[Tyler Weaver]

WWI was pretty much the end of combative swordsmanship in the West, at least. Officers went to war wearing swords and came out with swagger sticks to slap against their legs dramatically and pistols to do the actual killing if needed. Now, regardless of the usefulness of firearms, there was still a great deal of dirty, bloody hand-to-hand fighting in WWI and generals (at least) continued to be very fond of bayonets. Moreover, as the Japanese and Chinese showed in World War Two, a trained man with a sword was still combat-effective in some situations, especially if he kept his head on straight. It's not like swords stopped doing what they've always done best just because the 20th century came around.

So, why did Europeans armies abandon swords during WWI? Personally, I'm of the opinion that a combination of insufficient training, inadequate combat-effectiveness of designs then in use, cumbersomeness in the trenches, and many officers not being in the mood to get close enough to the other guy to use them was the cause, but I am interested in hearing other people's take on the issue.

[Allen Johnson]

Well, one cant argue with the results of the winners... I really dont think it was effective. Thus the reason it was dropped after these battles. Anytime you are fighting someone at a distance of more than 10 feet or so, anyone is going to choose a gun over a sword. Even if you dont have a gun, one of your buddies probably do. I think the blade was just not found as being very useful. Even bayonetts were being dropped into WWII. I your ideas of training and bulkiness are good points. Id rather spend more time training my troops to kill a guy when hes far away than if hes on top of you. Take care of one you dont have to worry about the other. That and if it does come to a close up tumble, a smaller knife will serve you better than a full sword. just my .02

[Patrick Kelly]

[David Etienne]

It's a bit off-topic but if you read "All quiet on the Western front", you'll find that in some cases, soldiers from both sides fought hand-to-hand with sharpened trench shovels.

" We are unfeeling dead who, through some dangerous trick of magic, are still able to run and kill. A young Frenchman falls behind; they catch up with him and he puts his hands up; in one of them he is still holding his revolver; we cannot tell whether he wants to shoot or to surrender. A stroke with a shovel splits his face in two.
Another seeing this tries to escape, but a bayonet whistles into his back. He jumps in the air and, arms outstretched, stumbles screaming as the bayonet moves up and down in his spine. "

Erich Maria Remarque, All Quiet on the Western Front.

And this testimony from Robert Jamet, lieutenant in the French army in 1915 (sorry it's in French):

" La lutte est hideuse. Il se produit des corps à corps au couteau. Les blessés couchés au fond des boyaux coupent les jarrets. A un carrefour, un grenadier démuni de pétards ramasse une pelle. Il la brandit et fend les crânes. Ses bras tombent en cadence, la pelle coupe les mains qui se tendent en avant dans un geste impuissant de protection, fait jaillir les cervelles. L'outil de labeur est souillé jusqu'au manche d'une bouillie rouge et blanchâtre. Cet homme "fait du bon travail". Nous ne nous occupons plus de nos camarades. Nous n'avons plus conscience de la douleur. Eclaboussés de débris sanguinolents, les mains rouges et terreuses, le visage congestionné, chancelants de fatigue, ne pensant plus, nous frappons, nous tuons... poussés par une force atavique, implacable, le salut du pays "

Robert Jamet, La sublime Hécatombe

[Steve Grisetti]

[Sean Flynt]

[David R. Glier]

This is why I've been saying that a long, well balanced, heavy bladed knife or short sword could be of great use. The Smatchet comes close, but taken to the next level. Shorter than a machete -that's too long to get at in a hurry, and too slow in a pinch.

A broad-bladed cinqueda, a short katzbalger, a messer, a big Bowie with a pommel... any of the above; something around that magic 18-24 inch mark. With a ka-bar, you just have to get TOO close.

[Tyler Weaver]

[Sean Flynt]

I'll see if I can find and scan that passage. You really should read the book, though.

[Thomas Laible]

WW I was a trench war. In difference to WW II the frontlines remained steady for a rather long time. The soldiers digged in the trenches and shot each other at the day. In the night they started raids on the trenches of the enemy - and then it came to hand-to-hand combat.
In a trench you couldn't use a large sword blade, the soldiers needed weapons for infight. So they improvised weapons, e.g. shortened a large saber to a big fighting knife (see attached file).

