Also think about getting the sword out and fighting in a tight alley that you would see in Europe of the time. The small sword had a distinct advantage. TheyThis is part of what brought them about.

i mean, maybe, but i do t think that would be the main reason. maybe as a secondary or tertiary reason, but i would say the main reason was ease of carry and transport vs raiper. seeing as how swords are almost never used on a daily basis.

And people who didn't know how to sharpen blades could be swordsmen now.

+Decay They are meant for swordfighting, just not as most people know it. The estoc, tuck or panzerstecher was used on foot, usually halfswording it like a small spear. In the smaller one handed forms, they are a lot like a heavy smallsword.

+Michael Eversberg II That's fair enough. I suppose I have always considered the smallsword and the duelling swords to be the same family, but I understand why some don't. When I talk about the colichmarde being the descendant of the epee I merely mean in it's blade construction and entire focus on thrust work. I have always considered and seen epee being so much closer to foil simply because of the target areas. Sport foil just deviates too far from smallsword with it's restriction on target zones.

Academy of Historical Fencing Well, sort of. The target zones do have to reasonings in their favor (mind, this is coming from someone who is not particularly fond of sport fencing). Firstly, the face is out because of the slow adoption / non-existance / lack of complete trust in masks. Rapier competitions had the same rules in years prior. Second, the torso gives you the highest percentage in removing your opponent from the fight, since it has most of the vital organs in it. With the blade being thin, it doesn't seem like it would be a quick killer unless you peg them in the heart, though. While hitting someone in the legs is a valid tactic, I've my doubts that it would immediately impede them. (This actually goes with your thoughts on not wanting to rely on it to defend your life!) I don't have much experience stabbing someone in the leg with smallswords, though. The modern epee's zones came into code when duels were beginning to be more commonly first-blood affairs. For a while, at least in Italy, the dueling sword's context was that you needed to make them stop fighting, but not kill them right away (murder). As it became more first-blood oriented, anything becomes a valid target (which greatly reinforces the adoption of the bowl/dish guard, since the lead hand/arm would be a cheap way to "satisfy" honor). Personally, I think if someone wanted to try and create a more "martial" form of sport fencing, keeping with the above ideas of maximum target training, the target zones from sabre, sans the left arm (unless you want to reintroduce off-hand parries), would be better. In my opinion (as a minor HEMA wanna-be), the best target zones for smallsword on smallsword combat are the face, neck, and weapon hand, with the torso being great as well. That's just my opinions at this time, with my current understanding; subject to change with new data and experiences. (I'm actually working on a dueling sword project on Imgur, as a follow-on to my thing on the smallsword; can link if you're interested) You are correct, though, in that they're the same family. It's a hazy blend between them, and "dueling swords" looked like simplified smallswords for a while before the bell/bowl became the norm. What sets them apart ultimately is the form altering one's technique a bit (some authors on the bell-guarded dueling sword advocated parries using the guard, while the smallsword masters out-and-out stated not to do this, which is why training weapons often have that figure 8 "lunette" guard). Definitely a case of evolution. And you're right, a lot of smallsword's form is fashion - once you don't have to wear them, you can start making design considerations that don't need to take that into account. In all honesty, my primary motivation for undertaking smallsword study is cost. While I've been exposed to several other weapons (first being I.33 way back nearly 10 years ago now), smallsword is by far the cheapest to begin in. For the cost of one synthetic sabre like you guys have, I can just about have two "classical" foils from Zen. Blade replacements are cheap. Protection is much cheaper - a mask, a jacket, some thin gloves, and you can go "all the way". Compare to the cost of knee/elbow/collar bone / impact torso / full-wrap head protection in swung weapon HEMA. I also happen to live near a place that has hosted a symposium on the weapon, and I find it a weapon less scary to more skittish people, since it doesn't involve stuff swung at their head. It's also a visually cool weapon, historically nifty, and ultimately informs later period sabre training for war.

***** Nah

+Decay Only a fool faults the tool. In the hands of a master, who appreciates and understands the weapons strengths and weakness, one may overcome any challenger. give me a fork and my opponent a battle axe and unless he is more practiced and masterful i will walk away the victor.

+matt maughan That is only partly true. The weapon in hand can give a sizeable advantage or disadvantage, you cannot overcome anything just by being better, this can easily be discovered by putting it into practice.

