Bayonet on a rifle & a fighting knife! You have the advantage in reach & the close. Best you can do with a sword is pair it with a pistol but the reach & close is compromised as well as the range be far shorter. Only Reason I can see for having a sword is on a ship as they often were used though a submachine gun would put it to shame!
@scholagladiatoria You got any tips for flail type weapons? I love nun chuks and also have a three section staff. Is there a book on morning stars that may be applicable?
So you aim your rifle and the weight on a chain, cable or rope at the end of your barrel swings a bit as you pull the trigger pulling you off target and the shot is wasted.
There is a context in sword v bayonet in that the bath ones is the weapon of infantry in offence and infantry moves in mutually supporting groups so the swordsman is more likely to have to deal with a bunch of bayonets as opposed to the infantryman who meets a sword by itself. Obviously there are a whole host of exceptions to this but massed swordsmen rarely encounter a single bayonet armed opponent whilst the bayonet armed man will normally be a part of a mutual group.
Wow! Reminds me of the study of ma-ai (dynamic distance) in Japanese Budo. The arts of Jukendo & Tankendo include the unequal length-pairing of the Mokuju (wooden rifle including a 'mounted bayonet' in its length) vs Bokuto (wooden Jp. saber) and Tanken (wooden bayonet as a long knife), respectively - interestingly, the Mokuju is restricted to spear-like thrusts (based on historical developments in the 4th quarter of the 19th century). Likewise, classical styles of Naginata-jutsu (fighting style of Jp.halberds) & Sojutsu (fighting style with Yari or Jp. spears) have the same approaches dealing with ma-ai. Although I train & teach a Naginata-jutsu, I have touched on both Jukenjutsu & Sojutsu training in the past. Great presentation ere! Thank you.
That example occurred to me, too: the WWII Japanese apparently had an integrated discipline of bayonet, sword, and dagger that instructors could qualify in, and so they must have done this kind of sword-versus-bayonet sparring all the time.
In Kung Fu, dao versus spear was really eye opening as to the limits of both. The dao is at an extreme disadvantage at longer distances, but the spear is screwed if you get a hand on it and get in close.
Yeah it would seem that the primary goal of the swordsman would be to fight to deflect, move in close, kill. Bayonet fighter would do the opposite. Keep him out of reach, stab.
Speaking of sabers, why were they (not the European military ones) so popular in places where mail- and scale armour was prevalent? As much as I love sabers in general, when it comes to armour, thrusting becomes more important, or you can go for blunt-force weapons. The Indo-Persian area had definitely a lot of examples of both, but South Eastern Europe, and e.g. Japan preferred cutting blades despite the prevalence of armour.
+scholagladiatoria *Thanks for the confirm.* Just as against the Dark Ages infantry spears to Renaissance pikes, sword-packing officers fought against enemy bayonets from the Baroque to the Great War. One arm that would've made an ideal all-arms officer's sword in the U. S. Army was the U.S. Sword, Cavalry, 1913; the foot officer would've had the reach to fight alongside the U.S. Magazine Rifles .30" 1903/1905 and Bayonets 1905 packed by the men under his command.
Have you heard of Bladesong? Its a game that lets you design your own swords. It's in open playtesting atm. Seems like something you'd find interesting.
Great vid, very interesting and they were absolutely foes on a battlefield - I wonder who usually came out on top? Practice against everything and everyone.
You can tie piece of water pipe on plywood cut to gunstock shape and you have rifle simulator. If necessary, pipe can be filled with metal pieces to make it heavier.
The U.S. Army still had three days of bayonet training in basic training when I went through in 1998 (they were still fielding the M16 rifle with 20-inch barrel). I understand they later dropped the training when they started fielding the M4 (basically, same rifle but with an adjustable stock and only a 14.5-inch barrel). Although the M4 technically has a bayonet stud, your reach with that rifle isn't that much better than if you just had the bayonet in your hand. Also, the lighter stock doesn't lend itself to buttstrokes or overhead smash. Also, length of the rifle and bayonet also change what techniques you can do, somewhat: the "baseball bat" swing was common amongst U.S. soldiers and Marines during WWII (armed with the M1 Garand), although it was never doctrinal (and definitely not realistic to try to do with an M16). I found an interesting tie-in to bayonet techniques later when I started training aikido and their short staff ("jō"; typically chest-height). There are both take-aways and retention techniques with the staff that would lend itself to carry over to the bayonet, and indeed in some of the older books you'll still see those techniques practiced with a wooden bayonet simulator ("mokujū"). Other than the simple thrusts, there are also some (counter-)attacks that would also carry over to bayonet, particularly in T.K. Chiba's lineage. No mistake though, there are also plenty of techniques that would be impossible to do with bayonet: various ones that require hand switching or end flips, anything with a 2-handed sword like grip, anything with single-hand, etc. The opposite is also true: buttstrokes aren't realistic to do with a jō, but you can do an overhead thrust, which can be similar to an overhead smash (with the stock of the rifle).
Don't be too sure about the switches and dexterity that can be achieved with a bayonet. Have you ever seen the USMC Silent drill team in action? Although contemporary/ 20th century soldiers weren't/ aren't trained to that level of dexterity, I'm sure elite 19th-17th century soldiers were. In fact, Charles XII of Sweden's Primary tactic was the bayonet charge after the first volley. He trained his men to a high skill level.
