@@gamingbros6650 depending where you are located I buy Amish made tools they made me a great tomahawk I had to provide measurements and they took it from there you could try that
I've been a police officer for about 15 years. About 10 years ago, I attended a scene where a home owner defended himself and his family against 2 home invaders using a cheap replica sword. It had a blunt/dull edge. And i got to admit the wounds inflicted were horrific to say the least. By that time I had attended numerous shootings, stabbings, vehicle accidents, etc. But those wounds were the only ones that made me grimace.
Yeah a bluntish sword will leave nasty wounds, but not crush bones like a mace or hammer, nor cut through flesh like a sharp edged sword would. Probably it leaves the flesh more torn which looks horrible and heals uglier.
I'm a big supporter of the 2nd Amendment, but my advice for those who can't get firepower to defend themselves is to go Medieval. He'd have been better off with a sword made for combat. Even the invaders would be safer; they're more likely to survive when it takes fewer hits to stop them.
Matt: remember what the Prussians said: "Recruits are cheap, Horses cost real money!!" (Attributed to the Hauptrossartz of the Prussian Army, when they decided to mount the sabers on the saddle.)
@john Mullholand horses are the tanks of the day. Rome got punked and easily defeated by the britons upon landing on England cause the britons had horses. Same when warring the tribes in Gaul.
Our bayonets were dull when I served with the Canadians and sharp when serving with the British. The difference, I was in “combat” while serving with the Brits in North Africa. I think it was/is more symbolic like Matt was/is saying. Damn bayonet and pistol I carried were not only pointless but a detriment. I had them as symbols for 99.999999999% of my time and only shot my pistol for qualifiers and never even drew it. I did dig with my bayonet and even damaged it and was fined while in reserves.
Was an engineer. was never given a bayonett or I would have tried to steal it when I left :) I DID get a nice shovel and was entrusted with it's care and maintenance.....
That’s because if they gave an engineer a bayonet you’d have used it as a flat head screwdriver or an entrenching tool like I did. It was simply a heavy stick, hammer and pocky thing that hilted me in the hip way too often.
I've bought six sabers from Easton Antique Arms. Three are blunt, three are service sharpened. The sharpened sabers all have nicks at the center of percussion on the blade. That may be a detriment to some collectors but not to me. Those are my hands down favorites because it means that there is a good chance they were used in combat. They are an 1853 pattern cavalry saber, an 1821 pattern cavalry saber and a 1796 pattern cavalry saber. Nicked all to hell on the center of percussion, pure history in my opinion. Of course the nicks could have been from some kid hacking around with the sword, but I don't think so. The blunt swords are great too but don't have the same historical value in my opinion. Just my two cents worth.
Hi Stan - I agree, I always prefer a sword to be service sharpened. I have some amazing swords that were never service sharpened and while I still love having them, they lack something that the sharpened swords have.
I have just one saber, and it was presented to me by my Father when I received my Commission in the US Army. I am the 5th generation in my family to carry / own this weapon. My Great-great Grandfather carried it during the US Civil War after he was promoted from SGT to 2nd LT.
I have made many knives. What I found was when you quench a sharp edge it cools very rapidly and can become very hard and brittle. Tempering it after helps, but the thin sharp edge reheats faster making it more difficult to reach the correct balance between hardness and toughness unless you have a very controlled oven or salt bath. Having a blunt edge makes the quenching and tempering a more forgiving process. You simply have a wider timing window to hit the correct balance.
Nope. Even 4 minutes is too long. Whatever happened to collating thoughts, forming a start-middle-end basic script and finishing one b***y sentence before starting the next?? Honestly, Matt doens't seem too bothered about gaining followers since he gives no ***ks about being interesting.
thanks Matt...Im in martial arts and just this last August we had started to practice our sword kata form, we are practicing two different swords the broad and the straight sword. Im enjoying your videos, because its wonderful to know all the different swords that were used in the middle ages and beyond. So thanks Matt and Cheers to you too. take care Nancy.
Our bayonets were issued as blunt as a cows bum, today the Swiss army knife does 99.9% of a modern armies cutting, I dare say, mores the pity as a kukri can do everything from cleaning toe nails to chopping up the potatoes and the bad man.
Many of the militias and committee of safety members in the north american colonies were required by law to furnish their own firearms and ancillary equipment during times of service or drill. These statutes often pre-dated the revolution by many decades.
It makes perfect sense to me to issue blunt swords, since you cannot unload a sword, I wonder how much time did it take to the poor armorers of the British Empire to sharpen all those swords at once.
@john Mullholand there where a few in the civilwar and the Spanish American war and yes a president of the United States charged in that war I bet it was awesome
@john Mullholand It has always been suicidal for cavalry to charge head on against infantry that were prepared for them. What really shut down the usefulness of cavalry on the western front in WW1 was that the trench networks extended across the entire front so there was no chance for cavalry to wrap around the flanks. In other fronts of WW1 where this wasn't the case cavalry was still used successfully.
A Thousand Young Matt explained that the swords were sharpener by a skilled person - either a contractor or the armourer of the regiment. I suspect that a skilled armourer with the right tools would be able to sharpen swords quite quickly to a decent edge.
@@AThousandYoung With what? Without the equipment to sharpen a weapon, it is useless to order a soldier to sharpen his own weapon. Also, it would mean poor quality standards.
This explains something I've read in many of Patrick O'Brian's Aubrey/Maturin novels: namely, that before a naval action, the ship's armorer would be busily sharpening swords, cutlasses, and axes. I had always thought, "But why do they need to be sharpened? Shouldn't the swords be sharp already?" It makes even more sense for cutlasses that are stored "naked" (without sheaths) in racks or arms chests to be issued blunt, to avoid injuries when handling them.
I was told as a child about how odd it was that one of the elders upon his return home blunted a sword before he permitted the family to fuss with it. Many in the family thought it the most freakish thing [ early or mid 19th century story event ]. And now I see, thanks. What had been done wasn't terribly unreasonable.
On private persons outfitting units, one of the last to form like this in the British Empire was Lord Strathcona's Horse, Outfitted as a squadron of mounted rifles out of Winnipeg, Manitoba, for the Boer or South African War. I believe it was the only Canadian unit to stay for the second phase of that war. Lord Strathcona's Horse still exists today as an armored regiment using the Leopard tank and Coyote recon vehicles, based in Edmonton Albertastan.
Fascinating stuff! Many thanks! I have (what I think is) an Anglo-Indian infantry sword and had to immediately go and check the blade ;) It is indeed single beveled, although blunt. Interesting.
I think it also had to do with plain cost. It takes a lot of time to put a final edge on a weapon. Not having the manufacturer do it saves a lot hand work, which means a lot of time, which means a lot of money - especially if you don't need a sharp weapon at the moment when it's issued.
All bevel types have pro's and cons, I think people hear that a secondary bevel is bad for a certain application they were viewing a video on. Full flat grinds are what they are thinking of, and they are good for razor thin edges. The angle of the full flat can become more robust in and of itself by increasing angle, the secondary bevel has 2 reasons, either using the metal for structural strength increase, or usually for display swords it's just an easy way to do it. All edge geometry has it's own little niche and it's fun to study, I personally have found apple seed grinds to be the jack of all trades of edge grinds, it retains the structural stability of a strong bevel, but also can get very thin at the edge to very good dynamics in the cut, diamond cross section blades work with the same dynamics and have been shown to be competitive to full flat grinds in cutting performance.
