November 30, 2005, 06:54 PM | #26 |
Senior Member
Join Date: June 5, 2005
Location: Seattle
Posts: 1,247
|
Cut with the point and stab with the edge was what we got.....
|
November 30, 2005, 11:02 PM | #27 |
Senior Member
Join Date: August 8, 2001
Location: 30 miles from Everywhere, right in the middle of Nowhere...
Posts: 718
|
Just remember Sulaco: it's rob the sheep, rape the land and pillage the women. No wait...
|
December 1, 2005, 03:58 PM | #28 | |
Junior member
Join Date: November 21, 2004
Posts: 1,631
|
Quote:
|
|
December 1, 2005, 04:46 PM | #29 | |
Member
Join Date: July 28, 2005
Posts: 36
|
Quote:
|
|
December 1, 2005, 08:19 PM | #30 | |
Senior Member
Join Date: October 31, 2005
Posts: 1,231
|
Quote:
Its just a calvery saber is not a fencing saber. Sharp sabers on foot is a good thing. Dull sabers on horseback is a good thing. Visa versa is bad. Ohh and one thing 2000 years of roman combat taught us...stabbing is easier then slashing, but I still like slashing. |
|
December 2, 2005, 09:06 AM | #31 |
Senior Member
Join Date: September 26, 2005
Location: Northern Virginia
Posts: 6,141
|
I took fencing in college, too, and believe it or not, the instructor's name was Pierce. That was at West Virginia University in 1968. I also got to use the schools rifle range during ROTC using .22 Springfield bolt actions.
I'm not sure that having a dull sword while on horseback for safety reasons is logical. If that were so, then what about guns? I think a lot of the controversy about swords in the military back then came from the fact that swords were commonly worn with civilian dress, at least by certain classes. They were taught by civilian fencing masters to be able to fight other civilians armed the same way, first with rapiers, then with smallswords, which are pretty much just small rapiers. They weren't intended for military combat exactly, even though they were usually carried into combat by officers. Indeed, the US Army NCO sword of around 1840 is a smallsword and not such a bad sword as such but I'm not sure it would stand up to an attack by a soldier armed with a saber of the period, dull or sharp. Another thing is that a stabbing sword like the NCO sword won't cut worth anything because there is not enough weight in the blade. Yet the blade needs to be as sharp as it can be just so the blade cannot be grabbed by the opponent without danger of losing fingers in the process. By the way, I think slashing is easier than stabbing, even if stabbing works better. Lest you think this is all pointless because nobody gets into a swordfight anymore (and very few of us in gunfights, for that matter), the emergency room at the local hospital will let you know that knife wounds are still common, unless you live in a nice peaceful town where nobody needs a gun.
__________________
Shoot low, sheriff. They're riding Shetlands! Underneath the starry flag, civilize 'em with a Krag, and return us to our own beloved homes! Buy War Bonds. |
December 9, 2005, 10:30 AM | #32 |
Senior Member
Join Date: February 3, 2005
Posts: 791
|
I took fencing at the University of Kentucky back in the 80s under Dr. Risk, the last of the old school swashbucklers.
He was truly a great guy and the embodiment of a chivalrous man. I once showed up to class with a broadsword after a smart alecky student was going on and on and on about how the epee and rapier were the ultimate swords. Dr. Risk pointed out that he had better thrust fast before he got decapitated or cut in half like the dead warriors at the Battle of Wisby. |
December 9, 2005, 11:48 AM | #33 |
Senior Member
Join Date: September 26, 2005
Location: Northern Virginia
Posts: 6,141
|
Jack Malloy, try to find out the story of Blackbeard's last battle. The theory holds if you really can thrust fast. (Obviously, there is more to it than that).
__________________
Shoot low, sheriff. They're riding Shetlands! Underneath the starry flag, civilize 'em with a Krag, and return us to our own beloved homes! Buy War Bonds. |
December 12, 2005, 01:40 PM | #34 |
Senior Member
Join Date: November 6, 2004
Location: Southern Illinois
Posts: 555
|
Sorry I missed this thread earlier; I share an interest, no, make that a passion, with big blades.
I must disagree with any notion that swords were left dull to make them more effective weapons. Doubtless many were carried during wartime with a rebated edge, but I am more inclined to believe this is because the sword was not really used as much as a weapon. There is even record of one armory somewhere in Europe that sharpened swords before they were issued for combat, and then dulled them again for storage once hostilities concluded. I have seen a compelling case made that the swords were left dull by the manufacturer to save on costs and reduce danger in shipping and storage/handling, and that the troops were supposed to sharpen them themselves. It's just that many never did get sharpened. Now aside from any historical contention, a dull sword just doesn't make sense. The kinds of swords we're discussing here simply were not designed to be blunt trauma weapons. If smashing bone was the goal, a crowbar would have been more effective and a lot cheaper at the same time. Swords are made to cut, and a sharp edge allows them to do this. Even if a blunt sword can still do damage with a good blow, it would have been even better with a sharp edge. Think about in combat if you didn't get time to rear back with a full powered blow, or if the enemy managed to partially block or redirect the swing. Now, that sharp edge would literally mean the difference between an instantly disabling wound, versus NO damage whatsoever. I hunt critters with what could be called a short sword, and a sharp edge is paramount to effectiveness. I sure wouldn't want to be handicapped in a situation where there's so much more at stake. |
December 12, 2005, 02:46 PM | #35 |
Senior Member
Join Date: May 25, 2004
Posts: 506
|
...makes one wonder, about the storage thing, if a sharp edge rusts faster than a dull one...