9 mm

Look at it as a S&W Shield 9.

The .380 is terrible! Check out the sig p398. It's a 9 that will carry the same as any .380 frame. Don't go lower than 9 unless you have rodent problems.

@@WaybackFencingClub Mouse calibers can do fine under certain conditions. A) Upper Thoracic hits B) Face C) Don't use JHP. Go Underwood or Buffalo Bore only. The advantages of a mouse caliber is size , weight and concealability. Many people died from those calibers. You won't just die if you carry a .22. Some advantages are for Corporate ecology or where you want to not be as detected. Some jobs like EMT, Nurse, desk , driver. Etc Great for ankle carry. Not being detected in those areas are more important than raw firepower. Otherwise a G29 or .44 Magnum takes the cake.

+Igor Proleiko That much is a given. But put it this way, as an unarmed man, I'd rather have to face a smallsword in a self defence scenario than any other sword :-)

And my glock will beat you both with whatever sword you want

+Qorhtomh Aside from the few who have added historical/classical to what they do, no. Sport fencing is a highly evolved sport rather than a martial art. It is also an Olympic sport. It is very unlikely there will ever be any substantial changes made to what they do. Ultimately the approach to what the fencer is doing when treating it like a martial art compared to a points scoring sport is very different. Even if they started using smallswords, it would just look like an epee fight with shorter blades.

+Foksuh It is indeed possible yes. Many smallswords still taper to a fine edge. The geometry means it is not a great edge, but could still slice, particularly in the event of trying to actually take hold of a weapon.

Academy of Historical Fencing I figured as much, thanks! :D

+Almus Quotch Its not so much that its at a disadvantage against a larger sword, its that it lacks defensive qualities. You are likely to be able to land a blow with it, but you can't cut to counter those who close, and the thrust is often not immediately incapacitating, so there is a good chance of being struck even after landing a blow. As for military grade weapons in a civilian context. Well throughout the renaissance there was often not so much a divide, frequently with the same weapons being carried in war as in civilian life. In the smallsword era, that began to separate. Though you will might have to face cudgels, staffs etc in case of self defence, a range of shortswords too, and several manuals (like Roworth) do outline the scenario of amsllsword vs broadsword or sabre, so clearly he expected it to happen. The smallsword is not formidable because it lacks the ability to cut, and lacks suitable defence for ones life, despite the ability to wound and kill an opponent.

+Academy of Historical Fencing Does it not do more deadly wounds though with the larger cross-section?

+Watch Ryder No, the tip of the smallsword, as much as you would want to enter an opponents body, is no larger than other sword types, and smaller than many. The larger cross section is much further down the blade where parries are made, and help in that regard, as well as maintaining rigidity.

+Rafael Herschel But the thrust frequently does not kill quickly, and historical accounts are full of those dealing a thrust on their opponent, deadly or not, and then being struck down themselves. It's all very well to say that the threat of something should be enough to stop certain things from happening, but we know from the evidence that that is often not the case.A sword carried for self defence needs to do that job first and foremost. Defence. Incapacitating or killing your opponent will often be the ultimate goal of that, but doing so in such a way that gets you hurt or killed is no good at all.

+Rafael Herschel Indeed that situation is possible, but only one situation. Historical accounts, from first hand, to town records, to coroners reports, are filled with encounters that were far more violent than that. There were duelling epidemics in the 16th and 17th century for example that lead to so many thousands of deaths that drives were made by the King to try and put an end to it. And by duelling, it Is not just the formal duel, but the street fight that was so common with the rapier and smallsword that followed it.In that regard a smallsword should be enough to strike and wound some thief or undetermined attacker, but against another sword user who is more determined, it has some real issues. When a weapon is chosen and carried for self defence, it needs to be up to the task of dealing with a range of common potential scenarios.

+Dancorg I hate to say it, but its a lot better than my British one. The guard is a little bit more robust, but more significantly, the blade is much stiffer and more robust. Double edge diamond section blade that is hollow ground, as opposed to the single edge fullered blade of the British 1896. From my experience, back edge blades do not work well when they are light, they become incredibly flexible. So that French one is more like a small rapier in many regards. I still don't like the Spadroon as a weapon. But they look nice and I like having them in my collection, and they do play an important part of the history of what we are doing.

