Plenty of other commenters have already nailed it. The problems aren't really "how to categorize this borderline example" but rather WHY the distinction is being made. Are you a museum curator or collector, cataloging a sword or making a label? Are you a fencer/soldier planning to use the weapon in combat, and selecting a style for training and use? At this point, we're all aware that historically, no one really cared very much about our modern hair-splitting taxonomic identifications; I believe we could all benefit from this ecumenical approach
it's too easy, though, to use the period designation of "this is a sword, this is a 2-hander, this is a big dagger" with no qualifiers, cos in each time period they only had a few swords to think about. And that's too ecumenical when you're talking history.
I imagine it's similar even to musical instruments, including their modern counterparts. When you first chose one, or were thinking of crafting one, you wanted it to work a certain way both for beginning practice and in use. Compare it to something like a flute (you know, also metal for the comparison, and there are actually quite a few different types of flute). It's a common instrument that is used in many settings, unlike all the other varieties (piccolo, bass flute, etc). Training ones for smaller kids, for example, can be shorter so they can reach the whole thing, but it is tuned and works as a standard flute, and not like a piccolo. Professional ones have a bit of varying lengths as well, for different reasons. But in all cases it's made as a standard flute, and people expect to use it as one, so they call it a flute. I imagine something similar was going on with the weapons where they were expecting certain traits, and they could sum up those traits with a name. They still might have some customizations, but the base instrument they wanted to use was mostly defined by the name (and therefore design) they would have used for it.
@@noahvannote363 Most axes are tools, I'd say. As are many bows. So maybe the really important distinction SHOULD be "how was it used?" rather than "what does it look like." Unless your audience is a hairsplitting collector who needs to assign modern categories to historic objects
...this German sword is called a "Infanterie-Offiziers-Degen" (infantry officers Degen) it is not more specifically a spadroon, it is a category of its own, but it exacely fills the role of a spadroon as a light, straight sword for military use. A smallsword in German is also referred to as a "Degen" - usually referred to as a "Galanterie-Degen" if it is this common typ of smallsword worn as part of a gentleman´s outfit. And earlier period sideswords are also often reffered to as "Degen", in this case often as "Feld-Degen" (battlefield Degen). The name "Degen" trace back to the Old-high-German word "degan", Middle-high-German word "degen", according to the Germanic word "þegna" meaning worrior. In the high and late middle ages in Germany "Degen" is a word for dagger ("surprisingly" the words dagger and degen have the same roots). This type of infantry officers Degen was in service in Germany form around 1700 (almost without changes in design from about 1750 onwards) and stayed in service in Prussia, even after 1889 when new typs of swords were regulated, by e.g. some officers of the infantry regiments of the King´s/Emperor´s life guard and his aide-de-camps till WW I. In this late times this swords are reffered to as "Infanterie-Offiziers-Degen, alte Art" (infantry officers Degen, old pattern)....
Everytime I see his videos I think why are there so many different expressions for swords in english while there are only few in german? Or do I only lack about special knowledge? We have (Lang-, Kurz-, Breit-)Schwert, Säbel, Degen, Florett - I think thats pretty much it!
@@bentrieschmannMaybe in English. : > That was more like a legal thing, with classifications by law. Similar as today with pocket knives in Germany tbh.
I can just imagine an overzealous student supposing we still saw swords as modern weapons in the current day and having to be reminded about context. :P
Great show my friend. As listed in George Cameron Stone’s book “A Glossary of the Construction, Decoration, and Use of Arms and Armor: In All Countries and in All Times,” ( great title) it states and I quote, “The English ‘cut and thrust’ play with the back sword. The name is probably derived from the German spadroon, a very light sword adapted for both cutting and thrusting. The spadroon being much lighter than the broadsword, and made both to cut and thrust, is therefore a weapon well adapted to those gentlemen who are masters of both small and broadsword, and unite according to circumstances the defensive and offensive movements of the two. In thrusting the spadroon has an advantage over the broadsword, on account of the celerity with which the fatal movement can be executed, but in cutting it is much weaker in its effects.” I was so fascinated to read this and then see your video. Thank you. The Lord bless you my friend.
The German swords would be "Degen", which is often translated to smallsword but is actually a period catchall term for any straight blade used in the period as oppsed to the Säbel/saber from the 18th century onwards and is now synonymous with the French Epee in sportfencing.
@@Leftyotism Actually no, check out the KD89 of the Prussian WW1 cavalry. It is short for Kavalleriedegen and a slightly curved or sometimes straight quite broad T-back blade. There were earlier "Haudegen" i.e. cutting swords, used in 17th and 18th century by German heavy cavalry.
@@olafkueppers3861 Haudegen and Kavalleriedegen does not mean Degen. I am German, I know German words and how they work. Hau-Degen is a Degen to hau with, hauen means beating. That's why it is not just called Degen all by itself, it needs additional words to change the meaning. Just like Großes Messer and Kriegsmesser does not mean Messer. You can check the word Degen in the German Duden, if you don't believe me.
I have a french épée de soldat or forte épée here. It has the typical smallsword / spadroon double shellguard hilt but the blade is a hollow ground (and still quite light) razor sharp cut and thrust blade. It's laying next to a 1796 spadroon or possibly dutch equivalent and it's hard not to look at that épée as the spadroon's great grand père.
I think there are three things that contribute to identifying what category a sword would fall into. 1: Blade 2: Hilt 3: Era and land it was created (or based on) If we want to really get down and dirty I think we could also add 4: How it was used 5: Construction method I think the first three are what makes you know for certain that a Napoleonic Spadroon is such while other swords from different eras and lands may seem different though they are much the same.
In Dutch I think you could call them Houwdegen. Degen is used for smallsword and rapier, houw means to cut (a striking cut, not cutting tomatoes except if you are an odd tonato cutter).
If i could be a "video game character in real life" and just respawn, I'd love to be this guys arch nemesis. so many cool weapons to fight against and maybe he'd tell me about what he's running me through with.
I would call it a light rapier. In mind a small sword is a sword that reduces length and width to save weight. Then adopts a cross section that heavily optimizes for thrusting, to the extreme detriment of cutting. The weapon you say you're not sure what it is. Seems like someone started with a small sword, but added the rapier features back on. Thrust optimized, can cut, but heavy(er).
A second entry from the same below mentioned book is as follows. “ Spadroon Guard. The spadroon guard is formed by dropping the point to the right from the outside guard, till it comes under the adversary’s blade, turning the edge upwards at the same time raising the wrist.”…”Although this is denominated the spadroon guard , yet it is not to be considered as the chief posture of defense with that weapon. It is indeed the weakest guard of any, and should never be had recourse to, but in such circumstances as will not admit of immediately changing to another without danger of a time thrust of cut.” (Art of Deffense 60.) Just thought this was interesting also. Thank you again.