@@helifanodobezanozi7689 Context matters. My comment was with respect to the techniques in the system that I practice with a staff. It's not a dexterity issue, it's that there is not a comparable way to grip a rifle in the instances that I'm referring to. (And I'm not about to itemize and describe an extensive list of techniques on a short TH-cam comment.)
@@jamesfrankiewicz5768 Well, as an old martial arts instructor I once knew said, there's a time to drive a sports car, and then there's a time to drive a dump truck. Both are good at what they are designed to do... It sounds like you're in the wrong vehicle for the job. An art that teaches proper combative spear might be a more apt tool for comparison.
I hear that. Studied reach in martial arts, often for stick or staff and what I use a lot is actually a good quality but common shovel. Sensei used to say "work as you fight and fight as you work" and we would generally prefer using the tools we work with. I've practiced an extended thrust and lunge many years now. It can be very deceiving. Just like a sabre lunge it's hard to see in the first place, leveled at the eyes. And it's kind of one motion, less than a second. I knew you would mention the weight. That combined with strength will almost certainly give wrist, that is to say control of the center in melee. Mind you I do not pretend to be an expert and thankfully have had no occasion to actually use those techniques other than practice, sparring and just an interest. But yes I can absolutely understand the heavy long bayonet being extremely dangerous against any sword. Perhaps notably on difficult terrain as well. Swordsman may not exactly have been able to choose the ground for a fight. Love watching you guys with swords when you close distances and that. But any of that I've ever done is on a flat surface for the most part. Not weaving around obstacles or distracted in any way.
A word about your sponsor: MOVA globes really are awesome!! A few years back, MOVA Globes did an April Fools thing about Flat Earthers and MOVA globes! I no longer remember the details, but I think they made a few ads where they stated that a new line of MOVA products were coming soon which included Flat Earths. Or something like that. In any case, it was uproariously funny!! Not only that, but their actual product is truly amazing.
Very nice commentary I have a qui question. What sort is that that you're using for this video I enjoy your videos but sometimes there's so many of the different swords that I get a bit confused. With all the excellent display that you do. The sword that you hadn't hand it peered to be very well-balanced.
Matt, they don't get the weight right, but mokuju are purpose built bayonet trainers. That said, when I was working kukri versus bayonet I used a Mosin-Nagant. And let me tell you, a buttstroke to the arm from a Mosin smarts.
Hmmm... some of my friends want to start bayonet practice... sword vs bayonet would be an interesting twist as we re enact 1750's through 1815... giving me ideas..
I think the Russian General Bagration personally instructed and joined his soldiers in bayonet practice. Not 100 per cent sure but I believe Radetzsky also did the same in the Austro-Hungarian army.
What a coincidence this video coming out just now! I have just been looking into creating some rifle and bayonet to train, but really struggling finding base materials. Existing trainers are far too light, and I agree that the weight is very important. What do you recommend to use to build some?
Focus your training on accuracy, and tactical maneuvering. The bayonet is useless, has been since WWI, you'll never run into a situation that would be survivable against an opponent who's also armed with a firearm, if you're down to having to use a bayonet..
How's it go with spears? "You have to get past the point,then you're in control" Of course that's a whole hell of a lot easier with a shield! I could see dodging a bayonet strike,grabbing the thing and then going to work with a sword,could also see kicking somebody in that sensitive spot between the legs if you had to.....
The best for such a training fight are special imitation rifles with a rod supported by a spring. Then, hitting a colleague does not cause him much pain, because the spring absorbs the impact. But I have a question on another matter: why do "Arabian" curved knives have a sharp inner edge / false edge? You probably know what I mean. This is exactly the opposite of sabers, which have a sharp (mostly) "outer" edge. Say something about the method of fighting with those Arabian curved knives.
Few (if any) extant pollaxes weigh 9lbs, especially at such a short length. Most are 5.5-6.5lbs. There is at least one combination pollaxe & firearm at the Royal Armouries that weighs nearly 8.5lbs.
There is a real upper limit to what a guy can haul around marching and what they can use for a protracted battle. From what I've read, most infantry have carried 70lb in their normal packs for a few centuries. What they carry has changed, but their limits have not.
It's not really though. Spears were used one handed with a shield, giving reach and protecion. Pikes were used with two hands but give you massive reach. A bayonet is like a pike with the reach of a sword. It's clumsy, it's heavy, it's short and slow.
@@faramund9865 If swordsmanship is like a dance, bayonet drill is like a freight train. The heaviness of the rifle that makes it cumbersome is also an advantage in that a lighter weapon is going to have a great deal of difficulty in stopping the point from advancing, so the swordsman is better off getting out of the way. But if an entire formation is getting out of the way, it's liable to turn into a massacre.
American bayonette drill in the mid to late 19th century copied French drill. French bayonette drill used fencing poitions and terminology (en prime, en secund, en tierse parries, for example. I do not know how this compares to British or other European drills of the period.
This makes me wish I still owned my Great Grand Father's M1 Garand. I could find a bayonet for that pretty easily. Unfortunately all my things we pawned, or disappeared when I joined the Navy in 95.
You can just as easily find a modern bayonet for either an AK or AR platform rifle. There are many of both that you can purchase that still put a bayonet lug on their rifles..