+Academy of Historical Fencing I see, I might be getting one then! Ironically when I had the chance to get one of those I instead choose a short flimsy rapier not much bigger than a smallsword :/ A somewhat related question: would you consider this sword a spadroon? i.imgur.com/hgue2Jw.jpg blade is 82cm

+Dancorg Yes, that would actually be better than most spadroons. Slightly less protection against the point, but a nice sabre grip and backslap and triple bar guard are you find on a lot of British 19th century swords. The blade also looks more substantial than many spadroons. Basically you are ending up with the equivalent of what the British adopted as their final pattern infantry sword.

+Academy of Historical Fencing What are your thoughts on the side sword from a fencing perspective? More specifically the transitional ones with a rapier-like swept hilts, rather than Schiavona-like basket hilts, with narrower 0.9-1 meter blades? They seem to be somewhat underrepresented. As a shorter person I ended up settling on a side sword by Danelli arms that I am the waiting list for, due to difficulties with any blades longer than 1 meter.

+Kageitenshi Sideswords are fantastic weapons. They are underrepresented because most people haven't heard of them, or they get lumped in with other swords, like rapiers. Great thing about the sidesword is that it is more universal than a long rapier, in that it is well suited to not just civilian combat, but also in war, and half armoured combat. Also, getting gloves that both fit in the hilts and still provide enough protection has been a real issue, which is another reason you see comparatively few. Right now mine is broken, which is why you do not see it on videos, but I will get another soon. Overall a great and useful weapon, as it still has a lot of reach, still has a good amount of hand protection, but has more powerful cuts and is better in confined spaces.

It rather depends on the exact thickness of the smallsword and also of the gambeson. Angelo in his manual of smallsword talks about how come underhand swordsmen stuff their jackets to stop blades from penetrating, suggesting that with enough packing you could achieve this, though I suspect there is more to that then just the way gambesons were done, as a stiff blade can penetrate fabrics remarkably easily. We know that swords designed for penetrating armour, or at least the weaker parts of the armour, were made using similar construction methods of the smallsword, though they were of course broader and heavier. Ultimately its a problem the smallsword would almost never have to encounter, but if it did, it would depend on a lot of factors.

​@AcademyofHistoricalFencing I suppose dishonorable people would stuff their clothing. Imagine having to deal with a cheat like that.

There aren't many dealers that really specialise in them except some very high end ones. Thierry the Sword Guy often has some for sale.

Try edged weapons nl . Though they mostly do Spadroons. You can search eBay.

Try edged weapons nl . Though they mostly do Spadroons. You can search eBay. Therion Arms has a French Smallsword by Cold Steel. These are reproductions.

+crabe As I said, French pronunciation isn't a strength of mine :-) Think I got it close enough half the time.

+mutt.machine A thrust can be parried with anything, a stick, your open hand, its just about timing. All of the energy is coming forward and to parry it requires a simple displacement. Not sure which sword he was using, can't remember if it was described exactly, but it is more likely he had some kind of spadroon. Either way, it surely could have parried thrusts from bayonets if he had his timing right,

+Academy of Historical Fencing It could be a Spadroon. Here is a link. www.masshist.org/database/viewer.php?item_id=436&mode=small&img_step=1&&pid=3 Prescott's Sword is on the left. It looks smallsword'ish to me but I am no expert.

+mutt.machine Yes that is likely a smallsword. Looks to be colichemarde construction like the one I showed in the video, these are very robust at the forte (strong) apart of the blade. Definitely doable to parry off bayonets with, but I'd rather have something rather more robust!

+Academy of Historical Fencing I would definitely rather have a good saber or cutlass in that situation. Some sources say he used a ceremonial saber but as you can see from the museum link ,that is no saber. I think what they meant was he used his ceremonial sword not because it was made for combat but because it was all he had on him and a dress sword is better than no sword :)

Yep, populist sources often use populist terms that everyone will understand. Say smallsword, spadroon etc and most people have no clue what it means.

+ActionPhysicalMan Draw cutting with a light one handed sword is going to be a joke most of the time. It wouldn't even penetrate the clothing of the day. The only real use would be against the face, and still very modest. Some of the swords in the late 17th century that were very much transitional swords were a little better, but even then, pathetic for the cut. I think you will find that with smallswords, the only real attempt at making an edge was to facilitate good penetration on the thrust, and to try and discourage the opponent from grabbing the blade.

