saber/sword differences
- Thread starter donald1
- Start date
Very loosely speaking, sabers tended to be curved, and often designed around cavalry use. They're a class of sword. Swords is a big category of large bladed weapons, probably starting from 18 to 20 inches in length. A true Bowie knife is generally hovering right around the line between sword and knife... Within that category, you can find sabers, epee, broad swords, claymores, longswords, katanas, Burmese dhas, and lots more. I'm sure there are others that will tear into this and really break it down...
In Western sport fencing, the foil and epee can only stab but the saber can slash. This is a big difference. A fencing style weapon is fine for dueling but you need a slashing weapon if you may have multiple opponents and/or ones coming from other than straight at you. But "sword" itself can mean almost anything.
This almost sounds like a Chinese verbiage issue where the "dao" term used referring to the "Chinese broadsword" a single edged primarily slashing weapon translates to "knife" while the "jian" translates to sword and refers to double edged straight weapons.
If that were true, the backbone of armies throughout the millennia wouldn't have been the spear. Armies generally fought in tight formations where you don't have the space to be swinging a large sword around much, and in any case, your flanks were covered by the men to your right and your left. So really, you are only concerned with who's in front of you.
I'm pretty sure curved swords, such as the saber, are more intended for cavalry use.
Curved blades were indeed quite common for cavalry use and have passed into historical familiarity because of such units as the Coldstream Guards or the Hussars. But so too did straight swords see use by cavalry forces. It's rather dependant on century and country really.
In and of themselves, sabres and hangers are not cavalry weapons per se and have often been used by other infantry units.
In and of themselves, sabres and hangers are not cavalry weapons per se and have often been used by other infantry units.
The differences in use of bladed weapons are myriad but the breakdown between curved, single-edged and straight, double-edged is quite marked.
The sabre-like weapons, which also include cutlasses, tulwars, scimitars, messers/hangars and so on are typically optimised for the slashing attack, with the thrust being secondary. The straight-swords tend to be more optimised for the thrust than the slash. But, of course, things are never that clear cut {Yeah! Bladed weapon pun attack
!} in sword typology and useage. You can have curved blades with the emphasis on the point and straight blades with the emphasis on the slash. Indeed, "The point or the edge?" has been a centuries long debate amongst swordsmen when it comes to effectiveness in battle.
The sabre-like weapons, which also include cutlasses, tulwars, scimitars, messers/hangars and so on are typically optimised for the slashing attack, with the thrust being secondary. The straight-swords tend to be more optimised for the thrust than the slash. But, of course, things are never that clear cut {Yeah! Bladed weapon pun attack
!} in sword typology and useage. You can have curved blades with the emphasis on the point and straight blades with the emphasis on the slash. Indeed, "The point or the edge?" has been a centuries long debate amongst swordsmen when it comes to effectiveness in battle.
One important thing to bear in mind about the sword, by the way, as Argus sort of touched on above, is that when combat takes the form of serried ranks of troops in formation then the sword becomes a 'side arm'. It was often carried by officers who were not in ranks because it is an excellent weapon for attack and defence when you have the room to swing it and manoeuvre; that is why, in part, it is the sword that symbolises power and authority rather than one of the other, more common, infantry weapons.
Here are a few videos of different styles so that the OP can get a flavour of just how broad a church the art of the sword is:
[video=youtube_share;k6BBq9zE2pY]http://youtu.be/k6BBq9zE2pY[/video]
[video=youtube_share;nv7Zz-WdXUc]http://youtu.be/nv7Zz-WdXUc[/video]
[video=youtube_share;xFiIDl_mt2c]http://youtu.be/xFiIDl_mt2c[/video]
[video=youtube_share;vFL2ghH0RLs]http://youtu.be/vFL2ghH0RLs[/video]
[video=youtube_share;o9TUxarH7ug]http://youtu.be/o9TUxarH7ug[/video]
And this has nothing to do with sword fighting
[video=youtube_share;6ZuQpRcAvf8]http://youtu.be/6ZuQpRcAvf8[/video]
[video=youtube_share;k6BBq9zE2pY]http://youtu.be/k6BBq9zE2pY[/video]
[video=youtube_share;nv7Zz-WdXUc]http://youtu.be/nv7Zz-WdXUc[/video]
[video=youtube_share;xFiIDl_mt2c]http://youtu.be/xFiIDl_mt2c[/video]
[video=youtube_share;vFL2ghH0RLs]http://youtu.be/vFL2ghH0RLs[/video]
[video=youtube_share;o9TUxarH7ug]http://youtu.be/o9TUxarH7ug[/video]
And this has nothing to do with sword fighting
[video=youtube_share;6ZuQpRcAvf8]http://youtu.be/6ZuQpRcAvf8[/video]
Last edited:
I remember reading an article on the study of wounds on a Japanese battle field circa 16 Century, and only 5% of all wounds, (deaths?) were the result of swords. The vast majority were arrows, stones and musket balls. One wants to stay as far away from ones enemy when one tries to kill them.
Armies are a special case. Since the context was a discussion in a karate class, I had in mind self-defense skirmishes.
OP
donald1
Senior Master
- Joined
- Jan 20, 2013
- Messages
- 3,557
- Reaction score
- 844
- Thread Starter
- #13
Here are a few videos of different styles so that the OP can get a flavour of just how broad a church the art of the sword is:
[video=youtube_share;k6BBq9zE2pY]http://youtu.be/k6BBq9zE2pY[/video]
[video=youtube_share;nv7Zz-WdXUc]http://youtu.be/nv7Zz-WdXUc[/video]
[video=youtube_share;xFiIDl_mt2c]http://youtu.be/xFiIDl_mt2c[/video]
[video=youtube_share;vFL2ghH0RLs]http://youtu.be/vFL2ghH0RLs[/video]
[video=youtube_share;o9TUxarH7ug]http://youtu.be/o9TUxarH7ug[/video]
And this has nothing to do with sword fighting
[video=youtube_share;6ZuQpRcAvf8]http://youtu.be/6ZuQpRcAvf8[/video]
the movies truth behind the sword 1/2 and 2/2 are really interesting showing the history behind, it really is cool thing seeing different styles use different techniques like those videos
Here are a few videos of different styles so that the OP can get a flavour of just how broad a church the art of the sword is:
And this has nothing to do with sword fighting
[video=youtube_share;6ZuQpRcAvf8]http://youtu.be/6ZuQpRcAvf8[/video]
Wow.....
For the lack of a better word or comment...THAT was just so very s***. Truly terrible to behold. Sigh.......Twirling a sword like a baton is not sword work, Turning your back to an opponent is not sword work, gripping a sword like a baseball bat is not sword work, "cutting" with the back of the blade is not sword work, being cute forgives nothing. Mark this is why we don't get huge crowds out to iaido, real swordsmanship, is boring. Wait, wait, wait, opening, cut and kill him, wipe the blood off, put the sword away and go have beer and wings. Now between you and I, if she were Asian I may have been more forgiving
Last edited by a moderator:
Well there goes my chance of ever getting my fifth dan then :angel: :lol:.
I've made it to fourth based solely on my cuteness. I'm suppose to grade for fifth in a few months, but I think they've caught on that I'm more troll like, than cute...
Fear not gentlemen, there's always the under-the-table money to see you through!
Nah, I'm actually cute, I just didn't want my buddy Mark to feel bad about himself. Shhhhhhh...our secret OK Paul?
Chris Parker
Grandmaster
.... I think I see the problem....
Similar threads
