If we’re going to take Chronos’ definition (does the most damage without regards to how often you actually strike the person) and apply it to a real weapon, I’d suggest the war hammer/war pick.
A friend of mine who collects weapons has one and it’s a model of brutal efficiency. Short haft (around 2.5 feet) with a metal head - one face is a blunt hammer, the other is a spike. Like most swinging weapons of the time it’s surprisingly light, maybe 3 or 4 pounds. From a physics standpoint it’s great - you can get a hell of a swing, and there’s a lot of mass at the Bad End. The hammer side will supposedly result in concussions and broken bones through plate, and the pick will penetrate plate, mail and wood (I’ve put it through 3/4" plywood) and put a nasty hole into whatever is on the other side.
Regarding some of the other debates about swords vs. polearms, I recall hearing that the most-oftened used infantry weapon was the spear or pike. It’s simple to make, anyone can be trained how to use one, and a massive pike wall presents a nasty problem for an oncoming enemy. You other stand off and use missile weapons or you just have to hit the wall very very hard, get past the pike heads and then you can use your sword or whatever.
The problem with great big choppy polearms that require swinging is that you can’t have hundreds of guys in close quarters using them.
On the OP, the bit about somebody swinging a 20-pound mace (from horseback???) sounds bogus to me. I played my share of RPGs as a kid and we thought that 15 pound greatswords sounded really cool, then I picked up some actual weapons - they’re surprisingly light, a few pounds for anything that you have to carry around and swing and thrust. Go to the local hardware store and find a 20 pound sledgehammer. Pick it up and imagine trying to swing it around, especially single-handed. Your arms would fall off and you’d die of exhaustion first
Ok, now I see we have a problem of semantics. A rapier is a TYPE of longsword that specializes in thrusting attacks rather than the slashing attacks that dominated medieval swords.
HOWEVER, in an interesting article I just found, the standard Renaissance longswords became thinner and more capable of thrusting than their medieval forebears to penetrate armor more effectively, but could still slash as well (and were the forebears of the rapier, which is, as you pointed out, the lighter equivalent). SO, if I may append my earlier statement, I’d rather have a Renaissance style longsword than one from the Middle Ages, since the former were designed to punch through armor.
We have the Royal Armouries museum near me, its an important national collect, the UKs most important.
They do reenactments of hand to hand fights, without the obvious results of course, and during the summer they also have jousting tournaments and exhibitions.
One of the main counter weapons to swords and most dangerous opponent seems to be some kind of axe thing with a spike/pick type lump on the head.
It has a spike sticking strainght out, like a spear, a hammer on one side and an axe on the other.
You’d expect it to be fairly heavy and unwieldy, but the skilled user can parry a sword blow very easily and if they rotate the weapon as the sword blow falls they can trap the swordblade and rip it out of the owers hands, done right it grips the sword blade suddenly and rigidly.
Add to this, this weapon is nothing like as heavy as first appears, it can be used very effectively single handedly, I saw one proponent gently throw it from one hand to the other almost like juggling.
Don’t be mislead, the war axe is a very fast and subtle weapon.
Other versions in the museum gallery can also be attatched to a short metal staff to make a polearm.
Why mix terms? For purposes of our discussion a longsword is a medieval two-handed sword made to be used against armor by thrusting through weak areas, and was also a very capable cutting weapon.
A rapier has nothing in common with the longsword and it is a purely thrusting weapon of the renaissance.
You may be talking about the cut and thrust sword. It was shorter than the medieval longsword and could both cut and thrust, though it stood somewhat in the middle of the two funcitons when compared to the longsword a rapier (the longsword could cut better, the rapier was better at the point on, thrust swordplay used with it).
Well, we have to mix terms because that’s what people did throughout history. When I say “longsword”, I mean anything with a blade 30" or longer, one or two handed (or one and a half), which includes greatswords, katanas, flamberges, estocs, bastard swords, tucks, and rapiers, differentiated from short swords like the Gladius and civilian weapons. Those damn medieval people could never agree on standards, anyway.
So anyway, I was talking about something along the lines of a Tuck (http://www.medieval-weaponry.com/en-us/dept_576.html). One handed, narrow blade, used by soldiers to find the weak spots in armor. Tell me THAT won’t shoot right through chain given a half-decent thrust.
