shop. But a change in Swiss gunlaw caused a decline,it is today only a twenty pages paper, you can get in Germany only as special order if you are regular reader of Visier, a german arms magazine. In late 90s in this Swiss Weapons Magazine there was a monthly series Spectacular crimes in Austria, the Habsburg dynasty was noted three times: The noted assassination attempt of Emperor Franz-Josef, the mysterious death by gunshot of his son crownprince Rudolf, and the assassination of Franz-Josefs wife Empress Elisabeth, known as Sissi in Swiss town Geneve/Genf. A strange coincidence: The Empress lived during her visit of Geneve in still existing hotel Beau Rivage, where in late 1980s a german gouvernor named Barschel died under mysterious circumstances. Suicid or murder?
Fantastic as always! Love your content, Matt!
After the mid 19th century, the sword is almost ornamental and is secondary to the breech loading carbine, for cavalry and dragoons, or to the percussion or cased ammunition revolver for officers.
In the US Union army o f the Civil War, the most effective cavalry units, such as Buford's Brigade at Gettysburg, were employed as mounted infantry, often with repeating rifles such as the Spencer which allowed a regiment sized unit in cover to lay down the fire of an entire muzzle loaded infantry division. Very few late war cavalry engagements were strictly horse and saber affairs. General J.E.B. Stuart met his end at the hands of a dismounted Union trooper who just happened to see a fancy Confederate uniform next to a farm building and took a pot shot which hit him.
US heavy cavalry was virtually nonexistent, and I believe one officer even said that whilst US light cavalry could run circles and harass European armies for days, European heavy cavalry was undeniably superior for the clash of arms (paraphrasing from admittedly poor memory).
Very very interesting video! I had wanted to hear some about sabers and this pretty much covered what I wanted to know. Cheers, Matt!
Fantastic video! I'm impressed with the volume of useful information you presented. Thank you for the presentation!
(before watching) My rudimentary understanding is rapiers had their "heyday" around the 16-17th century, and came about as a civilian defense tool, and were eventually adopted for the gentleman's duel as well. Rapiers were eventually later out by smaller swords, including: epees, smallswords/courtswords, and sabres as a practical fashion statement, since you can cut more times in one minute than a man can reload and shoot a musket.
I've read that a lot of double edged blades actually did have one primary edge kept sharper and a less sharp secondary edge.
It would make sense if reducing maintenance workload was a big reason for this.
A common sword technique is to quickly reverse the cut as a follow-through for a feint or missed swing. It doesn't have to be razor sharp to take a divot out of your face.
Back edge cut only needs 3 inches. Curved blade makes a better back cut around a block.
Loved this! I found this a very interesting topic to explore. Thanks Matt for the wonderful explanation!
Great presentation and very concise. Lot's of solid information and history. Well done!
Hey Matt, I have a theory about why double edged blades were a thing to start with. My suspicion is that the double edged steel/iron sword is a direct descendant of the double edged bronze sword and that when they started making steel/iron swords they wanted them double edged because that's what they were familiar with. I say this because its as easy to cast a double edged bronze sword as a single edged sword. The fact that the single edge is much easier to make and temper in iron and steel should have meant (if that was the only factor) that double edges would have died out or at least became less popular, yet they persisted. So my theory is that it was a combination of user familiarity and tradition that caused them to hang around.
that and the quality wasn't that great back then so having an extra sharp side to switch to after the first side dulls or chips is preferable
Actually, double edged blades have a combat purpose, they increase the number of possible techniques
Could also be the exact same reason double-headed axes were a thing. If you're spending all day chopping trees, it's easier to switch to the other edge when one gets dull than it is to take a break and sharpen it. Granted, you're probably not actually checking how sharp your edge is in the heat of battle, but it's a logical idea that I can image a smith coming up with when he's thinking about the next sword he's going to make.
False/reverse edge cuts are an important technique in longsword fighting, particularly from low guards. Plus the ability to whip the blade around and attack with the other edge in high guards (ox in particular), without needing to realign the edge, is incredibly quick given the inherent leverage of two-handed designs.
Past people were just as smart as we are now, they just had less access to resources and collective knowledge. You cut corners every day because there's no advantage to taking extra time/effort. They wouldn't keep doing a labor intensive tradition unless it offered actual practical advantages.