@@Markbell73 He probably didn't fight with that M1, WWII soldiers were able to bring back war trophy weapons, but not their issued personal weapons..As at the time they were considered the main rifle system in active duty use, the M1 you had was likely one he acquired as a civilian..
Also how was it your great grandfather who fought in WWII? If you joined the Navy in 95, let's say you were 16, and let's say your father was 18 when he had you, and you grandfather was 18, when he had your father, that would make your great grandfather far too old to fight in WWII.. You're not being truthful..
I know they had training swords such as wooden swords etc. Did they have wooden bayonets, which I would think would still be very dangerous with the weight behind them in a thrust.
Swedish training bayonets had a metal rod that sat on a spring, so it retracted back into the "barrel". Still, they are dangerous because they're very heavy but you could spar with it if you don't strike with the stock.
What types of swords are the most effective against bayonets and bayonet formations? I’m expecting that longswords grossmessers and rapiers will be better for such a task when compared to the sabres and backswords in use back then.
@@jacquesstrapp3219 Now you switch cases, which isn't valid. Cavalry was useless against spear and pike formations though. Against unorganized rabble it was fine. Sword and buckler formations are massed infantry on massed infantry. It isn't an officer or some officers dealing with multiple bayonets. It would have died against bayonet formations because there were rifles on the other side of the bayonet. Only Spain revived sword and buckler units against Swiss Pike formations and nobody copied them. Spain itself stopped using them.
@@jacquesstrapp3219 The scenario of an officer fighting multiple enemies is ridiculous. It is also the original question. You really can argue around that. You also can't argue around the time period being spoken of - the era of rifles. In an earlier time swords were really a back up weapon. Also the cavalry you speak of used pikes or lances against infantry, not swords.
@@jacquesstrapp3219 To get the job done, you've got to use the proper tool. The US Army way recognizes that. As a kid I wanted to be an Air Cav officer. Turns out I'm smart and good with paperwork, so JAG it is! The Romans would have loved me.
Hey hey, as a ex user of a rifle with or without bayonet. The pointy end isn't the only part thats is effective. In bayonet fighting the use of the blunt end after a parry is more effective. The butt end off the rifle will deal a blow and then you can finish again with the pointy end. So a rifle with bayonet is a pole arm and a mace (so to say)
@@Specter_1125 but still the butt end is the finisher so 2 say. Its what we trained 2 do. Use the pointy end 2 parry and then knock them out and finish again with the pointy end. We had a full bayonet vs bayonet fighting doctrine. The finisher was always the pointy en d but the buttstock was the enabler so 2 say
Its very important to pay attention to if the weapon is loaded and ready to fire (on you) because that will defeat your technique instantly but of course if theyre out of ammo, go for it
That was the initial point. TLDR - it is a substitute for a spear to defend against cavalry. The first firearm formations had a lot of pikemen to defend them against cavalry. As firearms improved and the realities of the battlefield were learned, there were less and less pikemen. In the end it was just a sergeant with a half-pike. But during that period, the bayonet was introduced. They were all long and could often be used alone as a weapon. They plugged into the end of the rifle, so the formations could ward off horsemen. Then somebody introduced lugs to attached the bayonet.
Why train against a bayonet? Because there are more bayonet users than you. Probability dictates that's your most likely worthy opponent. But is he a pitiful codfish or not? Sure, there are other types around. Light cavalry, heavy cavalry and officers. But who is guarding the officers? Infantryman with bayonets. To get to those Infantry Officers you need to combat the infantryman guards. And bayonets outnumber you. Officers armed with a Smallsword should also learn how to deal with bayonets. Like grabbing the bayonet in the left hand and thrusting with the right hand. Probably best not to parry or static block. Just evade and strike. That rifle and bayonet are not lightweight. Which can be a disadvantage. At least in Europe, US, France etc In other areas you may fight more swords.
Will spike bayonets (no cutting edges) be a good weapon to use against plate armour? Since it’s designe was quite similar to some late medieval anti armour weapons
The problem I see with that is the weight is on the opposite end for if you wanted to deal with armor. Getting into the gap of armor was incredibly difficult, which is why you’d usually hit some really hard in the head before going for it (obviously this is an over simplification).
Unless he's leading a charge, skirmishing, assaulting a position during a siege, etc. GENERALLY you're correct but it depends on the type of action/campaign/situation (or depending on the officer in some cases lol, try telling that to Thomas Cochran)
Seems the bayonet is essentially like a polarm or spear with the butt acting as a blunt. Never really thought about it. Glad i wont be running into anyone armed with one in my life. 😎 Edit: commented before Matt said pretty much exactly what i said.
The socket bayonet around 1700 was the final nail in the coffin of all non-gunpowder weapons. It was the end. No battle was decided by muscles and cold steel, at least not in the west, after that.
The weapon is not the champion . The skill of those that use them is . Experience with weapons will gain advantage no matter sword , spear , bayonet or quarter staff .
@@stefthorman8548 : Mr. Easton noted , that in some regions of the world, european troops had to face in 19th century many swordsmen. May be i misheared, but didn 't he said Afghanistan was such a place?
