If you name me vizier/chancellor/etcetera and let me rule in your stead, I'll grant you excalibur if we find it. Deal?I'll take Excalibur, but I want it with no strings attached.
If you name me vizier/chancellor/etcetera and let me rule in your stead, I'll grant you excalibur if we find it. Deal?I'll take Excalibur, but I want it with no strings attached.
The strings attached is the Lady of the Lake and she’s pissed.I'll take Excalibur, but I want it with no strings attached.
If you name me vizier/chancellor/etcetera and let me rule in your stead, I'll grant you excalibur if we find it. Deal?
Deal. I like swimming anyways. Will put the Excalibur search on my summer scheduleAll the paparazzi hanging around because I'm too sexy for my sword, too sexy for my sword ::strikes a runway pose:: and all that would still drive me crazy. I'm up for searching lakes, however, so long as you do the swimming. I'll sit on the shore sipping mai-tais, me being the future king and all.
Deal. I like swimming anyways. Will put the Excalibur search on my summer schedule
I just wanted to clarify, the majority of the swords people have named, except for some of the cavalry weapons, can be used to both cut and thrust, even if they were designed to favor one over the other. You can thrust with a slightly curved weapon like the katana or most sabers. You can cut with a short sword.
Also, mounted cavalry would have multiple weapons, usually including spears or lances which could hit the biggest punch even through armor. Since the spear would handle that thrusting job, swords for mounted cavalry could fill a different role.
Swords in warfare were often a backup weapon. They were light, discrete, and versatile, a good complement to a big polearm.
Slashing does zero against an armored opponent. Stabbing . . . might. Maybe. If you're really good, and they're down on the ground immobile after you've, I dunno, dislocated their shoulder or broken their legs or something.
The short sword, and even the arming sword (~30" blade) were comparable on the battlefield to the modern-day 9mm sidearm. You used a BIG weapon--spear, greatsword, axe, halberd-- to destroy someone's armor, or you used the equivalent of Judo (Google "Abrazare"; it's a 14th-Century wrestling technique for armored knights, and my sparring partner refers to it as "Judo for psychopaths") to break someone inside their armor, at which point you might use a smaller, more precise weapon to stab them through weak or damaged spots.
Slashing weapons were for unarmored opponents. Swords were not lightsabers.
More on this in my article on this site at The Why of Weapons: The Great Sword of War and my blog post on the mechanics of armor at Master Class: Armor | Joseph Malik.