My hands are about the size of Matt's. To my mind, spadroons are smallswords intended for grown men to carry in combat for better or worse. Smallswords proper have grips and hilts so tiny that suggest they were worn primarily for decoration and ease of carry. The smallswords on display would not look out of place in the hand of my 12 year old daughter, a keen fencer but by no means challenging Shaquille O'Neil in the height and reach stakes. I'm very possibly wrong but it seems to me that the difference between a spadroon and a smallsword is which of these one would carry into battle or to a formal event. Thanks, Matt your presentation is so interesting that I've put more time commenting on a style of swords that I don't care about in a way that nobody else will care about either.
The concept of a spadroon is hard to debate because there are two things I think we could discuss. One is the swords that were historically called spadroons, and the other is the concept of spadroons according to their properties and method of use. As Nick points out, from the perspective of conceptual history, the concept of a spadroon was perhaps closer to (and may have originated from) a more nimble backsword. So I suspect that the people who used swords that they themselves considered to be spadroons would have argued these aren't smallswords on the grounds that spadroons are closer to backswords in concept. However, as both you and Nick also point out, a "cut and thrust sword that is nimble in the tip" defines a lot of things, including many arming swords and (or) sideswords. In fact, most HEMA sideswords I see are short enough to not be called rapiers and seem to satisfy the properties that spadroons have. Some so-called military sabres are in fact not curved and basically qualify as spadroons. If we go by properties, a lot of Chinese jian would be spadroons, except for the methodology involved. So by that definition, any sword that a person trained on the spadroon can completely and effectively use as a spadroon is therefore a spadroon.
I've always thought of a spadroon as a straight cut and thrust military infantry sword and a small sword as a thrust centric sword that is scaled down from a rapier with a simpler hilt, both from the eitghteenth and nineteenth century. I also don't think that the hilt makes a difference (i.e. whether it has a shell guard is not relevant).
One style of sword that I keep finding conflicting information on is the espada ancha and hoping one day you can take a look at them. Most are described as homemade short swords and some sources state them to be spadroons (some are said to even be cut down service sabres but I've never found an example of one originating from that), and just seems like it's one of those sword types where all the claims about their history just reference other sources which are just as vague.
That's an interesting one because the words Espada Ancha just means "wide sword" and over here in the British museum we have various swords from what look like the late 16th century to the the 18th that someone's called it. Some are straight very yataganesk, others very dusack and clipped pointed and even fullered cutlasses with complex hilts. I'd say that it's a spanish designation for a short-carriable single edged sword so a lot like what he in Britain called in the 18th century falcions and cutlasses "hangers". I'm not a historian though so there could be exceptions in written accounts from the period 🙂
@@valandil7454 great points and you're right they come in all sorts of blade styles. I've encountered several in the various museums I've worked in with some with a thrusting blade and others clearly meant for slashing. All the one's I've handled have come out of the northern Mexico, southern United States regions during the Spanish colonial and then Mexican eras. Several were trophies brought back from the Mexican American war. I guess my main question is where the usage of calling them espada ancha came from since they cover such a wide variety of styles and in historical accounts I've mostly found them being referred to as machetes. I'm guessing it's a collector/museum term but again I've never really come across a work that really looked at them in detail.
Rather than categorizing a sword by it's aesthetic look, they should be categorized by how they are used, their size/weight and their features mainly, in my opinion.
Aesthetic categories are useful, so people will keep using them. It's quite ironic that you decided to focus on the use of the sword as the most important distinguisher, yet disregarded the use of the categorization method.
weapons would be best held to the same weight class, then varied by their features, and after that cluster them by use. that should be able to define a suitably broad search space.
@@JaneDoe-dg1gv That very pretty narrow pretty quickly, esp since some people dispute the category names. P{lus, there's different languages and cultures at play. And some weapons can be used in more than once style. Some, like some polearms, can be used in different styles and in different roles in one culture.
I mean, if you reduce it down far enough, basically any weapon can be described in terms of another weapon. For example: a halberd is just a longer club with a metallic pointy tip and and a small blade attached. Clubs are of course blunt swords (usually without a guard). Alternately: a halberd is a long-hilted short-bladed sword (with no guard), with an enlarged blade projecting off of one side and a hook on the other.
Unrelated to this video, but question for future video. Why were a one-handed poleaxe (axe head, hammer and spike) on a 26"-32" shaft not a thing even from "dark age" times to the 1300's? It would have satisfied Vikings, medieval levies (cheap and easy to make), and a knight for defeating armor?
Can a two-time parry detached riposte with the point be made near instantaneous and the sword is thrust centric? = Smallsword Is a two-time parry detached riposte, (i.e. not stesso tempo) a tiny bit slower and sword is thrust centric but has some cutting capacity = Shearing sword/Spadroon/Contre-pointe. Is a two-time parry detached riposte not instantaneous/struggles and sword can be thrust centric and has some decent cutting capacity: backsword. Military smallsword? No idea.
- This is a German sword of the 18th century... - It's a Degen. - Well, you might call it a spadroon... - Yes, a Degen. - ...or maybe a small sword... - Indeed, a Degen. - ...or maybe even a rapier - ... Degen ...
Echoing @SwordFighterPKN question below. One of the things that makes the 2 larger swords not a spadroon is the "solid" cross section of the blade towards the tip (no fuller[s]). And just *what* is a pallache (sp?), anyway? Heavy spadroon? What about late 19th century British officers swords? Spadroons?
Came back to this video because I just got a repro 18123 eagle headed sword that's labeled a spadroon, and while being a repro, it probably has its own quirks and inaccuracies as they all do, it made me wonder if some of the blurry lines could be clarified by the balance point of the sword. because I have an US pattern 1840 NCO sword that fits the spadroon mentality, but the 1812 sword is SO broad and SO chop-centric from what ive seen in comparison to the 1840, that it really seems like technique would lend more to a broadsword classification. Thoughts from anyone? My Irl practice has been more in modern saber, and older styles of rapier sporting as well as bayonet, so the whole great big swings idea is new to me still
Matt, I'm a bladesmith that is looking into joining HEMA with an interest in sabres, I would like to know you're feelings about curved or straight sabres for a novice as I know each has different way of using. You're extensive knowledge of these weapons and the ease of welding would be appreciated. Cheers..!
* ''Your'' when it means it belongs to you. ''You're'' means ''you are''. Examples: ''This is your sword''. ''So you're a fencer''. Sorry to be that guy but YOUR english cannot improve if YOU'RE not told how.
