Advantages and disadvantages of smallswords - HEMA

[@XCritonX]

The smallsword, a shiv for the upper class.

[@almusquotch9872]

Yes smallswords are at a disadvantage against larger swords, but in terms of weight they're more comparable to a bowie knife. I'd take a smallsword over a bowie knife in a fight any day.

[@KingdomOfDimensions]

Into a fight sure. Of course the Bowie knife is far more useful for a variety of everyday tasks and wasn't primarily a combat weapon. Similarly to the kukri, which while the last ditch melee weapon of the Ghurkas, was really a multi-purpose tool.

[@vaughanstarr3725]

I agree Sir, "stiffness is incredibly important for thrusting".

[@level58deathknight18]

"So let's ignore the length, let's just look at the stiffness. Okay, stiffness is incredibly important for thrusting." Sounds like me when a girl pulls my pants down.

[@blakewinter1657]

So, after 10 minutes of hearing the word 'spadroon' every few seconds (it is a very fun word, I must say), we find out that what smallswords have going for them is: 'they are not spadroons.'

[@GunFunZS]

I would expect though that a smallsword is much more wearable than military swords of the era, and would be an effective weapon against most urban thieves and bandits who might only have a knife or blackjack. Sure they might occasionally be better armed, but the thieves will generally need a small weapon for concealment reasons. At the least it advertises that you won't be a target with no risk.

[@scholagladiatoria]

Absolutely. I think this is the headline for the smallsword and spadroon - they were generally good enough for what they were generally used as.

[@TheArtofFencing]

I also think the point of wearability is a big one. The smallsword is not that heavy and bulky as a rapier, but also elegant in form. One point i wanted to add is in german the smallsword is called Hofdegen with translates into court epee. So it was seen as a weapon, wich is presentable enough to be worn at a palace or social events. Nobody wanted to have a heavy saber at there site and maybe ruin there clothes with its scabbard and hilt rubbing against the fabric.

[@jasperian1947]

wouldnt the small sword be more agile and manageable in crowded areas than a rapier?

[@LutzDerLurch]

jasperian marac the smallsword IS far more agile.

[@jasperian1947]

my point exactly

[@sparrowhawk81]

Another thought: You don't have to believe a weapon is the best ever just to justify learning it. Sure, a small sword is worse than a lot of other swords, but it has its own technique and learning it would be a fun and rewarding experience. A long sword isn't the best weapon ever, and neither is a katana or sword and buckler. We don't come from a society that actually USES swords. We pick them because we want to learn about them and see it as a fun pastime. They all have their contexts.

[@scholagladiatoria]

Absolutely - I hope I have conveyed that view in some videos, but I guess I should say this more explicitly in a new video.

[@sparrowhawk81]

scholagladiatoria You definitely have, maybe not all at once, but my comment was definitely a distillation of things I've come to realize on my own, heavily influenced by things you've said.

[@johng859]

So after 15 minutes I come away with; "Use the right tool for the job unless that tool is all you have with you." Got it. :)

[@johnharvey5412]

"crap... rubbish... woefully inadequate" Wow, Matt, how do you really feel? Don't hold anything back.

[@bretlynn]

here's a video about smallswords, now let me take this opportunity to yet again tell you how much spadroons suck lol :P

[@justicar5]

Some things need repeating, the fact that spadroons suck sweaty donkey's is one of them apparently.

[@SovietxxDan1992]

lol ikr!?

[@MariusThePaladin]

Why is it sucks ? EDIT: Nvm, watched his video XD

[@Rikitocker]

Personally I like Spads ... keeping in mind the context of their purpose and cultural significance helps a great deal. These were essentially beefed up Small or Court Swords for Officers - that Officer's could take to battle and use in a last ditch back to the wall circumstance - the idea being an Officer could maintain his standard and status with regard to the sword at his hip on Campaign and yet have something a little more robust, in case he meets something more hefty than another Spadroon or Smallsword. I still think they were largely ceremonial and status based weapons that were more largely intended to be used as a Dueling weapon or against others of their own class, using a weapon of like kind. Yes they were beefed up in order to be able to cope with a Sabre , Broad or Backsword ... but realistically, they were status symbols. On the other hand, McBane liked his Sheering swords all too well thank you very much and seems to have had great success with them. As always, it is more often than not the man and not the weapon that decides the matter. I still like Spads and think they're grand and lovely ...

[@PsylomeAlpha]

the bent tip on that thing is irritating. also, the spadroon looks like it'd be pretty good for a modern carry, especially since it seems like it'd be less lethal than a rapier. most criminals use knives, even here in the US, so a spadroon would be, relatively speaking, advantageous.

[@GeneralAdvance]

***** except a gun is much more dangerous to those around any incident, a sword thrust misses it cant go to far, a gunshot misses and its still going with deadly force for a fair way, not only that but light sword cut is much less likely to be lethal to the intended target than a bullet. the big problem with a sword is its very obvious, and concealed carry is much preffered to open carry by most who seem to support the carrying of weapons

[@PsylomeAlpha]

GeneralAdvance personally I feel open carry is best, since the only ones who should feel intimidated by any weapon are those wishing me ill will. all I know is that once I started openly carrying anything, even something as small and unassuming as a swiss army knife, the local bums became a lot less belligerent with me. if I openly carry a sword, then the only ones I might potentially have to fear would be career criminals armed with a pistol or some other form of handgun, and in that case I'd likely just hand them whatever cash I might have on me and my debit card, and kindly request the wallet back, since I really do like my wallet. if they stole my sword, well I'd have pictures of it, and report it, and everything else as stolen property, thus making them easily caught.