Matt, one of those "another video" topics that I can remember is armor in cold weather situations. Specifically, in last season of Game of Thrones where Sansa instructs an armorer to put leather on breastplates, and instead of addressing that, you said you would make a video about medieval armor in cold weather, unless I'm misremembering and it was Metatron who said it, though I don't think he does Game of Thrones-related content very often. In any case, that's one I would appreciate you doing.
Having worn steel toes in Canadian winters, I'm pretty sure that the insulation has to go underneath the metal, not outside it, and that adding a layer of leather to metal does nothing to keep one's toes warm.
i heard a korean war veteran say that if you sharpened your bayonet too much it would get caught in the bone when you stab. he also said when the bayonet gets stuck in the bone you had to kick him to get it out
On the point about the US being "culturally European," that might be generally true, but when it comes to swords, the US Marines, then and now, were using North African scimitars.
Or naval cutlasses for enlisted men which are borrowed from the Navy. USMC never embraced the sword for combat much. Knives like KA-BARs and bayonets are the chief USMC blades through history.
I pushed it to the two thousand likes....also I enjoyed this, I collect civil war swords and this is an interesting topic...just a quick historical note Gen. Custers favorite model 1860 was a C. Roby he carried it after the war and had it during the Indian wars out west...but he was a Yankee
I remembered in Война и мир there is a character who was a young Russian noble as a cavalry talking with an old soldier about sharpenning his sabre before his first battle.
It is my understanding that the American Civil War was, fierce as it was, a gentlemans war and the sharpened edge went against the rules of combat. I once read, "If a soldier was captured with a sharpened edge, that soldier was executed by his own sword". During the Civil War, the sword was indeed used primarily as a bludgeoning weapon best implemented from horse back. Example: "The iron-hilted M1833 was based on a Napoleonic-era British sword used by heavy cavalry and reputed to wrap "rubber like around a man's head"... These swords were used as baseball bats, not necessarily the sword fighting we may see in the movies. Military commanders have been demoted and reprimanded for ordering their men to sharpen their swords. The idea was not to decapitate, but to crack the skull.
Not an expert, but one explanation of the dull/sharp argument is one I learned from my father and father-in-law, both well decorated WW-II, Korean War vets. His explanation made good sense. Bayonets were ONLY to sharp for about 5-6 inches from the hilt where they could be used for mundane purposes like cutting bandages or other items. The reason was that having a sharp point/edge would cause the blade to stick in the wound, making it harder to recover the thrust. Like in chopping a green tree with a sharp axe versius a dull axe. Sharp axe takes a "bite" in the green tree and requires some manipulation to with draw. A dull axe delivers a good blow and usually bounces out but doen't bind in the wound.
I believe the historical statements of "blunt" edged weapons, aka swords, giving "worse" wounds comes from the fact that you can still cut with an edge that is not paper or hair cutting sharp. A dull kitchen knife can still cut and not only that, leave a ragged wound. Same goes for a blunt axe. So "worse" can be referring to wounds that are more difficult to treat and heal from, not necessarily that they do "more" damage than a keen/sharp edged swords/weapons. I don't have first hand experience with sword wounds(I imagine few do these days) but I have years of experience with working with kitchen knives as well as working tools like axes and I know that a razor edge, while nice to achieve on an edge, is far from necessary to cut. The apex of a relatively "dull" edge is still sharp enough to cut many materials when applied in regular use. In other words, you can run a dull edged knife across your skin and not be cut but if you swing it at flesh, it can still inflict a cutting wound.
Justin Reilly. "Bevel". The word is also used for the diagonal or round blunting of corners that aren't supposed to cut anything, like on tables, handles, phones etc.
I have a 1885 pattern sword that appears to have been combat sharpened - it has the look and feel of been sharpened in the field by the sergeant armorer sitting on a hand or foot cranked grinding stone and running the blade up and down a few times to get a sharp edge. the sharpening is very uneven and rough but that history and romance can never be achieved by a factory fine edge.
Additionally, I was taught that many Civil War swords were left blunt in combat due to sharp swords hanging up in bone and the sword being lost, especially for cavalry units. Most troops did not receive much training and couldn't handle sabers correctly. Most swords had pointed tip for thrusting but usually very little, if any, of the edge was sharpened. Officers had the choice but most enlisted troops at least had to prove competence before they were allowed to sharpen the edge. I read this several decades ago in an excerpt from an officer's diary account of the war.
I don't recall where I've heard it but I've been under the impression that cavalry sabres, meant to be used by cavalry, were kept blunt as the blunt force was enough to cause wounds and they would not get stuck in the person struck by them. Is there any validity to that do you know?
@7:45 are you saying the weapon needs to be given its...*gasp* final form?! I can imagine: swords grunting and screaming, the ground shakes, the sky blackens thunder and lightning overloads the senses, and three episodes later the cutlass becomes a light saber😂😂😂
Way back, perhaps a bit before the timescale he is talking about, swords (and it depends on what kind of sword) were not primamarily cutting weapons but rather breaking weapons. The force of the blow would break bones which could be more disabling than a cut. The sword was a blunt blade so that the force of the blow would be concentrated at a single point without damaging the blade. In those days swords had quillions which, for example, could be used for inflicting piercing wounds or even for piercing armour. In that case the sword would be held by the blade and swung two handed. The Scottish broadsword might be a good example. But again it all depends on what kind of sword we are talking about.
True the war clubs of the Native American's have a horrific impact with just a beveled but not sharpened wooden edge such as the Gunstock style war clubs. The force of the blow is concentrated at the edge sharp or not and if it, the sword is too sharp it will stick.
Secondary bevels are common today. Rob Bixby, Apostle P on You tube, is a professional sharpener, and he espouses Secondary bevels. He does a, say a 15° polished bevel with a 20° secondary. As I understand it, this means you can re-sharpen the secondary without taking off too much metal each time. Quicker, easier, less destructive.
I've seen a WWII era Japanese manual that showed how to blunt swords and bayonets for peacetime. With that said, I've never seen or heard of a WWII Japanese sword that was blunt.
@@johnfrancisdoe1563 Yes, but I would still expect to see some blunt swords and bayonets around. Every bayonet, that hadn't been messed around with, I've seen has the factory sharping.
@@arisukak It's probably because it might have been meant for after the war and had Japan won the war they would have blunted their edged weapons per the manual. But because they lost and surrendered their weapons en masse they never got the chance to blunt them.
Were scabbards ever fitted with stone to help maintain an edge when inserting and withdrawing the sword from the scabbard? Also as a method of keeping the sword snug while in the scabbard?
Presumably it would also help with shipping? Particularly in the context of larger numbers of swords being issued to militias or military units there would have been crates or rack of swords being transported from wherever the swords were made to where they were to be issued-probably by boat or rail, likely handled by hand or lifted overhead by cranes or similar mechanisms, therefore (although the swords were no doubt padded) having blunt swords would make shipping and transport that little bit safer?