So the only thing that none of those swords have in common with that spadroon is that massive fuller, which _is_ something that a lot of the (admittedly few) images of spadroons I've seen have in common to an extent. The name "spadroon" might also have a clue or two. The "spad" part I would guess is from Spade/Spada, and a brief skimming through Google trying to find the other half showed me two possibilities 1: It could be derived from the Spanish suffix "ón" which has several possible meanings in context including to mean that something's large or has large attributes. But the ones that feel more likely are the ones denoting contempt, that something is small or diminutive, or the one where it's used to form a different word out of a root like turning chair into armchair. So some possible readings could be Larger Sword, Bad/Lousy Sword, Swordlet/Little Sword, or something like Cutter/Stabber/Blade etc. 2: "Roon" is apparently a Scottish word for a strip of cloth. So perhaps it means something like Narrow Sword or Ribbon Sword. So my guess is that it's either bad Spanish for "Smaller than Big-Sword but bigger than Small Sword Sword", and thus goes in the suspect colloquial terminology bin. Or its a vaguely poetic name meant to reference a sword that was made to get the maximum width and length for the minimum weight, hence the lightness and typically broad fuller.
I think this discussion would benefit from some analysis regarding culture of origin. I find myself wondering, as I watch this, if 'spadroon' is just a name given, by a particular culture, to an array of swords that have a fair bit in common with small swords, broad swords, back swords, etc, which were so called by a different culture. If you compare the xiphos and the gladius hispaniensis, for example, they seem pretty similar to me, and probably could have been mistaken for each other, under the right circumstances. But, they were called different things in different cultures and with different languages.
The problem is that "spadroon" is basically a fuzzy blob where the fields representing "small swords" (primarily thrust blades, although some do have some cutting ability) and "broad swords" (primarily cutting blades, albeit with all having decent thrust) overlap a bit.
If I followed Nick's video on spadroons, it seemed he was making a case that the lineage of development of spadroons was different than with small swords. So they're different in that respect. But, there does seem to be a lot of crossover elements, which seems to be an indication of changing or different ideas of what to do with a sword. Certainly in a time when a soldier may have learned to use a smallsword and a broadsword, having something in between might seem less of a compromise and more of an attempt at versatility. Certainly McBane makes a distinction between smallswords and spadroons and he was apparently comfortable using both.
Hi Matt, I think a spadroon is not a kind of smallsword because the two weapons, in order to be used effectively, are gripped differently. With the spadroon you use a sabre-like grip, with the thumb in line with the back edge of the blade, with a smallsword you will prefer the thumb aligned with the inner flat or V of the blade and one edge on the carte side and one on the tierce side. Following my argument above, I'd say the spadroon is a kind of straight sabre that can have a smallsword-like hilt, that is used to thrust and cut and therefore gripped like a sabre.
Sir Walter Scott, writing in the times nearer to the use of this kind of weapon distinguishes in his novel "Waverley" between two types of smallsword - a flat-bladed Saxon type and a triangular-bladed French one.
What about blade cross-sections as a more important identifier? Your examples in this video seem to be pretty different, particularly between the Spadroon chosen here as the prime example and the back-/broadswords shown.
9:01 Great point there. Well, is it still a light sword? A Broad Sword would be heavier I think. But I think I'm gonna stick with War Spadroon! Since it looks like someone wanted a Spadroon that's better for war. Maybe instead of War Spadroon one could settle on Broad Spadroon, hmmm! 🤔
Perhaps the distinction is less about the sword and more about the way it's used, ie broadsword being more cav oriented, small sword being thrust oriented, spadroon being more of a hybrid style?
On the basis of my (long ago) reading of McBane: Is it the size of a small sword? Is it better suited to delivering draw cuts than either thrusts or slashes? If both answers are 'yes', it's a shearing sword/spadroon.
i'd say, as with many things having to do with categorisation, the borders are quite fluent. i'm pretty sure people used to call spadroons smallswords or shearing swords and vice versa a lot of the times, like we have different words for the same thing today.
It's almost like swords developed small idea by small idea slowly overtime by people who didn't think of them as different weapons. Instead the different names arose organically as the ideas drifted far enough to be weird to other people with old styles and warrant a new name.
I have a spadroon from MRL that I really like, but I don't think it's a really strong metal. Just a really nice balance. That said, I'd love to get a replica I could try cutting with, as I always thought of it as a 'smallsword that can still cut." Does anyone make a 'battle ready' spadroon?
If "spadroon-ness" is not decisively defined by blade style and dimensions, nor by hilt style, is it possible that it came into use to describe a range of swords in some sort of specific social context instead? That is, if a certain sort of person, or class of officer, carried a sword that might otherwise be called a backsword, etc., was it then listed as a spadroon? Or did labelling one as a spadroon evade some legal or military regulation or proscription?
This appears to be yet another occasion when the name of a sword "type" (in this case, the spadroon) has to be redefined as a FAMILY of related sword types, and furthermore, that examples can overlap with other categories. For example . . . "SPADROON: A description for several kinds of light, cut-and-thrust swords of the 17th, 18th, and 19th centuries, frequently used as military weapons. These swords included heavier forms of the smallsword and colichemarde, as well as lighter, narrower broadsword and backsword types, among others. [Also sometimes called 'shearing swords,' as were other types, resulting in some confusion.]" That's not nearly enough, and probably inaccurate, but I'd start building from there.
I think that defining weapons should be done like taxonomic rankings from biology. We look at defining traits to produce ever more narrow categories until we reach the species of the item. Basic divisions would be, thrusting, cut and thrust, and cutting as the kingdoms and then we subdivide from there.
@@JaneDoe-dg1gv That’s exactly what we’ve been doing, and it clearly has its limitations. That’s why I proposed my own definition, starting from scratch, and moreover left open the possibility that a sword can belong to more than one "type" at the same time.
I wonder if judging them by cutting capacity and the way form works would help rather than just staring at them in a vacuum. Two blades that are very similar but very different handles can change a lot about how it's used.
I think while its worth while to find and categorize the kind of ideal form of specific swords, I feel like we get really lost in the weeds trying to definitively pigeon hole many of these weapons when really they all exist on a sort of spectrum. Its like colors, we all know we all agree on the primaries and most of us know a good navy and a dark purple, but where's the line when that navy has a little to much red or that purple crosses over with to much blue? I think there's more value in saying it's purple with a little more blue in it, and it's a spadroon that's a little beefier with maybe a little broad sword. I think there is a lot of value in finding the pinnacles the high points that we can start from but we should be able to agree that the waters in-between are murky and that's ok.
Can we get rid of our modern desires to identify and individually box objects that are essentially the same things. For most of human history people called pointy/slash, longer than a knife objects, swords. Every object presented was just a sword nothing more. If you want to get picky, can we name the era/century it was made and if it has particular special way to use it. 15th, 16th, 17th, 18th, or 19th century + thrust centric, cut & thrust or cut centric Sword.