Or edges dulled or got nicked easily and they needed more edge to continue having a sword with an edge as it got beat up.
HI! I love your detailed analysis, refusing to dumb things down to fit in shorter video formats. It makes your videos valuable and informative, instead of pure entertainment! :)
Small question about a possibly erroneous assumption regarding cutting.
I have assumed that part of the advantage when cutting with a curved blade comes from the change in contact area when compared to straight blades. A curved blade will/might only have first contact with a smaller section of the blade than a straight one and approximate a sawing motion by introducing new steel into the opponent as the blade advances. Is there any truth to this analysis or will a straight blade with perfect edge alignment cut just as well as a curved blade?
Thank you!
Perfect balance between being concise and going a bit deeper
A very fun video really, I'm very glad you keep this interest in old-timey euro-weapons alive. Thanks again
Love your concise 20 minute long videos :P
thats a very pretty sword knot btw
An interesting parallel is Japan, where the classic longer Katana (which itself had replaced the longer Tachi) fell out of favour among firearm equipped Samurai, many whom preferred a somewhat smaller one handed sword
The short swords samurai carried could be used with two hands, and was usually addition to the longer sword. The uchigatana itself, when it had replaced the tachi as the weapon of the samurai, had the same variation of length as the tachi, and the differences are minute. It is not until the Edo period that they become uniformly shorter.
Very interesting video! Thanks Matt and Jon :)
An absolutely absorbing and satisfying presentation , I watched all of it .
Commendations and congratulations !
I was under the impression that having a slight curve to the blade also helped in drawing the sword out of the scabbard, ergonomically speaking.
You really can't discount fashion. Given how the "Hussars" blossomed in military fashion (everyone got crazy for the hussar fashion to the point it was the choice of faux uniform even in woman's civilian wear).
Fascinating dissertation . Thank you .
Enjoyed, Informative, and entertaining as always keeps me coming back.
This video covers why I think a cutlass/hanger/messer(with knuckle bow) is the ideal sword for modern day self/home defense - especially home. Bonus that reach isn't as big of an issue (firearms notwithstanding). A targe, large buckler, or rodela made of modern materials to comply with NIJ Level 3 would equip a home defender pretty well if firearms aren't an option.
Glock+cutlass sounds like an awesome combination
So to flip it around: why weren't sabers in use earlier? I suspect it is a mixture of metallurgy and the prevalence of armour, but it would be neat to hear a more informed take.
I reckon it was improved rifles. Sabres really fit the time of single shot, breech loading, black powder rifles. As rifles improved, the line of men became thinner and the officer was more likely to need to cover any weak point in the line if it came to bayonets. Later the firepower of rifles improved again and swords (and their use on foot) became less common in general, leaving sabres as the military sword
I would imagine it's armor. It seems the proto-sabres, Kilij, Samshir, Tulwar, etc, were prevalent for a long time in areas with soldiers that were less protected.
The rapier has the advantage in open space against most swords. Doubly so with a rapier & dagger combination.
But as the swords becomes less duelist-centric and become more general use, the rapier falls out of favor. Plus there are some laws that shorten the reach of rapiers.
The sabres offer the best compromise between a heavy cavarly blade (powerful cuts, ideal for cavalry, big reach) and a smallsword (an evolution of the thrusting sword, very light and agile). As such they get used by many officers, who sometimes also duel with one another and with opposing army officers.
They were actually, especially in Eastern Europe. Plus there are falchions and messers which were often slightly curved. Armor did have a lot to do with it, as did tradition. Remember most of your knights and Vikings carried blades developed from what their ancestors carried. I think the double edge truly descended from bronze swords which were very often cast double edged. So when they wanted swords in iron/steel they wanted them double edged as well because that's what they were familiar with.
Don't underestimate "We've never done it that way here" as a reason for designs not changing drastically over time.
Sabers can't cut through plate armor. So during Medieval times sabers would be useless on the battlefield. After guns started being used, we realized even the sturdiest plate armor is useless against bullets. So people stopped wearing armor, and if we are talking about humans not wearing plate armor, then all you have to do is look to Japan to see the most powerful sword against non armored enemies is a saber.
