Cavalry Sabre vs Infantry Sabre - Nick vs Gareth/Malcolm.
ฝัง
- เผยแพร่เมื่อ 27 ส.ค. 2024
- Cavalry sabres were used on foot plenty of times out of necessity, here we look at how that would go against the much lighter and more agile infantry sabre.
In the Napoleonic era, British infantry and cavalry sabres foilowed the same form. However, the cavalry models were a little longer (4cm in this case, about typical), and much heavier, especially in the tip.
This gave a little extra reach, and a massive amount of cutting power, however, they lack the fine manipulations of the lighter infantry models, which could still deliver immense power. We also have to hold back with the cavalry models, as their striking power is immense.
Both weapons are representative of original Napoleonic originals in size and handling.
Nick is in red with the cavalry sabre, initially facing Gareth in two short bouts, followed by Malcolm.
Training swords are by Black Fencer (Spain). Infantry sabre is the V5 curve model. And the Cavalry, a V5 sabre fitted with hussar blade.
Yeah, that cav hits like a beast. But you can feel that once you start, it's very hard to change intention.
That hit at 3:05!!
HebaruSan Satisfying pop
I'm tempted to make an animated gif out of it.
Classic Nick.
Do it; and take your place on the dark side of the force
Perfect slip of the leg
I don't know what I'm seeing, but I enjoy watching.
I have to say I found these videos extremely helpful. Nick's style of fencing is the most satisfying I've ever come across and there's no doubt he taught me no less than my instructor or the books I read. Cheers!
Nick you may have covered this elsewhere but do you feel in general the Cavalry sabre is working uphill in this matchup? Obviously the system is designed to work with infantry/cavalry sabre/ broadsword etc, but I always assumed that the infantry sabres were made lighter or balanced closer to the hilt and thus easier for protracted combat.
Does the reach advantage and extra authority in the cut balance out the lack of finesse? The match certainly seems pretty even! :)
I would think my Cavalry sabers are too heavy and slow for a one on one against a lighter faster weapon.
In a fight like this, the cavalry sabre is at a disadvantage no doubt. To exactly what degree is hard to say, because we can't use it to its full extent due to the dangerous hitting power.
But yes, the cavalry sabre lacks finesse and dexterity, and its only major advantage, besides a little reach, is the intimidation of the mass and power of the cavalry blade. When I fought Mike with it later, and he was not intimidated by it, he was able to strike a great variety of powerful blows with his infantry sabre, just running circles around the cavalry blade.
The mass of them mean they can barely feint, or recover quickly. They can't counter cut so effectively unless moulinets/parades are used. They have immense power, but are not so well suited to the more agile infantry combat. Saying that, I'd still expect a decent swordsmen to be able to do pretty well with one in the situation, which they did have to face plenty of times in history.
I wonder if you could avoid the rotation and just cut straight in using the weight of the saber to shave off a little latency in the cut. I always cringe when I see Matt Easton waving his sabers like a windmill. An awful lot of cavalry sabers would be like spinning up helicopter blades. I don't think his technique would work well in the saddle because you twirl your saber like a baton and you will strike your horse. Even easy downward cuts you have to avoid the horses head which can be moving around.
In the Napoleonic Era, was combat with Infantry sabres that common? It would seem that officers typically would keep to their pistols, and mostly dismounted cavalrymen would be the ones engaging in sword combat.
Single shot pistols that 10% of the time just went pfft or click instead of going Bang. The powder quality was quite variable and neither flint lock nor the early percussion were trouble free. In 1815 revolvers were still decades away.
Cant imagine 2 rivals fighting so casually with swords
It's called training
It's interesting, but when people start waving sharp weapons at each other, particularly in a duel situation where there's just the one dude focused entirely on stabbing you, people get a lot more cautious. There is a ton of evidence that swordsmen, particularly in the 1800's when these swords were in use, took things much slower than you see, for example, in the movies.
@@seannewton3480 the movie THE DUELISTS has great saber combat!!
I think this would be a lot more exciting if you got rid of all the rules and told them to “just pretend you’re trying to kill each other”
Cavalry on the left with the guy in Red?
Yes.
7:04 was really good! Caught him lowering his guard on his was back in
I'd like a video on swords specialized for cavalry, not just sabers but I take it that even cavalry troops from way older ages used swords in the like of sabers, like the mongols.
Our focus is almost entirely on 16th to 19th century European sources, but we do cover other elements outside that occasionally. I'll give it some thought. Certainly I will be making some more videos about cavalry swords in the 18th and 19th century, and will consider expanding. In fact a great many sword types were used on horseback, most types that were used on foot in fact, but they are frequently longer and heavier for cavalry use, as is shown here.
Academy of Historical Fencing I've always wanted some of your thoughts on Indian swords
The common tulwar handles much like a Napoleonic British sabre, usually a little heavier than an infantry sabre, but not as heavy as the 1796 light cavalry models. Handling is much the same, except for one core point, grip length and the restriction of the disk pommel. This forces a hammer grip and loss of dexterity in the wrist, but that's for for their style as they cut a lot more from the shoulder. Indian swordsmen are documented as being vulnerable to the feint, and the thrust, but also as fearsome fighters, delivering brutal cutting power.
Thanks for the reply. That's very informative. I've asked Black Fencer to make me a Khanda practice weapon but I've been struggling to find anything about the specifics of the weapons themselves like what sort of weight ranges are normal, point of balance etc.
love how you train
Great vid. I have been wondering about this for a while...
Verdict seems to be that infantry sabre > cavalry sabre on foot.