It's not like weapons only ever had one name historically. Pascha's treatise on the half-pike starts with a good example: "Kurtze ANLEIDUNG Wie der BASTON A DEUX BOUS, Das ist JAEGERSTOCK Halbe Pique oder Springe-stock Eigentlich zu gebrauchen und was vor Lectiones darauff seyn" Translated by Betsy Winslow: "Short manual on how the Stick with Two Points, that is, Hunting Stick, Half-Pike, or Springing-Stick, is actually used, and what preliminary lessons there are on it." 4 names, all for the exact same weapon. More if you keep the French & German names.
Is there any european sword from 16th century onwards that is double edged and symmetrical (no knucklebow, etc), that it can be used equally from both sides?
Sorry, boys: a spadroon is merely a kitchen implement. I knew of a hungry dragoon... Who used a vambrace instead of a spoon. He repurposed his pauldron As a soup-making cauldron, And fried his sausages on the tip of his spadroon.
I always liked that (as far as I understand) Chinese called all single edges blades dao, and all double edged blades jian. Like, no debate about at what length a knife became a dagger becomes a sword. So what do they call triangular cross sectioned stabby bois?
In Neal Stephenson's Baroque Cycle, he has an Oxford student in the sixteenth or seventeenth century wielding a spadroon against another student, who is using, if memory serves, a rapier. The guy with the spadroon was majorly outclassed and died. The impression given was that the spadroon was too short, and too slow, but then, the other guy was supposed to be one of the best swordsmen in England, while the spadroon guy was a "puritan", who hadn't been trained by one of Europe's greatest.
To quote the late great physicist Richard Feynman, "I learned very early the difference between knowing the name of something and knowing something." What "is" a "real" spadroon? For that matter, what is a "real" sword? Doesn't matter to the one who's able to use its physical characteristics, whatever they happen to be, effectively. Doesn't matter to the physical body of their unfortunate adversary on the receiving end.
I think that weight and point of balance of a sword (and so how "nimble" that sword is) might be important here. Smallswords, as far as I know, are lighter and balanced closer to the hilt, so they are more nimble. Broadswords are heavier and balanced further down the blade, so they are less nimble and more suitable for cutting. In this case spadroons are swords that have a cutting edge (or two), but are as nimble as smallswords, with similar weight and point of balance. Of course there probably are swords that are in-between smallswords and broadswords in weight and balance, so to some extent the problem of classification such swords is inevitable.
It seems to me that a spadroon is a compromise between cutting & thrusting, and is smaller & lighter than a side-sword. I also remember them getting a fair amount of criticism on this channel, even though I like the concept. My impression is that they're overall just adequate, a jack of all trades, master of none.
Spadroon sounds quite Scots to me - though the etymology actually seems to point to Latin and the same stem as "spade" - spadrone in Italian, funnily enough. Does it just sound Scots because I've read R L Stephenson and he mentions them..?
I recently saw the sculpture of Perseus slaying Medusa in the Vatican Museum, and the sword he was portrayed with doesn't seem like anything that exists in real life. This made me wonder if there are other works of art that made similar "mistakes", portraying characters with the "wrong" swords/arms and armour.
Identifying Swords. "Yep that's a sword".
Looks at messer...'shit'
"Actually it's a sabre."
"Ugh..."
The little-noticed other end of the statement "that's not a knife."
Medium length chonky stabber
@@Bluehawk2008Your mom is a sabre
I will always be impressed by the number of casual examples Matt can pull out.
Its a good safeguard against overgeneralising.
Plenty of other commenters have already nailed it. The problems aren't really "how to categorize this borderline example" but rather WHY the distinction is being made.
Are you a museum curator or collector, cataloging a sword or making a label? Are you a fencer/soldier planning to use the weapon in combat, and selecting a style for training and use?
At this point, we're all aware that historically, no one really cared very much about our modern hair-splitting taxonomic identifications; I believe we could all benefit from this ecumenical approach
it's too easy, though, to use the period designation of "this is a sword, this is a 2-hander, this is a big dagger" with no qualifiers, cos in each time period they only had a few swords to think about. And that's too ecumenical when you're talking history.
I imagine it's similar even to musical instruments, including their modern counterparts. When you first chose one, or were thinking of crafting one, you wanted it to work a certain way both for beginning practice and in use. Compare it to something like a flute (you know, also metal for the comparison, and there are actually quite a few different types of flute). It's a common instrument that is used in many settings, unlike all the other varieties (piccolo, bass flute, etc). Training ones for smaller kids, for example, can be shorter so they can reach the whole thing, but it is tuned and works as a standard flute, and not like a piccolo. Professional ones have a bit of varying lengths as well, for different reasons. But in all cases it's made as a standard flute, and people expect to use it as one, so they call it a flute. I imagine something similar was going on with the weapons where they were expecting certain traits, and they could sum up those traits with a name. They still might have some customizations, but the base instrument they wanted to use was mostly defined by the name (and therefore design) they would have used for it.
At that rate why differentiate between an axe and a bow they are both weapons right?
@@noahvannote363 Most axes are tools, I'd say. As are many bows. So maybe the really important distinction SHOULD be "how was it used?" rather than "what does it look like." Unless your audience is a hairsplitting collector who needs to assign modern categories to historic objects
@@noahvannote363 Depends how far you're generalising. We're talking about swords, though, so that statement isn't valid.
...this German sword is called a "Infanterie-Offiziers-Degen" (infantry officers Degen) it is not more specifically a spadroon, it is a category of its own, but it exacely fills the role of a spadroon as a light, straight sword for military use. A smallsword in German is also referred to as a "Degen" - usually referred to as a "Galanterie-Degen" if it is this common typ of smallsword worn as part of a gentleman´s outfit. And earlier period sideswords are also often reffered to as "Degen", in this case often as "Feld-Degen" (battlefield Degen). The name "Degen" trace back to the Old-high-German word "degan", Middle-high-German word "degen", according to the Germanic word "þegna" meaning worrior. In the high and late middle ages in Germany "Degen" is a word for dagger ("surprisingly" the words dagger and degen have the same roots). This type of infantry officers Degen was in service in Germany form around 1700 (almost without changes in design from about 1750 onwards) and stayed in service in Prussia, even after 1889 when new typs of swords were regulated, by e.g. some officers of the infantry regiments of the King´s/Emperor´s life guard and his aide-de-camps till WW I. In this late times this swords are reffered to as "Infanterie-Offiziers-Degen, alte Art" (infantry officers Degen, old pattern)....