Time for a war story. When I was stationed at Ft Campbell we had a change of commanding General. Normally this is not a big deal, you have a ceremony and everyone gets the rest of the day off. Unfortunately the incoming General wanted the troops participating in the ceremony to do so with bared bayonets on their rifles. Hilarity did not endue. The very first day of practice of marching with with razor sharp bayonets on the rifles resulted in there were about 50 casualties and 7(?) critical injuries. They decided it would be better not to use the bayonets.
Something about combat with blades that seems brutal to us today. I served in Helmand with the British army and on the occasions where the order to fix bayonets came down the line, it sent shivers down the spine in a way that sending a Javelin missile or haill of 7.62 towards the enemy didnt.
Great information. Who sharpened the knives? The armorer? Or was the person carrying the weapon expected to sharpen it (like a rite of passage and familiarization with the equipment)?
It could be either - I'm sure regimental armourers/sergeants did plenty of sharpening for members of the regiment, but soldiers were also expected to keep their own gear in good condition and ready for use.
Long ago I read in U.S. Navy a blunt cutlass was "naval stores' and a sharpened cutlass was 'naval ordnance.' The second category had more stringent accountability requirements. No idea if this is true.
Matt, I differ with your assumption that sharp swords will, in time, become blunt after any length of time, just sitting around. I don't even think that drawing and sheathing a sword repeatedly will cause a sword to become significantly duller. I do, however, support the idea that a sword, when initially issued, would generally be issued to a green troop, who would need to train with his new (blunt) sword before becoming proficient and safe. It's concerning that we don't have a lot of literature from the period (say, from sword manufacturers) about the decision to issue blunt swords,
They do become more blunter due to metal scabbards. Armies of the day spent large amounts of time drilling, continually drawing and sheathing swords - there are about 20-30 historical sources which describe how this blunts edges.
They will definitely become blunt quite fast. If even putting a kitchen knife in the dishwasher, will ruin the edge in no time. The use of secondary bevels or even micro bevels on edged weapons and tools, has mostly to do with shortening the maintenance time and increasing the life span of the equipment. Some macro shots/video clips of different service sharpened edges would be interesting.
@@bengttolkis8646 I've observed the same when it comes to kitchen knives, although never did proper objective testing to rule out if that comes from rough physical handling/metal on metal contact in the dishwasher or if it's the cleaning chemicals/higher temperatures. Or maybe even the knife steel/heat treatment (not putting my nice stuff in the dishwasher). I've had a good set of knives that I keep very sharp that does most of the work now and back then (VG-10 steel, pretty thin blade stock and smaller angle on the edge grind than a standard regular kitchen knife). Never allowed them in the dishwasher now or back when I lived with my parents, they stay sharp much longer while doing more hard work than the few cheap standard X50CrMoV15 knives. Both now that I'm living on my own and back then when my dad or me usually did the cooking. That said they'll "stay sharp" fairly well by the standards that most people have, I just like to keep mine much sharper since it takes little to no effort really to quickly touch them up with either a strop or my spyderco sharpmaker. I guess it might be worth it to only use the cheaper knives consistently and go through a period of handwashing them and then later only putting them in the dishwasher as a test.
It's mostly due to there being a lot of abrasive and corrosive compounds, as alkaline salts, oxidising bleaching agents and even sand in the dishwasher detergent.
I think there may also be a financial reason for sending swords out unsharpened. I mean if you are buying hundreds or thousands of swords, you will save a significant amount of money in labour costs if the blacksmith making them doesn't have to sharpen it.
Not if the units armourer or the soldier it is being given to are left with the responsibility of sharpening it. I mean they are getting x$'s a day no matter what you have them doing.
lisar3006 well I mean I can see that happening because that's approximately where you want to be cutting someone for full efficiency, closer to the hilt could afford to be blunt or at least less sharp than the "sweet spot" as you make a lot of parries with that part and if still somewhat sharp then draw cuts would still be effective.
Interesting! I assume modern-day military officer swords are always unsharpened, since they are purely ceremonial? Are they even sturdy enough (and made of proper alloys) to even _hold_ an edge?
I respect this guy. He has done, obviously, a great deal of study. And by the looks of it spent years gathering up a great collection. However I think maybe he is missing a point. The blunted weapons, swords specifically. Were made this way to break the arm of the offending assailant. And many were issued, at least to the U.S. Navy, for that very specific reason. At the time, officers at least were issued pistols, in addition to their swords. That's all I can offer at this time. As I have, over the years, forgotten the reasoning behind that Naval development. Other than to add it had something to do with boarding another vessel at sea. Good luck sorting it all out. Peace.
I drive through Chelmsford, Massachusetts every day!!! I have seen where that forge used to be as the foundations still exists after being destroyed by a fire.
A colleague from a military family told me that long ago, officers who had bought best quality, London swords would also buy an inferior weapon to present when the order went out for all swords to be sharpened. The less than careful attentions of the armorer would have spoiled the appearance of the polished blade of the 'best' sword and dulled its razor-sharp edge.
It's interesting that you consistently call it the "American War Of Independence". I don't know if it's this way all across the country, but I've always heard it labelled simply as "The American Revolution". It's fascinating how the same war can be titled something completely different in a different region, despite using the same language. Oh, and cheers from Southern Illinois:) P.s. we don't say "Cheers" either, lol! (Except when toasting or occasionally when congratulating)
Ethan Metcalf I watched a film of Lindbergh speaking not long after he made his famous flight. I paraphrase but this is close. 'I thought we spoke the same language'. Churchill, much the same. "England and America are two countries separated by a common language". Then there is Strine. Spoken down under. Good luck with that,mate. Don't you come the raw prawn with me! Is untranslatable to someone not born there.Cheers,eh. Fabbricobble some skookum choocher of your own,y'all.
Native English speakers like to talk up the differences between their dialects, but leaving a few outliers aside they are pretty tame for the most part, compared to how divergent the dialects of other languages can be.
I think "Revolution" has some connotation that we tend to celebrate in the states perhaps. Whereas the brits, to me anyway, seem to give the benefit of the doubt (and legitimacy) and call it the war for our independence. Interesting all the same and I certainly don't know of any real reason for the colloquial differences
@@davidtuttle7556 Not really that clear. The southern states succeeded and formed its own country. The US government/military did not leave when asked. If succession was viewed as legal the the confederacy was in the right on forcing the union army out cause the union army was basically claiming territory in a foreign country. If succession is viewed an illegal act then the confederate army/navy was a rebellion. Look at it this way. If California or Texas wanted to leave the USA and become there own country, would they have the right to do so? It all comes down to what the extent of state rights are over the federal government.
The saying "blunt swords leave worse wounds" comes from the tendency for the user to much more repeatedly hack and swing with a blunt sword, causing far more grotesque harm than a sharpened blade, which kills with a clean strike or two. Thus, a clean cut or a few clean cuts ARE obviously far more effective, but a dull blade would leave far more and far more disgusting wounds in order to kill an opponent. Its the effort required, not the blade itself in this saying.
11:36 i think the claim goes around to how clean cuts are easier to attend to than rips and tears. a blunt sword could leave a jagged tear rather than a clean cut which, in some cases, render the injury more difficult to heal. If there's any bearing on that claim i'd like to know one way or the other.
before i even press play, these swords are drill swords. they are for NCOs and SNCOs. officers have their own swords as well and they dont change if you are company grade, field grade or a general officer.