[@PsylomeAlpha]

***** and you can fend someone off with a sword at arm's reach. the fact that it gives you a wider amount of coverage (meaning space you can actively prevent someone from swinging at by merely holding the sword in front of you) than a pocket knife or a handgun means that knife attacks would be less likely to happen, especially since the guy attacking you might get in one decent hit with maybe a couple of scrapes as you get to a distance where the sword actually gives you the advantage, and that's only the case in a sneak attack, but he knows that if he doesn't haul ass away from the guy with a sword he's likely to die, so he's not likely to risk doing anything remotely near you. I've been attacked with knives before. people stopped attacking me when I started wearing a backpack that covered everything from my neck down to my thighs and stuffing the thing with books, making it to where back-stabs were not likely to do much. also, when I started bopping them over the head with my ridiculously large book-filled backpack.

[@SirKickz]

Hey Matt, recently it has come to my attention that there is a lot of confusion and myths surrounding armor (which likely isn't news to you). I'm having a hard time sifting through the nonsense when it comes to the different types of armor and what kind of weapons those armors could and could not withstand. My current understanding is that chainmail armor is effective against cutting weapons, but can be pierced by heavy piercing strikes like crossbow bolts, maybe the arrows from some heavy bows, war picks, and the like. Platemail will stop almost all cutting and piercing blows but is vulnerable to blunt weapons like maces and flails. It would be cool to see a video about armor and which weapons were effective at bypassing it.

[@TanitAkavirius]

There is no platemail though. Only plate armor, or plated mail.

[@SirKickz]

JuliusAkavirius Yeah, I miswrote that. Old DnD habits can be hard to break.

[@TanitAkavirius]

Graidon Mabson ;) I'm sorry I hope I didn't sound too aggressive.

[@VebbGames]

Graidon Mabson Also chainmail would be just as Vulnerable to a blunt blow as sure the armor wouldnt pit in or break from a blunt blow, but if your struck hard enough to cripple plate armor the impact you would receive wearing chaimail would do equal if not worse damage.

[@tamlandipper29]

I'm not sure plate is vulnerable to blunt impact. It's just that edged simply fails against plate. So blunt is comparatively better.

[@LafayetteCCurtis]

I'm not highly experienced with the smallsword or rapier either, but what I found from studying both was that smallsword and classical epee fencing might have been easier to learn up to a rudimentary level of proficiency; there were far fewer movement habits that I had to break and relearn before I could hold the guards and perform basic attacks in a manner that looked at least vaguely like what is shown in the plates of the more meticulously illustrated texts. By comparison, I had to do far more basic movement drills with the rapier before the look of my techniques even started to remotely resemble the plates in Capo Ferro (which I was studying at the time). If this was indeed the case back then, the smallsword's ease of learning might have been a pretty significant factor, especially since it meant a lazy noble or a middle-class tradesman (who might have been to busy to study fencing on a regular basis) would have a much better chance of absorbing at least some useful lessons when they hire a fencing master to give them a crash course prior to an impending duel. That being said, there are some possible objections to my notion that smallsword fencing is inherently easier to learn for the uninitiated, the most important being that most surviving rapier sources are less transparent and less beginner-friendly than later texts for the smallsword, foil, and epee.

[@TheTravelingbard]

I just gotta say, your channel and your videos are an excellent writer's resource. Thanks very much for making them!

[@TheUnseenPath]

In terms of pistols you mentioned in a previous video, someone will not always go down when shot but it also depends where you shoot them.

[@DLCSpider]

I would really like to see a video about glaives. There's so little information about them...

[@Seofthwa]

Sound like the spadroon is an epic failure. I find that the small sword is really quick though and coupled with quick footwork can be deadly. I have alway had problems facing opponents with the small sword. I have always preferred the rapier or saber over the small sword. Thanks for the great video on the topic.

[@thiagodunadan]

The spadroon looks like a sword for people who weren't expect to actually use the sword.

[@Briands2212]

Hi Matt, I am a fan of your videos!!! You have an extensive knowledge of swords, I truly enjoy listening to your critiques and praises of various weapons. I have to admit, one of my favorite swords besides the Spanish cup-hilt rapier is a certain Spadroon used in the movie, "The Mission". Col. Mendoza carries an iron Spadroon, with an iron shell guard with holes a blade with a large fuller, a thumb ring and a large pommel. I know it sucks as a practical weapon, but to me "just looks cool". I am also a huge fan of the Italian side sword and Conquistador-style swords. Take Care & Cheers to You!!!

[@chang.stanley]

There's one major advantage of a smallsword that wasn't mentioned ! All my knives are kept sharpened to a perfectly apexed edge, stropped down to 0.25um diamond, able to treetop or whittle free standing hair and everything. But on a full length sword, this is extremely hard to keep up and completely impossible to maintain on swords with metal scabbards. Smallswords having only a point and no edge, doesn't have this problem. I could stab things with it all day and even if I hit a rock, it only takes a couple seconds on a belt sander to bring it back to a perfect point and full functionality! Of course though, if all your swords were like butter knives, this would be irrelevant.

[@davidstegman8147]

Small Swords are less likely to trip over than a longer Sword.

[@kaunas88]

I have these swords and I agree completely with Matt.

[@Regolith86]

I have a question about your rapier. Every time you pull it out, I can't help thinking that the guard would be piss poor at protecting from thrusts at your hand, given the lots of open spaces. Since rapiers were primarily designed to go up against other rapiers with long narrow thrusting blades, why was the hilt designed that way? It looks very pretty, but it just doesn't seem very functional.