Ha! Well certainly, that’s what it was designed to do.
But personally I’d still chose the longsword simply because of it’s versatility. Why pick a sword with which you can only do one thing effectively? (well there ARE many reasons why but anyway… ) when you could pick one that does two very well?
That link’s not working right now, so I’ll check it later.
Anyway, in the same site that had the tuck, they had that “cut & thrust” sword you had mentioned before. It looks like the tuck was probably a refinement of that. To be really fair, we have to compare weapons of the same time period, but since a complete chronology of all the melee weapons used throughout the Middle Ages is beyond me, I guess that won’t happen today.
All in all, this has been educational. Weapons go from slashing to piercing when armor improved, but then when guns made armor obsolete, the slashing sword came back in the form of the cavalry sabre.
Hmmm…wonder why I missed this thread before. Anyway, since it was just referenced, a nitpick…
Actually the phalanx was acknowledged by contemporary Romans as the most fearsome pure offensive formation and they lost more than one battle against it ( though not without inflicting ruinous losses as Pyrrhus could attest ) - Roman legions that met phalanxs in level cxharges were frequently thrown back at first contact as it Cynocephalae or Pydna. The strength of the Roman legion over the phalanx was less an advantage in weaponry, than it was an advantage in formation flexibility. The phalanx was best suited for level ground and was vulnerable to loss of cohesion, whereas the legion based on interlocking smaller units was much more adept at holding and reforming formation. Also though all armies are most vulnerable to rear and flank attacks, the phalanx was more than usually so, as it could shift formation direction only very slowly.
The gladius did help, as it was indeed very useful at close quarters once the Romans had successfully infiltrated the gaps in a disrupted phalanx. But I wouldn’t say it was THE key.
And back to piercing during WWI when the British calvarly “saber” was created. I recall seeing a show on History Channel (?) wherein they called this the pinnacle of sword technology. The only thing that was really interesting about this was that it had a groove where one put their thumb to guide the point home more accurately. That and there was absolutely no edge to it, so piercing was the only way to use it.
Because we all know how successful British cavalry was in WW1. To say a weapon was effective, it has to be shown that it was used effectively. If you can show me a battle won trough use of this sword, then maybe we’ll believe you; otherwise, it’s nothing more than a weapon that looked good on paper. I mean, seriously - designing a perfect cavalry sword in 1917 is like designing a cutting-edge 8-track player circa 1990. You’re behind the curve no matter what you do
Besides, I also saw that show on the History (“We Never Say Anything Bad About Anything, Ever”) Channel. That sword looked like it was designed for charging only, without any thought for the follow-up. I couldn’t see how it was better than a good old-fasioned lance, which is longer and could be tucked underarm for better stablility.
Sheesh, expert cavalry swordsmen were fully aware of the advantages of thrusting versus slashing even in the early 1800s, and many would have preferred a longer, straighter sword to the more curved sabres (yes, there were relatively straight sabres.) I’m surprised that they at least thought it was in WW1 that straight sabres were invented…you would think that channel would attribute them to Hitler
in therms of hand to hand combat the topic should be with weapons no larger than daggers or large knives if you want a blade. swords and the like are considered melee combat. but the weapon that would be most devastating in H2H combat is the trench spike. yes spike is the word I’m using. the original trench spikes were designed with a triangular spike for a blade that extended between 6-8 inches along with a spike knuckle guard and half inch spike emerging from the bottom of the grip. this caused severe casualties in the world wars where it seen the most grueling H2H combat in recorded wars. the triangular spike has the unique ability to inflict wounds that could not be stiched up like a knife blade or bullet hole. this was perfect for penetrating the thick wool coats of German soldiers. the half inch spike emerging from below the grip proved reliable at cracking the steel helmets especially when jumping down into the trenches on top of an enemy combatant. the knuckle guard explains its self. if you ever used a decent set of knuckle dusters you know they pack quite the punch. now ad 1/4 inch spickes on each knuckle. by far this weapon is unrivaled in H2H combat in the hands of the right wielder.
To continue the conversation from this 2004 thread, I’d say the most powerful hand held weapon would have to be the cell phone or maybe a radio. Cops can call in SWAT teams or just backup as appropriate. Soldiers can deliver aerial bombardment. Presidents can initiate nuclear war. The hand held communicator is awesome.