It might also be that sharpening blades is particular to each person. Each person holds a different angle on the stone; like a fountain pen, don’t let anyone else touch it!
I have a Pattern 1796 light cavalry saber; it has very faint etching on the blade that, in addition to decorative floral designs, says MADE IN INDIA. The last six inches of the blade are sharp, including the topside. The remainder of the blade is blunt and thick. Is this typical?
Our SLR bayonets were at first issued with a sharpener in the scabbard but these were swiftly removed when recruits began to stab each other during drill.
I recently acquired 6 swords ( 3 Indian replicas, 1 dress sword and 2 other sabres ), all of witch are blunt. The one I've managed to age is the dress sword and that was made in 1856.
scholagladiatoria Short wars must have been quite the nuisance to regimental armourers then. Pity the poor soul who had to sharpen all the weapons for the Anglo-Zanzibar War, only to have the war end in 45 minutes. He probably finished his work, went for tea, and by the time he was back had to start grinding all the edges off again...
@SidtheKid Unlikely. Swords don't blunt that quickly and even if they did you couldn't rely on them to blunt along their entire length, which they'd need to be safe. Furthermore, most individuals wouldn't end up using their swords.
No, if the campaign was success, they threw it away along with the memories of war. If the campaign failed, its either the person died or they lived under occupation so its forbiden to keep weapon.
It is true that a sharper edge makes a cleaner cut than a duller roughly cutting edge, but of course a dull edge probably won't cut through clothing and gear as easily. People need to ask themselves, is a shallow jagged cut worse than a clean cut when it's maybe 1/3 as deep ? a deeper cut is a deeper cut cleaner or not.
If you sharpen an edge for the first time in general, it needs slightly less energy and time to make a second bevell. If you are sharpening lots and lots of swords in a hurry, that matters.
Lord Strathcona's Horse (Royal Canadians), was raised and equipped by Donald Alexander Smith, 1st Baron Strathcona and Mount Royal, during the Second Boer War.
Does this hold true for later bayonets as well? I've often been told, regarding WWI/WWII bayonets "a blunt blade causes a harder to heal wound" and I've run into a number of blunt bayonets, but this sounds like BS to me. Most of our M9 bayonets were ridiculously thick, stout, and blunt. I doubt if they could take an edge even if you were to try, and they were at least twice as thick as something like a Kabar of similar size
Perhaps it is because the sword as a primary instrument of war was in decline by the mid 19th? Most of the rank and file of the time carried a rifle or musket and just officers, actual horse cavalry and artillerymen (for brush clearing) tended to carry swords in the field.
What about earlier eras? Were medieval swords always kept sharp, or was there a similar sharpening ritual? What do the sources say (if anything) about this?
I do see it as plausible that _blunt_ sabres produced worse wounds: 1) survivor bias: if you die, no one needs to bother about your wound 2) have you ever tried sharpening a blade without the proper skills or tools? It often results in an edge that rips as much as it cuts, which in turn produces wounds that heal poorly compared to sharp cuts.
On the ritual significance of sharpening: there is a great painting of the Prussian Guard sharpening their swords on the steps of the French embassy in 1806.
Having used a blade in anger, I can attest to the importance of the sharpening ritual. When you know trouble is coming, it drives home the seriousness.
I'd feel funny walking around wearing a blunt sword in some place where I might get attacked with no warning. As the saying goes, "You can't make an appointment for an emergency."
I don't know how blunt those issued swords were....but consider this. When I was young I split wood with my Dad. He showed me that an overly keen edge on the ax would occasionally "stick" in the piece of wood you were attempting to split. Much of the cutting ability of things like axes and swords involves the driving force and weight behind the cut. A knife which is low weight should be honed to a sharper bevel with a thinner edge as the cutting tool itself has minimal weight. To understand what I am saying, imagine a straight razor in someones hand slashing downward on a person. Yes there would be damage, but nothing compared to a much duller edged sword with falling weight behind it. However if the sword was honed to the thinness of a razor, there is the chance that as the stroke came to the end of it's momentum and perhaps had hit bone...that the sharp blade would "stick" and be hard to withdraw.....while with a blunter edged weapon that bone would more likely to be crushed and shattered and therefore the blade more easily withdrawn.
I'll leave my comments on a future video.
I see what you did there.
I'll argue with you what was that you just did, in a future comment of course.
You can't stay on point to save your life apparently.
As I have a time machine I have already watched your future videos and found them to be flawed, try better.
Matt, you could write a book titled "Getting to it Later."
That would be a great title for a book that adresses all of the things matt would get to later.
Hey guys, I'm looking to buy a good boarding axe does anyone know where I can get a well made boarding axe from
Better: do a Kickstarter for the book, and get around to writing it later.
@@gamingbros6650 We'll Get to It Later
@@gamingbros6650 depending where you are located I buy Amish made tools they made me a great tomahawk I had to provide measurements and they took it from there you could try that
I've been a police officer for about 15 years. About 10 years ago, I attended a scene where a home owner defended himself and his family against 2 home invaders using a cheap replica sword. It had a blunt/dull edge. And i got to admit the wounds inflicted were horrific to say the least. By that time I had attended numerous shootings, stabbings, vehicle accidents, etc. But those wounds were the only ones that made me grimace.
Yeah a bluntish sword will leave nasty wounds, but not crush bones like a mace or hammer, nor cut through flesh like a sharp edged sword would. Probably it leaves the flesh more torn which looks horrible and heals uglier.
Laurens Feijten I presume the homeowner was arrested and the home invader was profusely apologised to and compensated? Assuming this was in the UK.
I'm a big supporter of the 2nd Amendment, but my advice for those who can't get firepower to defend themselves is to go Medieval. He'd have been better off with a sword made for combat. Even the invaders would be safer; they're more likely to survive when it takes fewer hits to stop them.
@@TheLastRussianYT you are good at sarcasm its hard to tell
Matt: remember what the Prussians said: "Recruits are cheap, Horses cost real money!!" (Attributed to the Hauptrossartz of the Prussian Army, when they decided to mount the sabers on the saddle.)
"Arzt" You supposedly mean.
Yep, mis-typed it. "Hauptrossarzt" Hard to keep up with three Languages here..Sorry!
That's very interesting. I suppose today one could say "soldiers come cheap, but the weaponry costs trillions of dollars," huh?
@john Mullholand horses are the tanks of the day. Rome got punked and easily defeated by the britons upon landing on England cause the britons had horses. Same when warring the tribes in Gaul.
Our bayonets were dull when I served with the Canadians and sharp when serving with the British. The difference, I was in “combat” while serving with the Brits in North Africa. I think it was/is more symbolic like Matt was/is saying. Damn bayonet and pistol I carried were not only pointless but a detriment. I had them as symbols for 99.999999999% of my time and only shot my pistol for qualifiers and never even drew it. I did dig with my bayonet and even damaged it and was fined while in reserves.
you could hardly say that a bayonet was pointless.
@@assbread5950 unless his digging took the top off it! 🤣
Okay you both got me. 😊
Was an engineer. was never given a bayonett or I would have tried to steal it when I left :) I DID get a nice shovel and was entrusted with it's care and maintenance.....
That’s because if they gave an engineer a bayonet you’d have used it as a flat head screwdriver or an entrenching tool like I did. It was simply a heavy stick, hammer and pocky thing that hilted me in the hip way too often.