Great material! Pleasure to listen 😊
Great question,I never thought to ask. Very interested in swords most of my life. Practiced with foil,epee,sabre,hand and a half etc. Good lecture delivered by an obvious expert.
I remember reading a book about dueling rules once. The challenged party were allowed the choice of weapons. But it especially mentioned that sabres could be declined if one of the parties didn't serve in the military. So it really seems to have been the go to weapon at that time.
You read fiction
@@Scorpy666that’s not true?
@@HariboStarman prove it, i've never found any literature mentioning this.
And a claim without evidence, could and should be dismissed without evidence. 🦭
@@Scorpy666 no I was sincerely asking. Im not the OP
@@HariboStarman i'm just saying. He didn't state a source, neither have I ever read about it or can I find anything about it online.
So my take is: today on stuff that never happened.
Unless OP can state a verified source.
I think your analysis is spot on. The only aspect you missed is the social element. The only professional swordsmen in 19th century armies were the cavalry. We should not find out surprising that their sword of preference became the good standard.
great answer(s) proving the greatness of the question. lovely detailing- lots of info on variances of usage. very cool
Fantastic video, lots of great information. I wanted to thank you for the excellent buying experience recently from you. I do truly love my new Prussian 1889 cavalry sword. One of the straight early 20th C swords, as you have described here.
When talking about the sabre it's important to remember that they were used in anger more often in a militia or policing role than on the battlefield. As a weapon for facing down a mob they are just the ticket. Not fragile, the guard can be used to punch or strike down and the flat of the sword is a good bludgeon, giving you 3 kinds of less lethal strikes before you ever have to use the edge or point. If you look back to the victorian era there were enough sabres to arm every constable.
As I pointed out in another video
The warriors of the steppe were using sabers (or at least an early form of saber) before it went mainstream
Eastern Europe have had sabres for just as long.
Sabres & scimitars & similar blades are great against lightly armoured opponents for they get cut down.
double edged thrusting blades are for fighting heavy armoured opponents & everything else you might come across.
Sabres are specialised while cruciform swords are versatile not the best at any job but enough to get it done.
Western Europe & central Europe had far more abundant heavy armour & armour in general.
Steppes people thought lightly from horse back.
Arms are determined by the environment & time more then fashion or preference for the most part.
@@arnijulian6241 Eastern Europeans adopted the Sabre from nomadic Turkic Mongol invaders just like it was adopted in the Middle East and China.
@@nomanor7987 Very absolute and cocky assertion for something that is still majorly debated by Academics. Whats certain is that sabres originated in Central Asia but by whom and how they spread cannot be definitively asserted. In Eastern Europe they appear as early as the 6th century in Uralic and Slavic and nomadic cultures (not just Turkic)
@@MrPanos2000 the Sabre is the horse rider weapon par excellence. Uralic and Slavs are not steppe peoples. It was the Avars (Rouran in Chinese) from Mongolia who introduced sabres and stirrups to Europe in the 7th century when they were defeated and expelled to Europe by the Gokturks. I’m not sure why you seem to think this is still being debated. What’s your obsession with sabres and it’s origin? Before the Turkic expansion the Persians, Byzantines, Arabs and Chinese used straight swords, like the Roman spatha even their cavalry. After the coming of the Turks everybody started using sabres, stirrups, riding boots with high heels, etc.
@@nomanor7987 Yaroslavl Museum has the oldest eastern European sword being a rudimentary sabre dated to 1st Century.
-Eastern European sabre have their origin in the Rhomphaia sword that adapted from the falx that adapted from the sica dagger.
Makhaira are also in part to sabres in europe.
Convergent design my fellow for if something is logical people far away arrive to similar conclusions.
Mind Turko-Mongolian cavalry sabre's appeared sometime in the 8th century.
This was a adaptation from the Chinese early dao which translate to sabre.
Khurasan are oldest lot of scimitar from the 9th century.
Persian & Arabic design were very intertwined as to who did either it is hard to pin but I suspect the Persians did it as the Arabs jacked their architecture not to mention most any study they accomplished anything of not in.