@@brittakriep2938 He did say that. While the Pashtuns did have jezails, they mostly used them to snipe the British troops equipped with firearms that couldn't reach as far, so a close encounter was not likely, and the jezail was not a standard issue weapon, like the brown bess, so fewer Pashtuns would have had them. Also, the Pashtun, at present, only make up 40% of the Afghan population, so other ethnic groups would have used different weapons.
The first rule of combat...the stabber will always beat a slasher.......the only rule of combats is that a stabber will always beat a slasher. Second rule of combat is the longer the stabber the better.
Says the guy who hasn’t considered a melee on horseback. Or on the deck of a ship. Or in a trench. Or in a grapple. Or inside a building. Or… just about anywhere besides an open field.
@@Specter_1125 true, I was just pointing out the glaring idiocy of the statement. Literally that type of thinking costs lives in war. The same Morons kept the USMC fielding 40 inch rifles throughout the Iraqi conflict. “Longer is always better…” - Small dick dipshits.
Then every soldier ever in history would just carry a 6 meter long pike. Theres a reason why short cut-centric swords have been the standard in pretty much the entire world for a very long time, there are situations where the pike is utterly useless and the sword crushes it, same goes for every polearm.
Get 10% off MOVA Globes with code SCHOLA at bit.ly/movaschola
*Globes* and (HEMA) *gloves* are basically asking for a crossover 😊
Bayonet on a rifle & a fighting knife!
You have the advantage in reach & the close.
Best you can do with a sword is pair it with a pistol but the reach & close is compromised as well as the range be far shorter.
Only Reason I can see for having a sword is on a ship as they often were used though a submachine gun would put it to shame!
@@arnijulian6241 I’d rather have my Glock 35 with Underwood ammo
@scholagladiatoria You got any tips for flail type weapons? I love nun chuks and also have a three section staff. Is there a book on morning stars that may be applicable?
Seems like there was a marked absence of spiked flails on the ends of rifles
I can only imagine what that would be like 😂
I kind of imagine spiked flails are more suitable to the butt of a rifle.
So you aim your rifle and the weight on a chain, cable or rope at the end of your barrel swings a bit as you pull the trigger pulling you off target and the shot is wasted.
I believe it was a joke....
I could be wrong.
@@Svensk7119 you're in sword tube land, we're VERY serious here. :) (edited for my bad spelling and grammar)
There is a context in sword v bayonet in that the bath ones is the weapon of infantry in offence and infantry moves in mutually supporting groups so the swordsman is more likely to have to deal with a bunch of bayonets as opposed to the infantryman who meets a sword by itself. Obviously there are a whole host of exceptions to this but massed swordsmen rarely encounter a single bayonet armed opponent whilst the bayonet armed man will normally be a part of a mutual group.
Wow! Reminds me of the study of ma-ai (dynamic distance) in Japanese Budo. The arts of Jukendo & Tankendo include the unequal length-pairing of the Mokuju (wooden rifle including a 'mounted bayonet' in its length) vs Bokuto (wooden Jp. saber) and Tanken (wooden bayonet as a long knife), respectively - interestingly, the Mokuju is restricted to spear-like thrusts (based on historical developments in the 4th quarter of the 19th century). Likewise, classical styles of Naginata-jutsu (fighting style of Jp.halberds) & Sojutsu (fighting style with Yari or Jp. spears) have the same approaches dealing with ma-ai. Although I train & teach a Naginata-jutsu, I have touched on both Jukenjutsu & Sojutsu training in the past. Great presentation ere! Thank you.
That example occurred to me, too: the WWII Japanese apparently had an integrated discipline of bayonet, sword, and dagger that instructors could qualify in, and so they must have done this kind of sword-versus-bayonet sparring all the time.
@@TheSaneHatter Toyama Military Academy. Sword forms of Gunto no Soho became the basis of post-war Toyama Ryu & Nagamura Ryu, which I have trained in.
In Kung Fu, dao versus spear was really eye opening as to the limits of both. The dao is at an extreme disadvantage at longer distances, but the spear is screwed if you get a hand on it and get in close.
Yeah it would seem that the primary goal of the swordsman would be to fight to deflect, move in close, kill. Bayonet fighter would do the opposite. Keep him out of reach, stab.
Thrust! Develop! Guard!
*versus
Good vid. Using pugil sticks, as bayonet v bayonet is also a great deal of fun.
I can't wait to see the Scholagladiatora/Forgotten Weapons crossover video
Yes. This needs to happen! Carl and Ian already did a WW1 hand to hand combat video, but I bet that Matt would make it a thousand times better!
He can show Ian Macollum a French Smallsword and show Matt Easton a French firearm.
I'm surprised artillery used rifles, considering cannons don't have hands.
Speaking of sabers, why were they (not the European military ones) so popular in places where mail- and scale armour was prevalent?
As much as I love sabers in general, when it comes to armour, thrusting becomes more important, or you can go for blunt-force weapons. The Indo-Persian area had definitely a lot of examples of both, but South Eastern Europe, and e.g. Japan preferred cutting blades despite the prevalence of armour.
+scholagladiatoria *Thanks for the confirm.* Just as against the Dark Ages infantry spears to Renaissance pikes, sword-packing officers fought against enemy bayonets from the Baroque to the Great War. One arm that would've made an ideal all-arms officer's sword in the U. S. Army was the U.S. Sword, Cavalry, 1913; the foot officer would've had the reach to fight alongside the U.S. Magazine Rifles .30" 1903/1905 and Bayonets 1905 packed by the men under his command.