I've bought six sabers from Easton Antique Arms. Three are blunt, three are service sharpened. The sharpened sabers all have nicks at the center of percussion on the blade. That may be a detriment to some collectors but not to me. Those are my hands down favorites because it means that there is a good chance they were used in combat. They are an 1853 pattern cavalry saber, an 1821 pattern cavalry saber and a 1796 pattern cavalry saber. Nicked all to hell on the center of percussion, pure history in my opinion. Of course the nicks could have been from some kid hacking around with the sword, but I don't think so. The blunt swords are great too but don't have the same historical value in my opinion. Just my two cents worth.
Hi Stan - I agree, I always prefer a sword to be service sharpened. I have some amazing swords that were never service sharpened and while I still love having them, they lack something that the sharpened swords have.
I completely agree and feel the same about my antiques form Easton Antique Arms.
I have just one saber, and it was presented to me by my Father when I received my Commission in the US Army. I am the 5th generation in my family to carry / own this weapon. My Great-great Grandfather carried it during the US Civil War after he was promoted from SGT to 2nd LT.
I have made many knives. What I found was when you quench a sharp edge it cools very rapidly and can become very hard and brittle. Tempering it after helps, but the thin sharp edge reheats faster making it more difficult to reach the correct balance between hardness and toughness unless you have a very controlled oven or salt bath.
Having a blunt edge makes the quenching and tempering a more forgiving process. You simply have a wider timing window to hit the correct balance.
A lot of waffle , jump t 4:17 for an answer .
THIS IS EXACTLY WHAT I WAS THINKING : /
Had it on wanting an answer and the guy just waffles on for like 5 fking years : /
Nope. Even 4 minutes is too long. Whatever happened to collating thoughts, forming a start-middle-end basic script and finishing one b***y sentence before starting the next?? Honestly, Matt doens't seem too bothered about gaining followers since he gives no ***ks about being interesting.
THANK YOU! Bl**dy hell... I was actually shouting "GET ON WITH IT!" 2 min in...
I wish I had gone right to this comment first. Somebody really likes to hear themselves talk... eye chee wa wa
THANKYOU.
I thought he was never going to the detail of the actual point.
Japanese person finding out Europeans didn’t keep their swords sharp 24/7:
“Shameful display!”
Metatron is shaking his head in disbelief
Sorry Johny but not all professional armies kept their swords sharp on Chinese women.
There is a British source that gives advice for travelling in Japan - it says to carry two large-caliber revolvers always loaded. Problem solved.
FILTHY GAIJIN GO HOME (ಠ益ಠ )
If I had no shame then I might criticize other people's culture and heritage.
I like how that morningstar is just hanging in there
And how those spears are just sticking around.
Are you saying you've seen rooms that DON'T have morningstars just hanging on the wall?
Thanks now I can't take my eyes off of it.
It's a flail :-)
@@scholagladiatoria Also getting into those later, right ? :-)
thanks Matt...Im in martial arts and just this last August we had started to practice our sword kata form, we are practicing two different swords the broad and the straight sword. Im enjoying your videos, because its wonderful to know all the different swords that were used in the middle ages and beyond. So thanks Matt and Cheers to you too. take care Nancy.
Oh. Now I see why our family heirloom; our antique gendarme sabre is blunt. Thanks for the explanation.
Those of us who've been/served with very junior personnel (enlisted and officer) would never think to ask that question.
Here is my 2 cents, better to have a sharp sword in peace than a dull one at war.
Around 11:00 he talks about this
I know, I watched it all the way through.
Sharpen it in 10 minutes
@@mistakenotou7681 you cant properly resharpen a kitchen knife in 10 minutes.... let alone a first sharpening on a sword
@@joejoelesh1197 if you have a grinding weal or a file it is posible
Our bayonets were issued as blunt as a cows bum, today the Swiss army knife does 99.9% of a modern armies cutting, I dare say, mores the pity as a kukri can do everything from cleaning toe nails to chopping up the potatoes and the bad man.
Many of the militias and committee of safety members in the north american colonies were required by law to furnish their own firearms and ancillary equipment during times of service or drill. These statutes often pre-dated the revolution by many decades.
You really did stick to the point on this one (7:35).
And you explained the topic at hand quite well.
Thankee.
This sword looks beautiful!
*Matt died on his way back to making those 'talk about it later' videos.*
Spyro Frost *at the age of 115.
It makes perfect sense to me to issue blunt swords, since you cannot unload a sword, I wonder how much time did it take to the poor armorers of the British Empire to sharpen all those swords at once.
I suspect each trooper had to sharpen his own sword.
@john Mullholand there where a few in the civilwar and the Spanish American war and yes a president of the United States charged in that war I bet it was awesome
@john Mullholand It has always been suicidal for cavalry to charge head on against infantry that were prepared for them. What really shut down the usefulness of cavalry on the western front in WW1 was that the trench networks extended across the entire front so there was no chance for cavalry to wrap around the flanks. In other fronts of WW1 where this wasn't the case cavalry was still used successfully.
A Thousand Young Matt explained that the swords were sharpener by a skilled person - either a contractor or the armourer of the regiment. I suspect that a skilled armourer with the right tools would be able to sharpen swords quite quickly to a decent edge.
@@AThousandYoung With what? Without the equipment to sharpen a weapon, it is useless to order a soldier to sharpen his own weapon. Also, it would mean poor quality standards.
This explains something I've read in many of Patrick O'Brian's Aubrey/Maturin novels: namely, that before a naval action, the ship's armorer would be busily sharpening swords, cutlasses, and axes. I had always thought, "But why do they need to be sharpened? Shouldn't the swords be sharp already?"
It makes even more sense for cutlasses that are stored "naked" (without sheaths) in racks or arms chests to be issued blunt, to avoid injuries when handling them.
Two minutes in: Get to the point, cut to the chase, slash the monologue: Three minutes in: Amazing circumlocution: I love your work.
I was told as a child about how odd it was that one of the elders upon his return home blunted a sword before he permitted the family to fuss with it. Many in the family thought it the most freakish thing [ early or mid 19th century story event ]. And now I see, thanks. What had been done wasn't terribly unreasonable.
On private persons outfitting units, one of the last to form like this in the British Empire was Lord Strathcona's Horse, Outfitted as a squadron of mounted rifles out of Winnipeg, Manitoba, for the Boer or South African War. I believe it was the only Canadian unit to stay for the second phase of that war. Lord Strathcona's Horse still exists today as an armored regiment using the Leopard tank and Coyote recon vehicles, based in Edmonton Albertastan.
Fascinating stuff! Many thanks! I have (what I think is) an Anglo-Indian infantry sword and had to immediately go and check the blade ;) It is indeed single beveled, although blunt. Interesting.
I think it also had to do with plain cost. It takes a lot of time to put a final edge on a weapon. Not having the manufacturer do it saves a lot hand work, which means a lot of time, which means a lot of money - especially if you don't need a sharp weapon at the moment when it's issued.
A nice little bit of detail to add into historical and fictional stories and settings. Than you very much!