[@Wunel]

Hilts formed of swept-back (my term) iron or steel forming a kind of basket were primarily, I believe, used to dissuade your opponent from slashing at your hand or protecting your hand if it were slashed at. Rapiers were obviously meant for thrusting however a cut directed towards an unshielded hand stood a modest chance of severing a vein, tendon or finger. Thrusts at the hand, though the bars of the hilt, while possible, would have been quite unusual for reasons of risk. Your chance of striking an incapacitating or dexterity-crippling blow to the hand with a thrust is quite low, it must also be weighed up against the substantially higher chance of having your sword trapped between the bars, leading to either you being disarmed by a flick of the wrist or arm from your opponent or possibly having your blade itself snapped (this being the preferable option). TL;DR It's hard to land a thrust through the guard and you risk being disarmed and swiftly murdered in each attempt.

[@josephdedrick9337]

in my sca fencing, most rapiers have a rondel type thing covering the area in front of your hand en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rapier#/media/File:Rapiere-img_0095.jpg(similar to the front bit as shown on the smallsword) and then bars protecting your hand, and ive yet to take someones hand through the guard(thought with a thinner blade on occasion u might) but ive hit the rondel protector a couple times, aka thrusts are blocked well by it.

[@sparrowhawk81]

So I guess the lesson with the spadroon is "Hey, spadroon! Make up your mind!"

[@badminton5920]

I've read the small sword developed because a full-size rapier was cumbersome to carry around, especially in court. Then people discovered the small sword could actually be a useful weapon as well.

[@crazyscotsman9327]

The reason why I would take a Broadsword over a smallsword is because of a quote from the battlefields. "Many Officers and soldiers were cut down through the scull and neck, to the very breast; others had sculls cut off above the ears. Some had both their bodies and crossbelts cut through at one blow; pikes and small swords were cut like willows." Quoted in Guest, Ken and Denise, Brittish Battles, 1996 p. 179.

[@joshuawhittemore1283]

There are many folks out there that get their nose all bent out of shape over what's the best weapon. "The right tool for the job." is usually the easiest answer. Most will agree that it really comes down to the skill of the wielder, although there is much truth to the saying, "whomever makes the first mistake usually ends up dead". When it comes to weapons, there were certain types throughout history that were designed for those lacking in experience and time to become "masters". These weapons were created to be extremely functional, durable, and most importantly, easy to learn in a short period of time. The "finer" or "gentlemanly" weapons were worn either ceremonially by the wealthy (a symbol status), an officer's weapon, or they were customized to meet a different skill level fighter (one who had the resources, time, and devotion to honing their skill to great levels). The latter is really no different than "status" weapons/gear from medieval times. Those who could afford finer weapons, usually did. Those who couldn't often adapted farm tools with deadly success.

[@foroparapente]

Questions: - are skills easier to build on a short sword? - isn't lighter = faster to move? the distance can be cleared faster with a longer sword, but a lighter sword might allow for a faster rate of block-to-attack which can give an advantage

[@WearyFeline]

I swear to god your comment section is the only civilized place of conversation on all of KZbin XD.

[@virgosintellect]

One Context to rule them all. one Context to find them. One Context to seek them all and in the KZbin Bind them.

[@morallyambiguousnet]

I would argue that the smallsword was worn by gentlemen in much the same way that many Americans wear firearms; as a sort of status symbol, masquerading as an 'in case I need to defend myself' item. ... though no doubt it would deal with some back alley tough with a knife quite well.

[@GunFunZS]

I would argue that you don't know anything about americans who carry firearms. It's hardly about status if you go greatly out of your way to avoid people realizing you have it.

[@morallyambiguousnet]

GunFun ZS Something can be worn as a symbol of status, without ever meaning to demonstrate that status to another person. And I do know a fair bit about Americans who carry firearms, in addition to being a firearm owner myself.

[@EvilTwinn]

morallyambiguousnet I'll just say I've never known anyone who wore a gun as a status symbol.

[@morallyambiguousnet]

EvilTwinn Ever known anyone who said, "I wear one because it's my right to do so"? If so, then you have.

[@EvilTwinn]

Nope. While I have heard of this happening, the actual numbers doing that are absolutely minimal. So much so that I've never encountered it. And I'd argue that the situation described is not using it as a status symbol.

[@AussieAnnihilation]

"stiffness is incredibly important for thrusting" So thats what i've been doing wrong in bed...

[@andrejmucic8822]

The smallsword was for bourgeois defense against the proletariat. Primary use. Duels were rare at this time. The fear of the street was pumped up by the bourgeois yellow press.

[@CBZ-vk9bz]

That's why rapiers still were in use in the XVIII century Spain. Although in battle were used military versions that actually weren't pure rapiers, they were a kind of late side swords. Quite bizarre.

[@CBZ-vk9bz]

Until the espadín (a mix of smallsword and spadroon) became popular.

[@mistergreene2]

I look at these much like the modern tiny pocket pistols (moment of silence for those across the pond who have no idea what I'm talking about). The modern adage is that the first rule of a gunfight is to have a gun and the same is equally true of swordfights -- the first rule is to have a sword.

[@KingEhrys98]

+mistergreene2 Do you mean America or UK? Cause I think everybody knows what a pocket pistol is...

[@mistergreene2]

+Anung Un Rama I know we all know what they are but they're totally illegal in the UK as are all handguns. in saying they have no idea what I'm talking about I mean that the tiny pocket pistols that have become popular in the US as of late really didn't start coming out until after the UK handgun ban -- ergo Brits will have never seen one unless they've traveled outside of europe.

[@KingEhrys98]

mistergreene2 You seem misinformed - guns aren't illegal in the UK. You need a licence and a certificate of ownership but beyond that, they're pretty much legal.

[@mistergreene2]

handguns were banned in the UK in 1997

[@AThousandYoung]

+mistergreene2 Good observation...but I think it's more like a blinged out small caliber dress pistol than a pocket pistol. A stiletto is like a pocket pistol.