Obviously in a real fight however the cavalry sabre would have the advantage of much deeper cuts and impact, which might change the overall verdict ?
Yes, infantry sabre is far superior on foot. Certainly if the cavalry can land blows they would do more damage, but infantry sabres still deliver wicked cuts, so this would come down to the quality of strikes landed by each fighter.
Ok thanks for the precision.
Hey Nick, I'm practicing rapier and I would like to ask you, which one is better: destreza or capo ferro?
How big is the difference in weight and balance between those two sabres?
120 grams heavier for the cavalry. Pob is 12.5cm on infantry, and 18.5cm on cavalry.
I've noticed you and your opponents are moving in a straight in a line. Do you think the infantry sabre would be *even better* if y'all were able to utilize 3D space, or would the difference be minimal? I'm thinking that the cavalry sabre may fare even worse due to lacking "fine manipulations" when footwork isn't as predictable.
That's how they fought in the late 18th-19th century, in general. Some 19th century sources describe moving to the side, but only during specific situations, e.g. when the enemy is rushing you, you can steap diagonally to the side while delivering a cut. I hear Swedish military sabre utilizes lateral movement a bit more, but I'm not sure.
Why no stepping to the side in British military sabre? I guess they didn't think it was needed. It was also influenced by French foil (because everything was influenced by France back that). There are lots of ways to use a sword, this is one of them.
FC Christmann and DG Pfeffinger wrote a treatise in 1838 (in German, in spite of the fact that Christmann was a cavalryman in Napoleon's Army)on saber fencing, in which there are several detailed drawings depicting side steps, which were contrary to conventional wisdom of the time
that's a question! why not to use later moviments? wouldn't be safer? I study thai saber (it's a Thai evolution from cutlass) and other tipes of swords and there are lateral moviments. 3D moviments are to me much better and I can't understand why to fight in a strict line.
@@Altoadige4dogs One reason for fighting in the straight lines you see is that on a battlefield, there'd be men on the right and the left, so there's not much room to maneuver. Also, there are bodies and holes on the ground, and side stepping while focusing on the opponent directly in front increases the risk of tripping. Finally, if you go too far to the side, you may end up with your side or back to the hundred other enemies behind the one you're fighting.
How much protection would you need to be able to go full force with the cavalry sabre? I assume it's about 250-300g more than the infantry one?
It's only about 120g more from memory, but almost all that extra mass in the extra reach and tip. So the power generation is massive. Realistically its not possible to go full force with it. Considering it handles like the real deal, which were famous for their cutting power. To gear uo to take that sort of power it would be more like an armoured fight. Gloves that can take that power and still have the right dexterity don't exist either.
@@AcademyofHistoricalFencing I must say I found this fascinating, if a blunt nylon sword is unsafe to use at full power with protective gear. It's easy to imagine the damage the real sharp thing would do...
That is because people assume that the only damage a sword does is with its sharp edge, and that synthetic swords are under weight. The synthetic swords we use are realistically weighted. Now, if I got a blunt steel 1796 LC and hit you full power though a fencing mask, you would go down. The synthetic is of the same weight and handling as that blunt steel would be. It spreads the force over a larger surface area, but otherwise will hit with the same mass.
To make another comparison. I have realistically sized and weighted maces that have about the same weight and balance as a 1796. These are blunt weapons designed to do significant damage through plate armour.
@@AcademyofHistoricalFencing I wish there was decent modern reproductions of military swords, but they all seem to handle like iron bars(not that I have personal experience) I do hope to get some antiques at one point. I do Google at times for them but I'm unsure just who are reliable and who sends out of the uk.
The dream is the 1796HC and LC as well as some earlier basket hilted heavy cavalry swords (mid 18th century/Austrian succession/seven years war)
And mabye some Dano-Norwgian stuff.
Now I must defeat somebody and tell them to conduct himself as a dead man...
Well Duel
"foilowed" error in the description
I am thinking a lot of the answer is tied into which cavalry saber vs which infantry saber..
As ever the attributes of each weapon will slightly change the likely outcome. But in most cultures and time periods, infantry sabres were simply a slightly lighter and smaller version of the cavalry sword, as here. So the results won't vary much.
Of course between two different cultures, the different can be a little more extreme.
Academy of Historical Fencing - Agreed. I was thinking across time, ie 1885 cavalry saber vs spadroon, etc. But you are right.
Both on foot so they are infantry saber 😀
Can a regular fencing saber sword have a French grip
What is the difference between the two?
The length, width and weight of the blade. The cavalry blade has a little more reach and a lot more striking power, which also slows it down.
the just hit the air... i really think even antonio banderas could beat one of them... there's no contact
Seems a variation on any sword fighting... I mean, my understanding of Polish sword fighting (I know, not what is being done here) seems even more dynamic. I am not intending on being needlessly critical, but would this not be the same if one sword was long or side sword?
I only see a plastic sabre against a plastic sabre. (nylon) :( Even if the video is nice and the technique is beautiful; the comparison cannot be accurate if they both had, historically, different weight. I see that it's written "representative handling" if that includes the weight I am happy about it :D
Yes, that does include accurate weight. I helped the manufacturer develop these sabres based on my antique original swords, and many others that I have handled. They look, weigh, balance and feel exactly like many original examples of their type.
Nick, practice more and you will start using the Polish sabre. You will soon learn the issues of wielding it against light western sabres :P
Pouca Esgrima e muito martelo/bigorna.
Other comments deleted, because you are talking nonsense. Be constructive or don't bother.