All bevel types have pro's and cons, I think people hear that a secondary bevel is bad for a certain application they were viewing a video on. Full flat grinds are what they are thinking of, and they are good for razor thin edges. The angle of the full flat can become more robust in and of itself by increasing angle, the secondary bevel has 2 reasons, either using the metal for structural strength increase, or usually for display swords it's just an easy way to do it. All edge geometry has it's own little niche and it's fun to study, I personally have found apple seed grinds to be the jack of all trades of edge grinds, it retains the structural stability of a strong bevel, but also can get very thin at the edge to very good dynamics in the cut, diamond cross section blades work with the same dynamics and have been shown to be competitive to full flat grinds in cutting performance.
Matt, one of those "another video" topics that I can remember is armor in cold weather situations. Specifically, in last season of Game of Thrones where Sansa instructs an armorer to put leather on breastplates, and instead of addressing that, you said you would make a video about medieval armor in cold weather, unless I'm misremembering and it was Metatron who said it, though I don't think he does Game of Thrones-related content very often. In any case, that's one I would appreciate you doing.
Having worn steel toes in Canadian winters, I'm pretty sure that the insulation has to go underneath the metal, not outside it, and that adding a layer of leather to metal does nothing to keep one's toes warm.
I believe "dull" is the proper term as "blunt" would refer to the tip eh wot?
WAR WERE DECLARED
and Crozier gets another blueberry...
I didn't know this was a crossover episode
Still waiting for the comparaison video (British 1821LT Cav VS 1822 French LT Cav swords ) :)
i heard a korean war veteran say that if you sharpened your bayonet too much it would get caught in the bone when you stab. he also said when the bayonet gets stuck in the bone you had to kick him to get it out
An interesting little factoid from history. Thanks for sharing your knowledge.
....did Matt just insinuate that the egg came before the chicken?
The question has been answered.
He didn't say "Context". How are we supposed to know when to drink?
;)
Good to know. I liked it.
On the point about the US being "culturally European," that might be generally true, but when it comes to swords, the US Marines, then and now, were using North African scimitars.
Or naval cutlasses for enlisted men which are borrowed from the Navy. USMC never embraced the sword for combat much. Knives like KA-BARs and bayonets are the chief USMC blades through history.
I pushed it to the two thousand likes....also I enjoyed this, I collect civil war swords and this is an interesting topic...just a quick historical note Gen. Custers favorite model 1860 was a C. Roby he carried it after the war and had it during the Indian wars out west...but he was a Yankee
I remembered in Война и мир there is a character who was a young Russian noble as a cavalry talking with an old soldier about sharpenning his sabre before his first battle.
It is my understanding that the American Civil War was, fierce as it was, a gentlemans war and the sharpened edge went against the rules of combat. I once read, "If a soldier was captured with a sharpened edge, that soldier was executed by his own sword".
During the Civil War, the sword was indeed used primarily as a bludgeoning weapon best implemented from horse back.
Example: "The iron-hilted M1833 was based on a Napoleonic-era British sword used by heavy cavalry and reputed to wrap "rubber like around a man's head"... These swords were used as baseball bats, not necessarily the sword fighting we may see in the movies.
Military commanders have been demoted and reprimanded for ordering their men to sharpen their swords.
The idea was not to decapitate, but to crack the skull.
Out of curiosity what source did you get that stuff from?
Not an expert, but one explanation of the dull/sharp argument is one I learned from my father and father-in-law, both well decorated WW-II, Korean War vets. His explanation made good sense. Bayonets were ONLY to sharp for about 5-6 inches from the hilt where they could be used for mundane purposes like cutting bandages or other items. The reason was that having a sharp point/edge would cause the blade to stick in the wound, making it harder to recover the thrust. Like in chopping a green tree with a sharp axe versius a dull axe. Sharp axe takes a "bite" in the green tree and requires some manipulation to with draw. A dull axe delivers a good blow and usually bounces out but doen't bind in the wound.
"Raise the Battle Flag . . sharpen your sword while you're at it."
I believe the historical statements of "blunt" edged weapons, aka swords, giving "worse" wounds comes from the fact that you can still cut with an edge that is not paper or hair cutting sharp. A dull kitchen knife can still cut and not only that, leave a ragged wound. Same goes for a blunt axe.
So "worse" can be referring to wounds that are more difficult to treat and heal from, not necessarily that they do "more" damage than a keen/sharp edged swords/weapons.
I don't have first hand experience with sword wounds(I imagine few do these days) but I have years of experience with working with kitchen knives as well as working tools like axes and I know that a razor edge, while nice to achieve on an edge, is far from necessary to cut. The apex of a relatively "dull" edge is still sharp enough to cut many materials when applied in regular use. In other words, you can run a dull edged knife across your skin and not be cut but if you swing it at flesh, it can still inflict a cutting wound.
Didn't know what a bevil was, great knowledge, thanks Matt!
Justin Reilly. "Bevel". The word is also used for the diagonal or round blunting of corners that aren't supposed to cut anything, like on tables, handles, phones etc.
I have a 1885 pattern sword that appears to have been combat sharpened - it has the look and feel of been sharpened in the field by the sergeant armorer sitting on a hand or foot cranked grinding stone and running the blade up and down a few times to get a sharp edge. the sharpening is very uneven and rough but that history and romance can never be achieved by a factory fine edge.
Here in the East, a blunt sword is considered pointless...
I bet no Gurkha ever laid hands on a blunt kukri!
thats what we say about an unloaded gun in USA
Additionally, I was taught that many Civil War swords were left blunt in combat due to sharp swords hanging up in bone and the sword being lost, especially for cavalry units. Most troops did not receive much training and couldn't handle sabers correctly. Most swords had pointed tip for thrusting but usually very little, if any, of the edge was sharpened. Officers had the choice but most enlisted troops at least had to prove competence before they were allowed to sharpen the edge. I read this several decades ago in an excerpt from an officer's diary account of the war.
Thank you, great information. the bevel question was something i had been wanting information on for a long time.
I don't recall where I've heard it but I've been under the impression that cavalry sabres, meant to be used by cavalry, were kept blunt as the blunt force was enough to cause wounds and they would not get stuck in the person struck by them. Is there any validity to that do you know?
Love the channel, I learn so much.
Thanks, be safe.
brilliant video, thanks Mr Easton.
@7:45 are you saying the weapon needs to be given its...*gasp* final form?!
I can imagine: swords grunting and screaming, the ground shakes, the sky blackens thunder and lightning overloads the senses, and three episodes later the cutlass becomes a light saber😂😂😂
Way back, perhaps a bit before the timescale he is talking about, swords (and it depends on what kind of sword) were not primamarily cutting weapons but rather breaking weapons. The force of the blow would break bones which could be more disabling than a cut. The sword was a blunt blade so that the force of the blow would be concentrated at a single point without damaging the blade. In those days swords had quillions which, for example, could be used for inflicting piercing wounds or even for piercing armour. In that case the sword would be held by the blade and swung two handed. The Scottish broadsword might be a good example. But again it all depends on what kind of sword we are talking about.
True the war clubs of the Native American's have a horrific impact with just a beveled but not sharpened wooden edge such as the Gunstock style war clubs. The force of the blow is concentrated at the edge sharp or not and if it, the sword is too sharp it will stick.
Secondary bevels are common today. Rob Bixby, Apostle P on You tube, is a professional sharpener, and he espouses Secondary bevels. He does a, say a 15° polished bevel with a 20° secondary. As I understand it, this means you can re-sharpen the secondary without taking off too much metal each time. Quicker, easier, less destructive.
