Re: [DL] Swords

["Theron Bretz" <tbretz@montroseclinic.org>]

> Does anyone know when swords went from something that
> was actually used in battle to something that cavalry
> officers waved about to rally the troops and such?

Never entirely, until the advent of WWII.  Until the elimination of the
horse, sabre technique was still part of the cavalryman's standard training
(the last combat sabre produced for the US Army was designed by Gen. Patton
and used through the 1930s - it was very definitely a weapon, not a piece of
decoration).  The British cavalry not only carried swords, but also light
lances for use in the field, particularly in colonial areas (hence the term
"Bengal Lancers", f'rinstance).

I think the perception of the sabre being relegated to the sole purpose of
rallying troops comes from the fact that it looks anachronistic when the
bullets are flying all around.  Nevertheless, it's worthwhile to remember
that a good deal of battle up to WWII still involved significant hand to
hand elements and a well-used sword is quite an adequate match for a
bayonet.  In fact, Japanese officers continued to carry mass-produced
katanas (or, in some cases, actual family heirlooms) into battle in the
Pacific campaign, and the Wehrmacht and Waffen-SS both had "Officer's
daggers" which were closer to a short sword in dimensions.

Theron
Houston
Afficionado of swords, armour, and their accurate utilization