When was the sword put out of use?

[Dr. Strangemonkey]

I would argue that the cut off date for swords as a practical weapon is much closer to the 1850 date mentioned earlier.

Thing is the sword is always a weapon primarly for 'private' use. Aside from a few limited periods and circumstances, most military/public formations do not rely on the sword as the primary weapon. People who need to be prepared to fight under improvised circumstances use the sword.

The gun isn't the issue, a culture that doesn't approve of large and unconcealed weaponry is.

Through the 18th century the sword is still the preferred means of street and dueling defense. At the begining of the period everyone who has a right to wear a sword wears a sword around all the time, lessen they be a pacifist. By the end of the period the sword has largely dissapeared from use because weapons and street violence are far less common/approved.

In areas where that isn't true, such as Japan or the American frontier, the revolver is the only firearm safe enough, light enough, rugged enough, lethal in the proper mode, and small enough to effectively replace it.

Swords aren't practical, though, so if you think you'll be dealing with nature you do use something like an axe, knife, military fork, firearm, or big stick and except the military and practical disadvantages.

 

[Dr. Strangemonkey]

Long Story Short:

Pre-Revolver:

Guard: either a good spear, stout mace, or long-firearm with attached bayonet. Dagger is your more likely secondary since people aren't willing to waste money on you.

Soldier: javelin, spear, axe, shield, pike, some form of bow, and firearm. If you are non-elite your secondary is likely to be some form of short axe, mace, or long dagger. If you are elite you almost certainly have a sword. At the end of the period the long dagger and some of the swords get replaced by bayonets.

Rural-citizen: firearm or bow, for hunting, spear or military fork, hunting and moving hay. Secondary weapons is either a big knife, short axe, or good stick. If you are in the right culture you might very well have a nasty sword or ethnic weapon.

Less rural Citizen: sword and stick are your preferred weapons. Secondary weapons would be some form of projectile, this can vary a great deal, sticks, and polearms. You need things that will be very deadly, convenient, and out of the way.

 

[Wombat]

I don't know as much about the 18th century Scottish rebellions in 1715, 1719 and 1745, but I believe the sword still played a significant part in the Scottish armoury of that era. They did lose though.

Well, at the Battle (or Slaughter) of Culloden (1745) there were still a good number of the troops with claymores and targes.

By the time you hit the War of Spanish Succession (c. 1700) most major European armies were primarily musket-armed, though still with a noticeable group of pikemen. Swords, by then, had been reduced to something for officers (amongst the infantry), but still a major, in fact the primary, cavalry weapon.

By the time you hit the American Civil War swords are still found amongst cavalry and officers, but as the war dragged on (esp. in the post-Gettysburg era), even cavalry began to rely on the carbine.

Of course there is the grand divide between Soldiers and Warriors; Soldiers, defined here as part of an organized military unit, favoured firearms fairly early on, or long polearms when not arquebus-armed. Certainly by the mid-1500s you have large units of arquebus-armed troops. By the time of the English Civil Wars (mid-1600s) you have about a 50/50 split between muskets and pikes. Warriors, defined here as inidivdual fighters not part of a military unit, favoured the sword well into the 1700s. Schools of fencing remained popular right into the late 1800s. The pistol only started to come into serious personal use from the mid-1700s forward. In the United States firearms far outstripped swords in the post-Civil War era as the U.S. government, in an attempt to recoup some funds, sold guns cheaply to veterans, thus leading to a fairly widely-armed populace, especially in the West; many Confederates merely kept their arms as no one asked for them back in many cases.

So you can say that the switch from sword to gun is a rambling path, with a large number of side tracks in between.

 

[Wolfspirit]

Ok new an more 'Personal' phrasing.

You live in a house in scotland you are rich enough to buy either a sword or a gun for protection etc. When is the latest you would opt sword rather then gun?

I did some researching before this and I found 1650(ish), I came here to make sure.

Depends on where in Scotland, in the Highlands you might still be using the sword much later than that. As Wombat mentioned, the Battle of Culloden had most of the Jacobite Forces (mainly Highland irregulars) using shock close-range fighting with swords. Of course, a good many of the Highlanders got wiped out after then, so I'd say that the 1750s would be a good bet.

 

[frankthedm]

I thought the army of Imperial Japan was the last time swords were in use in wartime.

weren't those used more on prisoners than combatants?

 

[jollyninja]

by the 30 Years War (central europe/Germany about 1615-1645)the musket had become the most common personal weapon on the battlefield for the infantry. officers were still carrying swords and the cavalry units would carry and use swords as a regular weapon until the end of the Crimean War (@1856). i hope that helps, any particular reason you wanted to know?

 

[Gez]

Swords (or machette, saber, knife, etc.) are still popular anywhere where you have lots of enemies and few ammunitions for your gun. Like if you want to practice "ethnic cleansing" on an impressive number of defenseless civilians.

The other asset of edged weapons, in general, are that they aren't too afraid of water (well, it could rust, after a while, if you don't take care of it); and they're less noisy than a non-silented gun. Of course, there's aquaguns, but when you are not geared up by Q., or by a modern army, it counts.

 

[Dr. Strangemonkey]

It's worth noting that bladed weapons are more controlled in many US states then firearms. Much of that is very pre-NRA legislation, knife fights can be nastily deadly in ways that firearms don't generally do.

Arnis de Mano(spelling?) is a knife and stick based martial art that has a very active street culture in the phillipines and is often rated as the deadliest martial art in the world.

 

[rounser]

During the English Civil War, complaints were made by officers that men would not put their swords to their intended uses. Instead, swords were much more likely used to clear brush, chop wood, or dig holes than for combat. So, I'd say that the writing was on the wall for swords before that point.

This suggests that swords might have been a precursor to the entrenching tool.

 

[Gez]

In the computer game Alone in the Dark, melee weapons were much more efficient than firearms. You just had to go close quarter with the hulking zombies. Their arm with the gun would pass over your shoulder, and you could bash them safely with headbutts and laundry beetle.

In the Star Wars movies, mook villains use blasters and always miss; while BBEG villains use sabers and kick ass.

--Helpful and to-the-point Gez