I've seen a WWII era Japanese manual that showed how to blunt swords and bayonets for peacetime. With that said, I've never seen or heard of a WWII Japanese sword that was blunt.
Japanese swords don't need to be sharpened, being extremely cutting is already part of their intrinsic nature.
@@johnfrancisdoe1563 Yes, but I would still expect to see some blunt swords and bayonets around. Every bayonet, that hadn't been messed around with, I've seen has the factory sharping.
@@arisukak It's probably because it might have been meant for after the war and had Japan won the war they would have blunted their edged weapons per the manual. But because they lost and surrendered their weapons en masse they never got the chance to blunt them.
I have a late 1930's Japanese officer's bayonet (brass hilt, steel blade). The blade is blunt, and appears never to have been sharp.
Were scabbards ever fitted with stone to help maintain an edge when inserting and withdrawing the sword from the scabbard? Also as a method of keeping the sword snug while in the scabbard?
Presumably it would also help with shipping? Particularly in the context of larger numbers of swords being issued to militias or military units there would have been crates or rack of swords being transported from wherever the swords were made to where they were to be issued-probably by boat or rail, likely handled by hand or lifted overhead by cranes or similar mechanisms, therefore (although the swords were no doubt padded) having blunt swords would make shipping and transport that little bit safer?
Time for a war story. When I was stationed at Ft Campbell we had a change of commanding General. Normally this is not a big deal, you have a ceremony and everyone gets the rest of the day off. Unfortunately the incoming General wanted the troops participating in the ceremony to do so with bared bayonets on their rifles. Hilarity did not endue. The very first day of practice of marching with with razor sharp bayonets on the rifles resulted in there were about 50 casualties and 7(?) critical injuries. They decided it would be better not to use the bayonets.
Kevin Sullivan I’m sure
Something about combat with blades that seems brutal to us today. I served in Helmand with the British army and on the occasions where the order to fix bayonets came down the line, it sent shivers down the spine in a way that sending a Javelin missile or haill of 7.62 towards the enemy didnt.
I`ll get back to that in a bit, not in a later video...completely forgets to get back to it. Classic Matt lolz.
on the topic of sharpening swords: I would love a video where you explain how to properly make things sharp :)
Great information. Who sharpened the knives? The armorer? Or was the person carrying the weapon expected to sharpen it (like a rite of passage and familiarization with the equipment)?
It could be either - I'm sure regimental armourers/sergeants did plenty of sharpening for members of the regiment, but soldiers were also expected to keep their own gear in good condition and ready for use.
A sharper edge can frequently also be a more brittle edge, susceptible to rolling over on sharpening and chipping on use.
Long ago I read in U.S. Navy a blunt cutlass was "naval stores' and a sharpened cutlass was 'naval ordnance.' The second category had more stringent accountability requirements. No idea if this is true.
Matt, I differ with your assumption that sharp swords will, in time, become blunt after any length of time, just sitting around. I don't even think that drawing and sheathing a sword repeatedly will cause a sword to become significantly duller. I do, however, support the idea that a sword, when initially issued, would generally be issued to a green troop, who would need to train with his new (blunt) sword before becoming proficient and safe. It's concerning that we don't have a lot of literature from the period (say, from sword manufacturers) about the decision to issue blunt swords,
It wouldn't become super blunt, but they do become blunter and so not as good at cutting, requiring maintenance.
They do become more blunter due to metal scabbards. Armies of the day spent large amounts of time drilling, continually drawing and sheathing swords - there are about 20-30 historical sources which describe how this blunts edges.
They will definitely become blunt quite fast. If even putting a kitchen knife in the dishwasher, will ruin the edge in no time. The use of secondary bevels or even micro bevels on edged weapons and tools, has mostly to do with shortening the maintenance time and increasing the life span of the equipment. Some macro shots/video clips of different service sharpened edges would be interesting.
@@bengttolkis8646 I've observed the same when it comes to kitchen knives, although never did proper objective testing to rule out if that comes from rough physical handling/metal on metal contact in the dishwasher or if it's the cleaning chemicals/higher temperatures. Or maybe even the knife steel/heat treatment (not putting my nice stuff in the dishwasher).
I've had a good set of knives that I keep very sharp that does most of the work now and back then (VG-10 steel, pretty thin blade stock and smaller angle on the edge grind than a standard regular kitchen knife). Never allowed them in the dishwasher now or back when I lived with my parents, they stay sharp much longer while doing more hard work than the few cheap standard X50CrMoV15 knives. Both now that I'm living on my own and back then when my dad or me usually did the cooking.
That said they'll "stay sharp" fairly well by the standards that most people have, I just like to keep mine much sharper since it takes little to no effort really to quickly touch them up with either a strop or my spyderco sharpmaker. I guess it might be worth it to only use the cheaper knives consistently and go through a period of handwashing them and then later only putting them in the dishwasher as a test.
It's mostly due to there being a lot of abrasive and corrosive compounds, as alkaline salts, oxidising bleaching agents and even sand in the dishwasher detergent.
9:20 "final thing I'll finish off with saying"
7 more minutes of talking.
Gotta get that context in.
Very good! Thank you.
I think there may also be a financial reason for sending swords out unsharpened. I mean if you are buying hundreds or thousands of swords, you will save a significant amount of money in labour costs if the blacksmith making them doesn't have to sharpen it.
Doug Allen But if you were to sharpen them upon unpacking the delivery, factory sharpening would be cheaper in total cost.
Not if the units armourer or the soldier it is being given to are left with the responsibility of sharpening it. I mean they are getting x$'s a day no matter what you have them doing.
I notice old sabers are only sharpened about 10 inches from the point or at lease the civil war sabers I saw were
lisar3006 well I mean I can see that happening because that's approximately where you want to be cutting someone for full efficiency, closer to the hilt could afford to be blunt or at least less sharp than the "sweet spot" as you make a lot of parries with that part and if still somewhat sharp then draw cuts would still be effective.
Interesting! I assume modern-day military officer swords are always unsharpened, since they are purely ceremonial?
Are they even sturdy enough (and made of proper alloys) to even _hold_ an edge?
They are blunt, yes. As to whether they are well enough made to use in combat, that entirely depends on which manufacturer they are from.
scholagladiatoria, I see, thank you :)
Ceremonial weapons are not made from the same materials as combat ready weapons.
So when peace was declared did they blunt the swords deliberately or just stop maintaining them? If they deliberately blunted them how did they do it?
I respect this guy. He has done, obviously, a great deal of study. And by the looks of it spent years gathering up a great collection. However I think maybe he is missing a point. The blunted weapons, swords specifically. Were made this way to break the arm of the offending assailant. And many were issued, at least to the U.S. Navy, for that very specific reason. At the time, officers at least were issued pistols, in addition to their swords. That's all I can offer at this time. As I have, over the years, forgotten the reasoning behind that Naval development. Other than to add it had something to do with boarding another vessel at sea. Good luck sorting it all out.
Peace.
I drive through Chelmsford, Massachusetts every day!!! I have seen where that forge used to be as the foundations still exists after being destroyed by a fire.