*Addition:* Or, the U.S. Magazine Rifles .30" 1917 or Trench Guns 12 Gauge 1917, and Bayonets 1917.
This is the first time I've seen a youtube add and thought, hey, I really want one of those. Thanks Matt!
Have you heard of Bladesong? Its a game that lets you design your own swords. It's in open playtesting atm. Seems like something you'd find interesting.
Oooh! Great video! More of the Imperial Japanese Army of the Meiji Era sword v bayonet drill please!
Outstanding! Our 18c HEMA folks will be picking this up again, too.
Great vid, very interesting and they were absolutely foes on a battlefield - I wonder who usually came out on top?
Practice against everything and everyone.
Those Mova Gloves are awesome!!
Matt that's a nice Mark II. Looks in fab shape.
A beautiful garden! I'm always happy about a new video. Greetings from a fan in Germany
A garden so lovely it had to be in focus
You can tie piece of water pipe on plywood cut to gunstock shape and you have rifle simulator. If necessary, pipe can be filled with metal pieces to make it heavier.
The U.S. Army still had three days of bayonet training in basic training when I went through in 1998 (they were still fielding the M16 rifle with 20-inch barrel). I understand they later dropped the training when they started fielding the M4 (basically, same rifle but with an adjustable stock and only a 14.5-inch barrel). Although the M4 technically has a bayonet stud, your reach with that rifle isn't that much better than if you just had the bayonet in your hand. Also, the lighter stock doesn't lend itself to buttstrokes or overhead smash. Also, length of the rifle and bayonet also change what techniques you can do, somewhat: the "baseball bat" swing was common amongst U.S. soldiers and Marines during WWII (armed with the M1 Garand), although it was never doctrinal (and definitely not realistic to try to do with an M16).
I found an interesting tie-in to bayonet techniques later when I started training aikido and their short staff ("jō"; typically chest-height). There are both take-aways and retention techniques with the staff that would lend itself to carry over to the bayonet, and indeed in some of the older books you'll still see those techniques practiced with a wooden bayonet simulator ("mokujū"). Other than the simple thrusts, there are also some (counter-)attacks that would also carry over to bayonet, particularly in T.K. Chiba's lineage.
No mistake though, there are also plenty of techniques that would be impossible to do with bayonet: various ones that require hand switching or end flips, anything with a 2-handed sword like grip, anything with single-hand, etc. The opposite is also true: buttstrokes aren't realistic to do with a jō, but you can do an overhead thrust, which can be similar to an overhead smash (with the stock of the rifle).
Don't be too sure about the switches and dexterity that can be achieved with a bayonet. Have you ever seen the USMC Silent drill team in action? Although contemporary/ 20th century soldiers weren't/ aren't trained to that level of dexterity, I'm sure elite 19th-17th century soldiers were. In fact, Charles XII of Sweden's Primary tactic was the bayonet charge after the first volley. He trained his men to a high skill level.
USMC Silent Drill Team: th-cam.com/video/0xvXMEnwyYM/w-d-xo.html
@@helifanodobezanozi7689 Context matters. My comment was with respect to the techniques in the system that I practice with a staff. It's not a dexterity issue, it's that there is not a comparable way to grip a rifle in the instances that I'm referring to. (And I'm not about to itemize and describe an extensive list of techniques on a short TH-cam comment.)
@@jamesfrankiewicz5768 Well, as an old martial arts instructor I once knew said, there's a time to drive a sports car, and then there's a time to drive a dump truck. Both are good at what they are designed to do... It sounds like you're in the wrong vehicle for the job. An art that teaches proper combative spear might be a more apt tool for comparison.
Very interesting. Thank you.
I believe that is original tiger stripe camouflage.
I hear that. Studied reach in martial arts, often for stick or staff and what I use a lot is actually a good quality but common shovel. Sensei used to say "work as you fight and fight as you work" and we would generally prefer using the tools we work with. I've practiced an extended thrust and lunge many years now. It can be very deceiving. Just like a sabre lunge it's hard to see in the first place, leveled at the eyes. And it's kind of one motion, less than a second.
I knew you would mention the weight. That combined with strength will almost certainly give wrist, that is to say control of the center in melee.
Mind you I do not pretend to be an expert and thankfully have had no occasion to actually use those techniques other than practice, sparring and just an interest.
But yes I can absolutely understand the heavy long bayonet being extremely dangerous against any sword.
Perhaps notably on difficult terrain as well. Swordsman may not exactly have been able to choose the ground for a fight.
Love watching you guys with swords when you close distances and that. But any of that I've ever done is on a flat surface for the most part. Not weaving around obstacles or distracted in any way.
A word about your sponsor:
MOVA globes really are awesome!! A few years back, MOVA Globes did an April Fools thing about Flat Earthers and MOVA globes! I no longer remember the details, but I think they made a few ads where they stated that a new line of MOVA products were coming soon which included Flat Earths. Or something like that. In any case, it was uproariously funny!! Not only that, but their actual product is truly amazing.
In the 18th century, you have spontoons, sergeants' halberds, and possibly the occasional linstock/polearm combo to deal with too....