The Arabs hate Persian & still have their Islamic schism later but the Persians were a relatively stable kingdom for 2 & 1/2 millennia till the USA fvcked that up!
oldest surviving Japanese sword (Kogarasu Maru) 8th century is basically a Chinese dao with some minor alterations.
Really most Japanese sword like the later katana are just Japanese sabres but try telling a weeaboo that?
my great grandfather, Jianis Georgadis, won gold with the sabre in the first olympic games in Athens 1896
Fascinating! Thanks, Matt.
This is it. This is the video I've been looking for. I've always had this question!
I was just thinking the same thing.
Do you know if the word "pallasch" comes from Hungarian "pallos" (pronounced pallosh)? I suppose the word "sabre" comes from Hungarian "szablya" which actually means sabre and also something to cut with. I suppose these sabres became widespread with the development of French hussars in the beginning of the 18th century, originally from Hungarian huszár refugees from the Rákoczy revolution (in Hungarian huszár means the twentieth man). There was also an extremely long and thin pallasch used by Hungarian cavalry in the 17th century called "hosszú tőr" which means "long dagger" which is a weird weapon.
Yep, that was concise by Matt Easton standards :)
Great video! Very enjoyable and informative. I had this question on my mind for a while, so thanks for answering it!
Great presentation & info
I've often considered the katana to be simply a 2-handed saber. So it's not just the europeans, other cultures also appreciated the cut and thrust of a single-edged curved blade. That said, in WW1 the Japanese were carrying single-handed sabers very similar to these, and only in WW2 did they switch back to the katana "gunto" for nationalistic reasons.
Katana is not necessarily two-handed, as samurai even carried a pair. But yeah, for all intents and purposes, it's a saber. That's why longsword/katana comparisons are ridiculous, you are not swinging a zweihander from horseback or wearing it as a sidearm on your belt, as both sabers and katanas were.
We have documents from the 18th century that comes from a Hussar who was writing on partisan warfare. In De Jeney's book, he argued that the saber was superior to the broad sword because you kill one with the broad sword ,but with the saber, on horseback ,you can kill one and wound two others for the capture.
Thanks for the show it was very informative
Great presentation, bravo !!! Thank you for sharing ( teaching) !!!
I always figured sabers were favored because the curved blade lends itself well to cutting in a cavalry charge, but of course as you elaborate on, it runs deeper than that.
Also, regarding the Falchion that you briefly touched on and referred to as a shortened saber. I've been under the impression that a Falchion is a bit different in that it's intended to be a heftier sword specialized for chopping and lunging - would you say that's not really true? Sorry if you've already answered this question in another video. This is the first video of yours that I've seen.
What would be your thoughts on a Schiavona style sword as a compromise between a full basket hilted broadsword and a small sword/spadroon instead of the adoption of the sabre and why do you think schiavona style swords weren't adopted more broadly, as it's overall design and style is more in line with traditional European or at least Western European swords.
Another thing is that to me a half basket hilt for a sabre is more of a quarter basket rather than a half basket in terms of proportion compared to a full basket hilt and schiavona. The schiavona and similar hilts look to me to be more of a half basket. Your thoughts
Very informative and interesting. Thanks so much.
Thank you for providing this fun and insightful video!! I would also add that a reason why sabers became so numerous in the 19th century was because larger, more professionalized armies were in need of an efficient, mass produced sword. And a mass produced sword, like described in this video, needed to be simple to manufacture, and provide a large number of officers who face a wide array of situations on the battlefield a sword for any given situation (thrust, stab, etc.).
I do still find myself a bit puzzled by the knucklebow hilts, since it seems odd to me they wouldn't at least have side rings. (Considering earlier hilt styles like on the walloon swords and "five ball" spadroons.) It almost seems like they decided to get rid of most of the hand protection, then realized they'd gone overboard and rolled back on that, resulting in the side-bar style.
Strap a sword with side rings to your hip and then go prone behind a berm to avoid cannon fire, and you'll see why they disappear as firearms come to dominate. I think I agree that the sidebar is an attempt to compromise, at least for people who might actually fight with the sword like cavalry. But side rings really get in the way.
@@davydatwood3158 Even if the ring or bar is only on one side? Also, in that case, what the heck is up with half baskets?
