Totally agree. People say that small sword or dagger are worse than other swords... they can't imagine that a bigger sword in a small place kinda suck? Or that carrying a big ass sword in everyday life wasn't convenient both in terms of comfort or sudden dangers? Or that weapons work differently in different situations? Or that a small sword or dagger was more economic than other bigger weapons?
Something my father told me that’s stuck with me. There is no “best weapon”. Only those you’ve trained with, and the ones that best suit the situation. A mace isn’t better than a sword, but it IS better at dealing with armor.
Came here to say that too. We forget too often that combat isn't warfare; skill, experience and gear win a battle, but numbers and minimal training/outfitting win a war. We often don't consider that part of history.
@@leonardomarquesbellini If that was true, nobody would use maces. As it stands, the spiked mace is among the most effective infantry weapons for dealing with armor. Swords don’t have the penetration, as they’re mainly for slashing or sometimes stabbing flesh (not other materials), which is why armor was so effective against them. Blunt damage however is transmitted through materials like armor to break bones underneath far more effectively than most swords.
I have done fencing for a few years now and I can say for sure that these types of weapons are for thrusting. If you aim, you can pierce right through a body and hit organs/vitals. Additionally the reach/range of the weapon is not to be understated. You can lunge way further than it may first seem. They are flimsy but for god sake I can tell you even getting hit hard by a blunt tipped one can hurt like hell
yeah it was my understanding that the smallsword was one of the deadliest weapons alongside rapier due to the context of their use and how incredibly deadly a single stab is.
Yes and no. The "thrust vs cut" debate has been going on for thousands of years since both have pros and cons but everyone wants their favorite thing to be the best. Thrusts tend to reach vital organs better and have better reach overall, but cuts can be faster
Cuts are also more likely to immediately disable someone (i.e. cut tendons, remove a limb etc.), where a thrust might allow them to also fatally wound you back before bleeding out. Lots of fatal ties in rapier and smallsword duelling.
In the context of self-defense, a thrust has a longer effective range and is harder to defend against, but a cut in motion also closes off whichever lines of attack it passes through, and is better for warding off multiple enemies. Plus what candlemancer said about immediate disabling vs. mortally wounding. Cut vs. thrust is kinda up to whether you prioritize killing your attacker or protecting yourself. The smallsword's predominance is pretty much because it's the easiest thing you could possibly carry and effectively use aside from, maybe, a shashka or machete. That and the fact that gunpowder was well on the way to making swords functionally obsolete, meaning that the most likely weapons you'd find yourself assaulted by in its time would be pistols and knives. The smallsword out-ranges knives, of course, and being held at gunpoint negates how good any sword might be.
@@Unit-3DI wouldn’t blame gunpowder, swords were used as sidearms through WWI. But smallswords were typically used in a civilian context where you didn’t worry about armor and ease of carry is a major consideration. Even on the battlefield, this is an officer’s backup when an enemy gets past his soldiers not his primary weapon (said soldiers).
The "worst sword" is a sword you never heard of, because it was so poorly designed, nobody wanted to make another one. The only reason we have heard of any of these weapons is because they served thier intended purpose well enough that someone decided it was worth mass producing.
@@VerdeMorte I would argue that they did their job perfectly. They were never intended to be used in a fight. It would be like using a Picasso painting to whack somebody over the head.
The French Smallsword at its time was going to duel against another Smallsword. As duels generally wanted to match weapons and the like to showcase skill. And nobody would wear armor in a duel. You could use a Smallsword against a bayonet as you would grab the bayonet with the offhand and then strike. An Officer is most likely to encounter the bayonet from the Infantry. Would I myself carry a Smallsword? Yes,but i would want a custom made one. How would I set it up? - All Steel construction - 1796 Spadroon Boat Shell Guard - About 25% thicker Triangular Smallsword blade on it. - Gilt the handle, guard ,pommel and knucklbow - Wooden core scabbard with leather on the outside - 33" Triangular blade - Colichemarde section - Fine wrapped wire on grip. ( then gilted) - Blade from Solingen, Germany( popular choice) This would be a fantasie blade. As its a custom option.
They were originally developed as a civilian sidearm...and yes often used for dueling. The later Epee De Combat was specifically designed for dueling. They were basically a smallsword blade with a much simpler hilt. Made in matching pairs like dueling pistols.
