Most effective sword type for modern unarmored sword fighting

S

scotjute

Joined
Aug 7, 2001
Messages
212
In western culture, the sword became lighter as gunpowder made armor obsolete. The last fighting
swords were basically sabres (thrusting & slashing) and rapiers (thrusting) types. Both of these featured one-handed operation. In the east the Samurai type swords continued right down to WWII. These allowed two-handed control and featured both speed and power. Would like to know if there are any studies concerning which type of sword and style of fighting would be the most effective in a modern sword fight (one that is unarmored)or just to hear discussion/opinions on the subject.
 
In unarmored combat speed is everything, so I guess that a rapier or smallsword would probably be the logical choice.
 
datubarong.jpg
 
Hmmm I guess this thread could easily turn into another one of those tired old "thrust" vs "cut" debates. However the reason I mentioned rapier or small sword is because they are both thrusters rather then cutters. Is the jian a thruster as well? The katana is primarily a cutter as are wakizashi and "ninja-to". The barong? that Fredrico posted (beautiful by the way) is also primarily a cutter. I guess we need to qualify this a bit more. Are we talking about a one on one duel here or a full combat situation?
 
I keep thinking of different scenarios and coming up with a different answer for each scenario!:D

(First, my standard disclaimer. I prefer a gun, but I'll stipulate the choice of a sword for the sake of discussion.)

For an non armor duel, I've got to say I'll take the rapier and main gauch. As for what style, mainly germanic with a healthy dose of Italian and French thrown in.

If you're talking Close Combat, where I will be in confined spaces fighting against an opponent with either a blade or other non-firearm weapon, give me a nice sharp Cut and Thrust sword and please, one of those WAY cool Jerry Hossom Wakizashis for a Main Gauche! :D

If I know I'm going to be up against a firearm?
Forget it, I want my short barreled AR-15!

:D

Either way, you notice that I have a definite preference for two blades.
I had to rule out the Katana, because even though it happens to be an excellent choice, due to some joint problems in my shoulders, I've discovered (rather painfully) that I cannot wield a katana to best effect without quickly disabling myself.

Kind of odd, I have no problem with wielding one handed blades, but the fulcrum movements required of a two hander places way too much strain on my shoulders. Tears me up fast.
 
Hey Ken,

I have been meaning to ask about that. Seems like I have heard somewhere that the main gauche was only in vogue for a short period of time, was deemed ineffective and discarded. Is there any truth to that?
 
Hey Ru... uh Triton!
No, I'd pretty much have to say there's no truth to it at all.
The carrying of a dagger was of course, something that was "always" done, but the Main Gauche as a second combat blade didn't come into major play until well after the Cut and Thrust sword came into wide acceptance and the Gauche eventually gained favor over the Buckler.
Call it roughly 1550-70 or so.

The Gauch survived the "death" of the C&T sword, and transitioned nicely with the Rapier, being accepted and used by all schools for a very long time, but I'd have to say it's "heyday" was during the Thirty Years War. The "Swordbreaker" main gauche was so popular during the TYW that it is almost universally recognized as a SYMBOL for that war. (Sort of a Logo?)

However, as the fortunes of the sword declined, so to did the main gauch. With the beginning of the end, and the migration of the fashion minded to the small sword, carrying the maine gauche was considered "tres'gauche" and not something that the socially blessed were likely to do. It was just considered "inelegant."

Then, as now, fashions are set by the "Social Elite", and the lower classes followed along in an effort to emulate their "betters" who had transformed the sword from a weapon of war, to a rather unwieldy status symbol. (All of which was predicated by the widespread appearance of the firearm on the battlefield.)

So even though the use of the Main Gauche lasted only 150 years or so, I'd say the Gauche didn't fall out of favor due to lack of effectiveness, but rather fell from grace for the same reason the sword itself did. It was made obsolesent by the gun.
 
Shhhh quiet you. You will give away my secret identity to everyone who doesn't know it already.:)

Well Ken, that answer sounds pretty definitive. I appreciate you taking the time. I guess that means that when I finally get that writhen rapier from A&A I will have to get the matching dagger. :) Sigh, so little money so many sharp pointy things.