Everytime I see his videos I think why are there so many different expressions for swords in english while there are only few in german? Or do I only lack about special knowledge? We have (Lang-, Kurz-, Breit-)Schwert, Säbel, Degen, Florett - I think thats pretty much it!
Messer can also be a sword, lol
@@georgstudnicka9969...no, there is much, much more: Schwert in general, then Langschwert, Kurzschwert, Breitschwert, Bohrschwert, Panzerstecher, Jagdschwert, Sauschwert, Plaute, Reitschwert, Seitschwert, Richtschwert, Rüstschwert, Bastardschwert, Langes Schwert, Großes Schwert, Zweihänder, Bidenhänder, Flammberg, Krummschwert, Rapier, Glockenrapier, Malchus, Ochsenzunge, Messer, Großes Messer, Kriegsmesser, Degen, Felddegen, Kavalleriedegen, Stoßdegen, Raufdegen, Galanteriedegen, Offiziersdegen, Stockdegen, Florett, Hieber, Korb-Schläger, Glockenschläger, Säbel, Infanteriesäbel, Kavalleriesäbel, Entersäbel, Florett...and some more....
I liked reading this!
@@bentrieschmannMaybe in English. : >
That was more like a legal thing, with classifications by law. Similar as today with pocket knives in Germany tbh.
Matt’s collection is going to be quite the archeological find in a thousand years.
I can just imagine an overzealous student supposing we still saw swords as modern weapons in the current day and having to be reminded about context. :P
Debate on transitional swords is fun. They are the 'tiktaalik' and 'archaeopteryx' of HEMA.
Great show my friend. As listed in George Cameron Stone’s book
“A Glossary of the Construction, Decoration, and Use of Arms and Armor: In All Countries and in All Times,” ( great title) it states and I quote, “The English ‘cut and thrust’ play with the back sword. The name is probably derived from the German spadroon, a very light sword adapted for both cutting and thrusting. The spadroon being much lighter than the broadsword, and made both to cut and thrust, is therefore a weapon well adapted to those gentlemen who are masters of both small and broadsword, and unite according to circumstances the defensive and offensive movements of the two. In thrusting the spadroon has an advantage over the broadsword, on account of the celerity with which the fatal movement can be executed, but in cutting it is much weaker in its effects.”
I was so fascinated to read this and then see your video. Thank you. The Lord bless you my friend.
Matt should be The Captain of The Royal Spadrooniers. Let's send a letter to The King.
Dragoons need their spadroons.😂
The German swords would be "Degen", which is often translated to smallsword but is actually a period catchall term for any straight blade used in the period as oppsed to the Säbel/saber from the 18th century onwards and is now synonymous with the French Epee in sportfencing.
Degen basically is a thin and straight sword.
@@Leftyotism Actually no, check out the KD89 of the Prussian WW1 cavalry. It is short for Kavalleriedegen and a slightly curved or sometimes straight quite broad T-back blade. There were earlier "Haudegen" i.e. cutting swords, used in 17th and 18th century by German heavy cavalry.
@@olafkueppers3861 Haudegen and Kavalleriedegen does not mean Degen. I am German, I know German words and how they work. Hau-Degen is a Degen to hau with, hauen means beating. That's why it is not just called Degen all by itself, it needs additional words to change the meaning. Just like Großes Messer and Kriegsmesser does not mean Messer.
You can check the word Degen in the German Duden, if you don't believe me.
@@Leftyotism I am German as well and Degen means Degen. If you read the manual on the KD89 it is constantly referd to as Degen
@@olafkueppers3861See, thanks for proving my point. You said it yourself, it's just the short version.
Began...the spadroon wars have 🐸
I have a french épée de soldat or forte épée here. It has the typical smallsword / spadroon double shellguard hilt but the blade is a hollow ground (and still quite light) razor sharp cut and thrust blade. It's laying next to a 1796 spadroon or possibly dutch equivalent and it's hard not to look at that épée as the spadroon's great grand père.
Love the shout-out to Nick, his videos about various weapon types are excellent!
I think there are three things that contribute to identifying what category a sword would fall into.
1: Blade
2: Hilt
3: Era and land it was created (or based on)
If we want to really get down and dirty I think we could also add
4: How it was used
5: Construction method
I think the first three are what makes you know for certain that a Napoleonic Spadroon is such while other swords from different eras and lands may seem different though they are much the same.
In Swedish these are called Huggvärja, literally Chopping Rapier
Ah almost like chopsticks but with rapiers
I am always interested in who calls things what.
And a cutlass gets even more basic, "huggare" or "chopper".
@@patrioticshitstain I like simple and clear speech haha, but I am German.
In Dutch I think you could call them Houwdegen. Degen is used for smallsword and rapier, houw means to cut (a striking cut, not cutting tomatoes except if you are an odd tonato cutter).
Return of da Spadroon!
Spadrooning intensifies!
Cheers!
Cheering sword ? Arst thou the one with all answers then ? ^^
If i could be a "video game character in real life" and just respawn, I'd love to be this guys arch nemesis. so many cool weapons to fight against and maybe he'd tell me about what he's running me through with.
Please do a video on the sword featured around the eight minute mark. I'm completely in love with it!
I saw a cartoon of a whole platoon of dragoons carrying spontoons and spadroons in Muldoon! Should've had walloons!
Silence, you poltroon!
I would call it a light rapier. In mind a small sword is a sword that reduces length and width to save weight. Then adopts a cross section that heavily optimizes for thrusting, to the extreme detriment of cutting.
The weapon you say you're not sure what it is. Seems like someone started with a small sword, but added the rapier features back on. Thrust optimized, can cut, but heavy(er).
A second entry from the same below mentioned book is as follows. “ Spadroon Guard. The spadroon guard is formed by dropping the point to the right from the outside guard, till it comes under the adversary’s blade, turning the edge upwards at the same time raising the wrist.”…”Although this is denominated the spadroon guard , yet it is not to be considered as the chief posture of defense with that weapon. It is indeed the weakest guard of any, and should never be had recourse to, but in such circumstances as will not admit of immediately changing to another without danger of a time thrust of cut.” (Art of Deffense 60.)
Just thought this was interesting also. Thank you again.
My hands are about the size of Matt's. To my mind, spadroons are smallswords intended for grown men to carry in combat for better or worse.
Smallswords proper have grips and hilts so tiny that suggest they were worn primarily for decoration and ease of carry. The smallswords on display would not look out of place in the hand of my 12 year old daughter, a keen fencer but by no means challenging Shaquille O'Neil in the height and reach stakes.
I'm very possibly wrong but it seems to me that the difference between a spadroon and a smallsword is which of these one would carry into battle or to a formal event.
Thanks, Matt your presentation is so interesting that I've put more time commenting on a style of swords that I don't care about in a way that nobody else will care about either.