[@Divertedflight]

I think another 'advantage' of the small sword is that Gentlemen could settle differences of the moment with lower risks of permanent consequence (barring death) that survived past the settling of matters. Obvious and long lasting physical disabilities would I'm sure in many cases seem an ungentlemanly effect to desire.

[@johndaniels8008]

Can you do a review of the Cold Steel small sword? I'd like to see how the version they sell stacks up against original small swords from the time when carrying such a thing was popular.

[@robertpatter5509]

I can answer this. I own three authentic Smallswords and all the Cold Steel Smallswords. The Cold Steel Smallswords are definitely beefier. The Colichemarde Smallsword by Cold Steel is about 50% thicker than a real Colichemarde Smallsword. It's a beast and it can cut. The Cold Steel Smallsword with a triangular blade is still thicker than the other Smallswords. It can easily take on a bayonet. The point isn't as tapered like a hyperdermic needle as the authentic Smallswords. I also have an Indian made 1767 Officers Smallsword with brass hilt. Slightly more beefy than the original Smallsword but not as beefy as the Cold Steel Smallsword. This too can take on a bayonet. And for a reproduction it has a nice tapered point. A bit more taper than Cold Steel. Cold Steel as a company always has beefy swords. They are not exact replicas. They invoke the spirit of the Smallsword but make it larger, beefier and heavier.

[@cmac5858552]

could you maybe do a video on bayonets? like comparing different rifles/bayonet blades and saying which ones were more effective/less effective?

[@SamScelza]

Some small swords had edged blades correct? Or does this make them a spadroon?

[@kefkaZZZ]

It is interesting that the lesson of compromise from weapons like the spidroon (sp?) are still applicable to modern weaponry. Example Harrier Jet and F-35.

[@kmal2t94]

scholagladiatoria Can you do a video on the general consensus of why swords "evolved" the way they did? Weapons were first limited by materials so started shorter from weaker metallurgy, yes? And, since people did what worked it makes sense in an era of armor (>1500s-ish) that a weapon like the longsword would be best. Its light, but can cut and thrust with enough weight to penetrate and do damage. In an armored warfare situation it would seem to be the "best" sidearm other than specialized weapons for heavy armor like maces etc. Out of warfare where you aren't armored, would the rapier not be the best (to kill) due to its versatility and length and since its lighter and doesn't need to penetrate armor? Why then in an era where armor went away (from firearms) would they switch to things like the sabre and smallsword/backsword and not stay with the rapier which seems better in unarmored situations? Why did the rapier go away? Was it the confined space of fighting that made the sabre "superior"? (if it is?) Why wouldn't the rapier stick around in civilian duels? I think you've implied that the rapier was too deadly so they went to more gentlemanly wounding swords. It would seem to me that in a non-firearm/crossbow environment, the longsword (and its contemporaries) are the most superior for armored combat killing (when you don't have your reach weapon) and rapier is the best civillian unarmored killing weapon. This is like 100 questions, but maybe you could help explain what the WMA community thinks on this.

[@loreacat]

As I kung fu student, I would love to hear your thoughts on the chinesse jian

[@DemonDaoist]

Interesting statement regarding how it is psychologically easier to thrust, leading to a higher number of fatalities from thrusting. How do you square it with documentation from the Romans ridiculing the use of the cut by the Gauls, highlighting how easily the thrust from a gladius would cause a fatality?

[@Paelorian]

You're telling me a weapon designed as a lightweight and compact weapon for low-risk civilian carry isn't as effective as a two-handed battlefield primary weapon? I'm shocked. Next you'll be telling us that a derringer is at a disadvantage against a service rifle. A smallsword is about as good as it gets for a contact weapon of it's size and weight, is it not? That makes it a superb weapon. It may be more useful to compare it to a more realistic armament decision: no weapon, a knife, or a smallsword. Just as a rifle is too big & bulky to routinely carry on a peaceful day in the city (hence handguns), some people may want to visit the market without bringing a small retinue to carry their claymore, zweihander, or halberd as well as their armor. I just want to go buy some food for dinner. A large weapon is an unacceptable burden. If only large weapons were available, then only a knife would be carried. A smallsword is a compromise. Inferior to a larger weapon, superior to a smaller one.

[@mackenziebenedict8403]

rapiers are better, rapiers were civilian weapons

[@susamogus5693]

@@mackenziebenedict8403 rapiers were much heavier and harder to carry than smallswords. Also i think they are less elegant

[@mackenziebenedict8403]

@@susamogus5693 you had a better chance of defending yourself with a rapier against other weapons than you would with a smallsword. Small swords were often just good against other small swords and anything smaller. Plus, there are many different shapes of rapier, which allows for uniqueness, as opposed to small swords, which look generally the same

[@nonyabiz9487]

Im not a sword expert but from what I see with antique weapons is a lot of infantry officers during Napoleonic warfare times had what I would call a combat size court sword that was a size closer to a rapier for the battlefield and they would duel all the time against other officers with heavier sabers like what the cavalry soldiers carried. There was no clear better weapon between the two. There was also smaller more fancy small swords that were more for social functions.