+Academy of Historical Fencing I spend/spent a lot of time sailing in the tropics when people wear very little so I wasn't actually considering much in the way of clothes. Maybe I'll try it out on myself with a jacket and see;-)

+ActionPhysicalMan Haha, yeh a little warmer than northern Europe. Thing is with the blade geometry of most smallswords, their light weight and lack of leverage being one handed, even against bare skin it is going to be very modest. Take clothing into the equation and it is useless. You have to consider what your opponent is doing whilst you try and make such a puny strike, most likely stabbing you through the chest or punching you in the face.

+Academy of Historical Fencing Okay, I'll stick with sleeping opponents until I get some proper training and a broadsword;-) Thanks, for the channel.

Then again, the late rapiers are also rather useless at cuttin, and in that light, the increased speed and maneuverability of a smallsword can be seen as an advantage.

No.

Interesting fact I figured out about 2 minutes after typing that post: in Safari, if you hit the < key it slows the video down. > speeds it up.

+kiba BG Except original treatise such as Roworth even has a section on how to fight against a smallsword with a sabre. Some smallsword treatise give advice on how to fight against a rapier, and plenty of different shortswords were carried in the time of the smallsword. It could well have to face other weapons.

Academy of Historical Fencing I want to say, maybe its the worst sword but its decent self defence weapon, against bandits with knifes, fists, sticks etc.

+dmytroy Bear in mind I didn't say it can't do a lot of damage, it can. The problem is that defence is a major problem with one, and against one. For example, if you used a big knife like a bowie against a smallsword, chances are you are going to get hit with a powerful thrust every time, that might be enough to stop you at distance, maybe, depends on the target. But if you had any kind of sword, chances are that smallsword user is going to get dealt a massive blow during or after.

+Decay Of course a knife Is a good self defence weapon. Go and watch our draw videos and see why it was essential to self defence and why most men used to carry them. They can also be essential to evening the odds against a more powerful fighter, or more skilled grappler. Those elements are key to defence.

that triangular blade lets it take hits from things that are much bigger

The foil is not shorter than epee, the standard size 5 adult is foil and epee are the same blade lengths. The foil was a common training tool for smallsword historically speaking, but the problem with today's foils is they are extremely light and far too flexible or whippy. If you look at a lot of historical foils, like the 19th century antique I have shown in other videos, it's actually heavier and stiffer than a lot of epee blades. This is why modern epee blades generally simulate the smallsword so much better, though largely in the smaller size 2 as mentioned.

+Timmy Turner You will find plenty of conflicting opinions of course, but that is ours. In many regards I would consider it a better sword than the spadroon though. At least as a fast thrusting blade it is good at that, the spadroon compromises at every stage. Yes I have fenced with many sport fencers. When we started the club, the other two were keen sport fencers, one of them having won many regional competitions. I have fenced with sport fencers in many countries, at different levels, including an Olympic sabre medallist, (though he was also training in HEMA by that time). In a HEMA match, depends on the weapon, but generally yes. High level sport fencers have tremendous athleticism as well as exceptional speed, but they lack cutting technique, even with sport sabre, and HEMA weapon weight changes what they can do drastically. The one risk against them is still the fast disengages and thrust, as well as the fact that they focus so heavily on scoring a point and not defence. If the weapon was closer to what they were used to however, like a smallsword, it would be a little different. Remove the ability to cut and it is a different story. Fencing good epeeists with the smallsword is tough. Sport fencers can transition very quickly and easily into HEMA and I have seen some become very good indeed. But armed only with their knowledge of sport fencing, the approach is wrong, and they lack a lot of repertoire.

Academy of Historical Fencing You always give great answers. I'm glad I subscribed to your channel. Would it be good for HEMA to become an olympic sport? What is your opinion on this topic?

+Timmy Turner Thank you. No I do not believe it would be good for HEMA to become an olympic sport. Becoming too sportive can create major issues. The enforcement of rules, abuse of those rules, and a sportive attitude can all change the fight an awful lot. Tournaments have a valuable place in HEMA, but I do not believe they should be the ultimate aim of HEMA or it's practitioners, just a useful and entertaining tool along the way. This is a subject on my list of video articles to make.