In the film "The wind and the lion" we have an excellent scene. American Marines armed with bayonettes VS Palace guards armed with scimitars.
Very nice commentary I have a qui question. What sort is that that you're using for this video I enjoy your videos but sometimes there's so many of the different swords that I get a bit confused.
With all the excellent display that you do. The sword that you hadn't hand it peered to be very well-balanced.
Yet another amazing video! Thanks Matt!
Have you ever done a video mentioning the saw back sword bayonet for the artillery carbine Martini-Henry?
@7:01 - Second Empire, isn't it? I was not aware of a third one.
Wasnt there that one british officer in one of the world wars that went into battle wtih sword and long bow?
Indeed, Mad Jack Churchill. Also had a piper with him in most engagements
Sabre a pied chambon is a French book I found that even takes mounted bayonets into account.
Next also for 4th of July, why officers might want to wear a bullet vest when on horse back near shrubbery
Great Video Matt, it indeed was enjoyable and thought-provoking!
Matt, I can barely see you, what with that tiger stripe cover.
I love me some tiger stripe.
Good video thanks as always ⚔️
Great points.
Mova globes is going on my wishlist.
Matt, they don't get the weight right, but mokuju are purpose built bayonet trainers. That said, when I was working kukri versus bayonet I used a Mosin-Nagant. And let me tell you, a buttstroke to the arm from a Mosin smarts.
Retroactively, but would it make sense for officers to carry a small buckler shield with, in case they have to deal with bayonets?
Hmmm... some of my friends want to start bayonet practice... sword vs bayonet would be an interesting twist as we re enact 1750's through 1815... giving me ideas..
Yeah anyone practicing primarily military swordsmanship should ideally be training primarily against bayonets and spears.
I think the Russian General Bagration personally instructed and joined his soldiers in bayonet practice. Not 100 per cent sure but I believe Radetzsky also did the same in the Austro-Hungarian army.
As for the Mova Globes, I'm waiting until they come out with Phobos and Demios (Terror and Rout) the steeds of Mars, the Great Stormer Of Walls 😲
What a coincidence this video coming out just now! I have just been looking into creating some rifle and bayonet to train, but really struggling finding base materials. Existing trainers are far too light, and I agree that the weight is very important. What do you recommend to use to build some?
Focus your training on accuracy, and tactical maneuvering. The bayonet is useless, has been since WWI, you'll never run into a situation that would be survivable against an opponent who's also armed with a firearm, if you're down to having to use a bayonet..
Which is better? The one left standing obviously.
@4:46 was that picture put in due to the time of year or was that just a fortuitous occurrence?
Good reasons.
I always thought a buckler in the left hand or a main gauche would be helpful against bayonet.
How's it go with spears? "You have to get past the point,then you're in control" Of course that's a whole hell of a lot easier with a shield! I could see dodging a bayonet strike,grabbing the thing and then going to work with a sword,could also see kicking somebody in that sensitive spot between the legs if you had to.....
The best for such a training fight are special imitation rifles with a rod supported by a spring. Then, hitting a colleague does not cause him much pain, because the spring absorbs the impact. But I have a question on another matter: why do "Arabian" curved knives have a sharp inner edge / false edge? You probably know what I mean. This is exactly the opposite of sabers, which have a sharp (mostly) "outer" edge. Say something about the method of fighting with those Arabian curved knives.
I understand that, by and large, the officers did not as a rule like it up 'em.
Few (if any) extant pollaxes weigh 9lbs, especially at such a short length. Most are 5.5-6.5lbs. There is at least one combination pollaxe & firearm at the Royal Armouries that weighs nearly 8.5lbs.
There is a real upper limit to what a guy can haul around marching and what they can use for a protracted battle.
From what I've read, most infantry have carried 70lb in their normal packs for a few centuries. What they carry has changed, but their limits have not.
I would love to see a video or series dedicated to bayonets of the 19th century.
Do you have a hema club in the west midlands, telford area?
Spears beats swords (with romans with their gladius and scutum combo being the exception) and a rifle with a bajonet is in essence a small spear
It's not really though.
Spears were used one handed with a shield, giving reach and protecion. Pikes were used with two hands but give you massive reach.
A bayonet is like a pike with the reach of a sword. It's clumsy, it's heavy, it's short and slow.
@@faramund9865 If swordsmanship is like a dance, bayonet drill is like a freight train. The heaviness of the rifle that makes it cumbersome is also an advantage in that a lighter weapon is going to have a great deal of difficulty in stopping the point from advancing, so the swordsman is better off getting out of the way. But if an entire formation is getting out of the way, it's liable to turn into a massacre.
Reason 7 - defence if one of the soldiers under your command violently disagrees with your orders.
American bayonette drill in the mid to late 19th century copied French drill. French bayonette drill used fencing poitions and terminology (en prime, en secund, en tierse parries, for example. I do not know how this compares to British or other European drills of the period.
This makes me wish I still owned my Great Grand Father's M1 Garand. I could find a bayonet for that pretty easily. Unfortunately all my things we pawned, or disappeared when I joined the Navy in 95.
You can just as easily find a modern bayonet for either an AK or AR platform rifle. There are many of both that you can purchase that still put a bayonet lug on their rifles..
@@CollinKillian yes, but they are not my Great Grandfather's M1. He fought with it. He earned his citizenship with it.