[@0835SEBO]

Stiffness is important for thrusting. Duh? It's hard to bang while flaccid! (another excellent video as always Matt)

[@extinctionvector6179]

Ok. Let me qualify that last statement, it was very rude, I'm sorry. It was out of line. Let me just say, that a lot of these KZbin videos talk about blade type vs blade type and focus on the strengths and weaknesses of the the physical properties of the weapon. Single combat with weaponry isn't about the physical properties of the weapon when they clash. It's about the *speed* and *maneuvarability* of the weapon on split-second timescales. The shape and weight of a weapon is more due to the combat norms of the day in regards to battlefield conditions and armor standards. This has nothing to do with blade vs blade properties. It has to do with environmental ones. If you were wielding a small sword by no other choice, your advantage is in tempo-breaking and the speed of thrust attacks on towards-attack counters. The key to rapier and small sword fighting is angle, timing, and direction change. If someone is wielding a heavier blade, you capitalize on position and angle, you don't attempt to use your needle directly against a meat cleaver and wonder why your blade snapped. To give an obtuse example, if you can step inside the swing of a heavier blade, closing distance, essentially within grappling range, you can finish the fight with a thrust at the right angle with a rear positioned attack vector . Step into a strike, stop it with your hand, body ,or blade (if you step inside a roundhouse attack and stop its momentum by placing your shoulder in the path of the wrist, for one example....the forte of a blade does the least damage), your left shoulder is essentially against the opponent, your right is to the rear holding the blade, skewer away. The ability to get a point on target far supersedes the blade properties, when armor and environment are t of consequence to the fight. That isn't to say that a small sword is ideal for the battlefield; in fact it's probably the worst choice. But when we are considering single combat (which is what comparing blade vs blade is essentially doing), the advantage isn't as much in the blade as it is within the tactical abilities your blade type provides in terms of speed, timing, and tempo control. The victory doesn't come from the blade, it comes from your ability to wield that blade's properties in the correct context. The mind, and your bodies' ability to execute those commands, is the ultimate arbiter in single combat. It isn't about the shape and weight of metals when they clash in these scenarios.

[@HaNsWiDjAjA]

Congratz, you have basically agreed with Matt

[@Gongasoso]

On a completely different topic, I would like to know your opinion about greatswords (not longswords, greatswords), those big, heavy things with two crossguards, that seem to me much more useful in a fantasy scenario than in real life.

[@kylebates3627]

Greatswords were used to break pike formations. The greatsword wielders would charge up front swinging their sword in a figure 8 formation. This would protect them from most attacks, and once they were inside the pike formation, they would either drop their sword or choke up and use it like a spear.

[@iseeicyicetea]

Gongasoso Kyle Bates afaik, that is just speculation. from what i've heard, nobody really knows how greatswords were used.

[@Gongasoso]

I suspect this might be stiring an interesting discussion.

[@kylebates3627]

iseeicyicetea It may be, but it's the only solid sound piece of info I've heard regarding its use.

[@kylebates3627]

***** Oh absolutely, my apologies if it came off like I implied that. What I was thinking was more along the lines of a wedge that would disrupt the line and leave an opening for your men to gain a foothold. This isn't dungeons and dragons where a handful of people with big swords beat all the guys with the smaller blades :P

[@TonboIV]

I was very interested in your brief commentary on bayonets. I'd always thought of them as bad makeshift spears, too heavy and unerganomic. It sounds as though they might actually be ideal for soldiers with little training. They can outreach most weapons. They're slow, but so heavy that they're difficult to defend against. I'd love to watch a video about that.

[@john1st13th5]

It IS very interesting, thank you very much!

[@alexneeley598]

Single stick is better likened to mencer fencing but with a long somewhat thick stick and proper face protection.

[@vonmazur1]

Sometime, I need to tell you about "Fencing" in Nam....specifically, the US M-1/M-2 Carbine with a bayonet vs SKS and AK with a bayonet. The situation was similar to what you are covering here.....

[@Komatik_]

Do tell?

[@vonmazur1]

Yes, but it was not very nice....The niceties of formal fencing went right out the window...

[@JinKee]

The doc says most of the bleeding is internal. That's good. Blood is supposed to be on the inside.

[@melkior13]

Can you comment on the differences/motivations of basket hilt vs. cup hilt rapiers? I can't see why someone would choose a basket hilt rapier even if fencing in an Italian style. Also, I don't seem to notice any significant weight difference between them.

[@rncftw]

If I was forced to fight someone where we had plenty of space and told to choose either a Khukri or a Small sword and was told that which ever weapon I chose that the opponent would have the other weapon... It's a tough one for me considering the khukri's stopping power and the small swords lack of stopping power. In this day and age if your anywhere near a hospital... Kind of makes me favor a Khukri. Different in other circumstances (no help/hospitals for miles around/many years ago) and probably the context this video was intended for :)

[@kissing88]

One stab from a smallsword would have immense stopping power on a person. I'd pick smallsword all the way. A khukri wielder of equivalent skill will be at a massive disadvantage confronting such an agile and longer weapon

[@shipmanhaven]

You keep mention cuts but one technique of a smallsword is the stinging blow, cutting or not on contact. It distracts and makes way for the thrust.

[@charliewheeler8602]

Shurely one of the main reasons small swords "evolved" and hence it's "point" was that large cities (eg London, Paris, Rome) were becoming so crowded that larger swords were impractical to wear in day to day life, never mind fashion. So the options were only (a) stop wearing a sword or (b) wear a small sword. In this "context" is a completely sensible sword to have and become familiar with using. We often forget, especially in HEMA and KZbin that the effectiveness of a sword in a fight is only one aspect of their characteristics, you ALWAYS have to understand their context and the environment they were used in.

[@robertpatter5509]

They probably still carried a dagger. Which has an advantage. If swords are forbidden then often a dagger was just fine. Unless it's a Messer. A Messer is made like a knife. A nifty loophole. Though a Smallsword is quite handy in small spaces with reach. Unlike a dagger.