The concept of a spadroon is hard to debate because there are two things I think we could discuss. One is the swords that were historically called spadroons, and the other is the concept of spadroons according to their properties and method of use.
As Nick points out, from the perspective of conceptual history, the concept of a spadroon was perhaps closer to (and may have originated from) a more nimble backsword. So I suspect that the people who used swords that they themselves considered to be spadroons would have argued these aren't smallswords on the grounds that spadroons are closer to backswords in concept.
However, as both you and Nick also point out, a "cut and thrust sword that is nimble in the tip" defines a lot of things, including many arming swords and (or) sideswords. In fact, most HEMA sideswords I see are short enough to not be called rapiers and seem to satisfy the properties that spadroons have. Some so-called military sabres are in fact not curved and basically qualify as spadroons.
If we go by properties, a lot of Chinese jian would be spadroons, except for the methodology involved. So by that definition, any sword that a person trained on the spadroon can completely and effectively use as a spadroon is therefore a spadroon.
Every outro I think Matt's setting us up for an April Fool's video hosted by Cat Easton with that, "I'm Matt Easton, and I'll continue to be..."
the sword at 8:50 is clearly a babybilbao. a bilbao is essentially a broad bladed cup/shell hilt rapier, and that sword is a smaller version of that
It's time for the spadroon redemption arc. Also, that specific spadroon example is very attractive. Black and gold is always nice.
If it's thin but can cut it;s a spadroon. if you can only stick 'em with the pointy end it's a small-sword.
I think what makes a spadroon is not only its design but how it was supposed to be used, when it was used and by whom.
I've always thought of a spadroon as a straight cut and thrust military infantry sword and a small sword as a thrust centric sword that is scaled down from a rapier with a simpler hilt, both from the eitghteenth and nineteenth century. I also don't think that the hilt makes a difference (i.e. whether it has a shell guard is not relevant).
The same with the rapier - the italo-french style or a cup hilt.
One style of sword that I keep finding conflicting information on is the espada ancha and hoping one day you can take a look at them. Most are described as homemade short swords and some sources state them to be spadroons (some are said to even be cut down service sabres but I've never found an example of one originating from that), and just seems like it's one of those sword types where all the claims about their history just reference other sources which are just as vague.
That's an interesting one because the words Espada Ancha just means "wide sword" and over here in the British museum we have various swords from what look like the late 16th century to the the 18th that someone's called it. Some are straight very yataganesk, others very dusack and clipped pointed and even fullered cutlasses with complex hilts.
I'd say that it's a spanish designation for a short-carriable single edged sword so a lot like what he in Britain called in the 18th century falcions and cutlasses "hangers".
I'm not a historian though so there could be exceptions in written accounts from the period 🙂
@@valandil7454 great points and you're right they come in all sorts of blade styles. I've encountered several in the various museums I've worked in with some with a thrusting blade and others clearly meant for slashing. All the one's I've handled have come out of the northern Mexico, southern United States regions during the Spanish colonial and then Mexican eras. Several were trophies brought back from the Mexican American war.
I guess my main question is where the usage of calling them espada ancha came from since they cover such a wide variety of styles and in historical accounts I've mostly found them being referred to as machetes.
I'm guessing it's a collector/museum term but again I've never really come across a work that really looked at them in detail.
Can you do a video witha quick overview of all the types
Rather than categorizing a sword by it's aesthetic look, they should be categorized by how they are used, their size/weight and their features mainly, in my opinion.
which is rather his point. :P
Aesthetic categories are useful, so people will keep using them. It's quite ironic that you decided to focus on the use of the sword as the most important distinguisher, yet disregarded the use of the categorization method.
@@DrVictorVasconcelos a smallsword with a "rapier hilt", is still a smallsword, not a rapier.
weapons would be best held to the same weight class, then varied by their features, and after that cluster them by use. that should be able to define a suitably broad search space.
@@JaneDoe-dg1gv That very pretty narrow pretty quickly, esp since some people dispute the category names. P{lus, there's different languages and cultures at play. And some weapons can be used in more than once style. Some, like some polearms, can be used in different styles and in different roles in one culture.
Love the video. Question: Can we get another video about broadswords?
I mean, if you reduce it down far enough, basically any weapon can be described in terms of another weapon. For example: a halberd is just a longer club with a metallic pointy tip and and a small blade attached. Clubs are of course blunt swords (usually without a guard). Alternately: a halberd is a long-hilted short-bladed sword (with no guard), with an enlarged blade projecting off of one side and a hook on the other.
Matt what type of sword do you think the fop uses in Rob Roy?
I believe he referred to it as a transitional rapier in his review of the fight scene.
Unrelated to this video, but question for future video. Why were a one-handed poleaxe (axe head, hammer and spike) on a 26"-32" shaft not a thing even from "dark age" times to the 1300's? It would have satisfied Vikings, medieval levies (cheap and easy to make), and a knight for defeating armor?
Can a two-time parry detached riposte with the point be made near instantaneous and the sword is thrust centric? = Smallsword
Is a two-time parry detached riposte, (i.e. not stesso tempo) a tiny bit slower and sword is thrust centric but has some cutting capacity = Shearing sword/Spadroon/Contre-pointe.
Is a two-time parry detached riposte not instantaneous/struggles and sword can be thrust centric and has some decent cutting capacity: backsword.
Military smallsword? No idea.
Brilliant! This makes so much more sense to put fighting context into the conversation.
- This is a German sword of the 18th century...
- It's a Degen.
- Well, you might call it a spadroon...
- Yes, a Degen.
- ...or maybe a small sword...
- Indeed, a Degen.
- ...or maybe even a rapier
- ... Degen
...
-Could also be a formal dress sword!?
-Yes, a Gala-Degen.
06:45 - Would that be a shearing sword? Or too thin/narrow?
12:40 - What I'd call a shearing sword for sure IMO. A little meaty spadroon.
Echoing @SwordFighterPKN question below. One of the things that makes the 2 larger swords not a spadroon is the "solid" cross section of the blade towards the tip (no fuller[s]). And just *what* is a pallache (sp?), anyway? Heavy spadroon? What about late 19th century British officers swords? Spadroons?
Came back to this video because I just got a repro 18123 eagle headed sword that's labeled a spadroon, and while being a repro, it probably has its own quirks and inaccuracies as they all do, it made me wonder if some of the blurry lines could be clarified by the balance point of the sword. because I have an US pattern 1840 NCO sword that fits the spadroon mentality, but the 1812 sword is SO broad and SO chop-centric from what ive seen in comparison to the 1840, that it really seems like technique would lend more to a broadsword classification.