There probably is a worst sword but no one coppied it so we just wont know about it. There was a magzine fed revolver, it is really bad only one was made and in a few hudrened years it might be fully forgoten.
I have said it before, and I say it again:the best sword is the sword that runs you or your enemy through. I bet that back in the day when sword fighting was a matter of life and death, people thought differently as a small hunk of metal is as likely to end you as a larger one.
I have learned to ignore people who categorize any historical matter as "oblectively the worst" or "objectively the best". They clarely don't understand the inportance of context.
This reminds me of the argument of full-size versus compact handguns sure a full-size carries more rounds and allows for better recall control but if you only carry it once a month what’s the point
Just remember guys, if you sword is too massive to carry everywhere with you so you constantly leave it home, whats the point of owning a sword then? Having a smallsword that is easily carried at your hip constantly is infinitely better than any sword you don't have at that moment.
Is the sword equivalent of a pocket pistol. Is awful compared to other options. But it's so easy to carry, you actually have it with you all the time so...
Smallswords are NOT "awful compared to other options"! I have several original antique sabres and smallswords...as well as a repro rapier, katana, and longsword. Smallswords are fantastic sidearms! Light, quick and deadly! As long as your opponent isn't wearing armor...the smallsword is at no disadvantage against any of the others. It just depends on knowing how to use it.
I'd choose a cutlass, or a machete or a wakizashi. I think the small sword wouldn't have the stopping power needed for a person trying to murder you. Not even mentioning how you can grab the blade and run through their defenses.
If both opponents were unskilled I'd agree with you. But a skilled smallswordsman is at no disadvantage. Even if his opponent is skilled as well! You'd be surprised how quickly a sharp spike piercing your heart or lung will end a fight!
Yeah, a small sword is pretty bad for me, someone who's trained extensively with saber, spear and longsword. It's phenomenal for my fencing buddy who's always quoting Pirates of the Caribbean. 😂
I absolutely destroyed a rapier user with my smallsword, it wasnt even close. He is inexperienced so oerhaps not entriely fair, but if smallsword was so bad it wouldnt have caught on
If I had a choice between a small sword for daily Carrie, and a long sword, I’m taking a small sword 🗡️ their lighter with excellent point control they require less room to use effectively and the tok style triangular, cross-section leave Wound channels that are likely to make you bleed out while being difficult to stitch up without surgery oh and did I mention their small? Overall shorter lighter and less encumbering than other thrusting weapons like rapiers and eptoks
"A messer of the same size"? I'd like to see a 300 gram messer! I happen to own a 300 gram and a 400 gram smallsword. That's a 34" blade with the weight of a dagger!
@@Master...deBater Yeah, "size", not "weight". Obviously, there's no weapon with any reach to speak of that is lighter than a smallsword. In my opinion, the added weight of a messer lends itself to more versatility, though the nimbleness and sheer fatality of the smallsword cannot be exaggerated.
@@mihacimpric745 yeah... they're basically a tri-lobed, hollow ground, very stiff 30+ inch spike! They're actually a fantastic construction. Btw... I completely agree with your original point.
Question, how insanely fast are canon Jedi if a padawan Kanan Jarrus could block shots from crosshairs sniper (which can nail targets from 10 kilometers away)
Sword where all so a faision statment. İf you going to carry a sword to simply show off you have a sword then this is great. And if you do get in to a fight. İt better than a dagger.
WHAT??? I have two original antique smallswords...one weighs 302 grams and the other 398 grams. That's a 34" blade on a weapon the weight of a dagger! My katana is weighs 1,142 grams. That's literally 2.9 times heavier than my heaviest smallsword...and 3.8 times heavier than my lightest! And the Katana blade is four inches shorter!
"In a vacuum" in this context is referring to the idea of considering weapons against one another without the context of time period, location, usage or cost. It's like saying: "Why does a .22 Rifle exist when the Apache Attack Helicopter is a thing?" because you're in the vacuum of "comparing weapons."
Key words "in a vacuum". A zweihander is a "better" sword when it's in your hands, but it's completely impractical in the context smallswords appear, making them "better" in that environment because you can actually have one on you. 1v1 duel scenario is a contrived situation for most swords and realistically makes almost *all* swords worthless because a simple spear beats them all in that situation.