@@RelativelyBest I think hand protection came down to to the individuals preference. While some people might have felt a full basket was worth the inconvenience others might have figured hand protection wasn't really all that important and comfort and convenience took priority. The fact that there is such a wide variety of designs shows that there really wasn't a one size fits all option.
I suspect it was simply because a larger hilt would get in the way. Remember, traditionally the sword was not the primary arm for cavalry. The lance was. And as they were still using lancers its not surprising that they'd want the backup weapon to be out of the way and not catching on things.
If you’re fighting against other soldiers you want the hand protection, if you’re primarily occupying or policing a civilian population you wouldn’t need it.
If you have ever had the opportunity to practice wearing and drawing various styles of cavalry swords while mounted on horseback, one distinction will become immediately apparent; curved swords are much easier to draw (especially quickly) while on horseback. You don't have nearly the freedom of movement while in even the most spartan of saddles, as you do on foot. So any help the sword can offer you in drawing it at need, would be very welcome! Great vid.
Is it faster on the ground too?
@@HariboStarman Drawing a curved sword while on-foot does tend to be a bit easier, especially if the blade is long. But the difference between drawing a straight blade and a curved blade, while in the saddle, is far more noticeable.
Thorough and concise, makes for a well packed twenty minutes.
Excellent presentation!
Also I would like to comment that is unfortunate that modern " Sabre fencing" has little relation to the handling of a combat saber.
Sabre was here from at least the 8th century (Avars and then Hungarians from the Great Steppe) and the (half)basket hilt was only a very last development. What made the sabre special was the curvature of the blade both with the curved blade.
The Sabre name origin is from the 17th origin, its a French name that means sword.
The Szabla (the Polish word for sabres) again is from the 17th century. Made famous by the Hussar cavalry.
Curved swords exited way earlier but they werent called Sabres.
The Eastern Roman Empire (later Kingdom of Romans) used curved-swords called Paramerion (along wth straight double-edged swords). They were introduced to the curved swords with the Persians (who were very advanced -similar to the eastern Romans and used heavy armored cavalry)
The Avars come later in the 6th century they were first used as a client-state/mercenaries by the Eastern Roman Empire in 600 AD.
So to summarize, the Sabre mentioned here is from a period where armor is rare, there are firearms all around, and cavalry is very specialized in its role.
Because the sabre depicted is an officer's weapon it loses length (vs the heavy cavalry blade) and adopts the half-basket (as opposed to dedicated duelist weapons who also had the duelist dagger).
In short the half-basket Sabre loses protection and reach in exchange for more maneuverability.
@@GeoGyf Dear omniscientist, "According to archaeological finds, the sabre was used by the conquering Magyars in the 9th century but the exact origin of the word is still debated by linguists. It is believed to be borrowed from a Turkic language, such as Kipchak or Kyrgyz [script needed] (selebe), with contamination from the Hungarian verb szab (“to cut”).[1] This Turkic source could ultimately be of Tungusic origin, from Manchu ᠰᡝᠯᡝᠮᡝ (seleme, “dagger”), from Proto-Tungusic *seleme (“iron”, adjective), derived from *sele (“iron”).[2] Compare Mongolian сэлэм (selem).
Compare German Säbel, Italian sciabola, Polish szabla. The Western European words were borrowed from Hungarian. (Wiktionary.org)
@@morriganmhor5078 Curved Swords were far older. The Eastern Roman empire used the Paramerion by the 3rd or 4th century. Curved sworda were used by Persian, Arabs and so on. All these people are older than Magyars and Polish.
And of course Mongolic & Turkic tribes, but these came to Minor Asia much later.
But we are talking about sabres, the video is about sabres and the sabres is a 17th century term.
@@GeoGyf Paramerion by the 3rd or 4th century? Don´t you say? More likely from about the 10th century, which is the time of the Magyars coming to Hungary. And yes, Avars also came from the Great Steppe, in about 550 AD and lived in Hungary and Bulgary etc. and probably used curved swords. But as far as I know, we don´t know the term they used for them. Sassanid swords were single-edged straight and the same were Arab (Saracene) blades before the coming of the Seljuks into Persia and then Asia Minor. But szabla/ szablya/sabre/saber came to Europe through Hungary and even the Polish who was the second European nation that used it BEFORe the 17th century acknowledged the Hungarian ancestry of that weapon.