Have you ever seen an A&A parrying dagger? What did you think? I currently have a "crusader" dagger from them in my posession and it is very nice.
 
Well a little bit on what the barong has been used for. generally its a very close quarters blade. Moro fighting tactics are very guerilla/pirate oriented. So ambush was a popular mode of attack. Spears to confuse the enemy and then finish them off with the blades. Generally though from a historical perspective I cant think of many other swords that have faced such a variety of opponents, from spanish sabers, to rapiers, to katana, to chinese weapons, to malay/indonesian weapons, to other Filipino and Moro weapons as well. Not to mention all the guns that have been tried against these primarily blade armed warriors. So on a historical precendent it stands up well, but then I dont know how many of us today learn to fight from childhood and make a living through piracy. So then it comes to the age old dilemna of skill of warrior vs advantages of weapon.
 
Fellows, I'm enjoying your opinions.
My training has been with foil, and my actual experience has been with machete (own land in Lousisiana).
For those who have chosen the rapier, I would ask the following: Most rapier type swords I have seen in magazines weigh about 2-2.5 lbs. Heavier than the foils I have trained with. Most katana type swords appear to be in the same weight range and seem appropiate for thrusting also. My experience with the machete indicates that when I am tired, I automatically go to a two-handed mode, which enables me to continue cutting with effectiveness for a while longer. Also if both sword types weigh about the same, would not the two-handed variety be more controllable, faster, etc. and hence a more lethal weapon?

Will admit that the two-weapon approach appears to
be a rather intrigueing one.
 
With the Jian, atleast the style Im learning, its mostly thrusts. But there are cuts. They're kind of like sliding thrusts, its hard to explain.

I though rapiers were alot lighter. The average Jian is only about 1.5lbs.

BTW the Katana is used for both cutting and stabbing. The blade is designed that well.
 
Correct me if I am wrong here guys but although you could thrust with a katana is it not mostly a cutter? The style of swordplay that a katana is designed for does not rely on thrusts very much as far as I know? You can not "fence" with a katana like you would with a rapier (Highlander aside) since it is a two handed sword or so I have been led to believe. Do not get me wrong, I like katana they are excellent swords it is their utility in an unarmored duel that I wonder about...
 
Federico,

You bring up excellent points about the barong, that is why I think we need to clarify the situation that we are talking about here a bit. If we are talking about jungle ambushes I might want that barong too...:)
 
Oops, read the post wrong, sorry.
When I take the Bokken out I mostly go for cuts, Iaido/Kendo does have some very effective thrusts, they're just not effective for me. In some styles it is a 1 handed blade. In the Nito-Ryu styles you have the Katana in your right hand and the Wakizashi in your left.
 
Triton, I've handled a katana once. It looks like it would be ok for thrusting, tho I would agree that its primary use appears to be slashing. As I
am ignorant of Samurai sword tactics, can't really say for sure, but I thought it was more than just a pointed machete.
When operated two-handed, then you're stating that it would not be as effective as a rapier type sword? especially in parrying blows or thrusting?
(oh no, can this mean that the Highlander did not
make the best choice in a sword!)
 
Yes the katana is a very capable sword for thrusting. And yes, it is designed primarily for cleaving. However, this does not mean thrusting is ignored. The design and utilization of the katana both incorporate thrusting efficiently and effectively.

A Japanese sword of the right proportions and design given the application would be a worthy asset in unarmed combat. So would a gim or a smallsword or a longsword or shamshir or barong or..or..or...

Having any sword in battle is like having a group of war dogs. You have to be in control, or the dogs could hurt you as much or more than your opponent. Or, if you only know the command "sit," perhaps dogs aren't going to be your top choice.

IMO, a fast sword with a secondary weapon (rapier, main gauche was brought up) has an advantage in unarmed combat, so long as the wielder is capable of being "skillfully lethal" while utilizing the speed potential of the weapon. But an advantage doesn't guarantee victory.

Shinryû.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top