Thoughts from anyone? My Irl practice has been more in modern saber, and older styles of rapier sporting as well as bayonet, so the whole great big swings idea is new to me still
Early in learning about sword types, my first guess at that at a glance would have been to call it a straight bladed sabre, especially with that hilt.
Matt, I'm a bladesmith that is looking into joining HEMA with an interest in sabres, I would like to know you're feelings about curved or straight sabres for a novice as I know each has different way of using. You're extensive knowledge of these weapons and the ease of welding would be appreciated. Cheers..!
* ''Your'' when it means it belongs to you. ''You're'' means ''you are''. Examples: ''This is your sword''. ''So you're a fencer''. Sorry to be that guy but YOUR english cannot improve if YOU'RE not told how.
OK Karen..!
So the only thing that none of those swords have in common with that spadroon is that massive fuller, which _is_ something that a lot of the (admittedly few) images of spadroons I've seen have in common to an extent.
The name "spadroon" might also have a clue or two.
The "spad" part I would guess is from Spade/Spada, and a brief skimming through Google trying to find the other half showed me two possibilities
1: It could be derived from the Spanish suffix "ón" which has several possible meanings in context including to mean that something's large or has large attributes. But the ones that feel more likely are the ones denoting contempt, that something is small or diminutive, or the one where it's used to form a different word out of a root like turning chair into armchair.
So some possible readings could be Larger Sword, Bad/Lousy Sword, Swordlet/Little Sword, or something like Cutter/Stabber/Blade etc.
2: "Roon" is apparently a Scottish word for a strip of cloth. So perhaps it means something like Narrow Sword or Ribbon Sword.
So my guess is that it's either bad Spanish for "Smaller than Big-Sword but bigger than Small Sword Sword", and thus goes in the suspect colloquial terminology bin.
Or its a vaguely poetic name meant to reference a sword that was made to get the maximum width and length for the minimum weight, hence the lightness and typically broad fuller.
I think this discussion would benefit from some analysis regarding culture of origin. I find myself wondering, as I watch this, if 'spadroon' is just a name given, by a particular culture, to an array of swords that have a fair bit in common with small swords, broad swords, back swords, etc, which were so called by a different culture. If you compare the xiphos and the gladius hispaniensis, for example, they seem pretty similar to me, and probably could have been mistaken for each other, under the right circumstances. But, they were called different things in different cultures and with different languages.
Do a video on mortuary hilts please
The problem is that "spadroon" is basically a fuzzy blob where the fields representing "small swords" (primarily thrust blades, although some do have some cutting ability) and "broad swords" (primarily cutting blades, albeit with all having decent thrust) overlap a bit.
I like to think we are still doing this now with modern weapons....
Future Matt Easten : "Is this polymer 9mm a glock clone?"
I think a better example is something like the M4. Is it a small rifle or is t a carbine?
Never gonna happen he's British. He'd wind up in Tower just for looking at a Glock.
6:54 im inclined to just call it one in the same. small spadroon sword
This reminds me of the Cutless vs. Hanger video from awhile back
If I followed Nick's video on spadroons, it seemed he was making a case that the lineage of development of spadroons was different than with small swords. So they're different in that respect. But, there does seem to be a lot of crossover elements, which seems to be an indication of changing or different ideas of what to do with a sword. Certainly in a time when a soldier may have learned to use a smallsword and a broadsword, having something in between might seem less of a compromise and more of an attempt at versatility.
Certainly McBane makes a distinction between smallswords and spadroons and he was apparently comfortable using both.
We're returning to the classics today
Hi Matt, I think a spadroon is not a kind of smallsword because the two weapons, in order to be used effectively, are gripped differently. With the spadroon you use a sabre-like grip, with the thumb in line with the back edge of the blade, with a smallsword you will prefer the thumb aligned with the inner flat or V of the blade and one edge on the carte side and one on the tierce side. Following my argument above, I'd say the spadroon is a kind of straight sabre that can have a smallsword-like hilt, that is used to thrust and cut and therefore gripped like a sabre.
Sir Walter Scott, writing in the times nearer to the use of this kind of weapon distinguishes in his novel "Waverley" between two types of smallsword - a flat-bladed Saxon type and a triangular-bladed French one.
What about blade cross-sections as a more important identifier? Your examples in this video seem to be pretty different, particularly between the Spadroon chosen here as the prime example and the back-/broadswords shown.
9:01 Great point there. Well, is it still a light sword? A Broad Sword would be heavier I think. But I think I'm gonna stick with War Spadroon! Since it looks like someone wanted a Spadroon that's better for war.
Maybe instead of War Spadroon one could settle on Broad Spadroon, hmmm! 🤔
Perhaps the distinction is less about the sword and more about the way it's used, ie broadsword being more cav oriented, small sword being thrust oriented, spadroon being more of a hybrid style?
On the basis of my (long ago) reading of McBane:
Is it the size of a small sword?
Is it better suited to delivering draw cuts than either thrusts or slashes?
If both answers are 'yes', it's a shearing sword/spadroon.
In Germany we call those things, Marke Eigenbau! 😁 which translates to something like DIY brand. 😁
i'd say, as with many things having to do with categorisation, the borders are quite fluent. i'm pretty sure people used to call spadroons smallswords or shearing swords and vice versa a lot of the times, like we have different words for the same thing today.
It's almost like swords developed small idea by small idea slowly overtime by people who didn't think of them as different weapons. Instead the different names arose organically as the ideas drifted far enough to be weird to other people with old styles and warrant a new name.
The hypothetical term 'narrow broadsword' comes to mind for those two 17th century shell-hilt swords, but mainly for the amusement value.
Is this the return of Mett Euston?
Where is Mett Euston??? We need him!
I’ve seen most swords in collections lumped under the rubric “cut and thrust sword”.
What is a spadroon? Baby don't thrust me, don't thrust me, no more!
The return of the Spadroon saga let's gooooo
I have a spadroon from MRL that I really like, but I don't think it's a really strong metal. Just a really nice balance. That said, I'd love to get a replica I could try cutting with, as I always thought of it as a 'smallsword that can still cut." Does anyone make a 'battle ready' spadroon?
If "spadroon-ness" is not decisively defined by blade style and dimensions, nor by hilt style, is it possible that it came into use to describe a range of swords in some sort of specific social context instead? That is, if a certain sort of person, or class of officer, carried a sword that might otherwise be called a backsword, etc., was it then listed as a spadroon? Or did labelling one as a spadroon evade some legal or military regulation or proscription?
This appears to be yet another occasion when the name of a sword "type" (in this case, the spadroon) has to be redefined as a FAMILY of related sword types, and furthermore, that examples can overlap with other categories. For example . . .
