Anyone remember that one twitter-meme that went something like: "If you were captured by terrorists yet could tweet something that would inform your followers that you were in mortal danger but would fly over the terrorists heads, what would it be?" Yeah I think this is the youtube version that.
Am I the only 1 out there with streamers glued to the back or my sword? After seeing your dual wield greatsword comment I feel that now my opponents won't be intimidated by my semi cheerleader pom-pom style pommel.
It's the Sherman 75mm cannon. It won't kill a Panther, but will do the job in most circumstances, and doesn't cost the earth. War is about compromise, and cost.
@@louisvictor3473 "Look out! It's a panther!" "For the last time, George, this is 1941. They haven't been... oh, I see what you mean." "Achtung! Panther!" "For the last time, Heinrich, this is 1941. Panthers haven't been... oh, I see what you mean." "Well, ho there pard'ner! Is that a panther I see?" "Skip, it's a darn mountain lion. Just because they're in the same genus doesn't make them the... Oh, I see what you mean..."
Hmmm.... perhaps it was also originally intended to be an easy weapon for someone trained in smallsword fencing to pick up. As smallsword duelling declined in popularity, perhaps so did the popularity of the spadroon. Just a theory.
Except the spadroon and smallsword developed in parallel. This concept of the spadroon being developed for those who were experienced in smallsword is a theory by collectors, based on the fact the first spadroon pattern was created in 1786, and not realizing the spadroon had existed for a hundred years or more by this point. Many infantry sabres that followed the spadroon were not so different in weight and handling, they were just curved (lightly). Even many of those eventually went straight in time.
Academy of Historical Fencing Perhaps more of a co-evolution then, rather than the one being directly inspired by the other. Clearly there was some cross-pollination of ideas about what makes a good sword.
@@AcademyofHistoricalFencing That doesn't really invalidate that point, as smallsword fencing was largely a refinement of rapier systems it isn't that it was developed overnight, so you would still be much more likely to have officers at hand that already had a solid foundation of thrusting sword principles than the sabre. As dueling declined in popularity you would get people with no training most of the time so it wasn't a factor anymore.
@@heretyk_1337 I think it's about time that swords should be allowed to self-identify as they choose and any classifications should be "Oakshott-Fluid".
[Don Lafontaine voiceover] In a world infected by spadroonitis.....he was our only hope.......he took up the sword.......Matt Easton is......THE SPADROONEER![/Don Lafontaine voiceover]
This seems a lot like a case where in general it's an okay design, but a lot of the bad reputation comes down to a particular implementation with a way too flexible blade.
My 'militarized' smallsword has mammoth ivory grips too and I love it. It looks and feels wonderful. I also made mammoth ivory grips for my favorite Cervenka dagger and a superlative Korth revolver. Ivory rocks especially when an elephant was not harmed for it.
Great video! I appreciate the context. As a long time fencer, it's interesting to think about how a sword would square up against various other weapons. Would be interested in more videos on that topic!
I liked the french epee/spadroon featured in one of your videos from a few years ago. The one with the offset fullers. It seemed to be a nice solid weapon, suitable for counterpoint fencing a le Valville.
Given the context of the spadroons (I didn't know, they haven't interested me enough to look up), I think I can almost transport all my comments from the katana video to them. Whilst nowhere as much a status/cultural symbol as in Japan, I'd say military swords were still a relevant cultural symbol then (I mean, we kept it to this day, granted in a purely ceremonial role), which I think the bladed nature and overall aesthetics of it can satisfy the self-image/morale and social roles of it (which are often overlooked, but those people were human too, you should never understimate society and psychology). More importantly on this side of the story, it was still a functional and desirable sidearm. However, with the improvements of gun technology, the introduction of the bayonet on said improved guns, people no longer wearing plate armor, changes in battle strategies enabled by these developments, all of that together made the martial needs of the sidearm different. In a way, the sword was now a side-sidearm - the default sidearm was the bayonet, that is what your sword is complementing, not the gun your bayonet is attached to. There was no real need for something as long as the preceding rapier since for your reach/stabbing needs the bayonet was there for you, which makes it clear why the rapier was replaced. A shorter sword that can still cut and thrust, rather than just thrust like a short sword, makes a lot of sense here as a complement to your bayonet and gun, specially on foot.
