Reply to thread

Message

<blockquote data-quote="Wombat" data-source="post: 1439466" data-attributes="member: 8447">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.&nbsp; Swords, by then, had been reduced to something for officers (amongst the infantry), but still a major, in fact the primary, cavalry weapon.&nbsp; 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.&nbsp; Certainly by the mid-1500s you have large units of arquebus-armed troops.&nbsp; By the time of the English Civil Wars (mid-1600s) you have about a 50/50 split between muskets and pikes.&nbsp; Warriors, defined here as inidivdual fighters not part of a military unit, favoured the sword well into the 1700s.&nbsp; Schools of fencing remained popular right into the late 1800s.&nbsp; The pistol only started to come into serious personal use from the mid-1700s forward.&nbsp; 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.</blockquote>

[QUOTE="Wombat, post: 1439466, member: 8447"] 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. [/QUOTE]

Verification