"SPADROON: A description for several kinds of light, cut-and-thrust swords of the 17th, 18th, and 19th centuries, frequently used as military weapons. These swords included heavier forms of the smallsword and colichemarde, as well as lighter, narrower broadsword and backsword types, among others. [Also sometimes called 'shearing swords,' as were other types, resulting in some confusion.]"
That's not nearly enough, and probably inaccurate, but I'd start building from there.
I think that defining weapons should be done like taxonomic rankings from biology. We look at defining traits to produce ever more narrow categories until we reach the species of the item. Basic divisions would be, thrusting, cut and thrust, and cutting as the kingdoms and then we subdivide from there.
@@JaneDoe-dg1gv That’s exactly what we’ve been doing, and it clearly has its limitations. That’s why I proposed my own definition, starting from scratch, and moreover left open the possibility that a sword can belong to more than one "type" at the same time.
Could it be what the french called an “epee du soldat”? Light cutting blade on smallsword hilt
The double edged sword with with brass shell guard might have been referred to as an Epee de Soldat.
Are spadroons and small swords interchangeable in small sword treatises?
I wonder if judging them by cutting capacity and the way form works would help rather than just staring at them in a vacuum.
Two blades that are very similar but very different handles can change a lot about how it's used.
I think while its worth while to find and categorize the kind of ideal form of specific swords, I feel like we get really lost in the weeds trying to definitively pigeon hole many of these weapons when really they all exist on a sort of spectrum. Its like colors, we all know we all agree on the primaries and most of us know a good navy and a dark purple, but where's the line when that navy has a little to much red or that purple crosses over with to much blue? I think there's more value in saying it's purple with a little more blue in it, and it's a spadroon that's a little beefier with maybe a little broad sword. I think there is a lot of value in finding the pinnacles the high points that we can start from but we should be able to agree that the waters in-between are murky and that's ok.
Been looking for a Cold Seel 5-Ball since Trafalgar. RH of course. Wish CS would bring them back again. 😮💨
Can we get rid of our modern desires to identify and individually box objects that are essentially the same things. For most of human history people called pointy/slash, longer than a knife objects, swords. Every object presented was just a sword nothing more. If you want to get picky, can we name the era/century it was made and if it has particular special way to use it.
15th, 16th, 17th, 18th, or 19th century + thrust centric, cut & thrust or cut centric Sword.
If you happen to get your hands on the new kvetun spadroon a review would be much appreciated
We need a Thomas-Easton typology for spadroons.
Take your place in history!
It's not like weapons only ever had one name historically. Pascha's treatise on the half-pike starts with a good example:
"Kurtze ANLEIDUNG Wie der BASTON A DEUX BOUS, Das ist JAEGERSTOCK Halbe Pique oder Springe-stock Eigentlich zu gebrauchen und was vor Lectiones darauff seyn"
Translated by Betsy Winslow:
"Short manual on how the Stick with Two Points, that is, Hunting Stick, Half-Pike, or Springing-Stick, is actually used, and what preliminary lessons there are on it."
4 names, all for the exact same weapon. More if you keep the French & German names.
Is there any european sword from 16th century onwards that is double edged and symmetrical (no knucklebow, etc), that it can be used equally from both sides?
Sorry, boys: a spadroon is merely a kitchen implement.
I knew of a hungry dragoon...
Who used a vambrace instead of a spoon.
He repurposed his pauldron
As a soup-making cauldron,
And fried his sausages on the tip of his spadroon.
Are they biscuits or cookies? ! ? !
They're crackers.
Less than 10 minute and 3 bot already, the future of internet is looking bright.
What makes you say that what did they say
@@georgestem2039"spadroon"
Someone with too much time on their hands should make a massive Venn diagram of all these variations in sword.
I'd like a replika of that "military smallsword/ I don't know sword".
I always liked that (as far as I understand) Chinese called all single edges blades dao, and all double edged blades jian. Like, no debate about at what length a knife became a dagger becomes a sword. So what do they call triangular cross sectioned stabby bois?
The best answer ever, to any question:
"I don't know"
In Neal Stephenson's Baroque Cycle, he has an Oxford student in the sixteenth or seventeenth century wielding a spadroon against another student, who is using, if memory serves, a rapier. The guy with the spadroon was majorly outclassed and died. The impression given was that the spadroon was too short, and too slow, but then, the other guy was supposed to be one of the best swordsmen in England, while the spadroon guy was a "puritan", who hadn't been trained by one of Europe's greatest.
Where "broadsword" bladed sabers common? I like double-edged blades and also a fan of saber hilts
To quote the late great physicist Richard Feynman, "I learned very early the difference between knowing the name of something and knowing something."
What "is" a "real" spadroon? For that matter, what is a "real" sword?
Doesn't matter to the one who's able to use its physical characteristics, whatever they happen to be, effectively. Doesn't matter to the physical body of their unfortunate adversary on the receiving end.
I think that weight and point of balance of a sword (and so how "nimble" that sword is) might be important here. Smallswords, as far as I know, are lighter and balanced closer to the hilt, so they are more nimble. Broadswords are heavier and balanced further down the blade, so they are less nimble and more suitable for cutting. In this case spadroons are swords that have a cutting edge (or two), but are as nimble as smallswords, with similar weight and point of balance. Of course there probably are swords that are in-between smallswords and broadswords in weight and balance, so to some extent the problem of classification such swords is inevitable.
It seems to me that a spadroon is a compromise between cutting & thrusting, and is smaller & lighter than a side-sword. I also remember them getting a fair amount of criticism on this channel, even though I like the concept. My impression is that they're overall just adequate, a jack of all trades, master of none.
I actually put an edge and sharpen my hollow-ground triangular smallsword. What do you call that?
Spadroon sounds quite Scots to me - though the etymology actually seems to point to Latin and the same stem as "spade" - spadrone in Italian, funnily enough. Does it just sound Scots because I've read R L Stephenson and he mentions them..?
I recently saw the sculpture of Perseus slaying Medusa in the Vatican Museum, and the sword he was portrayed with doesn't seem like anything that exists in real life. This made me wonder if there are other works of art that made similar "mistakes", portraying characters with the "wrong" swords/arms and armour.
Seeing you defending spadroons, you've really come a long way
They're long pointy things with handle on one end, that when wielded, can kill or get you killed. 😁
Is it small? Does it shear?
LK Chen's new Long Quan Jian is sort of like a Chinese Spadroon.
Ancient china was cool, they had alot of firsts when it comes to edged weapons as far as i member.
I opt for stabby pokey thing.
Would love to buy a spadroon, replica or antique worth restoring. Any suggests where I might find one?
Matt is selling the black one on his website for a cool £1295. If you hate money.
Looks like something i saw in the Maritime Museum in Greenwich called a 'Midshipman's sword'.
Spadroons were used by Dragoons.