@@Markbell73 He probably didn't fight with that M1, WWII soldiers were able to bring back war trophy weapons, but not their issued personal weapons..As at the time they were considered the main rifle system in active duty use, the M1 you had was likely one he acquired as a civilian..
Also how was it your great grandfather who fought in WWII? If you joined the Navy in 95, let's say you were 16, and let's say your father was 18 when he had you, and you grandfather was 18, when he had your father, that would make your great grandfather far too old to fight in WWII.. You're not being truthful..
@@CollinKillian that's not what he told us. But I don't recall all the details. I guess you could be right.
Hey matt do you need a license or something to own your historical guns?
Even if you have no amo
I shall contact the nearest military academy and inform them that they ought to train their officers in such skills posthaste. Cheerio, sir!
Wait, kids? There are mini-Eastons? I didn't know you had kids! I thought you and Lucy just raised kukris. :-)
When sword vs. spear gets industrial
I know they had training swords such as wooden swords etc. Did they have wooden bayonets, which I would think would still be very dangerous with the weight behind them in a thrust.
Foam/soft plastic
There's footage floating around somewhere of mock wooden rifles with giant padded balls at the muzzle end, presumably to increase surface area.
Swedish training bayonets had a metal rod that sat on a spring, so it retracted back into the "barrel". Still, they are dangerous because they're very heavy but you could spar with it if you don't strike with the stock.
What types of swords are the most effective against bayonets and bayonet formations? I’m expecting that longswords grossmessers and rapiers will be better for such a task when compared to the sabres and backswords in use back then.
Against formations I doubt any particular sword was that useful.
@@jacquesstrapp3219 Look at the original question.
Against multiple opponents no particular sword is that useful.
@@jacquesstrapp3219 Yes, but the question was which sword was most effective against bayonet formations and the point is that there isn't one.
@@jacquesstrapp3219 Now you switch cases, which isn't valid.
Cavalry was useless against spear and pike formations though. Against unorganized rabble it was fine.
Sword and buckler formations are massed infantry on massed infantry. It isn't an officer or some officers dealing with multiple bayonets.
It would have died against bayonet formations because there were rifles on the other side of the bayonet. Only Spain revived sword and buckler units against Swiss Pike formations and nobody copied them. Spain itself stopped using them.
@@jacquesstrapp3219 The scenario of an officer fighting multiple enemies is ridiculous. It is also the original question. You really can argue around that.
You also can't argue around the time period being spoken of - the era of rifles. In an earlier time swords were really a back up weapon.
Also the cavalry you speak of used pikes or lances against infantry, not swords.
The Martini Henry's lever action looks like it would be awkward to use, is it?
@@jacquesstrapp3219 Thanks that really helps.
@@jacquesstrapp3219 To get the job done, you've got to use the proper tool. The US Army way recognizes that. As a kid I wanted to be an Air Cav officer. Turns out I'm smart and good with paperwork, so JAG it is! The Romans would have loved me.
Hey hey, as a ex user of a rifle with or without bayonet. The pointy end isn't the only part thats is effective. In bayonet fighting the use of the blunt end after a parry is more effective. The butt end off the rifle will deal a blow and then you can finish again with the pointy end. So a rifle with bayonet is a pole arm and a mace (so to say)
He mentions the use of the butt in the video
@@Specter_1125 but still the butt end is the finisher so 2 say. Its what we trained 2 do. Use the pointy end 2 parry and then knock them out and finish again with the pointy end. We had a full bayonet vs bayonet fighting doctrine. The finisher was always the pointy en d but the buttstock was the enabler so 2 say
Sword vs shovel?
It would be the same as fighting a spearman. Though the modern spear goes bang.
Can you just use the book of sword agent spears of old war styles.
Sorry cemented to early and you covered it.
Thumbnail: "Why you need to train sword vs bayonet"
Me: "I don't"
Its very important to pay attention to if the weapon is loaded and ready to fire (on you) because that will defeat your technique instantly but of course if theyre out of ammo, go for it
It is very rarely just a sword for an officer. It’s sword + pistol.
@@Specter_1125 all right, then shoot the guy bayonet charging you ;)
Third Empire lol? I think you were conflating Second Empire with Napoleon the Third...
I say get in close, if you dont get stuck then you win. If you do get stuck then yu both lose.
That bayonet is hugely long. What fantastic reach, it's nearly a pike!
That was the initial point. TLDR - it is a substitute for a spear to defend against cavalry.
The first firearm formations had a lot of pikemen to defend them against cavalry. As firearms improved and the realities of the battlefield were learned, there were less and less pikemen. In the end it was just a sergeant with a half-pike.
But during that period, the bayonet was introduced. They were all long and could often be used alone as a weapon. They plugged into the end of the rifle, so the formations could ward off horsemen.
Then somebody introduced lugs to attached the bayonet.
Bayonets are cool
Why train against a bayonet?
Because there are more bayonet users than you. Probability dictates that's your most likely worthy opponent. But is he a pitiful codfish or not?
Sure, there are other types around. Light cavalry, heavy cavalry and officers.
But who is guarding the officers?
Infantryman with bayonets.
To get to those Infantry Officers you need to combat the infantryman guards.
And bayonets outnumber you.