__________________
"If it's rare, strange, or odd, i want it." I drank the cool-aid. Coal Creek Armory |
December 12, 2005, 03:06 PM | #36 |
Senior Member
Join Date: September 26, 2005
Location: Northern Virginia
Posts: 6,141
|
At this point I have to quote something from another forum:
"If I want to use something dull, I use a spoon."
__________________
Shoot low, sheriff. They're riding Shetlands! Underneath the starry flag, civilize 'em with a Krag, and return us to our own beloved homes! Buy War Bonds. |
December 12, 2005, 05:19 PM | #37 |
Senior Member
Join Date: August 21, 2004
Location: people's republic of California
Posts: 386
|
Swords are out of my area of expertise. However, did attend a civil war re-enactment lecture in which the guys playing soldiers brought up the fact that only the last few inches of the saber were sharpened.
I believe he mentioned the "sweet spot" on the saber which would cut a man in two when swung from the back of a horse...on foot the thrust was more effective. |
December 12, 2005, 08:36 PM | #38 |
Senior Member
Join Date: November 6, 2004
Location: Southern Illinois
Posts: 555
|
The last third to half of the blade is generally the most used part for cutting, so it would be the most important section to keep in good sharp condition, but I still would not want the base of the blade left intentionally blunt. The base would be used more for blocking and parrying since you have the most leverage there, so it would make sense to sharpen it at a steeper angle to take more abuse, but still not necessarily dull. (I have read that the base may have been reinforced or in some cases left dull with double edged swords in medieval times for certain techniques, but that is beyond the scope of this thread.) With a blade designed purely for thrusting, especially a shorter blade like a dagger, you'd still want the base sharp since this is the area that will open up the wound when levered around after the blade has been plunged in to the hilt.
Cut vs. thrust? Again, that's a debate that's probably beyond the scope of this thread, due to all the different techniques and scenarios possible. However, I will say that in terms of pure destructive potential, the cut is far more devastating than the thrust, assuming you have a good cutting sword. A relatively small hole/slit in the torso simply will not stop an organism as quickly as cutting it nearly in half. A slit in the arm is not as effective as removing the arm entirely. |
December 13, 2005, 09:31 AM | #39 |
Senior Member
Join Date: February 3, 2005
Posts: 791
|
A dull sword cuts for the same reason a dull machete cuts.
Physics. The force of the blow is concentrated along the narrow line of the edge of the blade. I have cut animal carcasses, as well as other mediums enough to know that yeah, you can injure or kill somebody with a rebated edge if you know what you are doing. Remember, in feudal Japan, Myamoto Musashi once killed a man with a wooden sword during a duel. I kinda doubt it was sharp. A sharp sword is far more lethal. You can take a major limb off with one good swoop if you are good and you don't torque your blade by striking off center. More than likely you can take a head off with one blow of a sharp sword, providing you are trained in test cutting. (It takes more than just a sharp edge, by the way). But we do know civil war era swords were made and delivered dull. That's in enough contracts from the makers. Its common enough of a fact that the handful of generals (such as one of the rebels) who carried sharpened swords, were commented upon. |
December 13, 2005, 12:56 PM | #40 | ||||
Senior Member
Join Date: November 6, 2004
Location: Southern Illinois
Posts: 555
|
Quote:
Quote:
Sounds like we're pretty much in agreement. Quote:
Quote:
|
||||
December 13, 2005, 05:13 PM | #41 |
Senior Member
Join Date: May 10, 2002
Location: Appalachia
Posts: 170
|
http://www.thearma.org/
http://www.swordplayalliance.com/ Both teach combat fencing which differs from sport fencing. I fenced saber in college and I studied with Maestro Eddie Floyd for a while and it took a lot of effort to unlearn my sport fencing. It made me better with empty hand and knife.
__________________
TANSTAAFL |
December 14, 2005, 07:31 AM | #42 |
Senior Member
Join Date: February 3, 2005
Posts: 791
|
Eddie Floyd is well respected in the WMA scene. He also designed swords for Museum Replicas Limited, and I think he made some of the stuff used in the movie Kull. On top of that, he trains a fight troup.
|
December 14, 2005, 10:23 AM | #43 |
Senior Member
Join Date: May 10, 2002
Location: Appalachia
Posts: 170
|
Maestro Floyd is a heck of a nice guy also and amazing to watch.
__________________
TANSTAAFL |
December 21, 2005, 05:28 PM | #44 |
Senior Member
Join Date: June 5, 2005
Location: Seattle
Posts: 1,247
|
Jack Malloy, Musashi gave up on steel swords because he was bored with fighting and winning duels with it, so switched to a WOODEN sword to keep his interest up!! In the end he started beating the Bej(()U(S out of his challengers with a wood stick (!) to shame them into leaving him alone. The mans story is unbelievable and amazing to say the least..
|
Thread Tools | Search this Thread |
|
|