[@jackwabba112]

Your comments on the "clean" or "civilized" thrust-based fatalities in duels made me think of something that I wondered about, in one of your other recent videos. You mentioned that, during the time when the epee-de-combat was popular in France, there was not a single recorded fatality, in duels with that weapon. I'm not disputing this, but at the same time I find it utterly confusing. I just can't wrap my head around the idea that none of these first-blood duels ever resulted in a death. I realize that the vast majority of these fights would end with someone getting poked in the arm, hand, or leg. But again: the idea that nobody ever got themselves run through? I have a hard time buying that it NEVER happened. Walk me through how unarmored people could be fighting with sharp, thrust-centric blades and never, ever wind up with an epee through their liver? Or into their eye socket? Could it be that the French fashion was to wear armor during these first-blood duels, like the Germans did, up into the early part of the 20th century, with their dueling society stuff?

[@GeneralAdvance]

running someone through on purpose would be very uncivilised, and getting yourself run through would be ASTRONOMICALLY stupid, probably a fair amount of duels consisted of at least one person being scared shitless of dieing and of causing a death

[@slipper329]

hopefully Matt sees this or someone who has good knowledge about HEMA in england because I want to take it up but live in ssex and have no real way of getting to any classes in london so my question is where can I learn around my area because I really want to learn

[@joelshort2907]

A similar question to the original one: if Spadroons are so rubbish (and I'm not disputing that they are; your arguments are very convincing), why were they used so much/become to fashionable? Is it because there wasn't a real expectation for its users to do much except carry it around and point at things? Or is it just fashion? Also, what's the difference between a Hanger and other kinds of swords? What kinds of sword (other than the Spadroon and Backsword) were used before the Napoleonic period? Thanks for the great video!

[@TonboIV]

Why do people buy SUVs? They're rubbish on-road, they're rubbish off-road. A lot of industries exist entirely to sell useless things.

[@TonboIV]

Thiago Kurovski People carry pistols because they're small, just like people carried swords because they were handier than spears. Matt is claiming that Spadroons are worse than other weapons of the SAME SIZE.

[@Regolith86]

***** Cops don't carry assault rifles because they're a pain in the ass to haul around with you, just like a spear would be. Pistols are far more convenient. Most police officers in the US do in fact keep either a shotgun or an assault rifle in their patrol vehicles, however, in case a situation arises where they may need it.

[@YenzQu]

I imagine that it actualy was mostly due to fashion and the reason was that gentlemen where expected to wear small swords at the time and a heavier weapon wouldn't have looked respectable. But in the heat of battle when there is smoke all around and bayonets are coming at you from all directions you need more of a cutting weapon. So they came up with this weak compromise and they really wanted to have a sabre the entire time.

[@ADADEL1]

Thiago Kurovski As a general rule of thumb, an officer's pistol is not made to kill the enemy. Not enough range. It's made to kill me when I get uppity and decide not to charge the hill with a machine gun encampment on top. My brains on my buddies is a good reminder that they should follow orders.

[@kazoosc]

I am sorry, but I couldn't help laughing every time you said spudroon but as straightforwardly informative as any of your videos

[@kamilszadkowski8864]

When you mentioned about the Crimean War and the Russian thick coats, I started to wonder if just the climate in Central and Eastern Europe (Poland, Lithuania, Russia et cetera) was one of the reasons why sabers were adopted there faster than in Western Europe. In particular, there were examples of wars between Poland and Russia during the autumn and winter in the sixteenth and seventeenth centuries. The only thing that ruins this theory is Scandinavia ... there sabers was not used for a long time ... Sorry for my English...

[@hjorturerlend]

Uhmmm... Not really, the most direct and likely explanations for the prevelance of strongly curved sabres in Eastern Europe are: 1. Curved sabres are very good as cavalry sidearms and the steppe landscape of E.E. is ideal for cavalry, which is why E.E. warfare was completely dominated by cavalry. 2. Mongol (who occupied most of Russia in the 13th century), Turkish and other Central Asian influences, who used curved sabers for the same reasons as the Russians and Poles. 3. Actually, against thick clothing you want a stiff weapon with a needle point, a sabre is not the best choice against someone in a greatcoat, a rapier is a good choice. 4. Even then, a greatcoat is not worth much against a lance or recurve bow - the weapons that really decided the outcome of steppe warfare.

[@Stratplayer05]

So was it then more by convention and stylistic choice that smallswords became more popular than things like transition rapiers or colichemardes and such or is there an advantage of using either against a smaller, lighter rapier-like sword?

[@RVM451]

Matt, I know that wasn't their tactical niche-so to speak-but were Rapiers ever pressed into service from Horseback? The question come to me when you mentioned a dismounted Saber Armed Cavalryman. How would you rate Small Sword against Katana? I realize that something like a Boar Spear would probably be better than almost any Sword-but back when there was still plenty of wilderness and protection against large predators might be a factor-what Sword would be best? I read an old story when I was a boy about a Viking in mail and carrying Sword and Round Shield who encountered a bear. He severed the bear's forearm and then ran it through-is this even conceivable against a big bear? (not some 200 pound Black Bear) Tiger? etc. I'm thinking that something like a Chinese War Sword used against the skull or failing that to inflict one massive gash at the onset-A beast, unlike a man, isn't apt to Evade, Dodge or Counter... I've also heard that even animals are smart enough to protect their eyes and that a man with as little as a long pointed stick who keeps it in the beast's face can often frustrate a predator into going away. A good Swordsman might be able to Blind or thrust his Point through the eye into the brain-maybe. Once again, I bow to your expertise. .....RVM45

[@izonker]

I have a question regarding the Colichemarde (to my understanding, also a type of small-sword): is it one of the exceptions to the smallsword's weaknesses that you outlined in this video? I am not intending to be a troll, but the example I saw of a Colichemarde in action was from an episode of Deadliest Warrior (and please pardon my undoubtedly rampant noobery in referring to said show) and the sword they purported to be a "Colichemarde" showed decent cutting power- at least against unarmored and unresisting dead pork.. I am genuinely curious about this, as I will be the first to admit that my only frame of reference is from a television show with a penchant for sensationalism. Thanks, and great video, btw.