Officers armed with a Smallsword should also learn how to deal with bayonets.
Like grabbing the bayonet in the left hand and thrusting with the right hand.
Probably best not to parry or static block. Just evade and strike.
That rifle and bayonet are not lightweight. Which can be a disadvantage.
At least in Europe, US, France etc
In other areas you may fight more swords.
Will spike bayonets (no cutting edges) be a good weapon to use against plate armour? Since it’s designe was quite similar to some late medieval anti armour weapons
The problem I see with that is the weight is on the opposite end for if you wanted to deal with armor. Getting into the gap of armor was incredibly difficult, which is why you’d usually hit some really hard in the head before going for it (obviously this is an over simplification).
Because a bayonet equipped rifle is both club and spear, tactically.
If an officer has gotten into melee combat things must have gone very wrong.
Like at Roarke’s drift and Islwanda? In war shit goes wrong and often does so very very quickly.
Unless he's leading a charge, skirmishing, assaulting a position during a siege, etc. GENERALLY you're correct but it depends on the type of action/campaign/situation (or depending on the officer in some cases lol, try telling that to Thomas Cochran)
Also melee tends to happen when attacking and breaking into a fixed position. Especially in the 18th, 19th, and first half of the 20th centuries.
Cavalry officers were absolutely expected to use their sword against bayonet.
@@seanpoore2428 Or Richard Sharpe.
Important swords of the period… and spadroons.
Dr. Zoidberg feels your pain.
🎩Hi. Think I will stick with my 7’ long spear, that has a very sharp 6” long bronze pointy bit.
Jacobite Rising
Well bayoneted rifle is longer so if you don't know how to handle a sword and are just wildly swinging you will lose hard
🗿👍🏿
Was it not somewhat common for Victorian-age officers to duel each other (mostly on the same side)? I imagine that makes sword vs sword more common.
This video was sponsored by Under Armour.
Seems the bayonet is essentially like a polarm or spear with the butt acting as a blunt. Never really thought about it. Glad i wont be running into anyone armed with one in my life. 😎
Edit: commented before Matt said pretty much exactly what i said.
*Promo SM* 🙈
Bayonets are terrifiying
First!😂
Second 😂
FILTH!
Wait, am I on the wrong page for a Sharpe reference?
The socket bayonet around 1700 was the final nail in the coffin of all non-gunpowder weapons. It was the end. No battle was decided by muscles and cold steel, at least not in the west, after that.
The weapon is not the champion . The skill of those that use them is . Experience with weapons will gain advantage no matter sword , spear , bayonet or quarter staff .
There’s a quote from I think Musashi about not being to win a duel with mere conviction in your hands.
Be a man, use a real bayonet... trial by fire lol.
I would like your content alot more if you didn't constantly repeat yourself. 5 times in 4 minutes is excessive.
You have good knowledge about swords and bayonets, but the Earth is flat, vacuum space is fake. Time to get a better sponsor!
You are a fool.
So says the idiot incapable of measuring the curvature of the sea...
Hm? Well the training sword against bayonnet is then helpfull, when the distance is 100m and the rifle magazin is full of liferounds.
Attention! According to Ian from , Forgotten Weapons ' afghan muzzleloaders had often rather good quality.
@@brittakriep2938who said anything about afghans?
@@stefthorman8548 : Mr. Easton noted , that in some regions of the world, european troops had to face in 19th century many swordsmen. May be i misheared, but didn 't he said Afghanistan was such a place?
@@brittakriep2938 He did say that. While the Pashtuns did have jezails, they mostly used them to snipe the British troops equipped with firearms that couldn't reach as far, so a close encounter was not likely, and the jezail was not a standard issue weapon, like the brown bess, so fewer Pashtuns would have had them.
Also, the Pashtun, at present, only make up 40% of the Afghan population, so other ethnic groups would have used different weapons.
@@rasmusn.e.m1064 : Thank you for this information.
The first rule of combat...the stabber will always beat a slasher.......the only rule of combats is that a stabber will always beat a slasher. Second rule of combat is the longer the stabber the better.
Says the guy who hasn’t considered a melee on horseback. Or on the deck of a ship. Or in a trench. Or in a grapple. Or inside a building. Or… just about anywhere besides an open field.
@@WarpathActualeven in an open field there’s exceptions to what this guy is saying.
@@Specter_1125 true, I was just pointing out the glaring idiocy of the statement.
Literally that type of thinking costs lives in war. The same Morons kept the USMC fielding 40 inch rifles throughout the Iraqi conflict.
“Longer is always better…” - Small dick dipshits.
@@Specter_1125 yeah good plan untill someone slashes your arm off.
Then every soldier ever in history would just carry a 6 meter long pike. Theres a reason why short cut-centric swords have been the standard in pretty much the entire world for a very long time, there are situations where the pike is utterly useless and the sword crushes it, same goes for every polearm.
the only white british man i like
And the point of your racist comment is...?
@@corneliussulla9963 lol racist towards white people? just cut it out
@@elias560ah, one of the "i can't be racist" group, it funny that you can't see yourself
@@stefthorman8548 I kinda like his attitude. The more he makes an ´a´ out of himself, the more people will wake up to the ridiculous woke nonsense.
@@stefthorman8548 the group that has power cant be the victim of racism you snowflake