• ZephrC@lemm.ee
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    51
    arrow-down
    2
    ·
    11 months ago

    I mean, arguing over the best sword is a silly thing to do anyway. Swords are sidearms. People carried them around in case their actual useful weapon broke, or for some reason they ended up fighting in a melee unexpectedly. Could be you were ambushed, could be you’re an archer that got caught in the fighting. Point is, if you’re in a sword fight something has already gone very wrong. Spending a bunch of money on a fancy high quality sword is a thing only rich people did, not soldiers, which is why fancy swords became associated with status in the first place.

    • RobertOwnageJunior@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      23
      ·
      11 months ago

      Too many One Piece fans are going to get shot in the stomach by crossbows if we ever go back in time. Just running in with Katanas in their mouth.

        • Smokeydope@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          6
          ·
          11 months ago

          Dont you know the moment you stick a sword in your mouth it instantly gains the ability to cut through steel and even dudes made of diamonds if you try hard enough. ;-)

    • Swedneck@discuss.tchncs.de
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      14
      ·
      11 months ago

      well swords were also used for personal defence, i would argue that’s the main use-case historically.

      A short sword and a buckler hung on your belt is very portable and extremely useful to have if you need to suddenly defend yourself while out on a road. Compare this to a polearm, which while better at keeping the nasty man away so he can’t poke you with his sharp stick, is also a big clunky thing that you have to lug around.

      • ZephrC@lemm.ee
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        13
        ·
        11 months ago

        That’s one of the things I meant by ending up in a melee unexpectedly. Presumably most people aren’t going around doing things they know will end up with them needing a weapon for self defense. It happens, but it’s not usually plan A. You are right though. That was a reason to have a sword. The theme is that swords were good when you needed something you could carry without it getting too much in the way. That’s what they’re good for. If you expected to be fighting you’d bring something better.

      • uniqueid198x@lemmy.dbzer0.com
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        6
        ·
        11 months ago

        Swords were a personal defense status symbol. They were fairly expensive, required training, and were often legally restricted deoending when and where we are talking about. This is why they continue to have sich mystique.

        Most peope who needed self defense used a stick

        • Swedneck@discuss.tchncs.de
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          3
          ·
          11 months ago

          While to some degree that’s true, it’s not like a sword was some impossibly expensive thing, just like how most people can afford a car nowadays most people could probably find some sort of sword in the past, or at least a particularly large dagger/knife.

          As for legality, that’s what messers are for.

        • NotYourSocialWorker@feddit.nu
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          1
          ·
          11 months ago

          Yepp, also part of the reason why students and the watch tended to get on badly in Europe. The students lived under university laws and didn’t mind showing it off by, among other things, carrying a sword.

    • Spendrill@lemm.ee
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      12
      ·
      11 months ago

      if you’re in a sword fight something has already gone very wrong

      That’s always my first thought.

    • UnknownQuantity@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      2
      arrow-down
      8
      ·
      11 months ago

      Oh my g.o.d! Do you think a swordsman main weapon was a bazooka? I’m not an expert on Japan, but in Europe the side arm was a dagger, which was very commonly used alongside with certain types of swords such as rapiers. Arches did not carry swords at all, though they could have had knives. A sword was a nobleman’s weapon and a peasant would forfeit their life if in possession of one (archers included). The same applied I Japan.

      • ZephrC@lemm.ee
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        2
        arrow-down
        1
        ·
        11 months ago

        Depends on the place and time. Everything before the invention of modern firearms didn’t all have the same rules and norms. Spears are just a dramatically better battlefield weapon than swords though, while also being cheaper, and bows are better than spears. There were times and places where it was illegal for most peasants to own a sword, and it did even occasionally happen that they were levied without being allowed to carry one, but that was pretty rare. In fact, in some places men were required by law to own one in case they were levied. By the time swords were widely outlawed professional armies and mercenaries were starting to be more common, and those were absolutely allowed to have swords.

        It did happen more in Japan, but even a halfway functional sword was crazy expensive in Japan. Their iron just isn’t good for making cheap swords.