[@GunFunZS]

Gotta start somewhere, and skepticism toward any weapon related thing on the history channel is a great place to start. They seem to be wrong more often than right about almost every broad claim or minor detail fact in any show I have seen. (Particularly in any show that is hosted by the caricature of bad leadership named Lee Ermey Sr.) I don't know anything about that style of smallsword, though. I'm a bit behind and rusty in my sword knowledge, but I can thorougly reccomend myarmoury.com as a very good resource full of people who actually have the real thing, research, use and basically know what they are talking about.

[@TheVanguardFighter]

That episode simply shows that someone with more skill at fencing and horse back riding is gonna be better at those things than someone with less skill. Its not a very historically accurare episode. The Colichmarde is thicker than later small swords, but it still can't cut as well as a saber. It was replaced by lighter smallswords and sabers. Gentlemen found that the lighter small swords were easier to carry and more maneuverable in the fencing hall and so they adapted the type of sword Matt shows. Soldiers and officers found that sabers were better at cutting and and so adapted sabers.

[@mfreyhanw1488]

That's a majestic rapier.

[@RandiJillH]

Just one comment. You state that the thrust is easier psychologically to see that a cut or hew and thus the thrust is easier to employ psychologically. Generally that does not hold out all things being equal. Giving offense in the form of cut versus thrust is independent of viewing said action. It is VERY difficult to stab someone mentally instead of slashing. Whether it was the Greeks or Romans telling their soldiers to thrust or in bayonet fighting during any modern war, the combatant shies away from the thrust without extensive classical and operant psychological conditioning. Just like a newbie sword practitioner will attack the sword instead of the person holding it, a new bayonet or knife fighter will attempt to slash or cut in lieu of stabbing. Only through drilling does a person overcome this natural tendency. Otherwise, left to their own devices, they will choose the slash, draw, push, or hew. That being said, I completely agree with the statement that viewing a mangled corpse with blood everywhere is much harder to stomach than a small area with minimal blood seepage. But they are separate "points", no?

[@alexriner7182]

I think you are talking about different things. yes, peoples natural inclination with weapons is to swing them around, but this would be overcome by the training nobles would recieve. Stabing would seem more, I hesitate to use the word moral but that kinda fits. Stabing seems less wrong than cutting and thus could be said to be "easier"

[@tsmspace]

but spadroons were mostly designed to face guns, so they wouldn't have been expected to need to duel as much, and they would have needed the blade to be sharp for all sorts of times when they just needed the threat of harm, rather than the actual harm itself.

[@enginnonidentifie]

A good video! It definitely seems as if the spadroon was made solely for aesthetics. However, I know "cut-fencing," for lack of a better name, was still taught in the 18th century and that more robust fighting swords continued to be made in this period. To this end, I wonder just how common it was for officers prior to the Napoleonic Wars to opt for these more rugged swords if they saw heavy combat. Would you happen to have any information in regards to this?

[@anticonformity100]

i think the spadroon has a use when fighting on a ship.

[@BigWillyG1000]

A lot where we have provenaunce were naval officers or they have naval themes in the decoration.

[@BunnyOfThunder]

So is the purpose of spadroons that they look nice with a uniform and are technically swords?

[@sky4eyes]

hi matty can you talk about small sword and modern day epee

[@RougeSamurai77]

Do you think a sport fencer could use a short sword well?

[@tfilmyr]

+RougeSamurai77 Only unless the opponent had absolutely no experience. Sport fencing (especially saber) teaches footwork and reach and most importantly how to trick your opponent into committing to an attack or defense that can then be exploited. That's really at the heart of all modern fencing. Of course you have many exchanges to get to that point in a contest. You may not have that opportunity in a true duel.

[@velkewemaster]

if smallswords were much longer, they would be better? a rapier with a longer smallsword blade would be an advantage?

[@Lyphatma]

Superior to the weapon a lower class mugger is likely to use?

[@TheBaconWizard]

Matt, I don't know if you have one, but would you talk a bit about the colichemard?

[@louisjolliet3369]

Hello Matt, I have a question. In an unarmoured duel, the rapier's main advantage over the smallsword is usually its reach. Now given a rapier and a smallsword/colichemarde of equal blade length, say both at 36 inches, wouldn't the smallsword/colichemarde have the advantage ?

[@scholagladiatoria]

The smallsword is quicker, but the rapier hilt is generally more protective of the hand and sword arm. It all depends on the specific features of the weapons of course.

[@louisjolliet3369]

Thanks for answering. Thats is what I was thinking. Can we agree that on the offense, the smallsword of equal blade length is likely to have an advantage, while the rapier will have an advantage on the defense ?

[@TheHobbes1]

Why the move from Broad to Long Sword and then to "Back" or Rapier?

[@dmytroy]

Great video, a question about Bayonet vs different types of swords. It seems really strange that officers adopted really an inferior weapon for dealing with the most common threat in war. To me it would seem that carrying a rapier or backsword/basket hilted sword of some sort would work much better. Or in best case scenario a dagger and a sword. What sword do you think would be the best at countering a bayonet? Also in a situation where sword is paired with a buckler or a dagger do you think that Bayonet still has advantage or now sword has an advantage?

[@KecskeTabornok]

Why is there 2 crossguards on the Zweihander?

[@knechtor5648]

if the spadroon combines the worst parts of a sword, does a spontoon combine the worst parts of a spear?

[@Wunel]

Similar name, but actually I believe spontoons more or less just added a small crossbar below the blade of the spear, with little other changes. Hard to see how is could create as bad a polearm as the spadroon is a sword.