Much informations on this point you'll find in "Fighting Knives" by Frederick Stephens - unfortunately it seems to be out of print.
http://www.amazon.com/exec/obidos/tg/detail/-...mp;s=books

Thomas

[Thomas Laible]

Lord Howard deWalden orderd and paid for his company of the Royal Welch Fusiliers a specials shord sword.
I was designed by the artist Felix Joubert and patented in London in 1916. Joubert claims, that it is loosely based on an historic welsh sword named "Cledd" (I have no idea what this Cledd has looked like). The patent files make clear, that its 17,5 inch blade is "especially useful for trench war". To my knowledge this sword only has been made in a small amount for deWaldens company. Some samples carry the inscription "dros urddas cymru" (= for the honor of Wales).

Thomas

[Thomas Laible]

[Gordon Frye]

There is a nice essay available on-line by Richard Alvarez on George S. Patton's Sabre Manual of 1913:

http://www.classicalfencing.com/articles/Patton.shtml

At the bottom of the article are some nice links to essays written by Patton himself on his manual.

Needless to say, at the time of the begining of The Great War, the Sword/Sabre was primarily in the purview of the Cavalry, while for Officers it was primarily a symbol of rank. (Even Bernard Law Montgomery mentioned that although he, like countless generations of young Englishmen before him, had his sword ground sharp on the eve of his departure for France in 1914, was far better trained at Sandhurst in bayonet fighting that sword fighting, and he wondered why in the heck he was even carrying the darned thing) But there were in fact some serious uses of the Sword by Imperial Troops even at that. In Palestine, there was of course the famous charge of the Australian Light Horse using bayonets rather than swords, but after that one, one company per squadron (as I recall) was re-equipped as Cavalry with Pattern 1908 swords. Indian Lancers remained faithful to the sword as well, and there are at least a couple of instances in which the Imperial Cavalry made sword charges against the Turks, even as late as 1918.

On the Continent, there is also the unfortunately not famous charge of F Troop, 2nd US Cavalry, using their 1913 "Patton" sabres in a Hell-for-Leather charge against the Germans in 1918. They actually succeeded in that one, too. (I even have a 1913 that the fellow who sold it to me... for gas money... claimed that his Grandfather had used in a horse charge in WWI. The fellow didn't know much else about it, but it has blood rust etching on it, and there was a trooper with the same last name in F Troop...)

The Germans, Austrians and Russians of course were still making great use of Horse Cavalry in the War on the Eastern Front. I don't know a heck of a lot about it, but there WERE some charges by Poles, Austrians and Russians that were effective. They usually ended up poorly for the horses, though. BTW, it seems as though it was actually quick-firing Artillery that was the serious killer of men and horses in that war (and the next as well), the Machinegun just gets most of the credit (not that they didn't kill PLENTY too!)

So there WAS in fact some effective use of the Sword/Sabre in the Great War... but not on foot.

Cheers,

Gordon

[Steve Grisetti]

[Gordon Frye]

[B. Fulton]

I've read Montgomery's account of his first close action in WW1, where he had a sword but not much idea what the heck to do with it..... his first opponent popped up with a rifle, he took a hack or two with the sword, then dropped it and I guess just punched the guy if I remember it right.


After that fight he got himself a revolver and a rifle.

Modern Special Forces rarely carry "fighting knives". Their knives (Striders, etc) are generally stouter than a Ka-Bar but are still primarily tools, since if they manage to expend 200+ rounds of rifle ammo, 3-6 magazines of pistol ammo, grenades, claymores, and have broken their E-tool (entrenching shovel, even the US model is better than a knife), they're pretty well screwed. That loadout is typical of a Marine Force Recon grunt or Army SF type.

In the invasion of Iraq, one Marine (no pistol backup) had his rifle go click when he expected it to go bang while clearing a house, an Iraqi was bringing his rifle up and he either dropped his rifle or chucked it at the Iraqi (can't remember) as he ripped his "utility" knife off his LBV and stabbed the guy. He had a karambit, which is a good utility blade but also a decent close-in weapon.

Something like a small-medium sized kukri, backed up by a medium sized folding knife and/or multitool would do fine for hand to hand type stuff, a bit larger and easier to use than say a Ka-Bar, and still quite effective for general purpose use (hacking/chopping and stuff).

[Björn Hellqvist]

There was another reason why swords dropped out of use outside of the parade ground: it was a sniper magnet. Officers carrying swords stood out among the common soldiers; even their revolver were too conspicious, which made many of them carry a rifle instead. Cavalry troops were trained in how to use the sabre, but given that the cavalry arm became rapidly outmoded, sabres saw limited use. During WW2, there was a US training manual on how to deal with sword-wielding German officers. Read about it in Amberger's "The Secret History of the Sword" - it's a real hoot!