A spadroon is the 18th century equivalent of a pocket pistol, it's not ideal if you actually need to use it though you likely won't need to, but it's light/handy enough to be comfortable enough to wear daily. Still much better than nothing though.
That's not the way expert swordsmen and masters of the 18thc considered them, some of which had to defend their lives. They thought the smallsword was best for the purpose you deacribe, and the spadroon to be far more universal.
I don't think it's a coincidence that they fall out of service as pistols get better after 1815, especially with the rise of the revolver. Spadroons were PDWs and by say the US Civil War revolvers are better for that so swords become more ornate and get other uses like being a pointer or thing to hold over your head to make a rally point. Pole weapons had done the same in the 18th century with halberds and spontoons going from serious weapons in 1700 to examples of American Revolutionary halberds where the axes is totally dull and designed to spell out US with the "blade" because at this point it's not really used as a weapon.
i got my 1796 spadroon with a random small sword (not a clue where its from or when etc) in a random auction for £25. I was most pleased though the flappy side guard does not give me much confidence in it
I forget which video it was, he was bashing the spadroon and Lucy commented that she liked the spadroon. Maybe she brought him around to her way of thinking. It seems like a good idea, a compromise straight blade that as was pointed out would be familiar to someone using a smallsword but had more "umph" to it.
May I recommend Mr. Easton, checking out the earlier 1740 Prussian Infantry Officers Pattern. It's what the British 1796 was based on. The Prussian version has a really sturdy and thick guard. The blade is hexagonal. It's narrow but has a good weight that gives a sufficient cut. Also quite stiff for the thrust. I think it's the ultimate 18th century spadroon.
to judge the worth of a weapon is to balance yin and yang. Both quality of the materials and the design of the weapon can produce a quality piece but to rate it against other weapons the warrior who wields the weapon completes its ratings. A weapon is an extension of ones self. A weapon is also a tool and the warrior its craftsman. How you wield your sword and for what purpose are what creates the stories of legends.
I see a comment about spadroons from Matt, I watch. Neal Stephenson's Baroque cycle of novels were not kind about the spadroon , but the guy was fighting a well-trained rapier user. He lost, and was dumped in the river.
*'I am not going to say I was wrong but I would like to qualify a lot of the bad things I said about Spadroons were based upon SOME bad spadroons!'* Now that's what I call a quality dodge by our favorite fencing MASTER, Matt Easton!
First, excellent channel. Since the topic is spadroons, a question comes up. Looking at the specifications on Kult of Athena, the British 1845 Infantry Officer sword (USS148) looks to be a spadroon. Its dimensions and weight are very close to those of the 1796 Pattern Spadroons (USS140, USS162 & USS141) and the 5-Ball Spadroons (USS106 & USS107). I realize that historical swords would have had more variation, and I'm uncertain how close these modern reproductions are to vintage items. Do vintage 1845 IO swords exhibit spadroon-like blade flex? Is the 1845 IO sword really a spadroon? Is the 1796 Pattern perhaps just an unfortunate under-design for the first try?
Hi - good question and probably worthy of a follow-up video. The replicas are unfortunately lumps compared to the originals, but the question still applies to the originals.
I will forgive anything since you made your beautiful rant dismissing those who think and say that France had been inept at war. It was the first time you used as many coarse words in such a short time. :-)
I find it fascinating how especially noticable in Europe weapons have almost constantly evolved. Some influences from outside Europe can be seen on occations, but mostly it was all within the continent. And to a much higher degree than in Asia or Africa, at least form what i see.
Matt, I have a sword very similar especially in hilt to that 1780s spadroon. But it has a curved sabre blade rather than a straight one. Are you interested?
I have a question about spadroons vs smallswords. Is an opponent grabbing your smallsword an actual risk in either individual or melee combat, and does the cutting edge of the spadroon make a significant difference? If so, is it possible that part of the intention of the design was "a sword you can use like a fencing smallsword, but without the risk someone will just rip it out of your hands in a dirty fight"?