@@morriganmhor5078 What strikes you as odd? There are multiple sources.
And Persians like the Eastern Romans used both types of swords, though i dont know the Persian names. The Romans ones are the Paramerioj (curved sword) and the Spathion (straight double-edged). Later the Spathion became the Spatha when it was lengthened.
At that point the Eastern Romans & the Persians (along with the Chinese) were the most advanced empires in the world. They used very heavy cavalry and heavy troops and thus this meant that curved swords werent the only thing they used. In fact both armies used maces very frequently. They destroyed themselves, which allowed the Arabs to become one of the biggest empires. And so on, then there were the Rus, then the Avars, then the Seljuk Turks, the Mongols and so on.
This is a quite educational video-especially for a person like me with no background knowledge about military weapons. Nicely explained. Thank you!
Great points and explained very well.
Apparently Polish cavalry went ahead of time, as it was using sabers even in XVII century ;)
Darth Vader was using sabers long long time ago
@@vsenderov Not that kind of sabers ;)
It seems like for unarmored combat the saber is the best sword? Also, could you do a video on the phasing out of armor all together? It seems like the Spaniards continued to wear helmets and armor long after the English ditched it. Is that true? And how did it effect confrontations between the two?
Very astute, and an excellent explanation.
I have always wondered how much is also fashion. You see a winning army carry something and that looks "cool", so I wanna look like that winning army. Obviously it affected uniforms back in the day. If the French keep winning battles, and they carry a saber (complete out of the blue example, don't know if they did or not for the example) other go "they carry a saber and win, we should be carrying sabers too". Even if the saber has really no reason for winning.
People respect blades more than guns.
Not everyone has been shot, most have beem cut.
I was really hoping you'd mention the Polish estoc in passing, even though it's from a slightly earlier period, geographically limited--and a saddle-mounted adjunct to a lance and szabla. Still, I find them fascinating and under-discussed; please consider giving them their own video sometime! 😊
Please. Sabre is much older than the estoc and "szabla" is what the West tried (not too succesfully) imitate as the "Basket hilted sabre". I heartily recommend D. A. Kinsley´s book Swordsmen of the British Empire 1600-1945, recommended by Mr. Easton.
@@morriganmhor5078 @Morrigan Mhor Oh, I know the book, and I know very well the szabla is older; in no way did I state otherwise. (My maternal family, sir, is Ukrainian and I have had had a lifelong fascination with swords; I'll leave it up to your imagination just how long I've been plumbing the depths of sources on the szabla. 😜)
What I said was (a) simply I wish Matt had mentioned the estoc in passing and (b) it is a fascinating piece worthy of discussion but rarely brought up. *Especially* in the context of the nuances of when and how it wouldve been used, when it was carried *with* not only szabla but lance. (Not to mention often bow and firearm!)
Are you referring to the Koncerz?
@@junichiroyamashita Yup!
greatly explained! great job
that image with the calvery on the horses and the airplane in the sky was wild.
I suppose once the cool kids in the cavalry started using sabers everyone wanted one, just human nature. Thanks for the content.
Sabers do seem like a well rounded and thought out practical everyday design compared to longswords, twohanders and what else.. It would be interesting to hear a comparison between back swept sabers vs. forward swept longer and thinner kukris.
Like yataghans?
The slight curve was fashionable for a simple reason - it reminded the user which edge of the blade was sharp. Double sharp edged swords were, of course, used - but were less common in later centuries (partly for safety reasons - especially on horse back).
Thanks for the information ⚔️
You forgot one major reason sabers became the primary military sword. They were more fashionable to have than the old sword styles. This is a surprisingly common reason why militaries adopt certain weapons.
Wasn’t there a trend in Spain to continue using rapiers well into the 1800s?
It's hard to call it a rapier, it's just a broad sword with the same cup-shaped hilt as on famous spanish rapiers, sometimes, as I understand it, called a bilbo sword.
Thanks for the educative episode.
Great information. Thanks
Instead of a proper longsword how about a bastard sword
Hey, that's not very nice calling the sword a bastard. What did the sword ever do to you?
We, The Watchers, approve.