A colleague from a military family told me that long ago, officers who had bought best quality, London swords would also buy an inferior weapon to present when the order went out for all swords to be sharpened. The less than careful attentions of the armorer would have spoiled the appearance of the polished blade of the 'best' sword and dulled its razor-sharp edge.
That is a really cool sweater.
It's interesting that you consistently call it the "American War Of Independence". I don't know if it's this way all across the country, but I've always heard it labelled simply as "The American Revolution". It's fascinating how the same war can be titled something completely different in a different region, despite using the same language.
Oh, and cheers from Southern Illinois:)
P.s. we don't say "Cheers" either, lol! (Except when toasting or occasionally when congratulating)
Ethan Metcalf I watched a film of Lindbergh speaking not long after he made his famous flight. I paraphrase but this is close. 'I thought we spoke the same language'. Churchill, much the same. "England and America are two countries separated by a common language". Then there is Strine. Spoken down under. Good luck with that,mate. Don't you come the raw prawn with me! Is untranslatable to someone not born there.Cheers,eh.
Fabbricobble some skookum choocher of your own,y'all.
@ except that the South started it.
Native English speakers like to talk up the differences between their dialects, but leaving a few outliers aside they are pretty tame for the most part, compared to how divergent the dialects of other languages can be.
I think "Revolution" has some connotation that we tend to celebrate in the states perhaps. Whereas the brits, to me anyway, seem to give the benefit of the doubt (and legitimacy) and call it the war for our independence. Interesting all the same and I certainly don't know of any real reason for the colloquial differences
@@davidtuttle7556 Not really that clear. The southern states succeeded and formed its own country. The US government/military did not leave when asked. If succession was viewed as legal the the confederacy was in the right on forcing the union army out cause the union army was basically claiming territory in a foreign country. If succession is viewed an illegal act then the confederate army/navy was a rebellion. Look at it this way. If California or Texas wanted to leave the USA and become there own country, would they have the right to do so? It all comes down to what the extent of state rights are over the federal government.
Thank You,well explained, quite civicing ,and in decent English.
Ah,"convincing" of course.
The saying "blunt swords leave worse wounds" comes from the tendency for the user to much more repeatedly hack and swing with a blunt sword, causing far more grotesque harm than a sharpened blade, which kills with a clean strike or two. Thus, a clean cut or a few clean cuts ARE obviously far more effective, but a dull blade would leave far more and far more disgusting wounds in order to kill an opponent. Its the effort required, not the blade itself in this saying.
11:36 i think the claim goes around to how clean cuts are easier to attend to than rips and tears. a blunt sword could leave a jagged tear rather than a clean cut which, in some cases, render the injury more difficult to heal. If there's any bearing on that claim i'd like to know one way or the other.
holy fuck mate, I wasnt prepared for the smooth head look - oh wait, im thinking of lindy
before i even press play, these swords are drill swords. they are for NCOs and SNCOs. officers have their own swords as well and they dont change if you are company grade, field grade or a general officer.
Really interesting - Thanks
It might also be that sharpening blades is particular to each person. Each person holds a different angle on the stone; like a fountain pen, don’t let anyone else touch it!
I have a Pattern 1796 light cavalry saber; it has very faint etching on the blade that, in addition to decorative floral designs, says MADE IN INDIA. The last six inches of the blade are sharp, including the topside. The remainder of the blade is blunt and thick. Is this typical?
Our SLR bayonets were at first issued with a sharpener in the scabbard but these were swiftly removed when recruits began to stab each other during drill.
I recently acquired 6 swords ( 3 Indian replicas, 1 dress sword and 2 other sabres ), all of witch are blunt. The one I've managed to age is the dress sword and that was made in 1856.
So at the end of a campaign, would they blunt all their swords again?
This is a good question, but the answer is not clear. The likely answer is "yes, sometimes".
scholagladiatoria Short wars must have been quite the nuisance to regimental armourers then. Pity the poor soul who had to sharpen all the weapons for the Anglo-Zanzibar War, only to have the war end in 45 minutes. He probably finished his work, went for tea, and by the time he was back had to start grinding all the edges off again...
@SidtheKid Unlikely. Swords don't blunt that quickly and even if they did you couldn't rely on them to blunt along their entire length, which they'd need to be safe. Furthermore, most individuals wouldn't end up using their swords.
No, if the campaign was success, they threw it away along with the memories of war.
If the campaign failed, its either the person died or they lived under occupation so its forbiden to keep weapon.
It is true that a sharper edge makes a cleaner cut than a duller roughly cutting edge, but of course a dull edge probably won't cut through clothing and gear as easily.
People need to ask themselves, is a shallow jagged cut worse than a clean cut when it's maybe 1/3 as deep ?
a deeper cut is a deeper cut cleaner or not.
If you sharpen an edge for the first time in general, it needs slightly less energy and time to make a second bevell. If you are sharpening lots and lots of swords in a hurry, that matters.
Lord Strathcona's Horse (Royal Canadians), was raised and equipped by Donald Alexander Smith, 1st Baron Strathcona and Mount Royal, during the Second Boer War.
Does this hold true for later bayonets as well? I've often been told, regarding WWI/WWII bayonets "a blunt blade causes a harder to heal wound" and I've run into a number of blunt bayonets, but this sounds like BS to me. Most of our M9 bayonets were ridiculously thick, stout, and blunt. I doubt if they could take an edge even if you were to try, and they were at least twice as thick as something like a Kabar of similar size
Did matt just answer the "chicken or the egg"-question? 🤔
Perhaps it is because the sword as a primary instrument of war was in decline by the mid 19th? Most of the rank and file of the time carried a rifle or musket and just officers, actual horse cavalry and artillerymen (for brush clearing) tended to carry swords in the field.
What about earlier eras? Were medieval swords always kept sharp, or was there a similar sharpening ritual? What do the sources say (if anything) about this?
I do see it as plausible that _blunt_ sabres produced worse wounds:
1) survivor bias: if you die, no one needs to bother about your wound
2) have you ever tried sharpening a blade without the proper skills or tools? It often results in an edge that rips as much as it cuts, which in turn produces wounds that heal poorly compared to sharp cuts.
On the ritual significance of sharpening: there is a great painting of the Prussian Guard sharpening their swords on the steps of the French embassy in 1806.
Having used a blade in anger, I can attest to the importance of the sharpening ritual. When you know trouble is coming, it drives home the seriousness.
I learned stuff, thanks
I'd feel funny walking around wearing a blunt sword in some place where I might get attacked with no warning. As the saying goes, "You can't make an appointment for an emergency."
I don't know how blunt those issued swords were....but consider this. When I was young I split wood with my Dad. He showed me that an overly keen edge on the ax would occasionally "stick" in the piece of wood you were attempting to split. Much of the cutting ability of things like axes and swords involves the driving force and weight behind the cut. A knife which is low weight should be honed to a sharper bevel with a thinner edge as the cutting tool itself has minimal weight. To understand what I am saying, imagine a straight razor in someones hand slashing downward on a person. Yes there would be damage, but nothing compared to a much duller edged sword with falling weight behind it. However if the sword was honed to the thinness of a razor, there is the chance that as the stroke came to the end of it's momentum and perhaps had hit bone...that the sharp blade would "stick" and be hard to withdraw.....while with a blunter edged weapon that bone would more likely to be crushed and shattered and therefore the blade more easily withdrawn.