[@Tyler_Lalonde-]

it is better to have that bar going across.

[@gebeme11]

Just like a pontoon combines all of the worst attributes of a boat.

[@therealr0bert]

Would it be beneficial to a day one noob to start with a smallsword when they aim to use rapier in HEMA eventual, but have no access to a rapier?

[@christosvoskresye]

Now that you bring up both dueling and the Revolutionary War, it reminds me that a great^n uncle of mine, Capt. James Richards, lost a hand in a duel with another American officer in the North Carolina militia. They were both drummed out of the service as a result, it being pretty stupid to start killing your own side in a war that isn't going that well anyhow. I've always assumed they were using sabers, though I'm not sure I've seen that in print.

[@BigDave1125]

So which sword should we buy for the coming dark age?

[@ThreeSeatStarboard]

Is it at all possible that spadroons were officer sidearms to discourage officer from engaging in melee?

[@MrHansBen]

Cold Steel makes a sword called the Colichemarde. Do you know anything about it?

[@christopherknorr2895]

So, essentially the spadroon is the F-35 of the sword world. Except for it was cheap to make, not inordinately expensive.

[@scholagladiatoria]

+Christopher Knorr lol

[@mamvee9320]

+scholagladiatoria I am now not too sure about the differences between a saber and a smallsword. Is a saber a smallsword?

[@KingEhrys98]

+Mikey B A saber usually has a curved blade.

[@AThousandYoung]

+Mikey B A sabre is not a smallsword. A sabre is a moderately curved slashing sword used in the military. A smallsword is a straight spike carried by gentlemen.

[@AThousandYoung]

+Christopher Knorr I agree with Mr Green below. The spadroon is the .22 calibur pistol of the sword world.

[@bottasegreta]

Are there straight sabers? Would love to see a video on that.

[@virgosintellect]

Patton sabres are elongated cavalryman daggers with a grip the size of a telephone 📞. Not designed for slashing at all.

[@CreatorofZen]

I'd like to know what your thoughts are on the Colichemarde. I know very little about swords from this era (I prefer medieval longswords and arming sword, or Viking age swords), but I know that it is an interesting variation on the smallsword and I am curious as to how it stacks up.

[@timothyheimbach3260]

Would the rapier cut better purely because r weighs more?

[@kyletimmons421]

scholagladiatoria love your stuff. I have a lot of interest in the 18th early 19th centuries and the smallsword figures a lot into that period. Quick question that you might be able to answer. The common bayonet cross section of the time is triangular, and I was wondering if you know if this is because the bayonets were modeled after small swords or this is some weird example of parallel evolution. And just out of curiosity do you guys do much with bayonets in HEMA?

[@tobender4ever]

What about using a smallsword against a man with a baseball bat, crowbar, tire iron?

[@dylanwight5764]

A smallsword has merit as a sidearm to somebody who'd rather disengage from a close range duel than to see it through. Can you parry with a smallsword? Easily. Can you catch an opponent's sword with a smallsword? Certainly. Can you use a smallsword to _prevent_ yourself from being wounded? Yes! A musketeer would find a smallsword very useful as a sidearm. Indeed, a gentleman would find a smallsword useful insurance against would-be muggers. In the end, a smallsword is light and compact, being more use defensively than offensively. For somebody who isn't interested in actually entering a swordfight or knifefight, the smallsword offers them a way out without getting in the way.

[@EdMurphy13]

Where there ever blades made the were essentially short rapiers? So like the same width and stiffness of the Rapier blade but take say 6-10 inches off. Or is that pretty much just an infantry sabre?

[@KnightedDawn]

Rapiers varied in length quite significantly.

[@epic0wnag]

why not just use a sidesword? I mean it was very old by this time period, but it seems like it could cut and thrust better than the spadroon, and is also heavier, giving more weight to parries.

[@creme8338]

heavier, more cumbersome (longer), wasnt in fashion, also just not needed for fights in the time period. sideswords essentially are just the transition between an arming sword and rapier. smallswords were primarily a self-defense and dueling weapon. also; a status symbol (much like modern pistols in america, but also other places). it looks much fancier than a sidesword as well.

[@creme8338]

actually, forget my comment. thought you were talking about the smallsword, not the spadroon. my point still stands though :P

[@Ericthefilo]

I thought the smallsword was mainly used as a civilian dress sword, for protection against random muggers and for duels. Wouldn't officers being a sabre into a real battle?

[@HelmutDoork]

Lol, I have the 1796 spadroon. What is funny is someone who looked at it thought it was a parade or Masonic sword because he didn't think the military would have a sword with a guard so flimsy.

[@saqibshah2572]

Would any of this vary on shipboard service and swordsmanship? Would these become better or more practical weapons or would the sabe, back sword, and rapier still be better swords?

[@KnightofAshes]

What is you opinion on the Colichemarde?

[@Arcanefungus]

How is a thrust more likely to wound fatally than a cut? Isnt the idea that you can poke someone in a nonfatal area to draw blood and end the duel? With a cutting sword, that might result in you lobbing their arm off, which can definetely and easily be fatal

[@atom8248]

Cuts that completely sever body parts require big wind up and are more telegraphed than a straight line of a thrust to the internal organs in the chest. Cuts are great, but most will not kill, but it will incapacitate if aimed at the right areas. Those big cuts definitely do happen, it's just that it needs to happen at the right time. Small cuts not being lethal don't mean they aren't effective at all, severing someones fingers is totally possible with a flick of the wrist. For example, in kenjutsu they teach you not to overcommit to cuts and when tried against tatami mats their strikes would not completely sever the tatami sometimes making a shallow slice of a few centimeters.