In part, there seems to be a dictate in fashion. In that it is fashionable for historical fencers, to decry the lamentable uselessness and effeminate nature of the so called 'swords' that superseded their own. It was for a long time in high fashion for long-sword fencers, to belittle the obviously ridiculous poking stick of the rapier as flimsy, feeble, useless and girly. A cripples rudiment of a sword, inbred by fashion. As more people actually picked up hist. Rapier fencing, and that group became too large and too proficient to lend itself to being easily mocked and laughed at, the new fashion now is to fall over laughing, about smallswords.

LutzDerLurch Also ich persönlich habe noch nie jemanden schlecht über das Rapier reden hören. Ich bin öfters auf HEMA Channels unterwegs, und das Rapier wird eigentlich überall respektiert und anerkannt, weil es einfach ein wahnsinnig gutes Schwert für Duellkämpfe ist.

You are wrong on so many levels. The rapier excelled at what it was intended to do. No sword is inferior or inadequate? Wrong. Plenty of spadroons for example were disastrously bad and recognised as being woefully inadequate. Most sword designs are successful, but to make such a broad statement as to say there are not poor sword designs is incorrect. I have a great love of so many sword designs. I own four original smallswords and two training versions because I love them too. This isn't about a bias. The smallsword replacing the rapier does not make it a better weapon. Sometimes a weapon that replaces another is because it is superior, but not always. In the case of the smallsword, it was largely fashion that caused it to replace the rapier, as well practicality of daily wear. Considering swords spend far more time being worn than being used. The rapier has always been solidly popular because historically it is very significant. It's use and wear was very widespread. In fact the smallsword is the weapon which has seen an increase in use proportionality compared to the rapier, because slowly people are starting to respect it a little more. Lastly, you say the rapier is 'too heavy to use on one hand in a resolute and fluid manner'. That is factually incorrect, and you cannot have much experience with one if you think so. Is the long bladed civilian rapier a perfect weapon? No, of course not, no sword design is perfect. But once drawn, in an unarmoured one on one fight it is one oft he best swords you could hope to have. Then combined with a dagger offhand, as was commonly done, it becomes an incredibly fearsome combination.

En primer lugar usted no me conoce como para permitirse el lujo de considerarme un ignorante en la esgrima. No falte al respeto. En segundo lugar, usted solo expresa una opinión, la cual puede ser muy discutible. En España llevamos mucho tiempo de contacto con el rapier (ropera para nosotros) y conocemos esta espada mucho mejor que usted y su cultura británica. No es una espada que no se pueda manejar, es una espada cuyo sistema debe adaptarse a un peso que le obliga a un tiempo de respuesta o contrarespuesta mayor que en otras espadas. Esto es si mismo puede ser una desventaja, y es una ventaja para las espadas más ligeras. El small sword como ustedes lo llaman no se impuso por una cuestión de simple moda. eso es una estupidez. Simplemente estaba mejor diseñada para el uso civil que el rapier. Por otro lado, todo depende de la filosofía de la esgrima que cada uno tenga, el rapier necesita mucho de la daga, la espada ligera no. Se basta por si misma debido a su capacidad de respuesta. Pero usted simplemente la descalifica sin tener en cuenta sus ventajas. Llevo, entre otras cosas por edad, muchos más años que usted como profesional de la esgrima en Madrid, usted tendrá sus conocimientos, no lo dudo, pero respete los conocimientos de una persona que ha vivido la esgrima en Italia y España desde hace más de 25 años. Y no, no estoy equivocado a todos los niveles, bájese del pedestal.

En cuanto a espadas superiores a otras, Las espadas que no daban buenos resultados fueron descartadas en poco tiempo, no es el caso ni del rapier ni del small sword. Cuando se usan armas que ponen en peligro la vida de las personas su eficacia es primordial, los antiguos eran antiguos no estúpidos. En la esgrima, la evolución está relacionada con determinados factores, si las circunstancias sociales lo aconsejan el diseño de la espada cambia; para una sociedad más urbana y más diferenciada del entorno militar, el small sword fue la mejor solución, el rapier por el contrario era un arma heredera de diseños militares con vocación de civil, de modo que era un híbrido a medio camino entre la esgrima civil y la militar, se adaptaba mal a los dos mundos. El small sword puso fin a este dilema. Ya he visto varios vídeos suyos, lo único que quiere es polemizar para atraer gente a su canal, pero su cualificación para dar lecciones de esgrima es muy discutible.